them peaceablie she was declared to be iust or iustified in the sight of men Therefore there are two kindes of iustification the one by faith before god the other by works before men therefore a man is not iustified by faith only but by works also which saying of S. Iamesis not repugnant to that we holde that a man is iustified before god sola fide by faith alone or by faith without the workes of the lawe as S. Paule saieth which is alone which comprehendeth al good works as also the examples of Abraham and Dauid in the 4. Chapter to the Romanes doc plainelie declare where the Apostle speaketh expreslely of circumcisiō which was a worke of obedience following the faith of Abraham And Dauid pronounceth the blessednes of a man to whome the Lord imputeth righteousnes without workes which must needes be vnderstood euen of workes following faith because Dauid speaketh of himselfe and of all men generallie that shall obtaine blessednes by the grace of god without merite of workes For to him that worketh reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt Againe the Apostle writing to the Galathians which were faithful speaketh generally It is manifest that by the lawe no man is iustified before god for the iust shal liue by faith By which texts many more the conclusion is moste necessarie that before God workes following faith doe not iuslifie but faith alone without workes yet not a dead but a liuing faith which worketh by loue Further he saith they haue expresselie for absolution whose sinnes ye forgiue are forgiuen whose sinnes ye retaine are retained Iohn 20. but we haue no where that Priests cannot forgiue or retaine sinnes in earth But the controuersie is not whether the Ministers of God haue power to forgiue or retaine sinnes for we beleeue that they haue such power but whether absolute power properlie to forgiue sinnes and how the same is to be exercised is the question For we beleeue that God onelie hath power absolutelie properlie to remit sinnes according to the scripture man by declaring Gods will pleasure Yet againe they haue expresselie The doers of the lawe shall be iustified Rom. 2. And we saie euen as much but because none is found a doer of the lawe we saie with the same Apostle that it is manifest that no man is iustified before God by the lawe But our answerer inferreth moreouer that we haue no where that the law required at Christians hands is impossible or that the doing therof iustifieth not Christians yes we haue it expressely That which was impossible of the law in as much as it was weake by the flesh God sending his sonne in the similitude of sinfull flesh c. If there had beene a lawe giuen that had bene able to giue life righteousnes in deede had bene of the lawe but the scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne that the promis by the faith of Iesus Christ might be giuen to them that belecue Againe by the workes of the lawe no flesh shal be iustified before him therefore no Christians by the workes of the lawe shal be iustified before him Moreouer we are saued by grace through faith not of workes Ergo Christians for none els are saued are iustified through faith without workes Yet againe they haue expresselie Psal. 75. Vowe ye and render your vowes we haut no where vowe ye not or if you haue vowed breake your vowes we confesse the Prophet willeth the people to vowe yet he meaneth onelie thinges lawfull and in their power to performe we bid no man to breake his vowe if it be lawful and possible but if he haue vowed to goe a pilgrimage which is Idolatrie or to liue vnmaried which is not able to liue continentlie we exhort him to repent of his wicked or vnaduised vowe to serue God as he hath appointed or to vse the remedie that God hath prouided They haue againe expreslie Keepe the traditions which ye haue learned either by worde or epistle 2. Thess. 2. we haue no where the Apostles left noe traditions to the Church vnwritten Saint Paull willeth the Thessalonians to keepe the traditions or doctrine which he had deliuered vnto them either by word of mouth or by his epistle This prooueth not that the Apostles left any traditions which are no where written in the holie scripture because they were not all written in the epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians But we haue expresselie that the holie scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation to make the man of God perfect and prepared to all good works which things seing we haue fufficientlie in the holie scriptures we neither regard nor receiue any other doctrine vnder name of tradition of the Apo stles or of Angels from heauen Still they haue expresselie If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commaundements and when he said he did that already if thou wilt be perfect go sel all thou hast giue to the poore follow me And we haue no where that either the commaundements of God cannot be kept or that we are not bound vnto them or that there is no degree of life one perfecter then another We graunt that who so by good deeds will seeke to enter into life as that yong man did must doe the deedes of the commaundements which if he can doe he shal liue by them but albeit he boasted that he had kept the commaundements yet it followeth not that he did keepe them indeede and as god required but was a blinde hipocrite and sought to iustifie him-selfe according to the heresie of the Pharisies That we are not bound to keepe the commaundements as neere as God will giue vs grace is no article of ours but a slaunder of his Finallie we denie that anie mortall mans life is perfect yet we graunt that some mens liues come neerer to perfection then other some Neither doth our Sauiours words include perfection in selling his goodes nor in giuing them to the poore for if a man bestowe all his goodes to feede the poore and haue not loue he is nothing but he addeth that he must followe Christ and take vp his crosse and so by Christs grace he shal attaine vnto perfection which he falselie imagined that he he had obtained by a pharizaical obseruation of the lawe this fauoreth not Monkes and friers more then hipocrites and liers Beside this They haue expresselie worke your owne saluation with feare and tremhling Phil. 2. we haue no where either that a man can worke nothing toward his owne saluation being holpen with the grace of God or that a man should make it of his beliefe that he shall be saued without all doubt or feare The saying of Saint Paull we acknowledge that men should worke out their owne saluation with feare and trembling together with the next verse following for it is God that worketh in
you both to wil and to be hable to do for his owne good pleasure whereupon we conclude that though a man is willed to worke his owne saluation by walking in that waie which god hath appointed for them that shal be saued yet he can doe nothing by his owne strength but all that he doth is of the grace of god for by grace you are saued through faith that not of your selues it is the gift of God To be short we make not the grace of God an helper onelie but a wholl doer and bringer to passe in vs of our saluation and of all thinges tending thereto For we are not apt of our selues as of our selues to thinke anie thing belonging thereto but our aptnes is of God Nor I saith Saint Paul but the grace of God which is with me Againe we haue infinit places of scripture to prooue that a man ought not to dout of his saluatiō in respect of the truth of Gods promises although we ought to feare trem ble at Gods iudgements and although we cannot be alwaies voide of feare in respect of our own weakenes Furthermore they haue expresselie doe ye the worthie fruites of penance Luc. 3. we haue no where that faith onelie is sufficient without all satisfaction and all other workes of penance on our partes The fruites worthie of repentance we acknowledge to be necessaire to declare vnfained repentance but not for satisfaction of Gods iustice which is blasphemous against the satisfaction of Christes death But that a faith which is fruitles or voide of the workes of repentance should be sufficient to saluation or Iustification we doe vtterlie deny as a thing contrary to the scriptures Yet againe they haue expresselie that euerie man shal be saued according to his workes Apo. 20. we haue no where that men shal be iudged onelie according to their faith We confesse as the text is that euerie man shal be iudged according to his workes and so perhaps he would haue saide if the corrector had done his part neither doe we affirme that men shal be iudged onelie according to their faith for triall of their faith shal be made by their workes Once againe they haue expresselie that there remaineth aretribution stipend and paie to euery good worke in heauen Marc. 9. 1. Cor. 3. Apoc. 22. Ps. 118. we haue as he saith no where that good workes done in Christ do merite nothing In the 3. text quoted out of the new testament is all one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a rewarde whether it be freelie giuen or deserued by laboure To him that worketh saith Saint Paule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rewarde is not accompted according to grace but according to debt But God is debter to no man Neither is there anie merit of good workes once named in the scriptures but against the merit of good workes Christ saith epxresselie when you haue done all thinges that are commaunded vnto you saie we are vnprofitable seruants and the paie wages stipend merite or desert of an vnprofitable seruant is shewed Matt. 25. 30. Cast out the vnprofitable seruant into vtter darkenesse there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth It is therfore the grace mercie and trueth of Gods promise whereby we claime rewarde and not the merites desert or debt of our good workes To that he saieth they haue expresselie praier and sacrifice for the dead in the second of the Maccaebees We answer that booke of Macabes to be no holie Scripture out of which he might haue expresselie a man commended for killing himselfe Whether Angels present good workes and almesdeedes before God and whether Saintes departed do praie for them that are aliue which he gathereth out of the Apocriphal bookes of Tobie and the Maccabes we make no question as of matters not reuealed in the canonicall scriptures But if they were graunted to be so yet it followeth not that men aliue must or may praie to Angels or Saintes departed Last of all out of the canonicall scripture he saieth they haue expresselie that the affliction which Daniell vsed vpon his bodie was acceptable in the sight of God Dan. 10. and we haue no where that such voluntarie corporall afflictions are in vaine But which of vs saith that such voluntarie corporall affliction as Daniell vsed and to such end as he did vse them are in vaine No man verilie You see therefore that while he boasteth of expresse words of scripture against vs he is driuen either to glose vpon the text or to faine some opinion vnto vs which we holde not at all and that all his bragges are but winde and wordes without matter as of one that-fcareth no shame because his heade is hidden The third waie of triall is necessarie collections made and inferred vpon the scriptures which we are willing to acknowledge and admitte to be of as great authoritie as the expresse words of the scripture But to discerne what is necessarie collection and what is not necessarie collection when there is no expresse wordes of scripture there is no certaine waie but the iudgement of Logicke for that onelie is necessarie collection which out of expresse words of scripture or articles of faith or other groundes confessed to be necessarilie gathered out of the holie scripture may be rightly concluded in a true and lawfull syllogisme whatsoeuer cannot be so concluded is no necessarie collection But our answerer saith we must referre our selues to the auncient primitiue Church for this meaning and his reason is For it is like they knew it best for that they liued nearer to the writers thereof then we doe who could well declare vnto them what was the meaning of the same we doe willinglie yeald to consult with the auncient primitiue Church to be holpen with their collections but to admit all their collections without examining them were to admit many errors that euen the Papists doe condemne for errors and which are reprooued by the scriptures them-selues Let one example serue in stead of manie S. Ierome collecteth out of this scripture It is good not to touch a woman that therefore it is euill to touch a woman Euerie man doth see that this is an vnnecessary collection and so are many other in the auncient fathers writings Wherefore we must vse the gift of knowledge of right gathering and concluding which God hath giuen not to be vnprofitable vnto his Church but to be both beneficiall and necessarie Againe marke the feeble reason vpon which our answerer groundeth his saying It is like they knew it best he cannot say it is necessarie that they knew it best then how prooueth he that it is like because they liued neerer to the writers then we doe who could well declare the meaning vnto them In deede if we had the writings of them that liued so neere vnto the Apostles that they might heare their meaning of their owne mouthes it were some likeliehood and yet no necessarie proofe
your fault At the least it is your fault that in so straunge a report you haue not sette downe his wordes in latine if euer you sawe the preface your selfe As for the corrupt edition or often chaungeing of Luthers workes by him-selfe we haue not to do with it for whie might not Luther reforme his owne workes if ought in them were erronius or offensiue But it is a cauill that you adioyne of the confession of Auspurg whereunto the Germanes perhaps ascribe too much as Alasco writeth For though there be diuers editions thereof differing in wordes yet are they not contrarie in sense as appeareth by the harmonie of confessions latelie set forth at Gencua Now sir so much as we finde sounding toward your reporte I will sette downe that the reader maie iudge how vprightlie you do charge Luther with denying three of the foure Gospells Enarrat in epist. Petri argumentum Primùm omnium notandum c. First of all it is to be noted that all the Apostles do handle the same doctrine for which cause it is not well done that men do number but onelie foure Euangelistes and foure Gospells whereas whatsoeuer the Apostles haue left written is one Gospell For the Gospell signifieth nothing els but the preaching and publishing of the grace and mercie of God by our Lord Christ deserued and purchased to vs by his death and that thou maiest take it properlie it is not that which is conteined in bookes and is comprehended in letters but rather a vocall preaching and a liuing worde and voyce which soundeth into the wholl world and is so openly blowen out like a trumpet that it may be heard euerie where neither is it a booke which conteineth a law in which are many good doctrines as it hath beene commonlie taken heretofore for it doth not commaund vs to worke any thing where by we may become iust but it sheweth vnto vs the grace of God freelie and giuen without our meritte namelie that Christ hath beene our mediatour and hauing made satisfaction for our sinnes hath abolished them and made vs iust and saued by his workes Now whoesoeuer doth either preach or write these thinges he teacheth the true Gospell that which all the Apostles and peculiarlie Saint Paull and Saint Peter in their Epistles haue performed Therefore whatsoeuer is preached of Christ is one Gospell although one handle it after one manner an other man after another in diuerse manner of wordes do reason of it For the matter may be handled either in long or in short speach and be described either streightlie or largelie But seeing all perteineth to this end to teach Christ to be our sauiour and that we are made iust and saued by faith in him without our workes it is one word it is one Gospell as there is but one faith onelie and one baptisme in all the Church of Christ. Therefore thoureadest nothing writen by any of the Aposties which is not conteined in the monuments of the other Apostles But they which haue handled this point especiallie and with greater diligence that faith alone in Christ doth iustifie they are the best Euangelistes of all And in this respect you may more rightlie call the Epistles of Paul the Gospel then those which Matthew Marke and Luke haue written For these men describe not much beside the storie of the Acts and miracles of Christ. But the grace which is wrought vnto vs by Christ none doth sette forth more fullie or more rightlie then Saint Paul especiallie in the Epistle to the Romanes Now seeing there is much more moment in the word then in the factes and miracles of Christ and if we should want the one it were much better to lacke the Acts and history then the word and doctrine it followeth that shose bookes are to be had in highest price which handle the doctrine cheeflie and the wordes of our Lord Iesus Christ. Seeing that if there were no miracles of Christ extant and we were altogether ignorant of them the words were sufficient for vs without the which we could not so much as liue Therefore hereof it followeth that this Epistle of Saint Peter is to be accounted among the most excellent bookes of the new testament and is the true and pure Gospell as in which he doth nothing els but that which Paul and the other Euangelists do teaching sincere faith that Christ is giuen vnto vs which hauing taken away our offences doth saue vs c. This that he speaketh naming Matthew Marke and Luke say you signifieth some tooth against these three Gospells And what tooth I pray you because these three Gospells speake too much of good workes As though S. Paul in his Epistles and namelie in that to the Romanes doth not speake as much of good workes as all those three Gospells and Saint Peter though breeflie doe not speake as much in effect But in the preface in question you affirme that Luther hath these wordes The Epistles of Paul and Peter doe farre passe the Gospells of Matthew Marke and Luke which yet more prooueth Luthers euill opinion of those three Gospells I doubtnot albeit I neuer sawe the preface my selfe but Luther doth plainlie expresse in what respect the Epistles of Paul and Peter doe excell the histories of the Gospell written by Matthew Marke and Luke euen as he doth in this preface vnto his exposition of Saint Peter Because these Epistles are more occupied in setting forth the Grace of Christ and the fruit and benefit of his passion which no more prooueth his euill opinion of those three Gospells then when Christ preferreth Iohn the Baptist before al the Prophets it prooueth his euil opinion of all the Prophets or when he preferreth him that is least in the kingdome of heauen before Iohn Baptist it prooueth his euil opinion of Iohn Baptist. These brutish Papists thinke all men voide of common sense when they make such impudent conclusions As for your first charge that it is a false opinion and to be abolished that there are foure ghospels For the ghospell of S. Iohn is the onely faire true and principall ghospell when you can alledge the words of Luther in latine to iustifie your report and because we know not how to come to the sight of that preface will set downe two sentences that goe before them and as manie that followe them you shall receiue a reasonable answere But vntill you haue thus much performed I am perswaded you wil be as farre to seeke as Campian was for his reporre of Luther that he should call the Epistle of Saint Iames Stramineam strawie or like strawe And yet you take vppon you to shew the intollerable impudencie of Master Chark and his fellowes in the Tower against Master Campian for that he could not presentlie shew out of their bookes where these wordes are written by Luther especiallie of Master Whitaker whoe to the admiration and laughter of all other nations hath set forth in latine that Luther neuer
homini Christtano indulgentia potest dari qui firmiter credat Papam posse dare se posserecipere habeat charitatem in affectu vt sit verè contritus confessus Of the parte of him that receiueth ae pardon it is required that he haue faith in vnderstanding because a pardon cannot be giuen but to a Christian man which steadfastlie beleeueth that the Pope is able to giue and he able to receiue and that he haue charitie in affection that he be truelie contrite and confessed More then this beside the fulfilling of the cause for which the pardon was graunted he doth not require In so much that he alloweth that a man maie receiue a pardon for his father and mother whether they be liuing or dead if the Pope doe so applie his pardon that he which will goe ouer the sea or to S. Iames in his fathers or mothers name shall inioie it for them and the receiuer doth performe as much for them The iust cause of graunt in the giuers is determined by the glosse aforesaid to be the honour of God and the exaltation of faith by such profitable workes as are expressed and required in the pardons as pilgrimage saying of such a praier giuing to such a fraternitie c. in which not the quantitie but the kinde of the worke is to be considered so that for a verie small worke maruelous large pardon maie be graunted if it please the Pope to whome the dispensation of the treasure of the Church is principallie committed for Bishops which are able to giue but fortie daies out of that treasure are but pettie baylies whome if you will accuse for lauishing the treasure in graunting of ouer large pardons you break the Canon lawe which telleth you that you must not call him to an account for his doings ALLEN Neuertheles the causes of giuing indulgencies may be more or lesse reasonable according to the state and varietie of thinges which to the wisdome of Gods Vicar in earth is best seene whome Christ so ruleth in that case that he maie be most beneficiall to his holie houshold in so much that it is not to be doubted but in these daies and in this great contempt of deuout and religious exercises the moouing onely of the people to prayer to holie peregrinations to the obedience of the Church may be a sufficient cause why there should be to praiers said vpon bookes beads or sanctified creatures for such purpose annexed great remission For looke what thinges be moste condemned of heretikes those things must Christian men be induced to reuerence with moste singular zeale religion Neither can there be anie thing in the worlde so necessarie for vs christian men of these times that be so voide of good workes as by deuotion and entire zeale to ioyne with our elders that in the holy communion of Sainctes we may be partakers of their vertuous deedes And that is the verie ende of all the Popes Pardons to make vs in our lake of satisfaction for our sinnes felowes and coparteners of the abundance that was in Christ first and then by him in our holy brethren departed before vs. FVLKE Throughout this chapter hitherto you haue disputed against the power of the Pope and the force of his pardons now it is time for you to coie him againe and to raise vp his pardons which you haue pressed downe so lowe Now the wisdome of Gods vicar is sufficient to iudge the causes of giuing indulgences and Christ so ruleth him in that case that he maie be moste beneficiall to his houshold in so much that it is not to be doubted but in these daies the Popes large pardons for litle workes may be of great force Then belike your former discourse serueth not for these daies that men muste fulfill their penance if they maie notwithstanding anie pardon that a pardon doth not remit anie good worke inioyned in penance that if a man lack power to fulfill this penance he must supplie it with other workes counteruailable or els the Popes pardons shall not be beneficiall to them at all or nothing so much as they seeme to sound But why saie you that in these daies Christ ruleth his Vicar in this case that he maie be most beneficiall to his holie houshold Hath not Christ as great care of his holy houshold the Church in all times and in all cases as in these daies and in this case Yes verilie But Christ hath not alwaies and in all cases ruled the Pope as it might be moste beneficiall to his Church for then his key of iurisdiction should neuer haue erred nor his life bene wicked to the great hurte and shame of his Church that I speake not of his criors in doctrine which you will not graunt as you doe the other Therfore it followeth that the Pope is not Christes vicar in earth appointed for the most benefite of his Church Your principle that thinges which heretikes doe hate must be moste reuerenced is false For nothing is to be esteemed more then the nature of the thing requireth whether it be loued or hated of heretikes The Anabaptists hate the wearing of armour it followeth not therefore that the wearing of armour should be counted a religious thing or more reuerenced then as a lawfull vsage and sometimes necessarie among Christians The verie end of the Popes pardons is well known to be the maintenance of the Popes pride and couetousnes the pretended end is wicked blasphemous derogating from the sacrifice of Christs death which is a full satisfaction and purging of all our sins the participation wherof is through faith wrought in our hearts by the spirite of God and not by the Popes application or coupling of anie Saintes merites with the onelie and omnisufficient sacrifice of Christ. ALLEN Vpon all which it is verie plaine that euerie man can not beneficiallie receiue the fruite of a Pardon this at least being requisite in euery man that listeth to attaine benefite thereby that he be in state of grace aud in earnest intent to continue in the knot of Christ his Church with loue and liking of the holie workes of his Christian brethren and accomplishing at least that small worke which commonlie now is ioyned to the Pardon for increase of Christian deuotion The continuance of which deuotion that more and more decaieth maketh the Pardons to be more common at this daie of late yeares then they were in the primitiue Church when moste men in the spring of Christian religion and feruour of faith sought to satisfie exactlie the debt of the penance or else which was a common case then recompensed it by Martyrdom though S. Gregorie the first of that name more then nine hundered yeare since in the ordering of the slations at Rome is knowne to haue giuen Pardons for yeares or daies in like forme as now is vsed And cleare it is that the thing it selfe being found lamfull no Protestant aliue can euer be able
their aduetsaries it is well knowne that Master Charke and the ministers of the Church are none such neither haue they anie such authoritie It remaineth then that he accounteth the Prince her councell magistrates and ministers of Iustice his aduersaries who indeede haue good cause so to be not onelie in respect of their heresyes but also in regard of their manifolde and almoste infinite practises of treason against the Prince and realme for which some of them haue suffered moste iustlie and not for offering of disputation as this traiterous heretike euerie where moste slaunderouslie doth avowe But nowe for their partes he saith they offere the best surest and easiest meanes that can be deuised or that haue bene vsed in Gods Churches for triall and they are manie in number The first is the bookes of Scripture receiued vpon the credit of the auncient Church of which we are content saith he to accept for canonicall and allowe all those and none other which antiquitie in Christendome hath agreed vpon But this is false for to omit that they receiue for canonicall such as the Church of God before Christ neuer receiued they receiue also such as the greatest and best antiquitie in Christendome receiued not as the Church in Origens time witnesse Eusebius more then the Church of Rome receiued in Saint Ieromes witnesse Ierome himselfe prologo Galeato and Ruffinus in Expossymb more then the Councell of Laodicea did receiue for canonicall as is manifest by the 59. canon The second way of trial is the expresse plaine words of Scripture wherein they must needs be farre superior for what one expresse plaine text haue they saith he in anie one point or article against vs which we doe not acknowledge liberallie as they doe and as the wordes doe lie yes we haue manie but a fewe shal serue for example God saith Exod. 20. Thou shalt not make to thy selse anie grauen image c. thou shalt not fall down to thē nor worship them Againe Matt. 4. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onelie shalt thou serue Which are moste plaine expresse and manifest against worshipping of Images and other creatures in anie vse of Religion Christ saith drinke ye all of this they be expresse and manifest wordes against the popish sacriledge of the cuppe The 14. to the Corinthians the first Epistle is expresse and plaine against publike praiers homilies lessons in a straunge vnknowne tongue 1. Tim. 4. in expresse and plaine wordes the spirite pronunceth the forbidding of marriage and meates to be the doctrine of deuilles And Heb. 13. Mariage is honourable in all men And 1. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. a Bishop Elder or Deacon must be the husband of one wife beside a great number more But the papists saith our answerer haue infinit texts against vs which we cannot admit without glosses and fond interpretations of our owne A bolde speach as alwaies he vseth but it shall alwaies be founde that if we doe in anie text departe from the grammaticall sense there is necessarie cause why as if it be a figuratiue spcach which is tried either by circumstances of the same place or by other texts of scriptures for the most parte hath the iudgement of the most auncient writers agreing with our interpretation But the most of these examples he bringeth haue nothing in shewe that the expresle wordes of scripture are with them or against vs but by their fonde false vnreasonable collections and such as they can neuer conclude in lawful true syllogismes as for example We haue it saith he for the supremacie expresselie saide to Peter that signifieth arocke vpon this rock will I builde my Church We answere that we might followe the interpretation of the most auncient and approoued fathers that the rocke here spoken of is Christ whom Peter confessed but graunting them that they could neuer euict we confesse that the Church is builded vpon the foundation of Peter the Apostle but not vpon him alone or more principallie then vpon all the Apostles who are all rockes or stones vpon whose foundation as also vpon the foundation of the Prophets the Church of Christ is builded Neither is it possible to prooue the supremacie of the Pope out of those wordes of scripture or anie other But they haue further expresselie touching the Apostles he that is great among you let him be as the younger Luk. 22. We haue no where there is none greater then other among you Neither do we holde that none ought to be greater then other among vs but that the greatest among the ministers ought to be seruant of all the rest and that none ought to exercise Dominion ouer the Lordes inheritaunce yet the primacie of order we graunt euen among the Apostles according to which Iames was president of the Councell at Ierusalem Peter the cheife Aposlle of the circumcision Paull of the gentiles all which will not serue one whit to maintaine the popish tiranny For Paul was nothing inferiour to the highest Apostles But for the reall presence they haue expreslie This is my bodie we haue no where this is the signe of my bodie Neither doe we denie the sacrament to be the bodie of Christ neither doe we affirme that it is a bare signe But that this is a figuratiue speach we haue expreslie This cuppe is the newe Testament in my blood and as expreslie the Apostle speaking of the same sacrament the rocke was Christ which prooueth that it must be vnderstoode in a sigue and after a spirituall manner and so doe al the olde Doctors interpretit as hath beene often shewed We haue expreslie saith he The bread that I will giue you is my flesh Iohn 6. they haue nowhere It is but the signe of my flesh And we confesse as much for we neuer saide that the signe of Christs flesh was crucified for vs but his verie naturall bodie which he promiseth in that text to giue for the life of the world which by faith and the spirit of God is made the spirituall foode of all the elect children of God and without eating of which none can be saued Ioh. 6. 53. But they haue expresly A man is iustified by works and not by faith onelie Iames. 2. we haue no where a man is iustified by faith alone no nor that he is iustified by faith without workes talking of workes that followe faith First we confesse the text that a man is iustified by workes As Abraham was when he offered his sonne and as Rahab was when she receiued the spies that is a man is declared to be iust in the sight of men For Abraham was iustified before God by faith before he offered his sonne whome God did not trie to enforme himselfe but to declare vnto men by the fruites of obedience that Abraham was a iust man euen so by faith the harlot Rahab perished not with the vnbeleeuers when the receiued the spies in peace but by receiuing
haue no sinne and of the obstinate Iewes If I had not come and spoken vnto them they should haue had no sinne If I had not done those workes among them which no other could doe they should haue had no sinnes Luthers meaning is therefore that vnbeleefe is the greatest and onelie sinne that damneth a man because all other sinns are forgiuen to him that beleeueth is baptized according to the promise of god Secondlie where Luther speaketh expresselie of a Christian baptized you say simplie a man where he saith with any sianes how great soeuer you sate doe what mischeefe he can And as for your blasphemous collection that a man cannot leese his saluation if he would neuer so faine c. and that he may doe what he will so he fall not into incredulitie Luther him-selfe in three wordes sheweth how farre it is from his meaning in his answere to the gatherers of errours out of his doctrine which delt more honestlie with him then you For they said Baptizatum etiam volentem c. that the baptized man though he be willing cannot leese his saluation Luther answereth Quia fides tollis omnia peccara facit volentem non pecca re Rom. 1. because faith taketh awaie all sinnes and maketh a man willing not to sinne For euen in his booke de captiuitate Bab. he addeth this condition which you doe fraudulentlie omitte Siredeat vel 〈◊〉 fides if faith doe returne or stand For by the same faith or rather the trueth of Gods promise all other sinnes are swallowed vp because God cannot denie him selfe if thou shalt confesse him and cleaue faithfullie vnto him that promiseth To conclude faith and good workes be vnseperable and the faithfull man although by corruption of nature he is apt dailie to fall away from God into most greeuous sinnes yet by grace he is either preserued from heinous sinnes or els he is brought to repentance and sorrow for the same So that Luthers doctrine of faith and vnbeleefe if it be vnderstood rightlie as he doth often expiicate himselfe is full of comfort to a troubled conscience yet giueth not bridle to sinne or carnall libertie And therfore howsoeuer you wrest his wordes from his meaning you shew yourselfe no lesse an impudent liar then the false witnesses that deposed against our sauiour Christ that he said destroie this temple and within three dayes I will raise it againe which wordes in deede he spake but not in that sense they deposed and therfore are condemned by the holie ghost as liars and false witnes bearers Luther saith onely infidelitie is the trouble of the conscience because there is nothing but sinne and damnation where there is no faith you conclude that nothing is sinne but vnbeleefe whereas in vnbeleefe there is nothing but sinne and being iustified by faith we haue peace with god And there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus who walke not after the flesh but after the spirit Againe where ' Luther saith that nothing maketh a wickedman but infidelitie because it is the roote of all wickednes and bringeth with it all wickednes you conclude that no other sinne maketh a man wicked which is true if it be vnderstood of him that hath faith is truly penitent for his sinne hath it pardoned by Gods mercie For to such one though his sinns were as redde as scarlet they are made as white as wol neither is he to be called Prauns a wicked man but rectus or iustus a right or a iust man who shall liue by his faith The second doctrine is so manifest a cauill that you doe in a manner acknowledge a satisfaction both by Master Hanmer and Master Charke onelie you would haue it considered how these wordes of Luther do sound in the eares of the people The enne commaundements appertaine nothing to vs. As though Luther did sette downe this Aphorisme so barelie that he did not plainlie declare his meaning For this he saith in his sermon intituled how the bookes of Moses are to be read with fruite Doctorem sanè c. truely we doe receiue and acknowledge Moses as a teacher of whome we learne much profitable doctrine as after shal be said but we do not acknowledge him to be a law giuer or a gouernour sithe he him-selfe restrained his ministerie to that people onelie Againe in answer to this question Why the tenne commaundements are to be obserued of vs Seeing Moses pertaineth not vnto vs he saith Sed inquis c. but thou saiest certainlie the commanndements of Moses that is of God are these not to haue straunge Gods to feare god to trust him and obeie him not to abuse his name to giue honour to parentes not to kill not to steals not to commit adulterie not to beare false witnesse c. is it not necessarie that we obserue these things I answere they are to be oserued of all men and they pertaine to all men not because they were commaunded by Moses but because these lawes that are rehearsed in the tenne commaundements are written in the nature of men For God hath imprinted these notices in all men euen in their creation Wherefore euen the gentiles to whome Moses was unknowen and to whome God hath not spoken as to them do know that God is to be obeyed God is to be called vpon parentes are to be honoured men must adstaine from murther and iniurie of others c. because these thinges displease God and are punished of him In the end he concludeth thus Dico igitur seruanda esse hee 〈◊〉 decalogi c. 1 saie therefore that these ion commaundementes are to be obserued not because Moses hath 〈◊〉 them which thing pertained to that people one lie but because all men haue these knowledges imprinted in nature with which Moses also agreeth If this be not sufficient to declare his iudgement to be farre from abolishing of the morall law I reporre me to you Now whether the ten commaundements appartaine more to Christians then to gentiles or Iewes we will not 〈◊〉 at this time Howsoeuer it be Luther saith not as you conclude that by this meanes they should no more appertaine to vs then to gentiles in whose nature also they were written But rather the contrarie maie be concluded by good Logick out of Luthers reason If they did appertaiue to the gentiles because they were writen in their nature much more to Christians in whose heart they are written also by the spirit of god What shall I saie more the Lord shall destroy all deceitfull lippes and the tongue that speaketh proudiie Thirdlie you reporte that Luther said It is a false opinion and to be abolished that there are 4. Gospels For the Gospell of Iohn is the onelie faire true and principall Gospel For this you cited his preface in nouum Testamentum which Master Charke cannot finde nor anie man els that I heare of in latine You saie it is not
yeares that none of the writers that gathered the monumentes of such auncient Fathers could once heare of them I meane Eusebius Hierome Gennadius The other testimonie out of the second of Nice which you quote as fondlie I will not stand vpon seeing it is of later time and lesle credit among such a number of bastardes made legitimat to set vp Idolatrie How well you haue iustified your nine slaunders and prooued Luthers Doctrine to be licentious and carnall I will not spend time in repeting let the reader iudge of that which hath beene brought on both sides The fift section entituled Other doctrines of Luther and of Caluine and Beza VVHat other absurdities you are able to bring out of Luther you haue giuen vs a sufficient taste in the former section in which you handle the matter of licentious libertie by which the indifferent reader may esteeme of the rest For ribaudrie scurrilitie and thameles falsehood of which you say you haue examples more infinit and without number when we heare of them you shall receiue answer either of confession defense or excuse But in the meane time you will note vs one or two thinges of impietie as they lie together in one treatise that we haue in England which he desendeth obstinatelie after they were condemned by the Church being such positions as cut the verie sinewes of all vertue and so open the high waie vnto all dissolution The first example is when he holdeth that the verie iust man in euerie good worke doth sinne mortallie by which saie you how doth he discourage all men from doing good I answer whatsoeuer Luther hath written to that effect as not to discourage men from doing good but to dissuade them from trusting in their owne doing when it is at the best And seeing there is so great imperfection in the best deedes of men he encourrageth men to labour more toward perfection He teacheth men therefore to a scribe to the grace of God that which is properlie his and to acknowledge their owne infirmity which without his grace can do nothing but euill which grace secing it is sufficient for vs in that his power is made perfect in our weakenes there is no discouragement either vnto faith or good workes for the sufficiencie of his grace shall comforte vs in faith and the strength of his mercie shal be glorious in our infirmitie Wherefore this Doctrine of Luther doth no more discourage men from doing good then he that saith whosoeuer hitteth not the pricke doth misse the marke doth discourage men from shooting as nighe as they can The second example of impietie is when he saith A man hath not in his power to doe euell Whereby saie you how doth he encourage all lewde people to wickednes deliuering them from the fault thereof But Luther doth neither of both For albeit he say that it is not in the power of man to make his waies euill because noe man hath anie power to do anie thing but from God in whome we liue mooue and haue our beeing yet doth he not deliuer the wicked man from the fault of his wickednes because he sinneth willinglie though he can do nothing els but sinne being destitute of the grace of God and therefore sinneth necessarilie for proofe whereof Luther alledgeth Augustine de spiritu litera cap. 4. saying Liberum arbitrium sine gratia non valet nisi ad peccandum c. freewill without grace auaileth not but to commit sinne c. And further he saith Ieremias quoque cap. 10. sic dicit Scio Domine quoniam non est hominis via eius nec viri est vt dirigat gressus suos Quid potuit apertius dici si via sua gressus sui non sint in potestate hominis quomodo via Dei gressus dei erunt in potestate eius Via enim hominis est ea quam ipsi vocant naturálem virtutem faciendi quod est in se. Ecce haec non est in arbitrio hominis seu liberi arbitrij Quid ergo liberum arbitrium est nisires de solo titulo Quomodo potest sese ad bonum praeparare cùm nec in potestate sit suas vias malas facere Nam malaopera in impiis Deus regit vt prouerb 16. dicit Omnia propter semet ipsum operatus est Dominus etiam impium addiem malum Rom. 1. Tradidit illos deus in reprobum sensum vt faciant quae non conueniunt c. Ieremie cap. 10. saith thus I know O Lord that a mans waies is not in his owne handes neither is it in man to direct his owne steppes what could be said more plainlie if a mans owne waie and his owne steppes be not in his owne power how shall the waie and steppes of God be in his power for the waie of man is that which they call the natural power of doing that which is in him Beholde this is not in the will of man or of freewill What is free will then but a thing of title and name onelie How can a man prepare him selfe to good when there is not in his power so much as to make his wates euill for God gouerneth euen the euill workes in the vngodlie as he saith in the 16. of the Prouerbes God hath made all thinges for him-selfe euen the wicked man against the euill daie and Rom. 1. God hath deliuered them into a reprobate minde to do those thinges which are not conuenient All power of doing is of God whether it be good or euil that is donne For the murtherer could not liue nor lift vp his hand but by the power which he hath of God who also ordereth euen the wickednes of the murtherer to good either for the punishment of him that is slaine or for his reward if he be slaine for the defence of his trueth and in a good cause and euermore turneth it to his glorie Yet is not the malice of the murtherer from God nor the murtherer deliuered from the fault of his wickednes because he doth not intend therein to serue God but his owne crueltie And this is that which Luther doth both saie and meane far from the slaunderous reporte of this malitious cauiller as his owne words do beare witnes The third example of impiety is that Luther teacheth that to fight against the Turke is to resist God him-selfe whereby saie you what a path maketh he to the empire of infidelitie But in truth Luther teacheth not that it is vnlawfull simplie and absolutelie to fight against the Turke but to fight against the Turke vnder the Popes banner The article is better gathered by the Collectors then by you sir defender Praeliari aduersus Turcas c. to make warre against the Turkes is to resist God visiting our iniquities by them And this article I do approoue saith Luther by a double experience of our infelicity The two experiences are these First that all praiers and Counsells of preuailing against the Turkes
haue beene hither to frustrate and the strength of the Turke is increased by our warres The second is that vnder pretext of making warre against the Turke the Popehath vsed to rake mony to gether for their pardons And he concludeth that without repentance and the ouerthrow of the Popes tyrannie there is no hope to preuaile in warre against the Turkes because God is not on our side butiustlie incensed against vs. Quantòrectius saith he faceremus c. How much better should we do if first with our praiers yea rather by changeing the wholl course of our life we reconcile God vnto vs And then that the Emperours the princes would restraine that Idole of Roome from tyrannie deceit and destroying of souies For that I also maie once prophecie although I know I shall not be heard Except the Pope of Rome be brought vnder all Christendome is vndonne Let him flie as Christ hath taught into the mountaines he that can or with confidence let him offer his life to death vnto the Romish murtherers The Popedome can worke nothing but sinne and destruction what will you more But who shall subdue the Pope Christ by the brightnes of his comming and none other Lord who hath beleeued our preaching he that hath eares to heare let him heare and let him absteine from the Turgish warre while the name of the Pope preuaileth vnder heauen I haue said By this you maie see that Luther fauored not the empire of infidelitie but sheweth by what meanes it maie be resisted Againe he forbiddeth not defense against the Turke but inuasion of the Turke when we maie be at peace with him For that it is lawfull to fight against the Turke in our owne defense he sheweth his opinion in consut Rat. Latomianae where he derideth the follie of Latomus and the diuines of Louane which racked the decree of Pope Leo to this sense that it was needles to answer the aduersaties of religion which is as great wisedome of the schoole of Louane in proceeding against Luther as if when the Turke doth set vpon vs which is no waies lawfull for him and yet he will not be staid we should send the diuines of Louane embassadors vnto him which should saie vnto him It is not lawfull for thee to fight and if thou do we will condemne thee and so suffer him to raunge at his pleasure and yet boast that we haue gotten the victorie Nay saith he let vs laie aside praiers and all spirituall armour and cease to resist the deuill denouncing vnto him and saying It is not lauful for thee to trouble the Church of God So that Luther by these wordes declareth his iudgement that it is as lawfull for vs and as necessarie with bodelie armour to defend our selues against the Turke assailing vs as it is to fight against the deuill with spirituall armour and to confute enemies of the trueth by the word of God For a fourth example of impietie you adde when he reprehended the Pope for defining beside scripture that the soule is immortall and calleth it a monster of the dunghill of Rome what ground of impietie doth he not laie In deed if Luther should denie the immortalitie of the soule as Pope Iohn the 23. did and was therefore conuicted and condemned in the Counsell of Constance wee would accurse Luthers memorie as much as the Popes But if Luther reprehended the Pope for deliuering that vpon the creditte of his owne definition and authoritie which is manifestlie grounded vpon the authoritie of holie scriptures what a slaunderous penne haue you He was charged by the Collectors art 37. to haue saide thus Certum est in manu Ecclesiae c. It is certaine that it is not in the hand of the Church or of the Pope at all to decree articles of the faith nay nor yet lawes of manners and good workes To this article Luther answereth thus Probo hunc sic c. This article I prooue thus 1. Cor. 3. No man can lay any other foundation beside that which is alreadie laide which is Iesus Christ. Here thou hast the foundation laid by the Apostles but euerie article of faith is part of this foundation therefore none other article can be laid then is alreadie laid There may be builded vpon as the same Apostle saith And therefore the Pope ought to be laide and builded vpon the same foundation but not to lay any foundation for all things to be beleeued are fully set forth in the scriptures Yet I permit that the Pope may make articles of faith to them that beleeue in him such as these are That the bread and wine are transsubstantiated in the sacrament That the essence of god doth neither beget nor is begotton That the soul is the substantiall forme of the bodie That he him seife is the Emperour of the world King of heauen and an earthly God That the soull is immortall And all those infinite monsters in the Romish dunghill of decrees that such as his faith is such may be his Gospell such his beeleeuers such his Church and that like lippes may haue like lettice and the cup a couer meete for it But we which are Christians and not Papanes doe know that there is nothing pertaining either to faith or good manners which is not abundantlie set forth in the holie scriptures that there is neither authoritie nor place for men to decree any other thing These wordes declare that what doctrine is true and needefull to be knowne must be receiued from God by the holie scriptures not from the Popes decrees or from any mortall mans authoritie It is maruaile you doe not charge Luther with holding the pluralitie of Gods because here prehendeth the Pope for defining that the essence of god can neither beget nor be begotton as wel as with denying the immortality of the soul. both which articles are to be taken out of the holie scriptures not from the authoritie of the Popes definition For though the Pope define any thing which is true yet it must not be receiued vpon his creditte but vpon the authoritie of Gods worde And seeing the Popes decrees doe containe such a number of vntruethes the articles of faith from the Popes decrees may receiue discredit rather then authoritie But all thinges must be examined according to the worde of God writen which is the truth yea euen the scripture comming from the mouth of the deuill Againe I wish the reader to consider how truelie you saie that Luther calleth that opinion of the immortalitie of the soule a monster of the dunghill of Rome when he speaketh of the infinite monsters of falsehoode that are found in the dunghill of the Popes decrees where of he maketh no expresse mention in answere to this article The last example of impiety is when Luther affirmeth and mantaineth that neither man nor Angell on earth can laie any one lawe vpon any one Christian further then he will him-selfe What foundation say you
flatlie against you for he that doth not that which god commaundeth sinneth although in the meane time he doe some other thing that is good or not euill yea although he sleepe and doe nothing Where Master Charke doth distinguish the creatures and ordinances of God which are good from the corruption and preuarication that is in them which is euill you picke a fond quarrell to him and make him to saie that deuills and euill men doe not repugne against the law of God and that they doe not sinne properlie Which is false for he saith no such thing but that euill men as they are the creatures of God are not against the law but the euill in men and so of the rest yet euil men doe sinne properlie and repugne against the law of God by the euill that is in them as in your owne example the Phisitian cureth his patient not as he is a man but as he is a Phisitian and by knowledge of Phisicke which is in him And as for the repugnance of contrarietie whereof the question is in the definition of sin it is not in the creature of god but the corruption of that good crearure A blacke horsse is not contrarie to the colour of white but the colour of blacke so not an euil man but sin of an euil man is contrary to the iustice of Gods law So a Phitisian driueth away an ague yet aPhisitian is not contrary to an ague but thevertue of the medicine which he ministreth When euerie childe may vnderstand your cauilling it is no meruaile though you charge M. Chark with such absurditie and ignorance yea with heresie and that out of Augustine Tom. 8. fol. 665. not telling vs of what edition you speake so that it were harde to finde if it were worth the search that which you talke of but you are to be pardoned for your note was vnperfect did not expresse in what homelie vpon what Psalme The second fault of the Iesuites definition is that they call it an humane or reasonable action Master Charke would rather saie a beastly or vnreasonable action of a man indued with reason Here you take on and aske whether Master Charke be so vnlearned in all foundation of Philosophie And Aristotle and Saint Augustine are called to witnes that sin proceedeth from the minde indued with reason and what other thing I beseech you doth Master Charke saie his wordes are plaine as I haue set them downe and the same that you cite out of Augustine Now if you will defend that sinne is an action agreeable to right reason because it proceedeth frō a reasonable man he giueth you a weapon to play with al against your next encounter otherwise he hath better reformed the wordes of your definition thé you haue either wit or grace to vnderstand It hath a better colour that you obiect of the morall workes of iustice temperance other vertues in the gentils which M. Chark wil acknowledge to be sin and yet they seeme to be agreeable to right reason so they are in part so far forth as they be directed by that light which is left in men proceeding fró the eternal word of god but in so much as that light shineth in darkenes and the darkenes comprehendeth it not no acceptable worke to God can be brought forth therebie Yea for so much as all the morall workes of the gentiles respected not the right ende of obedience and glorie of God whome they knew not their wholl actions were therebie vitiated and corrupted so that they may iustlie be called sinne Euen as praier is turned into sin and the sacrifice of the vngodlie is abhomination to the Lord. And M. Charke faith truelie whatsoeuer is not of faith is sin be it reasonable as you speake or against reason And in deede against right reason it is that the gentiles in their morall workes sought not to obey God according to his lawe and therefore euen their best workes of iustice and temperance were sinne But this is so iumpe you saie that an horse might be a sinner for that his actions proceed not of faith In deed if Saint Paul had spoken of the actions of brute beastes as your Saint Francis witnes your Legend did preach to brute beastes you had iumped neere the matter but when none but an asse would vnderstand Saint Paul to speake of any other actions then such as proceede from men you iumpe as neere as Germans lippes that were nine mile a sunder But you will answere to Saint Paul with S. Ambrose that he meaneth whoesoeuer doth a thing against that which faith prescribeth that is against a mans own conscience and iudgement he sinneth The words of S. Ambrose are these Rectè peccatum appellat quod aliter fit quà m probatum est He doth rightlie call that sinne which is done otherwise then is allowed Now this allowance or approbation is not referred to euerie mans corrupt conscience or ignorant iudgement as you expound it but is measured by faith which is a certaine knowledge and perswasion grounded vpon the worde of God as Saint Paul sheweth in the 14. verse of the 14. Chap. I know am perswaded by our Lord Iesus that nothing is vncleane of it selfe which faith when the Gentiles had not in their workes their works were sinne And therfore you abuse S. Ambrose by your glose to restreine the prescription of faith onelie to that which a man doth against his conscience and iudgement But Saint Augustine you say prooueth at large against Master Charke that the morall good workes of infidels were not sinne lib. de spiritu litera cap. 26. 27. 28. In truth S. Augustine though he call such workes iustice liberalitie wrought by infidels as we doe commonlie good workes yet his iudgement is none other then I haue before expressed and that he declareth in the latter ende of the 27. Chapter for in the 26. he hath nothing sounding that wase Speaking of infidels Quaedam tamen fact a vel legimus vel nouimus vel audimus quae secundùm iusticiae regulam non solùm vituper are non possumus verumetiam meritò recteque laudamus quanquam si discutiatur quo fine fiant vix iuueniuntur quae insticiae debitam laudem defensionemue mereantur Yet some deedes we either reade or know or heare of which according to the rule of righteousnes we cannot not only dispraise but also we do worthily rightly praise them although if it be discussed with what end they are done they are scarslie found which deserue the praise or defense dew to righteousnes But most cleerelie his iudgement is for Master Charke against you sir defender as well for the allegation of the text Rom. 14. where you scornfullie iumped in your sinfull horse as for the matter in question that the morall workes of Gentiles are sin before God Contra Iulianum Pelagianum lib. 4. cap. 3. towarde the ende in these wordes Si Gentilis inquis nudum
operuerit numquid quia non est ex fide peccatum est prorsus in quantum non ex fide peccatum est non quia per se ipsum factū quod est nudum operire peccatum est sed de tali opere non in domino gloriari solus impius negat esse peccatum If an heathen man saiest thou doe cloath the naked is it sinne because it is not of faith yea out of doubt in as much as it is not of faith it is sinne Not because the deede it selfe which is to cloath the naked is sinne but not to reioyce in the Lord of such a worke none but an vngodlie man will denie to be sinne This and much more to this effect hath Saint Augustine in that place against the Pelagians which with the papists denied that such workes of the infidels were sinne But albeit Saint Augustine be directlie against you yet Saint Ierome you thinke may helpe you in Ezechiell cap. 29. whoe saith thus Caeterùm ex eo quòd Nabuchodonoser mercedem accepit boni operis intelligimus etiam ethnicos si quid boni fecerint non absque mercede Dei iudicio praeteriri But of this that Nabuchodonvser receuied arewarde of good workes we vnderstand that euen the gentiles if they haue done any goood thing are not passed ouer without rewarde by the iudgement of God To this I answere that God rewardeth vertue in the gentiles it prooueth not their morall workes are not sinne in as much as they are not done of faith as S. Augustine at large teacheth in both the bookes and places last cited For those good facts are of the reliques of Gods image not altogether blotted out which God doth reward as his owne worke in them but in as much as they doe not those good deedes well they are sinne in the doers as Saint Augustine saieth and therefore neither Saint Augustine nor Saint Ierome are against Master Charke in this cause The third fault of your definition Master Chark saith is that you restraine sinne onelie to voluntarie action Against which you oppose Saint Augustine in manie quotations where he repeateth these words so often Sinne is an euill so voluntarie as it can be by no meanes sinne except it be voluntarie But what his iudgement was of those wordes appeareth best in his retractations which you quote lib. 1. cap. 13. 15. In the former he saith patest videri falsa haec definitio sed si diligenter discutiaiur inuenieiur esse verissima Peccatum quippe illud intelligendum est quod tantummodo peccatum est non quod est etiam paena peccati c. This difinition maie seeme to be false but if it be diligently discussed it shall be found to be most true For that sinne is to be vnderstood therein which is onelie sinne and not also the punishment of sinne as I haue shewed before when I rehearsed certaine thinges out of my third booke of free will Although euen those sinnes which not vnworthelie are called sinnes not voluntarie because they are committed either by them which know not or which are compelled can not be committed altogether without the will because euen he which sinneth of ignorance sinneth willinglie when he thinketh that to be donne which ought not to be donne And he which doth not those thinges which he will the flesh lusting against the spirit lusteth truelie vnwillinglie and there in doth not what he will but if he be ouercome he consenteth to concupiscence willinglie and therein doth not what he will being free from Iustice and a seruant of sinne And that which in children is called originall sinne when as yet they vse not the free choise of will is not absurdlie called also voluntarie because being drawne from the euill will of the first man it is made as it were comming by inheritance The same in effect he saith C. 15. answering that he had set downe de duabus animabus c. 14. Propterea vera est c. That definition is true for this cause for that that sinne is defined which is onelie sinne and not that sinne which is a punishment of sinne Againe he saith sine voluntate nullum esse petcatum siue in opere siue in origine that there is no sinne without will either in the worke or in the beginning By which sayings Saint Augustines iudgement is plaine that in the particular worke there are sinnes that are not voluntarie as those that come of ignorance or compulsion or as concupiscence original infection yet al these may be called voluntarie in respect of the first mans offence in whome was freedome of will which Master Chark graunteth and therefore that childish insultation needed not but to shew your pride in contempt of others as though al learning had beene bred with you and were like to die if you did not plant it in vs. Saint Augustine therefore is cleere that that sinne which is a punishment of sinne is not voluntarie and that his definition as he calleth it was onelie of sinne which hath none other consideration but as sinne his disputation being against the Manichees which deriued sinne from an euill God and not from the free will of man or deuill first created good by the onelie good God But you haue scripture to prooue euerie act or omission which is sin to be voluntarie because Christ him selfe saith that those things which do defile a man do come from the heart as though nothing might come frō that corruptroote the heart of man which is not voluntarie You your selfe affirm that euil thoughts are not voluntary which he saith come from the heart Mat. 15. 19. Now concerning the obiection of originall sinne there hath beene inough said out of Saint Augustine concer ning the other obiection of manslaughter donne without consent of will which you affirme to be innocencie God defend euerie good Christian from such innocencie At least wise you might haue made such a fact committed by error a voluntarie sinne by the first mans sinne that was of free will which if it had not beene no man should haue erred in that case or anie other But the text you tel vs calleth him an innocent man liberabitur innocens c the innocent shall be deliuered from the hand of the reuenger So great a Rabbin as you would seeme to be by your quotations out of Rabbi Isaac Rabbi Mose and Rabbi Leui should not be ignorant that in the hebrew text the word is harotzeach that is the killer not the innocent which yet is adiudged to escape punishment of death by the politike law because in respect of mans iudgement he hath not offended for which cause also Deut. 19. his blood is called innocent Yet his flying to the citie of refuge and imprisonment there vntill the death of the high priest argueth as Master Charke saith that there is somthing in his fact or the error by which he committed the fact that hath neede of forgiuenes by Christ
the workes of nature or will which are in vs but by the he lie ghoste which is geuen vnto vs which both helpeth our infirmitie and worketh with our health for that is the grace of God by Iesus Christ our Lord. to whome with the father and the holie ghoste be ascribed eternitie and goodnes for euer In this discourse of S. Augustine is declared that the commaundements of God are made possible and not heauie to be fulfilled by the grace of God nor by the strength of man either of nature or will and that by two meanes faith and loue Faith by which we craue obtaine forgiuenes of our imperfection and loue by which we cherefully endeuour to accomplish in work so much as we can which we can not do perfectly in this life in as much asno mans heart is pure in this life no mans loue is perfect in this world yet faith purifying our harts that by themselues are vnclean obtaineth as the same 's Augustine saith that which the law commaundeth But how far is this from the popish assertion to wit The law is not abooue our abtlitie to keepe it The cursse that you cite out of Augustine Serm. 191. and Ierorme explan Symb. ad Damasum is but a crack of a broken bladder in stead of a thunderbolte For both the sermon and the explanation are counterfeit stuffe being all one word forword except a litle 〈◊〉 flue in the beginning and the end and yet are most impudentlieascribed both to Augustine and Ierome But that ne ther of both is author of that sentence I wil prooue by 〈◊〉 of Saint Ierome who expresselie affirm ah that which the sermon and explanation accurseet We cursse the blasphemie of them saie the counterfeiters which saie that anie thing impossible is commaunded by God to man and that the commaundements of God cannot be kept of euerie one but of all in common Saint lerome dialog aduers. Pelag. lib. 1. saith Possibilia praecepit 〈◊〉 ego fateer Sed haec possibilia cuncta singuli habere non possumus non imbeciliitate naturae ne calumniam facias deo sed animilassitudine quae 〈◊〉 simul semper non potest habere virtutes God commaunded things possible and that I confesse But all these possible thinges euerie one of vs can not haue through weakenes of nature lest thou shouldest slaunder God but through wearines of minde which can not haue all vertues together and alwaies And his whole discourse in that dialogue is to prooue that no man can be without sinne the contrarie whereof is flat Pelagianisine He expoundeth also at large how the commaundements of God are possible and how vnpossible which maie be seene of anie man that will read his writings against the Pelagians and therfore it is very iniurious vnto him to make him a patrone of that sentence which he put posedlie and plentifullie impugneth To conclude Chrysostome and Basile meane not that a perfect obseruation of Gods law is possible in this life but that God geueth grace in some measure to keepe them to those that are borne 〈◊〉 in Christ in whome onelie is performed that which was impossible by the law as the A postle saith These fathers and diuerse other whose authority the Pelagians abused as you do to vpholde their heresie by such speeches meant to accuse the negligence and slothfulnes of men in keepeing Gods commaundements not to extoll the power and abilitie of mans free will to keepe them as Saint Augustine prooueth by manie testimonies taken out of their writinges in his treatises against the Pelagians The eleuenth section of de facing the scriptures and doctrines by tradition THe Iesuites you saie do not vse these termes of defacing that the scripture is imperfect maimed or lame and thereof I will not contend but the same in effect they holde as Master Charke saith when they affirme that all things necessarte to saluation are not contained in the scripture Your similitude of a marchant leauing his commaundements partelie in writings and partelie by word of mouth and referring the resolution of doubtes vnto his wife is not sufficient in this case For our Sauiour Christ liueth for euer whereas his seruants and the men of whome his Church which is his spouse consisteth are changed in euerie generation So that there can be no certaintie of his commaundements but onelie by his writings which if they containe not all thinges necessarie to saluation they are imperfect lame and maimed And where you saie that Saint Augustine prooueth the contrarie at large lib. 1. cont Cresc c. 32. it is vtterlie vntrue For he saith expresselie concerning the question of rebaptising them that were baptized by heretikes Sequimur sanè nos in hac re etiam Canonicarum authoritatem certissimam scripturarum We truelie doe follow in this matter also the most certaine authoritie of the Canonicall scriptures whereunto he adioineth the consent of the Catholike Church after some disceptation about the matter whose counsell agreeable to the holie scripture no man doubteth bur it is to be followed Theverie same doctrine you saie teacheth the said father lib. de side operibus cap. 9. and also ep 66. ad Don. In the former is no worde to the purpose he speaketh of the Eunuch whome Philip baptized whose confession of Christ being verie shorte some thought to be sufficient for anie man that should receaue baptisme whereas there is a more distinct knowledge and particuler explication of this faith in other places of scripture set downe that is to be required of them that are catechised and come to baptisme In the last quotation I thinke there is a faulte either in your Printer or in your notebooke which setteth downe ep 66. for ep 166. which is directed to the Donatistes whereas the other is to Maximus But in this epistle to the Donatistes there is nothing that prooueth this matter that the scriptures containe not all things necessarie to saluation Onelie he exhorteth the Donatistes to vnitie shewing that out of the same scriptures which teach Christ to be the head his bodie the Church is to be discerned and learned Touching the twelue pointes of doctrine set downe by the Censure as not conteined expresselie in the scripture and yet to be beleeued Master Charke answereth that seuen of them are in scripture the rest not necessarie to be beleeued But here you saie the question is of expresse scripture and not of any farre fet place that by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie If you meane by expresse scripture that which is expressed in so many wordes as the thing in cōtrouersy we deny that we haue anysuch question with you For we holde that any thing which by necessary demonstration can be concluded out of the scripture is as true as necessary to be beleeued as that which is expressed in plaine wordes And so we meane when we saie all thinges necessarie to saluation are conteined in the holie scriptures And as for your
were by them Baptized it seemeth they take it of their Master Nouatus who because he had contemned he ceremonie vsed in that time of the Church him-selfe taught his schollers to doe the same left it should hawe beene reputed a want in him Although not the omission of the ceremonie but the contempt of the vsage of the Church being not impious in it selfe was chiefelie condemned in him For at such times as he was ordained Elder or Priest of the Church of 〈◊〉 it was thought by the Bishope a matter that might be remitted in him that for other respectes seemed meete for the office neither was it thought necessarie that he should receiue that cerimonie so by him omitted but not yet as it was thought in despight of the Church refused The Fathers oflater time as Theodoret writeth decreed that such as came from his heresie and would be incorporated into the Church should by receiuing that cerimonie which in time of their heresie they despised declare that they were truelie conuerted from it and willinghe submitted themselues to the Catholike Church and her Doctrine But of late daies when that ceremonie of anointing hath beene accounted a Sacrament yea and a greater Sacrament then Baptisme and thought necessary to eternall saluation whereas yet it hath no institution of Christ set forth in the holie Scriptures the reformed Churches haue iustlie abrogated that custome according to that libertie which the Church hath in all ceremonies not commaunded by God according to the example of the Church in former ages which hath abrogated manie ceremonies vsed of auncient times aswell as that of anointing with oile them that are Baptized ALLEN And first because generallie all the foresaid ioyne together against the trueth in this argument that it is dishonour to god and great presumption in a mortall man to claime the power so proper to God let the studious reader well consider that no function power ne dignitie be it neuer so peculiar to God him-selfe by naturaii excellencie but the same maie be occupied of man secondarilie as by the waie of seruice ministery or participation so that man challenge nor vsurpe it not as of him selfe or when it is not lawfuliie receaued nor orderlie giuen All the workes that extraordinarilie and miraculouslie were wrought either by Christ in his humanitie or by the Prophets or Apostles wordes or by their garments or by what other instrumēt so euer they were donne were the works of god no lesse then to remit sins yet al these things other the like brought to passe by man through the power of god that worketh by mans ministerie the same nothing derogateth to gods glorie but infinitelie augmenteth his honour euen so the power of pardoning mans sins being emploied by God the father vpon Christ his sonne by Christ vpon his Church ministers practized by them not of their owne might heades but in the 〈◊〉 of the holie ghost which by the sonne of god was 〈◊〉 vpon them this authoritie I saie is no derogation but an euident signe of his mightie power of saluation left for the faithfulls sake in the Church When the person that was lame from his birth begged of Peter and Iohn somewhat for his reliefe at the Temole dore as his manner was Peter answered him that golde and siluer he had none to giue but that which he had he would willinglie bestowe which was power to heale him of his incurable maladie for proofe whereof he bad him arise and walke and so he did at his word in the sight of all that there were gathered which being done and the people wondering thereat the Apostle thus instructed them Brethren faith he why wonder you at vs as though we had brought this strange worke to passe by our owne strength and power it is the God of Abraham Isaac Iacob that hath glorified his sonne Iesus whome you refused and betraied to Pontius Pilatus to be crucified in his name and faith this poore man is recouered Marcke well that the same thing which peter said him selfe had to giue quod habeo tibi do the same yet he professeth that he holdeth not as of his owne right or might but as of Christ Iesus in whose name he willed the lame to walke euen so the the power of pardoning sinner is truely and properly in the Priestes as the power of working miracles is properly in Peters hands neither the one noryet the other holden as of their owne might and power but both practized for the glory of God in the name of Iesus of Nazareth by their appointed ministery And as truly as Peter might saie to the feeble in body that which I haue I giue thee rise and walke in the name of iesos of Nazareth so surelie may the Priest saie to the sicke in souie that which I haue I giue thee in the name of Iesus thy Ennes my sonne be forgiuen thee No lesse is the one the peculiar worke of God then the other no more doth one dishonor god then the other FVLKE Nothing that is proper or peculiar to God can be communicated to man but it ceaseth to be proper to God For it is against the nature of properties to be made common to any other subiect then to that whereof they are proper adiuncts And yet I denie not but that which is proper to God he doth exercise often times by the seruice or ministery of men in which they are but instrumental causes he him selfe is the principal efficient otherwise man maie not occupie or execute secondly or thirdly or last of all by waie of participation that which is proper or peculiar to God So that it remaneth still an vndoubted truth that God onelie doth forgiue sinnes properlie and man doth not forgiue sinnes properlie but is the instrument of God to vtter and declare the good pleasure of God in forgiuing sinnes to all and euerie one that repent and beleeue the Gospe ll Your general negatiue that there is no function power nor dignitie be it neuer so peculiar to God by naturall excellencie but it maie be occupied of man secondly as by the waie of seruice ministery or participation if it were vrged against you would breed horrible absurdities To omit all other the power of creating thinges of nothing by what meanes maie man be partaker thereof occupie it or exercise it But let vs consider your induction All Miraculous workes worught by Christ in his humanitie the Prophets or Apostles were no lesse proper to God then the power to remit sinnes Yes verilie for manie miraculous workes that God did by Moses the inchaunters of Egipt did the like by the power of the deuill whereby it appeareth that although ail power be deriued from God as from the first cause thereof euen that power which the deuill hath yet it is otherwise communicated to creatures then the power of remission of sinnes is For that remaineth onelie in the hande of God and is not properlie
be found in the scripture it is most cleere that God forgiueth our sinnes otherwise then by externall orders or sacramets Againe the sacrament of Baptisme is a seale and assurance vnto vs of the forgiuenes of our sinnes not onely such as are com mitted before baptisme receiued but euen vnto our liues end whensoeuer we are truelie penitent for the same Also the sacrament of the Lords supper in which we are spirituallie fed with the bodie of Christ which was giuen for vs and with his blood which was shed for the remission of our sinnes is a sure pledge token and seale of the remission of our sinnes committed after baptisme that we neede not the Popish sacrament of pennance for the same ALLEN As for my selfe good Christian Reader I am not so free from sinne wo is me therefore nor so void of mans affection but as often I heare in the sacrament of penance the Priest who to me then is Christ in full power of pardoning saying the wordes of absolution ouer me me think truelie I heare the sweete voice of Christ saying with authoritie thy sinnes be forgiuen thee Whereof no mortallman shall euer forbid me to take hope and singular trust of remission of sinnes with the passing comfort that thereon ensueth All these that are without Christes folde seeke not to heare his voice for all their load of sinne from the heauenlie and intire ioy whereof they be as farre as from the conceiuing of of the felicitie to come in heauen it selfe But let them assure themselues that Christ writeth with his holie finger all their sinnes though to Christ they will not now confesse them whiles they refuse the power ofremission that he both had aud hath in earth to the worldes end without which outward solemne act of penance man should either dispaire of Gods mercie and liue in feare intollerable of euerlasting perishing which often fall to timerous consciences or els which is now of daies more common men would liue in such passing presumption and vaine securitie of heauen that they should neuer till the very last breath of their euill time either be sorie for sinne or seke to do any good worke at al. This time shall testifie with me herein and the verie diuersitie that is betweene these our corrupt conditions and the holy studies and endeauours of our forefathers shalltestifie but the daies that yet are to come must need most feele the smart of it when these that now haue the direction of other mens steppes shall be gone by whome for olde discipline wherein they were brought vp Some signes and remnantes of vertue be continued in the world For when they be spent and our yonkers that neuer heard of the Churches discipline but haue had their full swinge in sinne with the instruction of a most wanton doctrine shall be the principall of the people if this diuision so long continue which God forbid into what terms shal trueth and vertue be then brought Me think I see before hand the lamentable state of things and in a manner beholde the fruit of our onelie faith of this bolde presumption of Gods mercie of remouing the discipline of penance of refusing the onely ordinance of God for remission of our mortall sinnes Euil are we now but a thousand partes worsse shal they be then which in long nouseling in this naughtie learning of libertie shall be in perpetuall wo and haue no feele nor sense thereof And all this must needs follow vpon the lack of these outward acts external waies of pardoning punishing offences and intended either for mans present comfort and solace or els to keepe in awe the wantons of the world by the rodde of outward discipline which in the Church hath euer especiallie beene obserued in the sacrament of penance FVLKE When we heare the authorized embassadours and messengers of reconciliation pronounce in the name of Christ according to the scriptures and promises of God that our sinnes are forgiuen vs whensoeuer we be hartilie sorie truely penitent for the same we haue sufficient warrant out of Gods word to assure our selues of remission of them with inestimable ioy comfort of conscience But for the sacrament of penance or the Priest to be Christ vnto vs in fullpower of pardoning or to haue anie wordes of absolution said ouer vs because we haue no ground in Gods word whatsoeuer imaginarie pleasure you haue therein we finde nothing that is of force to staie a weake conscience to comfort a troubled spirit or to heale a broken heart To confesse our sinnes to Christ who onelie knoweth whether our repentance be vnfained God forbid that we should refuse But to confesse them to a Popish Priest or anie lawfull minister if they be secret there is no law or commaundement of God to require vs. If our conscience be not satisfied about anie offence that we haue committed how we should declare our vnfained conuersion or repentance we maie vse the aduise of the Godlie and learned pastor who is able out of the word of god toresolue our doubts and quiet our conscience That the want of Popish pennance will driue all men either to desperation or securitie and presumption it is affirmed without anie proofe God be praised experience cryeth out of the contrarie side But rather the doctrine of poperie concerning the pretensed sacrament of penance is manifest occasion of securitie in them that are carnallie minded of desperation in them that haue a tender conscience For the one thinketh he hath an easy remedy for his sinnes to discharge them into a priestes eare the other considering the impossibilitie of confession and vnsufficiency of the satisfaction that be parts of this counterfet sacrament can finde smal comfort in the priests absolution Your blasphemous rayling at the doctrine of God iustifying by faith onely which you cal the instruction of a most wanton doctrine and the naughtie learning of libertie is sufficiently confuted by the examples of many thousands of Gods Saints who acknowledging that they are iustified in the sight of God by faith onelie in the merites of Christ are more fruitfull in good workes then all the popish hypocrites in the world Where you terme your popish penance to be the onely ordinance of god for remission of our mortall sinnes you vtter not onelie a grosse contradiction of the trueth taught in the holie scriptures but also directlie contrarie to the doctrine of all Papists and euen of your selfe For what saie you M. Allen were you wel aduised when you said that penance is the onely ordinance of God for remission of our mortal sins If it be as you saie then the sacrifice of the masse is not the ordinance of God for remission of our mortall sinnes as al Papists beside you do holde and mantaine and extreame vnction wherof you haue latelie affir med the contrarie is not the ordinance of God for the remission of our mortall sinnes The discipline of the Church wherby wantons are kept in
the leprous persons that is to say should onely discerne which were by God remitted or not remitted they could not that doo excepte they sawe the varietie of the saide sinnes by mans confession But now seeing they haue further interest in our matters and must properly both pardon and giue iust penaunce for sinne how is it possible they should doo this without exacte knowlege of entry of oure greeuous offences In deed a general confession such as is often made in diuine seruice to God or his priestes such as be Catholik doth some times take away the common infirmities of our sinfull life that our light trespasses be not imputed to vs or such as we haue so forgotten that we cannot by anie conuenient search call againe to our remembrance But other greater crimes and deadly sinnes for which the sacrament of discipline was instituted and the priestes iudgement seat erected in the Church are not discharged before God without seuerall contrition and distinct confession with readie in tent of the penitent to accomplish such fruites of penance as by the priest shall be appointed for the satisfying for his sinnes And what a marucilous disorder is brought into Christes Church by plaine flatterie of our selues herein whiles we holde that this generall confession is sufficient we see by experience of these our euill daies where there is now put no difference betwixt small offenders and most greeuous sinners no diuersitie of penance no more sorrow in one then in other no confession of the most wicked no more then of the smallest sinner or most honest liuer A common murtherer a filthie whoremunger a dailie drunkerd a false robber a greedie extorcioner confes as litle do as litle penance lament as litle yea a great deale lesse then the honest sort of people do for much more small and fewer faultes All men repose them-selues now of daies so much in Christes passion and there onelie no faith that they will neither confesse to God nor man neither sigh nor sorrow nor do satisfaction for their sinnes Well let all men be assured that God in the next world will not go by general Chapters but will haue an accompt of all our proper works and misdeedes till it come to our idle words and vaine thoughtes The which iudgement because Gods Church and ministers sentence to whome Christ gaue all iudgement of our sinnes in earth doth most cleerelie resemble we maie be out of doubt that the like particular discussing and examination of our owne selues here before his ministers must needes be had that we be not iudged of our Lord in the life to come FVLKE By seeing the varietie of sinnes though the Priest could see them as clearlie as he that committed them yea though he were present at the doing of them and did see all the circumstances of them he could neuer discerne which were by God remitted or not remitted except he could see the repentance of the sins according to which God doth either remitte or retain sinnes Therefore confession to this purpose is neither necessarie nor profitable For the further interest you claime you must bring better euidence then he therto you haue shewed forth or els we maie neuer yeelde it vnto you And greatlie I maruaile how you can affirme that the Priest can properlie pardon sinne when he can not to anie man pronounce pardon of his sinne except he be true lie contrite and penitent before god God onelie and the partie penitent are priuy to the con trition of his heart which in an Hipocrit with a thousand confessions maie be dissembled And I trow you will not saie that without vnfained contrition of the heart the priest maie pardon a sinner The doctrine of your masters is but with condition if the partie be contrite without counterfayting therefore he that can not pardon absolutely can much les pardon properlie Where you make generall confession auailable either for small and light offences or else for greater sinnes forgotten you speake without proofe and therefore your authoritite may be denied without doubt The disorder you speake of for lacke of shrift was greater when most mé went to shrift and not fearing the iugdement seat of God and thought they were sufficientlie discharged of their sinnes if they had powred them out into a priests lape or friers coule God be praised they that repose them selues moste in Christs passion and by the merites thereof beleeue to receiue forgiuenes of sinnes by faith in his bloode are more ready to confesse their vnworthines both before God man then any popish hypocrite that trusteth in the merit of his workes and his owne satisfaction for his sinnes and doe more sigh and sorrow for their sinnes although they be such as mans lawe cannot punish although they were knowne then they that whisper halfe an hower in a priestes eare for the sinnes of one whole yeare whereas one howers offences if they were particularie called to minde and repeated would aske longer time to confesse them We know that in the next world God will haue an account of al our misdeeds euen to our idle words thoughts therfore our wholl life ought to be a continuall meditation and profession of repentance yet we know by his word and assurance ofhis spirit that the same infinit multitude heape of our sinnes shal not be laid to our charge because out sauiour Christ is the lambe of God that hath taken them awaie and satisfied the iustice of God for them That Christ hath giuen al iudgement of our sinnes in earth to his Church and the ministers thereof you often affirme thereupon build vp your court of confession but by what wordes this may be prooued you are neuer able to shew For that text whose sinnes you forgiue c. imporeth no such manner of iudgement but an authoritie to pronunce a sentence declaratorie of Gods mercie in pardoning all them that trulie repent and of his iustice in punishing all them that obstinatly refuse the grace of God offered in the preaching of the Ghospel The examining iudgeing of our selues whch the Apostle requireth that we be not iudged of the Lord vrgeth vs not to commit our selues to the examination iudgement of othermen but to a diligent discussing of our owne conscience before god that we come not with hypocrisie or without dew regard of his presence and benefites to the participation of his sacraments ALLEN And this particular discussing Saint Paull meant when he commended vnto the Corinthians and by them commaunded all Christian men to prooue trie and iudge themselues especiallie afore the receipt of the blessed sacrament of Christes bodie and blood which requireth moste puritie of life in the receiuer that can be For to attempt to receiue the holie bodie of Christ before we haue in contrite manner confessed our selues and purged our consciences by the iudgement of Christes Church of the guilt of deadlie sinne is exceeding damnable to vs and much dishonour to
prooued by this place to haue bene in vse in his daies here is no mention thereof Finallie where you would build the antiquity of works vpon this mans authority to be as high as the Apostles I must tell you that by this place you can not albeit the Epiflle were graunted to be writen by the Areopagite For he calleth not Demophilus a Munke as Perionius translateth the word but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a seruant or inferior minister I knowe that Maximus and Pachymeres expound that worde to be meant of Munkes and that this Dynoise also elsewhere nameth Monachos that were in his time but his time was farre vnder the Apostles as is prooued inuinciblie by this argument that neither Eusebius nor Hierome nor Gennadius maketh mention of anie such workes extant in their time of Dyonisius Areopagita and therefore it is certaine they were counterfaited long after vnder his name ALLEN I can not stand vpon euerie point which greeueth me much my matter is so fruitfull and one worthie witnes is yet behinde S. Clement I meane him that S. Peter made his successour Si fortè saith he in alicuius cor vel liuor vel infidelitas vel aliquod malum labenter irrepserit non erubescat qui animae suae curam 〈◊〉 confiteri ei qui praeest vt ab ipso per verbum consilium salubre curetur quò possit fide integra bonis operibus poenas aeterni ignis euadere ad perpetuae vitae praemia peruenire If either enuie or infidelitie or anie other greeuouse sore priuilie possesse mans soule let not him that hath anie care of his saluation be ashamed to confesse it to him that is his Prelate that through his word and counsell he maie be healed of his sinnes and that in true faith and good workes he maie escape hell and attaine to euerlasting life Thus Saint Clement FVLKE The points are not so manie that you should proue but you might haue leasure enough to stand vpon them your matter is so passing barren that for lacke of authenticall writers you are driuen to praie aid of impudent counterfeiters as of shameles and vnlearned asses which counterfeyted the Epistles that goe vnder the name of Clemens and that without either wit or learning or likelihood of trueth For who would thinke that the holie man Clemens could not write his minde in true latine who would thinke that such barbarous latine was written by the bishoppe of Rome at that time when boyes and girles did speake a hundreth fold more pure latine what wise bodie would thinke that Clemens the Apostles schooler would take vpon him to teach the Apostle Saint Iames and that such bables as of keeping the sacraments from myse dong and rottennes nay not onelie to teach him but to giue him charge à principio Epistolae vsque ad hunc locum de sacramentis deleganti bene intuendis vbi non murirum stercora inter fragmenta dominicae portionis appareant neque putrida per negligentiam remaneant clericorum From the beginning of this Epistle vnto this place I haue giuen in charge of the sacraments to be well looked vnto where no mise â—urdes maie appeere among the fragments of the Lords portion neither maie they remaine rotten through the negligence of clarkes This is that worshipfull Clemens that prescribeth confession to a Priest I besech thee reader as Erasmus saith what wit shame or honestie haue they that will beare men in hand these Epistles to be written by so auncient so holy so wise so learned fathers in which is nothing but follie barbarousnes ignorance and impudencie The conclusion of this treatise remoouing the impediments of confessiòn ALLEN THus far in despit of heresie and al her abbettours hath trueth brought it selfe By Christ power was giuen to the Apostles and Priests to remit sinnes by Christ confession was instituted by the Apostles it was commaunded to all Christians by their example all nations faithfull afterward haue vsed it by generall Councells which be of moste soueraigne authoritie it hath bene both confirmed and commaunded by all learned Doctors liked and allowed by all Christian people frequented reuerentlie as the onlie refuge after their relapse Therefore whosoeuer shall see this case so cleare and so consonant to all reason to all learning to all the examples of antiquitie and to Christs owne institution let him schoole his conscience as he thinketh good FVLKE As a cowardlie traitor that is fled out of the battell wherin he had greater care to hid him selse frostrokes then to fight to attaine the victorie when he thinketh him selfe to haue escaped daunger ceaseth not to brag and boast of his valiant actes and strong aduentures in defence of his Prince or countrie so it fareth with you For as though you had fought vnder truthes baner you boast of the victorie against heresie whereas you haue serued heresie done your indeuor against the trueth striuing for nothing so much as that heresie might change names with trueth But they which will you voutchsafe to consider with how litle labour you haue bin encountred and chased out of the field will be able to discerne trueth from heresie and to giue trueth her true name of trueth and heresie her right name of heresie But let vs see what great matters this Champion of trueth hath brought to passe First that by Christ power was giuen to his Apostles and their successours to remit sinnes this victorie indeed is soone archiued against them which neuer withstood this tlitle But what manner of power this is and how to be executed by sentence definitiue or declaratiue according to the will of God or man and by what meanes it is exercised by preaching the Gospell or by murmering of words wherein trueth controulleth heresie you haue broughtnothing to fortifie your errors Secondlie you saie that confession was in stituted by Christ and yet haue no word in the scripture to prooue that popish confession to a priest after your position was either instituted or allowed by him The like I saie of the commendation of shrift to all Christians Neither haue you prooued the necessitie of confession by the example of anie faithfull nation that vsed it and allowed it nor by anie Christian generall councel before the Lateran councell gathered in the name of Antichrist to maintaine his pride and abominable heresies neither hath anie one learned Doctor for 500. or 600. yeares after Christ liked or allowed of confession according to your popish definition thereof much lesse that by all Christian people it was reuerently frequented lest of al that confession is the onelie refuge I meane confession alwaies to a priest for Christians after their relapse which most absurd proposition I thinke few learned papistes will maintaine sure I am manie of the Elder papists haue denied holding that by contrition of heart men might obtaine remission of sinnes without confession of the mouth to a priest Wherfore he that seeth
and the Pope haue two keies and they but one resolue vs these matters out of the holie scripture and you shall come somewhat nearer your purpose of pardons As for the communion of holie works which is betweene the heade and the members if you meane thereby the workes of men ioyned with the satisfaction or merites of Christ either shew vs where it is taught in the scriptures or giue vs le aue to denie it vntill you can prooue it ALLEN Perchaunce some Protestant will here call vs back and require proofe that there should be anie paine or tempor all correction remaining for those persons which hauetheir sinnes forgiuen by God in the sacrament of Penance or otherwise by the onelie faith of the partie penitent as he maie perhaps surmise If he list to be satisfied in this case let him turne backe and make a short view of the works of God since the beginning and there consider well whether God him-selfe hath not commonlie visited his children receiued to mercie with some correction answerable in respect of his iustice to the greeuousnes of the crime forgiuen Who is so froward or so rude but he may well discerne betwixt the sault of our first Father and the punishment of euerlasting damnation deserued thereby His sinne was one thing his deserued punishment an other thing his sinne was disobedience his punishment correspondent to that was euerlasting death Yet whensoeuer one of these two is forgiuen the other must needes be forgiuen also because he can neither be subiect to damnation whose sinne for which damnation was ordeined is forgiuen neither his fault be forgotten whose euerlasting punishing is pardoned which is the rewarde of sinne But now both these being once through Christ remitted to Adam as we read in the booke of wisedome who perceiueth not that he was for all that long afterward subiect to temporall death and manie other miseries both of this life and of the next beeing onelie punishments appointed by God for the ful satisfying euen of those sinnes which were forgiuen him FVLKE Out of all peraduenture we require proofe not onelie of this point but of manie more positions which you haue barelie affirmed to build your popish pardons vpon them And touching this point we do require proofe not onely that after sinnes and eternal paines remitted there are temporall paines remaining to satisfie Gods iustice but also if there were anie such remaining by what authoritie you should release them I know that often times after sinne remitted God sendeth or suffereth a temporal paine to remaine but that is not for satisfaction of his iustice but for a mercifull chastisement of his fatherlie discipline The punishment due to Gods iustice is eternall damnation for euery sinne as euen the glosse vpon the Extrauagant of Boneface the eight doth acknowledge And when God doth freelie remit the sinne he doth as freelie remit the punishment due for the same For what remaineth to be punished when the sinne is remitted Temporall paines therefore satisfie not his iustice but admonish his children of their ductie and make them carefull not to commit sinne which by his chastisment they are put in minde to be displeasing vnto him The temporall death and miseries that Adam was subiect vnto through his disobedience remained in him and his posteritie not as a satisfaction of Gods iustice for his sinne remitted and satisfied by Christ but as a monument and example of his iustice for sinne and therefore they remaine not onelie in the elect but in the reprobate for an admonition to beware of sinne vnto the Godlie and to take excuse awaie from the wicked of ignorance of Gods punishment for sinne yet are all those punishments vnto the Godie turned into blessings being either made his fatherlie chastisments for their amendment or els occasions of their eternall 〈◊〉 as aduersitie by humbling of them death by deliuering them into the possession of eternall life and therefore is blessednes pronounced both of the one and of the other But that Adam was subiect to anie miseries after this life or in this life as being onelie punishments appointed by God for the 〈◊〉 satisfying euen of those sinnes which were forgiuen him we denie vtterlie For the obedience of Christ was 〈◊〉 full satisfaction for the disobedience of Adam both for him and all Gods elect ofhis posteritie For if by the transgression of one manie haue died much more the grace of God and the free gift in grace which is of one man Iesus Christ hath abounded vnto manie For if through the transgression of one death hath raigned by one much more they which receaue the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousnes shall raigne in life by one Iesus Christ. For as by the disobedience of one man manie were made sinners so by the obidience of one man manie shall be made iust This and much more hath the Apostle to prooue that the redemption of Christ was more bountifull toward them which are iustified thorough faith then the transgression of Adam was rigorous to their condemnation which could not be if anie parte of Gods iustice remained to be satisfied by the punishment of the partie after his sinnes were remitted and he made iust by the redemption and iustification of Christ. Therefore the temporall paines whereto Gods children are subiect after their sinnes remitted are not left for the satisfiing of the iustice of God Or if you will needes contend that they are so left and that the Pope out of the treasure of the Church hath authority to pardon all such punishment or anie parte thereof let him make triall ofhis power in such corporal punishments as God laieth vpon his children for their corrections let him by his pardon release anie man of his sicknes age death if he can do none of these then either these are no punishments due to satisfie Gods iustice or els he hath no such power as is bragged of by dispensing of the treasure of Christes copious redemption to pardon men of all their punishment due to the iustice of God for sinne For if he had such power euerie sick man that receiueth a ple narie pardon à poena culpa should presentlie recouer of his disease yea I maruell how he should die if death be a penaltie due to the iustice of God for sinne which hath such a plentiful indulgence of all paines inioyned or deserued by sinne But if he cannot release one fit of an ague with all the pardons I maruell how he should release a man of all his paines of purgatorie yea spoile all purgatorie at once of all them that suffer paines therin except it be because he hath power onelie ouer that prison which is of his owne building and all that come therin but hath no power at all ouer them vpon whom God laieth any affliction either bodilie or spirituallie ALLEN Looke at the Prophet Dauid whether God corrected him not with temporall scourge after he
som Bishops that were to easie in graunting reconciliation to greeuous offenders partlie to meete with the hyporisie of manie sinners which vpon hope to be easily receiued made lesse account to become offenders cast out of the Church Andhereof came those seuere canons of the Ancyrane councell which were soone afterward somwhat mitigated in the Nicen councell and charge giuen to the Bishop to deale more gently with them that shewed great tokens of repentance before their time of penance expired Abomnibus verò illud praecipué obseruetur vt animus eorum fructus poenitentiae attendatur But let this be chiefelie obserued of all men that their minde and their fruite of repentance be considered Wherby they declare for what cause such time of penance was prescribed namelie by the fruites of repentance to make triall whether men were truelie penitent for their sinnes and meete to be receaued againe into the congregation or no. The councell of Carthage aster that perceiuing manie inconueniences to arise by those certaine prescript times of penance decreed Vt poenitentibus secundùm peccatorum differentias episcopi arbitrio poenitentiae tempora decernantur That times of repentance by the discretion of the Bishop should be appointed vnto them that doe penance according to the differences of their sinnes but that there remaineth for the satisfying of Gods iustice some temporall scourge after eternall paines by deadlie sinnes deserued be forgiuen with the sinnes themselues we know not out of the scriptures but the contrarie namelie that these sinnes being forgiuen and Gods iustice throughlie satisfied in Christ there remaineth no temporall punishment due for the sinnes forgiuen but sometimes a mercifull and fatherly chastisment which is not in anie mans power to release or remit but when it pleaseth the father of his wisdome and clemency to take it awaie ALLEN And therefore S. Augustine saith of the Churches vsage in prescribing penance thus Sed neque de ipsis criminil us quamlibet magnis remittendis in Sancta Ecclesia Dei desperanda est misericordia agentibus poenitentiam secundùm modum sui cuiusque peccati auia plerunque dolor alterius cordis occultus est alteri rectè constituuntur ab iis qui Ecclesiae praesunt tempora poenitentiae vt fiat etiam satis Ecclesiae in qua peccata remittuntur Euen for sinnes being neuer so greeuous and great we maie not dispaire of Gods mercie nor of reneission to be had in the Church marie alwaies presupposed that the offenders must doe penance according to the quantitie and greeuousnes of their offences And because often it chaunceth that the sorrow of mans hart wherein much standeth is vnknowne to other men it is verie reasonable that the Church should limite their penance by her gouernour to be accomplished in certaine times and appointed seasons for the answere of the Churches right in which onelie all sinnes be remitted as out of her lappe none at al be forgiuen for any benefit to the partie So saith this doctour of publike penance And of secret satisfaction which nowe is more vsed after confession lest anie man should feare that that were not sufficient to satisfie for the remnant of debt due for mortall sinnes forgiuen thus saith the author of that booke de Eccles. dogm set forth with Saint Augustines name Sed secreta satisfactione solui mortalia crimina non negamus Neither we doe denie but mortall sinnes maie be loosed by secret satisfaction Feare nos the worde satisfaction as though it derogated anie thing to the redemption which is in Christ Iesus It is here and in manie places of S. Augustines workes most common and no lesse vsed of all Catholike writers since Christes time who knew right well that the fruites of Christian penance done in the vertue and force of Gods grace doe applie Christes satisfaction effectuallie to our benefit and not remooue the vse therof from vs. But they haue a faith so solitarie now a daies that it will alpne apprehend what ye list and reach so farre into Christes iustice that her fautors shall haue no need of Christian workes or fruitfull repentance FVLKE Saint Augustine saith to verie good purpose but nothing to the maintenance of your purpose for which you alledge him namelie that temporall punishment is due to Gods iustice for sinne remitted whose saying I maruell why you do so geld that you recite it not whollie as he hath written but that either you would not haue men certainlie know that he speaketh of open penance done for great crimes committed or else you haue cited the place of some other mans credit rather then of your owne reading After he hath said that some man maie liue without crime but no man without sinne his wordes be these Sed neque deipsis criminibus quamlibet magnis remittendis in sancta Ecclesia Dei desperanda est misericordia agentibus poenitentiam secundùm modum sui cuiusque peccati In actione autem poenitentiae vbitae lecrimen commissum est vt is qui commisit a Christi etiam corpore separetur noÌ„tam consideranda est mensura temporis quà m doloris cor enim contritum humiliatum Deus non spernit Verùm quia pierunque dolor â—lterius cordis occultus est alteri neque in aliorum notitiam per verba vel quaecunque alia signa procedit cùm sit coram illo cui dicitur gemitus meus à le noÌ„ est absconditus rectè constituuntur ab iis qui Ecclesiae praesunt tempora poenitentiae vt fiat etiam satis Ecclesiae in qua remittuntur ipsa peccata extra eam quippe non remittuntur Ipsa namque propriè Spiritum Sanctum pignus accepit sine quo non remittuntur vlla peccata ita vt quibus dimittuntur consequantur vitam aeternam But neither of those crimes be they neuer so great to be remitted in the holy Church the mercie of God is to be dispaired of to them that repent according to the measure of euery mans sinne But in the doing of penance where such a crime is committed that he which hath committed it is also to be separated from the bodie of Christ the measure of time is not so much to be considered as of the sorrowe for God dispiseth not a contrite and an humbled heart But because often times the sorrow of one mans heart is hidden to an other and commeth not into the knowledge of other men by wordes or other signes whatsoeuer although it be knowne before him to whome it is said my groning is not hid from thee there be rightlie appointed by them that gouerne the Church times of repentance that the Church also maie be satisfied in which those sinnes are remitted for whithout they are not remitted For she hath properlie receaued the pledge of the holie Ghost without whome no sinnes are remitted so that they to whome they are remitted doe obtaine eternall life In these wordes Saint Augustine sheweth plainely that times of penance or repentance were enioyned
pardon of all that was past but made him his substitute in earth and chiefe pastour of all his flock FVLKE If a pardon can not take awaie penance then you recant that you defended before so egerlie If the debt of penance maie be taken awaie by the Popes pardon as you tolde vs oft before he can not iustlie be saide to neglect penance which doth not performe it because that is pardoned which he was content to haue performed if he had not bene pardoned If he be charged for omitting his dutie that performeth not his pardoned penance then were he as good to haue no pardon at all If a pardon serue onelie for them that lack time and space to satisfie then no man can haue benefite of a pardon in this life Beside the pardons are false that promise to all men that goe on such voyage or pilgrimage or saie such a praier or praie on such beades or giue to such a building or hospitall full remission à poena culpa or so manie yeares or lents of pardon de penitentiis iniunctis iniungendis of penance inioyned or to be inioyned Beware therefore left while you vrge so earnesthe the necessitie of penance to be performed you fight against Popes pardons which you tooke vpon you to maintaine And whereas you take vpon you by your aduertisement as it were to inioyne or commute penance where the Pope hath pardoned the sinne you doe in effect make frust rate the Popes pardon as the glosse vpon the bull of Pope Boneface 8. doth shewe where he saith That the Pope declared consistorialiter that his penitentiarie ought to inioyne nothing more then is inioyned in his pardon for ets as he saide the pardons should be made frustrate And whereas you presume to prescribe the change of one penance into another the Pope doth that alwaies in his pardon or els it is not of force as the same glosse teacheth that there must 4. thinges 〈◊〉 as principall to make a pardon effectuall Authoritie in the graunter capacitie in the receiuer godlines in the end profitablenes in the worke Now this worke into which the Pope chaungeth all penanceremitted though it be neuer so small yet being profitable to the honour of God or the exaltation of faith is sufficient without anie other supplie because in a pardon saith he not the quantitie but the kinde of the worke is considered by reason that a pardon principallie respecteth grace and not merite or els it should not be called a pardon For which cause also they that dwelled at Rome and visited the Churches in Rome appointed by the Popes pardon had as great Indulgence as they that came with great cost and trauell out of the furthest partes of Scotland or Ireland If this that the glosse writeth be currant poperie then doth your aduertisement differ from the iudgement of the Popish Charch and of the Pope himselfe But whereas you affirme that Christ gaue the Pharistes in charge to purge their sinnes by almes and that almespurgeth ventall sinnes you speake more then the text alloweth For Christ teacheth not the Pharisies to purge anie sinnes with almes but after he hath rebuked their hypoctisie that were carefull to make cleane the outside of the cuppe or platter when the inward parte of their heart was full of rauine and wickednes he prescribeth them the contrarie practise to purge the inward man by repentance and to testifie the same by almes which is contrarie to rapine spoyling and then all the creatures of God should be cleane vnto them although they vsed no such superstitious washing with water And if it be as you saie that not onely veniall sinnes but also the temporall debt that remaineth for deadly crimes after they be remitted be forgiuen by saying the Pater noster who is so foolish to paie anie monie for a pardon or what meaneth the Pope to make such a bragge of his pardons which can remiit no more then euerie man maie obteine at home by saying his Pater noster As for hearing of Masse taking their rightes if it be no more worth but to make men fit to receiue fruitfullie the Popes pardon they be litle worth sceing the pardon it selfe as in all this chapter you labour to prooue is but of small profite and the Pater nosier saying is as good as anie pardon Finallie where Saint Hilarie Saint Cyrill saie that Christ caused Peter to wipe away the blot of his treble denying with a treble confession neither of them both saie that Christ made him his substitute on earth chiefe pastor of all his flock otherwise then he made euerie one of the other Apostles ALLEN If it stand thus therfore with the partie penitent then the Popes pardon shall vndoubtedly be beneficiall vnto him otherwise either not at all or els nothing so much as they seeme so sound For although it be an old saying quod indulgentie tantum valent quantum sonant that Indulgencies be of as great force and valour as the forme of their wordes do import yet that is not otherwise to be vnderstoode then there where there maie seeme iust cause of graunt to the giuers and not euill disposition in the receiuers For as Adrianus that once was Pope himselfe reasoneth If the magistrates of the Church may not without iust cause giue dispensation cōcerning vowes othes fastes mariages or such like nor dispose the temporall treasures of the Church without reasonable cause then may not surelie the Byshops be lauish of the treasure of Gods house which is much more pretious whereof there can be no man partaker that is an vnprofitable member of the bodie FVLKE If the partie penitent be so qualified as he need not the Popes pardon then it shall vndoubtedlie be beneficiall to him But the Pope will not haue the power of his pardons to be so much extenuated nor his liberalitie restrained to so fewe persons nor to so narrowe a case And that olde saying Indulgentiae tantum valent quantum sonant pardons be of as great valour as the forme of the wordes doe import shall be taken for a good principle in the Popes consistorie when you with your new prouisoes shall be taken for a curious and a daungerous Papist The glosse vpon the first pardon of Iubelie graunted by Pope Boneface the 8. determineth idoneitie or capacitie in the receiuer that he be a member of the Church and purged from the fault Oportet quòd capax indulgentiae sit purgatus à culpa quòd sit in contritione ille ergo est habilis indulgentiam recipere qui est verè penitens confessus It behooueth that he which is capable or meet to receiue a pardon be purged from fault which is brought to passe in contrition he therefore is able to receiue a pardon which is truclie penitent and confessed The like saith Augustinus de Ancona Ex parte recipientis requiritur quòd habeat fidem in intellectu quia non nist
after his wordes set dowen in the section last before in which he speaketh neither of the deserts of the liuing nor of the deade able to answere his iustice for other but altogether of the mercie of god which taketh occasion euen of his loue which he beareth towards his Saints that are departed to shew compassion vpon them that are aliue this for his couenants sake although Chrysostome seemeth to speake of the intercession of them that are departed which yet prooueth no merit or satisfaction For to become an humble suter for a benefit or a pardon is not to deserue a benefit or to satisfie for an offenders trespace And this benefit he giueth saieth Saint Cyrill vpon this text vnto the memorie of holie men that sometime he forgetteth the euills which their posteritie haue committed To the like effect speaketh Saint Hierome that which God giueth of his mercie is no merit or satisfaction to his iustice ALLEN And suerlie if in the daies of olde where neither so much grace nor mercie was to be found nor Christ which is the fountaine of all pardon was not yet offered vp to paie the debtes of his brethren sinnes nor the communion of Saint was yet so fullie established whereby the merits of one might redound to an other nor the Church so honoured with the gift of Gods spirite for remission of mans offences nor the priesthood of God so credited with the keies of the kingdome if afore all these things were no otherwise wrought but in base figurse such waies were found out and that by Gods owne procurement of mercie and grace in the midest of intoyned penance and punishment what neede we to doubt but their now be many meanes made in this happie societie of Saints so to remit the bond of satisfaction to some that Gods iustice maie be answered againe by other of this happie household in the aboundance of their holy workes which the Church holdeth moste holilie for to be a perfect and euerlasting treasure to satisfie Gods righteousnes and procure mercie to the needie which by loue zeale deuotion do deserue the same If God remitted of olde temporall paine vnto his people at the call of Moses and Aaron and for his childe Dauids sake that was dead what will not he mercifullie forgiue by our high priests procurements whose pardons and punishments Christ hath solemnlie promised he woulde ratifie and allowe in heauen aboue What will he not do in respect of the paines and aboundant passions of his own childe Iesus that hath yet in the Catholike Church his death so duely represented for the remission of our daily debts what can be denied to the intercession of so manie Saints to the chast combate of so manie Virgins to the bloodie fight of so manie Martyrs to the stout standing of so manie Confessours what mercie maie not the Church craue and doubtles obteine for anie of ber children either in penance ' in this world or in paine in the next that hath in her treasure such abundance of satisfaction first in our head Christ Iesus through whose gratious workes all other mens paines are become beneficiall either to themselues or their bretheren and then in the store of al holy saints trauilles not yet wasted in procuring mercie for others besides moe waies of grace and remission that our mother the Church hath in readines to relieue her children that doe continue in her happie lappe and in the societie of her communion with humble submission of themselues to the powers ordeined of Christ for the gouernment of their soules with request for this pardon at their handes to whome be giuen the bestowing and disposing of the inestimable treasure of so blessed a ministerie FVLKE The grace and mercie of God in Iesus Christ was as largelie to be found for the saluation of his people in the daies of olde as in these daies Iesus Christ was yesterdaie and to daie is the same and for euermore And the Lambe was slaine from the beginning of the worlde as touching the effect of his death vnto all Gods elect and the communion of the Saints was as fullie established to the receiuing of al vertue of life from Christ their heade and to the mutuall seruice of loue and ministring of gods gifts one to another but not to merite at all either for themselues or for other Such meriting is dishonorable to the heade from whome euerie member receaueth life and all power and offices thereof ac cording to the measure of euerie member to the encrease and building vp of the wholl bodie in loue The Church of olde had also the ministerie of remission of sinnes and the keies of the kingdome of heauen and that not in base figures onelie but insufficient effect to the euerlasting saluation of Gods people And therefore to saie that all these things were none otherwise wrought but in base figures is to denie the saluation of all the fathers that died before the incarnation of Christ. For base figures could haue but base effectes base figures could not worke eternall life The ministerie figures of the law separated from Christ are in deede the weake and beg gerlie elements of the worlde but beeing referred to Christ and made effectuall by his death through faith in the partakers they are of the same power and riches vnto euerlasting saluation that the ministerie and sacraments of the new Testament But admit that nothing was wrought to them but in base figures yet it followeth not that after the incarnation and actuall death of Christ there should be any more meanes to remit the bond of satisfaction by answering Gods iustice then in that onelie sacrifice obedience and suffring of Christ or that the Church should haue such a store house of mans merites to satisfie Gods righteousnes or that men by loue zeale and deuotion may deserue Gods mercie these popish positions can neuer be prooued Againe whatsoeuer God remitted at the praier of Moses and Aaron and for his couenant made with Dauid or whatsoeuer he gaue to the memorie of that holie man he remitted and gaue for Iesus Christs sake in whome onelie his iustice was satisfied and he well pleased But your high priest with his Antichristian pardons and punishments which are grounded vpon the merites of men or coloured with the merites of Christ which yet are rent and rorne from the effect of his death Christ will destroy with the breath of his mouth and abolish with his glorious appearing For the death and passion of his sonne Iesus Christ God wil be merciful to his seruants that by faith take holde of the power of his death but neither by masses nor pardons doth he bestow the vertue thereof The good workes and sufferings of the saintes be examples of vertue and patience not merits or gifts of righteousnes The death of Christ answering Gods iustice and reconciling vs to his fauour hath made that good workes of his saintes which are the giftes of his grace
he quare venerit in carne Christus inueniemus qui eum negant in carne venisse Let vs inquire wherefore Christ came in the flesh and we shall finde who they are which denie him to haue come in the flesh For if you giue heede to their tongues you shall heare manie heretikes confessing that Christ came in the flesh but the trueth conuinceth them wherefore came Christ in the flesh was he not God was it not saide of him In the beginning was the worde and the worde was with God and the worde was God did he not feede the Angells and doth not he him-selfe feede the Angells did he not so come that he departed 〈◊〉 fromthence did he not so ascend that he did not forsake vs Then wherefore came he in the flesh Because the hope of resurrection ought to haue bene shewed vnto vs. He was God and he came in the flesh for God could not die the flesh could therefore he came in the flesh that he might die for vs. And how died he for vs No man hath greater loue then this to giue his life for his friendes therefore loue brought him to the flesh Whosoeuer therefore hath not loue denieth Christ to haue come in the flesh It is manifest now by this discourse of Augustine vppon some particuler causes of Christ comming in the flesh that his cheife and principall offices cannot be excluded in the right interpretation of this text and therefore Master Charke hath rightlie inferred that whoesoeuer denieth the offices of Christ or any parte of them is no lesse confounded by this scripture then they that denie his person or anie parte or essentiall propertie thereof and that by the consent of the auncient fathers exposition without the which also the text is euident of it selfe For the verie names of Iesus and Christ doe comprehende his offices which whoesoeuer denieth although in wordes he confesse his person and names doth make but an Idoll of Iesus Christe whoesoeuer therefore confesseth not Christ to be a Sauiour Prophet King and Priest is not of God but of Antichrist he whosoeuer confesseth not that he is a wholl and onelie Sauiour Prophet King and Priest is of the same spirite of Antichrist that denieth Iesus Christ being come in the flesh or as the vulgare translation hath that dissolueth Iesus For whoesoeuer setteth vp anie other Sauiour Prophet King or Priest in that sense that these offices pertaine vnto Iesus Christ dissolueth Iesus denieth Iesus Christ to haue come in the flesh whoe came to be our onelie Master-teacher according to the manifest texts of scripture which hath taught vs all thinges likewise our onelie spiritual King eternall and high priest whose office both kinglie and priestlie being confirmed to him by an othe passeth not from him vnto anie other in succession but remaineth alwaies the onelie mightie Prince King of Kinges and Lord of Lordes Whoesoeuer therefore derogateth from Christ anie parte of these dignities offices denieth Iesus Christ comming in the flesh and so doe the popish Catholikes or papistes by their doctrine of traditions Popes authoritie sacrifice of the Masse and such like Nay saith the answerer Martine Luther interpreteth this place to be vnderstoode of M. Charke and his fellowes saying That spirit is not of God but of Antichrist which dissolueth Christes flesh in the sacrament It cannot be denied but Martin Luther was in this case to rash and presumptuous in condemning other men for holding this contrarie to that wherein he erred him-selfe But this answerer is too impudent to faigne sayings wordes of his yea and to applie that which he saied further then Luther him selfe doth For first these wordes that are alleadged as Luthers saying are none of his but forged by the answerer Secondlie that which Luther saieth founding to such a matter can not be drawne against M. Charke and his fellowes who maintaine no such absurditie as Luther in that place oppugneth The very wordes of Luther in his booke intituled Defen verb Caenae Accipite c. are these Quare in superioribus dixi hunc spiritum non esse bonum neque per istos fanaticos homines quicquam boni machinari quanquam existimem hos concionatores contra quos haec scribuntur nondum mali quicquam in animo habere Sed bone Deus non sunt sui ipsorum compotes continentes à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 captiui tenentur Quare eis nimium sidendum non ect Nam spiritus qui Christi carnem dissoluit non est à Deo inquit Ioannes idqque probam spirituum vult esse Hic spiritus verè dissoluit carnem Christi cùm cam inutilem pereuntem prorsus communem carnem affirmat qualis est bouis aut vituli Wherefore I saide before that this spirite is not good neither goeth about any good thing by these fantasticall men the rebellious boures although I suppose these preachers against whome these thinges are now written as yet to haue none euil thinge in their minde But good God they haue no power nor holde of them selues they are blinded and holden captiue by a spirite wherefore they must not be trusted too much For that spirite which dissolueth the flesh of Christ is not of God saith Saint Iohn and that he will haue to be the triall of spirites This spirite in deede dissolueth the flesh of Christ when it affirmeth that it is vnprofitable perishing and altogether common flesh such as is the flesh of an Oxe or a calfe This is Luthers saying now it is certein that M Charke and his fellowes doe neithet thinke nor speake so vnreuerentlie of the flesh of Christ animated with his spirite which they acknowledge to be verie true meate wherewith we are fed vnto eternall life They had some smacke of Nestorianisme therefore against whome Luther vttereth these wordes from which M. Charke and his fellowes God be thanked are free But now commeth our answerer after he hath forged a place of Luther and hammered it out against Master Charke to maruaile that these men can finde so many absurdities vpon one sentence of scripture and first he would aske whether Master Charke thinketh that the Papistes doe exclude Christ when they allowe Prophets to teach vnder him Kinges to raigne vnder him Priests to sanctifie vnder him or no. As though there were no waie for Papists to be guiltie of Antichristianisme except they did exclude Christ altogether whereas it hath bene prooued that whosoeuer doth not acknowledge the wholl and euerie part of his offices is of Antichrist As for Prophets Kinges and Priests to teach reigne and sanctifie vnder Christ is not the matter in question but to teach reigne sanctify beside Christ to claime like authotitie in teaching gouerning sanctifying with him as to be fellow Prophets fellow Kings fellow priestes with him to teach that Christ taught not to make articles of faith to dispense against Gods commaundements to make lawes to binde the
conscience of men to sanctifie them by their worke whome Christ by his onelie oblation hath made perfect for euer They that holde these points denie Christ to be a perfect Prophet King and Priest But these be deepe mysteries of puritanisme saith the answerer Christ is a Prophet alone a King alone a Priest alone the ouerthrow of all gouernment No sir no to acknowledge Christe to be our onelie Prophet king and priest ouerthroweth not but establisheth all power that is ordeined vnder him to teach gouerne and sanctifie The scripture in deede Eph. 4. Acts. 5. doth allowe Prophets and teachers in the Church but not authors of new doctrine no makers of new articles of faith no traditions beside the Gospell of Christ which is written that we might beleeue and beleeuing haue eternall life in his name The scripture alloweth Kinges and rulers 1. Pet. 2. Act. 2. but the scripture giueth no authoritie to any king or ruler to dispense against the lawes of God nor to any Prophet or priest to discharge subiects of their oth made to their lawfull Prince to binde the conscience of man with new constitutions as necessarie to saluation c. But whereas you aske whether Priests may not sanctifie by the word of god 2. Tim. 4. you are neare driuen for proofes For to omitte that the Chapter you quote hath neuer a word either of priests or sanctifying and to take your meaning to be of 1. Tim. 4. verse 5. the Apostle speaketh not of the Priest or ecclesiasticall ministers power of sanctifying but of euerie Christian man and woman to whome euerie creature of God in the right vse thereof is sanctified by the word of God and praier and against them that forbid thinges consecrated and allowed by God as matrimonie and meates sanctifyed by his worde that hath giuen them to be receiued with thankesgiuing and by the praier of the thankefull receiuer as a mean to obtaine sanctification from God whoe onelie is holie and therefore hath onelie power properlie to sanctifie and to inioyne as more holie by their owne making and not by Gods sanctification virginitie then matrimonie fish then flesh yca take vpon them to sanctifie Gods creatures in an other vse then God hath appointed them as water fire garments boughs flowers bread and such like for religion and sanctifying of Christian men Againe he asketh what doe the traditions of Christ and his Apostles for of those onelie they talke when they compare them with scripture impeach the teaching of Christ and his Apostles I answere there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles pertaining to a Christian mans dutie to obtaine erernall life but those that be comprehended in the holie scriptures as the spirite of God in the scripture which cannot lie doth testifie And therefore they are the traditions of men and not of Christ and his Apostles that areso called vnder which title all heresies fansies may be brought in without testimonie of the written worde of God Wherefore such traditions doe greatlie impeach the office of Christes teaching reproouing his Apostles and Euangelists of imperfection if they haue not comprehended the summe of all that Christ taught and did for our saluation which Saint Luke in the beginning of his Gospell doth professe that he hath done and that verie exactlie And further it is false that our answerer saith they talke of the traditions of Christ and his Apostles onelie when they compare them with scripture For they compare the decrees of their Pope and of their generall councells allowed by him to be of equall authoritie with the holie scriptures as well as traditions Secondlie he asketh what doth the spiritual authorttie of the Pope vnder Christ diminish the Kinglie power and authoritie of Christ I answere the Pope hath no spirituall authoritie vnder Christ by anie graunt of Christ but he vsurpeth authoritie aboue Christ when he will controll the lawes and institutions of Christ as denying the cuppe of blessing vnto the laie people and in taking vpon him to make newe lawes and to inioyne men to obserue them in paine of damnation as be his lawes of abstinence from mariage and meates for religions sake which Christ hath left free for all men euen for Bishops Priests and Deacons of the Church and in an hundred matters beside Last of all he asketh How doth the priesthood of men as from Christ or the sacrifice of the altar instituted by Christ disgrace Christs priesthood or his sufficient sacrifice once for all offered on the crosse I answere the priesthood of reconciling by sacrifice doth not passe from Christ to anie man because he hath by one sacrifice made perfect for euer all that are sanctifyed and liueth for euer to make intercession for vs therefore hath as the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a priesthood that passeth not to any other in succession as Arons priesthood did whereby he is able to saue for euer those that come vnto God by hym Againe I denie that Christ did institute that sacrifice of the altar whereof there is no worde in all the scripture and therefore a new priesthood and a new sacrifice must needes be blaspemous against the eternal priesthood of Christ and that one sufficient sacrifice which he offered and therebie found eternall redemption The texts alledged by Master Charke Heb. 7. 9. he saith doe not impeach this dailie sacrifice of theirs because they graunt that sacrifice once offered c. in that manner as it was then done meaning bloodelie whereas they offer it vnbloodelie c. But the wholl discourse of the Aposile throughout the wholl epistle almoste excludeth all repetition of that sacrifice in any manner For therepetition of the same sacrifice should argue imperfection in it as it did in the Iewish sacrifices and without shedding of blood there is noremission of sinnes Is Christ shoulde be often offered he should often suffer All which being impossible it remaineth that as Christ offered himselfe but once and not often so no man hath authoritie or power to offer him anie more neither is there anie neede he should be more then once offered seing by that one oblation he hath made perfect for euer all that are sanctified and hath found eternall redemption for all that beleeue in him But for proofe that there must be such a daylie sacrifice in the Church vntill the end of the world he alledgeiu the prophecie of Daniell 12. Malachie 1. whereas Daniell speaketh of the dailie sacrifice of the Lawe which should cease in the persecution of Antiochus and be vtterly abolished by the death of Christ. And Malachic of the sacrifice of praise and thankesgeuing which by all nations is offered as a pure sacrifice and acceptable to him through Christ. The former exposition is allowed by S. Ierome to be verified of Antiochus in a type of Antichrist whoe shall forbid culium Dei the worship of God which doth not require any such