Selected quad for the lemma: world_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
world_n father_n holy_a miserable_a 3,417 5 10.5583 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A15082 A replie to Iesuit Fishers answere to certain questions propou[n]ded by his most gratious Matie: King Iames By Francis White D: of DivĀ· deane of Carlile, chaplaine to his Matie. Hereunto is annexed, a conference of the right: R:B: of St Dauids wth the same Iesuit* White, Francis, 1564?-1638.; Laud, William, 1573-1645.; Baylie, Richard, b. 1585 or 6, attributed name.; Cockson, Thomas, engraver.; Fisher, John, 1569-1641. 1624 (1624) STC 25382; ESTC S122241 841,497 706

There are 11 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

erred in exposition nor differed one for the other Thirdly the Fathers affirme that the Scripture expounds it selfe Aug. d. verb. 〈◊〉 Serm. 2. d. vnit Eccles. c. 5. p. 427. Chrys. sup Gen. Hom. 13. And they doe not alwayes referre men to Tradition concerning exposition of Scripture but prescribe other rules and meanes also Aug. d Doctr. Christ. l. 4. c. 30. c. Chrys. sup Gen. Hom. 21. sup Rom. Hom. 13. sup Iohn Hom. 39. Tertul. c. prax Hilar d. Trinit l. 5. Ambros. 〈◊〉 Psal. 118. Serm. 8. Origen Mat. Hom. 25. Fourthly that which the Aduersarie affirmeth touching the Fathers to wit that they held the Scriptures to be cleare in all substantiall points onely to men beforehand instructed by the light of Tradition is vntrue neither doe the Fathers speake of Tradition according to the Romish acceptation First sometimes the Fathers exhort heathen men which were not instructed by Tradition to reade the Scriptures Theophilus Antiochenus saith to Autolicus being as then a Pagan Verum tu ipse si placet consule liter as sacras But doe thou thy selfe if it seeme good vnto thee consult with the holy Scriptures Also they prouoke Heretikes which denied the Tradition of the Church to examine truth by Scriptures August d. vnit Eccles c. 2.3.16 contra Maxim Arrian l. 3. c. 14. Socrates Hist. lib. 1. cap. 6. Secondly by Tradition they vnderstand not the fabulous dreames and inuentions of Papals who like the Pharisees corrupt the right sence of Scripture by their vnwritten Traditions and affirme those things to bee Apostolicall which agree with the confessed Doctrine of the Apostles like darkenesse with light But the Fathers by Tradition vnderstand such exposition of Scripture as was vniformely receiued and commended for Apostolicall by the Primatiue Church and which besides antiquitie or the report of men appeared to bee Apostolicall by an exact harmonie and consent with the Text of the holy Scripture to which it was applied St. August d. Bapt. c. Donatist l. 5 c. 26 St. Cyprian Epist. 74. Tertul. d. praescript c. 21 Ruffin Hist. Ecclesiast l. 2 c. 9 IESVIT I hope I haue in the opinion of your most learned Maiestie sufficiently demonstrated the first ground of Catholicke faith to wit that a Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon the word of God not as written 〈◊〉 Scriptures but as deliuered by the Tradition of the Church successiuely from the Primatiue vpon the authority whereof we beleeue that both Scriptures and all other substantiall Articles of Faith were deliuered by the Apostles thence further ascending and inferring they came from Christ and so from God the prime veritie and Authour of truth ANSVVER You haue played the Paralogist and weaued a spiders web which is fitter to catch flyes than to persuade so religious learned iudicious and resolute a king who is like an Angell of God knowing good and euill Your obiections being weighed in the ballance of the Sanctuarie are found light they are Funiculus vanitatis a coard and bundle of vanitie a potsheard couered ouer with the drosse of siluer His most learned Maiestie as you truly stile him honoureth genuine and Orthodox all Tradition as no religious king or good Christian can doe more and hereupon to wit vpon the testimony of Tradition besides other Arguments he beleeueth that you and your consorts are deceiued when you hold that a Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon the word of God not as written in Scripture but as deliuered by Tradition c. For if the Scripture according to the doctrine and Tradition of the Primatiue Church is eminentissimae authoritatis of most eminent authoritie If it be the seed of which faith is first of all conceiued if it is the Rocke whereupon the Church is built if the authoritie of vnwritten Tradition dependeth vpon it and must bee examined by it If the Churches authoritie is 〈◊〉 from it then a Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon it First That which is most excellent in euery kind is the modell and paterne of all the rest but I trow you will grant the Scripture to be the most excellent part of Gods word 2. Pet. 1. 〈◊〉 S. 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 Manich. li. 11 cap. 5. d. Ciuit. Dei lib. 11. cap. 3. Ibid. 〈◊〉 14. cap. 7. d. Vnit. Eccles. 16. Chris. d. 〈◊〉 Hom. 4. Oecumen sup 2. Tim. 3. Ansel. sup 2. Tim. 3. Secondly A Christian is fundamentally built vpon the rock but the Scripture is a rocke Cardinalis Camaracensis 〈◊〉 vespert 〈◊〉 sacrae Scripturae In euery building orderly framed the foundation hath precedence then followeth superedification and lastly consummation According to this order Christ the most exact Architect did build his Church vpon the rocke of holy Scripture Thirdly The seed of Faith is the root and foundation of 〈◊〉 Christian the Scripture is the seed of Faith Iohn 20. 41. for it is the word of God Luc. 8.11 Iam. 1.18 1. Cor. 4 15. And were the Popish Tenet true that the Scripture is not the whole word of God but only a part thereof yet a Christian must be originally and fundamentally built vpon it together with Tradition And Tradition according to the Tenet of our Aduersarie in this place cannot be the sole foundation of Christianitie but only a part of the foundation Fourthly All Scripture giuen by diuine Inspiration is simply and without exception to be receiued and all Tradition repugnant to Scripture is to be refused From hence it followeth that Scripture is a rule of Tradition and not Tradition of Scripture and Scripture is the highest rule as both the Fathers and many Papists themselues affirme and thus it is certaine that a Christian is orignally and fundamentally built vpon the holy Scripture IESVITS 2d Ground That there is a visible Church alwaies in the world to whose Traditions men are to cleaue and the Church is one Vniuersall Apostolicall Holy ANSWER The subiect of this Proposition to wit Ecclesia the Church is a word or terme of diuers significations and therefore the Iesuit should haue declared in what notion he taketh the same when he saieth There is a visible Church c. First Cardinall Bellarmine with other Pontificians saith that the Church whereof he disputes is a companie of people linked together by the same profession of Faith and Communion of Sacraments vnder lawfull pastros 〈◊〉 vnder the Roman Bishop who is Christs Vicar Secondly The terme Church is taken in the holy Scripture for the vniuersall number of holy beleeuers in all ages and more strictly for the whole number of holy beleeuers vnder the New Testament Heb. 12.23 Apoc. 5.9 Ephes. 5.25.27 and thus it comprehendeth both the Church Militant and Triumphant Thirdly the Church is taken for the common and vniuersall multitude of Christian people of any one or more ages which
Church since the Apostles is the prime originall ground of Faith more fundamentall than the Scripture This assertion is Antichristian and impudent for can any thing be more fundamentall than the foundation or of greater authoritie than the word of God S. Peter speaking of the Propheticall Scriptures equalleth the same to the sensible voice of God which was vttered in the Apostles audience from heauen Math. 3.17 c. 17.5 saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We haue the most sure word of Prophesie c. vpon these words S. Augustine d. verb. Apostoli serm 29. commenteth as followeth Et cum dixisset hanc vocem audiuimus de Coelo delatam subiunxit atque ait habemus certiorem propheticum sermonem sonuit illa vox de Coelo certior est propheticus sermo when the Apostle had said We heard this voice from heauen he addeth further and saith We haue a more sure word of prophesie That voice sounded from heauen and yet the propheticall word is more sure he said more sure not better or truer because that word from heauen was as good and as profitable as the word of prophesie Why therefore more sure Because the hearer was more confirmed by it Our Sauiour himselfe in the Gospell examineth the Traditions of the Pharises and of the Iewish Church then being by the Scriptures Math. 5.6 and 7. Ch. 12.5 c. 15.4 19.4 And the holy Ghost in the new Testament both in the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles confirmeth the Truth which was taught by the authoritie of the Scriptures and Christ Iesus perpetually submitteth himselfe and his doctrine to the triall of the Scriptures and the Apostles after him did the like Acts 26.22 The antient Fathers affirme that the Scriptures are of most eminent authoritie and that wee are aboue all things to giue credit to them and that they are the mouth of God and the verie hand of God and Paul and Peter and Iohn and the whole companie of the Prophets do speake with vs by them and that Faith it selfe by which a iust man liueth is conceiued by them and the Church it selfe is demonstrated to wit tanquam à priori by them But on the contrarie Traditions receiue their authoritie from the Scriptures and may not be admitted vnlesse they agree with the Scriptures And in our Aduersaries Tenet men must first beleeue the authoritie of the Church before they can receiue or beleeue Tradition from all which it followeth that Tradition of the present Church is neither the prime originall ground of Faith nor yet more fundamentall concerning Faith than the Scripture The Trident Councell held it sufficient to equall Tradition with the Scriptures This new master with Baronius Pighius preferreth them before the Scriptures These men perceiue that the Roman Faith cannot subsist vnlesse they depresse the written word of God and exalt the prophane bastardly and Apocriphall Traditions of the Pope They say the Scripture is a breathlesse lumpe a nose of wax a leaden rule Andradius writeth That in the Books of the Scriptures themselues there is no diuinitie or any thing else binding vs to beleeue Stapleton saith That being considered as written it can no way be called the Temple or Tabernacle of the holy Ghost Bosius saith The holy Ghost resideth in the Church more effectually and nobly than in the Bookes of the Scripture And Majoranus hath these words The consent of the Church alone which neuer wanted the spirit of God ought to be of greater esteeme with vs than all mute and tonguelesse Bookes and than all the written volumes which are or euer were and which haue in all ages ministred fuell of contention to the wits of men And Gretsar the Iesuit There would haue beene fewer contentions in the world as I supose if there had beene no Scripture at all Iacob Brower a Reader of Doway saith I would not beleeue the Gospell did not the authoritie of Pope Paul the fift mooue me And lastly it is one of the dictates of Pope Hildebrand canonised by Baronius That no Chapter or Booke of Scripture must bee esteemed canonicall without his authoritie I doubt not but that Romists are able with faire glosses and distinctions to salue these blasphemies and to reconcile dark nesse with light but he that diggeth a pit for people to fall into althought he couer the same with some superficiall tecture is accused by the antient sentence of diuine Law Exod. 21.33 Towards the end of this Section the Iesuit addeth First That the Scripture is not knowne to bee Apostolicall but by Tradition This is false for the Scripture is knowne to come from the Apostles by inward grounds and testimonies contained in it selfe and by the vertue and effects of it as well as by the Tradition of the Church Secondly it is most vntrue that Tradition is knowne to come from the Apostles by it owne light but not Scripture for what internall light hath Tradition more than or aboue the Scripture If it haue then the articles of Popish Tradition Purgatorie adoration of Images c. are more manifest than the articles which Scripture teacheth concerning the incarnation and resurrection of Christ than Heauen and Hell c. Also sacred Scripture is receiued as diuine by all Christians Popish Tradition onely by some The Catalogue of Romish Tradition could neuer to this day be specified and distinctly assigned but the Canon of holy Scripture may Moreouer holie Scripture hath the perpetuall and vnanimous consent of the Primitiue Church Popish Tradition hath not Againe Bellarmine confesseth that nothing is better knowne and more certaine than holy Scripture but if nothing be better known then nothing hath clearer light Thirdly the confirmation of the former to wit What more euident c. is insufficient because that which is known to come from the Apostles by their owne immediat testimonie in writing is more euidently knowne to come from them than that which is affirmed to come from them onely by the report of men which are deceiueable Diuine testimonie maketh things more certaine and infallible than humane The testimonie of the Apostles extant in writing is totally diuine the report of Bishops is in part humane IESVIT And this may bee clearely prooued to omit other pregnant testimonies by the words of our Sauiour in the last of Matthew Going into the whole world teaching all nations baptizing them In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost teaching them to keepe all that I haue commanded you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world A promise of wonderfull comfort vnto them that pawne their soules and saluation vpon Gods word deliuered by perpetuall Tradition For in this sentence appeare these fixe things First That there is still a Christian Church all dayes not wanting in the world so
grieuous penaltie to depart out of Babylon and spirituall Sodome Apoc. 18.4 and Chap. 11.8 Saint Paul speaking of such as teach diuerse doctrine from the Apostles saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Depart from such from their assembly and Church Reade Acts 19. 8. 1. Corinth 10. 14. 2. Cor. 6. 14 15 17. Hos. 10. 17. The Roman Church in those things wherein wee departed from it was shamefully corrupted it did not onely forsake bur depraue and persecute the truth of God the leprosie thereof was incurable for it would not iudge it selfe nor bee reprooued by others nor reforme the least errour but desperately followed the Canon Si Papa c And none might inioy life and breath within her Precincts which would not obey her Traditions These Romuleans vnlesse they were blinded like Elymas could not be ignorant at least of some of their errours and corruptions but they chose rather in their Tridentine Synode to proclaime and propugne apertly or couertly all their antient forgeries than to compassionate the distressed and 〈◊〉 Christian world by mittigating or condescending according to truth in the smallest matters It had beene most facile for them without any preiudice or dammage to themselues to haue permitted the Communion of the holy Eucharist in both kindes the publicke 〈◊〉 of God in a knowne and vnderstood Language to haue abolished the adoration of Images c. But their Luciferian pride and mallice was so transcendent that they rather presumed to obtrude new Scandalls vpon the Christian World than to vse the least Moderation for the peace of the Church And euer since that Synod they haue proceeded from euill to worse obscuring and out-facing the Truth with Forgerie and Sophistrie They haue conspired against Kingdomes and States they haue surpassed professed Infidels in perfidious Stratagemes and immane Crueltie Lastly whereas they expelled vs by Excommunication and chased vs away from them by Persecution yet this Romane Aduocate taxeth vs of Schisme and Apostasie neuer remembring what S. Augustine long since deliuered The Sacriledge of Schisme is then committed when there is no iust cause of separation Or what some of his owne part haue said The Sheepe are not bound to be subiect to any Shepheard which is become a Wolfe or is aduerse to the saluation of the Flocke IESVIT Which also plainely will appeare to any man of vnderstanding that casts vpon her an impartiall eye For is she not conspicuously one the professors thereof agreeing in all points of Faith howsoeuer they differ about small vndefined Questions ANSVVER Externall Vnitie is found amongst Infidels and the Turkes being more in number than Papists neuer disagree amongst themselues touching matters of their Religion Shall wee then say as the Iesuit doth It will plainely appeare to any man of vnderstanding that casts his eye vpon Turkie that the same hath Veritie because it is conspicuously one Saint Augustine saith That Iewes Heretikes and Infidels obserue Vnitie against Vnitie S. Bernard Alia est vnitas Sanctorum alia facinorosorum The Vnitie of Saints is one thing and the Vnitie of wicked men Deceiuers another S. Hilarie Vnitas fidei vnitas perfidiae There is Vnitie of Faith and there is likewise perfidious and faithlesse Vnitie S. Gregorie saith That the ministers of Antichrist shall cleaue together like the skales of Leuiathan Therefore because externall Vnitie is in it selfe a thing common and Iewes and Mahometists enioy the same more apparently than many Christians our Aduersarie must prooue that his Church hath Veritie before his argument taken from externall Vnitie can be of any force Neither is Papisticall Vnitie so entire and absolute as this man gloryeth for Papalls disagree both in Doctrine and Manners They differ concerning the supreame Authoritie of the Church Whether it be in the Pope or in the Generall Councell They differ in the matter of Free-will and Grace They differ concerning the manner of the Conception of the Virgin Marie There are three Opinions among them concerning the Temporall dominion of Popes Some say he hath direct Temporall power some say indirect some say hee hath none but by the free Donation of Princes and that Princes were euill aduised in yeelding him so much And moderne Popes disagree with the antient concerning the Dignitie of vniuerfall Bishop adoration of Images Transubstantiation Communion in both kinds and the merit of Good workes Also they themselues complaine of grieuous hatred and discord reigning generally among them and some of them say There is greater Concord among Gentiles And when they colour these palpable Dissentions pretending that they are readie to submit themselues to the iudgement of the Pope First this Iudge and Vmpire is many times a Peace-breaker and no Peace-maker an Ismael in the Christian World whose hand is against euerie man and euerie mans hand is against him Secondly Vnitie which is founded on blind Obedience is onely an Vnitie of Pollicie and not of true Faith Thirdly this submission maketh not actuall Concord and miserable Dissention both intestine and forraine at home and abroad rageth betweene Popes and Princes and betweene one Popish Faction and another The Guelphes and Gibellines the Papalls and Imperialls are as famous in Histories for their Discord as the sonnes of Cadmus and when Papistrie was most potent the Christian World was most distracted IESVIT Apparently vniuersall so spread ouer the World with Credit and Authoritie that whole Mankind may take sufficient notice of her and her Doctrine for the embracing thereof ANSWER The Roman is a particular Church and not vniuersall it is onely an vnsound member of the whole and not the whole Rom. 1. 6. S. Paul saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among whom are yee also But a Church which is but one amongst the rest cannot be the whole and vniuersall Church It is as absurd to say that the Romane Church is the vniuersall Church as to affirme that England is the vniuersall World If the vniuersall Church be taken properly or absolutely it comprehendeth both the Triumphant and Militant Church Augustine Enchir. cap. 56. and 61. Couaruuias Resol Lib. 4. cap. 14. If it be taken restrictiuely it is the whole Church Militant of each Age. If Catholike be taken for that which is Orthodoxall in Faith and which holdeth no diuision with the common Bodie of Christianitie according to which notion the Fathers tearme particular Churches Catholike then neyther is this Title proper to the Romane Church alone neyther can Papists iustly assume the name of Catholike vntill they haue proued their Faith to be Orthodoxall and iustified themselues from being the Authors of Discord in the Christian World And to answere that which followeth although the Romane Church is spread ouer sundrie parts of the World because some people professing the Romane Faith trauaile or reside in many Countreyes and exercise their Religion where they trauaile or liue yet this
Apostles Creed is that societie of Beleeuers against which Hell gates preuaile not finally either by Heresie or mortall sinne But Hell gates preuaile against Popes and Popish Prelats by mortall sinne so farre as that they descend into the infernall lake Therefore the Roman Hierarchicall Church consisting principally of Popes and Popish Prelats is not the holy Catholicke Church in the Creed for that Church hath remission of sinnes and life eternall and passeth not into Hell Ioh. 10.28 August d. Doctr. Christ. li. 3. ca. 32. IESVIT The Church whereof Christ said Math. 28.20 I am alwaies with you to the consummation of the world is the Church of the Creed or the Church which to forsake is damnable For the Church wherewith Christ still abideth not according to corporall and visible presence but by his Spirit is the body of Christ whereof he is head into which he infuseth the life of Grace and consequently he that forsaketh this Church forsakes the body of Christ the head thereof and cannot liue by his Spirit but is in a dead and damnable estate as a member cut off and seperated from a liuing bodie as S. Augustine long ago noted The Catholicke Church is the bodie of Christ whereof he is head out of this bodie the holy Ghost quickeneth no man Now the Church whereof Christ said I am alwaies with you to the consummation of the world is not the Church inuisible of onely the Elect but a visible Church deriued by succession from the Apostles therefore hee that forsakes this Church deriued by succession from the Apostles forsakes the Church of the Creed the Catholicke Church the bodie of Christ and puts himselfe into a dead and damnable state and may haue all things besides Saluation and eternall Life as Fathers affirme whose testimonies in this behalfe are notable and famously knowne whereunto D. Field yeeldeth acknowledging One Holy Catholicke Church in which only the light of heauenly Truth is to be sought where only Grace Mercie remission of Sinnes and hope of eternall Happinesse are found ANSWER The Church whereof Christ said Math. 28.20 I am alwaies with you to the consummation of the world is the Church of the holy Apostles of Pastors and Beleeuers succeeding them in the same Faith and Religion and this is a principall part for the Catholicke Church in generall containes all Faithfull and iust persons from Abel c. of the Church in the Creed Secondly some part of the Catholicke Church of the Creed is alwaies visible in the world sometimes in an ampler sometimes in a smaller number of Professours Also the visibilitie thereof is at sometimes illustrious and notorious and at other times it is obscure according to the state of Persecution Thirdly to forsake the true Church in the maine and primarie Articles of Faith or by any wilfull infidelitie is damnable and all people which desire Saluation must actually if it be possible or Voto in case of necessitie conioine themselues to some part of the Orthodoxall Catholicke Church But our Sauiour promised to no one visible Sea or Church continuing after the Apostles by succession of Bishops absolute immunitie from all Errour and infallibilitie of Veritie but only presentiall assistance and protection of Grace sufficicient for the saluation of his people vpon condition to wit when the said Pastours taught and obserued that which he commanded and continued in the right vse of those meanes which he had deposed among them Ioh. 8.31 32. Rom. 11. 22. Read before in this Treatise pag. 94.99 The Testimonies of S. Augustine obiected by the Aduersarie which are That the Catholick Church is the body of Christ whereof he is head and that out of this bodie the holy Ghost quickeneth no man make altogether against himselfe for none are vitall members of Christs mysticall body but iust and holy persons And it is the same Fathers doctrine Impij non sunt reuera Corpus Christi wicked persons are not in deed and veritie Christs bodie And in another place In corpore Christi non sunt quod est Ecclesia quoniam non potest Christus habere membra damnata They are not in Christs bodie which is the Church because Christ cannot haue damnable members And Bernard saith Manifestum est non esse Caput Hypochritae Christum It is euident that Christ is not the head of an Hypochrite But the visible Rulers of the Popish Church haue many times bin as our Aduersaries themselues report not only Hypochrites but apparantly monstrous and damnable sinners therefore they are not the Catholicke Church out of which no Saluation can be had neither is perpetuall influence and assistance of Grace absolutely intailed vpon them Out of the former premises I argue thus Wolues Hipochrites and impious persons are not the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed out of which there is no Saluation Romish Prelats haue beene Wolues Hypocrites and impious men for they haue maintained false and superstitious Doctrine repugnant to the holy Scripture and aduerse to the Faith of the Primitiue Church which Protestants haue and are againe readie to demonstrate and they haue beene most notorious for all kind of abhominable vices as Romists themselues haue published to the World and they haue also most iniustly and tyranically persecuted and oppressed true beleeuers Ergo Romish Prelats are not the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed out of which there is no Saluation Argument 2. Out of the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed there is no Saluation Out of the fellowship of the Roman Church there hath beene and is Saluation Ergo The present Roman Church is not the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed And thus the Obiector hath gained nothing by accusing our Church of fundamentall error and his nine Accusations are prooued to be so many calumniations and we neither erre fundamentally in any maine Article nor yet pertinaciously or maliciously against any other Christian veritie For although whiles we liue in the world tenebras huius mortalitatis circumferimus as S. Augustine speaketh we carrie about vs in regard of our selues the darkenes of mortalitie tamen ad Scripturae lucernam ambulamus yet we studie carefully to walke according to the true light of holy Scripture and God hath hitherto so assisted vs that the euill eye of our Aduersaries is not able to discouer in our Doctrine any capitall Error neuerthelesse if vpon further inquisition they shall make it appeare by diuine testimonie or other sufficient proofe that we are deceiued in any matter of Faith small or great we will be as 〈◊〉 to reforme our selues as they are readie to accuse vs. And in all differences betweene them and vs we submit our selues to a free lawfull generall Councell to be tried by the rule of Gods word concerning which S. Augustine saith Extat authoritas diuinarum Scripturarum vndè mens nostra deuiare non debet nec relicto solidamento diuini
much as one day till the consummation of the world ANSWER The place of Saint Matthew chapter 28. 19 20. prooueth First that the holy Apostles receiued a Commission and Mandate from Christ to preach the Gospell to all nations both Iewes and Gentiles and to baptise them In the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost Marke 16. 15 16. Luke 24.27 Acts 1.8 Rom. 1.14 Secondly that our Sauiour promised his Apostles a perpetuall presence and assistance of his diuine power and grace both in regard of the gifts of edification Acts 2. 4. And in respect of the grace of inward sanctification Iohn 17.17 Thirdly because the Apostles were mortall and not to remaine alwayes personally vpon earth and other Pastors must succeed in the office of Ministerie the promise of Christ touching his spirituall presence and assistance of grace is extended to these successours and when they teach and baptise in such manner as Christ commanded diuine grace is present to their Ministeriall actions and the holy Ghost co-worketh with them Fourthly But yet succeeding Pastors receiued not the same measure of diuine Grace with the Apostles neyther had they immediate and Propheticall reuelation but onely a measure of Grace ordinarie mediate and in some sort conditionall Also the said Promise Matth. 28. 20. was common and equall to all the Apostles and to the successors of one Apostle as well as of another to the successors of Saint Iames and Saint Iohn c. as well as to the successors of Saint Peter Fifthly Notwithstanding the said promise Bishops and Pastors succeeding the Apostles were in respect of themselues subiect to errors and their iudgement in matters of Faith was not absolutely infallible like the Apostles but so farre forth onely as they walked in the footsteps and followed the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles Our Sauiour promised that he would be alwayes with the Apostles euen to the consummation of the World partly in their personall Teaching whiles they themselues liued in the World and partly in their permanent Doctrine contained in the Scriptures of the New Testament when the same was truly deliuered by their successors And he will be also with succeeding Pastors all Ages according to such a measure of Grace and assistance as is sufficient for the edifying of the Church if they for their owne part be studious to learne diuine Truth from the holy Apostles and carefull to preach the same to others But his promise concerning immunitie from error and mortall offences is not so absolute to successors as it was to the Apostles themselues Sixtly Many antient Expositors affirme That the Promise of Christ Matth. 28.20 is especially made to the iust and faithfull and some of them say to the Elect onely And Occham affirmeth That if there should be found in the whole World but one Orthodox Bishop or but one such Priest and a small number of Lay people professing right Faith in Articles essentiall and willing to embrace all other Diuine Vertie when the same should be manifested vnto them this were sufficient to make good Christ his Promise Matth. 28.20 In the next passage our Aduersarie inferreth and deriueth certaine Propositions from the former Text of Matth. 28. 20. First hee saith There is still a Christian Church all dayes not wanting so much as one day in the World till the consummation thereof I answer That there is still in the World a common Christian Church wherein some beleeuers hold the substance of right Faith But there is not perpetually in the World a Church the more potent and maior part whereof beleeueth and professeth right Faith without error in all points and so infallible in all her Doctrine as was the Primitiue Church which enioyed the immediate and actuall preaching of the Apostles IESVIT Secondly This Church is euer visible and conspicuous For the Church which alwayes teacheth and christeneth all Nations to which Christ saith I am alwayes with you not with you sitting in corners or hidden vnder ground but with you exercising the Office enioyned you in the words precedent Docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos c. ANSWER The Church is euer visible according to some degree of visibilitie but this Scripture teacheth not that the true Church is alwayes largely and gloriously visible The same doth not actually in euerie Age teach and christen all Nations and the Roman Church for sundrie Ages past teacheth and christeneth few or none within Natolia and other large Prouinces liuing in subiection to the Grand Seignior or Emperour of Constantinople And as Christ doth not say verbally in this Text I am alwayes with you sitting in corners so he doth not say I am alwayes with you when you are carryed vpon mens shoulders and tread vpon Emperours neckes and diuide and share the Kingdomes of the World and gather endlesse Riches by selling Pardons and preaching Purgatorie But yet of the two it is farre more agreeable to the Diuine Goodnesse who is a Father of the poore and oppressed to be present to his little flocke in persecution and when it flyeth as a Lambe from the Wolfe and hideth it selfe from the Oppressor Apoc. 12. 14 than that hee hath entayled his perpetuall presence vpon ambitious and oppressing Tyrants which stiled themselues Pastors and were rauening Wolues Scribes and Pharisees imposing insupportable burthens vpon others and not moouing them with one of their owne fingers And there is no cause why the good God which was present with Daniel in the Lyons Denne and with Ionas in the Whales Belly and with Ioseph in the Dungeon and with Iob vpon the Dunghill should in the dayes of the oppressing Antichrist withdraw his presence and assistance from his poore flocke yea although it were sitting in corners and hidden vnder ground IESVIT Thirdly This Church is euer Apostolicall for to his Apostles Christ said I am alwayes with you vntill the consummation of the World not with you in your owne persons but with you in your successors in whom you shall continue to the Worlds end Ergo a lawfull companie of Bishops Pastors and Doctors succeeding the Apostles must be perpetually in the World ANSVVER First The Church may be called Apostolicall because of Faith Plantation and Externall Ordination of Pastors According to Faith and Doctrine in all the maine and substantiall Articles the true Church is euer Apostolicall In regard of Plantation the Primitiue Church was Apostolicall because it was immediately planted and watered by the holy Apostles But Tertullian affirmeth That many particular Churches were not thus planted by Apostles or Apostolicall persons and yet they were truly Apostolicall by reason of consanguinitie of Doctrine with the holy Apostles According to the third manner to wit in respect of Externall Ordination and Imposition of Hands receiued from Bishops lineally succeeding the Apostles a false and corrupt Church may be Apostolicall as I haue formerly prooued And it is
vnderstand such things concerning his Person and Office as are necessarie to make them wise to saluation And whereas the Iesuit saith That other Creatures doe so rudely remotely c. represent God that none but perfect contemplants can acknowledge and worship him in them the holy Scripture speaketh in a contrarie manner to wit That the visible things of God his power and Godhead c. were made manifest and clearely to be seene in the fabricke of his Creatures euen of Heathen people which were not spirituall men or perfect Contemplants Rom. 1.19 20. The opinion of Gabriel Vasques mentioned only and touched aslope by our Aduersarie was this which followeth First There is not any thing in the world which we may not sincerely adore and God himselfe in the same Secondly One may according to right and sincere faith consider God internally present in euerie Creature and worship God in it and with it Thirdly It is lawfull to worship the Earth as Gods footstoole and the Sunne as his Tabernacle in the same manner as Images and other sacred things are worshipped Fourthly He is no Idolater which according to a good intention worshippeth God in a stone or in the rayes of the Sunne although the deuill were there or which adoreth the Asse vpon which Christ sate And if one worship God in a Crucifixe wherein the deuill lurketh hee need not excuse himselfe by saying hee was ignorant of the deuils presence nor limit his Worship by vsing any expresse condition Fiftly Although the former practise be lawfull yet the same may not be appointed to bee done promiscuously by rude or vulgar people Our Aduersarie is silent concerning his owne iudgement about the former Doctrine But if I may speake freely according to my priuate opinion I cannot perceiue why the Sunne and the Moone and the Earth and the Asse c may not be worshipped together with God their maker vpon as good and better reason than Pictures and Statues which are formed by Craftesmen and haue no force or operation in them I am taught also by learned Vasques that the deuill in very substance may lurke in Images and my Aduersarie cannot prooue that Christ is present or assistant to them Now it seemeth vnreasonable to worship that which may receiue the deuill when on the other side one cannot be certaine that it may haue any fellowship with Christ 2. Cor. 6.16 IESVIT Nor doth it follow That if wee worship the Image of Christ and the Crosse that he died on that we should also adore Iudas his lips which touched our Sauiours sacred mouth when he gaue him that trayterous kisse For it is easie to shew many differences betwixt Judas his lips and the Crosse. First Iudas his lips were conioyned substantially with Iudas that none could bow or bend vnto them and kisse them without seeming to bow and doe honour to his person In regard he being an intellectuall Creature was an obiect capable of veneration terminated and stayed in his owne person But the Crosse being a sencelesse thing is not an obiect sufficient to stay veneration within it selfe neither is it a part belonging to the substance of any wicked man that concurred to the punishing of our Sauiour but rather was fixed vnto and ioyned with his Bodie and so the outward bowing to the Crosse is done mentally onely vnto Christ whom we behold as stretched thereon Secondly the Crosse the Nailes the Launce and other such instruments being sencelesse creatures may be thought of as things sanctified by the touch of our Sauiours bodie not hauing in them any thing contrarie to the sanctitie of Christ and so could not hinder the conceipt of such imputed sanctitie But Iudas being most wicked and detestable and full of the most horrible treason that euer was did so defile and prophane his whole person and all the parts thereof that the meere touch of our Sauiours most sacred mouth could not sanctifie nor make holy vnto Christian imagination his lips without changing and sanctifying his heart for so long as he continueth without repenting his treason the liuely remembrance of that execrable fact doth so possesse a Christian heart as no respectfull thought to him can enter vnto it Finally the Passion of Christ may bee considered two waies First as proceeding from the will of wicked men the Diuels instruments to torment him in which consideration it is not gratefull vnto God but a detestable sinne in the authors thereof Secondly it may be considered as receiued in the bodie of Christ as abiding and continuing in his sacred person admitted in his heart and offered to his Father for the sinnes of the world and by this consideration it is sacred and venerable The lips of Iudas betraying Christ as the hands also of the wicked Minister that strucke him in Caiphas his house and other like instruments conioined with wicked persons were instruments of Christs passion as it proceeded from their wicked hearts and consequently as it was a detestable action but the Crosse the Nailes and the Lance that stayed in and were conioined vnto the bodie of Christ were instruments of Christs Passion as lodged in his sacred person and as offered to his heauenly Father and consequently as of a thing most highly venerable ANSWER Admitting many differences betweene Iudas his lips and the materiall Crosse it followeth not that the one may be worshipped although the other may not for there are many differences betweene the brazen Serpent and the Angell in the Reuelation yet neither of these creatures might be religiously adored 2. King 18 4. Apoc. cap. 19 cap. 22.9 There are differences betweene the Sunne and king Nabuchadonozer yet neither might be worshipped religiously Neither do the seuerall differences assigned by the Aduersarie conclude Not the first because there was something in Iudas his lips susceptible of respect which was not in the materiall Crosse to wit capacitie of Grace for Iudas might haue repented but an inanimate creature is not potentially susceptible of sanctitie Not the second for by error an insensible creature may terminate adoration as well as an intellectuall witnesse the idolatrie of Pagans Thirdly that the liuelesse and insensible Crosse whereupon Christ suffered was sanctified by his Passion must be beleeued when diuine ordinance is produced to make the same manifest But for ought I can obserue the Protestants vse not this obiection taken from Iudas his lips and some learned Papists affirme that Iudas his lips might be reuerently kissed The last words which are the Crosse the Nailes and the Lance that stayed in and were ioined vnto the bodie of Christ were instruments of Christs Passion as lodged in his sacred Person as offered to his heauenly Father affoord this Argument following for the Iesuit Those things which at the instant time of Christs Passion had a residence in Christs bodie and were ioined thereunto as instruments of his Passion and were offered by
Christ to his heauenly Father are thereby made most highly venerable But the Crosse Nailes and Lance were those things which at the instant time of Christs Passion had a residence in Christs bodie and were ioined thereunto as instruments of his Passion and were offered by Christ to his heauenly Father Ergo The Crosse Nailes and Lance are thereby made most highly venerable Both Propositions are false in whole or in part First those things which at the instant time of Christs Passion had a residence in his bodie and were ioined thereunto per contactum phisicum as instruments of his Passion were not thereby made most highly venerable because there is no diuine authoritie or any other snfficient reason to prooue this assertion Secondly these things were seperate instruments and not perpetually conioined to his person and if none did worship them when they were actually conioined there is no reason to thinke that they are to be worshipped being diuided If apparrell when it is ioined to an honourable person may be coworshipped with the person yet when it is diuided from the person and hangeth in a wardrobe or is worne by a Page it is otherwise Whiles God appeared to Moses in the bramble bush the ground whereon Moses stood is called holy Exod. 3.6 But this holinesse being only relatiue transitorie and denominatiue and not inherent or durable the former vision and apparition being finished the ground whereon Moses stood returned to his old condition The like may be said of the water of Iordan considered when Christ was baptised with it and againe considered when his baptisme was finished and out of the vse An Embassador during his embassage is a publicke and honourable person when his office ceaseth the honour consectarie and dependant vpon his office ceaseth also Secondly the latter branch of the assumption to wit the Crosse Nailes and Lance were offered by Christ to his heauenly Father at his Passion is impiously false for nothing was offered by Christ to his heauenly Father at his Passion but himselfe and part of himselfe Heb. 7.27 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he offered vp himselfe Heb. 9. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the eternall Spirit he offered himselfe without spot to God c. Heb. 10. 10. Wee are sanctified through the offering of the body of lesus Christ once for all 1. Pet. 2.24 Col. 1.22 Heb. 9.12 By his owne bloud he entred once into the holy place c. 1. Pet. 1. 19. And if the Crosse Nailes and Lance were offered by Christ to his Father then we were redeemed with corruptible things contrarie to the Apostles doctrine 1. Pet. 1. 18 and Wood Nailes and Yron were a part of the propitiatorie Sacrifice for the sinnes of the whole world which is a Iesuiticall or rather an Antijesuine doctrine that is a doctrine ascribing to dead creatures Yron Wood Steele Nailes c. that which is most proper to the pretious blood of Iesus This doctrine maintained by Loiolists is most sacrilegious and more to be abhorred than Iudas his lips But it is fulfilled in these men which Clement Alexandrinus saith of heathen Idolaters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are they not prodigious monsters which adore stockes and stones IESVIT Out of which J may conclude that Christ Iesus being a true man his Image hath a most euident and vndeniable right to represent him and so to be honoured for his sake ANSVVER Conclusions borrow their strength from their premises but the former premises haue no power to inforce this conclusion For although Christ is a true man yet his painted Image wanteth euident and vndeniable right to represent him because such right presupposeth diuine institution The same represents him and stands for him only by humane imagination which is all the Aduersarie is able to prooue but religious worship must haue a more sound and certaine foundation otherwise we must say to Papals when they are thus prodigall in giuing Christs honour to Idols 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ioh. 4. 22. ye worship ye know not what If in ciuile worship one should frame an Image or chaire of State in honour of a king and commaund people to kneele and bow to it none will be so foolish as to obey vnlesse such commandement be deriued from the kings authoritie or law But in things religious and heauenly men haue not the same libertie of deuising and commanding as appeareth by Gedeons Ephod Iudg. 8.27 Lastly if it should be granted that artificiall Images did represent figure or teach Christ Iesu by diuine institution as fully as the Bookes of holy Scripture or as the inward conceits and images of the mind yet it were inconsequent to inferre that the same were therefore to be worshipped in such manner as Papals require They were indeed to be vsed with reuerence but reuerent vsing and adoration are diuers actions IESVIT §. 2. THis Worship was euer since the Apostles in the Church without beginning ANSVVER IF it had no beginning how can this man prooue that the Apostles were the Authors IESVIT The disagreeing of Protestants about the time when Worship of Jmages began is a sufficient Argument That there is no beginning thereof assigneable ANSVVER The Iesuits Proposition is Worship of Images hath beene practised in the true Church euer since the Apostles c. His first Argument to confirme this is If Protestants disagree in assigning the time when the worship of Images first began in the Church Then the worship of Images was practised vniuersally and perpetually from the Apostles dayes But Protestants disagree in assigning the time when the Worship of Images first began in the Church Ergo The worship of Images was practised vniuersally and perpetually from the Apostles dayes and consequently the same worship is to be receiued and practised in these dayes First The consequence of the Maior Proposition is denied For is it not ridiculous to argue in this manner Learned Papists disagree in assigning the time when Heathenish Idolatrie first began Therefore Heathenish Idolatrie had his beginning in Paradise But learned Papists Bellarmine Pererius Barradias c. disagree in assigning and pointing foorth the moment of time when Heathenish Idolatrie fist began The time when people first began to offer their sonnes and daughters to diuells is not assigneable And who can certainely report when barbarous people first began to eate mans flesh or when the Assyrian matrons began first to prostitute themselues at the temple of Venus Is it therefore consequent that these customes had their beginning from Noahs dayes because their originall is not assigneable Our aduersaries Achilles therefore Protestants are not able out of approoued Historians to assigne the persons and time who and when began the worship of images in the Church Ergo the said custome is originally from the Apostles rather deserueth contempt and derision than an accurate solution 2. The assumption of the former argument is also denyed For Protestants disagree not in
intercessions to the Virgin Marie with diuine Prayers Hee affirmeth also that in Saint Augustines dayes Inuocation of Saints was not vsed in the common Seruice of the West Church And descending to the 600. yeeres he saith Inuocation of Saints among the Latines was not brought into the publicke Seruice and Letanies of the Church vntill the dayes of Pope Gregorie the first Lastly the forme and manner of Saintly Inuocation in the 600 yeere differed extreamely from that which was vsed by Papals in latter times and this is confirmed by Chemnitius setting downe verbatim many Collects and formes of deuotion vsed in latter dayes which were antiently vnheard of Secondly The Fathers which you cite in your Margine to prooue the Doctrine of Inuocation of Saints and Martyrs to haue beene a matter of faith from the dayes of Constantine are Gregorie Nyssen St. Basil Theodorit St. Ambrose St. Hierom and St. Augustine but hauing perused the places I finde not that these Fathers either deliuered this Doctrine as matter of Catholicke Faith or affirme the Practise thereof to haue beene necessarie and vniuersall or that they spake of such Worship and Inuocation of Saints as is practised in the seruice of your Church But as places may bee noted in some Fathers touching inuocation of Saints deceased or which argue that they requested Saints to assist them with their Prayers at least in generall and so farre foorth as they had knowledge of their necessities So likewise other Sentences are found in their writings maintaining the sole Inuocation of God by Christ and condemning Inuocation of Angels and Saints deceased according to the manner now vsed in the Romane Church Theoderit vpon the Colossians cap. 2. condemneth worshipping and Inuocation of Angels St. Ambrose saith Tu solus Dominus inuocandus es c. Thou Lord onely art to bee inuocated St. Hierom Nullum inuocare id est in nos orando vocare nisi Deum debemus We ought to inuocate that is by Prayer to call into vs none but God And in another place Whatsoeuer I shall vtter seemeth dumbe because hee Nepotian being defunct heareth me not St. Augustine Non sit nobis Religio cultus hominum mortuorum Let not the worship of persons defunct be our Religion Saint Athanasius Nunguam quispiam precaretur aliquid accipere a Patre Angelis vel ab vllis rebus creatis No man would euer pray to receiue any 〈◊〉 from the Father and from the Angels or from any other creature Thirdly That which the Iesuit affirmeth concerning Aerius and Vigilantius is false for neither of these is ranked among Heretickes by Philastrius Epiphanius St. Augustine or by any of the antient Fathers because they denied Inuocation of Saints departed and Popish Prateolus himselfe maketh not this doctrine any of Aerius his errours and treating of Vigilantius he produceth onely Lindanus and Hosius two most partiall Pontificians affirming him to haue beene condemned of heresie for this cause Wherefore our Aduersarie prooueth himselfe a weake Antiquarie when he affirmeth that Aerius and Vigilantius were condemned of heresie because they denyed Inuocation of Saints deceased Fourthly The Magdeburgians which in the third Centurie obserue Non obscura vestigia c some not very obscure traces or footsteps in the writings of the Doctors of this age concerning Inuocation of Saints speake of the least degree and kind of Inuocation to wit Compellation and besides they probably suspect that suppositious Sentences haue beene inserted into the Bookes of antient Fathers Lastly Ireneus stileth the Virgin Marie The Aduocate of Euah not in regard of her Intercession for Euah and her children after her decease and departure out of the world but because of that which she performed in beleeuing and obeying the heauenly message which the Angel Gabriel brought vnto her Luke 1.38 for hereby she became a blessed Instrument of conceiuing and bearing Christ Iesus and by this obedience the blessed seed was brought into the world by her whereby the fall of Euah and her children was repaired And thus shee was the Aduocate or Comforter of Euah and her children by bearing Christ and not because she was inuocated as a Mediator after her death by Euahs children IESVIT Neither can Protestants denie this to haue beene the Doctrine of the Fathers but seeke to discredit them as if they had been various vncertaine contradictorious in this point But seeing Antiquitie that hath perused their workes now more than 1300 yeeres neuer noted such contradictions in them Christian wisedome and charitie will neuer be so persuaded of the Fathers by Protestants specially their Allegations being such as may easily be explicated so as they make nothing at all against this Catholicke Custome ANSVVER Protestants maintaine that inuocation of Saints can be no Article of Faith although it were manifest that some Fathers liuing since or before the daies of Constantine had beleeued or practised the same for euery Article of Christian Faith must be grounded vpon diuine Reuelation But all opinions of the Fathers are not diuine Reuelation and the holy Fathers do not challenge to themselues infallibilitie of iudgement neither do our Aduersaries yeeld the same vnto them Therefore a surer foundation must be laid to proue Adoration and Inuocation of Saints to be a necessarie duetie than a few scattered opinatiue sentences of Ecclesiasticall writers Neuerthelesse Protestants are able to giue satisfaction concerning the iudgement of Antiquitie in this point And we haue prooued that the eldest Fathers for those ages in which Egesippus saith The Church continued a Virgin taught no such Doctrine Secondly no generall Councel nor yet any particular Councell confirmed by a generall did euer authorise or decree inuocation of Saints as it is now maintained by Papals to haue beene a necessarie duetie or practise Thirdly there be sundrie Principles and other passages in the Bookes of the Fathers by which this doctrine may be confuted IESVIT For all they say in this kind is reduced to these fiue heads First That Saints are not inuocated by Faith as authors of the benefits we craue ANSWER Our Aduersarie hath collected fiue Expositions to elude such testimonies as we produce out of antiquitie First whereas many Fathers treading in the steps of holy Scripture affirme that religious prayer is a proper worship belonging to the sacred Trinitie and by this argument they conclude against the Arians and Macedonians that Christ Iesus and the holy Ghost are verie God because Christians beleeue in them and pray vnto them The Iesuit telleth vs that the Fathers intend only that we may not inuocate creatures by faith as authors of the benefits we craue But if this glosse or solution be sufficient then the Argument of the Fathers concludeth not against the Arians that Christ is God because he is inuocated for the Arian vsing the Iesuits distinction may replie That Christ is inuocated as a Mediator and as
in his bodie by Concomitancie for then it were accidentally therein but as a part in the whole for as the bones sinews and veynes are integrall parts of anaturall humane bodie so likewise is the blood and naturall parts are in the whole by substantiall vnion not by Concomitancie for then they were in the bodie or belonging thereunto as an adiunct to his subiect If we consider the bodie of Christ taken for the more solid parts thereof as it is represented and exhibited in the Sacrament to wit as it was fixed to the crosse and diuided from the blood then according to this Sacramentall representation and exhibition the same alone neither containeth nor representeth the blood The sacred Eucharist is one intire Sacrament totum compositum hauing two externall Elements to wit Bread and Wine and these two signes or elements represent the materiall Sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse which consisted at the time of the Oblation thereof of a bodie fixed on a tree and the same dying by effusion of blood Luk. 22.21 And in the holy Eucharist Christ is as it were crucified before our eyes and his bodie and blood by representation are diuided and God Almightie vseth these mysticall creatures as instruments to communicate vnto euery worthie Receiuer the Sacrifice of Christ his Sonne 1. Cor. 10.16 But as the Sacrifice vpon the Crosse was not performed in one of these Indiuiduals apart or by it selfe but ioyntly in them both and without effusion of blood there is no remission of sinnes Heb. 9.22 So likewise in the holy Eucharist the bodie of Christ is represented as it was diuided from the blood and againe the blood as seuered from the bodie and God concurreth with both the Elements deliuered and receiued with the one as it were by inception and with the other by consummation and Communicants partake not the whole Sacrifice of Christ vntill they haue receiued both the materiall parts of the Sacrament Here then is no Popish Concomitancie either of the blood to the bodie when it is receiued apart or of the bodie to the blood when that is receiued alone but the Sacrament reacheth the bodie blood as they were diuided and they are then conioyned to make one Sacrifice when they are both deliuered and receiued The whole cannot be in one part neither doth one part Concomitate another but is substantially vnited to another and in a Sacrifice or Sacrament compounded of diuisible parts he which giueth or receiueth one materiall part doth not therein or thereby distribute or receiue the whole Neither againe is the Deitie vnited to the bodie or blood of Christ by Concomitancie but by personall vnion Thus then I argue Whatsoeuer is receiued in the Sacrament by vs was before offered to God vpon the Crosse. But the bodie of Christ hauing bloud in it by concomitance or the deitie in it by concomitancie or the bloud of Christ hauing in it the bodie or 〈◊〉 by concomitancie was not offered to God vpon the Crosse for before the effusion of the bloud the same was in the bodie as a part not by concomitancie After the full effusion the bloud was diuided from the bodie and the 〈◊〉 was with the bodie by personall vnion and not by concomitancie Ergo At this day the bodie and deitie of Christ are not in the bloud of Christ by concomitancie c. IESVIT First hee that acknowledgeth the reall presence of Christs sacred bodie vnder the forme of bread and denies concomitancie doth in his beleefe seperate the bloud and soule of Christ from his bodie but to seperate either Christs diuinitie from his humanitie or soule from his bodie or his bloud from his flesh is vnlawfull for such a beleeuer doth dissolue and destroy Christ Jesus and so is one of the number of them that S. Iohn condemneth Omnis Spiritus qui soluit Iesum non est ex Deo hic est Antichristus ANSVVER The summe of this obiection is Whosoeuer dissolueth Christ Iesus is an Antichrist Euerie one who admitteth reall presence and yet denyeth concomitancie dissolueth Christ Iesus for he seperateth the bloud and soule of Christ from his bodie and his diuinitie from his humanitie Ergo Whosoeuer in the reall presence denyeth concomitancie is an Antichrist Our answer is Whosoeuer dissolueth Christ Iesus according to S. Iohns meaning 1. Ioh. 4.3 by denying his deitie humanitie or personall vnion is Antichrist But the denying of Popish concomitancie inferreth none of these For although we affirme that in the holy Eucharist the bodie and bloud of Christ are represented distinctly and as they were diuided at his passion yet this dissolueth not Iesus but signifieth the seperation of his bodie and bloud formerly made vpon the Crosse And we beleeue that the holy Ghost according to the distinct signification of the sacramentall elements reacheth in a spirituall manner the bodie and bloud of Christ crucified to all faithfull communicants and addeth a seuerall effect and vertue of spirituall refection to each distinct part receiued according to the signification and this is confessed by Vasques Ruard Tapper Alexander Halles IESVIT And this argument hath greatest force in their opinion who shall thinke that Christ leaues heauen for the time to come downe really according to his Bodie and Bloud for how can the bodic of Christ come downe from heauen without bloud and soule vnlesse he come downe dead and so Christ should be not only mystically and figuratiuely but truely and really massacred in the Sacrament and the Eucharist be a bloudie Sacrifice and not incruent as the Fathers tearme it ANSWER None of our part thinke that Christ leaueth heauen to come downe really according to his bodie and bloud Act. 3.21 Donec seculum finiatur 〈◊〉 est Dominus Augustine in Ioh. tract 7. vntill the world be finished the Lord continues aboue And the Fathers tearme the holy Eucharist an vnbloudie sacrifice not because Christ is properly and in his substance offred therein but because his bloudie sacrifice vpon the crosse is by this vnbloudie commemoration represented called to remembrance and applyed Read the sentences of Fathers placed in the margen Read also Peter Lombard and the Enchiridion of Colen IESVIT Secondly The Priest in the person of Christ who is glorious in heauen or rather Christ being glorious in heauen by the mouth of the Priest saith This is my bodie but a bodie deuoid of bloud without soule and consequently dead and sencelesse is not the bodie of Christ as he is now glorious in heauen which hath bloud in the veines and is informed and glorified by a most excellent soule Therefore Christ glorious in heauen cannot say truely that a bodie void of bloud sence and soule is his bodie but soule life and bloud must needs follow and concomitate his bodie wheresoeuer it be ANSVVER First The new Testament acknowledgeth no proper sacrificing Priests but Christ Iesus onely
Cardinall 〈◊〉 saith That indulgences are granted onely for pennance imposed by the Church and so according to this opinion they release people onely of saying a certaine number of 〈◊〉 or from fasting certaine houres or from bestowing a few pence on the poore And it was a common opinion in the dayes of Albertus and Henricus de 〈◊〉 that Popes Pardons were onely pious Fraudes What indulgence is it then for 〈◊〉 Pontificians to Father this Popish Cosenage vpon the holy Apostles and Primitiue Church Thirdly I haue perused the place of S. Cyprian obiected by the Aduersarie and two other Epistles of the like argument wherein I finde that the Martyrs intreated the Church for mitigation of Paenance imposed vpon some offenders but neither doe the Martyrs themselues affirme That they had made Satisfaction for the temporall paine of sinne neither did S. Cyprian grant any other indulgence than from the paenance inioyned by the Canons of the Church in manner before rehearsed But if the Iesuit will obtaine his purpose he must prooue out of Antiquitie that the Church in those dayes maintained a common treasure of Satisfactions an application of the same to people defunct whose soules were frying in Purgatorie and that the Roman Pope was the onely or principall Key-bearer and Barterer of this Treasurie I reade of certaine Popes that they granted pardons of 〈◊〉 hundred dayes and of foure thousand dayes and of eleuen thousand yeares to all people which should rehearse S. 〈◊〉 his prayer and the 〈◊〉 Maria and one other Prayer to the blessed Virgin Our Aduersarie is reputed learned by his owne part and perhaps he hath the gift of working wonders I intreat him out of his owne vast reading or else from Father 〈◊〉 his storehouse to parallell this Romish liberall practise with some historie out of Antiquitie And if he please further to demonstrate that the antient Church had taxes and 〈◊〉 for summes of money vpon particular crimes to be solued to the Publicans of the Ecclesiasticall Roman Tribute in lieu of Pardons or for absolution he shall by disclosing to the world in what old Wall or Vault such vncouth Iewels are to be found highly aduance the reputation of his Roman pennance and pardons and for my part he shall haue leaue to squeese from his spirituall children what money he can vnder that title whereas in the meane time he and his fellowes by false pretence of Antiquitie doe but cheate their simple Lay-Catholikes of their coyne whereof no small summes are transported out of the Kingdome by such like glosses and trickes Fourthly for want of better testimonie the Obiector would prooue the antient vse of Pardons out of lapsed Tertullian for if this man being fallen from the Church opposed them then they were in vse in that age I answer the Aduersary might haue learned of Pamelius That the Indulgences which Tertullian oposed were the same whereof Cyprian speaketh Epist. 10 11 12. to wit relaxation of Canonicall censures and paenance to Adulterers and other notorious sinnes vpon the request of Martyrs being in prison and yet aliue Now it seemed to this Father to be vnlawfull both that the Martyrs should be Intreatours and that the Church should graunt Absolution tosuch persons or vse relaxation of censures imposed by the discipline of those times And it is to be obserued that this Father speaketh of liuing Martyrs and not of Martyrs defunct and of releasing censures and forgiuing faults in this world onely and not in Purgatorie But the Aduersarie is so farre from being able to prooue Popes pardons in Tertullians dayes that he cannot prooue the same to haue had any being in the dayes of Peter Lombard or Hugo Victor IESVIT I shall not need particularly to refell the vulgar obiections against this Doctrine which all proceed vpon mistaking and impugne what we neuer dreamed of They prooue that Christ onely dyed for the world and redeemed Mankind and not any Saint who doubts therof That we are sanctifyed and washed from the staine of sinne by the blood of the Lambe not of any Saint We confesse it They bring the testimonies of S. Leo and of S. Augustine That the Saints receiued Crownes of God gaue not Crownes vnto others but onely Christ we neuer did nor will deny it That onely in Christ we dye to sinne and are raysed againe soule and body vnto eternall life we neuer taught the contrarie for the Satisfactions of Saints haue not vertue to redeeme the world nor to satisfie for the guilt of sinne nor to take men out of the power of darkenesse nor to iustifie soules by infusion of grace nor to purchase for men crownes of Glorie nor to rayse men from life to death but only shew they are auaileable vnto one transitory effect which men might were they feruent obtaine by their owne industrie ioyned with diuine grace to wit the Remission of temporall paine which vertue also comes from the merits of Christ and his most pretious blood in and by the Satisfactions of Saints applyed to worke the aforesaid temporall releasement from which temporall seruitude the children of God may through his gratious assistance by good workes redeeme themselues or by Satisfactions of their fellow Citizens and Saints be redeemed Though this temporarie Redemption compared with the Redemption of Christ deserue not that Tytle ANSWER It is an errour to ascribe any effect to the operations of men which is proper to the death of Christ But to make Satisfaction to diuine Iustice for any punishment of sinne eternall or temporall is an effect proper to the death of Christ. For the holy Scripture teacheth expresly that all spirituall redemption is immediately wrought by the bloud of Christ Heb. 1. 3. When he had by himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 purged our sinnes Col. 2. 15. triumphing ouer them in himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And whereas our Aduersaries restraine these and the like places to the staine and eternall guilt of sinne the Apostle Col. 2. 14. affirmeth That Christ blotted out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hand writing of decrees contayned in the law that was against vs and tooke it out of the way nailing it to his Crosse and that by himselfe Heb. 1.3 Col. 2.15 but the temporarie punishment of sinne is contayned within the latitude of the Law Leuit. 26.14 Deut. 28.15 c. Therefore Christ Iesus our Sauiour immediately and by himselfe and not mediately by the passions of Saints wiped out and remooued out of the way the malediction of temporarie punishment as well as the guilt of eternall When Daniel himselfe one of the most holy Prophets prayed for the remission of his owne sinnes and of the transgressions of his people and made supplication to God for remission of temporall paines and plagues he offereth not his owne merits or Satisfaction but saith Dan. 9.7 Oh Lord righteousnesse belongeth vnto thee but
reficiens Sacramentaliter spiritualiter perfecta autem refectio non est in pane tantum necin vino tantum sed in vtroque b Claud. Saint d. Euchar. Repet 10. cap. 1. c Innocent Papa d. Offic. Miss li. 4. ca. 21. Est modus sumendi corpus sanguinem quo neutrum manducatur bibitur Ad bibendum poculū Domini iure communicationis admittimus Cypr. l. Ep. 2. f Cyprian Ep. 54. Quomodo docemus aut prouocamus eos in confessione nominis Christi sanguinē suum fundere si eis militaturis Christi sanguinem denegamus aut quomodo ad Martyrij poculum idoneos facimus si non eos prius ad bibendum in Ecclesia poculum Domini iure communicationis 〈◊〉 Id. Epist. 63. Quomodo possumus propter Christum sanguinem sundere qui sanguinem Christi 〈◊〉 scimus bibere a Reade before pag. 482. b Cyprian serm d. Caena Dom. Epist. 63. A Domino praecipitur ab Apostolis eius idem confirmatur ab Euangelicis praeceptis omnino recedendū non esse eadem quae magister docuit fecit Discipulos quoque obseruare facere debere cum in claritate sua Maiestate coelesti venire caeperit inueniat nos tenere quod monuit obseruare quod docuit facere quod fecit c Occhagauia d. Sacram. d. Euch. vsu effect tr 2. nu 14. Cyprianus vt legenti 〈◊〉 non habet verba illa plebi ministrando d Cyprian ll 2. Ep. 3. In the beginning of the Epistle Printed at 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 542. e Pammel Cypr. Epist. 63. 〈◊〉 de Heres 46. 〈◊〉 Ser. 4. d. Quadrages Gelas. apud Gratian d. Consecrat Cap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appeale li. 2. ca. 4. 140. 〈◊〉 de Coena Domini a Prateol d. Haer. li. 11. Manichaei à manete quodam c. dicti sunt qui circa annum 273 c. a Floruit Cyprianus an 250. Bell. d. Scriptor b Lev Serm. 4. d. Quadrag Cum ad tegendum infidelitatem suā nostris audent interesse mysterijs ità in Sacramentorū Communione se temperāt vt interdum tutius lateāt ore indigno Christi corpus accipiunt sanguinem autem redemptionis nostrae haurire omnino declinant Quod ideò vestram 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vt vobis huiusmodi homines his manifestentur 〈◊〉 quorum 〈◊〉 fuerit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notati 〈◊〉 à Sanctorum societate 〈◊〉 Sacerdotali authoritate c Vasques in 3. disp 216. cap. 4. nu 42. Ego existimo nequè proptèr Manicheorum Haeresin commendatum fuisse ab Apostolis aut à Leone primo vsum Calicis c. Leo non commendauit vsum Calicis contrà Manichaeos fed admonuit vt diligentèr obseruarent quosdam Manichaeos qui vt se Catholicos simularent ità sumebant Calicem vt sanguinem non haurirent in altera specie d Gratian. d. Consecrat Dist. 2. cap. Comperimus autem quod quidem sumpta tantummodo corporis sacri portione à Calice sacti cruoris abstineant Qui proculdubio nescio qua superstitione dicuntur astringi aut integra Sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur quià diuisio vnius eiusdemquè mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest prouenire e Vasques Disp. 216. cap. 6. nu 76. Quidam probabilitèr explicant de Laicis Manichaeis qui communicabant sub altera specie tantum c. Verum haec explicatio licet reliquis verbis 〈◊〉 accommodari possit extremis tamèn quibus causam reddit non potest conuenire Ill is enim denotat tale esse my sterium secundum se vt sine grandi sacrilegio diuidi nequeat nempè intelligere 〈◊〉 ratione suae significationis institutionis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Confess fid Cath. ca. 19. Hospin Hist. sacra pa. 2. fo 112. 〈◊〉 in 2. Edit loc com Impress Argent ann 1525. fol. 78. 〈◊〉 de Captiu Babilon ca. d. Euchar Hospin Histor. sacr 1. 2. fo 12. a Luther Edit Wittenberg anno 1546. d. Captiuit Babil d. Euchar. pa. 95. col 2. Sivtra species potest negari Laicis poterit eis pars Baptismi poenitentiae tolli Sivini speciem potest Ecclesia tollere Laicis potest panis speciem tollere c. Melancth Loc. Edit 1561. Lipsiae pa. 188. Iuel Replie ar 2. These godly learned men when they saw that through the malice of their 〈◊〉 they could not obtaine that Christs Institution might vniuersally be receiued yet they defired at least it might be left free without restraint for euery Church to do therein as they should think good and that without murmure or offecne of others c. Not that they thought Christ had not ordained the Sacrament to be administred vnto the people in both kinds or that in it selfe it is indifferent but as the godly Fathers at the beginning when they could not persuade the princes of the world and their people to receiue the 〈◊〉 yet they thought they were 〈◊〉 when they might haue place and libertie for themselues surely and with quiet conscience to meet together and to preach the Gospell Concil Floren. in decreto Eugenij 41. Concil Basilien sess 30. Concil Constantiens sess 13. a Const. Concil sess 4. Basil. sess 33. decree That the Pope is inferiour to the Councell and fallible in his iudgeme nt Halens 4. p. q. 11. 〈◊〉 2. a. 4. 55 3. Beda Hist. Gent. Anglic. lib. 2. c. 5. lib. 4. c. 14. a 〈◊〉 before pag. 482. b Vasq. disp 216. cap. 3. nu 38. Negare nō possumus 〈◊〉 in Ecclesia Latina fuissevsum vtriusque speciei vsque ad tempora Sancti Thomae durasse c Alex. Hal. 4. q. 10. m. 4. §. 1. Sumpto hoc Sacramento dignè in 〈◊〉 specie maior est effectus vnionis corporis Mystici cum capite quàm sumpto sub altera Ibid. q. 11. m. 2. ar 4. §. 3. Sumptio sub vtraque specie quem modum fumendi tradidit Dominus est maioris efficaciae complementi Item Licet illa sumptio quae est in accipiendo sub vna specie sufficiat illa tamen quae est sub duabus est maioris meriti tum ratione augumentationis deuotioris tum ratione fidei dilatationis actualis d Beda Hist. Anglorum lib. 4. c. 14. pa. 132. Expectare habes donec Missae celebrantur ac viatico Dominici corporis sanguinis accepto sic infirmitate simul morte absolutus ad aeterna in coelis gaudia subleueris Euseb. li. 6. Histor. ca. 36. ex Epist. Dionis Alex. ad Fabium Genebrardus Paulinus in vita Ambrosij Eus. Hist li. 6. c. 36. a Particulā puer quam apportarat 〈◊〉 siue intinctam in 〈◊〉 senis 〈◊〉 b Burchard Iuo 〈◊〉 vt Eucharistia quae in viaticum ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reseruatur 〈◊〉 sit in sanguinem Domini vt veraciter presbyter 〈◊〉 possit corpus sanguis Domini Iesu Christi prosit tibi in vitam aeternam c Erasm. Censura ante opera Ambr. Idē est Artifex