A MANVELL Or briefe volume of Controuersies of Religion betweene the Protestants and the Papists: wherein the Arguments of both sides are briefely set downe, and the Aduersaries Sophismes are plainely refuted.

Written in Latine in a briefe and perspi­cuous method by LVCAS OSIANDER, and now Englished with some additions and corrections.


At London Printed by Humfrey Lownes. 1606.


AS their part is the chiefest in defēding the truth vvho do sifte the full state of Controuersies, ex­plicating the question, maintaining reasons for the truth, and answearing the opposite argu­ments at large, as the nature of euery one doth require for the full setling of mens iudgments, vvho with sin­glenesse of heart desire to bee throughly satisfied; so is their labour requisite also, who do contract those larger disputations into a briefe and compendious summ. For it helpeth the memory, in calling to minde that vvhich hath beene reade in larger discourses before; it furthe­reth the iudgment, by giuing grounds of arguments & answeares, which may afterward by the learned Rea­der be further enlarged by his owne meditations as oc­casion shall require: it may serue for some good taste in the knowledge of controuersies for such as haue not the leisure & other opportunities & means to read the lar­ger disputations; and lastly being cōprised in a small vo­lume, it may easily be caried abroad, if [...]e desire to read such things, vvhere wee cannot haue not the greater volumes. VVhich reasons moued our Author to pen [Page] this briefe Manuell in a perspicuous methode, and it vvere to be wished that some of our Countrey men, whō God hath furnished with iudgment and other necessa­ries for such a purpose would endeuour to do the like in our vulgar tongue, in this briefe and plaine order, In the meane time the translation of this present worke shall bee, I trust, neither vnprofitable nor vnwel­come. Some things are altered, vvhich I iudged might bee offensiue, or othervvise hinder the Rea­der; but they bee such a [...]d no moe, than, I hope, who so shall compare the translation with the Originall vvith indifferencie, will confesse there vvas reason to doe so. Some things also, vvhere neede seemed to re­quire, I haue added, and vvhereas the Author in testimonies alleadged out of the Scripture quoted the chapter onely, I haue generally throughout for the ease of the reader annexed the verses also, as the case requi­red. The censure heereof I leaue to the indifferent reader, and commend the successe to God, vvhose Name be glorified for euer, Amen.

A Table of the Chapters and Questions.

  • CHAP, (1) Of the holy Scripture,
    • 1 VVhether it be vnsufficient.
    • 2 Whether it be obscure.
    • 3 Whether it be vncertaine or plyable to any sense.
  • CHAP, (2) VVhether the Scripture be to be reade of the lay people.
  • CHAP. (3) Of the interpretation of the holy Scripture.
  • CHAP. (4) Of Traditions.
  • CHAP, (5) Of the Letter and the Spirit,
  • CHAP. (6) Of councells.
  • CHAP, (7) Of the Church,
    • 1 Whether our Church or the Church of Rome bee the true Church.
    • 2 Whether, it be to be granted, that there is an inuisible Church.
    • 3 Whether the church may erre.
  • CHAP, (8) Of the Bishop of Rome.
    • 1 VVhether Christ haue neede vpon earth of any Vicar or visible head.
    • 2 Of the power and authority of Peter.
      • 1 Ouer the rest of the Apostles.
      • 2 In the rule and dominion of faith.
    • 3 VVhether Peter were at Rome, and there instituted an ordinarie succession,
    • 4 VVhether the Bishops of Rome be Peters successors,
      • 1 In Doctrine.
      • 2 In Manners,
    • 5 That the pope is Antichrist.
  • CHA (9) Of free-will.
    • 1 VVhether vnregenerat men can of themselues by vertu [...] of their free-will b [...]gin their conuersion▪
    • [Page] 2 Whether Originall sinne haue in it the nature of sinne▪
    • 3 Of the workes of Infidels.
    • 4 Of Grace.
  • CHAP, (10) Of Iustification.
    • 1 Of imputed righteousnesse, or of the signification of the word Iustification.
    • 2 Whether the grace of Iustification bee aequally alike in all.
    • 3 Whether we be iustified by good workes.
    • 4 Whether we be iustified by Fa [...]th alone
    • 5 Whether Paul doe deny Iustification by the workes of the Ceremoniall lawe onely.
  • (1) CHAP. (11) Of the true conditions of faith.
    • 1 Whether Faith be taken respectiuely or habitually.
    • 2 Whether Faith bee onely a bare knowledge and assent.
    • 3 Whether Faith be also in wicked men.
    • 4 Whether true Faith may be voide of good workes.
    • 5 Whether Faith be informed by charitie.
  • CHAP, (12) Of good workes.
    • 1 Whether good workes please God, ex opere operato.
    • 2 Of Will-worship in generall.
    • 3 Of workes of supercrogation or Councells in particu­lar.
      • 1 Of Pouerty.
      • 2 Of single life.
      • 3 Of Obedience.
    • 4 That good workes cannot be communicated to others.
  • CHAP, (13) Of Renouation or imperfect Obedience.
    • 1 Whether our obedience begun in this life be perfect.
    • 2 Whether Concupisceace remaining in the regenerate be a sinne.
  • [Page] (1) CHAP, (14) Of the Number of the Sa­craments in generall.
    • 2 A particular examination of the fiue falsely supposed Sacraments.
      • 1 Of Confirmation,
      • 2 Of Penance,
      • 3 Of Orders,
      • 4 Of Matrimony.
      • 5 Of extreame vnction,
  • CHAP, (15) Of Transsubstantiation in the Eucharist.
  • CHAP, (16) Of inclosing, carying about and adoring of the Sacrament.
    • 1 Whether the Eucharist out of the vse thereof bee a Sa­crament.
    • 2 Whether the Eucharist be to be adored.
    • 3 Whether the Eucharist be to be inclosed & caried about.
  • (1) CHAP, (17) Of the Masse in generall: whether it be a propitiatory Sacrifice.
    • 2 An appendix of the abuses in the masse.
      • 1 Priuate masse.
      • 2 The wresting of the masse to other affaires.
      • 3 Simonie in the Masse.
      • 4 The mingling of water with wine,
      • 5 A sinke of Ceremonies.
      • 6 The nouelty of their ceremonies.
      • 7 The errors and fooleries of the canon of the Masse.
      • 8 The masse sayd in Latine.
      • 9 Masse for the deade.
  • CHAP, (18) Of Communion vnder both kindes.
  • CHAP, (19) Of Purgatorie,
    • [Page]1 Whether there be a purgatory.
    • 2 Whether the dead be relieued by the suffrages of the liuing.
  • GHAP. (20) Of Inuocation of Saints.
    • 1 Whether Latria be giuen to Saints in popery.
    • 2 Whether Saints be to be prayed vnto,
    • 3 Whether Papists commit idolatry in worshipping of i­mages,
  • CHAP, (21) Of the Vow of single life in ecclesiasticall persons
    • 1 Whether mariage be a state, that defileth a man.
    • 2 Whether single life haue any prerogatiue in Gods sight before mariage.
    • 3 Whether it be in a mans choise to vow single life.
  • CHAP, (22) Of the errors of popish fastes.
    • 1 Of choise of meates
    • 2 Of the tying of fastes to certaine and set times,
    • 3 VVhether fasting be meritorious
    • 4 Of the fast of Lent.
    • 5 The keeping of fastes is more straightly vrged by the Papists than the keeping of Gods commandements,
    • 6 Mockeries in popish fastes.
    • 7 The iudgment of the holy ghost of the fastes of hypo­crites,
  • CHAP. (23) Of Repentance, and of the errours, which the papists bring into this place of Repentance,
    • 1 Of the merite of contrition.
    • 2 Of the sufficiency of contrition,
    • 3 Of popish satisfaction.
    • 4 Of omission of faith.
    • 5 Of Auricular confession,
    • (2) Conclusion,

A Manuell or briefe volume of Controuersies, betweene the Protestants and the Papists.

CHAP. 1. Of the holy Scriptures.

The holy Scripture alone is the Iudge of all con­trouersies which arise in the Church, and the most certaine rule of truth.


THE Prophet Isaie sendes vs in (1) deciding of cōtrouersies of Re­ligion, to the law and to the te­stimonie. Isai. 8. 20. that is, to the holy Scripture.

Christ in the controuersie of his person (2) [...]nd doctrine, saith to the Pharisies: Search [...]he Scriptures, &c. they, are they, which te­ [...]tifie of mee. Ioh. 5, 39.

[Page 2] Saint Paul greatly commendeth the holy (3) Scriptures vnto vs, saying: The whole Scrip­ture is giuen by inspiration of God, and is profitable to teach, to improue, to correct and instruct in righteousnes, that the man of God may bee absolute, being made per­fect vnto euery good worke. 2, Timoth: 3; 16, 17.

The Citizens of Beraea iudged of Pauls Sermons & opinions out of the Scriptures; (4) whether Paul taught such things, as were a­greeable to the holy Scriptures; and are for that cause commended. Act: 17, 11.

Christ answered out of the Scriptures to the questions of the Pharisies. Matthew, 19, (5) 4, &c. of the Sadducees. Matth, 22, 31, &c. of the perfect fulfilling of the law. Luke, 10. 26, 27. of his diuinitie out of Psalme, 110, Matthew, 22, 43, 44. Whereas hee might haue confuted and confounded them with his miracles alone.

The Apostles confirmed all their asserti­ons out of the Scriptures, as did also the E­uangelists. (6) Matthew speaketh often of the fulfilling of the Prophets, and so decides the greatest controuersie, that euer was, con­cerning [Page 3] the Messias, out of the writings of the Prophets. So Peter also prooueth out of the holy Scripture, that Iesus is the pro­mised Messias, the Sauiour of the worlde. Acts, 2, 25, &c. And Chapter, 3. verse, 18, &c. and Chapter, 4, verse, 11, 25, &c. and Chap. 10, verse, 43, Stephen fighteth against his aduersaries, the Priests, Pharisies, & Scribes, with the weapons of the Scripture. Acts, 7. Paul in the controuersie of Religion, which he had with the Iewes, prouokes to the law and the writings of the Prophets. Acts, 24, 14, and 26, 22, 27. The same Paul gathered the doctrine of Iustification out of the Scrip­ture Romanes, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 10, Chapters. Galath. 3, and 4, Chapter: and cleareth the controuersie of the person of our Sauiour out of the Scriptures. Ephesians, 4. Peter draweth Baptisme (1, Peter, 3. 21) And other controuersed points betwixt the Iewes and the Christians out of the Scripture of the old [...]estament. The Epistle to the Hebrewesis wholly heerein occupied, to proue the grea­test controuersie of his time, concerning Christ the only & true high Priest, out of the Scripture of the old Testament.

[Page 4] The same did likewise the ancient Fathers (7) in the Church of God; who confuted the Heretikes out of the holy Scripture, and the ancient godly Counsels ouerthrew the He­retikes, not by the opinions of men, but by testimonies of the holy Scripture dulie waighed.

The Position of our Aduersaries.

The holy Scripture alone cannot be the Iudge of controuersies.

Their reasons are.

Because it is insufficient, and containeth not all things, which pertaine to faith. (1)

Because it is obscure. (2)

Because it is vncertaine, and may be drawne ei­ther to this or that side. (3)

Hence arise these questions following.

The first question.

Whether the Scripture be insufficient. They affirme, we denie that it is insufficient: and that for these testimonies following.

These things are written (saith Iohn) that (1) you might beleeue, that Iesus is the Christ, the Sonne of God, and that in belieuing you, might haue life through his name. Ioh. 20. 31. Therefore those which belieue, may [Page 5] attaine euerlasting life by those thinges which are left writtē in the holy Scriptures: and so the Scripture is sufficient for the sal­uation of men.

Thou hast knowne the holy Scriptures of a childe, (saith Paul to Timothie) which are (2) able to make thee wise to saluation. 2. Ti­mothie, 3. 15.

All things, that I haue heard of my Fa­ther, haue I made knowne to you. Iohn, (3) 15, 15.

The holy Scripture doth m [...]ke [...]he man of God absolute, and perfect to euery good (4) worke. 2, Timo: 3, 17.

I kept back nothing, but shewed you all the counsell of God. Act: 20, 27. (5)

There can be moued no controuersie of Religion, for which the Scripture hath not (6) afore hand prouided a deciding or determi­ning sentence: therefore Saint Paul in the controuersie of Iustification calleth the Scripture prouident, or fore-seeing. Galath. 3, 8.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus.

(1) The Apostles taught many things, which [Page 6] are not written.

Answer, 1.

This is a begging of the question; for this same thing is it, which is denied. Now a doubtfull thing ought not to bee proued by an other as doubtfull. 2, The contrarie heereto is contained in the places of Scrip­tures before alleadged. 3, The Apostles should heereby be conuinced of vnfaithful­nes, as hauing kept back things necessary to saluation. 4, Moreouer, there is extant, not one onely writing of an Apostle or Euange­list, but more: that that, which is not con­tained in one, may plainely be seene in other of the Apostles writings.

(2) I haue yet many thinges to say vnto you, but you cannot beare them now. Ioh. 16, 12:

Answer. 1.

It is a fallacie, from that which is saide in some particular respect, to the same spoken absolutely and generally, in all respects: for Christ speaketh of his Apostles not yet illu­minated by his holy Spirit; but he speaks not of them, as beeing endued with the holie Ghost in the day of Pentecost: That which the worde Now dooth plainely declare. 2. [Page 7] While our Aduersaries argue from the A­postles not enlightened, to the Church in­structed by the writings of the Apostles, there arise in the Syllogisme foure termes. 3, Besides, it was one manner of knowledge, which the Apostles had before the day of Pentecost, and an other after the receiuing of the holy Ghost: therefore these diffe­rent thinges ought not to bee confoun­ded.

(3) Other thinges (saith Saint Paul) will I set in order, when I come. 1, Corinthians, 11, 34▪ therefore Paul did not write all things.


Paul speakes of indifferent Ceremonies in the Church, not of articles of Religion necessarie to saluation: Their Argument therefore (as the saying is) is from the staffe to the corner.

(4) Manie thinges are not contained in the holy Scripture, which are necessarie to faith:

[Page 8] Ans. 1. This we denie. & it is the very thing in question: therefore it is a begging of the question, 2. Our Aduersaries play with the word Faith: for they meane not a true and sauing faith, whereof our question is, but in a large sence they take the word Faith (vnfit­lie wrapping in the word Faith, euery friuo­lous toy, long after the Apostles time, as it were yesterday obtruded vpon the Church of Christ): and so from the two-fold signi­fication of the word, Faith: there arise foure termes, which hinder that there can be no iust conclusion.

(5) The Scripture saith nothing of Christs descension into hell.

Answere. That is most false: for the Scripture saith, thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell. Psalm, 16, 10. The sorrowes of hell compassed mee about. Psalm: 18. But that these Psalmes speake not of Dauid but of Christ, our Aduersaries themselues cannot denie, seeing the former is alleaged of Saint Peter expreslie in his Sermon of Christ. Acts: 2, 27.

[Page 9] (6) The Scripture sayth nothing of the per­petual Virginitie of Marie of a certainty. There­fore it is insufficient.

Ans. 1. Be it neuer so much, that the scrip­ture say nothing at all of the perpetuall Vir­ginitie of Marie, yet might it not therefore be said to be insufficient to our saluation for we are not hereby saved, because we believe that Marie after the birth of Christ remained a Virgin; but because we believe in Christ, who according to the Scripture (Isai 7. 14) was borne of a Virgin. 2. The perpetuall Vir­ginitie of Marie may bee shewed by the phrase of Scripture where it sayth: And hee knew her not Vntill She had brought forth: The word Vntill doth note also perpetuitie: as the Raven returned not vntill the waters were dried vp vpon the Earth. Genesis 8. 7. which Raven yet never returned at all.

(7) Manie things are rightly believed, al­though they be not contained in the Scriptures, as the words, Trinitie, Essence, Person, &c.

Ans. 1. A thing is sayd to bee contained in the Scriptures two manner of waves, ac­cording to the letter, and according to the s [...]nse by a good consequence. Or some­times [Page 10] the things onely, sometimes together with the things the wordes signifying the things are expressed also. So the thing of Trinitie and Persons in the Deitie, the Scrip­ture expresseth Mat, 3, 16, 17, 28, 19. Al­thogh the very words be not cōtained there 2, We are not heerby saved for that wee vse and approve these words, which were inven­ted for a more easie and plaine waye of tea­ching, but for that we steadfastly believe the thing it self, which is found in the scriptures.

(8) There are many bookes lost, as the Epi­stle to the Laodiceans &c. Therefore the Scrip­ture cannot be sufficient to saluation.

Ans, 1, There are yet remaining other bookes which are sufficient. 2, S. Iohn sayth of his Gospell alone, that it containeth all things necessarie to saluation, Ioh, 20, 31,

(9) The Canon of the holy Scripture (which is a thing necessarie to saluation) is not contained in the holy Scriptures.

Ans. 1. The Canon is a thing necessary not of it selfe, but by an accident, to wit, be­cause heritickes had forged certaine coun­terfaite bookes; which if they had not done, there had been no need of a Canon. 2, The [Page 11] true Canon is the perpetuall rule of truth which is comprised in the Scripture. For therfore false & counterfaite bookes are not received, because they contradict the Scrip­ture and the truth, neither do agree with the authenticke & Canonicall bookes. 3, And the Church of Christ could (for 300. yeares almost) discerne the true Scriptures frō the counterfaite, before the Fathers had com­posed the Canon, and catalogue of holy writte. The Canon therefore is not simply necessary and is contained after a sort in the Scripture.

(10) Hee shall bee called a Nazarite (Mat, 2, 23.) but this is not contained in the writings of the olde Testament.

Ans, Yes; this is typically spoken of Christ in the person of Sampson. Iudg 13, 5. And our Aduersaries (if they be well in their witts) will not reiect the types of Christ, set out in the olde Testament.

Question 2.

Whether the Scripture be obscure. We deny, they affirme. We say it is plain for these reasons.

The Lawe of the LORD is perfect [Page 12] conuerting the soule; the testimonic of the Lord is sure, and giveth Wisedome to the sim­ple. Psalm, 19, 7, Nothing of all which the Scripture could effect, especially to the sim­ple, if it were obscure.

The commandement of the Lord is pure, and giveth light to the eyes, verse, 8

Thy Word is a Lanterne to my feete, and a Light vnto my path Psal, 119, 105.

Wee have a most sure worde of the Pro­phets, to the which you doe well, that you take heede, as vnto a light that shineth in a darke place &c. 2 Pet. 1. 19.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus.

(1) Many sayings in the Scripture are very obscure.

Ans. 1. We may not dispute from a part to the whole, saving only particularly; and of meere particulars no conclusion wil follow: 2. Some things be obscure in the Scripture not of themselues, but accidentally: and the vaile that covers the eyes of the Iewes, and other infidels is the cause thereof, the word 2, Co, 3, 15 is not the cause. 3. That which is spoken more obscurely in one place, is explained more clearely in an other. And so by con­ference [Page 13] of places, the clearenes of the Scrip­ture appeareth.

(2) Saint Peter sayth that in Pauls Epistles there be some things hard to bee vnderstood, 2. Pet. 3. 16.

Ans. 1. Some things are hard to bee vn­derstood, therefore not all. Heere the for­mer answere fits this obiection, that is, that those things which are written of Paul more briefely and some what obscurely in one place, are in other places most fully explai­ned. 2. Peter layes the fault of the obscuri­ty vpon the vnlearned and vnstable, which wrest and peruert the Word of God. Now nothing was ever so plainly delivered, which may not bee wrested by the frowarde to a wrong sence: which is apparent in the out­ragious dealings of Heritikes. Neither yet is the Scripture for that cause to be accused of obscuritie. 3. Over and besides the greek text saith not, that either the Epistles of Saint Paul or the maner of his teaching, which he vseth in his Epistles is obscure; but only thus much it sayth, that Paul doth intreate of, not onely such things as are plaine and easie for everie one to conceive, but that he doth not [Page 14] let passe, in handling of things necessarie to beknowē, such things as have in them some difficultie. Which to bee so the nature of the Greeke Article En Hois, which cannot answere or agree with the Antecedent En autais, but with peri Toutoon: accordingly also as Xantes Pagninus, and Arias Monta­nus, both of them Papists and Men very skilfull in the tongues have translated this place.

3 In the Scripture are handled many things most obscure and such as cannot be found out by the wit of man, & to reason seeme very absurde.

Ans. 1. They be obscure & absurd to the reason of the naturall man, but not to faith, 2 It is not all one to say obscure things are hādled in the scriptures; & things are handled in the scriptures ob­scurely. For thē by the same reason euery expli­cation of an obscuritie should be it selfe nothing else but obscurity.

(4) The Greeke & Hebrue Phrases breed ob­scurity.

Ans, 1, To them that know not the tongues, they be obscure. Therefore that is but acciden­tally. 2, This inconuenience is easily remedied by the knowledge of the tongues. 3, Therefore the Primitive Church had the gifts of tongues. And at this day by the singular blessing of God, there are many excellent men, indued with the [Page 15] knowledge of the tongues, who do fitly & pro­perly expound the Phrases of the Scriptures.

(5) There be some customes of the former ages vnknowen vnto vs, as that which is said (1, Cor. 15, 29.) of them, which are baptized for dead.

Ans. 1. Some: therefore not the whole Scrip­ture. The argument therefore goes from a part to the whole. 2, Those things pertaine not to faith, but to some speciall Ceremonies of the Ancients: which faith is never a whit the worse, if it know not.

(6) The Scripture handleth heavenly and high matters, such as our reason cannot comprehend.

Ans. 1. By faith wee believe the heavens were made, Heb, 11, 3. 2. The Scripture, as much as may be, descendeth downe, and applieth it selfe to vs and our capacitie. 3. Many things are sim­ply to be believed, which in this life wee know but in parte, but in that which is to come, wee shall know fully.

(7) Some things are handled mistically, as the Revelation.

Ans. 1, Such are not Articles of faith, & there­fore wee may be ignorant of them without losse of Saluation.

(8) Some cannot beare strong meate. There­fore in the Scripture some things are plaine and some things are not plaine.

Ans. 1. This is an Argument from a par­ticular to a Generall; on this fashion: Some [Page 16] things are not vnderstood of all, therefore all the Scripture is to be accused of obscuritie. 2. Because the weaker sort cannot beare strōg meate, the faulte is not in the meate, but in their weakenesse. Therefore heere is the fal­lacie, whcih Logicians call fallacia accidentis. And the stronger in tracte of time may ex­pound the obscure things to the weaker.

Question, 3.

Whether the Scripture bee vncertaine, and pliable to any sense. Our Aduersaries affirme, & wee denie it. Because,

If the Scripture bee plyable to any side, then it will follow, that either God coulde (1) not, or would not speake more distinctly, that his minde might bee vnderstood. Nei­ther of which can bee sayde without great blasphemy.

Wee have a most sure word of the Pro­phets (2) (not flexible and vncertaine) 2, Peter 1.

The Word of our God shall stand for e­ver. (3) Isay, 40, 8. But we could not rely vpon the word of God, as most true & most certain, if the Scripture were flexible.

[Page 17] Heauen and Earth shall passe away, but my word shall not passe away. Luke, 21, 33. If wee must belieue this word, then doubtlesse it must not be flexible, doubtfull, and mutable.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus.

(1) In expounding of the sayings of Scripture, the best Interpreters & the fathers of the church doe not agree: therefore the Scripture may bee drawne into diuers sences and meanings.

Answ. The Scripture is not the cause there­of, which remaines alwaies the same both for Simil. As if the motion of the stars should therfore be said to varie & to change for that Al­phonsus & P [...]olomie haue not hit vpō the truest mo­tion. words & meaning: but the cause is the weak­nes of mans iudgement. Whence it cōmeth, that one vnderstands more than an other, that one hath more clearenes of iudgment than an other, that one is more or lesse furnished, with knowledge of tongues than an other, or doth lesse diligently compare places of Scripture together, and waigh the things themselues by their necessary circumstances, antecedents, & cōsequents, what went before, & what comes after: so then the Scripture is not flexible, but mans iudgment is diuers: therfore let vs chuse the better and refuse the worse.

(2) But all Heretiks do alleage for themselues the Scriptures.

Ans. I answer, 1, as to the former obiection. [Page 18] 2, That happens not by the fault of the Scripture, but the fault is in Heretikes, as S. Peter saith, for that they wrest, and offer vi­olence to the Scriptures, haling their opi­nions into the Scriptures. 3, Vnlesse the Scripture were certaine, and free from flexi­bilitie, it could not confute any heresie, ther­fore it is not vncertaine.

(3) The Copies of the bookes of Scripture might be corrupted by the Scriueners, and such as copied them out, or by the Iewes.

Answer. From what may be, to what is, is no good argument. 2, By comparing of an­cient Copies, as also by the Analogie of faith if any be corrupted, they may be amen­ded. 3, Againe, heere is the fallacie, which they call fallacia accidentis, wheras the Scrip­ture seemes to be flexible and vncertaine, but of it selfe it is not, but by an accident, to wit, through some mens negligence.

(4) But the Hebrue Copy in many places a­grees not with the translation of the seuenty In­terpreters: therfore it is corrupted by the Iewes.

Ans. That disagreeing hinders not the certainty of the Scriptures: for the translati­on of the seuentie Interpreters, is not of ab­solute authority in the Church of God: nei­ther [Page 19] is to bee compared or opposed to the Hebrew Bible, whereto as to the fountaine in the diuersitie of translations, we must euer haue recourse. And who can assure vs, that that which comonly goes now a-daies vn­der their name, is the right translation of the seuentie wheras it may euidently be shewed, that a great part of the Latine translation of the Bible is not Hieroms, which notwith­standing is thrust vpon the Church of God vnder the name of S. Hierome: for this, the barbarousnes of the Latine translation, and ignorance of the Hebrew tongue, as also the diuersitie of the stile in diuers places compa­red together, doe apparently in many places conuince.

CHAP. 2.

VVHether the Scriptures ought to bee read of the Lay-people? Our Aduer­saries denie, and wee affirme it, for these reasons.

Because the Scripture dooth make a man (1) [...]bsolute & perfect to euery good work. Lay men haue need of it for this purpose, as well [...]s the Clergie. 2, Timoth: 3, 17.

The Lord commanded that the King who (2) [Page 20] is a ciuill person, should read in the book of the law all the daies of his life. Deut. 17.

The Epistles of the Apostles were written, not onely to Bishops and Clergie men, but to (3) Lay men too, as appeareth by the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians, wherein he warneth his Hearers that they discerne betweene false and true teachers: So both the former and later Epistle to the Corinthians speaketh manie things to Lay men. So likewise the Epistle of S. Iohn, where the Apostle saith, I write vnto you litle children, &c. I write vnto you fathers, &c. I write vnto you young men. I write vnto you Babes, &c. 1, Iohn: 2, 12, 13, 14. Peter wri­eth to the Elect strangers dispersed abroad. If therfore Epistles bee written to Lay men, why should they not also be read of Lay men?

The brethren of the rich glutton were Lay-men, whō notwithstanding Abraham sendeth (4) to Moses and the Prophets. Luke, 6. 29.

This was fore-told by Isay, They shall be all (& so Lay men too) taught of God. Isai, 54, 13. (5)

We haue examples hereof in the Scriptures▪ (6) 1, of the Eunuch, who reade Isai the Prophet. Act: 8, 28. 2, Then of the Beraeans, Act: 17, 11.

Christ bids all in generall, search the Scrip­tures. (7) [Page 21] Neither did hee giue this charge to the Priests alone, but to others his hearers also: Ioh: 5 39.

S. Peter willeth all euen Lay men too, to be ready to giue an answer to euery man that as­keth (8) them a reason of the hope, that is in them. 1, Pet: 3, 15. which that they may do, it is need­full that they learne it out of the Scripture.

Contrariwise our aduersaries reason thus:

(1) The Scripture hath many obscure things, therefore the Lay people can reade it with pro­fite.

Answ. 1. Although all things be not to euery man plaine: yet the people alwaies finde such things, as they may vnderstand. 1, those things, which seeme hard, by often reading become more easie.

(2) The Lay people by reading the Scriptures misvnderstood, do easily fall into heresie, it were better therefore they should refraine.

Ans. 1. If they fall into heresie, that comes ac­cidentally, not because they reade the Scrip­tures, but because they read them not in such manner, as they should do, and doe preferre [...]heir formerly conceiued opinions before the Scripture, and wrest it to them. 2, On the contrarie side, good men and well minded, [Page 22] hauing been deliuered frō herisie by reading the Scriptures, haue returned to the truth.

(3) To whom it belongeth not to iudge of cō ­trouersies, to them neither doth it belong to read the Scriptures, but it belongeth not to Lay-men to iudge of cōtrouersies, therfore neither to read.

Ans. 1, The Minor or second proposition is most false. 2, Then had the Beraeans done amisse in reading, and from thence deciding a controuersie, then newely sprung vpp. 3, Seeing euery one is bound to answer to God for himselfe, it is needfull for euery Lay-man to proue all things, and keepe that which is good. 1, Thessa: 5, 21.

(4) So should the order, which discerneth be­tweene teachers, & learners, be confounded.

Ans. This we denie: for a Lay hearer may try and examine those things he heareth by the Scripture, & remaine for all that a hearer still: for he doth not therfore take vpon him the office of teaching in the church, because he examineth the thinges, which hee hath heard of his teacher by the touchston of the holy Scriptures. As likewise the Beraeans be­came not therefore of the order of teachers, because they iudged of the Sermons of Paul and Silas.


WHether the interpretation of the holy Scriptures bee to bee sought for from the Church of Rome.

This question arose from hence, that the Papists seeing, that wee did esteeme more of the holy Scripture, than that we would suffer the authority thereof to be diminished, and that the letter of the Scripture did manifestly make for vs, did straight change the state of the question, and said, that the question was not of the autho­rity of the Scripture, but of the interpretation thereof: the right of which interpretation they make to be so peculiar to the Church of Rome, that they would binde vs to receaue any inter­pretations, that should come from thence, bee they neuer so absurd and false. But we gainsay them herein, and reiect the forged power, wher­by the Bishops of Rome make claime to the key of knowledge and interpretation, as committed to them alone.

Reasons prouing our opinion.

Because the interpretations of the Papists contradict the euidences of holy Scripture, (1) as shall be most plainely prooued in his due place.

Because the greatest part of them are most vaine, as for example, that the eight Psalm (2) is expounded by the Canonists as meant of [Page 24] the Pope, which notwithstanding speakes of Christ alone, as the Apostles and Christ him­selfe haue interpreted it.

Because they affirme (as by name Cusanus doth) that if the minde and opinion of the Ro­mane (3) Church be changed, that then the holy Ghost doth change his mind in the Scriptures too. What an impious & mad absurdity is this?

Many times they explaine not the Scripture, but wrest it violently & shamefully to vphold (4) their own toyes, contrary to the text of Scrip­ture.

The gifts of God (such as the interpretation of the Scripture is one) are not tyed to certaine (5) persons & places: for God distributes these his gifts to euery man as he will. 1, Corinth: 12, [...]1.

It is no where read, that the whole Church is tied to the meaning of the Romaine Church, (6) but to the meaning of the holy Scripture, which doth expound it selfe most clearely.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe argue.

(1) If we beleeue the Romane Church, that it hath conuayed vnto vs the true & proper books of the Bible, and not counterfait and forged, thē must wee belieue her also in the interpretation, which she bringeth of the holy Scripture.

Ans. 1. It is one thing to beare witnes of the [Page 25] truth of the sacred books, and an other thing Simil [...]t is one thing to acknow­ledge the Seals hang­ed to a Te­stament and another to expound it contrary to the Teuor of the letter to expound them, So the Iewes are witnes­ses of the Canonicall books of the olde Tes­tament, & yet we accept not of their Talmu­dicall interpretations. 2, Moreover the inter­pretations of the Papists do contradict that same Scripture, wherof they beare witnesse.

(2) The Scribes and Pharises sit in Moses chaire, all therefore whatsoeuer they bid you obserue, that obserue and do, Mathew, 23, 2, 3.

Ans. 1, The Pharisies were to be believed, not simply in all things, but when they sate in the chaire of Moses, that is, when they taught the truth out of the law of Moses. It is ther­fore a fallacie from that, which is spoken but in part and some respect, to that which is absolutely spoken. 2, They were to be hear­kened vnto, when they taught Moses, but in the meane while Christ said also, Take heede of the leaven of the Pharisies. Now Christ by the leaven of the Pharisies meant their false doctrine, as S. Mathew expressely witnesseth cap. 16, v. 12. that is, Christ did reiect the Pharisies false interpretatiō of the Scripture. So then wee must distinguish betweene the scripture it self, which the Papists handle, & their false interpretatiō or humane traditiōs wherwith they defile it.

[Page 26] (3) God would have thē punished with death which would not obey the judgment of the high Priest, Devter, 17, 12.

Ans. 1, Moses speaketh not of matters of faith, but of civill government, betweene bloud and bloud, betweene plea and plea, betweene plague, and plague (as the wordes of Moses are, verse, 8) in which matters for publike peace sake, it was necessary there should be some order appointed for ending of controversies. For the high Priest at that time was the highest Iudge, from whom no man might appeale. 2, It was not in the high Priests choise to judge as hee pleased, but hee was tyed to the lawe of the Lord, according to which he gave sentence: In like sort is the Popetyed to it too.

(4) The Priests lippes shall preserue know­ledge, & they shall seeke the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts, &c Malach, 2. 7.

Ans, 1, Malachie there shewes what is the dutie of the Priests. But that the Priests did not their dutie the verie next words fol­lowing declare. But you are gone out of the waye, you have caused many to fall by the lawe, [Page 27] &c. verse, 8. 2, This argument changeth the manner of the speech; for the words are a commandement, teaching what the Priests should doe, but the Papists do vniustly turne them into words of promise, iust as if a man should say; God hath sayde, thou shalt not steale, therefore no man stealeth.

CHAP, 4. Of Traditions.

THE word Tradition often times is sim­ply taken for anie kinde of doctrine, whe­ther it be written or delivered by word of mouth. But by the name of Traditions are such things also meant, which were not writ­ten but onely delivered by word of mouth, and so have beene from hand to hand conveyed to our age: These kinde of Traditions are of two sorts: Some containe Ceremonies of nature in­different and changeable according to the cir­cumstances of place and time, which though they be not expressed in Scriptures, yet because they are not contrarie to the same, and are re­tained in the Church as things indifferent, are not called into question. But there bee other sorte of Traditions in Poperie, which are con­trarie [Page 28] to the Scriptures, and whereof there ap­peares not so much as one step in the Scriptures, (such as are the Canon of the Masse, Holy wa­ter a set number of prayers, holy Candells, and an infinite number more) which are commēded to the World vnder the glorious name of Apo­stolicke Traditions, to the observing whereof as being Apostolicke, all Christians are bound, if wee will believe the Papists, The question The state of the question then is. 1. Whether besides the Scriptures the A­postles delivered some things by word of mouth only, 2, Whether they delivered those things by word of mouth onely which at this day the Pa­pists bragg of as of, Apostolick Traditions. We deny both: the former wherof wee prove by the sufficiencie of the holy Scripture, which con­taines all things necessary to saluation. Whereof we have intreated before: the later wee prove by these reasons following.

Because these their Traditions are con­trarie (1) to the Scriptures which we wil prove clearely hereafter. But we may not thinke that the Apostles writt some things, and de­livered by word of mouth other, and those contrarie to their writings.

Because in Pauls time such Traditions be­gan (2) to bee suspected in the Church which [Page 29] appeares by the words of S. Paul. 2. Thessal, 2, 2. Be not suddenly moved from your mind nor troubled, neither by Spirit, nor by Worde nor by letter as sent from vs.

Because it may be proved out of histories, (3) that such traditions had their first beginning some ages after the Apostles death. Wherof see in particular Polidor Virgill, especially concerning the Canon of the Masse. de Inue­rerum lib, 5, cap, 11, &c.

It is proved by many & manifest reasons, (4) that those bookes and Canons, wherby they indevour to procure authority and credit to their Traditions, are forged and counterfaite (such as are the Canons of the Apostles, the Decretalls, the Decrees of Popes, the books of Clement and Dyonisius Areopagita. Nei­ther do our aduersaries doubt, but that many such Canons & bookes are counterfeits.

Such Traditions of men are condemned (5) by the holy Scripture.

1, Because they are in cause (as Christ wit­nesseth) that in the mean time the Cōman­dements of God are neglected. Mat 15, 3:

2, Because God is worshipped in vaine by the doctrines and precepts of men, verse, 9.

[Page 30] 3. Because the Traditions of men can­not reach into the minde of God: for my thoughts are not as your thoughts, neither are your waies as my wayes (saith the Lord). For as the Heavens are higher than the earth so are my waies higher than your waies, and my thoughts above your thoughts. Isay, 55, 8, 9. Whence it commeth to passe, that those things which men admire for their singular holinesse, do most of all displease the Lord God.

4. Because such plants as are not planted of the heavenly Father shall bee rooted out, Mat, 15, 13.

Because wee must rely our selues wholly on the Word of God, in worshipping of (6) God, and that onely must we doe, which he hath commanded. Neither may we add, or diminish, anie thing there from, Deut, 12. 32 neither may we decline from the comman­dements of God, either to the right hand or to the left, Deuter, 28, 14.

Because the Traditions of men are de­ceipts (7) or trappes, Beware (sayth Paul) least there bee anie man that spoyle you through Philosophie, and vaine deceite, through the [Page 31] Traditions of men, according to the rudi­ments of the World, and not after Christ, Colos, 2, 8.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe argue.

(1) Brethren stand fast and keepe the tradi­tions, which you haue been taught, either by word or by our Epistle. 2, Thessal, 2, 15. Ther­fore our Traditions (to wit the Papisticall) are to bee received and kept as Apostolike Tradi­tions.

Ans, 1. All the Propositions are parti­cular, and it is such a kinde of absurde reaso­ning as this: The Apostles delivered some things by word of mouth; we have some Tra­ditions, therefore our Traditions are Aposto­ [...]ike. 2. It is a fallacie from a part to the whole for when Paul wrot these things, fewe of those [...]hings which appertaine to the Canon of the New Testament, were then written. That [...]herefore, which Paul meant in respect of [...]hat time, when as al were not yet written, that the Papists vnderstand simply, even of that [...]ime, when the Canon was perfected: when as [...]ow wee have all things in the Apostles wri­ [...]ings, which are needefull to bee knowen for [...]aluation. 3. There are foure termes in the [Page 32] syllogisme, in the Maior are vnderstood Tra­ditions doctrinall & Apostolicke; in the mi­nor, forged Traditions, inuented long after the Apostles time.

2 Christ did not altogether reject the Traditi­ons of the Fathers where he sayth, these things ought you to have done, and not to have left the other vndone. Luke, 11, 42.

Answe. Christ there opposeth the strict obseruance of Moses his law, (not of mens Traditions) in outward small matters, (as in [...]ithing of cumime & mint) & the neg­lect of the principal duties of ye first & second Table, both which should have beene ioy­ned together & obserued, as being both the commandements of God. This reason ther­fore (6) is like a rope of land.

(3) When Paul and Timothy went through the Citties, Tradebanteis, they delivered, or gave them for Traditions, the decrees to keepe, which were ordained by the Apostles & Elders, which were at Ierusalem, Act, 16, 4.

Ans, 1, It followes not: The Apostles (7) deliuered somethings, therfore the Papisti­call Traditions are Apostolicke. There is no coherence in this reason. 2, Paul and [Page 33] Timothie deliuered not vnwritten verities, but those things, which were decreed of the Apostles, and then comprized in writing, & sent to the Church of Antioch. The Papists therfore dispute from a written to an vnwrit­ten Tradition.

(4) Paul saith, that hee deliuered certaine pre­cepts to the Corinthians, which they did well that they obserued them. 1, Corin. 11, 2.

Answ. The same answer, which was gi­uen to the first obiection, fits this too, that is, that there is no sound proofe of all particu­lars. The Papists should prooue, that those Traditions proceeded from the Apostles, which they bragge so fast to bee Aposto­licke.

(5) The Fathers testifie, that certaine Traditi­ons came from the Apostles to them.

Answ. 1. The Fathers many times by the name of Traditions vnderstand such things, as are contained in the Scripture, according to the sence and meaning thereof, though not according to the Letter. And in this sence there bee in the reason foure termes: the Fathers vnderstanding Traditions con­tained in the Scriptures, & the Papists, Tra­ditions [Page] not at all there contained. 2, The Fa­thers by Traditions Apostolick, vnderstand sometimes, generall customes and rites of indifference, which was in the liberty of the Church to alter as occasion should require. 3. If any of the Fathers haue maintained o­ther sort of Traditions as Apostolick, then the question is, whether they did well in ac­cepting such Traditions for Apostolicke, which were not Apostolick, neither did cō ­sent with the holy Scripture.

(6) That infants should be baptized, that the Eucharist should bee deliuered to women, &c. wee haue receiued from vnwritten Tradition onely.

Answ. 1. The Antecedent is not true: for concerning the former, wee haue Scripture that Baptisme is needfull for all, and that it doth belong vnto Infants. Iohn, 3, 5. Mark 10, 14, 15, 16. 1, Corinthians, 1, 16, &c. 2, The Trent Catechisme proueth the Baptisme of Infants by diuers places of Scripture Part: 2. cap. 2, quaest. 26. As for the latter, that the Eu­charist belongeth to the whole Church, and so vnto women, wee haue Christs comman­dement. Math: 26, 26, 27, 28. Mark, 14, 22, &c. [Page 35] Luk, 22, 19, 20. 1, Cor: 11, 26, 27, 28.

(7) The obseruation of the Lords day, is not found in the Scripture.

Ans. Seeing it is acknowledged by both sides, by the Papists as well as by the Protestants, that to set a certaine time a part for Gods seruice is a morall and immurable law, and that the Apostles left to the Church the first day of the weeke, which is the Lords day, in Parte terti [...], ca. 4, quaest: 4. steede of the seuenth day, which the Iewes obserued, (as the Trent Catechisme proueth out of 1, Corint. 16, 2, and Reuel. 1, 10:) We ought to acknowledge it as a precept of God grounded on the Scriptures.

CHAP. 5. Of the Letter and the Spirit.

THE Papists seeke themselues an other starting hole (when as they cannot proue See Fran. Coster in his Enchiri­dion of Cō ­trouersies. Cap 1, of th [...] holy Scrip­ture. out of the holy Scripture many their Ido­latrous and superstitious opinions;) to say that the Scripture is a dead and killing letter, but the Spirit, that is the meaning of the Scripture, is contained in the liuing tables of the heart of the Church: & that therefore all things ought to be iudged & determined not out of the Scrip: but by [Page 36] the consent of the Church. So, for examples sake, whereas nothing is found in the letter of the Scripture concerning the worshipping of I­mages, that, say they, is to bee sought for in the hearts of the faithfull (that is, of the Pope, Car­dinalls, &c:) Wherein the holy Spirit hath writ­ten it, that Images are to be worshipped. As for vs we acknowledge no other Scripture, wherein God doth by writing reueale his will, beside the sacred bookes of the Bible, and this spirituall Scripture of the Papists we reiect.

Because the holy Scripture, described and comprised in letters, deserueth this praise, (1) that it can make a man perfect: therefore vn­to There is one manner of Spirit in the outward Scripture, & another in the inward, which are cōtrary one to another concerning the authori­tie of the Scripture. Note heere the Spirit of Christ and Antichrist. perfection, there is no neede of any other new spirituall Scripture.

(2) Because that spirituall Scripture, which the Papists forge, doth disanull the authori­tie of the holy Scripture penned in paper by the instinct of the holy Ghost. But the holy Ghost cannot be so contrarie to it selfe, as to commend highly the Scripture by the Apo­stles and Prophets, and to diminish the au­thoritie of the same by an inward Scrip­ture.

(3) Because this inward Scripture is ma­nifestly [Page 37] proued to bee often ontrarie to the outward: Therefore the hol [...] Ghost, if he be the Author of both, should [...] conuicted ei­ther of falshood or inconstanie.

By this meanes we should it open a wide gap to all errours, whiles euey man would (4) brag of the inward writing o [...] the holy Spi­rit, and would compare it wit [...] and preferre it before the holy Scripture.

Besides, this sauours strongly of the error of the Enthusiasts, and Schweneldians, on (5) this wise. This inward Scripture or writing is either mediate, or immediate if mediate, then the Scripture keepes his old standing, to be the meanes and Rule of this inward wri­ting: if immediate, then they manifestly fall into the error of the Enthusiasts: but our Ad­uersaries accept not of the former; therfore of the later.

All the paines, which the Euangelists and Apostles did take in penning the Scriptures, (6) were bootlesse, if wee should take no more heede to their writings, than to such a like in­ward Schwenfeldian writing.

Contrarily our Aduersaries doe argue.

(1) The Letter killeth, but the Spirit giueth [Page 38] life. 2, Corin: 3 [...]. Therefore we are not to heede the Scripture w [...]tten with inke, but the inward Scripture of th [...] Spirit, sealed in the heart of the Church.

Ans. 1. T [...]t Paul doth not speake of any inward or o [...]tward distinction of writing, but of the diference of the law and the Gos­pell, the w [...]rdes immediatly going before A view of a Doctour▪ like exposi­tion, pro­ceeding frō the inward writing of the heart, doe shew: [...]od (saith S: Paul) hath made vs able Minist [...]rs of the new Testament, not of the [...]etter b [...]t of the Spirit. 2, So then there are fiue ter [...]es, taking the word Letter in the Antecedent or former proposition, accor­ding to Paules meaning for the Lawe, and in the consequent or later proposition for the whole body of the holy Scripture, accor­ding to the Papists meaning: and vnderstan­ding the word Spirit in the Antecedent for the Gospell, and in the consequent for En­thusiasme, or immediate inspiration from God: the argument therefore hangeth to­gether like sand. Now S. Paul calleth the law a killing letter, because that no man can bee iustified and saued by the law: but the Lawe doth rather condemne, and spiritually kill. But he calls the Gospell, Spirit, because the Gospel receiued by faith, doth giue the holy [Page 39] Spirit, which doth quicken our harts create them a new, & stir them vp to good workes.

(2) I will put my Lawe in their inward parts, and write it in their harts, &c. Ierem: 31, 33. ther­fore the will of GOD is to bee learned, not out of the outward but inward Scripture or writing.

Answer. 1.

The Epistle to the Hebrewes (cap: 8, vers, 10;) doth so expound these words, that hee compareth together the constraint or coac­tion of the law of Moses, to wit, the involun­tarie and enforced obedience, and the reno­vation of the mind by the Spirit of the Gos­pell, whereby the beleeuers, by the Sanctifi­cation of the Spirit, wrought by the preach­ing of the Gospell, doe performe a willing & voluntary obedience to God (the wil of man being set at liberty by the Spirit of God) and doe delight in the Law of [...]od, and haue no more stony hearts, but fleshly & tractable to performe obedience vnto their Lord. 2, What priuiledge soeuer is graunted by this gratious promise, the Pope, Cardinalls, and the rest of that Hierarchie, haue no reason to challenge it, as proper to themselues, seeing the Apostle applyes it, as doth also [Page 40] the Prophet to all, euen the least of Gods children. They shall no more teach euerie man his neighbour, saying, know the Lord, for they shall all know mee, from the least to the greatest of them, as it followeth in the next words. Ierem. 31, 34, and Heb. 8, 11.

(3) Yee are the Epistle of Christ, ministred by vs, and written, not with inke, but with the Spi­rit of the liuing God, not in tables of stone, but in the fleshy tables of the heart: 2, Corinthians, 3, 3.

Answ. 1. Paul compares the commenda­torie letters, whereby some of the fal [...]e Apo­stles did glory in their ministerie, and the worke it selfe, which ought to commend the work-man▪ and shewes that he hath no neede of letters of commendation, because the effect of his preaching in the Corinthi­ans did testifie, that his Ministerie ioyned with the holy Spirit, was powerfull and ef­fectuall. It will by no meanes therefore hence follow, that there is one inward, and an other outward Scripture. 2, The contrary doth rather follow hereof, because the holy Ghost was powerful by the meanes of Pauls ministerie, that therfore it was a mediate and [Page 41] not immediat word, wherby it pleaseth him to save those that believe. Rom, 1, 16.

(4) Yee have no neede that any Man should teach you, but as the same annointing teacheth you all things &c. and you have an oyntment from him, which is holy, and yee haue knowen all things. 1, Ioh, 2, 20, 27. Therefore we must have recourse not to the Scripture but to the an­nointing of the Spirit.

Ans, 1, That Saint Iohn speaketh of the annointing, which Christians receive by the preaching of the Gospell, these wordes do shew, Let therfore abide in you the same, which yee have heard from the beginning, verse, 24. Also, I write no new commande­ment vnto you, but an old commandemēt, which ye have had from the beginning, &c. verse, 7. Therefore S. Iohn dooth not teach that there is a two-fold Scripture, but decla­reth that they were inlightned by the pub­like ministery of the Word, & endued with the Holy ghost, that now they do know, by those thinges, which they had heard, how they ought to behave thēselues in all things. 2, It is therefore no good conclusion from the publike mediate ministerie to the imme­diate [Page 42] writing of the Spirit, seeing there bee foure termes. 3. If such an inwarde writing had been sufficient, what need had there bin of Iohns outward writing?

(5) All thy Children shall be taught of God, Isai, 54, 13. Ioh, 6, 45.

Ans, 1. The Prophet & Christ do speake of the knowledge of Christ, which should be more plentifull in the new Testament, than is was in the olde: but never a whit of the in­ward and outward Scripture 2. If they mean an immediate teaching, then fall they into the absurditie of the Enthusiasts & Schwen­feldians: if they meane a mediate teaching, let them know that the holy Scripture is that medium, that meanes, which is able to in­struct vs to Saluation, 2, Timoth, 3, 17. 3. It were strange If the Papists would attribute, this inward writing and gift of vnderstan­ding Scriptures, which they claime by these places to the common lay people among them: & yet all these places are meant of all the faithfull vnder the gospell, as it is evident by the words & circumstances of the places cited.

CHAP. 6. Of Councells.

THE Papists in defence of their errors ob­iect vnto vs the authority of certain Coū ­cells, as sacred, and such as may not bee gaine sayde. We willingly imbrace those Councells, whose decrees speake out of the holy scripture, alleaged in his true meaning: but if any where they swarue from the truth, we think they ought to bee examined by the rule of the holy Scripture, and do believe that no faithfull man is bound to stand to their authority, if they de­cree any thing against Scripture. But above all we detest their Idolatrous councells. And that which I have sayd, is built on these grounds following.

We reade in the holy scriptures that some Councells have erred.

  • 1, The Councell which was for the con­demning of Christ, Mat, 26, & 27.
  • 2, The Councell which condemned Pe­ter and Iohn, Act, 4, & 5.
  • 3, The councell which condemned Ste­phen, Act, 7.
  • [Page 44] 4 The Councell that was gathered a­gainst (2) Paul Act, 22, & 23.

Certain Councells celebrated in the time of the antient Fathers and afterwards, have erred; for example:

1, Manie Councells forbade the Mini­sters of the Church to marrie contrary to the expresse Word of God.

2 The Councell of Constance admitted the mangling of the Lords Supper.

3 The Trent Councell hath confirmed Carte loads of errors. So some other coun­cells (which for brevity sake. I passe over in silence) have either decreed false opinions, or have approved them being inuented of others before, Which to bee so our Divines have plainely proved in their severall Treati­ses.

Becavse some Councels disagree, one with (3) an other in their whole constitutions: which See Eras­mus in his annotatiōs on the 1, Corinth, 7 no man can deny who hath read and compa­red together the decrees of all the Coun­cells. Reade but the decrees of Gratian, and thou shalt often times finde diverse and con­trarie Canons concerning one and the same matter, alleaged of him in the same distinctiō

[Page 45] The Papists themselues receive not all (4) things, nor all Canons in all Councells. Take for example the Canons, which are caried about vnder the name of the Apos­tles.

Manie Canons of Councells are counter­saite. (5) For the Bishops of Rome have beene conuicted of forgerie, for corrupting the Canons of the Councell of Nice.

In one and the same Councell in divers copies the words & number of the Canons (6) are different. Look the Tomes of the coun­cells.

They be men, that are gathered together (7) in Councells: and seeing they be men, why may they not bee deceived, and lye, as the Scripture speaketh? Psalm. 116, 11. for nei­ther is the Spirit of God tyed to those per­sons.

Contrarily thus our Aduersaryes reason thus.

(1) All the faithfull were bounde to the obseruation of the Councell of Ierusalem, Acts, 15. Therfore they be bound to keepe the coun­cels of Bishops.

[Page 46] Ans, There is great difference between the Councell of the Apostles and the Papall councels. In that there were witnesses with­out all exception, but in these, men do meet, among whom there bee many vnlearned, wicked, in parte Epicures, and such as have sworne homage to the Pope. In the coun­cell at Ierusalem the decrees were made out of the Scripture, but the papall councells make constitutions very often against the Scripture. This is therefore a loose rea­son.

(2) In the councell of the Priests and Scribes, Caiaphas by the holy Ghost prophecied, that it was better that one should dye for the peo­ple, than that all the people should perish. Ioh, 11, 50, Therefore Councells speake by the holy Ghost, and are therefore to be obeyed.

Ans. 1. Although Caiaphas vnnwittingly spake the truth, that that it was better that one man should dye then all the people pe­rish, yet the mind and meaning of Caiaphas was nothing so. But the definitiue sentence of the High Priest and the Councell was, [Page 47] that Christ was an hereticke, a blasphemer, a seducer of the People; a wicked man, and such as well deserued the shamefull death of the crosse. This was the decree of that coun­cell; which if the Papists will subscribe vnto, they shall bee reckoned impious, and blas­phemous Men. And by alleaging this de­vilish councell they shall gaine small credite to their owne, 2, This argument proceeds from a particular to an vniversall, Caiaphas minding an other thing, and vnwittingly spoke a fewe true wordes, therefore all the decrees of their councells are simply in all thinges from the Holy Ghost, and can­not in any case erre, 3. They might with as much truth and better reason conclude that Southsaiers, when they are sought vn­to to speake for a rewarde cannot speake an vntruth, Because that Balaam being consul­ted with of Balak to speake against Israel, did on the contrarie side by inspiration blesse them, and which is more then is sayde of Caiaphas coulde not doe otherwise: and whereas the prophesie of Caiaphas was onely in his wordes, which hee spoke in [Page 48] an other sense, Balaams prophesie was both in his words and his meaning, Numb, 22, and 23.

(3) Thou shalt not remove the ancient bounds, which thy Fathers have made, Pro. 22, 28. Ther­fore the decrees of Councells are to be kept.

Ans, 1, Wee have to deale with Coun­sells, whose decrees are contrarie to the ho­ly Scriptures, the ancientest boundes of all: Therefore are the Councells themselues tyed to this precept. 2, This is an argument drawen from the not changing of antient things well ordained vnto new things con­stituted the last day, & that against right too: 3 And this doe wee at this day against the Papists: we shew men the antient limites and bounds, which the Prophets, Christ and the Apostles have set; but the Bishops of R [...]me haue overturned and cover those most anti [...]t bounds with their new-fangled opinions, & humane Traditions.

(4) Which hee commanded our Fathers to teach their children, that the posteritie might know it, Psal, 78, 6, 7. Therefore councells de­clare to vs those things which they were enioy­ned by this cōmandemēt to teach their childrē.

[Page 49] Answ. 1. There is more in the Conclusion Simil. A Prince bid [...] his servant [...] be faithfull, therefore none of the can bee vn­faithfull. than in the premises: for it followeth not, God commaunded our Elders to deriue the truth to us, therefore of certainty they did so. 2, It is a changing of the manner of speach, for the Antecedent containeth a comman­dement, the consequent a storie or narration of the fulfilling of that commandement.

(5) Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the middest of them. Math: 18, 20. Therefore the decrees of Counsels are sa­cred, &c. for they are gathered together in the name of Christ.

Answ. 1. Heere be foure termes. To be ga­thered together in the name of Christ, is to be gathered according to his word and wil, but this they apply to the companies of them, which decree contrary to the word and will of Christ: 2, It is a begging of the thing in question, for this is the speciall doubt, whe­ther Counsels decreeing contrarie to the Scripture, may be said to bee gathered in the name of Christ: for it is not enough in coun­sels to bragg, and make shew of the name of A protesta­tion contra­rie to thei [...] deeds. Christ, and to recite the wordes of the Apo­stolick Counsell; It seemed good to the holy [Page 50] Ghost, and to vs, &c.

(6) In the assemblies of Counsels inuocation is made to the holy Ghost, that hee would bee their guide:

Answ. 1. That is done with Idolatrous rites It is as if a man should heare one aske aduice of a wise man, but would not obay his ad­uice. of the Papisticall Masse, therefore their prai­ [...]rs are not heard: nay, such as their seruice is, that is Idolatrous, such is the Spirit, which ruleth them. 2, They obay not the Spirit, whom they pray vnto, neither doe they rest content with his pleasure comprised in the Scripture.

(7) But who would say that so many, so great, and so worthie men could all erre at once?

Answ. 1. The Scripture saith, that euerie man is a lyar, therefore it is not a thing im­possible, Psa. 116, 11 that so many and so worthie men should erre. 2, Wee cited before examples of famous Counsels, which haue erred. 3, There is no respect of persons with God. 4, I giue thee thanks, O Father (saith Christ) be­cause thou hast hid these thinges from the wise. (Matthew, 11, 25,) 5, Not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called: but God hath cho­sen the foolish thinges of the world to con­found [Page 51] the wise (1, Corinthians, 1, 26, 27,) 6, Onely one Prophet Micha spake the truth, when in the meane time foure hundred false Prophets consented together in a lye, 1, King, 22.

(8) All herisies at what time soeuer they haue sprunge vppe, haue still beene ouerthrowne by Counsels, therefore this honour is as yet due to Counsells.


This is a fallacie, putting that for the cause, [...]hich is not the cause, for Councells, not as For example so the Sam [...] ritans speak vnto the woman, wee do not now beleeue be­cause of thy words, but because we haue heard him our selues. Ioh. 4. 42. Counsells barely considered vnder the name of Councells, but as prouing the truth by the word of God, haue troden vnder foote and o­uerthrown herisies Had the Papists such coū ­cells, we would of our owne accord willingly giue them the honour due vnto them for their [...]rue and right alleaging and expounding of Scriptures.

CHAP. 7. Of the Church.

FVrther yet the Papists seeke an other shift for the defending of their humane Traditi­ons and Doctrines; whiles boasting of the name of the Church, with open mouth they tell vs, that the true Church was of olde time at Rome, and that the Bishop of Rome with his band, are at this day that Church; and that the Church cannot erre, and that therfore all what­soeuer is deliuered vnto vs from the Church of Rome, is to be helde for most certaine and infal­lible, as beeing receiued from heauen. Heere therefore wee are to handle three questions. 1, Whether the Church of Rome, or our Church bee the true Church. 2, Whether wee ought to grant, that there is an invisible Church. 3, Whe­ther the Church can erre.

First of al in the entrance we must obserue [...] that there may many waies arise ambiguiti [...] in the word, Church. First it doth signifie in­definitely Ambiguitie in the word Church. euery Church or congregation and is taken both in the good and bad pa [...] for any kinde of assembly or congregation whence also the Scripture maketh mentio [...] of the malignant Church. Secondly, it is t [...] ken for the company of them, which a [...] called by the outward ministerie of th [...] word and Sacraments, wherein are gath [...] red [Page 53] both good and bad. Matthew, 13. Third­lie, it is taken for the inuisible Church, or the company of them, which vse the Ministerie of the Word and Sacraments to their salua­tion, and are truely beleeuers: which also may bee called the companie of the Elect. Fourthly, it is taken foure maner of waies in respect of the foure fold outward face of the Church. 1, For the most pure Church of the Apostles. 2, for the Church of the Fathers; wherein there was a more sincere state of doctrine, than in after-ages, yet it was not altogether voide of superstition. 3, For the Church of Antichrist, which is ouerflowne with horrible Idolatrie, as with a kinde of deluge. 4, For the reformed Church, resto­red according to the conformitie of the A­postolick Church. A fift signification the Papists haue made vs, vnderstanding by the Church, not a company of teachers & lear­ners, but the Pope, Cardinalls, Bishoppes, Monkes, &c. By obseruing of these distincti­ons, we shall detect many stratagems of the Papists, seeing they play continually with the ambiguitie or equiuocation of the word Church, and in their arguments they bring [Page 54] sometimes fiue termes. But now let vs come to the questions.

Question. 1.

(Whether the Church of Rome (which at this day blasphemes the Gospell of Christ, curseth and persecuteth the professours thereof) or ours be the true Church. Wee denie that the Church of Rome is the true Church for these reasons.

Because they want the true notes, and the (1) true definition of the Church: therefore neither haue they the definitum, that is the Church.

1. The Church heareth the voice of Christ. (Iohn. 10, 27,). Which is reuealed in the Scripture, which the Papists do not heare, and that 1, in refusing it for their Iudge. 2, in making decrees in many thinges a­gainst it. 3, In giuing it but cold and slen­der commendation.

2. Because they haue not the sincere mini­stration of the Sacraments, and that. 1, in forging new Sacraments. 2, in defiling Baptisme with humane superstitions. 3, in making Monasticall habite & state equall to it 4, In changing the Lords supper into a sacrifice. 5, And in the C [...]munion of lay [Page 55] people, in maiming it of the one kinde, that is by taking the cup frō the people: they haue not therefore an vncorrupt Mi­nisterie, and consequently their Church may not be called a true Church.

Because they haue not so much as the (2) notes, which the Papists themselues require in the definition of a Church.

1. Their Church hath not vnitie. 1 Because they striue amongst thēselues about ma­nie things▪ 2, They haue not vnitie by rea­son of the foure-fold face and condition of the Church before noted.

2. Their church is not holy. because they trust in their own holines, which before god is not holines, but as filthy clouts. Isai, 64, 6.

3. It is not Catholick. 1, Because they haue not the consent of the whole world: for the Greeke Church hath alwaies dissen­ted from them in diuers points. 2, because they defend not the vniuersall true doc­trine of all times, therefore they neither a­gree with the Church of the Apostles, nor yet with the Church of the Fathers.

4. It is not Apostolick, because they agree not with the Apostles doctrine, seeing verie [Page] many of their thinges are not Apostolick, but superstitions raked together and compi­led of sundry Authors. Take for example there of the Canon of the Masse; and the mangling of the Lords Supper, which was vnknowne for many ages, and at length e­stablished by the Counsell of Constance. Likewise Indulgences, the feast of Corpus Christi & other moe without number, con­cerning which looke Polidor Virgil. lib. 4. cap. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, As also the whole. 5, 6, 7, 8, bookes. But of such like su­perstitions of the Romaine Church, (that they be contrary to the Scripture) shal here­after bee spoken in their proper places suffi­ciently.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus.

(1) The Church of God hath had the name of the Church euer since the Apostles time: there­fore it is the true Church.

Answ. 1. It followeth not; It was long a­goe, Simil. This woman was long since a Maid, ther­fore nowe she cannot be an harlot. therefore now it is. 2, There is no good argument from the bare name of a thing to the thing it selfe. 3, Neither yet doe wee de­nie, but that there doth at this day remaine some Church in the City of Rome, to wit, of [Page 57] such as bee yong children, girles and simple men, which simply believe in Christ their Saviour, and trust nor in their owne merits. Neither is it to be doubted, but that there be some intelligent and wise men in Rome, who with all their hearts derest the Popes impietie and tyrannie. But all these are not that Roman Church, with the authoririe wherof our Aduersaries do seeke to oppresse and beare vs downe.

(2) The Fathers themselves did account the Roman Church for the true Church.

Ans. 1, Here be foure termes. For in the Antecedent the worde Church is taken for that face or condition of the Church which was in the Fathers time, in the consequent for that state, wherin Antichrist doth raigne Now it followes not, it was so twelue or thir­teene hundred yeares ago or vpward, there­fore it is so now.

(3) The state of the Roman Church is most antient, therefore the Roman Church by reason of his antiquity is the true Church.

Ans. 1, We denie the Antecedent, for the testimonies alleaged before out of Poli­dor Vergill. 2, not simply that which is an­ciēt [Page 58] is to be received, but that which is most ancient. For the Devill is ancient, but God is more ancient. 3, Antiquity cannot make that good, which in it selfe is bad.

(4) The Church of Rome is the Vniversall and Catholicke Church: therefore it is the trve Church.

Ans. Wee denie the Antecedent. For if by the word Catholicke be meant that, which agreeth with the Catholicke and so with the Apostles doctrine, then the Antecedent is absolutely false. But if the Church of Rome be called Catholicke by reason of the multi­tude of those, that take parte and cleave to that side, then the multitude of them that err is no iust defence for the error. Otherwise in the time of Arrianisme, the Apostolicke, CHVRCH as beeing brought to a great paucitie, shoulde not have beene the true and Catholicke Church; but the Arri­ans should have been the Catholick Church for that they far exceeded in nūber the rest, which were the true Christians. In this sence therefore wee deny the consequence. The Antecedent also is not true, because (as be­fore I sayde) the Church of Rome doth not [Page 59] consent with the Church of the Apostles, nor yet with the Church of the Fathers. And therefore they haue not that vniuersali­ty of multitude whereof they boast.

(5) If the Church of Rome bee not the true Church, then for some ages together Christ had beene without a spouse, but Christ never was without a spouse, Therefore, &c.

An, 1. From a speciall to a generall; argu­ments are drawen only affirmatively. It is no good consequence therefore; the church of Rome consisting of Popes, Cardinalls, Bi­shops, Priests, and others of the same ranke, who withstood the heauenly truth, were not the spouse of Christ, therefore Christ had no spouse. 2. I deny the maior or first propositiō. For there were also other Churches, as the Greeke Church, which alwaies gainsayd the Bishop of Rome, and wherein Christ might haue his spouse. The argument therefore proceedes from an insufficient enumeration or reckoning vp of the parts to the whole. 3, In the visible erronious Church of Rome, there was the spouse of CHRIST hidden to the eye of the World (all glorious within Psal, 45, 13) or the inuisible companie of be­lieuers. [Page 60] Ans. so Christ neuerthelesse had his Spouse.

On the contrarie side that we haue the Church of God with vs we proue

Because to us agreeth the definition of the church: therefore the church which is the (1) thing defined, agreeth to vs also,

1. For in our Church the vncorupt mi­nisterie of the word and Sacraments dooth flourish; for witnesse whereof wee haue the holy scripture, nay our Aduersaries thēselues who hither to coulde neuer shewe out the Scripture, that there is any thing in our Ministerie, doctrine or administration of the Sacramentes contrarie to Christ, or his Apostles. Therefore wee are the true Church.

Because our Church in respect both of the (2) Word and Sacraments is comformable to the Church described in the writings of the New testament vnder the Apostles.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do reason thus.

(1) The Protestants belieue not all thinges, which the Church of Rome dooth. Therefore they are not the true Church.

Ans. 1. There is more in the Conclusi­on, [Page 61] than in the premises For no more follo­weth thence, than that we do not agree with the Church of Rome in all things: which who will deny? But wee may not for that cause be thought not to be the true Church (3) 2, It is a begging of the question. For whe­ther they which gaine-say the Churh of Rome, do gaine-say the true Church, that is the thing in controversie.

(2) The Protestants Church dooth not agree with the Church of the Fathers in all thinges. (4) Therfore they are not the true Church of Christ

Ans, 1. This argument is too common, and agrees to both sides. For by the same reason it may be proved, that the Papists are not the Church; because their Church (which they cannot deny) hath much fallen away from the Church of the Fathers 2, the church of the Fathers is not the sampler of (5) Churches, but the Church of the Apostles; to which it is sufficient that our Church is like.

(3) The Prodestants doctrine is new; It is but few yeares agoe, since it first sawe the light: There­fore their Church is not the true Church.

Answ. 1. This is a begging of the que­stion. [Page 62] For that same is the matter in con­troversie, 2. Our doctrine is not new, but re­nued, 3. There are therefore foure termes in the Argument. For in the Maior proposi­tion the worde Newe, is taken for that which is simply and altogether new: in the Minor, for the refined and renued ministerie of the Word, reformed according to the rule of the most anciēt doctrine of the Prophets, Christ, and the Apostles.

(4) The Church ought to have vnitie, but so hath not the Church of the Protestants; for it is rent and devided into parts and schismes.

Ans. 1 Heere be foure termes. For in the Maior proposition by the word Church are meant those, which in truth and deede are the Church: in the minor those which are in the outward company of the Church, or those which have mingled themselves a­mongst our Church, when as in truth they be not of our opiniō: And these sever them­selues from the true Church of them who maintaine the truth, and stirre vp Schismes. Of such sort of men Saint Iohn saith: They went out from vs, but they were not of vs: [Page 63] for if they had been of vs, they would have continued with vs (1, Iohn 2, 19) 2, It is a fal­lacie taking that for a cause, which is not a cause. Because the Church is not the cause of tumults and schismes, but Schismatickes are the cause therof. Otherwise the Church of Corinth had not beene the true church, seeing Paul writeth. There must be heresies among you. 1, Corinth, 11, 19.

Question, 2 Whether we must grant that there is an inui­sible Church.

The Papists acknowledge onely a visible Church, which same they tye to the Pope, Car­dinalls, Bishops, &c. rather than to the hearers: But wee, in this visible companie of them that heare the Word, and vse the Sacraments, doe be­lieve that there is an other companie inuisible to the eies of men (not in respect of the members & persons themselues, but in respect of the intēt of their hart, and their fayth) which is only known vnto God. And that for these reasons:

Because wee believe the holy Catholicke Church: but faith is the ground and evidēce of things, which are not seene. Heb, 11, 1.

[Page 64] Because those which are in the visible Church, may a great part of them be hypo­crites, betweene such and the true beleeuers God alone doth discerne, vnto vs the hearts of men are not knowne, and the Church doth iudge of secret [...]gings.

1. Christ knowes his sheepe, Ioh 10. 14, 27,

2 The foundation of God remaineth sure, and hath this seale, The Lord knoweth who are his, Timo. 2. 19.

Because we haue the thing it selfe, the invi­sible Church deciphered by examples in the holy Scriptures.

1 For a long time hath Israel beene without the true God, and without priest to teach, and without law, but there Christ was not altoge­ther (6) deprived of his Spouse, but though the ministerie were corrupted, he had his invisible Church, 2. Chron. 15. 3. 4.

2 I will leaue vnto me (saith the Lord) seven thousand men in Israel, which haue not bowed the knee vnto Baal. 1. Ki. 19. 18. But this com­pany could not then be perceived with bodily (7) eyes, but was invisible, and only knowne vnto God, as is gathered out of verse, 10, and 14.

[...] At the time of Christs comming into th [...] [Page 65] world, when the publick Ministerie of the Word was corrupted, God had his inuisi­ble Church, Marie, Ioseph, Zacharie, Eli­zabeth, the wise men that came frō the East, Simeon, Anna, &c.

He is not a Iewe, which is one outward. nei­ther is that Circumcision which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Iewe, which is one with­in, and the circumcision is of the hart, whose praise is not of mē, but of God. Rom. 2, 28, 29.

Now how God in the time of Poperie, the publick Ministerie of the word being cor­rupted, had his inuisible Church, is thus declared.

There were a cōpany of baptized Infants, (1) which were a great part of the Church: but Note. By this decla­ration it ap­peares, t [...]at we doe not condemne our godly ancestours, who liued in the time of Poperie. the Church was neuer at any time without baptized children, seeing that Baptisme euen vnder the raigne of Antichrist remained in the Church.

There were alwaies godly & intelligēt mē, which gaine-said the Pope, sometimes open­ [...]y, sometimes secretly: (See the booke, inti­ [...]uled Catal [...]gus testium veritatis): and those (2) who gaine-said him, had them which appro­ [...]ed their iudgement, although by reason of [Page] the tyrannie of the Bishops of Rome, they durst not openly make profession thereof.

There were also many simple men, whose harts were more pure, thā were the mouthes (3) of their teachers.

The simpler sort had the chiefe funda­mentall points of Christian Religion in the (4) Lords praier, the Creede and the ten Com­maundements, whereby they might bee in­structed to a true faith, a right inuocating of God, and an holy life.

They heard the Passion of Christ read out (5) of the stories of the Euangelists, as also the rehearsing of the Gospels. They might ther­fore out of the text, (neglecting the glosses of their Preachers) learn those things which are necessarie to saluation.

They confirmed their faith by receauing (6) the holy Supper of the Lord: which though it was maimed of the one kinde, (the cup be­ing quite taken frō them) yet were not they in fault, who were cōstrained to endure that tyrannie.

The Masse and other idolatrous seruice by the speciall prouidence of God, were cele­brated (7) in the Latine tongue; for which cause [Page 67] the Lay people, were the lesse partakers of their idolatrie, which vnderstoode not what was done.

They had Christ the foundation: It is cre­dible (8) therefore, that in their agonie, the stub­ble that was built vpon the foundation, was consumed, but thēselues saued, as it were by the fire of tentation & tribulation. 1, Cor. 3.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason.

(1) Yee are the light of the World; & a City that Note [...] this [...] our Ad­uersaries should proue, that the church is onely vi­sible, but they proue nothing els, but that the church is visible, which is not questi­oned. is set on an hill cannot be hid: also, no man ligh­teth a candle, and putteth it vnder a bushell, &c. Mat. 5, 14, 15. therefore the Church is visible.

Ans. 1. I graunt the whole reason, if by the Church be meant the externall publick Mi­nisterie. 2, It is a fallacie from that which is spoken in some respect to the same taken ab­solutely: for in that the Church is said to be visible, that is true in some respect onely, that is, not in respect of the inward man, but of the outward publick Ministerie.

(2) That the Church is visible, and that the Church is inuisible, be contradictories, therefore if it be granted that the Church is visible, the in­uisible is ouerthrowne.

Ans. Contradictions are not, vnlesse they [Page 68] be spoken of the same things, and in the same respect: but that Church is called visible in one respect, and inuisible in another: for it is visible in respect of the externall compa­nie of them that heare the Word and vse the Sacraments: but it is inuisible in respect of the inward man and true faith, which is knowne to God alone, as before I said.

(3) Vnlesse the Church bee visible, there will not bee an apparent and free accesse to the Church for any man, which ought notwithstan­ding continually to be so.

Answer. 1.

There is an equiuocation in the worde Church: First, it is taken for the publick Mi­nisterie of the Word and Sacraments, and so I grant the whole reason. Secondly, it is ta­ken for those, which doe truly beleeue the Word and rightly vse the Sacraments; and so the conclusion is to be denied. 2, By that, which hath beene sai [...] it appeareth, that the Antecedent speaketh of the former, the con­sequent of the later acceptiō of the Church: and so there bee foure termes in the Syllo­gisme.

(4) Christ bids vs heare the Church. Mat­thew, [Page 69] 18. Which if it bee inuisible, cannot bee found out.

Answer. 1.

I answere to this reason as to the former. 2, Our Aduersaries haue more in the con­clusion, than in the premisses. For thus much followeth, that there is a certaine visible church, or that in some meaning the church is visible: but that there is onely a visible Church, there is neuer a word in the place cited.

(5) The Fathers did oppose the authoritie of the visible Church, against Heretikes; therefore there must needes be a visible Church.

Ans. 1. It is a fallacie, supposing that for a cause, which is not. For they did not oppose the authority of the Church against the He­ritikes, for that it was either visible or inuisi­ble; but because at that time it preserued the sacred bookes, and the sincere profession of the Doctrine. 2, Neither did the Fathers seeke to represse the Heritikes by the onely authoritie of the Church: but stroue a­gainst them with the authoritie of the Scrip­ture.

Question. 3. Whether the Church may erre.

Our Aduersaries denie it, hoping that if it ap­peare (as in truth it doth) that the Church in an­cient times was at Rome: and if that the Church cannot erre, that they shall easily without any a­doe, free themselues from all crime of falshoode by the bare name of the Church, being free from all errour. But we denie it for these reasons.

Because the promises of preseruing the (1) purity of the Church are conditionall, and not absolute: as, if yee continue in my word, yee are verily my Disciples. Ioh 8. 31.

Because, where the thing doth testifie the contrarie, there no plea hath place. But we haue examples ready at hand, both in the (2) olde and new Testament, that the Church hath erred.

1. The Church of the olde Testament (a [...] concerning the publick Ministerie) hath often erred: as in the Wildernes, when i [...] worshipped the Calfe; in the time of the Iudges, it oftentimes fell away from the true seruice of God. The like happene [...] vnder the gouernment of King Ahab, i [...] the time of Ieremie, and of Christs com­ming [Page 71] in the flesh.

2. In the new Testament the Church er­red. 1, In the Church of Corinth many doubted of the Resurrection of the dead. 2, The Galathians swarued from the A­postolick doctrine of Paul in the article of Iustification. 3, The Church of Pergamus fauoured the Nicholaitans. Reuelation, 2, 15.

3. At this day the Church of Rome doth erre in many things, which hereafter shall be made to appeare as cleare as the noon day.

The particular members of the Church are not free from error, as it is plaine that (3) Peter erred. Galath: 2, 11, 14.

All admonitions and predictions of the changes of the Church, of taking heede of (4) 1: Iohn, 2, 18, &c, 1 cor, 11, 1 [...] Math, 7. 15 Act, [...]0, 28, 29, &c, 2, Thessal, [...] 2. 15. false teachers, of diligent keeping of sound doctrine. &c, were friuolous & superfluous, if [...]t were impossible that the church shold err.

And why aboue all other Churches, the Church of Rome (whereof we now treate) [...]hould haue this speciall priuiledge, that it (5) [...]annot erre, there is not one sillable or title in [...]he holy Scriptures.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus.

(1) The Church is the pillar and ground of truth. 1, Timothie, 3. 15. Therefore it cannot erre: and consequently the Church of Rome ne­uer did erre.

An. 1. There are heer foure terms: because the Antecedent speakes of the true Church, in which alone is Saluation to bee had, and which is the keeper of the writings of the Prophets and Apostles: but the consequent speaketh of the Church of Rome, which is indeede the company and Church of Babi­lon. 2, It is a fallacie from that which is spoken but in some respect onely, to the same taken absolutely. Because the Church is the pillar and ground of truth; that is, so long as it maintaineth the truth, & followes the direction of Gods word. But and if it swarue aside from the word of God, it can no longer be called the pillar of truth.

(2) Christ promised to the Church the Spirit of truth. Iohn, 14, 16, 17, Therefore the Church cannot erre.

Answer. 1. This promise did principallie pertaine to the Apostles, in whom it was [Page 73] most exactly fullfilled, and secondarily to the Church, which holdeth the doctrine of the Apostles; such as the Church of Rome is not at this day 2, It followeth not, the holy ghost was given to the Church, therefore the Church shall retaine it forever. Or the spi­rit was given to the Church, therefore the Church dooth alwaies follow the direction and guiding of the Spirit. For neither did Christ so promise his holy Spirit, that needs it must abide with the Church, howsoever the Church behaue it selfe, and turne aside from the revealed Word of God. For so the Church of the Galatians coulde never haue been seduced.

(3) Christ prayed for the Church: Father, sanctifie them with thy truth &c, Ioh, 17, 17. therefore it cannot err.

Ans, 1 Here bee foure termes. The An­tecedent speakes of the companie of the E­lect, or the inuisible; as is plaine by the whole text, the consequent of the visible Church. 2. It is a fallacie from that which is spoken but in some respect to the same taken abso­ly. [Page 74] For Christ speakes so, adding withall a condition: Thy Word is truth. Therefore this promise is tyed to the obseruance of that worde, as to a certaine condition.

(4) My Spirit which is vpon thee, and my words, which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seede from henceforth for euermore, Isai, 59, 21.

Ans. 1 If this promise had beene made without condition, then it would follow that God had not kept his promise. For these words doe immediately goe before: They shall feare the name of the Lord from the West, and his glory from the rising of the sunne, or the East: but the Easterne Churches have had a most miserable downe-fall long agoe. This promise therefore is condtionall, as if God should say, I will not forsake thee for ever, if thou forsake not me. It is there­fore a fallacy from that which is spoken but in some respect to the same taken absolutely. 2, This promise belongeth to the Church which obeieth the word of God, vnto which God will never be wanting with his spirit.

[Page 75] (5) The Comforter shall abide with you for ever, Ioh, 14, 16. therefore the Church of Rome cannot erre.

Ans, 1, What agreement is there between the Apostles, witnesses against whom no exception can be taken, & the present Church of Rome, as now it is vnder the kingdome of the Pope which differeth so much from the Church which Paul taught at Rome, as light dooth from darkenesse. 2 There is no good consequence from that which is spo­ken indefinitely, to the same spoken definite­ly or determinately, but in the Antecedent the speech is indefinite, in the consequent de­finite. There be therfore in this reason foure termes.

(6) Christ sayth that hee will abide with his Church vntil the end of the World. Mat, 28, 20. Therefore the Roman Church cannot erre. Simil. The Husband promised that hee would bee faithfull to his wife all his life lōg therefore she ca [...]not become an adultere

Ans. 1 There is more in the conclusion, than in the Premisses; for it followeth not, Christ remaineth with his Church, therfore the Church can in nothing swarue from Christ. 2, Besides the Argument is from that which is spoken indefinitely to the same [Page 76] taken definitely, 3. And there bee foure termes. For Christ speakes of the true Church wherewith the present Church of Rome (to which our Aduersaries wrest this promise) hath no agreement besides the bare and naked name onely.

(7) The gates of Hell shall not overcome the Church Mat, 16, 18.

Ans. 1, Heere bee foure termes. In the Antecedent the Church is meant, which is built vpon Christ, his Word and Sacramēts: but in the consequent such a Church is meant, as is built vpon the Pope and Traditi­ons of men, 2, As long as the Church remai­neth vpon this Rocke that is, Christ, it is in­uincible: but not so, if it make defection from the Gospell of Christ.

CHAP 8. Of the Bishop of Rome

THe Papists being driven from their holds, which have now beene treated of, doe flee to the authoritie of the Pope, as to a sure & sacred anchor. For they imagine 1, that Christ appointed Peter as his Vicar in the Church, 2. And gave vnto him both the dominiō over the whole Church, and also the dominion of faith. 3, that Peter was Bishop at Rome, and gave the same authoritie of dominion to that sea or place. 4, That the Bishops of Rome are his successours both in Power and Office. And that therefore whatsoeuer proceedes out of their mouth of any point of Religion must needes be infallibly true, and that all the faithfull or all Christians are bound to obey them. From this rope platted of sand arise moreover these questions. 1, Whe­ther Christ have need of any such Vicar on earth 2, Whether Christ gave Peter authority & po­wer, whereby he should beare rule over the rest of the Apostles and have the dominion of faith. 3. Whether Peter were at Rome, and did there constitute this order. 4, Whether the Bishops of Rome be the successors of Peter the Apostle.

Question, 1

Whether Christ have neede of any visible head or Vicar in his Church on Earth. The Papists affirme, and wee denie it for these rea­sons.

Christ had ill provided for his Church, if he had ordained a man vniversall Vicar, which (1) might erre, as beeing a man (as Peter also erred Galat, 2, 11, 14.) Neither could be present in all places.

Christ only is the head of the Church, Eph. 1, 22, & 4, 15. But the Church is not a two hea­ded (2) monster.

The Heavenly Father commended onely Christ vnto vs, that wee should heare him, (3) Matt, 17, 5.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason.

1 From a similitude. A Prince that goes into an other Countrey, hath neede to leave some man behinde him furnished with full and abso­lute power: so wee must beleeve that Christ did, when he was to depart from vs.

Ans, Heere be manie falshoods, and ri­diculous toyes. 1, Similes doe some times [Page 79] illustrate, but never prove, 2 If it were never so true, that Christ had appointed a Vicar, yet it would not follow that the Pope should be hee. 3, Neither is there absolute authority such as is falsely ascribed to the Pope) gran­ted to anie vicar, but authoritie onely, which is bounded and limited by lawes.

2 It is needefull, that some one watch for the whole Church.

Ans. 1. Christ watcheth for the whole: and for the parts and speciall members, let everie Bishop watch amongst his Clergie. 2. It is a thing impossible, that anie one man should watch over and for the whole: this rea­son therefore supposeth an impossibility.

3, In the olde Testament God appointed a Vicar, in deciding controversies, to wit, the high Priest, that hee might bee a visible head in the Church, Deut, 17.

An, 1, They argue from a type, (the significa­tion whereof was accomplished & ended in Christ) to the Pope. Which maketh foure termes in the Syllogisme; for the high Priest was not the type of the Pope, [...]ut of Christ. 2, The Priest was Iudge in civill affaires (between bloud and bloud, &c) [Page 80] therefore from civill affaires to Ecclesiasti­call, no good consequence can be drawen: vnlesse perhaps from the type of Christ to the Pope.

(4) It is needefull that there should be some Vicar of Christ to interprete cōtroversies which arise or fall out in the holy Scriptures.

Ans. If this were granted to bee never so true, (which yet may not be granted) it wold not therefore follow, that the Pope should be that interpreter. 2. The Holy Ghost sen­deth vs back to the Scriptures which is that our firme word of the Prophets (2, Pet, 1, 19.) 3, Wee doo not reiect anie Interpreter, which shall speake according to the law and the testimonie, that is, which shall inter­prete the Scriptures according to the Ana­logie of faith. But the Pope will never suffe [...] himselfe to be tyed to this condition.

(5) It is certaine there should be one and a cer­taine visible heade for the preseruing of the vni­tie of the Church.

Ans, 1 Christ is that heade which gover­neth his Church by the Ministerie of the Word and Sacraments; to whom whosoe­ver joyneth himself, is made one bodie with [Page 81] the Church vnder one head. 2, The Pope draweth vs from this vnitie, whilest he sends vs away from the Scripture to the closer of his breast, which doth very often crosse the holy Scripture directly.

6. A Monarchie is the best state of gouern­ment; but we must thinke that the Church is to haue the best state of gouernment: therefore a Monarchie.

Ans. 1. As concerning a visible head, there [...]s great difference betweene Ciuill and Ec­clesiasticall gouernment. And Christ him­ [...]elfe sheweth a very great vnlikenes between [...]hem, when he saith, The Kings of the Gen­ [...]iles raigne ouer them: but you shall not be so: Luk, 22, 25, 26.) 2, But as concerning an in­ [...]isible head, we haue Christ the only & true Monarch of his Church.

7, In the Church all things ought to bee done Corinth. 1. 14, 40. [...] order: but all Ecclesiasticall Order is contai­ [...]ed vnder the Pope.

Ans. In the Antecedent proposition Paul [...]eats not of the order of inferiour or superi­ [...]ur persons: but of the outward order of Ceremonies, which is to be obserued in the [...]ssembly of the Church for comlinesse sake. [Page 82] Such an order euery Church ought to ob­serue, (as the circumstances of time, person; and place shall require,) though they submit not themselues to the yoke of the Bishop of Rome. The alleadging therfore of that say­ing of Paul, makes nothing at all for the esta­blishing of the Monarchie of the Bishop of Rome: and so heere be foure termes in this argument.

Question. 2.

Whether Peter receiued 1, power of Domini­on ouer the rest of the Apostles, and 2, the domi­nion of faith: We denie both, and first we denie that Peter receiued Dominion ouer the other A­postles, for these reasons.

Because it is no where taught in the holy Scriptures. (1)

Because Peter doth no where testifie, that hee receiued such power, but behaued him­selfe (2) as equall to the rest in power.

1. I which am a fellow-elder (Consenior) and witnes of the sufferings of Christ. 1, Pe. 5, 1.

2. Not as Lords ouer gods heritage, but that yee may be ensamples to the flocke.

3. Therefore he suffered himselfe to be sent of the other Apostles into Samaria, with [Page 83] Iohn as his fellow & equall. Act. 8. 14.

4. He suffers himselfe to be accused, for that hee had gone in vnto the Gentiles, & as being their equall, cleareth himselfe be­fore them. Act: 11. 2, 3, &c.

5. Hee endured himselfe to be reproued of Paul. Galat: 2▪ 11, 14.

6: Who is Paul? who is Apollo? 1, Cor: 3, 5, which wordes doe shew that there was no authoritie, no superioritie among the Apostles, one ouer another.

7. When Iames, and Cephas, & Iohn knew Note. 1. Paul pla­ceth Iame [...] in the first place. 2, Hee saith not, pillar, but pillars. 3. H [...] calleth thē fellows. of the grace of God that was giuen vnto me, which are counted to be pillars, they gaue to mee, and to Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, &c, Galat: 2, 9.

Christ saith, the Kings of the Gentiles raigne ouer them; but yee shall not bee so. Luk, 22, 25, 26.

When the Apostles stroue for superiori­tie, (3) Christ neuer preferred Peter, but exhor­ted (4) all, (and so Peter also) to equalitie & hu­militie.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason.

1. Math: 10, 2. Where the Apostles are recko­ned vp in order, Peter is said to be the first.

[Page 84] Ans. There bee foure termes: in the An­tecedent the word, first, is taken for the or­der of counting or reckoning, and in the Consequent for the order of dignitie or au­thoritie.

2, Thou art Peter, and vpon this rocke I will build my Church. therefore Peter is the founda­tion of the Church; and thereupon hath power ouer the rest.

Ans. It is a fallacie of Composition, be­cause in the Papists argument, those thinges iointly are spoken of Peter, which Christ spoke distinctly, and seuerally of himselfe & of Peter. 2, Because Christ spoke to all the Apostles vnder the person of Peter, it would follow (arguing as the Papists doe) that eue­rie one of the Apostles was the Prince of the Apostles. Nowe what an absurditie were this?

3, Christ saith to Peter, feede my sheepe; &c. Ioh: 21, 17. Therefore hee made him head of the Apostles.

Ans. 1. Heere is the changing of an indefi­nite proposition, (which in this place is but a particular) into an vniuersall, thus: feede my sheepe, therefore feede all my sheepe▪

[Page 85] 2, Heere are foure termes: The word feede; in the Antecedent is to do the office of a Mi­nister of the Gospell: but in the Consequent it is to be a Prince, and to exercise domini­on.

4, Christ payed tribute for Peter and not for the rest of the Apostles, Matth: 17, 27, Therefore Peter was Prince of the Apostles.

An. This is a Doctor like exposition to pay tribute, that is, to make a Prince; for Peter, that is, Peter. These dotages of the Papists declare, how absurdly, for want of proofes, they scrape together any thing, to bleare the eies of the vnlearned.

5, Peter after the manner of a Prince lifted vp his voice on the day of Pentecost, when the rest of the Apostles held their peace, as it were for re­uerence sake to him: Act: 2, 14, & 4, 8.

Ans. This is a fallacie, putting that for a cause, which is not a cause, because the Apo­stles might giue Peter this honour, either for his age, or eloquence, and not because they acknowledged him for their Prince and head.

6, In the Counsell of the Apostles, Peter first of all gaue his voice: Act: 15, 7: Therefore he was [Page 86] Prince of the Apostles.

Ans. 1, The voice of Peter is described but whether he first of all gaue his voice, or some other before him, that is not written: there­fore there is more in the Consequent, than in the Antecedent, on this wise. Peters voice is the first, that is mentioned, therefore no man gaue any voice before him. 2, It see­meth rather that others spake before him, by these words next going before. When there had been great disputation, &c. Whence it ap­peareth that some had spoken their mindes before Peter. 3, out of this place it might ra­ther be proued, that Iames was the Prince of the Apostles; for that he, their voices being gathered, gaue the definitiue sentence: the argument therefore of the Papists is most fond.

7. The Fathers and Writers of the Church haue acknowledged Peter to bee the Prince of the Apostles.

Answer. If any of them did so, they had it frō vncertaine reports contrarie to the mea­ning of the Scripture. Neither ought the er­ror of a few to be any preiudice to the truth. 2, They gaine-saide the Primacie of Peter. [Page 87] Augustine on the 16 of Matthew. Cyprian in his Epistles, Gregorie the great & others.

Now in the second place, let vs treate also of Dominion of faith with the Papists is that po­wer or pre­rogatiue, whereby the Pope may as please him deter­mine and iudge of ar­ticles of Re­ligion. the power of knowledge, or domi­nion of faith.

Wee denie that such a power was granted by Christ to Peter, or any other man; and that for these reasons.

Because it is Christ alone, of whom the heauenly Father hath said, heare him. Math. 3, 17, and 17, 5, and there is one Maister or Do­ctor Math: 23, 8.

Though that we, or an Angell from hea­uen (1) should preach vnto you otherwise, than (2) that which we haue preached vnto you, let him be accursed: Galat: 1, 8.

Christ and Paul had not done well in sen­ding their hearers vnto the Scriptures, wher­as (3) rather they should haue sent them vnto Peter, if wee must stand to the Popes iudge­ment.

Peter himselfe sends vs to the word of the Prophets, and teacheth vs to attend to the (4) word, and not to himselfe, as for any perso­nall priuiledge: 2, Pet: 1, 19.

[Page 88] Peter in his Sermons and Epistles neuer (5) taught any thing by such an absolute pecu­liar power or authoritie, but confirmed all his assertions out of the holy Scripture, as is to be seene. Act. 2, 4, 10, and 15, Chap.

By this meanes there had beene no neede (6) of the Counsell of the Apostles▪ but Peter alone should haue beene asked, what hee would infallibly define.

Paul would not seeme to haue receiued a­nie thing from Peter, as concerning his do­ctrine: (7) wherein hee had offended, if the do­minion of faith had beene committed to Peter. Galat. 1, 11, 12, &c.

It may not be thought that such a domini­on (8) on of faith was committed vnto Peter, be­cause that hee was blame worthie, and went not the right way to the truth of the Gospel. Galat. 2, 11, 14.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus.

1, I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the King­dome of heauen. Matth: 16, 19, Therefore Peter had the key of knowledge, and the dominion of faith.

Ans. 1. There is more in the Consequent, than in the Antecedent▪ for it followeth not, [Page 89] the keyes were given to Peter, therefore po­wer was given him to appoint and constitute what he pleased in doctrine & faith. 2, There are foure termes. In the Antecedent the keyes are taken for that part of the ministery, which consisteth in binding and loosing of sinnes: in the consequent it is mistaken for authority to determine and constitute any thing what seemeth good in doctrine. 3 The keyes did not only belong to Peter, but to the rest of the Apostles also; vnto whom Christ promised the keyes vnder the person of Peter, who had answered for all. And Christ gave authority alike to all to retaine & to remit sinnes, Mar, 18, 18, Ioh, 20, 23, which Panormitan also doth aduertise vs of.

(2) Christ prayed for Peter, that his faith should not fayle. Luke, 22, 32, therefore Peter received the Dominion of fayth.

Ans. 1 Christ speaketh of Peters denying of him, from which by his prayer for him, he reclaimed Peter, and did not suffer him to perish with Iudas. To argue then from a particuler case to all the actions of Peter, is very absurde. 2, If to pray for a mans per­severance [Page 90] be all one, as to give him the do­minion of faith then because Christ prayed for the perseverance of all those, that should heare and believe in him through the prea­ching of the Apostles, (Ioh, 17, 20,) it would follow that he had committed vnto all them the dominion of faith, which is absurde. There are therefore in this argument foure termes.

3 Christ sayd to Peter, when thou art conuer­ted, strengthen thy brethren, Luke, 22, 32. Ther­fore the dominion of faith was given to Peter.

Ans. 1, Christ speakes of such a strengthe­ning, whereby he that hath beene tempted, knowes how to strengthen them which are tempted, in the like manner. But concer­ning the dominion of Faith, there is not one title. Againe therfore heer are foure terms: 2, Every man that strengtheneth his brother, should (by the same reason, as the Papists heer argue) have the dominion of faith as­sured vnto him. 3, And so also Peter could not have beene blame-worthy, if hee had Gal, 2, 11 14. obtained the dominion of faith, but hee ought rather to have chid Paul that repro­ved him.

[Page 91] 4 Vpon this Rocke I will builde my Church and the gates of hell shall not overcome it, Math, 16, 18. Therefore it must needes bee, that Peter received an infallible dominion of Faith.

Ans. 1, If Peter had beene that most firme and sure Rock, then that would follow. But we have shewed the contrarie therto before (Chap, 8, quest, 2, obiect: 2.) this is therfore rotten stuffe. 2, Now that Peter is not that rocke, and foundation of the Church, wher­of Christ speaketh in this place, is proued by these reasons.

1, Because the gates of hell prevailed against Peter. (1)

1, When hee denyed Christ; in which his So the gates of hel preuai­led against Pope Mar­cellinus, who sacri­ficed to I­dols, & a­gainst Li­berius, who sell in to Ari­anisme. denying doubtlesse he had perished, vn­lesse by the merites of Christ, he had been pulled from the iawes of hell, Mat, 26.

2, when he was worthie to be blamed, be­ing deceived of Satan to flatter them that were conuerted of the Iewes & to offend them that were conuerted of the Gentils Galat, 2

3, When Christ called him Satan, Ma, 16, 23. Then he would have hindred the passion of Christ, which was no small sinne. [Page 92] Because Christ is the Corner-stone, & not Peter.

1, Christ is the Chiefe Corner-stone, elect and pretious. Peter speakes this of Christ and not of himselfe, 1. Pet. 2, 6.

2, Other foundation can no man lay, than that which is layed, which is Iesus Christ, 1, Corinth, 3, 11.

3, Yee are built vpon the foundation of the Apostles & Prophets, Iesus Christ himself beeing the chiefe corner-stone. Ephes, 2, 20. Isay, 28, 16. Psalm, 118, 22. Matt, 21. 42.

Question, 3

Whether Peter left his authority and power behind him to his successors at Rome▪ We denie it. because it cannot be certainly prooved, not so much as that Peter was a [...] Rome. We hold it more probable that he [...] was never at Rome, for these reasons

Because it agrees neither with the accoun [...] of times in the Scripture, nor with the ac­count of other histories.

1. It crosseth the account of the Scrip­tures. [Page 93] For about the yeare of Christ, 37. Paul first returned to Ierusalem, Galat, 2. 18. and found Peter abiding there. About the yeare of Christ 51, (fourteene yeares after. Galat, 2, 1) Paul went vp againe to Ierusalem, and found Peter there. Now add thereunto [...], yeares onely, which Peter should haue [...]pent in travailing into Galatia, Pontus &c. 37 14 3 25 79 [...]not reckoning the yeares, in which he is re­ [...]orted to have governed the Church of An­ [...]ioch) and there amounteth the [...]4th yeare of Christ. Add to these 25. yeares, which he [...]s sayde to have beene Bishop of Rome, and [...]here ariseth the yeare of Christ 79. But it is [...]eported by the Ecclesiasticall historiās, that [...]eter was martyred in the last yeare of Nero, [...]hich was the 70th yeare of Christ. So by his reckoning Peter should have beene Bi­ [...]hop of Rome 9, yeares after he was dead.

2. It crosseth the account or chronolo­ [...]ie of Ecclesiasticall writers: but first we pre­ [...]ppose See Euseb, lib, 2, cap. 25. & take for granted, that there were [...], yeares, after which Paul founde him at [...]erusalem, and so there ariseth the yeare of Christ, 51. Add then 7, yeares; for the space [...] which, Ecclesiasticall historians do write [Page 94] that Peter was Bishop at Antioch, & 5 more which they say he spent in iourneying, and there ariseth the yeare of Christ, 63. Add hereunto 25, yeares, and there ariseth the yeare of Christ 88, and so Peter should have taught & preached 18, yeares after his death. The Papists will not see these absurdities, but passe ouer the truth hood wincked.

3, If any man shall say that we must reckon backward from the end of the years of Nero & Peter, then it wil follow, that Peter was in prison, not at Rome but at Ierusalem, in the 24 th, yeare before his death, and in the se­cond yeare of his being Bishop at Rome, Act 12. For in the 45 th yeare Peter was cast in prison by Herode. After which time Paul found him still as yet at Ierusalem.

If Peter had gone to Rome, he had done contrary to the covenant, he made with Paul (2) that Paul should preach the Gospell to the Gentills, and Peter to the circumcision, Ga, 2, 9.

Paul writing an Epistle to the Romans at that time, when Peter is sayd to have bin [...] (3) there, and saluting many brethren by name, maketh no mention at all of Peter.

[Page 95] When Paul came to Rome, hee was recea­ved (4) of the brethren; yet Luke sayth nothing that hee was received of Peter, the mentioning of whom should not surely have beene omitt­ted, if he had beene there, Act, 28, 15.

When Luke writeth that Paul abode 2, (5) yeares in his hyred house, yet hee dooth say nothing at all of Peter, that hee had any dea­ling there with Paul in any thing, Actes 28. 30.

In the Epistles written from Rome (to the (6) Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossi­ans, Timothie, Philemon) the Apostle Paul dooth never mention Peter so much as in one worde.

I have no man (sayth Paul) like minded, (7) who will faithfully care for your matters. For all seeke their owne, and not that, which is Ie­sus Christs; Philippians, 2, 20, 21. Heere, if Peter had beene at Rome, hee had beene ac­cused of vnfaithfulnesse.

At my first answering, no Man assisted mee (sayth Paul) but all forsooke mee. I praye GOD that it may not bee layde to their [Page 96] charge, 2, Tim, 4, 16. Which but to suspect, of Peter, were very harde, if he had been then at Rome.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus.

(1) Ecclesiasticall writers and the Fathers doe with one consent agree that Peter was at Rome.

An, 1 Because these Writers doo agree neither amongst themselues (for neither doo the Iesuites denie, but that they disagree very much concerning the time, when Peter came to Rome) seeing I say, that they neither agree amongst themselues, nor with the holy Scriptures, let their authoritie carrie as much waight as may bee, so that lesse bee not ascribed to the truth of the Scripture, than to them. 2, One of them transcribed and took it out of an other, as if a man should tell to o­thers the reports which he hearde. 3, Irenaeus the most ancient Ecclesiasticall Writer of all, whose writings are helde for not-counterfeits, dooth affirme indeed that Peter was at Rome; but hee lived in the yeare after the birth of Christ 185. that is 150, yeares after Christs as­cension into Heaven. Neither was hee the [Page 97] Schollar of Iohn the Euangelist, (who is held to haue liued the longest of all the Apo­stles) but Polycarps Schollar. Wherefore it is no wonder, if Irenaeus. Who was so farre off from the Apostles times, were some­what deceaued in the storie of Peter.

2. The Church which is at Babylon saluteth you. 1, Pet: 5, 13, There Peter calls Rome Babi­lon:

Ans. 1. This is to gather euery thing of a­nie thing: to change Babilon into Rome. 2, Hieron. in his Epistle to Marcella. We grant that Rome at this day is Babilon, but that purple coloured whore, as S. Hierom also thinketh. But out of question the Papists will boast but a little of this appellation of Babilon.

Question. 4.

Whether the Popes of Rome be Peters suc­cessors: this wee denie for these reasons.

Because this ordinarie succession totte­reth (1) immediatly after Peter, neither can they certainly say who was his successor: the dif­ferent opinions are these.

1. Platina, Sabellicus, Epiphanius, reckon thus.
  • [Page]1. Peter:
  • 2, Linus.
  • 3. Cletus.
  • 4. Clemens.
  • 5. Anacletus.
2 Eusebius, Irenaeus, Hierom reckon them thus.
  • 1. Peter.
  • 2. Linus.
  • 3. Anacletus.
  • 4. Clemens.
  • 5. Of Cletus they say nothing:
3. Damasus, the Tomes of the Counsels, Maria [...] Scotus, Caranza doe reckon them thus.
  • 1, Petrus,
  • 2, Clemens,
  • 3, Anacletus.
4. Onuphrius reckoneth them thus.
  • 1, Peter,
  • 2, Linus,
  • [Page 99] 3, Clemens,
  • 4, Cletus,
  • 5, Anacletus.

Caranza saith: In a matter so intricate I leave the defining therof to the iudgment of the Reader. Summa concil. pa, 13.

Amongst the Ecclesiasticall Writers (2) some doe reckon fewer & some reckon moe Bishops; so that they agree not in the nūber.

Because the Church of Rome, in respect of this succession, hath not anie where in (3▪ [...]he holy Scriptures any prerogative given her aboue other Churches.

They are not the sonnes of the Saints (as (4) [...]he Canon lawe confesseth) which possesse [...]he roomes of the Saints, but they that prac­ [...]se their works: nether doth the See make a Bi [...]op, but a Bishop maketh the See: as also the [...]ace doth not sanctifie the man, but the man both sanctifie the place. Distinct, 40, cap, [...]ulti Sacerdotes, &c. But the Pope is not the [...]ccessor of Peter, neither in doctrine, nor in [...]anners.

1. Not in doctrine.

Peter taught thus. There is giuen no other name vnder heaven whereby we must be sa­ued, (1) but by Iesus: Act. 4, 12.

The pope hath other names, that men may bee saued by the merites of Saints, the virgin Mary, Iohn Baptist, the holy Martyrs, as also Francis, Dominicus, &c.

Peter: To him (that is Christ) gaue all the (2) Prophets witnesse that through his name all that belieue in him, shall receiue remission of sinnes: Act 10, 43.

The pope: Sinnes committed after Baptisme are not remitted, but are recompenced for by vs; not because we belieue in Christ, but in our works.

Peter acknowledgeth one onely founda­tion of the Church, euen Christ the corner (3) stone. Math: 16, 16, 1, pet. 2, 6,

The pope placeth himselfe for the founda­tion and corner stone of the Church.

Peter: Submit your selues to all manner of ordinance for the Lords sake, whether vn­to (4) the King, or vnto Gouernours, &c, 1, pe [...] 2: 13.

[Page 101] The pope would haue all Kings and Empe­rours subiect to him.

Peter ascribes vnto Christ, that hee is the Shepheard and Bishop of our soules. 1, Pet. (5) 2, 25, and the chiefe or head Shepheard. 1, Pet. 5▪ 4.

The pope takes it to himselfe that hee is the pastor of all soules; and the head Shep­heard.

Peter: Baptisme is the stipulation or ta­king (6) to witnesse of a good conscience, 1, pet. 3. 21.

The pope: The state of Monkerie is equall See Aqui [...] as lib, 4, [...] distinct. 4 art▪ 3. to Baptisme and Christians, that haue fallen into any sinne after Baptisme cannot com­fort their consciences by their Baptisme, al­though they repent.

Peter: If any man speake, let him talke as (7) the words of God, 1, pet. 4, 11.

The pope▪ If any man speake, let him speake our Traditions of men. (8)

Peter: Feede the flock of God, not for fil­thie Venalia no­bis Templa, Sacerdotes, Altaria, Sacra Coronae, Ig­nis, Thura, preces, Coelum, est venale de­usque Mautu­ [...]n. lukers sake, 1, pet 5, 2,

The Pope. Wares of all sorts are heere to be sold: Buy what yee will for money downe told: [Page 102] Churches, Priests, Altars, Offerings & Crowns: We passe for quicke sale all Cities and townes. Fire, frankincense, Dirges & pardons frō paine, Hell, Heavē, God, the Devil we give al for gain.

1 Peter: not as though ye were Lords over Gods heritage 1, Pet, 5, 3. (9)

The Pope will bee Lord over Angells, Church and Christian Monarchies, &c.

Peter; Resist the devill steedfast in the faith, (10) 1, Pet, 5, 9.

The Pope: Resist him by consecrated can­dles, holy water, the signe of the Crosse, moonkish weede, &c.

Peter▪ Make your calling and election sure (11) (by holines and good workes) 2, Pet, 1, 10.

The Pope: seeke for your iustification be­fore God by good workes.

Peter: we followed not deceivable fables, when wee opened vnto you the power and (12) comming of our Lord Iesus Christ, 2, Pet, 1, 16.

The Pope hath canonized the fabulous Bookes of Dominick and the conformitie of Saint Francis; as also the lying Legends are yet set abroade to sale. And more over hee hath gone about to confirme the most of [Page 103] his trash by fables.

Peter: we haue a most sure word of the (13) Prophets, to which ye do well, that yee take heede, 2, Pet, 1, 19.

The Pope dooth no otherwaies runne a­way from the scripture, than the devill is sup­posed to doe from the signe of the crosse.

But and if we would further compare the Popes decrees with the doctrines and wri­tings of the other Apostles, we should finde that they differ as farre as Heauen and hell.

2, Peter and the Bishops of Rome differ very much in manners.

Peter inueigheth against them, which live luxuriously, delighting themselues in their (1) deceiuings &c. having eyes full of adulterie, 2, Pet, 2, 13, 14.

The Pope feedes a great number of such massing seruants of his owne.

Peter lived in humilitie. (2)

The Pope in more than Ruffian-like ryot.

Peter carried himselfe as a Minister or ser­uant (3) to others.

The Pope behaueth himselfe as Lord of Lords.

[Page 104] Peter caried about a wife with him, i. Co­rinthians 9, 5. (4)

The pope abhorreth mariage in priests.

Peter condemned Simonie, Act. 8, 20, &c:

The pope, for money selleth Indulgences, (5) Bishoprickes, Palles, Bulls: and all thinges are ordered for the scraping of money, and the wiping of others of their substance. See the popes A book o­penly set to sale, wherein is the price of absolutiō for most hai nous sinnes whereof Es­pencaeus cō ­plaineth most pitti­fu [...]ly in Tit. cap. 1. Di­gress. 2. taxa paenitentiaria.

6 Peter was godly, holy, honest, chaste, &c.

The pope hath in the Genealogie of his suc­cession, Thieues, Magicians, Southsaiers, Witches, Adulterers, Whoremōgers, War­riours, and what not?

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason.

The Fathers called the Bishops of Rome the successors of Peter.

Answer, 1.

They were better Bishops then, than they bee nowe a-daies. The ancient Bishoppes of Rome, the most of them were holy Martyrs, the late ones voluptuous persons. 2, And all godly and good Bishops are the successors of the Apostles in office; & not only the Bishop [Page 105] of Rome, if he were good and godly. 3, The Fathers also called Rome the purple colored whore. Hieron to Marcella, and Augustin. [...] Ciuit. Dei, lib, 8, cap, 22, and other.

An other (or the first) Question, coincident with the former.

Who the Pope is.

I Answere.

He is Antichrist.

Because all things, which are foretolde of Antichrist in the holy Scriptures, are fulfilled in the Pope.

Hee is called in the Scriptures an Aduer­sarie, (1) that opposeth himselfe against Christ. Now the Pope opposeth himselfe against Christ manie wayes as for examples sake.

1. Christ commends the holy Scripture, Ioh, 5, 39.

The Pope calleth it the matter of strife, & a dead letter.

[Page 106] 2. Christ condemneth the Traditions of men, Matth, 15, 3, &c. But the Pope dig­geth out of their graves Traditions long since buried, commendeth them highly, and bindeth mens consciences, vnder the paine of excommunication to obserue them.

3. Christ saith: out of the heart proceede e­vill thoughts: Matth, 15, 19. so that the heart is as a corrupt fountaine. The Pope saith: man is not so corrupted by the fall of our first parents, but that hee hath still free-will as well to good, as to evill.

4. Christ so expoundeth the lawe, that it is impossible for vs to keepe it (Luke 10, 27.) with all thy soule & with all thy strength, &c. But the Pope saith: the law of GOD may be fulfilled by man.

5. Christ received them, which believed: as; Thy faith hath made thee whole, Luke, 7, 50. But the Pope contendeth that faith a­lone iustifieth not, but that we have neede of good workes to our iustification.

6. Christ saith: when yee have done all, that is commanded you, say wee are vnprofi­table seruants, Luk, 17, 10. The Pope saith; [Page 107] consecrated persons over and aboue the fulfilling of the law, do also workes of su­pererogation, which they may bestow vpon others, as having no neede of them themselves.

7. Christ saith: verely verely I say vnto you, hee that believeth in me, hath life everla­sting, loh, 6, 40, 47.

But the Pope layeth at him with a curse, who perswadeth himselfe, that hee ought certainely to believe without doubting, that he is the heire of eternall life.

8, Christ sayth, that that goes into the mouth defileth not a man, Matth, 15, 11.

The Pope saith, that a man is defiled by ea­ting the meates which he hath forbidden.

9. Christ sayth: Drink ye all of this, Mat, 26, 27.

The Pope saith: Drinke not all, but onely Priests.

So likewise, the life of Christ & the Pope are directly opposite; but wee will not treate of that now. (2)

Because hee exalteth himselfe against all that is called God. For he takes vpon him to alter the Word of God, and the Sacraments: [Page 108] as is prooued in this whole booke through­out.

The Pope sits in the Temple of God, as a tyranne; captiuating Emperours, Kings, Prin­ces (3) and the Consciences of men vnder his ty­rannie.

The Pope sheweth himselfe, as if he were God: which hee hath done in accepting of (4) the flatteries of his retainers which are con­tained in the Canon Lawe, and in the books of the Canonists, as followeth.

1. That the Pope can doe all things above law, contrarie to lawe, and without lawe. Bald. ad caput cum super num. 1o. Extr, de caus, posses, et propt.

2. That he hath the same consistorie, and the See Baldus in C. cum super de causa Propt, et pos, Lib, cerem, Pon. 1, li. tit, 7. same tribunall seate with God.

3. That to him is given all power in Heaven and in earth.

4. If the Pope neither respecting his owne, nor his brethrens saluation should by heapes drawe innumerable soules with him into the pit of hell, &c. yet may no man say vnto him, what doest thou. Dist­inct. 40, cap, Si Papa.

[Page 109] 5, The Pope is god. Felinus. as also in the Canon lawe, Distinct, 96, cap. Satis.

6, The Pope is the Christ or anointed of the Lord.

7, The Pope may change the forme of the Sacraments delivered by the Apostles. Ar­chidiaconus.

8, The Pope can doo those things on earth, which God can doo in Heaven. August. Berovius in C. cum tu, num, 1, de vsuris.

9, The Pope hath no peere, but God: the same Berovius in Rubric: de offic. de leg, n. 10. And many other things which it were ouerlong to rehearse. If the Pope ap­proove not these glozing flatteries, why doth he not condemne them? why doth hee not forbid them? why doth hee not accurse them? As Herod therfore which rejected not the impious acclamations of the people, was therefore guiltie of their blasphemies before God and peri­shed very miserably: so the Pope, in that [Page 110] he condemneth not the impious flatteries of the Canonists, he approueth them, & is guiltie of eternall damnation and shall bee tormented with Herod for ever in Hell.

The comming of the kingdome of Po­perie is by the working of Satan, with mira­cles (5) and lying wonders, whereof all Popery hath been, and yet is full: as wee reade that manie such lying wonders haue beene of old descried and punished by the Magistrates.

The Pope worshippeth his God Mauz­zim (6) that is the masse with gold, silver & pre­tious stones as Daniel prophecied of Anti­christ. And if the hire of money were deni­ed, the masse would fall to the ground of his owne accord.

The Pope cares not for the desires of Women, but forbiddeth mariage vnto (7) Priests. And therefore maintaineth a doc­trine of deuills, 1, Tim, 4, 3.

Hee hath taken away the daily sacrifice; withdrawing those praiers frō Christ, which (8) he hath caused to be offered vnto Saints. And hath defiled the true worship of God with mens traditions and superstitions, and into­lerable [Page 111] idolatrie. This was doubtles to abo­lish the daily sacrifice.

These and such other things declare, that the Pope is not the successour of Peter, nor the Vicar of Christ, but the Antichrist; whō the Lord Iesus shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, &c. 2, Thessal, 2, 8.

Hitherto therefore we have maintained the authority of the holy Scriptures, against the vaine Traditions of the Papists, against Enthusiasmes or inspirations, councells not rightly celebrated, the counterfaite name of the Church and the falsely pretended autho­ritie of the Pope of Rome. The Popes them selues then are not the Iudges of controuer­sies, but the partie accused before the tribu­nal of the Church: the Church is the Iudge, the voice of the Church is the Scripture, which alwaies speaketh: by the rule whereof [...]ll whosoever they bee are bound to give [...]nswere, and make their account vnto God. [...]t is therefore good reason that no other rule [...]f truth should bee accepted of sauing the [...]cripture; according to which all opinions [...]nd constitutions are to bee examined and [...]dged in the Church.

CHA. 9 Of Freewill.


OVR Aduersaries that they might the more strongly vrge iustificatiō by works doe falsely affirme, 1, that a man not re­generated or conuerted, 2, even after the fall of Man, hath remaining in him so much po­wer, 3. in his will & vnderstanding, 4. in mat­ters spirituall, and such as pertaine to the saluati­on of the soule, that he can begin his conuersion, 5, of and by himselfe, and so deserue a more plen­tifull grace of iustification. This we denie for these reasons ensuing.

Because the Scripture calleth vnregenerate (1) men, dead men.

1. And you that were dead in sinnes and tres­passes, &c. Ephesians 2, 1.

2. When we were dead by sinnes, hee quick­ned vs. verse 5.

3. Give your selues vnto God, as they whic [...] are alive from the dead, Rom, 6, 13. [Page 113] Because the Scripture compares our will (2) vnto servitude.

1. Impenitent sinners are holden captiue of Sathan at his will, 2, Tim. 2, 26.

2. If you continue in my word, yee are ve­rily my Disciples, and yee shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. Ioh. 8, 31, 32. If they were now at length to bee freed, thē were they before not free men, but captiues and slaues.

3. Whosoeuer committeth sinne is the seruant of sinne. Ioh. 8, 34.

4. I am carnall, sold vnder sinne: Rom: 7, 14.

Because the Scripture bereaues vs (so to (3) speake) of all aptnes or abillity to good, as of our selues.

1. All the imaginations of the thoughts of mans heart are only evill continually. Gen, 6, 5.

2. The imagination of mans heart is euill, euen from his youth. Gen: 8, 21.

3. The naturall man perceaveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishnesse vnto him: neither can hee know them, because they are spirituallie [Page 114] discerned. 1, Cor. 2. 14.

4. We are not sufficient of our selues, to think any thing, as of our selues. 2, Cor. 3. 5:

5. Therfore God would signifie the hard­nes of our hearts by the tables of the law, made of stone. Iere: 31, 32, &c. 2, Corinth. 3, 3, 7.

6. By grace yee are saved through faith, & that not of yourselues. Ephes. 2, 8.

Because the Scripture ascribes to God a­lone, what good so euer wee haue either in (4) our vnderstanding or will.

1. Our sufficiencie is of God. 2, Cor. 3, 5.

2. God hath quickened vs in Christ. Eph. 2, 5.

3, It is God, that worketh in vs, both the will and the deede. Phil: 2, 13.

4, No man can come vnto me, vnlesse the Father which sent me draw him. Iohn, 6, 44.

5, Without me can yee doe nothing. Iohn 15. 5.

6, So God opened the heart of Lydia. Act. 16, 14.

Because the doctrine of our Aduersaries savours of the heresie of the Pelagians.

[Page 115] Contrariwise our Aduersaries do reason thus.

1. God giveth a choise to his people of obey­ing or disobeying: Deut. 30, 19. Iosuah, 24, 15. therefore GOD presupposeth freedome of will.

Ans. 1. There is more in the Conclusion, than in the Premisses: for it followeth not. GOD offereth them choise, and exhorteth them to obedience, therefore they can obey of themselues. 2, Had the Israelites never so much had freedome of will to good; yet they were regenerated, and renued by the word of God and the Sacraments. Now to argue from them to men vnregenerate, is no good consequent: for there arise foure termes.

2, God reproveth men in the Writings of the Prophets and other where, for that they would not convert, heare and obey, &c. therefore they had freewill, whereby they might have conver­ [...]ed, Math: 23, 37 Luke, 19, 23. Ezech. 18, 31. Iere. [...], 19, &c.

Ans: 1. There is more in the Conclusion, [...]han in the Premisses: for it followeth not, [...]hey would not convert, therefore they might convert of themselues, 2, It is a fallacie [Page 116] taking that for a cause which is none: for the finall cause of these legall Sermons, is not to free the will, but to encrease wrath, that the acknowledgement of finne may follow. It fol­loweth not then, The Law requireth this or that at our hands; therfore we can performe it of our selues: but GOD would haue vs to learne to acknowledge our owne bondage, and to pray, that he would create a new heart within vs, and take away our stonie heart, and giue vs in place thereof a heart of flesh.

3. Turne vnto me, and I will turne vnto you. Zacha. 1, 3, Heere God would haue vs, to pre­vent him in our conuersion.

Answer. 1.

The same answere serues for this argu­ment, Simil. The debter Mat, 18, is repro­ued for that hee payed not his debt to his Mai­sters, there­fore he was able to paie. which was giuen to the former: for the legall wordes of commaundement, vp­braiding, reproving, &c, doe not make vs a­ble to amend that, which is reproved in vs, as being amisse. 2, And the meaning of this place is, turne vnto me, and I will looke vp­on you in mercie, and doe you good. And what makes this for avouching of free will. 3, The conuersion of man is ascribed vnto God: Conuert me and I shall be conuerted: [Page 117] for thou art the Lord my God, &c. Ierem: 31. 18.

4. If there were no freedome of will in spiri­tuall thinges, then it would followe, that God mocked men, commaunding them by the prea­ching of his word to doe that, which were im­possible, namely to conuert.

Answer, If God suffered his word to bee preached without giuing of the spirit, then that might follow: but because God ioyneth his Spirit together with his word (whereby the hearts of the hearers are opened) it no way followeth, that GOD dooth mocke men.

5. God gaue Dauid the choise of three plagues. 2, Samuel 24, 12, and the residue shall choose ra­ther death than life. Ieremie, 8, 3, and such o­thers.

Ans, The freedome of this choise was a­bout outward matters of the World (to witt temporall punishments) and not about spi­rituall things. There are therefore foure termes, 2. There is no controuersie betwixt [...]s about outward matters.

6, God sayth vnto Cain: If thou doo well, [...]halt thou not bee accepted? and if thou doest [Page 118] not well, sinne lyeth at the doore: the desire thereof shall be subiect vnto thee, and thou shalt rule over it. Gen. 4, 7, therefore a man hath free-will.

Ans. i: There is more in the conclusion, than in the Premisses: for thus much onely doth follow; that Cain might haue refrained from killing of his brother; neither is there any mention or determination, whether hee might haue done it by power of his owne, or derived from some other where. 2, GOD speakes of an outward thing, that is, the es­chewing of manslaughter, therefore it is no­thing to the purpose. 3, The latter words of the place alleadged are ill translated; for Mo­ses meaneth not any dominion over sinne that Cain should haue, but over his brother. Therefore the place should bee translated thus: his desire shall be subiect vnto thee, and thou shalt rule over him, that is, over Abel thy brother.

7, A man may nill, therefore hee may will al­so:

An: From nill to will is no good conse­quence, seeing there is not the like reason of such contraries, as haue not the like cause▪ [Page 119] Now to will, proceedes of God, as from the first cause: but to nill comes from Sathan & the corrupt flesh: heere is a fallacie of com­position and division; because those thinges are ioined together, as having the like rea­son, which nature will not suffer to be ioined together for the reason aboue named.

8: Thou hast done evill (et potuisti) and thou mightest doe it: Ierem: 3, 5:

An. 1: The same answere serueth for this Simile. This man can runne into debt, there­fore he can pay his debts. argument, which was given to the former: for it followeth not, a man may sinne, there­fore hee may worke his conversion. 2, It is a fallacie from that, which agrees to one of it selfe, to that, which happeneth accidentally or from an other, which is not in his power: For we can sinne of our selues, but wee can­not doe well but by power receaued from God. 3: The word heere vsed, translated by the Latine Interpreter (potuisti) signifieth to be able to do any thing, & somtime to be of strength, or to be strong in doing any thing: the meaning of the prophet is, ye they kept no [Page 120] measure, but with all their strength and po­wer committed sinne.

9 The just man might offend, and hath not of­fended, and do evill, and hath not done it. Eccl. 31. 10. Therefore, &c.

Ans, 1, There is more in the conclusi­on, than in the premises. For all that follows is this, that the righteous man might reframe from transgressing; but it doth not hence fol­low, that he could doe it of himselfe. 2. The Author speaketh of an outward matter, name ly the outward vse of money. Therefore it is nothing to the purpose. 3, If it be meant of spirituall matters never so much, yet the argument followes not from a righteous and regenerate man (whose will is freed by the Holy-Ghost) to a man vnregenerate.

10, I will sacrifice freely vnto thee &c, Ps, 54, 6.

Answere, 1, Againe this argument pro­ceedes from a regenerate man to an vnrege­nerate, 2, and that this willingnesse and volun­tarie service was not in David of himselfe, it is plaine, because he could not of himselfe acknowledge his sinn of adulterie and man­slaughter, [Page 121] vntill he was admonished therof by the Prophet.

11, Cornelius could of his owne accord prepare himselfe to the grace of God, and dispose him­selfe to the acknowledgement of saluation, Act, 10. 4, &c.

Ans. Cornelius was before amongst the lewes instructed out of the Scriptures con­cerning the Messias; so that onely hee did doubt of the person of the Messias: there­fore it is sayd of him, that hee was a deuoute man, and one that feared God &c. and prayed God continually (Verse, 2) therefore this argu­ment proceedes from a regenerate man to an vnregenerate. For Cornelius did alreadie believe the sayings of the Prophets concer­ning the Messias: but did not yet know that those things were fulfilled in Iesus Christ of Nazareth.

12. Euerie Man that hath hope in God, par­geth himselfe. 1 Iohn 3. 3.

Answere, 1, Hee speakes of the rege­nerate, which have hope and trust in God by faith. 2, Neither dooth hee speake of their conuersion, but of their renouation or [Page 122] sanctification, which followes conuersion, and hath his growth and increasing in the re­generate vntill the end of their lives. This argument therefore hangeth not together, but hath foure termes.

13. If anie man open the dore vnto me; I will come in vnto him, &c. Revela, 3. 20. There­fore a man may aforehand dispose himselfe vn­to grace by his free-will

Ans. There is more in the Consequent, than in the Antecedent. For this onely is sayde, what the Sonne of GOD will doo to him, which openeth the dore vnto him: but there is never a worde sayde, by what power the heart of man is opened, whether by his owne, or such as he hath received frō an other.

14, Hee that standeth firme in his heart, that hee hath no neede, but hath power over his owne will, &c. 1, Corinthians, 7, 37.

Ans. Hee speakes of things meerely ex­ternall, of marrying or not marrying. Ther­fore this is impertinent.

15 Euerie man, as he hath determined in his heart, &c, 2, Corinth, 9, 7.

[Page 123] Ans, 1, The speech is of the regenerate, 2. And of externall matters, that is of gi­ving of Almes. There are therefore fiue termes.

16, Yet not I, (to wit, haue wrought) but the Grace of God (as the Papists expound it) hath wrought with mee. 1, Corinth, 15, 10. Ther­fore our strength doth worke in our conversion, and not God alone.

Ans, 1, Paul speakes not of his conuer­sion, but of the labour of his Ministerie, by which GOD did worke, 2. The text speakes of Paul being regenerated. 3, Paul disables himselfe in respect of all things, (even those that concerne his ministerie) and ascribes them to God alone in the wordes going be­fore, where hee sayth: By the grace of God, I AMTHAT I AM: and his grace which is in me, was not in vaine, &c. yet not I, but the grace of God, which is with me. Heere is therfore made a great confusion of the tearmes or words, 1, with mee, that is, I and God by ioynt working. 2, with mee, that is in mee. 3. the regenerate, 4, the vnregenerat, 5, conuer­sion, 6. Ministerie.

[Page 124] 17 We are Gods (Cooperarii) fellow-wor­kers. 1 Corinth 3. 9.

Ans. 1, He speakes of his ministerie not of his conuesiron. 2, And if it could be rac­ked to his renued state, yet were it then an ar­gument from the regenerate to the vnrege­nerate. 3, The Latine and Greeke phrase is ambiguous, and may either signifie that we are fellow workers with God, or we fellow workers amongst our selues, are the worke­men of God. This later is the plaine mea­ning of the place and therefore, to avoyde ambiguitie, it is rightly translated we toge­ther are Gods labourers.

18. If man be so enthralled vnto sinne, that hee cannot conuert of himselfe; he cannot iustly bee accused of sinne, vnles God will accuse na­ture.

Ans, 1, God doth accuse nature, not sim­ply as it is in it selfe, but in some respect, as it is corrupted. 2, The first man before hee fell, had the power of his free-will, which hee should haue preserued. Man therefore [Page 125] is neverthelesse iustly accused of his corrup­tion.

There remaine yet, besides this first, now ended, three other questions moe, in this matter of free will; which wee must needes discusse. 1, of Originall sinne, 2. of the works of infidells, 3, of Grace.

QVESTION, 1. Of Originall sinne.

The Iesuites at this day doe denie that Ori­ginall sinne in vs is truly and indeede sinne; which they doe, least they should be constrai­ned to acknowledge the great and horrible cor­ruption of the power of mans nature. Wee on the contrarie side do affirme that Originall cor­ruption is a sin, & that no little or light one, but a verie great one, and that for these reasons.

Because the holy Scripture giveth plain­ly (1) the name of sinne vnto it.

1. Behold I was borne in iniquity, and in sinn hath my mother conceived me, Psalme, 51, 5.

[Page 126] 2. Thou hast set our iniquities before thee and our secret sinnes (that is, originall sinn in the light of thy countenance, Psalm. 90 8,

3, I knew not sinne, but by the Lawe, for I had not knowne luste, except the law had sayd, &c. Rom, 7, 7.

4. Now if I doo that I would not, it is no more I that doe it, but the sinne that dwel­leth in me. Rom, 7, 20.

Because, seeing it is the fountaine & well-spring of all actuall sinnes: Originall sinne (2) by reason of which all the rest are sinns, shall much more be such it selfe.

Because Originall sinn or concupiscence, (3) rebelleth against the Lawe of GOD, and is not subject thereto, Romans, 7, 23. and 8. 7. But sinne is the transgression of the Lawe, 1, Iohn 3, 4.

See more hereof in the 13, Chap, of Concupi­scence.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason: thus.

1, Sinne is not sinne, vnlesse it bee volun­tarie; [Page 127] but originall sinne is not voluntarie, ther­fore, &c.

An, 1. We may not leape from one sci­ence See Chap. 13, quest, 2 obiect, 6. to an other, which is done in this argu­ment, whiles in defining what is sinne, the Aduersarie goes from Divinitie to Philoso­phie to fetch the definition thereof from A­ristotle, 2, And so here is a confusion of di­stinct principles and seuerall artes; and a fal­lacie of manie questions as but of one. 3, O­riginall sinne, though it be not voluntarie in vs now, in respect of the present corrupti­on, which wee draw by nature from our Pa­rents yet it was and is voluntarie, in respect of the beginning, principle, and cause therof. Adam and all his posteritie in his loynes cō ­mitted the first sinne of disobedience against God willingly; and thence issued Originall corruption. And this is sufficient even in rea­ [...]on and philosophie to make an action sin­ [...]ull. For a drunken man, though hee knowe [...]ot what hee dooth, yet if hee kill a man in [...]is drunkennesse, is by the Ciuill Lawes [Page 128] of men guiltie of murder, because himselfe was the cause of his drunkennesse.

See more in the place of Renouation, Cap, 13, quest. 2.

QVESTION 3. Of the workes of infidels.

The Question is, whether the good workes, or vertues of infidells, be so devoide of all fault, that the doers thereof do deserue grace. The Papists affirme they bee, wee denie it, for these reasons.

Without Faith it is vnpossible (note that hee (1) sayth, it is vnpossible) to please God. Hebr, 11, 6, but infidells want faith; otherwise they should not bee called infidells, there­fore, &c.

Without Christ there is no saluation, no [...] (2) eternall life, no favour or acceptance with God, Iohn, 17, 2, 3. Acts, 4, 12. Matthew, 3▪ 17. But Infidells are ignorant of Christ, ther [...] ­fore, &c.

The end of the workes, which Infidell [...] (3) doe, is not for the glorie of God, but most [Page 129] vsually for their owne glory, or couetousnes, or ambition, or pleasure &c.

4 If the person that doth the workes be not accepted of God, then neither can the workes be, how glorious soeuer they bee; So God had no respect to the sacrifice of Cain; not because for that the sacrifice was not of it selfe good, but because God hated Cain, for his impie­tie.

See more heereof in the 12, Cap, quest, 1 [...]

Contrariwise our aduersaries do reason thus,

1 Vertuous actions in infidels are not of them­selues Simil: Wine that is of it selfe very good if it bee kept in a corrupt vessell, be­commeth so distastful that it may breed loa­thing or cause vo­miting in them that drinke of it. euill; therefore they may not bee reckoned amongst sinnes.

An. What vertues are of themselues, wee are not heere to dispute; but howe they are to bee esteemed by reason of the faultinesse of them, in whome they are, 2, It is therefore a fallacie making moe questions, where there should be but one: for these two are confusedly shuffled together; what vertues are in thēselues & what in respect of the mā, in whom they be, [Page 130] It is also a fallacie, from that which is spoken in some particular respect; to the same taken absolutely and simply, for these actions are in the former place taken absolutely, and in the later, as they are considered in respect of him that doth them.

2 Vertues in infidels are the gifts of God, ther­fore they are not to be accounted for sinnes.

Ans. 1. As they are the gifts of God, so they are no sinnes: but heere they are considered, not as they proceede from god, but as the good and holy gifts of God are polluted in corrupt instrumēts. 2. Ther are some gifts of god which sanctifie the receiver, and some which doe not: of these later sort, are all the gifts of God in in­fidells. 3. A good thing by abusing of it, may become to be not good.

3. God hath sometimes rewarded the vertues of infidels: therefore they haue pleased him, and haue not beene counted for sinnes.

Ans. God hath commanded outward ho­nestie and civility, and doth bestowe temporall rewards on it, but our question is not of tem­porall, but of spirituall rewards, therefore this is nothing to the purpose.

[Page 131] The Iesuites in the Article of Iustification, doe expound the word Grace for a gift or habite infu­sed into the soule of man from heauen, vvherby he is moved or stirred to worke righteously; and by the which his workes are accepted with God, and this Grace they deuide into the first and seconde Grace, or into a preventing Grace, (whereby a man may prepare himselfe to the grace of Iustification) and a subsequent grace, (whereby a man is actually and habitually made iust) and so they goe about to shift of by this their explication, al the sayings of the scripture concerning the free instification by faith. But we in the Article of Iustification acknow­ledge no signification of the word Grace but such as excludeth all merits of men; and that for these reasons.

Because the word Grace (in the article of iu­stification) is opposed to Merits, workes, and (1) debt.

1 To him that worketh the wages is not ac­counted by fauour, but by debt. Rom: 4. 4.

2 If it be of grace, it is no more of workes: or else grace were no more grace, Rom, 11. 6:

3 Hee hath saued vs, not according to our workes, but according to his owne purpose and grace which was giuen to vs through Christ [Page 132] Iesus, before the world was. 2, Tim: 1: 9,

4 By grace ye are saued through faith, & that not of your selues: it is the gift of God, not of workes, &c. Ephes: 2: 8, 9;

Because it is opposed to the law which cau­seth wrath: we are not vnder the law, but vnder (2) grace: Rom: 6; 14:

Because the Scripture declareth the same by equivalent termes, or words of the same value (3) and signification.

1 They are iustified freely by his grace, Rom, 3, 4.

2 When the bountifulnes, and loue of god our sauiour toward man appeared, not by the workes of righteousnes, which wee had done, but according to his mercy he saued vs, Tit, 3, 4 5:

3 Let vs goe boldly to the throne of grace that we may receiue mercy, Heb, 4, 15.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe dispute.

1 The word grace is oftentimes in the Scripture taken for the gifts of the holy Ghost as. 1: Corin, [...] 4, there are (Diuisiones Gratiarum) diuersities of graces:

Ans 1 The propositions of this reason are [Page 133] meere particulars, and therefore no conclusion followes, 2. Whereas Saint Paul in that place treateth of miraculous gifts, not of iustification, and our question is only of iustification; the ar­gument is frivolous, and not to the present pur­pose: 3. Though wee denie not, but that the worde grace is sometimes in Scripture taken figuratiuely for the free gifts of God bestowed vpon men (for only we deny it to bee vsed in that signification in the article of Iustification any where in the Scripture) yet neither in this place alledged is the word Charis vsed, which properly signifieth grace, but Charisma, which signifieth a gift freely bestowed: and therefore the place is fitly and properly translated. There are diuersities of gifts.

2 Wee haue receiued grace for grace, Iohn 1, 16.

1 This is a Doctour like exposition, made of their meere Doctour like authoritie, without reason: wee haue receiued grace, that is the grace of iustification: for grace, that is, [Page 134] for the first preuenting grace, but the meaning of Saint Iohn is: because the sonne of God was in highest grace and fauour with his hea­uenly father, therfore the father doth embrace vs also with his grace and louing kindnesse for his sonnes sake, in whom we beleeue. 2. That grace in this place is opposed vnto merites, the wordes next following doe declare: for the law was giuen by Moses, but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ; Heere Christ and Moses are opposed betwixt themselues, as it were in the proper differences of their offices, that is of wrath by the lawe and of grace by the Gos­pell.

3 Grace is the gift of God, Ephes. 2. 8. there­fore it is an infused and inherent habite.

Answere, 1: It is a fallacie of composition and diuision, arising from the construction of the words, for the word gift is not simplie and alone construed with the word grace, but with saluation by grace, which if it might should haue been expressed in one word. Brieffely & plainely, the Apostle saith not, Grace is the gift of God, but that ye are saued by grace, that is the gift of God, 2 and for the same cause [Page 135] the gift in this place is not a habite, for gift is opposed there to workes and merites, as being a thing, that is bestowed of meere fauour.

4 It is a good thing that the hart be established with grace: Heb, 13, 9:

Answere, 1: It is a begging of the question; because this is controuersed, whether Grace doe in these wordes signifie an infused habite, 2. In that very place the Apostle opposeth Grace to the vaine confidence of workes, a­gainst them who put confidence in meates, drinkes &c. Therefore by the nature of contra­ries it appeareth, that the worde grace is heere taken for the free fauour and mercy of God, & so the argument hangeth not together, for in the Antecedent Grace is taken for the fauour of God, in the consequent for an infused ha­bite.

CHAP. 10. Of Iustification.

SEeing our aduersaries doe diuerse wayes wr [...]p and inuolue this disputation, let vs devide it into certaine and distinct members and que­stions.

Question: 1.

And first of all, whereas the word Iustification, wrested to a wrong signification by our aduer­saries, as if to iustifie were of an vniust man to make one iust habitually or by a habite infused: and see­ing they hisse at imputed righteousnesse, let vs consider the true signification of the word, which is no other, but to be absolved from the guilte of sinne, that it bee not imputed, but pardoned, which appeareth to bee so by the reasons fol­lowing.

Because the word Iustification is a borow­ed word from the court and place of iudge­ment; (1) which in his proper and naturall signifi­cation is vsed in the Scripture for to absolue & acquitte from fault and guilte: as

[Page 137] 1 Wo to them that iustifie the wicked for a reward. Isai. 5, 23.

2 The righteous shal bee iustified, and the wicked condemned, Deuter, 25, 1,

3 Euerie man that hath a matter might come vnto me, that I might iustifie him (as the origi­nall hath and is translated agreeable to the sense more plainely; that I might doe him iu­stice) 2, Sam. 15, 4.

4 He that iustifieth the wicked, and hee that condemneth the iust, euen they both are abo­mination Note, that the whole acte of Iustification is ve­ry liuely described in the scripture, as a kind of iu­diciall acte & processe, the person guilty is called to ye barre, is accused, wit­nesses are brought, he is con­demned or acquitted &c. to the Lord, Prov. 17, 15.

So doth the same word keepe the same sig­nification borowed from the court and iudicial proceedings in the Article of Iustification in the Scripture.

1 Who shall laie any thing to the charge of Gods chosen? It is God that Iustifieth, who shall condemne? &c. Rom, 8: 33, 34, heere yee see words and phrases borowed frō the court and Iudiciall proceedings to accuse, to con­demne, to iustifie &c.

The equivalent termes of iustification, or other words vsed to signifie iustification, doth proue the same.

[Page 138] (1) Reconciliation is taken for Iustification Rom, 5, 9, 10▪ 2, Corinth, 5, 19,

(2) Remission of sinnes is taken for Iustifi­cation.

1 Blessed is he, whose wickednesse is for­giuen. Psal, 32, 1,

2 Iesus shall saue his people from their sinnes: Matt. 1: 21.

3 To giue knowledge of saluation vnto his people by the remission of their sinnes, Luke 1: 77:

(3) To cover sinnes is vsed for Iustification. Blessed is he whose sinne is couered, Psal, 32, 1, 4 The holy Scripture doth describe Iustificati­on by the words, imputation, reckoning, ac­counting, &c: as,

1 God was in Christ, and reconciled the world vnto himselfe, not imputing their sinnes vnto them: 2: Corinth. 5: 19.

2 Blessed is the man, vnto whome the Lord imputeth not iniquitie: Psal: 32: 2:

3 As Dauid declareth the blessednesse of the man, vnto whome God imputeth righteousnes without workes Rom: 4, 6,

4 Abraham belieued God, and it was counted to him for righteousnes: Rom: 4, [...]

[Page 139] 5 To him, that worketh not, but belee­ueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly, his faith is counted for righteousnesse, Rom, 4, 5.

6 It is not written for him onely, that it was imputed to him for righteousnes, but also for vs, to whom it shall be imputed for righteousnes which beleeue in him &c. Rom. 4. 23: 24:

Contrariwise our aduersaries do reason.

1 To iustifie by force of grammaticall compo­sition of the word is all one, as to make a man iust, of one, who before was not iust, therefore to iusti­fie is to make iust.

Ans. 1 Heere be foure termes; in the Ante­cedent the signification of the word iustificatiō is taken grammatically, in the consequent it is taken according to that signification, which belongeth properly to Diuinitie. 2. The true signification of the word is to be sought for in the proper science, wherin the question is con­tained.

2 By his knowledge shall my righteous seruant iustifie many. Esai, 53. 11, therefore hee doth iusti­fie them by an infused habite.

[Page 140] Ans. It is a fallacie called ignoratio elenchi, for the necessarie determination or limitation is omitted; which followeth in the next words: for he shal beare their iniquities, which wordes declare, that iustification is to bee vnderstoode heere by imputation, for they are iustified by his bearing their sinnes, as if themselues had borne and wyped away their owne sinnes.

3 Holinesse shall preserue and iustifie the heart, that is shall cause, that the heart bee made iuste. Ecclesiastic. 1. 17.

Answere, 1: The booke is not Canonicall, and therefore in a point of such moment, his authoritie is not sufficient [...] in the Greeke text the word iustification is not found, 3: Neither if to iustifie in this place, & some others, should signifie habituall or inherent righteousnes, would it thence necessarily followe, that it should haue the same signification in the ar­ticle of Iustification.

4 Deferre not vnto death to bee iustified Ecclus. 18. 21, therefore there is habituall righteousnes, [Page 141] gotten by many actions.

Ans. 1 The meaning is: deferre not, to bee conuerted and reconciled with GOD, &c. Therefore this argument hangeth not toge­ther. 2. If to iustifie bee all one with the author of that booke, as of vniust to make iust, then an absurde sense would followe from the same wordes, in the beginning of this chapter. The Lord onely (iustificabitur) shall bee iustified: that is by the former in­terpretation, of an vniust God, shall be made a iust God by an infused habite.

5 Hee that is iust, (iustificetur) let him be iusti­fied still. Revel, 22, 11, therefore iustification con­sisteth of an habite.

Ans. 1 The speach is figuratiue, for by a Sy­necdoche the whole is put for the part, or the cause for the effect, for hee speakes of Reno­vation, (vnder the name of iustification) which the words next following, added by way of ex­plication, doe declare: and hee that is holy, let him be made holy stil (Sanctificetur adhuc) 2. from Renovation to iustification no conclusi­on can be made, but by foure termes.

QVESTION, 2, Whether the grace of Iustification bee bestowed equally vpon all them, that be iustified.

In this question the controversie is not about Renouation, which may and ought to receiue growth and increasing all our life longe, neither is there controuersie about the gifts of the holie Ghost, bestowed vpon them, who are iustified; but about that righteousnesse, by the which wee are said to be iust before God, and are reconciled to God through Christ. Our aduersaries affirme that this iustice or righteousnesse is not equall and alike in all them, which are iustified, and that it doth receiue increase, according to diuersitie of persons and times; but we vtterly deny it for these reasons.

Because our righteousnes, whereby we are iust before God, is not our owne, but is the 1 righteousnesse of Christ, for hee is made vn­to vs, of God righteousnes and sanctification 1, Corinth, 1: 30. Nowe Christ is receiued by faith of all them, that truely beleeue, not in part, but wholly with all his merite.

[Page] Peter writeth to them which had receiued like pretious faith with him, amongst whome (2) those were also, which were weake in the faith, 2, Pet: 1, 1,

So Christ giueth to them which beleeue, not an halfe, but a whole and entire iustification: (3) for he promised to them, that beleeue, eternall life; and eternall life is not giuen to them who are iustified in part onely, but to them who are wholly iustified. Ioh: 3, 15, 36: and 5, 24. and 6, 40, 47. and 17. 2: and 20, 31. Act 4, 12, and 10, 43, and 51, 11 &c.

Christ was the same to Peter as he was to Paule, as he was to the father of him that was (4) possessed, Marc. 9; 23: &c. to the Samaritan woman, Iohn 4. Neither is he diuerse of one kind or degree to on, & of an other to an other, according to the difference of men and their faith.

So the man sicke of the palsie was iustified wholly and not in part, by one act (so to speake) (5) complet and finished at one and the same in­stant, Matt, 9, 2; the Publican, Luk, 18. 13, 14. the theefe, Luke 23, 40, &c: the sinfull woman that annointed Iesus, Luke, 7, 38, &c:

Contrariwise our aduersaries do reason thus

1 To euery one of vs is giuen grace, according to the measure of the gift of Christ Ephes. 4. 7. therefore &c.

Ans. Paull speakes not of Iustification, but of the gifts bestowed vppon them, which are Iustifyed, for the adorning, and edifying of the Church, as the wordes following do declare. There are therefore foure termes in this argu­ment, for in the Antecedent the word grace is taken for a gift of the spirit, in the consequent for iustification:

2 There are diuersities of the gifts of God, 1 cor. 12. 4.

Ans; He speaketh of gifts, which are bestowed vpon them who are iustified; and so iustifi­cation is presupposed to goe before, as alrea­dy hath beene said. And hereof there is no controversie. Iustificatiō is on thing and the strong and weake ap­prehending or laying [...]ould of it, is an other

3 Iustifying faith is stronger in some men, and weaker in others.

Ans. 1 Yet there is the same obiect, totall and not partiall, of faith whether it bee strong o [...] weake; to wit Christ Iesus whole & entire with his most holy merits, which is our righteousnes. Peter [Page 145] calleth faith like precious, (2, Pet. I, 1) because there is the same obiect apprehended or laid hold on by all, although without all doubt▪ all, to whom hee wrote, had not the like strength and firmenesse of faith, which Pe­ter had: and Christ yeelded himselfe to bee receaued or laied holde on by a weake faith. Marke, 9, 23, 24, &c. Isai: 42, 3. as was aforesaid.

4. We are commanded to pray for the increase of Gods gifts: therefore, &c.

Ans: Wee are commaunded to pray for Note. The Papists doe stil cōfound iustification with renovation or san­ctification. the increase of the gifts of renovation or san­ctification, but not of iustification.

Question: 3.

VVhereas Renovation doth concurre toge­ther in Iustification; and faith cannot bee with­out good workes; it is questioned, What that is, whereby the righteousnes of Christ is apprehended of vs; whether it be faith or good works. The Papists ascribe it to good works; but we proue, that ju­stification may not bee graunted or attributed to good works, by these reasons.

Because good workes are not accepted of God, vnlesse they bee done by men that are [Page 146] iustified: therefore iustification goes before good works by the order of nature: which order is inverted, if iustification be ascribed to good works.

Because good works onely in them, which are iustified, please God: and so iustification (2) goeth before works. Now if wee will be iu­stified the second time by workes, that come after, what is this else, but to doe that which is already done?

Iustification by works doth derogate from Christ so much, as is attributed to our works: (3) for if wee could haue beene iustified by our works, what neede was there of the merite of Christ, who alone hath made satisfaction for all our sinnes?

1, I haue troden the Wine-presse alone, and of all the people there was none with me. Isai, 63, 3.

2, The bloud of Iesus Christ his sonne clenseth vs from all sinne. 1, Ioh 1, 7.

3, Hee (not our good works) is the recon­ciliation for our sinnes, and not for ours onely, but also for the sinnes of the whole world. 1, Ioh. 2, 2.

4. Among men there is none other nam [...] [Page 147] vnder heauen, whereby we must be saved. Act: 4, 12.

Iustification by workes, taketh away the certainty of Salvation, which the Scripture (4) proposeth vnto vs.

1, Because wee know not what, and howe many workes are necessarily required as sufficient to Iustification; that wee might know that we are truly and sufficiently iu­stified.

2, Euill doers, which are drawne to death and haue done none, or without doubt, very few good workes (such as the thiefe was, Luke, 22) should by this meanes de­spaire: whereas notwithstanding God de­sireth not the death of him that dieth. E­zech: 18, 32.

The holy Scripture doth take away the power of iustifying from workes, as well by (5) sayings of Scripture, as by examples:

(1) In his sayings it takes away iustification from works.

1, To him that worketh not, but believeth in him, that iustifieth the vngodly, his faith is counted for righteousnes. Rom. 4, 5.

[Page 148] 2, By the works of the law no flesh shall bee iustified in his sight. Rom. 3, 20.

3. We conclude that a man is iustified by faith, without the works of the Law. Rom. 3, 28.

4 If it be of grace, it is no more of works: or else grace were no more grace. Rom. 11, 6.

5, We know that a man is not iustified by the works of the law. Gal. 2, 16.

6. As many, as are of the works of the law, are vnder the curse. Gal: 3, 10.

7, Not of workes, least any man should boast himselfe. Ephes. 2, 9.

8. According to the power of God, who hath saued vs, and called vs with an holy calling, not according to our workes, 2, Tim. 1, 9:

9. Not by the workes of righteousnesse, which we had done▪ but according to his mercy he saued vs: Tit. 3, 5.

(2) The same is declared vnto vs by the examples of others: such as is.

(1) The example of Abraham, who was not iustified by works.

1, If Abraham were iustified by works, he hath whereof to reioice, but not with [Page 149] God: Rom▪ 4, 2:

2, Abraham beleeued God, and it was im­puted to him for righteousnes. Nowe to him that worketh, the wages is not coun­ted by favour, but by debt: Rom: 4, 3, 4 Gal: 3, 6: Now it is not written for him onely, but for vs, &c. Rom: 4. 23:

(2) The example of Dauid:

1. As Dauid declareth the blessednes of the man, vnto whom God imputeth righte­ousnes without works, Psa. 32, 1, Rom: 4, 6.

2, Enter not into iudgement with thy ser­vant. Psal. 143. 2. Now he is the servant of God, that doth the will of the Lord, and walketh in his waies. Psal. 119.

(3) The example of the Patriarck Iacob. Not by workes, but by him that calleth. Rom. 9, 11.

(4) The example of Paul.

1, I knowe nothing by my selfe, yet am I not thereby iustified. 1, Cor, 4, 4.

2, If any other man thinketh that he hath, whereof hee might trust in the flesh, &c. touching the righteousnes, which is in the law I was vnrebukeable, but the things which were vantage vnto mee, the same I [Page 150] counted losse for Christs sake, &c. for whō I haue counted all thinges losse, and doe iudge them doung, that I might winne Christ, and might be found in him, not ha­ving mine owne righteousnes, which is of the lawe, but that which is through the faith of Christ. Philip: 3, 4. 6, &c.

3, Wee (to wit Peter and Paul) which are Iewes by nature, knowe that a man is not iustified by the works of the Law, &c. and we haue believed in Iesus Christ, that we might bee iustified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law. Galat. 2, 15, 16.

(5) The example of the man sicke of the palsie, to whom without any his good works before done, Christ saith: Thy sinnes are forgiven thee: Math: 9, 2.

(6) The example of the Thiefe vpon the Crosse Luk, 23. 43.

(7) The example of the Publican. Luke, 18.

(8) The example of the sinnefull woman. Luke, 7.

(9) The example of the Iewes converted by the Sermon of Peter: Acts, 2, 37, 41, &c.

[Page 151] Moreover, works doe therefore not iusti­fie, because they are vnperfect in the regene­rate (6) also.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do argue thus.

1, Euill works doe condemne, therefore good works doe iustifie.


The opposition is vnperfect: therefore no good consequence can bee grounded thereon: for euill workes are perfectly euill; but good workes are not perfectly good: therefore they cannot iustifie: for wee doe not the good thing, that we would; but the euill, which wee would not, that doe wee, Rom: 7, 19.

2: Eternall life, (which abideth in them that be iustified) is called a reward. Matth. 5. 12. and 20. 1. 2. &c. Luk, 6, 35; therefore by good works we deserue eternall life.

Answere, i. The worde Reward is taken two manner of waies. 1, In the Antecedent The word Reward is diuerse in the Law & in Diviniti [...] of this argument for a reward that is due, [Page 152] and answereth in a iust and exact proportion to the worke wrought. Secondly it is taken otherwise in the Scripture, namely for a free It is as if a father shold promise a reward to his son for his paines, where as notwithstāding all the fa­thers goods do bv right of inheri­tance come to the son, and the son doth owe obedience to his father although his father promise him no reward. gift: and heereof it is, that euerlasting life is called a gift. (Ephes. 2, 8) an inheritance (Gal. 4, 7) and that, whereunto no proportion of desert doth answere, but the elect themselues doe esteeme the reward greater than their la­bour, or deseruing (Matth. 25, 37) there are therefore in this Syllogisme foure termes. 2, The word reward is vnderstood many times not of life eternall it selfe, but of the increase of glory in life eternall: as Math 5, and Luke, 6, for the glory of the blessed Saints in the life to come, shall be different. Once againe therefore heere be foure termes: for the mid­dle terme (Medius terminus) is one while ta­ken for life euerlasting it selfe, and an other while for a special and singular recompence in life eternall.

3. Christ shall frame the judiciall sentence at the last judgement from their good works, Mat. 25, 34. 35, &c. He will reward every man accor­ding to his works. Rom 2. 6.

[Page 153] Ans, 1. Christ dooth reason from sanctifi­cation to iustification going before, as from that which is better knowen vnto vs (for in that last iudgment, he will make ma­nifest the faith of his Electe even before men also) & he concludes as it were frō the effect to his cause, frō the fruit to the tree, & frō the later to the former. In this argumēt therfore they turne the later into the former & the ef­fect into the cause: 2, These verie same workes, if Faith bee not there before, are of none account, neither doe they deserue a­ny spirituall blessings: as was before sayde, when we treated of the workes of infidells.

4, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the Com­mandements, Mat, 19, 17.

Ans, 1, It is a fallacie from that, which is spoken but in some respect onely, to the same taken absolutely and in all respects: for that which Christ spoke in a particular re­spect, that is, to beate backe the perswasion of perfection in the young man, that our Aduersaries take as simply & absolutely spo­ken. 2, And Christ would that the young man should have tryall of the weakenesse of his strength in fulfilling the law.

[Page 154] 5 Not everie one that saith vnto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdome of Heauen, but hee that dooth my fathers will, which is in Heaven, Matthew, 7. 21. Therefore wee are justified by workes, which we are to doo.

Answ, 1, This is my Fathers will, that every one, that seeth the Son and belieueth in him, should haue eternall life, sayth Christ. The Heavenly Father therefore willeth that we believe in his Sonne, and by faith obtaine eternall life. For this is the worke of GOD which is required at our hands, that wee be­lieve in him, whom the Father hath sent (Ioh, 6, 29) 2. Wee denie, that those which bragg of their faith in Christ, and yet doo no good workes, are the heires of eternall life, because they haue not true faith, which worketh by love, Galat, 5, 6. But it dooth not hereof fol­low that we deserue eternall life by our good workes. For we are saved by grace, not of workes, least anie man should boast. Eph, 2, 8. 9. And good works are not pleasant to God, but onely in them, which bee iustified▪

6 VVorke out your saluation with feare & trembling. Philip. 2, 12.

[Page 155] Ans, Hee speakes of sanctification or re­novation in men alreadie regenerate. And warneth them, that they doo not through securitie let goe the meanes of their saluati­on; but inure themselues dayly to the exer­cise of piety, and the works of sanctification. Now to apply this to iustification, is to con­found iustification with sanctification. The argument therefore hangeth not together.

7 With such sacrifices God (Promeretur) is promerited. Heb, 13, 16.

Ans, 1, The Author of that Epistle spea­keth of men, which are iustified, they doe then wrongfully wrest it to men which are to be iu­stified. 2, That translation is corrupt. For the text according to the Greeke is, with such sacrifices God is well pleased; which is not all one, as to be iustified. For good works doo please God, as beeing a begunne and vn­perfect obedience in them, which are iustifi­ed; although those workes doo not iustifie.

8 God is not vnrighteous, that hee should forget your worke, and labour of loue &c, Heb 6. 10.

An, 1, There is more in the consequent than in the Antecedent; for it followeth not, God [Page 156] will recompense the good workes of them which are justified, in the life to come. Therefore those good workes deserue iusti­fication. 2, It is a fallacie making many que­stions, where there is but one. For it is one question, whether good workes doe iustifie, and an other whether God will reward the good workes of the iustified.

9. Redeeme thy sinnes by almsdeedes, and thine iniquities by mercy to ward the poore, Dan, 4. 24.

Ans, 1, Hee speaketh of the escaping of temporall punishments, and not of the man­ner of iustification His words haue this sense; Repent and bee mercifull to the poore, that God may turne from thee the temporall punishments of thy sinnes, which now hang over thy head. 2, His speech is a Sermon of Repentance, which doth include faith in it, by the figure Synechdoche. 3, The place is corruptly translated: The proper significati­on of the word, & true meaning of the place is rightly rendred thus: Breake of thy sinnes by righteousnesse, &c. that is, cease thy woon­ted sinnes, and begin a new life, &c.

[Page 157] 10 Almes do deliuer from all sinne, and from death, and will not suffer the soule to come into darknesse, Tobit, 4, 11.

Answ, 1, The booke of Tobit is Apo­criphall, and therefore can prooue no point in controversie. 2: He speaketh not of iusti­fication, but of temporall death, and of the temporall punishments of sinne (which are meant in this place by the word Sinne, after the phrase of the Hebrues) And he teacheth here the same, that is in Psal. 41, 1. Blessed is hee that iudgeth w [...]ely of the poore, the Lord, &c. 3. By a Synechdoche faith is in­cluded also in the wordes going before: set the Lord God alwaies before thine eyes, &c. (Verse, 6) 4. The worke cannot please God: vnlesse it bee done of one that is iustified.

11, The hearers of the Lawe are not righte­ous before God; but the doers of the Lawe shall be iustified, Rom, 2, 13.

An, It is a fallacie from that which is spoken but in some respect only, to the same taken absolutely and in all respects. For Paul speakes vpon supposition: If iustification be by the law, then not the hearers, but the do­ [...]ers of the Lawe shall be iustified: and so hee expresseth [Page 158] represseth the insolencie of the Iewes, who would be iustified, whereas notwithstanding they kept not the law, as if he should say, If iu­stificatiō be by the law, then not the hearers, but the dooers of the lawe shall bee iustified: But there can no man bee found either a­mongst the Iewes or the heathen, which is a perfect doer or keeper of the lawe; (as Paul, prooves it in the first, second, & third Chap­ters to the Romans) therefore if iustification be by the lawe, no man liuing shall be iustifi­ed, looke the place [...] Euen as Paul also doth ouerturne this supposition (Gala, 3.) There­fore this sophisme of our Aduersaries falleth to the ground.

12 VV as not Abraham our Father iustified through workes? Iames 2, 21.

Ans. If the words bee vnderstoode as they sound according to the letter, they are repugnant to other Scriptures, 1. in the meaning, because they speake cleane con­trarie concerning the iustification of Abra­ham (Romans 4, 3. Genesis 15. 6.) Second­ly in the historie. Because Iames saith, tha [...] Abraham was iustified after the offering vp of his sonne, whereas it appeareth by the [Page 159] former places, that hee was iustified about some twentie fiue yeares before. The mea­ning then of Saint Iames is, that they which are iustified are not without good workes: but that they doo so manifest their faith by their workes that by the effects they may bee knowne of others to be iustified; which is no­thing els, but to bee declared iust or righte­ous.

13 Loue couereth the multitude of sinnes, 1. Peter 4, 8.

Answ. In the proper place whence this sentence is cited (Prou, 10, 12.) it appeares, that it is meant of that hiding of sinns, which is before men, not before God. Therefore it is impertinently alleadged for iustificatiō.

14, Many sinnes are forgiuen her, for shee loved much. Luke 7. 47. Therefore loue meri­teth forgiuenesse of sinns.

Answ. 1. In the Parable going before, Christ sheweth that wee may gather by the love that followeth in the partie, who hath had manie sinnes forgiuen, and who fewe, in their iustification going before: seeing hee will loue more for the time to come, to whom manie, than he, to whom few sinnes have [Page 160] beene forgiven. This is therefore a chan­ging of the consequent into the Antecedent and of the effect and that which followes af­ter into the cause, and that which goes be­fore.

15 The chiefest vertue dooth chiefely iusti­fie. But Charitie is preferred before faith, 1, Cor, 13. 13. Therefore Charitie doth iustifie.

An. 1, Paul compareth loue or charity with faith, not in respect of iustification, but of duration and continuance. Therefore this is a fallacie from that, which is spoken in some respect, to the same taken absolutely and in all respectes, 2, Faith dooth not iu­stifie, as it is a vertue or habit for it own worth but as it is considered respectively, in respect of Christ, whose merits it applyeth vnto vs, and so doth iustifie vs for his sake. There are therefore in this argument more than three tearmes; and it hangeth together like a rope of sande.

16, If iustificatiō be takē away frō good works no man will thence forward bee mooued to doo good workes.

[Page 161] Ans: 1. It is a fallacie supposing that for the cause, which is not the cause: for the true doctrine of iustification is not the cause, why some men doe not good workes. 2, Neither may we doe evill, that good may come of it, that is, we may not falsely ascribe iustificati­on to works, that men may thereby be stirred vp to good works. 3, There are notwithstan­ding many most waighty causes besides, why we should doe good works, although iustifi­cation be not ascribed vnto them.

Question: 4.

Our Aduersaries denie, that wee are justified by faith alone, but to faith they joine hope and charity. We on the contrary side ascribe justifi­cation to faith in Christ alone; for these rea­sons.

Because in the former question all works are excluded from the acte of iustification, (1) and therefore faith onely is left. Romanes, 3, 4. and 11, Chapter, and a man is not iustified but by faith: Galathians, 2: and 3, Chapter. 2, Timoth: 1, Tit: 3, Psalm 32: as the remoo­ving of all other thinges hath sufficientlie beene proued by these places in the former [Page 162] question.

Because the holy Scripture, wheresoeuer it speaketh of Iustification, doth so describe it, that it mentioneth none, either work or affe­ction, but onely faith in Christ. Let vs then briefly runne over the places of the new Te­stament.

(1) The Gospell of Iohn.

1. As many as receaued him, to them h [...]e gaue power to bee the sonnes of God, even Let our Ad­uersaries shewe aniething, but faith alone in all these sayings of Scripture. to them that beleeue in his name. Iohn, 1, 12.

2. As Moses lift vp the serpent in the wil­dernes, &c. That whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue eternall life. Iohn, 3, 14, 15.

3, So God loued the world, that hee hath giuen his onely begotten sonne, that who­soeuer beleeveth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life. Ioh. 3, 16.

4. Hee that beleeueth in him shall not bee condemned. Ioh: 3. 18.

5. Hee that beleeveth in the sonne hath e­uerlasting life. Ioh: 3, 36.

6. The Iewes demaund, what shall we do, that wee might worke the works of GOD? [Page 163] Christ answereth: This is the worke of God, that yee beleeue in him, whom he hath sent. Ioh. 6, 28. 29.

7. This is the will of him which hath sent mee, that euery one which seeth the sonne and beleeveth in him, should haue euerla­sting life. Ioh 6. 40.

8. Verily, verily I say vnto you, he that be­leeveth in me, hath life euerlasting. Ioh. 6. 47.

9. These things are written, that yee might beleeue, that Iesus is the Christ, the sonne of God, and that in beleeving yee might haue life through his name. Ioh. 20. 31.

(2) The Acts of the Apostles.

1. To him gaue all the Prophets witnesse, that through his name all that beleeue in him, should receaue remission of sinnes. Act. 10 43.

2. By him euery one that beleeueth, is iusti­fied, Act. 13. 39.

3. By faith the heart is purified. Act: 15, 9.

4. The Iaylor asketh; Sirs, what must I doe to bee saved? and they saide, beleeue in the Lord Iesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, & thine houshold. Act. 16, 31, 32.

(3) The Epistle to the Romanes.

1, The righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ, vnto all and vpon all that be­lieue. Rom. 3, 22.

2, Wee conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the works of the lawe. Rom. 3, 28.

3, Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was counted to him for righteousnes: Rom. 4, 3.

4, To him that worketh not, but believeth in him, that iustifieth the vngodly, his faith is counted for righteousnes. Rom: 4, 5.

5, Therefore it is by faith, that it might come by grace, and the promise might bee sure to all the seede. Rom: 4, 16.

6, This is written for vs also, to whom it shall bee imputed for righteousnes, which beleeue in him, that raised vp Iesus our Lord from the dead: Rom: 4, 24.

7, Being iustified by faith, wee haue peace toward God. Rom: 5, 1.

8, If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Iesus, and shalt belieue in thine heart, that God raised him vp from the dead, thou shalt be saued. Rom: 10, 11:

9: VVith the heart man belieueth vnto [Page 165] righteousnes. Rom: 10, 10:

(4) The first Epistle to the Corinthians

It pleased God by the foolishnes of prea­ching, to saue them that beleeue. 1, Corinth. 1, 21.

(5) The Epistle to the Galatians.

1 We know that a man is not iustified by the works of the law, but (note that he saith but or except) by the faith of Iesus Christ: and wee have beleeued in Iesus Christ that wee might be iustified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law. Galathians. 2. 16.

2, They which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. Galathians. 3. 7.

3. God doth iustifie the Gentiles through faith. Gal: 3. 8.

4. They which bee of faith, are blessed with faithfull Abraham. Gal. 3, 9.

5. The iust shall liue by faith: Galathians, 3 11.

6. The Scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne, that the promise by the faith of Iesus Christ should be given to them that beleeue. Gal: 3, 22.

[Page 166] 7. The law was our school maister to bring vs vnto Christ, that we might be made righ­teous by faith. Gal: 3. 24.

8. Yee are all the sonnes of God by faith in Christ Iesus: Gal. 3, 26.

(6) The Epistle to the Ephesians.

By grace are yee saved through faith, not of works, least any man should boast. Ephes. 2: 8, 9.

(7) The Epistle to the Philippians.

That I might be found in him, not having mine own righteousnes, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ Philip: 3, 9.

(8) The Epistle to the Hebrewes.

1. By faith Abell obtained witnesse, that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: by the which faith also hee being dead, yet speaketh. Heb: 11. 4.

2. By faith was Enoch taken away, that he should not see death. Heb: 11: 5:

3, He that commeth to God, must beleeue that God is, &c. Heb: 11, 6, Finally, that whole Chapter is spent in the commendation of faith alone.

Nowe whereas in these sayings of Scrip­ture, [Page 167] there is handled the way and meanes to attaine salvation, iustification, everlasting life, forgiuenes of sinnes, a testimonie of righteousnes, &c. Why if any other thing be required but faith alone, why, I say, is it not, once so much as in one word, at the least insinuated by so great and worthie Au­thors in so many and so serious sayings of theirs? therefore faith alone doth iusti­fie. (3)

Contrariwise, Infidelity alone is the cause, that sinners doe not obtaine forgiuenes of sinnes, and so are condemned: whereas no sinne is vnpardonable, where faith is:

1, He that beleeveth not, is condemned alreadie, because hee beleeveth not in the name of the only begotten sonne of God: Ioh: 3, 18:

2 He that obeyeth not the sonne (or that The word in the latine translatiō is incredulus, that belee­ueth not, the originall, H [...] Ap [...]thō signifieth h [...] that belee­ueth not, or he that obeieth not, how soeuer it bee taken heere it is certaine it is opposed to faith and beleeuing as appeareth by ye wordes next going before. beleeveth not on the sonne) shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him: Ioh: 3, 36:

3, Except yee beleeve that I am hee, yee shall die in your sinnes: Ioh: 8, 2.

[Page 168] 4. The holy ghost shall reproue the world of sinne (as if this were the sinne by an ex­cellencie aboue other) because they be­leeue not in me. Ioh: 16. 8: 9.

5, If any man heare my words and beleeue them not, &c. hee hath one that iudgeth him: Ioh: 12. 47, 48.

6. Hee that will not beleeue, shall be con­demned. Mark. 16. 16.

7, The sinne of the Iewes, for which they were reiected, was their vnbeliefe. Rom. 11. 20.

8. Christ is to them that beleeue not, a stone to stumble at, and a rock of offence. 1 Pet. 2, 8.

9, He that beleeueth not God, hath made him a lyar. 1, Ioh. 5, 10,

10, Hee that hath not the sonne (now the sonne is had by faith) hath not life. 1, Ioh. 5, 12.

11. Without faith it is vnpossible to please God, Heb, 11: 6:

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe argue.

1, As a gift is receaued, not with one finger, but with the whole hand, so we doe not receaue [Page 169] iustification by faith alone, but by hope & cha­ritie together with fairh.

Ans. Similitudes haue no force to proue a thing. And yet a gift may be receiued with one finger too, as for example, a gold chaine may. This is therefore a most fonde argu­ment, although it were sometime allead­ged in a famous place and companie by a Ie­suite, a man of no small authoritie and ac­count.

2, We are saued by hope, Rom, 8, 24. Ther­fore we are not saued by faith alone.

Ans, 1, Paul speakes not of iustification, but of the future possession of euerlasting life, which in this life wee possesse in hope only, and this is all he saith, that we are truly blessed through faith, but we doe waite for the reuelation of that our blessednesse in hope, And therefore, because, to bee saved is in this place taken of S. Paul in one sense, and of our Aduersaries in an other sense, in the conclusion, there arise in the argument foure termes.

[Page 170] 3 Goe and teach all nations &c. not only to belieue but to obserue all things, whatsoeuer I haue commanded you. Math. 28. 20. Therefore faith alone sufficeth not.

Ans, Vnto Renouation (whereof Christ speaketh in the obseruing of those things h [...] Our Ad­uersaries make no difference betweene Sanctifica­tiō & iusti­fication. commanded) it sufficeth not onely to believe, but to worke is required also. But as concer­ning iustification, in the very same instructi­on of the Apostles, Christ sayth; he that shall believe and be baptized, shall be saued, with­out making mention of charitie, or any other workes, Marke, 16, 16.

4 It was not enough for the blinde man, that his eies were annoynted, but it was needfull Eckius. that he should goe to the poole Siloam (Ioh. 9, 6. 7.) that is, faith sufficeth not, but workes are re­quired also to iustification.

Ans, Wee may not determine of contro­uersed points by such Allegories, as haue no ground in scriptures.

5 If I had all faith, so that I could remoue mountaines, and had not loue, I were nothing &c. 1. Cor: 13, 2.

[Page 171] Ans, 1, Paul speaketh of the necessitie of loue or charitie, not as pertaining to iusti­fication, but to vnitie and the profite of the Church. It is therefore a fallacie, from that which is spoken in some respect to the same taken absolutely, and this saying of the A­postle is wrongfully wrested to iustification. 2, Neither doth he speake of iustifying faith, but of the faith of miracles. Heere be there­fore fiue termes in this argument.

6 To you it is giuen for Christ, that not one­ly yee should belieue in him, but also suffer for his sake. Philippians 1, 29. Heere Paul ioyneth faith and workes together.

Answ, 1, Heere is not anie thing meant of iustification; onely the Apostle sheweth, that they that belieue should beare all things patiently for Christs sake: and that it is the gift of God, and not of the strength or abili­tie of man, that they doo patiently suffer ad­uersitie for Christs sake, 2, He speaketh that of those, that be iustified which our Aduersa­ries expound of them, that are to be iustified. There are therefore fowre termes.

[Page 172] 7 Faith is effectuall (or worketh) by loue, Gal, 5, 6. therefore faith alone doth not iustfie, but loue or charitie together with faith.

An, 1. There is more in the conclusion, Roffensis, faith ful of good workes doth justi­fie before▪ it bringes forth the good workes. than in the premisses. For there dooth no more follow, but that faith which is voide of charity, is a dead faith: but that charity, which follloweth faith, doth iustifie, here is not one sillable. 2, The question is not, what vertues are linked or ioyned with others; but what is the peculiar propertie of euerie one of it selfe. Heere is therefore a fallacie in workes making manie questions for one.

8 Seest thou not, that the faith wrought with his workes? and through the works was the faith made perfect. Iames, 2, 22. and yee see then, that of workes a man is iustified, and not of faith onely, Verse, 24. and faith without workes is dead, Ver, 26, Shew me thy faith by thy workes. & I will shew thee my faith by my workes, Verse 18.

Ans, 1. Hee speaketh of a dead faith, which we reiect in the article of iustification also, 2, The meaning is, that our iustifica­tion is to bee delared before men by our [Page 173] workes, according to that, which our Saui­our sayth, Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good workes, &c. (Mat, 5, 16) 3, works are not good, vnlesse they be done by them, which are iustified.

9 This word (Onely) by faith, or by faith (alone) is found no where in the Scripture. Ther­fore we are not iustified by it alone.

Answ, Exclusiue particles, equiualent to the word (alone) are found in the holy Scripture.

1. The word Grace, Ephes, 2, 8, Rom,, 11. 5 6. Tit, 3, 7. 2, Timo, 1. 9.

2, The word freely, with other of the same signification Roman. 3, 24, charisma a gifte freely bestowed Roma. 6. 23: doron a gifte Ephe. 2, 8. kecharistai Ho Theos God gaue it freely, Galathians 3, 18. 19.

3. The word One: by the grace of one Rom, 5, 15, with one offering &c, Heb, 10, 14.

4, Without the Law, Rom, 3, 21, not by the lawe, Galat, 2, 21, & 3, 11.

5, The exclusion of workes: without works Romans, 4, 6. not by workes, Titus, 3, 5, not according to our workes 2, Timo, 1, 9. [Page 174] not of your selues. Ephes, 2, 8. Not ha­uing mine owne righteousnesse Philip, 3. 9. going about to stablis [...] their own righ­teousnesse, haue not &c. Rom, 10, 3.

6, The word Imputation which is opposed vnto merites, Rom, 4, 3, 4. 6, &c.

7, The forgiuenesse of sinnes, and the not recompensing for them by workes. Psalm. 32, 1, Rom, 4, 7.

8, Not, but by the faith of Iesus Christ, Gala, 3, 16. The force of which exclusiue what it is, is plaine by the like Phrase and man­ner of speech. Ioh. 6, 44. No man com­meth vnto mee, except the Father drawe him. and, No man commeth to the Fa­ther but by Mee. Ambro, in Epist. ad Roma. ca. 3, 14. Au­gust. in Ps, [...]8. et in Ioh. tract. 42. et de [...]empore Ser. 68. Basil homil. de Humil. Chrys. in Epist. ad Gal. cap: 3, &c.

Therfore exclusiue words (which exclude all things in vs, from iustification, but faith) are fully contained in Scripture. Neither can it be denied, but the Fathers have vsed the word onely by faith, or by faith alone.

10. If iustification be ascribed to faith alone there will be made too too easie a way to eternal life.

Ans. 1. To belieue is not so easie a thing. [Page 175] For faith is the gift of GOD, and it is not in the power of man to belieue when he will. 2, We require good workes to saluation, as necessarie conditions, but not as causes of iustification or saluation, 3, Nay the Pa­pists do make the way to Heauē much more easie, while first they place it in the free-will of man, and then expounde it, that Heauen is to bee purchased with money.


Our Aduersaries moue vs a fift question while they seeke for themselues a starting hole, affirming, that by the workes of the lawe in the places before cited, Paul vnderstandeth the Ce­remoniall law onelie, and not the morall. And secondlie, that the workes of the Lawe are opposed to the workes of the Gospell, as if the commandements of the Gospel were diuerse from those, which are contained in the ten com­mandements. The places of the Scripture fol­lowing, do most manifestlie contradict this opi­nion.

The righteousnesse of the Lawe is deni­ed (1) vnto Abraham. Rom, 4, where doubtles [Page 174] [...] [Page 175] [...] [Page 176] the Ceremoniall law cannot be vnderstood. for that it had then no being, but the morall law is meant.

Paul vseth the word (Works) absolutely (2) without anie restraint, as Ephes, 2, 9. Rom, 4, 6. and 11, 6, &c. in which places the nature of the thing will not suffer the word (works) to bee restrained to the Ceremoniall lawe onely.

So in like sorte he reiected the workes of (3) Righteousnesse, Tit. 3, 5.

Hee convinceth the Iewes to be sinnefull (4) by the morall lawe, as before hee conuicted the GENTILES by the morall lawe written by nature in the heart of man.

Paul decreede the morall lawe to be the (5) rule of good workes, euen in the regenerate also. Therefore he doth vnderstand not the Ceremoniall onely.

Wee establish the lawe, sayth Paul, Romans 3, 31. But the Ceremoniall lawe (6) is not established: for it is abrogated by the Gospell.

By the lawe commeth the knowledge of sin, which seeing it is a general speech apper­taining 7) [Page 177] as well to vs, as to the Iewes, it cannot be vnderstood of the Ceremoniall, but of the morall law, Rom, 3, 20.

8 I knew not sinne, but by the lawe (but what law was that? heare some particular comman­dement by way of instance, out of that lawe) I had not knowne lust, except the law &c. Rom. 7. 7: but the Ceremoniall law containeth no­thing concerning lust. It is evident therefore that Paul doth speake principally of the morall law, although hee doe sometimes adioyne the Ceremoniall law too, but hee bereaueth both morall and Ceremoniall of all power to iu­stifie.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do reason.

1 Paul maketh an opposition beetweene the law of workes, and the law of faith, Rom, 3. 27. therefore we are to accept of this distinction.

Answere, Paul doth in that place vse the worde law in a generall signification, for a doctrine. And whilest he denieth iustification to the law of workes, hee doth certainly denie it to works, therefore this is nothing to the purpose. And [Page 178] our Aduersaries doe not, or wil not vnderstand the phrase and manner of speach of the He­brewes, whereby the word law, Thorah, is ta­ken for a doctrine.

2 Paul speaketh of some things, that are Ceremo­niall, as of the Sabbaoth, of the new moones, of Circumcision, in the Epistle to the Galatians, ther­fore he vnderstandeth not the morall lawe.

Ans. 1 Paul passeth sometimes from the particular to the generall, and sometime from the generall to the particular, that hee may make it manifest, that no workes of the whole law doe iustifie a man. 2. Wee haue alreadie proued that he speaketh of all parts of the law, and not only of the Ceremoniall.

3 In the Acts of the Apostles Chap; 15, the Ce­remoniall lawes only are handled,

Ans. 1 Be it neuer so true, that the Ceremoniall law is there only hādled, yet we may not argue thus. Iustification is denied to the Ceremoni­all law, therefore it is not denied to the morall. Now in that place the mention was of the Ce­remoniall lawe; because there was expressely [Page 179] moued a cōtrouersie cōcerning the keeping of ceremonies. 2, And yet that that place doth not only treate of the Ceremonial law, is prooued by these words: which wee were neither able to beare, neither our fathers (amongst whom, the fathers that liued before Moses without the Ceremoniall lawe may be understood) but we beleeue through the grace of the Lorde Iesus Christ, to be saued, euen as they (Act, 5, 10, 11.) In which words Saint Peter had reference to the fathers, which were not able to beare the burden of the morall law, so that they might perfectly satisfie and fulfill the same. And Peter doth expressely oppose the grace of Iesus christ and faith in Christ to the fulfilling of the lawe: that which the whole course and order of the place doth manifestly declare to be true.

CHAP. 11. Of Faith.

Question, 1.

IT is no marvaile, that our Aduersaries doe deny iustification by faith alone, seeing they doe not acknowledge faith, and those which bee the ne­cessarie conditions thereof. Wherefore now let vs treat of the conditions of faith what they be, & wherein our aduersaries doe dissent from vs.

We consider faith, not (as our Aduersaries doe) Condition (1) as a worke, vertue, habite or qualitie: but we vn­derstand it relatiuely, according to the meaning of the Scriptures, as it hath respect and relation vnto Christ, and i [...] grounded vpon him: .: that is, faith is not that righteousnes in it selfe whereby wee are iust before God; but it is that instrument; whereby we lay hold vpon Christ & his righteousnes; which being by faith made and accounted with God as ours, we stand iust by the righteousnes of Christ before God, and this we proue.

1 Because the Scripture speaketh still of faith relatiuely, as it respecteth and is referred vnto Christ: as: He that beleeueth in Christ; in him; [Page 181] on him; the faith of Christ &c. Ioh. 3, 15, and 6, 40, 47, Act, 10, 43, and 15, 11, Galat, 2, 16, Rom, 3, 22, 26, and 4, 24, and infinite moe such like.

Contrariwise our aduersaries doe reason,

1 Faith is the gift of God: but the gifts of God are qualities: therefore faith is a qualitie.

Ans. 1 We denie not but it is a qualitie: but it doth not iustifie as a qualitie, but because it layeth hold on Christ. 2. Faith is called in the Scripture a gift, not that it should be defined as a quality, but that we might vnderstand, that it is freely giuen vs.

2 Faith is oftentimes in the Scripture vsed ab­solutely without determination or reference to a­ny other thing: as, Hee that shall beleeue, and bee baptized &c. Mark: 16, 16, if yee beleeue not, sure­ly yee shall not be established: Isai. 7. 9.

Ans. The obiect of faith is alwaies under­stood by the figure Synecdoche: for without it faith doth neither beleeue, neither is it faith:

[Page 182] 2, The Apostles taught their hearers to beleeue not absolutely, without reference to Christ, but to beleeue in Christ, in whom they were bid to beleeue, and to be baptized in his name. Matt, 28, 19,

3 Faith is a worke, Iohn 6: 29: therfore it iustifies, as a worke.

Ans; 1 The question is not, whether faith may be called a worke, but how it is considered in the verie act of Iustificatiō. This (how it is to be considered) Christ declareth in the words next following: This is the worke of God, that yee beleeue in him (See there is the relatiue or res­pectiue acception) whome he hath sent. 2, Be­sides in this argument, there is more in the conclusion, than in the premisses: for the collecti­on they make, is such like, as this, faith is in some sorte a worke, therefore it iustifieth as a worke.

Our aduersaries doe acknowledge nothing in faith but a bare and general knowledge and assent, Condition (2) making it only an historicall faith: but wee, as wee presuppose knowledge and assent, so wee affirme, [Page 183] that in faith there is required a trust or confidence whereby we relie and depende vpon God: & that for these reasons.

Because truste or confidence is the essential (1) and proper difference, whereby the faith of Christians is distinguished from the faith of Diuels; for that Diuells; though they cer­tainely belee [...]e, that Christ died for the sinnes of mankinde, yet they doe not put their trust in him, seeing that benefite doth not be­long vnto them:

Because the Scripture, when it speaketh of faith doth expressely vse such wordes, as be to­ken (2) trust or confidence.

1 By Christ wee haue bouldnesse and en­trance with confidence by faith in him, Eph 3, 12,

2 Let vs goe bouldly vnto the throne of grace Heb, 4, 16,

3 Seeing that by the bloud of Iesus we may be bould to enter into the holy place let vs drawe neare with a true heart in assurance of faith, Hebrewes, 10, 19, 22,

[Page] 4 Herein is loue perfect in vs, that wee should haue boldnes in the day of iudgement, &c. There is no feare in loue: but perfect loue casteth out feare: for feare hath paineful­nes and he that feareth, is not perfect in loue, 1, Ioh: 4, 17, 18. In this saying the ex­cluding of feare presupposeth a trust in Christ:

5. Sonne, be of good comfort, thy sinnes are for­giuen thee. Matth, 9, 2.

6 Daughter, be of good comfort, thy faith hath made thee whole. Matt, 9: 22.

7 Bee of good comfort: I haue ouercome the world, Ioh. 16, 33.

Contrariwise our aduersaries reason,

Iames acknowledgeth no other faith, but that which consisteth of a meere knowledge and assent Iam. 2.

Ans. 1 This holdes not, Iames founde no other faith in the Diuels; therefore neither did hee finde any other in true Christians. 2. Neither doth this follow. Iames intreateth on­ly of one kind of faith, to wit, of historicall [Page 185] faith; therefore the Scripture teacheth none other kind of faith.

Our Aduersaries affirme, that faith may bee in Condition (3) impenitent and wicked men, in Epicures and adul­terers, &c. but we denie, that faith can be in such men for these reasons.

Being iustified by faith, we haue peace to­wards God, Rom. 5, 1, but euery one that committeth (1) sinne, is of the Deuill, 1, Ioh, 3, 8, there­fore hee hath not peace towards God, & con­sequently, hee wanteth true faith.

All men haue not faith, 2. Thessal, 3, 2, (2)

The hearts of the beleeuers are purified by (3) faith, Acts, 15, 9: therefore true iustifying faith is not in a wicked and impure heart, which is polluted and laden with sinne.

Paule speakes of the wicked ones after an (4) other manner, than our Aduersaries doe:

1 That as concerning faith, they haue made shipwracke, 1, Timoth, 1: 19, of those, which haue bid all conscience farewell,

2 That they haue erred from the faith, 1, Tim; 6, 10, of couetous men;

[Page 186] 3 That they haue denied the faith; 1, Tim, 5 8: of such as are without naturall affection,

Contrariwise our aduersaries do reason thus

1 Wicked men haue wrought miracles in the name of Christ, by faith Matt. 7. 22, 23: therefore there is faith in the wicked ones.

Ans. They haue the faith of miracles, but not iustifying faith:

2 Satan himselfe hath faith: Iames 2, 19.

Ans. Satan hath an historicall faith: but our question is of a iustifying faith, therefore see­ing one kinde of faith is meant in the, Antece­dent, and an other in the consequent, there bee foure termes:

3 Simon Magus beleeued, whose heart notwithstanding was not right: Act: 8: 13. 21,

Answere, He was conuicted in conscience, that the miracles of the Apostles were not ma­gicall but deuine: as the forcerers of Egypt ac­knowledged the finger of God, Exod, 8, 19, Si­mon therefore beleeued, as Saint Luke saith▪ [Page 187] but it was an historicall faith onely, and not a true iustifying faith.

Our Aduersaries dreame, that true faith may be without workes: but wee maintaine, that a true iu­stifying Condition (4) faith cannot want his fruites: and that for these reasons.

A good tree cannot bring forth euill fruite, Matt, 7, 18. (1)

Faith worketh by loue, Galat. 5, 6, (2)

Faith without workes is dead, Iames, 2, 26, (3)

Because Christ shall proue our faith by our (4) workes, as by the in fallible effects therof. Matt. 25.

Contrariwise our aduersaries doe reason,

1 Shew me thy faith without workes, Iam. 2. 18 therefore faith may be without workes.

Ans. That translation is faultie; for accor­ding to the Greek it should be translated: shew me thy faith by, or out of thy works. 2: vnlesse S. Iames thought true faith to be effectual & wor­king by loue, he would not make cōparison between a vaine and true faith: and desire to haue [Page 188] the true faith to bee shewed or proved to bee such by workes, 3. That which hee doth dero­gate from a dead faith is wrongfully wrested to a iustifying faith:

2 Yet the Protestants cannot endure this pro­position: Good workes are necessarie to Saluati­on, therefore they beleeue that iustifying faith is without good workes.

Ans. That which we deny in some respect and consideration only, that our Aduersaries take, as simplie and absolutely spoken in all res­pects. We distinguish between faith & works, as betweene the cause and effects of iustifica­tion: we denie good workes to be necessarie as causes of iustification or saluation; but wee re­quire them as necessarie conditions of them, which are iustified and shall be saued.

Our Aduersaries maintaine that faith is infor­med Condition (5) by charitie, but we say that charitie is rather informed by faith.

Because faith doth not please God in i [...] (1) [Page 189] selfe, but for and because of Christ, whome it layeth hold on:

In euerie Relation two things doe concurre (nowe faith in that respect, in which it iustifi­eth, (2) is in the predicament of Relation) first the foundation, which is the matter or materiall parte, and secondly the forme or formall part, which is the destinating or referring of it to an other thing, which it respecteth. So faith (as it is taken in a generall acception) is the foundation or materiall part, or the thing in which this Relation is: the formall part is the ordaining or referring of it to an other thing, to wit vnto Christ.

Because the efficient cause doth informe (3) the effect, and not contrariwise: therefore be­cause charitie is the effect of faith, and faith the efficient cause of charity, faith cannot bee informed by charity.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason.

1 Paul makes faith to be of no reckoning with­out charitie, 1. Corinth: 13: therfore charitie doth [...]nforme faith.

[Page 190] Ans. 1. Paul speakes there of the saith of miracles, not of iustifying faith, 2. He doth not say that faith is informed by charitie, but commendeth the necessitie o [...] charitie in some respect, because that the faith, that hath not charitie following it, is not the true and sa­uing faith.

2 Faith worketh by charitie, Galat. 5. 6, therefore charitie doth informe faith.

Ans. 1, Charitie is heere placed for the meanes and instrument, by which saith wor­keth. Now meanes and instruments are not the forme of that thing, by which they are moved: but are said rather to bee informed by that, which moueth or worketh by them, 2. Paul heere describes a true and iustifying faith by the effects thereof.

Therefore our Aduersaries vnderstand not what faith is.

Question: 2. Of the certainetie of saluation:

Because in the handling of this question, the Au­thor hath many thinges throughout, which might [...]rooue off [...]nsiue, I thought it better to referre the rea­der to the writings of our Countrey-men, then to leaue [...] things scandalous, or to make it vp with many pat­ches, which the reader may haue exactly done other­where, if he please to reade Maister Perkins in his Reformed Catholicke, and in his treatise of Consci­ence: and Maister Downham Christian warfare: booke 2: & Chap: 6: 7: 8: &c.

CHAP. 12. Of good Workes,

VVHat we are to thinke of iustification by workes, hath beene declared in the for­mer chapter, there remaine yet two principall errors of our Aduersaries: one of the worke wrought, an other of good workes themselues, to the doing whereof Christi­ans are bounde. Now let vs treate of them in ge­nerall and in particular.

Question: 1.

Whether a good worke doe please GOD, by vertue of the worke wrought, though it be done without a good and sanctified minde (as for example, while they vse the Sacraments, heare Masse, singe Canonicall houres &c. without de [...] ­tion:) Our Aduersaries affirme it: but wee den [...] it, and teach, that the worke doth not please go [...] ▪ vnles it bee done by a man that is iustified: and when that the person is in sauour with God, then that the worke is accepted also. And this is proved by this reasons following.

Whatsoeuer is not of faith, is sinne: Rom, 14, 23, But that which is by the work wrought (1) onely, is not of faith: therefore, &c.

Woe bee to you Scribes and Pharises, hypocrites, for ye tithe mint, and anise & cum­min, (2) and leaue the waightier matters of See a work otherwise comman­ded (ti­thing) with out mercy and faith­fulnesse. the lawe, as iudgement and mercie, and fide­litie. Matt, 23, 23,

This people draweth neere vnto me with their mouth, and honoureth mee with their lipps, but there hart is farre of from me. Matt, (3) 15, 8: Isai: 29; 13.

The same thing is proued by the example (4) [Page 193] of the Israelites and others; whereas their works, no not those which were comman­ [...]d thē, did please God any longer, because of want of faith in the persons that did [...]hem.

1. Sacrifice was a worke acceptable to God: Abel sacrificed; and Cain sacrifi­ced, but his worke was not accepted: the reason whereof is given in the Epistle to the Hebrewes. cap. 11. ver: 4. By faith Abel offered vnto God a greater sacrifice than Cain, by the which faith he obtained wit­nesse, that he was righteous, &c.

2. To him will I looke, even to him that is poore, and of a contrite spirit, and trem­bleth at my words. Hee that killeth a bul­lock, See works▪ what they are by the worke wrought. is as if he flew a man: hee that sacri­ficeth a sheep, as if he cut off a dogs neck: he that offereth an Oblation, as if he offe­red Swines bloud: hee that remembreth Incense, as if hee blessed an Idoll. Isa. 66, 2. 3, 4.

3. VVhat haue I to doe with the mul­titude of your sacrifices, saith the Lord? I am full of the burnt offerings of Ramms, and of the fatte of the fed beastes: [Page 194] and I desire not the bloud of bullocks, nor Heere is a large Cata­logue of works done without faith and an honest hart. of Lambes, nor of Goates. When ye [...] come to appeare before mee, who requi­red this at your handes, to tread in my Courts? Bring no moe oblations in vaine: Incense is an abhomination vnto mee: I cannot suffer your new moones, nor Sab­baths, nor solemne daies (it is iniquitie) nor solemne assemblies. My soule hateth your new Moones, and your appointed feasts: they are a burden vnto mee: I am wearie to beare them. And when yee shall stretch out your handes; I will hide mine eyes from you: and though yee make many praiers, I will not heare: for your The cause why they displeased God. hands are full of bloud. Wash you, make you cleane▪ take away the euill of your workes from before mine eyes: cease to doe euill: learne to doe well: seeke iudg­ment, relieue the oppressed: iudge the fatherlesse, and defend the widowe. And come now & let vs reason together, faith the Lord: though your sinnes were as crimsin, they shal be made white as snow, though they were red like scarlet, they shall be as wooll Isa, 1, 11, 12, &c.

[Page 195] 4. The same is witnessed, Psalm. 50. 8, &c: and 51. 16. Where the true sacrifices are not defined by the worke wrought, but such as come from a person, contrite, and humbled, and which is in favour with God.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason.

1. Though the person bee not in favour, yet the worke it selfe is good.


The worke hath a double respect: either as it is considered in it selfe, whereof wee speake not heere: or as it is considered in an other. According to this latter respect the worke is considered together with the wor­ker: and so the work which is good in it self, is polluted by the impure and impenitent worker. Whereof we spoke more afore.

2. The worke of Ahab, though an hypocrite, pleased God, when he humbled himselfe. 1, Kin. 21, 29.

[Page 196] Ans: As Ahab did not truly repent, so nei­ther was there any thing meant as concer­ning eternall salvation, but onely of the di­minishing and mitigating of temporall pu­nishments. Now our question is of workes, which (as our Aduersaries thinke) merite e­verlasting life: they argue therefore verie fondly.

Question: 2.

Whether workes and services of mans choise and tradition; having no warrant in the holie Note, The state of the Controuer­sie is not of things in­different, & such as per­taine to or­der in the Church but of the true manner of worship­ping God. Scriptures, doe please God, and be to be obser­ved, as necessarie to justification. Our Adver­saries hold this affirmatively, laying so great a necessitie vpon those traditions, that often times a man shall be judged to haue sinned more gree­vously, for transgressing one of those traditi­ons, than for neglecting some of Gods comman­dements: but wee out of the word of God, doe reject these wil-worships.

Hitherto may be applied those arguments, which were brought before, chap. 4. against (1) traditions.

[Page 197] Because to appoint and define the service of God, belongeth to God alone, and not to (2) any creature whatsoeuer.

1, Hence it is, that the Lord doth set this preface before the 10 Commandements, as it were to procure authority to them. I am the Lord thy God. Exod: 20. 2.

2. God (not wee) hath ordained good workes, that wee should walke in them. Ephes. 2, 10.

3, Proue what is the good, and accepta­ble and perfect will of God, not of men. Rom: 12. 2.

4. Teaching them to obserue all things, whatsoeuer I haue commaunded you. Math. 28, 20.

The will of God is perfectly declared in the holy Scriptures, that wee haue no neede (3) to make choise of new services for him.

1, For the Scripture doth instruct a man, that he may be absolute, being made per­fect vnto all good workes. 2, Timothie, 3, 17.

God will not haue any man to depart from this his revealed will, or to adde (4) [Page 198] any thing thereto, or to frame or invent any new things beside.

1. Yee shall not doe, euery man, whatso­euer seemeth him good in his owne eyes; but whatsoeuer I commaund you, take heede yee doe it. Thou shalt put nothing thereto, nor take ought there from. Deut. 12. 8. 3 [...].

2. Take heede that yee doe, as the Lord your God hath commaunded you: turne not a side to the right hand, nor to the left: Deut. 5, 32.

3, Seeke not after your owne heart, nor after your owne eyes. Numb, 15, 39.

4, Thou shalt not turne away frō the law to the right hand, nor to the left. Iosu, 1, 7. Because GOD doth witnesse, that such works are very displeasing vnto him. (5)

1, By the example of the Israelites, who of a good intent did erect for Gods glory, Groues, Temples, high places, Altars, &c.

2, So those, who would, without the cō ­maundement of God, imitate the fact of Abraham in offering vp his sonne, are most sharply reproued by God. 2, King 16, [Page 199] 3, and 17, 17, and 21. 6. and 23. 10: &c:

3. Saul, in sacrificing without the com­maundement of God, offended: 1: Sam: 13. 9. 10. 11.

4. In vaine they worship mee, teaching for doctrines, the precepts of men: Matth. 15, 9.

By these services of mens choise and devi­sing it commeth to passe, that the comman­dements (6) of GOD are neglected; as Christ shewes by examples; Math; 23; 16;

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason:

1. VVhatsoever is done with a good intent; cannot displease God; but the service of God; of mans choise and invention is done with a good intention; therefore; &c.

Ans: In the first proposition is the beg­ging of the thing in question: for that pro­position is not onely controversed, but also it is very expresly condemned in the places of Scripture before alleaged.

2. The holy Ghost, which is promised to the Church, will not commaund those things which are contrarie to Gods will: but those services of God are deliuered of the Church from the [Page 200] mouth of the holy Ghost: therefore &c.

Answere, 1.

If the CHVRCH did ordaine those things by the instinct of the holy Ghost, then would wee graunt them the whole reason: but seeing that this same thing is a matter in controversie, heere is a begging of the thing in question. 2, Christ saith of the holy Ghost, hee shall bring all thinges to your remem­brance, that I haue tolde you. (Iohn: 14, 26) Nowe let our Adversaries proue that ever Christ tolde such thinges, and wee will be­leeue them. Likewise, the holy Ghost shall glorifie Christ, Iohn, 16, 14: but these services doe obscure Christ with his merites. 3, Nei­ther may wee impute that to the Church of Christ, whatsoeuer certaine superstitious men haue broached vnder the title and name of the Church; bringing heereby the true Church of Christ into bondage, and vexing them with the observation of mens traditi­ons.

3. Christ saith of his Apostles, he that heareth you, heareth mee. (Luke. 10. 16.) therefore it is [Page 201] all one, as if Christ had deliuered those seruices of God with his owne mouth.

Ans. 1. What agreement is there be­tweene Christ and Belial? betweene the A­postles and the Prelates of the Roman Anti­christ? 2, It is a fallacie of diuision, because those necessarie words, which are part of the instruction that Christ gaue to his Apostles, are omitted, to wit, teach them to obserue whatsoeuer I haue commanded you. Matthew 28.

4 As the doctrine of the Scribes and Pha­rises sitting in the chaire of Moses, was approo­ued, so the constitutions of the Prelates of the Church, concerning the seruice of God, are to be approued and ratified.

Answ. 1, To sit in Moses chaire, is not to frame new deuises of GODS seruice, but to teach MOSES. It is therefore a fal­lacie from that, which is spoken in some respecte onely to the same taken absolute­ly and in all respectes. For then the Phari­ses fate in Moses chaire, when they taught the law of Moses; but not when they broa­ched superstitious and false conceits, wherof Christ saide. Beware of the leauen of the [Page 202] Pharises, meaning their doctrine (Matth 16, 6, 12) 2. There is more in the conclusion, than in the premisses. For there followeth no more, but this, that the Ministers of Christ, that teach well and liue ill, are to bee heard, if in the meane while they teach that which is truth. But what is this to the purpose?

5 Manie things are held and defended in the Church (that is of Rome) which are not in the Scriptures.

Answ, For this verie cause they are for­geries, & deseruedly for the reasons before alleadged, to be reiected.

6 There are in the most auncient Councels, which are approved and allowed on both parts, constitutions, which are not comprised in scrip­ture; but are receiued as being de [...]uered by the Church.

Ans, 1, These constitutions belong to order and comelinesse, and are not matters of faith. Therfore this is nothing to the pur­pose. 2, Neither are they proposed by the Councells as meritorious of eternall life, but as things indifferent. 3 And in Councells, [Page 203] which wee approue of, wee receiue those things onely, which are not contrarie to the Word of God.

7 Christ never commanded to abstaine from that which is strangled, which notwithstanding the Apostles commanded, Acts. 15, 29. Nay they were abrogated, and afterward brought vp by the Apostles.

Answ. It is a fallacie from that which is spoken in some respect to the same taken ab­solutely and in all respects. For the Apostles did not require this, as a thing necessarie to saluation, but did ordaine in some respect ac­cording to the rule of charitie in favour of the weake ones, who might bee offended at Christian libertie vsed vnseasonably. But the Papists contend for such constitutions, as they make necessarie. It is therefore an ar­gument from that, which is necessarie by an accident and speciall occasion, to that which is of it selfe absolutely necessarie.


The question is, what kinde of workes those bee, which our Aduersaries doe call workes of supererogation. Our Aduersaries commende them highly, as making men perfect: but wee haue some things to except against them both in generall, and in particular. as,

That which they presuppose as a grounde is Error: (1) false; that is, that we can performe more, than is required of vs by the lawe.

When yee haue done all things, which (1) are commanded you, say wee are vnprofita­ble seruants, Luke, 17, 10.

It is contrarie to the article of sanctifica­tion, (2) which dooth not grant to any man in this life, a perfect & plenarie fulfilling of the lawe; much lesse anie workes of supereroga­tion. Whereof wee shall speake in the next Chapter following.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason thus

1 Christ sayth: if thou shalt supererogate anie thing, &c. Luke 10, 35. Therefore he had [Page 205] reference heere to workes of supererogation.

Ans, 1, In controuersed points of Reli­gion, wee may not play with allegories, which haue no ground in Scripture, 2. Christ doth there extoll the charitie of the Samari­tan [...], who before had giuen money to the hoste to make prouision for the wounded man, and with all promised him, that if he [...] spent more in prouiding for him, hee would repaie it. But what is this to workes of supe­rerogation?

2 I fulfill the rest of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh, for his bodies sake, which is the Church, Colos. 1, 24.

Ans, He speaketh nothing of the per­fecte keeping of the lawe, much lesse of workes of supererogation, but of that par­cell of the Crosse, which God layeth vpon the shoulders of the Church and the mem­bers thereof, to bee borne of them, that they may bee made like to the image of his Sonne (Romans, 8, 29). For the mea­ning of Paul is onely this, since that cer­taine afflictions are allotted to the CHVRCH, that himselfe beareth [Page 206] a great part of them, that the measure of suf­ferings may bee fulfilled in the mysticall bo­die of Christ. And what is this to the works of supererogation?

They faine that Christ hath brought vs a Error: (2) new and more perfect lawe, by adioyning E­uangelicall councells to the lawe, which is very false.

Because manie of those things, which they call councells, are indeed commandements, (1) and the explication of the morall law: wher­of manie also are comprised in the Lawe of Moses, where the tenne Commandements are explained.

Christ was not a Lawgiuer, but a Media­tour. (2)

1, The Lawe was given by Moses, but grace and truth by Iesus Christ, Ioh, 1, 17.

2, And therefore (that hee should not seeme a Law giuer) Christ iudgeth no man Ioh, 8, 15.

3, Therefore the preaching of the Gospell (not of the Lawe) is called the preaching of Christ, and the Ministerie of reconcili­ation. 2 Corinthians, 5, 18, 19, 20.

[Page 207] This false assertion of our Aduersaries sa­voureth (3) of Mahometisme. For Mahomet in his Alcoran saith; that Moses gave not so perfect a law; that Christ gaue a more perfect law (for that no man could bee saued by the [...]awe of Moses:) but that Mahomet hath gi­uen a most perfect and absolute law. Change this last name of Mahomet into the name of S, Francis, Saint Dominicke, &c. and it wil be the verie same thing.

Our Aduersaries reckon Povertie amongst Euangelicall Councells, and workes of supere­rogation, (3) Pouerty. but falsely.

Because it is not a councell, but a com­mandement, (1) that when neede so requireth, we Mat, 8, 19, 20, &c, &. 10, 37, 38, &c. Lu, 18, 29 &c. should part with al the goods of this life, nay life it selfe for Christs sake. But the Moonk­ish pouertie is farre from this.

The Moonkish pouertie is but a mocke­rie. For therein the sweate of the browes (2) (layed vpō everie man in his calling) is chan­ged for yearely and most certaine renenews and pensions for terme of life.

Contrariwise our aduersaries doe reason,

1 CHRIST sayd to the young man, who asked a councell of perfection: If thou wilt bee perfect, goe and sell all &c, Matt, 19, 21. Marke 10, 20.

Ans, The whole text doth make it plaine, that Christ woulde represse and pull downe the proude yong Pharisee, that swelled with perswasion of his owne perfection, and that he meant nothing lesse, than to teach, that perfection did consist in povertie. Neither would Christ by this answer prescribe a com­mon rule of attaining to perfection. But, as God prooued Abrahams obedience, when he commanded him to offer his sonn (which yet he would not haue done) so Christ by en­ioining the young man poverty, would bring to light his disobedience, and idolatrous worshipping of money: That so it might appeare, that hee loued riches more, than God; and that therefore he lyed in bragging that he had kept the lawe.

[Page 209] They ground the counsell of vowed chastitie (4) Cha­stitie. vpon the words of Paul. Concerning virgins, I haue no commaundement of the Lord: but I give counsell. 1. Corint: 7, 25, and, he thas is able to receaue this, let him receaue it. Matthew, 19: [...]2.

Ans, 1. Pauls counsell in this place was not concerning perfection, or of obtaining of eternall life, but his counsell was fitted to the present necessitie; that is, for feare of persecution: it is not then to the purpose. 2, Paul left this counsell free at their owne choise, neither did he lay a snare on their cō ­sciences: Wherein there is no agreement with the moonkish vowed chastitie. 3. Christ (Matthew, 19) handleth nothing of the per­fection of man, but onely teacheth, that the vnmaried man wanteth many molestations, whereunto they which liue in wedlocke, are subiect.

They call Moonkish obedience, vnder the rule of their founder, the third evangelical coun­sell: (5) Obe­dience. but very shamelesly.

For they haue no one word, whereby they (1) [Page 210] can proue it vs out of the Scripture.

Because it is obedience performed not to Christ, but to men, Benedict, Bernhard, Fran­cis, (2) Dominicke: therefore it cannot receaue any reward of Christ.

True obedience, commaunded in the word of God, which is to be performed to (3) God and men is heereby neglected; for by this pretended obedience, the obedience which is by vertue of the fift commaunde­ment, due to Parents and Magistrates, is a­bolished, and hath no place amongst Monkes.

They teach, that these workes of supere­rogation Error. (6) may bee communicated vnto o­thers, for a certaine summe of money, or lands, or other goods of the laitie: which is false.

If one man might communicate perfecti­on (1) to another, what neede was there of Christs incarnation?

Euery man shall giue an account for him­selfe, not for another. Rom. 14. 12. (2)

Simonie is committed, when heaven and heavenly goods are sold for money. Acts. 8. (3) 20.

[Page 211] By this meanes, the poore should bee de­barred from salvation; because they are not (4) able to buy the Moonkes workes of supere­rogation; whereas notwithstanding Christ preached the Gospell to the poore. Matth: 11, 5.

CHAP. 13. Of Renovation, or Regeneration, and the obedi­ence, which is begun in the iustified and the regenerate.


THE question is not heere, whether the re­generated be bound to doe good workes: (for that is confessed by both sides) but whether the good workes of the regene­rate, such as they be in this life (in keeping of the law) be so perfect, that if God would deale with them in judgement, hee could finde nothing in their good works, which hee might rightly and justly condemne. Our Aduersaries holde the affirmatiue, wee defend the negatiue part, vpon the grounds following.

[Page 212] The very nature of the lawe, wherein the (1) regenerate are exercised, if it bee rightly and thoroughly waighed, doth take away perfe­ction from men, even from the regenerate, as they be in this life.

1, The law is a burden, that canot be born of any, neither regenerate, nor vnregene­rate as peter saith the law is a yoak, which neither our Fathers, nor we (namely the regenerate, the Apostles) were able to beare Act: 15, 10.

2. Christ did that, which was impossible to the law. Rom. 8, 3.

3, Hee that keepeth the whole law, and yet faileth in one point, is guilty of all. Iam: 2, 10.

4, The law is spirituall, but I (Paul rege­nerated) am carnall, sold vnder sinne. Rom. 7, 14, for Paul was not as yet in this life al­together spirituall.

5. The lawe requireth the whole heart, soule, and all the powers of man: which no man can performe. Luke, 10. 27. Deut. 6, 5.

[Page 213] 6. The law reckons Concupiscence in the Catalogue of sinnes, which is not yet taken away, but remaineth in the regene­rate.

This is proved also by the complaints of regenerate men in the Scripture, who com­plaine (2) of the weakenes and corruption of the flesh, which hindereth the perfection of good workes, and doe therefore desire to a­uoide the iudgement of God.

1. All our righteousnes is as filthy clouts. Isai, 64, 6.

2. Enter not into iudgment with thy ser­vant: for in thy sight shal none that liveth, Paul doth not only ac­knowledge that the first motions of Concu­piscence are remai­ning in the regenerate, but that they were also euils wherwt him­selfe was cū ­bred; when he saith, the evill that I would not, that do I. be iustified. Psal. 143, 2.

3. Who can vnderstand his faults? clense me from secret faults. Psal. 19, 12.

4. I allowe not that, which I doe, for what I would, that do I not, but what I hate, that doe I: to will is present with mee: but I finde no meanes to performe that which is good: for I doe not the good thing which I would, but the euil which I would not, that doe I. &c. O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this bodie of death? Rom. 7, 15, 18, 19, 24.

[Page 214] 5. Not as though I had alreadie attained to it, &c. Philip. 3. 12. 13. Where Paul doth manifestly affirme, that he hath not as yet attained to full perfection.

6, I know nothing by my selfe, yet am I not thereby iustified. 1, Corinth. 4. 4. for God seeth many sinnes in vs, which are vnknowne to vs, but are not hid from God.

7, My power is made perfect in weake­nes. 2, Cor. 12. 9.

8. If we say, that we haue no sinne (wee the regenerate, Iohn and his auditors) wee deceaue our selues, and truth is not in vs. 1, Ioh. 1. 8.

9. Therefore the children and Saints of God pray, forgiue vs our trespasses: and, therefore (because thou hast pardoned my sinne, in hope of the like, by mine ex­ample) shall euery one, that is godly, make his prayer vnto thee in a time, when thou mayest be found. Psal. 32. 6.

Because there remaineth still in the re­generate (3) the flesh, which desireth fleshly and carnall thinges: but carnall desires doe not [Page 215] agree with the law of God.

1, But I am carnall Rom. 7, 14.

2. I doe not the evill, but the sinne that dwelleth in me doth it. Rom. 7. 17.

3. I know, that in me, that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing. Rom. 7, 18.

4. If I doe that I would not, it is no more I that doe it, but the sinne that dwelleth in me. Rom. 7, 20.

5. I see another law in my members, re­belling against the law of my minde, and leading me captiue vnto the law of sinne, which is in my members. Romaines, 7. 23.

6, I my selfe (Paule regenerated) in my minde serue the law of GOD, but in my (4) As much as is added to vs so much is taken frō Christ. Not we, but Christ did those things which be­long to the perfect keeping of the law. flesh the law of sinne. Rom. 7, 25.

Because the doctrine of our perfect ful­filling of the law, is contrarie to the full and perfect merite and obedience of Christ: for

1. If wee could haue perfectly kept the law, what neede was of Christ? and why should Paul abandon all his owne righte­ousnes: Philip: 3, 8, 9. &c.

[Page 216] 2. That that was impossible to the law, in as much, as it was weake, because of the flesh (see our imperfection) God sending his sonne, in the similitude of sinfull flesh, &c. Rom 8. 3.

3. After our first recōciliation with God. Christ should be vnto vs vnprofitable and fruitlesse: because they who were recon­ciled and alreadie regenerated, might by themselues satisfie God, that they should not haue any more any neede of a Media­tour and intercessour: which to say, is in Scripture absurd.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe dispute.

1. He that loveth his neighbour, hath fulfilled the lawe; and loue is the fulfilling of the lawe. Romanes. 13. 8. 10. but the regenerate haue loue: therefore they do perfectly fulfill the law.

Ans. 1. It is one thing to fulfill the law in a certaine manner and after a sort, (that is, ac­cording to the measure of begun and imper­fect obedience) and another thing to fulfill it perfectly. Whereof this latter agreeth to Christ alone, the other to the regenerate: therefore there is more in the conclusion, [Page 217] than is in the premisses. For if our Aduersa­ries can shewe vs perfect loue in anie of the regenerafe (such a loue as is required Luke, 10, 27, Deuteronomium 6. 5.) then will we willingly yeelde vnto them the perfect fulfil­ling of the lawe.

2 God commanded not impossibilities: ther­fore Simile. A rich mer­chant buy­eth a tower of a Noble▪ man at a great pric [...] Now be­fore the buyer p [...]i [...] the mony, he looseth all his wealth by gaming, may hee that so [...]ld it now be [...] accuse [...], a [...] if h [...]e had made a cō tract with the mer­chant, which he [...] was not a­ble to per­forme? wee may perfectly keepe the Commande­ments of God.

Answ, God commanded not impossi­bilities, but to whom were they not impos­sible? to man before his fall, in the integritie [...]f nature, and endued with the Image of God. But Paul sayth that the lawe was impossible to man, after he had fallen, (Romans, 8, 3.) Therefore God is not to be accused, as is hee had commaunded things impossible to bee done, but wee are to bee accused, who haue lost the abilitie and power to performe them.

3 His Commandements are not grieuous, 1, Ioh, 5, 3. and my yoke is easie, and my burden is light, Matt, 11, 30

Ans, 1, The Commaundements of Christ are easie to the faithfull, because the regenerate doo obeye them with a wil­ling [Page 218] motion of the Holy-ghost, and not by constraint, &c. It is therefore a fallacie from that, which is spoken but in some re­spect onely to the same taken absolutely. 2, There is more in the conclusion, than in the premisses. For thus much onely followeth: the Commandements are easie, therefore Christians doe them not with griefe. And yet this willing and readie obedience dooth not comprise in it absolute and full perfec­tion.

4 Those things, which are burden some and impossible in the law, doe not pertaine anie lon­ger to the regenerate, neyther are they tyed to them, but to the possible things onely.

Answer. 1. Seeing, that this is sayde without Scripture, wee may denie it with the same facilitie, that it is affirmed. 2, Paul acknowledgeth himselfe to be bounde to the Lawe of Concupiscence, that forbid­deth luste, which is one of the impossibili­ties in the lawe. Therefore the Antecedent proposition is false.

[Page 219] 5 There bee in the Scriptures examples of perfect men: as, Hezekiah walked with a per­fect heart. 2. King, 20. 3, the heart of Asah the King was perfect. 2. Chron. 15, 17.

Answ, 1, Perfection there is opposed vnto hipocrisie. It is therefore perfection not absolutely, but in some respect 2. This perfection of those Kings was imperfecte, For Hezekiah is in the same Chapter accused of sinne, and the punishments for sinne are denounced against him. And of Asah it is recorded, that he cast the prophet of the Lord into prison, and that he trusted more in the helpe of the Phisitians, than in the Lord, &c, It is then a bad sequele, to conclude from perfection in some respect and sort, to abso­lute perfection, which is without all spot.

6 Zacharie and Elizabeth were both iust, and walked in all the Commandements and or­dinances of the Lord without reproue, Luke 1. 6

Ans, 1. It followeth not, they are sayde to bee iuste: therefore they are sayd to be iust by the workes and perfecte fulfilling of the [Page 220] lawe. 2, For they are sayde to bee iuste in some respect, that is for Christs merite. 3, Their righteousnes in a holy conuersation is opposed to hypocrisie. 4, They liued with­out reproofe before men, but they were sin­ners before God. For Zacharie sinned through vnbeliefe, and therefore was made dumbe. Therfore this reason is many waies faultie.

7 If thou wilt be perfect, &c. Matth, 19, 21, Simile. A sicke man thinketh himselfe [...]ound, and yet cannot stand vpon his feet, his Phisitian, to let him [...]ee his dis­ease, bids him walke, therfore he can walke. therefore we may be perfect.

Answ. Christ in this place by these wordes conuinceth the young man of im­perfection: so farre is he from decreeing and saying that perfection is possible; as was de­clared before Chap, 12.

8 The regenerate are called perfect. Let vs, as manie as be perfect, be thus minded. Philip, 3, 15. Among them that are perfect, 1, Corin, 2, 6, The Scripture maketh a man perfect, 2, Timoth, 3, 17.

Ans, 1, Paul speaketh of them, which do acknowledge Christ, not hypocritically, but truly, and are inflamed, not with an hypocriti­call, but with a true zeale of amending their life, and he speakes of such a perfection, as [Page 221] befalleth the Saints of God, who yet carie a­bout with them the corrupt flesh. There are therefore foure termes; seeing that perfecti­on in this argument is taken two manner of waies, first for sinceritie opposed to hypocri­sie, and then for absolute and full perfection in everie point. 2, As concerning the place, For exam­ple, the law is holy, the law is pro­posed to sinners. Therefore sinners al­so are holy (2. Timoth, 3, 17.) the Scripture containeth perfect instruction of a holy life. But it doth not hereof follow, that the regenerate are perfect. For no man liueth in all things ac­cording to the rule of the Scripture.

9 The sinnes of the regenerate are veniall sinnes, therefore they hinder not their perfecti­on.

Answer, 1, They doe not therefore be­come no sinnes, because they be veniall sins, neither doe therefore cease to be contained vnder sinne as their genus, because they be­come of an other species, than other sinnes bee. 2, They are euen hereby conuicted of imperfection, because they be veniall, & haue neede of pardone, 2, No sinnes are ve­niall, in the Papists sense.


The fond euasion of our Aduersaries doth giue occasion to this second question; whilest they denie that Concupiscence, and the first motions thereof be sinnes, or haue the nature of sinne; for they cannot but confesse that they re­maine in the regenerate. Wee on the contrarie side affirme, that both Concupiscence it selfe, and also the first motions thereof, are sinnes in the regenerate: and that for these reasons follo­wing.

To whatsoeuer thing the definition of a (1) thing agreeth, to the same agreeth the thing defined; but the definition of sinne agreeth to Concupiscence; therefore the thing defi­ned, which is sinne, agreeth to it too.

1, Sinne is the transgression of the lawe, 1, Iohn 3, 4. But Concupiscence swarueth from the lawe. Therefore Concupiscence is sinne.

2. The wisedome of the flesh is not subiect to the lawe of GOD, neither indeed can bee Romans, 8, 7. But concupiscence [Page 223] rebelleth against the lawe of God, Rom. 7, 23. therefore it is a sinne.

The name of sinne is expressely attributed to concupiscence. (2)

1, Whilest it is forbidden in the tenth Com­mandement.

2, Let not sinne raigne in your mortall body, that yee should obey it in the lusts thereof Note. Paul cal­leth concupiscence sin, Rom. 6 fiue times. Rom 7. six times▪ Rom, 8, thrise. Rom, 6, 12.

3, I knew not sinne, but by the lawe; for I had not knowen lust or concupiscence, except the lawe had said, thou shalt not lust, Rom, 7. 7.

4, Sinne tooke occasion by the commaunde­dement, and deceiued me. Rom, 7, 8, 11.

Because termes aequiualent to sinne are attributed to Concupiscence. (3)

1. An euill present with vs, Rom, 7, 8, 21.

2: A thing not good, Rom, 7, 18.

3. The flesh lusteth against the spirit, Galat, 5. 17. which is enimitie against God. Rom, 8, 7.

4, Therefore Paul teacheth vs to crucifie Concupiscence, or the luste of the flesh Galathians, 5, 25.

[Page 224] The first motions of luste or concupi­scence, and other bad affections, are con­demned as sinnes.

1, Of anger, Christ saith, whosoeuer is angrie with his brother vnaduisedly, shall bee culpable of iudgment, Matthew, 5, 22.

2. Of hatred: whosoeuer hateth his brother, is a Man-slayer, 1, Ioh. 3, 15,

3, Of the first motion of Concupiscence vn­to wantonnesse, Christ sayth whosoeuer looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committted adulterie with her alreadie in his heart, Mat. 5, 18.

Contrariwise our aduersaries doe reason thus.

1. There is nothing, that bringeth damnation, in them which are in Christ Iesus. Rom. 8. 1. But sinne is a thing that causeth damnation. There­fore sinne is not in the regenerate, and conse­quently Concupiscence, seeing it is in the rege­nerate, is no sinne.

Ans. All sinne deserueth damnation, but it bringeth not damnatiō to any, in whom it is [Page 225] pardoned, as it is in all the children of God, & that is Paules meaning, that there is nothing that shall cause damnation, in them which are in Christ Iesus, because that which is damnable in them of it selfe, is made veniall for Christs sake.

2 Christ hath purged all our sinnes. Heb. 1. 3. Therefore concupiscence in the regenerate is not sinne.

Ans. This is a monstrous and misshapen reason; for by the like argumēt, because Christ hath purged all sinnes: therefore neither adul­terie, nor manslaughter should bee sinnes any more.

3 Christians regenerate are sanctified and washed from their sinnes and offences. 1: Cor: 6: 11. therefore they haue no sinne, and consequent­ly Concupiscence in them is no sinne.

Ans. 1. There is more in the Conclusion, than in the premisses, for this only doth follow: they are washed and sanctified: therefore their sins are not imputed to them. For if they were not sinnes, they had no neede to bee washed [Page 226] from them, 2. Washing from sinnes, doth not cause, t [...]at they should not be, but it respecteth the guilt of sin, which is taken away: otherwise the regenerate should not sin any more, which sauoureth of the error of the Anabaptists. And maruaile it is, that our Aduersaries da [...]e come into the light with such toyish foole­ries. The Ana­baptisme of the Pa­pists.

4 Concupiscence, if it be ouercome, as it is in the regenerate, giueth but matter of victorie and glo­rie vnto them, therefore it is not sinnne.

Ans. 1 It were a shamefull argument, for by the like reason, Satan should not sinne, because if hee be ouercome, hee doth but yeeld vs mat­ter of reward, 2. It is a fallacie from that which is a cause by accident; not of it selfe: for we may not say that Concupiscence is not sinne by his owne nature, because the conquest of it yeel­deth vs matter of glorie.

5 If concupiscence be sinne, then all sinnes bee equall, and be a like sinnefull.

Answere, 1.

Though we keepe the iust degrees of sinnes, [Page] yet sinnes of the lowest degree, cease not to be sinnes: and qualities in the smallest degrees doe not, because of their smallnesse, cease to be such qualities, as they by nature are, 2, The consequence of the argument should bee this: If concupiscence be a sinne, then all men are sinners before God, but this conclusion liketh not our Aduersaries.

6 Sinnes are not sins, vnlesse they bee voluntarie, but Concupiscence is not voluntarie: therefore, &c.

Ans. 1 The theologicall knowledge of By this reason origi­nall sinne should be no sinne. sinne is not to be learned out of Aristotle, or Baldus, but out of the holy Scripture, which reckoneth Concupiscence and inuoluntary sins amongst sinnes. 2, And according to this definition of the Papists, Concupiscence is a sinne, for though it be not done by the consent and will of the spirit, yet it is voluntarie in res­pect of the flesh, (Rom, 7, 25,) 3, It is a pro­position Ethic. N [...]. com. lib. [...]. c. 5. deliuered by Aristotle himselfe, that those things be done of vs willingly, the begin­ning & cause whereof was in our selues: as if a drunken man cōmit any fault in his drunkenes, [Page 228] when he knoweth not what hee doth, and can­not auoid it, yet he is to be accounted to doe it willingly; because himselfe was the cause of his ignorance & disabilitie: so by nature God made vs able to keepe his lawe, wee through our fault haue lost this abilitie, & haue brought vpon our selues a necessitie of sinning: which is therefore voluntarie in vs, because our selues were the cause thereof.

7 Concupiscence, when it hath conceiued. bringeth forth sinne, Iames, 1. 15. therefore Concu­piscence it selfe is not sinne, but the cause there­of.

Ans. 1: Iames speaketh of actuall sinne: and in the meane while he doth not acquitte con­cupiscence of the name of sinne: for if there­fore concupiscence be not sinne, because that, which springeth from it, is by Saint Iames cal­led sinne, then neither can concupiscence bee a sinne in the vnregenerate, which is absurde, 2, Seeing euery thing doth beget and bring forth his like (to insist in the metaphore of S. Iames) certainely concupiscence, which bringeth forth sinne, is it selfe sinne also. And that which [Page] maketh another to be so, is it selfe much more so: but concupiscence doth tempt and entise vs to sinne, as saint Iames saith in the same place, therefore, &c,

8 Concupiscence is in the Scripture called sinne improperly; as Christ also is called sinne, 2. Cor. 5. 21.

Ans. 1. Why wee should not take the worde sinne in his proper signification in the place alledged (2, Cor, 5. 21,) the text giueth vs reason, when it saith, That God made him to be sinne for vs, which knew no sinne, but there bee noe reasons why, when wee speake of concupiscence, wee should change the pro­per signification of the word into an improper, 2. Neither is it in the place of Paul, an impro­per speech, but a manner of phrase boro­wed from the Hebrewes, wherein the worde sinne is taken for a sacrifice for sinne: there­fore our Aduersaries doe bewraie their great ignorance.

9 Blessed is hee, in whose spirit there is no guile Psal. 32, [...]. therefore Concupiscence is not a sinne in the righteous. [Page] Ans: 1. To be without guile is opposed vnto hypocrisie, and nothing els is meant, but that the righteous are of a single & vpright heart. 2. It is a fallacie of diuision, whiles the thinges, that goe before, are seuered from those that follow after, for the whole verse is this. Blessed is the man to whome the Lord imputeth not iniquitie, and in whose spirit there is noe guile: therefore if sinnes be not imputed, yet they are in the man, though they be not imputed vn to him.

10 The fathers denie, that concupiscence is a sinne.

Ans. They denie it to be sinne according to the ciuill definition, where the will consenting and the act performed and consummated is vnderstood: not according to that definition, which is taken out of Diuinitie.

CHAP. 14: Of the Number of the Sacraments.

VVe denie not, but that the ancient wri­ters did vse the word Sacrament some times (but in a very general significa­tion) to note other things by, than Baptisme & the Lords supper, partly for reuerence, & partly [Page 231] for some misterie in the thing. But the question is of the more stricte and most proper signification of the word Sacramēt, in such sort as it agreeth to the Lords Supper and to Baptisme. Hereuppon the question is, whether the other fiue papistical Sacraments (to wit Confirmation, Penance, Ex­treme Vnction, Order and Matrimony) be to be receiued vnto the number of Sacraments in such sort, as that they may haue the like autoritie, & the same definition of a Sacament with the other vndoubted Sacraments, and most properly so called. Our Aduersaries contend for the num­ber of their seauen Sacraments: but we admit not of that number, for these reasons.

Because that number of 7 Sacraments is, no (1) where mentioned in holy Scripture.

Neither can there be any of the ancient fa­thers (2) shewed, who did precisely reckē 7 Sacra­ments; and neither moe nor fewer.

Wheras it is the power of God to ordain Sacraments, (3) none of the other fiue Sacraments haue the words of Sacramentall institution contai­ned in the Scripture.

Our Aduersaries themselues cannot (although their schoolemen haue toyled in it many waies but al in vaine) they cānot, I say, giue a general [Page 232] definition of a Sacrament, which is not larger thē the thing defined (that is, so that it doth not admitte within the definition other things be­sides those 7. Sacraments) or els which is not straiter than the thing defined, (whiles they endeuour to exclude other things, which be­sides their 7. Sacraments doe arise out of their larger definition) that is, which is so framed, that there be not some of the 5, counterfeit Sa­craments excluded by that definition. Heere our Aduersaries doe sticke in doubtfull plight, whiles they make the definition of a Sacrament either too large or too straite.

Seeing those two, vndoubted Sacraments, the Lords Supper and Baptisme, doe admitte (1) the same definition, and may be contained vn­der one generall definition, so that whatsoeuer in that generall definition agreeth to the one, the same agreeth to the other also; why should the other 5 controversed Sacraments, if they be truely and properly Sacraments, why shold they want this proprietie of a common defini­tion, and why should they not be pertakers of the same definition?

Contrariwise our aduersaries doe reason,

1 As there are 7 spirituall diseases, so there must bee 7 remedies and Sacraments. And as there be 7 cardinall vertues; so there must be 7 Sacraments, which conferre the same.

Answere 1.

These diseases and these vertues what euer they be, were in the time of the old Testament also. If therefore 7 Sacraments be necessarily concluded from the 7 diseases and 7 vertues, it will likewise follow, that in the olde testament there were neither moe nor fewer than seauen: but because the cōsequent is false, therfore the Antecedent is false also. 2, Besides, those disea­ses and vertues may either bee restrained to fewer, or extended to moe: these are therfore ropes of sande.

2 The number of seauen in the Scripture is an holy number, and is oftentimes vsed in myste­ries the 7, Seales, Reuel. 5. 1. the 7 trumpets; Revel. 8. 6, the 7 starres & Candlestickes Reuel. 1, 13, 16, the 7 loues, Matt 15, 34. the 7 eyes vpon [Page 234] one stone Zachar, 3. 9. and such like both in the old & new testament, concerning the number of seauen, therefore there are 7 Sacraments.

Answere 1.

If our Aduersaries would make a perfect syllogisme, thus it should be framed: whereso­euer in Scripture there is the number of seauen, there the 7 Sacraments are prefigured &c. But this proposition, as is cannot be pro­ued, so it is ridiculous, and therefore our Aduersaries keepe it close. 2, Yea, not 7. but 70 Sa­craments might by the same reason bee pro­ued, seeing that the number of Seuentie is of­ten vsed in Scripture. The captiuitie of Babilon endured 70 yeeres there were 70 palme trees in Elim, Exod, 15. 27, the patriarches des­cended into Egypt with 70 soules, there were 70 Elders of the people, there are 70 yeares of our life, Psal: 90, 10. Christ chose 70 disci­ples; we must pardon our brother that sinneth against vs, seuentie times seauen times in one day, &c: It is therefore a fallacie taking that for a cause, which is no cause, whereof followeth no conclusion:

[Page 235] 3 There are 7 principall orders in the Church. The first is of them that enter into it, whereto an­sweareth Baptisme. The second is of them that warre and plaie the souldiers, and to this confirma­tion answereth. The third of them that resume strength and refreshing, in the Euchariste; the fourth of them that arise after a fall, by pennance▪ The fift is of them that depart out, with extreame vnction. The sixt of them, that minister and doe seruice in the Church, and heereto belong holy or­ders. The seuenth is of them, that bring in newe souldiers, by matrimonie: therefore needes it must be, that there be: 7. Sacraments, and neither more nor lesse:


These distinctions of orders, diseases, ver­tues, are speculations of idle braines, which cannot beget vs any Sacraments, for it should be proued by the holy Scriptures, that all these things haue the force and propertie of Sacra­ments. 2. Neither may the counterfeit Dioni­sius in his Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie rest con­tent with this number of 7, for such reason: as these be:

4 The fathers haue giuen the name of Sacramēt vnto other things beside Baptisme and the Supper

[Page 236] Ans: 1. Yet did they neuer precisely define the number of 7 Sacraments to be necessarie, 2. Neither did they name other thinges Sacra­ments in the like sorte, as they did Baptisme and the Lords Supper, but either they called them so, for renerence of the things, or for some my­stery in them.

A particular Examination of the fiue Papisticall Sacraments.

Whether that the other 5 Popish Sacraments be to be called properly & truly Sacraments, (seeing that the word Sacrament is not contained in the Scripture) we can not better learne, than if the true properties of Sacraments be fetched from the defi­nition and nature of the two proper and vndoub­ted Sacraments, baptisme and the Lords supper. Wherby afterward, the agreeing or disagreeing of the rest of the Popish Sacramēts, wil be made manifest. For this is a groūd without cōrrouersie, so that it neither can, nor ought to bee refused of either side.

Now the properties of a true Sacrament (as they are taken out of Baptisme & the Lords Supper) be these.

There is required on outward signe, or visible, (1) materiall and corporall element, which may by a certaine and set rite and gesture, be handled [Page 237] vsed and giuen.

It is required, that the Element and the rite (2) haue an assured divine commandement and institution.

That it be an institution and commandemēt (3) of the New testament.

That it be such an institution or ordinance, which is to last not only for a time, but to the (4) ende of the world.

That there be some promise of God, of the grace, fruite and effect of the Sacrament. (5)

That that promise bee not bare and naked, but ioyned vnto, and as it were clothed with (6) that Sacramentall signe.

That the promise be not of any forte of ble­ssings either Corporall or Spirituall, but of (7) Iustification, Reconciliation, and the whole be­nefite of Redemption.

That it be not a generall promise only, but such as respecteth euery one, euen euery particu­lar (8) man that vseth the Sacraments.

These properties and conditions, seeing they agree to both the vndoubted Sacraments in all things; it must needes bee, that the other, if they be true Sacraments agree with them in the properties rehearsed.

Contrariwise our aduersaries doe reason.

1 The Apologie of the Augustane Confession doth admitt absolution and orders into the num­ber of Sacraments, therefore themselues (the Au­tors of the Apologie) doe not obserue the proper­ties proposed.

Ans. 1 They admitte them for Sacraments, in a general acception of the word sacrament, according to which acception, the fathers cal­led all those things Sacraments, whereby the generall promises of God were applied to eue­ry seuerall man; in which the Ministerie may be called a Sacrament: It is therefore a fallacy from that which is spoken but in some respect onely, to the same taken absolutely in all res­pects, 2, But because Absolution and Orcers doe want the visible Element, the Apologie doth protest, that it can endure they should be called by the name of Sacraments, so that they be not made equall to Baptisme and the Lords Supper. Therfore the Apologie doth not speak of that signification of the worde Sacrament, where of wee heere dispute. And therefore there be foure termes in the argument.

[Page 239] 2 The same Apologie protesteth that they will not contend about the word Sacrament, therefore it is friuolous to dispute thereof so exactlie.

Ans. Because the worde Sacrament is a thing not contained in Scripture, therefore the autors of the Apologie doe not brawle about the word: In the meane time the controuersie of the matter and thing signified by it, is not layd aside: that is, whether there bee one and the same reason and dignitie of Baptisme and the Lords Supper, as of the other, which ouer and besides these two, are by our Aduersaries graced with the name of Sacraments: They doe therefore but dallie by a fallacie from that is spoken in some respect only to the same ta­ken absolutely:

Nowe then let vs compare and examine the 5 popish Sacraments seuerally euery one by it selfe, by the proposed properties

1 Confirmation:

We cannot allow Confirmation for a Sacrament for these reasons following.

Because it hath no cōmandement frō God, for [Page 240] there appeareth not so much as any steppes of commandement, or example in the holy scrip­ture, wherby it may be certaine, that the faithful were annointed by the Apostles with the oile of confirmation, and that magically exorcized or coniured.

1 Philip is not said to haue confirmed the trea­surer of Candace. Act, 8, 27, &c.

2 Neither is it written that Peter did it to the three thousand Iewes that were conuer­ted, Act, 2, 40, 41, &c.

3 Neither is it read, that Paul confirmed any of the beleeuers with oile or Chrisme, in all the storie of the actes of the Apostles.

[...] There are abominations in the Popish confir­mation.

1 That Exorcizing or coniuring of Chris­me is altogether magicall, whereby some legi­ons of Diuels are coniured from the oile; superstitions, the signe of the Crosse and others, be­ing annexed thereto.

2 It turneth to the disgrace of Baptisme, as if more grace were receiued in confirmation, than in Baptisme, according to the doctrine of the Papists.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe dispute.

1, In confirmation there is the matter or ele­ment, oile, and the word of the Lord, In the name of the Father, &c. it is therefore a Sacra­ment.

Answere: 1. There is no commaunde­ment of God, whereby wee are enioined to vse oile, to confirme the mindes of the faith­full. 2, By the same reason, when wee say grace at dinner, there is the matter, meate, and the forme, the word of blessing it, or gi­ving thanks: therefore by the same reason wee should eate and drinke nothing but Sa­craments. 3. There wanteth also the com­maundement of God, whereby the word of blessing and consecration is appointed and tyed to the visible element. It is therefore a fallacie taking for a cause, that which is no cause, and heere bee brought partiall causes, not totall: part of those thinges, that are re­quired to a Sacrament, but not all.

2, The Apostles Peter and Iohn confirmed the Samaritanes, and Paul the Ephesians. Act. 8, 15, 17, and 19, 6.

Ans. 1. We reade not one word that they [Page 242] confirmed them with exorcized oile, or gi­ving a blow on the eare, which is the Popish ceremonie. 2. The places alleaged do speake of the wonderfull gifts of the holy Ghost, which are ceased in the Church: but Sacra­ments ought not to cease, but and if our Ad­uersaries can bestow the admirable gifts of the holy Ghost by their confirmation, wee will also receaue their confirmation.

3. Christ instituted the Sacrament of Confir­mation, and the consecration of the Chrisme, the day before he suffered.

Ans: 1. Let them, if they can, shew vs one sillable heereof in the whole storie of the Gospell. 2. Certaine writings, wherein such traditions are recorded, as beeing receaued from Christ, which are thrust vpon vs vnder the name of antiquitie, are counterfaits: neither are they warrant inough to make a new Sacrament.

4: Certaine persons were annointed with oile in the old Testament: therfore Christians ought to be confirmed with it.

Ans. 1. Our Sacraments ought by their beginning to be Sacraments of the new Te­stament. 2. Oile in the olde Testament was [Page 243] a shadowing of the holy Ghost: but sha­dowes are alreadie ceased, therefore this is an inconsequent argument. 3, And, if oile may be translated out of the olde Testament into the new, why should not also all other the ceremonies of the Leviticall law, which Christ hath abrogated at his comming?

5. The beleevers were confirmed by the im­position of the hands of the Apostles.

Answere. 1.

The Apostles laied their hands on the be­leevers, that they might receaue the won­derfull gifts of the holy Ghost (as was afore­said) besides it was to last but for a time, nei­ther was it vsed towards all: for there were many thousands of Christians, on whom the Apostles laied not their hands: for those wonderfull gifts were not bestowed on all Christians. And what is this then to Popish Confirmation? 2. Heere bee more termes than three. 1, Confirmation. 2, Sacrament. 3. Laying on of hands. 4: Ceremonies different from laying on of hands. 5, The bestowing of the gifts of the holy▪Ghost. 6. The bare Popish spectacle of Chrisme or oile.

[Page 244] 6. Christ confirmed the little children. Mar. 10: 16: therefore Confirmation is a Sacrament.

Ans. 1. The Antecedent speaketh of bles­sing and praier (such a Confirmation as is vsed at this day in our Churches) neither is there any mention of oile: but the Conse­quent speaketh of a quite other thing, alto­gether different from the action of Christ: there arise therefore foure termes.

(2) Penance;

Repentance, though it bee necessarie for all men, yet it is not to bee counted among the Sa­craments, for these reasons.

Repentance was commaunded, and was (1) necessarie in the olde Testament also: but our Sacraments ought to be the institutions of the new Testament.

Seeing in the olde Testament (where also was repentance) it was not reckoned for a (2) Sacrament; why should it now be?

It wanteth a visible element, ordained by God for Repentance. (3)

Those ceremonies, which the Papists vse in their penance (laying on of handes and (4) [Page] such like) haue no promise, that God will be effectuall, in vs by those rites:

The Popish penance is polluted with ma­nie (5) humane traditions and corruptions, as shall bee declared in his proper place (Chap. 23) for which cause it deserveth not the name of a Sacrament.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe dispute.

1, penance is commaunded, Mar: 1, 15: Math: 3, 2. therefore it is a Sacrament.

Answer. 1.

It is a fallacie, for that there is not a suffi­cient reckoning vp of the causes and parts requisite to a Sacrament: for not some one or other partiall cause alone, is a sufficient cause of a Sacrament. 2. By the same rea­son Charitie should be a Sacrament too, for that also hath the commandement of Christ. Ioh. 13, 34. and in other places.

2, Penance hath an outward element also, as the laying on of hands: therefore it is a Sacra­ment.

[Page 246] Ans. 1. If the ceremonies of actions per­formed by the hand bee elements in the Sa­craments; then in Baptisme there will bee two elements, to wit, water and the laying to of the hands, or the washing of the childe by the hand of the Minister: which is ab­surd: therefore the Antecedent is false. 2. The rite or ceremony of laying on of hands, is not commaunded in Scripture. 3. Neither can it be shewed, that the grace of God is ty­ed to the ceremonie. Neither doe we reade, that Iohn Baptist laied his hands vpon euery one of that innumerable multitude of men, whom vppon their repentance hee bapti­zed.

3. In penance there is an application of the grace of God to euery one in particular: there­fore it is a Sacrament.


It is a fallacie, from an vnsufficient cause: for remission of sinnes is applied to euerie one in particular by faith, and yet it is not therefore a Sacrament. And as Papists say, the grace of iustification is applied to euery one in particular by good works▪ therefore, [Page 247] according to their opinion, the good works of the regenerate should bee counted a­mongst the Sacraments. And by this meanes what an infinite number of Sacraments shall we haue?

(3) Order.

Wee denie that Popish Orders are to bee ac­counted a Sacrament) if we speake properly of a Sacrament) for these reasons.

Because it hath no outward element. (1)

Because the rites, which are there woont (2) to bee vsed, haue neither example of the A­postles, nor commandement of Christ; and therefore they haue no promise of grace to the receaver.

Because those things, which are alleaged (3) out of Scripture for their degrees of Orders, are very ridiculous.

1. That Christ was Ostiarius, a doore-keeper, and so thereby did institute this See Duran­dus in his book called Rationale Divinoru [...] officioru [...]. degree of Orders, they triflingly proue, because he said. I am the doore: by mee if any man enter in, hee shal be saved. Ioh. 10 9. And so their Ostiarij, the dore keepers in Poperie shall be that dore, by which we [Page 248] must enter into heauen.

2. The degree of Lector or Reader they proue, because Christ did reade out of the booke of Isai. Luk, 4, 17.

3, They proue the degree of Exorciste, because Christ gaue power to his Apo­stles to cast out Devils. Mar. 6. 7, 13.

4, The degree of Acolythites, they proue, because Christ saide: Hee that followeth mee, walketh not in darknesse. Iohn: 8. 12.

5. The degree of Subdeacon is proued, because Christ when he washed the Apo­stles feete, was girded about with a linnen to well. Ioh: 13. 4.

6, They proue the degree of Deacon, be­cause Christ did distribute the Eucharist or Communion to his Apostles, Math: 26 26, &c.

7, They proue the degree of Priesthood, because Christ was a Priest after the or­der of Melchisedech: because hee offered himselfe to his Father in his last supper: because there he ordained his Apostles to be Priests.

[Page 249] Because the rites of the popish ordinati­on, (4) a great part of them be taken out of the ould Testament, where the Priest was an­nointed with oile &c. Wherfore those be­long not to the Sacraments of the newe Te­stament, vnlesse we would bring Christians backe againe to Iudaisme.

Because the end of the popish ordinati­on (5) is not intended and destinated to the prea­ching of the Gospell, but to the offering of the sacrifice of the masse, for the liuing and for the dead. Which how great an impie­tie it is, shall bee declared afterward in the chapter of the masse.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason thus.

1 The institution of the ministery is contai­ned in the Olde and New Testament. There­fore it is a Sacrament.

Ans. 1. The maior proposition (which our Aduersaries doe not set downe) is mani­festly false, which should be this: whatsoe­uer is instituted in the Olde and New Testa­ment, that is a Sacrament. 2; It is a fallacy [Page 250] from an vnsufficient reckoning vp of the cau­ses; for it is not some one propertie of a sa­crament, that can suffice, vnlesse there bee a sufficient cause brought, that is such a one, as consisteth of all the properties, which con­curre to the making of a Sacrament, 3. There is more in the Conclusion, than in the premisses. For there doth no more follow, but that the Ministerie dependeth not vpon humane but deuine authoritie. 4, And by the like reason, (to answere them by an instance) the ordination of the Magistrate should be a Sacrament For it hath his institution both in the Olde and New Testament.

2 Order hath a visible signe, the imposition of hands as appeareth by the ordination vsed of the Apostles. Therefore it is a Sacrament.

Ans, 1, We answered a little before, that imposition of handes is not the Element or matter of a Sacrament. 2, We doo not reade that that ceremonie was euer commanded of Christ. 3, * Though there be no certain cōmand [...] ­ment for imposition of h [...]des, yet be­cause we And it is now in the liberty of the church to v [...]e it, or not to vse it. But sacramēts haue not Ceremonies which are left to [Page 251] mens liberty. Seeing thē heere be vnderstood sacramentall Ceremonies, both which are see that it was still v­sed of the Apostles their so precise v­sing of it. ought to be vnto vs in steed of a comman dement. Calvin Iustitut. lib. 4. cap. 3 5. 16. How soeuer, there is no thing in it to make it the matter of a Sacra­ment. left, and which are not left to mens choise and libertie, there arise fower termes.

3 The order of the Ministerie hath a promise of grace, that God will work effectually by the ministerie. Therefore it is a Sacrament.

Ans, 1. That promise respecteth ra­ther the hearers, than him, that is ordained. For he may preach vnto others to their sal­uation and himselfe be a cast-away: but the Sacraments doe apply grace to him, that v­seth them.

4 But wee reade that in Ordination grace i [...] bestowed vpon them, which are ordained. As we reade of Timothy, 2, Timoth, 1, 6.

Answer. 1, The Apostles had the gift of miracles, and did giue the Holy-ghost miraculously by the imposition of hands, 2, GOD dooth vsually worke by the good meanes ordained by himselfe: and so dooth bestowe his grace vppon the person which was ordayned at the praier [Page 252] and request of the whole congregation, ga­thered together in his name for so holy an exercise. Yet wee may not therefore thinke, that the imposition of hands is a sacramentall signe, which conferreth grace.

5 Augustine, writing against the Donatistes dooth call Order a Sacrament: as doo other of the Fathers also.

Ans, 1. They did so in some sort and respect, for the excellencie and reuerence of the ministerie, which the Donatistes did debase. 2. The Fathers vsed the word Sacra­ment in a larger signification, than we here take it, as was sayde in the beginning of this Chapter.

4. Matrimonie.

Why wee doe not account matrimonie for a Sacrament, these be our reasons:

Because it hath no promise of grace of iu­stification. (1)

Because by the same reason it should haue (2) been a Sacrament in the Olde Testament, which the Papists will not grant.

[Page 253] Because if it were a Sacrament, then Sa­craments should bee amongst infidells, and (3) without the Church▪ which is absurde,

Because it hath no visible Element. (4)

Because there is there no applying of (5) grace.

Because our Aduersaries doo so speake of (6) Matrimonie, that they leaue no place for it Pope Syri­cius. among Sacraments, calling it a carnall state, wherein they that live, cannot please God; they say also that Priests are polluted by this state. How then dare they call Matrimony a Sacrament, seeing their Ecclesiasticall persons doe abhorre it, as a prophane thing

Contrariwise our aduersaries doe dispute.

Paul calleth matrimonie a Sacrament, Ephes, 5, 32.

Ans, 1, The Papists translation is cor­rupt the worde in the Greeke, signifieth a mysterie or secre [...] [...], Paul sayth not of mariage, that it is a mysterie, but of the spiritual coniunction of Christ & his Church as hee expoundeth himselfe, But I speake concerning Christ and the Church▪

[Page 254] 2 Mariage is honourable among all, and the bed without spott, Hebrewes 13, 4. But the bed should not be without spot, if there were not They bee the wordes of Eckius in his En­chiridion. the Grace of the Sacrament.

Ans, 1, The Ministerie, Magistrates, Parents are honourable, and yet no Sacra­ments. 2, Here is a fallacie taking that for a cause which is not. For the bed is sayde to bee vnspotted, not because matrimonie is a Sacrament, but because the religious Man and Wife dooth not defile the bedde with whoredome and adulterie; as the next words following do declare. 3, If the grace of the Sacrament doo make the bed spotlesse, why do they not grant matrimony to their priests? why doo they esteeme it more tollerable, for a Priest to bee a whoremonger and adulte­rer, than a married man? For such Priests haue they to lerated manie in poperie, when as they will not away with honest mariage.

3 Mariage hath the promise of eternall life For the woman shall bee saued by bearing of children, 1, Timoth, 2. 15.

[Page 255] Ans. 1, By this reason all married per­sons, euen the infidels should bee saued. 2, Paul comforteth women; that their sor­rowes which GOD layeth vpon them for a punishment, do turne to them to bee offi­ces of their calling, & exercises of the crosse, of a Sacrament neuer a word, 3 Paul spea­keth vpon supposition and with limitation; If they continue in faith, &c. Hee dooth not ascribe saluation to matrimony, but onely dooth teach, that those wiues shall be saued in the state of wedlocke, who keep faith, god­linesse, charitie, and chastitie. 4. Godly wo­men, by perseuerance in faith, loue▪ &c. doo sanctifie their matrimonie; but sacraments are not sanctified by man, but on the contra­rie side, men receiue sanctification from the Sacrament.

4 The vnbeleeuing husband is sanctified by the Wife. 1, Cor. 7, 14 Seeing therfore Matri­monie hath the power of sanctifying, it is a Sa­crament.

Answ. 1. If this sanctifying heere spo­ken of, pertaine to saluation, then it fol­loweth, that infidels shall bee saued by their belieuing wines; which is absurde; but if [Page 256] to sanctifie heere signifie an other thing, then the argument falleth to the ground, 2, But there bee fowre termes; For in the Antece­dent holy signifieth (after the phrase of the Hebrues) that which is granted and permit­ted as a thing that is lawfull to be vsed in ho­ly manner (in which sense creeping things are saide to be purified, Acts, 10, 15.) but in the consequent it is taken for sanctitie or ho­linesse and iustification and renouation.

5 Matrimonie hath his institution & blessing from God, Gen. 2, 18, 22, 24. Therefore it is a Sa­crament.

Ans. That promise of blessing is not of the grace of iustification and reconciliation, but onely of a temporall felicitie. It is no­thing therfore to a Sacrament, which is con­uersant onely about the grace of reconcilia­tion.

6 Matrimonie is a remedie or medicine (as the schoole-men speake) of a spirituall disease, to witfornication, 1, Cor, 7, 2,

Ans, 1, This is not sufficient to make it a Sacrament; because it is a remedie against [Page 257] fornication! 2, Faith and praier are remedies against tentations: shall they therefore bee counted Sacraments?

(5) Extreame vnction.

We admit not of extreame vnction; because it neither hath the wordes of institution which is to continue in Church, nor any certaine ordina­tion of his rite, described by the circumstances thereof, nor the promise of grace of iustification, nor any other property at all of a true Sacra­ment.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe dispute.

1. Extreame vnction hath the outward element of oile; therefore it wanteth not the property of a Sacrament.

Ans. Vnlesse to this element there come the word, to destinate it to this purpose, to cō maund it, and to promise the forgiuenes of sinnes, and euerlasting life (of all which our Aduersaries can shew nothing in the Scrip­ture) their oile of the sicke is no more to bee esteemed, than oile Oliue, which is provided to be sawce for a sallet of hearbs.

[Page 258] 2. The Apostles did annoint many sicke men with oile, and healed them. Mark. 6. 13, therefore Extreame vnction is a Sacrament, en [...]oined by Christ to the Apostles.

Ans: 1. That annointing was a tempora­rie thing, neither hath it any commaunde­mēt, that we should do the like. 2. By the same reason the handkerchiefs of Paul (Act: 19. 12. and the shadowe of Peter, whereby manie sicke men were healed (Acts. 15. 15.) should be Sacraments. 3. The text speaketh of mi­raculous gifts, which because they endured but for a time, doe not come within the cō ­passe of Sacraments.

3 Is any man sicke among you? let him call for the elders of the Church, and let them pray for him, and annoint him with oile. &c. Iames, 5. 14.

Answer. 1.

It followeth not: Iames speaketh of oile, therefore of oile of Extreame vnction magi­callie exorcized. 2. That annointing was not [Page 259] extreame vnction, but was for the recoverie of health; whereas on the contrarie side ex­treame vnction is administred in Poperie, to them which are readie foorth-with to die, when there is no hope of any recoverie. 3, The meaning of Saint Iames is, that praier should be made for the sick, that their sinnes may bee forgiven them, whereby they haue drawne sicknes vpon them: but thence ari­seth no Sacrament. 4. Caietan no meane Cardinall among the Papists, saith this place cannot bee vnderstoode of extreame vncti­on, but of the miraculous annointing spo­ken of▪ Mark, 6. Whereof hee giveth three reasons. 1, Because Iames doth not say: Is a­nie man sicke vnto death, but simply, is any man sicke. 2, The end and effect heereof is the easing of the sicke: but of remission of sins he speaketh not but only conditionally: wheras Extreame vnction is not administred but at the point of death, & is directly inten­ded for remission of sinnes. 3, Iames bids call for many Ministers to one sicke man, both to pray for him and to annoint him; which is much different from the rite of Extreame vn­ction. So one of their owne pillars hath [Page 260] wyped them of two places at once. (This of Iames and the sixth of Marke) which are the onely shewes of authoritie, the Papists haue for this forged Sacrament.

CHAP. 15. Of Transsubstantiation.

OVr Aduersaries doe expound the sacra­mentall vnion in the Eucharist, to bee by manner of Transsubstantiation; whereby they imagine, that after the words of con­secration, the elements doe altogether vanish a­way, and are changed into the substance of the body and bloud of Christ, so that besides the bare accidents, which are seene, tasted and felt, there remaineth no whit of the elements in the Sacra­ment: but we denie that there needes any such fic­tion of Transsubstantiation for the making of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper: and that for these reasons.

The nature of a Sacrament requireth, that there be together an earthly and an heaven­lie (1) [Page 261] lie matter: as Irenaeus saith: or, not that the substance be changed, but that grace be ad­ioined, as Theodoret speaketh.

Because there be other meanes of Sacra­mentall (2) vnion, than by Transsubstantiation a­lone: as is apparent in Baptisme.

Christ saith not; This shall bee made my body; or this is changed into my body: but, (3) This is my body; to wit, by sacramentall re­lation and vnion, as in other Sacraments.

Paul, the heavenly Interpreter of Christs words, doth not admit Transsubstantiation, (4) but doth so interprete the sacramentall vni­on, that stil the visible elements remaine, or the bread of the Sacrament after the conse­cration, hee calleth bread still: to giue vs to vnderstand, that the substance of the bread remaineth still.

1, The bread (saith he) which we breake (that is, distribute after the consecration) is it not the communion of the body of Christ. 1, Cor. 10. 16.

2. All we are partakers of one bread. 1. Corinth: 10. 16.

[Page 262] 3. As often as yee shall eate this bread. 1, Cor: 11. 26.

4. Whosoeuer shall eate this bread. vers. 27.

5. Let a man examine himselfe, and so let him eate of this bread. verse, 28.

So haue the Fathers explaned this myste­rie, that they declare, that the elements re­maine (5): as, Receaue that in the bread (spiri­tually by faith) which hanged vppon the Crosse. Augustine.

These manner of speaches in the Scrip­ture are almost alike: God is man: This is (6) my beloved sonne. In which phrases is no­ted the most neare and straite vnion of the two natures in Christ (farre straiter and more neare, than this of the Sacrament:) and yet is not concluded the transsubstantiation of one nature into another, or the abolishing of either nature.

Vpon the opinion of Transsubstantiation many absurdities doe follow. (7)

1, So Christ should be said to haue a two­fold body or two bodies; whereof the one [Page 263] should bee taken from the virgine Marie, and the other should be made of bread.

2. We should not receaue the body cru­cified for vs, but a certaine other thing, which an houre before was not that bo­die, but bread; nay, which a little before had no being in nature; which is absurd and impious, contrarie to the wordes of Christ, whereby he promiseth vs that bo­die, that was given for vs, and that bloud, which was shed for vs.

3. Accidents are heereby made to bee without a subiect: as if when the snow is melted, the whitenes of the snow, should remaine alone with out a subiect.

4. Mise, that gnawe the consecrated bread, cannot gnaw bare accidents alone. Therefore either accidents are substances, that they may be subiect to the grinding of teeth, or the glorified body of Christ is subiect to elementarie passions and natu­rall sufferings, both of which are most ab­surd. The like question may bee made concerning the burning of the Eucharist: [Page 264] what it is, that burneth? whether bare accidents? or the body of Christ?

5, Infinite such other grosse absurdities may bee seene in the Writings of that fa­mous man, Wilhel. Holderus, (de mure exen­terato) wherein are recited many other such like things, according to the opinion of the Schoole men.

Our Aduersaries themselues doe not be­leeve (8) that there is Transsubstantiation.

1. And therefore they seeke out other and more goodly words, as annihilation of the elements, or a ceasing of them to be, desinition they call it.

2. Gerson amongst his reasons for the communion vnder one kinde, bringeth this as a reason, why the cup should bee denied to the people; because the wine might bee corrupt, and turned into Flies and vineger. If the wine be truly transsub­stantiated, then can it not bee corrupted, vnlesse wee will say, that Flies and vineger may be generated of the glorified body o [...] Christ, or that they are generated of acci­dents, there being no corporeall matter or substance required thereunto.

[Page 265] 3 Transsubstantiation was not belieued in the whole Church before I take is, this is a fault in the print, & that the Autor meāt to say▪ 1300 yeares, as [...] c [...]tur [...] wri­ters also do (Cē [...], 13, cap, col, 622) for in the 13th centurie af­ter Christ, was the Councell of Lateran vn­der Innocē ­tius the 3d. whereof the Autor heere speaketh: which was the [...] ge­nerall Coū ­cell wherein Transsubstā tiation was defined & so after gene­rally recei­ued, how so­euer for só-400, or 500 yeares, before it was disputed of, & maintai­ned by some three hun­dred yeares: and this error at the length was spread further, and was confirmed by the Lateran Councell.

Contrariwise our aduersaries doe dispute.

1, That which Christ reached to his Apostles, was the true bodie of Christ. Therfore the bread was turned into his body by Transsubstantiation.

Ans, 1, There is more in the conse­quent, than in the Antecedent. For it fol­loweth not, Christ gaue his body to his dis­ciples; therefore there was his bodie in none other manner, than by Transsubstantiation. For it was in the sacrament by sacramen­tall relation and vnion, and receiued of the belieuers spiritually by faith.

2 Christ sayde not: This breade is my bodie; but he sayde: This, meaning thereby his body: so that the demonstratiue particle, (This) is con­strued and taken, not for the bread, but for the body. Heereby therefore he insinuated, that the [Page 266] bread was not then in the Eucharist.

Ans, 1. Then the speach shall be this: this body shall be my body, which is idle. 2, This explication of Christs words cannot stand with the doctrine of the Papists. For where­as they say, that the power of Transsubstan­tiating is contained in those fiue words pro­nounced Hoc enim est corpus meu [...]. (for this is my bodie) doubtles whē Christ tooke up the breade, and pronounced the word (This) as yet was made no Transsubstantiation, and so the speech should haue bin of a non ens, a thing which had no being.

3 The worde (est, is) is a verbe substantiue, which noteth a beeing, or subsisting; therefore there must needes be Transsubstantiation.

Ans. 1, By the same reason, it will as well follow: Christ saith, I am a vine; but the verbe (sam or I am) is a verbe substantiue, which noteth the beeing and subsisting of a thing. Therefore there must needes bee Transsubstantiation of Christs nature into a vine. 2, It signifieth the beeing, but not the manner of the being. There is Christs body indeed, but not after a naturall manner of be­ing by Transsubstantiation, but after a spiri­tuall by faith and sacramentall vnion.

[Page 267] 4 There must needes bee an Identitie, that the body may truly be predicated of the breade: (for it were not true that breade remaining the same, and a different thing from the body should be the body:) but an Identitie of the breade and body can bee no other way made, but by Trans­substantiation: Therefore, &c.

Ans. There needes no Identitie to make the predication true: for this proposition is true, the Lambe is the Passeouer, and yet the Lambe and the Passeouer bee not the same thing. For some things are affirmed of other, because they are really & formally in­herent in them: & some things again are affirmed of other, because they haue an externall vnion and coherence, which is most vsuall in all the sacramental speeches both of the old & new Testament. Circumcision is the Co­uenant, the Rock was Christ▪ &c.

5 As that predication is vnderstood (Matth, 3) This is my beloued Sonne, that is, whatsoeuer ye see; is my beloued Sonne: so are the wordes of Christ to be vnderstood in the supper: as, This is my body, that is, that which yee see, is my body. So that the bread remaineth no longer bread.

[Page 268] Answer, 1, Howsoeuer the predicati­on be vnderstood (Matthew, 3,) the contrarie will rather follow thereof. For by reason of the neare coniunction of the two natures in Christ, the one is predicated of the other in Concreto, but there is no Transsubstantiati­on or changing of one nature into the other. 2, Christ was the Sonne of God both in re­spect of his deitie and of his humanitie. And therefore this speach is nothing like those of the Sacrament.

6 Seeing that the predication is changed (so that the breade is afterward not called bread, but the Lords bodie) it must needes bee that the sub­iect; (that whereof it is spoken) must bee chan­ged also, & therefore there is Transsubstantiation.

Answer, There is a great change, but it is of vse and qualitie, not of substance. Therefore after the consecration it is called blessed and holy breade, the communion of the body of Christ, and is not common vul­gar breade. But it followeth not, there is a change, therefore by Transsubstantiation.

[Page 269] 7 Tropes and figures are not to bee admitted in the wordes of the supper. For it is to bee sup­posed, that Christ would then speake plainely without figures) but if Transsubstantiation be not granted, there must needes be admttted some fi­gure, Therefore, &c.

Answ, All figures and improper spee­ches are not obscure, but they are, when they be vsuall and knowen, most cleare and signi­ficant. Now there bee no other figures or tropes in the Lords Supper, but such as are, and alwaies were vsuall in Sacraments, and familiarly knowen to the Church, 2, How will the Papists auoid a trope in those words of Christ (Luk 22, 20) This cupp is the New Testament in my bloud? Is the cupp pro­perly the Newe Testament?

8, Breade, before the consecration the Fa­thers call breade; but afterward they call it the body of Christ.

Ans, And so doo wee. For though it be in nature bread, euen after the consecration, [Page 270] as Paul oftentimes calleth it, yet is it sacra­mentally the body of Christ.

9 In the liturgie of Saint Iames Transsubstan­tiation is approued.


This is a testimonie from a forged and counterfaite writing.

10 All things are possible with GOD; there­fore Transsubstantiation.


From what GOD can doo to what hee will, is no good consequence. It is a fond reason, to argue as Papists doo, from the absolute omnipotencie of GOD, with­out his Word or Promise.

Heere follow certaine shiftes of our Aduersaries.

1 Breade, after the phrase of the Hebrues, is often taken for nourishment, so whereas the body of Christ is the nourishment of the soule, it may well be called breade by Paul, euen after the conse­cration.

Ans, It followeth not, breade in some places signifieth nourishment; therefore in the Lords Supper breade dooth not signifie bread. All these propositions be meere par­ticulars: and therefore nothing followeth thereof.

2 Some things which haue beene changed in nature, haue kept their olde name in the scripture; as the Rod of Moses, that was turned into a Ser­pent. So may breade after it is transsubstantiated, keepe the name of breade.

Ans, 1, They should first proue that there is Transsubstantiation, but this argument of the Papists presupposeth Transsubstantiati­on, which we denie. It is therefore a beg­ging of the thing in question. 2, They bee [Page 272] meere particulars, from which nothing will follow.

3, The Ancient Church admitted of the Phrase (Sub specie) that is vnder the shape or Accidents. Therefore they intimate hereby, that the breade and wine remaine not.

Ans, Our Aduersaries trifle with an aequi­uocation of the worde (Species). For the Fathers tooke it, for the one part or kinde of the outward Element in the Sacrament, as it is also meant in that question betweene vs and the Papists, whether the people are to receiue (sub vtraque specie) vnder both kinds, that is both the breade and the wine; not vnder both accidents, which were a sense­lesse speach: but they take the word (Speci­es) for a shape or accident, which the Fa­thers meant not.

CHAP. 16. Of the adoration, inclusion, and carying about of the Eucharist: as also of the Sacraments out of their vse.

THe adoring, carying about, and shutting of the Eucharist in a boxe, vseth to bee glosed with this colour especially, among the Pa­pists: for that they say, that the Eucharist is and remaines a Sacrament besides and out of the vse thereof; turning that into an argument or proofe, which is a controversie: therefore are wee also to make a question heereof.

Question. 1.

Whether the Eucharist remaine a Sacrament out of the vse thereof: We denie it for these reasons.

Because, seeing Sacraments are actions, they consist onely in vse and action, that they (1) may bee Sacraments: which action and vse ceasing, the Sacrament it selfe ceaseth al­so.

Seeing our Aduersaries themselues doe not account, Baptisme to bee a Sacrament, (2) out of his vse, (as in which the wordes [Page 274] of the action are contained in the instituti­on) and moe wordes of the action doe con­curre in the Lords Supper, than in the insti­tution of Baptisme, much lesse also may the Eucharist remaine out of his vse, than Bap­tisme may.

Where the whole action is not, neither is there the whole Sacrament: but when (3) the Consecration is rent and seperated from the communicating or receauing, there is not the whole action: neither is there there­fore the whole Sacrament.

Christ doth prescribe a certaine end and vse; Eate, drinke. Christ instituted this vse (4) for this Sacrament; wherefore, this vse cea­sing, the Sacrament ceaseth also.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe dispute.

1. When Christ pronounced these words (This is my body) the Disciples had not eaten as yet; and yet the words of Christ were true then, before they did eate, therefore it was a Sacrament also e­ven before, and without the vse thereof.

Ans. 1. If we made the action and vse one­lie to consist in eating and drinking, then [Page 275] the argument would follow: but we doe not define that action to consist onely in eating and drinking, but in doing all those thinges, which Christ either by his example or com­maundement bids vs doe: as namely, to re­ceaue the bread, to breake, blesse, distribute and eate it, to giue God thanks, and to shew the Lords death. It was not therefore out of the vse of the Sacrament, when Christ rea­ched the bread to his Apostles.

2. Luke omitteth these wordes; Take, eate; in­timating thereby that the body of Christ is in the Eucharist out of the vse thereof.

Answere. 1.

By a fallacie of Division those things are severed asunder, which ought out of foure rehearsalls of the institution, to haue beene ioined together: for that which Luke omit­ted, the other two Euangelists, and Paule haue supplied. The whole action then is not to bee taken from some one of them alone, but iointly and together from them all. 2: They conclude heere any thing of everie thing: for what coherence is? Luke omitted some words, therefore he did omit them for [Page 276] none other cause, but to shewe, that the Sa­crament out of his vse, is neuerthelesse a Sa­crament.

3. Christ faith: this is; he saith not; It shall bee made my body heereafter, to wit in the eating.

Answere. 1.

It was answered a while agoe, that the action and vse doth not consist in eating a­lone; And therefore in the acte of the Sup­per, the bread is rightly called the bodie of Christ, even before the eating; that it shall not be needefull to say; This shall bee made the body of Christ. 2, And Christ in these wordes would simply say this much: I giue you my body to be eaten.

4 If the Eucharist bee not a Sacrament out of his vse, it would followe, that not the wordes of Christ, but our vse doth make a Sacrament.

Answere. 1.

Christs will (whom wee ought to obey in eating and drinking) maketh the Sacrament, and not our vse. The vse of the Sacrament therefore relyeth vpon the words of institu­tion: and how then doe wee ascribe it to vs, and not rather to the word of Christ, while [Page 277] wee doe that, which is commaunded by the wordes of Christ. It is therefore a fallacie supposing that to bee a cause, which is none.

5. In the Primitiue Church the Deacons were woont to carie parts of the Eucharist to the sicke: therefore the Eucharist remaines a Sacrament out of the vse.

Ans. These parts were caried to the sicke, that they should take them and eate them, as Communicants and partakers of the com­mon action, according to Christs instituti­on: and therefore that was not out of the vse of the Sacrament. It is therefore a loose conclusion from the Sacrament in vse, to the Sacrament out of his vse.

6. Ecclesiasticall writers doe report, that some were wont to carie the Eucharist home with them, and to reserue it.

Ans. 1. And it may be doubted, whether they did well or no: 2. Other mens abuse doth not make a rule for vs, and impose a necessitie to doe or approoue the like. And the Reader may heere obscrue that the Pa­pists doe vsuallie in their Sophisticall rea­sons suppresse that proposition, which is [Page 278] weake and lyable to open exception; as kno­wing that they cannot proue it: but this is not to deale sincerely with the Church of God.

7. But when afterward, some daies being pas­sed after the consecration, they did (in the time of persecution) eate the consecrated bread, which they had reserved, who would denie but that they receaued the body of Christ, especially being, as they were, so deuoutly affected?

Ans, 1. Wee may not make rules of those things, which happen in case of necessitie. 2. Neither may we thinke, that those deuout Christians, in that agonie of persecution did receaue the reserved Eucharist without the memorie of Christs passion, without godly praiers, and giving of thankes. All which seeing they belong to the vse and ac­tion of the Supper, it may not bee saide that they receaved the Sacrament out of the vse. And the elements, which they vsed, were destinated to the vse of the Lords Supper.

Question. 2.

VVhether the Eucharist bee to bee adored. [Page 279] Our Aduersaries doe adore it with divine wor­ship onely due to God, not onely in the vse ther­of, but out of the vse too, in their Oratories, and in publicke processions when it is caried about. We say that the Eucharist is to be reverenced, as an holy mysterie, but not to bee adored or wor­shippeed; and that fo [...] these reasons.

Because the Sacraments doe consist of an earthly and an heavenly matter: therefore (1) when the Sacrament is adored, the element and the earthly matter is adored: which is Artolatria, a worshipping of bread.

Out of the vse, the worshipping of the Eucharist is more absurd Idolatrie: for out (2) of the vse, Sacraments cease to bee Sacra­ments; and so they worship bread, which is not so much as holy or sacramentall bread.

True adoration cannot be without faith. (3) (Romanes, 14. 23.) and faith is not without the word of God. (Romaines, 10. 17.) Seeing then we haue no word, whereby we are bid­den to worship the Eucharist, faith falleth, which is the primarie ground and stay of a­doration.

[Page 280] If the Eucharist bee to be adored, then by (4) the like reason Baptisine should bee adored too, because of the presence and effectuall operation of the holy Ghost. But our Ad­uersaries denie this latter, and therefore wee the former.

When Christ reached the Eucharist to (5) his Disciples; wee doe not reade any where, that the Apostles rose vp, and worshipped the Sacrament: which out of doubt they would haue done if the Sacrament should haue beene adored.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason.

1. Transsubstantiation takes away all occasion of Idolatrie: therefore (say they) wee are vniustly accused of Idolatrie.

Ans. 1. Transsubstantiation is a principle simply false: therefore it is a begging of the question. 2. If Transsubstantiation were granted, yet it could not bee prooved that it should haue place out of the vse of the Sacra­ments: these are therefore rotten and rui­nous foundations.

2. If it bee rightly adored in the vse, why not rightly also out of the vse.

[Page 281] Ans, Because the Sacrament out of the vse, is no Sacrament. As was declared a while agoe.

3, Wheresoeuer Christ is, there hee is to bee adored: but Christ is in the consecrated host▪ there­fore he is to be worshipped in the hoste.

Answer, 1, Wee worshipp Christ in the Eucharist, (for wee say at the Communi­on wee praise thee, wee worship thee &c.) but wee worshipp not the Eucharist, nor CHRIST as there carnally present. 2, The maior proposition (as it is proposed by the Papists) is not simply and in all respects true. For Christ was in Peter the Apostle, yet Pe­ter would not suffer himselfe to be worship­ped, Act, 10, 25, 26.

4 If the manhoode of Christ, (which yet is a creature) bee [...]ightly adored because of the hypo­staticall vnion, why may not the bread be adored too, because of the Sacramentall vnion.

Answere 1, There is great difference betweene the Sacramentall vnion and the personall vnion: the one maketh [Page 282] one person and subsistence, the other dooth not. 2, The flesh of Christ never subsisted by any proper subsistence of his own before the incarnation, but as soone, as it beganne to haue a beeing, it subsisted in the person of the Sonne of God, and that not by any pro­per subsistence of his owne. Hereof it com­meth to passe that whosoeuer doth adore the Sonne of God, that is, the second person in Trinitie, the same dooth also rightly adore the flesh of Christ. which things seeing they be nothing so in the breade and wine of the Euchariste, the case is nothing alike, 3, The Sacramentall vnion is onely by relation, and may bee dissolued, the personall vnion is a most neare ioyning of two natures in one person, which neuer can be dissolued. 4, Con­cerning the worshipping of the flesh of Christ, wee haue the word and examples in the Scripture: but we want both for the wor­shipping of the Eucharist, as was saide a while a goe.


Concerning carying about, and inclosing the Eucharist in a boxe, we deeme all those things im­pious.

Because they haue no commandement (1) of God.

Because they are contrarie to the commandement, of eating and drinking the Sa­crament. (2)

Because in so doing, the sacramentall ac­tion (3) is pulled a sunder, to wit, the consecratiō from the vse and pertaking of it.

The vse of the Supper, is turned into an action altogether different from the instituti­on (4) of Christ.

The feast of Corpus Christi, and the car­rying (5) about of the Sacrament were now late brought in and set on foote by the Bishops of Rome, about an hundred and an halfe of yeares agoe.

If the commandement of Christ, con­cerning the true vse of the Sacrament, were (6) performed, there would remaine none occa­sion of shutting vp and carying about of the Sacrament.

[Page] There bee no examples of the Apostles (7) for it. For Paul who writeth to the Corin­thians of the Eucharist most exactly, yet doth not so much as in one worde mention anie shutting of it vp, carying it about or adoring it.

Neither can there bee shewed in the pu­rer (8) primitiue Church, anie so much as a step and token thereof.

CHAP. 17. Of the Masse.

THe Papists haue turned the sacramēt of the Note here the [...]nrse is to bee ob­serued a­against sōe of the Pa­pists who peruert the state of the question in this dispu­tation and say that they striue onely for the sacri­fice of Eu­charist, or thanksgi­uing, these same are stracken with a curse by the councel of trent Lords Supper into a sacrifice; wherein they offer daily, the consecrated breade and win [...] to God the Father, for the sinnes of the li­uing and the dead. And more ouer they contend, that in the Eucharist, there is not onely a sacrifice of remembrance and thanksgiuing, but that there is also a propitiatorie sacrifice. For so saith the Councell of Trent (Sess, 6. cap. 2, can. 3.) If any man shall say, that the sacrifice of the Masse, is only a Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiuing, or a bare commemoration of the sacrifice performed vpon [Page 285] the Crosse, and not a propitiatorie Sacrifice, or that it doth profit him alone that receiueth it, and that it ought not to bee offered for the huing and the dead, for their sinnes, punishments, satisfacti­ons and other necessities, let him bee accursed. But wee acknowledge no such visible Sacrifice in the Church, neither do we finde in scripture anie other propitiatorie Sacrifice besides the Sacrifice of Christ: and this sacrifice of the Masse, wee doe re [...]ect for the reasons following.

Because to make of the Lords Suppera propitiatorie sacrifice for the liuing and the (1) deade, is contrarie to the institution of our Lord Iesus Christ, and it is to disanull & per­nert his Testament.

1, Christ did not command to offer his bo­dy and bloud, but to eate and drinke them.

2. And there is not so much as one word in al the action and institution of the supper, which might inferre any mention of a Sa­crifice.

3, Neither do we reade, that Christ offered himselfe in his supper (as if by his owne example hee would institute masse) for if hee offered himselfe to his heauenly [Page 286] Father in his supper, then should hee not haue perfected his sacrifice, with one oblati­on once made, (Heb, 7, 27, & 9, 26., 28, and 10, 10. 14.) but with a double oblation twise made, namely, once in his supper, & once vpon the Crosse, which is false & absurd. But if he offered not himselfe in his supper (as it is most true, he did not) then neither can his example, which wee should fol­low, lay vpon vs the office of sacrificing.

4. Paul receiued of the Lord the institution of the Eucharist: but made mention of no sacrifice at all; which the Apostle, (es­pecially seeing hee boasteth that hee had shewed all the councell of God. Acts, 20, 27,) ought not to haue omitted, if there should haue been anie respect of a propiti­atorie sacrifice in the supper.

5, Paul bids vs, to shew the Lords death, not to represent it by a stagelike spectacle, not to sacrifice, 1, Cor. 11, 26. For to shew the Lords death, and to sacrifice are things al­together different.

The doctrine of the propitiatorie (2) [Page 287] sacrifice of the Masse, dooth twhart the perfect satisfaction of Christ. For if CHRIST haue satisfied for the sinnes of al men with one sacrifice once offered, and that propitiation of his bee sufficient. what neede is there so often to iterate a propitiatory sacrifice in the Masse?

1, Hee (Christ, not the masse) is the propi­tiation or reconciliation, not onely for our sins, but also for the sins of the whole world, 1, Ioh. 2, 2.

2, And therefore, vpon the crosse he cryed; It is finished. Ioh, 19, 30.

But the masse twharteth also the priest­hood (3) The Priest­hoode of Christ is not com­mō to him with anie man. of Christ.

(1) For Christ alone could offer himselfe for a propitiatorie sacrifice; neither could a­ny man offer vp Christ, but hee himselfe a­lone. Therefore Popish priests, vnlesse they willingly say that they are new Christs, can not offer a propitiatorie sacrifice,

1, Christ did it once, when hee offered vp himselfe, Hebr, 7. 27.

[Page 288] 2, Not that hee should offer himselfe often. Heb. 9, 25.

3, Otherwise the masse-priestes should bee Priests after the order of Melchifedech, which agreeth to Christ alone.

4, Neither doth anie man take vnto himselfe this honour, but hee that is called of God, as was Aaron. So likewise Christ tooke not to himselfe this honour, to be made the high Priest, but he that sayd vnto him &c, Thou art a Priest for euer after the or­der of Melchifedech, Heb, 5. 4, 5. &c.

(2) It is repugnant also to the doctrine of the Priesthood of Christ, in respect of the perfect and plenarie sacrifice, which is not to be iterated. For herein is the priesthood of Christ opposite to the Priesthood of the olde Testament, that the sacrifices thereof ought to bee iterated, but the sacrifice of Christ had no neede to bee iterated.

1, Christ needed not daily, as those high Priests (of the olde Testament) to offer vp sacrifice, for his owne sinnes, and then [Page 289] for the peoples: for that did hee once, when he offered vp himselfe. Heb. 7. 27.

2. The lawe having the shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offer yeere by yeere continu­ally, sanctifie the commers thereunto: for would they not then haue ceased, to haue beene offered, &c. Heb. 10. 1. 2.

3. After hee had saide: This is the Testa­ment, that I will make with them, &c. and their sinnes and iniquities will I remember no more. Now where remission of these things is, there is no more offering for sin. Heb. 10. 16. 17. 18.

4. Christ by his own bloud entered once into the holy place: and obtained eternall redemption for vs (not such a redemption as is to be iterated every day.) Hebrewes. 9. 12.

5. Not that hee should offer himselfe of­ten, as the high Priest entred into the holy place every yeere with other bloud, (for then must he haue often suffered since the foundation of the world): but now in the end of the world hath hee appeared once [Page 290] to put away sinne by the sacrifice of him­selfe. And as it is appointed vnto men, Once to die, and then commeth the iudg­ment. So Christ was once offred to take away the sins of many. Heb. 9, 25, 26. &c.

6. By the which will we are sanctified, e­ven by the offering of the body of Iesus Christ once made Heb. 10. 10.

7. And every Priest (namely of the olde If our Ad­versaries say, that they offer the same & onely sacri­fice of Christ: here let them see that there is not granted an iteration of the same sacrifices in the new te­stament. Testament) appeareth daily ministring & oft times offereth one maner of sacrifice, which can never take away sinnes: but this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sinnes, sitteth for ever at the right hand of God, &c. For with one offering he con­secrated for ever them, that are sanctified. Heb▪ 10. 11. 12. &c.

The sacrificing Priests, do daily as much as in them lieth, kill and crucifie Christ in the Masse: wherefore the Popish Masse is so (4) much the more abhominable: which is in­deede harsh to mans eares, but that it is true, will appeare by the places of Scripture fol­lowing.

[Page 291] 1. Without shedding of bloud is no re­mission. Heb▪ 9: 22.

2. Where a Testament is, there must be the death of him, that made the testament. Heb: 9, 16.

3. If Christ must bee often offered, then should he haue often suffered. Hebrewes, 9, 26.

The Masse was vnknowne in the primi­tiue Church for some certaine ages: as shall (5) afterward bee declared in particular, and as Maister Valentine Vannius hath proved in a severall booke published, and to this day ne­ver touched by any of the Aduersaries.

Many Massing ceremonies, were of a cer­taine blinde zeale brought in out of the olde (6) Testament shadowes forsooth mingled with the light.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe dispute.

1. It is needfull; that the Church haue some vi­sible sacrifice, to helpe mans infirmitie withall.

Ans. 1 No man denies, that we need visible helps, for the strengthening of our faith: but to faine, choose and appoint such sacrifices, is not in our power, but belongeth to God [Page 292] alone. 2. Such visible helps and staies of our faith, God hath given vs in the Sacraments, wherewith it is meete wee should rest con­tent, and not frame new ones at our owne pleasure.

2; Euery Priest is taken from among men. &c. that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for men. Heb. 5. 1. Therefore it is needfull that the Priests of the Church haue some thing, which they may offer to God for sinnes.

Ans: 1. If the Apostle in this place had compared together the Priests of the olde Testament, and the Priests of the newe Te­stament, then the argument would followe. But he makes the comparison betweene the Priests of the olde Testament, and the Priest Iesus Christ, which was prefigured by them. This then is all that followeth: that it was necessarie that Christ should offer some sa­crifice for our sinnes. And so there is more in the conclusion, than in the premisses. 2, Wee doe not reade any where in the newe Testament that there were Priests appoin­ted, who should offer visible sacrifices: but there were ordained Ministers of the word and Gospell.

[Page 293] 3. Wee haue an Altar. Hebrewes, 13, 10. there­fore it is necessarie that we haue oblations also and sacrifice.

Ans. 1. This is a Paralogisme of all Parti­culars, thus: In our Altar (which is spirituall) is required a sacrifice: therefore it can bee no other sacrifice, but that of the Masse. 2, It is a fallacie from that, which is spoken but in some respect, to the same taken absolute­lie: for the Apostle doth not simply speake of euery sort of sacrifice, but treateth expres­lie of a spirituall sacrifice, saying: let vs offer the sacrifice of praise vnto God, &c. verse, 15. and, to doe good and to distribute, forget not▪ for with such sacrifices GOD is well pleased. verse, 16.

4, Daniel prophecieth of Antichrist, that hee shall take away the daily sacrifice: Dan: 8, 11, and 11 31. But that cannot be vnderstood of spirituall sa­crifices, of praise and thanksgiuing (which Ty­rants cannot raze out of the hearts of men) but of the outward and visible sacrifice, which is the Masse.

Answer. 1.

Daniel speaketh principally of Antio­chus, who having defiled the lawfull wor­ship [Page 294] of God, did abolish the daily sacrifice for the space of three yeeres and an halfe: & allegorically he speaketh it of the Antichrist of Rome, who hath abolished the true and sincere publicke service of God, and in the place thereof hath set his Idoll service. 2, There is more in the conclusion than in the premisses; for it followeth not: Antichrist shall abolish the daily sacrifice: therefore that sacrifice can bee none other, but the sa­crifice of the Masse. whereas notwithstan­ding there be other, and farre truer sacrifices of Christians, which are abrogated and cor­rupted by antichrist, as the daily sacrifice was of old by Antiochus: such as are godly prai­ers (which are called sacrifices. Heb: 5, 7. Reu: The Popes of Rome are very carefull of the fulfilling of this pro­phecie; which not­withstāding▪ themselues haue fulfil­led long since very diligently. 5, 8. and 8, 4.) which the Antichrist of Rome hath robbed Christ of, and commaunded them to be offered to Saints: such as are also the sincere preaching of the Gospell, and the right administration of the Sacraments; all which are in such horible sort, turned vpside downe, mangled and corrupted by the Bi­shop of Rome, that it may well bee said, that they are abolished, and that this prophecie of the abolis [...]ing of the spirituall, true and [Page 295] most acceptable sacrifices to God, the daily sacrifices of Christians, is of a truth fulfilled in him.

5. The types of the olde Testament, of the dai­lie Sacrifice, did decipher the daily sacrifice of Christians, to wit, the Masse.


The Sacrifices were types of that one and onely sacrifice of Christ, but not of the mi­nisterie of the newe Testament, saue onely spiritually. (Hebr: 7, and 9: and 10, chapter.) But heere in this matter of the Masse, there is no strife concerning spirituall sacrifices: therefore the argument is of no force, seeing it hath foure termes.

6. Frō the rising of the sunne to the going down of the same, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in euery place Incense shall bee offered vnto my name, and a pure offering, Malachie: 1, 11. But there can be no purer offering, than the body and blood of Christ: therefore the Prophet speaketh of the sacrifice of the Masse.

Answere. Paul biddeth men lift vp cleane and pure handes in praier euery where: 1, T [...]. 2, 8. (which is the same with that sacrifice of praier & invocation of Davids. Psal. 141. 2.) [Page 296] There are therfore other spirituall sacrifices, which are also called cleane. Heere is then a fallacie, a non distributo ad distributum, ar­guing by two particulars, as if the one were contained vnder the other, as a particular vnder his generall: for there bee moe sacrifi­ces of the new Testament, none of which is that one, which our Aduersaries catch at: for beside that one onely sacrifice of Christ, there bee these also reckoned in the holy Scriptures.

1. The Ministerie of the Gospell. Rom: 15, 16.

2. The conuersion of the Gentiles. Rom. 15, 16. Phil. 2, 17.

3, The Praiers of Christians: Hebr: 5, 7: Revel: 5, 8, and 8, 4.

4, The sacrifice of praise and thanksgi­ving▪ Heb: 13, 15:

5, Liberality towards the poore, and for the maintenance of the Ministerie, Heb: 13 16, Phil: 4, 18:

6, Mortification of the olde man and re­novation, Rom: 12, 1.

[Page 297] 7, Endurance of persecution, or martirdome for the name of Christ, Philip, 2. 17.

Therefore if there were no where in the World anie popish or idolatrous massing sa­crifice, yet the prophecy of Malachie should be neuerthelesse fulfilled among Christians by these spirituall sacrifices. Now the spiri­tual sacrifices of Christians are called cleane, because our heauenly Father dooth accept them for cleane and perfect for Christs me­rits sake.

(7) The Pascall Lambe was a type of the holy supper. But the Lambe was not onely eaten, but also offered. So it is requisite in the Eucharist also, not onely to eate but also to offer.

Answ, 1, Thence this onely followeth, that our Lambe, CHRIST IESVS, was to be sacrificed. But that we should of­fer him, that b [...] the type (which was fulfilled in Christ) cannot be proued. 2, Wee haue before declared that the rite of sacrificing yearely was abolished by the one onely sa­crifice of the true Lambe. 3, If all things [Page 298] that belonged to this type should be applied to the Lords Supper, then because it was needefull that the Lambe should bee killed, they shall make themselues a bloudy sacri­fice in the masse: which our Aduersaries themselues holde absurd. 4, Yea, and that which is more, we reade no where, that the Paschall Lambe was offered or sacrificed, but that it was killed. For both the Hebrew word, and the Greeke word (which Paul v­seth, 1, Cor, 5, 7) doth not alwaies signifie to sacrifice, but to kill. Therefore the Popish argument falleth to the ground.

(8) There shall bee a handfull of corne in the papists in their scarcitie of arguments are driuen to [...] to the Rab­bi [...]. the earth, euen in the top of the mountaines, &c. Psal, 72, 16. Rabbi Salomon expoundeth these words of a kinde of Cakes in the daies of the Mes­sias. Therefore the Psalme speaketh of the eleua­tion of the masse, wherein the breade is lifted vp aboue the sh [...]uen crowne of the Priest.

An, This is a scuruie argument, to drawe the spirituall fertility and plentifulnesse of the Church to the propitiatorie sacrifice of the masse. But such as the matter is, such be their arguments.

[Page 299] 9 Christ saith: facite hoc, but facere doth some­times in the scripture signifie to sacrifice. There­fore it is all one, as if Christ had sayde; facite, that is, sacrifice, hoc (this) that is my body.

Answ, 1, They bee meere particulars, whence nothing will follow. 2, The word (facere) when it is put absolutely without ex­presse mention of a sacrifice, doth never sig­nifie to sacrifice, except in that verse of Vir­gils Bucolicks, Cum faciam vitula pro fr [...]gibus, ipse ve [...]ito. But Virgill will not stablish a massing sacrifice. 3, And if the word facere in the holy supper doe signifie to sacrifice: and Christ spoke those wordes to all Christians, Hoc facite in mei Commemorationem (Doe this in remembrance of Mee) it will follow that all Christians ought to offer the massing sacrifice: and so all shall be Priests, though they be not oyled and shauen.

10 Christ saith: Hoc facite Doe this, to wit, that which you see mee doe. But Christ offered Himselfe then to his heauenly Father. There­fore he commaunded that his bodie should bee offered in the masse.

Ans, 1, The minor or second proposition [Page 300] is false, for if Christ offered himselfe to his Fa­ther in his supper after the manner of the masse; and the masse be (as the Trent councell defineth it) a propitiatorie sacrifice for the li­uing and the dead, for sinnes, punishments, and satisfaction and other necessities, &c. then was there at that time satisfaction made to the heauenly Father alreadie by a sacrifice in the supper, for the sinnes and punishments of men: and Christ offered himselfe the se­cond time vpon the altar of the Crosse, when there was no further neede, which required him so to doo: and the heauenly Father would haue one and the same debt twise pai­ed vnto him: and those debts are payed the third time ouer at this day, while Christ is offered againe in the masse. But if Christ at length offered himselfe vpon the altar of the Crosse, it is false, that he offered himselfe to his Father in his supper. 2, The word facite, doe, in these wordes is referred to a certaine action, that is to the reiterating of the cele­bration of the Lords supper in the Church, of the blessing and distributing of the breade and wine, of the eating and drinking, of the remembrancing & shewing CHRISTS [Page 301] death, and of giuing of thankes for Gods be­nifits, &c.

11 Christ was offered in the supper after an vn­bloudie manner, and vpon the Altar of the Crosse after a bloudie manner.

Ans, If so, then was he not offered once but twise, which is contrary to the Epistle to the Hebrues, cap, 7, ver, 27, & 9, 28, & 10. 12.) 2, And the scripture doth not anie where say, that Christ should bee offered after vn­bloudie sort.

12 The distinction betweene a bloudie & vn­bloudie sacrifice, hath the ancient Fathers for Au­tors thereof.

Ans, The auncient and purer Fathers di­stinguish betweene the bloudie sacrifices of the Olde Testament, and the spirituall sacri­ces of christians in the New Testament. But what is this to the visible massing sacrifice of the Papists?

13. Hee was offered, because he would. Isay 53, 7. Therefore Christ is offered in the masse, and hee offered himselfe in the supper.

[Page 302] Ans, Who can choose, but laugh at suc [...] a reason? first the translation which they fol­low, is false, quite disagreeing from the ori­ginall; and then doth it follow, that because Christ was a sacrifice vpon the Crosse, that therefore he is sacrificed in the supper?

14 Christ is a Priest for euer; therefore that he may for euer be offered, it must needs be, that he did institute in his Supper an eternall sacrifice, that is, such as is dayly to be offered.

Ans, 1. By this argument it would follow, that it should bee necessarie, not that the Priests, but that Christ should offer himselfe daily: for not the massing sacrificers but christ is the Priest for euer. 2, It would follow also (seeing they presse the word Eternitie or for euer) that the sacrifice should remaine to be offered still in the World to come after the last iudgment. 3, The Apostle speaketh of eternall efficacie and vertue of Christs Priest­hood, whereby, he one and the same to day and yesterday, hath for euer sanctified them which were to be sanctified. Which while our Aduersaries apply to their sacrificers, there arise foure termes. 4, And Christ a­bideth neuerthelesse a Priest for euer, al­though [Page 303] there bee no where anie sacrifice of how Christ is a Priest for euer. the masse. For 1, in sanctifying vs, he brin­geth vs to his Father. 2, He alwaies maketh intercession for vs. 3. He is able for euer to saue them, that come vnto him, which are all the offices of the high Priest.

15 Melchizedeck was a type of Christ: but Melchizedeck offered bread & wine. Gen, 14, 18, Therefore it must needes bee, that Christ offered his body and bloud in his Supper.

Ans, 1, If it were true, that Melchize­deck offered breade and wine, (which yet is not true) nothing els would follow, but that Christ offered bread and wine, which our ad­uersaries thēselues would not grant. For they auouch that the bread and wine doth not re­maine in the holy supper, but that they are annihilated & so transsubstantiated, that no­thing remaineth beside the body & bloud of Christ. There are therfore 4, termes. 2, But neither did Melchizedeck offer, but brought forth (as the Hebrew word signifyeth) bread and wine for the refreshing of Abrahams souldiers, as the text doth clearely teach. 3, Neither is Melchizedeck sayde to bee a type of Christ in this, whether offering, or [Page 304] bringing forth of breade and wine: But first in respect of the name of Melchizedeck, the King of righteousnesse. Secondly, because hee was King of Salem, and Christ is King or Prince of peace. (Isay, 9, 6.) Thirdly be­cause Melchizedeck was together both a King and a Priest, and so is Christ. Fourth­ly, because the progenie of Melchisedeck is not related, so is Christ a Priest for euer af­ter the order of Melchisedeck (Psalm, 110. 4) All which, whereas the Epistle to the He­brues dooth most clearely and distinctly say, yet it saith nothing of the masse. It is there­fore a fallacie from that, which is spoken but in some respect onely, to the same taken ab­solutely and in all respects.

16 The text (Genes. 14, 18.) saith: for he was a Priest, but it is the office of Priests to of­fer sacrifices. Therefore Melchisedeck then of­fered breade and wine.

Ans, The hebrue text hath not the parti­cle, for; but readeth thus; and he was a Priest of the most high God: and blessed him, that is, Abraham. There is then no reason of the [Page 305] consequence: Melchizedeck was a Priest, and blessed Abraham; therefore hee offered vnto God bread and wine: let the Papists at length be ashamed of such Paralogismes.

17. Paul compareth together the table of the Lord and the table of Devils: which comparison cannot be entire, (seeing there is an offering in the table of Devils) vnlesse there be also an offering in the table of the Lord 1, Cor: 10. 21. therefore there must needes be a sacrifice in the Lords Supper.


In the place of Paule cited by our Aduer­saries, it is not said, that the Heathen did of­fer on their tables sacrifices to Devils: nei­ther that there was any offering at the table or celebration of the Lords Supper. But this Paul treateth of, that Christians cannot with good conscience both eate the body of Christ at the Lords table, and neverthelesse in the banquets of the heathen, eate of those meates, which were offered vnto Idols: for all sacrifices were not wholly consumed with fire, but a good part thereof was reserved for costly banquets. And what make these [Page 306] things for the confirming of the sacrifice of the Masse? 2, Bee it that at their tables, they offered those meates to Devils; how doth it follow, that there must needes be an oblati­on at the Lords table too? vnlesse they haue some strange Logicke to shew (contrarie to the olde receaved axiomes,) that thinges which are compared together, must needes agree in euery particular point.

18. The body and bloud of Christ bee propitia­torie for our sinnes. In the holy Supper there is the body and bloud of Christ: therefore the Masse is propitiatorie for our sinnes.

Ans. 1. The body and bloud of Christ is not in the sacrament, saue only sacramentally and spiritually, and therfore cannot be there offered. 2. By the same reason it would fol­lowe, that in euery place where Christ was on earth, there should be a propitiatorie sa­crifice. The vertue and efficacie of Christs sacrifice doth at all times flow from the flesh of Christ, but it was made a propitiatorie sa­crifice but once, and that vpon the Crosse; it is offered and given in the Supper; and re­ceaved of the beleevers by faith. 3. There is a changing of the predication: for in the mi­nor [Page 307] it is said: The body and bloud are in the Sacrament, in the conclusion: therefore the Masse is propitiatorie. Were it granted that their Masse were nothing but the Sacrament duly administred, & that the body of Christ were carnally there, yet there would no more follow but this, that in the Masse there is that, which is propitiatorie for sinnes. And if it be propitiatorie in bare being, why nee­deth it to be sacrificed, that it may be propi­tiatorie.

19. The Fathers of the Church called the Eucha­rist by the name of a sacrifice: therefore the Masse is a sacrifice.

Answer. 1. It is a fallacie heaping vp moe questions for one: for it is one question, whe­ther the Fathers called the Supper a sacrifice (which is not yet sufficient for the purpose) and another, in what sence they called it a sa­crifice, whether as the Papists meane it, or otherwise: 2 It is a fallacie from a thing spo­ken but in some respect, to the same taken absolutely: for the Fathers called it a sacrifice in some respect onely (as namely, 1. because all sacred rites may be called by the common word of the olde Testament, sacrificia, sacrifi­ces, [Page 308] quasi a faciendo sacra, from doing holy & sacred actions. 2. Because in the Supper there is a commemoration of that one onely and true sacrifice of Christ, they gaue that name to the action from the more chiefe and prin­cipall respect. 3, Because of praiers, which were poured out in the celebration of the Supper, which are called sacrifices as was be­fore declared. 4, Because of praise & thanks­giving, which were vsed in the celebration of the Supper, and are called sacrifices in the Epistle to the Hebrewes. 5. Because of their offering of first fruites, and food which they called [...] loue-feasts. 6, Because the spi­rituall sacrifices, faith, hope, charitie, &c, are exercised & stirred vp by the vle of the Sup­per.) 3, The Papists should proue, that the ancient Fathers ever taught, that the Masse is a propitiatorie sacrifice for the sinnes of the living and the dead: but this they will never doe.

20. The Church hath alwaies acknowledged the Masse for a sacrifice: therefore it is a noveltie to denie the Masse to be a sacrifice.


The Antecedent is prooved false: 1, be­cause [Page 309] there is no Masse in the newe Testa­ment. 2, Neither can it be shewed in the Pri­mitiue Church, as was before alleadged out of the booke of Valentinus Vannius, who hath plainely proved, that the Popish sacri­fice of the Masse was not in the Church of Christ for the space of 600 yeares or there­about. 3, Because the chiefe thinges in the Masse are newe of late invention, and were heaped together at sundry times, one after a­nother. some by one Pope, and some by a­nother. And such novelties are iustly reie­cted by vs.

21. The Masse is an application, whereby that, which Christ merited for vs, is applied to everie man in particular.

Answere. 1:

It cannot bee said to bee any application, vnlesse it bee thereunto so ordained by God. Now wee haue a two-fold application onely of the merites of Christ, recorded in Scrip­ture. Whereof the one is by the word and faith without any externall element; and the other by the elements and rites in the Sacra­ments ordained thereunto. But the Masse is a [Page 310] thing altogether different from the Lords Supper: therefore it maketh nothing for the applying of Christs merite. Moreover, the Masse hath no testimonie from the Scripture of either of these manners of applying. Nei­ther therefore doth it applie the merite of Christ. 2, And, because the Masse hath no cōmandement of God, it may not be lawfull for men to tye the grace of God to mans in­ventions.

22. In the Masse there is remembrance of the passion and death of Christ: therefore the Masse is to be reverenced.

Ans. 1. The remembrance of the passion & death of Christ, ought to bee done by the celebration of the Lords Supper, which Christ ordained and instituted, but not by the theatricall celebration of the Masse, which was not instituted by Christ. 2, The Papists striue not onely for the remembrance of the Lords death in the Supper, but for a propiti­atorie sacrifice, as the Canon of the counsell of Trent hath it. There is therefore more in the consequent, than in the Antecedent.

23. There are many good things contained in the Masse: therefore, &c.

[Page 311] Ans. And there be very many idolatrous things contained in the Masse. And, Magick is therby made good, because Magitians vse good and holy wordes: for good mingled with evill doth not make that, which is evill, to become good, but that, which was good of it selfe, is corrupted by the evill: as when a man mingleth poison with good wine.

24, The Masse is a representation of the death and passion of Christ. Now seeing a representa­tion doth worke more strongly than a bare com­memoration, the Masse cannot displease God.

Answere. 1. Because a representation see­meth stronger and more forcible to men, it doth not therfore seeme stronger to God al­so: for my thoughts are not as your thoughts (Isai: 55, 8.) 2, Seeing that representation is a kinde of commemoration, they which con­tend for a representation alone, are stricken by the Pope with a curse, in the Canon be­fore cited. 3, Neither doth the first Supper of Christ beare a representation, in which Supper our Aduersaries themselues doe not admit of a representation.

[Page 312] 25. Luke maketh mention of the * Liturgie of the Apostles: Act. 13, 2. therefore the Apostles ce­lebrated Masse.

Ans. 1. The word Liturgie is vnderstoode of any service of God: and therefore their owne vulgar Authenticall translation ren­dreth it, ministrantibus illis, and our English [...] accordingly, as they ministred to the Lord. 2, Seeing the most of the thinges in the Po­pish Masse are new, how, I pray you, doth the Masse sute with this allegation of the A­postles who were dead sundrie hundreds of yeares before the Popish Masse was borne.

26. We reade of many miracles, that were done at the Masse of the Papists: therefore it is not to be reiected.

Answer. 1.

The most of those miracles are such, as If those mi­r [...]les bee t [...]ue, how ch [...]nceth it, tha [...] now the [...]e bee no miracl [...]s done about the Masse, [...] sel­dome, and those most false too. the Papists at this day are ashamed of the books, wherein those miracles are reported. 2, The comming of Antichrist shall be with all power, and signes and lying wonders. (2, Thess. 2, 9:) as Paul prophecied of him. 3. Mi­racles without the word of God are not suf­ficient [Page] to prooue articles of religion as wee reade, Deut, 13, 1, 2, 3.

27 Luther doth confesse the deuill suggested arguments vnto him, against the masse. Therfore to impugne the masse is diuelish.

Ans, 1, Luther describeth the conflict of Luther di­mis [...]a pri­uata. his conscience, wherein Satan after his man­ner, laying a truth for his ground, endeuou­red to build thereupon falsehood and despe­ration. Euen as the deuill tempting Christ, alleadged the holy Scripture, which vndoub­tedly is true. But it doth not therefore follow that simply euery thing is a lye, which Satan bringeth in his tentations. For when hee obiecteth our sinnes against vs, certainely he speaketh a truth. 2, We oppose not against our Aduersaries either the authoritie of Lu­ther or the tentation of Satan, but the Word of God. Now the testimonies of Scripture which ouerthrow the masse, cannot be ter­med deuilish suggestions. Let them then answere vnto them if they can.

28 Our Aduersaries seek a shift, to wind them­selues out of the danger of the thunderbolts of the Epistle to the Hebrues & say, that Christs bodie al­waies remaineth one; & therfore though it be daily [Page 314] offered, yet it is alwaies the same, and but one on­ly, and so it doth not anie waiet whart the Epistle to the Hebrues.

Answ, 1. That is not the question: whe­ther Christs bodie be one and the same. But here is the controuersie, whether that bodie, which is one and the same, be often to bee offered to God: seeing the Apostle to He­brewes witnesseth, that that bodie was once onely offered, and that the offering thereof may not be iterated. There is then no con­nexion of the Antecedent & consequent in this paralogisme, 2, But neither do they of­fer the same bodie of Christ, which was of­fered vpon the Croffe, but an other bodie, which within a moment of time before was breade, if all bee true, which they faine of Transsubstantiation. But the true bodie of Christ was not breade. Therefore neither doo they offer one and the same body of CHRIST.

An appendix of other abuses of the Masse.

The followers of Antichrist have transfor­med 1, Abuse priuate masse. the Masse into a priuate action, wherein there is no communion, but the masse-maker onely re­ceiueth the sacrament, whilest others, that be pre­sent onely looke on, who are perswaded, that such a masse benifitteth them neucrthelsse, though they communicate not. But wee reject this priuate masse fos these reasons.

Because the Lords supper, by those pri­uate (1) masses, which neuer were instituted by Christ, is changed into an action altogether diuerse and different from the first instituti­on.

Christ gaue not onely a bare spectacle to (2) his disciples in his first supper, but distributed his bodie and bloud to them to be eaten and druncken. Priuate masses therefore haue no agreement with the action of Christ.

That appellation of the Lords Supper v­sed (3) by the Apostles (the breaking of breade) [Page 316] which is nothing els, but by a hebrue phrase, the distribution of it, sheweth, that in the primitiue Church in the celebration of the supper, there was a communicating, & that priuate masse was altogether vnknowen.

The same is meant by the wordes of (4) Paul; we are all partakers of the same bread, 1, Cor, 10, 17, If the Corinthians were par­takers, then doubtles they were not bare be­holders of some priuate masse.

That which Paul speaketh of the abuse (5) of the Supper among the Corinthians: eue­ry man taketh his owne supper afore, & one is hungrie, and an other is drunke, 1, Corin. 11, 21. May not vnfitly be applyed to the pri­uate masse, for a certaine likenesse betwixt them. For what more like to this abuse than is the priuate masse, wherein the looker on hungreth: the masse-maker hath his priuate banquet, though he be not drunken, vnlesse perhaps of the former dayes ryot?

Contrariwise our aduersaries do dispute.

1, There is mention made of a priuate commu­nion euen in the histories of the primitiue Church.

Ans, 1, Priuate communion at that time [Page 317] was a thing much differing frō priuate masse now a dayes. For from the beginning whi­lest persecution did still rage, and the Christi­ans were therfore inflamed with great zeale, the whole Church did vse to celebrate the Supper euerie day. But after persecution cea­sed, the zeale of Christians was by little and little abated, so that afterwards they did cō ­municate onely vpon the Lords day. In the meane while they of the cleargy and the mi­nisters of the Church kept the custome of the dayly communion. And this Commu­nion, when they of the laitie were absent, be­gan to be called a priuate Communion, and that which was celebrated on the Lords day, was called a publicke Cōmunion. It is there­fore a frivolous argument, & altogether frō the purpose, whilest our Aduersaries argue from the priuate receiuing of the Lords sup­per to the priuate sacrifices of the Masse (so making foure termes.)

2 Those which are the lookers on in priuate masse, do communicate spiritually. Therfore they want not the fruite of the masse.

Ans, 1. We speake of the sacrament and sa­cramental eating, & our Aduersaries alleadge [Page 318] spirituall eating. There are therefore in this argument foure termes, 2, That spirituall communion may bee by faith alone, euen out of the masse and communion. There­fore it is nothing to the masse.

3, This is the nature of the ministerie, that the benefits of God bee by it applyed vnto men. But priuate masse is a part of the ministerie. Ther­fore by it there is application Made to the standers by.

Ans, 1, The minor proposition is fal [...], It suffiseth not that a Preacher preach to himselfe without hauing any hearers: so neither sufficeth it, that the masse-ma­ker alone communi­cate for o­thers. becavse our aduersaries cannot free their publicke masse, much lesse their priuate masse from idolatrie, and how shall idolatrie then be a part of the ministerie? 2, Sacramentall application doth not consist in a bare specta­cle, but in the vse and fruition, as it is not suf­ficient to saluation that an vnregenerate man bee a beholder of Baptisme, vnlesse himselfe also bee baptized.

4 Priests that doe masse are the mouth of the Church. Therefore if the Priest communi­cate, it is all one as if the whole Church had com­municated.

[Page 319] Ans, 1, The Antecedent hath no ground in the scripture, 2, Neither doo the Papists themselues belieue this which they say, o­therwise the priuate cōmunion of the Priest would bee sufficient for thē, that they should neuer haue neede of anie publicke commu­nion. 3, The mouth of the Church should bee an impure one, when the Priest is pollu­ted with adulterie, whoredome, and such o­ther wickednesse.

The Priests in the Olde Testament did sa­crifice for others, the laitie being present: so in priuate masse the Priest may communicate for them that stand by.

Ans, 1, There is great difference. For the Priest in the Olde Testament in sacrificing and offering did giue something to God, but he that communicateth doth not giue, but receiue some thing. There are therefore foure termes, whiles for one medius terninus, there arise vnto vs two, the one whereof is to offer, the other, to receiue or communi­cate. 2, And hee that brought the sacrifice to the Priest to be offered, was not excluded [Page 320] from the act of sacrificing, but hee also was sayde to haue sacrificed, which also hath no affinitie with priuate masse, in which, the laickes which are present at priuate masse▪ are bare lookers on.

They haue wrested the masse from the end of 2, Abuse the wrest­ing of the supper to other bu­sinesse. Communion to infinite other affaires, and altoge­ther from the purpose: hence haue arisen manie kindes of masses: as namely,

  • 1. The Masse of the Crowne of thornes,
  • 2. The Masse of the three nayles.
  • 3. The Masse of the foreskin of Christ.
  • 4, The Masse for sea-faring men.
  • 5, The Masse for trauellers on horsebacke, or on foote.
  • 6. The Masse for women great with child.
  • 7, The Masse for women in trauell of child­birth.
  • [Page 321] 8. The Masse for women that bee bar­ren.
  • 9. The Masse for those that bee sicke of a quartane or [...]ertian ague, and others of the like sort: which is nothing else, but many waies to prophane the holy Supper.

But they doe also [...]ell those Masses for money to every one that as keth for them. No [...] our Ad­uersaries 3. Abuse. Simonie. themselues doe greatly condemn [...] Si­monie, not marking in the meane while, that the [...]ost of their Priests are Simoniacal: In which rout of men the Pope is mos [...] Simoniacall of all, as by whom, heaven, and God, and all is set to sale, as Mantuan saith.

In the Masse they mingle water with wine (per­haps 4, Abuse. The ming­ling of wa­ter with wine. to fulfill the prophecie of Isaie. Thy wine is mixt with water. Isa: 1, 22.) which, were it helde as an indifferent thing, might bee borne with all; as there bee some coniectures, that the Easterne Churches were wont to mingle water with wine, because of the strongnesse of the wine, and least they might seeme to make feasts in the holy Sup­per, and as wee are not sure that the wine which i [...] bought for the vse of the Sacrament, is not ming­led with water by the Vintners: but because our Aduersaries hold it as [...] thing of necessitie to bee [Page 322] done, therefore it may not be endured.

Because neither the Evangelists, nor Paul (1) makes any mention of this mixture, but mention wine alone.

This mixture of water bringeth the Pa­pists (2) into a maze: for they haue no word, by which the water with the wine should bee transsubstantiated, and in the meane while they may not confesse that the substance ei­ther of the wine, or of the water beside the bare accidents, doe remaine after the conse­cration. Let them looke then howe they may winde themselues out. The Schoole-men haue laboured heerein in vaine.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason.

1. Wee reade that of ancient time the wine was mixt with water in the supper.

Answere. 1:

It is a fallacie from that which is true in some respect, to the same taken absolutely: for wee said, that the Easterne Churches did it in some respect. 2, It was a custome of the Easterne Church, which laied no necessitie on it: but our Aduersaries make it a law, and [Page 323] of necessitie. 3, The question is not what and of whom, but how rightly it is done.

2, VVater and bloud flowed out of the side of Christ; therefore water ought to be mingled with wine.

Answer. 1.

Christ ordained no Sacrament vpon the Crosse: It is therefore heere vn [...]itly allead­ged. 2, The Scripture doth no where referre this to the Supper. 3, It would thence follow, that not the bloud of Christ alone, but water also ought to bee in the cup: which crosseth their conceite of Transsubstantiation. 4, The ancient Fathers haue expounded it of the 2 [...] Sacraments, the bloud of the Supper, & wa­ter of baptisme.

3. In the Revelation the multitude of Nations is compared to water: therefore mistically water is to be mingled with wine in the Sacrament.

Answere. 1.

That place hath nothing of the Sacrament. 2, The new Testament, especiallie in matters of the Sacraments, admit not of allegories, e­specially such, as haue no groūd in scripture. [Page 324] 3, Neither is it lawfull for vs to add anything to the Sacraments, vpon sandy grounds scra­ped together here-from.

4, It seemeth, that Christ did mingle water with the wine, in that the Host carying a Pitcher of wa­ter went before them into the Inne.


This is a Doctor-like proofe: In the pitcher there was water; therfore the cup must haue water mixt in it in the Supper.

In the Masse they haue brought in a huge heap of ceremonies, which sprung vp one after another 5. Abuse. a sinke of ceremonies no long while agoe; which Sleidan doth brieflie describe, [...]peaking of the tumult that was raised at Strasburge because of the Masse, in the 21 booke of his historie, in these words.

There was a great cōcourse of men, espe­cially, of the youth: for it was to all these a rare spectacle and not heard of before, that many there with shaven crownes, c [...]oathed after a newe fashion, should sing together such thinges as no man vnderstoode: that candles and torches should burne, as the say­ing [Page 325] is, at noone day; that smoake and per­fumes should bee raised vp with Frankin­cense; that the Priest with his Attendants should stand at the Altar; pronounce words in an vncouth language; vse divers bowings & gestures; bend downward with his hands close shut; one while [...]ling abroade, another while pull backe his armes; ever and anone turne himselfe; one while crie aloude, ano­ther while mutter over some thinges with great silence; cast his eyes on high; looke groueling to the ground; stand in no one place; turne himselfe now to the right part, now to the left part of the altar; wagge with the fingers; breath vpon the chalice, and lift it vp on high, and after set it downe; in cer­taine places name sometimes the living, sometimes the dead; breake vnleavened bread, & dip it in the chalice; strike his breast with his fist; sigh; make as though hee slept with his eyes shut; awake againe, eate one part of the bread, and drinke vp the other whole with the wine, least any drop should be left; wash his hands; shew to the people with his backe towards them, and his hand stretched out, the gilded Paten, moo [...]e the [Page 326] same to his forehead and breast; kisse one while the Altar, another while an Image in­closed in some matter or me [...]tall: thus farre Sleidan.

This Masse therefore hath none affinitie with that Masse, which some Ecclesiasticall Historians doe write, that the Apostles, and their Schollars did celebrate without all ce­remonie, onely adding the Lords prayer: which our Aduersaries cannot denie, vnlesse they will reject the witnesses of their owne religion.

Moreover, how lately those Ceremonies arose, [...]. Abuse. The new­ [...]es of their ceremonies and were vnknowne to the Primitiue Church, we cannot more briefely learne, than by the narration of Polydore Virgil. He writeth on th [...] wise. D [...] in [...]ent. rer. lib. 5, cap. 11.

All mysteries (of Religion) were deliue­red of Christ amongst his Apostles plainely and simply: the whole order of Ceremo­nies was naked and plaine, having more de­votion than gay furniture: for it is evident [Page 327] enough, that Peter, (who either first of all, as being the chiefe of the Apostles, or toge­ther Where was here the of­fering after the Co [...]s [...] cratio [...] with the rest of the Apostles, did est­soones celebrate divine service, with that rite, which hee receaved from Christ) was woont straight after the consecration to bring in the Lords Prayer. Afterward Iame [...] the Bishop of Ierusalem, increased these my­steries: Basill also increased them, and o­thers at sundrie times instituted other things. Caelestinus the Introitus of the Masse, the beginning whereof is the Psalme; Iudica me Deus. Damasus ordained the Confession, which is made by the Priest before hee as­cend to the Altar: yet some there bee, who ascribe it to Pontianus. Gregorie ordai­ned the Antheme, which followeth the In­troitus, and therefore it is commonly called by the same name: as also that Kyrie should be said nine times, & the Antheme after the Epistle, Gospel, & Communion. But the An­theme after the Epistle they call the gradual, because the Deacō ascendeth into an higher place to reade the Gospell. Telesphorus or­dained the Hymne, Gloria in excelsis Deo. [Page] Gelasiu [...] first invented the Or [...]isons, that is, the clauses of praiers, as they call them. Hie­r [...]m the Epistle and Gospell: and Anastasi­ [...]s first appointed when it was read, that all which were present at service, should stand crooked and bending downe for reverence, that they might bee more readie to defend the faith of the Gospell, or to marke and note it, which we vse to doe rather standing, than sitting. The Alleluiah was translated from Ierusalem. The singing of the Creede, that it should bee sung after the Gospell on feastivall daies, and should bee repeated by the people, which were present at service, was the decree of Pope Mark the first. The same decree was renued afterward by Da­masus. Gelasius made the Antheme, which Here Masse was so cele­brated, that the people might an­swere. they commonly call the Tract, and the Hymnes: and the prefaces, which goe be­fore the Canon, hee framed in an elegant speach and song, which, as Pelagius repor­teth, are nine in number. Vrbanus addeth the tenth vnto the honour of the virgin, the mother of God. And whereas Incense is bur­ned at the Altar, Aaron did that first; as the Lord said vnto Moses. Thou shalt set an altar [Page 329] before the vaile, and Aaron shall burne ther­on sweete incense; as it is in Exodus (30, 6, 7) And afterward Leo the third decreede, that the same should be done amongst vs; which was also obserued of the heathens. Hereof it is, that Virgill saith of Venus in the first of his Aen [...]ids.

Vbi Templum illi, centum (que) Sab [...]o
Th [...]re calent arae &c.
Where stand her famous seates,
And Temple rich, and of incense an hundred altars sweats.

The vse of washing their hands seemeth to haue come from the Olde Testament, for that the Iewes were wont to beginne not onely diuine seruice, but their banquets also with washing of hands; as holding it wic­ked to eate bread with vnwashen hands, which fault they obiected against the Disci­ples of Christ. Or else this custome was ta­ken from the Heathen, amongst whom those which sacrificed did first of all washe their hands: & as Hesiod saith, there was a charge [Page 330] giuen, that no man should in the morning of­ter wine to Iupiter with vnwashen hands, lest the glory of the sacred things should be pol­luted. (And here againe he alleadgeth ver­ses of Virgils) thus farre Polydore Virgill. Who so would see more, let him reade Du­randus his booke intituled Rationale Diuin [...] ­rum Offic [...]orum.

Behold the great impudencie of our Ad­ [...]ersa [...]ies, who boast of antiquity in the masse and endeuour to fetch it from the verie Apo­stles, contrarie to their consciences and cre­dit to all histories, but least they here seeke a shift and pretend that these things are spo­ken of the ceremonies only, which are not of the substance of the masse: let vs heare what the same Autor writeth of the chiefest & the substantiall misterie of the masse, of the Ca­non, I meane in the same booke and chapter. Where he saith thus:

In the prefaces, that Sanctus, Sanctus, How finely the masse came from the Apostls Sanctus, Dominus, Deus Zebaoth should bee sung, was first decreed by Sixtus, which was taken frō the Prophet Isay. Gelasius made; Teigitur, which afterward was made, the begin­ing, as before Syricius had made Communi­cants; [Page 331] which now is set in the third place. Whence it appeareth that the Canon it selfe, was neither al framed by one man, neither broght into that forme, whereof it now consisteth. The certaintie whereof hence appeareth, that Alexander the first, who was along time be­fore Gelasius and Syricius, appointed for the memoriall of Christs passion: Qu [...] pridie, quā pate [...]eter, &c. vnto these words: Hoc est Cor­pus meum. Wherefore it is cleare enough, that then was the beginning of the Canon, when, as hath beene sayd, Gelasius was Bi­shop of Rome, about 360, yeares or some­what more after Alexander. Then Leo added Hanc igilur oblationem &c, vnto these words, placitus accipias. Gregorie annexed thereto three petitions, Diesque nostras in tua pac [...] disponas, atque ab aeterna damnatione [...]o [...] eripe, et in Electorum t [...]orum iubeas grege numerar [...]. The same Gegorie the first added, Sanctun [...] sacrificium, immaculatam hostiam. And in like sort others added other things. Thus far Polydor Virgil.

By this narratiō you see, that they are stark & shameles lies, which the Papists boast of the antiquity of their [Page 332] masse, & of Apostolick traditions of the masse. You haue heere the history of the be­ginning of the principall and substantiall parts of the masse compiled out of the Eccle­siasticall histories, not by some Lutheran, but by a faithfull seruant of the Romane Church, euen by a masse-Priest. 7, Abuse. The errors and [...]oole­ries of the Can [...] of the masse.

Now le [...] vs see by one or two examples, how absurd that Canon is, thus patched together by diuerse shreds.

The Ancients in times past, at the time (1) of the celebration of the Eucharist, brought loue-feasts, for the sustenance of the poore, and maintenance of the ministerie. At those offerings (which certainely were no propi­tiatorie sacrifice) the Church was woont to pray for preseruation and safetie, &c. Now that in the Canon before the consecration is applyed to the breade and wine at this day, and the breade and wine are offered to God the Father for the saluation of the Church.

In the Canon, God is requested to ac­cept that pure sacrifice of the body and bloud (2) of Christ, as he did accept the sacrifice of A­bel [Page 333] and Meschizedeck. If our Aduersaries referre these words to the olde accustomed offerings, they make mockeries, seeing this manner is now ceased amongst them: and they pray for that, which is no where. But if they refer them to the present sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ in the masse; what is this else, but to make intercession to the heauenly Father for his Sonne Christ?

Againe how absurdly is that most pre­cious sacrifice of Christs own body & bloud, (3) compared with the sacrifice of Abel, which, it may be, was a Lambe or a Goate? but these witlesse men make no more reckoning of Christs sacrifice, than of a goate or a Lambe.

There is comparison made with the sa­crifice (4) of Melchizedeck, whereas yet there is An error in the sa­crifice of Melchize­deck, who did not sa­crifice but brought forth bred and wine. nothing in Scripture (as hath alreadie beene shewed) that Melchizedeck did offer breade and wine. The sacrifice of Christ is compa­red with that sacrifice which is not, neuer was, and neuer shall be.

The Canon sayth that they offer the bread (5) [Page 334] of life to the heauenly Father: But where are they bid to offer the breade of life? Where­of we reade nothing in the whole course of the scripture, but that the bread of life should be eaten, not offered.

The Canon is contrarie to the article of (6) Christs ascension, when it commandeth the Angels to carie the hoste before the face of God to the high altar. What? And did not Christ ascend vnto his Father? And is there neede, that he should now after all appeare before his Father, that he should be caried from the earth aboue to his Father?

Againe seeing Christ is neuer in his glo­rifyed (7) bodie absent from his Father, what do the Angels carie, according to the Canon of the masse? if breade, then they commit idola­trie; if his body, then hath Christ two bodies, one whereof is present in Heauen with the Father; and the other is now after all, caried from the earth by the Angels.

And lastly, that we may not seeme heere (8) to make a large refutation of the Canon, whatsoeuer praise, prayer, thankesgiuing, was wont to be vsed in the primitiue Church [Page 335] in the celebration of the Supper, and offe­rings of charity, all that (though the man­ner of those offerings bee abrogated, with which that part of the seruice should rightly haue beene abrogated too) all that, I say, our Aduersaries do so retaine, that they haue (of a foolish ordinance) trasferred to the bread of the Eucharist present in the Supper, all those which formerly belonged to an acti­on altogether different from this. As anie man may easily finde moe, than be heere al­leadged, if hee doo but onely reade the Canon of the masse. In the meane while the Councell of Trent striketh all them with acurse, which say there be errors contained in the Canon of the masse. But it is [...]uident how it wanteth no errors, but aboūdeth with them.

This is also one of the Abuses of the masse, that 8, Abuse. Masse sayd in Latine. it is celebrated not in a knowen tongue, and such as the people vnderstand, but in a strange and in­deed only in the latine tongue, which we reproue for these causes

Because in the supper, there ought to bee a cōmemoratiō, of the death & passiō of Christ (1) [Page 336] which how can it be done in a tongue which the people vnderstand not. And how shall he that occupieth the roome of the vnlearned say Amen, at thy giuing of thankes, seeing he knoweth not, what thou sayest? 1, Corin 14, 16.

Paul writ the institution of the Lords (2) Supper to the Corinthians, rather in their mother tongue, than in an other.

Before the receiuing of the Supper, to the fruitfull vse thereof it is needfull to admo­nish (3) and exhort the communicants before hand, that the people may examine them­selues. This admonishing hath no place, where the holy Supper is celebrated in a strange tongue.

Paul, though hee commend the gifte of (4) tongues, yet woulde haue all thinges in the Church ordered to edification, but by a strange tongue, he that vnderstandeth it not, is not edified: neither can the hearers faith be strengthened by that speech, which hee knoweth not what it meaneth.

[Page 337] I had rather in the Church (saith Paule) (5) speake fiue words with mine vnderstanding, that I might also instruct others, than tenne thousand wor [...]s in a strange tongue. 1, Cor: 14. 19. for this purpose reade that whole chapter. Paul had rather in the publike con­gregation of the Church speake so, that hee might bee vnderstoode: but the Papists had rather in the meeting of the Church speake, that they be not vnderstood.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do reason thus.

1. Masse is to be saide in Latine, that they which come to vs out of France, Italy, & England may vnderstand it, and thereby set the vnitie of the Church.

Ans. 1 By the like reason, wee should not preach in the Dutch tongue, but in the La­tine amongst Dutch men, that strangers, which come vnto vs may vnderstand and heare the consent of our doctrine: 2, The whole flocke and company of the godly are not to bee neglected, for the cause of a stran­ger or two; whereas notwithstanding there is often times never a one present. 3, If there be a necessitie, that all strangers should vn­ [...]erstand [Page 338] Masse, how much more needefull, [...]at the whole Church at home should vn­derstand? 4, It is not certaine that all stran­gers doe vnderstand the Latine tongue.

2. The words of some one language (for exam­ple, of the Dutch tongue) are in sund [...]y places of the land, different and disagreeing, which falleth not out in the Latine tongue.

Answere. 1.

The Papists may bee ashamed of such sencelesse Paralogismes: for by the same reason it should bee vnlawfull to preach in Dutch. 2. And why doe not the Iesuites at this day, for the same reason, cease to publish their writings in the Dutch tongue? But a fit cover for such a pot: such as is the Popi [...] Religion, such are the Popish reasons.

3. If service should be said in the vulgar tongue, then there would be a prophanation of the myste­ries of Religion.

Answere. 1.

This is the sore that our Aduersaries can­not abide should bee touched: for they are afraide, least the grosse absurditities of the Canon of the Masse should bee espied even [Page 339] of the Laicks. 2, By the like reason, it should not bee any more lawfull to reade the Gos­pels appointed for Sondaies, (wherein are many high Mysteries of faith contained) in the vulgar tongue before the people: but mysteries of Religion, whiles they are pro­posed to the Church and explaned, are no­thing at all by this meanes prophaned. vn­lesse they account the Church as Swine and Dogges, before whom it is not lawfull to cast sacred things.

4. Strangers, which vnderstand not our vulgar tongue, would laugh at our service, which they vnderstand not.

Answer. 1. And what if the common peo­ple deride the Masse, because they vnder­stand it not, being saide in Latine? 2. And what if those strangers vnderstand not the Latine tongue neither, will they not there­fore deride it too? If when the whole Church is come together in one, & all speak stārge languages, (that is, if nothing be done in the vulgar tonge) there come in they that are vnlearned, or they which beleeue not, [Page 340] will they not say, that ye are out of your wits? as Paul saith. 1, Cor. 14, 23.

(Note that what is here spoken of the say­ing of Masse in Latine, may also bee vnder­stood of praiers rehearsed in Latine onely,)

It is an abuse of the Masse also, that they [...]. Abuse. Masse for the dead. offer the Masse not so much for the living, as for the dead, residing (as the Papists thinke) in Purgatorie: and that they perswade them selues, that the Masse doth profit the dead, and that they are helped by the multitude of Masses: the vanitie whereof how great it is, shall bee declared afterward in the question of Purgatorie, and therefore we will surcease from that labour now: let it suffice; that wee haue rehearsed now some fewe errors and a­buses of the Masse in steede of many.

CHAP. 18. Of Communion vnder one kind [...].

THE Antichrist of Rome hath moreover mangled the holy Supper of Christ, and hath bereaved the people of the one part or kind of the Supper, namely the Cup; which hee pretendeth to appertaine not to the lay people, but to the Priests onely: but wee greatly reproue this mangling of the Supper, as a kinde of sacri­ledge, and that for most iust reasons.

Because it doth directly oppugne the sa­cred & first institution of the Supper by our (1) Lord Iesus Christ.

1. For Christ instituted an entire & whole Sacrament consisting of two kindes, or rather of two parts, and not a maimed Sa­crament.

2. Neither did hee institute two Sacra­ments of the Supper; whereof the one, which is for the Priests, should consist of two parts, or, as they speake, of two kinds; the other for the people, but of one.

[Page 342] This maiming of the Supper, is repugnant (2) to the expresse words of Christs Commaun­dement.

1. Drinke yee (a word of the Imperatiue Moode) all of this. Math. 26. 27.

2. And all of them drank of it, according to his commandement. Mar. 14, 23.

This was not barely commanded, but (3) in the vertue of a Testament, which no man may disanull.

1. For the Cup, which our Aduersaries bereaue the people of, is the Cup of the new Testament. 1, [...]o [...]. 11. 25. Luk, 22, 20.

2. This is my bloud of the newe Testa­ment. Math. 26. 28. Mark. 14, 24.

The Lord tyed the commemoration of his death to the Communion of the holie (4) Cup also. therefore the commemoration of the bloud Christ shed belongeth equally vn­to all, and consequently the Cup also.

As Christ ordained the bread, as a means to partake his body, which was given for (5) vs; that receaving the bread according to his ordinance, we should therewith by [...]aith recea [...]e his body also: so hath hee ordained the Cuppe as a meanes for receaving his [Page 343] bloud [...] therefore, seeing the lay people haue neede to receaue the bloud of Christ shedd for their sinnes, it is needefull also to receaue it in the Cup, the ordinarie meanes thereof, and not in the bread.

Those thinges which Christ by the great wisedome of his Father, did sever from them (6) selues in the bread and the wine, those doe our Aduersari [...]s confound together.

It is prooued that the ancient and Primi­tiue (7) Church did communicate vnder both [...]indes.

1. By the example of the Corinthians, to Note. The B b in the counsell of Constance, cōsesse that the Cōmu­nion vnder one kinde, was neither instituted by Christ, nor vsed by the faithfull of the Pri­mitiue Church those Pa­pists the whom Paul prescribes the entire instituti­on of the Supper equally to all. 1, Corinth. 11. 26, 27, 28.

2, By the Ecclesiasticall Histories in the times of the Fathers.

3, By the confession of our Aduersaries in the Canons of the counsell of Constance; which haue these words.

Though Christ did administer to his Disciples, this venerable Sacrament vnder both the kindes of bread & wine: yet not­withstanding [Page 344] this, the Communion vn­der which would proue the Cōmunion vnder one kind by the Scripture, doe reproue the counsell of Cōstance for a lie▪ and doe hold that the Counsell may erre. one kinde onely, is to be held for a law. And againe,

Although in the Primitiue Church this Sacrament was receaved of the faithfull vnder both kindes: yet notwithstanding this, the custome being brought in, &c.

(8) Seeing therefore that the Commu­nion vnder one kinde, was neither ordained by Christ, nor vsed of the Apostles, this con­stitution of Communion vnder one kinde onely, can neither be Divine nor Apostolick, but Antichristian, as having had no place in the Church of Christ for many hundred yeares. And when as afterward it crept into the Church by little and little, in some pla­ces, not every where; it was at length con­firmed & brought in publickly by the coun­sell of Constance.

The lightnes of those reasons, which they bring for the mangling of the Supper, ought (9) This booke was publi­shed by Gerson, in the yeare, 1417. Au­gust. 20. to make it iustly hated of godly men. Now wee will very briefly note the reasons of the counsell of Constance, as Gerson hath ex­planed them in a particular booke for that purpose: and these be they.

[Page 345] 1, If the cuppe were granted to the people, there were danger of sheading.

2, Danger in carying it from place to place.

3, In the si [...]inesse of the vesselles: which should bee Sacred, and not commonly handled and touched by the Laickes.

4, In mens long beards.

5, In the reseruing of it for the sight: For vineger might be generated in the vessell: add moreouer, that in summer time flyes might breed [...] in it, & some times the wine might pu [...]rifie.

6, Manie would abhorre to drinke it, when manie others had dr [...]nk [...] before them.

7, In what vessell could there bee so much wine consecrated, as would bee required at Easter time for some thousands of Cō ­municants.

8, There would bee losse in the chargeable prouiding of wine. For in some places it is hardly gotten, & other where it is sould deere.

9, There would be danger, least it should congeale.

10, Hereof would arise a danger of a false [Page 346] conceit, as if there were as great worthinesse in the Laickes, about receiuing Christs bo­dy, as is in the Priests.

11, It would be thought, that the Commu­nion of the cuppe hath beene heretofore, and now were necessarie, and so all the Doctors of the Cleargie and the Prelates, which haue not opposed themselues a­gainst the contra [...]ie custome, by their pre [...] ching & writing should haue offended.

12, The power & vertue of this sacrament, would be deemed to be more in the recei­uing, than in the consecration of it.

13, It woulde follow that the Church of Rome did not iudge soundly of the sa­craments, neither were herein to be imi­tated.

14, It would follow, that the Councell of Constance did erre in faith & good man­ners.

15, It would be [...] an occasion of Schismes in Christianity.

Had it beene strange, gentle Reader, if this councel had been beaten to powder with lightning and thunder from Heauen; which hath mangled, turned vp side downe, and [Page 347] broken the Testament and last will of the Son of God, giuen vs in charge by the eternall Wisedome of GOD, with such friuolous, foolish, and idle reasons. Thus forsooth the Sacraments are to be handled, so great ought to bee the authoritie of the Sonne of God in his Church, with what burden of conscience then doo our Aduersaries defend this mang­ling.

Contrariwise our aduersarie [...] do dispute.

1. Christ saith: Doe this in remembrance of Mee, that is administer the Supper, in remem­brance of Mee; but this agreeth onely to Priests, not to Laicks. Therefore neither doth the Cup belongeth vnto the Laicks, seeing it pertaineth [...]ot to them to administer the Supper.

Ans, 1, By this reason the Laicks should be thrust, not from one but from both kinds of the Sacrament. 2, The word (Doe) hath not only reference to him that administreth, but to the cōmunicants too. Otherwise seeing the apostles did not administer in the 1, supper [Page 348] but onely receiued the Sacrament frō Christ, they also should haue communicated but vn­der one kinde.

2 All the Apostles were Priests; therefore the vse of the Cup and that precept, Drinke ye &c. belong to Priests onely.

Ans, 1,

Then the Primitiue CHVRCH did amisse, and Paul the Apostle too, who deli­uered the Supper vnto the lay people, not mangling the Communion of the Laicks (as they call them) but in such wise, as hee had receiued it from the Lord, that is, so as it was deliuered vnto him. 2, Againe by this rea­son the latity should bee excluded not from the cup onely, but from the whole Sacra­ment. 3, It cannot be, that Apostles were then Priests, that is, sayers or doers of masse: because then the masse had no beeing at all: & that the Apostles were made priests at the Supper, it is a tale, framed without authori­tie of the scripture. If it bee obiected, that they were made Priests before, when they were sent to preach, the schoole-diuines de­nie [Page 349] it, who say that they were made Priests at the supper, and reduce the Apostles at the time of their sending forth, into the order of ex [...]rcists, not of priests.

6 Christ did not so institute both kindes, that it may not be lawfull also to communicate vn­der one kinde onely.

Answ, 1, The Antecedent proposition is most false: for it cannot be shewed in scrip­ture, that Christ did institute both kindes as a thing indifferent and arbitrarie. 2, The words of Christ are vnanswerable: Drinke ye all of this. Now vnlesse they can shew a restricti­on or limitation in the scripture of this vni­uersall proposition, it remaiueth an vniuersall in his full force. 3. It is a Doctour like inter­pretation: Drinke ye all; that is, it is not need­full that all drinke. Then those vniuersall sayings shall also bee so expounded: Come vnto me all ye, that are wearie, that is, it is not needefull, that all which are wearie and heauie laden, should come vnto me, &c. A rare kinde of Diuinitie no doubt.

[Page 350] 4, The true body of Christ is not without Concomi­tance. bloude, therefore seeing the bloude is contained also vnder hat kinde, it is sufficient to communi­cate vnder one kinde onely.

Answer, 1, This argument deserueth thunder claps and eternall brimstone. Christ forsooth seemeth foolish to them who (not considering that his bloud was cōtained vn­der his bodie) instituted vnnecessary things in his last will, as not hauing his wits well a­bout him for feare of death. But Wise­dome is iustified of her children. 2, And if vnder the breade there were the bodie not voide of bloude, yet we should not so satisfie Christs commandement, who commanded vs not to eate, but to drinke, drinke, drinke his bloud.

5 Paul saith: whosoeuer shall eate this bread, or drinke, &c. 1. Corin, 11, 17. there by the dis­iunctiue particle (or) is granted a Communion vn­der one kinde.

Answer, 1,

If that were Paulls meaning, then were it lawfull to communicate with the cup only [Page 351] without breade which seeing our Aduersa­ries denie, they doe thereby expose the vani­ty of this argument to bee derided. 2, Paul when hee describeth the institution of the Supper in its proper place, 1, Corinth, 11, 24. 25, 26, 28. Vseth no disiunctiue particle. 3. Our Aduersaries in running to the Greeke text, doe against the councell of Trent, which enioyneth the ould vulgar latine translation of the Bible, to bee helde for authenticall in disputations, so that no man may dare or presume to reiect it vpon any pretence what seeuer. Sess, 4, Decret, 2.

6 Paul saith in the Greeke texte: All wee are Partakers of one breade: and those words (et de vno calice, and of one cup) though they be in the olde translation, yet they are not in the Greeke text. Therefore Paul allowed a Communion vn­der one kinde.

Answ, 1, It is a failacie of composition and Division, because those wordes are se­uered from the entire and perfect reasoning of Paul, by which words he argueth after­warde from the communion of the cup, as in the beginning hee did from the communion [Page 352] of the breade, saying: yee cannot drinke the cup of the Lord and the cuppe of deuills. From these words, a man might conclude by the same consequence, as the Papists vp­on their authoritie doe, that it were lawfull to communicate with the cup onely without breade.

7 Paul saith: let vs keepe the feast in vnleaue­ned breade. 1 Cor. 5, 8. There Paul maketh no mention of the cup, insinuating one kinde onely.

Ans, Paul speakes of the newnesse of life of the regenerate, by an argument drawen from a rite of the Passeouer whereby they abstained from leauen. This is then an idle & inconsequent reason. For these are Pauls words whole and entire: let vs keep the feast not with olde leauen, neither in the leauen of ma [...]tiousnesse and wickednesse: but with the vnleauened bread of sinceritie and truth. These are nothing to the Lords supper, there are then foure termes.

8▪ Christ celebrated the supper vnder one kind onely, before his two disciples in Emaus, Luke, 24, 30.

[Page 353] Ans. 1. There is described Christs vsuall custome; wherein hee vsed to breake bread (at dinner or supper) and to blesse it: nei­ther doth there appeare any shew of the ce­lebration of the Supper in this storie. The words are not said: This is my body. they are not bid, eate; or call to remembrance the Lords death: neither is it said, that the two Disciples did eate, but it seemeth rather, that they broke off their Supper straightwaies for ioy▪

9. Paul celebrated the Supper vnder one kinde onely, in the ship. Act. 27, 35.

Ans. There is nothing at all of the Supper, but of alaying their hunger: vnlesse our Ad­uersaries would haue it, that the heathen and vnconuerted Souldiours did communicate too, and that they grewe to bee merie in the celebration of the Supper of the Lord, as at a feast or banquet: for both these are com­prised in that rehearsall of Saint Luke. The argument then is this: hunger is alaied with bread, therefore the lay-people may com­municate vnder one kinde onely.

[Page 354] 10. In the Church of the Apostles, the faithfull communicated vnder one kinde (of bread) on [...]ly. Act. 2, 42:

Ans. 1. The breaking of bread in that som­what The connsel of Cōstm [...]e doth con [...]es in expresse words, that in the Pri­mitiue Church, this Sacrament was vs [...]d to be receaved of the faith full vnder both kinds. obscure place, may as well bee vnder­stoode of the communitie of goods, and re­receaving the poore into their fellowship, as of the Communion in the Supper: for by the circumstances it should rather be meant, that their bread was broken in their houses and not in the Church, that is, that the Chri­stians lived of their goods in common: nei­ther is this interpretation or sence absurd. 2, But bee it granted, that the speach is there of the Supper: yet it being a Synecdochicall speach, where the whole is signified by a part, it will not exclude the Cup.

11. Christ bad vs pray: Giue vs this day our dai­ly bread, &c. therefore the lay people ought t [...] communicate vnder one kinde.

Answere. 1. The Priests say the same pray­er, let them then abstaine also from the Cup. 2, The word (Bread) in the Antecedent is ta­ken for food and rayment, in the consequent [Page 355] for Communion vnder one kinde: so there are foure termes.

12. The Fathers, when they speake of the Sup­per. doe oftentimes mention the bread onely, and not the Cup also.

Ans. 1. They name the Supper so by a fi­gure Synecdoche, from the more principall part signifying the whole: but the figure Sy­necdoche hath not an exclusiue power; but vnder one part includeth the other two. [...], The counsell of Cōstance doth grant that in the Primitiue Church (in the time of the Fa­thers) the Communion was vsed vnder both kindes. 3, If such sayings of the Fathers doe exclude one part of the Sacrament, why doth this exclusi [...]e belong to the Laicks onely, and is not extended to the Priests al­so.

13. The ancient Canons did thrust bad Priests downe to the Communion of the Laicks: there­fore Communion vnder one kind [...] for the Laicks, was then in vse.

[Page 356] Answer. The Communion of the Laicks was a punishment for evill Priests, because Th [...] a god­ly Laicke & a evill Priest are estee­med of the Papists a­like. they were suspended from their office, & the power of consecrating, whereby they did minister and distribute in the holy Supper, was taken frō them, and a place was appoin­ted for them amongst the Laicks: In which signification the Communion of Laicks is ta­ken in the Antecedent; because therefore it is taken otherwise in the consequent, there are foure termes.

14. In ancient time, they caried the consecrated bread home with them: but there is nothing saide of the carying of the Cup: therefore, &c.

An. The question is not what was done; but whether it were rightly done, and according to the rule of Christs institution.

15. The Communion vnder one kinde is an an­cient Tradition.

Ans. 1. The counsell of Constance saieth no: as hath beene said sundry times. 2, The Tradition of Christ and the Apostle Paule, concerning the Supper, is farre more anci­ent. Let this tradition then, which is of no such antiquitie, giue place to the more anci­ent.

[Page 357] 16. The Church hath power to change the Sa­craments, because at this day all holde, that tha [...] change is lawfull, whereby the Supper is transla­ted from the evening to morning meetings.

Answere. 1.

The change of the circumstance of time in the celebration of the Lords Supper, be­longeth not to the substance of the Sacra­ment, but to the accidents and circumstan­ces: to reason then from these, to changes in the substance, is against art and reason. 2, And that was spoken to the Church, Turne not aside to the right hand, nor to the lea [...]t Deut. 5, 32.

17. Of the sonnes of Eli it is written: Appoint [...]e, I pray thee, to one of the Priests offices, that I Eckius in his Enchiri­dion. may eate a morsell of bread. 1, Samuel. 2, 36 there­fore the Communion vnder one kind is due to the Laicks.


I will onely reckon vp the severall Termes that bee in this argument. 1, The sonnes of Eli. 2, Lay Christians. 3, The Priests office, or maintenance by the revenues of the Priesthoode. 4, The Lords Supper. 5, The [Page 358] repulse from the Priests office. 6, Admission to the Supper. 7. A morsell of bread. 8, The Sacrament vnder one kinde. Is not this a ve­rie fertill argument of many termes? and how prodigall are our Aduersaries in termes.

CHAP. 19. Of Purgatorie.

OVr Aduersaries lay it for a ground, that as there bee three sorts of men, some good, some bad, and some of a meane sort betwix [...] both, so there shall be three estates of mens soules after this life; that they are either altoge­ther blessed, or [...]uerlastingly damned, or else in the temporall punishment of Purgatorie. And this last sort of soules, (to wit those that bee in Purga­torie) hath much augmented their rents and reve­nues: for the Papists [...]each, that those soules may [...]e h [...]lpen by the prayers of the liuing, purchased by golde and siluer, yea by lands and other reve­nues also: of these things then let vs treate briefe­lie.

Question: 1.

Seeing that which is not, hath no proprieties, first the question is, whether there be a Purgatorie. Our Aduersaries say there is, we say, no; for these reasons.

Because the Scripture teacheth vs nothing of Purgatori [...], neither in the letter, nor in the (1) sence thereof: but the Scripture containeth all things necessarie to salvation.

Yea, a [...] often as Christ and the Apostles (2) speake of the estate of soules after this life, they mention onely two estates, either of e­ternall life, or of hell torments.

1, Hee, that shall beleeue, and be bapti­zed, shall bee saved: but hee, that will not beleeue, shall be damned. Mark, 16, 16.

2, Verily, verily, I say vnto you; hee that heareth my word, and beleeveth in him, that sent me, hath euerlasting life, and shal not come into condemnation, but hath passed from death vnto life. Ioh. 5, 24▪

3. Hee that beleeveth in the sonne, hath euerlasting life, and hee that obeyeth not the sonne, shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him: Ioh: 3, 36.

[Page 360] 4. He that believeth in him, shall not bee condemned: but hee that believeth not, is condemned already: Ioh. 3, 18.

5. So in the parable (Luke, 16) there are onely two places after death mentioned: euerlasting life, (wherein was Abraham and Lazarus) and eternall damnation (wherin was the glutton:) neither is there granted any passage from the one to the o­ther.

6. Christ at his comming maketh onely two flockes, to wit, the blessed and the damned Matthew: 25: and Christ saith no­thing of the purging of them which are of the meane sort betwixt the other two, by Purgatorie; whereas notwithstanding in that congregation of all men, the three sorts of men, the good, the bad, and those of meane sort betwixt both, shall all appeare before the tribunall seate of Christ.

7, So Christ, did not send the Thiefe vpon the Crosse to Purgatorie (though hee had done many ill deedes), but calleth him di­rectly to heaven: Luk, 23, 43:

[Page 361] Paul would not haue Christians to be ig­norant (3) of the estate of thē, which are dead in Christ: there he doth not only say nothing of Purgatorie; but hath arguments also a­gainst it, 1, Thes, 4, 13. &c.

1, He saith, the faithfull departed do sleepe, not they are tormented in purgatorie, ver, 13.

2, He speaketh it for our comfort. But there would be no comfort, if we should know that our friends religiously departed, were in paine and torments and such as bee ex­treame, ver, 13.

3, Christ will bring with him at his cōming the faithfull departed, hee will not then at length, cal them to him out of Purgatorie, ver, 14.

The Popish purgatorie, whereby wee should bee purged from sinnes after death, doth crosse and twhart the one only and true (4) purgatorie of Christians: which is the merit and bloud of Christ, layed holde on by faith.

1, Mens hearts are purged by faith, not by the [Page 362] fire of purgatorie) Act. 15, 9.

2, The bloude of Iesus Christ the Sonne of God, purgeth vs from all sinne, 1, Ioh, 1, 7.

3, Be not deceiued; neither fornicatours, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor wantons, &c, shal inherit the kingdōe of God: And such were some of you; (now see their purga­torie, what it was) but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are iustified in the name of the Lord Iesus, and by the spirit of our God, 1, Cor. 6, 9, 10, 11.

It twharteth also the perfect satisfaction, and perfect merite of CHRIST, if no we (5) after all wee must make satisfaction in the paines of purgatorie.

1, For so the passiue righteousnesse of Christ shall be thrust out of dores.

2, Christ is the reconciliation for the sinnes of the whole World, 1, Ioh. 2, 2.

3, Surely hee hath borne our infirmities &c. I say dooth in one place re­fute Pur­gatorie by many arguments. Hee was wounded for, our transgressions &c. with his stripes we are healed, &c. the Lord hath layde vpon him the iniquity of [Page 363] vs all, &c. The chastisement of our peace (the punishment of our sinnes) was vpon him, &c. Hee hath caried our sorrowes. Isay 53, 4, 5, 6.

It is contrarie to the article of the Christi­an (6) faith

1, We belieue the remission, not the com­pensation of sinnes.

2, Wee belieue eternall life. Heere is no mention of Purgatorie.

The opinion of our Aduersaries concer­ning Purgatorie hath no waight. (7)

1, For they confesse that there was no pur­gatorie in the time of the olde Testa­ment.

2, They cannot auoyde the absurditie con­cerning them which shall bee founde a­liue at the latter day, and haue deserued Purgatory: what shall be done with them: whether God will pardon them those punishments: or whether they must bee tormented for a time after the finall sen­tence of the last [...]dgment.

[Page 364] 3, The grounds of this opinion were taken from Plato and Virgil, lib, 6. Aened.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do reason.

1, Because all men haue not perfect and firme faith, therefore all after this life cannot perfectly be [...]aued.

Ans, 1, Christ, when he saith, that faith is the instrumentall cause of saluati [...]n, hee speaketh of faith generally, and excludeth neither weake, nor imperfect faith. 2. Christ layed holde on by faith, cannot be deu [...]ded; that he should be said, to be laied hold on but in part; and they which lay holde on him, to be saued but in part; but whole Christ is ap­prehended as well by a weake, as by a strong faith. 3, It is a fallacie, taking that for a cause which is no cause. For the strongnesse or weakenesse of faith (or an accident of faith) is not the cause of apprehending saluation, but of retaining it, Now that which is spoken of retaining, that ou [...] Aduersaries do wrong­fully apply to the apprehending thereof.

[Page 365] 2 No vncleane thing shall enter into the king­dome of Hea [...]en, Reuel, 21, 27. Therfore needs they must be purged by purgatorie.

Answ, 1,

There bee foure termes in the argument. For the purging from the filth of sinne in the Antecedent is taken for the iustification of faith, whereby all that belieue, are washed, are sanctified, are purified, (1, Cor, 6, 11, 1, Ioh 1, 7. Acts 15, 9.) in the consequent it is taken for a clensing in purgatorie, neither knowen to God, nor to the Scriptures. 2, There is more in the Consequent, than in the Ante­cedent. For it followeth not: the heires of e­ternall life are vncleane, therefore they are purified onely by the fire of Purgatorie, and not by any other means, such as these which concurre together are, faith, the bloud & the merite of Christ.

3 In the name of Iesus shall euerie knee bow, both of things in Heau [...]n, and things in earth, and things vnder the earth, Philip. 2, 10, Reuel. 5, 13. But the deuills hate Christ, and doe not bow the [Page 366] knees vnto him. Therefore there are soules in pur­gatorie; and consequently there is a purgatorie.

Ans, 1, The bowing of the knees in this place is the same, that subiection, in which sense euen the Deuils (though they tremble) doe in outward cariage confesse subiection to Christ. 2, It is an error taking that, which is spoken indefinitely of al sorts of creatu [...]es, whether reasonable or vnreasonable, as i [...] it were spoken definitely, of a certaine sort of men; of whom notwithstanding there is no certaintie in Scripture. 3, As concerning the place (Reuelat, 5, 3, 13.) where there is mention made of such as are vnder the earth, I answeare. 1, If there were a purgatory, yet were it not certaine, that it were vnder the earth. 2, Vnder the earth, are both the crea­tures vnder the earth; & also the dead, which are buried, which shall appeare before Christ at the resurrection, and shall testifie their subiection.

4 If anie mans worke burne, hee shall suffer losse, but he shall be safe himselfe: neuerthelesse yet as it were by the fire. 1, C [...]rin, 3, 15. Therefore there is a Purgatorie.

[Page 367] Ans, 1, It followeth not, the fire shall [...]ye it; Therefore purgatorie fire shall trie it, 2, Paul saith the worke shall burne, not the person; but our Aduersaries imagine the per­sons and soules shall burne. 3, If Paul speake of purgatorie, then the Saints shall be thrust into purgatory; which is proued by the vni­uersall particle Eueri [...] mans worke, &c. 4, He speaketh of the fire of tribulation, affliction, and tentation; against which, stubble may not be opposed, but faith which is more precious than golde, 5. So then while they confound the worke that shall burne, and the persons that shall burne, and also the fire of tribula­tion and the fire of purgatorie, there arise not foure, but fi [...]e termes.

5 Of the sinne against the Holy-ghost, it is sayd, it shall neither bee forgiuen in this World, nor in the World to come. Matth. 12, 32. Therefore there remaineth a place after death wherein sinnes are forgiuen.

Answere, 1, CHRIST speaketh of the World to come; but our Aduersaries themselues denie, that there shall bee anie Purgatorie in the WORLD to come, [Page 368] vnlesse they will fall into the errour of Origen. 2, Christ speaketh of remission in the World to come: but our Aduersaries vrge not, remission, but satisfaction in purgatorie. There are therefore foure termes. 3, The phrase of speach (neither in this World, nor in the world to come) in Marke 3, 29. are expres­sed thus: hee shall neuer haue forgiuenesse

6 Thou shal [...] not come out thence, till tho [...] hast payde the v [...]most farthing, Matth, 5, 26. It must needes be therefore, that there is a purgato­rie.

Answ. 1.

Christ in these words doth not speake of the state of the World to come; but admo­nisneth vs, that in this present life we studie for peace and quietnesse, and be reconciled to our Aduersaries: least by our stubbornes wee drawe vpon vs greater euilles from the ciuill Magistrate. 2, Were the place neuer so much to be expounded allegorically; ye [...] herein it faileth, that we, (who haue offen­ded an eternall and infinite God) must neede [...] [Page 369] bee subiect to eternall punishments: where no place is graunted to temporall punish­ment. 3, There would follow this absurdi [...]ie also: that wee must agree with our Aduersa­rie, that is, with Sathan: this ende allegories haue, which are st [...]tched beside the mea­ning of the Scripture.

7, Wee went through fire and water, but thou broughtest vs out into a wealthie place. Psal. 66. 12 therefore there is a Purgatorie.

Answere. 1 Our Aduersaries alleadge this out of the olde Testament contrarie to their conscience; whereas notwithstanding the Schoole-men teach, that in the olde Testa­ment there was as yet no Purgatorie. 2, That the Psal [...]ne speaketh of temporall tribulati­ons, is prooved by the [...]e words next follow­ing: I will go [...] into thy house with burnt of­ferings▪ which cannot agree to soules de­parted. 3. In the Psalme it is said: Thou hast caused men to ride over our heads: (men, not Devils, as is imagined to bee in Purgatorie.) 4, A sweet interpretation forsooth, we haue gone through water, that is, through fire of Purgatorie.

[Page 370] 8 I haue loosed thy prisoners out of the pit, wherein is no water. Zachar, 9. 11, that is, I haue freed them out of Purgatorie, and consequently, there is a purgatorie.

Ans, 1, It is a metaphoricall speach, wherein is described the deliuerance of all mankinde after they had fallen. It is then a fallacy from a thing spoken in part and some respect, to the same absolutely taken. 2, There be contradictories in this, and the argument going before, if they be vnderstood of pur­gatorie. In the former argument, water is af­firmed to be in purgatorie, in this it is deni­ed, that there is anie water. 3, If the lake without water bee vrged, let our Aduersaries knowe, that that place (Luke. 16. 23, 24) is hell, whence is no returning. And so it doth not agree to purgatorie neither.

9 He is like a purging fire, and fullers sope; and hee shall sit downe to try and fine the siluer: he shall euen fine the sonnes of Leui &c. Malach. 3, 2, 3.

Answ. 1.

That they bee meere metaphores, the word (like) doth shew. It is then a fallacie [Page 371] vrging a misconstruction of the words. 2, There is more in the consequent than in the Antecedent. For it foloweth not: he shall purge the sonnes of Leui: Therefore that purgation can be none other, but by the fire of purgatorie. 3, The whole text doth speake of the first comming of Christ, and of his ministerie, whereby hee shall confounde and wipe away hypocrites, as drosse, and shall institute the true worship of God, and shall consecrate spirituall priests and Leuites by his bloud. It is nothing therefore to the purpose.

10 Haue pittie vpon mee, O my friends: for the hand of God hath touched me. Ioh, 19. 21 Therefore there is a purgatorie.

Answ, 1, Yet againe our Aduersaries remember not, that the Schoole-men know of no purgatory in the olde Testament. 2, Iob desireth his friendes, that they would cease from rebuking an innocent man, and rather pittie him, than continue to reproue him. 3, Iob was aliue and how could he bee in Purgatorie?

[Page 372] 11. C [...]is [...] [...]nt in his Spirit, and preached to the Spiri [...] [...] which were in time past disobe­d [...]ent, when once the long suffering of God abode in the daies of No [...]. 1, Pe [...], 19, 20. therefore there is a Purgatorie.

Answere. 1. Some of the Popish Doctors (though impertinently too) doe expound this place of Limbus Pa [...]um, and not of Pur­gatorie. 2, These belong to the olde Testa­ment, in which the doctrine of the Papists admitteth of no Purgatorie.

12, Iudas Ma [...]habaeus sent to Ierusalem two thousand [...]achmes of [...]ver for those that were slaine: and the Author addeth withall. It was an holy and good thought, to pray for the dead, that they might be delivered from sinne. 2, Maccab. 12, 43, 45.

Answer. 1. The booke is Apocriphall, and in the end of the booke the Author craveth pardon, saying: If I haue done well, and as the storie required (note, he wrote as an Hi­storian, and not as one that delivered points of faith it is the thing, that I desired: but if I haue [...]poken slenderly and barely it is that I could▪ [...] M [...]acchab. 15, 39. 2, Iudas had no comma [...]dement o [...] [...]od to doe so: there­fore it is no pre [...]ption to vs. 3. Once againe [Page] wee must remember our Aduersaries, why they would endevour to proue Purgatorie out of the old Testament: seeing themselues denie, that there was any Purgatorie in the olde Testament.

13. Augustine in some places doth not dislike the mention of Purgatorie.

Ans. 1. Augustine speaketh of it very stag­geringly and doubtfully: adioining to his dis­puration of Purgatorie these wordes: Per­haps it is true. Deciuit. Dei. li. 21, cap. 24, & 26.

14, Because there be three sorts of men, good, evill, and of a meane sort betwixt both, it must needes bee, that there bee three such conditions of soules after this life.

Ans. 1. We are not now to deale with the morall and politick principles of Plato, Ari­stotle, Virgill, &c. but with principles farre different from them, namely with the prin­ciples of Divinity revealed from heaven. See­ing then, that divers principles are confoun­ded, it is a fallacie, involving many questions as one. 2, The distinction of men in Divinity is farre different from this, and is onely two-fold; betwixt the Beleevers and the Infidels: betwixt the Sheepe and the Goates: betwixt [Page 372] [...] [Page 373] [...] [Page 374] those which gather with Christ, and those which scatter: betwixt those which are with Christ, and those which are against him. And therefore vnto these there are two pla­ces onely, and no moe assigned after death in the Scriptures.

15 Gregorie the Great, learned Purgatorie from spirits, that appeared vnto him, and shewed the punishment of Purgatorie.

Answ. Those spirits were not the sovles of men departed, but they are the trickes and mockeries of Satan. 2, The truth should be learned, not of the dead, but of the Word of God, (the lawe, and the testimonie. Isay, 28. 20). 3, Gregorie in this vncertaine kinde of arguments, had a humane slippe; seeing he ought to haue sticken rather to the Scrip­ture, than to visions and spirits.


Whether the deade, after their death not ha­uing attained the blisse of Heauen, may be holpen in Purgatory by the suffrages of the liuing (espe­cially by the masse, and those s [...]uices of God of [Page 375] mans in [...]ntion & chois [...]. Our Aduersaries affirm, we denie it.

Because that which is not at all, hath no accidents. Therefore seeing it cannot bee (1) proued, that there is a purgatorie: but the contrarie is proued [...] it is in vaine to dispute of the helping of soules in purgatorie.

The time of repentanc [...] in Scripture is onely granted to this present life: after (2) death is left no place for repentance.

1, In an acceptable time haue I heard thee, Isay, 49, 8. Behold now the accepted time, beholde now the day of saluation, 2, Cor, 6. 2.

2. While wee haue time, let vs doe good. Galat, 6, 10.

3, The godly must redeeme the time, Eph, 5, 16.

4, The time is short 1. Corinth, 7, 29. as if he should say: Hee that will doe well, let him doo it in this life; for in the other life the time of dooing good cannot bee recalled.

5. Exhort one another dayly, while it is called To day. Hebrues 3, 13. To day if you will hear [...] his voyce, &c. let vs studie [Page 376] therefore to enter into that rest. Heb: 4, 7, 11. and Psal. 95, 7, 8.

After death there is none amendment of (3) change to be hoped for.

1. If the tree do [...] fall towards the South or toward the North, in the place that the tree falleth, there it shall be Eccles, 11, 2.

The deade doe not after death by anie good procure Gods favour for the altering (4) of their estate.

1. For every man shal receaue the things that are done in his body. 2: Corinth: 5, 10. he faith not, after death, out of the body.

Neither are the dead holpen by the suf­frages or works of other men. (5)

1, Every man shall beare his owne bur­den. Galat: 6, 5.

2. Neither could the wise virgins giue of their oile to the foolish virgins: Matth: 25, 9:

But especially th [...] dead cannot be holpen (6) by those workes, private Masses, workes of supere [...]ogation, &c: for how impious those be, hath beene before declared. And seeing the living by that idolatry deserue hell, how can they helpe the dead with those workes, [Page 377] which God hath reiected?

Contrariwise our aduersaries do dispute.

1 The workes of the dead follow them, Re­uel, 14, 13. Therefore they are [...]ased by good workes in Purgatorie.

Answer, 1,

The text is by this argument corrupted and wrested many wayes. 1, The place spea­keth of the blessed and those that rest from their labours; but our question is of them which are not yet blessed, but are excluded from rest. 2, The text speaketh of the re­compence of a mans owne workes; but our Disputation is of the workes of the liuing, done in fauour of the dead. 3, The text spea­keth of the increase of glorie in the heauenly life: but our disputation is of the diminishing and shortning of paines in purgatorie. This argument then is nothing els, but a heape of termes that haue no coherence one with another.

2 In the Scripture holy men haue mourned for their dead, as Abraham for Sarah, [...]acob for Ra­hel, [Page 378] Ioseph for his Father. Therefore the dead [...] [...]re holpen by the workes of the liuing.

Answer, 1, It is a fallacy, taking for a cause, that which is no cause. For wee no where reade, that the cause of their mour­ning was the relieuing of the deade, but sor­row for their friends, parents, brethren se­uered from them by death was the cause thereof. 2, For the same cause Paul biddeth vs to keepe a meane in mourning, because those which are deade in Christ, liue in rest; not in torments; with Christ, not with the deuil.

[...] In olde time, the liuing were baptized for the dead. 1, Cor. 15, 29. But that had beene in vaine, v [...]lesse the workes of the liuing might ad­uantage the dead. Therefore, &c.

Answ, 1. The Greeke text is, to be bapti­zed ouer the dead, not for the deade, that is, they would be baptized ouer their graues, both to shew their hope of the resur [...]ection (which was very incredible amongst the Gentiles): and also for a testimonie, that they were ready to expect death for Christs sake, in whose name they were bapt [...]zed. But that this baptisme was vsed for the deade, to [Page 379] the profite and helpe of the deade, heereof nothing is sayde in the text.

4 Liberalitie pleaseth all men liuing, and from the deade restraine it not, Eccles, 7, 33.

Ans, 1, In the olde Testament, our Aduer­saries confesse there was no purgatorie: Ec­clesiasticus then could not speake of a thing, which had no beeing. 2, There is more in the conclusion than in the premisses, name­ly, it becommeth vs to be thankefull toward our friends departed. Therfore our thanke­fulnesse consisteth heerein, that wee helpe them beeing in purgatorie with masses and other such workes; whereas notwithstan­ding we may be thankefull to them, in bury­ing them honourably, in doing good to their posterity, and in preseruing their good name after their death.

5 Powre forth teares ou [...]r the deade, and be­gin to mourne, as if thou hadst suffered great harme, &c. Eccles, 38. 16.

Ans, 1, The whole text speaketh only of an honest desire and remembrance, which our friēds departed leaue of thēselues with vs after their departure. There is therfore more [Page 380] in the premisses, than in the conclusion.

6 Power out thy breade on the buriall of the lust, Tob; 4, 17. Therefore the dead are holpen by the workes of the liuing.

Ans, 1, Whether the powring of their bread vpon the buriall do helpe the deade, or no, therof Tobias saieth neuer a word. 2 He speaketh of the buriall of the iust, and if hee were iust, then should he not be in purgatory, (if a purgatori [...] were granted) neither should he need good works to be relieued by them, According to the saying in the booke of wis­dome: The soules of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no hurt shall touch them (Wisd, 3, 1.) 3, And, those which at this day in the reformed Churches, do giue almes af­ter the death of their friends doe it not, that they may help them being in purgato­rie (for they do not belieue that there is a pur­gatorie) but that they may preserue an hono­rable remembrance of the dead. Some such thing it was also, that [...]obie enioyned his son concerning the powring of his meate vpon the buriall of the dead. Or; seeing it appea­reth, it was a custome amongst the Iewes, [Page 381] that the friendes and well-willers of the dead, for the loue they had to him, vsed to make a banquet to his children and kindred, to comfort and refresh them at the buriall of their friend. As appeareth, ler. 16, 7. It is most probable, that Tobie alluded to that custome.

7 Monica the mother of S. Augustin, when she lay a dying, desired a memoriall of her to bee kept in the celebration of the Eucharist.

Answ, 1.

She desired a remembrance of her, not a massing sacrifice, thereby to be holpen. 2, Augustine praying for his mother sayth, he doubteth not, but that God had done that long since, which he desired for his mother. 3, And the examples of christians (which some times slip into a superstition) are not rules to order our life by.

8 In ancient time, there was a remembrance kept of the deade in the celebration of the Eucha­rist

Ans, 1, This antiquity reacheth not so [Page 382] far backe as to the Apostles time. Therfore it is not sufficient for vs. 2, The memory of them was ordained, not that they doubted of the saluation, and blessed estate of the godly departed: but the examples of the dead were proposed to be imitated, and thankes were giuen to God for his gifts bestowed vpon the faithfull departed, while they liued, & grace was begged at Gods hands, for imitation of them and the gift of perseuerance. The re­membrance then which was obserued of an­cient time, doth not su [...]e with that, which is now a dayes kept in popery for the deliue­rance of soules (which remaine in Vtopia.)

CHAP. 20. Of the In [...]ocation of Saints.


IN this Chapter wee are enforced to proceede with an other methode, than wee haue done in the former. For whereas the papists cannot cleare themselues from the crime of idolatrie, very boldely they beginne to denie that, which is noto­ [...]iously [Page 383] knowne: And (as if the thing it selfe might bee mitigated with milder wordes) they refraine from the word invocation, & place insteed there­of, the word veneration. After the same fashion, they change their doulian or a certaine kinde of seruice, with Latria, or the worship due to God. That these things then may be brought to light, & the state of the question truly & rightly set downe, let vs see out of a few exāples, in the praiers directed by Papists vnto Saints, and as yet not cancelled in their Churches, or disallowed: heereby, I say, let vs see, whether it be a bare veneration or reuer [...]ce, or whether there be deuine worship therin, which they giue to Saints. That is, whether they pray for any thing to Saints, which is only to bee craued of God: and doe ascribe vnto Saints, that which is proper to God alone.

And the first that heere offereth it selfe, is [...], This psal ter was printed at Venice in the yeare, [...]476 by [...]ohn de Hallis: and there [...] ­mai [...]e yet two other copies, the one prin­ted at Pa­ [...]i [...] the o­ther at Li [...] the Ladies Psalter; wherein are contained these things following.

1, Come vnto her (that is Marie) all ye, that labour and are troubled, and shee shall giue refreshing, & comfort to your soules. Come vnto her in your tentations & the gratiousnesse of her countenance shall stablish you, Psal, 2.

[Page 384] 2, Deliuer vs by thy holy prayers from the gate of hell, and the belly of the depth. Psa, 6.

3, I trust in our Lady, because of the sweet­nesse of the mercifulnes of her name, &c, And let her mercie take away the multi­tude of your sinns, & let her fruitfullnesse acceptable to God, procure to vs the plen­tie of merites. Psal, 10.

4, Arise O Lady, preuent him (that is our ad­uersarie) and supplant him, and destroy all his endeuours, Psal, 13.

5, Keepe me, O Lady, because I haue trusted in thee, and mercifully grant vnto mee the droppings of thy grace, Psal, 15.

6, Vnto thee, O lady, haue I lifted vp my soule: through thy prayers, let me not be asha­med in the iudgment of God, Psal, 24.

7, I will offer vnto thee the sacrifice of praise, and d [...]uoutly will I exalte thy glory, Psal, 29.

[Page 385] 8, In thee O Lady, haue I put my trust; let If this bee not to wor­ship Sa [...]ts with the p [...] per worship of GOD, what thē is? Surely this whole psalm is due to GOD, as Christ and Stephen did commend their soul [...] vnto God. me not be confounded for euer; receiue me into thy fauour, incline thine care vn­to me, and make me ioyfull in my heaur­nesse: thou art my s [...]ength and refuge, my comfort and protection, vnto thee haue I cryed, when my heart was troubled, and thou heard [...]st me from the [...]opp of the [...] ­uerlasting hills. Into thine hands O Lady, doe I commend my spirit, my whole life, and my last day, Psal, 30.

9, Blessed are they, whose hearts doo loue thee, O Virgin Marie, their sinnes shall be mercifully washed away by thee, Psal. 31.

10, By thy holinesse my sinnes are purged, by thine integrity incorruptibilitie is giuen me. Psal. 44.

11, The Lord sayd vnto my Lady; sit on my right hand, Psal, [...].

And infinite oth [...] moe, which the short­nesse of a Manwell wil not permit, to set them [Page 386] down heere. But by a few the reader may see, that throughout the whole Psalter, whatsoe­uer the Psalmist ascri [...]eth to God, and Iesus Christ his Sonne, and such things, as Dauid durst pray for to none, but to God alone, are all ascribed to the Virgin Mary.

And the hym [...] which they vse now to sing dayly in their Churches very deuoutly, doth (2) sufficiētly declare, that they giue to the virgin Mary the titles of Christ, and do pray to her for such things, as are to be craued of Christ. Now the hymne (in English) is on this wi [...]e.

All haile O Queene of mercy: our life, sweetnes, and hope, all haile. Vnto thee we banished sonnes of Eue doe crye. Vnto thee we sigh g [...]aning and [...]eeping in this vale of teares: Ah, then our Aduocate, turne those thy mercifull eyes vnto vs, and shew vnto vs after this Exile, Iesus the blessed fruite of thy wombe, O gentle, O sweet, O godly Vir­gin Mary.

Heereof see the Ro­man Breuiary printed at Antwerp in the yeare 1579, as also the booke called Hor­culus animae part, 5. Heereto may be adioyned the titles, (3) by which they, salute the Virgin Mary. Aduo­cate, Helper, the gate of Heauen, Enlightner Deliuerer, Mediatour, Sauiour, Comfort, it. [Page 387] aduersity, Refuge, Rocke, the Fountaine of Grace, &c. Which are ascribed euery where throughout the psalter to the blessed Virgine Mary, and partly in the Rosaries, and partly in that, which they call Cursus horarum & o­ther prayers. These fa [...]e [...]tles are contai­ned in the forecited Breuiary, as also in the seruice of the blessed Virgin (in officio bea­tae Virgi [...]s▪) In the letany of the blessed Virgine these titles are giuen her: the foun­taine of mercy, the streame of wisdome; the rod of Iesse, the tree of life, the orient light & splend [...]r, the window of heauen, the passable gate of paradise, the true saluation & blessed­nes, the mother of orphanes, &c. See that notable worke called mariale, printed at Stras­burge in the yeare 1493: there ye shal finde al these and in some points those that f [...]re ex­c [...]ede them. Moreo­uer there they craue of Mary, that she would deliuer vs from all euill: from all euill tenta­tion [...] from the wrath and indignation of God: from danger and dispaire, &c. That she would vouch safe to keepe the holy Church [...] &c. There is a booke extant printed in Italy in Octauo: Wherin he that prayeth speaketh to the Virgin Marie thus: Ora Filium iuum suppliciter, & prae [...]ipe sublimiter, &c. pray thy Sonne humbly, and command him loftily, that in the euen tide of the World he would bring vs to eternall ioyes. How great are these abhominations?

[Page 388] But they haue dealt the like with other (4) Saints also, giuing vnto them the titles of See their Breuiaries & hymnes▪ yet not cācelled in the po­pish king­dome, you shall mee [...]e with many such for the things fol­lowing can­not bee de­nied seeing they are fōg in many pla­ces vntil this day: Christ, and crauing of them those things, which it is not lawefull to craue of any but of Christ alone.

1, O holy Virgin Dorothie; make vs happy by thy vertue: create in vs a new heart. In the olde Missals.

2. He saue vs from sinne, that we may rest with the blessed soules in Heauen. Of Saint George.

3, All haile pre [...]ate Augustin; heare vs cal­ling vpon thee, and after death bring vs triumphing into the heauenly Kingdome, Of S. Augustin.

4. O Francis, brightsome light, chiefest cru­cified Martyr, now thou triumphest with CHRIST in the companie of celestiall wights. Be thou to vs the way of life, shew thou to Christ for vs alwaies thy godly wounds. Of S. Francis.

5, All haile glorious Agnes, keepe thou me in the true faith, sweete and dearely belo­ued Virgin, I heartily beseech thee: gran [...] to all men religiously to serue GOD by [Page 389] whom thou art elected, with perfect chari­tie.

6, Loose the guilte of my polluted lippes, 5. Iohn.

7, O reuerend Bishop, a religious and pre­sent worke-man to them, which with a faithfull heart doe seeke to thee in their perills. Take away the damages of death, & giue vs the wages of life, that after this departing of the flesh, wee may bee with thee in glory. Of S. Nicholas.

8, Giue hee vnto vs the heauenly armour, when tentation is at hand: let him fighting for vs hand to hand, put the harmefull e­nemy to flight, of S. Martin.

In diseases and other perils and dangers, they were wont to pray vnto fourteene Hel­pers (5) or Relieuers; whereas these things were to be begged of God. So they assigned saints as so many guardian gods, to euerie particu­lar arte, workemanship and countrey, wher­in the names vsed in paganisme, onely were changed, not the things themselues. For as of olde time Mars, Mercurie, Hercules, Mi­nerua, &c. were worshipped of the Gentils, [Page 390] so in their steed the Papists do now worship George, Nicholas, Martin, Katherin, &c.

Out of this short narration, thus now I reason. Whosoeuer praieth to a creature for that, which is to be begged of God alone, he doth not onely reuerence that creature, but placeth him in the steed of GOD, & com­mitteth idolatrie. But the Papists do so. (As was proued a while agoe.) Therefore they do not onely reuerence the Saints, but place them in Gods steed, & commit idolatry. And whosoeuer giueth to a creature the titles of God, and the glory of God signified by the same titles, hee committeth idolatry; (as is most certaine in the Scripture:) but that the Papists do so, hath bin alreadie proued. Ther­fore they do not barely reuerence Saints, but they worship them as Gods, giue vnto them diuine honor and so commit idolatry.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do dispute.

1 Wee make not Gods of Saints, because wee worship them with a lower degree of worship, than is Latrîa, or the worship proper to God: [Page 391] namely the saints wee worship with Dulia: the Virgin Mary with Hyperdulîa, &c.

Ans, 1, This is the same, as was the di­uine worship of the heathen; who (as Plato witnesseth) did worship one God, that is I [...] ­piter, for the chiefest God: the rest they cal­led lesser Gods, and worshipped them with a lower degree of worship. 2, There needeth no protestation, where the thing itselfe is e­uident. Now the thing it selfe proclaimeth as before was shewed, that diuine worship is giuen vnto Saints. It is in vaine then to make any protestation. 3, Suppose the names of a thing be changed, and if the thing remain the same, no man can heereby defende his facte.

2 Austin brought in the distinction betweene Dulia and Latria. Therefore the inuocation of Saints is iustly defended by this distinction.

Answ, 1, Augustin by this distinction distinguisheth the obedience of the first and second table, or our obedience towards God, and our obedience toward our parents and Magistrats; granting that obedience is due to both, but in a lower degree to the Magistrate than to [Page 392] GOD as it is Act, 5, 29. Now this is no­thing to the inuocation of Saint [...], whereof Austin sayth nothing in this his distinction. Moreouer Austin speaketh of obedience to be yelded to the liuing: but our Aduersaries of the inuocation of the dead [...]. 2, The Scripture vseth the words Latreuein and douleuein with­out difference. Doule [...]ein is referred to God also. Rom, 7, 25, as also 1. Thes, 1, [...]. so also doule [...]n to [...]uri [...] Acts, 20. 19. and latreuein in the translation of the seuentie interpreters is vsed to signifie seruile workes also. Leu. 23, 8, & 28. 18.

3 Wee doe not pray vnto, but mention and name the Saints.

Ans, The contrarie hath beene alreadie proued. 2, This compellation or naming them hath no ground in Scriptures.

Whether we may pray vnto Saints.

Ou [...] Aduersaries holde the affirmatiue parte, but we the negatiue, for these reasons.

[Page] By the confession of our Aduersaries: who (1) confesse that the inuocation of Saints hath no commandement of God for it, as appea­reth by these words of Eckius. The inuoca­tion of Saints (sayth he) is not expressely cō ­manded in the holy Scripture. Not in the Olde Testament, where the people were o­therwise prone to idolatrie, and the Fathers were as yet in Limbus not glorified, Isai, 63, 16. Abraham is ignorant of vs, and Israel knoweth vs not. Vnder the Gospell also it was not commanded, least the Gentiles con­uerted to the faith, should thinke, that they were brought again to the worship of earth­ly things, that a [...]ter their olde manner, they should worship Saints, not as Patrons, but as Gods, as at Lycaonia they would haue sacri­ficed to Paul and Barnabas. Moreover if the Apostles and Euangelists had taught that Saints should be worshipped, it would haue beene counted arrogancie in them, as if they themselues had sought that glorie after their death. The Holy-ghost therefore woulde not by expresse scriptures teach the worship­ping of Saints, but those which were strong in the faith, hee taught them by miracles, [Page 394] and the helpes receiued from Saints▪ when prayers were powred out vnto them, that the Saints were to bee worshipipped, &c. Thus farre E [...]kius. Ou [...] of this confession these corollaries following are to bee noted.

1, That inuocation of Saints w [...]s vnknowen in the time of the Apostles, & in the time of Christs Ministerie vpon earth. Where is now the antiquity of the Apo­stolicke doctrine among the Papists?

2, That the Apostles did not only not write, but that they would not write of the wor­shipping of saints, least themselues should seeme to hunt after that honour (because in truth it did not belong vnto them.)

3, That after the canon of the Scripture was perfected, yet neuerthelesse the inuocatiō of Saints was vnknowen: and that yet notwithstanding Christians might beel [...] ­ued, as Iohn witnesseth of his Gospel, [...]ap, 20, ver, 31.

4, Seeing the Apostles wrote all things ne­cessary to saluation (Act, 20, 27. Ioh, 20, 31,) and the holy Scripture is such, as ma­keth a man perfect to euery good work (2, Timoth, 3, 17.) It followeth heereof, that either these things are not true, which are heere spoken of the scripture, or that it is [Page 395] a lye, that inuocation of saints is necessary to saluation.

5, It followeth, that inuocation of Saints hath none other grounds, than lying mi­racles, frō which God dehorteth vs De, 13, 2, 3. 2, Thes, 2, 9. Isay, 8, 19.

6. It followeth also, that all those papists doe impudently and against their conscience, which being of Eckius his minde, do go a­bout to proue inuocation of saints by say­ings of the Scripture.

7, It followeth also, that because inuocation of Saints is not contained in Scripture; were it neuer so void [...] of sinne, yet no man were bound to accept of it.

The Scripture biddeth vs worship and (2) pray vnto God alone.

1, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, & him only shalt thou serue, Mat, 4, 10, Deut, 6. 13. and 10, 20.

2. Call vpon Mee in the day of trouble. Psa, 50, 15.

3. I will not giue My glory vnto an other. Isa. 48. 11.

4. Christ bid vs pray, Our Father &c. Matt. 6. 9.

[Page 396] 5, Come vnto [...]e, all ye, that are weary, &c. Matth, 11. 28.

Hee is to be prayed vnto whom we may call vpon in faith. But faith is by the Word (3) of God, Rom, 10, 17. Therefore because we haue no word, to stir vp our faith with pro­mise of being heard, or to command vs so to do, nay because it is an horrible sinne, and religion forbiddeth vs to belieue on Saints, doubtlesse it is vnlawfull also to pray vnto them.

But neither may wee pray vnto Saints, as to mediatours; because the holy Scrip­ture (4) doth ascribe the glory of mediation to none, but to Christ alone.

1. So he is called the Mediatour of the New Testament. Heb. 9, 15.

2. There is one GOD and one Mediatour be­tweene God and man, which is the man Christ Iesus: who gaue himselfe a ran­some for all men (1, Timo, 2, 5, 6.) Now 1, This vnity is taken away, if there be e­rected moe Mediatours. 2, And the saint [...] gaue not themselues a ransome for vs, therefore, &c.

[Page 397] [...] If any man sin, we haue an Adu [...]cate with the Father, Iesus Christ the i [...]st, 1, Ioh, 2, 1. But Saints are no [...] Iesus Christ the I [...]st.

[...] Verily, verily, I say vnto you, whatsoeuer ye shall aske the Father in My Name, Hee will giue it you. Ioh, 14, 13, & 16, 23.

[...] No man commeth vnto the Father, but by Me, Ioh, 14, 6.

By the doctrine of the inuocatiō of Saints, Christians are bereaued of that confidence (5) in the loue & mercy of Christ the Sonne of God, in trust whereof they ought to pray: as if Christ were not truly a brother toward vs, as if He were not mercifull, and a louer of mankinde, but such a one as would not be appeased, and a fearefull Iudge euen to the repentant, vnlesse hee were first pacified by some Intercessour or Saint. The contrarie whereof is proued in Scripture.

1, In all things it became him to bee made like vnto his brethren, that he might bee As the Priest was a mediator betweene God and the peopl [...] so Christ in one and the same word is called a Priest & a Mediator. He. 2, 17, 18 mercifull, & a faithfull High Priest in things concerning God, that he might make recon­ciliation for the sinnes of the people for in [Page 398] that He suffered, and was tempted, Hee i [...] able to su [...]ou [...] them, that are tempted▪

2, Seeing then that wee haue a great high Priest, which is entred into heauen, euen It [...] [...]l [...] Sonne of God, let vs holde [...]a [...] our profession. For we haue not an hig [...] Pr [...]est, which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in al [...] things tempted in like sort, yet without sinne. Let vs therefore goe bouldly vnto the throne of grace, that we may recei [...] mer [...]y, and finde grace to help in time o [...] neede. Heb. 4▪ 14. 1 [...]. 16.

3. Wherfore he is able also perfectly to save them which come vnto God by him, see­ing he euer liueth to make intercession for them. Heb, 7. 25.

4, The Lord is gracious and mercifull slowe to anger and of great mercie. Psal. 145, 8. Num, 14, 18.

Yea and God the Father also is mercifull towards repentant sinners, for the intercessiō (6) of his Sonne, so that there is no [...]d [...] of the intercession of Saints.

1. The Lord is ful of compassion & mercie; slow to anger & of great goodnes. He will not alway chide, nor keepe his anger for e­uer, He hath not dealt with vs after our sins [Page 399] n [...]r [...]warded [...]s according to our iniqui­ties. Heere the implacable popish god is not proposed vnto vs, to whom wee should not da [...]e to come but by the me­d [...]ation of Saints. For as high as the heauen is aboue the earth, so great is his mercy toward thē, that fe [...]e him. As far as the [...]ast is f [...]ō the west, so far hath he remoued our sins f [...]ō vs. As a father hath compassion on his children, so hath the Lord compassion on them that fea [...]e him. Psal, 103. 8, 9, &c.

2, Hereto belong all the penitentiall fermōs of the prophets, wherein God openeth his ready and willing minde. Ezech, 18, & 33, chap. and many other places.

3, Paul in the 8 th to the Romans, is wholy herein busied, to shew vs, with what confi­dence we should cometo God by his Son, with the [...]ro [...]ings of the holy Spirit, [...]so that we should nothing doubt of the fauor of God toward vs.

The [...]i [...]cation of Saints is for this cause, (7) not to be [...]o [...]n with, be [...] [...]se the saints heare vs not, yea & they know not what is done on earth.

1, Though Abraham be ignorant of vs & Is­rael know vs not, yet thou art our Father. Isai, [...]3, [...]6.

[...], Thus dooth the Prophet comfort Iosias: Thou shalt b [...] put in thy graue in peace, and thine eyes shall not see all the euill [Page 400] that I will bring vpon this place [...], King 22, 20.

And because the most seruent prayers are often made without the voice or motion (8) of the mouth and lippes, but in the entralls of the heart, and in the spirit, if prayer bee directed to Saints, hereby is deuine honour giuen vnto them, as if they vnderstoode the thoughts of the heart which is proper to God alone.

1; Thou alone knowest the hearts of all the Children of men, 1, King, 8, 39.

2, I the Lord search the heart and trye the reines, Ier, 17, 10. and [...]0, 12, Reu. 2, 23.

There are manie also in the popish cata­logue (9) of Saints, of whom there is great doubt, they be not glorified in Heauen: And many of them, which now are prayed vnto, never were at all; such as George, Christo­pher, &c. are fained to haue beene.

Wee haue no examples of the inuocati­on (10) of Saints, and Angells in the Scripture, but we haue examples to the contrary.

[Page 401] 1, Paul & Barnabas would not be worship­ped. Act, 14, 14, 15.

2, So the Angel of the Lord forbade him­selfe to be worshipped▪ Reuel. 19, 10, and 22, 8, 9.

GOD accounteth all the worship of a (11) Creature according to the worship of God, idolatrie, and esteemeth it as an Apostacy from GOD.

1, By the example of the Samar [...]tans, who worshipped the creature together with GOD, 2, King, 17, 41.

2, My people hath committed two euils: they haue forsaken Mee the fountaine of liuing waters, and digged to themselues broken cisternes. Iere, 2, 13.

3, The Gentiles offended, for that they wo [...] ­shipped and serued the creature, paraton ktisan [...]a, beside the Creator.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason thus.

1 Euen as in Princes Courts, there is neede [Page 402] of some mediatour to procure accesse to Princes; so when we would pray vnto God, we haue neede of the Saints to be our mediatours

Answ, 1, Similitudes proue nothing. 2, A certaine widowe cal­ling to the Emperour of Rome for justice, when he an­sweared, I am not at leisure to heare thee, then (quoth she) haue no leisure nei­ther to be Emperour. It is a similitude ill befitting this thing: for it is a fault, if Princes themselues refuse to heare their subiects, either for negligence or pride. And if they refuse, because promiscuous ad­mittance of all might bee dangerous to their persons, or because themselues cannot doe all, but leaue many things to their officers, these bee infirmities which belong to men, but no way to God. For God is not as man

2 It is a point of Christian humility, to seeke for a Mediatour, when thou iudgest thy selfe vn­worth [...]e. Hos, 11, 9.

Answ. 1. We haue neede of humility, but of true humility; which is such, that we e­steeme our selues, and the merits of all Saints more vnworthy than we may obtaine mercy for them, but for Christs sake alone. This is true humility, which doth not leade vs from Christ. Seeing then our Aduersaries meane another humility than this, by this ambigui­ty of the word (humility) there arise foure termes, 2, The popish humilitie is repugnant [Page 403] to the commandemēt of God. For God saith Call vpon me in the day of trouble. The Pa­pists wil answer: Lord, humility teacheth me, not to cal vpon thee because I am vnworthy.

3 He that honoureth the friends of the Prince, doth that which is acceptable to the Prince. So the worship of Saints may be acceptable to God.

Ans, 1, Againe our Aduersaries deale by Similitudes and coniectures in a matter of such difficulty. 2, That saints are to bee ho­noured or reuerenced, no man denieth, but they may not so be honoured, as that God be thereby robbed of his honour, which is done by inuocation, but they are honored by pub­lishing the vertues, wherewith God indued them, and by imitating the godlinesse, wher­in they flourished.

4 Christ is of greater dignitie, than that we may dare to come vnto him because hee is made higher than the heauens. Therefore we haue need of the mediation of Saints.

Ans. 1, The Antecedent is false, as hath bin shewed before. And Christ calleth vs, to come vnto him saying▪ Come vnto me al &c. Mat, 11, 28. 2, This is not humilitie, but diffi­dence reproued & condemned by God.

[Page 404] 5 Let my name bee called vpon these children, and the name of my Fathers, Abraham and Isaac. &c. Genes. 48, 16. Therefore the Saints are to bee called vpon in prayer.

Answ. 1.

The Papists deny that inuocation of Saints was in vse in the olde Testament, the Fathers (as their fable is) beeing then in Limbus. Why then doo they alleadge a testimony of the olde Testament? 2, It is an hebrue phrase, to call or name ones name ouer another, that is, to bee reckoned in his family; as, seauen women▪ shall take holde on one man, say­ing; let thy name be called or named ouer vs, that is, let vs be called by thy name, and so bee thou our husband. Isay, 4, 1.

6 Though Moses & S [...]amuel stood before me, yet mine affections could not bee toward this people. I [...]r, 15, 1. Ezech, 14, 14.

Ans, 1, A conditionall speech proueth nothing, vnlesse the condition be first gran­ted. And the sense of the text doth shew that these men did not then stand before God, for the people. 2, The Papists themselues doe denie, that they t [...]en stoode before God but they say they were in Limbus. Therefore [Page 405] they alleadge this saying against their con­science.

7 The Fathers in the olde Testament, did of­ten pray for the merites sake of the Patriarches, as Iacob, Genes, 32, 9. Moses Exod, 32, 13. Deute. 9, 27. Psal, 132, 10, &c.

Ans, Let the places be considered, & it wil be manifest, that they provoked not to the persons or merits of the patriarches, but to the Couenant, which God of his meere fa­uour and mercy had made with the Patri­arches & their posterity. The argument then is altogether impertinent.

8 As Absolon, when he was reconciled to his father, was not by and by admitted into his fa­thers presence. (2, Sam, 14, 24.) So sinners recon­ciled vnto God, may not goe straight into Gods presence, but must vse intermediate persons, namely the Saints departed.

Ans. 1, There is great difference between the reconciliation with God, and reconcili­ation with a ciuill Magistrate, and neither prescribeth any rule vnto other. The argu­ment then is vnfit, and drawen from things of vnlike and different qualitie. 2, The Hea­uenly [Page 406] Father is glad of the returne of his pro­digall son, and goeth out to meete him, not waiting til some daies man make way for the sonne to his father, Luke, 15, 20.

9 As Adonias did not himselfe goe vnto Sa­lomon, but sent his mother before, whom the King set at his right hand: so we send before vs the mother of Christ, who is placed at the right hand of Christ. 1, King. 2, 19.

Answ. 1. The Kingdome of Christ is one thing, and an externall politick kingdome is an other: neither can it be proued, that the Kingdome of Christ is to bee gouerned on the same fashion, as politick kingdomes vse to be. 2, From this place we may conclude against our Aduersaries, that as Adonias ob­tained nothing by his Mother, so those, which seek for the intercession of Saints s [...]al obtaine nothing, nay they shall haue the hea­uenly King, Christ, angry with them.

10 Call now, if any will answere thee: & turn thee to some of the Saints, Iob, 5, 1.

Ans, 1, The right translation is, to which of the Saints wilt thou turne thee? and the meaning is, looke and see▪ whom thou canst find to agree to thee: or to which of the saints [Page 407] or holy men thou wilt be take thee, for the defence of thy cause. The godly will not, and the vngodly cannot defend thy cause. Where then shalt thou find any defence? 2, Or, Iobs friends bid him look to the examples (not the praiers) of the saints: whether euer God doe vse to afflict his saints so: but here is nothing of intercession. 3, Moreouer our Aduersaries confesse, that there was no in [...]ocatiō of saints in the olde Testament.

11 If there shall be an Angell speaking for him, one of a 1000. to declare the righteousnes of man; the Lord will haue mercy vpō him. Iob, 33, 23, 24.

Ans. 1. The Translation is bad, which should be thus according to the hebrue veri­ty. If there be an Angel (or messenger or prophe [...]) with him, an interpreter one of a thousand, who may declare vnto man his righteousnes, thē he wil haue mercy on him, &c. that is, if he, who is corrected of the Lord for his sin, be admonished by an Angel (or a faithfull prophet of the Lord) of his righte­ousnes (either of the Lords, how iustly he pu­nisheth him, or of his own, what he ought to do, to amend his life,) he shall obtaine mer­cy: Therefore this place is nothing at all to the purpose

[Page 408] 12 Intercessions are commanded and appro­ued of, in the Church. 1, Tim, 2, 1. Iam, 5, 14, &c, Paul desireth intercession, Rom, 15, 30, Colos, 4, 3. Abraham prayeth for Abimelech, Gen, 20, 17. The Lord biddeth Iobs friends to require his intercession, Iob 42, 8.

Ans. 1, To argue from the liuing to the deade, i [...] to make foure termes. 2, If the Saints pray neuer so much in generall for the Church, yet they are not therefore to bee worshipped. And whereas it standeth with reason that the Angells do pray for the Paul did not wor­sl [...]p or p [...]ay [...]nto the Ro­ [...]ans, church, yet they would not suffer themselues to be worshipped. (Reuel. 19, 10. & 22. 8. 9.) 3. To desire the prayers of other men aliue, and to pray vnto, are things very different. 4, And it is a farre different thing, to ioyne the prayers of manie men together, whose prayers they beeing aliue, we desire, that the praier may be the stronger; that is, I say much different frō directing our praiers vnto them.

13, The Saints departed are sayd to be aequall vnto the Angels, Luke, 20, 36, But Angels doo from God know things present, and things to come. Therefore the Saints know the same also, and so they know our prayers.

[Page 409] Ans, 1, Christ maketh the comparison betweene the blessed Saints and Angels, not in respect of their offices, but in respect of thei [...] glorification and state of life in the o­ther World, wherein they shall haue no need of Matrimonie. It is then a fallacie from a thing spoken but in part and some respect, to the same taken absolutely. 2, The office of Angells is, to bee ministring spirits; by rea­son Heb, 1 of this office, God doth many times re­ueale to the Angels things present & things to come; but neither dooth hee reueale all things, nor alwaies. Now because this of­fice is neuer in Scripture giuen to the blessed soules departed: doubtlesse, the cause of this speciall reuelation beeing denied, both the necessity and certaintie of their knowing our prayers, and so of our praying vnto them, is denyed.

14 Elizeus, though hee was absent, yet by the spirit knew the actions of Gehazi. 2, King, 5 26. So the Saints in the spirit may know our prai­ers and our estate.

Ans, Of pure particles nothing follo­weth. [Page 410] Elizeus being absent, saw the actions of Gehazi. Therefore the Saints heare and see al things, that are done vpon earth. What foolery is this? For it is neuer sayde in the Scripture, that the deade doe in the spirit know our affaires, as Elizaeus being aliue did know the deedes of Gehazi, and that in a mi­raculous manner

15 The Saints do pray for the Church, Reuel, 5, 8. and 8, 3.

Answer, 1. In that vision it is not certaine, that the speach is onely of the prayers of the Saints departed, but in generall the praiers of the Church are pourtraied out by the 24. Elders. 2. It is graunted that the Church tri­umphant doth in generall pray for the mili­tant, but that they do in particular pray for certaine and definite members thereof, the Scripture sayth nothing of it. 3, Neither is there any mention made of inuocation of Saints, in the places cited (Reuel, 5, & 8.)

16 Yea but the Scripture doth grant adorati­on to Creatures, in their kinde. As Abraham adored the Hittits. Gen, 23, 7. Iacob worship­ped Esau. Genesis, 33, 3. Nathan did the like to Dauid, 1, King. 1, 23. and Salomo [...] the King vnto his mother. 1, King, 2, 19, &c.

[Page 411] Answer, The Phrase is there a hebrue Phrase, whereby, an externall ceremony (bowing of the body) and ciuil reuerence is described: but we speake of the inward spiri­tuall affection & deuotion of the heart. Heere are therefore foure termes.

17 There is one that accuseth you, euen Mo­ses &c. Iohn, 5, 45. Therefore the Saints departed deale for and against the liuing.

Answ, It is a figure called Metonymia, whereby Christ signifieth not the person of Moses, but his lawe.

18 The rich glutton commeth not with his prai­ [...] to God, but to Abraham as to a mediator, Luk. 16, 24.

Ans, 1, Right. We must forsooth learn the inuocation of Saints from the desperate & damned soules. 2, There is much difference betweene the parable of the glutton, and the popish inuocation of Saints. 3. These prai­ers got the g [...]utton nothing; and so may the Papists speede.

19 Onias and Ieremias appeared praying for the people, 2, Maccab, 15, 12, 13, 14.

Answ. 1.

The booke is Apocriphall. 2, There is re­hearsed a deame, not an article of Religion. 3, Wee doe not reade that the Iewes did for this dreame pray vnto Onias and Ieremias, but they prayed vnto God.

20 Heare now the prayers of the deade Israe­lites. Baru [...]h, 3, 4.

Answ, 1, The booke is not canonicall. 2, Lyra expoundeth it, not of the prayer of the dead after their death, but of those praiers which the Saints being aliue did long since before their death [...]owre out vnto God, for the preseruation of the Church.

21 Miracles haue beeen done, & yet are done at the inuocation of Sainrs.

Answer, 1, Miracles alone without the Word of God, especially if they be contra­ry to the Word of God, are not fufficient: as God admonisheth, that we should not be­lieue miracles, without the word (Deuter, 13. 2, 3) 2, And the comming of Antichrist shall [Page 413] bee with lying Miracles. 2, Thes, 2, 9. Reuel. 13, 13.


Our Aduersaries denie, that in worshipping images they doe commit idolatrie: but the con­trarie is proued by these reasons.

Let them Grāmatically expound the word Idolatry, and they shall be able to make none (1) other thing of it, but a worship and seruice of Idols: but that they worship and serue Idols, no man can denie, that hath but once in all his life entred into the popish temples.

It is proued by experience▪ For they pro­strate (2) themselues before Idols, pray before them, adorne them, they dedicate offerings vnto them, light candles, sigh vnto them, &c. And they worship one image of one Saint (for example, of the Virgin Mary) more than all other images of the same Saint. Is no [...] this to worship the image? and to ascribe vnto it, some portion of diuinitie.

[Page 414] Their owne confession, & their books do (3) witnesse thus much.

1, Euery image is to be worshipped, as that whose image it is, is worshipped. Seeing therefore Christ is worshipped with the worship of Latria (Diuine worship) it fol­loweth, that his image is to be worship­ped with the worship of Latria. Tho. A­quinas. part; 3, q, 25, art, 3.

2, Because the image of Christ is brought in, to represent him, who was crucified for vs, neither doth it shew it selfe to vs for it selfe, but for him: therefore all reuerence, that is offered vnto it, is offered vnto Christ and therfore the worship of Latria ought to be giuen to the image of Christ. Bona­uent, vpon the senten. lib, 3, Dist, 9, Quest. 2.

3, In the pontificall the signe of the Crosse is consecrated with this prayer: Wee be­seech thee O holy Lord, Father Almigh­ty, Eternall God, that thou wouldest vouchsafe to blesse this wood of the crosse that it may be a sauing remedy to mankind that it may be the strength of Faith, the increase of good workes, and the redemp­tion [Page 415] of soules: it may bee a comfort, and protection & safeguarde, against the cru­ell darts of our enimies, &c.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do dispute.

1 As wee honour the images of Princes, so it is mee [...]e we should honour the images of Saints.

Ans, 1, He that vseth the princes image with honorable respect, doth not therefore adore him: and all men would count him [...] foole, which should put off his hat to the Princes picture, or kneele thereto, or lying prostrate should vtter these words to the pic­ture which should bee spoken to the Prince. 2, If any man doe not of purpose dishonour or disgrace the Princes image, hee hath ho­noured it sufficiently. 3, Let vs honour the image of GOD in the Saints aliue, on that manner, which Christ hath prescribed, Matth. 25, 36. 40. That is by doing good vn­to the needie saints.

2 The stocke or wood or stone is not wor­shipped amongst the Papists, but the intention is directed vnto him whose image it is.

[Page 416] Answ, 1, Doubtelesse the Israelites were not so senselesse, as to worship the golde, or the [...]umpe that was moulten of the golde (Exo. 32.) But they worshipped in the signe that which they thought was the true God: neuerthelesse God condemned them of Ido­latrie. 2, If they worship not the images, why doe they prostrate themselues before one i­mage of the blessed Virgin, rather than be­fore an other? If this onely bee their purpose, that they may bee put in mind of the blessed Virgin Mary; might not a lesse regarded image pictured at home, or in some more obscure place of the Church bee sufficient therefore? Wherefore seeing they are vsed to do their deuotion before one cer­taine particular image, who wil euer belieue that they giue not that worship to the Idol [...] themselues? And to denie that they worship idols, what is it else, but to desire to pull out mens eyes, that they should not see that, which all that be present, doe beholde with ther eyes.

Now it shall not neede to refute the wor­shipping of idols, seeing our aduersaries thē ­selues do acknowledge it aboundantly refu­ted, [Page] if this worshipping can bee prooued a­gainst them: Therefore they seeke to giue vs the slip, and denie those things, which are most manifest to sense.

CHAP. 21. Of the Single life, and Vowes of Eccle­siasticall persons.

THAT the Pope of Rome might make vp the full measure of Antichrist, he hath de­filed also the sanctity of Matrimony, whilst he accuseth that state of impurity & imper­fection, and proclaimeth that those, that liue therein, liue in the flesh (for so Syric [...]us and Inno­cencius say, Dist. 82. cap, 2, & 3.) and for this cause forbiddeth Ecclesiasticall persons, as pri [...]sts, Monkes, and Nunnes mariage, as beeing a thi [...] not so fit for sanctitie and perfection, as they call it; and admitteth no maried man to holy orders; and thrusteth him out, that is already in Or­ders if hee doe marie; and thinketh it more tole­rable for a Masse-Priest to be a whoremonger and an adulterer, than ioyned to a wi [...]e by lawefull [Page 418] matrimonie. This doctrine of Devils (1, Timo. 4, 1, 3) they goe about to hide by three arguments e­specially: by the first of which, they depriue ma­trimonie of purity and holines; by the second they denie vnto it the excellencie of perfection (as they call it:) and in the third, they alleadge the insolu­bilitie of their vowe; adioyning heereto some few frivolous reasons moe. Wee will, by Gods helpe, examine everie of these in their proper place.

Question. 1.

Whether mariage be a state, that defileth a man, [...]nd maketh him vnfit for the exercising of sacred offices. Our Adversaries affirme it, and we denie it, for these reasons.

Because Matrimonie is an holy ordination (1) of the most holy God, instituted before the fall, and renued and restored after the fall. But and if there were any pollution in Matri­monie, that ignominie should certainly re­dound vnto the Author.

God will haue Matrimonie (even after the (2) fall) to be honorable among all, and the bed H [...] can that which is honoura­ble and vnd [...] filed d [...]le a man? [Page 419] vndefiled. Heb. 13, 4.

Matrimonie was alwaies counted verie honourable, both in the olde Testament and in the new. (3)

(1) In the old Testament take for example the places following.

1. It is not good that man should bee himselfe alone. Gen. 2, 18.

2, Two are better than one, &c. Eccles, 4, 9.

3, David gaue honourable testimonie of mariage, Psal: 127, verse, 3, 4, 5: and 128. 3, Moreover, bee compared the mysterie of Christ and the Church to mariage Psalm, 45, 9, 10, &c.

4, Salomon wrote a most excellent song in commendation of matrimonie and of an happy mariage, Pro. 31, 10, &c.

(2) In the newe Testament the holinesse of the state of Matrimonie is maintained.

1, By Christ, when hee renu [...]th the first in­stitution, May wee thinke that Christ wold be present at polluted mariages? Math: 19, 4, 5, 6:

[Page 420] 2, And hee honoured mariage both with his presence, and the first miracle of his ministerie. Ioh, 2, 2. 7. &c.

3, The mutuall [...]ndnes & the bond of loue betweene Christ and the Church, is com­pared by Paul to mariage. Ephesians, 5, 25, 32.

4, And the same Paul (1, Cor, 7, 2,) shew­eth the profit & the necessitie of mariage: and likewise defendeth the holines of ma­riage against the spirits of error, 1, Tim, 4. 1, 3.

There are also in the Olde and New Te­stament examples of most godly men, who (4) though they liued in wedlocke, yet retained the name of holinesse and sanctity, and that in the sight of God.

(1) In the Olde Testament we haue very many; but these may suffice.

1. Henoch walked with God, after he begot Methuselah, three hundreth yeares; & be­gate Sonnes and Daughters. Gen, 5, 22.

[Page 421] 2, Noah was a Iust and Vpright man in his time, and Noah walked with God, and he begate three sonnes, Shem, Ham, and Ia­pheth, &c. Genes, 6, 9, 10.

3, Abraham the Father of the faithfull, was Will any man say that any vnmaried man is more pure than was Abraham beeing maried? maried, as were also the other Patriar­ches.

4, Dauid a man after Gods owne heart was maried, and in state of wedlocke compo­sed Psalms most acceptable to God, being indued (in a principall measure) with the Spirit of God.

5, Ezechiel the Prophet was maried, Ezech, 24, 16. 18.

6, The high Priest, who offered holy obla­tions to GOD, might by the lawe of God marie a wife: neither was he pollu­ted by mariage bed, to be made thereby vnfit for the Priests office. And Aaron was commanded by God to burne sweet [...] incense euery morning in the tabernacle before the Arke of the Couenant, as it is Exodus 30, 7. Neither did the vse of mariage bed hinder him in this behalfe; For he begate sonnes.

[Page 422] 7. And so were the rest of the Priests ma­ried also.

8. Zacharie and Elizabeth were both iust before God, and walked in all the cō ­maundements and ordinances of the Lord without reproofe: and yet they were man and wife, & had Iohn Baptist to their son. Luk, 1, 6.

(2) In the newe Testament also there were Ecclesiasticall persons, holy and religi­ous that lived in wedlock.

1, Peter had a mother in law, and there­fore a wife. Math. 8, 14.

2, Haue wee not power to leade about a wife, being a sister, as wel as the rest of the Apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas. 1, Corinth. 9, 5.

3, Philip the Evangelist, which was one of the seaven Deacons, had foure daugh­ters, which did prophecie. Acts. 21, 8, 9.

4. A Bishop must be vnreproveable, the husband of one wife, &c. having children vnder obedience with all honestie. 1, Tim. 3, 2, 4.

5. Let Deacons bee the husbands of one [Page 423] wife, and such as can rule their children well, and their owne housholds. 1, Timo. 3, 12.

6. The like appeareth by the examples of Spiridion, and of others in the Primitive Church: who being holy men, and indu­ed with singular gifts of the Spirit, were maried and begat children. And often times the legitimate sonnes of Bishops succeeded their Fathers in the Bisho­pricks.

Paul doth sharply reproue them, which disgrace mariage, saying: In the latter daies (5) some shal depart from the faith, and shal giue heede vnto spirits of error, and doctrines of Devils, which speake lies through hypocri­sie, & haue their consciences burned with an hot iron, forbidding to marie. 1, Tim. 4, 1, 2, 3.

Finally, if matrimonie be a Sacrament, if (6) it do confer grace, and that grace of the Sa­crament causeth (as Eckius saith) the bed to bee vndefiled, why are Ecclesiasticall persons polluted thereby? Or why is a state otherwise impure and defiled, reckoned among the Sa­craments, as matrimonie in the opinion of the Papists is?

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do dispute.

1 The vse of Mariage bed after the fall is impure, and not without lust. Therfore priests who ought to bee pure, must abstaine from wed­locke.

Ans, 1,

If the speech bee of the motions of con­cupiscence remaining after Originall sinne (whereof the Psalmist maketh mention in his conception. Psal, 51, 5) then is it a fallacie of an accident, and that which agreeth to the accident (to wit, Originall sinne) is transfer­red to the vse of Mariage bed, which of it selfe is right, lawfull and ordained by God. And if because of this accident, men should abstain from mariage as frō an impure state, then should they abstain from all other states and workes, because in all of them there con­curreth somewhat of Originall sinne. And because purenes becommeth all Christians, therefore all should abstaine from mariage, 2, But if the vse of mariage bed bee compa­red [Page 425] to vnlawfull lusts, and aequall thereunto; it is manifestly repugnant to these sentences of Scripture.

1, In the Scripture the vse of mariage bed & lust are opposed as contraries: but contra­ries, seeing they destroy one another, are not the same.

2, To auoide fornication let euery man haue his wife. 1, Cor, 7, 2. and what? may the remedy of lust & impuritie, be called lust S [...] the s [...]n beames, which are as it were the reme­dy of dark­nes, should be called darkenes. and impurity?

3, Paul saith; let the Husband giue vnto the wife due beneuolence, he bids them also come together again. 1. Cor. 7. 3, 5. And what? dooth Paul bid them follow after impuritie? dooth he egge them forward to sinne?

4, The bed betwixt the godly maried cou­ple is vndefiled. Heb. 13. 4.

2 If Mariage bed were so pure, then would not Paul bid them abstaine in the time of prayer and fasting.

[Page 426] Answ. 1, Hee speaketh not of all sorts of prayers; but of solemne prayers. 2, Nei­ther doth he bid them therefore abstaine, be­cause the vse of mariage bed is impure, and would pollute their prayers, but that they may giue themselues to prayer, and their prayers may be the more feruent, &c. Euen as in the time of solemne prayers we leaue of the exercise & duties of our proper & honest calling, that wee may attend to prayers and sermons. Heere is then committed a fallacy, taking that for the cause, which is not the cause.

3 I was borne in iniquity, &c. Psalm, 51, 5. There Dauid confesseth the impuritie of mariage therefore, &c.

Answ, 1, Hee speaketh not of the vse of mariage bed in his parents, as if that were of it selfe a sinne: but he sheweth that lumpe or masse, so to speake, of which he was crea­ted, euen then to haue been polluted with sin (for the whole substance of man was corrupt with sinne); not by reason of the act of ma­riage bed, but by reason of originall sinne, which doth accidentally concur there with: [Page 427] heere is then committed the fallacy of an ac­cident. 2, Whereas our question heere is not concerning originall sinne, whether it be in the regenerate, and doe concurre also in their good workes; but whether there be in matrimony of it selfe anie impurity; our Ad­uersaries change the state of the question, & play the Sophisters.

4 They that are in the flesh cannot please God, Rom, 8, 8. But those which are maried, are in the flesh. Therefore, &c. This is pope Syricius his ar­gument.

Answ, 1, What it is to bee in the flesh, Paul expoundeth. Gal, 5, 19. Where he rec­koneth vp the fruites of the flesh, (to wit, sins and crimes) but there is no mention of ma­riage, but of the contraries thereto. 2, To liue in the flesh, with Paul is to liue in sinne, but with our aduersaries, to liue in the flesh, is to liue in the state of matrimony. There­fore there are foure termes in this argu­ment.

5 Yea, but many doe vse mariage bed intem­perately, which is not without impurity.

Answ, 1,

This is the fallacy of an accident. For this is a thing that accidentally agreeth to mariage besides the right vse, and that but a­mongst some onely. [...], Neither is a thing which is of it selfe laweful, to be condemned, because some vse it excessiuely: Otherwise men should be forbidden wine, because some be druncken.

6 I speake this by permission, or indulgence not by commandement (this to wit, that the mari­ed do not defraud one an other, but that they come together againe, as man and wife) 1, Cor, 7, 6. But those things, which are honest and good, haue no need of permission and pardon.

Answ. 1, Paul granteth leaue and par­don to those, which are too incontinent, which appeareth by these words going be­fore, that Satan tempt you not for your in­continencie; but what is this to the lawfull vse of matrimony, and to them which vse the mariage bed moderately? 2, And if permis­sion or leaue be granted them, which exceed, [Page 429] how much lesse shall they be defiled thereby, which vse it temperately? 3, If Satans way be stopped (as Paul heere sayth) by the vse of wedlocke, is then Satan driuen from vs by luste and impurity? 4, For this very reason, the vse of mariage bed is lawfull and without impurity, euen because it is permitted: vnlesse we wil say that God permitteth and granteth vnhonest things. Neither durst the Apostle of Christ haue granted anie libertie to sinne. 5, And seeing they play with the ambiguity of the word, indulgence, (as sometimes for the pardoning of an offence, and some times for the permitting of a lawefull thing) there arise foure termes in the argument.

7 These are they which are not defiled with women. Reu, 14. 4. Therfore the companie with women is a filthie thing.

Answ, 1,

If the words be taken properly and with­out a metaphore, then he speaketh not of defiling by wines, but generally by women, [Page 430] that is, of fornication and adultery, and it is a fallacie from that which is spoken inde­finitely and in generall; to the same taken definitely and for one set part. 2, But if the place be taken metaphorically, (as the cir­cumstances of the text do altogether euince) then the text speaketh of Idolatry, which the Holy ghost in the Scripture vseth to describe by fornications and adulteries. And so the argument is as a rope of sand.

8 If a mans issue of seede depart from him, hee shall wash all his flesh in water, and be vnclean vntill the Euen. Leuiticus, 15, 16. Therefore the companie of man and wife is not without polluti­on.

Answ. 1.

The text speaketh expressely, not of the lawfull companying of man and wife, but of the issuing out of the seede, which is done in sleepe, when the seede is cast forth with­out the vse of mariage bedd, as the whole course of the speech dooth there declare. There are therefore foure termes, seeing the word, issue of seede, is ambiguous. 2, Legal [...] [Page 431] impurities and pollutions by the ceremonial law of Moses are not pollutions in manners, else hee should sinne, that toucheth a deade corps, Leuit, 21. 1. and Num. 5, 2. Where there is the same commandement concer­ning vncleanenesse by touching the dead, as by the issuing of seede.

9 Abi [...]elech sayd to Dauid: if the young men bee cleane from women, they may eate. 1, Sam. 21, 4.

Ans, 1, Cleanenesse in the Antecedent is taken for Leuiticall cleanenesse, and the speech was of the hallowed breade, which was lawfull for the priests only to eate: in the consequent it is taken for cleanenesse before God, which as yet hath place among Chri­stians. There are therefore foure termes. 2, Now the shadowes of the Leuiticall Law, are not to bee brought againe into the cleere light of the Gospell.

10 Dauid deuided the Leuites into 24. compa­nies, that they might do their office by course, least they should be driuen to minister when they were polluted. 1, Chro, 24.

Answ, 1, It is a fallacie taking that for the cause, which is not the cause, for we doe [Page 432] no where read that this was the cause of the diuision, but it is apparant to bee done for excellencie, and order and comelinesse sake, as also that none of the Leuites should be quite excluded from the ministerie. 2. Neither doe wee reade that those companies had neede to purifie themselues before their turnes came. 3. And if the Papists bee so much delighted, to bring the old Testament into the new; by the same reason let them be circumcised, by the same reason let them forbid their Priestes the vse of wine, when they haue the charge of the ministerie.

11 Yee husbands dwell with your wi [...]s ac­cording to knowledge, &c. that your prayers be not interrupted, 1. Pet. 3. 7.

Ans. Hee speaketh not of the company of man and woman, but of tyrannous hus­bands, which handle their wiues in seruile & violent manner, liuing in continuall discord▪ Now that their prayers are hindered by rea­son of their heart full of anger. hatred and enuie, Christ teacheth, Matth. 5. 23 24, 25. It is then a fal [...]acie taking that for the cause, whi [...]h is not the cause.

[Page 433] [...]12. Bee yee cleane. Isal, 52. 11. without spot. Ephes. [...]. 27, &c. therfore Priests ought to abstaine from mariage.

Ans. 1. These places speake of that cleane­nes, which ought to bee cōmon to all Chri­stians, that they be pure and cleane from wic­kednes and sinnes: If these places then do [...] rightly conclude, then generally all Christi­ans should abstaine from mariage. 2, Or if in the place of Isaie, there be enioined any Le­viticall purification beside to the Levites, that belongeth not to Christians.

Therefore the lawfull companying of man and wife is not a polluted thing, and so neither is Matrimonie it selfe impure or pol­luted, but lawfull, holy, vndefiled, honoura­ble, and vnspotted. Heb. 13. 4. Albeit all men be polluted and infected with original sinne: which pollution the holines of Christ impu­ted by faith vnto vs, doth cover, so that the heavenly Father doth acknowledge vs for pure and holy.

Question, 2.

The qu [...]stion is, whether before God (espe­cially in the article of Iustification) single life bee [Page 434] more holy and doe des [...]rue more, than the state of Matrimonie. Our Aduersaries doe so much admire and extoll single life, that in the meane while they doe debase the state of Matrimonie. And in for­mer time the Schoole men haue taught by writing that the least and meanest works (as standing, sit­ting, eating, drinking and such as follow heere­vpon) which are done by Monkes in single life, are more acceptable to GOD, than are the greatest works of the first and second table, which are done by maried men. Wee doe no way disallow honest single life, neither doe wee denie, but that it is in many thinges more commodious and happy than Matrimonie, if a man haue the gift of continencie: but we allow not of that superstitious loud extol­ling of single life, but we do beleeue that both the single and the married men are before GOD ac­cepted with like favour, by faith in Christ; and that no man meriteth any thing more by single life, than those that liue godlily and faithfully in wedlock.

Because, (as before was said) the holy men (1) of God, Abraham, Enoch, Noah lived in maried state, and begot children, who were neverthelesse most acceptable to God.

Because we are not iustified by single life, (2) [Page 435] nor any other worke, but by faith alone. Doubtlesse neither single life, nor mariage doth make vs either the more or the lesse ac­cepted with God.

Paul doth so compare mariage and single life together, that hee doth detract nothing (3) from mariage before God. 1, Cor. 7.

1, It is better to marrie, than to burne [...] verse, 9.

2, As the Lord ha [...]h called every one, so let him walke and so ordaine I in all Chur­ches; verse, 17.

3, Let everie man abide in the same vo­cation, wherein hee was called. verse, 20. And againe,

4, Brethren, let every man, wherein hee was called, therein abide with God. verse, 24.

5. Art thou bound to a wife? seeke not to be loosed. verse, 27.

6, If thou takest a wife, thou sinnest not: and if a virgine marrie, shee sinneth not. verse, 28.

7, If any man thinke it is vncomelie for his virgine, if shee passe the flower [Page 436] of her age, and neede so require, let him doe what he will, he sinneth not. let them be married. verse, 36.

8. So then, hee that giveth her to marri­age doth well, but hee that giveth her not to mariage, doth better. verse, 38.

Moreover, when as Paul doth seeme to preferre single life before mariage, he doth it (4) not in this respect, that it is more acceptable with God, but in a particular respect, because of the present necessitie, and of the impedi­ments of serving God more readily: for at that time persecutions were ri [...]e, which were more troublesome to the married, than to those which lived single: and this appeareth by th [...]se places out of the same Chap­ter.

1, I suppose this be good for the present necessitie: I meane, that it is good for a man so to be; verse, 26.

2. Such (that is, those that be maried) shall haue trouble in the flesh: but I spare you [...] verse, 28.

3, I would haue you without care, verse, 32.

[Page 437] 4. This I speake for your commoditie, not to tangle you in a snare, but that yee follow that which is honest, and th [...]t yee may cleaue fast vnto the Lord without se­paration. verse, 35.

5. But she (a widowe) is more blessed, if shee so abide in my iudgement. verse, 40. Now he speaketh heere of temporall hap­pines.

There is no difference of respect before God, either of those that bee single, or those (5) that be maried.

1. God is no accepter of persons: but in everie Nation hee that feareth him, and worketh righteousnes, is accepted with him. Act: 10. 32.

2. As Circumcision is nothing, nor vn­circumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandements of God. (1, Cor. 7, 19.) So is it rightly said of single life and marriage, seeing wee doe not please God, either because wee liue single, or because wee are married, but because wee are in Christ by faith.

3. Their is neither Iewe, nor Grecian: there is neither bond, nor free: there is [Page 438] neither male nor female: for yee are all one in Christ Iesus. Galat. 3, 28.

Married persons haue so great promises in mariage, as our Aduersaries will never (6) shew were made to single life.

1, The woman shall bee saved through bearing of children, if they continue in faith, and loue, and holines with modestie. 1, Tim. 2, 15.

2. Blessed is every one that feareth the Lord, and walketh in his waies, &c. thou Blessings of godly mar­riage. shalt be blessed and it shall bee well with thee, &c. Loe, thus the man is blessed, that feareth the Lord: the Lord out of Sion shall blesse thee, and thou shalt see the Spirituall blessing out of Sion. wealth of lerusalem all thy life: thou shalt see peace vpon Israel, thy wife shall be as the fruitfull vine. Psal. 128.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do dispute.

1. I would that all men were, even as I my selfe [...]m. 1, Cor. 7, 7.

Ans. The Apostle doth not say this, as if single men were more perfect or acceptable before God, but as Paul saith, I spare you, be­cause [Page 439] of the tribulation of the flesh. It is ther­fore a fallacie from that which is spoken but in part and some respect, to the same taken absolutely, and in all respects.

2. It is good for a man so to bee, that is vnmar­ried. 1, Cor: 7. 26.

Ans: 1. Good is not there opposed to euil: for then this should be the conclusion: Sin­gle life is good; therefore marriage is evilll: but this would turne to the contumely of the Author of Matrimonie. 2, Heere bee foure termes: for the Antecedent speaketh of a corporall felicitie or good, & the consequent of a spirituall.

3. Art thou loosed frō a wife? seeke not a wife. 1. Cor. 7, 27.

Answer, 1. Paul addeth forthwith; If thou take a wise, thou sinnest not: therefore the single man is not more perfect than the mar­ried. 2. Still they commit the fallacie of ta­king that absolutely, which is spoken but in part and some respect onely: neither do they consider the words of Paul, where hee saith; for the present necessitie, not for any future excellencie in heaven.

[Page 440] 4, They which haue wiues, let thē be as though they had none. 1, Cor. 7, 29.

Ans. Paulspeaketh not in this place of the companie of man & wife, but admonisheth the married, that in those perilous times, (wherein the confession of the truth of the Gospell is required) they should not haue more care of their wiues, than of Gods glo­rie, and their owne salvation.

5. The vnmaried careth for the thinges of the Lord, how he may please the Lord: but he that is married careth for the thinges of the world, howe he may please his wife. 1, Cor. 7, 32.

Ans. 1. Hee speaketh not of perfection or imperfection before God, but of commodi­ties and discommodities, or certaine Impe­diments which vse to happen in marriage, for that the maried hath care and charge of providing necessary things of this life for his family: which care who so might bee freed from, without some greater or as great in­convenience on the other side, might haue the more time and opportunity to bestowe himselfe wholly on heavenly Meditations: but the like doth befall in all other estates, wherein menne haue to deale with the [Page 441] affaires of this life: So the Magistrate because of his great businesse in the commonwealth, hath not so much liberty to apply himselfe to religion. 2, A maried man may also ser [...]e God neuerthelesse: Otherwise Zacharie & Elizabeth could not haue beene called iust before God, Luke, 1, 6. Neither doth e [...]ery conueniency in a state make it by and by a more perfect state, for else riches were a more perfect state, than pouerty, because a man hath meanes to prouide necessaries for his profession, the more liberty to intende matters of religion, and may bee liberall t [...] the poore, yet the papists wil not say that the state of rich men is a state of greater perfecti­on, than the state of poore men.

6 The vnmaried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body & spirit, 1, Cor, 7, 34.

Answ, 1, This obiection is all one with that, which went next before, & therfore let the former answere serue for it also. 2, In the meane time, let the vnmaried papists, which vaunt so of their single life, remember that [Page 442] they are commanded to be holy in body and Spirit; that they doe not burne with lustfull cogitations.

7 He that giueth her to mariage doth well, but he that giueth her not doth better, 1, Corinth, 7, 38.

Ans, 1, It is a fallacy taking that absolute­ly, which is spoken but in part and some re­spect. For it is not of it selfe & simply better, but with a restriction, it is better and more commodious, for the present necessity, that they may cleaue to the Lord without hinde­ [...]ance. In the meane while it is say de to all Christians. He that cannot containe, let him mary; and it is better to mary than to burne:

8 Shee (a widow) is more blessed, if shee so continue. 1, Cor, 7, 40.

Answere, Shee is more blessed with a temporall blessing, as Christ calle [...]h the bar­ren blessed, Luk; 23, 29. There are therefore [...]oure termes.

9 The barren is blessed, which is vndefiled, & knoweth not the sinnefull bed: she shall haue frui [...] in the visitation of soules. Wisd, 3, 13. Therefore single life is before God more blessed, than ma [...]ri­mony.

[Page 443] Ans, 1, The text speaketh of a maried woman that is barren: but our Aduersaries speake of one that is v [...]maried: for there ca [...] bee knowen no barrennesse, where there hath not been the companie of man and wo­man. 2, The text speaketh of a woma [...] which refraineth from adultery: this is she­wed by the words: She knoweth [...]ot the sinn [...] ­full bed: Our aduersaries speake of a woman, which abstaineth from lawefull mariage: There is therfore a confusion of many terms, which [...]ang not together, and a fallacie ta­king that absolutely, which is spoken in part onely. 3, And the booke is Apocriphall.

10 Let not the Eunuch say, Beholde I am [...] d [...]y tree. For thus sayth the Lord to the Eunu­ches that keepe my Sabbaths, & choose the thing that pleaseth me, and take holde on my couenant, as if priests & monkes were Eunuches, & did not rather fil the world with bastards▪ euen vnto them will I giue in mine house & with­in my walles a place, &c. Isay, 56, 3, 4, 5. The [...] ­fore single life is before God more excellent tha [...] mariage.

Ans. 1, It is a fallacy taking that absolutely, which is spoken but in part only. In the olde Testament those that were barren thought [Page 444] themselues neglected of GOD. These the Prophet comforteth, because before GOD there is no difference betweene the barren and the fruitfull, for that all which belieue, are indifferently receiued into the Kingdome of God. Now that which the Prophet sayth shall not hinder them, that our Aduersaries do fondly turne into a prerogatiue. 2, The contrary rather followeth from this place, to wit, that both the fruitfull and the barren, the maried and the vnmaried are alike estee­med of God, if they belieue on the Messias, and take holde of the Lords couenant.

11 There is no weight to be compared to the continent minde. Eccles, 26, 15.

Ans, The whole text speaketh of an ho­nest & chaste maried woman, who doth not defile her bed with adulterie. This is then a rope of sande. 2, And the booke is Apo­criphall.

12 Who sayde to his Father and to his Mother, I know you not, and to his brethren, I am igno­rant of you; and they knew not their owne sons [Page 445] &c, These haue kept thy Word, Deut, 33, 9.

Answ. 1.

The translation is false. Which accor­ding to the hebrue is thus: Who, (that is Le­ui) sayde vnto his Father and to his mother, I haue not seene him, neither knew he his brethren, nor knew his owne children. For they obs [...]rued thy Word and kept thy coue­nant; they shall teach Iacob thy iudgments. That is the Leuites were inflamed with such a zeale against the transgressours of Gods law, that they neyther spared kindred, no [...] parents, nor brethren, nor their owne sonnes, but killed them as though they had not seene them, or knowne them. And that for this exploite, whereby God was appeased, they were fit men, to whom the ministery should bee committed in their generations for euer. As the story, whereunto Moses alludeth, is at large described (Exod, 32, 26, 27, 28. &c.) 2, He sayth not, they begate not sonnes, but they knew them not, that is, they had no re­spect of persons. 3, And with all, this is taught vs, that those are fit ministers & wor­thy commendation, that throughly & man­fully [Page 446] do their dutie in the Church with great zeale, not passing for it, that they bring sorow or losse of goods (by reason of persecutions arising thereupon) to their parents, wife, or children. But what is this to popish single life? This argument then hangeth together like sande.

13 Marie sayth, I know not man, Luke, 1, 34. as hauing respect to the vow of perfection, to wi [...], single life.

Ans, 1, The text sheweth the contrarie, saying that she was affianced to a man, (Luk, 1, 27.) and so that Mary and Ioseph should haue come together (Ma [...]hew, 1, 18.) vnlesse God had forbidden it, because our Sauiour was to be borne of Mary.

14 Some have made themselues chaste for the Kingdome of Heauen. Matth, 19, 12.

Answ, The Kingdome of God signifieth the dispensing of the Gospell, in performing whereof that they might bee lesse hindered, some remained vnmaried, as Paul. But this is nothing as concerning any prerogatiue with God: neither is single life therefore of it selfe more holy before God, than is honest matrimony.

Heere follow certaine other generall arguments of our Aduersaries for the prerogatiue. of single life.

1 Paul biddeth the maried to abstaine from companying together for a time, that they may giue themselues to prayer. 1, Cor, 7, 5. But pries [...]s and monasticall persons [...]ught to giue themselues at all times to prayer: Therfore they ought alwaies to ab [...]aine from mariage.

Answ. 1. Paul there speaketh not of or­dinary and dayly, but of [...]olemne prayers in the time of perills of imminent persecutions: For which praiers sake the maried priest may abstaine for a time, no lesse then the laick. 2 Though the Laickes also ought as well to pray alwayes, (for, pray alwaies, continually, sayth Paul, Ephes, 6, 18. 1, Thes, 5, 17.) yet they are not bidden therfore to remaine al­waies vnmaried. 3, Heere is a fallacie, taking that for the cause, which is not the cause, For Paul bids thē not abstaine for a time, by rea­son of any vncleannes in matrimony, but that being hindred with none other outward or wordly thing, they might more conuenient­ly giue themselues to prayer.

[Page 448] 2 No man that warreth entangleth himselfe with the affaires of this life, because hee would please him, that hath chosen him to be a Souldi­our, 2, Timo, 2, 4. But priests are Gods Souldi­ours.

Answ, 1.

Heere onely is reprooued that careful­nesse, whereby Christians doe ouer much meddle with worldly affaires. 2, Maried men also are Gods Souldiours, though they liue not single. For which warrefare Paul dooth arme all Christians with spirituall weapons (Ephesian, 6). 3 And that the Minister of the Church bee not compelled to care at home for the things of this life, hee may bee [...]a­sed of this care by his wife.

3 The Woman is bounde by the lawe while her husband liueth. Rom, 7, 2. 1, Corin, 7, 39. But Christ, who is the Husband to priests, liueth foreuer. Therefore priests may neuer be ioyned in matrimony.

Ans, 1,

It is an argument from a spirituall con­iunction [Page 449] to a corporall: therefore there are foure termes: 2, Spirituall marriage with Christ doth not take away corporall matri­monie: otherwise all married Christians should bee spirituall adulterers: which our Aduersaries dare not in such grosse manner vtter, though perhaps they thinke not much better.

4. I haue prepared you for one husband, to pre­sent you a pure virgin vnto Christ. 2, Corinthians, 11. 2.

Answ. 1, Paul writeth heere to all the Co­rinthians, whether single or married, whe­ther Lay men or Ministers of the Church; all them hee calleth a pure virgine. Therefore this text is nothing to the single life of Priests. 2, It is a metaphoricall speach, which besides the metaphoricall signification concludeth nothing: but marriage and single life are vsed of our Aduersaries without any metaphore: therefore they dispute by foure termes.

5. The Father hath right to keepe his virgine vnmarried, as please himselfe. 1. Cor. 7, 36, 37. 38. But the Church hath the right and authority of a Father, over Ministers; therefore it hath right to forbid Priests to marrie.

[Page 450] Ans. 1, That the Church hath not power simply at her owne pleasure, but a limitted & restrained power, was proved in the com­mon place of the Church. 2, The right and power of a Father also is limitted so, that Pa­rents are bound to haue cōsideration of their children, that they constraine not them to containe, which haue not the gift of conti­nencie, and by this occasion expose them to vnchast lustes. Which seeing it is not obser­ved by the Church of Rome, they doe not rightly vse their right of fatherhoode: but they vse the right, or rather the wrong of Tyrannes. Then the maior proposition is not vniversally true, especially seeing it is con­trarie to the saying of Paul: He that cannot containe, let him marrie. 3, In the same place Paul leaveth all this matter at mens li­bertie: Seeing then the Church of Rome doth in this matter bereaue such, as belong vnto her, of that libertie, contrarie to the do­ctrine of Paul, the place of Paul hath not affinity or coherence with the purpose of the Papists.

Question. 3.

The question is, Whether it be lawfull for every [Page 451] one to vow continencie or single life. Our Aduer­saries affirme, and we denie it for these reasons.

The nature of vowes is this, that first they bee not contrary to the word of God: then (1) that they be of things, which are in our owne power; but continencie is not in our owne power, but is a peculiar gift of God.

1, All men cannot receaue this thing. Hee that is able to receaue this, let him re­ceaue it. Math. 19, 11 12.

2, Every man hath his proper gift of God (not of himselfe, or of his owne free will) one after this manner, and another after that. 1, Cro. 7, 7. Where the Apostle doth expresly speake of continencie.

3, As God hath distributed to every man. 1, Cor. 7, 17. where he speaketh of the same matter.

Pauls doctrine of continencie is such, (2) that he would haue it to be free, & not bound It is very cleare, that in Pauls time; the vowes of single life were alto­gether vn­knowne: by vow.

1, If they cannot abstaine, let them mar­rie: for it is better to marrie, than to burne. (1, Cor. 7, 9.) Contrary to this our [Page 452] Aduersaries teach thus. If they cannot containe, yet let them not marrie; for it is therefore the vowes, which Priests now vs [...], are not Apostolical. better that Priests should burne, and be­come who remongers & adulterers, than that they should bee ioined in honest ma­trimonie.

2. This I speake for your commoditie, not to tangle you in a snare. 1, Cor. 7, 35, but our Aduersaries lay snares vpon mens consciences.

3. If any man thinke it is vncomely, &c: let him doe what he will 1, Corinth. 7, 36. Note if the Father thought it but vncome­lie, he was bound no further.

Because by this vowe of continencie ma­nie thousand soules are thrust downe into e­ternall (3) destruction, while they vowe conti­nencie, which they cannot keepe.

This vowe doth cause many hidden sins (4) to be committed and many other foule close crimes, which it is a shame even to report. Concerning these things reade Balaeus of the visitation of English Monasteries: as also the Balaeus in the preface to the lyues of the Bi­shops of Rome. verses of Mantuan, who himself was a Papist, and of Iacobus Actius Sannazarius, of Mar­cellus Palingenius, of Franciscus Petrarcha [...] [Page 453] as also the booke of Iohn Della Casa, [...]e Sodo­miae encomio: all which the day of the Lord shall once disclose, and shall repay them vp­on their heads, who haue beene the Authors and maintainers of this tyrann [...]ussi [...] impo­sed vowe.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe dispute.

1. Vowes are to be kept. And heere they heape vp many sayings to no purpose, Deut. 23, 21. Leui▪ 27; 2, 10. Numb: 6, 2, Psal: 75, 12, Eccles, 5, 3;

Ans. 1. There be foure termes in the argu­ment, because the Maior speaketh of vowes, which are not out of our owne power, but of lawfull and approved vowes, which were not repugnant to the rules delivered, Numb. 6. & 30 Chapter; such as were the vowes of the Nazarites, of offerings, &c. but the minor meaneth a vowe not allowed of, nor com­maunded, and such a vowe as is not in our power to keepe.

2. Though every one haue not the gift of conti­nencie, yet we may obtaine it by prayers; for what soever yee shall aske, yee shall receaue. Iohn, 16. 23, 24.

[Page 454] Ans. 1. If God had appointed, the praying for the gift of continencie, as an effectuall and sufficient remedie against burning, then the argument would followe: but because God hath appointed another remedy, for the avoiding of fornication, to wit, lawfull ma­trimonie (according to these sayings: It is better to marrie, than to burne: if they can­not containe, let them marrie: and for avoi­ding of fornication, let every man haue his wife:) therefore there is no consequence in the Papists argument 2, We haue an assured promise to obtaine those thinges by prayer, which doe directly pertaine to the salvation of our soules; but seeing wee may be saved in honest Matrimonie, without the obtaining of the gift of co [...]tinencie, God is not tyed to heare our praiers, when we desire the gift of continencie. 3, And if every man may ob­taine by prayer the gift of continencie, why not also the gift of tongues? or, why not the gift of healing also?

3. Refuse the younger widowes: for when they haue begun to waxe wanton against Christ, they will marrie, having damnation because they haue broken the first faith (that is their vowe.) 1, Timo. [Page 455] 5, 11. 12. Therefore the vowe of continencie can­not be broken, vpō any pre [...]ense of not being able to containe.

Answer. 1, It cannot by any one word bee prooved, that these widowes made vowes, that they would not afterward marrie: this place then is wrongfully wrested to Popish vowes of continencie. 2, These widowes are not reproved, for that they marrie, but for that they secretly play the harlots, and then seeke for marriage for a pretense to cover their naughtinesse. 3, The first faith is not any vowe, but the first faith that was given to Christ in Baptisme: this is the first faith, which they breake, while they make the members of Christ, the members of an har­lot. 4, And Paul biddeth these younger wi­dowes marrie, in the same place: hee should then bid them breake their vowe, if these wi­dowes had made any vow: which our Aduersaries will not willingly graunt. 5, If this place be vnderstood of vowes, it followeth a­gainst the Papists, that they offend, in laying vowes vpon thē, which are not yet come to three [...]core yeeres of age: for Paul would haue such chosen, as be threescore yeeres old.

[Page 456] 4. The vowe which Priests make of chastitie, is a free vow of their owne accord; neither doth any man compell them to it.

Ans. 1. This wee denie: for those that will be admitted into holy Orders, haue none o­ther entrance, but by vowing. A man that is admitted, if he marrie, is removed from his calling, and is punished in his body: what a kinde of liberty is this? It is therefore a loud lie.

5, Paul (1, Timo. 4, 1, 3.) doth not speake of the Pope, that he holdeth the doctrine of Devils, but he meaneth the Tatian [...] and Encr [...]ti [...]ae her [...]tikes.

Ans. 1. Paul saith of them: forbidding to marrie, but the Pope forbiddeth to marrie: therefore &c. 2, It followeth not, the Tatiani forbad marriage: therefore the Pope, which forbiddeth it too, is not to bee reprooved. There is the like iudgement of like things. 3, Though the Pope doe not forbid mariage to all persons▪ yet hee forbiddeth it; and there­fore hee is rightly condemned by Paul with the Tatiani and Encratitae.

CHAP. 22. Of the Popish Fastes.

IN this chapter the controuersie is not, whether Christians ought to fast. (For none of our side doth denie that) but the question is, whether the popish fastes, such as are in vse amongst our Aduersaries, bee to be approued and necessarie to be obserued. But because so many things meete together in the popish fastes, which are repug­nant to the holy Scripture, let vs treate of them all seuerally.

(1) Error 1

And first of all, our Aduersaries do place their fastes, not in sobriety, or temperance in meate and drink; neither in a totall absta [...]ing from all meate and drinke for a certaine time, which was vsed of the Auncients; but in abstinence from flesh, and white meates, &c. onely putting a difference be­twixt meates. And they presse that difference to be obserued with such seuerity, that amongst them he is accounted to commit a more hainous crime, who should taste flesh vpon the dayes forbidden; than hee that should be taken in adulterie, or [Page 458] other wickednesse: And in some places (especial­ly of Italy and Spaine (men are in greater danger for tasting flesh vpon the dayes inhibited, than for committing capitall crimes. Wee disallow and reiecte this obseruation and preposterous choise of meates, for these reasons.

Because there is not any either comman­dement or example, in the whole Scripture (1) of the new Testament, of this difference and choise of meates: and therefore it is rightly reiected, as a meere will-worship.

1, Teach them to obserue all things that I haue commanded you, Matt, 28, 20.

2, Of such like obseruations Christ sayth: In vaine they worship mee, teaching for doc­trines, mens precepts, Matth, 15, 9.

In the Newe Testament those Leuiticall differences of meates are taken away, which after a sorte are brought in againe of our ad­uersaries. (2)

1, The things that God hath purified, pollute thou not, Act, 10, 15.

2, Whatsoeuer is set before you, eate, 1, Cor, 10, 27.

[Page 459] 3, That which goeth into the mouth, defileth not the man, Matth, 15, 11.

4, Meate maketh vs not acceptable to God: for neither if we eate, haue we the more: neither if we eate not, haue we the lesse. 1, Cor, 8, 8.

5, The Kingdome of God is not meate nor drinke, but righteousnesse and peace, and ioy in the Holy ghost, Rom, 14, 17.

6, It is a good thing that the heart bee sta­blished with grace, and not with meates, which haue not profited them, that haue beene occupied therein, Heb, 13, 9.

By this difference and choise of meates layed vpon the Church, as if it were necessa­rie, Christian libertie is impugned. (3)

1, In the latter times some shall departe from the faith, and shall giue heede vnto spirits of errours, and doctrines of deuills, which speak lyes through hipocrisie, and haue their consciences burned with an hote iron, forbidding to marrie, and commanding to abstaine frō meats which God hath created to be receiued with gi­uing thāks of thē that belieue & know the truth: for euery creature of God is good, [Page 460] and nothing ought to bee refused, if it be receiued with thankesgiuing. 1. Tim, 4, 1, 2. &c.

2, Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not, & let not him that eateth not, iudge him that eateth, Rom, 14, 3.

3, Let no man condemne you in meate or in drinke, &c. Colos, 2, 16.

4, If ye be deade with Christ from the ordi­nances of the World, why as though yee liued in the World, are ye burdened with traditions? As, touch not, taste not, han­dle not. Which all perish with the vsing, and are after the commandements & doc­trines of men: which things haue indeed a shew of wisdome, in voluntary religion and humblenes of minde, and in not spa­ring the body: neither haue they it in any estimation to satisfie the flesh, Coloss, 2, 20, &c.

5, Vnto the pure are all things pure, Titus. 1, 15.

6, Whatsoeuer is soulde in the shambles eate yee, and aske no question for consci­ence sake, 1, Corinth, 10, 15.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason.

1 Obedience is due to the Church but the Chu [...]ch hath ordained such fasts. Therefore, &c.

Answer, 1, In customes and indifferent ceremonies for orders sake, obedience is to be performed to the Church, but not in mat­ters of necessity and articles of our beliefe, vnlesse it be vpholden by the authority of the scripture, whereof we haue spoken in the be­ginning of this booke. Thither we referre the Reader. 2, Neither is that rightly ascribed to the Church, which is tyrannously obtru­ded to be obserued of Christians by supersti­tious men vnder the name of the Church.

2 Hee that is weake, eateth herbes, Rom. 14. 2. Therefore the eating of flesh may rightly be for­bidden for the weake ones sake.

Answ, 1, Paul speaketh of those that be weake: but the Church respecteth not the weake, but onely their owne tyranny, which they would establish by such superstitious precepts. 2, Paul addeth presently vpon it, let not him that eateth, despise him that ea­teth [Page 462] not, &c. Now if our Aduersaries think he spoke these words of the choise and diffe­rence of meates, why doe they not leaue the vse of meates in mens libertie? and, why do they not take away the difference betweene him that eateth, and him that eateth not? 3, Seeing Paul speaketh of a thing, which hee leaueth in free choise, and our Aduersaries of a thing not lefte at liberty, this allegation of Paul is impertinent. And there be 4. termes.

3 It is good not to eate flesh, Rom, 14▪ 21.

Ans, 1, Paul speaketh of the moderating of Christian liberty, (wherof there is no con­trouersie) which seeing our Aduersaries doe wrest to the abrogating of Christian liberty, there is more in the conclusion than in the premisses, and there is committed the fallacy of taking that absolutely, which is spoken but in part onely. 2, If these words of Paul do binde vs to a choise of meates, then it will follow, that we must not drinke wine neither, For Paul ioyneth these together: It is not good to eate flesh nor to drinke wine. Whence one of the two dooth follow; that either these words are alleaged impertinent­ly, [Page 463] or that the Church of Rome doth erre in not forbidding the vse of wine. The latter our Aduersaries do not grant. Therefore needs they must grant the former.

4 If meate offend my brother, I will eate no flesh while the World standeth that I may not of­fend my brother, 1, Cor, 8, 13.

Ans, 1, Paul doth not speake of the po­pish difference of meates (wherein the vse of all flesh generally is forbidden) but of things sacrificed to idolls. Therefore it is nothing to the purpose. 2 Euen this moderating of our liberty, is it selfe a temporall precept (as ap­peareth Acts. 15, 29) the Popes prohibition then, seeing it is perpetuall, hath no affinity with this precept of Pauls. And seeing there be two termes in this argument, which have equiuocation in them, there arise fiue terms

5 In the Olde Testament there was alwaies a difference made of some meates, before and after the floode, and in the time of the law.

Answ, 1, These for the most part were shadows of things to come. Therfore they be long not to vs in the new Testament. 2, Then [Page 464] there was an expresse commandement of God: which wee doe not onely want in the new Testament, but wee haue also the con­trary commandement of Paul, Coloss, 2, 20. &c.

6 Daniel fasted with choise of meates, Dan, 1, 8, and 10, 3.

Answ, 1, This was partly (Dan, 1, 8.) by the commandement, (Leu, 11.) partly of his owne free accord (Dan, 10. 3) and not of superstition: but it was rather a fast of sobrie­ty and temperance, all which haue no affi­nity with the popish faste, especially seeing Daniel abstained also from wine: which the popish Prelates, Priests and Monkes, would be loth, I warrant you, to obserue.

7 The choise and difference of meates hath ground in scripture, Leuit, 11, Deut, 14.

Answer, 1, They were Leuiticall pre­cepts, abrogated by God. Acts, 10, 15. By the Apostles, Act, 15, 10, 19, 20, &c. By Paul Coloss. 2, 16, 17, 20. &c, and (Heb, 13. 9.) 2, And that Leuiticall difference of meates was not in this, whether it were lawefull to eate flesh or fi [...]h: but there was difference put be­tweene the cleane and vncleane liuing crea­tures. [Page 465] Wherefore that Leviticall difference of meates is fondly wrested to the Popish difference and choise of meates: and there be fiue termes in this argument.

8, The Apostles did forbid to eate bloud, or that which was strangled, Act. 15. 29.

Answ. 1, It was a temporall commaunde­ment for the moderating of Christian liber­tie, vnto the edification of the weake; but the Popish difference and choise of meates doth not moderate, but abrogate Christian liber­tie, neither is it for any weake ones sake, but for obtaining of tyrannie in the Church. 2; The Apostles did not forbid them flesh at all, but bloud & that which was strangled, which many men at this day also by nature thinke abhominable to be eaten. It is nothing ther­fore to the purpose.

9 The Nazarites abstained from certaine meats and drinks, Numb. 6, 3.

Ans. 1. The vowe of the Nazarites did be­long to a certain abstinence for one set time: but heerein it agree [...]h not with the Popish choise and difference of meates. 2. It was a Leviticall ceremonie, which ought to cease among Christians. 3, The law of Nazarites [Page 466] did forbid the vse of wine also, which not­withstanding our Aduersaries doe retaine in their fast▪

10. The Rechabites abstained from wine. Ier. 35. 6. 10.

Answ. 1. They did it not to merite the fa­vour of God: but they had receaued a com­mandement frō their Father, that they might the more easily abstaine from drunkennes & the vices, which follow drunkennes. Neither would their Father prescribe a law to others, but to his sonnes. It is then a fallacie taking that absolutely, which is spoken but in part. 2. We dispute of flesh and they answer of wine:

11. It is not read that Christ did eate flesh, but that he did eate bread and fish, &c.

Answ. 1, As if the Pascall Lambe had not beene flesh. 2. We should not therefore haue an example to imitate, if it were never so plaine, that Christ did abstaine from flesh. 3. But neither doe we reade, that Christ did eate hearbs, nuts, spices, nor that he dranke beere. (3) All these therefore shall be inhibited Christi­ans, if this argument follow.

12. The earth was cursed by God. Genes. 3, 17. but beasts live of the earth: therefore there should [Page 467] be an inhibitio [...], that they be not eaten▪

Ans. 1 By this reason all flesh at all times should be forbidden. 2, That curse is but in part, namely, that it should be barren, and bring forth thornes and thistles. 3, So, should we not eate hearbs neither, which spring im­mediatly out of the earth.

13. Because flesh is most nourishing, and bring­eth forth the pricks of Concupiscence, wee ought to abstaine from flesh at that time, which is appoin­ted for the taming of our flesh.

Answer. 1. These are the precepts which haue a shewe of wisedome in will-worship. (Coloss. 2, 23) and wine should be forbidden rather than flesh; as that which inflameth men to Inst and other vices, as it is said. Prou: 23, 31, 32, &c.

14. The Apostles fasted. Acts. 13, 2. 3▪ and 14. 23. And fasting is commended. Matthew. 6 16: Marke, 9. 29. Io [...]l. 1. 14. Zachar. 7, 5. and 8. 19. Io­nah, 3, 5, 7.

Answer. 1. That Christians should fast in their kinde in due sort and manner, no man denieth, but without the losse of Christian libertie; those things then are brought for ar­guments, which are out of cōtrouersie. 2, But [Page 468] whiles the argument is from a true manner of fasting, to the Popish hypocriticall man­ner of fasting, there arise foure termes. For the fasting of the Apos [...]les did not consist in the difference of meates: but they that fasted in the old Testament, abstained frō all meate, and drinke a whole day vntill evening: Such a fast the Popish Priests and Monkes will ne­ver be perswaded to practise.

(2) Error.

Whereas in the Church of God it is left at liber­tie for any man to fast at any fit time: yet the Pa­pists are so bound to their fastes by lawes at sette times, that he may incurre the danger of his head, who shall breake his fast at those times. Which al­so is repugnant to Christian liberty.

Let no man condemne you in meate or drinke, or in respect of an holy day, or of the (3) new Moone, or of the Sabbath dayes. Colos. 2, 16.

(3) Error.

The Papists teach that fasting hath the nature of a merite, and that it is a satisfaction for actuall sins and punishments. This is repugnant to the doc­trine of the merite and one only satisfaction of our [Page 469] Saviour, and to the article of Iustification, as was declared in his proper place.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do dispute.

1, The Ninivites and others haue by fasting ob­tained a mitigation of punishments: therefore fa­sting is meritorious.

Ans. 1. They that obtained the spirituall grace of God obtained it by faith: for with­out faith no man can please God (Heb. 11. 6.) 2, And whereas others obtained a mitigating or deferring of temporal punishments, it be­longeth not to this disputation, wherein the question is not of temporall grace, but of the grace of iustification. So the wicked King A­hab, by fasting and humbling himself in sack-cloath, obtained the deferring of temporall evils, but escaped not eternall punishments. 1, King. 21, 29.

(4) Error.

Heere in the Papists erre also, that of a wrong zeale they thrust vpon the Church, the fast of Lent without any authoritie from God.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason.

1. Christ fasted forty dayes. Matth. 4, 2. but e­very action of Christ is our instruction; therefore &c.

[Page 470] Ans. 1. This fast was miraculous, neither is there any thing in it, which agreeth with the Popish fast. But and if every action of Christ be our instruction, then we must worke mi­racles too. 2. We should also in like manner abstaine 40 daies altogether from all meate. 3, We haue no commandement, to imitate this fact of Christ. 4. And, if we must imitate every action of Christ in particular, then wee should with a whip scourge the Popish Mer­chants of holy things out of the temples. But woe to the Pope with his Simoniacal mates, if this dealing should be vsed.

2. Moses and Elias fasted 40 daies.

Ans. 1, If their example should bind others to imitate them, then the fast of Lent should haue beene instituted in the olde Testament also: which seeing it was not done, the vani­tie of this argument is apparent. 2, Both their fastes were miraculous and vnimita­ble.

3, Lent fast is the tithing of the daies of the yeare; Therefore it was well ordained of the Church.

Ans. These be fictions of idle braines, with­out the word of God. Will-worships there­fore [Page 471] to be condemned.

4, The Canons of the Apostles doe commend the fast of Lent.

Ans. 1, They be counterfait Canons: which our Aduersaries themselues dare not altoge­ther denie, vnlesse they they be without both iudgement and shame. 2, There are many things in those Canons, which the Papists themselues at this day doe reiect.

(5) Error.

He that violateth the law of fasting or of Lent, is sorer punished amongst our Aduersaries, than he that transgresseth the law of God.

Why doe yee transgresse the commande­ment of God, for or by your tradition? Mat. 15, 3.

(6) Error.

There are many mockeries in this Popish Lent fast.

They permit most delicate fishes to bee eaten, which are more dainty than any beefe (1) or veale: such as are Pikes, Sea-pikes, Sal­monds, Giltheads, Gudgions, Lampreyes, Eeles, Oysters, &c. These meates may bee, and vse to bee daynties manie times, in the more costlie banquettes of rich [Page 472] men, or perhaps of noble personages. It is a fit course forsooth to tame the flesh by dain­ties.

In the meane while they refraine not from wine, but reserue the strongest wine for Lent (2) time; taming the flesh, if it please you, with strong wine, according to that of the Pro­verbs Prou. 23, 31, 33.

That the hypocrites may seeme to fast till evening, they sing their Evensong at dinner (3) time, that afterward they may freely banquet and take their repast: as if God did not know the houre of the day, but by their service and singing.

In the evening they make a Collation (so they call it) with divers delicate sawces, con­fections, (4) spices, almonds, and wine: and in the mean time they beare the world in hand, that they fast notably.

They sell Indulgences for money, to eate butter, flesh, egges, white meates, &c. in (5) Lent time; committing Simonie, and ma­king way for adva [...]ntage and gaine by fastes.

The iudgment of the holy Ghost of such man­ner of Fastes.

Crye aloude, spare not: lifte thy voice (1) like a Trumpet, and shewe my people their transgression, and to the house of Iacob their sinnes. Yet they seeke me dayly, and will know my wayes, euen as a nation, that did righteously, and had not forsaken the statutes of their God: they aske of me the ordinances of iustice: they will drawe neere vnto God, saying wherefore haue we fasted, and thou seest it not? &c. Is it such a fast that I haue chosen, that a man should afflict his soule for a day, and to bow downe his head as a bul­rush, and to lye downe in sackcloth & ashes▪ wilt thou call this a fasting, or an acceptable day to the Lord? Is not this the fasting, that I haue chosen, to loose the bands of wicked­nesse, &c. Isay, 58. 1, 2, &c.

When ye fast, looke not sowre as the (2) hypocrites: for they disfigure their faces, that they might seeme to men to fast. Vere­ly, I say vnto you, they haue their rewarde, Matth. 6, 16.

[Page 474] Bodily exercise profi [...]eth little, 1, Tim, 4, (3) 8. Where Paul doth not speake of the exerci­ses of the body vndertaken for healths sake: but of abstinence from those things, which are in themselues left free and indifferent: and such exercises he maketh no great recko­ning of.

A Popish shifte.

The Pope doth not say, that meates are euill. Therefore the place of Paul. (1, Tim, 4, 1, 3.) be­longeth not to him.

Answ. 1. Neither dooth Paul say, that erroneous spirits shall say that meats are euill, but that they shall bring in an abstinence frō certaine meates, vnder what pre [...]ense of Reli­gion soeuer it bee done. 2, And the place (Coloss, 2, 20, &c) which we cited, is more cleare, than that it can bee shifted off. The Pope therefore remaineth a Doctor, that teacheth the doctrine of deuils.

CHAP. 23. Of Repentance.

WHereas the Pope of Rome hath thrust, his errours into the article of Repen­tance also, wee will likewise briefely propose them.

(1) Error.

Contrition (which otherwise neither ought, nor can be excluded from repentance) is required by our Aduersaries not simply in Repentance, but they teach that sinnes are blotted out and satisfied for, by contrition, which wee ascribe to Christ a­lone (who was wounded for our transgressions, Isa, 53, 5) according as the Scripture teacheth vs, as hath beene sufficiently declared in the article of Iustification: and the sayings of Scripture, Acts, 4, 12. 1, Ioh, 1, 7. & 2, 1, 2. doe witnesse.

(2) Errour.

They appoint a certaine measure to contriti [...] on, and do teach that vnlesse it be sufficient, there is no remission of sinnes granted. We reiect this doctrine of sufficient contrition.

[Page 476] Because it breedeth a perpetuall doub­ting (1) of the remission of sinnes; the repentant sinner being alwaies in suspense, and neuer knowing, whether he be so contrite and sor­rowfull, as the measure of his sins do require; & therfore will alwaies be in doubt and anxi­ety, whether his sinns be forgiuen.

Neither can his Confessor free him from (2) this doubt. For how shall he know certain­ly, that the penitent mans contrition is suffi­cient, for the greatnes and multitude of his sinnes? And so at length he should thrust his penitent into the depth of desperation, be­cause he sendeth him to his owne sufficient contrition, and not to the all-sufficient satis­faction of Christ.

By this doctrine of sufficient contrition the (3) soule of mā is led to a thing simply impossible For how is contrition for all sins, possible, see­ing the knowledge of all and euery sin in par­ticular, (not only contrition for them) is im­possible and vnknowen vnto vs?

1, Who can vnderstand his faults? clense me from my secret faults, Psal, 19, 12.

2, Thou hast set our secret sins in the light of thy countenance, Psal. 90, 8.

(3) Error.

They require satisfaction in their repentance or penance, not the satisfaction of Christ, but their owne, which the priest receiuing confession must lay vpon him that confesseth, that heereby satisfaction may be made to God by the sinner for his sinne. Which same also cannot stand with the one alone satisfaction of Iesus Christ, nor with the article of free iustification; nor with the imperfe [...] ­tion of our good works. Add heereto, that those workes of satisfaction, are for the most part works of their owne deuising, which for that very respect are hatefull to God. Which seeing they haue beene sufficiently handled before in their proper place, it is not needefull now to repeate the same: Let it suffice onely to note and reckon vp their er­rours. The explication thereof the Readershall finde before in their due place.

(4) Errour.

In reckoning the parts of repentance they omit faith, and take awaie as it were the soule or life of true Repentance.

For Contrition without faith is despera­tion, as wee are taught by the most woefull (1) examples of Cain and I [...]das Iscario [...].

Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinn. Rom, (2) 14, 23. Therefore Repentance without faith [Page 478] cannot please God, that sinnes may beforgi­nen.

Repentance without faith profited Esau nothing, Heb, 12, 17.

(5) Errour.

Mens Consciences also with our Aduersaries are most miserably tormented, while they driue them that confesse to a particular rehear [...]ing of all and euery of their sinnes, and that with euery cir­cumstance of the facte (fondly affi [...]ming that this same particular confession is meritorious by rea­son of the shame that is ioyned with it) which vex­ing of mens consciences in the Church of God, is not to be borne with, for these reasons.

[...] Because it hath no precept nor example of Christ or his Apostles. (1)

Such auricular confession (as they call it) hath no promise of grace in the Word of (2) God.

The Gospell is turned into the law, whiles the desert of remission of sinnes is placed in (3) the reckoning vp of offences (as it were out of the tables of the law.)

The Conscience is brought into perpe­ [...]uall doubting, and at length into desperati­on, (4) [Page 479] on, while a man feareth lest he haue forgot­ten some of his sinnes, or lest he haue not re­hearsed his sinnes with all circumstances ne­cessarie, to the remission of his sinnes. And therfore he must alwaies doubt of the remis­sion of his sins: which how terrible a tormēt of Conscience it is, men of conscience may easily iudge. Hence it came to passe, that superstitious men in Popery, coulde scarse e­uer make anie end of confessing, and yet still there arose new prickes of conscience.

Agai [...] mens workes, which cannot stand (5) in Gods iudgment, are placed in the roome of Christs satisfaction and the free forgiue­nesse of sinns, while [...] such confession is made meritorious.

The doubtfull cons [...]ience is dri [...]en to an (6) impossibility, as before was cited out of Psal, 19, 12. & 90. 8.

Contrariwise our Aduersaries do dispute.

1 In the Primitiue Church publike confession of [...]innes by circumstances was required.

Answere, 1, It was a part of ec [...]lesiasti­call discipline, which was woont to be per­formed before the whole Church by such [Page 480] persons as had grieuously fallen, before the Church had any Christian Magistrates. But that popish auricular confession was vnkno­wen to all antiquity. There are therefore foure termes.

2 God exercised priuate confession in Adam, when he sayd, Adam, where art thou? & in Cain, when hee asked, where is Abel thy brother? Gen, 3, 9, & 4, 9.

Answ. 1. Those places prooue nothing lesse. For Neither did Adam nor Cain rec­kon vp their sinnes, but endeuour to cloke them. But to prea [...]h to the impenitent the acknowledging of their sinnes, & to receiue confession in the care; are things very far dif­ferent. 2. Neither did either Adam or Cain deserue anie thing by that confession which was with much a doe wrunge from them: For Caine despaired, and Adam belieuing on the promised seede of the woman, was saued by faith. not by the confession of his sinne. The Argument then hangeth not to­gether.

[Page] 3, Hee that hideth his sinnes, shall not prosper: but hee that confesseth and forsaketh them, shall haue mercy. Prou. 28, 13. When I held my tongue, my bones cōsumed, Psal. 32, 3. If we acknowledge our sinnes, &c. 1. Ioh. 1, 9. therefore Auricular con­fession is grounded on the Scripture.

Ans, 1. Seeing there is not one onely man­ner of confession, but diuers, they argue from that which is spoken indefinitely to the same taken definitely, & from a particular as from an vniversall: for there is a confession before God; there is a generall confession, there is a particular, before the Ministers, before the Church, before our brethren, whom we haue offended, &c. All these things our Aduersa­ries do fondly confound together.

4. The Iewes were baptized of Iohn and con­fessed their sinnes; therefore he speaketh of Auri­cular confession. Math. 3, 6:

Answer. 1, There is more in the conclusion than in the Premisses: for it followeth not; they confessed themselues to be sinners ther­fore they confessed every one of their sinnes on the Popish manner. 2, The text saith, that Ierusalem & all Iurie, & all the region about Iordan went out vnto Iohn, &c. of how much time then, and how many tenne yeares had [Page 482] Iohn neede of, if hee would haue heard the particular and secret enumeration of all and every their sinnes: nothing therefore follo­weth.

5. Christ saith: Whosesoever sinnes yee remit, they are remitted vnto them: and whosesoevers sinnes yee retaine, they are retained. Ioh. 20, 23. That it may therefore bee knowne what sinnes ought to be retained, what not; it is needfull there should be a particular enumeration of them.

Answ. 1. There is more in the conclusion than in the Premisses: for sinnes may bee re­mitted to them, which confesse themselues to be sinners, & seriously to repent. Although there be made no particular enumeration of all sinnes, yet wee keepe a good custome in The chur­ches of Germanie. our Churches, thinking it meete, that the Minister, before he giveth absolution, should try whether hee that confesseth, vnderstand the doctrine of the acknowledgement of sin, of Redemption, of Grace, and Iustification, &c, But that this should be done by that auri­cular circumstantiall enumeration of sinnes, there is no whit contained in Christs words▪ Now as concerning retaining of sinnes, that belongeth to impenitent sinners; but we may [Page 483] not practise it vpon them that confesse their sinnes. What needeth then for this retaining of sinnes, any enumeration of sinnes, in them, to whom Christ biddeth vs apply the key of loosing? 2, Against the Popish auricular confession we haue an example of Peter, who having heard the generall and devout confes­sion of the sinnes of the Iewes, did not seeke after particulars any more, but gaue vnto them Absolution & Baptisme. Act, 2, 38, 41.

6. Christ saith to the Leaper: goe, sh [...]w thy self [...] vnto the Priest. Matt [...]. 8, 4. therefore hee biddeth him confesse his sinnes to a Priest.

Ans. 1. There is not any sillable in the text concerning any manner of confession. It is then a rope of sand. 2, The cause of sending him to the Priest was not any confession, but for a witnesse vnto them, that they might not be able afterward to denie or cavill at Christs miracles. 3, And at that time, by the custome and commaundement of the law of Moses; the iudging of leaprous persons belonged to the Priests: which at this day is committed to Physitians. Heere then is a fallacie taking that for the cause, which is not the cause.

7. A [...] the Chirurgion ought first to vie we and [Page 484] search the wounds, that hee may apply necessarie plaisters: so it is needfull that the Priest take a par­ticular view of the wounds of conscience, before he giue absolution.

Ans: 1, Similitudes proue nothing. 2, Here is great difference & vnlikenes: for it is need­full that the Surgeon doe looke vppon the wounds, because hee ought to apply severall plaisters according to the diversitie of the wounds: neither are all plaisters fit for all dis­eases, which in spirituall wounds of consci­ence is not so: for there all and every disease is cured with one & the same plaister, to wit, the bloud of the sonne of God: 1, Ioh: 1, 7, and 2, 2.

8. He that desireth absolution, may deceaue the Minister, therfore auricular confession is better.

Answ. 1, And hee that confesseth may de­ceaue the Priest in auricular confession: fo [...] who can assure the Priest, that he that confes­seth, hath kept back nothing, or that he hath not tolde some vntruth in the circumstances. 2, This evill ought to be met withall, not by auricular confession, but by a graue & serious admonition: namely that God searcheth the hearts of all men, and though the Ministers, [Page 485] his Mess [...]ngers be deceaued, yet that he can­not be deceaved, who will inflict most grie­vous punishments vpon the vnrepentant.

9. Acknowledge your sinnes one to another. Iam. 5, 16.

Ans: 1. It is an argument from a particular, as if it were an vniversall: for it doth not fol­low that Iames doth no [...] speake heere of any other kinde of confession, but of that auricu­lar. 2, He saith, Confesse one to another: he doth not therefore speake of auricular con­fession before a Priest, but of a mutuall con­fession of them, who haue beene offended one by another. And it is all one with that of Christ, concerning reconciling our selues with our brother offended. Matth. 5, 23, 24. Heere are therefore foure termes, and ropes of sande, as are almost all our A [...]uersaries ar­guments.

The Conclusion.

The godly & intelligent Reader will mer­vaile perhaps, that our Adversaries, the plai­sterers over of Popish errors, are not afraide to bring to light with such earnestnes, such trifles for the defence of Popish errours, and that in so great light of the Gospel and such a [Page 486] learned age. But he wil cease to mervaile, if he shall cōsider with himself, that the Papists for meer want of good arguments are driven to that necessitie, that whiles they cannot resist the heavenly truth, whatsoever coms in their way, (how absurd soever it be) that they lay hold on for a dart, and throw it against the doctrine of the Gospell. And that befalleth them, which Virgil writeth: Furor arm a mi­nistrat: Furie findeth out weapons. The Lord bring againe to a right minde so many of our Aduersaries, as haue not sinned vnto death, Amen.


This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.