alledge those words of the Apostle (p) 1. Cor. c. 11. Qui manducat bibit indignè c. He that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drinketh iudgment to himselfe not discerning the body of our Lord Out of which words we gather that some are here reprehended in that they receiue the body of Christ vnworthily but these do not receaue it in spirit and fayth for in so doing they should receaue it with profit and worthily therfore they receaue his body only in body and not in spirit and consequently his body is there really and truly present And in this sort is this text expounded by the fathers vz. Ambrose (q) In c. 11. prioris ad ad Corinth Theodor Ierome (r) In c. 1. Malach. Chrysostome (s) Hom. 24. in prior ad Corinth hom 83 in Matth. Origen (t) Hom. 2. in psal 37. Basil (u) l. 2. de baptisae 3. others which exposition of the fathers being true depriueth our Aduersaries of all sufficient answere to the said text 10. That those three places which the Catholiks do commonly vrge for proofe of Priests authority in remitting sinnes vz. Math. 16. To thee I will giue the keyes of heaueÌ„ and whatsoeuer thou shalt bynd vpon earth shal be bound in heauen c. Math. 18. What things you shall bynd vpon earth shal be bouÌ„d in heauen and what things you shall loose c. Lastly Iohn 20. Whose sins you shall remit are remitted vnto theÌ„ and whose sinnes you shall retaine are retained That these places I say doe proue that Priests haue authority giuen them truly and really to remit sins in the Sacrament of Pennance not only by declaring and pronouncing their sinnes to be remitted as our Sectaries do teach it appeareth out of the fathers expositions of the foresaid places who expounding them literally with the Catbolikes do proue therby the true authority of the Priests therin S. Gregory (x) Hom. 26. in Euang expounding the words Whose sinnes you shall remit thus sayth Principatum superni iudicij c. The Apostles do obtaine a principality of supreme iudgment that in the place of God they may retayne the sinnes of some and loose the sinnes of others S. Chrysostome (y) l. 3. de sacerd the scope of which booke is to proue this point expounding the former texts and comparing the authority of the Priests of the old law ouer the leprous persoÌ„s with the Priests of the new law thus concludeth At nostris Sacerdotibus non corporis lepram c. It is granted to our Priests I say not to try them which are purged but absolutely to purge and cure not the leper of the body but the filth and foulnes of the soule See also S. Austin (z) l. 20. de Ciuit. Dei expouÌ„ding those words of the Apoc. Et vidi sedes sedentes c. Ierome (a) Ep. ad HeliodoruÌ„ de vita solitaria Ambrose (b) l. 1. de poenit c. 2 sequent Gregory (c) Oratione ad ciues timore perculsos Naziazene all which do interpret the former texts literally and ackknowledge from thence the sayd authority in Priests for remitting of sinnes which the Catholikes at this day do teach 11. That place of S. Iohn (d) c. 3. vz. Except a man be borne againe of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God doth proue that the Sacrament of Baptisme doth ex opere operato conferre grace and iustify a man which perspicuous and cleare testimony to peruert our Aduersaries are forced to say that the wordes are not spoken of the Sacrament of Baptisme but only of regeneration caused by the holy Ghost whose property is to wash the soule as the water doth wash the body And yet against this phantasticall exposition we are able to produce the fathers who do literally vnderstand the former words as spoken of the Sacrament of Baptisme which exposition of theirs granted as true doth necessarily force the Catholike Doctrine therin See Cyrill Austin Chrysostome and Origen all interpreting this place as also Ambrose (l) l. 3. de spirit saÌ„ct c. 11. Cyprian (m) l. 3. ad Quirinum Ierome (n) In c. 16. Ezech. and the rest 12. In proofe of Freewill mong other places we alledge those words of God spoken to Cain Nonne (o) Genes 4. si bene egeris recipies c. If thou dost well shalt thou not be accepted and if thou dost not well sinne lyeth at thy doore Sub te erit appetitus eius tu dominaberis illius that is And vnto thee it desire vz. of sinne shal be subiect and thou shalt rule ouer it vz. ouer sinne 13. Now our Aduersaries in answere hereto do say that the words Sub te erit appetitus eius tu dominaberis illius ought to haue reference to Abel meaning hereby that Abel should be subiect to Cain and that as being the elder he should rule ouer Abel Which construction being most forced indirect is generally impugned by the Fathers who in the exposition of the former words do in both places vnderstand sinne and not Abel Thus we find that S. Austin (p) l. 15. de Ciuit. Dei c. 7. saith of this place as interpreting it Quiesce ad te enim conuersio eius tu dominaberis illius numquid fratris absit cuius igitur nisi peccati that this Content thy selfe Cain for it shall turne it selfe to thee and thou shalt rule ouer it ouer what ouer thy brother God forbid ouer what then but ouer sinne S. Ierome in like sort wryteth thus (q) Inquaestion Hebraicis Quia liberi arbitrij es moneâ— vt non tibi peccatum sed tu peccato domineris alluding to the words in Genes Because thou art of freewill I do counsell thee that sinne may not rule ouer thee but thou ouer sin See also Ambrose (r) lib. 2. de Cain c. 7. Gregory (s) lib. 4. moral cap. 22. and Prosper (t) l. 2. de vocat geÌ„â—ium c. 13. expounding those former words of sinne and not of Abel all which fathers do euen deriue the Doctrine of frewil from their foresaid exposition therof 14. For maintenance of Iustification by workes for we allow that saying of the Historiographer Fayth that is seene is better then faith that is heard we do vrge that place of Iames (u) cap. 2. aboue touched Do you see because of workes a man is iustified and not of faythonly which text is so plaine direct for Iustification by workes as that S. Austin (x) lib. de side operibus c. 14. is not afraid to say that the very scope and drift of this Epistle of S. Iames as also that of Peter Iohn and Iude was chiefly to represse the heresy then begun about Iustification by fayth only so great an impugner was this auncient Father of our Aduersaries sole and melancholy fayth for so I
Marcionites and Arians that razed out such places of holy writ as were against them Neyther is Bucer (b) dialog contra Melancthon See Lindan dub 84. 96. 98. dumbe in censuring Luthers sayd translation as erroneous Besides both which censures of him you find to touch only one particular that he inserteth words of his owne into the text it selfe as though they were written by the holy Ghost as for example translating that text A man is iustified by fayth without the workes of the law he inserteth in coÌ„trary both to the Greeke and Latin the words only to explicate as himselfe sayth more plainly the Apostles meaning against the Iustification of works done in the tyme of grace 3. The same taske of translation was vndertaken and performed by Caluin but with what dexterity he carryed himselfe therin it appeareth to say nothing of Illyricus coÌ„demning therof by the testimony of Carolus (c) Tract Testamnoui part 11. fol. 110. Molineus a yonger brother of his owne house who wryteth of Caluins translations in this sort He made the text of the ghospell to leape vp and downe at his pleasure and he vsed violence to the same and added of his owne to the very sacred letter for drawing it to his owne purpose 4. Oecolampadius so truly intituled per Antiphrasin as infecting Gods house and church with the darknes of heresy by the helpe of his brethren of Basil would needes busy himselfe with the like labour Yet was their translation so distastfull to Beza (d) In respons ad defens Castalion vide etiam praefat Testam noui anno 155â— as that he chargeth them al with great sacriledge impiety in corrupting of the sacred word it selfe 5. Neither will Beza passe ouer as vncontrolled the translation of Castalio tearming his proceeding with Gods word to be bold pestilent sacrilegious and Ethenicall speaking else where (e) Annot in act 10. of Castalio in this poynt he sayth It commeth to passe that whiles euery man will rather freely follow his owne iudgement then be a religious interpreter of the holy ghost he doth rather peruert many things then translate them Beza himselfe translated the new Testament but with what applause his work was entertained you shall heare for besides Castalio his reciprocall testimony of condemning the same Illyricus much impugneth it and Molineus (f) In tâ—aÌ„slat noui Testament part 64. 65. 66. plainly chargeth Beza Quòd de facto textum mutat that actually he changeth the very text of Gods word it self for the patronizing of his Doctrine 6. Good God would any thinke if their owne writinges were not as yet extant to charge them therwith that such men as these being indeed the Antesignani the most choice and eminent Doctours and as it were so many Oracles or Sunnes of their new Ghospell should no sooner deuide themselues by open Apostasy from the vnity of the Catholike Church but that they begin to inueigh one against another in great acerbity and bitternes of speach concerning their different translations Plainly discouering by their mutuall reproualls and recriminations herein that though they all conspire to make head against the Catholike Fayth yet do they presently therupon broach forth different Doctrines amoÌ„g themselues and ech one glad to fortify their opinions by impugning all other translations which are not made sutable to their new stamped Doctrine 7. Wherfore a company of men falling from the body of the Catholike Church may be well resembled to some mighty fall of earth from the body of a huge mountaine and this mountaine euen by Esay himselfe figureth out Christs Church which great clod is no sooner disparted from the rest but it crimbleth it selfe into innumerable small parcells But herein we are to admire Gods prouideÌ„ce who is able to vse the actioÌ„s of the Churches enemies as handmaids to the Churches preseruation no otherwise then the betraying of (g) Gen. â— 45. 50. Ioseph by his brethren to the safety of the Israelites For seing the diuision of heresy is not mathematicall and infinite but determinate limitable therfore euery heresy though at it first appearance it drawes mens eyes vpon it like blazing starres which seeme high but are low shine no longer then their matter endures yet at the length consumes wasts away by subdiuiding it selfe and striuing to make it own part good against al others so as it falleth out that the Catastrophe and CoÌ„clusion of all such proceeding is this that it may be truly pronounced The war of Heretikes to be the peace of the Church and their diuisions her vnion 8. But to returne for I had almost lost my selfe in our Aduersaries former disagrements touching their translations where we are to obserue that though some of their translations came nearer to the vulgar Latin translation then others yet ech of them as is sayd mainly dissents one from another like two faces which bearing some resemblance to a third face haue notwithstaÌ„ding no likenes betwene themselues That the English Translations are corrupted therfore not sufficient to determine doubts in Religion CHAP. VII THE Hebrew and Greeke Originalls of the holy Scriptures as also the Greeke and Latin traÌ„slations of the same being examined and found defectiue by our Aduersaries assertions we are to descend to our English translations and to shew that they are fraughted with many corruptions and that our Aduersaries cannot iustify the sayd translations to be true and exact only according to the Originalls out of which they are made and consequently that the sayd translatioÌ„s cannot with any shew of iudgment or reason be exposed for the infallible iudge of Controuersies That these translations are most corrupt and erroneous may be proued two wayes first from the translations themselues SecoÌ„dly from the Confession of our English Protestants 2. And concerning the translations themselues three thinges are found in them which may assure all men of their impurity first the adding of diuers wordes vnto the text which words are not to be found neyther in the Hebrew nor in the Greeke Originalls and the wordes added are of such nature as they make only for the better mayntaining of the Protestants religion 3. I could instance this in many textes of their traÌ„slations but one or two shal be sufficient at this tyme as for example in the first Chapter of the Acts our English translations speaking of the election of Matthias the Apostle read thus He was by a common consent counted with the eleuen Apostles to proue out of this place that all Ecclesiasticall functions ought or at least may be made by a popular election which diuers reformed Churches of the Caluinists doe hold at this day Here these former words to wit with a common consent are plainly added by our Aduersaries since the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heere vsed signifie only He was reckoned numbred or accounted neyther is there any other Greeke wordes in the text which they can or do pretend to
(h) Ibidem c. 11. all which seuerall descriptions thereof being taken literally as they expound them do precisely make vp three yeares and a halfe and consequently cannot be applyed to the Pope And therfore our Aduersaries in answere to the sayd places are glad to say that in all those textes an vncertaine tyme is figuratiuely to be vnderstood though it be expressed diuersly by one and the same continuance of tyme. To proue that the Pope is Antichrist they commonly vrge that of the Apocalyps (i) cap. 17. where it is sayd that the whore of Babylon doth sit vpon that Citty which hath seauen hils meaning Rome Which wordes do not directly touch Antichrist but only by their supposed inference that by the whore of Babylon is meant Antichrist which they are neuer able to proue since therby is vnderstood Rome in the tyme of the heathen Emperours who then worshiped Idols and was drunke with the bloud of Gods Saintes In confirmation of the Reall Presence we vrge the sentence of our Sauiour recorded by all the Euangelistes to wit This is my body c. Which text being literally taken doth containe expresly the very conclusion maintayned by vs not by circuitions or ambages but directly plainly immediatly So as it cannot be conceaued how our Sauiour could speake more perspicuously in this poynt 6. Now against the Reall presence our Sacramentaries do chiefly obiect that saying of Christ (k) Ioan. 6. It is the spirit which quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing Which wordes do not fall directly vpon the question of Christ his Reall Presence in the Sacrament Neyther is so much as Christ his flesh vnderstood hereby as they would seeme to inferre since then it would follow that his Incarnation and death auayled vs nothing but only the carnall conceite of the Iewes is cheked hereby who thought that Christ would deliuer his body to be eaten fleshly corporally and carnally as other common meates are eaten 7. To the same end they oâ—â—â—ct those words of Christ Do this in remembrance of me which place by no necessary or probable illation can include the true absence of himselfe which is the poynt in question since they haue a refereÌ„ce only to a circumstance of himselfe to wit of his death passion which as being past is absent in remembrance wherof he commandeth vs in the former wordes to receaue his sacred body and bloud in the Sacrament of the Eucharist conformably to that speach of S. Paul (l) 1. Cor. 11. mortem Domini annunciabitis do nec veniat You shall shew the death of our Lord vntill he come the Apostle so interpreting Christs former words 8. To proue that Priests in the Sacrament of Pennance where by putting God in remembrance of our sinnes he soonest forgetteth them and in acknowledging our selues to be sinners we cease to be sinners haue power to remit or retaine sinnes we alledge the playne wordes of our Sauiour to them (m) Math. 18. whatsoeuer you shall loose vpon earth shal be loosed in heauen as also those words recorded by S. Iohn (n) 20. Whose sins you forgine they are forgiuen them and whose sinnes you retaine they are retained Both which places in plaine direct immediate construction containe in themselues the very touch and poynt of this controuersy without any inference or circuition at all since they giue a direct and streight proofe of the conclusion it selfe to wit that Priestes haue power to remit or retaine sinnes For denyall of Priests authority in remitting or retayning of sinnes our Sectaties are accustomed to produce that text of the Psalmist (2) Psalm 50. Tibi soli peccauimus we haue sinned only against thee inferring herby that because we sinne only against God therfore only God can remit sinne which inference if it were true then should it by the same reason take away the vertue of Baptisme for remitting of Originall sin They likewise obiect certaine places of (3) Psalm 18. 37. Scripture which shew that we are not able to number all our sinnes and consequently not able to confesse them to the Priest which illatioÌ„ is most weake since it maketh as must against the Confession of ous sins to God as to the Priest 9. For confirming the Doctrine of Freewil the Catholikes do alledge among other authorities these following In arbitrio (p) Num. 30. viri erit siue faciat siue non faciat that is It is in the choice or will of a man whether he will do or not doe As also Optio (q) Iosue 24. vobis datur eligite hodie quod vobis places Choice is giuen to you chuse that to day which pleaseth you And againe Quoties (r) Math. 23. volui congregare c. How often would I gather togeather thy children as the hen gathereth her chickens and thou wouldst not All which places directly and flatly teach that we haue frewill to do and not to do Now our Aduersaries for denyall of this Doctrine are accustomed to alledge chiefly such places where it is sayd that all things are done according to the will and counsell of God As for example that of Christ as if the eternall Word of the Father came downe to destroy that former wrytten word of God Vnus passer (s) Math. 9. c. Not one sparrow shall fall vpon the ground without your Fathers will And againe Qui (t) Ephes 8. operatur omnia c. Who worketh all thinges according to the Counsell of his will Both which texts besides diuers others of the same nature conclude nothing except first they be able to proue that the Will Counsell and Foreknowledge of God cannot stand with mans freewill The contrary wherof is most cleare as appeareth by the example of Adam who by our Aduersaries (u) Caluin 1. l. Instit c. 15. §. 8. Luther in comment in Gen. acknowledgment had freewill to stand or fall and yet his fall was neyther meerely contrary to Gods will since he permitted the same nor to his foreknowledge and prouidence since he foreseeth all things 10. Concerning Iustification by works the Catholikes Conclusion and Position is found literally and eueÌ„ in those words wherin they vsually expresse this theyr Doctrine since we read in S. (x) c. 2. Iames That ex operibus iustificatur homo c. A man is iustifyed by workes and not by fayth only In like sort where our Aduersaries doe obiect any place against vs the very distinction sometymes such is their scarsity and dearth of pertinent texts which the Catholikes do vse to auoyde their argument is literally expresly set downe in the words of those texts Thus we fynd that they vrge to this end those words of the Apostle Arbitramur (y) Rom. 3. hominem c. we account a man to be iustified by fayth without the workes of the law as also that other vz. Scientes (z) Galat. 2. c. Knowing that man is not iustifyed
by the works of the law In both which places the very answere is expressed which the Catholikes are accustomed to make to such arguments since in the sayd testimonies it is set down so we Catholikes do teach that the works of the law of Moyses and consequently all others done meerely by nature and freewill without the fayth spirit and grace of Christ can in no sort iustify a man vpon which expresse distinction of works in the Scripture it selfe it followeth that all other places which through a naked resemblance of words may seeme to make more literally for the Protestants in this poynt then these alledged are to be expounded by these former texts since the holy Ghost caÌ„not set downe contrary and repugnant Doctrines 11. For defence of Traditions we vsually alledge that place of the Thessalonians (a) 2. c. 2. Brethren hold the traditions which you haue receaued whether it be by word or by Epistle Wher we see that the Apostles words do immediatly and necessarily without any helpe of strained consequences imply a diuision or partition of his Doctrine which no doubt was Gods word And that part therof was deliuered to the Thessalonians by his Epistle the rest by word of mouth only Which Text containes the very conclusion of the Catholikes Doctrine to wit that the Euangelists and Apostles did not wryte all things touching Christian fayth but deliuered part therof only by preaching or by some other such like instruction Now our Aduersaries to confront this text and the Doctrine deriued thence are acccustomed to obiect the words of S. Paul (b) Galat. 1. Sed licet nos c. But if we or an Angell from heauen euangelize to you besides that we haue euangelized be he anathema In which words they suppose two things and both false before they can square this text to their purpose 12. First that the word Euangelizare doth include only the wrytten word and not verbum traditum the word left by Tradition which is implicitly the matter in question and as the Sophisters call it Petitio principij Secondly that the Latin word praeter being in this text hath reference to euery thing which is not expresly set down in Scripture since indeed it here signifieth as much as contra meaning therby all Doctrine contrary to the Doctrine already deliuered by the Apostles for otherwise S. Iohn should haue had the Anathema pronounced against him for wryting of the Apocalips after this Epistle of S. Paul was wrytten So farre distant is this text from falling directly and plainly vpon the impugning of Traditions since from such false supposalls as granted they draw their Illation against the Catholike Doctrine therof 13. In like sort they alledge that saying of the Apostle to Timothy All Scripture (c) 2. c. 3. inspired of God is profitable to teach to argue to correct to instructe in iustice thaâ— the man of God may be perfect instructed to euery good worke Where we see that this text as well as the former is so farre froÌ„ pressing the Doctrine of Traditions immediatly and without any helpe of a secondary inference as that it doth not so much as once make mention of Traditions at all either in word or sense neyther can any thing be racked against vs from thence vntill it be first proued which neuer shal be that the word vtilis signifyeth sufficient and because a thing is profitable and conduceth to another thing or end it therfore is sufficient alone of it selfe for the obtayning therof 14. Lastly they bring forth certaine places (d) Math. 15. Galat. 1. Coloss 2. which do particularly condemne certayne pernicious and friuolous Traditions of the Iewes and the Traditions which the Catholikes do teach to haue bene deriued from our Sauiour and his Apostles be all one So impertinently do our Aduersaries alledge these and such like places against our Doctrine of Traditions 15. Concerning prayer for the dead what can be more cleare perspicuous for proofe therof then those words alledged out of the Machabees (e) 2. c. 1. a testimony so euident as that I cannot forbeare it though it impugne my former method Sancta ergo salubris est cogitatio c. It is therfore a holy and heathfull cogitation to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sinnes Which place we see doth literally expresly contayne the very conclusion of the Catholike Doctrine therin and which words proceeded vpon the practise of Iudas Machabeus who sent a summe of money vnto Ierusalem to procure sacrifices to be performed for the spirituall reliefe and ease of his dead souldiers I know that our Sectaries do expunge out of the Canon of Scripture this booke as Apocryphall yet they are to remember that it is reckoned among other diuine and vndoubted bookes of Scripture by the third Councell of Carthage (f) Can. 47. by Innocentius (g) Epist ad Exuperium the first and by S. Austin himselfe who thus (h) l 18. de Ciuit. Dei c. 36. sayth Libros Machabeorum c. The bookes of the Machabees are acknowledged by the Christians for Canonicall not by the Iewes 16. Now the chiefest places which our Aduersaries do obiect herein are among others such as being intended of the generall resurrection of the Iust are calumniously wrested by them to the particular tyme of ech vertuous mans death Thus they alledge that sayng of the Psalmist (i) Psalm 126. Cùm dederit dilectis suis somnum ecce haereditas Domini as also that place of the Apocalips (k) 14. Beatiqui in Domino moriuntur c. Blessed are they which dye in the Lord from henceforth now sayth the spirit that they rest from their labours for their workes follow them And as concerning this later place Saint Iohn throughout his whole Chapter speaketh of the later iudgment and therfore except the Protestants do first coÌ„found the particular tymes of mens deaths with the tyme of the general iudgment they can draw nothing from hence in denyall of purgatory adde to this that some of the Fathers as shal be shewed hereafter do interpret this text of martyrs only who neuer suffer any paynes in Purgatorie 17. They also produce to the same end the place in Ecclesiastes (l) â—1 Si occiderit lignum ad Austrum c. If the tree shall fall towardes the Souht or towardes the North it shal be in that place where it did fall The meaning of which passage being deliuered in Metaphors or Allegories doth the more hardly conuince any thing since the sense in regard therof appeares the more doubtfull Notwithstanding the common exposition of this place is that euery man eyther dyes in state of grace vnder which state are also vnderstood those which come to Purgatory and so falleth towards the South wherby is meant Heauen or in the state of mortall sinne and then falleth towards the North to wit into hell And whosoeuer dyeth in eyther of
We account a man to be iustifyed by fayth without the workes of the law Where besides that the very text it selfe doth expresly speake of the workes of the law which kind of workes no Catholike doth teach to iustify S. Austin (r) l. de gratia liber arbit c. 17. doth euen in the same sense expound this place saying thus Homines non intelligenâ—es c. Men not vnderstanding what the Apostle heere sayth did thinke that he sayd fayth would suffice a man though he liued euilly and had no workes which God forbid that a Vessell of Election should so thinke who in a certaine place after he had sayd In Christ Iesus neyther Circumcision nor prepuce auaileth any whit straight added but Faith which worketh by loue Thus S. Austin In like sort they vrge another saying of the sayd Apostle vz. Si Abraham (s) Rom. 4. ex operibus c. If Abraham be iustifyed by workes he hath glory but not with God As also that other Gratia estis saluati c. By (t) Ephes â— grace you are saued through faith c. and not of works In both which places are vnderstood workes done by the force of nature before our vocation and calling in Christ as appeareth out of S. Austin (u) Supra praefat in psal â—1 and S. Ierome (x) Eâ—ist ad â—thesiphontem expounding the sayd places See also Austin expounding the former and other such like places in l. de praedest Sanct. c. 7. epist. 105. ad Sixtum l. de hono perseuerenâ—iae c. 2. 10. Against the merit of good workes they alledge diuers places which may seeme to intimate that God doth crowne men only in mercy and consequently not by force of their owne workes as where it is sayd Beati misericordes quia c. Blessed are they which be mercifull for they shall obtaine mercy which place both S. Austin (z) Epist 105. l. de correp gratia cap. 13. and S. Gregory (a) In psal 7. paenitential expound thus to wit that blessednes and eternall felicity is attributed to mercy not because there is not a true reward of merit but because the merit it selfe is giuen to man by the mercy of God For a man cannot do any meritorious worke before he be iustified but he is iustified by the grace mercy of God 11. They also vrge that place aboue mentioned of S. Luke Cùm feceritis haec omnia c. When you haue done all these thinges which are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants for we haue but done what we ought to haue done which text may seeme to make against the merit of workes and against workes of supererogation yet in the Fathers iudgments it nothing impugneth the same who though they do giue seuerall expositions thereof yet not any one of theÌ„ maketh against the Catholike Doctrine in this point S. Chrysostome (c) Hom. in illud Illatum est cor Oziae sayth that our Sauiour did not meane that we were vnprofitable seruants but that we should so say and thinke of our selues therby to humble our selues least a selfeliking pride might corrupt our good works S. Austin (d) Serm. â— de verbis Domini sayth that we may be called vnprofitable seruants because when we haue kept all Gods commandements we haue done nothing but what we ought to haue done and therfore in rigour and iustice we can expect no reward but only from the liberall promise and bargaine of God with vs. 12. S. Ambrose (e) l. 8. in Lucam expoundeth the former wordes in this sense to wit that we should acknowledge how weake and imperfect we are of our selues to do any good worke and that we are made profitable seruants therto only by the assistance and grace of God Now no one of these expositions as I sayd before doth agree with our Aduersaries exposition of the sayd place or preiudice the Doctrine of merit 13. Against actuall and inherent Iustice they vsually prostitute that saying of Isay (f) cap. 64. Facti sumus immundi omnes nos tanquam pannus menstruatae omnes iustitiae nostrae that is We are all made vncleane and all our iustice is like vnto the cloath of a menstruous woman Out of which words they endeauour to proue all our actions to be bad and sinfull wheras it is certaine that the Prophet did speake these wordes not in the person of himselfe or of the iust but only of the wicked Iewes by reason of whose sinnes both their Citty and the people were to be deliuered into the hands of the King of Babylon And this appeareth out of the word which a little before he had spoken vz. Ecce iratus es peccauimus behould thou art angry because we haue sinned And thus we fynd this place expounded by Cyril (g) In huÌ„c locum The truth of which expositioÌ„ appeareth more clearly out of the words following the former textes vz. Non est qui inuocet nomen tuum There is not any which calleth vpon thy name which saying must haue reference only to the wicked and not to the iust 14. To the sayd end they obiect Dauid saying Non intres (h) c. 142. in iudicium cum seruo tuo c. do not enter into iudgment with thy seruant because no liuing creature shal be iustifyed in thy sight Of which place the Fathers do deliuer seueral expositions but all different from our Aduersaries meaning intention S. Ierome (i) In hunc psalm Hilary (k) Ibidem Arnobius (l) Ibidem do say that the meaning of Dauid was that man cannot besayd to be iustifyed if he be compared with the purity and sublimity of the iustice of God in respect wherof the iustice not only of men but euen of Angells may be accounted to be but Iniustice and impurity Lastly S. Gregory (m) In coÌ„ment huius psalm as also S. Austin (n) l de perfect iustitiae do referre the sayd wordes of Dauid to veniall sinnes without committing of which our life cannot be passed ouer 15. Concerning Euangelicall Counsels of which our Aduersaries are professed enemies they therfore doe alledge those sayings (o) Math. 22. Marc. 12. Luc. 10. where we are commanded to loue God with all our forcâ— strength and will as is aboue rehearsed wheras indeed those words are put downe only for greater efficacy vnderstanding therby that we are to loue God sincerly truly and aboue all other thinges thus doth S. Ierome (p) In coÌ„ment ad c. 22. Math. Chrysostome (q) Chrysostom ibid. and Ambrose (r) ad c. 10. Luc. expound this place They also obiect that saying of Christ where he (s) Luc. 14. teacheth That except a man renounceth all the things he possesseth he cannot be Christ his disciple concluding froÌ„ thence that there are no Euangelicall Counsells which place notwithstanding S. Austin (t) Epist 5.
may well tearme it since it will be euer alone and caÌ„not brooke the company of good workes 15. In like manner for proofe of merit of workes among other testimonies is alledged that saying recorded in Matthew (y) c. 20. Voca operarios redde illis mercedem Cal the workmen and pay them their hyre or wages in which place by the word hyre is vnderstood their daily wages as appeareth by the parable it self Now by this daily wages is signified eternall life euen by the common exposition of the Fathers vpoÌ„ this place See also S. Austin (z) lib. de sancta virginit c. 26. S. Ierome (a) l. 2. in Iouinian S. Gregory (b) lib. 4. moral c. 42. all of theÌ„ so interpreting the former words 16. For proofe of Euangelicall Counsels which make a difference betwene a Stoicks dulnes and a Christian and religious contempt is as I said before that place of Saint Matthew alledged (c) Math. 19. There are Eunuches which haue gelded themselues for the kingdome of heauen where the words for the kingdome of heauen do not signify as the ProtestaÌ„ts would haue it for the better and more easy preaching of the gospell meaning that some are to abstaine from mariage only to that end but the former wordes do truly import so much as literally they signify that is that some forbeare mariage and liue in perpetuall chastity for the gayning of the ioyes of heauen and thus is this place expounded by Cyprian (d) lib. de habitu virginum Chrysostome (e) In huÌ„c locum Ierome (f) l. 1. contra Iouin Austin (g) De sancta virginit c. 24. who thus wryteth therof Christo laudante eos qui se castrauerum c. Christ praysing them who haue gelded theÌ„selues not for this world but for the kingdom of heaueÌ„ shall any Christian gainsay the same in affirming that this kind of gelding is profitable only for this life not for the life to come For proofe of the said Doctrine we synd that the Fathers do interprete those words of our Sauiour Si vis (h) Math. ibidem perfectus c. If thou wilt be perfect Go and sell all that that thou hast c. â—nd follow me c. only as a Counsell and not as a Precept as our Aduersaries do teach See vpoÌ„ this text Ambrose (i) l. de viduis vltra med Ierome (k) Contra Vigil Austin (l) Epist 8â— q. 4. Chrysostome (m) â—n huÌ„c locum who do ioyntly teach that our Sauiour exhorted and counselled only to Pouerty in his former words but imposed no commandement and precept therof whose exposition being true it followeth that who voweth perpetual pouerty performeth an Euangelicall Counsell And of such an one is verifyed that saying of one Father Omnia inuenit in Deo qui propter Deum omnia reliquit 17. Concerning the visibility of the Church we vrge those words of the Psalmist (n) Psalm 18. to wit In sole posuit tabernaculum suum He placed his tabernacle in the sunne Which place Saint Austin (o) Tract 2. in epist Ioan. doth thus expoudd In manifesto posuit Ecclesiam suam He placed his Church in an open and conspicuous place In like sort according to the expositions of S. Ierome and S. Austin the Church of Christ is coÌ„pared to a mighty huge mountaine which is euer in sight See their expositions giuen vpon Isa 2. Dan. 2. and Micheas 4. S. Austin (p) l. de vnitat Eccles c. 14. also doth expound those words of S. Matthew vrged by vs of Christs Church vz. A citty placed vpon a mountaine cannot be hid So clearly did those fathers thinke that the sayd text did confirme the visibility of the church 18. For proofe of Traditions we vsually alledge that place of the (q) 1. Cor. 11. Apostle Laudo Laudo vos quòd per omnia c. I prayse you that in all things you are myndfull of me and that as I haue deliuered to you you keepe my precepts Which text the Fathers expounding do coÌ„stantly teach that the Apostle did heer speake of vnwritten precepts and Traditions so doth Damascene (r) l. 4. c. 17. Basil (s) l. de spirit sanct c. 29. Chrysostome (t) In hunc locum Epiphanius (u) Haeres â—1 Theophilact (x) In huÌ„c locum interprete this place 19. In like sort the Fathers do interprete that other place of S. Paul aboue mentioned of vnwritten traditioÌ„s to wit that of the Thessalonians It aque fratres tenete c. Therfore brethren hold the Traditions which you haue receaued eyther by speach or by Epistle So doth Theophilact (y) hoc loco Damascene (z) l. 4. de siâ—e c. 17. Oecumenius (a) In huÌ„c locum Basil (b) De spivit sanct c. 29. expound it And Chrysostome (c) In hunc locum thus briefly wryteth of the former words Hinc patet quod non omnia per epistolas tradiderint c. Hence it appâ—areth that the Apostles did not deliuer all things by their Epistles but many thinges also euen without writing which do deserue and are worthy of as much credit authority as the former things deliuered by writing 20. Touching Lymbus Patrum or the place where the soules of the iust were before Christ his Incarnation and death we are accustomed to alledge that place of the booke of the (d) 1. Reg. cap. 28. Kings where the soule of Samuel appearing to Saul was seene to ryse out of the earth And that it was the true soule of Samuel appeareth by the testimonies of the fathers so expounding that place See S. Austin (e) De cure pro mortuis c. 15. Ambrose (f) In 1. c. Luca. Ierome (g) In 7. Isa Basil (h) Epist 80. ad Eustachium and Iosephus (i) l. 6. antiquit c. 156 21. That Christ after his death and Passion did truly descend into hell that (*) Hebr. c. 2. so he might destroy through death him who had power ouer death we produce that plaine place of S. Matthew where it is sayd (k) c. 12. Sicut fuit Ionas c. Euen as Ionas was three dayes three nights in the belly of the whale so shal the sonne of man be in the heart of the earth Which place that it is not vnderstood of the graue as our Aduersaries do answere but of hell it selfe according to the Catholiks exposition appeareth from the testimonies of Ierome (l) In c. 2. Ionae who thus wryteth Sicut cor est in medio animalis ita infernus in medio terrae esse perhibetur that is Euen as the hart is in the midst of the liuing creature so is hell in the middest of the earth of Irenaeus (m) l. 5 circa finem of Tertullian (n) l. de anima c. 31. of Gregory Nissenus (o) â—n oraâ—
persecuting the Church of Christ In this sort this place is expounded by Tertullian (f) l. coÌ„tra Iudaeos l. 3. contra MarcioneÌ„ and Ierome (g) Epist 17. ad MarcellaÌ„ But others of them to wit S. Austin h and S. Bede (i) In cap. 17. Apoc. doe vnderstand by the Whoore in the Apocalips sitting vpon the seauen hils the generall all and vniuersall Citty of the diuell which in the Scripture is often called Babylon by the seauen hils is vnderstood the number of the proud and chiefly of the earthly kings So thus we find that according to either of the constructions deliuered by the auncieÌ„t Fathers this former obiected text doth nothing at all touch Antichrist 4. In like manner our Aduersaries do vrge those words in the second to the (k) cap 2. Thessalonians Ita vt in templo Dei sedeat c. So as he is to sit in the temple of God Where the Apostle speaking of Antichrist the Protestantes wil needs haue him to meane that Antichrist shall sit in the Church of vs Christians forsooth because the Pope sits therin as head therof whereas the Fathers do interprete the former wordes of the temple of the Iewes which once was the temple of God and where according to the iudgments both of the Fathers and vs Catholiks Antichrist is to sit thus is this place expounded by Chrysostome (l) In hunc locum Ambrose (m) In c. 21. Luc. Hilary (n) Can 25. in Math. Cyril (o) Catech. 15. Hierosolym Hippolitus (p) Orat. de mundi consuÌ„mat Ireneus (q) lib. 5. and others 5. Against the Reall Presence they vrge the words of our Sauiour recorded by S. Iohn as is afore touched vz. The flesh profiteth nothing it is the spirit which quickneth Now that this place is vnderstood only of the carnall apprehension of the Iewes of eating grosly and carnally Christs body appeareth out of Chrysostome (r) In hunc loâ—um Theophilact (s) ibidem Cyprian (t) In ser de coena Domini and Origen (u) l. 3. in epist. ad Rom. To the same end they produce those words Non y bibam ex hoc sanguine vitis c I will not drinke henceforth of the fruit of this wyne vntill that day as I shall drinke it new with you in my Fathers kingdome Drawing from these words which do tearme the cup wyne as if our Sauiour had spoken of the Cup consecrated that there was no reall change of bread and wyne into the body and bloud of Christ wheras we find that S. Luke (y) cap. 22. doth x Math. 26. make mention of two cups the one at supper wherof the former words were spoken the other after supper which our Sauiour consecrated and to which the former words had no reference And thus we find this place explicated answerably to S. Lukes relation by Ierome (z) in c. 26. Math. Bede (a) In c. 22. Luc. Theophilact (b) In cap. 22. Luc. 6. In denyall of auricular Confession and of Priests their authority for remitting of sinnes therby they produce the wordes of Christ recorded by S. Iohn (c) cap. 20. vz. Sicut misit me pater c. Euen as my Father sent me so I doe send you But Christ say they when he remitted and forgaue sin exacted not any particular enumeration of them as appeareth out of S. Luke (d) cap. 7. S. Matthew (e) cap. 9. Therfore we are not bound to any secret confession of our sinnes To which argument we answere that the former place of S. Iohn is not so to be vnderstood that the Apostles their successours were precisely bound to do all things after the same manner as they were done by Christ since by that rule then the Apostles ought not to baptize in (f) Act. 2. remission of sinnes because Christ without Baptisme did remit the sinnes of Mary Magdalen neither to giue the holy Ghost by imposition of handes since Christ gaue it by breathing (g) Ioan. 20. vpon the Apostles Therfore the former text alledged according to the expositioÌ„ of S. Chrysostome (h) In hunc locum doth import that our Sauiour said that he did send the Apostles as himselfe was sent because he gaue to theÌ„ the power of remitting or retaining of sinnes as himselfe had receaued of his Father or according to the interpretation of S. Gregory (i) Hom. 2â— in Euang because he did send the Apostles to suffer persecution and death as himself was sent to vndergoe Lastly because according to (k) In huÌ„c locum Cyril he did seÌ„d them to performe the sayd office which himselfe was seÌ„t to accomplish to wit to reclayme men from sinne to propagate the Church to preach the Ghospell And thus we see that though the Fathers do sometymes differ in literall exposition of certaine texts yet they all agree in this in which point we heere chiefly insist that they do not affoard any such sense wherin the Protestantes doe vrge them against the Catholike fayth 7. To take away auricular Confession they alledge those words of Ezechiel (l) c. 33. Quotiescunque ingemuerit peccator c. As often as a sinner shall grieue and lament I will not remeÌ„ber his iniquities Out of which words they labour to proue that God only exacteth this repentance griefe of a sinner for the remission of his sinnes and not any auricular confession of them or absolution of the Priest To which we answere that neither of them is excluded by the sayd words since no man can grieue and lament for his sinnes in any auaileable manner but that he must desire al those meanes as confession therof and absolution which God hath instituted in his Church And in this sort we fynd that S. (m) Epist 91. ad TheodoruÌ„ Leo doth obiect this very place against himselfe in this poynt and then thus answereth it Which exposition of his must needs be true since the former text if it should exclude confession and absolution by the same reason it should also exclude Baptisme yea fayth charity as necessary for the remission of our sinnes since a man may grieue for his sinnes only by reason of the temporall losse comming therby 8. Wheras against Freewill they vsually obiect that text of Isay (n) c. 22. vz. Omnia opera nostra c. O Lord thou hast wrought all our workes in vs yet we find that Ierome (o) In comment eiusdem loci doth p In huÌ„c locum vnderstand those words of Gods chastisements of that people and Cyril (p) In huÌ„c locum of Gods miracles and benefits shewed to theÌ„ So as neither of theÌ„ nor any other do vnderstand them in our Aduersaries sense 9. For proofe of Iustification by fayth only they vrge that saying of the (q) Rom. c. 3. Apostle Arbitramur hominem iustificari c.