his merite and not for the dignity and perfection of the righteousnesse which is communicated vnto vs in Christ And farther they say that the faithfull soule doth not rely vpon that righteousnesse that is inherent in it but vpon the onely righteousnesse of Christ giuen vnto vs without which there neither is nor can be any righteousnesse And they adde hereunto that they that truly repent of their sinnes should most firmely and with great assurance of faith resolue that they please God for Christs sake who is a Mediatour betweene God and them because he is a worker of propitiation a High Priest and an Intercessour for vs whom the Father hath giuen vnto vs and all good things together with him And therefore though they say not as the Canons of Colen that Christs righteousnesse is the formall cause of our justification yet Vega thinketh they followed the same opinion because besides inherent righteousnesse they affirme that another righteousnes namely that of Christ is communicated to vs by which especially wee are made righteous and vppon which only we must rely The Interim published by Charles the 5 with the assent of the imperiall states deliuereth the same touching iustification that the former authors haue done And the diuines of both sides in the conference at Ratisbon agreed in the same explication of the article of iustification that wee haue hetherto deliuered A great contention there is and hath beene whether the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to vs bee the formall cause of our justification and whether we be formally justified by his imputed righteousnesse or not But Andraeas Vega supposeth that it is a meere logomachie and verball contention which his conjecture I thinke will be found more then probable For as I haue already shewed in the justification of a sinner three things are implyed 1 To be free from dislike disfauour and punishment as if he had neuer offended Secondly to be respected fauoured and indeared vnto God in such sort as righteous men are wont to be as if he had done all righteousnes And thirdly To haue the grant of the gift of righteousnesse to keepe from euill and incline him to good in the time to come All these denominations are respectiue and a man may be so denominated from something without For one man is reconciled to another in that hee no longer intendeth euill vnto him and one man is deare vnto another and we are deare vnto God formally by that loue whereby we are beloued of him And because that which giueth satisfaction to God and that which maketh him well pleased towards vs is that for which formally or in respect whereof God willeth our good not euill by both these we may be sayd though in a different sort to be formally iustified Wherefore hauing sufficiently cleared the point of controuersie touching the first justifying and reconciling of a sinner to God and made it appeare that the Church euer beleeued as we now do it remaineth that we speake of the second justification The second justification consisteth in the remission of such sinnes as the justified man dayly through infirmity falleth into and the progresse and going on in well doing and the dayly preuailing against sinne whereby the kingdome of sinne is weakened and the kingdome of grace and righteousnesse is confirmed and more strongly established in us Touching the second justification there is no difference between vs them that so deliuered the doctrine of the first justification as I haue before expressed but between the Romanists vs there are sūdry things cōtrouerted For 1 t many of thē deny the veniall sins into which the regenerate do fal to be properly sins therefore think not aright of the remissiō of thē 2◠They imagine that sūdry externall obseruatiōs ex opere oper◅to giue grace remit those sins whereas in truth in the opiniō of others they auaile no otherwise then they stirre vp deuotion and raise in vs good motions and desires to purge out the remaines of sinne and to seeke the remission of it Thirdly they make the good workes of men justified to deserue increase of grace the reward of eternall life of condignity But I will shew in that which followeth that the doctrine of merit was neuer admitted in the Church neither before nor after Luthers time In this justification men are justified meerely by faith as in the first so farre forth as it importeth remission of sins but in that it importeth an increase confirmation and growth in that good that is begun in us our working of vertue and good indeauours causing the same may be sayd to justify that is to make vs more iust inherētly then before more strōgly inclined to good in which sense S. Iohn saith Qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc The third kind of justification which is sayd to bee the restoring of men once justified and afterwards fallen from grace to the state of grace againe is meerely imaginary For they that are called according to purpose and soe justified do neuer totally nor finally fall from God The sins which men run into I haue elsewhere shewed to be of 2 sorts Inhabiting only or Raigning the former in the judgment of our aduersaries themselues do stand with grace the state of iustification Sins regnant are as Theodoret writing vpon the sixt to the Romans after him others do rightly note of 2 sorts for either they raigne as a tyrant or as a king a king reigneth with the loue liking of his subjects who wish nothing more then to liue vnder him think there is no happines but in his slauery a tyrant with dislike They that are justified called acording to purpose neuer haue sin raigning in them as a king but somtimes as a tyrant they haue For though Dauid Peter were strangely transported with the violēt passions of feare lust yet who will euer think that these lost all their former good affections towards God thought it their happines to be subject to his enemies Nay it is cleerly deliuered concerning Peter by Theophylact and sundry others that though the leaues were shaken off yet the roote remained vnmarred Iustification likewise as I haue shewed in the same place importeth 2 things An interest right title to the kingdome of heauen a claime to it by vertue force of the same right title the one of these may cease be suspended when the other remaineth If a man that hath much due vnto him vpon good assurances do some act for which he is excommunicated or outlawed he looseth not the title right he had to the things due vnto him vpō those assurāces but if the same things be detained all prosecution of his right is suspēded all actuall claime ceaseth during the time he continueth in that estate So in like manner if a man called according to purpose justified who can neuer finally fall from God fall
that in the one men are sure and know they neither are nor can be deceiued in the other they knowe and are certaine that they are not not that they cannot bee deceiued But this difference cannot staud for if a man know and bee certaine that hee is not deceiued he must certainly know that no such thing doth now fall out as doth fall out when men are deceiued in apprehensions of this kind and consequently that now and things so standing he cannot be deceiued For example a man dreaming thinketh he is waking and vndoubtedly perswadeth himselfe hee seeth or doth something wherein he is deceiued because it is but representation in a dreame but he that is waking knoweth that he waketh that hee seeth that which he thinketh he seeth that in this perswasion hee is not nor cannot be deceiued things so standing Amongst the Articles agreed vpon in the conference at Ratisbon 1541 this is one Docendum est ut qui vere poenitent semper fide certissimâ statuant se propter Mediatorem Christum Deo placere quia Christus est propitiator Pontifex interpellator pro nobis quem pater donavit nobis omnia bona cum illo Quoniam autem perfecta rectitudo in hac imbecillitate non est suntque multae infirmae pavidae conscientiae quae cum gravi saepe dubitatione luctantur nemo est à gratiâ Christi propter ejusmodi infirmitatem excludendus sed convenit tales diligenter adhortari ut ijs dubitationibus promissiones Christi fortiter opponant augeri sibi fidem sedulis precibus orent juxta illud Adauge nobis Domine fidem So that touching this point it is evident that the Church of God euer taught that which we now teach Neither haue wee departed from the doctrine of the Church in that wee teach that faith onely justifieth For many of the ancient haue vsed this forme of words as Origen ad Rom. 3. Dicit Apostolus sufficere solius fidei justificationem ita ut credens quis tantummodo justificetur etiamsi nihil ab eo operis fuerit expletum Hilar. can 8. in Math. Fides sola justificat Basil. homil de humilitate Haec est perfecta integra gloriatio in Deo quando neque ob justitiam suam quis se iactat sed novit quidem seipsum verae justitiae indigum solâ autem fide in Christum justificatum Ambros. ad Rom. 3. Iustificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicem reddentes solâ fide justificati sunt dono Dei Chrysost. Homil. de fide lege naturae Eum qui operatur opera iustitiae sine fide non potes probare vivum esse fidem absque operibus possum monstrare vixisse regnum coelorum assecutam nullus sine fide vitam habuit latro autem credidit tantum iustificatus est Aug. l. 1. contra 2 Epistolas Pelag. c. 21. Quantaelibet fuisse virtutis antiquòs praedices justos non eos salvos fecit nisi fides mediatoris 83. q. q. 76. Si quis cùm crediderit mox de hâc vita decesserit iustificatio fidei manet cum illo nec praecedentibus bonis operibus quia non merito ad illam sed gratiâ pervenit nec consequentibus quia in hac vita esse non sinitur Theophylact. ad Galat. 3. Nunc planè ostendit Apostolus fidem vel solam iustificandi habere in se virtutem Bern. ser. 22 in Cantic Quisquis pro peccatis compunctus esurit sitit iustitiam credat in te qui iustificas impium solam iustificatus per fidem pacem habebitad te Et ep 77. citans illud Qui crediderit baptizatus fuerit salvus erit Cautè inquit non repetiit qui vero baptizatus non fuerit condēnabitur sed tantū qui vero non crediderit innuens nimirum solam fidem interdum sufficere ad salutem sine illâ sufficere nihil Sometimes by these phrases of speech they exclude all that may bee be without supernaturall knowledge all that may be without a true profession Sometimes the necessity of good workes in act or externall good workes 3. The power of nature without illumination and grace 4. The power of the Law 5. The sufficiency of any thing found in vs to make vs stand in judgement to abide the tryall and not to feare condemnation And in this sense faith onely is said to justifie that is the onely mercy of God and merite of Christ apprehended by faith and then the meaning of their speech is that onely the perswasion and assured trust that they haue to bee accepted of God for Christs sake is that that maketh them stand in judgement without feare of condemnation And in this sense all the Diuines formerly alleadged for proofe of the insufficiency of all our inherent righteousnesse and the trust which wee should haue in the onely mercy of God and merite of Christ doe teach as wee doe that faith onely iustifieth For neither they nor we exclude from the worke of Iustification the action of God as the supreme and highest cause of our iustification for it is he that remitteth sinne and receiueth vs to grace nor the merit of Christ as that for which God inclineth to shew mercy to vs and to respect vs nor the remission of sinnes gratious acceptation and grant of the gift of righteousnes as that by which we are formally justified nor those works of prenenting grace whereby out of the generall apprehension of faith God worketh in vs dislike of our former condition desire to be reconciled to God to haue remission of that is past grace hereafter to decline the like euils to do contrary good things For by these wee are prepared disposed and fitted for iustification without these none are iustified And in this sense to imply a necessity of these to be found in us sometimes the fathers others say that we are not justified by faith only And we all agree that it is not our conuersion to God nor the change we find in our selues that can any way make us stād in judgment without feare and looke for any good from God otherwise then in that we find our selues so disposed and fitted as is necessary for justification whence we assure our selues God will in mercy accept us for Christs sake CHAP. 12. Of Merit MErit as Cardinall Contarenus rightly noteth if we speake properly importeth an action or actions quibus actionibus aut earum autori ab altero iusticia postulante debeatur praemiū No man can merit any thing of God First because we are his seruants owe much more seruice vnto him thē bond-slaues that are bought for money owe vnto their masters though no reward were promised we were bound to obey his commands Yet if we looke on the bounty of God he deales with us being bond-men as with hired seruants recōpencing that with a reward which we stood bound in duty to
Canons prouided that Bishops and other Cleargy-men might make their last Will and Testament and giue to whom they pleased that which came to them by inheritance the gift of their friendes or which they gained vppon the same But that which they gayned vpon their Church-liuings they should leaue to their Churches But the Church of England had a different custome neither were these Canons euer of force in our Church And therefore her Bishops and Ministers might euer at their pleasure bequeath to whom they would whatsoeuer they had gained either vpon their Church liuings or otherwise And surely there was great reason it should be so for seeing The labourer is worthy of his hire why should not they haue power to giue that which was yeelded vnto them as due recompence and reward of their labours to whom they please And how can it bee excused from iniustice and wrong that men spending a great part of their owne Patrimonie in fitting themselues for the Ministery of the Church which conuerted to the best aduantage and benefitte might greatly haue enriched them should not haue right and power to dispose of such thinges as they haue lawfully gayned out of those liuings which are assigned to thē as the due reward of their worthy paines Yet are there some that are much more iniurious to the holy Ministery For Waldensis out of a Monkish humour thinketh that Cleargy-men are bound to giue away whatsoeuer commeth to thē by inheritan ce or by any other meanes that they ought not to possesse any thing in priuate and as their owne And alleageth to this purpose the saying of Origen Hierome and Bernard that the Cleargy-man that hath any part or portion on earth cannot haue the Lord for his portion nor any part in heauen But Cardinall Bellarmine answereth to these authorities That these Fathers speake of such as content not themselues with that which is sufficient but immoderately seeke the things of this world and proueth that Cleargy-men may haue and keepe lands and possessions as their owne First because the Apostle prescribeth that such a one should be chosena Bishop As gouerneth his owne house well and hath children in Obedience which presupposeth that he hath something in priuate and that is his owne Secondly hee cofirmeth the same by the Canons of the Apostles the Councell of Agatha Martinus Bracharensis in his Decrees and the first Councell of Hispalis and further addeth that a man hauing Lands Possessions and Inheritance of his owne may spare his owne liuing and receiue maintenance from the Church for proofe whereof he alleageth the Glosse and Iohn de Turrecremata a Cardinall in his time of great esteeme and confirmeth the same by that saying of Christ The Labourer is worthy of his hyre and that of the Apostle Saint Paul Who goeth to warfare at any time at his owne charge FINIS AN APPENDIX CONTAYNING A DEFENSE OF SVCH PARTES AND PASSAGES OF THE FORMER foure bookes as haue bin either excepted against or wrested to the maintenance of Romish errours Diuided into three partes THE EPISTLE TO THE READER SINCE the time I presumed good Christian Reader to offer to thy view what I had long before for my priuate satisfaction obserued touching certaine points concerning the nature definition notes visibility and authority of the Church much questioned in our times first there came forth a Pamphlet intituled The first part of Protestant proofes for Catholique Religion and recusancie After that a larger discourse bearing the name of A Treatise of the grounds of the old and new religion thirdly the first motiue of one Theophilus Higgons lately minister to suspect the integrity of his Religion The Author of the first of these worthy workes vndertaketh to proue out of the writings of Protestant Diuines published since the beginning of his Maiesties raigne ouer this Kingdome that his Romish faith and profession is Catholique The second endeauoureth to make the world belieue that Protestants haue no sure grounds of Religion And the third hauing made shipwracke of the faith and forsaken his calling laboureth to iustifie and make good that he hath done Euery of these hath beene pleased for the aduantage of the Romish cause amonst the Workes of many worthy men to make vse of that which I haue written the first seeking to draw mee into the defence of that hee knoweth I impugne and the other two taking exceptions to certaine parts and passages scattered here and there Such is the insufficiencie and weakenesse of the idle and emptie discourses of these men that I almost resolued to take no notice of them But finding that the last of these good Authors fronteth his booke with an odious title of Detection of falshood in Doctor Humfrey Doctor Field and other learned Protestants and addeth an Appendix wherein hee vndertaketh to discouer some notable vntruethes of Doctor Field and D. Morton pretending that the consideration thereof moued him to be come a Papist I thought it not amisse to take a little paynes in shewing the folly of these vaine men who care not what they write so they write something and are in hope that no man wil trouble himselfe so much as once to examine what they say yet not intending to answere all that euery of these hath said for who would mispend his time and weary himselfe in so fruitlesse a labour but that which concerneth my selfe against whom they bend themselues in more speciall sort then any other as it seemeth because I haue treatised as Maister Higgons speaketh of that subiect which is the center and circumference in all religious disputes And b◅cause Mr Higgons is pleased to let vs know his name whereas the other cōceale theirs it being no small comfort for a man to know his Aduersary I will do him all the kindnesse I can first begin with him though he shewed himselfe last and from him proceed to the rest What it is that maketh him so much offended with me I cannot tell but sure it is he hath a good vvill to offend me for hee chargeth mee vvith trifeling egregious falshood collusion vnfaithfull dealing abusing the holy Fathers and I knowe not what else But such is the shamelesse and apparant vntrueth of these horrible imputations that it is altogether needelesse to spend time bestow labour in the refutation of them Yet because in the suspicion of heresie falsehood and vfaithfull dealing in matters of faith religion no man ought to be patient I will briefely take a view of his whole booke And though his beginning bee abrupt and absurd his whole discourse confused and perplexed and all that he doth without order or method yet to giue satisfaction to all I will follow him the same way hee goeth I was vnwilling good Christian Reader to trouble thee with such discourses but the restlesse importunity of our aduersaries setting euery one a worke to say something against vs forceth mee thereunto Read
heart that they may discerne see the light of heauenly truth it is evident that in Augustines judgment the authority of the Church serueth but as an introduction that the thing which right beleeuers rest vpon is of a higher nature to wit the discerning of heauenly truth Wherefore finding himselfe too weak to giue any substantiall answer he betaketh himselfe to a most silly exception pretending that I haue not truly translated these words of Augustin praesto est authoritas quā partim miraculis partim multitudine valere nemo ambigit authoritie is ready at handwhich standeth vpō 2 things the one the greatnes of miracles done the other multitude Is this a false translatiō hath the authority of the church that force which it hath to moue mē to beleeue partly by reasō of miracles partly by reasō of multitude may it not be truly said that it standeth partly vpon the greatnes of miracles wrought partly vpō multitudes but valere doth not signifie to stād vpō it is true it doth not yet what boy in the Grāmer School will not laugh at him for thus childishly demeaning himself for what man of vnderstāding would cal men to cōster euery word precisely as it importeth by it selfe without consideration of the coherence it hath with other in the same sentence Besides this place of Aug. there is another cited by Me out of Hugo where he maketh 3 sorts of beleeuers whereof the first are such as are moued out of piety to beleeue which yet discerne not by reason whether the things they beleeue are to bee beleeued or not The second such who by reason approue that which by faith they beleeue The third sort are such as by reason of the purity of their heart conscience begin inwardly to taste what by faith they beleeue This place maketh strongly for the confirmation of that I say that the evidence of sundry things in the light of faith and grace is that formall reason which assureth vs of the truth of them For heere Hugo affirmeth that the best sort of beleeuers doe approue by reason or by taste invvardly discerne the things they beleeue to be true So that such approbation or spiritual taste is the reason of their perswasion of the truth of these things To this authoritie the Treatiser hath nothing to say but that it maketh nothing to the purpose and that if I meant to translate the vvords of Hugo I haue not exactly translated thē Whether the saying of Hugo be to the purpose or not I vvill leaue it to the iudgment of the Reader but as for his other exception I vvould haue him knovv and any sensible Reader vvill very easilie discerne that I meant not exactlie to translate his vvordes but at large to set downe the intent driftes of them which I haue most truely performed and therefore hee doth Me wrong when hee saith I deale corruptly vntruly In the third place hee endeauoureth to make his Reader beleeue there is a contrariety betweene Me and Luther Brentius in that Luther with whom Brentius seemeth to agree maketh the Scripture to be of it self a most certaine most easie and most manifest interpreter of it selfe prouing judging and enlightning all things I acknowledge many difficulties in it But if the Treatiser had beene pleased to haue taken thinges aright he could not but haue seene that Luther also acknowledgeth manifold difficulties in the Scripture yea hee doth see it and acknowledge it and yet will not see it and therefore that he bee not contrary to himselfe when he affirmeth that the Scriptures are easie interpret themselues and judge and enlighten all thinges he must bee vnderstood to meane that notwithstanding some difficulties they are not so obscure and hard as that Heretiques may wrest and abuse them at their pleasure and noe man bee able to conuince them out of the euidence of those sacred writings as the Romanistes imagine but that wee may bee so assured out of the Scripture it selfe and the nature of the thinges therein contained that wee haue the true meaning of it that wee neede not altogether to rest in the authority of Church which explication of Luthers words the Treatiser might haue found in the place cited by him if hee had beene pleased and so haue omitted the vrging of this imagined contradiction §. 3. The 4. thing that he proposeth which cōcerneth me is that I mentiō a rule of faith according to which the Scriptures are to be interpreted which if we neglect al other considerations are insufficient the like he alleageth out of the Harmony of confessions whence he inferreth that we admit another guide in interpreting the Scripture besides the letter of the Scripture But hee should knowe that the rule of faith mentioned by me deliuered to vs from hand to hand by the guides of Gods Church containeth nothing in it but that which is found in Scripture either expressely or by necessary implication so that though wee admitte another guide in the interpretation of of Scripture besides the bare letter yet wee admitte noe other but that forme of Christian doctrine which all right beleeuing Christians taught by the Apostles and Apostolique men haue euer receiued as contained in the Scripture and thence collected To this hee addeth an excellent obseruation which is that I seeme to confesse that Saint Paul sometimes by the workes of the Law vnderstandeth the workes of the Law of Moses in that I say that that Apostle pronounceth that the Galathians were bewitched and that if they still persisted to joyne circumcision and the workes of the Law with Christ they were fallen from grace and Christ could profit them nothing But hee needed not thus to mince the matter for I willingly confesse that Paul not sometimes onely but euer vnderstandeth by the workes of the Lawe the workes of Moses Law Neither can there any thing be inferred thence for the Papists or against vs. For whereas by the workes of the Lawe some vnderstand those workes which the ceremoniall Lawe prescribed other such as the morall Lawe requireth and and a third sort such as by terror it worketh in men or causeth them to worke without any chaunge of the heart which cannot be wrought but only by grace the Papists think that whē the Apostle sayth we are iustified by faith without workes he excludeth not such works as the Morall Law requireth but such as the ceremoniall Law prescribeth and the morall Law worketh in men we teach that he excludeth all these So that a man repenting and beleeuing may bee saued though hauing neuer done any good worke he be taken out of this world before he can do any It is true indeede that good workes do necessarily follow iustification if time do serue and opportunity bee offered yet are they no meritorious causes of saluation But the Treatiser will proue out of that which I haue written that they are meritorious that
faith only doth not iustifie that good works are meritorious he endeauoureth to proue because I confesse that men iustified freely by grace are crowned in the world to come for that new obediēce that is foūd in thē after iustificatiō But this cōsequence I suppose wil not be thought good seeing as Cassander rightly notethout of Bucer God in respect of good works or hauing an eye to thē or for good works giueth not onely temporall but eternall rewardes not for the worthinesse of the workes in themselues but out of his owne grace for the merit of Christ first working such good workes in them that are his and then crowning his owne workes in them as Augustine long since aptly obserued Let vs see therefore if he can proue any better that fayth onely doth not justifie this hee vndertaketh to doe out of that which I haue written that justification implieth in it faith hope and charity But for the clearing of this poynt let him be pleased to obserue that by the name of justification sometimes nothing is meant but an adiudging of eternall life vnto vs sometimes the whole translation of a man out of the state of sinne and wrath into a state of righteousnesse and acceptation with God which implyeth in it sundry things concurring in very different sort without any preiudice to the singular prerogatiue of fayth For first it implyeth in it a worke of almighty God as the supreame and highest cause Secondly the merits of Christ as the meanes whereby God is reconciled and induced to take vs into his fauour Thirdly in him that is to be justified a certaine perswasion of the trueth of such thinges as are contayned in the holy word of God Fourthly motions of feare contrition hope of mercy and the like workes of preparing grace as causes disposing and fitting him that is to be justified that hee may be capable of Gods fauour Fifthly as the susceptiue cause an act of faith by which a man truely repenting of former euils and seeking deliuerance without all doubting firmely beleeueth that all his sinnes are remitted him for Christs sake Lastly an infusion of the habite of diuine and heauenly vertues as a beginning of that life of God to which he doth adiudge them whom he receiueth to fauour So that my saying that justification thus taken implyeth in it Faith Hope and Charitie contrarieth not our position that fayth onely justifieth in sort before expressed which the Treatiser knowing right well insisteth no longer vpon this cauill but passeth to an vntruth charging Mee that I say of S. Augustine whom yet I pronounce to haue been the greatest of all the Fathers and the worthiest Diuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times that his manner of deliuering the Article of Iustification is not full perfect exact as if I imputed some fault to him in not deliuering the poynt of justification as it became him whereas I haue no such thing but say onely that his manner of deliuering that Article was not so full perfect and exact as we are forced to require in these times against the errours of the Romanists in which saying I no way blame that worthy Father but shew that new errours require a more exact manner of handling of thinges then was necessary before such errours sprung vppe which I thinke no wise man will deny and am well assured this Treatiser cannot deny vnlesse hee will bee contrary to himselfe For hee sayth expressely that Saint Augustine before some articles of Christian Religion were so throughly discussed and defined in the Church as afterwards vpon the rising of new heresies spake not so aptly and properly as was needfull in succeeding times and therefore retracted some things which hee had formerly vttered So that the Reader will easily finde that in this passage hee hath sayd lesse then nothing neither will his next discourse be found any better wherein he laboreth to shew a contrariety between Me Luther Caluine others in that I make that acte of fayth which obtayneth and procureth our justification to bee an acte by way of petition humbly intreating for acceptation and fauour and not of comfortable assurance consisting in a full perswasion that through Christs merits wee are the children of God Whereas Luther Caluine and the rest make iustifying faith to be an assured perswasion that through Christs merits wee are the sonnes of God But the Treatiser might easily know if hee were disposed that according to our opinion iustifying faith hath some actes as a cause disposing preparing and fitting vs to the receipt of that gracious fauour whereby God doth iustifie vs and other as a susceptiue cause receiuing embracing and enioying the same in the former respect neyther they nor I make faith to consist in a perswasion that wee are the sonnes of God in the latter wee both do and so agree well enough though the Treatiser it seemeth could wish it were otherwise §. 4. WHerefore let vs goe forward and take a view of that which followeth The next thing which hee hath that concerneth Mee is that it may bee gathered out of my assertions in my Third Booke of the Church that I thinke as hee saith some other also do that it is no fundamentall point of doctrine but a thing indifferent to beleeue or not to beleeue the reall that is the locall presence of CHRISTS Body in the Sacrament But I am well assured there can no such thing be gathered out of any of the places cited by him vnlesse it be lawfull for him to reason à baculo ad angulum as often as he doth For in the pages 120 and 121 of his second part because I confesse that in the Primitiue Church the manner of some was to receiue the Sacrament in the publique assembly and not bee partakers of it presently but to carry it home that the Sacrament was carried by the Deacons to the sicke that in places where they communicated euery day there was a reseruation of some parts of the sanctified Elements and that the sanctified Elements thus reserued in reference to an ensuing receiuing of them were the bodie of Christ to wit in mysterie and exhibitiue signification hee goeth about to conclude that I must needes confesse the reall that is the locall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament which consequence is no better then if a man should goe about to conclude that this Treatiser hath written a good and profitable booke because hee hath troubled the world with one such as it is full of vaine idle and emptie discourses whereof if any man make doubt let him consider but the very next words For whereas I confessed Calvines dislike of the reseruation aunciently vsed and yet saide it cannot bee proued that hee denied the Sacramentall elements consecrated and reserued for a time in reference to an ensuing receiuing of them to bee Sacramentally the body of Christ hee saith I labour in vaine because
and the two first kindes thereof 432. Chap. 14. Of the third kind of communication of properties and the first degree thereof 434. Chap. 15. Of the third kind of communication of properties and the second degree thereof 438. Chap. 16. Of the worke of Mediation performed by Christ in our nature 441. Chap. 17. Of the things which Christ suffered for vs to procure our reconciliation with God 445. Chap 18. Of the nature and quality of the passion and suffering of Christ. 450. Chap. 19. Of the descending of Christ into hell 453. Chap. 20. Of the merit of Christ of his not meriting for himselfe his meriting for vs. 464. Chap. 21. Of the benefites which we receiue from Christ. 469. Chap. 22. Of the Ministery of them to whom Christ committed the publishing of the reconciliation between God and men procured by him 471. Chap. 23. Of the Primacie of power imagined by our Aduersaries to haue beene in Peter and their defence of the same 479. Chap. 24. Of the preeminence that Peter had amongst the Apostles and the reason why Christ directed his speeches specially to him 486. Chap. 25. Of the distinction of them to whom the Apostles dying left the managing of Church-affaires and particularly of them that are to performe the meaner seruices in the Church 488. Chap. 26. Of the orders and degrees of them that are trusted with the Ministery of the word and Sacraments and the gogouernment of Gods people and particularly of Lay-elders falsely by some supposed to bee Gouernours of the Church 493. Chap. 27. Of the distinction of the power of Order and Iurisdiction and the preeminence of one amongst the Presbyters of each Church who is named a Bishop 497. Chap. 28. Of the diuision of the lesser titles and smaller Congregations or Churches out of those Churches of so large extent founded and constituted by the Apostles 501. Chap. 29. Of Chorepiscopi or Rurall Bishops forbidden by old Canons to encroach vpon the Episcopall office and of the institution necessary vse of Archpresbyters or Deanes 504. Chap. 30. Of the forme of the gouernement of the Church and the institution and authority of Metropolitanes and Patriarches 510. Chap. 31. Of Patriarches who they were and the reason why they were preferred before other Bishops 515. Chap. 32. How the Pope succeedeth Peter what of right belongeth to him and what it is that he vniustly claimeth 518. Chap. 33. Of the proofes brought by the Romanists for confirmation of the vniuersality of the Popes iurisdiction and power 521. Chap. 34. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall iurisdiction taken out of the decretall Epistles of Popes 524. Chap. 35. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes Supremacie produced and brought out of the writinges of the Greeke Fathers 533. Chap. 36. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes Supremacie taken out of the writings of the Latine Fathers 539. Chap. 37. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall power taken from his intermedling in ancient times in confirming deposing or restoring Bishops deposed 550. Chap. 38. Of the weakenesse of such proofes of the supreame power of Popes as are taken from their lawes Censures dispensations and the Vicegerents they had in places farre remote from them 556. Chap. 39. Of Appeales to Rome 561. Chap. 40. Of the Popes supposed exemption from all humane iudgment as beeing reserued to the iudgement of Christ onely 571. Chap. 41. Of the titles giuen to the Pope and the insufficiencie of the proofes of his illimited power and iurisdiction taken from them 582. Chap. 42. Of the second supposed priuiledge of the Romane Bishops which is infallibility of iudgement 585. Chap. 43. Of such Popes as are charged with heresie and how the Romanists seeke to cleare them from that imputation 593. Chap. 44. Of the Popes vniust claime of temporall dominion ouer the whole world 602. Chap. 45. Of the Popes vniust claime to intermedle with the affaires of Princes and their States if not as Soueraign Lord ouer all yet at least in ordine ad Spiritualia and in case of Princes failing to do their duties 609. Chap. 46. Of the examples of Church-men deposing Princes brought by the Romanists 618. Chap. 47. Of the ciuill dominion which the Popes haue by the gift of Princes 632. Chap. 48. Of generall Councels and of the end vse and necessity of them 642. Chap. 49. Of the persons that may be present in generall Councels and who they are of whom generall Councels do consist 645. Chap. 50. Of the President of generall Councels 649. Chap. 51. Of the assurance of finding out the truth which the Bishops assembled in generall Councels haue 660. Chap. 52. Of the calling of Councels and to whom that right pertaineth 667. Chap. 53. Of the power and authority exercised by the ancient Emperours in generall Councels and of the Supremacie of Christian Princes in causes and ouer persons Ecclesiasticall 677. Chap. 54. Of the calling of Ministers and the persons to whom it pertaineth to elect and ordaine them 686. Chap. 55. Of the Popes disordered intermedling with elections of Bishops and other Ministers of the Church their vsurpation intrusion and preiudicing the right and liberty of others 696. Chap. 56. Of the ordinations of Bishops and Ministers 702. Chap. 57. Of the things required in such as are to be ordained Ministers and of the lawfulnesse of their Marriage 704. Chap. 58. Of Digamie and what kind of it it is that debarreth men from entring into the Ministerie 727. Chap. 59. Of the maintenance of Ministers 733. What things are Occasionally handled in the Appendix to the fifth Booke THat Protestants admit triall by the Fathers 749. Of Purgatory and Prayer for the dead 750. 764. 776. 783. 787. 792. Whether generall Councels may erre 761. The opinion of the Greekes concerning Purgatory 764. Of Transubstantiation 770. The opinion of some of the Schoolemen thinking that finall Grace purgeth out all sinfulnesse out of the soule in the moment of dissolution 772. Of the heresie of Aerius 789. Nothing constantly resolued on concerning Purgatory in the Romane Church at Luthers appearing 790. Abuses in the Romane Church disliked by Gerson 795. Grosthead opposing the Pope 809. The agreement of diuers before Luther with that which Protestants now teach 813. Of the difference betweene the German Diuines and vs concerning the Vbiquitary presence and the Sacrament 819. The differences of former times amongst the Fathers and of the Papists at this day compared with the differences that are found amongst Protestants 823. Of the Rule whereby all controuersies are to be ended 827. That the Elect neuer fall totally from grace once receiued 833. What manner of faith is found in infants that are baptised 837. Of the saying of Augustine that hee would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him 841. Of the last resolution of our faith 844. 856. Of the sufficiency of the Scripture 847. Of Traditions 849. 892. Of the merit of works
that pertaine to the Church THey that are partakers of the heauenly calling and sanctified by the profession of divine truth and the vse of the meanes of saluation are of very diuers sorts For there are some that professe the truth deliuered by Christ the Sonne of God but not wholly and entirely as Heretiques some that professe the whole sauing truth but not in vnity as Schismatickes some that professe the whole sauing truth in vnity but not in sincerity and singlenesse of a good and sanctified minde as Hypocrites and wicked men not outwardly divided from the people of GOD and some that professe the whole sauing truth in vnity and sincerity of a good and sanctified heart All these are partakers of the heauenly calling and sanctified by the profession of the truth and consequently are all in some degree and fort of that society of men whom GOD calleth out vnto himselfe and separateth from Infidels which is rightly named the Church These being the different rankes of men made partakers of the heauenly calling and sanctified by the profession of sauing truth there are diuers names by which they are expressed and distinguished one from another For as the name of the Church doth distinguish men that haue receiued the revelation of supernaturall truth from Infidels and the name of the Christian Church Christians from Iewes so the name of the Orthodoxe Church is applyed to distinguish right beleeuing Christians from Heretiques the name of the Catholicke Church men holding the Faith in vnity from Schismatiques the name of the invisible Church the Church of the first borne whose names are written in heauen the mysticall body of Christ and the like to distinguish the elect from all the rest so that many were of the Church which were not of the Christian Church as the Iewes before the cōming of Christ many of the Christian Church that are not of the Orthodoxe many of the Orthodoxe that are not of the Catholique and many of the Catholique that are not of the invisible and Church of the first borne whose names are written in heauen Thus then the Church hauing her being name from the calling of grace all they must needes bee of the Church whom the grace of God in any sort calleth out from the profane and wicked of the world to the participation of eternall happinesse by the excellent knowledge of divine supernaturall and revealed verity and vse of the good happy and pretious meanes of saluation but they onely perfectly and fully in respect of outward being which professe the whole trueth in vnity and they onely principally fully and absolutely are of the Church whom divine grace leadeth infallibly and indeclinably by these meanes to the certaine and vndoubted possession of wished blessednesse because in them onely grace manifesteth her greatest and most prevailing force without which efficacie of grace winning infallibly holding inseparably and leading indeclinably no man euer attained to saluation of which whoso is partaker shall vndoubtedly be saued In the benefites of this grace none but the elect and chosen of God whom he hath loued with an euerlasting loue haue any part of fellowship though others concurre with them in the vse of the same meanes of saluation and bee partakers with them of sundry inward motions inclining them to good When we say therefore that none but the elect of God are of the Church wee meane not that others are not at all nor in any sort of the Church but that they are not principally fully and absolutely and that they are not of that especiall number of them who partake and communicate in the most perfect worke force and effect of sauing grace CHAP 8. Of their meaning who say that the Elect onely are of the Church THis was the meaning of Wickliffe Husse and others who therefore define the Church to be the multitude of the Elect not for that they thinke them onely to pertaine to the Church and no others but because they onely pertaine vnto it principally fully effectually and finally and in them only is found that which the calling of grace whence the Church hath all her being intendeth to wit such a conversion to God as is joyned with finall perseverance whereof others failing and comming short they are onely in an inferiour and more imperfect sort said to be of the Church The elect and chosen of God are of two sorts some elect onely and not yet called some both elect and called Of the latter there is no question but they are the most principall parts of the Church of God Touching the former they are not actually of the Church but onely secundùm praescientiam praedestinationem in Gods prescience and predestination who hath purposed what they shall be and knoweth what they will be It is frivolous therefore that Bellarmine Stapleton and others of that faction alledge against vs that the elect before they are called are not of the Church For it is true if they speake of actuall admission into the fellowship of Gods people but false if they speake of the intent and purpose of Almighty God whereby they were chosen to be made his in this present world before the world it selfe was made Secundùm praescientiam saith Augustine multi etiam qui apertè foris sunt haeretici appellantnr multis bonis Catholicis meliores sunt In the prescience of God many that are apparantly without and named Heretiques are better then many and those good and right beleeuing Catholique Christians And in his tract vpon Iohn Secundùm praescientiam praedestinationem quam multae ovesforis quam multi lupi intus Quidest inquit quod dixi Quam multae oves foris quam multi luxuriantur casti futuri quam multi blasphemant Christum credituri in Christum hi oves sunt veruntamen modò alienam vocem audiunt alienos sequuntur Item quà m multi intus laudant blasphematuri Casti sunt fornicaturi stant casuri non sunt oves de praedestinatis enim loquimur According vnto Gods prescience and predestination how many sheepe are there without and wolues within what is it saith Augustine that I said How many sheepe are there without how many are there that now wallow in all impurity and filthines that hereafter shall be chast and vndefiled How many now doe blaspheme Christ which hereafter shall beleeue in Christ and these are sheepe yet for the present they heare the voyce of a stranger and follow strangers On the other side how many are there now within which presently praise God that hereafter will blaspheme him which now are chast that hereafter will become impure adulterers now stand that hereafter will fall and these are not sheepe for we speake of the predestinate It is true therefore that Wickliffe Husse Calvine and others doe teach that none but the elect doe pertaine to the Church in such sort as hath beene before expressed and that all the electare
posterity not by imitation only but by propagation and descent subjecting all to curse and malediction yet not without possibilitie and hope of mercifull deliuerance Thirdly wee must beleeue that for the working of this deliuerance the Sonne of God assumed the nature of man into the vnity of his diuine person so that hee subsisteth in the nature of God and man without all corruption confusion or conuersion of one of them into another that in the nature of man thus assumed hee suffered death but being God could not be holden of it but rose againe and triumphantly ascended into Heauen that hee satisfied the wrath of his father obtayned for vs remission of sinnes past the grace of repentant conuersion and a new conuersation joyned with assured hope desire and expectation of eternall happinesse Fourthly wee must constantly beleeue that God doth call and gather to himselfe out of the manifold confusions of erring ignorant and wretched men whom hee pleaseth to be partakers of these precious benefits of eternall saluation the happy number and joyfull society of whom wee name the Church of God whether they were before or since the manifestation of Christ the sonne of God in our flesh For both had the same faith hope and spirit of adoption whereby they were sealed vnto eternall life though there bee a great difference in the degree and measure of knowledge and the excellencie of the meanes which God hath vouchsafed the one more then the other Fiftly wee must know and beleeue that for the publishing of this joyfull deliverance and the communicating of the benefits of the same the Sonne of God committed to those his followers whom hee chose to bee witnesses of all the things hee did and suffered not onely the word of reconciliation but also the dispensation of sacred and sacramentall assurances of his loue set meanes of his gracious working that those first messengers whom hee sent with immediate commission were infallibly led into all trueth and left vnto posterities that summe of Christian doctrine that must for euer be the rule of our faith that these blessed messengers of so good and happy tidings departing hence left the ministerie of reconciliation to those whom they appoynted to succeede them in the worke so happily begun by them Lastly wee must know and be assuredly perswaded that seeing the renouation of our spirites and mindes is not perfect and the redemption of our bodies still remaining corruptible is not yet therefore God hath appointed a time when Christ his sonne shall returne againe raise vp the dead and giue eternall life to all that with repentant sorrow turne from their euill and wicked wayes while it is yet the accepted time and day of saluation and contrary wayes cast out into vtter darkenesse and into the fire that neuer shall bee quenched all those that neglect and despise so great saluation That all these things and these onely doe directly concerne the matter of eternall saluation is euidently proued by vnaunswerable demonstration For how should they attaine euerlasting happinesse that know not God the originall cause and end of all things the object matter and cause of all happinesse that know not of whom they were created of what sorte to what whereof capable and how enabled to it how farre they are fallen from that they originally were and the hope of that which they were made to be whence are those euills that make them miserable and whence the deliuerance from them is to be looked for by whom it is wrought what the benefits of it are the meanes whereby they are communicated to whom and what shall bee the end both of them that partake and partake not in them Wee see then that all these things and these onely essentially and directly touch the matter of eternall saluation Other things there are that attend on them as consequents deduced from them or some way appertayning to them whereof some are of that sorte that a man cannot rightly be perswaded of these but hee must needes see the necessary consequence and deduction of them from these if they bee propounded vnto him as that there are two wils in Christ that there is no saluation remission of sinnes or hope of eternall life out of the Church that the matrimoniall societie of man and wife is not impure as the Marcionites Tatianus and other supposed nor any kinde of meates to bee rejected as vncleane by nature as the Manichees and some other Heretickes fondly and impiously dreamed other things there are that are not so clearely deduced from those indubitate principles of our Christian faith as namely concerning the place of the Fathers rest before the comming of our Sauiour Christ concerning the locall descending of Christ into the hell of the damned In the first sorte of things which are the principles that make the rule of faith a man cannot be ignorant and bee saued In the second which are so clearely deduced from those principles that who so aduisedly considereth them cannot but see their consequence from them and dependance of them a man cannot erre and be saued because if he beleeue those things which euery one that will bee saued must particularly know and beleeue he cannot erre in these The third a man may be ignorant of and erre in them without danger of damnation if errour bee not joyned with pertinacie The principall grounds of Christian doctrine aboue mentioned are the whole platforme of all Christian Religion The rule of faith so often mentioned by the Auncient by the measure of which all the holy Fathers Bishops and Pastours of the Church made their Sermons Commentaries and Interpretations of Scripture This rule euery part whereof is prooued so neerely to concerne all them that looke for saluation we make the rule to trie all doctrines by and not such platformes of doctrine as euery Sect-master by himselfe canne deduce out of the Scriptures vnderstood according to his owne private fancie as the Rhemists falsely charge vs. This rule is deliuered by Tertullian Irenaeus and other of the Fathers and with addition of conclusions most easily clearely and vnavoydably deduced hence by Theodoret in his Epitome Dogmatum CHAP. 5. Of the nature of Schisme and the kindes of it and that it no way appeareth that the Churches of Greece c. are hereticall or in damnable schisme OVt of this which hath beene deliuered it is easie to discerne what is Heresie and what errours they are that exclude from possibility of saluation It remaineth to speake of Schisme and the kindes and degrees of it Schisme is a breach of the vnity of the Church The vnity of the Church consisteth in three things First the subjection of people to their lawfull Pastours Secondly the connexion and communion which many particular Churches and the Pastours of them haue among themselues Thirdly in holding the same rule of faith The vnity of each particular Church depends of the vnity of the Pastour who is one to whom an
that others whom Augustine refuteth in his booke De fide operibus were of opinion that all Christians how damnably soeuer they liue holding the trueth of Christian profession may and shall be saued This he saith is the doctrine of the Protestants If any of vs euer wrote spake or thought any such thing let GOD forget euer to doe good vnto vs and let our prayers bee rejected from his presence but if this bee as vile a slaunder as euer Satanist devised the Lord reward them that haue beene the Authours devisers of it according to their workes But let vs see doth he make no shew of proofe doubtlesse he doeth Luther saith he pronounceth that there is no way to haue accesse vnto God to treate with him touching reconciliation acceptation into his fauour but by faith that God regardeth not workes that a true Christian is so rich in faith that he cannot perish though he would nor how wickedly soeuer he liue vnlesse he refuse and cease to beleeue For the cleering of these places of Luther wee must remember that which Illyricus hath fitly noted to this purpose that there are two Courts of Gods Iudgements most righteous proceeding towards the sons of men the one he calleth forum iustificationis the other novae obedientiae In the first hee saith God requireth perfect righteousnesse fully answering that his Law prescribeth which being no where to bee found but in Christ no way apprehended but by faith in this respect sitting in this Court of exact tryall he regardeth no workes vertues or qualities finding nothing of worth or worthy to be respected but looketh to our faith onely for Christs sake onely at the sole and onely suite of Faith forgiueth sin imputeth righteousnesse Notwithstanding because he neuer saith to any sinner Thy sinnes are remitted but that he addeth goe and sinne no more that vpon perill of forfeiting the benefite receiued and that some worse thing should betide vnto him therefore there is another Court wherein he sitteth giueth commaundement for new obedience and workes of righteousnes though not requiring so strictly that perfection which formerly hee did but accepting our weake indevours study of well doing and in this sort it is that hee will judge vs in the last Day according to our workes Thus then wee see how that though Faith be neuer alone yet in procuring vs acceptation with God it is alone and that though God regard none of our vertues actions qualities as being of any worth in the strictnes of his Iudgment but reject them as vnpure vncleane respect nothing but the humble sute petition of Faith for the purpose of justification yet when we are justified he requireth of vs a new obedience judgeth vs according to it crowneth vs for it That which Luther addeth that a man cannot perish though hee would and how wickedly soeuer hee liue vnlesse he cease to beleeue may seeme hard at the first sight but not to them that doe knowe that Luther is farre from thinking that men may bee saued how wickedly soeuer they liue for he constantly teacheth that Iustifying faith cannot remaine in that man that sinneth with full consent nor be found in that soule wherein are peccata vastantia conscientiam as Melancthon speaketh following Augustine that is raging ruling preuailing laying wast and destroying the integrity of the conscience which should resist against euill and condemne it This is all then that Luther saith that no wickednesse with which faith may stand can hurt vs soe long as faith continueth but if sinne once become regnant and so exclude faith wee are in the state of damnation Against this doctrine of Luther or any part thereof neither Bellarmine nor the gates of hell shall euer be able to prevaile Wee see then how iustly wee are charged with the heresies of the Simonians Eunomians and the like monsters surely as iustly as Bellarmine may be charged with true and honest dealing in this imputation and other that follow CHAP. 23. Of the heresie of Florinus making God the author of sinne falsely imputed to Caluine and others THe next heresie which they say wee are fallen into is the heresie of Florinus who taught that God is the cause and author of sinne This he sayth Caluin Luther Martyr and sundry other of the greatest Diuines of the reformed churches haue defended in their writings Of this sinfull wicked and lying report wee are sure GOD is not the Author but the diuell and therefore wee doe not fully accord with Florinus But that it may appeare how truly these men write and speake of things of soe great moment I will onely positiuely lay downe what wee thinke of this matter and the adversaries slaunders will bee sufficiently refuted For the clearing of our opinion touching this poynt I will first set downe the different kinds of sinne Secondly what God may be sayd to will or decree touching the first entrance thereof And thirdly what when it is entred Sinne as wee know is nothing else but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a transgression of the law The law is partly affirmatiue requiring partly negatiue forbidding the doing of a thing Hence it followeth that all sinne is either of omission or commission Sinne of omission is the not doing of that the Creature is bound to do Sinne of Commission is the doing of that the creature is bound not to doe The not doing of that the creature is bound to doe God may be sayd to will and decree foure wayes First by effectuall opposing against the doing of it in this sort it is impious to thinke that God decreed the omission or not doing of that the creature stands bound to doe Secondly by discouraging and disswading from the doing of it which is no lesse absurd and impious then the former Thirdly by deniall of that grace concurrence and assistance without which it cannot be done this cannot bee imagined in respect of the state of mans first creation but wee must make God the Author of sin and therefore there is none of vs that doth attribute any such thing vnto God But contrarywise Caluin whom Bellarmine seemeth most to challenge noteth fitly to this purpose out of Augustine that God gaue Adam posse si vellet sed non velle quod potuit power to stand and continue in his vprightnesse if he would though hee did not inseparably hould him to it but left him to his owne choice whence followed that euill we now complaine of Fourthly by deniall of that grace assistance and concurrence without which he seeth the creature will not be moued nor wonne to doe it though it haue other more then sufficient graces motiues and encouragements to induce it therevnto In this fourth sense many feare not to say that God negatiuely or privatiuely decreed the sinne of omission or the not doing of that the creature was bound to doe in that he decreed the deniall of
non diffido scio quid faciam calicem salutaris accipiam That is When my strength shall faile I will not bee troubled neither will I despaire I know what I will doe I will take the cup of saluation And in another place Totum quod dare possum miserum corpus istud est id si minus est addo corpus ipsius Nam illud de meo est meum est parvulus enim natus est nobis filius datus est mihi de te Domine suppleo quod minus habeo in me O dulcissima reconciliatio O suavissima satisfactio That is All that I can giue is this miserable body if that be too litle I adde his body for that is of mine and it is mine a litle child is borne vnto vs a sonne is given vnto mee from thee I take ô Lord to supply what I finde wanting in my selfe O most sweete reconciliation O most sweet satisfactoin Who doth not see that God doth by such a faith as that is that is exercised in the celebration of this representatiue sacrifice and in the eating of the body of Christ the sufferings whereof are here represented apply the benefit of Christ his dearest sonne to his faithfull ones Neither doe wee attribute this application to the priest but to God nor to our worke but to Gods benefit Which yet wee receiue no otherwise but by faith with the assent of our owne will Hitherto wee haue heard the words of the authour of the Enchiridion and the same authour els-where sayth that the orthodoxe diuines deny the externall action which wee call the sacramentall oblation to conferre grace or to haue any spirituall effect ex opere operato It is true sayth hee that a wicked man may pronounce the words of Christ and so make the elements of bread wine to become the sacrament of the Lords body and bloud and this sacrament ex opere operato that is out of the very nature of a sacrament of it selfe how ill soeuer the minister bee will conferre grace instrumentally to all such as receiue it without such indisposition as might hinder the working of it But if wee speake of the offering of Christ representatiuely it hath no force farther then the faith of the offerer extendeth If the priest therefore not onely outwardly but inwardly also by the acte of faith present the sufferings of Christ in the body of his flesh to God in desire by the merit thereof to escape his wrath hee bringeth much good vpon himselfe if hee devoutly beseech God for his Christs sake whose sufferings hee representeth vnto him to bee mercifull to the people committed to his charge or to any other there is no doubt but this his prayer in the nature of a prayer is most powerfull to obtaine in this kind But if hee bee wicked faithles his representatiue offering of Christ of meerely in respect of it selfe worketh no good to himselfe nor any other For in the representatiue offering of Christs passion to God must be included a supplication made to God for that passion sake and a desire of those good things that wee need Now the prayer of such a sinner God heareth not but the people spiritually representing vnto God by the acte of their faith that which the priest doth sacramentally obtaine all desired good and the removing of all evill not by force of that the priest doth but by their owne faith which is stirred vp by that outward acte done by him The most reverend Canons of the Metropoliticall Church of Colen agree with the authour of the Enchiridion their words are these Consecratione factâ in missâ Christus Dominus qui seipsum aliquando in corpore suo mortali Deo patri coelesti cruentum sacrificium pro peccatis mundi obtulit denuo totius ecclesiae nomine modo incruento spirituali representatione commemoratione sacratissimae suae passionis offertur quod ipsum fit quando ecclesia Christum eius verum corpus verumque sanguinem Deo Patri cum gratiarum actione oratione attentâ pro suis totius mundi peccatis proponit seu repraesentat quanquam enim sacrificium illud in eâ formâ quâ in cruce offerebatur semel tantum oblatum sit semel tantum sanguis effusus vt ita repeti iterumque offerri non possit nihilominus tamen consistit manet tale sacrificium coram Deo perpetuò in suâ virtute efficaciâ acceptum ita vt sacrificium illud in cruce oblatum non minus hodierno die in conspectu patris sit efficax vigens quam eo die quo de saucio latere sanguis exiuit aqua Quapropter cum vulnerati corporis nostri plagae pretio redemptionis semper opus habeant ecclesia proponit Deo Patri pretium illud in verâ fide devotione iterum sed figuratiuè spiritualitèr ad consequendam remissionem peccatorum non quod huic operi suo quo videlicet commem or at repraesentat sacrificium illius meritum ascribat remissionis peceatorum vt quam solus Christus cruentâ suâ oblatione in cruce nobis promeruit verum tali suo commemoratiuo mystico fidei sacrificio in quo repraesentat ecclesia sistit in conspectum patris verum corpus sanguinem eius vnigeniti applicat sibi accommodat magnum illud donatiuum remissionis peccatorum quod Christus impetravit cum accipiat remissionem peccatorum per nomen eius qui credit in eum Act. 10. That is So soone as the consecration is done in the Masse Christ the Lord who sometime offered himselfe in his mortall body a bloudy sacrifice to God his heauenly father for the sins of the whole world is now offered again after an vnbloudy manner by representation and commemoration of his most sacred passion which thing is then done when the Church doth propose and represent Christ and his true body ' and bloud to God the Father with thanksgiuing and with earnest prayer for the remission of her sinnes and the sinnes of the whole world for although that sacrifice in such sort as it was offered on the Crosse was offered onely once and his bloud only once powred forth so that he can no more be so offered yet notwithstanding that sacrifice remaineth and abideth before God perpetually in its vertue and efficacie and is so acceptable vnto him that being but once offered on the Crosse it is no lesse effectuall and of force in the sight of God to day then it was that day when water and bloud streamed out of his wounded side Wherefore seeing the soares and hurts of our wounded bodies haue alwayes need of the price of redemption the Church proposeth to God in faith and devotion that price againe but figuratiuely and spiritually to obtaine remission of sin not as if shee did ascribe to this her worke whereby she commemorateth and representeth that his sacrifice the meriting of
rightly noteth that there is no merit properly so named to bee attributed to mortall miserable men and that though the ecclesiasticall writers vse the word merit and when they speake of holy mens workes call them merits yet they thinke them not to bee properly so but doe so name the good actions of holy men that proceed from faith and the working of the holy Ghost because Almighty God though they bee his gifts and joyned in them by whom they are wrought with defect imperfection yet is so pleased to accept of them out of his goodnesse that he not onely rewardeth the doers of them with ample great rewards in their owne persons but so as to doe good to others for their sakes So God sayd to Abraham if there were but fifty righteous in the city hee would spare the whole city for their sakes Neither onely doth hee good for their sakes whose workes hee thus rewardeth while they liue but euen after they à re dead also And therefore God promiseth that hee will protect Hierusalem for his owne sake and for Dauid his seruant which he must be vnderstood to doe not onely in respect of the promise made vnto him but with respect had to his vertue according to the which we read 1 Reg. 15. 3. that God left a little light in Hierusalem to Abiam the sonne of Roboam King of Iudah for Dauids sake who did that which was right in the sight of the Lord. This Dauid saith Chrysostome did not only please God while he was in the body but he is found to haue yeelded great comfort after his death to such as he left behinde him aliue The Prophet Esay commeth to Hezekiah and saith vnto him I will defend this city for mine own sake and for Dauid my seruants sake David is dead but his vertues that pleased God do still liue O strange thing O ineffable clemencie a man long since dead patronizeth him that liueth In this sense then it is that the Church desireth God to be gratious vnto her in graunting her petitions for the merit of those his holiest Ones that she remembreth no way derogating from the merites of Christ but putting a great difference betweene them and those of the Saints for Christs merite is the onely price of our redemption by which onely we are redeemed from sinne eternall death and being reconciled to God are adopted to bee sonnes and heires of eternall life but the merites of the Saints here mentioned are nothing but those imperfect good workes which they did while they liued here which God was pleased so to accept that hee promised not onely to reward them with great and ample rewards in their owne persons but to doe good for their sakes that did them to others also Bucer speaking of the publique prayers of the Church which wee call Collects in which the intercession and merites of Saints are commemorated hath these words Seeing in these prayers whatsoeuer is attributed to the intercession and merites of Saints all that is asked not of the Saints but of our mercifull God through Iesus Christ they that so pray doe thereby professe and testifie that they acknowledge that those things which they aske of God by the intercession and for the merites of the Saints are the free gifts of God c And a little after Wee willingly acknowledge and publiquely professe that GOD doth reward the workes of his Saints not onely in their owne persons but in those also that pertaine vnto them and for whom they intercede for hee hath promised to doe good to a thousand generations to them that loue him and study to keepe his Commaundements hence it was that hee would not heale those of the house of Abimelech till Abraham interceded and intreated for them and hence it was that God graunted and gaue the deliuerance and saluation of all the people to Moses when he intreated for the same These are the wordes of Bucer which not being contradicted by any of our profession it is evident that no part of Romish Religion disliked by vs can bee prooued out of this part of the Canon of the Masse Thus hauing cleared that great objection of Mr Brerelie touching the publique Liturgie vsed in the Church in the dayes of our Fathers and made it appeare that the vsing thereof is no proofe that the Church that then was was not a Protestant Church and hauing made it cleare and evident that both the Liturgie it selfe and the profession of such as vsed it shew plainely that the Church that then was neuer allowed any Romish errour howsoeuer some did in the midst of her it remaineth that I now proceed to shew in the particulars that the outward face of Religion at and before Luthers appearing was not as M ◠Brerelie telleth vs the now professed Romane Religion and that whatsoeuer wee haue done in the reformation of the Church was long before wished for and desired by the best men amongst the guides of the Church CHAP. 1. Of the Canon of the Scriptures THat the Church did not admit the Canon of Scripture which the Romanists now doe nor euer accounted those bookes Canonicall which we thinke to be Apocryphall it will easily appeare in that all the most famous Divines from the beginning of the Christian World euen till the time of Luther did reject those bookes as Apocryphall that wee doe The Church of the Iewes to whom as S. Paul saith the oracles of God were committed admitted but onely 22 Bookes as deliuered to them from God to be the Canon of their faith as Iosephus witnesseth Neither did the Christian Church euer admit any more Melito Bishop of Sardis being desired by Onesimus to send him a catalogue of the bookes of the old and new Testament writeth thus vnto him Hauing diligently sought out the bookes of the old Testament and put them in order I haue sent them vnto you the names whereof are these the 5 bookes of Moses Genesis Exodus Leuiticus Numbers Deuteronomie then Iesus the sonne of Naue Iudges Ruth the 4 bookes of Kings two bookes of Chronicles the Psalmes of Dauid the Prouerbes which is also called the Wisdome of Salomon Ecclesiastes the Canticles Iob the Prophets Esay Hieremie one booke of the twelue Prophets Daniel Ezechiel Esdras Some soe translate the words of Melito as if hee reckoned the wisdome of Salomon as a seperate booke and so meant the booke that is commonly called the Wisdome of Salomon and is by vs accounted to be apocryphall but Ruffinus translateth as wee doe and that wee haue rightly expressed the meaning of this worthy Bishoppe and that hee onely added this as a glorious title to the booke of Salomons Prouerbs which as Eusebius saith the auncients vsually called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reader will soone be satisfied if he peruse that which D. Raynolds hath touching this point in his prelections Eusebius she weth that Iosephus according to the auncient
and in the new there are eight Hugo cardinalis repeateth certaine verses expressing which bookes are Canonicall and which Apocryphall the verses are these Quinque libros Moisi Iosue Iudicum Samuelem Et Melachim tres praecipuos bis sexque Prophetas Hebraeus reliquis censet praecellere libris Quinque vocat legem reliquos vult esse Prophetas Post hagiographasunt Daniel Dauid Hester Esdras Iob Paralipomenon tres libri Solomonis Restant Apocrypha Iesus Sapientia Pastor Et Machabaeorum libri Iudith atque Tobias Hi quia sunt dubii sub canone non numerantur Sed quia vera canunt Ecclesia suscipit illos Here he numbreth the bookes Canonicall and Apocryphall as wee do And the same Hugo in prologū galeatum speaking of the bookes reiected by vs saith that these bookes are not receiued by the Church for proofe of doctrine but for information of manners And in another place he saith they are not counted amongst the Canonicall Cardinall Caietan sayth those bookes only are to be accounted Canonicall which Hierome so accounted and admitteth none of those that are now questioned this he wrote at Rome as himselfe telleth vs in the yeare 1532. From the Church of Rome which was the principall amongst these of the West let vs proceed to see what other Churches thought of this matter Thomas Aquinas proposing the question whether the soules of them that are departed doe know what things are done here it being obiected that the dead do often appeare vnto the liuing as Samuel appeared vnto Saul concerning Samuel he answereth that it may be sayd that he appeared by diuine reuelation according to that in Eccle siasticus 46. or else if the authority of that booke be not admitted because it is not in the Canon of the Hebrewes it may be sayd that that apparition was procured by the diuel Antoninus Archbishop of Florence affirmeth that the authority of the sixe bookes questioned is not sufficient to proue any thing that is in controuersie and that Thomas secunda secundae and Lyranus in his prologue before the booke of Tobias do say that those bookes are not ofsoe greate authority that any sufficient proofes may be drawne from them in matters of faith as from the other bookes And therefore pronounceth he thinketh they haue such authority as the writings of the Fathers approued by the Church And he mentioneth a certaine worke intitled Catholicon the authors name is not knowne but the same author as hee telleth vs pronounceth that none of these books were receiued for proofe of matters of faith but only for information of manners By this of Antoninus who was present at the councell of Florence it will easily appeare to be meerely supposititious that we find in the abridgment of that councell by Caranza that these bookes were pronounced to be canonicall for had they bin so neither would hee nor others haue reiected them after the holding of this councell neither would such a decree haue bin omitted by all others that put out the councells at large and abridged Radulphus Flaviacensis in his commentaries vpon Leuiticus speaking of bookes pertaining to the sacred history hath these words The books of Tobias Iudith and of the Macchabees though they be read for the edification of the Church yet haue no perfect authority Beda after the history of Ezra addeth thus farre the diuine scripture containeth the course of times what things afterwards wee found digested among the Iewes they are taken out of the booke of Macchabees Iosephus the writings of Africanus It appeareth by the Epistle of Hilarie B. of Arles that in Massilia in some other places of France there were that tooke exception to Augustine alleaging a place out of the booke of Wisdome cap. 4. Raptus est ne malitia mutaret intellectam eius and affirmed that this testimonie as not beeing canonicall should haue beene omitted Hugo de sancto victore hauing reckoned the 22 bookes of the old Testament sayth there are besides certaine other bookes as the Wisdome of Solomon the booke of Iesus the sonne of Sirach Iudith Tobias and the booke of Macchabees which are read but are not written in the canon these hee matcheth in authority with the writings of the Fathers Richardus de sancto victore deliuereth his opinion of the same bookes in the same sort and maketh them to be of no greater authority then the writings of the Fathers Petrus Cluniacensis abbas after an enumeration of all the bookes that are canonicall sayth there are yet besides these authenticall bookes 6 other books not to be rejected Iudith Tobias Wisdome Ecclesiasticus and the two bookes of Macchabees which though they attaine not to the high dignitie of the former yet they are receiued of the Church as containing profitable and necessarie doctrine Ockam to the same purpose saith that according to Hierome in his Prologue before the booke of Proverbes and Gregory in his Moralls the booke of Iudith Tobias and the Macchabees Ecclesiasticus and the booke of Wisdome are not to be receiued for confirmation of any matter of faith For Hierome saith as Gregory also doth that the Church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobias and the Macchabees but accounteth them not amongst the Canonicall Scriptures So also it readeth those 2 volumes of Ecclesiasticus and Wisdome for the edification of the people but not for confirmation of points of faith and Religion Richardus Radulphus Archbishop of Armach and Primate of Ireland saith it is defined in generall Councels that there are 22 authenticall bookes of the Olde Testament Thomas Waldensis Provinciall of the Carmelites heere in England an enemy to Wickliff whose workes were greatly approued by Pope Martin and the Cardinals at that time hath these wordes The length breadth and depth of the city are equall for as in breadth it can enlarge it selfe no farther then to the loue of GOD and our neighbour nor in heigth nor depth then to GOD the rewarder of all so in length which is the Catholique Faith it cannot growe beyond the 12 Articles contained in the Symbole and found scattered in some of the 22 bookes especially seeing the Holy Ghost sayth in the conclusion of all Canonicall Scripture Let him that will take of the water of life freely I professe vnto euery one that heareth the words of this prophesie if any man shall adde GOD shall adde to his plague Lyra writeth thus Now that I haue by Gods helpe written vpon the Canonicall bookes of holy Scripture beginning at Genesis and so going on to the end trusting to the helpe of the same GOD I intend to write vpon those other bookes that are not Canonicall such as are the book of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Iudith Tobias and the bookes of Macchabees and addeth that it is to bee considered that these bookes which are not Canonicall are receiued by the Church and read in the same for the
wordes When a Lay man saith the Lords prayer or any other devoutly his affection is lifted vp toGod reficitur affectus non intellectus sed quandò intelligit reficitur affectus intellectus and this the Apostle sheweth to be true in respect of the publique prayers because if the people vnderstand the prayer or blessing of the Priest melius reducitur in deum devotius respondet Amen And then proceeding to those words If thou blesse c. hath these words What shall hee doe that supplieth the place of the vnlearned Which words import as much as what doth it profite the simple people that vnderstand not as if he should say litle or nothing because they know not how to conforme themselues to him that is the minister of the Church by answering Amen and that for this cause in the Primitiue Church the blessings and all other things pertaining to the publique seruice of God were in the vulgar tongue but after that people were multiplyed and increased and they had now learned to conforme themselues to the Priest by standing when the Gospel is reade and by adoring the Eucharist the seruice was in Latine and that it sufficeth now that the Clearke doth answere for the whole people Here is confession that the people profiteth litle or nothing when the praiers and blessings are in a tongue they vnderstand not that therefore the Primitiue Church had the seruice in the vulgar that while it is in Latine they cannot themselues but another must answere Amen for them and that yet now they haue learned by standing or kneeling differently to conforme themselues to the Priest according to the different things he doth which a deafe man that neuer heard word may doe by obseruation of the eye it is well enough But Cardinall Caietan vpon the same place hath these words Out of this doctrine of the Apostle Paul it may be gathered that it were better more for the edification of the Church to haue the publique prayers that are reade in the hearing of the people pronounced in a tongue common to the cleargy and people and vnderstood of them both then in Latine And when hee was challenged by the Parisians for saying it were better to haue the prayers said in the Church in the vulgar rather then in the Latine tongue his answere was that they recited not his words fully for he had not said it were better but it were better for edification nor that the prayers should be said but that the publique prayers should be said in the vulgar tongue and this his assertion hee said was grounded vpon the authoritie of the Apostle Cardinall Contarenus proposing the question what is to bee thought of such prayers as ignorant men make without vnderstanding answereth that it is to be conceiued that they are of force in respect of the affection of the mind and intention they haue to pray vnto God though they know not what they desire or pray for but that they want the fruit which they should haue if they vnderstood those prayers that they vtter with their mouthes for then they would direct the intention of their mindes and their desires to God for the obtaining in particular of such things as with the mouth they pray for and they would bee more edified by the pious sense and vnderstanding of their prayers And he concludeth that they pray not in vaine but that they would pray better if they vnderstood the meaning of their prayers And to the same purpose Harding against Bishop Iuell saith it were better the people should say their prayers in their owne tongue that they might the better vnderstand them Innocentius the 3d seemeth to haue had due consideration hereof therfore he prescribeth that because in sundry parts there are mixed within the same city or diocesse people of different languages hauing in the vnity of the same faith different rites and manners the Bishops of such Cities or Diocesses shall prouide fit men to celebrate divine service according to the diversities of their rites and languages to minister the sacraments of the Church vnto them instructing them both by word and example Some restraine the words of Innocentius to the Greeke and Latin tongues only as if he had only allowed the hauing of the seruice in different tongues in those citties and places where Greeks and Latines met But I see not why these words should be thus restrained seeing there is no question but this Pope would allow that which Iohn the 8◠his predecessour others had don in permitting nay in cōmanding the seruice to be in the Slauonian tongue And besides how he could say that the Greeks in some parts of the world agreed with the Latines in the faith whom he so bitterly reproueth for very maine differences in religion and who as Thomas à Iesu testifieth most stiffely hold their owne religion though they liue vnder Princes of the Roman profession I know not Wherefore to grow to a conclusion it appeareth that anciently all Churches that euer most of the Christian Churches had their seruice in a tongue vulgarly vndestood that if any had not it was either because they knew not how to write any thing in their owne tongue or because that which was their naturall tongue ceased to be so after they first had the seruice in it that many had soe in the West Church when Luther first shewed his dislike of Romish errors abuses that there neuer wanted worthy diuines Bs Praelates of great esteem who vrged the vnfitnesse of hauing it in a tongue not vndestood the necessity of the vulgar that all in whom there was any sparke of grace sought to haue it vnderstood And therefore as I noted before out of Iohn Billet sundry Churches though they had their seruice in Latine yet caused the same things that they read in Latine to be expounded in the vulgar others as the Bs in the third councel of Tours that such things should be read to the people in the vulgar as might informe instruct them in all points of Christian faith religion their words are these We all with vnanimous cōsent haue thought fit to ordain that euery B. shall prouide and haue homilies containing necessary admonitions that so they that are vnder him may be taught our meaning is that these homilies shall containe instructions touching the catholike faith according to their capacities concerning the euerlasting rewards of the good eternall damnation of the wicked the resurrection last iudgment such works course of life whereby men may attain or whereby they are sure to be excluded from eternall life And we ordaine that euery B. take care to translate the same homilies plainely and perspicuously into the vulgar Roman or German tongue that all may the more easily vnderstand the things that are vttered vnto them Among other articles proposed in the councell of Trent by the Embassadors of Ferdinand
is punished in the other which remaineth when either he is kept from inioying the things he orderly desireth or left free to desire such things as orderly are not to be desired If man haue lost all desire of that which is just as just as here he saith he hath then surely he sinneth in all his actions and is depriued of all morall rectitude for what morall rectitude is in him that loueth nothing because it is just farther then it may be commodious and in that respect pleasing The schoolmen are wont to vrge that a man may naturally loue God aboue all for seeing he naturally loueth that which appeareth vnto him to bee good why should he not loue God aboue all who is the chief good To this Luthers answer is this that there is a twofold loue for there is amor amicitiae amor concupiscentiae a loue whereby a man willeth the good of him that he loueth a loue whereby he desireth to make vse of the good of that hee loueth and to make it serue his turne In the first sort a man loueth his friend by the latter his horse now saith Luther it is true that euery sinfull man loueth God with the latter kind of loue desiring to make vse of God to serue his owne turne but it is not possible for a naturall man to loue God as a man loueth his friend that is to desire that God may rule raigne be glorified as God to rejoyce when his will is done though it be contrary to that we desire to bee grieued when he is offended And this surely is confirmed by Bernard for he saith that there are 4 degrees of loue For 1 a man loueth nothing but himself 2◠Heloueth other things amōgst other things God for himself finding that he cannot be without him Thirdly He loueth God for God Fourthly he loueth him selfe for God The two former are naturall and as I thinke finfull the two latter I am well assured in the iudgement of Saint Bernard proceede from grace and not from nature for hee sayth That is first that is naturall and then that which is spirituall and that scarce any of the elect of God goe beyond the first of these two latter degrees in this life So that according to that which before I alleadged out of Gregorius Ariminensis euery one that willeth any thing either willeth God or some other thing that is not God if God not for God but for some other thing expected to bee had from him or by him this is vti fruendis to make vse of that for the hauing of some thing as more loued that should be enjoyed as the best and most loued of all other things and this is most perverse as Saint Augustine telleth vs. If wee loue any thing else besides God and not for God it is likewise an iniquitie So that seeing naturally it is impossible to loue for God it is impossible to loue any thing rightly and consequently all the actions of naturall vnregenerate men are sinne And that they are so indeede it is proved by such authorities as may not be excepted against Cyprian de bono patientiae in principio sayth the true vertue of patience cannot be in Infidells now there is the same reason of one vertue and of all his words are these Hanc se sectari Philosophi quoque profitentur sed tam illis patientia est falsa quam falsa sapientia vnde enim vel sapiens esse vel patiens posset qui nec sapientiam nec patientiam Dei novit quando ipse de ijs qui sibi sapere in mundo videntur moneat dicat perdam sapientiam sapientum prudentiam prudentum reprobabo Augustine sayth Thou wilt say if a Gentile shall cloath the naked is it sinne because it is not of faith truely in that it is not of faith it is sinne not because the action of cloathing the naked in it selfe is sinne but to glory in such a worke and not in the Lord none but an impious man will deny to bee sinne If a Gentile that liueth not by fayth shall cloath the naked deliver him that is in daunger binde vp the wounds of him that is wounded bestow his goods to honest friendly purposes and shall not suffer himselfe to bee brought by any torments to beare false witnesse I aske of thee whether hee doe these good workes well or ill for if hee doe these things ill that are good thou canst not deny but that hee sinneth that doth any thing ill if thou say hee doth these good things and doth them well then an euill tree bringeth forth good fruite which he that is truth it selfe saith cannot bee If thou shalt say that a man that is an Infidell is a good tree then hee pleaseth God for that which is good cannot but please God who is good But Iulian the Pelagian answereth as the Papists doe at this day I acknowledge saith hee that they are steriliter boni that is their good is barren and bringeth forth no fruite who not doing the good things they do for God receiue not from him the reward of eternall life The answere of Saint Augustine is out of the 6 of Mathew If thine eye bee evill thy whole body shall bee full of darkenesse c Know that this eye is the intention with which every one doth that hee doth and learne by this that hee that doth not his good workes out of a good intention of a good faith that is of that faith that worketh by loue all the whole body that consisteth of such workes as members is full of darkenes that is the blacknes of sinnes Or truely because thou grantest that such workes of infidels as seeme to thee to bee good bring them not to eternall saluation and the kingdome of heaven know thou that we say that that good will that good worke by which onely a man may bee brought to the everlasting gift and kingdome of God can bee given to none without that grace that is given by him that is the only mediatour betweene God and man All other things that seeme to bee commendable amongst men let them seem to thee to bee true vertues let them seeme to thee to bee good workes and done without all sinne For my part this I know that the will is not good that doth them for an vnbeleeuing will and vngodly is not good Let these wills be according to thy iudgement good trees it sufficeth that with God or in Gods judgement they are barren and so not good Let them be fruitfull amongst men amongst whom also they are good vpon thy credit authority thy commendation thy planting if thou wilt haue it so so that I obtaine this whether thou wilt or not that the loue of this world whereby euery one is a friend of this world is not of God and that the loue that maketh a man injoy the creatures whatsoever they bee without
the loue of the creator as the chiefest and vtter most good is not of God Now the loue of God whereby wee come to God is not but from God the Father by Iesus together with the holy Ghost By this loue of the creator each one vseth the creatures rightly and without this loue of the creator no man vseth the creatures well And againe Noveris non officiis sed finibus à vitiis discernendas esse virtutes Officium est autem quod faciendum est finis vero propter quod faciendum est Cum itaque facit homo aliquid vbi peccare non videtur si non propter hoc facit propter quod facere debet peccare convincitur Quae tu non attendens fines ab officiis separasti virtutes veras officia sine finibus appellandas esse dixisti Ex quo te tanta absurditas sequitur vt veram cogaris appellare iustitiam etiam cuius dominam repereris avaritiam Siquidem manus abstinere ab alieno si officium cogites potest videri esse iustitiae Sed cum quaeritur quare fiat respondetur ne plus pecuniae litibus pereat quomodo iam hoc factum verae poterit esse iusticiae cum serviat avaritiae And againe Absit vt virtutes verae cuiquam serviant nisi illi vel propter illum cui dicimus Psal. 79. Deus virtutum converte nos Proinde virtutes quae carnalibus delectationibus vel quibuscunque commodis emolumentis temporalibus serviunt verae prorsus esse non possunt Quae autem nulli rei servire volunt nec ipsae verae sunt Verae quippe virtutes Deo serviunt in hominibus á quo donantur hominibus Quicquid autem boni fit ab homine non propter hoc fit propter quod fieri debere vera sapientia praecipit etsi officio videatur bonum ipso non recto fine peccatum est ideo Virtutes non relatae ad Deum vitia potius sunt quam virtutes Nam licet à quibusdam tunc verae honestae putentur esse virtutes cum ad seipsas referuntur nec propter aliud expetuntur etiam tunc inflatae ac superbae sunt ideo non virtutes virtutes sed vitia iudicandae sunt Bona opera extra fidem simillima sunt celerrimo cursui extraviam And againe Quamlibet videatur animus corpori ratio vitiis laudabiliter imperare si tamen Deo animus ratio ipsa non seruit sicut sibi serviendum esse ipse Deus praecepit nullo modo corpori vitiisque rectè imperat Nam qualis corporis atque vitiorum potest esse mens domina veri Dei nescia nec eius imperio subiugata sed vitiosissimis daemonibus corrumpentibus prostituta Proinde virtutes quas sibi habere videtur per quas imperat corpori vitiis ad quodlibet adipiscendum vel tenendum nisi ad Deum retulerit etiam ipsae vitia sunt potius quam virtutes Prosper agrees with Saint Austine his words are these sine cultu veri Dei etiam quod virtus videtur esse peccatum est nec placere ullus Deo sine Deo potest Qui verò Deo non placet cui nisi sibi Diabolo placet That is without the worship of the true God euen that which seemeth to be vertue is sinne neither can any man please God without God And whom doth hee please that pleaseth not God but himselfe and the diuell And the same Prosper in his 3d booke de vitâ contemplativâ Apostolus non dixit omne quod non est ex fide nihil est sed dicendo Omne quod non est ex fide peccatum est declaravit quod omnia gesta sinon fuerint ex fide non sint aliqua bona credenda sed vitia quae non invant suos operarios sed condemnant inflatosque praecipitant atque à finibus aeternae salutis eliminant That is the Apostle did not say whatsoeuer is not of faith is nothing but by saying it is sinne he declareth that whatsoeuer things haue not beene done out of faith are not to be thought good but faults and vices which doe not helpe the workers of them but condemne them and cast them headlong downe being puffed vp and banish them out of the confines of eternall saluation And the same Prosper in another place Omnis infidelium vita peccatum est nihil bonum sine summo bono ubi enim deest agnitio aeternae incommutabilis veritatis falsa virtus est etiam in optimis moribus That is the whole life of Infidels is sinne and there is nothing good without the chiefe good and wheresoeuer the knowledge of the eternall and incommutable veritie is wanting let a mans manners be neuer so good it is no true vertue hee seemeth to haue There is nothing good without faith saith Chrysostome and that I may vse a similitude and make a comparison they that flourish in good workes and know not God seeme to me to bee like the reliques of the dead wrapped vp fairely Basil in his second booke de baptismate proposing the question whether it be possible or whether it be acceptable to God that he that serueth sin should doe the workes of righteousnesse bringeth the explication of this question out of the Olde Testament where GOD saith the sinner that offereth to me a calfe is as he that killeth a dogge and in the New Testament the Lord saith he that doth sinne is the seruant of sinne and no man can serue two masters wherefore we are to bee exhorted to make the tree good and her fruit good and first to purge and make cleane that which is in the inside of the cuppe and of the platter and then all that is without will bee cleane Gregory in his morals writing vpon those words of Iob If my mouth haue kissed my hand hath these words Sancti viri sciunt se non virtute propriâ—… sed praeveniente supernâ gratiâ ad meliora vota vel opera commutatos quicquid sibi mali inesse cognoscunt de mortali propagine sentiunt meritum quicquid verò boni in se inspiciunt immortalis gratiae cognoscunt donum eique de accepto munere debitores fiunt qui praeveniendo dedit eis bonum velle quod voluerunt subsequendo concessit bonum posse quod volunt Let them that are otherwise minded tell vs whether the morall actions of Infidels bee good or euill if good then they are from grace whereof they are not partakers if euill then haue they the thing proued about which we contend Beda writing vpon the 14th to the Romanes vpon those words Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne saith as Prosper that all the whole life of Infidels is sinne that nothing is good without the chiefe good that where the knowledge of the eternall and incommutable veritie is not if the manners and conversation of them that
eiusdem loco meriti quod ego miser habere deberem non habeo Item Domine pono eandem passionem mortem Domini mei Iesu Christi inter me et iram tuam in manus tuas Domine cōmendo spiritum meum There is extant a certaine forme of confession attributed to S Bernard in which he speaketh to God in this sort Recordare Domine Iesu quia tuum non est perdere quicquam eorum quae Pater tuus dedit tibi quin tibi proprium est misereri semper parcere neminem perdere sed salvare nam Pater tuus misit te in mundum non vt iudices mundum sed vt vitam habeamus per te vt sis propitiatio nostra advocatus noster non contra nos Quod enim debuimus tu soluisti quod peccavimus tu luisti quod negleximus tu supplesti proficiat ergo nunc Domine et in extremis meis plenaria imò superflua satisfactio amarissima mors tua pretium inaestimabile fusi sanguinis tui cōmemoratio satisfactionis tuae c Ante annos 200 quidam Dominicanus Coloniae quomodo forēt aegroti consolandi docuit his verbis Morti jam vicinus prorsus nihil suis bonis operibus confidere debet nec propter mala diffidere sed omnem spem in merita Christi ejus immensam misericordiam collocare haec est fides Catholica Christiana quae neminem fallere potest So that hetherto wee finde the Church wherin our Fathers liued and died was a Protestant Church and that they were taught to die in the same faith that wee now are But some man will say howsoeuer these disclaimed all merit and confidence in workes as liuing in bad times wherein iniquity abounded and charity was waxen cold yet others of a more excellent quality pleaded their owne righteousnesse and innocency desiring to be iudged according to the same So Dauid Ps. 26. and elsewhere And so when the Lord had said to Ezechias set thy house in order for thou must die hee turned his face to the wall and prayed vnto the Lord said I beseech thee Lord remember how I haue walked before thee in truth with a perfect hart haue done that which is good in thy sight And Paul 2. Tim. 4. with more confidence when his dissolution was at hand he was ready to be offered vp I haue fought a good fight I haue finished my course I haue kept the faith henceforth there is layd vp for mee a crown of righteousnes which the Lord the righteous iudge shall giue me in that day Of Hilarion Hierom reporteth that when he was ready to die he vsed these words Egredere quid times egredere anima mea quid dubitas sexaginta annis seruiuisti Christo mortē times in haec verba spiritum exhalauit But the answer herevnto is easy for the diuines doe note that there is justitia causae facti personae a righteousnesse of some particular cause of some particular fact of the person Causae so Dauid oftentimes desired of God to be judged in the differences between him his aduersaries that wronged him according to his righteousnes innocency in those quarrels Of fact so it is sayd that Phinees stood vp wrought vengance it was imputed to him for righteousnesse that is he was iudged to haue done a righteous act in so doing The righteousnes of the person is twofold for there is a righteousnes that is sincere true pure there is a righteousnes that is true sincere but not pure None of the Ss euer pleaded the former kind of righteousnes nor desired to be iudged according to the same For Dauid in that respect declineth iudgment saying Enter not into iudgment with thy seruant for no flesh is righteous in thy sight again If thou Lord shouldest be extreame to marke what is done amisse who should be able to abide it But in the latter sort they do plead the truth simplicity of their harts the sincerity of the righteousnes that is found in them And this for 2 reasons first in that hereby they are assured that they pertain to God that hath thus begun to do good vnto them so confirme themselues in the hope expectation of that they desire by the cōsideration of the good he hath already done vnto them And besides also for that they know this is the condition wherewith all the promises of God made vnto them for their good are limitted and therefore if they found not this they could expect nothing of God finding this they need not to doubt to obtaine any thing that is necessary for thē And in this sort do Cardinall Contarenus Albertus Pighius men of no small esteeme in the Roman Church cleere these obiections So that it remaineth firme which I haue deliuered that the righteousnes which is inherent in the iust is impure vnperfect that it is not safe to relie vpon it But because this is a matter of great consequence I will demonstrate that the same was taught before at after Luthers time by men of best place and quality in the Church wherein our fathers liued Bernard distinguisheth 4 kinds of righteousnesse Our righteousnes he sayth is Recta sed non pura of which our Fathers sayd no lesse truly then humbly All our righteousnesse is as the poluted ragges of a menstruous woman For how can our righteousnesse be pure wherein it cannot be but there should be sinne The righteousnesse of the first man was both right and pure but because it was not firme and constant it lost purity and retained not so much as the rectitude it had In the Angells there is righteousnesse right pure and firme of an high and excellent nature but much inferiour to that of God Non enim innata est iis sed à Deo collata ut natura ipsa quod ex se est non modo iustitiae sed etiam iniustitiae capax inveniatur Numquid non ista est pravitas quaedam quam in angelis suis vera illa iustitia legitur invenisse That is The righteousnesse that is found in the Angels is not inborne but giuen to them bestowed on them so that their nature as of it selfe is capable not only of righteousnesse but of vnrighteousnesse also And is not this a kind of pravity and iniquity which that true and perfect justice is said to haue found in his Angels For he that was not ignorant of the justice of God saith no one liuing shall be ivstified in thy sight Hee saith not no man but no one liuing happily that thou maist know that he excepteth not the Angelicall spirits For they liue and so much more truely then men as they are nearer to him in whom is the fountaine of life Yet these are just sed ex eo non coram eo munere eius non in eius
into grieuous sin such as is in some sort regnant as Dauid did hee looseth not the right title hee formerly had but the actuall claime to that whereto he hath title is suspended So that he falleth not totally from justification but so only as for the present to haue no actuall claime to any thing by vertue o◅ it The remission of his originall sin the right to heauen obtained in baptisme the force and vertue of repentance of former sins and the right to the rewards of actions of vertue formerly done remaine still neither needeth he newly to seeke remission of sins formerly remitted but of this only the remission of the other will be reuiued again he may make claime to all those things he had formerly right vnto by vertue of the former right This is cleerely deliuered by Alexander of Ales p. 4. q. 12. memb 4. art 6. Scotus Durandus the rest of the Schoole-men So that the elect chosē of God once justified neuer falling totally from justification are neuer to be newly justified againe but the dayly lighter sins they run into stand with the right they haue to the fauours of God eternall happines the actuall claime to the same by that right The more grieuous depriue thē of the claime only not of the right when they are justified acquitted from these by particular repentance they are restored to their former claime only hauing neuer lost their right so that they cannot properly be sayd to be newly justified but only to be justified from such particular sins as they newly run into Hauing spoken of justification and the nature of it as it is considered in it selfe it remaineth that wee come to speake of the things required in men for the disposing and fitting of them that they may be capable of this grace There were amongst the Schoole-men as Stapleton telleth vs and after them in the beginning of these controuersies in religion who extenuating the corruption of nature taught vnaduisedly that men without and before the motions of grace may doe certaine morall good workes in such sort as thereby to fitte themselues for the receipt of the grace of justification and to merit it ex congruo Who to expresse this their false conceipt were wont to say facienti quod in se est Deum non denegare gratiam that is that God will not faile to giue grace to such as doe the vttermost that lyeth in them But the same Stapleton telleth vs that the more sound and judicious euer taught that there is no power nor will in man to dispose and fit himselfe for the receipt of this grace vnlesse hee bee moued by preventing grace stirring inciting and inclining him to turne to God and that the merite of congruence hath beene long since hissed out of all Schooles Touching these preparations wrought in men by preventing grace First it is agreed betweene those of the Church of Rome and those of the reformed Religion that faith to beleeue in generall the truth of things revealed and contained in Scripture is necessarie in the first place and before all other things Secondly that in particular there must be a viewing of the things there found that the consideration of mans originall state there described the fall corruption of nature and manifold sinfull euils into which each man is plunged together with the apprehension of Gods displeasure against the same is necessarily required Thirdly a feare sorrow growing out of the discerning of this vnhappy condition wherein we are Fourthly an enquirie by what meanes wee may escape out of these euils Fiftly faith to beleeue that God most inclinable to releeue vs rather then man should vtterly perish sent his owne Sonne into the world to suffer the punishment of sin to satisfie his justice to bring grace dissolue the workes of the diuell that so all that in sense of former euils flye to him for mercy and deliuerance may escape be saued Sixtly hauing found so happy meanes of escape a flying vnto God in earnest desire to bee receiued to mercy for Christs sake to be freed from the guilt of sinne to bee reconciled to God and to haue grace to decline euill and doe good in the time to come All these things in the judgement of the Diuines of both sides are necessarily required in them that are to be justified The most reverend Canons of the Metropoliticall Church of Colen in the booke called Antididagma Coloniense make the things required in them on whom the benefite of justification is bestowed to be of two sorts For there are some that onely dispose prepare vs other by which we receiue the same Of the former sort is the generall perswasion of faith touching the trueth of things in Scripture the particular consideration of things concerning the knowledge of God and our selues sorrow feare dislike of our present estate desire to be deliuered out of it to be reconciled to God to haue grace to decline euill and doe good Of the latter sort is the perswasion of faith whereby we assure our selues without doubting that God will not impute our sins vnto vs that thus penitently turne vnto him but that the course of his mercies now and euer shall be turned towards vs for his Sonne Christs sake This is that speciall faith they of the reformed Religion speake of and the Romanists seeme so much to dislike whereas yet the best and most judicious amongst them euer did and still doe admit the same Andraeas Vega l. 9. c. 7. saith that there hath beene a great controversie about this matter not onely betweene Catholiques and such as they esteeme heretickes but euen amongst the most learned Catholiques of this age at Rome at Trent at Ratisbone and in sundry other places many affirming that a man without speciall revelation may vndoubtedly beleeue and certainely assure himselfe that he is in grace and hath obtayned remission of all his sinnes This perswasion rising as a conclusion out of two propositions the one of faith the other euident vnto vs in our owne experience is a perswasion of faith because whensoeuer a conclusion is consequent vpon two propositions the one of faith the other euident in the light of reason and experience it is to bee beleeued by faith or as Iohn Bacon certitudine consequente fidem This opinion as Vega telleth vs Claudius Belliiocensis followed in his Commentaries vpon Timothy And the most reverend Canons of the Metropoliticall Church of Colen together with the Authors of the Enchiridion of Christian Religion published in the Provinciall Councell of Colen vnder Hermannus so much esteemed as Cassander telleth vs in Italy France The Authors of the booke offered by Charles the 5 to the Diuines of both sides And as some say Hieron Angestus But for the better clearing of this point First I will produce the testimonies of such as liued before Luthers time Secondly I will
ipsum tibi peccata donantur Hoc est testimoniuÌ„ quod perhibet in corde nostro spiritus sanctus dicens Dimissa sunt tibi peccata tua Sic enim arbitratur Apostolus gratis iustificari hominem per fideÌ„ Gulielmus Altisiodorensis in sent lib. 3. tract 6. Quidam dicunt quod quidam sciunt se non habere charitatem scilicet qui sunt in actu vel proposito peccandi Alij dubitant se habere charitatem cum habent aequè fortes rationes ad vtramque partem contradictionis Alij putant se habere charitatem Alij sciunt se habere charitatem scilicet qui gustauerunt dulcedinem Dei in quibus ferè extinctus est fomes vt Maria Magdalena et Aegyptiaca post multos fletus And a litle after distinguishing 2 kinds of knowledge properly so named he saith by the one we know we are in grace and not by the other The booke called regimen animarum agreeth with Altisiodorensis making 5 sorts some that knowe they haue not some that doubt some that thinke they haue quidam qui experiuntur se habere charitatem vt illi qui gustant diuinam dulcedinem in quibus fomes ferè extinctus est qui semper vel bona faciunt vel affectant quidam certi sunt se habere charitatem vt sunt illi quibus Deus reuelauit secreta coelestia sic fuit Paulus Pantheologia likewise saith Quidam dicunt quod aliqui sciunt se esse in gratia experimentaliter sicut illi qui sentiunt dulcedinem divinae bonitatis in oratione gustant quam suav is est Dominus Alios scire se esse in gratia Dei supernaturaliter sicut sunt illi qui ita dotati sunt à Deo perfecti quod jam non habent rebellionem fomitis sed habent plenam pacem spiritus sentiunt se elevatos in contemplatione divina sicut fuerunt Paulus Maria Magdalena Alexander of Ales 3. part 9. 61. memb 7. art 3. First reckoneth the opinion of 5 sorts of men formerly mentioned to wit of men knowing they are not in grace of men doubting of men thinking they are of men experimentally knowing it as doe they qui sentiunt dulcedinem divinae bonitatis in oratione gustant quam suavis est Dominus And lastly of men who haue knowledge that they are in grace qui ita sunt dicati Deo perfecti quod iam non habent rebellionem fomitis sed habent plenam pacem spiritus sentiunt concupiscentias carnis in se consopitas sentiunt se omninò elevatos in divinam contemplationem sicut fuit Beata Magdalena Paulus qui ait ad Rom 8. Quis separabit c. And then he distinguisheth contemplatiue and affectiue knowledge that some make a knowledge by science and a knowledge by experiment the one an infallible the other a fallible medium and thinketh that wee may knowe by certaine experiments that wee are in grace which experiments are charitas apud vim rationalem pax apud irascibilem laetitia apud concupiscibilem That a man may haue certaine knowledge that hee is in grace he proveth out of Revel 〈◊〉 To him that overcommeth I will giue the hidden Manna c. which no man knoeth but hee that reeciueth it therefore hee that receiueth it doth know it but that hidden Manna c is not vnderstood onely of the injoying of diuiine sweetnes in glory in heauen but by grace in this world but he that receiueth it knoweth it therefore he that receiueth the diuine sweetnes by grace knoweth it therefore hee knoweth hee hath grace by it as by a certaine experiment Besides the taste that is well affected cannot but discerne the sweetnes that is put vnto it therefore if the soule bee rightly affected it cannot but discerne the diuine sweetnes put to it but the discerning of diuine sweetnes is by grace therefore a soule rightly affected cannot but know that it hath grace therefore grace is experimentally knowen as by the sense of diuine sweetnes 2. Cor. vlt. Doe yee not know your selues that Christ Iesus is in you except you bee reprobates This the Apostle speaketh to the Corinthians therefore there is some man who if he bee not a reprobate knoweth that Christ is in him and if hee know this he kuoweth hee hath grace because Christ is not in vs but by grace whence it followeth that hee knoweth experimentally that hee hath grace Iohn Bachon lib. 3. dist 30. q. 1. saith expressely that men may be certaine they are in grace by a certainety following faith or flowing out of faith In our age Cardinall Caietan Commentar in Ioan. 14. Dat Deus etiam hoc vt sciamus quae à Deo nobis donata sunt c. Cuilibet diligenti ipsum promittit non quod se manifestabit sed quod se insinuabit dictio enim graeca significat velut tacitè clam indicare quoniam Iesus cuilibet diligenti se indicat sei psum intus internâ illustratione inspiratione diversimodè prout electi experiuntur accipientes manna absconditum quod nemo novit nisi qui accepit And writing vpon those wordes 1. Io 2 In hoc scimus quontam cognoviâ—…us eum he sayth Intendit Iohannes ad litteram monstrare signum infallibile internae lucis divinae in nobis esse si mandata eius servauerimus Roffensis saith Sacramenta ideo potissimum sunt instituta vt per vsum illorum citra vllam dubitationem confidamus gratiam nos esse consecutos de sacr eucharist lib. 1. cap. 6. The Authours of the booke offered by Charles the fift to the Diuines appoynted for the conference at Ratisbon in the fift article plainely affirme Oportere vt verè paenitentes fide certissimâ statuant se propter mediatorem Christum Deo placere The same was agreed vnto by the Divines of both sides Cardinall Contarenus president of the meeting and conference approved it and as the same Vega sayth many Catholiques in the Councell at Trent before the publishing of the decree followed the same opinion as most probable and sought to confirme it by many arguments And hee reporteth that amongst others there was one learned man that professed hee held the denying of the certainety of grace to bee a worse errour then that imputed to Luther for whereas the Lutherans attribute too much to faith this opinion derogateth from fayth the sacraments the merits workes of vertue Yet in the end there was a decree passed for the vncertainety of grace but in such sort that who would held their former opinions still and made such constructions of the decree as they pleased as it appeareth by Ambrosius Catharinus in his apology against Dominicus à Soto wherein he defendeth an absolute certainety of grace and a certainety of fayth and yet will not be thought to be touched by the censure of the councell Martinus Eisingreinius a man of no small account hath a whole
performe 2. Because no profit coÌ„meth vnto God froÌ„ any thing we can do the good saluation of our soules he accounteth his gaine and out of his goodnesse so esteemeth of our good workes as if they were profitable unto him 3. Because though our workes were profitable vnto God and though we were able to do them of our selues yet wee could neuer repay vnto him so much good as wee haue already do dayly receiue from him but now it is so that he first bestoweth on us one gift which he may afterwards reward with another 4 Because in many things we offend all so haue neede of pardon so farre are wee from meriting any thing at Gods hands 5 Because no meritorious act is so great a good as eternall life so not equiualent vnto it and therefore so great a reward cannot in strictnesse of justice be due vnto it Actus secundum se consideratus sayth â— Scotus absque acceptatione diuinâ secundum strictam justitiam non fuisset dignus tali praemio ex intrinseca bonitate quam haberet ex suis principiis quod patet quia semper praemium est majus bonum merito justitia stricta non reddit melius pro minus bono ideo bene dicitur quod semper Deus praemiat vltra meritum condignum vniuersaliter quidem vltra dignitatem actus qui est meritum quia quod ille actus sit condignum merituÌ„ hoc est vltra naturam bonitateÌ„ actus intrinsecaÌ„ ex mera gratuita acceptatione diuina Et forte adhuc vltra illud ad quod de coÌ„muni lege esset actus acceptandus quandoque Deus praemiat ex mera liberalitate And againe Lib. 4. dist 49. q. 6. de tertio dubio De praemio quod est aeterna beatitudo dico quod loquendo de stricta justitia Deus nulli nostrum propter quaecunque merita est debitor perfectionis reddendae tam intensae quam est beatitudo propter immoderatum excessum illius perfectionis vltra illa merita sed esto quod ex liberalitate sua determinasset meritis conferre actum tam perfectum tanquam praemium tali quidem justitia qualis decet eum scilicet supererogantis in praemijs tamen non sequitur ex hoc necessario quòd per illam justitiam sit reddenda perfectio perennis tanquam praemium imo abundans fieret retributio in beatitudine vnius momenti 6. To merit is to make a thing due that was not due before whence it followeth that no man can merit eternall life For they that define merit do say that no man can merit soe great a good as eternall life ex condigno vnlesse he be first justified reconciled to God and made partaker of the diuine nature but whosoeuer is soe justified reconciled to God and made partaker of the diuine nature hath right to eternall life in that hee is justified reconciled and made partaker of the diuine nature Therefore seeing to merit is to make that due that was not due before noe man can merit eternall life And Bellarmine confesseth that many thinke eternall life cannot be merited but onely some degrees in the same and for this reason as it appeareth by the epistle of Cardinall Contarenus to Cardinall Farnesius the diuines of both sides in the conference at Ratisbon thought good to omitte and suppresse the name of merit 1 For that it might be thought a derogation to the goodnesse and bounty of God that giueth vs freely eternall life to say that wee meritte it And secondly for that it might be conceiued that it was not due before in respect of free gift and that our working could merit it though it were not due to vs by gift Let vs see therefore what the Church of God hath taught touching merit The Author of the answere to Bells challenge named by him the downefall of Popery article the fift chapt 3. pag. 220. protesteth that Bell doth greatly wronge the Romanists in saying it is a part of their faith and that it was defined in the councell of Trent that good workes done in Gods grace are coÌ„dignely meritorious of eternall life for the councell defined no such thing and they that hold it hold it not as a point of faith but as an opinion onely Whereupon Vega who was one of the duines of the councell of Trent writeth de fide operibâ—… quaest 4. that some noble Schoole diuines being moued with no light arguments and vsing a certaine sober and prudent moderation haue denied that there is any condigne merit of eternall happinesse and hee sayth quest 5. that Gregory Durand Marsil Walden Burgensis and Eckius doe deny condigne merit Sotus also another diuine of the sayd councell lib. 3. de naturâ gratiâ cap. 7. sayth that there is some difference amongst catholiques about condigne merit and chap 8. after he had proued condigne merit out of the councell and otherwaies yet concludeth not that it is a point of faith but onely calleth it conclusionem probatissimam a most approued conclusion And Bellarmine lib 5 de iustificatione cap 16 after hee had rehearsed two opinions of catholiques whereof the one seemeth to deny condigne merit the other admitteth it only in a large sense proposeth and defendeth the third opinion which defendeth condigne merit absolutely onely as verissimam communem sententiam theologorum most true and the common opinion of diuines This confession might suffice to proue that the Church neuer admitted of the doctrine of merit of condignity as any point of her faith in the daies of our Fathers seeing euen since these differences grewe that are now afoote betweene those of the reformation and the stiffe maintainers of all confusions formerly found in the state of the Church and religion there are many found amongst the enemies of reformation that reiect the merit of condignity Yet for the better satisfaction of the reader I will more fully and at large sette downe the opinions of them that opposed against the doctrine of meritte properly soe named before LVTHERS time Gregorius Ariminensis besides the reason formerly alleaged that no act of man though done in out of the habite of charity is so great a good as eternall life and equivalent to it consequently that so great a reward as eternall life cannot be due vnto it ex debito iustitiae hath sundry other reasons for proof of the same Intelligendum est saith he etiam ipsa hominis bona merita esse Dei munera quibus cum vita aeterna redditur quid aliud nisi gratia pro gratia redditur haec Augustinus Idem Antecedens probatur ratione Nam constat quod animae carenti charitate simul gloriâ Deus quantum ad neutram est illi debitor si dat charitatem gratis donat Nunc autem nullus diceret quod ex eo quod Deus donat aliquod munus alicui fiat ei alterius muneris debitor Ergo non ex
will not conceiue that they may haue something to say against vs are all easily cleared and answered by this explication of the same By that which hath beene sayd touching Christs being a Mediatour according to both natures wee may easily vnderstand how and according to what nature hee is Head of the Church In a naturall Head Bonauentura obserueth three things the first that it is Conforme caeteris membris the second that it is Principium membrorum and the third that it is Influxiuum sensus motus that is first that it hath conformitie of nature with the rest of the members of the body Secondly that it is the first chiefest and in a sort the beginning of all the members and thirdly that from it influence of sense and motion doth proceede and hee sheweth the same to bee found in Christ the mysticall head of the Church For first hee hath conformitie of nature with them that are members of his body the Church in that he is Man Whereupon S. Augustine sayth Vnius naturae sunt vitis palmites the vine and the branches are of the same nature And secondly as the naturall head is the chiefest and most principall of all the members so is Christ more excellent then they that are Christs Omnia membra faciunt vnum corpus sayth S. Augustine multum tamen interest inter caput caetera membra Etenim in caeteris membris non sentis nisi tactu tangendo sentis in caeteris membris in capite autem vides audis olfacis gustas tangis All the members make one body yet is there great difference between the head and the rest of the members for in the rest a man hath no sense but that of feeling in the rest he discerneth by feeling but in the Head heseeth and heareth and smelleth and tasteth and feeleth So in the members of Christs mysticall body which is the Church there are found diuersities of gifts operations administrations and to one is giuen the word of wisdoâ—… to another the word of knowledge to another faith to another the gift of healing to another the operation of great workes and to another prophesie but to the man Christ the spirit was giuen without stint or measure and in him was found the fulnesse of all grace The third property of a naturall Head which is the iufluence of Senâ—…e and Motion agreeth vnto Christ in respect of his humanity and diuinity both For hee giueth influence of diuine sense and motion two waies per modum praeparantis and per modum impertientis that is by preparing and making men fitte to receiue grace by imparting it to them that are fitted prepared He prepareth and fitteth men to the receipt of Grace by the acts of his humanity in which hee suffered death dying satisfied Gods wrath remoued all matter of dislike meritted the fauour and acceptation of God and soe made men fitte to receiue the grace of God and to enioy his fauour Hee imparteth and conferreth grace by the operation and working of his diuine nature it being the proper worke of God to inlighten the vnderstandings of men and to soften their hearts So that to conclude this point we may resolue that the grace in respect whereof Christ is Head of the Church is of two sorts the one created and habituall the other increate and of Vnion In respect of the one hee giueth grace effectiuè by way of efficiencie in respect of the other dispositiuè by way of disposition fitting vs that an impression of grace may be made in vs. CHAP. 17. Of the things which Christ suffered for vs to procure our reconciliation with God HAuing shewed how Christ as a Mediator interposed himselfe between God and vs when we were his enemies and how he is the Head of that blessed company of them that beleeuing in him looke for saluation let vs see consider first what he suffered for vs to reconcile vs vnto God secondly what he did for vs thirdly what the benefits are that hee bestoweth on vs and fourthly to whom he committed the dispensation of the rich treasures of his graces the word of reconciliation and the guiding and gouerning of the people which hee purchased as a peculiar inheritance to himselfe Touching the first to wit the sufferings of Christ he was by them to satisfie the justice of God his Father displeased with vs for sinne that so wee might bee reconciled vnto him Wherefore that wee may the better conceiue what was necessary to be done or suffered to satisfie the justice of God wee must consider sinne in the nature of a wrong and in the nature of sin In the nature of a wrong and so two things were required for the pacifying of Gods wrath for first he that hath done wrong must restore that he vnjustly tooke away from him whom he wronged and secondly hee must do something in recompence of the wrong he did as if hee tooke away another mans good name by false and lying reports hee must not only restore it to him againe by acknowledging that the things were vntrue which in defamation of him hee had spoken but he must also take all occasions to raise continue and increase a good opinion of him If sinne be considered in the nature of sinne it implyeth in it two things debitum poenae and debitum neglectae obedientiae that is a debt of punishment and a debt of obedience then neglected when it should haue been performed and therefore in the satisfaction that is to reconcile us to God displeased with vs for sinne as sinne two things must be implyed for first the punishment must be sustained that sinne deserued and secondly that obedience must be performed that should haue been yeelded whilest sinne was committed but was neglected For if only the punishment be sustained we may escape the condemnation of death but we cannot inherit eternall life vnlesse the righteousnesse and obedience which Gods law requireth be found in vs also Now the law of God requireth obedience not only in the present time and time to come but from the beginning of our life to the end of the same if wee desire to inherit the promised blessednesse And though the performance of that obedience that was neglected may seeme to be in the nature of merit rather then satisfaction yet in that it is not simply the meriting and procuring of fauour and acceptation but the recouering of lost friendship and the regaining of renewed loue it is rightly esteemed to pertaine vnto satisfaction Touching sinne considered in the nature of an offence wrong and the things required to pacifie Gods wrath in that respect there is no question but that the sinner himselfe that wronged God in sinning must by sorrow of heart disliking and detesting and by confession of mouth condemning former euils restore that glory to God hee tooke from him and seeke and take all occasions the weaknes of his meanes wil affoord
sunder These being the things required in a foundation simply and absolutely in respect of all times persons and things Christ onely is that foundation vpon which the spirituall building of the Church is raised because he onely is that beginning whence all spirituall good originally floweth and commeth vpon whom all the perswasion of the truth of things revealed staieth it selfe as being the Angell of the great Couenant and that eternall Word that was with God in the beginning vpon whom all our hope confidence and expectation of any good groundeth it selfe all the promises of God being in him yea and Amen And in this sense the Apostle Saint Paul saith Other Foundation canne no man lay then that which is layd which is Iesus Christ. And S. Augustine and other of the Fathers vnderstand by that rocke vpon which our Sauiour promised Peter to build his Church the rocke that Peter confessed which rocke was Christ vpon which foundation euen Peter himselfe was builded for that other Foundation can no man lay then that which is laid which is Iesus Christ. But in respect of some particular times persons and things and in some particular and speciall considerations there are other things that may rightly bee named foundations also in respect of the spirituall building of the Church So in respect of the frame fabrique of vertue and weldoing raised in this building the first vertue namely Faith vpon which all other vertues doe stay themselues and from which they take the first direction that any vertue can giue is rightly named a foundation In respect of the forme of Christian doctrine the first principles of heauenly knowledge are rightly named a foundation Not laying againe saith the Apostle the foundation of faith and of repentance from dead workes of the doctrine of Baptismes of the imposition of hands of the resurrection of the dead and ofeternall iudgement let vs be led forward vnto perfection These first principles of heauenly knowledge are named a foundation because they are the first things that are knowen before which nothing can be knowen and because vpon the knowledge of these things all other parts of heavenly knowledge doe depend In respect of the confession of the true faith concerning Christ the first cleare expresse and perfect forme of confession that euer was made concerning the same may rightly be named a foundation and in this sense Peters faith and confession is by diuerse of the Fathers named the Churches foundation But they vnderstand not by the faith and confession of Peter either the vertue and quality of faith abiding in his heart and mind or the outward act of confessing but the forme of confession made by him when he said Thou art the Christ the Sonne of the liuing God vpon which forme as being the rule of all right beleeuing the Church of God is builded In respect of the supernaturall knowledge of God in Christ the first immediate reuelation made to the Apostles from whom all other were to learne and by whose Ministerie accompanied with all things that might winne credit they were to be gained vnto God may very rightly and justly be named a foundation vpon which the faith of all after-commers is to stay it selfe and from which in all doubts they must seeke resolution And in this sort Bellarmine saith truely that the Apostles may be named Foundations of the Church according to that description in the Reuelation of Saint Iohn of the wall of the citie of God that had 12. foundation-stones vpon which it was raised and in them written the names of the Lambes twelue Apostles and that of S. Paul that wee are builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Christ Iesus being the Head corner-stone And this in three respects First because the Apostles were the first that founded Churches and conuerted vnbeleeuers to the faith Secondly because their doctrine which they receiued immediatly from God by most vndoubted revelation without mixture of errour or danger of being deceiued is the rule of the faith of all aftercommers and that sure immoueable and rockie foundation vpon which the perswasion of all succeeding generations and posterities may and doth most securely stay and ground it selfe Thirdly because they were Heads Guides and Pastors of the whole vniuersall Church hauing not onely supreme but prime and originall gouernment of the same out of whose most large and ample commission all Ecclesiasticall power and authoritie of after-commers was in an inferiour degree and sort to bee deriued and taken In all these respects all the Apostles were that strong rocke and those strong rockie foundation-stones on which the Church is builded though in a peculiar sense Christ alone bee the Rocke and in all these respects as S. Hierome saith Super omnes ex aequo Ecclesiae fortitudo solidatur that is the strength and firmenesse of the Church doth equally indifferently stay it selfe vpon them all and consequently no more vpon Peter then any of the rest Hitherto we finde nothing peculiar to Peter and not common to all the Apostles so that all the allegations of our Adversaries touching the feeding of the Sheep of Christ committed to Peter the power of the keyes of binding and loosing of remitting and retaining sinnes and the promise that on him as on a rockie foundation-stone elect and precious Christ would build his Church are to no purpose seeing they are forced to confesse that all these things were likewise either by direct words or by intendment bestowed on all the rest Wherefore let vs see how notwithstanding this their confession they can make good that there was a primacie of power in Peter and how they goe about to confirme the same CHAP. 23. Of the primacie of power imagined by our Adversaries to haue beene in Peter and their defence of the same FOr the avoyding of the cleare evidence of the truth of all that which hath beene said touching the equalitie of the Apostles of Christ amongst thēselues which our Adversaries cannot but see acknowledge they haue two shifts The first that the Apostles were equall towards the people but not amongst themselues The second that they were equall in the Apostolique power but that Peter had that amplitude of power which the rest had as Apostles by speciall fauour and onely in for their own persons as an ordinary Pastour and in such sort that he might leaue the same to his Successors These their silly shifts evasions we will examine that so the truth of that which hath bin said be more fully cleared that all men may see perceiue that nothing can be substātially objected against it nor no evasiō foūd to avoid it Touching the first thing that they say it is an Axiome as I thinke that may not bee doubted of that whatsoeuer things are equall in respect of a third thing are in the same sort fo farre for equall amongst themselues So
like For with money they themselues may not meddle Pope Iohn the two and twentieth following Nicholas and finding by experience that these Fryers did but abuse the world with their faire shewes of perfection condemned their hypocrisie and would be no patron of it as his predecessour was First therefore hee shewed that perfection consisteth essentially in charity wich Paule nameth the bond of perfection that the abandoning of propriety in things maketh nothing to perfectiō farther thē it excludeth the care that is wont to be found in men in getting keeping disposing of them weakning the act of diuine loue So that if there be as much carefulnesse in men after the disclaiming of propriety in things as before their seeming pouerty maketh nothing to Christian perfection Now he sayth that after the ordination of his predecessour these Fryers were no lesse carefull in getting and keeping things both by begging judiciall suing and the like meanes then any other mendicants that haue some things as their owne in common And that therefore howsoeuer they pleased themselues their obseruation was of no more perfection then theirs that had something of their owne in common Secondly he shewed that these mendicants hauing the vse of such things as are giuen to them and the Church of Rome the propriety in name and title but not in deede being onely to secure them in the vse thereof and to make no benefit that it is but a single right the Church hath and that they are in trueth and indeede no poorer then they that haue thinges of their owne seeing they may change the vse of one thing for another or at least cause the procurator designed by the Church of Rome to change things into money and buy for them such as they rather desire to haue making vse of all things that come to their hands at their pleasure as much as they that haue them of their owne Thirdly hee pronounced that to thinke that Christ and his Apostles had nothing of their owne in speciall or common and that they had no right to vse such things as they had to sell them giue them or with them to buy other is contrary to the Gospell condemneth Christ and his Apostles of iniustice and ouerthroweth the whole Scripture Yet Pope Nicholas defined that Christ his Apostles had nothing of their own either in speciall or common and that the hauing of a common bagge no way contrarieth this conceit seeing that was but by a kinde of dispensation in the person of the weake and imperfect and to shewe that he disliketh not them that come short of his perfection Thus we see Pope Nicolas erred in a matter of faith patronized hypocrites in their faignes shewes of counterfeit perfection was disliked and contraried by his owne successour Iohn the two and twentieth for the same by reason whereof there grew a maine difference betweene Pope Iohn and the Franciscan Fryers hee charging them with heresie and persecuting them from place to place and they likewise disclaiming him as a damnable heretique and no Pope The principall men on the Fryers part were Michael Caesenas and Occam the great Schoole-man who hath written much against Pope Iohn touching this argument Neither is Pope Iohn though in this point of Christian perfection hee were of a sounder better judgment then his predecessor any happier thē he For he is likewise charged with errour in matter of faith that not vniustly by the same Friers that he so much hated persecuted For as Occam testifieth in his Dialogues hee taught that the soules of the just shall not see God till the generall resurrection and that not faintly or doubtingly but in such passionate and violent manner as not to endure those that thought otherwise Gerson likewise in his sermon vpon Easter day before the French King and his Nobles sayth That the theefe on the crosse in that very hower that Christ spake vnto him was made happy and sawe God face to face according to the promise of Christ made vnto him This day shalt thou bee with mee in Paradice and that thereby the doctrine of Iohn the two and twentieth is proued false that was coudemned by the Diuines of Paris with the sound of trumpets before King Philip vncle to the King before whom then he spake the King rather believing the Diuines of Paris then the Court of Rome Bellarmine to deriue the hate of this matter from the Pope to others would willingly fasten this errour on Caluine and to that purpose alleageth two places out of him But neither of them proueth any such thing For in the first he speaketh not of any stay of the Saints departed without in outward courts out of heauen till the resurrection as the Cardinall strangely misunderstandeth him but sheweth by a most apt comparison that as in the time of MOSES Law the high Priest onely entred into the Holiest of all to make an attonement and all the people stayed without So none but Christ goeth into the presence of God to make peace and to worke the great worke of reconciliation and that all the sonnes of men are to expect without till hee bring them assurance of fauour and acceptation And in the second place where saith that the dead are joyned with vs that liue in the vnity of the same faith his meaning is not that faith opposite to sight is found in the Saints after death as it is in vs but that they haue a cleare view and present enjoying of those things which we beleeue Neither is there any thing found in Caluine that may any way excuse the errour of Pope Iohn Thus then I hope it doth appeare by that which hath beene saide that Popes are subiect to errour that they may become Heretiques and define for heresie and that therefore the second supposed priviledge of the Roman Bishop which is infallibility of judgment is found to haue no proofe at all Wherefore let vs proceede to the third which is his power to dispose of the kingdomes of the World and to ouer-rule the Princes and Potentates thereof CHAP. 44. Of the Popes vniust claime of temporall dominion ouer the whole world TOuching the right and interest of Popes in intermeddling with secular affaires and disposing of the Kingdomes of the world there are three opinions among the Romanists The first is that the Pope is soueraigne Lord of all the world or at least of all the Christian world and that the Princes of the Earth are but his Vicegerēts and Lieuetenants The second that the Pope is not soueraigne Lord of the world nor of any part thereof and that therefore hee may not at his pleasure intermeddle with the affaires of Princes but only in case of some defect foūd in them as when they faile to doe their duty or seeke to hinder the common good especially of the Church The third that hee may not at all
made partakers of the life of grace or being already partakers of it to be strengthned confirmed and continued in the same Thirdly that the elements of bread and wine presenting to our consideration the spirituall nourishing force that is in the body blood of Christ are not a bolished in their substances as the Patrons of Transubstantiation imagine but onely changed in vse in that they doe not onely signifie but exhibite and communicate vnto vs the very body and blood of Christ with all the gracious working of the same Fourthly that the meaning of Christs wordes when hee said this is my body this is my blood is This which outwardly and visibly I giue vnto you is in substance bread and wine and in mysterie and exhibitiue signification my body and blood but this which invisibly together with the visible element I giue vnto you is my very body that was crucified and my blood that was shed for the remission of your sinnes Fifthly that the body and blood of Christ which the Sacraments doe not signifie only but exhibite also and whereof the faithfull are to be partakers are truely present in the blessed Sacrament but the one part denieth that they are present secundum suum esse naturale that is in the naturall beeing or beeing of essence because the body of Christ being finite and hauing finite dimensions cannot be in many places at one time the other part on the contrary side answereth that the body of Christ is finite indeed but that because it is personally ioyned to the Deity it is wheresoeuer the Deity is yet doe not they of this part say it is euery where localitèr but repletiuè personalitèr that is not locally but repletiuely and personally which distinction Zanchius professeth hee doth not well vnderstand but saith if their meaning bee that the body of Christ is present secundum esse personale that is in that being of diuine subsistence communicated to it whereof I haue spoken before they say true and contradict not the other who speake of the naturall beeing of Christes body or beeing of essence and not of existence or subsistence which is infinite and Diuine And though Christs body be euery where in that personall being as well as in the Sacrament yet is it not any where else presented vnto vs in the nature of spirituall food So that there is no difference between these men touching the presence of Christes body in the Sacrament neither will there bee any found touching the eating of it for whereas in eating there is implied a chewing or mastication of that which is eaten a traiection from the mouth into the stomacke and a turning of the substance of the meate into the substance of the eater a bodily eating of Christs body there cannot bee seeing it is impassible and admitteth no such diuision as is made in chewing and besides if it should bee swallowed whole it cannot bee turned into the substance of our bodies but rather turneth vs into the substance of it selfe so that there is onely a spirituall eating of Christ consisting in that chewing that is by meditation vpon the seuerall and distinct thinges that are found in his natures powers actions and sufferings a traiection from the vnderstanding part to the heart and an incorporation of the beleeuer into him Yet it is not to be denyed but that Luther and some other did teach that euen the wicked doe in a sort eat the flesh of Christ not as if they did corporally touch his sacred body much lesse teare rent or diuide it with their teeth or turne it into their substance but for that they may bee said in a sort to eate the flesh of Christ though vnprofitably and to their condemnation in that they truely receiue the body of Christ eating that outward substance of bread with which it is truely present though not locally and to this purpose the same Zanchius reporteth that a man of no vulgar note amongst the followers of Luther did not feare to tell him that hee and his doe not say that we eate the body of Christ corporally in such sort as that our mouth and body should touch his sacred body which is not locally present but that the body of Christ is eaten bodily only in respect of the Sacramentall vnion attributing that to the body of Christ that properly agreeth to the bread with which the body is present These things are found in a discourse of Zanchius intitled Iudicium Hieronymi Zanchii de dissidio caenae dominicae written by him for the satisfaction of a Bishop of Italy at the request and entreaty of Paulus Vergerius and Sturmius By that which hath beene said we see there is no difference in iudgement between them who out of humane frailty are too much diuided in affection Luther vttered many thinges very passionately against Zuinglius and others conceauing that they made the Sacraments to be nothing but onely notes distinctiue seruing to put difference betweene Christians and such as are no Christians as a Monkes Cowle distinguisheth a Monke from him that is no Monke or empty signes without all presence of grace and exhibition of the thinges they signifie But if hee had fully vnderstood the meaning of them hee was so violently opposite vnto hee would not haue censured them so hardly as hee did If Master Higgons had euer read this Tract of Zanchius hee would not haue willed Mee to excogitate or scanne out any reconciliation betwixt Lutherans and Sacramentaries in the matter of the Sacrament The second part of the Chapter §. 1. WHerefore let vs come to the next part of this Chapter wherein hee vndertaketh to demonstrate that the thinges alledged by Mee to take away the offence and scandall of the seeming differences amongst Protestants are but false and empty pretenses The first thing that I alledge is that it is not to bee marvailed at that the Tigurins Gesnerus and others disliked the distempered passions of Luther or that some difference were amongst them seeing the like were in former times betweene Epiphanius and Chrysostome Hierome Ruffinus Augustine and others The second that the Papistes haue their differences also and those farre more materiall and vnreconcileable then any are amongst vs. The third that our differences grow not out of the nature and quality of our doctrine and that wee want not a certaine rule by the direction whereof all controuersies may be ended Against the first of these my allegations first hee opposeth a diuelish vntrueth affirming that Gesnerus and the Tigurins did not onely dislike the distempered passions of Luther but hate him with mortall hatred and accurse and execrate him as possessed of a legion of Diuells which neither Higgons into whom a lying spirit is entred nor any of those diuells hee is growne so familiar with shall euer proue So that there is no cause of trembling but at the fearefull iudgement of God against such as Master Higgons is that forsake the loue of
seeing there are alwaies some right-beleeuers but a right iudgment of men by their power of iurisdiction maintaining truth suppressing error may be wanting Nay that somtimes there was no such iudgmēt in the Church it is most euident For Vincentius Lyrinensis sayth the Arian heresie infected not some part onely but almost the whole Christian world soe that almost all the Bishoppes of the Latine Church were misled by force or fraud Yea Athanasius and Hierome report that Liberius Bishoppe of ROME was carryed away in that tempestuous whirlewinde and subscribed to heresie soe that there was noe sette Tribunall on earth in those dayes to the determinations whereof it was safe to stand §. 2. IN the next place the Treatiler chargeth Mee that whereas Luther defendeth that infants in Baptisme actually beleeue I endeauour to wrest his words to habituall faith which sence he sayth Luthers discourses will not admit and for proofe hereof referreth the reader to certaine places in Luther and to the positions of his followers but as Festus sayd vnto Paul thou hast appealed to Caesar to Caesar shalt thou goe so seeing this Treatiser referreth the Reader to Luthers discourses and the doctrine of his Disciples to these I will send him which will turne greatly to the Treatisers disaduantage For the reader cannot but finde by Luthers discourses and the doctrine of his Schollers that I haue rightly deliuered his opinion to bee that infants are filled with habituall fayth when they are regenerate and not that they haue any such acts of faith or knowledge of God as men of yeares haue Let vs therefore heare what Luther himselfe will say some men saith hee will obiect against that which I haue said touching the necessity of faith in such as are to receiue the Sacramērs with profit that infants haue no faith nor apprehension of Gods mercies that therefore either faith is not so necessarily required to the due receiuing of the sacramēt or that infants are Baptised in vaine Here I say that which all say that other mens faith euen the faith of such as present thē to Baptisme steedeth litle children For as the word of God is mightie when the sound therof is heard euen to the changing of the heart of a wicked man which is no lesse vnapt to heare the voyce of God to listen vnto it thē any litle babe so by the prayer of the Church which out of faith to which all thinges are possible presenteth it to baptisme the child is changed cleansed and renued by the infusion of faith or by faith which is infused and powred into it Thus doth Luther expresse his owne meaning touching this poynt Now let vs heare what his followers will say It was agreed vpon saith Chemnitius amongst the followers of Luther that when we say infants beleeue or haue faith wee must not imagine that they do vnderstand or feele the motions of faith But their errour is rejected who suppose that infants baptized please God and are saued without any operation or working of the holy spirit in them whereas Christ pronounceth that vnlesse a man bee borne a new of water and of the spirit hee cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen So that this is all that Luther and the rest meant that children cannot be made partakers of those benefits that God offereth to men in Baptisme nor inherit eternall life by vertue of the faith of the Church without some change wrought in them by the spirit fitting them to be joyned to God which change or alteration in them they call faith not meaning to attribute vnto them an actuall apprehension of Gods mercies for they constantly deny that they feele any such motions of faith but a kinde of habituall faith onely there being nothing in faith but such an act of beleeuing as they deny or the seede roote and habit whence actual motions in due time do flow With whom Calvine agreeth for whereas the Anabaptists obiect against him defending that infants are capable of regeneration that the Scripture mentioneth no regeneration but by the incorruptible seed of the word of God which infants cannot heare he answereth that God by his diuine power may renue and change them by some other meanes Secondly hee addeth that it is not absurde to thinke that God doth shine into the hearts of those infants which in infancie hee calleth out of this world to himselfe and that hee doth make himselfe knowne vnto them in some sorte seeing they are presently after to be receiued and admitted to the cleare and open view and sight of his glorious face and countenance and yet saith he will not rashly affirme that they are indued with the same faith which wee finde in our selues or that they haue knowledge like vnto that of faith And in the next section speaking more generally and not restraining himselfe to such as die in infancy hee saith that they are Baptized into future repentance and faith which vertues though they bee not presently formed in them yet a seede of either of them lieth hid in them The Papists are distracted into contrary opinions touching this point For some thinke that grace the roote of faith and other vertues is infused into children in Baptisme but not faith other that not onely grace but the habit of faith hope and charity is powred into them likewise which opinion as more probable was admitted in the Councell of Vienna and is embraced by vs as true Wherefore let the Reader judge whether I haue wrested the words of Luther or the Treatiser wronged Mee SECT 3. IN the third place hee laboureth to demonstrate and proue that there is a contradiction betweene the reuerend Bishop of Lincolne and Doctour Morton my selfe touching the power of ordination which that learned Bishoppe appropriateth vnto Bishops and we communicate in some cases to Presbyters But this silly obiection is easily answered for his meaning is that none but Bishoppes regularly may ordaine which we confesse to be true as likewise none but they onely may confirme the baptized by imposition of hands and yet thinke that in case of necessity Presbyters may performe both these things though of ordinary right belonging to Bishops only Part. 1. Sect. 1. LEt vs passe therefore from the preface to the booke it selfe the first thing that he objecteth in the booke it selfe is that I giue Apostolicke power to the present Church whence he thinketh it may be inferred that the Church cannot erre in matters of faith or ceremonies That I giue Apostolique power to the present church he endeavoureth to proue because I say She hath authority to dispense with some constitutions of the Apostles touching order and comelinesse which he thinketh She might not doe if she had not the same Authority by force whereof they were made but he could not but know that this proofe is too weake if he were not very weake in vnderstanding For the Apostles made these constitutions
the See of olde Rome and shall be before all the rest in order and honour Neither did Martian the Emperour as the Treatiser most vntruely avoucheth voide the Canons of these Councels which in this sort were confirmed afterwards by Iustinian Wherefore seeing it is evident that almost the whole Christian world in diuerse Generall Councels feared not to make another Bishop the Bishop of Romes Peere I hope the Reader will easily discerne that I haue not passed the bounds of modestie nor fallen into any vnseemely scoffing and railing vaine as the Treatiser chargeth Mâ—… when I taxe the Antichristian and Lucifer-like pride of the Romish Antichrist who not-with-standing the contradiction of the greatest part of the Christian world sought to subject all the members of Christ to himselfe and pronounced them all to be in the state of damnation that bowe not downe before him as Vice-God and supreame commaunder on earth But it seemeth hee had a great desire at the least to seeme to say some-thing against Me. For other-wise hee would not so shamelesly be-lye Me as he doth when hee saith I would deriue the beginning of the Popes superioritie from Phocas whereas in the place cited by him I haue no such thing but the contrary For I affirme that in the first Councell of Constantinople the Bishop of that citty was set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishop of Rome and before the other two Patriarches of Alexandria and Antioche thereby confessing that the Bishop of Rome had the first place at that time Which when the Constantinopolitan Bishop sought to haue Phocas so concluded matters betweene these two Bishops that the Bishop of Rome should haue the first and chief place in the church of GOD and Constantinople the second so that the praeeminence chieftie which the Pope claimeth lawfully was ancient and not deriued from Phocas howsoeuer he might and happily did enlarge and extend it farther then was fit giuing him a kinde of vniversalitie of jurisdiction §. 11. FRom the Primacie of the Bishop of Rome the Treatiser passeth to the infallibilitie of his judgment and affirmeth that his Decrees though he define without a Generall Councell are that firme Rocke and sure ground vpon which our Faith is to bee builded and that a man may well admit his definitions as a ground of supernaturall Faith and prudently builde an act of such supernaturall Faith vpon it And yet in the same place confesseth it is not yet authentically defined that the Pope in this sort cannot erre Which thing also Bellarmine and Stapleton acknowledge professing expressely that it is no matter of faith to beleeue that the Pope cannot erre if hee define without a Generall Councell In which passages there is as I suppose a most grosse contradiction For how can the infallibilitie of the Popes iudgement bee to them a Rocke to builde an act of supernaturall Faith vpon who neither know nor beleeue that his iudgement is infallible but thinke so onely Can a man certainely and vndoubtedly builde his perswasion of any thing vpon his sayings whome hee neither knoweth nor beleeueth to bee free from errour Wherefore for the cleering of this poynt First the Treatiser saith Though the Church haue not authentically defined that the Pope cannot erre yet the Scriptures and other arguments brought to proue it are so plaine and there are so many that thinke so that a man may very well admitte his definitions to be a ground of fayth Whence it will follow that a man may build his fayth vpon the Scriptures and other arguments and reasons without expecting the resolution of the Church for the vnderstanding of the one and discerning of the force and validity of the other â— Whereas else-where hee professeth that without the resolution of the present Church the letter of holy Scripture and the workes of Antiquity yeeld no certaine and diuine argument Secondly hee contradicteth himselfe and denieth the supposed infallibility of the Popes judgement to bee the Rocke on which the Church is builded and maketh that rocke to be onely the consenting iudgement of the Pope other Bishoppes in a Generall Councell contrary to the opinion of almost all learned pious men as he telleth vs himselfe who thinke that that infallibility of judgment and assurance of trueth vpon which our faith is to be builded is not partly in the Pope and partly in other Bishops but altogether in the Pope Thus seeking to avoyd one contradiction hee runneth into many The second Part. §. 1. HAuing surueyed the first part of the Treatise and examined such objections as the Authour of it maketh against Mee I will passe to the second wherein first he goeth about to proue out of that which I haue that Bishops assembled in Generall Councels may interpret the Scriptures and by their authority suppresse them that gaine-say such interpretations as they consent vpon subjecting them to excommunication censures of like nature that according to the prouidence and wisdome of Almighty God Generall Councels should not be subject to errour in such matters for that otherwise men might be forced according to Gods ordinance to obey Generall Councels erring propounding false Doctrine Which is a very silly kinde of reasoning for in the very same sort a man may proue that particular Bishops are free from erring in their proceedings that they can impose prescribe nothing vniustly vnder paine of excommunication for that otherwise men might bee forced and that according to Gods ordinance to obey such Bishops erring in their proceedings and commanding vnjust things whereas there is no question to bee made but that they haue power to excommunicate who may abuse the same and that sometimes it is a thing most pleasing vnto God by refusing to obey them that haue power to excommunicate but abuse the same to run into the vttermost extremities of their censures yea S. Augustine pronounceth that the patient enduring of wrongs in this kinde shall be highly rewarded by almighty God Secondly in the same chapter labouring to proue that Protestants contemne reject the Fathers to that purpose wresting some sayings of Doctour Humfry and others he objecteth that I haply may seem to some one that doth not throughly looke into my words to approue the authority of the ancient Fathers as farre forth as any Catholicke but sayth that in truth I doe not For proofe whereof hee setteth downe what I haue written touching this poynt Namely first that wee must receiue as true whatsoeuer hath beene deliuered by all the Saintes with one consent which haue left their opinion and judgement in writing it not being possible that they should all haue written of any thing but that which was generally receiued in their times and toucheth the very life of Christian fayth Secondly whatsoeuer the most famous haue constantly and vniformely deliuered as a matter of fayth no man contradicting them though many bee found to haue sayd nothing of
and Gods grace euen in his first conuersion Wherefore let vs passe from the question touching the co-operation of mans will with Gods grace to the other concerning the necessity of good workes to saluation Where first it is agreed on that there is necessarily required in all that will be saued a dislike of former euils wherewith God was offended Secondly a ceasing to doe euill Thirdly a desire of grace that may preserue and keepe vs from the like Fourthly a desire to doe things pleasing vnto God in that time that remaineth Fiftly it is acknowledged by all that in them that are justified and haue title to eternall saluation good workes are so farre forth necessary to saluation if they haue time that the not doing of them is sinne which without repentance and remission excludeth from saluation Sixthly that good works are necessary as fruites of faith which all they that are justified and looke for saluation are bound in duty to bring forth Seauenthly that they are not so absolutely necessary that no man can be saued without them for a man may be saued that in the last moment disliketh sinne and desireth pardon for it and grace that he may not fall into it again without the actuall doing of any good workes So that I protest I cannot see wherein there could bee any reall difference betweene these men neither will the Treatiser I thinke be able to shew me any such difference either out of the acts of the Synode of Altenberge or by any other meanes For that men are bound in duty to doe good workes that they necessarily follow faith that no man can be saued without dislike of sinne desire of avoyding it and purpose of doing that which is pleasing vnto God Illyricus made no question and so disliked not the saying of his opposites that good workes are necessary to saluation as thinking them in no sort necessary but because he thought their words did import that no man in any case can bee saued without the actuall doing of good workes no though hee haue them in desire and that no man may assure himselfe farther of the fauour and mercy of God towards him then hee findeth the presence of the workes of vertue in him which thinges vndoubtedly they neuer meant Another opinion there is that is attributed to Illyricus touching the nature of originall sinne which is greatly condemned by many For first hee is charged to haue taught that the substance of mans soule was changed and corrupted by Adams fall whence it will follow that it is mortall Secondly that sinne is a substance sundry other like thinges whence the impious positions of the Manichees may be inferred For the clearing of Illyricus from these impieties first wee must obserue that hee distinguisheth two sorts of corruption naming the one naturall and the other spirituall the one consisting in the abolition of the thing corrupted the other in a transformation of it Secondly that this transformation of the soule is not in respect of her essence and being simply but of her essentiall and substantiall powers faculties Thirdly that this transformation of the soule in her faculties is not in respect of all her faculties but the best and principall only to wit reason and the will Fourthly that there is not any transformation or transuersion of these faculties simply in respect of all obiects for the soule by the light of naturall reason iudgeth rightly of many things still though with some imperfections but in respect of her principall object to wit God his worship and Law So that this is all that Illyricus sayth that the soule of man since Adams fall is so transformed and changed in the best and principall of her essentiall and substantiall faculties that they are not onely turned away from their principall obiect and from tending to the right end whither they should looke but converted also to the desiring of such things as they should not or in such sort as they should not but of the extinguishing or abolishing of any of the essentiall and naturall faculties of the soule much lesse of the essence and being of it simply he hath no word Wherefore let vs come to the other part of the accusation framed against him which is that he maketh sinne to be a substance and let vs heare what he will say vnto it himselfe There are saith Illyricus certaine absurd sayings maliciously attributed vnto me as that sin is a substance that it is in the predicament of substance that it is the reasonable soule of man and that on the contrary side the soule is sin but I neuer vsed any such speeches neither did I euer say any more but that some part of originall sin is the soules essentiall facultie of reason the will corrupted in that they are averted turned away from their right obiect end But for the more full clearing of him from that impious opinion which is imputed to him wee must take notice of certaine good obseruations found in him As first that we may speake of sinne concretiuely or abstractiuely Secondly that if we speake of sin abstractiuely that is sinfulnesse it is nothing but an inconformitie with the Law of GOD. Thirdly that that to which such inconformitie immediatly cleaueth and wherein want of conformitie with Gods Law is found may rightly be named sin concretiuely So that if such inconformitie be found in any action we may safely pronounce it to be sin if in any habite we may pronounce that that habite is sin if in any inclination or desire that that is sinne also if in any the essentiall substantiall faculties of the soule as being turned from the right object end and converted to such obiect and end as they should not wee may safely pronounce that these faculties disordered put out of course are sin euen that originall birth sin which is the fountaine whence all other doe flow So that to conclude this point according to the opinion of Illyricus if wee speake formally abstractiuely originall sin is the disordering of the essentiall substantiall Faculties of the soule consisting in an aversion from the principall obiect and a conversion to other in stead of it But if wee speake concretiuely materially originall sin is the substantiall facultie of the soule which wee call Free-will turned from seeking God to oppose it selfe against him in which passages there is no impiety nothing vnsound or that doeth not stand with the trueth which wee professe but his manner of speaking was such as might giue occasion of dislike therefore himselfe confesseth that hee qualified some formes of wordes which hee had formerly vsed vpon the advice of Simon Museus that his meaning might bee the better knowne no misconstruction made of that hee meant well So that it will bee found that there was no reall difference betweene Melancthon Illyricus about originall sin or any other matter of faith therefore