A GODLY AND [...]euout Treatise, teach­ [...]ng with what due prepa­ [...]ation wee ought to come to the holy Communion, which is indeed an Ab­brigement of the Systeme of Diuinity, and may serue for a Cate­chisme of Chri­stianitie.

WHat is Christi­an Religion? De Religi­one, Zanch tom. 4. in fol pag. 263. & Seqq.

It is that worship and seruice which euery good & [...]odly men ought by vertue of [...]ond and obligation to tender [...]nto God himselfe. Wherein [Page 2] is chalked out vnto vs th [...] way as well of liuing here [...] nestly,Thologia disciplina est non con­templatrix sed practica Syst. Theol. pag. 2. Is diuinas scripturas recte legit, qui vertit verba in o­pera. Ber. Hoc Philo­sophia ge­nus in af­fectibus si­tū verius, quam in Syllogismis, vita est magis quā disputatio, &c. Eras▪ in Paracel. ad studium Christian Philosoph. as liuing hereaf [...] happily; as Augustine sai [...] in his Booke of true Religio [...] the first Chapter. The o [...] course of liuing well and happ [...] consists in true Religion, wher [...] we know the onely true God, [...] worship him in holy purenes [...] For by Religion the soule [...] man, which before by sin [...] was seperate from God bei [...] now reconciled, is againe [...] ed and re-vnited to God, fro [...] whence Religion hath its [...] ry name: For when we [...] lige, as it were; that is, obl [...] and bind ouer againe o [...] soules vnto God, thou w [...] empty our selues of all supe [...] stitious worship contrary [...] Gods seruice. So saith Lact [...] lib. 4. cap. 28.Syst. Theol. pag. 4. and lib. 6. cap. [...] Wee are by the tye of Religi [...] bound and obliged vnto G [...] [Page 3] whereupon it is called re-ligion, Calu. Instit. l. 1. c. 12. §. 1 not as Cicero will haue it, of re­lection, but of religation, in as much as God doth hereby binde vs ouer to his seruice, whom it is our part to serue as our Lord, and to obey as our Father. For in very deed this is the duty of man, wherein the summe of all and the su [...]mitie of a blessed life doth consist. This is the very first step in wisdome,Omnes pro­miscuè ve­nerantur Deum, [...]au­cissimi re­uerentur. Cal. Instit. l. 1. c. 2. §. 2. to know what it is for God truly to be a Father vnto vs, and him with all sanctity to worship and re­uere, obeying his will, and wholy deuoting our selues to his seruice.

Which bee then the princi­pall parts wherein Christi­an Religion, or, the speci­all actions wherein the worship of God standeth.

There bee three of them. First, The meditation of the [Page 4] word of God, and consequent­ly of faith in Christ our Saui­our, which is especially com­prehēded in the word of God, to whom wee must referre all in our meditation. Secondly▪ The vse of the Sacraments in­stituted by Christ. Thirdly, Inuocation of Gods holy name ioyned with the loue of God, and our Neighbour▪ Of the former and last part of Christian Religion, we ha [...] spoken else where, and at ano­ther time; at this opportuni­tie it is our purpose only t [...] treat of the middle or secon [...] Branch of Christian Religion▪ or the seruice of God, an [...] therein touching the vse o [...] the p [...]incipall Sacrament o [...] the New Testament, namel [...] the Lords Supper, which is cal­led commonly the holy Communion, as also the Eucharis [...] that is, a most eminent sacrifice [Page 5] of thankesgiuing to Christ our Sauiour.

Wher [...]in consisteth the true vse and due preparation to the holy Communion?

In two things; to wit, in Knowledge, and Deuotion.

Of what sort is that Know­lege▪ which appertaineth to our commendable prepara­tion vnto, and our lawfull vsing of the holy Commu­nion?

It is of two sorts, Generall, [...]nd Particular.

Of how many kinds is our ge­nerall knowledge?

Of two either it is Prima­ [...]y and indepentant, or Secon­dary, and arising from the [...]ormer.

How many parts hath the for­mer kinde?

It consists of a double do­ [...]trine, the one of God, the o­ [...]her of Gods Word.

[Page 6]What is God?

1. Syst. The­ol p. 10. 2. Ibid. p. 93. 3. Ibid. p. 105 & seqq. 4. Ibid. p. 116 5. Ibid. p. 117 Zanch. Cō ­fess. p. 483. & Loc. Comun: Theol. 1. de diuinis no­minibus & proprieta­tibus. Zanch. tom. 2. detribus Elohim in Illud Ioan­nis. 1 Ioh 5.7. copiosissimé Zan. tom. 1. Si non est vnus, non est. Tertul Deus est v­nus imo, si dici potest, vnissimus. Bern. Syst. Theol. p. 14. contra Tritheitas & Mani­chaeos. [...] Iustin. Mar. & Damasc Syst. Theol. pag 19. De Deo lo­qui etiam vera peri­culosissimū est. Arno [...]. Syst Theol. p. 55. & 58.God is a spirituall Essence, First, before all, most perfect▪ eternall. Secondly, infinite▪ Thirdly, Almighty, of incomprehensible wisedome, goodn [...]sse. Fourthly, mercy. Fiftly▪ Iustice, subsisting in three persons, the Father, the Sonne and the holy Ghost.

What are wee to consider [...] God?

Two things, the Essence, a [...] Person.

What, and of what sort is [...] Essence of God?

It is most simple, and one [...] one, so that God, in regard [...] his Essence, is simply on [...] as [...]he Scripture witnesse [...] Deuter. 6. vers. 4. Heare [...] Jsrael, the Lord our God is [...] God. 1. Tim. 2. v. 5. One G [...] and one Mediatour.

What is the Person?

It is the manner of being [Page 7] God, whereby Gods Essence is made relatiue, and respe­ctiue; which relation not­withstanding neither multi­plieth the Essence, nor diuides it into parts, which may in some sort appeare by the de­grees of light and heate. For in the Sunnes light, there are certaine degrees, as morning or twi-light, and noone-light, or perfect sunne-shine. And yet for all those degrees, the light is the same. So in heate luke-warme, and scalding hot, though they make two de­grees, yet they make vp but one mumericall caliditie,Ibid. p. 16. which in a higher degree is in boyling water now, before being in the same water incli­ning to feruent heate, in a lower degree So then, that we may apply this instance to our present purpose, in some resemblance, the Per­sons [Page 8] of the Deitie,In Dei est alius & a­lius non a­liud & a­liud Vint. Lerinens. M [...] D [...] tam non habit hoe & illud, quam non haec & illa Bern. or these di­uerse manners of Gods being, doe not multiply the Diuine Essence, no more then the di­uers degrees of heate or light doe multiply the light or heat [...] so that I speake right when I say there are moe persons in the diuine Essence, but it can­not be vttered without blas­phe [...]y, to say there are in God more Natures, or more Gods then one.

[...]. Nazianzē Qui nescis Trinitatē, ito ad Ior­danem. Mat. 3. Aug. Syst. Th p 46 vide etiā p. 35. & seqq. Dicamus tres sed non ad praiudi­ciā vnita­t [...], dicamus vn [...] sed non ad con­fussionem Trinitatis. Ber. v. Syst. Theol p. 49. [...]. Na. Quomodò pluralitas in vnitate sit, aut ipsa vnitas in pluralitate, scrutari hoc temeritas est, credere pietas est, nosse vita, & vita ae­terna est. Bern. How many persons are there?

Three, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, which is proued by manifest Testi­monies of holy Writ. Matth. 28 19. Goe teach all nations, baptizing them in the nam [...] (sc. by the Authority and ap­pointment) of the Father, th [...] Sonne, and the Holy Ghost. Iob. 15.26. When that Comforte shall come, whom I will send t [...] you, from the Father, euen t [...] [Page 9] Spirit of Truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he well testifie of me: where they are all three plainely named; the Father, from whom the holy Spirit is sent; the Sonne, who sendeth; and the Holy Ghost who is sent. 1. Ioh. 5 7. There bee three which beare record in Heauen, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one, in Essence or Na­ture.

How proue you that these three persons bee that one God?

First, I must haue it gran­ted, that these three persons are distinct, because hee that sendeth, is distinguished from him that is sent, and hee from whom, is distinguished from him that is sent. Now I [...]c. 15. plainely saith, that Christ is hee that sendeth, the Holy Ghost him that is sent, and [Page 10] the Father, from whom the Sonne sendeth the holy Ghost. Whence I doe necessarily in­ferre, that these three manners of being in God are distinct: which being graunted, I shall easily prooue this three-fold manner of being, or these three Persons in the diuine Essence, to be that true God. For first, as touching the Father, the very aduersaries themselues yeeld,Christus est Deus [...] cōtra Ariū [...] contra Apo­linar. [...] contra Ne­stor. [...] contra Eu­tych. Syst. Theol. pag. 52. & seqq. that he is truely God. And touching the Sonne, wee haue manifest testimonies of the Scripture, Rom. 9.5. Of whom (namely the Israelites) are the fathers, of whom Christ came as concerning the flesh, who is God aboue all, blessed for euer. If aboue all, therefore about those, who by reason of their excellent gifts are called Gods. That the holy spirit is God, these Sentences of Scrip­ture plainely proue: Acts 5.3 [Page 11] Peter saith to Ananias, Why hath Satan filled thy heart, that thou shouldest lye against the ho­ly Ghost? And presently he ad­deth, vers. 4. Thou hast not lyed vnto men but vnto God. There­fore the holy Ghost is God. Another place is 1 Cor. 2.10. The Spirit searcheth all things, euen the profound things of God: And the verse follow­ing, For who knoweth the things &c. Whence wee may thus re [...]son, whosoeuer know­eth the secrets, the profound secrets of God; or which is all one, whosoeuer is omnisci­ent, is God: but the Holy Ghost is Omniscient. Ergo▪ The Maior is euident, the Minor is expr [...]sly in the Text. Secondly, whatsoeuer is in God, is God: but the Holy Ghost is in God: Ergo. The Proposition is of certaine truth, for that God, who is a [Page 12] most simple Essence, void of all difference and compositi­on, cannot consist of any thing which is not God. The assumption is in the Text, v. 11. where it is said; As the reasonable soul is in man: that is, of the essence of man, so the holy Spirit is in God. Hither­to may tha testimony 1 Cor. 3.16. be referred: [...]. August. Enchirid. cap. [...]6. Know yee not that yee are the Temple of God, and that the holy spirit dwelleth in you? where the latter words doe expound the former: for it is all one, as if the Apostle had said; Know yee not that yee are the Temple of God, seeing that the Holy Ghost dwelleth in you, who is God▪ But if the Aduersaries say, that the spirit is nothing else, saue the effects and gifts of God, they are most manifest­ly confuted, and confounded by the words of the Scrip­ture, [Page 13] 1 Cor. 12.4.5.6. There are diuersities of gifts, but the same spirit; there are diuersities of ministrations, but the same Lord, &c. And verse 11. All these gifts worketh that one and selfe same spirit distributing, &c. Whence ariseth this ar­gument; He that distributeth a gift, is not himselfe that gift that is distributed, but the Holy Ghost is the distri­buter of all those gifts: Ergo. The Proposition is cleare e­nough. The Assumption is plaine in the Text, where it is said, that the spirit worketh, and distributeth al those gifts. Another argument out of the same text may bee this: Hee that is endued with a will, hee cannot be a bare vertue or ac­cident, but is a substance sub­sisting by it selfe, but the Ho­ly Ghost; &c. Ergo. The Ma­ior is cleare: for whosoeuer [Page 14] willeth, he vnderstandeth, and whosoeuer willeth and vnder­standeth, hee must bee a sub­stance by it selfe subsisting. The Minor is clearely set downe in the text, where it is said; The Spirit distributeth to euery one as he will.

Fuit princi­pium essen­di DEVS, sequiter cognoscendi principium VERBVM DEI, non [...] Verbum Christi. Syst. Th p. 167. Qui Scrip­turā igno­rat, Christū ignorat. Hieronym, de Scriptu­ra, Zanch. Confess. pag. 482. item in illud Pauli. 2 Tim. 3.14 tom. 8. p. 319 & seqq.I haue heard the doctrine con­cerning God, tell mee now besides what the holy Scrip­ture is?

It is that testimony and witnesse which God hath gi­uen to Mankind, as touching his owne nature and will, and as touching those thinges which appertaine to the sal­uation of man.

How is the holy Scripture diuided?

Three manner of waies: first, by reason of the Time wherein it was reuealed: se­condly, by reason of that Au­thority it hath in proouing: [Page 15] thirdly by reason of the Mat­ter which it handleth.

How is the Scripture diuided in respect of the time wher­in it was reuealed?

Into the Old and New Te­stament. The Old Testament therefore is that part of the Scripture, which God reuea­led to the first of Man-kind, & people of the Iewes which liued vntill the Ministery of Christ, which hee reuealed, I say, by the Prophets, as by his Scribes and Notaries. But the New Testament is called that part of the Scripture which God hath reuealed to Man-kind after the birth of Christ, by the Euangelists and Apostles, as by his Pen­men or Notaries.

How is the Scripture diui­ded, in respect of that autho­rity it hath in prouing?

So it is diuided into the [Page 16] bookes which are Canonicall, and those which are not Cano­nicall, but Apocryphall?

Which doe you call the Cano­nicall Books?

Syst. Theol. pag. 169. item p. 173. Hi consti­tuūt [...]. Chrysost.Those which are of vn­doubted authority in prouing the Articles of Faith, or which are the Square, and Rule of our faith: for Canonicall is deriued from Canon, which signifieth as much as a Rule or Square.

Of what sort are the Canoni­call books?

Of two sortes, either of the Old, or of the New Testa­ment.

Which Books of the Old Te­stament are Canonicall?

The Canonicall Scripture of the old Testament is diui­ded into foure rancks,Syst. The. pag. 182. the first containeth the fiue Bookes of Moses; the second, those Bookes which are called Hi­storicall, [Page 17] as these; Joshua, Iudges, Ruth, the two Bookes of Samuel, the two Bookes of Kings, the two Bookes of the Chronicles, the Bookes of Es­dras, Nehemiah, Ester. The third, Bookes which are writ­ten in verse, which are called Poeticall, as these; Job, the Psalmes of Dauid, the Pro­uerbs of Salomon, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs: the fourth comprehendeth the Prophets, which are either greater Prophets, in number foure, or lesser, to wit, twelue.

Which Bookes of the New Testament are Canonicall?

The Canonicall Scripture of the New Testament is di­uided into the History of the Euangelists, the Acts of the Apostles, the Apostles Epistles, and the Prophecy, or Reuela­tion of John.

Which are called Apocri­phall, [Page 18] or not Canonicall?

Syst. Theol. pag. 190.Which are not of infallible truth and authority in pro­uing the Articles of faith, and consequently which are not the Rule, and Square of our beliefe, but containe precepts of life, and historicall in­structions.

Which are those Apocryphall Bookes?

Among the Bookes of the Old Testament, as wee haue before said, there are some found not to bee Canonicall, such as the Booke of Tobias, Iudith, Wisedome, which falsly is ascribed to Salomon; Eccle­siasticus, or Syracides, the third and fourth bookes of Esdras, all the Bookes of the Macca­bees, Baruch with Ieremy his Epistle, the Prayer of Manas­ses, the fragments of Ester, the additions to Daniel, as is the Song of the three Children, [Page 19] the Historie of Susanna, the Historie of Bell and the Dra­gon. None of all these Bookes are to be found in the Hebrew tongue, in which Language onely God would haue the Bookes of the Old Testament to bee written, neither were they written by the Prophets, or any person immediately called of God. Neither doth Christ, the Euangelists, or the Apostles cite them at any time: and to conclude, there bee many vntruths in them. Wherefore when the Papists vrge any thinge out of these Bookes against vs, wee must answer, that those Bookes containe not the in­fallible Word of God, and consequently that they haue no firme force, or validity in prouing.

How is the Scripture diui­ded, in respect of the [Page 20] matter it handleth?

Into the Law and the Gos­pell: for that part of Gods Word is called the Law, wherein wee are taught what we ought to doe, but the Gos­pell is that part of Gods Word, wherein we are taught, what we ought to beleeue, and consequently wherein wee haue the remission of our sins promised vs by faith in Christ

I haue heard sufficiently, touching the diuision of the Word of God, J pray you also instruct mee in the pro­prieties of it?

That will I willingly doe, so I first admonish you, that hereafter wee shall alwaies take the holy Scripture for the Canonicall Bookes onely, and not at all for the Apocryphall.

VVhat is the first proprietie of the holy Scripture?

The first propriety is, that [Page 21] it deriues all its authority from God alone,Syst Theol. pag. 171. not from the assembly of godly men, which is called the Church.

How proue you this?

I proue it by these reasons: first, the testimony of God hath not any authority from men. The Scripture is the te­stimony of God alone: Ergo. It hath none authority from men; yea, the most holy men that bee; and consequently not from the Church, which is nothing else but a company of godly and sanctified men The force and pith of the ar­gument you shall finde, 1 Ioh. 5.9. If wee receiue the witnes of men, the testymonie of God certainely is greater. Secondly, that must needs be before the Scripture in naturall order, of which the authority of the Scripture dependeth: But the Church is not before the [Page 22] Word of God: Ergo. The Ma­ior proposition is euident, be­cause that which dependeth of another, must needs come after that, on which it depen­deth. The Minor is thus proo­ued: That which is gathered, gouerned, regenerated by the Word, or by the Scripture, that is in order after the Scripture. But the Church. Ergo. The Maior is plaine, the Minor is prooued by 1 Pet. 1.23. Wee are regenerated, and borne anew by the word of God. Iames 1.18. He hath begotten vs by the word of truth. Ioh. 17.20. Which by their word shall beleeue in me. Thirdly, the foun­dation of any building de­pends not on the roofe, or vp­per roomes, which are built vpon the foundation, but con­trarily those same vpper roomes, and the roofe depend vpon the foundation: but [Page 23] the Word of God is the foun­dation: Ergo. The Maior is plaine in it selfe. The Minor is confirmed by that, Ephes. 2.20. You are built vpon the foun­dation of the Profits and Apo­stles. Obict. The Papists obiect to vs that place, 1 Tim. 3.15. Where the Church is said to be the pil­lar and ground of truth. Where­to we answer, Answ. that this argu­ment is sophisticall, or a falla­cie, 1 commonly called a Dicto secundum quid a dictum simpli­citer: For the Church is not called the piller and ground of truth, in regard of it selfe, but in regard of Christ the head, who is that corner stone And further it is so called, in regard it is the keeper of the Scripture,Syst. Theol pag. 181. forsomuch as God hath made the Church onely to haue to doe with the trea­surie of his Word, and in the Church, as on the piller and [Page 24] doore of his house, or pallace, he hangeth those holy Tables, which euery man must go thi­ther to read. No otherwise then the Magistrate hangeth vp on pillars, and gates of his Court, Tables, containing in them his Lawes and Decrees, to the end that his Subiects may there reade them, as in a publike place. Lastly, the Church is called the Pillar of Truth in this respect, because that God vseth the testimony of the Church as his instru­ment, and meanes for the pro­posing, teaching, and expoun­ding of the holy Scriptures vnto men: for the Ministers of the Church are the conser­uers of truth, and the inter­preters of the Scriptures, yet not so, as if the authority of the Scripture did depend on them, but because God vseth them as his seruants and Ministers [Page 25] to propound, and to beate into the memories of men his holy Scripture; euen as a Prince vseth a Cryer for the promulgation of his lawes vnto his Subiects. And here take this similitude with you: a man goeth to the Vniuersi­tie, as vnto the very shop and store-house of Learning, yet hereupon it followeth not, that the truth of that learning we are taught there in the V­niuersitie, doth depend on the authority of the Vniuersity. Besides, this must a [...]so be ob­serued, that whatsoeuer the Papists say tovching the au­thority of her Church aboue the Scripture doth nothing at all profit them, but that they manifestly beg the point in question, whilest they thus argue: The Church hath au­thority aboue the Scriptures: The Pope of Rome is the [Page 26] Church: Ergo. For suppose wee grant them their Maior (which notwithstanding is false, as wee haue manifestly proued) yet they are neuer a­ble to prooue their Minor, as shall bee showne anone more distinctly.

VVhat is the second propriety of the word of God, or the holy Scripture?

Syst. Theol. pag. 176.That it bee intire, perfect, and sufficient to saluation, which is prooued by that, Io [...]. 20.30. Many other sign [...] did Jesus which are not writte [...] in this Booke; but these thinges are written that you may be­leeue, that Jesus is the Christ, that Son of God▪ & that you be­leeuing, might haue life by his name. Out of which place [...] thus reason: That which is s [...] written, that by it wee may beleeue in Christ Iesus, and s [...] obtaine eternall life, that, [...] [Page 27] say, is sufficient to life eter­nall: But the Scripture is so written: Ergo. Againe thence I thus argue: The holy Scrip­ture was written to this end, that wee might beleeue in the Sonne of God, and get eter­nall life: Ergo. Whatsoeuer Word is not written, profi­teth or auaileth vs nothing to faith, & to eternall life which must diligently bee noted a­gainst the errour of the Pa­pists, which say, there are two words of God,Quod non legi, vsur­pare non debeo Amb. Non sum aliorū ser­monum dis­cipulus, nisi coelestium. Origen. the one writ­ten, the other vnwritten, vp­on which pretence they will needs obtrude vnto vs Tradi­tions, which they call Apo­stolicall, the Decrees of the Popes, and the custome of the Church. Of which the Coun­cell of Trent in the fourth Session thus speaketh: Who­soeuer doth not with like affecti­on of mind, reuerence the Tradi­tions [Page 26] of the Church, as hee doth the holy Scriptures, let him bee accursed. But against those Traditions, first, note the suf­ficiency of the Scriptures. Se­condly, this argument▪ The Traditions of the Chu [...]ch ei­ther agree with the holy writ, or they dissent from it. If they be co [...]sonant to it, then they say the selfe same thing th [...] Scripture saith, and so the [...] are Scripture: for that ough [...] not in all reason to be done b [...] m [...], which may bee perfor­med by fewer. Or they dissen [...] from the Scripture (as all th [...] Traditions of the Popes, as namely, that Tradition, wherby the Cup in the Lords Supper is prohibited to be administred vnto the lay people and such like). And if they disagree with the Scripture▪ they cannot fill vp the Scripture, for that which is repug­nant [Page 29] to any thing, doth not fill vp, but rather quite ouer­throw it. Another testimony of the perfection of the holy Scripture is most manifest, in the 2 Tim. 3.16. The whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration from God, and is profitable to teach, to reprooue, to correct, to instruct; that the man of God may be perfect, and perfectly in­structed to euery good worke. From whence wee may frame these arguments. First, the Scripture is a totum, an intire thing: Ergo, it is perfect; for a totum is that, which wanteth no necessary parts. Secondly, that which sufficeth vs for do­ctrine,Adoro ple­nitudinem Scriptura­rū. Tertul. for reproofe, for cor­rection, and instruction, that is full & compleate: for there is none that can shew any thing besides, whereunto the Scripture should bee profita­ble. But the Scripture is suf­ficient [Page 30] to those things: Ergo. Thirdly, that which maketh a man perfect, and furnished to euery good worke, that same must needs be perfect: but th [...] Scripture doth so. Ergo. The Maior is therefore true, be­cause there is no effect which is more perfect then its cause, or because a perfect effect presupposeth the cause to be per­fect, and nothing can giue that to another which it hath not it selfe, if the Scripture therefore make men perfect then it must also be perfect.

VƲhat is the third propriety of the holy Scripture?

That in the Articles of faith,Syst. Theol. pag. 199. which are necessary to saluation it bee plaine, easie and perspicuous; easie, I say▪ and perspicuous; first, in re­spect of them to whom [...] ought to bee a light for the [...] saluatiō, according vnto th [...] [Page 31] 2 Cor. 4.3. If our Gospell be hid, it is hid to them which perish: whence it necessarily fol­lowes, that the Gospell is not hid, but cleare, and open to those which doe not perish, as Peter saith. 2 Pet. 1.19. You doe well, in that you attend to the word of the Prophets, as vn­to a light that shineth in a darke place. Psal. 19.7.8. The word of God is cleare. Psal. 119.105. The word of God is a light to our feete and steppes. Secondly, the Scripture is easie, as it is an instrument, which it hath deriued to it from the princi­pall guide, the holy Spirit, who is that true teacher and interpreter of the Scripture. Ioh. 14.26. The Aduocate which is the holy Ghost, he shall teach you all things. 1 Ioh. 2.27 That annointing, that is, the holy spirit, teacheth vs of all things. Also Ioh. 16.13. When [Page 32] that spirit of truth shall come, he shall leade you in all truth. Lastly, it is easie, if that in the handling of it wee vse conue­nient meanes, and expound one place by another, accor­ding to the rules of good and lawfull exposition, which you may reade in the 201. page of my Systeme of Diuinitie. If then any shall demand,Syst. Theol. pag. 201. who hath the authority to interpret the Scripture, if the Pope of Rome be he? I answer, that e­uery one is the best interpre­ter of his owne words, where­as therefore the Scripture is the Word of God, and of the holy Ghost, and not of the Pope of Rome, therefore the holy Spirit hath the authority to interpret, as that true aduo­cate and teacher of verity. But why then doth the Bishop of Rome chalenge to himselfe this authority to interpret the [Page 33] Scriptures? I answer, because he knowes well enough, how bad his cause is, and therefore dares not submit his Tenents to the Word of God, or the Scripture, if it be rightly vn­derstood, and therefore will he wrest, and stretch the scrip­tures at his owne pleasure. Touching which poynt, I would haue you note the words of a certaine Apostate from the faith, Casper Schop­pius Papist, who is now at Rome with the Pope; hee in that Epistle he wrot touching his defection from vs vnto the Papists, about sixe yeares agoe, set out at Ingolstadium, in the 24 page, saith thus, The summe of all controuersies betwixt the Catholickes and the Lutherans consists in these two things; that besides the holy Scripture, the Traditions of the Apostles, and of the Church, are [Page 34] necessary to bee beleeued. And that the holy Scriptures them­selues, neither can, nor ought to be interpreted of any with autho­rity, saue of the Catholike Ro­man Church. In which two do­ctrines, if one be once perswaded and setled, hee will easily yeeld & aioyne himselfe to the Church of Rome in the rest of the chiefe points of faith: For if I were to dispute with the Heretikes, a­bout any article of faith, it must needs be that there be somewhat set downe in the Bible, touching my opinion, or that there bee no­thing at all to be found for it. If there be nothing in the Bible for­me, presently then I say, that it was wont so to be obserued by tra­dition from the Apostles, in the Church of Rome. But if there be somewhat contained in the Bi­ble, touching mine opinion, and the Heretique will interpret it another way then might serue [Page 35] my turne, then presently I oppose to him, the Church of Rome, that it hath so interpreted it: so that euery Dispute ought to bee reduced to these two heads. Thus farre he. And truly this is it that the Pope of Rome labors for, that hee may wrest the Scripture as seemeth him good; and then it is, as if any offering to fight with ano­ther, and the weapon should be a sword, he would fight vp­on this condition, that hee may be suffered to weild his aduersaries Sword as hee will. And so it is likewise, as if any would haue a suite in Law, tryed before the Iudge according to the lawes, but vpon this condition, that it may be lawfull for him to in­terpret the Law on his owne side; iust so the Pope doth, for hee saith, I will dispute with you out of the Scripture, but [Page 36] so, that it may bee lawfull for mee to interpret the Scripture on mine owne behalfe. I would haue this also noted, that if the Papists demaund who is the Iudge in the con­trouersies of faith? Wee an­swer,Syst. The. pag. 174. item. p. 203. that the chiefe and high­est Iudge of controuersies of faith, is he who is the Author, both of faith and of the scrip­ture, to wit, the holy Ghost. According to that of Ioh. 16.8. When the Comforter shall come, he shall reprooue, he will iudge the world of sinne. And then only the Scripture to bee the Law and Sentence of this Iudge, according where vnto iudgment must be giuen con­cerning cōtrouersies of faith, as it doth manifestly appeare by Ioh. 5.45. There is one who accuseth you, euen Moses. i. e. the writings of Moses which giue iudgement against you; [Page 37] and yet more manifestly, Ioh. 12. vers. 48. He that reiecteth and receiueth not my words, hath one that iudgeth him. This word, &c It is not true there­fore which the Pope of Rome saith, that hee is the chiefe Iudge and decider of contro­uersies: for he is not fit to bee a iudge who is accused and found guilty of deprauing and falsifying the Word of God.

I haue heard you sufficiently about the former sort of knowledge of Christian Religion, or touching the principles of Diuinitie, to wit, God and Gods word: Now I desire to bee in­structed in the second kinde of knowledge, arising from the former, that is, touch­ing tthe parts of this hea­uenly Doctrine which doth spring from the doctrine [Page 38] which is of God and of the holy Scripture?

You tell mee right, and I perceiue you well vnderstand the method and progresse, which ouhgt to be obserued in vnderstanding the doctrine of Religion, and therefore now will I instruct you touching the parts of Diuinity or Chri­stian Religion.

How many parts hath this secondarie or deriued know­ledge?

Two: whereof the forme, is of the end it selfe, the latter is of the meanes that leade vs to that end.

What is the end of Diui­nitie?

Saluation, or life euerlast­ing.

How many waies is the sal­uation of man considered!

Two manner of waies: ei­ther as it is perfect and com­pleate, [Page 39] or as it is but begunne and imperfect: or, either in respect of the life to come, or of this present life.

What is perfect and eternall saluation?

It cōsisteth in three things.Syst. Theol. pag. 110. First, In most absolute per­fection of body and soule. Se­condly, In that vnutterable ioy wherewith wee shall tri­umph before God, the holy Angels, and godly men. Third­ly, In that most euident Maie­stie, glory, and honor, where­in wee shall triumph ouer death, Sathan, sinne and sin­full men. And this is that which Peter saith, 2. Pet. 1. v. 4. We shall be made pertakers, saith he, of the diuine nature, of diuine perfection, ioy and glory. And Phil. 3. vers. 21. Christ shall transforme our base body, that it may be like the glo­rious body of Christ. Esay. 64. [Page 40] vers. 4. 1 Cor. 2. vers. 9. The things which the eye hath not seene, nor the eare heard, nor euer entred into the heart of man to conceiue, are those which God hath prepared for them that loue him.

What is imperfect saluation, or that which is begonne onely?

It is a taste of eternall sal­uation,Syst. Theol. pag. 211. V pag. hic 115. & seqq. or that comfort and ioy of conscience which wee haue in this life arising from the forgiuenes of our sins, and from that confidence we haue towards God, whom we cer­tainely know to bee reconci­led vnto vs by Christ Iesus▪ so that no calamity whatsoe­uer can be able to seperate vs from his loue, no not death it selfe, or that anxity and hor­ror which vsually wee feele a [...] the houre of death. Of this the Apostle speaketh, Rom. 5. [Page 41] uers 1. Therefore being iustifi­ed by faith, we haue peace, e. i. a ioyfull and merry conscience in the very midst of callamity and death, Rom. 8. vers. 35. Who shall seperate vs from the loue of Christ? shall oppression? shall anguish? &c.

I see now what the end is, I may expect to reape from this heauenly doctrine, which how much the more it is desirable, so much the more J long to know the meanes, by which I may be conducted to this end?

The meanes whereby thou maist com to this most desired end, are two. First,Partes Theologiae duae, [...] & [...]. Naziaenzen Syst Theol. pag. 212. the know­ledge of thy misery. Secondly, of thy redemption out of that misery.

The former part of this hea­uenly science touching the diseases of the Soule.

How may I come by the right [Page 42] knowledge of my misery, or of the sores of my soule?

If thou shalt weigh well with thy selfe these foure things. First, that which went before thy misery. Secondly, the efficient cause of thy mise­ry. Thirdly, the parts of thy misery. Fourthly, the exem­plary cause, or glasse wherein thou hast represented vnto thee thy misery.

What is that which went be­fore the miserie of man­kinde?

Quanto vi­demus ma­iora fuisse bona, quae amisimus; tanto gra­uiora cog­noscemus esse mala in quae inci­dimus. Vr­sin. Syst. Theol pag. 218.That happy and blessed e­state wherein man was inue­sted by God before his fall, on the Image of God which wa [...] in man.

What is the image of God in man, or rather what was it?

It was nothing else but that absolute and perfect estate be­fore the fall, consisting in the [Page 43] perfection of the vnderstan­ding and the will of man,De imagi­ne Dei Zanch. tom. 3. pag. 678. and further in the maiestie of man whereby he farre excelled all other of the creatures; or, that I may speake yet more plaine­ly, the Image of God in man was either prime and principall, or secondary and de­pending of the former. The prime Image was both in his minde and in his body.Syst. Theol. pag. 224. In his body there was perfect health and safety. In his mind there was vnderstanding without er­rour; will without staine of sin.De libro arbitrio Zanch. Loc. Com. 3. item tom. 4 p. 87. That other Image which pepended or arose from this, was that maiestie and alacritie was in man, springing from the perfection of his body and soule; touching which, the Scripture speaketh, [...] Gen. 1. v. 26. Let vs make man according to our Image, and according to our likenesse: Ephes. v. 4.24. [Page 44] Paul calls true righteousnesse and holinesse the Image of God. Nazianzē. Hitherto must be refer­red the whole doctrine touch­ing the state of Man before the fall, and touching his li­uing in Paradise, anent which you may read Gen. 1. ver. 27.28.29. and all the second Chapter of that Booke.

What is the cause of mans mi­serie?

Syst. Theol. pag. 233.The fall of our first Parents or the defection of Adam and Eue from God in their first e­state of innocency, which was by eating of the forbid­den fruite.

What haue we to do with the fall of Adam and Eue, see­ing then wee had no being at all?

Adam and Eue did repre­sent all mankind, and there­fore they had giuen them feli­city and the Image of God [Page 45] for all mankind; wherefore in regard, they by their offence lost that which they had re­ceiued for all mankinde, they lost it not in themselues a­lone, but in all their posterity. Euen as if a King should giue any one some Priuiledges for himselfe and his posteritie, and he that had these Priuiled­ges granted, should be attain­ted of Teason against the King, then surely he himselfe should loose all those priui­ledges which hee had gotten of the King, and his posterity should get no benefit of them neither.

And was this so great a mat­ter to bite an Apple, and to eate of it?

The eating of the Apple was a most grieuous offence, not in regard of the Apple it selfe, the losse thereof was but small, for there were Apples [Page 46] good store in Paradise: but because that eating flowed and issued as it were from the fountaine of most horrible sinnes,V. Aug. En­chirid. ad Laurēt ca. 45. & 46. to wit, from pride ma [...] thereby affecting the seate and Maiestie of God,Qui man­ducauerunt vt essent quasi Dii, perdiderunt quod erant facti homi­nes immor­tales. Augustin. and so be­came guilty of high treason against Gods Maiestie, as God mockingly casts man i [...] the teeth, Gen. 3.22. Behold, Adam is made like vnto one of vs, that is, hee is made as it were one of the persons in th [...] Sacred Trinity. Another si [...] is vnbeleefe, in that our first Parents did not beleeue Gods words to bee true, when hee said, in what day soeuer ye shal [...] eate of it, yee shall die the death. But contrarywise, in that they readily beleeued the Diuell who spake vnto them by the Serpent as by his in­strument, and told them, that they should not dye at all, and so [Page 47] they gaue more credit to him then vnto God. The third sin is contemptuousnesse, and disobe­dience, for wee ought to obey God in all his commands, euen in those which wee thinke are but of little rec­koning. The fourth sinne is vnthankefulnesse, for man was created after the likenesse and Image of God, and therefore it was his duty to obey Gods Commandements in token of his thankfulnesse for the be­nefit. The fift and most grie­uous sinne was that apparant reuolt and falling from God to the diuell, namely when man went about to attaine to bee like vnto God by the Counsell and helpe of the diuell, and so conspired as it were with the diuell against God

I haue also heard of the cause of misery, or of the diseases of the soule, tell mee now [Page 48] further, what bee the parts of our misery?

They bee two: Sinne, and the punishment for sinne; for in these two things our misery consisteth. First, that we are sinners: And secondly, that we for sinnes are lyable to temporall and eternall pu­nishments.

What is sinn?

Syst. The, pag. 247. Geminum peccati for­male, pug­nantia cum lege & or­dinatio ad poenā. vrsin. [...], 1 Ioh. 3.4 Est dictum factum con­cupitum contra le­gem Dei. Augustin. De peccato Zanch in c. 3. Genes. tom. 4. pag. 1. & seqq. item tom, 6. pag. 78. S. Th. p. 251. Nihil pec­cato origi­nali ad prae­dicandum notius, nihil ad int [...]lli­gendum se­cretius. August. Peccatum originis est carentia iustitia ori­ginalis de­bitae inesse. August. Peccatiō originis est, quod trahi­mus à nati­uitate per ignorantiā in mente, & per con­cupiscentiā in carne. Hugo. S. Th. p. 268. Committē ­do qua ve­tantur vel omittendo, quae man­dantur, nam boni viri est non tantum recte agere. sedetiam rectè ociari.It is a stepping aside from that rule of perfection and righteousnes which God requireth at our hands. Or, it is whatsoeuer is repugnant to the Law of God.

What sorts of sinne be there?

Two: Originall & Actuall.

VVhat is Originall sinne?

It is that staine had corrup­tion of humane nature, of the vnderstanding & will of man, whereby a man euen from his very birth is carried, and ha­led along to sinfull actions; [Page 49] of this sin speaketh the Scrip­ture, Gen. 6.5. The imagina­tions and thoughts of mans heart are only euill continually: Psal. 51.5. In iniquitie was J formed and conceiued, and in sinne hath my mother brought mee forth: that is, My sinne was concei­ned and borne with me. Rom. 5.12. By one man sinne entered into the world, and death by sin. Also; By the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners.

What is Actuall sinne?

It is that obliquitie or pra­uity, by which the actions & doings of a man, are carried in a course contrary to the Law of God, or else when a man offends against the will of God, not only in inclination and pronenesse, but indeed it selfe.

I haue heard of the former part of mans misery, name­ly, of sinne; what is the [Page 50] other part of humane misery?

The punishment of sinne.

How many kinds of punish­ments for sinne be there?

Two: Temporary and E­ternall.

Temporary punishment wh [...] is it?

Syst. Theol. pag. 225.It is that misery which man endures in this life, as po­uerty, disgrace, diseases, an [...] at the last, death it selfe, which is called, the wages of sinne▪ Rom. 6.23.

VVhat is eternall punishment▪

Syst. Theol. pag. 186.It is that vnspeakable sor­row, torment, and disgrace, which the damned shall suffe [...] in hell with the diuell and [...] Angels.

I conceiue now the parts of mans misery, shew mee [...] the exemplary cause where­by as in a glasse, J may [...] to the knowledge of my mi­sery?

The glasse wherein we may perfectly see our misery, is that high and strict rigour of the law of God, both in ex­acting that righteousnesse, which wee are neuer able to performe, and also in threat­ning most grieuous punish­ments which they must abide, which do not satisfie the Law of God, either by themselues, or by another.

VVhence may we know the ri­gour of Gods Law?

First,De Lege Zanch Cō ­fess. cap. 10. item Loc. Com. 5. itē com. 4. pag. 185. & seqq. euen by euery Com­mandemēt of the Decalogue, of which wee cannot in this life performe so much as one perfectly; the summe of which Commandements are contai­ned in those words, which Saith Mathew hath, Chap. 22 Luk, 10. Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God, &c. Secondly, by those grieuous commina­tions, which are added to these [Page 52] Commandements: Cursed is euery one that abideth not, &c. Deut. 27.26. Gal. 3.10. This then is our greatest misery, that wee cannot satisfie the Law of God, sithence wee are not able nor apt of our selues to thinke any good; 2 Cor. 3. [...]. and consequently that according to Gods word we must be cur­sed both in this life, and in the life to come, vnlesse wee can obtaine from the great mercy of God, redemption and re­mission of our sinnes; which is another thing, euen an ex­cellent remedie against o [...] misery, that this heauenly discipline setteth out vnto vs, and which wee meane now to handle.

The Second part of this celestiall Science, which is touching the freeing of Man from his misery, that is, from sinne, and the punish­ment of sinne.

I Know well my misery, I would gladly know how I may bee freed from this misery, or what remedie there is for these diseases of my soule?

The remedy is two fold, either prime and independant, or secondarie, and depending of the former.

VVhat is the prime, or inde­pendant remedy?

It is our free predestinati­on and election,Syst. Theol. pag. 296. De praede­stinatione. Zanch. tom. 2. p. 476. & seqq. item Mi­scellan: 1. part. p. 1 [...]3. & seqq. & pag. 279. & seqq. whereby God hath decreed from all e­ternity, to redeeme and saue euerlastingly some certaine [Page 54] men by his Sonne, of which these sayings of the Scripture beare witnesse: Ephes. 1.4.5. He hath elected vs in Christ be­fore the foundations of the world were laid. Hee hath predestina­ted vs, whom hee might adop [...] for sonnes in Christ Jesus, eue [...] out of the good pleasure of hi [...] owne will. [...]. De gratia salutis son­te Zanch. Loc. Com 4. item tom. 8. pag. 180. Disputare vis mecum? mirare me­um & ex­clama, O altitudo! Augustin. Rom. 8. verse 30. Whom hee hath predestinated them also he called. Rom, 9. will haue mercy on whom I wil [...] haue mercy: therefore electio [...] is not in him that willeth, or i [...] him that runneth, but in [...] which sheweth mercy, Psal. 15.16. Acts 13. vers. 48. An [...] so many of them as were predi­stinated vnto life eternall belee­ued, Mat. 20. vers. 16. M [...] are called but few elected.

J haue heard as touching th [...] prime remedie of our mis [...] ry, to wit, election vnto [...] eternall, now instruct me [...] [Page 55] the other kinde or remedie?

That is diuided into three heads: First, Redemption. Secondly, Iustification. Third­ly, Sanctification.

VVhat is Redemption?

It is the setting of vs free from sinne, and the punish­ment of sinne, wrought by Christ Iesus, the Sonne of our Redeemer.

How many things offer them­selues to bee considered about our Redemption?

Two: the efficient cause, or Authour of Redemption: Secondly, the obiect of it, whereunto Redemption ap­pertaineth.

VVho is our Redeemer?

Iesus Christ:De Redēp­tore. Zanch Confess. c. 11 for he is made vnto vs of God Wisedome, Righ­teousnesse, Sanctification and Redemption. 1 Cor. 1.30. 1 Tim. 2.5. There is one Me­diatour betwixt God and man, [Page 56] euen the man Christ Iesus.

How many things are wee to consider in Christ our Re­deemer?

Two: his Person, and his Office.

How many things are there to be considered in the Per­son of Christ?

Two: to wit, the parts of it, and their Vnion.

Of how many parts doth the person of Christ consist?

Syst. Theol. pag. 312.Of two: the diuine nature, and the humane. And this I p [...]oue, that Christ consisteth on these two Natures, because he is true God, and true man. That he is true God, we haue spoken before, when we pro­ued the Sonne to be God. And truely that there is another Nature in the Sonne of God, besides the humane nature, may bee proued by two ma­nifest arguments, the former [Page 57] whereof is this: In what per­son soeuer there is made a di­stinction and limitation, so that one thing is attributed to it, by reason of one part, and another thing agreeth vnto it, by reason of another part, in that person of necessity there must be two natures: but in the Person of Christ there is such a limitation: Ergo. The Minor is proued out of Rom. 1.3. where the Apostle saith, that the Sonne of God was made the seede of Dauid according to his flesh. Whereupon it ne­cessarily followeth, that there is another thing in Christ be­sides his flesh: for when as I say, that man is immortall ac­cording to his soule, it must needs follow, that there is some other thing in man be­side his soule: for euery limi­tation, argueth a diuersitie in that which is limited. The o­ther [Page 58] argument is, to whom many things are attributed, which can in no wise agree to humane nature, in him there must needs be another nature or essence distinct from the humane nature. But vnto Christ many things are so at­tributed: Ergo. The Minor is proued by that, Iohn 8. verse 58. Verily, Verily, I say vnto you, Before Abraham was, I am. This can by no meanes be vn­derstood of the humane na­ture, because Christs Natiui­tie was two thousand yeares after Abraham. That trifling exposition which the Samosa­tenian Heretikes giue of this place, before Abraham was, to wit, the Father of the faith­full, I am, is altogether vn­sound, and not sounding with the text, neither with the scope and intension of Christ in this place; for hee was to [Page 59] answer to the obiection of the Iewes, who had said in the verse going before, Thou art not yet fiftie yeares old, and hast thou seene Abraham? Now what an answer should this haue beene, if he had said, Be­fore Abraham was the Father of the faithfull, I am: for that should haue beene as ridicu­lous an answer, as if when one should say to me, thou art not yet forty yeares old, and hast thou seene Sigismund King of Polonia? and I should answer, Before my sonne shall get a sonne, and be a father, I am; would not all laugh at such an answer, giuen to that questi­on? and that Christ is Man, it needs no prouing, because all grant it.

Why is not the sole humane Nature of Christ, called a Person as well as euery one of vs be called persons?

Persona est 1. substātia 2. singularis 3. Intelligēs 4. Non purs alterius. 5 Non sus­ [...]tata ab a­lio. 6. In com­municabilis Syst. Log. l. 1 cap. 5. Totus totū, me assump­sit vt toti mihi salutē gratificare tur: quod u. in assūp­tibile est incurabile est Lumb.Although the humane Na­ture of Christ consisteth of a soule and a body, euen as wee doe, notwithstanding it can­not subsist a part by it selfe, without adioyning it to the diuine Nature, whereas wee can subsist euery one by him­selfe seuerally; otherwise hee is like vnto vs in other things, sinne onely excepted, as the Scripture witnesseth, Heb. 2. verse 14. Because therefore the children are partakers of flesh and blood, euen Christ also was made partakers of them. And verse 16. He tooke not the An­gels, but the seede of Abraham, whereupon hee ought to bee made like vnto all his brethren in sub­stance; namely, according to his soule and body: Which may bee obserued against the Vbiquitaries, Syst. Theol. pag. 320. who conceit there was another kind of hu­mane substance in Christ, then [Page 61] such as we haue; namely, such a one as can bee in one, and the selfe same instant of time euery where in all places both in heauen and earth, and so they confound the diuine and humane Nature one with the other.

I haue heard what bee the parts of Christs person: now shew me what is the v­nion of those two parts in Christs Person?

It is that indissoluble knot, whereby the humane Nature is so surely tyed vnto the di­uine, and the diuine Nature so linked to the humane, that of them two is made but one Person, and that those Na­tures for euer cannot be dis­ioyned the one from the o­ther.

VVhat are wee to consider in this vnion?

Two things, to wit, The [Page 62] cause of the Vnion of the two Natures in Christ, and then the properties of this vnion?

VVhat is the cause of the V­nion of these two Natures in Christ?

Syst. Theol. pag. 313. Assumpsit quod non e­rat, non a misit quod erat. Aug. De Incar­natione. Zanch. tom 8 pag. 16. & seqq.The conception of the hu­mane Nature in the Virgin Maries wombe wrought by the Holy Ghost, and then the Natiuitie and Incarnation, whereby after that most strait coniunction of the humane Nature with the diuine in the Virgin Maries wombe, the man Christ was borne and brought forth into this light, See Syst. Theolog. pag. 323.

How many proprieties hath this Vnion?

Syst. Theol pag. 316. [...]. Cvrill.Three: First, that it is ex­ceeding fast and sure. Second­ly, that it cannot possible bee dissolued. Thirdly, that by reason thereof, those things that agree only to the one Na­ture, [Page 63] are notwithstanding attributed to the whole Per­son,Silua pro­prietate v­triusque natura, sus­cepta est à maiestate hum [...]litas, à vertute infirmitas, ab aeterni­tate mor­talitas. Leo. Vid. Pet. Lumbard. l. 3. sent. di­stinct. 21. Syst. Theol. pag. 326. because of either of those two natures. See Syst. Theol. pag. 320.

I haue heard as touching the Person of Christ, now it re­maines, that I bee instru­cted in the Office of Christ, and first of all that you tell me how the office of Christ is called generally?

It is in generall tearmed the Office of a Mediatour.

What is a Mediatour?

Generally a Mediatour im­porteth such an one as doth reconcile the party offending to the party offended, which reconciliation consisteth in these three things. 1. The Me­diatour must make interces­sion for him that hath grieued the party offended. 2. Hee must satisfie the party offen­ded for the iniurie and wrong [Page 64] done.Non medi­ator homo praeter de itatem, non mediator Deus prae­ter huma­nitatem sed inter diui­nitatem so­lam & hu­manitatem solam me­diatrix est humana diuinitas & diuina humanitas. August. 3. He must promise and lisewise prouide that the of­fender shall not offend any more. And therefore when we say Christ is a Mediatour, it is as if wee say that Christ is that Person that hath appea­sed God, whome mankind by their sinnes had most g [...]ie­uously offended, and who hath giuen satisfaction to the Iu­stice of God by his Passion and Death, who prayeth for sinners, and applyeth his me­rit vnto them by faith, who regenerateth them by his ho­ly Spirit, that they may begin in this life to hate sinne, and to bee warie that they offend God no more.

Of how many sorts is the Of­fice of Christ our Medi­atour?

Of three sorts: Propheticall, Scerdotal, & Regal, in regard whereof our Sauiour is called [Page 65] Christ, i. e. anointed and ap­pointed vnto this triple Of­fice, because in the Old Te­stament by Gods owne com­mand, there were anointed Profits, Priests, and Kings.

Which is the Propheticall Office of Christ, and in what doth it consist?

It consists in two things. 1.Syst. Theol pag. 333. In the Office of teaching: And 2. In the Efficacie of his teaching: for Christ is called a Prophet. 1. Because he hath reuealed God and Gods will vnto Angels and vnto men. For God could no otherwise be knowne, then by the Son, according vnto that: Iohn 1. 18. The Sonne who is in the bo­some of the Father, he hath re­uealed him vnto vs. 2. Because he hath appointed and preser­ued in his Church the Mini­stery of the Gospell, and be­stoweth on his Church able [Page 66] Teachers and Ministers, fit­ting and furnishing them with gifts necessary for teaching, Ephes. 4. vers 11. Christ hath giuen some to be Prophets, other to be Apostles, and Teachers. 3. Because hee is powerfull by the Ministerie of the Word, and inclineth the hearts of such men as are elect, to be­leeue and obey the Gospell, Luk. 24. vers. 45. Then he o­pened their vnderstanding, that they might vnderstand the scrip­tures. Acts 16. vers. 14. The Lord opened the heart of Lydia, to attēd vnto those things which were spoken by Paul.

Which is the Priestly Office of Christ, and wherein doth it consist?

Syst. Theol. pag. 340.It consists in three things. First, in the purging of our sinnes. Secondly, in the ver­tue and applying of that Pur­gation. Thirdly, in his Inter­cession [Page 67] for vs: for as the Priest in the Old Testament had two Offices, the one to make attonement for sinne, and the other to pray for the people. So likewise the Priest­ly Office of Christ heerein consisteth. First, that hee should offer himselfe as a Sa­crifice to his eternall Father for our sinnes. Secondly, that he should make Intercession for vs vnto his eternall Fa­ther.

What are there to bee conside­red in the first part of Christs Priestly Office, to wit, in the satisfaction for our sinnes?

There be two: namely, the causes or meanes whereby Christ wrought this expiati­on, and so satisfied for our sinnes; and secondly the Pro­prieties of that Expiation.

VVhat bee the causes by [Page 68] which Christ wrought this expiation?

These be of two sorts, ei­ther Prime, or arising from the prime causes.

VVhat is the prime cause?

Syst. Theol. pag. 342.The obedience of Christ in that he humbled himselfe, and was subiect to the Law, to the end that he might satisfie for vs, who had broken the Law. According to that, Rom. 5. verse 19. As by the disobedi­ence of one man, to wit, of A­dam, many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one, to wit, of Christ, many shall be made righteous.

VVhat is the other cause a­rising and springing from this prime cause?

It is two-fold. The Passion; and the Death of Christ.

Of what sort is the Passion of Christ?

It is of two sorts. Exter­nall, [Page 69] and Internall.

VVhat is the Externall Pas­sion?

It is both that anguish which Christ endured in his most Sanctified body; and al­so that ignominy and shame which hee sustained for our sakes.

VVhat was the Internall Passion?

That wonderfull sadnesse,Deum pa­ti plus est and heauinesse, which Christ felt in his soule for our sinne; Of which it is said,quam om­nes homines in omnem aternitatē pati. Mat. 26. v. 38. My soule is heauy euen vnto the death, where, by death he vnderstandeth not only cor­porall death, but eternall, as if he had said, my soule is as heauy and sorrowfull, as their soules are which must for euer be damned.

How many were the torments of Christ in soule?

Two.

[Page 70]Which is the former?

Syst. Theol. pag. 348.The former was in the Gar­den, before he was apprehen­ded and led to publike iudge­ment:Audi vtrā ­que vocem, tum carnis infirmae, Pater, si possibile sit, transeat à me calix: tum promp­ti animi, Non tamen vt ego volo sed vt tu vis fiat. Ambros. for there beganne hee to bee affraid of himselfe, lest God should leaue and forsake him, whom he then beheld as one who was grieuously of­fended for the sinnes of Man­kinde, and consequently who was extreamely angry with him that had taken and trans­lated vpon himselfe the sinnes of the whole world.

Whereby doe you know the greatnesse of these torments, and sufferings in the soule of Christ?

By two tokens. First, in that Christ there needed Angels to comfort him, and to hold him vp, lest being too much affraid by that horrible sight of the angry and wrathfull God, hee should haue fainted. See Luk. [Page 71] 22. v. 43. and hence it was that hee vttered that speach, My soule is heauy vnto death, euen to eternall death.

What is the other token of those most grieuous torments in the soule of Christ?

His bloody sweat; for this was a manifest signe that all the naturall forces in Christ were much weakened, and as it were bound from doing their Office, by reason of that great torment and terrour, so that nature could not keepe the blood any more in the veines, but was faine being coniealed, and clotted, to cast it out as it were, and driue it to the exterior parts, of which great violence and terrour, the like example can no where be read in any History.

VVhich is the other suffering or torment of Christ in soule?

The latter was that which a little before his death hee felt vpon the Crosse, when he stroue against that temptat [...]ō of his perpetuall separation and obiection from the face o [...] God, whereupon he sent forth that dolefull cry, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken mee? where by a Metonymy he calleth that fearefull temptati­on (wherewith those are won [...] to bee troubled whom God hath cast from his sight, and quite forsaken) desertion or forsaking. For requisite it was that Christ should endure such a temptation, that hee might deliuer vs from eternall damnation.

I haue seene the passion of Christ, now tell me his death?Syst. Theol. pag. 355.

The death of Christ, is the separation of his Soule from his Body, whereby hee satis­fied [Page 73] for, and purged our sins and deliuered vs from eternall death. And so much the very shedding of blood and water out of Christs side did mani­fest, of which Iohn speaketh, Iohn 19. vers. 34. One of the Souldiers (saith he) pearced his side, and presently issued out blood and water; by the blood, Christ signified that our sins were ransomed, and satisfied for: by the water, that we are washed from the filth of our sinnes.

It followeth now in order that you instruct me as touching the proprieties and be­nefits of Christs Passion, tell mee therefore what is the first proprietie of Christs Passion?

This it is, that it was alto­gether necessary, in regard that mankinde could no way else be freed from eternall death, [Page 74] but by the death of the Sonne of God: And that for this rea­son, because the most high God is most iust, and therefore ne­uer remitteth sinnes without satisfaction; sithence, that by nature hee hateth sinnes, and can in no wise indure them: for he that is iustice, most e­minently, cannot away with iniustice, euen as the fire can­not abide water. As it is said, Psal. 5. vers. 4. Thou art not a God that willeth wicked­nesse. Againe, plaine places of the Scripture doe testifie the same. Rom. 8. vers. 3. That which was impossible to the Law, that hath God done by sen­ding his Sonne, i. e. that which by no other meanes could haue beene performed, was done by the death of the Son of God, Heb. 2. v. 14. There­fore because the children are par­takers of flesh and blood, hee also [Page 75] in like manner was made parta­ker of them, that he might abo­lish by death him that had the power of death, that is, the De­uill; and in the ver. following, and might set at libertie those which through the feare of death were subiect vnto bondage all their life long: that is, that hee might redeeme those which otherwise should haue peri­shed eternally, vnlesse Christ had wrought their Redemp­tion. And truly if there had beene any other way to haue satisfied for sinne, then that might haue beene performed, either, by our selues, or by some other creature. But wee could not haue done this for our selues. First, because what­soeuer good we doe, wee doe already owe it vnto God, and that which we owe vnto God is not the price of Redempti­on or satisfaction: but it is [Page 76] due debt. Secondly, because we adde somwhat to the score of our d [...]bts euery day, and therefore we can neuer be a­ble to satisfie and pay them. And that wee daily adde sinne vnto sinne, See 1 Iohn 1. v. 8. Psal. 130. v. 3. Math. 6 v. 12. Math. 18. v. 25. Thirdly, be­cause sinne is a wrong and in­iurie to God, and so an infi­nite euill, and therefore also deserueth either eternall pu­nishment, or one equall there­unto, out of which (if it had beene laid vpon vs) we could neuer haue beene able to haue freed our selues. No other crea­ture could satisfie for vs; for example, Not the Angels▪ first, because man, and no o­ther creature may be punished for that sinne man had com­mitted, the Iustice of God re­quiring that it should be so, as it is said, Ezech. 18. verse 4 [Page 77] That soule that hath sinned, euen that shall die. Secondly,Homo debu­it sed non potuit, Deus potuit sed non de­buit, &c. O sapientia potens at­tingens v­bique forti­ter! O po­tentia sapi­ens, dispo­nens omnia suauiter! Bern. Non satia­bar dulce­dine mira­bil [...], conside­rare alti­tudinem consilii tui super salu­tem gene­ris humani▪ August. Be­cause no creature, no not the Angels are able to escape and free themselues out of eter­nall punishment. Whereupon it followeth, that it was re­quisite, that he who should sa­tisfie the Iustice of God for our sinnes, should bee truly God, and truly man. Man he was to bee, because man had sinned, and therefore Gods Iustice so requiring, he that should pay and smart he must be man, as it is said, Heb 9.22. Without shedding of blood, there is no remission of sinnes: wherefore that Christ might shedde blood, it was meete he should be man. And he was to be God too: First, that by the power of his diuinitie, hee might vndergoe the infinite anger of God against the sinn of mankinde, with which an­ger [Page 78] Christ should certainely haue beene ouerwhelmed,Opus si [...]e exemple, gratia sine merito, cha­ritas sine modo Bern. O foelix cul­pa, quae talē & tantum meruit re­demptorē! if hee had beene but bare man; Because God is a consuming fire, Deut. 4. vers. 24. and there­fore as man hee desireth the cup of his Passion might bee taken away from him, as be­ing that which hee could not beare, as he was man: And as man hee cryeth out vpon the Crosse, Oh God, why hast thou forsaken me? Secondly, It was needefull that he should be tru­ly God, who would satisfie for our sinnes, that his suffering and punishment might be of infinite worth, and so equiua­lent to eternall damnation: For, because we by our sinnes had deserued not only Tempo­rall but Eternall punishment, it was necessary that hee wh [...] would take in hand our deli­uerance, should vndergoe not the temporall punishment a­lone, [Page 79] but the eternall too; the Eternall, not by reason of the extent and continuance of it, but in value and equiualence, that is, his punishment was to bee equiualent to eternall punishment, or to haue an e­quall proportion with eter­nall punishment. But no mans punishment can equalize e­ternall punishment, but only of him who is himselfe eter­nall, who is truly God, where­upon the Fathers said very rightly and deuoutly. For God to suffer, it is more then for all men to bee damned eternally▪ Thirdly, Because the satis­faction must needs haue been of infinite worth and value, to the end it might sufficiently serue for the purging and ran­soming of all mens sinnes. But none there is that can worke such a satisfaction of infinite value, vnlesse hee himselfe [Page 80] bee infinite, that is, God.

What is the second propriety of Christs Passion?

That it was truly expiatory, and satisfactory, that is, our sinnes by vertue of Christs ex­piation were forgiuen vs. Which must bee noted, 1, against the Samosatenians, who blasphemously say, that the Passion of Christ was only ex­emplary, that is, that Christ by his Passion would giue vs on­ly an example to obey God in all things, and to beare the Crosse which God shall lay vpon vs patiently, as Christ before vs patiently did beare his Crosse. This dangerous doctrine, that throweth our consciences headlong into the pit of despaire, arose from no other spring, then the de­niall of the God-head of the Sonne of God. For, because there was none could satisfie [Page 81] for our sinnes, except he were God, as we haue also a little before prooued, and the Sa­mosatenians deny Christ to be truly God, therefore no far lie was it, if they thought, that the Passion of Christ was not satisfactory but only exem­plary. But to their blasphe­mies wee oppose; First, the Diuinity of the Son of God, prooued and euicted already by euident testimonies, to wit, when we concluded this necessarily, that Christ who suffered for vs was the Sonne of God, and hence it will fol­low that his suffering was of infinite valour, and conse­quently, that it was satisfacto­rie. Secondly, most apparent testimonies of holy writ, Esa. 53. vers. 4. Hee himselfe car­ried and bare our infirmities tru­ly, and vers. 5. He was tormen­ted for our sinnes, and hee was [Page 82] broken for our iniquities, Rom. 5 vers. 9. Now then being iusti­fied by his blood, wee shall bee saued. 2 Cor. 5. vers. 18. All these things are of God, who hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe by Jesus Christ, and vers. 21. He made him who knew no sinne to be sinne for vs. 1 Tim. 2. v. 5.6. There is one God, one Me­diatour of God and men, euen the man Christ Iesus who gaue himselfe, a price of our Redemp­tion: an example is one thing, and a price or ransome is ano­ther thing. Galat. 2. vers. 20. The Sonne of God hath giuen himselfe for me, for if righteous­nesse be by the Law, then Christ died without a cause; as if hee had said, Christ dyed to that end, that by his death hee might bestow on vs righteous­nesse, in satisfying Gods Iustice thereby for our offen­ces. But there is a very plaine [Page 83] place, Gal. 3. ver. 13. Christ redeemed vs from the curse of the Law, when hee was made a curse for vs: for it is written, cursed is hee that hangeth on the tree. 1 Iohn 1. verse 7. The blood of Iesus Christ, the Sonne of God, purgeth vs from all our sinnes. 1. Iohn. 2. verse 2. Hee is the propitiation for our sinnes. These are most pregnant pla­ces of Scripture for this point, whereunto wee may adde this argument. If the Passion of Christ was but ex­emplarie, surely he would ne­uer haue cryed out with a loud voice, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? for those words are not set downe as an example for vs to follow, nay rather we ought to doe quite contrary to them, euen to haue alwaies sure confidence in God, and neuer to thinke, or cry out, that we are forsa­ken [Page 84] of him, as it is said, Rom. 8. vers. 15. wee must cry Abba Father, in thee doe I settle my soule. Againe, if the Pas­sion of Christ was but exem­plary, how were then the Fa­thers saued which were before Christ, and so had not his ex­ample? and how was the thiefe saued, that could not i­mitate Christ in his example, whereas he was now hanged on the Crosse as wel as Christ, and that before his conuersi­on. Secondly, this same pro­priety of Christs Passion must be noted against all such, as attribute the purging of their sinnes, and the merit of the forgiuenesse of them to almesdeeds, or other works of their owne: for if so be that there is no remission of sinnes, but by shedding of blood, as wee haue shown before, and almesdeeds, or other workes, euen [Page 85] the best of thē shed no blood, certainely then by no works of ours whatsoeuer can there bee wrought expiation or re­mission of sinne.

What is the third propriety of Christs Passion?

That it was most sufficient, Per Chri­stum hominem iusti­tiae Deiplenissime sa­tisfactum pregenere humano. Bellar. lib. de asccus­ment in De um, grad. 13. cap. 3. neither neede wee any more expiation: which is proued by that, Heb. 9. v. 26. New was he in the end of the world made manifest by that offering vp of himselfe once to take away sinne. And verse 28. Christ was once offerd vp, that hee might take a­way the sinnes of many. And yet more euidently, Heb. 10.12. This man after the offering of his sacrifice, sitteth for euer at the right hand of the Father. And vers. 14 By his one obla­tion; that is, by that his obla­tion, which only is most per­fect and sufficient. Now that w^t is said, Col. 1.24. Objection I fulfill the [Page 86] remainders of Christs suffering or passion in the flesh; Soluti. It must not be so vnderstood, as if the Passion of Christ were not of it selfe sufficient, [...] Christi sunt duplicia quaedam [...] in carne sua, quadā [...] in membris quae sunt Christi, quia mēbrorū. Za [...]ch. but needed some addittament to fill it vp: but there, by a Synecdoche, the Passions of Christ hee calleth all such, as the members of Christ were to suffer: as if he said; I must also indure those afflictions, which Christ shall feele in his members, as he ex­pressely annexeth; I fulfill the remnant of Christs Passion in the flesh, for the body of Christ which is his Church: that hee might plainly shew, that hee spake not of that passion which Christ suffered for our sinnes,Omnes sanctorum afflictiones, vel sunt [...], q [...]bus pu­niuntur peccata, vel [...] quibus pro­batur fides vel [...] quibus con­firmatur doctrina, & de his loquitur. Melanct. but of the crosses and afflictions which the Church must sustaine in this world, which Church by a Metapho­ricall kind of speaking is the body of Christ. And this which [Page 87] we haue spoken about the suf­ficiency of the passion of Christ, we must note againe against the Papists, who reach and say, that expiation and purging of sinne, is partly by good workes, which shall bee confuted in the doctrine of Iustification, partly by the Masse, which shall likewise bee confuted in the point of, and concerning the Lords Supper, and partly by Purga­tory, which (say they) is a fire, in which the soules of men af­ter this life are tormented with temporall paines, and are purged from sinnes, and from which the soules of such as are aliue by fauour and by prayers, may be deliuered, as the Councell of Trent saith in the fifth Session. Against which obserue these reasons: First, Calu, [...]nsti l. 3. c. 5. §. [...]. & seqq. in the sacred Volume there is no one testimony of [Page 88] Purgatory, nor not so much as one example of any one that was in that Purgatory fires Ergo, it is a meere inuen­tion of their owne braine; They vrge a place, Obiecti. 1 Cor. 3. verse 13. where it is said, that by the fire shall be made manifest, and proued, euery mans worke of what sort it is. But they ap­ply this to Purgatory very foolishly:Solus. for the Apostle spea­keth as touching the edif [...]ca­tion of the Church, and saith, that the time shall come, when it shal be tryed and examined, how much euery one hath profited in edifying the the Church, by the word of God, and the holy Spirit, which two he calleth fire, by a Metaphor. Hee addeth fur­ther, Verse, 15. He shall be sa­ued but euen as it were by the fire: where abiding still in the Metaphor and similitude, he [Page 89] saith, that not all those who haue not edified aright, shall straight way bee damned for euer, but that they shall suffer a tryall in their owne consci­ence, because they haue not so faithfully discharged their Of­fice as they should. Secondly, obserue two manifest say­ings of the holy Writ, where­in you shall finde but two pla­ces only that must bee in the next world pointed out vnto you, the one for the blessed, the other for those, who are eter­nally damned▪ Mark the last. 16. Iohn 5.24. Verily, verily, I say vnto you, who so heareth my word, and beleeueth in him that sent me, shall not come into iudg­ment; and by consequence not into Purgatory, which is a part of Iudgement; but shall passe from death to life. Reuel. 14. vers. 13. Blessed are they henceforth which dye in the [Page 90] Lord. Henceforth; that is, from the very moment where­in they dye. There is also a plaine place. Luke 23.43. where Christ saith to the thiefe; To day shalt thou bee with mee in Paradice: where­as he (if any) needed this Pur­gatory fire.

I haue heard sufficiently, as concerning the first part of Christs Priestly office, name­ly, the purging away of our sinnes; tell me what is the second part of the Priestly Office of Christ?

Syst. Theol. pag. 357.It is that effectuall applica­tion, whereby Christ doth al­sufficiently and powerfully apply that his purging per­formed by him vnto the faith­full, so that by it they may obtaine remission of sinnes, reconciliation and peace.

What is the third part of this Office of Christ.

It is his intercession for vs

VVhat doe you meane by in­tercession?

I doe not meane any Pray­er, or suite, whereby Christ would get vnto vs againe the the fauour of God, as one man is said to interceed for ano­ther, that he may procure him somewhat; but I vnderstand, first that perpetuall value and vertue of the Sacrifice of Christ, namely, in that Christ presenteth his passion, which he suffered for vs, vnto the eternall Father. Secondly, the Fathers consent resting in this Passion of Christ, contented and agreeing, that this Pas­sion of Christ shall be of force for vs for euer.

VVhich is the third Office of Christ?

His Regall Office:Syst. Theol pag. 359. for Christ is not only a prophet & a priest vnto vs, but he is also a King.

[Page 92]In what points consisteth the Regall Office of Christ?

In foure: First, in that hee gouerneth the Church by his Spirit, and by his Word; and doth not only shew vnto vs by his Word what we ought to doe, but by the worke of the Spirit in vs, enableth vs to doe them. Secondly, in that he defendeth vs against our enemies, Satan, Sinne, and Death, that they haue no po­wer to hinder our saluation. Thirdly, in that he beautifieth his Church with excellent gifts, and appointeth the Mi­nisterie of his Word, making men obedient vnto his owne ordinance. Fourthly, in that at the end of the World he shall appeare to bee Iudge of all men,Syst. Theol. pag. 368. and shall condemne the wicked to eternall punish­ments, but shal make the godly to shine with eternall glory.

[Page 93]I doe already conceiue the office of Christ what it is, & and of how diuers sorts it is: now I would haue you tell mee what the obiect is about which Christ exer­cises this his Office?

It is the Church.Calae Instit. lib. 4. ca. 1. De Eccle­sia. Zanch Miscellan. 2. part pag. [...]1. & seqq. item Con­fess cap. 2 [...].

How many waies is Church taken?

Two waies: in a large, or in a more strict signification.

What is the Church taken in the large accepti [...]n?

It is the multitude or com­pany of all such men,Syst. Theol. pag. 371. as haue the word of God preached vn­to them, in which company there bee many Hypocrites which doe not beleeue truly, and therefore are damned for euer.

What is the Church as it is strictly taken?

It is that number and company of men, which are elect [Page 94] of Christ by faith vnto eter­nall life.Syst. Theol. pag. 383. And this company is wont to be parted into two rankes, the one Militant, the other Triumphant. That com­pany of the elect and godly, is called the Militant Church, which remaineth yet on earth; but the Triumphant is that company of the faithfull that is already in Heauen. And so the rule of the Fathers is to be vnderstood:Non perue­nit ad prae­mia Christi qui relin­quit ecclesi­am Christi. Cypr. Non Deus huic pater est, cui non Ecclesia mater. [...]. Nazianz. He shall neuer bee a member of the Church Tri­umphant, that hath not beene a member of the Church Mili­tant. But whereas the Church is diuided into the visible and inuisible Church, that is no true diuision to speake properly, but only a distinction of di­uers respects in the Church. For the Church is said to bee visible, in respect of the men themselues which are in the Church, and may bee seen [...], [Page 95] and inuisible, in respect of the internall graces, to wit, of faith, and other gifts of the holy Spirit, which are not so obuious to the senses. Which must be noted against the Pa­pists, who would haue the Church to bee a glorious ap­pearing company, which may by the very senses be pointed out, and acknowledged by the externall pompe of ceremo­nies, as Bellarmine affirmeth. The Church is as visible, as the common wealth of Ʋenice. Con­trary whereunto our Sauiour speaketh, Luk. 17.20. The Kingdome of God commeth not with obseruation; where it is apparent enough out of the Text, hee speaketh of the Church in this world, namely, that it shall be no such glori­ous company, as should bee knowne by externall ceremo­nies and obseruations, or by [Page 96] solemnities, aparrelling of Senatours, of Counsellors, and other such like.

What are to be considered a­bout the Church?

The Head, the Members, and the Proprieties.

Who is the Head of the Church?

Syst. Theol. pag. 374.Christ alone is the Head of the Church, aswell of the Mil­litant, as the Triumphant, which is confirmed, first by apparent testimonies of holy writ, Ephes. 1.12. God hath put all things vnder the feete of Christ, and hath appointed him ouer all to bee the Head to the Church, which is the body. And Ephes. 4 15. Christ is the head, by whom the whole body is coup­led and knit together Col. 1.18. Christ is the Head of his Body the Church. A like place there is Col. 2.19. It is proued, secondly, by reason, because e­uery [Page 97] head ought to infuse vi­gor and liuely vertue into all the members, as our head, for instance, infuseth liuely spirits into euery part of our body for sense and motion: but Christ alone can infuse that liuely vigour into the mem­bers: Ergo. True (say the Pa­pists) Christ is the Head of the Church, Obiect. but he is the inui­sible Head, therefore there is neede of another visible Head, who must bee Christs Vicar on earth, and Peter the Apo­stles Successour; to wit, the Pope of Rome. Soluti. Whereunto we answer, that in this strange doctrine of the Papists, there are contained many puddles of errour. The first errour is, that Christ hath neede of a Vicar, or Deputie on earth, whereunto wee oppose these arguments. First, there is no 1 Vicar, but implyeth the weak­nesse [Page 98] of the principall Re­gent, or Gouernor. For ther­fore Kings haue their Depu­ties, because they bee but weake men, not able to looke vnto all their Subiects by themselues, but Christ is an omnipotent King. Secondly▪ Hee needeth a Deputie, who cannot vpon all occasions bee euery where present with his Subiects, but Christ is alwaies euery where present with his members, as hee promiseth, Matthew, 28.20. Wheresoeuer two or three are gathered toge­ther in my name, there am I is the midst of them: that is, im­mediately 2 am I present with them,Ego fiden­tur dieo, quia quis­quis se vni­uersalem sacerdotem vocat, vel vocari desi­derat, in e­latione sua Antichri­stum prae­currit. Greg. Mag. Galu. Instit. lib. 4. cap. 6. as the Hebrew phrase teacheth. The second errour is, that they thinke it a righ­teous thing for some one man, and he a Bishop, or Minister of the Church, to attribute vnto himselfe this power, to [Page 99] bee the vniuersall Head and Gouernour of the whole Church, whereunto wee op­pose these Arguments: First, because Christ doth plainely forbid primacie in the Church, Matth. 20.26. Luke 22.26. Secondly, because the Apostles themselues, diui­ded the Office of the Apostleship, among themselues, for that they saw, that one man could not bee ouer all Churches. As the Scripture witnesseth, Galath. 27.8.9. where Paul saith; When they saw that the Gospell of vncir­cumcision was committed vnto me, as the Gospell of Circumci­sion vnto Peter: and when Iames, and Cephas, and Iohn, which were counted Pillars, knew of the grace giuen vnto me, they gaue vnto me and Bar­nabas the right hands of fellow­ship, that wee should doe the Of­fice [Page 100] of the Apostles among the Gentiles, and they execute the same Office among the Jewes. Thirdly, Moses, who was a farre greater man then the Pope, could not beare the bur­den of iudging the people of Israel alone, but was constrai­ned [...]o part it, as it is Exod. 18. much lesse therefore can the Pope gouerne the whole 3 Church.Planū est, Apostolis interdicitur dominatus. Bern. Quicunque desideraue­rit prima­tum in terra, inueniet confusionē in caelo. Distinct. 40 cap. multi. The third errour is, that they faine Peter to haue bin Head of the Church, whereas not withstanding, 1 Christ flatly forbiddeth Peter and his other Apostles, to seeke after this Head ship; and secondly, Paul to the Gal. 2.7. in plaine tearmes saith, that Iames and Peter and John were counted, or thought to be pillars, that is, by an erro­nious conceire they were ta­ken to be such by them, who might by the abuse of that ti­tle, [Page 101] deceiue the Galathians. They obiect that place, Mat. 16.18. Thou art Peter, Obiection and vp­on this Rocke, super hanc Pe­tram, will I build my Church. Whereunto wee answer, Solut. that hee saith not, and vpon thee (Peter) will I build my Church; but wee say, this is the intention and scope of Christs speech, namely, to commend the confession of Peter, Tu es Pe­trus & su­pra hanc petram, &c. sapius ex posui, vt s [...]per hunc intelligere­tur, quem confessus est Petrus di­cens, tu es Christus fi­lius Dei vi­ui. Non e­nim dictum est ei, Tu es Petra, sed tu es Pe­trus. Petra autem erat Christus, quem con­fessus. Simō dictus est Petrus. Aug. which hee setteth out by a Paranomasie, or allusion vnto the name of Peter; as if he said, I rightly set vpon thee the name of Peter (see the first Chapter of Iohn, where Christ gaue Peter his name) because thou in the name of the other Apostles, hast made such a confession, and vttered such a doctrine, as vpon which, as it were on a Rock my Church shall bee builded. First then, Christ commendeth Peter, & [Page 102] in the person of Peter, all the Apostles, for that they belee­ued Christ to be the Sonne of God. Secondly, hee sheweth the profit and fruit of that confession, to wit, for that this doctrine and confession was to bee the foundation whereupon Christs Church should bee built, so that it should neuer bee ouerturned by Satan. Otherwise that Pe­ter neuer vnderstood these words of himselfe, as if hee were that stone or Rocke, vp­on which the Church is rea­red, he himselfe professeth o­penly, 1 Pet. 2.4. where hee saith, that Christ is that very stone, vpon the which the Church was to bee built. The 4 fourth errour is, that they take for certaintie, than Peter was Bishop of Rome, and so consequently, that hee was at Rome, which not withstand­ing [Page 103] is vncertaine, neither can it be firmely proued, that Pe­ter was euer at Rome, but the contrary; for that place which before wee cited, Gal. 2. is ve­ry remarkable; namely, in that Paul did so deuide the Apo­stleship, and part it with Pe­ter, they shaking hands on the motion, that Paul should goe to the Gentiles, to conuert them, and Peter should labour in the conuersion of the Iewes: This promise, the right hand being giuen vpon it, Peter should haue broke, if hee had gone to Rome to conuert the Gentiles; neither doe we reade that two Apostles went into the same Citie, especially, it being so farre off, to preach the Gospell. Wherefore si­thence by the confession of all, it is apparent, that Paul preached the Gospel at Rome, what neede was there that [Page 104] Peter should come thither, es­pecially at the very same time. As the Papists say that they were both at Rome in Nero his time. II. Out of the last Chapter of the second to Ti­moth. v. 16. In my first defence, saith Paul, when I appeared be­fore Nero, there was none that stood to mee, but all forsooke me, I pray God it be not laid to their charge: But if Peter had then beene Bishop of Rome, as the Papists will haue it, what a disgracefull thing had it been and vnworthy a Bishop to for­sake his brother and his owne companion? Bellarm. saith, that Peter was at that time gone abroad to visite the Churches. But wee answer, that it was not meete that he should goe away, then when hee should haue assisted his brother, but should rather haue put off the visitation vn­to [Page 105] some other time, which hee would haue done, doubtlesse, if hee had beene at Rome. A­gaine I say, that Bellarm. coines that answer of his, be­cause he neither backs it with any place of Scripture, nor of any Historian, but speaketh it out of his owne braine. III. This may be concluded by the circumstance of time, for they say that Peter was 25 yeares at Rome, and 7 yeares at Anti­ocheia, which make 32 yeares, and yet they say that Peter was crucified at Rome vnder Nero, and that hee came to Rome the 2 of Claudius the Emperour. Now Claudius raigned but 13 yeares, and Nero 13, so that both their Regiments lasted but 26 yeares;Secundum Hieronym. how then could Peter come the 2 of Claudius, and continue 27 yeares Bishop of Rome, and yet be crucified vn­der [Page 106] Nero? IV. We say, that Eusebius and Hierome who are of that opinion, doe not a­gree with themselues; yea, and Hierome especially mani­festly contradicts himselfe. For when as hee in one place had said, that Peter was cruci­fied vnder Nero, afterward expounding those words of Ch. Mat. 23. Luk. 11.49 Be­hold I send unto you Prophets, &c. Flatly affirmes that Peter was crucified by the Iewes at Ierusalem. When the Anci­ents therefore are opposite vnto themselues, hereby it may appeare that they knew no certainetie in this point, and consequently we see how much we are to detest the im­pudencie of the Popes, which set downe for certainety, that Peter was Bishop of Rome. 5 The fift errour is, that they in­ferre the Pope of Rome to bee [Page 107] Peters successour: for first there is no sure ground to e­uince that Peter was euer at Rome; how then could the Pope of Rome succeed Peter? Secondly, if wee grant this to the Papists out of pitty,Calu. Instit. l. 4. c. 7. §. 23 that Peter was at Rome, yet it doth not follow, that the Pope of Rome was Peters successour: for the Turke also hath his seate at Constantinople, not­withstanding it doth not follow, that the Turke is the law­full Emperour of the East, or of Greece, the Emperours be­fore hauing their lawfull resi­dency, and abode at Constant­inople: for the place makes not the succession lawfull, but two things there bee which make lawfull succession: first, the power giuen of God; se­condly, the imitation of the Predecessors in life and man­ners. As Cyprian saith in a [Page 108] certaine place, and after him Ambrose and Hierome: Cathedram Petri non tenet qui fidem Petri non tenet. True succession is succession in do­ctrine, and hee cannot bee said lawfully to hold the Chaire of Peter, who holdeth not the do­ctrine of Peter. But neither of these the Pope of Rome hath: first, whence will hee proue, that God hath giuen him that power to sit at Rome, as the Monarch of the Church? surely hee cannot bring so much as one letter out of the Scripture of God to proue this; nay, Christ inioyned the contrary to his Disciples, to wit, that one of them should not desire to bee aboue ano­ther. 2. The true succession, which is in doctrine, the Pope of Rome hath not: for if the Decrees of the Pope, and the Epistles of Peter be compared together, there will appeare as great difference betwixt [Page 109] them, as betwixt light and darkenesse: yea, we are about to proue by and by, that the Pope of Rome is the Ringlea­der of Idolaters, so farre is he off from being Peters succes­sor in Doctrine.

Which be the members of the Church?

They bee all the Faithfull which doe beleeue in Christ vnto eternall life; for they all are vnited to Christ, euen as the members of our body vnto their head. They are vni­ted, I say, by the holy Spirit, who produceth such like mo­tions in them, as are in the hu­mane nature of Christ assu­med; that is hee maketh that the Faithfull become parta­kers of the Sacerdotall, Prophe­ticall, and Regall power which is in Christ. About which matter Peter Epist. 1. c. 2. v. 9. speaketh most sweetly, You [Page 110] are a chosen generation, a royall Priesthood, a holy Nation, a peo­ple whom God hath chosen, as peculiar to himselfe, that the vertues of him might be mani­fest, who hath called you out of darkenesse into his admirable light. See concerning this most comfortable doctrine, to wit, the vnion of the members with Christ the Head, in the Syst. of Diuinitie. pag. 376.

What sorts be the members of Christ of?

Calu. Instit. lib. 4. cap. 3. De Mini­sterio Zanch. in Epist. p. 135 & in pra­cept. 4. ObiectionThey bee of two sorts, the Ministers of the Word, and the Hearers. Here the Papists challenge vs, that we haue no lawfull Ministers in the Church, and by consequence that there be no lawful sheep, because (say they) where there are no true Pastors and Shep­heards, there can be there no lawfull or true sheepe. But we deny the Antecedent, Soluti. where [Page 111] they say, that in our Churches there be no lawfull Pastors: because hee is a right Pastor, who rightly and lawfully ex­ecutes his charge, which is done by the pure preaching of the Word, and the admini­stration of the Sacraments. But (say they) from whom had your Luther and Caluin their callings? Wee answer: That we depend not on Caluin and Luther, but on the Pro­phets themselues, and the A­postles. As for Luther and Caluin, they were neither Pro­phets nor Apostles. But if they would know what kind of calling Caluins and Luther his was, wee answer; It was ordinary: for Luther by the publike authority of the Vni­uersitie at Witenberg, was cre­ated Doctor of Diuinity, and so was hee called to teach by an ordinary vocation. Yea, [Page 112] but the Vniuersitie at Witen­berg, it was Papisticall? An­swere: True, it was so at that time, yet it called Luther to the sincere preaching of the Gospell For the Papists them­selues say not, that when Lu­ther was called by them to teach, that hee was called by them to teach heresies, but to teach the Truth. Therefore whē afterwards he taught the Truth, he taught it, being or­dinarily called thereunto, al­though hee taught it not ac­cording to the Popes minde and his Bishops. Yea, but hee taught errours of Papistrie before? I answer: that that fault of Luther made not his vocation voyd. The same we say of Zwinglius, Caluin, and others, which were created by Bishops; where not with­standing it must bee conside­red, that vnto that ordinarie [Page 113] calling, there was somewhat extraordinarie adioyned, to wit, in that God set forth, and adorned those first Miinsters of the doctrine of the Gospell with a singular vertue to dis­couer the fearefull abomina­tions of Poperie: for the rest of our Ministers, which haue, and yet do teach in the Refor­med Church, they were called ordinarily by them who haue authority, and as yet to this day are so called.

Now I much desire to heare of the proprieties of the Church, and first tell mee what kinds be the proprie­ties of the Church of?

They be oft two kinds, some of them doe notifie and point out vnto vs where the Church is, other are bare proprieties.

How many demonstratiue proprieties of the Church be there, or how many bee [Page 114] the true markes of the Church?

Calu. Instit l. 4. c. 1. §. 9.There bee only two; first, the purity of Doctrine and Sa­craments: Secondly, obedience and sanctity of conuersation answerable to the Word of God, which is proued out of the tenth of Iohn 27. My sheepe heare my voice. Mat. 28 v. 19. Goe, and teach yee all nations, baptising them. Ioh. 15.14. Yee are my friends, &c. Ioh. 13.35. By this shall all men know, that ye are my Disciples, Obiect. &c. The Papists say, these are not the notes of the true Church: for, say they,Syst. Theol pag. 393. all hereticks can challenge to themselues thus much, that they haue the pure word of God, and the law­full vse of the Sacraments. Therefore I answer; Soluti. that that which is but by an accident, doth not take away that which is per se. Now it is but [Page 115] by accident, that the heretiques take this vsurpation on them­selues: for what is there more excellent in the Church then the pure Word of God, and the lawfull vse of the Sacra­ments? But in setting downe the markes of the Church, they doe not agree among thecselues. See the 396 page of my Syst. of Diuinitie. Yet generally they say, that these are those markes, 1. Antiqui­tie. Whereto I answer; Obiect. that if they brag of antiquitie Solut. sim­ply, the Diuell also is a most ancient Serpent, neither is he in that regard any whit the better; therefore we ought to seeke after antiquitie of true doctrine,Id est veri­us quod pri­us, id prius quod ab in­itio, id ab initio quod ab Apostolis Tertul. which wee say and affirme to be in our Church, in that, namely, her Note and Marke is the pure Word of God, then which nothing is more anciēt. But your Church [Page 116] (doe they obiect) began but with Luther some 80 yeares agoe,Proleps. Looke be­yond Lu­ther. therefore it is not the true Church? I answer: that it is an vntruth, that our Church did but begin then. For our Church begunne pre­sently in Paradice, and was al­so in the time of the Prophets. The second marke they make a continuall succession, Obiect. Pietatis successio proprie suc­cessio est astimanda. Greg. Naz Non habent haereditatē Petri, qui­fidem Petri non habent. Ambros. or a perpetuitie of doctrine in the Church, and som condem­ning our Church, as in which there hath beene no such con­tinuall succession, they insult ouer vs, saying: Where were your Churches before Luther those 600 yeares, wherein you say, the World was obscured by the darknesse of Poperie? Whereunto we answer, Solut. that the Church is sometime more clearely manifest,Calu Instit. lib. 4. c. 2. sometime it is more obscurely apparant; if therefore by succession they [Page 117] vnderstand the state of the Church alwaies alike flou­rishing, then we say, that it is false that such a succession is a propriety and marke of the true Church:Ecclesia est quae aliquā ­do obscura­tur & tan quam ob­nubilatur multitudi­ne scanda­lorum, ali­quando tri­bulationum & tentati­onum flucti bus operitur atque tur­batur. Cum Arriani &c. Aug. for the visible state of the Church consisteth in religious-worship, and in do­ctrine, wherein the Church is not alwaies like vnto it selfe, hauing her obscurings, and as it were eclipses, such as the Sunne and Moone haue; and sometimes it is wrapped a­bout with errours, so that it cannot shew its head by any visible estate, or ministerie whereunto the Scripture beares manifest testimony, 1 King. 19.18. where it is plaine, that the estate of the Church was altogether obscu­red, insomuch that Elias thought with himselfe, that he alone was left aliue of all the members of the Church, be­ing [Page 118] priuie to none beside him­selfe, that worshipped God purely; yet euen then the Lord said vnto him, I haue re­serued vnto my selfe seuen thou­sand, Syst. Theol. pag. 389. which haue not bowed their knees before Baal. So in the time of Christ his liuing vpon the earth, the state of the Church was a most corrupt state, so that beside Christ and his Apostles, there were very few members of the true Church; yea, and before Christs birth a little, Mary, Ioseph, Zachary, and Elizabeth, and a few more, which lay so secret, that there was no shew of them to any man, made vp the true Church. Such like vnto these was that estate of the Church those 600 yeares vnder the Papacie, of which time there was expresse pre­diction before, Reuel. 12.6. that the time, to wit, should [Page 119] come, that the Church should be obscure, as it were hid in the wildernesse. But therefore can any conclude, that there was no Church? No surely, no more then it doth follow; This man is hid; therefore hee is not a man. There were in that most thicke darkenesse of Po­perie, and vnder the King­dome of that Antichrist of Rome,Syst. Theol. pag. 408. true members of the Church, although by reason of that cruell tyranny of the Pope they lay hid, neither was there so few of them as the Papists faine, which at that very time vnder Popery had the pure doctrine and the Sacramēts, but there were ve­ry many of them, euen whole Countryes that were not de­filed by the corrupt Doctrine of the Papists, as the Albin genses, and the Valdenses, and they of Picardie, who propa­gated [Page 120] the holy Truth in Bohe­mia, and Polonia, in spite of all the Popes resistance. As al­so a hundred yeares before Luther, Et si Papa­tus non sit ecclesia vo­luit tamen Deus in Papatu ser­uare eccle­siam. Theod. Beza. there were the Hus­sites, Brethren of Bohemia, who maintained the true Doctrine of the Gospell, as those times would giue them leaue. Yea, and further in all and euery of those yeares there were by Gods working, continually raised vp Witnesses and Tea­chers, who openly and before all, shewed their detestation of the Pope, and Popish er­rours, which Witnesses of the Truth, euen in the time of Pa­pacie, they are all gathered together in a Book most wor­thie the perusing, which wee ought alwaies to oppose to the Papists, which hath for its Title, Catalogus testium veri­tatis: that is; A Catalogue of the Witnesses of the Truth. [Page 121] The third Note the Papists doe make vniuersality, Obiect. because forsooth the Church dispersed ouer all the world,Syst. Theol. pag. 404. ought to be Catholike? I answer: That the Papists here doe contra­dict themselues, when they say, the Church of God must be Catholicke, and yet the Ro­mish Church must bee that Church of God; which is all one, as if I should say; the Church must be the vniuersall Dantiscan Church, or the vni­uersall Cracouiun Church, or a particular vniuersall Church; for to be the Romish Church, and to bee a particular one, is all one, Againe, wee answer, that we do not denie, that the Church ought to bee Catholike, in that sense wherein the word is vsed in the Creed, as afterwards it shall be made plaine. And we say, that our Church hath alwaies beene, [Page 122] and now also is Catholike, because that after the Apo­stles had gathered the Church out of all Nations, there did alwaies from time to time re­maine some reliques of the true Church in all Nations, al­though those reliques were hid and obscured, as that book Catalogus testium veritatis; which we haue a little before cited, doth testifie, that in the very time of Poperie, there was alwaies in Greece, Italy, Spaine, Germany, Bohemia, Po­lonia, some found that oppo­sed and resisted the Pope. But whereas the Iesuites obiect vnto vs, that in America, and in the East Indies, there are no Protestant Preachers of the Gospell as yet, but all Papists, and especially Iesuites labou­ring the conuersion of the peo­ple? I answer them: first, that the Pharisies also did runne a­bout [Page 123] both by Sea and Land, to draw men vnto their faith, and yet for all that, their Re­ligion was not true. Secondly, I say, that the Papists haue slaine moe in the Jndies then they haue conuerted, as you may see by a place, which I haue cited in my Politiques l. 1. c. 4. that in a very short time a hundred and fortie thousand men were murdered by them. Thirdly, I am sure the Diuell also goes a compassing the whole world, and seduceth many, yet is he for that neuer a whit the better. Fourthly, I auerre, that our Ministers al­so haue taught the true Gos­pell in America: inasmuch as Caluin sent thither two Mini­sters of the Church from Ge­neua, the one whereof was Joannes Lerius, who commit­ted that story to writing. And at this day there are Ortho­doxe[Page 124] Ministers in the East Jn­dies: which doe publikely preach the true doctrine of the Gospell, carried ouer thi­ther by the Merchants of the Low-Countryes. And doubt­lesse toward the end of this world, the true Religion shall be in America; as God now is preparing the way for it by the English and Low-Countrie Merchants; that that of Christ may bee fulfilled, Matth. 24.14. The Gospell shall bee prea­ched throughout the whole World, that it may bee a witnes to all Nations. For GOD in in all his workes is wont to effect a thing successiuely, and therefore first hee sends vnto those Nations some light of his Essence and his Truth by the Papists, and afterward will make these things shine more cleerely vnto them by the true and faithfull Mini­sters [Page 125] of the Gospel. Obiect. The fourth note the Papists say, is vnitie and good agreement. Solut. I an­swer:Vt est eccle­sia Dei v­na, sic est Diaboli v­na Babylō. Aug. Consent and vnitie is but so farre a marke of the Church, as the consent is in truth and goodnesse, and not in euill and falsehood: for such an agreement in euill and falsitie is among the very De­uills, and what greater agree­ment and consent then among robbers? so also among the Turkes, there is very great consent, so that Mahometisme is farre and heare by them propagated; yet doth it not hence follow, that Mahome­tisme is the true Church. Se­condly, I answer, that in our Church there is great consent in the truth; for howsoeuer after Luthers time, there arose many Churches, the Diuell being alwaies busie to cast his plots against the true [Page 126] Church, and to stirre vp in it diuers Sects; yet the Ortho­doxe Professours are at good agreement about the Articles of Faith, as that excellent Booke called, the Harmony of Cōfessions doth testifie; where­in it is manifestly prooued that there is exceeding great consent betwixt the Church­es of France, England, Scot­land, Bohemia, and those which are in Germany neere vnto Rhene, and in other Pro­vinces. For that disagreement which is betwixt the Luthe­rans and the Orthodoxe Pro­fessours, doth not straight way quite dissolue the vnity which is betwixt the mem­bers of the true Church. Thirdly, I deny that there is so great agreement in the Ro­mish Church, as they boast of: for it can bee easily showne, that the Popish Writers a­gree [Page 127] not in any one Article a­mong themselues, as it doth appeare out of Bellarmine, who ordinarily disputeth a­gainst other Papists, & allea­geth their oppositiōs, & cōtra­dictions to thēselues: this may further appeare by Joh. Pappi­us and Matthias Illyricus his Book of the Sects & Dissenti­ons & cōtradictiōs among Po­pish Doctours, printed at Ba­sil, 1565; whereunto the Pa­pists haue not as yet answerd. Andr. Chrastouius likewise hath written a Booke hee cals Bellum Iesuiticum. The good agreement the Iesuites haue among themselues, who nei­ther is as yet confuted.In the Bod­leian Li­brary at Oxford. That same Book of Chrastouius was printed at Basil in quarto 1593, and it containes 205 Iesuiticall contradictions.

Which is that bare, or secondary propriety of the Church?

To the Church of the New Testament,Syst. Theol. pag. 404. this propriety doth also agree that it is Ca­tholicke, and that first in re­spect of places, not because it possesseth many Kingdomes, but because it is scattered o­uer the whole world, and not tyed to any one certain place, to any determinate countrey, or city. Secondly, in respect of men, because it doth consist of men of all sorts, gathered out of the condition of al men of all Nations, Act. 10.35. Thirdly, in respect of times, because it shall continue all times, euen vnto the end of the world, as it is said, Matt 28. I will be with you euen vnto the end of the world. Fourthly, in respect of vnitie, because the Catholicke Church is at all times but one, to wit, in the vnity of doctrine, and con­sent in that doctrine. And [Page 129] thus much we haue spoken of the proprieties of the Church. Now if we shall examine and try the Popish Church by these proprieties it will appeare to bee no pure Church, but to be very corrupt, euen as a rotten apple is an apple corrupted, and no otherwise, then a man that is infected with the plague, is a man, but no sound man. And that the Popish Church is not the pure Church, I will prooue it by two manifest reasons: the first, An idolatrous Church is not the true and pure Church, but such a one is the Popish Church, Ergo. The propositi­on is euident, because God doth abhorre nothing more then Idolatrie; therefore hee saith, Flie from Idols; and, No Idolater shall be saued. The as­sumption I confirme thus: That Church which giues that [Page 130] honor, which Dauid giues vn­to God the Creator, in the ve­ry same words vnto the crea­ture, to wit, the Virgin Ma­ry, that same Church is ido­latrous. But the Church of Rome doth so goe now, that the Church of Rome doth at­tribute that honour which is due vnto God, vnto the Vir­gin Mary: I proue it by a most euident testimony out of that same Psalter of Marie the Virgin, which was compiled by Bonauentura, who liued 250 yeares agoe, and canoni­zed of the Pope of Rome, so that hee is accounted among the Saints, and the title of a Seraphicall Doctour, which is more then Angelicall, giuen vnto him. This same Psalter was by the permisson of the higher powers printed in La­tin at Brixia, and Bononia in Italy eight yeares since, being [Page 131] before printed at Ingolstadium in the Dutch tongue some 20 yeares agoe: in the Preface whereunto it is expresly said, that it was compiled, the holy Ghost inditing and di­ctating it. And further, that very Psalter is in speciall vse in the Romish Church, but especially it is currant among the Monkes of Saint Bennets Order, which are called Ci­stercians. Now in this Psalter, all those things which Dauid attributes to the high & most mightie God,Ye haue this Psalter in Bonauē ­tures works printed in seauen Tomes at Rome 1588 vol. 6. pag. 502, in La­tin; in Eng­lish yee haue diuers passages of it, and a­mongst the rest, these in Foxes Martyro­logy, prin­ted 1583. fol 1600. Missale Ro­man. edit. Salmanticae A D. 1588. feria 6. in parasceue p. 223. are by them put vpon the Virgin Marie, as Psal. 51. Haue mercy vpon me, O Lady, and cleanse me from all mine offences. But that of all o­ther is most blasphemous, which they apply vnto her out of the Psal. 109. according to that distinction, The Lord said to my Lady, sit thou mother mine at my right hand; where [Page 132] Mary is made the mother of God the Father, as though the Father had beene incarnate, and made man, that I may not say further, that to be set on the right hand of God, is to haue a like power, and equall glory with God himselfe. A­gaine, that the Romish Church is an Idolatrous assembly, I prooue it out of the Romish Masse booke, where in the Ser­uice appointed for Good-Fri­day, it is said, that the Priest so soone as he hath put off his shoos, & then approacheth to adore the Crosse, shall kneele 3 times, before hee kisse the Crosse, and then afterward the Ministers of the Altar, they must also kneele, and three times adore the Crosse. II. Arg. That Church which ap­proueth manifest crimes, is not the pure Church: but the Church of Rome is such. Ergo. [Page 133] The Proposition is herein ma­nifest, for that the Papists themselues doe yeeld sanctity and holinesse of manners to be a note of the Church. The as­sumption I cōfirme, 1. for that the Pope doth dispence for In­cest, Sodomy, and other most grieuous crimes See the Tax­es, Fines, or Nundinations of the Court of Rome descri­bed at large in Musculus his Common Places, 2. It is con­firmed out of Costers Enchiri­dion, Coster. En­chirid. c. 5. propos. 9. where you shall finde it written, that a Priest commit­ting fornication, or keeping a concubine in his house, does not so grieuously sinne, as he that doth marrie. This doth Gretzer al­low of in his History of the Iesuiticall order: pag. 115. Most truly wrote our Coster,Gretzer In­golstad. A.D. 1594. that a Priest should not so grie­uously offned, if hee should com­mit Fornication, as if hee [Page 134] should marry. And he addeth; Yea it is truly spoken, that a Priest doth lesse sinne in committing Adultery, then in mar­rying a Wife. Bellar. 2. lib. de Monach. cap. 30. Jt cannot truly be said of a Nun that hath vowed continencie, that it is bet­ter to bee married, then to burne, for both in her is euill, to be mar­ried, and to burne; yea, worse it is to bee married, then to burne, whatsoeuer our aduersaries say to the contrary, that it is writ­ten, 1 Cor. 7. It is better to mar­rie, then to burne. Here that is worthy marking, which Slei­dan sets downe in his first booke, that a certaine Italian Bishop, Casa by name, hath written a whole Booke in the praise of filthy Sodomy. Where wee may note for a conclusion, that although all those things be granted to the Papists, which they most glo­riously [Page 135] dispute about the Church, yet they can gaine nothing hereby, because they ought to make it plaine first vnto vs, that the Popedome is the true Church; which in that they haue not as yet prooued, nor shall euer be able to proue it, they doe but delude them­selues with a vaine title of the Church. And whereas they say, that it is absurd, before the point of the Church bee discussed, to take in hand to dispute of any of the Articles of faith; that also can little a­uaile them, because wee doe dispute, and iudge of doctrine and faith by the word of God, and it may be so disputed, al­though that point of the Church bee not before hand­led:Syst. Theol. pag. 390. for the Word of God is before the Church, and aboue the Church, neither hath the Church any authority to [Page 136] wrest the Scripture, as wee haue formerly proued in the common place of Scripture. But here I would haue noted the exceeding fraud of the Popish Writers, that when they haue made a great stirre about the Church, and stood long vpon it, at length they conclude, the Church to be a Councell, consisting of the Pope, the Cardinals, and Bishops; and so exclude all other, which are neither Cardinals nor Bi­shops, from the Church; at least remoouing them so farre, that they shall not make vp the Church, properly so cal­led, and principally, that here­by they might the more esta­blish the insolēt pride of their Spiritaltie, against the mani­fest Word of God.

You haue made plaine the Doctrine of Redemption vnto me, now it followes, [Page 137] that you instruct mee in the matter of the Iustifi­cation of man before God; wherefore shew me J pray you what is Justification?

It is the absoluing of sinne­full man from his sinnes;Syst. Theol. pag 413. De Iustifi­catione, Zanch. Cōfess. c. 19. item. Loc. Com. 11. Calu instit. lib. 3. cap. 11 & seqq. or it is a forgiuing of sinnes by the meere grace and fauour of God, for the merits of Christ imputed and applied vnto vs by Faith.

What are to bee considered a­bout Iustification?

Foure things: 1. the prin­cipall cause: 2. the instrumen­tall cause: 3. the effect and fruite: and lastly, the neces­sary adiunct.

What is the principall cause of Justificatiō before God?

The principall cause is either primarie, or secondary: the prime c [...]use, is the grace and mercy of God, the other cause is the merit of Christ, or the [Page 138] death and passion of Christ made ours, imputed vnto vs, or appropriated vnto vs, so truly, that the Passiō of Christ should besteede vs as much, as if we our selues had hanged on the Crosse, and had died for our owne sinnes. Hereof we haue manifest testimonies of the Scripture, Rom. 5.8.19. As by one man many were made sinners, Ipse pecca­tum & nos iusticia, nec nostra sed Dei, nec in nobis sed in ipso, sicut ipse pecca­tum non su­um sed no­strum, nec in se sed in nobis. Sic ergo sumus iustitia Dei in ipso vt ille est pec­catum in nobis nempe imputatio­ne. Aug. &c. Rom. 4.5.6. Bles­sed is the man, vnto whom God imputeth righteousnesse, without the workes of the Law, 2. Cor. 5.21. Hee made him which knew no sinne, to bee sinne for vs that wee might bee made the righteousnesse of God in him, Gal. 3.13. Christ hath redee­med vs from the curse of the Law, whilest hee was made a curse for vs. Philip. 3.9. That J may bee found not hauing my owne righteousnesse, but that which is by the faith of Christ. [Page 139] Now there is no opposition in this we say,Syst Theol. pag. 420. that a sinner is iustified by the meere grace of God, and yet by the merit of Christ, because it was brought about by the meere mercie & grace of God, that Christ per­formed that meritorious work for vs: for Christ was in no wise bound vnto vs, to die for vs, but hee out of his meere grace and mercy did vndergo death for vs.

What is the Instrumentall cause of Iustification?

Only faith in Christ,De Fide Zanch. Loc. Com. 7 & 8 inso­much as by faith, euen as by a hand and instrument wee lay hold on, and apply vnto vs the merit and satisfaction which Christ hath performed for vs.

What is Faith?

Faith is not only a bare knowledge of the History of Christ,Syst. Theol. pag 427. Calu Instit. lib. 3. ca. 2. but it is also a sure con­fidence of the heart, whereby [Page 140] wee set downe in our selues for certainety, [...]. and be perswa­ded that our sinnes are for­giuen vs of God for the death and passion of Christ. Note here two maine errours of Po­perie, whereof the first is, that faith is only a certaine Histo­ricall knowledge, and no true and sure confidence of the hart: against which the Scrip­ture it selfe directly speaketh, Rom. 14.5. and Heb. 10.22. where faith is called a sure trust and perswasion. See my Gymnasium logicum, wherein you haue this in that Theame Fides, some what opened. The second errour is that we come by the remission of sinnes,Calu. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 14 & 15. & 17. & 18. not by faith alone, but also by the merit of good workes: con­trary vnto those sayings in the Scripture, Ephes. 2.8. By the grace of God you are saued through faith, and not of your [Page 141] selues. Rom. 4.3. Abraham be­leeued, and that was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse. A­gaine, Vnto him not that work ethe, but that beleeueth in him, which iustifieth the wicked, his faith is counted for righteousnes. Luk. 8.50. Mark. 5.36.Si credis, fi­dei cur alia infers? qua­si iustificare non suffici­at sola Chrysost. saith Christ, onely beleeue: which is all one, as if hee had said; By faith alone thou shalt obtaine euerlasting life. So then al­though these words bee not manifestly extant, By faith a­lone wee are iustified, yet the sense is manifestly put downe, and other words therevnto e­quiualent are contained in the Scripture: for whereas the A­postle saith, Rom. 3.28. Wee conclude, that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the Law. Certainely it is all one, as if hee said, Wee con­clude that a man is iustified only by faith; for a man must [Page 140] [...] [Page 141] [...] [Page 142] needs bee iustified either by faith, or by workes: a third way none can be able to shew, Paul plainely saith to the Ga­lathians,Gal. 2.16. Non opus est lege, quando im­pius per so­lam fidem iustificatur Ambros. Ephs. 2.5. Tit. 3.5. We know that a man is not iustified by the workes of the Law, but by the faith of Je­sus Christ. Not By those righ­teous deeds which we haue done, but by his owne mercy hee hath saued vs through the Lauer of regeneration, and renewing of the holy Spirit. Therefore it remaineth that wee say, that faith alone doth iustifie a man. And that no man is iustified by workes, and so conse­quently, that our workes doe not merit for vs forgiuenesse of sinnes, I proue it by euident testimonies of holy Writ. I. Tit. 3.5. Eph. 2.8.Quātaelibet fuisse vir­tutis anti­quos prae­dices iustos, non eos sal­uos fecit nisi fides. Aug. By grace are ye saued through faith, and that not of your selues, it is the gift of God, not of workes, least any should boast. Secondly, Philip. [Page 143] 3.9. Rom. 3.24. II. Wee are iustified before we do any works, as S. Paul expresly witnesseth of Abraham, that before hee had done any good worke he was iustified before God. Rom. 4.2. where hee saith;Non praece­dunt iusti­ficand̄u sed sequuntur Iustificatū. Aug. If Abraham had beene iustified by workes, he had wher­in to boast, but not with God. To him that worketh, the wages is not giuen vpon fauour, but debt: but he that worketh not, but be­leeueth only in him, who iustifi­eth the wicked, his faith is im­puted vnto him for righteous­nesse. III. Arg. is taken from the proprietie of our workes. Our works are debts, therefore by them can we de­serue nothing.Nihiles per te, Deum inuoca. tua peccata sunt, meri­ta Deisūt, supplicium tibi debe­tur, & cum praemium ad venerit, sua dona coronabit non merita tua. Aug. Vae etiam laudabili hominum Vita, si re­mota mise­ricordia, eam discu­tias. Aug. Ipsa nostra iusticia, quāuis ve­ra sit, talis tamen est, vt potius peccatorum remissione conslet quā virtutum perfectione. Idem. No­stra si qua est humilis iustitia, recta forsan, sed non pura; nisi forte meliores nos esse credimus quā patre nostros, qui non minus veraciter quā humiliter di cebant Omnes iusticiae nostra sunt tanquam pannu [...] mulieris menstruata Bern. Antec. is con­firmed by Luk. 17.10. When you haue done all that you can do, &c. 2. Good workes are not ours, but Gods; now by that which is anothers, and not our [Page 144] owne, we can merit nothing. Antecedent is proued, Phil. 2.13. God it is who worketh good in you, & perfects it, Eph. 2.10. Wee are his workemanship, cre­ated in Christ Jesus vnto good workes which he hath prepared, that wee should walke in them, Thirdly, our good works are not perfect, therefore wee can merit nothing by them; for three things there be required of him that will merit; first, that he hath that, by which he will merit of his own: secondly, that it bee no debt: thirdly, that that bee perfect: which three conditions our good workes haue not, as it is said, Esa. 6.64. All our righteousnes is like vnto a menstruous cloath. And Phil. 3.8. Paul calleth his workes dung.

[Page 145]I vnderstand what iustifi­ing faith is, now tell me the causes thereof whereby it is begotten in vs?

The principall cause where­by sauing faith is ingendred, is the holy Spirit, the instru­mentall cause or meanes is ei­ther ordinarie, or extraordi­narie.

What is the ordinary meanes wherby the holy spirit wor­keth faith in vs?

It is twofold, namely,Syst. Theol. p. 436. the Word of God, and the Sacra­ments.

The Word of God you haue already touched, now tell me what is a Sacrament?

It is a holy signe instituted of God,Syst. Theol. pag. 439. whereby God ma­keth the beleeuers sure of his fauour, the forgiuenesse of their sinnes,De sacra­mentis, Zanch. Cō ­fess. c. 14. and other bene­fits likewise by Christ his passion and death to bee be­stowed [Page 146] vpon them.

Of what sortes are the Sa­craments?

Of two sorts, Sacraments of the Old and New Testa­ment

How many Sacraments were there in the Old Testa­ment?

Syst. Theol. pag. 448.Two, to wit, Circumcisi­on, and the Paschall Lambe.

How many Sacraments bee there in the New Testa­ment?

Syst. The. pag. 451.Two onely, Baptisme, and the Supper of the Lord?

What is Baptisme?

Calu. Instit. l. 4. c. 15.It is a Sacrament of the new Testament, whereby sprink­ling of the water in the name of Father, Sonne, and Holy Ghost being made, wee are initiated and grafted into the Church, and whereby there is sealed vnto the faithfull for­giuenesse of sinnes by the [Page 147] blood of Christ, and regene­ration vnto life eternall. See more in my Syst. of Diuin. pag. 451. and in the Comment on Vrsins Catechisme, pag. 429. according to the last E­dition.

What is the Lords Supper?

This wee shall handle after­ward in the opening of our particular knowledge, where­with wee must furnish our selues, regard that the know­ledge hereof comes nearest vnto our lawfull and seemely preparing of our selues to the Lords Supper. Here only would be noted that errour of the Papists, who haue made seuen Sacraments of the New Testament, to wit, Baptisme, Calu. Instit. l. 4. c. 19. Confirmation, Pennance, the Eucharist, Extreame Ʋnction, Orders and Matrimony. But that number of Sacraments is neither vpholden by any testi­monie [Page 148] of holy Writ, neither is it propped by the authority of any of the ancient Fa­thers, but it is a new deuise, hatched not aboue 200 yeares agoe in the time of Lombard, the Master of the Sentences. Besides, euery Sacramēt shold haue a signe and a thing sig­nified, but Pennance, Orders, Matrimony haue no signes at all. Further yet, euery Sacra­ment hath annexed promise of grace, and appertaines to all beleeuers in the Church; and to conclude, it is more then manifest, that all Sacraments ought to bee instituted by Christ; euery of which markes of a Sacramēt cannot be auer­red, & truly attributed vnto those fiue Sacraments the Pa­pists faine, no, to none, saue Baptisme & the Lords Supper.

What is the extraordinary meanes of Faith?

Miracles, Syst. Theol. pa. 465. Miraculae necessariae erant vt crederet mundus, postquam vero iam mundꝰ cre­didit, qui miraculum quaeritmag­num est ipse prodigium. Aug. which are extraor­dinary signes, whereby God after a wonderfull manner, wrought and confirmed faith in the time of the Primitiue Church. And here must be ob­serued a double error of the Pa­pists; First, in that they are of opinion, that now there is need of Miracles; whereas this is only the vse of Miracles, name­ly, to confirme doctrine at the beginning, and first setting a broach of it; and therfore must cease after the doctrine be suf­ficiently confirmed. Second er­rour is, in that they thinke, that Miracles is a marke of the true Church,Quasi hoc non scriptū esset ventu­ros qui ma­ximas vir­tutes [...]edent ad corrum­pendam ve­ritatem. Tertullian. when as euen very hy­pocrites oftentimes haue done miracles; yea, and can do them, Marke. 13. v. 22. Luke 21.8. where it is plainly told vs that toward the end of the World, there shall arise false Prophets, which shall worke miracles. But [Page 150] 2 Thess. 2. ver. 9. is a notable place against the Papists that doe so brag of their miracles. The comming of Antichrist is in the power of Satan, with all power and signes, and lying won­ders; whence it may appeare, that before the ende of the world to doe many miracles, is a marke of Antichrist; and the Apostle calls those Miracles, lying wonders; time and long experience testifieth so much: for in the Monasteries, how ma­ny sleights and iuggling tricks doe the Monkes finde out and practise to deceiue the common people, and make them beleeue that they worke miracles.

I haue heard the causes of Iu­stification, tell mee also what is the fruit of Iustification?

Syst. Theol. pag. 416.It is that peace of conscience, by which a man is made sure of the grace and fauour of God, and of eternall life, which must [Page 151] especially bee noted against that detestable errour of the Papists; De certitu­diuine salu­tis. Zanch. Miscellan. 1. par. p. 214 & seqq. Calv. Insti. l. 3. c. 13. §. 3. who in their Trent Councell, Session 6. boldly af­firme, that a man cannot hereof bee certaine in this life, but ought alwayes to doubt of it; and they adde, that there can bee no greater sinne before God, then that a miserable sinner, should assure himselfe of Gods fauour; yea, and further they adde, that whosoeuer shall holde that opinion, ought to bee accur­sed. To this their abominable errour, we oppose most plaine places of holy Writt, Rom. 8 vers. 15. Yee haue not receiued the spirit of bondage, but that spi­rit of Adoption, by which wee crie Abba, Father; which spirit beareth witnes to our spirit, that wee are the Sonnes of God: This is a very horrible impiety that wee will not receiue the testi­mony of the Spirit, but doubt [Page 152] of the truth, & certainty ther­of, 1 Iohn 5.10. Hee that belee­ueth in the Son of God, hath the Testimonie in himselfe. And surely if God would haue had vs to haue doubted,Hoe dixit Deus, hoc promisit, si parum est. hoc iurauit. Aug. hee would neuer haue sworne, that hee would bee mercifull to vs. But now he hath sworne thus much very euidently, EZech. 33.11. As I liue (saith the Lord) that is, as truely as I am, and liue, I will not the death of a sinner, but that hee liue. Also, Iohn 5.24. Verely, verely J say vnto you, whosoeuer beleeueth in the Son, hath eternall life. And, Woe bee to thee then (saith Saint Austin) if thou beleeue not God, when he sweares to thee. But the Pa­pistes obiect; Obiect. Tria consi­dero, in qui­bus tota spes mea consistit, Charitatem adoptionis, veritatem promis­sionis, Potestatem redditionis, &c. Bern. They that are weak are subiect to falling, and they cannot bee sure of the grace of God. Answ. Who so [Page 153] are weake they may easily fall, I limit the proposition thus, vnlesse there bee one that is mightier, who vpholdeth them. Now God it is that holdes vs vp, and that helpeth our infir­mities. And therefore certaine wee may be of the forgiuenesse of sinnes, and of the grace of God, not by any thing in our owne nature indeed, which is weake, but by the helpe and as­sistance of the holy Ghost, ma­king vs strong according to those sayings of holy Writ, Psal, 37.24. Though the righ­teous fall, he shall not bee cast off, because the Lord putteth vnder his hand. Iohn 10.28. I wil giue vnto my sheepe eternall life, nei­ther shall they perish for euer, neither shall any one take them out of my hand, my Father which hath giuen mee them, is greater then all; that is, hee can supply their wants readily, and vphold [Page 154] them mightily. Rom. 8.38. I am perswaded, that neither life nor death, neither things present, nor things to come, shall bee able to separate vs from the loue of God, which is in Christ. Again, they obiect that place, Obiect. 1 Cor. 10.12. Hee that standeth, let him take heed that he fall not I answer: Solut. That the Apostle there speaketh of hypocrites, which doe perswade themselues falsly that they stand; and further he speakes also of the weaknesse of men, touching which wee can­not be enough admonished, to the end that wee may thinke saluation not to lie in our owne strength, but in the grace of God only. Obiection They vrge also that place, Eccles 9.1. A man know­eth not whether hee is worthy loue or hatred. Solut. Whereto I an­swere, First, that this is a falla­cie not beeing limitted, wee ought then thus to limit it; A [Page 155] man knoweth not of himselfe, but hee may know it,The fathers speake a­gainst a vaine pre­sumptiō, not a godly as­surance. God re­uealing it vnto him, and the holy Spirit witnessing it. Se­condly, a man knoweth not by those humane causes, & by the euent of Fortune, and the chan­ces and changes of these out­ward things. And therein the Text it selfe is a mouth to ex­pound it selfe, for there it is said, that a man by externall changes, such as are riches, po­uertie, health, sicknesse, honour, contempt, that a man cannot by these things, nor any other externall estate, iudge, and cer­tainely know, whether hee bee in the fauour of God, or be ha­ted by him. And therefore that their Argument is not sound, which argue thus, as many doe, I am rich, Ergo, I am the sonne of God: or, I am poore, Ergo, God doth hate me. This iudge­ment then, whether wee bee in [Page 156] the fauour of God or not, wee must take from Gods Word. Sithence therefore it is cer­taine that a faithfull soule may bee assured of the fauour of God, and the forgiuenesse of sinnes, and may bee made par­taker of the peace of Consci­ence, as it is said, Ro. 5.1. Being iustified by faith, we haue peace: thence another thing doth ne­cessarily follow,De perse­uerantia Zanch. Mi­scellan. 1. part p. 91. & seqq. itē pag. 347. to wit, That a man when hee is once receiued into the fauour of God, and hath obtained remission of his sinnes, that hee (I say) cannot fall away from the Grace of God, nor lose his Faith, nor be obnoxious vnto eternall da [...] ­nation. For because we ought not to doubt of the grace of God, therefore, neither can wee fall away from the grace of God: for if we could fall a­way from it, then wee might doubt of it; but we being once [Page 157] receiued into the grace and fa­uour of God, that wee cannot altogether loose that grace of God, the Scripture witnesserh, Rom. 8.1. There is no condem­nation to those which are in Christ Iesus: if no condemna­tion, then perpetuall fauour, & if no condemnation, then al­so no time is wherin they may slide from the grace of God, & fall into condemnation: for by no condemnation, is excluded both all the kinds thereof, and all occasions of falling therein­to. Hitherto appertaineth that place,Ipse ergo eos facit perse­uerare in bono, qui facit bonos: qui autem ca­dunt & pe­reunt, in Praedestina­ [...]orum nu­mero non fuerunt, August. which before wee haue cited, Iohn 10.28. My sheepe none shall take out of my hand, which is all one, as if hee had said, My sheep shal neuer be ta­ken out of my hand. Which must be diligētly noted against the Papists, who affirme, that a man after that he is taken into the fauor▪ of God, may fall again [Page 158] out of his fauour, euen as if he had neuer been in fauor, but may haue of a mercifull God, an vncompassionate, and irreconcileable God; euen as when one falls out of the fauour of the King in stead of a gentle and kinde master, hee hath now an angry and cruell Lord. Obiect. But here they obiect that place in the 51. Psalme, where Dauid after that hor­rible sinne of his was commit­ted, prayeth, Restore vnto mee the ioy of my saluation, vers. 12. therefore, say they, hee had lost the fauour of God. Solue. I an­swer, that the Papists doe not halfe well enough looke into the text, for it is not said, Re­store vnto me my spirit which I had lost; but he saith, restore my ioy, my comfort againe to me. Therfore that text makes against themselues; for if Da­uid had lost that grace and spi­rit [Page 159] of God, then had hee lost that his saluation, but hee speakes otherwise, hee saith only restore comfort vnto me; for a true beleeuer, when that he falleth into sinnes, the ho­ly spirit for all that remaineth in him, yet it doth not cherish his conscience, but it groweth sad and heauy, and so ceaseth to bee glad, and merry as be­fore times he vsed to bee, hee doth therefore desire of God that he would take away this sadnesse and heauinesse of heart from him, and that hee would restore vnto him a ioy­full and gladsome spirit.

I haue heard as touching the fruite of Iustification, what is that you told me was ne­cessarily conioyned and an­nexed thereunto?

Because the iust man falls seuen times euen in a day,Not [...] onely but [...]. therefore to Iustificatiō there [Page 160] must alwayes bee adioyned Repentance.

True repentance of what parts doth it consist?

De penitē ­tia Zanch. Loc. Com. 9. Calu. Iustit. l. 3. ca. 3Of two parts, one of them as it were contrary vnto the other; to wit, griefe, or sorrow for sinnes committed, and the offending or displeasing of God, and then comfort and confidence of the forgiuenesse of sinnes, which is to bee had, by & for the merits of Christ. See the 467. page of my Syst. of Diuinitie, and in the com­mēt vpon Vrsins Catechisme, page 640.Calu Instit. lib. 3. c. 4. Here note a double errour of the Papists, whereof the first is,Quid mihi ergo est cū hominibus vt audiant confessiones meaes, qua­si sanaturi sint omnes linguores meos? That vnto true re­pentance there is required Confession to a Priest. To which errour wee oppose our iudgements: First, because such a Confession is no where commanded of God. Secondly, because there is no one exam­ple [Page 161] for it of any Saint through out the whole booke of God;Curiosum genus ad cognoscen­dum vitam alienam, desidiosum ad co [...]rigē ­dum suam. Quid a­me quaerunt audire qui­sum, qui no­lunt a te audire qui sint Aug. no example I say, but which teacheth vs to make confessi­on of our sinnes only to God: So doth Dauid Psalm. 51.4. Again, thee only haue I sinned O Lord. And the Publicane. Luke 18.13. Standing in the Temple confessed his sinnes only to God, and thence w [...]nt away iustified: Whereupon (saith Chrysost.) Confesse thy sinnes to God, for to doe this to man it is not safe for thee, for that men may either discouer them or vp­braide thee with them The o­ther Popish errour is,Non glori­abor quia iustus sum, sed gloria­bor quia re­demptus sum. Gloriabor non quia vacuus peccati sum, sed quia mihi remissa sunt peccata. Non gloriabor quia profui, neque quia pro­fuit mihi quisquam sed quia pro me aduocatus a­pud Patrem Christus est, sed quia pro me Christi sanguis eff [...]sus est. Ambros. that Re­pentance which they call pen­nance is satisfactory, as if wee by our repentance did satisfie for our sinnes: vnto which de­testable [Page 162] errour, those places of the holy Bible are to bee opposed, by which wee haue before made cleare that the passion of Christ doth suffi­ciently satisfie for all our sinnes.

You haue already sufficiently instructed mee about Re­demption: now take the paines I pray you, to in­struct mee about sanctification?

De Regene­ratione. Zanch in Epist ad E­phes pag. 161 & seqq. Calu. Instit. l. 3. c. 5. Sanctification, Regeneration, and new Obedience, or Conuer­sion vnto God, are all one in signification. And it is no­thing else saue the changing of our depraued, or corrupt nature into better, and then a setled resolution to avoid sin hereafter, and to frame our liues to som new course which may bee pleasing vnto God, and beseeming our profession of Faith and Religion;Syst. Theol. pag. 475. which [Page 163] regeneration in this life cer­tainely cannot be perfect, but only inchoate, and alwaies cōioyned with a combating, & a reluctance against sin, or of the flesh and the spirit, As the Apostle very largely sets it downe, Rom. 7. Gal. 5. The good (saith he) that I would, J doe not. But in that other life we shall perfectly be regene­nerated, sanctified, and refor­med vnto the Image of God; yet for all this,Calu. Instit. l. 3. cap. 16. Gods will it is our regeneration should bee begunne in this life, and that good workes bee done by vs, as our Sauiour commandeth, Math. 5.16. Let your light so shine before men &c. 2 Pet. 1.10. Labour to make your voca­tion and election sure by good workes, that is, Labor to giue vnto your selues a sure, and to others an euident testimo­ny, that you haue true Faith [Page 164] from whence doe spring and arise good workes; for Faith without workes is dead, and indeed is no Faith. 1 Thess. 4.3.V. Zanch. in Epist ad Thessal. This is the will of God euen your Sanctification. Rom. 6.12.13. Make your members hence­forth weapons of righteousnesse. And most dreadfull is that speach. Heb. 12.14. Without holinesse none shall see God: Wherefore if it be demanded whether good workes are ne­cessary vnto Saluation. I An­swer, That if we take Saluati­on for our first entry thereun­to: namely, Remission of sins, and iustification; then good workes are not necessary: be­cause it is most necessarily re­quired that first our sinnes, be forgiuen vs, before we can do any good works pleasing vn­to God: good workes there­fore are of no force to procure remission of sinnes, which we [Page 165] doe obtaine onely by Faith, contrary to the Papists te­nent: but if the word be not taken for the remission of sinnes, but for life eternall, which hereafter wee shall bee possessed of: there is need then of good workes,Sunt via ad regnum non causa regnandi. Ber. as a meane and way, but not as any meri­torious cause of saluation; for then indeed shall we be cloathed vpon, if we be not found naked: that is, in that other life, wee shall be fully renued and con­formed, if that we begin that reformation, and sanctificati­on in this life. And this is that which the Apostle speaketh Heb. 12.14. Follow peace with all men, and holinesse without which none shall see the Lord.

How many parts are there of our Sanctification?

Two: God workes, and Pray­er; For in these two standeth our whole Regeneration and [Page 166] conuersion; namely, to doe good workes, and dayly to call vpon God by Prayer.

What are good workes, or what things are required vnto Workes which are good, or pleasing vnto God?

Three things bee requisite to good workes: First, that they spring from a true Faith: For Whatsoeuer is not of Faith, is sinne. Rom. 14.23. Heb. 11.6. Without Faith it is im­possible to please God, &c. Se­condly, that they be comman­ded by God; for what works soeuer are enioyned by men, and not by God, those are not good workes. Ezech. 20.18.19. You must walke in my Commandements, and not in the Commandements of your Fa­thers. Math. 15.9. They wor­ship mee in vaine, teaching for doctrines mens precepts. Third­ly, that our good workes, bee [Page 167] alwaies referred to the glo­ry of God; and not vnto vaine glory and hypocrisie. 1. Cor. 10.31. Doe all vnto the glory of God, Mat. 5.16. That men see­ing your good workes, may glori­fie your Father which is in hea­uen. Hereby may easily bee discerned, what is to bee thought of the most of the Papists workes, wherewith they thinke that they worship GOD, such as are their Watchings, and Pilgrimages to holy places, and adorning of Churches with Shrines & Images: for such workes are no good workes; First, be­cause they are not done out of Faith, but out of a most pe­stilent opinion of meriting & satisfying for sins. Secondly, because they are not cōman­ded by God, but inuented & appointed by Popes and Bishops against the expresse cō ­mandement [Page 168] of God: as that of Fasting & abstaining from Flesh on Friday; which man­ner of Fasting and difference of meate is expressely against the Word of God. Mat. 15.11 That which entreth into the mouth doth not defile the man; but that which commeth out of the mouth, that defileth the man. 1 Tim. 4.1.3. The Apostle ex­presly and plainely nameth the Forbidding of certaine meates, and so of Flesh, among the Doctrines of Diuels. Colos 2.16. Let no man condemne you in meate and drinke, or in respect of Holy daies. Rom. 14.14. I am perswaded by our Lord Ie­sus Christ that nothing is vn­cleane, or common of it selfe; but to him that thinketh any thing to be common or prophane: for the Kingdome of God is neither meate nor drinke, but righteousnesse, peace and ioy in the holy Ghost. v. 17.

[Page 169]What is then the rule and square of our good workes, and so consequently whence doe we know what works be commanded by God?

The Morall Law, Syst. Theol. pag. 475. or the Decalogue is the only square of our good workes, whereby we may know, what workes are acceptable vnto God. This law is reduced to two heads, to wit, the true wor­ship of God, and then the workes of charity,Syst. Theol. pag. 480. which wee performe to our neighbour. The worship of God is set downe in the former part of the Decalogue; and the loue of our neighbour, with the workes of charity, is compri­sed in the second Table.

Which is the other part of sanctification?

Inuocation of Gods name

How many waies is God in­uocated,Calu. Instit. lib. 3. ca. 20.or called vpon?

Syst. Theol. pag. 487.Two waies; the first way is Petition, or beging of those things whereof wee stand in neede: and the second is Thankesgiuing for those which we haue receiued: both which kinds of Inuocation is either publike or priuate. As touch­ing both of them, read my Syst. of Diuinity. Pag. 487. And here must bee obserued two maine errours of Pope­rie:Honorandi sunt sancti propter imi­tationem, non adorādi propter re­ligionē, & Angelos ho­noramus charitate non serui­tute, nec eis tēpla cōstru imus. No­lunt enim sic se hono­rari à nobis, quia nos ip­sos, quum boni sumus, templum summi dei esse noue­runt. Aug. First is, touching the In­uocation of Saints: Secondly, about the worshipping of I­mages, & adoring of reliques. As touching the former of these twaine, wee in oppositi­on therevnto maintaine, th [...] God alone is to bee called vp­on in Prayer; that is, the deuout affection of our minde, is to be directed euen vnto God, and not vnto Angels, nor vn­to the Virgin Mary, nor vn­to the Apostles, nor yet vnto [Page 171] those fourteene Helpers, as they call them; by whose me­diation and merits, the Pa­pists doe most blasphemously say, that they are rid, and de­liuered from all aduersities; as are, George, Erasmus, Basil, Pantalion, Vitus, Christopher, Dennis, In Anto­ninus his time, vnder Pauls pi­cture was written, Per hune itur ad Christum: and vnder Dominicks, Sed peristū faciliùs. Flac. Illy­ric. Dominick, Achati­us, Eustace, Gyles, Marga­ret, Barbara, and Catharine. Hence is the Masse of the fourteene Helpers. But vnto this their praying vnto Saints, we oppose the plaine Word of God: whereby will bee plainely proued, that wee owe the deuour affection of our minds onely vnto God: Deut. 6. The Lord thy God shalt thou worship, &c. Which place Christ repeating, Mat. 4.10. expounds thus:Desanctorū inuocatione Zanch. in 1. Epist. Ioan. And him only shalt thou serue; pro­ducing it against Satās temp­tation. See the like places, [Page 172] Exod. 20.3.4. Psal. 50. v. 15. Psal. 95. v. 6. Psal. 99.5. The Angels themselues forbid this, and refuse to bee wor­shipped, as being idolatrous. Iudg. 13.16. where the An­gell saith vnto Manoha: Martyribus non sacrifi­cantus sed vni Deo. Aug. If thou wilt make a burnt Offering, offer it vp vnto the Lord, and not vnto mee. Reuel. 19 v. 10. also the 22. v. 9. the Angell forbiddeth Iohn, and stayes him from falling downe before him, and worshipping of him. Wherevpon he saith to him; See thou doe not this, for I am thy fellow seruant; that is, I am also a creature as well as thy selfe.Abalio ora re non pos­sum, quam a quo sciam me conse­cuturum: quoniā & ipse est qui solus prae­stat, & ego sum cui im­petrare de­betur, famulus cius, qui eum solum obseruo, qui ei offero o­pimaem ho­stiam, quaē mandauit orationem de carne p [...]dìca, de anima in­nocenti, de spiritu san­cto profectā Tertull. Paul Coloss. 2. 18. ex­pressly condemnes worshipping of Angels. And note I pray you a very plaine place. Rom 10.14. How shall they call on him, in whom they haue not be­leeued? Whence thus I argue: Wee ought not to beleeue in [Page 173] the Saints; therefore neither ought we call, or pray to thē. And the Apostle further in his Epistle to the Galathians, Chap. 4.8. blameth the Hea­then, for that they called on them, which by nature are not Gods. Whence I also argue:Reuera Sanctū erat corpus Mae­riae, non ta­men Deus: reuera vir­go erat Maria & honorata, sed non ad adorationē nobis data: Epiphan. Ibi sunt spi­ritus defun­ctorū, vbi non vident quaecunque aguntur aut eueni­unt in ista vita homi­num. Aug. The Saints are not by Na­ture Gods: Ergo, they are not to be called vpon: or if they bee called vpon, then is com­mitted flat Idolatrie. Yea, but the Saints may mediate for vs, therefore they are to bee called vpon. Whereunto we answer, denying the Ante­cedent, that the Saints can me­diate for vs with God: First, because we have one only Me­diator, to wit, Christ Iesus, as it is written; There is one Me­diatour betwixt God and man, euen the man Christ Iesus. 1. Tim. 2. v. 5. Like places here­vnto, see Ioh. 10.9. Rom. 3. [Page 174] 25. Rom. 8.34. Heb. 2.17. Heb. 7.25. Heb 9.12. Second­ly, the Saints cannot be Medi­atours, for that they doe not know the groanings, & sighes of our hearts, and vnderstand not our priuate troubles and afflictions. For these bee the conditions of an Aduocate or Mediatour; first, that our Me­diatour bee nominated and commended vnto vs vpon good and sufficient warrant of Gods Word: Secondly, that that same intercessour be per­fectly righteous and holy: Thirdly, that hee also know, the groanings and afflictions of him, for whom hee meanes to mediate: none of all which agreeth vnto the Saints. For the Saints are neither appointed vnto vs by God to be our intercessours, neither haue we any command in holy Scrip­ture, that we are to make the [Page 175] Saints Mediatours for vs, or to call on them. Nay, rather quite contrary precepts here­unto, which wee haue before cited. Againe wee finde not through the whole volume of of Gods booke, any one ex­ample of any Saint, that hath prayed vnto a Saint, and en­treated him to play the Medi­atour for him. Neither does the second condition agree to them, for that they are not al­together pure before God, y^t they may mediate for others: but they themselues rather haue need of a Mediatour: as it is said, Iob 15.15. Yea, in his Saints bee found vncleannesse. Thirdly, the Saints are igno­rāt of our afflictiōs & affecti­ons, how can they therfore interceed for vs, if they wot not what we aske? for God alone challengeth this priuiledge to himselfe, to be the searcher of [Page 176] the heart, and the discoue­rer of the thoughts, and groa­nings of men. Yea, but (say the Papists) the Saints as the friends of God haue all our groanings and prayers disclo­sed vnto them in the glasse of the Trinitie.Note. Si quando homines exorare o­portet, ia­nitorib pri­us occurre­re oportet, &c. In Deo nihil tale, ad quem confugies? ad Abrahamum? non te audiet. Ille solus precandus & exorandus qui & scriptam in te damnationem delere potest & incendium restinguere. Chrysostom. Whereto I an­swer: first, that if the Saints come to the knowledge of our groanings by God, what need is there, that first wee should call on the Saints? and to what end is it to haue any such Mediators with God, sithence he to whom they me­diate, knoweth better what is wanting to vs, then the Mediators themselues? For it should seeme to bee a prepo­sterous course to vse any in­tercessour [Page 177] vnto a King, if the King knew the party, for whome the Mediatour would interceede,Solent ta­men pudorē passi mise­r [...] vti ex­cusatione per istos posse iri ad Deū sicut per comites peruenitur ad regē, age nunquid tam demōs &c. Vide Amb. in 1 ca. epist. ad Rom. better then the Mediatour himselfe. And how absurde should it be, if the in­tercessour should say: Tell me, I pray you, O my King, what this felloW askes, for whom I am to mediate? Se­condly, I say, that the Scrip­ture hath broken that pro­spectiue glasse all to shiuers. Esay 63.15.16. Heare from heauen thy holy dwelling place: for thou art our Father: Abra­ham heareth vs not, and Israel is ignorant of vs: but thou art our Father, thy name is from euer­lasting. Where it is plainely affirmed, that Abraham and Israel, which long agoe were dead, and whose soules rested with God in the Heauens, did not in any glasse behold and know the groanings and af­flictions [Page 178] of the Church mili­tant on earth. And indeed that the Saints departed are not priuie to our affaires done vp­on the earth nor know any thing in specialtie, what hap­peneth among the liuing, that place in the second of Kings, Cha 22.20. witnesseth, where God saith vnto Iosiah, a most religious & holy King: I will gather thee vnto thy Fathers, that thine eyes may not see all the euills, which I will bring vpon this place, Esay. 57.1. The iust and the righteous are taken a­way from the sight of the euill, that in his yeares hee may not behold the calamities, which are to be sent vpon the Land for wretched impiety. Ec. 9 4 the dead know nothing any more, to wit, of those things, which are done vpon the earth. Hence therefore is it rightly inferred, that the Saints can­not [Page 179] bee Mediators. And in­deed wee haue no neede of them to be our intercessours: first, because God knoweth our afflictions better then they, yea, better then the An­gels: secondly, because God is more merciful then any Saint, and more desirous that wee should liue, then any Saint can be.Ideo ad regem per tribunos aut comites itur, quia homo vti (que) est rex, & nescit, quib. debeat rem­pub credere. Ad Deum autem, quē vtique ni­hil latet, &c. Vid Am. v­bi supra in 1. cap ad Rom. Now that we doe vse the intercession of some No­ble man, or great man vnto Kings (which is their most plausible argument), it is for the great defect and weake­nesse that is in man: for that Princes are not acquainted with all mens grieuances: se­condly, because Princes are more affected vnto one man, then vnto another; but no such respect of persons is there with God, as it is said, Acts 10.34. the Papists bring vs in a distinction betwixt [...] [Page 180] seruice, and [...] adoration: and say that the one, to wit, Seruice is due to Saints, the o­ther, that is, Adoration is due to God. Against which di­stinction,Calu. Instit. l. 1. cap. 12. §. 2. you may reade a most cleare disputation in the exposition of Vrsins Cate­chisme, pag. 739. where it is proued by holy Scripture, that [...] and [...] both the one and the other agrees vnto God, and neither of them both vnto Saints. Only this one thing I will not let passe, that the Papists themselues breake downe the pale of their owne distinction, which I proue by this reason: All those thinges which Dauid in the Psalmes giues vnto God, hee giues them all by the way of adora­tion: but all those very things w^c Dauid giues vnto God, are attributed vnto the Virgin Mary in Bonauentures Psalter: [Page 181] Ergo. The other errour of the Papists is, about the worship­ping of Images, and so also of that worship, which they make vnto the Reliques of the Saints. And first of all the Pa­pists hold, that those prayers which are made in, or at cer­taine set Chappels and Chur­ches, and before the Images of the Saints, are of greater efficacie, and greater worth, then those which are in other places powred forth before God: quite against the holy Word of God, Ioh. 4.21.23. The time shall come, when the true worshippers shall neither be at Jerusalem, nor in this moun­taine, but in spirit and truth worship the Father. Matt. 6.6. Christ bids vs, go into our chā ­ber, and there the doores being shut, to powre out our prayers. 1. Tim. 2.8. The Apostle wil­leth men to pray in euery place, [Page 182] lifting vp pure hands. Now a­gainst reliques and Images, let that place bee well obser­ued, Esay, 42.8. My glory wil I not giue vnto another, nor mine honor vnto the grauen Ima­ges. Calv. Insti l. 1. c. 11. §. 9 But we (say the Papists) doe not worship Images, and we know, that it is said in the second Commandement; Thou shalt not bow downe thy selfe vn­to them, &c. To this what shall we answer, but that they say one thing, and doe ano­ther: for wee haue already proued, that they fall downe, and worship the Crosse; Be­hold the signe of the Crosse, come and let vs worship it. Againe, it is impossible, that ones whole affection should bee bent and setled on an Image, and yet that he should not di­rect some deuotion vnto the Image; as one of the Ancients hath well said: Jt cannot possi­ble [Page 183] bee, Placuit picturas in ecclesia esse non debere: ne quod co­litur aut a­doratur, in parietib. pingatur. Concil. Elibert. that the affection should be withdrawne from that, wher­on our whole sense is fixed, and fastned. Therefore Lactantius saith, that there can bee no true worship performed, where it is done with respect vnto Images. Thirdly, wee say, that both these are equally forbidden of God, namely, the worship­ping of the Image it selfe, and the worshipping of God at, [...]. Atha. Quis ergo iste honor Dei est per lapideas & ligneas for­mas discur­rere, & in­anes atque examines figurastan­quam nu­mina vene­rari, & ho­minem, in quo vere [...] i­mago Dei est, sperne­re? Clem. Rom. or before an Image. For this you haue a plaine place, Leu. 26.1. You shall make you none Idols, nor grauen Image, neither reare you vp any pillar, neither shall you set vp any stone or image within your Land to worship before it: for I am Je­houah, the Lord your God. But Images (say they) are Lay­mens Bibles, and therefore they may be borne with, as certaine historicall documēts for the good of lay people: [Page 184] whereto I answer: first, that it is no little blasphemy to affirme, that Images are Bi­bles, that is, the Word of God: for the authority of Gods word, and of the Bible, is the greatest that may bee, and it is vnspeakeable: But who dare say, that the autho­ritie of Images is as diuine and eternall, as that of God himselfe. Secondly, Images cannot be Lay-peoples Bibles, because the Bible containes the true doctrine of God: but Images are deceitfull & lying Teachers,Calu. Instit. l. 1. c. 11. §. 5 teaching lyes, as it is manifestly written by Ier. 10.8. and by Habb. 2.18.19. Further wee ought not to bee wiser then God, who hath in­stituted, that his church should be taught, not by dumbe Pi­ctures and Images, but by the liuely preaching of his Word, and the lawfull vse of the Sa­craments. [Page 185] And these things be spoken also, as touching the a­doration of Reliques, for the worshipping of them is con­futed by those very same pla­ces of Scripture, by which the worshipping of Images hath beene ouerthrowne.

You haue led mee by the hand through all Diuinitie, and so haue holpen mee to some generall knowledge, wher­by I may in some sort bee prepared vnto the holy Supper of the Lord: now it remaines that you furnish mee with some particular knowledge about the same Supper of the Lord, wher­unto I desire to prepare my selfe?

You say well indeed,S. Th. p. 439 and I doe it very willingly, so bee that, before all, you note that the word Sacrament is no where extant in holy Scrip­ture, [Page 186] but there are diuers words aequiualent vnto it; as Romans 4. the word Signe or Seale; where Paul calleth Cir­cumcision the seale of the righte­ousnesse of Faith. A Sacrament then,Calu. Insti­tut. l. 4. c. 14 is a holy signe or seale annexed to the Word of God, as vnto Tables and Letters, wherein God promiseth vnto vs his fauour, and the forgiue­nesse of sins by the death and suffering of our mediatour Ie­sus Christ. Now signes be of three sorts: Some there bee, which are onely Significatiue, [...]. and noting out somewhat, as the Meare-stone signifieth the fields, which it parts, to be di­uers: [...]. Some are Memoratiue, representing vs the memory of somewhat, and exciting our affection and will, thankfully to thinke on it: as wh [...]n one friend giues vnto anoth [...]r some excellent booke, or a [Page 187] piece of gold to be a signe vn­to him of his friendly remem­brance. Lastly, some Signes are Confirmitiue, [...]. wherby some benefit or other promised vn­to vs by any man, is made cer­taine vnto vs. As the seale hanging at the Kings Letters Patents, doth not only signifie and put the partie in remem­brance of some benefit, but it doth especially certifie him; as namely, by which hee, to whom the letters are granted, is certainly assured to obtaine that benefit or good thing, which is promised him in the Letters. A Sacrament then is a Seale or Signe, assuring vs the forgiuenesse of sinnes, pro­mised in the Letter Pattents of the Gospel. In which short and plaine description, the whole nature of Sacraments doth consist; neither is it here any whit needfull that the [Page 188] godly heart should bee trou­bled or molested with any sub­tilties either of Papists, [...]. or of Vbiquitaries. [...].

J conceiue what a Sacrament in generall is, I would haue you to shew mee what the Supper of the Lord is?

It is a Sacrament of the new Testament, or, it is a holy signe ordained by Christ in the New Testament, that by bread broken and eaten,S Th. p. 454 Calu. Insti­tut. l. 4. c. 17 De coena Domini Zanch. Mis­cellan. 1. part. pag. 387. & seq. wee may bee admonished and cer­tified, that the body of Christ was broken vpon the Crosse, and giuen for vs: and by wine powred out, and drunke, wee may bee remembred and assu­red, that the blood of Christ was shed for vs, for the remis­sion of sinnes.

How many things are wee to consider in the Lords Sup­per?

S. Th. p. 440Three things, as in euery o­ther [Page 189] relation; first, the two termes of the relation, the Re­late, and the Correlate: Second­ly, the foundation and ground of this relation: thirdly, the end or finall cause of this rela­tion.

What is the Relate in the Lords Supper, and what is it called?

It is called the signe, or the thing which puts vs in mind, and giues vs assurance of some other matter.

How many kind of signes bee there in the Lords Supper?

The Relatum or signe in the Lords Supper is twofold: Substantiall and Accidentall.

Which is the Substantiall?

It is true bread, & true wine.Sub vtra (que); specie sumi­tur ipse totus Christus, sed si in altera tantū sume­retur, ad alterius tantum, id est, animae vel corporis, non vtriusque pariter tuitionem valere significare­tur. Ambros. Aut integra Sacramenta percipiant, aut ab integris arceantur, quia diuisio vnius eius­demque mysterii sine grandi sacrilegio fieri non po­test. Gelasius.

[Page 190]Which is the Accidentall?

It is the breaking of the bread, and the taking of it; likewise the powring out of the wine, and the taking of it.

What is the Corelate in the Lords Supper?

It is called the thing signifi­ed, or that thing where of wee are put in mind, and assured in the Lords Supper. The an­cient Church called the Rela­tum, the earthly matter, as is bread and wine, for both of them spring from the earth and the thing signified, it cal­led the heauenly matter; where­upon, it rightly and religi­ously taught that the Supper of the Lord did consist in two things, a terrene or earthly, and a celestiall or heauenly matter; and therefore that it behooued those which came vnto the Lords Supper, to [Page 191] thinke that there they should receiue two things, to wit, an earthly thing after an earthly fashion; that is, bread & wine with the mouth of the body, and an heauenly thing after an heauenly manner, that is, the Body and Blood of Christ by a true faith.

What be the things signified in the Lords Supper?

The thing signified is of two sorts, substantiall, or ac­cidentall.

What is the substantiall?

Euen whole Christ our Me­diatour according to both natures, diuine and humane, but especially according to his body and blood, in asmuch as in his body, as the subiect of his passion hee suffered for our sinnes, and by his blood shed hee purged our sinnes. And this it is which Christ saith, This is my body which is [Page 192] giuen for you; that is, in the Supper of the Lord you are put in remembrance, and as­sured of my body, as it hung vpon the Crosse, and also of my blood which was shedde likewise for you vpon the Crosse.

What is the Accidentall?

Euen all those benefits, which doe acc ew vnto vs by the passion and death of Christ, as the forgiuenesse of sinnes, regeneration sanctifi­cation, and in fine life euer­lasting: as Christ saith, My blood which is shed for you for the remission of sinnes.

I haue heard of both thy termes in the Lords Sup­per, to wit, the Relate and the Corelate: now J would be instructed about the foundation and ground of holy admonition and certi­fication, as you calld it?

The fundamentall or effici­ent cause of the Lords Supper is,Syst. Theol pag. 446. partly in respect of the thing it selfe, or the Sacrament, partly in respect of vs which doe vse the Sacrament.

What is the foundation, in re­spect of the Sacrament it selfe?

It is two fold, the institution of Christ, and the agreement or correspondencie betwixt the signe, and the thing signified.

What are to bee considered in the institution of Christ?

Two things: First, the History of the institution of the LORDS Supper, set downe by the Euangelists: secondly,De verbis Caenae. Zanch. E­pist lib. 1. pag.. 179. Calu. Instit. l 4. cap. 17. §. 12. & seqq. the especiall words of the in­stitution, which are, This bread is my Body which is giuen for you: 1 Cor. 11.24. This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood. vers. 25.

How are those words to bee vnderstood?

Syst. Theol. pag. 457. Dominus non dubita­uit dicere hoc est cor­pus meum, cum signum daret cor­poris sui. Aug. Hoc. est cor­pus meum, id est, hoc est figura corporis mei. Tert. Panis dici­tur corpus suo modo, cum sit sa­cramētum; non autem dicitur rei veritate sed myste­rio signifi­cante. Aug.They are to bee construed according to the nature of signes or sacraments, which are not transubstantiations of things, but, as we haue a little before noted, significati­ons and seales of things. These words therefore are not sub­stantially to be vnderstood, as if the Bread were the sub­stance of the Body of Christ, for by that reason bread should haue beene crucified for vs, bread should haue beene giuen to die for vs; and so the Cup likewise should haue beene shed for vs vpon the Crosse, the Cup should haue issued out of Christs side. Nei­ther are they to bee vnder­stood consubstantially, as if the body of Christ were included in the bread, and the bloud of Christ included in the wine; for Christ saith not, in this bread is my body, or in this [Page 195] wine is contained my blood,Vt quid pa­ras dentes & ventrē? crede & māducasti. Idem. Antequam sāctificetur panis, panē nomina­mus▪ diuina autem illa sanctificāte gratia libe­ratus est ab appellatio­ne panis, dignus au­tem habi­tus est do­minici cor­ports appel­latione, et si natura pa­nis in eo remansit. Chrysost. [...]. Macar Seruator noster nomina cō ­mutauit, & corpori quidem id, quod erat symboli ac signi, nomen imposuit; symbolo autem, quod erat corporis, causa mutationis manifesta estiis, qui &c. Theodoret. neither would our Sauiour teach his Disciples, where his body or his blood was, for they saw that well enough, in that Christ was sitting with them at the Table. But those words are to be vnderstood in a commemoratiue, or certifi­catiue signification: as if Christ had said, the bread doth for a certaintie signifie vnto you, and giues you notice of my body, which is deliuered vnto death for you; and the wine doth most certainely no­tifie & assure you of my blood which is shed for you, for the remission of sinnes. Christs [Page 196] speech then is altogether the like, as if when a Prince hath granted to any one a faire Mannor, and hee giue withall vnto the Graunt his letters with his Broad seale, and de­liuering the man these his let­ters with the seale, hee should say, Loe, theres your Manner. Now hee giues not the Land substantially into his hands, and by consequent it will fol­low, that that speech of the Prince must not bee vnder­stood substantially, as if those letters and the seale were the very substance of the demain, or because the demaine were inclosed in the seale, but it is a significatiue and certifica­tiue kind of speaking, which must bee thus vnderstood and interpreted; these letters of mine, and this seale doth im­port and assure thee of the cer­taine hauing and possessing of [Page 197] that Mannor, Farme, or de­maine. Wherefore wee con­clude▪ that the Body and Blood of Christ according to the substance thereof, is nei­ther in the bread, nor in the place where the Supper of the Lord is administred, but in heauen, as is vsually said, he as­cended into the heauens, from whence only hee shall come at the last Judgement; but that the Bread & Wine do giue vs no­tice and assurance, that that very body which now is in heauē, was giuen for vs on the Crosse, and that the Blood of Christ was shed for vs. Which must bee obserued against the Papists and Vbiquitaries, who seeke after the body and blood of Christ in that very place where is the bread and wine.

What is the other foundation, in respect of the Sacra­ment?

Si sacramē ­ta aliquam similitudi­nem earum rerum qua­rum sunt sacramen­ta non ha­berēt: ne sa­cramenta quidem es­sent. AugIt is the agreement or meet analogie betwixt the signe, and the thing signified, or, it is that fitnesse, whereby the Bread may signifie and ascer­taine vs of Christs body gi­uen for vs, and the wine may notifie and assure vs of the blood of Christ shed for vs.

Wherein consists the fitnesse which true Bread hath to signifie the Body of Christ.

It consists in three things: 1. that like as the bread is bro­ken, so the body of Christ was broken and torne vpon the Crosse for vs: as Paul saith This bread it is the communi [...] of the body of Christ. 2. Th [...] like as bread hath the force of nourishing, so the body o [...] of Christ giuen for vs vn [...] death, hath power to refres [...] our consciences forlorne, and almost spent and pined away [Page 199] by reason of sinne. 3. Like as bread doth not only nourish, but it doth also strengthen our body: so the body of Christ in like manner deliue­red vnto death for vs, hath power continually to cherish and sustaine our drooping mi­serable consciences.

Wherein consists the corre­spondencie that Wine hath vnto the Blood of Christ?

In three things also; first, euen as the wine is poured out into the Cup, and poured also out of the Cup: so the blood of Christ sprung out of his body, and was shed vpon the Crosse. Secondly, euen as wine hath the power of reui­uing and quickning, or of hea­ting and moyst [...]ning of our body, and of increasing vitall and animall spirits; so the blood of Christ, or the merit [Page 200] of the blood of Christ hath the power of quickning our Con­sciences benummed and dry­ed vp by reason of sin Third­ly, euen as wine maketh glad the heart of man, and hath great vertue in it to cheare vp the mind: so the merit of Christ, or the bloud of Christ worketh an vnspeakable ioy in our soules: whereof Dauid speaketh, Psal. 51. Restore vnto me my ioy againe.

J haue heard what the foun­dation of the Lords Supper is in respect of the Sacra­ment it selfe, or the things themselues, now tell mee what is their ground and foundation which doe vse it, or the foundation in re­spect of vs?

It is true Faith, whereby wee doe so looke vpon these signes, as they signifie, re­member, and assure vs of the [Page 201] body & blood of Christ,Si quis mā ­ducauerit ex ipso, non morietur in aeternum. Hoc perti­net ad vir­tutem Sa­cramenti non ad visi­bile Sacra­mentum Qui man­ducat in­tus, non fo­ris; qui manducat corde, non qui premit dente Aug Quasi non possit tangi quum iam ascenderit; at vtique poterit, sed af­fectu, non manu; voto, non oculo; fide, non sen­sibus Bern. and so cōsequently of his whole me­rit: and so likewise of assured remissiō of our sins following vpō that merit. For in the sup­per of the Lord remissiō of sins is not granted vnto vs, neither hath the Bread or the Wine any power to purifie from sinnes, as the Papists per­uersly doe imagine: But our Faith is confirmed & strength­ned by th [...]se signes in the re­mission of sinnes; which was granted and giuen vnto vs be­fore that wee approached the Supper.

Wherein consists that Faith, which we must bring to the Lords Supper, thereby to be confirmed and strengthned.

It consists in two things: [Page 202] First, in a sure trust and con­fidence, whereby wee beleeue for certaine, that Christs bo­dy was giu [...]n and his blood shedde for vs: that is, for that person that commeth to bee partaker of the Lords Supper. Secondly, it consisteth in ap­plication, whereby wee appro­priate vnto our selues Christs passion, steadfastly beleeuing that wee as Christs members are so made one with Christ our head, that as hee suffered for our sinnes, euen so the par­don for all those sinnes for his passion sake we should as cer­tainely be perswaded of, as if we our selues had beene cruci­fied, and there haue giuen our owne proper bodies, and shed our owne hearts blood.

I haue heard as concerning the foundation and ground of the Lords Supper; it remaineth that [Page 203] I heare somewhat of the end or the finall cause, for which the Lords Supper was instituted, and for which it becommeth mee to communicate at the Lords Table?

The end or finall cause is first in respect of Christ, then in respect of our selues. In re­spect of Christ, Reliquit nobis Christꝰ [...]. i. e. Monu­menta suae salutaris passionis, quae propo­suimus iux­ta eius mā ­data. Basil. the end is the commemoration of that his most bitter passion, which he endured for vs both in his soule, and in his body. A com­memoration (I say) that is, a gratulatorie remembrance, to the end that for that so great a benefit, and vnutterable loue towards vs, we should in the publike assembly and congre­gation, in the very face of the Church, yeeld together with that remembrance most hear­tie thankes. As Christ saith, Doe this in remembrance of me. [Page 204] 1 Cor. 11.24. in an Eucha­risticall or thankefull wise. Whereupon this Sacrament is also called the Eucharist, for this principal vse of the Lords Supper. In respect of our selues the vse of the Lords Supper is either Primary or Secondary.

What is the Primarie vse of it in respect of our selues?

It is two fold: First, the confirming and establishing of our Faith as touching the for­giuenesse of our sinnes, for Christs body giuen vnto death for vs, and for his blood shed vpon the Crosse likewise for vs. The other vse is the nourishing, strengthning, re­uiuing, and chearing of our consciences, which were by the burthen of sin oppressed, withered, and disconsolate.

Which is the secondary vse arising from the former?

It is three fold: first, the [Page 205] consecration of our selues, that euen as Christ offered himselfe once vpon the Altar of the Crosse for vs: so we should in this publike action of the Church offer vp our selues, and our whole life, euen all that are ours vnto God and his Sonne. Secondly, the publike confession of the faith, to wit, that by these externall sym­boles and tokens, as by a mi­litary marke and badge wee may testifie, vnto what com­pany we belong, and to what religion wee adioyne our selues. Thirdly, the obligation of our selues, that wee should also by this publike action in the sight of the Church, bind our selues to loue our neigh­bour, and to doe the workes of charitie, especially to them that are partakers with vs in the same beliefe and religion. And hereupon it was, that the [Page 206] Ancients called this Supper of the Lord [...], that is, a loue-feast; and that they were alwaies wont, which came vnto the Supper, to giue some Almes vnto the poore, that so they might testifie, how that by the vse of the Lords Sup­per, they were obliged to per­forme workes of loue and cha­rity towards their Neigh­bours. And this is the true doctrine of the Lords Supper, drawne out of the onely word of God,Syst. Theol. pag. 459. Calu. Iustit. lib. 4. ca. 18. and taken from the nature of Sacraments. But contrariwise, the Masse is an horrible monster, an Idoll of Antichrists owne making, consisting of diuers horrible blasphemies, whereby the whole dignitie and excellen­cie of the Lords Supper is de­faced, and quite taken away; namely, while they say, that Christ in the institution of [Page 207] the holy Supper, before that euer hee gaue his body and blood vnto his Disciples, did vnder the bread and wine of­fer vp himselfe truly; though after an vnbloody manner, for the honour of his Father, and that hee did appoint then his Disciples, and all Ministers afterward to doe the like.Si Deus di­misit pecca­ta per vnā bostiam, nec dum iam opus est se­cunda. Chrysost. Saluatoris hostia semel oblata ab­soluit om­nia, fidaque in omne tē ­pus perdu­rat. Aarom successores dati fue­runt; Dominus autem sine transitione & successore sacer­dotiam ob [...]net in aeternum. Athanas. As the Masse-priests indeed after a few words vttered, like Ma­gicall Spels and Charmes, and after a few histrionicall ge­stures and ceremonies doe beare vs in hand that they do And further they blush not to affirme, that this Sacramēt is a sacrifice, a most true propitia­tory sacrifice for the sinnes, punishments, and all wants not only of the liuing, but of the dead too. And so blasphe­mously tread, as it were, vn­der [Page 208] foot the Passion of Christ, which as formerly wee haue proued, is the alone and only propitiation for our sinnes, which was only to bee made and performed by Christ, and not often to be reiterated, as are the expresse words of the Apostle against that Idoll of the Masse worthy to bee ob­serued.De sacrifi­cio Christi. Zanch. in Epist ad Ephes. 180. Heb. 10.12. Christ ha­uing made that one only offering for sinnes, for euer sitteth at the right hand of God: And v. 14. By that one oblation hath he con­secrated for euer those which are iustified. You may reade more abuses and abominations of the Popish Masse very plaine­ly propounded in the explica­tion of Vrsins Catechisme, at the eightieth question.

You haue fitted mee for the Lords Supper by know­ledge, both generall and particular: now it remai­neth [Page 209] that you prepare mee also by true deuotion. What things then, I pray you, doe appertaine vnto that true Deuotion?

Two things: first, that you bethinke with your selfe, how oft you are to vse the Lords Supper: secondly, that you consider well, how you may vse it worthily.

How oft must I vse the Lords Supper?

Very often; where truely there can be no certaine num­ber of times prescribed vnto any man:Non est au­daciae saepi­us accedere ad Domi­nicam mō ­sam sed in­digné acce­dere, etiam si semel tā ­tùm id fiat in tota vi­ta. Chrys. because euery one out of his godly vnderstan­ding, is to set downe that with himselfe. But in the Pri­mitiue Church, the Christians surely did vse the Lords Sup­per, as often as euer they came together to heare the Word of God; as may appeare out of the 3 of the Acts, where the [Page 210] Christians are said to haue met to heare the Word of God,Scio Romae hanc esse consuetudi­nem, vt fi­deles sem­per Christi corpus acci­piant. Hierom. Accipe quo­tidie, quod quotidie ti­bi prosit: sic viue vt merearis quotidie ac­cipere. Qui non mere­tur quoti­die accipe­ro; non me­retur post ānum acci­pere. Amb. and to the breaking of bread, that is, the Supper of the Lord. But it would bee conuenient foure times in the yeare, or twise at the least e­uery yeare to approach the Lords Table; and that for these reasons. First, because frequent and solemne thankes­giuing is by vs to bee perfor­med for that so excellent be­nefite which was afforded vn­to vs by Christs Passion. Se­condly, because Christ in ex­presse termes commands. How often soeuer you shall doe it in re­membrance of me; where the word how often soeuer, enfor­ceth an often vsage: that is, so often, as often as you shall come; so that it presupposeth, that wee are often to come. 3. And thus farre are wee in­debted to our faith, that wee [Page 211] often strengthen it, so much we owe vnto our consciences, that wee may often hereby cherish, quicken and cheare,Qui vulnus habet, me­dicinam quaerit; vul­nus habe­mus dum sub peccato sumus, me­dicina est Sacramen­tum Bern. them vp: for by this good helpe and meanes, wee stirre our selues vp to leade a new life, whilest that wee conse­crate and offer vp our selues to God by the vse of the Lords Supper. Thus much wee owe likewise to the Church that wee may hereby make open profession, and giue a publike testimony, that wee bee fel­lowes and members of it. Last­ly, thus much wee are bound to performe for the auoyding of corporall punishments: for 1 Cor. 11.30. it is said, For this cause many are weake and sicke among you, and many sleep, &c. where the Apostle tea­cheth, that God punisht many in the Church of Corinth with diseases and death, because [Page 212] they did not rightly vse the Lords Supper. Now if God did lay his punishing hand on them by diseases and death for the wrong vse, we may bee sure that he wil punish for the rare vse of the Lords Supper.

Teach me now further how I may worthily vse the Lords Supper, and so how my deuotion must bee qua­lified?

Qui sibi nullius ma­li est con­scius, hunc oportet sin­gulis diebus accedere: qui vero peccatis oc­cupatus est neque poe­nitet, ei nec in festis accedere tutum est. Nec enim se mel in an­nō accedere liberat nos à peccatis, si indignè accesseri­mus: quin hoc ipsum auget dam­nationem, quod cum semel tan­tum acce­damus, ne tum quidē purè acce­dimus. Chrysostom.That indeed is it, which a­boue all other is most neces­sary, because of that most sharpe sentence pronounced by the Apostle. 1 Cor. 11.27. Whosoeuer therefore eateth this bread, or drinketh this Cup vn­worthily, he is guilty of the bo­dy and blood of Christ; that is, he is held guilty of the viola­ting of this sacred signe and seale, whereby the body and blood of the Lord is represen­ted, and withall assured vnto [Page 213] vs. Whereupon hee further addeth; Let euery man there­fore examine himselfe, and so let him eate of this Bread and drink of this Cup; for who so eateth and drinketh vnworthily, eateth and drinketh his owne damna­tion, not discerning the Lords body, that is, not vsing with reuerence those most holy signes and pledges, whereby wee are assured of the Lords body, and so consequently not discerning, or putting a­ny difference betweene com­mon bread, which we eate e­uery day at our Tables, and this bread, which by reason of the vse and office of certify­ing and assuring is made holy; and so likewise of the Wine.

Of what sorts is that deuoti­on, I pray you tell me?

It must be of two sorts: ei­ther Antecedent, going be­fore the receiuing, or Conco­mitant, [Page 214] and ioyned to the re­ceiuing of those holy myste­ries.

How is the Antecedent de­uotion called?

It is called, The examining of a mans selfe, according to that wee erstwhile vrged out of the Apostle; Let euery man therefore examine himselfe, &c, 1 Cor. 11.28.

What is the true trying of a mans selfe, and of what parts does it consist?

The examination, or proo­uing of a mans selfe, is no­thing else but the sifting of ones conscience, what a man thinketh of himselfe; and this examination is three fold.

Which is the first examina­tion?

The first examination is as touching our misery, which a­gaine is either generall, name­ly, when wee consider with [Page 215] our selues the misery of whole mankind; which did betide vs by the fall of our first Pa­rents, which doth consist in sinne, and the punishment of sin; or speciall, when our thoughts are occupied about our owne peculiar misery; which ex­amination stands in 2 things: first, in the acknowledging of those sinnes, which thou e­uery day hast committed, ei­ther by omitting good things, which should haue been done, or committing euill which should haue been left vndone, and that both in respect of good workes, which wee ought to doe, as also in re­spect of prayers, and daily inuocating on Gods Name, which hath beene either alto­gether neglected, or but cold­ly performed, together with a due and diligent considerati­on of those punishments both [Page 216] corporall and eternall, which we might for those our sinnes feare would iustly fall vpon vs. Secondly, In a serious griefe & repenting sorrow for those our sinnes. It were, me thinks, very meete to make such an examination of our selues on the third day (as it were) for examples sake, on Friday be­fore the celebration of the Lords Supper; and on that day to bee read both the first part of sacred Theologie, and also the 20. Chap. of Exod. the 28. of Deut. and thereunto to bee added that prayer of Da­uid out of the 51. and 38. Psalmes.

Which is the second exami­nation?

Apprehēsio Applicatio. Si credis peccata tua non posse deleri, nisi ab eo cui so­li peccasti & in quem peccatum non cadit, benè facis: sed adde adhuc vt credas quia per ipsum tibi peccata dimitūtur. Hoc enim est testimo­nium Spiri­tus Sancti, dimissa sunt Tibi peccata. Bern.The second is concerning our faith, namely, whereby wee recouer our selues out of our former sorrowfull medita­tion, fixing our faith and be­liefe [Page 217] on Christ, thinking on his Person, his Office, and es­pecially his Passion & Death, and applying that his Passion and Death to our selues, euery one of vs assuring our selues, that for that his Passion all our sins are forgiuen. Where it will also bee expedient to reade ouer the whole doctrine of the remedies against our mi­series, euen vnto the doctrine of Iustification, and thereunto to adioyne the 26. and 27. Chapters of Mathew the 17.18.19. of Iohn; the 5.3. of Esay, and likewise the 8. of the Epistle vnto the Romans.

What is the third examinatiō?

The third must be occupied about our sanctification, or new life; which consideration, is absolued by a double reasō & steady purpose of heart: the first, of doing those good works hereafter, which are to be per­formed [Page 218] either towards GOD or towards our Neighbour. The second, of daily calling on God by prayer. Where it shall not bee impertinent to recall the whole doctrine of sanctifica­tion, and to reade the fift and sixth Chapters of Mathew; the 12, and the following Chap­ters of the Epistle to the Hebrewes; the latter Chapters of the Epistle to the Galath. the Epist. to y^e Coloss. to the Ephes. both the Epist. of John and of Iames. And this may be done vpon the Sabbath day.

Thus farre I haue heard of that deuotion which ought to goe before the vse of the Lords Supper: now tell me also somewhat of that deuotion, which I ought to vse at the receiuing of the ho­ly Communion?

That deuotion is either ex­ternall, namely, that wee doe [Page 219] soberly and reuerently ap­proach vnto this holy action, in regard of our outward ge­sture, or internall and princi­pall, which consists in these foure points, First, that thou render vnto Christ most de­uout and hearty thankes for that his passion and death, which for thy sake he suffered and sustained. Secondly, that thou taking the Sacred bread doe make sure thy faith and appropriate vnto thy selfe the merit of Christs passion, and so of the breaking of his bo­dy vpon the Crosse, cherish­ing & strengthning thy con­science with that assurance; and then taking the wine, that thou bethinke with thy selfe, how that the blood of Christ was shed for thy sinnes, and so withall reuiuing and filling with ioy thy drooping con­science. Thirdly, this deuo­tion [Page 220] must be also in considera­tion of thine owne selfe, that thou doe hereafter dedicate and consecrate thy selfe whol­ly both in soule and in body, and all thy workes vnto God. Fourthly, that thou doe also remember the Church, in whose sight thou vsest the Lords Supper, firmely resol­uing with thy selfe to abide alwaies in that Church, and to doe the workes of charity vn­to the Brethren. For the bet­ter effecting of these 4 points of this internall deuotion, e­uery one may vse some pithy forme of prayers about the very act of receiuing. And so haue we finished the doctrine of true preparation vnto the Lords Supper, and together with it haue laide downe the summe and Epitome of all Diuinity. Now what remaineth, but that wee earnestly intreate of [Page 221] God, sithence his Word is a Lanterne vnto our feete, and a light to our pathes, that hee would enlighten our minds, and open our hearts, that wee may vnderstand the vndoub­ted truth of his holy word, and bee piously transformed into those things which wee vnderstand, so that wee may not in any thing displease his heauenly Maiestie, and that for Christ Iesus sake our Lord and only Sauiour. So be it.

A briefe direction how to examine our selues before we goe to the Lords Table, how to behaue our selues there, and how to try our selues afterwards.

BEfore wee must dare to come to the holy Communion, we must di­ligently and carefully sift and examine our selues.

I. The subiect of our exa­mination is ourA man must not set vp his Consistory in other mens C [...]n­s [...]ien [...]es. My Lord [...] selues, & not others, as the Apostle saith; Let euery m [...]n examine himselfe and so let him eate, &c. 1. Cor. [...]1.28.

[Page 224]II. The matter wherein out examination must chiefly consist (presupposing our ge­nerall and particular know­ledge) is of three sorts. The first is, as touching our repen­tance: the second concerneth our Faith. The third is about our Charity.

Touching our Repentance thus. Wee cannot choose but know (our consciences wit­nessing vnto vs) how grie­uously we doe daily offend a­gainst Gods holy Statutes, both in thought, word, and deede: wherefore wee seeing our hideous sinnes and mis­deeds; for which, if God in his iustice would deale with with vs,1 Contriti­on for 2.3. Confession and Dete­station of 4. Resoluti­on to for­sake sinne. we might expect no­thing but destruction & dam­nation: Let vs enter into the closets of our owne hearts, and see whether wee find our selues inwardly sorry for all [Page 225] our misdoings: Secondly, confessing all our sinnes vnto the Lord: and thirdly, grow­ing to an inward hatred and loathing of sinne, both in our selues and others: fourthly, fully purposing to conforme our selues according to Gods holy Lawes and Commande­ments. Which sorrow of heart for by past sinne, and good purpose of mind to preuent sinne hereafter if we shall find in vs, then may wee perswade our selues of true and vnfai­ned Repentance.

Touching our Faith in this manner. Sinne was that by which man became miserable, and because he brake the com­mandements of God, & light­ly regarded the behests of the most High, therefore was hee not onely turned out of his most blissefull and happy e­state; but stood guilty of e­ternall [Page 226] death & cōdemnation both of body and soule for sin. When man, sinfull man, stood in this dolefull case, destitute of all helpe and succour ei­ther from himselfe, or other creature liuing in the world, it pleased God of his owne loue and free mercy graciously to behold wretched man, and to send him a Sauiour, euen Ie­sus Christ the righteous, pro­mising remission of sinnes, li­berty from the snare of the Diuell; and in stead of con­demnation, euerlasting life to all those, which with a true faith and stedfast beliefe lay hold on Christ merits, apply­ing the promises of God in Christ to their owne soules in particular. This, when wee shall haue diligently, weighed in our mindes, then let vs turne to our hearts,1. Appre­hēsiue per­swasion. and see whether we 1. feele our con­sciences [Page 227] assured by the Spirit of God, that the punishment of our sinne is fully in Christ discharged; and that 2.2. Particu­lar Appli­cation. what­soeuer hee hath done for man, appertaineth not onely vnto others, but even to vs also And thus, if we shall perceiue our hearts affected, wee may perswade our selues of a true and liuely faith.

Touching Charitie, on this wise. As Charity is the fruit and effect of a true and liuely faith (so that it is impossible we should have a sound faith but wee must bee fruitfull in good workes and deeds of Charity; for as the light can in no wise be separated from the Sunne,Ego non credam ve­ram fidem esse intra, nisi bona o­pera vide­am extra. Ioh. Huss. nor heat from the fire, nor breath from a liuing body; so neither can these two inseparable vertues bee disioyned, but if faith bee the root, good workes and chari­table [Page 228] deeds will bee the fruit, insomuch that hereby may we more then probably iudge of the purenesse and sincerity of our faith:) So likewise many be those fruits and effects of true Charity and Christian loue; which if by our search wee shall find in vs, wee may certainly assure our hearts of the possession of that rich gemme, and precious vertue Charity.1. Reconci­liation, which wee must affect and seeke after, Mat. 5.23. Eph. 4.32. 2. Entire affection, which wee must har­bour to­wards our neighbour. Rom. 12.17, 20. They bee set downe by Gods own Spirit: the Pen­man is the Apostle Paul 1. Cor 13.4.5. &c. Loue suffe­reth long; is bountifull; loue enuieth not; loue doth not boast it selfe; it is not puffed vp; it disdaineth not; it seek­eth not her owne things; it is not prouoked to anger; it thinketh not euill, &c. This place when wee haue read di­stinctly and discreetly, let vs enter into a serious cogitati­on, [Page 229] and examine our selues first,Cui semel ignoueris cura vt ille sentiat bo­na fide id esse actum & si qua in re illum iu­uare potes experiatur te amicum. Lud. Vines. whether wee be reconci­led vnto such as wee haue of­fended, and heartily forgiue such as haue offended vs: and secondly, bee ready withall to doe them all the good wee can: And this affection if we shall find in our selues vpon our suruey and examination, wee may perswade our selues of true and sound Charity.

III. The forme of our Scru­tinie is after a iudiciall man­ner of proceeding.

First, 1. Exami­nation as Iustices. we must examine our selues, and take a Catalogue of our sinnes, the Diuell him­selfe hath in store against vs, by which wee haue offended Gods iustice.

Secondly, 2. Endite­ment, as Clerkes. then according to the ten words of the Law, we may frame ten seueral actions and inditements; as for in­stance (because I would speak [Page 230] to the capacitie of my weak­est Brethren) muster vp be­fore thee all thy Atheisticall conceits, or at least so many as thou canst remember, and then indite thy selfe for the first Commandement; looke and see whether thou hast not set vp an Image, or an Idoll in thine heart, and so indite thy selfe for the second Comman­dement. Call to mind thirdly, whether thou hast not by swearing and blaspheming, taken Gods Name in vaine; remember fourthly, whether thou hast not often propha­ned Gods holy Sabbath fift­ly, whether thou hast not been disobedient and refractary to Parents and Gouernour: sixt­ly, whether thou hast not har­boured in thy breast murthe­ring malice and enuie: se­uenthly, whether thou hast not set open thine eyes to vn­cleannesse [Page 231] and vanity: eight­ly, whether thou hast not in­iured thy neighbour in his goods: ninthly, whether thou hast not wronged him in his good name: nay, whether tenthly, thou hast not giuen the reines loose to all concu­p [...]scence;See the particular sinnes a­gainst eue­ry Com­mande­ment in my Lord of Landasses Preparati­on Pag. 18. et seqq. and in Perkins his Trea­tise of the nature an practice of Rep [...]ta [...]e 3. Verdict [...]f conden­ [...]ation, a [...]. and so for the breach of euery commandement, frame a seuerall inditement, and plead guilty. This maist thou doe by thy se [...]fe, yet if thou art weake, and desirest helpe; thou shalt find the in­ditement drawne at large for thee in the Practice of Piety, Pag. 565. 566. & seqq. of the eighth Edition. For further helpe see Maister Theologus, schooling Asunetus in Dents Plaine Mans Path way to Heauen, Pag. 332 & seqq. of the fifteenth Impress [...]on.

Thirdly, t [...]n adde thereto so many seuerall sentences of [Page 232] condemnation.

And so forthwith, fourth­ly, 4. Sen­tence, as Iudges. pronounce a perpetu­all confusion due to vs, with a shame for that which is past, with a griefe for that which is present, and with a feare of that may come heere­after. (And when we can thus bring our selues into the worst taking that can be, Tunc optimè habet, saith Bu [...]er, qui possimè habet For hauing thus pronounced this shame of face dew vnto vs, God will cease from his sentence of anger; nay he will say, This man hath condemned himselfe, I need not to condemne: seeing hee hath straitly examined him­selfe, I remit all, I will ex­amine him no further, hee is free, let him come, and so let him eat of my Bread, & drink of my Cup.) Then being con­strained to conclude wee are [Page 233] vnworthy; wee must in the next place goe out of our selues, & faint after the righ­teousnes can make vs worthy, which cannot be effected but by Faith,M Greene­ham. which commeth by the blessing of the Gospell: whereby we (being conscious of our owne vnworthinesse) doe seeke wisedome out of our selues, and sue for obedience in the Sonne of God Christ Iesus our Lord.

These are those duties which we must thinke vpon, be­fore we come to the Lords holy Table: now for our behauiour there, obserue thus much.

The duties which are requi­red of vs in the celebration of the holy Communion are of two kinds, either Generall, See Master Brinsleys true Watch 1 part page 183. of the eight Edi­tion. or common to this and other times, or Peculiar and proper to this seruice.

[Page 234]I. The generall and com­mon duties are to ioyne with the Congregation in confes­sing of sinnes, in singing of Psalmes and Hymnes, in hea­ring with reuerence and deuotion Gods holy word preached, in praying, and the like.

Secondly, touching the proper duties more peculiarly be­longing to this seruice,Corpus Christi di­cimus esse ca [...]auer, nosque op­poriere esse aquilas, vt intelliga­mus in al­tum subu [...] ­landum esse si velimus ad Christi corpus ac­cedere, haec [...]nim aqui­larū men­sa [...] est, non graculo­rum. Chrys. and our behauiour in the recei­uing of those holy Mysteries, as the Church hath retained it, there is a commandement giuen, that wee lift vp our hearts to the Lord. And wee must indeed be as Eagles soa­ring vp to heauen by hauing carefull meditations on hea­uenly and i [...]uisible things, a rising from the due consideration of the things themselues offered vnto vs, that is, the outward elements of bread & wine; as also from a regard [Page 235] full contemplation of euery action in that holy ministra­tion.

First therfore when we see the bread and wine set before vs on the Lords Table, wee know that they are appointed for the nourishing and strengthning of our bodies, but here wee must not stay. Our hearts hereby are to bee led to meditate on the body and blood of Christ; which is appointed to bee our soules nourishment to feede vs to eternall life; for so he pro­f [...]sseth of himselfe, Ioh. 6.55. My flesh is meate indeed, and my blood is drinke indeed.

Secondly, when wee see the breaking of the bread, and pow­ring out of the wine, our hearts are to be led to the meditation of the c [...]uell death of the Crosse, which Christ suff [...]red for the remission of our sinns, when his most blessed body was [Page 236] broken, and his most precious blood shed for the redemption of mankind.

Againe, when we see that the bread which is broken & giuē vnto vs by the Minister, is all of the same loafe, or at the least of the same graine; and the wine whereof we drinke, that it commeth from the same grape, and receiued by vs in the same Cup, wee are hereby to be led to the meditation on that communion, which wee haue with all Gods Saints, which are partakers of those holy mysteries, and to the consideration of that vnion, which we haue, or should haue among our selues, as members of one mysticall body, where­of Christ Iesus is the head.

Lastly, when wee eate that holied bread, and drinke that consecrated wine, wee know, that they turne to nutriment [Page 237] for our bodies, & so cōsequēt­ly that they grow into one sub­stance with vs: hereby are we led to a further meditation on our incorporation into Christ Iesus, to bee made one with him, and hee with vs: so that hereby wee may assure our hearts of our reconciliation with God, and of all the bene­fits of Christs death and passi­on: for seeing Christ is be­come ours, how shall not God with Christ giue vs all things?

And these are those holy Meditations whereupon we must bestow the best of our thoughts in that so sa­cred a businesse: now as touching the triall of our soules, after the receiuing of those holy mysteries, note but this.

After that the Lord hath fed our soules so graciously at [Page 238] his owne Table, we must take heede that wee proue not vn­thankefull to the louing kind­nesse of the Lord. And there­fore it is required of vs, & that not for a day, or a weeke, or some small time, but euen for euer continually to retaine a thankfull remēbrance of those blessings, wherof we are made partakers in Christ Iesus as al­so neuer to let sl p out of our mind that interchāgeable pro­mise, which hath past betwixt God & vs. The Lord promi­sing to be our God, & we pro­mising henceforth to become Gods faithfull & obedient ser­uants, to serue him in holi­nesse all the remainder of our life. Whence the ordinary custome in these daies may worthily be reprehended: for howsoeuer men for a day, or a short space seeme to haue a Christian sense of that holy [Page 239] duty, whereto they haue bound themselues by their p [...]omise; yet notwithstand­ing within a while they re­turne with the Dogge to the vomit, and with the Sow to wallowing in the mire. Wherefore to good purpose it is, that wee propose to our hearts a triall of our selues, euen after our receiuing. For though a man by the sight of the soyle may gather by some guesse, what fruite will come vp; yet when hee sees rhe fruite, the matter is farre more sure. And therefore be­cause those Accidents Ante­cedent, as repentance from dead workes, faith in Christ, and loue towards men may sometime deceiue vs, it is good (to put the matter out of all doubt) to trie our selues afterward, if wee can heare the Word more ioyful­ly, [Page 240] if we trauell for the righ­teousnes of faith more sound­ly, and make the score of our sinnes lesse then they were before. And these in­deed are comforta­ble fruites of the truth of our holinesse.

A Short Treatise touching Mans SER­VILE WILL, before the working of GODS grace plainely and fully as I trust opening that Controuersie euen as it was written to a Friend, in answere of a Popish Pamphlet, touch­ing Mans Free-wil.

MY good Friend,Praloq. I suppose you gaue me not that Popish Script to o­uerlooke it only, but to ex­amine and censure it, for your resolution and satisfaction in [Page 252] that point of Controuersie (which it only touches vpon) concerning Free-will and the power of nature before grace. A point, which if the Author of your Script had throughly vnderstood, hee might well haue blam'd himselfe in the choyce of that Doctrine for the countenancing of his Re­ligion which of all other doth monderogate from the credit of the Romish faith. For I am vtterly of this mind, that there is no one Doctrine through­out the whole body of Diui­nity which doth more direct­ly crosse and thwart the truth of the Gospell, which doth more liuely argue and con­uince Popery of Antichristia­nisme, then the Papists tenent touching Free-will.

Ha's Rome no other hand, to prop't then that?

Rome, without other hopes, must needs fall flat.

And therefore your Author whosoeuer it was light vpon this point vnluckily.

First, he offends in limine, Status con­tron. in the very proposall of the que­stion; for the question is not Whether Man in the state of corruption hath Free-will, or freedome of will, who euer de­nied that? but the State is this. Whether a man in his corrupt estate, hath of himselfe before the working of Gods grace in his soule, any power or ability natu­rally to turne himselfe vnto God, to affect that which is truely and Theologically good either for the willing and propo­sing of it to himself in cogitation or for the absoluing and performance of it in action. The Ie­suits, who are the most refined [Page 254] Papists, do hold that an vnre­generate man hath such a na­turall power and strength, by which hee doth prepare him­selfe for his conuersion and saluation, and by which hee doth affect and effect too that which is truly and vniuocally good. Wee teach and affirme that there is in the vnrege­nerate no such power of na­ture, no such strength of free-will, nor any faculty to doe ought that good is; but onely he is led by the corruption of nature to that which is euill till Gods grace hath wrought a change in the whole man, by an effectuall and vnresistable call.

[...]. Adam indeed our common Father had such a quality and naturall faculty of the soule bestowed vpon him by God in his first creation, whereby po­tuit non peceare, if hee had [Page 255] would, he should not haue sin­ned. This he had for himselfe, and for his posterity, hee be­ing the root of Mankind; but by his disobedience and auer­sion from God, hee depriued himselfe and consequently his Posterity of that excellent quality, as Saint Austin very appositely. Homo malè vtens libero arbitrio, & ipsum perdi­dit & seipsum: Man not v­sing his Free-will aright, lost both it and himselfe too. Now what we lost in Adam, we do not regaine but by Christ Ie­sus. It is Christ alone that makes vp those breeches: and therefore till a man bee rege­nerate by the grace of Christ, till hee be implanted into the body of Christ, till Christ dwell in his heart by faith, he can neuer looke to be freed from that misery, whereinto hee was plunged by Adams [Page 256] first transgression. This is the true state of the Controuer­sie, whereby you see what wee hold, and what they op­pose. The proofes which are brought on their side (to giue your Author his due) are ve­ry orderly and distinctly pro­posed; but some of them are impertinent, some friuolous, all as weake as water: for a generall answer to them all, doe but obserue a double di­stinction.

• I. Man is consi­dered in a foure­fold Estate.
  • 1. In statu instituto, in the state of integri­ty, before the fall; wherein his will was inclinable to good or euill. So in­clined to good that it might decline to euill; which he did, and wee feele it and smart for it.
  • 2. In statu destituto, [Page 257] in the state of cor­ruption, after the fall; wherein his will is inclinable onely to euill, being made the slaue and seruant of sinne, yea dead in sinne.
  • 3. In statu restituto, in the state of Regene­ration by Christ: wherein his will is inclinable to good and euill; the Spirit calling to good, the flesh calling to e­uill.
  • 4. In statu praestituto, in the state of glo­ry, whereunto hee was predestinate in Christ: where­in his will is incli­nable onely to good, and that immuta­bly!
• [Page 258]II. The things where­about the will of man is, con­uersant, are of three sorts.
  • Naturall, as to eate and drinke, heare and see, talke and walke, and the like, in these hee hath free­will after the fall.
  • Ciuill Affaires, as to argue and dispute, to follow a trade, to resort to the Church to listen outwardly to that is taught, in these he hath freewill, though it bee very weake and maimed, as S. Austin saith.
  • Spiri­tuall, which are ei­ther appertain­ing to the King­dom of
    • Darknesse, as all sins, and to these a man is freely car­ried by the corruption of nature.
    • God, as the duties of ho­linesse, and in [Page 259] these actions an vnrege­nerate man hath no free­dome of will at all.

Now the reasons that are brought against the Ortho­doxe truth doe either speake of man in his integrity, and the state of regeneration, and so con­clude not that which is in question about the corrupt e­state of man abiding vnder the Dominion of Sinne: or they speak of freedome in na­turall and ciuill affaires, which wee doe not altogether deny; but that hee hath no will to desire nor power to effect Spirituall actions appertaining to the Kingdome of God, these reasons following shall most euidently euict. [...].

I. Who can bring a cleane [Page 260] Reas. 1 thing out of that which is vn­cleane? saith holy Iob, and he answers himselfe with his own words. No body can doe it. Iob, 14. An euill Tree (saith our Sauiour) cannot bring forth good fruit, Math. 7.17. but the vnregenerate, a man in his corrupt estate is an euill Tree, Math, 12.13. therfore he can bring forth no good fruit, he can doe nothing that is good.

Reas. 2 II. All the imaginations of an vnregenerate mans heart are euill, only euill, continual­ly euil. Gen. 6.5. if all be euill, and only euil, & continually too, there is no imagination nor inclination to good at all.

Reas. 3 III. They that are dead cannot possibly performe any worke of a liuing man. Sin is the death of the soule, grace is the life o [...] it. But an vnrege­nerate man is dead in trespas­ses and sinnes, Eph. 2.1. and [Page 261] therefore hee hath no more power to raise himselfe out of the graue of sinne, or to walke in the wayes of godli­nesse, then a dead man hath to raise vp his body out of the Sepulchre, or to walke and worke as a liuing man.

IV. If by the Power of Reas. 4 Free-will a man might attaine to grace, then by the power of the flesh a man might attaine to the spirit: the reason is, be­cause as Free-will is of the flesh, so grace is of the spirit; now Christ saith, That which is borne of the flesh is flesh, and that which is borne of the spirit is spirit, Joh. 3. The force of this Argument I thinke none will deny that hath read the Combate betweene the flesh and the spirit, in the Apostle, Galat. 5. whereby it manifest­ly appears, that in euery faith­full Christian there are two [Page 262] contrariant Principles of a­ction. The one is flesh, that is the part vnregenerate: the other is spirit, and that is the regenerate part. The spirit calleth vs to good; the flesh haleth and draweth vs along vnto euill. Now then, Free­will being of the flesh, and be­longing to the part vnrege­nerate (for whatsoeuer is not spirit, is flesh) cannot produce any spirituall action. Those actions are deriued from ano­ther Principle. The workes of the flesh proceed not from the spirit, therefore the works of the spirit doe not issue from the flesh. The causes will al­waies be distinct, and the ef­fects different, That which is born of the flesh will be flesh, and that which is borne of the spirit will bee spirit. Ioh. 3.6.

Reas. 5 V. If wee are not able of [Page 263] our selues so much as to think a good thought, then we can­not will any thing that is good, before the grace of God hath brought vs out of our corruption. Ignoti nulla cupido, wee cannot desire that wee know not; wee know not that, that wee cannot thinke vpon. But wee are not able of our selues so much as to thinke a good thought as of our selues, but all our sufficiencie, the word in the originall.

is Emphaticall, all our idoni­ety and aptitude to good, is from God. And therfore saith Austin Omne bonum opus gra­tia Dei praecedit. Epist. 106. The grace of God must of ne­cessity precede euery good worke of ours, or else there will be no good done.

VI. Our actions depend Reas. 6 vpon the will, the will is di­rected [Page 264] by the vnderstanding, the vnderstanding cannot di­rect except it bee inlightened. Now our vnderstanding is darkened naturally; so the A­postle describes vnregenerate men, hauing their vnderstan­dings darkened, walking in the vanity of their senses, Eph. 4, 18. Nay, which is more, wee are naturally darknesse it selfe. Ye were ende darkenesse, saith the Apostle; but now ye are light in the Lord. and Ioh. 1.5. the light shined in the darknes, & the darknesse comprehended it not.

VII. If an vnregenerate man can doe any good thing before his conuersion, then all his doings are not sin, but he may doe something which is pleasant to God. But he can doe nothing pleasing to God, for without faith it is impossi­ble to please God, but hee hath [Page 265] no faith. And againe, all his workes are sinfull, for whatso­euer is not of faith is sinne Rom. 14. last. They may appeare glorious in outward shew, but bring them to the touch once and they will proue to be no­thing but splendida peccata glistring sinnes, as Saint Au­stine calls them.

VIII. Naturally wee are Reas. 8 enemies to God and auerse or vntoward to all goodnesse. Our vnderstanding is enmitie with God, Rom. 8 7. Our wis­dome is foolishnesse with God, 1 Cor. 1. Our hearts are stony hearts; so that God must bee faine to take them from vs, and to giue vs for them hearts of flesh. Ezek. 11.19. We must be made new creatures before wee can follow that which is good, Ephes. 2.10. We are the workemanship of God, created vnto good workes. Did man [Page 266] (who was nothing) conferre ought to his creation? no more can wee (who are worse then nothing) conferre ought to our conuersion. Alasse, wee are quite averse from it, as I said a little aboue, and therefore must bee drawne of God, ac­cording as our Sauiour spea­keth. No man commeth vnto me vnlesse the Father that sent me draw him. Ioh. 6.44. It is a very strange speech, and yet true, because the Truth it selfe hath spoken it; we must be drawn to Christ or we shall neuer come to him. But you will say, voluntas non potest cogi, that the will of man cannot bee compelled. I acknowledge the truth of that Philosophi­call axiome, but see in our Sauiours speech the conditi­on of euery man as he is in his corrupt nature, hee is averse, hee is vnwilling to receiue [Page 267] good, to doe good, sed ex no­lentibus volentes facit saith S. Austine, of vnwilling God doth make vs to bee willing. Certum est nos velle cum volu­mus, fed ille facit ut velimus, It is true and certaine that wee doe will when we doe will, but it is God that makes vs will, Certum est nos operari cum o­peramur, sed ille facit ut opere­mur. It is true and certaine that we doe well when wee doe well, but it it God that makes vs to doe so: so that all must bee ascribed to God and no­thing to our selues, which shall be my ninth reason.

IX. If euery good thing in Reas. 9 man doth proceed from God, then it cannot bee ascribed to the power of Freewill or strength of corrupt nature to will or doe any thing that is good, because God workes this in nobis sine nobis [...]in vs [Page 268] without our helpe. But what­soeuer good thing is in man it proceeds from God. For what hast thou that thou hast not re­ceiued? saith Saint Paul, and Saint James very plainely, euery good giuing and euery per­fect gift commeth from aboue e­uen the father of light. I am 1. And therefore we shall finde, reading the Scriptures with a single eye and sincere heart, that the beginning and pro­gresse & consummation of our saluation, all is from God and from Gods grace, nothing from our selues. By the grace of God. I am what I am, saith the Apostle. 1 Cor. 15. Hee that hath begunne that good worke in you will also perfect in vntill the day of Christ Iesus Phil. 1.6. thers the b [...]gin in expressed and consummation too: and, not to reckon all, in is God that worketh in you [Page 269] velle & perficere, both to will and to doe euen of his owne good pleasure. Phil. 2.13. Marke that last place well, it beates downe the strength of corrupt nature, and batters the walls of Freewill; especi­ally if the whole context bee considered. For hee saith: Worke out your saluation with feare and trembling, for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to doe, euen of his owne good pleasure. It is the com­mon vse of ignorant Papists to take the first part of this sentence, for their working, but they leaue the latter part which expounds the former: for wee must worke out our saluation with feare & trem­bling. True, but when wee worke so, the Apostle tells vs that God set vs on worke, and the worke which we worke is Gods worke. Wee in all our[Page 270] workes that are good doe but follow the motion of the first worker, which is God wor­king in vs. See Didac. Stella vpon the first verse of the first Chap. of Saint Luke. I con­clude with that speach of Saint Austine, lib. 1. de. gra. & lib. arbit. Cap. 16. Ʋt ve­limus, Deus sine nobis operatur. God doth worke a willing­nesse in vs to doe good with­out our helpe, Cum autem vo­lumus & sic volumus ut facia­mus, nobiscum cooperatur. When wee are once willing and so willing that we doe in­deede that which is good, God workes with vs (praeuenit gra­tia ut velimus, he doth preuent vs with his grace that wee may will, subsequitur gratiane frustrà velimus, and hee doth follow vs with his grace, that wee may not will in vaine) tamen fine illo operante ut veli­mus, [Page 271] vel cooperante cum volu­mus ad bona pietatis officia nihil valemus. So that except God first worke in vs the will, and then worke with vs when wee will, we are not able to per­forme any worke of Piety and Godlinesse.

The X. and last reason Reas. 10 which I meane to stand vpon at this time (which shall be a touchstone vnto you for the tryall of those two opposite opinions mentioned in the state of the question) shall bee this. That Doctrine which giues the most glory to God, vndoubtedly is the true doctrine, that which takes a­way all boasting from man is the right opinion. But our doctrine ascribes all vnto God & the power of his grace, that hee alone might haue the glo­ry; the Popish doctrine makes sinfull man a partner with [Page 272] God in his glory, ascribing part to Gods grace, part to mans Free-will. Our tenent disrobes man of all boasting and glorying in himselfe, and teaches, that hee that glorieth must glory in God; the Po­pish tenent ascribing a great part to corrupt Natures strength, teacheth a man in part to glory and boast of his owne goodnesse, and so pares away from Gods glorie, and therefore the Protestants opi­nion is true, and the Papists false. It was the saying of good S. Cyprian, Jn nullo glori­andum est, quia nostrum nihil est, Wee must not glory in any case, for wee haue nothing to glory of. I will conclude the whole reason & proofes with the speech of Bonauenture, whom the Romanists account the Seraphicall Doctor, Pi­arum mentium semper fuit [Page 273] vt totum attribuant gratiae diuinae, & nihil libero arbitrio. This hath beene the practice of all godly and religious minded men in the world, to ascribe the whole glory of our conuersion and saluation to the grace of God, and no­thing to Free-will. And hee proceeds further, and tels vs, that looke what wee attribute to Free-will, wee detract so much from grace; and looke what wee attribute to grace, so much wee detract from Free-will; and that this later is the safest way, whereas the former is not without danger. By this shall yee know saies our Sauiour whether my Doctrine bee true, or whether J speake of my selfe. Hee that speaketh of himselfe seeketh his owne glory; but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, that man is true, and there is no vnrighteousnesse [Page 274] in him. Here is then that Ly­dius lapis, the very touch-stone by which any indifferent man that is an intelligent Scholler withal, able to iudge of things without partiality, not fast [...]n­ing his opinion vpon any mans sleeue, but submitting himselfe to the euidence of Gods Word, may trie true and sound Doctrine, from false, erroneous and rotten hy­pocrisie.

[...].Thus far haue I proceeded in the [...], or confirma­tion of the truth; a word or two as my leasure will serue of the [...], or confutation of the aduerse proofes. The Arguments which the Author of your Script hath well compacted together, mostly strike vpon one string, as the two last from the authority, of Scripture, the 2 first from the authority of the fathers, [Page 275] the 3. 4. 5. and 6. from de­monstratiue reason: I will cast them all into one mould, because I may not vnfitly ap­ply one answer to them all. The argument is this.Ob. Similia o­lim cum ob­iectaren­tur Augu­stino libel­lum de cor­rept. & gratia scri­bere coa­ctus fuit. Galu. Instit. l. 2. c. 5. §. 4. & seq. Take a­way free-wil from a man, then to what end serues all the re­proofes, complaints; exhorta­tions in the word of God? why doth God promise vs any thing vpon condition of our obedience? Why hath God left vnto vs his holy com­mandements, if we can do no otherwise of our selues then euill? If the Condition bee impossible, or the perfor­mance of his Commande­ments, (why!) hee may seeme to mocke vs in bidding vs do that which is impossible for vs. I answere,Resp. 1. the precepts and commandements of God dispersed through the Volume of the Scriptures, doe not im­port [Page 276] what we are able to doe, but what is our duty to doe; not what we can doe, but what we should doe; yea, and what wee could haue done once in Adam, that so seeing our duty what we ought to doe, and our infirmity, that we are not able to doe it, wee might haue re­course vnto God by prayer, that by the mighty power of his grace we might bee made able to do what he commands vs, as Leo a good Bishop of Rome excellently speaketh, Ideo datur praeceptum, vt requi­ratur praecipientis auxilium, & S. Austin Synonymally, yet more fully to the same pur­pose. Iubet Deus quae non possu­mus, vt nouerimus quid ab ipso petere debeamus. God com­mands vs those things which are aboue our power to doe, that we may run vnto him by prayer and petition, for his [Page 277] ayde and helpe to doe them. I assure you it wrought this good affection in holy Dauid, as you shall finde, Psal 119.4. Thou hast commanded (saith the Prophet to God) that we should diligently keepe thy com­mandements. Whereunto hee answers not in all haste as a Pelagian or a Papist would, O Lord I will, I can keepe thy cōmandements, because thou dost command mee so to doe: but what is Dauids answer? O that my wayes were made so direct, that I might keepe thy Statutes. The Imperatiue in God (as one wittily) begets not a potentiall but an optatiue in Dauid, Vpon Gods Precept there followes immediately Dauids Prayer; Tu praecepisti, Thou hast commanded that wee should diligently keepe thy commandements, there's Gods precept. O that my waies [Page 278] were made so direct that I might keepe thy Statutes! there's Dauids Prayer. And let vs learne this Lesson of the blessed Prophet to distrust our selues, and flye vnto God for the assistance of his power­fully working grace with that short and pithy prayer of S. Austin. Da domine quod iubes & iube quid vis. Lord giue vs grace to performe what thou commandest, and then com­mand what thou wilt. And this is yet a thing more eui­dent by the common practice of the Church, and of all the godly in the Church. For to them that demand to what end are precepts and exhortati­ons, if we cannot of our selues do that which is commanded? we may in like manner inter­rogate, why doth the Church pray continually for grace to doe those things that are com­manded, [Page 279] if it bee in our owne power to doe them? But the Church of God doth pray thus daily, as appeares plain­ly by the Seruice-Booke; wherein you haue 3. Collects to be said euery morning and euening Prayer. And whereas one of them is for the day, the other for peace and defence against dangers, the third is alwayes for grace. And there is no Papist that can iustly take exception at those pray­ers. For as touching these Collects for grace vsed in our Litturgie, both at morning and euening Prayer wee find them expressly and verbatim in their owne Masse-bookes. In officio B. Virginis, & in ho­ris B. Virginis ad vsum Sarum; printed at Paris, 1510. Now I say the Church by praying to God continually for grace to doe his commandements, [Page 280] doth acknowledge the true vse of hearing precepts and exhortations, which is not to be proud of any power in vs, or to presume of that which is not in vs; but to pray, and thereby to acknowledge that wee haue it from grace.

2 2. God without mockery, may require of vs obedience, and the perfect obseruing of all his comandements, though it bee impossible for vs to keepe any one of them. Yet this, I say, God may exact of vs without all iniustice, be­cause it comes to bee impossi­ble vnto vs onely through our owne default: for God made man at the first righteous, & in­dued him with a power of do­ing whatsoeuer he should haue commanded him, but wee haue fought out vnto our selues many inuentions, as the wiseman [Page 281] speaketh. Giue mee leaue to make this plaine vnto you by an easie and familiar compa­rison.

You are a Gentleman of good meanes, yet giuen to retyrednesse, and you are de­sirous to rent out, or set to farme your whole demeanes. Say you couenant for foure or fiue hundred pounds per annum. Your Farmer at the ma­king of the bargaine is an a­ble, substantiall, sober man, well able to pay you your annuall rent. But so it fals out, that soone after, he is with-drawne to lewd and riotous courses, and spends both time and estate vp­on luxurie and vanity. So that now hee is Bankerupt, not worth fiue pence in all the world, and consequently altogether vnable to pay you fiue hundred pound. What [Page 282] then? may not you in equity and iust law require of him your annuall rent, although it be impossible for him to pay it? I know you may. Iust so it is betwixt God and man. At the first man was created in perfect righteousnes, and so was a person fitted to the obseruance of all good duties; but soone after, hee turned bankrupt, hee fell vpon rio­tous and disobedient courses, being tempted by the woman, and shee by the Serpent, to eat the forbidden fruit. Before he was the seruant of God, now he is become the slaue of sin So that he hath no strength to runne in those good wayes▪ wherein at first God set him. What then? Because hee is not able to do any good, may not God in equity exact of him the keeping of his commandements? I trow hee [Page 283] may, yea I am sure he doth, and that rightly, because the thing is become impossible to man meerly through his owne de­fault.

3 The exhortations and de­hortations, the promises and threatnings which haue an­nexed 3 conditions are not in vaine, neither is there any mockery in them, although we be not able of our selues to fulfill the exhortation or per­forme the condition. For, it must be obserued, that there are in the visible state of the Church both elect and repro­bate; and these two will grow together in the field vntill the haruest, when they shall bee separate by the Angels, the wheat, that is, the elect gathe­red into Gods barne, the tares, that is, the reprobate gathe­red into sheaues to be burnt. So then the precepts of God [Page 284] in the Word, and the exhorta­tions of the Ministers accor­ding to the Word are directed either to the reprobate or to the elect, and not one iot of the Word of God shall fall to the ground. For to the one it be­comes the sauour of death vn­to death, to the other the sa­uour of life vnto life. I open my selfe thus. The exhortati­ons, threatnings, promises, warnings, &c. set downe in the Word of God and publi­shed by the mouth of his Mi­nisters, being directed to the reprobate make them the more inexcusable, that their mouths may be stopped, and that they may not say another day, that if they had beene exhorted to such a good duty, they would haue imbraced it, if they had beene admonished of such a fault, they would haue forsa­ken it. For here there consci­ences [Page 285] shall conuict them, and they shal know then that there hath beene a Prophet among them. If they be directed to the elect, they bee eyther such as are not yet effectually called, and then the holy Spirit en­wrapping himselfe in his Word, worketh an admirable change in their hearts, and be­gets those good things in them whereunto they are ex­horted; for the Word of the Lord is mightie in operation, as the Apostle saith, and the Law of the Lord is perfect conuerting the soule, as the Psalmist spea­keth; or else they bee actually called, and then by those de­nunciations of iudgement they become more wary in their carriage, by those ex­hortations to godlinesse, they become more liuely and for­ward in all good courses, ten­ding and striuing after per­fection.[Page 286] So that in all this here is no mockage at all, nei­ther can God without blasphe­my be said to doe any thing in vaine. This because it is the most substantiall doubt and most stood vpon by your Au­thor, therefore I haue endea­uoured to cleere it thus at large as you see, and to afford it a full answere.

Ob.For the other, they are ei­ther impertinent, as that out of Ecclus. 15.14. which speakes of man in his first e­state of creation before the fall,Sol. wherein we deny not man freewil; besides, I say not, that the Booke is Apocryphall, al­though that might serue for a sufficient answere; or they be friuolous,Ob. as that of Cain, Gen. 4▪ 7 wherin it is not said, that he shall haue dominion o­uer sin,Sol. but there God vrgeth an argument to coole the heat [Page 287] of his anger, taken from the subiection of his brother A­bel. Ob. Of this Bran is that testi­mony taken out of Iosuah 24.Sol. wherein hee giues them their choice whether they will serue the true God or not, not as if it had been in their power to haue chosen, but only that hee might draw from them a con­fession of the true worship of God, by which protestation they might the more be tied to Gods seruice after Iosuahs death, and held the more in­excusable if they fell to Idols after this solemne profession to feare God, and to abiure all idolatrous worship. And that instance of Ananias, Ob. Act. 5. is like, because it spea­keth onely of an humane and ciuill matter,Sol. the sale of a piece of land, which was in his owne power.Ob. The first de­monstratiue reason, which is, [Page 288] argumentum cornutum, carries some better shew with it, but concludes nothing against the truth.Haec Pela­gii quoque arma erant ad impetē ­dum, Augustinum Calv. Instit. l. 2. c. 5. §. 1 Sol. It is this: Sin is either necessary or voluntary; if ne­cessary, thē it is not sin if vo­luntary, then it may be auoy­ded. The hornes of this argumentation are too short and weake to push down the truth. If sinne be necessary, then it is no sinne? How proue you that argument? You must remem­ber (which you also learned in morall Philosophy) that [...] & [...] voluntarium & inuitum are opposed, not [...] & [...] voluntarium & necessarium. God and his Angels are good necessarily, and yet they are voluntarily good. The Deuill and his An­gells are euill necessarily, and yet they are euil most willing­ly too. [...] oportet, there must be heresies, sayes the Apostle, [Page 289] Necesse est, It is necessary that offences come, sayes our Saui­our; and of Iudas his bloudy sinne▪ and the Iewes malicious conspiracy against Christ, it is expresly said, That they did nothing but what the mighty hand of God had decreed long afore to be done. Briefly then, sinne is both voluntary and necessary. Voluntary in re­spect of mans will; for we say that a man may bee carried freely and with a full swing to the workes of darknesse, e­uen to commit wickednesse with greedinesse, neither is it necessity, but compulsion, which takes away the liberty of the will. And it is also Ne­cessary in respect of Gods de­cree, which is immutable. For this is a most certaine and vn­doubted truth, that nothing can bee done in the world, which his right hand hath not [Page 290] before determined either to doe▪ as in all good things, or suffer to be done, as in all sinfull actions; as S. Austin very ful­ly and learnedly proueth in his Enchiridion to Laurentius.

Conclus.It was Themistocles his com­mendation in Thucydides, that hee could [...] ex tempore, and on a sudden speake to any point and coun­sell alwayes for the best. For my selfe I must confesse I am none of those ready wits, yet thus much I haue beene bold out of some former acquaintance with this point of do­ctrine, to write raptim on a sudden to this question for your satisfaction, which I trust also will bee sufficient to perswade any ingenuous man, that is only tainted with Po­pery, and not branded with the marke of the Beast (for there is no hope of such) to [Page 291] think and conceiue wel of the truth of our doctrine. If I had had my tooles about mee, I should haue made it a more perfect worke, but you know I am far from my bookes. Such as it is, it is yours, and I am yours to vse in all Christian offices.

[...] Or The Heads of a plaine and profitable me­thod of Teaching shadowed and pointed at.

WHereas there bee now in vse two wayes of deliue­ring the precepts of any Art, according to the doctrine of Plato, the one, [...], a longer; the other, [...] a shorter way: in the setting downe of these few rules fol­lowing, I haue made choice of the later; because I am sure I haue only to deale with intel­ligent men, or schollers, to [Page 293] whom (as the old saying runs, Verbum sat) one word is as good as a thousand.

I. Preloquution, if the mat­ter require; vnder which Co­herence, auoid affectation. I meane not only an affectation of big words and phrases; but also of a farre fetcht entrance into the Text, as hee that in e­uery Sermon he made, whatso­euer the Text was, would bee sure to begin alwayes at the beginning of the world.

II. Partition, into as few parts as you can. Auoid curio­sitio. As for example, if I were to handle those wordes of Christ, Weepe not for mee, but weepe for your selues, I would not diuide them thus. The parts are sixe. I. Weepe: II. Weepe not: III. Weepe not, but weepe: IV. Weepe not for mee: V. Weepe for your selues: VI. Weepe not [Page 294] for mee but for your selues; for feare I should seeme rather to play with the Text, then to diuide the word aright.

III. Interpretation, if terms or words bee ambiguous. A­uoid needlesse criticismes, as if I were to open the name of Paul, I should say it came from Pi in Hebrew, which signifies [...]s, and [...] in Greek, that is, tibia. Master Selden hath intermixed many need­lesse Criticismes in the Hi­story of Tithes, obserued and exploded by diuers Worthies: so that I shall not need to say any thing; but onely pray for him that the pride of his heart in worm-eaten learning, and his malice against the Ministers of the Gospel, which he hath discouered by th [...] Booke, though couertly, and aliud a­gens, may bee forgiuen him; [Page 195] and that the sin of many close-fisted sacrilegious Patrons, which detaine the ChurchesOf the point be­fore the fa­mous Hi­story saw the light. DD. Carle­ton, now L. Bishop of Chichester. Tithes pro­ued due to the Mini­sters of the Gospel by diuine right. Sir Hen: Spel­man De non temerandis Ecclesijs. M. Eburne. The Maintenance of the Ministery. M. Robarts. The Reuenew of the Gospel, Tithes. M. Gosthwick. The truth of Tythes. To the point and person too. S. Iam: Sempill. Sacriledge Sacredly handled. DD. Tillesley. Animaduersions on the famous History. DD. Sclater. The Ministers portion, and question of Tithes Reuiewed. M. Montague. Dia­tribae on the History. M. Nettles. Answere to the Iewish part of M. Selden. Right, and think they haue gotten a very good pretence for so doing by the writing of that Booke, bee not one day laid to his charge.

It is a wonder to see what adoe the Friers make with the first word in the Angels salu­tation, Aue, Luc. 1. First, say they, Aue is as much as sine vae, making it come of a priuitiua particula, in Greeke, and vae in Latine. Secondly, they find the [Page 296] name of our great Grandame in it, & because Eue wrought mans destruction, and Mary mans Saluation, therefore the Angell doth most fitly begin the Salutation with Aue, which Anagrammatiz'd, is Eua. Ioan Picus in his Hepta­plus findes I know not what Mysteries in the first word of the Bible Berescit, by trans­posing and conioyning the Letters diuersly (as though he were ringing changes) hee pickes out three wordes, the intellectuall, Celestiall, and corruptible, and withall this sentence. Pater in filio, & per filium principium, & fine siue quietem creauit caputignem & fundamentum magni hominis foedere bono. All this as he con­ceiues, dissults out of the re­solution and com [...]osition of the first word in Genesis.

IV. Collection of Doctrines [Page 297] or conclusions out of the se­uerall parts as they shall natu­rally arise, auoid straining, as Christ bid some body loose Lazarus and let him goe, ergo the Ministers haue power to loose and absolue sinners: it is Sixtus Senensis his Collecti­on. Moses saith that the Stars were created to bee signes, Ergo, the Astrologer may come to the knowledge of mens fortunes, and of parti­cular euents by the Stars: it is Sr. Chrystopher Heydons Col­lection Abraham paid Tythe to Melchizedech of all the spoyles, euen of the spoyles, Ergo, the spoyles onely: it is Mr. Seldens Doctrine. God made man after his owne I­mage, Ergo, Images are to be suffered in Churches. The Sun is greater then the Moone by many degrees, Ergo the Pope is aboue the Emperour. Da­uid [Page 298] saith, Praise God in his Saints, Ergo, wee may pray vnto the Saints. Christ said to Peter, thy faith shall not faile, Ergo, the Pope of Rome can­not erre. These and the like inconsequences, are meere wrestings of the Text. And so it is likewise when a Para­ble is vrged beyond the scope and drift of it, very common among Popish interpreters.

V. Probation, 1. By autho­ritie of Scriptures opening them along, if need be. 2. By arguments or reasons illustra­ting them some way as you can. Auoid prolixitie. That's S. Austins counsell, Lib. 4. de doct. Christ. 22. and his reason. is, Quando prolixa est oratio in vno genere minus detinet audito­rem: and therefore hee would not haue a Preacher stand long vpon any point, when it is once vnderstood of the peo­ple, [Page 299] but slide into another. I haue heard of a Preacher that stood vpon a short Text seuen yeeres together; and I haue read I am sure of one Thom. Hasselbachius, that was twen­ty one yeers in preaching vp­on the first Chapter of Esay; neither did he come to the end of it in all that space, but left in an vnperfect work twenty foure large volumes behinde him of that he had expounded. Take heed of such prolixity, and remember the old saying, Varietas delectat.

VI. Solution of doubts if a­ny occurre, auoyd tedious disputes. That a Minister may moue doubts in his Sermon, if he be able to solue them, Saint Austin doth warrant, Lib. 4. de doct. Christ. c. 20. But for one to draw in by the necke & shoulders a disputable que­stion, and vpon the smallest [Page 300] occasion that may bee to fall into a large field of controuer­sies, by handling the points pro and con, as there is menti­on made of Will in the Lords Prayer; therefore for a man to fall vpon the doctrine of Free-will, and dispute the question thereupon, this is not warrantable. Long disputes are fitter for the Schooles then for the Pul­pit.

VII. Application, 1. By way of Confutation, if it be a matter of controuersie. 2. By way of Reprehension, if you preach against any sinne, or if you commend a vertue, you may reprehend the contrary vice. 3. By way of Exhorta­tion to the good, Dehortation from euill. 4. By way of Di­rection, vrging and shewing he motiues and meanes how to attaine the good, how to [Page 301] eschew the euill. 5. By way of Consolation, if it will con­ueniently arise. Auoid all in­decorums. An indecorū is, when circumstances are not rightly obserued in the application. Verbi causa. If any man should preach of the life or death of S Iohn Baptist, on S. Iohn the E­uangelists day in Christmas, & apply it to that Festiuall; though it be bonum, good, at all times to be remembred of the sobriety and austerity of that holy man of God; yet it is not benè, id est, appositò dictum, well done, and therefore an indeco­rum, because it is verbum non in tempore suo, a word not in his fit season. Kec­kerman in his Ecclesiasti­call Rhetorique (I will not cite the Chapter and Page, because I would haue you read the whole Treatise) tells a tale of a Fryer, that follow­ing [Page 302] his Postill, and sticking too close to the very wordes that hee found written, had al­most brought the whole town where hee liued about his eares. And it was thus. The Postiller had very bitterly in­ueighed as it seemes against the sinnes that raigned in the Towne where he preached du­ring the time of a common plague, and had told them that because they cōtinued in those sins God had sent the plague among them. The Homiliary Frier, finding this in his Po­still, and taking little thought, saue only to get it by heart, & pronounce it boldly enough, deliuered the very same words in his owne congregation, in­ueighing against the sinnes that raigned in the Towne, and told them that for those sinnes God had sent this grie­uous plague among them. At [Page 303] these words all the Auditors were greatly astonied, and came vpon him presently af­ter Sermon, to inquire in what house, or what part of the town the pestilence was that he spake of in his Sermon, for they knew of none. The silly Ignoramus could not resolue them, but answered thus. Howsoeuer it be, whether the plague be in the towne or not, I am sure I found it so as I said in my Postill.

For the opening of these short rules, and more full vn­derstanding of the whole mat­ter, let not a young Diuine trouble himselfe with multi­tude of bookes. Among many Worthies who haue written of this subiect, I haue found these three very vsefull and profitable. Keckerm. de Rheto­ric. Ecclesiast. Augustin. de doct. Christian. and M. Bernards [Page 304] Faithfull Shepheard.

And Mr. Weemse his Booke of Lathoquar in Scotland, written of late as it seems of purpose to helpe young Di­uines in this way and Method of teaching, intituled, The Christian Synagogue.

In setting downe these few notes and rules, I would not be thought to take vpon mee to prescribe vnto Academicall Preachers (nolo sus Miner­uam) but to Rurall; neither to instruct the graue and learned, well experienced among them; Veteranos Iesu Christi Milites, but new beginners. Neither do I tye them to this onely Me­thod. It may bee euery Text will not admit of it, and it may bee euery mans gift doth not lye for it. But my desire was to help my selfe by these Col­lections, and those that are weake; and I pray my bre­thren [Page 305] to giue a candid inter­pretation of my good affecti­on, being most ready to enter­taine any other more profita­ble way of teaching that they shall suggest.