and yet neither that of sufficient waight to proue that that he hath vndertaken to proue as before hath bene shewed 24. W. BISHOP Because I haue cited already some of the Latine auncient Doctors in stead of the rest I will record out of them in a word or two how old rotten heretiks vsed alwayes to reiect vnwritten traditions and flie wholly vnto the written word See the whole book of Tertullians prescriptions against heretiks which principally handleth this very point The same doth Irenaeus witnesse of the Valentinians and Marcionists * Lib. 3. cap. 2. The Arians common song vnto the Catholickes was I will not admit to be read any words that are not written in the Scriptures as witnesseth S. Hilary in his booke against Constantius the Emperour against whom he alledgeth the preaching of the Apostles and the authoritie of the auncient Bishops expressed in his liuely colours S. Augustine some 1200. yeares ago recordeth the very forme of arguing which the Protestants vse now a days in the person of Maximinus an Ariā in his first book against him in the beginning If thou shalt saith this heretik bring any thing out of the Scriptures which is common to all we must needs heare thee but these words which are without the Scriptures are in no sort to be receiued of vs when as the Lord himselfe hath admonished vs and said in vaine do they worship me teaching commandements and precepts of men How S. Augustine opposed against them vnwritten traditions hath bene afore declared The like doth S. Bernard affirme of certaine heretikes of his time called * Hom. 62. Cant. Apostolici So that most truly it may be concluded that euen as we Catholickes haue learned of the Apostles and auncient Fathers our noble progenitors to standfast and hold the Traditions which we haue receiued by word of mouth as well as that which is written euen so the Protestants haue receiued as it were from hand to hand of their ignoble predecessors old condemned heretickes to reiect all Traditions and to flie vnto the onely Scriptures R. ABBOT For conclusion of this question he bringeth vs here a rotten tale how old rotten heretickes vsed alwayes to reiect vnwritten traditions and flie wholly to the written word To make this tale good he bringeth vs first a lie and then a fond cauill He referreth his Reader first to Tertullians booke of prescriptions the purpose whereof what it is I haue shewed before at large but in all that booke is no word of heretickes flying wholly to the written word Tertullian sheweth how they mangled and marred the Scriptures being vrged therewith reiecting what and where they list so that by the Scriptures there was no dealing with them but that they did flie to the Scriptures or required triall thereby he affirmeth not And this is plaine by Irenaeus euen in that place whence M. Bishop citeth him for his second witnesse and where he speaketh of the very same heretickes of whom Tertullian spake a Iren lib. 3. c. 2. Cùm ex Scripturis arguuntur in accusationem ipsarum conuertuntur Scripturarum quasi non rectè habeant neque sint ex authoritate et quia variè sunt dictae quia nō possit ex his inueniri veritas ab his qui nesciant traditionem Non enim per literas traditam illam sed per vinam vocem ob quam causam et Paulū dixisse sapientiam loquimur inter perfectos Heretikes saith he when they are reproued by the Scriptures fall to finding fault with the Scriptures as if they were not aright nor of authoritie and that they are doubtfully set down and that by the Scriptures the truth cannot be found of them that are ignorant of tradition for they say that the truth was not deliuered by writing but by liuely voice and that therefore Paul said We speake wisedome among those that be perfect Now by these very words of Irenaeus do thou esteeme gentle Reader the trecherie of this man who beareth thee in hand that Irenaeus noteth it there for a propertie of heretickes to reiect vnwritten Traditions and to flie wholly to the written word when as it was their abusing and refusing of the Scriptures that made him to appeale to the tradition of the Church the matters of their heresies being concerning the fundamentall articles of our beleefe which are euidently taught by the written word It is truly said that heretickes shunne the Scriptures euen as the theefe doth the gallowes and as it is true in other heretickes so it is in the Papists vpon whom how iustly those words of Irenaeus light and how fully they describe their vsage towards the Scriptures hath bene b Answer to the Epistle sect 11. before declared To this apparent lie M. Bishop addeth a blind cauill for which he bringeth the speeches of Constantius the Emperour and Maximinus both Arians out of Hilary and Austine The matter is answered sundry times before Against the assertion of the Church that the Sonne of God is consubstantiall or of the same substance with the Father they excepted idlely and vainely that they would admit no words that were not written M. Bishop knoweth well that we do not so because we receiue and professe those words which they refused yea he knoweth that we say and teach that the Pope is Antichrist that the Church of Rome is the purple whore of Babylon that the Masse is an abhominable idoll and wicked prophaning of the Sacrament of Christ and such like and yet these words are no where found in the Scripture We contend not concerning words let them vse what words they will so that the doctrine imported and meant by those words be contained in the Scriptures Of those heretickes called Apostolici S. Bernard saith no such matter as he alledgeth All that he saith is that c Berna in Cant. ser 66. Instituta Ecclesiae non recipiunt they did not receiue the ordinances of the Church and what is that to the doctrines of faith taught by Christ and his Apostles which are not contained in the Scriptures Concerning which against M. Bishops conclusion I conclude this question with the saying of Saint Austin before alledged and worthy here againe to be remembred d August supra sect 8. Whether concerning Christ or his Church or any thing that belongeth vnto our faith and life I will not say if we not being to be compared to him that saith If we but if an Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you anything but what ye haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospell accursed be he Hearken to it M. Bishop and let it make you afraid to pleade for Traditions any more CHAPTER 8. OF VOWES 1. W. BISHOP MAster Perkins is very intricate and tedious in deliuering his opinion concerning Vowes I will in as good order as I can briefly correct his errors herein In this passage which he intitleth of our consents he rangeth many things wherein we
yeelded them grace for their conuersion it had followed infallibly that they had beene conuerted neither should the frowardnesse of their will haue defeated the purpose of his will k Esa 46.10 My counsell shall stand saith he and I will do whatsoeuer I will therefore of the children of Ierusalem whomsoeuer God would gather he certainly did gather His will was to gather l Rom 11.5 a remnant according to the election of grace Ierusalem would not but resisted the will of God and hindered so much as in it lay the gathering of this remnant of her children m August Euchirâ—â— cap. 97. Vbi est illa omnâ—potentia c. si colligere filios Hierusalem voluit non fâ—cit An potius illa quidem filios sis â—s ab ipso câ—lligi neluit sede quoque relente filios eius câ—llegit ipse quos voluit quia in coelo in terra non quaedam vâ—luit fecit quaedam vero veluit non fecit sedomnia quaecunque volâ—â—t fecit But though Ierusalem would not yet God gathered whom he would and to them he yeelded his infallible sauing grace whereby he worketh to will and to do and giueth the gifts before mentioned of repentance faith knowledge and such like without which there is no conuersion and the giuing whereof is our conuersion vnto God Which seeing God gaue not to Ierusalem saue only to his remnant it is absurdly sayd by M. Bishop that there was no want of Gods helpe inwardly for their conuersion Their refusing and withstanding was the fruit of Free will which howsoeuer God do otherwise offer grace hath nothing in it selfe wherof to do otherwise 13. W. BISHOP Cap. 3. The last testimonie is in the Reuel where it is sayd in the person of God I stand at the doore and knocke if any man shall heare my voyce and open the gates I will enter in to him and will sup with him and he with me Marke well the words God by his grace knocks at the doore of our hearts he doth not breake it open or in any sort force it but attendeth that by our assenting to his call we open him the gates and then lo he with his heauenly gifts will enter in otherwise he leaues vs. What can be more euident in confirmation of the freedome of mans will in working with Gods grace R. ABBOT Here M. Bishop doth somewhat plainly shew himselfe and assureth vs that it is not without cause that we haue hitherto accused him of the Pelagian heresie The grace which for fashion sake he speaketh of is no other but such as whereby God knocketh at the doore of our hearts but worketh nothing in our hearts till we first of our selues assent to let him in He attendeth till we open him the gates and then he with his heauenly gifts will enter in which was the damnable errour of the Pelagians that Gods grace and gifts are bestowed vpon the precedence of our will and workes But we haue heard before out of the Arausicane councell that a Arausican Concil 2. cap 4. Supra sect 8. if any man say that God exspecteth or attendeth our will and doth not confesse that God worketh in vs to will he gainsayth the doctrine of the Apostle Which is the same as to say If any man say that God attendeth for our opening the gates vnto him and doth not confesse that God himselfe openeth the gates vnto himselfe he is contrarie to the doctrine of the Apostle b August cont duas epist Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 6 Aditus diuinae vocationis ipsa Dei gratia procuratur The entrance of Gods calling is wrought or procured by the grace of God himselfe he knocketh with one hand openeth with another c Psal 107.16 breaking the gates of brasse and smiting the barres of iron in sunder and howsoeuer mightily he knocke we neuer heare we neuer open till he open and make entrance for himselfe It is he that d Act. 16.14 openeth the heart he e Luk. 24.45 openeth the vnderstanding he f Psal 119.18 openeth the eyes he openeth g Iob. 33.16 the eares he openeth h Psal 50.15 the lips he openeth i Act. 14.27 the doore of faith and why then doth M. Bishop say that he attendeth till we open He doth not attend our assenting to his call but k August de praedest sanct cap. 19 Deus operatur in cordibus hominum vocatione illa secundum proposiâ—um vt non inarater audâ—â—nt Euangelium sed eo audâ—to contâ—er taÌ„tur credant exerpientes non vt verbuâ—a hominum sed sicum est verò verbum Dei by his calling which is according to his purpose he worketh in the harts of meÌ„ that they heare not the Gospel in vaine but do conuert and turne receiue it not as the word of man but as it is indeed the word of God And whereas he saith that God doth not break open the doores it is not alwaies true For God somtimes with great violence assaulteth the hart l Iude vers 23. by terror feare pulleth men out of the fire as with a mighty hammer breaketh the pride rebellioÌ„ of the wil fighting stirring against him When men are in the height of their insolencie madly raging against him he striketh them to the ground as he did the Apostle m Act. 9.4 S. Paule and by astonishment ouercometh and subdueth them vnto himselfe thus n August contr duas Epist Pelâ— lib. 1 cap. 19. Non ait duxerit vt illic ali quo modo intelligamus praecedere voluntatem Quis trahâ—tur c vt supra Sect 10 not leading them as vpon their precedent will but drawing them not to beleeue against their wils which is vnpossible but of vnwilling to become willing In a word when God knocketh o Idem de Praedest sanct ca. 20. Ostrum ergo apertum est in â—is quibus datuÌ„ est aduersarij autem multi ex eis quibus non est datuÌ„ the doore is opened in them onely to whom it is giuen but they to whom it is not giuen are still aduerse and they neuer open and therefore M. Bishop saith amisse that God attendeth that we open him the gates or otherwise leaueth vs. Neither do the words alledged serue for confirmation of the freedome of mans will telling vs onely what must be done that God may enter but not importing that we do it by any power of Free will 14. W. BISHOP To these expresse places taken out of Gods word let vs ioyne the testimonie of those most auncient Fathers against whose workes the Protestants can take no exception The first shall be that excellent learned Martyr Iustinus in his Apologie who vnto the Emperour Antonine speaketh thus Vnlesse man by Free will could flie from foule dishonest deedes and follow those that be faire and good he were without fault as not being cause of such
reputed with men who account no sinne at all but either in the performance of the act or in the resolution and purpose of the will We fall not into sinne that is into any morall or actuall sinne into any outward sinne euen in the like sort as S. Iames saith that o Iam. 1.15 concupiscence when it hath conceiued bringeth foorth sin when yet he did not meane but that concupiscence also it selfe is sinne as shall afterwards appeare 3. W. BISHOP Now to the second O wretched man that I am who shall deliuer me from this body of death Here is no mention of sinne how this may be drawne to his purpose shall be examined in his argument where he repeateth it so that there is not one poore circumstance of the text which he can find to proue S. Paule to take sinne there properly Now I will proue by diuers that he speakes of sinne improperly First by the former part of the same sentence It is not I that do it all sinne is done and committed properly by the person in whom it is but this was not done by S. Paul ergo Secondly out of those words I know there is not in me that is in my flesh any good And after I see another law in my members resisting the law of my mind Thus sinne properly taken is seated in the soule but that was seated in the flesh ergo it was no sinne properly The third and last is taken out of the first words of the next Chapter There is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus that walke not according to the flesh c. Whence I thus argue there is no condemnation to them that haue that sinne dwelling in them if they walke not according vnto the fleshly desires of it therefore it is no sinne properly For the wages of sin is death that is eternall damnation R. ABBOT Now to the second saith he and when he hath done saith nothing of it but putteth it ouer to the handling of the argument and therfore there will we also examine his examination But though he shift off the one circumstance with ignorance and the other with saying nothing yet as if he had very effectually done what he pretendeth he inferreth that not one poore circumstance of the text could be found to proue that S. Paule tooke sinne there properly marry he will bring vs diuers to proue that he taketh sin improperly Wel then let vs see what these diuers proofes be we doubt they are like his answers the one very bad and the other starke naught First he will proue it by the former part of the sentence It is not I that do it All sinne saith he is committed properly by the person in whom it is but this was not done by S. Paule ergo But we deny his minor proposition and it is altogether absurd and senslesse How should concupiscence do any thing in S. Paule which is not done by S. Paule Can the accident of the person be an efficient cause of any thing by it self without the person The accident is but the instrument of the person and what the accident doth the person doth it by the accident And therefore accordingly S. Paule saith a Rom. 7.14.23 I am carnall sold vnder sinne I do that I would not the law of my members leadeth me captiue to the law of sinne I in my flesh serue the law of sinne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen I my self in my mind serue the law of God and in my flesh the law of sinne This S. Austine well obserued b August de verb. Apost Ser. 5. Adhuc concupisco vtique etiam in ipsa parte ego sum Non enim ego alius in mente alius in carne Sed quid igitur ipse ego Quia ego in mente ego in carne ex v troque vnus homo Igitur ipse ego ego ipse mēte seruio c. Euen in that part that lusteth it is I also for here is not one I in the mind and another in the flesh Why doth he say I my selfe but because it is I in the mind and I in the flesh euen one man of both these Therefore I my selfe euen I my selfe in mind serue the law of God but in my flesh the law of sinne But yet though being but one and the same person he diuideth himselfe as it were into two parts being in part renewed and in part yet continuing old And hereupon he saith It is not I that do it that is not I according to that that is renewed in me and yet I according to that whereby I am still carnall and sold vnder sin not I according to the inner man wherein I delight in the law of God and yet I according to the flesh whereby I am still captiue to the law of sinne of which flesh I say not I because I account my selfe that that I ioy to be and which I shall euer be not that which though it be my selfe yet is that I would not be and which I labour not to be and therefore striue to destroy and put off as being without it to liue for euer c Ibid Mens regit caro regitur magis sum ego in eo quo rego quà m in eò in quoregor I may rather say I in that wherein I rule then in that wherein I am ouerruled therefore I say it is not I that do it and yet it is I in both M. Bishop therefore by his first circumstance proueth iust nothing and euen as little proueth he by the second Which he taketh out of those words d Ver. 18. I know that in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing and after I see another law in my members resisting the law of my mind Hereof he argueth thus Sinne properly taken is seated in the soule but that was seated in the flesh ergo it was not sinne properly Which is the same as if a man would argue thus that the true Pope hath his consistorie chaire in Rome but the Pope that now is hath his consistorie in the Laterane Church therefore he that now is is not the true Pope For what is flesh as the Apostle speaketh thereof but a part of the soule the soule it selfe so farre as yet in part it is not regenerate What is M. Bishop so absurd as to thinke concupiscence to be seated in the flesh as the flesh is diuided against the soule Nay the soule it selfe hauing cast off the yoke of obedience to God and betrayed it selfe to the temptations of the diuell for the gratifying and pleasing of the flesh is become a seruant to that that should haue bene a seruant vnto it and being abiected to sensuall and carnall and earthly desires is wholy called by the name of flesh to whose seruice it doth addict it selfe Thus saith Origen that e Origen de princip lib. 3. cap. 4. Anima cùm crassioris sensus fuerit
that before but here in confirmation of his argument he will ad some texts of holy Scripture And first he alledgeth the words of Christ d Ioh. 13 10. He that is washed needeth not but to wash his feet but is wholy cleane Where we may wonder that the mans wits should so much faile him thus to cite a place directly against himselfe For Peter to whom Christ there speaketh had bene baptized before and yet hee needed to be washed still insomuch that our Sauiour saith to him e Ver. 8. If I wash thee not thou shalt haue no part in me Therefore the vncleannesse of sinne was not wholy taken away in Baptisme but remained in part still to be taken away Nay in the very place it selfe the exception is plaine For it namely specifieth that he that is washed hath still need to wash his feete and that he is not in such sort wholy cleane but that his feete are still vncleane And what are these feete but the corrupt affections and lusts of sinne whereby we still cleaue to the earth and haue a remainder of fleshly and earthly conuersation Of these the Apostle saith f Col. 3.5 Mortifie your members which are vpon the earth fornication vncleannesse wantonnesse euill desire couetousnesse u Aug. cont Iulian lib 6. cap. 5. Iam baptizatis dicebat Apostolus Mortificate c. Quomodo ergò mortificat baptizatus fornicationem quaÌ„ non iam perpetrat n si cùm desideria eius quibus non consentit expugnat quae in benefacientibus et omnino non fornicantibus nec consensione nec opere etsi non desunt tamen quotidiè minuentur Thus did the Apostle speake to baptized men saith Austin How then doth the baptized man mortifie fornication which now he committeth not but by fighting against the desires thereof and not consenting to them which are not yet wanting though daily they be diminished Now if by reason of these earthly feete these corrupt desires being a part of originall infection we haue still need to be washed it followeth that by reason of these desires we are still vncleane euen by the hauing of them though we giue no consent vnto them Now Ambrose expresly expoundeth this place of a remainder of Originall sinne from which still after Baptisme we remaine to be cleansed h Ambros de ijs qui initiantur myst ca. 6. Mundus erat Petrus sed plantam lauare debebat Habebat enim primi hominis de successioâ—e peccatum quaendo eum supplantatut serpens persuasit errorem Peter was cleane saith he but yet he was still to haue his feete washed For he had still the sinne that commeth by succession from the first man whom the serpent beguiled and perswaded him to error Therefore his feete are washed that those hereditarie sinnes may be taken away For our owne sinnes done by our selues are released in Baptisme Where speaking of men baptized in elder yeeres as Peter was he plainely signifieth that what sinnes they haue by their owne action they are in Baptisme wholy abolished but that Originall sinne as touching the matter and corruption of it is still dwelling in vs and that we haue still need to be washed and cleansed therefrom And this S. Austin giueth to vnderstand who writing vpon those speeches of Christ asketh the question i Aug in Ioan. tract 80 Quis est in haec vita sic mundus vt non sit magis magisque mundandus Who is there in this life so cleane as that he is not more and more to be cleansed or made cleane and so affirmeth that the faithfull are here mundi mundandi cleane but yet so as that in part they remaine still to be cleansed accordingly as the Apostle exhorteth the faithfull k 2. Cor. 7.1 Let vs cleanse our selues from all filthinesse of the flesh and of the spirit and grow vp to full holinesse in the feare of God But here M. Bishop alledgeth Gregorie affirming by those words of Christ that he that is washed hath not any thing remaining of his sinne c. Which words Gregorie indeed hath but altogether to other purpose then M. Bishop citeth them disputing in that place against some who held l Greger lib. 9. epist 39 Siqui sunt qui dicunt peccata in Baptismo superficietenus dimitis quid est haec praeâ—â—catione enfidelius peccata in Baptismo superficietenus dimitti that sinnes in Baptisme are but superficially pardoned Against them he alledgeth the words of Christ here spoken and inferreth m Si igitur peccata in Baptismate funditùs minimè dimittuntur quomodo is qui totus est mundus est totus Totus enim mundus dici non potest cuide peccaeto aliquid remansit Sed nemo resistit voci veritatit quae ait Qui totus est c. Nihil ergò ei de peccati sui contagione remanet queÌ„ totum fatetur mundum ipse qui redemit Si igitur peccata in Baptismo fuÌ„ditùs minimè dimittuntur c. If then sins be not altogether forgiuen in Baptisme how then is he wholy cleane that is washed For he cannot be sayd to be wholy cleane to whom any thing is remaining of his sinne And to that meaning he saith that there is nothing remaining to him of the contagion of his sinne comparing the guilt of sinne to a contagion or infection wherewith the person is still touched after that the fact is past and gone vntill by forgiuenesse it be taken away Now let these words be referred to the drift whereto they were written which being expressed in the next words before M. Bishop hath very guilefully concealed and they haue nothing in them contrarie to our assertion For we deny not but that sinnes are fully and wholy pardoned to the regenerate we deny not but that the guilt thereof is quite taken away and therefore by Gregories testimonie M. Bishop auaileth nothing The very like doth Ambrose say n Ambros in Psal 118. Ser. 18 Culpa in eo habere non potest portionem quem absorbuerit remissio peccatoruÌ„ Sinne can haue no portion in a man whom forgiuenesse of sinnes hath swallowed vp who yet plainly affirmeth the remaining of Originall sinne it selfe after the pardon thereof as before is said Now we may not thinke that Gregorie was so simple as that he saw not in the words of Christ that he that is sayd to be wholy cleane hath an exception set downe as touching his feete and therfore could not intend any further but that he is wholy cleane as touching the guilt yet partly still vncleane by remainder of corruption To Gregorie he addeth Hierome but the words which he alledgeth are a meere forgerie He hath borrowed them from Bellarmine of trust and Bellarmine hath deceiued him as he will do any man that putteth any trust in him Hierome in the o Ad Oceanum epistle cited by him speaketh somwhat of Baptisme in behalfe of one who had had
a conuiction of guilt of death incurred thereby and yet could yeeld no remedie against death being afterwards b Heb. 7.18 disanulled because of the weaknesse and vnprofitablenesse thereof so farre should we be from thinking that of the ceremoniall law it should be sayd Do this and thou shalt liue The yong man demandeth of Christ c Mat. 19.16 What good thing shall I do that I may haue eternall life Now looke of what law our Sauior answereth him as M. Bishop hath cited before d Vers 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements of the selfe same law doth he answer another to the same question vpon recitall of a briefe of the commandements e Luc. 10.28 This do and thou shalt liue namely of the morall law to which it hath reference f Leuit. 18.5 where it is first spoken as appeareth by that that followeth for declaration of it Of which also it is rehearsed by g Ezech. 18.11.13 c. Ezechiel the Prophet and is by the Apostle Saint Paul further alledged to shew the difference betwixt h Rom. 10.5 the Righteousnesse of the law and the Righteousnesse of faith Moses saith he this describeth the Righteousnesse of the lavv that the man vvhich doth these things shall liue thereby i Gal. 3.12 The lavv is not of faith but he that doth these things shall liue in them Of which law he saith k Rom. 3.20 By the lavv commeth the knowledge of sinne that it saith l Cap. 7. ver 7.16.22 Thou shalt not lust that he consenteth to it that it is good that he delighteth in it as touching the inner man that the m Cap. 13. v. 9. Gal. 5.14 summe thereof is Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe all which doe vndeniably point out vnto vs the morall law as both n August de spir lit ca. 14. Saint Austine and o Hieron epist ad Ctesiphont Saint Hierome out of the same and such like places haue expresly affirmed Of the same law therefore he saith p Gal. 3.10 So manie as are of the workes of the law are vnder the curse for it is written Cursed is euerie one that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the law to do them And because no man continueth in all he concludeth hereof q Ver. 11. cap. 2.16 that by the law no man is iustified in the sight of God that by the workes of the law no flesh shall be iustified Now of the selfe same law doth he say that which M. Bishop hath cited for the cutting of his owne throat r Cap. 5.4 Ye are abolished from Christ whosoeuer are iustified by the law thereby teaching vs to resolue that Iustification by Christ and Iustification by the worke of the law cannot possibly concurre in one Now whereas the Apostle for auouching Iustification onely by faith in Christ taketh it for a ground that no man fulfilleth the Righteousnesse of the law M. Bishop that he may be wholy thwart and crosse vnto him affirmeth that by the helpe of Gods grace men are made able to fulfill the law to be iustified thereby Against which assertion to proue that the Righteousnesse of the regenerate and faithfull is not such as that it can answer the iustice and Righteousnesse required in the law M. Perkins alledgeth the common confession of all endited by the Prophet Esay Å¿ Esa 64.6 All our Righteousnesse is as a menstruous or defiled cloth For if the Righteousnesse commaunded by the law be most exact and perfect and no righteousnesse is performed by vs but what by our weaknesse and corruption is blemished and stained then can no righteousnesse of ours satisfie the commandement of the law But M. Bishop answereth that the Prophet speaketh these words in the person of the wicked of that nation and that time and therefore that they are madly applied vnto the righteous Where a man would wonder that he should be so mad as to imagine that prayer to be vttered in the person of wicked men or that wicked men should make mention or any their Righteousnesse vnto God And as for the time it fitteth not the age wherein the Prophet himselfe liued but was prophetically written in respect of a time long after succeeding He foresaw in the spirit the desolation of Ierusalem and the temple and that whole land and thereupon putteth himselfe into the person of the faithfull and maketh himselfe as one of them that should liue at that time This is verie apparent by the Prophets words t Vers 10. Thine holy cities lye wast Sion is a wildernesse and Ierusalem a desert The house of our sanctuarie and of our glorie where our fathers praised thee is burnt vp with fire and all our pleasant things are vvasted This prayer then was to serue for a direction to the faithfull that then should be to make their mone vnto God and to intreat mercie at his hands And very answerable to this propheticall prayer is the prayer of the Prophet Daniel made presently at that time For whereas M. Bishop to proue that the Prophet speaketh in the person of the wicked alledgeth those words u Esa 64 5. Lo thou hast bene angrie for we haue offended and haue euer bene in sinne the Prophet Daniel likewise saith x Dan 9.5 We haue sinned and haue committed iniquitie and done wickedly y Vers 7. O Lord Righteousnesse belongeth vnto thee and vnto vs open shame z Vers 10. We haue not obeyed the voyce of the Lord our God to walke in his wayes c. And whereas he alledgeth the other words a Esa 64.7 There is no man that calleth vpon thy name and standeth vp to take hold of thee the Prophet Daniel in like sort saith b Dan. 9.13 We haue not made our prayer before the Lord our God Both of them say We haue offended We haue sinned We haue not prayed as shewing plainely that they so spake of other men as that they implied themselues also Nay saith M. Bishop that is but the manner of Preachers and specially of such as become Intercessours for others who vse to speake in the persons of them for whom they sue Where he maketh the holy Prophets and seruants of God as verie hypocrites to God as he himselfe is as if they tooke vpon them to accuse themselues to God when they intended nothing lesse But to driue him out of this hole the Prophet Daniel saith of himselfe that in that prayer c Dan. 9.20 he confessed his owne sinnes and the sinnes of his people and why should Daniel the Prophet be sayd to confesse his owne sinnes and not the Prophet Esay or those iust and faithfull in whose person Esay spake Nay both the one and the other spake out of the true affection of the faithfull at all times who alwayes find in themselues defects and defaults whereby they find iust
truly not because he had sinne in him but because our sinnes were laid on his shoulders That reason is naught for he is not truly a sinner that payes the debt of sinne which an innocent and most iust person may performe but he that either hath sinne truly in him or is so by imputation stroken that the sinnes are made his owne really and he in all cases to be dealt with all as if he sinned himselfe as they hold that one iustified by imputation of Christs iustice is really in Gods sight iust and is both loued in this life and shall be rewarded in the next as if he were truly iust indeed But to auouch our Sauiour Christ to be so a sinner is to say that he was auerted from God the slaue of the diuell and sonne of perdition which is plaine blasphemie That sentence out of the Prophet Isa 53. He was counted with sinners is expounded by the Euangelists that he was so taken indeed but by a wicked Iudge and a reprobate people And therefore if you allow of their sentence range your selfe with them as one of their number S. Chrysostome by him produced confirmeth the same saying that God permitted him to be condemned as a sinner not that he was one truly Christ I know is called sinne by S. Paul but by a figure signifying that he was a sacrifice for sinne as hath bene before declared The same blessed Apostle when he speaketh properly affirmeth in plaine tearmes that Christ was tempted like vnto vs Heb. 4. in all things excepting sinne R. ABBOT M. Perkins yeeldeth that as we are called righteous by the Righteousnesse of Christ so Christ might be called a sinner by our sinnes not by hauing the blemish and corruption thereof but onely the guilt and imputation euen as he becommeth truly a debtor that vndertaketh anothers debt M. Bishop saith that an innocent and most iust person may pay the debt of sinne and such a one do we acknowledge the Sonne of God to be who yet being iust and innocent might by M. Bishops owne confession be termed being rightly vnderstood a sinner because he saith that he may be called truely a sinner who is so by imputation stroken as that the sinnes are made his owne really and he in all cases to be dealt with as if he had sinned himselfe For thus was the case with Christ who really though not inherently took vpon him our sinnes by vndertaking really as in our person the guilt thereof and therefore being dealt with as if he himselfe had committed the same Therefore doth Hierome apply these words to Christ a Hieron in Psal 87. Vt supra sect 5. Thou hast brought vpon me that wrath and storme of thy furie which thou wast to poure out vpon the nations because I haue taken vpon me their sinnes So Hilarie saith that b Hilar. in Psa 68. Omnis in eum terror desaeuientis in nos â—eÌ„pestatis in cubuit all the terrour of the tempest that raged against vs lighted or lay vpon him Therefore in right meaning to say that Christ was made a sinner in the bearing of our sinnes is not to affirme that Christ was auerted from God the slaue of the diuell and sonne of perdition as M. Bishop ignorantly collecteth because these are consequents onely of inherent corruption and sinne whereby a man is borne in sinne according to the depraued image of him of whom he is borne and not euerie one to whom sinne is imputed but c 1. Ioh. 3.8 whosoeuer committeth sinne is of the diuell Therefore the Fathers in that sence that here is spoken of haue not forborne to terme Christ a sinner in respect as he tooke vpon him the imputation of our sinnes So saith Oecumenius d Oecumen in Heb. cap. 9 Etenim Christus vehementer peccator erat vt qui totâ—â—s mundi peccata assumpserat sibique propria fecerat c. Quod enim Christus peccator fuerit audi Eum qui peccatum c. Christ was greatly a sinner as who did take vpon him the sinnes of the whole world and make them proper to himselfe For that Christ was a sinner heare the Apostle He made him sinne for vs c. Vpon which words of the Apostle Chrysostome also saith not only as M. Bishop citeth that God permitted him to be condemned as a sinner but also as M. Perkins alledgeth though M. Bishop vnhonestly dissembleth it e Chrysost vt supra sect 5. He made the iust a sinner that he might make sinners iust In like sort Hierome as in one place he saith that f Hier. in Psal 21. Peccata nostra sua reputat Christ accounteth our sinnes his sinnes so in another place he affirmeth that g Jdem in Psal 37. Peccatorem se profiâ—etur qui peccata nostra portauit Christ did professe himselfe a sinner in that he bare our sinnes So saith also Saint Austin h August in Psal 37. Tanquâ—m peccauit in infirmitate tua Christus Modo enim peccata tua tanquam ex cre suo dicebat ea dicebat suae Christ after a sort sinned in thy infirmitie he mentioned thy sinnes out of his owne mouth and called them his sinnes All this the Prophet Esay confirmeth when he saith i Esa 53.12 He was counted with the transgressors which was not onely by a wicked iudge and a reprobate people as M. Bishop mentioneth but in that God made him sinne God counted him with sinners and therefore layed vpon him the curse of sinners in that he was k Gal. 3.13 Act. 5.30 hanged on a tree for the l Deut. 21.23 curse of God is vpon him that is hanged Therefore the Prophet in the same place saith that m Esa 53.6.10 the Lord did lay vpon him our iniquities the Lord would breake him and make him subiect to infirmities that we may vnderstand that God did not onely leaue him to the hands of men but himselfe counted him with sinners by the bearing of our sinnes and therefore dealt with him himselfe accordingly so that he had cause to cry out n Psal 88.6 Applied to Christ by Athanaâ— De interpret Psal by Arnob. and Hierome in Psal 87. Thine indignation lieth hard vpon me and thou hast vexed me with all thy stormes o Vers 14. Lord why abhorrest thou my soule and hidest thy face from me p Vers 16. Thy wrathfull displeasure goeth ouer me and the feare of thee hath vndone me Yet as touching the person of Christ in himselfe we acknowledge it as farre as M. Bishop that he was q Heb. 4.15 excepted from sinne that he was r Cap. 7.26 holy harmelesse vndefiled separated from sinners and because to apply vnto Christ the name of a sinner in what sort soeuer is subiect to misunderstanding and offence we wholy forbeare the same and as though a man by taking vpon him another mans debt be become a debtor yet we call him not a
How can this be better knowne then if we see weigh and consider well what kind of faith that was which all they had who are sayd in Scriptures to be iustified by their faith S. Paul saith of Noe That he was instituted heire of the iustice Heb. 11.7 which is by faith What faith had he That by Christs Righteousnesse he was assured of Saluation No such matter but beleeued that God according to his word and iustice would drowne the world and made an Arke to saue himselfe and his familie as God commaunded him Abraham the Father of beleeuers and the Paterne and example of iustice by faith as the Apostle disputeth to the Romans What faith he was iustified by let S. Paul declare who of him and his faith Rom. cap. 4. hath these words He contrarie to hope beleeueth in hope that he might be made the father of manie Nations according to that which was sayd vnto him So shall thy seed be as the starres of heauen and the sands of the sea and he was not weakned in faith neither did he consider his owne bodie now quite dead whereas he was almost an hundreth yeares old nor the dead Matrice of Sara in the promise of God he staggered not by distrust but was strengthened in faith giuing glorie to God most fully knowing that whatsoeuer he promised he was able also to do therefore was it reputed to him to iustice Lo because he glorified God in beleeuing that old and barren persons might haue children if God sayd the word and that whatsoeuer God promised he was able to performe he was iustified The Centurions faith was verie pleasing vnto our Sauiour who sayd in commendation of it That he had not found so great faith in Israel What faith was that Marrie that he could with a word cure his seruant absent Math. 8. Say the word only quoth he and my seruant shall be healed S. Peters faith so much magnified by the auncient Fathers and highly rewarded by our Sauiour was it any other Math. 16. Then that our Sauiour was Christ the Sonne of the liuing God And briefly let S. Iohn that great Secretarie of the holy Ghost tell vs what faith is the finall end of the whole Gospell These things Iohn 20. saith he are written that you may beleeue that Iesus is Christ the Sonne of God and that beleeuing you may haue life in his name With the Euangelist the Apostle S. Paul accordeth verie well Rom. 10. saying This is the word of faith which we preach for if thou confesse with thy mouth our Lord Iesus Christ and shalt beleeue in thy heart that God raised him from death 1. Cor. 15 thou shalt be saued And in another place I make knowne vnto you the Gospell which I haue preached and by which you shall be saued vnlesse perhaps you haue beleeued in vaine What was that Gospell I haue deliuered vnto you that which I haue receiued that Christ died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures was buried and rose againe the third day c. So by the verdite of S. Paul the beleefe of the articles of the Creed is that iustifying faith by which you must be saued And neither in Saint Paul nor any other place of holy Scriptures is it once taught that a particular faith whereby we apply Christs Righteousnesse to our selues and assure our selues of our saluation is either a iustifying or any Christian mans faith but the verie naturall act of that vgly Monster presumption which being layd as the verie corner stone of the Protestants irreligion what morall and modest conuersation what humilitie and deuotion can they build vpon it R. ABBOT What the reason was why M. Perkins here propounded no obiections of the Papists M. Bishop might haue conceiued because he had a Chap. 3. Of the Certaintie of Saluation before noted and confuted the best that are alledged by them If he had not so done yet it should not be likely that he had therefore omitted them because he knew not how to answer them because this which M. Bishop bringeth for their principall reason is but a verie weake and simple reason The thing that he would proue thereby is that iustifying faith is that Catholike faith as he calleth it whereby we beleeue all that to be true which God hath reuealed He abuseth the name of Catholike faith whereby hath bene wont to be imported the true and sound doctrine of the Catholike Church comprised in bookes taught in Pulpits and schooles professed by the mouth which a man may preach to others and himselfe be voide of iustifying faith Thus Vigilius saith hauing discoursed of some points of doctrine b Vigil cont Eutych lib. 1. Haec est fides professio Catholica quam Apostoli tradiderunt Martyres roborauerunt fideles hucusque custodiunt This is the Catholike faith and profession which the Apostles deliuered the Martyrs haue confirmed and the faithfull keepe vntill this day Iustifying faith is the priuate act of the heart and conscience of the man that is iustified which though it be grounded and built vpon it yet cannot but absurdly be termed the Catholike faith But M. Bishop perhaps by Catholike faith meaneth that iustifying faith whereby he and his fellow Catholikes must hope to be iustified By which meanes he hath matched the diuel with himselfe and his Catholikes and hath made him a Catholike For if it be the only faith of a Catholike to beleeue all that to be true which God hath reuealed what hindereth the diuell to be a Catholike seeing he beleeueth and to his griefe well knoweth that all is true that is reuealed by God This is that which we rightly call historicall faith the obiect whereof is the word of God in generall and it is no more but credere Deo to beleeue God in that which he speaketh which is incident to diuels and damned men This historicall faith is presupposed and included in iustifying faith but the proper obiect of iustifying saith is c 2. Cor. 5.19 God in Christ reconciling the world vnto himselfe or the promise of Gods mercie to vs in Christ Iesus whereby we do not onely beleeue the promise in generall to be true but do trust in God and expect good at his hands according to that promise for Christs sake This faith therefore is called d Rom. 3.22 Phil. 3.9 the faith of Christ that is whereby we beleeue in Christ and is further expressed to be e Act. 3.16 faith in his name f Rom. 3.25 faith in his bloud Of which S. Austin saith g August in Ioan. tract 35. Fides Christi est credere in eum qui iustificat impium credere in mediatorem sine quo interposito non reconciliamur Deâ— credere in saluatorem qui venit quod perterat quaerâ—re atque saluare c. The faith of Christ is to beleeue in him that iustifieth the vngodly to beleeue in the Mediator without
whose meanes we are not reconciled vnto God to beleeue in the Sauiour which came to seeke and to saue that which is lost to beleeue in him that saith without me ye can do nothing This is the faith whereby we are saued and whereby all the faithfull haue bene saued from the beginning of the world To which purpose S. Austin againe saith h August de nat grat cap. 44 â—a fides iustes sanauit antiquos quae sanat et nos id est mediatoris Dei hominum hominis Iesu Câ—risti fides sanguinis eius fides crucis eius fides mortis resurrectionis â—ius The same faith saued the righteous of old that now saueth vs that is the faith of the man Iesus Christ the Mediator betwixt God and men the faith of his bloud the faith of his crosse the faith of his death and resurrection Thus by faith Abel in his lambe beheld i 1. Ioh. 1.29 the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world and thereby his sacrifice was accepted and in that respect is Christ called k Apoc. 13.8 the lambe that was slaine from the beginning of the world But here M. Bishop vndertaketh to tell vs and therefore let vs heare of him according to the depth of his diuinitie what kind of faith that was which all they had who are sayd in Scriptures to be iustified by their faith And first he beginneth with Noe of whom it is sayd that l Heb. 11.7 he was made heire of the righteousnesse which is by faith But what faith was that He beleeued saith he that God according to his word and iustice would drowne the world and made an Arke to saue himselfe and his familie as God commanded him And what in the drowning of the world and making of an arke to saue himselfe did Noe consider nothing but the drowning of the world and the making of an arke to saue himselfe S. Austin calleth the Arke m Aug. cont Faust Manich. lib. 19 cap. 12. Sacramentum arcae in qua Noe domus à diluuio liberata est the sacrament of the Arke and in a sacrament or mysterie did the faith of Noe see no more but onely what his eyes did see n Chrysost in 1. Cor. hom 7. Mysterium appellatur quoniam non id quod credimus inituemur sed quòd alia videmus alia credimus In sacraments as Chrysostome saith we do not see that which we beleeue but we see one thing and beleeue another Noe then in the Arke did beleeue that which he did not see which what it was S. Peter giueth vs to vnderstand when he maketh our baptisme the thing that o 1. Pet. 3.21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answereth the type and figure of the Arke which saith he saueth vs by the resurrection of Iesus Christ The Arke then was to him a figure and seale of the same whereof Baptisme is a figure and seale to vs p Rom. 4.11 a seale of the righteousnesse of faith of q Cap. 3.22 the righteousnesse of God by the faith of Iesus Christ to all and vpon all that do beleeue His deliuerance temporally was a figure of that spirituall saluation which both he and we haue by the washing away and forgiuenesse of our sinnes by the bloud and death and resurrection of Iesus Christ and in the beleefe hereof was it that he was made heire of the righteousnesse of faith In the second place Abraham is brought forth whose faith M. Bishop construeth to be no more but this that he beleeued that old and barren persons might haue children if God sayd the word and that whatsoeuer God promised he was able to performe Where if he had looked into the Apostles words with the eyes of a doctor of diuinitie he would haue found the seed there spoken of to be r Gal. 3.16 Christ as the same Apostle elsewhere expoundeth it Christ in person as the head and all the faithfull gathered as members into one bodie with him Å¿ August in Psal 58. Totus Christus caput corpus post Christus est toâ—um corpus Christi the head and the bodie making one whole Christ as S. Austin speaketh God promised vnto Abraham a seed wherein t Genes 15.2 all the nations of the earth should be blessed Herein God would make him u Rom. 4.13 the heire of the world and x Vers 16.17 a father of many nations not to that seed onely which is of the law but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham that we may know that a spirituall seed is here to be vnderstood which should become the children of Abraham by y Vers 12. walking in the steppes of the faith of our father Abraham and so should be made partakers of the blessing with him The performance of all this promise of blessing to Abraham and all the nations of the earth stood vpon his hauing of a sonne which God had promised vnto him The barrennes of Sara the old age both of Abraham and her might seeme to denie all hope of hauing a sonne But yet Abraham rested secure in the affiance of the power of God not doubting but that God was able and would giue him a sonne of whom Christ should come to be vnto him that blessing that God had promised This was the thing that Abrahams faith respected and to which the Apostle referreth it speaking of a promise that was to be sure not to Abraham only z Vers 16. but to all the seed both of beleeuing Iewes and Gentiles who are also called a Heb. 6.17 heires of the promise to the performance whereof to shew vnto them the stablenesse of his counsell God bound himselfe by an oath that by two immutable things wherein it was vnpossible that God should lie his promise and his oath we might haue strong consolation which haue our refuge to hold fast the hope that is set before vs. Of what that old and barren persons may haue children if God say the word O base and abiect conceipt of so diuine and heauenly a matter Nay but of the blessing which as the Apostle noteth before God did sweare vnto Abraham and vnto that seed which he would multiplie vnto him by faith to be blessed together with him Thirdly he alledgeth the faith of the Centurion of which our Sauiour testifieth that b Mat. 8.10 he had not found so great faith in Israel And what was that faith Marrie saith he that he could with a word cure his seruant absent Say the word only quoth he and my seruant shall be healed But did he only beleeue that by saying the word Christ could cure his seruant Surely he beleeued somewhat else that made him to beleeue that he beleeued somewhat else that made him to say Lord I am not worthie that thou shouldest enter vnder my roofe c August de verb. Dom ser 6. Neque hoâ—â—ret â—um 〈…〉 He would
That those words haue a farre different sence To wit that Christ had then ended his course and fulfilled all prophecies and endured all such torments as it pleased God to impose vpon him for the redemption of mankind of satisfaction temporall there is no mention neither can any thing be drawne thence against it No more can be out of this other Christ made sinne for vs 2. Cor. 5. that is the punishment of sinne as M. Perkins gloseth it but the learned say an hoast or sacrifice for sinne But we graunt that he suffered the punishment for our sinne and say consequently that all sinne is pardoned freely for his sake and the paine of hell also which is punishment of sinne but not other temporall paines such as it hath pleased the iustice and wisedome of God to reserue vnto euery sinner to beare in his owne person And after this sort and no other was God in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe And that Saint Paul vnderstood well that Christes sufferings did not take away ours may be gathered by these his words Colos 1. I reioyce in suffering for you and do accomplish those things that want of the Passions of Christ in my flesh for his body which is the Church But of this point more when we come vnto the Arguments for the Catholike part R. ABBOT What our Sauiour meant by saying in the very instant of his giuing vp the ghost a Iohn 19.30 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is finished we may coÌ„ceiue by the Apostle making as it seemeth application of that word when he saith b Heb. 10.14 With one oblation he hath * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consummated or made perfect for euer theÌ„ that are sanctified By that one oblation he performed whatsoeuer was necessary for our full and perfect satisfaction and reconcilement vnto God And therein he fulfilled all prophecies that were written of attonement peace to be made betwixt God man the effect wherof S. Peter expresseth saying c Act. 10.43 To him giue all the Prophets witnesse that through his name all that beleeue in him shall receiue remission of sinnes d Ephe. 1.7 In him we haue redemption saith S. Paul through his bloud euen the forgiueâ—eâ— of sins Now as the author to the Hebrewes inferreth e Heb. 10.18 where remission of these things is there is no more offering for sin so may we infer where remission of sinnes is there is no more satisfying for sin because sacrifice satisfaction haue one and the selfe same respect to sin Seeing then Christ hath done that that yeeldeth vs perfect forgiuenes of sins it must follow that there remaineth no further satisfaction to be performed for sin And thus much is coÌ„tained in M. Bishops words but that like Caiphas he saith wel vnderstandeth not what he saith Christ saith he endured all such torments as God would impose vpon him for the redemption of mankind And what is redemption but a paiment of full perfect satisfaction f Tho. Aquin p. 3. q. 48. art 4 in corp Quia passio Christi sufficient superabuÌ„dant suit satisfactio pro peccato reatu poenae humani generis eius passio fuit quasi quoddaÌ„ pretium quo liberati sumus ab viraque obligatione Naâ—â— ipsa satisfactio qua quis satisfacit siue pro se siue pro alio pretium quoddam dicitur quo seipsum vel alium redimit à peccato poenae Christus autem satisfecit dando seipsum pro nobis ideo passio Christi dicitur esse nostra redemptio Because the passion of Christ saith Thomas was a sufficient and superabundant satisfaction for the sin of mankind guilt of punishment his passion was as it were a price or paiment by which we were set free froÌ„ obligatioÌ„ both those waies For the satisfactioÌ„ wherby a man satisfieth either for himself or for another is called a price by which a maÌ„ redeemeth or buieth out himselfe or another from sin and punishment Now Christ saith he hath made satisfactioÌ„ by giuing himself for vs therfore the passioÌ„ of Christ is said to be our redemption If then the passion of Christ be therefore our redemption because he hath paid a sufficient superabundant satisfaction to free vs from obligation of guilt and punishment how can it stand that after Christes redemption the obligation should stil remaine that there should be yet a further satisfaction to be made Either it must be said that Christ hath not made a full redemption or else it must be acknowledged that Christ hath taken away all temporal satisfaction But Christ in saying It is finished testifieth that in his death he fully finished our redeÌ„ption Therefore he testifieth that he hath left no place for any further satisfaction This cannot be shifted off A perfect redemption taketh away all obligation of further satisfaction or else it cannot be called absolutely perfect Christes redemption therfore being simply absolutely perfect must necessarily inferre a deniall of temporall satisfaction Albeit the very name of temporal satisfaction in this case is absurd because the guilt of sin being only infinite eternal and in no fort temporall cannot be brought within any coÌ„passe of temporall satisfaction as before was said In a word we do not beleeue that Christ plaid the Sophister vpon the crosse to say quantum ad auersioneÌ„ It is finished that is the satisfaction of sin is fully paid but quantum ad conuersionem all is not yet fully finished but there remaineth some further satisfaction to be made No more do we beleeue that the Apostle when he said g 2. Cor 3 21. Christ was made sin for vs did play fast or loose as meaning that if we vnderstand sin quantuÌ„ ad auersioneÌ„ then it is true that he was made sin for vs that is the punishment or sacrifice for sin but that quantum ad conuersionem we are made sin for our selues or one man for another Or that when it is said h 1. Pet. 3 13. He suffered for sinnes once the iust for the vniust that he might bring vs to God the meaning is that in part he suffered for our sins to bring vs to God but left vs in part to suffer for our owne sinnes to bring our selues to God We cannot be perswaded that that was the meaning of the Apostle when he said i 2. Cor. 5.19 God was in Christ reconciling the world vnto himselfe because he defineth that reconcilement to consist in the not imputing of our sinnes and how are our sinnes not imputed if we be still holden in any sort to make satisfaction for theÌ„ But these things though they be apparently blasphemous wicked and do expose the Gospel of Christ to mockery contempt yet M. Bishop laboureth to colour with a sentence of S. Paul which for more theÌ„ a thousand yeares after the time of Christ and his Apostles neuer any man
the fire but still we say what is this to satisfaction We still require his proofe that for the vertue and woorth of these fruites it is that God is appeased towards vs. But that cannot be for a man cannot bring forth good fruite except first of all he be made a good tree for e Chap. 7.17 an euill tree cannot bring forth good fruite And if he must first be a good tree that he may bring forth good fruite then God must first be appeased towards him which is by the faith of Iesus Christ f Rom. 3.25 whom God hath set forth to be our reconciliation or attonement through faith in his bloud Our good fruites then are not the causes but the effects of Gods being appeased towards vs. If we haue none we are sure that we are in state of iudgement and damnation and the sentence of Saint Iohn taketh hold of vs but if we haue them we are not to account them the redemption of our sinnes but testimonies of the remission and forgiuenesse thereof Yea but Saint Iohn saith M. Bishop seemeth to confute the laying hold on Christes satisfaction by faith Where or in what words Marry because he saith Say not in your hearts we haue Abraham to our father We may imagine that he had a vizard on his face whē he wrote this that the paper might not see him blush Why what is there in these words against the laying hold on Christes satisfaction by faith Forsooth he saith to them it will not helpe you to say that ye are the sonnes of Abraham who was father of all true beleeuers Well but what is this yet to laying hold on Christes satisfaction by faith It is as much saith he as if he had said trust not to your faith hand off ye generation of vipers This is a strange construction that say not in your hearts we haue Abraham to our father should be as much as to say Trust not to your faith But it grew at Rome and we know that things farre fetched are woont to be very strange As for vs we conceiue in our simplicity that Iohns meaning was to reprooue them for flattering themselues for that carnally they were the seede of Abraham as if that were sufficient security for them towards God when as in the meane time they neglected the repentance and faith and workes of Abraham The true children of Abraham are they g Rom. 4.12 who walke in the steps of the faith of Abraham and h Iohn 8.39 do the workes of Abraham which they not regarding could not be accounted the sonnes of Abraham whose of-spring was reckoned according to the spirit not according to the flesh Thus doth our Sauiour testifie of them that they beleeued not saying vnto them i Math. 21.31 Publicans and harlots shall go before you into the kingdome of God For Iohn came vnto you in the way of righteousnesse and ye beleeued him not but Publicans and harlots beleeued him and ye though ye saw it were not moued with repentance afterward that ye might beleeue him Now is it not a wonder that whereas it is apparent that they had no faith yet Iohn Baptist should say vnto them Trust not to your faith Well all this is nothing he cannot serue the Popes turne that will not notably cogge and lye The rest of his commentarie accordeth with this where he foisteth in the satisfying of Gods iustice there being nothing in the words of S. Iohn that foundeth to that effect 14. W. BISHOP Cor. 7.10 The 7. obiection with M. Perkins Paul setteth downe sundrie fruites of repentance whereof one is reuenge whereby repentant persons punish themselues to satisfie Gods iustice for the temporall punishment of their sinnes M. Perkins answereth A repentant sinner must take vengeance of himselfe and that is to vse all meanes to subdue the corruption of nature and to bridle carnall affections which kind of actions are restrainments properly but no punishments directed against the sinne but not against the person Reply I neuer saw any writer so contradict himselfe and so dull that he doth not vnderstand his owne words If this subduing of our corrupt nature be restrainments onely from sinne hereafter and not also punishments of sin past how then doth the repentant sinner take vengeance of himselfe which you affirme that he must do Reuenge as euery simple body knoweth is the requitall of euill past We graunt that all satisfaction is directed against sinne and not against the person but for the great good of the man albeit that for a season it may afflict both his bodie and mind too as Saint Paules former Epistle did the Corinthians but this sorow being according vnto God doth much benefit the person as the Apostle declareth For besides this reuenge taken on himselfe to appease Gods wrath it breedeth as it is in the text following in our corrupt nature that loueth not such chastisement A feare to returne to sinne least it be againe punished for where there is no feare of paines much pleasure thither our corruption will runne headlong It stirreth vp also in vs Indignation against sinne and all the wicked instruments of it A defence and clearing of our selues with the honester sort And an emulation and desire to flie as farre from sinne as other our equals and consequently A loue of vertue and honest life which freeth vs frō that sorow and all other troublesome passions all which are plainly gathered out of the same text of S. Paul R. ABBOT The Greeke fathers Chrysostome Theophylact Oecumenius and Hierome amongst the Latines do referre the reuenge there spoken of by the Apostle to the punishment of the incestuous man whereby they maintained the authority and due regard of the lawes of God But we further very willingly yeeld that by reuenge is also meant a wreaking of a mans anger as I may terme it vpon himselfe being offended and grieued at himselfe for the sinne that he hath done and therefore bending himselfe to crosse and thwart those desires by which he was led vnto it This the Scripture teacheth vs by the termes of a Math. 16.24 denying our selues b Col. 3.5 mortifying our earthly members c 1. Pet. 4.1 suffering in the flesh d Gal. 5.24 crucifying the flesh with the affections and lusts of it and e Rom. 6.6 destroying of the body of sinne Thus men occasion requiring giue themselues ouer to fasting and weeping and mourning and forbearing of accustomed delights yea and to open rebuke and shame with men hauing by publike offence made themselues a scandall to the Church This reuenge we denie not we say that hereby we testifie both to God and men the displeasure and offence that we haue taken against our selues we teach others to take heed and carefully to shun those occasions whereby we haue fallen we labour hereby that the tēptations of sin may no more in the like sort preuaile against vs but we are still
the written word i Tertul aduers Hermog Adoro scripturae plemdinem c. Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis officina si non sit scriptum timeat vae illud adijcientibus aut detrahentibus destinatum I reuerence the fulnesse or perfection of the Scripture saith Tertullian Let the schoole of Hermogenes shew me that that which he saith is written if it be not written let him feare the wo that is appointed to them that adde or take away And so Basil saith that k Basil ser de fide Manifestus est fidei lapsus liquidum superbia virium vel respuere aliquid eorum quae Scriptura habet vel inducere quicquam quod scriptum non est cùm Dominus dicat Oues meae vocem meam audiunt alienum autâ—m non sequuntur Apostolus per humanum exemplum vehemeÌ„tèr prohibeat aliquid in diuinis scripturis vel addere vel demere cum dicit Hominis quidem Testamentum c. it is a manifest falling from faith and an apparent sinne of pride either to refuse any thing that the Scripture hath or to bring in any thing that is not written seeing our Lord Iesus Christ saith My sheepe heare my voice they do not follow a stranger and the Apostle by a humane example greatly forbiddeth in the holy Scriptures either to adde any thing or take away when he saith A mans testament when it is coÌ„firmed no man refuseth or addeth any thing to it Hereby then it is plaine that the forbidding to adde or take away hath reference to the written word of God and therefore that the doctrine of faith and religion is to be taken from thence onely and nothing therin to be admitted but what hath the warrant of the holy Scriptures 6. W. BISHOP M. Perkins His 2. testimony * Esa 8.20 To the law and testimony if they speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Here the Prophet teacheth saith M.P. what is to be done in cases of difficulty men must not run to the Wisards and Southsayers but to the law and to the testimony commending the written word as sufficient to resolue all doubts whatsoeuer Answ By the law and testimony in that place the 5. bookes of Moses are to be vnderstood if that written Word be sufficient to resolue all doubts whatsoeuer what need we then the Prophets what need we the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles what Wizard would haue reasoned in such sort The Prophet willeth here that the Israelites who wanted wit to discerne whether it be better to flie vnto God for counsell then vnto Wizards and Soothsayers do see what is written in the law of Moses concerning that point of consulting-Wizards which is there plainely forbidden in diuerse places Now out of one particular case whereof there is expresse mention in the written word to conclude that all doubts and scruples whatsoeuer are thereby to be decided is a most vnskilfull part arguing as great want of light in him as was in those blind Israelites R. ABBOT If M. Perkins had thought himselfe to be so wise as M. Bishop doth himselfe we should certainely haue condemned him for a wizard what we thinke of M. Bishop in the meane time we leaue it to him to consider of The Prophet in the place alledged dehorteth the faithfull from yeelding to the wicked motions and counsels of hypocrites and vnbeleeuers who casting away all trust and confidence in God and relinquishing the yoke of obedience to him sought by other helpes and meanes to secure and establish themselues against the daungers which they imagined to themselues who as they had giuen themselues ouer to idolatrie so followed the course of idolaters in this behalfe and for aduice and direction in such things as concerned theÌ„ for their safetie they sought taught one another to seeke to Southsayers and such as vsed familiar spirits and tooke vpon them to call vp the soules of dead men to giue answer to such things as should be demanded of theÌ„ By them they would be instructed what to do and what course to take for their owne good hereby were hardened in their abhominations and apostacie froÌ„ God to the further prouocation of his wrath against themselues He therefore aduertiseth the faithfull and godly not to ioyne with them in any such doings but when they shold perswade them to enquire of any such wicked persons rather to answer them a Esa 8.19 Should not a people enquire at their God Euery nation seeketh to their owne God The Lord is your God will ye not seeke to him will ye go for the liuing to them that are dead Hereupon he addeth the words here questioned b Vers 20. To the law and to the testimonie if they speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Wherin he giueth to the people of God a generall direction to go to the law to the testimony to be instructed what waies they ought to walke in and to hearken to none to follow none but only such as speake vnto them according to that word The Prophets of God called men one way false Prophets wizards and Southsayers called men another way he teacheth them therefore a sure way to know to whom to commit themselues by considering who spake according to that word Now to this the wizard giueth vs a wizard like answer that the Prophets willed them to see what was written in the law of Moses concerning that point of consulting wizards So then there is no more here said but this that if the wizards do not say vnto theÌ„ that they are not to consult with wizards it is because there is no light in them and who but a wizard would haue made such a construction of the place The Prophet teacheth them in generall to seeke to the law of God for aduice and answer of such things as touching which they went to consult with wizards southsayers to be directed thereby in seeking to prouide for their owne safetie thence to take resolution of their doubts and to take it for certain that they led them in darknesse whosoeuer should draw them to other waies then could be warranted thereby c Basil in Esa cap. 8. Vnaquaeque natiorem ambagiosam quaestionem de quae cupiebat edoceri suo proporebat Deo dissoluendaÌ„ Quos supponebaÌ„t esse Deos his offerebant diluendas inquisitiones suas Euery nation saith Basil vpon that place did propound to their God the doubt and question wherof they desired to be taught to haue resolution thereof whom they tooke to be gods to them they offred their questions to be answered Therfore he sheweth that the people of God for answer of their doubts should go to God in going to the law and to the testimony d Aducit Deus legem velut manuductionem viam tibi praemumentem Vis certò persuaderi quae sint futura Prouide
of the temple of the Lord. But it pitieth me to think of the sillinesse of this man in vpbraiding vs with not searching the writings of the auncient fathers of whoÌ„ I am perswaded that we may truly say that he neuer read so much as one volume of any one of the fathers had bene in pitifull case for the writing of this book had not Bellarmine bene content vpoÌ„ trust to lend him the whole stock Well he hath read them that haue read the fathers if they lie be it so he cannot tell how to help either himselfe or them Thus for the finding of a Iudge we came first to the Pope and from the Pope he hath brought vs to the councels from the councels to the writings of the fathers now froÌ„ the writings of the fathers he leadeth vs to the Church He alledgeth to this purpose two sayings of S. Austin The former vpon occasion of the question betwixt the Donatists him is thus m August cont Crescon lib. 1. ca. 33. Quisquis falli metuit istius obscuritate quaestionis candem ecclesiam de illa consulat quam sine vlla ambiguitate sancta Scripturae demonstrat Whosoeuer feareth to be deceiued by the obscurity of this question let him seeke for aduice to that same Church which without any ambiguity the holy Scripture doth demonstrate and point out We admit the condition we willingly hearken to the iudgement of that Church in obscure points which we do not readily vnderstand we highly esteeme the censure of that Church which otherwise by the Scripture is demonstrated to be the true Church S. Austine in those words hath reference to the whole Church from the time of the Apostles very rightly directeth him that was not able otherwise to discerne to presume that to be the truth which from the very originall had bene continued and practised in the Church This serueth not M. Bishops turne because it fitteth not to M. Bishops Church No more doth that other place which he citeth n IdeÌ„ cont epist funda cap. 5 Ego verò Euangelio non credereÌ„ nisi me Catholicae ecclesiae coÌ„mcueret authoritas I should not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authority of the catholike Church should moue me to it M. Bishop before hand telleth vs that S. Austin did not speak this as touching his being at first a Christian but euen now being a learned and iudicious Doctor he would not beleeue but for the authority of the Church But very lewdly doth he abuse S. Austine in making him so to say as if he had resolued that it being supposed that the Church should backslide and fall away he himselfe also would play the Apostata and fall away from the faith of Christ What was his faith built vpon men and not vpon God himselfe Did he not know that though o Rom. 3.4 euery man be a liar yet God is true What if the whole world had conspired against the booke of God as not long before by Arianisme it had against the Sonne of God when Constantius the Emperour said to Liberius Bishop of Rome concerning Athanasius p Theodoret hist li. 2. ca. 16. Quota pars tiles orbis terrarum qui solus facis â—â—m homine scelerato Liberius NoÌ„ dimnuitur solitudine mea verbum fidei Who art thou to the whole world who thus alone standest with a wicked man Liberius though afterwards he yeelded yet for that time answered well The word of faith is no whit impeached by my being alone and would not think we S. Austine beare the like minde howsoeuer all other sell away yet constantly to cleaue to that which he knew to be the truth It is not all M. Bishops foolish Rhetorick that can make vs to beleeue that S. Austin would make any such protestation to that effect Yea and were not both he his fellowes very absurdly wilfull they would well enough see as haply they do by that which goeth before and that which followeth that it can be no otherwise construed but as in the person of a man at first receiuing the Christian faith to whoÌ„ it is no small motiue thereunto that the same faith hath found credit entertainment throughout the whole world But the words themselues shall best declare to what purpose they were set down q IdeÌ„ vt supra Si inuonires aliquem qui Euangelio nonduÌ„ credit quid faceres dicenti tibi Non credo Ego verò Euangelio non crederem nisi me Catholicae ecclesiae commoueret authoritas Quibus ergo obtemperaui diceÌ„tibus Credite Euangelio cur eis non credereÌ„ diceÌ„tibus mihi Noli credere Maniâ—haeo Elige quod vâ—lis Si dixeris crede Catholicis ipsi me monent vt â—ullam fidem accoÌ„modeÌ„ vobis c Si dixeris Noli Catholicis credere noÌ„ rectè facies per EuangeliuÌ„ mo cogere ad fidem Manichaei quia ipsi Euangelio Catholicis praedicantibus credidi If thou shouldest find any man who yet beleeueth not the Gospell what wouldest thou do to him saying vnto thee I do not beleeue Surely I should not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authority of the catholike Church should moue me vnto it Whom then I haue hearkened vnto saying vnto me Beleeue the Gospell why should I not hearken to them saying to me Beleeue not Manicheus Chuse whether thou wilt If thou wilt say Beleeue theÌ„ of the catholike Church they giue me warning to giue no trust to you If thou wilt say Do not beleeue theÌ„ of the catholike Church thou shalt not do well to force me by the Gospel to the faith of Manicheus because by the preaching of them of the catholike Church I haue beleeued the Gospell We see that both the propounding and the processe of these whole words do cry out against M. Bishop and as it were with loud voice do proclaime that S. Austins meaning was no other but that the consent and authority of the Church ouerspreading the whole world was at first a mighty strong inducement vnto him to beleeue that Gospell wherein all so constantly did accord because it could not be taken but to be of God which had gotten that estimation and account with so many nations and peoples of so strange and diuers dispositions Marke the words gentle Reader What wouldest thou do to him saying I do not beleeue Surely I should not beleeue vnlesse c. vnto whoÌ„ I hearkned saying Beleeue the Gospel c. By the preaching of them I beleeued the Gospel The thing is apparent vnto any man that doth not stop his owne eies that he may not see And hereof most holily deuoutly the same S. Austin speaketh in his confessions to God euen as it were to tell vs the meaning of these words r IdeÌ„ Confess lib. 6 cap. 5 Semper credidi esse te curam nostri gerere etiamsi ignorabam vel quid sentiendum esset de substaÌ„tia tua vel quae
diuels to forbid to marrie truth if one should hold mariage in it selfe to be wicked and therefore condemne it in all sorts of persons as Montanus and the Manichees did But we haue a more reuerend opinion of mariage than the Protestants themselues For we with the Apostle * Ephes 3. hold it to be a great Sacrament they that it is a morall contract only Notwithstanding we maintaine that such persons who being of ripe yeeres haue aduisedly vowed chastity may not marrie not because mariage is not honourable but for that they haue solemnly promised to God the contrary which we also hold to be better than if he had maried And so to vse S. Austines words He forbiddeth to marrie who saith it to be euill but not he who before this good thing preferreth a better And a little after you see saith he that there is great difference betweene perswasion to virginity by preferring the greater good before the lesser forbidding to marrie by accusing lying together for issue The first is the doctrine of the Apostles which we teach the latter only of deuils * Lib. 3. cont Faust Manich. cap. 6. R. ABBOT Because the second is like the first we presume it to carie sufficient waight and strength of argument against M. Bishops answer The Apostle reckoneth it for one of a 1. Tim. 4.1.3 the doctrines of diuels to forbid to marrie M. Bishop answereth Truth if one should hold mariage in it selfe to be wicked and therefore condemne it in all sorts of persons as Montanus and the Manichees did But if he had vnderstood what he had said he would not here haue named Montanus for Montanus in this point was outright a Papist and condemned the Marcionites and Manichees for that opinion with which M. Bishop here chargeth him Tertullian being become by his fall the champion of Montanus and being vrged by the catholike Church with the words of the Apostle in the place here cited against b Ibid. commanding to abstaine from meates answereth the place cōcerning meates as Maister Bishop here doth concerning mariage that the holy Ghost in those words c Tertull. de Ieian Praedamnant iā haereticos perpetuam abstinentiam praecepturos ad destruenda et despiciēda opera creatoris quales inueniam apud Marcionē apud Tatiantum c. non apud paraecletum condemneth heretikes that should commaund perpetuall abstinence to destroy and disgrace the workes of the Creator Such saith he as we finde with Marcion and Tatian with whom the Manichees therein consented not with Montanus his paracletus As therefore in meates so in mariage Montanus condemned them who dishonoured the worke of Gods creation and tooke it to be a thing in it selfe vncleane and wholy to be condemned Therefore Tertullian writing againe in behalfe of Montanus concerning mariage setting the Church on the one side vnder the name of Naturalists or Carnalists and heretikes on the other side saith d Tertull. de Monogam Haeretici nuptias auferūt Psychici ingerunttilli nec semel isti nō semel nubūt c. Neque continentia eiusmodi laudanda est quia haeretica est neque licentia defendenda quia Psychica est illa blasphemat ista luxuriat illa destruit nuptiarum Deum ista confiuidit Heretikes take away mariage Carnalists vrge it they marry not so much as once these marry more then once their continency is not to be commended because it is hereticall nor the licence of the other to be defended because it is carnall the one blasphemeth the other exceedeth the one destroieth God from being the author of mariage the other shameth him Anone after he saith that e Jbid. Christum Paracletus contestabitur qualē credimus cū toto ordine creatoris their Paracletus did testifie Christ according to the faith with the whole order or ordinance of the Creator In the same place he alledgeth their soundnesse in the rule of faith namely that which summarily we professe in the articles of our Creede as an argument that those things which they taught were not of the euill spirit f Ibid. Aduersarius spiritus ex diuersitate praedicationis apparet primò regulā adulterans fidei ita ordinem adulterans disciplinae c. Fidem dicit pro eis integritas praedicationis c. Ante quis de Deo haereticus sit necesse est tunc de instituto c. Paracletus nouae disciplinae institutor c. who would first haue corrupted them in faith and then haue peruerted them in order of conuersation whereas now their integrity in preaching the faith did giue assurance or warrant for them A man saith he must first be an heretike concerning God and then as touching institution of behauiour but Montanus their Paracletus was as he saith an instructour or teacher not of any new faith but of new order and conuersation to which purpose he saith in another place hauing set downe a briefe of the articles of our beliefe g Tertull. de veland virgin Hac lege fidei manēte caetera iam disciplinae conuersationis admittūt nouitatem correctionis c. Propterea Paracletū misit vt ad perfectū perduceretur disciplina This law or rule of faith abiding other matters of discipline and conuersation do admit newnesse of correction and maketh the end of the sending of their Paracletus to be this that discipline or conuersation might be brought to perfection Montanus then denied not mariage according to the rule of faith to be Gods institution but professeth of their continencie that it h Idem de Monog Continentia religiosa legem nuptiarum honorat honoured the law of mariage and therefore M. Bishop did him great wrong to couple him in that sort with the Manichees who wholy blasphemed mariage as vncleane and hauing originall from the diuell and power of darknesse But yet he will say that Montanus taught somewhat against mariage and we acknowledge the same yet not as to condemne mariage but i Jbid. Saluo inquis iure nubēdi Planè saluo c. nihilominus tamen ex ea parte destructo qua continentiam praefert c. Praelatione continentiae imposita to preferre continency as Tertullian saith It is true that albeit he acknowledged mariage to be Gods institution yet he held the liberty thereof to be permitted but onely once and that once to be yeelded onely to the infirmity of the flesh euen as M. Bishop said before that to common Christians the Apostle said If they cannot abstaine let them marry but it is plaine by Tertullian that all this was but to commend a state of greater perfection k De veland virgin Quae Paracleti administratio nisi haec c. quòd ad meliora proficitur the ministerie of their Paracletus being that men should profit to better things and l De Monog Secundum sanctitatem caruis admonuit incedere should walke according to the holinesse
may be vowed vnto God but virginity is more acceptable to God then mariage therefore it may be vowed He nameth an exception to the first proposition if we be able to performe it and saith that it is before confuted but his confutation commeth too short and it still standeth good that continency is a thing whereof we cannot promise the ability to our selues and therfore cannot make any lawfull vow thereof But letting that passe let vs examine the proofes of his minor proposition that virginity is more acceptable to God then mariage He bringeth first the words of S. Paul b 1. Cor. 7.38 He that ioineth his virgin in mariage doth well but he that ioineth her not doth better and concerning the widow c Ver. 40. she shall be more blessed if she so abide in my iudgment We heare the words but yet we see not any proofe therein of that which M. Bishop would proue by them We know that liberty is better and more blessed then bondage and yet liberty is not more acceptable to God then bondage or the free-man then the bondman d Act. 20.35 It is a more blessed thing as our Sauiour saith to giue then to receiue and yet it followeth not that he that giueth is more acceptable to God or more blessed with God then he that receiueth S. Paul himselfe giueth vs to vnderstand in what respects he meaneth better and more blessed First when he saith e Ver. 26. It is good for the present necessity that mariage be forborne by them that can forbeare f Hieron cont Heluid sub fineÌ„ Quae est ista necessitas Vae praegnantibus lactentibus in die illa Jdeò sylua succressit vt postea recidatur Ideò ager seritur vt metatur Iam plenus est orbis terra nos non capit Quotidie bella nos secant morbi subtrahunt naufragia absorbent c. What is this necessitie saith Hierome Woe saith he to them that be with child and to them that giue sucke in that day Therfore the wood groweth that it may afterwards be cut downe Therefore is the field sowed that it may afterwards be reaped The world is full the earth containeth vs not warres are still hewing vs downe diseases take vs away shipwrackes swallow vs vp He giueth hereby to vnderstand that the Apostle meaneth this necessitie of the troubles that are incident to the faithfull by persecutions other temporal calamities the bearing wherof is so much the more easie by how much the lesse a man is distressed and distracted with care of wife children hath therby no hinderance but that either by life or by death he may freely do that that shall be according to God Againe to signifie his meaning the Apostle further saith g Ver. 28. The maried shall haue tribulation in the flesh but I spare you h Ver. 32. I would haue you to be without care The vnmaried careth for the things of the Lord how he may please the Lord but the maried careth for the things of the world how he may please his wife i Ver. 35. I speake for your commoditie that ye may cleaue to the Lord without separation By all which words the Apostle importeth that there are many cares and distractions incident to mariage whereby a man is holden to the respect of the things of this life and of the world that he cannot so wholy addict himselfe to God From these distractions single life if a man will so vse it is more free and giueth a man full liberty of applying himselfe entirely to those things wherin consisteth the seeking of the kingdome of heauen Thus therefore single life is better and more blessed because there is in it greater oportunity of following those good things wherein consisteth the attainment of eternall blisse Thus the father doth better that continueth his daughter being so willing vnmarried because he leaueth her at full liberty to bestow her self to the Lords vse Thus the widow is more blessed if she so abide because she is more free to serue the Lord. But M. Bishop telleth vs that twelue hundred yeares ago S. Austine of set purpose confuted this error and specially in his Treatise de Virginitate whence he nameth sundry chapters 13. 23. 24 25. Where it appeareth that M. Bishop neither vnderstandeth what we say nor what it is that S. Austin confuteth S. Austines speech his against the k Aug. de sanct Virgiuit cap. 13. Qui putant continentiae bonum non esse necessarium propter regnum coeloruÌ„ sed propter praesens seculum quod scilicet ceniugid terrenis curis pluribus atque arctioribus distenduntur qua molestia virgines continentes carent who thinke that the benefite of continencie is not needfull for the kingdome of heauen but onely for this present world because mariage is distracted with many earthly and troublesome cares the incumbrance whereof virgins and continent persons do auoide in a word as afterwards he expresseth it that l Ibid. cap. 24. Praesenti vitae vâ—le esse non futurae it is profitable for this life not for the life to come Now when we say that single life where the gift of continency is is more helpfull and yeeldeth greater oportunity to the seruice of God do we make it profitable for this life only and not for the life to come Hath the seruice of God a reference onely to this world and do we follow Châ—ist onely for a benefit in this life Indeed we should be far wide if we thought that the end to which the Apostle driueth shold be an idie voluptuous life but we determin that the preferment of continency single life so coÌ„cerneth this present life as that it specially respecteth eternal life We recken not of the preferment thereof in respect of this life but all the account that we make of it is in respect of the life to come knowing that by how much the more industriously and incessantly we apply our selues to the worke of God so much the greater reward of glorie we shall haue with him not by reason of anie merite or desert but by the heauenly disposition of that voluntarie grace and mercy which hath promised that m 1. Cor. 15.58 our labour shall not be in vaine in the Lord because n Cap. 3.8 euery man shall haue his wages according to his worke S. Austin therefore in confuting them that say that the benefite of continencie is onely for this life saith nothing against vs. He accouÌ„teth him no Christian saith M. Bishop that doth contradict Christ promising the kingdom of heauen to Eunuches Though those be no words of Austin yet we will aske him for what Christ doth promise them the kingdome of heauen Doth he promise it to them for being Eunuches Surely then many should come to the kingdome of heauen who neuer had anie beliefe thereof It is not then their being Eunuches that Christ respecteth but
ministerio Paul is not abashed in one of his Epistles to speake to his wife which he did not lead about with him because he needed not much to be ministred vnto The words which he meaneth are to the Philippians i Phil. 4.3 I beseech thee faithfull yoke-fellow helpe those women which laboured with me in the Gospell It is true that in respect of that power that he had of himselfe for containing he saith k 1 Cor. 7.7 I would that all men were euen as I my selfe am but these authors as we see haue holden that for no necessary proofe but that Paul might be married also as the rest were Yea but all of them saith M. Bishop after their following of Christ abstained from the company of their wiues But that is more then Master Bishop can proue yea Clemens Alexandrinus against those Heretickes before mentioned condemning mariage asketh thus l Clem. Alex. vt supra An etiam Apostolos reprobaÌ„i Petrusenim Philippus filioâ— procrearuÌ„t Philiopus autem filias quoque suas viris tradidit Do they also reiect the Apostles For Peter and Philip begat children and Philip bestowed his daughters to husbands And this of Peter is confirmed by the legend of the Romane Church which amongst many notable lyes counterfeit stories lighted no doubt vpon some truth The Legend recordeth that Peter had a daughter named from his owne name giuen him in his Apostleship Petronella which in the time of the persecution by Domitian the Emperour was much desired by Flaccus a noble man and thereby appeareth to haue bene then but young whereas if she were not born after the time that Peter was an Apostle she must needes be aboue threescore yeares old it being no lesse from the time that Peter was called to the time of that persecution And to giue the more likelihood hereof we find it certaine that Peter led his wife with him from place to place where he preached as did also other of the Apostles whereof the Apostle S. Paul speaketh manifestly m 1. Cor. 9.5 Haue we not power to leade about a sister being a wife as well as the rest of the Apostles and as the brethren of the Lord and Cephas M. Bishop will say he meant it not of wiues but of other deuout women as though it were not more likely that the Apostles hauing wiues should lead about their owne wiues rather then strange women Yea and the words of the Apostle conuict it so to be vnderstood who would not be absurd in speech to say a sister being a woman and therefore must needs be taken to say a sister being a wife therfore they that take it otherwise are faine to falsifie misplace the Apostles words as the vulgar Latin doth And whereas they are wont to say that those deuout women shold go about with the Apostles to minister vnto theÌ„ of their substance as some did to our Sauior Christ it cannot be the meaning of the Apostle here because he speaketh here of a power whereby he might burden the Church with himself and his but the going about of such women with theÌ„ had bene the disburdening of the Church Yea such women should haue bin said to haue followed them not to be led about by theÌ„ neither would the Apostle haue spoken singly as of one because it could not but haue caused suspitioÌ„ obloquy to go one with one saue only with their owne wiues And thus Clemens Alexandrinus in the place before cited vnderstaÌ„deth it of the Apostles wiues sheweth the cause why the Apostles tooke theÌ„ with them n Clem. Strom. lib 3 Ministraturae apud mulieres quae â—â—mos custoâ—tebant per quas etiam in gynaecaeum alsque reprehensione malauè suspitione ingredi posset doctrina Domini to minister to women which kept the houses that by them the doctrine of the Lord without reproofe or euill suspition might enter into the closets of women This was the speciall cause of their leading theÌ„ about in that respect Clement saith that o Jbid. Non vt vxores sed vt soreres circumducebant they led them not as wiues but as sisters not in regard that they were wiues onely but for that they were also sisters in the faith of Christ in the hope of the Gospell and thereby meet for that vse which was the thing properly intended in the leading of them But hereby he sheweth that certaine it is that the Apostles led their wiues about with theÌ„ so namely the Apostle S. Peter of whom he hath before said as we haue heard that he also begat children and when afterward his wife was put to death for the faith of Christ he was there present as the same Clement also testifieth in another place did p Idem Sirom lib. 7. Cum vides sei vxorem suâ—a duci ad mortem c. exhortanis consolando proprio nomine eam compellans dixit Heus tu memento Domini Tale erat beatorum matrimonium vsque adamicissâ—ma perfecta affectio Vide Euseb hist lib â— cap. 27. exhort and comfort her and calling to her said O wife remember the Lord Iesus Such saith he was the mariage of such blessed persons and their perfect affection euen to the greatest amitie Now last of all M. Bishop for example nameth the best Christians in the purest antiquitie liuing perpetuall virgins he citeth for it Iustin Martyr and Tertullian when he taketh it indeed from the fantastical dream of his owne idle head Of the best Christians neither of them saith a word onely they say that some did liue virgins and vnmarried amongst theÌ„ to shew how far they were from the fornications incests which were vsually practised amongst the Pagans Iustin hauing said that by the doctrine of Christ he that looketh vpon a womaÌ„ to lust after her hath committed adulterie with her in his heart that not onely the committing of adulterie but also the will and desire thereof maketh a man reiected of him inferreth these words q Iust Apol. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Surely many with vs both men and women of threescore or seuenty yeares who from their childhood haue learned the doctrine of Christ do continue vncorrupt and I glory that in all sorts of our men I can shew such The Translator to vncorrupt hath added coelibes vnmaried but there is no reason by the words of Iustin to vnderstaÌ„d any thing else but that they kept themselues vncorrupt froÌ„ fornication vncleannes which it was hard to find that any amongst the Pagans to such yeares had done But yet of that I will not contend onely I say that taking the words of vnmaried persons here is nothing said that either they were the best or better theÌ„ any other No more is there in the words of Tertullian who taxing the fornications incestuous filthines of the Pagans saith r Tertul. Apolo cap. 8. cap. 9. Nos ab
had vndertaken nor might without reproch and infamy leaue their course were content euen to cast themselues into the diuels mouth and by practise of lewd and vncleane life to worke their owne confusion and ouerthrow Albeit we would aske M. Bishop what it is for which they commended virginity in so high measure and degree If they respected the integrity of the flesh what was it more then was to be found amongst heathen idolaters as in the vestall virgins and others or then is now to be found amongst the Turkes If he will say that they respected it as dedicated to God why should they make that a seruice to God wherein they that knew not God might glory as well as they and wherein for it selfe there was nothing that concerneth the seruice of God If he will say that they conceiued it not as in it self to be a seruice of God but onely regarded the imploying of it to those things whereby God is serued they meant nothing against vs because we also conceiue the power of virginity to be an excellent gift and worthy to be admired and honoured where according to the freedome and libertie that it giueth it is faithfully bestowed to the seruice of Iesus Christ An excellent gift I say as the gift of learning the gift of eloquence the gift of tongues such like which may be in the euil as wel as in the good therfore are no otherwise acceptable to God but only in their vse Now as excellent gifts are very seldome and rare so is it in this many may be willing but few attaine vnto it and therfore it was the great ouersight of many of the fathers so promiscuously to entertaine multitudes and by such bonds to tye them to that kinde of life whereto so many were vnable and whereof they found that to be true which Hierome confesseth that b Hieron adu Iouin lib. 1. Jnâ—â—pere plurimorum est perseuerare paucorum it was in verie many to begin but in few to perseuere As touching their sayings which M. Bishop alledgeth they neede not much to be stood vpon If they speake of virginity in the two former sorts now mentioned they fall of themselues If in the last meaning I answer let virgins be according to the patterne which they describe c Cyprian de hab virg Quibus desideria taÌ„ carnis corporis nullae sunt Sola in vobis quae sunt virtutis spiritus ad gloriam remanscrunt that there be in them no desires of the flesh and of the body and there remaine in them onely the things of vertue and of the spirit for the receiuing of heauenly glory and wee will honour them as the more excellent portion of the Lords flock and the top of Christian perfection not for their virginity but for their piety wherof notwithstanding they haue the better opportunity by virginity and only so as that if maried persons shall equall them in pietie they shall stand as high as they The saying of Athanasius as he alledgeth it is a counterfeit neither was Athanasius the Author of any so base a worke The words here cited do shew the singular vndiscretion both of the Author that wrote them M. Bishop that cited them in that he calleth virginitie the ioy of the Prophets and the glory of the Apostles when in a manner all both the Prophets Apostles were maried men and not virgins and the life of Angels when it is a thing nothing concerning Angels These are but flourishes of vaine wits which respect not how substantiall but how glorious their words be And to such Rhetoricall amplifications Ambrose as touching that matter of virginitie is too much affected and appropriateth those things to the deuotion of virgins which nothing hindereth but that they should be common to the faith and deuotion of maried estate He so speaketh as if heauenly life were onely to be found in virgins whereas in maried persons the Scripture setteth before vs the speciall examples and patternes thereof As for Hierome he needeth no censure of ours being of old sufficiently censured by the Church of Rome as before hath bene shewed We reuerence his learning but yet wee cannot but acknowledge in him some want both of modestie and pietie where in a proposterous humour of extolling virginitie he speaketh basely and rudely concerning mariage and doubteth not to transcribe into his workes those sentences and arguments which Tertullian in his heresie vsed to the same purpose against the Church as to him that compareth his epistle ad Gerontiam de Monogamia and first booke against Iouinian to Tertullians booke de Monogamia will easily appeare To be short all the exhortations rules that they could vse for the keeping of virginity could not auaile but that the stinke thereof hath alwaies bene lothsome to the world They set bankes against a streame that could not be staied and thereby caused a deluge and ouerflowing of great vncleannesse Which if Chrysostome saw to be such as that he held it better there should be no more virgins as before was shewed what shall we but take them wilfully to dwell in darknesse who after so much further experience continue to maintaine that damnable vow which all Christian ages from the time that it first began haue had cause to rue As for the ministers they liue in chast and lawfull mariage as the Prophets and Apostles haue done and can for that be no more accounted carnall and fleshly then they were yea and they thinke that the wals of the stewes and Surgeons instruments beyond the seas and the confession closets of many female Recusants at home will beare witnesse at that day that they haue not bene so carnall and fleshly as Romish Priests 17 W. BISHOP Concerning the vow of pouertie and monasticall life in which as M. Perkins acknowledgeth men bestow all they haue vpon the poore and giue themselues to Prayer and Fasting yet hee is not ashamed to auouch that this vow is against the will of God and assayeth to prooue it Acts cap. 20. verse 35. It is a more blessed thing to giue than to receiue Answer As the very proposition that it is displeasing to God to cut off all cares of the world and to betake our selues wholy to his holy seruice and contemplation of heauenly matters is in it selfe prophane and vngodly so the proofe thereof is deuoid of naturall wit and sence Marke the Argument It is against Gods will to giue away all because it is more blessed to giue than to receiue Why if it be a more blessed thing to giue than they please God better that giue So that this his proofe improoues flatly his owne assertion But the dreamer meanes perhaps that if you giue all at once you shall not be able to giue afterward but rather stand in neede to receiue Reply But no such humane prudence can be drawne out of that sentence which encourageth rather to giue for the present then to
the likenesse of any thing in heauen c. The Papists say that the commandement is meant of the Images of false Gods but it must needs be vnderstood by the Image of the true Iehouah and it forbids to resemble God either in his nature or in his properties and works for so saith the Romane Catechisme vpon the second commandement Answer This passeth all kind of impudencie to quote the Romane Catechisme in defence of that opinion which it doth of set purpose disproue It teacheth indeede that the very nature and substance of God which is wholy spirituall cannot be expressed and figured by corporall lineaments and colours and alledgeth the places produced by M. Perkins to proue that vnlawfull yet by and by annexeth these words Let no man therefore thinke it to be against religion and the law of God when any person of the most holy Trinitie is purtraited in such sort as they haue appeared either in the old or new Testament c. But let the Pastor teach that not the nature of God but certaine properties and actions appertaining to God are represented in such pictures If the man be not past grace he will surely blush at such a foule error His texts of Scripture are taken out of the same place of the Catechisme and do proue only that Gods proper nature cannot nor may not be resembled in any corporall shape or likenesse Then Master Perkins returnes to confute the answer made him that Idols are there only prohibited and saith that we then confound the first and second commandement For in the first was forbidden all false Gods which man frames vnto himselfe by giuing his heart and the principall affections thereof vnto them Good and in the second admitting it to be the second is forbidden to draw into any materiall likenesse that Idoll which the heart had before framed vnto it selfe and to giue it any bodily worship which is distinction good enough to make two seuerall commandements Now the Romane Catechisme following Clement of Alexandria Lib. 6. Stromat and Saint Augustine Quest 71. super Exod and Ep. 119. cap. 11. and the Schoole-doctors in 3. Sent. distinct 37. doth make two commaundements of the Protestants last distinguishing desiring thy neighbours wife from coueting thy neighbours goods as they do Thou shalt not commit adulterie from Thou shalt not steale and make but one of the first two because the former doth forbid inward and the second outward Idolatry and the outward and inward actions about the said obiect are not so distinct as the desiring of so diuerse things as a mans wife for lecherie and his goods of couetousnesse And yet besides adde another reason very probable that the reward and punishment belonging alike to all the Commandements cannot in good order be thrust into the middle of them but must be placed either with the first or last Now comprehending the two former in one the reward is annexed conueniently to the first whereas if you make them two it is out of order and without any good reason put after the second This I say not to condemne the other diuision which many of the auncient writers follow but to shew how little reason Maister Perkins had to trust to that answer of his that we should confound the first and second which he saw the very Catechisme cited by himselfe doth make but one of both R. ABBOT M. Bishop doth much amisse here to put M. Perkins to the blush for an ouer-sight as touching the Romaine Catechisme and therin very ill prouideth for himselfe who in his owne booke hath scarcely written one leafe wherein there is not cause for himselfe to blush Verily he hath little cause to be so angry with M. Perkins for thinking better of the Romaine Catechisme then it doth deserue he onely pointed at it in a marginall note by memory which oftentimes deceiueth the carefullest man Albeit it may be that M. Bishop and I are both deceiued and so is it very likely that by ouer-sight of the writer or the printer the marginall note is put after which should be applied to the words before The Papists say the commandement is meant of the Images of false Gods But the point of question is whether it be lawfull to make an Image to represent God We say it is not lawfull because God hath wholy forbidden it when he saith Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen image c. That hereby God forbiddeth the making of any Image to him we proue for that God after the giuing of the law aduertiseth his people by Moses as to declare the intent of this commaundement that therefore a Deut. 4.15 they saw no image in the day that the Lord spake vnto them in Horeb out of the midst of the fire because they should take heede vnto themselues not to corrupt themselues by making them a grauen Image or representation of any figure Againe by the Prophet Esay he expostulateth the matter with idolaters saying b Esa 40.18 To whom will ye liken God or what similitude will ye set vp vnto him M. Bishop answereth that those texts do proue onely that Gods proper nature cannot or may not be resembled in any corporall shape or likenesse But if these places proue onely this what do they proue more then the heathen idolaters themselues freely confessed such at least as were of any capacity or discretion amongst them They knew their Images to be but corruptible things hauing beginning and end and therefore that they could not expresse the nature and condition of the Godhead which they knew to be immortall Hermes Trismegistus as Cyrill alledgeth said that c Cyril cont Iulian lib. 1. Jncorpâ—reum corpore significare impossibile perfectum imperfecto coÌ„prehendere non possibile sempiternum conferre cum momentaneo dâ—fficile it is impossible to signifie the incorporeall God by a body or by a thing vnperfect to comprehend that that is perfect or to compare that that is eternall to that that is but for a moment Zenophon a follower of Socrates acknowledgeth that d Minut. Felix in Octa. apud Arnob. ZenophoÌ„ Socraticus formaÌ„ Dei veri neg ac videri posse ideò queri non oportere Aristo Chius comprehendi omninè non posse vterque maiestatem Dei intelligendi desperatione senserunt the forme of the true God cannot be seene and therefore is not to be enquired of as also Aristo Chius that the same cannot be comprehended They both saith Arnobius perceiued the maiestie of God by despaire to attaine to the vnderstanding of him Antisthenes the Cynicke affirmed that e Clement Alexand. in proâ—â—ept Antisthenes dicit Deum nulli esse similem quare eum nemo potest discere ex imagine God is not like to any and therefore that no man can learne him by an image So doth Euripides for the notifying of God vse these words f Ibid Qui cuncta cernu ipse sed noÌ„ cernitur Who seeth