the scripture alloweth that speech Wee are messengers for Christ and for Christ or in Christes steede we beseech you 2. Corinth 5. 20. 21. He saith not as Christ but for Christ and the highest dignitie that the pastors of the Church haue is to be ministers only of reconciliation 2. Corinth 5. 18. and to be dispensers or disposers of the mysteries of God 1. Corinth 4. 1. See then what is become of this distinction Distinct. 37. There is an action in the Church which is both a sacrifice and a representation of a sacrifice beside there is also an otherthat is no sacrifice but a representation onelie the first is the Masse the second the Eucharist Bellarm. lib. 1 de missa cap 1. Contr. 1. The Eucharist also is a sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing as the word signifieth for other sacrifice externall in the Church we acknowledge none but these spirituall ones Hebr. 13. 15. 16. 2. Such distinction of a sacrifice representing and a representing without a sacrifice they learne not out of the word nay it is coÌ„trary to it for al that Christ commaundeth vsis to doe this in his remeÌ„brance and this doing is nothing else but eating drinking according to his institution in the sacrament 1. Corinth 11. 26. vers 2â— This do as often as ye drinke it This doing is coÌ„municating by drinking not sacrificing as they fondly imagine Distinct. 38. There is Duplex diuortium a double kinde of diuorce in matrimonie quoad thorum cohabitationem quoad vinculum A diuorce from bed and bourd onely the mariage knot or bond remayning still as in case of adulterie and an other kinde when the knotte or bond it selfe is dissolued and loosed Bellar. de matrim lib. 1. cap. 14. Contr. This distinction is contrarie to the Apostle as wee shall shew marriage cannot bee dissolued in respect of bedding and bourding together but the bond Vinculum must needes be vntied What the Vinculum or bond of mariage is Saint Paul sheweth The wife hath not power ouer her owne bodie but her husband and so likewise the husbande c. 1. Corinth 7. 4. and that this is the bond it is gathered out of the 15. verse where speaking of the departure of infidels hee sayth that a brother or sister is not in subiection that is is no longer bound to performe these duties and debtes of mariage verse 27. Art thou bound to a wife secke not to be loosed Ergo the bond may bee loosed the word here vsed is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the which worde commeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vinculum â— bond Therefore by not being in subiection or vnder power one of an other is to be freed and to be no longer bound If the marriage knot or bond could not be vntied among christians the apostle needed not to haue saide Seeke not to bee loosed for who will seeke for an impossible thing Distinct. 39. Some vertues are Morales moral some Theologica theologicall repentance which they call penance is a vertue Morall saith the Iesuit faith a vertue Theologicall Bellarm. lib. 1. de poenitent cap. 29. Contr. First this distinction is not currant for if you vnderstande by Theologicall that which is diuine for so wee englishe Theologia Diuinitie then are all the vertues of christians Theologicall that is Diuine both in respect of the author for they are all the giftes of God Iam. 1. 17. as also in respect of their operation and effect Yee are partakers sayth S. Peter of the diuine nature if ye flie the corruption of worldly lusts 2. Epist. 1. 4. Lo the flying of worldly lustes which is with them a Morall vertue is now become a theologicall or diuine vertue because thereby wee are made diuine or like to the diuine nature Secondly if they bee morall vertues which consist in manners and practise they theologicall that consist in knowledg and speculation Faith in that sense is not theologicall but morall Faith working by loue Gallath 6. 5. Thirdly what needeth such distinction and separation of vertues seeing the apostle ioyneth them all together Ioyne vnto your faith vertue to vertue knowledge to knowledge temperance 2. Peter 1. ver 6. 7. Therefore it is no good argument which the Iesuite maketh â—ayth belongeth not to repentance because one is of this kind another of that seeing the apostle both in nature practise ioyneth theÌ„ together Distinct. 40. In contrition Propositum non peccandi duplex there is a double purpose not to sinne any more Virtuale siue implicitum formale seu explicitum an inward and vertuall purpose and a formall and explicate purpose the first is not sufficient but it is necessary that he which is iustified from his sinne should make a formall expresse purpose not to sin any more beside the detestation which he hath of sinne Bellarm. lib. 2. de poenitent cap. 6. Contr. First the Lord saith by his prophet If the wicked will returne from all his sinnes and keepe my statutes hee shall surely liue Ezech. 18. 21. Here is nothing required but a forsaking of sinne and doing of righteousnes which may be done without any such formall or expresse purpose yet a purpose of heart is necessary Act. 11. 23. which must needs accompanie the detestation of sinne and amendement of life Secondly I pray you where was this formall expresse vowe or purpose in the theese vpon the crosse vnto whoÌ„ Christ notwithstanding promised paradise Luk. 23. verse 42. 43. Distinct. 41. They distinguish thus of merites There is Meritum de congruo merite of congruitie as the workes which goe before instification though they be not simplie meritorious Ex debito iustitiae by the due debt of iustice yet they deserue of congruitie Meritum de condigno merite of condignitie followeth iustification whereby a man by his meritorious works is worthy by iustice of the kingdome of heauen Rhemist annot Ro. 2. sect 3. Bellarm. lib. 2. de poenitent cap. 12. Contr. First that there is no merite at all of condignitie S. Paul sheweth saying The afflictions of this life are not worthie or as they reade Condigne of the glory to come Rom. 8. ver 1. 8. The Rhemistes distinction vpon that place of condigne to and condigne of is but a Iesuiticall toye and not worth the answere Secondly that there is no merite of congruitie before iustification it is thus prooued Without faith there is no merit for without faith it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11. 6. and saith is not before iustification Rom. 5. 1. Ergo. Distinct. 42. Workes of the lawe or of nature done without or before sayth merite not but workes done by Gods grace are truely meritorious Thus they answere vs when we obiect that place Rom. 3. 28. Wee holde that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe Rhemist in hunc locum Contr. The Apostle himselfe taketh away this distinction Ephes. 2. By grace are
yee saued through faith not of workes then it followeth ver 10. for wee are his workemanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good workes which God hath or deyned that wee should walke in Here the apostle excludeth euen workes of grace prepared and or dayned of God from being any cause of our iustification Distinct. 43. Some things doe iustifie Ex opere operantis by the worke of the doer Id est fide deuotione suscipientis That is by the sayth and deuotion of the recevuer so the sacramentes of the old law did iustifie Some things doe iustifie Ex opere operato by the very worke wrought as the Sacraments of the New Testament Bellarm. de effect sacr lib. 2. cap. 13. Contra. First there is one and the same efficacie substance and operation in generall of the Sacraments both of the olde and newe Testament For they did eate the same spirituall nieate and drinke the same spirituall drinke 1. Cor. 10. 2. 3. Secondly Yet neither of them do conferre grace or are causes of our iustification before God but are onely seales of the iustice or righteousnes that commeth by faith Rom. 4. 41. Yet wee graunt that in the Sacraments of the Gospell there is a more liuely resemblance and more full representation of spirituall things than there was in the other in which respect they are preferred before them Thirdly Wee are not iustified before God in part or in whole by any worke either operantis or ex operato of the doer or of the thing done But wee are iustified onely by faith all workes euen such as are wrought in vs by grace are excluded from being any cause of our iustification before God Ephes. 2. 10. 11. Fourthly And so farre is it off that any iustification can bee had ex opere operato by the worke wrought without respect to the faith of the doer that no such worke is at all acceptable to God much lesse able to iustifie for without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11. 6. And thus this Iesuitic all distinction is nipped in the head Distinct. 44. To extenuate eneruate the force efficacie of the death and passion of our Sauiour Christ as though it were not alone by it selfe a sufficient satisfaction for the sinnes of the world vnlesse other satisfactions as helpes were ioyned thereunto they haue forged and deuised impious and blasphemous distinctions of their owne First there is a kinde of satisfaction Pro amicitia restauranda for restoring vs to the friendship of God there is another Pro iustitiae restauranda for restoring of iustice lost and decayed in vs the first satisfaction is only wrought by the death of Christ the other must be wrought by vs Bellar. de poenitent lib. 4. cap. 1. Contra. Christ hath satisfied for vs in paying the raunsome for our sinnes and hath reconciled vs to God in imparting to vs of his righteousnes He hath made him to be sinne for vs which knew no sinne that wee should be made the righteousnes of God in him 2. Cor. 5. 21. therefore Christ hath by his death not onely redeemed vs and reconciled vs to the fauour of God but hath also clothed vs with his righteousnes who is made of God vnto vs our wisedom righteousnes sanctification redemption 1. Cor. 1. 30. Not onely our redemption but our righteousnes hec hath therefore satisfied the wrath of God in restoring his friendship and hath repaired iustice decaied in vs by his iustice and righteousnes Distinct. 45 There is a satisfaction pro â—câ—â—â—a for 〈…〉 another kinde pro poena for the punishment The first was 〈…〉 by Christ 〈…〉 the other is our satisfaction to bee 〈…〉 mine ibidem So there is duplex 〈…〉 〈◊〉 double or twofold remission of sins the first in baptisme both 〈…〉 poena from fault and punishment the second from the fault but wee our selues must satisfie for the punishment Bellarm. depoenitent lib. 4. cap. 14. Contra. If our sinnes be for giuen vs the punishment likewise together with the sinne is remoued for sinne causeth death and all other punishments It should not therfore stand with the iustice of God to lay punishment vpon men hauing forgiuen them their sinnes for this were to say that their sinnes are not truely forgiuen Christ hath set vs at peace with God by the bloud of his crosse Coloss. 1. 20. Ergo hee hath satisfied both for the offence and punishment For if God punish stil then were we not at perfite peace with him his anger yet abiding And whereas they make the first remission of sinnes to be auailable both for the sinne and punishment the second but for the sinne the Apostle reasoneth cleane contrarie If while we were yet sinners and enimies Christ dyed for vs much more being iustified by his blood and reconciled by his death wee shalbe saued from wrath through him Ro. 5. 10. 11. Much more saith the Apostle if then in the first reconciliation to God we had remission of both being now reconciled wee shall much more Hence also it is manifest that Christ worketh all both before our reconciliation and after Distinct. 46. Men also may satisfie for the fault but ex congruo non ex condigno It is a satisfaction of congruitie not of condignitie Bellarm. li. 4. de poenitent cap. 1. Contra. There is no satisfaction wrought by man for his sinnes no not of congruitie First it is repugnant to the nature and propertie of satisfaction for that which is of congruitie is accepted of fauour but satisfaction is an exact compensation in respect of iustice by this God is iustly satisfied by the other hee is but enclined to fauour as they teach Secondly there is no satisfaction for sinne ex congruo for when we were enimies saith S. Paul wee were reconciled to God Rom. 5. 10. But nothing that enimies can do is acceptable vnto God therfore God cannot any waies no not ex congruo by our satisfaction be appeased before our reconciliation nor yet afterward for our sinne in the purchasing of our reconciliation was alreadie satisfied for by Christ. Distinct. 47. Man can not satisfie God for the eternall punishment due vnto sinne but for the temporall he may Bellarm. lib. 4. de poenitent cap. 1. Contr. Seeing our Sauiour Christ hath fully redeemed vs by his most precious bloud he hath not onely satisfied for our sinne but for our punishment both eternall and temporall due vnto sinne Heb. 10. 14. with one offring hath he made persite or as the Rhemistes read consummated for euer them that are sanctified If then he haue consummated vs by our redemption he hath satisfied for all for if any thing were left to be done by vs wee should not be consummated by him And as for the punishments and chastenings of this life S. Paul sheweth the ende of them not to make satisfaction but we are chastened of the Lord that we should not be condemned with the world 1. Corinth 11. 32. Distinct. 48. There is
immediately by Iesus Christ Galath 1. 1. and verse 16. he saith he did not immediately being now called and appointed of Christ communicate with flesh and bloode Faith which iustifieth is not the efficient or instrumental cause of saluation Rhemist Galath 6. sect 4. But the contrarie is proued out of scripture 2. Corinth 5. 7. We walke by faith and not by sight As the eie then is the instrument whereby wee behold thinges present so is faith the organon or instrument of the soule whereby we apprehend thinges absent and inuisible That also is an euident place to this purpose Ephes. 2. 10. By grace are ye saued through faith and that not of your selues for it is the gift of God and not of workes What else can be the meaning of this place but that we are saued by grace apprehended by faith So that grace is the efficient cause faith the instrumental And least that any man should say that faith saueth vs as other vertues wrought in vs by grace not by an apprehension of grace but as a meritorious cause as the Rhemistes affirme the Apostle addeth that faith is the gift of God and therefore meriteth not and he excludeth workes euen workes of grace ordained for vs to walke in from beeing any cause of Iustification before God And so faith also is excluded as it is an act or worke of the vnderstanding onely and hath place onely in the matter of saluation in respect of the apprehensiue facultie and power thereof Whereas the Apostle saith the gift of God is eternall life Rom. 6. 23. The Rhemists take vpon them to correct the Apostles wordes saying thus The sequele of speech required that as he said Death or damnation is the stipend of sinne so life euerlasting is the stipend of iustice and so it is Rhemist Rom. 6. sect 8. What can be more contrarie to the Apostle then this Life euerlasting saith he is the gift of God Nay say they it is as properlie the stipend of righteousnes as damnation is the stipend of sinne but the Apostles declination from that sequele sheweth the contrarie Christes paines were of no account of their owne nature compared with his glory Rhemist Rom. 8. sect 5. A monsterous blasphemie and contrarie to scripture for if there were no comparison betweene Christes sufferinges and the glorie which he hath purchased for vs by them then his sufferinges were no satisfaction to Gods Iustice Wherefore his passion being the passion of the sonne of God was both a full satisfaction and a worthie desart of that glorie which hee hath obtained for vs Thou art worthie to take the booke and to open the seales thereof because thou was killed Reuelat. 5. sect 9. Christ therefore in respect of his passion did fully deserue all that glorie which hee hath obtayned for vs but there is no desert where there is not a proportion betweene the labour and the reward yet wee affirme not that Christ merited for him selfe for his owne glorification was due vnto him before the worlde was Iohn 17. 5. That our afflictions are meritorious of heauen Rom. 8. 18. Saint Paul sayth cleane contrary that the afflictions of this time are not worthy of the glory which shall be reuealed ibid. They deny that the Iewes did receiue the trueth or substance of Christ in their sacramentes as we doe in ours or that they and wee do eate and drinke of the selfesame meate and drinke Rhemist 1. Corinth 10. sect 2. and yet the Apostle saith plainely That they did all eate the same spirituall meate and all drinke the same spirituall drinke for they dranke of the spirituall rocke which followed them the rocke was Christ. ibid. Doth not the Apostle now say here that they did drinke the same spirituall drinke with vs for Christ was their spirituall drinke and so is he ours That where the Apostle sayth This is not to eate the Lords supper 1. Corinth 11. 20. Hee meaneth not the Sacrament which Christ instituted at supper but the feastes of loue which were vsed in the primitiue Church Rhemist ibid. And yet it is most manifest by the circumstance of the place that S. Paul reprooueth them for the abuses in the Lords supper and therefore putteth them in minde of the institution of Christ verse 23. which had beene a matter impertinent if hee in so saying the Lords supper had not meant the Sacrament That the force and efficacie of common prayer dependeth not vppon the peoples vnderstanding hearing or knowledge and that the infant idiote and vnlearned man taketh no lesse fruite of diuine office than any other Rhemist 14. sect 10. And therefore it is not repugnant to saint Paul to pray in the latine that is an vnknowen tongue ibid. sect 15. Yet in trueth S. Paul flatly condemneth the vsing of an vnknowen tongue in publike prayers and thankesgiuing Hee that occupieth the roome of the vnlearned can not say Amen at thy giuing of thankes seeing hee knoweth not what thou saiest for thou verilie giuest thankes well but the other is not edified And it followeth verse 19. I had rather in the Church speake fiue woordes with mine vnderstanding that I might instruct others then ten thousand words in a strange tongue What could haue beene spoken more plainely against the vse of an vnknowen and vnedifying tongue in the Church That man hath a proper freedome and motion in his thoughtes doings and all is not to be referred vnto God 1. Corinth 3. sect 2 Rhemist that man was neuer without free will but it is made onely more free by grace Rhemist Iohn 8. sect 2. That the Gentiles doe beleeue by their free will Act. 13. 2. All this is flat opposite to scripture Which saith wee are not able to thinke a good thought of our selues 2. Corinth 3. 5. And that God worketh in vs both the will and the deed Philipp 2. 13. That wee are not formally made iust by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto vs but by a iustice inherent and resiant in vs. Concil Trident. sess 6. can 10. Rhemist Rom. 2. sect 4. yea they condemne it as hereticall to say that a man hath no iustice of his owne to be iustifyed by but the iustice onely of Christ Rhemist Philip. 3. sect 3. And yet S. Paul sayth thus in plaine termes That I might be found in him not hauing mine owne righteousnesse which is of the lawe but that which is through the faith of Christ euen the righteousnes which is of God through faith Philip. 2. 9. Here the Apostle refuseth his owne inherent righteousnesse and cleaueth onely to the imputatiue iustice of Christ to bee iustified by though wee denie not an inherent righteousnesse in the faithfull but imperfect not a meanes of their iustification before God but the fruites thereof and is no other but that which we call Sanctification They doe set vp Idols or images to bee adored and attribute vnto them religious worship contrarie to the scripture Children keepe your selues
as there was in the law 2 The scripture saith Where the remission of these thinges is there is no more offering for sin Heb. 10. 18. But they teach that their Masse is a sacrifice propitiatorie both for the quicke and the dead as though remission of sinnes were not already obtained by the oblation of Christ. 3. Also the scripture saith Without shedding of blood is no remission Heb. 9. 22. how then can their sacrifice giue remissiō of sins as they affirme where there is no effusion or shedding of blood for they cal it the vnbloody sacrifice Bellarm. de miss lib. 1. cap. 25. Their doctrine and superstitious vse of priuate masses where the priest receyueth alone the people onely gazing and looking vpon him neither eating nor drinking is altogether repugnant to the vsage and doctrine of the Apostles as Saint Paul witnesseth Wee that are many are one bread and one bodie in as much as wee are all partakers of one bread 1. Corinth 11. 17. There ought to bee therefore many at the communion which are made partakers of one bread They affirme that it is a necessarie thing to receyue the communion fasting Bellarm. de miss lib. 2. cap. 14. But the Apostle seeth no such necessitie in it giuing libertie vnto those that can not endure to fast to eate at home before 1. Cor. 11. 34. yet abstinence for them that are able is conuenient That it is lawful for the parties married to be dismissed each from other for diuerse causes beside fornication as for heresie for auoiding of offence for the vow of continencie Bellarm. de matrim lib. 1. cap. 14. yet our Sauiour Christes words are plaine to the contrary Whosoeuer doth put away his wife except it be for fornication causeth her to commit adultery Math. 5. 32. That the coupling in marriage of a faithfull partie with an infidel is not onely illicitum but irritum is not onely vnlawfull to be made but being made is voide Bellarm. de matrim lib. 1. cap. 23. S. Paul teacheth the contrarie The woman that hath to her husband an infidel if he consent to dwell with her let her not put him away 1. Corinth 7. 13. The marriage therefore of such is not in respect of the vnbeleeuers infidelitie if there be no other cause actually void Though we grant acknowledge also with S. Paul that it is not lawful for the faithful to match in marriage with an infidel 2. Cor. 6. 14. That it is not against the law of nature for a man to marry his brothers wife neither that it is simplie prohibited in the law of Moses but that in some cases it may be dispensed withal Caietan Bellar. Bellar. de matrim lib. 1. cap. 27. But Iohn Baptist the best expounder of the lawe openly reproued Herod saying It is not lawfull for thee to haue thy brothers wife Math. 14. Mar. 6. It is a generall reproofe without any exception or limitation at al. That we are not iustified onely by faith yea they say that workes are more principal then faith in the matter of iustification Rhemist Iam. 2. sect 7. Flat contrary to the doctrine of the Apostle Therefore we hould that a mā is iustified by faith without the workes of the law Rom. 3. 28. Workes are so far from being more principall then faith that they haue not to doe at all in the matter of iustification before God That some sinnes are veniall pardonable of their owne nature not worthy of damnation Rhemist Rom. 1. sect 11. Whereas the Apostle sayth that the stipend of sinne is death speaking generally of all sinne Rom. 6. 23. yet both great small sinnes are not onely pardonable but indeed clearly remitted and pardoned by grace in Christ vnto the faithfull and beleeuers which repent and study to amend The law by Christ say they is Ministratio vitae effecta is made the ministration of life Andrad lib. 5. And they call it verbum fidei the word of faith Trident. Concil sess 6. cap. 7. But S. Paule calleth it a killing letter ministerie of condēnation 2. Corinth 3. 6. 9. And that it serueth but as a schoolemaister to bring vs to Christ Galath 3. 24. And he saith flatly that the law is not of faith Galath 3. 12. How then dare they call it the worde of faith vnlesse they list to play with an aequinocation of the worde contrarie to the Apostles meaning But it were too long to rehe arse all their opinions which they maintaine contrarie to scripture such in a manner are all which they houlde wherein they dissent from vs. Let these therefore suffice for example sake which we haue seene and for the rest wee will take their owne confession who doe not denie but that they hold diuerse opinions which are not grounded nor gathered out of scripture as Gabriel Biel confesseth of transubstantiation Non inuenitur in canone bibliae expressum It is not found expressed in the canon of the bible In canon lect 40. Likewise Siluester Prierias Indulgentiae authoritate scripturae non innotuere nobis Pardons or indulgēces are not known vnto vs by authority of scripture lib. cont Luth. Bellarmine also graunteth that single life is not imposed vpon ministers by the word of God there being no precept neither in the old or new testamēt that forbiddeth ministers to marrie Declericis lib. cap. 18. Againe in an other case he confesseth that Matrimoniū inter fidelem infidelē non est iure diuino irritum That mariage betweene a beleeuer an infidel is not void orfrustrate by the law of God yet the papists generally hold the contrary De matrimon lib. 1. cap. 23. And many other such like opiniōs they haue which in their iudgment are not found in scripture but as we thinke are able to proue are cōtrary to scripture in so much that it is a cōmon saying of their schoole-diuines Thus wold I say thus would I hold being in schooles but yet be it spoken here amongest our selues It cannot be so proued by the holy scriptures Ex Paralipom Abbat Vrspergens Bellarmine also concerning the adoration of Images saith that in a sermon before the people it is not safe to affirme that images are to be adored Cultulatreiae with religious worship de sanctor imaginib lib. 2. cap. 22. and yet he graunteth that concerning the matter it selfe it may be admitted that images after a sorte and improperlie may haue that kinde of worship cap. 23. Is not this now an holy religion that in corners secretly whispereth one thing as in the care and publikelie maintaineth and teacheth an other I conclude then this place with that saying of Bernard as he said of certaine superstitious orders of monkes An regula non concordat euangelio vel apostolo alioquiregula iam non est regula quia non recta Doth not your rule agree with the gospell or the Apostle then is it no rule because it is not right Apolog. Bernard so may
I say of this popish religion ifit agree not to the gospell Non est religio quia nonrecta It is no religion because it is not right But if they shall say vnto vs that their profession is agreeable to the worde of God not that which wee haue written but to the vnwritten word which are their traditions I will shape them an answere againe out of Bernardes wordes Qui vos audit inquit Christus me audit ac si diceret Iudicium meum inter obedientes contemnentes non de mea secreta traditione sed de vestra publica praedicatione pendebit He that heareth you saith Christ heareth me as if he should haue said I will iudge betweene obedient hearers and contemners not by my secrete tradition but by your publike preaching Epist. 77. How is it thē that our aduersaries doe flie from the writinges and preachinges of the Apostles to secret and vncertaine traditions which they imagine were giuen by Christ And here shall be an ende also of this part Heresies maintained and defended by papistes OVr purpose is here as in the rest to cleere and discharge both our selues and our cause of and from those foule and false accusations of heresie which our aduersaries doe blaspheme vs withal The Rhemistes most wickedly match Caluinistes and Anabaptistes together 1. Tim. 1. sect 4. they maliciously cal the sectes of protestantes the idolatrie of this time Rom. 1. sect 10. Whereas it is well knowen to all the world that we worship no images or Idols as they doe yea most wretchedlie they say we passe all heretikes that euer were Hebr. 13. sect 3. Bellarmine obiecteth 20. seueral heresies against vs Lib. 4. de notis eccles cap. 9. Wee wil then this doe first examine those pointes particularlie which they obiect for heresie and this being done we will afterward requite them with as many hereticall opinions as they haue inuented against vs but more iustlie and with a great deale more trueth The first heresie which the Iesuite obiecteth against vs is of the Simonions and heretikes called Eunomiani The Simonians held opinion that they were saued only by the grace of Simon their sectmaister whom they made their Christ and sauiour The Eunomiani taught that no sinnes could hurt them if they had faith Such also saith he are the heretikes of this time that would be iustified onely by faith We aunswere who seeth not with what impudencie these thinges are obiected against vs The Simonians said they were saued by the grace of Simon we by the grace of Christ is it all one with papistes to be saued by Simons grace and by the grace of Christ their heresie therefore was condemned not because they ascribed all to grace but in that blasphemously they set vp Simon to be their sauiour The Eunomians were such enemies to good workes as Augustine testifieth that they affirmed Quod nihil homini obesset quorumlibet perpetratio peccatorum That the committing of the most heynous sinnes could not hurt a man Heres 54. But God be thanked we are not enemies to good workes for we hold them to be necessarie and without them it is impossible to be saued for a liuely faith cannot be void of good workes yet by them we are not iustified before God neither in part nor in whole And if therefore they condemne vs as heretikes because we affirme iustification by faith onely let Augustine also go in the number of heretikes Nostra fides inquit iustos ab iniustis non operum sed ipsa fidei lege discernit cont 2. epist. Pelagian lib. 3. cap. 6. The righteous are discerned from the vnrighteous by the lawe of faith not of workes Abraham non merito sui tanquam ex operib sed Dei gratia fide iustificatus est Abraham was not iustified by any merite of his owne as by his workes but by the grace of God through faith lib. 2. exposition in Roman cap. 20. 21. Florinus the heretike affirmed that God was the author of sinne this heresie Bellarmine chargeth Caluine withall because he writeth thus that they which contemne the word of God Their owne wickednes is the cause thereof Sed in hanc prauitatem a Deo addicti sunt But they are adiudged or addicted vnto this wickednes by the appointment of God Ans. 1. Augustine reporteth not this to haue bene the heresie of Florinus but another that he should hold Deū malasnaturas creasse That God had created things euil by nature Haeres 66. 2. We affirme also with Caluin that men fal into sin not by Gods bare sufferance or permission onely but by the iust decree iudgmēt of God so the scripture saith that God hardened Pharao his heart Deus indurauit cor Pharaonis per iustū iudicium ipse Pharaoper liberum arbitrium God hardened Pharaos heart by his iust iudgment Pharao hardened it himselfe by his own free wil vnto euil de grat liber arbtr cap. 23. And in another place treating of those wordes of Dauid cōcerning Shemei the Lord hath bid him curse Dauid 2. Sam. 16. 10. he writeth thus Non iubendo dixit vbi obedientia laudaretur sed quod eius voluntatē proprio suo vitio malā in hoc peccatum iudicio suo iusto occulto inclinauit Not that God commaunded him to curse for then his obedience were to be commended but because God by his secret and iust iudgment did lead his inclined will being euil of it selfe vnto this sinne If Caluine now be counted an heretike for so saying let the scripture be blamed that teacheth him so to speake and let Augustine also take part with him Thirdly he obiecteth the heresie which is ascribed to Origen that Adam vtterly lost the image of God by his fal according to the which he was ereated So Caluine affirmeth saith he Per peccatum hominis obliteratā esse coelestem imaginem That by the sin of man the heauenly image was blotted out Ans. 1. Caluine saith not that the image of God was altogether lost perished in man but that it was corrupted onely depraued as S. Paul saith Berenewed in the spirit of your mindes Ephes. 4. 23. shewing that the very purest part of our nature was corrupted 2. Augustine goeth further then Caluine Natura tota fuit per liberum arbitrium vitiata Nature was wholly corrupted by mans free will tract in Iohan. 87. Homo non peccauit in parte aliqua sed tota qua conditus est natura deliquit Man offended not in any one part but in his whole nature wherein he was created he sinned Vitiato ergo libero arbitrio totus homo vitiatus est Free will being therfore corrupted man wholly or in euery part became corrupt Hypog lib. sen. articul 3. Fourthly Bellarmine obiecteth the heresie of the Pepuzianes who do permit women to be priestes So Luther teacheth saith he that a woman or a boy may as well absolue in the sacrament of penance as a Bishop or a priest And
actualis satisfactio an actuall satisfaction and that is our satisfaction Alia est satisfactio virtualis a virtuall satisfaction This name Bellarmine hath not but the sense Such is the satisfaction of Christ Per quam habemus gratiam vt satisfaciamus by the which we haue grace and power to satisfie Bellarmine de Purgator lib. 1. cap. 10. Distinct. 49. Christ hath immediatè immediately satisfied paid the raunsome for our sinne but mediatè mediately onely for the temporall punishment Bellarm. de poenitent lib. 4. cap. 15. Contra. Both these distinctions tend to one ende and therefore one aunswere shall suffice them both First If Christ hath both actually and immediatly satisfied for the greater that is our sinne and euerlasting punishment due to the same much more hath he for the lesse that is temporall punishment Secondly All punishment and recompense of sinne is caused by the curse of the law Cursed is he that continueth not in all things written in the law c. Galath 3. 10. But Christ hath actually and immediately redeemed vs from the curse of the law being made a curse for vs ibid. 13. which curse wee are not able to beare neither in whole nor in part Ergo actually and immediatly he hath redeemed vs from all punishment both spirituall temporall due vnto sinne Distinct. 50. Christ is a Sauiour in a double respect either for sauing men alreadie fallen into sinne and condemnation or els for preseruing susteining them from falling In this sense he was a Sauiour onely to the virgin Marie who was preserued onely from sinne by Christ not saued from her sinnes which shee had not Franciscant Fox p. 801. col 1. Contra. Christ is called Iesus a Sauiour in this sense onely Because he should saue his people from their sinnes Math. 1. 21. He was then either in this sense a Sauiour vnto Marie or not at all But her Sauiour he was as shee her self confesseth Luke 1. 47. Ergo he saued her from her sinnes In the other sense if Christ be a Sauiour at all for preseruing from sinne hee is so vnto Angels not vnto men as Bernard saith Qui hominibus subuenit in tali necessitate angelos seruauit a tali necessitate He that helped men out of their necessitie preserued Angels from such necessitie lib. de Diligend Deo Distinct. 51. When wee obiect that place of S. Paul against the Popish doctrine of merites Wee are iustified freely by grace Rom. 3. 24. They aunswere by a distinction There are two iustifications the first which is onely of grace and the seconde wherein wee proceede daily by good workes Rhemist Annot. Rom. 2. Sect. 3. Contra. The Scripture speaketh but of one iustification which glorification followeth Rom. 8. 30. whom he iustified them also he glorified If then this one iustification do bring vs to glorification what neede a second Againe their second iustification is nothing els but that which the Scripture calleth sanctification which issueth out from iustification as the fruites thereof But Christ is both our righteousnes and sanctification 1. Cor. 1. 30. Ergo he is both our first and second iustification and so both are of grace Distinct. 52. There is iustitia imputatiua iustitia inhaerens iustice imputatiue when the righteousnes of Christ is imputed vnto vs and made ours by faith Iustice inhaerent is that iustice that actually abydeth in vs by this wee are iustified and truely made iust not by the other Rhemist annot Rom. 2. Sect. 4. Contra. A iustice inherent wee graunt to be in faithfull men but imperfect it is not able to iustifie them before God But the righteousnes onely of Christ imputed to vs by faith is our iustice before God The Apostle saith Christ was made sinne for vs that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him 2. Corinth 5. 21. Looke how Christ was made sinne for vs so are we made righteousnes in him but our sinnes were imputed to him him selfe knewe no sinne Ergo our righteousnes before God is none other but his righteousnes imputed to vs by faith Distinct. 53. Whereas they holde that the law may be perfitly fulfilled in this life lest it should seeme a verie absurd opinion and not farre from blasphemie as in deede it is not they would qualifie the matter by a distinction there is a perfection among men a perfection among Angels one kinde in earth another in heauen the perfection in this life may be attained vnto though the other cannot Harding Defens Apolog. 368. pag. Contra. First this is an absurde distinction nothing to the purpose The question is of the perfection of obedience to the lawe and hee telleth vs of the perfection of Angels as though the lawe were giuen to Angels as if God had said to them Thou shalt not steale thou shalt not commit adulterie c. Secondly Such a perfection as God hath appointed in this life wee denie not but that it is possible by Gods grace to attaine vnto But full and perfect obedience to the lawe in this life cannot be had no otherwise than Christ hath fulfilled it for vs. Saint Paul saith They that are of the workes of the Law are vnder the curse but they which are of faith are blessed Galath 3 9. 10. The lawe therefore vnto vs is no otherwise perfitly fulfilled in this life so that wee by such fulfilling may escape the curse thereof than by faith and beleefe in Christ who hath done it for vs. Distinct. 54. There is an habitual and an actual faith the faith in habite which also wee may call a potentiall faith The actuall faith is to bee found in such as are of yeares of discretion Bellarm. de Baptism lib. 1. cap. 11. Contra. There is no habituall or potentiall faith that pleaseth God The liuely iustifying faith is alwaies actuall working by loue Galathians 5. 6. Distinct. 55. Sinnes some are venial that is pardonable of their owne nature Some mortal because all that doe them are worthie of damnation Rhemist Rom. 1. Sect. 11. Contra. That all sinnes by grace are pardonable thorough Christ to all beleeuers blasphemie onely against the Holy Ghost excepted which is irremissible and which the faithfull are sure to be preserued from wee graunt But no sinne of it owne nature is pardonable For all transgression of the lawe is subiect to the curse Galath 3. 10. But all sin is the transgression of the law 1. Iohn 3. 10. Ergo. Distinct. 56. A man may sinne two waies materialiter formaliter materially and formally Hee that sinneth materially onely that is of a simple minde doeth it sine culpa without his fault as Peter did failing somwhat in his example Galath 2. Erratum fuit absque vlla Petri culpa it was a small errour without any fault of Peters Bellarm. de Pontif. lib. 1. cap. 28. Contra. All sinne in deede is not a like heynous for trespasses committed willingly are greater than faultes done of simplicitie or ignorance yet are they
all sinnes and make the offender guiltie much or little Otherwise there should not haue needed any sacrifices to be prouided in the law for sinnes done of ignorance Leuit. 4. Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne Rom. 14. 23. He sayth not whatsoeuer is done of malice or wilfulnes but whatsoeuer is not of faith that is of a sure ground done with certaine knowledge and perswasion and according to a good conscience as Bernard expoundeth the place De fide vera non falsaputo dixisse Apostolum omne quod non ex fide peccatum quia fides falsa fides non est Non autem ex fide vera bonum creditur quod malum est I thinke the Apostle spake of a true not a false faith in that place Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne because a false faith is no faith and by a true faith a man can not beleeue that to be good which is euill lib. de Dispensat Therefore all sinnes done ignorantly and simply though the intent be neuer so good do make the partie that sinneth guiltie and faultie Distinct. 57. There is a double certaintie of saluation Certitudo infallibilis an infallible certitude which a man cannot haue in this life certitudo humana moralis a morall and humane certitude and this is sufficient for a man to rest himselfe vpon Bellarm. de Sacram. lib. 1. cap. 28. Contra. First they speake contraries for how can there be a certitude not vnfallible for that that is certaine is vnfallible and what is fallible is vncertaine Secondly The Apostle saith otherwise Giue diligence to make your calling and election sure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sure without staggering or wauering For if ye do these things ye shall neuer fall 2. Peter 1. 10. Is not this an vnfallible certitude whereby a man shall be assured neuer to fall If this might not be attained vnto in this life S. Peter would not exhort vnto it Distinct. 58. I let passe here their idle fansies and fonde schoole distinctions not fit to bee vsed by boy Sophisters much lesse by men that would be counted graue diuines As how there are causae morales iustificationis aliae causae Physicae Morall causes of our iustification and Physical or naturall causes Bellarm. de effect sacram lib. 2. cap. 11. Contra. This distinction is repugnant to the Iesuites own doctrine for faith is no Morall but a Theologicall vertue as he distinguisheth them but it is faith that iustifieth Rom. 5. 1. Ergo no morall vertue Themselues also exclude the workes of nature from being any cause of iustification how then can there be any Physicall causes for in deede our iustification is no Physicall or naturall but a metaphysicall and supernaturall worke Distinct. 59. Not much vnlike to this is that distinctiō of dolor summus intensiuè appretiatiuè Our sorrow is greatest intensiuely when it is in the highest degree It is the greatest appretiatiuely or in estimation when as wee sorrow not for a thing as much as wee can yet wee had rather loose other things than loose that As a godly man may mourne intensiuelie for the death of his children more than for his sinnes yet hee had rather loose his children than the fauour of God True contrition then requireth sorrow in the highest degree appretiatiuè but not intensiuè Bellarm. lib. 1. de poenitent cap. 11. Contra. It is not possible that a man should weepe more for that which hee lesse esteemeth And if a man mourne more for a temporall losse than for his sinnes hee mourneth not a right Therefore sorrow for our sinnes ought to be the greatest in the highest degree intensiuè And thus true sorrow is described in the Scriptures Wee roare like Beares and mourne like Doues Esay 59. 10. Beholde O Lorde how I am troubled my bowels swell my Liuer is powred out vpon the earth Ierem. Lament 1. 20. O that my head were as the waters and mine eies as fountaines of teares Ierem. 9. 1. Cut off thine haire O Ierusalem and cast it away and take vp a complaint Ierem. 7. 29. They shall mourne like Doues smiting vpon their breastes Nahum 2. 7. In that day shall there be great mourning in Ierusalem as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddo Zachar 12. 11. Thus the Prophets did vse to describe true sorrow for sinne than the which none could be greater as Moses saith Seeke the Lorde with all thine heart and all thy soule Deut. 4. 29. Wherfore sorrow for sinne ought to be the greatest and chiefest of all other euen intensiuè as wee haue said Distinct. 60. Many such goodly distinctions they haue as to shewe that two bodies may be in one place they haue inuented this distinction there is duplex diuisio extrinseca respectu locs intrinseca ratione subiecti There are two kindes of diuision of one thing from another the externall diuision in respect of place the internall in respect of the subiect And so when two bodies are in one place they are internallie distinct from themselues though they be not distinct and diuided in place the first diuision is taken away not the second Bellarm. lib. 3. de Eucharist cap. 3. See what iugling here is and all to breede an impossible conclusion for seeing euery bodie hath his proper place yea spirites haue their proper definite places much more bodies two bodies then must haue two places vnlesse they be mingled and incorporate together and so make but one bodie Thus they distinguish of the being and subsistence of the accidents of bread and wine in the Eucharist without their subiects sunt in se negatiue non positiuè they haue a being in themselues negatiuely not positiuely Bellarm. lib. 3. de Eucharist cap. 24. Is not this good stuffe I pray you what is esse negatiue to be with a negatiue that is put the negatiue non to esse and so non esse by this skilfull Philosophie shall be esse not to be is all one with to be Such toyes these vaine men do traine vp their schollers in and thinke by them to deceiue the worlde I will trouble the Reader at this time with no more of their stuffe by these examples alreadie set foorth wee may giue our iudgement of the rest That their distinctions are lewd sophisticall and vaine inuentions to obscure the truth withall and not woorth a rush all distinctions wee condemne not wee knowe they haue their profitable vse for the finding out of truth and discouering of falshood but such distinctions as serue to countenance errour superstition against the manifest truth of Gods worde such as are these Popish distinctions wee vtterly abhorre condemne Of such distinctions we may say as one of their owne fellowes said of that distinction of Simonie There were Simoniaca de sui natura there were Simoniacall things by nature forbidden by the worde of God as to buy or sell Sacraments Simoniaca iure positiuo Simoniacall things by the positiue lawe and constitutions of
well with the Ecclesiasticall function much more the care of one familie may The Iesuit is not wel aduised so soon to forget himselfe 9 That place in Zacharie Thou hast loosed thy prisoners out of the pit where there was no water Zachar. 9. 11. Bellarmine in one place expoundeth of Limbus patrum The dungeon of darknes from whence the Patriarkes were deliuered lib. 4. de Christi anima cap. 〈◊〉 In another place hee alleadgeth it to prooue purgatorie lib. 1. de Purgator cap. 3. But Limbus patrum and purgatorie are places among Papistes much different 10 Bellarmine in expouÌ„ding of that place 1. Cor. 3. 13. The fire shal trie euery mans worke and vers 15. He shalbe saued yet as it were by the fire is put to such trouble and busines that within the compasse of one Chapter hee admitteth contrarie senses of the same place in the first place by fire vnderstanding the iudgement of God in the seconde the flames of purgatorie de Purgator lib. 1. cap. 4. 11 Bellarmine in one place writeth thus In extremo iudicio duo tantum loca remanebunt Paradisus Gehenna At the last iudgement two places onely shall remaine Paradise and Gehenna heauen and hell lib. 1. 〈…〉 g. cap. 8. respons ad 5. obiect And yet not long after he confesseth that there are two places of eternal punishment Limbus infantum pro poena solius damni aeterna the dungeon of infants for eternal punishment of losse without smart and infâ—rnus pro poena damni sensus Hel for the eternall punishment both of losse and smart These then are two places that shall last for euer and Heauen is the third how then are there but two lib. 2. de Purg. ca. 6. 12 Bellarmine otherwhile beareth vs in hand that there are but two kindes of religious worship The higher kinde called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 due onely to God and an inferior sort called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proper to Saintes vnto the which kinde belongeth that which they call Hyperdouleiâ— a higher kinde of inferior seruice or worship proper to the virgine Marie and the humanitie of Christ so he maketh three kindes in all lib. â— de Sanct. cap. 12. But in another place he doubleth the number and maketh sixe seuerall sortes Latreia simpliciter and secundum quid the first due vnto God the second vnto his image Hyperdulia simpliciter and secundum quid and so likewise Dulâ—a simpliciter and secundum quid the first proper vnto the virgine Marie and other Saintes the other to their images lib. 2. cap. 25. 13 Bellarmine to proue amongst other reasons that those words of Christ This is my bodie are taken properly not figuratiuely alledgâ—â—h this for one verba legum perspicua propria esse debent the wordes of lawes and statutes should be perspicuous and proper And againe Dogmata praecipua non nisi proprijs verbis tradi solent in diuiâ—is literis principall precepts are wont in the Scriptures to be expressed in proper wordes therefore it is not like that Christ being now to prescribe a perpetuall lawe and forme of this sacrament would speake obscurely lib. 1. de Eucharist cap. 9. yet elswhere hee saith Necessariò fatendum est scripturas esse obscurissimas It must necessarily be graunted that the Scriptures are most obscure de Verb. lib. 3. cap. 1. And findeth great 〈◊〉 with vs for saying that the precepts of faith are euldently expressed in Scripture which is no more than hee himselfe affirmeth 14 Sometime Bellarmine telleth vs that Corpus Domini solo corpore 〈◊〉 fide acceptum nihil prodest That the bodie of Christ being onely receiued with the bodie profiteth not de Eucharist lib. 3. cap. 9. Wherein hee faith right Sometime againe hee would make vs beleeue that the Sacraments are auailable ex opere operato by the verie woorke wrought non ex merito agentis vel suscipientis not for the worthines either of the receiuer or Minister And againe Fides poenitentia non dant efficaciam sacramenti Faith and repentance doe not giue efficacie to the Sacrament lib. 2. de Sacrament cap. 1. How these things agree together I can not see that the Sacrament should not profite without the faith of the receiuer And againe that it should auaile ex opere operato without any respect had to the receiuer 15 Bellarmine saith opera bona sine fide non prosunt good workes profite not without faith de Sacrament Eucharist lib. 3. cap. 9. And yet els-where confesseth that there may be Meritum de congruo a merite of congruitie before iustification If then workes may merite then they are auailable and that without faith which cannot be had before iustification Bellarmine lib. 2. de Poenitent cap. 12. 16 Bellarmine in one place saieth Non solum res sed etiam verba in Sacramentis nouae legis a Deo determinata sunt vt non liceat quidpiam immutare The wordes and matter in the Sacraments of the newe lawe are so determined of God that it is not lawfull to change one iotte de Sacrament lib. 1. cap. 21. yet they haue presumed contrarie to their owne rule to change both As for the matter of the Eucharist they haue taken away the one halfe depriuing the people of the cup. And concerning the wordes they do shewe no lesse boldnesse in altering them They haue put in enim into the wordes of consecration saying hoc enim est corpus meum and in consecrating the cup they adde these wordes mysterium fidei The mysterie of faith and all this Bellarmine saith is well done and that these wordes which are not founde in the Gospell are supplyed by tradition from Saint Peter de Sacram. Eucharist lib. 4. cap. 14. Thus they offend against their owne rules for they adde vnto the wordes determined of God in his holye worde which is conteined in the Scriptures 17 Bellarmine sometime graunteth that the bodie of Christ is made of bread in the Eucharist vt ex aqua factum est vinum as of water Christ made wine lib. 3. de Eucharist cap. 24. But in another place he flatly denyeth it for that was a productiue conuersion of the water into wine which is when that beginneth to be which was not before but the changing of bread into Christes body is no productiue conuersion but onely adductiue not making a thing to be which was not before but onely bringing it to a place where it was not before De Eucharist lib. 3. cap. 18. 18 To saye that the Iewes did not eate the same spirituall meate with vs and that the Manna which they did eate had no spirituall effect which is affirmed notwithstanding by Saint Paul 1. Corinth 10. 1. 2. and yet to graunt that they which were then iust or righteous were so iust ob participationem sacrificiâ— crucis by the participation of the sacrifice vpon the crosse I thinke are plaine contraries to say they were not partakers of the same spirituall meate with vs
These and an hundred such like proper Rhetoricall speeches our good countri-man hath sent vs from Louaine to shew how he hath profited in popish eloquence and to make vp our mouthes after he hath long dallied in wordes in good sober sadnes he speaketh thus friendly vnto vs OmniuÌ„ quidem haereticoruÌ„ caecitas magna est pertinacia singularis sed vestra hodie Whitachere tua inquam tuorumque conâ—enarum haereticorum tum caecitas tum pertinacia longè maxima est In all heretikes there is both great blindnesse and singular obstinacie but thy blindnes Whitakers and wilfulnes with the rest of thy fellow-heretikes passeth all lib. 3. cap. 7. sect 5. Wee are much beholding to you good countriman Father Thomas Stapleton that worthie Louanian professor for we will giue you your titles though that worthie man be but plaine whitakers with you that you can finde in your hart to giue vs the vpper hand in blindnes and wilfulnes of all heritikes that euer were But cursed and confounded bee all such heretikes as are more wilfullye blinde and obstinate against the truth then papists be This doubtie Doctor sturdie Stapleton chargeth as wee haue seene this godlie learned man with foure especial crimes ignorance follie impudencie lying But you M. Stapleton therein shew your selfe neither so deepe a clarke nor so wise a man or of so sober a spirit as you would be taken for As for the first his which you cal ignoraÌ„ce shal be able by Gods grace to match ouermatch your LouaniaÌ„ learning or sophistrie rather The folishnes of the Gospell simplicity of the truth in him shal not giue place to your humane and serpentine wisedome In deede he is too modest too milde and humble a man to deale with so proud vainglorious and spitefull boasters A wrangling Sophister were fitter to answere your intemperat and immodest rayling than so graue and reuerend a Diuine But as for lying take it to your selues both it and the father therof There shal be more trueth found in fewe of his lines than manie of your leaues and more good diuinitie in one page than is in your whole booke And haue you beene these foure yeres in hatching so goodly a bird and bringing foorth a Cockatrice egge Surely you haue spent your time well And be these the frutes of your studies Wel ex vnguibus Leonem by such fruits we know what the tree is what neede other arguments your vsual and customarie railing bewraieth your malicious spirite And tell me you wretched miserable men which haue nothing more common in your mouthes than to call vs asses doults fooles how can you escape that heauie sentence of our Sauiour which saith that who so calleth his brother foole is in danger of hell fire Math. 5. But it is no newe thing for Heretikes to raile and reuile it hath euer beene their custome and guise The Pelagians called Augustine Cultorem daemonum a worshipper of diuels August cont Iulian. lib. 3. cap. 18. The Donatists accused Cecilian a Catholicke Bishop of sinne against the holie Ghost August contra Crescon lib. 4. cap. 17. So it is true as Maxentius saith Haeretici cum peruersitatis suae non possunt reddere rationem ad maledicta conuertuntur Heretikes when they finde them selues not able to yeeld a reason of their wilfulnes then they fall to plaine rayling Such plentie of scoffes taunts of cursings reuilings is an euident signe of an euill cause bewraieth a cankred stomacke We will not answer them in the same kinde for our cause is better our malice hatred much lesse It grieueth not vs to be euill spoken of without cause We are sorie for them they hurt not vs but blemish their owne credit before men and make their account more heauie before God I wil shut vp this place with that good saying of Bernard Bonum mihi si me dignetur Deus vti pro Clypeo libens excipio in me detrahentium linguas maledicas vt noÌ„ ad ipsum perueniaÌ„t It is good for mee if God vouchsafe to vse me in steed of a buckler I willingly do latch in my selfe the dartes of slaunderous tongues that they light not vpon him Popish slaunders and false accusations Part. 2. NOw in the next place hauing tasted sufficiently of the first dish of their bitter sower taunts reproches which we haue had but a cold welcom vnto let vs take an assay of the next And that I feare me we shal find not much plesanter Yet because wee will not be vnmannerly ghestes wee will taste of euery dish Our aduersaries therefore are not contended to load vs with bitter and vnsauourie words but they do also charge vs with fained and deuised things accusing vs falsely and imposing vpon vs strange vnknowen articles Their accusations then and false challenges are either generall against our whole Church or particular directed leauelled against some speciall men and both kindes concerning either the doctrine or maners of our Church of these in order and first of their accusations in generall and vaine surmises of our doctrine and here I will especially follow our Rhemistes as before we made bold with master Harding who in this case are verie plentifull They charge vs to say That the Church consisteth onely of the elect and that there are no euill men in the Church Annot. Math. 3. Sect. 7. Math. 22. Sect. 2. Whereas wee affirme that the visible Church vpon earth hath both good and bad in it but the inuisible Church we hold to consist of the elect onely Annot. Math. 19. Sect. 11 that wee should saye God can do no more than he hath done or will do which they call blasphemous infidelitie Wee say no such thing but onely this that God can do nothing contrary to his owne will word glorie and yet is Almightie Annot. Math. 23. Sect. 6. That wee teach It is enough to haue onely faith Wee teach no such thing wee say that faith onely iustifieth but faith working by loue as Saint Paul saith not voide of good workes Galath 5. 6. That wee say the Church hath failed many hundred yeres til Luther and Caluin Annot. Math. 28. Sect. 2. Whereas we beleeue that the Church hath alwaies continued and shall continue till the end of the world That we hold that it is sufficient to be baptized with the Holie Ghost and that water is not necessarie Annot. Mark 1. Sect. 5. But wee graunt that baptisme with water is necessarie if it may be had acording to Christes institution Otherwise in those that are preuented by death wee affirme that the lacke of water cannot depriue them of their inheritance That wee say all things are easie in Scripture Annot. Luk. 6. Sect. 1. Wee say no such thing but confesse that manie things are therein harde to be vnderstood Yet the doctrine of faith to be in the word plainly declared so that the people may safely be admitted to the reading
a little touch those Popish forgeries which they haue in their idle and phantasticall braine deuised against some particular men amongest vs sorted out from among the rest And first of all they lay load vpon poore Wickliffe charging him with many things which he neuer helde As that he should teach that a Prince is not to be obeyed being in deadly sinne Rhemist Rom. 13. Sect. 4. 1. Peter 2. Sect. 8. which wee haue shewed before to be a great vntruth That Wickliffe did condemne degrees of schooles titles of Doctors and masters Rhemist Math. 23. Sect. 4. This is a meere slaunder of Wickliffe Fulk ibid. That he should saie that God ought to obey the diuell Bellarmine Praefat. in controuers and addeth for the proofe hereof that this his heresie was condemned in the Councel of Constance Sess. 8. Wee take this to be a meere slaunder as the rest for there is no such thing found obiected against Wickliffe neither in those 18 articles exhibited against him in the conuocation of certeâ—n Bishops at Lambeth Fox P. 432 nor yet amongst those 9 articles which were condemned as hereticall nor those 23 which were condemned as erronious Fox P. 435. Yet concerning this matter three schollers of the said Wickliffe that followed not long after shewed their opinion namely Nicholas Herford Phillip Repingdon Iohn Ayshton And thus they say that God ought not to obey the diuell in his owne person or essence nor with the obedience of necessitie for so to affirme say they it is heresie Fox P. 438. And againe they graunted that they meant an obedience of â—oue because God loued the diuell and punished him as he ought P. 439. The phrase and maner of speech is somwhat strange but who seeth not that their meaning is sound and good First that God not in his owne persoÌ„ but in his creatures yeeldeth obedience to the diuel that is sometime giueth him power ouer his creatures Secondly yet not of necessitie for God can when it pleaseth him tie Sathan short exempt his creatures from his power Thirdly that God loueth him as his creature so he doth also the wicked suffering the Sunne to shine vpon them Mat. 5. Fourthly that the Lord in his iustice is to punish the diuel so doth they are reserued in euerlasting chaines of darknesse Iud. 6. In this sort also they dealt with Iohn Husse deuising strange Articles against him which he neuer thought As that he should saye that Saint Gregorie when they alleaged his authoritie against him was but a rimeâ— wherein Iohn Husse himselfe aunswered that they did him great iniurie for so much as he alwaies esteemed and reputed S. Gregorie for a most holie Doctor of the Church Fox pag. 606. Thus it was falsly obiected against the same Iohn Husse in the Councel of Constance where he was most vniustly condemned that he saide there should be a fourth person in diuinitie and that a Doctour heard him to speake the same Iohn Husse desired the Doctour might be named which not obtaining he thus cryeth out O miserable and wretched man that I am which am forced and compelled to beare such blasphemie and slaunder Fox P. 622. This was as wee see the guise of the olde Papistes thus without all feare to slaunder the children of God whose of-spring I meane the Papists of latter time do tread in the same their fathers steppes So was M. Tindall that faithfull seruant of God abused by them vpon whome they fathered manie false articles As that he should saie that it is impossible for vs to consent to the will of God Fox P. 1247. Artic. 3. Whereas he meant and so spake that by nature it is impossible no otherwise than the Apostle saith That the wisedome of the flesh is not subiect to the law of God neither in deede can be That he should say euery maÌ„ is lord of another mans goods as though he should fauour the Anabaptisticall communitie P. 1248. Articl 18. Tindals wordes be these If thy brother or neighbour neede and thou haue to helpe him and yet shewest no mercie but withdrawest thine handes from him thou robbest him of his owne That he should saye the woorst Turke hath as much right to my goods at his neede as mine housholde or mine owne selfe P. 1248. Articl 20. Tyndall saith and writeth thus If thy neighbours which thou knowest be serued and thou haue yet superfluitie to the verie Infidels wee are detters if they need as farre foorth as we maintaine them not against Christ. Lo here is no mention made of any Turke and expressely he saith that our neighbors so our owne familie is to be preferred the rest to haue of the remainder superfluitie Is not this great heresie thinke you That Christ tooke away all lawes and maketh vs free and at libertie P. 1251. Articl 5. Tyndall saith thus Hee hath not deliuered vs from the Law but from the power and violence of the Lawe but for all that he hath not taken away from the powers and officers their right sworde and authoritie to punish the euill That hee should affirme that by workes wee decaie from the faith P. 1252. Articl 16. But Tyndall faith By trusting in workes wee decay from the faith That keeping of virginitie and chastitie of Religion is a diuelish thing P. 1253. Articl 20. Tyndall hath not the chastitie of Religion but of the Religious meaning Monkes Friers vpon whom the yoke of single life was imposed violently enforced which S. Paul himselfe calleth a doctrine of diuels That he should say if we beleeue that God hath promised euerlasting life it is impossible we should perish P. 1255. Articl 6. But Tyndall thus writeth when with a perfect courage we put all our trust in God and in his promises it is impossible we should perish for he hath promised vs euerlasting life He speaketh not of a generall beleefe only but of an assured trust and confidence in God That he should hold that the Gospell maketh all true Christian men seruants to all the world P. 1257. But Tyndall thus By the rule of charitie not of office dutie euery Christian man is bound one to help another Thus deceitfully they clip and mangle the good mans wordes to make him to speake what they list themselues And as wee see their falshood in collecting these articles the like craft they vsed in a great number more against this good man master Tyndall they falsifie 29. articles out of his booke called the wicked Mammon 25 out of the booke entituled the Obedience of a Christian man 37 out of his booke called the Reuelation of Antichrist 41 out of his booke named the Summe of the Scripture consul Fox a P. 1247. ad P. 1257. The number in all is 132 articles some forged some wrested some mangled none sincerely alledged which they obiect against him Now let vs see how they deale with Martin Luther â—urely after the same fashion as they doe vnto the
punishment in purgatorie exceedeth the greatest torment in this life Bonauenture denyeth that and saith that the greatest paine of purgatorie onely exceedeth the greatest of this life And so thinketh Bellar. lib. 2. ca. 15. But this is a needelesse question to dispute of the paines of purgatorie for there is no such place as we haue elsewhere shewed That the Saints know our prayers though it be not agreable to scripture yet it is agreed vpon among papists yet about the maner how they come by the knowledge of our praiers it is not amongst them agreed Some thinke that mens praiers are at that instant reuealed to Saints when they are made Others that in the beginning of their happines so soone as they are receiued into heauen they beholde all things in God as in a glasse which appertaine to them And this Bellarmine taketh to be the more probable opinion ca. 20. yet it is but a prophane speculation for God himselfe onely knoweth the heart neither will he giue his honour to another Caietanus Cardinall confoundeth images idols taking them for all one Bellar. and the rest make great difference betweene them Images they say they haue but no Idols Bellarm. de imaginib sanctor lib. 2. cap. 7. Some papistes hold opinion that the Images of the Trinitie ought not to be made Abulens Durand Peresius Caranza who beside alloweth not the Image of Christ to be made Others hold the contrary that they may safely bee made and adored Caietanus Catharinus Sanderus and Bellarmine who for the most part holdeth with the worst opinion Concerning the worshippe of Images it is agreed amongest papistes to be lawfull and commendable though it bee flat contrarie to the second commaundement yet they disagree about the manner of worship Some holde that the Image in it selfe is not at all to bee worshipped but before the Image that onely whose Image it is Sic Durandus Alphonsus de castro Others that the Image is to be worshipped and adored with the same kinde of worship that the exemplar is whose Image it is and so the Image of Christ to bee worshipped as Christ himselfe Sic Caietanus Bonauentur Capreolus and others There is a third opinion that Images properly in themselues may bee worshipped yet with an inferior kinde of worship then that which is due to the Saint resembled by the Image Peresius Catharinus Sanderus to these consenteth Bellarmine de Imaginib sanctor lib. 2. cap. 20. The Papistes make two kindes of Religious worship the higher and more excellent kinde which is due onely vnto God they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the inferiour kinde which may bee giuen vnto Saintes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sic Bellarminus Yet Martinus Peresius a learned papist sayth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot signifie the worship of Sayntes for the worde is translated serâ—itude or seruice but we are not seruants to the Saints but their fellow-seruants Bellarm. lib. 1. de beatitud Sanctor cap. 12 Now concerning the sacraments Some of them thinke that the same definition of a sacrament cannot agree vnto the sacraments both of the old and new testament but improperly Sic Magister sententiar Albertus Bonauenture Others thinke that this definition of a sacrament est sacrae rei signum It is a signe of an holy thing may properly comprehende both the olde and new sacrament because it is not of the essence of a sacrament to bee a cause of sanctification but a signe onely Sic. Thom. Dominicus a Soto Martinus Ledesinius and this is the truer opinion But Bellarmine fully liketh neither lib. 1. de sacram cap. 12. Nowe whether the sacramentes doe consist ex verbis rebus of the wordes and the things or elementes as their matter forme it is a great question among papistes Some holde that they doe not but that any thing sensible whether it be the element or the word is the matter and the fourme to bee the signification Sic Dominicus a Soto Caietanus Others thinke that all Sacramentes consiste not of the worde and elementes but some onely Sic Durandus A thirde opinion is that the sacraments onely of the New Testament do consist of these parts not the sacrameÌ„ts of the old Sic alexand Alensis and others thinke that al sacraments doe consist of these parts either in themselues or some what instead or place of them Sic dominicus a Soto Bellarmine taketh somewhat from all these opinions Lib. 1. de sacram cap. 1 8. But to put the matter out of doubt there must be in euery sacrament both the word and element the word sanctifieth 1. Timoth. 4. 5. and therefore must needs be there nothing can serue insteed of it there must be also an elemeÌ„t beside the word to be sanctified and therefore the word cannot be the element The Iesuites do hold that the intention of the minister is necessarie to make a sacrament he must haue a purpose and intentioÌ„ Faciendi quod facit ecclesia to do that which the Church doth that is to make a sacrament Sic Bellar. cum alijs Catharinus a papist saith it is not necessary to haue such an intention but that a sacrament may be without it wherein he thinketh aright for the sacrament no more dependeth of the ministers intention theÌ„ the preaching of the word doth Concerning the efficacie of the sacraments they do all hold that they are causes of sanctification but not alike Some holde that the minister is the efficient and working cause of iustification the sacrament but the instrument Sic Caietanus Sotus Ledesinius Some contrariwise that the sacrament is the efficient cause the Minister but the instrument Ita Tho. Aquinas ex Bellarm. lib. 1. c. 27. and of these there are two sorts some thinke that the sacraments are but causes Sine quibus non without the which wee are not iustified Sic Bonauentur Scotus Durandus Others thinke that there is verily an effectuall power giuen to the sacraments to iustifie Sic Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 11. What adoe is here about nothing the sacramentes are no instrumentall or efficient causes of our iustification but seales onely of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4. 11. And it is faith whereby we are iustified Rom. 5. 1. As touching the sacraments of the law some deny that they did iustifie ex opere operantis that is by the faith and deuotion of the receiuer Sic Magister others thought they did And for Circumcision some held it did iustifie ex opere operato by the very worke wrought Sic Alexander Bonauenture Scotus Gabriel Others were of opinion that it did not iustifie of it self but as it was a protestation and application of faith Sic Tho. Capreolus Scotus to this Bellarmine enclineth lib. 2. ca. 13. But if these fellows would haue contented themselues with iustification by faith as the scriptures teach vs they needed not to haue made so many doubtes Concerning the Indeleble character which they say is imprinted in the soule by the sacramentes and can