Synopsis papismi, that is, A generall viewe of papistry wherein the whole mysterie of iniquitie, and summe of antichristian doctrine is set downe, which is maintained this day by the Synagogue of Rome, against the Church of Christ, together with an antithesis of the true Christian faith, and an antidotum or counterpoyson out of the Scriptures, against the whore of Babylons filthy cuppe of abominations: deuided into three bookes or centuries, that is, so many hundreds of popish heresies and errors. Collected by Andrew Willet Bachelor of Diuinity.

Synopsis papismi, that is, A generall viewe of papistry wherein the whole mysterie of iniquitie, and summe of antichristian doctrine is set downe, which is maintained this day by the Synagogue of Rome, against the Church of Christ, together with an antithesis of the true Christian faith, and an antidotum or counterpoyson out of the Scriptures, against the whore of Babylons filthy cuppe of abominations: deuided into three bookes or centuries, that is, so many hundreds of popish heresies and errors. Collected by Andrew Willet Bachelor of Diuinity.

Table of contents

Title page

TO THE RIGHT VERTVOVS, MOST EXCELLENT, AND NOBLE PRINCESSE QVEENE ELIZABETH, OVR DREAD LADY, BY THE GRACE OF GOD, Queene of England, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, &c.

The Preface to the Reader.

THE FIRST BOOKE OR CENTVRIE CONTEINING THE CONTROVERSIES OF RELIGION, WHICH ARISE IN QVEstion betweene the Church of God and the Papistes, about the word of God conteined in the Scriptures, and the Church Militant here vpon earth, with the partes and members thereof.

THE FIRST GENERALL CONTROVERsie of the holie Scriptures.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the Canonicall Scripture.

Of the state of the first Question.

The Papists Assertion.

The Protestants confession.

OF THE BOOKE OF BARVCH.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

OF THE SEVEN APOCRYPHAL Chapters of Esther.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

OF CERTAINE CHAPTERS annexed to Daniell.

OF THE BOOKE OF TOBIE.

OF THE BOOKE OF IVDITH.

OF THE BOOKE OF WISEDOME.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

OF THE BOOKE CALLED Ecclesiasticus.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

OF THE TWO BOOKES OF the Machabees.

AVGVSTINES IVDGEMENT OF the bookes called Apocrypha.

THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERning the authenticall and most approued Edition of the Scriptures.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

The Papistes Argumentes.

THE THIRD QVESTION: CONCERNING the vulgare translation of Scripture.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

AN APPENDIX OR PART OF THIS question, concerning publike prayers and diuine seruice in the vulgare toung.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION: OF THE authoritie of the Scriptures.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the perspicuitie and playnnes of the Scripture.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING the interpretation of Scripture.

THE FIRST PART OF THE SIXTH QVEstion: of the diuerse senses of Scripture.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE SECOND PART OF THE SIXTH QVEtion to whom the chief authoritie to expound Scripture is committed.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART OF THE SIXTH QVEstion: concerning the meanes or methode to be vsed in interpreting of Scripture.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION: CONCERNING the perfection and sufficiencie of Scripture.

THE FIRST PART OF THE NEcessitie of the Scriptures.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE SECOND PART OF THE SEVENTH question, of the sufficiencie of Scripture.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

3

THE THIRD PART OF THE SEVENTH question: whether there be any traditions, beside Scripture concerning faith and manners.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE SECOND GENERALL CONTROVERSIE, CONCERNING THE CHVRCH.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF THE definition of the Catholike Church.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE FIRST PART OF THIS FIRST question, whether wicked men and infidels may be true members of the Church.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE SECOND PART OF THE QVESTION, whether the Catholike Church be inuisible.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE SECOND QVESTION, whether the Church may erre.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE Catholike Church may erre in doctrine.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER THE visible Church may fayle vpon the earth.

The Papistes.

The Protestantes.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE notes and markes, whereby the true Church may be discerned and knowen. FIRST OF THE FALSE AND ERROneous notes of the Church.

Of antiquitie. Note. 1.

Of Vniuersalitie. Note. 2.

The third Note of Succession.

The fourth Note, of Vnitie.

The fift Note of the power of working miracles.

The sixte Note of the gift of Prophecying.

Of the true and infallible Notes of the Church of Christ.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

The fourth question of the authoritie of the Church.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE CHVRCH hath authoritie in matters of faith beside the scriptures.

The Papists.

The Protestantes.

AN APPENDIX OR MEMBER OF THIS part of the question, whether we are to beleeue in the Church.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PARTE OF THE QVESTION concerning the ceremonies of the Church.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The fift question, whether the Church of Rome be the true Church.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE ROMANE Church be the Catholike Church.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART: THE CHVRCH OF Rome is not a true visible Church.

The Papists.

Protestants.

THE THIRD CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING COVNCELS.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the necessitie of Councels.

The assertion of the Papists.

The confession of the Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, BY WHOSE AVthoritie Councels ought to be called.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF WHAT PERSONS the Councel ought to consist.

The Papists.

The Protestants confession.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, WHO OVGHT to be the president and chiefe moderator in Councels.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFTE QVESTION WHETHER Councels may erre or not.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING THE AVthority of general Councels, whether they may absolutely determine without scripture, and necessarily binde all men to the obedience of their Canons.

The Papists.

The Protestantes.

THE SEAVENTH QVESTION, WHETHER Councels be aboue the Pope or not.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF THE CONditions and qualitie of generall Councels.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE BISHOP OF ROME, COMMONLIE CALLED THE POPE.

THE FIRST QVESTION, WHETHER THE Regiment of the Church be Monarchicall.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, WHETHER PETER were the chiefe, and Prince of the Apostles, and assigned by Christ to bee head of the Church.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, CONCERNING Peter his being at Rome.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER PETER were at Rome.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER PETER were Bishop of Rome.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, WHETHER THE Bishop of Rome be the true successor of S. Peter.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING THE primacie of the See of Rome.

THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE BISHOP of Rome hath authoritie ouer other Bishops.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING APpeales to bee made to Rome.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE Pope be subiect to the iudgement of anye.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER THE Pope may be deposed from his papacie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE ORIGInall and beginning of the primacie of Rome.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT PART OF THIS QVESTION, CONCERning the proud names and vayne glorious titles of the Pope.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT QVESTION, WHETHER THE Pope may erre, or not.

The Papists.

The Protestantes.

A PART OR APPENDIX OF THIS QVEstion, whether the Church of Rome may erre or not.

The Papists.

The Prot••tants.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE spirituall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE POPE may make lawes to binde the conscience, and punish the transgressors thereof iudicially.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS QVEstion, whether all Bishops doe receiue their Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction from the Pope.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF THE temporall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE Pope directly or indirectly haue authoritie aboue Kinges and Princes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART OF THE QVESTION, concerning Saint Peters patrimonie, whether the Pope may be a temporall Prince.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE NINTH QVESTION OF THE PRErogatiues of the Pope.

THE TENTH QVESTION, CONCERNING Antichrist, and whether the Pope be that great aduersarie vnto Christ.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER ANTICHIST be yet come, and how long he shall continue.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE NAME, character and signe of Antichrist.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

OF THE CHARACTER OR SIGNE and badge of Antichrist.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, CONCERNING the generation and original of Antichrist.

The Papists.

The Protestantes.

THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE seate and place of Antichrist.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT PART CONCERNING THE doctrine of Antichrist.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SEVENTH PART CONCERNING the miracles of Antichrist.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE EIGHTH PARTE OF THE QVEstion, concerning the warres, and kingdome of Antichrist.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE NINTH AND LAST PART OF THIS question, whether the Pope be Antichrist.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT GENERAL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING SPIRITVAL PERSONS, COMMONLY CALLED THE CLERGIE.

THE FIRST QVESTION, CONCERNING THE name of Clerkes or Clergie men.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, CONCERNING the election and institution of Bishops and Pastors.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE ELEction generally of all Bishops and Pastors.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the election of the Pope.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING THE degrees and orders of ecclesiasticall ministers.

THE FIRST PART OF THE SEVEN degrees or orders Ecclesiasticall.

The Papists.

The Protestantes.

THE SECOND PART OF THE DIFFErence of Bishops and other Ministers.

The Papists.

The Protestantes.

THE THIRD PART, CONCERNING THE office and title of Cardinals.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING the Keyes of the Church, committed for the execution to the pastors and gouernors thereof.

THE FIRST PART, WHEREIN THE AVthoritie and power of the Keyes consisteth.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, TO WHOM THE authoritie of the keyes is committed.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE PASTORS of the Church haue any absolute power to remit sinnes, otherwise, then as Ministers onely.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER STRAIGHT waies whatsoeuer be loosed or bound by the ministerie of men vpon earth, be so in heauen.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING the lawfulnesse of mariage in Ministers.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER IT BE lawfull for Ministers to marrie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER any ought to bee admitted to the Ministerie after second marriage.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER MINISTERS ought to refrayne the companie of their wiues, being entered into orders.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT QVESTION, CONCERNING THE maintenance of the Church by tithes.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE PAIment of tithes be necessarie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, BY WHAT RIGHT tithes are due to the Ministers of the Gospel.

The Papists.

The Protestantes.

THE SIXT GENERAL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE SVPERSTITIOVS ORDERS AND SECTS OF MONKES AND FRIERS.

THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE BEGINning and originall of Monkes, and of their diuers sects.

THE FIRST PART OF THE ORIGInall of Monkes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the diuers sects of Monkes and Friers.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERning the Counsels of perfection.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING vowes in generall.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER VOWES PERtayned onely to the old law, and are not now permitted vnto Christians.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHAT THINGS MAY lawfully be vowed by Christians.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, CONCERNING VOLVNTArie vowes, whether they be any part of the worship of God.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING Monasticall vowes in particular.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE vow of voluntarie pouertie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the vowe of obedience.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE vow of continencie or chastitie.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING Monasticall persons, which do enter into that profession.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE younger sorte are to bee admitted to professe Monkerie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER CHILdren may enter into profession of Monkerie without their Parents consent.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER Married persons may with mutuall consent become votaries.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER MARIage contracted not consummate, may without consent be broken for the vow of continencie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING the rules and discipline of Monasticall life.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE solitarie and austere life of Monkes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the habite and shauing of Monkes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART OF THE MONKES Canonical houres.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, CONCERNING THE maintenance of Monkes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SEVENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE CIVIL MAGISTRATE.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING THE AVthoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE AVTHOritie of the ciuill Magistrate ouer Ecclesiasticall persons. The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER THE PRINCE haue power ouer Ecclesiasticall goods.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, CONCERNING THE PRINCES authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OR FOVRTH PART OF THE QVEstion, whether the Prince in any good sense may be called the head of his kingdome, and consequently of the Church in his kingdome.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, CONCERNING THE authoritie of the Prince in punishing heretikes.

§

ILLVSTRISSIMO ET INclytissimo Domino Comiti Essexio, non tam generis claritate, quam virtute sua nobili de re literaria, studiosisque omnibus semper optimè merito, Dominoque mihi multis nominibus colendissimo.

HERE FOLLOW THE controuersies concerning the Church Triumphant.

THE EIGHT CONTROVERSIE concerning Angels.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERning the Celestiall Hierarchye, or degrees of Angelles.

THE FIRST PART OF THE DIVERS orders and degrees of Angelles.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER MICHAEL be the prince of the Angels.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE MINIsterie and function of Angels.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING the defence and protection of Angels.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papist.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PARTE, WHAT OFFICE the Angelles haue about our prayers.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART of this question, whether Angelles or Saints know our heartes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING THE worship of Angels, first in generall, then in particular, of inuocation.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART OF THE INVOcation of Angels.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE NINTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING SAINTS DEPARTED.

1

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF LIMBVS PATRVM, where the Patriarkes were imagined to be.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OR APPERTINANCE OF THIS question, concerning the apparition of Samuel.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERNING Purgatorie.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THERE BE any Purgatorie after this life.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE CIRCVMSTANces and other matters belonging to Purgatorie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE PRAIERS OF the liuing, or any other workes of theirs doe profite the dead.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OR AN APPERTINENCE TO this part, concerning the burials and funerals of the dead.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS CONTROuersie, of the Saints departed that are in ioye and blisse.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING THE blessed and happie estate of the Saints departed.

THE FIRST PART OF THE BLESSED estate of the Saints before God in heauen.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE Canonizing of Saints.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART of other circumstances, which belong to the Canonizing of Saints.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION CONcerning the adoration of Saints.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER SAINTS are to be adored and worshipped. The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX TO THIS FIRST part, concerning vowes and othes made to or by Saintes.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART OF THE distinction of the two kindes of worshippe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART CONCERNING the kissing of holy mens feete.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION CONcerning the inuocation of Saints.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER prayers are to be made to Saints.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER THE Saints departed do pray for vs.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE Saints vnderstand our prayers, and be alwaies at hand to helpe vs.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERning the reliques of Saints.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING the worshipping of Reliques.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART OF THE TRANSLAtion of the bodies of Saints.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE KEEPING and preseruing of reliques.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART CONCERNING VISIsions and miracles done at the Tombes and reliques of Martyrs.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFTH QVESTION CONCERNING Images, and of the signe of the Crosse.

1

THE FIRST ARTICLE OF THE DIFFErence betweene Idols and Images.

THE SECOND ARTICLE, WHETHER IT BE lawfull to haue the images of the Trinitie, of Christ, or of the Angels.

THE THIRD ARTICLE, WHETHER THE images of Saints are to be worshipped.

THE FOVRTH ARTICLE, WHAT MANNER OF worship is to be giuen to Images.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS question concerning the signe of the Crosse.

THE FIRST ARTICLE OF THE TRVE Crosse whereon our Sauiour suffered.

THE SECOND ARTICLE OF THE Image of the Crosse or Crucifix.

THE THIRD ARTICLE OF THE SIGNE of the Crosse in the forehead, or made ouer any thing with the hand.

THE FOVRTH ARTICLE OF THE POWER and efficacie of the Crosse.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX CONCERNING THE name of Iesus.

THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING Temples and Churches.

THE FIRST PART OF THE SITVation of Churches.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OF THIS PART concerning the fourme and fashion of Churches.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE END and vse of Churches.

THE FIRST POYNT OR ARTICLE, whether our Churches are for sacrifice.

THE SECOND ARTICLE, WHETHER Churches are more holy places in them selues.

THE THIRD ARTICLE, WHEther Churches and Temples maybe dedicate to Saintes.

THE THIRD PART OF THE ADORning and beautifiyng of Churches.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART OF THE DEDICAtion of Churches.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT PART OF THINGS HALLOWED and consecrate for Churches.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF PILGRImages and Processions.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX CONCERNING THE HOLY LAND, and holy warres for the same, as they were called.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE EIGHT QVESTION CONCERNING holy and festiuall dayes.

THE FIRST PART OF HOLY DAIES in generall.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE Lords day.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE FESTIVAL daies of Christ and the holy Ghost.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, OF THE solemnities of Saintes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX TO THIS parte of the vigiles and night watches annexed to festiuall dayes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT PART, OF LENT and Imber dayes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE NINTH QVESTION, CONcerning the Virgine Marie.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE Virgin Marie were voyde of original and actuall sinne.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER Marie vowed Virginitie before the Annuntiation.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE ASsumption of the Virgin Marie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART OF THE HOnor and worship of the Virgin Marie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OR FIFT PART OF THE MErites of the Virgine, and of the Aue Maria.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE TENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE INTERCESSION AND MEDIAtion of Christ, whether he be onely our Mediatour and Intercessor.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

HERE FOLLOW SVCH CONTROVERSIES, as concerne the Sacraments of the Church. OF the Sacraments then, wee must first intreate in generall, and afterward handle them in particular. THE ELEVENTH GENERAL CONTROVERSIE, OF THE SACRAMENTS IN GENERAL.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF THE NATVRE and definition of a Sacrament.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE EFFICIENT CAVSE, that is, the author or institutor of a Sacrament.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE FORME OF A Sacrament, and the manner of consecration.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OF THIS PART, WHETHER THE forme of wordes in the institution of the Sacraments may not be by some addition, or other alteration changed.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE INSTRVMENTALL cause of the Sacraments, that is, the lawfull Minister.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER THE Sacraments be seales of the promises of God.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, OF THE efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE SACRAMENTS of them selues doe giue or conferre grace.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE difference of the olde and new Sacraments.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE Character or badge, which (as they say) is imprinted in the soule by the sacraments.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, OF THE necessitie of the sacraments.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION OF THE number and order of the sacraments.

THE FIRST PART, OF the number.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE order and degree of the sacraments among them selues.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE TWELFTH GENERALL CONTROVERSY, OF THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISME.

THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE NAME and definition of Baptisme.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE PARTES, which are the matter and forme of Baptisme.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE necessitie of Baptisme.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX, WHETHER THE want of Baptisme may bee by any other meanes supplied.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, WHETHER women and Lay-men ought to baptize.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT QVESTION, OF SVCH AS are to be admitted to baptisme. Of the Baptisme of Infants. part. 1.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX, OF THE POpish vse in baptizing of Bels.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF THE effects and fruites of Baptisme.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER IN BAPtisme our sinnes be cleane taken away.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART: WHETHER BAPtisme serue onely for remission of sinnes past, & not for the sinnes also to come.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART OF THE LIBERTIE and priuiledges obtained by Baptisme.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, OF THE difference betweene the Baptisme of our Sauiour Christ, and the Baptisme of Iohn.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF the ceremonies and rites of Baptisme.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRTEENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE, OF THE SACRAMENT OF THE LORDS SVPPER OR EVCHARIST.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE SAcrament of the Eucharist.

THE FIRST QVESTION, CONCERNING the reall presence of Christ in the sacrament.

The Papists.

The Papists.

The Papists.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX TO THIS QVESTION, WHETHER it stand with the power and will of God, that Christs bodie should be carnally present in the Sacrament.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERNING Transubstantiation.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, WHETHER THE Eucharist being once consecrated, be a Sacrament, though it be neither eaten nor drunk.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, CONCERNING the elements or materiall part of the Sacrament, namely bread and wine.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFTH QVESTION, OF THE wordes of consecration.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF THE PROPER effect and vse of the Lords Supper.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, OF THE manner to be obserued in receiuing the communion.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF RECEIuing the Sacrament in one kinde.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE NINTH QVESTION OF THE adoration of the Eucharist.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APENDIX, OR TENTH PART, whether the wicked doe receiue the bodie of Christ.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS CONTROVERSY, CONCERNING the Popish Masse.

THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE DIVERS representations of the death of Christ.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, OF THE sacrifice of the Masse and the Priesthoode thereto belonging.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE name and terme of Masse.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE sacrifice of the Masse.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART, OF the name and office of Priestes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE VERTVE AND efficacie falsely ascribed to the sacrifice of the Masse.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, FOR WHOM THE sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT QVESTION OF priuate Masses.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX CONCERNING THE name of the Sacrament.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF THE MANNER OF saying and celebrating Masse.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, OF THE CEREMOnies which they vse in the idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE FORME OF THE Masse, which consisteth partly of the Canon, partly of such things as are rehearsed before and after the Canon.

THE FIRST PART OF THE PRAIERS WHICH goe before the Canon of the Masse.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE Canon of the Masse.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE ERRORS AND BLASPHEMIES that are to be found in the Canon of the Masse.

§

To the right honorable Sir Robert Cicil Knight, one of her Maiesties most honorable priuie Councell.

HERE ENSVE THE CONTROVERSIES OF THE FIVE OTHER POpish Sacraments: Penance, Matrimony, Confirmation, Orders, Extreme Vnction.

THE FOVRTEENTH CONTROVERSIE, of popish Penance.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF THE name of Penance.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, WHETHER THERE be any Sacrament of penance.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, WHETHER THERE be any other Sacrament of repentance, beside Baptisme.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, OF THE essentiall partes of Penance.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE MATTER and forme of popish penance.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS QVESTION, OF the three materiall partes of popish Penance, contrition, confession, satisfaction.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX, WHETHER REpentance goe before faith.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT QVESTION, OF CONTRITION: the first part of their penance.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF AVRICVLAR Confession, the second part of penance.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX OF OTHER CIRCVMSTANCES of Auricular confession.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, of satisfaction.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE PVNISHment remaine, the sinne being once pardoned.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER THE TEMPOrall punishment of this life may be redeemed by good workes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER A MAN may truely satisfie the wrath of God, for the punishment due vnto sinne.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER ONE man may satisfie for another.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF INDVLgences and penall iniunctions.

THE FIRST PART: WHETHER PEnall and painefull workes are necessarie vnto repentance.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, BY WHOM penall workes are to bee inflicted.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF PARDONS and Indulgences.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE NINTH QVESTION, OF THE ceremonies and circumstances of penance.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFTEENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE, OF MATRIMONIE.

THE FIRST QVESTION, WHETHER Matrimonie be a sacrament.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, OF THE CAVSES of diuorse in mariage, and whether it be lawfull to marrie after diuorse.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THERE MAY BE more causes of diuorse, then fornication onely.

The Papists.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER IT BE LAWfull to marrie after diuorsement for adulterie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE degrees in mariage prohibited.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE SVPPVtation and account of degrees.

The Papists.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER ANY OF THE degrees prohibited in the law may be dispensed withall.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER ANY OTHER DEgrees may be by humane law prohibited, beside those directly forbidden in the law.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, OF OTHER impediments of marriage.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT QVESTION, OF THE COMPARISON betweene Virginitie and Marriage.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF THE TIMES OF marriage prohibited.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, OF THE ceremonies and rites of Matrimonie.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXTEENTH CONTROVERSIE, OF CONFIRMATION, ORDERS, EXTREME VNCTION.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF Confirmation.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER it be a Sacrament.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE MATter and forme of Confirmation.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE EFFIcacie and vertue of confirmation.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, OF THE RITES and ceremonies of Confirmation.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, of Orders.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE receiuing of orders be a Sacrament.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

OF THE EFFICACIE, WHICH THEY ascribe to this sacrament.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE ceremonies.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF EXTREME VNCtion. First, whether it bee a sacrament. Secondly, of the efficacie. Thirdly, of the ceremonies.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER EXtreme Vnction be a sacrament.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE effect and vertue of extreme Vnction.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE MINISTER of extreme Vnction, and the ceremonies.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE CONCLVSION OF THIS treatise concerning the sacrament.

HERE ENSVE SVCH QVESTIONS AND CONTROVERSIES AS ARE MOOVED CONCERNING THE BENEfites of our redemption, purchased vnto vs by the death of Christ. THE SEVENTEENTH CONTROVERSIE.

THE FIRST PART, OF Predestination.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF Reprobation.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, WHETHER PREdestination proceede from the free will and purpose of God, without relation to our workes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE certaintie of Predestination.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE BENEFIT of our vocation, to the which belongeth the knowledge of sinne and the lawe.

THE FIRST QVESTION, of sinne.

THE FIRST PART, OF originall sinne.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE difference of sinnes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THOSE, which they call veniall sinnes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER all sinnes be remissible.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFTH PART, WHETHER God be the author of sinne.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT PART, OF THE WORKES of those which are not regenerate.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, CONCERNING the law, with the seuerall partes thereof.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER IT BE possible in this life to keepe the Law.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER iust men doe sinne.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE WORKES of Supererogation.

The Papists.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER GOD be to be serued for hope of reward, or feare of punishment.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE FIFTH PART, OF THE VSE of the Law.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THIS controuersie of Iustification.

THE FIRST QVESTION of Free will.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER FREE WILL be vtterly lost by the transgression of Adam.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE POWER AND strength of free will in man.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, of Faith.

THE FIRST PART, WHAT FAITH IS, whereby we are iustified.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE DIVERS kindes of faith.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHEther charitie be the forme of iustifying faith.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, HOW MEN are iustified by faith.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT PART, WHETHER faith bee meritorious.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SIXT PART, WHETHER to beleeue bee in mans power.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SEVENTH PART, WHEther faith may be lost.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE EIGHT PART, WHETHER wicked men may haue a true faith.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF good workes.

THE FIRST PART, WHICH BE the good workes of Christians.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHEther there bee any good workes without faith.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE vse and office of good workes.

THE FIRST ARTICLE, WHEther bona opera be applicatoria.

THE SECOND ARTICLE, WHEther bona opera be expiatoria.

THE THIRD ARTICLE, WHEther our works be meritorious.

THE FOVRTH PART, OF THE distinction of merites.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FIFT PART, OF THE MANner of meriting.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, of Iustification.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE PREparatiue workes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE two kindes of iustification.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, OF inherent iustice.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, OF IVSTIFIcation onely by fayth.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

HERE FOLLOW SVCH CONTROVERSIES AS doe arise betweene the Protestants and Papists, about the natures of Christ.

THE EIGHTEENTH GENERAL CONTROVERSIE, CONCERNING THE HVMANE NATVRE OF CHRIST.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF THE VBIQVITIE OF the bodie of Christ, whether his humanitie be euery where.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER OVR SAVIOVR Christ did verily encrease in knowledge and wisedome as he was man.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX, OF THE MANNER of Christs birth.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER CHRIST suffered in soule.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER CHRIST descended in soule into hell, to deliuer the Patriarkes.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

AN APPENDIX, CONCERNING the place of Hell.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE NINETEENTH CONTROVERSIE, OF MATTERS WHICH ARE IN QVESTION concerning the diuine nature of Christ.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER CHRIST be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, God of him selfe.

The Papistes.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER CHRIST bee our mediator, as he is man onely, or as hee is both GOD and man.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER CHRIST merited for himselfe.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE TWENTIETH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE, CONCERNING THE COMMING OF CHRIST TO iudgement: which appertaineth to his whole person, as he is both God and man.

1

THE FIRST QVESTION, WHETHER the Gospel be already preached thorough the worlde.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND QVESTION, OF THE comming of Henoch and Elias before the day of iudgement.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE most grieuous persecutions that euer were, shall be toward the end of the world.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS CONtrouersie, about the manner of Christs comming to iudgement.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

The Papists.

The Protestants.

A PARTICVLAR INDEX OR TABLE OF ALL THE CONTROVERSIES, WITH THEIR SEVERAL questions contained in this treatise.

The contents of the first Booke. This Booke containeth seuen Controuersies.

THE SECOND BOOKE CONTAINETH SIXE CONTROVERSIES.

THE CONTENTS OF THE THIRD BOOKE.

Faults escaped.

§

§

[Page]

[Page]

SYNOPSIS PAPISMI, THAT IS, A GENERALL VIEWE OF PAPISTRY; wherein the whole mysterie of iniquitie, and summe of Antichristian doctrine is set downe, which is maintained this day by the Synagogue of Rome, against the Church of Christ, together with An Antithesis of the true Christian faith, and an Antidotum or counterpoyson out of the Scriptures, against the whore of Babylons filthy cuppe of abominations: Deuided into three bookes or Centuries, that is, so many hundreds of Popish heresies and errors.

1. COR. 11.9.

There must be heresies, that they which are approued amongst you might be known.

TITVS. 3.10.

A man that is an heretike, after the first and second admonition, auoyde.

AVG. DE VERA RELIG. CAP. 6.

Ecclesia Catholica vtitur gentibus ad materiam operationis suae, haereticis ad probationem doctrinae suae, schismaticis ad documentum stabilitatis suae: alios inuitat, alios excludit, alios relinquit, omnibus tamen gratiae Dei participandae dat potestatem: siue illi informandi adhuc, siue reformandi, siue recolligendi sunt.

The true Catholike Church doth vse the Gentiles as matter to worke vpon, heretikes for the trial of their doctrine, schismatikes to proue their constancie: the first she inuiteth, the second she excludeth, the third she leaueth, yet to them all she offereth the grace of God: in instructing the Gentiles, reforming of heretikes, and bringing home againe schismatikes.

Collected by Andrew Willet Bachelor of Diuinity.

AT LONDON [...]nted by Thomas Orwin, for Thomas Man, dwelling in Pater noster row at the signe of the Talbot. 1592.

TO THE RIGHT VERTVOVS, MOST EXCELLENT, AND NOBLE PRINCESSE QVEENE ELIZABETH, OVR DREAD LADY, BY THE GRACE OF GOD, Queene of England, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, &c.

[Page]

[Page]

WHen we call to minde (most gracious and dread Soueraigne) the manifold blessings, which the Lord by your Highnes hand hath reached forth to this Realme & Church of England, the long flourishing peace, which the land vnder your prosperous gouernmēt hath these many yeares enioyed, the like whereof neither our forefathers haue seene, nor other countries knowne: The notable reformatiō also of the church, & purging of the house of God, which daies the holy Martyrs and seruants of God long sighed for, and desired to see, but saw them not: When we doe consider these things, we nothing doubt to say, that the prophecie of Esay is fulfilled in these our daies, who saith concerning the Church: Kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and Queenes thy nursing mothers: Isa. 49.23. as it is also prophecied in the Psalmes,Psal. 49.16. In stead of thy fathers thou shalt haue children, whom thou mayest make Princes in all lands. For now who seeeth not, that many Christian Princes in the worlde are become the children of the Church?

Your Maiesties renowmed father king Henry the eight, and your Highnesse brother of blessed memory king Edward the sixt, did but begin the foundation of the Temple, and lay the plot, and with Dauid prepared gold, siluer, brasse,1. Chron. 22.14. iron and all thinges needfull for the building: but it was his good pleasure, that you with peaceable Salomon should finish the building, and with Zorobabel should prosper with the stone of tinne in your hand. The Lord hath made you a wall and a hedge to his vineyard to keepe out the wilde boare:Zach. 4.10. a goodly tree to [Page] giue shade to the beasts of the field, & succour to the [...]oules of the aire, a nurse to the people of God,Isa. 5.2. Dan. 4.9. to carry them in your bosome, as the nurse beareth the sucking child. The Lord Christ would once againe hang vpon the breasts of a Virgin:Num. 11.12. God hath raised you vp a Deborah to iudge Israel, an Esther to deliuer the Church: the Lord hath made you as that vertuous matrone that doth cloath her family with double rayment:Pro. 31.21. your Realme flourisheth with true religion, and abundance of peace▪ this is our double apparell. Now seuen women shal no more take hold of one man,Isa. 4.2. saying, Come let vs be called by thy name: but thousands of men make sute to one woman, as all Israel went vp to be iudged of Deborah. Iud. 4.5.

What though the Papists fret and storme, and cut your Maiestie very short,Rhemist. annot. 1. Cor. 14. sect. 16. Iud. 1.6. saying, that the Prince ought neither to giue voice in coū sell for matters of religion, nor make Ecclesiastical lawes, and would as Zedechiah his eyes were put out, & Adonibesech his fingers cut off, so both take away the eye of your iudgement, and your right hand of power in Ecclesiasticall matters? What though another foule mouthed Iesuite doth most impudently slaunder your Maiestie, saying in great contempt, I am reipsa Caluinistis in Anglia, mulier quaedam summus Pontifex est?Bellarm. de notis Eccles. lib. 4. cap. 9. Psal. 59.14. As for them, let them wander and run vp and down in the Citie, barking and snarling like hungrie dogges, seeking meat▪ and shall not be satisfied, as the Psalme saith, yet shal the building prosper vnder your hand: the people of God doe cry out with shoutings▪ Grace grace vnto it; the whole Church of God from all partes of the world saluteth you,Zach. 4.7. Psal. 118.26. Psal. 45.4. saying: We haue blessed you out of the house of God, & do encourage you to go forward, gird thy sword to thy thigh prosper thou with thine honor, ride on, because of the word of truth God hath giuen into your hand a two edged sword: with one edge i [...] defendeth the Church from false religion; with the other, the cōmon wealth from oppression:August. ad fratres in eremo, ser. 14. as an anciēt father saith, Tunc iustitia dicitu [...] gladius ex vtraque parte acutus, quia hominis defendit corpus ab exterioribus iniurijs, & animā à spiritualibus molestijs. To Kings & Princes it is especially said, Thou shalt walke vpon the Lyon and Aspe, the young Lyon and Dragon thou shalt tread vnder thy feete. Psal. 91.14. The Lyon is the open enemy, the Aspe & dragon is the close hypocrite that peruerteth religion. The good lawes of Princes are as the pitch of Noahs arke,Gen. 6.14. it was pitched within and without: so good Princes are to prouide, both for the safetie of the land from forraine enemies abroad, and [Page] to preserue the soundnes of religion, from corruption of heresie at home. How lawfull your Maiesties gouernement is, and how well pleasing before God, the sequele and effect doth abundantly shew. Salomon asked wisedome, and he receiued both riches and honor withall: none of all these hath God denyed to you: the Lord loueth you, his left hand is vnder your head, his right hand doth embrace you, as the wiseman saith, At his right hand is length of daies, at his left, riches & honor: all these hath the Lord graunted vnto you:Cant. 2.6. Pro. 3.16. and thus the Lord honoreth those that honor him. And as your Maiestie doth proceede and continue in aduauncing the Lords honour: so he is able yet to do greater things for you.

Now then, seeing your Highnes is our Zorobabel, the chiefe builder of Gods house, and the rest of your faithfull subiects are the helpers and workemen, some as labourers vnder you: I your humble and meanest subiect, as a poore labourer, fit but to carry rubbish & stones, and to serue other builders, haue forced my selfe to do somewhat towards the building of Gods house: I haue therfore (may it please your Maiestie) in this worke set downe the bodie and summe of all Popish opinions whatsoeuer, wherein we dissent from them, and they from the truth, and haue endeuoured to lay open their nakednes, that euery man may see their great brags, and small abilitie: words, but no matter: great promises, yet little performed: and why, as Augustine saith,Cont. Petilian. 2.98. Ostē dere hoc non possunt, non quia ingenium deest, sed quia bona causa.

This labour of mine was thought to be very expedient for these times, and not before enterprised by any, that men not learned, might in one volume finde all the controuersies of religion, which their leisure would not suffer them to collect them selues. Many of our learned countrimen haue in some choise & principal controuersies, as the Lords valiant champions, maintained the truth strongly against the common aduersarie: but this small labour, as it pleased the Lord, was left for me: they haue borne the heate of the day, the coole euenings worke is cast vpon me. They haue built with hewen stones,Isa. 9.10▪ the brick-worke is my lot; they haue squared the tall cedar trees, the wilde figge trees must be hewen out by my hand.

This simple worke I haue presumed to present to your Maiestie, as a token of my dutie and seruice, a poore scholers gift, as a signe of my thankfulnes to God and your Maiestie, by whom we haue both leisure and maintenance to follow our studies: for as the Poet saith, Deus [Page]nobis haecotia fecit, God through you hath wrought vs this peace. And I was emboldened the rather to offer this simple labor to your Highnesse, remembring your Princely & gracious disposition, which hath bene wont to accept with great fauour and regard, the meanest gifts of your subiects, yea hath not refused to receiue posies and nosegaies at their hands: With the same Princely countenance, I beseech your grace to receiue this posie of mine,Fox. pag. 2093. Non florum, sed foliorum. A princely minde your Highnesse knoweth, is as well seene in accepting of small giftes, as giuing of great: as Alexander said to a souldier, vpon whom he bestowed a citie: Si tu non es dignus tanta recipere, ego tamen dignus tanta donare: so the speech somewhat altered, me thinketh I heare your Maiestie thus saying to me: Licet non tu dignus tantula donare, ego tamen digna tantula accipere: though it be not fit for thee to offer so small a gift, yet it standeth with my Princely nature to receiue it.

And now (O noble Queene, our dread Soueraigne) the mother of Israel, a nurse to the people of God, be strong and feare not, the Lord fighteth for you: it is the truth, the ancient Catholike Apostolike faith, which we vnder your leading and protection do professe. As for your enemies,Psal. 28.42. Psal. 92.10. they shal be as the dust before the wind, and as the clay in the streetes, but your crowne shal flourish, your horne shalbe exalted. In you is that saying verified as it was somtime in Dauid, The stone which the builders refused, Psal. 118.22. Cant. 1.4. is become the headstone of the corner. You were somtime black with sorow, and the sunne of affliction hath looked vpon you: but now the Lord hath made you comely, beautifull as the morning,Cant. 6.9. faire as the moone, giuing his Church vnder; on abundance of blessings: so that we may now all say, This is the day which the Lord hath made, let vs reioyce and be glad in it: yea we will not cease still to pray with the Church of God, O Lord saue now, send vs now prosperitie. Psal. 118.25. That the Lord would in mercy yet lengthen out these good daies, and so replenish your roiall hart with his grace, that you may still bring forth fruit in your age: that what worke the Lord hath yet to bring to passe in his Church,Psal. 92.14. it may be finished by your hand: that both this your Realme of England may still be strōgly fenced and hedged about with all temporall blessings,Isa. 5.2. as also the watchtower and watchmen of the Church may thriue and prosper in their spirituall businesse.Psal. 46.4. Habac. 2.14. And as the Temple of God is now built & set vp aloft, so the riuer of God may flow, and the streames therof make glad [Page] the people of God: that all the land may be filled with knowledge, as the waters couer the sea: and as Aarons siluer bels in the Temple, so the voice of the Gospell may be heard ouer the whole land.Psal. 118.27. And thus shall the Lord graunt you your harts desire: your sacrifice shall not only be bound to the hornes of the altar, but euen turned to ashes: that is, the Lord will not onely encline his eare to your praier, but graunt your request to the full. That at length your Maiestie shall not doubt to say with the kingly Prophet Dauid, Psal. 92.11. Mine eye shall see my desire against mine enemies, and mine eare shall heare my wish against the wicked that rise vp against me. And let all the people of God say Amen: euen so be it O Lord, Amen.

Your Maiesties most humble subiect, ANDREW WILLET.

The Preface to the Reader.

[Page]

GOod Christian Reader, thinke not the time long, nor the labour lost, if I shall in a few words open my mind further vnto thee: and as leading thee by the hand, shew thee the way & entrance into this treatise following. We are not ignorant how this famous Church of England the mother of vs all, hath been these many yeeres molested and troubled with hollow hearted brethren, sowers of corrupt doctrine, deuisers of mischiefe, enemies to our peace, and in one word, Romish Catholikes and Papists. They haue been from time to time, as prickes to our sides, and thornes in our eyes,Canticl. 2.15. Math. 3. as the Cananites were to Israel: they are the Foxes that destroy the Lords vineyard, the progenie of the Pharisees, a generation of vipers, whose propertie is to gnaw out the sides of their damme when they are brought forth: euen so haue these vipers sought the destruction of their countrey. They are the serpent by the way, that byteth the horse heeles, & causeth the rider to fall backward: that is,Gene. 49.17. Ezech. 39.18. subtilly do vndermine and hinder the prosperous successe of religion. Of such prophecied Ezechiel, They do eate the good pasture, and tread downe the rest with their feete: they haue drunke of the deepe waters, & troubled the residue with their feet. They are not cōtent themselues to eate the fat, & drinke the sweet of the land, but some of them haue laboured & practised to disturbe our peace, and to trouble the quiet state of the land. But let not vs (good brethren) be offended at these things. First let vs not be astonished, as though some strange thing had befallen vs:1. Cor. 11.19. for S. Paul hath said, That heresies must be among vs, that they which are approued may be knowne: in time of persecution exercebant patientiam Ecclesiae, they did proue the patience of the Church: but now as Augustine saith, exercent sapientiam, they doe exercise the wisedome of the Church. Let not the number and multitude offend vs of those, which doe band themselues against the Church: for so it must be, Christs flocke is but a little flocke. Let vs not be afrayd of their wisedome,Luk. 12.32. power or strength: the scripture teacheth vs, that they in their generation are wiser then the children of light: yet the Lord our God, that is with vs, and fighteth for vs, is wiser and stronger then they. Let them not deceiue vs with a shew of holinesse:2. Cor. 11.14. 1. Pet. 4.15. In Psalm. 34. Conc. 2. for Sathan can transforme himselfe into an Angel of light: neither let it moue vs because they endure some trouble and losse of their goods, and imprisonment of their bodies for their religion (which is falsely so called) for S. Peter saith, That men may suffer as euill doers, and so doe these. And S. Augustine saith, Si poenae martyres faceret, omnes carceres martyribus pleni essent, omnes catenae martyres traherent: If the punishment onely, and not the cause made Martyrs, al prisons should be full of Martyrs, and all that are bound with fetters and chaines should be Martyrs. But let vs (not stumbling at any of these stones) be constant in the faith, and go forward in the profession of the Gospel, which is grounded vpon the Scripture, sealed with the blood of Martyrs, waited and attended vpon these many yeeres, as the mistresse with the handmaid, with peace, prosperitie, and abundance of all blessings. With them there is no peace to be had:Bellarm. de laicis. lib. 3. cap. 19. Deut. 22.10 their owne Doctors teach, that no reconciliation can be made betweene vs: And indeed so it is, for there is no fellowship betweene light and darknesse. The Israelites were commanded, not to sow their ground with diuers seedes, nor to plough with an oxe & an asse. What is this els, but that the Church of God cannot consist of beleeuers & Idolaters of true Christians and hypocrites, Catholikes and Heretikes, Protestants and Papists? Their seede and ours is diuers: they sow the doctrine of men, and humane traditions: we sow the seede of Gods word. The oxe is onely fit for the Lords plough, that chaweth the cud, and deuideth the hoofe, the asse doth neither: Who is he that deuideth the hoofe, & chaweth the cud Augustine telleth vs,Homil. 35. Fissa vngula pertinet ad discernendū, quid dextrū, quid sinistrū: ruminatio pertinet ad eos, qui cogitant postea quid audierint: He deuideth the hoofe, that deuideth and discerneth what is good, & what euill: and they chaw the cud, that do meditate of that, which they heare out of the word. But such are not the common Catholikes among Papists: for they do not allow [Page] euery one, the mistresse, the mayd, the ploughman and artificer to talke of Scripture, or moue questions and doubts in Religion: and so make them asses, not oxen to chaw the cud.Rhemist. Prefat. sect. 7. Rhemist. 1. Ioan. 4. sect. 1. Dan. 2.33. Ierem. 15.19. They say it belongeth not to euery Christian, to discerne betweene true and false doctrine, but they must take their faith of their superiours, and obey them in all things: and so neither would they haue them deuide the hoofe, taking from them their discerning iudgement. There is no agreement therefore to be looked for at their hands: no more then yron or clay can be tempred together: Their old vessels cannot receiue the new liquor of the Gospell: but they must first become new themselues: they must first put off their beggerly ragges of Popish ceremonies and superstitions, or els they shall neuer put on Christ: And to be short, Reuertantur illi ad te, ne tu reuertaris ad illos: Let them returne vnto vs, we will not returne to them, as the Lord saith to Ieremie.

But lest now we should be thought to speake without booke, deepely charging our aduersaries with heresie, lyes, false doctrine, and prouing nothing: we will take some paynes of set downe some principall opinions of the Papists, which haue in the purer ages of the Church been condemned for heresies.

Marcellina the companion of Carpocrates the archheretike, worshipped the Images of Iesus 1 and Paul, and offered incense vnto them, August. heres. 7. So the Papists do worship the Images of Saints, and in the second Nicene Councel it was decreed, that the Image of God should be worshipped with the same honour that God himselfe was.

The Heracleonites did anoynt their sicke which lay a dying, with oyle and balme, Heres. 16.2 So the Papists haue found out extreme vnction and made it a Sacrament.

The Caians did hold, that the sinne of Iudas in betraying Christ, was a benefite to mankind,3 Heres. 18. The Papists come somewhat neere: One of them affirmeth, that the Iewes had sinned mortallie, if they had not crucified Christ: Ex Iuell. defens. Apolog. p. 676.

The Pepuzians iudged heretikes, because they permitted women to be Priests, Heres. 27.4 So it was decreed in the Florentine Councel among the Papists, that in the case of necessitie, not only a lay man, but an heretike, pagan, and a woman to, may baptize.

The heretikes called Angelici were condemned, because they worshipped Angels, Heres. 39.5 So the Rhemists teach, that Angels may be worshipped, Annot. in Apocal. 3 sect. 6.

There was a sect of heretikes that walked with bare feete, because God sayd to Moses, put off 6 thy shooes, &c. Heres. 68. And so are there of Friers that goe barefoote, as the Friers Flagellants, and Franciscanes.

The Priscillianists did make the Apocrypha, that is, bookes not Canonicall of equall authoritie 7 with Scripture, Heres. 70. So doe the Papists, the bookes of Tobie, Iudith, Machabees, and others, which are not found in the Canon of the Hebrue, they make thē bookes of Canonical Scripture, and part of the word of God: yea, they say, that whatsoeuer the Pastors of the Church doe teach beside Scripture in the vnitie of the Church, is to be taken for the word of God, Rhemist. annot. 1. Thessal. cap. 2 sect. 12.

An Archheretike called Marcus, did hold that Christ did not verily suffer and indeed, but in 8 shew onely and appearance, Heres. 14 The Appollinarists also affirmed, that Christ tooke humane flesh without a soule, Heres. 55. I pray you, how farre are the Papists from these heresies? for they affirme that Christ suffered not in soule: Nay the Rhemists hold, that it is a blasphemous assertion so to say, Annot. Hebr. 5. v. 7. What is this els, but either with Marcus to say, that Christ suffered but in shewe, and that he felt nothing in soule, when he cryed out vpon the Crosse, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? for if there were no such matter indeed, Christ must haue vttered those words only in outward shew and pretense. Againe, they cannot shift off handsomely from them the Appollinarists heresie: for why did Christ take vpon him our flesh and soule, but to redeeme man, that was lost both in bodie and soule? and therefore he must needes haue suffered both in bodie and soule: for if there were no vse of the humane soule in the worke of our redemption,Cont. Felician. cap. 13. you might as wel say with the Appollinarists that Christ had no soule at all. Thus Augustine reasoneth: Si totus homo perijt, totus beneficio saluatoris indiguit, sitotut beneficio saluatoris indigebat, totum Christus veniendo saluabit: If the whole man [Page] both in bodie and soule were lost, he wholly had need of a Sauiour: and if he wholly needed a Sauiour; Christ by his comming did wholly saue him. Ergo ▪ it followeth that Christ must wholly haue died & suffred in bodie & soule to redeeme man, that was wholly lost in bodie & soule.

9 The Anthropomorphites did imagine, that God was in shape and proportion like a man, Heres. 50. Doe not our Rhemists sauour strongly of this heresie, which allow the image of God to be pictured like an old man with gray haires in their Churches? Annot Act. cap 17. v. 29.

10 The heretikes Abeliani ▪ thought it not lawfull for their sort to liue without wiues, and yet they neuer vsed, nor kept companie with their wiues, Heres. 87. Do not the Papists come neere them, which hold that their priests which were married before orders, ought not afterward to haue accesse to their wiues, yet are they their wiues still, neither is the marriage knot dissolued betweene them? Rhemist. Act. 21. sect. 1.

11 The Pelagian heretikes did hold three pernicious opinions. First, that a man may be perfect in this life, and keepe all the Commandements, Heres. 88. So the Rhemists say, it is possible to keepe all the precepts of the law, Annot. Ioan. [...]4. sect. 1. Secondly, the Pelagians say, that grace is giuen vnto men onely to this end, that they may more easily doe those things which they are commanded to doe by their owne free will, Heres. 88. So the Rhemists say, that man was neuer without free will, but hauing the grace of Christ, it is truely made free, Annot. Ioan. 8. sect. 2. What is this els, but that his free will is made more free, and that grace helpeth him not whollie to worke, but more easily onely? Thirdly, the Pelagians hold, Gratiam Dei non ad singulos actus dari: That the grace of God is not needfull to be giuen at euery assay, but that their free will in most things is sufficient, August. Epist. 106. So the Rhemists say, that though the Gentiles beleeued specially by Gods grace, yet they beleeued also of their owne free will, Act. 13. sect. 2. What say they els, but that a man may beleeue by his owne free will without grace.

The Manichees condemned the eating of flesh, as being vncleane and impure, Heres. 46. So 12 the Papists also forbid at certaine times the eating of flesh: And herein they perhaps differ from the Manichees: They held that flesh was vncleane by creation. The Papists by reason of the curse: for God cursed the earth, and not the waters (say they) and therefore vpon fasting daies fish is preferred before flesh, Durand. lib. 6. capit. de alijs ieiunijs. So they both agree in this, that flesh is a thing impure and vncleane: for if they had not so thought, why did not that popish Bishop of London Stokeslie, rather suffer the pigge to be eaten, which was found in one Frebarnes house in Lent time,Frebarn. Fox. pag. 1585. his wife being great with child longing for a peece thereof, then command it, as an vncleane thing to be buried in Finsburie fields, and so the good creature of God to be spoyled and lost?

There was also another most blasphemous opinion of the Manichees: for they held that the parts and members of Christ were dispersed euery where, and that in their meates & drinkes, they did deliuer the members of Christ, which were tyed and bound in the creatures. Tales (saith Augustine [...]unt electi eorum. vt non sint saluandi à Deo, August. in Psal. 104. sed saluatores Dei, liberant enim membra Christi▪ cum manducant: The elect amongst them for so they call their principals) do make themselues the sauiours and redeemers of God, for they doe set at libertie (as they imagine) the members of Christ, he is not their sauiour. Compare now the opinion of the Papists with these heretikes: see if they be not cosin germanes: for as they made themselues, saluatores Christi, sauiours of Christ: so is it a saying amōg the Papists, that Sacerdos est creator createris sui: the Priest at Masse, which by fiue words speaking maketh the body of Christ, is a maker, say they, of his maker, a creator of his creator, Ex Iuell. lib. artic. p. 615. But herein the Papists go beyond the Manichees: for they deliuered the bodie & members of Christ frō the prison of the creatures, and sent them vp to heauen: the Papists bring them downe from heauen, and close them in the creature, vnder the shape of bread and wine.

Thus farre we thought good to shew, how neere the Papists come to the heretikes of olde time: that it might appeare to the world, that we doe not vniustly charge them with heresie, and that we haue good cause to shunne and abhorre their poysoned doctrine. Many other heresies I could haue produced; which are reuiued by our aduersaries, & raked againe as it were out of their graues, where they did quietly rest. But that I am not of purpose now to deale in [Page] this matter: which may in a seuerall Treatise (God willing) hereafter as time and opportunitie shall serue, be handled more at large.

I haue onely by the way giuen a tast of the bitter and sower doctrine of Poperie: that our countrymen, which haue been any thing that way infected, may take warning, that if they haue sipped of the whore of Babylons cup of fornicatiō, they should leaue of, before they haue drunke more deepely, lest they in the end be constrained, to draw out the very dregges thereof, and to be drunken with their intoxicate cup. If they will in time be warned, they may: a word to a wise man is sufficient: and if they be wise, they will also take heed in time, I say vnto them as Augustine did sometime to the Donatists: Si sapitis, bene & rectè, si autem non sapitis, nos vestri curam gessisse non poenitebit, quia et si cor vestrum ad pacem non conuertitur, Cont. Petilianum. 3.59. pax nostra tamen ad nos reuertitur: If you will be learned it is well, and as we wish: but if you will not, it repenteth vs not, that we haue had some care of you: for although your hart be not conuerted to the peace of the Gospell, yet our peace returneth to vs againe.

Here by the way, I must remember my selfe of one thing, which I had almost ouerslipped. Euery where both in this Preface and in this whole booke, speaking of our aduersaries, I call them Papists, as we are knowne by the name of Protestants: I suppose our English Romanists will take no offence or griefe hereby so to be called: although I haue heard, that some of them hold great scorne to be named Papists, yet I see no reason, why they should so doe. The Rhemists like this name well enough, because it is not deriued from any one man,Anno [...]. Act. 11. sect. 4. but from their Popes and chiefe Bishops, to whom (say they) we are bound to cleaue in Religion, and obey in all things: So to be a Papist (say they) is to be a Christian man, a child of the Church, and a subiect to Christs Vicar. Seeing then this name pleaseth their ghostly fathers of Rhemes so well, there is no reason why they should mislike it: and therefore we will vse it still, as best expressing their profession, who are pinned vpon the Popes sleeue for their faith and Religion: As likewise the name of Protestants we refuse not: which name I thinke tooke beginning in England in King Henry the eights daies: when there was a generall protestation made in the name of the King, the whole Councel and Clergie of England against the Pope:See Sicidan. Fox pag. 1083. In the which protestation, thus we finde: England hath taken her leaue of popish crafts for euer, neuer to be deluded with them hereafter: Romane Bishops haue nothing to doe with English people: the one doth not traffique with the other: at the least, though they will haue to deale with vs, we will none of their marchandise, none of their stuffe. Thus we see how a Papist and a Protestant are defined: A Papist is he that cleaueth to the Pope in Religion, and is obedient to him in all things: A Protestant is he, that professeth the Gospell of Iesus Christ, and hath renounced the iurisdiction of the sea of Rome, and the forced and vnnaturall obedience to the Pope. These names therefore as best fitting both our professions, seeing no cause to the contrary, I purpose euery where to vse and retaine throughout this Treatise.

I would here finish and make an end of this Preface, but that first I must make the Reader acquainted, with the order and methode, which I haue followed in setting downe the controuersies: The whole bodie therefore of the controuersies betweene the Papists and vs, our worthie and learned countriman D. Whitakers hath digested and disposed into a singular Methode, the which I haue propounded to my selfe throughout this discourse to obserue.

The heresies and errours therefore of Poperie, doe either impugne the offices of Christ, with his benefites and merites, or his person: the most of them are of the first kinde, some errours they maintaine against his person, but not many.

First, the name of Christ sheweth his offices: for it signifieth annointed: he was annointed to be our Prophet, King and Priest: Iesus betokeneth a Sauiour, and setteth forth the benefites of our redemption and saluation. First then of his offices, and then of the benefites, that do arise and spring thereof.

The first office of our Sauiour Christ, is to be our heauenly teacher and Prophet. His heauenly doctrine is conteined no where els but in the Scriptures. The first generall controuersie then must be of the Scriptures: where there arise many questions: as of the Canonicall [Page] bookes of the Scripture, of the vulgare translation of Scripture, of the perspicuitie, and plainenesse, authoritie, interpretation and perfection of Scripture, with such other.

The second office of Christ is to be our King: and because his kingdome is his Church: here we are to handle the controuersies about the Church: Which is either the Church Militant vpon earth, or the Church Triumphant in heauen.

The Church militant is to be considered, either in generall, where these questions are moued, what the Church is, whether it be visible or not, by what markes it is knowen, whether it may erre, what authoritie it hath. Then the parts of the Church, which are either assembled and gathered together, as in generall Councels: where these doubts must be discussed, whether generall Councels be necessary, by whom they ought to be summoned, whether they can erre, whether the Pope be aboue Councels or not, and such like. Or els the parts of the church are seuerally to be considered, and they are of three sortes, either the chiefe parts, the middle and meane parts, the lowest and basest parts of the Church: The chiefe member they make to be the Pope: where there are many questions and of great waight, as whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall, whether Peter were appointed head of the Church, whether the Pope be Peters successour, whether he may erre, whether the Pope be Antichrist, with such other. The middle parts, are their Clerkes, which are either secular, as they call them, which haue any Ecclesiasticall function, where we must enquire of their election & degrees of their single life, and such like, the Regular Clerkes are their Monkes, and other of that profession, where we must entreat, of vowes, of their solitarie life, their habite, their Canonicall houres, with other matters. The lowest members are the lay men: where the questions about the Ciuill Magistrate must be handled: as whether he may put heretikes to death, whether he haue any power and authoritie in Ecclesiasticall matters, and hetherto of the Militant Church.

The triumphant Church consisteth either of Angels, or other Saints departed: Concerning the Angels, we dissent about the orders and degrees of them, about their ministerie and office, and whether they are to be prayed vnto.

Concerning the Saints departed, there are many questions in controuersie, as of Purgatory▪ Lymbus Patrum, whether they are to be praied vnto, of their Reliques, Images, Temples, Holie daies, and such like.

The third office of Christ is his Priesthood, whereof there are two parts, his intercession, where we must enquire, whether Christ be the onely Mediatour of intercession▪ and his Sacrifice, where the maine and great controuersie concerning the Sacraments doth offer it selfe: for by the Sacraments the power and efficacie of the death of Christ is deriued vnto vs.

Here first we must entreate of the Sacraments in generall, as of their number, their efficacie, the difference betweene the Sacraments of the olde and new Testament: then in particular, as of Baptisme, and the seuerall questions thereto belonging, of the Lords Supper, where also the great controuersie about their Idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse, and other necessary questions must be handled. Then follow in order fiue other popish Sacraments to be considered of, confirmation, penaunce, extreme vnction, orders, matrimony. And these are the controuersies concerning the offices of Christ.

The controuersies which concerne the benefits of our redemption, with other seuerall questions, are these, as of predestination, of sin, of the law, of free will, of faith, of good workes, the particular questions are set forth at large in other places.

Lastly, there remaine some questions, about the person of Christ, [...] whether he be [...], that is, God of himselfe, whether he encreased in wisedome, whether he suffered in soule, whether he merited for himselfe, with such other.

Thus haue we the summe & body of Antichristiā doctrine, which we purpose by the grace of God to goe through, beginning at the first, and so prosecuting euery particular questiō, till we are come to the last. My purpose is not to set down all the heresies, which impugne the Christian faith, but onely those which are maintained by the Church of Rome this day; who are the chief troublers & disquieters of the peace of our Church: I say therefore with Augustine, Omnis Christianus Catholicus ista nō debes credere, sed nō omnis, qui ista nō credit, cōsequenter se debet Christianum[Page]Catholicum [...]utare vel dicere. Euery true Catholike Christian is bound not to beleeue any of these errors set down in this book: but it foloweth not, that whosoeuer beleeueth not these, is a true Catholike: for there are other heresies in the world, which destroy the faith, as the heresies of the Anabaptistes, Familie of Loue, Libertines, and such like. But our speciall purpose and drift is, to weed out the Popish cockle and darnell, that troubleth our field. Neither haue I set forth at large the controuersies betweene vs: for that laborious worke other of our learned countrymen haue taken in hand, as D. Whitakers in Cambridge, D. Reynoldes in Oxford, and besides, it farre exceedeth my strength and habilitie: I haue onely brieflie set downe the grounds of Poperie, as I haue collected them out of Bellarmine, the stoutest champion of their side, our English Rhemistes, Eckius, Canisius, and other Papistes, as also out of the late Chapter of Trent, for it deserueth not the name of a Coūcell. And with all as an Antidotum or counterpoyson, I haue opposed and set against them, the cōfession of the Protestants and Church of God: with reasons and Arguments of both sides, and places of Scripture annexed: adding also throughout the iudgement of Augustine, who of all the fathers, is most plentifull in these matters, which fall in question in our dayes.

The benefite, which the Christian Reader shall reape in some measure (I trust) by this simple labour of mine, is threefold. First the knowledge of all Popish errours, which much auayleth: Multum adiuuat cor fidele nosce, quid credendum non sit, August. de heresib. epilog. etiamsi disputandi facultate id refutare non possit: It much helpeth a Christian toward beleefe, to know what is not to be beleeued, though he can not refell it by Argument. Secondlie he shall vnderstand both their principall Obiections, which they do entangle simple men withall, as also he shall learne how to defend and maintayne the truth. Thirdly the chief places of Scripture, which make for them or against them, are briefly euery where expounded and opened.

This whole worke I haue deuided into three partes or bookes: the first conteineth the cō trouersies of the Scriptures and the Militant Church: the second the controuersies of the Triumphant Church: and of the Sacraments: the third the questions, concerning the benefites of our redemption, and as touching the person of Christ: Which bookes I haue thus deuided, not so much in respect of the matter which they conteine: for then the controuersies of the Militant and Triūphant Church ought not to haue bene sundred: but that there might be some equalitie & indifferent proportion in the Volumes, euery one of them comprehending a Centurie that is an hundred of Popish errours either vnder or ouer.

But the rather I haue so done, because I had proceeded no further, then to the end of the controuersies of the Militant Church when this first booke went out of my hāds: the which I was moued vpon some occasion to publish, before the rest were finished, which shall not stay long after, God assisting me. Wherein I doe also folow the counsell and example of Augustine, who writing of the like argument of heresies, doth thus conclude his booke: Hunc librum, August. lib. heres. epilog. antequam totum hoc opus perfeci vobis credidi esse mittendum, vt cum, quicun (que) legentis, ad id, quod restat implendum, quod tam magnum esse cernitis, orationib. adiuuetis. This booke I thought good (saith he) to send abroad, before the rest be finished, that whosoeuer readeth it, might helpe me with their prayers, to the better performing of that which remaineth: Which I beseech thee also (good Christian Reader) to afoord me, that being mutuallie assisted one with the prayers of an other, we may walke on with strength and chearefulnesse in our Christian race, till we haue by Iesus Christ obtayned the price of euerlasting life. Amen.

THE FIRST BOOKE OR CENTVRIE CONTEINING THE CONTROVERSIES OF RELIGION, WHICH ARISE IN QVEstion betweene the Church of God and the Papistes, about the word of God conteined in the Scriptures, and the Church Militant here vpon earth, with the partes and members thereof.

[Page]

[Page]

THE FIRST GENERALL CONTROVERsie of the holie Scriptures.

ACcording to the methode, which we wil (God assisting vs by his spirite) obserue throughout this whole Treatise of the controuersies, in the first place we are to entreat of such matters, as cōcerne the Propheticall office of Christ. He is our Prophet, our heauenly teacher, and Doctor. Math. 23. vers. 8. from him proceedeth all holy knowledge: we haue not seen God, nor the high things of God: but the onely begotten sonne, which is in the bosome of the father, he hath declared him. Iohn. 1.18. Wherefore all the true sheepe of Christ, will heare his voyce. Iohn. 10.3. His voyce is not els where heard but onely in the Scriptures: We must heare Moses and the Prophetes. Luke. 16.29. First of all therefore this great and most famous controuersie betweene vs and our aduersaries concerning the Scriptures must be handled: which is distributed into seuen seuerall questions.

1 Concerning the Canonicall Scripture, what bookes are to be receiued into the sacred Canon, what books to be reiected and counted apocryphall.

2 Concerning the authenticall Edition of the holy Scriptures, whether the Hebrue Greeke or Latine translation is cheifly to be folowed.

3 Whether the Scriptures ought to be translated into the vulgar and English toung: and whether publique prayers and diuine seruice ought to be vsed in the same toung.

4 Whether the scriptures are authorized by the Church, and not rather so knowne to be of them selues.

5 Concerning the perspicuitie and playnnes of the Scripture, whether [Page] it be so hard, that the common people may not safely be admitted to the reading thereof.

6 Concerning the interpretation of Scripture: which question is deuided into three parts: first whether the Scripture admit diuerse senses and expositions: secondly who hath the cheife authoritie to expound Scripture: thirdly what meanes ought to be vsed in expounding of it

7 Concerning the perfection of the Scripture, three parts of the questiō. First, whether the Scriptures be necessarie: secondly whether they be sufficient to saluation: thirdly whether there be any traditions beside necessarie to saluation.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the Canonicall Scripture.

Of the state of the first Question.

WE haue not any thing in this place to deale with those heretikes, which denie either the whole Scripture, or any part thereof: but onely with our aduersaries the Papistes, that holding all those bookes to be Scripture, which we do acknowledge, doe adde vnto them other bookes which are not canonicall: so that they offend not as other heretikes, in denying any part of the Scripture, but, which is as bad in adding vnto it, for both these are accursed. Reuel. 22.18.

First of all breifly before we proceed, let vs see who they were that offend in the first kind. Some heretikes generally reiected the whole Scripture, some certaine partes thereof. The Sadducees receiued no Scripture, beside the fiue bookes of Moses, the Maniches condemned the whole old testament, and so did wicked Marcion.

The bookes of Moses the Ptolemaites refused, the booke of the Psalmes the Nicolaitanes, and the Anabaptistes in our dayes: there wanted not which condemned the booke of the Preacher and the Canticles as wanton and lasciuious bookes: and the Anabaptists are not here behind with their partes. The holy and excellent booke of Iob hath also found enimies, and some of the Rabbins which do thinke that the storie is but fained: which heresie is confuted Ezech 14.14. for there Noah, Iob, Daniel are named together: so that it is manifest, that such a man there was.

The new testament the Maniches most impiously affirmed to be full of lies. Cerdon the heretike condemned all but Lukes Gospel. The Valentinians could away with none but Iohns Gospell. The Alogians of all other hated Iohns writings. The Ebionites onely admitted Matthewes Gospell. The Acts of the Apostles the Seuerian heretikes contemned. The Marcionites the Epistles to Timothie, to Titus, to the Hebrues. The Ebionites could not away with any of S. Paules workes. ex Whitakero, cont. 1. de Script. cap. 3. Vnto these adde the Zwencfeldians and Libertines that refuse to be iudged by the Scripture, calling it a dead letter, and flie vnto the inward and secret reuelations of the spirite. [Page] And by your leaue the Papists are not far from this heresie some of them: although the Iesuite crie neuer so much with open mouth, that wee belye them, De verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 1. Take but a litle paines to peruse that worthy learned mans and reuerent fathers defence of the Apologie p. 521. there you shall find how that Lodouicus a Canon Lateran in Rome, said in the Councell of Trent, that the Scripture is but mortuum atramentū, dead inke. The Bishop of Poitiers sayd, that it was, but res mammis & muta, a dead and dumbe thing. Albertus Pigghius, that the Scriptures were but muti Iudices, dumbe Iudges. Eckius calleth it Euangelium nigrum, & theologiam atramentariam, the blacke Gospell and inkie diuinitie: and it is nasus cereus, a nose of wax saith he. And now in cometh Hosius with his part: that it is but lost labor which is bestowed in the Scripture: for the Scripture is a creature, and a certaine bare letter. But the Iesuit saith, that we abuse the name of that man, for those are not his owne words, but he reporteth them of Zuinckfeldius: Be it so for this time, though M. Iewell bestowe some paines to proue them to be according to his owne meaning. Though these be not Hosius owne wordes, yet these are not much better, yea far worse, who speaking of Dauids writing of the Psalmes, sayth thus, Quid ni scriberet, scribimus indocti docti (que) poemata passim, why might not he write (sayth he) being a temporall Prince, as Horace saith, we write ballades euery body both learned and vnlearned. p. 522.

I pray you now how much do these Papists differ from the Libertines and Zuinkfeldians, vnlesse it be in this, that the Libertins cleaue to secret reuelations, the Papistes are pinned vpon the Popes sleeue, affirming that it is no Scripture nor Gospel without the determination of the Church. Nay one of them saith, determinatio Ecclesiae appellatur Euāgelium, the determination of the Church is called the Gospell. Iohannes Maria! will you yet heare of greater impietie? Anno Domini .1240. or thereabout there was a booke set forth by the Friers, called Euangelium aeternum, full of their owne fables, and abominable errors: they taught that Christes Gospell was not to be compared vnto it, and that the Gospel of Christ should be preached but fifty years. This booke with much a do was condemned by the Pope, (but after long disputation) and it was burnt secretely, lest the fryers should haue bene discredited: and withall the booke of Guilielmus de S. amore, which he had written against the Friers, and disputed against their Gospell, was commanded to be burned with the other. Besides these heresies, their opinion also is to be reiected, that thynke that the holy writers might in some things be deceiued, as mistaking one thing for another, or fayling in their memorie. To this opinion Erasmus enclined, whom Bellarmine taketh paine to confute, lib. 1. cap. 6. He might as well haue turned his argument vpon Melchior Canus their owne champion, who thinketh that Stephen Act. 7. in telling so long a storie might forget him selfe in some things Cau. lib. 2. cap. 18. ex Whitakero, but now to the question.

[Page]

The Papists Assertion.

THere are certaine bookes annexed to the old Testament, which the Papists error 1 them selues do not acknowledge for canonicall, as the Prayer of Manasses, the two bookes of Esdras, commonly called the third and fourth of Esdras: also other which are not vsually in our English Bibles, as an appendix to the booke of Iob, the 151. Psalme, a booke called the Pastor. All these by our aduersaries are reiected. The question betweene vs is concerning these books: first certaine peeces ioyned to canonicall bookes; as seuen Chapters of Esther, certaine stories annexed to Daniel, as of Bel & the Dragon, of Susanna, the Song of the three children: also the Epistle of Baruch ioyned to Ieremy. Thē folow certaine whole books, as Tobie, Iudith, the Wisedome of Salomon, Ecclesiasticus, two bookes of the Machabees: these six bookes with the other three appendices or peeces of books the Papists hold to be canonicall, and of as firme authority as any part of the Scripture. Arguments they haue none, beside cartaine testimonies of some fathers and Councels, which we purpose not to deale withall, leauing them to our learned country men who haue taken in hand to discusse these controuersies to the full.

The Protestants confession.

WE are agreed concerning the new testamēt, that all the books therof as they stand are to be receiued of all for Scripture: for as for those forged Gospels of Thomas, S. Andrew, of Nicodemus and the like, though the Church were troubled with them in times past, yet their memory being now worne out, there is no question of thē. Concerning the bookes on both sides acknowledged, if some one man seeme to doubt of some one part, as Luther doth of the Epistle of Iames and Iude, it ought no more to preiudice vs, then Catetanus opinion doth hurt them who called more bookes in question then Luther did, as the Epistle of Iames, of Iude, the second of Peter, the second and third of Iohn, the last Chapter of Marke.

We differ not then in the new Testament, vnlesse it be concerning the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, which ouer aduersaries stoutly affirme to be S. Pauls, which we deny not, neither certainly can affirme it, seeing in some Greeke copies it is left out, and in the Syriacke translation. But it mattereth not who was the author, seeing we receiue it as canonicall: for the title is no part of the booke, and so neither of Scripture: and we receiue many bookes in the old Testament, the authors whereof are not perfectly knowne.

So then all the question is about the Apocrypha of the old Testamēt: they are called Apocrypha, because they are hid and obscure, not because their authours are vnknowne: for as I sayd, we knowe not by whom certaine Canonical bookes were written: neither are they so called because of some vntruthes conteined in them contrary to Scripture, as the most of them haue▪ for it foloweth not, that euerie booke which hath no vntruth or lye, should straight wayes be taken for Scripture, but they are therfore iudged and called Apocrypha, because they were not in former time receiued into publike and [Page] authentick authoritie in the Church, neither to be alledged as grounds of our faith though they may be read for example of life, and may haue other profitable vse. But the Canonicall Scripture onely hath this priuiledge to geue rules of faith, and thereupon it hath the name, that we may be bold to beleeue and ground our faith vpon the canonicall & holy Scripture, which is the onely word of God. Wherefore out of this number of Canonicall Scripture we exclude all the books afore named, & therfore let not the reader be deceiued, that although they be ioyned in one volume with the Scripture; to think that they are for that of the same authoritie and credit with the rest: first we will shew one reason in general, and afterward come vnto the particular books in order.

1 All canonical scripture in the old Testament was written by Prophets: we haue a sure word of the prophetes, saith S. Peter 2.1.19. and S. Paule, Rom. 16.26. calleth them the Scriptures of the Prophets. But none of those bookes aforenamed, of Tobias, Iudith and the rest, were written by the Prophets: for they were all written since Malachies time, who was the last Prophete, as the Church complaineth, Psal. 74.9. There is not one Prophete; nor any that can tell vs how long. Ergo none of these bookes are canonicall.

2 All the canonicall bookes of the old Testament, were acknowledged of the Iewes and Hebrues, for they were then onely the Church of God, and where should Scripture be found but in the Church? to them, sayth S. Paule, were committed the oracles of God, Rom. ▪3.2. But the Iewes receiued none of these books: for none of them are written in the Hebrue toung, neither did they receiue them with the like authoritie as other bookes of Scripture; and this some of the Papists can not denie. Ergo thy are not Canonicall.

3 There is no Scripture of the old Testament, but it hath approbation of the new: for as the Prophetes beare witnesse to Christ, so he againe doth witnesse for the Prophets, and therefore it is a true proposition of Caietane, though he be controlled and checked of Catharinus an other Papist for it, that there is no Scripture, which was not either written or approued by the Apostles: but in the whole new Testament you shall not find one testimony cited either in the Gospel or the Epistles out of any of the Apocrypha, as out of other bookes of Scripture: therefore hauing no approbation of the new Testament, we conclude they are none of the old.

4 It shall appeare in the seuerall discourse of the particular bookes, that there is somewhat euen in the bookes themselues to be found, that barreth them from being Canonicall.

OF THE BOOKE OF BARVCH.

The Papistes.

THis is their best reason for the authoritie of this booke, because Baruch was Ieremies scribe: and therfore Baruch can not be refused, vnlesse also we [Page] doubt of Ieremie. Bellarm. lib. 1. de verbo. Dei. cap. 8.

The Protestantes.

THis booke was neither written by Ieremie nor Baruch: first because it is in Greeke: if either Ieremie or Baruch had written it, it is most like they would haue written in Hebrue. Secondly, the phrase and manner of speach sheweth that it was neuer written in Hebrue: for in the 6. Chapter in the Epistle of Ieremie, it is said that the Israelites should be in captiuitie seuen generations, that is 70. yeares, but it can not be found in any Hebrue booke that generation is taken for the space of 70. yeares.

OF THE SEVEN APOCRYPHAL Chapters of Esther.

The Papistes.

ONe of their chief Arguments, besides testimonies and authorities, which would make to great a Volume, is this (which is common also to the rest of the Apocrypha) they are read in the Church, & haue bene of auncient time, Ergo they are Canonicall. I aunswere, that it is no good argument. Hierome saith plainly, Legit Ecclesia, sedeos inter Scripturas Canonicas non recipit, Praefat. in lib. Solomon. The Church indeede (saith he) readeth them, yet for all that they are not Canonicall. And Augustine was wōt to read vnto the people the Epistles of the Donatistes, and his aunsweres vnto them. Epist. 203.

The Protestantes.

THe most of our reasons against the authoritie of the 7. Chapters added to Esther (for of the 10 first Chapters, which are found in the Hebrue, we make no doubt at all) are drawen from the matter of the booke it selfe.

1 In the second of the Canonicall Esther. ver. 16. it is said that the conspiracie of the two Eunuches against the king, was in the 7. yeare of Assuerus: but in the 11. Chap. ver. 2. of the Apocryphall Esther, we read that Mardocheus did dreame of this conspiracie in the secōd yeare. Bellarmine aunswereth, that both are true, for the dreame was in the secōd yeare, & the conspiracie in the seuēth; so belike, there was fiue yeares betweene. But in the 11. Chapter, it is said that Mardocheus was much troubled about that dreame, and the next night after his dreame the conspiracie was enterprised.

2 The true history of Esther saith that Mardocheus had no reward at that time of the king. cap. 6.3. but the forged storie saith, that at the same time the king gaue him great gifts, which can not be meant, of that great honor which afterward was bestowed vpon Mardoche: for then Haman (being hanged the same day) could worke him no despite, wheras the forged story saith, that after the king had rewarded him, then Haman began to stomach him, because of those two Eunuches.

[Page]3 Againe the storie which is added, was written many yeares after Mardoches & Esthers death, vnder the raigne of Ptolomaeus & Cleopatra, as it appeareth. cap. 11.1. it is not like therefore to be a true storie: Bellarmins ridiculous cōiecture is this, that there were two stories writtē in Hebrue of Esther, the one cōpendious & short, which we now haue: the other more large, which might be translated by Lisimachus there spoken of cap. 11. whose translation we now onely haue, the originall being perished. What goodly gesses here be, to make Canonicall Scripture? what neede two bookes of one thing? If the first were written by the spirite of God and so were Canonicall, what neede a secōd? the spirite of God vseth not to correct his own writings: and this can not be that ample and large storie imagined, being shorter, and not so full as the first.

4 Besides the false storie saith, that Haman was a Macedonian. Cap. 16. v. 10. the true storie saith, he was an Agagite or Amalekite. cap. 8.3. how can these two agree? Nay the forged booke saith, that Haman would haue destroyed the king, & so cōueyed the kimgdome of the Persians to the Macedonians: which could in no wise be: for the kingdome of the Macedonians was not yet spoken of: and so it continued in small or no reputation till Phillippus the father of Alexander, who was many yeares after. Vide plura▪ Whitach. quaest. 1. cap. 8. De Scripturis.

5 In the latter Chapters that is repeated, which was set downe in the former part, which argueth, that the story was not writtē by one mā: and it is not like he would write one part in Hebrue, another in Greeke. If any say (as the Iesuite saith) that this part was in Hebrue, and being translated into Greeke, was lost: why was one part rather lost then the other? and was it not as like to be preserued in Hebrue as in Greeke? These are verie bare and suspicious coniectures.

OF CERTAINE CHAPTERS annexed to Daniell.

THere are three parcels ioyned to Daniell, the song of the 3. childrē, the storie of Susanna, of Bel and the Dragon, in the vulgare Latin, which are not any part of Canonicall Scripture.

1 They are neither extant in Hebrue at this day, nor are like to haue bene translated out of Hebrue into Greeke: but compiled first in Greeke, and therfore not written by Daniell: for v. 54.58. of the storie of Susanna, where one of the Elders saith, he saw her vnder a Lentiske tree, the other vnder a prime tree: he vseth a certaine paronomasie or allusion vnto the Greeke wordes, which cā not stand in the Hebrue, as of the tree [...], he saith the Angell of the Lord [...], shall cut you in two: and so of the tree [...], shall deuide thee in two. As if a mā should thus allude in English: thou wast vnder the prune tree: the Lord shall prime thee. This allusion is not in the Hebrue, as the learned haue verie well obserued, but onely in the Greeke.

[Page]2 The time is vncertaine whē this storie should be done. It was in the captiuitie: for Susanna dwelt in Babilon, but Daniell could not then be so young a child as the storie maketh, for he was carried away in the first captiuitie with Iehoiakim as it is Dan. 1. And Ezechiell, that liued about that time doth speake of the great prudence & sage wisedome of Daniel, Ezech. 28.3. and ioyneth him with Noah & Iob. cap. 14. All this proueth that Daniell could not bee so very a babe in the beginning of the captiuitie, as the storie maketh him.

3 In the story of Daniell it is said that he was 6. dayes in the Lyōs den, but the true storie saith he was there but one night. cap. 6. The Iesuite aunswereth, he was twise in the Lyons den, or rather he thinketh there were two Daniels, the one of the tribe of Iuda, which was that great Prophet: the other of Leui, which was the principall in those two stories of Susanna, and of Bel and the Dragon. But this is a poore shift, to inuent another Daniell, whom the Scripture neuer knew: and if it were so, why are all their actes ioyned together, as if one Daniell had done and write them all.

OF THE BOOKE OF TOBIE.

1 THis booke is not found in the Hebrue, in the which toung all the oracles of God were kept. Ergo it is worthelie doubted of.

2 Our aduersaries them selues confesse, that in Hieromes time it was not receiued for Canonicall. The Iesuite aunswereth: that it might be doubted of before it was determined in a Generall Councell: to whom (saith he) it appertaineth to define of Canonicall Scripture: As though this were not a greater doubt, whether a Coūcell hath any such authoritie, to determine which books ought to be receiued for Canonicall, for Canus a Papist maketh question of it. Lib. 2. cap. 8. And the Iesuite him selfe saith that the Church can not, Facere Canonicum de non Canonico, make a booke not canonicall, to be canonicall, but onely to declare those to be Canonicall, which are so in deed. Wherefore the Papistes take to much vpō them, to make this boke within the Canon, being of it selfe not Canonicall, and so adiudged by antiquitie.

3 He that readeth the booke it selfe shall finde that both the stile, and the matter is not such as beseemeth Canonicall Scripture: read Tremell. in cap. 3. ver. 8. cap. 13. ver. 15.

OF THE BOOKE OF IVDITH.

AN escpeciall Argument against this booke is, that the historie can not be assigned to any time.

1 It is pretie sport to see how the Papistes doe moyle them selues about this point: and can not agree amongest them selues. Some hold that this storie fell out after the captiuitie in Cambises time, as Lyranus, and Driedo: some in Darius Histaspis raigne, as Gerardus, Mercator: some would haue it before the captiuitie in Sedechias time, as Genebrard: some in Iosias time, as Iohan. Benedictus: [Page] but the Iesuite confuteth them all, and bringeth the storie to Manasses raigne: but he hath also mist the cushin.

2 It appeareth that this story could not be after the captiuitie for we read not of any Nabuchadneser afterwards, for the kingdome was translated frō the Assirians to the Persians and Meedes. Againe it could not be before either in Iosias time, Sedechias, or Manasses, first because in the 5. Chap. v. 18. it is said that the temple had bene destroyed and cast downe, which could not be in any of those kings raignes. It is but a shift of Bellarmines, to say those words were foysted into the text: it is rather to be thought, that the Iesuite is put to his trūps, not hauing els, what to answer. Secōdly Iudith being at this time in the flower of her age, and liuing afterward many yeares till she was 105. yeare old, all which time, and many yeares after her death, the booke saith in the last Chapter, the land had rest: this can not agree with Manasses time: for within 40. yeares or not much aboue, the land fell into great trouble, straight after Iosias death. Where then is this long time of rest? And the Iesuite that still groūdeth vpon impossibilities and vnlikele-hoods, that Iudith was at this time 40. yeare old, which was (saith he) in the beginning of Manasses raigne, and so to dye about 7. yeares before Iosias: yet for all his scanning is driuē to this shift, that the many yeares peace after her death, must be vnderstood of poore 7. yeares. Thirdly, if all this happened in Manasses time, whom the Chaldeans tooke and carried away prisoner, and had much troubled and afflicted the country of Iudaea: what neede had Holofernes to enquire so curiously of Achior the Ammonite, of the country their Citie, people, kings, and such like:Iudith ca. 5. seeing they had knowen the country, to well before in spoyling and wasting of it, as the Iewes by wofull experience had felt.

OF THE BOOKE OF WISEDOME.

The Papistes.

OVr aduersaries reason thus: they say that S. Paul. Rom. 11.34. vsing this speach: who hath knowen the Lordes minde or bene his counseller? doth alledge it out of the 4. Chapter of this booke. v. 13. Ergo it is Canonicall. We aunswere. First the Apostle seemeth not in that place to cite any testimonie, though the wordes which he vseth▪ may els where be found. Secondly though the like wordes are read in the booke of Wisedome, yet is it not necessarie the Apostle should borrow them frō thēce, but rather they are alledged out of the 40. of Esay. 13. Where the Prophet saith, who hath instructed the spirit of God or was his counseller? And this also is the opiniō of the Rhemistes, that S. Paul in that place vseth the Prophets wordes.

The Protestantes.

OVr reasons against the authoritie of this booke are these and such like.

1 Because this booke is not found in the Hebrue, but written onely [Page] in Greeke: wherefore it is not Canonicall seeing the Iewes had all the oracles of God.

2 Philo a Iew is thought by the Papistes them selues to be the author of this booke, who liued after Christ in the time of Caligula, neither him selfe was a Christian or beleeued in Christ: therefore an vnlike man to be a writer of Canonicall Scripture. Bellarmine saith, it was another Philo, who was more auncient. Indeed Iosephus maketh mention of a Philo before this time, but he was an Heathen and no Iew.

3 If this booke were written by Solomon, why is it not extant in Hebrue? for Solomon wrote in Hebrue & not in Greeke. Many of the Papists also do proue, that it was not written by Solomon: for though Solomon in the 2. Chapter be brought in praying vnto God: that is no good argument to proue Solomon the author, for the author might speake in the person of Solomon.

OF THE BOOKE CALLED Ecclesiasticus.

The Papistes.

THey haue none but common and generall arguments for the authoritie of this booke, as that it was of old read in the church, & diuerse of the fathers alledged testimonies out of it. All this proueth not, as we haue shewed before, that it was Canonicall, but that it was well esteemed and thought of, because of many wholesome and good precepts which are conteined in it.

The Protestantes.

WE do thus improue the authoritie of this booke.

1 The author in the Preface saith, that he trāslateth in this booke such things, as before were collected by his grandfather in Hebrue, and excuseth him selfe, because that things translated out of the Hebrue do loose the grace, and haue not the same force: so then it appeareth that this booke can not be Canonicall being imperfect: neither was his grandfathers worke (which is now lost) to be thought any part of the Scripture, seeing he was no Prophet him selfe, but a compiler and a collector of certaine things out of the Prophetes.

2 He exhorteth his countrymen to take it in good worth, and so craueth pardon: but the spirit of God vseth not to make any such excuse, whose works are most perfect, and feare not the iudgement of men.

3 This booke saith. cap. 46. v. 20. that Samuell prophesied after his death, & from the earth lift vp his voyce. Whereas the Canonicall Scripture saith not that it was Samuell, but that Saul so imagined, and thought it to be Samuell. 1. Sam. 28. And Augustine thinketh it was, phantasma Samuelis, but a shew onely and representation of Samuell, and an illusion of the deuill. Lib. ad Dulcitiū, quaest. 6. For it is not to be thought, that the deuill cā disease the soules of any [Page] men, much lesse of Saints departed.

OF THE TWO BOOKES OF the Machabees.

OVr Argumentes against the authoritie of this booke are these ensuing, for our aduersaries bring nothing on their part, but such Argumentes drawen from testimonies & authorities, as do generally serue for all the Apocrypha, which are aunswered afore.

1 Iudas is commended. 2. booke. chap. 12. for offring sacrifice for the dead: which was not commanded by the law, neither is it the custome of the Iewes so to do to this day: & againe they were manifest Idolaters: for there were foūd iewels vnder their coates consecrate to the Idols of the Iamnites. And our aduersaries graunt them selues, that prayer is not to be made, for open malefactors dying impenitently.

2 Lib. 2. cap. 2. many things are reported of the arke, the holy fire, the altar the tabernacle, which should be hid by Ieremie in a caue, and that the Lord would shew the people these things at their returne. Here are many things vnlikely and vntrue. First, it is found, saith the text in the writings of Ieremie: but no such storie is there found. Secondly Ieremie was in prison till the very taking of the Citie: and the Citie being taken the temple was spoyled, the holy things defaced and carried away, how could they then be conueyed by Ieremie? Thirdly in their returne, they found neither arke nor fire, nor any such thing: but saith the Iesuite, the Iewes in their conuersion to God in the end of the world, may haue them againe: as though, whē they shal beleeue in Christ, they will any more looke backe to the ceremonies or rites of the law, for what vse then I pray you shall they haue of altar or sacrifice or any such like.

3 There is a great disagreeing in the storie betweene the two bookes cō cerning the death of Antiochus. Lib. 1. cap. 6. v. 6.16. It is said that Antiochus dyed for grief in Babylon, hearing of the good successe of the Iewes. Lib. 2.1. ver. 16. Antiochus was with the rest of his souldiers slayne in the temple of Nanea, and his head cut of & throwen forth. Chap. 9. the same Antiochus falling sicke by the way dyed with a most filthie and stincking smell, cōsumed of wormes: How could this man dye thrise, in Babylon, in Nanea, and by the way in a straunge coūtrey. It is confessed by the Iesuite, that it was the same Antiochus, who saith he lost his armie in the temple, and sickned by the way and dyed at Babylon. But the storie saith that their heads were cut of: I thinke thē he could not liue, and that he dyed in a straunge country, therefore not at Babylon in his bed. These things hang not together.

4 Further the author of these bookes saith, that he abridgeth the story of one Iason a Syrenean. Lib. 2. cap. 2. v. 23. Who was an Heathen: but the spirite of God vseth not, neither needeth to borow of prophane writers. He saith that this worke was not easie but paineful to him, but required sweating and watching. [Page] v. 26. But to the holy writers of Scripture, though their own labour and diligence was not wanting, yet was not the worke hard or molestious vnto them. Lastly the author faith he writeth for pleasure & recreation of the Reader, and craueth pardon, if he haue not done well. Lib. 2.15.39. But to read for pleasure is no end of Scripture, neither doth the spirit of God vse any excuse either for matter or manner.

Our aduersaries say that S. Paule likewise confesseth, that he was rude in speaking. 1. Cor. 11.6. We aunswere, he so saith, because the false Apostles so gaue out of him, not that he was so indeed: and yet in that place S. Paule doth not excuse him selfe, for his not sufficiēt hādling of his matter, as this author doth: neither is that speach of S. Luke any thing like: for there the Euangelist doubteth not to say, that he had attained to an exact knowledge of all things. Vpon these premises we conclude, that these bookes of the Machabees are not Canonicall, nor to be taken for any part of holy Scripture, though we denie not, but that there may be some profitable vse of them for the storie.

AVGVSTINES IVDGEMENT OF the bookes called Apocrypha.

FIrst, generally of them all thus he writeth. Quas ita (que) Scripturas dicimus nisi Canonicas legis & Prophetarum, de vnit. Eccle. 16. We acknowledge no Canonicall Scripture of the old Testament, but the law and the Prophetes, but none of the Apocrypha were writtē by any of the Prophets. Againe he saith: Omnes literae, quib. Christus Prophetatus est, apud Iudaeos sunt Psal. 56. All the bookes, which do Prophesie of Christ, were kept amōgest the Iewes: but none of the Apocrypha were written in Hebrue. Ergo. Concerning the story of Bel and the Dragon he calleth it a fable, de mirabilib. lib. 2. cap. 32. Of the same credite is the storie of Susanna.

The booke of Iudith was not (saith he) receiued in the Canon of the Iewes. De Ciuit. Dei. 18.26.

The two bookes of Ecclesiasticus and the wisedome of Solomon are onely said to be Solomons, propter eloquij nonnullam similitudinem, because of some affinitie and likenesse of the stile. De Ciuit. Dei. 17.20. So he thinketh that Solomon was not indeed the author of them: how then can that booke be Canonicall, which geueth it selfe a false title: being called the wisedome of Solomō, and was neuer compiled by Solomon.

THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERning the authenticall and most approued Edition of the Scriptures.

The Papistes.

WHereas it is confessed that the Hebrue Edition of the old Testamēt error 2 is the most auncient: in the which toung the Scriptures were compiled [Page] by the Prophets: & that the new Testamēt was writtē in Greeke by the Apostles and the Euangelistes, yet our aduersaries do generally hold, as it was decreed in the Tridētine Chapter. Sess. 4. Decret. 2. That in all sermōs, readings, disputations, controuersies, the vulgare Latine trāslation should be taken for authentike before the Hebrue or Greeke, and that no man should presume vpon any occasion to reiect it, or appeale from it.

The Protestantes.

WE do truly affirme, that although there are diuerse Editiōs of the old Testament besides the Hebrue, and some of them verie auncient, as the translation of the Septuagints, compiled by 72. aunciēts of the Iewes, at the instigation of Ptolomeus Philadelphus king of Egypt, 300. yeares before Christ: and after Christ there were other translations in Greeke made by Aquila, Synomachus, Theodotion, and others: also a Chalde Paraphrase compiled by the Iewes, & last of all diuerse Latin translations, the which, as Augustine saith, in his time were so many, that they could not be nūbred: yet of al the rest the Hebrue being the most auncient and the mother of the rest, and freest from corruptions, ought to be receiued as most authentike. And for the new Testament, though there be a Syriacke translation verie auncient, yet the Greeke ought to be preferred (being the same toung, wherein the Apostles and the Euangelistes wrote) to be the onely authentike copie. As for the Latin translation of the Bible, we are able to proue it to be verie corrupt and faultie and therefore not authentike.

The Papistes Argumentes.

1 THe Latin Church hath vsed the vulgare Latin translation for the space of 800. or 900. yeares, and it is not like that the Church all this while was without the true Edition of the Scriptures. Ergo it is onely authenticall. We aunswere. First, by this Argument it foloweth that this vulgar Latin being generally vsed, was preferred before other Latin translations, which were at the first in great number, not that therefore it is more authentike then the Hebrue in the old, and the Geeeke in the new Testaments. Secondly, there were other Churches besides the Latin all this while, as amongest the Greekes famous congregations and Churches: that be it in the Latin Church, the vulgar translation was reteined being erroneous, yet the whole Church continued not in that errour, which were not so tyed and bound to the Latin translation. Thirdly, if men all this while (knowledge decreasing, and a way being in preparing for Antichrist) were negligent in correcting and amendi [...] the common translation, this is no good Argument to make it authenticall.

[...] As the Hebrues had an authentike translation in their own toung, and [...] in theirs, why should not the Latin Church haue it also authenticall [Page] in Latin. We aunswere. First, it is no good reason, because the Lord did consecrate the Hebrue and Greeke toung, and therein would haue his word written, that therefore he would or should also haue made the Latin as well authenticall, as they. Secondly, if the Latin Church must haue an authentike translation, why should not other countrys likewise haue their authenticals? The Armenians had the Scriptures of old translated by Chrisostome, the Sclauonians by Hierome, the Gothes by Vlphilas, why should not these also as well be authenticall? and so looke into how many toungs the Scriptures should be translated so many authenticall translations should there be.

3 They say that all other translations, which are come forth since are erronious, and much differ amōgest them selues. Aunswere. First, this is no reason to prefere it before the Hebrue and Greeke, though it were better thē all other trāslations. Secondly, they charge vs falsly, that our trāslations are dissonant and erronious: for their disagreement is not in such substantiall points, & where any of them do swarue from the originall, we allow them not: and yet there is not the meanest of them, but may iustly compare with theirs, yea and be preferred before it. Thirdly, if their trāslation were so pure, as they say Beza him selfe maketh it, he would not haue set forth a new Edition: and he preferreth it in some places before other translations, but is farre of from making it authenticall, and so are we: these are the Iesuites arguments. De verb. Dei lib. 2. cap. 10. and some of our Rhemists in their Preface to the new Testament. Some of our Argumentes are these, for it is not necessarie to repeat all, and it were to long.

1 If the Latin translation be authenticall, as it was decreed in the Councel of Trent, then it must haue bene so from the beginning, so soone as there was any Latin translation: for the Councell had not authoritie to make that authenticall, which was not, but onely to declare it so to be. But the Latin translation, for the space of 600. yeares after Christ was not receiued as authenticall: for we finde that the Latin writers as Lactantius, Hilarius, Ambrosius, Hieronimus, Augustinus, and others did not vse the same Latin translation: Ergo, this vulgare Latin hauing not bene alwayes, since it was extant authenticall, why should it now begin?

2 That Edition, which was made, and framed, and first writtē by the Prophets, Apostles, Euangelistes, is to be preferred before that, which was not cō piled by any Prophet or Apostle. But such are the Hebrue in the old Testament, and the Greeke Edition in the new, by the confession of our aduersaries, Bellarmin. cap. 7. lib. 2. Such is not the Latin, for it is vncertaine, by whom it was written: for the Iesuite confesseth, that it is not all of Hieromes Edition: as the booke of the Psalmes, Wisedome, Ecclesiasticus, the Machabees, which they thinke were not translated by Hierome: But let vs graunt that the whole was of Hieromes doing, yet was he no Prophet nor Apostle, saith he, Aliud est vatem esse, aliud interpretem, it is one thing to be a Prophet, another to be an interpreter. Wherefore it is no reason, that Hieromes, or whose translation els soeuer [Page] should be receiued before the writings of Prophets and Apostles.

But say our aduersaries, if we had a perfect copie of the Hebrue & Greeke editions, we cōfesse they were to be preferred: but now they are full of faults, and greatly corrupted. We aunswere. First, the Iesuite him selfe disputing against Canus and Lindanus two Archpapistes, that though there may be some scapes in the translations by the fault of some Libraries and imperfect copies, yet concerning the doctrine of faith and manners, saith, there is no corruption in them. Lib. 2. cap. 2. Secondly, though there may be and are some wordes falsly written, and by errour thrust into the text, yet they shall neuer proue that they are more corrupt, the Hebrue and Greeke, then the Latin: for it foloweth no more, that because of some scapes the Latin is to be preferred before them, thē that a cloake altogether patched and ragged is better then a cloake of veluet that hath but one peece.

3 The Iesuite him selfe, and other Papistes confesse, that in some cases it is very necessary to haue recourse to the originall: as when some word seemeth to be mistaken by the writer, as where cecinit is read for cecidit: dorix, for vorax, cor for coram, or when the Latin copies do varie, or if the sentence in Latin be ambiguous, and lastly, the force and propertie of the wordes is better vnderstood in the originall. Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 11. Ergo by the Iesuites confessiō, the originall or fountaines are more certaine and sure without doubtfulnesse and ambiguitie, therefore more authenticall then the Latin.

4 There are many & great errors in the vulgare translation, and contrarie to the originall, Ergo it is not authētike. Some of the places we will quote, as Genes. 3. ipsa conteret, for ipsum, she shall breake the Serpents head, where we do read, that not the woman, but her seede shall breake his head. Genes. 6. ver. 6. for figmentum cordis malum: the thoughtes of mans hart are euill, they read, intenta ad malum cogitatio, enclined to euill: and so extenuate originall sinne. Genes. 14.18. for protulit panem & vinum, Melchisedech brought forth bread and wine: they read, obtulit he offred, or made an oblation of bread and wine, and would hereby establish the sacrifice of their Masse. Ecclesiasticus. 16.14. for secundum opera, a man shall receiue according to his workes: they read after the merite of his workes. In their Latin translatiōs of the Psalmes there are many corruptions. Psal. 67. v. 12. si dormiatis inter medios cleros, though ye sleepe between two lots, without any sēse: the Hebrue thus inter ollas, though you haue lyen amongest the pots, as being blacke with affliction. v. 22. they read conuertam in profundum maris: I will turne them into the bottom of the sea, for reducā profundo maris, I will bring them frō the depth of the sea, cleane cōtrary. Psal. 132.15. viduā eius benedicam, I will blesse his widow, for victū, I will blesse his victuails. So in the new Testamēt, are many false readings. Luc. 1.28. plena gratia, for gratis dilecta, hayle Marie full of grace, for freelie beloued. Luc. 15.8. euertit domū, for euerrit: she ouerthrew the house, for she swept the house. 1. Cor. 15. v. 51. non omnes immutabimur, we shall not all be chaunged, for omnes immutabimur, we shall all be chaunged. Ephe. 2.10. creati in bonis operib. created in good [Page] workes, for ad opera bona, created vnto good workes. An hundred more errours and ouer, you may finde noted in the readings of our learned country mā D. Whitakers. 2. quaest. de Scrip. 10.11.12. cap. these I haue set down for a tast.

Lastly we will rehearse Augustines iudgement: Vtcun (que) est, ei linguae magis credatur, vnde est in aliam per interpres facta translatio: Howsoeuer the case standeth (saith he) we ought to geue more credit to that toung, out of the which other are translated. Lib. 15. de Ciuit. cap. 13. Ergo the Hebrue in the old Testament, and the Greeke in the new, out of the which the Latin and all other trāslations haue issued, ought to haue the onely preheminence.

THE THIRD QVESTION: CONCERNING the vulgare translation of Scripture.

The Papistes.

THey do not absolutely condemne the translation of the Scriptures into the vulgare toung, what soeuer they haue thought in times past: neither would they generally haue euery mā permitted to read the Scripture, but such onely as haue especiall licence from their ordinarie, hauing the testimonie of their Curates that they be humble and deuout persons, Rhenens. praefat. sect. 6. So then they hold it daungerous for all men to read Scripture, and they would not willingly licence any, but their Pope holie deuout Catholikes; they are like to make a mad peece of worke, that go about to picke their faith out of Scripture, say the Rhemists, annot. 1. Cor. 1.5. This then is their opinion, that it is neither necessarie nor conuenient for all men to haue accesse to the Scriptures: we will see some of their reasons.

1 From the time of Esdras till Christ, and in our Sauiours time, the Scriptures were not in the vulgare toung, but onely in the Hebrue, which the Iewes vnderstood not after the captiuitie: Ergo it is not now necessary to haue them in the vulgare toūg. That the people vnderstood not Hebrue, the Iesuite proueth out of the 8. of Nehemiah: where it is said, that Esdras did expoūd the law to the people, because they vnderstood it not. We answere, that the text saith cleane contrary, that he read the law before the people that vnderstood it. v. 3. and they might geue the sense, though the people vnderstood the language. Concerning the places obiected out of the Gospell, to proue the Iewes spake another language thē Hebrue, as it appeareth by those speaches Marc. 5. Talitha cumi, Math. 27. Golgotha, which sauour not of the Hebrue toung, we answere, that although they spake not pure Hebrue, but many straunge wordes were vsed, yet they vnderstood the Hebrue, for why els doth Christ bid the people to search the Scriptures? And they were not the Iewes, but the Romane souldiers that vnderstood not the voyce of Christ vpon the Crosse, saying, he called for Elias.

2 The Apostles (saith the Iesuite) wrote their Epistles onely in Hebrue or Greeke, and not in the vulgare tounges of the natiōs to whom they preached, [Page] Ergo it is not necessary that the scriptures should be in the vulgare toung. We answere. First, it had bene an infinite labour for the Apostles, to haue left their writings in euery language, neither was it necessary, seeing out of the original they might be trāslated into euery language. Secōdly, they preached the same things vnto the Gētiles in their own toūgs, which they afterward left in writing. Thirdly, the Greeke toūg, wherein they wrote, was vniuersally knowen, and few countryes were ignorant of it, especially in the East parts.

3 There is no cause (say they) why the Scriptures should be translated: if it be for the vnderstanding of the people, they vnderstād them not being translated neither. We aunswere: many things they may easely vnderstand: and for the harder places, they are nearer the vnderstanding of them being translated, then before: for then they haue two great lets, the toung vnknowen, and the obscure and hid sense; now they need not to labour for the toung, but onely for the sense.

4 The Scriptures are occasion of offence and heresie, being not right vnderstood, Ergo. First▪ because many surfet of meats and drinkes, it is no reason that sober men should be forbidden the vse of them: no more for heretikes & wicked mens sakes ought the people of God to be barred from Scripture. Secondly, more haue perished by ignorance in Scripture, then by misunderstanding it: and the Scripture, was ordained of God to meete with offences, and to confute heresies. 2. Tim. 3.15. Wherefore these men make them selues wiser then God, that thinke the Scripture is an occasion of those diseases, for the which it is apppointed a remedie.

The Protestantes.

WE do beleeue and hold that it is requisite, expedient and necessarie for the Scriptures to be vttered and set forth in the vulgare and commō speach, and that none vpon any occasion ought to be prohibited the reading thereof for knowledge and instructions sake: and that Christian Magistrates ought to prouide, that the people may haue the Scriptures in their mother & knowē toung. Wherefore great wrong was offered to the people of England that diuerse 100. yeares, till king Henrie the eight, could not be suffred to haue the Scriptures in English. And how I pray you did the Papistes storme, when as Tindals translatiō came forth? some affirming that it was impossible to haue the Scriptures trāslated into English, some that it would make the people heretikes: others that it would cause thē to rebell. Fox. pag. 117. col. 1. What fowle and shamefull slaunders were these? For the vulgare translations of Scripture we reason thus.

1 It is Gods commandement, that the Scriptures should be read before the people, that they may learne to feare God, Deut. 31. vers. 11.12. The people are commanded to write the law vpon their gates, and in their houses to conferre and talke with their children and teach them the law▪ Deut. 6.6.7.8. And our Sauiour biddeth the people search the Scripture, Iohn. 5. v. 39. Ergo what God hath commaunded, no man ought to prohibite or forbid: the people therfore [Page] must not be kept from reading of Scripture.

2 Without Scripture there is no faith, faith is necessarie for all people, Ergo the knowledge of the Scripture: that faith cōmeth by the scriptures, read Iohn. 20.31. these things are written, that ye might beleeue Iesus Christ to be the sonne of God. Againe the weapons of Christiā men, are not denied to any, whereby they should fight against their spirituall enemies, but the word of God is a speciall part of our harnesse,Ephe. 6. and a principall weapon, euen the sword of the spirite Ergo.

3 The Gospell may be preached in the vulgare toung, as our blessed Sauiour and the holy Apostles taught the people: Ergo the word of God may be read and writtē in the vulgare toung. The proposition our aduersaries graunt, that Sermōs may be made in the vulgare toung: but it foloweth not, say they, that therefore Scripture should be in the mother toung. Rhem. 1. Cor. 14.8. But I pray you how can the preacher alledge Scripture in his Sermō, vnlesse it be recited in the vulgare toung? or how should the people know they preach the word, vnlesse they may compare their doctrine, with Scripture as the Berrheans did? Act. 17.

4 We haue the practise of the Church of God in times past for our warrant: for in Chrisostomes time the people had vulgare translations: whereupon he exhorteth them to get them Bibles, or at the least the new Testament, the Actes of the Apostles, the Gospels. Homil. 9. Epist. ad Coloss. We heard before that the Armenians, Sclauonians, Gothes had the Scripture in their own language: so many hundred yeares ago in England king Alured translated the Psalter: a copie whereof was found in Crowland Abbey, called S. Guthlakes Psalter, as M. Lābert witnesseth: and Bede our learned country man, translated S. Iohns Gospell. Fox. pag. 1115. col. 2. The Rhemistes also confesse that more then 300. yeare ago the Italians had the Bible translated, and the French men aboue 200. yeares ago. Praefatan Testam. 4. sect. Why should not the people of God haue the same libertie now freely to read the Scriptures, as they haue had in times past?

5 Let vs heare Augustines opinion: Lectiones diuinas (saith he) & in Ecclesia, sicut consuestis, audite, & in domib. vestris relegite. I would haue you both to attend vnto the publike readings in the Church, and in your house to read ouer againe the holy lessons: but how could the people read them at home, if they were not in their vulgare toung?

AN APPENDIX OR PART OF THIS question, concerning publike prayers and diuine seruice in the vulgare toung.

The Papistes.

error 4 IT was decreed in the Tridētine Coūcell, that the seruice of the church which they cal the masse, should not be celebrated in the vulgare toūg. Sect. 22. cap. 8. [Page] And it is the cōmon practise euery where of the Romish church to vse the Latin toung onely. We must be cōtent (say they) with those three toungs which God honored vpon the Crosse: namely the Hebrue, Greeke and Latin. This libertie onely they graunt, that their Priest may expound some things, as he readeth, and shew the meaning to the people

1 Thus they argue: the maiestie and grauitie of the sacred businesse, doe require also to be vttered in a sage, sanctified and graue language, Ergo not in the vulgare. We aunswere, the grauitie▪ reuerence, and holynesse consisteth not in words, phrases, and soundes, though neuer so eloquent, but in the things them selues: neither is any toung that is vnderstood, before the Lord counted barbarous: for S. Paule saith, that he is a barbariā, and speaketh barbarously in the Church, that can not be vnderstood. 1. Cor. 14.11. And Actes. 2.11. the verie straungers and barbarians heard the Apostles vtter in their languages the wonderfull things of God: they thought the toung no disgrace to those holy mysteries they vttered.

2 Leuit. 16. ver. 17. The people is commaunded to stand without, till the Priest went in and made attonemēt for them: they vnderstood not the Priest, for they heard him not, Ergo it is not necessarie the people should vnderstand the Minister. We answere. First, that was a type of our Sauiour Christ, who euen so ascended into heauen, as the high Priest did into the holy place: but types and figures proue nothing. Secondly, they vnderstood not the priest, because they heard him not: but they can not proue that the Priest vttered any thing in their hearing at any time, which they vnderstood not.

3 We must onely vse those toungs in holy affaires, which were sanctified in the Crosse: that is Hebrue, Greeke, Latin. We aunswere: those toungs were not then vsed for any such purpose, but that the death of Christ might by those cōmon and vniuersall toungs be the further spread abroad. And surely if they would proue that these toungs were hereby sanctified, me thinkes Pilate was no fit instrument of that sanctification, by whose appointment the title was written.

The Protestantes.

WE do affirme, that as it hath bene the commendable vse of all ancient Churches, to haue the seruice in the vulgare toung, that the people might vnderstand, and be better stirred vp to deuotion: so the same godlie vse ought for euer to remaine and be retained in the Church of God.

1 This is most agreable to S. Paules doctrine. 1. Cor 14. who would haue all things done to edifying: but by an vnknowen toung no man is edified: and he saith, he had rather speake fiue wordes to be vnderstood, then ten thousand otherwise. Some of the Papistes say, that S. Paule speaketh of preaching not of praying: but in the 14. ver. he speaketh namely of prayer, and in the 16. of the peoples saying Amē, which was not geuē at Sermons, but in the end of prayers: this is but a weake aunswere. The Rhemistes and the Iesuite say he speaketh [Page] of certaine extraordinarie Hymnes and giuing of thankes, whereof S. Paule speaketh, Ephe. 5.19. Answere S. Paule speaketh generally of all publike exercise in the Church, whether of prayer, preaching, singing, that it should all be done in a knowen toung: for he vseth the generall termes of speaking, [...], and of the voyce, as ver. 11. If I vnderstād not the power of the voyce (he saith not of the song, or preaching) I shalbe to him that speaketh, a barbarian: so he misliketh not onely preaching, or singing, but any kinde of speaking in the Church in a strange toung. This place of S. Paule is to euident and plaine, thē that it may be so easilie wrested and depraued by their hereticall and Antichristian gloses.

2 Who seeth not that prayers made with the vnderstanding are more cō fortable and fruitfull: the other nothing to profite at all, nor yet to be auaylable before God? Howsoeuer our aduersaries say, that the hart and affectiō may pray, though the vnderstanding pray not, yet S. Paule saith, they speake in the ayre: their prayer is but wind 1. Cor. 14.9. Therefore not amisse did that godly Martir M. Wisehart, compare the ridiculous gestures of the Priest at Masse, being not vnderstood of the people, to the playing of an ape. Fox p. 1269. col. 2. And one Iohn Riburne was vniustly troubled of Longlād Bishop of Lincolne anno 1530. for saying, if we had our Pater noster in English, one should say it nine times, against once now. Fox. pag. 984. col. 2. And was not that ghostly & Bishoplike coūsaile thinke you of the Bishop of Cauaillon to the Merindoliās in Fraunce? that it was sufficiēt to know their Pater noster, & Creede in Latin: it was not necessary to saluatiō to vnderstand or expoūd the Articles of faith: for there were many Bishops, Curates, yea Doctors of Diuinitie, whō it would trouble to expound the Creede or Pater noster. Fox. Martirol. pag. 949. col. 2.

3 We will conclude with Augustine. Quare dicta sunt, nisi vt sciantur? quare sonuerunt, nisi vt audiantur? quare audita sunt, nisi vt intelligantur? tract. in Iohan. 21. Why are things spoken in the Church (saith he) but to be knowen? why are they pronoūced, but to be heard? why are they heard but to be vnderstood? Ergo, Lessons, and Scriptures, and publike prayers must be vsed in a knowen toung, and easie to be vnderstood.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION: OF THE authoritie of the Scriptures.

The Papistes.

error 5 THe Papistes of former times doubted not to say, that the Scripture is not authenticall without the authoritie of the Church; so Eckius saith, so Pigghius, that the authoritie of the Scripture dependeth of the authoritie of the Church necessarilie. Hermannus a Papist most impudently affirmeth, that the Scripture should be of no more credite then Aesopes Fables, without the approbation of the Church: a fowle blasphemie. But our Papistes of later time, being ashamed of their forefathers ignoraunce, they say that the Scriptures in [Page] them selues are perfect, sufficient, authenticall, but that to vs it appeareth not so, neither are we bound to take them for Scripture without the authoritie of the Church: so Canus, Bellarmin. Stapleton: so that, (say they) in respect of vs the Church hath absolute authoritie to determine, which is Scripture, which not. Ex Whitacher. quaest. 3. de Script. cap. 1.

1 There is no more certaine authoritie, thē of the Church, Ergo the church must determine of scripture, sic Stapleton. We answere. First, the maiestie of the Scriptures them selues is more certaine, and the inward testimonie of the spirite, without the which we can not be perswaded of the truth and authoritie of the Scripture. Secōdly, if they meane by the church, the sinagogue of Rome, it hath nothing to do to iudge of Scripture, being the seate of Antichrist: neither is the authoritie of that Church to be credited, but rather suspected and mistrusted.

2 There are certaine writings of the Prophetes not canonicall, and other writings of some that were no Prophetes, made canonicall, Ergo the Church hath authoritie to iudge of Scripture, sic Stapleton. For the first, where he obiecteth that there are many writings of the Prophetes as of Solomon, Nathan, Ahiia, Ieedo. 2. Chronic. 9.29. that are lost, and if they were extant, should not be receiued. We aunswere. First, it is not to be doubted of, but some part of the canonicall Scripture is lost. Secōdly, how proueth he that if they were extant, they were not to be acknowledged for Scripture.

To the second, that bookes not made by Prophets are iudged canonicall, as of Tobie, Iudith. We aunswere, that these bookes ought not to be canonicall, neither that euer they were so taken, till of late it was decreed by Councels of no great antiquitie: for in the Laodicene Councell and other auncient Councels, they were deemed not to be canonicall.

3 Certaine bookes of the new Testament before doubted of, as the Epistle to the Hebrues, the Apocalipse, the 2. Epistle of Peter, the second of Iohn, are receiued into authoritie by the Church: and other bookes, as the Gospell of Thomas, Mathias, Andrew, Peter, were reiected by the authoritie of the Church. We answere. First, we deny not but that the Church is to discerne betweene the true Scriptures & forged bookes, but this she doth not of her own authoritie, but folowing the direction of Gods spirite speaking in those writings: for the Church looking into the sacred and diuine matter of the Apostles writings was moued to acknowledge them for the word of God, though of some they were doubted of: & finding the other to be fabulous bookes did by the direction of the same spirite reiect them. Secondly, Augustine and Hierome thinke that the Canon of Scripture might be confirmed in the Apostles time, Iohn being the suruiuer of thē all, who both acknowledged the true writings of the Apostles, and condemned the contrarie. If it be so (the spirite of God in the Apostles hauing determined this question already concerning the canonicall Scripture) the Church hath no authoritie to alter or chaunge that decree. Plura. apud Whitacher. quaest. 3. de Scriptur. cap. 5.

[Page]

The Protestantes.

WE do not despise the sentence of the Church, as our aduersaries doe falsely charge vs: but we confesse that it is the duetie of the Church to geue testimony to the Scriptures, as the Goldsmith doth trie the gold: Fulk. annot. 2. Gal. 2. But the Church ought not to set the Lordes stampe vpon false coyne, as the Papistes do in making Apocryphall bookes canonicall. Neither doe we onely beleeue the Scripture, because of the Churches testimonie, nor chiefly, but because the spirit of God doth so teach vs▪ and the Scriptures them selues do testifie for them selues: so that euerie man is bound to acknowledge the Scripture, though there were no publike approbation of the Church: Fulk. 2. Galat. 6. Whitacher. quaest. 3. cap. 1. de Scripturis. We do reason thus.

1 The Iesuite doth reason strongly for vs: he bringeth fiue arguments to proue the Scripture to be the word of God: veritas vaticiniorum, the constant and perpetuall truth of the Prophecies: incredibilis scriptorum conspiratio, the wonderfull harmonie and consent of holy writers of the Scripture: testis est Deus ipse, the spirite of God is a principall witnesse vnto vs: testis est ipsa Scriptura, the Scripture it selfe beareth witnesse, as 2. Tim. 3. all Scripture is geuen by inspiration: testis est diuinorum numerus infinitus miraculorum: lastly the many and great miracles wrought by the Prophetes and Apostles do testifie for the truth thereof. He maketh no mention at all of the testimonie of the Church, but saith the same that we hold▪ that the spirit of God inwardly working in our harts by the Scriptures them selues, which we find to be most perfect, consonant, true, of singular maiestie, doth teach vs which is the word of God. Bellarmin. de verbo Dei. lib. 1. cap. 2.

2 The Scripture geueth authoritie to the Church, Ergo the Church geueth not authoritie to the Scripture: the first we proue by our aduersaries own confession: for being asked, how they know that the Church erreth not, they alledge such places of Scripture, as Math. 28.20. I am with you to the end of the world, and the like: how then doth the Church geue authoritie to Scripture, seeing it taketh her warrant and authoritie from thence? the Iesuite him selfe saith, that nihil est certius vel notius Scripturis, nothing is more certaine or notoriously knowen then Scripture: and againe, sacra Scriptura est regula credendi certissima, the holy Scripture is the most certaine rule of faith. Bellarm. de verbo. 1.2. If the authoritie of Scripture then be most certaine, what reason is it, that they should depend vpon the iudgement of the Church which is nothing so certaine? the lesse certaine ought (rather and so doth indeed) depend of the more certaine, the Church vpon the Scripture, not contrariwise, for the Scriptures are the foundation of the Church. Ephe. 2.20.

3 To beleeue the Scripture is a worke of faith▪ the Church can not infuse faith into vs, but the spirite of God, Ergo the spirite of God not the Church teacheth vs to beleeue Scripture▪ argum. Whitach. 18.

4 If the Scriptures depend vpon the approbation of the Church, then the promises of saluation and eternall life conteined in the Scriptures do so likewise: [Page] but it is absurde to thinke that the promises of God do stand vpō the allowance of men, Ergo neither the Scriptures. argum. Caluini.

5 The Scripture is the chief iudge, and ought so to be in all cōtrouersies: we may appeale from the Church to the Scripture, not from the Scripture to the Church: the Church is subiect to the Scriptures, the rule of faith is in the scriptures, not in the Church: for the cōpanie of faithful which is the Church, are ruled by faith: they do not ouerrule faith, neither are a rule thereof: the Church is a point of beliefe, as in the Creede, not a rule or measure thereof: Ergo the Church is not the chief iudge of Scripture, but it selfe to be iudged by scripture. Whitach. argum. 16.

6 We haue euident places of scripture. Iohn. 5.34. saith Christ, I receiue no witnes of men: but the scripture is the voyce of Christ, and of the same authoritie, Ergo. Ver. 36. I haue a greater testimonie thē of Iohn, the scriptures do testifie of me. Ver. 39. The testimony of the scriptures is greater thē the record of Iohn, Ergo then of the Church. 1. Iohn. 5.6. the spirite beareth witnesse, that the spirite, that is, the doctrine of the spirit is the truth. And. ver. 9. if we receiue the witnesse of man, the witnesse of God is greater, Ergo, not the iudgement of the Church, but the witnesse of the spirite doth certifie and assure vs of the truth and authoritie of scripture.

7 I will adde one saying out of Augustine, Mihi certum est, nusquam a Christi authoritate discedere, non enim reperio valentiorem. Contra Academic. lib. 3. cap. 20▪ I am resolued for no cause to leaue the authoritie of Christ (speaking in the scriptures) for I finde none more forcible: Ergo the authoritie of scripture is aboue the Church, which is denied by the Rhemistes. annot. 2. Gal. sect. 2.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the perspicuitie and playnnes of the Scripture.

The Papistes.

OVr aduersaries do hold that the scriptures are most hard, difficult, and obscure.error 6 Bellarmine saith, necessario fatendum est, Scripturas esse obscurissimas, it must needes be graunted that the scriptures are most obscure. de verbo Dei. lib. 3. cap. 1. They do not onely affirme that some things are obscure in the scriptures: but that they are all hard, and doubtfull, and vncertaine, and compare thē therfore to a leaden rule, which may be turned euery way, Petrus a Soto. And to a nose of wax, Lindanus a Papist, ex Tilmanno, de verbo Dei error 5. Our Rhemistes say, it is all one to affirme some things to be hard in a writer, and the writer to be hard: so they conclude, that the scriptures are both in respect of the matter and manner, very hard, and therfore daungerous for the ignoraunt to read them. Rhemens. annot. in. 2. Pet. 3. ver. 16.

1 They obiect that place. 2. Pet. 3.16. where the Apostle saith, speaking of S. Paules Epistles, that many things are hard. Ergo the Epistles of S. Paule are hard, and so the scriptures: this is Bellarmine and the Iesuites argument. We answere. [Page] First, he saith not that Paules Epistles are hard, but many things, which he entreateth of. Secondly, they are hard not to all▪ but the vnstable and vnlearned do peruert them. Thirdly, We denie not, but that some places in the scripture are obscure, and haue neede of interpretation: but it foloweth not, that therefore the whole scripture is obscure: and because of some hard places, that the people should be forbidden the reading of all.

2 The scriptures are obscure both in the respect of the matter and manner: first the matter is high and mysticall: as of the Trinitie, of the incarnatiō of the word, of the nature of Angels, & such like. We aunswere, these mysteries may be said to be obscure three diuerse wayes. First, in their owne nature: so are they hard indeed, for by humane reason, we can not attaine to the depth of thē. Secondly, in respect of their handling in the scripture: so are they not obscure, for all these things are plainly declared in the word, as the nature of such deepe mysteries will afoord. Thirdly, in respect of vs: so must they needs be obscure, if men be not cōtented with the knowledge in the word, but curiously search further. Luther therefore doth aptly distinguish of these things, he saith that, res Dei, the things of God are obscure, the very depth of his mysteries can not be comprehended of vs, but, res Scripturae, these things, as they are opened in scripture, are plaine, if we will content our selues with that knowledge.

Secondly (saith Bellarmine) the maner of handling is hard and obscure: there are many tropes, metaphores, allegories, Hebraismes, which can not easily be vnderstood. We aunswere. First, many of these are rather ornamentes of the scripture, as tropes, metaphores, then impediments to the reader. Secondly, though the phrase of scripture seeme hard at the first, yet by further trauell in the scriptures it may become easie and plaine: for all things are not vnderstood at the first. Thirdly, we denie not but that some places are obscure, and had neede to be opened.

3 If the scriptures be not hard, what need so many Commētaries, and expositions. Rhemist. 2. Pet. 16. We aunswere. First, so many Commentaries are not requisite, some may be spared. Secondly, expositions are needfull for the vnderstanding of darke places: but many things are plaine inough without expositions, and may be vnderstood of the simple.

The Protestantes.

WE do not hold that the scripture is euery where so plaine and euident, that it need no interpretation, as our aduersaries do slaunder vs, and therefore here they do fight with their owne shadow. Bellarm. lib. 3. de verbo cap. 1. We confesse, that the Lord in the Scriptures hath tempered hard things and easie together, that we might be exercised in the Scriptures, and might knocke & labour by prayer and studie, for the opening of the sense: and that there might be order kept in the Church, some to be hearers, some teachers & expounders, by whose diligent search and trauell, the harder places may be opened to the people. But this we affirme against our aduersaries: first that all [Page] points of faith necessarie to saluation, are plainely set forth in the Scriptures: secondly that the Scriptures may with great profit be read of the simple and vnlearned, notwithstanding the hardnesse of some places, which in time also vsing the meanes they come to the vnderstanding of. Ex Fulk. annot. 2. Pet. 3.16. Whitacher. quaest. 4. cap. 1.

1 First, that which we maintaine is euident out of the scripture, Deut. 30.11. the commaundement, which I commaund thee, is not hid from thee, nor farre of. And as it foloweth, thou needest not ascend to the heauens, or go beyond the sea: the word is neare vnto thee, euen in thy mouth and hart, to do it. argum. Brentij. Ergo the scriptures are plaine. First the Iesuite aunswereth, that it is meant onely of the decalogue and the ten commandements, that they are easie, not of the whole Scripture. As though if the commandements be easie the rest of the scriptures be not likewise, as the Prophets and historicall books being but commētaries and expositions of the decalogues. S. Paule. Rom. 10.6. vnderstandeth this place of the whole doctrine of faith, who better knew the meaning of Moses then the Iesuite.

2 2. Cor. 4.3. If our Gospell be hid, it is to them onely that are lost, Ergo the Scriptures are plaine to the faithfull. The Iesuite aunswereth. S. Paule speaketh of the knowledge of Christ, not of the Scriptures. First it is manifest out of the 2. verse, that S. Paule speaketh of that Gospell, which he preached to the Corinthians, which is the same he wrote vnto them: wherefore if the Gospell preached were easie and plaine, why is not the Gospell written by him, I meane the doctrine of faith being the same, which he preached? Secondly if they graunt that the knowledge of Christ is easie, we aske no more: for this is that we say, that the doctrine of faith and saluation is plainly expressed in Scripture.

3 This is the difference betweene the new Testament and the old: the old is compared to a clasped booke. Isay. 29.11. the new to a booke opened. Apoca. 5. the knowledge of Christians farre exceedeth the knowledge of the Iewes: it was lawfull for them to read the scriptures, much more for all Christians. The Iesuite aunswereth that our knowledge is greater then theirs, not in all scripture, but in the misteries for our redemption onely. We answere, this is all we desire: for if the misterie of saluation and redemption be plainly opened in the scripture, why should not the people be admitted to the reading of the word, to be confirmed in the knowledge of their redemption? who seeth not what sillie aunsweres these be?

4 Augustine thus writeth of this matter, In ijs (inquit) quae aperte in Scripturis [...]osita sunt, inueniuntur ea omnia, quae fidem continent mores (que) viuendi. De doctrin. Christia. lib. 2. cap. 9. The plaine and easie places of scripture conteine all things necessarie vnto faith and good life, Ergo the doctrine of saluation in the scriptures is not hard and difficult, but easie of good Christians to be vnderstood.

[Page]

THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING the interpretation of Scripture.

THis question doth diuide it selfe into three partes: First concerning the diuerse senses of the scripture. Secondly, to whō the chief authoritie to expound scripture is committed. Thidly, what meanes must be vsed in the interpretation of scripture.

THE FIRST PART OF THE SIXTH QVEstion: of the diuerse senses of Scripture.

The Papistes.

error 7 THere are two straunge Assertions of our aduersaries cōcerning this matter. First they affirme that the scripture may haue diuerse senses and meanings in the same place. The sense of the scripture is either literall (say they) & historicall, which is the first & most proper sense; or spirituall, that is an higher sense deriued out of the other, and it is of three kinds, Allegoricall, Tropologicall, Anagogicall: they shew by particular instance and induction, that the scripture besides the literall sense may haue these also.

The Allegoricall sense is, when besides the plaine historicall and literall meaning, somewhat is signified which by an allegorie is referred vnto Christ or the Church, as Gal. 4. beside the truth of the storie of the bond and free woman, S. Paule applieth it vnto the two Testaments, Ergo one place may haue more senses then one.

The Tropologicall sense is, when as there is somewhat signified appertaining to manners, as Deut. 25. Thou shalt not mussell the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne, this by S. Paule is applied to the Ministers of the Gospell, 1. Cor. 9. Ergo, the scripture hath diuerse senses.

The Anagogicall sense is, whē the place is applied to decipher & set forth the kingdome of heauen and eternall things, as Psal. 94. I sware vnto them, if they should enter into my rest: this is literally vnderstood of the rest in Canaan, & spiritually of life eternall, Ergo many senses: thus reasoneth. Bellarmin. lib. 3. de Scriptur. cap. 3.

The Protestantes.

WE affirme that of one place of scripture there can be but one sense, which we call the literall sense, when as the wordes are either taken properly, or figuratiuely to expresse the thing which is meant: as in this place, the seede of the woman shall breake the Serpents head, the literall sense is of Christ, who should triumph ouer Sathan, though it be spoken in a borowed and figuratiue speach. There can be therefore but one sense, which is the literall: as for those three kinds, they are not diuerse senses, but diuerse applicatiōs onely and collections out of one and the same sense.

[Page]1 It shall appeare by a seuerall induction of all these kindes: In the first example of the Allegoricall sense Galathes 4, the Apostle saith not that there is a double sense, but that it may be allegorically applied, which is historically set downe. There is then but one sense of the place, part whereof consisteth in the storie, part in the allegorie: so that the whole sense is conteined in them both. Concerning the second exāple of the Tropologicall: there is not a twofold sense of that place, but one whole generall sense; that as the mouth of the oxe was not to be musled, so the Minister of the Gospell must be prouided for. Likewise of the Anagogicall kind: it is not one sense to vnderstād the rest of Canaan, an other of the kingdome of God: but there is one whole sense, that as they for their Idolatrie were depriued of the land of promise, so we should take heede lest by our disobedience we lose the hope of the kingdome of heauē. So we cōclude that those are not diuerse senses, but one sense diuersly applied.

2 The literal sense is the onely sense of the place, because out of that sense onely may an argument strongly be framed: wherefore seeing allegories and tropes do not cōclude, they are not the senses of the place. An allegorie or type may be part of the literall sense, and then it concludeth: but when an allegorie is framed beside the literall sense, it concludeth not, and therefore is no part of the sense: as to reason thus, the oxes mouth must not be musled, Ergo the Minister must be maintained, it foloweth well, because it is part of the sense: but allegories deuised beside the sense proue not, though they may illustrate.

The Papistes.

THeir other assertion is this, that it is lawfull to allegorise scripture both in the old and new Testament. Bellarm. lib. 3. cap. 3. They reason thus. Rhemens.error 8 annot. Heb. 4. ver. 5. The Apostle applieth the rest of the Sabboth to the eternall rest. Ergo, the like applications of the fathers are lawfull. See annot. Heb. 7.2. the Apostle (say they) findeth great misteries, euen in the very names: Ergo it is lawfull to make allegories.

The Protestantes.

WE say, it is daungerous to make allegories of Scripture without the warrant and direction of Gods spirite: this was the occasion that diuerse of the auncient fathers greatly erred: as the Iesuite him selfe reprehēdeth Papias, Iustinus, Lactantius, for allegorising that place Reuel. 20. which made them fall into the error of the Chiliastes, by false interpreting of the thousand yeares there mentioned.

To their argumēts our learned countryman D. Fulk answereth. First, it foloweth not, because it was lawfull for the Apostles gouerned by the spirite to make allegories, that it is therfore lawfull for others. Secondly, whē the fathers or any other writers can be assured of the same spirite, which the holy writers had, and of the like dexteritie in vnderstanding and expounding Scripture, [Page] they may likewise be bold to make allegories.

Let vs heare what Augustine saith of this matter. Sicut mihi multum errare videntur, qui nullas res gestas aliquid aliud praeter id, quod eo modo gesta sunt, significare arbitrantur: ita multum audere, qui prorsus ibi omnia significationib. allegoricis inuoluta esse contendunt. As they are much deceiued, which thinke that the stories in the scripture do signifie no other thing, but that which was done: so they are to rash and bold, that would draw all things to allegories, which they read in scripture. Ergo, it is not lawfull for any to inuent allegories of scripture, as it seemeth good to them selues.

THE SECOND PART OF THE SIXTH QVEtion to whom the chief authoritie to expound Scripture is committed.

The Papistes.

error 9 IT was decreed in the Councell of Trent, that scripture should be expoūded, as the Church expoundeth it, and according to the common and consonant cōsent of the fathers, Sect. 4. The Rhemistes say; that the sense of the scriptures must be learned of the fathers and pastors of the Church. Praefat. Sect. 18. If the fathers agree not, the matter is referred to a generall Councell: if there it be not determined, we must haue recourse to the Pope and his Cardinals. The Iesuite dare not referre the matter to the Pope alone to expound scripture, but ioyneth the Colledge of Cardinals with him. Bellarm. lib. 3. de script. cap. 3.

1 They obiect that place Deut. 17.9. where the people are commaunded to resorte vnto the Priest or Iudge in doubtfull matters. Ergo, there ought to be a chief and supreme iudge in Ecclesiasticall matters, Bellarm. We aunswere. First, here the ciuill Magistrate and the Iudge are ioyned together, as ver. 12. Wherefore if they will gather hereby, that the Pope must be supreme Iudge in all Ecclesiasticall matters, then the Emperour ought to be as well in ciuill. Secōdly, the text saith, they shal come to the Priests. ver. 9. assigning many, not to one onely Priest. Thirdly, they must iudge according to the law. v. 11. not as they list thē selues. Fourthly, here is no mentiō made of doubts in interpreting scripture, but of controuersies that may fall out betweene man and man, either Ecclesiasticall to be decided by the Priest, or ciuill by the Magistrate. Fiftly, we graunt that in euery country there ought be a supreme and high seate of iudgement for determining of controuersiall matters betweene men: but it foloweth not that there should be a supreme iudge ouer the whole Church especially in such matters as this concerning the sense of the scriptures, which i [...] not commited to the iudgement of men, neither is any such controuersie named in that palce. ver. 8.

2 Ecclesiastes 12.11. The wisemā cōpareth the wordes of the wise to nayles which are fastned, geuen by one pastor: Ergo the Pope is supreme iudge. We aunswere, the wise men are here vnderstood to be the Pastors and Ministers [Page] of Gods word, but this one pastor signifieth neither the high Priest in the old law, nor the Pope in the new, but Iesus Christ, the high shepheard for our soules. What great boldnesse is this to attribute that to the Pope, which is onely proper to Christ?

3 They also picke out some places in the new Testament, as Math. 16.19. to thee will I geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen. Christ saith so to Peter, Ergo the Pope hath authoritie to expound scripture. We aunswere. First, by the keyes here is meant commission to preach the Gospell, not onely to expound doubtes. Secōdly, they were geuen to all the Apostles, not to Peter onely, Math. 28. v. 18.19. Thirdly, the Pope is not successor of Peter, no more then any other godly Bishop, nor so much vnlesse he folow Peters steps. So they abuse that place Math. 18.17. he that will not heare the Church &c. Ergo the Bishops and chief pastors must expound the doubt in scriptures. Aunswere. First, our Sauiour speaketh here of the discipline of the Church, of correctiōs and admonitions, not of interpreting scripture, which dependeth not vpō the will & fantacie of Pope, Cardinals, or Popish Councels, but must be tryed by the scriptures them selues. Secondly, we must geue eare to the Church, but with a double condition: we must be sure it is the Church of God, secōdly, we must not heare them, cōtrary to the scriptures, but so long as they do teach the doctrine of Christ.

The Protestants.

WE haue a more compendious way to come to the vnderstanding of the scripture: It were to lōg whē we doubt of any place to stay till we haue the generall consent of the pastors of the Church, or to expect a generall Councell, or go vp to Rome. And it were to much to trouble the Popes grauitie with euery questiō: The Lord hath shewed vs a more easie and ready way: see that we neede not ascend to heauen or cōpasse the earth or passe the Alpes: but the word of God is amongest vs, the scriptures them selues and the spirite of God opening our harts do teach vs how to vnderstand them: the interpretation of Scripture is not assigned to any succession of pastors, or tryed to any place or persons. Our arguments folow, some few of them.

1 That onely hath power to geue the sense of Scripture, which doth beget vs faith: the spirite onely by the Scriptures begetteth faith. Rom. 10.17. faith commeth of hearing the word, Ergo the spirit of God is the onely interpreter of scripture. The proposition also is cleare: for seeing the Scripture is the true sense and meaning therof, if any should geue the sense of the scripture, but that which worketh faith, then vpon him should our faith be grounded. If the Pope therefore geue the sense of Scripture, and our faith ariseth of the Scripture vnderstood, then our faith is builded vpon the Popes sense. argum. Whitach. 2. & 9.

2 The Scriptures cā not be interpreted but by the same spirit, wherewith they were writtē, but that spirite is found no where but in the Scriptures, Ergo. [Page] The first part the Papistes them selues graunt: the second is thus proued: the spirite of the Apostles is not geuen by secret inspiration, that sauoureth of Anabaptisme: where is it thē to be found? whether is it like that S. Peters spirite should be found in the Popes chaire, or in his Epistles? or if they haue S. Peters spirite, where is S. Paules found but in his writings? Yet it is all one spirite, & appeareth not els where but in the Scriptures: where euery man may finde it as wel as the Pope: the spirituall man iudgeth all things. 1. Cor. 2.15. you haue an oyntment from him that is holy, and you haue knowen all things: and ver. 27. you need not that any mā teach you. By these places it is euident, that euery faithfull man by the spirite of God may vnderstand the scriptures.

3 The doctrine of the Church must be examined by the Scriptures, Ergo the scriptures are not to stand to the iudgement of the Church. The former part is proued by the example of the Berrheans. Act. 17.11. If they did well in examining Paules doctrine, much more may the decrees of the Pope, Church, Coūcels be examined by the scriptures. But they knew not whether Paule was an Apostle or not▪ therefore they might examine his doctrine, saith the Iesuite. Answere, it is no matter for the person of Paule, they examined his doctrine, which dependeth not vpon the person. Secondly, they could not be ignoraunt of his Apostleship, who was famous throughout the Churches. Thirdly, they doubted onely whether Paul was an Apostle, but we are sure the Pope is none, neither successor of any Apostle, but very Antichrist, Ergo we haue more iust cause to examine his decrees.

4 Lastly, let Augustine speake: Nouit charitas vestra omnes nos vnum magistrum habere, & sub illo condiscipulos esse, nec ideo magistri sumus, quia de superiore loco loquimur vobis, sed magister est omnium, qui habitat in nobis omnib. You know brethren (saith he) that we are all felow scholers vnder one maister, and though we speake to you out of an higher place, yet are we not your master, he is the teacher and master of vs all that dwelleth in our harts. Ergo the spirite of God speaking in the scriptures is the chief and best interpreter thereof.

THE THIRD PART OF THE SIXTH QVEstion: concerning the meanes or methode to be vsed in interpreting of Scripture.

The Papistes.

error 10 OVr aduersaries prescribe this methode and course to be takē in expounding of scripture, which consisteth in foure rules: the generall peactise of the Church, the consonant interpretation of the fathers, the decrees of generall Councels, lastly the rule of faith, consisting partly of the scriptures, partly of traditions vnwrittē, Stapleton. Cōcerning the three first, we haue already touched them in part: they appeare to be insufficient. First, the Councels and fathers he made chief interpreters of Scripture before, and now they are but meanes: what other chief iudge then is there to vse these meanes? surely none [Page] but the scriptures. Secondly, these meanes are most vncertaine, the practise of the Church is often changed, fathers agree not in their expositiōs, and Councels can not alwayes be had.

Concerning the rule of faith consisting of vnwritten verities: he groundeth it falsely vpon that place. Rom. 12.6. let vs prophecie according to the rule of faith, and Gal. 6.16. as many as walke according to this rule. This rule was a certaine platforme of Religion, geuen by the Apostles before the Scriptures were written, according to the which (say they) the Scriptures were afterward compiled by the Apostles. Rhemens. in Rom. 12.6. Answere, S. Paul meaneth no other rule, but that which is set downe in his writings, no other forme of doctrine but that conteined in his Epistles, as in the 6. to the Galathians, speaking of this rule, he alludeth to the former verse, where he saith he reioyced in nothing but in the Crosse of Christ: his rule therfore is to receiue Christ onely without the ceremonies or workes of the law: against the which heresie he disputeth in the whole Epistle. But of all other it is a great blasphemie to say that the Apostles set downe the Scriptures by a rule, as though the spirite of God, by whom they spake, had neede of any such direction.

The Protestantes.

WHen we say that the scriptures must expound them selues, our meaning is, that by certaine compendious and ready meanes, we should labour to vnderstand the scriptures by them selues: the meanes are especially these foure. First, to haue recourse to the originall toung, as in the old Testament to the Hebrue, in the new to the Greeke: as 1. Tim. 2.15. through bearing of children they shalbe saued, if they continue in faith and loue: In the English it is doubtfull, whether this clause, if they continue in faith, be referred to children, or to those that beare them: but read the Greeke and the doubt is remoued: for bearing of children is all one word in the originall [...], so that it must needes be vnderstood of the women: for this word [...] ▪ bearing of children is in the singular number, that which foloweth of the plurall, and it is but an action, not a person, so that it should be improperly sayd, if they continue▪ that is, in bearing of children.

Stapleton obiecteth against this meane: that it is not now needefull, seeing there is a perfect and absolute translatiō authorised by the Councell of Trent, he meaneth the vulgare Latin. We answere. First, it is no perfect but an erronious translation, and verie corrupt. Secondly, if it were neuer so perfect, yet for more certaintie, it is profitable to search the originall: euery man will trust his owne skill, rather then another mans. Thirdly, the Councell did fondly in authorising an old blind translation, before the authenticall copies of the Hebrue and Greeke.

2 Secondly, the scope of the place, the circumstance of it, with that which goeth before, and commeth after must, be wayghed, which will bring great light to the place we haue in hand: an example we haue 1. Pet. 4.8. loue couereth [Page] multitude of sinnes: the Papistes gather out of these words, that loue doth iustifie vs before God and taketh away our sinnes: but by the circunstance of the place, the Apostole saying immediatly before: haue feruent loue among you, it is euident he vnderstandeth brotherly loue amōgest our selues, whereby faultes are buried, forgeuen, and forgotten.

Stapleton obiecteth: that this is but an vncertaine way, and many times fayleth: for the scripture passeth many times from one matter and argument to another: how then can it helpe to consider the circumstance of the place being of a diuerse matter? We answere, we say not that any of these meanes serueth for euery place, but when one fayleth, to vse another: when the circumstance helpeth not, to runne to the originall, if there we find, no succour to cō pare places together, and when we may, to vse them all, or the most.

3 Thirdly the conference of places is very profitable, as Iames. 2.21. Abraham was iustified by workes, compare it with that place Rom. 4.2. there S. Paule saith flatly that Abraham was not iustified by workes: Wherfore seeing one Apostle is not contrary to the other: we must needs gather, that this word iustified is diuersly taken, Paule saith that Abraham was not iustified that is, made righteous before God by his workes. Iames saith he was iustified, that is declared to be iust before men, and so Thom. Aquinas expoundeth it.

Stapleton obiecteth, that this meanes in cōparing of places is of it selfe many times of smal force. Answere, as though we affirme that these meanes must be vsed asunder, and not rather ioyntly together, and where one fayleth, another to helpe. Secondly, some things are found but once in the scriptures. Aunswere, they are then either very plaine, or not greatly necessarie. Thirdly, heretikes haue erred in comparing of Scripture. Answere, they compared them not diligently, nor with a syncere minde, but corruptly and negligently.

4 The fourth rule is the analogie and proportion of faith, which is nothing els but the summe & grounds of Religiō gathered out of scripture, such as are conteined in the Creede, the Lordes Prayer, the ten Commaundements, and in our whole Catechisme. We must take heede, that in the interpretation of Scripture we swarue not from this rule of faith, nor impugne any principle of Religion. Wherefore the Papistes interpretation of those wordes of Christ we do reiect. Hoc est corpus meum, this is my body: who would haue the verie flesh of Christ present in the Sacrament: for this is against the article of the Creede, that Christ is ascended into heauen, and there sitteth till his comming againe in iudgement.

Concerning these meanes, thus writeth Augustine. Rarissime inuenitur ambiguitas in verbis proprijs, quam non aut circumstantia ipsa sermonis qua cognoscitur Scripturarum intentio, aut interpretum collatio, aut praecedentes soluat inspectio, de doctrin. Christ. lib. 3.4. There is almost no ambiguitie in any word properly vsed (that is not metaphoricall or borrowed) which may not either by the circumstance of the place, the conference and comparing of interpreters, or [Page] by looking into the originals, easily be taken away. Augustine we see approueth this methode, though our aduersaries like it not.

Besides these, prayer must be vsed before we enterprise any thing, that the Lord would direct vs. And they which cā not so easily take this course, which is prescribed, shall do well to seeke helpe of learned and godly expositors, or to consult with their Pastors and Ministers. Ex Whitacher. quaest. 5. cap. 9.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION: CONCERNING the perfection and sufficiencie of Scripture.

THis question is deuided into three parts. First, whether the Scriptures be absolutely necessary. Secōdly, whether they be sufficient without vnwritten traditions. Thirdly, whether there be any traditions of faith and manners beside the Scriptures.

THE FIRST PART OF THE NEcessitie of the Scriptures.

The Papistes.

THe Iesuite laboureth to proue, that the Scriptures are not simply necessarie:error 11 which we denie not, for meate is not simply necessarie, for God may preserue man without: so in respect of God nothing is simply necessarie: God is not necessarily tyed to vse this or that meanes: but his argumentes do tend to this end, to shew that the scriptures are not necessarie at all, and may be spared in the Church (so saith Petrus a Soto) the Scripture was not alway extant, and it is not necessarie vnto faith: And the Scripture it not now so necessarie since Christ, as it was afore. Tilman. de verbo Dei error. 17.

1 There was no Scripture from Adam to Moses, for the space of two thousand yeares, and yet true Religion was kept and continued, and why might not true Religiō be as well preserued a 1500. yeare after Christ without scripture, as afore.

We answere: It foloweth not, because in times past God taught his church by a liuelie voyce, that the written word is not necessarie now: for the Lord saw it good, that his word should be left in writing, that we might haue a certaine rule of our faith in this corrupt and sinfull age. And what els is this, but to cōtroll the wisedome of God, saying it is not necessarie or needfull for the Church, which the Lord saw to be needfull: for if the Lord had thought it as good for vs to be taught without Scripture, as in that simple and innocēt age of the world (I meane innocent in respect of vs) he would not haue moued and stirred vp his Apostles to write.

2 After the time of Moses, when the law was written, yet there were many that feared God amongest the Gentiles, which had not the Scriptures, as Iob, and the other his friends, Ergo the scripture not necessarie. The Iewes also [Page] them selues vsed traditions more then Scriptures, as Psal. 44. v. 1.2. the fathers did report the workes of God to their children: by the negligence also of the Priests the law was lost, as 2. King. 22. we read that the volume of the law was found, which had bene missing a long time.

We answere. First, euē the faithfull amōgest the Gētiles did read the scripture, as the Eunuke Act. 8. had the booke of the Prophet Isay. Secondly, the Iewes declared the workes of God vnto their children, but the same were also written, as how the heathen were cast out before them, and of their deliuerāce out of Egypt: those were the things they heard of their fathers, as we read Psal. 44. & 78. yet all these things are recorded in the bookes of Moses. Thirdly, what though the Priests were negligent in preseruing the scriptures, it is no good argument to proue that therefore they are not necessarie, neither was the whole booke of the law lost, but either Moses owne manuscript, or the booke of Deuteronomie. Yet he hath proued nothing.

3 The Church after Christ wanted the Scriptures many yeares, Ergo they are not necessarie.

We aunswere, it is a great vntruth: for the old Testamēt the Church could not be without, and the new Testament was written not long after in the age of the Apostles: whose liuely voyce and preachings were vnto them, as their writings are now to vs. See now, what strong arguments they bring: the scriptures were not necessary in the time of the Patriarkes, when God taught them by his owne voyce, they were not necessarie in the time of the Prophetes and Apostles, when they had mē inspired of God to teach them, Ergo they are not now necessarie, when neither God teacheth from heauen, neither haue we any Prophetes or Apostles to instruct vs by heauenly reuelations: nay rather because they were not necessarie then, when they had other effectuall meanes, notwithstanding they are necessarie now, seeing there is no other way of instruction left vnto vs.

The Protestantes.

THat the scriptures are necessarie for the people of God, the reading, preaching, and vnderstanding whereof is the onely and ordinarie meanes to beget faith in vs, we thus proue out of the Scriptures them selues.

1 The scriptures conteine necessarie knowledge to saluation, which can not be learned but out of the scripture, Ergo they are necessarie. The knowledge of the law is necessarie, but that onely is deriued from the Scripture: as the Apostle witnesseth Rom. 7.7. he had not knowen lust to be sinne, vnlesse the law had said, thou shalt not lust. And if the right knowledge of the law is not learned, but out of the scripture: much more the knowledge of the Gospel, is more high and mysticall, and more straunge vnto our nature.

2 That whereby we are kept frō error and doubtfulnes in matters of faith is necessarie: but this is performed by the scripture, Ergo. First the Scripture keepeth vs from error. Math. 22.29. ye erre not knowing the scriptures (saith [Page] our Sauiour). The ignoraunce of scripture was cause of their error. Secondly, if our knowledge were onely builded vpon tradition without scripture, we should be doubtfull and vncertaine of the truth, so S. Luke saith in his Preface to Theophilus: I haue written (saith he) that thou mightest be certaine of those things, whereof thou hast bene instructed: Hence we conclude, that although we might know the truth without scripture, as Theophilus did, yet we can not know it certainlie without.

3 If the scriptures be not necessarie, then we may be without them, but this can not be, Ergo the scriptures can not be spared: for then God had done a needlesse and superfluous worke in stirring vp the Prophets and Apostles to write. S. Paule saith, that what soeuer is writtē, is written for our learning, that through patience and cōsolation of the scriptures we might haue hope. Rom. 15.4. The Lord saw in wisedome that his people could not be without the Scriptures, which are necessarie for their learning, for their comfort, and to strengthen their hope: how then dare our aduersaries say, that the scriptures are not necessarie, seeing these things wrought in vs by the scriptures, knowledge, consolation, hope, are most necessarie.

4 Let Augustine now put in his verdict: Illud credo, quod etiā hinc diuinorū eloquiorum clarissima authoritas esset, si homo illud sine dispendio salutis ignorare non posset. de peccator. merit. & remiss. lib. 2.36. I thinke (saith he) that euen concerning this matter (speaking of the originall or beginning of the soule) the Scriptures would not haue bene silent, if we might not safelie be ignoraunt of this matter, without daunger of saluation, Ergo whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluatiō, is onely to be found in scripture (for other matters there not expressed, there in no daunger in not knowing them) therfore the Scriptures by this Fathers iudgement are most necessary.

THE SECOND PART OF THE SEVENTH question, of the sufficiencie of Scripture.

The Papistes.

THey do straungely affirme, that the Scriptures conteine not all things necessarie error 12 to be knowen cōcerning faith and manners, and that they are not sufficient without traditions. Bellarm. cap. 3.4. Lindanus a Papist saith, that the scriptures conteine not all things necessarie to saluation. Andradius, that their approued traditions are of equall authoritie with the Scripture▪ Ex Tilman. de verbo error. 2.

1 First, the Iesuite thus reasoneth against the sufficiencie of Scripture. There are diuerse bookes of canonicall Scripture lost and perished, Ergo that part of canonical scripture, which remaineth is not sufficiēt: that much is lost, he thus proueth: 1. Chron. cap. vlt. mention is made of the bookes of Nathan & Gad. 2. Chron. 9. of the bookes of Ahiiah & Ieedo: & in the new Testamēt. Col. 4. of the Epistle of S. Paule to the Laodiceans: all those bookes are lost.

[Page]We aunswere. First, we denie not, but that some bookes are now wanting, which were part of canonicall scripture, & yet that which remaineth is sufficiēt: as some of Solomōs bookes are perished, which he wrote of herbes & plāts, and many of his Prouerbes: the Lord saw that they were not so greatly necessarie for vs to saluation. Secondly, there is not so much wanting, as the Iesuite would beare vs in hād, for the books of the Prophets which he nameth, are the same with the bookes of the Chronicles & of the Kings, which no doubt were writtē by those Prophetes. And as for the Epistle of S. Paule to the Laodiceās, there was neuer any such: the text is, written from the Laodiceans, it was the Epistle rather of the Laodiceans to S. Paule, vnto the which he partly maketh aunswere in the Epistle to the Colossians, and therefore he would haue it read also in their Church.

2 If the Apostles had any such meaning to contriue in the scriptures the summe of faith and all necessarie knowledge, it is very like Christ would haue geuen them some expresse commaundement so to do: but we read not of any such strict commaundement, Ergo they had no such purpose. Bellarmine.

We aunswere. First, they them selues dare not denie, but that the Apostles wrote by the instinct of the spirite: what is that els, but the commaundement of God? Actes. 16.6. Paule was forbidden of the holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia: and ver. 10. when he had seene a vision of a man of Macedonia appearing vnto him: the Apostle concludeth that they were called of God: wherefore what they did by the secret mouing of the spirite, was done at the cōmaundement of God. Secondly, Apocal. 11.1.14.13. Iohn is biddē to write that which he saw: no doubt the other Apostles had the like cōmaundement.

3 There are many points, which we ought in no wise to be ignoraunt of, which the scriptures speake either obscurelie of, or not at all.

First, these things are obscurely and doubtfully set downe in Scripture, the equalitie of the persons in Trinitie, the proceeding of the holy Ghost, from the Father and the Sonne, the doctrine of originall sinne.

We aunswere. First, if these things be found at all in the Scriptures, it is sufficient concerning the question we haue in hand. Secondly, the Scripture doth manifestly declare the truth in all those points, the equalitie of the persons is directly proued. 1. Iohn. 5.7. the procession of the spirite. Iohn. 15.26. the spirit is there said to be sent frō the Father & the Sonne. And Ioh. 14.26. Original sinne is described plainly by the Apostle. Rom. 5.12. though the name be not found in Scripture.

Secondly, there are diuerse things necessarie to be knowen, not at all declared in Scripture. First, as that Marie continued a perpetuall Virgine. We answere, the Scripture saith euery where she was a Virgine, neither maketh mention of any children she had, and therefore out of the Scripture we gather, that she continued. Secondly, Basile saith that it is sufficient to know she was a Virgine before the birth of Christ. Secondly, to know that the Pasch or Easter must be kept vpon the Lordes day is necessarie. Aunswere, there is [Page] no such necessiitie in it to saluation: neither needed the Church so much to haue contended about it in times past: these are the mightie weapons, which our aduersaries vse.

The Protestantes.

WE do not affirme, as our aduersaries charge vs, that all things necessarie to saluation, are expressely conteined in scripture, that is, in so many words: but this we hold, that all things, which are necessarily to be knowen of vs, are either expresly declared in Scripture, or necessarily concluded out of Scripture, and so conteined in them. We also graunt, that it was not Gospell onely which was written, but all that Christ and his Apostles taught by liuely voyce: the whole summe whereof and substaunce is conteined in the written word: and so we conclude, that nothing necessarie to saluation either concerning faith or manners, is els where to be found but in the holy Scriptures.

1 S. Paule saith: if we, or an Aungell preach vnto you otherwise then that which we haue preached, let him be accursed, Ergo the Scripture conteineth all things necessarie.

First, the Iesuite aunswereth, that S. Paule speaketh not onely of his writings, but also of his preachings which were not written.

We aunswere, that the summe of all S. Paules preachings is conteined in his Epistles and other holy writings: for S. Paule confirmed his doctrine out of the scriptures, as Act. 17.10. the Berrheans examined his doctrine by the scriptures, and found it to be consonant, and to agree in all things.

Secondly, he condēneth, those which preach any thing, not besides or otherwise, but contrarie: and therefore not any other doctrine besides Scripture is forbidden, but that which is contrarie. We aunswere, whatsoeuer is imposed as necessarie to saluation beside the Scripture, praeter Scripturas, is also contra Scripturas, contrarie to Scripture, as are all Popish traditions, which they lay a necessitie vpon, both beside and contrarie to Scripture. Neither did those false Apostles against whom S. Paule writeth so much, bring in another or cōtrary Gospell, as the Apostle saith ver. 7. as they did labour to corrupt and peruert that Gospel, which S. Paul taught. Therfore all traditiōs whether praeter, or cō tra, beside or contrarie to Scripture, are notablie by this place ouerthrowen.

2 Iohn. 20.31. these things are written, that ye might beleeue that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God, & that in beleeuing ye might haue life through his name, Ergo the Scriptures conteine all things necessarie to saluation: for they suffise to worke in vs faith, and faith bringeth vs to eternall life.

First, Bellarmine aunswereth, that Iohn speaketh onely of that which he had written. Aunswere. If this one Apostles writings were able to worke faith, the whole body of Scripture much more: but he rather speaketh of all other holy writings, of the Apostles, for he was the suruiuer of them all, & acknowledged their writings and approued them. Secōdly (saith he) the Apostle saith not that those writings onely suffise, but they are profitable, and referred to [Page] this end to worke faith. Aunswere. The Scripture is not one of the meanes, but the sole, whole, and onely meanes: for if they perfectly worke faith, what neede any other helpes: but the first is true, for they doe beget in vs a perfect faith, which shall bring vs to eternall life, Ergo they are the onely meanes of faith.

3 The whole Scripture (saith S. Paule) is profitable to teach, to improue, to correct, and instruct in righteousnesse. 2. Tim. 3.16. Ergo it conteineth all things necessarie: for what els is requisite besides these foure, to teach the right faith, improue error, to instruct in righteousnes and vertue, & to correct vice?

First they aunswere, the Apostle meaneth as well euery booke of Scripture, as the whole, euery part therfore hath this perfection as well as the whole. But you will not say, that euery booke conteineth all things necessarie to saluation: therefore this perfection is not so to be taken.

We aunswere. First, S. Paule vnderstandeth the body of Scripture as ver. 15. thou hast knowen the Scriptures, he speaketh of them all. Secondly, if euery part had these vtilities, you might as well conclude that euery word and sillable hath them, for they are parts of Scripture. Thirdly, it appeareth by these foure great vtilities here set downe, that the Apostle meaneth not any part or partes of Scripture, but the whole, for euery part of Scripture is not profitable for all these endes, but the whole.

Secōdly, they say it foloweth not: the Scripture is profitable, therfore sufficient, they also graunt it is profitable. Aunswere, but we conclude out of S. Paule, that the Scripture is not onely profitable, but sufficient, as it foloweth v. 17. that the man of God may be absolute, perfectly instructed to euery good worke. If then the scriptures are able perfectly to instruct vs, then are they sufficient, then neede we no other helpes.

4 Lastly, Augustine thus writeth, in Psal. 66. Ne putetis (saith he) ex alijs Scripturis petendum, quod forte hic deest. Thinke not (saith he) that it is to be found in any other writings if it be not in Scripture. And in another place: In Euangelio quaeramus, nam si ibi non inuenimus, vbi inueniemus? Let vs (saith he) seeke to be resolued in the Gospell, if we finde not there, where shall we find it? Ergo by the iudgemēt of Augustine there is no truth necessary to be knowen, which is not to be found in the Scripture.

3

THE THIRD PART OF THE SEVENTH question: whether there be any traditions, beside Scripture concerning faith and manners.

The Papistes.

error 13 THey vnderstand by this word tradition, doctrine, preceptes, and ceremonies, with other vsages of the Church, which are not written in the scriptures. They do not say that all their traditiōs are necessary, but they make diuerse kindes of them: some are vniuersall, obserued in the whole Church, [Page] some particular: some are free, some necessarie, some are Apostolicall, inuented by the Apostles, some Ecclesiasticall by the Church: so thus they conclude: all traditions decreed in Councels, and iudged Apostolicall: & whatsoeuer the Church of Rome receiueth as Apostolicall, are not to be doubted, but to be Apostolicall indeed. Secondly, all Apostolicall traditions are of equall authoritie with the writings of the Apostles. Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2. & 9. and they are that part of the word of God which is vnwritten, as well as the scriptures are that part which is written: Let vs see what arguments they bring for these traditions.

1 They geue an instance of certaine traditiōs, as the Baptisme of infants, and the not rebaptising of those, which were before Baptised by heretikes: We aunswere, these two customes of the Church are grounded vpon scripture: for as childrē were in the time of the law Circūcised, so are they now vnder the Gospell Baptised: and that promise Gene. 17. I will be thy God, and the God of thy seede, as it belonged to them and their children, so doth it appertaine to vs and our children.

Concerning the other point, that they whom heretikes haue once Baptised, ought not to be Baptised againe: S. Augustine doth proue it out of the scripture. Ephe. 4. there is one Faith, one Baptisme, Ergo not to be repeated.

But now they come in with other traditions, as the Lenton fast, which they vse most fondly and superstitiously: the eight Ecclesiasticall orders, Bishops, Prists, Deacōs, Subdeacons, Acolythistes, Readers, Exorcistes, Doore-keepers, the worshipping of Images, with many other: these they would face vs out to be Apostolical traditions, and to haue bene vniuersally obserued, which are but their vayne brags, and Thrasonicall crakes: they shall neuer proue them vniuersall, much lesse Apostolicall: And because they finde no scripture to establish these their superstitious fantasies by, they flye vnto tradition, which is their onely hauen, where they hope to finde succour: but all in vayne. Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 9. Consul. Whitacher. quaest. 6. cap. 4.

2 They proceede and alledge scripture for their traditions, as that place Iohn. 16.12. I haue many things to say, but you can not beare them now, Ergo say they, there are many traditions not written.

We aunswere. First, it foloweth not, because Christ declared not all things at that time, that therefore he kept them from his Apostles all together. Nay whatsoeuer afterwardes the Apostles learned of the spirite of God, they had heard before of Christ, for it was the office of the spirite, but to put them in remembrance of Christes sayings. Iohn. 14.26. which they had heard before, but vnderstood them not, and so forgat them. Wherefore these things, which Christ forbeareth to speake, are the same things, which are cōteined in the Apostles writings. Secondly, if there were other matters, which Christ vttered not, how foloweth it, nay what great presumptiō is it to say, that those trifles and apish toyes, which the Papistes vse in their Idolatrous sacrifice, and their other beggarly ceremonies (which boyes may well laugh at) are those profoūd [Page] matters, which the Apostles were not then able to conceiue.

3 That of all other, they take to be an inuincible place. 2. Thess. 2.15. keepe the instructions or traditions, which ye haue bene taught either by word, or by Epistle, Ergo there are traditions besides scripture.

We aunswere: when S. Paule wrote this Epistle, all the scriptures were not writtē: wherefore besides these two short Epistles, which do not conteine the summe of the Gospell, nor all necessarie preceptes, he by his preaching supplied, what was wanting, and so declared vnto them the whole mysterie of the Gospell, as he saith. 1. Thess. 2.2. these he calleth his traditions, because yet he had not written his other Epistles, wherein those instructions and traditions are conteined. This then is but a weake argument: the Thessalonians had other instructiōs and traditions beside the two Epistles writtē vnto them, Ergo they had other traditiōs, beside all the writings of S. Paule and the other Apostles: this is their mayne and waightie argument.

The Protestantes.

FIrst, we graunt, that all things are not written which our Sauiour Christ and the Apostles taught, and that it was the Gospell, which they preached, as well as this which is written: yet in substance they preached the same Gospell, which now is expressed in the scripture: neither was there any necessarie precept deliuered in their Sermons, which is not now to be found in the scriptures. Secondly, we denie not but there were certaine rites and orders ordained by the Apostles in diuerse churches, which were not cōmitted to writing, because they were not to continue and endure for euer in the Church: as that precept Act. 16. that the Gentiles should abstaine from strangled, and from bloud. Thirdly, we also graunt that the Church may vse externall rites and orders either left by tradition, or ordained by the Church for decencie and comelynesse, and tending to edification. But we constantly affirme, that there are no traditions in the Church of God necessarie to saluation beside scripture: wherein all things are conteined necessarie to saluation, both concerning faith and manners.

1 It is not lawfull, as to take ought from the word of God, so to adde any thing vnto it. Deut. 12.32. Apocal. 22.18. But they which bring in traditiōs necessarie beside the scriptures, do adde vnto them, Ergo.

To the proposition the Iesuite aunswereth, that all addition to the word of God is not forbidden, for the Prophets did write after Moses, & the Apostles after the Euangelistes. We aunswere: that those holy men had authoritie from God to compile scripture, if the Papistes haue the like Apostolike authoritie for their traditions, let them shew it, and we will beleeue them. Secondly, the Prophetes did but explane Moses, and expound the law, and the Apostles did as it were set forth their Commentaries vpon the Gospell: this therefore was no addition, because they did not derogate from the perfection of the scriptures any way.

To the assumptiō they aunswere, that their traditions are but expositiōs of [Page] Scripture. We aunswere, their traditions are cleane contrarie to Scripture, as the worshipping of Images, and the sacrifice of their Masse: and they adde to Scripture, making it vnperfect, saying, it doth not conteine all things necessarie to saluation. Wherefore they can not escape that curse, which they runne into that adde to the word of God.

2 All traditions among the Iewes besides the law were condemned Math. 15.3. Ergo all vnwritten traditions now must be abolished. The Iesuite aunswereth. First, Christ condemned not the auncient traditions of Moses, but those which were newly and lately inuented. Aunswere, first the Scripture maketh no mention of any such traditions of Moses: Christ biddeth them search the Scriptures, not runne vnto traditions. Secondly, these seemed to be auncient traditions, bearing the name of Elders traditions, and they were in great authoritie amongest, the Iewes: most like because of some long continuance.

Secondly (saith he) Christ findeth fault with wicked and impious traditions. Aunswere. First, their traditions were not openly and plainly euill and pernicious, but had some shew of holynesse, as the washing of pots, and tables, and beds. I would the Papists did not here take thē selues by the nose, whose traditions come nearer to open impietie, and blasphemie, then theirs did. Secondly, Christ in opposing the Scripture against traditions, therein condemneth all traditions not written, besides the Scripture.

3 If Paule preaching the whole Gospell. Act. 20.27. did say none other things then Moses and the Prophetes, then all things necessarie to saluation are conteined in the Scriptures. For it can not be said to be a whole and perfite Gospell, if any thing necessarie to saluation be wanting. But Paule preached nothing, but out of Moses and the Prophetes. Act. 26.22. Ergo much more now is the Scripture a perfect rule of faith: we hauing beside Moses and the Prophetes, the holy writings of the Euangelistes and Apostles.

4 Last of all, although we might multiplie many arguments, but these I trust, strongly concluding out of Scripture, may serue as a sufficient bulwarke against all Popish paper▪ bullets. Let vs heare in the knitting vp the iudgement of Augustine. In his rebus inquit, in quib nihil certi statuit Scriptura, mos populi Dei, vel instituta maiorum, pro lege tenenda. Epist. 86. In all those things (saith he) speaking of externall rules, and ceremonies, of the which we haue no certaine rule out of Scripture, the custome of the people of God, and the godly constitutions of our forefathers must stand for a law: but concerning matters of faith and good maners the Scriptures do giue certaine rules: as in another place: In ijs quae aperte in Scriptura posita sunt, inueniuntur illa omnia, quae continent fidem, moresque viuendi, De doctrin. Christian. 2.9. all things appertaining to faith, and the rule of life, are plainlie expressed in the Scripture, Ergo by the sentence of Augustine, traditions besides scripture haue nothing to do with the doctrine of faith and manners, but do consist onely in externall rites and customes of the Church.

[Page]

THE SECOND GENERALL CONTROVERSIE, CONCERNING THE CHVRCH.

HAuing now finished the questions betweene our aduersaries and vs, concerning the Scriptures, and word of God, which all do belong to the Propheticall office of Christ: in the next place such controuersies are to be handled as do concerne the Kingly office of Christ. And seeing the Church of Christ is his kingdome, where he ruleth and raigneth, we must intreat of the Church: and first in generall of the whole, and in speciall of the partes and members. This present controuersie concerning the Church in generall standeth vpon fiue principall questions.

1 Of the definition of the Catholike Church: two partes of the question. First, whether wicked men and infidels, be true members of the Church. Secondly, whether the Catholike Church be inuisible.

2 Whether the Catholike Church may erre, and whether the visible Church may fayle vpon earth.

3 Concerning the true notes and markes of the Church.

4 Of the authoritie of the Church: two partes. First, whether the Church haue authoritie in matters of faith beside the Scriptures, and whether we ought to beleeue in the Church. Secondly, concerning the ceremonies of the Church.

5 Whether the Church of Rome be the true Church: two partes. First, whether it be the Catholike Church. Secondly, whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church: of these now in their place and order.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF THE definition of the Catholike Church.

The Papistes.

THe Catholike Church (say they) is a visible companie of men professing the same faith and Religion, and acknowledging the Bishop of Rome to be their chief pastor, and the Vicare of Christ vpon earth. Bellarmin. de Eccles. Lib. 3. cap. 2. Canisius capit. de praecept. Eccles. articul. 9. Lindanus. lib. 4. cap. 84.

The Protestantes.

THe Catholike and vniuersall Church is the inuisible cōpanie of the faithfull elected and chosen to eternall life. Iohn. 10.16. A particular Church is a member of the vniuersall and Catholike Church, and it is a visible companie and congregation of men, amongest whom the pure word of God is preached, and the Sacramentes rightly administred: in the which visible congregation, [Page] there may be and are many hypocrites, euill and vnfaithfull men found, and shalbe to the end of the world. Ex Amand. Polano. So then betweene the vniuersall and particular Church, there is a treble difference. First, the one is dispersed ouer all the world, the other in some one country, citie or any certaine place. Secondly, the vniuersall consisteth onely of the elect, the particular both of good and bad. Thirdly, the Catholike is inuisible, the other is visible and to be seene.

The question betweene vs and our aduersaries, is about the vniuersall Catholike Church, which they do falsly define in three points. First, they hold that wicked men are true members of the Catholike Church. Secondly, they allow not this distinctiō of the Church visible and inuisible, but do affirme that the Catholike Church is visible. Thirdly, they make the Catholike Church to be in subiection to the Bishop of Rome. Concerning this last point, it belongeth to the controuersie of the Bishop of Rome, and therefore we will not touch it in this place. The other two are now to be handled in this question as two partes thereof.

THE FIRST PART OF THIS FIRST question, whether wicked men and infidels may be true members of the Church.

The Papistes.

THey affirme that not onely the predestinate, but euē reprobates also may belong vnto the Church, and be true members thereof. Bellarmin. Lib. 3. de error 14 Eccles. cap. 7. Nay they denie that the elect which are vnborne, and not yet called, do appertaine to the Church of Christ. Rhemistes. annot. in. 1. Tim. 3. Sect. 10. This then is generally their opinion, that there is no internal grace or vertue required in the mēbers of the Church, but onely the externall and publike outward profession. Bellarmin. cap. 2. And therefore they doubt not to say that euen wicked men and reprobates remaining in the publike profession of the Church, are true members of the body of Christ. Rhemistes. annot. in Iohan. 15. Sect. 1.

1 They first alledge certaine places of Scripture, as Math. 3. the Church is compared to a barne floore, where there is both chaff and corne. Math. 13. to a net cast into the sea, where all manner of fish are gathered together. 2. Tim. 2. to a house, wherein there be vessels of honor and dishonor, Ergo both good & bad are members of the Church. Bellarmin. cap. 7. lib. 3.

We aunswere. All these places must be vnderstood of the visible Church: which is knowen by the publike preaching of the word, and therefore Math. 3. compared to a fanne, and Math. 13. to a draw net, the Apostles, pastors and teachers are the fisher men. Wherefore we denie not but that wicked men may be in the Church, but not of it: yea they may be members of the visible Church for a time, but can not be truly ingraffed into the body of Christ. [Page] Fulk. annot. Iohan. 15. Sect. 1.

2 The Church (say they) is compared to a body. 1. Cor. 12. as in the body there are some partes, which haue neither sense nor life: so in the Church there are some mēbers, which haue neither faith nor charitie, which is the life of the Church, Ergo wicked men may be right members of the Church. Bellarm. cap. 10. there may be also some fruitlesse braūches in the vine, and so euill men may be members of Christ. Rhemist. annot. 15. Iohan. 1. euery braunch not bearing fruit in me shalbe cast forth, Ergo there may be fruitlesse braūches in Christ.

We answere to the first, who would haue said, as the Iesuite doth, that there are partes in the body, that receiue neither life nor sense of the body: doth he meane the nayles and heares, as he seemeth to geue instance in the end of the Chapter: but they are no partes of the body but excrements: he is so deepe in his sophistrie, that he hath forgotten Philosophie: and yet they receiue some gift from the body, for they grow & encrease, but the wicked receiue no grace at all from the Church. The Rhemistes yet are more reasonable, that say the wicked in the church, are as ill humors and superfluous excrements in the body, rather then liuely partes therof. 1. Iohan. 2. Sect. 10.

To the second, is a dead bow or a braunch, I pray you, any part of the tree? I thinke not: the tree can not conueniently spare any one of the partes therof: but the dead partes are hurtfull and combersome, and it doth the tree good to cut them of. But that they haue preuented vs, we would haue vsed no better argument against them, then this drawen from the resemblance of a mans body: for as what is in the body receiuing no life nor power from the body is not properly a part of the body, howsoeuer it seeme to be ioyned to the body: so the wicked although they be in the outward face of the Church, yet because they are not partakers of the spirituall life thereof by Christ, are not truly to be iudged members of it.

3 If wicked men should not be right members of the Church, but the faithfull and predestinate, we should be vncertaine which is the true Church, which is not to be admitted, because the whole doctrine, and all the principles of Religion do depend of the testimonie of the Church. Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 10.

We aunswere. First, although it is necessarie that the true Church should be certainly knowen, yet not for that cause, which the Iesuite pretendeth: for the Religion of Christians is grounded vpon the Scriptures, and although the true Church doth geue a notable testimonie thereunto, yet doth not our faith depend vpon their witnesse, testimonie, or allowance. Secondly, the true visible Church is certainly knowen by the preaching of the word and the right vse of the Sacramēts: so that we doubt not but there is the true Church, where we finde these markes: neither is it needfull to know the estate of euery particular member thereof, for so long, as all actions in the Church are directed and ordered by the rule of Gods word, we neede not to doubt to commit our selues to that Church, howsoeuer otherwise men do stand before God: and yet, so much as is necessarie, the faithfull may be iudged & knowen by their fruites.

[Page]Thirdly, though we admit that wicked men are mēbers: yet the vncertainty remaineth still: for they them selues hold that neither men not Baptised, or persons excommunicate, or heretikes can be of the Church: but many may liue in the Church, whom we know not to be Baptised, which may be ipso facto, by the deed doing excommunicate without publike sentence, and heretikes also: wherefore euen amongest themselues they are vncertaine, who are members of the Church.

The Protestantes.

WE hold that the Catholike Church consisteth onely of the predestinate, and comprehendeth the vniuersall number of all those which shalbe saued, not onely those now liuing on earth,Fulk. annot. 1. Iohan. 2. Sect. 10. Fox. pag. 609. but all that haue bene since the beginning of the world: of this Church S. Paule was euen being a persecuter, for he was neuer a member of the deuill nor reprobate, as Iohn Husse saith articul. 2. Of this Church Iudas the traytor neuer was, though he were reputed for a Disciple of Christ for a while Huss. articul. 7. Therefore the wicked and reprobate though they liue in the outward assembly of Christians, are no more the true members of Christ, then the tares in the field may be counted wheat or good corne.

1 The true members of Christ, are also his sheepe, the wicked are not the sheepe of Christ, Ergo neither his members.

The sheepe of Christ heare his voyce: they do not heare his voyce,Iohn. 10. vers. 3. Ergo if they shall aunswere, that hypocrites and wicked men do heare Christes voyce, so long as they continue in the outward profession of Christians, we thus improue it: Christes sheepe do folow him in life and example Iohn. 15.4. but so doe not they. If it shalbe yet aunswered that they may also a while walke in Christes steps: this is not enough, for all Christes shalbe saued. ver. 9. wherfore the Gospell vnderstandeth such folowers, as continue to the end.

2 Christ is the head of his Church, and all the partes thereof, but he is not the head of the wicked & reprobate, Ergo. The Iesuite graunteth that he is the head, euen of those partes that shall perish. Bellarmin. cap. 7. We thus answere, Christ is the head onely of those, for whom he gaue him selfe. Ephe. 5.23.25: but he gaue not him selfe for the wicked, Ergo. If this be denied, we thus proceede, Christ dyed onely for those whom he sanctifieth and cleanseth, to make them a glorious Church without spot and wrincle. Ephe. 5.26.27. But this can not agree any wise to the wicked, Ergo.

3 The Church of God is the whole familie of the children of God in heauen and earth, Ephe. 3.15. they both make but one Church, the wicked are not of this familie: for who would say that the Saintes in heauen, and wicked and reprobate men vpon the earth, are felow seruaunts, and of one houshold, Ergo they are not of the Catholike Church.

4 Of all other that is a most euident place. 1. Iohn. 2.19. they went out of vs, but were not of vs, Ergo heretikes and reprobates are not of the church. [Page] Bellarmine aunswereth: though they were not of vs, that is, of the Church: animis & voluntate, in soule, and minde, and purpose of hart, yet they were of vs, externa professione, in externall profession. Thus they are not ashamed, such is there great boldnesse, to contradict the scriptures, for the Apostle saith, non erāt ex nobis, they were not of vs: they say, yes, forsoth, after a sort, erāt ex nobis, they were of vs: the Apostle saith nay, they say yea, he saith indeed exierunt ex nobis, they went out of vs, which soundeth nothing like, as erant ex nobis, they were of vs, as the Iesuite subtillie would conclude.

De Baptis. lib. 6. cap. 3.5 Let Augustine speake for vs both, Illa columba, vnica, pudica, casta, sponsa sine macula & ruga non intelligitur, nisi in bonis, iustis, sanctis. That louely doue (saith he) the chast, vndefiled, and vnspotted spouse (that is the Church of God) is onely vnderstood of those that are righteous, faithfull, holy, Ergo the wicked are not of the Church, which is the spouse of Christ.

THE SECOND PART OF THE QVESTION, whether the Catholike Church be inuisible.

The Papistes.

THey do affirme that the Catholike Church is and hath bene alwayes visible: error 15 not so visible, because it might be seene, but that it hath bene alwayes actually visible, & not seene onely vnto the mēbers of the church, but notoriously knowē to the whole world. Rhemens. annot in Math. cap. 5. Sect. 3. Neither do they meane any particular Church so to haue bene visible, but the vniuersall catholike church, which they define to be a visible cōgregatiō of all faithfull men. Canisius. cap. de fide & Symbol. articul. 18. Bellarmin. lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 12. ration. 7.

1 The foundation of the Church is visible: therefore the Church is visible: the proportion they proue thus: for whether we affirme Christ, or Peter to be the foundatiō of the Church: both of them are now visible in him which is the Vicare of Christ, and Peters successor.

We answere. First, we vtterly denie either Peter to be the foundation of the Church, or els the Pope to be his lawfull successor: for Peter is no more the foundation of the Church, then all the Prophetes and Apostles. Ephe. 2.20. whose doctrine is the foundation, not their persons. And as for the Pope, we care not so much for outward successiō in place, which notwithstanding they can not proue to haue bene perpetuall without interruption, as we do require a succession of faith and doctrine. Secondly, we affirme that Christ is the foundation, but not the visible beholding of Christ, with the carnall eyes, but beleeuing in his name, for when Peter had vttered that notable confession of Christ, he said that flesh and bloud had not reuealed it but his father in heauen: but if the beholding of Christ, had geuen Peter a sight of the foundation, thē flesh had reuealed it vnto him, his carnall eyes had brought him to Christ. Thirdly, we may much better returne this argument vpon them selues: that [Page] because the foundation of the Church, which is faith in Christ, is inuisible, therefore the Church is inuisible.

2 They heape vp many places of Scriptures, but to small purpose as Math. 18. tell the Church. Actes. 15. when they came to Ierusalem they were receiued of the Church, Philip. 3.6. Paule persecuted the Church: how could the church be persecuted, how could it receiue the Apostles, if it were not visible? Bellarmin. cap. 12.

We answere, what goodly reasons here be: a particular church such as was at Ierusalem may be seene, Ergo the catholike and vniuersall. Secondly, a particular church may be sometime visible, Ergo alwayes. Thirdly, the church is visible vnto the faithfull, as in time of persecution, for to Paule it was not knowen, when he persecuted it, but onely to the brethren, Ergo it is visible to the world. For these three points they must proue that the catholike church not a particular is visible, that the Church is not sometime but alway visible, yea and to the world, or else they say nothing: for shame masters make better arguments.

3 He hath set his tabernacle in the sunne. Psal. 19. The Church is as a Citie vpon an hill, Math. 5. Ergo it is alwayes visible. Bellarmin. ibid. Rhemist. Math. 5. Sect. 3.

We answere. First, the Apostles them selues, euen at this time, when Christ spake these wordes vnto them, were not so in sole, or in monte, in the sunne, or vpon the hill, that they were seene of the world, nay they were not seene nor acknowledged of the Scribes and Pharisies in Iewrie: the Church is seene of the faithfull, it is visible to them that search for her out of the Scriptures: they that cā see the mountaine, shal see the Citie, the mountaine is Christ, the Citie is the Church. No marueile if the Church be not alwayes visible to the world, for they see not, neither do they know Christ. Secondly, the church is said to be on a hill: because the truth seeketh no corners, heretikes and false t [...]achers flye into the desert and into secret places, Math. 24. ver. 26. But the truth is not ashamed: the Apostles confessed Christ, euē before Kings and Princes, Marke 13.19. so Augustine expoundeth it. Cont. Faustum. lib. 13. cap. 13.

The Protestantes.

COncerning the catholike church, we hold, that because, it is an article of our faith, it is alwayes vnto the world inuisible, and not to be espyed but by the eyes of faith. Fulk. Math. 5. Sect. 5.

Concerning particular churches▪ if by visible, they vnderstand that which may be seene, so we graunt they are alwayes visible. Fulk. Act. 11. v. 24. If for that which is actually visible: we say it is not so alwayes visible to the world, nay it may sometimes be so hid and secret, that the members know not one another. Fulk. in Math. 5. Sect. 3.

1 To the Hebrues it is thus written. cap. 13. v. 18.23.24. you are not come to the moūtaine, which might be touched, but to the Citie of the liuing God, the [Page] celestiall Ierusalem, &c. Ergo the church is inuisible, and here opposed to the visible hill of Sinay.

Bellarmine answereth, that this is vnderstood of the triumphant church in heauen, not of the militant vpon earth.

To this we make answere, the Apostle vnderstandeth the whole vniuersall church in heauen and earth, which both make but one familie, Ephe. 3.15. for here he nameth not onely the spirites of iust men which are in heauen, but the faithfull vpon earth, whose names are written in heauen: the congregatiō (saith he) of the first borne: the wordes are [...] and [...], a gathering together, collection or cōgregation, which must needes be vnderstood of men vpon earth. Againe (saith he) ye are come, not ye shall come: they had now left the smoking mountaine Sinay, and were come to Sion, the church vnder the Gospell. Wherefore this is a most firme and inuincible argument: the catholike church is the vniuersall number of Gods chosen in heauen and in earth, Ergo inuisible.

2 We will giue an instance: In the dayes of Elias the church was not visible, for he camplaineth, and saith that he was onely left alone, 1. King. 19.10. Ergo the church is not alway visible.

Annot. in Rom. 11. ver. 4.The Rhemistes answere. First, at that time the church was visible in Iudaea, the souldiers were numbred to 1000. thousand, 2. Chron. 17. We aunswere againe. First, belike they haue taken a more exact account of them then the Lord him selfe: for he (saith he) had reserued 7000, 1. King. 19.18. that had not bowed their knees to Baall, they say there were ten hūdred thousand. Againe Elias, if he had knowen such a number, could not haue bene left so comfortlesse, as in grief of hart to desire to dye. But be it graunted that the church was visible in Iudaea at this time, though it were not so to Elias: yet where was that visible church in the dayes of Achaz, and Manasseh, when Iudaea fell also to Idolatrie? Thirdly, to beleeue that there is an holy catholike church is an article of our faith, Ergo it is inuisible.

Bellarmin answereth. First, the holinesse of the church is inuisible. We reply, so the church is partly visible, partly inuisible by his confession. First, why thē do ye define the catholike church to be a visible cōgregatiō, if it be not wholly & altogether visible? they know that difinitio must cōuenire definito, the definitiō must agree wholly to that which is defined: but now it is not: for they say, the catholike holy church is partly visible as it is a church, partly inuisible as it is holy. Secondly, do we not say in the Creede, Credo Catholicam, as well as Credo Sanctam, I beleeue a catholike church, as well as I beleeue the holy church? then it is also inuisible, as it is catholike, because this also is part of the article: see I pray you what shifting is here?

Secondly, he answereth, that some thing is seene in the church, some thing beleeued: for we see that visible companie of men, which make the church, but whether that companie be the true church, we do not see it, but beleeue it.

We reply againe. First, the Iesuite hath not yet proued that some thing is [Page] seene in the church, some thing beleeued: but one thing is seene, namely the congregation as they are men, another thing is beleeued, that they are the church: the sight and beliefe now by his owne confession are not both in the church. Secondly, we denie that the vniuersall cōpanie of the catholike church, which is the number of the predestinate can be seene, therefore all is beleeued, and nothing seene. Thirdly, he saith that by faith we know which is the true church: Ergo by faith we know which are the members of the church: Ergo by faith the mēbers do know them selues to be of the Church: therefore faith is requisite in the true members of the church: thē vnfaithfull men can not be true members of the church, which point the Iesuite strongly before maintained against vs. Mendacem oportet esse memorem, a lyar had need haue a good memorie: lest he tell contrarie tales, and so hath the Iesuite here, for before he denied that faith was requisite to make a true member of the church: here he saith that without faith a mēber cā not be knowen, much lesse therfore made.

3 The Rhemistes confesse in these very words, that in the raigne of (their imagined and supposed) Antichrist the externall state of the Romane church, and publike entercourse of the faithfull with the same shall cease, and that there shalbe onely a communion in hart with it, and practise in secret, Annot. in. 2. Thess. 2. Sect. 10. Where then (I pray you) shalbe your tabernaculum in sole, ciuitas in monte, candela splendens in domo: your tabernacle in the sunne, your Citie in a mountaine, your candle shining in the house, that is, say you, in the world. Math. 5. Sect. 3. Ergo out of their owne wordes we conclude, that the church shall not alwayes be visible, and notoriously knowen in the world.

Lastly, we will conclude with Augustine. Aliquando in sola domo Noah Ecclesia erat: in solo Abraham Ecclesia erat: in solo Loth & domo eius Ecclesia erat: in solo Henoch Ecclesia erat: Sometime the church was onely in Henochs house,Enarrat. in Psal. 128. sometime onely in Noah, some time in Abraham alone, in Loth & his house. How then hath the church bene alwayes so visible and notoriously knowē to the world, when it hath layen hidden some time in one house, yea in one man.

THE SECOND QVESTION, whether the Church may erre.

THis questiō is deuided into two parts. First, whether the catholike church may erre at all, or not? Secondly, whether the visible church vpon earth may fall away from God into Idolatrie and apostasie.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE Catholike Church may erre in doctrine.

The Papistes.

THey do teach that the catholike church can not possiblie erre, not onely in matters absolutely necessarie to saluation, but not in any thing, which error 16 [Page] it imposeth and commaundeth, whether it be conteined in the word of God or not: yea that it can not erre in these things, which beside the word of God are commaunded. And by the church here, they do meane not onely the Pastors and Bishops, but the whole companie of the faithfull: so that neither that which all the pastors of the church do teach, can be erronious, nor what is receiued generally of the whole church. Bellarm. de Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 14. Rhemist. annot an Iohan. 14. ver. 16.

1 The church (say they) is the pillar of truth▪ 1. Tim. 3. Ergo it can not erre. We answere. First, it is no otherwise the pillar of truth, then a virgin without spot and wrincle, Ephe. 5.27. As that place doth not priuiledge the church frō all sinne and imperfection of life, so neither doth this place exempt her from all error in doctrine. Secondly, she is called the pillar of truth in respect of vs, because the truth is preserued in the true church, and is not els where to be found: not because the truth dependeth vpon the church: for S. Paule sendeth not Timothie in this place to learne of the church, as though it could not possiblie be deceiued: but (saith he) these things haue I written, that thou mayst know how to behaue thy selfe in the house of God. ver. 14.15. Ergo the word of God is the rule of truth, and the church hath no warrant, to be kept from error, but as she is lead and gouerned by the word of God. Thirdly, the argument foloweth not, for Peter was a pillar and yet erred. Gallat. 2.9.11.

2 They heape many arguments together. The church hath the spirite of God, to lead it into all truth, the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it. Math. 16. God hath geuen it Apostles, teachers, Euangelistes to keepe it in the truth. Ephe. 4. Christ hath prayed for the church, that it may be sanctified in the veritie. Iohn. 17. Christ prayed that Peters faith should not faile, Ergo the church can not erre. Rhemens. annot. 1. Timoth. 3.15.

We answere: euery one of the elect hath the spirite of God, neither shall the gates of hell preuaile against the faith of any one of the elect to ouerthrow it: Christ prayeth for euery one of his Disciples that they may be sanctified in the truth. Iohn. 17.20. wherefore it foloweth as well by these arguments, that no one faithfull man can fall into error. The pastors and teachers, so long as they folow the Apostles doctrine, may keepe the church from error, but it is not gathered out of that place. Ephe. 4. that the pastors if they swarue from Gods word can not erre.

Concerning Peter, Christ prayed for him that his faith should not faile in that greeuous tentation, which he fell into. Secondly, he prayed not for him as gouernour of the church, but as he prayeth for euery faithfull man. Iohn. 17.23. Thirdly, for all this prayer Peter erred▪ Gallat. 2.

3 This argument was vsed in the Councell of Basill: the Church is without spot, and wrincle. Ephe. 5.27. Ergo without error.

We aunswere. First, S. Paule speaketh there of a glorious church, such as it shalbe in the kingdome of heauen, not of the church as it is vpon earth: so Reuel. 7.14. The elders, which sat round about the throne, which are the Saintes [Page] in heauen, were seene in long white robes, which they had washed white in the bloud of the Lambe.

2 It foloweth out of this place that the church is as well without sinne, as free from error: which the diuines in the Councell did also graunt. But seeing by their owne confession euery member of the church, being clothed in this mortall flesh sinneth, how can the church be without sinne? If the church consist of men, and all men are sinners, how is the church free? If all the partes and members be sinnefull, how is not the whole also polluted with sinne? If all the partes of the body be sicke and diseased, how can the whole be sound? The church also is not ashamed to confesse her selfe to be blacke. Cant. 1.5. she shalbe made bewtifull and glorious without all spot & blemish in the kingdome of God: and euen now also is made righteous and iust before God through Christ: not because she hath no sinne, but because it is remitted: and although some errors and imperfections remaine, yet shall they be no hinderaunce to her saluation.

The Protestantes.

WE doubt not to say, that the church of God may erre in some points not necessarie to saluation: but can not fall cleane away from God into any dānable error. Fulk. annot. in Ephe. 5. ver. 29. That the church may erre, as we say, we do shew it thus: and by the Church, we vnderstand the whole companie and congregation, the pastors with the people.

1 When our Sauiour Christ suffred, the church erred in faith, Ergo it may erre: the proposition is thus proued. The church was either in the Scribes and Pharisies, or els in the Apostles: but both of them erred: they in putting Christ to death, the other in their incredulitie, not beleeuing rightlie in the resurrection of Christ.

Bellarmine aunswereth, first that the Pharisies were priuiledged not to erre,Lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 17. onely till the cōming of Christ. We replie againe. First, after Christ was come they sate in Moses chaire, and Christ biddeth they should be heard. Math. 23.2. if they erred not afore, neither could they now, for they were not displaced out of Moses chaire: but the truth is, they neuer had any such priuiledge not to erre. Secondly, if the Pharisies were now prone to error, then by our aduersaries owne confession, they ceased to be the church, Ergo the church was not now visible, for in them it was not: and the Apostles fled from Christ, and shifted for them selues: how could then the church be visible to the world?

Secondly, the Iesuite aunswereth concerning the Apostles. First, the Apostles were not yet entred into their office and Bishoprike, but onely appointed to it, and therefore they might erre. We replie againe. First they were not onely appointed Apostles, but partly already they had exercised their Apostleship: for they were sent forth to preach the Gospell, and had power and commission to worke miracles, and heale diseases Math. 10▪ how then is not the Iesuite ashamed to say, that they were not yet Pastors nor Apostles? Secondly, if [Page] the Pharisies erred, and the Apostles erred, then all the world was in error, Ergo by their saying at this instant there was no church vpon the earth, which is a great absurditie, for the church erreth not, they say.

Secondly, (saith the Iesuite) the Apostles erred not in faith: they were reproued for not beleeuing the resurrection: which beliefe because they had not yet receiued, they could not loose it. We reply. First, though they had not erred in any materiall point: yet if there were any error at all in them, it is sufficient for our purpose: that they erred it is manifest, for they fled away from Christ. Secondly, he excuseth them for their infidelitie concerning the resurrection, because this faith they had not yet receiued. But had not Christ (I pray you) often instructed them of this matter: and if this were no such error in them, then Christ was to sharpe in reprouing them for their infidelitie. Thirdly, it appeareth, that they wholly were deceiued concerning the Messiah: Luke. 24.21. the two Disciples say, they trusted that it had bene he that should haue deliuered Israell: see then what weake aunswers these are: did these felowes thinke, that their gloses should not be examined? or that their dreames should be taken for oracles?

2 The church of the Iewes erred before our Sauiour Christes comming, Ergo the true church may erre.

The proposition is proued: In the time of the raigne of good kings, they did offer sacrifice vpon hill altars, but onely to the Lord, which was an error. 2. Kings. 12.3.14.4. The feast of the Passeouer was not kept so precisely according to Gods word at any time before, no not in the raigne of the best kings, as it was in the 18. yeare of Iosias raigne, 2. King. 23.22. The feast of Tabernacles had not bene so solemnly and truly kept from the dayes of Iosua, as it was in Nehemiahs time▪ Nehem. 8.18. Ergo all this while the church of the Iewes erred somewhat in the externall worship of God. Fulk. Ephes. cap. 5. Sect. 4.

Cont. 2. Epist. Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 7.3 Augustine saith, Quomodo erit Ecclesia in isto tempore, perfecta sine macula & ruga, cuius mēbra non mendaciter confitentur se habere peccata. How can the church be perfect in this life, without spot or wrincle, whose members do truly confesse, that they are not without sinne? Ergo the church sinneth and is imperfect, and why not subiect to error? But in the Councell of Basill it was denied, as ye heard, that the church could sinne.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER THE visible Church may fayle vpon the earth.

The Papistes.

error 17 THey hold that it is impossible that the visible church should vtterly fayle vpon the earth, and fall from God, but that there shall alwayes be a visible and knowen church vpon the earth, hauing a perpetuall succession of Pastors and Doctors, where the true worship of God shalbe preserued and kept. Bellarmin. lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 13.

[Page]1 These and such places of Scripture they stand vpon, Math. 16. the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it, Math. 28. I wilbe with you to the end of the world. Psal. 88. his throne shalbe as the Sunne, and endure as the Moone, Ergo the visible church shall not fayle vpon earth. Bellarmin.

We aunswere: that these places must be vnderstood, of the catholike and vniuersall church, whereof we denie not, but euery true particular church is a part. This church is the spouse of Christ, this church shall not perish, this is the kingdome of Christ, with this church will he alway be present to the end of the world: we denie not but that the inuisible church shall continue vpon the earth so long as the world endureth. Secondly, those places are vnproperly vnderstood of the visible church, for therein are both good and bad: how thē can that be the spouse of Christ, where there are many infidels and wicked ones, which haue not espoused themselues vnto him? how can it be called his kingdome, whereas it is not of all acknowledged? But in the true catholike church all and euery one are espoused to Christ: all and euery one haue the kingdome of God within them, as it is Luke. 17. ver. 21.

2 They do abuse that place of S. Paule Ephe. 4.11. he gaue some to be Apostles, some Euangelistes, some pastors and teachers, for the gathering together of the Saints: Ergo the church shall alwayes be visible till all the Saintes are gathered together. Bellarmin. cap. 13. Rhemistes. Ephes. 4. Sect. 5.

We aunswere: this place proueth that the church hath neuer wanted pastors and teachers for the continuance of the truth, neither shall euer be without them, as the Lord said by the Prophet Isay. 59. ver. 21. My spirite, which is vpō thee, & my words which I haue put into thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor the mouth of thy seede for euer. We therfore denie not but that in all ages, yea in the most ignoraunt times of Poperie, God raised vp faithfull teachers vnto his church: although they were not mitred and croziard Bishops, neither could shew any outward pompe or boast of any glorious successiō: Such were Gulielmus de S. Amore, Arnoldus de noua villa. an. 1240. Berengarius, Ioachim Abbas, in the time of Innocentius 3. Wikclef, Bruto, Swinderby, Ex Foxi Protestat. Badby, and others about. anno. 1400. with many, which were not knowen to the world: for the truth neuer in any age wanted witnesses.

By the continuance of the truth and right faith, we gather, that there haue bene alwayes faithfull teachers, though not notorious to the world, and shalbe: but who they were, and where they liued, what pompe, what authoritie they were of, it is not materiall to know: wherefore an outward visible succession of Bishops and Pastors is not necessarie for the continuance of the truth: neither can it be concluded out of this place.

3 Thus they reason, there haue bene alwayes some faithfull men, which haue outwardly professed their faith: for if they dissembled or cloaked their profession, then were they not faithfull: Ergo the church hath bene alwayes visible, as in the time of persecution. Bellarmine.

We aunswere. First, the Iesuite doth cleane peruert and chaunge the state [Page] of the question: for he defineth a visible church, to be multitudo congregata, in qua sint praelati & subditi: a multitude or companie gathered together, where there are both Prelates and Bishops, and people obediēt vnto them. And now he geueth an instance of persecution, wherein some faithfull Christians may geue an outward profession of their faith: where is now that multitude congregate together? where is that iurisdiction of Prelates? where is that visible and glorious succession? We denie not but that in time of persecution the faithfull may be knowen to them selues: and yet some time they are not: for in Israell there were seuen thousand faithfull beside Elias, yet he knew none of them. But it foloweth not, that therefore the church is then visible to the world, and notoriously knowen to men, for so the Rhemistes say, in Math. 5. Sect. 3. & Act. 11. Sect. 3. Thus they flye manifestly from the question.

The Protestantes.

WE denie not, but that the catholike vniuersall church, as it hath hitherto continued since the beginning of the world, so shall it endure to the end: the Lord shall neuer want vpon earth a companie of faithfull men, which shall truly serue him: though it be not necessarie, neither hath alwayes bene seene, that they should be in any one place. A visible church we define to be a congregation of men, amongest whom the word is truly preached, and the Sacraments administred: such a Church hath not alwayes bene, neither can we be assured that it shall alway be found vpon the earth, wherein the worship of God publikely and visibly is practised.

1 In the raigne of Ahaz king of Iuda there was no visible church, where the pure worship of God was practised, for both Israell vnder Pekah, and Iuda vnder Ahaz, fell to Idolatrie, and folowed the custome of the Gētiles. 2. Kings. 16.3. yea Vriah the high Priest consented with the king to set vp Idolatrie. Likewise in the dayes of Manasseh, who did euill after the abhomination of the heathen. 2. Kings. 21.2. there was no place, where God was publikely worshipped. for Iudah was corrupted, Israell was carried away captiue, Ergo there was a time, when there was no visible Church.

2 In the Passion of our Sauiour there was no visible church, such a church we still meane, as where there are, Prelati & subditi, pastores & oues, Prelates and people, pastors and sheepe. We proue it thus.

The visible Church was not amongest the Pharisies and Priests, for they shamefully and wickedly erred. Bellarmin. 17. It was not among the Apostles, for they also erred, therfore after the Papists opiniō they were not the Church: for the Church (say they) erreth not. Secondly he saith, they were yet but materiall partes, not formall, that is, not Bishops or Pastors, how then could there be a visible Church, which was without the formal and principall parts, that is Pastors and Bishops, Ergo there was then no visible Church.

3 When the abhominatiō of desolation shall stand in the temple, & there shalbe a generall defection and apostasie from the faith, then shall the visible [Page] church fayle vpon earth: But the first is true Math. 24.15. 2. Thess. 2.3. Ergo.

To the first place the Iesuite aunswereth that it must be vnderstood of the destruction of the temple. cap. 16. But the Rhemistes more liberall then so, affirme that it shalbe especially accomplished in Antichristes time, when as the sacrifice of the Masse shall vtterly be abolished. annot. in Math. 24. ver. 15.

To the next place, cōcerning that defectiō & apostasie, which S. Paul speaketh of, first he saith, that it shalbe a defection from the Romane Empire: but the Rhemistes say, it shalbe a defection frō most points of Christian Religion. Secondly, the Iesuite aunswereth, that though it be a defection from the Romane faith, yet it shall not be generall but particular: but the Rhemistes better aduised graunt it shalbe a reuolt of kingdomes, peoples, prouinces: & the publike entercourse of the faithfull with the church of Rome shall cease, they shall onely communicate with it in hart. annot. in 2. Thess. 2. Sect. 6.

Now out of their owne wordes we conclude: there shalbe a time whē as the publike seruice of God shall cease, there shalbe desolation in the Churches and temples of Christians: there shalbe then no publike entercourse with the Church, but a priuat communicating in hart, Ergo there shalbe a time, when there shalbe no outward visible Church notoriously and famously knowen: Ergo our aduersaries are in an error, & are condemned by their owne mouth.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE notes and markes, whereby the true Church may be discerned and knowen.
FIRST OF THE FALSE AND ERROneous notes of the Church.

OVr aduersaries do deuise many notes, whereby their Church is discryed, as Bellarmine reckoneth vp▪ 15. in order, to many (certaine) to be found in a good Church: but there are six principall, which they doe most stand vpon: antiquitie, vniuersalitie, succession, vnitie, the power of miracles, the gift of prophesie. We must first touch these in order, and then come to the true and infallible notes of the Church.

Of antiquitie. Note. 1.

THe Papists make great bragges of the long continuance of their Church: yea that they can shew the discent of their Church from Adam. Rhemistes.error 18 annot. in Act. 28. Sect. 5. But (alacke) sillie men they must come short of our Sauiuiour Christs and the Apostles time, by fiue or six hundred yeares, for the most of the opinions, which they now hold. Let vs examine their reasons.

In any great chaunge of Religion (say they) the authors of the Sect, the time when it began, the persons that oppugned it may be knowen: but no such thing can be shewed of our Church (say they) as we can shew of yours, we can [Page] tell them the yeare, the places, and ringleaders of their reuolt, say our English Rhemistes. annot. in 1. Iohan. 2. Sect. 9. Bellarmin. lib. 4. de Eccles. cap. 5.

We aunswere. First, no meruaile if Papistrie herein do much differ from other heresies: they, as the heresies of the Arrians, Pelagians, Donatistes, because they were not long to continue, sodainly brake out, and sodainly againe were extinguished. But Papistrie, being the prop and pillar of Antichrists kingdome, by whom the world must be deluded many yeares, was at the beginning to worke closely and secretly, not breaking out at once into open impietie and blasphemie, but vnder pretense of holynesse, to set a broach her deadly poyson: therefore S. Paule calleth it a mysterie of antiquitie, which began euen to worke in his dayes. 2. Thess. 2.7.

Secondly, we also aunswere, that all these things, the authors of their sectes, the time, the persons that withstood them, may manifestly be detected: first concerning the time, we haue a manifest Prophesie, Apocal. 20. that Sathan should be bound a thousand yeares, and afterward let loose: when no doubt Antichrist should begin to shew him selfe to the world. Cōcerning this space of a thousand yeares, there are two probable opinions: some thinke they are to begin immediatly after our Sauiour Christes time, and so counting a thousand yeares, all which time Sathan must be bound, then Antichrist should begin to appeare.Fox▪ pag. 426. Thus Iohn Wicliffe expoundeth it. Others say the thousand yeares ought to begin after the three hundred yeares expired of persecution: for all that while it is most like Sathan was let loose, when he raged with opē mouth like a Lion against the Church and Saints of God: of this opinion was Walter Brute somewhat after Wicliffes time: who by this meanes maketh the Prophesie of Daniell of 1290. dayes,Fox. 480. and that in the Apocalipse 12. of 1260. dayes, to agree with the thousand yeares of Sathans binding: for taking euery day for a yeare, we shall come to .1290. yeares after Christ: when the thousand yeares must be expired, beginning from the three hundred yeares of persecution. If we count the thousand yeares from Christ, we shall come to the time of Hildebrand the seuenth, who was Pope of Rome, a thousand yeares after Christ and vpward: by whom the mariage of Ministers is thought first to haue bene forbidden: if we begin after the ceasing of persecution, which continued three hundred yeares, we shall fall into the yeare .1300. about the time of Iohn Wicliffe, Fox. pag. 101. whē the great rabble of Monkes and Friers began to swarme, and superstition to encrease.

But we will take a litle payne briefly to touch the authors of many superstitions in Poperie, and of their erronious and hereticall opinions. Anno. 420. Zosimus Bishop of Rome did chalenge a prerogatiue aboue other Churches, that it might be lawfull to make appeales frō other Churches to that sea: and to set the better colour vpon it, he falsely alledged a decree of the Nicene Coū cell, but there was no such thing found there: wherefore it was decreed in the Councell of Carthage at that time, that none should appeale ouer the seas to Rome.

[Page] Bonifice the third, purchased of the wicked Emperour Phocas the title of vniuersall Bishop. Transubstantiation was first concluded against Berengarius anno. 1062. vnder Leo the ninth, but not publikely enacted before anno. 1216. vnder Innocentius the third. The Dominicke Friers brought in the same time,Fox. Martyrol. pag. 1147. and their Sect established by Innocentius the third. Auricular confession also was brought in anno. 1215. vnder the same Pope.

Mariage first prohibited by Nicholas the secōd, Alexander the second, Gregorie the seuenth, about the yeare 1070. The Communion in one kinde forged and inuented, and decreed in the Councell of Constance, not aboue two hūdred yeares ago. By these few examples it may appeare that it is false which the Iesuite saith, that the authors of their sectes and heresies cā not be shewed.

Now we will briefly declare, what oppugners and gainsayers they haue had in all ages, since their grossest opinions began to be receiued: Such were Bertramus and Berēgarius about pope Hildebrands time▪ that mightily impugned the grosse opinion of Trāsubstantiatiō. Robertus Gallus 1291. Robert Grosthead Bishop of Lincolne, who was called malleus Romanorū, the mallet or hammar of the Romanes anno. 1250. Franciscus Petrarcha 1350. Iohannes de rupe Scissa, who Prophesied against the Pope 1340. with many other,Fox. Protest. which ceased not to crye out against the abhominable vices and erronious opinions of the Church of Rome. Wherefore it is a great vntruth, which the Iesuite doth so stifly auouch that we can not set down the pedegree & discent of their church and faith, and how it hath continually bene resisted.

3 Now whereas they say, that they can name the ringleaders of our sect: we haue none other maisters and authors of our faith, then our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles, by whose holy writings we refuse not to be tryed: But you flye from the light: you disgrace the Scriptures, making them imperfect, and insufficient: this the true Disciples of Christ would not do, you are the Disciples of Christ, as the Pharisies bragged, that they were the Disciples of Moses: And as then the true church was not in those that sat in Moses chaire, though they could alledge great antiquitie, but in Christ and his Apostles: so is not now the true Church to be discerned, by custome or number of yeares, but by that truth, which was taught and preached by our blessed Sauiour, and his Apostles.

Of Vniuersalitie. Note. 2.

OVr Church is vniuersall, say they, both in respect of time, person, & place,error 19 it hath alwayes bene in the world, in all countrys and nations it hath florished, Ergo it is the true Church.

That it is vniuersall, they first proue by the name of Catholike, which is, say they, by Gods prouidence appropriat to them, which name they affirme without ground to haue bene imposed by the Apostles vpon true beleeuers. Rhem. in Act. cap. 11. Sect. 4.

We aunswere. First, the name of Christians is a more honorable title then [Page] the name of Catholikes: for it is manifest Act. 11.26. that this name was vsed in the Apostles time, and by the Apostles them selues allowed: but it is not certaine that the name Catholike came from the Apostles. Againe many heretikes chalenged this name to be called Catholikes, who did not so easily obtaine to be called Christians: which ancient and honorable name the Papistes do despise, for in Italie and at Rome it is vsed as a name of reproch, to signifie a dolt or a foole. Fulk. in Acts. 11.26.

2 We say that you doe vsurpe this name, as the Donatistes in Augustines time would be called Catholikes: for what is the name of Catholike, without the Catholike doctrine? They are the true Catholikes, that professe the auncient and Apostolike faith: to vs therefore, be it knowen to you, this name of better right appertaineth, then to you (ô ye Papists) yet we haue better argumentes to proue our Church by, then by sillables and titles: Quasi nos (saith Augustine) huius nominis testimonio nitamur ad demonstrandam Ecclesiam, Epist. 48. & non promissis Dei. As though we (saith he) do leane vpon this name to proue our Church by, and not rather vpon the promises of God.

Secondly, they proue their vniuersalitie, by the multitude of people, that haue receiued the Romish faith: and their Church (say they) hath replenished the greatest part of the world. They would proue this by the propagation of the Church, in the Apostles time, in Tertulian, Irenaeus, Hierome, Augustine, yea and afterward in Gregories dayes: yea and now also besides many great countryes in Europe, they haue of their church in India, America, & the vnknowen parts of the world. Bellarmin. cap. 7. nota. 4.

We aunswere. First, the truth is not alwayes to be measured by the iudgement or opinion of the multitude: folow not a multitude saith the Scripture to do euill: the greatest part is not the best: Christ calleth his flocke pusillum gregem, a litle flocke, feare not litle flocke (saith he). Secondly, you haue nothing to do with the Church, which was propagated in the Apostles time, nor for the space of fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ: it was not your Church, for the most of your heresies are more lately sprong vp then so. And you need not bragge of your vniuersalitie now: for the Turke (I trow) hath a larger dominion then the Pope, and Mahometisme is as largely spread as Papistrie, and further to: And for Europe, I hope you neede not make your boast: the Pope had neuer lesse iurisdiction, then he hath now, and I trust euery day, shall haue lesse. But many (you say) in the new found countryes, haue bene cōuerted to your religiō. In deed, if you had had grace, such an opportunitie being offered as the Spaniards had, you might haue won that simple people to Christ. But you thirsted more for their gold, then for their soules health: it is notoriously knowen to the world, what extreme crueltie hath bene wrought vpon that innocent people. Was that a Catholike part of the Spaniardes to keepe dogges of purpose, to werry and destroy the inhabitants, to vse them as horse and beastes, to plough, to carry, to digge? Thus by your crueltie, there were out of one small Iland called Hispaniola, which was well peopled and inhabited, [Page] destroyed and rooted out in short time, two milions of men and women, the storie of Benzo an Italian is abroad to be seene of this matter: you haue none or few of your Popish Catholikes in those countryes, but of your owne brood, that haue bene sent thither, but enough of this.

3 We nothing doubt, but that our faith, the truth of the Gospell hath bene long since knowen and published to the whole world.

Those two cōditions, which the Iesuite putteth in, to make the Church vniuersall, do helpe vs very well: the first is, that it is not necessarie, that all coū tryes wholly should professe the Christiā faith: but it suffiseth, if there be some of the church in euery country: the second, it is not requisite, that this vniuersalitie of the Church should be all at one time, but if it be done successiue, that is, in diuerse ages, one country to be ioyned to the Church after another, it is enough.

Now keeping these two conditions, we shall easily proue our Church to be vniuersall: for there are no countryes in Europe, and few in the whole world, wherein there are not some of our faith, namely that abhorre worshipping of Images, do onely hope to be saued by faith in Christ without merite, and beleeue in the rest, as we do. And againe taking one age after another, we shall easily make it good, that our faith at times hath spread it selfe ouer the whole world.

The third Note of Succession.

THey make great boast of the long and perpetuall successiō of their Popes error 20 from the Apostles for the space of these 1500. yeares and more: condemning all Churches, which can not shew the like order of succession. Bellarmin. cap. 8. Rhemist. annot. in Ephe. 4. ver. 13.

We aunswer. First, they can not shew such an entier and perpetuall successiō, without any interruptiō or discontinuance for so many yeares: for sometime there were two, sometime three Popes together, and this schisme continued 29. yeares, till the Councell of Constance, where three Popes were deposed at once, Benedict 13. the Spanish Pope: Gregorie 12. the French Pope, and Iohn 23. the Italian Pope.

2 If succession be so sure a note of the Church, it is found also in other Churches besides: as in Cōstātinople, where hath bene a perpetuall succession, as Nicephorus saith, from S. Andrew the Apostle: in Antioch from S. Peter: and in other Churches in Grecia. The Iesuite here is driuen to his shiftes, and hath nothing to say, but this: that the argument foloweth negatiuely, that where there is no succession, there is no Church: not affirmatiuely, that where any succession can be shewed, there straightwayes it should folow there is a true Church: so by the Iesuites owne confession he hath made but a bad argument for the Church of Rome: we haue a perpetuall succession of Popes from the Apostles time, Ergo we are the Church. It foloweth not: saith the Iesuite, we graunt it. Why then a litle before did he call it insolubile argumentum, an insosoluble [Page] and vnanswerable argument.

3 Thirdly we say, that a succession of persons in the same place, without succession of doctrine, which they can not shew, is nothing worth. A succession of the Apostolike faith and doctrine proueth a continuance of pastors and teachers, and not contrariwise. We haue the Apostolike faith, and therefore, we doubt not but that there haue bene continually in the Church faithfull teachers, by whom that doctrine hath bene preserued and kept: though they were not famous, nor carried a glorious shew in the world. For that outward succession is not necessarie, neither so much to be stood vpon. Augustine, whē he had alledged succession against heretikes, concludeth thus: Quanquam non tantū nos de istis documentis praesumamus, Epist. 165. quā de Scripturis sanctis: although (saith he) we presume not so much vpon these documēts as of holy Scripture.

The fourth Note, of Vnitie.

error 21 OVr aduersaries do stand much vpon vnitie: which they thinke is the glorie of their Church: they doe embrace vnitie amongest them selues, and all ioyne in obedience to their head. Their vnitie also is seene, say they, in the wonderfull consent of all their writers in matters of Religion: and the notable agreement and concord in the decrees of their Popes and Councels. But as for vs, and our Church, they say it is full of rents, schismes and diuisions. Bellarm.

First of the vnitie of their church, and then of the vnitie of ours. Their vnitie, they say, is partly seene in their obedience, and louing societie and felowship, partly in their Religion and doctrine.

First for their concord and loue one toward another: we will take some paynes, a litle to decypher it. About the yeare of the Lord 900. there was pretie sport amongest the Popes, nine of them one after another. Stephen the sixth abrogated all his predecessor Formosus decrees: and not content with that, he tooke vp his body which was buried, and cut two fingers of his right hād off, and commaunded his body to be buried againe. After him succeeded Pope Rhomanus, Theodorus the second, Iohn the tenth, who ratified and confirmed the doings of Formosus. After them folowed Pope Sergius, who disanulling all their actes, tooke vp againe the body of Formosus, cut of his head, and commaunded his body to be throwen into Tiber the great riuer in Rome.Fox. pag. 146. Was not here great amitie and loue thinke you, amongest the Popes?

Another notable example of their vnitie we haue in Pope Vrbanus time the 6. against whom stood vp a contrarie Pope in Fraunce named Clement: it is worth the noting, what coyle these two popes kept: between whō many battailes were fought, many thousands slaine. Pope Vrbane beheaded fiue Cardinals together after long torments. Bishop Aquilonensis, because he did ride no faster, was had in suspition, and slayne and cut in peeces by Vrbans souldiers, at his commaundement,Fox. pag. 434. behold here I pray you the vnitie of these Catholikes.

We will adioyne one other example, no longer since, then in king Henry the eights time. The Duke of Bourbon being the leader of the Emperors armie, [Page] layd siege to Rome, and sacked it: the souldiers brake in vpon the Pope, which was Clement the seuenth being at Masse, slew diuerse of the Priests, and one Cardinall called Sanctorum quatuor: they layd siege to the Castle of S. Angell, so long till the Pope yeelded him selfe. The souldiers dayly that lay at the siege, made iestes of the Pope: sometime they had one riding like the Pope with a whore behind him, sometimes he blessed, sometime he cursed: sometime with one voyce they would call him Antichrist. See here is their Catholike obedience to their chief Bishop.Fox. pag. 988. Thus much concerning their vnitie and concord in life.

Let vs likewise take a view of their vnitie in doctrine. We heard before how Pope Stephen and Sergius abolished the decrees of Formosus: how then saith the Iesuite, that the decrees of Popes do consent together? The Councell of Basile, and Constance before that decreed, that the Pope should be subiect to generall Councels: but this Canon was afterward reuersed, and now generally the Papists hold the contrary, that the Pope is aboue Councels.

Let vs see the consent of their writers: Bellarmin. lib. 1. de verbo. cap. 12. maintaineth against Lyranus, Driedo, Genebrard, and others, that Iudith was in Manasses time. Against Alphonsus de Castro, that heretikes are no members of the Church. Lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 4. Against Iohannes de turre cremata, that faith is not necessarie to make one a member of the Church. Lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 10. And euery where the Iesuite taketh great libertie to confute and controll other his felow Papistes: belike hauing found out some starting holes, that they either knew not, or were ashamed to creepe into, as the Iesuite doth.

But (saith he) we denie not but that we haue dissentions, but they are not in materiall points, but in such things as appertaine not to faith. I meruaile, he blusheth not thus to say, him selfe knowing the contrary. Is it not a substantiall point and belōging to faith, to know which bookes are canonicall Scripture, which are not? But in this question they do much disagree. Caietanus the Cardinall saith, that we must acknowledge no Scripture, but that which was either written, or approued by the Apostles. But Catharinus a Papist, doth reiect that opinion. Hugo Cardinalis, Arias Montanus, do hold no bookes of the old Testament to be canonicall, which are written onely in Greeke: the Papistes now generally hold the contrary. Ex Whitacher. 1. contr. c. quaest. cap. 6. Bellarmin saith, that all those opinions, which the Church holdeth, as articles or preceptes of faith, were deliuered by the Apostles: & that the Church must not now seeke for new reuelations, but content her selfe, with the Apostolike traditions and doctrine, de Scriptur. lib. 4. cap. 9. Out of the which words it doth necessarily folow, that the church is not now to foūd any new article of faith: but this generally is denied by the Papistes: and Stapleton an English Papist, is not ashamed to say, that the Church, may adde more bookes to the canonicall Scripture, by her absolute authoritie.

Further, to beleeue that the virgine Marie was without sinne, yea conceiued without originall sinne, is now amongest the Papistes receiued for an article [Page] of faith: and therefore in Paris none are admitted to be Doctors of Diuinitie, which doe not first confirme this article by their oth. Yet this was a great question betweene the Scotistes and Thomistes, and a great and hote contention arose about this controuersie anno. 1476. betweene the Dominicke Friers, who affirmed that she was conceiued in sinne, and the Franciscanes, that held the contrary.Fox. pag. 801. But these Franciscanes had the vpper hand, and foure of the other order were condemned and burned for it at Berne: and yet for all this our aduersaries will say still, that they varie not▪ in matters of faith. Thus we haue seene, what is to be thought of Popish vnitie.

Now to answere briefly to their false accusation, whereby they charge vs with manifold schismes and dissentions: yea Bellarmin is not ashamed to say, that an hundred seuerall sectes are sprong amongest vs. cap. 10. lib. 4. de Eccles.

1 We say with S. Paule: oportet haereses esse. 1. Cor. 11. there must be heresies and diuisions in the Church. And it is a signe we haue the truth, when the deuill goeth about by schismes and contentions to hinder the preaching thereof. We answere to you, as Augustine did to the paganes. Non proferant nobis quasi concordiam suam: hostem quippe, quem patimur, illi non patiuntur: Let them not boast of their concord, and cast in our teeth the dissention of Christians: the enemie assaulteth not them as he doth vs: Quid ibi luchri est, quia litigant, vel damni si litigant: the deuill shall get nothing if they should disagree, nor lose any thing by their agreement: for he hath sure hold enough of them already, consenting all in Idolatrie. But amongest Christians he laboureth to hinder the truth by discord, because he can not otherwise withdraw them frō the true Religion. Hearken now (ô ye Papistes) if you consent together, it is in euill: so long it pleaseth the deuill well enough: he should destroy his owne kingdome in sowing dissention amongest you, for you fight for him. He vseth to cast fire brands amongest good Christians, to withstand by this meanes the proceeding of the Gospell.

2 It is a great sclaunder, that there are so many diuisions amongest vs: an hundred saith the Iesuite, but he shall neuer proue ten. He might haue bethought him selfe of a full hundred of sectes amongest his owne darlings the Monkes and Friers, as M. Fox hath faithfully gathered the number. pag. 260.

3 Those few schismes and dissentions, which we haue (and yet to many, we must needes confesse) are not about points of faith, and articles of Religion: but concerning some things belonging to discipline and Church gouernement: which matters we denie not, but haue bene somewhat to hotely and egerlie folowed of some amongest vs: but God be thanked, this contention hath not bene pursued by fire or death, as the Franciscanes did persecute the poore Dominickes: nor yet to the pronouncing of ech other heretikes, as Eugenius your Pope was condemned as an hereticke in the Councell of Basile.

[Page]

The fift Note of the power of working miracles.

THis they affirme both to be necessarie in the Church, to haue power to work error 22 miracles, for the confirmation of the faith, when there is any extraordinarie chaunge or innouation of religion, and that it is a sufficient note to describe the Church: for it cannot bee, say they, but that, wheresoeuer this power is found, there should be the true Church.

And hereupon they take occasion to extoll the miracles of their Church: beginning at the Apostles time, and so in euerie age they take vpon them to shew, that their Church neuer wanted those that were endued with this power. Bellar. cap. 14.

We answere. First, the gift of miracles doth no more prooue that to bee the true Church where they are wrought, then they to be holie men and elected of God, that doe them: The Magicians wrought many straunge things in Aegypt, cōtending a great while with Moses: Antichrist shal come working with signes and wonders. 2. Thessal. 2. Therefore this proueth not a Church. But heere they haue a double euasion: these were false miracles, wrought by the diuell, as those of the Magicians, or els but forged, and onely to the eye, and in outward appearance, as Antichrist is sayd to come with lying wonders. We replye. First, they are called lying wonders, not that they are done in shewe onely, and haue no such thing indeede, but because they are wrought to confirme lyes, and discredite the trueth. Secondly, your miracles are very like to be such, both wrought by the power of the diuell, and some of them but iugling feates of cousoners. Thirdly, yet a wicked man may haue power to worke miracles, not in shewe, but verily and indeed, as to cast out diuels, and to doe it in the name and power of Christ, and yet be none of Christs disciples. Matth. 7.22.

2 Concerning your miracles wee answere, that they are either fables, and old wiues tales, and no credite to bee giuen vnto them, or els they are one of those two sorts, whereof Augustine speaketh:De vnitat. eccl. cap. 16. Remoueantur ista vel mendacia fallacium hominum, vel portenta mēdacium spirituum. Away with those miracles, which are either cousoning trickes of deceitfull men, or wonders of lying spirits.

First, Monkish fables are not a whit daintie with our Romish Catholikes, their Legendes are full of them: As that of Berinus, how being in the middest of the sea, sayling into France, hauing forgotten somewhat at home,Fox pag. 122. went back walking vpon the sea, and came to them againe hauing not one thred of his garment wet. Many like tales are reported of Aldelmus Abbot of Malmesburie, as how he caused an infant at Rome of nine daies olde to speake, to cleare Sergius the Pope, who was thought to be his father: how he drew along a great piece of timber, that went to the making of the Church at Malmesburie. Such good stuffe also they haue of Iohn of Beuerley, of Egwine Abbot of Euesham, who when he had locked his feete in fetters, and cast the key into the sea, afterward a fish brought the key againe into the ship where he was sayling. Reade M. Foxe [Page]pag. 125. All these and a thousand more are but Monkish fables and dreames, whatsoeuer the Iesuite maketh of them.

Secondly, it is out of doubt, that some of them were well practised with the diuell, and through his helpe could doe much. We will begin with Dunstane, who caused a Roode to speake, which was more strange, then that of Balaams asse: for the asse had life, though she had no reason, but this image had neither: Polidore Virgil thinketh little better of Dunstane for this deede doing, but that he was a sorcerer. Fox. pag. 158.

It is famous in histories, how Siluester the 2. was aduaunced to the Papacie by the diuell, and gaue himselfe vnto him, and how, hauing some remorse before his death, he confessed the fact before the people, and willed that his bodie should be drawne of wilde horse when he was dead,Fox. pag. 167. and there be buried where the horse left it of their owne accord. How much such diabolicall practises are fauoured by the sea of Rome, may appeare by this one example, which we will now touch: In Pope Adrians dayes, not many yeares agoe, there was a most abhominable thing practised in Rome, euen vnder the Popes nose, and by his permission and sufferance. The citie of Rome being at that time grieuouslie scourged and punished of God with the pestilence, there was one Demetrius a Grecian, who with the good liking of the whole citie, to appease the wrath of their gods, tooke a wild Bull, whom with magicall enchantments he made so tame, that he led him with a twine thred,Ex Paul. Iouio tom. 2. lib. 21. and so sacrificed him: And this being done, the sicknes somewhat slaked. Call ye this the Church of God, that suffreth such heathenish and abhominable superstitions to be done in it? Or shall I take these men for Christians, that doe allow the idolatrous and diuellish sacrifices of the heathen?

Thirdly, let vs see what pretie fine iugling casts haue been wrought by the Papists to deceiue the people. In King Henries dayes, there was a monstrous Idoll called the Rood of grace, which was made so with wiers and ingins, that one standing within could make euery part of the Idoll to moue, the hands, the eyes, the mouth: if a man brought but a small piece of siluer, it would hang downe the lippe; if it were a good piece, then should his iawes goe merilie: This abhominable Idoll by the Lord Cromwels meanes was broken downe, and the engines and parts thereof shewed at Paules Crosse. Such a like thing was the bloud of Hales, which they made the people beleeue was some of Christs bloud, but in the ende it was found to be but the bloud of a drake, and shewed likewise at Paules Crosse. Fox. pag. 1188. At Calis in the Sepulchre, it was said, there were three hostes besprinkled with bloud (as it was put in writing vnder Bull and Pardon:) but the place being searched at King Henries commaundement, they found three white counters sodred in the stone with the top-bone of a sheepes tayle. pag. 1223. A thousand such forged deuises the Papists had, which they are not ashamed to maintaine for straunge and holy miracles. By this that hath been shewed, it is euident (I hope) to the indifferent reader, what small cause our aduersaries haue, to boast of their miracles.

[Page]3 Now to adde somewhat concerning the miracles of our Church. First, we truely say, that our doctrine is not newe nor straunge, and therefore, they are not to call for miracles at our hands. The miracles of Christ and his Apostles, are also our miracles, seeing we professe the same doctrine, which was confirmed by those miracles. Secondly, yet, the Lord be thanked, we are not destitute of miracles, as Augustine saith: Modò caro caeci non aperit oculos miraculo domini, at cor caecum aperit oculos sermone domini. Now, saith he, the blind doth not receiue his bodily sight by the power of Christ, but the blind heart is lightened and illuminate through the Gospell of Christ: Such miracles (the Lord be blessed) we can shewe: sinners are conuerted, afflicted consciences are comforted, the ignorant are instructed, many are called by the preaching of the Gospell. Thirdly, if this will not content them, but they still crye with open mouth, and say, where are your miracles? Behold, to stop their wide and clamorous mouth, we will shewe them also such miracles, as they looke for, like to which they haue none. Was not that a miracle, which Oecolampadius reporteth to haue been done at the Martyrdome of Master Hugh Spengler: who being cast into the water and so drowned, presently all the water was coloured with bloud,Ann. 1525. he hauing receiued no wound nor hurt in his bodie before: at the which all the people were greatly amazed?

But what thinke you of that straunge signe which George Scherrer shewed at his death, who being beheaded, the bodie lay a pretie space vpon the bellie, till one might haue eaten an egge, and then turned it selfe vpon the backe, & crossed the right hand ouer the left, and the right legge ouer the left: the Magistrates seeing it, hauing condemned his bodie to be burned before, being moued at the sight hereof, caused it to be buried. Fox ex Math. Illyrico.

It is worth the remembring, that is reported in the French stories of Petrus Burgerius a blessed Martyr: who was cast into a filthie dungeon, where a theefe had lien the space of eight moneths, being almost eaten vp with lice, and in such miserie, that he cursed his parents that bare him. This man through the teaching and the prayers of the Martyr, felt such comfort in the Gospell, that he became very patient in his affliction: and after his conuersion this straunge thing was wrought vpon him: that whereas before he was so full of lice,Fox ex Ioh. Crispin. pag. 907. that he might haue plucked out twelue at once betweene two of his fingers, the next day he had not one.

Now, because the Iesuite hath such a spite at Luther (he is a great eye sore to him) we will in a word or two declare what straunge things were wrought by Luther. It is credible reported of him, that a certaine young man had bound himselfe by obligation to the diuell, sealed with his bloud to giue him his soule, so he might haue his wish and desire satisfied with money: In short time hee grewe to great wealth: the matter being disclosed with much adoe to Luther, he calleth the congregation together, and ioyneth in prayer for this yong man: and as they prayed, the obligation was cast in at the windowe.Fox. pag. 864. A notable and straunge miracle, which is crediblie reported of Luther.

[Page]He was a man feruent in prayer: one might haue seen the teares falling from his eyes as he prayed: And as he was earnest in prayer, so his prayers wanted not effect, for as he himselfe confessed, he had obtayned of God, that so long as he liued, the Pope should not preuayle in his countrey. And is not this also a thing to be wondred at, that for all the Pope and Emperour ioyned together, & bent their forces against this silly poore man; yet the Lord defended him from the Lyons teeth, and graunted him to end his dayes in peace?

Thus it is apparant and manifest, that the Lorde sheweth his miraculous power manie times in his Saints, to astonish the wicked: The great miracles which haue been declared in their holy martyrdomes, would fil a large volume: And by the grace of God, hereafter we may haue occasion in an other treatise of purpose, more at large to publish them. But these arguments wee doe not chiefly stand vpon: Yet thus much was not amisse by the way to be put in, to requite our aduersaries withall, who doe so greatly magnifie and extoll their Antichristian Church, for their lying and fayned miracles.

The sixte Note of the gift of Prophecying.

error 23 THis also our aduersaries holde to be a perpetuall marke, whereby to knowe the Church: for they say that the true Church of GOD wanteth not those which are endewed with the spirit of prophecie: And so they beare vs in hand, that in euery age there hath flourished some Prophet in their Church: the first, that the Church shall alwayes haue Prophets, they would prooue out of Ioel 2. I will power of my spirit vpon all flesh. The second, that they haue had such prophets, they do infer vppon a few forged examples, of Saint Barnard, and S. Frauncis, a popish Saint, and the founder of the superstitious order of the Franciscanes.

To the first we aunswere. 1. The prophecie of Ioel was accomplished in the Apostles time, Act. 2. as S. Peter expoundeth it, and therefore we need not looke further for the fulfilling of it. 2. The Church of the Iewes wanted Prophets for the space of 4. hundred years and more before the comming of Christ: for we read of no Prophet after Malachy: and the Church complayneth of this want, Psalm. 74. verse. 9. that they had Prophets no more: wherefore, the Church of God after the comming of Christ, may better spare this extraordinary function of prophecying, seeing both Christ is already come, who was the very subiect and matter of all the auncient prophecies: And wee haue also most euident prophecies of the Apostles, Rom. 11. cōcerning the calling of the Iewes, 2. Thes. 2. of Antichrist, in the Apocalipse of the general estate & conditiō of the Church to the end of the world: Som of which are already accomplished, som to be fulfilled in their seasō: In these prophecies we must rest & cōtent our selues, not looking for new reuelations. 3. There haue been Prophets amongst the heathen, out of the Church of God: they also can bring foorth diuers olde prophecies: so that if the issue lay in this poynt, they might as well contend to be the [Page] Church of God.Iustin. lib. 1. Astiages dreamed that hee sawe a Vine growing out of his daughter, that couered all Asia: which came to passe in Cyrus. Augustine reporteth a prophecie of Hermes Trismegistus, De ciuit. dei lib. 8. cap. 26 how that all the Images and Idols of the heathen should be broken downe through all Aegypt. The Indians were foretolde of the Spaniards comming many a yeare before their arriuall in those places: Their Zemes, that is, their diuels, which they worshipped as Gods, told them, that there should come a people with long beards, fierce and cruell, that at one stroke should strike men off by the middle: And all these thinges fell out afterwards to that nation accordingly.Benzo. lib. 1. cap. [...].

But they wil answere, that these were not true prophecies inspired of God, but vncertaine predictions of the diuell. What will they say then to Balaam, that prophecied of Christ? there shall come a starre of Iacob (saith he) Numb. 24.17, and in the same place he sayth, he heard the words of God.

The prophecies also of Sibill are wonderfull: which many yeares before the comming of Christ, prophecied of his incarnation, and of his passion, with the circumstances thereof, as how he should be crowned with thornes, that they should giue him vineger to drinke, how the vaile of the temple should be rent, & darknes should couer the earth for three houres: & he himself should rise the third day: yea she setteth down the very name of the Messiah, Iesus Christ. Aug. cont. Iudaeos. ca. 16. Tom. 6. These prophecies came not of the diuell, for these mysteries, without all doubt were not known to the euill spirits: for they were not fully reuealed to the Angels thē selues before the cōming of Christ. Eph. 3.10. Wherfore we conclude thus, that as the gift of prophecying is no sure signe that they are mēbers of the Church & elected of God, which are endued with it: as Christ saith, Math 7.22. that many which had prophecied in his name, in the day of iudgemēt should be refused: & Balaam is set forth as an example of a false Prophet & wicked mā: Ep. Iude. 11: so neither is this gift an infallible mark of the Church of God, whersoeuer it is foūd.

To the second part, concerning this miraculous gift which our aduersaries pretend to haue: we answere. 1. They are but fables which they bring: for if al that is reported of Saint Bernard in his life, of his miracles, and prophecies, were true, neither S. Paul nor any of the Apostles were to be compared vnto him for number of miracles: such casting out of diuels out of men, women and children, healing of strange diseases, foretelling of thinges to come: the Gospell almost hath not stranger things of our Sauiour Christ.

As for Saint Francis, you may gesse by this, what spirit he was of, that prescribing to his followers, a certaine strict order of liuing, as to wear no girdle, to goe barefoote, and such like, he called it regulam euangelicam, the rule of the Gospell: belike making himselfe an other Christ, and so bringing in another Gospel: for to all Christs Disciples Christs Gospel [...] is sufficient. 2. But if they haue any prophecies of credit, which they can shew, they are such, as are reported, of Pope Siluester the 2. who had warrant from the diuel; that he should not die before he sung Masse in Ierusalem: and so it came to passe, for hauing sung Masse in a chappell so called, he immediately dyed. Not much vnlike to this was that of king Henry the 4. who ended his life in a chamber at Westminster [Page] called Ierusalem, as he had an olde prophecie. Edward the 4. also was tolde that his successours name should begin with G. which was the cause of George the Duke of Clarence death, his owne brother: but the diuelish prophecie notwithstanding tooke place,Fox. p. 717. for Richard Duke of Glocester was king after him. In like manner Valence the Emperour had a blind prophecie, that one should raigne after him, whose name began with Theod. which made Theodorus to rebell against him: but so it came to passe in deede, that Theodosius was Emperour after him. Such blinde prophecies we denie not but the popish Church hath had many, which as you see, doo cause murder, sedition, and bloodshed: but other good prophecies comming of GOD, wee knowe them not to haue any.

3. Wee denie not, but that there haue liued some amongst them in their Church, which in those dayes were counted Prophets and Prophetisses, as Hildegardis, anno 1146. likewise Briget, Catherine Seuensis: whom Bellarmine reckoneth vp amongst others that wrought miracles. cap. 14. but concerning these we wil answere, as the Iesuite doth for Sibilla a Prophetisse amongst the heathē: that she prophecied as touching such matters as should fall out to the Church, for a testimonie of the faith of the Christians: And so to bee counted herein a Prophetisse of the Church rather than of the heathen. cap. 15. so wee say, that if those three abouenamed were Prophetisses, they were of our Church, and not theirs: for they prophesied of the decay of their Church and raising vp of ours. Hildegardis first prophecied of the beginning of Friers, and of their destruction, saying, that in the end, when their gifts and rewards ceased, they should goe about their houses like hungrie and madde dogges,Fox. p. 261. drawing in their neckes like doues. Briget prophesied of the Church of Rome, that it should be as a body condemned of a iudge, to haue the skinne flayne off, and the flesh to bee cut in peeces: Catherine de Senis, speaketh of a reformation of the Church, & such a renouation of Pastors: that the onely remembrance thereof sayth she, m [...]keth my spirite to reioyce in the Lord.Fox. p. 842. All these things we see nowe accomplished: the sects of Friers in many places put downe: the Popish iurisdiction cast out; a notable reformation to be wrought in the Church. Our aduersaries (I thinke) haue not to reioyce in these prophecies: neither haue any great cause to chalenge them for their Prophets. But I will help them a little, and bring to their remembrance a notable Prophetisse of theirs in king Henry the 8. dayes, which was one Elizabeth Barton, a Nun, commonly called, the holy mayd of Kent, who beeing instructed by the Friers, fayned, as though she had many reuelations: she prophecied, that if the king proceeded in his diuorce, then in question betweene him and Q. Catherine, that hee should not be king one yeare, no not one moneth: But (GOD bee thanked) hee liued almoste twenty yeares after that, by whom many worthy things were wrought for the good of Christs Church. This prophetisse was afterward iustly met withall, and worthily suffered for her demerites, with all her accomplices: amongst the which, Fisher B. of Rochester was one,Fox. p. 1055 who thereupon was imprisoned, and forfayted his [Page] goods to the King. If they will bragge of their Prophets, let not the holy mayd of Kent be forgotten in any wise.

4. Now lastly because they shall not outface vs with a vaine brag of Prophets: I will shew what prophesies the Gospell hath beene adorned withall. Was not Iohn Husse a Prophet, who thus sayd at his death: centum reuolutis annis deo respondebitis: after an hundred years you shall giue account of this your doing vnto God? Likewise Hierome of Prage, post centum annos vos omnes cito: I cite you all to make answere after an hundred yeares. Which prophesie of theirs tooke effect accordingly: for both these holy men suffered martyrdome about anno 1416. and iust an hundred yeares after, anno 1516. the Lord raysed vp Luther, who indeede called the Pope and his doctrine to account.

Was not Sauonarola a Prophet, that sayd one should passe ouer the Alpes like Cyrus, who should destroy all Italie? and is it not so come to passe? for neither Cyrus, nor whosoeuer els could haue more layde wast the popish Italian Church then the word of God hath done, and the liuely preaching of the Gospell. Walter Brute prophecied that the temporalities should be taken from the Clergie for the multitude of their sinnes:Fox. p. 500. this Walter liued in king Richards dayes the second. Bilney that constant martyr and faythful seruant of God prophecied, that many Preachers should come after him, which should preach the same fayth that hee had taught, and should conuert many from their errors. And many such examples wee haue of holy martyrs and worthy Prophets: But we hereby doe not proue our Church: Yet this I hope hath not been out of the way, to haue aunswered a little to our aduersaries vaine and vntrue bragges.

Hitherto, we haue touched the principall notes and markes whereby the Papists doe decipher out their Church vnto vs: Now it followeth, that we declare the right and certaine signes of the true Church.

Of the true and infallible Notes of the Church of Christ.

THe outward tokens whereby the true visible Church is discerned, are not many in number, as our aduersaries doe reckon vp many: the Iesuite no lesse than 15. supplying belike in number that which they want in waight. Neither in this place doe we speake of the vniuersal Catholike inuisible Church which is beleeued and not seen, being an article of our faith: but of particular visible Churches, which are discerned and knowen by these two essentiall markes, the true preaching of the word, and right vse of the sacraments: Some also doe adde a third, namely, ecclesiasticall discipline. Beza confess. de eccles. art: 7. Hooper vpon the Creede articul: 72. But this partly is comprehended in the 2. former: for there cannot be hearing & preaching of the worde, & the frequenting of the sacraments, vnlesse there bee an exercise of Church discipline: partly also we say that it is not so essential a note, as the other are: for the absence of the other make a nullity of the Church: If the word or sacramēts in substance [Page] be corrupted, the Church also is defaced: but if there be not an exact forme of discipline, it doth not straightway cease to be a Church: Wherfore we conclude, that the true preaching of the word, and right vse of the sacraments, are the only necessary and essentiall notes of the Church: Where these two are rightly vsed according to Gods worde, there is a right Church, as here in England God be blessed: Where they are falsely and impurely handled, there is a false and corrupt Church, as among the Papists: where they are not at all in vse, there is no Church, as amongst the Turkes, Iewes, and Infidels. First we will examine our aduersaries arguments, and then bring foorth our owne.

The Papistes.

1. BEllarmine thus argueth: the true notes of the Church ought to be proper and particular, not common and generall, as these are: for euery sect of hereticks doe chalenge to themselues the right preaching of the word, and vsage of the sacraments. Ergo they are no true notes.

We answere. 1. It skilleth not how many do lay clayme to those notes: the word of God it self is a manifest iudge, where pure doctrine is taught, and the sacraments rightly kept according to the institution. It is no matter, howsoeuer Papists and other heretickes doe make their bragges, the scriptures themselues can soone decide this question. 2. I maruaile they are not ashamed to obiect, that our notes are common, seeing theirs are most common: for not only assemblies of hereticks, but euen the heathen and Idolatrous Gentiles might as well prooue themselues to be the Church, by those popish notes, of vniuersalitie, for Idolatrie had ouer-spread the whole world; of vnitie, they all consented to persecute the Church of Christ; of antiquitie, for the worship of Idols continued aboue two thousand yeares: of succession, for the monarch of the Assyrians endured 1300. yeares, their kings all this while one succeeding another. They had also Prophets, and such as wrought miracles. Our aduersaries may be now ashamed to cast vs in the teeth, that our notes are common, when as theirs doe well agree to the Synagogues of Sathan, and assemblies of Infidels.

2. Sayth he, the note or the marke must be better knowen and more notorious, then the thing marked or notified by it: so are not these: for we know not which is the worde of God, nor what bookes are canonicall, and to be taken for scripture, but by the Church.

We answere: the Iesuite still beggeth that which is in question: a foule fault in a professed disputer: for haue we not largely prooued before 1. contr. quaest. 4. that the Church dependeth vpon the authoritie of the scripture, and not contrariwise, and that there is no more certaine and euident and vndoubted thing in the whole world, vpon the which a man may bee bolde to builde and ground his faith, then vpon the scriptures? This sure is a childish and ridiculous argument, to take that as graunted, which is most of all in controuersie.

[Page]3 The true notes (sayth hee) are inseparable from the Church: it is neuer without them. But many true Churches haue wanted these: The Church of the Corinthians was a true Church, and yet they beleeued not the resurrection. cap. 15. The Galathians were a true Church, and yet they held that Moses lawe was to bee obserued together with the Gospell. And, the Corinthians likewise did not sincerely obserue the Sacraments. 1. Corinth. 11. Ergo, they are no true signes.

We answere. First, this argument may with better right bee returned vpon their owne head: for many true Churches haue wanted their markes: Christ and his Apostles had neither succession from Aaron, nor vniuersalitie, and yet they made the true Church. The Church of the Iewes after Malachies time had no Prophets, nor miracles, for the space of 400. yeares before Christ, & yet were they the true Church, and so of the rest of your notes, the Church of Christ hath many times wanted them. Secondly, It was not the whole Church of Corinthus that doubted of the resurrection, but certaine false Apostles that laboured to seduce others. 1. Corinth. 15.34. Some of you (sayth the Apostle) haue not the knowledge of God: he saith, not all. So likewise amongst the Galathians, there were false teachers, that stood for the lawe of Moses: Galath. 5.9. a little leauen doth marre the whole lumpe. It was not therefore a publike doctrine in the Church, but secretly taught by false Apostles. Thirdly, there may be some error in the Church, but being not fundamental, such an one as destroyeth faith, it doth not dissolue the Church: as there was some abuse amongst the Corinthians in receiuing the Sacrament: but the forme and institution and substance of the Sacrament was kept. Nay, yet to graunt a little more: though the error bee daungerous and of great waight and moment, and such an one, as being stifely maintained would destroye the faith and Church too: yet if they haue fallen into it rather of ignorance, then any other cause, and doe not continue in it, but doe submit themselues to bee reformed by the word, it ceaseth not for all that to be a Church. So the Corinthians referred themselues wholly and their opinions to the iudgement and determination of the Apostle. Hetherto our aduersaries haue sayd nothing agaynst vs: now wee will say somewhat for our selues.

The Protestants.

1 FOr the sufficiencie of these Notes, we would desire no better arguments, then those which our aduersaries alleadged against vs: for first our notes are proper onely to the Church, and cannot bee found in any place, where the Church of God is not. Secondly, they are most notorious markes, and a man by the Scriptures may more easely knowe, what true doctrine is, and which are the right Sacraments, then which is the true Church. Thirdly, these markes can not be absent from the Church, but doe alwayes accompanie it, and it is no longer a true Church, then it hath those markes.

[Page]2 We are able out of the Scriptures to proue these marks, which may stand in stead of many reasons. Iohn 10. my sheepe heare my voyce: Ephes. 5. clensing it by the washing of water through the word: Ergo, the Word and Sacraments are true notes of the Church.

Bellarmine answereth to the first place, that the hearing of the word, is not a visible note of the Church, but a signe vnto euery man, whereby he may knowe his election. Wee replie agayne: looke which way a man is knowne to bee a member of the Church, by the same way the Church also it selfe is discerned: if the hearing of the word doe make one a sheep of Christ, then doth it also shew which is the flocke and fould of Christ: As I knowe my hand or foote to bee a part of my bodie, because it hath life and motion of the bodie: euen so the bodie is discerned from a carkas, because it moueth and liueth.

To the second place he answereth, very simply: that the Apostle there sheweth not, which is the Church, but what good Christ hath wrought for his Church. We replie againe: But the Church is best knowne by the benefites that Christ hath bestowed vpon it, amongst the which the Word and the Sacraments are not the least: Ergo, by these the Church is knowne, and in that place by the Apostle described: And let the reader iudge, whether that place of the Apostle, where there is direct mention made of the word and sacraments, be not fitly applied to our purpose, concerning the description of the Church.

3 Let Augustine speake: In scripturis didicimus Christum, in scripturis didicimus ecclesiam: epistol. 166. In the scripture we doe learne Christ, in the scripture let vs likewise learne the Church. His argument is this: Looke how Christ is knowne, so is his Church, but Christ is onely knowne by his word: Ergo, so is his Church.

The fourth question of the authoritie of the Church.

THe Papists affirme, that the authoritie of the Church consisteth in these fiue poynts. First, in authorising the scriptures, and defining, which are Canonicall. Secondly, in giuing the sense of the scripture. Thirdly, in determining matters besides scripture. Fourthly, in making lawes & constitutions for the Church. Fiftly, in exercising of discipline.

Concerning the two last, we doe not greatly stand with them. We acknowledge the Church hath authoritie to make decrees and constitutions, but so, as the Apostles did: Visum est nobis & spiritui sancto, It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost: the Church must be directed by the wisedome of the spirit speaking in the scriptures.

We also acknowledge the holesome power of the Church in exercising of holy discipline: but it must be done in the name and power of Christ. 1. Cor. 5.4. not according to the will of men.

Concerning the two first: we haue alreadie shewed, that neither the Church doth giue authoritie to the word of God, but doth take her authoritie from thē: [Page] for the scriptures are of sufficient credite of themselues. 1. controu. quaest. 4. Neither that the sense of scripture dependeth vpon the interpretation of the scripture, but that the word expoundeth it selfe: 1. controu. quaest. 6.

There remaineth therefore onely one poynt to be discussed of the authoritie of the Church: namely in deciding of matters beside the scriptures: which are of two sorts, either necessarie appertayning to faith, or indifferent concerning ceremonies: of both these in their order.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE CHVRCH hath authoritie in matters of faith beside the scriptures.

The Papists.

WE ought to take our faith and al necessarie things of saluation at the hands error 24 of our superiours. Rhemist. Act. 10. sect. 8. In poynts not decided by scripture wee must aske counsaile of the Church. Praefat. sect. 25. The Church is the onely piller and stay to leane vnto in all doubts of doctrine, without the which there can be no certaintie nor securitie: we must therefore beleeue it and trust it in all things. annot. 1. Timoth. cap. 3. sect. 9. Yea it hath authoritie say they, to make newe Articles of faith:Rhemist. 1. Timot. 3.9. as in the Councell of Constance it was decreed to be necessarie to saluation, to beleeue the Pope to be head of the Church. In the Councell of Basile it was made an Article of the faith, to beleeue that the Councell was aboue the Pope, and therfore Pope Eugenius in not obeying the Councell was adiudged to be an heretike.

1 Vpon these words in the Gospel. Iohn. 15.27. the spirit shall testifie of me, and you shall beare witnesse also: they conclude thus: Ergo, the testimonie of the trueth ioyntly consisteth in the holy Ghost and Prelates of the Church. Rhemist. Iohn. 15. sect. 8.

We answere. The witnesse of the spirit, and of the Apostles, is all one witnesse: for the spirit first testifieth the trueth to the Apostles inwardly, and the Apostles inspired by the spirite did witnesse it outwardly: so the Pastors of the Church witnessing with the spirit, which is not now inspired by reuelation, but onely found in the scriptures, are to bee heard: but if the spirit testifie one thing in the word, and they testifie another, there we must leaue them.

2 The Church erreth not: Ergo, we must heare her in all things. Rhem. 1. Timoth. 3. sect. 9. We answere. First, the Church may erre, if she followe not the scriptures. Proued before. 2. controu. quaest. 2. Secondly, so long as the Church heareth Christs voyce, we are likewise to heare hers: and so long as she is preserued from error, she will not swarue from Christs precepts, neither impose any thing vpon her children, without the warrant of her spouse.

[Page]

The Protestantes.

THat the Church hath no such power to ordaine articles of faith, or impose matters to be beleeued necessarie to saluation not contayned, or prescribed in the holy scriptures: We prooue it thus, and wee are sure, that the true Church of Christ will neuer chalenge any such prerogatiue.

1. All truthes and verities in the scriptures are not so necessary to saluation, that the ignorance thereof should bring perill of damnation: Ergo much lesse are any verities out of scripture of any such necessitie: the first is manifest: for to know the iust chronologie of time or space of yeares, from the beginning of the world to Christ, is a veritie in scripture, yet not necessary: so to beleeue that Marie continued a virgin euer after the birth of our Lord, was thought by Basile to be no necessarie poynt to saluation, if wee did hold her to haue beene a virgin afore: and many such other poyntes there are in scriptures, which a man may be ignorant of without perill of saluation, Ergo much more may we be ignorant of vnwritten verities, or rather Popish fables.

2. The Church hath no more authoritie then the Apostles, nor yet in all things so much: But they had no power to make articles of faith: for Saint Paul deliuereth that which he had receiued concerning the sacrament, he durst not adde vnto it, as the Papists haue been bolde to doe since, 1. Cor. 11. Ergo the Church may explane and open articles of fayth out of the scriptures, but not make new.

3. We prooue it by the confession of our aduersaries. The fathers of Basile, that concluded, it was an article of the Christian fayth to beleeue the superioritie of the councel,Fox. p. 677. did gather it out of the saying of Christ, dic ecclesiae, and therfore enforced it as an article. Whereby wee gather, that they helde, that the Church could establish no article of fayth without scripture. Bellarmine likewise sayth, that the Church is not now gouerned by newe reuelations, but wee ought to be contented with those decrees, which wee haue receiued from the Apostles:Cont. de scriptur. quaest. 6. c. 4 Ergo, as D. Whitakers doth strongly conclude, the Church cannot coyne new articles of faith.

4. Lastly, we haue before prooued at large out of the worde of God, that the scriptures containe all things necessary to saluation: and therefore all articles of fayth must be deriued from thence. 1. controu. quaest. 7. And so we conclude with Augustine: Epistol. 49. quaest. 2. Linguae sonos, quibus inter se homines sua seusa communicēt, pacto quodā societatis sibi instituere possunt: Quib. autē sacris diuinitati congruerent, voluntatem dei sequuti sunt, qui rectè sapuerunt: Quae omnino nunquam defuit ad salutem iustitiae pietati (que) hominum. Men, sayth he, may deuise among themselues what language they will vse to expresse their minde: But howe to serue God, wise men euer followed the will and commaundement of GOD▪ which neuer hath failed men in all necessary matters concerning righteousnes and godlines. By this fathers sentence, the scriptures, which containe the will of God, containe all necessary things. Ergo, we neede not seeke elswhere.

[Page]

AN APPENDIX OR MEMBER OF THIS part of the question, whether we are to beleeue in the Church.

The Papists.

WE ought to beleeue and trust the Church in all things: yea to beleeue in the Church. Rhemist. 1. Tim. 3. sect. 9. the scripture also vseth this speech error 25 to beleeue in men. annot. in 10. Rom. sect. 41.

1. Exod. 14.31. they beleeued in God and Moses. Ergo. We answere, your owne vulgar text hath it, crediderunt deo & Mosi seruo eius: they beleeued God and his seruant Moses: that is, hauing seene the great power of God in the destruction of the Aegyptians in the red sea, according to the word of Moses, they gaue credite vnto Moses, which spake vnto them from God.

2. Philem. v. 5. Hearing of thy loue and fayth which thou hast toward the Lord Iesus and vnto all the saints. See, say they, here is faith toward the saints.

Wee answere: there is no man, that is not peruersly disposed, but may easily distinguish the Apostles wordes: to attribute fayth to Iesus Christ, and loue to the saynts: Which may appeare by the altering of the preposition, as they themselues read in their owne translation, loue and fayth in Iesus Christ, and toward the sayntes: so it must needes bee thus vnderstoode, fayth in Christ, and loue toward the sayntes: this therefore is but a sophisticall cauill.

The Protestants.

THis word, Credo, beleeue, is taken three wayes: for there is credere deo, to beleeue God, that is to trust him in all things, credere deum, to beleeue God to be, credere in deum, to beleeue in God, as our creator, Lord, and redeemer. So we doe credere ecclesiam, we beleeue there is one holy Catholicke Church: credere ecclesiae, we doe also beleeue and giue credence to the Church, following the word of God: But we do not in any wise credere in ecclesiam, beleeue in the Church.

1. We must not beleeue or put any confidence in a creature: the Church is but a creature, Ergo: for to beleeue in God, is onely proper to the Godhead: and therefore, Iohn 14.1. where Christ sayth, ye beleeue in God, beleeue also in me: we doe necessarylie out of these words inferre, that Christ is God, because we are commaunded to beleeue in him.

2. Fayth is of things that are absent, and not seene: but the Church is present alwayes vpon earth, and alwayes visible, as our aduersaryes hold: how then can it bee an obiect of our fayth? We can not beleeue in that which is visible & seene, for it is agaynst the nature of fayth.

3. Augustine sayth, sciendum est, quòd ecclesiam credere, non tamen in ecclesiam credere debemus, quia ecclesia non est deus sed domus dei: De tēpore serm. 131. We [Page] must know, that we are to beleeue there is a Church, not in the Church, for the Church is not God, but onely the house of God.

THE SECOND PARTE OF THE QVESTION concerning the ceremonies of the Church.

The Papists.

THey doe holde that the Church of God may vse and blesse diuers elements error 26 and creatures for the seruice of God: as holy water to driue away diuels: the hallowing of salt, waxe, fire, palmes, ashes, oyle, creame, milke, honey, Rhemist. 1. tim. 4. sect. 12. & 13. Yea that the Church may borrow rites and ceremonies of the Iewes: ibid. sect. 18. Yea by the creatures thus blessed, or rather coniured, they say, remission of sinnes is obtayned, sect. 14.

2. Remission of sinnes was annexed to the oyle wherewith the sicke were annoynted, Iames 5. Ergo, remissions of sinnes may be applied by the like consecrated elements, Rhemist. 1. Tim. 4. sect. 14.

We answere: First, it followeth not, because the creature of oyle was vsed in the miraculous gift of healing, which ceremonie was no longer to continue, than that miraculous gift indured: it followeth not, that other elements may be vsed so now, there being not the like occasion, seeing all such myraculous giftes are now ceased. Secondly, it was not the oyle whereby their sinnes were forgiuen them, neither was it applied to that ende, it was onely a pledge vnto them of their bodily health: but the prayer of fayth shall saue the sick, sayth the Apostle, v. 15. for God hath promised to heare the faythfull prayers of his children both for themselues and others.

3. Saint Paul vsed imposition of hands, which was a ceremonie of the law vsed in consecrating of Priestes. Ergo, it is lawfull to borrowe ceremonies of the Iewes.

We answere: It followeth not, because Christ and the Apostles by the spirite of God retayned some decent actions vsed in the lawe, therefore now the Church at her libertie may take of the Iewish ceremonies: this is great presumption, to thinke it is lawfull for the Church to doe whatsoeuer Christ and his Apostles did. Fulk. 1. Tim. 4. sect. 18.

The Protestants.

ALthough there be great moderation to bee vsed in the ceremonies of the Church, and there is also some limitation for them: yet hath the Church greater libertie in the rites and ceremonies, which are appoynted for order and comelinesse sake, then in the doctrine of fayth and religion: The doctrine of saluation is alwayes the same, and cannot be changed, and toucheth the conscience: But rites and ceremonies are externall, and commanded for order sake: and neither are they vniuersall, the same in euery Church, nor perpetuall, but are [Page] changed according to times, and as there is occasion. Againe, the precepts of Christianitie are either directly expressed, or necessarilie concluded out of the scriptures: but externall rites and ceremonies are not particularlie declared in the word: there are onely certaine generall rules set downe, according to the which all ceremonies brought into the Church, are to bee examined: as for the Sacraments of the Church, they cannot bee altered, hauing a perpetuall commandement from Christ: Therefore the Church cannot appoynt, what, how many ceremonies soeuer she shall thinke good, but according to these foure rules and conditions, which followe here in order.

1 All things ought to bee done to the glorie of God, euen in ciuill actions, much more in things appertayning to the seruice of God, 1. Cor. 10.31. Our aduersaries offend agaynst this rule, applying and annexing remission of sinnes, to their owne inuentions and superstitious ceremonies, as vnto penance and extreame vnction, which they also make Sacraments: for this is greatly derogatorie to Christs institution, who hath only appoynted the hearing of his word, and vse of the Sacraments, for the begetting and encreasing of faith, and by this faith only is the death of Christ applied vnto vs for the remission of sinnes.

2 All things ought to be done orderly and decently, 1. Cor. 14.40. Wherefore al ridiculous, light & vnprofitable ceremonies are to be abolished: such our aduersaries haue many, as knocking, kneeling, creeping to the Crosse, lighting candles at noone day, turning ouer of beades, and many phantasticall gestures they haue in their idolatrous Masse, as turning, returning, looking to the East, to the West: crossing, lifting, quaffing, and shewing the emptie cup, with many such toyes.

3 All things ought to bee done without offence, 1. Corinth. 10.32. But to whom, that hath but a little feeling of religion, is not the abhominable sacrifice of the Masse offensiue? What good conscience doth it not grieue, that the Priest should create his maker, as they say? should offer vp the bodie of Christ in sacrifice, and be an intercessor as it were for his mediatour, desiring God to accept the sacrifice of his sonnes bodie? As also to make it a propitiatorie sacrifice for the quicke and the dead? But of these matters we shall haue fitter occasion to entreate afterward, when we come to the seuerall controuersies.

4 All things ought to bee done to edifying, 1. Corinth. 14. vers. 12. But the popish ceremonies are so farre from edifying, that by reason of their infinite rabble and number, they are a clogge vnto Christians, and more burdensome, then were the obseruations of the Iewes: They haue hallowed fire, water, bread, ashes, oyle, waxe, flowers, braunches, clay, spittle, salt, incense, balme, chalices, paxes, pixes, altars, corporals, superaltars, altarclothes, rings, swords, and an infinite companie besides: doe these tend (thinke you) to the edification of the minde? Nay, they doe cleane destroy and extinguish all spirituall and internall motions, drawing the heart from the spiritual worship of God, to externall beggerlie and ragged reliques and ceremonies. Fulk. 1. Timoth. 4. sect. 1. Beza. lib. confess. de eccles. articul. 18.19.20.

[Page]

The fift question, whether the Church of Rome be the true Church.

THis question hath two parts. First, whether the Romane Church be the Catholike Church or not. Secondly, whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE ROMANE Church be the Catholike Church.

The Papists.

BEllarmine defining the Church, maketh this one part of the definition, to be error 27 subiect vnto the Bishop of Romes iurisdiction. Lib. 3. de eccles. cap. 2. And therefore they conclude, that they are out of the Church and no better then heretikes, that doe not acknowledge the Pope to be their chiefe Pastor. Canis. de praecept. eccles. cap. 9. So they make the Romane faith, and Catholike, to bee all one: Rhemist. annot. in 1. Rom. sect. 5.

Their reasons are none other, then we haue seene before, taken from vniuersalitie, antiquitie, vnitie, vnto the which wee haue alreadie answered, quaest. 3. of this controuersie, Not. 1, 2, 3.

The Protestants.

WHile the Church of Rome continued in the doctrine of the Apostles, it was a notable and famous visible Church, and a principall part and member of the vniuersall Catholike: but now since it is degenerate and fallen away from the Apostolike faith, from being the house of God, to be a synagogue for Antichrist, we take it not to be so much as a true visible Church. But neuer was it to be counted the Catholike Church, as though all other Churches were parts and members of it: but it selfe onely was a part as others, and Catholike too, while it continued in the right faith: but not Catholike as hauing iurisdiction ouer the rest, and all to receiue this name of her.

1 The vniuersall Catholike Church is so called, because it conteyneth the whole number of the elect and first borne of God, Heb. 12.23. Whereof manie are now saints in heauen, many liuing in the earth, many yet vnborne. But all these were not, neither are of the Romane faith: the holie men departed knewe not of these superstitious and prodigious vsages, which now doe raigne in the Church of Rome: nay, many of them neuer heard in their life so much, as of the name of Rome: Ergo.

2 It is called Catholike, and vniuersall, because they that are to be saued, must belong vnto this companie, and be of this Church, for without the Church there [Page] is no saluation, for Christ onely gaue himselfe for his Church to sanctifie it and cleanse it. Ephes. 5.25. But all that dye out of the faith of the Romane Church, do not perish. Nay verely, we doubt not to say, but that all which depart this life in the communion thereof without repentance, are barred from saluation, and dye out of grace. We are in the right faith: neither will we be our owne iudges, the scriptures shall iudge vs: Euery spirit that confesseth, that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God. 1. Iohn 4.2. We beleeue aright in both the natures and all the offices of Christ: which you doe not, which doe greatly deface his prophetical office, in not reuerencing his word, but making it imperfect: his kingdom, in appointing him a Vicar and Vicegerent vpon earth, as though he of himselfe were not sufficient to gouerne: his Priesthood, in setting vp another sacrifice: Ergo, your spirit is not of God.

3 The Catholike Church is so called, because it embraceth the whole and onely doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles. Ephes. 2. vers. 20. But the Romane Church receiueth many things contrary to scripture, and addeth many things vnto it, as it shall appeare throughout this whole discourse. Ergo.

4 The Catholike Church hath the name, because it is dispersed ouer the whole earth. Acts 1. vers. 8. But so was neuer the Romane faith, which is now professed, as we haue shewed before. Quaest. 3. de Eccles. Not. 2. Ergo, ex Amand. Polan.

THE SECOND PART: THE CHVRCH OF Rome is not a true visible Church.

The Papists.

THeir arguments are as wee haue heard. Quaest. 3. of the notes of the Church,error 28 grounded vpon their succession, miracles, gift of prophesiyng: answered sufficiently afore, Not. 4.5.6. Wee neede not, nor must not for breuities sake repeate the same things often.

Protestants.

WE denie vtterly that they are a true visible Church of Christ, but an Antichristian Church, and an assembly of heretickes, and enemies to the Gospell of Iesus Christ.

1 That cannot bee a true Church, where the word of God is not truely preached, nor the Sacraments rightly administred according to Christs institution: So are they not in the Popes Church: For the word is not sincerely taught, but they haue added many inuentions of their owne, and doe preach contrarie Doctrines to the Scripture: the Sacraments also they haue not kept, for first they haue augmented the number: they haue made fiue more, of confirmation, orders, penance, Matrimonie, extreame vnction: beside, the Sacraments [Page] of Christ they haue corrupted. In baptisme, beside water, they vse spittle, salt, oyle Chrisme, contrarie to the institution: and they lay such a necessitie vpon this Sacrament, that al, which die without it, say they, are damned. In the Lordes Supper, they haue turned the Sacrament to a sacrifice, made an Idol of bread, chaunged the Communion into priuate masses, taken the cup from the lay people, and many other abhominations are committed by them. Ergo, neither hauing the word, nor Sacraments according to the institution, they are no true Church.

2 They which are enemies to the true Church, and doe persecute the members thereof, are no true visible Church: they cannot be of that Church, which they persecute; as Bellarmine saith of Paul: how could he bee of that Church, which he with al his force oppressed? de eccles. lib. 3. cap. 7. But they persecute the Saints of God, & are most cruel towards them, as their consciences beare them record. Ergo.

3 The habitation of Antichrist cannot be the Church of Christ, so is theirs: the Pope himselfe is Antichrist: for who else but hee sitteth in the temple, being an enemie to Christ. 2. Thes. 2. Where haue you a citie in the world built vpon seauen hilles but Rome? Apocalyps. 17.9. But of this matter we shall of purpose intreate afterward. Ergo. they are not a true visible Church.

THE THIRD CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING COVNCELS.

A Councel is nothing else but an assembly and gathering together of the people of God, about the affaires and businesse of the Church: and they are of two sortes, either vniuersall in the name of the whole Church; or particular, which are either National, when the learned of a whole Realme are called together; or Prouincial, when as the Churches of one Prouince doo assemble into one place to consult of Religion.

There may be two especiall occasions of Councels: the one for resisting and rooting out of heresies; as the Apostles and elders met together, Act. 15. against those which would haue imposed the Iewish ceremonies vppon the beleeuing Gentiles. So the Councell of Nice was celebrated the yeare of the Lorde 327. to confound the heresie of Arrius, who denied Christ, as he was God, to be equall to his Father. In the Councel of Constantinople, Anno 383. or there aboute, the heresie of Macedonius was condemned, which denied the holy Ghost to bee God: In the Ephesine Councel the first, Nestorius heresie was ouerthrowne, which affirmed Christ to haue two persons. Anno 434. The Councel of Chalcedon was collected Anno 454. about the heresie of Eutiches, which held that there was in Christ but one nature after his incarnation, so confounding his humanitie and diuinitie together.

[Page]The other cause of the calling of Councels, is, to prouide & establish holsome Lawes, decrees and constitutions, for the gouernement of the Church: so the Apostles called the brethren together, Act. 6. to take order for the poore. And in the Councell of Nice an vniforme order was established for the celebration of Easter, which before had much troubled the Church.

The questions betweene vs and the Papists, concerning Councels are these, First, whether generall Councels be absolutely necessarie. Secondly, by whome they ought to be called. Thirdly, of what persons they ought to cōsist. Fourthly, who should bee the president of the Councel. Fiftly, concerning the authoritie of them. Sixtly, whether they may erre or not. Seauenthly, whether they are aboue the Pope. Eightly, of the conditions to be obserued in generall Councels: of these in order.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the necessitie of Councels.

The assertion of the Papists.

THey seeme in wordes to affirme, that Generall Councels are not absolutelie error 29 necessarie: for the Primitiue Church was without any Councel for the space of 300. yeares and more: yet they hold that some Councels, either generall or particular, are of necessitie to be had. Bellarmine de concil. lib. 1. cap. 11. And yet this is to be maruelled at, that they should so much stand for Councels, seeing they might vse a farre more compendious way, in referring all to the determination of the Pope, whome they boldly, but very fondly affirme, that hee cannot erre.

Although they seeme not to lay a necessitie vpon Generall Councels, yet in truth they doo contrarie: for they allowe no Councels at all, without the Popes consent and authoritie, neither thinke it lawfull for any Nation or Prouince, to make within themselues any innouation or change of Religion. So in the assembly at Zuricke. Anno 1523. For the reformation of Religion, Faber tooke exception against that meeting, affirming that it was no conuenient place, nor fit time for the discussing of such matter, but rather the cognition and tractation thereof belonged to a generall Councel. Sleid. lib. 3.

And further they hold, that what hath beene decreed in a Councel, cānot be dissolued but by the like Councel, as if the Councel of Trent were to bee disanulled, it must be done by the like Synod. Bellarmine de cōcil. lib. 3. ca. 21. Which Councel they affirme to haue been general, & therefore another general Councel must by their opinion necessarily be expected, before it can be reuoked.

The confession of the Protestants.

WE doe hold that generall Councels are an holesome meanes for the repressing and reforming, both of errors in Religion, and corruption in manners: and that true generall Councels ought to bee much desired, and conueniently [Page] expected: that is, such a Councell, where euery man franke & free may vtter his minde without feare: an holy Councel, where euery mā may goe about to set vp godlines, not to oppresse the trueth. Such a Councell King Henrie the eight of worthie memorie in his protestation for the Church of England, for not comming to the Councell of the Pope, truely affirmeth, that he desired, and craued nothing so oft of God: but because there is no hope of any such Councel, seeing the Pope would be the chiefe doer in it, and it is too vnreasonable, that the same man should be both a partie, and a iudge: we doubt not, but that it is lawfull by the word of God, for euery Prince, Duke, Lord, within his owne seignorie, without any further delay, or expectation, by the aduice and Counsaile of the learned and godlie of the land, according to Gods Lawe, to reforme their Church.

First, because all delay in matters of the Church are dangerous, and inconueniences are at the first hand to be met withall, as we see Act. 6. and Act. 15. immediatlie, when any question did arise, the Apostles assembled together. In the Councel of Basile, where it was decreed, that the Pope was subiect to the Councels, Panormitane a stiffe champion on the Popes side, would haue the decree stayed till the returne of the Princes Embassadors: But Arelatensis that worthy Cardinall stepped vp, and shewed what danger there might be in a small delay, by the example of Hannibal, who deferring his going but one day to Rome, was driuen cleane out of Italy, hauing been very like to haue taken the citie, if he had vsed the opportunitie. But without all controuersie, matters of faith ought not to be delayed: which could not be auoyded, if a generall Councel should alwaies be waited for.

Secondly, a Prince hath the like authoritie in his dominion, as the housholder hath in his house. But euery man ought to reforme his house, without any further delay, aduisement or consultation, as Iosua sayth, I and my house will serue the Lord, 24. vers. 15. Wherefore the Prince may and ought to performe the like in his countrie.

Lastly, we finde by experience, that the Lord hath blessed such reformations, which haue been made by Princes in their owne territories: as that in Zuricke anno. 1523. at Berne, 1528. and the most happie reformation of our Church of England ▪ begun by King Henrie the 8. encreased by that most vertuous Prince King Edward the 6. and prosperouslie continued and established by our gracious Soueraigne Queene Elizabeth.

I will adde the testimonie of Augustine: who answering to the Pelagians, which obiected that they were condemned by certaine single Bishops in their owne Diocesse, without a Synode, he sayth thus, Ac si congregatione synodi opus erat, vt aperta pernicies damnaretur, quasi nulla haeresis aliquando, nisi synodi congregatione damnata sit, &c. cont. 2. Epistol. Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 12. As though, saith he, a Synode or Councel were alwayes necessarie to condemne a knowne heresie: Nay, wee finde that more heresies without comparison, haue been in the same places condemned, where they first sprang, without any such necessitie, more so, then otherwise.

[Page]

THE SECOND QVESTION, BY WHOSE AVthoritie Councels ought to be called.

The Papists.

THey doe generally hold, that generall Councels ought onely to be called and appoynted by the Popes authoritie, or his assignment: their goodly reasons error 30 are these.

1 Councels ought to bee congregate in the name of Christ, that is, by him that hath authoritie from Christ so to congregate them: see here is a goodly exposition, to assemble in the name of Christ, is to assemble by the authoritie of the Pope: so belike where Christ saith, wheresoeuer two or three are gathered together in my name, &c. Christ will not bee present with them, vnlesse we send vp to Rome for license, that two or three may come together.

2 Generall Councels should be appoynted by them, that haue generall authoritie to commaund men to come to the Councell: but this authoritie ouer the whole Church neuer any Emperour had, in such ample manner, as the Pope hath: Ergo. Answere: first, it is a great vntruth, that the Popes spirituall iurisdiction which he falsely challengeth, was at any time greater then the Emperours dominion: for Constantine ruled ouer both the West and East Churches: but the Churches of Greece were neuer, nor are not to this day subiect to the sea of Rome. For Pope Eugenius would haue dissolued the Councell of Basile vnder this pretence, because the Greekes, which should come vnto the Councell for the vniting of their Church, would not passe the Alpes: but this vniting neuer went forward, Anno. 1431. Agayne, if the commaundement of one Emperour or Potentate bee not large enough to appoynt a generall Councell, as in these dayes it is not, it may bee done by the consent and agreement of Princes.

The Protestants.

WE hold it as a fond and ridiculous assertion, that generall Councels should be ruled at the Popes becke, but that this authoritie is due, and hath been of olde vnto Christian Princes and Magistrates, and the Pope in so doing doth but vsurpe vpon their right.

1 That the Pope hath not absolute authoritie, to call, remoue, dissolue, or establish Councels, it is proued out of scripture: for Act. 6.2. the twelue Apostles, and not Peter onely, whose successor the Pope doth falsely chalenge to be, called the multitude together about the election of Deacons.

2 The Councels in times past were sommoned by the Emperours, which our aduersaries themselues cannot denie, as the Nicene first, by Constantine the great: Constantinopolitane. 1. by Theodosius the elder. Ephesin. 1. by Theodosius [Page] the younger: Chalcedonens. by Martianus. But, say our aduersaries, these Councels were not appoynted without the consent of the Bishops of Rome. I meruaile they are not ashamed so to say: for when Theodosius called the Councell of Chalcedon, Leo then Bishop of Rome, neither liked the time, for hee would haue had it deferred, nor the place, being desirous to haue it in Italy: yet he was content to obey the Emperours commaundement, and sent his Agents to the Councel, there to appeare for him: Epist. 41.47.48. ad Martianum: This was alleadged by Tonstal and Stokeslie two archpapists in their Epistle to Cardinall Poole.

3 It is a good reason which was alleadged in the Councell of Basile, that if Popes onely should call Councels, there should be no meanes left to withstand a wicked and vicious Pope. Who would thinke (say they) that the Bishop of Rome would congregate a Councel, for his owne correction, or deposition?

4 The Pope hath no more authoritie, nor, by their leaue, nothing like as Peter had: but he challenged not this dignitie amongst the Apostles, to summon Councels. We reade of foure onely Councels of the Apostles, say the fathers of Basile (for this also is their argument) the first was for the choosing of Matthias. Act. 1. congregate at the commaundement of Christ, who inioyned them not to depart from Ierusalem. The second. Act. 6. congregate by the twelue, not Peter onely,4. Councels called by the Apostles. for the election of Deacons. The third, which was holden as touching the taking away of circumcision, and other ceremonies of the lawe, was gathered together by a generall inspiration, Act. 15.6. The fourth, wherein certaine things contained in the lawe are permitted, seemeth to be gathered by Iames. Act. 21.18. Vpon these reasons the Councel thus concludeth: that if the Pope would resist, and haue no Councel congregate, yet if the greater part of the Church doe iudge it necessarie to haue a Councel, the Councel may bee congregate, whether the Pope will or not. Ex Aenea Syluio, Fox. pag. 676. Col. 2.

5 Augustine saith: Catholicos Episcopos & partis Donati iussu imperatoris disputando inter se contulisse. Breuicul. collation. lib. 1. cap. 1. That the Catholike Bishops and the Donatists, did meete together to dispute at the commaundement of the Emperour: There were in that Councel, which was at Carthage, of the Catholike Bishops 286. and of the Donatists 279.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF WHAT PERSONS the Councel ought to consist.

The Papists.

WHereas there are foure sorts of men vsually present at Councels, the Princes error 31 and Magistrates, Bishops and inferiour Ministers and Priests, and other lay people: of all these, Bishops (they say) onely must haue a deciding or [Page] determining voyce: Priests and other learned may dispute and haue a consultatiue voyce: Princes are there to defend the Councel, and see order kept: other of the Laitie may be there as officers and ministers, as Scribes and Notaries: but the suffrages and voyces must onely be giuen by Bishops. Eckius. loc. de concil. Bellarm. de concil. lib. 1. cap. 15. Let vs see some of their reasons.

First, to teach and to feede is proper for the Pastors only, and to establish and decree in Councel, is nothing els but to feede and teach: Ergo, Pastors onely must rule in Councel: which none are but Bishops: Soli Episcopi pastores sunt (sayth the Iesuite) neque laici neque ecclesiastici quicunque: Onely Bishops are pastors, and none other of the Clergie besides, and to them onely, he sayth, that is to bee applyed, Act. 20. Take heede to your selues, and the flocke, ouer the which God hath made you ouerseers.

I answere. First, what an absurd saying is this and voyde of sense, that the Bishop is the onely pastor of his Diocesse, and that euery Minister is not pastor in his owne parish? Nay, if the Iesuite would speake trueth, he shall finde that popish Bishops are neither Pastors nor Doctors, for the most of them neither feede, nor teach: And they be not ashamed to professe it, Ann. 1540. or thereabout, Thomas Forret Martyr, being found fault withall by the Bishop of Dunkelden in Scotland, because he preached so oft, exhorted the Bishop agayne, and wished that he did preach. The Bishop answered: nay, nay, let that bee, we are not ordayned to preach: and in further talke the blind blockish Bishop bewrayed his owne ignorance, I thanke God (sayth he) that I neuer knewe what the olde and newe Testament was. Thereupon rose a common prouerbe in Scotland, you are like the Bishop of Dunkelden, that knewe neither the old nor new lawe. Fox. Martyrol. pag. 1266.

With this blind saying of the popish Bishop, our countrey men of Rhemes also doe agree, which doubt not to say, that many which haue no gift to preach, yet for their wisedome and gouernment, are not vnmeete to be Pastors and Bishops. Annot. in 1. Timoth. 5. sect. 13.

2 I answere, the Iesuite bewrayeth his ignorance, in making no difference betweene communis, and propria politia ecclesiae: the common and speciall policie and office of the Church: for there are proper offices and dueties, some of Pastors, some of gouernours, some of other Ministers: but this office to be performed in general Councels, is not proper to Pastors, but common to the whole Church: whereupon wee denye, that it is Proprium pastorum munus, suffragia ferre in concilijs: It is not the proper duetie of Pastors, to giue voyces and make decrees in Councels.

3 By the Iesuites argument, the fathers of Basile doe conclude cleane contrarie out of that place, 4. Ephes. That because Christ instituted not onely Apostles and Prophets, but pastors and teachers for the work of the Ministerie, who doubteth (say they) but that the gouernance also of the Church is committed vnto others together with the Apostles? And hence they inferre, because [Page] the worke of the Ministerie is layd vpon the rest of the Clergie, that therefore they ought not to be excluded from Councels.

Secondly, Panormitane in the Councel of Basile thus reasoneth for Bishops: that they were the pillars and keyes of heauen, and therefore had onely deciding voyces: Vnto him answered at that time the wise and couragious Cardinall Arelatensis, shewing Augustines iudgement vpon those words (I will giue thee the keyes of heauen) that the iudiciall power was giuen not onely to Peter, but also to the other Apostles, & to the whole Church, the Bishops, the Priests. Whereupon he inferreth, that if the Priests haue a iudicial power in the Church, they also ought to haue a determining voyce in Councels.

Thirdly, Lodouicus the Prothonotarie in the same Councel thus argued: Albeit (sayth hee) Christ chose twelue Apostles and 70. Disciples, notwithstanding in the setting forth of the Creede, onely the Apostles were present, thereby giuing example, that matters of faith did pertaine onely to the Apostles, and so consequently to Bishops. To him Arelatensis made this answere: First, it followed not, because the Apostles onely are named, that they therefore only were present at the setting forth of the Creede: for wee see that Princes beare the name and commendation of many actions, which are done notwithstanding by their helpers. 2. Lodouicus cannot be ignorant (sayth he) that there be some articles in the Creede, which were not put to by the Apostles, but afterward by generall Councels: as that part, wherein mention is made of the holy Ghost, which the Councel of Lions did adde: Thus much out of the Councel of Basile.

The Protestants confession.

OVr opinion grounded vpon trueth and scripture is this: that, not onely Bishops, but all other pastors admitted to the Councel, and the learned and discreete amongst the Lay men, ought to haue concluding voyces in Councel: and that rather the discussing and consulting of matters pertayneth to the learned Diuines, the deciding to all, then contrariwise.

First, that inferiour pastors are to bee ioyned with Bishops and Prelates, it was amplie proued in the Councel of Basile, of the which I haue so often made mention, as noble Arelatensis reasoneth thus: The dignities of the fathers is not to be respected but the trueth: neither will I preferre a lye of any Bishop, be he neuer so rich, before a veritie or a trueth of a poore Priest: this is his first reason, that the trueth ought to bee receiued at any mans mouth bee he neuer so simple: and therefore Priests as well as Bishops are to bee admitted to the Councel.

2 He declareth the ancient practise of the Church: In the Councel of Nice, where there were assembled 322. Bishops, Athanasius being then onely a Priest, withstood the Arrians, and infringed their arguments: In the Synode [Page] of Chalcedon, there were present sixe hundred Priests, which name is common both to Bishops and Priests. When Paul Bishoppe of Antioch preached that Christ was a man of common nature: the Councell assembled against him at Antioch, where the sayde Paul was condemned, neither was there any man, which did more confound the sayd Paul, then one Malchion Priest of Antioch, which taught Rhetorick there.

Concerning the second part, that laye men also with Priests ought to bee admitted: first we haue testimonie out of the word of God for it. Tit. 3.13. for this cause Zenas the lawyer is ioyned as fellow in commission with Apollos. But we haue a more euident place. Act. 15.22. It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church: here we see that not onely the Elders but the whole multitude, were admitted into consultation with the Apostles. To this place our aduersaries doe thus aunswere: Lodouicus the Prothonotarie, first thus rashly and fondly gaue his verdicte in the Councell of Basile, that there was no argument to be gathered of the Acts of the Apostles, whose examples were more to be maruayled at, then to be followed:A blasphemy of a Papist. But to this Arelatensis replied, that he would stay himself most vpon the Apostles doings: for what, sayth he, is more comely for vs to followe, then the doctrine and customes of the primitiue Church? And Aeneas Siluius reporteth (who writeth of the actes of that Councell) that all men impugned this saying of Lodouicus, that the Apostles were not to be followed, as a blasphemie.

Wherefore the Iesuite hath found out another aunswere: he sayth that none but the Apostles gaue sentence, the rest onely gaue consent, and inwarde liking and approbation: this cauill Arelatensis met withall long before the Iesuite was borne, in the forenamed Councell. Neither this worde, sayth hee, It seemed good, signifieth in this place consultation, but decision, and determination: And so it doth indeede: for seeing there is one worde applyed to them all, [...], placuit, it seemed good to the Apostles, Elders and the whole multitude, why should it not be taken in the one and selfe same sence, and after the same manner vnderstood of them all?

2. Seeing the Councel doth represent the whole Church, there ought to be present and to giue sentence of all sorts and callings of men: and the tather, because the matter of fayth and religion is a common cause, and as well appertayneth to lay-men as to Bishops, it behooueth them also to bee present: And further it were more reasonable, that princes and temporall Magistrates should binde their subiects to their lawes, without their consent, then that ecclesiastical persons should lay yokes vpon Christians against their willes, for ciuill matters are more indifferent and left to our choyce, then spirituall are: Yet we see there are no lawes enacted in our Realme but by the high court of Parliament, where alwayes some are appoynted for the commons, euen the whole neather house, without whose consent no acte can passe. So it were very reasonable, that no law should be layd vpon the Church, without the generall consent thereof.

[Page]3. Lastly, Augustines iudgement we heard before alleadged by Arelatensis, that seeing the iudicial power of the keies is committed to the whole Church, to Bishops, to Priests, they all ought to bee entertayned in generall Councels.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, WHO OVGHT to be the president and chiefe moderator in Councels.

The Papists.

error 32 WIth one whole consent they all agree and holde, that the Pope onelie ought to haue the chiefe place in Councels, either himselfe in his owne person, or else his Legates and deputies for him: they reason thus.

1. The Pope is the chiefe pastor of the vniuersall Church, for vnto Peter onely it was sayd, pasce oues meas, feede my sheepe, and he is called and saluted in Councels by the name of father: and all other both Princes and Bishops are sheepe in respect of him.

Wee answere, first, in the Iesuites argument, there is petitio principij, a foule fault in a good Logician, though it bee none in a Sophister, still to begge that which is in question: for yet he hath not prooued that the Pope is the vniuersall pastor. 2. That place, feede my sheepe, prooueth it not: Augustine saith, redditur negationi trinae trina confessio, ne minus amori lingua seruiat, quàm timori. in Iohan. tract. 123. he recompenceth a threefold deniall, with a threefold confession, lest that his tongue should be lesse seruiceable to loue, then it was to feare: so then, by this fathers iudgement, it was no priuiledge to Peter to bee thrise admonished, but he is thereby put in mind of his thrise deniall of Christ. Againe, I maruaile the Iesuite can so soone forget himselfe: for in the 15. chapter afore, he prooued by these words (feede my sheepe) that Bishops onely were pastors, and he can now turne the wordes to serue onely for the Pope. 3. What great matter is it for the Pope to be called father, seeing he is not ignorant that all Bishops assembled in Councell and other learned, are called by that name. Nay, it is no rare matter for other Bishops to be saluted by the name of Pope: as Prosper writing to Augustine, twise in one Epistle calleth him, beatissimum Papam, most blessed Pope, Tom. 7.4. Princes and Bishops to the Pope are sheepe, sayth the Iesuite. 1. For Bishops, though he had a iurisdiction ouer all, which will stick in his teeth to prooue, yet shall they be no more his sheep, then Priests are to Bishops, and Bishops to their Metropolitanes, who cannot be sayd to be their sheepe, though they haue some preeminence ouer them: for Augustines rule must stand, nemo se nostrum episcopum episcoporum constituit. De baptism. 2.2. No man is a Bishop of Bishops, nor shepheard of shepheards. Secondly, for Princes he hath nothing to doe with any but those in his owne Bishopricke, and as they are his sheep one way, as they are taught of him, so he and his Cardinals are the Magistrates sheepe another way, and in respect of [Page] the ciuil gouernement he is their shepheard: And both he and they, prince and priest are sheep-fellows, vnder Iesus Christ the chiefe shepheard: as Augustine sayth, tanquam vobis pastores sumus, sed sub illo pastore vobiscum oues sumus, in Psal. 126. we are shepheards to you, but both you and I are sheep vnder that great shepheard.

The Protestants.

WE doe truely affirme, that the Soueraigne Maiestie of the Emperour and chiefe Magistrate, or his legate, if he either be present himselfe, or sende, ought to be president of the Councel: Or else in their absence, one to be chosen and elected by the Councel for that function, as Cardinal Arelatensis was chosen in the Councell of Basile by the fathers to be moderator.

First, that it belongeth to the Prince, to haue this prerogatiue, it is hence prooued, because he is the chiefe iudge in all matters and causes, both ciuil and eccesiasticall: And it appeareth by the auncient practise of the godly kings in Israel and Iuda. Dauid gathered a Councel together, when hee brought the Arke to Ierusalem. 1. Chronicl. 15.3. where he was the chiefe doer, and director; for he appoynted the Leuites their courses, and set forth a certayne fourme of thanksgiuing to be vsed. 1. Chronicl. 16.4.7. Hezekiah assembled a Councel. 2. Chronicl. 30.2. where it was decreed, that the passeouer should be solemnly kept: & the postes were sent forth with the kings writ or commission. In Iosiah his raigne there was a great assembly at Ierusalem, of the Princes, the people, priests and Leuites, and al from the greatest to the smallest: where the king him selfe was president and chiefe agent, reading the law before the people. 2. Chronicl. 34.30.31.

Secondly, we finde that the Emperours themselues haue beene present at Councels: As in the Nicene, Constantine the great was present: in the Councel of Chalcedon, Martianus: in the Constantinopolitane 3. Constantinus the Emperour: in the Constantinopl. 4. Basilius the Emperour was present. Is it to bee thought that these noble Emperours, were at the Councels as inferiors or vnderlings? or had they not the chiefe places? then sure they were presidents: for in the Councell the chiefe place belongeth to the president. They might appoynt a speaker or prolocutor for them, as in the parliament house, though the prince be present, yet the Lord Chauncellour speaketh: but the chiefe power and Soueraigntie in the Councell, was in the Emperours.

Thirdly, not to heape vp many reasons in so playne a cause: I will alleadge one example most manifest out of Augustine: who writeth that in that great Councel at Carthage where the matter was discussed between the Catholicks & the Donatists, there being present more then 500. Bishops of both sides, Marcellinus was appointed to be moderator of that disputatiō: who diuers times putteth in his sentence in the disputation, and last of all, bidding both parts to go aside, he writeth the sentence definitiue, and concludeth against the Donatists, approuing the actes of the Catholike Bishops. haec August. breuicul. collation.

[Page]

THE FIFTE QVESTION WHETHER Councels may erre or not.

The Papists.

error 33 THey are not all agreed, what to determine of this matter; some affirme that Generall Councels can in no wise erre, although the consent of the Pope bee wanting: thus the fathers in Basile concluded, who is it, say they, that will preferre a sinfull man before an vndefiled Church? But Bellarmine more the Popes friend then so, holdeth, that euen generall Councels may erre, vnlesse they follow the instructions and directions of the Pope: Yea that it is not sufficient for the pope to call a Councel, and sende his Legate thither, but hee must write continually for aduertisement from his maister before any thing be concluded: and therefore they doubt not to say, that the Councell of Basile erred, though it had the consent of the Popes Legate, in defining, that the Councell is aboue the Pope, because he had no such direction from the Pope, Bellarmine de concil. lib. 2. cap. 11.

Nay the Iesuite goeth further, that particular Councels being approoued by the Pope cannot erre. cap. 5. So they holde that the holy fathers of the cruell Inquisition cannot erre: Yea Panormitane was not ashamed to say openly in the Councell of Basile, that he would prefer the iudgement of the Cardinals of Rome before all the world. This then is the Iesuites opinion, that no Councels by the pope confirmed can erre: & that a particular Councel hauing his allowance, is to be preferred before a generall without. Let vs see some of their reasons.

1. They abuse certaine places of scripture for their purpose: as that Act. 15. ‘It seemed good to vs, and the holy Ghost: I am with you to the end of the world: He that heareth you, heareth me.’ Bellarmine cap. 2. Rhemist. in Act. 15.8.10. so then thus they argue, Councels are neuer without the spirite of God, therefore can they not erre. A silly argument, as though the spirite of God were at their commaundement, or were tyed to places or persons: They must first performe the condition, before they can chalenge the promise: that is, to followe the rule of Gods word, and obediently to submit themselues thereunto, then will God vouchsafe to be present: The Gospell sayth, that wheresoeuer two or three are gathered together in my name, I will be present euen in the midst of them: Here promise is made not to thousands or hundreds, but to two or three: and therefore by this place an assemblie of few persons may as well be exempted from error, as Councels: but there is a condition, In nomine meo, in my name, and then followeth, in medio illorum, in the midst of them: if then they are not met in the Lords name, they cannot looke for the presence of Christ. I pray you where was the holy Ghost present in that Councel at Rome vnder Iohn. 23. when there appeared a great Oule, which stared and out faced the pope, who [Page] blushing at the matter, and fuming, rose vp and departed? At the sight of which Owle they whispered one in anothers eare, that the spirit appeared in the likenes of an Owle: and after that, in an other session the same Owle appeared, and could not be driuen away, vntill by throwing bats and cudgels at her, shee fell downe dead before them. ex Nichol. Clemang. In the beginning of the Councel of Constāce after the accustomed hymne song, veni sancte spiritus, a bil was set vp with these wordes, alijs rebus occupati nunc adesse non possumus, Wee are now otherwise occupied, we cannot be present with you. We see now how sure the Papists are of the holy Ghost in their popish Councels.

The Protestants.

WE doubt not to say, that Councels haue erred, and may erre, presuming any thing besides the warrant of Gods worde, and that neither vniuersall or particular Councels are priuiledged, much lesse any one man, no nor the Pope, not to erre in matters of fayth, otherwise, then following the trueth of the Scriptures, for in so doing, they are sure, not to be deceiued.

1. We haue also examples in the scripture of Councels that erred, as that assemblie in Achabs dayes of 400. Prophets, who were al deceiued: the Iesuite thus answereth, that it was an assemblie of prophets, not of priests: as though priestes were more piuiledged from error, than Prophets. And these, say they, were false Prophets, not Prophets of the Lord: We graunt so, and this withal, that wheresoeuer the Lords Prophets, and pastors, and ministers assemble, that there they will heare the Lords voyce: which the Pope in his Councels doth not. But he still supposeth, that the Pope and his ministers are Christs Disciples: which is an vnreasonable supposition, seeing we hold him to be Antichrist, and that the Iesuite knoweth.

Such a Councell was that of the Iewes, Iohn 9. where all they were excommunicate that confessed Christ, & Mark. 14▪ Christ himselfe was by the Councel condemned: It cannot be denied, that this Councell erred. Let vs heare the papists goodly answeres: some say, that the Councel erred in a matter of fact, de facto, non de iure, not in a case of right, as whether Christ should be put to death: as though in condemning him, they denied not that he was the Messiah: other, that they erred in their owne opinion, not in the sentence giuen, for Christ indeede was guilty of death, say they, because he did beare our sinnes: the Iesuite findeth not much fault with this answere, & yet it is an open blasphemie, as is that also of the papists, that the Iewes had sinned mortally, if they had not put Christ to death. Some of them say, the Councel erred not in that which was done, but in the maner of iudgement, because it was tumultuous & disorderly,Popish blasphemies. & done by suborning of false witnesses: and this sayth the Iesuite, is probabilis responsio, a probable answere sayth hee, being most impious and blasphemous. But he dare not rest in this answere, but findeth out a fourth of his owne, that the chiefe priestes and Councels of the Iewes could not erre before the comming [Page] of Christ, but after he was come, they might. A blinde popish answere▪ for doth not Christ euery where impugne the traditions and decrees of the Elders, as Mark. 7. which our Sauiour should not haue done belike, seeing the Elders before his comming could not erre: or will they say, that those traditions were right and good before, and afterward erronious? I know not els, what they should say.

3. We see by experience that many councels haue erred: we let pas those which the Iesuite himself cōfesseth to haue erred, as the third Coūcel of Antioch, where Athanasius was condemned, and the Arrian heresie approoued: the Councel of Arimine, where the same heresie was furthered: the fourth Ephesine approuing Eutiches heresie: These Councels, though they were generall, the papists confesse to haue erred, and they haue a trick to shift it off, but a silly one God knoweth. They were not approoued by the Pope, saye they: As though all verity & knowledge in the whole earth were locked vp in the Popes breast.

But wee will bring an instance of such Councels as the Pope allowed, and yet by the papists owne confession erred. In the Councell of Naeo-Caesarea, confirmed by Leo 4. in the 7. canon: second marriage is forbidden. In the Councel Toletan. 1. the 17. canon: it is thus written, that one may be admitted to the communion, though he haue a concubine, modò non sit vxoratus, so hee be not wiued: the Iesuites poore shift is this, that a concubine is here vnderstoode for a wife without a dowrie, and further sayth, that Agar was Abrahams wife, and not his concubine, agaynst the scripture: for Abraham should haue done euill in sending of her away as he did, if she were his wife, and the scripture calleth Sara by the name onely of Abrahams wife, the other by the name of a bond woman, Gen. 21.8.12.

In the sixt Synod confirmed by Adrian the 1. canon. 72. the mariages betweene Catholikes and hereticks are adiudged to be voyde. In the second Councel of Nice, act. 5. it was concluded, that Angels and mens souls are bodily and circumscriptible.

In the Councel of Rome vnder Pope Stephan the 7. all the acts of Formosus his predecessor were reuoked: And in the Councel of Rauenna vnder Iohn. 9. Pope, Formosus actes were established, and Stephans decrees abrogate.

Lastly, in the Councel of Constance, they are excommunicate, that receiue the sacrament in both kinds: the Councel of Basile on the contrary side permitteth and giueth leaue to the Bohemians to vse both kindes. One of these Councels, must needs erre, & both of them were confirmed by the Popes: the Councel of Constance by Martin the 5. the Councel of Basile by Foelix 5. By this induction of many particulars we inferre and conclude, that Councels euen approued by the Pope, may and haue erred,

4. Lastly, Augustines opinion is this, that prouincial Councels ought to giue place to general: Et ipsa plenaria priora posteriorib. emendari, and the former general Councels must be amended by the latter. The Rhemists haue found out this shift, that in matters indifferent, which are to be chāged, according to time [Page] and place, Councels may be altered, Act. 15. sect. 8. But to that it is aunswered, that the word emendare, signifieth not onely a change, but a correcting of that which is amisse. And that clause of Augustines must bee put in, why Councels must be amended: si a veritate deuiatum fit, if they swarue from the truth, de baptism. lib 2. cap. 3. Wherfore we conclude, that Councels may erre.

THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING THE AVthority of general Councels, whether they may absolutely determine without scripture, and necessarily binde all men to the obedience of their Canons.

The Papists.

IN words they would seem to magnifie the scripture aboue Councels: for error 34 they say, that the authority of the scripture depēdeth not in himself, of Church, Pope, or Councels: but in respect of vs, the word of God is the word of God, say they, though there be no determination of the Church, but we doe not know it so to be, but because the Church hath so defined: Bellarmine lib. 2. de con. cap. 12. Here is a goodly glosse, but nothing to the purpose: for in that they say the Church hath absolute authoritie to declare and pronounce which is the word, (which indeed it hath not without testimonie and warrant of the word it selfe) by this meanes it commeth about, that much is taken for the worde of GOD which is not: and so the Church doth not onely declare the worde, but maketh that the word which is not.

First, beside the Apocrypha, which they make part of the word, as we haue shewed afore, they hold that their traditions are also the word of God. Bellarmine cap. 12. Secondly Gratian is so bolde to affirme that the decretall Epistles of the Popes are to be counted amongst the Canonical scriptures, dist. 19. can. in canonicis, & that the Canons of Councels are of the same authority, dist. 20. can. decretales. And Greg. 1. epist. 24. saith, he doth reuerēce the 4. general Councels, as the foure Euangelists. Thirdly, they shamefully affirme, that whatsoeuer the pastors and priests do teach in the vnity of the Church, is the word of God, Rhemens. 1. Thes. 2. v. 12.

First then they conclude, that Councels are not bound to determine according to the scriptures, but as iudges may determine of their own authority. Secondly, that al men are bound of necessity to receiue the decrees of Councels, without any further triall or examination. They reason thus; out of the scripture.

1. Deut. 17.12. He that harkeneth not vnto the priest, that man shal die. But mark I pray you, what goeth before, ‘v. 11. according to the law which they shal teach thee, & according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee, shalt thou do: see then, here is no absolute iudicial power giuen to the priest but according to the law of God.’

2. The example of the Apostles Act. 15. is as fōdly alleadged, where it was decreed (saith the Iesuite) that ye Gētiles shuld not be burthened with ceremonies, which saith hee, was not determined by the scriptures but by the absolute suffrages [Page] of the Apostles. Again, their decrees were absolutely imposed vpon the Churches, without any further examination of the Disciples. Ergo, we are now also absolutely bound to obey all decrees of Councels, Bellar. de concil. 1.18.

We answere: first, it is false, that this matter was determined without scripture: for Iames alleadgeth scripture: & Peter thus reasoneth, we beleeue through the grace of God to be saued as wel as they v. 11. therfore what need this yoke of ceremonies? 2. Though there had been no scripture, who seeth not that the spirit of God so ruled the Apostles, that their writings and holy actions should serue for scripture vnto the ages following? Thirdly, the Disciples needed not to examine their decrees, knowing that they were gouerned by the spirit, as they themselues write: It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost: yet we see the brethren of Bereae searched the scripture for the trueth of those things which the Apostles preached, Act. 17.11. When they can proue such a plenarie power & fulnes of the spirit in their pastors and Councels, as was in the Apostles, we wil also beleeue them.

The Protestantes.

WE doe firmly beleeue that neither the Church nor Councels haue any such absolute power to determine without the holy scriptures, either beside or agaynst them, or to binde other men to obey such decrees: Neither that the true Church of God dare or will arrogate such power vnto it self: But that Councels are ordayned for the discussing & deciding of doubtful matters, according to the scriptures, and word written.

1. If the Apostles preachings might bee examined according to scripture, much more the acts of all other Bishops and pastors. But that was lawful in the Disciples of Berea, Act. 17.11. which are commended for it: therefore called noble, couragious Christians, because of this their promptnes, & diligence in searching out of the truth. Ergo.

2. All things necessarie to saluation to be beleeued, are articles of our fayth: but al such articles must be grounded vpon the word of God, therfore nothing can be imposed as necessary to saluation without the word of God. Wherefore it is a blasphemous saying of the papists, that the Church may make new articles of fayth, Rhemens. annot. in 1. Tim. 3. sect. 9. and Eckius maintained the same poynt agaynst Luther, in the disputation at Lipsia, and brought forth a new article of faith, agreed of in the Councel of Constance, that it is de necessitate salutis, of the necessitie of saluation,Martyrol. Fox. p. 848. to beleeue that the Pope is the head of the Church. The fathers of Basile more modest then so, concluding that it was an article of fayth to beleeue that Councels were aboue the Pope, doe vse this reason: those things, say they, which we alleadge for the superioritie of general Councels are gathered out of the sayings of our Sauiour Christ.Martyrol. Fox. p. 677. Ergo, we are al bound to obey them. Therefore we conclude, that the word of God only written is the rule of fayth, and al things necessary to be beleeued, Rom. 10.10. Fayth commeth by hearing, and hearing by the word. Councels are to explane and declare articles of faith, not to establish new.

[Page]3 Lastly we will heare Augustine speake, Nec tu debes Ariminense, neque ego Nicaenū tanquā praeiudicaturus proferre concilium, scripturarum authoritatibus, &c. Neither must I alleadge the Nicen Councel, nor you the Arimine, I am neither bound to the one, nor you to the other, let the matter be tried by Scripture, cont. Maximu. Arrianum lib. 3. cap. 14. By this fathers sentence therefore, no man is bound of necessitie to be tyed to Councels, but the Scripture onely is absolutely to be beleeued.

THE SEAVENTH QVESTION, WHETHER Councels be aboue the Pope or not.

The Papists.

THis is a matter yet not fully determined amongst the Papists. Neither are error 35 they all of one opinion: In the Councell of Constance and Basile, it was fully concluded: that the Councell is aboue the Pope: Gerson of Paris, that was also present in the Councell of Constance, and a great dooer against Iohn Hus, stifly maintaineth the authoritie of Councels aboue the Pope. Other Papists more fauorable to their new God amight, say, that the Pope is by right aboue the Councell, but he may (if he wil) submit himselfe to the Councell. But now commeth in the stoute Iesuite, and saith with the rest of the schoolemen, that the Pope hath such a soueraigntie aboue the Councell, that he cannot be subiect to their sentence, though hee would. Bellar. de concil. lib. 2.14. Yet hee is in a mammering with himselfe, for saith he, in periculo schismatis, when there is a schisme, and it is not knowne who is the true Pope, in such a case the Councell is aboue the Pope: Let vs examine some of his best reasons.

1 Now commeth in a great blasphemie. All the names, saith the Iesuite, that are giuen to Christ in the Scriptures, as head of the Church, are ascribed to the Pope, as he is called fidelis dispensator. Luc. 12. a faithfull steward in the Lords house, pastor gregis, Iohn 10. the shepheard of the flocke, Caput corporis ecclesiae. Ephes. 4. the head of his bodie the Church, vir seu sponsus, Ephes. 5. the husband or spouse of the Church: all these titles, saith he, are due to the Pope, Ergo, he is aboue the Church, and so consequently aboue generall Councels. Bellar. de concil. lib. 2.17.

O Lord what great blasphemie is here, to appropriate the titles of Christ, to a mortall man: But goe to Bellarmine, and the rest of that packe, fil vp the measure of iniquitie of your forefathers: say with Pope Athanasius, that the people of the world are the partes of his bodie: with Cornelius the Bishop in the Councell of Trent, the Pope being the light came into the world, and men loued darkenes rather then light: with Pope Calixtus in the Councell of Rhemes, who, when hee saw the Councell would not consent to excommunicate the Emperour, impiously cried out, that they had forsaken him, as Christ was left of his Disciples: with Innocentius the third, that all things in Heauen and earth, and [Page] vnder the earth doe bowe the knee vnto him: with Otho no Pope, but a Cardinall, that sitting amongst his Bishops, blasphemously applied to himselfe the vision of Ezechiel cap. 1. resembling the Bishops to the sower faced beasts, himselfe vnto God that approched to the Prophet in the midst. Euen thus with the like spirite of blasphemie, doo the Iesuites crie out, that the Pope is the chiefe shepheard, steward, husband, and head of the Church vpon earth.

But we will leaue to charge them so deepely with blasphemie, which notwithstanding they cannot auoyde: Let vs heare, what the fathers of Basile say to this poynt. Bellarmine saith, the Pope is the husband: but they reason cleane contrarie: the Church (say they) is the spouse of Christ: the Pope, make the best of him you can, is but a Vicar: but no man dooth so ordaine a Vicar, that hee maketh his spouse subiect vnto him, but that the spouse is alwaies thought to be of more authoritie then the Vicar, forsomuch as she is one body with her husband, but the Vicar is not so: thus haue they to the full answered the Iesuite, ex Aenea Syluio. Better arguments they haue none for the Popes prerogatiue, then we haue seene.

The Protestants.

THat the Pope is by right, and ought to be subiect to generall Councels, and that they haue authoritie to iudge, examine, suspend, punish, & depose him, if there be iust cause, it is proued thus. This matter was pithilie disputed vpon by the Fathers of Basile, some of whose reasons, it shall bee sufficient heere to followe.

1 They proue this conclusion out of Scripture. First, whereas Panormitane had saide, that the Pope was Lorde of the Church, vnto him Segouius answered, that it was the most honourable title of the Bishop of Rome, to be called the seruant of the seruants of God: and Peter, saith hee, forbiddeth pastors to behaue themselues as Lords ouer the Clergie, 1. Pet. 5. And if Christ the sonne of God, came not to be ministred vnto, but to minister and serue, how then can his Vicar haue any dominion? So was Panormitane answered.

Againe, the Diuines thus argued: Christ saith to Peter, dic Ecclesiae, Peter is sent to the Church or Councell: Ergo the veritie doth remit the Bishop of Rome to the Councell. But to this the Iesuite saith, that Peter was not yet entred into his office to bee chiefe Bishop, but was as a priuate person. So then belike, this rule of our Sauiour Christ, dic Ecclesiae, tell it to the Church, did but binde Peter, till Christ were ascended, and he receiued his Vicar-dome.

This cauillous answere the Fathers of Basile wisely foresaw, and preuented it, for they shew how Peter was subiect to Councels euen after the ascension, as Act. 11. Peter is rebuked (say they) by the congregation, because he went to Cornelius an heathen man, as if it had not been lawfull for him to attempt any great matter without the knowledge of the congregation: but that seemeth to make more for the purpose, Galath. 2. where Paule rebuked Peter to his face, because [Page] contrarie to the decree of the Councell of the Apostles, hee did cogere gentes Iudaizare, hee would constraine the Gentiles to doe like the Iewes. Ergo, Peter was subiect vnto the Councell, ex Aenea Syluio.

Other reasons many were alleaged by the Fathers of Basile. First the Bishop of Burgen: As in euery well ordered Kingdome, the whole realme should be of more authoritie then the King, so the Church ought to be of more authoritie then the Pope, though he were Prince thereof.

The Diuines brought these argumēts: the Church is the mother of the faithfull, and so of the Pope, if he be a faithfull man: the Pope is then the Churches sonne, as both Anacletus and Calixtus Bishops of Rome confessed. Ergo how much the sonne is inferiour to his mother, so much is the Church superiour to the Pope. Secondly, the Pope is inferiour to Angels, he is not greater then Iohn Baptist, of whom it is said, that the least in the Kingdome of God is greater then he: but the Angels doe reuerentlie accord vnto the doctrine of the Church. Ephes. 3.10. Ergo the Pope is bound to doo the same, who is lesse then the Angels. These Fathers thought none so absurd to denie the Pope to be inferiour to Angels, and therefore labour not to proue it. Yet Antoninus an olde Papist saith, Non minor honor datur Papae, quàm Angelis, there is no lesse honour due to the Pope then to the Angels. Nay another saith (I thinke it be Pope Paschalis) Datur Episcopis, quod ne Angelis, vt Christi corpus crearent: it is graunted to Bishops, which is not giuen to the Angels, to create the bodie of Christ. But the Fathers of Basile thought not these men worthie the answere, no more doe we, and so let thē passe. Thirdly, the Pope (say they) being the Vicar of the Church, for he is more truely so called, then the Vicar of Christ▪ he may be deposed of the Church: for a Lord may put out his Vicar at his pleasure. Ergo the Pope is vnder Councels.

4 If the Councels might not ouerrule the Pope, there were no remedie left to resist a wicked Pope: Shall we suffer all things, say they, to run into ruine and decay with him? for it is not like, that hee would congregate a Councell against himselfe. To this the Iesuite answereth, that there is no remedie left, but to pray to God in such a case; who will either confound or conuert such a Pope. Here is goodly diuinitie: we know that Antichrist shall at length be destroyed at the comming of Christ: but if he should be let alone in the meane while, and not be bridled, he might doe much hurt, as he hath done too much alreadie. Yet the Iesuite confesseth, that a wicked Pope may bee resisted by force and armes: and why not, I pray you, as well by peaceable meanes? these sayings are contrarie. Bellarm. cap. 19.

So then this is Popish diuinitie, that be the Pope neuer so wicked, doe he neuer so much harme, hee is not to bee controuled of any mortall man. Such doultish schoole poynts maintained especially by begging friers, the fathers of Basile complained of: As that they should say, that no man ought to iudge the high and principall seate, that it cannot be iudged, either by Emperour, Clergie, King or people. Other affirme, that the Lord hath reserued to himselfe the depositions [Page] of the chiefe Bishop: Others, yet more mad, are not ashamed to affirme, that the Bishop of Rome, though hee carrie soules in neuer so great number to hell, yet is he not subiect to any correction, or rebuke. For all these straunge and blasphemous positions, the fathers concluded, as yee haue heard, that the Pope ought to obey generall Councels.

4 Lastly, I will adioyne the iudgement of Augustine, who writing in his 162. Epistle concerning the Donatists, whose cause was heard and determined by the Emperours appoyntment at Rome before Miltiades then Bishop there, and other Bishops assistants: and yet for all this the Donatists would not bee quiet: Thus he saith, Putemus, illos iudices, qui Romae iudicauerunt, non bonos iudices fuisse: Restabat adhuc plenarium Concilium, &c. Put case (saith hee) that the Bishop of Rome and the rest, iudged corruptly: there remayned yet another remedie: A generall Councell might haue beene called, where the iudges and the cause might further haue been tried, and examined, & their iudgement, if there were cause, reuersed. Whereby it appeareth, say the fathers of Basile, that not onely the sentence of the Pope alone, but also the Pope with his Bishops ioyned with him, might be made frustrate by a Councell. Here the Iesuite paltreth & saith, that a matter determined by the Pope in a particular Councell may be called againe in question by the Pope in a general Councel. First what neede that, seeing that a particular Councel hauing the Popes authoritie, as the Iesuite confesseth, cannot erre? Againe, Augustine saith, vbi cum ipsis iudicibus causa possit agitari: In the which generall Councell the cause and the former iudges, of the which Miltiades was one, may bee tryed and examined, so that the Pope himselfe might be adiudged by the Councell, and not the cause onely. Vpon the Premisses we truely and iustly conclude, that the Pope is and of right ought to be subiect to generall Councels.

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF THE CONditions and qualitie of generall Councels.

The Papists.

THeir vnreasonable and vnequall conditions, are these and such like, as followe.

1 That the Pope onely should haue authoritie to summon, call, proroge, dissolue and confirme Councels, and he onely to bee the iudge, president and moderator in Councels, or some at his appoyntment.

2 They will haue none to giue voyces but Bishops, and such as are bound by oath of alleageance to the Pope.

3 That the Councell is not bound to determine according to Scripture, but to follow their traditions, and former decrees of Councels.

4 That no Councell is in force without the Popes assent, yea the Pope himselfe [Page] (say they) by his sole authotitie may abrogate and disanull the canons and decrees of Councels.

These and such other conditions the Papists require in their Councels: So they wilbe sure, that nothing shall be concluded against them.

The Protestants.

OVr conditions, which we would haue obserued and kept, in generall Councells, are these, most iust and reasonable:

1 That the Pope, which is a party, should be no iudge: for it is vnreasonable, that the same man should be both a partie and a iudge: and therefore he ought not to meddle with calling and appoynting Councels, with ruling, or moderating them, seeing it is like, he would worke for his owne aduantage.

2 That such a time and place be appointed, as when and where the Churches of Christendome may most safely and conueniently meete together: not at such a time, as Paulus the third, called a Councell, when all Princes in Christendome were occupied in great affaires: nor such a place, as he thē appointed at Mantua in Italie, whither Princes could not come without perill of iourney and danger of life, being penned in by the Popes garrisons. Thus Pope, or Bishop Leo, (for then there were no Popes) writ to Martianus the Emperour, to haue the Councell remoued from Calchis to Italie, but hee preuayled not. So Pope Eugenius would haue dissolued the Councell at Basile, and brought it vnder his owne nose.

3 We would haue it a free Councell, where euery man might fully vtter his minde, and that there should be a safe conduct graunted to al to come and goe: which the Pope for all his faire promises is vnwilling to doe, as it was flatly denyed to Hierome of Prage in the Councell of Constance: to whome it was answered, that he should haue safe conduct to come, but none to goe. Neither if they should giue a safe conduct, were they to bee trusted, for it cannot bee forgotten, to their perpetuall infamie, that they brake the Emperour Sigismunds safe conduct graunted to Iohn Husse in the Councell of Constance, saying, that faith was not to be kept with Hereticks.

4 That the matter should not bee left wholie to Bishops and Prelates, but that the learned of the Clergie and Laitie besides, should giue voices, seeing the cause of religion is common, and concerneth all. But most of all, that nothing bee carried with violence or popularitie, against the Scriptures, but euery matter determined according to the truth thereof.

Such a Councell wee refuse not, nay wee much desire, which is the true generall Councell: that is not generall, where all men cannot speake; no freedome nor libertie graunted for men to vtter the trueth, where all thinges are partially handled, and are swayed by one mans authoritie. Wherefore the Rhemists slander vs in saying wee raile vppon general Councels. annot. in Act. 15.10. and that we refuse them. 2. Galath. 2. Whether wee or they are enemies to true, generall, free, holy, indifferent Councels let all men iudge.

[Page]

THE FOVRTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE BISHOP OF ROME, COMMONLIE CALLED THE POPE.

THis great and waightie controuersie conteineth tenne seuerall questions.

1 Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall.

2 Whether Peter were the Prince of the Apostles, and by our Sauiour Christ made head of the Church.

3 Whether Peter were at Rome, and dyed Bishop there.

4 Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter.

5 Concerning the primacie of the Bishop of Rome: sixe partes of the question. First, whether hee haue authoritie ouer other Bishops. Secondly, whether appeales are to be made to Rome. Thirdly, whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any. Fourthly, whether he may be deposed. Fiftly, what primacy he hath ouer other Churches. Sixtly, of his titles and names.

6 Whether the Bishop of Rome may erre, and likewise whether the Church of Rome be subiect to error.

7 Of the spiritual iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome: two parts. First, whether he can make lawes to binde the conscience. Secondly, whether other Bishops doe receiue their iurisdiction from him.

8 Of the Popes temporall iurisdiction: two parts. First, whether hee haue authoritie aboue Kings and princes▪ Secondly, whether he be a temporal prince.

9 Of the prerogatiues of the Pope.

10 Concerning Antichrist: nine parts. First, whether Antichrist shall be some one singular man. Secondly, of the time of his comming. Thirdly, of his name. Fourthly, of his nation and kinred. Fiftly, where his place and seate shall be. Sixtly, of his doctrine and manners. Seuenthly, of his miracles. Eightly, of his kingdome and warres. Ninthly, whether the Pope bee the very Antichrist: of these in their order.

THE FIRST QVESTION, WHETHER THE Regiment of the Church be Monarchicall.

error 36 WE are not ignorant that the Philosophers made three formes and states of gouernement in the commonwealth: the Monarchical, when as the principall and soueraigne power rested in one, as in the King, Queene or Emperor: as Rome sometime was ruled by Kings, and many yeares after by Emperors. Secondly, the Aristocratical, when the commonwealth was gouerned by an assembly and Senate of nobles, as the Romanes had a long time, their Consuls and Senators. Thirdly, the Democratical, which is the popular state, when the people and multitude bare the greatest sway: as sometime in Rome also, tribuni [Page]plebis, the officers for the people had the chiefe authoritie. Now of all these in common-wealth matters, the first kinde is the best and safest, the Monarchical or princely gouernement. The question now is, whether the same forme ought to bee reteyned in Church-gouernement: and in this question certaine things are to bee obserued: First, that wee haue not to deale in this place with that part of Ecclesiasticall regiment, wherein the prince hath interest, as in ordayning Ecclesiasticall Lawes, and seeing to the execution thereof: but the question is onely of that regiment Ecclesiasticall, which is proper to the gouernors of the Church, which consisteth in the ministerie of the word and Sacraments, in ordaining and electing of Church-ministers, in the dispensing of the keyes of the Church, in the Ecclesiasticall censures and discipline, and such like: whether in the Church there ought to bee one chiefe Bishop, from whom all other receiue this power in the premisses. Secondly, the question is not of the spirituall gouernement of Christ, who is the chiefe Monarch and King of his Church, but of the outward and externall regiment vpon earth. Thirdly, wee speake not of the state of any particular Church, either nationall, prouinciall, or oppidall, but of the generall state of the Church: whether ouer all Churches there ought to be one chiefe Bishop. These things premised, wee come now to the question.

The Papists.

THat there ought to bee one chiefe Monarch and high Bishop ouer all the Church, in all Ecclesiasticall matters, for the deciding of controuersies, preseruing the vnitie of the Church, from whom all other Ecclesiasticall Ministers doe receiue their power and authoritie, they thus would proue.

1 The militant Church is in all things answerable and correspondent to the triumphant companie in Heauen: as Heb. 8.5. Moses was bid to make all things according to the paterne shewed in the Mount. But in heauen there is beside God himselfe, a Monarch and chiefe commaunder of the Angels, euen Michael the Archangel, Reuel. 12.7. Michael and his Angels fought. Ergo, it ought to be so vpon earth.

We answer. First, the Church vpon earth, neither is, nor can be altogether like to the celestiall congregation: for there is no temple, Reuel. 21.22. There shall enter no vncleane thing: and many such like differences there are: We are bid to follow them in holines and obedience, so farre wee must imitate the Angels, as in the Lords prayer 3. Petit. As for imitation and conformitie in other things, we haue no such commaundement: we are promised hereafter to be like them, but that is not yet. Neither doth that place proue any such thing, Heb. 8. For how followeth it, Moses was shewed a paterne to make the Tabernacle by, Ergo the Church hath a paterne of her gouernement from Heauen? When they can shew any such paterne reuealed in the word, (for their dreames and phantasies we wil not beleeue) for the Church, as Moses had for the Tabernacle, then they shall say somewhat.

[Page]2 It is a vaine controuersie so to descant of the Angels, as to appoynt them a Captaine and commaunder, and to make nine orders or bands of them, as our Rhemist. annot 1. Ephes. vers. 21. These are but their dreames, they haue not a worde in Scripture for it. And concerning Michael, they are much deceiued, for in that place Apocal. 12.7. Christ is called Michael: Michael and his Angels fought against the Dragon. And who I pray you is the chiefe Captaine of the Church against the diuell and his hoast but Christ? And so is it expounded verse 10. Now is saluation in Heauen, and the strength and Kingdome of our God, and the power of his Christ: Here hee is called Christ, who before is Michael. In other places also, Michael is vnderstood to be Christ, as Dan. 10.21. there is none that holdeth with mee but Michael your Prince: here Michael is the prince of the Church, and not of the Angels. And that Michael is not the prince of the Angels, as our aduersaries meane, taking Michael for an Angell, it is proued out of the 13. verse. Michael one of the chiefe princes: the Angels are all called princes, and not one to bee prince aboue them.

Likewise the nature and signification of the word Michael agreeth hereunto:Tremel. for it is compounded of three hebrue particles, as much as to say, one that is equall vnto GOD: which name in that sense cannot bee giuen vnto any creature.

Further, Epistle Iud. 9. there is mention made of Michael the Archangell, who stroue against the diuell, and saide, the Lord rebuke thee Sathan: where the Apostle alludeth, to that place of Zacher. 3.2. where the very same words are found: but there the prophet calleth him Iehouah, that spake those words, and here the Apostle calleth him Michael: so that in this place it must needes bee vnderstoode for Christ.

But to conclude, we denie not, but that Michael may bee the name of some glorious Angell: but out of these places it cannot bee proued. And againe, we will not stand with them, but that there may be degrees of excellencie amongst the Angels, as there shall be amongst the Saints: but that any one hath any such soueraigne and commaunding authoritie ouer the rest, it is a curious and presumptuous surmise.

2 The Church of the olde Testament was a figure of the Church vnder the New: but they had a high Priest aboue the rest. Ergo, there ought to be now.

We answere, First, we graunt the high Priest was a figure, but neither of Peter nor Pope, but onely of Christ: for in two things did the high Priest resemble Christ, in offering of sacrifice (so hath Christ offered vp himselfe. Heb. 7.27.) and in entring into the sanctuarie to make attonement for the people: so Christ is entred into the Heauens, to appeare in sight for vs before God, as the apostle saith. Heb. 9.24. I trow in neither of these the high priest could be a type either of Peter or Pope.

2 Neither doth it follow, because there was an high priest in one countrey, therefore there ought to bee one ouer the Churches in al countries: as the Iesuite [Page] frameth an other argument by a comparison: because a bishop is ouer his diocesse, a Metropolitane ouer his prouince, there may bee as well a Pope ouer the whole Church: For by the same reason, because a Lorde may bee the chiefe in his seignorie, a Duke in his prouince, a Prince in his Kingdome, therefore there ought to bee an Emperour ouer all the world: or as Master Caluine saith, because one fielde is committed to one Husbandman to dresse and to till, therefore the whole Worlde may: which were a thing impossible.

The Protestants.

THat there ought not to be any one chiefe Bishop, Pope or prelate, to exercise iurisdiction ouer the whole Church, wee doe thus make it good.

1 We acknowledge no head of the Church but Christ, neither doth the Scripture attribute this title of Maiestie ouer the whole Church, but onely to Christ. If the Pope or any else bee the head, the Church is his bodie,Iuel ans. to the Apol. page. 657. which Bellarmine is a shamed to graunt yet. Pope Athanasius doubted not to call populos mundi, partes corporis sui, the people of the Worlde the partes of his bodie.

Againe, if he be the head, hee must doe the duetie of an head, which is, to knit and ioyne the parts together, and to giue effectuall power to euery part. Ephes. 4.16. Where the Apostle alludeth to the gouernement of mans bodie: in the which the parts receiue a double benefite from the head, the knitting and ioyning together by sinewes, which come from the head, and sense and motion also giuen to euery part from the head: but it were blasphemie to thinke this of the Pope, that he giueth any influence to the Church. If they answer, he is but a ministeriall head, Christ is the principall. We say againe, that although these things are principallie wrought by the principall head, yet they must bee done instrumentally or Ministerially by the Ministeriall head: or else it is but a rotten head: such an one as the Wolfe found in a caruers shop (as you knowe the fable is) a goodly head, saith hee, but without wit or braine. If Christ performe all the duetie of the head himselfe, then is there no other head: if the Pope doe somewhat, that belongeth to the head, tell vs, what is it? If hee will bee an head, and doe nothing, surely hee must needes bee a brainelesse and witlesse head.

2 It is a daungerous and impossible thing to haue the charge of all Churches committed to one man: GOD alone is sufficient to beare that burthen. Saint Paule saith, who is sufficient for these things? No pastor or minister, that is but set ouer one flocke or parish, is sufficient to preach the worde: much lesse is any one man sufficient to gouerne the whole Church.

Bellarmine answereth first: Saint Paul saith of himselfe, that hee had the care of all Churches. 2. Corinth. 11.28. We replie againe, first, then belike [Page] Saint Paul was vniuersall pastor and not Peter. Secondly, wee must consider that the Apostles were sent to all the world: their calling was not limited: when they had planted the Gospell in one place, they did take care also for other places: but now there is no such Apostolicall calling. Thirdly, Paul did not beare this burthen alone, but the Apostles and Euangelists were his coadiutors and fellow-helpers.

Secondly, sayth he, why may not the care of the whole Church bee committed to one man, as well as the gouernment almost of the whole world was appointed by God to Nabuchadnezzar, Cyrus, Augustus; seeing the gouernement of the Church is easier then the ciuill and politike regiment?

We replie. First, wee neuer reade of any that had dominion ouer the whole world, as the Pope chalengeth to haue ouer the whole Church, which is dispersed throughout the world. Secondly, these great and large Monarches are saide to haue been giuen of God, Dan. 2.37. Not that this large dominion and vsurpation ouer other countries so much pleased God: for the people of God the Israelites in their most flourishing estate neuer had such soueraigntie ouer other countries, but by voluntarie subiection, as in Solomons dayes, 1. King. 4.21. the Kings round about brought presents vnto him: But because the Lord turned and vsed this their large and mightie dominion to the good of his Church: for Cyrus was a defender of the Church, against all that bare euill will thereat: and the large Empire of the Romans serued very commodiously for the propagation of the Gospell. Thirdly, the Iesuite sheweth his skill, when he saith, that the regiment of the Church is easier, then the gouernement of the commonwealth: Whereas there is no greater and waightier burthen vpon earth, then is the charge of soules. It seemeth the Pope taketh his ease, finding the care of the Church to be so easie and pleasant a thing: in deede as he vseth it, it is no great matter: for hee preacheth not, but giueth himselfe to ease and idlenes and all princely pleasures. But England hath found by experience, and so did that worthie and famous Prince King Henry the eight, that there was neuer matter so hardlie compassed, as was the reformation of the Church, and the suppression of idolatrie and superstition in this lande. Augustine saith, Nemo nostrum se episcopum episcoporum constituit, aut quasi tyrannico terrore ad obsequēdi necessitatem collegas suos adigit. de Baptis. 2.2. None of vs doth count himselfe a Bishop ouer other Bishops, or taketh vpon him after a commaunding manner, as tyrants vse, to enforce his fellowes to obey. Ergo by his iudgement all Bishops are of like and equall authoritie.

[Page]

THE SECOND QVESTION, WHETHER PETER were the chiefe, and Prince of the Apostles, and assigned by Christ to bee head of the Church.

The Papists.

THis our aduersaries doe stiffelie maintaine, that he was not only head of the error 37 Church, but of the Apostles also. Bellarmi. lib. 1. de pontif. cap. 11. And the Rhemists doubt not to call him the chiefe and Prince of the Apostles. 1. Corinth. 9. ver. 5.

1 Wee will omitte manie of their waightie arguments, as out of these and such like places: I haue prayed for thee Peter, that thy faith should not fayle: cast forth thy net into the deepe, I will make thee a Fisher of men: Peter payed toll for Christ and himselfe: Peter drew the net to the land full of great fish: Peter onely drew out his sword in the defence of Christ. Ergo Peter was the Prince of the Apostles and head of the Church. ex concil. Basilien Fox. pag. 673.

Such other goodlie arguments our Rhemists doe make: Peter did excommunicate Ananias and Sapphira: he healed the sicke by his shadow. Ergo he was the head of the Church. Annot. 5. Acts se. 5.8. Againe, Peters person was garded with foure quaternions of Souldiours, Act. 12.4. the Church prayed for him. Ibid. sect. 4. Paul nameth Cephas, 1. Cor. 9.5. Ergo hee was chiefe of the Apostles. Are not here goodlie arguments thinke you? To these reasons I neede make no other answere, then that, which our learned countrie man dooth in his Annotations. You must, saith he, bring better arguments or else children will laugh you to scorne. Fulk. Annot. Act. 5. sect. 5. Let vs see therefore if they haue any better arguments.

2 They take that to be a maine inuincible place for them, Matth. 16.18. Thou art Peter, and vpon this rocke will I builde my Church. Ergo the Church is built vpon Peter.

To make this argument the more strong, they set vnder it diuerse props: First, why did Christ giue Peter this name more then to any other of the Apostles, to call him Peter, of Petra a Rocke, but to shew that hee was appointed to be the foundation of the Church? Bellarmine cap. 17. Wee answer, Christ hereby signified, that Peter should bee a principall piller of his Church, as the rest of the Apostles, Ephes. 2. He chaunged also the names of some other Apostles, as Iames and Iohn were called Boanerges, the sonnes of thunder, Mark. 3. Therefore this was no such preeminence to Peter, neither is it true that Peter was almost called by no other name, for he is oftē in the Gospel after this called by his old name Simon, Mat. 16.17. & 17, 25. Fulk. Annot. in Ioh. 1. sec. 7. Secondly, againe (saith Bellarmine) the text is aedificabo, I will build my Church: but if Christ be here taken for the rocke, his Church was built alreadie, [Page] for many beleeued in him. But Peter was not made the foundation of his Church, till afterward after his resurrection, and therefore hee saith, I will build.

Wee answere. First, it is a corrupt glosse, to say the Church of Christ was not builded, till after the resurrection: for seeing that many beleeued before in Christ, and made a Church, either they must graunt, that the Church was without a foundation, or else, that the foundation was changed from Christ to Peter. Secondlie, it is taken therefore for the enlarging and increasing of the Church of GOD. It followeth not, because Christ saith, I will build, and his Church was begun to bee built alreadie, that therefore another kinde of building must bee excogitate: no more then, because Christ gaue his spirite to the Apostles Matth. 10.1. and againe Iohn 20.22. and yet biddeth them stay at Ierusalem till they should receiue the holie Ghost Acts. 1.7. that therefore they should looke for another holy Ghost, or as though they had not receiued the holy Ghost before. But as the sending of the holy Ghost is meant, for the increase and more plentifull measure thereof, so is the building of the Church here taken for the increase of the building.

Tract vlt in Iohann.Wee yet further answere with Augustine: super hanc petram, quam confessus es, aedificabo ecclesiam: vppon this rocke, which thou hast confessed, will I build my Church: so that in this place is meant not Peter to bee the rocke, but either Christ, whome he confessed, or his saith: whereby he confessed him, which commeth all to one effect. There is no great difference, whether wee say, the Church is builded vppon Christ, or faith is the foundation of the Church, for faith is an apprehension of Christ: but of the person of Peter it can no more bee vnderstoode then of the rest of the Apostles, who in some sence are called the foundation of the Church, namely in respect of their holy Apostolick doctrine vpon the which the Church is built. Ephes. 2.20.

Bellarmine and the Iesuites denie not, but here is relation also to the faith of Peter, but faith considered in his person. We answere: if they meane Peters particular faith, which was a proper adiunct to himselfe, the vniuersall Church cannot be built vpon that faith, seeing when Peter dyed, his faith also, as a proper accident to his person, ceased: if they vnderstand that generall faith, whereby Peter in the name of all the rest made this confession: then they all are as well made pillars and foundations of the Church, as he, because it was their generall confession. Fulk. annot. in 16. Matth. sect. 8.

3 Another place, which our aduersaries mightely vrge, are those words which follow verse 19. I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen, whatsoeuer thou shalt binde in earth, shalbe bound in Heauen: Ergo: Peter had especiall iurisdiction giuen him more then any of the rest. Bellarmine cap. 12.

Wee answere. First, as Peter confessed in the name of all the rest, so this [Page] power is geuen him not onelie for the rest (as the Rhemists falslie charge vs, that we make Peter a proctor for others) but together with the rest: Peters person must be excluded: for immediately after he deserued for a certaine slip of his person to bee called Sathan: it were an vnfit match, the same person at the same time to be honoured with the glorious title of the rock of Christ, and to sustaine so great a rebuke as to bee called Sathan. Secondlie, here is no more promised to Peter then vnto all the rest of the Apostles: Matth. 18.18. They likewise haue authoritie giuen them to binde and loose, and it is performed to them all alike. Iohn 20.23.

2 By the keyes here cannot be vnderstoode that large iurisdiction which the Papists dreame of, as not onely the authoritie and chaire of doctrine, iudgement, knoweledge, discretion betweene true and false doctrine, all which we graunt together with Peter to haue been giuen to al the Apostles besides. But say they, hereby is signified the height of gouernement, the power of making lawes, of calling Councels and confirming them, of ordeyning Bishops and Pastors, finally to dispense the goods of the Church spirituall and temporall: all this is added without ground, neither had either Peter or any of the Apostles this ample authoritie, no nor the Bishops of Rome for many hundred yeares after Christ. For this plenarie power of the keyes, when they signifie, a soueraigne and chiefe, and surpassing power, are so onely giuen vnto Christ, and to no mortall creature: He is saide to haue the keye of Dauid, who openeth and no man shutteth, who shutteth, and no man openeth. Apocalip. 3.7. Fulk. Annot. 16. Matth. sect. 13.

Lastly, I will oppose the iudgement of the Fathers of the Church, who alleadge out of Augustine, that Peter receiued the keyes for the whole Church, and out of Ambrose, that when Christ said to Peter, pasce oues, the blessed Apostle toke not charge of them alone, saith he, but together with vs, and we together with him. Fax. pag. 675.

4 Other arguments they alleadge for the primacie and preeminence of Peter, as Matthew 10. Hee is named in the first place. Bellarmine cap. 18. Wee answere, this mought bee, because Peter was the most auncient in yeeres, or one of the first that was called. But howsoeuer it was, it is no great matter: for this order is not alwaie kept, as Galath. 2. Paul nameth Iames first; Iames, Cephas, Iohn, saith hee, verse 9. the Iesuits best shift is heere to denie the text, saying; it should bee read, Cephas, Iames Iohn: vnlesse Iames bee named first, because he was Bishop of Ierusalem: Marke I pray you, Ergo at Ierusalem Peter was not before Iames, but next vnto him, therfore not prince of the Apostles. Bellarm. cap. 18.

Againe, say they, Peter standeth vp in the election of Matthias. Acts 1. preacheth the first Sermon, Acts 2. Acts. 15. Peter speaketh first. Wee answere to the first: Wee denie not a primacie of order to haue been in Peter: but it followeth not, that hee which speaketh first, or giueth the first [Page] voyce, should bee the head and commaunder of the rest to the second: wee also graunt that Peter in zeale, promptnes and forwardnes, was not behinde any of the Apostles, but euen with the first: for in him was that saying of Christ verified vppon the woman. Shee loued much, because much was forgiuen her, Luk 7: So was it with Peter, to whome Christ forgaue much, and therefore hee loued much. To the third wee answere, that by the Iesuites owne confession, Iames, who was (as they say) Bishoppe of Ierusalem, had the primacie there: how then can they now giue it to Peter?

The Protestants.

THat Peter had no such iurisdiction ouer the Apostles, as to bee called the head and Prince of them: but that to them all indifferentlie were the keyes committed, and did all faithfullie execute their Apostleship without any subiection of each to other, but ioyned the right hands of fellowship together: we thus confirme it out of the holy Scripture, and necessarie arguments deriued out of the same.

1 Ephes. 2.20. Apocalips. 21.14. The Church is said to bee built vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles. Ergo no primacie of power amongst the Apostles, they all founded the Church.

Bellarmine confesseth that in respect of their doctrine, there was no difference betweene Peter and the rest,Bellarm. cap. 11. for they all were first planters of Churches, they all preached the Gospell by reuelation: But in respect of gouernement, they were not equall: they had chiefe authoritie committed to them as Apostles and Embassadors of Christ: But Peter, as ordinarie pastor.

Wee answere. First, by his owne confession the Apostles had chiefe authoritie as Apostles, but there was no higher authoritie or power then of the Apostleship: but as they were Apostles they were equall (saith the Iesuite:) Ergo there could be no superioritie, for the calling of the Apostles was the highest in the Church.

2 To preach the Gospell, and to haue iurisdiction of gouernement, do both belong to the power of the keyes: but the keyes were equallie committed to all: Ergo they had all equall power both to preach and to gouerne. That they all had the power of the keyes equallie graunted vnto them, wee haue proued before out of Matth. 18.18.

2 Bellarmine himselfe confesseth, that Iames was Bishop and ordinarie pastor at Ierusalem, and saith with Anselme and Thomas Aquinas, that therefore he is named first by Saint Paule, Gal. 2. Bellarm. cap. 19. Therefore at Ierusalem Peter was to giue primacie to the ordinarie pastor there.

If they answere, that Rome was then the chiefe citie, and therefore Peter being [Page] Bishop of Rome was to haue the preeminence: To this we replie: that Ierusalem was rather to be preferred in respect of place, which was chosen by the Lord himselfe, to be the chiefe citie of his Church: But Rome through the tyrannie and vsurpation of the Romans ouer other countries was aduanced to that dignitie, not by the election of God.

But Bellarmine answereth, that Peter was Bishop of the whole Church, and so of Ierusalem too. We answere, he now saith lesse for Peter, then if hee called him, as he was, the Apostle of the whole world: for it was more to be an Apostle thā a Bishop. Diuers were called in the Apostles times, episcopi, ouerseers, or Bishops, that were not Apostles, as the pastors of Ephesus, Act. 20.28. Wherefore now hee hath saide iust nothing: in seeking to aduance Peter, hee hath disgraced him, in pulling him downe from his high Apostleship, to the chaire of a Bishop.

3 Peter had no superioritie ouer Paul, for they ioyned right handes of fellowship: and this allotment was made betweene them, that Paule should bee the chiefe of the Gentiles, and Peter of the circumcision, Galath. 2.9. Ergo.

Bellarmine answereth. First, they were ioyned as fellow-laborers in the preaching of the Gospell: but Peter might for all this bee greater in the office and power of gouerning. Wee answere: yea, but the text saith, that Paule onelie was not appointed to preach to the Gentiles, but hee had the chiefe Apostleship. Now to the Apostleship belongeth, not onely the function of preaching, but the whole vse of the keyes, and power of iurisdiction. Ergo: in all respects Saint Paule ouer the Gentiles had the chiefe Apostleship.

But let any man say, that this was a humane compact amongst themselues, and Paul had his lotte at Peters assignement: the text sheweth, that the Lorde himselfe had made this distribution. For when they sawe, saith Saint Paul, that the Gospell ouer the vncircumcision was committed to mee, verse 7. So then the Apostles did but confirme by their consent, that distribution, which they sawe the Lord himselfe had appoynted.

Further saith the Iesuite, the diuision was not so made, but that it was lawfull for Peter also to preache to the Gentiles. Wee answeare: wee graunt it, and for Paule to preache to the Iewes, yet that distinction remayned still, that Peter was chiefe of the circumcision, Paule of the vncircumcision.

Againe saith hee: but Peter had the more excellent lotte, for Christ himselfe first preached to the Iewes. Wee answere, wee denie not, but that hee had the first lotte in order: for to the Iewes was the Gospell first offered: but Paul had the larger and more glorious lotte: the Church of the Iewes, now decaying, and the Gentiles beginning to be planted in their roome. But howsoeuer it was, it cannot bee denied, but that Paule was chiefe towards [Page] the Gentiles: And therefore the Church of Rome might with better right haue deriued their authoritie from S. Paul, then from Peter: Both of them they cannot make patrons of their See: seeing by their owne rules the Pope cannot be successor to them both.

Further, out of the same place, Galath. 2.11. an other thing commeth to bee obserued: that Peter was rebuked of Paule, and in such sort, that it appeareth there was no great inequality between them▪ for he doth it to his face openlie, before all men, and at Antioch, in Peters owne Bishopricke, as they say, can it be now thought that Paul was any thing inferior to Peter?

Cap. 15. Bellarmine and the Iesuits answere, that the Pope may bee rebuked of an inferior, and ought to take it patiently, if it be done in zeale and loue. Aunswere: First, wee doe not simplie thus conclude, because Paul reprehended Peter, therefore he was not his superior, but because of the manner, as we shewed: it was done in such sorte, so plainely, so openly, without any submission or crauing of pardon, that there can appeare no inequalitie at all betweene them. Secondly, although they seeme heere to graunt, that the Pope may be rebuked, yet is it otherwise in their Canon lawe, which saith, that though the Pope doe leade innumerable soules to hell, no mortall man may presume to reprooue his faultes, part. 1. distin. 4. cap. Si Papa. Fulk. Annot. in Gala. 2. sect. 8.

4 Lastlie, what reason was there, why Christ should giue the supremacie to Peter ouer the rest? Christ was no acceptor of persons: if hee had bene, Iohn should haue bene preferred, whom he loued most. If deserts be weighed, I think Peter deserued no more then the rest of his fellowes: Nay I thinke the wisedome of the Spirit, foreseeing the questions that should afterward arise in the Church about Peter, hath so disposed, that this Apostles infirmities both in number more and weight greater then any of the rest, should be euidentlie set forth in Scripture. We will brieflie runne them ouer, not to derogate from the blessed memorie of so excellent an Apostle; but a litle to stay and bridle the preposterous zeale of our aduersaries, who doe ascribe more vnto him, then euer he would haue challenged to himselfe.

To let passe the smaller slippes and scapes of this Apostle, as his rashnesse in aduenturing beyond his strength, to walke vppon the Sea, Matth. 14. Secondlie, his vnaduised speech in the Mountaine, Math. 17. let vs make three Tabernacles: thirdlie, his ignorance, Matth. 19. In saying to Christ, how often shall I forgiue my brother? till seuen times? Fourthlie, his impatiencie, as in drawing out his sworde and cutting off Malchus eare. Fifthlie, his timorousnesse in flying from Christ at his apprehension. Sixtlie, his curiositie, Iohn 21. In asking concerning Iohn, what shall this man doe? To let passe these as common infirmities: There are fower great faultes, which Peter fell into, much amplified, and stoode vppon by the fathers.

[Page]1 He de [...]orted our Sauiour from his passion with these words: Master fauour thy selfe, Math. 16. and was therefore called Sathan, an aduersarie to the death of Christ, and so to the redemption of man. Augustine chargeth him with great forgetfulnes, hauing made so notable a confession of Christ before, and noteth him for some sparkes of distrust and infidelitie. Ille Petrus, qui iam eum confessus fuerat filium dei, timuit, ne sicut filius hominis moreretur, in Psal. 138. The same Peter (sayth he) which a little before had confessed him to be the Sonne of God, feared lest he should dye and perish as a man.

2 In promising rashly not to denye Christ, yea vnto death, whereas Christ had foretold him of his fall before, Augustine noteth great presumption: Petrus ex egregio praesumptore creber negator effectus. Epist. 120. cap. 14. Peter of a great presumer, is become a desperate denyer.

3 The third great sinne was committed by Peter in denying of Christ, and that thrice, yea with an oath, at the instance of a mayden, and in a very short while, before the cocke crewe twise, Mark. 14.72. The Iesuite answereth, that this was no hinderance to Peters primacie, but a furtherance and a confirmation of it. But whether it were a let to his primacie or not, let all men iudge, seeing it had been sufficient to haue hindered his saluation and destroyed his faith, without the great mercie of God.

Let vs heare Augustines iudgement of Peters fall. Some man may excuse Peter, and say, that he did nothing, but as Christ forewarned him. What then (sayth he) if Peter therefore did not amisse, because his fall was foretold by Christ: Rectè etiam fecit Iudas, qui tradidit dominum, quia & hoc praedixerat dominus: Exposit. in Psal. 140. then Iudas did well too (sayth he) in betraying of Christ, for this also Christ shewed afore? But some agayne may say: he denyed not Christ, for hee sayd hee knewe not the man: Quasi vero (sayth he) qui hominem Christum negat, Tractat. in Iohann. 66. non Christum neget: as though hee that denyeth the man Christ, doth not flatly denye Christ. Christ also taketh away all doubts (saith he) when he thus said to Peter, the cock shall not crowe till thou hast denyed me thrice: he sayth not, till thou hast denyed the man, but me. Agayne, Ipse potius redarguit defensores suos: Peter himselfe doth confute his maintayners and defenders: Agnouit planè peccatum suum infirmitas Petri: Peters owne conscience gaue him, that hee had sinned, for he went out and wept bitterly. But if by this meanes his primacie was confirmed, he had occasion to reioyce, and not to weepe: Yea he wept bitterly, his sinne was very great: how then dare one of your sect say with a blasphemous mouth, Petrus non fidem Christi, sed Christum salua fide negauit: Copus. vide Iuell. p. 665 defens. apol. Peter denyed not the faith of Christ, but his faith remayning safe and sound he denyed Christ? The ancient writers durst not so extenuate Peters fall, no nor Peter himselfe, that wept full sore, as these men presume to doe.

4 The last fault noted in Peter was that, for the which he is reproued of Paul Act. 2. Tush (saith Bellarmine) it was a very small and light offence. Yea, was it so smal a fault to constrayne the Gentiles to doe like the Iewes? for this was the poynt, as S. Paul writeth, Galath. 2.14. And Augustine saith, Petrus non obiurgatus[Page]a Paulo fuit, quòd seruabat consuetudinem Iudaeorum, in qua natus & educatus fuit, sed quòd eam gentibus imponere volebat. Exposit. ad Galat. Peter was not rebuked of Paule, because hee kept the custome of the Iewes, wherein hee was brought vp, but because he would lay it vpon the Gentiles. Was this leuissimum peccatum, a small transgression? S. Paule should greatly haue been to blame, for rebuking Peter openly, and so plainly for so small an offence, and should haue done agaynst his owne rule, Galath. 6.1. But Peter did it of a good mind (sayth Bellarmine. Bellarm. cap. 28.) Yea did? then he was worthie to be excused, not worthie of blame, as S. Paule writeth. He might also doe it ignorantly and vnwittingly (saith hee.) How can that be? seeing he was one that made the decree, Act. 15: That no yoke should be layd vpon the Gentiles: other then there expressed, and now contrarie to that decree, hee constrayneth the Gentiles, Iudaizare, to play the Iewes. These things doe not hang together.

I will now conclude out of Augustine, as hee alleageth out of Cyprian: Nec Petrus, cum secum Paulus de circumcisione disceptaret, postmodum vindicauit sibi aliquid insolenter, vt diceret se primatum tenere, De baptis. 2.2. Howsoeuer it was, Peter, when Paule reasoned thus with him, did not stand vpon his pantofles, & chalenge any primacie to himselfe. But it is very like, if there had been any such primacie in Peter of power and iurisdiction, (a primacie of order wee graunt, as Cyprian in that place calleth Peter, primum, the first) that this sharpe reprehension of Paul should either haue been spared, or els not done in that vehement manner.

THE THIRD QVESTION, CONCERNING Peter his being at Rome.

THis question hath two parts: first, whether Peter were at all at Rome or not.

Secondly, whether he were Bishop of Rome.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER PETER were at Rome.

error 38 OVR aduersaries would seeme to prooue it by these and such like arguments.

1 Out of that place of S. Peter 1.5.13. the Church that is at Babylon saluteth you: Babylon here (say they) is taken for Rome, from whence Peter wrote his Epistle, Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 2. de pontif. Rhemens. argum. in 1. Epist. Petri.

We answere: First, it is a sillie argument for them hereby to proue Peters being at Rome: for thus much they haue gayned by it, that Rome is Babylon, and so the seate of Antichrist, Reuel. 18. Secondly, there were two Babylons, one in Syria, the other in Aegypt, from either of which S. Peter might dare his epistle and it is most like that he would keepe the common and knowne name of the place, that it might be out of doubt what Church he ment: as for the name of Babylon, [Page] to be ascribed to Rome, though it were so mysticallie, yet was it not so called: for why might not Paule as well haue written his Epistle to the Romanes vnder that name, the Church of Babylon, as Peter wrote from thence?

2 Agayne, they alleadge that storie, how Peter ouercame Simon Magus at Rome, when he would haue taken his flight into the ayre, hauing made himselfe wings, and by the prayer of Peter was brought downe agayne and brake his legges, and so dyed: whereupon Nero being offended with Peter, would haue apprehended him: who being counsailed by the Church, would haue fled from Rome: but meeting Christ at one of the gates, and saying vnto him, whether goest thou Lord? And he answered, I come agayne to be crucified: Peter vpon those words returned backe agayne, and was crucified for the testimonie of Iesus. Bellarm. cap. 2.3.

We answere: First, we denye not that Peter was at Rome, but shewe only the insufficiencie of their arguments: and agayne, we moue such doubts, as by them are yet vnanswered, as afterward shall be shewed. Secondly, concerning this storie of the victorie ouer Simon Magus, they that doubt of Peters being at Rome, may also doubt of this, neither of them being necessarie to be beleeued as articles of faith, but probable and coniecturall, as matters of storie. For some part of the storie is denyed by Augustine, as how Peter fasted vpon the Saturday,Epistol. 86. the combat betweene him and Simon Magus, following vpon the Lords day after, and thereupon rose the custome of the Saturday fast among the Romanes: Est quidem (saith he) haec opinio plurimorum, quamuis eam perhibeant esse falsam pleri (que) Romani. This is (saith he) a probable opinion of many, (concerning Peters fast) yet the Romanes themselues thinke it to be false.

3 That concerning Christs apparition to Peter, seemeth to bee most vnlike of all: and sauoureth somewhat of the Popish Legends. Like vnto this are the tales of S. Christopher, how he caried Christ, and how S. Gregorie had him for one of his ghests at his table of hospitalitie: such visions and apparitions of Christ are contrarie to the scriptures, which say, that the heauens must conteyne him till his comming agayne. Bellarmine answereth: first, by this meanes, wee doe compedes Christo inijcere, wee fetter Christ in heauen. We answere, belike then heauen is a prison, with the Iesuite: God send all that are his such a prison at the length. Agayne, Christ is no otherwise concluded and shut vp in heauen, then as it pleaseth himselfe, and as he hath appoynted so to be.

2 He obiecteth: that Christ appeared neere vnto the earth to Paule. We answere: First, there is no such thing proued out of the text, but rather the contrarie, that the voyce was heard from heauen; not neere the earth, but aboue, Act. 22.6. Secondly, Paule heard a voyce onely, he sawe no man, neither he nor the companie with him, Act. 9.7, 8. But onely a great light they sawe shining from heauen, Act. 22.6, 9. Therefore out of this place they cannot prooue any such real apparition of Christ.

3 Peter dyed at Rome, his sepulchre is to be seene there to this day: Ergo, he was at Rome. Bellarm. cap. 3.

[Page]We answere: First, it followeth not, if Peter were buried at Rome, that therefore he dyed there: for the translation of the bones and bodies of Martyrs is no vnusuall thing in your Church: As it followeth not, because Iohn Baptists head, as you say, is to be seene at S. Siluesters at Rome, that therefore he dyed there; so neither doth it followe of S. Peter.

2 Agayne, how shall wee beleeue you, that it is S. Peters Sepulchre, which is shewed at Rome; seeing you haue made so many mockeries alreadie, making the world beleeue, that Peters bodie is sometime in one place, sometime in an other? Half his bodie (you say) is at S. Peters in Rome, halfe at S. Paules, his head at S. Iohn Laterane, his neather iawe with the beard at Poicters in France, many of his bones at Trieirs, at Geneua part of his brayne. You see that we may as well doubt whether Peters bodie bee at Rome, as in any of these places. And such as you see, are our aduersaries arguments for Peters being at Rome.

The Protestants.

COncerning Peters being at Rome: First, wee doe not vtterly denye it, but onely affirme that he could not come thither so soone as in the second yeare of Claudius, and sit there so long, namely, fiue and twentie yeares, as they hold. Secondly, it may bee graunted, that he was there, as a matter of storie, not an article of faith. Thirdly, wee haue certayne doubts and arguments, about some circumstances of his being there, which our aduersaries are not able to answere.

1 There is great disagreeing amongst the writers, concerning the time of Peters comming to Rome: Orosius sayth hee came thither in the beginning of Claudius raigne: Hierome saith, the 2. yeare of his raigne: other say, the fourth yeare: other, the thirteenth yeare: Damasus would haue him come thither in Nero his raigne. This dissention of writers sheweth that the matter may be iustly doubted of, Fulk. in Rom. 16. sect. 4.

Bellarmine and the Iesuites answere: No more doe all agree concerning the time when the world was created, nor for the storie of Christs life, in what time euery thing was done when he suffered, and such like: yet it followeth not, that those things were not true, because there is some diuersitie about the time, Rhemist. 1. Pet. 5.13.

Wee replie: First, most of these things concerning the chronologie of scripture, though it be not necessarie to saluation, yet by diligent search may be found in scripture. Secondly, if they can shewe any scripture for Peters being at Rome, as we haue for the other stories, we will beleeue it, though the time perfectly be not knowne: but seeing the scripture maketh no mention at all of his being there, and the time is vncertayne, we may worthilie doubt of it, much lesse are bound necessarilie to beleeue it.

2 The storie of Peters comming to Rome in the second yeare of Claudius, his abiding at Rome fiue & twentie yeres, his death and martyrdome in the 14. yere [Page] of Nero, and the 37. yeare after Christs ascension: we proue out of the scriptures to bee false. For Peter was at Ierusalem and in those quarters round about till 18. yeares after Christ: for Paul sawe him there 3. yeares after his calling, and agayne 14. yeares after that, Galath. 2. there is 17. yeares, and one yeare was past before Pauls conuersion: in all 18. yeares: adde vnto these the 25. yeares of Peters being at Rome, that maketh 43. yeares: and so Peter should suffer in Vespasianus raigne, and not in the time of Nero.

Bellarmine and the Iesuites answere: that Peter was at Rome seauen yeares before the Councel held at Ierusalem, Act. 15. which was in the 18. yeare after Christ: and that being expelled the citie by Claudius with the rest of the Iewes, he returned to Ierusalem, and there spake with Paul, and after that went to Rome agayne and there ended his life.

This answere we shewe to bee very insufficient. First, Act. 15.2. it appeareth that there was, as it were, a standing and set councel of the Apostles at Ierusalem, of the which Peter was one: for the Church thought good to send vp to the Apostles and Elders which were at Ierusalem. Secondly, till the 18. yeare when this Councel was held, it seemeth that Peter had laboured onely or especially amongst the Iewes, of whom there were then but fewe at Rome: for, saith the Apostle, he that was mightie in Peter in the Apostleship ouer the circumcision, was also mightie in me, Gal. 2.8. Therfore Peter was not knowne to haue laboured vntill this time in the circumcision. Thirdly, afterward it is more like he went to Antiochia then to Rome: for after this, Paul rebuked Peter at Antioch, Gal. 2. Fourthly, these are but bare coniectures of our aduersaries, and craftie euasion without scripture: but seeing we appose them out of scripture, it is great reason, they should likewise answere vs out of scripture.

3 We haue diuers other obections also out of the scriptures: as first, that if Peter were at Rome, it is not like that Paul would leaue him out in his salutation in the end of his Epistle, Rō. 16. sent to the brethren. Our aduersaries answere but very simplie, that at that time, when S. Paul wrote his Epistle, either Peter was not at Rome, or els Paul might write some especiall letters to him by himselfe, and this Epistle enclosed in them: such goodly coniectures they haue. But I pray you what needed S. Paul to haue written vnto the Romanes, if S. Peter so faithfull and vigilant a Pastor, were continually amongst them?

Other places also of scripture we haue: as Philipp. 2.20. speaking of Timothy he saith, I haue none like minded to him that will faithfully care for your matters Coloss. 4.11. These onely are my workfellowes, 2. Timoth. 4.11. onely Luke is with me: Ergo, Peter all this while was not at Rome, for Paul would not haue left him out of the number of his fellowe-helpers: at the lest he would not haue commended Timothy, though he were a worthie yong man, before him. That which Bellarmine answereth, is iust nothing: that S. Paul speaketh in those places onely of his domesticall helpers, which did minister vnto him: When S. Paul speaketh plainly of his fellowe labourers: these onely are my workfellowes to the kingdome of God, Coloss. 4.11.

[Page]An other argumēt doth arise out of S. Pauls words, 2. Timoth. 4.16. At my first answering no man assisted me: Ergo, it is like that Peter was not then at Rome, for he would not haue forsaken Paul. Bellarmine answereth: that he speaketh onely of such fauourers as hee had in Caesars court, that they would not make sute for him to the Emperour. But this is a weake solution. First, it appeareth by that which followeth, that they left him without helpe in his open Apologie or defence: they did not assist me (sayth he) but the Lord assisted me: that is, gaue me strength to defend my cause: so that the word, assisting, must bee taken in the same sense before, that they fayled him in that, wherein God assisted him, that is, in speaking boldly in the defence of the truth. Secondly, it is proued by the diuers successe that he had at his first and second answering: at the first all left him, but at the next many were emboldened through his bonds: what to doe? more frankly to speake the word, Philipp. 1.14. Ergo, at the first they forsooke him, because they were afrayd to speake the word.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER PETER were Bishop of Rome.

error 39 OVr aduersaries would gladly bring it about that Peter was Bishop of Rome, there enthronised, and sate in the Bishoplike chayre many yeares, and after left it to his successors.

1 The Romane faith was first planted by Peter, for he first preached to the Gentiles, Act. 15.7. Ergo, he was the first Bishop.

Answere: First, that Peter first preached to the Gentiles, it is contrarie to the storie of the Acts: for Paul was conuerted before Peter sawe the vision from heauen, Act. 10. before which time Peter made a great question, whether it were lawfull to preach to the Gentiles. But Paul immediatly after his conuersion preached to the Gentiles, Galath. 2. therefore before Peter. Neither is there any thing to the contrarie, Act. 15.7. the Gentiles beleeued by S. Peters mouth, as he sayth, but not first. Secondly, that Peter first preached not at Rome, it is thus gathered: because it is not like that the Christian faith being spread farre abroad, could be kept from Rome the space of 12. yeares, for so long it was by their account, before Peter came to Rome. Agayne, there were diuers that dwelled at Rome, which heard the Apostles speake diuers tongues, Act. 2. being straungers then and soiourners at Ierusalem: and Rom. 16.7. he maketh mention of Andronicus and Iunia, which were in Christ before him: By these it is most like that the Christian faith was first sowed at Rome. Thirdly, it is more like that Paul preached at Rome before Peter: for when he came to Rome, he called the Iewes together, who sayd vnto him, that they had heard nothing concerning him by letters or from the brethren out of Iudea, Act. 28.22. But if Peter had beene there, Paul no doubt should haue been knowne at the least by name: The Iewes also say vnto him, wee will heare of thee what thou thinkest: and some of them were perswaded by Paul, some beleeued not. It seemeth by this place that the [Page] Iewes in Rome had not heard of the Gospell before. But if Peter had been amongst them, who had an especiall charge of the circumcision, he would haue had the greatest care of the Iewes to winne them to Christ. Fourthly, though Peter had first preached to the Romanes, it would not followe, that therefore he was Bishop there: for Paul first founded the Church of Ephesus, yet they say Iohn was first Bishop there: wherefore they should gayne nothing by this argument, if it were true, but that Peter was the first preacher, and conuerter of the Romanes to the faith.

The Protestants.

IF wee take the name of Bishop generally for that office which hath the publique cure and charge of soules: in that sense we denye not but Peter and the rest of the Apostles may be called Episcopi, Bishops, as Christ is called the shepheard and Bishop of our soules, 1. Pet. 2.23. But taking it strictly for a Bishop of this or that place, which is called Episcopus intitulatus, a Bishop entituled, wee denie that either Peter or Paul were Bishops, Fox. pag. 15.

1 Paul was Apostolus Gentium, the Apostle of the Gentiles, and Peter of the circumcision; therefore it is more like that Paul was chiefe Pastor of the Romanes, because they were of the Gentiles, and part of his charge: and vnlesse they can proue that Paul resigned ouer his lot vnto Peter, that he also should be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles, as he was of the Iewes; Peter should haue intruded himselfe into Paules charge, not in preaching to the Gentiles, (for both Paul might preach to the Iewes, and Peter to the Gentiles) but in taking vpon him to be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles, which was giuen before to S. Paul.

2 The Rhemists themselues graunt, that the Church of Rome was founded both by Peter and Paul, annot. in 2. Gal. sect. 6. B. Tunstal a strong champion of theirs, but varying from them in this opinion, shewed in a letter of his to Cardinall Poole, how in times past, both Peter and Paul ▪ were counted Patrones of the Church of Rome, and principes apostolorum, the chiefe of the Apostles. Eusebius sayth, that Clement was the third Bishop after Peter and Paul: Alexander succeeded in the fift place after Peter and Paul: If therefore the Bishops of Rome challenge any preeminence of authoritie from Peter, they may doe it as well from Paul: for they both founded that Church, preached there, and both there suffered, Fox, pag. 1066.

3 No Apostles were Bishops▪ for they were diuers offices, Eph. 4.11. he gaue some to be Apostles, some to be Pastors & Doctors: Ergo, they were diuers offices, and the same were not Apostles and Pastors or Bishops, for both are all one. The offices were much different: Apostles were immediatly called of God, Bishops and Pastors were ordayned by the Apostles, the Apostles calling was general ouer the whole world, the Pastors were obliged to their dioces & parishes & particular Churches: the office of the Apostles was extraordinarie, & but for a time; the calling of Pastors was to endure euer in the Church. Wherfore it can in no wise be that the Apostles were Bishops of any certaine places. Irenaeus saith, [Page] that Fundata ecclesia beati apostoli Lino officiū episcopatus iniungunt: the Church of Rome once founded, the holy Apostles layd the charge of the Bishopricke vpon Linus. Whereby it appeareth, that they onely reteyned their Apostleship inioyned them of Christ, Tunstal. ex Fox. pag. 1066. It had therefore been contrarie to the commaundement of Christ: who sayd, Ite in vniuersum mundum, goe into all the world: if they should haue left their calling, and bound themselues to any peculiar Church: Ergo, we conclude that neither Peter nor Paul were Bishops of Rome.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, WHETHER THE Bishop of Rome be the true successor of S. Peter.

The Papists.

error 40 THey doe generally hold, that the Bishops of Rome being lineally descended by succession from Peter, they haue the same primacie, apostolike authoritie & iurisdiction ouer the whole Church, which Peter had, Bellar. lib. 2. de pont. c. 12.

They are very barren and scant of arguments in this place to maintaine and vphold this succession by, and in the end the Iesuite runneth to tradition: and at the length he thus concludeth; that it is not, de iure diuino, it is not necessarie by the lawe of God, that the Romane Bishop should be Peters successor: but it dependeth onely vpon the ordinance of Peter, Bellarm. cap. 12. and is proued by tradition, not diduced out of scripture. That it was necessarie for Peter to haue a successor, they say, it is proued out of scripture: which we also graunt, that all faithfull Pastors and Ministers are the Apostles successors, though they haue not their plenarie and Apostolike power: but that the Pope ought to bee and is his successor, it standeth vpon tradition.

We see then the grounds of their opinion: scripture they haue none but blind tradition: vnlesse therefore they could bring better stuffe for the Papall succession, we will not spend any time in confuting nothing.

The Protestants.

THat the Pope or Bishop of Rome neither can, is, or ought to be S. Peters successor, in his high and Apostolike authoritie, primacie, and iurisdiction ouer the whole Church, which Peter himselfe neuer had: thus we declare it.

1 The Pope, though hee were Peters successor, yet can hee not receiue that from him, which he neuer had: but Peter had neuer any such primacie of power, as we haue shewed before, Quaest. 1.2. Ergo, he is not here in his successor.

2 That primacie which Peter had, could not bee conueyed to any other: namely, his primacie of confession, which he first of all the Apostles did vtter concerning Christ, proceeding from faith, did adhere so to his person, that it could not bee deriued to any successor of his: for Peters faith was a proper adiunct to himselfe, Argument. Tonstalli, Fox. pag. 1066.

Agayne, how can he haue the Apostolike authoritie being not an Apostle: [Page] But an Apostle he is not: for Christ onely made Apostles, the Apostles did not ordayne other Apostles, Argum. Nili.

3 He succeedeth not Peter rightly in place: for seeing Peter sate at Antioch: why may not that Church challenge succession, as well as Rome? Why might not also other Churches haue Apostolike succession, as Alexandria from Peter and Marke, Herusalem from Iames, Constantinople from Andrew?

Further, they haue no certaine succession from Peter: Tertullian maketh Clement the next successor to Peter. Optatus first nameth Linus, then Clement: Irenaeus, after Peter, placeth Linus, and Cletus, and Clement in the fourth: What certaintie therefore can they haue of so vncertaine succession? Fulk. annot. in Rom. 16. sect. 4.

4 It skilleth not who commeth in the place & roome of the Apostles: They that will be their true successors, must followe their example, and walke in their steps, teaching their doctrine and embracing their holie vertues. Wherfore the Pope is not Peters right successor, swaruing both from his doctrine & example. Non sanctorum filij sunt, qui tenent loca sanctorum, sed qui exercent opera eorū. They are not the children of the Saints, which occupie the same places, but they which doe their workes, Lambert. Fox pag. 1120. So Bernard writing to Eugenius chargeth him, that in respect of his pompe and pride, he did rather succeede Constantine, then Peter, Iohann. Huss. pag. 610.

5 All good Bishops and Pastors are as well the Apostles successors, as the Pope, nay rather then he, being a wicked man, Iohn. Huss. articul. 4. Fox. pag. 590. Lambert. pag. 1120. Nay, they haue greater and more excellent titles▪ then to be called the Apostles successors: for those that walke in obedience vnto Gods commandements, our Sauiour calleth them, his sisters, kinsfolkes and brethren, Math. 12.50. Ergo, the Pope is not the right successor of Peter.

Lastly, of this matter Augustine thus writeth: Cathedra tibi quid fecit ecclesiae Romanae, in qua Petrus sedit, & in qua hodie Anastasius sedet: Cont. Petil. lib. 2. ca. [...]1. vel ecclesiae Hyerosolymitanae, in qua Iacobus sedit, & in qua hodie Iohannes sedet. What hath the Sea of Rome done vnto thee, wherein sometime Peter sate, & where Anastasius now sitteth? or what hath the Church or chaire of Ierusalem committed, where sometime Iames sate, and Iohn now sitteth? In those words Augustine ascribeth as much to the succession of other Apostolicall Churches, as he doth to the succession of the Bishops of Rome. Cap. de precept. eccles. artic. 9. B. And therefore Canisius craftely leaueth out the one half of the sentence, cōcerning the Church of Ierusalem: Neither is it true, which our aduersaries say, that Peters Sea remaineth still at Rome, when all other Apostolicall Sees are gone: for euen to this day the See of Antioch standeth and hath a Patriark: likewise the See of Alexandria. The See of Constantinople neuer wanted successors to this day: nor the Church of Ephesus: In India and Aethiopia, there hath been alwaies a succession in those Churches planted by the Apostles, and is at this day, Fulk. 2. Thess. 2. sect. 7. Wherefore they haue no cause to bragge of their succession, which is found in other places, as well as at Rome.

[Page]

THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING THE primacie of the See of Rome.

THis question hath diuers partes, which must be handled in their order. First, whether the Bishop of Rome haue authority ouer other Bishops. Secondly, whether appeales ought to be made to Rome from other countries. Thirdly, whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any. Fourthly, whether he may be deposed. Fiftly, what primacie he hath ouer other Churches, & how it began. Sixtly, of the titles and names giuen to the Bishops of Rome.

THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE BISHOP of Rome hath authoritie ouer other Bishops.

The Papists.

error 41 THey doubt not to say, that the Bishop of Rome hath authoritie and ought so to haue, to ordaine and constitute Bishops, to depriue and depose them, to restore them likewise to their former dignities, and this power hee exerciseth ouer the vniuersall Church.

The Iesuites principall & only argument is drawen from certain examples: how the Bishops of Rome haue in times past, constituted, deposed, and restored some Bishops in the Greeke Church, as in the patriarchal Seas of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch: Ergo, hee hath power ouer all Bishops.

We answere: First, It was not done by the absolute authority of the Roman Bishops, any such constitution, or deposition, though perhappes their consent and allowance were required, as Leo writeth thus to Martianus the Emperour, about the ordayning of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople: Satis sit, quod vestrae pietatis auxilio & mei fauoris assensu episcopatum tantae vrbis obtinuit: It is sufficient,Epistol. 54. that by your godly helpe and my fauourable assent, he hath obtained so famous a Bishoprick. Whether was greater now, the help and furtherance of the Emperor, or the base assent of Leo? Secondly, wee denie not but that the Pope sometimes, what by sufferance of others, what by his owne intrusion, hath vsurped this power ouer other Bishops: by this ought not to make a law: that which is once or twise done by a false title, cannot prooue the iustnes of the title. Thirdly, that the Bishop of Rome hath no such authoritie, it appeareth by this, that he doth not, neither of many yeares hath constituted or ordayned the patriarks of the Greeke Church: they came not vp to Rome nor yet sent thither for their palls as other Archbishops here in the West parts haue done, & paied full dearely for them, being made slaues to the beast of Rome.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THat the Pope neither hath, nor yet ought to haue any such authority ouer other Bishops: but that euery one in his owne precinct, and iurisdiction hath the chiefe charge: It is thus proued.

1. Peter was not chiefe, neither did exercise iurisdiction ouer the twelue: Ergo, neither the Pope ought to doe ouer other Bishops. The antecedent or first part is thus confirmed. The heauenly Hierusalem, which is the Church of God, is described Apocal. 21. not with one foundation onely of Peter, but with 12. foundations after the number of the Apostles: argument. Tunstalli. To this purpose also hee alleadgeth in saying out of Hierome contra Iouinian. Fox. p. 106 [...] All the Apostles receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen: and vpon them all indifferently and equally, is the strength of the Church grounded and established. Fox. p. 1066.

2. Till the yeare of the Lord 340. there was no respect had to the Church of Rome, but euery Church was ruled by their owne gouernment: afterward followed the Councel of Nice, wherein was decreed, that the whole Church should be deuided into foure circuites or precincts: ouer the which there were foure Metropolitanes or patriarkes set: first the Bishop of Rome: next the Bishop of Alexandria: the third was the Bishop of Antioch: the fourth the Bishop of Ierusalem: and not long after came in the Bishop of Constantinople in the roume of the B. of Antioch. All these had equall authoritie in their prouinces, and one was not to deale within anothers charge: Ergo, the Bishop of Rome had not then the iurisdiction ouer the whole Church, argument. Nili. plura Fox. p. 9.

3. We will adioyne the testimonie of the fathers of Basile, which were all of the Popish sect: what haue the Bishops been in our daies say they, but only shadowes? might they not haue been called shepheards without sheepe? what had they more then their Miters and their staffe, when they could determine nothing ouer their subiects? Verily in the primitiue Church, the Bishops had the greatest power and authoritie: but now it was come to that poynt,Fox. p. [...]79. col. 1. that they exceeded the common sort of priests onely in their habite and reuenewes. What plainer testimonie can we haue, then from the papists themselues?

Augustine also agreeth to their sentence: habet omnis episcopus, saith he,De baptis. lib. 2. cap. 2. pro licē tia libertatis & potestatis suae arbitrium propriū, tanquam iudicari ab alio nō possit, quomodo nec ipse potest alium iudicare, sed expectemus vniuersi iudiciū domini nostri Iesu Christi: Euery Bishop is priuiledged by his own authoritie to follow his owne iudgement, neither is subiect to the iudgement of other Bishops, as he is not to iudge them, but they all must be referred to the iudgement of Christ: See then in this place Augustine setteth Bishops in the highest roume in the Church, and sayth, they haue no iudge aboue them but Christ.

[Page]

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING APpeales to bee made to Rome.

The Papists.

SVch, say they, is the preeminēt authority of the Bishop of Rome, that appeals error 42 may be made vnto him from all Churches in the world, and that all ought to stand to his sentence and determination. For the proofe hereof they bring no scripture, nor any sound argumēt, but stand chiefly vpon certain odde examples of some that haue appealed to Rome: which we denie not to haue been done: but our answere more at large is this.

1. One cause of these appeales, was both for that, they which were iustly cōdemned of other Churches, found greater liberty and fauour at Rome, as Apiarius did, who being condemned in the 6. Aphricane Councel for his detestable conditions, found fauour with Zosimus Bishop of Rome, who wrote for him to the Councel to be receiued agayne. No maruayle then, if licentious fellowes, hoping to finde more fauour at Rome, did appeale thither: As also the ambition of the Bishops of Rome did somewhat helpe forward this matter, who were as ready to receiue such appeales, as others were to make them.

2. Bishop Tunstal doth answere very fully to this poynt, that, although appeales were made to Rome, yet was it not for any iurisdiction that the See had: but this was the cause, partly for that there were many deuisions and parts taking in the Oriental Churches, as also because many were infected with heresies, from the which the West & Occidētal Churches were more free, they were content to referre the cause many times to the Bishop of Rome, as being a more indifferent iudge, and not like to be partial, being no partie in the cause. Neither was their [...] to the Bishop of Rome singularly, but to the whole congregation of the Bishops of Italie and France, or of the whole West, as it appeareth by the epistles of Basile. Tunstal. apud Fox. 1067.

The Protestants.

That appeales ought not to be made to Rome, but that all matters and controuersies may best be ended and determined at home, where they doe arise: It is thus confirmed.

1. This matter was notably handled, anno 420. in the sixt Councel of Carthage, where Augustine was present, with Prosper and Orosius: To this Councel Pope Zozimus sent his Legate with certaine requests, of the which this was one, that it might be lawful for Bishops and priests to appeale from the sentence of their Metropolitanes, and also of the Councel to Rome: alleadging for him self a decree of the Nicene Councel. The Councel of Carthage sent forthwith to the patriarkes of Cōstantinople, Antioch & Alexandria, for a copie of the Coūcel [Page] of Nice, wherein no such Canon was found, that appeales should bee made to Rome: but the contrary: for in the sixt Canon of that Councel, it was founde how all matters, and all persons ecclesiasticall, both Bishops and others were committed to their Metropolitanes: vpon this decree the Councel of Carthage drew out certain reasons why appeales should not be made to Rome. First, it is not otherwise to be thought, but that the grace of God is as ready at hande in one prouince as in another. Secondly, there is no neede to seeke any outlandish help: for the partie grieued may appeale to a prouinciall or generall Councel. Thirdly, it were not equall nor right to appeale from the Councel to the Bishop of Rome: for it is not like, that God will inspire his truth vnto the Bishop, and denie it to a multitude congregated in his name.

Fourthly, no forraine or outlandish iudgement can be so vpright or iust: because the witnesses cannot be present, being hindered by infirmitie of sex, age, sicknes, by whom the truth should be discussed.

Vpon these reasons the Councel concluded, that neither any appeales should be made to Rome: neither that Legates should be sent from Rome for deciding of matters: And this answere they made to Zozimus first, to Bonifacius and Celestinus, that in short time one succeeded another. And for all the B. of Rome his absolution, Apiarius was againe called coram, and brought to confesse his fault. Fox. p. 10. col. 2.

Now out of the Acts of this Councel, and their reasons alleadged wee conclude, that it is not fit, conuenient nor reasonable, that appeals should be made to Rome.

The Iesuite answereth, that appeales were forbidden to be made by priests to Rome, not by Bishops. This is but a vaine shift, for the reasons of the Councel are general against all appeales: And Apiarius, that appealed to Rome, was a priest, and no Bishop.

2. We can bring the decrees of a latter Councell, then this of Carthage: for in the Councell of Basile it was decreed, that no actions or controuersies should be brought from other countries to be pleaded at Rome▪ which were more then foure daies iourney distant from the said court of Rome, a few principall matters onely excepted, apud Fox. p. 697.

3. This also is flatly contrary to the rule of the Apostle, that appellations should be made out of the Church a far off. Is it so, sayth hee, that there is not a wise man amongst you, no not one that can iudge amongst his brethren? 1. Cor. 6.5. Ergo, euery Church hath wise men sufficient in it, whereby their controuersies may be ended.

4. Augustine also thus writeth concerning this matter, Miltiades Episcopus Romanus, non sibi vsurpauit iudicium de causa Ceciliani, sed rogatus imperator iudices misit Episcopos, qui cum eo sederent, epist. 162. Miltiades Bishop of Rome did not vsurpe or take vpon himselfe to iudge the cause of Cecilian, but the Emperour being requested, sent other bishops, that should sit and determine the cause together with him. Out of these words first we note, that it had beene [Page] vsurpation and presumption for the Bishop of Rome to haue taken vpon him the iudgement of this matter, not belonging vnto him, vnlesse the Emperor had committed it. Secondly, that Miltiades did not suffer other Bishops to sitte with him, as Bellarmine imagineth: but, he could not otherwise choyse, for they were ioyned in commission by the Emperour, to be iudges as well as he. Thus we see what small shew or colour of title the Pope hath, to heare or receiue appeales from other countries.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE Pope be subiect to the iudgement of anye.

The Papists.

error 43 THe Pope neither can nor ought to bee iudged either of the Emperour, or anie other Seculare or ecclesiasticall Magistrate, no not of any generall Councel, Bellarmin. cap. 26. Nay, hee should doe iniurie vnto GOD, to submit himselfe to the iudgement of any, Iacobat. ex Tilhemann. de pontif. rom. err. 34.

Beside certayne blinde canons and constitutions, and a fewe examples grounded vpon the insolent practises of Popes, they haue no other arguments either out of scripture, or drawen from reason, to confirme this their hideous and monstrous opinion withal.

Bellarmine reasoneth thus: the Prince is not to bee iudged by the commonwealth: but is greater then his kingdome: the Pope is the prince of the Church: Ergo

We answere: First, concerning the Princes high and Soueraigne authority we will not now dispute: we make it not infinite, the word of God must bee a rule and square both of ciuill and ecclesiasticall iudgement. Secondly, It is sufficient for vs here to answere, that the Iesuite hath sayd nothing: for this which he assumeth for a reason, is the greatest matter in question between vs: and so great an vntruth he hath vttered, that he is constrained to leaue scripture, and seeke helpe else-where. But he shall neuer, by any good reason, or sufficient authority prooue, that the Pope hath any such Princedome in the Church, as he would beare vs in hand.

The Protestants.

THat the Pope as well as other ecclesiasticall persons, ought to be, and is by right subiect to the iudgement and authoritie of the Emperor, King, Prince, or other supreame magistrate, and may also by generall Councels be corrected and censured, thus it is proued.

1. Peter was iudged of Paul, Galat. 2. and of him iustly reproued: Ergo, the doings of the Pope may be iudged and censured.

Bellarmine answereth, that it was not iudicialis censurae, but fraterna correptio, it was no iudiciall censure, but a brotherly reprehension.

[Page]We replie: First, publike censure and reprehension is a part of ecclesiasticall iudgement and discipline, therefore Peter being publikely rebuked, was therby iudged also of Paul. Secondly, the question is not onely concerning publike & open iudgement, but whether it be lawfull to call the Popes doings into question, & whether his decrees are absolutely to be receiued without any scāning or discussing, or making any doubt thereof: for this we hold, that it is the duety of all Christians to examine and trie the trueth of all things, which they are to receiue and beleeue, though they sit not formally and iudicially, as in consistories: to iudge their spirituall pastors: so the Beraeans iudged of the Apostles doctrine: so may the Popes decrees be examined and iudged. Thirdly, the Iesuite granteth that the Pope may be rebuked and brotherly reproued, but the Extrauagant denieth it: non est, qui audeat dicere, domine curfacis sic? none dare say vnto him, sir why doest thou so?Fulk. 2. Gal. 2. sect. 8.

2. Euery soule must be subiect to the higher powers, Ergo, the Pope, Rom. 13.1. Bellarm. answereth, that the Apostle here speaketh of all superiours both spirituall and temporall, and therefore it cannot bee concluded, that the Pope ought to obey, but hee must bee obeyed, because hee is also a spirituall power.

We replie: Saint Paul in this place speaketh onely of the ciuill Magistrate. First he calleth them [...], Princes, which is not meant of ecclesiasticall or Church gouernors, nor so taken in any place of scripture. Secondly, they are sayd to beare the sword. Thirdly, tribute is payde to them: those thinges agree not to ecclesiasticall gouernors: so the Iesuite is answered.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER THE Pope may be deposed from his papacie.

The Papists.

SOme of them holde that the Pope ought not, neither can be deposed for heresie; error 44 because it is not possible for the Pope to fall into heresie. Pighius the Iesuite confesseth this to be a probable opinion: but himselfe defendeth it not: he confesseth also the opinion of Caietanus, that the Pope may be deposed for manifest and apparant heresie. Bellarmines opinion is this: that the pope can not be deposed for any cause but heresie: and not for all heresie, but that which is manifest and apparant: Neither is he then deposed by any act of the Church, but is of himselfe deposed, and ceaseth any more to bee pope: so the Church may afterward punish him, but he is then no Pope, for as soone as he is become an hereticke, his popedome in the very Acte is gone from him, Bellarmin. cap. 30.

He reasoneth thus: A manifest hereticke is not so much as a member of the Church, much lesse can he be pope, who they say is the heade of the Church, and therefore in such a case the pope is deposed without anie sentence: and if [Page] afterward the Church proceede against him, they doe not iudge the Pope▪ for he had lost his papacie before.

We answer: First, if a manifest hereticke be actually deposed, it is by the secret iudgement and sentence of God: for by no other authority can he be deposed as they hold: but before God manifest heresie, and close and secret heresie is all one: therefore the Pope is also actually deposed for secret heresie, and not onely for manifest: and so some of the papists think, as Iohann. de Turre veniata. Secondly, what call you manifest heresie? or how is hee knowen to bee a manifest hereticke? Can hee bee an heretick before hee bee conuinced? shall iudgement passe against him vncondemned? A murtherer is a dead man by lawe, yet hee liueth till iudgement passe vpon him: so is the Pope beeing an heretick, yet Pope, till he be iudicially proceeded against; as a murtherer dead by right is in act yet liuing, till by law he is depriued of his life. An heretick, sayth Saint Paul, after two or three admonitions auoyd: that is, saith the Iesuite, he is now excommunicate before the sentence of the iudge. Be it so, but hee must first be admonished, and if he still continue obstinate, then he is a manifest heretike: so before the Pope can be knowen to be a manifest heretick, he must be found obstinate, he cannot be obstinate, vnlesse he refuse to be admonished, if he be admonished, then is he iudged. Thirdly, an heretick ceaseth not to bee a priest, (as they speake) no not after heresie is knowen, for manifest heretickes may baptize. The Donatists in Augustines time were manifest hereticks, and yet the Church did not baptize againe after them: If a manifest heretick cease not to be a priest, neither ceaseth he to be Pope; there is like reason of both: for if an heretick, because he is not a member of the Church, can not be a Pope, neither also can he retayne the priesthood.

Lastly, who seeth not what bare and friuolous shifts those are? one saith, the Church may iudge the Pope,Caietan. not as he is Pope, but in respect of his person: an other sayth, that they may iudge the man which was Pope, but hee is then no Pope, because his heresie tooke from him the papacie. Why masters what iugling is here? is the Pope one thing and the Popes person an other? By the same reason you may say, that the Pope neither eateth, nor drinketh, nor sleepeth, nor dieth, and so make a god of him, because it is the popes person that doth all this, and not the Pope.

And by this shift you make no difference betweene an heretick Bishop, o [...] heretick priest, and heretick Pope: for by the same reason, none of them all shall be subiect to the iudgement of the Church: for we may say, that a manifest heretick, whether Bishop or priest, hath lost by that very act of falling into heresie, his priesthood and Bishoprick, and then is neither Bishop nor priest. And so you may conclude altogether: that neither Pope, Bishop nor piest can bee deposed from heresie.

The Protestants.

WE doubt not to say, that the Pope both lawfully hath been depriued somtime by the Emperour, somtime by generall Councels, not onely for hesie, [Page] but for other notable crimes, and may still bee proceeded agaynst by the same right, as well as any other Bishop or Prelate.

1 Diuers examples wee are able to bring forth, how the Pope hath been deposed for other crimes, beside heresie. Pope Iohn the 13. was deposed in a generall Councel by the consent of Otho the Emperour, for other matter beside heresie: as that he ordayned Deacons in a stable, that he committed incest with two of his sisters, that playing at dice, he called to the diuell for helpe, that he defloured virgins, that he lay with Stephana his fathers concubine, likewise with Ramera and Anna, and her Neece: for these beastlie parts and such like, he was deposed: there was no heresie obiected agaynst him. And thinke you not he was worthily vnpoped? yet the Papists thinke no: for they admit no cause of depriuation but heresie. This deuillish Pope, through the harlots of Rome (for he was well beloued of them) recouered his Popedome agayne; but at the length the Lord himselfe displaced him: for in the tenth yeere of his Popedome, being founde without the citie with an other mans wife, hee was so wounded of her husbande, that within eight dayes after hee dyed, Fox. pag. 159.

Boniface the 7. tooke Pope Iohn the 15. who was made Pope a little before, and hee expelled, yet recouering the Papacie by force, hee tooke him, put out his eyes, and threwe him in prison where he was famished: Likewise was Iohn the 18. serued by Gregorie the 5. his eyes were thrust out first,Fox. p. 160. and he afterward slayne. I meruaile how our Catholikes can excuse these furious outrages of their ghostly fathers of Rome!

In the Councel of Brixia, Gregorie the 7. was deposed, not for heresie, but for other abominable vices: as maintayning of periurie and murthers: for following Diuinations & Dreames, Sorcerie & Necromancie, Fox. p. 181. Pope Iohn the 23. deposed in the Councel of Constance: Eugenius in the Councel at Basile: yet neither of them for heresie. And yet our aduersaries would still make vs beleeue, that Popes cannot be deposed for any crime but heresie.

2 We can haue no better argument, then from our aduersaries themselues. It is a sport to see what diuers opinions they hold, and doe runne as it were in a maze, not knowing which way to get out. Pighius thinketh, that the Pope cannot possiblie fall into heresie, and therefore for no cause may bee deposed: Some other thinke that the Pope for secret and close heresie is actually deposed of GOD, and may also bee deposed and iudged of the Church: thus holdeth Iohann. de turre cremat. Caietanus is of opinion, that for manifest and open heresie the Pope is both alreadie by right deposed, and may also actually be deposed of the Church: But Bellarmine confuteth all these. There is a fourth opinion most grosse: that the Pope neither for secret nor open heresie, is either alreadie of right deposed, or may be actually depriued of the Church. Lastly commeth in the nice and daintie Iesuite with his quirkes and quiddities, who sayth, that the Pope in case of manifest heresie, ceaseth to bee Pope, and is euen now deposed: and if after the Church proceede agaynst him, they iudge not the [Page] Pope, for now hee is no Pope: Which opinion how absurd it is, I haue declared before.

THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE ORIGInall and beginning of the primacie of Rome.

The Papists.

THey doe boldly affirme without any ground, that the primacie of that See error 45 hath his beginning from no other but Christ: they are the Iesuites owne words: Romani pontificis ecclesiasticum principatum, authore Christo, principium accepisse: that the princely dignitie of the Bishop of Rome, acknowledgeth no other author or beginner thereof, but Christ, Bellarm. cap. 7. lib. 2.

1 They would build the primacie of the Romane Church vpon certaine places of scripture: as Math. 16. Thou art Peter, and vpon this rocke will I build my Church. Luk. 22. I haue prayed for thee Peter, that thy faith should not faile. Iohn 21. Christ sayd to Peter, feede my sheepe: Ergo, Peter and Peters successors haue their primacie from Christ, Bellarm.

To these places Tunstal and Stokeslie two Popish Bishops, yet in this poynt holding the truth, did properly make answere in their Epistle sent to Cardinall Poole.

To the first: They affirme out of the ancient expositors, that it is ment of the faith which was then first confessed by the mouth of Peter, and not of Peters person. Further, confirming out of S. Paul, that neither Peter, nor no creature beside, could bee the foundation of the Church: for no other foundation can any man lay (sayth the Apostle) besides that which is layd, Iesus Christ, 1. Cor. 3.

To the second they answere: that Christ speaketh onely of the fall of Peter, which hee knewe in his godlie prescience, giuing an inkling vnto him, that after his fall hee should bee conuerted and strengthen his brethren: for if it were ment also of Peters successors, they must first faile in faith, and after confirme their brethren.

To the third: The whole flock of Christ was not committed to Peter to feede: for he himselfe testifieth the contrarie, exhorting all Pastors to feede the flocke of Christ, [...]. Pet. 5. which was giuen them in charge by Christ, as it followeth in that place: when the chiefe shepheard shall appeare, ye shall receiue the incorruptible Crowne of eternall glorie: He calleth not himselfe the chiefe shepheard, but onely Christ. It is euident therefore (say they) that your 3. scriptures ment nothing lesse, then such a primacie ouer all, Fox. pag. 1067.

2 There can bee no time assigned since Christ (say they) when this primacie should begin, nor no author named that brought it in: Ergo, it must needes bee attributed to Christ, he must of necessitie bee found the author thereof.

[Page]We answere: the time may bee assigned, the authors named, when, and by whom this pretensed and vsurped authoritie was brought in, as euen now wee will shewe.

The Protestants.

THat the vsurped iurisdiction of Rome tooke not the beginning from Christ, nor his Apostles, neither was heard of for many yeres after: we thus are able to proue it.

1 Before the Nicene Councel, which first deuided the regiment of the Church into foure Patriarchal seates: Rome had small or no preeminence. So Aeneas Syluius witnesseth, who afterward was Pope of Rome, and called Pius the 2. Ante Nicenum concilium sibi quisque viuebat, & ad Romanam ecclesiam paruus habebatur respectus, Epist. 301. Before the Nicene Councel, euery Bishop liued to himselfe, there was no great respect had to the Church of Rome. What more euident testimonie can wee haue then of a Pope himselfe? Yet the Iesuite sayth, that it is false in part, which hee writeth. He is somewhat mannerly, in making him but halfe a lyer: yet I wonder that he will confesse any vntruth at all in his ghostly fathers words, Bellarm. cap. 17. lib. 2.

Secondly, in the Councel of Nice there was no primacie of power giuen to Rome ouer the whole Church: but the other Patriarkes of Alexandria, Antioch, Ierusalem, were priuiledged in like manner in their confines, as the Bishop of Rome was in his: They had all equall authoritie giuen them in their owne prouinces: Sic Tonstall. Stokesli. ad Poolum.

Thirdly, afterward there was a certayne primacie of order graunted vnto the Patriarke of Rome aboue other Patriarkes; as to haue the first place, to sit first, to giue his sentence first. One cause hereof was, for that Rome was then the Emperiall and chiefe citie in all the world: this reason was rendered in the Councel of Chalcedon. Can. 28. An other cause thereof,Fox. pag. 9. was the ample priuiledges and immunities, which the Emperours endued it withall, as Constantine the great: and Gratianus the Emperour made a lawe, that all men should reteyne that religion, which Damasus of Rome, and Peter Bishop of Alexandria did hold.

A third cause was, the vnquiet estate of the Greeke Church, who often voluntarily referred their matters to the Bishop of Rome, as being lesse partiall and a more indifferent Iudge, they themselues being diuided and rent into sects. And hereupon, and other like causes it came about,Fox. p. 18. that the Bishop of Rome a little stepped aboue his fellowe Patriarkes, but yet had no such preeminent authoritie, as to commaund them.

Fourthly, the Pope of Rome being thus tickled with vayne glorie, because they were reuerenced of other Churches, many matters were committed vnto them, and their consent required vnto the decrees of Councels, when they were [Page] absent. Hereupon they laboured euery day more and more to aduance that See, taking euery small occasion that might helpe forward their ambicious desire, till Anno. 606. or somewhat after, Boniface the 3. obtayned of wicked Phocas the Emperour (who murthered his master the Emperour Mauritius and his children, to come to the Empire, and was after slaine himselfe of Heraclius that succeeded him) of him, I say, Boniface for himselfe and his successors obtayned, to bee called vniuersall Bishops ouer the whole Church:Fox. p. 120. and the See of Rome to haue the preeminence aboue all other Churches in the world.

Afterward in Pope Zacharie his time, the proude and insolent iurisdiction of Rome was established by Pipinus King of France, who aspired to the Crowne, and obtayned it by the sayd Popes meanes, first deposing Childericus the rightfull King, and dispensing with the oath, which the French men had made before to Childericus, Calum. Institut. 4. cap. 7. sect. 17.

Thus then it sufficiently appeareth, that the primacie of Rome, which it now vniustly challengeth ouer other Churches, is not of any such antiquitie, as they would beare the world in hand, neither that it had the beginning from Christ: but both the time when, and the authors by whom it began, may bee easily assigned.

2 Wee neede no better argument, to proue that the primacie of Rome hath not his originall from Christ, then the Iesuites owne confession. First, he sayth, that it doth not depend of Christs institution, but, ex Petri facto, of Peters fact, that the Bishop of Rome should bee rather Peters successor, then the Bishop of Antioch, or any other: It is not, iure diuino, saith he, by Gods lawe: neither is it, ex prima institutione pontificatus, quae in Euangelio legitur, of the first institution whereof wee reade in the Gospell. And agayne, Romanum pontificem succedere Petro, non habetur expresse in scripturis: It is not expressely set downe in scripture, that the Bishop of Rome should succeede Peter: but it is grounded onely vpon the tradition of Peter. Nay, he saith further, that Peter needed not to haue chosen any particular place for succession, and he might as well haue chosen Antioch as Rome: Ergo, neither is the succession of Rome grounded vpon scripture, neither any commandement of Christ: for then Peter could not haue had free choyse to appoynt his successor where he would himselfe, as the Iesuite saith, if he had had any especiall direction or commaundement from Christ. So then, marke I pray you, they cannot proue out of scripture, that the Bishop of Rome ought to succeede Peter in the chiefe Bishopricke, but onely that Peter had the chiefe Bishopricke committed to him and his successors in generall, whosoeuer they should appoynt: Ergo, the Bishops of Rome by their owne confession, can alleadge no scripture, institution, or commandement of Christ, for the primacie of the Church to bee annexed to the See of Rome: and yet agaynst their knowledge they will alleadge scripture to colour the matter withall, Bellarm. lib. 2. de pontif. ca. 17.

3 Augustine saith: Secundum honorum vocabula, quae iam ecclesiae vsus obtinuit, episcopatus presbyterio maior est. The office of a Bishop is aboue the office [Page] of a Priest, according to the names of honour, which the Church by custome hath obtayned. If then the difference of those two offices, both named in scripture, did arise rather and spring of the custome of the Church, which thought it good to distinguish them for auoyding of schisme, and is not grounded vpon the authoritie of scripture: much lesse can the Pope (whose neither name, nor office is expressed in scripture) fetch from thence any shew of proofe, for his vsurped primacie.

THE SIXT PART OF THIS QVESTION, CONCERning the proud names and vayne glorious titles of the Pope.

The Papists.

BEllarmine setteth downe to the number of fifteene glorious names which error 46 haue been of old giuen (as he saith) to the Bishop of Rome, whereby his primacie ouer other Bishops is notoriously knowne: but the principall are these: He is called the Pope and chiefe Father, the prince of Priests, or high Bishop, the Vicar of Christ, the head of the Church, the Prelate of the Apostolike See, vniuersall Bishop. These sixe names or titles they doe appropriate to the See of Rome, Bellarm. de Roman. pontif. lib. 2. cap. 31.

The Protestants.

WE will shewe by Gods grace, that these sixe seuerall titles and names aforesayd, are either such, as ought not in their sense to be attributed to any Bishop, nor any mortall man▪ or els were common in ancient times as well to other Bishops, as to him of Rome.

1 For the first name of Pope, it is deriued from the Greeke word [...], which in the Syracusane language, is as much as, Father: which name was indifferently giuen to other Bishops, which were famous in the Church for their vertue and learning: As Cypriane, Epiphanius, Athanasius, were called Papae, Popes:Fox. pag. 8. Augustine saluteth Aurelius President of the 6. Councel of Carthage, by the name of Pope, Epistol. 77.

Likewise, those two epithetes of the Pope, as to bee called, Beatissim. & sanctissim. pater: most holy and blessed father, were vsed in the stile of other Bisshops: Prosper, in his Epistle to Augustine, twise calleth him Dominum beatissimum papam, Lord, most blessed Pope, Tom. 7. Hierome calleth Epiphanius, Beatum papam, blessed Pope, Ad Eustach. Fabiol.

Augustine writing to Petrus the Presbyter, or Priest, being no Bishop, yet thus saluteth him: Ad sanctitatem tuam scripsit, he hath written to your holines.De origine anim. 2.1. De origine anim. lib. 1. cap. 2. Nay, in his booke dedicated to Renatus a lay man, neither Priest nor Bishop, thus he writeth, Hinc angor, quòd sanctitati tuae▪ minus quàm vellem cognitus sum: This grieueth me, that I am not so well knowne to your holines as I desire. If [Page] then these titles of holinesse and blessednesse were not onely giuen to Bishops, but Priests also, yea vnto lay men of vertuous and holy life; what colour or shewe of reason can our aduersaries haue, to make them proper to the Bishop of Rome?

2 The second name is prince of Priests, or high and chiefe Bishop: which title, if it be taken for a chiefe power, dominion, and soueraigntie, is proper only to Christ the chiefe shepheard, 1. Pet. 5.4. and cannot in that sense agree to any man. If it bee vsed onely as a title of excellencie and commendation, so was it in times past ascribed to other excellent and famous Bishops, as Ruffinus lib. 2. cap. 26. calleth Athanasius, Pontificem maximum, chiefe Bishop: yea it was in common giuen to all Bishops: as Anacletus Bishop of Rome in his second Epistle writeth thus: Summi sacerdotes, id est, Episcopi, a deo iudicandi sunt: The high Priests, that is, Bishops (saith he) are to bee iudged of God. If it be taken further for the excellencie of the ministerie of the Gospell, and the worthie calling of Christians, in this sense the title of summum sacerdotium, of the high Priesthood, is attributed to all ministers Ecclesiasticall, both Bishops and others:Fox pag. 12 Col. 1. so Fabianus Bishop of Rome vseth this name. Yea, the holy Apostle calleth all the people of God [...], a princely, royall, or chiefe priesthood: Ergo, the Bishop of Rome hath no especiall or proper interest in this name.

3 The third name is, to bee called the Vicar of Christ vpon earth. Where we are to vnderstand, that in respect of the spirituall regiment and kingdome of Christ, he needeth no Vicegerent vpon earth: for, I am with you (saith he) to the end of the world: he himselfe is alway present in power, and needeth not in that respect, that any man should supplie his roume. Petrus scriba martyr. Fox. pag. 906. If we doe take it for a word of office and publike administration, so the Magistrate may bee called the Vicar of Christ, in gouerning the people according to the word of God: In which sense Eleutherius Bishop of Rome, writing to Lucius King of the Britaines, calleth him the Vicar of Christ, and therfore in his owne kingdome had power out of the word of God to establish lawes,Fox. p. 107. for the gouernment of the people. So all Bishops, Pastors and Ministers in ancient time were called the Vicars of Christ, in preaching, praying, binding and loosing in the name and power of Christ.Quaest. ex [...]uo (que) 127. So Augustine saith, or whose worke els it is, that, Omnis antistes est Christi vicarius: Euery pastor and prelate (and not the Pope onely) is the Vicar of Christ. And this is confessed by our Rhemists, annot. in 2. Cor. 5.18. that the Bishops and priests of the Church are for Christ, and as his ministers,Quaes [...]. 106 that is, his Vicars. Nay, Augustine maketh yet a more generall vse of this word: he saith, that, Homo imperium Dei habens, quasi vicarius eius est: That man by creation being made Lord of the creatures, doth therein represent God, and is as his Vicar vpon earth. So then, all ministers are the Vicars of Christ; the ciuill Magistrate likewise, in some good sense, may bee so called: yea in respect of the creatures, man generallie is vpon earth in Gods steade: Ergo, this name cannot be appropriate to the Pope of Rome.

[Page]4 It is also too huge a name for the Pope or any mortall man to beare, to be called the head of the vniuersall Church: this is a name only due vnto Christ, neither doe the scriptures acknowledge any other head, but him, Ephes. 1.22.4.15. But (say they) wee doe not make the Pope such an head, as Christ is, but only a ministeriall head ouer the militant Church vpon earth.

We answere: First, Ergo, the Pope by your owne confession is not head of the vniuersall Church, whereof the triumphant Church in heauen is a part. Secondly, the Rhemists confesse that the Church in no sense can bee called the bodie of the Pope: Ergo, the Pope cannot be any wayes the head of the vniuersall Church, Annot. in 1. Ephes. 22. Thirdly, the Fathers of Basile vsed this argument: The head of the bodie being dead, the whole bodie also dyeth; but the whole Church doth not perish with the Pope: Ergo, he is not properly the head of the Church, Fox pag. 675.

If it shall bee further obiected, that the Bishop of Rome hath been called in times past, caput Episcoporum, the head of all other Bishops: we answere, that it was but a title of excellencie and commendation, not of dominion and power: as London is called the head or chiefe citie of England, yet are not other cities of the land subiect vnto it, or vnder the iurisdiction thereof. But we shall haue occasion more fully to discusse this matter afterward.

5 They would haue the Pope called the Prelate of the Apostolike See: the Rhemists say further, that the Papall dignitie is a continuall Apostleship, Annot. 4. Ephes. sect. 4.

We answere: First, if they call those Churches Apostolicall, whose first founders were the Apostles, then the See of Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, are as well Apostolicall as Rome: and this the Iesuite denyeth not, Lib. 2. de pontific. cap. 31. Secondly, those Churches are Apostolicall, which hold the Apostolike faith: so is not the See of Rome Apostolicall, being departed and gone backe from the ancient Catholike faith: but those Churches where the Gospell of Iesus Christ is truely preached, are indeede Apostolike. Thirdly, how can the Pope be an Apostle, or haue Apostolike authoritie, seeing hee preacheth not at all, much lesse to the whole world, wherein consisted the office of an Apostle? Neither can he shewe his immediate calling from Christ, as all the Apostles could: for seeing he challengeth the Apostolike office by tradition from S. Peter, and not by commandement from Christ; he can in no wise be counted an Apostle, or his office an Apostleship: for the Apostles ordayned onely Euangelists and Pastors, they had not authoritie to consecrate and constitute new Apostles. Our aduersaries for this their Apostleship, can finde nothing in scripture, nor for a thousand yeeres after Christ in the ancient writers, Fulk. annot. in Ephes. 4. sect. 4.

6 Concerning the title of vniuersall Bishop, it was thus decreed in the sixt Councel of Carthage, as it is alleadged by Gratian: Distinct. 99 Vniuersalis autem nec Romanus pontifex appelletur: No not the Bishop of Rome is to be called vniuersall. [Page] In Gregorie the first his time, Iohn Patriarke of Constantinople, obtayned of the Emperour Mauritius to be called vniuersall Patriarke: but Gregorie would not agree thereunto, calling him the forerunner of Antichrist, that would challenge so proude a name.

Bellarmine and other of that sect doe answere, that Gregorie found fault with this title,Lib. 2 de pont. ca. 31. because Iohn of Constantinople would haue been Bishop alone, and none other to bee beside him, but all other onely to bee his deputies and vicars.

To this wee replie: First, Iohn did onely challenge a superioritie ouer other Bishops, not to be Bishop alone, for this had been a thing impossible. Secondly, if Iohn had sought any such thing, it is not like that the Chalcedone Councel and the Emperour would haue yeelded to so vnreasonable a matter as they did. Thirdly, Eulogius Patriarke of Alexandria doth call the sayd Gregorie vniuersall Pope, which name he vtterly refuseth: and yet Eulogius had no such meaning to make him Bishop or Patriarke alone, but onely to giue him a preeminence aboue the rest.Fox. pag. 13 This modest and humble Bishop of Rome Gregorie, in stead of the title, Vniuersall, brought it into the Popes stile to be called Seruus seruorum dei, seruant to Gods seruants: Ergo, wee conclude with Gregorie, that this title. Vniuersall, is an Antichristian name, and that it hath misliked the ancient Bishops of Rome themselues, and how other Patriarkes and Bisshops haue challenged that ambitious name and title, as well as the Popes of Rome.

THE SIXT QVESTION, WHETHER THE Pope may erre, or not.

The Papists.

THey denye not but that both the Pope by himselfe, and together with a error 47 whole Councel, may bee deceiued in matters of fact, that is, in historicall poynts, and the truth of things that are done, because it dependeth of the testimonie and information of men: But in matters of faith and doctrine, the Pope determining with the Councel, is not subiect to error: yea, the Pope by himselfe alone decreeing any thing concerning faith cannot bee deceiued, Bellar. lib. 4. de pontific. cap. 1 [...]. No nor yet in precepts of manners prescribed to the Church by the Pope, is there any feare or daunger of error, cap. 5. Yea, it is probable (sayth he) that the Pope, not onely as Pope, cannot erre, but not as a priuate person, is it like he should fall into heresie, or hold any obstinate opinion contrarie to the faith? cap. 6.

1 Luke 22.31. Simon, I haue prayed for thee, that thy faith faile not. Christ here prayeth for Peter, and his successors, that they might not at any time erre, or be deceiued in matters of faith, Bellar. cap. 3. Rhem. annot. in Luk. 22. sect. 11.

[Page]We answere: First, this was a particular prayer for Peter, that his fayth should not fayle in that great and dangerous tentation, into the which, our Sauiour foresaw, hee should fall: For if it were to be vnderstood of Peters successors, they also must first be sifted by Sathan as Peter was, and deny Christ, and so being conuerted strengthen their brethren: if they will vnderstand one parte of Peters successors, I pray you, why not all? Secondly, Our Sauiour prayeth likewise for all his Apostles, that they might be sanctified in the truth, yea for al, that should beleeue by their preaching: yet is not euery Christian priuiledged from all error of fayth. Thirdly, after this Peter himselfe erred, and was reprehended of Saint Paul. Fulk. annot. in Luk. 22. sect. 11.

2. The high Priests that sate in Moses chayre were priuiledged not to erre. Ergo, much more now are the chiefe pastors of the Church free from error, Bellarm. cap. 3. Rhemist. Luk. 22. sect. 11.

We answer: the high Priests had no such priuiledge, for some of them fell into strange errors: Vriah the high Priest set vp an idolatrous altar at the Kinges commaundement, 2. King. 16. Eliashib was ioyned in Affinitie with Tobiah the Ammonite, contrary to the law of God, Fulk. ibid.

The Protestantes.

THat the Popes and Bishops of Rome haue not onely erred in manners, but euen in fayth; and not onely priuately and personally as men, but pulikely and iudicially as Popes; that they haue by their publike and open preaching, defence, allowance, and consent approued and established erronious, and some hereticall opinions: thus we trust to make it playne and euident to all men.

1. Peter erred: Ergo, the Pope may, though he were Peters successor. First, Peter erred in denying of Christ: the Iesuite answereth: First, he began not yet to be the chiefe Bishop, which he entred not into till after the resurrection, when Christ sayd vnto him, Feede my sheepe, Iohn 21. therefore all this while he might erre. A goodly answere: I pray you tell me, was not the Church before Christs passion, and after, built vpon the same rocke? I trow they cannot denie it: but Peter was not the rock before, therefore not after.

If he were therefore called a rock because of his confession of Christ, why should he not then rather, straight after his confession, take possession of his office, then immediately after his deniall of Christ? Surely this is but a silly shift. Secondly, sayth the Iesuite, Peter fayled in charitie when he denied Christ, not in fayth, cap. 3. and if he fayled in fayth, he lost the confession of fayth, and not fayth it selfe. We answere: First, and can a true fayth then bee separated from loue by your doctrine? The Apostles knew no such fayth: Saint Iames sayth, it is a dead fayth that is without the works of loue, and the fayth of diuels, that is, no faith, Iames 2.17.19. If then Peters loue failed, his fayth also fayled. Secondly, we doe not say that Peters fayth was lost and vtterly extinguished, for Christ prayed for him, but whether it were an error in fayth which Peter fell into: for it [Page] is not all one to erre in fayth, or cleane to lose fayth. Thirdly, hee lost the confession of fayth, he denied Christ in word, Ergo: he denied the fayth, howsoeuer he thought in heart: for these two are the principall fruites of fayth, to Beleeue with the heart, and Confesse with the mouth, Rom. 10. and where either of these is wanting, there can not be a right fayth: for he that putteth away a good conscience, maketh shipwrack also of faith, 1. Tim. 1.19. But the Iesuite I see hath a queazie stomack, let him cough vp lustily, and say with one of his fellowes, Petrus non fidem Christi, Alan. Cop. sed Christum salua fide negauit. Peter denied not the fayth of Christ, but, his fayth remayning sound and whole, hee onely denied Christ. Loe, here is newe popish diuinitie, that a man may denie Christ, and yet not denie the faith.

Secondly, Peter erred in constraining the Gentiles to doe as the Iewes. Bellarmine saith, it was an error in example & conuersation, not in fayth or doctrine, cap. 7. We answere: First, in this example of Peter there was also included an error in fayth, for how should the Gentiles better know Peters iudgement, then by his example, by the which they fell into an error of fayth, and were constrayned to conforme themselues like to the Iewes: thinking that the Iewish ceremonies were necessary to bee retayned? Secondly, Saint Paul himselfe sayth, they went not the right way to the truth of the Gospell: Ergo, they erred from the trueth of the Gospell, and so in fayth. Thirdly, the diuines of Paris doe attribute to Peter an error in fayth, Fulk. annot. 4. Galat. sect. 9.

2. We can produce many examples of the Popes, which haue erred iudicially, namely, openly haue maintayned errors. To let passe Marcellinus, who sacrificed to Idols, as a slippe of his person, and he afterward repented him of his fall: yet by the way the Iesuite is deceiued, that thinketh it probable, that the Popes particular person cannot fall into heresie: here you see Marcellinus fell into Idolatrie.

Liberius subscribed to the Arrians, consented to the condemnation of Athanasius: as testifieth Ierome, confessed by Nicolaus Cusanus, and Alphonsus de castro, both papists, Iuel. pag. 164. defens. Apolog.

Honorius 1. consented to the heresie of Sergius Bishop of Constantinople, who was a Monothelite, and held, that there were not two wills or operations in Christ,Lib. 6. de loc. cap. vl. and so destroyed the two natures. That Honorius was a Monothelite, Melchior Canus a papist confesseth: hee was condemned for an heretike in the 6.7. and 8. generall synodes. Bellarmine answereth, that the Councels are corrupted, or they might be deceiued in iudgement, as in a matter of facte: or that Honorius onely misliked the speech, to say there were two willes in Christ, and not the thing. See what poore shiftes heere bee to make Honorius no heretike, and yet all will not be.

Pope Stephen the sixt tooke vp Formosus body, and cut off two fingers of his right hande, and buried him againe in a lay-mans Sepulchre: Then [Page] followed Rhomanus the first, Theodorus the second, Iohannes the ninth, and restored Formosus with his decrees, iudging him to bee lawfull Bishop. After them commeth Sergius the third, who tooke vp the body agayne, cutte off the head, and cast it into Tiber. The Iesuite answereth, that Stephanus and Sergius erred onely in a matter of fact. A goodly cloke to couer the filthines of their Ghostly fathers withall.

But by your leaue a little: doe you not holde it to bee an article of fayth to beleeue the Pope to bee heade of Christes Church? Then was it an article of fayth to hold that Formosus was right Pope, for at that time there was no other. Ergo, Stephanus and Sergius erred in fayth, defining the contrary. All that you can say, is this: that it was not yet determined and decreed for an article of fayth, so to beleeue: see I pray you, these mennes fayth is pinned vpon Popes sleeues. Why masters, the rule of fayth is certaine, you cannot make new articles of fayth now, but onely declare and explane those that are. But doe you not thinke that these iollie Popes, that would rake the dead out of their graues, for their holines might deserue at GODS hand, to haue a priuiledge not to erre in fayth?

Siluester the second was a Necromancer and a Coniurer, and therefore fallen from the fayth. Bellarmine sayth: hee was a good man, and all are fables and lyes that are tolde of him: and because hee was cunning in Geometrie, that ignorant age straightwayes iudged him to bee giuen to Necromancie.

Thus wee may take the Iesuites worde, if wee will. But the storie is reported by authors of better credit then Bellarmine: as Iohannes Stella, Platina, Petrus Premonstratens. Nauclerus, Antoninus. Fox. pag. 167.

Anastasius was a Nestorian heretike, whose heresie was this, that there are, as two natures, so also two persons in Christ, Alphons. de castro. lib. 1. de haeresib. cap. 4.

Celestinus is reported by Laurentius Valla a Canon of Rome, to haue been a Nestorian heretike, de donation. Constantin.

Now commeth in Pope Hildebrand, or rather Heldebrand, for hee was a very brand of hell fire: called Gregory the seuenth: Of whome Benno writeth thus: that hee poysoned sixe Popes his predecessors to make himselfe a way to the popedome: that hee was a Coniurer, a raiser of Diuels, and in his rage hee cast the sacrament into the fier. But sayth Harding our countrey man, though vnworthily, Benno was his enemie, and wrote of displeasure: and Bellarmine thinketh that some Lutherane was the author of the booke, which goeth vnder the name of Benno, who was Cardinall in this Hildebrands time. But Benno onely doth not thus report of him: he was openly twise for the same crimes condēned in Councel: first at Wormes: thē after deposed in the Coūcel at Brixia in Italy, & Pope Clement 3. elected to succeed him.Vrspergens. And the said Gregory died in exile, of whom Antonius reporteth, that before his [Page] death, he repented him of his insolencie shewed toward the Emperour Henrie the 4. whom with his wife and young child bare foote, and bare legd, hee had caused three dayes together, in extreame frost and colde, to waite at his palace gates at Canusium, Fox. p. 179. Iuel. p. 168. defen. apol. before he could speake with him. Yet this Hildebrand for all these insolent, cruell, and dishonest partes, is commended by our papists, Harding, Bellarmine and other, for a deuout Catholike man, who did all things of a zeale to the Church. By this you may iudge, whome our aduersaries count a Catholike man.

Pope Iohn the 22. affirmed, that the soules lie in a traunce till the day of iudgement, and feele neither payne nor ioye. Harding, and likewise Bellarmine answere, that this was an error, but no heresie. Yet in the Vniuersitie of Paris, it was condemned for heresie, as Gerson writeth. Againe sayth Harding, he held it only as a priuate opinion. But Massaeus sayth, that Pope Iohn preached this heresie and sent out preachers to maintaine it. Hee was condemned (sayth he) with his error by the diuines of Paris in the presence of Philip the French King, before he was Pope, when he was yet but a priuate Doctor. But the contrary is proued by B. Iewel, that he was Pope 13. yeares before Philip was king, Iuell. defens. apolog. p. 667.

Pope Iohn the 23. denied the life to come, and the resurrection of the body: And this heresie was openly obiected against him in the Councel of Constance. Bellarmine and Harding before him, answere, that he was not the rightful Pope, for there were three at that time, and therefore might erre. But Platina sayth, that he was chosen at Bonoma, by the consent of all the Cardinals, ex Iuel. pag. 671.

Lastly, Pope Eugenius the 4. was condemned and deposed as an heretike in the Councel of Basile. Where the Iesuite hath no other answer, then by condemning the Councel as Schismatical, to acquite the Pope, Lib. 3. de pontif. cap. 14.

By these examples it may appeare to the indifferent reader, that it is no rare nor impossible thing, for the Popes of Rome to erre, yea become playne heretikes: And as for that shift of the Iesuite, that they are no longer Popes, whē they openly begin to teach heresie, this is, as Alphonsus sayth, In re seria verbis velle iocari, De haeresib. lib. 1. cap. 4. to dallie with words in a serious and earnest matter. And so euery Bishop shal be as well priuiledged as the Pope, and cannot fall into heresie: for why may we not say that a Bishop, when he is knowen to bee an heretike, ceaseth to bee Bishop any longer, as the Pope is no longer Pope, and so as long as he remayneth Bishop, cannot possiblie bee an heretike? Surely this is but paltrie and beggarly stuffe.

De baptis. lib. 2. cap. 3.4. Augustine is not a whit afrayd to say, Episcoporum literas per sermonem sapientiorem cuiuslibet in eare peritioris, & per aliorum episcoporum grauiorem authoritatem, & per concilia licere reprehendi, si in eis à veritate deuiatum sit. That the decrees of all Bishops whatsoeuer (not excluding Popes) may be corrected either by the sentence of wiser men in that poynt, wherein they erred, or by the [Page] better aduised sentence of other Bishops, or by Councels may be reuersed, where they doe erre. Ergo, it is possible for Popes, by his iudgement, to erre.

A PART OR APPENDIX OF THIS QVEstion, whether the Church of Rome may erre or not.

The Papists.

THey doe not onely affirme that the Pope cannot erre, but that the Church error 48 of Rome also cānot be deceiued in matters of faith, so long as the Apostolike See remayneth there, which they say is like there to remaine to the ende of the world. Bellarm. lib. 3. de pontif. cap. 4. Hereupon Panormitane doubteth not to say, that he would preferre the iudgement of the Cardinals of Rome, before the iudgement of the whole world: this he sayd, standing vp in the Councel of Basile, Fox. pag. 669. ex Aenea Syluio.

1. The Rhemists vpon those words of Saint Paul, Rom. 1.5. your fayth is published through the whole world, doe thus inferre: See (say they) the great prouidence of God in the preseruation of the Romane common faith. In times past the Romane fayth and Catholike all one: Ergo, that See cannot erre in faith.

We answere: they must proue their Romish faith and popish religion, to be the same which was praysed and commended by the Apostle, or els they gayne nothing: but that shall they neuer doe.

2. So long as the Apostolike See remayneth at Rome, it shall be preserued from error, but that is like there to remaine till the worlds end: for it onely remayneth, when all other Apostolique Sees are gone: and it is very probable, that if this See could haue been ouerthrowen, it should haue been done by the incursion and inuasion of the Gothes, Vandals, Turkes, the emulation of Princes, diuisions and schismes of Popes themselues: yet for all this it standeth still, and hath so continued almost 1600. yeres, and shall so continue still. Ergo, the Romane Church can not erre. Bellarmin. lib. 2. cap. 4. Rhemist. annot. in Thessal. 2. sect. 7.

We answere: First, it is a great vntruth, that all other Apostolike Sees are gone, for there is a succession at Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, Ephesus, euen at this day. Secondly, it is false, that the See of Rome hath continued in that religion it now professeth, which indeed is no religion, but superstition and heresie, these 1600. yeres: for first till Gregories time, which was 600. yeeres after Christ, none of the popes would be called vniuersall Bishops: and it was more then 300. yeeres, from Gregorie the 1. to Siluester the 2. when sathan is thought fully to be let loose: for he by the diuel was aduanced to the papacie: All these yeeres therefore you must strike off in your account. Thirdly, that the See of Rome, which is the seate of Antichrist, hath continued many yeeres we graunt: [Page] for it is the iust iudgement of God vpon the world, because they loued not the trueth, that they should be deluded a long time, and deceiued by Antichrist, and beleeue lies: so did Saint Paul prophesie, 2. Thessalonians 2.10, 11. And wee grant also that that Antichristian See shall in some sorte remayne till the comming of Christ, whom hee shall destroie with the brightnes of his appearing, as Saint Paul sayth. You haue gayned therefore nothing by this, but that Rome is the seate of Antichrist, Fulk. annotat. in 2. Thessalonians 2. sect. 7.

The Prot [...]tants.

IT is euident and plaine, and neede not much proofe, that the Romane Church, as also any particular visible Church, maie not onely erre in faith, but fall cleane away into heresie and Idolatrie, as we see it come to passe in the Church of Rome.

1. The Church of Rome hath no better assurance of their continuance, then the Church of the Iewes had before Christ, no nor yet so great, for they were a peculiar and chosen nation. But Iudah fell and transgressed, and committed Idolatrie in the raigne of Ahaz, and therefore the Prophet Esay complayneth and sayth, From the sole of the foote to the head, there is nothing sound, cap. 1. ver. 6.

Neither are they better then the Church of Ephesus was in Saint Iohns time, who was as able (I think) to keepe that Church from error, as the Pope is to keepe Rome: yet the Lord threatneth to remoue his candlestick frō amongst them, vnles they did amend, Reue. 2.5. Ergo, the Church of Rome may erre.

2. The Pope may erre, as we haue before shewed, Ergo the Church of Rome: for the Apostolike See, as they say, is the cause that no error can approch or come neere them. Therefore (me thinketh) the Iesuite committeth a foule absurditie, in saying, the Church of Rome cannot so much as erre personally, and yet they grant that the Pope may erre personally. So by this reason the body shuld haue a greater priuiledge then the head: the Church of Rome should bee freer from error then the Pope, who should preserue it from error: this sure is a great absurditie in Popish diuinitie, Bellarmin. cap. 4.

3. It is confessed by our aduersaries themselues, that the Church of Rome may erre: as the Councel at Rome vnder Adriane the second erred, sayth the Iesuite, in determining Honorius to bee an heretick, one of his predecessors. cap. 11.

The Councel of the Italian Bishops at Brixia erred in condemning Gregory the seuenth, who was, if you will beleeue Harding, a vertuous and an holy man. Nay Paulus Iouius a popish Bishop confesseth, that Adrianus 6. was made Pope, mira & pudenda Senatorum factiosorum suffragatione, through the strange and shamefull suffrages of factious Cardinals,Lib. 20. fine. because they preferred a stranger before their owne order.

[Page]But our aduersaries haue a trick, to shift off all this that hath been saide: They erred in a matter of fact, not in any poynt of fayth. Yet they cannot so closely conuey the matter away: for Panormitane euen in such questions also preferreth the iudgement of the Cardinals before the whole world, speaking in the defence of Eugenius, who was challenged in the Councel of Basile, for the dissolution of the Councel, which he did (saith Panormitane) with the aduice of the Cardinals: whose iudgement he so much esteemeth in this matter, which concerned not faith, namely, for the dissoluing of the Councel.Fox. p. 669.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE spirituall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome.

THis question hath two partes: the first, whether the Bishop of Rome haue a coactiue and constrayning power to make lawes to binde the conscience, and to punish the transgressors. Secondly, whether other Pastors and Bishops haue their iurisdiction immediatly from God, or from the Pope.

Other questions also there are, which belong to this matter, as whether the Pope be the chiefe iudge in controuersies of fayth, which we haue already handled, entreating of the perfection and authority of the scriptures: as also whether it be in the Pope to summone, dissolue, and confirme Councels, which hath been sufficiently declared before, in the controuersie concerning Councels. Concerning other questions, as the canonizing of Saints, which they say appertaineth to the Pope, the election and confirmation of Bishops, pardons and indulgences, we shall haue fitter occasion to deale in them, in their seuerall places and controuersies. At this time wee purpose onely to touch these two poynts aforesaide, of the Popes Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE POPE may make lawes to binde the conscience, and punish the transgressors thereof iudicially.

The Papists.

THat the Pope hath such authorie, to make lawes for the whole Church,error 49 which shall binde vnder paine of damnation, as well as the lawes of God, it is the general opinion of the papists, Fox. 981. articul. 13. & p. 1101. artic. cont. Lambert. 29. But they put in this clause, So they bee not vniust lawes nor [Page] contrarie to the diuine law, Bellarm. cap. 15. And yet they say that the Pope may make lawes, hauing not the authority nor warrant of scripture, neither is it necessarie for these lawes to be expressed or diduced out of scripture. And these lawes are not onely of externall rites and orders of the Church, but euen of things necessary to saluation, Bellarm. cap 15. in reprehens. Caluini. Yea he addeth further, that in matters not necessary to saluation, he can not be disobeyed without deadly sinne, and offence of conscience, cap. 16. loc. 1. Bulla Leonis 10. aduersus Lutherum, Fox. p. 1283. col. 1.

1. The Apostles prescribed a law concerning the abstaining from blood, things strangled, and offered to Idols, concerning the which, Christ gaue them no precept: But this law did binde the people in conscience: for euery where the Apostles gaue straight charge, for the keeping of the decrees, Bellarm.

Answere: First, the Apostles commaunded no newe thing, but the same which they themselues were taught of Christ, that they should take heede of offence: the Christians therefore were not bound in conscience any further to keepe the decrees concerning such things, then for auoyding of scandal and offence. Secondly, for afterward the offence being taken away, the law also ceased: and Saint Paul giueth libertie, notwithstanding this law, to eate things offered to Idols, if it might be done without offence, Asking no question (sayth he) for conscience sake, 1. Cor. 10.27. Ergo their consciences were not hereby obliged and bound.

3. It is necessary to haue some lawes, beside the diuine law, for the gouernment of the Church: for the word of God is too vniuersal, neither is sufficient to direct euery particular action: therefore other ecclesiasticall lawes must bee added, but euery good and necessary law hath a coactiue and constraining power, and bindeth the conscience to obedience: Ergo the constitutions of the Popes and Councels, which are the only ecclesiastical lawes, doe binde the conscience, Bellarmin. cap. 16. lib. 4.

Answere: First, the word of God contayneth all necessarie rules to saluation: wherefore all lawes of the Church concerning matters of faith, are but explanations, and interpretations of the rules of fayth set forth in scripture, if they be godly lawes, and so are not the lawes of men but of God, and doe bind the conscience to the obseruation thereof: as the lawes of the Church, which command Christians to resort to the congregation to heare Gods word, and reuerently to receiue the sacraments, are the very ordinances and commaundements of Christ, who enioyned his Apostles to preach, and baptize, and his faythfull people to heare and to be baptized, and therefore in conscience wee are bound to the obedience hereof. Secondly, there are other ecclesiasticall lawes appoynted for the publique order of the Church, concerning externall rites and circumstances of persons and place, as the houres of prayer, the forme of the le [...]turgie & publike seruice, the times fittest for the celebration of the sacraments, and such like. These and such like constitutions do not binde in conscience absolutely, in respect of the things themselues, which are indifferent, [Page] but in regarde of that contempt, and offence which might followe in the not keeping of them: contempt to our superiors, whome wee ought in all lawfull things to obey; offence, in grieuing the conscience of our weake brethren. So that euen these constitutions also which are made according to the rules of the Gospell, that is, vnto edification, to the glorie of God, and for auoyding of offence, doe necessarilie binde vs in conscience, not conscience of the thinges themselues, which are but externall, but conscience of obedience to our Christian Magistrates, and conscience in taking heede of all iust offence, sic. Caluin. Institut. lib. 4. cap. 10.11.

3 But we are not, God be thanked, driuen to any such straight, that if there be neede of any such Ecclesiasticall lawes, we should run for succor to the Popes beggerly decretals. (And yet such Canons, as were in force amongst them, agreeable to the rules of the Gospell, we doe not refuse.) But if there bee want and penurie of good lawes, euery Church hath as full authoritie, to make decrees and ordinances for the peace and order, and quiet gouernement thereof, not as the Pope of Rome hath ouer the vniuersall Church (for that by right is none, or if it be, it is but an vsurped power) but as the Bishop of Rome hath in his owne Bishopricke and dioces.

The Protestants.

WHat our sentence is of this matter, it doth partlie appeare by that which wee haue alreadie saide: that the Pope hath no power ouer the whole Church, and therefore can make no lawes to binde the conscience or otherwise for the same, for it belongeth not to his charge. Secondly, we say, that neither he, nor any ecclesiasticall gouernement beside, can make lawes of things necessarie to saluation, other then those which are in Scripture conteined. Thirdly, all Ecclesiasticall lawes made concerning externall rites, and publike order, doe not otherwise binde the conscience, then in regarde of our obedience due to Christian Magistrates in lawfull things, and for auoyding of scandall and offence: But in respect of the things commaunded, such lawes doe not binde. Caluin. loc. praedicto.

1 Saint Iames saith, there is one lawe-giuer which is able to saue and to destroy, cap. 4.12. He therefore onely maketh lawes to binde the conscience, that is able to saue and to destroy: but that cannot the Pope doe. Ergo, Caluin. argum.

Bellarmine answereth, that the lawes of men doe binde vnder paine of damnation, in as much as God is offended and displeased with their disobedience, and so iudgeth them worthie of punishment. cap. 20. All this wee graunt, that the lawes of men being good lawes, doe binde in conscience in respect of the contempt and disobedience to higher powers, but not in respect of the thinges commaunded, which in their nature are indifferēt. The Iesuite should haue said: [Page] that God is offended not onely for their disobedience, but simplie for not doing the things commaunded, which he durst not say: As when the Magistrate for some profitable and politike end commaundeth vpon some dayes abstinence from flesh, it is not the eating or not eating of flesh, that simplie displeaseth and offendeth God, but the contempt of the lawe, and wilfull and obstinate disobedience to the magistrate: for otherwise the vse of the creature is free and indifferent.

Cap 1 [...]. lib. 4. de pontif.2 Wee will beate the Iesuite with his owne staffe: hee saith not that all lawes doe binde the conscience, but onely iust lawes, in the which fower cōditions are required. First, that they be made for some profitable end: so are not popish lawes which nourish superstition, and haue no edifying, and some of them doe commaund plaine idolatry, & open impietie, as the worshipping of images, the adoration of the Masse, & such like. Secondly, saith he, they must not be contrarie to Gods law, but such are many of their ordinances, yea the most of them. Thirdly, they must be made by him that hath authoritie: therefore none of the Popes lawes binde the vniuersall Church, for it is not subiect to him. Fourthly, the forme and manner of imposing such lawes must be orderly: but their lawes are most disordered, imposed vpon the Church violently, without their consent, or any good proceeding. Thus, you see, euen by their owne confession, their lawes cannot binde.

One thing more I must needes tell them of. If they would needes haue their lawes to binde men in conscience, they should haue made fewer of them: now they are so many, that if the breach of them were an offence of conscience, doe men, what they could, they should dailie make shipwrack of their conscience. It is a true saying that is reported of one Thomas Arthur, a good Christian, it is an homely speech, because the matter was somewhat homely, yet hee did hit the marke. Like as (saith he) crosses were set vp against the walles of London, that no man should pisse there; and while there were but a few, men for reuerence of the crosses, would not pisse against the wall: but when in euery corner they set vp crosses, men of necessitie were faine to pisse vpon the wall and crosses too. So saith he, if there had been fewer lawes of the Church, they would haue been better kept:Fox. pag. 999. but now they are so manie, that men cannot chose but breake them.

3 The Pope hath no power to correct the transgressors of his lawes ouer the whole Church. Ergo, hee cannot make lawes to binde the whole Church. The argument followeth, for hee that hath absolute power to make lawes, hath also power to commaunde obedience to the lawes so made.

The first is thus proued: the Pope indeede hath taken vppon him many times to thunder out his excommunication against other Churches: but it was an vsurped and tyrannicall power, and many times resisted, and controuled.

Pope Victor Anno 200. would haue excommunicate the East Churches about the keeping of Easter,Fox. p. 41. but hee was stayed by Irenaeus. The [Page] Councell of Constance did sende out excommunications against Pope Benedict. sess. 36.

In the Councell of Basile, Pope Eugenius cited Cardinall Iuliane, with the rest of the fathers there assembled to come to Bononia, vnder great penaltie: they likewise cited Eugenius vnder the like penaltie, either to come or send to Basile. Fox. pag. 668.

Pope Leo the tenth, in his fumish Antichristian Bull, excommunicated and condemned Luther. Luther with better right pronounceth sentence of excommunication against him, being an aduersarie to Christ, in these words: ‘according to the power and might, that the spirit of Christ, and efficacie of our faith can doe in these our writings, if you shall persist still in your furie, we condemne you together with this Bull and all the decretall, and giue you to sathan to the destruction of the flesh, that your spirit in the day of the Lord may be deliuered: in the name, which you persecute, of Iesus Christ our Lorde. Fox. page 1286.’

Thus you see what small force there is of these popish leaden Bulls, and presumptuous excommunications: for it falleth out iustlie by them,Prouer. 26. ver. 2. as the wise man saith. As the Sparrow and the Swallowe by flying escape, so the curse causelesse shall not come. Now seeing therefore the Pope fayleth of power and strength to see his lawes executed in the vniuersall Church, it cannot bee that his lawes should vniuersally binde.

Lastly, let Augustine speake: he thus defineth sinne, peccatum est dictum, Cont. Faustum lib. 22. cap. 27. factum, vel concupitum contra legem aeternam Dei, sinne is any thing done, saide, or coueted against the Lawe of GOD: therefore the transgression simplie of the lawe of man is not sinne; but as thereby also the Lawe of God is transgressed: Ergo simplie it bindeth not the conscience: for sinne onely bindeth and toucheth the conscience.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS QVEstion, whether all Bishops doe receiue their Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction from the Pope.

The Papists.

THey denie not but that the power of order, as they call it, which consisteth error 50 in the administration of the Sacraments, is equallie distributed to all Bishops, and that they, as well as the Pope doe receiue it immediatly by their consecration, of God, but the power both of externall iurisdiction, which standeth vpon Ecclesiasticall censures, constitutions and decrees, and internall iurisdiction, which is exercised in binding and loosing, is deriued, say they, from the Pope to all other Bishops.

1 God tooke of the spirite that was in Moses, and distributed it among the seuentie Elders,Numb. 11.16. that were chosen to beare the burthen of gouernement [Page] with Moses and to bee his helpers: the Lorde tooke of his spirite, not by diminishing it, but by deriuing of his vertue to the rest: but the Pope is now in the roome and place of Moses in the Church: Ergo, from him to the rest is this an authoritie deriued.

Answer: First, Moses example was extraordinarie, he was a figure of Christ, not of the Pope, Deuteron. 18. vers. 15. The Pope might with better right stand vpon Aarons example, who was high Priest, not lay claime to Moses office, who was the Prince and Captaine of the people: for the Pope, I trow, would be chiefe Bishop, and not Emperor too. Secondly, the meaning is not that God deriued Moses spirit to the rest: but bestowed the like gift of prophesying vpon them, as Moses had: surely neuer any mortall man had the spirite in such aboundance, that it could bee deuided into seuentie portions, and one Prophet to make many. The like phrase is vsed, 2. King. 2.15. Where the Prophets saide, that the spirit of Eliah did rest on Elisha, that is, God endued him with an excellent spirit of prophesying, as Elias had. If they will vnderstand this place also of deriuing of spirits, how then shall that be taken in the 9. verse where Elisha praieth, that this spirit might be doubled vpon him? If his spirit were deriued from Eliah, how could it be doubled vpon him? How could it be multiplied and increased? how could he haue more then was in the fountaine or originall, seeing he receiued all from thence?

3 What maketh this place, I pray you, for the power of externall iurisdiction? Here it is saide that God gaue of his spirit to seauentie Elders and rulers of the people, and enabled them for their office; endued them with wisdome, and knowledge, and dexteritie in iudging of the people: this maketh nothing for their purpose, vnlesse they will also say, that there is a secret influence of knowledge and wisdome deriued from the Pope to all other Bishops, whereby they are made able to execute their office: but (I trow) they will not say so: for Alphonsus de castro, truly saith of the Popes of Rome, constat plures eorum adeo esse illiteratos, vt grammaticam penitus ignorent: it is certaine that many of them were so vnlearned, that they hard and scant knew their grammar.

4 The argument followeth not from one particular countrie, as this was of the Iewes, to the vniuersal Church: that because the seauentie Elders receiued iurisdiction from Moses (yet that cannot be proued out of this place, for they were rulers before, and commaunders of the people, the were now but inwardly furnished, and further enabled) yet it were no good reason, that therefore the Ecclesiasticall Ministers ouer the whole Church, should receiue their power from one.

5 Neither doth it follow, that because the Prince and ciuill Magistrate may bestowe ciuil offices, create Dukes, Earles, Lords, constitute Iudges, Deputies, Lieutenants, by his sole authoritie, that by the same reason Ecclesiasticall ministers should receiue their power & office from their superiors: for although, the Church from ancient time, hath thought it good, to make some inequalitie and difference in Ecclesiasticall offices for the peace of the Church: yet the superiors [Page] haue not such a soueraigntie and commaunding power ouer the rest, as the Prince hath ouer his subiects.

The Protestants.

THat Bishops haue not their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from Rome, but do as well enioye it by right of their consecration, election, institution, in their owne precinctes, circuites, prouinces, cities, townes, yea, as the Pope doth in his Bishopricke, and by much better right, if they be good Bishops, and louers of the truth: thus briefely it is proued.

1 The Apostles had not their iurisdiction from Peter, but all receiued it indifferently from Christ: this the Iesuite doth not barely acknowledge, but proueth it by argument,. against the iudgement of other Papists. cap. 23. Ergo neither Bishops are authorised from the Pope, though he were Peters successor: for if he were (to graunt it for disputation sake) he is no more to the Bishops of the Church, then Peter was to the Apostles. If hee gaue not the keyes to the Apostles; neither doth the Pope Saint Peters successor, to the Bishops, the Apostles successors: for they may with as great right challenge to bee the Apostles successors, as he can to be Saint Peters.

Nay, the Apostles gaue no power or iurisdiction to the Elders and pastors, whom they ordained: Act. 20.28. Take heede to the flocke, ouer the which the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops or ouerseers: and Ephes. 4.11. Hee hath giuen some to bee Apostles, some Prophets, some pastors and teachers: so then the pastors and teachers, though ordained by the Apostles, yet had their calling and office frō God and not from the Apostles, much lesse now can they receiue their power from any, no not from the Pope, for he is no Apostle, no nor Apostolike man, hauing left the Apostolike faith.

2 Augustine saith, Solus Christus habet authoritatem, & praeponendi nos in ecclesiae suae gubernatione, & de actu nostro iudicandi. de baptis. 2.2. Onely Christ hath authoritie (saith hee) to preferre vs to the gouernement of the Church, and to iudge of our dooings: the pastors then of the Church haue the keyes of the spirituall regiment from Christ himselfe, not from the Pope, or any other.

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF THE temporall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome.

THis question hath two partes: first, whether the Pope in respect of any spirituall error 51 iurisdiction, haue also the chiefe soueraigntie in temporall and ciuill matters, and so to be aboue Kings and Emperors: secondly, whether the Pope, or any Bishop, may be the chiefe Lord and prince ouer any Countrie, Citie, or Prouince.

[Page]

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE Pope directly or indirectly haue authoritie aboue Kinges and Princes.

The Papists.

THe Papists of former times were not ashamed to say, that the Pope is the Lord of the whole Church: as Panormitane in the Councell of Basile, Fox. page 670. Yea, Pope Innocentius the third said, writing to the Emperor of Constantinople, that as the Moone receiued her light from the Sunne, so the imperiall dignitie did spring from the Pope: and that the papall dignitie was seuen and fortie times greater then the imperiall:Innoc. 3. in decretal. yea Kinges and Emperors are more inferior to the Pope then lead is to golde, Gelasius distinct. 96. But our later papists ashamed of their forefathers arrogancie, in wordes seeme to abate somewhat of their proud sentence, but in effect say the same thing: For they confesse that the Emperor hath his office and calling of God, and not from the Pope: neither that the Pope directly hath any temporall iurisdiction: but indirectly hee may depose Kinges and princes, abrogate the lawes of Emperors, and establish his owne: he may take vnto himselfe the iudgement of temporall causes, and cite Kings to appeare before him: yet not directlie (saith the Iesuite) as hee is ordinarie Iudge ouer the Bishops and whole Clergie, yet indirectlie, as hee is the chiefe spirituall Prince, hee may doe all this, if hee see it necessarie for the health of mens soules. And so in effect, by their popish indirect meanes, they giue him as great authoritie, as euer hee vsurped or challenged, Bellarmine lib. 5. cap. 6.

1 The Ecclesiasticall and ciuill power doe make but one bodie and societie, as the spirite and the flesh in man: Now the Ecclesiastical power, which is as the soule and spirite, is the chiefe part, because it is referred to a more principall end, namely the safetie and good of the soule: the other is as the flesh to the spirite, and respecteth but a temporall end, as the outward peace and prosperitie of the common-wealth: Ergo, the spirituall power is chiefe, and may commaund the other. Bellarm. cap. 7.

Ans. First, it is a very vnfit and vnproper similitude, to compare these two regiments to the soule and the bodie: for by this meanes, as the spirite giueth life to the bodie, and euery parte thereof, so the ciuill and temporall state should receiue their office and calling from the Ecclesiasticall, which the Iesuite himselfe denieth, and so directly the one should rule the other: for the soule directly I trow, not indirectly moueth the body and gouerneth it. But if wee will speake as the Scripture doth, we make all but one bodie: and it is the spirit of Christ, who is the head, that giueth effectuall power to euery parte. Ephes. 4.15.16.

2 It is false that the ciuill magistracie onely concerneth the outward and [Page] temporall commoditie onely: for vnto Princes also is committed the chiefe care of religion and the worship of God: They are to see true religion aduaunced, yea to watch ouer Ecclesiasticall ministers, and to charge them to looke to their offices: the Prince is Gods minister, for the wealth both of the soules and bodies of his subiects: And therefore Saint Paul exhorteth to pray for Kings and gouernours, that wee may liue (not onely) a peaceable life, but in all godlines and honestie, 1. Timoth. 2.2. Ergo, it is parte of the magistrates office, as to procure the peace of the people, so to haue a care of their godlie life. Wherefore it is false, as the Iesuite supposeth, that the chiefe ende of the ciuill gouernement, is onely outward and temporall: Ergo, his argument is nothing worth.

2 Azariah the high Priest droue Vzziah the King out of the temple, when hee would haue burned incense, and caused him to goe out of the citie and dwell apart, 2. Chron. 26. Iehoiada likewise deposed Athalia, 2. King. 11. Ergo, the Pope may depose wicked and vngodly Princes. Bellarmine cap. 8.

Answere: First, wee denie, that there is now, or ought to bee any such high Priest in the Church of God, to haue the chiefe authoritie in spirituall matters, as there was in the lawe: for hee was the type and figure of Christ, who is our high Priest, and chiefe Bishop. Secondly, these examples doe not excuse the Popes tyrannie, who hath deposed rightfull Kinges and Emperors, and better then himselfe: as Pope Zacharie deposed Childericus the French King, and set vp Pipinus: Gregorie the seuenth set vp Rodolphus against Henricus the fourth, the Emperor. Pope Paschalis set vp the sonne of the saide Henricus against his father. But we will answere more particularly to these examples.

To the first: First, it was not the sole act of Azariah the high Priest, but there were 80. Priests that ioyned with him beside, and they all spake to the King: this example therefore maketh nothing for the sole authoritie of the Pope, who saith, that he may depose the Emperor himselfe, without any Councell. Innocent. 4. Secondly, they did not depose Vzziah: they onely withstoode him according to the lawe of God, because hee vsurped the priests office: so ought faithfull Bishops and pastors euen to reproue the greatest Magistrates, for the manifest contempt, and open breach of Gods lawe: Neither did they constraine the King to goe forth, before they saw the iudgement of God vpon him: for the text saith, they compelled him to go forth, because the Lord had smitten him, they saw the leprosie to rise vp in his face, vers. 20. This therefore was the extraordinarie iudgement of God, and not of the high priest. Thirdly, he was not deposed from the Kingdome, though he dwelt alone: his son did execute the office only for him, and raigned after him: for being a leper, by the law he was to dwell apart, Leuit. 13.46. Here was nothing done (we see) by the sole authoritie of the high Priest, but they had the manifest and direct lawe of God, vnto the which their Kings also were subiect.

[Page]To the second example, we answere. First, Athaliah was a tyrant and an vsurper, and ought not to raigne, and therefore was iustly deposed. Secondly, Iehoiada did it not by his owne power, but assembled the Fathers and Princes of the land, 2. Chron. 22.2. He shewed them the young King, and they made a couenant with him. Iehoiada onely gaue directions, (the King being now knowen vnto them) vnto the Captaines and gouernours. Thirdly, they had the flat word of God for that action, The Kings sonne must raigne, as the Lord hath saide, concerning the sonnes of Dauid, ver. 3. So when the Pope hath any such warrant from God, he may doe as Iehoiada did.

The Protestants.

THat the Pope or any other person Ecclesiasticall hath no manner of temporall iurisdiction either directly or indirectly ouer Kings, Princes, Emperors, but ought of right to bee subiect to them and their lawes: it is thus proued.

1 By the same reason whereby the Iesuite proueth, that the Pope directlie hath no temporall iurisdiction, we will conclude, that neither indirectlie can he haue any, and so none at all. Christ, while he liued vpon earth, tooke vpon him no temporall iurisdiction, either directly or indirectly: he refused to bee a King, Iohn 6. Nay hee would not bee a Iudge in ciuill matters, as in deuiding the inheritance, being thereto required, Luke 12.13. Hee payed poll money, Matth. 17. hee did submit himselfe to the iudgement of Pilate an heathen Iudge: therefore seeing Christe vsed no such temporall iurisdiction, neither can any Minister of Christe: for the seruant is not aboue the Master: Onely Antichrist dare presume beyond the example of Christ.

Fox. p. 670.2 The Fathers of Basile doe vrge that place of Saint Peter 1. Epist. 5.2. against Panormitane, who had vnaduisedly sayd, that the Pope was Lorde of the Church. But the Apostle saith, Feede the flocke of Christ, not by constraint, but willinglie, not as Lordes ouer the Lordes inheritance, verse 3. But the Pope contrariwise vseth all forceable, constraining, and tyrannicall meanes, killing, slaying, imprisoning, deposing those that will not obey him:Fox. pag. 786. who calleth himselfe chiefe Lorde and Magistrate of the whole Worlde. Surely this is Antichrist, and not the Minister of Christ, or successor of Saint Peter, whose counsaile he refuseth to followe and obey.

3 Let but the stories of former times bee searched: there wee shall finde how wickedly and insolently the Popes behaued themselues towards Kings, and Emperors: Pope Alexander caused Henry the second to doe penance for Beckets death, and to bee displed of the Monkes. Innocent the third caused King Iohn to kisse the feet of the Bishop of Canturburie his own subiect. Alexander the third did tread vpon Emperor Frederick his neck. Pope Innocent spoyled Frederick the second of his Empire, caused him to bee poysoned, [Page] and his sonne Conradus to be beheaded: and these Emperors were deposed by the Popes in order,Fox. p. 787. Henricus 4. Henricus 5. Frederick 1. Philippus Otho the 4. Frederick 2. and Conradus his sonne.

It is not good, they say, to put a sword into a mad mans hand: and thinke you not, that these Popes vsed the temporal sword very discreetely, which they thus vsurped, making fooles and slaues of Emperors, as Pope Adriane did, that rebuked Frederick the first, because he held his stirrup on the wrong side, and did excommunicate him, for setting his name before the Popes in writing? Th [...] very insolent, diuellish, and Antichristian practise of this their temporal power, sheweth from what originall it commeth, euen from the father of pride.

Lastly, Augustine saith, writing vpon those words, Rom. 13. Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers: Si quis putat, quia Christanus est, non sibi esse vectigal reddendum aut tributum, aut non esse exhibendum honorem debitum, eis, qui haec curant potestatibus; in magno errore est. If any man thinke, because he is a Christian, that he is not bound to pay tribute and taxe, and yeelde due honor to the temporall powers (for of such Augustine speaketh) he is in a great error. If all then are subiect to the temporal magistrate, that are Christians, then all Bishops and Ecclesiastical persons, yea the Pope himselfe, if he be a Christian. Ergo, the Emperor is not subiect to him.

THE SECOND PART OF THE QVESTION, concerning Saint Peters patrimonie, whether the Pope may be a temporall Prince.

The Papists.

THey say that it is not against the word of God, that the Pope should bee error 52 both a temporall and Ecclesiasticall Prince,Bellarm. lib. 5. c. 9. and that both the swordes of spirituall and Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction doe belong vnto him: and that hee is the right heire of Saint Peters patrimonie: to him belongeth as chiefe Lorde the Imperiall citie of Rome, the pallace of Laterane, Fox. p. 793. Capua also and Apulia are his. distinct. 96. Constantin.

1 Moses (saith the Iesuite) was both priest, and Prince: so was Heli 1. Sam. 4. He iudged Israel fortie yeeres: so were also the Macchabees, Iudas, Ionathan, Simon: yea Melchisedech long before Moses, was Priest and King: Ergo the Pope is lawfullie both chiefe Bishop, and chiefe Prince also, and Lord of that which he now possesseth. Bellarmine cap. 9.

Ans. Concerning Melchisedech. Who knoweth not, that hee being King and Priest, was a liuelie figure of our Sauior Christs spirituall Kingdome and Priesthoode? Heb. 7. And as yet the offices of the spirituall and temporall gouernement were not distinguished: for all the Patriarkes, Abraham, Isaack, Iacob, & the rest were sacrificers, therefore wee cannot borrow any examples from them for this matter.

[Page] Moses also did offer sacrifice to God, and was chiefe iudge both in spirituall and temporall affaires vnto the people, vntill such time, as when by Gods commaundement,Leuit 8.9. Aaron was chosen to the priesthood, vnto whome the charge of sacrifices and vnto his sonnes was committed: so Moses remained still Prince of the people, whom Iosua succeeded, and Aaron was inuested to the priesthoode, and so the offices were distinct: this example therefore of Moses is extraordinarie, and proueth not.

Concerning the time when Ely iudged Israel, which was in the dayes of the iudges, we must vnderstand, that the gouernement of Israel was very dissolute, and men were left to themselues to doe almost what themselues listed: as Iud. 17. we reade that Micah set vp an Idoll in his house, and the reason is rendered, there was no King in Israel, but euery man did that which seemed good in his owne eyes. Likewise the tribe of Dan offered violence to Micah, and robbed him, Iud. 18. For there was no King in Israel, vers. 1. The Leuites wife was most shamefully abused by the Gibeonites, for there was no King, chap. 19.1. The men of Beniamin tooke them wiues by force: for they had no King, chap. 21.25. So you see that both religion was corrupted, and the maners of the people grew to be outragious; and all because there was no perfect distinct gouernement, there was no King in Israel.

In Elie his time, the word of God was precious, 1. Sam. 3.1. Great was the ignorance of the whole land: the licentiousnesse also of his sonnes was a great offence to all Israel, and brought a great decay of godlines with it, 1. Sam. 2.17.23. Yea they caused the people through their euill example to sinne, verse. 24. Wherefore Elie his house was iudged of GOD for his remisnes in gouernement, in not correcting his sonnes, chapter 3.13. And hee that cannot rule his owne house, how should hee care for the Church, 1. Timoth. 3.5? It cannot now bee proued by the example of Elie, that the ciuill gouernement was annexed to the priesthoode by the Lordes appoyntment: but it is rather to bee ascribed to the corruption of those times: for hauing no King nor Captaine ouer them, they were driuen of necessitie to come to the high Priest, vnto whome the iudgement of many matters was committed by the lawe of God, Deuter. 17.8. Leuit. 13.2. But the priesthood, and the ciuill magistracie were two distinct things alwaies from the time of the lawe established.

It is then no good argument, which is drawne from the practise and example of those corrupt times: And yet wee say not, that these offices were so distinct, but that the Lorde might rayse vp some extraordinarie prophet, as hee did Samuel, who to restore iustice and religion decayed, might for a time both iudge the people and offer sacrifice, as wee see hee did.

As for the examples of the Maccabees, they moue vs not, you must bring better scripture for your purpose: the authoritie of those bookes binde vs not: and againe we see they did contrarie to the lawe, in taking vppon them both [Page] offices: for the priesthood was annexed to the posteritie of Aaron for euer, Numb. 3.10. And the scepter was not to depart from Iuda till Christ came, Genes. 49.10. As the Lorde also had promised to Dauid, that the Kingdome should remaine in his seede. 2. Chron. 22.3.

2 Constantine the great gaue vnto the Pope the chiefe gouernement of the Citie of Rome, and other Lordships in Italie, yea the soueraigntie ouer the West parts: why then is it not lawfull for him to enioy his gift? Bellarmine lib. 5. cap. 9.

Ans. First, the donation of Constantine seemeth to be forged: for if Constantine resigned to Siluester the politicall dominion of the west partes, how could he then haue distributed his Empire amongst his sonnes, as the West part to one, the East to the second, the middle part to the third? Againe, the donation saith, that Constantine was baptised at Rome by Siluester before the battaile against Maximinus, and that then the patrimonie was giuen: but it is certaine by stories that he was baptised at Nicomedia, by Eusebius Bishop there, in the 31. yeere of his raigne: wherefore it seemeth to be a forged and deuised thing. plur. apud. Fox. pag. 105.

2 Aeneas Siluius saith, that Mathilda, a noble Dutches in Italie, Fox. protesta. ad Angl. gaue those landes to the Pope, which are called S. Peters patrimonie: how then can it be true, that they were giuen by Constantine? Thirdly, the popish doctors and Canonists confesse, that Constantines grant is not so much to bee counted a donation, as a restitution of that which tyrannouslie was taken from him: but hee hath his power spirituall and temporall immediatly from Christ: you see then that they themselues make no great reckoning of Constantines donation. Antoni. summa, maior. 3. part.

4 Yet if Constantinus that good Emperor had been so minded,Fox. p. 791.793. to haue bestowed the imperiall dignitie vpon the bishop of Rome: there remaineth a great question, whether he ought to haue accepted of it or not; nay hee should haue refused it: for the temporall sword belongeth not to spirituall gouernors: At the least it had been a charitable part, not to haue suffered the Emperor to disinherite his owne sonnes, for to enrich the See of Rome: as Augustine very well saith, Qui vult, exhaeredato filio, ecclesiam haeredem facere, quaerat alterum, qui suscipiat, non Augustinum, immo deo propitio nullum inueniat. Ad Frat. in e [...]emo. ser. 52. He that would make the Church his heire, and defeate his own children, let him seeke some bodie else, to accept of his gift: surely Augustine wil not, nor I trust any honest man beside.

The Protestants.

FIrst we willingly grant, that the Church may inioy those tēporall possessions, which haue been of old granted vnto it for the better maintenance thereof, so they bee not abused to riot and excesse: as the Leuites beside their tithes, [Page] had their cities and fieldes, Numb. 35. Secondly, the iudgement of Ecclesiasticall matters doth of right appertaine to the Church, as Amariah the Priest was the chiefe in all matters of the Lord, 2. Chron. 19.11. Thirdly, we doe not vtterly exclude spirituall persons from temporall causes: but as the ciuill Magistrate hath his interest in ordaining of Ecclesiasticall lawes, so spirituall persons ought not to be strangers from the ciuill state; being meete men for their knowledge and conscience to be consulted withall, and conferred with, and to be ioyned in Councell with the Magistrate in difficult matters: as wee reade, Deuter. 17.8. How the high Priest, and chiefe iudge, did ioyne in mutuall helpe and assistance. But that any spirituall person may bee a temporall prince, and haue the chiefe gouernement of both states, and handle both swordes, we say it is contrarie to the word of God: for in these three poyntes standeth chiefly the office of the prince, in making and ordaining ciuill lawes, in hauing power of life and death, in proclaiming of warre, and waging of battayle: with none of these ought Ecclesiasticall persons to deale, as we will now shew in order.

1 Concerning the making of ciuill lawes and statutes, though the Ecclesiasticall bodie, according to the ancient custome of this land, haue their suffrage and voyce, and doe giue consent: yet the chiefe stroke, in alowing, confirming, and enacting of such lawes is in the prince, and cannot agree or bee matched with any spirituall office.

Saint Paul saith, Who is sufficient for these things? that is, for the work of the Ministerie, 2. Cor. 2.16. If therefore spirituall persons suffice not to execute to the full, their spirituall charge, though they should bend all their studie and care that way, much more insufficient shall they be, if they be entangled in temporall affayres, for the well guiding and ordering whereof a whole man likewise is scarce sufficient.

Againe (saith he) no man that warreth, entangleth himselfe with the affaires of this life, 2. Timoth. 2.4. By affaires seculare here are not onely vnderstoode (as the Iesuite imagineth) merchandise, traffike, buying, selling, and such like, but the care and charge also of ciuill gouernement, of making lawes and orders for the ciuill state, which must needs bee a great let to the spirituall busines, and require greater studie and labor, then the other baser workes which are named. To this Augustine agreeth: Quo iure (saith he) defendis villas? Vnde quisque possidet quod habet? Iure humano, iure imperatorum: quare? quia ipsa iura humana per imperatores & reges seculi Deus distribuit generi humano. tract. in Ihoann. 6. By what law doest thou defend thy possessions? by the lawe of man, the lawe of the Emperors: for these humane lawes, by Gods ordinance are giuen vnto men by the Emperors and Kings of the world. See then, ciuill lawes, and humane constitutions are giuen and made, not by the Pope, Priest, or any other Prelate, but onely by Kings and Princes, and the ciuill magistrates.

2 It were a mōstrous & an vnnatural thing, that any Ecclesiastical gouernor should haue power of life & death: for he hath no better right to the ciuil sword, [Page] then the prince to the Ecclesiasticall sword: and if it be not lawfull for the ciuill Magistrate to excommunicate, which is as the spi [...]tuall sword, and the greatest censure of the Church, no more is it to be suffered, that by the authoritie or commaundement of any Ecclesiasticall person, any man should bee put to death.

The high Priest was not to deale with matters of bloud, which touched the life: but the offenders were brought to the gates of the citie, where the magistrates sate. Deuter. 17.5. Not to the temple, where the priest ministred. Nay, we see, that in the most corrupt times of the Iewish common-wealth, namelie, when they put our blessed Sauiour to death, the priests did not challenge any such power: It is not lawful (say they) for vs, to put any to death: Iohn 18.31. But that power was in the temporall Magistrate, as Pilate said to Christ, Knowest thou not, that I haue power to crucifie thee, and power to loose thee? Ioh. 19.10. Ergo, the Pope cannot bee a temporall prince, to haue power of life and death.

3 If the Pope be a temporall prince, then hee may wage battaile, which although the Iesuite dare not plainely affirme, yet it followeth necessarilie vpon his assertion: for it is lawfull for any temporall prince to make warre: And it hath been the common practise of Popes and popish prelates so to doe.

There were great & bitter battailes fought betweene Vrbane the sixt, and the Antipope Clement, in the which on the one side there were 5000. slaine. Fox pag. 434. Henry Spenser a lustie young bloud, Bishop of Norwich, was the Popes Captaine generall in France: where he sacked the towne of Grauenidge, Fox. pag. 446. and put man, woman and childe to the sword.

So Pope Iulius cast his keyes into the Riuer Tybris, and tooke himselfe to his sword: waged many battailes, and at the last was encountred withall by Lewes the French King, vpon Easter day: where there was of his army slaine, to the nū ber of 16000. But these warlike affaires of the Pope misliked the Papists themselues: for hee was therefore condemned in the Councell of Turone in France, Fox. p. 798. Anno. 1510. We may see how well these furious Popes doe followe the rule of Christ, who cōmaunded Peter to put vp his sword into his sheath: If it were not lawfull for Peter to strike with the sword, how is it lawfull for the Popes, that, I am sure, dare not challenge more to themselues, then was lawfull for Peter? Thus wee see how absurd a thing it is, that the Pope should bee a temporall Prince.

THE NINTH QVESTION OF THE PRErogatiues of the Pope.

BEside these priuiledges and immunities of the See of Rome, which hitherto we haue spoken of both in spirituall and temporall matters, there are other prerogatiues, which haue been in times past giuen to the Bishops of Rome, most blasphemous & wicked, which the Papists of this age are ashamed of, and [Page] therefore passe them ouer with silence: for Bellarmine saith nothing of them: Wee will therefore spare our labor in confuting of them, they are so grosse and absurd, but onely bring them forth, that the godly reader may vnderstand the abomination of the whore of Babylon.

There are three monstrous and shameful prerogatiues, which the Canonists ascribed to the Pope in times past: and they are these, his power dispensatiue, his power exemptiue, his power transcendent, so we will call them at this time. error 53 First, his prerogatiue in dispensing was wonderfull: it would offend a Christian eare, to heare what his grosse Canonists are nothing ashamed to say, Papa potest dispensare contra ius diuinum, Iuell. p. 59. Defens. Apolog. Fox. p. 785. the Pope may dispence against the Lawe of God, contra ius naturae, against the Lawe of nature: contra Apostolum, against the Apostle, contra nouum testamentum, against the new Testament: Nay, Papa potest dispensare de omnibus praeceptis veteris & noui testamenti: the Pope may dispence with all the Commaundements both of the olde and new lawe. What intolerable blasphemies are here? The practises also of Popes are agreeable hereunto: for did not the Court of Rome dispence with King Henry the eights marriage with his brothers wife? but that vngodly dispensation at the last was ouerthrowne: and it was well concluded by act of Parliament: Anno. 1533. That no man had authoritie to dispence with Gods lawes.

error 54 2 Concerning his power exemptiue: the Pope (say they) is not bound to any lawe: No man is to iudge or accuse him of any crime, either of adulterie, murther, simonie, or such like. If he fall into adulterie, or homicide, hee cannot bee accused,Fox. p. 785. artic. 188. but rather excused, by the murthers of Sampson, theftes of the Hebrues, the adulterie of Iacob. As Oziah was stricken for putting his hand to the Arke inclining, no more must subiects rebuke their Prelates going awry:Fox. p. 788. artic. 130. by the inclination of the Arke, the fall of prelates is vnderstoode. This generally is the opinion of the Canonists: but the Iesuites doo holde the contrarie, that it is lawfull, euen for an inferior priest to rebuke the Pope. Rhemist. Annot. in 2. Galath. sect. 8. Wherefore, seeing they confute themselues, they neede not any other refutation.

error 55 3 Concerning the third power, which we call Transcendent: One saith, that,Antonius in Sum. part. 3. non minor honor Papae debetur, quàm Angelis, that there is no lesse honor due to the Pope, thē to Angels. Another saith: Papatus est summa virtus creata, The Popedome is the highest power, that was created of God, aboue Angels, or Archangels. Againe, those wordes of the Psalme, thou hast put all things vnder his foote,Iohn de Parijs. as sheepe and oxen, fowles of the ayre, fishes of the sea: they thus blasphemouslie applie to the Pope, by sheepe and oxen vnderstanding men liuing vpon the earth:Antonius Sum. maior par. 3. dist. 22. by the fowles of the ayre, the Angels in Heauen, whom they say, the Pope may commaunde; by the fishes, the soules in purgatorie: Ouer all these the Pope, say they, hath absolute power, who may, if it please him, release all purgatorie at once. What horrible blasphemies are here? Yet our Rhemists and other Iesuites are somewhat more modest, which confesse that the Pope is but Christs Vicar in the regiment [Page] of that part which is on the earth. Annotat. 1. Ephesians sect. 5. Seeing then they confute themselues, wee will not further trauaile herein, but proceede.

THE TENTH QVESTION, CONCERNING Antichrist, and whether the Pope be that great aduersarie vnto Christ.

THis question is deuided into many partes. First, whether Antichrist shall bee some one singular man. Secondly, of the time of his comming and continuing. Thirdly, of his name. Fourthly, of what nation or kinred hee shall come. Fiftly, where his place and seate shall bee. Sixtly, of his Doctrine and manners. Seauenthly, of his miracles. Eightly, of his Kingdome and warres. Ninthly, whether the Pope bee the very Antichrist. This then is a most famous question, and worthie throughly to bee discussed, euery poynte therefore must be handled in order.

The Papists.

THey hold that Antichrist, whose comming is foretolde in the Scripture, shall error 56 be one particular man, not a whole bodie, tyrannie, or Kingdome, as the truth is, Bellarm. cap. 2. lib. 3.

1 They vrge the words of our Sauiour, Iohn 5.43. I come in my Fathers name, and ye receiue me not, if another come in his owne name, him will ye receiue. Here Christ, say they, speaketh of another that shall come, namely Antichrist, for here one is opposed to one, namely, Antichrist to Christ, not a Kingdome to a Kingdome, or sect vnto sect, but one person to another. Bellarmine cap. 2. lib. 3.

Ans. First, here is not so much an opposition of persons, as there is of doctrine, as to preach in the name of God, and to preach in the name of men: and though Christ be the chiefe doctor and teacher, that came in the name of his Father, yet all true preachers beside, doe come in the same name: for so our Sauiour saith of his Apostles, He that receiueth you, receiueth me, and he that receiueth me, receiueth him that sent me Matth. 10.40. Therefore, he that receiueth the Apostles, receciueth God: they also then doe come in the name of Christ: and so Christ and all the faithfull make but one, Iohn 17.21.

2 Neither doth Christ here speake of one speciall enemie, but of all false prophets, for it is not vnusuall in the Scripture, in the singular number to expresse a multitude being of the same kinde, as Iohn 10.11.12. There is a comparison betweene Christ the true shepheard, and the hireling: where, by the name of hireling, all false shepheards and spirituall theeues are vnderstood, and so is it in this place: therefore they cannot conclude out of this place, that Antichrist shall be but one man.

[Page]2 An other proofe is out of 1. Iohn 2.18. the Antichrist shal come, [...], the Greeke article, [...], expresseth some singular notable person. Bellarmine ibid.

Ans. It is false. The Greeke article doth not alwaies in scripture assigne some particular person: as Matth. 4.4. Man shall not liue by bread onely: the Greeke text hath [...], the man, and yet is it vnderstood not of any one man, but of all in generall, so 2. Tim. 2.17. The man of God, that is, euery faithfull minister, or good Christian, yet is it expressed with the article. Fulk. Annota. 2. Thess. 2. sect. 8.

3 Apocal. 13.18. It is the number of a man: the proper name of Antichrist is set downe, Ergo, but one man. Bellar. ibid. Rhemens. 2. Thes. 2. sect. 8.

Ans. The name here mystically described, which shal conteine 666. in number, for so the Greek letters [...] ▪ doe signifie being nūbred, doth not expresse any particular name of one man, but rather of the whole societie and bodie of Antichrist: for it is said to be the number of the beast. Now by the beast is vnderstoode the Romane Empire, the name whereof is [...], Latinus, which letters doe arise in computation to the whole number of, 666. And this name Irenaeus thinketh to agree best to this place. Further, seeing the Rhemists themselues by the best do vnderstand the vniuersal companie of the wicked, Reuel. 13. ve. 1. And this is the name or number of the beast: it must be vnderstood, by their own confession, of a companie and congregation, and not of one singular person.

The Protestants.

THat Antichrist, which is interpreted an aduersary, or against Christ, shal not be one man (as the Papists imagine, that the Popes might be disburdened and discharged of this name, who are many) but that it is a whole body, companie and sinagogue, and a succession of heretikes, we doe thus proue it.

Argument. Bezae.1 The mysterie of iniquitie wrought in Paules time, then was there a way in preparing for Antichrist. 2. Thes. 2. But it is vnpossible for one man to continue from Paules time to the end of the worlde, Ergo, Antichrist is not one man but a succession of heretikes.

Bellarmine answereth: if the mysterie of iniquitie began in Paules time, that is, the kingdome of Antichrist; and you will needes make Rome the seate of Antichrist: belike S. Paul and S. Peter were the Antichrists, for there were no Bishops of Rome beside at that time. Ans. First, that Antichrist begā then to work euen in Rome it cānot be denied, seeing the Papists confesse, that Simon Magus first broched his heresie there, and that Peter calleth Rome Babylon. It is not necessarie, that the mysterie of iniquity should so soone creepe into the very chaire of the Pastors and Bishops: that should come to passe in the full reuelation of Antichrist: It is sufficient that it wrought closely amongst the false apostles: wherefore the Iesuits obiection concerning Peter and Paule, is ridiculous. Fulk. Anno. 2. Thes. 2. sect. 9.

2 S. Paul saith, that there must come a departing or apostasie & generall falling [Page] from the faith: for that an apostacie signifieth a relinquishing of the faith, not a departure from the Romane Empire. Now this generall falling away from the faith cannot be accomplished in one man, but it sheweth a whole bodie or companie, whereof Antichrist is the head, one man of sinne succeeding another by succession: and this apostacie cannot be wrought at one time, but it shall come to passe in seuerall ages: for how is it possible, that at once such a generall apostacie should be? Ergo, Antichrist shall not be one particular man, Argum. Caluini. Neither can the Iesuite thus shift off the argument, to say, that this generall apostacie is but a preparation to the kingdome of Antichrist, not that he shall then bee presently come: for S▪ Paul ioyneth both these together: There must come a departing first, that the man of sinne be disclosed, vers. 3. So that this very apostacie and departing shall be a disclosing and manifest declaration of Antichrist.

3 Iohn 3.7. The Apostle sayth: Many deceiuers are come into the world, which confesse not that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh: the same is the deceiuer and the Antichrist: Marke then, one deceiuer is many deceiuers: one Antichrist many Antichrists, 1. Iohn 2.18. Ergo, Antichrist shall not be one man, but many, Argument. Ful. annot. 2. Thess. 2. sect. 8.

4 Augustine sheweth, how that in his time this place of S. Paul was not expounded of any one man, but of a whole bodie: Nonnulli non ipsum principent, sed vniuersum quodammodo corpus eius, De ciuitat. dei 20.19. simul cum suo principe hoc loco intelligi Antichristum volunt: Some (saith he) doe take Antichrist not for the head alone, but for the whole bodie and multitude together with their prince. And their coniecture is this: because these words, vers. 7. He which withholdeth, are vnderstood of the Empire & Emperours of Rome, which were many: so the man of sinne, which is described as in the person of one, may fitly be vnderstood of a succession of many.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER ANTICHIST be yet come, and how long he shall continue.

The Papists.

THe Romish Iesuites doe hold that Antichrist is not yet come, neither can they tell when he shal come: But this they say boldly, that Henoch and Elias, error 57 who liue all this while in Paradise, shall come immediatly before Antichrist, and that Antichrist, when he is come, shall raigne but three yeeres and an halfe, and then shall the world end, Bellarm. cap. 4. lib. 3. de pontif. Rhemist. 11. Apocal. sect. 2.4.

1 The Romane Empire must vtterly be destroyed & layd wast before Antichrist come: as S. Paul sayth, That which withholdeth must first be taken away, 2. Thess. 2.7. that is, the Romane Empire. But the Empire yet remayneth: for the Emperour is knowne by name, and there are also prince electors of the Empire: Ergo, Antichrist is not yet come, Bellarm. cap. 5.

[Page]Answere: It is true that the Romane Empire, while it retayned and kept the ancient dignitie, maiestie and power thereof, was an hinderance and let to the tyrannie of Antichrist, but when it began to decay, then Antichrist set in his foote. First, it was not necessarie therefore that the Empire should vtterly be extinguished, but so much onely taken away, namely the ancient honour and imperiall maiestie therof, as hindered Antichrist, and so we finde, that the Romane Empire was more then halfe decayed, when Antichrist crept into Rome. Secondly, the imperiall power must in some sort be restored by Antichrist: for the Pope vsurped the same authoritie which the Emperours had, yea greater: for the whore is described sitting vpon the beast, Apocal. 17. which is the Empire: and therefore it is sayd, vers. 8. The beast that was, and is not, and yet is: for the ancient Empire both is, and is not: It is, because the power thereof is translated to the Pope: it is not, that is, not in that kingly manner, as it was in times past. Apocal. 13.12. The beast that rose out of the earth with two hornes like a lamb, did all that the first beast could doe before him: that is, the power of the Empire was in the Pope. Thirdly, Apocal. 13.15. It is sayd, that the image of the beast remayned, & that the other beast gaue a spirit vnto the image of the beast: So is it at this day, the name and image of the Empire remayneth, but the maiestie and power is gone: And who giueth life to the image but the Pope? he confirmeth and ratifieth the election of the Emperour. Wherefore, this rather is an argument that Antichrist is alreadie come, because nothing but the image of the beast remayneth.

2 Antichrist shall raigne three yeeres and an halfe: but if hee were alreadie come, he must needes haue raigned diuers hundred yeeres alreadie, Bellarmin. cap. 8.

They proue this raigne of Antichrist for this short season, out of those places of Daniel 7.25. A time, times, and halfe a time: and Apocal. 12.14. Also it is described by dayes 1260. dayes, and by moneths 11.2. two and fourtie moneths: which all come to one reckoning, and make three yeeres and an halfe.

Answere: First, the time is also set downe by the name of three dayes and an halfe, Apocal. 11.11. How then is it likely, that 1260. dayes and three dayes and an halfe, should signifie the same time? Secondly, with much better sense are these times applied by our learned and painfull countreyman Master Fox, to the great persecution vnder the Emperours, which continued 294. yeeres, which time is mystically signified by 42. moneths, taking euery moneth for a sabboth of yeeres. And the rest of the numbers agree hereunto: for 1260. dayes make three yeeres and an halfe, that is, moneths 42: and three daies and an halfe make houres 42.Fox. p. 101. So taking euery houre in the dayes, and euery moneth in the yeeres for a sabboth of yeeres, there ariseth 294. yeeres, which was the iust time of the persecution from the death of Iohn Baptist, vnto the end of Licinius the tyrant & persecutor. This account, I say, better agreeth with the truth of historie, then their imagined computation. Thirdly, if it should be taken, as they expound it, for so short a time, then very little of the prophecie in the Apocalyps is yet fulfilled, [Page] which we doubt not but is most accomplished, as it may appeare in comparing the visions reuealed in that booke together. And agayne, there is no prophecie beside this of 42. moneths, which can bee applyed to the great persecution in the Primitiue Church: wherefore it is not like that the Lord would leaue his Church, without some comfort, in forewarning them of those great troubles which immediatly ensued. But if these prophecies, which are wrested by the Papists, did no [...] foretell of those persecutions, then are they vtterly forgotten in that booke: which is not like, it being the greatest triall that euer the Church had.

4 We say then, that wee are not curiouslie to search into times and seasons, which the Lord hath not reuealed: Onely this wee learne, that the time of affliction being set downe by dayes and monethes, the faithfull should hereby bee comforted, knowing that the time of their trouble is limitted of God, and is but short in respect of the kingdome of Christ.

2 The Lord sayth, Math. 24. that those daies shall be shortned, lest no flesh should be saued. But how can the time bee short, if it should last some hundreds, or a thousand of yeeres? Bellarmin. cap. 8. Rhemist. annot. Matth. 24. sect. 6.

Answere: First, that place vers. 22. is properly vnderstood of the calamitie of the Iewes, which if it had continued any longer, the nation of the Iewes had bin vtterly destroyed. Secondly, yet notwithstanding the raigne of Antichrist is short in respect of the eternall kingdome of Christ: yea the whole time from his ascension vntill his comming agayne, is counted but short, Apocal. 22.20. I come quickly: and S. Peter sayth, That a thousand yeeres before God is as one day, and one day as a thousand yeeres, 2. Pet. 3.

3 Christ preached but three yeeres and an halfe, therefore Antichrist shalbe suffered to preach no longer.

Answere: First, yet Christ was thirtie yeeres old when he began to preach, and shewed himselfe before, though not so openly, as when he was twelue yeere old he disputed with the Doctors in the temple: he was also acknowledged for the Messiah in his natiuitie. If Antichrist then must in this respect be correspondent to Christ, he must also be knowne to be thirtie yeeres vpon earth, before he be fully manifested. Secondly, though Christ himselfe preached no longer, yet he sent his Apostles, who preached many yeeres after: we doe not therefore oppose the person of Antichrist, whom we denye to be a singular man, to Christ, but the kingdome of the one to the other. Now by their owne reason, it followeth, that because the kingdome of Christ endured many yeeres, and yet doth, that therefore Antichrists kingdome must likewise.

Other demonstrations the Iesuite hath to prooue that Antichrist is not yet come: as because the Gospell is not yet preached to all the world, cap. 4. Bellar. Helias and Henoch are not yet come, who are certainly looked for, cap. 6. There shall bee a most grieuous and terrible persecution vnder Antichrist, which is not yet past, cap. 7. But these arguments shall bee answered in another [Page] place towards the end of this worke, when we come to speake of the appearing of Christ to iudgement.

The Protestants.

THat Antichrist shall raigne but three yeeres and an halfe, we take it for a meere fable, and a very popish dreame: whereas on the contrarie side, wee are able to shewe, both that Antichrist is alreadie come, and hath tyrannized in the world these many yeeres.

1 We will make it plaine by demonstration, that Antichrist hath been in the world many yeeres agoe, by the propheticall places of scripture. First, it is sayd, the number of Antichrist is 666. Apocal. 13.18. So, anno. 606. or thereabout, Boniface the 3. obtayned of Phocas the Emperour to be called vniuersall Bishop. Thus sayth Illyricus, Chytraeus. Also beginning at the yeere of the Lord 97. at which time Iohn wrote the Apocalyps, and counting 666. yeeres, we shal come to the time of Pipinus, whom the Pope made King of France, and he agayne much enlarged the iurisdiction and authoritie of the Pope. And yet more euidently, about the yeere of the Lord 666. the Latine seruice was commanded to be vsed in all countreys subiect to the See of Rome, by Pope Vitalianus: and about the same time, Constantius the Emperour remoued the ancient monuments of the Empire to Constantinople, and left the citie to the Popes pleasure, Fulk. annot. in 13. Reuel. sect. 10.

Another prophecie we haue, Reuel. 20.3. that after one 1000. yeeres Sathan must be let loose. Euen so, a thousand yeeres after Christ, Pope Siluester a great coniurer, hauing made a compact with the Diuell, obtayned the Papacie, and not long after him came in Gregorie the 7. a great Sorcerer also and Necromancer, sic Lutherus.

But because it is not to be thought, that Sathan was bound during that great and long persecution vnder the Romane Emperours, wee must begin the account of the 1000. yeeres, from the end of the persecution, which continued 294. yeeres: vnto that adde a thousand, so haue we the yeere of our Lord 1294. About which yeere Boniface the 8. made the sixt booke of the Decretals, confirmed the orders of Friers, and gaue them great freedomes: with this number agreeth Daniel his 1290. dayes, Dan. 12.1 [...]. Also somewhat before this time, anno 1260. the orders of Dominicke and Franciscane Friers began first to be set vp by Honorius the 3. and Gregorie the 9. and so haue we the 1260. daies, which are set downe, Apocal. 12. plura apud Fox. pag. 398.

2 If Antichrist should raigne but three yeeres and an halfe, as our aduersaries teach, and then immediatly that time being expired, the world should end: then it is possible to assigne the time of our Lord Christ his comming to iudgement, so soone as Antichrist is reuealed. But the Gospell sayth, that of that day and houre knoweth no man, no not the Angels in heauen, Math. 24.36. yet these good fellowes take vpon them to be wiser then the Angels: for they dare [Page] set downe the very day of Christs comming: which shall be, as Bellarmine presumptuously imagineth, iust 45. dayes after the destruction of Antichrist. And to this purpose he abuseth that place of Dan. 12.11. where mention is made of 1290. dayes, that is, as he fondly interpreteth, three yeeres and an halfe, the iust time of Antichrists raigne: But blessed is he that commeth (sayth the Prophet) to 1335. dayes: that is, sayth Bellarmine, to 45. dayes after the destruction of Antichrist, and then Christ commeth, cap. 9. What intolerable boldnes and presumption is this, contrarie to the saying of Christ, to attempt to declare the very houre of his comming?

Agayne: the prophecie of Daniel had no such meaning: for he onely speaketh of the afflictions of the Church, before the comming of Christ, as Iohn prophecieth of the troubles that came after. Daniel therfore in that place receiueth instructions concerning the cruell persecution of the Iewes vnder Antiochus Epiphanes, the beginning, and the end thereof: There are three times reuealed vnto him.

The first is of a time, two times, and halfe a time, or rather the deuiding of time, or as Tremellius more agreeable to the Hebrew, a part or parcel of times:Dan. 7.25. so long should the temple be defiled, and the abomination set vp in the temple, that is, three yeeres and certayne dayes: And so it came to passe, for this desolation began in the temple the 145. yeere of the raigne of the Greekes, the fifteene day of the moneth Casleu. 1. Macchab. 1.57. when Antiochus caused the daylie sacrifice to cease, and incense to bee burnt to Idols: And iust three yeeres and ten dayes after, which is to bee reckoned for the odde parcell of times, Ann. 148. the 25. day of Casleu, they began to offer sacrifice in the temple according to the lawe, 1. Macchab. 4.52.

The second time reuealed, is of a 1290. dayes, Dan. 12.11. which maketh three yeeres, seuen moneths and odde dayes: which is the time, counting from the desolation, when as the sacrifices should be restored, and confirmed by the Kings graunt, and Letters Patents: which accordingly came to passe, ann. 148. the fifteenth of the moneth Xanthicus, which was the last moneth but one, as it is recorded, 2. Macchab. 11.33.

The third time is described by dayes, 1335. Dan. 12.12. Blessed is hee that should liue to see that time: namely, when the Church of the Iewes should fullie bee deliuered by the death of Antiochus, which was in the beginning of the next yeere, which was 149. 1. Macchab. 6.16. Thus wee see these times were fully accomplished vnder the tyrannie of Antiochus: wherefore these prophecies being once fulfilled, they cannot bee drawne to signifie any other time, but by way of similitude and comparison.

Neither is that any thing worth, which the Iesuite obiecteth out of S. Paul, 2. Thess. 2.8. Then shall the wicked man bee reuealed, whom Christ shall consume with the spirit of his mouth: As though presently after the reuelation of Antichrist Christ should come. And therefore Antichrist must not be expected [Page] or looked for before the end of the world: for the whole time from the first comming of Christ to his second, is in the scripture called nouissima hora, the last times, 1. Ioh. 2.18. And therefore Antichrist, at what time soeuer he is reuealed after the ascension of Christ, he commeth in the last times: whose vtter ruine and destruction shall be reserued for the glorious appearing of Christ, as the Apostle there speaketh.

3 Whereas the scripture sayth, that Sathan must bee bound for a thousand yeeres, and after let loose agayne, Apocal. 20.2: And it is playne that the thousand yeeres since Christ are expired more then fiue hundred yeeres agoe: It followeth hereupon that Antichrist is alreadie come: for he must bee reuealed with the loosing of Sathan. Our aduersaries haue nothing to answere but this, that by this 1000. yeeres, a certayne time is not ment, but the whole space during the time of the newe Testament, till the comming of Antichrist, Rhemist. Reuel. 20. sect. 1. To whom wee answere, that by the same reason, neither shall their 42. moneths shewe any certayne time, but the whole space so long as Antichrist shall raigne: and this number of moneths, as of dayes, weekes, houres, the scripture euery where taketh mystically in prophecies: but when thousands, or hundred yeeres are mentioned, they are alwaies taken literally: as Isay. 7.8. it is prophecied, that Ephraim, that is, Israel, should vtterly cease to bee a people within 65. yeeres, which euen so came to passe, counting from the fourth yeere of the raigne of Ahaz King of Iuda, to the 25. yeere of Manasses, when the remnant of Israel was carried away.

THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE NAME, character and signe of Antichrist.

The Papists.

THey stoutly affirme, that Antichrist shall be one particular man, consequently error 58 they also hold, that he shall haue a certayne name, as Christ is called Iesus, so Antichrist must also haue a proper name: but what that name shall be, no man can tell, vntill hee come: but it shall consist of certayne letters, that in number make sixe hundred sixtie sixe, Bellarm. cap. 10. Rhemist. annot. Apocal. 13. sect. 10.

1 Apocal. 13.18. Count the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666. Hereupon they conclude, that Antichrist shall haue a certayne name, which conteyneth that number, Bellarm. ibid.

Answere: First, it is the number of the beast, and yet of a man: Ergo, it cannot bee the name of any one man: for by the beast, the Iesuites themselues vnderstand a companie or multitude, Rhemist. Apocal. 13. sect. 1. Wherefore it must be such a name as agreeth to a companie or succession of men, and such is the name Latinus, as afterward we will shewe. Secondly, it must bee a name by number, [Page] shewing the time, not an idle number signifying nothing; the time of his comming is set downe to be 666: But the name of their Antichrist cannot shew any such time, seeing there are yeeres more then twise 666. gone alreadie, and yet they say, their Antichrist is not yet come.

2 Antichrist shall haue a name, as Christ had, but it is not necessarie to bee knowne, otherwise then Christ his name was:ι. 10.η. 8.σ. 200.ο. 70.υ. 400.ς. 200.888. which was described by Sibil by the number of 888. as Antichrists is by 666. yet was not his name, Iesus, perfectly knowne before his comming, neither is it necessarie that Antichrists should before that time. Iesus, in Greeke letters thus, [...], maketh as you see 888. Bellarm. cap. 10.

Answere: First, you must proue Antichrist to be one singular man as Christ was, and then striue for his name. Secondly, you doe euill to match Sibils prophecie, and Iohns reuelation together, as though her coniecture of the name of Christ, by the number 888. were of like authoritie with Iohns prophecie, of 666. Thirdly, it is false, that the name, Iesus, was onely by Sibil signified by these numbers: for Augustine alleadgeth certayne verses of Sibil, which began with the letters of Christs name in order one after another: so that the first letters of the verses shewed this title or name: [...]: Iesus Christus filius Dei saluator: And the Latine verses translated out of the Greeke, doe almost keepe the same order of letters, August. cont. Iudaeos pagan. cap. 16. We see then that Sibil foretold the very name, Iesus Christ, and did not onely decipher it by numbers. Why might not Antichrists name as well be shewed?

The Protestants.

WE affirme by warrant of scripture, that as it is a meere fable, that Antichrist shall bee one singular man; so of the like truth is it, that hee shall be knowne by some notorious name: neither can any such thing bee gathered, Apocal. 13.18.

1 If there should come such a notorious wicked person into the world, who only should deserue to be called Antichrist, it is not vnlike, but that the spirit of God, speaking of his name, both could & would also haue expressed it: As Iosias was described by name, 1. King. 13.20 and Cyrus, Isai. 44.28.45.1. long before either of them came into the world: And why, I pray you, might not this propheticall Euangelist, haue named Antichrist, as well as Sibilla foretold the name of our Sauiour Iesus Christ?

Agayne, Christs names were prophecied of and knowne before: One name of his is to bee called a Nazarite, so the people call him, Math. 2 [...].11. a prophet of Nazareth. This name the Prophet hath, Isay. 11.1. he calleth him, Netser, in Hebrew it signifieth a branch. Another name of his, is King of Israel, Iohn 12.23. prophecied of by Zachar. 9.9. Also he was called the sonne of Dauid, Math. 21.9. And Isay sayth, he shall spring out of the roote of Iesse. 11.1.

[Page]Further, hee was knowne by the name Messiah, or Christ, before he came, Ioh. 4. the woman of Samaria said, I know well that Messiah shal come, which is called Christ, vers. 25. This name was reuealed to Daniel, 9.25. he is called Messiah, the prince.

But will our aduersaries say, his name Iesus was not knowne before his comming? yes, euen that name also hath some euidence out of the Prophets: for Iesus or Iesua, is all one, and signifieth a Sauiour: of the which name we reade Zachar. 3. where mention is made of Ieshua the high Priest, who was a type of our Sauiour Christ, and bare his name, for vers. 5. a Diademe is set vpon his head: which must needes bee vnderstood of Iesus Christ, our high Priest. Agayne, he is called Hosanna, Iohn 12.13. which signifieth the same that Iesus, and both are deriued from the same roote: translated, Saue vs. Which name we finde in the 118. Psal. vers. 25.

Lastly, if the name Iesus Christ were reuealed to Sibilla a heathen prophetisse, how can it be, that the Prophets of God were ignorant of it? Therefore by their owne argument, seeing Christs names were knowne before his comming, why should not Antichrists in like manner, if he should be some one singular notorious man?

2 We can bring foorth a name, which in all respects agreeth with that description, Apocal. 13.18. which is a name both of a man and of the beast, that is, of a companie, or succession of men, which sheweth the time of Antichrists birth, namely, the yeere 666. which also doth fitly agree with the manners and properties of Antichrist: and that is the name Latinus, which in Greeke letters [...], sheweth in account, the number 666. and so doth the name of Rome in Hebrew — [...], romiijth. And, ecclesia Italica, λ. 30.α. 1.τ. 300.ε. 5.ι. 10.ν. 50.ο. 70.ς. 200.666. ר. 200.ו. 6.מ. 40.י. 10.י. 10.ת. 400.666. in Greeke letters doe make the same number.

We see then, that all things do well agree to this name: first, that is signifieth the whole Latin Church or Empire, & so is the name of the beast. Secondly, it sheweth the time 666. about which yeere Pope Vitalianus composed the Latin Seruice, and enioyned all Nations to vse no other. Thirdly, it properly agreeth with the Antichristian practise of Rome; which is called the Latine Church. And contrarie to S. Paules rule they haue brought an vnknowne tongue which edifieth not, into the seruice of God: yea they preferre it before the Greeke and Hebrew, making the Latine translation of the scriptures onely authenticall, as it was concluded in their Tridentine chapter. And they doe so much extoll their Latine text, as the setter forth of the Complutense edition is not ashamed in his preface to write, that he hath placed the Latine text betweene the Hebrew and the Greeke, as Christ betweene the two theeues, Fulk. Apocal. 13. sect. 10. What Church then in the whole world but theirs, can be called the Latine Church? Fourthly, it also maketh much for vs, that we haue a consent of names, for [...], & in Hebrew Romiijth, doe all make the same number, and doe note the Latine, Romane, or Italian Church.

[Page]But they obiect: First that Latinus maketh not that number with [...]. but Lateinus with [...]. A great matter: wherein they shew their ignorance, as though the Greeke dipthong, [...]. be not vsually expressed by a single [...]. in Latine, as we say, [...], Antiocheia in Greeke, and [...], Alexandreia, with [...]. dipthong: in Latine, Antiochia, Alexandria, with single [...]. for the cities of Antioch, and Alexandria: this therefore is a small quarell. But mark I pray, what a poore shift this is: If this smal letter [...]. be but admitted, the Pope is made Antichrist: so we haue found out Antichrist, sauing one small letter.

2. Why, there are many names beside, that make that number, as [...], and others: nay the Rhemists say, that Luthers name, in the Hebrue, and Bellarmine, that Dauid Chytraeus his name, doe expresse that number of 666. But what of all this? there is none of these names, vnto the which the three properties aforesayd doe agree, as they doe vnto Latinus, as to betoken the whole body of Antichrist, to shew the time of his birth, and describe the qualities of his Kingdome, as the word Latinus doth, yet this we doe not say, that this is the very name which is meant in that place, and that the Prophesie can haue no other meaning: But to shew how ridiculous their interpretation is, and how much nearer ours commeth to the truth.

OF THE CHARACTER OR SIGNE and badge of Antichrist.

The Papists.

THey do hold that Antichrist shall haue a certaine outward marke or character, which he shall cause to be printed in the right hands, and foreheads error 59 of all both small and great, that doe belong to his kingdome, Apocal. 13.16. But this marke is not yet knowen, no more then his name is: Onely this they are sure of, that the Pope hath not Antichrists character, but rather the character of Christ, the signe of the Crosse which he causeth to be signed in the foreheads, Bellarmin. cap. 11.

1. Antichrist must in all respects be contrarie to Christ: for as he seeth his image and crucifix adored, so shall he set vp his owne image to be worshipped: and therefore as Christians now doe beare in their foreheads the signe of the Crosse which is Christs marke, so hee shall inuent an other marke contrary to Christs: and he will make his name and the letters thereof sacred, as now the name of Iesus is worshipped among Christians, Rhemist. Apocal. 13. sect. 7.

Answere: First, where haue you learned, that roodes and images are to be adored and worshipped? or doth not the word of God teach the plaine contrarie Psal. 115.8.9? O Israel trust in the Lord: but they that worship images are like vnto them: he therefore that trusteth in an image cannot trust in God. Againe, where learne you to make an Idoll of the letters or sillables of Christs name, to cause men to carry it in their caps, and bow their knee vnto it? think [Page] you that Saint Paul, when he sayth, that all thinges doe bowe the knee to the name of Iesus, yea of things in heauen, Philip. 2. that he meant, that euen the Angels doe stoup and make obeysance, when they see the name of Iesus written in a glasse window? Or who taught you that the signe of the Crosse is to be borne vpon mens foreheades, and that with crossing of the forehead, we are preserued from daunger? Saynt Paul, you knowe, hath no such meaning, when he sayth, He bare in his bodie the markes of the Lorde Iesus, which were nothing else, but the signes and tokens of his persecutions, as whippings, stoning, and such like in his flesh: Galath. 6.17. Neither, when he saith, He reioyced in nothing but the Crosse of Christ, whereby he was crucified to the worlde, verse 14. hath he any relation to the Crosse in the forehead: for it were a myracle, that a man by crossing his forehead, should straight wayes crucifie and mortifie his affections: Nor yet did our Sauiour speake of this marke, where he saith, that they which will followe him, must take vp his crosse, Mark. 8.34. for in that place, by taking vp of the Crosse, he meaneth, nothing else but the forsaking and denying of our selues. So it is playne, that in the scripture you finde not this superstitious signe of the crosse in your foreheads.

2. Where you say, that you doe honour the character of Christ, as his name, and the signe of the Crosse: You doe euen so honour Christ, as the souldiers did, that gaue him a reede for a scepter, and thornes for a Crowne, and bowed themselues in mockage: So you do leaue Christ certaine badges and signes of his kingdome; but indeed you spoyle him of it, and of his Priesthood too, making other mediatours beside him, and other sacrifices propitiatorie beside his. What doe you else now, in bowing the knee to the name and sillables of Iesus, and spoyling him of his honur, but with the souldiers in mockage to bow vnto Christ? And I pray you, how doe you honour the name of Christ, when you make a iest of the name of Christian? for in Italie it is a worde of reproch, taken for an idiote or foole.

3. We answere, that the signe whereby Christians are marked, are not external, but internall: we are sealed by the spirite of God, Ephes. 4.30. The outward signes are none other, but the two sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords supper: by the right administration wherof the congregations of the faythful are knowen. But of this, more shall be spoken in the Antithesis, or Antidotum, in the declaration of our opinion.

The Protestants.

BY the character or marke of Antichrist, we doe not vnderstand any visible signe or badge to be printed in the right hand or the forehead, as the Iesuite imagineth: as though he should brand all his subiects in the hand or forehead: But heereby is meant and signified chiefely the societie and communion, whereby they shalbe ioyned to Antichrist, by giuing vnto him their fidelitie, [Page] oth, and obedience, agreeing together in the same corruption of fayth, and doctrine. This is Antichrists badge or cognisance. Fulk. Apocalip. 13. sect. 7. There are also outward markes of their coniuncton with Antichrist: as the shauing of Priests, and greazing them with oyle: such are the receiuing of holie bread, the wearing of beades, the annoynting with chrisome: But the proper note and character, is the oth and profession of fealtie and obedience.

1. Antichrist say they, shall bring in another contrary character, to disgrace the signe and character of Christ, namely the crosse in the foreheads:Argum. But Christ hath appoynted no such visible character, neither are true Christians knowen by any such: therefore also the character of Antichrist is no such thing.

1. The people of the Iewes had no such outward badge, who were more charged with outward obseruations, then Christians are: Circumcision was the onely signe of the couenant to them, Genes. 17.11. which was one of their chiefe sacraments, in place whereof Baptisme is enioyned vs: Ergo, much lesse are we to be knowen by any other outward badge.

2. This place Apocal. 13. is taken out of Ezech. 9. where the Angel is commaunded to set a marke vpon the foreheads of them that mourne: but that was no visible externall marke, for it was shewed the Prophet in vision: Ergo, neither is it to be taken so in this place.

3. We grant, the sacraments are badges and markes of our profession: which markes the Pope, the onely Antichrist hath defaced, by bringing in fiue other sacraments, and cleane changing, polluting and altering, the right sacraments which Christ instituted: for they haue brought into baptisme, chrisme, salt, oyle, spittle, and such trash: into the Eucharist, adoration, transsubstantiatiō, sacrifice, with such like: so that herein he sheweth himselfe Antichrist, and hath altered the true markes of Religion.

2. It appeareth by the effect what is the Character of Antichrist:Argumēt. The text saith, It was not lawfull for any to buy or sell, but he that had the marke or the name of the beast: No more was it lawfull for any to haue trafficke amongst the papists but hee that acknowledged the Popes crosse keyes, or made himselfe a member of the Romish Italian Church: Nay they say, he is not of the Church, that acknowledgeth not the Pope to be head of Christes Church, Fulk. Apocal. 13. sect. 7.

The Iesuite obiecteth: First, this oth of fidelitie and coniunction cannot be that character: for it must be in the right hand or forehead. Answere, Wee haue already declared, that it is too childish to take these wordes literally, as though all Antichrists subiects should carie brandes in their foreheads or hands. Secondly, saith he, many do both buy & sell amongst them, that haue not made profession of their fealtie to Rome, as the Iewes, Bellarm. cap. 11. Answer: Yea no maruaile, for Antichrist is an enemie onely to Christ: al other people he can brook well enough beside good Christians: tell me I pray you, whether our merchants be admitted to traffick safely in Spaine, if their religion be knowen: [Page] The seruants of God amongst you, can neither enioy, houses, lands, libertie or life: which yoke also was layd a long time vpon this land, till it pleased God to haue mercie on vs: for the which his name be blessed.

3. Againe, many yeares agoe, euen in Augustines and Ambrose his time, all Churches were ioyned to Rome, before Antichrist was yet reuealed. Ergo. This is not the Character of Antichrist. Bellarmin. ibid.

Answere: First, they were ioyned then in common consent of religion, not as subiects by compulsion, but voluntarie, because at that time Rome in the chiefest poynts of Religion was in the right fayth. 2. But of late dayes in the Councel of Constance not yet 2. hundred yeares agoe, it was made an article of faith, to beleeue, that the Pope was the head of the Vniuersal Church: yea about the yeare 600. the title of Vniuersal Bishop first began to be appropriate to Rome: whereby was insinuated, that all Churches in the world should be vnder the obedience thereof.

Lastly, we haue the testimonie of one of their Popes themselues, who saith plainly,1. Gregor. that hee is the forerunner of Antichrist, which would bee called Vniuersall Bishop. lib. 4. epistol. 32. See then by his testimony, the title of Vniuersality, and exacting of obedience of other Churches, is the character & marke of Antichrist.

THE FOVRTH PART, CONCERNING the generation and original of Antichrist.

The Papists.

error 60 THey doe reiect those olde fancies concerning Antichrist, as that hee should be borne of a Virgin by helpe of the diuel, that hee should haue the diuell to his father: that he should be a diuell incarnate: or that hee should bee Nero, raysed from the dead. Refusing these fables, they haue found out one as foolish: Our Rhemists holde, that Antichrist shalbe borne of the tribe of Dan. Bellarm. dare not say so, but he thinketh that he shall come of the Iewes stock, and be circumcised, and be taken of the Iewes for their Messiah. cap. 12.

1. That he shall come of the tribe of Dan: thus they would prooue it, Genes. 49.17. Dan shalbe a serpent by the way biting the horse heeles: Ierem. 8.16. The neying of his horses is heard from Dan. And Apocal. 7. where 12. thousand of euery tribe are reckoned, onely Dan is left out, because (belike) Antichrist should come of that tribe. Rhemist. 2. Thess. 2. sect. 8.

Answere: Bellarmine confuteth all these reasons: the first hee saith with Hierome to be vnderstood of Sampson, who came of the tribe of Dan: the second place is of Nabuchadnezzers comming to destroy Ierusalem, as Hierome also expoundeth it: to the third he sayth, that Ephraim is left out as well as Dan: yea and so is Manass [...]h too: because the tribe of Ioseph is named for his two sonnes: but Dan is left out because Leui is reckoned in his place. Wee may see now, [Page] how well they agree, when one Iesuite confuteth another. Bellarmin. cap. 12.

2. Bellarmine standeth much vpon that place, Iohn 5.43. If an other come in his name, him will ye receiue: But sayth he, the Iewes will receiue none, but of their owne kinred, and whom they looke for to be their Messiah. Ergo. Antichrist must come of the Iewes. ibd.

Answere: This place we haue shewed before, part 1. of this question, to be vnderstood of false prophets amongst the Iewes, such as mention is made of Act. 5. as Theudas and Iudas, and not of any one false prophet: so Iohn 10. where Christ compareth himselfe, which is the true shepheard, with the hireling, he vnderstandeth all hirelings, though he speake in the singular number.

The Protestantes.

THat it is a very fable and cousoning deuice of heretikes, to make men beleeue that Antichrist shall come of the tribe of Dan, or of the stock of the Iewes, thus we shew it.

1. It is out of doubt, that the nation of the Iewes shall bee conuerted vnto God, and mercy shalbe shewed againe to the remnant of Israel, Rom. 11.25. confessed also by the papists: But if one come, which shall reedifie the temple, and restore the sacrifices and circumcision, such an one, as the Iewes shall take for their Messiah: who seeth not, that by this meanes the Iewes will bee more hardned, hauing now their owne hearts desire, their temple; Messiah, circumcision: and their conuersion would be greatly hindred, nay quite and clean ouerthrowen?

2. If Antichrist should come of the Iewes, it is like that his seate should bee at Ierusalem, and that the temple shall be built agayne by him: but that cannot be, for the temple, as Daniel prophesieth, shall lie desolate euen vnto the ende, Dani. 9.27. Ergo. he shall not come of the Iewes. More of this in the next parte.

THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE seate and place of Antichrist.

The Papists.

BEllarmine holdeth opinion, that Antichrist shall haue his imperiall seate at Ierusalem, and reedifie and build againe the temple, yea for a while commaund error 61 circumcision to be vsed and obserued, Bellarm. cap. 13. lib. 3. de pontif. Rhemist, 2. Thessa. 2. sect. 11.

1. Apocal. 11.8. the Citie of Antichrist is called the great Citie where our Lord was crucified. But Christ was crucified at Ierusalem. Ergo.

Answere: First, it cannot be so vnderstood, for ver. 2. Ierusalem is called the holy Citie. ver. 8. This great Citie is called Sodome and Aegypt: how can the same Citie be capable of such contrary names? How can that be called an holy Citie, where the abomination of desolation shall be and the seate of Antichrist?

[Page]Secondly, Augustine in Apocal. homil. 8. vnderstandeth by the great Citie and the streetes thereof, the middest of the Church: And by the great citie verie fitly is vnderstood the large iurisdiction of the Pope, who sayth, hee is head of the great citie and Catholike Church: Whose seate we see is at Rome, by authoritie of which citie Christ was put to death: and by Antichrist the Pope, Christ also is persecuted in his members. Fulk. annotat. Apocalyps. 11. sect. 2.

2. Apocalips. 17.16. the tenne hornes, that is, tenne kings, amongst whom the Romane Empire shall bee deuided, shall hate the scarlet whore, that is, Rome, and burne it with fire: how then shall it bee the seate of Antichrist? Bellarm.

Answere: The text is plaine, that the same kingdomes, that before had giuen their power to the beast, and were subiect to the whore of Babilon, shall after make her desolate, and eate her flesh: which thing we see in part to be accomplished already, that many princes haue redeemed their necks from Antichrist his yoke, Fulk. Apocal. 17. sect. 3. It is not necessary therefore to bee done all at one time, but one after another.

3. 2. Thessal. 2. he shall sit in the temple of God: but at that time the Iewes onely had a temple, the Christians yet had none, and the Apostle speaking of the Church of God, did of purpose refrayne this name, lest the Church of Christians should be thought like the Iewes Synagogue. Bellarm.

Answere: First, the Iewish temple shall not be built againe, as Daniel prophesieth, 9.27. and how can it be built in so short a space, seeing Antichrist, as they say, must raigne but three yeeres and an halfe? and to what purpose, seeing he will abolish all sacrifices? Secondly, though it should be built againe, nay if it were standing now, for the exercise of Iewish sacrifices, it could not be called the temple of God. Thirdly, by the temple therefore is meant the visible Church, that which sometime was a true visible one, as the Church of Rome, and after should be so taken, reputed and challenged, as it is at this day by the papists: Neyther haue the papists hereby any aduantage, as though the Pope sate in the very true Church: for it is not the true Church indeede, but so reputed and taken by them. Fourthly, though there were no materiall temples of the Christians in Pauls time, what of that? hee speaketh not here of any such materiall temple, but of the Church of God, neither doth Saint Paul in this sense refuse to vse the name of temple, as 1. Corinthian. 3. vers. 16. and 6. vers. 19. and in other places.

The Protestants.

THat Rome is the seate and place of Antichrist, beside that the Rhemists confesse so much that Antichrist shall raigne there, annot. Apocal. 17. sect. 4. We prooue it thus.

[Page]1. Antichrist is called the great whore of Babilon, Apocal. 17.5. But Babilon is Rome, Ergo, Rome is the seat of Antichrist.

Obiect: It was Babilon, while it was gouerned and ruled by heathen Emperors, but the Church was not then called Babilon, Bellarm. Answere: First, Ergo by your owne confession, Rome shall be the seat of Antichrist, seeing by Saint Iohn it was called Babilon. Secondly, it was not onely called Babilon in the time of the heathen, but euen of Christian Emperors: Augustine saith, it is Occidentalis Babïlon, the Babilon in the west partes,De ciuitat. dei 18.22. & 27. & prioris filia Babilonis, and daughter to the first Babilon. Thirdly, Saint Iohn doth not onely prophesie of the crueltie of the terrene state, but of the false prophet Antichrist, you should also vsurpe an ecclesiasticall gouernment there.

Obiect. Secondly, they obiect that by the damnation of the great whore, is vnderstoode the finall destruction of all the company of the reprobate, Rhemist. Apocal. 17.1. Answere, the damnation vniuersally of the wicked is described cap. 20. and therefore this place must be vnderstoode of Antichrist, and his adherents: And very fitly doth the name of whore agree to that See, for once a whore indeede was Pope there, called Iohn the eighth. Which so wringeth the Papists, that they haue no other shifte but impudently to denie it.

2. Wee haue another argument out of the same chapter, vers. 9. the seuen heades are seuen mountaines, on which the woman sitteth: But there is no citie in the world notoriously knowen to stand vpon seuen hils but Rome: Ergo, it is the seate of Antichrist.

Obiect. The text is, they are also seuen kings, so the seuen heades or seuen hils signifie seuen kings: for there shall bee so many chiefe Empires which shall persecute the Church, there are fiue part: Aegypt, Canaan, Babilon, the Persians, Grecians, the sixt, the Romanes, which in parte standeth yet, the seuenth shall be Antichrist, Rhemist. Apocalip. 17. sect. 7.

Answere: First, the seuen heads are expounded to be both seuen hils and seuen kings: the scripture vseth not to expound one harde and obscure thing by an harder and more obscure, as to say, seuen heads are seuen mountains, that is, seuen kinges: for wee were neerer the sense before: and the terme of heads doth more fitly resemble kinges, then mountaines. Secondly, the seuen kinges are more fitly taken for seuen principall gouernours of the Romanes, as Kings, Tribunes, Consuls, Decemviri, Dictators, Emperours, Popes: for by these seuen orders hath the common wealth beene gouerned first and last. Fulk. ibid.

Obiect. Rome is not now built vpon seuen hilles, it standeth in the playne in Campo Martio, Sander. ibid.

Answere: First, you haue then no right to Peters Chayre, for when hee sate at Rome, the Citie stoode vppon seuen hils. Secondly, though the Pope nowe hath remooued his pallace to the Vaticane, on the other [Page] side of the riuer, yet he did sit for many yeares in Laterane, vntill the time of Pope Nicholas the second, who was almost 1100. yeeres after Christ. Thirdly, though the Pope hath remooued his pallace vpon pleasure beyond the riuer: yet his See is not remoued: for vpon euery one of those hils there are Monasteries, and chapples, and such like monuments to be seene to this day. In mount Caelius there is the Monasterie of Gregorie the first, the Cathedral Church of Laterane. In mount Auentine, the Monasteries of Sabi [...]e and Boniface. In the mount Exquilinus the Minster of S. Maria maior, the ruines of Saint Cyriacus Church, which is yet a title of a Cardinal. The mount Viminalis hath the Church of Saint Laurence. The mount Capitoline hath an house of friers, called Ara coeli. The mount Palatine the Church of Saint Nicholas. The mount Quirinalis hath S. Maria de populo. Wherefore though the Popes person be remooued a little aside, yet the popish religion is exercised, and reliques of superstition are to be found in euery one of those hils. Wherefore we nothing doubt to conclude, but that Rome is that Citie vpon 7. hils, and so the principal seate of Antichrist.

THE SIXT PART CONCERNING THE doctrine of Antichrist.

The Papists.

error 62 THeir opinion is, that Antichrist shalbe an open and manifest aduersarie to Christ, and that he shall abolish all worship of God, and all religion. Rhemist. annot. 2. Thess. 2. sect. 10. Bellarmine draweth all the doctrine of Antichrist, to these foure heads. First, he shall denie Iesus to be Christ, and abolish the sacraments instituted by Christ. Secondly, he shal make himselfe Christ. Thirdly, he shall make himselfe God, and be adored as God. Fourthly, he shall abolish al other worship, both true and false, yea the worship of Idols. Wherefore, sayth he, the Pope cannot be Antichrist, that doth none of these things, cap. 14. of these now in their order.

Argumēt.1. Antichrist shall vtterly denie Christ. 1. Iohn 2.22. & 4.3. Euerie spirite that confesseth not, that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God, this is the spirite of Antichrist. Ergo, Antichrist shall altogether denie Christ.

Answere: First the Rhemists say that this is not a marke for all times, to know an heretike by, but it was onely for those times, to confesse Christ to bee come in the flesh: this is a surer note now, say they, that whoso confesseth not Christ to be really present, and to be sacrificed in the masse, is not of God. Rhemist. annot. 1. Iohn 4. sect. 2.Serm. de verbis Apostoli. 33. Where I will not stand to note the presumption of these papists, that will correct and amend the Apostles rule, to know heretikes by, which serueth for all times, and so Augustine taketh it. But here first I oppose our Rhemists iudgement against Bellarmine: for they denie that this place serueth to describe Antichrist, belonging onely to the Apostles times: Bellarmine saith, it doth most properly decipher Antichrist.

[Page]2. The great Antichrist shall denie Christ no otherwise then other Antichrists and heretikes did in the Apostles time: for they are all Antichrists 1. Iohn 2.18. and he giueth one rule to know them all by, vers. 22. But the Antichrists then denyed not Christ apertly, but couertly, Ergo, so shall the great Antichrist.

The first is true, that the olde heretikes did not plainly denie Christ to bee come in the flesh: but some denied his humanitie, some his diuinitie, some his person. Augustine sayth, Arriani hoc negant, licet verbis fateātur, the Arrians deny that Christ is come in the flesh, though they confesse it in word: for he that doth not confesse that Christ is equall vnto God, denieth Christ in the flesh: and so of other heretikes. The second also is as true: that Antichrist, who is no other but the Pope, shall also cunningly and couertly denie Christ, for he that denieth the offices of Christ, denieth Christ: As Augustine sayth of Peters deniall, Quicquid eius negauit, ipsum negauit. Tract. in Iohann. 66. whatsoeuer hee denyed of or belonging to Christ, he denied Christ. So the Pope denieth Christ to bee our Prophet, King, and Priest: His propheticall office he defaceth, and in effect denieth, in disgracing the scriptures, saying, they are imperfect, and conteine not all matters necessary to saluation, that their authoritie bindeth vs not without his allowance: His Kingly office, in making himselfe Christs Vicar and Vicegerent vpon earth, in making new lawes, sacraments, ordinances beside Christs, as necessarie to saluation as the rules of the Gospell: His priesthoode, in setting vp a new propitiatorie sacrifice in the abominable Masse, beside the onely sacrifice of attonement vpon the Crosse, in making other mediators and intercessors beside Christ: and such like, whereof wee shall haue occasion to entreat afterward more at large. Ergo, the Pope in denying the offices of Christ, denieth Christ, and so is Antichrist.

2. Hee shall make himselfe Christ and Messiah,Argum. which the Iesuite would prooue out of Iohn 5. ver. 43. If another come in his name, him will yee receiue: But the Pope commeth not in his owne name, but in the name of Christ, hee calleth himselfe Christs Vicar. Ergo hee can not bee Antichrist, Bellarm.

Answere: First, It is not necessarie that Antichrist should openly professe himselfe to be Christ, in name, but he shall doe it, opere, indeede, and that closely and couertly: for those whom Christ calleth, pseudochristos, false Christs, Matth. 24.23. Iohn calleth Antichristos, Antichrists, 1. Iohn. 2.18. False prophets therefore are false Christs, & Antichrists: yet all those false prophets and heretikes did not in name and outward profession make themselues Christs.

2. The Pope of Rome in effect maketh himselfe Christ: for who but Christ is the head of the Church? who but Christ is superiour to the Angels, and to commaund them? who but Christ can make sacraments and articles of fayth? But all this the Pope taketh vpon himselfe to doe: yea the Iesuite is not ashamed to say, that he hath the same office which Christ had being [Page] vpon earth, lib. 5. de pontif. cap. 4. And whereas they say, the Pope commeth in the name of Christ: it shall as much profite him (it being not in trueth▪ but in colour onely and shew) as it shall profite the false prophets to say in the day of the Lorde, Haue not wee in thy name prophecied, and cast out diuels? Matth. 7.22.23. to whome Christ shall make answere, Verily I know you not.

3. Antichrist shall openly name himselfe God, and commaund men to worship him as God,Argum. 2. Thessal. 2.4. But this doth not the Pope: Ergo, hee is not Antichrist, Bellarm.

Answere: First, If Antichrist should be such an one, you might haue found amongst the Emperors of Rome diuers Antichrists: for such an one Caligula was, that commaunded temples to be erected in his name, and his images to be set vp to be worshipped, yea in the temple at Ierusalem.

2. Saint Pauls wordes will not beare any such sence: he shall sitte, [...], as God: and your vulgar Latine hath ostendens se, tanquam sit Deus, shewing himselfe as though he were God, that is, in deede and effect, not in open profession: for hee should sit and be worshipped in the temple as God: howe then can it bee called the temple of God, being thus a temple of most grosse Idolatrie?

3. The Pope in effect maketh himselfe a god vpon earth: for he can dispence against the law of nature, the law of GOD, agaynst both new and olde testament: as we haue shewed before, quest. 9. of this Controuersie▪ yea Bellarmine sayth, he may by his Apostolike authoritie dispence with the precepts of the Apostles cap. 14. He is able to change the nature of things, and of nothing to make thinges to bee, of wrong to make iustice, &c. Pope Nicholaus distinct. 96. yea it is sayd of the Pope, that hee is neither GOD nor man,Extrauag. but a middle thing betweene both: Pope Boniface. I pray you then what is he? he is no Angel, for he is aboue them, and commaundeth them: Papa Angelis praecipit, Agrippa. the Pope commaundeth Angels. He must then either be a God or a diuell, by your owne confession, choose which you will: Nay they doe make him a playne God: Es alter Deus in terris, an other God vpon earth: and they salute him by these names, Dominus deus noster Papa, our Lord god the Pope. Thus it is proued, that the Pope, both by his deedes as also by his titles, doth make himselfe god vpon earth.

4. Antichrist say they, shall take away all worship yea of Idols, and shall commaund nothing to be worshipped but himselfe,Argumēt. 2. Thessal. 2.4. the worde is [...], numina, all things that are worshipped. But so doth not the Pope, for he prayeth to Saints, adoreth the bodie of Christ on the altar. Ergo. Bellarm. cap. 14. Rhemist. 2. Thess. 2. sect. 10.

Answere: First, the text prooueth not, that hee shall take away, all Idols, or thinges worshipped, but shall exalt himselfe agaynst them, and make smal account of them. The place also of Daniel is playne, ‘11.37. Hee shall not regarde the God of his fathers, nor care for any God, but shall magnifie [Page] himselfe aboue all: And in his place shall he honour the God Mauzzim, and the God which his fathers knew not, shall hee honour, with golde and siluer.’ Out of this place we gather two thinges: first, that Antichrist shall bring in a strange God, which his fathers neuer knew: so hath the Pope inuented a breaden God, which he honoureth with golde and precious stones, making more account of it, then of any image or relique whatsoeuer.

Secondly, yet he shal magnifie himself aboue all such Gods, Images, Roodes, shrines and the like▪ yea aboue his owne breaden God: so doth the Pope: for he rideth vpon mens shoulders, when his breaden God is caried vpon an hackney: he exalteth his throne aboue the altar, the Crosse is caried on the right hand of Emperours swordes and scepters, but is layd vnder his feete: In the yeare of Iubile, he beateth vpon the gates of Paradise with a golden hammer: Fulk. annot. 2. Thesse. 2.10. so then howsoeuer like an hypocrite he seeme to adore his breaden God, yet indeede dooth hee magnifie himselfe aboue it.

Bellarmine hath no other shiftes to foyst off our arguments, but these: hee sayth, this Mauzzim, is like enough to be the diuell himselfe, whom Antichrist shall worship: but he careth neither for siluer or golde: or else it is himselfe. And how I pray you can a man worship himselfe? or else, saith hee, it is some strong castle where he shall lay his siluer and golde: or else you know not what, Bellarmin. 14.

2 That Antichrist shall not abolish Idoles of siluer and golde, but rather commaund the people to worship them, as the Pope now doth, it is playne, Apocalyps. 9.20.

The Rhemists obiect, that hee speaketh here agaynst the heathen Idols, which is here called the worship of diuels. Answere: First, in this place Iohn speaketh of the ende of the worlde, in the opening of the seuenth seale: and the Idols of the heathē were abolished long agoe: Neither is there any knowen nation in the worlde that hath worshipped Idols of golde, siluer, brasse, stone, or wood, but the papists, for these many yeares. Secondly, all worshippers of Images, doe worship diuels: for Idolatrie is a seruice inuented by the diuell, Fulk. annot. Apoc. 9. sect. 4.

The Protestants.

THat Antichrist shall not in outward shew be an open enemie to Christ, but secretly and closely, and vnder pretence of religion take away all religion: thus we make it playne.

1 These places alleadged before doe prooue it: Iohn. 1.2.18. the Antichrist, and the Antichristes, shall bee enimies all alike, but the Antichrstes in Saint Iohns time, were couert enemies. Ergo, so shall the great Antichrist.

[Page]2. Saint Paul calleth it the mystery of iniquitie, 2. Thess. 2.7. and he shal come in all deceiueablenesse of vnrighteousnesse, vers. 10. and God shall send them strong delusion, to beleeue lies, vers. 11. All this prooueth that Antichrist shal worke closely, cunningly, mystically, by deceiuing, by delusion, not by open enimitie, and prophanenes, or by violence and tyrannie onely, as the papists imagine.

3 Antichrist shall be the greatest enemie to Christ, and his kingdome, that euer was in the worlde. But hee is a greater enemie that pretendeth friendship, and yet is a foe, that vnder the name of Christ persecuteth the Christian fayth, then he that openly destroyeth it, making no shewe of Religion: as Dauid complayneth, Psalm. 41.9. ‘Yea my familiar friend whom I trusted, which did eate of my bread, hath lift vp his heele against me’: This was accomplished in Iudas, who betrayed Christ with a kisse, who was the greatest enemie of Christ, sinning against his owne knowledge and conscience: Euen so they now a dayes, are the greatest enemies that Christ and the Church hath, that betray Christ with a kisse, which name themselues the Church of God, and yet make hauock of the Church.

4. Lastly, Augustine sayth as much, that Antichrist shall come with deceiueable doctrine, and shew of righteousnes. Quid expa [...]escimus in Antichristo, nisi quia nomen suum honoraturus est, & Domini contempturus▪ Quid aliud facit, De verb. domin. secūd. Iohan. serm. 45. qui dicit, ego iustifico? Quid aliud est dei ignorare iustitiam, & suam velle constituere, quam dicere, ego iustifico, ego sanctifico? What other thing doe wee feare in Antichrist, but that hee shall honour his owne name, and contemne Christs? What else doth he, which sayth, I doe iustifie, I make holie? What is this but to destroy the righteousnesse of God, and to bring in his owne?

Marke nowe I pray you, if all this bee not true of the Pope of Rome: for hee taketh vpon him to iustifie, to sanctifie, to dispense with mens sins for an hundred, yea a thousand yeeres: to ridde soules out of Purgatorie: nay to commaund Angels to carrie their soules to heauen, that die in their Pilgrimage to Rome, as Pope Clement the sixt did: what is this▪ else but to saie,Iuel. p. 595. Ego iustifico, sanctifico, I iustifie, I sanctifie? and who I pray you, doth so, if Augustine may be iudge, but Antichrist? but thus the Pope doth. Ergo he is Antichrist.

THE SEVENTH PART CONCERNING the miracles of Antichrist.

The Papists.

ANtichrist, they say, shall be a Magitian, and worke straunge signes and error 63 wonders by the power of the diuell: and these three miracles by name [Page] shall bee wrought by him: Hee shall cause fire to come from heauen, and make the Image of the beast to speake; and thirdly, hee shall faine himselfe dead and rise agayne, Bellarm. cap. 15.

1. He shall by the helpe of the diuell cause fire to come downe from heauen, as it is Apocal. 13.13.

Answere: First, it is a great question whether the diuell haue any such power to bring downe fire from heauen: for the Iesuite himselfe remembreth the storie 1. King. 18. How Baal his priests would haue fetched down fire from heauen, but they could not: onely Elias did it: and he that will doe the like, must haue Elias his spirite, as Christ sayth, Luke 9.55.

2. It is very grosse to vnderstand this literally: for the whole chapter is mysticall, of the Beast with seuen heads, of another beast with two hornes, and all the rest. But three waies Antichrist may fitly bee sayde to bring fire from heauen: First, by fire the holy Ghost may be vnderstoode, as Matth. 3. and Act. 2. The spirite appeared in fierie tongues: so Antichrist and his ministers make men beleeue, that they doe conferre the holy Ghost, as in consecration, in absolution of sinners, and such like. Secondly, the Popes thunderbolts of excommunication, are resembled to fier, whereby he hath made the whole world afrayde in times past, as though he could cause the heauens to fall vpon men: yea, to make the matter more likely, the Pope vseth burning Tapers in excommunicating men, which with violence are throwen downe as though GOD himselfe did rayne fire from heauen vpon them. And this is the terrible manner of their excommunication: there are three candles burning set vp:Fox. p. 1038 and then they begin to accurse them, whom they excommunicate, bodie and soule to the diuell: and let vs, say they, quench their soules in hell fire, if they be dead, as this candle is put out (and with that they put out one of the candles) If they be aliue, let vs pray, that their eyes may be put out, as this candle is, and so the second candle goeth out, and that all their sences may fayle them, as this candle looseth his light, and so the third candle goeth out. Beholde, here is the fire which the Pope and his popelings doe bring from heauen. Sic Bullinger. serm▪ 60. in Apocalips. Thirdly, the Dragon is sayd, Apocalips. 12.4. with his tayle to drawe many starres from heauen: that is, many excellent men, as starres in giftes and knowledge, shall bee deceiued by the Pope, and be wonne vnto him: yea the Pope himselfe is a Starre fallen from heauen to the earth, from heauenly doctrine to earthly tradition, Apocalips. 9.1. thus Antichrist also may be sayd to fetch fire from heauen.

2. The second miracle, hee shall cause the Image of the beast to speake, which the Iesuite vnderstandeth literally, that is, grossely.

Answere: First, Bellarmine and our Iesuites doe not here agree: for Bellarmine sayth, that these two miracles shall be wrought by Antichrist himselfe, to fetch fire from heauen: and to cause the Image to speake: But the Rhemists saye, this other beast, is another false Prophet, inferiour to Antichrist, which shall also worke wonders, such an one as Caluine, say they: where [Page] they shew their malice, more then learning, for Caluine, they know, tooke not vpon him to worke myracles, annot. Apocal. 13. sect. 3.

2 This causing the image to speake hath a better meaning: The image of the beast is the shadow of the olde stately Empire of Rome, which was erected by the Pope: for the west partes wanted an Emperour the space of three hundred yeeres from Augustulus time till Pope Leo the third, who made Charles the great king of France,Auentin. lib. 4. Emperour: And at this day is there nothing in the Empire, but onely a name, title and image: for neither hath the Emperour the Imperiall authoritie, which is in the Pope, nor the Imperiall kingdomes, vnlesse he haue them of his owne. And the Pope onely maketh this Image to speake, for vnlesse he doe confirme the election of the king of the Romanes, he is not thought worthy the name of Emperour. Bullinger. ibid.

3 And yet we denie not, but that they both haue and may make images speake either by the helpe of the diuell, as Dunstane caused a roode to speake, or by iugling, as the Roode of grace by gimmals was made to roule the eyes, mooue the lippes and such like, in king Henries dayes.

3 The third myracle that Antichrist shall work, is to fayne himselfe dead, and to rise againe, Apocalyps. 13.3.

Answere: There can bee no such thing gathered out of the text: First, the wordes will not beare it: the text is, that one of the heads was wounded to death, and the wound was healed: which cannot be so meant, as though hee fayned himselfe dead: but he receiued a wound indeede.

2 The sence is mysticall, as thorough the whole chapter: First, it is sayd, that the seuenth head was wounded to death: but reuiued agayne: that is, the seuenth gouernement of the Romanes in the Popedome: for the papacie had many times deadly blowes, and yet was healed agayne: especially when there were three Popes together, at Rome, in France, and the third in Spaine: but this wound was cunningly healed vp in Pope Martin the fift, in the Councell of Constance, the other three beeing deposed. Sic Bullinger Serm. 59. Secondly, it is said vers. 14. that the beast whose image remained, had the wound of a sworde, and yet liued: which is vnderstoode of the Romane Empire, reuiued and quickned by the Pope.

The Protestants.

IT is true that Antichrist shall worke signes and wonders by the power of Sathan, 2. Thessal. 2. but lying signes, both because they shall bee done to confirme lyes, neither shall they bee such as the Prophets wrought, but many of them but cunning and cousening sleights of iuglers. And for such wonders wee neede not to search farre, the Popish Church is full of them▪ Where else then should wee looke for Antichrist?

1 There haue beene of the Popes themselues▪ Sorcerers and Coniurers, [Page] such an one Antichrist shall bee, sayth Bellarmine. Siluester the second came vp to the papacie by the helpe of the diuell, as wee haue before shewed. Gregorie the seuenth was condemned in the Councell of Brixia for a Coniurer: And Benno a Cardinall in those dayes thus writeth of him: that on a time hee sending two of his seruants for a certaine Sathanicall booke, charging them not to looke into it: they notwithstanding looked into it, and presently a great multitude of diuelish spirites were round about them: who were instant vpon them to knowe why they were called for: the seruants beeing at the first astonished, yet comming to themselues, enioyned them to plucke downe certayne high walles neere to Rome: and so they came to their master, Fox. page 176. What other Antichrist now neede wee looke for? If hee must bee a Coniurer, wee may heere make our choyce.

2 Wee are not ignorant, what lyes and fables are reported by the papists of the myraculous actes of their popish Saints, of the which wee haue spoken before: As howe Dunstane appeared to a cripple, that came to his Tombe to bee helped of his lamenesse: How Plegildus a priest sawe and handled the shape of a childe vpon the alta [...], which after hee had kissed returned agayne to the likenesse of bread. How a certaine Iewes boy tolde his father that hee saw a childe broken in peeces vpon the altar and distributed among the Christians: and the boy for that,Fox. p. 1148 was cast into a furnace of fire, and was preserued from the fire by the Virgin Marie, which appeared to him, and spred her garment ouer him. Many such either lyes and fables, or workes of diuels the popish Church hath many: What neede wee therefore doubt, but that it is the Antichristian Church?

3 Augustine sayth, Saint Paul calleth them lying wonders, either because Antichrist shall deceiue men per phantasmata, with iugling sleights, or because, ad mendacia per trahet credituros, De ciuitat. deilib. 20. cap. 19. by his wonders he shall make them beleeue lies. But in which sense they are so called, it shall appeare when Antichrist is come sayth hee: and indeede it is now apparant; for our aduersaries haue plenty of both kindes, both myracles wrought indeede by the diuell, and many prety iugling feates beside.

THE EIGHTH PARTE OF THE QVEstion, concerning the warres, and kingdome of Antichrist.

The Papists.

BEllarmine sayth, that Antichrist shall make great battayles agaynst the error 64 Saynts, and shall conquere the whole worlde: first by crafte he shall aspire to the kingdome of the Iewes: secondly he shall fight with three kings of [Page] Lybia, Aegypt, Aethiopia. Thirdly, with a great armie he shall persecute the Christians throughout the world, and this shall be the battaile of Gog and Magog, Bellarm. cap. 16.

1 That he shall craftily aspire to the kingdome, he proueth it out of Daniel, 11.21. where it is prophecied of one that he shall obtayne the kingdome by flatteries.

Ans. This prophecie of Daniel, as likewise the whole chapter, was historically accomplished in Antiochus Epiphanes, who defrauded Seleucus his brothers sonne of the kingdome, and circumuented his elder brother Demetrius: so that it being once fulfilled, it cannot be wrested to any other sense: of Antichrist it cannot be ment; for here is a succession of Kings described, vers. 19. One is sayd to be ouerthrowne, that is, Seleucus, but not in battaile, for he was poysoned, vers. 18. There another is sayd to bee ouerthrowne and to be no more found, that is, Antiochus magnus. But Antichrist cannot succeede any in the kingdome of the Iewes: for he shall be their first King, as the Papists imagine.

2 He shall (sayth Bellarmine) ouercome three kings, of Lybia, Aegypt, Aethiopia, Dan. 11.43. and this horne shall remoue three other hornes, Dan. 7.8.

Ans. This also must needes be vnderstood of Antiochus Epiphanes: and they are two prophecies. First, he is called a little horne, because he was not heire to the kingdome: he remoueth three other hornes: for by his meanes Ptolemaeus Philopater was cast out of the kingdome in his fathers time Antiochus the great: his brother Seleucus poysoned, his sonne Demetrius disinherited, Tremell. Dan. 7.20. The second prophecie was also accomplished by Antiochus, who ouercame Aegypt, and the countreys adioyning.

Of Antichrist it cannot bee vnderstood: for the first prophecie speaketh of a beast with ten hornes, which must be vnderstood of one kingdome & monarch, and by the ten hornes ten Kings are signified: for so was Antiochus Epiphanes the tenth from Seleucus: here then is a succession of Kings: but Antichrist shall not succeede any.

3 The Iesuite saith, that Antichrist with a great armie shall vexe the whole world, and that shalbe the battaile of Gog and Magog prophecied of Ezech. 38.39. & Apocal. 20.

Ans. The prophecie of Ezechiel was fulfilled in the time of the Macchabees, when as Gog and Magog, that is Antiochus, with the helpe of the Syrians and Scythians and other countreys, molested the people of God: for vers. 23. chap. 39. the Prophet speaketh of the captiuitie of Israel, from the which they should at that time bee deliuered. And agayne, the Lord would not leaue his Church, which at that time endured great afflictions at the hands of the heathen, comfortlesse: but if these prophecies of Ezechiel and Daniel concerne them not, then small had been their comfort. Lastly, the Iewes may with as good reason vnderstand the prophecies concerning Christ, of their Messiah, whom they yet looke for, as you may these prophecies concerning the enemies of the Church, of your Antichrist.

[Page]The other prophecie also is fulfilled, Apocal. 20.8. how Gog and Magog from the foure corners of the earth, shall compasse the tents of the Saints: for by Gog and Magog, is vnderstood the whole multitude of the enemies of the Church both within and without, as Turkes, Papists, Infidels, which all haue agreed together at times and in their turnes, though enemies amongst themselues, to afflict the people of God, Fulk. annot. in hunc locum.

And if you will needes also haue the other two prophecies fulfilled agayne, being once before accomplished: they agree fitly to the Turkish Empire: for Mahomet by craft and subtiltie aspired to a kingdome, and in short time he ouerranne Aegypt and Lybia, with other parts of Africa.

The Protestants.

WE denye that there shall come any such Antichrist: or that it is possible for him to wage battaile with the whole earth. We graunt that the Antichrist of Rome hath warred with the Church, poysoning it with corrupt doctrine, and persecuting the same by fire and sword: which his rage is well slaked now, God be praised, in many places, and his tyrannie ouerpast: miserable were the state of the Church if it should endure such a brunt agayne.

1 It is impossible that Antichrist in so short a time as three yeeres and an halfe, should conquer all nations, and be Monarch of the whole world, burne & sacke Rome, and driue out the Pope, as the Papists graunt themselues, Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 3. de pontifice. A man cannot in that space traua [...]le through the whole world, much lesse conquer it.

And seeing Antichrist shall begin at Ierusalem, make his habitation there, and haue an end there: (for (say they) he shall be slayne in Mount Oliuet, Gloss. sup. Apocal:) It is not like that in his owne person he should conquer the world: neither can it be thought that he shall do it by his deputies, for then they should be the Antichrists and not he. See what a Labyrinth you are fallen into, out of the which you cannot wind yourselues.

2 Antichrist is not described in scripture as a warriour, or warlike man sitting harnessed in his tent, but like an hypocrite aduācing himself in the temple; not comming with engins of warre, but deluding and deceiuing with false miracles, and lying signes, 2. Thessal. 2. Not with Harolds of armes openly proclaming warre: but he shall worke in a mysterie, Apocal. 17.5. Wherefore it is but a popish dreame and fancie, that Antichrist shall be such a mightie warriour: yet we denye not but that diuers of the Popes haue been warriours, but that was beyond the commission of Peters crosse keyes.

3 Lastly, they haue no ground of this their opinion out of scripture: for neither Ezechiel nor Daniel maketh for them, prophecying of the state of the Church before Christ: nor yet the Apocalypse, the prophecie of Gog and Magog being accomplished in the greatest part alreadie: Wherefore away with these mistie clowdes of your brainsicke inuentions: they shall not bee able to abide the lightsome sun-beames of the truth.

[Page]

THE NINTH AND LAST PART OF THIS question, whether the Pope be Antichrist.

The Papists.

THis question pincheth our aduersaries very sore, that wee should touch their error 65 head so neere, as to make him Antichrist. For this being once knowne, wee neede not labour much about other matters: for Antichrist with all his doctrine must not be heard, but abhorred of the Church.

They therefore, craftily foreseeing this, doe take great paynes to deliuer the Pope out of this danger, and haue found out many starting holes, but all to smal purpose: yea their forefathers seeing the matter so playne, and almost put out of doubt,Concil. Later. sess. 11. gaue straight charge in the late Councel of Laterane to all preachers, that none should dare once to speake of the comming of Antichrist. This argueth a guiltie conscience. But yet they face out the matter, and say, the Pope cannot be Antichrist: their arguments are none other then those we haue heard, being eight in number.

1 Antichrist shall be one singular man: the Popes haue been many, part. 1. of this question. Secondly, he shall raigne but three yeeres and an halfe: but the Pope hath continued many hundred yeeres, part. 2. Thirdly, he shalbe knowne by his name: the Popes haue sundrie names, part. 3. Fourthly, he must come of the stocke of the Iewes: but there was neuer yet any Iewe Pope, part. 4. Fiftly, his seate must be at Ierusalem: the Popes is at Rome, part. 5. Sixtly, he shall manifestly denie Christ: so doth not the Pope, say they, part. 6. Seuenthly, he shall doe strange miracles, as bring downe fire from heauen, cause Images to speak, part. 7. Eightly, He shall wage great battailes, and conquer all the world, part. 8. Which cannot agree to the Pope: Ergo, he is not Antichrist.

Answere: To these eight arguments, we haue before answered seuerally: shewing, how fabulous, ridiculous, and impossible our aduersaries assertions are, without ground of scripture, shewe of reason, or colour of argument. Wherefore we will not trouble the reader with needlesse repetitions, desiring him to haue recourse to that which hath been alreadie sayd.

The Protestants.

THat the Pope of Rome is very Antichrist, and that all the qualities and properties which the scripture describeth Antichrist by, doe fitly agree vnto his person: and that we are not therefore to expect or looke for any other Antichrist. Thus by testimonie of scripture, and sufficient reasons deduced out of the same, we trust it shall appeare to all men.

[Page]1 The first place of scripture is Daniel 11. where many notes and markes are declared proper to Antichrist, yet especiallie set foorth to describe Antiochus Epiphanes, who might be very well a type and figure of Antichrist who was then to come.

1 vers. 36. It is sayd, He shall doe what him listeth. This is most true of the Pope: his will must stande for reason, Distinct. 96. cap. satis. If the Pope should drawe infinite soules to hell, no man is to say vnto him, Sir, why doe you so, Distinct. 40? Heere Bellarmine hath but this poore shift, to say, that it is meant onely of publike iudgement, that no man is by authoritie to call the Pope to account: but yet a brotherly admonition may bee vsed. But who seeth not that the words are generall: Nemo debet ei dicere, No man ought to say vnto him: neither Iudge, nor other?

2 Hee shall magnifie himselfe agaynst GOD, and speake blasphemous things agaynst GOD: hath not the Pope done so? Of him it is sayd, that GOD and the Pope haue but one Consistorie: I am able to doe almost all that GOD can doe, Fox. pag. 785. articl. 192. I am aboue all and in all: Hostiens. Nay, that Dominion and Lordship which Christ had in earth, but habitu, in habite, the Pope hath actu, in act and in deede. Agayne, as we reade, the earth is the Lordes, and the fulnesse thereof, and as Christ sayth, all power is giuen mee in heauen, and in earth: so is it to bee affirmed, that the Vicar of Christ hath power on things celestiall, terrestriall, infernall, apud Fox. pag. 791. col. 1. Now let the discreet reader iudge, whether this fellowe doe not magnifie himselfe, and speake blasphemously agaynst God.

3 Hee shall prosper till the wrath bee accomplished: So hath the Pope had but too good successe: hee hath subdued Emperours, and made them his seruants, trode vpon their neckes, made them serue at his table, crowned them with his feete, made them hold his stirrup, and leade his horse by the bridle. But wee doe hope that his date is out, and that hee shall prosper no longer.

4 vers. 37. He shall not care for the God of his fathers: No more doth the Pope: for he hath inuented and erected a newe breaden god, which he worshippeth, hangeth vp in Churches, carrieth about in procession, being but a peece of bread. This breaden god a might, his forefathers neuer knew.

5 Hee shall not care for the desires of women: So hee prohibiteth lawfull marriage, permitteth adulteries, and the vnnaturall lust of Sodomites. Bellarmine first denyeth the text, which is faithfully translated according to the Hebrew. Secondly, he sayth, the place is meant literally and properly of Antiochus, who was giuen to the pleasures of women.

Answere: First, if it be meant literallie of Antiochus, then can it not be meant literallie of your Antichrist: If Antiochus be but a type of Antichrist, then can you not necessarilie conclude out of this place: for types prooue [Page] not, vnlesse they be diuine, that is, appoynted of God to be types, which you can not shewe for this place: see then, the best arguments that you haue for your Antichrist, out of the prophecies of Daniel and Ezechiel, are proued nothing worth. Secondly, as Antiochus was giuen to vnlawfull desires of women, so is the Pope: yet might he be an enemie to chast and holy marriage, and so is the Pope. And by the way let it bee noted, that the Iesuite picketh quarrels with scripture, and maketh it false: for the text sayth, He, that is, Antiochus, shall not care for the desires of women. Yes (sayth the Iesuite) he shall be giuen to the pleasures of women, cleane contrarie to the text, Bellarm. cap. 21.

6 vers. 38. He shall honor his god Mauzzim, that is, a god of power and riches, with gold, siluer, precious stones: Both of these are most true of the popish religion: for their god hath brought them great riches, lands, treasure, possession: by their idolatrous Masses, they haue greatly enriched themselues, wherein their breaden god playeth the chiefe part: and therefore they doe worship him agayne with gold, siluer, precious stones: what rich Corporals, and Altarclothes, Copes, Vestiments of veluet, silke, wrought with gold, are seene in their Churches? what gilding of Roodes, and Roodlofts, garnishing of Idols, what rich Crucifixes of siluer, of gold, beset with pearle and precious stones?

This description therefore of Daniel, as you see, doth in euery respect agree with the conditions and properties of Antichrist of Rome, Argument. Illyrici.

Secondly, Saint Paules description in euery poynt also is verified in the Pope. First: He shall exalt himselfe aboue God, and all that is called God, 2. Thess. 2.4. So the Pope challengeth the full authoritie of Christ, as wee haue shewed before, and exalteth himselfe aboue Emperours, which are called gods vpon earth: yea they haue taken the iust proportion of inequalitie betweene the Pope and Emperour: for the Pope is 47. degrees aboue the Emperour: as the Sunne is 47. degrees bigger then the Moone, Innocent 3. in decretalib.

2 He shall sit in the temple, that is, in the Church: so the Pope nameth himselfe head of the Church, and hath the keyes, as he braggeth, both of heauen and hell. Therefore the Turke cannot bee that Antichrist, because he is out of the Church: and so in truth is the Pope, but yet he challengeth to him and his the name of the Church.

3 The mysterie wrought in Paules time, and afterward encreased: so not long after the Apostles time, the Bishops of Rome began to lift vp their heads aboue other Churches, as Zozimus falsified the Councel of Nice, and sent to the 6. Councel of Carthage, to haue it there confirmed, that it might be lawfull to send vp appeales to Rome.

4 Antichrist shall come with lying signes: So hath the Pope done, as experience proueth, and we haue shewed before.

5 vers. 11. God shall send strong delusions, that they shall beleeue lyes. And in time of Poperie, men indeede were so strongly deluded, that the father persecuted the sonne, the sonnes set fire to their father, yea the husband was made a witnesse agaynst the wife, the wife agaynst her husband, and seruants accused [Page] their masters. These things are so well knowne in stories, that I neede not come to particulars.

6 Antichrist is called a wicked man, and a man of sinne, vers. 3.8. And where shall you finde more wicked men, then among the Popes? Siluester the 2. gaue his soule to the diuell to obtayne the Papacie, Fox. pag. 167. Benno reporteth of Hildebrand, that he poysoned sixe Popes to come to the Popedome. Pope Stephen and Sergius, tooke vp the bodie of Formosus, and mangled it, cutting off his head and fingers, and so cast it into Tibris, Fox. pag. 120. We haue heard before, what a holy Father Pope Iohn the 13. was, he lay with his owne sister, and with his fathers Concubines, playing at dice, called for the diuell, was slayne in adulterie. And was it not, I pray you, a common prouerbe in England? He that goeth to Rome once, seeth a wicked man; he that goeth twise, learneth to know him; he that goeth the third time, bringeth him home with him, Fox. pag. 841. argument. Illyrici.

The third place we doe take out of the Apocalyps, chap. 9. where is a playne storie set downe of the Pope.

1 vers. 1. He is a starre fallen from heauen: he is departed from the ancient faith of Rome to superstition and idolatrie.

2 He hath the key of the bottomlesse pit: who giueth the crosse keyes in his armes but the Pope? who sayth hee may euacuate all Purgatorie at once, if hee will, but he? Who sayth, he may, Pleno iure currus animarum plenos secum ad tartara detrudere, by full right, carrie downe to hell with him charriots Ioden with soules? cap. si Papa. distinct. 42. Is not this the Pope? who then more fitly may be sayd to haue the key of the bottomlesse pit.

3 There arise out of the bottomlesse pit a great flocke of Locusts, that is, the innumerable sort of begging Friers: for they are in euery respect described: First, compared to Locusts for their number, vers. 3. There were an 100. diuers sorts of Friers, Fox. pag. 260. Secondly, they had power giuen them for fiue moneths: that is, as Walter Brute expoundeth it, taking a moneth for thirtie dayes, & a day for a yeere, as it is prophetically taken: an 150. yeeres, for so long it was from the beginning of the Friers vnder Innocent the 3. anno 1212. to the time of Armachanus, who preached, disputed, and wrote agaynst the Friers, about anno 1360. Fox. pag. 414. Thirdly, they shall sting like Scorpions, not slay all at once, but venome and poyson the conscience with the sting of their pestilent doctrine. Fourthly, other parts also of the description agree, as vers. 7. They are as horses prepared to battaile, that is, stoute & ambitious, their haire as the haire of women, that is, they shall be effeminate, and giuen to the lusts of the flesh: their teeth as the teeth of Lions: they by valiant begging shall deuoure the portions of the poore: as it was well proued in King Henry the 8. dayes, in the Supplication of beggars, that the summe of the Friers almes came to a great summe in the yeere: for the fiue orders of Friers had a penie a quarter for euery one of euery housholder throughout England, that is, for them all twentie pence by the yeere▪ suppose, that there be but ten housholds in euery towne, and let there [Page] be twentie thousand parishes and townes in England; it will not want much of twentie thousand pound. Thus had they Lions teeth, that is, consuming and deuouring. Lastly, they haue a King, vers. 11. whose name is Abaddon, a destroyer: for the Pope their chiefe prince and patron, hath by his Antichristian doctrine layd wast the Church of God, Argument. Chytraei.

The fourth place of scripture wee will take out of the 17. of the Apocalyps ▪ there the seate of Antichrist is described. First, vers. 5. It is called Babylon, the citie which raigneth ouer the Kings of the earth, vers. 18. This can be no other but Rome, which then had the Empire of the whole world. Secondly, It is the citie built vpon seuen hils or mountaynes, vers. 9. that is no other but Rome. Thirdly, the whore, which is Antichrist, shall sit vpon the beast with seuen heads and ten hornes, that is, shall succeede in the Empire, and haue the authoritie thereof: so hath the Pope. Fourthly, the ten hornes, that is, the Kings of the earth, shal giue their authoritie to the beast: but afterward shall deuoure her flesh: Euen so the Kings of the earth by their sword maintayned the authoritie of the Pope. But now being taught by the Gospell, they are made the Lords free men, and begin to subdue their neckes from his yoke.

The fift place is 1. Iohn 2.22. Who is a lyar, but he that denyeth that Iesus is Christ? the same is Antichrist that denyeth the father and the sonne.

Euen so the Pope of Rome, though not openly and apertly, yet closely and subtilly is an enemie vnto the whole trinitie: He exalteth himselfe aboue God the father; because he taketh vpon him to dispense not onely agaynst the lawe of nature, but agaynst the lawe of God, the morall law, and agaynst the precepts both of the old and new testament: but a lawe cannot be dispensed withall, but by the same authoritie or greater.

Agaynst Iesus Christ he exalteth himselfe, and all his offices, he denyeth him to be the onely Prophet, saying, the scriptures are vnperfect, and that their traditions are also necessarie to saluation. Agayne, he maketh other bookes scripture, then those which are Canonicall. His kingly office he doth arrogate to himselfe, in making lawes to binde the conscience, in ordayning other Sacraments, in granting Indulgences and Pardons, & saying that he is the head of the Church. His Priesthood he is an enemie vnto, constituting another priesthood after the order of Melchisedech, then that of our Sauiour Christ which begun vpon the Crosse, and remayneth still in his person, being incommunicable to any other creature: yet they make euery sacrificing Priest to bee of the order of Melchisedech.

He impugneth the office of the holy spirit, counting that prophane which the holy Ghost hath sanctified, as marriage and meates: arrogateth in all things the spirit of truth not to erre: applieth the merites of Christs passion after his owne pleasure, by Pardons, Indulgences, by ceremonies and Sacraments of his owne inuention, Fulk. 2. Thess. 2. sect. 10. Ergo, we conclude out of S. Iohn, that seeing he denieth Iesus to be Christ, he is Antichrist.

Sixtly, S. Paul sayth, that Antichrist shalbe an aduersarie, [...]. 2. Thess. 2.4 [Page] An aduersarie in doctrine, teaching cleane contrarie to the Gospell of Christ: so doth the Pope.

1 The scripture sayth, wee ought to put our trust onely in God, and not in man, Ierem. 17.7. and to call vpon God onely in the day of trouble, Psal. 50.15. and to worship him in spirit and truth, Iohn 4.24. The Papists say cleane contrarie, that we must call vpon Saints, and beleeue they can helpe vs, and they teach vs to fall downe before Images, which are stockes and stones.

2 The Gospell teacheth, that wee are freely saued by Iesus Christ, without workes, which neither merite remission of sinnes, nor eternall life, for eternall life is the free gift of God, Rom. 6.23. And our sinnes are forgiuen vs freely, because they are not imputed, Rom. 4.6. They affirme cleane contrarie, that by our merites we may deserue heauen: and that vita aeterna, is merces bonorum operum, that eternall life is the reward of good workes. But S. Paul sayth, it is a free gift, Bellarm. cap. 23.

3 The Gospell teacheth vs, that we should growe vp to an assurance of our election, 2. Pet. 1:10. and with boldnes to call vpon the name of God, Heb. 4.10. The Papists say, we should be kept alwaies in doubt, and it is presumption to be assured of the fauour of God.

4 The Gospell saith, that not onely externall acts, but euen secret thoughts are sinne, yea the very cōcupiscence of the flesh to be sinne, Genes. 6.5. Rom. 7.7. They denie that concupiscence and euill thoughts are sinne, vnlesse the be voluntarie, and haue the consent of the will, ibid.

5 The Gospell teacheth, that it is impossible for any man to keepe and performe the lawe of God, Rom. 8.7. Luk. 17.10. They doubt not to say, that a man by grace may fulfill the lawe, and by fulfilling of it deserue heauen.

6 Christ instituted the Sacrament in both kinds, and Paul. 1. Cor. 11. giuing a direction concerning the Sacrament, not onely to the Pastors and Ministers, but to the whole Church of Corinth, doth rehearse the institution in both kinds. But the Papists doe minister but in one kind to the people.

7 The Gospell saith, that the Church is builded vpon Christ, and he is the onely foundation thereof, 1. Cor. 3.11. The Papists hold that Peter first, and now the Pope, whom they make his successor, is the foundation of the Church, Argument. Chytraei. And thus we see, the Pope in his doctrine is a plaine aduersarie to Christ, and therefore Antichrist.

The seuenth argument, Apocalyps 17.1. Antichrist is called the great whore: And here we are to note the singular prouidence of God, who suffereth not one iot of his word to fall to the ground: for euen soverily, Anno 853. next after Leo the 4. there was a right whore elected Pope called Iohn, or if you will, Ioane the 8. who fate in the Papacie two yeeres, sixe moneths; and on a time being with child, fell in labour in the midst of a solemne procession. Whereupō there was a certayn Image of a woman with a child set vp in the same place where the Pope was deliuered: And euer since the Popes, when they goe to Laterane, doe shun that streete, being yet the neerer way, abhorring that fact and the memorie therof. [Page] There was also long after a chayre of Porphyrie stone kept in Laterane, with an hole in the midst, wherein the newe elected Pope was wont to sit to haue his humanitie tried, Iuell. pag. 428. Defens. Apol.

Obiect. 1. Harding, and since him Bellarmine obiect, that there was neuer any such Pope, because she is not registred in the Popes Calendar. Ans. No, they left her out for shame, as Marianus Scotus writeth. Agayne, Bishops names haue vpon sundrie occasions been left out: as Chrysostomes name was striken out vpon displeasure out of the table of the Bishops of Constantinople: So Pope Cyriacus is not reckoned in the Calendar of the Popes, and yet he was one of them.

Obiect. 2. Whereas it is said, that this Pope Ioane was first student at Athens, and afterward professed at Rome, Harding denieth, that at Athens then there was any place for students, but all was barbarous, and so sayth Bellarm. neither that at Rome there was any open profession of letters at that time. Ans. First, anno 680. the Bishop of Athens was at a Councel at Constantinople, called Synodus sexta, anno 742. at the second Councel of Nice, there were many Bishops of Greece present: and Pope Ioane followed, anno 853. and how should Athens afterward become barbarous, being inhabited all this while by Christians? for it was not taken of the Turkes before anno 1440. Secondly, and me thinkes it is a discredite for Rome, that there should be there vnder the Popes nose no profession of learning, and that there should be there no Vniuersitie of Students, where the vniuersall Bishop sate. But Theodoricus Niemus, sometime the Popes Secretarie, sayth, she read a Lecture two yeeres at Rome.

Obiect. 3. It is not like that God would suffer S. Peters chayre to be polluted by a woman, Harding. Ans. You presume to much of Gods prouidence, hauing no such promise. Why might not a woman as well creepe into S. Peters chayre at Rome, as one did into S. Andrewes of Constantinople? as Bellarmine confesseth, what priuiledge hath one more then the other.

Obiect. 4. As for the chayre (saith Harding) it is a fable: but Bellarmine more modestly graunteth there is a chayre of Porphyrie, but to another purpose, to shewe the Popes humilitie, not to trie his humanitie. Agayne, Harding sayth it is a lye, that the Popes refrayne to goe that way. But Bellarmine, that knoweth Rome better then he, denieth not that the Pope so doth, but not for any such heinous fact there committed, but because it is a strait way, and is not fit for his trayne. And as for the Image, Harding saith, it representeth no such thing, but is rather like one of the great ragged stones at Stonage. Bellarmine denieth not, but there is such an Image, but it seemeth not to bee a picture of a woman, but rather of some heathen priest going to sacrifice. We see how handsomely they agree in their answers: And no maruaile, for if one lyer is many times contrary to himselfe, how should two lyars agree? But these men go only by coniectures: we haue their owne writers against them: for Theodoricus Niemus saith there is such an Image that resembleth such a thing, and that the Popes will not goe that way in procession to this day vpon that occasion. And as for the chayre of [Page] marble to that vse, to search the Pope, Sabellicus reporteth it, Aenead. 9. lib. 1.

In this one example we may see the boldnes of our aduersaries, which are not ashamed to denye so famous a storie, being reported by Sabellicus, Leonicus Chalcondyla, Marianus Scotus, that liued about the yeere 1028. Sigebertus Gimblacens. anno 1100. beside thirteene Historiographers, as they are quoted by Bishop Iewel, and of them all not one a Lutherane.Desens. Apol. p. 434. It is almost as foule a shame for them to denye so manifest and playne a thing, as it is a great blot to their succession, that a whore sate sometimes in the Papall chayre. Thus then by euident demonstration it appeareth, that the Pope is the whore of Babylon, and so consequently very Antichrist.

Lastly, in the eight place, their owne witnesses shall speake: Bernard sayth, Bestia de Apocalypsi, cui datum est os, loquens blasphemias, Petri Cathedram occupat. The Beast in the Apocalypse, Epistol. 125 to the which a mouth was giuen speaking blasphemies, doth occupie Peters chayre. Ioachim. Abbas sayth, Antichristus iam pridem natus est Romae: Antichrist a good while since was borne at Rome. The Bishops in the Councel at Reynspurge say thus: Hildebrandus Papa, sub specie religionis, iecit fundamenta Antichristi: Hildebrand vnder colour of holines, hath layd a foundation for Antichrist. Nay, long before any of these, Gregorie the 1. first of all the Gregories, and the best of all the Popes that haue followed him, thus prophecied of his successors: Ego fidenter dico, Lib. 6. epist. 30. quòd quisquis se vniuersalem sacerdotem vocat, vel vocari desiderat, in elatione sua Antichristum praecurrit: I speake it confidently, that whosoeuer calleth himselfe, vniuersall Priest, or desireth so to bee called in the pride of his heart, is the forerunner of Antichrist. But the Popes of Rome are now called vniuersall Bishops or Priests: Ergo, they are either Antichrists, or the forerunners of Antichrist. But it is not like that Antichrist should haue so many forerunners, and so many yeeres, almost a thousand since Boniface the 3. was first called vniuersall Bishop: Ergo, Antichrist is alreadie come, and hath been a good while: and where els should he be, but there where his forerunners were, namely, at Rome? Now therefore seeing wee haue so many witnesses, the scripture, reason, experience, authorities to prooue the Pope Antichrist: who will either bee so simple, as seeing so good grounds, not to beleeue it, or so scrupulous, hauing such certayne euidence, to doubt thereof? And thus at the length, by Gods gracious assistance, wee haue finished and brought this great question concerning Antichrist, to an end, as also the whole controuersie as touching the Bishop or Pope of Rome.

[Page]

THE FIFT GENERAL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING SPIRITVAL PERSONS, COMMONLY CALLED THE CLERGIE.

HAuing now sufficientlie handled the controuersie of the chiefe member of the militant Church, which our aduersaries say is the Pope, wee must come in the next place to speake of the middle parts, which are those whom they call Clericos, Clerkes, and they are of two sorts; Secular, which haue any publique function in the Church: or Regular, which liue according to some rule, and they are called Monachi, Monkes. First then of their secular Clerkes.

This controuersie conteyneth sixe questions.

1 Of the name and title of Clerkes or Clergie men.

2 Concerning the election of Bishops and Ministers: first of all in generall: secondly, of the election of the Bishop of Rome.

3 Concerning Ecclesiasticall orders. First, in generall: secondly, of the difference of Bishops and other Ministers. Thirdly, of Cardinals.

4 Concerning the keyes of the Church, and the power of binding and loosing: the question deuided into foure parts.

5 Concerning the marriage of Ministers: three parts of the question.

6 Of the maintenance of the Church by tythes: in two parts.

THE FIRST QVESTION, CONCERNING THE name of Clerkes or Clergie men.

The Papists.

error 66 THis name Clergie, in Latine, Clerus, is a name made proper to the Spiritualtie, by vse of antiquitie, and agreeably to Scriptures: they are so called, because they are the Lords lot, and consecrate to the diuine seruice: the rest are called popular, or lay men, which meddle not with any function of the Church.

1 This word (say they) hath been vsed by all antiquitie, and thereby Church Ministers only signified: Ergo, it is a fit and decent name, Bellar. lib. 1. de Clericis, cap. 1. Rhemens. 1. Pet. 2.3

Ans. First, the Fathers vsed this name Clergie, but not as it is now vsed of the Papists, which doe hereby as it were exclude the people of God from the Lords inheritance, counting them as Asses and Dogs, in respect of the Clergie: they vsed it as a ciuill indifferent name, for an outward distinctiō of their callings, not as a name of more holines, and so we refuse it not.

2 What though by custome & continuance this name hath been somewhat abused, we will learne herein to speake of the scriptures, and not of men.

[Page]Secondly, we mislike this name (say our aduersaries) because we would haue no difference betweene the people and Clergie, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. It is a great slander: because we make no such difference, as they doe, as to make the Clergie onely Gods lot and portion, and to count the people as vnholy, and to preferre euery ignorant doltish Masse priest, before the best and deuoutest of the people: therefore they imagine we make no difference at all. We doe distinguish the calling of the one, and the other: none of the lay sort to be so hardie as to meddle with the word or Sacraments, which are committed to the Ministers, which you notwithstanding permit them to doe: and the people euery where to reuerence their Pastors and to yeeld due obedience vnto them. But that the calling of the one before God in it selfe, is more meritorious then the other, that we doe not, neither dare affirme.

3 The Leuites in the time of the lawe, were seuered out from the rest of the Lords people, and he was their lot and inheritance, and they the Lords lot. Deut. 18.2. And as the Leuites were then, so are the Ministers of the Gospell now. Bellarm.

Ans. First, the Lord is rather sayd to be their lot, because they had the Lords portion, and liued of the Altar, then they are sayd to be the Lords lot: for the whole nation was holie vnto God, and a kingdome of Priests, Exod. 19.6. Secondly, it followeth not, that because there was a legall and ceremoniall difference then betweene the Priests and the people, that therefore it ought to be so now: Nay rather the contrarie followeth, because there was such a difference then, that therefore the Priesthood of the lawe being ceased, there ought to bee none such now: for Christ hath made vs all Kings and Priests to God his father, Apocal. 1.6: And we are al a royall priesthood and holy nation, 1. Pet. 2.9. Now, though there be a difference of callings amongst men, yet before God we are all Priests alike, and there is but one Priest for vs all to Godward, euen Christ Iesus our Lord.

The Protestants.

THe name of Clerkes, or Clergie men, if it be not vsed as a name in it selfe of greater holines and merite, and so is in effect a proude excluding of the rest of Christians from the Lords inheritance, we refuse it not, though there are better names and titles, to call the Ministers of the Gospell by: yet being taken as it is in Poperie, we doe vtterly refuse and reiect it.

First, 1. Pet. 5.3. The Apostle exhorteth the pastors and teachers to feede the flock of Christ, non vt dominantes Cleris, not as Lords ouer Gods Clergie & inheritance. Here S. Peter calleth the whole flocke, the Clergie: wherefore it appeareth, that this difference was not knowne in the Apostles time of lay and Clergie men: And it is agaynst all sense, that Saint Peter should vnderstand here the inferiour Ministers, and so exhorteth the superiour Pastors and Bishops to looke to their Clergie, as the Rhemists would haue it: for S. Peter speaketh of [Page] the whole flocke and congregation, which cannot bee vnderstood properly of many Ministers dispersed into seuerall places.

2 Neither shall wee finde this word Clerus, the Clergie, properly applied to the Ministers, throughout the newe testament, let our aduersaries brag neuer so much of scripture as they doe. Galat. 6.6. S. Paul vseth these names of difference, [...], the teacher, and he that is taught: and 1. Corinth. 14.16. [...], the speaker, and [...] the priuate or vnlettered man. So that all their names are giuen in respect of their outward ministerie and calling, not in regard of any difference before God. For before the Lord, as there is neither Graecian nor Iewe, bond nor free,Galat. 3.28. male nor female; so neither is there Clerke or lay man.

3 Augustine thus writeth concerning this name, Cleros, qui sunt in ecclesiastici ministerij gradibus ordinati, sic dictos puto, quia Matthias sorte electus est, in Psal. 67. Clerkes, which serue in the Ministerie, I thinke, were so called, because Matthias was chosen by lot. See then, they are not called Clerkes because they are the Lords lot, but because they are allotted and chosen out of the people for that seruice: as the Leuites are called the peoples gift, Numbers 18.6. and the Priests office an office of seruice: not of more merite or holinesse, or an office of Lordly preeminence, but of ministerie and seruice. Augustine therefore hath a notable saying: Non nos digni, qui pro vobis oremus, vos indigni, qui pro nobis oretis, Psal. 68. We are not onely worthie to pray for you, and you vnworthie to pray for vs: Auditoribus suis, quibus verbum praedicauit, se commendauit Apostolus, ibid. The Apostle commendeth himselfe to their deuout praiers, to whom he preached. By this their error is confuted, that thinke the prayer of a Priest to be the rather heard for the merite and dignitie of his calling, howsoeuer els he be affected in his prayer. So the Rhemists say, that a prayer not vnderstood profiteth by the vertue of the worke wrought and the office of the Priesthood, Annot. 1. Corinth. 14. sect. 10.

THE SECOND QVESTION, CONCERNING the election and institution of Bishops and Pastors.

THis question hath two parts: First, of the election generally of Pastors and Ministers: Secondly, of the election of the Bishop of Rome.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE ELEction generally of all Bishops and Pastors.

The Papists.

error 67 THey say, that the election of Bishops neither belongeth to the Clergie, nor the people, but wholly appertayneth to the Bishop of Rome: as for the people, they haue (they say) nothing at all to doe in the election of their [Page] pastors, or ordayning of them, that neither their suffragium, consilium, or consensus, suffrage, counsell or consent is to be required, Bellarm. de clericis lib. 1. cap. 7. & 8.

1 That the people are to be vtterly excluded, thus they would proue it: Aaron was onely elected of Moses, without consent of the people, so were the Apostles by our Sauiour: Ergo, the peoples consent is not required, Bellarm.

Ans. Who seeth not, that there is great difference betweene ordinary and extraordinary callings? such as the calling of the Apostles was, and Aarons at the first, though the office of the high Priest afterward became ordinarie. Also it followeth not, the Apostles were chosen without consent of the people, when there were yet no faithfull and Christian congregations, and because they were pastors of the whole world, Ergo, as well the peoples consent may be wanting in the election of ordinarie Bishops and Pastors, which haue their peculiar & proper charges, and there being now many faithfull and well instructed congregations. It is one thing to appoynt Pastors for the Church not yet planted, & an other thing to constitute them in a Church alreadie reformed and instructed: for we reade of nations that haue been conuerted to the faith, by those that had no calling of the Church, as a great nation of the Indians was by Aedesius and Frumentinus, Ruffin. lib. 1.9. and the Iberians by a captiue woman, Ruffin. 1.10.

2 The people cannot iudge, who are fit to be pastors, and their elections are tumultuous, as we may reade, how in the election of Damasus there were 137. persons slaine, and therefore it is not meete, nor conuenient, that the matter should be committed to the people, either to elect, or ordayne: but whatsoeuer they did in times past, it was either by sufferance or negligence of the Bishops, Bellarmin. cap. 7.

Ans. First, meere popular elections were neuer allowed in any well ordered Church, neither was the allowāce of their pastors wholly referred to the people, neither did they beare the chiefe stroke, but the election was moderated by the wisedome and grauitie of the Clergie, Fulk. Tit. 1. sect. 2. Secondly, the question is not betweene vs, concerning the ordayning of pastors, for that belonged only to the Eldership, and was done by laying on of their hands, 1. Timoth. 4.14: but concerning the electing and choosing of them. Thirdly, neither doe we dispute, whether it be conuenient and necessarie at al times, but whether it be lawfull: for neither doe we affirme, that it is of the essence and substance of the calling of ministers to be chosen by the voyces of the people: as though they were no ministers, but vsurpers and intruders that are not so called:Fulk. Act. 14.22. but whether it hath been at any time, & may yet be lawfull, to require the consent of the people. Fourthly, it is false, that the people had this right by vsurpation, or els sufferance of the Pastors: for Cyprian sayth, it did, De diuina authoritate descendere, lib. 1. Epistol. 4. That this custome was grounded vpon diuine authoritie, yea it was established by the lawes of Kings: as there was a lawe made by Lodouicus Pius King of France, that Bishops should bee ordayned by the free election of the Clergie and the people, ex Ansigis. lib. 1. cap. 20.

[Page]3 Therefore (say they) elections of Bishops ought to bee at the Popes assignement: for vnto Peter was committed the care of the vniuersall Church, when he bad Peter feede his sheepe. Hereupon they are bold to affirme, that we haue neither true Bishops nor Ministers, because they are not lawfully sent, that is, as they interprete it, from the See Apostolike, Bellarm. lib. 1. cap. 3.8. Rhemist. Rom. 10. sect. 5.

Answere: First, the charge giuen to Peter beareth no such sense: that because Christ bad him feede his sheepe, therefore he and his successors should onely haue authoritie to consecrate Ministers: for if Peter had it by this grant, other Elders and Pastors had it in like sort, to whom it as well appertayned to feede the flocke of Christ, 1. Peter 5.2. And agayne, not Peter onely, but the rest also of the Apostles did ordayne and consecrate Pastors and Elders, as it shall be shewed afterward.

Secondly, neither is it a good reason to condemne our Ministerie, because it hath not the Popes allowance: for euery Church hath a lawfull calling within it selfe, without sending to forrayne Prelates for their approbation. And if you aske vs by whom our Ministers were first called, seeing there were none but popish Bishops in euery Church: wee answere: that some had their calling in the Popish Church, which afterward being more effectually called of GOD, became profitable teachers of the Gospell. Neither is it necessarie, that the Church should alwayes be bound to an ordinarie calling; when as the state of the Church is so corrupted, and the gouernment thereof, that no good calling can bee obtayned: for then the Lord raiseth vp some extraordinarily for the reformation of the Church, such as we doubt not, but Luther was. In which and the like cases, the ordinarie imposition of hands by the Pastors of the Church, being heretikes and idolaters, as it was in time of Poperie, is not to be expected or stayed for, Plura apud Fulk. annot. Rom. 10. sect. 5.

The Protestants.

COncerning election or choise to be made by the people, we are to put three cases. First, meere popular elections, wherein the people by multitude of voyce should carrie all away, are in no case, nor at any time to be allowed. Secondly, for the people to giue their voyce in elections, which are moderated and gouerned by the graue and wise Pastors and Elders, it hath been vsed in times past, and may bee agayne, and is in some places, where the state of the Church, the condition and qualitie of the people will beare it. Thirdly, though the people neither beare sway in the election, nor giue their suffrages and voyces, yet it is conuenient and requisite, that their consent should be had, and publike testimonie: for the Ministers should bee such as haue a good report of all, 1. Timoth. 3.7. Fulk. Act. 14. sect. 3. But as for the Pope, let him keepe himselfe, as a Bishop in his owne Dioces, he hath nothing to doe with ordayning or electing of Ministers in other Churches.

[Page]1 Numb. 20.27. Eleazar was made Priest in Aarons place, in the sight of all the congregation: Ergo, Ministers ought to be ordayned publikely in the sight of the congregation: not in corners or priuate places, as they vsed to doe in time of Poperie: yea it is recorded of Pope Iohn the 13. that he ordayned Deacons in a stable. And herein they offended manifestly agaynst their owne rules: for their decree is, Nullus inuitis detur Episcopus, Ex Celestin pap. distin. 63. cap. cleri. sed Cleri & plebis consensus & desideriū requiratur: Let no Bishop be thrust vpon any against their wils, but let the consent and desire of the people and Clergie be knowne.

2 We haue the example of the Apostles, Act. 1. & 6. & 14.23. When Matthias was elected, the whole multitude was called together: and Act. 6. the Deacons were chosen by the whole multitude: Ergo, the people had an interest in times past in the election of Church officers: and this example of the Apostles may safely and lawfully bee followed of the Church, when time and place serueth.

Bellarmine answereth: First, the election of Deacons and Pastors is not all one, neither is there the like reason. Ans. They are both publike officers for the good of the Church, and therfore if the people haue any interest in the one, why not in the other? Secondly, this was done by the grant and sufferance of the Apostles. Ans. Yea the Apostles called them together, but by the direction of the holy Ghost: as Act. 15. when the Church was assembled together vpon another occasion, it is sayd, It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost. Agayne, in the election, beside imposition of hands, prayer was vsed, which was a chiefe part of that action: but the people had their interest in publike prayers, as being part of the congregation, and were not admitted thereunto at the pleasure and will of men: wherefore it is not true, that it was a meere grant of men, that the people might be present at elections, but it so seemed good to the Apostles thereto directed by the spirit of God.

3 But as for the right of elections in the Pope, it hath no shewe of reason: for bee it that Peter had onely the right of consecration amongst the Apostles, you doe but flatter your selues in thinking, that whatsoeuer right was in Peter, it must needes be in the Pope: for he is not Peters successor, as we haue shewed before at large. But we will hold you rather to this poynt: that all the Apostles had as full right to ordayne and consecrate by laying on of hands, as Peter had. Looke Act. 6.6. & Act. 13.3. & Act. 14.23. And if the Pope cannot haue all that which Peter had, much lesse can he bee capable of that which Peter neuer had.

4 We haue had good experience in England, of the Popes great discretion and wisedome, in collation of spirituall preferments, and ordayning of Bishops. About anno 1253. the Pope wrote a very imperious and commanding letter to the good Bishop of Lincolne, Robert Grostede, Fox. p. 323. to bestowe a Canonship in Lincolne vpon his nephewe, a boy: for so Popes call their bastards: but he suffered the repulse for that time. In the time of Edward the 3. and Richard the 2. a [Page] certificate was sent vp into the Chauncerie, of such Ecclesiasticall dignities, as were possessed by strangers not inhabiting the land: and there were found aboue fourtie Deaneries, Archdeaconries and Prebends, and those not the worst, some worth one hundred, some two hundred, nay, some foure hundred pound by the yeere, the Archdeaconrie of Canturburie was valued at seuen hundred Florences by the yeere, which a Cardinall of Rome had: And there were aboue a dosen Cardinals resiant at Rome, Fox. p. 429. that had at once the best and richest dignities in the land: beside a great sort of Italian priests, and others, that were beneficed in England. By this it may appeare, what good choise the Pope-holy father of Rome was wont to make in bestowing Church dignities: and it were pitie but he should haue the ordering of them still, he did so well dispose of them when he had them.

5 Let Augustine speake, who growing now old, was desirous to knowe his successor while he liued: he went not to Rome for the matter: but assembling the Church together at Hippo where he was Bishop; in the presence of two Bishops beside, and seuen Presbyters or Elders, Astante clero & frequenti populo, the whole Clergie, and a great sort of people standing by: Augustine himselfe began first and sayd, Presbyterum Eradium mihi successorem volo: I would haue Eradius presbyter to be my successor. Afterward, hearing how the people did approue and like of his motion, he desired them to subscribe to that which was done, Rogo vt dignemini gestis subscribere, qui potestis. And when they held their peace, he vrged them further, saying, Hic mihi responsione vestra opus est, de hac assensione aliquid acclamate: I must needes haue you make some answere, and testifie your consent by your acclamation: A populo acclamatum est, fiat, fiat, dictum vicies quinquies: The people cryed out, let it be as thou hast sayd, let it be, and this was repeated fiue and twentie times, Augustin. epistol. 110. By this example it appeareth, though the people made not the choise, yet their consent was demanded. And thus a Bishop was elected, and no word sent vp to Rome at all.

Neither was it the custome of the Church so to do in those dayes: for whereas the Donatists obiected agaynst Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage, because he stayed not to be ordayned of the chiefe Bishop of Numidia, Vt princeps Episcopus a principe ordinaretur: That one chiefe Bishop might bee ordayned of an other. Augustine answered, that there was another custome of the Catholike Church, Vt non Numidiae, sed propinquiores Episcopi, Episcopum ecclesiae Carthaginis ordinarent: Breuicul. collation. 2. cap. 5. That not the Bishop of Numidia, but those Bishops that were neerest at hand, should ordayne the Bishop of Carthage. So we see, they were not onely bold to choose an inferiour Bishop, as was Eradius of Hippo, without the Popes consent: but they would aduenture to ordayne a chiefe Metropolitane Bishop euen of Carthage, without the Popes leaue.

[Page]

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the election of the Pope.

THey say, that the surest and safest way and simplie the best, is that which is error 68 now vsed, to choose the Pope by, namely by the Colledge of the Cardinals: That whosoeuer is by two partes of the sayd Cardinals elected, is rightly the successor of Saint Peter, and the vndoubted Pope of Rome.

1 None can better iudge who is fittest for the papacie,Argum. then they which are the Popes Counsellers, and know the affayres of the Church. Ergo, the Cardinals the meetest men.

Answere: First, you take that for graunted, which wee instantly denie, that the Cardinals of Rome are alwayes the wisest and most learned: as though a Cardinals hat doth bring with it such abundance of vertue and learning: nay a title of a Cardinalship is sooner obtayned by fauour than desert, by masses of money, then weight of learning: And good reason, seeing that the Cardinals make a gayne of the papacie: For an Asse loaden with golde shall sooner enter into the Castle of Saint Angel, then any other comming with a cart loade of bookes: they that reade Cardinal Wolseyes instructions sent to Stephen Gardiner at Rome, what great promises of money and preferment, may easily vnderstand the disposition of the Pope-holy Electors of Rome: Seeing they make a gayne of the Pope, why should not he set Cardinalships to sale?Fox. p. 992. for if Iacobus Archbishop of Mentz payd 27000. florences for his pall, what thinke you a Cardinals hat is to be valued at, which is a higher degree,Fox. p. 794. then either Bishop or Archbishop?

We say then, that there may be wiser and more learned men of the Clergie in Rome then the Cardinals: and that the whole Clergie may better iudge, then a few ambitious Cardinals, and are freer from corruption.

2 They are not fitter, not concerning the affayres of the Church, for Bishops are like to know better, what appertayneth to the office of a Bishop, then priests and Deacons, as most of the Cardinals are.

2 It appeareth by the continuance to be the best:Argum. for it hath now endured foure hundred yeeres: and by the effect, for the See of Rome hath neuer been freer from Schismes, then since this order was taken for the Popes election, Bellarmin. cap. 9.

Answere: First, how can it be of such long continuance, seeing by your owne confession, it exceedeth not foure hundred yeeres? Nay who will not graunt, that the ancient order of electing the Bishop of Rome by the whole Clergie, and consent of the people of Rome, with the confirmation of the Emperour, which lasted a thousand yeeres, till this new deuice came in place, was far more ancient and durable? Secondly, how well the Cardinals election hath kept the See of Rome from Schisme, experience of former times teacheth vs: In pope Vrbanus time the 6. there were two popes many yeeres together: [Page] and one did so deadly pursue the other, that Pope Vrbane at once cut off fiue of the Cardinals heads: might they not haue great ioy, thinke you, in choosing such a Pope? In the time of Pope Iohn the 23. there were three Popes at once. In the Councel of Basile Pope Eugenius was deposed,Fox p. 434. and counted an heretike. And yet for all this, the Cardinals are the onely preseruers and maintainers of the peace of the Apostolike See.

The Protestants.

THough it doe not greatly concerne vs, what manner of election is vsed at Rome: (for vnto vs the electiō of the meanest Bishop in the land is as much, yea and more, then the glorious enthronizing of the Pope:) Yet it shall not be amisse briefly to shew, how these great antiquaries are become enemies of antiquitie, refusing the ancient manner of election, which was vsed in Rome for a 1000. yeares together, namely, that the Bishop there should be elected by the whole Clergy, wiht the consent of the people and confirmation of the Emperour.

1 It is a playne case, that till the yeare 685. in all their elections they wayted for the authoritie of the chiefe Magistrate, the Emperour, or the deputie of Italie. But then came in the constitution of Constantine the 4 that their elections should be firme without the consent of the Emperour. Yet for all this constitution, anno. 810. Pope Adriane gaue vnto Carolus magnus full authoritie to elect the Bishop of Rome: and anno. 961. Leo the 9. made the same grant to Otho first Germane Emperor. This continued in force till Alexander the 2. his time, who was elected first without the Emperors consent, but afterward repenting of it, he protested openly, that he would be no longer Pope vnlesse hee had the Emperours consent, and thereupon he was deposed by Hildebrand, and throwen into prison. This was more then a 1000. yeeres after Christ: since that time the Emperour hath been excluded, and shut out from their elections. But all this while notwithstanding, though the Emperors consent sometime was not necessary, yet the Clergie of Rome, and the people retayned their ancient priuiledge still. So we see by this new erection of the Colledge of Cardinals,Fox. p. 4.6. there is great iniurie offered to three estates, the Emperor, the Clergie of Rome, the people.

2 This new forme of election hath not stood continually in force, since it was first founded. For in the Councel of Constance sess. 40. they proceeded to the election of a new Pope, not staying for the rest of the Cardinals, but appoynting other electors in their roume. In the Councel of Basile, the Duke of Sauoy was elected Pope, by other electors, then Cardinals: Nay there was but one Cardinal, namely, Arolatensis, the rest were Bishops, Doctors and others. And though they will say perchance that this Pope was chosen in a schisme, for they holde the Councel of Basile to be schismaticall: yet they can not, neither doe deny, but that Pope Martin the 5. who was chosen at Constance, was rightfully Pope.

[Page]3 In Augustines time the rest of the Bishops of Italie neere vnto Rome, should seeme to haue had some interest in the election of the Bishop: Romanae ecclesiae Episcopum non ordinat Episcopus aliquis metropolitanus, sed de proximo Ostiensis Episcopus: The B. of Rome is not ordained by any Metropolitane, but by the Bishop of Ostia that is neere at hand, Breuicul. collation. lib. 2. cap. 5.

THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING THE degrees and orders of ecclesiasticall ministers.

THis question hath 3. parts: first of the 7. degrees of popish priesthood. Secondly, of the difference and distinction of Bishops & other Ministers. Thirdly, of the institution of Cardinals, a new degree of the popish Clergie.

THE FIRST PART OF THE SEVEN degrees or orders Ecclesiasticall.

The Papists.

THough they haue diuers degrees of dignitie in the Church, as Popes, Cardinals, Patriarkes, Primates, and such like: yet they make but seuen error 69 Ecclesiasticall orders, which are conferred solemnlie by certayne rites and ceremonies by their Bishops: And they are these, Ostiarij, doore-keepers, Exorcistae, Exorcists, Lectores, Readers, Acolythi, Attenders, Subdiaconi, Subdeacons, Diaconi, Deacons, and the highest degree, Sacerdotes, Priests; vnto the which all the other are but rises and steppes. All these they maintaine to be Ecclesiasticall orders, and to be retayned in the Church, Bellarm. cap. 11. Rhemist. 1. Tim. 3. sect. 7.

They haue no proofe nor warrant out of scripture, for these friuolous orders, but onely a shew of antiquitie, as they alleadge certaine Canons out of the 4. Councel of Carthage, where such offices are reckoned vp, Rhemist. ibid.

Answere: First, to let passe this, that the Councel may be suspected for the credite thereof, seeming wholly to be patched out of the Popes decrees. Secondly, we denie not but they had such offices, as Readers, to reade the text of the scriptures, exorcists to cast out diuels, which was an extraordinary gift for that time, Acoluthists, young men appoynted to attend vpon the Bishop for their better instruction: Doore-keepers, that kept the entrie of the Church that no heathen person or excommunicate should enter. But these were both diuers offices, then are now appoynted for them in the popish Church: for they make them now, all or the most ministers and seruitors for the idolatrous seruice of the Masse, which in those dayes was not heard of: neither though there were such offices and seruices in the Church, were they made orders and degrees of the ministerie.

[Page]3 They had other offices beside, which now are not in vse, no not amongst the papists: for they had also singers, labourers, confessors, diggers or Sextons: so that if you will make all those offices vsed in time past in the Church, so many orders of the ministery, you must make ten or eleuen: more, then you doe acknowledge, or vse in your Church, Fulk. annot. 1. Tim. 3. sect. 7.

The Protestantes.

THe question is not betweene vs and our aduersaries in this place, concerning the titles and dignities annexed to the ministerie, as of Bishops, Archdeacons, Deanes, Prouosts, but of the seuerall orders of the Ministery: For Bishops and other ministers doe not differ in order, but in office of gouernment: They holde that there are seuen seuerall such orders, which haue their seuerall rites of consecration, and peculiar offices in the Church allotted them. But we content ourselues with those orders onely and degrees as necessary, which the holy scripture hath commended, Fulk. ibid.

1 As for the names and offices of Subdeacons, Readers, Exorcists, Acolythi, doore-keepers, we haue no such warrant out of the scripture, to make them orders of the Church: and therefore we condemne them. All necessary orders for the edifying & building of the Church, the scripture hath prescribed vs, Eph. 4.11. there are al offices set down needful for the doctrine, instruction, & edifying of the Church: Fulk. Ephes. 4. sect. 4. Wherefore away with these popish orders, inuented by men. But as for vnable offices and seruices, which shall be thought meete for the affayres and busines of the Church, they may bee retayned and kept, but not as new orders of the ministerie.

2 These offices are first Idolatrous, as they are nowe vsed among the papists, for the Deacons, Subdeacons, Acolythi, were to attend vpon the Priest at Masse. Secondly, some of their offices were ridiculous, as to sweepe the Church, to driue out dogs, and to holde a fly-flap of Peacoks feathers, to keep the flies from falling into the cōmunion cup.Clemens constitut. lib. 8. cap. 15 Thirdly, they were distinguished, by ridiculous ornaments & attire, which were proper to euery one of them: as it shall appeare now in their description.

From the Priest when he was disgraded, they tooke the Chalice, patine, and host, that he should haue no power any more to offer sacrifice: they scraped his nayles with a peece of glasse, and so tooke away his annoynting: and lastly, they tooke away his priestly ornamēts, the Che [...]ile, which signified charitie, the Stole, that represented the signe of our Lord. Frō the Deacons in their disgradation, they tooke first the booke of the Gospels, and so all power to read the Gospels: Then they tooke away his Dalmatike a signe of his Leuiticall office, and the white Stole behinde his backe that signified innocencie.

From the Subdeacon they tooke the book of the Epistles, that he should haue no more power to reade them, also the emptie Chalice, and Subdeacons vesture: his office was to serue and minister to the Deacons at the Altar.

The Acolythi did light the candles in the Church, and brought wine and [Page] water to the altar in pitchers and bottels: and in his degradation there was taken from him, an emptie flaggon or bottle, and a candlestick, with a waxe candle put out.

The order of exorcisme was taken away, by depriuing him from power to reade in the booke of exorcismes.

From the Reader they tooke the booke of Church lectures or lessons. Last of all, from the doore-keeper was taken the keyes of the Church: And so was hee depriued of all power to open or shut the Church doores, and to ring the bels. Ex Fox pag. 2134.

Thus we see, how much these offices are degenerate from the ancient vse: First, they are all but Ministers and attendants for the abominable sacrifice of the masse, which in those dayes was not knowen, for the Acoluthus or waiter waiteth vpon the Subdeacon, the Subdeacon vpon the Deacon, and all of them vpon the Priest at Masse. Secondly, whereas then the Exorcists had a peculiar grace of God to cast out diuels: their Exorcists do but reade certaine exorcismes in bookes, their Readers onely read the text of scripture: now they reade the legends of popish saints. Then in time of persecution, when Christians assembled in the night, the wayters had the charge to light the candles, but now they doe light them at noone day.

3 These offices haue not been in vse these many yeares among the papists themselues: for many times the Sexton or his boy, doe execute the charge both of Acolites, Ostiaries and Readers, yea of Deacons and Subdeacons also, when the Priest with his boy can dispatch a Masse. Neither are these orders retayned amongst them, for any especiall seruice or office, but onely as praeparatories, and steps and degrees to the priesthood, Fulk. annot. 1. Timoth. 3. sect. 7.

THE SECOND PART OF THE DIFFErence of Bishops and other Ministers.

The Papists.

WE differ from them in two poynts: First, they say, that Bishops are not onely in a higher degree of superioritie to other Ministers, but they are as Princes of the Clergie, and other Ministers as subiects, and in all things to bee commaunded by them. Secondly, they affirme that Bishops are onely properly Pastors, and that to them onely it doth appertaine to preach, and that other Ministers haue no authoritie without their license or consent, to preach at all, and that not principally or chiefely, but solie and wholie to them appertayneth the right of consecrating and giuing orders.

For the first, for the princely authoritie of Bishops, whom they would haue obeyed in all things; they wrast these and such like places of scripture: as 2. Cor. 1.9. I write vnto you, to know whether you will be obedient in all things, [Page] Ergo, they must be absolutely obeyed. Answere: the Apostle challengeth only obedience in such things, as he should commaund agreeable to Gods word, for if I my selfe (sayth he) preach another Gospell, holde me accursed, Galat. 1. Fulk. annot. 1. Cor. 2. sect. 3.

2 Against an Elder receiue no accusation vnder two or three witnesses, 1. Tim. 5.19. Ergo, the authority of Bishops is absolute and princelike: Videmus Episcopum iudicem esse presbyterorum, proinde verum principem, wee see the Bishop is the iudge of the Elders, Ergo, a prince ouer them, Bellarm cap. 14.

Answere: First, it followeth not, Bishops haue iurisdiction and authoritie ouer other Ministers, Ergo, they are princes ouer them. Can there be no preeminence and superioritie in the Church, but it must needes be princelike? Is euery iudge a prince ouer those, which are brought before him to be iudged? 2. Timothie had no such princelike authority, for here it is restrained & limited, a rule is set down by the Apostle which he must obserue: Ergo, his authoritie was not absolute. Thirdly, Saint Paul was so farre off from making Timothie a prince in the Church at Ephesus, that he would rather haue him not to rebuke, but to exhort the Elders as fathers, the younger men as brethren, cap. 5.1. Where now is his princely authoritie become, whereas he maketh his subiects (as our aduersaries call inferior Ministers) his fathers and brethren?

For the second, the Apostles properly had the preaching of the word committed vnto them, Act. 6. For other were chosen to attend vpon tables: the Apostles also onelie had the right of laying on of hands, Act. 14.23. Ergo, It is proper onely to Bishops to preach, and to ordayne, who are the Apostles successors, Bellarmin.

Answere: First, Bellarmine denieth that Bishops doe properly succeed the Apostles, de pontifice lib. 4.25. because he would magnifie the Pope his ghostly father aboue all Bishops: but now forgetting himselfe, hee sayth, Episcopi propriè succedunt Apostolis, Bishops doe properly succeede the Apostles, cap. 14. & so by this reason euery Bishop hath as ful authoritie as the Pope. Secondly,Fulk annot. Iohn 20. sect. 3. euery godly & faithful Bishop is a successor to the Apostles, we denie it not, & so are all faithfull and godly pastors & Ministers: for Christ prayeth for them all indifferently, hauing first praied for his Apostles, Iohn 17.20. I pray not for these alone, sayth our Sauiour, but for al them which shal beleeue in me through their word. Thirdly, at that time when the Deacons were elected, the congregation was at Ierusalem, neither were there as yet any other Pastors ordained, & therefore the Apostles only attēded vpon preaching of the word: but afterward when they had ordayned Pastors in other Churches, to them also fully was committed the word of reconciliation, Ephes. 4.11. Christ hath giuen some to be Apostles, some Prophets, some Pastors and teachers: So that Pastors & teachers, though ordained first by the Apostles, yet had their calling of God, and together in their calling, authoritie and commission to preach, neither being once ordayned, needed they to expect anie further license from the Apostles.

[Page]And as for the right of ordayning and imposition of handes, though it were chiefly in the Apostles, yet the Pastors and Elders together with them layde on their handes, Act. 13.4. Yea the Rhemists confesse as much, that when a Priest is to be ordered, the rest of the Priests together with the Bishop doe lay on their hands, Annotat. 1. Timoth. 4.18. What doth this else signifie, but that they haue some interest in ordayning together with the Bishop? The law also must be changed, Heb. 7.12. that is, the manner and forme of the priesthood. But we easily see your drift: you would gladly haue vs like of this argument, that in stead of a high Priest in the law, you might bring a Pope into the Church.

The Protestantes.

FIrst, though we doe admitte, that for auoyding of schisme, the Church hath thought it meete, there should be difference in degree and a superioritie among Ministers, yet your princely dominion which you doe vrge, in no wise must be admitted.

1 It is contrary to the rule of Christ. Luk. 22.25. the Kings of the nations are Lords ouer them, and they that haue authoritie ouer them, are called benefactors: Here our Sauiour speaketh not of tyrannical dominion (for how could tyrants be benefactors?) but forbiddeth, that there should be any such princelike and pompous preeminence among ecclesiasticall persons, as there is among secular and ciuill gouernours: A superioritie may be graunted, but not as the Prince is ouer his subiects: it was so in time of popery, that the people were halfe subiects to the Prince and halfe subiects to their spirituall gouernours: But though we acknowledge other ecclesiasticall fathers and pastors, yet we are subiects onely to our prince.

2 Saint Peter also is flat against this princely rule and dominion, Feede the flock, sayth he, not as Lords ouer Gods heritage, but that you may bee ensamples, 1. Pet. 5.3. But are not they, I pray you, Lords ouer the flock, that challenge to be princes?

Secondly, concerning the power of preaching, we affirme, that euery pastor once ordayned, hath sufficient authoritie to preach in his owne flocke and charge,Fox. p. 454. as Iohn Husse notably prooued to their face out of a certayne glose in the fift booke of the decretals, that when as the Bishop ordayneth anie Priest, he giueth him also therewithall authoritie to preach. Wee denie not, but when there is iust occasion, this authoritie maybe restrayned by the Church gouernours, and so also may an euill Minister be suspended from his whole ministerie: But the power before spoken of, hee hath at his first receiuing of orders: We thus shew it.

Whatsoeuer belongeth to the office of a Minister set ouer a flocke or charge, hee receiueth the power thereof when he is ordayned: But to preach the word, belongeth to the office of such: for preaching is properly the feeding of the people.

[Page]But see the absurditie of the papists: they say it is not proper to the priesthood to preach, but onely to haue power to sacrifice the body of Christ: But it is proper to the Bishop, say they, to preach. We answere: First, then the Bishop is properly the pastor of euery flocke and congregation in his diocesse, for hee that properly feedeth, is properly the Pastor: And hee that is properly the Pastor, hath the charge of soules properly, yea more, then hath the particular Pastor: for he is improperly their Pastor, but as it were the Bishops substitute and Vicar: But what Bishop in the worlde is able to beare so great a burthen, to haue the especiall and proper charge of all the soules in his diocesse? It is not to be denied, but he hath a charge of their soules, as a Christian Prince also hath in some respect of his subiects: but to say hee is the proper Pastor, and hath the proper & principall charge of soules in teaching and feeding of them (for the question is now of preaching, not of gouerning) who is able to abide it? Secondly, but our Rhemists tell vs another tale, that many that are not able to preach, are meete enough to bee Bishops, 1. Timoth. 5. sect. 13. Ergo, it is not proper to Bishops neither to preach. I pray you then, for whom is it proper? if neither for Bishops nor inferior Pastors, then for none. Thirdly, they make but seuen orders of Ecclesiasticall Ministers, and the priesthood is the chiefe: for a Bishop and a priest make but one order, as Bellarmin. confesseth cap. 11. But to none of all these orders it is proper to preach: for seeing it is not proper to the priest, none of the inferior orders can challenge it. See then what goodly orders these are, which leaue the very chiefe parte of the ministery vndone, which is the preaching of the word. I thinke their meaning is, that this preaching is not so necessary a dutie, but may be well spared in the Church.

2 That which a man is bound to doe vnder paine of the curse of GOD, that he may lawfully performe in due order without the leaue of men: but a woe is layd vpon them that preach not the Gospell, where they are bound, 1. Cor. 9.16.Fox. p. 453 Ergo. Argum. Wicliffi.

3 A man is bound to giue corporal almes to the poore, the needie, the hungry, the thirstie, neither is he to craue leaue of any: Ergo, much more to teach the ignorant, to comfort the weake, and doe other dueties appertayning to his charge, Argum. Wicliffi.

Concerning the power of giuing orders: As Saint Paul speaketh of the laying on of his handes, 2. Timoth. 1.6. so he maketh mention of imposition of hands by the Eldership: 1. Timoth, 4.14. And the Rhemists vpō that place mislike not the practise of the Church, that their Priests doe lay on their handes together with the Bishop vpon his head that is to be ordayned. So that by this it is manifest, that imposition of hands doth not wholly and folie belong vnto the Bishop, seeing the rest of the Elders were wont to lay on their hands likewise, or the Bishop in the name of the rest, Fulk. annot. Tit. 1. sect. 2. So that the Elders were not excluded.

[Page]

THE THIRD PART, CONCERNING THE office and title of Cardinals.

The Papists.

BEllarmine would faine haue the office of Cardinals, as ancient as the Apostles error 72 times: and the name to be worthilie appropriated to the See of Rome, that as the Pope himselfe by his prudence and holines, is, tanquam cardo Ecclesiae, to the Church as the hingell to the dore, vpon the which it is turned and borne vp: so his Counsellers and assistants should be called Cardinals, hauing the care of the Vniuersall Church: but the Iesuite, beside some vaine shew of mothworne antiquitie, hath not one good argument to proue the name, and office of Cardinals, to be either ancient or commendable. Then especiall office, as they are Cardinals, is to elect and chuse the Pope, and to be assistant vnto him in Counsell, for the gouernement of the vniuersall Church, Bellarm. cap. 16.

The Protestants.

THat neither the name of Cardinals, as proper to Rome, is ancient, nor their office, or either of them lawfull or commendable, but vsurped and Antichristian, thus briefely it is shewed.

1 In Augustines time it was a common name, vsually applied, both in the good and euill parte, to chiefe and principall men of any place, or sect: as he calleth the ringleaders of the Donatists, Cardinales Donatistas, Cardinall or captaine Donatists: de baptism. lib. 1. cap. 6. Surely, if it then had been onely due to the assistants of the Romane Bishop, Augustine had been much to blame to applie the name to Heretikes.

2 Augustine thus writeth to Hierome, Quamues secundum honorum vocabula, saith hee, Episcopatus presbyterio maior sit, tamen in multis rebus Augustin. Hieronim. minor est. Though according to the custome of the Church, a Bishop be greater then a Priest, yet Augustine a Bishop in many things is inferior to Hierome a Priest. Now Hierome was a Priest of Rome, and a Cardinall, as our aduersaries say,Epistol. 19. and therefore they picture him commonly in a red gowne and habite of a Cardinall: yet you see Augustine as a Bishop was before him, though for his great learning he putteth himselfe behinde him.

3 Augustine in another place complaineth of one Falcidius a Deacon of Rome, qui duce stultitia, saith hee, diaconos presbyteris coaequare contendit: who being led or carried away with follie,Quaest. vet. & nou. Testa. 101. did goe about to make Deacons equall vnto Priests. Is not the same follie now generally practised in Rome, or a greater? for they doe not onely preferre Cardinall Deacons before Priests, but euen before Bishops and Archbishops: in Augustines time, this was counted a great follie.

[Page]4 Concerning the office of Cardinals in the electing of the Pope, we haue shewed before, quest. 2. part. 2. that it is of no great antiquitie: and that it is iniurious to three estates, to the Emperor, who was wont to cōfirme the election, to the Clergie of Rome, who had in times past interest in the election, and to the people, whose consent was also in time past required: But now all these are excluded, and the matter is wholly referred to the Chapter of Cardinals.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING the Keyes of the Church, committed for the execution to the pastors and gouernors thereof.

THis question hath foure partes. First, wherein the authoritie of the keyes consisteth: secondly, to whom they are committed: thirdly, whether there is absolute power of binding and loosing in the Church, or ministerially onely: fourthly, whether they that haue the dispensation of the Keyes, doe alwaies necessarily bind and loose before God: of these in order.

THE FIRST PART, WHEREIN THE AVthoritie and power of the Keyes consisteth.

The Papists.

error 73 BY the Keyes and power of binding and loosing, they chiefly and principally vnderstand the censures of the Church, as Excommunications, Anathematismes, suspensiōs, Degradations, & the whole Ecclesiastical iurisdictiō. Rhemist. Annot. Matt. 16. sect. 14. Bel. lib. 1. de pontif. cap. 13. Secondly, they tye remission and retaining of sinnes to their imagined and deuised sacrament of penance, saying, that where Christ gaue authoritie to remit sinnes to his Apostles, Iohn 20.23. he instituted the sacrament of penance, Rhemist. Iohn. 20. sect. 3. The sacrifice also and Sacraments of the Church, say they, are ministred for remission of sinnes, Rhemist. 2. Corinth. 5. sect. 3. Thirdly, they seeme to grant in words, that by preaching also of the Gospell, sinnes are reteined, and remitted, ibid. but they make small account thereof: for as we haue heard, they make it not of the essence of their priesthood to preach, neither doth it properly appertaine vnto that office: yea, say they, absolutiō cānot be rightly sought for at the priests hands, but by confession of our sins, which is done in penance. Rhem. Ioh. 20. sect. 5. This then is their opinion, that by their deuised ceremonie and Sacrament of penance, sinnes are properly forgiuen, and that the preaching of the word is not thereto necessarie.

Their chiefe argument is, by abusing that place, Iohn 20.23. where they say Christ instituted the Sacrament of penance, when he gaue power to his Apostles to remit and reteine sinnes.

[Page]Ans. First, your Sacrament of Penance, is neither grounded vpon this, nor any other place of scripture: here in the wordes of Christ there is no institution of a sacrament, because there is no visible element giuen, whereunto the worde being added may make a sacrament. Secondly, here the commission is but renewed, which was granted before to his Apostles, and their successors, Matth. 18.18. Fulk. Annot. Iohn. 20. sect. 3.

The Protestants.

THe Keyes of the Church, that is, the power to bind and loose sinners, to open or shut vnto them the kingdome of God, consisteth both in the externall discipline and gouernement of the Church lawfully executed according to the word of God, as also in preaching of the Gospell, by assuring in Christs name all faithfull and penitent persons remission and forgiuenes of their sinnes, and in denouncing and threatning the wrath of God against the disobedient and impenitent: also as the sacraments are ioyned to the word, as seales and pledges of the promises thereof, so by the right administration of the sacraments together with the preaching of the word, sinnes are retained or remitted.

The Rhemists therefore doe vs great iniurie, in falsely charging of vs, that we should hold that the spiritual power of the Church standeth only vpon the preaching of the word, whereas wee grant, that it is exercised also in the Ecclesiasticall gouernement of the Church, both in punishing, excommunicating & censuring of offenders, which is the binding of them, and in releasing and absoluing them againe, which is the other power of loosing: Rhemist. 2. Corinth. cap. 10. sect. 1. Leauing now this part of spiritual power in Ecclesiasticall discipline, which is not in this place in question betweene vs, wee must touch that other part, which is exercised in the word and sacraments.

1 That the sacraments doe binde and loose, it is proued out of the word of God: they doe binde, Whosoeuer eateth & drinketh vnworthily, eateth & drinketh his own damnation, 1. Cor. 11.29. they doe also loose, As oft as ye shal eate this bread and drinke this cup, you shewe the Lords death, till he come, vers. 26.

But here is a double caution and condition to be annexed. First, that all Sacraments worke not this effect, but onely those of Christs institution, which are but two, baptisme and the supper of the Lord: for Paul saith, I haue receiued of the Lord, that which I deliuered vnto you, 1. Cor. 11.23. If the Apostles would not, neither might deliuer any Sacraments, but those which were instituted of Christ, what great presumption is it in any other to doe it? Secondly, we must not think, that remissiō of sinnes is necessarily tied to the Sacraments, as though there could be no remissiō without thē, for the grace of remission may be effectual in the name of Christ, by the preaching of the word without a sacramēt, Ioh. 20. sect. 4. Ful. For the word may be preached without a sacramēt, but the sacramēt cānot be ministred without the word: for that were as though a man should deliuer a seale without a writing. Neither is it our meaning, that as the Rhemists cauil with vs, the sacramēt cannot be administred without a sermon of the death [Page] of Christ: for though that were alwaies to bee wished, yet where it cannot bee had, there must and ought to be a briefe shewing and declaration of the death of Christ out of the word, so oft as the Sacrament is administred, as it is obserued in our Church. Fulk. Annot. 1. Corinth. 11. sect. 15.

3 We must take heede, we conceiue not thus, as though the Sacrament gaue grace by the worke wrought, and that by the very vse, forme, and externall act of the Sacrament wee obtaine remission of sinnes, as the Rhemists would beare vs in hand, 1. Corinth. 11. sect. 15. But the Sacraments are onely effectuall to the worthie receiuers, and to the worthie receiuing, faith is requisite, as Saint Paul willeth all men to examine themselues, 1. Corinth. 11.28. which is, as hee himselfe interpreteth it, to proue whether they be in the faith, 2. Corinth. 13.5. These conditions then being obserued, we denie not, but that there is an exercise of the keyes euen in the Sacraments.

2 But chiefely and principallie, is this power dispensed by the preaching of the word, as Saint Paul saith, Wee are the sauour of death vnto death, vnto some: there is the binding: and to other the sauour of life vnto life: there is the loosing, 1. Corinth. 2.16. So our Sauiour Christ saith, He that refuseth mee, the word that I haue spoken, shall iudge him in the last day, Iohn. 12.48. Here is the power of binding: Againe, the truth shall make you free, Iohn 8.32. Here is the power of loosing. Who therefore doubteth this, that the preaching of the word is the most proper and principall way and meane, for the exercising of this Ecclesiasticall power? for seeing faith is the key of heauen, thereby wee haue free accesse vnto the throne of grace, Rom. 5.2. and faith commeth by hearing, Rom. 10.17. and hearing by the word: It remaineth that by the word the keyes are dispensed.

Augustine also subscribeth vnto this: for speaking of reformation of life and repentance with remission of former sinnes, thus he saith, Quid empturus es vt facias, quae emplastra quaesiturus? ecce cùmloquor, muta cor, & factum est, quod tam saepe & tam diu clamatur, vt fiat. in Psal. 63. What medicine or plaister wilt thou buie to heale thy sinne? Behold euen now, while I preach vnto thee, change thy heart, and it is already done, which we so often call vpon you to be done: See then by the preaching of the word our heart is chaunged, our life amended, and our sinne remitted.

THE SECOND PART, TO WHOM THE authoritie of the keyes is committed.

The Papists.

error 74 THe authoritie and power of excommunication, say they, is not in the whole Church, but onely in the Prelates: neither was the power of binding and loosing giuen vnto the whole church: but in their own name, not in the name or right of the Church, doe the pastors and Prelates exercise this power, Remist. 2. [Page] 1. Corinth. 5. sect. 3. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 7. The Church is sayd to binde and loose, because the Prelates doe binde & loose, as a man is said to speake, and see, though he onely speake with the tongue, and see with the eyes.

1 They seeme to proue it by S. Paules example, 1. Corinth. 5. I absent in bodie but present in spirit haue decreed: S. Paul vseth here his Apostolike power, in sending his letters and Mandatum, to haue the incestuous person excommunicate: Ergo, the right was in him and not in the Church, and so consequently in the Bishops his successors.

Ans. First, S. Paul sendeth no Mandatum, but sheweth his Apostolike power, in decreeing the incestuous person worthy of excommunication, and requiring the same to be executed by the Church, Fulk. 1. Corin. 5. sec. 2. Secondly, though Paul gaue the sentence, yet was it done both in the power of Christ and the name of the whole Church: for he had decreed onely that he should be excommunicate: it was not actually done: but to the due performing thereof there is required, the congregating of the Church in Christs name, the presence of Paul in spirit by his apostolike power, & that it should be done in the name of Christ. Al this sheweth, that Paul gaue sentence in the name of the whole Church.

2 Paul (they say) by the preeminent power of his Ministerie, pardoneth the incestuous person whom he had excommunicate, Rhemist. argument. in 1. ad Corinth.

Ans. The text is plaine, that he consenteth the Church should pardon him, 2. Corinth. 2.10. To whom you forgiue any thing I forgiue also. Heere not Paul onely, but the whole Church pardoneth, Fulk. ibid.

3 The Iesuites simile may bee returned vpon his owne head: for as the eye and tongue in the bodie are but instruments of the life and power of the soule, which quickneth the whole bodie: so the gouernours of the Church do execute the discipline of the Church by the spirit of Christ, which is giuen to the whole bodie.

The Protestants.

THe authoritie of excōmunication pertaineth to the whole Church, although the execution and iudgement thereof, to auoyd confusion, be committed to the gouernours of the Church which exercise that authoritie, as in the name of Christ, so in the name of the whole Church, Fulk. totidem verbis, annot. 1. Cor. 5. sect. 3.

1 Math. 18.17. If he wil not heare thee tell the Church: this place proueth, that although the exercising of the keyes be referred to the gouernours of the Church; yet the authoritie and right is in the whole Church: for the keyes were giuen to the whole Church. The pastors and gouernours, though they be excellent and principall members of the Church, yet are they improperly called the Church, Argument. Illyrici.

2 We conclude the same also out of S. Paules words, 1. Cor. 2.21. All things are yours, whether Paul, Apollos, or Cephas, whether things present, or things to come, and ye are Christs, and Christ Gods: Ergo, whatsoeuer power is in the [Page] Church, it is the Churches, not onely the common vse and the benefite thereof, (because it may be answered, that although the keyes be onely granted to the Prelates, yet they vse them to the good of the Church) but the right also and possession thereof, euen as the Church is the inheritance and proper possession of Christ.

3 Augustine consenteth: Ecclesia, quae fundatur in Christo, claues ab eo regni coelorum accepit in Petro. Tract. in Iohann. 124. The Church, which is founded vpon Christ, receiued in Peter the keyes of the kingdome of heauen: But the whole Church, and not onely the Pastors, is founded and builded vpon Christ: Ergo.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE PASTORS of the Church haue any absolute power to remit sinnes, otherwise, then as Ministers onely.

The Papistes.

error 75 THey spare not to say, that Priests haue full right to remit sinnes, and are not ministers onely thereof and dispensers, but haue full power as Christ had, and he that doubteth of their right herein, may as well doubt whether Christ had authoritie as man to remit sinnes, Rhemist. annot. Iohn 20. sect. 3. And againe, they call it an expresse power and commission, yea a wonderfull power which is giuen vnto Priests to remit sinnes, and therfore it followeth necessarily, that men should submit themselues to their iudgement, for release of their sinnes, Annot. Iohn 20. sect. 5.

1 They reason thus out of our Sauiours owne words, Iohn 20.21. As my father hath sent me, so I send you. He sheweth his fathers commission giuen to himselfe, and then in plaine termes most amply imparteth the same to his Apostles: But Christ had full right to remit sinnes: Ergo, also the Apostles and their successors: for they haue the same power that Christ had, Rhemist. annot. Iohn 20. sect. 3.

Ans. First, it is great presumption, and spoken without any ground, to say, that Christ, by sending his Apostles into the world, gaue them as full, large, and ample commission, as he himselfe had: for neither the Pope, in whom remaineth, as they say, the Apostolike authoritie, by their owne confession, can doe all that Christ did, as to ordaine and institute Sacraments: and Christ (say they) might forgiue sinnes without the Sacraments, which the Pope cannot doe, and so consequently neither the Apostles, whose full iurisdiction he hath, in this behalfe, Bellarm. de pontif. lib. 5. cap. 4. Secondly, the power therefore here granted to the Apostles, is in the name of Christ, to declare and pronounce remission of sinnes, according to the wil of God, not properly in their owne power to release or absolue sinners.

2 He breathed vpon them, and gaue them the holy Ghost, vers. 22. Therefore he that denieth the Priests authoritie to forgiue sinnes, he must denye the [Page] holy Ghost to be God, and not to haue power to remit sinnes, Rhem. ibid sect. 4.

Ans. What a blasphemous consequence is this? The holy Ghost hath absolute power to forgiue sinnes: Ergo, the Apostles also, and all other Priests haue the same power. First, by this meanes they make no difference betweene the fulnes of power in our Sauiour Christ, and the communication of that power to other Ministers: of Christ it is sayd, that the Spirit was not giuen him by measure, Ioh. 3.34. and that the holy Ghost dwelleth in him bodily: but it were great blasphemie so to say of any man, Apostle or Minister beside, which haue receiued of the same grace, but not in the like measure that Christ hath, but the spirit is giuen to euery one in measure, as they haue neede in their seuerall places and callings. Secondly, though we should grant, that the Apostles had the full authoritie of Christ actually to remit sinnes, which they shall neuer proue, yet it may be doubted, whether al Ministers, whom they call Priests, (which name we refuse not, if it be taken according to the sense of the originall word Presbyter, and not for a sacrificing priesthood) haue as full power, in this case, as the Apostles had, nay it is plaine, they haue not: for the Apostles and other in the Primitiue Church, had power to discerne spirits, 1. Cor. 12.10. and to giue actually the bodies of the excommunicate to bee vexed, and possessed of the diuell, 1. Cor. 5.5. and after a strange manner to exercise power ouer their bodily life, as Peter did vpon Ananias and Sapphira, Act. 5: Yet we rather stand vpon this poynt, that neither the Apostles, nor any other Ministers haue power actually to remit sinnes, then onely as dispensers and stewards in the name of Christ.

The Protestants.

AL the power of binding and loosing committed to the Apostles and to the Ministers of the word and Sacraments, is, by declaring the will and pleasure of God out of his word, both to pronounce forgiuenes of sinnes to all, that are truely penitent, & the reteining of them to the obstinate and impenitent, Fulk. annot. Iohn 20. sect. 3. So that Ministers are not made iudges in this case, but only as the Lords ambassadors, to declare the will of God out of his word.

1 There is a notable place for this purpose, 2. Corinth. 5.18. God hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe through Iesus Christ, and hath giuen vs the ministerie of reconciliation. So then Christ is the onely author of reconciliation, the Apostles are but ministers: how then say the Rhemists, that Christ himselfe is but a minister also of our reconciliation, yet a chiefe minister, whereas the Apostle maketh him the author? God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe, vers. 19. Wee are but ambassadors for Christ, and pray you in Christs stead, to bee reconciled vnto God: this then is the office of Ministers, not to reconcile men vnto God, but to pray them to bee reconciled through Christ: Christ onely is the reconciler, they but ministers of reconciliation: They are but messengers and ambassadors, onely to declare their Princes pleasure; [Page] their commission is certaine, beyond that they cannot goe. Wherefore that is a blasphemous decretal, and cleane contrarie to the scripture, which is ascribed but falsely, to Pontianus Bishop of Rome, which sayth, that God hath Priests so familiar, that by them he forgiueth the sinnes of others, and reconcileth them vnto him, Fox. pag. 59. But S. Paul sayth, that God onely by Christ reconcileth vs vnto himselfe.

2 Augustine doth very freely vtter his minde concerning this matter, who putteth this obiection: If men doe not forgiue sinnes, then it should seeme to be false which Christ sayth, Whatsoeuer you bind in earth is bound in heauen. He answereth: Daturus erat dominus hominibus spiritum sanctum, &c. God was to giue vnto men the holy Ghost, by whom their sinnes should be forgiuen them. Spiritus dimittit, non vos; spiritus autem Deus est: Deus ergo dimittit, non vos: the spirit therefore remitteth sinne, and not you: the spirit is God, God forgiueth sinnes, and not you. Here is one argument, God onely forgiueth sinnes: Ergo, not man. Againe, Quides homo nisi aeger sanandus? vis mihi esse medicus? mecum quaere medicum. O man what art thou that takest away my sinnes, but a sicke man thy selfe? wouldest thou be my phisition? nay, let vs both together goe seeke a phisition that may heale vs. Lo, another argument: He cannot be a phisition to others, that needeth a phisition himselfe: he cannot reconcile others to God, who hath himselfe neede of a reconciler. Further, he sayth: Qui dimittit per hominem, potest dimittere praeter hominem: non enim minus est idoneus per se dare, qui potest per alium dare. He that can forgiue sinnes by man, can forgiue also without man: for he may as well forgiue by himselfe, as he can doe it by another. Here is then the third argument: If man doe actually forgiue sinnes, then Christ should not forgiue sinnes without man:Augustin. Homil. 23. for the whole power is committed to man. Yea, the Rhemists affirme the same, that it is necessarie we should submit our selues to the iudgement of the Priest for release of our sinnes: if it bee necessarie, then sinnes cannot be remitted without the Priest: then is Christs power limited, he cannot forgiue without man, which is contrarie to that Augustine affirmeth here.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER STRAIGHT waies whatsoeuer be loosed or bound by the ministerie of men vpon earth, be so in heauen.

The Papists.

AN expresse power (say they) is giuen vnto Priests to remit and reteyne error 76 sinnes: And Christ promiseth, that whose sinnes soeuer they forgiue, they are forgiuen of God, and whose sinnes soeuer they retaine, they are retained of God, Rhemist. annot. Iohn 20. sect. 5. Whereby it appeareth it is their opinion, which is manifest also by the practise of their Church, that at the will and pleasure [Page] of euerie priest exercising the keyes vpon earth, men are bound and loosed in heauen.

They ground this their opinion vpon the generalitie of the wordes: Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted, Iohn 20.23. and Math. 18.18. Whatsoeuer you binde in earth shall be bound in heauen.

Answere: These places are not so to be vnderstood, as though God were bound to ratifie euery decree of men vpon earth: for first this power is giuen to all lawfull pastors which doe holde the Apostolike fayth, not to Idolatrous, ignorant and blasphemous priests, such as most, if not all, of the popish sorte are. Secondly, they must decree in the earth according to Gods wil: Wherefore Iohn 20.22. first Christ breatheth his spirite vpon his Apostles, and then giueth them their commission: signifiyng hereby, that they must execute this power as they shall be directed by Gods spirite: and Matth. 18.20. it followeth, that they must be assembled in the name of Christ: that is, according to Christs rule and the direction of his word, they must binde and loose, and not at their owne discretion.

The Protestants.

THat no sentence or decree of men bindeth or looseth before God in heauen, but that which is pronounced according to the will and pleasure of GOD, and by the warrant of his worde, the scripture euery where teacheth vs.

1 Prouer. 26.2. As the sparrow by flying escapeth, so the curse that is causelesse shall not come. Isay 5.20. Woe vnto them that speake good of euill, and euill of good: Hee that iustifieth the wicked and condemneth the iust, they are both an abomination to GOD, Prouer. 17.15. Wherefore a priest binding a penitent man, and loosing a wicked man, doth flatly transgresse the law and rule of Gods word: neither shall his sentence be ratified in heauen.

2 In saying that whosoeuers sinnes the priest bindeth or looseth, his sentence standeth in effect before God, they must needes admit one or both of these absurdities: either to grant, that a Priest cannot erre in dispensing of the [...]eyes, which were too shamefull a saying, to giue so great a priuiledge to euery ignorant and simple priest, (such as their Church hath great store of) which no mortall man can haue. Saint Paul giueth warning to Timothie, who was more then a common or ordinarie minister, that he lay not his handes sodaynly vpon any, ad 1. Timoth. 5. vers. 22. But if Timothie so excellent a man had been free from erring in executing his function, this exhortation of Saynt Paule had been needlesse and superfluous.

Or else, they must say that the iudgement of mens soules is committed vnto them: for if, looke, how they pronounce vpon men on earth, euen so it fareth with them before GOD: then the saluation and damnation of men [Page] dependeth of their sentence: But the scripture sayth, Doe not iudge thy brother, for we shal al appeare before the iudgement seate of Christ, Rom. 14.10. Men therefore are not iudges to pronounce who are saued or damned, but the iudgement must be committed to Christ.

But who knoweth not that the popish Church doth arrogate vnto themselues this power, to define who are Saynts in heauen, and whose soules are tormented in hell? Thus they dealt with Iohn Husse: hauing condemned him, they set a crowne of paper vpon his head pictured with diuels, saying vnto him: Now we commit thy soule to the diuel. At the burning of that worthie seruant of God and blessed martyr, Iohn Frith, one Doctor Cooke, a fowle mouthed papist bid the people to pray no more for him, then they would for a dogge.Fox pag. 1036. And thus they take the Lords office out of his hand, in taking vpon them to be iudges of men.

3 I will conclude with Augustines words, he sayth, that sinnes are forgiuen or not forgiuen, non secundum arbitrium hominum, sed secundum arbitrium dei, & orationes sanctorum: not after the will and pleasure of men, but according to the will of God, and at the prayers of deuout and holie men.

THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING the lawfulnesse of mariage in Ministers.

THis question hath three partes: first, whether it bee expedient or requisite that all Ministers should be tied vnto single life. Secondly, whether men twice maried are to be admitted into the ministerie. Thirdly, whether Ministers hauing entred into holie orders, ought to renounce the societie of their wiues before maried.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER IT BE lawfull for Ministers to marrie.

The Papists.

error 77 BEllarmine confesseth that single life is not imposed vpon Ministers by the lawe of God, for there is no precept either in the olde or new testament, that forbiddeth Ministers to marrie: but it is a positiue law of the Church, most ancient and most iust, kept and obserued euen since the Apostles time. And therefore it is not now lawfull for Ministers to marrie, cap. 18. lib. de Clericis.

1 1. Timoth. 2.3. the Apostle sayth, that no man that warreth, entangleth himselfe with the affayres of this life: But to bee maried and to haue care of houshold, are counted amongst the affayres and busines of this life: Ergo, a Minister who is the Lords souldier, ought not to entangle himselfe therewith, Bellarmin.

Ans. First, the Iesuite before confessed, that they had no scripture against Ministers mariage, how is it then, that now he pleadeth scripture? Secondly, we must put the Iesuite in minde of his owne exposition of this place, lib. 5. de [Page]pontif. cap. 10. where, this place being alleadged against the temporall dominion of Ecclesiasticall persons, he answereth, that this place onely forbiddeth negotiationes, and mercimonia, merchandise and traffick in the worlde, not regimen politicum, not politicall regiment. If then the politicall care of a citie, prouince, or common-wealth be no impediment, in his iudgement, to the spirituall warfare: much lesse without all question is the domesticall care of one familie, the charge of wife and children. Thirdly, we vtterly denie, that mariage is an hinderance or let to the calling of Ministers: nay we say, that it is an helpe and comfort to those that haue not the proper gifte of continencie.

2 The Iesuite giueth diuers instances, wherein mariage is a let and impediment to ministers: As, it hindreth their prayer, their preaching, their almes and liberalitie to the poore, for they haue wife and children to care for. Bellarmin.

Answere: First, belike you esteeme of mariage as of an vnholie and vnpure thing, that a man can neither pray, nor doe the office of a Christian performing the duetie to his wife: and indeede one of your companions calleth mariage a prophanation of sacred orders. Greg. Martin. discouer. cap. 15. sect. 11. Whereas the Apostle calleth it an honourable state, Heb. 13. and it was instituted in Paradise, whereas before the fall of man there was no vncleane thing. Secondly, we denie not, but that abuse of mariage both in ministers and other lay-men, is an impediment to all holie actions: and therefore Saint Paul giueth generall Counsell to all both ministers and others, that they which haue wiues should bee as though they had none, 1. Cor. 7.29. that is, should liue soberly in mariage, and not giue themselues to the wantonnes of the flesh. Thirdly, neither doth mariage hinder hospitalitie: for Saint Paul requiring that a minister should be harborous, 1. Tim. 3.2. giueth also rules concerning the gouernement of his familie, his wife and children. vers 4.11. For to whom may he better commit the care of houshold affayres then to his wife? And that familie which is guided by a carefull & godly huswife, we see by experience, to yeeld more reliefe to the poore, and giue entertainement to strangers, then those houses which haue none. And where it is obiected, that Ministers will care altogether for their children: It hath been seene that single priests in time of poperie, haue been more couetous and greedie to enrich their kinred, then maried Ministers haue cared for the prouision of their children.

3 Single life by the Apostle is preferred before the maried estate, and therefore fittest for Ministers: for he that is maried careth for the things of the world, 1. Cor. 7 33. Rhemist.

Ans. First, single life is preferred before mariage, in all men, & not onely in Ministers: And therefore as lay-men are not bound to single life, though it be in it self more conuenient, so neither ought ministers to bee. 2. Though a thing in it selfe be best, yet is it not vniuersally best for euery man: as riches are better then pouertie, because they are Gods blessing: yet is it not best [Page] for euery man to be rich: God seeth it good, that some men should be poore: So single life is the best for those that haue the gift of chastitie, that can with a quiet conscience liue single: otherwise matrimonie were much better: for Saint Paul, that wisheth that euery one would liue single as hee did, yet afterward sayth, It is better to marrie then to burne: So that by the Apostles iudgement, to marrie is best for him that hath not the gift of continencie. Iewel. pag. 232. defens. Apolog.

The Protestants.

THat it is not onely lawfull but conuenient, that all men both Ministers and others, that haue not receiued a proper gift of continencie, should marrie, and that it is agreeable and consonant to the word of God: thus wee shew it.

1 The scriptures are most playne for the mariage of Ministers, 1. Timoth. 3.2. Saynt Paul sayth a Bishop, and generally euery Minister, may be the husband of one wife: and verse 11. their wiues are described, howe they ought to behaue themselues: Let their wiues be honest. Ergo, it is lawfull for them to bee maried. Bellarmine answereth, that Saynt Paul speaketh of the wiues which they had before their calling and ordayning, not those, which they should marry after. But there appeareth no such thing out of the text: Nay Saint Paul, say wee, had libertie as well as others, to leade about a sister a wife, euen after hee was an Apostle, 1. Corinth. 9. Wherefore it is as lawfull afterward as afore. Bellarmine answereth: We must thus read, a Sister a woman, and it is like they were women, that did minister vnto the Apostles and followed them. We replie: First, the word Sister, doth implie a woman, and therefore it had been an improper and needlesse speech, to say, a sister a woman: therefore we must rather read, a sister a wife. Secondly, if they were other women, which ministred of their substance, what neede the Apostles to be mayntained of the Churches? if they ministred but in their seruice and attendance, who were more fit to doe it and to follow them from place to place then their wiues? Thirdly, the phrase of leading about a sister, importeth a superioritie and authority, such as the husband hath ouer his wife.

Another place we haue, Hebr. 13.3. Mariage is honourable among all men: Ergo, amongst Ministers. Bellarmin. If it were meant of all mariages, then to marrie within the degrees of consanguinitie, were also honourable. Answere: This is a very childish cauill: First, hee might haue read further, And the bedde vndefiled: Saint Paul therefore speaketh of lawfull mariage: and indeede the other ioyning and coupling of men and women together contrarie to GODS lawe, is not to bee counted Matrimonie or Wedlocke, but Incest rather and Fornication, as the brother to marrie his brothers wife, and such like. Secondly, Saint Paul sayth, not all mariages are honourable, but mariage is honourable for all men; the generalitie is not of the thing, but the persons: Wherefore we doe fittly conclude out of this [Page] place, that marriage is lawful and commendable euen among ministers. argum. Caluin.

Further Saint Paul saith, For auoyding of fornication, let euery man haue his owne wife, 1. Corinth. 7.2. Here is no restraint for Ministers. Bellarm. this is to be vnderstoode of those that haue not made a vow of continency. Answer: First, our Sauiour Christ commaundeth no such vowes: it is a cruell Antichristian yoke laide vpon Ministers, to binde them, when they receiue orders, to vowe single life: & therefore your Antichristian decree ought not to abridge the generall libertie granted by the Apostle. Secondly, the end of marriage is generall, to auoyde fornication, and therefore the remedie also is generall: for euerie man hauing not a proper gift of continencie, may be in danger of that inconuenience, if he be denyed the ordinarie helpe. Melancthon.

Againe, 1. Timoth. 4. to forbid marriage is called a doctrine of diuels: but the Popish Church forbiddeth marriage. Bellarm. Wee doe not forbid marriage to any, but we require single life of all that are entred into orders, which, it is at their owne choyce to receiue, or to refuse. Ans. First, it is necessarie that some should receiue orders, and be consecrate to the Church ministerie: wherefore requiring this condition of all such to liue single, though particularly you prohibite not this man or that to marrie, yet generally you prohibite the whole calling, which is worse. Secondly, if you say you doe not forbid marriage simplie to all: no more did the Manichees, for they suffered their scholars and auditors to marrie. And Saint Augustines words are generall. Ille prohibet matrimonium, qui illud malum esse dicit: he forbiddeth marriage,Cōt. Faust. li. 30. cap. 6. that thinketh it is euil: you therefore forbidding marriage, must needs hold opinion that is wicked and euill.

2 This restraint of the marriage of Ministers, hath not been of ancient time in the Church, but imposed vpon the Church of late, 1000. yeere after Christ: Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus anno 180. had seuen of his progenitors before him Bishops of the same See. In the Nicene Councel Paphnutius stoode vp, and stayed the decree, that should haue past, for restraining of the marriage of Ministers, and it is saide, Synodus landauit sententiam Paphnutij: The Synod commended Paphnutius sentence. Sozomen. lib. 1. cap. 11. Gregorie the father of Gregorie was Bishop of Nazianzum. The Greeke Church neuer yet receiued this popish decree of single life, and their Bishops are married at this day. Bellarmine saith, that the Church of Rome hath dispenced with them, cap. 18. Ergo if the Pope would dispence with the Latine Church, it might be lawfull enough then for Ministers to marrie; wherefore it is but a humane constitution. Againe, it is false that they haue dispenced with the Greeke Church: they care not for their dispensations, but vse their owne Christian libertie: neither was the Greeke Church euer subiect to the Bishop of Rome.

Thus we see, that in times past marriage was lawfull for all men, vntill Pope Nicholas the second, Alexander the second, and Gregorie the seuenth, that notable sorcerer and adulterer: for these three comming together, one not long [Page] after another, began by publike decree to restraine Priests marriage: not long after them, Anselme began to play the Rex here in England, anno 1104. who stoutely proceeded in his vngodly purpose,Fox pag. 1166. and enacted that married Priests should either leaue their wiues, or their benefices. At which time 200. Priests at once came barefoote to the Kings palace, to make complaint: And for all Anselmes Popelike and outragious proceedings against married Priests, yet they continued married well nie two hundred yeeres after Anselmes time,Pag. 1167. doe what he could: and thus it is manifest, that the restraint of Ministers marriage is no ancient thing, but then began most to be vrged, when Antichrist fullie was reuealed to the world, when as the orders of Friers came in and were confirmed and priuiledged vnder Boniface 8. about anno 1300.

3 What better argument can we haue against this Popish decree, then the great vncleannes, and foule enormities that haue been brought, by the meanes thereof, into the Church? In the time of Gregorie the first, who enioyned his Clergie to liue single, commaunding on a time his seruants to catch him some fish, out of his Motes and Ponds, in stead of fish they brought vnto him sixe thousand heads of yong children: whereupon, he fetching a great sigh with himselfe, commended then the saying of the Apostle, It is better to marrie then to burne. Bellarmine hath no better answere then to denie the storie, which notwithstanding is found in the Epistle of Huldericus Bishop of Augusta, which he sent to Pope Nicholas. Fox. pag. 1155.

In Anselmes time, after the restraint of Ministers marriage, great rumors, and complaint was brought to him,Fox. pag. 1165. of the execrable vice of Sodomitrie, which began to raigne in the Clergie. Pope Pius the second saide, hee sawe manie waightie causes, why wiues should bee taken away from Priests, but he saw more why they should be restored to them againe. Bishop Iewell Apol. cap. 8. diuis. 3. Bernard saith, Tolle de Ecclesia honorabile coniugium, &c. Take from the Church honorable Matrimonie, shall you not replenish it with incestuous persons, concubinaries, Sodomiticall vices? Hereupon the popish Catholikes seeing their owne infirmitie,Sup. Cant. serm. 66. Iuel p. 231. began thus to salue vp the matter, Si non castè, tamen cautè: if thou deale not chastly, yet deale charily. Yea they are not ashamed thus to write, If any of the Priests should bee found imbracing of a woman,Fox. p 785. it must bee expounded and presupposed, that hee doth it to blesse her.

I but (saith Bellarmine) these are the abuses of single life, will you condemne a good thing, because of the abuse? by the same reason (saith he) coelum & terra tollenda sunt, Heauen and earth must be taken away, because they were abused of the heathen and taken for Gods. cap. 21.

Answere: First, wee say not, that these bee the fruites of single life, which Saint Paul commendeth in all those that haue the gift, but of this co-acted and constrained Popish Virginitie, which is imposed indifferently vpon all, and cannot haue any good vse: secondlie, when you can proue that restraining of Ministers marriage is of Gods ordinance, as it is certaine Heauen and [Page] earth are of his making, then wee will grant vnto you, that it may haue a right vse, and for the abuse ought not vtterly to be abolished.

4 Lastly, Augustine saith, Quae nubere volunt, & ideo non nubunt quia impunè non possunt, melius nuberent, quàm vrerentur, id est, De sanct. virgin. cap. 34. quàm occulta flamma concupiscentiae in ipsa conscientia vastarentur. Those Virgins, which would marrie, but cannot, because of restraint, and reproch, might better marrie then burne, that is to say, then with the secret flame of concupiscence, to be wasted and consumed in their conscience. Wherefore it followeth, that all they, both Ministers, votaries & Virgines, that haue not power to absteine, should doe better, for all their profession and vow, to marrie, then to burne.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER any ought to bee admitted to the Ministerie after second marriage.

The Papists.

THey denie not, but that Bishops and Ministers, hauing been once married,error 78 are rightly ordeyned, so that afterward they doe not companie with their wiues: but they which haue been either themselues twice married, or haue married a widdow, which had a husband before, are vtterlie vncapable of holy orders, Bellarmine cap. 23. Rhemist. Timoth. 3. sect. 4. and this they call Bigamie.

1 They reason thus out of Saint Pauls words, 1. Timoth. 4.2. A Bishop must be the husband of one wife: that is, say they, that no kinde a way was, Bigamus, or had two wiues either at once, or one after another: And they proue their interpretation thus: First, as Saint Paul describeth a widow of the Church, 1. Timoth. 5.9. that hath been the wife of one husband, so here hee saith of a Bishop, that he should be the husband of one wife: but that is meant, successiuè, of one husband after another: for it was neuer seene that one woman should haue more husbands then one at once, nor neuer suffered either amongst the Iewes or Gentiles: therefore it must be so taken here, a husband of one wife: that is, who hath been but once married, as it is taken there, a wife of one husband, that neuer had more, not onely simul, at once, but not successiuè, not successiuely one after another, Bellarmine cap. 23.

Ans. First, there were many women both among the Iewes and Gentiles, that had forsaken their first husbands, and were vnlawfully coupled to others, and so had moe husbands at once, and likewise many men that had done the like to their wiues, but afterward repented, and were conuerted to the Christian faith, but yet were not admitted to any publike office in the Church, because of their former infamous life. Of such the Apostle speaketh in both these places, and not of those that married one wife, or one husband after another. [Page] It is therefore great boldnes, and a greater vntruth to say, that there were none such heard of in those dayes: for although it were neither lawfull then nor now, yet both many such were heard of in those dayes, and it were no hard matter to finde out some now among the papists, that haue had more then one wife at once. Secondly, he is not to be counted Bigamus, or Digamus, that is coupled and ioyned to one wife after another lawfullie, but he that vnlawfully at once enioyeth more then one. Fulk. Annot. Timoth. 5. sect. 6. & cap. 3. sect. 4.

2 Againe say they, the high Priest in the lawe was not permitted to marrie a widow, Leuit. 21.13. Which lawe being obserued in the high Priest, ought much more to be kept now, Rhemist.

Answere: That lawe concerning the high Priest, did onely appertaine to himselfe, who was a figure of Christ: neither can it be extended to the Ministers of the Gospell, no more then any other partes of his office, that were peculiar to that state and calling, Fulk. Annot. 1. Timoth. 3. sect. 4.

The Protestants.

THat it is not by the word of God forbidden, that any man should marrie the second, yea the third time, after the decease of his wife, neither that hee is to be counted vnchast or giuen to wantonnes in so doing (much lesse hee that in his first marriage taketh a widow,) neither that, to haue been twise married ought to be a barre or a stop from entring into the state and calling of the Ministerie, if otherwise the man be qualified and furnished with sufficient graces for that calling: thus it is proued.

1 They that cut off such, as haue been twise married, from behauing any calling in the Church, doe sauour of the heresie of Montanus, into the which also Tertulliane fell, who condemned second marriage: for if once marriage be no impediment nor preiudice to him that is to bee ordained, but second marriage be, then doe they disallow second marriage, (because a man is thereby disabled to be a Minister) if not simply, yet they make it lesse lawful, nay more offensiue, and subiect to obloquie and reproch. But the scripture maketh no difference betweene first & second marriage: S. Paul saith, For auoiding of fornication, let euery man haue his own wife: he saith not, his first wife: but generally: so that it is lawfull for auoiding of fornication to marrie the second or the third wife, as well as the first.

2 If it be as lawfull to marrie the second wife, as the first, if it be for auoiding of fornication, then secōd marriage doth no more hinder the receiuing of orders then the first: but the antecedent is true: for what should make the second marriage lesse lawful? not any dutie that the wife or the husband oweth to the partie deceased: for they are free in that respect, & set at libertie, Rom. 7.3. Neither is the end of marriage made frustrate more now then before: for hee that marrieth the second time, may haue as good cause to doe it, for auoiding of fornication, as he had at the first.

[Page]3 Second marriage, make the worst of it you can, is not so great a blot as fornication, or adulterie, or to haue a Concubine: but these were no lets of priesthood in poperie: Nay, we reade that Augustine in the purer age of the Church, that confesseth he had two Concubines, yet afterward was made presbyter,Confess. lib. 6. ca. 15. and at the last a Bishop for all that. Wherefore, there is no reason that exception should be taken against a twice married man, seeing a fornicator is free.

Lastly, of this opinion Augustine seemeth to be: That it is as lawfull to marrie the second time & the third, as the first. Ait Apostolus, mulier alligata est viro, quamdiu vir eius viuit; non dixit primus, secundus, tertius, aut quartus: The woman is bound (sayth the Apostle) so long as her husband liueth; he sayth not,De bono viduitat. cap. 12. the first husband, second, third, or fourth: So the woman is as free after the first or second husbands death, as when she was a virgin. Yet if she can content her selfe with her widowes estate, and haue the gift of continencie, she shall do better not to marrie: But if she haue not, it is better to marrie (S. Paul sayth not, the first, second or third time, but so often as she hath neede) rather then to burne.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER MINISTERS ought to refrayne the companie of their wiues, being entered into orders.

The Papistes.

THey confesse, that Peter and other of the Apostles were married, but after their calling they had no companie with their wiues, Rhemist. Math. 8. sect. 3 error 79 And so ought the Ministers of the Gospell (sayth Bellarmine) be kept from the vse of their wiues, to whom they were married before their calling.

1 The Priests of the lawe were bound to withdrawe themselues during the time of their seruice, while they attended vpon the sacrifice, and to forbeare the companie of their wiues: much more the Priests of the lawe, that must alwayes offer sacrifices, must be alwayes free from matrimonie, Rhemist. Luk. 1. sect. 10.

Ans. 1. The Leuiticall priesthood did represent and shadowe forth the priesthood of Christ, and their legall cleansings, washings, abstinence, purifyings, did shewe forth the holines and perfection of the priesthood of Christ: wherefore the lawe of their abstinence doth no more binde vs, then other of their legall purifications: they haue their end in the priesthood of Christ. 2. We acknowledge no sacrificing priesthood in the newe testament, nor any sacrifice in the Church for sinne, but onely that sacrifice of atonement vpon the Crosse: but our sacrifices are spirituall, of praise and thanksgiuing; therefore the argument followeth not from the priests of the law, to those that are no priests, Fox. pag. 1166. 3. Purenes of life, we grant, is as much required now in Ministers of the Gospell, as it was then in the priests of the lawe: therefore they ought as well to haue libertie to marrie, seeing matrimonie is the best remedie agaynst fornication and vncleannes of life.

[Page]2 Another argument they picke out of S. Paules words, 1. Corinth. 7.5. Defraude you not one another, vnlesse it bee by consent for a time, that you may giue your selues to prayer. If the lay man cannot pray, vnlesse he abstaine from his wife, the Priest, that must alwaies pray, must alwaies abstaine, Rhemist.

Ans. 1. The lay man is bound to offer prayers alwaies as well as the Priest, and so by this reason, neither ought any lay man to performe his duetie to his wife, if it were an hinderance to praier. 2. S. Paul speaketh not here of all praier, but of a speciall kind, which, to be made more feruent, requireth fasting and abstinence, which kind is not alway necessarie, but vpon some certaine occasion. 3. It is so farre off that a lay man cannot pray, vnlesse he abstaine from his wife, that many times he prayeth more quietly then he that is vnmarried, or abstaineth, if he haue not dominion ouer his lust, Fulk. annot. 1. Cor. 7.5.

The Protestants.

NEither the Apostles forsooke the companie of their wiues, after they were called and chosen of Christ, neither ought the Ministers of the Gospell to renounce, abandon, and forsweare the societie and fellowship of their wiues: but rather to liue with them in all temperance and sobrietie, for the good example of others:

1 It is proued out of the 1. Cor. 9.5. that Peter & the other Apostles did leade about their wiues in their companie, and S. Paul there sayth, that he also might vse the same libertie. Likewise, 1. Timoth. 3.5. S. Paul giueth rules concerning the house and familie of the Minister, his children, the behauiour of their wiues. vers 11. But where, I pray you, is it fitter for the Ministers wife and children to be, then with her husband? By these places it is apparant, that Ministers wiues were not excluded from their husbands companie: as a thousand yeere after & more it was decreed by Anselme, that they should not dwell in house with their husbands, nor talke with them without two or three witnesses, Fox. pag. 1167.

2 It is cleane contrarie to the scripture. First, our Sauiour sayth, whosoeuer putteth away his wife, except it be for fornication, causeth her to commit adulterie, Math. 5.32. By this rule, therefore a Minister ought not for any other cause to put away and dismisse his wife, but for fornication: Ergo, it is not lawfull because of his calling, or vpon any other colour to send her away. Secondly. S. Paul sayth, They ought not to defraud one another but for a time, and that with consent, 1. Corinth. 7.5. Therefore if the wife will not consent, her husband cannot goe from her: nay, though there be consent, yet they must be asunder but for a time: they cannot by consent altogether breake off, and dissolue their marriage, which was made before God, though they would neuer so fayne themselues, vnlesse it be for fornication, then without consent the marriage knot is broken.

3 Peter left not the companie of his wife after he was made an Apostle: for he had a daughter called Petronilla, of whom the popish legends write much holines, which must needes be borne after he was called Peter. And agayne, it is proued by her age, for she was so young in the persecutiō vnder Domitian, that Flaccus the Countie desired her in marriage: but if she had been borne before [Page] Peters Apostleship, she must haue been threescore yeere old at that time, or hard vpon, Fulk. Math. 8. sect. 3.

4 Augustine thus writeth of this matter: Vna sola esse causa posset, qua te id. quod vouisti, non solum non hortaremur, verumetiam prohiberemus implere, si forte tua coniux hoc tecum suscipere animi, seu carnis ins [...]rmitate recusaret, Epistol. 45. There may be one cause, and no more, which would make me, not only to moue you to performe that which you haue vowed, but to disswade and forbid you, namely, if your wife by reason of her weakenes, should refuse to beare the yoke with you. Therefore, by Augustines sentence, neither ought a Minister that is married, performe the vow of continencie which he made, without consent of his wife: for he speaketh generally of vowes made by those that are ioyned in Wedlocke.

THE SIXT QVESTION, CONCERNING THE maintenance of the Church by tithes.

COncerning the maintenance of the Church, there are diuers poynts, wherein we & our aduersaries agree: The maintenāce of the Ministers of the Church is either by temporal possessions, which haue been bestowed vpon the Church, by the gift of deuoute and religious men, or els they haue inheritance from their friends and a patrimonie of their owne, or els they liue of the tithes and oblations of the people.

1 We grant, and agree vnto them: that the Church Ministers, beside the portion of tithes, may lawfully enioy temporall lands, which the Church of ancient time hath been endowed withall. But we yeeld vnto them vpon certaine conditions: First, there must be a moderation vsed in all such gifts, which are bequeathed to the Church: for Ecclesiasticall persons ought not to be too greedie and hastie in receiuing whatsoeuer in simplicitie and blind deuotion any man shall giue vnto them: as if they see that others are empouerished by the gift whereby they are enriched. Thus the Priests offended in our Sauiour Christs time, who allured the people to bring their offerings to the Altar, though their parents wanted in the meane time, whom they were bound to relieue by the law of God. This also was a common practise in time of Poperie: So the priests might be enriched, they cared not greatly, though all the stock of their patrones and founders were vndone: who because they were vnsatiable, & had no measure in entising simple men, to giue ouer their lands and Lordships into their hands, the statute of Mortmaine was made not without iust cause, to be a rule vnto thē, that otherwise could not rule themselues. Augustine doth highly commend Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, and worthely, for this one act: A certaine rich man of Carthage hauing no children, gaue all his substance to the Church, reseruing onely the vse thereof for his life time: afterward the man had children: Reddidit Episcopus nec opinanti ea, quae donauerat. Ad fratres in erem. ser. 52. The Bishop restoreth vnto him that which hee gaue, not looking for it, nor making any account of it: In potestate habuit Episcopus non reddere; sed iure fori, non iure poli: [Page] It was in the Bishops power not to restore the gift, but by the lawe of the court, not by the lawe of heauen. I pray you how many such examples can ye shewe me in the time of popish superstition? This then is the first thing required, that although it be lawful for the Church to enioy the bequests of their benefactors, yet it should be done with some limitation: As the Leuites, beside their tithes, had cities appoynted them: but the number was set downe, they should not exceede 48. in all: and to euery citie was a quantitie and circuite of ground allotted, which should in length and bredth contayne euery way 3000. cubites, Numb. 35. vers. 5.8.

2 It must also be prouided, that the gifts and legacies bestowed vpon the Church, bee for the maintenance of pietie and true religion, and to good vses, not to nourish idolatrie and superstition: or if they be giuen through ignorance of the time, to such vnlawfull purposes, they ought by the Prince to be conuerted to better and more godly vses: As now in England, the lands of Colledges, which were first giuen to maintaine that abominable Idoll of the Masse, are turned to the maintenance of learning and true religion. So was the lawe of Moses, that the gold and siluer, brasse, yron, tinne, lead, which the Israelites should receiue of the heathen,Numb. 31 23. first should passe through the fire, and so bee made cleane, and fit for holy vses: Euen thus according to this lawe, the lands consecrate to superstition, hauing now passed through the fire of Gods word, and triall of the truth, may safely be vsed to the glorie of God, in aduancing and setting forward true religion and vertue.

3 Another thing must bee required: that Church-men ought not to abuse the possessions of the Church, to maintayne pride, idlenes, and ryotous liuing: for in case they doe notoriously spend and wast the Church goods, the Prince, by whose authoritie they were giuen to the Church, may iustly take from them their superfluities, not leauing the Church destitute of sufficient maintenance. This is notably proued by Iohn Husse, in the defence of Wickliffes articles: And we haue seene the practise thereof in England,Fox. p. 457. in the late suppression of Abbeyes: wherein (though some of those lands might otherwise haue been disposed of) yet the prouidence of God notably appeared in bringing desolation vpon those Cels of sinne, and vncleane cages of birdes: neither hath this been an vnusuall and vnaccustomed practise in the Church, for Princes to correct the misdemeanour of Priests, by cutting them short of their temporalties: for in Augustines time the Christian Emperours dispossessed the Donatists of their Churches and possessions, and gaue them to the Catholike Bishops. And at that time the Donatists cryed out, as the Papists doe now, Quid mihi est imperator? What hath the Emperour, the King to doe with our lands? Augustine answereth, Secundum ius ipsius possides terram: by the lawe of Princes the Church enioyeth her possessions: Recitemus leges imperatorum, videamus si voluerint aliquid ab haereticis possideri: Tractat. in Iohann. 6. Let vs then rehearse the lawes of Emperours, and see, whether they suffer heretikes to enioy the Church possessions.

[Page]Secondly, concerning the second kind of maintenance, which ariseth by the proper and peculiar inheritance, which Church ministers haue:Bellarm. cap. 27. we also yeeld our consent, that a Minister▪ to whom some inheritance is befallen, is not bound to disclaime therefore the maintenance which he hath of the Church: for the Leuites, beside the allotment of the tythes, had their proper houses, which they might sell, and redeeme agayne, Leuitic. 25.32. As also that place 1. Timot. 3.2. will beare it, where the Apostle would haue a Bishop to be harberous, and giuen to hospitalitie: which he shall be much better able to performe, hauing some helpe, beside the Church liuing, of his owne inheritance. So then it is not to be doubted, but that Ecclesiasticall persons may, together with spirituall liuings, retayne their owne proper inheritance: referring them both to one and the selfe same end, that is, to countenance their Ministerie, and to be the better able to performe the externall dueties thereof, in releeuing the poore, helping the needie, and such like.

Thirdly, as touching the proper maintenance, and reuenew of the Church, which is by tithes: diuers poynts are agreed of and accorded betweene vs. First, that tithes due onely to the Church, and cannot be alienated to any other vse, nor be turned to the maintenance of lay men: for there must be, where tithes are payed, a matter of giuing and receiuing, Philipp. 4.15. We giue spirituall, and receiue temporall: which because lay men doe not performe, they haue nothing to doe with the tithe: for not keeping the condition, they cannot claime the couenant.

2 The people are bound in conscience, to giue of their goods vnto their lawfull Pastors, according to the determination of the Church, and the positiue lawes of Princes made in that behalfe, the which they are bound to obey: and the tenth being the hire of the labourer and the wages of the Lords workeman, Math. 10.10: it shall be as great a sinne to defraude the Minister of his portion, as to keepe backe the meate or wages from the hireling and labourer, Iam. 5.4.

3 We vtterly denie also, and herein consent with our aduersaries, that tithes are not pure almes, as some haue been of opinion in times past,Belarm. cap. 25. but are a plaine debt of the people to their Ministers. First, the wages or reward of the labourer is no almes, but his due, and of right belonging to him: but tithes are so vnto Ministers who labour in the Lords haruest, 1. Timoth. 5.16. Ergo, no almes. Secondly, almes doe alway exceede the desert of the almesman, they shewe the beneuolence and free heart of the giuer, not any merite or worthines in the receiuer: but tithes and all other temporall gifts, are farre inferiour to the labours of Ministers: for what are temporall things to spirituall, 1. Cor. 9.11? Ergo, no almes. Thirdly, the tenth is the Lords part, and by him it is assigned to his faithfull Ministers, which in Gods stead doe teach vs, 2. Cor. 5.20. But almes cannot be giuen vnto God. Agayne, the tenth is as an inheritance to the Church, and to bee counted as the corne of the barne, or the abundance of the winepresse, Numb. 18. vers. 26.27. It is vnto them as the fruite of the earth, and encrease of the ground to the husbandman: Therefore to be counted no almes from men, [Page] but the blessing of God both vpon the pastor and the people.

4 We also agree, that it is not meete that the maintenance of Ministers should be voluntarie, or left to the peoples choise: but that it is conuenient, iust, equall, requisite, that both by lawes of Princes, and constitutions of the Church, prouision should be made, as there is, for the necessarie, certayne, and competent maintenance of the Church. First, the tenths in the lawe were established by a perpetuall ordinance: Ergo, the maintenance of Ministers ought now also to be confirmed by positiue lawes, as then tithes were: the argument followeth: for if their Ministerie deserued such assurance of their maintenāce, which did but serue at the Altar, much more now doth the Ministerie of the Gospel deserue it. And the Apostle also seemeth so to reason, 1. Corint. 9.14.15. that as they which wayted on the Altar were partakers of the Altar: so God hath ordayned (sayth he) that they which preach the Gospell, should liue of the Gospell. That is, as then the people did not onely giue tithes voluntarily, but were bound by lawe to doe it: euen so God hath ordayned, that Ministers should liue of the people: and by this ordinance of God, the people may as well be bound vnto it now, as they were then. Secondly, if Ministers, bound in conscience to feed and instruct the people, may also be enforced and vrged by the constitutions of the Church and lawes of Princes to do that, which in conscience they are bound: why may not the people likewise be constrayned by publike lawe, to performe that dutie to their pastors, which their owne conscience doth vrge them vnto? Thirdly, experience teacheth, that men are hardly (euen liuing vnder a law) brought to pay their rights to the Church, no not in those places where they can take no exception against their pastors: how much more vnwilling would they be (I speake of those which are not yet wonne to a through liking of the Gospel) if they were left to their owne libertie?

5 We also acknowledge (as Bellarmine seemeth to grant, cap. 25.) that to pay precisely the tenth, is not now commanded by the law of God: as though that order could not be changed by any humane law, as the Canonists hold, but men necessarily were bound to pay tithes: But thus farre forth we hold, that it is groū ded vpon Gods law: first, in respect of the equitie of the law, in paying of tithes, which is this, that the Ministers ought to liue of the people, and to haue sufficient & competent maintenance by them: which equitie and substance of the law is morall, and ought alwaies to continue, being grounded vpon the law of nature: Thou shalt not musle the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne.1. Cor. 9.6 Secondly, in as much as the lawe of the land and of the Church doth confirme this ancient constitution of tithes, (which is left indifferent of itselfe) we are bound to obey such lawes, being agreeable to the word of God: And in this sense also, tithes may be sayd to be due by the lawe of God, because Gods word commandeth obedience to our Magistrates, in all lawfull ordinances.

6 Though the lawe of tenths be not now necessarie, as it was a ceremonious duetie: but it is lawfull either to keepe that or any other constitution, for the sufficient maintenance of the Church, whether it bee more or lesse then the [Page] tenth part: yet we doubt not to say, that this prouision for the Church maintenance by paying of tithes, is the most safe, indifferent and surest way, and no better can come in the place thereof. First, it is the most equall way, to haue euery thing in the kinde, according to the Apostles rule; Let him that is taught make his teacher partaker of al his goods, Galath. 6.6. But this cannot be so conueniently done any other way, as by erecting of a set stipend, or such like, as by paying the tenth in the kind.

2 Whereas S. Paul requireth, that the Pastor should be giuen to hospitalitie, 1. Timoth. 3.2. who seeth not, that for the better and more conuenient maintenance of his house, it is the fittest course to receiue the tenth in his owne nature and kind: being so more able to relieue the poore, hauing sufficient prouision and store of his owne?

3 The tenth is as the corne of the barne, & the abundance of the winepresse, Numb. 18.27. that is, it is more or lesse, as God giueth encrease to the fruites of the earth: which is the most equall and indifferent way: for then the Minister, as God blesseth them, shall be partaker of the blessing, and if they suffer losse, he likewise shall beare the burthen with them.

4 This manner of tithe-paying is farre more safe and sure, then any way can be deuised, because of the long custome and continuance, which without great hazard of the Church cannot be broken: neither is it possible by any act of parliament, to make stipends so certayne, as this constitution of tithes is: for the people will hardly yeeld to breake their custome: and when an old custome is broken, a newe is not so soone receiued: nay, many yeeres must runne to make a custome. Agayne, whatsoeuer may be obiected agaynst tithes, that they breed much trouble, wrangling and contention, may be more iustly feared, in the collection, leuying, imposing, and demanding of stipends.

5 Hitherto we haue shewed, that it is most naturall, that the Ministers portion should be payed in the kind. Now, concerning the tenth, though it be not necessarie, yet that proportion being first appoynted by the wisedome of God, is verily thought to be most equall and indifferent betweene the pastor and the people, as both affoording competent sustenance for the one, when he liueth of the tenth, rather thē the fifteenth, or twentith part, which were too skant allowance, nor yet grieuing or oppressing the other, when the owner hath nine parts reserued to himselfe. And so if it be most meete, that things should be answered in their kind, no proportion can serue better, then that which was first deuised by the Lord himselfe: yet we hold neither the one nor the other to bee necessarie.

Hitherto for the most part we and our aduersaries are agreed, both concerning tithes, as also other maintenance of the Church: but we differ about tithes in two poynts. First, there is a question betweene vs and the Rhemists about the necessitie of paying of tithes: Secondly, concerning the right whereby the Ministers of the Gospell may demaund their dueties, which they say, is by reason of their Priesthood: of both these now briefly in their order.

[Page]

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE PAIment of tithes be necessarie.

The Papists.

error 80 THe paiment of tithes is a naturall duetie, that men owe to God in all lawes, and to be giuen to his Priests in his behalfe for their honour and liuelihood, Rhemist. annot. 7. Hebr. sect. 4.

1 Iacob vowed to pay tithes to God, before the lawe, Genes. 28. Ergo, it is a perpetuall lawe. Rhemist.

Ans. One Papist shall answere another at this time. Bellarmine proueth by this example the cleane contrary, that the paiment of tithes is not morall, because it did not bind before the lawe of Moses: for Iacob made a voluntary vow to pay his tithes, vpon a condition: but if he had been bound absolutely to pay tithes, they should haue been payed without any such condition: It was therefore a voluntarie and a franke offering in Iacob.

2 Christ confirmeth the lawe of tithes, Math. 23.23. though he preferre the workes of mercie and iudgement, yet he sayth that the other ought not to be left vndone, speaking of the paying of tithes, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. We must consider in what time our Sauiour Christ so spake vnto the Pharisees: for as yet neither the lawe nor the ceremonies thereof were fully abrogated: Christ was circumcised, & Mary his mother purified according to the lawe, Luk. 2.21.22. Our Sauiour also biddeth the Leper to shewe himselfe to the Priest, and offer a gift as Moses commanded, Math. 8.4. Yet none of al these ceremonies doe now stand in force, though Christ did them at that time, and bad them to be done. The same answere may serue also concerning his iniunction to the Pharisees as touching their tithes.

The Protestants.

THe lawe of paying tithes did borrowe part of the morall, part of the iudicial, and part of the ceremoniall lawe. The morall part therefore, is the equitie of the lawe, which is perpetuall, that as the Leuites then liued of the tenth, so the Ministers at all times ought sufficiently to be prouided and cared for. The iudiciall part was in this, that as the Leuites were not much lesse in common account then the tenth part, being one of the tribes, (though in proportion of number, they made welneere the thirtith part: for the rest of the tribes were numbred to sixe hundred, three thousand, fiue hundred and fiftie persons, Numbers 1. the Leuites made but two and twentie thousand,603550 Numb. 3.) As I say the Leuites made one whole tribe, and were not much lesse then the tenth part in that account, being in number the thirteenth tribe, for there were twelue beside. [Page] So it was thought reasonable that the tenth parte of their brethrens goods should be allotted vnto them: which being a iudiciall and politike constitution of that countrey, doth neither necessarily binde Christians now, neither is forbidden, but left in that respect indifferent. Thirdly, the ceremonie of the lawe was in this, because the tenth was due to the priests and Leuites for their seruice at the altar, and as belonging to their priesthood: In which sense tithes are neither due now vnto Ministers, nor in any such respect can be challenged, seeing the Priesthood of the lawe is gone, and all the ceremonies thereof: Whereof although it bee a wise and politike constitution, that the people should pay their tithes, and may conueniently be retayned, yet is it not now of necessitie imposed vpon Christians, as though no other prouision for the Church could serue but that.

1 Bellarmine thus reasoneth (for herein he is an aduersary to our Rhemists) (one Iesuite against another) If the law of tithes be moral, then the other precept annexed to this law was moral also, that the Leuites, because they liued of the offerings and tithes, should haue no patrimonie or inheritance beside. And by this reason euery Minister now ought to resigne such inheritance and possessions, as are left him by his friends: which is not to bee admitted. Ergo, neither the other law standeth necessarily in force, Bellarm. cap. 25.

2 Saint Paul sayth in flat words, If the priesthood be changed, of necessitie there must also be a change of the law, Heb. 7.12. But the priesthood of the law is altered and changed, Ergo, also the law of the priesthood, and so consequently the ceremonial duetie of tithes.

3 In Augustines time, it was no generall law nor custome in the Church, that tithes should be payd. Praecidite & deputate aliquid fixum ex annuis fructib. vel quotidianis quaestibus: defaulke, sayth he, and appoynt some certaine portion, either of your yearely fruites, or your ordinary and daylie gaines.In Psal. 146 Decimas vis? decimas exime: Will you make choyce to pay tithes? then let that be the portion. And yet this is no great matter: for the Pharisies, whose righteousnesse you ought to exceede, payed their tithes: Tu vix millesimam das: Thou scarce payest the thousand part: Tamen non reprehendo, vel hoc fac, sic sitio, vt ad istas micas gaudeam: Yet I finde not fault: doe so still:De tempor. serm. 205. for I so thirst after your well-doing, that I refuse not your very crummes. We see then, that then the payment of tithes was voluntarie: Augustine refuseth not the ten hundred, that is, millesimam partem, the thousand part, which he calleth their crummes.

THE SECOND PART, BY WHAT RIGHT tithes are due to the Ministers of the Gospel.

The Papists.

COncerning tithes or their equiualent due to Christ & the priesthood of the error 81 new Testament, Rhemist. annot. Heb. 7.4. this then is their opinion, that the [Page] priesthood of the Gospell being more excellent then the priesthood of the Law and their sacrifice, which they offer vp in the Masse, being of greater worthines, they may with better right challenge tithes, then the priests of the law did for their seruice at the altar: So that tithes are due to the Church onely because of the priesthood, not for any other duetie appertaining to that office, as preaching the word, ministring the sacraments, or any such.

Abraham payd tithes, they say, to Melchisedech, which was the priest of the most high God in offering the formes of bread & wine, wherein Melchisedech did sacrifice: Ergo, tithes are now due to the priests of the Gospel and new law, which are all after the order of Melchisedech, Rhemist. Hebr. 7. sect. 4. & 8.

Answere: First, Melchisedechs priesthood consisted not in offering bread and wine to God, but brought them foorth to refresh Abraham: neither were they formes of bread and wine onely, as you imagine, but very materiall bread and wine: for if Melchisedechs priesthood had consisted therein, the Apostle would not haue omitted the chiefe thing, wherein Christs priesthood was shewed forth, as he doth, making no mention at all of it. Heb. 7. Secondly, againe it is great blasphemie to say, that euery popish priest is after the order of Melchisedech, Rhemist. Heb. 7. sec. 8 nay that the proper act of Christs priesthood consisteth in the perpetuall offering of his bodie & blood in the Church: for by this reason euery impure priest doth more properly offer the body of Christ in the Masse, then it was offered by himself vpon the cros: thē the which, what greater blasphemie can be vttered? And yet they are not ashamed to speak it: yea the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse, (say they) was after the order of Aaron; and not after the order of Melchisdech, Fulk. Heb. 7. sect. 9 12 and so they preferre euery popish priest offering in the Masse, before Iesus Christ sacrificing himself vpon the Crosse: contrary to the scripture, which maketh this difference between the priesthood of Aaron and the priesthood of Melchisedech; that the priests of the law were many, because they were taken away by death: But Christs priesthood is eternall, because he dieth not, Heb. 7.23. But if there should be many priestes after Melchisedechs order, there should heerein bee no difference at all: Wherefore seeing Melchisedechs priesthood onely resteth in Christ, and is not translated to any other; and that there is now no sacrifice left but spirituall, of prayse and thanksgiuing, Heb. 13.15. it followeth that by Melchisedechs right no tithes are now due vnto the Church, neither in any such regard ought to be challenged.

The Protestantes.

TIthes, or their equiualent are not due to the Church in respect of any sacrificing priesthood, of which sorte there is none in the new testament ordayned to continue: but for other pastorall dueties, and principally the preaching and dispensing of the word, and instructing of the people.

1 If there were any such priesthood, and tithes in that right did appertaine to the Church: it is most like that our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles would haue challenged them. But there is no one precept in the new testament concerning paying of tithes, but onely for a sufficient maintenance for the ministers of the Gospel, 1. Cor. 9.14. Gal. 6.6. Fulk. Hebr. 7. sect. 4.

[Page]2 Saint Paul euery where, so oft as he sheweth the duetie of Christians in relieuing and mayntayning their pastors, maketh onely mention of sowing of spirituall things, 1. Cor. 9.11. and of teaching and instructing, Gal. 6.6. Ergo, tithes are due vnto Pastors and Ministers onely or especially for their feeding and instructing, and sowing spirituall seede, which is the word of God.

3 There is no such sacrificing priesthood now in the Church, as wee haue partly shewed before, and shall of purpose more fully declare it afterward: for euery where in the new testament spirituall sacrifices are commanded: and all Christians are made Kings and Priests vnto God, Apocal. 1.6. Other priesthood we read of none. Wherefore in that respect tithes cannot be due.

Lastly, Augustine sayth: Si mendicum non contemnis, quanto magis bonem, per quem trituratur haec area: If thou despisest not a beggar,Psal. 103. part. 2. how much more oughtest thou to haue regard of the oxe that treadeth out the corne on the floore: That is, the Minister that preacheth the Gospel: for so Saint Paul expoundeth it 1. Timoth. 5.17. ‘The Elders, sayth he, that labour in the word and doctrine are worthie double honour: and then it followeth, vers. 8. for the scripture sayth, Thou shalt not muzle the mouth of the oxe, that treadeth out the corne.’ Sufficient maintenance therefore to the Ministers is due for their labour and trauaile in the word.

THE SIXT GENERAL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE SVPERSTITIOVS ORDERS AND SECTS OF MONKES AND FRIERS.

MOnkes in Latine, called Monachi, deriued of the Greeke word, were such, as liued solitarilie, & thereupon had they their name: And they were at the beginning of three sortes: some were called Eremites that liued in woods and desarts by themselues: there were other which were mued vp and enclosed in cels and wals, which had not so much libertie as Eremites had: but kept alwayes in their cages and closets, and soe in miserie spent their dayes: and these were called Anchorites, that is, separated, set apart from all men and liuing by themselues: There was a third sorte called Coenobites, which liued in companies, as it were in Colledges by them selues, & had all things common: And these properly were called Monks, Bell. lib. 2. de monach. cap. 3. This controuersie hath many questiōs.

1 Concerning the beginning & original of Monks, & of their diuers sects, 2. partes.

2 Concerning Counsels of perfection, whether they differ from Euangelicall precepts.

3 Concerning vowes in generall, three partes: First, whether it be lawfull for Christians to make vowes. Secondly, in what things lawful vowes consist. Thirdly, whether voluntary vowes are any part of the worship of God.

[Page]4 Concerning Monasticall vowes in particular, three partes: First, of the vow of voluntary pouertie: Secondly, the vow of obedience: Thirdly, the vow of continencie.

5 Concerning Monasticall persons: First whether the younger sorte ought to be admitted to professe Monkerie. Secondly, whether children can professe without consent of their parents. Thirdly, whether maried persons may with mutuall consent. Fourthly, whether either of the parties, the mariage not consummate may enter into profession.

6 Concerning the rules and discipline of Monasticall life: First, of their solitarie and seuere kinde of life. Secondly, of their canonical houres. Thirdly, their habite and apparell. Fourthly, of their maintenance, whether they ought to liue by begging, or labour of their handes: of these in order.

THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE BEGINning and originall of Monkes, and of their diuers sects.

THis question hath tow partes: First of their originall. Secondly, of the diuersitie of their sects.

THE FIRST PART OF THE ORIGInall of Monkes.

The Papists.

error 82 THey make this profession to be as ancient as the time of our Sauiour Christ, and prooue the beginning thereof both out of the newe and olde Testament.

1 Helias and Helizaeus were Eremites, and liued without wiues, neither possessed any riches: Ergo, this profession of life is most ancient, Bellarm. cap. 5. Rhemist. annot. in Mark. 9.3.

Answere: First, the argument followeth not: they had no wiues, nor riches, Ergo, were Eremites: for euen amongst the papists themselues many were kept from wiues (as their priests) and yet were neither Monkes nor Eremites. Secondly, though we reade not that Helisaeus was married, yet the sonnes of the prophets were, that liued as it were in the same Colledge with him, 2. King. 4.1. which Bellarmine maketh a Colledge of Monkes and Eremites: and sayth very vntruely, that they all liued without wiues, cap. 5. Thirdly, though Elias and Elisaeus were sometime in the wildernes, yet they alwayes remained not, neither liued there, Fulk. annot. Mark. 9.3.

2 Iohn Baptist a perfect patterne of Eremitical life, for liuing in the desert and wildernes, for his rough apparell, for abstaining from all delicate meate, Rhemist. annot. Math. 3.1.

[Page]Answere: First, Iohn Baptists calling was singular and extraordinary, and therefore cannot be made an author of any ordinary profession. Secondly, wee denie not but his life was austere, and that he made his abode in a solitarie place, yet there were houses and villages not farre off: his apparell also was course cloth, made of the hard haires of Camels: his foode was of locusts and wilde honie, the vsuall and common meate of that countrey: he was an extraordinary preacher of repentance, and shewed in him selfe an example of austere life, as it became the forerunner of Christ: But being no minister of the Gospel, but the last prophet of the law, he cannot be a patterne of an ordinary profession vnder the Gospel, Fulk. annot. Matth. 3. sect. 1.

3 Nay Bellarm. fetcheth his monkish order from a more ancient beginning, thē from Elias, & Iohn Baptist: yea from before the flood: for Enos, saith he, seemeth to haue brought in some stricter kinde of life, and peculiar maner of worshipping God: whereas the text sayth, that he began to call vpon the name of God: that is, after another manner: for Adam, Seth, Abel, before this time called vpon the name of God. cap. 5.

Answere: First, who would haue thought, that there had been Monks and Eremites before the flood, if the Iesuite had not sayd it, or that this text, which he alleadgeth, could haue proued it? The argument followeth not: Enos brought in a peculiar worship of God, therefore was founder of the Eremiticall life: for he brought in the true worship of God: but the other is superstitious and erronious. Secondly, Tremellius readeth more agreeably to the Hebrue, Tum nomē Dei coeptum est inuocando profanari: then the name of God began to be prophaned in calling vpon, that is, his worship began to be corrupted: for the Hebrue word signifieth, both to inuocate and call vpon God, as also to corrupt, pollute, or prophane. Thirdly, if we read as they doe, The name of God beganne to be called vpon: it onely sheweth a restoring and renewing of the true worship of God, which was polluted by the posteritie of Cain, whose stocke and familie is set downe in that chapter, Gen. 4.

The Protestants.

WE see then that this Monasticall and solitarie kinde of life hath no proofe nor ground out of the scriptures, either by precept or example: Nay this kinde of profession was not knowen in the Church, for diuers hundred yeeres after Christ; how could then the Apostles be the founders of this order? And though the name of Monks be of some antiquitie in the Church, yet they were farre vnlike vnto Popish Monkes, that for these many yeres haue pestered the Church.

1 It is certaine, as Hierome witnesseth, that Antonius, and his disciples Amathas and Macarius, were the first beginners of Monkish profession, three hundred yeere after Christ, Centur. 4. cap. 6. Fulk. annot. Mark. 9.3.

2 The beginning of Monkes, was not for the more merite, and to doe [Page] penance for their owne sinnes and the sinnes of the worlde, for Antonius the first Monk confessed, that Christ onely suffered for the sinnes of the world: but the first occasion was giuen in the time of persecution, when as men were not suffered to worship God aright publikely:Fulk. Matt- [...]. sect. 3. and therefore they fled into the wildernes: Rhemist. Math. 3. sect. 3. But now seeing the Christian fayth is openly professed, they haue no such causes to seeke solitarie and secret places.

3 The popish Monkes are altogether vnlike theirs: First, they liued in solitarie places, farre from resorte of people: but the popish Mock-monkes liue in Cities and the frequencie of the people, Fulk. annot. Math. 3. sect. 3. Secondly, the Monkes in times past laboured with their hands: but the popish fatbellies pampered themselues in idlenes. Thirdly, they are altogether vnlike in life and doctrine as wee shall see more at large afterward. Fulk. ibid.

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the diuers sects of Monkes and Friers.

The Papists.

error 83 THey say that imitation of diuers holy men, as of Saint Francis, Saint Benet, Saint Dominick, which hath brought in diuers sects and orders of Religious men, doe tend all to the imitation of Christ, Rhemist. annot. Philip. cap. 3. sect. 2.1. Thess. 1.2.

This their assertion they would ground vpon the Apostles wordes, Philip. 3.17. Be ye followers of me brethren: Rhemist.

Answere: First, Saint Paul would haue them no otherwise to follow him, then he did Christ, 1. Cor. 11.1. Neither gaue any other rules to his followers, then he had learned of Christ, as the patrons of the Monkish sects haue done. Secondly, Neither did Saint Paul erect a new order of Paulians, as Franciscus did of Franciscanes, Dominick of Dominicans. Thirdly, Saint Paul was a perswader of vnitie, not a maker of diuisions among Christians: as the Monkes & Friers haue done, one sort persecuting another for their opinions euen to death. Fulk. annot. 1. Thess. 1. sect. 2. Fox. pag. 798.

The Protestants.

COntrariwise we affirme, that it is a great derogation to Christ when the people shall say, I follow the religion of Augustine, the religon of Francis, an other sayth, I holde of Dominick, another, I hold of Iesus, as the Iesuites doe: Fulk. Philip. 3. vers. 17.

1 Saint Paul reproueth the Corinthians, because they made the like sects amongst themselues: one sayd I am Pauls, another, I am Apolloes, and concludeth that therefore they were carnall, 1. Cor. 3.4. And further, he sayth, they should not reioyce in men, for all things were theirs, whether Paul, Apollos, or [Page] Cephas, ver. 21.22. That is, they were not masters of their fayth, to institute new religions and sects, but the Ministers and seruants of the Lords inheritance: If therefore it was not lawful to say, I hold of Paul, I hold of Cephas: neither is it lawfull to say, I holde of Dominick, I hold of Francis: I hold of Iesus: for seeing they make their sects, and Iesus maketh his, it is euident, that they are not all referred to the imitation of Iesus: for then they might all as well bee called Iesuites.

2 The number of Monkes and Friers was almost infinite, sects vpon sects, and new orders daylie were deuised, as Augustinians, Bernardines, Carmelites, Carthusians, Dominicanes, Franciscanes, and a great sort more, to the number of an hundred sects, as they are reckoned by Master Fox. pag. 260. and Tilmane Heshus. setteth downe 65, seueral sects or rather schismes of Monkes, loc. 25. error 10. This yrksome rabble therefore of Monkes is fitly shadowed foorth by the swarme of Locusts, which came vp out of the bottomlesse pitte, Apocal. 9.4. And verily as the Locusts and Grashoppers consume and deuoure the fruits of the earth, so the begging-Friers, and idle Monkes deuoured the goods of the people, and corrupted the doctrine of the Church.

3 Lastly, this diuision of Monkery into sects and sundry orders, is of no great antiquitie: they were not knowen in Augustines time, who knew no other name of them, then Monkes: for hee wrote a booke of purpose, de opere Monachorum: of the labour of Monkes: But other names of Carmelites, Carthusians, Franciscanes, or such like were not heard of in the Church in those dayes: but came in long after in the time of Innocentius 3. about anno 1212. many yeeres after Augustine, Fox. pag. 259.

THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERning the Counsels of perfection.

The Papists.

THis they say is the very foundation of the Monastical life, which is the most error 84 perfect estate and calling of Christians: for they performe more then Christ hath commaunded, not onely his precepts, but euen his Counsels also: Which, they say, doe much differ: for the precepts are inioyned to all Christians, and to leaue a precept vndone is sinne: but the Euangelicall Counsels are giuen only to those that are perfect, which they are not bound to keepe, neither doe they sinne in leauing them vndone, yet if they obserue them, they doe merite more and shall haue a greater rewarde: Such Counsels of perfection are these, to giue all we haue to the poore, to abstaine from eating of flesh, to vow chastitie and such like, Bellarm. cap. 7. Rhemist. annot. Math. 19. sect. 9.

1 Matth. 19. verse 21. Christ sayth, goe and sell all thou hast, if thou wilt bee perfect. This was a Counsel of perfection, not a precept giuen to all Christians.

Answ. First, this was both a Counsel and precept, though not to al, yet to [Page] this one man, to discouer his hypocrisie and vayne confidence which he had in himselfe, as though he had kept the law, when he was farre from it, Fulk. Matth. 19.9. Mark. 10.3. Secondly, it is a generall precept vnto all, to loue the Lord with all the heart, and to be content, when the Lord requireth, for Christs sake to leaue all we haue, Caluin. Institut. 4. cap. 13. sect. 13.

2 Act. 2.44. They had all things common. This is not a rule or precept to all Christian men to liue in common, but a life of perfection and counsell followed of the Religious, Rhemist.

Answere: This liuing in common among the brethren in the Apostles time, is the same that ought alwayes to be among all Christians, that no man account that to be his owne, which the necessitie of his brother requireth to be bestowed vpon him: this the rule of charitie requireth, which is one of the great commandements. Fulk. in hunc locum.

3 1. Corinth. 7.25. Concerning Virgins I haue no commaundement of the Lord, but I giue mine aduice. A precept therefore is one thing, a Counsel of perfection another, Bellarm. cap. 9.

Answere: First, Paul hath no generall commandement from God to impose the yoke of continencie vpon any, because God had left marriage free, and therefore no man is to be barred and kept from it: But the Apostles particular aduice and sentence (being moued by the spirit of God, vers. 40.) is not onely a Counsel, but a commandement, that both they which haue the gift of continencie, should glorifie God by that gift, vers. 7. and they which haue it not, should marrie rather then burne, and so dishonour God, vers. 9. Therefore the Apostle sayth, Let euery man wherein he is called therein abide with God. vers. 24. If a man be called to liue single, hee ought to obey his calling, hauing receiued the gift: if a man be called to the maried estate, he must not presume beyond his strength, to liue vnmaried. Wherefore it is both Counsel & a precept, to those that haue receiued the gift of single life: for otherwise they disobey Gods calling, which is sinne. And our Sauiour sayth, he that is able to receiue it, let him receiue it, Matth. 19.12. He that hath the gift, is commanded to vse it, for in leesing it he sinneth. And lastly, euery man by commandement is bound to the vttermost of his power to set forth Gods glorie: But God is most glorified by the single life of those, which are able to conteine, and therefore they ought in duetie so to doe.

The Protestants.

WE doe truely affirme and according to the scriptures, that it is impossible for any man to performe the law and commaundements of GOD, much lesse to fulfill more then is commaunded: And therefore it is false, that beside the precepts of Christ there are Counsels of perfection, which are at a mans choyce to doe or not to doe: for whatsoeuer is to the glorie of God wee are bound to doe: We acknowledge then no such euangelical Counsels, as they imagine, Caluin.

[Page]1 Math. 5.48. Our Sauiour sayth: Ye shall be perfect, as your heauenly father is perfect. Therefore all Counsels tending to perfection, are commandements. If there be any thing whereby we may more neerely attaine vnto perfection, that we are bound and commanded to doe: As if a man can better obtaine this perfection of godlinesse, by liuing single, if he haue the gift, he ought to doe it: for hauing not the gift, and yet presuming, he burneth in lust, and so is set further backe in the course of godlines, Caluin. argument.

2 We are bound to loue God with all our heart, with all our soule, with all our strength: Therefore whatsoeuer thing there is, whereby wee may expresse the loue of God, we are bound by commandement to doe it, it is not left to our owne will: for not to loue God more then thou doest, if it be in thy power, it is a grieuous sinne, Martyris argument.

Bellarmine answereth thus: Qui deum diligit super omnia, etiamsi eum non tam ardenter amet, quàm forte posset, vel non faciat pro eo omnia, quae posset, ille habet deum pro summo bono, cap. 13. He that loueth God aboue all things, although he loue him not so entirely, as perhaps he may, neither doth all things for his sake, that lie in his power, yet for al this, he esteemeth of God as his chief good: I pray you see what contradictorie speeches these be: The Iesuit sayth, a man may loue God perfectly and aboue all, and yet not loue him so much as he is able, that is, imperfectly: so a man, by his Monkish diuinitie, may loue God aboue all, and yet not loue him aboue all: for if he did, he would refuse to do nothing for Gods loue that is in his power.

3 Luk. 17.10. ‘When you haue done all those things which are commanded you, say, we are vnprofitable seruants, and did nothing but that which was our duetie to doe:’ Ergo, we are bound to doe all things that are to be done, and we cannot doe that which we ought, much lesse more then wee ought to doe, Martyris argument.

Bellarmine answereth: First, Christ sayth, when you haue done all which I commanded you, not which I counselled you.Cap. 13.

Ans. As though the argument followeth not strongly: you cannot doe the lesse, that is, keepe my commandements, therefore you cannot doe the more, that is, speaking now (as the Iesuite doth) the Counsels of perfection, which are more then the precepts: It is a precept of necessitie to dispense our goods to the vse of the poore, it is a counsell of perfection, as they say, to giue all away to the poore: But if a man cannot performe the first, that is, keeping his goods to vse them aright, much lesse is hee able with a resolute minde to giue them all away.

Secondly, he answereth: Christ biddeth them to say so, as shewing their humilitie, not that they were indeede vprofitable seruants. A poore shift, as though Christ enuied the good of his seruants, or would obscure their wel-doing, and doth not rather aduance it to the vttermost, and make the most of the seruiceable workes of his children, as wee see, Matth. 25.34. And Christ being a faithfull Prophet, would not surely deceiue his Disciples, and tell theme one [Page] thing, and himselfe knowe and thinke another. But these Frierlike mists and smoake of Locusts, is not able to dimme the cleere light of this scripture, which sheweth, that when we haue done all wee can doe, wee come farre short of our duetie.

4 Augustine, though sometime he seeme to make some difference betweene a precept and a Counsel: Praeceptum est, saith he, cui non obedire, peccatum est: Consilium, quo si vti nolueris, minus boni adipisceris, non mali aliquid perpetrabis. De virginit. cap. 15. A precept is that, which not to obey, is sinne: A Counsel is that, which if thou wilt not followe, thou doest not commit any euill, yet thou hast the lesse good. Though he seeme in words, I say, to make difference, yet his meaning is this, That a precept is of things necessarie, as to followe vertue, to eschue vice: A Counsel is of things indifferent, as to vse or not to vse, as to eate or not to eate flesh: But yet the occasion may so serue, that euen this counsel is necessarie: for we ought not to eate flesh to offend our brother. Multa facienda sunt non iubente lege, sed libera charitate: Many things are to be done (sayth he) not by force of any lawe, but by the rule of charitie: that is, we haue no particular law, but the generall rule of charitie. A Counsel then is seene in things indifferent, which are alwaies lawfull, but not alway expedient: and it is nothing els but a particular application of the generall rule of charitie: Charitie wisheth that nothing should be done to offend our brethen, 1. Cor. 10.32. The scripture likewise giueth libertie to eate flesh, there is no generall precept or prohibitione yet the Apostle giueth counsel, that is, according to the rule of charitie sayth, that although all things are cleane: Malum tamen est homini, qui per offensionem manducat: yet it is euill to the man that eateth with offence, Roman. 14.20. Here we see the transgression of an Apostolicall Counsel is sinne: And though we be not bound by any particular precept, at this time or that to abstaine from flesh, yet, qua facienda sunt libera charitate, the things that are to be done in the dutie of loue, doe as well binde vs, as if we had a direct commandement: for loue is the fulfilling of the commandements, yea it is one of the great commandements to loue one another. Yet the counsel or libertie concerning indifferent things, remaineth in it owne nature free still: as the Apostle counselleth to eate, not asking any question: in such a case it is neither euill not to eate, nor good to eate: but if any man be present that may take offence by our eating, then is it euill to eate. So Augustine cōcludeth: Multa mihi videntur licere & non expedire, quae per iustitiā, quae coram deo est, permittuntur, sed propter offensionē hominū vitanda sunt. Many things are lawful, but not expedient, lawful before God, but not expedient because of the offence of our brethen. De adulter. coniug. lib. 1. cap. 14.17. Thus we see Augustine doth nothing fauour the popish distinction of precepts and counsels: for by his sentence, euen Counsels, that is, the libertie and freedome of things indifferent, are restrained, and made necessarie in the externall vse, by the rule of charitie.

[Page]

THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING vowes in generall.

THis question hath three parts: first, whether it bee lawfull for Christians to make vowes. Secondly, in what things lawfull vowes consist. Thirdly, whether voluntarie vowes be any part of the worship and seruice of God.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER VOWES PERtayned onely to the old law, and are not now permitted vnto Christians.

The Papists.

THey hold it as lawfull, and as free a thing for Christians to bind themselues by vowes vnto God, as it was vsed and practised of the Iewes in the time of the error 85 lawe.

1 Isay 19.21. They shall knowe the Lord in that day, and doe sacrifice and oblation, and vow vowes vnto God and performe them. This prophecie is concerning Christians, which should in the time of the Gospell make vowes vnto God, Bellarm. cap. 17.

Ans. The Prophet doth, by the externall seruice of God vsed in the Church at that time, set foorth the spirituall worship of God in the Church of Christ: for Iewish vowes shall be no more then in force, then their sacrifices and oblations. Also vers. 19. the Prophet sayth, that an Altar shall bee set vp in Aegypt, and vers. 18. They shall speake the language of Canaan: But these things were not literally, but mystically performed, neither is it necessarie the other should.

2 Psal. 76.11. Vow vnto God and performe: Ergo, vowes now are lawfull, Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. It appeareth by the text, that it was a commandement vnto the Iewes, and for that time: for it followeth, Al ye that are round about him: that is, the Leuites and Priests that dwelt round about the temple. And bring presents to him that ought to be feared: but now Christians bring no such externall presents and gifts, therefore it cannot be properly vnderstood of them.

The Protestants.

WE do not condemne al vowes, neither denye, but that a Christian in some cases may vow, as presently it followeth to be shewed: But Iewish vowes are vtterly vnlawfull, such as the vowes of the Nazarites were, Numb. 6. as to abstaine from wine and strong drinke, not to shaue their haire, and such like: if we place religion in such vowes.

[Page]1 Their vowes were ceremonious, and consisted in externall rites, which were shadowes and significations of spirituall things: as not to cut their haire, not to touch any dead thing, to abstaine from wine and strong drinke: But all shadowes are now gone and abolished: and such externall vsages are vnprofitable, as were those precepts of the false Apostles, Touch not, tast not, handle not: which all perish with the vsing, and are the commandements of men, as S. Paul sayth, Coloss. 2.21.22. Such precepts notwithstanding, Monkes & Friers at this day doe binde themselues vnto: for it is not lawfull for them to touch siluer nor to tast flesh, according to the strict and superstitious rules of their Patrones.

2 The Nazarites were by their vowes separated vnto God, Numb. 6.2. that is, were counted as more holy, during their vowes, and better accepted of before God. But now God is not pleased by any such externall rites, or bodily seruices: In Christ Iesu, neither circumcision auaileth any thing, nor vncircumcision, but faith that worketh by loue, Galath. 5.6.

3 S. Paul sayth, He that is circumcised is bound to keepe the whole law, Galath. 5.3. He that keepeth any one ceremonie of the lawe, doth make himselfe a seruant to the whole lawe: for if after the profession of the Nazarites, they will vow not to drinke wine, not to shaue their heads, hereby the better to please God: why are they not also purified, and bring an offering according to the law, as Paul did, who because of the infirmitie of the Iewes, was agreed with foure other men which had a vow, to bee purified according to the law? But this S. Paul did being amongst the Iewes, who cryed out against him as a breaker of the lawe, lest he should be scandalous vnto them.

Augustine thus notably writeth concerning this matter: Sicut defuncta corpora necessariorum officijs deducenda erant quodammodo ad sepulchrum, non deserenda continuò, vel sicut canibus proijcienda. The ceremonies of the lawe (sayth he) were not presently to be cast off, but as dead bodies must bee brought to the graue with some seemely pompe of their friends, and not to be cast vnto dogs. Thus he sayth, that in the Apostles time all Iewish ceremonies were not in act abolished, though they were alreadie as dead carkasses, that is, by right depriued of life: yet they required some space to bee honourably layd downe, and as it were buried. But whosoeuer would now goe about to renew the Iewish ceremonies againe (sayth he) Tanquam sopitos cineres eruens, non erit pius deductor vel baiulus corporis, sed impius sepulturae violator: He should as it were rake in dead mens ashes, and not be a seemely bringer of the bodie to the ground, but a wicked violator of Christian buriall: Euen so Augustine maketh it as wicked a part, to bring in vse any Iewish rites, as to pull one, honestly buried, out of his graue.

[Page]

THE SECOND PART, WHAT THINGS MAY lawfully be vowed by Christians.

The Papists.

THey hold that the proper vowes of Christians are voluntarie, not of such error 85 things which Christians are bound in duetie to doe, but of such as they may leaue vndone, if they will, such as are their popish vowes of continencie and voluntarie, or rather wilfull pouertie.

1 Deuteron. 23. ‘When thou shalt vow a vow vnto God, thou shalt not bee slack to pay it, it should be sinne vnto thee, but when thou abstainest from vowing, it shall be no sinne vnto thee.’ By this the Iesuite proueth, that the vowes of Christians are voluntarie, and not of necessarie dueties, for it were sinne to leaue any thing vndone, that we are in duetie bound vnto, cap. 19.

Ans. First: We denie not but that the Iewes had voluntarie vowes, and might binde themselues by vow to performe many things, which being not vowed, it was no sinne to leaue vndone: As the Nazarites vowes concerning abstinence from wine and strong drinke: which things other might lawfully vse without sinne, if they were not professed Nazarites. But these ceremoniall lawes doe nothing appertaine to Christians.

Secondly, it may also be vnderstood of necessarie vowes, which we are bound vnto of duetie, and then the sense is this: If you abstaine from vowing ye sinne not, that is, not so hainously as after the vowe made; as Pagans and Infidels doe sinne in transgressing Gods law: but a Christian sinneth more after publike profession and promise made of obedience vnto Gods commandements.

The Protestants.

WE hold that to vow is not a thing simply forbidden Christians: but our vowes are limited and restrained: for they are either such, as directly or immediatly are referred to the worship of God, whereby wee binde our selues more straightly to serue him: and such vowes are onely of such things as are commanded and necessarily to be done: and in this sense there is but one common vow of all Christians, and that is our solemne promise made in baptisme, which the Papists denie properly to be a vow, Bellarmin, cap 19. There is another kind of vowes, that directly concerneth not the worship of God, which may be of things not commanded, of the which we will entreate in the next section. Now wee are to proue, that Baptisme is the onely proper vow of Christians, which directly toucheth the seruice and worship of God.

1 Circumcision was a generall vow of the Iewes, for thereby they bound themselues to keepe the whole law, Galath. 5.3. Ergo, Baptisme is the vowe of Christians, which commeth in the place of circumcision. And againe, it appeareth [Page] by this, that because Christians transgressing, doe deserue greater punishment, then Iewes or Gentiles, that they are more straightly obliged and bound by their couenant vnto God then the other: and not onely, as the Iesuite sayth, because they haue tasted more of the goodnesse of God, and so are more vnthankfull: for there are two parts of the couenant betweene God and vs: The Lord sayth, Thou art my people, and so enricheth them with knowledge, and euery good thing: The people say, Thou art my God, Hosh. 2.23. And thus as the Lord doth couenant with them, so they doe binde themselues vnto God: The breach of which couenant, is that which stirreth vp principally the anger of God against vs.

2 Augustine vpon the 75 Psalme writeth thus: Vouete & reddite domino de [...] vestro omnes communiter: Quid debemus vouere? credere in illum, sperare ab illo vitam aeternam, bene viuere, secundum communem modum: Make your vowes and pay them vnto God generally altogether. What must we vow? to beleeue in him, to hope for eternall life, to liue honestly, not to steale, not to commit adulterie. These then are the common and generall dueties of Christians: no other then we promised and vowed in baptisme.

THE THIRD PART, CONCERNING VOLVNTArie vowes, whether they be any part of the worship of God.

The Papists.

error 86 AL voluntarie vowes (say they) made by Christians, as not to eate flesh, not to drinke strong drinke, or to liue vnmarried; doe concerne the worship of God, and thereby men are made more acceptable vnto him, Bellar. cap. 16.

1 Iacob vowed to pay tithes, Genes. 28. Dauid to build a temple vnto God, Psal. 131.2. But neither of these two were commanded them, and yet they were properly referred to the seruice of God.

Ans. First, we denye not, as we haue sayd, but that in the law and before there might be such voluntarie vowes, yet it followeth not, that there should bee any such now. Secondly, both those dueties were necessarie, and commanded in generall, though not in particular. As first, Iacobs vow was that the Lord should be his God, vers. 21. No man can denye, but this was necessarie, and a commandement: Then seeing the Lord is his God, it is also necessarie that he should acknowledge him by some externall worship, as by appointing the Lord an house in that place, and bringing oblations vnto his altars: these are but particular duties, that doe followe that generall commandement.

Secondly, Dauid did vow that, he was bound to doe being King of Israel, namely, to haue a care of the temple of God: for thus he sayth to Nathan the Prophet, I dwell in an house of Cedar trees: but the Arke of God remaineth within the curtaines, 2. Sam. 7.2. This belonged to the King of duetie, as it was generally commanded all Israel, Hagg. 1.4. but that Dauid was discharged of this care, by the especiall warrant of God by the Prophet.

[Page]2 Hebr. 13.16. To doe good and to destribute forget not, for with such sacrifices God is pleased. Intelligitur (sayth Bellarmine) de eleemosyna non praeceptae: it must be vnderstood of almes which is not commanded.

Ans. As though all kind of almes and releeuing of the poore be not commanded: for the works of charitie, and to doe good are alwaies enioyned vs. Againe, this place serueth nothing at al for vowes: It seemeth he was hard bestead, that had no better choise of places.

The Protestants.

WE grant that there are other kind of vowes then before we spake of, which doe not directly concerne the worship of God, neither are of things commanded vs, nor yet is God thereby the better pleased: but they serue onely as helps, to make vs more fit vnto Christian dueties: As a man that seeth he is by nature giuen to dronkennes, doth vowe that he will take no strong drinke, lest he should offend that way: Another purposeth to fast, thereby to tame his flesh, and the more feruently to pray: As Iob made a couenant with his eyes not to looke vpon a maide, 31.1. But these things of themselues, by the outward act, are not the more acceptable vnto God, neither is God by eating or not eating, or looking or not looking, the better worshipped, as these things are considered in themselues. Wherefore by the word of God we condemne all voluntary and superstitious vowes of men, inuented to serue God by, as vowes of chastitie, of going in pilgrimage, offering to Images, and such like.

1 S. Paul condēneth al voluntary worship of God which is inuented by man, as vnprofitable, though it haue a shew of wisedome in humblenes of mind, and not sparing the bodie, Coloss. 2.23. As such are the ordinances of the world in worshipping of Angels, and in abstinence, Touch not, tast not, handle not. But such are all popish vowes, a voluntary seruice of God, euen in the same things which the Apostle taketh exception against, for they make vowes to Angels, to Saints, vowes to keepe daies holy, and to fast in them: Ergo, they are vnlawfull.

2 Rom. 14.23. Whatsoeuer is not of faith, is sinne, that is, grounded vpon knowledge out of the word: Ergo, all voluntarie vowes made to serue God by are to be abandoned, because they haue no warrant out of Gods word. Bellarmine answereth, that the place is not so to be vnderstood, but rather, by faith, is meant the conscience of man, and so whatsoeuer is done against the conscience is sinne.

Ans. By faith, is not vnderstood any conscience, but the assurance of a right conscience, which must needes be builded vpon the word: for vers. 22. S. Paul saith, If thou hast faith, haue it with God: This cannot be spoken of a corrupt conscience which is not able to abide Gods trial, but a right conscience established out of the word.

[Page]3 Let vs heare Augustines iudgement: Sunt multi, qui vouent, alius pallium, alius oleum, alius ceream ad luminaria noctis, alius vt vinum non bibat per aliquot annos, alius vt ieiunia certo tēpore faciat, alius vt carnes non comedat. Non est istud votum optimum neque perfectum, adhuc melius volo: non eligit Deus nec speciem tuam, nec oleum tuum, nec ieiunium tuum, sed hoc, quod hodie redemit, ipsum offer, hoc est, animam tuam. There are many that vow, one a cloake, another oyle, another a waxe candle, another that he will drinke no wine, another that he will fast, another that he will eate no flesh. This is not the best kind of vowing: God neither careth for thy comely apparell, nor for thy oyle, nor for thy fasting: but offer that vnto him, which he hath redeemed, that is, thy soule, De tempor. ser. 7. We see by this, what account Augustine maketh of superstitious voluntarie vowes, made with an intent to please God thereby.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING Monasticall vowes in particular.

THere are three kinds of vowes which belong vnto Monkerie: the first is the vow of voluntarie pouertie: the second, the vow of obedience vnto the Monasticall presidents and gouernours: the third is the vow of continencie: of these three in order.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE vow of voluntarie pouertie.

The Papists.

THey say it is an acceptable seruice vnto GOD, for a man to giue all he hath error 87 to the poore, and by vow to consecrate and addict himselfe to voluntarie pouertie.

1 Math. 18.21. Christ faith, If thou wilt be perfect, goe and sell all thou hast, and giue it to the poore, and come and followe me. This is properly to followe Christ, to lacke proprietie and liue in common: and thus the Apostles followed Christ, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. First, This is a precept not generall to all, but giuen to this one man to discouer his hypocrisie, and vaine confidence that he had in himselfe, as though he had kept the law, which he came farre short of. Secondly, the Apostles themselues had proprietie: Peter had a house: Iohn had to prouide for the virgin Marie, whom Christ commended vnto him: Matthew made a feast of his owne goods, Fulk. ibid.

2 Act. 2.44. They had all things common: and Act. 5. Ananias and Sapphira, after their profession of commō life, deteining some part proper to themselues, were reproued and iudged of the Apostles: Ergo, it is acceptable to God to liue in common, Rhemist. ibid. Bellarm. cap. 20.

[Page]Answere: First, that communitie, vsed then amongst the brethren, ought alwayes to be among Christians, no man to count that his owne which the necessitie of his brother requireth to be bestowed vpon him: euery man was not then bound to giue vp the proprietie of their goods: for they distributed to euery man as they had need, Act. 4.35. But if they had giuen vp all the proprietie of their goods, then all should haue needed alike: And Peter sayth not the contrary, but that Ananias might haue kept the proprietie of his goods, if he had not made publike profession to the contrarie, Act. 5.4.

2 Concerning Ananias, we doe not read that he made any vowe to giue his goods to the Church: nay the contrary appeareth, in that Saint Peter saith, While it remayned with thee, appertained it not to thee? But if his vowe were past before, the goods, though not yet solde, could not appertaine vnto him. Agayne, the principall and chiefe cause, why Peter proceeded agaynst him, was his lying and hypocrisie, not for breaking his vow: for it cannot bee proued that he promised all, but that he affirmed that hee brought all, whereas hee withdrew part.

The Protestants.

VOluntarie, or rather wilfull pouertie, for a man, hauing no vrgent cause, to leaue all he hath, and bequeath himselfe to a poore and needie life, onely for opinion of greater merite, and hope thereby better to please God, is neither a thing acceptable nor commendable before God, nor any where commanded in the scriptures.

1 1. Timoth. 6.17. Saint Paul giuing Counsel to rich men, biddeth them not to cast away their riches: but Charge them, sayth he, that they be not high minded, nor put their trust in vncertain riches: Surely it had been a more compēdious way to wish them at once to leaue their riches, so they should not be in danger, either of pride, or vaine confidence: But the Apostle saith no such thing. Againe, God giueth vs abundantly al things to enioy: riches are the gift of God, we ought not to be weary of Gods blessing. And as Iob sayth, The Lord giueth, the Lord taketh: therefore a man ought not to make himselfe poore, because he made not himselfe rich, but to waite vpon God.

Further it followeth, vers. 18. that they do good, and be rich in good works: he that can vse riches well, may bee rich in good workes; but he that is poore wanteth occasion and meanes to doe good, as the rich man indued with grace may: Wherefore he is an enemie to the glorie of God, that changeth his rich estate, wherein he may more glorifie God, for a poore.

Agayne, if it were so acceptable a thing to God, and so meritorious to liue in pouertie, what made the Prophet to pray agaynst it? Giue mee not pouertie nor riches, but feede me with foode conuenient, Prouer. 30. vers. 8.

2 What better argument can we haue against them, then their own practise? for, though in words they much commend voluntarie pouertie, yet it is [Page] a rare thing, to finde it amongst them: for not one among a thousand of them, if they haue landes, doe giue them to the poore, but to their owne kinsfolkes, or else to the Abbeyes, where they know they shalbe wealthily maintained. The Pope also is good to many, and granteth them capacities to possesse temporall goods contrary to their former vowe. Fulk. annot. Mark. 10. sect. 3.

3 Augustine sayth, Diuitiae seculares si desint, non per opera mala quarantur in mundo: Si autem adsunt, per opera bona seruentur in coelo: Epist. 1. posteriorum. If secular riches be wanting, let not a man seeke to get them by euill doing in the world: but if he haue them, labour, by well doing, to store them vp in heauen. He counselleth not men to cast away their riches: It was the heresie of the Pelagians to perswade rich men to cast away their goods, August. epistol. 106. and of the Manichees likewise, August. cont. Faustum. lib. 5. cap. 10.

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the vowe of obedience.

The Papists.

error 88 THey that doe enter into the monkish profession, do vow in all things to become obedient to their gouernour, & to follow his rules & iniunctions: As the Franciscanes follow Saint Francis rule, who in stead of a girdle, put a corde about him, went bare-foote, in winter season couered his flesh with yce and snow.Fox. p. 259. It is acceptable, and gratefull seruice, say they, vnto God, to be thus obedient to their fathers and gouernours.

1 Ierem. 35. The sonnes of Ionadab are commended, for being obedient to their father, who enioyned them to drink no wine, nor to sow their fields, nor builde houses but dwell in tents: See, they obeyed their father in thinges not commanded of God: Ergo, so ought religious Monkes to doe. Bellarm. cap. 21.

Answer. First you cannot shew, that your monkish Abbots haue such authoritie ouer their Monkes, as the father hath ouer his children: for Coloss. 3. and in many other places, children are commanded to be obedient to their parents: But they haue neither authoritie nor calling out of the word. Secondly, Ionadab inioyned nothing contrarie to the law of the Nazarites, Numb. 6. and if you say, that it was not the custome of the Nazarites to dwell in tents: you shall finde that the Rechabites did not so straightly obserue this, as the other, namely not to drinke wine: for Ierem. 35.11. they came vp for feare of the Caldeans that were in the land, and dwelt at Ierusalem: they dispensed with the voluntarie iniunction of their father, for dwelling in their tents, but kept the other vow of abstaining from wine still, because it was after the law. Wherefore this example maketh not for monkish obedience, seing they are inioyned things not commanded by God, nay contrary to his commandements.

[Page]

The Protestants.

NO obedience to any ruler either spirituall or temporall is to be yelded vnto, but for the Lords sake, and in such matters, wherein we haue the warrant of Gods word for our obedience.

1 Coloss. 3.23. Seruants be obedient to your masters, and whatsoeuer you do, doe it heartily as to the Lord: But if any thing be inioyned vs which is not warranted by the word of God, we cannot with a good conscience obey as before the Lord. Agayne, Saint Paul saith, Coloss. 2.18. Let no man at his pleasure beare rule ouer you, or beguile you, or as the Rhemists translate, seduce you wilfully: Ergo, no man must impose rules of life beside the Gospel, for this were to rule ouer men at their pleasure.

2 Augustine sayth, Cum homo conster anima & corpore, oportet nos ex ea parte, quae ad hanc vitam pertinet, subditos esse potestatibu [...]: ex illa parte, qua credimus deo, & ad eius regnum vocamur, non oportet nos cuiqua [...] esse subditos: Seeing a man doth consist both of bodie and soule; in regard of that parte, which the affayres of this life concerne, we ought to be subiect to the higher powers: but in respect of that part whereby we beleeue, and are called to the kingdome of God, we must be obedient to none, August. in 13. ad Rom. Therefore no man may impose any new religion vpon vs, which altogether toucheth the conscience.

THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE vow of continencie or chastitie.

The Papistes.

THe vow of chast and continent life is commendable and meritorious, they say, in all that doe take it vpon them, and after the vow made, they are sure error 89 to receiue that high gift of continencie, if they duely labour for it, Rhemist. annot. 1. Corinth. 7. ver. 7. But whosoeuer marrieth after the vow made, sinneth damnably, and turneth back after Sathan. Rhemist. annot. 1. Tim. 5. sect. 12.

1 Math. 19.12. Some haue made themselues chaste, or as the Rhemists doe very homely translate it, haue gelded themselues for the kingdome of heauen: this proueth the vowes of chastitie to be both lawfull and meritorious, Rhemist. in hunc locum.

Ans. This is meant onely of those that haue the gift of continencie, who, if they be sure they haue receiued it, may vow and purpose single life: but without such assurance no man can vow continencie lawfully. Secondly, but as for meriting, it commeth neither by being maried or vnmaried, but is the free gift of God through Christ. Fulk. ibid.

2 1. Timoth. 5.12. Hauing damnation because they haue cast away their first fayth: that is, the vow of continencie, which they made to Christ: it cannot [Page] be meant of the first fayth in baptisme, for that is not lost by mariage, Rhemist. And againe, vers. 15. They are turned back after sathan: we may here learne, for those to marrie which are professed, is to turne back after Sathan. Rhemist. in eum locum.

Answer: First, Saint Paul speaketh not here of widowes alreadie chosen, but to be chosen: hee would haue younger widdowes to bee chosen, because they woulde waxe wanton, and marrie: and therefore it is not like, that by the first fayth heere is meant the vowe of chastitie, seeing there is no cause that these younger widdowes shoulde make any vowe, beeing excluded by the Apostle from Church seruices. Secondly, vers. 14. Saint Paul himselfe Counselleth the younger widdowes to marrie, therefore it is not like they were votaries. Thirdly, by the first fayth is vnderstood the Christian fayth, which the younger widowes waxing wanton, and lasciuious, nor carying to match with Infidels, were in danger to breake, as the Apostle telleth them of some that had done so already, and were turned backe after Sathan. Fourthly, we say not that the fayth of baptisme is broken by all mariage, but with ioyning with Infidels. Fiftly, it appeareth what breach of faith Paul meaneth, when he sayth, They waxe wanton, and idle, and are busie-bodies, goe from house to house, and speake things vncomely, verse 13. Which is a sliding back from the Christian fayth, when our life iarreth with our profession: not a breach of any vow of continencie, Fulk. 1. Timoth. 5. sect. 10.12.

The Protestants.

OVr sentence then appeareth to be this: that the vow of continencie cannot lawfully be made of all, neither is indifferently to be required of them, seeing all are not indued with that gift, Fulk. Math. 19.6. And that it is better euen for vowed persons, hauing rashly presumed beyond their strength, to marrie, rather then to burne. Fulk. 1. Cor. 7. sect. 8.

1 The scripture euery where commaundeth such to vse the benefite of mariage,Argum. that haue not the gift to liue single, 1. Cor. 7.2. For auoyding of fornication let euery man haue his wife: and ver. 9. If they cannot abstaine let them marrie. Wherefore they transgresse the commandement of God, and presume rashly, that hauing not this gift, doe vow virginitie.

Bellarmin. Answer. First, Saint Paul wisheth men to marrie, not for euery temptation of lust, but when they are ready to fall into externall workes of vncleannes, as into fornication: and therefore hee sayth, For auoyding of fornication let euery one haue his wife: For Saint Paul felt the pricke of the flesh, that is, the lust of concupiscence, and was buffeted of it, yet maried not for all that cap. 30. Rhemist. annot. 1. Corinth. 7. sect. 8.

Answere: First, we say not that for euery light temptation, which by resisting may be ouercome, in those that haue the gift of continencie, a man is to desire mariage, but when he is continually enflamed with lust, so that the will doth consent: though he be not yet so ouercome, that he fall in outward [Page] vncleannes: and this is the Apostles meaning, when hee sayth, It is better to marrie then to burne, that is, with inward lust when his minde is disquieted: And such a man as doth burne with secret concupiscence, still wrastling with that fire, and not being able to quench it, if he refuse to vse the lawfull remedie of mariage, is in danger also to fall into outward fornication.

2 Concerning Pauls example: First, the place is not so to be vnderstoode of the lust of concupiscence: for it is not like, that the Apostle being kept vnder, with hunger, colde, imprisonment, should bee so greatly tempted that way. But either it may be vnderstood of the particular temptation to pride and vainglorie, as he him selfe expoundeth it, vers. 7. lest I should be exalted out of measure through the abundance of reuelations: Or else generally Saint Paul vnderstandeth by flesh, the whole masse of corruption and whatsoeuer was in him that resisted the spirite: In this sense he crieth out, Roman. 7. Who shall deliuer me from this body of death! Caluin.

2 Though we yeeld that Saint Paul was tempted of his concupiscence, yet he ouercame and subdued it, obtayning from God, after some striuing, grace and power to quench the secret fire: And so we denie not, but that men ought by fasting and prayer to labour for that precious gift. But if they feele the fire to burne within them still, then are they to vse the remedie prescribed by Saint Paul, that is, to marrie.

Secondly, sayth Bellarmine, Saint Paul giueth libertie of mariage onely to those which were free and had not vowed continencie, cap. 31.

Answere: First, the Apostles words are generall: Let euery man haue his wife: I, say the Rhemists, he speaketh of those that were maried before their conuersion, that they might still vse and keepe their wiues. Yea but Saint Paul speaketh of all vnmaried, in the verse next before, It is good not to touch a woman: I trow he meaneth not, it is good for a man that is maried not to touch his wife. Secondly, it is a generall libertie, which he granteth to all, ver. 9. If they cannot conteine, let them marry: but many votaries cannot contayne, as it may appeare by the vnchast liues of your Monkish rabble: therefore hauing the disease, they may vse the remedie, that is, marrie.

Argum. 2. Virginitie, and continent life is onely to be required of those which haue the gift of continencie: But all haue not that gift: Ergo, the vow of Virginitie is not indifferently to be made by any. That the gift of continencie cannot be had or obtayned of all, neither resteth in our free wil, it is plaine by scripture.

1 Math. 19.12. He that is able to receiue this gift, let him receiue it: Ergo, all are notable to receiue it.

Bellarmin. First, though they are not able to receiue it yet, yet they may if they will, and aske for it by prayer: for the text is, Some haue made themselues chaste for the kingdome of God: whereby it appeareth that it is in the will of man, cap. 31. Answer. Hee speaketh cleane contrary to the text: for Christ sayth, None receiue it but to whom it is giuen, and the wordes are, [Page] qui capere potest, not, qui velit, hee that can receiue, not hee that will receiue. And they are sayd to make themselues chaste, not because it is in their owne choyce, but being enabled of God, and hauing receiued power ouer their will, they are sayd to make themselues chaste, hauing receiued power by the spirit of God: So our Sauiour sayth, Come vnto me all ye that are laden, Math. 11. & yet no man commeth to Christ, but his father first draweth him, Iohn 6.44. Wherefore it being a peculiar gift of God, all cannot haue it, neither are sure to obtaine it, though they aske it by prayer, because wee haue no promise to bee heard.

Rhemist. When a man is bound to abstaine by vow, or other necessarie occasion, as imprisonment, banishment, sicknes, no doubt, if he labour for the gifte of continencie, he may haue it. Ans. They that binde themselues to a rash vowe, haue no promise to be heard praying for continencie. Secondly, they that are driuen vnto any such necessitie as you speak of, which they are not a cause of themselues, neither can auoide, as in long and perpetual sicknes, it is certaine that God will giue the gift being sought by lawful meanes: But as for banishment and imprisonment, they are not of such necessitie, but that the husband is bound to follow the wife, and the wife her husband, Fulk. 1. Cor. 7.6.

Neither are many of those meanes commendable, which were vsed in Monkerie: for some of them were superstitious and vnlawfull, as they vsed Phisick and medicine to correct or slake, and extinguish nature in them: Francis was wont to couer his bodie with yce and snow, others did whip themselues: This was not to subdue and tame the bodie, but to destroy and kill the bodie, and make it vnfit for other dueties. The scripture prescribeth no other meanes but prayer and fasting, and labour in our vocation. Some of them againe vsed externall exercise of their bodie, as by fasting, by lying harde, by watching, which in themselues were not amisse: but they leaue the chiefe and principall, which is the spirituall meanes: for the outward ex [...]rcise of the flesh without this, is little worth, Coloss. 2.23.

Bellarmin. To beleeue is no lesse the gift of God, then to liue chaste, yet we exhorte all men to beleeue, and they doe vowe and promise it in baptisme: why may they not as well vowe continencie, although it be a peculiar gift? cap. 31.

Ans. They are both indeed the giftes of God, but one is necessarie to saluation, namely, to beleeue, and is promised to all that will seeke for it: But the other gift is not necessary, neither hath any such promise.

Secondly, Saint Paul calleth this a proper gift: But if all men were capable of it, how could it be called a proper gift? One after this manner, another after that, sayth the Apostle. But if euery man might attaine to that one gift of continencie, they should not all haue their proper gift, but all one gifte, and after the same manner. And though Saint Paul should meane, that to liue chastely in wedlock be also a proper gift of God, as Bellarmine vrgeth, and we denie not: yet it remaineth still, that the other is a more singular and proper [Page] gift, and is not therefore commonly, and indifferently bestowed vpon all.

Thirdly, Saint Paul sayth, that a man may marrie his Virgin if neede so require, 1. Corinth. 7.37. But if euery one, labouring for the gift of continencie, might obtayne it, there should then be no necessitie of mariage: which the Apostle here affirmeth.

Lastly, the Rhemists say, that the marriage of those that haue vowed, is the worst sorte of incontinencie and fornication, 1. Corinth. 7. sect. 8.

Augustine saith cleane contrarie: Non ipsae nuptiae talium damnandae iudicantur, sed damnatur propositi fraus, damnatur fracta votifides: postremò damnantur tales, non quia coniugalem fidem posterius inierunt, sed quia continentiaa primam fidē irritam fecerunt: de bono viduitat. cap. 9. The mariages of such are not condemned, but the violating of their vow is condemned, not because they afterward entred into the league of mariage, but because they did break the first fayth of continencie: Augustine sayth not, that such mariages are no mariages, but plaine adultery & fornication: But maketh the mariage lawful, & reproueth their rashnes before in making, and their vnstedfastnes nowe in breaking their vowes.

THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING Monasticall persons, which do enter into that profession.

THere are foure sortes of people which the papists do offer great wrong vnto, in drawing them to the profession of monkery: First, vnto the yonger sort, which haue libertie to marrie. Secondly, to the children and sonnes, whom they make Monks without consent of their parents. Thirdly, they say, maried persons, by mutual consent, may betake themselues to a Monks habite. Fourthly, if mariage be contracted, not consummate or finished, they may one leaue another without consent first had.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE younger sorte are to bee admitted to professe Monkerie.

The Papists.

IF they be come to the yeares of discretion, they may, men or women at any error 90 age, take vpon them the vow of Monkerie, Bellarm. cap. 35.

1 Math. 19.14. Suffer little children to come vnto me: Ergo, young men and mayds may become Monkes. Bellarm.

Answ. First, the text speaketh of little children: but by your confession, they must be of yeeres of discretion that should enter into your profession: so are not little children. 2. As though none could come to Christ, but through a Monks cowle: Nay, I would, they of all men, did not goe furthest off from Christ. It followeth also in the texte, Of such is the kingdome of heauen: [Page] so by this reason, heauen gates should be open onely to Monkes and Friers: and this is the right heresie of the Pelagians, and Manichees, that promised the kingdome of God not one, but those that cast a way their riches.

2 Iohn Baptist liued from a childe in the wildernesse: Ergo, lawfull for young ones to professe Monkerie.

Answere: First, Iohns example is extraordinarie, as his office and calling was singular, & therefore is no more to be imitated and followed in his solitarie life, then in his diet of Locusts and wilde honie: He sprang also in his mothers womb: so, I think, all Monkes and Eremites doe not. Secondly, it is not certaine at what yeeres Iohn entred into the Wildernesse: for hee was thirtie yeere olde when hee came and preached in the Wildernesse, as Matthew writeth, 3.1.

The Protestants.

THough we should grant, that a Monastical life were in some persons, and at some times tolerable among Christians, yet of all other the yonger sorte, in whom lust doth raigne, were most vnfit, and not to be admitted vnto that kinde of life.

1 Saint Paul would haue no widow to be chosen vnder 60. yeeres, 1. Timoth. 5.9. and I will the younger to marry, vers. 16. Ergo, it is contrarie to Saint Pauls rule, to suffer any such to make vowes of continencie.

Rhemist. answere. First, it was but a rule for that time, when as yet there were no Monasteries nor discipline, but young widowes, wandred vp & down idly. Answ. First, the same cause that young women had to marrie then, they haue now, and therefore the rule is generall. Secondly, as though the wals of Monasteries were able to keepe in Virginitie: no, it is notoriously knowne, that vnchast life hath scaled the wals of Nunneries, crept in at windowes, and found muses in the ground.

2 Saint Paul, say they, counselleth young widowes to marrie, not young Virgins, which hauing not experience of lust, are not so greatly tempted. Ans. How chaste your cloyster women haue been, and free from these tentations, the stories of former times make mention: and the examples of so many vnchaste milch-Nunnes, and filthie Monkes and Friers, are a sufficient proofe, Fulk. 1. Timoth. 5. sect. 11. But all these shifts notwithstanding Saint Pauls rule must stand, that no widowes must be admitted vnder 60. yeere olde.

2 The Manichees tooke occasion hereby to insult against the Catholiks, because they admitted so many Virgins to the profession of single life: Certatim ad hanc professionem [...]asincitatis suasionibu [...]vestris, vt iam penè maior in Ecclesijs omnibus virginum apud vos, quam mulierum numerositas habeatur, August. cor. Faustum. 30.4. Ye labour (say the Manichees) to drawe women of euery hand to this profession by your perswasions, that now in your Churches, the number of professed virgins exceedeth the number of women. And hereby [Page] the Manichees that extolled virginitie, and condemned mariage, were induced to think that the Catholike Bishops also were of their opinion.

Likewise Augustine, epistol. 169. maketh mention of one Priuius, that because while he liued among the Catholikes, he could not enioy the speech and companie of two young Nuns, he ran away with them to the Donatists. Thus we see what good commeth to shut young men and women into cloysters.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER CHILdren may enter into profession of Monkerie without their Parents consent.

The Papists.

IF they be of sufficient age, as the men of 14. yeere at the least, the women error 91 of 12. and their Parents be not driuen to any such necessitie, that they neede their childrens helpe, they may without Parents consent enter into Monkery.

1 God sayd to Abraham, get thee out of thy countrey and from thy fathers house: Genes. 12. and Christ Math. 10. whosoeuer loueth father or mother more then me, is not worthy of me. Ergo, children may become Monkes, without their fathers leaue, Bellarm. cap. 36.

Answ. First, who would haue thought that Abraham was a Monk, but that the Iesuite saith it? Secōdly, by the same reason a man may not leaue his parēts only, but go out of his countrey. Thirdly, Abraham was 75. yere old at that time, when he went out of Haran, verse 4. Ergo, wee will conclude that none ought to be made Monks before those yeares. Fourthly, When God calleth any man to a Monkish life, as Abraham had an especial calling of God, wee will giue him good leaue to goe.

Concerning the other saying of our Sauiour, it maketh nothing for you. First, Christ speaketh of persecution, when a man ought not for loue of his friends to denie Christ: but, I trowe you will not grant, that your Monkish life is persecution: and yet it is after a sorte▪ for the Locusts, which are none other but Monkes and Friers, Apocal. 9. doe bite and sting like serpents, that is, do secretly wound mens consciences. Secondly, a man may leaue his parents, as Christ commandeth, though he dwell in the same house with them: that is, by setting his loue and affection on heauenly things. Thirdly, doe all goe to Christ that come into your Monasteries? nay, I would they went not from Christ: for they liue after another rule, then Christs: Francis your great founder erected a new sect of Monkerie, and found out a new rule for them, which he called regulam Euangelicam, the rule of the Gospell: as though Christes rule were not sufficient▪

The Protestants.

CHildren ought not by the law of God to make any vow of single and continent [Page] life without the consent and liking of their parents. Luther. Pet. Martyr, Lib. de caelibat. et votis.

1. By the law of Moyses the father had power to disallow the vowes which the daughter made being in his house, Numb. 30.6. Which law was not ceremonious: for it was grounded vpon the Morall law, which commanded all obedience and duetie of the children to the Parents: And that it is not abrogate, it appeareth, because the same law is renewed by S. Paul. 1. Corinth. 7. ver. 36.37. Where the Apostle referreth the whole matter of keeping a virgin, or placing of her in mariage to the will of the father, yet so, that he must haue regard vnto the necessitie, the estate and condition of his virgine. Both these places do apertly proue, that neither the childe can be bestowed in marriage, nor vowed to virginitie, without the consent and determination of the parents.

2. Let vs heare what authoritie Augustine yeeldeth to the father ouer his children: Agite vicem nostram in domibus vestris: Episcopus inde appellatus est quia superintendit: vnusquisque ergo in domosua, si caput est domui suae, debet ad eum pertinere episcopatus officiū. de Sanct. Ser. 51. You (saith Augustine their Bishop) must supplye our stead in your houses: a Bishop or Superintendent, is so called because he ouerseeth: therefore euery housholder, being the head of his house, ought to playe the Bishop in his house. The father then is a Bishop ouer his children: shall any man then dare to take any out of his house, that is his Bishoprike, or any sheepe out of his folde, without the Bishop and sheepheardes consent?

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER Married persons may with mutuall consent become votaries.

The Papists.

WIth mutuall consent the man & the wife may separate thē selues and vow error 92 and promise single life for euer, so long as they both shall liue. Bellarm. Cap. 37.

Marie and Ioseph were perfitely man and wife, yet by mutuall consent they liued continently all their daies: Ergo, it is lawfull for married couples to separate themselues for euer, both agreeing therunto. Bellarm. cap. 37.

Answ. 1. It appeareth by the text, that there was no such thing purposed by Ioseph, before he was admonished by the Angell in a dreame, but that, as she was already betrothed: so there was an intent on Iosephs parte, that they should come together. Math. 1.18. But that in the meane time Marie was found with childe by the holy ghost: and so from that time Ioseph being a iust man neuer knew his wife: there was no such purpose or vowe before.

2. That this was an extraordinary exāple, who seeth it not? When any man [Page] shall be admonished by an Angell as Ioseph was, and shall haue the like cause as Ioseph had to abstaine, which shall neuer bee, hee may be bould to doe as Ioseph did.

The Protestants.

THey that are once ioyned together in marriage, and haue made a couenaunt each to other before God, can not separate them selues though they both consent, there being no other cause, but a purpose of single life for more holines sake.

1. It is flat contrary to S. Pauls rule. 1. Corinth. 7.5. ‘Defraud not your selues, except it be with cōsent for a time, that you may giue your selues to fasting and prayer, and againe come together, lest Satan tempt you for your incontinencie.’ First the Apostle saith directly: they should but separate themselues for a time. Secondly, we doe thus reason out of his wordes: there is no cause of separation, but to be giuen to fasting and prayer: but this may be done by a separation for a time: neither is it necessary we should alwaies be giuen to fasting and prayer, but vpon speciall occasion: therefore perpetuall separation is not needfull. 3. They that are long separated, are subiect to fall into tentation: the same cause therefore that moued them first to marrie, for auoiding of incontinencie, ought to moue them to come together againe: Therefore it is not good nor lawful they should separat them selues for euer.

2. That which God hath coupled, no man ought to put asunder: but they that are married haue made a couenant to God. Pro. 2.17. as well as to themselues, and are ioyned by Gods law together: Ergo, they can not dissolue their mariage by their owne power and will, the Lord hauing an interest therein.

Augustine Thus writeth, Non licet excepta causa fornicationis coniugem a coniuge dirimi, nec sterilem coniugem fas est relinquere, vt faecunda ducatur, de nupt. & concupiscen. Lib. 1. Cap. 10. It is not lawfull for married couples, one to be separat frō another, vnlesse it be for fornication: nor to leaue a barren wyfe to marrie a frutefull. Therefore if fornication onely be a iust cause of finall separation, there can be no other: If there were any other, it is most like it should be for procreation of children: But neither for that cause is a man to leaue his wife, Ergo for no other. Therefore, not for any vow of continencie is marriage to be dissolued, or any separation to be admitted. Bellarm. saith, that by their separation, Marriage is not dissolued. Auns. It is asmuch dissolued, as by your law in cases of diuorse. 1. For these are your words: for aduoutrie one may dismisse another, but neither party can marry againe, for any cause during life. Rhemist. Math. 19. Sect. 4. So ye allowe onely a kinde of dismission in the case of adultery, and so you do in the vowing of continencie: And thus you make this cause as forceable as the other, to break off the Matrimonial duety, which is contrary to the gospell.

[Page]

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER MARIage contracted not consummate, may without consent be broken for the vow of continencie.

The Papists.

error 93 THeir opinion is, that if the mariage be contracted onely and ratified, but not yet consummate, by the parties comming together, it is lawful for either of them without the others consent to vowe chastitie, cap. 38. Bellarm.

His reason is, because it is lawfull for a man to passe from a lesse perfect state of life to a more perfect, if it may be done without detriment, as this may be: for yet they haue no children, and the partie may as well bee maried to another. Bellarm.

Answ. First, a single life is not alwayes the perfecter state, nor to all, as it is not to them that haue not the gift to containe, as it is most like hee hath not, that is contracted, and hath made promise of mariage: for then all this needed not. Secondly, though there be none of those impediments named, yet there is a greater: namely, their fayth & promise made each to other before God, which they ought not to violate. Thirdly, Saint Paul saith, If thou be bound to a wife, seeke not to be loosed, 1. Corinth. 7.27. But they that are espoused one to the other, are bound, vnlesse you will say, that the couenant made by them vnto God Prouer. 2.17. bindeth not.

The Protestants.

MAtrimonie whether ratified onely by lawfull contract or espousals, or consummate, ought not any way to be broken with consent or without, for Monasticall profession.

1 Our reason is, because it is perfect mariage already in substance and before God, which is ratified by contract onely and solemne vowe and couenant made each to other: And being thus betrothed, the one giueth power of their body to the other, and now they are no more free. That this mariage is perfect before God, and in substance, it appeareth by the law of Moses, by the which a man defiling a mayd betrothed, was to suffer death, as well, as if hee had committed vncleannes with a woman already maried. Deuteron. 22. verse 22.23. And Math. 1.18. Marie that was but betrothed to Ioseph, is by the Angel called his wife, vers. 20.

2 August. saith, Coninges fidem sibi pariter debent: Cui fidei tantum iuristribuit Apostolus, vt eam potestatem appellaret dicens, Mulier non habet potestatē sui corporis sed vir, &c. Maried couples doe owe fayth & troth one to the other: which mutual troth the Apos. maketh such accoūt of, that he giueth it ye name of [Page] power: saying, The woman hath not power of her owne bodie, but the man, and likewise the man, &c. Augustine sayth, that by the very plighting of their troth each to other, they receiue mutuall power and interest one of anothers bodie. But this troth was plighted before the consummation of their mariage, Ergo, they had one interest in another then, and can do nothing one without the consent of the other: de bon. coniugal. cap. 3.

THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING the rules and discipline of Monasticall life.

THis question hath foure partes. First, of the solitarie and seuere kind of life in Monkes and Eremites. Secondly, of their canonicall houres appoynted for prayer. Thirdly, of their habite and apparell. Fourthly, of their maintenance, whether it ought to come by their labour.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE solitarie and austere life of Monkes.

The Papists.

TO liue in solitarie places, to weare sack-cloth, to be giuen continually to error 94 fasting, to lie hard, to fare meanely, and by other such wayes to punish and afflict the bodie, they say, are notable meanes to bring the soule to the contemplation of heauenly things.

1 John Baptist liued in the desart, fared coursely, and was barely apparelled, he ate Locusts and wilde honie, and ware a garment of Camels haire: he was a right paterne of true Eremites, Bellarm. cap. 39. lib. 2. de Monach.

Answer. First, Johns life was not so austere, as they make it: for the place where he liued was not so solitarie, but that there were villages and houses not far off, as it may appeare by the peoples resort vnto him: his apparel was of Camels hayre, and was somewhat course, yet no such thing as sack-cloth,Fulk Matt. 3. sect. 1. or haire-cloth, for of the finest of the Camels haire Chamblets and Grograines are made that are had in price amongst vs: his diet also in eating Locusts & wilde honie was vsual in that coūtrey. Secondly, we denie not but Iohn liued an austere life, because he was a preacher of repentance, & had a singular office to prepare men for the cōming of Christ: Therfore his calling being extraordinary, he cannot be an author of an ordinary calling among Christians. Thirdly, seeing Christ came eating and drinking, liued amongst men, and was apparelled as others were, why should Christians rather choose to imitate the Baptist, who had no office or ministerie in the Gospel, Math. 11.11. then our Sauiour Christ, whose life and doctrine is for our imitation?

[Page]

The Protestants.

THat the solitarie life of Eremites, in flying the comfortable societie of men, and their rigorous manner in the vnnatural chastising of their bodies, is contrarie to the rule of the Gospell, thus we shew it.

1 Heb. 10.24.25. Let vs consider one another, and prouoke one another to good workes, not forsaking the assemblies of our selues together, as the maner of some is, but exhorting one another: here the Apostle speaketh manifestly against those that shunne the societie and companie of their brethren, because they must needes fayle in the dueties of charitie, as in exhorting one another, and prouoking to good works: these dueties Eremites can not performe, therefore their life is vnlawfull: and Math. 24, it is a note of false prophets and false Christs to liue in the desarts. Againe, they that loue solitarie places, doe offer themselues to tentation, and fall into the snares of the diuel: God saw it was not good for Adam, no not in Paradise, to liue alone: but I think their desarts are farre vnlike to Paradise: Christ to be tempted of the diuell was lead into the Wildernes: Therfore such places are fit for Sathans working. The preacher sayth, Two are better then one, for if one ouercome him, two shal stand against him, Eccles. 4.12. We are better able being ayded by our brethren to resist Sathan then being alone: We ought not then to tempt God, and not knowing our own strength, to goe forth into solitarie places, and as it were prouoke Sathan to the Combat.

2 That cruel and inhumane kind of chastising their bodies by fasting & other discipline vtterly is vnlawful. The Monks called Grandimōtenses, did weare shirts of maile next their bodies, the Charter Monkes, haire-cloth: the Monks Flagellants went bare-foote in linnen shirts, leauing an open place in the backe where they did daylie whip themselues before the people, till the blood followed. Moses a certaine Abbot did so afflict his bodie with fasting and watching, that for 2. or 3. daies together many times he had no appetite at all to his meat, neither could sleepe. An other Eremite (as Cassianus writeth) did purpose with himselfe not to eate meate, vnlesse he had some guest or stranger with him, and so was constrayned to abstaine somtime fiue dayes together: two other Monasticall brethren, trauayling in the desart of Thebaide, did vow not to take any sustenance, but such as God should send them: and as they went, a certaine wilde people,Fox. p. 154. contrarie to their custome, offered them meat, the one tooke it as sent of God, the other refused it, because he thought it to be sent rather of man then of God, and so died.

Basilius magnus, and Gregor. Nazianzene, did so pluck downe themselues by immoderate fasting, that when they were called to bee Bishops they were not able to sustaine the labour thereof.

Where in all the scriptures learned these men, thus to punish their bodies? this is not with Saint Paul to subdue and bring vnder the flesh: but to kill and destroy it: contrary to that saying of Saint Paul ▪ No man euer yet hated his own flesh,Ephe. 5.29. but loueth & cherisheth it: see I pray you, how these men loued and cherished their bodies?

[Page]Let vs heare what Aug. sayth, Tudeseris res humanas, & segregas te, vt nemo te videat: Cui proderis? tu ad hoc peruenisses, si nemo tibi profuisset? In Psal. 49. An quia veloces pedes tibi videris habuisse ad transeundum, praecisurus es pontem? Thou leauest the care of humane things, and separatest thy selfe that no man should see thee: to whom doest thou good in so doe doing? Hadst thou come to this perfection thy selfe if no man had done thee good? because thou hast quickly passed ouer, wilt thou cut off the bridge, that no man else should passe? See then Augustine maketh the heremiticall life altogether vnprofitable to men.

THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the habite and shauing of Monkes.

The Papists.

BOth these superstitious customes, for Monks to be knowne by their coules & error 95 shauen crowns, they receiue and allow as cōmendable and fit for them to be knowen by. Beside some shew of antiquitie, scripture they haue none: but their best reason is this: that as Senators & souldiers, Noble mē & rustikes are knowē by their apparel, so it is meet that Monks should bee discerned from others by their habite, Bellarm. cap. 40. Our Rhem. vse the same reason for shauen crowns, that it is a note of distinction between the Clergie and lay-men, annot. 1. Pet. 5. sect. 2. And for priestlike garnents, they alleadge out of Apocal. 1. vers. 13. how Christ appeared to Iohn vested in a priestlike garment.

Ans. 1. We deny not, but that it is conuenient for Ministers to be discerned from others euen in their apparel: which may be done by the grauity & modestie therof in colour, in plainnes, not necessary to bring in strange and ridiculous fashions of attire, such as Monks coules are: yet Ministers are better discerned by other things, then their apparel, as they are described by S. Paul, 1. Tim. 3. But as for any such distinction of monks we allow not: for the very calling it selfe ought to be abolished. As for shauen crownes and beards, they are but tokens of Baals priests, make the best of them you can.

2 Christ appeared in a long garment down to the feete: which they translate a priestlike garment, as though Christ were then going to Masse: The word is, podéres, which signifieth a long vesture, downe to the feete, which was one of the high priests garments, and hereby is signified the priesthood of Christ: but what is this to the attire of Monks or priests? We denie not but long garments for their comlines are fit for Ministers, according to the fashiō of the countrie, but not as necessarie, representing more holinesse: for in the East countreyes, short garments were graue and comely enough: as the prophets had their mantles: and S. Paul maketh mention of his cloke. 2. Tim. 4.13.

The Protestants.

WE condemne both the habite and shauing of the Monkes as superstitious, euen as their whole life and profession is.

[Page]1 There is no one precept in the new testament concerning formes and fashions of apparell to be vsed by Clergie men, but onely in generall termes, that they should be modest and sober, and graue in their behauiour, 1. Tim. 3. The Leuites and priests indeede in the law, had rules and precepts set them both for their vestures in the temple, and their ordinary apparell, Numb. 15.39. that it should be made with fringes in remembrance of the commandements. But who seeth not that such significations of apparel were Leuitical, and meerly ceremonious? such is the habite of Monkes: for their coules, sayth the Iesuite, signifie their innocencie, like vnto children that are couered with vailes like vnto coules. But to place any religion or holines in apparell, as they did, (for it was thought a great priuiledge to be buried in a Monks coule) is abominable superstition: for such Monkish superstition our Sauiour rebuked the Pharisies, Math. 23.5. All their works they do, to be seene of men: for they make their Phylacteries broad, and make long the fringes of their garments. If the Pharisies did abuse to vain-glorie and superstition, that kinde of apparell which the law commaunded: there can be no good vse of Monkish habites, which the Gospel neither commendeth nor commandeth.

As for shauen crownes: they were directly forbiddē by the law of Moses, not only to round the tufts of their beard, as the Gentiles did, Leu. 19.27. but not to shaue their beard, or make bald their head, Leuit. 21.5. And then it was a signe of holines not to cut the haire, as in the Nazarites it appeareth, Num. 6. It was then the custom of the heathen and of their Idolatrous priestes to shaue themselues: How then dare the papists make that a signe of holines now, which was a signe of prophanenes, and heathennes then? And is their religion so beggarly, that they must needs borrow their ceremonies of the heathen?

2 The great variety of their habits, & foolish significations of their shauings, doe shew what beginning they had. The Monks of Basiles order went in white, of Benets rule in black, the Cistercians had white rotchets vpon a black coate: the Grandimōtenses a coate of mailes,Fox. p. 154. with a black cloke vpon. Some starred Monks: some Iesuites, with a white girdle, & a russet coule: some Celestines all in blew, both cloke, coule and cap. The Franciscanes did weare ropes for girdles & treen shooes.

They render also diuers reasons of their shauen crownes: some say, it resembleth Christs crowne of thornes: some by shauing the haire, do signifie the mortifiyng of the affections, as cutting of things that are superfluous: some by baring of the head, the simplicitie and plainnes of life. Bellarm. saith, it is a signe of repentance and conuersion. Is not here good stuffe, thinke you? Such rites, such ceremonies, such significations, such humane traditions, I think the Pharisies would haue abhorred. For these are worse then their washing of tables, brasen vessels, pots, cups, and such like: And yet our Sauiour saith of them, that they did lay the commandement of God apart, to establish their owne traditions, Mark. 7.8.

Lastly, let August. speak: Cōcerning the habite of ecclesiastical persons, thus [Page] he writeth: Aequè laicis patet coeli palatium dei mandata seruantibus quàm sanctimoniali▪ habitu praeditis sacerdotibus. De salutar. docum. cap. 8. The heauenly palace is as well open for Lay men, keeping the commandements of God, as for Priests in their holy attire. What profiteth it then, I pray you, to be buried in a Monkes coule? Againe, Augustine found fault with certaine dissolute Monkes in that time, that suffered their haire to growe long: Against whom he vrgeth the saying of S. Paul, 1. Corinth. 11.14. Doth not nature it selfe teach you, that it is a shame for a man to haue long haire? And so he concludeth: Hoc quò pertinet, quaeso, tam apertè contra Apostoli praecepta comari? What meaning haue you in this, to suffer your haire to growe, contrary to the precept of the Apostle? But this precept did no more belong to Monkes, then all other Christians. Concerning the shauing of Monkes, Augustine hath not one word at all, but of polling, and clipping the haire: he speaketh onely against certaine crinitos fratres, that nourished their haire and suffered it to grow of length.

Nay, our Rhemists loue shauing so well, that they defend the shauing of Nunnes, and would proue it out of Hierome, who indeede speaketh of the cutting of their haire, not for any religion, but to auoyd certaine little beasts that bred betweene the skinne and the haire, (you knowe what beasts they are) because they vsed not the bathes, nor oyle, as other women did, Fulk. 2. Thessal. 3. sect. 2. But whatsoeuer Hierome saith, it is flat contrarie to Saint Paules rule, who saith, It is a shame for a woman to be shorne or shauen, 1. Cor. 14.6.

THE THIRD PART OF THE MONKES Canonical houres.

The Papists.

THe 3.6.9. houres, they say, are consecrated and deuoted to praier, which they call their Canonical houres: at the 3. houre the holy Ghost descended: at error 96 the 6. houre Peter went vp to the top of the house: and at the 9. houre Peter and Iohn went vp to pray in the temple, Act. 3.1. And Daniel vsed to pray thrice in the day, Dan. 6.10. Ergo, those times ought to be consecrate to prayer, Rhemist. Act. 10. sect. 6.

Ans. First, we denye that it can be gathered by any of those places, that these houres onely ought to be set apart for prayer. Peter and Iohn went vp at the 9. houre, which was the time of the euening sacrifice, when the religious Iewes went vp to pray. Secondly, Daniel praied three times a day, but at what houres the text speaketh not: yet by this example, and by the other proofes alleadged, we doe gather, that at the 3.6.9. houre, that is not precisely at any of these times, but in the morning, when men rise vp to their labours, at noone before their repast, and at night when they goe to rest, it is meete and conuenient that men should make their praiers vnto God, and at other times also when they finde themselues fit. Thirdly, the popish seruice hath nothing but the names of these [Page] houres: for they are all finished in the forenoone, they haue their Nocturnes at midnight, their Prime early in the morning, whereas the sixt houre is at high noone, the ninth houre is the third houre before the Sunnes set, Fulk. ibid.

The Protestants.

WE denye not but that set times of publike prayer are commendable, as we haue our forenoone, and afternoone seruice: But at vnseasonable houres, as at midnight, or the rising of the Sunne, to call the people together, when they cannot cōueniently be assembled, is but a superstitious custome. Again, it is profitable for men in the morning, noone, euening, though not precisely at any set houres, to direct their prayers vnto God: but so to stint mens prayers, as that they ought of necessitie to keepe their houres, as though their prayers were then more auaileable, it hath no ground out of scripture.

1 S. Paul saith, Pray continually, 1. Thessal. 5.17. Ergo, it is lawfull to pray at all times, and one time as fit for prayer as another, if a man be prepared. Agayne, the same Apostle saith: I will that the men euery where lift vp pure hands without wrath and doubting, 1. Timoth. 2.8. Out of these words we gather two arguments: First, prayers are no more bound to times, then to places: a man may pray euery where, Ergo, at euery time. Secondly, a man ought not to pray but when he is voyd of wrath, and is otherwise prepared: but it may be that at the stinted houres, of the 3.6.9. a man may bee in wrath, and otherwise not fit, therefore he is not necessarily to be tyed to those houres.

2 Augustine thus writeth: Cum quisque orationem quaerit, collocat membra sicut ei occurrerit. Cum autem non quaeritur, sed infertur appetitus orandi: hoc est, cum repente aliquid venit in mentem, quocum (que) modo inuenerit hominem, non est vtique differenda oratio. Lib. 2. ad Simplician. quaest. 4. When any man desireth to pray, let him dispose his bodie as he thinketh best: But when as it commeth not of his desire and seeking, but suddenly his affection is stirred vp to pray, howsoeuer prayer findeth him (that is, whether standing or sitting) he must not in any case deferre it and put it off to another time. This then is Augustines minde, that a man should pray so oft as he hath a disposition thereunto, and not deferre his prayer, as they doe, which bind themselues to Canonicall houres.

THE FOVRTH PART, CONCERNING THE maintenance of Monkes.

The Papists.

error 97 THey neither denie that it is vnlawfull for Monkes to labour with their hands, where necessitie, bodily strength, the order of the Church doth require thē, neither doe they confesse, that it is necessary for them to worke: And so are not ashamed to maintaine their idle, slothfull, and Epicures life, Bellarm. cap. 41.42. Rhemists, Thessal. 2.3. sect. 2. But they may either liue of the lands giuen to their houses, or els by their religious begging, cap. 44.

[Page]1 Monkes are not now bound to worke, hauing wherewithall to liue beside of lands giuen vnto them, because most of them are Priests, and doe serue at the Altar, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. First, we grant that Ministers of the Gospell labouring in the word and Sacraments, ought to be maintained by the Gospell: But such are fewe or none of your Monkes, who being fit for no other seruice either in the Church or commonwealth, are thrust into Monasteries by their friends: they are idolatrous Priests, and serue little better then at Baals altar. If any of them be fit for the Ministerie, as we denye not but some haue come out of your Cloysters, as Luther, Bucer, P. Martyr, by whom the Church of God hath receiued much good: but they must come first out of your Dennes, and relinquish their Monkish life, and labour amongst the people: so shal they be no more regular, but secular priests, as you terme them. Secondly, the lands which were bestowed vpon them, were first giuen vpon an euill intent, that by their prayers they should redeeme the soules of their founders, who most of them had cōmitted some notable sinne, & so pro remedio animarū, to helpe their soules, they built Monasteries: So King Ethelstane for killing his brother Edwin, built two Monasteries, Middleton and Michelney for his soule, Fox. pag. 152. King Offa for killing Ethelbert a good Prince, who came peaceably for the despousage of Atheldred his daughter, being pricked in conscience, gaue the first Peter pence to Rome, pag. 114. Those lands therefore being giuen first for vngodly purposes, and continued by them for idolatrous vses, ought cleane to bee taken from them, and to be bestowed vpon better vses, neither is it lawfull for them in that sort to enioy them.

2 They proue the impudent begging of Friers, which they call religious begging, to be lawfull and commendable, by the example of Christ, who had not a place where to put his head, Luk. 9. and of his Apostles, that were charged not to possesse gold or siluer in their purses, Math. 10. Bellarm. cap. 45.

Ans. First, I pray you where euer did you reade that Christ went a begging? he liued not of almes, but gaue almes, and Iudas was the almesman, though he playd his part but euill. Augustine flatly denyeth that you auouch: He saith that Christs bagge was as Fiscus regis, euen as the Kings Exchequer: and that what was giuen him, was as due as tribute money to the Prince: But the King, I trow, is not a begger. Nisi putetis, (sayth he) quia dominus petebat & indigebat, cui seruiebant angeli, qui de quinque panibus tot millia pauit. Vnlesse you thinke (sayth he) that Christ begged, and wanted, whom the Angels serued, and who fed with fiue loaues not a fewe thousands, in Psal. 146. Secondly, if the Apostles were beggers, then they liued of almes, but that is vntrue: for Christ saith, The labourer is worthie of his hire: but the labourers wages is earned and deserued, it is no almes.

The Protestants.

FIrst we say, that no idle persons ought to be maintained in a Christian commonwealth, but they that haue not any other necessary calling, should labour [Page] with their hands, and therefore Monkes that are fit for no other seruice in the Church, ought to labour and worke.

1 Saint Paul giueth a general rule: He that will not worke, let him not eate, 2. Thessal. 3.10. speaking of those that haue no necessarie calling in the Church: Ergo, Monkes must worke, or els by S. Paules rule, not eate. The Rhemists answere, that this is but a naturall admonition or counsel. Nay, it is a precept and commandement, that all in their seuerall places and callings should labour, none liue idlely: for S. Paul saith not, this I counselled you, but this I warned you of, or denounced vnto you, and he calleth those that followed not this rule, inordinate walkers.

2 Againe, if you will needes haue Monks, let them be as they were in times past: for then they were lay men and laboured with their hands, till anno. 606. when Boniface made a decree that Monkes might vse the office of preaching and Christening: but before that, Monks were forbidden by the generall Councel of Chalcedon, not to entermeddle with matters Ecclesiasticall, Fox. pag. 154. But perhaps they will say, as they doe, that some of them work, as their Nunnes: And I pray you, why not their Monkes too? I thinke their great bellies hinder them. Neither are their Monkes altogether idle; for some of them in painting, caruing, grauing, and garnishing their Idols, are very cunning. But, according to the saying, they might better be idle then ill occupied, and as good neuer a whit, as neuer the better.

3. Neither is it to be permitted, that Friers should get their liuing by begging: for what are they els but valiant beggers? First, there ought to be no beggers in the common-wealth: as Deuteron. 15. Though the Lord say, that they should neuer be without poore or beggers, which should want their helpe, vers. 11. Yet vers. 5. this charge is giuen, that by them, that is, their default, there should not be a begger in Israel: they should so prouide for the poore, that they neede not go a begging. There are also positiue lawes, to restraine the number of beggers, and therefore there is no reason, that by a number of idle vagrant persons, belli-god Friers, that begging order should be enlarged. Secondly, but seeing it can not bee chosen, but there must needes be some beggers: they ought not to bee young sturdie lubbers, that are able to worke, as most of the Friers were, but such as are described, Luk. 14.21. where the King saith to his seruants, Goe out quickly, and bring hither the poore, the maimed, the halt, the blinde: Ergo, such lusty fellowes ought to liue by the sweate of their browes, not to eate vp the bread of the poore. Lastly, in the sermons, Ad fratres in eremo, which are ascribed to Augustine, thus we reade: Eia fratres mei, semper boni aliquid facite, quem tadet orare, Serm. 16. vel psallere non desistat, quem taedet orare, vel psallere, manibus laborare non desistat. My brethren, alwaies bee ye doing of some good; if you bee wearie of praying, sing, if of singing, then labour with your hands. And in the same place, old men onely of 80. yeere old are exempted from working. And in another place Augustine sheweth, that the Monkes in his time did so plye their worke, Vsque adeo, vt etiam naues oneratas in ea loca mittant, qua inopes incolunt: that [Page] they sent shippes laden with necessaries, vnto those places where the poore inhabited. De morib. eccles. cap. 32. Ergo, in Augustines time Monkes liued not by begging, but with labour of their hands.

Thus by Gods goodnes we haue finished this question, and this whole Controuersie: One other question remaineth: whether the Monasticall life be meritorious or not: which we haue referred to another place, when we shall come to the question of Virginitie in generall and the priuiledges thereof.

THE SEVENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE CIVIL MAGISTRATE.

MAny things, which Bellarmine in this controuersie laboureth to proue, are agreed vpon betweene vs and our aduersaries, and therefore we will spend no time in them.

1 We teach, as well as they, that there ought to bee Magistrates, Princes and gouernours amongst Christians, contrarie to that which the Anabaptists hold, that there ought to bee equalitie among Christians: The holy Ghost, Iudg. 17.6. & 19.1. maketh this the cause of al disorder, At that time in Israel there was no King amongst them, but euery man did that which seemed good in his owne eyes.

2 We doe hold, that euen wicked Kings and Tyrants haue power ouer the goods and liues of men, neither that it is lawfull to disobey them, but in matters onely belonging to our conscience, where it is better to obey God then men, Ieremy 27.6. I haue giuen, saith the Lord, all these lands to Nabuchadnezzar.

3 Concerning the power of Princes, we grant, that they may make lawes and ordinances to gouerne the people by, Prou. 8.15. that they may punish the offenders of their lawes, Rom. 13. They doe not beare the sword for nought: That it is lawful for Christian Princes, vpon iust occasion, to wage battaile, Luk. 3.14. Iohn Baptist doth not condemne the calling of Souldiers, but teacheth them to vse it aright.

These things then being agreed vpon on both sides: the seuerall questions, wherein we differ from them, and they from the truth, are these.

1 Concerning the authoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters, three parts of the question. First, whether he haue power ouer persons Ecclesiasticall. Secondly, whether ouer their goods. Thirdly, whether in Ecclesiasticall causes.

2 Whether the ciuill Magistrate may prosecute heretikes to death: and whether he ought to be the Iudge of heretikes, with other like questions.

3 Whether the positiue and ciuill lawes of Princes doe binde their subiects and oblige them simply in conscience. This matter we haue discussed before, Controuer. 4. quaest. 7. part. 1.

4 Whether the Pope ought or may excommunicate the Prince, or Emperour, [Page] or otherwise hath any temporall iurisdiction aboue him: this question also is handled before, Controu. 4. quaest. 8. part. 1.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING THE AVthoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters.

THis question hath three parts. First, whether he haue power ouer the persons Ecclesiasticall. Secondly, whether ouer their goods. Thirdly, whether the Prince be chiefe in causes Ecclesiasticall.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE AVTHOritie of the ciuill Magistrate ouer Ecclesiasticall persons.
The Papists.

THe Clergie is not bound to keepe and obserue the ciuill and positiue lawes error 98 of Princes, if they be contrarie to the Canons of the Church: neither ought they for any cause to bee cited before the ciuill Magistrate, or to be iudged by him, Bellarm. de Clericis, cap. 28.

It is absurd (saith the Iesuite) that the sheepe should iudge the shepheard, Bellarm. And the Apostle willeth all men to obey their Bishops and ouerseers, Heb. 13.17. and to submit themselues vnto them, from which rule neither Kings nor Emperours are exēpted: Prelates must be obeyed, Ergo, not obey Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. First, the obedience here required we acknowledge, that it ought to be yeelded by Kings & Emperours to those that haue the ouersight of their soules: for the Prince is bound to receiue and beleeue all true doctrine which is taught by the Pastors and Bishops of the Church, agreeable to the word of God, vnder paine of damnation: and the Pastors are bound vnder the like paine to obey the Princes lawes, made according to the word of God. Secondly, wherefore the spirituall obedience of the ciuill Magistrate to the word of God, taught by the Pastors of the Church, is no exemption of them from their ciuill obedience: for euery soule is subiect to the higher powers, Rom. 13.1. Fulk. annot. 13. Heb. sect. 9

The Protestants.

THat Ecclesiasticall persons are subiect to temporall gouernours, and are to be iudged by their lawes, the scriptures speake plainly.

1 Rom. 13.1. Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers: Ergo, Bishops, yea the Pope himselfe, if he haue a soule. The like sayth S. Peter, 1.2.13. Submit your selues to all manner ordinance. Salomon remoued Abiathar from the Priesthood, and put in Sadock. Paul appealed, and submitted himselfe to Caesar. Againe, if Priests offend and commit any grieuous sinne, as of murther, theft, who shall punish them? The ciuill Magistrate onely beareth the sword: They [Page] must either grant, that priests are no euill doers, which were to too grosse: or if they be, that they are vnder the ciuill Magistrates power: for he is the Minister of God to take vengeance vpon euery euill doer, Rom. 13.4.

In Augustines time, the controuersies betweene the Catholike and Donatist Bishops, were committed to the iudgement of the Emperour. Ait quidam, Epistol. 162 saith he, Non debuit Episcopus proconsulari iudicio purgari: Quasi verò ipse sibi hoc comparauerit, ac non Imperator ita quaeri iusserat, ad cuius curam, de qua rationem deo red liturus est res illa maximè pertinebat. But, saith one, a Bishop ought not to haue been purged before the Proconsul, or ciuill Magistrate: As though (sayth Augustine) the Proconsul did of himselfe intermeddle in this matter, and was not commanded rather of the Emperour so to doe: vnto whose charge that matter principally appertained, and whereof he shall make account vnto God: Ergo, by his sentence, the cause of the Bishop principally was to be iudged by the Emperour.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER THE PRINCE haue power ouer Ecclesiasticall goods.

The Papists.

THe goods of the Clergie both secular and Ecclesiasticall, are and ought to error 99 be exempted from paying tribute to Princes; yet they haue not this libertie, say they, by the Lawe of God, but by the grant of Princes themselues, Rhemist. annot. Rom. 13. sect. 5. Bellarm. de Clericis. cap. 28.

Genes. 47.22. & 27. The lands of the Priests were exempted from paying tribute: Ergo, it seemeth that this custome is grounded vpon the law of nature, Bellarm.

Ans. First, the Hebrew word signifieth rather Presidents, such as were the Kings officers, not Priests, as Tremellius sheweth: who were maintained by the Kings prouision, being officers of his houshold: for Genes. 41.45. Ioseph is sayd to marrie the daughter of Potyphar prince, not priest of On. The same word Cohen is there vsed: for it is not like that Ioseph would match himselfe with an idolatrous priests daughter. Secondly, but be it granted, this was but a politike constitution for that coūtrey: other Princes are not bound to Pharao his law. Thirdly, they gaine nothing by this, but that it is an humane constitution.

The Protestants.

THat Princes haue authoritie to punish Ecclesiasticall persons offending in their goods; either by displacing them, or by conuerting the Church possessions by them abused, to better vses, we haue shewed before, Contr. 5. quest. 6. part. 1. And that their goods ought to pay tribute, subsidie, taxe, vnto the prince, thus now it is proued.

1 Our Sauiour Christ paied poll money, Math. 17.25. Rom. 13. Euery soule [Page] ought to be subiect to the higher powers, and there vers. 5. paying of tribute is made a part of subiection: the argument therefore thus followeth: Clergie men are subiect to Princes, therefore they ought to pay tribute.

2 Ex concessis, we reason thus from their owne confession: That which Princes gaue to the Church, vpon good cause they may take away: but this immunitie, not to pay tribute, was first granted, as they confesse, to the Church, by Kings and Princes: Ergo, they haue the same right, hauing iust occasion, to take it from them againe. What Augustines iudgement is, we haue seene in the place before alleadged.

THE THIRD PART, CONCERNING THE PRINCES authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall.

The Papists.

error 100 THe Prince, they say, hath no authoritie to giue voyce deliberatiue or definitiue in Councels concerning matters of religion, nor to make lawes Ecclesiasticall concerning the same: Onely they giue them authoritie to execute the Ecclesiasticall lawes made by the Church, Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 14.16. Bellarm. de pontif. lib. 1. cap. 7.

Argum.1 Kings and Princes may in their owne persons execute if they will, whatsoeuer their inferiour officers do, as to heare and determine causes, as the Iudges and other Magistrates doe: but the Prince cannot execute any Ecclesiasticall function, as to preach, baptize: Ergo, he hath no authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall: for how can the Prince impart that to others, whereof he is himselfe incapable, as to giue Bishops and Pastors power to ordaine, to preach, and such like, Bellarm. Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. First, the authoritie of ciuill Magistrates doth not giue any thing to Ecclesiasticall Ministers, which appertaineth to their office, as to ordaine, preach, baptize, neither is the Prince to deale in these offices: yet may the ciuill Magistrates command them to execute their charge and dueties according to the word of God. Wherefore it followeth not, Princes cannot execute the pastoral dueties themselues: Ergo, they ought not to see them executed. Dauid, Salomon, Iehosophat, Ezechia, commanded the Priests to execute their office according to the law of God, though it was not lawfull for them, neither did they execute any thing proper to the Priests office in their owne persons; neither doth any Christian Prince challenge any such right in Ecclesiasticall functions: wherefore it is an impudent slander of Bellarmine, which he giueth forth of our Queene, Iam re ipsa Caluinistis in Anglia mulier quaedam summus pontifex. And now (sayth he) in England the Caluinists haue a certaine woman for their chiefe Bishop. De notis eccles. lib. 4. cap. 9.

2 It doth not followe, that the Prince might as well execute Ecclesiasticall offices, as he may ciuill in his owne person, if he haue authoritie ouer both: No [Page] more then it followeth, that because Ecclesiasticall persons doe teach both ciuill Magistrates and Church officers their dueties, and may in their owne persons execute the one, that is, spirituall duties, that they may as well intermeddle in the other: But these two offices of Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall gouernment are distinguished, and must not be confounded. The Prince, though he haue authoritie to command Ecclesiasticall persons, yet being a ciuill Magistrate, is not to deale with the execution of spirituall dueties. Bishops & pastors likewise haue a spiritual charge ouer kings & princes, to shew thē their duties out of Gods word, yet because they are persons Ecclesiastical, they ought not to meddle with meer Ciuill dueties. The Prince hath the soueraigntie of externall gouernement in all causes & ouer all persons, yet not alike, for Ciuill offices he may both command and execute; Ecclesiasticall duties he commandeth onely: Bishops and pastors haue also a spirituall charge ouer all, prescribing out of Gods word as well the duetie of Magistrates, as of Ministers, but not alike, for the one they may fully execute, so may they not the other. The head in the naturall bodie, resembleth the Prince in the commonwealth, in some sense: the head giueth mouing to the whole bodie and all the parts thereof: but to the principall parts in the head the eyes, tongue, eares, it giueth beside the facultie of mouing, the sense also of seeing, tasting, hearing: So in the common-wealth, by the Princes authoritie all persons are kept in order, and vrged to looke to their charge, both ciuill officers and spirituall, as al the parts of the bodie receiue mouing from the head: But the ciuill officers receiue power and authoritie beside, and their very offices of the King, as the parts in the head, receiue sense from their fountaine: but Ecclesiasticall Ministers receiue not their offices from the Prince, or any mortall man, but they haue their calling according to the order of the Church of God.

Argum. 2. For the space of 300. yeeres the Church after Christ had no Christian gouernours, but all Heathen and Idoll worshippers, yet then the Church was established, and preuailed: Ergo, Ciuill Magistrates ought not to deale in Ecclesiasticall affayres, Bellarmine.

Ans. 1. Euen then also, the Heathen Emperours had authoritie in Church matters, and if they had commanded any thing agreeable to true religion, they should haue been obeyed: as Cyrus in the law which he made for building the temple, Ezra. 1. Darius the Median, for worshipping the true God, Dan. 6. Fulk. Rom. 13. sect. 3. The heathen Emperours then had the same power, but they knewe not how to vse it: Christian Princes doe succeede them in the same office, but are better taught by the word of God how to exercise the sword. Secondly, we denie not but that in the time of persecution all things necessarie for the spirituall building thereof may be had, without the Magistrate, as a Vineyard may bring forth fruite without an hedge, but it cannot enioy peace, nor be in a perfect estate, in respect of the externall gouernement, but vnder good Magistrates, as the Vineyard may soone be spoyled, the wild bore and the beasts of the field may breake in vpon it hauing no hedge. The child being in the womb, though it haue as yet small vse of the head, but is fed by the nauell, which is in [Page] steed of the mouth, hath in it selfe the lineaments and proportion of a humane bodie, yet it wanteth the perfect beautie, till it be borne and come forth, and the head receiue his office: So may the Church haue a being in persecution, and the want of the ciuill head may be otherwise supplied, but it is not beautifull till the head be set vp, and the sword put into the Christian Magistrates hand.

Argum. 3. Princes haue no cure nor charge of soules: Ergo, they are not to meddle with Ecclesiasticall lawes, Rhemist. annot. 1. Corinth. 14. sect. 16.

Ans. Parents haue charge ouer the soules of their childrē, for they are charged to bring them vp in the instruction and information of the Lord, Ephes. 6.4. Therefore Princes also haue directly charge of the soules of their subiects according to their place and calling, by prouiding and making good Ecclesiasticall lawes, and compelling them to the true seruice of God: As the Ecclesiasticall Ministers in another kind, and more properly are said to haue the cure of soules, in feeding and instructing the people, Fulk. ibid.

The Protestants.

THe ciuill Magistrate, by the word of God, hath power to make and constitute Ecclesiasticall lawes, and to establish true religion, and see that all persons vnder their gouernment doe faithfully execute their charge: To say therefore that the Church officers are to deuise lawes concerning religion, and the Prince onely to execute them, is to make the Prince their seruant, and doth derogate too much from the princely authoritie: Neither doe we giue vnto the Prince absolute power to make Ecclesiasticall lawes: for first, the Prince is not to prescribe what lawes he listeth to the Church,Fulk. Hebr. 13.9. but such as onely may require the true worship of God. Secondly, that it is expedient and meete, according to the commendable custome of this land, that the godly learned of the Clergie should be consulted withall, in establishing of Ecclesiastical ordinances, vnlesse it be in such a corrupt time, when the Church gouernours are enemies to religion, for then the Prince, not staying vpon their iudgement, ought to reforme religion according to the word of God, as we see it was lawfully and godly practised by King Henrie the 8. Thirdly, we doe make exception of all such Ecclesiasticall canons and ordinances, the making whereof doth properly belong to the office of Bishops and gouernours of the Church: for our meaning is not, that it is not lawful for Ecclesiastical Ministers, to make Ecclesiastical decrees, which do properly concerne their office, as concerning the censures of the Church, excommunication, suspension, absoluing, binding, loosing, and such like, which things are incident to their pastorall office: and yet we grant, that the Prince hath euen in these cases an ouerruling hand, to see that none abuse their pastoral office. But that any lawes ought to be made without the authoritie of the prince, which the prince is bound, to execute, we vtterly denie: And so we conclude, that the ciuill Magistrate hath power ouer all persons and in all causes, both temporall and ecclesiasticall, in such manner as we haue sayd.

1 S. Paul willeth, that praiers should be made for Kings and Princes, that vnder them we may leade a peaceable life, in all godlines and honestie, 1. Tim. 2.2. [Page] Ergo, it is their duetie as well to procure religion by their authoritie, as ciuill honestie. Againe, He beareth not the sword for nought, Rom. 13.4. He hath power to punish al euill doers: therfore also to correct euill ministers, & to make Ecclesiastical lawes: for otherwise he should haue no ful power to correct the transgressors thereof.

2 We reade that Iosua, Dauid, Salomon, Iosia, did deale in ecclesiasticall matters, which concerned religion and the worship of God. Bellarm. They did it by an extraordinarie authoritie, not as Kings, but as Prophets. Nay, it was an ordinarie power: for all the good kings of Iuda beside, as Iehosaphat, Hezekiah, and others, did take care of religion: & this was so properly annexed to the kingly office, that idolatrous kings also tooke vpon them to command false religion, as Ieroboam set vp two golden calues, and Ahaz king of Iudah cōmanded Vriah the high Priest to make an Altar according to the patterne which he sent from Damascus, 2. King. 16.11. This power also was afterward exercised by Christian Kings and Emperours: as Constantinus, Theodosius, Martianus, made lawes for the Church, Fulk. annot. 1. Cor. 14. sect. 16. Iustinianus the Emperour decreed many things concerning Church affayres: as how excommunication should be vsed, how Bishops and Priests should be ordained, concerning the order and manner of funerals: that the holy mysteries should not be done in priuate houses. Carolus magnus decreed, that onely the Canonical bookes of scripture should be read in the Church: he chargeth all Bishops and priests to preach the word. Lodouicus Pius his sonne, and Emperour after him, ordained that no entrie should bee made into the Church by Simonie:Fox. pag. 7. that Bishops should bee chosen by the free election of the Clergie and the people. All these Emperours did lawfully exercise their princely authoritie in Ecclesiastical matters: Ergo, other princes may doe the same still.

3 Augustine saith, Epistol. 50. Quis mente sobrius &c? Who in his right wits would say to the King, It pertaineth not to you, who in your kingdome is religious or sacrilegious, to whom it cannot be said, let it not pertaine vnto you, who in your kingdome will be chast or vnchast? And in another place, Ad fratres in erem. serm. 14. Tunc iustitia dicitur gladius ex vtra (que) parte acutus, quia hominis defendit corpus ab exterioribus iniurijs, & animam à spiritualibus molestijs. Then iustice is rightly called a sword with a double edge, because it doth both defend the bodie from externall and corporall wrongs, and the soule from spirituall vexation: That is, the sword of the Magistrate serueth as well to prune the Church, and to cut off all errors and heresies in religion, as to destroy the vices and corruptions in manners.

AN APPENDIX OR FOVRTH PART OF THE QVEstion, whether the Prince in any good sense may be called the head of his kingdome, and consequently of the Church in his kingdome.

The Papists.

THey do appropriate this title, to be called heads of the vniuersall Church, to error 101 [Page] the Pope of Rome, most blasphemouslie: for there can be no head of the vniuersal bodie but Christ: But for Princes to be called the head, that is, chiefe gouernours of the Churches in their kingdomes, they do abhorre it. Whereupon Bellarmine is so saucie as to checke and controule King Henrie the 8. because he was called the head of the English Church.

1 The heathen Emperours were not heads of the Church, being not so much as members thereof: therefore neither Christian Magistrates, which doe succeede them in that authoritie, Rhemist. annot. 1. Pet. 2. sect. 6.

Ans. 1. The argument followeth not: they were no true mēbers of the Church, therefore could not be heads, that is, haue the soueraigntie of the externall gouernment: for wicked kings and princes doe keepe their magistracie & gouernment still: who though they be not true members of the Catholike Church, yet ought to be obeied as princes. 2. Though the metaphorical name of head agreed not vnto them, yet were they by Gods ordinance appointed to be heads & gouernours of his people & protectors of his Church, & should haue been, if they had not abused their authoritie. 3. Christian princes, though they haue the same authoritie, which they had, yet now exercising the sword according to Gods law, and being Nurses of the Church, may vse and retaine those princely titles in deed, to be called Patrones and defenders of the faith, & head, that is, chiefe gouernours and protectors of the Church: which by right had been due vnto the other, if they had vsed their authoritie as they should.

2 Christian princes are members of the Church, Ergo, not heads: for if they were heads, how could the Church stand without them, as it did in the time of persecution?

Ans. First, as though the head is not a member and part of the bodie, though a principall one: so the Prince is a member of the Church, but a principall and chiefe member, not of the inuisible Church, for so Christ is onely head, but of a particular visible Church. Secondly, we denie not but that the inuisible and spiritual Church may consist without the Magistrate, but a visible, flourishing, and wel-gouerned Church cannot want a head or chiefe gouernour, that is as a wall or hedge vnto it.

The Protestants.

TO bee head of the vniuersall Church is proper onely to Christ, and in that sense is not communicable to any creature: for he is to his Church, as the head to the naturall bodie, giuing vnto it influence of grace, spirit and life: he is therefore the onely mysticall head of the vniuersal Church: But in another sense the Prince may be said to be the head and chiefe gouernour of his kingdome, & of that particular visible Church, where he is king: We make him neither the mysticall head, which is only Christ, (farre be that blasphemie from vs) nor a ministerial head, as they make the Pope to be as Christs Vicegerent in the Church; but a politicall head, to keepe and preserue the peace of the Church, and to see [Page] that euery member doe his office and duetie. But this name we confesse is vnproperly giuen to the Prince, neither were we the first inuentors of it: for the papists first gaue it to Henry the 8. And there are other titles which doe sufficiently expresse the office of the Prince, and may bee more safely vsed. If any man thinke it too high a name for any mortall man, and so not to be giuen to any, we will not greatly contend about it: But if any denye it to the Prince, as thereby to abridge her of her power in Ecclesiastical matters, we doe stand stiffely for it; and are bold to affirme, that with much better right is this title attributed to the ciuill Magistrate then it was to the Pope: yea, and that it hath been of old giuen in a modest and sober sense to Kings and Princes, and may with a fauourable exposition be still: and Princes also may receiue this honour and title at their subiects hands, with protestation of their Christian meaning herein.

1 This phrase, for the King to be called the head, is not vnusuall in scripture, 1. Sam. 15.17. Saul is sayd to be the head of the tribes. Psal. 18.43. Dauid the head of the nations: Isay. 9.15. The Prince or honourable man the head of the people: yea Princes are called Gods, Psal. 82.2. which is a name of greater Soueraigntie, then to be called heads. Bellarmine answereth: Princes doe rule ouer their subiects as men, not as Christians, and Kings are set ouer the people not as they are Christians, but politike persons: so the Prince is head of the kingdome, not of the Church, De pontif. Rom. lib. 1. cap. 7.

Ans. Stephen Gardiner taketh away this cauill very sufficiently, we will set one Papist against another. It is all one (sayth he) to call the Prince head of the Church of England, and head of the Realme of England: for if all Englishmen be his subiects, why are they not his subiects, as they are Christians? If the wife or seruant bee subiect to the master or husband being infidels, doth their conuersion, or name of Christians make them lesse subiect,Fox. p. 1059 then they were before? Haec ille. Againe, how farre is this, I pray you, from Anabaptistrie, to say, that subiects, onely as men, not as Christians, are in subiection to Princes? for doth it not followe hereupon, that as Christians they ought to haue no superiour or Magistrate?

2 It is sufficient for vs, that this title more fitly and properly belongeth to euery Prince in his owne kingdome, thē to the Pope, for the Pope can in no wise be head of the Church: he is not the mysticall head, neither dare they say so: for Christ onely is the head in that manner: neither can he be the Ministeriall head of the vniuersall Church: for the Catholike Church is a bodie mysticall, & must needes haue a mysticall head: neither is he the politicall head of any particular Church: for no Bishop can be a politicall head: because he that is the head and chiefe must haue a coactiue power, to binde his subiects to obedience: so hath not any Bishop: The Prince onely beareth the sword, and enforceth obedience. Againe, in a farre diuers sense is the Prince called the head, then the Pope was: for first the Pope challenged to be head of the vniuersal Church: but the prince is chiefe only in his owne kingdome. Secondly, the Pope would be an absolute head, to doe all vpon earth that Christ did, yea and more to, to bind and loose at [Page] his pleasure, to depose Kings, to dispense with the word of God, to constitute and make lawes at his pleasure: in so much that one of his clawback flatterers is not ashamed to say of him, Christus & Papa vnum faciunt consistorium, & excepto peccato potest Papa, quasi omnia facere, quae potest Deus: Christ and the Pope make but one Consistorie,Panormitan. & keepe but one court; & sinne onely excepted, the Pope in a manner can doe all things that God can doe. But we doe limit the power of the Prince: who is not to impose any lawes vpon the Church, but such as are agreeable to the word of God: neither doe we make him a spirituall officer, as the Pope would be, but a ciuill gouernour, who by positiue lawes is to prouide for the peace and welfare of the Church.

Lastly, S. Peter sayth, Submit your selues to the King as the chiefe, [...], or most excelling:1. Pet. 2.13. what is this els, but as to the head? what is it to be chiefe but to be head? But we will not much contend for the name, so they will grant vs the thing: namely, that the Prince is a commander euen in Ecclesiasticall matters, as Augustine saith: In hoc reges Deo seruiunt, si mala prohibeant, nō solum quae pertinent ad humanam societatem, verumetiam, quae ad diuinam religionem. Cont. Crescon. lib. 3. cap. 5. In this Kings doe good seruice to God, if they forbid euill to be done, not onely in matters pertaining to humane societie, but in things concerning religion. As for the title, to bee called head, let them cease to call their chiefe Bishop so who hath no right vnto it, and we will promise also to lay it downe, though in good sense we might vse it, though the Pope had neuer layd claime thereunto.

THE SECOND QVESTION, CONCERNING THE authoritie of the Prince in punishing heretikes.

WE doe willingly grant, that obstinate heretikes and peruerters of the faith, if they persist in their damnable opinions, and remaine incorrigible, may, and ought to be cut off and punished by death, to make others to feare: so Seruetus at Geneua, and one Valentinus at Berne, both monstrous heretikes, not amongst the Papists, but by the Protestants were worthily put to death. In this therfore we and our aduersaries agree, that heretikes may be punished by death by the ciuill Magistrate. If Luther, or any other haue held any priuate opinion to the contrarie, let them answere for themselues: but although we vary not in the principall, yet there are certaine circumstances and accessaries greatly material, wherein they both dissent from vs, and from the truth.

Bellarm. de pontif. lib. 1 cap. 7.1 They would haue the Magistrate onely to be their executioner, the iudgement of heresie they say belongeth to the Church: for they cited, examined, iudged, disgraded, condemned heretikes, and then gaue them ouer to the secular error 102 power: this was the common practise of their Church.

But we hold, that the hearing, iudgement, sentence and condemnation of heretikes belongeth to the ciuill Magistrate, as well as the execution: because these actions are proper to the ciuill sword, which the Magistrate beareth, Rom. 13. and Deut. 17.5. The false Prophets and Idolaters were brought to the gates of [Page] the citie where the ciuill Magistrate was wont to sit. Augustine is of the same mind, Cur in veneficos, vigorē legū exerceri iuste fatentur, in haereticos & schismaticos nolunt fateri? Cont. epist. Parmen. 1.7. Why doe they grant, that the vigour of the law may iustly be executed vpon witches, and not as well vpon heretikes and schismatikes? But the causes of witches are heard, iudged, and handled before the ciuill Magistrate: Ergo, also the cause of heretikes. Augustines reason is out of the 5. Galath. 20. The works of the flesh are manifest, which are adulterie, fornication, idolatrie, witchcraft, and heresies are also reckoned vp amongst: All these are workes of the flesh, Ergo, the Magistrate being appoynted to punish euill doers, hath as full right to deale against them all, as some.

2 We differ about the way and meanes to try an heretike by: They affirme, that he is an heretike onely that is so iudged by a generall Councel, or the sentence error 103 of the chiefe pastors of the Church: they would haue an heretike tryed by the constitutions and Canons of their Church, Annot. Tit. 3. sect. 2. Rhemist.

We say, that an heretike is to be conuicted by the scriptures, and that he that holdeth any opiniō obstinately against the manifest authoritie of scripture, may be iudged an heretike without a generall Councel: So Augustine writeth, answering the Pelagians, who obiected that they were condemned without a Synode. Ac si congregatione synodi opus erat, vt aperta pernicies damnaretur, quasi nulla haeresis aliquando, nisi synodi congregatione damnata sit. As though a Synode neede to be congregate or called, to condemne such open wickednes, as if neuer any heresie had been condemned but in a Synode or Councel: Cont. 2. epistol. Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 12. This is that heretical opiniō, as they call it, which the Councel of Constance condemned in Iohn Husse, & him together with it, because he said, ‘That an heretike, whatsoeuer he be, ought first to be instructed, and taught with Christian loue, & gentlenes by the holy scriptures, & by reasons drawn out of the same, before he suffer corporall or bodily punishment: Fox. pag. 610. articul. 18.’ Which his saying is grounded vpon that rule of the Gospell, Math. 18.15. That if we see one offend, we should first tell him priuatly; then before 2. or 3. lastly declare it to the Church: and if he will not heare the Church, that is, by scripture conuincing him, then continuing obstinate, let him be as a publicane. This rule the papists kept not in their bloudie persecutions here in England: They put many hundreds to death, & were not able to cōuince any one of heresie: but in disputation were themselues put to silence and made ashamed: Their onely arguments were the fire and fagot.

3 Againe, they vsed vnlawfull waies and vniust, in sifting and examining, by error 104 cruel tormēts the poore innocents brought before them, neither shewing accusers nor witnesses: Iohn Browne Martyr appearing before Warrham and Fisher, two bloudsuckers, was burned with hot coales, his bare feet being set vpon thē: Fox. p. 1292. Cutbert Symsons fingers were grated with an arrow, and he himself piteously racked, to be made betray his innocēt brethren, p. 2032. Tomkins hand was burned by Bonner, till the sinewes sparkled againe, pag. 1533. And these were the witnesses and accusers that were brought against them.

[Page]This was cleane contrarie to the law of Moses: At the mouth of two or three witnesses, shall he that is worthie of death dye, Deuteron. 17.6. Augustine saith, Quis iudex accusantis sumat personam? &c. What Iudge would take vpon him to be an accuser?Quaest. ex vtroque mix. 102 Our Lord Christ knewe Iudas to be a theefe (sayth he:) yet because he was not accused, he did not cast him off. He counteth it a very vnnaturall thing for the Iudge to be an accuser, and to proceede without witnesses: which although in some criminall cases is more tolerable, yet in the cases of life and death ought in no wise to be vsed. The same iudgement also Augustine giueth of that cruell custome of tormenting men, to conuince them by their own mouth, which was inuented by the heathen, but neuer more cruelly practised, then among the papists: Hoc intolerabile est (saith he) & rigandum fontibus lacrymarum, cum propterea torqueat iudex accusatum, ne occidat nesciens innocentem, & fit per ignorantiam, vt & tortum & innocentem occidat, quem ne innocentem occideret, torserat: How intolerable a thing is it, and to be much lamented, that while the Iudge tormenteth the partie accused, lest vnwittingly he should put an innocent man to death; it falleth out that he adiudgeth to death a man both innocent, & beside tormented, whom, lest he should slay as an innocent, he before put to torment. His meaning is, that when a man is put to the racke, or otherwise tortured, that he might confesse the truth, and cleere himselfe; it commeth to passe, that through extremitie of the payne, he maketh himselfe guiltie, and so the innocent is both wrongfully tormented, and vniustly put to death. Which kind of forcing men by torture, though in some dangerous cases, as of high treason, and such like, where there is great perill in the concealing of the truth, and no other way to sift it out, may be admitted: yet to vse it as an ordinarie course as the papists did, and in causes of religion, it is to too shameful, and of all Christians to be abhorred.

4 Where haue they learned so hotly and fiercely to pursue simple men and women to death, for none or very small offences, which they notwithstanding error 105 falsely called heresie? Was it heresie for Iames Brewster to heare one Sweeting to reade many good things out of a certaine booke: or for the same Sweeting, when as the sayd Iames should say, Now the sonne of the liuing God helpe vs, to answere, Now almightie God so doe? yet for these heresies were they both condemned and burnt in Smithfield, Anno. 1511. Fox. pag. 818.

A woman of Auspurge had like to haue been burned, for asking a priest that carried the Host to a sicke man with Taper-light, what he meant to goe with a light at noone day,Fox. p. 894. if Mary the Emperours sister had not made sute for her, Anno. 1550.

Anno 1525. a Monke burned in France, because he had forsaken his abominable order and married a wife, pag. 896.

Iohannes de Cadurco, being at a feast, where it was agreed that euery one should bring forth this posie or sentence, because he brought forth this: Christ reigne in our hearts, and prosecuted it out of the scriptures, was burned, Anno. 1533. pag. 897.

[Page]A Tailour burned at Paris anno. 1549. for working vpon an holy day: ex Iohan. Crispin. Fox p. 903.

Ralfe Hare constrained to abiure for saying before the Bishop of Winchester: The Lord is my witnes, It is Symbolum Haereticorum, saith Winchester, a marke to know heretikes by, to say the Lord, the Lord, page 1225.

One Thomas Sanpaulinus Matyr, because he rebuked a man for swearing, was thereupon suspected to be a Lutheran, examined, condemned and burned at Paris, anno. 1551. pa. 904. Many such like examples might be produced of holye Martyres, which for these and such other great heresies were put to death.

And as the offences were very smal, as we see, so their māner of proceeding was most cruell, void of all humanity. They spared not women with childe: We haue not forgotten that famous example of their crueltie, which shall be remē bred to their perpetuall shame and infamie: Howe they burned 3. simple women in the Isle of Garnsey, anno 1556. which had submitted thēselues to their mercie, one of the three was great with childe, which brast out of her wombe in the midst of the fire, and was throwne in againe. pa. 1944.

They had no compassion of the tender age of children: In the towne of Byrbroke, while Richard Chapman did pennaunce in the Church, beeing inioyned to kneele barefoote, and bare legged all the sermon while vppon the colde steps of the Church: a little boy for giuing him his hat to kneele vpon, was had into the vestrie and piteously scourged. pa. 1047. Cruel Bonner burned Richard M [...]kins a childe of 15. yeeres, for speaking against the sacrament of the aultar, who notwithstanding at the stake was taught to speak much good of the B. of London, and so did, pa. 1202. John F [...]ttie his childe being of 8. yeere oulde, for saying to one of the Bishoppes Chaplens, that he had Balaams marke, was scourged so cruelly, that within 14 dayes hee died.

Nay such was their cruelty, they condemned to death men that were bestraught of their wits: as Collins and Cowbridge were burned beeing both franticke, see their storie. page 1131.

Where is now that lenitie and compassion, which ought to be in the Ministers of the Gospell? Such crueltie was not heard of, no not amongst the heathen. Yea they breake their owne law: which suffereth a man once to abiure his heresie, but if afterwarde he be detected, he dieth without mercie. Fox. Anno. 1511. William Carder & Agnes Grebil were condemned, though they submitted thēselues, and promised to be conformable to their religion. page 1277.

Yet this law of theirs is most vniust, and contrary to the gospell, which faieth, that if thy brother sinne against thee 7. times in a day, and 7. times in a day turne againe, and say, It repenteth me, thou shalt forgiue him. Luke 17.4. Yet these men will forgiue but once, and not that neither: But S. Paul saith,Tit. 3.10. An heretike after once or twise admonition reiect. Bellarm. his best answer is by denying the text, saying, that it was not so red in former times: but thus, after once admonition. de laicis. cap. 22.

[Page]There was more clemencie vsed in Augustines time: for then Bishops did not prouoke the Magistrate to execute whom they had condemned, but did entreat the Magistrate to shew compassion vnto Heretikes, not straight wayes to punish them with death: Ne sic vitam istam finiant (saith Augustine) per supplicium, vt ea finita non possint finire supplicium, Least they should so end this life by punishment, that the life being ended, they should neuer end their punishment. Epist. 54. And in another place, sic eorum peceata compesce, vt sint, quos poeniteat peccasse, Epist. 159. So restraine their sinnes, that they may yet remaine to repent them of their sinnes: In those daies therefore, men were not by and by punished with death to preuent their repentance, as in time of poperie, but their repentance was expected, to deliuer them from the sentence of death. Thus much of this question, as likewise of the whole controuersie: and thus far also concerning such controuersies, as are moued about the Church militant, heere vpon earth: which wee haue hitherto prosequuted by the Lords gracious assistaunce: In the next place we are to deale in those controuersies, which concerne the other part of the Church triumphant in heauen.

1. Timoth. 6.16.

Soli Deo immortali Patri, Filio, cum spiritu sancto sit honor & imperium sempiternum.

§

§

[Page]

THE SECOND BOOKE OR CENTVRIE, CONTAINING AN OTHER LARGE HVNDRETH OF POPISH errors, and many of them foule heresies, deuided into six seuerall Controuersies: CONCERNING THE ESTATE OF THE CHVRCH TRIVMPHANT IN Heauen, and the Sacraments of the Church Militant vpon earth.

Jmprinted at London by Thomas Orwin for Thomas Man. 1592.

ILLVSTRISSIMO ET INclytissimo Domino Comiti Essexio, non tam generis claritate, quam virtute sua nobili de re literaria, studiosisque omnibus semper optimè merito, Dominoque mihi multis nominibus colendissimo.

[Page]

[Page]

SCite illud (Nobilissime Comes) ab Epicharmo olim dictum perhibetur: ‘ [...].’

Qua sententia monet, neruos atque artus esse sapientiae, nō temere credere: Idque pulchrè depingi solet oculatae manus effigie: vt ne vel manu contrectare, vel pugillo premere, id est, mentis consensu & iudicio approbare audeamus, quod nō prius penitus exploratū habuerimus. Hoc sequi cōsiliū si nostrates voluissent, (papicolas volo, et pontificiae haerese [...]s sectatores Anglos) si singula ad trutinam expēdissent prius, ad quae postea admouerunt manus, non tam temere & imprudenter callidis doctoribus aurem praebuissent, nec tam facile & cito a sana doctrina desciuissent.

Multi enim apud nos sunt imperiti homunciones, & indoctae mulierculae (quanquam & doctos etiam aliquos, et satis cordatos viros ex isto genere agnouerim) qui nec scientia armati, nec animi proposito stabiles, nescientes lethale, non minutim & guttatim, sorbillarunt, sed plenò gutture hauserunt venenum: dum nihil probantes, vel examinantes, se papisticae superstitionis astutijs illaqueari passi sunt. Haec dum meeum seriò cogito, & altiùs tanquam ex animi spècula prospiciens contueor; non ex alijs initijs, quā temeritatis, & ignorantiae, hoc tā magnum malum enatum & exortum video. Jgnorantiae est, quòd veritate spreta & neglecta, errores sponte & liberè imbiberūt [Page] & amplexati sunt: temeritatis verò, quòd se, nullo delectu habito, seditiosis & impijs magistris in disciplinam tradere voluerunt. Qui non Epicharmi philosophi humanum, sed Pauli Apostoli diuinum consilium respuunt:1. Thes 5.21. qui sic monet, Omnia probate, & quod bonum est tenete. Contra istos etiam satis nos cautos dedit dominus Christus,Math. 7.15. sic praemonens, Cauete a Prophetis mendacibus, qui veniunt ad vos in vestimentis ouium, sed intrinsecus sunt lupi rapaces. Cum igitur multos quorūdā insidijs deceptos in fraudem illici, & in errores toto impetu praecipitari cernerem, idque non alij principio, quā ipsorum ignorantiae tribuendum esse: operae precium facturum duxi, si quis papisticae superstitionis capita in synopsin quandam cōijcere studeret, et passim verae fidei ex scripturis adhibens antidotum, vniuersam doctrinam pontificiam vno intuitu conspiciendam proponeret. Hoc opus tam necessarium; cum diu expectassem, dum aggrederentur, alij, cum neminem huc animum applicasse, aut id in animo habere perspexeram: Ego tandem prodij è multis millibus ad hoc onus sustinendum minimè omnium idoneus. Qui me operam meam non perditurum, sed aliquid Ecclesiae commodi allaturam mihi persuaseram, si in isto opere desudarē, vt haberent nostrates, quo aduersus haeresin pontificiam instructiores esse possint.

Numerū si quis quaerat haerese [...]n, quas Romana ecclesia orbi nostro propinauit, mensuram omnem & modum superant, & ad immensam molem excrescunt: Trecentos ego, & plures hoc opere percurri errores pontificios, nec omnes tamen complexus sum.De ciuitat. Dei. lib. 19. ca. 2. Varro scriptor ille copiosus, & vir multae lectionis (vt scribit August.) philosophorum sectas vsque ad ducentas octoginta octo numerauit et recēsuit. Sed a papistis huius seculi errorū varietate & multitudine veteres illi superantur. Scripsit non multis abhinc annis libellum Tilemannus quidā Heshusius, [Page] qui sic inscribitur: Sexcenti errores pontificij: Geminauit ille & duplum effecit numerū hunc, quem nos secuti sumus. Trecentos nos malumus, quam sexcentos ponere: Non quòd non putem, tot vitijs & corruptelis superstitionem pontificiam scatere: vel non posse tot colligi illius synagogae errores: Sed id feci iā partim, quia praecipua capita maximè prose [...]ui cupiebam, caetera missa faciens (quanquam credo paucissima sint, quae me in hoc opere subterfugerint) partim, quia distinctius ille interdum eorum sententias profert, quàm opus habuit, in diuersa loca dispertiens, quae commodè ad vnam classem referri poterant. Breuiter a me omnia tractata, & tanquam per saltum decursa sunt: ad amussim enim singula expendere, & omnes rimari angulos, longioris esset operis, & viribus meis maioris. Atque cū ego Enchiridion potius conficere volui, quod (vt eleganter Aug.) manibus possit adstringi, nō quod armaria possit onerare, vt fusius iam & vberius singula explicentur, nō breui Enchiridio (vt idem ait) manus debuit impleri, sed grandi studio pectus accendi.Enchirid. cap. 5.

Tuo verò Honori (Nobilissime Comes) hanc mediam istius operis partē consecratam volui: Primò vt munusculo hoc prioris doni tenuitatem compensarem: vt libelli illius, quem tuo honore indignum, tuo tamen nomine in publicum emittere ausus sum, secundae nostrae lucubrationes indignitatem praestarēt. Jterum verae te religionis & professionis Euangelicae, non fautorem solum, sed patronum eximium norimus omnes, & libenter veréque agnoscimus. Nobili enim vestrae familiae id insitum credo est. Jn te enim auita virtus repullulat, & patris resplendet imago: Qui non tam Euangelio ornamento, cum viueret, quàm Euangelium ipsi honori fuit.

Titulus etiam vester id indicat: Quantum enim Essexiorum [Page] Comitum studio Euangelij negotium promotum sit, ignorare non possunt, qui Cromwelli Nobilissimi Comitis Essexij meminisse velint. Quid verò nomen? Nonne auspicato tibi obtigisse videtur? vt omnes iam ad superbos Euangelij hostes deuorandos, natum nobilem Deuorosum intelligant? Cui ergo iustiori titulo hanc operis partem nuncuparem, quàm tibi, facile non occurrebat quispiam. Tertiò denique vestro patrocinio opusculum hoc commendatum volui, vt tui nominis & nobilitatis veluti alis & vmbra tectum, facilius linguarum vel vitaret asperitatem vel minus pertimesceret. Si quis enim leuiter in nos insultans verborum telis nostra haec appetere gestit: Augustini illud responsum a meferet. Nunc ergo (ait) ne tui stomachi follis indigesta maledictorū cruditate rumpatur,Cont. Iulian. Pelagiā. lib. 2. in hunc euome, si audes calūniosas tuas vanitates, vestra scilicet virtus (Optime Comes) haec nostra in tutelā suscipiens, de iniustis hominum querelis & contumelijs aut penitus securum, aut minus sollicitum dabit: Quibus ego sic exorsus dicerem, agite boni viri, in nobilem hunc tela vestra conijcite: nisi per illius latus, causa nostra non perfoditur: Et sic tandem coeptis desisterent, ne dū nostra conuitijs conuellerēt, tuo honori vim attulisse viderentur. Valeat, viuat, vigeat Nobilitas tua: Et pergas adhuc illustrissime Domine, quod etiamnum facis, bonos fouere, virtutem amare, religionem colere: Et te vicissim amet, foueat, seruet incolumem Deus optim. Max. in perpetuum.

Tuo Honori addictissim. Andr. Willet.

HERE FOLLOW THE controuersies concerning the Church Triumphant.

[Page]

THey are two in number: The first is as touching the condition, office and Ministerie of Angels: The second of and concerning the Saints departed.

THE EIGHT CONTROVERSIE concerning Angels.

THis controuersie containeth 3. questions. First, of the Hierarchie and holy degrees of Angels: Secondly, of their ministerie and office: Thirdly, of the worship and inuocation of Angelles.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERning the Celestiall Hierarchye, or degrees of Angelles.

THis question hath like wise two partes: First, how many degrees there be of Angels, Secondly, whether Michael be the Prince of the Angels.

THE FIRST PART OF THE DIVERS orders and degrees of Angelles.

The Papists.

THey do boldely affirme, that there are nine orders of Angelles, and those that do doubt of it, they charge with infidelitie and blasphemie: There are first principalities, then potestates. 3. powers. 4. dominations: Eph. 1.21. 5. there are thrones. Coloss. 1.16. vnto these ad 4. other, Cherubim, Seraphim, Angels, Archangels: so haue we nine in all. Rhemist. annot. Ephe. 1 sect. 4.

The Protestants.

AS of the diuersitie of names we gather, that there are diuerse orders, so to error 1 enquire of them more subtilly, to define their number, and appoint their degrees: [Page] it is a point not onely of foolish curiositie, but also of vngodly and daungerous rashnes, ex Caluino. Fulk. ibid.

Augustine sayth, Quid inter se distent quatuor illa vocabula, throni, dominationes, principatus, potestates, dicant qui possunt, si tamen possunt probare quod dicunt, ego me ista ignorare confiteor. What difference there is betweene these foure words, Thrones, Dominions, Principalities, Powers, let them tell vs, that be able, so they can proue that they tell vs: for my part, I confesse I knowe it not. August. Enchiridion. cap. 58. With Augustine therefore we confesse, that as it appeareth by these seuerall names, there are distinct orders of Angels: so how many there be, and how they are distinguished, the scripture hath not reuealed vnto vs: and it were curiositie for vs to enquire: We shall then know, when we shall be like vnto the Angels.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER MICHAEL be the prince of the Angels.

The Papists.

error 2 THey say, that in heauen beside God himselfe, there is another commander and captaine of the Angels, euen Michael the prince of the Angels: which place the diuel had in the beginning before his fall. For as the scripture saith, the diuell and his angels, meaning, that all euill angels are subiect vnto him: so by Michael and his angels, we vnderstand all good angels, that are likewise subiect to him, Apocal. 12.7. Rhemist. Bellarm. de pontif. lib. 1. cap. 9.

The Protestants.

FIrst, Michael in that place signifieth Christ, who is Lord of the angels; for the angels cannot be sayd to be any other Michaels angels, but only the angels of God and Christ: Fulk. ibid. This is also proued by the text, vers. 10. Now is come saluation, the kingdome of our God, and the power of his Christ, for the accuser of the brethren is cast out. Here he is called Christ, which before is named Michael. Augustine also so expoundeth it, Michaëlem intellige Christum: By Michael vnderstand Christ: Homil. 9. in Apocalyps.

Secondly, it followeth not, that as there is a chiefe and captaine of the euill angels, so amongst the good there should be a chiefe angel aboue the rest, beside Christ: for it is sufficient that there is one Lord and prince of the angels, euen Christ. Secondly, neither is it proued out of scripture, that amongst the diuels there is one captaine and great diuel to whom the rest were subiects: for whereas the Pharisees obiected, that Christ cast out diuels through Beelzebub the prince of the diuels, Mark. 3. if either the Pharisees did then so meane, or any shall now gather vpon their words, that there is a great master diuell that ruleth [Page] and commandeth the rest, it was in them but a pharisaicall dreame, and in the other a popish collection. We deny not, but that there may be degrees in power and angelicall gifts both among the good and bad angels, as there shall be degrees in glorie among the Saints: yet the Saints shall not be princes one ouer the other, no more are the angels now. Thirdly, marke the answere of our Sauiour in that place, If Sathan cast out Sathan, Mark. 3. Here Sathan is made a common name to all euill spirits. But Apocalyps. 12. where mention is made of the diuell and his angels, the text sayth, The great dragon, the old serpent, called the Diuell and Sathanas, vers. 9. Here the name Sathanas, is giuen to the prince of the diuels: so there is not one Sathanas, but many. And where our Sauiour calleth the diuell the prince of the world, Iohn 14. S. Paul calleth them all principalities and powers, worldly gouernours, and princes of the darknesse of this world, Ephes. 6.12. So there is not one prince of the diuels, but they are all princes. Thus Augustine expoundeth that place, Draco pugnauit & angeli eius: id est, diabolus & homines voluntati eius obtemperantes: The dragon fought and his angels, that is, wicked men obeying his will, Apocalyps. Hom. 9. So by Augustines sentence the diuels are not subiects to the great diuell, but they are all princes and commanders of wicked men.

THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE MINIsterie and function of Angels.

THis question hath two parts: first, of the externall ministerie of angels, in the protection, and defence of the Church. Secondly, of their spirituall office about the prayers of Gods seruants.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING the defence and protection of Angels.

The Papists.

MIchael (say they) is the protector and keeper of the whole Church of Christ,error 3 Dan. 10.21. And as earthly kingdomes haue their speciall angels for their protectors, so also haue particular Churches, Dan. 10. Rhemist. annot. 1. Apocal. sect. 9.

The Protestants.

THE whole Church hath Christ himselfe, who is the true Michael, Fulk. ibid. for her [Page] protector and defender: And so is that place in Daniel to be vnderstood. Augustine also by Michael vnderstādeth Christ: the name also signifieth as much: Michael, that is, one like vnto God: see more of this before: Controv. 4. quaest. 1. The scripture sayeth. All power is giuen to Christ, and hee is with his Church to the end of the world: Math. 28.18.20. He therefore is the chiefe patrone and protector of his Church.

Secondly, It cannot be proued out of scripture, that kingdomes haue their speciall Angels protectors, for Dan. 10. The Princes of the Persians and Grecians, were not Angels but earthly princes: for Angelles doe not resist Christ and his Angelles defenders of the Church, as the Prince of Percia did▪ ver. 13 Fulk. ibid. but all the Angelles of heauen are readie to serue the Lord at his pleasure, for the defence of his Church, without anye limitation of place, Zachar. 1.10. These are they whome the Lord hath sent, to goe through the worlde. The Angelles execute their message, not in seuerall countryes but in the whole world.

The Papist.

error 4 EVerie one hath from his natiuitie an Angell for his custodie and patronage against the wicked, before the face of God. Gen. 48.16. Iacob saith, The Angell that hath kept mee from my youth vp. Acts 12.15. It is his Angel. Rhemist. ibid. Math. 18.10. Their Angelles behould the face of my Father. Ergo, euery man hath his proper Angell.

Answ. 1. Iacob by the Angell vnderstandeth Christ, to whome it is proper to blesse Gods children: the Angell blesse thy children saith he, Gen. 48.16. This Angell appeared vnto him in Bethel, and is called the God of Bethel. Gen. 31.13. with this Angel Iacob wrestled, 32. which was God, as it appereth by the name of Iacob, he is called Jsrael, because hee had preuailed with God, and the place is called Peniel, I haue seene God face to face: Other proper Angell Iacob had none, for all the Angelles of God were appointed for his defence. Gen. 32.1. He met an hoste of Gods Angelles, and accordingly called the place Mahanaim.

2. Neither of the other places proue that men haue proper Angels. Math. 18. The children of God are said to haue their Angels: not theirs, as euery man his proper Angell, but theirs in common, because they were deputed for their defense. Act. 12. Peter at that time was deliuered by one Angel, but it followeth not, that therefore he was his proper Angell.

The Protestants.

WE nothing doubt of the protection of Gods Angelles: but that euery one hath a proper Angell appointed for his protection from his natiuitie, out of scripture it is not proued.

[Page]1. Sometime one Angel hath the charge of a multitude. Exod. 23.20. The Lord saith to all the people of Israel, I send mine Angell before thee, to keepe thee in thy way.

2. Sometime many Angelles are ready for the defense of one man: Gen. 32.1. an hoste of Angels met Iacob. Psa. 91.11. He shal giue his Angels charge ouer thee, to keep thee al in thy wayes: Ergo, euery man hath not his particular proper Angell.

3 Luke 16.22. The poore man is said, being dead, to be carried not by one Angell, but by the Angels, into the bosome of Abraham. But if he had one Angell appointed to be the president of his life from his natiuitie, it had beene also parte of that Angelles charge, to haue conueyed his soule into Heauen. So Augustine writeth: Si bene vixerimus, vbi a carnis vinculo anima liberata fuerit, mox in occursum nostrum Angelorum chorus occurret. De salutarib. document. cap. 39. If we liued well here, when as the soule is gone from the body, the holy company of the Angels are ready to meete vs, he sayeth not one Angell, but the whole chore or company.

THE SECOND PARTE, WHAT OFFICE the Angelles haue about our prayers.

The Papists.

THeir opinion is, that the Angelles do offer vp our prayers vnto God.Haeres. 5. And they would proue it by that place Apocalyps. 8.2. An Angell stood by the Altar, with a golden censer, and much incense was giuen vnto him to offer with the praiers of the saintes. Rhemist. in hunc locum.

Ans. Augustine vpon this place sayth, that this Angell is Christ, Thuribulum aureum est corpus eius sanctum, the golden censer is his body, ex quo Deus [...]dorem suauitatis accepit, out of the which God smelt a sweete sauour. Homil. in Apocalyp. 6. And in another place he saith, Vt altare sanctificat dona, sic Christus preces nostras, as the altar sanctifieth the gift, so Christ doth our praiers▪ quaest. in Euangel. 34. First therefore this place is vnderstoode of Christ, not of any Angell.

2. If this place might be vnderstood of Angels, that they haue some ministerie about our praiers, it maketh nothing notwithstanding for popish inuocation of Angels: for the Angel here cōmendeth not the prayers of the Saints by his merit, but by the much incense giuen vnto him, to ad to the prayers of the Saints to make them acceptable, which is the sweete smell and sauour of the precious d [...]ath and merites of Christ. Fulk. in hunc locum. Augustine indeede sometime ascribeth such an office vnto the Angelles to carry vp our prayers to Heauen, as their charge is to carry vp our soules: not as mediatours or intercessors, but as the Lords messengers and agents here vpon earth, to reporte vnto him our affaires: dicuntur Angeli preces nostras, & vota Deo offerre, non vt deum [Page]doceant, qui omnia antequam fiant, nouit, sed vt super his dei voluntatem consulant. The Angelles are said to offer vp our prayers and vowes vnto God, not to informe or instruct the Lord, but onely to consult and know his pleasure: tom. 9. de dilection. Cap. 3. & in Psalm. 74. for the Angels haue two offices, the one, to execute the commaundement of God in the world, and to attend vpon him to receiue their charge, Math. 18.10. the other, to returne vnto God as faithfull messengers the successe of their busines in the worlde. Zechar. 1.10. Now whether the Angelles be appointed of God to report vnto him our sayings and doings,Fulk. Apo. [...]. sect. 2. as other affaires of our life, the scripture no where euidently sheweth. Neither, if it were graunted, would it any thing helpe their popish inuocation of Angelles.

Rhemist. alleadge Tob. 12.12. to proue the offering of our prayers by Angelles. Answer, It is neither canonicall Scripture, nor agreeable vnto it: Fulk. annot. Coloss. 2. sect. 3.

The Protestants.

THe scripture alwayes maketh Christ our onely Mediator, neither Angelles nor Saints, by whome our prayers and all other spirituall sacrifices are offered vnto God. Fulk ibid.

1 Hebrew. 13.15. Let vs by him offer the sacrifice of praise alwayes to God. 1. Peter. 2.5. You are an holy priesthoode, to offer vp spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God, by Iesus Christ. Ergo, Christ Iesus is our onely Mediator.

Secondly, Galatian. 3.19. The Lawe was ordayned by Angelles in the hand of a Mediator. Ergo, the Angelles are one office, and the Mediator another. Augustine sayeth: Quòd non aliquem ex Angelis dicit Mediatorem, 1. Tim. 2. sed ipsum Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum habes alio loco: vnus (inquit) Deus, & vnus mediator Dei & hominum, homo Christus Iesus. That the Apostle calleth not any of the Angels, but only Iesus Christ our Lord, Mediator, we haue in another place: There is one God, saith he, and one Mediator of God and man, the Man Iesus Christ.

AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART of this question, whether Angelles or Saints know our heartes.

The Papists.

THe Angelles and other Celestiall spirites doe knowe our heartes and inwarde repentance:Haeres. 6. And betweene the Angelles and the blessed soules of [Page] Saintes, there is no difference in this case, the one being as highly exalted, and neere God, as the other, in whome and by whome only they see and know our affaires. Luke 15.10. There is ioy in heauen▪ in the presence of the Angelles ouer one sinner that repenteth. Ergo, they know our repentaunce. Rhemist. Lu. 15. Sect. 2.

Ans. 1 Our heartes and inward repentance are not knowen to the Angelles, but by the fruites, and true effectes thereof.

2 Although the elect, after the resurrection shal be like in glorie to the Angelles, yet it followeth not, that they shall be like in all thinges, much lesse that their soules now in heauen, be in all thinges like vnto the Angelles, whose presence and Ministerie God vseth in the preseruation of his chosen.

3 That all thinges done in the worlde may be seene in God, as in a glasse, is but a prophane speculation, and the deuise of an ydle braine. Fulk. ibid.

Argum. 2 Abraham had knowledge of things in earth, which were not in his time, as that they had Moyses and the Prophetes bookes, which hee neuer sawe. Luk. 16. ver. 29. Rhemist.

Answere: First, In this narration many thinges are spoken parabolically, out of the which we must not ground any doctrine not taught els where in scripture: for you may aswell say that soules haue fingers and tounges, and that elementall water wil quench hell fire, as that Abraham knew what books were written after his death.

Secondly,Haeres. 5. Albeit that the doctrine of the Church comprehended in the scriptures, might be reuealed to Abraham after his death, yet it followeth not, that he knew all thinges, as you affirme the saintes doe, by beholding the Maiestie of God. Fulk. annot. ibid.

The saintes therefore in heauen knowe so much as the Lord thinketh good to reueale vnto them, they knowe not all things.

The Protestants.

WE deny not, but that as Prophetes and holy men in this life, may knowe many secret thinges reuealed vnto them by the spirit of God, as Peter found out the secret fraude of Ananias, & Sapphirae: Eliseus being absent found out Gehezi his corruption: yea, hee could tell what was doone in the King of Syria his chamber: so the Lord may reueale vnto the saintes in heauen at his pleasure, some thinges done vpon earth. But that they receiued any such gift of God, to know all thinges done vpon earth, it is a great vntrueth, and cleane contrary to the scriptures.

1. Salomon sayeth in his prayer vnto God: Heare thou in heauen, in thy dwelling place, and giue vnto euery man according to his wayes, as thou knowest [Page] his heart, for thou onely knowest the hearts of all the children of men. 1. King. 8.39. Out of this place we thus reason, he only knoweth the heart, that is the Iudge of all men, and a rewarder of them according to their wayes: But the Lord onely is iudge. Ergo. Againe, the wordes themselues be plaine, that God onely knoweth the heart: so that what knowledge of secrets the Saintes haue, it is by reuelation, not by searching the heart.

Againe S. Paul saith: No man knoweth the thinges of man saue the spirit of man which is in him: so the thinges of God knoweth no man, but the spirite of God. 1. Corinth. 1.11. the Rhemist. aunswer that no man knoweth the secrets of the heart naturally, but by extraordinary gift he may, as the Prophets did. Ans. No man euer had or can haue a generall gift to know the heart, but when God seeth it good to reueale it: for otherwise the comparison holdeth not: The spirit of God onely knoweth the things of God: which also is giuen to men to know, but not by receiuing any gift, to search and looke into the nature and heart as it were of God (for then should they knowe all the secrets of God, which neuer any did:) but onely by reuelation of the spirite, which openeth Gods secrets vnto them, so farre as it is conuenient and needfull.

Euen after the same manner the spirite of God may reueale the secrets of the heart of man, not by giuing them a generall gift them selues to looke into the heart, as into a glasse, but by reuealing such thinges, when the Lord seeth it expedient.

Neither had the prophets an inherent gift and dwelling in them, to know secrets, but the worde of God was inspired into them at times, as they had neede, as we see in Nathan 2. Sam. 7.3.4. in Elisha. 2. King. 2.15. in Isaiah. 2. Kin. 20.4. And though Paul was taken vp into heauen, and sawe many secrets, yet he knew not all: for thus he saith of him selfe, If I knew all secretes: 1. Corinth. 13.2. Ergo, no man euer receiued this gift, to search the heart: but it is proper vnto God, who will not giue his honour to another.

2. Augustine saith, Nescire mortuos quid hic agatur dum hic agitur: that the dead know not what is done here, while it is in doing. But they vnderstand either by relation of those that departe this worlde, or els by the Angels: Non quidem omnia, sed quae sinuntur indicare: sicut Prophetae, nec hic omnia cognoscebant. sed quae illis essereuelanda dei prouidentia iudicarat. de cura pro mortuis. cap. 15. Neither do they know all things, but what God suffereth to be knowen, as neither did the Prophets knowe al things while they liued, but what God in his diuine prouidence thought good to reueale vnto them. I note out of this saying of Augustine, three thinges.

FIRST, What great vncertaintie of opinion heere is: Howe the dead should come by the knowledge of humane affaires, the Papists think they haue it by Gods gift: otherwhile they say, they see all thinges in God, as in a cleare glasse. Augustine sayeth, they knowe them by the Angelles, or by men newly departed this lyfe: so that it appeareth to bee but a meer conceit and imagination, that they haue any such knowledge, whereof there is no surer ground. [Page] Secondly, Augustine saith, they know not things presently done, but afterward, contrarie to the Papists. Thirdly, they know not all things, as the Prophets also did not, but what the Lord reuealeth vnto them: wherein also he is contrarie to our aduersaries.

THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING THE worship of Angels, first in generall, then in particular, of inuocation.

The Papists.

THey say that the diuine honour and adoration due vnto God alone,Haeres. 7. is not to be giuen to Angels: But there is a religious reuerence, honour and adoration, which is not to be denyed to Angels and Saints, Rhemist. annot. Apocalyps. 19. sect. 4.

1 Iosua fell downe before the Angel and worshipped, Iosua 5. Rhemist.

Ans. He worshipped not an Angel, but the Lord Christ himselfe the captaine of the Lords armie: for it was a diuine worship: He is bid to put off his shooes, as Moses was, when God appeared out of the fierie bush, Exod. 3. But a diuine worship (by your owne confession) is due onely to God, Fulk. annot. Coloss. 2.3.

2. 1. Timoth. 2.21. I charge thee before God and the Lord Iesus Christ, and his elect Angels, that thou obserue these things: Ergo, Angels may be adored and reuerenced, Rhemist.

Ans. Saint Paul maketh here the Angels witnesses of his waightie charge: so Moses calleth heauen and earth to witnesse, Deut. 30.19. may we therefore conclude, that he yeelded any religious worship to heauen and earth? Fulk. ibid.

The Protestants.

AS for due reuerence, which is of loue, not of any seruice, there is no question, but we ought to yeeld it vnto the Angels. But all religious seruice or worship is due onely to God, and whosoeuer man or Angel requireth, or receiueth any religious worship or seruice, vsurpeth that which is due vnto God, Fulk. Apocal. 19. sect. 4.

1 Apocal. 19.10. and 22.9. Iohn fell downe to worship the Angel: but the Angel suffered him not: See thou doe it not, (saith he) for I am thy fellowe seruant, and of thy brethren, worship God: Ergo, Angels are not to be adored with any religious worship.

Rhemist. First, he forbiddeth him onely to worship him with diuine adoration.

Ans. The words are generall: he sayth not worship God, with this kind of seruice: but worship God.

Rhemist. Secondly, you say, that Iohn so worthie an Apostle was not ignorant [Page] of that poynt, that Angels were not to be worshipped as God: we may replye also, that if Iohn had knowne that this other kind of seruice was vnlawfull, he would not haue done it.

Ans. Iohn sinned not of ignorance, but of forgetfulnes, in this extasie of his mind, while he beheld the glorie of the Angel, as likewise through his frailenes and forgetfulnes he committeth the like againe, cap. 22. which Iohn would not haue done, being once before admonished, had he not presently forgotten himselfe: But the other error of worshipping the creature for the Creator, was too grosse an error for the Apostle.

Rhemist. Thirdly, he was deceiued in the person, taking the Angel for Christ, and therefore was not culpable at all in this fact, in giuing diuine honour to the Angel, for he sinned onely materially, not formally.

Ans. First, Iohn was not ignorant, that he was an Angel, and not Christ, for he sayth, he was one of the seuen Angels that had the seuen vials. Secondly, though he sinned of ignorance, yet was it a sinne: for the Prophet, which beleeued the olde Prophet, sinned grieuously, as it appeared by his punishment, though he did it ignorantly, 1. King. 13. Wherefore it is a grosse error of your Schoolemen, that say, a man sinneth not, if he worship the diuell in the shape of an Angel ignorantly.

Rhemist. Fourthly, the Angel would not receiue this worship at Iohns hand, whom he knew to be in great fauour with God, and greater then some Angel.

Ans. First, though hereafter the childrē of God shalbe made equall to the Angels in glorie, yet in this mortall life they must needes be inferiour, seeing Christ himself, in respect of his passion, was inferiour to the Angels, Heb. 2.9. Secondly, the Angel would not haue taken this homage at any other mans hands, beside Iohn: for he giueth a reason, that he is not only his fellow seruant, but also of his brethren. So for al their shifts and cauils, we strongly conclude by this example, that no religious honour ought to be giuen to Angels.

2 Honoramus Angelos, charitate non seruitute (sayth Augustine) nec eis templa construimus: We honour Angels with the duetie of loue, not of seruice, neither doe we build temples vnto them. Quod ergo colit summus Angelus, id colendum etiam est ab homine vltimo. That therefore which is worshipped of the highest Angel, the man of lowest degree ought also to worship, De vera religion. cap. 55. Ergo, no worship due vnto Angels, but all vnto God.

THE SECOND PART OF THE INVOcation of Angels.

The Papists.

Haeres. 8.THey hold, that it is lawfull to direct our praiers vnto Angels, Rhemist. Coloss. 2. sect. 3. Yea, and because they pray for vs, and deale with God to procure [Page] mercie for vs, they may iustly be called our aduocates.

Angels are deputed for our protection (which is nothing but aduocation) Dan. 10.23. Math. 18.10. Rhemist. annot. 1. Iohn 2. sect. 5.

Ans. First, the argument followeth not: for the Angels at the appoyntment of God, may serue for our protection and defence, though they be not aduocates for vs, to obtaine remission of our sinnes. Secondly, the places alleadged proue no such aduocation of Angels, but onely defence and protection. Dan. 10.23. The Angel was readie at the first praiers of Daniel, but he was letted a while. This proueth, that angels may knowe our praiers when it pleaseth God, and be ministers of his helpe vnto vs, which we denye not: not that they are our aduocates.

The Protestants.

THat angels are not to be worshipped, nor inuocated, as mediatours, intercessors, or aduocates, the scripture speaketh euidently.

1 Coloss. 2.18. Let no man beguile you in the humblenes and worshipping of Angels: Ergo, not lawfull to pray vnto them, or to worship them.

Rhemist. The Apostle speaketh heere against the wicked doctrine of Simon Magus, that affirmed that the angels both ill and good, were mediators for vs vnto God, and against the superstition of the Iewes, that worshipped the angels by whom the law was giuen.

Ans. The Apostle condemneth both these superstitions, as likewise the popish inuocation of angels: because all will-worship is forbidden, which is not after the prescript of Gods word, Coloss. 2.23. Fulk. in hunc locum.

2 If any man sinne, (sayth the Apostle) we haue an aduocate with the father, Iesus Christ the Iust, he is the propitiation for our sinnes, Iohn 2.2. Ergo, Christ onely is our aduocate.

Rhemist. Christ is our aduocate in the highest degree, because by himselfe, and his owne merites, without the assistance of any other, he obtaineth pardon for vs. The other, as angels and Saints are as secondary intercessors, that obtaine not any thing by their owne merites, but onely through Christ.

Ans. First, he onely and properly is an aduocate that can pleade the iustice of his clients cause, which euery one that prayeth for vs cannot doe: for though the angels and Saints departed should pray for vs (which we knowe not by the scriptures) as our brethren vpon earth doe, yet should they not be mediatours and aduocates, but petitioners and intreators for vs, Fulk. ibid.

Secondly, we gather many strong arguments out of this place, for the sole sufficient aduocation of Christ. First, the Sonne is the best and onely sufficient aduocate with the father, therefore where we may haue free and bold accesse to the Sonne, Heb. 4.16. what need haue we of the seruants helpe? 2. He is the only aduocate that is iust and righteous before God: so onely is Christ, the angels [Page] are imperfect in his sight, Iob. 4.18. Ergo. Thirdly, he must be our aduocate that is also the propitiation for our sinnes, Ergo, onely Christ.

Augustine saith, Dicitis, angelos nos colimus: vtinam illos coleretis, facile ab illis disceretis, illos non colere: But ye will say, ye worship not images but Angels: I would you did truely worship and reuerence them: for you should soone learne of the Angels, not to worship the Angels, in Psal. 96.

THE NINTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING SAINTS DEPARTED.

THis Controuersie hath two parts: first, of those that being departed suffer some punishment after this life. Secondly, of those that are straight receiued to ioye in heauen. The first part hath two questions: first, of the place of darknesse, where the faithfull remained till the comming of Christ, as the Papists imagine. Secondly, of Purgatorie.

1

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF LIMBVS PATRVM, where the Patriarkes were imagined to be.

The Papists.

Haeres. 9.THey haue deuised and imagined in their foolish conceit foure infernall and subterrestrial places: Hell, Purgatorie, Limbus infantium, where children remaine dying without baptisme, and Limbus Patrum, where the Fathers were before Christs comming. These places they distinguish three waies: first by the situation: Hell is lowest, Purgatorie is next, Limbus infantium in the third place, Limbus Patrum vppermost. Secondly, they differ in measure of punishment, some of them haue poenam damni, and poenam sensus, a double punishment, both of losse, in that they are excluded heauen, and of paine also, as Hell, and Purgatorie: the other two Limbi, are but dungeons of darknes onely, where they suffer no other smart or paine, but are onely absent from God. Thirdly, they differ in time and continuance, say they, Hell and the dungeon of children shall abide for euer: but Purgatorie and the dungeon of the fathers are temporall: the one, that is, Limbus Patrum is many yeeres agoe dissolued: and Purgatorie also shall cease, say they, at the comming of Christ, Ballarm. de purgat. lib. 2. cap. 6.

This then is their opinion, that the Patriarkes and Prophets before Christs comming were not in heauen, but were kept in an infernall place of darknesse, yet without paine, and were deliuered by Christs descending into hell, Bellarm. de Christi anima. lib. 4. cap. 11. Rhemist. Heb. 9.8.

Argum. First, Heb. 11.40. God prouiding a better thing for vs, that they without [Page] vs should not be perfect: That is, (say the Rhemists) the Fathers of the law could not be admitted to the ioyes of heauen, till the Apostles and other of the new lawe, were associate with them, and a way made into heauen by the death and ascension of Christ, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. First, by this reason the Patriarkes could not enter into heauen before the death of the Apostles, if there were no enterance found, vnlesse they were associate with them. Secondly, if the way were not opened before Christs ascension, then the Patriarkes could not ascend before: where were they then al those 40. daies? for they were deliuered out of Limbus Patrum before Christs resurrection. Thirdly, there is therefore no such meaning of this place: but it is to be vnderstood of the resurrection, when as all the elect shall be consummate together, and enter bodie and soule into heauen. Fulk.

2 Zachar. 9.11. I haue loosed thy prisoners out of the pit, where there is no water; That is out of Limbus Patrum, Bellarm. de Christi anima. lib. 4. cap. 11.

Ans. Augustine giueth a cleane contrarie sense of the place, by the pit without water he vnderstandeth, Humanae miseriae siccam profunditatem & sterilem, vbi non sunt fluenta iustitiae, sed iniquitatis lutum: De ciuitat. dei. lib. 18. cap. 35. The drie and barren dungeon of humane miserie, where there are no springs of iustice, but the puddle and mire of iniquitie: That is, the Prophet speaketh of the deliuerance of the people from their cruel and vniust bondage and captiuitie.

3 1. Pet. 3.19. In the which spirit he also went and preached vnto the spirits that were in prison, which sometime had been disobedient in the daies of Noe. This place proueth euidently (sayth Bellarm.) that Christ descended into hell, and deliuered the fathers from thence, De Christi anima. lib. 4.13.

Ans. The place can haue no such meaning: First, by the spirit here the humane soule of Christ cannot be vnderstood, but is diuine power: for he was not quickned or restored to life by his humane soule, but by his diuine power his soule was ioyned againe to his bodie. Augustine also giueth another reason, why he cannot be said to be quickned or made aliue in spirit, that is, in his soule: for then he must haue died before in soule. But, Mors animae peccatum est, à quo ille immunis fuit: But the death of the soule is sinne, from the which Christ was free.

2 The Apostle speaketh onely of those which were incredulous and disobedient, not of the faithfull, such as the Patriarkes were and Prophets. Yea (sayth Bellarm.) they might be vnbeleeuers at the first, but after repented before they dyed.

Ans. Then the Apostles comparison could not hold, if any were saued without the Arke: for as then eight persons onely were saued, all without the Arke perished: so now without baptisme and faith of the Church (for by baptisme he vnderstandeth not the washing of water, but the inward grace of the spirit) none can be saued. If then any were saued out of the Arke, there may now also be saluation out of the Church. Augustine also sayth, Ii modò, qui non crediderunt Euangelio illis intelligantur esse similes, qui tunc non crediderunt, cum fabricaretur[Page]arca. They which now beleeue not the Gospell, are like to them which beleeued not then while the Arke was in making. And they which doe now beleeue and are baptized, are like to those which then were saued in the Arke. Augustine thinketh therefore, that they were incredulous persons, and vtterly perished both bodie and soule: And so is our opinion.

3 The text saith not, he went and deliuered, but went and preached: for Augustine calleth it an absurd thing to thinke, that the Gospell was preached to them that were dead, which in their life time were incredulous: for if the Gospell bee preached in Hell (sayth he) it would followe that it is not necessarie it should be preached here in the world, if men when they are dead, may heare it, and be conuerted. And againe, it would ensue (sayth he) that there should bee a Church in hell: for where the word is preached, there is a Church. Wherefore he concludeth, that it must needes be vnderstood of Noah his preaching in the spirit and power of Christ: Arcae fabricatio, praedicatio quaedam fuit. The building of the Arke was a kinde of preaching, Epistol. 99. So also he expoundeth that 1. Pet. 4.6. The Gospell was preached to the dead: Ex circumstantia loci apparet, eum intelligere eos, qui nunc mortui sunt, sed olim in vita Euangelium audiuerunt. Commentar▪ in epistol. ad Roman.

4 The text is not, that were in prison, but doth better beare this sense, that are: So the Apostles meaning is this, that they which were incredulous and disobedient in time past, when Noah in the spirit of Christ, or Christ by his spirit in Noah preached to the world, were then destroyed in the flood, & now for their increduliti [...] are punished in the prison of hell.

The Protestants.

THat the holy Patriarkes, Fathers and Prophets dyed in the same faith before the comming of Christ, which all true Christians doe now hold, and were presently receiued into the ioyes of heauen, and not kept in any infernall place or dungeon of darknes: thus it is proued.

1 They had all faith, and beleeued in Christ: yea, the same faith that is now preached: as it is defined by the Apostle, Heb. 11.1. They also by this faith obtained remission of sinnes, Rom. 4.7. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen, as it is alleadged out of the Psalme: Ergo, they were blessed: but out of the kingdome of God there was no blessednesse to be found: therefore they also went to heauen.

2 If the heauens were not opened before Christs ascension, as the Rhemists affirme: then none went to heauen before Christ ascended. But that is false: Henoch and Elias by their owne confession were taken vp into Paradise: so was the soule of the theefe vpon the Crosse. But Paradise is heauen, yea the third and the highest heauen, as S. Paul calleth it, 2. Corinth. 12.4. And so Augustine expoundeth that place, Voluit Deus Apostolo demonstrare vitam, in qua post hanc vitam viuendum est in aeternū. The Lord would shew vnto the Apostle [Page] that life, wherein, after this life, we shall liue and remaine for euer: De Gene. lib. 12.28. These three therefore went to Paradise, which is no infernall or place of darknesse, but a Celestiall habitation of ioy, light, and felicitie: They were not then in Limbo Patrum, in the dungeon of the Fathers. Wherefore we conclude, there was accesse to heauen before the ascension of Christ.

3 The Fathers and Patriarkes, before Christs comming, were in Abrahams bosome: but that was no infernall place or prison, such as they imagine Limbus Patrum to be. Augustine proueth, that it could not be membrum, or pars inferorum, a member or part of Hell, or any infernall▪ place, as the Iesuits hold: First, the text saith, there is magnum chaos, a great gulfe, a great distance betweene, Luk. 16.26. and vers. 23. The rich man sawe Abraham a farre off: wherefore it is not like, that both those places should be infernall. Secondly, Abrahams bosome, was quietis habitatio, & faelicitatis sinus, a place of rest and blisse: but so is not any infernall place, where there is horror, and darknesse. Thirdly, the place where the rich man was, is called Hell, or infernall: there is no such thing sayd of Lazarus, that he was in any lower place: but aboue in some high and farre distant place: for the rich man is sayd to lift vp his eyes. Augustine then concludeth: Ne ipsos quidem inferos vspiam scripturarum locis in bono appellatos reperire potui. Epistol. 99. I doe not finde that this word infernall, is taken any where in the scriptures in the good part. And therefore the bosome of Abraham, being a place of rest, sayth he, cannot be any infernall place.

AN APPENDIX OR APPERTINANCE OF THIS question, concerning the apparition of Samuel.

The Papists.

THey hold opinion, that it was the very soule of Samuel that appeared at the error 10 witches house at Endor vnto Saul: and vse it as an argument, to proue that the soules of the Patriarkes were not in heauen, but in some infernall place, before Christs comming, because Samuel ascended out of the earth, Bellarm. De Christ. anim. lib. 411.

Argum. 1. Because he that appeared to Saul, is called Samuel in the text. Augustine answereth: that the Images of things, are called by the names of the things themselues: as Genes. 41. Pharao sayd, he sawe eares of corne, and fat and leane kine in his dreame, when they were but the images of such things: So the diuell because he appeared in the shape of Samuel, Samuel himselfe is sayd to be seene: Ad Simplicianum lib. 2. quaest. 3.

Argum. 2. Ecclesiastic. 46: It is set downe as a commendation of Samuel, that he prophecied being dead, Ergo, it was Samuel indeed, Bellarm. De Purgat. lib. 2. cap. 6.

Augustine answereth, that this booke was not receiued into the Canon of the scriptures: It is not Canonicall, De cura pro mortuis. cap. 15.

[Page]Arg. 3. He telleth Saul things to come, as how the next day he should be ouercome, and slaine. But the diuell knoweth not things to come, Bellar. ibid.

Augustine answereth, Facile est & non incongruum: It is an easie matter with God, and not vnlikely, that some things should be reuealed to euill spirits, for the greater punishment of the wicked: for otherwise we might maruaile: Quomodo daemones agnouerint Christum, quem Iudaei non agnoscebant: How the diuels knewe Christ, whom the Iewes did not acknowledge: Ad Simplician. lib. 2. quaest. 3.

The Protestants.

THat it was not the soule of Samuel which appeared, who was now at rest; but the diuell in the likenes of Samuel, who also can transforme himselfe into an Angel of light: Augustine proueth by these foure arguments.

Argum. 1. Because the Witch or Pythonist vsed enchantments, vnto the which the soule of so holy a prophet was not subiect, Daemoniacis incantationibus vti videtur. De mirabilib. scriptur. 2. cap. 11. Bellarmine answereth: that Samuel preuented her enchantment, and came vp voluntarily.

Ans. The text is contrarie, vers. 11. for the woman first asketh Saul, whom she should bring vp, that is, by her charmes and incantations: and he sayd, bring me vp Samuel.

Argum. 2. Quomodo Saul &c. How could Saul obtaine to heare a Prophet speake from the dead, whom God vouchsafed not to answere by Prophets aliue? The text is, that God gaue him no answere neither by Prophets, nor by dreames, therefore I haue called for thee, vers. 15. Ergo, it was not Samuel, for then God should haue giuen him answere by Prophets.

Argum. 3. If it had been Samuel, he would not haue told a lye vnto Saul, saying, to morowe thou shalt be with me: Magno quippe interuallo separari bonos à malis legimus: for we reade that the good are separated from the bad by a great distance after this life, as it appeareth in the storie of Diues and Lazarus. August. ad Simplician. ibid.

Bellarm. He sayth as much, as you shall be dead: noting the generall condition, not the particular state of the dead.

Ans. This phrase in scripture importeth, and implieth also the particular state of those that are departed, as 2. Sam. 12.23. Dauid saith of his child, I shall goe to him, he shal not come to me: And Luk. 23.43. Christ saith, This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise: In both places it signifieth to be in rest and ioye, in the same place, where they are, with whom they are sayd, they shalbe: Ergo, it must be so taken here.

Argum. 4. If it had been Samuel: Vtique vir iustus non permisisset se adorari, The iust man would not haue suffered himselfe to be adored and worshipped: as the diuell doth take it at Saules hands, to be worshipped of him. For the text sayth, he enclined his face toward the ground, and bowed himselfe, or worshipped: August. quaest. ex veteri. testam. 27.

[Page]

THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERNING Purgatorie.

THe question hath three parts: first, whether there be any Purgatorie for soules to be purged & cleansed in after this life. Secondly, of other circumstances and matters that doe belong thereunto. Thirdly, of praier for the dead.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THERE BE any Purgatorie after this life.

The Papists.

THere is (they say) a certaine infernall place in the earth, called Purgatorie,Haeres▪ 11. in the which, as in a prison house, the soules which were not fully purged in this life, are there cleansed and purged by fire, before they can be receiued into heauen: Bellarm. de Purgator. lib. 1.1. lib. 2.6. Rhemist. Matth. 12. sect. 6.

Argum. 1. Zachar. 9.11. Thou hast loosed thy prisoners out of the pit where was no water. Psalm. 66.12. We went through fire and water. These and such like places the Iesuite vnderstandeth of Purgatorie, Lib. 1. de Purgator. cap. 3.

Ans. First, the Iesuite brought this place before, to proue that there was Limbus Patrum, and now he maketh it serue for Purgatorie: thus they can make the scripture to speake what they list themselues. But Purgatorie and Limbus Patrum, are two diuers, yea and contrary things: for the Limbus was onely for those that liued before Christ: Purgatorie began since: the Limbus was voyde of payne and punishment, so is not Purgatorie: wherefore if the Lake or pit in Zacharie signifie Purgatorie, it maketh nothing for Limbus: and if it serue for Limbus, then they misse of a place for Purgatorie. But indeede it signifieth no such thing: but is taken onely in that place for the affliction and miserie of this life, as we shewed out of Augustine. And so doth he also expound such and the like places out of the Psalmes: as Psalm. 86.13. Thou hast deliuered my soule from the lowest graue. Quid (sayth he) est lacus infimus, nisi profundissima miseria, qua non sit profundior? What els (sayth he) is the lowest pit or graue, but the lowest degree of miserie, then the which there can be no greater?

Argum. 2. Luk. 8.55. Her spirit came againe and she arose. Christ raised the rulers daughter to life. This euidently sheweth that there is a third place beside Heauen and Hell: for the soules that are there cannot returne againe, Rhemist.

Ans. Surely a goodly argument, the spirits of Lazarus and of the Maide returned: Ergo, there is a third place: and why may you not thinke, that their soules were, whereas the soules of other righteous are? And why may not the [Page] Lord bring at his pleasure, if it pleaseth him, the soules at rest into their bodies againe? Fulk. 8. sect. 5.

Argum. 3. Of all other they most insult, and beare themselues bolde vpon that place of Saint Paul, 1. Corinth. 3. which being rightly vnderstood, doth not helpe them anything at al: vers. 13. The fire shal trie euery mans worke. vers. 15. if any mans worke burne, he shall suffer losse, but he shall be safe himselfe, yet as it were through the fire. Bellarm. Rhemist. by fire here vnderstand the flames of Purgatorie; by wood, stubble, strawe; veniall sinnes, which must be purged by that fire, Rhemist. 1. Cor. 3. sect. 3.

Ans. First, by the precious matter here, as of gold, siluer, are not the workes of charitie vnderstood, but the preaching of sound doctrine: by straw, and stubble, and wood, and other combustible matter, the affectation of eloquence, and corrupt teaching of the truth, yet holding the foundation: not veniall sinnes, as the Rhemists affirme: and this Bellarmine also granteth.

Secondly, fire is here taken allegorically, as the rest of the words are of gold, siluer, stubble: neither can it be taken for their Purgatorie fire; because it trieth the workes onely, not the persons, and all must be tried by this fire, as well those that build gold and siluer, as the other: but all shall not passe through Purgatorie, by their owne confession. They are driuen to this shift, to graunt, that vers. 13. the fire is taken in one sense, namely, for the sentence and iudgement of God, and vers. 15. in another, that is, for the flames of Purgatorie. But who seeth not how absurd a thing this is, that in an allegorie the same word, and in the same place, should be so diuersly taken?

Thirdly, The day shall reueale it, that is, sayth Bellarmine, the day of the Lord at the comming of Christ: the Rhemists vnderstand the particular day of euery mans death; so well they agree together. But it is apparant, that this is the meaning, that the day, that is, the time shall declare it: for God hath appoynted a time to examine euery mans doctrine by fire: which is nothing els but the iudgement of God by the fire of his word, whereby euery man, in the day of his calling and conuersion, shall knowe whether he hath preached aright or not: Fulk.

The Protestants.

THat there is no such place of Purgatorie after this life, but that here onely is the place of repentance, and to be reconciled vnto God: and that the soules departed are presently either receiued vp to heauen, or thrust downe to hell: thus it is proued out of the scriptures.

Argum. 1. The scripture maketh but two kinds of works, either good or euill, Ecclesiastes 12.14. But two sorts of men, he that beleeueth shall be saued, he that beleeueth not, shall be condemned. Mark. 16.16. But two places, heauen and hell: Math. 25. Christ hath but two flockes, one of sheepe at the right hand, another of goates at the left: and he saith to the one, Come ye blessed: [Page] to the other, Goe ye cursed. There are but two sorts of men, therefore but two places: Ergo, no Purgatorie.

Bellarm. There shall be indeede at the comming of Christ but two places, heauen and hell: Purgatorie shall haue an end.

Ans. First, you say your selues that there shall be two infernall places for euer, Hell for the wicked, and a Limbus for infants that dye vnbaptized, and heauen that maketh three, and now you say there shall be but two. Secondly, there are but two places now, because there are but two sorts of men, for the beleeuers are alreadie passed frō death to life, Iohn 5.24. The vnbeleeuers are alreadie condemned, Iohn 3.18. Thirdly, Augustine consenteth with vs, Non est vlli vllus medius locus, vt possit esse nisi cum diabolo, qui non est cum Christo: There is no middle or third place, but he must needes be with the diuell, that is not with Christ. De peccator. remiss. & merit. lib. 1. cap. 28. And againe, Tertium locum penitus ignoramus, imo nec esse in scripturis sanctis inuenimus: The third place beside heauen and hell, we are vtterly ignorant of, nay wee finde not in scripture that there is any.

Arg. 2. S. Paul saith, that euery man shall receiue the works of his bodie, according to that which he hath done either good or euill, 2. Cor. 5.10. Therefore there is no place to cleanse and purge the soules of men after this life: for then they should not receiue according to the works done in their flesh.

Bellarmine sayth, that euen they whose sinnes are remitted after death, doe receiue nothing but that which was done in the flesh, for they deserued in their life time to be helped after death.

Ans. First, as for desert, we will shewe elsewhere, that it hath no place before God neither in this life, nor the life to come: for the scripture sayth, Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne: not who deserueth remission of sinnes, Rom. 4.6. Secondly, this deuised and friuolous distinction, doth not stand with the Apostles meaning: for he speaketh of things actually done in the flesh, not deserued to be done, and of the workes of the bodie, not of the soule, & of things perfectly done, not begun onely or in choate: and he vseth it as a reason to perswade men, euen while they liue, to be accepted of God, vers. 9.11. But if there might be any such helpe after death, there needeth no such hast presently to be conuerted vnto God.

Argum. 3. Apocal. 14.13. Blessed are the dead from henceforth that dye in the Lord, for they rest from their labours: Ergo, there is no Purgatorie: for all the godly departed are at rest.

Bellarm. First, it is not meant of all the godly, but onely of Martyrs, which dye for the name of Christ.

Ans. As to liue in Christ Iesus, is a phrase of scripture, & signifieth to liue godly in Christ, 2. Timot. 3.12. so to dye in the Lord, signifieth to dye in the faith of Christ, 1. Thessal. 4.16. Therefore this place is vnderstood of all the godly.

Bellar. 2. This word (amodò) from henceforth, is not to be vnderstood straight after their death, but straight after the day of iudgement, thē they shalbe blessed.

[Page]Ans. First, by this reason none that are dead in Christ should be happie before that time. And yet by your owne confession, Martyrs are straightway receiued vp to heauen. Secondly, S. Iohn vseth this word elsewhere, to signifie from this time forward, as Iohn 1.51. Christ sayth to Nathanael, From henceforth you shall see heauen open.

Rhemist. Thirdly, it may be also vnderstood of the soules of Purgatorie, that are without danger of sinne and damnation, and are put in vnfallible securitie of their saluation, with vnspeakable comfort.

Ans. First, so the Saints liuing are blessed, being as well without feare of damnation, Rom. 8.1. and are assured of their saluation, Rom. 8.16. Secondly, I pray you what rest or comfort can they haue, that endure greater paine then any in this life? And how can their consciences be quieted, seeing their soules are so afflicted? for bodies they haue none, whatsoeuer they suffer is in soule: how then can ioy and paine, comfort and horror be together in the soule? Fulk. ibid.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE CIRCVMSTANces and other matters belonging to Purgatorie.

The Papists.

error 11 1. THey say, it is an article of faith, to beleeue that there is a Purgatorie, and that he, which beleeueth it not, is sure to goe to Hell, Bellarm. lib. 1. de purgatorio. cap. 11.

The Protestants.

WE hold, that it is not onely an article belonging to the faith, but contrarie to it: and that though there were a Purgatorie, yet it should not be necessarie to saluation to beleeue it. First, because the scripture hath not determined it, which containeth all things necessarie to saluation. Secondly, the Greeke Church holdeth it not to this day: they confesse no Purgatorie, though they pray for the dead: it were a hard matter therfore to pronounce them damned. Thirdly, Augustine doubted of it: He sayth, that there should be some such place after death, non incredibile est, it is not incredible, & vtrum ita sit, quaeri potest, & aut inueniri aut latere fideles potest: whether it be so or not, it may be enquired, and it may either be safely found out, or remaine hid and vnknowne to the faithfull: Enchirid. 69. Augustine saith, A faithfull man may safely be ignorant of Purgatorie.

The Papists.

error 12 2. THey say, they onely goe to Purgatorie, that dye in their veniall and light transgressions, or which haue their sinnes remitted, but not satisfied for the punishment, Bellarm. lib. 2. de Purgat. cap. 1.

The Protestants.

FIrst, we denye that any sinnes are of their owne nature veniall, as they affirme; for the wages of al sinne, without the mercie of God, is death, Ro. 6.23. [Page] Secondly, what equitie should there be in this, that veniall sinnes should be punished with the hellish fire of Purgatorie, that exceedeth al the afflictions of this life, yea and a longer time then any man liueth vpon earth; for the Pope taketh vpon him to pardon for thousands of yeeres: and yet mortall and deadly sinnes (as they call them) may be satisfied for here, where neither the penance can be so grieuous, nor so long? Thirdly, the sinne once remitted, there remaineth no punishment, Mark. 2.5. Christ saith to the sick of the palsie, ‘Thy sinnes are forgiuen thee: and vers. 10. That ye may knowe that the Sonne of man hath authoritie on earth to forgiue sinnes, I say vnto thee, arise, take vp thy bed and walke.’ The releasing him of the punishment of his bodie, was a signe that his sinnes also were forgiuen, and the sinne being remitted, the punishment also ceaseth. Wherefore who so leaueth the world without sinne, is no more guiltie of any punishment.

The Papists.

3. THe soules in Purgatorie doe neither sinne any more, neither can they merite.error 13 Ecclesiastes 9.5. The dead knowe nothing at all, vers. 10. there is neither worke, knowledge, nor wisedome in the graue, Bellarm. cap. 2.

The Protestants.

WE say, that if there were any such place as Purgatorie, the soules there tormented, must needes both increase in charitie and righteousnes, because the more they are purged the more pure they are, and the lesse drosse is in them: and being in vnspeakable torments, they cannot choose but tremble and feare, yea and also be disquieted in their soules, as the Saints were sometime in their afflictions here vpon earth: and therefore cannot be without sinne: for feare hath painfulnes, as the Apostle saith, and he that feareth is not perfect in loue, 1. Iohn 4.18. Ergo, a seruile or slauish feare is sinne. That place alleadged doth not onely take away meriting or working from the dead, but all knowledge and vnderstanding. And it is spoken in the person of the Epicure and sensuall man, that thinketh that the dead knowe nothing.

The Papists.

4. THey affirme, that the soules in Purgatorie are certaine of their saluation in error 14 the midst of their torments: for euery soule departed, straight after death receiueth sentence of life or death, Bellarm. cap. 4.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, that euery soule is iudged presently after death, we grant: and it maketh strongly against your Purgatorie: for the sentence giuen is either of death or life: and the sentence being giuen is accordingly executed: so [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] that they which receiue sentence of life goe presently to heauen, the other to hell. For to what purpose els should the sentence be giuen, if it be not straightwaies in force? So S. Paul saith, that they which looke to be clothed with their house from heauen, shall not be left naked or vnclothed, 2. Cor. 5.2, 3, 4. But if some soules ordained to life eternall, should pause a while in Purgatorie, being vnclothed of their flesh, they should be left altogether naked, hauing not yet receiued their clothing from heauen. Secondly, where there is securitie of saluation, there is the greatest comfort & ioy that can be: how then can the soules in Purgatorie be so grieuouslie tormented, which cannot be els where then in their conscience? for as for the whipping, scalding, freezing of soules in Purgatorie, they are but old wiues fables: the ioy then of the soule is in the conscience, so is the sorowe: how then can both these be matched in the soule together, to haue vnspeakable ioy, as also to feele most horrible paine?

5 In these poynts alreadie set downe, our aduersaries we see are bold to define certainly of Purgatorie: but there are as many poynts, and somewhat more, which they leaue in doubt and vncertaine. First, where Purgatorie should bee: Bellarmine gesseth it is in the bowels of the earth next to hell, cap. 6. so doe the Rhemists, Luk. 16. sect. 8. But they doe not all agree, neither hath their Church defined it. Secondly, they cannot tell how many yeeres Purgatorie endureth, whether an hundred, or two hundred, or thousands of yeeres. Thirdly, they can not tell certainly whether it be materiall fire which burneth in Purgatorie, but they say it is probable. Fourthly, neither cā they shew how corporall fire should worke vpon the soules in Purgatorie, being spirituall and incorporall, Bellarmine cap. 12. Fiftly, they are vncertaine whether the diuels or angels be the tormentors in Purgatorie, cap. 13. Sixtly, whether the paine of Purgatorie be at all time alike, or by little and little slaked toward the end, and whether it doe exceede all the paines and sorowes of this life, they yet remaine vncertaine, and are not able to determine, Bellarm. lib. 2. de purgat. cap. 14. Let vs leaue them therefore with their vncertainties, and brainsicke phansies: for the vaine inuentions and imaginations of men haue no end, but are fitly by the Prophet cōpared to sparkles, that leape out thick out of the fire, but are soone extinguished: Walk, saith the Prophet,Isay. 50.11. in the light of your fire, and sparkes that you haue kindled: that is, as the sparkes giue but a dimme light for a man to walke by, he may stumble and grope about still for all that light: euen so, no maruaile if the Papists doe wander vp and downe in their imaginations, walking by the light and sparkles of their phantasticall and mathematicall fire of Purgatorie.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE PRAIERS OF the liuing, or any other workes of theirs doe profite the dead.

The Papists.

Haeres. 15.THeir opinion is, that the praiers of the liuing are neither auailable for the Saints in heauen, for they neede them not, not for the damned in hell, for [Page] they cannot be helped, but onely for the soules tormented in Purgatorie, who doe finde great ease, say they, by the praiers of the liuing, and therfore we ought to pray for them, Bellar. lib. 2. de purgator. cap. 15.18. Rhemist. annot. 2. Thessal. 2. sect. 19.

Argum. 1. Christ while he liued, profited the dead, for he raised to life the rulers daughter, Math. 9. the widdowes sonne, Luk. 7. and Lazarus, which were dead: therefore euen so the members of Christ ought one to helpe another, the liuing the dead, Bellarm. cap. 15.

Ans. First, is not here a strong argument, thinke you, Christ raised Lazarus and some others from death to life, Ergo, we ought to pray for the dead? for it followeth not, that vpon the miraculous workes of Christ, we should build the ordinarie dueties of Christians: Augustine would haue told you that Christ is not to be imitated in such workes: Non hoc tibi dicit, non eris discipulus meus, nisi ambulaueris supra mare, aut nisi suscitaueris quatriduanum mortuum: He saith not vnto thee, Thou shalt not be my disciple, vnlesse thou walke vpon the sea, & raise one that hath been dead foure daies: But, Learne of me: for I am humble and meeke. Secondly, if prayer for the dead be vnto vs, as the raising of the dead was to Christ: then, as all the dead are to be praied for, so Christ should haue raised againe all that went then to Purgatorie, or els, by your conclusion, he failed in charitie, as we doe now, if we pray not for the dead, as you beare vs in hand. Thirdly, though the Saints departed, and the faithfull liuing are members of the same bodie, and so are bound in loue one to the other, yet it followeth not, that one should pray for the other. They with vs, and we with them doe wish and long to see the redemption of the sonnes of God accomplished, Reuel. 6.10.22.20. But charitie bindeth vs not one to pray for another, because we knowe not one the particular needes of another. Nay, to pray for any departed, is against the rule of charitie: for loue beleeueth all things, and hopeth all things, 1. Corinthians 13.7. Wee ought to hope the best of the dead, that they are at rest: but in praying for them, wee presuppose they are in miserie, and so neede our prayers: therefore wee hope not the best of them, as charitie willeth vs.

Argum. 2. Iohn 5. vers. 16. The Apostle sayth, There is a sinne vnto death, for the which a man ought not to pray: that is, deadly sinne, wherein a man dyeth without repentance: but for other sinnes not vnto death, whereof men repent themselues, it is lawfull to pray: Ergo, we may pray for those that are departed not in deadly sinne: for this place is properly to be vnderstood of praying or not praying for the dead: because so long as a man liueth he may be prayed for, because all sinnes are pardonable in this life, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. First, a sinne vnto death is not onely finall impenitencie, but sinne also against the holy Ghost, such as was the sinne of Iudas, and of the Pharisees. Secondly, though we should vnderstand it of finall impenitencie, yet it is but a so [...]y argument, some of the dead ought not to be praied for: Ergo, the rest may, [Page] Thirdly, the text cannot be vnderstood of praying for the dead: for the text sayth not, If any man see that his brother hath sinned not vnto death, but, If he see him sinning: but the dead doe neither sinne, nor are seene to sinne. Fourthly, whereas you say, that all sinnes are pardonable in this life, our Sauiour Christ saith contrary, that the sinne against the holy Ghost can neuer be forgiuen, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. Plura. apud. Fulk. ibid.

The Protestants.

TO pray for the dead, is a worke neither pleasing before God, because he hath no where commanded it, nor auailable for them that are departed, because they haue their iudgement alreadie. While we liue, let vs one pray for another, but when we are gone, the praiers of the liuing helpe vs not.

Argum. 1. The ground of this popish opinion of prayer for the dead, is their superstitious deuise of Purgatorie: for none els doe they hold it lawfull to pray for but for the soules onely in Purgatorie. But there is no Purgatorie, as we haue shewed before, after this life: our purging is onely in this life: Christ hath by him selfe purged our sinnes. Hebr. 1.3. Christ his bloud is the chiefe and onely purgation of our sinnes: there are also other inferiour and ministeriall purgings, whereby that onely soueraigne purging is made beneficiall, and applied vnto vs: as the inward operation and worke of the spirit is compared to fire, Math. 3.11. 1. Corinth. 3.13. There is also a purging fire of affliction compared by the Prophet to fullers sope, Malach. 3.3. There also shall be a third purging fire in the day of the Lord, 1. Pet. 3.7. when as the corruption and mortalitie of our bodies shall be purged away, and then shall our mortalitie put on immortalitie, 1. Corinth. 15.53. Other Purgatorie after this life we acknowledge none. Seeing then that there are no soules in Purgatorie, and for none els it is lawfull to pray but for the soules tormented in Purgatorie: it followeth, that we are to pray for none at all that are dead.

Argum. 2. No prayer is acceptable to God without faith. We must pray without wauering and doubting, Iames. 1.6. But so can we not pray for the dead: for we cannot tell in what case they are for whom we pray, whether they be in heauen, hell, or purgatorie, and therefore we cannot assure our selues that our prayers are heard, but must needes pray with great doubting and wauering of the mind: Ergo, such praiers are in vaine, Iames 1.7.

Argum. 3. Our praiers profite not the dead, because there is no place after this life for repentance or remission of sinnes: for this should be the end and intendment of our praier, that they might be released of their sinnes, and eased of their paine. There is no remission of sinnes after death, because there is no true repentance: repentance there is none, because there can be no amendment of life, which alwaies followeth repentance: for Iohn Baptist that was a preacher of repentance, bid not onely the people to repent, but to bring forth fruites worthie repentance, Math. 3.2.8. So saith the Prophet Ezechiel, If the wicked [Page] will returne from his sinnes, and doe the thing that is lawfull, he shall liue and not dye, 18.21. There are two parts then of repentance, as Isay sayth, Cease to doe euill, learne to doe well, 1. Isay. 16.17. But there is no place of working out of the bodie: Ergo, then no repentance.

To this Augustine agreeth: Non est apud inferos poenitentia ad salutem proficiens, ecce nunc tempus est salutis, nunc tempus remissionis. In hac vita poenitentiae tantum patet libertas, post mortem nulla correctionis est licentia: De tempor. serm. 66. In hell, or among the dead, there is no repentance vnto saluation: behold now is the time of saluation, the time of forgiuenes: In this life onely haue men libertie to repent, after death there is no place for amendment. What is become now (I pray you) of your Purgatorie repentance? after this life there is no saluation to be had, because there is no remission of sinnes: no remission of sinnes, because there is no repentance: there is no repentance, because there is no amendement.

Rhemist. Our Sauiour saith, Math. 12.32. that blasphemie against the spirit shal neither be forgiuen in this world, nor the world to come: Ergo, some sinnes may be forgiuen in the world to come.

Ans. Mark expoundeth Mathew: He saith, It shall neuer be forgiuen, Mark. 3.29. So that not to be forgiuen either in this world or the world to come, is nothing els, but neuer to be forgiuen: for if it be not forgiuen in this life, it shall neuer be forgiuen.

Bellarm. Yea, but Mathew must expound Marke, because he setteth it downe more fully, and Marke doth but abridge the Gospell written by S. Matthew, De Purgat. lib. 1. cap. 4.

Ans. But why should not Mark rather expound Mathew, seeing he writ after him? and we vse to expound the former writers by the later, not contrariwise.

AN APPENDIX OR AN APPERTINENCE TO this part, concerning the burials and funerals of the dead.

THere are certaine poynts, wherein there is no great variance or dissension betweene vs. First, we confesse, that it is meete and conuenient, that the bodies of Christians, being departed, should after a seemely and comely manner be brought to the graue: as Dauid commendeth the men of Iabesh Gilead, for burying the bodie of Saul, 2. Sam. 2.5. The brethren also tooke the bodie of Stephen & buried it, Act. 8.2. Secondly, it is not to be denied but that lamentatiō and sorow may be made for the dead, obseruing S. Pauls rule, that We mourne not as those that haue no hope, that is, excessiuely, 1. Thess. 4.13. where S. Paul doth not simply forbid Christians to sorow, but not as the Gentiles. The brethrē also made great lamentation for Stephen, Act. 8.2. Thirdly, we doe also graunt, that according to the diuers customes of coūtreys, it is not vnlawfull to vse some comely rites and ceremonies in the buriall of the dead; not for religion, but for orders sake: as among the Israelites, the mourners were wont to goe about in [Page] the streetes, Ecclesiast. 12.5. And Christ commended the woman in the Gospell, for anoynting of him against his buriall, Mark. 14.

But beside these poynts by vs confessed, and acknowledged; there are other more waightie matters, as touching the order of funerals, wherein we worthily and iustly dissent from our aduersaries.

error 16 1 They doe attribute much to the places where men are buried, as in Churches, and Churchyards, but especially vnder the Altar, Rhemist. as the soules of the righteous doe rest in Christ, who is that altar, vnder the which the Apostle sawe the soules of Martyrs: so for the correspondence to the place in heauen, their bodies are commonly layd vnder the altar, where the sacrifice of the body of Christ is daylie offered, Annot. Apocalyps. 6. vers. 9.

Ans. The altar of the Crosse was the onely place where the bodie of Christ was sacrificed: neither need it to be often offered in sacrifice, but it sufficed once onely to haue been done, Heb. 9.25.27. And in the Communion, we acknowledge no sacrifice, but of praise and thanksgiuing. Heb. 13.15. It is kept onely in remembrance of the death of Christ, 1. Cor. 11.25. And how should it be auaileable for the dead, seeing it profiteth not all the liuing, but onely those that are present, which doe eate and drinke the holy elements of bread and wine in remembrance of the bodie and blood of Christ giuen and shed for them? So saith the scripture, Doe this, as oft as you doe it, in remembrance of me, 1. Cor. 11.25. The doers therefore, agents, and receiuers, haue the present benefite, not they which are absent: how then can the dead receiue any solace by it? It profiteth then not a whit to be layd in Churches, or Churchyards, or other hallowed places, as they call them: for all places are alike: neither helpeth it the dead to be buried in one place more then another: for God shall command the sea, and all other places to giue vp their dead, Apocalyps. 20. The very heathen did confesse as much: one sayth, It skilleth not, humíne, an sublimè putrescam: whether I rot vnder,Theodor. or aboue the ground. And another thus writeth, Coelo tegitur, qui non habet vrnam: Lucan. Heauen is a couering to him that hath no other coffin. It were a foule shame then for Christians, to exceede the very Gentiles in their superstitious conceits. Augustine sayth, Si aliquid prodest impio sepultura preciosa, oberit pio vilis, aut nulla: De cura pro mortuis cap. 3. If sumptuous funerals profite the wicked, then homely or no burials doe hurt the godly. Therefore as it helpeth not a wicked man to be buried in one place, more then another, so it doth not hinder or hurt the godly and righteous man.

2 We condemne also their superstitious ceremonies which they vse at their error 17 funerals, as the burning of Tapers, which signifieth, say they, that the soules of the dead are aliue, Bellarm. de purgator. lib. 2. cap. 19.

Ans. First, this superstitious vse of setting vp candles, was directly forbidden in the Elibertine Councel, Canon. 34. Of the like sort also were other superstitious vsages, as the going about of the belman to will the people to pray for their soules, the ringing or iangling of bels to bring their soules to heauen, with queere songs and other melodie to commit the bodies to the ground, and commending [Page] their soules to the protection of Saints. We denie not, but comely and decent orders, voyde of superstition, may be vsed, according to the fashion of the countrey: as Iacobs bodie was embaulmed after the manner of the Egyptians, Genes. 50.2. At the buriall of their Kings, the Israelites vsed to burne odors, Iere. 34.5. The Iewes manner was to wash the bodies of the dead, to winde it vp in a linnen cloth, and burie it with spices and odors: So our Sauiours bodie was buried after the manner of the Iewes, Iohn 19.40. We reade also that Ioseph was put into a coffin or chest, Genes. 50.26. Of these and the like customes, Augustine giueth a rule, writing vpon those words in the Gospell, Iohn 19.40. As it was the manner of the Iewes to burie: Non mihi videtur Euangelista sic frustra dicere voluisse: ita quippe admonuit, in huiusmodi officijs, quae mortuis exhibentur, morem cuius (que) gentis esse seruandum: in Iohann. tract. 120. Me thinketh the Euangelist sayd not thus without cause: hereby letting vs to vnderstand, that in performing such dueties of buriall to the dead, the manner and custome of euery countrey is to be kept.

The Iewes also had a custome, with some companie or frequencie of people, to bring their dead to the ground, Eccle. 12.5. And in the while, to vse some admonition to the people concerning death and mortalitie which came in by sinne, and of the wrath and mercie of God. Syrus. interp. in Mark. 14.3. Neither doe we see, why it is not lawfull now among Christians, at funerals and burials, to haue some godly sermon and exhortation, to put the people in mind of their end, and to comfort them with the hope of the resurrection, as also to giue God thankes, for those his faithfull seruants, that did glorifie him by their life, and by their godly departure. This seemeth also to haue been the commendable custome of the Church in ancient time: as Augustine writeth thus, Exposit. in Psal. 103. part. 1. Pauca nos cogit dicere temporis angustia, quod & nouit charitas vestra debere vos exequijs fidelis corporis solenne obsequium. The shortnes of the time causeth me to be briefe, and you know, that we are to performe a solemne dutie to the bodie of our faithfull brother. The sermon seemeth to haue been made at some funerall. The Iewes also, the buriall being ended, did comfort those that mourned, and eate and dranke with them, and gaue them the cup of consolation, Ierem. 16.7. Iohn 11.31. Both which customes may be kept and retained without any superstition. But other customes and ceremonies, that doe sauour of impietie, and doe any way implye prayer or commendation of the soules of the dead, ought to be left and abolished.

3 Another abuse in popish funerals, is their superstitious and often remembrance of the dead: for they haue their weekes mind for the dead the seuenth error 18 day, nay their halfe weekes mind the third day, their moneths mind the thirtith day: and beside, their anniuersarie or yeeres minde. I pray you what neede all this? Where doe they finde, that wee should mourne for the dead a moneth, thirtie dayes together, much lesse a whole yeere? Ioseph mourned but seuen dayes for his father, Genesis 50.10. So did the Gileadites for Saul, 1. Samuel 31.13. The Egyptians in deede mourned threescore and tenne [Page] daies, when Ioseph mourned but seuen: that we may see a manifest difference betweene the moderate mourning of the faithful, and the excessiue lamentation of infidels. But the popish yeeres mindes doe farre exceede the Egyptians stinted mourning: there being fiue times 70. daies in a yeere. Yet yeerely stipends, erected for weekely, monethly, quarterly, or yeerely sermons we mislike not: being ordained for the instruction of the people, without any relation to the soules of the dead, otherwise, then to giue God thankes for them, and those good things which the Lord wrought by them.

error 19 4 They doe greatly erre and are deceiued, in holding it to be a meritorious worke, which is performed in the buriall of the dead: alleadging to this purpose that place, 2. Sam. 2.5. where Dauid sent messengers to the men of Iabesh Gilead, saying, Blessed are ye of the Lord, that you haue shewed such kindnes vnto your Lord Saul and haue buried him: therefore now the Lord shewe mercie and truth vnto you, Bellarm. cap. 19.

Answere. There can be no such conclusion gathered out of these words: The Lord will shewe mercie, according to his truth and promise, to those that are mercifull: Ergo, it is meritorious to be mercifull: for here the reward dependeth of Gods promise and truth, not vpon the worthines of the worke: Indeed Dauid saith, as it followeth in that place, I will recompence this benefite, because you haue done this thing. They might deserue kindnes at the hands of Dauid, because one good turne requireth another: but before the Lord there is no merite or desert. Secondly, to burie the dead is a worke of charitie, and therefore commanded, as all other dueties of charitie are. The things then commanded, we doe of duetie, we are bound to doe them: Ergo, they are not meritorious: So saith our Sauiour Christ, Doth the master thanke his seruant for doing that which he was commanded? I trow not, Luk. 17.9.

error 20 5 In their funerals and suffrages for the dead, they doe make great difference betweene the rich and the poore: for they say, it is possible that so many prayers and suffrages may bee made at once for the dead, that their soules may at once be deliuered out of Purgatorie, Et ideo in hoc solo casu melior est conditio diuitis, quàm pauperis, quia habet vnde suffragia fiant pro ipso. And therefore in this case onely the estate of the rich is better then the poore, because he hath wherewithall suffrages should be made: that is, able to giue great legacies, and bequests to that end: Albert, mag. de officio miss. tract. 3. Againe, they haue greater respect vnto the Pope departed, then any other: for the first day there must be 200. Masses read for his soule, and for nine daies after an 100. Masses euery day, Tilemann, de primat pontif. error 86.

Ans. Where doe they reade in all the scriptures, that the rich in matters of the soule should be preferred before the poore? nay, the scripture saith plainly, that God is no accepter of persons, Act. 10.34. And S. Iames saith, We ought not to regard a rich man that weareth goodly apparell, hauing a gold ring, before a poore man in vile apparell: 2. vers. 2. Where also doe they learne to pray for [Page] none but for those, for whom they are hired to pray? And if praier be a worke of charitie, and if by their praiers they can deliuer mens soules out of Purgatorie, why doe they not extend their charitie to all in praying for them?

What if the rich Glutton, and poore Lazarus were aliue now, or these popish Masse-mongers had liued then: would they haue been bought for money to haue prayed for the rich mans soule, and let Lazarus alone? It is like they would. But surely all their Masses should neither haue profited the one: nor the want of them haue hindered the other. Marke, I pray you, what Augustine saith: Praeclaras exequias in conspectu hominum purpurato illi diuiti turba exhibuit famulorum: De cura pro mort. cap. 9. sed multò clariores in conspectu domini vlceroso illi pauperi ministerium praebuit angelorum: A goodly funerall did the friends and seruants make for the rich man arayed in skarlet in the sight of the world: but a more blessed buriall had the poore man in the sight of God, by the ministerie of the angels. Therefore there is no respect of persons to be had among the dead: neither haue the rich any greater priuiledge for the multitude of suffrages, then the poore that wanteth them: for no doubt the rich mans executors spared for no cost; Masses, Trentals, Diriges they had enough, if they were then to be had: yet for all this stirre his soule went to Hell, and Lazarus soule was by the angels caried to heauen, that had none of this geere.

6. Lastly, if there were no other thing to be misliked in their Funerals, this were sufficient to condemne them as abominable; that they thinke, their singing,error 21 chaunting, ringing, giuing of dole and almes to the poore, and all other their superstitious customes doe helpe and profite the dead: Bellarm. ibid.

Augustine giueth two reasons of this duetie to be shewed in the burying of the dead. First, Corpori humando quicquid impenditur, non est praesidium salutis, sed humanitatis officium. What duetie is performed in enterring the bodie, is an officious worke of humanitie, not any reliefe for the health of the soule. Secondly, sayth he, Corpori mortuo, sed tamen resurrecturo, impensum huiusmodi officium, est quodammodo eiusdem fidei testimonium: De cura pro mortuis epilog. This Christian duetie bestowed in burying the dead bodies, which shall notwithstanding rise againe, is a liuely testimonie in vs of the same faith. That is, we doe carefully commit the bodies of Christians to the ground, knowing that they are not lost, but shall rise againe: but as for the dead themselues, they receiue no benefite at all. Curatio funeris, pompae exequiarum, viuorum sunt solatia magis, quàm subsidia mortuorum: This great prouision for funerals, this great pompe of burials,De cura pro mortuis cap. 2. they are comforts for the liuing, not helpes to the dead. Impleant ergo homines ista erga suos postremi muneris officia, & sui leuamenta moeroris: Let men therefore performe this last duetie to their friends, which is also a great lightening of their griefe: Ergo, funerals profite not the dead, but comfort the liuing: yea, it is called the last duetie, which is performed at burials: If it be the last, then there is no duetie afterward to be done: therefore prayers also are superfluous: for if it were needfull to pray for the dead, then the last duetie should not be in the [Page] buriall, another comming afterward. And thus much also concerning the manner and order of funerals.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS CONTROuersie, of the Saints departed that are in ioye and blisse.

THis controuersie standeth of these seuerall questions.

1. Of the blessed estate of the Saints in heauen, and of the Canonizing of them vpon earth.

2. Of the adoration of Saints: First, whether they be to be adored or not, and whether it be lawfull to sweare by them. Secondly, of the diuers kinds of worship. Thirdly, of the worship of Saints vpon earth.

3. Of the inuocation of Saints: whether they pray for vs and vnderstand our praiers.

4. Of the adoration, translation, keeping of reliques, and of the miracles wrought by them.

5. Of Images, and the signe of the Crosse, & other matters thereto belonging more particularly handled.

6 Of Churches: the forme, vse, ornaments, dedication of them, and such like.

7 Of Pilgrimages and Processions.

8 Of holy and festiuall daies, the Lords day, Saints daies, and of Lent.

9 Of the Virgin Mary, her conception, vowes, assumption, worship, merites. Of these now in order.

THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING THE blessed and happie estate of the Saints departed.

THis question hath two parts: First, of their blessednes which they haue before God in heauen. Secondly, of the publishing or making knowne their blessednes before men, which they call the canonizing of Saints.

THE FIRST PART OF THE BLESSED estate of the Saints before God in heauen.

The Papists.

BEllarmine taketh great paynes, Lib. 1. De Sanctis, in sixe long chapters together, to proue, that the Saints departed doe presently enioy the sight of God, and doe enter into blisse, and that their soules forthwith are receiued into heauen, and are not kept in any secret by-places till the day of iudgement. But all this while he sighteth with his owne shadowe: for we grant, as much as he proueth, that the righteous are with Christ so soone as they are loosed from their [Page] bodies, as Christ sayd to the theefe vpon the Crosse, This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise, Luk. 23.42. See also to this purpose, Philipp. 1.23. 2. Corinth. 5.1. Heb. 12.22. All these places doe euidently proue, that presently after their departure, the soules of the faithfull doe enioy the presence of Christ, and the celestiall companie of the Angels in heauen. Yet our aduersaries stay not heere, neither are contented with this, that the Saints are blessed: but proceede further, and giue them a full possession of blessednesse, making no difference betweene error 22 them and the Angels in glorie, but affirme that they are as highly exalted as the Angels are, Rhemist. annot. Luk. 15. sect. 2. And Bellarmine therefore taketh vp Caluine, because he saith, the Saints are yet in hope and expectation of the perfect fruition of glorie, Cap. 1. lib. 1. De Sanctis.

The Protestants.

WE confesse, that the Saints in heauen are alreadie Apocal. 14.13. blessed: yet they looke for the full accomplishment and perfection of their glorie, when as their bodies shall be glorified in the resurrection: Then it is sayd, they shall be like the Angels, and yet not in all things: much lesse are their soules now equall to the Angels in glorie, Fulk. ibid. annot. Luk. 15. sect. 2.

Argum. 1. The Saints shall be as the Angels, but not before the resurrection, Math. 22.30. Neither can it be proued out of that text, that they shall then be equall to the Angels in all things: for it is not all one to say; they shall be as the Angels, because they shall then neede no marriage, as to say they shall be equal to the Angels in all things. Apocalyps. 6.10. The soules vnder the altar doe crie, Lord, how long! Ergo, they are in expectation of greater glorie. And reason also giueth as much, that the bodie and the soule being ioyned together in the kingdome of God, shall make a fuller weight and measure of ioye.

Argum. 2. The wicked spirits and damned soules, haue not yet their full and perfect torment: Ergo, neither the Saints their perfect ioye. The diuels are now tormented, and kept in chaines of darknesse, 2. Pet. 2.4. Iud. 6. But their full damnation is reserued for the day of the Lord, Math. 25.41. They are not yet tormented in such measure, as they shall be, and themselues make account for, Math. 8.29. Luk. 8.31.

Lastly, if now the Saints are equall to the Angels in ioye, their soules onely being in heauen: it then followeth, that in the resurrection, when their bodies shall be restored to their soules, their happines shall farre Rhemist. Luk. 20. sect. 3 affirme that some Saints shall be aboue the Angels. exceede the Angels: which no where the scripture teacheth vs, vnles they will thus reason, Christ tooke not the Angels, but the seede of Abraham, Hebr. 2.16. Ergo, wee are better then the Angels. But to this Augustine answereth very well: Some perhaps will say, that wee are better then the Angels, because Christ dyed for vs, and not for the Angels. Quale est (sayth he) ideo se velle aegrotum laudari, quia vitio suo tam detestabiliter aegrotauit, vt non posset aliter, Tractat. in Iohan. 110. quam medic [...] morte sanari. As if a sicke man deserued commendation, because by his owne [Page] fault, he was so dangerously sicke, that he could not be healed, but by the death of the Phisition. Quid hoc aliud est, quàm de impietate gloriari? Christus enim pro impijs mortuus est. What is this els but for man to boast of his wickednes? Christ dyed not for angels, but for men, because they were wicked.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE Canonizing of Saints.

The Papists.

error 23 THe Canonizing of Saints, is nothing els but the publike determination and sentence of the Church, whereby men that are dead, are iudged to be Saints, and worthie of honour and worship, as to be prayed vnto, temples and altars to be set vp in their names, holy daies to be appoynted for them, and their reliques to be adored. And thus it is lawfull, profitable, and expedient for the Church to Canonize Saints, Bellarm. cap. 7.

Argum. 1. The Patriarkes and Prophets were Canonized for Saints in the old law, Heb. 11. So Act. 7. Stephen & other were Canonized: therfore it is credible, that the Lord would haue the same order still continued in his Church, Bellarm. cap. 7.

Ans. First, neither in the old nor the new lawe, were any set vp to be Saints, with intent to be worshipped, called vpon, temples to be consecrated in their names: but onely the scripture giueth testimonie of them, as of holy and faithfull men: and so may we also honour the blessed Martyrs, whom the cruell Emperours of Rome, and since them the Popes of Rome haue sent through fire and other torments to heauen. Secondly, when they haue as good testimonie for their Saints, as we haue for the holy Patriarkes and Prophets, they may be bold to pronounce them to be holy blessed. Thirdly, your argument followeth not, vnles you will say, that the Church may doe all things now, which the Prophets and Apostles did then: They may as well make scripture, and more Canonicall bookes by the same reason, as make and Canonize new Saints.

The Protestants.

THat none of the Saints are to be adored or worshipped, their images or reliques, or praiers to be made vnto them, or any such honor to be giuen them, it shall afterward appeare more at large: And therefore they ought not to be Canonized to any such end or purpose. We also grant, that the number of Gods Saints and elect is encreased daylie: and we are sure in generall, as the scripture testifieth, that the death of his Saints is precious in the sight of God, Psal. 116.15. And that all are blessed that dye in the Lord: But particularly we are not able certainly to determine of any: the matter is to be left wholly vnto God, and we in the meane time to hope the best.

[Page] Argum. 1 If the Church hath authoritie to Canonize Saints, & determine of the election or saluation of men, then may we as well iudge of the condemnation of those that are lost: for if it be knowen to the Church who are Saints in heauen, they also may as wel define who are damned in hell. But this none can doe: nay, it were great rashnes and want of charity for any so to take vpon them. S. Paul saith, Why condemnest thou another mans seruant? hee standeth or falleth to his owne master, Rom. 14.4. No man can iudge whether the seruant stand or fall, but his Master: Ergo, if the Church presume to determine of the election or damnation of those that are departed, she is nowe a Mistres and Lady rather of the Saintes, then they Lords or patrones to her, as the Papistes holde they are.

Argum. 2 Iudge not (saith S. Paul. 1. Corinth. 4.5.) before the time vntill the Lord come. The iudgement then of men, who are saued, and who are condemned, is reserued for the comming of Christ: Therefore it is great presumption for men to preuent the time, and to take vpon them to bee Iudges in Gods place. Againe, our Sauiour Christ saith, that To sit at his right hand or left, in his kingdome, was not his to giue (meaning as he was man) but it shal be giuen to them for whome it is prepared of my Father, Math. 20.23. How then is it in the power of any sinfull man, to giue vnto any a seat, either at the right hand, or left hand of Christ, in the kingdome of God? Argument. Gualter. Bruti. Fox page. 487.

Augustine also consenteth: Non separatio iam cuique tuta est, illius erit separatio, qui non nouit errare: Nos in hac vita difficile est, vt nos ipsos nouerimus, quantò minùs debemus de quoquā praeproperam ferre sententiam. It is not safe for men now to make separation (of the good and bad) it belongeth to him, that can not erre: We in this life do hardly know our selues, howe much lesse ought we to iudge rashly of others? exposit. in Psalm. 139. Here are two reasons giuen, why it is not lawfull for men to iudge of the election or reprobation of men: first their iudgement is subiect to error, and therefore the matter must be referred to God, who erreth not: Secondly, we can not iudge our selues, much lesse can we iudge of others. Ergo, no man liuing ought or is able to define either who are Saints in heauen, or who are damned in Hell.

AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART of other circumstances, which belong to the Canonizing of Saints.

The Papists.

THey say, that it doth appertaine onely to the Pope, to Canonize a Saint for error 24 the whole Church: and that none ought to be acknowledged for Saints, but they that are so Canonized by him: And that herein the Pope is of so infallible a iudgement, that he can not erre in Canonizing of Saints: because that ordinarily [Page] none are Canonized by the Pope for saintes, which haue not beene knowne to worke miracles, Bellarm. lib. 1. cap. 8.9, 10.

The Protestants.

FIrst, if saintes were to be registred and Canonized as they say: yet it should not belong to the Pope, but to the whole Church.

Argum. 1 The Pope hath no authoritie ouer the whole Church: no nor yet in any other Bishoppes dioces, no more then they haue in his: Let him be content with his owne dioces (and it were to be wished, that he could rule that well) the whole world is too large a prouince for him.

2 The whole Church hath power to excommunicate and deliuer vp to sathan, 1. Corinth 5.4. and to cut off the prophane and wicked from the Church of God, as heathen and publicanes, Math. 18.17: Ergo, to iudge who are members of the Church, and saintes of God, is a matter which appertaineth to the whole Church. 3 Before Anno. 800. in the time of Carolus magnus, there was no saint publiquely Canonized by the pope, as Bellarm. confesseth: but the truth is, this custome of Canonizing saints beganne not till more then 1000. yeare after Christ, til Alexander the 3. his time, and Gregorie the 7. I pray you then, were there no saints before? if there were, who canonized them?

Secondly: So much as is to be knowne of saints and holy men, euery Christian is to acknowledge, without any publike decree or determination of the Pope or any other: for the word of God giueth rules, whereby we may discern the righteous from the vnrighteous: Christ speaking of false prophets, sayeth, By their fruites ye shall know them, Math. 7.16. And againe, he fayth thus to his Apostles, By this shal men know that you are my disciples, if you loue one another, Iohn 13.35. By these rules, it is easie for euery Christian to iudge who for the present time, are the true disciples of Christ, who otherwise.

Thirdly, it is a most impudent and shameles saying, that the Pope can not erre in canonizing of Saintes: 1 Miracles are no sufficient proofe of a saint: for many, that shal be condemned in the day of Iudgement, haue had power to do straunge workes, Math. 7.22, 23. 2 What better argument can wee haue of this, then common experience? For the Popes haue registred in their Calendars notorious wicked mē, and traitors to their Princes, as saints and holy men: Such an one was Thomas Becket, who som hundreth yeers was worshipped as a saint, by the name of S. Thomas of Canterbury: and yet was a plaine traitour to his prince, Fox page 225. And therefore his shrine was iustly put downe in King Henrie the 8. dayes. Richard Scroope of York was openly in armes against Henry the fourth.Fox. pa. 579 Thomas Earle of Lancaster a rebell against Edward the second, yet both are the popes canonized saintes.

Fox p. 1054 Elizabeth Barton was called the holy Maide of Kent, and fayned that she had many reuelations: yet was found to be a traitour, & executed: these are the [Page] popes saints. And on the other side, they haue condemned the true saintes and Martyrs of God, and accursed them to the bottomlesse pit of Hell: as they delt most wickedly with Iohn Husse that zealous seruant of God, vpon whose head they set a crowne of paper pictured with deuilles, as if he were giuen into the power of Satā. But we do iudge of these holy men, as the scripture teacheth, which sayth, that they are blessed which dye in the Lord, Apocal. 14.13. Their good life, holy profession, and constant death and martyrdome decla [...]d no lesse; and that assurance, which God gaue them of their election: as it appeared in that worthy Martyr doctor Barnes, who being brought to the stake, sayeth thus vnto the people: If saintes do pray for vs, I trust to pray for you within this halfe houre: who at the same time vttered his opinion, that not withstanding to pray vnto saintes was against the worde of God,Fox. page. 1199. although it should be granted, that they pray for vs.

Let them now be ashamed to say still, that the pope cannot erre in Canonizing saints, who condemneth good men, and iustifieth the wicked, according to the common saying, Many are worshipped for saints in heauen, whose soules do burne in Hell.

Thirdly, Augustine thus writeth of this matter: Per has humanorum cordium tenebras, res multùm miranda & dolenda contingit, vt eum nonnunquam quem iniustum putamus (iustiu tamen est) auersemur, & hominem bonum tanquam malum affligamus, quem nescientes amamus. By reason of the darkenes and ignorance of mens heartes, a pitifull and strange thing many times falleth out, that we should hate a man, whome we take to be a wicked and vngodly one (and yet he is a righteous man:) and so wee punish a good man for a bad, whom we notwithstanding do vnwittingly loue for his goodnes, tract. in Iohan. 99. Ergo the iudgement of men is vncertaine, and the best may be deceiued in iudging of others, who are bad, and who good.

THE SECOND QVESTION CONcerning the adoration of Saints.

THis question hath three partes, First, whether saintes are to be adored: Secondly, of the diuerse kindes of adoration: Thirdly, concerning the worship due vnto holy men liuing, as the kissing of feete, and such like.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER SAINTS are to be adored and worshipped.
The Papists.

THey doubt not to affirme, that there is a kynde of Religious woorshippe due vnto Saintes, not that great Religious woorshippe which is proper error 25 [Page] vnto God, but a kinde somewhat lesse and inferiour to that, yet a religious adoration, which is the meane or middest betweene that highest worship due vnto God, and ciuill honour which is giuen vnto men. So this is their sentence, that religious worship is due both to God and to the saints: heerein onely (say they) the difference is, the more religious worship belongeth onely to God, the lesse vnto the saintes. Bellarm. cap. 12. lib. 1. de Sanctor. beatit.

Argum. 1 The Psalmist saith, Adore his footestoole, Psal. 99.5. and Heb. 11.21. Iacob adored the top of his rod: Ergo, it is lawfull to adore creatures. Bellarm. cap. 13. Rhemist. annot. 11. Heb. sect. 9.

Answer. In the first place by the footestoole is vnderstood the Tabernacle with the Arke: the Prophet saith not, Adore his footestoole, but, At or before his footestoole: for we deny not, but that we may kneele downe, and fall prostrate in adoring of God before such thinges, but none is to be adored but God. In the same place the Apostle saith, that Iacob worshipped toward the end of his staffe, that is, leaning vpō his staffe. The vulgar latine readeth corruptly adorauit fastigium baculi, He worshipped the end of his staffe: for then the Greek preposition [...], were superfluous. And Augustine expoundeth it aright, saying, that Iacob by faith worshipped God vpon the end of his staffe: quaest. in Gen. 162. Fulk. annot. Heb. 11. sect. 9.

Argum. 2. Nabuchadnezzar bowed himselfe to Daniel, and caused odors to be offered vnto him, and worshipped him, who for so doing was not reproued of the Prophet: Ergo, Saints are to be worshipped. Bellar. ibid. Rhemens. annot. Apocal. 19 sect. 5.

Ans. 1 The offering of sacrifice, is a worship, by our aduersaries owne confession, proper to God, though they graunt most grossely, that it is lawfull to offer incense to the images of saints. Bellarm. cap. 13. The King therefore commanding in this place sacrifice to be offred to Daniel, did attribute vnto him the godly worship: and therefore no doubt he was reproued of Daniel, though the text make no mention of it. Bellarmine, by offering of sacrifice, here wold vnderstand the bringing of gifts. Ans. This is shewed afterward verse. 48. Howe the King made Daniel a great man, and gaue him great gifts: and the offering of presents is but a part of ciuil honor: but the King here doth yeeld religious worship to Daniel.

2 It appeareth verse 47. that the King was reproued by Daniel, and forbidden to worship him, and commaunded onely to worship God, because the King confesseth, that Daniels God is a God of Goddes, and therefore onely to bee worshipped.

The Protestants.

WE can finde in the worde of God but two kindes of worship or adoration: a religious worship only due vnto God: and a ciuill honour vsed amongst men. As for the Angels and saints, we do honour them with loue, not with seruice. [Page] We do also reuerence the holy men vpon earth, as the Prophetes and Apostles were in times past, with a ciuill adoration or worship of loue, not with a religious seruice. There is also a due reuerence & estimatiō of such things as are sanctified to holy vses, as of the Tabernacle, Arke, Altar, Sacrifice in the Law: such now are the Sacraments, which are duely to be reuerenced, yet not to be adored, or kneeled vnto. So we conclude, that all religious seruice and worship belongeth onely vnto God, and it were great idolatrie, to giue it to any other, Fulke annot. Apocal. 19. sect. 5.

Argum. 1. The scripture is plaine: Math. 4 10. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him onely shalt thou serue. 1. Tim. 1.17. To God only wise, immortall, inuisible, be all honour and glory: Ergo, all religious worship is onely due vnto God. Bellarmine answereth, that these places are to be vnderstoode of a certaine kinde of religious worship, which is onely proper to God. Ans. All religious worship is forbidden in these places to be giuen to any but vnto God: for Sathan did not tempt Christ, to worship him as God, but only to fall downe and worship him: he asked onely of him, [...], a certaine inclination of the body, which Christ denieth, as being onely proper to God, Caluini. argum.

Argum. 2. When Cornelius fell downe at Peters feete and would haue worshipped him, he was forbidden by Peter, Act. 10.25. So the Angell would not suffer Iohn to worship him, Apocal. 22. Paul and Barnabas stayed the people that would haue offered sacrifice vnto them, Act. 14.14.

Bellarm. answereth to the first, that Peter of modestie refused the homage of Cornelius.

Ans. Peter giueth this reason, why he would not haue Cornelius so to do, I also am a man (saith he:) thereby letting him to vnderstand, that such kind of worship ought not to be giuen to any man: The same reason is rendered Acts. 14. by Paul & Barnabas, why they refused sacrifice: We also (say they) are men. If Peter did of modesty refuse Cornelius worship, then Paul and Barnabas did for modesty sake onely likewise refuse to be sacrificed vnto, which I am sure they will not graunt.

Bellarm. to the second saith, that Iohn did well in worshipping the Angel, and the Angell did well in refusing to be worshipped: for though the Angels of right are to be worshipped, yet they do well to refuse it, for reuerence to the humanitie and manhoode of Christ. Ans. first, let it be noted that Bellarmin shapeth a cleane contrary answer to our Rhemist. as appeareth before, cont. 8. quaest. 3. part. 1. For they say, that Iohn was deceiued in the person of the Angel, taking him for Christ, & is forbidden by the Angel to worship him as God: but Bellarmine altogether freeth Iohn from all error, and commendeth his dooing: whereas it is certaine, that Iohn knew well enough that he was an Angell, but being carried away in the ecstasie of his minde, did for the present time forget himselfe. And that the Angell did not of modestie refuse to be worshipped, but absolutely and simply, it is made manifest by his answer to Iohn, Worship thou [Page] God: He would not haue the Apostle to worship him, but God.

Bellarmine to the third saith, that the Apostles did well in refusing to be sacrificed vnto: because to offer sacrifice is an external act of worship to be performed onely to God, cap. 14.

Ans. 1. What reason haue they to burne incense vnto saints and their images, rather then to offer sacrifice? For it appeareth in the law, that the burning of incense was more precious, & a more high point of the Leuitical seruice, then was the offering of sacrifice. 1. The Altar of incense was more curiously made, being ouerlayed with fine golde, and was called the golden altar, the other for burnt offerings, the brasen Altar, Exod. 40.26.

2. The altar of incense was placed in the Tabernacle neare vnto the most holy place, the other altar stood at the doore without, Exod. 40.26.29. 3. The ministers were diuerse: the priests offered sacrifice in their courses, but Aaron onely and his successours the high priests burned incense, Exod. 30.7. 4. Vpon the brasen altar incense was offered with other sacrifices, Leuit. 2. But vpon the golden altar no burnt sacrifice or any oblation, but onely incense was offered vnto God. 5. Of all offrings & oblations, it most liuely prefigureth the sacrifice of atonement wrought by Christ vpon the crosse, who therefore is called by the Apostle, A sacrifice of sweete smelling sauour vnto God, Ephe. 5.2. Seeing then that the offering of incense was a more soueraigne thing in the Lawe, then was the oblation of sacrifices: there is small reason for it, that our aduersaries should reserue the lesse, that is, the offering of sacrifices for the Lord, and participate the greater & more worthie seruice, that is, censing of odors & perfumes vnto saintes, as Bellarm. doth, cap. 13.

Ans. 2. If sacrifice were not then to be offered to saints, much lesse are prayers to be made now vnto them: for to cal vpon God is a greater thing, thē to offer sacrifice, Psal. 50. ver. 8.14. If saints can not chalenge the lesse, that is, to haue sacrifices, they haue no right to the greater, namely, to bee called vpon and prayed vnto.

Lastly, Augustine sayeth, Non sit nobis Religio cultus hominum mortuorum, quia si piè vixerunt, non sic habentur, vt tales quaerant honores, sed illum a nobis coli volunt, quo illuminante laetantur meriti sui nos esse consortes: honorandi ergo sunt propter imitationem, non adorandi propter religionē. Let vs not make it any part of Religion to worshippe men that are dead: for if they liued well, they are now in that state, that they need not, neither do require any honour at our handes: but they would haue vs to worship God: by whose illumination or reuelation, they may vnderstand, and do reioyce, that we are partakers and fellowes in the same faith. They are then to be honored for imitation, not to be adored for Religion. Haec August. de vera Religion. cap. 55.

AN APPENDIX TO THIS FIRST part, concerning vowes and othes made to or by Saintes.

[Page]

The Papistes.

FIrst, vowes may be made to Saints (say they) properly as vnto God, though not altogether in the same manner: Prayer may be made to saintes, therefore error 75 vowes also. A vow in the Greeke toung is called [...], votum, prayer [...] or al [...]o. As they differ not in name, so neither in deede are they to bee seuered. Bellarm. lib. 3. de sanct. cap.

Ans. 1. He taketh that for graunted, which is chiefely in question: for it is idolatry to pray vnto any other but vnto God: Call vpon me in the day of trouble, Psalme 50.15. It is not lawfull to pray vnto saintes, therefore not to vow.

2. To make vowes is a more strict and binding act of religion, then prayer is: for in euery vow there is a prayer: we pray God to giue vs grace to performe the thing vowed: and there is beside a full purpose of the heart with a solemne promise, whereby we bind our selues to the perfourming. Again we may make petition & request vnto mortal men, but vowes we can make none vnto them: It would not therefore follow, though saints might be prayed vnto, that they are also capable of our vowes.

Secondly, it is also lawfull (they say) to sweare by the name of Saintes, because all is referred to the honour of God; as hee that sweareth by the temple, sweareth also by him that dwelleth therein. Rhemist. Mathew 21. sect. 8.

Ans. 1. In this place Christ reproueth the Pharisies for their swearing▪ and condemneth it by this argument: that howsoeuer they thought it a smal matter to sweare by the Temple, yet in effect they did sweare by God himselfe. See thē the boldnes of these men, that dare iustifie swearing by creatures by the same reason, that Christ condemneth it. 2. Our Sauiour saith nothing but this, that in euery othe there is an inuocation of the diuine power, and therefore whosoeuer sweareth by a creature, committeth idolatrie, in making it his God.

The Protestants.

1. THat it is great impietie to make vowes vnto Saints, it is thus proued, Isay 19.21. In that day the Egyptians shal know the Lord, and shal do sacrifices, and vow vowes vnto the Lord. But sacrifices are not due vnto saintes, but onely to God: therefore neither vowes.

Againe, the vowes of Christians are not to binde them selues to go in pilgrimage, or to offer vnto this Saint or that, this Image or that, as Augustine saith, alius pallium, alius oleum, alius ceram, one voweth a cloke, another oyle,De tempor. Sermo. 7. a third a wax Candle: God careth not for these vowes, saith he, Sed hoc, quod hodie redemit, ipsum offer, hoc est, animam tuam. But offer and vow vnto God, that which as this day hee hath redeemed, that is, thy soule. The vowes therefore of obedience and repentance and all Christian dueties are the true vowes, [Page] the vowing of body and soule to the seruice of God, Rom. 12.1. But this can not bee vowed vnto any but to him that redeemed vs: Ergo, not to any Saint.

2 That wee ought onely to sweare by the name of God, the scripture is plaine, Deuteron. 6 13. Thou shalt feare the Lord thy God and serue him, and shalt sweare by his name; and by no other, Exod. 23.13. But saintes are not to be feared nor serued, for the Septuagint translate: [...], Thou shalt worship God, which kinde of worship the Papists themselues dare not attribute to saintes: Ergo, neither are we to sweare by them.

Againe, to sweare, is to cal him to witnesse by whome we sweare, and so to make him our God: for whom we sweare by, wee confesse to be a searcher and knower of our hearts, and a reuenger of false swearers. To sweare then, is to call God to witnesse. Quid tu facis, cum iuras? Deum testem adhibes. Augustine. What doest thou,Serm. 10. Sermonū 17. when thou swearest? Thou callest God to wintesse: But they that sweare by saints, call them to witnesse, and none els are called to witnesse, but they by whom they sweare: Ergo, they make Saints their Gods, seeing God is called vpon in euery oath.

THE SECOND PART OF THE distinction of the two kindes of worshippe [...], and [...],

The Papists.

error 26 THat kinde of worship which is proper to God, they say, is fitly expressed by the Greek word [...], neither is this word vsed, but for the worship of God: the other word [...], is taken for all kind of seruice both of God & men: so that the religious worshippe, which is called [...], is onely to be giuen to God: the other called [...], may bee attributed to Angelles and Saintes, Bellarmine, Cap. 12.

The Protestants.

This distinction is but of late inuented and coyned of our aduersaries, somewhat to countenance them out in their idolatrous and superstitious worship of saints. We thus do refell it.

Argum. 1. This distinction helpeth them not: for heere are onely two wordes, which doo betoken two kinds of worship [...], is the religious honor: [...], is the ciuil dutie, such as seruants performe to their masters. They should haue found out three names for their three kindes of worshippe: they haue gained nothing by this distinction, but that ciuill adoration is due vnto Saints, such as is giuen to men vpon earth. As for their fayned word [...], which may be called a superseruice, when they can find it in scripture, they shal know more of our minde: and yet receiuing this terme, it signifieth but a more ciuill seruice, it betokeneth not a new kinde of religious worship.

[Page]Argum. 2 Neither are the wordes so vsed, as they make vs beleeue: for, the word [...], which they make proper for the seruice of God, is applyed to men, as Leuit. 23. Opus seruile non facietis, You shal do no seruil work: the word is [...]: Lodouic. Viues also sheweth out of prophane authors, that somtime the word [...], is taken for the seruice of men or maids to their masters: in 10. lib. Aug. de ciuit. Dei. cap. 1.

So contrariwise, the worde [...], is taken in scripture for the proper seruice of God, as Gal. 4.8. Ye did seruice to them that by nature were no gods: the word is, [...]: Ergo, religious seruice is only due vnto God, not to Angelles or saints, for they are not by nature gods.

Augustine saith, [...] debetur Deo, tanquam Domino: [...], verò, nō nisi Deo, tanquam Deo: quaest. in Exod. 94. Religious seruice is due vnto God as Lord: religious worship is onely due vnto God, as he is God.

THE THIRD PART CONCERNING the kissing of holy mens feete.

The Papists.

IT is a signe of reuerence done both to Christ and other sacred persons, as Prophetes, Apostles, Popes, or others representing his person heere vpon error 27 earth, Rhemist. act. 4. sect. 3.

Argum. 1. The Shunamite fell downe and embraced Eliseus feete, 2. King. 4.27: Ergo, the Popes feete ought to be kissed.

Ans. 1 Your popes must be first as holy men as this Prophet was, who was thus reuerenced for his holynes, before they can challenge the like honor.

2 This reuerence to the prophet was voluntary in the woman, not looked for or exacted by the prophet, as the pope looketh for it of duty.

3 Heere is no mention made of kissing of feete, but onely that she caught him by the feete, which was partly a signe of her ioy, that she had met with the prophet, partely by this sodain and disordered gesture, the prophet perceyued that she was troubled in minde, for Gehazi would haue thrust her away, but he said, Let her alone, for her spirite is troubled within her.

4 This is no warrant for the pope to offer his feete to be kissed of Kinges and Emperours, because the woman fell downe at the prophetes feete: think you, that if the King of Israel had so done, the prophet would haue suffered it?

Argum. 2. Marie kissed Christs feete: Ergo, the popes feete ought to be kissed.

Ans. What arrogancie is this, that the pope a mortall and sinfull man, should challenge that honor which was done to Christ being God in the flesh, and void of sinne? He might also with the like blasphemie challenge to be worshipped: because the women in the Gospel caught Christ by the feete and worshipped him, Mat. 28.9. We may see by this, of what spirit hee is, and whether he be not that Antichrist, that shal make him selfe as God, 2. Thess. 2.4.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THe kissing of the feete, was an humble and lowly gesture, which was worthily vsed toward our Sauiour Christ, who was God in the flesh, and in his body and humanity annexed to his Godhead, as God to be worshipped: but it is too diuine, and too lowly an homage to be offered to any mortall man: and holy men in times past refused it, when any carried away with immoderat zeal and admiration of their person, were ready to giue it vnto them.

Argum. 1. When Cornelius fell downe at Peters feete, the holy Apostle would not suffer him to do it. The pope is of a cleane contrary spirite to S. Peter: for he refused it beeing offered: the Pope holdeth out his toe, and offereth it to be kissed, and vrgeth men thereunto.

Argum. 2 If such kissing of feete be commendable, how commeth it to passe that the pope only hath holy feete to kisse; and not other Bishoppes and Clergy men, as well as he?

Augustine thus wryteth vpon those wordes of the Psalme, Worship his foote-stoole, reading according to the Septuagint▪ saith he, the earth is his foote stoole, but wee must not worship the earth: Conuer [...]o me ad Christū, & inuenio, quomodo sine impietate adoretur terra: suscepit enim de terra terram, quia caro terra est. in Psal. 98. I turne me (saith hee) vnto Christ, and I finde, howe the earth may without any impiety be worshipped: for hee tooke earth of earth, flesh of the flesh of the Virgin, the flesh is earth: Out of these wordes I conclude that the flesh, the body, the humanity ought not in any to be worshipped, but onely in Christ, for the neare coniunction of the Godhead and humane nature together: and therefore consequently no kissing of feete, which is an externall act of diuine worship, is seemely for any mortall man.

THE THIRD QVESTION CONcerning the inuocation of Saints.

THis question hath three partes. 1. Whether prayers are to bee made vnto Saintes. 2. Whether they do pray for vs. 3. Whether they vnderstand our prayers.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER prayers are to be made to Saints.

The Papists.

error 28 THeir assertion is this, Sanctos defunctos piè & vtiliter à viuentib. inuocari: that Saintes departed are with great profite and piety called vpon, and prayed vnto: and that it is not onely lawfull but godly, so to do, Rhemist. 1. Tim. 2. sect. 4. Bellarmine cap. 19. lib. 1. De sanctor. beatitud.

Argum. 1. They say, they do not pray vnto saints, as authors of any benefite or grace, but as intercessors onely: Neither do they make them immediat intercessors, but onely through Christ, concluding al their prayers, per Christū[Page]Dominum nostrum. Bellarm.

Ans. 1. It is false, that you pray vnto thē as intercessors onely, for you desire them not onely to pray for you, but to haue mercy on you: for thus they pray, O blessed Lady haue mercy vpon vs, preserue thy seruants, let the merits of S. Marie bring vs to the kingdome of heauen. Fulk. 1. Timoth. 2. sect. 4.

2. It is also false, that they make them not immediat intercessors, but conclude their prayers per Christum Dominum nostrum: For in that blasphemous prayer, Tu per Thomae sanguinem quem pro nobis impendit, fac nos Christe scandere, quò Thomas ascēdit: Here they aske life eternal of Christ by the blood of Thomas of Canterbury. How then is it true which the Rhemists affirme in word, that Christ alone by his merites procureth all grace and mercy towarde mankind, ibid: when they hope to obtaine their requestes by the merites of Saintes? See Fulk. annot. Iohn. 16. sect. 3. where diuerse praiers to saints, as to S. Marie, S. Osmond, S. Anne, S. Katherine, are rekoned vp, and none of them concludeth, per Christum Dominum nostrum.

Argum. 2. Exod. 32.13. Moyses thus prayeth, Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob thy seruants: Moyses here hopeth to haue his prayers heard by the merits of these holy men, Bellarm.

Ans. Moyses rehearseth only the couenant, which the Lord made with these holy men and their seede, as the wordes following do shew, To whome thou swarest by thine owne selfe, and swarest vnto them, I will multiplye your seede: Moyses therefore pleadeth not the merits of Abraham, Isaac, Iacob, but vrgeth and presseth the promise of God, and couenant made with them.

Argum. 3. The saints do pray one for another here vpon earth, and do one desire an anothers prayers: as S. Paul Rom. 15. Ephes. 6. Coloss. 4. and in other places desireth to be assisted by their prayers: Ergo, much more may we desire the prayers of Saints departed. Bellarm. Rhemist.

Ans. 1. To pray one for another while we liue, is a duety of Charitie, and commaunded in scripture: but to request the prayers of saints departed, hath no warrant in the worde. 2. Wee do not desire the godly liuing to pray for vs, as our Mediators, or as though by their worthines we are brought into the fauour of God, as you say the saints do: and therefore your argument followeth not, from the prayer of the liuing to the prayer of the dead. 3. We may one pray for another, and one request the prayers of another, while wee liue, because we know our mutuall necessities: But the saintes departed knowe not what things are done vpon earth, neither are euerie where present to heare our prayers.

The Protestants.

THat prayer is onely to be made vnto God, and to no other creature beside, as being an especiall part of the worshippe of God, which we ought not to giue to any other: thus it is proued out of the word of God.

Argum. 1. Rom. 10.14. Howe shall they call vpon him, in whome they haue not beleeued? But wee must beleeue onely in God, and therefore onely [Page] pray to God. Rhemist. answer, It is true, no more can we pray vnto our lady, nor any saint in heauen, vnlesse we beleeue they can help vs.

Ans. The scripture euery where teacheth that we must beleeue in God, and that they are cursed that put any confidence in man, Ierem. 17.5. Againe, they can haue no assurance, to settle their conscience, but out of the scriptures: They haue a vaine perswasion of the ability of Saintes to helpe them, but they haue no ground of any such beliefe out of scripture.

Argum. 2. Heb. 4.16. Let vs come with boldnes to the throne of grace, Ergo, we haue no neede of the inuocation of saintes, seeing wee haue free and bolde accesse through Christ.

Rhemist. By this reason we should not pray one for an other, while we are aliue. Ans. we do not put our confidence in the merite and worthines of other mens prayers, as you do in the intercession of saints. Againe, this mutuall duetie of prayer one for another, is commaunded and requyred of God, as the other is not: Wherefore to run vnto saints, and not vnto Christ, is to doubt either of his readines, or ability to helpe vs.

3 Iohn. 16.26. Christ saith, that after he hath by his mediation and intercession brought vs into the fauour of God, In that day shall you aske the Father in my name, and I say not, that I will pray to the Father for you, for the Father himselfe loueth you. If then the prayer of Christ to God his Father, shall not then be needfull, what vse is there of the prayer of other creatures? Fulk. 1. Tim. 2. sect. 4.

Augustine saith, Pro quo nullus interpellat, & ipse pro omnib. hic vnus, verusque Mediator est. lib. 2. cont. Parmenian. cap. 8. He for whome no man prayeth, but him selfe entreateth for all men, he is the onely true Mediator: Ergo, saintes no mediators, and therefore not to be prayed vnto.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER THE Saints departed do pray for vs.

The Papists.

error 29 THat the saints in heauen do not onely pray in general, but particularly for vs ready in all our needs by their prayer and mediation to assist vs: thus they would proue it.

Argum. 1. 2. Pet. 1.15. I wil endeuour (saith the Apostle) that you may haue remembrance of these thinges after my departure. Peter promiseth to be careful of them, and to pray for them after his departure. Rhemist. ibid. Bellarm. cap. 18.

Ans. This which here the Apostle promiseth, he performeth in writing this Epistle, whereby they might be put in remembrance, when hee was gone. And therefore he saith. ver. 13. I think it meete, so long as I am in this Tabernacle, to stir you vp by putting you in remembrance: he acknowledgeth now only to be the time wherein he may do them good, and therefore deferreth it not. There is no sillable, which soundeth that way, that he would pray for them after his dissolution.

[Page] Argum. 2 Apocal. 5.8. The 24. Elders are said to haue golden vialles ful of odors, which are the prayers of the saints: Rhemist. in hunc locum. Ergo, the Saints in heauen do pray for vs.

Ans. The 24 Elders do represent the Church Militant vpon earth, whose conuersation is in heauen, and they do continually offer vp their prayers. And that the place is so to be vnderstoode, it appeareth verse 10. Thou hast made vs Kinges and priests, and we shall raigne vpon the earth: that is, their kingdome is spirituall, in fighting against, and ouercomming the concupiscence of the flesh and all carnall desires.

The Protestants.

THat the blessed Saintes doe sing vnto the praise of God in heauen, and doe magnifie the Lord, and praise him with a new song of thankesgiuing, which is a kinde of prayer, we deny not, Apocal. 5.9. and that they haue a general desire and longing, both for vs, for themselues, and all the elect of God, that the day of our refreshing were come, and that all the people of God were ioyned in one, and their enemies vanquished and destroyed, we learne also out of the scripture, Apocal. 6.9. But that they should offer vp our speciall prayers, & make particular request for vs to God, it no where in the scripture is found, but rather the contrary.

Argum. 1. The scripture no where testifieth, that the Saints in such manner do pray for vs: Ergo, we may safely be ignorant of it: nay it were great presumption, without scripture to beleeue it.

Argum. 2 The Saints departed know not our wants, nor what is done in the earth. The liuing know that they shall die, but the dead knowe nothing at all, Eccles. 9.5. But of this more shall be said in the next part. See Augustine of this matter. contro. 8. quaest. 2. part. 3.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE Saints vnderstand our prayers, and be alwaies at hand to helpe vs.

The Papists.

THey affirme 3. things, which they are driuē to graunt by necessity of Argument, while they stifly mantaine inuocation of Saints: For first they graunt error 30 that they know our hearts, and our inward repentaunce, and secret thoughtes, for otherwise it would not auaile to pray vnto them, yet not of themselues, but by the reuelation of God. Bellarm. cap. 20.

Ans. We deny not, but that God may reueale vnto them some things at his pleasure, but heereof it followeth not that they know all our affaires, and heare all our prayers.

[Page]Againe, what a preposterous order is this, and superfluous, God first reuealeth vnto them our prayers, and then they solicite God in our behalfe? I praye you what neede this, seeing God knoweth our prayers? First, why is he not as ready of himselfe to graunt our requestes, as to staye till he be entreated?

Secondly, seeing it were in vaine to pray to Saints, if they had not power to help vs: they also are vrged to confesse, that the saints are patrones of men, and haue the gouernment of the worlde committed to them: yea, that they may receiue others into the kingdome of heauen.

Argum. 1. Apocal. 2.26. To him that ouercommeth, wil I giue power ouer nations, and he shall rule ouer them with a rod of Iron: Ergo, the saints haue the gouernment of men committed vnto them. Rhemist. ibid. Bellarm. cap. 18.

Ans. The power which our Sauiour heere promiseth, is the participation of his kingly inheritance, first, spiritually to ouercome the world by faith in this life, and after this life they shall be set in ful possession of his royall inheritance. The Rod of Iron, is the worde of God, which is also called a two edged sword, whereby they execute vengeance vpon the heathen, Psal. 149.7. It is the sword of the spirite, whereby the wicked shall be destroyed. Augustin expoundeth it to be the rod of Iustice, whereby the good are corrected, and the wicked broken in peeces: Homil. 2. in Apocal.

Argum. 2 Luke 16.9. Make you friends of the vnrighteous Mammon, that when they need, they may receiue you into euerlasting habitations: see, the saints may receiue their friends and benefactours into their eternal mansions: Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. 1 Almes bestowed vpon the poore do procure their prayers, but not their patronage. 2 The wordes are thus parabolically to bee vnderstoode: They shall receiue you, that is, shall giue testimony of you, and your almes shall be a testimony of your charity, and proceeding from a liuely faith, shall euerlastingly be rewarded. 3 That it is not meant of the persons, but of the worke, it is plaine, because almes which issue from a true faith, shall be rewarded at the Lords hand, though bestowed vpon an hypocrite. Fulk▪ ibid.

Thirdly, They also hold that the saints at their pleasure can be present with their bodies, and be amongst vs, and so heare our praiers Bellarm. cap. 20.

Argum. 1 Otherwise the saints should be fettered as it were in heauen, if they remaine and be kept all in one place. Ans. They are not fettered when they are limited by the Lord to a place: see also what a goodly opinion these fellowes haue of heauen, making a prison of it. Rhemist. annot. Apocal. 6.9.

Argum. 2 They follow the Lambe whither so euer he goeth: Ergo, they may be euery where. Ans. That place Apocal. 14. is vnderstoode of al the elect, yea of those that do imitate & follow Christ, liuing vpon earth. 2 If the souls are euery where, because the lamb is euery where, then Christ in his humanitie is euery where, and so the Papists are become Vbiquitaries.

Argum. 3 The deuils are of great dexteritie, and celeritie in passing from [Page] one place to another. Ergo, much more the Saints.

Ans. 1 The argument followeth not: for deuils by property of nature together by the sufferance of God, do wander vp and downe the worlde, beeing thereto appointed of God: but the soules of saints haue no such office, as wee read in scripture, to be cursory spirites in the worlde. 2 Though it should bee graunted, that in a short time they are able to change their places: yet it is vnpossible, they should be in so many places to heare the prayers euerye where, made vnto them, vnlesse they could be in diuerse places at once. Fulke Apoca. 6. sect. 1.

The Protestants.

FIrst, it is a great vntruth and blasphemie to say, that the saintes do know our thoughts, inward repentance, prayers, as the Rhemistes affirme.

Argum. 1 God onely is the knower of the heart, neither doth he communicate this property of the Godhead to any creature: hee may reueale what hee thinketh good vnto them: but for them, when they wil them selues, to know our secret praiers and meditations (for this is the question) it is impossible.

Argum. 2 Augustine, Out of those wordes of the Prophet Isay 63.16. Abraham is ignorant of vs, and Iacob know vs not, concludeth thus, Si tanti patriarchae, quid erga populum ex his procreatum ageretur, ignorauerunt, quomodo mortui viuorum rebus atque actibus cognoscendis adiuuandisque miscentur, De cum pro mortuis If so great Patriarks were ignorant what became of the people which was borne of their loynes, how is it like, that other dead can be present to vnderstand, and be helping to mens affaires?

Secondly, We acknowledge no patrones, protectors or captains in heauē, but our Lord God and Sauiour Christ.

1 Psalme 73.25. The Prophet Dauid saith, Whome haue I in heauen but thee? and Iacob calleth only vpon the Lord God, to be the guide of his iourney. Gen. 28.20.

2 By appointing saintes to be patrones of places and countries, at length they brought in a multitude of popish saintes, and were not in superstition farre behinde the Gentiles, who gloried in the number of their gods: For haue they not alloted some to countries, as S. George for England: S. Andrew for Scotland S. Denis for Fraunce, S. Patrik for Ireland? So likewise diuerse saintes were called vpon for diuerse diseases, as S. Rombal for the tooth-ach, S. Petronil for the Ague: One for horse as S. Loye, S. Antony for Pigges, S. Gregorie for Schollers, S. George for souldiers: Euen thus the heathen inuented diuerse gods, Neptune for the sea, the Satyrs for the woods, the Nymphes for the water, Ceres for corne, Bacchus for wine, Venus for the Troians, Pallas for the Grecians, Iupiter stator for the Romanes.

Nay they were yet more ridiculous, they appointed many Goddes for one thing: As for Infantes Vagitanus, that made them to crye, CuCuninus, [Page] that kept them in their Cradle, Adeona, Abeona, to teach them to goe: So for the entrie of the house,August. li. 4 de ciuitate dei. ca. 8. they had Limentinus the God of the thresholde, Cardea the God of the hinges, Forrulus that kept the dore: for their corne, they had the Goddesse Seia when it was sown, Proserpina whē it sprouted, Nodotus when it knotted, Hostilina when it [...]ared, Flora when it waxed white, Runcina when it was cut downe. The like superstition almost raigneth in poperie. But what need we run to so many for these things, when as at the Lords hands we are promised, as king in the name of Christ, to receiue al things we neede? This great folly of theirs sheweth what good commeth by the deuised patronage of Saints.

Thirdly, it is also another popish fable and dreame, that the Saints may be present euery where, as it pleaseth themselues, at their tombes and sepulchers, and wheresoeuer els they are called for.

Argum. 1 Acts 3.21. The heauens containe the humanity of Christ; it hath pleased him there to rest himselfe, vntill his comming to iudgement. Ergo, much more are the saints kept in their resting places.

Argum. 2 The Saints are at rest, they do cease from the affaires of this life, Apocal. 14.13. They rest vnder the Altar in the peace of Christ, Apocal. 6.9. there expecting and waiting the comming of Christ to iudgement: Ergo, they do not wander nor stray abroad in the world, neither do entermeddle with humane affaires.

Augustine saith, Si rebus viuentium interessent animae mortuorum, meipsum pia mater nulla nocte desereret, quae terra marique secuta est, vt mecum viueret: de cura pro mortuis. If the soules of the dead were present at the affaires of the liuing, my deuoute mother would neuer a night be from me, who when she liued, followed me by sea and land, to haue my company, and to liue with me: Ergo the saints departed are not present with vs, when they would.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERning the reliques of Saints.

THis question hath 4 partes. 1 Whether the reliques of saintes are to bee worshipped. 2 Of the translation of reliques. 3 Of the keeping and preseruing of reliques. 4. Of the miracles wrought at the tombes and reliques of Martyres.

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING the worshipping of Reliques.

The Papists.

THe reliques of saintes, that is their bodies and bones, and sepulchres, where error 31 they are buried, are to be adored and reuerenced, Trident. concil. sess. 25. [Page] though with lesse honour somewhat, then the Saints themselues, Bellarm. de reliquijs sanctor. lib. 2. cap. 21. And not onely their bodies (say they) are worthie of due reuerence, but other monuments of theirs, as S. Peters chaire at Rome, Rom. 16. vers. 16. the prison, wherein S. Paul was kept in Malta, Rhemist. Act. 28.1. the chaine that S. Paul was bound with at Rome, Act. 27.4. the stone that hit Saint Stephen vpon the elbowe now to bee seene at Ancona in Italy, Act. 7. sect. 6.

Ans. As for S. Peters chaire, and S. Pauls chaine, they are neither able to shew that Peter sate in such a chaire, or that it is the very chaine which they shewe, wherewith Paul was bound. Concerning the prison house at Malta, they shew that, which neuer was: Paul was a prisoner, but not in prison there: that of the stone that smote Stephen vpon the elbow is a meere fable: See Fulk vpon that place.

Argum. 2. Iosias, when he caused the bones of other dead to be burned, yet he commanded them to let the Prophets bones alone, Bellarm. cap. 3. The disciples of Iohn came and buried his bodie: an example of duetie and religious deuotion to the dead bodies of Saints, Rhemist. Math. 14. sect. 2. Their bodies are the temples of the holy Ghost, and shall be raised againe to life: Ergo, they must be adored and worshipped, Trident. Concil. sess. 25.

Ans. One answere may serue for all these arguments. We denie not, but that the dead bodies of the faithfull are to be layd vp with reuerence in hope of the resurrection, but it therefore followeth not, that they must be abused to idolatrie: Iohns disciples buried his bodie, but shrined it not to be worshipped: Iosias made difference betweene the bones of the idolatrous priests, and of the true Prophet: the one he burned, and thought them vnworthie of honest sepulture, the other he suffered to rest, and enioy the honour of buriall. But of any adoration or worshipping of his bones, we reade not.

The Protestants.

THe bodies of Martyrs are reuerently to be brought to the ground, in testimonie of our hope of their resurrection, and their memorie is to be honored, as in praising God for their constant martyrdome: so the Psalmist sayth, Right precious in the sight of God is the death of his Saints, Psalm. 116. As also in following their steps, and propounding vnto vs their good example: but to adore and worship their bones, to kisse, and kneele downe at their sepulchres, is to too grosse idolatrie, and not to be vsed amongst Christians.

1 The Lord did of purpose himselfe burie the bodie of Moses in a secret place, which was neuer knowne to the Israelites: and this reason is generally rendered by most writers, lest the people of Israel should worship his body, and so commit idolatrie: Ergo, the adoration of the bodies of Saints displeaseth God: Argum. Caluin.

Bellarmine answereth, that though the people of Israel might by that meanes [Page] haue fallen into idolatrie, yet the people of God may now more safely honour reliques, because they are not so prone to idolatrie.

Ans. Experience of popish idolatrie proueth the cleane contrarie: for the like superstition and worshipping of images was neuer so common and vsuall, no not in the most corrupt times of that Church, as now it is in poperie.

2 Our Sauiour Christ reproueth the Scribes and Pharisees, calling them hypocrites, because they did garnish the sepulchres of the Prophets, whom their forefathers put to death, Math. 23.29. But their doctrine they neglected and regarded not. Such hypocrites are the Papists at this day, who commit a double fault: for they contemne the doctrine of the Apostles, whose memories they would seeme to honour: and againe, in the superstitious honour and worship, which they yeeld vnto them, they exceed the bonds of Christian pietie.

3 Their bodies were not to be worshipped when they were aliue, much lesse now they are dead. What are they now but earth, dust and ashes? according as the Lord sayd to Adam, Thou art dust, and to dust shalt thou returne, Genes. 3.19. What is this els, but to worship the earth, euen dust and ashes? So Augustine saith: Timeo adorare terram ne damnet me, qui fecit coelum & terram: I am afraid to worship the earth, lest he condemne me, that made both heauen and earth. Onely in Christ (sayth he) I finde, quomodo sine impietate adoretur terra, how the earth, that is, his body, may be worshipped without any impietie: namely, because of the neere coniunction and vnion of his humane nature with the Godhead in one person: for otherwise of it selfe the bodie of Christ is Gods creature and workmanship, and not capable of diuine worship. This then is the priuiledge that Christ hath, more then all Saints and Martyrs beside, that in him onely the humanitie is adored.

THE SECOND PART OF THE TRANSLAtion of the bodies of Saints.

The Papists.

IT is an vsuall thing amongst them to translate, and carrie from one place to error 32 another the bones and reliques of Saints: as they say Iohn Baptists head was translated from Samaria to Alexandria, and is now at Amiens in France, Rhemist. Math. 14. sect. 1. So the body of S. Luke was remoued, they say, from Achaia to Constantinople, and from thence to Padua in Italy, where now it remaineth: Argument. in Luk. Rhemist. The stone also that hit S. Stephen is now at Ancona in Italy, Act. 7. sect. 6.

Argum. 1. Ioseph gaue charge concerning his bones when he died, and they were remoued from Egypt to the land of Canaan, at the departure of the Israelites, Exod. 13. Heb. 11.22. Ergo, the remouing and translation of Saints bodies or reliques lawfull, Rhemist. Bellarm. cap. 3.

Ans. Ioseph gaue commandement concerning his bones, to testifie his faith [Page] and hope in the promise of God, for the inheritance of the land of Canaan: they were not remoued to be adored or worshipped: Ergo, no such translation of reliques is hereby proued. Secondly, you can shew no such charge, that S. Paul, Peter, or any of the rest, gaue concerning the translation of their bodies, as Ioseph gaue vnto his posteritie.

The Protestants.

WE denie not, but that the bodies of the dead, before they be interred, may bee conueyed vnto the place of their buriall, as Iosias was carried being dead by his seruants from Megiddo to Ierusalem, where a sepulchre was prepared for him, 2. King. 23.30. But either for the dead to be remoued to be buried in some one place more then another, for the holinesse thereof: or the bones of Saints to be raked out of their graues, and translated, with intent to shrine them, and set them vp to be adored: they are superstitious customes, and not vsed of ancient time among the people of God.

Argum. 1. That the place profiteth not the dead, but vnto them it is all alike wheresoeuer they are buried: we haue shewed afore, 1. part. controuer. 9 quaest. 2. part. 4. The example of Augustines mother is notable, and worthie the memorie: She had with great care prouided her a sepulchre neere vnto her husband, who dyed at Thagasta in Africa, and was there buried, and was purposed her selfe to lye by him: but the Lord so disposed, that she left her life at Hostia in Italie, and being readie to depart, she sayd thus to her sonnes: Ponite hoc corpus vbicunque, nihil vos eius cura conturbet: Burie my bodie where you thinke good, take no great care for it. And being asked, if it grieued her not to leaue her body so farre off from her owne citie, she gaue this godly answere: Nihil longe est à Deo, neque timendum est, ne ille non agnoscat in fine seculi, vnde me resuscitet: August. lib. confess. 9. cap. 11. No place is neerer to God then other, neither am I to feare, lest the Lord should not as well raise me vp in this place, as in mine owne citie: Ergo, in respect of the dead, it skilleth not where they are buried.

Argum. 2. The other custome of translating of reliques to be worshipped, is farre more impious and superstitious: for hereupon it commeth, that the people haue been deceiued with false reliques: yea one and the selfe same relique is sayd to be in diuers places. As of S. Iohn Baptists head: his face, they say, is at S. Iean Angelz: the rest of his head at Malta: his skull at Nemours: his braine at Nouium Rastrouiense: his iaw bone at Vesalium: a peece of his eare at S. Floride: his forehead and haires in Spayne at S. Saluadores: and yet for all this his whole head is to bee seene at Saint Siluesters in Rome, and at Amiens in France: Fulk. Matthew 14.2. Thus they haue mangled also the bodie of Saint Peter: halfe (they say) is at Saint Peters in Rome, halfe at Saint Paules: his head at Saint Iohn Laterane: his neather iawe with his beard at Poycters in Fraunce: at Triers many of his bones. Fulk. Rom. 16. sect. 4. See what mockage and cosoning [Page] here is, and abusing of simple people? How can their whole bodies bee in one place, and yet their parts and bones in another? And where doe they learne thus to dismember their bodies, and to rake them out of their graues? The honouring of the bodies of Martyrs, is to suffer them quietly to rest in their graues, and not to rot aboue the ground. Iosias honoured the Prophets sepulchre, and would not remoue his bones: herein therefore they dishonour the Martyrs, and offer violence to their bodies, thinking falsely that they doe great worship vnto them.

Augustine sayth, that hee which would now renewe the ceremonies of the Iewes, that are as it were buried: tanquam sopitos cineres eruens, non erit pius deductor aut baiulus corporis, sed impius sepulturae violator. Epistol. 19. He should be as one raking in the ashes of the dead, and so bee rather a violator of Christian buriall, then a bringer of the bodie honestly to the ground. So by Augustines iudgement, eruens sopitos cineres, he that pulleth out dead mens ashes, bones, or reliques, is sepulturae violator, a prophaner of their buriall.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE KEEPING and preseruing of reliques.

The Papists.

error 33 WE must not thinke it impossible, that the monuments of Saints, as their garments, reliques, bones, should endure a long time, seeing Manna was kept so many hundred yeeres in the pot, which was placed by the Arke, being a thing so apt to putrifie, Rhemist. Hebr. 9. sect. 4.

Ans. When we haue a commandement for the reseruation of such things, as the Israelites had, we may beleeue they will keepe so long. And againe, the Israelites for all that did not worship the pot of Manna, though it were of such long continuance.

The Protestants.

THe bodies and bones of men departed neither are to be kept out of their graues, as we haue shewed, neither can they be preserued without corruption.

Argum. 1. Vnto all Adams seede it is sayd, Dust thou art, and to dust shalt thou returne: only the bodie of Christ had this priuiledge, Psal. 16. Not to see corruption: Ergo, the bodies of men departed, though they were neuer so holy, being all the seede of Adam, must be turned to dust.

Argum. 2. If they would glorifie God and speake the truth, they doe very wel knowe by experience, that the reliques of Saints haue no such promise or warrant for their continuance: for most, if not all of their reliques, were forged and deuised, and no such thing indeed. S. Peters braine at Genoua was found to be a [Page] pumice stone: S. Antonies arme was found to be an Harts pissle: at Toures of late the image of Venus in an Agate was worshipped for the image of the Virgine Mary: the blood of Hales in England was descried to be but the blood of a drake: the three hostes at Caleis were but three white counters sodred into a marble stone. These and many such monuments and reliques of Saints the Church of Rome hath great store: no maruaile now, if they be of long continuance, for stones and counters may last a great while: and drakes blood, with other such stuffe, is not so daintie, but it may be still renewed.

Of such cosoning trickes Augustine complained in his time, speaking of runnagate Monkes, he saith: Alij membra martyrum, si tamen martyrum, venditant: Alij fimbrias suas, & phylacteria magnificant: Some doe boast of reliques of Martyrs, which they carrie about, & perhaps they are no such reliques: some doe extoll their habite and Monkish weede: De opere Monachorum, cap. 28.

See then, I pray you, what diuellish idolatrie was this, to cause the people to worship counters, drakes blood, Harts sinewes, and other such base creatures, in stead of reliques: which, though they were such indeede, ought not to be worshipped.

THE FOVRTH PART CONCERNING VISIsions and miracles done at the Tombes and reliques of Martyrs.

The Papists.

FIrst, they almost make it an ordinarie thing in their Church to worke miracles: Bellarmine sayth, that it is a sufficient note of the Church, the glorie or error 34 power of miracles, De eccles. lib. 4. cap. 14. Christ sayth, that they that doe beleeue in him, shall doe greater workes then he. No maruaile then, if the image of our Ladie (say they) and the like, worke miracles, as Peters shadowe did, and that they seeme greater then Christs: for he promiseth that his Saints shall worke greater miracles then himselfe, Rhemist. annot. Iohn 14. sect. 3. They also call vpon vs to confirme our doctrine by miracles, because we preach newly and extraordinarily, Rhemist. 2. Corinth. 12. sect. 5.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, that place alleadged proueth not such a generalitie and perpetuitie of working miracles: for then euery one that beleeueth should do greater workes then Christ: for our Sauiour speaketh generally, He that beleeueth. Augustine doth farre otherwise, and in a better sense expound this place: He that beleeueth in me shall doe the same workes that I doe: Quae opera, nisi vt ex impio iustus fiat? prius ego facio, deinde & ipse faciet, quia facio, vt ipse faciat. What workes, sayth he, but that he which beleeueth of a wicked man shall be made [Page] righteous? which worke first I doe (sayth Christ,) then he himselfe doth it, because I make him to doe it. Quod vtique in illo, sed non sine illo Christus operatur: Mans conuersion is wrought by Christ in man, & not altogether without man, because Christ working in vs, doth enable vs by his grace to worke out our saluation: Philipp. 2.12: yet is it not our selues that worke, but the grace of God in vs. Then it followeth, he shall doe greater workes then these: Prorsus maius hoc esse dixerim, quam est coelum & terra: The redemption and conuersion of men, is a greater worke then the heauens or the earth: Tract in Iohann. 72. Augustine therefore doth properly vnderstand this place, not of outward miracles, but of the wonderfull conuersion of the heart, which we are sayd to worke, because Christ worketh it in vs.

2. As we denie not but that there may in these daies be miracles wrought: and all such miracles as serue to confirme the doctrine deliuered in scriptures, we doe not refuse, though we be not bound to beleeue any mans report of such miracles, but onely the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists: so we affirme that there is no such necessitie of miracles, as in times past: neither that we are to be pressed to shewe miracles, seeing we professe the ancient Apostolike faith, which hath been alreadie confirmed by the miraculous workes of our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles. Wherefore we condemne the fabulous histories and reports of popish Saints, whose liues are fuller of miracles, if we wil beleeue them, then were the liues of Christ and his Apostles. Nay, there is nothing almost done in their seruice, but by a miracle: Christs bodie present in the Masse by a miracle: Diuels chased away with holy water: Saints know their thoughts, heare their prayers, are present here and there, their bodies many yeeres kept from corruption, and all by miracles: I conclude this poynt with Augustine: Aut non sunt vera, quae dicuntur; aut si haereticorum aliqua mira facta sunt, magis cauere debemus: Either they are not true miracles, which they boast of: or if they be, we must beware and take heed of them the more.

The Papists.

error 35 SEcondly, they doe as much maintaine their fabulous visions and apparitions, as lying miracles: as how Christ came in a pilgrims weede to Gregories table of hospitalitie, Rhemist. Hebr. 13.2. Peter beleeued the vision and apparition shewed to Cornelius, at his report, before it was written: Ergo, we ought to beleeue visions not written in scripture, Rhemist, Act. 10. sect. 3.

The Protestants.

FIrst, that of our Sauiour Christs appearing, is an hereticall fable, and impugneth the article of our faith concerning Christs ascension into heauen, and there remaining till his second comming. Secondly, Peter was not bound to beleeue Cornelius vision, till he had been by vision admonished himselfe: the Apostles which were then endued with the gift of discerning spirits, could better [Page] iudge of true visions, then any man now can: yet we refuse not to giue credite to visions, when they are as crediblie reported vnto vs, as this was to Peter: but no vision, nor miracle, nor angel from heauen, shall drawe vs away from the doctrine of the scriptures to beleeue errors. Lastly, we denye not, but that they may haue visions: but such as one Vincentius bragged of, that wrote against Augustine concerning the originall of the soule: He sayd, that another Vincentius who had been a captaine or chiefe Donatist, appeared vnto him in vision, and bad him write those bookes: to whom Augustine thus answereth: Ille qui se transfigurat in angelum lucis, in eo tibi est transfiguratus, Lib. 3. cap. 2 de animae origine. quem tu fuisse veluti angelum lucis credidisti. He that can transfigure himselfe into an angel of light, did transfigure himself into the shape of that man, whom thou esteemedst as an angell of light. Such apparitions they may haue, and yet no great cause to boast of them.

The Papists.

THirdly, they say that the power of working miracles was in the Apostles actually,error 36 and that they properly did giue health, and other things by their miraculous gift, though they receiued the force and vertue of God. And therefore they finde fault with vs, because we giue this note, A miracle done by Christ by the hands of the Apostles:

First, Peter sayth, That which we haue, giue we to thee, Act. 3.6. Secondly, we must not thinke, that they had no more power, then as dead instruments in the workmans hand, Rhemist. in hunc locum.

The Protestants.

WE both agree, that the power of working miracles was giuen of God: but herein we differ, they think that this power was inherent in the Apostles, and that hauing once receiued this power of God, they could execute it themselues: like as a man hauing the power of sense and mouing by nature, moueth and seeth when he list himselfe. But we hold against the Pelagians, Gratiam dei ad singulos actus dari, that the grace of God is daylie infused, and we haue need of it for euery act: it is not sufficient once generally to haue receiued it. So then the Apostles were but the instruments of Christs working: he is better sayd in them and by them to worke miracles, then they in and by him. Neither doth it followe, that they are dead instruments: for the horse (I trowe) that draweth in the plough is no dead instrument: yet he hath neede for euery boute and turning to haue a driuer and a guide: truely we are as vnfit for the Lords yoke by nature, as the horse is for the plough: and therefore haue need of the Lords continuall direction. The Apostles then gaue that they had, not as owners, but as the Lords agents, and instruments of his working.

[Page] Tractat. in Iohan. 71. Augustine thus writeth: Maiora, quam ipse fecit, dicit eos facturos, sed in eis vel per eos se faciente: He saith, they shall doe greater workes then he: that is, himselfe working in them or by them: Ergo, Christ wrought miracles by the hands of the Apostles, they were his liuely instruments in working.

The Papists.

error 37 FOurthly, they doe greatly triumph and reioyce for the miracles which are wrought by the vertue of holy reliques. First, the woman was healed by touching the hemme of Christs garment: Ergo, vertue in holy reliques, Rhemist. Secondly, napkins that had touched S. Paules bodie wrought miracles, by the vertue giuen vnto them: Ergo, reliques may, Act. 19. vers. 12. Rhemist.

The Protestants.

Ans. TO the first: first, the vertue was not in the hemme of Christs garment, but he sayth, it proceeded from himselfe, Luk. 8.46. Secondly, it was her faith that healed her, for many that thronged Christ, touched his garments, but receiued no benefite: neither was there any vertue in his garments when the souldiers parted them amongst them. Thirdly, if it pleased the Lord to vse some externall signes, as of oyle, clay, spittle, in healing of men, yet haue we no warrant, that he will doe the like by touching of reliques.

To the second: first, the napkins brought from Paul had no such vertue in them: for the text is plaine, that they were wrought by the hands of Paul. Secondly, not all that touched them were presently healed. Thirdly, they were but as signes and tokens to the diseased, that the Apostle (when it pleased God, might dispense miracles, euen when he was absent. Lastly, if they haue to this day miracles wrought by the reliques & monuments of Saints; I feare me, nay, I dare say, they are no better then the Donatists miracles were, either figmenta mendacium hominum, vel portenta fallacium spirituum: either the glosings and fables of lying men, or the strange workings of deceiuing spirits.

THE FIFTH QVESTION CONCERNING Images, and of the signe of the Crosse.

THe first part concerning Images, is subdeuided into certaine other articles and poynts. First, of the difference of Idols and Images. Secondly, whether it be lawfull to haue Images. Thirdly, if it be lawfull to worship them. Fourthly, what manner of worship it should be.

1

[Page]

THE FIRST ARTICLE OF THE DIFFErence betweene Idols and Images.

The Papists.

THere is great difference (say they) betweene an Image and an Idoll: an Image called in Greeke [...], is the true similitude of a thing: an Idoll, [...] error 38 in Greeke, translated simulachrum, doth represent that which is not, as were the Idols of Venus, Minerua, women Goddesses, which was a meere deuised thing. Images they confesse they haue, but no Idols, Bellarm. cap. 5.

First, S. Paul sayth, 1. Corinth. 10. That an Idoll is nothing: that is, doth represent a thing that is not: as such were their heathenish Idols, Bellarm.

Ans. First, the place is not so vnderstood: for the Apostle sayth, That things offered to Idols also are nothing, which were not made to represent any thing: But his meaning is this, that of themselues they are nothing to breede offence, neither were it needfull to shunne eating of Idoll sacrifices, or to abhorre an Idoll, but that they are abused and turned to the seruice of diuels, as it followeth in the next verse. Therefore an Idoll is not sayd to be nothing, because it representeth a thing imagined, but that of it selfe, being but wood, or stone, or such like, it were not offensiue, if it were not abused to idolatrie. Secondly, all the portraictures of the Heathen were not Idols in this sense: for Iupiter, Mars, Apollo, Hercules, whose images they had, were men sometime liuing. Thirdly, you haue images representing nothing: as the pictures of Angels, of God the Father, of the holy Ghost, which haue no shape nor likenes. Againe, you haue also your imagined Saints, as Bellarm. lib. 1. de sanctor. beati. ca. 20. S. George, S. Christopher, for there were neuer any such: and therefore you haue Idols as well as the Heathen.

The Protestants.

THough the name Idoll haue an odious signification in the English tongue, yet neither the Greeke [...], nor the Latine simulachrum, doe sound so euill vnto the eares: and in many places of the scripture we may in differently reade, idoll or image: for all worshipping of Images is idolatrie. If we will distinguish them, they are thus rather to be seuered: An Idoll is that image, which is set vp with an intent to be worshipped: an Image is a generall name as well to vnlawfull pictures set vp for idolatrie, as lawfull, which haue but a ciuill vse. But that the Papists Idols are images, thus we proue it.

Argum. 1. The scripture calleth the Gentiles Idols, images, Rom. 1.23. there the word [...] is vsed: Ergo, idoll and image are taken for one: they haue images set vp for religious or rather irreligious vses, Ergo, Idols.

Arg. 2. Apocal. 9.20. There is mention made of Idols of gold, siluer, brasse, which cannot be vnderstood of the Idols of the Gentiles, which were abolished [Page] long agoe: and that prophecie is to be vnderstood of men liuing after the opening of the seuenth seale, which is toward the end of the world. Wherefore it must needes be vnderstood of the Papists, who are the onely knowne people in the world, that worship images: Ergo, they haue Idols.

Augustine taketh imago, and simulachrum, which is the Latine for the Greeke [...] for all one: for the loue of the dead (sayth he) images were first made, whereof the vse of simulachers or Idols doe arise.

THE SECOND ARTICLE, WHETHER IT BE lawfull to haue the images of the Trinitie, of Christ, or of the Angels.

The Papists.

error 39 THat Images may haue a good ciuill vse, as for decencie or comelines of some worke, or for vtilitie of storie, it is of neither part denied: but they further affirme, that it is lawfull to expresse the Trinitie by pictures; as God like an olde man, and with the world in his hand; Christ, as he walked vpon the earth; the holy Ghost in the likenes of a Doue; the Angels with wings: and these pictures (they say) are very meete and profitable to be set vp in Churches, Rhemist. Act. 17. sect. 5.

Arg. 1. To paint the Trinitie, or any one of them as they appeared visiblie, is no more inconuenient, then it was vndecent for them so to appeare. Rhem. ibid.

Ans. You flatly controll the law of God, which simply forbiddeth any similitude to be made of things in heauen or in earth to worship God by. And Deut. 4.15. God expresly declareth, that he would not appeare in any visible shape when he gaue the law, lest the people should abuse that shape, to make an image of God after it. Lastly, the argument followeth not: for God sawe it was conuenient sometime by visible signes to appeare vnto men, and yet seeth it to be inconuenient for pictures to be made to resemble him by: for els he would neuer haue forbidden it.

Arg. 2. The angels were pictured in forme of Cherubims: Ergo, Spirits may be portraicted.

Ans. When you can shewe an expresse commandement for your images, as the Israelites had for them, we will yeeld, that they are lawfully made. Againe, how followeth it, God may command images to be made for the vse of religion: Ergo, men may? for the law bindeth not the Lord who is the lawmaker. But the law sayth, thou shalt not make to thy selfe, that is, by thine owne authoritie any grauen image. The Cherubims also were not made publikely to be seene and gazed vpon by the people, but were set in the holy place: so are not your pictures and images which are set vp openly in your Churches to entise people to idolatrie.

[Page]

The Protestants.

TO set forth the Godhead and diuine nature by any picture or image, is impossible, and therefore both vnlawfull and inconuenient: but to bring them into Churches, and to make them for some vse of religion, is a high steppe vnto grosse superstition.

1. Such images of the Trinitie among the Papists, are made to resemble the diuinitie and Godhead: for to what purpose els should such images be made? Fulk. Act. 17. sect. 5. They picture God the Father like an old man: because in that forme he appeared to Daniel: but how knowe they whether it were God the Father, rather then God the Sonne, who is as old as God the Father, or then the whole Godhead? They commend also the image of God the Father with the world in his hand: which is a lying image, and maketh simple people to beleeue, that the world was made onely by God the Father, which was the worke of the whole Trinitie. Some of the Papists themselues, as Abulensis, Durandus, Peresius, doe hold, that the image of God ought not to be made, and that it is rather tolerated, then allowed in the Church.

As for the images of Christ in the forme of a Lambe, and the holy Ghost in shape of a Doue, Bartholomaeus Caranza, a papist, sheweth that they were forbidden in the sixt generall Synode, Canon. 28. And this Bellarmine denyeth not.

Concerning the picture of Christ as he was man, the Papists themselues confesse, and we denye not, but it may better be made then the image of the Trinitie: yet can there not be any true image of Christ, as he was in forme of man: for the image doth onely expresse his bodily shape, not as he was God in the forme of man: and so such a picture were dangerous to the weake and ignorant: being a lying image, shewing Christ onely as man, who was both God and man. And againe, the image, which is made of his bodily shape, is no more the image of Christ, then of any other man, Fulk. Act. 17. sect. 5.

But some will say, if Christs image cannot conueniently be made, because it expresseth not his Godhead; by the same reason we cannot make a picture of a man, because his soule being inuisible cannot be painted.

Ans. The reason is not alike: for he that pictureth a man liuing, setteth forth the life, beautie and motion of the bodie, by which effects, by a consequent, the soule is resembled, which causeth and worketh these things in the bodie: but in the bodily shape of Christ, there cannot be made to appeare any such notorious signes of his Godhead.

2. Though it bee not simply vnlawfull to expresse in painting the visible shapes that were shewed in vision to the Prophets, if it be onely for vse and signification of the historie, or if there be any other commendable vse: yet to make those shapes for any vse of religion, or seruice of God, is abominable idolatrie, Fulk. ibid. Epiphanius sawe in a Church at Anablatha, Epiphan. epist. ad Iohann. an image painted in a [Page] table, as it had been of Christ or a Saint, he tooke it downe and cut it in peeces: affirming that it was contrarie to the scripture for any image of a man to hang in the Church of Christ. The Elibertine Councel, Canon 36. decreed, that no pictures should be made in Churches. If no pictures, much lesse carued images, which are a more strong prouocation to idolatrie.

Augustine rendreth a reason, why it is dangerous to haue images in Churches, where there is yea but the least feare of superstition: Quis orat intuens simulachrum, qui non sic afficitur, vt ab eo se exaudiri putet, nec ab eo sibi praestari, quod desideret, putet? Who (sayth he) prayeth beholding an image, and is not so affected, as though he were heard of it, and hopeth not to haue that performed by it, which he desireth? Psal. 113.

THE THIRD ARTICLE, WHETHER THE images of Saints are to be worshipped.

The Papists.

error 40 THat images are to be reuerenced and worshipped, so it be not with the diuine honour due vnto God, it was concluded in the late Tridentine Chapter, sess. 25. confessed by our Rhemists, Act. 17. sect. 5. maintained by the Iesuites, Bellarm. cap. 12.

Argum. 1. The brasen serpent was worshipped of the people, seeing it was set vp in a high place, and gaue health to those that looked vpon it: Ergo, images may be worshipped, Bellarm. The people also fell downe before the Arke and tabernacle, and worshipped God: Ergo, lawfull, praying, to fall downe before a Crucifixe, Rhemist. annot. Heb. 11.21.

Ans. First, it was not the serpent that healed thē, but Christ who was thereby prefigured. Iohn 3.14. The serpent was lift vp, that the people might round about the better behold it, and it sheweth forth also the lifting vp of Christ vpon the Crosse. It was not set vp to be worshipped, neither was it worshipped till the people fell into superstition, and offered incense to it, and therefore because the people abused that monument, Hezekiah brake it downe, 2. King. 18. Secondly, it is not all one to fall downe before, in, or at the Arke and tabernacle, and to worship God, as to worship the Arke or tabernacle. You doe not onely fall downe before a Crucifixe, but worship it: neither is it as lawfull to worship before a Crucifixe, as it was before the tabernacle: for the one was commanded of God, the other is the superstitious deuise of men.

Argum. 2. As the image of Nabuchadnezzar was for his honour, so the image of Christ is for his, Rhemist. Reuel. 13.14.

Ans. A good similitude, if Christ himselfe had not forbidden so to be honoured and worshipped.

Argum. 3. Man is honoured because he is the image of God: Ergo, images [Page] of Saints to be reuerenced, because they are their Images, Bellarm. cap. 12.

Ans. First, man is a liuely image of Gods owne making, images of Saints are the workes of men. Secondly, no image can so liuely represent a Saint, being but a dead thing, as man who hath a liuing soule is the image of God. Thirdly, we doe reuerence men with ciuill honour, not with religious worship, as they doe their images. Fourthly, though Gods image in man were to be worshipped: yet it would not followe, that Saints images should: for all diuine worship belongeth onely to God: but the Saints themselues, though they were aliue, are not to be worshipped, much lesse their images.

Argum. 4. The chiefe Iconomachi, that is, enemies or oppugners of Idols, say they, are the Iewes, Samaritanes, Mahometanes: yea the diuell himselfe loueth no images, Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. First, it followeth not, the Iewes and Turkes abhorre images, and therefore Christians ought to loue them: for the heathen hated many vices, which are also to be abhorred of Christians. Secondly, they were not the first Iconomachi, Image haters: for Moses was an Iconomach, when he caused the golden Calfe to be burnt to powder: Hezekiah an Iconomach, that brake downe the brasen serpent: Iosiah an Iconomach, that caused the Idols to bee destroyed, 2. King. 23. Nay, God himselfe was the first Iconomach, that forbiddeth Images and Idols to be made in the moral law. Thirdly, I pray you where did the Iesuite learne, that the diuel hateth an image? I am sure the scripture speaketh contrarie, that what was offered to Idols was sacrificed to diuels, 1. Corinth. 10.20.

The Protestants.

THat Images or Idols are not at all to be reuerenced or worshipped, or to be made, or set vp in Churches, or in any other place for any religious, or rather irreligious vse: thus out of the holy scriptures we make it plaine.

Argum. 1. The making of any similitude or likenes, to fall downe before it and worship it, is flatly forbidden in the second commandement, Exod. 20. Ergo, they are not to be worshipped. So likewise, Deut. 4.15. Isai. 40.18. and in many other places in the old Testament, Worshipping of Images, which is idolatrie, manifestly forbidden in the new Testament, Rom. 1.23. 1. Corinth. 10.20. 1. Iohn. 5.21. Ergo, not lawfull.

Ans. One Catharinus a great Papist, sayth, that the commandement in the lawe against images, was but temporall, and to continue but till the establishing of the new Testament. But Bellarmine vtterly misliketh this answere, being most absurd, for the morall lawe is perpetuall, De imaginib. sanct. lib. 2. cap. 7. They doe giue therefore a more deliberate answere: that the scriptures doe reproue and condemne the idolatrie of the heathen, which worshipped their images as Gods. But so doe not they: they make no account of them, as they affirme, for their matter or forme, but for that relation they haue to the things whose images they are, Rhemist. Philipp. 2. sect. 2.

[Page]Ans. First, the Iewes also in their golden Calfe had a relation to that God that brought them out of the land of Egypt, Exod. 32.4.5. The like relation had Ieroboam in setting vp of his Calues, 1. King. 12.28. for they were not so mad as to thinke that a Calfe brought them out of Egypt. And it appeareth yet more plainly: for Exod. 32.5. Aaron sayth, To morowe shall be the Lords holy day: the word is Iehouah: which name the Iewes only ascribed vnto God: So Iudg. 17.3. Micah his mother sayth, that she had consecrated the shekles of siluer to the Lord Iehouah, to make a molten Image: wherefore in their Images they had relation to God, and yet were they reproued for their idolatrie. The like relation the Gentiles also had in their Idols, as Augustine witnesseth: Non ego illum lapidem colo, &c. adoro, quem video, sed seruio ei quem non video. Quis est ille? Numen quoddam inuisibile quod praesidet illi simulachro. in Psal. 96. I doe not worship that carued stone or Image: I reuerence that I see, but I serue or worship that I see not: that is, a certaine diuine spirit, which is president in that image. Wherefore popish idolatrie can no more be excused by this shift of reference or relation, then either the Iewes or Gentiles, that pretended the same colour.

2 It may be proued by the practise of the popish Church in England, that simply without any such relation or signification they commanded Images to be worshipped. Thomas Man Martyr troubled, because he beleeued not in the Crucifixe.Fox p. 815. artic. 7. Robert Raue of Dorney molested, because he sayd, that an Image grauen with mans hand, is neither God, nor our Ladie, but made for a remembrance of Saints: nor wee ought to worship any thing, but God and our Ladie, and not images of Saints,Fox. p. 850. which are but stockes and stones. Mistresse Alice Dolie brought into trouble for saying, We should not worship that thing that hath eares,pag. 984. and eyes, and can neither see, nor heare. These good men and women, we see, were persecuted in those daies for denying worship to Images, as they were Images. So then the popish doctrine was (as it appeareth) that Images were simply to be worshipped.

Argum. 2. Apocalyps. 9.20. Worshippers of Idols of siluer and gold are there condemned: which can be no other but the Papists: for that prophecie is to be fulfilled in the latter times towards the end of the world, after the opening of the seuenth seale and blowing of the sixt trumpet. But there is no knowne nation in the world, nor hath not been many a day, that worshippe Images, but the popish Synagogue.

Argum. 3. Man is the image of God, and yet is not worshipped: how much lesse ought we to worship carued images, which are but made with mens hāds? As Augustine saith, Opera hominum non colenda, meliores sunt artifices: The handie workes of men are not to be worshipped, the workmen themselues are better, and yet not worshipped. What foule idolatrie is this, to preferre the workes of mens hands, before the worke and image of God, to despise men, and haue in so great regard dead stockes and stones.

Argum. 4. Augustine sayth: Noui multos esse sepulchrorum & picturarum adoratores: I know there are many which worship sepulchres and pictures. Of these [Page] he warneth men to take heed, Noli consectari turbas imperitorum: Followe not such vnlearned and vnskilful multitudes. Bellarmine answereth, that Augustine wrote thus when he was a young man, and not fully conuerted, cap. 16. A sillie shift: yet we will vouchsafe an answere, though it be worthie of none. Let vs heare what Augustine thought when he was old, and stayed in iudgement: Iam verò artifex melior est eis, quem te tamen puderet adorare: melior & tu, in Psal. 113 quamuis ea non feceris, quoniam, quae illa non possunt facis, melior & bestia. The workman is better then the image, who gaue fashion and shape vnto it, yet thou wouldest be ashamed to worship him: thou thy selfe art better, for thou canst doe many things which that cannot: nay a bruite beast that heareth and seeth is better. By this we may see what Augustine thought of worshipping of Images.

THE FOVRTH ARTICLE, WHAT MANNER OF worship is to be giuen to Images.

The Papists.

BEllarmine, who is the mouth of the rest, setteth downe these two positions: First, that Images, though they are not properly to be worshipped with diuine error 41 honour, neither is it safe so to teach in the hearing of the people, yet improperly they may haue the same worship, which properly belongeth to the Saint whose image it is. Secondly, there is a religious worship properly due vnto images, as they are considered in themselues, & non solum vt vicem gerunt exemplaris, and not onely as they represent another thing: Bellarm. de imaginib. sanctor. lib. 2. cap. 21.23.

The Protestants.

WE haue shewed before that Images ought not to be worshipped at all, and that all religious worship is due onely vnto God: wherefore to vs this question is superfluous, with what religious worship Images are to be adored: for no religious worship at all is due vnto them: yet let vs vouchsafe the while, to see the contradictions that are amongst them, and the absurdities that they are driuen vnto.

1 Our Rhemists confesse, that Images are not at all to be worshipped with any diuine honour, Act. 17. sect. 5. But it was decreed in the idolatrous Councel of Nice the second, and maintained by Thomas Aquinas, Bonauentur, Caietanus, and other papists, that the image of God is to bee worshipped with the same worship that is due vnto God. And Bellarmine commeth not much short of them, that sayth, improprie, improperly Images may haue the same worship: as the Kings ambassadour improperly is honoured as the King. I pray you how farre are these men from making their Images Gods? for they say they are the Lords deputies and Vicegerents, as the ambassadour is for the King.

[Page]Againe, the Rhemists affirme, that the Images of Christ are not to be honoured or accounted of, but for the respect and relation they haue to our Sauiour, Annot. Philipp. 2.2. So the Tridentine Councel determineth, Sess. 25. Honos, qui eis debetur, refertur ad prototypa, quae illae repraesentant: The honor due vnto them is to be referred vnto those things which they represent. But Bellarmine teacheth cleane contrarie, that they haue not onely a respectiue honour, as representing other things, but properly and in themselues considered are to be worshipped. We may see by this, how handsomely they agree together.

2. Let vs see their absurdities. First, they hold that all images are not to be worshipped alike: for they make 3. degrees of religious worship; the highest, which they call [...] ▪ due vnto God; the lowest religious worship, which they call [...] proper to Saints; the middle or mean worship, called by thē [...], as you would say, Superseruice, to be giuen onely to the virgine Mary. And as these three, Christ, the Virgine, the Saints doe differ, say they, in honour, so their Images accordingly must be distinguished in their worship.

Thus it commeth about, that a Roode of wood representing Christ, is more to be honored, then an Image of our Ladie of siluer; and Her image, if it be but of stone, is more to be reuerenced then a Saints image of gold: and thus the excellencie of nature, which is giuen these things by creation, is inuerted.

Againe, whereas beside these three deuised worships, which are properly due (as they say) to the Saints, not to their [...]mages, the images also haue their proper worships: they make three other inferiour kinds of worship, which doe exceed in degree, as the other superiour kinds doe: so as Christ hath his [...], worship, his image must haue [...], his vnder worship, (for wee must coyne newe names for strange deuises) their Ladie Mary hath her [...], super-seruice: her image must haue an [...], and vnder-ouer-seruice: as the Saints haue their [...], seruice, so their images must haue their [...], an vnder-seruice. And thus haue we sixe kindes of religious worship: as Bellarmine hath coyned them, cap. 25. and yet before the Iesuite tolde vs but of two kinds of religious worship, and the third a ciuill: three in all, Lib. 1. de Sanct. beatit. cap. 12.

But the scripture acknowledgeth one onely kind of religious worship, and that due onely vnto the Lord: Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serue, Math. 4.10. And the Angel forbad Iohn to fall downe before him, giuing a rule for all religious worship: Worship God, sayth he, Apocal. 22.9.

Now, if our aduersaries deale plainly with vs, and tell vs in good sooth, that they would not haue images to bee adored with diuine worship: I aske them, whether to offer incense be not a part of diuine worship? They cannot denye it: for Hezekiah therfore brake downe the brasen Serpent, because the people burned incense to it, 2. King. 18.4. Seeing then the Iesuite alloweth censing & burning of odors before Images, Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sanctor. beatitud. cap. 13. they giue vnto them diuine honour. The Iesuites simple shift, that offering of incense [Page] was a sacrifice then, an so parte of diuine worshippe, but it is none now, is not woorth the answer. Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 17.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS question concerning the signe of the Crosse.

THis part also is deuided into certaine points or articles.

1. Of the honour due to the true Crosse of Christ, whereon he suffered.

2. Of the Image of the Crosse.

3 Of the Signe of the Crosse in the forehead, or made otherwise with the hand.

4 Of the power and efficacie of the Crosse.

THE FIRST ARTICLE OF THE TRVE Crosse whereon our Sauiour suffered.

The Papists.

THe wood of the Crosse, both the whole and euery piece thereof (say they) is worthy of great worship and reuerence: and therefore it hath bene worthily error 42 visited in pilgrimages, honored with festiuall dayes, reserued with all deuotiō in times past, Rhemist. annot. Iohn. 19. sect. 2.

Argum. 1. It is highly sanctified, by the touching, bearing and oblation of the sacred body of Christ, the Altar of that supreame sacrifice, & instrumēt of our redemption. Ergo, to be worshipped, Rhemist. ibid. Bellarm. lib. 2. de imagin. cap. 27.

Ans. If therefore it was holy because it touched the body of Christ, & was an instrument of his death: by the same reason, the nayles that pearsed him, the speare that goared his side, the tormenters that crucified, Iudas that betrayed and kissed him: All these should also be honored and worshipped, that handled and touched him, and were instruments, occasions, and procurers of his death.

Argum. 2 The Crosse of Christ was found out, say they, in Constantines time the great, by a strāge miracle: for there were three crosses digged vp, which had beene a long time buried in the earth: the two crosses vpon the which the 2. theeues suffered, the 3. whereon our Sauiour hung: They brought them al three to a woman that then lay very sick, they laid the two first to her, and she remayned as she was; then they applyed the third, and she was presently made whole. Bellarm. ex Ruffino: Ergo, the Crosse is holy and to be worshipped.

Ans. The inuention of the Crosse by Helena Constantines mother, seemeth to be a forged and fabulous storie.

1. Eusebius that writeth of the life of Constantine, and the Actes of Helena and registreth diuerse matters of lesse importance, yea hee sheweth howe the [Page] Mount Caluarie, where the heathen had built Idolatrous Temples, was purged, and in that place (say they) the Crosse▪ was found, yet he maketh no mention at all of the inuentiō of the Crosse: which it is very like he would not haue omitted, if there had bene any such thing.

2. The most auncient author that writeth of this matter, is Ambrose, deobitu Theodosii, which oration Erasmus thinketh to be forged in Ambroses name.

3. There is great disagreement amongst writers about this storie. Ambrose sayeth, the Crosse was knowen by the tytle that Pilate fastened to it. Sozomenus and Nicephorus say, the letters were worne out, and it could not be discerned by the tytle. Paulinus sayth, the way to discerne it, was reuealed to Helena: Ruffinus ascribeth the deuise to Macarius Bishop of Ierusalem: Paulinus saith, it was knowen by raising vp a dead man to life: Ruffinus, by restoring a sick woman to health, Fulk annot. Iohn 19 sect. 2. Thus we see of what small credit this storie is. And be it graunted, that there might be some such thing found: yet they must bring better proofe for that miraculous inuention, before we wil beleeue it.

The Protestants.

WE are not taught any where in the worde of God, to giue any religious worship to any creature, nor to adore stockes and stones, no nor the very Crosse it selfe, whereon Christ was crucified, if it were nowe to bee seene or had.

Argum. 1. If there had belonged vnto the Church any religious care of it, the Apostles would (no doubt) haue procured the safe keeping thereof, and not haue suffered the Church to want it 300. yeeres: and it had beene an easier sute for Ioseph and Nicodemus to begge the Crosse, then the body of Iesus.

Argum. 2. If the Crosse were to be adored, we are vncertaine which it is, and where to be had; and so might worship a common peece of wood, for the wood of the Crosse: for there is no doubt but this relique is forged and counterfeyted as the rest be. Euegrius saith, the Crosse was at Apamea: Ruffinus, that it was left at Ierusalem, and that Helena sent a peece of it to Constantinople: and in many other places there are peeces of the Crosse to bee seene, which if they were all laied together (as Erasmus saith) would fill a shippe: for why? Paulinus witnesseth, that the Crosse remaineth whole at Ierusalem, as though it had been neuer touched, though innumerable peeces be dayly cut off from it, at the request of men. But this fable that goeth vnder the name of Paulinus, the Papistes themselues are ashamed of.

But if the true and right Crosse were to be had; why might it not be serued, if people beganne to abuse it to Idolatrie, as Hezekiah serued the brasen serpent? he brake it in peeces, when the people began to make an Idol of it.

Augustine saith, Christus ambulauit in mari, vt ostenderet in mari esse viam: sed tù quoniam i [...] mari ambulare non potes, naui portare, ligno portare, crede in crucifixum, & poteris peruenire: Nemo potest transire mare huius seculi nisi Cruce[Page]Christi portatus. Christ walked in the Sea, to shewe vs that our way must bee through the Sea: But thou, because thou canst not walke in the sea, must sayle in a ship, and be carried in a peece of wood: Beleeue in him that was crucified for thee: No man can passe the sea of this world, but being borne vp with the crosse of Christ.

Heere Augustine maketh no reckoning of the wood of the Crosse, which was easier to be had in his daies, then euer since, but ascribeth al to faith and beleefe in Christ crucified.

THE SECOND ARTICLE OF THE Image of the Crosse or Crucifix.

The Papists.

THe Image of Christ vpon the crosse, whether painted, carued, or grauen, we error 43 see is had in great honour amongst our aduersaries: They kneele downe before their crucifix, weare it in their bosomes next to their heart, carry it in their iourneyes, set it vp to be adored in their churches.

Argum. 1. As adoration was done vnto God in olde time, at and before the Arke and Tabernacle, so it may be done now, at, or before a crucifix, relique, image, Rhemist. annot. Heb. 11. sect. 9.

Ans. 1. It is not al one to worship God at or before a thing, as to worship and adore the thing: the Israelits worshipped God, in, at or before the Tabernacle, yet did they not worship the Tabernacle, as you do the crucifix.

2. They might worship God before the Arke, because they were commanded so to do: but it is not lawfull to fall downe before a crucifix, because all such images are flatly in the 2. commandement forbidden.

Argum. 2. The signe of the crosse appeared to Constantine in the ayer, he caused the crosse to be carried before him as an ensigne in battail: When the Iewes had leaue of Iulian to build the Temple, there were Crosses seene euery where in their garmentes, and many such apparitions haue there beene of the Crosse: Ergo, it is to be honoured and worshipped, Bellarmine cap. 28.

Ans. 1. What if Constantine caused the Crosse to be carried before him, stamped it in his coyne, set vp his picture with the Crosse in his hand? all this we grant was done, & may be done againe: It was but a ciuil, no religious vse of the Crosse: He worshipped it not, vnlesse you will say, he set vp his owne image with the Crosse in his hand to be worshipped.

2. As for the apparitions of the Crosse (though wee think many of them to be forged) yet wee deny not, but that the Lord hath and may yet shewe, what signes and tokens it pleaseth him in the Heauen, and the earth: yet it followeth not, that the signe of the crosse should therfore be worshipped, because it was shewed to Constantine, no more then other signes and strange sights that many times appeare in the aire.

For the other apparition of Crosses in the Iewes garmentes, wee will [Page] require it with another, and yet you shal gaine nothing by it. Anno. 1505. vnder the raigne of the Emperor Maximilian, there appeared diuerse tokens of bloody crosses, the nayles, the spunge, the speare, and other signes of Christs passion, in the garments of men and women, yea in their rockes, while they were a spinning, reported by Francis Mirandula, Carion, Functius, Melancton, Flaccius: But the Popish Chronologers make no mentiō of it, as Christianus Masseus, & others of that profession. As the Crosses in the Iewes garments, that went about to establish their ceremonies againe, did shew, that do what they could, the gospell, that is, the preaching of his Crosse should take place, as it did: so these signes in Germany did portēd, that the gospel in Germany should be preached, though the Papistes striued neuer so much against it. But it is a farre fetcht conclusion, to inferre heereupon, that the signe or Image of the Crosse is to be adored.

The Protestants.

THe Image of the Crosse of Christ, is neither to be painted, carued, grauen, for any religious vse, nor to be adored or worshipped: but men so doing do fal into the grieuous and high offence and sinne of idolatrie.

Argu. 1. The Scripture neuer calleth the Crosse, whereon Christ suffered, the holy Crosse, as the papistes do, but rather cursed: for S. Paul proueth that Christ became accursed for vs, because he dyed vpon the Crosse, according to the scripture, Cursed is euery one that hangeth on a tree. Howe then is it nowe honored, which was then accursed? And if all crosses are worthy honour, because of Christ his Crosse, then why not all nayles, and speares? for with them he was pearsed; al thornes also, because of his crowne of thornes: yea, & al horse-mangers too, because he was laid in a Cribbe?

Argum. 2 They are vncertaine of what fashion the Crosse of Christ was, whetherlike the Greeke letter. Υ. or this letter, x. or the Greek [...]. T. or of this fashiō. † or of this, ✚. which is the vsuall fourme of their Crosses: how then dare they worship that which they know not, and are vncertaine of?

3. All those reasons which we brought before against the worshipping of images: part. [...]. huius quaest. articul. 3. may be vrged against the adoration of Crucifixes.

Augustine thus writeth, Hanc intuentes salutiferam crucem, omne calumniantium superborum virus expellimus, In Psal. 118 Cont. 26. By beholding this helpfull, or helthfull Crosse, we are able to auoid the poyson of all proud venemous Cauillers. Hee speaketh not of any Crucifix that they had in sight, but of the fruitfull meditation of the passion of Christ: as he sayeth a little before, Dum vigilantissima & diligentissima pietate Christus crucifixus attenditur, When with diligent and watchfull and godly attention we consider Christ crucified. Loe, this was Augustines Crucifix, to meditate vpon the death of Christ.

[Page]

THE THIRD ARTICLE OF THE SIGNE of the Crosse in the forehead, or made ouer any thing with the hand.

The Papists.

THey say, it is an holy and venerable signe, and meet to be vsed, to crosse the error 44 forehead, and other partes, to blesse them selues and their meates with crossing and such like. Rhemist.

Argum. 1. Jacob crossed his handes when he blessed his sonnes: it is lyke our Sauiour did lift vp his handes in the forme of the crosse, when he blessed. It is a conuenient memoriall of the death of Christ: and therefore to be vsed. Rhemist. annot. Luke 24. sect. 5.

Ans. 1. Iacob laid his handes after that forme, because of the present occasion: for the younger sonne that should be the greater, was placed at his left hand, and the elder at the right.

2. Seeing the scripture expresseth not in what manner Christ lifted vp his hands, it is great presumption for you to say, it was done in the similitude of the Crosse.

3. How can it be a conuenient memoriall of Christs death, beeing neither ordained of Christ, nor taught by his Apostles so to be?

Argum. 2. Apocal. 7.3. Hurt not the earth, till wee haue sealed the seruants of God in their forehead: This is the signe of the Crosse, Rhemist. ibid. Bellarm. cap. 29.

Ans. It is the signe proper to Gods elect, and therefore not the signe of the Crosse, which many reprobates haue receiued, Fulk ibid.

The Protestants.

THough we finde that the signe of the Crosse hath beene of ancient time vsed in Baptisme, and is now in some reformed churches without popish superstition: yet this ridiculous & superstitious abuse of the signe of the Crosse, which is common and vsual among the Papists, to crosse themselues, their foreheads, their eies, mouth, lippes, to crosse themselues going foorth, and returning home, thinking thereby to be sufficiently shended and preserued from euill, we do vtterly condemne, and haue worthily abolished.

Argum. 1. This custome of crossing hath no warrant from scripture, neyther was practised by the Apostles: Valentinus the Heretike was the first that made any great account of it, Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 1. therfore not to be vsed amōgst Christians.

Argum. 2. Math. 23.5. Christ reproueth the Pharisies for their phylacteries, [Page] that is certain writings of the law in parchment, which they bound to their foreheads, and for their broad fringes, which were notwithstanding cōmanded by the lawe. If our Sauiour reproued them for abusing the things rightly instituted at the first: much more worthie of blame is the superstition of Christians that hath no ground nor warrant at all.

In Iohann. tract. 43. Augustine sayth, Christus elegit, vt in cruce penderet, vt ipsam crucem in cordibus fidelium figeret: Christ made choise of that kind of death to hang vpon the Crosse, that his Crosse might be fixed in faithfull mens hearts: he saith not in frontibus, in the forehead, though in some editions that word be foysted into the text, but in cordibus, in their hearts.

THE FOVRTH ARTICLE OF THE POWER and efficacie of the Crosse.

The Papists.

error 45 THe signe of the Crosse (say they) hath two notable and powerfull effects: one is to driue away diuels and euill spirits, to heale and cure diseases: the other is to sanctifie and blesse creatures, as our meates and drinkes, which is done by the signe of the Crosse, Rhemist. 1. Timoth. 4. sect. 12.13. Bellarm. cap. 30.

Argum. 1. That the signe of the Crosse, euen ex opere operato, as Bellarmine sayth, by the very act, and making of the signe, yea by a Iew, Infidel or Pagan, hath power to driue away the diuell, they would thus proue it: Dauid by his Harpe droue away the euill spirit from Saul: the Angel did the like with the fishes liuer, in the storie of Toby: Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. First, we must haue better scriptures then Apocryphal stories to build our faith vpon: The good angels of God haue power from God to driue away euill spirits, though they vse no externall signes: yet it followeth not, that euery man may do that which is granted to the Angels, though we should admit the storie. Secondly, Dauid not so much by the sound of his Harpe refreshed Saul, as by his godly songs and musicke chased away the spirit: neither did the euill spirit depart from him, but he for the while found some ease: his phantasticall and melancholy fits which Sathan wrought vpon, being by his pleasant harmonie somewhat allayed. Thirdly, all this being granted, yet haue they not proued by these examples, that Pagans and Infidels, by the signe of the Crosse, may chase away euill spirits.

2. That things are hallowed and blessed by the signe of the Crosse, they also proue it, because the Crosse being an holy signe in it selfe, doth communicate holines vnto the things signed with the Crosse: Bellarm. cap. 130.

Ans. First, we denie the signe of the Crosse, as they vse it to be an holy but rather a superstitious and deceiueable ceremonie. Secondly, though it were holy, yet being abused, it cannot transferre any holines to other things▪ for in the law [Page] the sacrifices of the wicked, though they lay vpon the Altar, were not thereby sanctified, but were an abomination, being not offered in a right faith: Nay, there is no outward ceremonie so holy, as that it can impart the holines to another thing: as it is shewed, Hagg. 2.13. Though a man did beare holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, yet was it not thereby holy.

The Protestants.

FIrst, it is a deceitfull toy that they beare the people in hand: the diuell at the signe of the Crosse will flye away: For the weapons of our warfare (saith S. Paul) are not carnall, 2. Corinth. 10.4. but the signe of the Crosse is an external and carnall, no spirituall weapon, and therefore preuaileth not against spirituall powers. Act. 19. The diuel would not giue place when Iesus and Paul were named, much lesse at the signe of the Crosse.

Augustine saith: Signum Christi expellit exterminatorem▪ si cor nostrū recipiat saluatorem: The signe of Christ doth expell the destroyer, when our heart receiueth our Sauiour: Tractat. in Iohann. 50. So it is not the signe in the forhead, but the faith of the heart, that maketh Sathan afraid: if sometime he auoyd when men signe themselues, he is disposed to play with them, that he may deceiue them more strongly.

Secondly, we knowe no such meanes to sanctifie creatures by: They are blessed and sanctified for our vses (as S. Paul saith) by the word and prayer, 1. Tim. 4. Prayer therefore without warrant of the word is but presumption. They therefore hauing no word for their superstitious crossings, inuocations, incantations, popish blessings, doe deceiue themselues and others, in thinking that the creatures in such order are sanctified vnto them.

AN APPENDIX CONCERNING THE name of Iesus.

The Papists.

THe name of Iesus (they say) ought to be worshipped by capping and kneeling error 46 thereunto, by wearing it in their cappes, and setting it vp in solemne places: alleadging for their purpose that of S. Paul, That at the name of Iesus all things shall bow, Philipp. 2.10. Yea, they say, that Protestants by abolishing the name and Image of Christ, doe make a way for Antichrist. Rhemist. annot. Phi [...]ipp. [...]. sect. [...]. Apocal. 13.17.

The Protestants.

1. THe bowing at the name of Iesus, as it is vsed in poperie, to bend the knee [Page] at the sound thereof, is not commaunded in this place: which sheweth especially the subiection of all creatures, of Turkes, Iewes, infidels, yea of the deuils themselues to the power and iudgement of Christ. Secondly, Protestantes haue onely taken away the superstitious abuse of the name of Iesus. Thirdly, the kneeling at the name of Iesus is superstitiously abused in popery: for the people stoupe onely at the sound, not vnderstanding what is read, and so make an idoll of the Letters and syllables, adoring and worshipping the very name when they heare it or see it: And againe in sitting and not veyling at the name of Christ, Immanuel, God the father, the sonne, and the holy Ghost, and bowing onely at the name of Iesus: Fulk. ibid. Fourthly, due reuerence may be vsed to our Sauiour without any such ceremony of capping or kneeling, Fulk. Neither doe we bind any of necessitie to vse this reuerence to the name of Iesus, as the Papists doe, which think that Christ cannot otherwise be honoured: neither doe we iudge and condemne those that doe vse it, being free from superstition, and grounded in knowledge, and carefull not to giue offence: for superstitious and offensiue ignorance is not in any case to be defended. Fiftly, this outward reuerence to the name of Iesus was first taken vp amongst Christians, because of all other names it was most derided and scorned of the Paganes and Iewes: and therefore they did the more honor it. But now there is greater daunger of popish superstition in abusing holy things, then of prophane paganisme in vtterly contemning them: and therefore there is not such necessary and iust occasion of vsing this externall gesture now, as was in former times: It was not vsed of necessity then, much lesse now.

THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING Temples and Churches.

THis question hath diuerse partes. First, of the forme and situation of Churches. Secondly, of the end and vse of Churches. Thirdly, of their ornaments, Fourthly, of the dedication of Churches. Fiftly of thinges halowed and consecrated for Churches.

THE FIRST PART OF THE SITVation of Churches.

The Papists.

THe Churches and Temples of Christians (say they) are most conuenientlye and haue bene of auncient time builded toward the East. Bellarmine libro tertio, capite tertio, de sanctis.

Argu. 1. Paradise was built in the East, Genes. 2.8. and therefore we ought to pray that way, for desire we haue to our Country.

[Page]Ans. 1. Paradise was then Eastward vnto Moses and the Israelites being in the Wildernes, when he wrote this storie: but it cannot be East to all Christian nations: for Paradise being planted in Eden which was part of Mesopotamia, must needes be West to the Persians, South to the Scythians and Tartarians, North to the Aethiopians: wherefore this reason is not generall for all Churches in Christian nations. Secondly, it skilleth not where that earthly Paradise is situate: our heauenly Paradise is in heauen, which is euery where open to all true beleeuers.

Argu. 2. Wee looke for Christ to come in the East to iudgement, therefore we pray toward the East: As the lightning shineth from the East to the West, so shall the comming of the Sonne of man be. Math. 27.24. Therefore he shall appeare toward the East. Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. 1. By that similitude of the lightening, the sodainnes of his appearing, not the place is declared. Secondly, it is great presumption to define that which the Scripture hath not reuealed▪ Christes comming is onely generally set downe, he shall come in the cloudes, Math. 24.30. And we shall be caught vp in the cloudes. 1. Thessal. 4.17. There is no particular description of the place.

The Protestants.

TO vs it is no matter, which way Churches are builded, we may turne our selues in praier as well toward any one parte of the heauens, as an other: Neither doe we refuse to pray in Churches builded toward the East. But that our Oratories and places of praier ought rather to be builded that way, then any other; out of the Scripture it cannot be proued, and we holde it as a meere superstitious opinion.

Argu. 1. S. Paul exhorteth men euery where to lift vp pure handes. 1. Tim. 2.8. He saith, In euery place, without exception, whether toward the East or the West, or wheresoeuer.

2. If any place were more daungerous then other to pray in, it is not so safe, and perhaps more perilous to pray toward the East for Idolaters were wont to turne them toward the East, and to worship the Sunne rising. Ezech. 8.17. And for this cause the holy place in the Tabernacle was toward the West. Exod. 26.27. And it was the custome of the Iewes to pray Westward, least they should be entised to worship the Sunne rising in his strength. And therfore the Iesuite maketh but a bad argument: The Iewes praied toward the West, Ergo. christians must pray toward the East: nay rather contrary, because they turned their backe to the East, for feare of Idolatry; Christians, if any place were to be regarded more then other, ought vpon the same ground also to follow the same custome, for as much as all men by nature are prone to Idolatrie: and the reason [Page] of their so praying, seemeth rather to be morall, then ceremoniall: This I say not, as though I commended the Iewes superstitious praying toward the West, but onely to shew that they haue better reason for their custome, then our aduersaries haue for their superstitious turning toward the East. But to christians all places are alike.

Augustine saith, cum quis quaritorationem, c [...]llocet membra, sicut ei occurrit. If any man be desirous to pray, let him place his body, as occasion serueth: he saith not, toward the East, or toward the West. ad Simplician. lib. 2. quaest. 4.

AN APPENDIX OF THIS PART concerning the fourme and fashion of Churches.

The Papistes.

error 48 THey would haue their Churches to be built as Salomons Temple was, which consisted of three partes: there was first the porch or court for the people; then the holy place where the Altar stood, and the Priests offered sacrifice, and last of all the most holy place, where the Arke and Mercieseate were placed. So they haue the Church porch, then the body of the Church, and aboue that, their Sanctuarie, as they call it, or the queere or chauncell, which was separated from the rest, by steps or staires, hangings or curtaines, and other partitions. And here must stand their Altar. Bellarm. lib. 3. de [...] Sanctor. cap. 3.

The Protestants.

COncerning the fashion and fourme of Churches, and the [...] and partitions within, we will not much contend, so these conditions be obserued, First, that all superstition be auoided in making one place of the Church holier then the rest, wherein the Papists mightily offend▪ for the queere or chauncel was for their Priests and singers, the other part of the Church for lay men, they were not to enter into that holy place: and thus according to the places, they deuided the congregation: as though one part were more holy then the other▪ The people also were made to beleeue, that to be buried in the Chauncell but especially vnder the Altar, was more auailable for the dead, then to be buried in the Church. But where learne they that our Churches ought to haue a sanctuary, as the Iewish Temple had? that was an euident type, and is now accomplished in our Sauiour Christ, who is now entred into the heauens, as the high Priest then entred into the holy place to make atonement for the people. Heb. 9.24. This therefore is very grosse, to reuiue and renew again Iewish types and figures. And if herein they wil imitate the building of Salomons Temple, to [Page] haue a Sanctuary, why doe they not also build toward the West, as the Temple was? why bring they not their Altar downe into the body of the Church? for in their holy place there was no Altar. And indeed, Altar we acknowledge none, as afterward shalbe proued. But we see no reason▪ why the communion Table may not be set in the body of the Church, as well as in the Chauncell, if the place be more conuenient and fit to receiue the Communicants. But I pray you why is your Altar rather set in your Sanctuary, then the Fonte or Baptistery? they are both Sacraments, as well Baptisme as the Lords Supper: why should one be preferred, as holier then the other?

Secondly, all things in the Church ought to be done vnto edifiyng, and therefore we allow no such partitions, as doe hinder the edifiyng of the people and exclude them from hearing: as in popish Churches the Priest is pued or mued vp by himselfe a great way off, that his voice can hardly be perceiued of the people: The Minister is so to stand and turne himselfe as he may be best heard and vnderstood of the people: as Ezra had a pulpit of wood to stand in when he read the Law, Nehemiah. 8.4.

Augustine thus writeth, Cum Episcopus solus intus est, populus & orat eum illo, et quasi subscribens ad eius verba, respondet, Amen. While the Bishop or Pastor praieth within, the people both praieth together with him: and subscribing to his words, answereth, Amen. By this it appeareth, that though in Augustines time the Minister had a place for him selfe (as it is meete he should) yet he so disposed himselfe, that his praier was heard of all the people: for otherwise how could they pray with him, and subscribe or giue assent to his wordes?

THE SECOND PART, OF THE END and vse of Churches.

THis part hath 3. seuerall pointes. First, whether the Churches of Christians are built to offer sacrifice in. Secondly, whether they be in themselues places more holy then others. Thirdly, whether they may be dedicate to Saintes.

THE FIRST POYNT OR ARTICLE, whether our Churches are for sacrifice.

The Papists.

THe principall end of Churches is for the sacrifice of Christians, and in that error 49 respect they are truely called Temples▪ they are not onely for prayer, [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] the preaching of the word, and administration of the Sacraments, but chiefely for the externall sacrifice of the Masse. Bellarm. cap. 4.

Argu. 1. The Churches of Christians haue altars, therefore sacrifices: that they haue altars, he thus proueth: First 1. Corinth. 10.21. You can not be partakers of the Lords table, and the table of Deuils: by the table here is meant the altar, for the table of the heathen was their altar, wherein they sacrificed to their Idols.

Ans. 1. A table is one thing, an altar an other: and very vnproperlye is an altar called a table: this place in any wise mans iudgement maketh more against them then with them. Secondly, S. Paule speaketh not here of the sacrifices of the heathen nor of their altars, but of the feastes which they made in their idolatrous temples, which was done vpon tables, of such sacrifices, as had bene offered to idoles: vnto the which feastes S. Paul forbiddeth Christians to come, as it appeareth in the rest of the Chapter, and more plainely. cap. 8.10.

Argu. 2. Heb. 13.10. Wee haue an altar, of which they haue no power to eate that serue at the Tabernacle: that is the altar whereon Christs body is offred. Bellarm. Rhemist in hunc locum.

Ans. The Apostle speaketh expressely of participation of the sacrifice of Christs death, (as it is manifest in the 2. verses next following) which is by a Christian faith, and not in the Sacrament onely, whereof none can be partakers that remayne in the ceremonial obseruations of the Leuitical sacrifices. For the Apostle speaketh manifestly, verse 12. of the suffering of Christ without the gate: Christ therefore is the altar, yea our Priest and sacrifice too. You abuse this place to proue your materiall popish altars, which are many: but the Apostle saith, we haue an altar, speaking of one.

The Protestants.

THe Churches of Christians are the houses of praier, made to that end, that they should come together to heare the word of God read and preached, receiue the sacraments, and offer vp their spiritual sacrifices of praise and thanksgiuing: other externall sacrifices, or altars we acknowledge none.

Argu. 1. The temple of the Iewes was called an house of praier, that is, principally for praier, Marke. [...]1.17. Moses was read and preached in their synagogues. Act. 15.21. Much more are the Churches of Christians appointed for preaching and praier. Act. 20.7. The first day of the weeke, which is the Lords day, they came together to breake bread, and Paul preached vnto them. Ergo the administration of the word and sacramēts with praier, is the chiefe and only cause of the holy assemblies of Christians.

Argu. 2. Altars we haue none in our Churches. S. Paul calleth it the Lords table. 1. Corinth. 10.21. where wee receiue the sacrament of the bodye and bloud of Christ. And he calleth it bread, which is broken▪ 1. Corinthians 11.20. But bread is set vpon Tables, not sacrificed vpon Altars.

[Page] Augustine also calleth it, Mensam Domini, the Lords table, Epist. 59. & epist. 50. He sheweth howe cruelly the Donatistes handled Maximian a catholik Bishop, beating him with Clubbes, euen in the church, lignis altaris effractis immaniter ceciderunt, and wounded him with the wood of the Altar, which they had broken downe. Where though he improperly call it an Altar, yet was it a communion table framed of wood, and made to bee remoued, not fastened to the wall, as their popish Altars were.

THE SECOND ARTICLE, WHETHER Churches are more holy places in them selues.

The Papists.

GOd (they say) rather dwelleth and is present in Churches, then els where:error 50 and therefore it is more auailable for a man, euen to make his priuate prayer in the Church.

Argum. 1. The Temple of Salomon was ordained euen for the prayers of priuate men: and Salomon prayeth vnto God, that they might be heard. 1. King. 8.38. So Anna prayed in the Tabernacle, 1. Sam. 1. And the apostles went vp to the Temple to pray, Act. 3.1. Ergo, prayers made in the Temple are more auaileable, Bellarm. cap. 4.

Ans. 1. See what Iewish arguments here are: because the Lord gaue an especiall blessing to his Temple amongst the Iewes, that was the onely place for sacrifices, and so also a peculiar priuiledged place for prayer: therefore hee will binde and tye himselfe to some certaine place now. But our Sauiour sayth cleane contrary vnto the woman of Samaria, The houre cōmeth when ye shall neither in this mountaine, nor in Ierusalem worship my Father, Iohn. 4.21. The prayers and sacrifices of Christians, are now no more tied and limited to places: That was but a type vnto the Iewes, that as then God would be onely heard in his Temple: so his name is now onely truely inuocated and called vpon in his Church.

2. It is falsely alleadged that the Apostles went vp, only to pray, to the temple: they went vp at the ninth hower of prayer, when the people were accustomed to go vnto the Temple, that they might preach the gospell vnto them.

The Protestants.

WE preferre publique prayers made by the Congregation in the Church, before priuate prayers, not because of the place, but in respect of the congregation, whose prayers ioyntly al together are more feruent & effectuall, then the prayer of one man: But if we compare publique prayer with publique, and priuate with priuate, we doubt not but that the one and the other being made in faith, may as well be heard out of the Church, as in it.

[Page]Argum. 1. The promise of our Sauiour is generall, Wheresoeuer two or three are gathered together, I am in the middest amongst them, Math. 18.20. So S. Paul, I wil that men euerie where lift vp pure handes. 1. Tim. 2. Ergo, they may be heard praying in faith in any place.

Argum. 2. So our Sauiour saith, When thou prayest, enter into thy chamber: he sayth not, go to the church. Bellarm. saith, he entereth into his chamber, that prayeth without vaine glorie, whether hee doe pray secretly or openlie.

Ans. Our Sauiours words are plaine without allegorie, for he speaketh of shutting the dore of the chamber, and there is a manifest opposition betweene the Pharisies praying in the corners of the streets, and the frequencie of people, and the others praying in secret.

Augustine saith, Quid supplicaturus Deo locum sanctum requiris? volen [...] in Templo orare, Lib. sententiar. Augu. in te ora: & ita age semper, vt Dei Templū sis, ibi enim Deus exaudit vbi habitat. When thou art about to pray, what needest thou goe to any sacred place? wouldest thou pray in the Temple or Church? see that thou be the Temple of God, and there the Lord will soonest heare where he dwelleth.

THE THIRD ARTICLE, WHEther Churches and Temples maybe dedicate to Saintes.

The Papistes.

error 51 THey nothing doubt, but as Churches may be consecrated, and dedicated to the honour of God, so they may be also vnto saints.

Argum. 1. The Temple of Salomon was not only built for sacrifices and prayer, but for the Arke of God also: as Dauid sayeth to Nathan: Now I dwell in an house of Cedar trees, and the Arke of God remaineth within curtaines. 2. Sam. 7.2. But there is as great honour, yea, and greater due to the reliques of Saintes: Ergo, it is lawfull to builde Temples vnto them. Bellarmine cap. quarto.

Ans. 1. When you haue a commandement to build Churches for reliques, as they had to build a Temple for the arke, ye may be bolde to do it.

2. To build a Temple for the arke, was all one as to build an house for the Lord: for it was the Mercieseate of God: it pleased the Lord to dwell betweene the Cherubims, there to shewe euident tokens of his presence. And whereas Dauid consulted to build an house for the arke, the Lord doeth thus answere him by his Prophet: Shalt thou build me an house for my dwelling? verse 5. So the Temple was made in the honour of God, being made for the Arke. It [Page] was all one, for the Arke to dwell there, and the Lord him selfe to dwell there: This argument therefore maketh nothing for them.

The Protestants.

TO build Churches and religious houses in the name and honour of saintes, and to make them Patrones and Protectoures of those places, and there to call vpon them, and make prayers vnto them, all which is defended by our aduersaries, we holde it vtterly vnlawfull, as tending to manifest impietie, and idolatrie.

Argum. 1. No diuine worship is to be giuen to Saints, therefore no Churches to be made in their names For it is part of the diuine worshippe to haue Temples.

Augustine saith, Nos non Martyribus Templa, sacerdotia aut sacra constituimus, quoniam non ipsi, sed Deus [...]orum nobis Deus est: De ciuitat. Dei, lib. 8. cap. vlt. Wee doe not ordaine Temples, Priesthoodes, or sacrifices for Martyres: for not they, but their God, is both their God and ours: None therefore is to haue a Temple but God. But marke I pray you their distinction: They say, that Religious houses as they are Temples, are onely consecrated to God, but as they are Basilica, palaces, sumptuous buildinges, the selfe same Churches may be dedicate to Saintes. Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. If one and the same Church may be consecrate both to God and to some saint beside, I pray you who is the principal patrone of that church: God or the saint? You will say I am sure, God is. But I will proue the contrary, because it hath the name of the faint: It is called by the name of S. Peter, S. Paul, or some other, not by the name of God: Thus they are not contented to make saintes Gods fellowes, but will euen thrust him out of place, giuing vnto saintes the honor of Gods house.

2. How names are to be giuen to places, wee can not better learne, then of those auncient founders of names the holy Patriarches: As Abraham Gen. 22.14. calleth the mountaine Iehouah-iireh, The Lord hath seene. So Iacob giueth holy names to the place where he met the Angelles, Gen. 32.2. and where he wrestled with the Angell, ver. 31. They as we see gaue holy and reuerent names vnto places, not made peculiar for Gods seruice, but onely for ciuil vse for the places to be called and knowen by: how much more ought churches and houses of God to be called by his name?

We therefore conclude, that Churches ought not to bee erected in Saintes names, to worship them thereby, and make them our Patrones, mediators, and presenters of our prayers: for this were great Idolatrie: Euen like as the Heathen called their Temples by the names of their Idolles, Venus, Iupiter, Diana and the lyke: Yet wee refuse not to call our Churches by the names of Saintes, as they haue beene called of olde, because wee are not inuentors [Page] of names; and termes inured by continuall custome can hardly be left. Wee vse them only as ciuil termes to distinguish places by: if any otherwise vse them, for any Religious purpose, they do amisse. And yet we deny not, but that the names of holy men may be safely remembred, by thankesgiuing vnto God for such excellent instruments, and setting before our eyes their good example. And concerning the names which haue bene superstitiously giuen in times past vnto Churches and other places (though it were to bee wished, that they neuer had beene so giuen) yet now we vse them (setting apart all superstition) as ciuill names of differēce, as S. Luke describeth the ship of Alexandria, wherein they were carried, whose badge (saith he) was Castor & Pollux, Act. 28.11. In a ciuil matter of description, hee refuseth not to vse the names of the heathen goddes. Augustine also giueth a good rule concerning such names. He speaketh of the names of dayes, which were called after the names of heathenish Idols, as the 4. day in the weeke, which we call Wednesday, was then called and is yet in the Latine toung,In Psal. 93. Dies Mercurij, Mercurie his day. Sic dicitur, a paganis, & a multis Christianis, sed nolumus vt dicant, et vtinam corrigātur: melius de ore Christiano ritus loquendi ecclesiasticus procedit. So it is called of the heathē, & of many christians, but I would not haue them called so, and I wish they were amended: for a Christian kinde of speaking best becommeth a Christian. Sed si quem forte cō suetudo traxerit, &c. sciat illos omnes homines fuisse. But if custome preuaile with a man so to speake, let him vnderstand that all they were but men, whome the heathen take for gods.

So say wee, it were to be wished, that we had names void of al shew of superstition: but seeing for our speaking we must be ruled by custom, let vs know that those saints, by whose names places are called, are no Gods, nor Gods fellowes, nor patrons, or Mediators for vs, nor any way to bee worshipped: But they are the fellow seruants of all faithfull Christians, to bee reuerenced with a Christian duety of loue, not a religious worship of seruice.

THE THIRD PART OF THE ADORning and beautifiyng of Churches.

The Papists.

error 32 THe Temples and Churches of Christians they would haue built in the most sumptuous and costly manner, yea, in beauty to exceede the palaces of Princes, with siluer, golde, silke, Veluet; to be decked and adorned, Bellarmine cap. 6.

Argum. 1. The Tabernacle of the Iewes was of exceeding beauty: the Curtaines therof, of silke; the vessels, euen to the snuffers for the Lampes, were of golde, the Priests garment had a breastplate of golde, set about with precious stones: Therfore why should not the Temples of Christians be in like sort adorned, and set foorth? as Isay prophecieth, that the Glory of Lebanon shal come, [Page] the Firre, Oliue, and Boxe tree to beautifie my sanctuary, Isai. 60.13. which is literally to be vnderstood, Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. First, if the Iesuite had turned his argument and reasoned thus: the temple of the Iewes was gorgeous, and sumptuous, and beautifull to the eye: therfore Churches of Christians ought not to be so now: he had reasoned much better: for their seruing of God was externall; now God will be worshipped in spirit. All things were done vnto them in types and figures: the outward glorie of their temple was a liuely figure of the spirituall beautie of the Church of Christ. Secondly, where you would haue the prophecie of Isay to be literally vnderstood, you haue made a good argument for the Iewes: for then they shall haue their sanctuarie restored againe, which the Prophet speaketh of by name. And if that place of Isay haue a literall sense, why not that also, 54.10. I will lay thy stones with Carbuncle, and thy foundation with the Saphires: I wil make thy windowes of Emeraudes, and thy gates shining stones? Say also that this shalbe literally performed: and so according to this grosse sense, the prophecie of Haggie shal also be fulfilled: the glorie of the last house shalbe greater then the first, Hagg. 2.10. But I thinke you neuer sawe Church built in this goodly manner, in beautie surpassing the Iewish temple, nor neuer shall.

The Protestants.

THat the Churches of Christians, and places of praier, ought decently to bee kept, yea and with conuenient cost and seemely beautie to be built and repaired, and Church vessels with other necessarie furniture, to be of the best, not of the worst sort, we doe both commend it, and practise it: for so we learne by the example of our Sauiour, that cast out of the temple sellers of doues and money changers, and would not suffer them to carrie vessels through it, Mark. 11.15, 16. that the house of praier ought to be reuerently regarded: but yet it followeth not, that such immoderate and excessiue cost should be bestowed vpon the walles of the Church and Idols, to garnish and beautifie idolatrie, and poore people in the meane time to want. A Matrone ought to goe comely and decently apparelled, though not tricked vp with the iewels and ornaments of an harlot.

Argum. 1. Our Sauiour Christ reproueth the Scribes and Pharisees, because they drewe the people to bee good vnto the altar, and bestowe largely vpon them, and so leaue their parents helplesse, Math. 15.5. And he often doth inculcate that golden saying, I will haue mercie & not sacrifice: it is better to succour the liuing temples of God, which are the bodies of his poore children, then to bestowe superfluous cost vpon dead temples of stone.

Argum. 2. Christ also doth rebuke them, because like hypocrites they did garnish the sepulchres of the Prophets, & yet persecuted their doctrine, Math. 23.29: so all popish pharisees are worthie of blame, that take greater care in garnishing the temples and tombes of the holy Apostles and Martyrs, then they [Page] doe in setting forth their holy doctrine, and preaching the Gospell, nay they doe contemne, persecute, and hate that doctrine, for the which those holy men died: so that this prouerbe was very well deuised of them; In times past we had golden Priests and woodden Cuppes, now we haue woodden Priests and golden Cuppes.

Augustine exhorting the people to be liberall to their Bishops and Pastors, thus writeth further: Forte ecclesiam fabricat, forte vtile aliquid in domo dei molitur, In Psal. 105 part. 2. expectat vt attendas, expectat, vt intelligas super egenum. Perhaps he is in building a Church, and doing some profitable worke in the house of God, he looketh that thou shouldest attend, and consider of his neede. By this it appeareth, that Churches were not superfluous costly in Augustines time: for nothing was done, but what was thought necessarie and profitable: and the builders (which were then for the most part their Bishops) were not of any great abilitie, to bestowe superfluous cost, nay they were not able to finish the necessarie workes, without the beneuolence and contribution of the people.

THE FOVRTH PART OF THE DEDICAtion of Churches.

The Papists.

error 53 THe superstitious dedication of their Churches, with the Annuall memories thereof, they would warrant by the example of our Sauiour Christ, who was present at the feast of the dedication, which was instituted by Iudas Macchabeus, Iohn 10.22. and by his presence allowed it, Rhemist in eum locuum.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, a thanksgiuing to God for the restitution of the temple after the horrible prophanation thereof; is a thing approued by Gods lawe, but it is not necessarie to keepe a yeerely memorie thereof: for neither was there any such instituted by Ezechiah, after the prophanation of the temple by Achaz and Vrias, nor by Iosias, after the same had been most horribly polluted by Manasses and Amon, nor by Zorobabel, Esdras or Nehemiah, after it was reedified, when it had been vtterly destroyed by the Chaldees Fulk. ibid.

Secondly, your popish hallowing of Churches hath nothing like vnto it, but the name: for they vse a number of foolish ceremonies, & many of them grosse superstitions, in the dedication of their Churches.

First, there are twelue Crosses painted round about in the Church, & twelue burning Lamps set ouer against euery one of them, one against one: hereby (say they) the twelue Apostles are signified, that by the preaching of the Crosse gaue light to the whole world. Secondly, they vse oyle in anoynting their Altar, and other vessels, shewing hereby that they are consecrate to holy vses. Thirdly, [Page] they sprinkle water, burne incense, set vp Taper light: this sheweth (sayth the Iesuite) that the place is consecrate to prayer, and other holy actions. Fourthly, they sprinkle ashes round about the Church, and write in the floore the Greeke and Latine Alphabet from one side of the Church to the other. This betokeneth (say they) the preaching of faith, which is the foundation and ground of all righteousnesse, which was first taught in the Greeke and Latine tongue. Fiftly, they beate vpon the Church doore, and call vpon Saints and Angels: that is, (say they) to command Sathan to depart, Bellarm. cap. 5.

First, they offend in the number of their foolish ceremonies, exceeding herein the manner of the Iewish dedication: so that vnto them it may bee sayd, as Paul to the Galathians; How turne you againe to impotent and beggerly rudiments? 4.9.

Secondly, they haue no warrant for their friuolous shadowes and significations: Coloss. 2.17. which are but shadowes of things to come, but the bodie is in Christ: we haue the bodie, what need any more shadowes? Christ wil not now be worshipped with Crosses, ashes, characters, candle light, & such apish toyes.

Thirdly, some of these ceremonies are impious, and sacrilegious: the inuocation of Angels and Saints, is a robbing of God of his honour, who onely is to be prayed vnto.

Augustine sayth of such inuentors of newe rites and ceremonies, Ipsam religionem, quam deus paucissimis sacramentis liberam esse voluit, oneribus premunt: Epistol. 119 They cumber religion with burdensome ceremonies, which the Lord hath made free with a fewe sacraments.

THE FIFT PART OF THINGS HALLOWED and consecrate for Churches.

The Papists.

THey maintaine their superstitious & popish blessing with the Crosse, the hallowing of waxe, fire, palmes, ashes, holy bread, holy water, salt, oyle, & such error 54 like: which haue power, as they would beare vs in hand, to driue away diseases and euill spirits, Rhemist. annot. 2. Timoth. 4. sect. 12.13. Bellar. lib. 3. cap. 7.

Arg. 1. First, for the hallowing of these creatures to holy vses, and making of them actually holy, they alleadge that saying of S. Paul, 1. Timoth. 4.5. Euery creature of God is good and is sanctified by the word of God and prayer: Ergo, these creatures may be sanctified to holy vses, as the water also in baptisme, and bread and wine in the Eucharist: for the Apostle speaketh not here onely of the common benediction of meates, but of a more high and exact applying of creatures to holy vses, Rhemist.

Ans. 1. S. Paul here speaketh only of the common & ordinarie vse of Gods creatures, as of meates & drinks for euery mans priuate vse & he sheweth how they are sanctified by the word of God, which permitteth vnto the faithfull the free vse of thē, and by praier: not that they are vnclean by nature, but by pollutiō [Page] of sinne: and by this meanes are made holy and cleane. Secondly, we confesse also, that some things set apart for the seruice of God, are more specially called holy, as the Arke, Altar, & Temple: but it is not lawfull to seuer what creatures we will from the common vse, and consecrate them to the seruice of God, but such as are appoynted by his word; as water in Baptisme, and bread and wine in the Lords Supper haue the warrant of Gods word, as none of your popish trumperie haue: neither are these creatures so consecrate holy in themselues, to conferre or impart their holines to other things, but are so called in respect of the holy vse, for the which out of the word of God they are appoynted.

Argum. 2. For the efficacie and power of these hallowed things, they thus reason. The bitter water giuen to the adulterous woman caused her thigh to rot, if she were guiltie, otherwise it made her fruitfull. Numb. 5. Elisaeus healed the bitter water with casting in salt: the Apostles healed the sick with annoynting them with oyle, Rhemist. Bellarm. ibid. Ergo, these sanctified creatures may doe the like.

Ans. First, the bitter water of it selfe had not that power, but by vertue of that oth, with the which the woman was charged. Againe, it hath the warrant of the word, as yours haue not. Secondly, Elisaeus and the Apostles had the spirit to worke miracles, so haue not you: and they might haue done that they did without any such meanes. Againe, it was common salt, and ordinarie oyle which they vsed, not blessed before, after your popish manner.

The Protestants.

FIrst, we hold that no such things ought to be separated for holy vses, because they haue not the warrant of the word of God: for all things that are sanctified, are so sanctified by the word of God and praier, 1. Timoth. 4.5. But they haue not the word of God for their warrant, neither doe they vse any prayer of faith, but a superstitious kind of crossing. Nadab and Abihu were consumed with fire, because they offered strange fire, not taken from the Altar: that is, they presumed of their own authoritie, without Gods commandemēt, to consecrate a strange element to Gods seruice, and were punished, Leuit. 10. Ergo, it is dangerous without Gods word, to consecrate any such things.

Concerning the sprinkling and washing with holy water: Augustine thus writeth of the same or like custome of washing: Ne ad ipsum baptismi sacramentum videretur pertinere, Epistol. 119 cap. 18. multi hoc in consuetudinem recipere noluerunt: nonnulli de consuetudine auferre non dubitarunt. Many would not receiue that custome, lest it should seeme to be another baptisme: and some haue not doubted cleane to take it away.

Secondly, though such things were rightly halowed, yet haue they no such power: Christ sheweth the way, wherby euill spirits are chased away: by praier and fasting, Mark. 9.9. And therefore to coniure creatures, to expell Sathan, without the word of God, is no better then a kind of Magicke & enchantment.

[Page]

THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF PILGRImages and Processions.

The Papists.

FIrst, they hold that pilgrimages made to Ierusalem and the holy land, as they call it, to Rome, and to the memories of Saints in other places, to aske and obtaine error 55 their helpe, are godly and religious, and to bee much vsed of Christians, Concil. Trident. sess. 25. Bellarm. cap. 8. The halt and lame went vp to Ierusalem to be healed in the poole of Bethesda, Iohn. 5. Certaine Greekes came vp to worship at the feast, Iohn. 12.20. The Eunuch went vp in pilgrimage to Ierusalem, Act. 8. Ergo, it is lawfull and requisite, Rhemist.

Ans. First, when you can proue that such miracles are wrought at the memories of Saints, as the scripture testifieth of this poole, men may be bold to goe vnto them for their bodily health, as we see there is resort vnto Bathes: but not for any religion. Secondly, the Grecians, that visited Ierusalem, were Iewes that dwelt amongst the Gentiles, or Proselytes, which were bound to visite the temple at Ierusalem. Thirdly, the Eunuch went not vp in pilgrimage to Ierusalem, but to worship: for there was yet no other knowne place of the world, where God was worshipped.

Secondly, their solemne processions, especially vpon Palme Sunday, with carrying the Sacrament about, strawing of rushes, bearing of palmes, setting vp error 56 of boughes, hanging vp rich clothes, the quire and queristers singing: they would warrant by that action of our Sauiour Christ, Math. 21.8. when he came riding to Ierusalem, and the people strawed their garments in the way, Rhemist. annot. Math. 21. sect. 1.

Ans. First, your processions are horrible abusings and prophanations of the Lords institution, who ordained his Supper to be eaten and drunke, not to be carried about in procession like an heathenish Idol. Secondly, that which the people and Christs disciples did, they had warrant for out of the scripture: but who required this theatrical pompe at your hands? The riding of Christ vpon an asse was before prophecied of, Zachar. 9. and the childrens crying out in the temple, Psal. 8. The cutting downe of palme branches was a ceremonie belonging to the feast of Tabernacles, truly accomplished by our deliuerance in Christ. But you haue turned the holy mysterie of Christs riding to Ierusalem, to a Maygame, and Pageant play.

The Protestants.

FIrst, that no places ought to be frequēted or resorted vnto for religions sake, or more holines, or for the health of the soule: we proue it out of the word of God.

[Page]Saint Peter sayth, That in euery nation, he that feareth God is accepted with him, Act. 10.35. Ergo, one nation is as holy as another. And now our Sauiour saith, That God will not be worshipped at Ierusalem, or in Mount Garrizin, but in spirit and truth, Iohn. 4. He therefore that seeketh places to worship God in, as though he were rather to be found in one place then another, hath left the spirituall worship.

Augustine thus writeth concerning pilgrimage: He wisheth men to seeke them teachers and instructors, by whom they might be taught: De erat in ea terra, quam incolebas: quae causa vtilius cogeret peregrinari? But is there no teacher in the countrey where thou dwellest? what better cause canst thou haue to trauell, and goe in pilgrimage to seeke one in other countries? De vtilit. credend. cap. 7.

Thus he would haue men to play the pilgrimes, not to runne gadding to Relikes and Images, but to seeke for teachers and instructors.

Secondly, the popish pompous processions are both superstitious, in reuiuing and renewing the Iewish ceremonies, such as the feast of Tabernacles was, which are all now abolished as shadowes by the comming of Christ. And they are plainly idolatrous, for they carrie about their breaden god in procession, and make an Idol of a piece of baked wheate: but Paul sayth, The Sacrament ought to be receiued with thankesgiuing in the Churches and congregations of Christians, 1. Corinth. 11.33. not to bee carried about to bee gazed vpon in the fields. Seemely processions, voyd of superstition, which are vsed for ciuill purposes, as to maintaine the limits and bounds of townships, and withall by the sight of Gods blessing vpon the creatures to bee stirred vp to thankfulnes, we neither mislike nor condemne.

AN APPENDIX CONCERNING THE HOLY LAND, and holy warres for the same, as they were called.

The Papists.

THey which are but a little acquainted with ancient stories, shall finde, that error 57 there were neuer in Christendome such bloodie warres, and for so long a time, as those, which were at the instigation of the Popes, taken in hand by christian Princes for the recouerie of the holy land in so much that they were made to beleeue, that it was a meritorious work [...]. Whereupon King Richard the first, calling to minde his rebellion and disobedience to his father, in part of satisfaction purposed a voyage into the Holy land, as it was called, to redeeme Christs patrimonie from the Infidels, Fox. pag. 235. Bellarm. de laicis. lib. 3. cap. 16. First, for why? they say it is an Holy land: for if the places of Gods apparition are coun [...] holy. Exod. 3.5. Iosua. 5.15. much more the places of Christs natiuitie, buriall, passion, and resurrection. Saint Peter calleth the place where Christ was transfigured,2. Pet. 1.18. The holy mount, Rhemist. 1: Timoth. 4▪ sect. 10.

[Page]Ans. The places, where God appeared in times past, were holy for that time onely of Gods presence, not for euer after: and the mount is called holy in respect of the time, wherein the transfiguration was; not that the holines of the place doth alwaies continue: for that place which Iacob called Bethel, the house of God, Genes. 28. is by the Prophet called Bethauen, the house of wickednesse, Ose. 4.15. because of the idolatries there committed: what was now become of the holines of the place?

The Protestants.

TO warre against the Turkes vpon iust cause, as to seeke to defend our selues from their inuasions, and to maintaine the confines and bounds of Christendome, to deliuer Christians vniustly and cruelly kept in slauerie vnder him, we hold it lawfull: but to wage battaile with him, onely for a superstitious deuotion to the land of Palestina, to recouer it out of his hand, we see no warrant at all for it.

Argum. 1. The euill successe that Christians haue had against them, and the shamefull ouerthrowes that they haue sustained at their hands, doe euidently shewe, that God was not pleased with those superstitious warres. While Princes had a good quarrell, seeking onely to maintaine their owne, and to deliuer Christian countries from the thraldome of the Turkes, God prospered them, as the famous victories of Scanderbeius, and Iohannes Hunniades obtained against Amurathes the 8. Turkish Emperour, do notably testifie: but those superstitious and pope-holy warres, though sometime they had good successe, yet in the end all went to wracke. And as their cause was not good, so neither were the meanes that they vsed: for they brought S. George, and S. Denys into the field against the Turkes, and left Christ at home If the Israelites could not be deliuered from the Philistims by the presence of the Arke, but thirtie thousand fell before them, and all because of their sinnes: let not men thinke that popish Saints can defend them, while their liues remaine vnreformed at home.

2. That the heathen are not to be prouoked to warre, but vpon iust cause: that is, when they prouoke vs; it appeareth by the example of the Israelites, who as they came from Aegypt, sent vnto the King of Edom and Moab, that they might haue leaue to walke through their land: but they not granting so much, yet the people of God offered them no violence, but went a longer iourney about, Iudg. 11.17.

Augustine sayth, Sapiens gesturus est iusta bella: sed multo magis dolebit iustorum necessitatem extitisse bellorum: A wise man will take iust warre in hand:De ciuitat. dei. 19.7. but it more grieueth him that he hath iust cause to warre. And what he meaneth by iust warre, he further sheweth: Iniquitas partis aduersae iusta bella ingerit gerenda sapienti. The iniquitie or iniuries of the aduerse part, doth giue vnto a wise man occasion of iust warre. Iust warre therefore ariseth, when men are prouoked by iniuries.

[Page]

THE EIGHT QVESTION CONCERNING holy and festiuall dayes.

THis question hath diuers parts. First, of holy dayes in generall. Secondly, of the Lords day. Thirdly, of the Festiuall dayes of Christ and the holy Ghost. Fourthly, of Saints holy dayes. Fiftly, of the time of Lent.

THE FIRST PART OF HOLY DAIES in generall.

The Papists.

error 58 FIrst, they hold that holy and festiual daies, are in themselues, and properly and truely, more sacred and holy, then other daies are, Bellarm. cap. 10. proposit. 2. Apocalyps. 1.10. I was in the spirit (saith the Apostle) on the Lords day: God reuealeth such great things to Prophets rather vpon holy daies, then prophane daies: Ergo, some daies holier then other, Rhemist. Apocal. 1. sect. 6.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, God giueth not his graces in respect of times, but according to his owne pleasure. Times of praier he chooseth often, and of other godly exercises, not for the worthines or holines of the times, but for the better disposition of his seruants in such exercises, to receiue them: yet this was not perpetually obserued: for God appeared to Moses keeping of sheepe, Exod. 3. to Amos following his herd, Amos 7. Secondly, wee grant that the Lords day being commanded of God, and so discerned from other daies, may be said to be holier then the rest, in respect of the present vse, but not in the nature of the day: for then could it not haue been changed from the last day in the weeke to the first: as water in Baptisme is holier then other waters, because of the sacred vse, not in it selfe, as by a qualitie of holines inherent. And as for other festiuall daies, which haue not the like institution, they are appoynted onely of the Church, for Christian policie & orders sake, for the exercise of religion. But this now popish, & before time Iewish distinction of daies, as being by their nature ho [...]er then other, is flatly against the Apostles rule. Rom. 14.5. One putteth difference betweene day and day, and Galath. 4.10. You obserue daies and moneths, times and yeeres.

Augustine saith, Nos dominicum diem & pascha celebramus, sed quia intelligimus, quo pertineant, non tempora obseruamus, sed quae illis significantur temporibus, Cont. Adimant. cap. 16. We keepe the Lords day and the feast of Easter, not obseruing the times, but remembring what is signified by those times: that is, for what cause they were ordained: Ergo, obseruers of times are reproued.

[Page]

The Papists.

2. THey affirme the keeping and sanctification of holy dayes to be necessary,errour 59 Rhemist. annot. Galath. 4. sect. 5. and that we are bound in conscience to keepe the holy dayes appointed of the Church, although no offence or scandale might follow and ensue vpon the neglecting of them.

Esther 9. Mardocheus and Esther appoint a new festiuall day, not instituted of God, and bind euery one to the obseruing therof, that none should faile to obserue it. ver. 27. Ergo men bound in conscience to keep festiuall daies. Bellarm. ca. 10.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, though we refuse not some other festiuall daies, yet we acknowledge none necessary, more then are of the holy Ghosts appointing in the Scripture. Secondly, we deny that the constitutions of the Church for holy dayes do bind Christians, in respect of the dayes them selues, in conscience to keepe them, otherwise then they may giue offence by their contempt and disobedience to the holesome decrees of the Church: for it selfe in it owne nature is indifferent, neither can the Church make a thing necessary in nature, which God hath left indifferent: nothing bindeth absolutely in conscience, but that which is necessary by nature: wherefore keeping of holy dayes, being not enioyned but left indifferent in the word, bindeth no otherwise then we haue said. Thirdly, the example of Esther sheweth that the Church hath authoritie to appoint for ciuill vses, dayes of reioycing: that festiuall day then begun did not binde the obseruers in conscience, no otherwise then they were bound in all lawfull things to obey their gouernours, for their consent was required, and they promised both for themselues & their seede to keepe that day. Esther. 9.27. Whereby it appeareth that they were not bound absolutely in conscience to obserue it.

Augustine speaking of the Sabboth, saith thus:De tempor. ser. 36. haec est dies quam fecit Dominus, exultemus & laetemur in ea. This is the day which the Lord hath made, let vs reioyce and be glad therein, Psal. 118.24. This onely holy day he saith, is of the Lords making, and therefore of all other necessary to be kept.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE Lords day.

The Papists.

THe seuerall pointes wherein our aduersaries and we doe differ about the errour 60 Christian Sabboth, are these.

First, the principall exercise of the Sabboth, say they, is for the people to come to the Church and heare Masse, which their abominable and idolatrous sacrifice [Page] they make the proper worke of the Sabboth, Catechism. Roman. pag. 649.

The Protestants.

THe Sabboth was ordayned for the people to assemble together to heare the word read, Act. 15.21. & preached, and to receiue the Sacramets, Act. 20.7. and to offer vp their praiers: these were the proper exercises of the Sabboth: as for the popish sacrifice of the Masse, we finde no mention at all thereof in Scripture.

The Papists.

error 61 2. WE dissent about the rest of the Sabboth: they allow such workes to be done vpon the Sabboth, as shalbe permitted by the Prelates and Ordinaries, and such as by long custome haue bene vsed. Bellarm. cap. 10.

The Protestants.

WE holde, that as the Lords day was instituted of God, so the manner of celebrating and keeping it holy, is to be learned out of the word, and neither custome nor authority ought to giue liberty for such workes vpon the Lords day, as are not warranted by the word.

First, we graunt that we are not so necessarily tied to the rest of the Sabboth as the Iewes were: for those things are abolished which appertained to the Iewish Sabboth: First, the prescript of the day. Secondly, the ceremonious exercises of the Sabboth in the sacrifices and other rites of the Law. Thirdly, the typicall shadowes and significations of their Sabboth, as first it betokened their rest in Canaan; then the rest and peace of the Church by Christ, Hebre. 4.3.5. Fourthly, the strickt and precise rest, wherein Christians haue more liberty then the Iewes had: and againe, they obserued their rest, as being properly and simply, and in it selfe a sabboth daies duty; but we doe consider it, as being referred to a more principall end: as making of vs more fit for spirituall exercises.

Secondly, we allow these workes to be done: First, opera religiosa or pietatis, the religious workes, and conferring to piety: as the Priestes did slaye the sacrifices vpon the Sabboth, and yet brake not the rest of the Sabboth, Math. 12.5. so the people may walke to their parish Church, though somewhat farre off: the Pastor & Minister may goe forth to preach, yea, and preaching is of it selfe a labour of the body, to study also and meditate of his Sermon, to ring the bels to call the people to the Church: all these are lawfull, as being helpes for the exercises of religion. Secondly, opera charitatis, the workes of mercy are permitted, as to visite the sicke, the Phisitian to resorte to his patient, yea, to shew compassion to brute beastes, as to helpe the sheepe out of a pit, Math. 12.11. Thirdly, opera necessitatis, the workes of necessitie, as the dressing of meat and such like, Math. 12.1.3. Our Sauiour excuseth his Apostles for plucking the eares of Corne, when they were hungry. As for opera voluntaria, workes of pleasure and recreation, we haue no other permission to vse them, then as they shalbe no [Page] lets or impediments vnto spirituall exercises, as the hearing of the word, and meditating therein, and such other: Otherwise they are not to be vsed.

Augustine saith, speaking of the Iewes, who did greatly prophane their Sabboth, in sporting and dalliance: Melius toto die foderent, quàm toto die saltarēt:In Psal. [...]2. part 1. It were better for them to digge all day, then to daunce all day: euen so verily, it were better for many poore ignorant people, that vpon the Sabboth giue themselues to drinking, and quaffing, & gaming, if they should goe to plough or cart all the day. But as for other seruile workes, as to keepe Faires and Markets vpon the Lords day, to trauell themselues, their seruants, and beastes vpon the Sabboth, it is flat contrary to the commaundement of God, and the practise of the Church, Nehemiah 13.16. where there is no extream and vrgent necessitie: so that it is not to be doubted, but that as the keeping of the Lords day is a moral commaundement; so also the manner of the obseruing thereof in sanctifying it, and resting therein is morall: the ceremonies of the rest being abolished, that is, the Iewish strictnes thereof, and the opinion which they had of their rest, as being simply a part of the sanctifying of the Sabboth. But we doe consider it, as referred vnto more principall duties, and obserue it, not as of it selfe pleasing God, but as making vs more fit for spirituall exercises. Contrary to these rules, we acknowledge neither power in Ordinaries, nor priuiledge in custome, to dispence with the sanctification of the Sabboth.

The Papists.

THey affirme that the Apostles altered the sabboth day, from the seaueth day to the eight, counting from the creation, and they did it without scripture,error 62 or any commaundement of Christ: such power (say they) hath God left to his Church. This then they holde, that the sabboth was changed by the ordinarie power and authoritie of the Church, not by any especiall direction from Christ: thereupon it followeth, that the Church, which (they say) cannot erre, may also change the sabboth to any other day in the weeke, Rhemist. Apoca. 1. sect. 6.

The Protestants.

1. THe Apostles did not abrogate the Iewish sabboth, but Christ himselfe by his death, as he did also other ceremonies of the Law: and this the Apostles knew both by the scriptures, the word of Christ & his holy spirite.

2. They did not appoint a new sabboth of their owne authoritie: for first they knew by the scripture, that one day of seauen was to be obserued for euer, for the seruice of God and exercise of religion, although the prescript day according to the Law were abrogate: for the Lord before the morall law was written, euen immediatly after the creation, sanctified the seauenth day, shewing thereby, that one of the seauen must be obserued so long as the world endured. Secōdly, they knew there was the same reason of sanctifiyng the day of Christs resurrection, and the restitution of the worlde thereby, as of sanctifiyng [Page] the day of the Lords rest, after the creation of the world. Thirdly, they did it by the direction of the spirite of God, whereby they were so directed and gouerned, that although they were fraile men by nature, and subiect to error: yet they could not decline in their writings and ordinances of the Church, from the truth, which assurance of Gods spirite in the like measure the Church hath not: but so farre forth is promised to be led into all truth, as she followeth the rule of truth expressed in the Scriptures. Wherefore the Church hath no authority to change the Lords day, and to keepe it vpon Munday or Tuesday, or any other day: seeing it is not a matter of indifferency, but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe, deliuered by the Apostles: for the Lords day began in the Apostles time, and no doubt by their Apostolike authority directed by the spirite of Christ, was instituted, Act. 20.7. Apocal. 1. ver. 10. Neither can there come, so long as the world continueth, so great a cause of changing the Sabboth, as the Apostles had by the resurrection of Christ. Wherfore the law of the Sabboth as it is now kept and obserued, is perpetuall.

The Papists.

errour 63 4. THey affirme that the keeping of the Lords day, in stead of the Iewish Sabboth, is a tradition of the Apostles, and not warranted by Scripture, Rhemist. Math. 15. sect. 3.

The Protestants.

THe obseruation of the Lords day is not deliuered by blinde tradition, but hath testimony of holy Scriptures, 1. Corinth. 16.2. Act. 20.7. Apocal. 1.10. and the obseruation thereof is according to Gods commaundement, not after the doctrine of men, Fulk ibid.

The Papists.

errour 64 5. THey teach that the Lords day is commaunded, and likewise kept for some mysticall signification, not onely for the remembraunce of benefites already accomplished, as of the resurrection of Christ, and the Aduent or comming downe of the holy spirite: but also to betoken vnto vs things to come, as our rest and glory in the kingdome of God, Bellarm. de cultu sanctor. li. 3. ca. 11.

The Protestants.

1. WE graunt, that the Sabboth may be so applied, both to call to remembraunce things already, as vpon that day done: as the resurrection of Christ, and the descending of the holy Ghost. Some think also that Christ vpon that day was baptized,August. de tempor. ser. 154. vpon that day turned water into wine, fed fiue thousand with a few loaues, came vnto his Apostles after his resurrection the dores being shut, and that as vpon this daye he shall appeare to iudgement: but vpon what ground I know not: Certaine it is that vpon this daye Christ [Page] rose againe, and that the holy Ghost came downe then vpon his Apostles. We denye not but that the keeping of the Lords day holy, may fitly bring vnto our remembrance these things: yea and that it may be a type and symbole vnto vs in some sort, both of things spirituall, as to betoken our ceasing and resting from the workes of sinne, Hebr. 4.10. and 1. Pet. 4.1. as also of things to come, as the kingdome of heauen is called a Sabboth, Isai. 66.23.

But we dare not, neither will affirme, that the Sabboth was ordained & constituted for any such end: for the commandement of the Sabboth now to vs is onely moral, not typical or ceremonial, as the Iewish Sabboth was: but looke wherein the Sabboth was moral to the Iewes, so it is kept still: As in these two poynts it was morall to them: first, to be a signe betweene them and the Lord, and to distinguish them from other people, Exod. 31.17. And so also the right keeping of the Lords day is a notable outward marke of difference betweene the Church of God & all others. Secondly, that vpon the Sabboth they should resort together, and heare the lawe read and preached, Act. 15.21. And for this cause, namely, the exercise of religion, are Christians chiefly bound to the Sabboth. It may (I say) fitly be drawne to resemble heauenly and spirituall things: but that is not any end of the institution. The Iewes had two kind of types, typos factos, and, typos destinatos, types made and applied, and types appoynted and ordained of God to shadowe forth some notable thing: as the Paschall Lambe, was typus destinatus, of our Sauiour Christ, as they were not to breake a bone of the Lambe, so was it accordingly performed in Christ. They had also many types beside, that were not destined to signifie any certaine thing: of such S. Paul speaketh, 1. Corinth. 10, 6, 11. So wee say of the Sabboth, that it is not typus destinatus, it is not instituted for any shadowe or signification, though it may be fitly applied to such an vse.

The Papists.

6. THey say that we are not bound vpon the Sabboth by any peculiar commandement to abstaine from sinne, more then vpon any other day: neither error 65 that the internall act of religion appertaineth to the keeping of the Sabboth, but the external: that any sinne committed vpon the Sabboth is not therby the greater: neither that we are more bound vpon the Sabboth to seeke for internall grace then vpon any other day, Bellarm. lib. 3. cap. 10. propos. 4.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, we grant that all sinne, as of theft, adulterie, and the like, are in their owne nature alike, at what time soeuer they are committed, yet they may be made more hainous by the circumstances: as of the place, as sacriledge is greater then common theft, so why not of the time?

Secondly, if that which is no sinne vpon the worke-day, be a sinne vpon the Sabboth, as to digge, to plough, to cart, then that which is a sinne of it selfe, as to [Page] steale, to cōmit adulterie, must needs be greater & more hainous being done vpon the Sabboth: for beside the sinne, he also prophaneth the Sabboth, which is the breach of another commandement. Thirdly, the internall act of religion is properly commanded in the sanctifying of the Sabboth: for it cannot be sanctified by the externall act of going to Church, and hearing the word, vnlesse a man be inwardly in the deuotion of his heart prepared for those holy exercises. So inward grace is more sought for vpon the Sabboth, not in respect of that inward desire which we haue vnto them, which ought alwaies to be alike feruent in vs, if it were possible, but because of those outward meanes, of hearing the word, publique prayer, receiuing the Sacraments, which are vpon the Sabboth: for the which we ought more especially to prepare & examine our selues, Ecclesiast. 4.17. 1. Corinth. 11.28.

Augustine sayth, speaking of the Iewish women: Quanto meliùs foeminae e [...] rū lanam facerent, quàm illo die in neomenijs saltarent: spiritualiter obseruat Sabbatum Christianus, abstinens se ab opere seruili, id est, à peccato: Tractat. 3. in Iohan. Their women might be better occupied in spinning at home, then in dauncing vpon this day: for a Christian doth spiritually keepe the Sabboth, in abstaining from al seruile worke, that is, from sinne. They then that do obserue the Sabboth onely in externall acts, doe but carnally keepe it.

The Papists.

error 66 7. THey hold it a thing vnlawfull for Christians to fast vpon the Lords day, Bellarm. lib. 3. de cultu sanctor. cap. 11.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, we grant that this opinion is very ancient, & that in Tertullians time it was receiued in many Churches: and they thought it as vnlawfull to bow the knee vpō the Lords day, Tertul. lib. de coron. Militis. Die dominico ieiunare nefas ducimus, & de geniculis adorare: We count it vnlawfull to fast vpon the Lords day, and to pray kneeling. But the Papists obserue not the one, why then should they binde themselues to the other? Ignatius maketh fasting vpon the Sabboth as great an offence, as the killing of Christ himselfe, Epistol. ad Philipp. But, I trust, they will not say so.

Secondly, the reasons why fasting is not to be vsed vpon the Lords day, because the Iesuite setteth downe none, I will supplie out of Augustine: first, Sentio (saith he) ad significandam requiem sempiternam (vbi est verum Sabbatum) relaxationem, Epistol. 86. quàm constrictionem ieiunij aptius conuenire. I thinke, that to signifie the eternall rest, which is the true Sabboth, libertie rather, then the vrging of fasting doth most fitly agree. But to this we answere, that this signification of eternall rest, is no essentiall part of sanctifying the Sabboth, nor no end of the institution, as we haue shewed afore, though it may haue such an application: and [Page] therefore this reason proueth not such a necessitie of not fasting vpon the Sabboth. Secondly, Die dominico ieiunare magnum est scandalum: It is a great offence to fast on the Lords day, because the Manichees made choise of that day to fast in: Per quod factum est, vt ieiunium Sabbati horribilius haberetur, By the which (sayth he) it came to passe, that the fast of the Sabboth was more abhorred, Augustin. ibid. But this reason now bindeth not vs, because the name and heresie of the Manichees is now worne out, and therefore there is no feare of any scandale to arise that way.

Thirdly, we grant that the Lords day is not the fittest time for publique fasts: first, because it is a day of reioycing: so we reade that the people in Nehemiah his time, were forbidden to mourne and weepe, after the lawe was read vnto them by Ezra, because it was a day of ioy and mirth, Nehem. 8.11. Secondly, the day of solemne and publique fasting ought to be set a part from other dayes, and to be proclaimed solemnely, and to be spent wholly in spirituall exercises, euen as the Sabboth, with vacation and rest from other bodily labours, as we may reade, 2. Chronicl. 20.3. Nehem. 9.1. And therefore any day is more fit then the Sabboth, because that is a holy day alreadie vnto the Lord: but when we will humble our selues before the Lord by fasting and prayer, some day would onely for that purpose bee consecrate vnto GOD: that may be as a voluntarie sacrifice: whereas wee are bound of necessitie to keepe the Lords day.

But concerning priuate and particular fasts, when men by themselues haue occasion to giue themselues to prayer, whereof S. Paul speaketh, 1. Corinth. 7.5. Such priuate exercises may be better performed vpon the Sabboth, because of the ordinarie exercises of the word, which are notable meanes to kindle and stirre vp true deuotion in him, which at that time will humble himselfe: yea and publike fasts, though not ordinarily, yet whē there is iust occasion, may be kept vpon the Sabboth: as we reade Act. 20.7. how that Paul continued his preaching till midnight: whereof Augustine writeth thus, Necessarius sermo resiciendi corporis causa interrumpendus esse non visus est profecturo Apostolo: The necessary preaching of the Apostle, he thought not good, for the refreshing of their bodies to breake off, being readie to depart. We conclude therefore, that it is lawfull to fast vpon the Lords day, though it be not alwaies expedient. And Augustine very well determineth this matter: Ego in Euangelicis, & Apostolicis literis video praeceptum esse ieiunium: quibus autem diebu [...]non oporteat ieiunare, & quibus oporteat, praecepto domini, vel Apostolorum non inuen [...]o de finitum: I finde both in the Euangelicall and Apostolicall writings, that fasting is commanded: but vpon what dayes we ought to fast, vpon what we ought not, I doe not finde it defined, Epistol. 86. Wherefore to fast or not to fast vpon the Lords day, or vpon any other, being not determined in scripture, is left as a thing indifferent to the Church of God.

[Page]

The Papists.

error 67 8. THe name Sunday, is an heathenish calling, as al other weeke-daies in our language: some imposed after the names of Planets, as in the Romanes time: some by the name of certaine Idols, which the Saxons did worship▪ which names the Church vseth not, but hath appoynted to call the first day the Dominike, after the Apostle, Apocal. 1.10. the other by the name Feries, vntill the last of the weeke, which she calleth by the old name Sabboth, because that was of God, not by imposition of the heathen, Rhemist. annot. Apocal. 1. sect. 6.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, as the name of Sunday, and the rest, is of the heathenish beginning, and therefore were better to be otherwise termed, as the first, second, or third from the Lords day, as the Iewes called their daies from the Sabboth: so your terme of feries, is no lesse heathenish, deriued from the word feria, or feriae, which were so called a feriendis victimis, of striking the heathenish sacrifices, as Sextus Pompeius sayth, Fulk. ibid.

2. We haue other names also that might bee reformed, as of our moneths; as March is so called of Mars, August. cont. Faust. 18.5. Iune of Iuno, Ianuary of Ianus, which were heathen goddes: Iuly and August doe beare the names of men: yea, and if wee might bee inuentors of newe names, the termes of Christmas, Michaelmas, Candlemas, should not stand in force, nor any more be vsed, which are as offensiue as the rest: for as for the names of heathen Idols, the most part are ignorant of them: but the vulgar terme of Masse, is to too well known, & too much loued of many of our countrey men. Now for the name Sunday, which is so great a mote in your eye, if there were no more but that: Augustine sheweth, how it might be fauourably expounded, Dies magni solis celebramus, illius solis, de quo dicit scriptura, orietur vobis sol iustitiae: We doe keepe Sunday holy, namely, of that great Sunne, whereof the scripture speaketh, the Sunne of righteousnesse shall arise.

3. We wish that all these termes might be layd downe, as Augustine sayth, Nolumus, vt dicant, & vtinam corrigantur vt non dicant: We would not haue men so to speake,In Psal. 93. and I wish they were reformed. But seeing by continuall custome mens tongues are inured to such termes, let them knowe, that they are vsed onely as ciuill names, to call things by, not for any religion or mysterie in them contained, or signified.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE FESTIVAL daies of Christ and the holy Ghost.

The Papists.

THE feasts of Easter and Whitsontide, and other solemnities of Christ, were error 68 prescribed (they say) by the Apostles, Rhemist. Matth. 15. sect. 2. to be kept [Page] vpon certaine dayes, and that Peter did appoint that Easter should not be kept the 14. day of the first Moone, as the Iewes obserued it, but the Lordes day after. And of the feast of Pentecost mention is made, 1. Corinth. 16.8. Ergo, these feasts were instituted of the Apostles: Bellarm. cap. 12.13.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, wee graunt that it is expedient for the Church to keepe the memoriall of the Natiuitie, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension of Christ, and of the comming of the holy Ghost; and the dayes instituted for the remembrance thereof, no doubt, ought to be had in greater account, then any other holy dayes instituted by the Church. Secondly, it cannot be proued, that they were prescribed by the Apostles, or if they were, but as indifferent ceremonies, which are subiect to alteration, and in the which the religion or worship of God dooth not consist. Certaine it is, that before the time of Constantine the great, there were not many festiuall dayes kept, in so much, that the feasts of the Natiuitie of Christ, Easter, Pentecost, were not vniformally obserued for many yeares after, as appeareth by diuerse Councels.Concil. Aurel. 4. c. 1. Tolet. 10. cap. 1. And before Constantines time, there was great contention betweene the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the East, about the celebration of Easter: they alleadging the constitution of Saint Iohn, the other of Saint Peter: wherefore it is like, that the Apostles appointed no such certaine dayes: for then the Church would not haue broken them.

Thirdly, Pentecost, whereof Saint Paul speaketh, was the feast of the Iewes, which with other solemnities of theirs the Apostles obserued not as a portion of Christian religion, but taking occasion of the meeting of the Iewes in those festiuall dayes: and so doe we obserue those holy dayes for order and edification of Gods people, that vse to assemble at such times, Fulk. Matth. 15. sec. 3.

Fourthly, what cause is there, why Easter and Whitsontide should be tied to the Lords daye, and the Natiuitie of Christ, which Bellarmine confesseth, was vpon the Lords day, should indifferently bee kept vpon any day? but that hereby wee vnderstand, that it is an indifferent matter, whether they should bee kept vpon the Lords day, or any other, and whether vpon any certaine daye, or to bee left to the discretion of the gouernors of the Church to be obserued as any other occasion shall be offered, Fulk. annot. Apocalyps. 1. sect. 6.

Lastly, we shewed Augustines opinion, in the first part of this question, how hee vnderstandeth that saying, Psalme 118. This is the day which the Lord hath made, onely of the Sabboth: thereby insinuating, that other holy dayes either were not instituted of God at all, or else not with the like necessitie.

[Page]

THE FOVRTH PART, OF THE solemnities of Saintes.

The Papists.

error 69 1. THey hold that holy dayes may be dedicated vnto Saints, for their honor and worship: as Christ promised that the charitable act of Marie Magdalene wrought vpon him should be recorded and remembred, Matth. 26. vers. 13. Hereby we learne that the good workes of Saintes may be recorded to the honor of Saints in the Church, whereof arise their commemorations and holy dayes, Rhemist. annot. Matth. 25. sect. 1.

The Protestants.

1. THe good works of Saints may be remembred to the honor of God, without their holy dayes and commemorations: Christ instituted no holy day of Mary Magdalene, nor commanded an image of her fact to be made, but a memorie of her in preaching the Gospel, Fulk. ibid. Secondly, we graunt, that Christian solemnities may be kept, as things indifferent, which the Church may retaine or abrogate as it shall seeme best for edification, not obserued of necessitie as a part of the worship of God, nor consecrate to the honor of Saints; seeing al diuine worship is wholly to be reserued to God, not to be giuen to any other: For times and seasons, the scripture saith, the Lord hath put onely in his owne power:Cont. Faustum lib. 2. cap. 21. therefore he is onely to haue the honor of them, Act. 1.7. Thirdly, what honor is due vnto Saints Augustine sheweth: Colimus martyres eo cultu dilectionis, & societatis, quo & in hac vita coluntur sancti homines Dei. Wee doe honor Martyrs, with the seruice of loue and fellowship, as holy men are honored in this life. But it is not lawful to consecrate times and dayes to holy men liuing, therefore neither to Saints departed: for one and the same kind of honor is due to them both.

The Papists.

error 70 2. THey maintaine, that there may bee holy dayes and commemorations of all Saints, as Christ promiseth there should bee of Mary Magdalene, Rhemist. Matth. 25. sect. 1.

The Protestants.

THis is another principal fault, which we finde & complaine of in their holy dayes: that they haue pestred the Church with such a number of Saints and Saints dayes. First, as we haue partly shewed before, they appointed a seuerall Saint almost for euery purpose, as here we haue set it downe:

Saint Leonard for captiues.

Ex Tilemann. loc. 28.

Saint Rochus for the pestilence.

Saint George for warre.

Saint Anna giueth riches.

Saint Nicholas and Christopher for the sea.

[Page]Saint Apollonia for the toothake.

Saint Otilia for the eyes.

Saint Margaret for women in trauell.

Saint Laurence keepeth from the fire.

Saint Catherine giueth wit & learning.

Saint Iohn against poyson.

Saint Quirine for the fistula.

Saint Protasius and Geruasius, helpe to bewray theft.

And thus is it true of them, as Ieremie complained of the Idolatrous Israelites: that their gods were after the number of their cities, Ierem. 2.28. In like manner also haue they multiplied their Saints dayes: for beside the festiuals of Christ, the holy Ghost, and of the Apostles, they haue added these besides.

Saint George his day.

Corpus Christi.

Assumption of Mary.

Natiuitie of Mary.

Conception of Mary.

The birth dayes of the Apostles.

Magdalenes.

Laurence.

The Dedication feast.

Tilemann. loc. 26.

Martin. their holy dayes.

Nicholas. their holy dayes.

Catherine. their holy dayes.

Anne. their holy dayes.

Beside in the Dioces of Salisburge, fifteene festiuals of Saint Rubert, with many more: whereof some of them are blasphemous, as to keepe the Conception of Mary, in remembrance that shee was conceiued without sinne: some of them fabulous and forged; as the Assumption of Mary, in memorie of her Assumption in body to heauen, which is a meere fable. But all the rest are idolatrous and superstitious, ordained for the honor and worship of creatures. And thus haue they cumbred the people of God with their infinite obseruations: So that the Lorde saith to them, concerning their feastes, as vnto the Israelites: They are a burden vnto mee, I am wearie to beare them, Isai. 1.14.

In Augustines time, or who else it was that made those Sermons, when there were nothing so many festiuals, as now among Papists, yet more then needed, he writeth thus in a sermon vpon a festiuall: Laetus sum hodierno die propter tantam festiuitatem: sed aliquantulum tristis, De diuers. serm. 47. quia non video tantum populum congregatum, quantus congregari debuit. I am glad to daye, because of this festiuall day: and somewhat grieued withall, that the people resorte not in such frequencie, as they should. We may see by this, that euen then the people began to wax wearie of their many holy dayes.

The Papists.

THey enioyne sanctification and necessarie keeping of all their festiuities and holy dayes: and so make no difference betweene the obseruation of error 71 holy dayes appointed of GOD, and others ordained of men, requiring the like strictnes in keeping of them all, Rhemist. Annot. Galat. 4. sect. 5.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THere are no dayes necessarie to be kept, but those that are of the Lords appointment: the rest, being voyde of superstition, may be celebrated as indifferent: and therefore not to be commaunded with the like strictnes, as is the Lords daye. There is greater libertie vpon holy dayes for bodilie labour, then vppon the Sabboth: for bodilie rest vppon the seauenth day is commaunded of GOD: bodily labour vppon all other dayes permitted, and may without offence of conscience bee vsed, when it is not by the lawfull authoritie of the gouernors of the Church vppon iust occasion restrained, as during the time of publike praiers and fastes, hearing of the word, and such like.

The rest of the Sabboth, so far as it helpeth our preparation and fitnes to spirituall exercises, and is a part of sanctifying the Lords day, bindeth simplie in conscience, because it is the commaundement of GOD: but the rest vpon holy dayes doth not in it selfe binde vs, no otherwise then by reason of offence, that may arise by our contempt of the constitutions of the Church.

We finde that Simon Islip, Archbishop of Canturburie, directed his letters patents to all Parsons and Vicars, wherein he straightly charged them and their parishioners vnder paine of excommunication, not to absteine frō bodily labor vpon certaine Saints dayes, which before were wont to be halowed and consecrated to vnthrifty idlenes, Fox. pag. 393. Ergo, by their owne iudgement, all the festiuities of their Church are not to be kept alike.

Augustine maketh three degrees of festiual dayes: in the first and highest degree he placeth the Lordes day: Quomodo Maria virgo, mater domini, principatum tenet inter omnes mulieres, ita inter caeteros dies, haec omnium dierum mater est. As amongst women, the Virgine Marie, the mother of our Lord is the chiefe, so this day is the mother and chiefe of al other dayes, speaking of the Sabboth of Christians, de tempore serm. 36.

In the next place or degree he putteth the festiuals of Christ, and the holy Ghost, as the commemorations of his Natiuitie, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension: as in his sermon vpon the Ascension day hee thus saith, Conditoris basilica huius S. Leontij hodiè depositio est: sed dignetur obscurari stella à sole. To day wee haue the commemoration of the deposition or sepulture of Saint Leontius the founder of this Church: But let not the starre thinke much to bee obscured of the Sunne. So in the third ranke he counteth the commemorations of holy men, which vnto the festiuities of Christ were but as the Starre to the Sunne. Wee will adde a fourth place or degree, distinguishing betweene the commemorations of the holy Apostles, and other superstitious and popish Saintes dayes, which our Church hath worthily thrust out at the dores.

[Page]

AN APPENDIX TO THIS parte of the vigiles and night watches annexed to festiuall dayes.

The Papists.

1. THey were wont vpon Saintes eeues to giue themselues to fasting, and watching. But their night vigiles or watches they doe not now so error 72 strictly obserue, because of the great abuses which did growe thereupon, Bellarm. cap. 17. Yet they haue not altogether left them, for they haue their Nocturnes or midnight mattens, and their prime houres in the morning. Rhemist. annot. Act. 10. sect. 6.

The Protestants.

THe Christians in time of persecution had their antelucanos hymnos, their early and timely songs and hymnes: they met together to worship God, before the Sunne rise, because they could not safely, neither were suffered to assemble in the daye time. But that is no reason, why now the Church should vse vigiles or nocturnes, seeing we now haue free exercise of religion in the day time: no more then Paules example is to bee vrged, that prayed by the riuers side with the people, and there preached vnto them, because in Idolatrous cities they could haue no places of meeting. That therefore wee now ought to doe the like, hauing Churches and Oratories to assemble in, Augustine, if the sermon be his, thus witnesseth: Iubente Ambrosio cessabant vigiliae Mediolani, quia cum vigilabant per noctem, ad ecclesiam, Ad fratres in eremo. serm. ludendo & chorizando conueniebant. At Millaine by Ambroses commaundement, the vigiles ceased, because the people, when they watched, did come by night, daunsing, and sporting and playing, to the Church.

The Papists.

2. THey haue also another superstitious custome, to set vp wax candles, and error 73 taper light before Images, and vpon the altar, to carrie them about in procession, and euen at middaye, and high noone: And Bellarmine would authorise this custome by the continuall burning of the lampes daye and night, as he saith, in the tabernacle amongst the Iewes.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, wee say of this, as we did of the vigiles of the Church before: that Christians in those dayes in their night assemblies vsed candle light: but it followeth not, that the vigiles being now left, we should burne [Page] candles at noone daye: and that this was their custome, to burne their lampes onely in the night, Augustine sheweth, where hee speaketh of those that did vowe ceram ad luminaria noctis, De tempore Serm. 7. waxe candles for the lights of the Church in the night.

Secondly, it is vtterly vntrue, that the lampes in the Tabernacle burned all day: the contrarie is proued, that they were lighted in the euening, and so burned all night, for those that kept the watch in the Temple, 2. Chron. 13.11. and that in the morning againe they were put out, 1. Sam. cap. 3. vers. 3. The Priest shall set the lampes on fire, inter duas vesperas, betweene the two twilights, that is, the euening and morning, Exod. 30.8. And hee shall dresse them to burne from the euening to the morning, Leuitic. 24.3. That therefore which the Iesuite made for an argument for himselfe, wee will vrge against him: that seeing the lampes amongst the Iewes, who abounded in types and ceremonies, were burnt onely in the night, and not vpon the day; it is shame for those that would bee counted Christians, in superstitious customes, to exceede and goe beyond them.

THE FIFT PART, OF LENT and Imber dayes.

The Papists.

1. THey holde, that the holy time of Lent, (as they doe fondly call it, as error 74 though any time in their sense were more holy then another) is an Apostolike tradition, warranted by the example of Moses, Elias, and our Sauiour Christ, that fasted 40. dayes, Rhemist. Matth. 4▪ sect. 2.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, that fasting of our Sauiour Christ, and the holy Prophets, was miraculous, and no more to bee imitated then Christs walking vpon the Sea,In. Psal. 90. praefat. or raising of the dead, as Augustine saith, Non tibi dicit, Non eris discipulus meus, hee saith not, Thou shalt not bee my Disciple, vnlesse thou walke vpon the sea, or raise the dead: but learne of mee, because I am humble and meeke. Yet if any of them can fast so many dayes, as they did, without eating any thing at all, wee giue them good leaue.

Secondly, that it was not an Apostolike tradition, it appeareth, because it was not vniformally kept of the Church,Euseb. lib. 5 cap. 26. a long time after them: For as Irenaeus witnesseth, some fasted one day, some two dayes, some fourtie houres day and night. But if it had been necessarily enioyned and prescribed by the Apostles, such varietie of custome could not haue sprung vp, at the least not haue been suffered in the Church. Thirdly, Epiphanius saith, that the Wednesdaies fast was an Apostolike tradition,Epiphan. Heres. 75. and to obserue the feast of [Page] the sixe dayes of Easter, with bread, salt, and water: which obseruations, are not kept amongst the Papists themselues, yet haue they as good testimonie of antiquitie to bee Apostolike traditions, as the Lent fast. Fourthly, in Augustines time there was no necessarie enforcement for euery man to keepe Lent: Si aliquis, saith hee, ieiunare non potest, eleemosyna sine ieiunio bona est. If any man be not able to fast,Serm. de temp. 62. almes without fasting is good and profitable. Wherefore seeing the Lent fast was then voluntarie, it is euident that it was not an Apostolike prescription, which should haue bound all men necessarily.

The Papists.

2. A Second abuse in their fasting, is to appoint prescript times, necessarilie error 75 to fast in, as in Lent, on Fryday, Saturday, & vpon Imber dayes, which are prescribed for the foure solemne times of giuing orders: And this also they say, is an Apostolike tradition, Acts. 13.3. They fasted & prayed, and laid their hands vpon them, Rhemist. ibid.

The Protestants.

Ans. 1. FOr prayer and fasting to bee vsed at such times as Ministers are ordained, we doubt not but it is an Apostolik tradition, because we find it written in the Actes of the Apostles: But it was fasting from all meat and drinke, which the Apostles vsed, not abstinence from flesh onely, as vpon your Imber dayes. Neither do you obserue those dayes of fast for any such purpose: For your Imber dayes are kept amongst you, though there bee no orders giuen in the whole dioces.

2. Prescript and set times of ciuill abstinence from some meates, for the benefite of the common wealth, as your Lent and Imber daies, are still retained in England, and no otherwise, we condemne not: But to appoint ordinary tymes of necessary and Religious fasting, without special cause, was of the auncient Church accounted heresie in Montanus.

This also was the practise of the Church of God in the olde Testament,Euseb. lib. 5 cap. 18. vpon speciall occasion, not at set, and ordinary times, to enioyne publike fasting, as the prophet sayeth, Blowe the Trumpet in Sion, sanctifie a fast, call a solemne assemblie, Ioel 2.15. which sheweth that their publike fastes were not vsuall & ordinary, but especially sanctified, and solemnly proclaimed.

As for the fixed and set fasting dayes in the weeke, in Augustines time, onely the Churches of Rome kept the Saturdayes Fast, all the East Churches, and many of the West obserued it not: And whereas some alleadged, that Peter fasted vpon Saturday, beeing the next day, which was the Lordes day, to encounter with Simon Magus, Augustine saith, it was opinio plurimorum, the opinion of many, quam tamen falsam esse perhibent [Page]plerique Romani: yet many of the Romanes holde it but for a fable. And so he generally concludeth, concerning prescript dayes of fasting. Quibus diebus non oporteat ieiunare, & quibus oporteat, praecepto Domini vel Apostolorum nō inuenio definitum: Vpon what dayes we ought to fast, vpon what dayes not, I finde it not defined by any precept giuen by our Lord or any of the Apostles. Epistol. 86.

The Papists.

error 76 3. A Third abuse in popish fasting, is the difference that they make betweene meates and drinkes: as the forbidding of flesh-eating vpon fasting dayes for more holines, and the eating of egges, butter, & cheese in Lent: as it was decreed at Lucerna in Heluetia, Fox. p. 867. Anno. 1524. Abstinence also from some meates vpon certaine dayes for religion, is warranted by the Rhemist: as God prohibited Adam the eating of some fruites in Paradise for obedience, and in the lawe for signification, annot. 1. Timoth. 4. sect. 6.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, now Antichrist sheweth himselfe in his colours, making it as lawfull for him, to forbid the vse of some meates for religion, now vnder the Gospel, when God hath made them all lawful and free, as God himselfe might forbid the vse of some, for obedience in Paradise or signification in the Lawe. Secondly, S. Paul calleth it the doctrine of diuels, to command to absteine from meates, 1. Timoth. 4.3. Againe, let no man condemne you in meate and drinke. Colos. 2.16. The Rhemist. answere, that the Apostle speaketh in the first place against those heretikes, that condemned meates as euill by creation, such were the Manichees, and in the second, against the Iudaicall obseruation of meates. But they onely prohibite the vse of some meates for the chastising of the bodie.

Ans. First, not onely the Manichees and other heretikes preferred some meats before other, as more holy, but euen the Papists also in the prescript times of their fasts, doe command to absteine from meates for pietie and religion: And therefore they are counted most holy amongst them that neuer eate flesh. And Durand testifieth, that fish in interdict dayes, is rather vsed then flesh, because flesh and not fish was accursed in the dayes of Noah. Durand. lib. 6. cap. de alijs ieiunijs. Yea they command abstinence from meates vnder paine of damnation: what is this else, but with the old heretikes to condemne the creatures of God themselues? Secondly, the popish prohibition of meates, is more superstitious, then was the Iewes: For they prohibited such meates, as by the lawe were counted vncleane, as to eate beastes that died alone, or were torne with beasts, or strangled, or touched any vncleane beast, as likewise they inioyned pennance to them, that did eate or drinke, where a dogge or cat had lapped, or a mouse had been drowned and such like, Fulk. annot. 1. Timoth. 4 sect. 6. I pray you how farre are they now from the superstition of the Iewes? Nay they goe beyond them: for the legall difference of meates for signification, was instituted of God for those times. [Page] But this superstitious distinction of meates vnder the Gospel, which giueth vs the free vse of all the creatures of God, which are sanctified by the worde and prayer, 1. Timoth. 4.5. is brought in by Antichrist, who is an enemie vnto God.

3 Neither doe they abstayne from flesh and other meates for chastising of the flesh: for they permit the vse of all other meates vpon their fasting dayes, that may prouoke lust, flesh onely excepted, as the eating of spices, and other dayntie and delicate confections, the drinking of wine, and all kind of fish. Euen like as Augustine reporteth of the Manichees, that would drinke no wine, nor eate flesh:De morib. Manich. 2. cap. 13. but in stead of wine they had Pomorum nonnullorum expressos succus vini speciem satis imitantes, at (que) id etiam suauitate vincentes: the sweete liquor of pleasant fruites like to wine in colour, but excelling it in sweetnes: and for flesh they had their straunge & exquisite fruites, with great varietie of dishes, seasoned and strawed with pepper. This was the Manichees fast: and this is the popish custome in their fastings at this day. Agayne, if they forbare some meates for chastisement of the body, why might it not bee as lawfull to eate butter, and egges, in the time of Lent, as vpon other fasting dayes: but that they make difference of the times, as one being holyer then an other, and so also a difference of meates, some being more agreeable to holy times, then other?

Wherefore to conclude this poynt: Ciuill abstinence from flesh, as for policies sake, and the better mayntenance of the common wealth, that there should bee a vent for fish, as well as for flesh, and that euerie man might liue of his trade and calling: as also for the health of the bodie, to abstayne from hurtfull meates: as likewise to keepe a temperate and sober dyet, and to take heede of surfetting and drunkennesse: These kindes of abstinence, in making difference of meates, wee mislike not: but for pietie or religions sake to distinguish them, it is to too great superstition.

The Papists.

FOurthly, their religious kinde of fasting they holde not to bee a generall error 77 abstinence from all meates and drinkes, but onely from some certaine kindes, as from flesh, and wine, as Timothie refrayned from drinking of wine, and in steade thereof vsed water, 1. Timothie 5. verse 23. Rhemist.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, for chastising of the bodie, it is lawfull to abstayne either wholly for a time, or in respect of the quantitie or qualitie of the meates, which may more prouoke carnall lusts, not in the prohibition of the whole kind, as the Papists doe of all flesh, bee it neuer so grosse or small in quantitie. Likewise [Page] it is lawfull for chastising of a mans body to abstaine from any kinde, as of wine, fruites, spices, flesh, so that the vse of them be not forbidden, as though in the very abstinence there were religion, Fulk. ibid.

2 But the true and properly religious fast of Christians, is a generall abstinence from all meats and drinkes, during the time of such fasting: Esther. 4.16. Nehemiah. 9.4. Where the manner of their fast is described: howe the lawe was read vnto them foure times in the day, and as oft did they worship the Lord and confesse their sinnes. It was the custome of the Church also in Augustines time, in the dayes of fast, not to abstaine onely from flesh, or some certayne kinde of meate, as the Papists vse, but altogether to continue fasting till the eeuen. Rogo vos (fratres) (sayth he) vt in isto sacratissimo tempore, exceptis dieb. dominicis nullus prandere praesumat: De tempor. serm. 62. I pray you, brethren, that in this holy time, none of you presume to dine at all, except it be vpon the Lords daies. Ergo, they that wil keepe a true religious fast, if they are able, ought for the time wholly to absteyne.

The Papists.

error 78 FIftly, they erre, in affirming fasting to be a meritorious worke, Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 15. vers. 32. Anna, Tobie, Iudith, Esther, serued and pleased God by fasting, Annot. Math. 15. sect. 3.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, we doubt not, but that fasting is a worke acceptable to God, being referred to the right end, as to chastise and humble the bodie, 1. Corinthians. 9.27. and to make our prayers more feruent, 1. Corinthians. 7.5. But otherwise there is no holinesse or vertue in fasting of it selfe, neither is it by the worke wrought of any merite or worthines: For our prayers, which are a more principall worke, then fasting is, yet of themselues by any worthynes in them, are not regarded of God: for Salomon sayth, When thou hearest, haue mercie, 1. King. 8.30. It is of the Lords mercy, that our prayers are heard, not of any worthynes in them.

Augustine sayth very well, Si volumus bene ieiunare à cibis, ante omnia ieiunemus & à vitijs. De tempor. serm. 64. Quid prodest, pallidum esse ieiunijs, si odio & inuidia liuescas? What doth it helpe to fast from meate, if wee fast not from sinne? What auayleth it to be pale and wan with fasting, if thou frettest with hatred and enuie? Ergo, the externall or outward acte of fasting of it selfe is litle or nothing worth.

The Papists.

error 79 SIxtly, and lastly, they grieuously offend in their fastings, in laying so straight and hard a yoke vppon mens shoulders, as charging them vnder payne of damnation to keepe their fasting dayes, making it deadly sinne, yea, heresie [Page] to transgresse them: as one Laurence Staple was troubled and persecuted, anno. 1531. because in Lent hauing no fish, hee did eate egges,Fox. pag. 1043. butter, and cheese: nay, they were so cruell, that hardly they suffered women in child-bed to haue flesh in their houses: As anno. 1532. two young Gyrles were constrayned to abiure,pag. 1048. because they were found vppon Saint Peters eeuen eating broth made of mutton, their mother lying in childe-bed. Howe was poore Frebarne tossed too and fro,pag. 1184. and brought into great daunger, because a pigge was found in his house in Lent time, for the which his wife longed?

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, no positiue law, not grounded vppon scripture, can so binde any person, that in the breaking of such hee shall sinne deadlie:Fox. pag. 1110. And of this sorte is the fast of Lent and other dayes for religion, which were ordayned without authoritie of scripture: Lambert ad articul. 17. And seeing the rest of the Sabboth, being the commaundement of GOD, might yet vpon necessarie cause be broken, as wee haue shewed; how much greater libertie ought the people to haue had in the obseruation of those dayes, which were onely inioyned by men? for who seeth not, that the rest in the Lords day being Gods owne appoyntment ought more surely to binde, then fasting vpon forbidden dayes, enforced by men? yet was it counted an heynous sinne to eate flesh vpon a day interdict, and a small offence, or none, to violate the rest of the Sabboth.

2 Saint Paul could see no such necessitie of fasting and abstinence, when hee willeth Timothie to drinke wine, and no longer water, for his infirmities sake, 1. Timoth. 5.23. But if there were religion in fasting and abstinence, it ought not to be intermitted for the bodily health: for the lesse principall is to giue place to the greater.

In Augustines time also there was no such necessitie: Qui ieiunare non praeualet, in domo sua praeparet, quod accipiat: He that is not able to fast, let him prepare in his house for his owne eating. And agayne, Si possibilitas non fuerit ieiunandi, sufficit eleemosyna sine ieiunio. Serm. de tempor. 62. If a man haue not possibilitie to fast, in stead of fasting let him giue almes. What is become now of your Lent and Imber fastes, which you prescribe as necessary to be kept of all?

THE NINTH QVESTION, CONcerning the Virgine Marie.

THis question standeth of many parts: 1. Whether the B. Virgin Marie were conceiued without sin. Secondly, whether she vowed Virginitie before the Angel was sent vnto her. Thirdly, of the assumption of her body into heauen. [Page] Fourthly, of the dignitie and preeminence that shee hath (as they affirme) aboue all other Saints, yea, and the Angels to. Fiftly, of the merites of the virgin Marie and of the Aue Maria.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE Virgin Marie were voyde of original and actuall sinne.

The Papists.

error 80 1 AL men are borne in sinne, Christ onely excepted, and his mother for his honor: Rhemist. Rom. 5. sect. 9.

Answ. it is no more dishonour for Christ to be borne of a sinner, then to haue taken his flesh, and lineally descended, according to his humanity, of Thamar that committed incest with Iuda and Rahab which was an harlot: Math. 1.3.5. Secondly, it maketh more for the honor of God that Christ was borne without sinne of a woman which was a sinner, and more setteth foorth his power, then otherwise, lest he should be thought to haue deriued his puritie from his mother.

2 They holde, that there was no actuall sinne in the Virgin Marie, no not the lest and smallest sinnes, which they call venial, Rhemist. 1. Iohn. 1. sect. 5. She was especially protected, and preserued from sinning by the grace of God.

Ans. That God is able clearely to rid his children from sinne, & to preserue them from falling thereinto, we denie not: but, seeing you haue no scripture for this priuiledge, that should be bestowed onely vpon Marie, to be free from sin: but rather the contrary is proued out of scripture, That all haue sinned, Rom. 3.23. it is too rash and bolde an assertion, contrary to the will of God, to ascribe any thing to his power. He is as able to exempt all from sinning as one: vnlesse therefore you can shew some especiall warrant out of Gods word, for Maries freedome, by your reason, all the children of God shall bee freed from sinne as wel as Marie, because God is able to doe it.

The Protestants.

THat the Virgin Marie was both conceiued in sinne, and was also subiect to actuall sinnes in her life, as other of the children of God, thus out of the scripture we doe declare it.

1 How els can the word of God be true, that sayth, All haue sinned, Rom. 3.23. &. 5.12. They will answere, that Marie had an especiall priuiledge: then let them shew it out of the word of God, and we will beleeue: otherwise the general conclusion must stand, that all haue sinned. Againe, Marie her self in her song, calleth Christ her Sauiour: Luk. 1.47. Ergo, she was a sinner: for how els could she be saued from her sinnes which she had not? If they answere as they doe,Fox. p. 801. that Christ was her Sauiour onely, because hee preserued her from sinne: Wee doe thus replie. First, that a Sauiour in scripture is defined [Page] to be he that saueth the people from their sinnes, Math. 1.21. not that preserueth onely. Secondly, if Marie were free from originall sinne, as they say she was, she needed not a Sauiour to keep her from sinne, for she might haue preserued herselfe.

Arg. 2 Marie dyed, Ergo, she was a sinner: for sinne brought death into the world, Rom. 1.5. If she had had no sinne, she had not dyed. Christ indeede, though he were no sinner, yet he bare our sinnes, and therefore dyed for vs.

Christ checked and rebuked his mother, Iohn. 2.4. Woman, what haue I to doe with thee? Ergo, it seemeth, she was not without fault. Rhemist. answere: It was rather a doctrine to others, to teach them not to do any thing for respect of kinred, against reason, then a reprehension to Mary. Wee replie: But I pray you, how could the Apostles learne to beware of that fault, if it had beene no fault in Marie? How could they be admonished in her, if she were not first her selfe admonished? And the maner of speech sheweth, it was a rebuke, Christ saluting her by no other name, then if he had spoken to any other woman.

Argum. 3. The Papists themselues are in a stagger, and dare not constantly affirme, that Marie was conceiued without sinne, but put in this clause (as many godly deuout men iudge) Rhemist. Rom. 5. sect. 9. And Bellarmine sayth, in maiori parte Ecclesiae piè credi, that the greater part of the Church doth so godly beleeue, yet he dare not determine vpon it himselfe, de cult. sanctor. lib. 3. cap. 16. But why are they afrayd to holde it as an vndoubted trueth, seeing Pope Sixtus hath clearely determined that it was so, forbidding the Dominick Friers to preach the contrary,Fox. p 800. and hereupon erected a new holy day of her conception? Here then they are driuen to a great straight: for either they must abolutely hold, that she was not conceiued in sin, agaynst the Master of sentences, and Thom. Aquinas, with other schoolemen, or els holde the contrary, and so confesse the Pope to haue been in error.

Augustine sayth, beatior Maria percipiendo fidem Christi, quàm concipiendo carnem Christi: Materna propinquitas nihil Mariae profuisset, nisi foeliciùs Christum corde quàm carne gestasset. De sanct. virginit. cap. 4. Marie was more happy in perceiuing the fayth of Christ, then in conceiuing the flesh of Christ: neither had it profited her to be the mother of Christ, if she had not more happily borne him in her heart, then she did in her wombe. But what neede had Marie to beleeue in Christ, if she had been pure from her natiuity, and had no sinnes to be forgiuen her? Augustine yet more playnly sayth, Maria ex Adam mortua propter peccatum Adae: Adam mortuus est propter peccatum, & caro domini ex Maria mortua est propter delenda peccata. Marie dyed being borne of Adam, In Psal. 34. conci. 2. because of the sinne of Adam: Adam dyed because of his owne sinne: Christ dyed in the flesh to take away our sinnes: Ergo, Marie by his sentence was borne in the sinne of Adam.

[Page]

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER Marie vowed Virginitie before the Annuntiation.

The Papists.

error 81 THey would gather and conclude so much out of the answere of Marie to the Angell, who told her, she should conceaue and beare a sonne: How can this be (sayth she) seeing I know no man? That is, she plainly declareth, she could haue no childe by knowing a man, because of her vow, for otherwise she needed not haue asked such a question, how a woman might haue a sonne promised her, if she had maried to haue carnal copulation. Rhemist. Luk. 1. sect. 13. Bellarmin. de Monachis. cap. 22.

Ans. First, Ambrose maketh this to be the cause why Marie so answered, she had read the prophesie of Esay, that a virgin should conceiue & bring forth a sonne, and therefore knew very wel, that this holy childe should be otherwise conceiued, then by the knowledge or helpe of man, Fulk. ibid. Secondly, as also the Angel deliuering at once his whole message, and shewing what maner of childe it should be: euen the Sonne of the most high, who should sit on the throne of Dauid, and of his kingdome there should be no end: that is, that the childe should be the Sonne of God: she straightwayes conceiued that such a holy seede could not be borne of man, and therefore asketh, how without man he might be borne. Sic Caluin. Beza.

The Protestants.

THat Marie, as she was an entire Virgin before the birth of Christ, so that she continued also a Virgin all her life after, we doe verily think, and condemne their opinion that holde the contrarie: but that she vowed or purposed Virginitie, before the message of the Angel was brought vnto her, it is rashly without scripture, nay rather agaynst it, affirmed.

Argum. 1. The text is playne, that they had a purpose to consummate their mariage: When as Marie was betrothed to Ioseph, before they came together▪ Math. 1.18. Ergo, there was a meaning to come together, if she had not in the meane time been found to be with childe of the holy Ghost: for otherwise, it shuld seeme to haue been a mockery on Maries behalfe, to promise mariage to Ioseph, without any purpose to performe the duety of mariage. But if it were done with both their consents, then mocked they with God, who instituted mariage for some ende and purpose, which could not be attayned out of mariage: for they should haue maried neither for auoyding fornication, nor for procreation, which are the two chiefe ends of mariage: as for the third, which is mutuall comfort, it ariseth of the former.

Argum. 2. It was not the manner among the Iewes to vow Virginitie, but [Page] it was rather a shame and reproch to remayne and die a Virgin: and therefore Iephthaths daughter lamented her Virginitie, Iudg. 11.38. Howe then could Marie be induced contrary to the custome of the Church, to vow Virginitie? Yea Augustine confesseth as much: Hoc mores Israelitarum recusabant: The manners of the Israelites did not suffer it, de Virginit. cap. 4. though he himselfe els-where, and in the same place seemeth to incline to the contrary opinion.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE ASsumption of the Virgin Marie.

The Papists.

THey report the story of the death and departure of the Virgin Mary, after error 82 this manner▪ At the time of her death after she had liued sixtie three years, all the Apostles, being dispersed into diuers nations, were myraculously brought together to Ierusalem, to solemnize her funerall. They buried her in Gethsemani: and for three dayes together the Angels were heard to sing melodious songs: At three dayes ende also Saint Thomas came; who being desirous to see her bodie, and not finding it in the graue, they thereupon assuredly deemed that her body was assumpted into heauen, Rhemist. Act. 1. vers. 14.

Argum. 1. It is best agreeable to the priuiledge of the mother of God, not to see corruption, Rhemist. ibid. Seeing also her sonne was exempted from corruption, & natura Mariae excipitur, the nature of Marie must be excepted: caro enim Iesu est caro Mariae, the flesh of Iesus is the flesh of Marie. And seeing Christ came to fulfil the law, which sayth, Honor thy parents: it is very like, eum in morte speciali gratia eam honorasse, that he did honor her by special grace in her death. These reasons and other are to be read in a forged booke amongst Augustines works, bearing title, De assumptione Mariae.

Answ. First, there is no credite to be giuen to the forged writings which passe vnder the name of Saint Denis, and Athanasius, out of whom they doe reporte the assumption of Marie, nay their owne lesson, which they reade vpon the Assumption day, doth controll and confute the other. First, that story saith, that without doubt she was taken vp in bodie. But your lesson leaueth it as vncertayne, whether she were raysed vp in body or not. Secondly, the forged story sayth, she was buried in Gethsemani, which was in mount Oliuet: your lesson sayth, that the place of her buriall is in the midst of the valley of Iehosaphat, which is betweene mount Oliuet and the Citie, Fulk. ibid. Secondly, it followeth not, because Christ tooke flesh of the Virgin, that therfore she should also as well be exempted from corruption: for hee tooke flesh also of Dauid, and other his progenitors, who by the same reason should bee made immortall. And if she were priuiledged by beeing the mother of Christ, from seeing corruption, why not also from hauing anie sinne? for her Sonne after the flesh saw neither. Thirdly, Christ also both did and might honor his mother as he was man, though so great a priuiledge bee not graunted vnto her. [Page] The reuerence, which was to be done to his mother, was in regard of his manhood, and so was he obedient vnto them, Luk. 2.51. and so long as he liued in the flesh: and therefore he did care for her euen vpon the crosse, commending her to the disciple whom he loued. But he neither was to honour her as he was God, and therfore not to free her from corruption, which had been a work of his Godhead: and the natural affection and honour due vnto parents ceaseth after this life. It were then too grosse a conceit, to think that Christ hath such regard now of the virgin Marie in heauen, as he had of her, being his mother, in the dayes of his flesh: for Christ, as he is not now knowen after the flesh, 2. Corinth. 5.16. so neither knoweth he any after the flesh.

The Protestants.

THis vncertaine reporte of the assumption of Mary, with other circumstances thereof, we holde to bee a very counterfeit storie, and worthy of no credite.

Argum. 1. If it were a matter of such waight, as they make it, who haue erected a new found holy-day of the assumption of Mary, surely the scriptures would not haue been silent therein: especially Saint Iohn (as Augustine saith) to whose charge she was committed, would haue left somewhat in writing of that matter: for sayth he, Nullus fideliùs id narrare potuerit, for no man could more truely and faythfully make relation thereof.De sanct. serm. 35.

Argum. 2 That generall sentence pronounced vpon Adam and all Adams seede, must needes also take place in the virgin Marie, Thou art dust, and to dust shalt thou returne, Genes. 3.19. Christ onely is excepted, and that by the testimonie of the word of God: wherefore, vnles this priuiledge of the virgin could be proued out of scripture, as Christs is, we must needs hold her subiect to that generall law of corruption.

Augustine sayth, Assumptio eius in apocrypha non in catholica reperitur historia: the assumption of Mary is found in an Apocryphal, that is, an obscure and vncertaine, not a Catholike or authentical storie.

THE FOVRTH PART OF THE HOnor and worship of the Virgin Marie.

The Papists.

error 83 THey doe ascribe vnto her a kinde of religious honor, more then to any of the Saynts beside: For whereas they call the worship of Saints, [...], seruice, the honor of the Virgin, they tearme, [...], a higher kinde of seruice, Bellarmin. de Sanct. lib. 2. cap. 25. They call her, Regina mundi, scala coeli, thronus dei, ianua Paradisi, The Queene of the world, the ladder of heauen; the throne of God, and gate of Paradise: yea they giue her iurisdiction ouer her sonne, Iube natum, commaund thy sonne, Iure matris impera filio, commaund thy sonne by [Page] the right of a mother. Coge Deum, compell God to be mercifull to sinners, Annot. Fulk. 1.15.

Againe, they say, she is to be honoured with the feasts of her Natiuitie, Assumption, and Conception: for the other two, of her Purification, and Annuntiation, are not proper to the Virgine, but concerne Christ: the one his Conception, the other his Presentation, Rhemist. actor. 1. sect. 7.

Argum. She her selfe prophecieth of all Catholike generations, that they should blesse her in keeping her festiuities and memorials: but if these festiuities of her Conception and Assumption be not kept, she should haue none at all: and so be thought worthie of lesse remembrance, then any other Saint, Galat. 4. sect. 5. Rhemist.

The Protestants.

1. WE doe not celebrate any festiuall daies in the honour of creatures, neither of the Virgine Mary, nor any other Saint, but only to the honor of God: and therefore the feasts of the Annuntiation, and Purification, may much better be receiued, because they belong and are referred vnto Christ, then the other festiuities, of the assumption and conception of Mary, the institution whereof was most superstitious: the one for the fayned assumption of her bodie, which your owne writers are vncertaine of: the other to maintaine the heresie of the Franciscanes, that she was conceiued and borne without sinne. As for the memorie of the Virgine Mary, it may better be kept, then by such festiuities: as our Sauiour Christ taught to keepe the remēbrance of Mary Magdalene, by preaching the Gospell, Math. 26.13. Fulk. annot. Act. 1.7. And if they only are Catholike generations, that call her blessed in keeping these festiuities in her memoriall: then there were no Catholike generations for many hundred yeeres after, and so do you condemne the age of the Apostles: for neither then, nor many yeres after were these superstitious festiuities heard of. But Mary saith in her song, From henceforth, euen from this time forward, shall all generations call me blessed: so that, if her blessednesse had consisted in the memorie of those daies, they should immediatly haue been kept, especially the day of her natiuitie, Fulk. Galath. 4. sect. 5.

2. We doe allow all praise giuen vnto the Virgine, without the dishonour of God and her Sonne and Sauiour Christ: we doe acknowledge the honour that God vouchsafed her, not to be a meritorious or principall efficient cause of our redemption, but onely an holy vessell, and instrumentall cause of the conception and birth of Christ, by whose only merite and worthines our redemption is perfited, as by a proper and principall, and onely meritorious efficient cause thereof. And therefore, those are blasphemous titles which are giuen vnto her, to call her the ladder of Heauen, and gate of Paradise, and such like: and so in a manner to make her our redeemer. Augustine saith, She was more happie, in that she conceiued the faith of Christ, then in conceiuing the flesh of Christ.De sancta virgine cap. 3. If then these titles be vnmeet for her, in respect that she receiued the faith of Christ, which is [Page] common to al the children of God, then are they more vnfit, in that she conceiued the flesh of Christ.

3. It is great presumption to thinke that the Virgine Mary may command her sonne in heauen: seeing she had no authoritie to command him vpon earth, in any thing pertaining to his office, Ioh. 2.4. And now likewise that carnall respect of children to their parents ceaseth in the kingdome of God.

As for that superioritie & higher kind of honour which she hath aboue al the Saints beside, we finde no warrant out of scripture. She is respected now in heauen, not as she bare the flesh of Christ, but as she liued by faith in Christ: she also reioyced in God her Sauiour. The scripture therefore maketh one condition and estate of all that shall be saued: and sayth generally of all, of others as well as the Virgine Christs mother, That they shall be as the angels in heauen, Matth. 22.30. Yea, our Sauiour sheweth, that Whosoeuer doth the wil of God, is his sister, brother and mother, Math. 12.50. By the which we learne, that other the faithfull seruants of GOD may by their faith in Christ, be as well accepted of God, as if they had borne Christ in the flesh. Where then is that high dignitie, which she hath, as the mother of Christ, aboue all Saints? Augustine saith: Tu concinis sine fine choris coniuncta, Angelis & Archangelis sociata: Thou (O Virgine) doest reioyce being ioyned vnto the heauenly quire,Serm. 35. de assumpt. Mariae. being associated to Angels and Archangels. He maketh her not Ladie or Queene of heauen, but onely a fellow companion of the Saints and Angels.

AN APPENDIX OR FIFT PART OF THE MErites of the Virgine, and of the Aue Maria.

The Papists.

1. THey doe teach and hold, that she onely amongst all women deserued to error 84 beare the redeemer of the world, and so by her merites obtained that fauour to be the mother of Christ.

Argum. The Angel saluteth her, & calleth her, Full of grace, which sheweth the prerogatiue that she had aboue other women, and the worthines that was in her, Rhemist. Luk. 1. sect. 12.15.

The Protestants.

Ans. 1. Wee acknowledge that herein she was blessed aboue all other women, in that she was chosen to be the mother of our Sauiour, and that she was endued fully with the graces of the holy Ghost: but those graces she had not of her selfe, but of the free gift of God, without her merites.

2. The word [...], signifieth freely beloued, not full of grace, as it is likewise taken, Ephes. 1.6. [...]. He hath made vs accepted in his beloued Sonne.

3. She her selfe confesseth her selfe in her song, to bee of a lowe degree, [Page] poore in spirit, and hungrie, whom God in mercie looked vpon, Luk. 1.50. whereas God sent away the proud and rich: as the proud Pharisie that thought himselfe rich of good workes, obtained nothing of God, Luk. 18. Wherefore if she had stood vpon her owne deserts, she had made her selfe rich, not poore: neither should she haue magnified the mercie of God, but his iustice: for when a reward is giuen according to desert, it is of his iustice, and not mercie.

Augustine thus commenteth vpon the words of her song, Magnificet animae mea Dominum, & recordetur, quomodo nullis suis praecedentibus meritis, De sancta▪ virginit. serm. 35. sed sola dei bonitate sit ab iniquitate saluata: Let my soule praise the Lord; and remember, how that not by any merites going before, but through the only gracious goodnes of God, it is deliuered from sinne: Ergo, Mary not saued by her merites, nor consequently the mother of Christ, by her merites, but onely by the meere fauour of God.

The Papists.

2. THey much commend the often vsing of the Aue Mary, which is done (say error 85 they) to the honour of Christ and our Ladie.

Argum. They be the very summe and abridgement of the whole Gospell: and therefore to be vsed, Rhemist. Luk. 1. sect. 11.

The Protestants.

1. You do shamefully abuse those words, in making a praier of them, which was but a forme of salutation vsed by the Angel: neither can you say them in that sense they were vttered in by the Angel. Also you offend in the vaine repetition of them vpon your beades, as the heathen did, Math. 6.7. and in committing idolatrie, in the inuocating of the Virgine, and praying vnto her in these words: who is a creature and not a God to be called vpon.

2. What mysterie soeuer be contained in these words, yet the people vnderstand nothing at all. And though we denie not but that the words are holy and mysticall, yet it followeth not that they should be vsed for a prayer.

3. What great account they make of the Aue Mary, it may appeare by this: that they thinke they may alter and change it, and adde to it at their pleasure: as by Pope Sixtus the 4. there was a clause more added vnto the common Aue Mary, in this manner: Haile Mary full of grace, the Lord is with thee,Fox. p. 800. blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruite of thy wombe Iesus Christ, and blessed is Anna thy mother, of whom thy virgines flesh hath proceeded without blot of originall sinne. What a fearefull thing is this, that they should thus dare to adde vnto the scriptures? How can they now escape that iudgement that is threatned against all those that doe adde, or take ought to or from the word of God? Apocal. 22.18.

Thus farre of such questions and controuersies, as concerne the kingdome of Christ, which is his Church: of the which we haue now entreated at large: first in generall of the whole, and then of the seuerall parts and members thereof in order. Now follow those controuersies, which belong vnto the [Page] Priesthood of Christ, the third excellent and glorious office of our Sauiour: which his Priesthood is partly seene in his intercession and mediation for vs, partly in his sacrifice, where we are to handle the great and waightie controuersies of the Sacraments, by the which the sacrifice of his death is applied vnto vs.

THE TENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE INTERCESSION AND MEDIAtion of Christ, whether he be onely our Mediatour and Intercessor.

The Papists.

THey seeme in these very words to confesse, that Christ is the onely singular error 86 aduocate and patrone of mankinde, that by himselfe alone, and by his owne merites procureth all grace and mercie, none asking or obtaining either grace in this life, or glorie in the next, but by him. But this letteth not, but that there may be other inferiour mediatours, though not in that singular sense, Rhemist. annot. 1. Timoth. 2. sect. 4.

Argum. Christ is the only Sauiour and Redeemer of the world, yet the name of Sauiour and Redeemer is giuen to men in the scriptures, as Iud. 3.9. Othniel is called a Sauiour, Act. 7.35. Moses a Deliuerer or Redeemer: and all this without derogation to him, that in more excellent manner is the onely Sauiour of the world: Ergo, there may be also many mediatours, in an inferiour degree to that singular mediatour, to offer vp our praiers, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. 1. If Christ be sufficient to procure all grace and mercie vnto vs, what neede then the mediation or inuocation of Saints? for wee must either doubt of his power, in ioyning other helpers with him, or make question of his good will and readines to helpe vs, in making other mediatours vnto him.

2. They make other mediatours and intercessors beside Christ, euen in that high and singular degree: for not onely Christ by their doctrine, by his merites procureth grace, but other Saints also by their merites are our mediatours: as it is plaine to see in that popish praier, Tu per Thomae sanguinem, &c. By the blood of Thomas, which for thee he did spend, make vs, Christ, to climbe, whither Thomas did ascend. In this blasphemous prayer and a thousand such, they pray only to Christ as God, not as mediatour, men departed, and many of them no Saints, they make their onely mediatours by their owne proper merites. See Fulk. ibid.

Againe, their Saints are not onely intercessors for grace, but conferrers of grace and helpe, which is the highest degree of mediation. They appoynt seuerall patrones amongst the Saints for all purposes: S. Apollonia for the toothach: Saint Rooke for the pestilence: Saint Petronill for the ague: Saint Gregorie [Page] for Schollers: Saint Morris for Souldiers: Saint Luke for Painters: Saint Crispin for Shoomakers: Saint Nicholas for the sea: Saint Iodocus for corne: Saint Vrbane for wine. And thus doe they not onely (as they beare vs in hand) pray for these graces and blessings, but they haue power themselues to bestow them.

Ans. 3. Concerning the name and title of Sauiour and Redeemer, we answere: first, men are called in the Scripture, Deliuerers and Sauiours, in respect of some temporal deliuerance, not of the spiritual or eternal redemption, which belongeth onely to Christ: but you make your Saints mediators of eternall redemption. Secondly, they whom the Scripture calleth Redeemers and Sauiours, were appoynted by God for such temporall deliuerance: but you cannot shewe the like appoyntment for Saints to be mediators of eternall saluation, though in an inferiour degree to Christ. Thirdly, seeing the name of God and Christ is giuen to men in the scriptures, as to Princes and Prophets: why may you not as well say, that there may be many Gods and Christs properly, though in an inferiour degree to him which is only God and Christ, as to appoynt other inferiour Redeemers, Sauiours and Mediators?

The Protestants.

WE acknowledge but one onely Mediatour as well of intercession as redemption, euen Iesus Christ our Lord: to whom and through whom all our praiers & supplications ought to be made: to him we only pray, as being one God with the Father and the holy Ghost: by him and through him we only pray, as being the only Mediatour betweene God and man.

Arg. 1. S. Paul saith, There is one mediatour of God and men, the man Iesus Christ, 1. Tim. 2.5. Hence we doe frame this argument: The mediator betweene God and men, must himselfe be both God and man: but so is none but Christ: Ergo, he is the onely Mediatour.

Arg. 2. He is onely the aduocate and mediatour for our sinnes, that is the propitiation for our sinnes, 1. Ioh. 2.1. Christ only is the propitiation for our sinnes: Ergo, the onely mediatour.

Augustine thus writeth vpon this place: Si Apostolus ita diceret, &c. If the Apostle had sayd thus: If any man sinne, you haue me a mediatour with the father,Cont. Parmen. lib. 2. cap. 8. and I doe by my praier obtaine pardon for your sinnes (as Parmenianus in a certaine place maketh the Bishop a mediatour betweene the people & God:) Quis sicut Apostolum Christi, & non sicut Antichristum intueretur? Who would behold him as an Apostle of Christ, and not as Antichrist? It is then Antichristian doctrine, in Augustines iudgement, to make any other mediators or intercessors beside Christ.

HERE FOLLOW SVCH CONTROVERSIES, as concerne the Sacraments of the Church.
OF the Sacraments then, wee must first intreate in generall, and afterward handle them in particular.
THE ELEVENTH GENERAL CONTROVERSIE, OF THE SACRAMENTS IN GENERAL.

[Page]

THis Controuersie containeth diuers questions: first, of the nature and definition of a Sacrament. Secondly, of the efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments. Thirdly, of the number and order of the Sacraments, the difference and preeminence amongst them. They thus follow in their order.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF THE NATVRE and definition of a Sacrament.

WE thus define a Sacrament, to be an outward sensible signe, representing an holy, inward, and spirituall grace, instituted of Christ, to be vsed in that manner he hath appoynted, to seale vnto vs the promises of God, and to assure vs of the remission of sinnes, by the righteousnes of faith in Christ, Rom. 4.11.

Some things there be in this definition, that are agreed vpon betweene vs and our aduersaries: as that the Sacraments are outward signes of spirituall and holy graces, and that there must be a conueniencie and agreement betweene the signe and the thing signified: that not euery thing may be represented by a Sacrament, but an holy and spirituall grace: that a Sacrament ought to be instituted by a diuine, not an humane authoritie, Bellar. de Sacram. in gener. lib. 1. cap. 9

The seuerall poynts then wherein we dissent from them, and which they mislike in this definition, are these: First, concerning the authoritie of insti [...]uting a Sacrament, which we affirme to be deriued onely from Christ, and manifestly to be proued out of the scriptures. Secondly, of the forme and manner of celebrating the Sacraments. Thirdly, of the instrumental or ministerial cause, which is the Minister. Fourthly, of the vse and end of a Sacrament, whether it be a scale of the promises of God, and instituted for that end.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE EFFICIENT CAVSE, that is, the author or institutor of a Sacrament.

The Papists.

THey doe willingly grant, that neither the Apostles then had, nor the Church error 87 now hath authoritie to institute Sacraments: but that this power is onely in Christ, and that the Apostles did but declare and deliuer that which they receiued of Christ: yet for the triall of this, they refuse to be iudged by the expresse word of God, but flie vnto their traditions, which they call the word of God not written, Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 14. & 23.

Argum. The sacrament of Baptisme, and of the Eucharist, were instituted [Page] without expresse warrant of scripture: for at that time the newe testament was not written, when Christ ordained those mysteries: Ergo, for the other Sacraments we need not the expresse cōmandement of scripture, Bellar. lib. 1. cap. 14.

Ans. First, the traditions of our Sauiour giuen vnto the Apostles concerning those two Sacraments, were afterward written by the Apostles, and expressely set downe in scripture: & therefore we doubt not, but that they were of Christs institution. But your traditions being not committed to writing, concerning your other forged sacraments, are iustly suspected, seeing the Apostles should haue as well been charged with all the sacraments, if Christ had instituted thē, as with only two. Secondly, how then followeth it, the word of God was sometime vnwritten, therefore it is so still? or Christ, who was the author of the word written, might institute sacraments without expresse scripture: Ergo, the testimonie of scripture is not necessarie now?

The Protestants.

WE hold no sacraments to be of Christs institution, but those onely which the scripture testifieth to haue been commanded by Christ, as Baptisme, Math. 28.19. the Lords Supper, Luk. 23.19. The other, which haue no testimonie of scripture, were not appoynted by Christ.

Argum. 1. S. Paul saith, That the scriptures are able to make the man of God absolute and perfect to euery good worke, 1. Timoth. 3.17. But how can the Minister of God be perfectly furnished and prepared for the worke of the ministerie, if he haue not sufficient direction out of the scriptures concerning the sacraments of the Church? for how can he absolutely execute euery part of his office, if he faile in the right vse of the sacraments? Ergo, seeing the scriptures are able to make him perfect, from thence he receiueth sufficient instruction for the sacraments.

Argum. 2. Augustine saith: Christus sacramentis numero paucissimis, obseruatione facilimis, &c. Christ hath ioyned his people together by the sacramēts, few in number, easie in obseruation: such are Baptisme, and the partaking of his bodie and blood: then it followeth: Et si quid aliud in scripturis canonicis commendatur: And if any other sacrament be commanded in the canonicall scripture, Epistol. 118. Ergo, we must attend vpon the scripture and written word of God, if we will be instructed aright concerning the Sacraments.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE FORME OF A Sacrament, and the manner of consecration.

The Papists.

THe Sacrament is not consecrated (say they) by al the words of the institution,error 88 but by a certain forme of speech to be vsed ouer the elemēts: as these words to be said ouer the bread, This is my body: & the like ouer the wine, This cup is [Page] the new testament, &c. And in Baptisme these: In the name of the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost. These are the formes of the Sacrament, and very words of consecration, though spoken in a strange tongue, without further inuocation of the name of God, or giuing of thankes, or without a Sermon, which we require (as they say) as necessarie to the essence of a sacrament, Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 11 sect. 11.15. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacrament. cap. 19.

Argum. S. Paul sayth, The cup of blessing which we blesse, 1. Corinth. 10.16. The Apostle referreth the benediction or blessing to the cup or Chalice, which is nothing els but the consecration thereof, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. First, wee denie not, but that to blesse here doth signifie to sanctifie or consecrate: but that is not done by a magicall murmuration of words ouer the Sacrament, but by the whole action according to Christs institution, in distributing, receiuing, giuing of thankes. Secondly▪ as for the words which Christ vttered in the institution, we rehearse them not, as a magicall charme to be sayd ouer the bread and wine to conuert their substance: but to declare what they are made to vs by force of Christs institution, namely, his bodie and blood.

The Protestants.

WE doe not hold, that it is an essentiall part of the Sacrament, alwayes to haue a sermon before it, as they vnderstand a sermon; which notwithstanding were most conuenient, and alwaies to bee wished: but this wee affirme, that the Sacrament cannot be rightly ministred, vnlesse there be a declaration, and shewing forth of the Lords death, not only in the visible action of breaking & distributing the elements: but also in setting forth the end of the Lords death out of the word of God, with an exhortation to thankfulnes, which is alwaies obserued amongst vs in the dayly celebration and receiuing of the Sacrament. Concerning the words of the institution, we also grant, that they are necessarily to be vsed in the celebration of the Sacrament: but not as the Papists vse them: For first, they make them not all of one value, but out of the whole institution, picke out certaine consecratorie words, as they call them: as, This is my bodie, This is the cup: whereas the other words, Take ye, eate ye, drinke ye, doe this in remembrance: doe as well belong to the institution, as the other. Secondly, they say, that the words of institution doe not serue any thing at all for the instruction of the people, to shew them the right vse of the Sacrament, but onely for benediction and consecration of the elements, Bellarm. cap. 19. Thirdly, they doe hold, that only by the pronouncing of those words, the elements are consecrated: whereas by the whole action, and cerebration of the Sacrament, the giuing, receiuing, inuocation, thankesgiuing, according to Christs institution, the consecration is performed vpon the elements, Fulk. 1. Corinth. 10. sect. 4.

Arg. 1. That the words of institution rehearsed, do helpe as well to admonish & stirre vp the people to a thankful remēbrance of the death of Christ, as to consecrate & blesse the elemēts, it is manifest: whereas Christ saith, as the words are vsually rehearsed, Doe this in remembrance of me: and S. Paul saith, That by [Page] receiuing the sacrament, we doe shew forth the Lords death, 1. Corinth. 11.26. Ergo the people are by the words pronounced, instructed and admonished, and taught the right vse of the sacrament.

Argum. 2. that the words of institution doe helpe toward the benediction or consecration of the Elements, we deny not, but not by them alone, but praier also and thankesgiuing, and the whole action beside of receiuing. To the consecration or sanctifiyng of any creature, two things are required: the word of God, and praier, 1. Timoth. 4.5. Neither the word sanctifieth without praier, nor praier without the word. Ergo to the sanctifiyng & cōsecrating of the sacrament, the bare rehearsall of the institution sufficeth not, without inuocation and praier.

Augustine saith, Accedat verbum ad elementum, et fiet Sacramentum. Let the word be ioyned to the element, and it is become a Sacrament. And in an other place, he sheweth what word he meaneth: Faciente verbo, non quia dicitur, sed quia creditur, hoc est verbum fidei, quod praedicamus. The word effecteth this, not because it is spoken or vttered, but because it is beleeued: this is the word of faith, saith the Apostle, which we preach: thus farre Augustine tract in Johan. 80. Wherefore it is not the muttering of a few words in a strange toung, after the manner of enchaunters, that by any secret force giuen vnto them hath power to consecrate: but the vnderstanding, hearing, and beleeuing the institution of Christ, with calling vpon the name of God, and thankesgiuing before him.

AN APPENDIX OF THIS PART, WHETHER THE forme of wordes in the institution of the Sacraments may not be by some addition, or other alteration changed.

The Papists.

THe words of institution may be changed two manner of wayes: either substantially,error 89 when the sence is also altered with the words; or accidētally, whē the elements or syllables are onely changed, but the sence remaineth the same. If there be a change in the substance of the words, the sacrament is imperfect: if the alteration be of the forme onely of words, and not of the sence, the sacramēt is not destroyed: but he sinneth that doth so alter them. Wherefore it is not lawfull any way at all to alter or change the forme of words. Bellarmine cap. 21. li. 1.

Argum. It is not lawfull to adde or take, to or from the words of scripture, much lesse to change the words appointed to be vsed in the Sacrament. Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. To adde or detract to or from the word of God, with a purpose and intent, to wrest it to a contrary meaning, and destroy the true sence thereof, cannot be done without great impiety: and such is the manner of all heretikes: But to alleadge Scripture, in keeping still the full sence, though we misse of the [Page] wordes, is not to be counted so heinous a sinne: we see the holy Apostles in citing textes of Scripture, doe not alwaies binde themselues to the very wordes, as Act. 7.43. Heb. 10.5. The Apostle saith, A body thou hast giuen me: In the Psalme we read, Mine eares hast thou opened: diuerse wordes, yet the same sense.

Augustine saith very well, they that vnderstand the Scripture, though they keepe not alwaies the wordes, are better then they that read and vnderstand not:De doctri. Christian. lib. 4. cap. 5. Sed vtrisque ille melior, qui et cum volet, ea [...] dicit, et sicut oportet, intelligit: But he is better then both, that both remembreth the wordes, and keepeth the sense too: yet he also deserueth praise, that beareth the sense in minde, though he cannot the words.

The Protestants.

NO substantiall change (we confesse) is to be admitted in the forme of Institution, which may alter the sense: neither is any particular man by himselfe to make any accidentall change, and bring in a new forme of wordes, but the publike and vniforme order of the church must be kept, yea, and the church likewise is bound both to reteyne the true sense, and, as neere as may be, the very words, but where occasion serueth, to make some small accidentall change: of the words, the sence being nothing diminished, it is not condemned as an vnlawfull and sinfull act.

Argum. 1. The Euangelists report not all the same forme of words, which should be vttered by our Sauiour, neither yet S. Paul fully accordeth with them, in the precise and strict forme of institution: as by comparing of them together, it may be seene,

Mat. 26. ver. 27. Take, eat, this is my body. | S. Luke. cap. 22. This is my body which is giuen for you, do this in remembrance of me. ver. 19. | S. Paul. Take, eat, this my body which is broken for you, doe this in remēbrāce of me. 1. Cor. 11.24.
ver. 28. This is my blood of the new testament, that is shedde for many for the remission of sinnes. | This cup is the new testamēt in my blood which is shed for you. | This cup is the newe testament in my bloud, this do as oft as you drink it in remē brance of me.

If it had beene a sinne, to haue missed in some termes and sillables, no doubt the spirite of God would not haue suffered these holy writers to haue made the least scape. Is it to be thought a sinne in the Church, which in stead of Take ye, eate ye, in the plurall number, hath appointed the Sacrament to be ministred particularly in the singular number, to euery of the cōmunicants, saying. Take thou, eat thou, drinke thou? Wherfore all accidentall change of words carieth not with it a guilt of sinne.Cont. Donat. de baptis. li. 6. ca. 25

Augustine indeede saith, Certa sunt verba euangelica, &c. The words of [Page] the gospell are certaine, whereby Baptisme is consecrated.Tractat. in Iohan. 80. But yet he saith else where, In ipso verbo aliud est sonus transiens, aliud virtus manēs: In the word spoken the sound which passeth, is one thing, the vertue or sense of the words which abideth, is an other: It is then the sence of the words, not the sound or sillables, that is certaine and permanent.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE INSTRVMENTALL cause of the Sacraments, that is, the lawfull Minister.

SOme things are yeelded vnto of both sides: First, that no man ought to take vpon him to administer the Sacraments, vnlesse he be thereunto lawfully called and ordeined by the Church, sauing that they make exception of Baptisme, which in case of necessity, as they teach, may be giuen by the hands of lay men or women: but of this matter we shall haue fitter occasion afterward to consider. Secondly it is agreed, that the efficacy or vertue of the Sacrament, dependeth not of the faith or honesty of the Minister: but a faithfull man may receiue the sacrament worthily, euen at the hands of an vnworthy Minister.

The Papists.

THe point of difference betweene vs, is this: They do teach that the efficacie,error 90 perfection, and being of the Sacrament, doth necessarily depend of the intention of the Minister, so that they holde it to be no sacrament, if the Minister haue not, Intentionem faciendi, quod facit ecclesia, A full purpose and intent in ministring the Sacrament, to doe that which the Church doth, that is, to consecrate the elements, and to make a Sacrament, Trident. concil. sess. 7. canon 11. Bellarm. cap. 27. So that by this rule, if the Ministers intention be not wholy vpō the busines he hath in hand, it shall be no Sacrament.

Argum. If the Ministers intention were not necessary to make a sacrament, when it chaunceth that the gospell is read at the table by a Minister, there being both bread and wine set before them, and he in reading saith, This is my body, and This is my blood, straightwaies all that bread & wine should be consecrate, and become a sacrament, but because his intention is wanting, it is none▪ Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. 1. But what if the Minister should haue a fantastical conceite and intent, as he readeth, to consecrate all the bread & wine vpon the table, then it should seeme by your rule, that it must needs be a sacrament, which were euen as absurd a thing as the other? 2. There are other lets & impediments, from hauing a sacrament at the table, thē the intention of the minister being wanting or kept back: for the elements are not consecrated, nor the Sacrament made by the bare pronouncing of the words: but the whole institutiō ought to be obserued: there must be eating, drinking, taking, and doing al in the remēbrāce of the death of Christ: there must be distributing, receiuing, inuocatiō, thākesgiuing: the whole action in the sacramēt, is the cōsecration therof: these things thē being wāting, [Page] there can be no Sacrament.

The Protestants.

IF the Sacrament be administred aright according to the institution of Christ, whatsoeuer the Minister be, howsoeuer affected, be he neuer so prophane in his hart, without any godly purpose or intention: yet to the worthie receiuer it ceaseth not to be a Sacrament, Caluin. in antidot. concil. Tridentin. sess. 7. canon 11.

Argum. 1. The word of God, with what intention soeuer it be preached, yet may haue his effect, and worke faith in the hearer. So Christ be preached (saith S. Paul) whether vnder pretence, or sincerely, I therein ioy, Philip. 1.18. Ergo the Sacraments also may haue their efficacie, without the intent of the Minister. argum. Lutheri.

Argu. 2. If the effect of the Sacrament consisteth vpon the intention of the Minister, then should euery man be vncertaine whether any thing be wrought in him, or he haue receiued any benefit by the Sacrament, because he knoweth not the intent of another mans hart, and so should he be depriued of the spirituall comfort, which he might reape by the Sacrament, Caluin.

Tractat▪ 5. in Iohan. Augustine saith: Sacramentum Baptismi tam sacrum est, vt nec homicida vel ebrioso ministrante polluatur: The Sacrament of Baptisme is so holy, that it cannot, either by a murtherer or drunken person ministring it, be defiled. And I pray you, is it not like to be a good intention, that should enter into the harts of such lewd and wicked men? Therfore without any good intention, euen by the hands of such, may the Sacraments be giuen.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER THE Sacraments be seales of the promises of God.

The Papistes.

error 91 THey vtterly deny, that the Sacraments be pledges and seales vnto vs of the promises of God, or that therby our faith is nourished and confirmed, and we assured of free remission of sinnes by the death of Christ: neither that the sacraments were ordeyned for any such end. Bellarm. lib. 1. de sacram. cap. 14.

Argum. 1. If the sacraments confirme vnto vs the promises of God in his word, then must they of necessitie be more euident, and better known vnto vs, then is the word of God: for that which is lesse knowen, and not so notorious, cannot perswade vs of that, which we haue better knowledge of. But such are the Sacraments, which are not so euident, being called mysteries of religion, as are the words of God: Ergo Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. 1. It is strange to see, that you should now contend for the euidence, and plainenes of Scripture, which you haue locked vp from the people, with [Page] no other pretence, then because they are hard and obscure, and dangerous ro be read of the simple. Secondly, you doe not well in comparing the word and the sacraments together: for they cannot be diuorsed or separated: for the word giueth life to the sacraments, the sacraments againe giue liuely testimony and witnes to the truth of the word. But let this be the question, not whether the writing by it selfe, and the seale by it selfe are of greatest force: but whether an instrument with a seale be not of greater euidence and strength, then without it: So the word of God, which doth but beate vpon the sence of hearing, must of necessitie, not in it self, but in respect of vs, worke more effectually, being sealed by the sacraments, where we receiue instruction by two other sences of ours, the sight, and the taste.

The Protestants.

THat the Sacraments are ordeined of God, to be pledges and seales of his promises made vnto vs in Christ, that as verily as the externall elements are applied to the outward man, so our soules spiritually are refreshed with an assured hope of the remission of our sinnes in Christ, and so the sacraments to be seales onely of the righteousnes of faith, and not giuers or workers of grace in vs: it is euident out of the Scripture.

Argum. 1. Abraham receiued the signe of circumcision, as the seale of the righteousnes of faith, Rom. 4.1. Circumcision then was to Abraham a seale of the righteousnes of faith, that is, that he was iustified by faith. Ergo so are all other sacraments.

Rhemist. Indeede circumcision was a seale to Abraham, for he was iust before, and receiued this sacrament, as a seale thereof afterward. But it foloweth not, that it was so in all: for in Isaac his sonne, and so consequently in the rest, the Sacrament went before and iustice followed. annot. Rom. 4. sect. 8.

Ans. 1. The Apostle setteth forth the example of Abraham, to shew how all men are iustified before God, and what is the vse of the sacraments in all men: and therefore it is no extraordinary or exempt case, but the common case of all the faithfull, that righteousnes (saith the Apostle) might be imputed to them also, Rom. 4.11. Secondly, although Isaac with many other, were first circumcised, and after iustified: yet this is perpetuall, they were no more iustified by circumcision, then Abraham, who was iustified before he was circumcised, but by faith onely: and therefore the Sacraments are seales of the iustice of faith, whether the iustice of faith goe before, or follow after.

Argum. 2. Augustine saith, In Isaac, qui octauo die circumcisus fuit, praecessit signaculū iustitiae fidei, et quoniam patris fidem imitatus est, De Baptis. cont. Donatist. lib. 4. cap. 24. secuta est in crescente ipsa iustitia, cuius signaculum in infante praecesserat. In Isaac, who was circumcised the eight day, the seale of the righteousnes of faith went before: and because he did follow his fathers faith, as he grew, iustice it selfe followed, the seale whereof went before in his infancy. Ergo circumcision was a seale as well [Page] to Isaac as to Abraham, and so consequently to all.

THE SECOND QVESTION, OF THE efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments.

THis question also hath diuerse partes: First, whether the Sacraments do giue or conferre grace by the worke wrought. Secondly, of the difference of the Sacraments of the olde and new testament. Thirdly, whether the Sacraments of the new law doe imprint a signe or character in the soule, that can neuer be put out. Fourthly, of the necessity of the Sacraments.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE SACRAMENTS of them selues doe giue or conferre grace.

The Papistes.

error 92 THe Sacraments giue grace ex opere operato, by the worke wrought, that is, by force and vertue of the worke and word done and said in the sacrament, Rhemist. Act. 22. sect. 1. So that not faith onely iustifieth, but the Sacraments also, and other workes of religion. Rhemist. Rom. 6. sect. 5. The Sacraments then are immediate instruments and efficient causes of our iustification, not mediately, as they nourish and encrease our faith, but properly and in themselues: Faith in the receiuer giueth no efficacie to the Sacrament, but onely taketh away the lets and impediments which might hinder the efficacie of the Sacrament: as the drynes of the wood maketh it to burne the better, yet is it no efficient cause of the burning, which is the fire onely, but onely a helpe. Thus they compare the Sacrament working of it selfe, to fire that burneth, and faith is as the drying of the wood, but a disposing and preparing of the hart. Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacram. cap. 1.

Argum. 1. Be baptized and wash away thy sinnes, Act. 22. ver. 16. The Sacrament of Baptisme doth of it selfe wash away sinnes, Rhemist. And we see in S. Iames, that remission of sinnes is annexed to the vnction with oyle, Rhemist. 1. Timoth. 4.14. Ergo, the Sacraments giue and conferre grace.

Ans. 1. To the first we answer, that the text ioyneth with the Sacrament, the inuocation of the name of God, to the which saluation is promised, Rom. 10.13. to wash away sinnes: wherefore that place maketh nothing for your purpose. Secondly, in the other place health of body is promised by the gift of miracles▪ but remission of sinnes is said to be obtained by the praier of the Elders. The praier of faith shall saue the sick, Iam. 5.15.

Argum. 2. S. Paul. saith, He hath cleansed his Church, by the lauer of water in the word, Ephes. 5.26. Ergo baptisme is an instrumental cause of our iustification. Bellarm.

Ans. 1. It is not vnusuall in the Scripture to call the signe or Sacrament by the thing signified: as, Exod. 12.11. the Paschall Lambe is called the [Page] Passeouer, whereas it was but a signe and memoriall thereof. So Baptisme is called, The lauer of regeneration, Tit. 3.5. because it is a sure signe of our regeneration by the holy Ghost. Secondly, the Apostle in this place expoundeth himselfe: for he saith, that We are washed by water in the word: that is, the outward element doth send and referre vs to the word and promise of God, whereof it is a seale.

The Protestants.

THe sacraments haue no power to giue or conferre grace to the receiuer: neither are they immediate instruments of our iustification: instrumentall meanes they are to encrease and confirme our faith in the promises of God: of themselues they haue no operation, but as the spirit of God worketh by them, our internall senses being moued and quickened by those externall obiects. Neither doe we say, that the sacraments are bare and naked signes of spirituall graces: but they doe verily exhibite and represent Christ to as many, as by faith are able and meete to apprehend him. So to conclude: looke how the word of God worketh being preached, so doe the sacraments: but the word doth no otherwise iustifie vs, but by working faith at the hearing thereof: So sacraments doe serue for the encrease of our faith: faith is not a seruant and handmaide to the sacraments, (as the Iesuite declared by the homely similitude of the fire and drie wood) but faith is the more principall, and the sacraments haue no other vse or end, then as they are helpes for the strengthening of our faith. Grace of themselues they can giue or conferre none.

Argum. 1. Rom. 1.17. The iust shall liue by faith: Ergo, he liueth not, that is, he is not iustified by any worke wrought, as by the sacraments, but onely by faith: faith therefore giueth life and efficacie to the sacramentes, it is not contained absolutely in themselues. Againe, Saint Paul saith, That faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes, before he was circumcised, Rom. 4.10. Ergo, he was not iustified by circumcision: no more are we by the sacraments: but both he and we are iustified onely by faith.

Argum. 2. Saint Peter sayth, Baptisme saueth vs, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but in that a good conscience maketh request vnto God, by the resurrection of Christ, 1. Pet. 3.21. Ergo, it is faith in the resurrection of Christ, which worketh in vs peace of conscience, and not the outward washing, that saueth or iustifieth, Kemnitij argum.

Augustine thus writeth: Aliud est aqua sacramenti, aliud aqua, Tractat. in Epist. Iohā. 6. quae significat spiritum dei: ista visibilis est, & abluit corpus, & significat, quid fit in anima, per illum spiritum anima mundatur & saginatur. The water of the Sacrament is one thing, the water which signifieth the spirit is another: the one is visible, and washeth the flesh, and signifieth what is done in the soule: but by the spirit the soule is cleansed. The Sacrament of Baptisme then, by this fathers sentence, and so all other sacraments, doe not giue grace, but signifie onely and represent grace.

[Page]

THE SECOND PART, OF THE difference of the olde and new Sacraments.

error 93 THe sacrifices and ceremonies of the olde law were so farre from giuing spirit, grace, remission, iustification, and thereupon the entrance into the ioyes of heauen, that they were but meere shadowes, obscurely representing the graces of the new testament: whereas the sacraments instituted by Christ, contain and giue grace, and iustification. Rhemist. Heb. 10. sect. 3.

Argum. 1. They were but shadowes of good things, not the image of the things themselues, Heb. 10.1. They were but shadowes and representations of the sacraments of the new Testament. Ergo they had not the same efficacie or power. Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. 1. Their sacraments were onely shadowes of Christs sacrifice, not of our sacraments, though these come in the place of the other, and are answerable and correspondent vnto them. Secondly, neither doe the sacraments of the new Testament giue grace or iustification, but are onely liuely testimonies of grace and reconciliation wrought by the death of Christ. Thirdly, their sacraments were as effectuall to assure the Fathers of grace & remission of sinnes by Christ, as our sacraments are to vs. Fulk ibid.

The Protestants.

WE doe holde and constantly affirme and teach, that the Fathers in the law receiued no lesse the truth and substance of Christ by faith in their sacraments, then we doe in ours: although in respect of more cleere and lightsome signification, our Sacraments doe farre exceede theirs, and so also may more liuely stirre vp our faith: yet the substance and effect both of their sacraments and ours, was all one and the very same.

Argum. 1. S. Paul speaketh plainely, that the Israelites did all eate the same spirituall meat, and all drinke of the same spirituall rocke, and the rocke was Christ, 1. Corin. 10.3.4. Therefore Christ was exhibited as well to them in their sacraments, as he is in ours.

Bellarm. answereth, They did all eate the same spirituall meate amongst themselues, not the same together with vs. So also say the Rhemists, that they amongst themselues did all feede of one bread, and drinke of the same rocke. The Apostle saith not, that they and we doe eate and drinke of the selfesame meate and drink. Rhemist. in hunc l [...]cum.

Ans. 1. Yes the Apostle saith so in effect, that there is one and the [Page] selfe same spirituall meate and drinke to vs all, both to them and vs: for what doe we eate and drink but Christ? and so doe they: The rock, sayth the Apostle, was Christ. Secondly, Augustine sayth so expreslie, that they did eate the same spirituall meate, and drinke the same spirituall cuppe, that wee doe: Quicunque in Manna Christum intellexerunt, eundem, quem nos cibum spiritualē manducauerunt: de vtilitat. poenitent. cap. 2. They which in the eating of Manna did vnderstand Christ, did eate the same spirituall meate that we doe. Ergo, Christ was as well present by fayth to them in their sacraments, as hee is to vs in ours.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE Character or badge, which (as they say) is imprinted in the soule by the sacraments.

The Papists.

FIrst, there is a certayne seale, and spirituall marke or badge, imprinted by the sacraments, in the soules of the receiuers, which can neuer bee blotted error 94 out, neither by sinne, apostasie, or heresie: 2. but it perpetually remayneth for the cognisance of their christendome, and distinction from others, that were neuer of Christs folde, by which also they are consecrated and deputed to God. Thirdly, this indeleble Character, is giuen by three sacraments onely, Baptisme, Confirmation, Orders; which is the cause they are not reiterable, nor euer to be receiued but once. Rhemist. annotat. 2. Cor. 1. sect. 7. Trident. Concil. sess. 7. can. 9. Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacram. cap. 19.

Argum. 2. Corinth. 1.22. He hath sealed vs, and giuen the earnest of the spirite into our hearts. Likewise, Ephes. 4.30. Grieue not the spirite of God, by whom ye are sealed agaynst the day of redemption. This sealing is nothing els, as they say, but an imprinting in the soule of this indeleble marke or Character.

Answ. First, the Apostle speaketh manifestly of the spirituall and inward seale of the spirite of God, wherof Baptisme is an outward seale in our bodies. Secondly, it is an absurde thing to hold, that he that hath vtterly and maliciously renounced Christianitie, and blasphemed Christ himselfe, should still retayne this Character of Baptisme, as a cognisance of his christendome. Thirdly, Baptisme is not reiterable, that is, to be iterated or repeated, not because it leaueth an indeleble character in the mind of the baptized; which is but a meere deuise and fansie: but because, as it sufficeth once to be borne in the flesh, so once to be borne agayne, and to be regenerate by the spirit (of the which regeneration, Baptisme is a seale and pledge) it is sufficient. As for confirmation, and orders, we acknowledge them to be no sacraments: and therefore to haue no such indeleble character.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THat by Baptisme and some other sacraments, there is imprinted in the soule a marke or character, which can neuer be blotted out, no not by Apostasie: and that this is the cause why Baptisme cannot be iterated, we holde it to bee a meere deuice, and inuention of men.

Argum. 1. Where the end and fruites of Baptisme are vtterly extinguished, there can not remayne any character or badge, or signe of Baptisme: The fruits of Baptisme are repentance, and regeneration by the spirite: But it is possible for these, in some that are baptized, to be vtterly lost, as in them that fall away by Apostasie, they cannot bee renewed by repentance, Hebr. 6.6. therefore in such, there is not to bee found any character, badge or signe of Baptisme, which they haue vtterly renounced: onely the memoriall thereof is kept before God, they being so much worse, then they that were neuer baptized, because they haue wilfully reiected their profession.

Argum. 2. The cause why Baptisme is but once to bee giuen, is not, as they alleadge, because it leaueth such a sure mark behind, so deeply dyed in the soule, that it cannot be blotted out. There are other causes that come nearer the truth: 1. As God is but one, who maketh a couenant with vs in Baptisme, and the fayth but one, into the which we are entred by that sacrament: so Baptisme is one and the same, Ephes. 4.5. 2. The institution of God is another cause, who hath appoynted the other sacrament often to be receiued, 1. Corinth. 11.25. but for the iteration of Baptisme, we haue no such commandement. 3. Baptisme commeth in the place of Circumcision: as that was but once administred, so likewise it must be in the other. 4. In Baptisme God maketh a perpetual couenant with vs, which he alwayes remēbreth, & therfore neede not to be put in minde, by the often vsing of that sacrament. These and the like reasons may be alleaged, why Baptisme is not often to be required: and not that, which by them without any ground is pretended.

Augustine is flat agaynst them, for the iteration of confirmation: Manus impositio non sicut baptismus repeti non potest. Quid enim est aliud, nisi oratio super hominem? The imposition of hands is not as Baptisme, neuer to be iterated agayne: for what is it else, but prayer ouer a man? De baptism. contr. Donat. lib. 3. cap. 16. Confirmation in his opinion may be iterated, and therefore imprinteth no such character.

THE FOVRTH PART, OF THE necessitie of the sacraments.

THey willingly graunt, that no sacraments are absolutely necessary in their nature, but in respect of the institution and commmandement of God, for he is as able to work without sacraments, as with them. In this poynt, wee are agreed: the poynts of difference are these.

[Page]

The Papists.

1 THese 3. sacraments are absolutely and simply necessary, as they are instituted error 95 of God: Baptisme vnto all: Penance to those that fall after Baptisme: Orders simply necessary to the whole Church. And thus they vnderstand necessary, that without the which a man cannot bee saued: without the rest of the sacraments men may be saued, so there bee no negligence or contempt, Bellarm. lib. 1. de sacram. cap. 22.

The Protestants.

THough the sacraments being appoynted for our comfort, are necessary and profitable as holesome meanes to be vsed for the increase of our fayth, and much to be desired and sought for: yet God hath not layd such a necessitie vpon any of them, as that the want of them should cause hazard of saluation. The thiefe vpon the Crosse was saued both without Baptisme and Penance: I pray you what penance did Peter after his thrise deniall of Christ, but that he wept bitterly, and earnestly repented him of his fall? Such repentance we holde to be necessary, but a sacrament of penance we acknowledge none. So the ordaining of ministers to preach, is the ordinarie meanes to beget men vnto the fayth: yet many haue beene called without such preaching: as Paul was conuerted by the voyce of Christ from heauen, Nabuchadnezzar was called by the great myracle of the preseruation of the three children in the fierie ouen.

So Augustine sayth, Vndique vocat nos Deus ad poenitentiam, vocat per lectorem, vocat per tractatorem, vocat per intimam cogitationem▪ vocat per flagellum correptionis, vocat per misericordiam consolationis: God calleth vs euery way to repentance; he calleth, by the reader, by the preacher, by the inward thought, by the scourge of correction, by the mercy of consolation: in Psal. 102. God therefore may call and instruct vs by more wayes then one, he is not tied to any.

The Papists.

2 THe sacraments of the new law are necessary to saluation, that is, it is impossible to obtayne the grace of iustification, by fayth alone, without the celebrating of the sacraments, sine sacramentis, aut eorum voto, or at least, hauing a will, purpose, and desire to celebrate and vse them, Concil. Trident. sess. 7. can. 4.

The Protestants.

A Necessitie of the sacraments we grant, as also of other profitable meanes, as of preaching the word, of prayer, and the like: but no simple or absolute necessitie, as wee haue sayde: neyther are the sacraments necessarie at all, being ordayned for no such vse, to bee meanes to apply the grace [Page] of iustification vnto vs: but our iustification is onely applyed and apprehended by fayth, as Saynt Paul concludeth, Rom. 3.28. that a man is iustified by fayth onely, without workes of the law: yea, all workes whatsoeuer are excluded, as destroying grace, Rom. 11. ver. 6. The sacraments are profitable instruments, to stirre vp the gift of fayth and other graces in vs, but not by their proper work to iustifie vs.

De tempor. serm. 53. Augustine sayth: Primò fides catholica Christiano necessaria est, per ipsam renascimur in baptismate, & salutem aeternam impetramus: First of al, the catholike fayth is necessarie for a Christian, by the which in Baptisme wee are borne agayne, and obtayne eternall saluation. He sayth not that Baptisme, but that fayth is necessarie, and that it is fayth which giueth life to the sacrament: it worketh not by it owne proper act.

THE THIRD QVESTION OF THE number and order of the sacraments.

THE FIRST PART, OF the number.

The Papists.

THeir generall sentence and opinion is this, that there are seuen sacraments, error 96 neither more or lesse: Baptisme, the Eucharist, Confirmation, Penance, Matrimonie, Orders, extreame Vnction. If any man say that any of these are not truely and properly sacraments, or that they are not all of Christs institution, let him be anathema, or accursed, Concil. Trid. sess. 7. can. 1.

Argum. The number of seuen is mysticall, prophetical, perfect: the Prophet commaunded Naaman to wash himselfe seuen times, 2. King. 4. The Altar must be cleansed seuen daies, Exod. 29.37. Iob offered seuen bullocks & seuen rammes for his friends, Iob 42. So in the Apocalyps. 7. Churches, 7. Angels, 7. starres, 7. Candlesticks, 7. thunders, and the like: And why not also seuen sacraments? Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 26. Rhemist. annot. Apocal. 1. sect. 3.

Answ. First, the number of seuen is sometime applyed, to describe mysteries of wickednesse, as well as of godlinesse: As the beast with seuen heades, Apoc. 17.8. is called a mysterie, or as your vulgar Latine hath it, a sacrament. And with greater reason may we conclude, that this beast with seuen heads, is Antichrist, with his seuen Popish sacraments: then you out of Naamans seuen times washing, can picke out seuen sacraments. But if you will needs make a mysterie of seuen: it may as well be a mysterie of iniquitie as of godlines, euen the mysterie of the beast with seuen heads, as wee haue sayd. Secondly, what though the number of seuen, and of some other numbers, be sometime mysticall and significatiue, when it pleaseth the Lorde in his word so to applie and appoynt them? doth it therefore follow, that men vpon their owne heads, may superstitiously apply numbers to sacraments, prayers, [Page] fastings, times, as though there were any religion in numbers, or that the Lord had the rather respect vnto such things because of the number?

The Protestants.

THis worde or name, Sacrament, may be taken two wayes: first, generally for any mysticall signe or symbole, which may represent an holy thing: and so we will graunt, that there may bee not onely seuen Sacraments, but seuen and seuen: which are more properly symboles and signes, then sacraments: As the couering of the head in the woman is a symbole of subiection, 1. Cor. 11.10. the Sabboth day a symbole or sacrament of the heauenly rest, Heb. 4. In this sense Augustine calleth the mysterie of the Trinitie a sacrament: yea hee sayth, the sacrament of fire, because therein in some sorte, by the vndeuided and inseparable properties thereof, the heate, light,De symbol. lib. 3. cap. 9. and shyning brightnesse, the Trinitie, sayth he, is shadowed foorth. Wherefore euery signe or symbole of a holy thing, that hath a spiritual signification, either found in scripture, or deuised by men, is not by and by a sacrament.

Secondly, if we will take a sacrament in the strict and proper sense, there are especially three things required thereunto: First, that they doe not onely signifie, but exhibite and represent vnto vs after a liuely manner, the spirituall things which are signified. Secondly, they must haue the institution & perpetuall commandement of Christ. Thirdly, the sacraments of the new law must succeede in the place of the olde. Hereupon we will inferre, that there are but two sacraments in the new Testament, Baptisme, and the Lords Supper.

Argum. 1. These two alone are not onely signes of heauenly things, but seales and pledges vnto vs thereof, whereby our fayth is strengthened, and our hope confirmed in the promises of God: as the remission of sinnes is represented in Baptisme, Act. 2.38. the death of Christ shewed foorth in the Eucharist, 1. Corinth. 11.26. The like commendation is not giuen of any other of their sacraments.

Argum. 2. Christ onely commaunded these two sacraments to bee vsed for euer in his Church: to such spirituall purposes, as Baptisme is instituted and commaunded, Math. 28.19. the Lords Supper likewise, Math. 26. Many other ceremonies Christ vsed himselfe, as lifting vp of hands, the tempering of clay and spittle, his Apostles imposition of hands, and anoynting with oyle: But he hath not layd his commaundement vpon these ceremonies, enioyning vs perpetually to keepe them▪ as he hath charged vs with the other two.

Argum. 3. The sacraments of the newe Testament succeede in the roume of them of the olde: Baptisme standeth in stead of Circumcision, the Lordes Supper is come in place of the Paschal Lambe. But they cannot shew what old sacraments, those fiue other newly inuented, confirmation, orders, penance, matrimony, extreame vnction, doe succeede and supplie: Ergo, they are none. And beside, if all these should be sacraments, and so seuen in all: [Page] we should haue more in number then the Iewes had, which is not to bee admitted: for they had but two ordinary sacraments, Circumcision and the Paschall Lambe: two extraordinarie, as their baptisme in the red sea and the clowde, and their eating of the Manna, and drinking of the rocke, 1. Corin. 10.2.3. So they should haue but foure sacraments, for your seuen. Other legall rites, ceremonies, and sacrifices they had, and many typical shadowes and significations, but no more sacraments then we haue heard.

Augustine yeeldeth to haue no more sacraments then onely two: As Eua was made out of Adams side as hee was asleepe: Sic ex latere domini dormientis in cruce manauerunt sacramenta, ex quibus formaretur ecclesia: So out of the Lordes side sleeping vpon the crosse, the sacraments of the Church issued: that is, water and blood: by the which he vnderstandeth the two sacraments.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE order and degree of the sacraments among them selues.

The Papists.

error 97 IF any man shall say, that these seuen sacraments are of equall dignitie, and not one in some respect to be preferred before the other, let him be accursed, Concil. Trident. sess. 7. can. 3. In diuers respects one sacrament may excell another, as Baptisme excelleth the rest, because of remission of sinnes thereby effected, or, as we say, represented. Orders excell, in respect of the minister, because they are onely, say they, conferred by a Bishop. Matrimony excelleth, in respect of the signification, the coniunction of Christ and his Church. But simply the Eucharist exceedeth all, because of the substance of the sacrament, the reall and bodily presence of Christ. Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 28.

Answer. First, that Baptisme and the Eucharist exceede all the other, we do easily admit; for we holde them to be no sacraments: and therefore we stand not vpon their seuerall priuiledges. Secondly, neither Baptisme is more excellent then the Lords Supper, because it representeth the remission of sinnes: for that also is insinuated in the other: for how can we shew foorth the Lords death, which is done in that sacrament, vnlesse we call to minde the benefits purchased by his death, as remission of sinnes? Neither doth the Eucharist goe beyond Baptisme, in regard of a more full presence of Christ: for he is not otherwise present in one sacrament, then in the other, presenting himselfe in both spiritually to be apprehended of the worthy receiuer: as for that carnal and grosse presence of the body of Christ in the sacrament, we acknowledge none: as afterward it shall more fully appeare, when wee come in order to that question.

Augustine sheweth, that Christ is no otherwise present in the Eucharist, then in the preaching of the word, for the manner of his presence: Eucharistia [Page]panis noster quotidianus est, & quod vobis tracto, panis quotidianus est, De diuers. serm. 9. & quod in ecclesia lectiones quotidie auditis, panis quotidianus est: the Eucharist or sacrament of thankesgiuing is our dayly bread, that which I handle and preach to you, is our daylie bread, that which you heare read daylie in the Church, is our daylie bread. If Christ then be no more really present in the sacrament then in the worde, what is become of the preeminence, that the one sacrament in that respect should haue aboue the other?

The Protestants.

THat the one sacrament should be so much extolled aboue the other, namely, the Lords Supper to be preferred before Baptisme, as the more worthy and excellent sacrament, we finde no such thing in the word of God: but that both of them are of like dignitie in themselues, and to be had equally and indifferently in most high accompt: thus it is prooued.

Argum. 1 They are both commaunded and instituted by the same authoritie of our Lord Iesus Christ: neither is one by the first institution aduanced aboue the other. Secondly, there is the same matter and substance of both sacraments, Christ Iesus with all his benefites. Thirdly, one and the same end of them both, which is the increase and strengthening of our fayth in the promises of God: Ergo, they are both of equall dignitie and worthynes.

Let them say now, which is the more worthy thing, Baptisme, or the word preached: no doubt, they will preferre Baptisme: for they holde that the sacraments doe giue grace by the worke wrought, and so doth not the worde: yea, they are offended, because we say, that the sacraments are no otherwaies instruments of our iustification, then the word preached is, but that the one worketh by the hearing, the other by the senses of seeing, handling, tasting: but they all serue to one end, namely, to beget and increase fayth in vs. This our assertion they vtterly mislike, Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacram. cap. 2. Whereby it appeareth, that they preferre Baptisme before the word. We then thus reason out of Augustine: He thus writeth: Dicite mihi, quid plus videtur vobis, verbum dei, an corpus Christi? respondere debetis, quod non sit minus verbum dei: ‘Tell me, which is the chiefer in your opinion, the word of God or the body of Christ? (& that is the sacrament of his body:) ye must answere, that the word of God is not inferior: Homil. 26.’ Hence we frame this argument: The word of God is equiualent to the sacrament of the Lords bodie: Baptisme is equiualent to the word of God, by our aduersaries own confession. Ergo, also it is of equall value and dignitie, with the other sacrament.

[Page]

THE TWELFTH GENERALL CONTROVERSY, OF THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISME.

THis controuersie standeth vpon diuers questions: 1. Of the name and definition of Baptisme. Secondly, of the partes of Baptisme. Thirdly, of the necessitie of Baptisme. Fourthly, of the Minister of Baptisme. Fiftly, of the parties which are to be baptized. Sixtly, of the effects of Baptisme. Seuenthly, of the difference of Christs Baptisme and Iohns. Eightly, of the ceremonies of Baptisme.

THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE NAME and definition of Baptisme.

COncerning the name, there is no question betweene vs, for the name of Baptisme hath the originall and beginning from the scripture: Saint Paul vseth this word, Coloss. 2.12. We are buryed with him through Baptisme. And againe, Heb. 6.2. All the question is about the definition of Baptisme.

The Papists.

error 98 THey define Baptisme to bee a sacrament of regeneration by water in the worde: that is not which signifieth and sealeth vnto vs our regeneration, and assureth vs of remission of sinnes: but actually iustifieth and regenerateth vs, Bellarm. lib. 1. de Baptism. cap. 1.

The Protestants.

WE rather, according to the scriptures, define baptisme, to be a signe or seale of our regeneration and new birth, whereby wee are assured, that as verily by fayth in the blood of Christ we are cleansed from our sinnes, as our bodies are washed with water, in the name of the Father, Sonne, and holy Ghost: So that Baptisme doth not actually bestow remission of sinnes by the work wrought, but is a pledge and seale of the righteousnesse of fayth, as Saint Paul sayth of Circumcision: Rom. 4.11. for it is not the washing of the flesh by water, but the establishing of the heart with fayth and grace, that saueth vs, 1. Pet. 3.21. See this poynt handled more at large, Controuers. 11. next before, quest. 2. part. 1.

Augustine saith, Per fidem renascimur in baptismate: by fayth wee are borne agayne in Baptisme, De tempor. serm. 53. It is then the proper act of fayth, to regenerate vs, not of Baptisme, the vse and end whereof, is to strengthen and increase our fayth.

[Page]

THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE PARTES, which are the matter and forme of Baptisme.

AS touching the matter, that is, the externall element vsed in Baptisme, there is no question betweene vs, but that it ought to bee plaine and common water, Act. 10.47. Saint Peter saith, Can any man forbid water, that these should not bee baptized? Wherefore wee condemne the foolish and vngodly practises and inuentions of heretikes, that either exclude water altogether, as the Manichees, with others; or doe vse any other element, as the Iacobites, that in stead of water, burned them, that were to be baptized, with a whot yron: or as the Aethiopians, which are called Abissines, Bez. Matth. 3. vers. 11. that vsed fire in stead of water: misconstruing the words of the Gospell, Matth. 2.11. That Christ should baptize with the holy Ghost and with fire: which is not literally to bee vnderstoode, but thereby is signified the internall and forceable working of the spirite, which kindleth zeale and loue in our hearts as fire.

Concerning the forme of Baptisme: we all agree, that no other is to be vsed, then that prescribed by our Sauiour Christ: to baptize in the name of the Father, the Sonne, and holy Ghost: that it is neither lawfull to change this forme in sense, as many heretikes haue done, nor yet in words, as to leaue out any of the three persons in Trinitie, and inclusiuely to vnderstand them by naming of one: for whereas some alleadge that place, Act. 2.38. Bee yee baptized in the name of Iesus Christ, for remission of sinnes; to proue, that it is lawfull onely in the name of Christ to baptize, wee are to vnderstand, that the forme of Baptisme is not in that place expresly set downe, but the scope onely and end of Baptisme, which is to assure vs of remission of sinnes in the name of Christ, as Beza very well noteth vpon that place. The point of difference betweene vs, concerning the forme of Baptisme is this.

The Papists.

THey are bold to affirme, that this forme of Baptisme, to baptize in the name error 99 of the Father, Sonne, and holy Ghost, is not fully concluded out of Scripture, but deliuered by tradition: for (say they) the commandement of Christ, to baptize in the name of the Trinitie, Matth. 28. may bee vnderstoode thus: to baptize them into the faith of the Trinitie, or by the authoritie of the Trinitie. And it were sufficient, by those words, to doe and performe it in act, without saying the wordes; were it not, that wee haue otherwise learned by tradition, that this very forme of wordes is to bee kept, Bellarmine de baptism. lib. 1. cap. 3.

The Protestants.

WE neede no tradition for this matter; the very forme which is to bee vsed in Baptisme, is plainely proued out of the Scriptures: for that commandement [Page] of Christ, Goe and baptize, &c. doth necessarily imply a forme of speech to be vsed. Wee grant, that in the Scriptures, this word (name,) is taken for power, vertue, authoritie, as Act. 3.6. In the name of Iesus arise and walke. So also, as there is a Baptisme with water, there may be a baptizing with fire, Matth. 3.11. Wherefore if part of the commandement bee to bee taken properlie and literally, as this, Goe and baptize, why not the rest also, In the name of the Father, Sonne, and holy Ghost? If then the whole commaundement bee properly and plainely vnderstoode: how can they baptize in the name of the Trinitie, vnlesse the Trinitie bee spoken and named?

Secondly, it appeareth also out of other places of Scripture, that this forme was vsed in the Apostles time: As ‘Act. 10.47. Can any man forbid water, why these should not be baptized, which haue receiued the holy Ghost, as well as wee?’ As if Saint Peter should haue reasoned thus: these haue receiued the giftes of the holy Ghost: Ergo, they may be also baptized in the name of the holy Ghost. Likewise, Act. 19.2. When the brethren at Ephesus had answered Paul, that they had not heard, whether there were a holy Ghost: he saith vnto them, ‘Vnto what then were you baptized?’ By this interrogatorie it appeareth, it was their manner to baptize in the name of the holy Ghost, and so consequently of the whole Trinitie. Wee haue no cause then to flie vnto tradition, this matter being so plainely decided by the Scripture.

Augustin. tract. in Iohann 80. Vpon those wordes of our Sauiour, Iohn 15.3. You are cleane thorough the word, which I haue spoken vnto you. Detrahe verbum, & quid est aqua, nisi aqua? Accedit verbum ad elementum, & fit sacramentum. Take away the word, and what remaineth in Baptisme but bare water? let the word be ioyned to the element, and it maketh a Sacrament. The forme then of Baptisme, is the word, which Christ spake: and where else speaketh Christ, but in the scriptures? Ergo the forme of Baptisme, is the word of Christ, prescribed and commanded in the scriptures. Away therefore with your vncertaine and deceitfull traditions. Our Baptisme is builded vpon a surer foundation: namely, the word of God.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE necessitie of Baptisme.

The Papists.

THey affirme, that Baptisme is simply necessarie to saluation by Gods appointment: error 100 so that all which die vnbaptized, vnlesse the want of Baptisme be recompensed either by Martyrdome, or penance, must needes perish, and be depriued of eternall life, Concil. Trident. sess. 7. can. 7. Bellarm. lib. 1. de baptism. cap. 4.

[Page]Argum. Iohn 3.5. Our sauiour Christ saith, ‘Vnlesse a man bee borne of water and the spirite, he cannot enter into the Kingdome of GOD:’ Ergo it is necessarie to saluation to bee baptized. Bellarm. ibid. Rhemist. in hunc locum.

Ans. First, it is not necessarie by water here to vnderstand materiall water, but the purifying grace of Christ, which is called the water of life, Iohn. 4.11. Water then is here added as an Epithete of the spirite, because it clenseth and purgeth as water: as Iohn 7.38. He that beleeueth, out of his bellie shall flowe riuers of waters of life. ‘Quid aqua sit, saith Augustine, euangelium interroga’. Inquire of the Gospell, what this water is. Then it followeth,Tract. in Epistol. Iohann. 6. vers. 39. This spake hee of the spirite, which they that beleeued in him, should receiue. By water then it is no rare thing, to vnderstand the spirite. Secondly, Why may not water bee here figuratiuely taken, to expresse the working of the spirite, as fire is added to the spirite, Matth. 3.11. He shall baptize with the holy Ghost and with fire. What greater necessitie is there in this place, to vnderstand water literally, then fire in the other?

Thirdly, as you expound these wordes of Baptisme, so yee doe applie another place, Iohn 6.53. to the other Sacrament: Vnlesse you doe eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his blood, you shall not haue life in you. ‘If this bee spoken of the Sacramentall eating and drinking of Christ’, as the Rhemists take it: then belike there is as great necessitie of the Eucharist, as of Baptisme: and so indeede Augustine sometime thought,Cont. 1. Epistol. Pelag. lib. 4. cap 4. that the one was as necessarie to saluation as the other. Sine Christi carne & sanguine, nec paruuli vitam habere possunt in semetipsis. Without the flesh and blood of Christ, neither can infants haue life in themselues. And therefore it was the custome of those times, to giue of the Sacrament to children: Paruulis adhuc & infirmis, In Psalm. 64. stillantur quaedam de sacramentis: some part of the Sacrament is instilled and powred into the mouthes of young and tender children.

But our aduersaries in no wise will admit that the Eucharist is as necessarie as Baptisme: wherefore they doe thus comment vpon our Sauiours wordes: that they also doe eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood, which ioyne in heart and desire to be partakers of the Sacrament, and so mystically, and spiritually doe receiue it, Rhemist. Iohn 6. sect. 8. And why, I pray you, may there not be as well a mysticall and spirituall receiuing of Baptisme without the Sacrament, as of the Eucharist or Lords Supper, seeing this place, Iohn. 6.53. doth as necessarily enforce the receiuing of this Sacrament, as that place, Iohn 3.5. doth lay a necessitie of Baptisme?

The Protestants.

WEe acknowledge no greater necessitie in Baptisme, then in the other Sacrament: both which wee grant to be necessarie as helpes and proppes, and profitable meanes to increase our faith: but not so simplie necessarie, [Page] as that without them (there being no neglect, or contempt had of them) it were impossible to be saued.

Argum. 1. The children of the faithfull are holy already, euen before they are baptized: for they are within the couenant, and to them also belongeth the promise. The Lord saith, I will be thy God, and the God of thy seede, Genes. 17.7. And Saint Paul saith, that the children of the faithfull are holy, 1. Corinth. 7.14. If the Lord then be the God also of children, & if they be holy, being borne of the righteous seede, how can they possibly perish, although they die vnbaptized?

Argum. 2. Circumcision was as necessarie to the Israelites▪ as Baptisme is to vs: but their children, which died before the eight day, when they were to bee circumcised, perished not: for Dauid doubteth not to say of his child that died the seuenth day, I shall goe to him, hee cannot returne to me, 1. Sam 12.18.23. He pronounceth that the child was saued. Ergo, neither children dying without Baptisme now are condemned.

Argum. 3. The holy Ghost may be giuen without Baptisme, so it bee not contemned and neglected, when it may be had: therefore life eternall may be had without Baptisme: for the holy Ghost is able without the sacrament, to regenerate vs, and bring vs to eternall life.

The first is proued, Act. 10.47. Who can forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which haue receiued the holy Ghost, as well as wee? They had the holy Ghost before and without Baptisme, as Augustine saith, Adhuc loquente Petro, Homil. 23. non dico nondum imponente manum, sed nondum baptizante, venit spiritus sanctus: While Peter yet spake, before he laid on his hand, or Baptized them, the holy Ghost came: Ergo Baptisme not necessarie.

Argum. 4. You your selues make two exceptions: of Martyres and them that doe penance, which may be saued without Baptisme: Ergo Baptisme is not simplie necessarie. And if our Sauiour speake of Baptisme, Iohn 3.5. as yee say he doth: there is no priuiledge for any, no not for Martyres, for all must bee borne of water and the spirite: that is, say you, baptized. Neither are your two exceptions generall enough: for the theefe vpon the crosse was saued, and yet neither died a Martyr: for he himselfe confesseth, that he was righteously punished, Luk. 23.41. neither did he any such penance, or made any such satisfaction, as you require.

AN APPENDIX, WHETHER THE want of Baptisme may bee by any other meanes supplied.

The Papists.

OVr aduersaries make three kindes of Baptisme, Baptismum fluminis, baptismum error 101 sanguinis, baptismum flaminis: the Baptisme of water, the Baptisme of [Page] blood, which is Martyrdome, and the Baptisme of the spirite, which is contrition and penance: by these two, the first, say they, may be supplied.

They affirme, that Martyrdome, and penance or contrition, doe by the very act or worke wrought remit sinnes, and iustifie the workers, and not in respect of the faith onely, which is in Martyrs or penitent persons. Bellar. cap. 6. lib. 1. de baptism.

Argum. The Innocents, which were slaine by Herod, were saued onely by their Martyrdome, they had neither faith, nor workes. So the theefe vpon the Crosse was not onely iustified by his faith, but by the act and worke of contrition.

Ans. First, it is not necessarie to hold all those children to be Martyrs, and so to bee saued: for Macrobius writeth, that one of Herods sonnes, which was nursed in those parts, was slaine among the rest: the infants which were saued, were within the promise, and belonged to the couenant, and so could not bee lost: their saluation depended of their free election before God, it was not purchased by the very act of their dying.

Secondly, the theefe also vpon the Crosse was iustified by his faith and beleefe in Christ. And therefore Augustine doth chiefely commend his faith: Tunc fides eius de ligno floruit, quando discipulorum emarcuit: Then his faith did as it were bud and flourish out of the tree of the crosse, when the faith of the Disciples withered.

The Protestants.

NEither the outward worke of Martyrdome nor contrition doe iustifie, or giue remission of sinnes: but the faith onely of Martyrs and penitent persons, whereby they apprehend Christ.

Argum. 1. Saint Paul saith, 1. Corinth. 13.3. That if a man giue his bodie to be burned, and haue no loue, it profiteth not. Ergo ‘it is not the outward act of Martyrdome, but an effectuall and liuely faith working by loue, which pleaseth God.’

Argum. 2. Neither is the bare worke of sorrowe and contrition in it selfe acceptable to God: for there is a worldly repentance that causeth death, there is a godly repentance not to be repented of, which worketh in vs care, zeale, feare, desire, which are the fruites of faith, 2. Corinth. 7.10.11. Ergo it is faith onely that maketh all our workes to be accepted of before God: for without faith, it is vnpossible to please him, Hebr. 11.6.

The Papists.

2. MArtyrdome and contrition or conuersion of the heart vnto GOD,error 102 though they bee no Sacraments, yet may supplie the lack of Baptisme, Bellarm. ibid.

[Page]Argum. Martyrdome in the scriptures is rightly called a Baptisme: as Christ speaking of his death, saith, I must bee baptized with a Baptisme, Luk. 12.50. And therefore it may fitly stand in stead of Baptisme.

Ans. If euery thing, that hath the name of Baptisme, may bee vsed in place thereof; then adde vnto your number of such deuised supplies, the Pharisaicall washing of cuppes, for they are called baptismata calicum, the Baptismes, or clensings of cuppes, Mark. 7.4.

The Protestants.

WE neede not any such supplies to make good the want of Baptisme, neither is it safe so to doe.

1. It is great presumption and boldnes, without warrant of Gods word, to giue the effect and blessing, which God hath annexed to the Sacraments, to any other externall worke: for what is this else, but to institute other Sacraments, then Christ left? And shall wee not thinke, that God by his spirite can better supplie the losse and the want of the Sacraments, then we by our owne inuentions can helpe our selues?

2. Concerning contrition of the heart, if you vnderstand by it true repentance, and withall a vowe and true desire to receiue the Sacrament of Baptisme, which cannot bee obtained because of some remedilesse necessitie: that in such a case it standeth as auailable, as if a man had been actually Baptized: for thus the Rhemists expounde themselues, annot. Iohn 3.2. I pray you what greater necessitie is there now of Baptisme, then of the other Sacrament? For this is true, and we willingly grant: that euery man that shall be saued, must either receiue the Sacraments, or haue a desire vnto them: for the neglect and contempt of the Sacraments without repentance is a sinne damnable. And thus you ouerthrow your selues, making Baptisme necessarie without necessitie.

De animae origin. lib 1 cap. 9.3. Augustine admitteth none of these supplies, but onely Martyrdome: Nemo fit membrum Christi, nisi aut Baptismate Christi, aut morte pro Christo: No man is made the member of Christ, but either by the Baptisme of Christ, or in dying for Christ: here Augustine maketh but one supplie of Baptisme, they make two. When men followe their owne inuentions, there can be no agreement.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, WHETHER women and Lay-men ought to baptize.

The Papists.

error 103 THey hold, that not onely Lay men, but Pagans: that are not baptized themselues, yea and women also, may be ministers of Baptisme, in a case of necessitie, eBllarm. cap. 7.

[Page]Argum. Exod. 4. Zipporah circumcised her sonne, and the Lord was pleased therewith, and went away from Moses, whom hee came against to haue slaine him. Ergo women may as well now minister Baptisme.

Ans. First, there is not the like strict necessitie of Baptisme, as there was then of Circumcision: for if euery man childe were not circumcised the eight day, the Lord threatned to cut him off from among the people, Genes. 17.14. But Baptisme is not tied or limited to any such time or number of dayes. Secondly, there was great necessitie, which enforced Zipporah to circumcise her childe: for they had neglected the time, and passed the stint of dayes: wherefore the Lord strooke Moses with sicknes: and being not able himselfe to performe that duetie, his wife in great haste taketh the childe and cutteth him, to saue her husbands life: but shee in great indignation cast away the fore-skin from her, knowing that shee was constrained to commit an vnwomanly act. There cannot bee any such necessitie of Baptisme, as there was then of Circumcision; which was to be done within a certaine compas of dayes. Thirdly, you may as well proue by this example, that a woman may baptize, the Bishop, Priest, or Deacon standing by (which notwithstanding you hold vtterly vnlawfull) as that it is lawfull for her to baptize: For Zipporah did it in the presence of Moses.

The Protestants.

NEither lay men, of what calling soeuer, nor yet Midwiues, or any other women, ought to bee suffered in a wel reformed Church to baptize infants: neither are they authorized so to doe amongst vs.

Argum. 1. The commission and charge to baptize, was giuen onely by our sauiour Christ to his Apostles, and all lawfull Ministers their successors, Matth. 28.19. Ergo, Lay men and women, in baptizing, goe beyond the commission of Christ.

Argum. 2. The preaching of the word, and administration of the Sacraments, are and ought alwaies to be ioyned together. And the care and charge of both is committed to Pastors and Ministers lawfully ordained: Goe, saith our Sauiour, and teach all nations, baptizing them, Matth. 28.19. But it is not lawfull for women to preach the word, 1. Corinth. 14. vers. 35. Ergo not to baptize.

Argum. 3 If it be lawfull for such to baptize, it is onely in the time of necessitie: but there is no such necessitie, as we haue shewed of Baptisme. Ergo, it is not at all lawfull for them.

Augustines iudgement is this: if a Lay man doe giue Baptisme: Nescio an piè quis dixerit esse repetendum: I cannot tell, whether it may well bee iterated or repeated. Hee dooth not allowe Lay men to baptize: but is of opinion, that they are not to bee baptized againe, that receiue Baptisme at their handes. Yet hee speaketh vncertainelie, (I cannot tell [Page] saith he) and so we will conclude with Augustine, Lib. 2 cont. Parmen. cap. 13. Si Laicus baptismum dederit, nulla cogente necessitate, alieni muneris vsurpatio est. If a Lay man doe baptize, where there is no necessitie, it is an vsurping of another mans office. But there is no such necessitie to cause him so to doe: Ergo.

THE FIFT QVESTION, OF SVCH AS are to be admitted to baptisme. Of the Baptisme of Infants. part. 1.

THat infants are to bee baptized, it is fully agreed and concluded betweene vs. Which point we doe strongly maintaine by the Scriptures against the Anabaptists of our age. But herein we dissent from our aduersaries.

The Papists.

error 104 1. THey affirme, that the Baptisme of children and infants is grounded vpon tradition, and not vpon Scripture, Bellarmine lib. 4. de verbo dei. cap. 9.

The Protestants.

IT were very hard, if we had no more certaine ground for the baptizing of infants, then tradition, which is but a feeble weapon to fight against heretikes withall: we haue manifest proofes out of Scripture for it.

First, they belong vnto the couenant: Genes. 17. I will bee thy God, and the God of thy seede: Ergo they haue right to the signe of the couenant.

Secondly, they are called holy, which are borne of faithfull parents, 1. Cor. 7.14. Ergo, are not to be denied Baptisme.

Thirdly, they are redeemed by the blood of Christ, who died for all the children of God, Iohn 11.52. To them belongeth the kingdome of God: Ergo also Baptisme, which is a pledge of remission of sinnes and eternall life.

Fourthly, it is also proued by the practise of the Apostles, who baptized whole families, with all that thereunto belonged, Act 16.33.

Fiftly, Augustine also proueth it out of Scripture, by comparing our Baptisme with the circumcision of the Iewes:De baptis. cont. Donatist. lib. 4. cap. 24. Veraciter coni [...]cere possumus, quid valeat in paruulis baptismi sacramentum, ex circumcisione carnis, quam prior populus accepit. How auailable Baptisme is in little ones, we may gesse by the circumcision, which the former people in the lawe receiued. Ergo not onely by tradition, but chiefely by Scripture the lawfulnes of childrens Baptisme is confirmed.

The Papists.

2. BAptisme, they say, giueth grace and faith to the infant that had none before, error 105 Rhemist. Galath. 3. sect. 6. This then is their opinion, that infants, though actually & fully they haue not faith, as other haue, yet there is a certaine habite of faith and hope infused into them in Baptisme, so that partly they doe [Page] beleeue of themselues, and partly by the faith of others, namely of them that bring them to Baptisme, Bellarm. lib. 1. de baptism. cap. 11.

Argum. Without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb. 11.6. Rom. 3.28. We hold that a man is iustified by faith. Ergo children, if they haue no faith, are neither iustified, neither yet doe please God, Bellarm.

Ans. First these places doe as wel proue that children haue an absolute, perfit, and actuall faith: (for it is a perfect faith that iustifieth vs, and maketh vs acceptable to God) which I am sure our aduersaries will not yeeld vnto. Secondly, the iustification and saluation of children dependeth of the free election of God, Rom. 9.11. And that which faith worketh, in those that are of vnderstanding, the spirit of God is able to effect in infants, by some secret way, best knowne to himselfe.

The Protestants.

THat infants neither haue faith in themselues, nor yet are profited or furthered to their saluation by the faith of others, it is thus proued.

Argum. 1. Saint Paul saith, Faith commeth by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, Rom. 10.17. But infants can neither heare nor vnderstand the word of God: Ergo, no faith is wrought in them.

Argum. 2. There is no habituall or potentiall faith that pleaseth God: but the iustifying faith is alwaies actuall, working by loue, Galath. 5.6. Ergo, children haue either no faith, or it must needes bee an actuall or working faith.

Argum. 3. Infants are not iustified, nor relieued or helped forward towards their saluation by the faith of their parents, or Godfathers, when they are baptized: for the Scripture saith, The iust shall liue by faith, Rom. 1.17. that is, by his owne faith, not the faith of another.

‘Augustine denieth that children are illuminate in their mindes, when they are baptized: Si illuminati essent, ipsum baptismum laeti susciperent, cui videmus eos cum magnis fletibus reluctari: If they were illuminate, they would ioyfullie receiue Baptisme, which we see them to striue against with great crying. And why should the Apostle say, Bee yee not children in vnderstanding,De pecca. merit & remiss. lib. 1. cap. 26. 1. Corinth. 14.20. if so be their mindes were illuminate? Wherefore that saying in the Gospell, saith hee, This is the light that lighteth euerie one that commeth into the world, Iohn 1.9. Whereby they would proue, that children doe receiue light at their verie first comming into the world, is thus to bee vnderstoode, Quia nullus hominum illuminatur, nisi lumine illo veritatis, because no man is lightened, but onely by that light. What now is become of that lumen fidei, the light of faith, which you say is infused into children in Baptisme.’

[Page]

AN APPENDIX, OF THE POpish vse in baptizing of Bels.

The Papists.

error 106 THey begin now to be ashamed of the blinde practises of their superstitious and ignorant forefathers: for Bellarmine flatly denieth, that bels are baptized amongst them: but they are onely consecrate and halowed for diuine vses, as other Church vessels are, lib. 4. de Roman pontific. cap. 12.

The Protestants.

IT is a great shame for them, to denie so manifest a thing. For in the halowing of bels, first, there were Godfathers chosen, secondly, they gaue names to the bels: thirdly, the bels had new garments put vpon them, as is accustomed to bee done to Christians in their Baptisme. Fourthly, the baptizing of bels was onely permitted to the Bishops suffragane, whereas their Priests and Deacons did vsually baptize infants: all this sheweth, that it was not onely a Baptisme, which they bestowed vpon bels, but in a more principall kinde, then common Baptisme was. This was one of the greeuances, which the Princes of Germanie complained of in the assembly at Noremberge, Fox Martyrol. p. 861. col. 1. edition. 4. that the suffraganes exacted of the people such great summes of money for the baptizing of bels: with what face then, can they denie this vngodlie custome of theirs, in Christening and baptizing of bels?

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF THE effects and fruites of Baptisme.

THe partes of this question are these: first, whether our sinnes are wholly remitted, and cleane taken away in Baptisme. Secondly, whether Baptisme serueth onely for the remission of sinnes that are past. Thirdly, of the liberties and priuiledges, which are obtained by Baptisme: which partes are now seuerally to be handled.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER IN BAPtisme our sinnes be cleane taken away.

The Papists.

THe sinnes which are past, they affirme, not onely by the grace of Christ error 107 receiued in Baptisme, to be forgiuen and pardoned, and no more imputed, but euen wholly to be rased, and rooted out: Et tolli omne illud, quod veram [Page]habet & propriam rationem peccati: And all that wholly to be taken away, which hath the nature and qualitie of sinne, Concil. Trident sess. 5.Decret. de original. peccat. For the concupiscence or originall sinne, remaining after Baptisme, is now no more to bee called sinne. In infants then newly baptized, there is neither mortall nor veniall sinne, Rhemist. 1. Iohn. 1. sect. 5.

Argum. The Scripture saith, Beholde the lambe of God, that taketh away the sinnes of the world, Ioh 1.29. Christ doth sanctifie and cleanse his Church by the washing of water, through the word. Ergo, by remission, sinnes cleane taken away, Rhemist. Rom. 4. sect. 7.Ephes. 5.26.

Ans. First, if sinne in baptisme were wholly remoued, not onely the guilt, but the very staine and blot of sinne: how commeth it to passe, that many which are baptized, doe fall afterward into deadly sinnes, yea there is no man, that liueth without sinne? If sinne once haue been vtterly expelled and banished out of the flesh, how commeth it in againe? if their iustification haue once clearely rid them from sinne, how can they be subiect to it againe? for the grace of iustification, being once obtained, can neuer bee lost: the giftes of God are without repentance. Rom. 11.29.

2. The Scripture is true, that Christ by his blood, cleanseth, washeth, taketh away our sinnes: not by actually purging vs from all corruption, but in freely acquiting and discharging of vs before God, both of the guilt and punishment of sinne: so the Scripture saith, Blessed are they, whose iniquities are forgiuen, and to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne, Rom. 4.7.8. Our sinnes therefore may be truely forgiuen, though some corruption of sinne doe still remaine in vs.

The Protestants.

THere are three things to bee considered in sinne. First, the staine or blot, corruption or remnant of sinne in vs. Secondly, the guilt, fault, and offence of sinne. Thirdly, the punishment and stipend due vnto it. By our spiritual washing in the blood of Christ, whereof Baptisme is a seale, both the guilt and punishment of our sinnes are not onely hid and couered in Gods sight (as our aduersaries doe falsely charge vs to say:) but they are truely forgiuen vs for Christs sake, and shall neuer be remembred any more. But yet there is left in vs some remnant of sinne so long as we liue in this flesh, which in the end together with the corruption and mortalitie of the bodie, shall bee cleane taken away.

Argum. 1. If wee say wee haue no sinne, wee deceiue our selues, and the truth is not in vs, 1. Iohn. 1.8. Ergo, there are none liuing at any time voyde of sinne, no not in their Baptisme. Saint Paul also exhorteth to bee renewed in minde, and to put on the new man, and put off the old, Ephes. 4.23. Ergo, there remaineth some sinne and corruption after Baptisme: what neede else this renewing of the minde, and putting on the new man afterward?

[Page]Argum. 2. Originall sinne is not taken away in Baptisme, therefore some sinne remayneth still: And that this originall corruption is properly called sinne and is sin indeede, S. Paul sheweth euidently, Rom. 7. ver. 7, 8. where he nameth lust and concupiscence sinne.

Augustine thus writeth, Meminisse debemus peccatorum omnium plenam remissionem fieri in Baptismo, Cont. Pelag. lib. 2. cap. 2 [...]. hominis verò qualitatem non totam continuò mutari: We must remember, that all our sinnes are fully remitted in Baptisme: but the quality of man (that is the corruption, and staine or blot of sinne) is not wholly chaunged.

THE SECOND PART: WHETHER BAPtisme serue onely for remission of sinnes past, & not for the sinnes also to come.

The Papists.

error 108 CHristes death applyed to man by Baptisme, wypeth away al sinnes past, for new sinnes other remedies be dayly requisite, Rhemist. Heb. 10. sect. 4. The councell of Trent holdeth them accursed, that thinke all sinnes to be forgiuen, fide Baptismi suscepti, by faith of Baptisme receiued, sess. 7. can. 10.

Heereupon their saying ariseth, that Baptismus est prima tabula post naufragium: that Baptisme is the first boord of refuge after shipwracke: & Poenitentia est secunda tabula post naufragium: penance is the second boord of refuge: So that if a man do fall after Baptisme, he must vse other helpes and meanes for the remission of sinnes: for Baptisme is not auaileable for sinnes afterward committed, Bellarm. cap. 18.

Argum. It is impossible, saith the Apostle, for them that haue beene once lightened, and tasted of the heauenly grace, if they fall away, to bee renewed by penance, Heb. 6.6. that is, they which fall away from faith and grace, after Baptisme, cannot be baptized againe, or be illuminated, or renouated, by so easie a cleansing of sinnes, as the Sacrament of Baptisme did yeeld: Ergo, Baptisme is not auaileable for remission of sinnes, which men fall into afterward, Bellarm. cap. 18.

Ans. The Apostle speaketh not of this or that kinde of Repentance, but generally of all, shewing, that there is no hope of remission nor grace to repent left for those which fall into the grieuous sinne of Apostasie, which hee heere describeth, for they crucifie againe the Sonne of God, and make a mock of him, ver. 6. And that the Apostle vnderstandeth the sinne of Apostasie, & the sinne against the holy Ghost, it appeareth by comparing that other place, Heb. 10.29. with this: for there they are said, to tread vnder foote the sonne of God, and to despite the spirit of grace. The Apostle then cutteth off such from all hope of grace, and repentaunce: not onely barreth them from some speciall kinde of repentance.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THe externall act of Baptisme neither wipeth away sinnes going before, or comming after: but it is the inward working of the spirite of God, which by the vertue of Christs death, testified and shewed forth in Baptisme, that washeth away our sinnes. And Baptisme is a seale of remission of sinnes, for the confirmation of our faith, euen of those which are committed after Baptisme, as well as of sinnes done before: and although the ceremonie of Baptisme be not repeated, yet the vertue of Gods spirit testified thereby, remaineth to our liues end.

Argum. 1. Mark. 16.16. He that shall beleeue and be baptized, shall bee saued. Wee reason thus, Baptisme is a seale of that faith, whereby men are saued, or to the which saluation is promised: but that faith beleeueth remission of all sinnes, both past and to come: therefore Baptisme also sealeth vnto vs the remission of all our sinnes, going before or following after.

Argum. 2. Baptisme is a signe and seale of our mysticall washing in the blood of Christ: But all our sinnes both before and after are washed away by the blood of Christ: Ergo, Baptisme doth assure vs of a perfit remission of all our sinnes.

So saith Augustine: Eodem lauacro regenerationis, & verbo sanctificationis, omnia prorsus mala hominum regeneratorum sanantur, etiam quae posterius humana ignorantia aut infirmitate committuntur. ‘By the same lauer of regeneration, and word of Sanctification, all the sinnes in men regenerate are healed, yea euen those, which by humane ignorance afterward are committed:’ Non vt baptisma, quoties peccatur, toties repetatur, sed quia ipso, quod semel datur, fit, vt non solum anteà, verùm etiam posteà quorumlibet peccatorum venia fidelibus impetretur. Not that Baptisme, so oft as a man sinneth, is to bee repeated: but by vertue of that which is once giuen, it commeth to passe, that the faithfull haue remission of their sinnes not onely before, but also after. Ergo, Baptisme hath it force not onely for the present, but it reacheth vnto the time following.

THE THIRD PART OF THE LIBERTIE and priuiledges obtained by Baptisme.

The Papists.

1. THey haue defined, that a man, by Baptisme, is not onely debitor fidei,error 109 sed etiam vniuersae legis Christi implendae, not onely a debter of the faith, but is made a debter to performe the whole law of Christ, Concil. Trident. sess. 8. can. 7. that is, Baptisme is not onely a signe of free iustification by faith, neither [Page] doth he which is baptized professe himselfe onely by faith to bee iustified,Bellar. lib. 1 de baptis. cap. 15. but partly also by his workes, and the keeping of the commandements of Christ.

The Protestants.

Ans. IN Baptisme wee make profession of our obedience, to die vnto sinne, and rise vp to newnes of life, Rom. 6.2. yet not thereby to bee iustified: but in being baptized wee shew our faith and hope, onely to looke for remission of sinnes and saluation of our soules by the death of Christ.

Argum. 1. Circumcision, in place whereof Baptisme is giuen to vs, is called by the Apostle a seale of the righteousnes of faith, Rom. 4 11. not of the righteousnes of workes: much more then is Baptisme, which is a Sacrament of the Gospell, a pledge vnto vs of the iustice of faith.

Argum. 2. By Baptisme we are freed from the curse of the lawe: for it is a Sacrament of the death of Christ, and of all the benefites thereof: and Christ by his death hath borne for vs the curse of the lawe, Galath. 3.13. But if by Baptisme we binde our selues to the obseruance of the lawe, to bee iustified and finde life thereby, we must needes fall into the curse, because we are not able to keepe the commandements. Wherefore seeing Baptisme deliuereth vs from the curse, it also exempteth vs from the workes of the lawe.

The Papists.

error 110 2. ALthough Christians are bound by solemne vow in Baptisme to walke in obedience before God, and to keepe his commandements: yet are they not therefore freed and exempted from the obseruance of the lawes and ordinances of men, the which they are bound in conscience to keepe, and vnder paine of damnation, Bellarm. cap. 16.

The Protestants.

BAptisme onely bindeth vs to keepe the commandements of God: and so far forth also to obey men, as they commaund things lawfull: but wee must not be brought in bondage to mens traditions and obseruations, seeing we are the Lords free men, and by Baptisme consecrate to his seruice.

Argum. Math. 28.19. Goe and teach, baptizing them, &c. and teaching them to obserue all that I haue commanded you. Ergo, Baptisme bindeth vs onely to the obseruation of Gods precepts. 1. Corinth. 7.23. Yee are bought with a price, be not the seruants of men: Baptisme is a signe of the death of Christ, the price of our redemption. Ergo, wee are freed from all meere humane seruice, in receiuing of Baptisme. For this cause is it called the Baptisme of Christ:Cont. Petili. lib. 3.55. Augustine saith, Paulus dixisse legitur euangelium meum: baptismum autem Christi nemo Apostolorum ita vnquam ministrauit, vt auderet dicere[Page]suum. Paul is read to haue said, My Gospell: but neuer any of the Apostles durst call the Baptisme of Christ their Baptisme. Ergo, seeing it is the Baptisme of Christ, and we are onely baptized in his name, not in our owne name, or the name of men: wee must onely hope to bee saued by faith in him, and become his seruants wholly.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, OF THE difference betweene the Baptisme of our Sauiour Christ, and the Baptisme of Iohn.

The Papists.

THe Baptisme of John (they say) was of another kinde then Christs Baptisme was, neither was it sufficient without Christs Baptisme, nor had the error 111 like force or efficacie, as his Baptisme had: and therefore such as had been baptized of Iohn, were afterward admitted to Christs Baptisme, Concil. Trident. sess. 8. canon. 1. Bellarm. lib. 1. de baptis. cap. 20.21.

Argum. 1. Matth. 3.11. Iohn himselfe saith, I baptize you with water: but hee shall baptize you with the holy Ghost: Ergo, Iohns Baptisme and Christes not all one: for Iohns Baptisme gaue not the holy Ghost. Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. Iohn speaketh not of diuerse Baptismes, but of diuerse operations, and ministeries, in one and the same Baptisme: for Iohn, as all other ministers doe, did but giue water: and Christ working together with them, giueth the holy Ghost. But it will be answered, that Iohn saith not, he dooth baptize, but hee shall baptize: Ergo, Christ did not baptize together with Iohn by his spirite.

Ans. The same Iohn in another place speaketh of Christ in the present tense. Iohn. 1.33. This is hee which baptizeth with the holy Ghost: Ergo, Christ did both then baptize with his spirite, and afterwards also more manifestly, when the giftes of the spirite began to bee shed forth more plentifully vpon men.

Argum. 2. Saint Paul baptized twelue men at Ephesus with Christs Baptisme, that had receiued Iohns before, Act. 19.4.5. Ergo, Iohns Baptisme was not the same that Christs was, Bellarm.

Ans. There can be no such thing gathered out of that place; for those words in the fifth verse: When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus, are part of the narration which Paul maketh of Iohns manner of Baptisme: so that the sense is this, they that heard Iohns doctrine, were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus. It is not so to be read, as though they were baptized againe of Paul, but he laieth onely his hands vpon them, that had before receiued the Baptisme of Iohn.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THat Iohns Baptisme was not diuerse from Christs Baptisme, but was all one with it in propertie and effect, and that they which were baptized by Iohn, were baptized into the name of Christ, and therefore needed not againe to bee baptized; thus it is made manifest out of Scripture.

Argum. 1. Iohns Baptisme differed not in the matter of the Sacrament, for he baptized with water as Christs Apostles did. There was also the same forme of both, the word of God: for Iohn also taught the people to beleeue in Iesus Christ that was to come, Act. 19.4. There was also the same scope and ende of Iohns Baptisme: For hee preached the Baptisme of repentance, for remission of sinnes, Mark. 1.4. Ergo, it was the same with the Baptisme of Christ.

Argum. 2. If the Baptisme instituted by Christ were another Baptisme, then Iohns was, and yet hee himselfe was baptized of Iohn: then it would followe, that wee are baptized now with another Baptisme, then Christ himselfe was, for hee receiued Iohns Baptisme: but this were very absurd, to say, that there is not the same Baptisme of the head and the members, of Christ and his Church: Ergo, Iohns Baptisme all one with Christs.

Bellarmine denieth, that the proper end and scope of Iohns Baptisme was for remission of sinnes: yet Augustine granteth it, who notwithstanding being carried away with the error of that time, doth else where put some difference betweene the Baptisme of Iohn and Christ: Si quis contendat in baptismo Iohannis dimissa esse peccata, De Baptis. cont. Donatist. lib. 5. cap. 14. non ago pugnanter: If any man will contend, that remission of sinnes also was giuen in Iohns Baptisme, I will not bee against it. There being then the same proper end and scope of both these Baptismes, how can they choose but be all one?

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF the ceremonies and rites of Baptisme.

The Papists.

error 112 THey haue brought into the Sacrament of Baptisme a multitude of superstitious ceremonies, whereby they haue greatly polluted the holy Sacrament of Baptisme, mixing therewith their owne inuentions.

First before Baptisme, they haue deuised these toyes to bee vsed. First, they doe exorcise, coniure, and exufflate the euill spirite from the partie to bee baptized. Secondly, they touch the eares and nostrels with spittle, that his eares may bee opened to heare the worde, and his nostrels, to discerne betweene the smell of good and euil. Thirdly, the Priest signeth his eyes, eares, mouth, breast, [Page] forehead, nostrels, with the signe of the crosse, that all his sences thereby may be defended. 4. Then halowed salt is put into his mouth, that he may be seasoned with wisdome, and be kept from putrifiyng in sinne. 5. The partie is anoynted then with oyle in his breast, that he may be safe from euill suggestions, & between the shoulders, which signifieth the receiuing of spiritual strength.

Secondly, these ceremonies doe accompany Baptisme it selfe. 1. The Font and water therein is consecrated and halowed, in the name of the Father, the Sonne, and holy Ghost. 2. Hee is thrise dipped in the water, to signifie the being of Christ 3. dayes in the graue.

Thirdly, after Baptisme, they haue this vse, 1. He is anoynted with holie Chrisme in the top of the head, & thereby is become a Christian. 2. A white garment is put vpon him, to betoken his regeneration. 3. A vaile is put vpon his head, in token that he is now crowned with a royal Diademe. 4. A burning taper is put into his hand, to fulfil that saying in the Gospel, Let your light so shine before men, &c. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Baptism. 25.26.27. Catechism. Rom. p. 310. Gabr. Biel. lib. 4. distinct. 6. qu. 3.

The Protestants.

AGainst these Popish ceremonies, which they vse in baptisme, we doe reason thus.

1 It is contrary to the rule of the Gospell, that there should bee such types, shadowes, significations, brought into the seruice of God, as they make in Baptisme: for seeing we haue the body which is Christ, all such shadowes ought to be abolished, Coloss. 2.17.

2 In one sacrament they haue forged and found out many, as their chrisme, oyle, salte, spittle: which they make not onely seales of holy things, but giuers and conferrers of grace, which is more then any sacrament can haue: and it is contrary to the scripture: for the spirit of GOD is as the winde that bloweth, where it listeth, Iohn. 3. It is not tyed to creatures, elements, externall signes, as they include the spirite (as it were) in these outward things, which haue power (as they affirme) to giue wisedome, strength, power against the diuell, and such like. But Saynt Paul sayth, that the weapons of our warfare are not carnall, 2. Corinthian. 10.4. The meanes whereby Christans both obtayne spirituall graces, and shend them from euill, are spirituall: For if in Christ Circumcision auayle not any thing, which was notwithstanding instituted of God: but fayth is all in all, Galath. 5.6. Much more vaine and vnauaileable are the deuises and inuentions of men.

3 This beggerly company of ceremonies doth also deface and impugne the sincere and pure institution of Christ: None of all those ceremonies were vsed when Christ himselfe was baptized, Math. 3. which notwithstanding had beene most fitte, considering the worthynes of his person that was baptized. Neither did Christ giue any such thing in charge to his Apostles, but [Page] biddeth them onely preach, and baptize in the name of the Father, Sonne, and holy Ghost, Math. 28.19. nor yet were any such ceremonies in vse in the Apostles time. Saynt Peter sayth, Act. 10.47. Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized? He calleth not for oyle, salt, spittle, or any such thing, but onely for water.

Augustine vtterly misliketh this combersome rabble of needlesse ceremonies,Epist. 119 cap. 19. Ipsam religionem, quam Deus paucissimis sacramentis liberam esse voluit, onerib. premunt, vt tolerabilior sit conditio Iudaeorum, qui etiamsi tempus libertatis non agnouerint, legalibus tamen sarcinis, non humanis praesumptionibus subijciuntur: They doe cumber religion with their burdensome inuentions, which Christ made free with a very few sacraments: so that the Iewes case was more tolerable, who though they knew not the libertie of the Gospell, yet were subiect to the legall ceremonies, not to the inuentions of men.

And is it not euen thus (I pray you) in the Popish Church? for neuer was Iewish circumcisiō stuffed with the third part of ceremonies, which their Baptisme is defiled withall.

THE THIRTEENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE, OF THE SACRAMENT OF THE LORDS SVPPER OR EVCHARIST.

THis Controuersie hath two parts: First, of the sacrament it self. Secondly, of the sacrifice, which they say, is offered vp in the sacrament: which they call the sacrifice of the Masse.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE SAcrament of the Eucharist.

THis part of the controuersie standeth vpon diuers questions: First, whether the body of Christ be really and substantially in the sacrament. Secondly, whether the elements of bread and wine be changed, conuerted, and transubstantiate into the very body and flesh of Christ. Thirdly, whether the Eucharist remayne a sacrament after the vse and celebration. Fourthly, of the outward elements in this sacrament. Fiftly, of the words of consecration. Sixtly, of the proper effect of the Lords supper. Seuenthly, of the maner of celebrating it. Eightly, whether it ought to be ministred in one kinde. Ninthly, whether it is to be adored.

[Page]

THE FIRST QVESTION, CONCERNING the reall presence of Christ in the sacrament.

The Papists.

IN the sacrament of the Eucharist, vnder the formes of bread and wine, by error 113 the efficacie of the word of Christ spoken by the Priest, is really, verily, and substantially present, the naturall body and blood of Christ,Fox. 113 [...]. articul. 1. sex articul. which was conceiued of the virgin Marie; the same bodie, that is now in heauen, Rhemist. Mat. 26. sect. 4. yet after another maner: For he is in heauen according to the naturall existence of his body: in the sacrament, he is really present in his flesh, yet sacramentally by his omnipotent power, Concil. Trid. sess. 13. can. 1.

Argum. 1. The figures must be inferior to the things that are figured and represented: the sacraments of the law were figures of the sacraments in the Gospel: therfore they ought to be inferior. But vnles the bread & wine should be the very blood & flesh of Christ in the sacrament: their sacraments in the law should not only not be inferior, but far superior to ours. As for example, the Paschal Lambe is in nature to be preferred before bread, and the slaying of the Lamb did more liuely represent the death of Christ, then the breaking of bread, the eating of flesh doth also better set forth the spirituall nourishing, then the eating of bread. Wherefore, vnlesse we beleeue a reall presence in the sacrament; their sacrifices, in dignitie and excellencie should farre exceed and excel ours, Bellarm. lib. 1. de. sacram. Eucharist. ca. 3.

Ans. 1. It is not true, that their sacraments were figures of ours: But S. Paul sheweth, that both their sacraments and ours doe figure out and represent the same thing, as the spiritual eating and drinking of Christ, 1. Corint. 10.2.3 Our sacraments are indeed figures correspondent and answerable to theirs, and theirs also had a certaine reference and relation to ours: but they were not types of ours: for then our sacraments should bee the body of theirs, whereas Christ is the bodie both of their sacraments and ours. Saint Peter sayth, that Baptisme is an antitypon, a figure answerable to the sauing of the eight persons in the flood: 1. Pet. 3.21. They are correspondent one to the other, and had mutuall relation and respect one to the other. But that was not properly a type of Baptisme, but both Baptisme and that are figures and signes and liuely representations of our saluation in Christ.

2. If the reall presence of Christ onely commendeth the sacrament, and aduanceth it before the rytes of the law, which in all other respects are better: by this argument Baptisme still remayneth inferior to the sacramēts of the law: for you affirme no reall presence in Baptisme, as you do in the Eucharist: and in all other respects it must needes giue place to Circumcision: for the cutting of the flesh is a more liuely representatiō of regeneratiō, thē is the washing by water: and the flesh of man is in nature more precious then water. So by this reason, [Page] though you haue wonne credite for the Eucharist, yet you haue lost it for Baptisme.

3 We answere therefore, that although the reall presence bee set aparte, yet our sacraments are more excellent then theirs. First, the price and woorth of thinges in their nature are not to be weighed in a sacrament, but they must bee considered in respect of the vse, to the which they are ordayned by the institution. Flesh, you say, is better then bread: so is wine and milke better then water in their nature: but in Baptisme water is better then they, because Christ hath now set it apart for a more holy vse. Secondly, the slaying of the Lambe doth more liuely represent, say you, the death of Christ, then the breaking of bread.

Answ. We graunt, that if breaking of bread had beene vsed in the law, it had not been then so significant as the slaying of beasts: but the breaking of bread now in the light of the Gospell, in this abundance of knowledge and instruction, being a signe of a thing already done and finished, must needes be more pregnant and liuely in representation, then the killing of sacrifices in the law, which were types of things to come, the mystery of the Gospel being not yet opened to the world. Wherefore our sacraments are more excellent then theirs, in respect of the more cleare light and fuller signification, which they haue by the word of God, & the preaching of the Gospel ioyned vnto thē: We neede not deuise any other way of excellencie for our sacraments, then this, which we haue sayd, agreeable to the scriptures, 2. Cor. 4.3. Galat. 3.1.

The Papists.

ARgum. 2. ‘Iohn. 6.55. Christ sayth, My flesh is meate indeed, and my blood is drinke in deede: he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.’

First, this place must be vnderstoode not of any spirituall eating or drinking of Christ without the sacrament, but is properly meant of the manducation and eating of him in the sacrament. First, Vers. 51. The bread, sayth Christ, that I will giue: he speaketh of a thing to come, for the sacrament was afterward instituted: but if this bread were to be taken for his word, and the eating thereof for beleeuing in him; in this sense the bread was giuen already.

Answ. Christ also speaketh in the present tense, vers. 32. My father giueth you the true bread from heauen: & I am the liuing bread that came down from heauen: if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer, vers. 51. Hee sayth not, he that shall eate, but, he that euen now eateth. And afterward he speaketh of the time to come; ‘The bread that I shall giue, because his death and passion was not yet finished: therefore he sayth, The bread that I shal giue, is my flesh, which I will giue for the life of the worlde:’ But he speaketh euery where of the eating of his flesh in the present tense, vers. 35.50.51.53. which cannot bee vnderstoode of the sacramentall eating, the sacrament being not yet instituted, but of a spirituall manducation.

[Page]

The Papists.

SEcondly, those words being applyed to the sacrament, must needes also bee vnderstood properly and literally, for the very eating of the flesh of Christ, & drinking his blood, not tropically, or figuratiuely.

1. The flesh of Christ, which Christ promiseth to giue them to be eaten, he preferreth before the Manna, which their fathers did eate in the wildernes: the true bread which he giueth them, is more excellent then the bread of Manna. But if the bread in the sacrament doe but signifie the flesh of Christ, and be not it in very deede, it should be no better then Manna, which also did signifie and shew foorth Christ, Bellarm. cap. 6.

Ans. Christ compareth not the spirituall substance of Manna, with his flesh and blood, but the corporall foode, which being receiued into the belly, and not receiued into the heart by fayth, hath no power to giue eternall life. For, vers. 32. Christ sayth, that Moses gaue them not Manna from heauen: Ergo, he meaneth the corporall foode, not the spirituall substance of Manna, for as it was a sacrament of Christ, it was heauenly bread. Againe, vers. 49. Your fathers did eate Manna in the wildernes and dyed. He speaketh of the materiall foode, for they that did Manna spiritually by fayth, died not in soule.

Ans. Now on the contrary side we will prooue, that this place contayned in the sixt chapter of Iohn, cannot be so vnderstoode as they expound it.

First, Christ speaketh not onely of the sacramentall eating of his flesh, and drinking of his blood, but generally of the spirituall participation by fayth, whether in the sacrament or without, which is wrought in vs by the holy Ghost.

1. If it be vnderstoode of the sacrament, then it will follow that no man can be saued, vnlesse he doe receiue the sacrament: for Christ saith, ‘vers. 53. Except you eate my flesh and drink my blood, you cannot haue life in you.’ This, I am sure, they will hardly grant, that the Eucharist also should bee necessarie, as they make Baptisme, to saluation.

2. If Christ hath relation to the sacrament, then must it of necessitie bee ministred in both kindes, for in euery place he ioyneth both these together, the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood.

Augustine also thus writeth vpon these wordes,Tract in Iohan 26. Hoc est manducare illam escam, & illum bibere potum, in Christo manere, & illum manentemin se habere. This it is to eate that flesh, and to drinke that drinke, to abide in Christ, and to haue him abiding in vs, but this may be done without the sacrament, Ergo, it is not necessary to vnderstand it of the sacrament.

Secondly, though we should graunt that this whole treatise Iohn. 6. may fitlie be referred to the sacrament, yet the wordes must be taken figuratiuelie, for the spirituall eating and drinking of Christ in the sacrament, and not otherwise.

1 Vers. 35. Christ so expoundeth his owne words: ‘I am the bread of life, he that commeth to me shall not hunger, and he that beleeueth in me shall not thirst.’ To eate then, and to drinke Christ, is to beleeue in him.

[Page]2 Christ vnderstandeth another manner of eating of his flesh, then the Capernaites did. But they imagined that Christ would giue his very flesh and blood to bee eaten: And therefore they went away offended, and sayd, This is an hard saying, vers. 60. Therefore Christ to correct their erronious conceit, sayth vnto them, that his words were spirite and life, that is, spiritually to be vnderstoode, verse. 63.

So Augustine interpreteth those wordes of Christ, as if he had sayd, Spiritualiter intelligite, quod locutus sum, You must vnderstand spiritually, that which I haue sayd. You shall not eate this body which you see, nor drinke that blood,In Psal. 98. which shall be shed for you. Sacramentum vobis aliquod commendaui, spiritualiter intellectum viuisicabit vos: I haue commended a certaine mystery and sacrament vnto you, which being spiritually vnderstood shall quicken you.

The Papists.

ARgum. 3. Christ in the institution of this sacrament, sayd vnto his Apostles, after hee had giuen thanks and blessed: Hoc est corpus meum: This is my bodie: that is, that which is contayned in this bread, or vnder the formes of this bread, is my very body, Bellarm. cap. 9. So that these wordes must needes be taken properly, not to bee a trope or figure.

1 It is not the manner of the scriptures to set down flatte precepts and commaundements, and directorie rules in obscure termes, or figuratiue speeches, but plainely and euidently: therefore it is not like, that Christ, being now to prescribe vnto his Apostles the perpetuall lawe and forme of this sacrament, would speake obscurely.

2 Though he spake by parables and signes to the Pharisies, yet there was no cause why he should so doe, none being present but his Apostles, Bellarmin. ibid.

Ans. 1. It is very well, that you will now (though I thinke vnawares) grant vnto vs, that the precepts and rules in scripture are set downe simply and playnely: wherefore the scriptures cannot bee so hard and obscure, as you would beare vs in hand they are: for if the precepts and rules of fayth be euidently in scripture expressed, as you seeme to confesse, what reason haue you to keepe back the people from the reading of scripture?

2 It is false that the scriptures vse no figures nor tropes, in the declaration of the lawes and sacraments of the Church: for sayth not Saint Paul, speaking of the sacraments of the Iewes, Petra erat Christus, the rock was Christ, 1. Cor. 10.4. that is, signified Christ? Likewise in the 17. vers. We that are many are one bread: that is, our spirituall vnitie and coniunction is represented, in that we are partakers of one bread.

3 Sometimes our Sauiour would speake darkely, being alone with his Apostles, thereby to stirre them vp more diligently to attend vnto his wordes, [Page] as when he biddeth them beware of the leauen of the Pharisies, Mark. 8.15. Yet this speech of our Sauiour Christ vttered in the hearing of his Apostles, This is my bodie; was neither so darke nor obscure, that the Apostles neede much bee troubled about the vnderstanding. Nay, many things being spoken in borrowed and metaphoricall wordes, are vttered with greater grace, and carrie a fuller sense: When Christ sayd, I am the doore, Iohn 10.9. I am the vine, Iohn 15.1. he spake by figure as he doth here, for neither was he a vine, or a doore, as the bread was not his bodie: Yet which of the Apostles was there, that vnderstoode him not, when he called himselfe a vine, and a doore? Neither could they doubt of our Sauiour Christs meaning here.

Contra. Now on the other side, we will make it playne, that these words of Christ, are spoken tropically:

1 Where Christ sayth according to Saint Luke, This cuppe is the new Testament in my blood, Luk. 22.23. we must needes admitte a double trope or figure: for first, the cuppe is taken for that which was contayned in the cuppe. Secondly, the wine in the cuppe was not the newe Testament, but a signe of the new Testament. If then in one parte of the sacrament hee spake by a figure, why not also in the other, when he sayth, This is my bodie, that is, a liuely signe and seale thereof?

2 It is no vnusuall phrase in the scripture, to say (this is) that is, signifieth as Genes. 17.10. Circumcision is called the couenant it selfe, where it was a signe onely of it. And Exod. 12.11. the Lambe is called the Lords passeouer, which it betokened onely: In the same sense Christ sayth, This is my bodie: that is, exhibiteth and representeth vnto you my bodie.

Augustine so expoundeth these wordes, Non dubitauit Dominus dicere, Aug. cont. Adimant. cap. 12. Hoc est corpus meum, cum daret signum corpus sui: Christ doubted not to say, This is my bodie, when hee gaue a signe and sacrament of his bodie.

The Protestants.

THat Christ is present with all his benefites in the sacrament, wee doe willingly graunt, neither doe we thinke that the elements of bread and wine are bare and naked signes of the bodie and blood of Christ, but Christ is verily by them exhibited vnto vs, and spiritually by fayth, we are truely made partakers of his precious bodie & blood: not that Christ descendeth from heauen to vs, but we ascend by faith and in spirit vnto him: yea, we confesse as much as Bernard sayth, whose speech they themselues allow, In sacramēto exhiberi veram carnis Christi substantiā, sed spiritualiter non carnaliter: that the very substance of Christs flesh is exhibited vnto vs in the sacrament, but spiritually, not carnally. This Bellarmine acknowledgeth to bee true,cap. 2. lib. 1. though hee would not haue the worde (spiritually) to bee vsed, lest it might bee, as hee sayth, by vs misconstrued. This then is our fayth and iudgement, that wee are [Page] verilie in this sacrament engrafted into the bodie of Christ, and doe truely eate his flesh, and drink his blood: but all this is done spirituallie onely and by faith: As for their carnall eating and deuouring of Christ, we vtterlie reiect, and condemne it.

Argum. 1. In the receiuing of the sacrament there is a double coniunction, we are ioyned to Christ, & make one body also amongst our selues: so saith S. Paul, ‘1. Cor. 10.16.17. We are made partakers of the body of Christ, and wee that are many are one bread, and one body: but our participation with the mysticall bodie of Christ is spirituall.’ Ergo, also our communication with his naturall body, Fulk. in hunc locum.

Arg. 2. If the body of Christ be in the sacrament, thē is it eaten, & torne with the teeth: And what is eaten goeth into the belly, & is cast out into the draught, Mark. 7.19. I pray you what is now become of the body of Christ? doth it passe the same way that other meates doe?

Bellarm. answereth, lib. 1. cap. 11. ad argum. 5. that they are the accidents of the bread and wine which are eaten, and chawen, or rent by the teeth, & not the body of Christ: and yet the body of Christ goeth down into the stomack, but no further: but when the formes of bread & wine begin to be corrupted there, the body of Christ goeth away, Bellarm. cap. 14.

Ans. 1. This is new learning, that the accidents of meate are chawen in the mouth, & not the meate it selfe: & that the formes only, not the substance is altred, & corrupted in the stomack. Say also that men are nourished with accidents & not with the substance: If the priest chance to drink too deepe of the chalice, and so become drunk, I pray you what is it, that maketh him so light headed? Is it, think you, the accidents onely of wine? Surely a drunken man would not say it. If a Mouse chance to creepe into your pixe, and fil her hungry belly with your God-amight: what is it that the Mouse feedeth vpon? trow you they bee accidents onely? for you say that the consecrated host goeth no further then the stomack: and yet it is too much that the housel of Christians should be housed in a mouses belly. These are but ridiculous and light questions, yet such, as haue troubled your grauest and sagest heads, and remayne vnanswered.

2. Bellarmin. denieth, that the body of Christ being eaten, goeth any further then the stomack: But our Rhemists goe further; they say, that we are made a peece of his body and blood: They should rather haue sayd, that his body and blood is made a peece of vs,Rhemist. 1. Cor. 10. sect. 5. being conuerted into our substance. But silly men, we pitie them: If we should presse them still with these questions, they would sooner run mad, then find out any reasonable and sober answere for vs.

Argum. 3. Christ in his flesh is ascended vp to heauen, and there must remayne till his comming againe, Act. 3.21. Agayne he saith, The poore you shal haue alwayes, but me alwayes you cannot haue, Mark. 14. Ergo, Christ being now in his humanity in heauen, cannot bee present in the sacrament vpon earth.

[Page] Bellarmine answereth, that the carnall presence of Christ doth not draw him out of heauen: his naturall bodie remaineth there still: yet by his omnipotent power, he can make his bodie to be in many places at once, cap. 14.

Ans. If Christs bodie be in heauen and in earth, and in many places at once; it must either be his owne naturall bodie which was borne of the Virgine Mary, or he must euery day create himselfe a new bodie: but this were to too absurd to be granted, that euery day there should be a new Christ. Neither can the first be admitted: for a natural bodie hath a natural presence: but so hath not Christs bodie in the Sacrament: for it is not there naturally, being without shape or forme, neither visible nor sensible. And how can it stand with the propertie of a true naturall bodie, to be in a thousand places at once? for so must Christs needs be, and in more too, seeing he is kept and hanged vp in euery popish Church. And further, if totus Christus, whole Christ, be in the Sacrament, both with his bodie and soule: you must either graunt, that there are many whole Christs, seeing he is in many places at once: or els if there be but one whole Christ, his humanitie must be dispersed euery where as his Godhead is: and so are you against your wils become Vbiquitaries.

Hearken what Augustine sayth:Ad Dardan. epistol. 57. Cauendum est ne ita diuinitatem adstruamus hominis, vt veritatem corporis auferamus: We must take heede we doe not so maintaine the diuine nature of the man Christ, that we take away the nature of his bodie.

Argum. 4. The fathers in the law did eate the same spiritual meate, and drinke the same spirituall drinke in their Sacraments that we doe, 1. Corinth. 10.2.3. but they did not eate the flesh of Christ, nor drinke his blood, but onely spiritually by faith: Ergo, no more doe we.

Argum. 5. There remained wine still after the consecration and distribution amongst the Apostles: for Christ saith, He will drinke no more of the fruite of the vine, Math. 26.29. So S. Paul calleth the other element bread after the consecration, 1. Corinth. 10.17. We that are many are one bread, because we are partakers of one bread. Likewise, cap. 11.26. Ergo, there remaineth still bread and wine in the Sacrament. And therefore no bodie of Christ: for they cannot be there both together, as they teach.

Lastly, we must vnderstand, that this their deuised and forged opinion of the reall presence of Christ, is of no antiquitie in the Church: neither was there any question about it for a 1000. yeeres after Christ, til the time of Berengarius, who liued about Anno. 1060. who was sore troubled, for maintaining the truth against the carnall presence, and vnder Pope Leo the 9. and Nicholas the 2. was constrained twise to recant:Fox. p. 1152 yet there was no publique lawe or decree made in the Church concerning transubstantiation, till the Councel of Laterane, which was held vnder Pope Innocent the 3. Anno. 1215.

And that this grosse opinion fauoureth not a whit of antiquitie,Epistol. it may appea [...]e by the resolute iudgement of Augustine: Sacramenta ex similitudine ipsarum rerum nomina habent, secundum quendam modū sacramentū corporis Christi,[Page]corpus Christi est, &c. The Sacraments, because of some likenes, doe beare the names of the things themselues: as the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ is after a certaine manner called his bodie.

Commentar. in Psal. 3 Christus corporis sui figuram discipulis commendauit: Christ did commend to his disciples a figure of his bodie. Quid paras dentem & ventrem? Crede, & manducasti? Why doest thou make readie thy teeth & thy bellie? Beleeue in Christ, and thou hast eaten him.

Secundum praesentiam maiestatis semper habemus Christum, secundum praesentiam carnis recte dictum est discipulis, Me semper non habebitis: According to the presence of his Maiestie we haue Christ alwaies: according to his carnall presence, it was truely sayd to his disciples, You cannot haue me alwaies. By these and many such places in this ancient father, it is manifest, that in those daies there was no such opinion held of the carnall presence.

AN APPENDIX TO THIS QVESTION, WHETHER it stand with the power and will of God, that Christs bodie should be carnally present in the Sacrament.

The Papists.

114. Error.THere are two difficulties or impossibilities, which doe hinder the reall presence of Christs bodie in the Sacrament: First, it would follow, that a natural bodie, such as Christs is, might be in two places at once: for they say, that it is in heauen, and in the Eucharistall at once. Secondly, that a naturall bodie may be in a place, and yet not occupie or fill a place: for if Christs bodie be in the Sacrament, it occupieth no place: the compasse of a thinne and round cake is not answerable to the proportion of Christs bodie.

Notwithstanding both these difficulties, it is agreeable both to the power and good pleasure of God, that the bodie of Christ should be included in the Sacrament, Bellarm.

Argum 1. It is possible for the bodie of Christ to be in many places at once, and it also standeth with his will: as Act. 9.4. Christ appeared to Saul, either vpon the earth, or in the ayre next to the earth: for how could he either heare the voyce of Christ sitting in heauen, or see the light so farre off? Ergo, Christ was in two places: he appeared to Paul vpon earth, and he was at the same time in heauen, from whence he shall not moue till the day of iudgement, Bellarm. de sacram. Eucharist. lib. 3. cap. 3. Rhemist. Act. 9. sect. 1.

Ans. First, the text is plaine, that Christ spake from heauen, from whence the light shined, vers. 3. he was neither in the ayre nor vpon the earth. Secondly, doe you make question, whether Paul could see a light, or heare a voyce from so farre;23. seeing that the Sunne, whose bodie is so farre distant from vs, doth disperse his beames ouer the face of the earth; and the voyce of the thunder is hear [...] [...]ery farre? Will ye denie Christ to haue that power, which we see to be in his creatures? [Page] Thirdly, and why was it not as possible, that Christ from heauen should be heard of Paul, as he was seene of Stephen sitting on the right hand of God? Act. 7.56.

Argum. 2. The bodie of Christ may be where it pleaseth him, and yet shall not need any naturall place, or occupie any roome: he is able to bring a Camel through the eye of a needle, Math. 20.26. He also came through the doores in to his Apostles, rose out of the sepulchre thorow the stone, was borne, his mothers wombe being shut: therefore he may as well, and is no doubt, present vnder the shapes of bread and wine in the Sacrament, Rhemist. Math. 26. sect. 11. Bellarm. lib. 3. de. Sacram. cap. 6.

Ans. 1. Christ sheweth in that place, that it is as impossible for a rich man, that is high minded, and trusteth in his riches, to enter into heauen, as for a Camell to passe through the eye of a needle: but it is possible with God to giue rich men humble and lowly minds, and so make them fit for his kingdome, as to make the Camell lesse, and so draw him thorow a needle. It is not proued out of this place, that God can or will draw the huge bodie of a Camell through a needle, remaining still of that bignes: no more then that it is possible for God, to bring a proud, rich, arrogant man to heauen, his affections not altered: both these are impossible to God, because they are contrarie to his wil and ordinance: the one is against the law of iustice, to bring a wicked man to heauen: the other against the law of nature.

2. For the other three examples: it is not proued out of scripture, that the bodie of Christ pearced the doores, the graue, stone, or his mothers wombe: although the doores were found shut after Christs entrance, the graue couered, and his mother remained a Virgine still: for all these passages might giue place for a while to the bodie of Christ, and returne againe to their place: as the red sea was diuided till the Israelites passed, and afterward the waters came together againe. And concerning the last instance of the birth of Christ, it is certaine out of the scriptures, that Christ opened the wombe of his mother in his birth, Luk. 2.23. Hetherto therefore they haue proued nothing.

The Protestants.

OVr aduersaries doe falsely charge vs to say, that God can doe no more then he hath done, or will do, Rhemist. Math. 26. sect. 11. This we say: that Christ is almightie, and yet can doe nothing against his owne will, his word, or glorie: as to dishonor his glorious bodie, and to bring it within the compasse of a piece of bread, that it may be deuoured of cats, dogges, rats, mice, or which is worse, to be eaten of wicked men the members of the diuell: although the question be not so much betweene vs, what Christ is able to doe of his absolute power, but what he will doe according to his word, Fulk. Math. 17. sect. 1.

Argum. 1. It standeth neither with the power or will of God, to doe contrarie to his word: For it is impossible that God should lye, Hebr. 6.18. And this [Page] thing, not to lye, is not a wāt of power, but a signe of greater power in God. But it is plainly declared in scripture, that Christ hath a true naturall bodie, and is in all things like vnto vs, Hebr. 2.17. Therefore neither can his bodie, being a true humane bodie, as ou [...]s are, be in many places at once: neither can it choose but occupie that roome and place where it is. The Angel sayd, He is risen, he is not here, Math. 28.6: but it had been no good argument, to say, he is risen and gone to another place, and therefore he is not here, if so be the bodie of Christ might be in many places at once. The scripture then hath defined it, that Christs bodie is in one certaine place: wherefore to say, that Christ hath a true naturall bodie, and yet retaineth not the naturall properties of a bodie, is to speake contradictories, that he hath, and hath not a true naturall bodie: and this were to make God a lier.

Cōt. Faust. lib. 20. cap. 11. Augustine sayth of Christ: Secundum corporalem praesentiam, simul in sole, luna, cruce, esse non potest: Christ according to his corporall presence, cannot be in the Sunne, the Moone, and vpon the Crosse all at one time.

And concerning the other poynt, he writeth thus: Spatia locorum tolle corporibus, Epistol. 57. & nusquam erunt, & quia nusquam erunt, nec erunt: Take away space of place from bodies, and they shall be no where, and if they be in no place, then are they not at all.

Argum. 2. The reall and carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament, is a thing superfluous, needles, and vnprofitable. First, the fauour of God in the remission of sinnes through Christ, is as well sealed vnto vs in Baptisme, as in the Lords Supper▪ what neede then the carnal presence in the one more then in the other? Secondly, that Christ is in bodie present in the Sacrament, is not perceiued by any sense: for they neither tast him, see him, nor feele him: it must be then a worke of faith: but by faith Christ is as well apprehended being absent, as being supposed in this manner to be present: Ergo, this kind of presence is needles.

Argum. 3. It is an inglorious, vnworthie and vnseemely thing, that the glorious and impassible bodie of Christ, should be inclosed in the formes of bread and wine, deuoured and chawed, eaten and gnawed of mice, subiect to mould and rottennes, to be spilt vpon the ground, burnt in the fire: for all these inconueniences must needes follow vpon the carnall presence.

Bellarm. It is no more inglorious or impossible for these things now to happen to the bodie of Christ, thē it was for him to be carried in his mothers womb, to be swathed in swadling bands, and to be subiect to iniuries which were done to his bodie vpon earth.

Ans. First, as though there be the like reason of the passible bodie of Christ, while he liued in the world, which was buffeted, whipped, pearced with nayles, crucified; and of his glorious and impassible bodie now, that it may in like manner be rent and diuided. Secondly, neither was it possible that Christs passible bodie should be subiect to the like infirmities, as to rottennes, corruption, consumption in the fire, as his bodie is now in the Sacrament. If it were then verified in Christ, Thou shalt not suffer thy holy one to see corruption: [Page] for his bodie did not putrifie or corrupt in the graue: much more is it true in the glorious bodie of Christ, that it cannot suffer any such things: How then are you not ashamed to affirme, that the bread and wine are made in the Sacrament, the very bodie and blood of Christ: seeing those elements, if they be kept long, will waxe sower, and mouldie, and fall to corruption? which things once to thinke of the glorious bodie of Christ, were great impietie. Leaue off for shame then these your grosse opinions, so much derogatorie to the glorie and honour of Christ.

THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERNING Transubstantiation.

The Papists.

IF any man shall say, that there remaineth the substance of bread and wine in the Sacrament, after the words of consecration; or shall denye that the whole error 115 substance of bread is changed and conuerted into the bodie of Christ, and the whole substance of wine into the blood of Christ, the formes and shewes onely of bread and wine remaining, which singular and miraculous conuersion the Church calleth Transubstantiation; let him be accursed, Concil. Tridentin. sess. 13. can. 2. Bellarm. lib. 3. de sacra. euchar. cap. 19. Rhemist. Matth. 17. sect. 1.

Argum. 1. Christ transfigured his bodie marueilously in the Mount, as wee reade, Math. 17. sect. 1. Ergo, he is able to exhibite his bodie vnder the formes of bread and wine, Rhemist.

Ans. First, your argument followeth not, Christ could giue a glorious forme to his passible bodie: Ergo, he can take away the essentiall properties of his naturall bodie, and yet keepe a true bodie stil. Or thus, Christ could glorifie his bodie not yet glorified: Ergo, he can or will dishonour his glorious impassible bodie: by enclosing it vnder the formes of base creatures to be deuoured of dogs and mice: which is honoured and worshipped of the Angels and Saints in heauen. Secondly, the question is not so much of Christs power, as of his will: therefore you conclude not aright, Christ is able to doe it: Ergo, he will.

Argum. 2. He that seeth water turned into wine by the power of Christ, need not to doubt how he changeth bread into his bodie, Rhemist. Ioh. 2. sect. 2.

Ans. First, when you can bring any warrant out of scripture for your imagined conuersion, as we haue for this miracle, we will giue eare vnto you. Secondly, and when it shall appeare to the senses, that the bread is changed into flesh, as the water was knowne to be turned into the wine, by the colour and tast: we shall then no more doubt of this conuersion of the bread, then they did of the other of water. Thirdly, if Christ could alter and change the substances of creatures: what reason haue you to giue such an omnipotent power to euery priest, with a fewe words to doe as much, as Christ himselfe could when he was present? [Page] Fourthly, all this proueth but an abilitie and power in Christ, not a will or purpose, to worke any such change or conuersion.

Argum. 3. Though the substance of bread and wine be chaunged, yet the formes remaine still for these causes. First, because if the formes also should be changed, there should be no sensible signe left, and so no Sacrament. Secondly, the faith of the receiuer is the better tried this way: who beleeueth the flesh of Christ to be present, though he see it not. Thirdly, Christ would not haue the formes altered, because man abhorreth to eate humane flesh in the proper shape, Bellarm. cap. 22.

Ans. First, your first reason is insufficient: for neither doe the bare and naked signes or accidents of the elements make a Sacrament, but the substance of thē: for betweene the Sacrament and the thing thereby represented, there ought to be some conueniencie and agreement: namely, as the bodie is nourished by bread and wine, so doth the soule feed vpon the bodie and bloud of Christ. But they are not the accidents of bread and wine that nourish vs, but the substance: Ergo, not the accidents but the substance is the visible signe. Likewise in Baptisme, it is not the forme or outward accident of water, that is the signe, but the substance of water that washeth.

2. It is a more liuely operation of faith, to beleeue in Christ absent in heauen, then present in earth, although he appeare not to the senses. And Christ is indeed properly the obiect of faith, as he is now in heauen: Hope (saith the Apostle) entreth into that which is within the vaile, whither our forerunner Iesus is entred for vs, Heb. 6.19. Faith and hope therefore doe leade vs to things within the vaile, that is, things in heauen, and not vpon the earth.

3. What a strange saying is this, that Christ giueth his flesh to be eatē in the Sacrament, yet hideth it vnder the formes of bread and wine, lest men should abhorre to eate it? for is it to be thought, that Christ would command any vnseemely thing, or contrary to humanitie? How could the Apostles command the Gentiles to abstaine frō strangled & blood, Act. 15. whē as, by your doctrine, they did eate dayly in their assemblies, the raw flesh and blood of Christ? And how is it that Christ now forgetteth his owne rule, He that doth the truth (sayth he) commeth to the light, that his deedes may be made manifest? Iohn. 3.21. But Christ now flieth the light, & shrowdeth himselfe vnder the shape of bread and wine, and wil not shew his flesh. These therefore are but sillie causes which you haue rendered, why Christ would haue the substance of bread onely changed, and not the accidents.

The Protestants.

AS the name of transubstantiation is straunge, and newly deuised: so is the meaning thereof most vnreasonable: that in the Sacrament, the substance of bread should be conuerted into the bodie of Christ, the formes onely remaining: An opinion contrary to scripture, reason and common sense.

[Page]Argum. 1. As Christ said, Math. 26. (pointing to the bread) This is my body: so he sayth, Iohn. 6.35. I am the bread: but in this place he was not changed into bread: why then in the other place should the bread be turned into his body? for the speech is all one.

Argum. 2. The bread in the Eucharist after the consecration, is subiect to diuers changes and alterations, and so likewise the wine: for they may be boyled and made hot, they may be infected with poyson: for it is certaine that Victor the 3. Pope, and Henry the 7. Emperour, were poysoned with the Sacrament: the wine may waxe sower and turne to vineger: the bread may putrifie and breed wormes: Ergo, the substance of bread and wine remaine still: for the accidents cannot be subiect to such alterations: and to say that Christs bodie may be thus handled, it were great impietie, Argum. Pet. Martyris.

Bellarmine answereth: Materia substituitur à Deo in ipso instanti, in quo desinunt esse illae species: God supplieth some other matter in the very instant, when the formes begin to be changed, Cap. 24. argum. 6.

Ans. Is not here good geare, thinke you, that if a man should come to poyson the Sacrament, that is, the bread and wine, which are alreadie consecrate, and made the bodie of Christ, God should supplie by a miracle some other matter for him to worke vpon, and so God himselfe should be accessarie vnto that wicked act? Or if a sillie mouse should be so bold as gnaw vpon a consecrate Host, that then likewise some other matter and substance should for that instant be appoynted: and so God shall make miracles for mice? And why, I pray you, may not the substance of bread still remaine, as well as another substance to be put in the stead thereof?

Arg. 3. When Christ spake these words, Hoc est corpus meum, the bread was transubstantiate, before, or after, or while the words were spoken. Before, they will not say, for the elements were not then consecrate: nor after, for thē Christs words, This is my bodie, had not been true in that instant when they were spoken. Neither was the transubstantiation wrought in the while of speaking: for then should it not haue been done all at once, but successiuely, and one part after another, as the words were spoken one after another. But this is also contrarie to the opinion of the Papists, that would haue it done all together.

Argum. 4. It is against the nature and propertie of accidents and externall formes to be without a subiect, or substance, wherein they should rest: such are the whitenes and roundnes of the bread, the rednes and sweetnes of wine: if bread be gone, what is become of the roundnes and whitenes, and so of the wine. If a man aske what round or white thing is this, or what red and sweete thing is this, shewing the cup: what shall be answered? we cannot say, it is bread, or wine: for there is none left. And I am sure, they will not say, that the bodie of Christ is either round or white, or such like: and yet somewhat there must needes be, that must take denomination of these accidents.

Argum. 5. You say, the very flesh of Christ that did hang vpon the Crosse, [Page] is in the Sacrament: but that cannot be: for that flesh Christ tooke of the Virgine Mary: this sacramentall flesh is made of bread: Ergo, it is not the same flesh which was crucified vpon the Crosse.

Bellarm. The bodie of Christ is made of bread, but not as any matter or materiall cause thereof, but as the wine was made of water by our Sauiour Christ.

Ans. And I pray you how was the wine made of the water? was not the water the very matter which was turned into wine? for one of these three changes and mutations it must needes haue: first, either the water was annihilate and turned to nothing, and so the wine was created of nothing, which I am sure you will not graunt: secondly, or els there was a mixture of wine and water, the one being mingled with the other: which is likewise false, for it was very good and perfect wine: neither, I thinke, will you easily admit, that the bodie of Christ and the bread are mingled together in the Sacrament. Thirdly, there remaineth but the third kind of change, that is, the conuersion of one substance into another, as the water was changed into wine: and so is the substance of bread conuerted into the substance of Christs bodie, if you will haue any chaunge at all: and thus Christ hath gotten by your helpe a breaden bodie: another from that, which he tooke of the flesh of the Virgine.

Lastly, the diuersitie of opinions, which this grosse conceit of the carnall presence of Christ hath hatched, doe easily shew and demonstrate vnto vs, what we are to thinke of this popish doctrine.

Some doe hold, that the elements doe still remaine in their owne nature in the Sacrament, and that together with them the bodie of Christ is carnally present. Others doe teach, that there remaineth no more bread and wine, but onely the verie naturall bodie of Christ: of each opinion there are three sorts.

First, of them that hold the elements not to be chaunged. 1. Some are of opinion, that the bodie of Christ and the elements are locally ioyned together, either for that instant onely, or els because of the vbiquitie and omnipresence of Christs humanitie: of which opinion are the Lutherans.

2. Some there were, that thought onely so much of the bread to be changed into the bodie of Christ, as was receiued of the faithfull: and that part which the wicked receiued, to be bread still.

3. Others taught, that the bread was assumed in the Sacrament to the person of Christ, euen as his humanitie: so that Christ was bread by consecration, as he was man by his incarnation: an horrible and monstrous opinion, which is fathered vpon Rupertus the Abbot. Iohannes Parisiensis also came neere this opinion, who likewise affirmed, that the bread was assumed to the person of Christ, and vnited vnto him, yet not immediatly, as the other taught, but by the mediation and meanes of the humanitie of Christ.

Secondly, of those that maintaine the conuersion of the elements. First, some would haue the forme onely of bread chaunged not the matter, as Durandus. [Page] Secondly, some contrariwise, would haue the matter altered, and the forme to remaine. Thirdly, the Iesuits affirme the bread wholly in substance, both in matter and forme to be changed, the outward formes and accidents onely remaining. ex Bellarm. lib. 3. de sacram, Eucharist. cap. 11.

Thus men, when they begin once to leaue the truth, the Lord leaueth them to themselues, and they runne mad in their owne inuentions, not finding any end: and so it is iustly come vpon them, as S. Paul saith of the heathen: ‘Because when they knew God, they did not glorifie him as God, neither were thankfull: they became vaine in their own imaginations, and their foolish hart was full of darkenes: when they professed themselues to be wise, they became fooles, Rom. 1.21.22.’ We therefore leauing these shalow pittes of humane inuentions, which will holde no water, will betake vs to the fountaine of truth. This then, to conclude, is our definitiue sentence, and full determination, according to the Scriptures, that Christ indeed is verily present in the Sacrament, neither by conuersion of the bread into his body, either wholly, or in parte, nor by assumption of the bread to the vnity of his person; nor yet by the coniunction of his body and bread together▪ but he doth verily exhibite himselfe, with all his benefits, spiritually by faith, to be eaten and drunke of the worthy receiuer, as we haue sufficiently proued before out of the Scriptures.

THE THIRD QVESTION, WHETHER THE Eucharist being once consecrated, be a Sacrament, though it be neither eaten nor drunk.

The Papists.

THe elements in the Sacrament, that is, the bread and wine, being once consecrate,error 116 which say they, is done by the prolation of those words, hoc est corpus meum, This is my body, whether they be receiued or not at that instant, but be reserued and kept in boxes, and pixes, and other vessels of the Church, for daies, weekes, moneths, to be caried solemnely to those that are sick, and to be applyed to other vses: are still the very body and blood of Christ. Trident. Concil. sess. 13. can. 4.7. Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2.

Argum. 1. Christs words which were spoken ouer the bread, This is my body, were true as soone as he brought them forth, before he said, Take, eat, and so likewise of the cup: therefore it was a Sacrament, before they did receiue and eate it, and had beene a Sacrament still, if it had not bene receiued at all at that time. Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. 1. Those wordes of Christ, This is my body, were not spoken before he brake the bread and distributed it: but first as S. Math. setteth it downe, he brake the bread and gaue it to his Disciples, saying: Take, eate, and then follow those words, This is my body. Math. 26.26. which seeme to haue bene vttered [Page] euen in that instant, when they tooke the bread, and began to eate it.

Secondly, the institution of the Sacrament consisteth partly of a promise, partly of a precept: the promise is this, Hoc est corpus meum, This is my body: the precept, Accipite, manducate, Take, eate. Christ doth no otherwise make good his promise, then we performe the condition: vnlesse therefore accordingly we doe take and eat it, it is not the body of Christ.

The Protestants.

THe Eucharist is no sacrament beside or without the vse thereof: so that, though some form of words be pronounced ouer it, if it be not receiued and eaten and drunk, it is no sacrament: neither is that which remaineth after the distribution, the Eucharist being ended, either of the bread or wine, any part of the sacrament, but so much onely as is taken and vsed.

Argum. 1. It is no Sacrament, vnlesse it be vsed according to the institution as Christ hath commanded it: but to the institution it belongeth on the behalfe of the Minister, to blesse, break, and distribute it: on the behalfe of the communicants to take,1 Cor. 11.24.26. eate, and drinke it: in them all, thereby to shew the Lords death, and to doe it in remembrance of Christ. But this cannot be performed by vsing the words of benediction onely, but by the whole action: for how can they shew the Lords death, or doe it in remembrance of Christ, vnlesse they take, and eate? Ergo, if it be not so vsed, it is no Sacrament.

Argum. 2. The Sacraments of the new testament are alike, and of one and the selfesame kinde, there is one way of instituting and consecrating both: but the water in baptisme is no part of the Sacrament, but during the solemne action of baptizing▪ afterward it returneth to the common vse, so much as is not vsed. Ergo, it is so also in the Eucharist: for as Christ saith to his Apostles: Ite, baptizate: Goe and baptize, so that it was no Sacrament, vnlesse some body were baptized: euen so he saith, Accipite, [...]anducate, Take, eate. No Sacramēt then, vnlesse it be receiued and eaten.

And here I pray you, let it be noted, how well the Iesuits agree amongst themselues: our Rhemists doe commend the reseruing also of the water in baptisme, and carrying of it home to giue it the diseased to drink, annot. Iam. 5. sect. 5. Bellar. saith, that Res permanens in baptismo, That the thing permanent in Baptisme, that is, water, which remaineth, is not the sacrament, but ipsa actio, the action of baptizing it selfe, and alloweth onely the Eucharist to be reserued, and remaine a Sacrament, Etiam extra vsum, Without the vse thereof, Bellar. li. 4. de Eucharist. cap. 3. But we haue shewed already, that both the Sacraments are halowed and sanctified alike, and that both in the one and the other, the vse onely and present action according to Christs institution, maketh the Sacrament.

In Augustines time some vsed to receiue the Communion dayly: but vpon [Page] the Sabboth or Lords day, it was commonly receiued of all: Quotidie Eucharistiae communionem percipere, nec laudo, nec reprehendo, De ecclesi. dogmatib. cap. 54. omnib. tamen dominicis diebus communicandum suadeo et hortor. Euery day to receiue the Eucharist, I neither commend, nor dispraise it but euery Lords day I doe perswade men and exhort all to communicate. It should seeme then, that in those daies there was no such superstitious reseruation of the Sacrament, seeing euery day, or at the least euery Sabboth it was administred.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, CONCERNING the elements or materiall part of the Sacrament, namely bread and wine.

The Papists.

1. The bread which is vsed in the Sacrament, ought to be vnleauened: because it is most agreeable to Christs institution, who made the sacrament of vnleauened error 117 bread, for he instituted his last Supper, after he had eaten the Passeouer: which was to be eaten with sweet and vnleauened bread, according to the Lawa, neither was there any leauen to be found in Israel for seuen daies together: and not onely Christ, but all the Iewes at that time did keepe the Passeouer: and the next day after, in the which Christ suffered, was the first solemne festiuall day of the seuen, being the fifteenth day of the moneth, as it was commanded, Leuiticus 23.5. Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 11. sect. 10. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Eucharist. cap. 7.

The Protestants.

1. WE deny not, but that Christ vsed vnleauened bread, at the institution of his last Supper, hauing immediately before eaten the Paschall Lambe, which we doubt not but he kept, according to the Lawe, with sweete bread: yet in the time they are greatly deceiued, affirming, that all the Iewes eate the Passeouer like wise ouer eeuen, and crucified Christ on the morrow, which should haue beene, and was vnto them (as they say) a chiefe festiuall day.

The truth is, that Christ eate the Passeouer the 14, day at eeuen, as it is appointed in the Law: but the Iewes had a contrary tradition: they would in no wise keepe two festiuall daies together: and therefore because the sixteenth daie was their Sabboth, they would not haue the feast of vnleauened bread vpon the fifteenth day (though it were so appointed by the law) to auoide the concurrence of two holy daies together, but deferred it till the next [Page] day, which was their Sabboth, and eate the Passeouer the eeue before, which was the 15. day at night; whereas Christ reforming that abuse, kept the Passeouer the eeue before according to the Law, that is, the 14. at night: It appeareth then, that the next day following, which we call Friday, wherein Christ was put to death, was not kept of the Iewes as a holy day.

First, the text saith, they would not put Christ to death vpon the feast day, fearing the tumult of the people, Mark. 14.2. Secondly, if they had kept it holy as the Law commaunded, they should haue done no seruile labour therein, that is, no work of the body, Leuitic. 23.7. But what could be a more seruile worke, then to crucifie Christ, to carry the Crosse, and pitch it in the ground, and such like; which the Iewes would not haue done vpon that day, which they were as straightly to keep as the Sabboth? It is also called the preparation of the Sabboth, Mark. 15.43. Wherein they were wont to prepare against the Sabboth what was needfull: but such workes of preparation could not haue bene done in that great festiual day. Augustine also saith, that the day of Christs suffering was not Pascha, sed praeparatio Paschae, It was not the Pasch, but the preparation to it:De consen. Euangel. li. 3. cap. 13. it is not therefore true that it was kept holy of the Iewes, the day of Christs passion, neither that they did eate the paschall Lambe the same eeue that Christ did, but the night following.

If they shall obiect that place, Mark. 14.12. where the Euangelist saith, It was the first day of vnleauened bread, when Christ eat his passeouer: and therefore all the Iewes began then to eate sweet bread. We answere, that the Euangelist hath relation vnto the right time of keeping the Passeouer, as it was prescribed by the Law, and obserued by Christ: not to the corrupt custome of the Iewes. Wherfore we graunt that Christ might eate vnleauened bread, but not in such manner and order, as they say.

Secondly, it was not of the substance of the institution to eate vnleauened bread, no more then to eat it at night, and to receiue it sitting, we are not more bound to the one, then to the other. Againe, Christ vsed vnleauened bread, because it was the vsuall bread at that time: so we do vse that which is the vsuall bread in our time. And S. Paul speaketh of such bread, as was vsuall among the Gentiles, when he saith, The bread which we break, 1. Cor. 10.17. Ergo, ordinary bread and leauened to be vsed, not vnleauened.

The Papists.

2. COncerning the other element of wine, which is vsed in the sacrament, error 118 they say it is to be mixed with water, and they impudently condemne all those Churches, that doe not mixe water with wine, in the Sacrament.

Argum. Water gushed out together with blood, out of the side of Christ. Ergo, wine and water is to be vsed together in the Eucharist, Rhemist. 1. Cor. 11. sect. 10. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Eucharist. cap. 10.

[Page]

The Protestants.

1. WE deny not, but that of ancient time, in hot Countries, especially where their wine was strong, they vsed to mixe water with wine, in their common drink, and thereupon they so vsed it in the sacrament: but it was neuer generally the practise of the East Countries so to do: for the Armenians and Iberians vsed not of ancient time to put water in the Cup in the ministration, Fulk. nnot. 1. Corinth. 1 [...]. sect. 10.

Secondly, Be it that this mixture of wine were conuenient to be vsed: you cannot make such a matter of necessitie of it, as to charge them with heresie, and denounce damnation against them that keepe not that custome,De cōnsecrat. distin. 2. in glossa. especially seeing your Canonists and schoolemen do graunt that it is de honestate tant [...]m, of decency onely, not of necessitie. And yet we are faine to drinke mingled wine many times against our willes: for the Minister need put in no water, it is mixed to his hands many times. The Vintners craft standeth very well with popish profession.

Thirdly, we holde it rather to be a superstitious custome and contrarie to Christs institution: for he in his last supper gaue wine, not water to be drunk, for he calleth it the fruit of the Vine, which is wine and not water.

Fourthly, the water and bloud which issued out of Christs side, signifie no such thing, but rather as S. Iohn expoundeth them: by water, is betokened our washing from our sinnes, whereof Baptisme is a pledge: by blood, the full satisfaction that Christ hath made for our sinnes, whereof the other sacrament is a [...]eale, 1. Iohn. 5.6. This is that Iesus Christ, that came by water and blood, not by water onely, but by water and blood. By the which words the Apostles meaning is not, that by the water and blood, which were shed vpon the crosse, we should vnderstand the Sacraments of the Church: but those spirituall graces, whereof the Sacraments are liuely signes, namely the satisfaction and ransome of our sinnes by Christs blood, and our ablution and washing from the same.

Augustine picketh out no such fancie out of this mysterie as you doe, for the mixture of wine and water: but he doth more fitly apply it to the sacraments of the church. E Christi latere dormientis in cruce promanarunt sacramenta ecclesiae, in Psal. 138. Out of Christs side dying vpon the Crosse, issued the sacraments of the Church: namely, Baptisme, and the Eucharist. He draweth not both water and wine to signifie one sacrament, but applyeth them to both.

THE FIFTH QVESTION, OF THE wordes of consecration.

The Papists.

THese words (say they) This is my body, to be spoken ouer the bread, and the error 119 like ouer the wine, This is the new testament in my blood, are the very forms [Page] of the Sacraments and words of consecration: which being vttered, immediatly the elements are changed into the body and blood of Christ: wherefore these words are not to be read historically for the instruction of the people, but they are onely consecratory wordes, to be pronounced ouer the elements: Rhemist. 1. Cor. 11. sect. 11. Bellarm. lib. 4. de sacram. cap. 13.

Argu. If these were not the onely words of consecration This is my body, and if presently vpon the vttering of these words the body of Christ was not present: then should not the words of Christ be true, Bellarm. ibid.

The Protestants.

1. WE acknowledge no such consecration at all, by vertue whereof the elements are conuerted and transubstantiate into the body of Christ, as we haue before shewed. A consecration we graunt, which is a setting apart of the elements, which before were common, to holy vses, and by the vetue of Christs institution, to be made vnto vs signes of holy things.

Secondly, those are not the onely words of consecration, This is my body, and, This is the cup of my blood, and yet Christs wordes shall be true: for we must not dismember the sentence: Christ saith, Take, eate ye, this is my body: it is then made his body to be taken and eaten: by taking then and eating, the elements also are consecrated, not onely by saying of the words: ye must not then diuide the words of the institution, for then they shall no more consecrate, then if you should pronounce but two of your consecratory words, as, This is, or, My body, and leaue out the rest.

Thirdly, that these are not the onely words of consecration, it appeareth, because both the bread was broken and distributed, and the Cuppe also, before Christ spake those words, as Math. 26.26. for first Christ saith, Take, eate, and, Take and drink, before he said▪ either, This is my body, or, This is my blood: neither can ye well tell yourselues, which are your consecratory wordes for the Cup, whether those that Mathew setteth downe, This is my blood of the newe testament: or as Luke hath, This Cup is the new testament in my blood. Nay, Bellarmine vseth an other forme beside these: Hic est calix [...]s [...] guinis▪ This is the Cup of my blood, Bellarm. cap. 13.

Fourthly, we conclude then, that not onely these words, but al the rest belonging to the institution, are to be rehearsed in the Sacrament, both to instruct the people, that they may know the right vse of the Sacrament: and they help also with the rest of the whole action, of taking, eating, drinking, praying, thankesgiuing, to consecrate and make the Sacramēt, as we haue shewed more at large before: controu. 11. quest. 1. part 2. to that place we referre the Reader.

[Page]

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF THE PROPER effect and vse of the Lords Supper.

The Papists.

THey doe generally holde, that this Sacrament was not properly ordeined error 120 for remission of sinnes, neither that the Sacrament hath any such vse: but it serueth onely as a preseruatiue against sinne, Trident. Concil. sess. 13. can. 5. Bellarm. lib. 4. de sacram. cap. 17.

Secondly, they teach, that faith is not sufficient to prepare vs for the Communion: and although a man be neuer so contrite, quantumcun (que) se contritos existiment, yet they must be throughly purged and absolued from their mortall sinnes, before they come to communicate, Concil. Trident. sess. 13. canon. 11. Bellarm. ibid.

Argum. 1. They that receiue the Communion, are one body as they are partakers of one bread, 1. Cor. 10.17. but they which are in any greeuous and deadly sinne, are not liuely members of Christ, and of his mysticall body: therefore the sacrament doth not profit them at all, Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. 1. Neither doe we affirme, that men ought rashly & presumptuously to come to the Lords table, but to repent them throughly of their sinnes, and to haue a stedfast and liuely faith in Christ, who cannot be said, thus preparing themselues, to remaine in their sinnes: neither yet are they so fully acquited of them, that they need not to receiue the Sacrament to their comfort, and to strengthen their faith in the hope and assurance of the remission of sinnes. Secondly, wherefore all this hindreth not, but that they should be true members of Christs body, euen hauing a troubled conscience, and labouring vnder the burthen of their sinnes: for the weake and sicke parts of the bodie, are they therfore no partes at all, because of their infirmities? Augustine saith very wel,Cont. 2. epi. Pelag. 3.3. Non filios diaboli faciunt quaecun (que) peccata, peccāt enim et filij Dei: In quibus non est fides, filij sunt Diaboli: Euery sin maketh not a man the childe of the deuil, for the Children of God also sinne: but they which haue no faith, are the sonnes of the Deuill. Ergo, all sinnes cut not men off from the body of Christ, but onely the want of faith: they then that haue sinned, and doe repent them and come with faith, are still the sonnes of God, and members of Christs body.

Argum. 2. There is not one and the same proper vse and end of diuerse Sacraments: but Baptisme is receiued for remission of sinnes. Ergo, the Eucharist is not for that end, Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. 1. The death of Christ, and so remission of sinnes purchased by the same, is properly represented vnto vs in both Sacraments: yet in a diuerse respect: for as to be borne is one thing, to be fed and nou [...]shed is another: yet both worke the same thing in the body, though diuersly: for the birth [Page] giueth life, meate and drink preserueth it: the same difference is betweene Baptisme and the Lords Supper, they both are seales vnto vs of our iustification, in the remission of sinnes by Christ: but by Baptisme we are initiated, regenerate and borne anew, and engrafted into the body of Christ. The other sacrament doth confirme, encrease, and nourish our faith, already begun and planted in vs, for the remission of sinnes, and all other benefits of Christs passion.

The Protestants.

FIrst, we doe truly affirme and teach, that an especiall and principall vse of the Eucharist or Communion, is to strengthen and assure our faith of the remission of sinnes: and yet we deny not, but that it hath other vses beside: for as in Baptisme not onely the washing away of our sinnes is shewed forth, but it also betokeneth our dying to sinne, and rising to newnes of life, Ro. 6.3.4. So in the Lords supper whole Christ with all his benefites is exhibited vnto vs, as it is a pledge vnto vs, not onely of remission of sinnes, but that Christ is become our righteousnes and sanctification, 1. Cor. 1.30. that he will assist vs with his spirite, and replenish our harts with grace, Ioh. 4.14. yea, the spirituall eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Christ, is a pledge vnto vs of the resurrection, and of life eternall, Ioh. 6.54. But that amongst the rest, it also assureth vs of remission of sinnes, thus it is proued.

Argum. Christ after S. Mathew saith, This is the blood of the new testament, that is shed for many for remission of sinnes, Math. 26.28. But the new testament includeth a promise of remission of sinnes, Iere. 31.34. Yea our Sauiour setteth it downe in plaine termes: for why els should our Sauiour make expresse mention of forgiuenes of sinnes, if this sacrament did not serue for that vse?

Secondly, we doe holde, that to haue a liuely faith in the promises of God, with repentance for our sinnes, and a full purpose to amend our liues, is a sufficient preparation for the Communion: and that this sacrament is a soueraigne remedy for a troubled conscience. Neither ought men to refraine from the Communion, till they haue fully satisfied for their sinnes, as the Papists teach, and are cleered in their conscience of all their sinnes: for so, few or none at all, should be admitted to the Lords table: but in whom faith hath alredy wrought repentance in some measure, he may safely receiue the sacrament for his further comfort, and assurance of remission of sinnes.

Argum. Iohn. 6.35. He that beleeueth in me, saith Christ, shall neuer thirst: S. Paul also exhorteth men to examine themselues, 1. Corin. 11.28. which is nothing els, as himselfe expondethu it, then to proue whether they be in the faith, 2. Cor. 13.5. Ergo, the examination or triall of faith, is a sufficient preparation for the Lords table.

Augustine saith, Ad Deum acceditur, fide sectando, corde inhiando, charitate currando. We come or haue accesse vnto God in folowing him by faith, seeking [Page] him in our heart, and running to him with loue, In Psalm. 33. concion. 2. Ergo, by fayth we haue accesse vnto God, Rom. 5.2. but a liuely fayth, which worketh by loue, Galath. 5.6.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, OF THE manner to be obserued in receiuing the communion.

The Papists.

1 THey holde it in no wise lawfull for Christians, otherwise then fasting to error 121 receiue the communion: and that they ought to eate nothing before they doe communicate, vnlesse it be in a case of great necessitie, Concil. Constantiens. sess. 13. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Eucharist. cap. 22. ratione. 4.

The Protestants.

1 WHat they here vnderstand by necessitie, it may be doubted, seeing they themselues will not graunt the like necessitie to be in the Eucharist, as they say there is of Baptisme: All sacraments, we graunt, are necessary, that is, profitable, expedient, requisite, so often as they may bee had: But none so necessary, that the want thereof vnto a faythfull man, that in heart doth wish and desire them, can be any hindrance to his saluation.

2 That it is lawfull for any man to eate before he come to the communion, if his stomack be weake, and not able to fast so long (for otherwise, if a man can abstaine, we wish him so to do rather) Saint Paul sheweth, writing to the Corinthians, 1. cap. 11.34. If any man be hungry, let him eate at home. Some of them, he sayth, came hungry, some drunken, vers. 21. the Apostle commendeth neither, but telleth them, if they bee hungry, they haue houses to eate in. Againe, in that our Sauiour Christ after supper instituted the sacrament, it doth euidently declare vnto vs, that it is no sinne to eate or drink before we receiue the sacrament.

Augustine sayth, Neminem cogimus dominica illa coena prandere, sed nulli etiam contradicere audemus: Epist. 118. cap. 7. We compell none to take the Lords Supper in dinner while, or after dinner, neither dare wee forbid any so to doe: so hee maketh it a thing indifferent, to communicate fasting or otherwise.

The Papists.

2 THey binde the people onely once in the yeare to receiue the communion error 122 at Easter time, and take it to be fully sufficient for them so to doe, Concil. Trident. sess. 13. can. 9.

[Page]

The Protestants.

2 THis decree of theirs is contrary to the practise of the Apostles, whom the Rhemists confesse to haue ministred the sacrament to the Christians daylie, Annotat. Act. 2. sect. 6. So expounding the wordes of the text, They continued dayly in breaking of bread.

2. It seemeth also to be contrary to Saint Pauls rule, who speaketh of often communicating: Doe this, sayth he, as oft as you drink it, 1. Corinth. 11.25. For seeing the eating of that bread, and drinking of that cuppe, is nothing els, but a shewing foorth of the Lords death till he come: who seeth not, that it ought oftener then once or twice in the yere to be receiued, seeing the death of Christ ought continually to be remembred, and shewed foorth?

3 Therefore Augustine doth boldely reprehend their custome that content themselues with once receiuing in the yeare: Si panis quotidianus est, cur post annum illum sumas? accipe quotidie, quod quotidie tibi prosit: If it be thy daylie bread, why doest thou take it but yearely? take that daylie and continually, which may profit thee daylie, In Luk. serm. 28.

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF RECEIuing the Sacrament in one kinde.

The Papists.

error 123 CHristians (say they) are not bound by any commaundement of GOD to receiue the sacrament in both kinds, Concil. Trident. sess. 21. can. 1. And whosoeuer saith, that the Church hath erred or done amisse, in decreeing that lay men and the Clergie not saying Masse, should receiue in the one kinde, that is bread onely: Or that it is lawfull for them to communicate in both, contrary to the determination of the Church: let him bee accursed, Concil. Trident. sess. 21. can. 2. Rhemist. Iohn. 6. sect. 11. Bellarmin. lib. 4. de Eucharist. cap. 20.

Argum. 1. Christ is all and whole in euery parte of the sacrament, his blood by a certaine concomitance is in the bread, & his flesh by the like concomitance is in the cup, for otherwise Christ should be deuided: But euery spirit, sayth the Apostle, that dissolueth Iesus, is of God, 1. Iohn. 4.3. Wherefore hee that receiueth in one kinde, is as well partaker of whole Christ, and of the full grace and effect of the sacrament, as if hee receiued in both, Bellarmin. cap. 21.

Ans. 1. We denie any such concomitance of the blood and flesh of Christ in the sacrament: for he is not in his carnall presence with his very flesh and blood there included, as we haue shewed before: the bread and wine are signes [Page] onely of his body and blood, and therefore Christ is not diuided, they being the signes onely and not the thing signified.

2 The place alleadged out of Saint Iohn is greatly abused and corrupted by them, while they choose rather to follow their olde blinde latine translation, then the authenticall Greeke text: the words in the originall are, Euery spirite that confesseth not Iesus Christ: not, euery spirite that dissolueth: And this may appeare to bee the true reading, by the opposition in the former verse, Euery spirite that confesseth Iesus, is of GOD: therefore this is the best reading, Euery spirite that confesseth not Iesus: as being set opposite and contrarie to the other verse. Againe, the Rhemists vnderstand this place after their owne reading, of the dissoluing of the humanitie and diuinitie of Christ: not of any such separation of the flesh and blood of Christ, as Bellarm. supposeth.

3 This their deuice of concomitance ouerthwarteth the institution of Christ: For he sayth, the bread is his body, the wine his blood: but by their rule, the bread is his blood, and the wine his bodie. And be it graunted, that the blood of Christ is in the bread, yet how can any man be sayd to drink it in bread? We vse to eate bread, not to drink bread: his blood therefore cannot be there, because it cannot be drunke there.

Argum. 2. Luk. 24.30. Christ brake bread to his disciples, Act. 2.42. the Apostles brake bread: Ergo, to communicate in one kinde is grounded vpon the example of Christ and his Apostles, Bellarmin. lib. 4. de Eucharist. 24. Rhemist. Iohn. 6.11. And Christ sayth, Whosoeuer shall eate this bread, shall liue for euer, Iohn 6.58. Ergo, it is sufficient to receiue in one kinde.

Answer: 1. To the two first places, we say, that it is not necessary to vnderstand the breaking of bread in the sacrament: but the vsuall bread rather, which was accustomed in their daylie repasts and feasts after thankesgiuing to be broken. Or, if we take it for the sacrament, the breaking of bread is by a Synecdoche taken for the whole mysterie, as it is an vsuall phrase of speech in scripture: for otherwise wee will conclude as well, that Christ and the Apostles did but consecrate in one kinde, which they holde for a great absurditie, as that the other receiued but in one kinde: But their opinion is, that although the people must communicate in one kinde onely, yet the Priest must consecrate both, Rhemist. annotat. Iohn. 6. sect. 11.

2 To the second place wee answere: First it is not vnderstoode of the sacramentall eating of Christ, but of the spirituall manducation of him, which may be done without a sacrament: For whosoeuer eateth this bread, shall liue for euer: but whosoeuer eateth the sacrament, shall not liue for euer. Secondly, seeing the eating and drinking of Christ are so often ioyned in this chapter, as vers. 53.55.56. they might well know, that drinking is here to be vnderstoode, though it be not expressed.

Argum. 3. In many countries there is no wine to bee had, as in the cold Northerly countreies: and therefore they cannot communicate according [Page] to the institution: whereupon that there might be an vniformitie in all Churches, it is most meete that where wine may bee had, they should notwithstanding be content to receiue it in one kinde, Bellarmin. cap. 28. Also there may arise much inconuenience in graunting the cuppe to the people, as in spilling and sheading the wine, which after consecration is the blood of Christ, Rhemist. annot. Iohn 6. sect. 11.

Answ. 1. As in some countries there is no wine to bee had, so wee finde that in certaine places and regions of the world there is no bread, such as Christ vsed,Lib. 1. cap. 27. made of wheate or the like grayne: as in some places amongst the West Indians, they haue a certaine kinde of bread made of rootes called Cazabi, as Benzo witnesseth. Wherefore by this reason of vniformitie, wee should not communicate at all, either in bread or wine, seeing that as some countreyes are destitute of wine, so other are of bread: but all this not withstanding, the sacrament may be duely administred in all places in both kindes: and where they haue neither bread nor wine, neither can possibly prouide them, they may safely vse such other elements, as doe stand them in the like stead: as in the place of bread, that which commeth nearest to the vse thereof: and for wine, some other precious liquor, that is to be had, as in Russia in stead of wine they vse a certaine drink like vnto that which we call Metheglen.

2 As for the other reasons of the inconueniences in spilling the wine, shaking the cuppe, the hanging of it on mens beards, & other such friuolous allegations: as they were no let or hinderance, why Christ notwithstanding did not institute the sacrament in both kindes, and the Church accordingly obserued it, as we reade, the Corinthians did communicate in both kindes: so ought they to bee no reason, why Christians should not receiue in both kindes nowe.

The Protestants.

WE holde it to be an Antichristian practise of the Church of Rome, to take away from the people the cuppe in the sacrament: for although they sometime minister the cuppe to the people, yet they vse no consecration ouer it, neither giue it as any parte of the sacrament, Fulk. annotat. 1. Corinth. 4.10. sect. 4. They doe therefore offer great wrong to the people of God, in depriuing them of the one halfe of the communion.

Argum. 1. Iohn 6.53. Christ sayth, Except you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his blood, you haue no life in you. Here wee see both eating and drinking are ioyned together: Ergo, Christians ought to doe both. This place maketh strongly against our aduersaries, who doe expound it of the sacramental eating and drinking of Christ.

Argum. 2. Christ instituted the sacrament in both kinds, giuing charge and commaundement to all Christians in the same manner to celebrate it: [Page] for he sayth, Drinke ye all of this. If our aduersaries answere, as they doe, that this was spoken to the Apostles: by the like reason they may say also, that when Christ sayd, Take, eate; he spake vnto his Apostles, and so the people shoulde neither receiue bread and wine, but the Ministers onely.

Agayne, Saynt Paul, the best expounder of our Sauiour Christ, declareth the right vse of the Lords Supper in both kindes for all Christians: for hee writeth to the whole congregation, and Church of the Corinthians, not to the Pastors and teachers onely: and to euery Christian he sayth, Let a man examine himselfe, and so let him eate of this bread, and drinke of this cuppe, vers. 28.

Argum. 3. The Priest that saith Masse, you allow to consecrate and receiue in both kindes, because hee must expresse liuely the passion of Christ and the separation of his blood from his bodie in the same: Rhemist. annotat. Iohn. 6.58. By the same reason all the communicants ought to receiue in both kindes, because they doe all shewe foorth the death of Christ, and sheading of his blood in the sacrament: 1. Corinthian. 11.26. And seeing the cuppe is a signe of the blood of Christ shedde for remission of sinnes, Math. 26.28. for as much as the thing signified, that is, the remission of sinnes, in the blood of Christ, is common to all faythfull Christians, why should they not as well be partakers of the signe?

Argum. 4. This prohibition for lay men, not to receiue in both kindes, is but a late deuise of the Church of Rome, not past two hundred yeare olde, decreed no longer agoe then in the Councell of Constance, Fox. pag. 1150. yet after that, he Councel of Basile graunted the vse and libertie of the cup to the Bohemians, Fox. pag. 694.

Thus they take vpon them to ouer-rule mens consciences, now restrayning, now againe graunting libertie, binding and loosing at their pleasure.

In Augustines time there was no such separation of the cuppe from the bread: but both were indifferently vsed in the communion: Cum cibo & potu, saith he, id appetant homines vt neque esuriant, neque sitiant, Tract. in Iohan. 27. hoc veraciter non praestat, nisi iste cibus & potus, &c. As men by their meate and drink doe prouide, that they neither hunger nor thirst: so this spirituall meate and drink worketh the same effect in vs. Whereupon it followeth, that seeing in the sasacrament is contained and signified the full and sufficient nourishment of our soules by the flesh and blood of Christ, it must needes be resembled by the outward full sufficient nourishment of our bodies, which is not by eating alone, but by eating and drinking.

[Page]

THE NINTH QVESTION OF THE adoration of the Eucharist.

The Papists.

error 124 IT was decreed in the Councel of Trent, that the Eucharist should be adored euen with the highest degree of worship, (Cultu latreiae) which is proper to God: that it should also be carried about in solemne processions, to be shewed to the people, to bee worshipped and adored of them. And whosoeuer holdeth the contrary, they pronounce accursed, Trident. Concil. sess. 13. can. 6.

Argum. 1. Hebr. 1.6. Worship him all ye Angels. Ergo, Christ in the sacrament▪ and wheresoeuer else his person is, ought to bee adored of men and Angels, Rhemist. ibid. This Saint Paul meaneth, they say, by discerning the Lords bodie, 1. Corinth. 11.29. that is, adoring, worshipping it, and making prayers vnto it, Rhemist. ibid.

Answ. 1. We denie Christ to be present in the sacrament really, corporally, substantially: therefore it is not to be adored: 2. Although the body of Christ were present in that manner vnder the accidents of bread and wine, yet vnlesse Christ bee so present, that the elements or the accidents of the elements be ioyned and vnited vnto him in one person, as the Godhead and humanitie make but one person, hee is no more to bee adored, then God the father is to bee worshipped in the Sunne or Moone, in the which he is verily present. But to say that the visible formes and elements are ioyned in an hypostaticall vnion to Christ, as his humanity is to his Godhead, it is great blasphemie. 3. A reuerent estimation and discerning of the Lordes bodie we graunt in the sacrament; in preferring the elements before all other meates and drinkes, because of their mysticall signification, as wee preferre the mysticall washing in Baptisme before all other: but to kneele, holde vp the handes, and to worship a peece of bread, wee count it grosse and abominable Idolatrie.

The Protestants.

THat the sacrament is not to be adored with any godly worship, but onely to be duely reuerenced as an holy mysterie: thus wee prooue it by the worde of God.

Argum. 1. In the first instituting of the sacrament, the Apostles receiued it sitting, not kneeling, by taking of it, not lifting vp their handes to it. Ergo, they did not adore it, neither is it by vs to be adored.

Agayne Christ commaundeth vs, onely to Take, and eate and drinke, [Page] and to doe all in remembrance of him: the sacrament therefore was appoynted to be eaten and drunken, not to be carried about, or to bee gazed vpon, or to be kneeled vnto.

Argum. 2. Christ, as we haue shewed, is no otherwise present in the Eucharist, then in Baptisme. But the water in Baptisme is not to be adored: Ergo, neither the bread in the sacrament.

Augustine did not so much as dreame of any adoration of the sacrament: A Cerere & Libero Paganorum dijs, longè absumus, quamus panis & calicis sacramentum nostro ritu amplectimur: Wee doe not worship the heathenish Gods of corne and wine, Ceres and Bacchus, although after our manner wee embrace the sacrament of the bread and of the cuppe. His meaning is, that Christians do not worship bread and wine in the sacrament, as the heathen did, Cont. Faust.

In sacramenti sanctificatione & distributione existimo Apostolum propriè iussisse fieri [...] orationes, 1. Tim. 2.1. Quod verò quidam codices, non habent orationes, sed adorationes, non arbitror scienter interpretatum: In the consecrating and distributing of the sacrament, I think the Apostle bade orations or prayers to be made, not as some doe vnlearnedly interpret, adorations or worshippings, Epistol. 59. Ergo, hee approueth not the adoration of the sacrament.

AN APENDIX, OR TENTH PART, whether the wicked doe receiue the bodie of Christ.

The Papists.

THe wicked, they say, doe in the sacrament eate the true flesh of Christ and error 125 drinke his blood, though they be Infidels, and ill liuers.

Argum. They are guiltie of the bodie and blood of Christ, 1. Corinth. 11.27. How can they be guiltie of that, which they haue not receiued? And agayne, by the vnworthy receiuing of no other sacrament, is a man made guiltie of the body and blood of Christ, but onely here: Ergo, the wicked are partakers of his body? Rhemist. annot. 1. Corint. 11. sect. 16.

Answere: 1. The wicked may be guiltie of the bodie and blood of Christ in vnworthy receiuing the sacrament, though Christ be not corporally present: Euen as he that contumeliously receiueth the seale of the prince or abuseth his image, is guiltie of the Maiestie of the prince, though he haue not hurt his person. 2. He also may bee guiltie of the blood of Christ, that despiseth Baptisme, which he receiued as a signe of his washing in the blood of Christ. And so the Apostle sayth of wicked men, that fall away from Christian religion, that they crucifie agayne to themselues the Sonne of God, Heb. 6.6.

Augustine also bringeth in Christ thus speaking to the wicked in the day of [Page] iudgement, Grauior apud me est, peccatorum tuorum crux, in qua inuitus pendeo, quàm illa, in quam tuimisertus ascendi: the crosse of thy sinnes, whereby thou didst crucifie me, was more grieuous vnto me, then the Crosse, to the which for thy cause I was lifted vp: Serm. 181. cap. 7. de tempor. Thus we see, that wicked men by their sinfull life may crucifie Christ, though they can offer no violence to his body.

The Protestants.

THat wicked men and Infidels, cannot in any sense be partakers of the true bodie and blood of Christ, thus it is prooued.

Argum. 1. By faith only are we made partakers of the bodie and blood of Christ: but this fayth the wicked cannot haue. The first part is proued out of the Gospell: He only that drinketh of the blood of Christ shall neuer thirst agayne, Iohn 4.14. He that shall neuer thirst, must beleeue in Christ, Iohn 6.35. Ergo, he onely that beleeueth doth drinke the blood of Christ. So Augustine saith, Nolite parare fances, sed cor, non quod videtur, sed quod creditur, pascit: doe not prepare your iawes, but your heart, it is not that which is seene, but what is beleeued, that nourisheth: Ergo, Christ must bee receiued by faith: therefore Infidels or vnbeleeuers cannot receiue him.

Argum. 2. Whosoeuer eateth the flesh of Christ and drinketh his blood, shall haue eternall life, Iohn 6.54. But the wicked haue not eternall life: Ergo, they neither eate nor drinke Christ.

Augustine sayth, De mensa dominica sumitur quibusdam ad mortem, quibusdam ad vitam: Tract. in Iohan. 26. res verò, cuius sacramentum est, omni homini ad vitam; nulli ad exitium, quicunque eius particeps fuerit: From the Lords table some doe receiue vnto life, some vnto death: but the thing, whereof it is a sacrament, worketh in all to life, in none to death, whosoeuer are partakers of it. But the bodie and blood of Christ are the things signified in the sacrament: Ergo, whosoeuer receiueth them, hath life thereby; the wicked then receiue them not.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS CONTROVERSY, CONCERNING the Popish Masse.

THis part likewise comprehendeth diuers questions.

1 Of the diuers representations of the death and sacrifice of Christ.

2 Of the sacrifice of the Masse, the name thereof, and of the sacrificing priesthood.

3 Of the vertue and efficacie which they falsely ascribe to the Masse.

4 For whom the sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable: whether for the quicke and the dead.

[Page]5. Of priuate Masses.

6. Of the manner of saying and celebrating Masse.

7. Of the ceremonies which they vse in the idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse: some goe before: some are obserued in the celebration thereof.

8. Of the forme of the Masse, which consisteth partly of the Canon, and of the preface to the Canon, where we are to shew the foule and heretical blasphemies, which in great number are belched out by them in the Masse. Of these now in their order.

THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE DIVERS representations of the death of Christ.

The Papists.

THey are not contented with that one liuely representation of the death of Christ, which is exhibited in the Lords Supper, but they haue brought in error 126 two more beside that, and so make three in all: the first, say they, is simplex repraesentatio, a simple and plaine representation of the death of Christ, which is done so often as the Sacrament is receiued: the second is Repraesentatio ad vinum, A liuely and full representation of Christs death: which they doe vse yearely to set forth by solemne gestures, apparell, and other ceremonies vpon Good Friday, as it is commonly called, before Easter, when they doe make nothing else but a Pageant play of the Sacrament: the third representation is also a sacrifice beside, and that is the sacrifice of the Masse, Bellarm. de Missa. lib. 1. cap. 1. The Rhemists make a fourth representation beside, which is in the solemne receiuing of the Communion at Easter: So then first, Christs death is shewed forth by the Sacrament of the Eucharist all the yeare long as it hangeth in the pixe, or when it is carried to house the sicke, Catechism. Rom. pag. 408. Secondly, it is represented once in the yeere by their solemne Pageant vpon good Friday, when there is no Sacrament consecrated, but an histrionicall expressing by certaine gestures and actions, the manner of Christs crucifying. Thirdly, in the continuall sacrifice of the Masse, Christ his death is represented. And lastly, in the solemne receiuing at Easter: for then especially, the mysterie of Christ our Paschall lambe is commended to the people to be eaten with all sinceritie in the Sacrament: and so doe the Rhemist. expound that place of Saint Paul, Let vs keepe feast or holy day, not with the leauen of malitiousnes, 1. Cor. 6.8. literally applying it to the feast of Easter, Rhemist. in hunc locum.

The Protestants.

FIrst, we are taught by the word of God, that by eating the bread, and drinking of the cup in the Sacrament, not by gazing, looking, lifting vp, turning, hanging vp bread in pixes, or by any such meanes, but onely as we haue saide, [Page] is the Lords death shewed forth and represented, 1. Corinth. 11.26. Wee acknowledge therefore one onely Sacramentall representation of Christ, and no more in the Lords Supper: the sacrifice of the Masse we iudge to bee an abominable idol, as afterward shall be shewed.

Secondly, it is a foule absurditie to make any representation of Christs death, by bare gestures, shewes, and actions of the bodie without any Sacrament, as they doe in their popish pageants vpon Christs Passion daye: for at that time there is no Sacrament consecrated, Eckius. cap. 15. But the Priest, by certaine gestures and motions of the bodie, in bowing, bending, casting abroade his armes and such like, dooth resemble Christ crucified, Bellarm cap. 1. But to call this a liuely representation being done without a Sacrament, and the other in the Sacrament, simplicem repraesentationem, but a simple and plaine representation, is too great presumption: wherein they prefer their owne superstitious deuises, before the ordinance of Christ.

Thirdly, that place of Saint Paul is vnfitly applied to the celebration of Ester: Augustine expoundeth it far otherwise: Diem festum celebremus, non vtique vnam diem, sed totam vitam in azymis synceritatis & veritatis: Let vs keepe holy day, not one onely day, but all our life long, in the vnleauened bread of purenes and trueth. So then in Augustines iudgement, the Apostle had no relation to any certaine time, which he would haue kept holy: but to the reformation of the whole life.

THE SECOND QVESTION, OF THE sacrifice of the Masse and the Priesthoode thereto belonging.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE name and terme of Masse.

The Papists.

error 127 THere are diuerse opinions amongst them, concerning the originall of this name. Some say it is called Missa the Masse, Quia oblatio & preces ad Deum mittantur, Hugo, de S. Victore. Others, quod Angelus a Deo mittatur, quisacrificio assistat ▪ Because an angell is sent of God to bee assistant at the Masse. Thom. Aquinas. 3. part. quaest. 83. artic. 4. Some, of the hebrue worde Missath, Deut. 16. which signifieth an oblation: Some, ex missis donarijs, & symbolis, of the giftes and offerings sent or put in before the Communion. But what beginning soeuer it had, they doe now generally take the Masse, for that solemne action, whereby the Sacrament is made a sacrifice, and offered vp to God. Bellarm. lib. 1. de missa. cap. 1.

[Page]

The Protestants.

WE doe not greatly force vpon this name: for both the name and the thing is abolished from our hearts and mouthes; & we trust in God, wee shall neuer haue occasion to knowe it againe. But howsoeuer it is, this name Missa, Masse, cannot signifie any such thing as they pretend.

1 For it seemeth that Missa was deriued, à dimissione populi, of the dimission or sending away of the people: and so was taken generally for any congregation assembled either to pray, or sing Psalmes, or for any other religious duetie: As yet to this day in the Dutch language (Messe) signifieth any solemne frequencie or congregation of the people. In this sense Cassianus vnderstandeth Masse, that is, for the dimission of the people:De canonicis orat. lib. [...]. cap. 7. speaking of him that commeth not timelie to the howers of praier: hee would not haue him to enter in, but stantem pro foribus congregationis missam praestolari debere: hee ought standing without the doores to waite for the misse of the congregation.

2 Augustine taketh this word Missa generally for the leiturgie or seruice of the Church, as serm. de tempore 251. if that Sermō be Augustines. Sunt aliqui, & maximè potentes huius mundi, cum veniunt ad ecclesiam, non sunt deuoti ad laudes Dei celebrandas, sed cogunt presbyterū vt abbreuiet Missam: there are some, and commonly the great men of the world, which come not to Church with any deuotion to sing praises to God, but they constraine the presbyter or Minister to make short Masse. Here this word Masse signifieth the whole leiturgie, as singing of Psalmes, and praising God; not any sacrifice or oblation: for then he would haue said, Cogunt sacerdotem, not presbyterum, They constraine the priest, not the Minister. Wherefore as the sacrifice of the Masse is of no great antiquitie, so neither is the name in that sence.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE sacrifice of the Masse.

The Papists.

CHrist, they say, at his last Supper, did offer vp his owne bodie and blood in error 128 sacrifice, vnder the formes of bread and wine, to God his father: and at the same instant made his Apostles, and their successors Priests, to offer vp his bodie [...]n the Sacrament, Concil. Tridentin. sess. 22. cap. 1. And the same bodie which Christ offered vp vpon the crosse, is dayly offered vp by the ministerie of the Priests, the difference onely is in the manner of offering, Concil. Trident. ibid. c. 2. The eternitie & proper act of Christs Priesthood, consisteth in the offering & sacrificing of the body & blood of Christ in the formes of bread & wine in the Church, Rhem. Heb. 7. sect. 8. And we meane alwaies of Priest & sacrifice [Page] taken in their owne proper signification, ibid. sect. 7. In the Eucharist then there is a true sacrifice of the very bodie and blood of Christ offered vp to God, by the hands of the Priest, in the formes of bread and wine, Bellarm. cap. 5.

Argum. 1. Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisedech: but the proper act of Melchisedechs priesthoode did consist in sacrificing in the formes of bread and wine: Ergo, the eternitie of Christs priesthoode standeth in the sacrificing of his bodie and blood in those formes: there doth therefore still remaine a proper external sacrifice in the Church, Rhemist. annot. Hebr. 7. sect. 8. Bellarm. cap. 6.

Ans. 1. We confesse, that Melchisedech was a type of our Sauiour Christ, and that he was a Priest after Melchisedechs order: but not in any such respect, for offering in bread and wine: for the text saith, hee brought forth bread and wine, he offered it not: he brought it forth for the refreshing of Abraham, and those which were with him, Genes. 14.18.

2. He brought forth bread and wine, and not the formes onely of bread and wine, therefore your sacrifice in the formes onely is not after his order.

3. If Melchisedechs bringing forth of bread & wine were a sacrifice or oblation, and a type of the like sacrifice to continue for euer in the Church, it must also haue been a propitiatorie sacrifice for the remission of sinnes, as they say the sacrifice of the Masse is, which was thereby signified: but there is no propitiatorie sacrifice for remission of sinnes, without shedding of blood, Hebr. 9.22. Therefore Milchisedechs act, being without blood, was no such sacrifice, and consequently none at all.

4. The Apostle to the Hebrues sheweth, wherein Christ was a Priest after Melchisedechs order, Heb. 7. First, in that Melchisedech was both king & Priest, verse 2. so is Christ. Secondly, in respect of the eternitie of his Priesthoode: we doe not reade either of the beginning of his dayes, or end of his life, nor of any change of his priesthoode, vers. 3. Al which is most truely verified in Christ. Thirdly, Melchisedech was a type of Christ, and his Priesthoode of Christs, because of the excellencie thereof aboue the Leuiticall Priesthoode: for Leui paide tithes in Abraham to Melchisedech, and therefore was inferior, and was blessed of Melchisedech in Abraham, the lesse of the greater: so is the Priesthoode of Christ aduaunced farre aboue Aarons order. If in any other materiall point Melchisedechs Priesthoode had resembled Christs, as in this oblation of bread and wine, the Apostle would not haue omitted it.

5. Therein consisted the proper act of Melchisedechs priesthoode, for the which he receiued tithes of Abraham: but, as the Apostle saith, he receiued tithes, and blessed Abraham, Heb. 7.6. Ergo, the tithes were due not for any sacrifice which he offered, but for his blessing. The same therefore was the proper act of his Priesthoode.

Argum. 2. They alleage that place, Heb. 8.3. Euery high Priest is appointed to offer giftes and hostes, wherefore it is necessarie that he also haue somewhat [Page] to offer. Christ then hath a certaine host in externall and proper manner, as other Priests haue, but this visible and externall act of sacrificing he doth not exercise now in heauen: therefore it must needes bee meant of the perpetuall oblation of his body and blood in the Church: for somewhat he must alwaies haue to offer, Rhemist. Hebr. 8. sect. 3.

Ans. 1. The Apostle saith not, that it is necessarie that Christ should still haue somewhat to offer in sacrifice: but that it was needefull for him to haue somewhat, which he had alreadie offered: for the verbe [...], signifieth not the present tence, but the time past: whereby is vnderstoode the oblation which hee had already offered once, and which neede not bee repeated, Hebr. 7.27. For as herein hee is like to other Priests, that hee must haue somewhat to haue offered, so is he vnlike also in this, that they by reason of their infirmitie had need to offer often: but Christ our high Priest did it but once, as in that place the Apostle sheweth.

2. The gift which the Apostle in this place attributeth to Christ,Vers. 2. was his bodie, which hee calleth the true Tabernacle, which the Lord pight and not man. But that bodie of Christ, which they say is offered vp in the sacrifice of the Masse, is not of that nature: for it is made by the ministerie of man: for euery one of their sacrificing Priests is able to make the bodie of Christ: but this bodie, which Christ had to offer, was made onely by God, without the helpe of man, as the Apostle saith. Againe, say, if you dare, that the bodie which you offer, is the true Tabernacle and temple of God: for then it would followe, that God dwelleth in temples made with hands, that is, by the ministerie of man, contrarie to the Scriptures: seeing you affirme that the bodie of Christ is no otherwise present but by the ministerie of the Priest. And what a goodly Tabernacle is this for God, thinke you, which you shut vp in a pixe, and hang vp in your Churches? A mouse may eate it, the fire may consume it, corruption may take it: would God suffer his Tabernacle thus to be defiled? Wherefore vpon these premises we conclude, that what you offer in your popish sacrifice, cannot be the proper gift belonging to Christes Priesthoode.

Argum. 3. The Apostle saith, Hebr. 13.10. Wee haue an altar, whereof they haue no power to eate, which serue in the Tabernacle. Ergo, we haue not onely a common table to eate meere bread vpon, but a verie altar in the proper sense to sacrifice Christs bodie vpon. Rhemist. annot. Hebr. 13. sect. 6.

Ans. First, the Apostle speaketh of the sacrifice of Christs death, whereof we are made partakers by faith: which they can reape no benefite by, which remaine in the ceremoniall obseruations of Leuiticall sacrifices. Christ therefore is our Priest, altar and sacrifice: for verse 12. the Apostle maketh mention of the suffrings of Christ: he meaneth not then the Communion table, which is vnproperly called an altar, or any materiall altar beside, but the altar onely of Christs death. Secondly, if wheresoeuer in Scripture this worde (altar) is read, it must be taken for a proper materiall altar, we shall haue also a [Page] material altar in heauen, Apoc. 8.3. which I am sure they wil not grant. Thirdly, the Apostle saith, We haue an altar, which is but one, whereas popish altars are many: it cannot therefore be vnderstoode of such altars.

The Protestants.

THat there are spirituall sacrifices remaining yet vnto Christians in the exercise of religion, we doe verily beleeue, being so taught by the Scriptures: such are the sacrifices of praise and thankesgiuing, Heb. 13.15. The sacrifice of almes and distribution, verse 16. the mortifying also of the flesh, is a kinde of crucifying, and so a spirituall sacrifice, Galat. 6.14. And in this sense wee denie not, but that the Sacrament may be called a sacrifice, that is, a spirituall oblation of praise and thankesgiuing: but that there is a proper and externall sacrifice, as in the lawe of Goates and Bullocks, vpon the crosse of the bodie of Christ: so in the Eucharist, of the same bodie and flesh of Christ: we doe hold it for a great blasphemie, and heresie.

Argum. 1. The very flesh, and true naturall bodie of Christ, is not, as wee haue shewed before at large, in such carnall and corporall manner present in the Sacrament: therefore it cannot in the Sacrament be sacrificed, and offered vp.

Argum. 2. This sacrificing of the bodie and blood of Christ is contrarie to Christs institution: for he saith onely, Take yee, eate yee, drinke yee: he saith not, Sacrifice yee, or lift vp, and make an oblation of my bodie. Neither doe those wordes, hoc facite, doe this, giue them any power to sacrifice: for to whome he saith, Eate yee, drinke yee, to the same also he saith, Doe yee. Wherefore, if doe yee, be as much as, sacrifice yee: all Christians, for whome it is lawfull to eate and drinke the Sacrament, by this rule haue authoritie to sacrifice. Againe, the words are, Doe this in remembrance. We remember things absent, and which are alreadie done and past: if then there be a present sacrifice in the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ, it cannot properly be said to be a memorie of his sacrifice.

Argum. 3. The Apostle saith, that Christ neede not to offer himselfe often, but that he hath done once in the end of the world, Heb. 9.26. And with one offering, hath hee made perfite for euer them that are sanctified, 10.14. Ergo, Christ cannot be sacrificed againe: for that were to make his sacrifice vpon the crosse imperfect.

Bellarmine answereth: that the Apostle here speaketh of the bloodie and painefull sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse, which was sufficient once to bee done: but this taketh not away the vnbloodie sacrifice, which is but an iteration of the former, whereby the fruite and efficacie of that first oblation is applied vnto vs, Bellarm. lib. 1. de miss. cap. 25.

Ans. First, the Apostle excludeth all manner iterations of the sacrifice of Christ, for otherwise, if Christ should now bee often howsoeuer sacrificed, the difference would not hold betweene the sacrifices of the lawe which were often [Page] done, and the sacrifice of Christ, which was once to be performed: for their sacrifices were also in a manner iterations and commemorations of the sacrifice of Christ. The Apostle then thus reasoneth, They had many iteratiue and commemoratiue sacrifices of Christs death: Ergo, we haue not now. Secondly, that is but a foolish and false distinction of the bloodie and vnbloodie sacrifice, as they vnderstand it: for there can be no proper vnbloodie sacrifice of Christ, neither could he be offered vp, otherwise then by dying, Heb. 9.27.28. Therefore he is not offered vp in the Sacrament, because now he dyeth not. Thirdly, neither neede wee inuent a new kinde of sacrifice, for the application of Christs death: for to that end Christ hath appointed the preaching of the word, and instituted the Sacraments: wherby the death of Christ with al the benefites thereof, are most fruitefully applied vnto vs, Galath. 3.1. 1. Corinth. 11.26.

Argum. 4. Augustine in a certaine place allegorizing the parable of the prodigall child, thus writeth, Vitulum occidit, Ad fratres in erem. serm. 27. quando in sacramento altario memoriam passionis in mente renouauit: He slew the fat calfe, when hee renewed in the Sacrament of the altar the memorie of his passion in his minde. Hee calleth it the Sacrament, not the sacrifice of the altar: and it onely bringeth to our minde the memorie of Christs passion and sacrifice: there is then no oblation or sacrifice in the Sacrament, but onely a commemoration of Christs sacrifice, which we denie not.

AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART, OF the name and office of Priestes.

The Papists.

AS they doe falsely teach and perswade, that there is yet remaining a proper error 129 externall sacrifice for Christians vnder the Gospell, so also they maintaine a sacrificing Priesthoode. And further they say, that the Leuiticall Priesthoode was not translated into the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse, but is properly turned into the Priesthoode and sacrifice in the Church, according to Melchisedechs rite, in offering vp the bodie and blood of Christ in the formes of bread and wine, Rhemist. annot. Hebr. 7. sect. 7. Wherefore they which minister vnder the Gospell, are worthilie called Priests: which word doth so certainely implie the authoritie of sacrificing, that it is by vse made the onely English of Sacerdos, Rhemist. act. 14. sect. 3.

The Protestants.

FIrst, we hold it to be a great blasphemie to say, that the Priesthood & sacrifice of Christ vpō the Crosse, is not that sacrifice or Priesthood into the which the old sacrifice & Priesthood was translated & changed. The Apostle proueth the contrary: for that sacrifice, whereby the new Testament is established, is that, [Page] whereunto the old sacrifice and Priesthoode is translated: but this is done by the singular sacrifice of Christ, who is the suretie of a better testament, Hebr. 7.23. Ergo, his singular sacrifice vpon the crosse, is that whereinto the old Leuiticall sacrifices are changed, and no other. Againe the Priesthoode after Melchisedechs order is that, into the which the old Priesthoode is changed: but the Priesthoode of Christ vpon the Crosse was after that order. Ergo. But here they are not ashamed to denie, that the sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse was after Melchisedechs order, but doe most impudently and blasphemously affirme, that it was after the order of Aaron, Heskin. lib. 1. cap. 13. And thus euery vile massemonger shall be more properly a Priest after Melchisedechs order, then Christ himselfe.

Secondly, none but Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisedech: for vnto whome the Lord saide, Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech, to him the Lord saith also in the same Psalme, Sit thou at my right hand, Psal. 110. But this cānot agree to any popish Priest: therefore not the other. Againe, the Apostle maketh this difference betweene the Priesthoode of the lawe and the Gospell: because then there were many Priests, they being prohibited by death to continue: but Christ is the onely Priest of the New Testament, because he dieth not, Heb. 7 23.24. If they answer, as they doe, that although there be many Priestes, yet it is but one Priesthoode, because Christ concurreth with them in the actes of the Priesthoode, Rhemist.

We answer, first, Christ concurreth with his faithfull ministers in the actes of their Ministerie: but no such Priesthoode doe wee acknowledge. Secondly, so Christ concurred in the actes of the Leuiticall Priesthoode, and the sacrifices of the law that were rightly offered: wherefore this concurrence of Christ dooth no more take away the multitude of Priests in the Gospell, then it did in the lawe.

Thirdly, concerning the name of Priests in their sense, as it implieth an authoritie of sacrificing, we vtterly abhor it: secondly, but as it is deriued of the Greeke word [...] ▪ which signifieth an Elder, we refuse it not, but wish rather, that it had not bin abused in cōmō speach to signifie popish sacrificers. Thirdly, as for the word (sacerdos) which may be englished a sacrificer, we finde it no where in the New Testament giuen to the ministers of the Gospell, and so much Bellarmine confesseth, cap. 17. And therefore vnfitly and vnproperly agreeth vnto them. If some of the fathers haue confounded the names of Sacerdos and (Presbyter) they are not to be commended. The word Sacerdos, a sacrificer, being a proper name of the Leuitical Priests, cannot properly be attributed to the Ministers of the Gospell. To conclude, this word (Priest) as it is the English of (Sacerdos) we doe not approue: but as it giueth the sense of (Presbyter) from whence it is deriued, we condemne it not: for so it signifieth nothing else but an Elder. If common vse of speech haue drawne it to a contrarie sense, it would be amended.

Quaest. euangelicar. lib. 2. quaest. 40. Augustine saith, Sacerdotiū Iudaeorum nemo dubitat, &c. No faithful mā doubteth, but that the Priesthood of the law was a figure of the royall Priesthoode in [Page] the Church, whereby all that pertaine to the bodie of Christ are consecrated. He acknowledgeth no other Priesthood abiding in the Church, then that whereby all Christians are made Priests, to offer spirituall sacrifices vnto God through Christ.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE VERTVE AND efficacie falsely ascribed to the sacrifice of the Masse.

The Papists.

1. THey blasphemously affirme, that it is a sacrifice propitiatorie, that is, auailable error 130 to obtaine, ex opere operato, by the very worke wrought, remission and pardon of all their sinnes. Trident. Concil. sess. 22. can. 3.

Argum. Christ himselfe sayth in the institution, This is my blood shed for you for the remission of sinnes: Ergo, the sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable for remission of sinnes, Bellarm. lib. 2. de miss. cap. 2.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, Christ instituted no sacrifice, as we declared afore, but onely a Sacrament in remembrance of his death and passion. Secondly, the Sacrament rightly administred, serueth to assure our faith of remission of sinnes by the death of Christ: but it doth not by it owne vertue conferre remission of sinnes, neither profiteth by the worke wrought: for the Apostle sayth, That without faith it is impossible to please God, Hebr. 11.6. wherefore no action is accepted of God not proceeding of faith.

Argum. The Apostle sayth, Where there is remission of sinnes, there is no more sacrifice for sinne, Hebr. 10.18. Seeing then remission of sinnes is fully obtained by the death and sacrifice of Christ, there can be no more sacrifice for sinne: Ergo, the Masse is no sacrifice for sinne.

The Papists.

2. THe sacrifice of the Masse is not onely propitiatorie for sinnes, but auaileable error 131 to obtaine all other benefites, as peace, tranquilitie, health, and such like. Bellarm. cap. 3.

Argum. S. Paul willeth, That prayers and intercessions should be made for all men, especially for Kings, that we may leade a godly and a peaceable life, 1. Timoth. 1.1. These are the prayers which are made in the celebration of the Masse, Bellarm.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, the Apostle speaketh generally of al prayers, made by whomsoeuer, as it appeareth, vers. 8. Therefore this place is vnfitly applied to the praiers of Priests in the Masse. Secondly, this place proueth, that temporall benefites [Page] are obtained by faithfull prayers, not by the sacrifice of the Masse, which S. Paul neuer knewe. Thirdly, Augustine indeed expoundeth this place of the publike prayers of the Church vsed in the administration of the Sacrament: for he calleth it,Epistol. 59. Domini mensam, the Lords table, not the altar: he meaneth nothing lesse then your popish Masse

Argum. It is contrarie to the institution of Christ, to applie the Sacrament for any such temporall or external vse. It was ordained to be receiued in remembrance of Christs death, to assure vs by faith of remission of sinnes, and other spirituall blessings: not to giue vs assurance of health, peace, life, prosperitie: for the obtaining of such blessings, according to the will of God, other meanes are appoynted. The ministerie of the Sacraments no more serueth for such vses, then the preaching of the word.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, FOR WHOM THE sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable.

The Papists.

error 132 FIrst, they affirme that Masse may be fayd and offered for all the liuing, yea for Pagans and infidels, for men absent as well as present: for Saint Paul willeth prayers and supplications to be made for all men, 1. Timoth. 2.1. Bellarm. cap. 6.

Secondly, the sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable for the dead which are in error 133 Purgatorie, Bellarm. cap. 7. Concil. Trid. sess. 22. can. 3.

error 134 Thirdly, Masse may be rightly sayd in the remembrance and for the honour of Saints, with inuocation of them also in the prayers of the Church, Bellarm. cap. 8.

Argum. The Apostles taught the Church to keepe a memorie or inuocation of the Saints in this sacrifice, and that there should be speciall prayers for the dead: for these and such like were the things (no doubt) that S. Paul sayth he would set in order when he came, 1. Cor. 11.34. Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. 1. To the place out of Timothie we haue answered before, that it is vnderstood generally of all prayers made by the faithfull: neither doth it follow, it is lawfull to pray for all men, and therefore the Sacrament is auaileable for all men: for these are two diuers things: prayer is an effect of our faith, the Sacrament is an instrumental or ministerial cause of our faith.

2. It is too great boldnes for you, without scripture, to affirme, that these superstitious rites of yours were those very orders which the Apostle promised at his comming to establish: but either they were such as partained not to the administration of the Sacrament, or were but accidentall orders meete for the Church of Corinth, and not necessarie for all times and places.

[Page]

The Protestants.

FIrst, the Sacrament (for sacrifice we acknowledge none) is onely ordained for their comfort that doe receiue it: neither can one receiue the Sacrament for another, no more then he may be baptized in the stead of another.

Secondly, neither doth the celebration of the Sacrament profite the dead, as we haue shewed before, that it is in vaine to pray for them.

Thirdly, neither are the Saints, either then or at any other time to be prayed vnto, or either by this, or any other religious worship to be honoured.

Argum. All these superstitious obseruances are cleane contrarie and repugnant to the institution of Christ. First, he sayth, Take ye, eate ye, doe this: wherefore to their comfort onely the Sacrament worketh, that doe receiue it, and are doers in that action: the benefite thereof then is not extended to the absent, but onely to the partakers. Secondly, the dead can feele no comfort by it, because they can neither eate nor drinke it, nor be doers therein. Thirdly, Christ sayth, Doe this in remembrance of me: he sayth not, in remembrance of Angels, Apostles, Saints: but onely of me. Therefore it is contrarie to the institution to vse any commemoration of Saints in the Sacrament.

Augustine sayth, Quis offeret sacrificium corporis Christi, nisi pro ijs, qui sunt membra Christi? Who will offer the sacrifice of the bodie of Christ, but for the members of Christ? Lib. 1. de origin. anim. cap. 9. Therefore the Sacrament can not be celebrated for Pagans and Infidels, who are no members of Christ.

Againe, he sayth: Nos Martyribus non constituimus templa, sacerdotia, sacra aut sacrificia: We doe not erect either temples, priests, seruice or sacrifices to Martyrs, De ciuitat. dei. lib. 8. cap. 27. Ergo, it is not lawfull to vse the Sacrament for the honour of Saints.

THE FIFT QVESTION OF priuate Masses.

The Papists.

IF any man shall say, that priuate Masses, wherein the Priest alone by himselfe error 135 doth communicate, are vnlawful, and therefore to be abolished, we pronounce him accursed, Concil. Tridentin. sess. 22. can. 8.

Argum. The sacrifices of the law were sacrifices, before the people did eate thereof: so the substance & making of a medicine is one thing, the ingredience, or taking of it, an other: Ergo, neither is receiuing part of the substāce or making of the sacrifice of Christs bodie, but a consequence only: therefore there may be a sacrifice and sacrament without it, Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 11. sect. 14.

[Page]Ans. First, we denie that there is any sacrifice in the Eucharist, but a Sacrament onely: and therefore the comparison holdeth not betweene a sacrifice, which consisted both of oblation to God, and the participation of the people that offered, and the Sacrament which Christ in his institution offered not to God, but to his Disciples. Secondly, neither doth the similitude of a medicine conclude: for you cannot proue that the Sacrament not receiued hath vertue in it, as a medicine hath: for faith is requisite to the worthie receiuing of the Sacrament, which is not necessarie in the applying of a medicine: and yet it is not properly called a medicine, vnlesse being made, it be also applied, and being receiued doth heale.

The Protestants.

WE vtterly condemne the superstitious practises of popish priests, who doe vse to communicate alone in their Masses, the people standing by▪ gazing and looking vpon him: yea you might haue seene many Masses sayd in one Church at once, almost in euery corner one, no person being present for the most part, but the priest and his boy.

Argum. This priuate receiuing of the Sacrament is contrarie to the institution of Christ, who sayth, speaking to many, Take ye, eate ye, and diuide this amongst you: there must be then a diuision and distribution. Saint Paul also sayth, We that are many are one bread and one bodie, in as much as we are partakers of one bread, 1. Corinth. 10.17. Ergo, many must communicate together· For the Apostle speaketh not of the mysticall communion of the faithfull in this place, which doe all make but one bodie in Christ, (for so we doe communicate with the Church by faith, not onely in the Sacrament, but without it) but of the Sacramentall communion of as many as receiue together: for how els can they be sayd to be partakers of one bread, or loafe, vnlesse they receiue together.

Augustine sayth, that, Sacramentum benedicitur, sanctificatur, & ad distribuendum comminuitur: Epistol. 59. That the Sacrament is blessed, sanctified, and broken to be distributed: Ergo, where there is distribution, there must be many to receiue.

AN APPENDIX CONCERNING THE name of the Sacrament.

The Papists.

136. Error.THey vtterly mislike these names of the Sacrament, that it is called amongst vs the Lords Supper, or Communion: belike (say they) they will bring it againe to the Supper, or euening seruice, Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 11. sect. 6. And the name Communion, is as ignorantly vsed of them, thereby making the people beleeue, that many should communicate together, 1. Cor. 11. sect. 24. they should rather vse the names of the Eucharist, Masse, or Leiturgie.

[Page]

The Protestants.

FIrst, for the name of the Lords Supper, we doe learne of S. Paul so to call it: When ye come together, (sayth he) this is not to eate the Lords Supper, 1. Corinth. 11.20.

Rhemist. The Apostle calleth their feasts of loue, which they were wont to make after the receiuing of the Sacrament, the Lords Supper, coenas dominicas, because they were made in the Lords houses, which were called Dominicae: he meaneth not the Sacrament.

Ans. First, there were then no such distinct places, as Churches, and Oratories for the seruice of God, which began to be built many yeeres after, but they assembled together in their owne houses. Secondly, if their loue-feasts were called the Lords Suppers, it would followe that they neuer had them but at night, and that then also the Sacrament was celebrated about the time of their feasts, which must be at the eeuentide. But this, I think, they dare not affirme▪ that they celebrated the Sacrament at night: wherefore the Apostle cannot meane any other Supper, but that which was instituted by Christ, as it followeth, vers. 23.

Augustine calleth it the Lords Supper, Coenam manibus suis consecratam discipulis suis dedit: His Supper being consecrated,In Luk. ser. 33. he gaue with his owne hands to his Disciples. And although we sate not downe at that feast: Ipsam coenam tamē fide quotidie manducamus: Yet we eate that Supper daily by faith.

2. The name Communion, the Apostle also himselfe vseth: he calleth it [...], The communion of the bodie of Christ, 1. Corinth. 10.16: so doth Augustine name it, Communionem corporis Christi. de ciuit. Det. 20. cap. 9.

3. As for the names of Eucharist, and Leiturgie, we mislike them not, being vnderstood in their own sense: but because they are Greeke and not vnderstood of the people, we vse them not. The horrible sacrilege of the Masse, is the cause also why we vse not that terme.

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF THE MANNER OF saying and celebrating Masse.

The Papists.

IT is not necessiarie that the Masse (or as we call it, the Sacrament) should be sayd or done in the vulgar and familiar speech, but for the greater reuerence,137. Error. to be kept in the Latine tongue, they say, it is more conuenient: and that the words of consecration should not be vttered in a loud and audible, but in a soft and low voyce, Bellarm. cap. 11.12.

Argum. Christ for the space of three houres, being so long vpon the Crosse, vttered nothing in the hearing of the standers by, but 7. short sentences: Ergo, in the sacrifice of the Masse, it is not necessarie to vtter all in the hearing of the people, Ibid.

Ans. First, they haue not proued by this example, that the Priest should mutter [Page] and mumble to himselfe; but the contrarie rather: that either he must altogether hold his peace, or els speake aloude; vnlesse they can shew that Christ spake some words secretly to himselfe. Secondly, we must not fetch the right vse of the Sacrament of our owne heads, from the example of Christs sacrifice vpon the Crosse: but we are commanded to resort for direction, to the institution in his last Supper, 1. Corinth. 11.23.

The Protestants.

FIrst, for the Sacrament or any other part of the seruice of God to be ministred in an vnknowne tongue, is contrary to S. Pauls rule, who would haue al things to be done in the Church to edifying, and in such sort that the vnlearned might say, Amen, 1. Corinth. 14.16. But the people cannot be edified by a language which they vnderstand not: nor yet can say, Amen vnto strange prayers. But of this matter we haue alreadie elsewhere entreated more at large.

Secondly, it is also contrarie to S. Pauls rule, that the Priest should mutter to himselfe, and not speake aloud in the hearing of the people: for he saith, Ye doe shew forth, [...], annuntiatis, preach or declare the death of Christ, so often as ye receiue it, 1. Corinth. 11.26. But they doe not annuntiare, that is, preach, set forth, and declare the death of Christ, that speake onely to themselues.

Augustine sayth, Populus cum episcopo orat, & quasi ad eius verba subscribens respondet, Cont. Parmenian. lib. 1. cap. 7. Amen: The people prayeth with their pastor, and subscribing to his words, say, Amen. But how can the people say, Amen, where nothing is heard, or subscribe in their hearts vnto it?

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, OF THE CEREMOnies which they vse in the idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse.

The Papists.

error 138 SOme ceremonies goe before the celebration of the Masse, and they are of such things, as they haue alwaies in a readines for that impious seruice: such are the vestiments and apparel of the priest, the Albe, Chesil, Stole, Dalmatike, with such other: Altars, Altarclothes, Corporasses, Pixes, Paxes, Dishes, Candlestickes, Platters, Censers, water-pots: all these and the like trumperie ought of right to be vsed in the sacrifice of the Masse, the better to discerne the bodie of Christ, Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 11. sect. 18.

The Protestants.

FIrst, for diuers causes we doe condemne and reiect these superstitious vsages of the Papists: 1. Because of the superfluous & vnnecessarie number of them, fewer by a great deale may serue for the Communion to be kept, after Christs [Page] institution: neither doe we reade, that Christ at his last Supper vsed any such, who notwithstanding would not haue left out any thing requisite and needfull for the Sacrament.

2. The superfluous and excessiue cost, in making so many Church vessels of gold and siluer, so many Masse garments of silke, fine linnen, embrodered with gold, pearle, & precious stones, was both an intolerable burthen to the Church, at whose charge such things were prouided, and a great deale more costly, then became the simplicitie of the Gospell.

3. Conuenient vessels and instruments, which are necessarie for the administration of the Sacrament, with other seemely ornaments: as a decent couering for the Communion table, a cleane and hansome vessell to keepe the wine, a cup of siluer for the distribution, cleane linnen napkins for the bread: such instruments and ornaments of the Lords table we condemne not, but vse them our selues: yet none of them for such ends or purposes, as they pretend, to discerne the bodie of the Lord by them: as though they were ordained to waite and attend vpon the bodily presence of Christ, which they haue falsely imagined: but we vse them for decencie and order sake, and due reuerence, which is to be yeelded to so great mysteries.

In the Apostles time they had no consecrated Altars, but Communion tables, 1. Cor. 10.21. neither is it like that they vsed vessels of gold or siluer in the Lords Supper, when they had neither siluer nor gold in their purses, Math. 10.9. Wherfore such things are not necessarie for the discerning of the Lords bodie.

The Papists.

2. THere are other ceremonies, which they obserue and vse in the very action it selfe and celebration of the Masse: as the diuers gestures of the Priest, to lift vp his eyes, and cast them downe againe, and to lift them vp the second, the third time: sometime to cast abroad his hands, to close them againe, to warble with his fingers, to bow, to bend, to ducke, to turne on this side and on that, now on the right hand, againe on the left: to sigh, to smite vpon his breast, to lift vp the Chalice, and shew it to the people, and set it downe againe: as also the diuiding of the host into three parts, which signifie three parts of the Church, in heauen, in earth, and in purgatorie: the rinsing of part thereof in wine, and eating part drie, the washing of his fingers before consecration: kissing of the altar, the patten, the booke, the paxe: sprinkling of holy water, censing of odors, crossing the chalice, the bread, their mouth, breast and face, which signe of the crosse they make aboue twentie times in one Masse while: Adde also vnto these, their tedious & yrksome songs, the rude noyse and vnedifying sound of strange instruments, and the whole course of their Masse musicke set forth in a strange language, and endited to the honour of Saints. All these superstitious rites, with diuers more, vaine, vnfruitfull, abominable, they notwithstanding with force and maine defend and maintaine, Bellarm▪ lib. 2. de missa. cap. 14.15. Concil. Trid [...]ntin. sess. 22. ca [...]. 7.

[Page]

The Protestants.

1. THis multitude of humane inuentions, agreeth not with the institution of the Lords Supper: for we reade not of any such kissing, kneeling▪ becking, bowing, or the like ridiculous gestures to haue been vsed, when our Sauiour instituted the Supper, nor afterwards by the Apostles to haue been practised▪ wherefore wee contenting our selues with the plaine institution of Christ, doe worthily reiect all such toyes.

2. Most of these gestures are impious, and tend to idolatrie in the adoration of bread and wine, which are but creatures: and they are all friuolous and hypocriticall, stealing away true deuotion from the heart, and making men to rest in the outward gestures of the bodie. Augustine sayth very well: Corpus genibus flexis prosternis, collum curuas in oratione, video vbi iaciat corpus, sed quaero vbi volitet animus? Thou bowest the knee, bendest thy bodie in prayer stretchest out thy necke, I see where thy bodie lieth: but what is become of thy soule?

3. Concerning Church songs and Musicke, Augustine thus writeth: S [...]briè Psallimus in Ecclesia diuina cantica Prophetarum: Epistol. 119 cap. 19. We sing treatably and soberly in the Church the diuine songs of the Prophets. Two conditions he requireth: first, that we sing holy Psalmes taken out of the scriptures. Secondly, that they be sung treatably and distinctly: Etiam illic (sayth he) si sonum non sensum libido audiendi desideret, Cont. Iulian. lib. 4.14. improbatur: Euen in good songs, if we follow the sound, not the sense, it is to be discommended: but in popish songs neither of these conditions is kept: for both the dittie, for the most part, is idolatrous, stuffed with inuocation and adoration of Saints, and the note is so diuided and drawne out in length, that nothing can be vnderstood.

THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE FORME OF THE Masse, which consisteth partly of the Canon, partly of such things as are rehearsed before and after the Canon.

THE FIRST PART OF THE PRAIERS WHICH goe before the Canon of the Masse.

WE doe not vtterly condemne whatsoeuer is sayd or sung in their Leiturgie or Masse: for as they haue their introite, so we doe bid the people, after due preparation, in our Communions to draw neere. We haue also our Confiteor, a confession of sinnes to be said before the Communion. Other formes also, which haue been vsed of ancient time, we doe not refuse: as Dominus vobiscum, The Lord be with you: Kyrieeleson, Lord haue mercie of vs: Sursum corda, Lift vp your hearts: with Alleluia, praised be God, and Sanctus, Sanctus, holy, holy: and Gloria in excelsis, Glorie be to God on high: the preface also to the Communion, Verè dignum, & iustum est, It is meete, right, and our bounden duetie: [Page] And we vse also the Lords praier after the distribution. These formes we mislike not, vsing the same our selues, which notwithstanding we borrowe not from them, but from the ancient and purer ages of the Church. But the corruptions, additions, immutations, which are vsed by them in these prefaces to the Masse, we doe vtterly condemne, as their introite and confiteor, is stuft full of idolatry, and inuocation of Saints: their Kyrieeleson is 9. times repeated in an vnknown toung Eleuation and adoration was brought in by Pope Honorius, anno. 1222. the Agnus was deuised by Pope Sergius, ann. 700. the Pax by Innocentius, plura apud Foxum. p. 1403.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE Canon of the Masse.

The Papists.

1. FIrst, the forme of their Masse they haue (they say) by tradition from the Apostles:error 139 Rhemist. 1. Cor. 11. sect. 22.

The Protestants.

THeir owne authors doe testifie, that euery patch of their Masse was thrust in by Popes later then the Apostles: as by Leo the 1. Gregory the 1. Gregory the 3. Innocentius the 3. Honorius the 3. with many other: yea, Gregory the 1. confesseth, that one Scholasticus made the most part of the Canon. Ergo, it was not deuised by the Apostles. Bellarmine answereth, that Gregory setteth not downe any one man, by this name Scholasticus, but meaneth generally some notable learned man: and in this sense S. Peter, saith he, which was the author of the Canon, may be called Scholasticus, Bellarm. cap. 19.

Ans. This deuise of the Iesuite is rather to be laughed at, then to be confuted: who euer heard before, that S. Peter and the other Apostles were Scholastici, Schoolemen? what is this els, but to set the spirite of God to schoole, in saying that the Apostles being men endued with the holy Ghost, were brought vp in Schooles? Againe, Gregory findeth fault with the said Scholasticus, that in composing the Canon, he would put in his own praiers, and leaue out the Lords praier: but if this Scholasticus had beene Peter, I think Gregory would not haue beene so bolde, as to haue rebuked him.

The Papists.

2. THe Canon of the Masse (they say) is perfect and absolute,140. Error. voide of all error, and therefore not to be changed or abrogated, Concil. Trident. sess. 22. can. 6. Bellarm. cap. 21.

[Page]

The Protestants.

BVt we on the contrary side, more truly and agreeably to Scripture, doubt not to say, that there can be nothing more corrupt, abominable, fuller of all impiety, heresie, lying, then is their idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse: as it shall now more particularly appeare, by the collection of the seuerall errors.

THE ERRORS AND BLASPHEMIES that are to be found in the Canon of the Masse.

1. THe Priest speaking of the bread and wine, thus saith, ‘Which we offer vnto thee for thy holy Catholike Church: and againe afterward, Which we offer for the redemption of their soules.’ What great blasphemie is this, to offer bread & wine for the redemption of the Church, for the which Christ in great loue offered vp himselfe?

2. The Priest saith, Worshipping the memoriall of the Virgine: But Christ instituted the Sacrament to be kept in remembrance of himselfe, and not for the worship of Saints.

3. ‘By whose merites and praiers, namely of the Saints, grant we may be defended.’ Thus the merites and praiers of Christ are excluded.

4. ‘We beseech thee (saith the Priest) to receiue this oblation, which we beseech thee in all things to make blessed:’ Heere the Priest is made a mediator betweene Christ and his Father: desiring God to sanctifie the body & blood of his sonne.

‘5. Who the next day afore he suffered: But the Scripture saith, The same night, For this is my body:’ Heere they haue put in enim, of their owne, and left out, quod pro vobis datur. Such is their boldenes, that they are not ashamed to change the words of our Sauiour Christ.

6. He saith further: ‘The holy bread of eternall life, which vouchsafe thou with a pleasant countenaunce to beholde:’ The bread of eternall life is Christ himselfe, if this be he, how dare ye presume to offer him vp to his Father?

7. ‘As thou didst vouchsafe to accept the righteous giftes of Abel, and the sacrifice of Abraham.’ Heere the sacrifice of Christ is compared to the sacrifice of beastes: and the Priest seemeth to attribute as much efficacie to the one, as to the other.

8. ‘And the holy sacrifice which thy high Priest Melchisedech did offer vnto thee.’ This is a plaine vntruth, and a flat lie, as we haue shewed alredy, that Melchisedech sacrificed bread and wine.

9. ‘Command thou these to be brought by the hands of thy holy Angell, vnto the high altar in heauen.’ What an absurd thing is this, that he should desire that to be carried into heauen which he eateth and deuoureth? And if this be the body of Christ, what need the help of an Angell to carry it vp to heauen? is not Christ able to lift vp his own body? or what need that to be conueied to heauen, which was neuer from thence?

[Page]10. ‘As many of vs as shall receiue thy Sonnes body and blood:’ And yet for the most part none receiue but the Priest: and when the people doe communicate, the wine they haue not: how then can he say, As many?

11. ‘Remember, O Lord, the soules of thy seruants, which rest in the sleepe of peace, and graunt them a place of refreshing and rest:’ Heere is an other error contrary to the Scriptures in praying for the dead, and the praier also is contrary to it selfe: for first he saith, they rest in peace, and yet afterward praieth for their refreshing.

12. ‘Vouchsafe to giue some portion with thy Saints:’ And why doth he not rather pray to be admitted to the fellowship of Christ?

13. ‘Deliuer vs by the blessed intercession of the Virgine:’ What then is become of Christs mediation and intercession?

14. ‘Let this mingling together of the body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ, be vnto me saluation of minde and body:’ Then is not Christs blood shed vpon the Crosse the full sufficient and perfect saluation of mankinde, if there be an other saluation beside.

15. Grant me so worthily to take this holy body and blood, that I may merite to receiue forgiuenes of sinnes: ‘O sinfull man, how canst thou merite that which is Christs onely gift?’

16. ‘Let the priest bow himselfe to the host, saying, I worship thee, I glorifie thee, I praise thee:’ What monstrous Idolatry is this, thus to worship a piece of bread?

17. ‘Let this communion purge vs from sinne:’ If they meane the principall purging of our sinne, so doth Christ onely purge vs, Heb. 1.3. If they vnderstand the instrumental meanes of our purgation, so are we purged and iustified onely by faith, Rom. 3.28.

18. ‘Respect not my sinnes, but the faith of thy Church’: By this reason one may be profited by an others faith: which is contrary to the Scriptures: the Iust shal liue by faith: his owne, and not an others.

19. ‘Let vs worship the signe of the Crosse:’ What I pray you wil not these Idolaters worship?

20. ‘Let this sacrifice which J haue offered, auaile to obtaine remission of sinnes:’ If the Masse be auaileable for this end, wherefore then died Christ?

Thus we see with how many and what great and horrible blasphemies this popish, nay rather, diuelish canon of the Masse is stuffed: indeede it is an epitome and abridgement of Papistrie, the marrow, sinewes, and bones of their idolatrous profession: yea the very darling of the popish Church: it is the very proper badge and marke of a papist. He that hateth the Masse, hateth the whore of Babylon: he that loueth the Masse, cannot loue the truth.

If then I should be demaunded at once, which of all popish blasphemies and heresies I thinke most abominable, contrary to the faith, and to be abhorred of all good christians: (though I know that there are many of this kinde) yet I would redily answere the Masse: the inuention whereof, I am wel assured, cannot be ascribed but to the deuil himselfe, the author of all lies and blasphemies.

[Page]I conclude therefore with that saying of Gregorie, as he said concerning the word, Antichristus: so may I in as good sense of this word, Missa, as it is now vnderstoode of Papists. Si spectes quantitatem vocis, duae sunt syllabae; si pondus iniquitatis, est vniuersa pernicies. If you marke the quantitie of the word, it standeth but of two syllables: but if we respect the waight of iniquitie, it containeth all impietie and vngodlines.

Soli Deo immortali Patri, Filio, cum Spiritu sancto sit honor et imperium sempiternum.

§

§

[Page]

THE THIRD BOOKE OR CENTVRIE, CONTAINING A THIRD HVNDRED OF POPISH ERRORS, AND HERESIES, ABOVT the controuersies of the fiue Popish Sacraments, and of the benefites of our redemption, and concerning the person of Christ,

CONSISTING OF SEVEN SEVERAL CONTROVERSIES THE 14, 15.16, 17, 18, 19, 20. in number.

Jmprinted at London by Thomas Orwin for Thomas Man. 1592.

To the right honorable Sir Robert Cicil Knight, one of her Maiesties most honorable priuie Councell.

[Page]

[Page]

BOth that general loue (right honorable) which the Church of God doth beare to your worthie and honorable Father, for his sincere and sound affection to religion, and the dutifull reuerence which our vniuersitie of Cambridge, and generally the whole company of Students doth owe vnto him as their singular good Patrone, haue moued and caused me at this time, to cōmend this last part of this worke to your Honor his sonne: of whose loue also vnto the Gospell, following your Fathers steppes, we are all perswaded, and conceiue no lesse hope of your honourable fauour to learning: I haue (as your Honor seeth) vndertaken an hard peece of worke, and thrust my shoulders vnder an heauy burthen: for in this worke I haue taken vpon me, to discouer and lay open all popish Heresies, and Errors, to portraite and decipher the whole body of papistrie, to spread abroad the whore of Babylons skirtes, that her filthines may appeare: to vncouer her whorish face, which masked vnder the visour of the Church, and religion: for we may say to them, as Leo Bishop of Rome did sometime to certaine Heretikes: Ecclesiae nomine armamini, sed contra Ecclesiam d [...]micatis: You are armed with the name of the Church, and yet you fight against the Church.

This difficult matter being thus by me enterprised, I haue exposed my selfe to the obloquie and euill speech of two sortes of men: against whom in the defence of this work I must craue your Honors aid and protection. The first sort, is of our hollow harted Countrimen, that haue English faces, but Romish harts, who will forge cauillations (I know) against these labours of mine: and not cease to accuse me of lying and falshood, as not hauing truly and indifferently set down the opinions of the popish Church. To meete then with those slanderous accusations, let such men know that I haue beene most carefull and circumspect in this behalf, throughout this whole work, not to charge [Page] them with any opinions, which I haue not gathered out of their owne writings, and alleadged their owne Authors for them: so that with a good conscience I can protest before God (that one day shall open the secrets of our harts) that to my knowledge I haue not any where vsed any forgerie, cauilling, or deceit, in setting downe their assertions: and I would to God their writers were as free from this fault, and as indifferent in alleadging the sentence of our Church, as we doe deale plainely with them. But as for them, it is a shame to see, how without all feare, the Rhemists in their annotations vpon the new testament, doe bely and slander our Church: I will for example sake note a fewe places.

They charge vs to say, that God is the author of sinne, annot. Math. 13. sect. 2. which blasphemie is further off from vs, then it is from them: though we graunt, that nothing is done in the world beside the will of God, not by his permission onely.

That we affirme all things to be easie in Scripture, annot. Luk. 6. sect 1. whereas we say onely, that the doctrine of faith is plainly declared in Scripture: and deny not, but that many things are therein hard to be vnderstood.

That we should say, that the preaching of the Law, and the iudgement to come, maketh men hypocrites, Act. 24. sect. 2. whereas we holde the preaching of the Law to be necessary to bring men to repentance: but iustification by keeping the Law, which they teach, we vtterly condemne.

That we condemne good workes as sinfull, Pharisaicall, hypocriticall, annot. Rom. 2. sect. 3. whereas we acknowledge them to be the good gifts of God, the fruits of iustification, the way wherein all Christians must walke to saluation: we onely exclude them from being any cause of our iustification before God.

That we allow no fasting, but morall temperance, and spiritual fasting from sinne, Act. 13. sect. 5. whereas we doe acknowledge a Christian vse of fasting and abstinence from all meates and drinkes, for the taming of the flesh, and making vs more fit to pray: not an abstinence from flesh onely, as they do superstitiously practise.

That we should say, man hath no more free will, then a peece of clay, Rom. 9. sect. 7. whereas we onely say, that our free will hath no power or strength at all, to will or doe the thing that good is, without the grace of God.

[Page]That Caluine holdeth Christians children to be so holy, that they neede no baptisme, annot. 1. Cor. 7. sect. 11. Whereas Caluine clean contrary reasoneth thus against the Anabaptists, That children ought therefore to be baptized, because they are holy, as S. Paul saith: And such slanderous accusations they haue published against vs, which would require a seuerall treatise to be set forth at large.

Let indifferent men now iudge (comparing their writings with ours) which of vs hath dealt most vntruly, and vnfaithfully each with other: and whether we haue not more iust occasion to complaine of them, then they of vs. But to let accusations goe, I would desire them rather to listen to the words of exhortation, that they would but indifferently weigh with an equal balance of Christian iudgemēt, what is set downe on both partes in this booke: I trust if they be not wilfull and obstinate in their opinions, that they may in time conceiue some better liking of the truth.

Augustine in a certaine place maketh mention of drunken Polio, Cont. Iust. Pelag. lib. 1 who one a time came from his pots and riotous company to Xenocrates schoole, to laugh the graue Philosopher to scorne: but it fell out to his good farre otherwise: Ad extremum totum se illi, ad quem deridendum venerat, discipulum tradidit: But Polemo being cleane changed by Xenocrates speech, became his Scholler whom he went to scorne: and whereas he came drunke, he returned sober. So I wish that our English recusants would but take vp this and such other bookes into their hands, if it were but to scorne them, God may so worke with them, that their scorning shalbe turned into a loue and lyking of the truth. And I further say vnto them, as Augustine to the Pelagians: Quod dicimus, orent, vt aliquando intelligant, non litigent, vt nunquam intelligant, quod dicimus intendant, non contendant, illuminentur, non calumnientur.

An other sort of men there is beside these (Right honorable) against whom I must arme my selfe: they are such, as are giuen to extenuate,Cont. 2. epist. Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 1▪ disgrace, and discommend the labours of others. Me thinkes I heare them thus to giue out of me. He hath taken a matter in hand aboue his strength, some of his writings are extant already, we know what he can doe, he is like to perform no great matter, and what doth he? he doth but abridge other mens writings, he bringeth nothing of his owne. To these accusations I thus answere: First, I confesse my strēgth to be small of it selfe: yet God by weake meanes may worke great [Page] things. Some Pamphlets of mine, I cōfesse, are abroad vnworthy this learned age, though perhaps befitting the person that wrote them, his time & age, and the occasion considered. But I say rather with August. I count my self in the number of those, qui scribendo proficiunt, et proficiendo scribunt, which profit in writing, and by profiting write. Secondly, cōcerning my labour & paines taken in this work I boast not; he that thinketh it light, let him trie first himselfe before he giue his iudgement: the waight of this burthen he onely knoweth that felt it, and God that gaue strength to beare it: but as for my part, I hunt not for the praise of men, I desire onely to profit the church of God: I had rather men should holde their peace then flatter. It is very well said of him,Augustin lib. 2. de Serm. dom. Si inter quos viuis te recte viuentem non laudauerint, illi in errore sint: si autem laudauerint, tu in periculo es. I had rather other mē should be in a small error, then I in great danger. Epictetus wise saying is much commended: [...], sustine, abstine, sustaine, and abstain I would we might part it betweene vs: sustine hath bene mine, I haue endured the labour▪ I would abstine might be theirs, that they would abstaine from ill speaking.

Lastly, if I haue taken vpon me more then is performed, I haue done foolishly: for that olde verse might haue warned me sufficiently, ‘Sumite materiam vestris, qui scribitis, aptam —viribus.’ But I trust, by the gratious assistance of God, I haue in some smal measure accomplished, that I would, and I say with Augustin, Gratias ago Deo, qui quantum voluit donando, quod voluit, fari promisit, et v [...]i voluit tacendum, linguae terminum posuit. For it is God that gaue me strength to proceede so far as I haue done, and hath set me my boūds, which I should not passe: for no m [...]n may exceede the line and measure of his gifts, 2. Corin. 10.14.

Thus I end, commending these my labours to the charitable and christian iudgement of the Church of God, whom I desire to profit, and to your Honors protection, whom I wish in vertue and honor to tread your Fathers path, and both of you to liue so long as it pleaseth God, to his glory, and the comfort of his Church, and afterward to be euerlastingly rewarded in heauen, through the onely merits of Christ Iesus, to whom be praise for euer.

Your Honors to commaund in the Lord Christ, Andrew Willet.

HERE ENSVE THE CONTROVERSIES OF THE FIVE OTHER POpish Sacraments: Penance, Matrimony, Confirmation, Orders, Extreme Vnction.

[Page]

THE FOVRTEENTH CONTROVERSIE, of popish Penance.

VNto this controuersie belong these questions following,

First, of the name Penance, whether it be rightly giuen.

2. Whether that which they call Penance, but we much better, Repentance, be a Sacrament.

3. Whether there be any other Sacrament of repentance beside Baptisme.

4. Of the essentiall partes of penance, as the matter and forme, and of the 3. material parts, Contrition, Confession, Satisfaction: with an appendix, whether repentance goe before faith.

5. Of Contrition, 1. The cause thereof, 2. The quantity thereof, 3. Whether it be ioyned with faith, 4. Whether it be satisfactory, 5. Whether contrition be necessary for venial sinnes, 6. Of contrition which onely proceedeth of feare.

6. Of Auricular confession, 1. Whether it be necessary, 2. whether it be a diuine ordinance, 3. To whom it is to be made, 4. Of the time.

7. Of satisfaction, with the seuerall branch [...]s of this question.

8. First, of penall iniunctions, 1. Whether necessary, 2. By whom to be imposed. Secondly, of indulgences, 1. Whether there be any such, 2. The groūd of them, 3. In whose power they be.

9. The circumstances of penance, 1. Their habite, 2. Their workes, 3. Of the time of their penance.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF THE name of Penance.

The Papists.

THe Latine word Poenitentia, which they translate, Penance, being deriued of error 1 poena, doth signifie (say they) not onely confession and amendement of [Page] life, but contrition and sorrow for the offence, and painefull satisfaction, Bellarm. lib. 1. cap. 7.

Argum. Math. 11.21. the word must needs signifie, sorrowful, paineful, and satisfactory repentance, Rhemist. Math. 3.2.

The Protestants.

Ans. THe place quoted out of S. Mathew, proueth no such thing: where our Sauiour saith, that Tyre and S [...]don would haue repented in sackecloth and ashes: which is no satisfaction for sinne, but an outward signe of true sorrow for sinne.

Argum. The Greeke word euery where vsed, is [...], which signifieth as Laurentius Valla noteth, emēdationem mentis, the change or amendemēt of the minde; and no such outward satisfactory penance as they pretende. Wherefore it is more fitly englished, Repentance. And although the Latine word Poenitentia doe not properly expresse the Greeke word, to the which resipiscere, & resipiscentia, repentance and to repent do better answere: yet agere poenitentiam, in Latine, is not to doe penance, as the Rhemists translate it, but is all one, as to say, repent, yea, and so the Rhemists themselues read, be penitent. Mark 1.15. and not, doe penance. And Act. 11.18. they translate, poenitentiam, repentance.

De poenitentia, ca. 9. Augustine thus taketh this word poenitentia, Rectè poenitens quicquid sordium contraxit, oportet vt abluat saltem mentis lachrymis. The true penitent man must at the least wash away his sinnes with the teares of the minde. If then repentance be in the soule, what is become of this outward satisfactorie penance?

THE SECOND QVESTION, WHETHER THERE be any Sacrament of penance.

The Papists.

error 2 CHrist (they say) instituted the Sacrament of penance, when he breathed vpon his Apostles after his resurrection, and said vnto them: Receiue ye the holy Ghost: whose sinnes ye remit, they are remitted: whose sinnes ye retaine, they are retained. Ioh. 20.22. The faculty of the Priesthoode cōsisting in remitting of sinnes, is heere bestowed vpon the Apostles, Rhemist. annot. Ioh. 20. sect. 5. Herevpon they are bolde to conclude, that penance is truely and properly a Sacrament, Concil. Trident. sess. 14. canon. 1. Bellarm. lib. 1. de poenitent. cap. 10.

Ans. 1. If the power of remission of sinnes were heere first instituted, how could the Apostles baptize or minister the Lords supper before, without power to remit sinnes to the penitent? Christ therefore in this place doth but renewe and confirme the authority of their Apostleship, which was granted to them before, Math. 18.18.

[Page]Secondly, this power here giuen, is principally exercised by preaching of the word of God, and denouncing publikely or priuately the promises of God, for remission of sinnes to the penitent, or the threates and iudgement of God, in binding the sinnes of the obstinate and impenitent: So Luke 20.24. Christ commandeth his Apostles to preach repentance and remission of sinnes in his name.

Thirdly, we confesse also a iudiciary power of the keies, in binding and loosing, which is exercised in ecclesiasticall discipline, in punishng and absoluing according to the word of God: as the incestuous person was bound, when he was deliuered vp to Sathan, 1. Cor. 5.5. he was loosed againe, when he was restored to the Church, 2. Cor. 2.7. But neither this nor the other was commended to the Church as a Sacrament.

The Protestants.

TRue repentance we doe acknowledge, which is a dying to sinne, and a walking in newnes of life, Rom. 6.4. But a Sacrament of repentance we finde none in Scripture, and therefore we deny it.

Argum. 1. In euery Sacrament there is an externall sensible element, as water in Baptisme, bread and wine in the Lords Supper: but there is none in their penance: Ergo, no Sacrament.

Bellarm. answereth, that the words of absolution and confession, are the outward signes in penance: it is not necessary it should be a visible signe: it is a sensible signe being audible, cap. 11.

Ans. 1. There must be the word beside the element: as Augustine saith, Accedat verbum ad elementum, Let the word be ioyned to the element: and it maketh a Sacrament: the word it selfe cannot be the element: for the same thing cannot both sanctifie and be sanctified. And if the audible word be the element, by this reason the preaching of the word also shalbe a Sacrament.

Argu. 2. There was repentance and absolution of sinnes both, in the olde testament: for both Dauid confessed and was sory for his sinne, and the Prophet Nathan pronounced forgiuenes from God, 2. Sam. 12.13. so likewise Iohn preached repentance for remission of sinnes, and the people came and confessed their sinnes: heere were all things necessary for true repentance, yet was it no Sacrament all this while, as they themselues confesse, which they holde to be instituted after Christs resurrection, Trident. concil. sess. 14. cap. 1. Why then should it be rather a Sacrament now, then before?

Augustine thus writeth, Sacramentum ideo dicitur, quia aliud videtur, aliud intelligitur: It is called a Sacrament, because one thing is seene,Serm. de baptis. ad infantes. another vnderstoode. And then he saith, Quid tale aut ipsi vident, aut alijs queunt ostendere in eo, quod sacramentum poenitentiae vocant: But neither doe they see, or can shew to others, any such visible signe in that which they call the Sacrament of repentance Heere Augustine denieth repentance to be a Sacrament, because it hath no visible signe.

[Page]

THE THIRD QVESTION, WHETHER THERE be any other Sacrament of repentance, beside Baptisme.

The Papists.

error 3 BAptisme serueth onely, they say, for remission of sinnes done before: for sinnes committed after Baptisme, the Sacrament of penance, which is a distinct Sacrament from Baptisme, is appointed for a remedy: and therefore is fitly called,Secunda tabula post naufragiū. The second table of refuge after shipwracke, Concil. Trident. sess. 14. canon. 2.

Argum. S. Iohn saith, If we confesse our sinnes, he is faithfull to forgiue vs: 1. Epist. 1.19. he saith not, that by the memory of Baptisme, but by confession, which is a part of penance, our sinnes are forgiuen, Bellarm. cap. 13.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, we say not, that by the bare memory or remembrance of baptisme, sinnes after committed are done away: but that the sacramentall force of Baptisme doth extend it selfe to our whole life, that is, to be a seale vnto vs of remission of all our sinnes in the blood of Cbrist. Secondly, so that confession of our sinnes is not a taking away of the force of baptisme, but a more effectual applying thereof, as the people which were baptized by Iohn confessed also their sinnes.

Argu. We acknowledge no other Sacrament of repentance, but baptisme: for so the scripture calleth it, The baptisme of repētance for remission of sinnes. Marke 1.4.

De fide ad Petrum. cap. 29.So Augustine calleth Baptisme, Sacramentum fidei, et poenitentiae, the Sacrament of faith and repentance: what neede we then seeke for a new Sacrament of repentance, which cannot any where be found in Scripture?

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, OF THE essentiall partes of Penance.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE MATTER and forme of popish penance.

The Papists.

error 4 THe forme of this Sacrament, say they, consisteth in the words of absolution, pronounced by the Minister, the matter thereof is the contrition, confession, and satisfaction of the partie penitent, Concil. Tridentin. sess. 14. cap. 3. Bellarm. lib. 1. cap. 15.

[Page]

The Protestants.

NEither is their penance a Sacrament, neither can these be partes of a Sacrament.

Argum. 1. In euery Sacrament there are two things required: res terrena, and actio externa, the earthly thing or element, as is water in Baptisme, and the externall action: neither doth the element alone, nor the action alone make a sacrament: as in baptisme there is both water, which is the matter: and the washing, that is the action. Wherefore seeing in their penance there is nothing but the action of the Minister, and the action of the receiuer, it can be no sacramēt.

Argum. 2. The partes of euery sacrament, as the forme, the matter, must be instituted of Christ: But this are they not able to shew for the forme and matter of penance, namely, the institution of Christ: Ergo, it is no sacrament.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS QVESTION, OF the three materiall partes of popish Penance, contrition, confession, satisfaction.

The Papistes.

THese three (they say) are the true and proper partes of penance, contrition,error 5 and painefull sorrow of the hart, confession to the Priest, and satisfaction to God for our sinnes, Concil. Trident. sess. 14. can. 4. Rhemist. Math. 3. sect. 2.

Argu. Contrition is proued, Psal. 51.17. A contrite hart is a sacrifice to God. Confession, Math. 3. They were baptized in Iordane confessing their sinnes. Satisfaction▪ Math. 11.21. They would haue repented long agoe in sackecloth and ashes, Bellarm. cap. 19.

Ans. 1. That godly sorrow and contrition of the hart, is necessary to true repentance, we neuer will deny, but that this sorrow is any satisfaction to Gods iustice, we abhorre it as a monstrous blasphemy. Secondly, Confession and acknowledgement of our sinnes vnto God, and in some cases, where the conscience is not satisfied, to the Minister or some other faithfull man, we do willingly graunt: but that it is necessary to make generall confession of sinnes to the Priest, that place proueth it not: for Iohn had had shriuing worke enough for many yeeres, to heare euery mans particular confession: Thirdly, that sitting in sackecloth and ashes, was no satisfaction for sinne, but an outward signe of true sorrow for sinne.

The Protestants.

WE doe make two partes onely of true repentance, according to the scriptures, that is, the mortifying of the olde man with his works, by dying vnto [Page] sinne: vnto the which belongeth true sorrow, and contrition of hart for our sinnes, 2. Corinth. 7.11. acknowledgement and confession thereof before God, 2. Sam. 12.13. and a perfect hatred and detestation of sinne, and indignation with our selues for the same, 2. Corinth. 7.11. The other part is the renewing and quickening of the new man in vs, which consisteth partly in setting our consciences at peace with God, our sinnes being forgiuen vs, Rom. 5.1. and working in vs a zeale, studie, care and desire of newnes of life, 2. Corin. 7.11. these two partes onely we finde in Scripture.

Argum. Isai. 1.17. Cease to doe euill: Learne to doe good: we must die vnto sinne and walke in newnes of life, Rom. 6.4. Put off the olde man, put on the new, Coloss. 3.9.

Serm. 66. Augustine saith, Fructus est dignus poenitentia, transacta deflere peccata, & ea iterum non agere, This is true repentance, to lament for sinnes past, and not to commit the same againe: though this be no perfect definition of repentance, yet we see that both confession and satisfaction are excluded.

AN APPENDIX, WHETHER REpentance goe before faith.

The Papists.

error 6 THeir opinion is, that repentance goeth before iustification by faith, and that it is a way rather vnto faith and iustification in the remission of sinnes: poenitentia est via ad remissionem peccatorum, et prior iustificatione, Bellarm, cap. 19.

Argum. Act. 2.38. Repent and be baptized in the name of Christ for the remission of sinnes: Remission of sinnes followeth repentance: Ergo iustification also and faith, Bellarm.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, this place proueth not, that remission of sinnes followeth repentāce, because baptisme was giuen after repentance, for Baptisme doth not giue remission of sinnes, but it is a seale onely and confirmation of our faith, in the remission of sinnes. 2. Neither is remission of sinnes obtained by our repentance: but we are already, being once called, iustified before God, by the remission of our sinnes, and imputation of the righteousnes of Christ, Rom. 4.7.8. By repentance and other workes that follow, our calling is made sure, 2. Peter 1.10. and our saluation finished vnto our selues, Philip. 2.10. and our faith perfited.

Argum. Iustification goeth before sanctification: for this is the fruite of the other: but repentance is part of our sanctification, renouation, or regeneration, being called by S. Paul, A walking in newnes of life, Rom. 6.4. Ergo, it [Page] followeth and commeth after our iustification. And seeing without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb. 11.6: how should our repentance be acceptable to God, vnlesse it proceeded of faith? faith then is initiate and begun in vs before repentance, which we denie not, by true repentance and other fruites of sanctification, to be daily strengthened and encreased.

Augustine sayth, No man is iustified but by the grace of Iesus Christ: ‘Non solum remissione peccatorum, sed priùs ipsius inspiratione fidei & timoris dei, donec sanet omnes languores nostros. Not onely by remission of sinnes, but first, by inspiring into vs faith and the feare of God, til he haue cured all our maladies.’ He saith (as we heare) that faith is inspired before we haue remission of sinnes and the feare of God, without the which there is no true repentance.

THE FIFT QVESTION, OF CONTRITION: the first part of their penance.

THere are certaine poynts which we doe agree vpon.

1. We grant, that true contrition and sorrow of the heart is necessarie vnto repentance, and that it standeth very well with the libertie of the Gospell, and is profitable for Christians, 2. Corinth. 7.10.

2. That true contrition is ioyned both with a full hatred and detestation of sinne committed, 1. Corinth. 11.31. We must iudge and condemne our selues, as also with a full purpose to amend our liues, Act. 11.23.

Let vs then now see what difference of opinion there is betweene vs concerning contrition.

The Papists.

1. THey hold that contrition is neither wholly of mans free wil, nor yet wholly of God: but that man by his free will, holpen of God, is able to repent:error 7 so that he doth only, Deo adiuuante, poenitere, He is brought to repentance, God onely helping and assisting him, Bellarm. de poenitent. lib. 2. cap. 3.

The Protestants.

TRue contrition of heart, as all other good thoughts in vs, as they are good, come onely of God: our cogitations indeed are our owne, but all the goodnes of them is the meere gift of God, Iam. 1.17.

Argum. 1. Timoth. 2.25. If at any time God wil giue them repentance: Repentance thē is the gift of God. And Augustine writing vpon these very words, saith, Quantumlibet praebeat poenitentiam, nisi ipse dederit, quis agit poenitentiam? Although he neuer so much giue occasion of repentance, yet vnlesse he bestowe vpon vs the full gift of repentance, no man is able to repent. Thus he plainly distinguisheth betweene praebere poenitentiam, to offer occasion to repent: as he proueth out of S. Paul, Rom. 2.4. The bountifulnes of God calleth thee to repentance: and dare poenitentiam, to giue or grant repentance. But if God should [Page] onely helpe our free will, and worke together with vs to repentance, and not doe all alone himselfe, he should rather praebere, then dare poenitentiam: offer occasion by stirring of vs vp to repentance, then grant vs repentance it selfe, which were contrary to the Apostle.

The Papists.

error 8 2. THey teach, that contrition ought to be perfect, because it must proceede from the loue of God, which is the most perfect kind of loue, Catechis. Roman. pag. 439: and that the greatnes of the griefe ought to be answerable to the quantitie of the sinne: So they conclude, that a man shall neuer knowe when he is sufficiently contrite, Thom. Aquinas: for he must be contrite for euery great sinne he hath committed, Tileman Heshus. loc. 9. de poenitent. err. 25.27.28.32.

The Protestants.

WHat is this els but a plaine doctrine of desperation? for when is a man able so perfectly to be contrite, as his loue toward God ought to be perfect? or how can his sorrowe be equiualent to the waight of his sinnes? or can a man remember all his sinnes, that he should be sorie for?

Argum. 1. The sorrowe of Christians is not infinite or vncertaine, but it is determined and limited. Saint Paul sayth, That he should not be swallowed vp of too much heauines, 2. Corinth. 2.7. And againe, My Epistle made you sorie, though for a season, 2. Corinth. 7.8.

Augustine sayth, Ista est vera poenitentia, quando quis sic conuertitur, vt non reuertatur: De tempor. in natali. serm. 3. This is true repentance, when a man doth so turne vnto God, that he returne not vnto sinne. When a man therefore hath in this manner repented, he may be sure that he hath mourned sufficiently: It is therefore vntrue, that a man is vncertaine when he hath sorrowed enough.

The Papists.

error 9 3. COntrition (they say) as it is not altogether without hope to obtaine mercie: so can it not haue certitudinem remissionis peccatorum, a certaintie or vndoubted assurance of remission of sinnes, Concil. Trident. sess. 6. cap. 9. Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 2.

The Protestants.

GOdly sorrowe and contrition bringeth ioy and comfort to the soule in the end, with vndoubted assurance of the forgiuenes and remission of sinnes.

Argum. 1. Godly sorrowe worketh in the true penitent person, a cleering of the mind, 2. Corinth. 7.11: but the soule and conscience cannot be cleered and set at rest, vnlesse wee bee perswaded that our sinnes are forgiuen vs, Ergo.

[Page]Argum. 2. All hope is certaine, and bringeth vndoubted assurance, and therefore it is called the anchor of the soule, Heb. 6.19. Wherefore either contrition is voyd of hope altogether, (which they will not grant) or if it haue any hope, it is sure and stable, and worketh a full perswasion and assurance of the mercie of God.

Augustine sayth, Petrus mox à Domino indulgentiam accepit, De tempor. serm. 66. qui amarissimè fleuit trinae negationis culpam: Peter straight way receiued pardon and indulgence, when he had most bitterly bewayled the sinne of his threefold deniall of Christ. How could Peter immediatly haue felt and receiued the remission of that great sinne, if the Lord had not assured his conscience thereof?

The Papists.

4. THey make contrition a part of satisfaction for our sinnes, and to be a cause error 10 of iustification and remission of sinnes, not onely in disposing and preparing of vs thereunto, but in that thereby we verely obtaine remission of our sinnes, Bellarm. lib. 2. de poenitent. cap. 12.

Arg. Luk. 7.47. Many sinnes are forgiuen her, because she loued: Not onely faith, but loue or charitie obtaineth remission of sinnes, Bellarm. ibid. Rhemist. in hunc locum.

The Protestants.

Ans. THe argument is not from the cause to the effect, but from the effect to the cause: for Christ doth not reason thus, she loued much, therefore many sinnes are forgiuen her: but contrariwise, Many sinnes are forgiuen her, therefore she loueth much. As the next words declare: to whom little is remitted, he loueth little. And our Sauiour sayth in plaine words in the last verse, That her faith had saued her, whereof her loue was an effect.

Argum. That the contrition of the heart is no meanes of our iustification, nor a meriting cause or procuring of remission of sinnes: Saint Paul sheweth, Rom. 4.5, 6. To him that beleeueth faith is counted for righteousnes: And Dauid declareth the blessednesse of that man, to whom God imputeth righteousnes without workes: It is faith then onely that obtaineth remission of sinnes: and a man is iustified without any respect had to his workes. Therefore neither contrition, nor any other worke inward or outward, procureth remission of sinnes, but faith onely is the meane.

So Augustine sayth, ‘Opera sequuntur iustificatum, non praecedunt iustificandum: Workes followe a man alreadie iustified, they goe not before to iustification, De fide & operib. cap. 14.’ Therefore the worke of contrition is not auaileable to iustification.

The Papists.

5. COntrition (they say) is not necessarie for veniall or small offences, neither error 11 is a man bound thereunto, So. lib. 4. distinct. 17. articul. 3.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THis assertion is cleane contrarie to scripture: for the Prophet Dauid praieth not onely to be kept from presumptuous sinnes, Psalm. 19.13. but euen to be cleansed from his secret faults, vers. 12.

Augustine agreeth: ‘Non solum propter vitae huius ignorantiam, sed etiam propter ipsum puluerem mundi huius, qui pedibus adhaerescit, quotidianam habere debemus poenitentiam: Not only for the ignorances of this life, but euen for that drosse and dust of the world, which hangeth vpon our feete, we ought daily to repent vs.’ He meaneth the lesser and smaller scapes of our life.

The Papists.

error 12 6. THere is a kind of cōtrition that proceedeth only from the feare of punishmēt, when a man doth leaue sinning, not for any loue or delight he hath in God, but onely for feare of damnation: Euen this contrition also is good and profitable: yet this seruile feare is at length cleane driuen out by charitie. But there remaineth still in the godly an awe and feare of God, and his iudgements, with mistrust, and feare of hell and damnation: as Math. 10. Feare him that can cast bodie and soule into hell, Rhemist. Iohn. 4. sect. 6. Bellarm. lib. 2.17.

The Protestants.

FIrst, we acknowledge that the feare of punishment is necessarie in the beginning, to make a way for true loue to enter, as the bristle or needle (as Augustine sayth) maketh roome for the thred to enter. We also confesse, that there is a continuall feare and reuerence of God in the godly, such as children haue of their parents: but as for any mistrust or feare of hell and damnation, after loue be once entred, and we made the children of God, which breedeth terror and anxietie of conscience, it is cleane expelled, and thrust out of the doores by loue.

Argum. So saith the Apostle, There is no feare in loue: but perfect loue casteth out feare, and maketh vs to haue confidence in the day of iudgement, 1. Ioh. 4.17, 18. But he that feareth damnation and is afraid of the day of iudgement, cannot haue confidence in that day. So Augustine: Quid dicimus de illo, qui caepit timere diem iudicij? si perfecta in illo esset charitas, non timeret? What say we to him, that feareth the day of iudgement? if loue were perfect in him, he would not feare it?

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF AVRICVLAR Confession, the second part of penance.

The Papists.

error 13 NOne can rightly seeke for absolution at the Priests hands, vnlesse they confesse particularly at the least all their mortall sinnes, whether they be committed [Page] in mind, heart, will and cogitation onely, or in word, and worke, with all the necessarie circumstances and differences of the same, Rhemist. Ioh. 20. sect. 5. And this sacramentall confession, as they call it, must be made secretly to the Priest, Concil. Trident. sess. 14. can. 6.

Argum. 1. This wonderfull power of remitting and retaining of sinnes, which was giuen to the Apostles and their successors, Ioh. 20.22. were giuen them in vaine, if no man were bound to seeke for absolution at their hands: which can not be had of them without distinct vtterance to them of our sinnes: for they cannot rule the cases of conscience, vnlesse they haue exact knowledge and cogitation of their sinnes, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. 1. God hath not made his ministers in Christs stead iudges of cases of conscience, as though there were in them an actual power to remit and absolue sinnes: but their office is onely to declare and set forth vnto all penitent persons, the promises of God for remission of sinnes, & the seueritie of Gods iudgement against impenitent persons: which is especially performed in the preaching and applying of the word either publiquely or priuately: as S. Paul calleth the Gospell committed vnto him, The word of reconciliation, 2. Cor. 5.16.

2. A man therefore may by their ministerie, which are the preachers of reconciliation, finde remission of sinnes, without a particular declaration thereof: neither is it necessarie for them to haue so exact a knowledge of our sinnes, seeing they are not absolute iudges of the conscience, but the ministers and ambassadors of reconciliation, 2. Corinth. 5.20.

3. And Ministers are not to stay while suite is made vnto them for their helpe, but they ought to exhort and desire men to be reconciled to God by their ministerie.

Argum. 2. As the Priests in the law had onely authoritie to discerne the leprosie of the people, and therefore Christ sendeth the lepers to the Priest, Luk. 17.14. so men must reueale the spirituall leprosie of sinne to the Priest, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. First, the leprosie was not healed by the Priest, but onely declared to be healed: so sinnes are declared to be forgiuen by the Priest, not properly forgiuē. Secondly, the Priest receiued not knowledge of all diseases, but of this, that was contagious: therefore it would not followe hereupon, that all sinnes are to be confessed to the Priest: but such as are notorious, where publique confession is by Church discipline inioyned: and such confession we denie not. Thirdly, the argument followeth not from the Priests of the law, to the Ministers of the Gospell: for the Priesthood of the law is translated wholly vnto Christ, who hath all knowledge to discerne, and power to heale our spirituall diseases.

The Protestants.

COnfession of sinnes, such as the scripture alloweth, we doe acknowledge: as namely these foure kinds: There are priuate confessions, either to God alone, as Daniel confesseth, 9.4. or for the easing of our conscience, to man also, [Page] as to him whom we haue offended, Math. 5.24. Or to any other faithfull man, the Minister or some other, that we may be holpen and comforted by our mutuall prayers, Iam. 5.16. There are also two kinds of publique confession, either of the whole congregation together, Nehem. 9.3. or of some one or more, that make publique confession of their sinne, for the satisfying of the congregation, whom they haue offended: which belongeth to Ecclesiasticall discipline, 2. Corinth. 2.6. But this particular confession of all sinnes, yea of them that are secret, and to none but the Priest, is an Antichristian yoke and too heauie for Christians to beare.

Arg. 1. It is not necessarie to make confession at all vnto men: the Prophet Dauid confessed onely vnto God, Against thee O Lord onely haue I sinned, Psal. 51.4. Augustine also sayth, ‘Quid mihi cum hominibus vt audiant confessiones meas, quasi ipsi sanaturi sint languores meos? What haue men to doe to heare my confessions, as though they were able to heale my sores? Confess. lib. 10.3.’

Argum. 2. If a man otherwise cannot finde ease of conscience, but will open his sinnes to men: it is not alwaies necessarie he should seeke to the Minister, though it be most cōueniēt, if he be a fit man: any other faithful godly man may serue: for so the Apostle biddeth vs, Acknowledge our faults, not to the priest, but one to another, Iam. 5.16. Whereupon Augustine writeth, ‘Peccata nostra debemus non solùm Deo sed etiam sanctis & Deum timentibus confiteri: We must confesse our sinnes not onely to God, but to men also that feare God’: He sayth not, Sacerdotibus, onely to the Priests, Homil. 12.

Argum. 3. Such a particular enumeration of sinnes is not necessarie, neither is it possible: It sufficeth, where our sinnes are kept from our sight, to say with the Prophet, Cleanse me from my secret sinnes, Psal. 19.12. Augustine sayth, Quot habes in corde compunctiones facinorum, tot habe illic punctiones confessionum: Looke how many sinnes doe pricke thy conscience, so must thy confession be. It is an vncomfortable doctrine to teach men to labour to remember all their sinnes, and to make a particular catalogue of them: they haue worke enough to be eased of those sinnes that lye heauie on the heart.

AN APPENDIX OF OTHER CIRCVMSTANCES of Auricular confession.

The Papists.

1. THis order and custome of Confession, they hold to be a diuine ordinance, error 14 no humane tradition, Concil. Trid sess. 14. can. 6.8.

The Protestants.

THey are neuer able to shewe that it had any diuine institution: but it was a meere deuise and inuention of men. First, we reade that Nectarius a good Bishop of Constantinople, did abrogate this custome of Confession vpon this occasion, [Page] which had before time been vsed in that Church: for it was found out, that a certaine woman of the citie, vnder this pretence of confession, had vnlawfull companie with the priest to whom she confessed: whereupon the good man abolished that custome, seeing more harme then good to come by it.Beza antith. Pap. cap. 7. And this act of his was approued by that famous preacher Chrysostome, who succeeded him in that see: but if it had been the ordinance of God, it ought not for some abuse to haue been abolished.

Augustine also sayth, Si deest sacerdos, confiteatur proximo: De poenit. cap. 10. If a priest cannot be had, let a man confesse to his neighbour: Ergo, to confesse to a priest, is no certaine ordinance of God: for then might it not be changed.

The Papists.

2. IT is necessarie that euery man should confesse to his owne parish priest,error 15 Thom. ex Tileman. Heshus. loc. 7. err. 46.

The Protestants.

YEa, but Augustine sayth, Sacerdos, vt perfectus medicus, primùm sciat curare peccata sua, & tum detergere aliena: ‘The priest as a cunning phisition, must first know how to cure his owne sinnes, before he can helpe another, De salutaribus docum. cap. 50. And in another place, Quaerat sacerdotem scientem ligare & soluere, ne ambo cadant in foueam: Let him seeke a priest that knoweth how to bind and loose, lest both fall into the ditch, De poenitent. cap. 10.’ But such an one cannot be had in euery parish: for many times the parish priest is worse then he that commeth to be confessed: such an one, Augustine sayth, is not to bee taken, and therefore men should not in that case bind themselues to their popish priest.

The Papists.

3. IT is enough for men once a yeere in the time of Lent, to confesse themselues,error 16 Concil. Trid. sess. 14. can. 8.

The Protestants.

AVgustine sayth contrarie, Non tantum laici, sed etiam sacerdotes vna die esse non debent sine poenitentia: Not onely lay men, but not priests ought to be one day without repentance, In Apocal. hom. 2. His reason is, because they can not be one day without sinne.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, of satisfaction.

THis question containeth these parts: First, whether the sinne being forgiuen, there remaine any punishment.

2. Whether the temporall punishment of this life may be redeemed by good workes.

[Page]3. Whether the wrath of God may be satisfied for sinne, and the punishment due vnto the same.

4. Whether one man may satisfie for another: of these now in their order.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE PVNISHment remaine, the sinne being once pardoned.

The Papists.

error 17 THey doe affirme, that it may stand with the iustice of God to forgiue the sinne committed, & yet reserue the punishment, Concil. Triden. sess. 14. can. 14. Argum. The Lord forgaue vnto Dauid the sinne of adulterie and murder, which he had committed, yet he punished him in the death of his child, 2. Sam. 12.13.14. Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2.

The Protestants.

Ans. THat crosse was laid vpon Dauid, not as a punishment of his sinne, but as a fatherly correction or chastisement, to exercise him & make him more carefull for the time following: as Augustine sayth, writing vpon the same example:De peccator. merit. & remiss. lib. 2 34. Subsecutus est illius comminationis effectus, vt pietas hominis in illa humilitate exerceretur, at (que) probaretur: The effect of the threatning immediatly followed, that Dauids godlines might thereby be tried and proued: He saith not, that Dauid might thereby be punished.

Argum. Christ sayd to the sicke of the palsie, Mark. 2.5. Sonne, thy sinnes are forgiuen thee. Whereby our Sauiour would haue them to vnderstand, that the sinne being once forgiuen, the sicknes of the bodie, which was the punishment of sinne, could not continue: for the cause being remoued, the effect ceaseth.

The afflictions of this life are the louing corrections of God to admonish vs, not plagues to punish vs: as Augustine sayth well, Tota miseria generis humani dolor medecinalis, non sententia poenalis: The miserie of man is but a medicinall griefe, not a sentence of punishment: In Psalm. 138.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER THE TEMPOrall punishment of this life may be redeemed by good workes.

The Papists.

error 18 THat we may redeeme and buy out as it were the punishments due to sinne in this life, by other good works, it is their generall sentence: and they proue it thus.

Argum. Daniel sayd to Nabuchadnezzar the King, Redeeme thy sinnes by righteousnes, and thine iniquities by shewing mercie to the poore, cap. 4.24. Bellarm. cap. 3.

[Page]

The Protestants.

Ans. THe text is rather thus to be read: Breake off thy sinnes by righteousnes: that is, leaue off to doe euill: as it is by Tremellius translated more agreeably to the Hebrue: for if redemption be here properly vnderstood, it would follow that men may redeeme not onely the punishment of their sinnes, but the sinnes themselues: and so take Christs office out of his hand.

By true and faithfull repentance, and other good works proceeding of faith, we may auoyde Gods heauie iudgement due to our sinnes, yet not for the merit or satisfaction of any worke, but through the merites onely of Christ.

Argum. Looke how our sins are forgiuen, so is the punishment due vnto them: but our sins are forgiuen vs freely in Christ, Ierem. 31.34. Ergo, so is the punishment.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER A MAN may truely satisfie the wrath of God, for the punishment due vnto sinne.

The Papists.

IT is not a sufficient satisfaction, to beleeue that Christ hath abundantly satisfied error 19 for vs; neither yet is it enough to amend and correct our liues: but God also must be satisfied for our sinnes, by the punishment and chastisement of our selues, as by affliction laid vpon vs by God, or penance enioyned by the priest, or by praier, fasting, almes deedes, which we doe take vp our selues, Concil. Trid. sess. 14. can. 13. Rhemist. Matth. 11.21.

Argum. 1. Matth. 3.8. Bring forth fruites worthie repentance: he preacheth satisfaction by doing worthie fruites of penance, as fasting, praier, almes, and the like, Rhemist.

Ans. Fruites worthie of repentance, are no satisfaction for sinne, but arguments of true repentance, effectes, not any part thereof.

Argum. 2. Iudge your selues, that you bee not iudged, 1. Corinth. 11.31. We must punish our selues according to the waight of the sinnes past, Rhemist. And againe saith the Apostle, What great punishment hath it wrought in you! 2. Corinth. 7.11. This is nothing else but the satisfactorie punishment for our sinnes, Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 8.

Ans. The Apostle meaneth nothing else, but an hartie and earnest sorrowe for our sinnes, whereby we doe iudge and condemne, and as it were punish our selues, yet wee are farre from making any satisfaction hereby for our sinnes: as Augustine saith, ‘Omnis iniquitas puniatur necesse est, aut à poenitente homine, aut vindicante Deo: vis non puniat? puni tu: antequam ipse intendat vt puniat, tu confitendo praeueni & puni. In Psal. 58. All sinne must needes be punished either of man himselfe repenting, or God reuenging: if thou wilt not haue him punish, punish [Page] thou, before he intend to punish: preuent him by thy confession, and punish thy selfe.’ So then this punishment of our selues is nothing else, but true repentance and confession of our sinnes.

The Protestants.

THat satisfaction ought to be made vnto men, either by restitution, as Zacheus restored that which hee had wrongfully gotten: or by reconciling our selues to those, whom wee haue offended, as Matth. 5.24. wee doe willingly grant: but that the wrath of God may be appeased and satisfied for our sinnes, or the punishment due vnto the same by any worke of ours, it is a great blasphemie, and cleane contrarie to the course of Scripture.

Argum. 1. That it is sufficient to returne vnto God by true repentance and amendement of life, without any satisfaction, either for our sinne, or the punishment of sinne: the Prophet Ezechiel sheweth, where speaking of the conuersion of a wicked man, he saith, His iniquities shal no more be mentioned, or laid to his charge, chap. 18.22. But if after the sinne remitted, there should remaine some punishment behinde, his sinnes should still bee remembred and mentioned: there is therefore no satisfaction for the punishment of sinne, because none remaineth.

Argum. 2. Isai. 43.25. I am he that putteth away thine iniquities for mine owne sake. Likewise, 53.4. He hath borne our infirmities, and carried our sorrowes: the chastisement of our peace was vpon him, and with his stripes are we healed. God of his free mercie doth forgiue our sinne: Christ also hath fully satisfied for vs: Ergo, there is no satisfaction in vs: wee are made whole by his stripes, and not our owne.

Argum. 3. Our praiers, fastings, almes, and what workes soeuer, are neither meritorious, nor satisfactorie: for when we haue done all, we are but vnprofitable seruants, and we did no more then was our duetie, Luk. 17.10.

In Matth. serm. 16. De poenitent. cap. 10 Augustine saith, Peccasti in fratrem? fac satis, & sanatus es. Hast thou offended thy brother? satisfie him, and thou art healed. Qui multos offendit peccando, placare multos debet satisfaciendo: He that hath offended many in sinning, must appease many by satisfying them. These kindes of satisfaction both publikely and priuately we acknowledge: but satisfaction to God, neither hee, nor we acknowledge. Lachrymas lego, satisfactionem non lego: I reade of Peters teares, saith he,De tempor. serm. 117. but of no satisfaction.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER ONE man may satisfie for another.

The Papists.

error 20 SAtisfactorie workes are not onely profitable to the sufferers themselues, but also for other their fellow members in Christ, and one may beare the burthen, and discharge the debt of another, Rhemist. Coloss. 1. sect. 4.

[Page]Argum The passions of the Saints are suffered for the common good of the whole bodie, as Saint Paul saith: Now I reioyce in my sufferings for you, and fulfill that which is behinde of the afflictions of Christ for his bodies sake, which is the Church, Coloss. 1.24. Here Saint Pauls afflictions are meritorious and satisfactorie for the Colossians, Rhemist.

Ans. The Apostles sufferings were for the glorie of God, and the confirmation of their faith: but therefore it followeth not, that they were meritorious, either for himselfe, or others. His sufferings are said to be Christs, who suffereth in his members, not that they receiue any force from Christ to bee satisfactorie, but because hee was made like and conformable by his sufferings vnto Christ, Rom. 8.17. Augustine also thus expoundeth the place, Non dixit, pressurarum mearum, sed Christi, quia membrum erat Christi: He saith not, of my sufferings,Tract. in Iohan. 10 [...]. but of Christs, because hee was a member of Christ: they are not then the sufferings of Christ, as though they receiued a satisfactorie power from Christ: but because hee was a member of Christ, who suffered together in and with his members.

The Protestants.

NOne can merite or satisfie for themselues, much lesse for others: neither can one man beare the burthen, or pay the debt of another mans sinne.

Argum. The Scripture saith, The soule that sinneth, the same shall die, Ezech. 18.20. Euery man shall beare his own burthen, Galath. 6.5. None can redeeme his brother, or giue a price to God for him, Psalm. 49.8.

Augustine vpon those words, Iohn. 16.23. Whatsoeuer yee shall aske in my name, he will giue it you: ‘Exaudiuntur quippe omnes sancti pro seipsis: non autem exaudiuntur pro omnibus, vel amicis, vel inimicis, &c. The Saints are heard praying for themselues:Tract in Iohan. 102. but they are not heard praying for all their friends or enemies, because it is not said simplie, He will giue, but, He will giue to you.’ Ergo, much lesse can they satisfie for others, if their praiers bee not heard alwaies for others.

THE EIGHT QVESTION, OF INDVLgences and penall iniunctions.

THE FIRST PART: WHETHER PEnall and painefull workes are necessarie vnto repentance.

The Papists.

NOt onely amendement, and ceasing to sinne, or repentance in heart before error 21 God is alwaies enough to obteine full reconcilement, but there must bee outward penaltie, correction, and chastisement beside, Rhemist. 2. Corinth. 2. sect. 2.

[Page]Argum. The incestuous person was rebuked of many, 2. Corinth. 2.6. which word implieth, beside his inward repentance, outward correction and chastisement.

The Protestants.

Ans. WEe acknowledge, that in notorious sinnes, and offensiue to the Church, as this of the young mans was, inward repentance is not sufficient, but that after sharpe discipline, by the outward testification of sorrow, and publike confession, satisfaction must bee made to the Church: but it followeth not that this course should be taken for all sinnes, which a man repenteth him of. And yet wee graunt that outward signes of our sorrowe are alwaies necessarie in true repentance, not as satisfactorie meanes to redeeme our sins, but onely as infallible tokens and effects of our repentance. As Augustine saith, Satis durus est, cuius mentis dolorem oculi carnis nequeunt declarare: Hee is hard harted, the griefe of whose minde, the eyes of his flesh doe not shew forth, de poenitent. cap. 9.

Argum. There are but two essentiall partes of repentance, and true conuersion vnto God: To turne from our sinnes, and leade an holy life. So saith the Lord by the Prophet, If the wicked will returne from his sinnes and keepe all my statutes, Ezech. 18.21. This is all God requireth, without any other penall workes: wherefore ceasing from sinne and amendement of life, which necessarilie include the true sorrow and conuersion of the heart, are sufficient for repentance.

THE SECOND PART, BY WHOM penall workes are to bee inflicted.

The Papists.

error 22 THe priests onely, they say, haue power to enioyne workes of penance, as affliction of bodie, mulct, penaltie, correction, by almes-deedes, fasting, abstinence and such like, Conc. Trid sess. 14▪ can. 15. Rhemist. 2. Corinth. 2. sect. 2.

Argum. To them is giuen authoritie to binde, and loose: Ergo, to enioyne penance, Bellarm. cap. 5. lib. 4.

The Protestants.

Ans. 1. SOme kinde of mulctes Church discipline is not to deale withall: as bodily punishment, and pecuniarie fines, which are to be imposed at the discretion of the magistrate. Secondly, we grant a wholsome vse of the keyes in Church discipline, in punishing and clensing of notorious offenders in the open face of the congregation: but priuately to enioyne men penance for their secret sinnes is an Antichristian yoke.

Argum. True repentance is a free worke, not of compulsion, or coaction: Saint Paul exhorteth men to iudge themselues, that they bee not iudged, [Page] 1. Corinth. 11.31. But now when penance is laid vpon a man, and not voluntarilie taken of himselfe, hee is iudged rather of another, hee doth not iudge himselfe. Augustine saith, ‘Quem poenitet, punit seipsum, prorsus aut punis aut punit Deus, vt ille non puniat, puni tu. Hee that repenteth, punisheth himselfe: either thou punishest, or God: if thou wilt not haue God to doe it, punish thy selfe.’ A man therefore must punish himselfe, he must not be punished of another in his repentance to Godward: for of outward chastisement to the world, now is not the question.

THE THIRD PART, OF PARDONS and Indulgences.

The Papists.

1. THe principall Magistrates of the Church are no lesse authorized to pardon, then to punish, & to remit the temporall punishment due to sinners,error 23 the offence being first forgiuen, which wee call an Indulgence or pardon, Rhemist. 2. Corinth. 2.4. Concil. Trid sess. 25.

Argum. To whome you forgiue any thing, I forgiue also, 2. Corinth. 2.10. Here the Apostle forgiueth the young man a peece of his punishment, when he might haue kept him longer in penance for his offence, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. 1. Wee denie not, but that the Church may release such publike exercise of humiliation, which is enioyned offenders for triall of their repentance, and some satisfaction of the Church, when it seeth, that they are sufficiently humbled. But it followeth not, that the Church therefore may dispence with any necessarie part of repentance towards God. Secondly, whereas you say, the Apostle, notwithstanding his rebuke was sufficient, might haue kept the young man still in temporall punishment: it is cleane contrarie to the Apostles owne rule, who perswadeth the Corinthians to forgiue him, least he should bee ouercome of too much heauines, vers. 7. The Apostle therefore would neither forgiue nor release him, before they had forgiuen him, and hee had satisfied the whole Church, verse 10. Neither would hee keepe him longer in punishment, hauing once sorrowed sufficiently, verse 6. The Apostle therefore did neither binde nor release him at his owne pleasure, but as hee sawe repentance to bee wrought in the offender.

The Protestants.

THe power which the Pope and popish Bishops doe challenge vnto themselues, in giuing Pardons and Indulgences, is most blasphemous.

1 They doe take vpon them to release both the punishment of this life, and the paines of purgatorie also, and say, that their pardons profite both the dead and the liuing, Bull. Leon. 10.

2 They pardon not only the punishment, but the sin both past, and to come, for dayes, yeares, hundreds, thousands of yeeres: how so euer the Rhemists [Page] would beare vs in hand that an indulgence is a release but of the punishment. Such was the first Iubile pardon granted by Boniface 8. an. 1300. And another by Leo the 10. an. 1513. See also the Boston pardons graunted by Pope Innocent, Pope Iu [...]ye, Pope Clement, which gaue them release of all their sinnes for fiue hundred yeares, Fox. pag. 1178.

3 And, which filled vp the measure of iniquitie, they set their pardons to sale: as in Pope Leo his time, his pardoners for ten shillings would giue to any man power,Fox. p. 844. to deliuer one soule at his pleasure out of purgatorie.

Argum. The scripture saith, that God onely forgiueth sinnes, Mark. 2.7. And that Christ no otherwise, then as God, forgaue sinnes, vers. 10. His Apostles onely as his ministers and Ambassadors, and in his name, declare and pronounce remission of sinnes, 2. Corinth. 5.19. Wherefore there is no such power giuen vnto men, at their pleasure to binde or loose.

De Baptis. lib. 3. cap. 18 Augustine saith, Non secundum arbitrium hominum tenentur, aut soluuntur peccata, sed ad arbitrium Dei, & orationes sanctorum: Sinnes are not loosed, or retained at the pleasure of men, but according to the will of God, and praiers of his Church.

The Papists.

error 24 2. THe satisfactorie and meritorious workes of the Saints which doe abound, being communicable, and applicable to the faithfull that want, are the very ground of the indulgences and pardons of the Church, and the very treasure thereof, and to be dispensed according to euery mans neede by the pastors of the Church, 2. Corinth. 2. sec. 5. Coloss. 1. sect. 4.

The Protestants.

HEre are many blasphemies and vntruthes couched together:

1 That a mans penalties may exceede and bee greater then his sinnes, and so his abounding may supplie another mans want: for thus the Rhemists say: which cannot stand with the iustice of God, to punish a man more then he hath deserued. And it is contrarie to the Scriptures: ‘Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant: for in thy sight shall none that liueth be iustified, Psalm. 143.2. And Iob saith, If the Lord should call him to account, he should not answere one to a thousand, 9.3.’

2 How can the Church gouernours dispense the merites of one to another▪ Who made them stewards of another mans good? Yee say also the contrarie your selues, That the abounding passiōs of the Saints are applicable to others by the sufferers intention, Rhem. 1. Colo. 2.2. Then not by the Churches dispensation.

3 It is a great blasphemie, that one may bee holpen by another mans merites, and it doth derogate from the death of Christ, whose onely merites are the treasure and storehouse of the Church: The most righteous man that euer was, [Page] can but saue his owne soule, Ezech. 14.14. And that onely by Christ.

Augustine saith: ‘Vnusquisque pro se rationem reddet, In Matt. serm. 22. nec alieno testimonio quisquam adiuuatur apud Deum, & vix sibi quisque sufficit, &c. Euery man shall giue account for himselfe, before God no man is holpen by the testimonie of another: the testimonie of his owne conscience doth hardly suffice for himselfe.’

The Papists.

3. THe dispensing of pardons and indulgences, is onely committed, they say,error 25 to the chiefe magistrates the Popes and Bishops: and as the Bishops in their Diocese haue especiall cases reserued to themselues, wherein inferiour Priests are not to deale: so the Pope hath also his proper reseruations, wherein other Prelates are not to meddle, Concil. Trident. sess. 14. cap. 7. The cases reserued to the Pope are 51. in number, Fox. pag. 785. The Bishop of Paris, ann. 1515 reserued these cases to himselfe, to dispense in murder, witchcraft, sacrilege, heresie, simonie, adulterie, ex Tileman. Heshus. loc. 9. de poeniten. err. 63. Likewise the yeares of their pardons are limited: Bishops may not exceede 40. dayes pardon: the Pope may be lauish in his hundreds and thousands, yea, and this reseruation of cases, standeth not onely with the externall policie of the Church, but is of force euen before God, Concil. Trident. sess. 14. cap. 7.

The Protestants.

WE will not much contend with them about reseruation of cases: for wee acknowledge no such power to giue pardons, or indulgences, either in superior or inferior Priests: yet wee will shew how this deuise of theirs standeth not with their owne doctrine.

Argum. 1. It is a greater power to remit the sinne, then to release the punishment: but euery Priest hath the greater power, as they say, to remit sinnes, yea as fullie as hath the Pope himselfe: Allen in his booke of pardons, cap. 2. Ergo, why haue they not the lesse power, which is by indulgence to dispense with the punishment? And that of these two, the remission of sinnes is the greater, it is confessed by the Rhemist. 2. Corinth. 2. sect 6.

Argum. 2. In the point of death, the reseruation of cases hath no place: but at that time euery Priest may absolue from all manner sinnes and punishment, Concil. Trident. sess. 14▪ cap. 7. But euery houre is with some, and ought to be with all, the point of death: because we are vncertaine when it commeth, and therefore ought alwaies to be in a readines. Therefore euen by their owne rule euery Priest hath at all times authoritie to absolue in all cases.

Againe, if those words of Christ be spoken to all ministers and preachers of the Gospell, Iohn. 20.22. Whose sinnes ye reteine, &c. (which cannot bee denied) to them all then is committed equally that power of binding and loosing, which is exercised by the preaching of the word.

[Page]

THE NINTH QVESTION, OF THE ceremonies and circumstances of penance.

The Papists.

error 26 1. THey enioyne their penitent Clients to poll their heads, and their women to weare a vaile, to goe in black, to put on sackcloth, to looke sowrely: and such like presumptions they haue concerning the habite of those that doe penance, Bellarm. lib. 1. de poenitent. cap. 22.

The Protestants.

OVr Sauiour cleane contrarie biddeth his Disciples, not to looke sowrely, nor to disfigure themselues, when they fast and repent, or to shew any other outward token of their sorrow, but to doe it secretly betweene themselues and God, to wash their face, to annoynt themselues with oyle, that it appeare not to men that they fast, Matth. 6.16.17.

Augustine also answering a certaine obiection, that young men newly married might make: How can I shaue my head or change my habite? saith thus, Vera conuersio sufficit tibi, sine vestimentorum commutatione. The true conuersion of the heart may suffice thee without changing of thy vesture.De temper. serm. 67.

The Papists.

error 27 2. THey enioyned them to fast bread & water certaine dayes in the weeke, to lie hard, to absteine from marriage, or to doe some great almes deedes to satisfie for their sinne, Bellarm. ibid. to goe a pilgrimage, and such like workes of penance were prescribed them.

The Protestants.

TRue repentance consisteth not in such outward exercise of the bodie, but is a conuersion rather of the heart. It was the manner of hypocrites, idolat [...]rs and superstitious men, to seeke to appease their Gods with afflicting of their flesh, as the Gentiles did cut their hayre, Deut. 14.1. Baals Priests did launch their flesh, 1. King. 18.28.

Argum. What is to be thought of such punishing of the carkasse, Saint Paul sheweth, Coloss. 2.23. He calleth it voluntarie religion or superstition in not sparing the bodie: when men doe not vse such outward exercises of fasting and abstinence for the chastisement of the flesh, to subdue it to the spirit, but with an opinion of meriting thereby, preferring them before the faith and conuersion of the heart, as the papists doe.

Augustine saith, ‘Non sit satis, quòd doleat, sed ex fide doleat, & non semper doluisse, doleat: Let it not suffice to bee sorrowfull, but let his sorrowe proceede of faith,De poenitent. ca. 13. and let it grieue him, that hee is not alwaies grieued for his [Page] sinne.’ So then true repentance is especially an inward worke of fayth, rather then an exercise of the body, and it ought alwayes to continue. Wherefore it consisteth not in such laborious workes, which if a man should long endure, he should end his life sooner then repentance.

The Papists.

3 THey measure their penance by number of yeares and dayes: They haue error 28 their quadragenas, fortie dayes penance: septenas, seuen yeares penance, Ex Tileman. Heshus. loc. 9. de poenitent. Err. 83. And they lengthen or cut short the time of penance at their pleasure, to continue three, seuen, or tenne yeares, yea sometime more, Bellarmin. lib. 1. de poenitent. 22.

The Protestants.

THat true repentance is not to bee measured by the time, but by the right sorrow and contrition of the offender, Saynt Paul teacheth vs, who writeth for the young man to be released, because of his great and sufficient heauines for his fault, 2. Corinth. 2.7.

Augustine also sayth, ‘Poenitentia vera, non annorum numero, De tempor. serm. 66. sed amaritudine animicensetur: poenitentia quamuis sit exigui temporis, &c. True repentance is not measured by number of yeares, but by the bitternes of the soule: though it be but for a short time, yet it is not despised before that iudge which regardeth the heart.’

THE FIFTEENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE, OF MATRIMONIE.

THe seuerall questions belonging to this Controuersie are these.

First, whether Matrimonie bee a sacrament properly so called.

2 Of the causes of diuorce, and whether it bee lawfull to marry after diuorce.

3 Of the degrees in mariage: First, the maner of supputation or accounting of degrees. Secondly, whether the degrees forbidden, Leuit. 18. may bee dispensed with. Thirdly, whether any other degrees may bee by humane law prohibited.

4 Of the impediments of mariage, of two sortes. First, of those that may hinder the contract of mariage onely. Secondly, of such impediments, as may both dissolue the contract and the mariage also consummate.

5 The comparison of mariage and virginitie, whether either bee preferred [Page] before the other before God.

Of these now in their order.

6 Of the times of mariage prohibited.

7 Of the ceremonies and rites of mariage.

THE FIRST QVESTION, WHETHER Matrimonie be a sacrament.

The Papists.

error 28 THat it is properly and rightly a sacrament instituted of God, and not deuised of men, Concil. Trid. sess. 24. can. 1.

Argum. 1. Ephes. 5.32. This is a great sacrament: Matrimonie is here a signe of an holy thing, representing the coniunction of Christ, and his Church. Ergo, a sacrament.

Answ. 1. The wordes are thus to be read rather, This is a great mystery. Or if we reade sacrament, they haue no great aduantage, seeing they are not ignorant, that the originall word, Mysterie, which they translate sacrament, is attributed to other things then sacraments: as 1. Timoth. 3.16. Mysterie of godlinesse: Apocal. 17.5. A mysterie great Babylon. Neither doe they themselues much vrge this argument. 2. The Apostle sayth not, that Matrimonie is a mysterie, but I speake of Christ and his Church, vers. 32.3. Matrimonie we confesse to be instituted of God, and to be a signe of a holie thing: yet no sacrament: for so was the Sabboth ordayned of GOD, and signified the rest in Christ, Hebr. 4.8. yet was it no sacrament. Wherfore al significatiue and mysticall signes are not sacraments.

Argum. 2. Matrimonie giueth grace of sanctification to the parties maried. They shalbe saued in bearing of children, if they continue in faith and loue, 1. Timoth. 2.15. These are the graces giuen by matrimonie. Ergo, a sacrament.

Answ. 1. We denie that any sacraments giue or conferre grace, they are instruments only of grace. 2. We also grant that by matrimonie God giueth to the faithfull this speciall grace to liue in holines & purenes, from the filthy pollution of the flesh: but the sacraments are seales of spirituall graces, and serue for the increase of fayth: it is not sufficient to bee a meanes of any common gift, but of the spirituall and iustifiyng grace to make a sacrament. 3. Wherefore if by fayth and loue here, they vnderstand only the fidelity and duety of wedlocke, they are not those spirituall graces, whereof sacraments are seales: if wee take them for the true faith and loue, which are the common graces of the faythfull, as the very meaning is, they are as well to be had out of wedlock, as in it.

The Protestants.

THat matrimonie is no sacrament of the Gospell, speaking now properly, and [Page] vnderstanding a sacrament, for the seale of the grace of God in the remission of our sinnes by Christ, it is thus proued:

Argum. 1. Matrimony was instituted by GOD, before sinne, in Paradise, therefore it can be no sacrament of the Gospell.

Argum. 2. Our aduersaries are contrary to themselues: for they call matrimonie a prophanation of Orders, Martin▪ sect. 15. cap. 11. And they say it is more tolerable for a Priest to keepe many concubines then to marrie, Pighius ex Tileman. Hesbus. loc. 21. Err. 2. Doe these fellowes meane in good sooth, that matrimonie is a sacrament, which they make so vile, polluted and vncleane a thing?

3 In euery sacrament there ought to be an external sensible element, as the matter, and a sanctifiyng word, as the forme: But in matrimony there is neither. Ergo, it is no sacrament.

Bellarm. The forme, are the wordes pronounced by the parties themselues, when they contract matrimonie: I doe take thee, &c. They also themselues are the matter: yea and the Ministers of the sacrament too: For the Iesuite holdeth, that it is a sacrament in the very contract and giuing of mutuall consent, before it be solemnized in the Church, De matrim. cap. 6.

Ans. 1. The sacrament is one thing, and the receiuers another: therefore the maried parties cannot be the sacramental matter, being the receiuers. 2. It is not euery word that sanctifieth, but the word of God, 1. Tim. 4.5. but these words, I take thee, are no parte of the word: Ergo, they want also the forme of a sacrament. 3. The ministers of Christ & preachers of the word are only the dispēsers of the mysteries and sacraments of the Church, 1. Cor. 4.1. Wherefore the parties themselues could not be ministers of matrimonie, if it were a sacrament.

Augustine thus writeth, ‘Ne quis istam magnitudinem sacramenti in singulis quibusque hominib. vxores habētib. intelligeret, ego autē dico, inquit, &c. Tract. in Iohan. 8. Lest any man should think, when the Apostle had said, This is a great sacrament, that this great Sacrament is to be vnderstood of all maried persons, the Apostle addeth, but I speake of Christ and his Church.’ But if so be matrimony were a sacrament, why is it not to be found in al maried folke?

THE SECOND QVESTION, OF THE CAVSES of diuorse in mariage, and whether it be lawfull to marrie after diuorse.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THERE MAY BE more causes of diuorse, then fornication onely.

The Papists.

DIuorse, as Bellarm. defineth it, is either from the dueties of mariage, as from error 29 bed and boord, as we say, which is properly called diuortium, or it is a dissoluing of the knot and bond of mariage, which is called repudium.

[Page]First then, they affirme, that the very bond and knot may bee dissolued in the mariage of Infidels, if one of them after mariage become a Christian: his reason is, because mariage contracted in infidelitie is no sacrament, and therefore may be dissolued, Bellarmin. cap. 12.

Argum. Saint Paul sayth, If the Infidell partie will departe, let him depart, a brother or sister is not in subiection in such a case, 1. Corinth. 7.15.

Answ. Saint Paul giueth not liberty to the one partie at their pleasure vtterly to renounce the other, as though they were no longer man and wife: for Saint Paul had sayd before, that if the Infidell partie bee content to dwell with the other, he or she is not to be put away. But his meaning is, that if one partie wilfully depart, the other is no longer bound, nor in subiection for the performance of the mutuall dueties of mariage.

The Papists.

error 30 SEcondly, separation from bed and boorde may be admitted, they say, for diuers causes, Concil. Trident. sess. 24. can. 8. Bellarmine nameth three: Fornication, according to Christs rule, Math. 5. Heresie, Tit. 3. An heretike must be auoyded. Thirdly, when one is a continuall offence to another & a prouocation to sinne: If thine eye offend thee, pull it out, Math. 5.29. Bellarmin. cap. 14.

Answ. Fornication we admit is a iust cause of separation and diuorce, but not heresie: for Saint Paul would not haue a woman to forsake an Infidell, 1. Corinth. 7.13. therefore not an heretike. Wee must auoyd such, that is, take heede of their poysoned opinions, and shun their company also, where we are not otherwise bound: Neither is the eye to be cut off, where there is any hope: but who knoweth whether the offensiue partie may returne to grace? And this place proueth as well a finall [...]utting off of mariage, as a separation or disiunction.

The Protestants.

FIrst, that there is no cause of vtter dissolution of mariage by way of diuorce, but onely adulterie and fornication: it is plaine by our Sauiour Christes wordes, Math. 5.32. & 19.9. where neither infidelitie nor any cause beside is excepted, but onely fornication.

Secondly, Saint Augustine sometime was of opinion, that the wife might be dismissed for infidelitie: but he reuoketh and retracteth that opinion, Lib. retract. 1. cap. 19. For elsewhere he flatly concludeth thus: A viro non fornicante non licere omnino discedere: that it is not lawfull for a woman at all to leaue her husband, if he committe not fornication, De adulter. coniug. 1.7.

And yet further, to make this matter more playne, we acknowledge no other cause of lawful diuorse in mariage but that only, which is prescribed in the Gospell, namely, for adultery or fornication, Math. 5.32. & 19.9. There is notwithstanding another cause whereby the mariage knot may bee dissolued, [Page] though not for fornication: as when one of the parties doth wilfullie renounce, leaue and forsake the other vpon no iust cause, but either of lightnes or for diuers religion, as when an Infidel forsaketh a Christian, a Papist a Protestant, an heretick a true professor, or vpon any other vnlawfull or vniust cause: for the Apostle sayth playnely, A brother or sister is not in subiection in such things, 1. Corinth. 7.15. that is, is freed from the yoke or bond of mariage.

First, it is plaine that the Apostle is so to be vnderstoode in this place: for the word, which he vseth is, [...], is no longer a seruant, or in subiection: which is to be taken in the same sense, as if he should say, [...], he or she is no longer bound or tyed: which word the Apostle vseth, vers. 39. And agayne the Apostle hath relation here to the fourth verse, where hee sayth the wife, [...], hath no power of her own bodie, & the husband likewise: But now, saith he, the infidel partie hauing wilfully separated himself, [...], the innocent partie is no longer in subiection, that is, [...], hath now power ouer his owne body: and is now become [...], free, exempt from the mariage knot or bond, in which sense the Apostle vseth the word, verse 39.

Secondly we must know what kinde of desertion it is, that causeth a dissolution of mariage, and in what manner. First, it must be malitiosa desertio, a malicious departure without any iust cause: But when as the husband is absent by consent about necessary affayres, as the Merchant beyond the seas: or is employed in some waightie busines, as in warfare, in ambassage, or such like: or is violētly deteined in prison or captiuity, amongst the Turks or elswhere: In these & the like cases the wife is bound to waite & expect the returne of her husband, vnles she be otherwise aduertised of his death. Secōdly, the innocēt partie must vse all meanes to reconcile, reclaime, and bring home agayne the wilfull and obstinate partie so departing, if it be possible. Thirdly, if he continue in his obstinacie, and departe, hauing no purpose to returne, the matter must be brought before the iudge or Magistrate in such cases: who after publike citation of the obstinate partie, and certaine knowledge that he refuseth wilfully to appeare being cited, and is not otherwise letted to come, may with mature deliberation pronounce the innocent partie free and at libertie to marrie, according to Saint Pauls rule, A brother, or sister is not bound in such things.

Thirdly, neither is Saint Paul contrary to our Sauiour Christ, who alloweth no diuorce but onely for fornication: for that is a diuers case from this, whereof Saint Paul treateth: And there is great difference betweene lawfull diuorse, and vnlawfull and wilfull desertion: for there the innocent partie first claymeth the priuiledge of separation: here the guiltie partie first separateth himselfe: there diuorse is sued, and required: here the innocent partie seeketh no diuorse, but seeketh all meanes of reconciliation: So that properly the setting free the innocent partie in this case, cannot be called a diuorse. Christ therefore speaketh of lawfull diuorce, not of euery dissolution of mariage: for then mention should haue beene made in that place of naturall death and departure, which is confessed by all to be a dissolution and breaking off of mariage.

[Page]Thus haue I shewed mine opinion with Beza and others concerning thi [...] poynt: Herein further as in all the rest referring my selfe to the determination of our Church, and the iudgement of our learned brethren, Beza. 1. Corinth. 7. vers. 15. Amand. Polan. Hemingius. T [...]leman. Heshus.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER IT BE LAWfull to marrie after diuorsement for adulterie.

The Papists.

FOr adulterie one may dismisse another, but neither partie can marrie again error 31 for any cause during life, Rhemist. Math. 19. sect. 4. no not the innocent partie may marrie againe: for the mariage knotte is not dissolued because of adulterie, Concil. Trident. sess. 24. can. 7.

Argum. 1. Rom. 7.2. The woman is bound by the law to her husband, so long as he liueth: nothing but death dissolueth the bond betweene man and wife: therefore not lawfull to marry againe after diuorse, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. Saint Paul must be expounded by our Sauiour Christ, who maketh exception of fornication, Math. 5. Neither doth Saint Paul denie, that mariage may be dissolued, while they liue, without breaking of wedlock: but that, although the knot holde during their life, yet by death it is dissolued. Againe, Saint Paul hauing no occasion to intreat of diuorse, speaketh of mariage as it standeth whole and sound by the ordinance of God, that if a woman ioyne her selfe to another man, her former wedlock being not lawfully dissolued, she is a wedlock breaker.

Arg. 2. 1. Corinth. 7.11. If she depart, let her remayne vnmaried, or be reconciled: Ergo, the parties separated for fornication may not marry again, Rhemist.

Ans. Saint Paul speaketh of other separations, which are caused by dissentions in mariage, and not of diuorse for adulterie: for he sayth, If she depart: not If she be put away: neither was it so vsual a thing for reconciliation to be sought after solemne diuorse. Againe, he sayth, Let not the woman depart, as being in her choyce, whether she would depart or not: but in the case of fornication, she was to depart, or rather be put away, whether she would or not.

The Protestants.

FOr no other cause in the world, but only for fornication may there be either a finall separation, or cleane dissolution of mariage, by way of diuorse: But for that cause our Sauiour hath graunted libertie, both to dissolue matrimonie, and to marrie againe.

Argum. ‘Math. 5.32. Whosoeuer putteth away his wife (except it bee for fornication) committeth adulterie:’ Ergo, for fornication it is lawfull for a man to dismisse his wife. Likewise Math. 19.9. Whosoeuer shal put away his wife, [Page] except it be for whoredome, and marrie another, committeth adulterie: Ergo, for adulterie it is lawful for the man both to put away and renounce his wife, and the wife likewise her husband (for there is the like reason for both) and for them to marrie agayne. This libertie graunted by our Sauiour Christ, by no humane law can be restrayned, or cut off.

Argum. 2. Saint Paul sayth, Let euery man haue his wife, and euery woman her husband, for auoyding of fornication, and it is better to marrie, then to burne. Wherefore it is lawfull, the first mariage according to the word of God being broken, both for men and women to vse the remedie agaynst incontinencie, and to be maried agayne: for he speaketh generally of all.

Augustine sayth, that he which putteth away his wife for adulterie and marieth another, ‘Non est aequandus ei, is not in the same case with with him, which for any other cause putteth away and marieth agayne.’ But if it bee as lawfull for other causes to be diuorsed, as for heresie & infidelitie,De fide & [...]per. cap. 19 as the Iesuite telleth vs, there should be no difference made betweene the second mariage of the one and the other. Augustine in the same place, though he bee elsewhere resolute against mariage after diuorse, yet graunteth that it is not playne out of scripture, whether he be an adulterer, that marieth againe after diuorse for adulterie: ‘Sed quantum existimo, venialiter ibi quisque fallitur, but as I thinke, we are euery one of vs herein deceiued.’

I end this poynt, better allowing Pollentius iudgement for this matter, then Augustines, betweene whom there is much discoursed of both sides: ‘Si mulier à viro non fornicante discesserit, non ei licere alteri nubere propter praeceptum▪ si autem à fornicante, non ei expedire propter opprobrium: If a woman departe from her husband being no adulterer, it is not lawfull to marrie another because of the commaundement: but if he be an adulterer, it is lawful to marrie, but not expedient alwayes, because of the shame and reproch, Ad Pollent. lib. 1. cap. 6.’

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE degrees in mariage prohibited.

FIrst of the supputation of degrees. Secondly, whether the degrees forbidden, Leuit. 18. may be dispensed with. Thirdly, whether any other degrees may by humane law be prohibited beside those.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE SVPPVtation and account of degrees.

THe degrees are either of consanguinitie, which is of diuers persons comming of the same stock and blood: or of affinitie, which ariseth of mariage, as when the kinsmen of either partie that is maried, are by mariage allied to the other, though not of his blood, as Laban the brother of Rebecca was allied by mariage, as also by blood vnto Isaac, though not so neerely.

[Page]In both these kindes of kindred there is a right line both vpward and ascending: as in consanguinitie, the Father or Mother, Grandfather, Grandmother, and so forth: in affinitie, the Father in law, and mother in law, the stepfather, or stepmother: as also descending, as the sonne, the sonnes sonne, the sonne in law, or daughter in law, and their sonnes and daughters. There is also a collaterall line in consanguinitie, as brother and sister, brother and sisters children, vncle or aunt: in affinitie, the brothers wife, sisters husband, the vncles wife, or aunts husband. Now our aduersaries set downe these rules to know the degrees by.

The Papists.

error 32 1 IN the right line there are so many degrees as persons,

Abraham.

Isaac. 1.

Iacob. 2.

except the first, from the which wee beginne the account: as in this example Iacob is in the second degree from Abraham.

Answer. We see no reason, why the first should be left out: for looke how many generations, so many degrees: But euery person is a generation: And this is the manner of account in scripture: as Math. 1. there are 14. generations reckoned from Abraham, whereof Abraham maketh one, Iudg. 14. Enoch the seuenth from Adam, Adam being the first himselfe in that number: Thus the scripture numbreth inclusiue, not exclusiue, inclusiuely comprehending also the number, from whom the account beginneth: And thus Abraham must be counted the first degree, and Iacob, not in the second but the third from him.

The Papists.

error 33 2 IN the collaterall line, if the parties bee equally distant from the roote or stock of the generation, looke how many degrees distant they are from the stock, so is the distance betwene themselues:

Bathuel.

Rebecca.

Iacob.

Laban.

Rachel.

Iacob and Rachel are in the second degree, because each of them is remoued from Bathuel, in the second degree, Bellarm. cap. 26.

The Protestants.

Answ. NEither doe we allow this rule: but rather follow the account of the ciuill law, which in the collaterall line maketh so many degrees as persons, excepting the stock, which is not to bee counted in collaterall degrees, because we begin not to number there. Wherefore according to the rule afore sayd, how many generations, so many degrees. According then to the account of the ciuill law, which we here follow, Iacob and Rachel are not in the second, but the fourth degree each from other: Rachel, 1. Laban, 2. Rebecca, 3. Iacob, 4. For in collateral degrees, we count not the distance from the roote or stocke, but the mutuall distance from themselues.

[Page]And by this reason, if Cosin germanes be but in the second degree, there should be no degree beyond the second forbidden, Leuit. 18. for there is no degree forbidden beyond this: neither is this by name and directly forbidden.

The Papists.

3. THeir third rule is this: In collaterall degrees vnequall,

Thare.

Abraham.

Aram.

Sara.

error 34 that is, when both are not alike distant from the stocke, they shall differ in that degree, in the which the further of them is remoued from the stocke: as in this example, Sara is distant two degrees from the stocke, and as many from Abraham, Bellarm. ibid.

The Protestants.

Ans. NEither is this rule perfect: for by this reason, he that is indeed a degree further off, shall be in the same degree: for if the vncle and the nephew be remoued but the second degree, and Cosin germanes are but distant in the second degree, as they say, the vncles sonne shall be in the same degree with his cosin, as his father is, which is not to be admitted.

Wherefore in collaterals we preferre the Ciuill account of degrees: that is, so many persons, the stocke of the kinred excepted, so many degrees. These then are the rules of marriage.

1. In the right line ascending and descending, all degrees are forbidden.

2. In collateral consanguinitie the prohibition reacheth to the third degree: as it is not lawfull to marrie the vncle, or the Aunt, who are in the third degree from their nephew.

3. In collateral affinitie the prohibition is extended to the fourth degree: for affinitie is alwaies a degree beyond that consanguinitie, by the which it commeth in: as it is vnlawfull to marrie the vncles wife, Leuit. 18.14. which is in the fourth degree from her nephew, being one degree beyond her husband, who is the vncle in the third degree. And this is to be obserued, that there is no affinitie in the first or second degree, but the neerest is in the third: as the wiues or husbands father, brother, or daughter, which are all in the third degree: the husband is in the first, the wife the second, and they in the third.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER ANY OF THE degrees prohibited in the law may be dispensed withall.

The Papists.

THey say not that the Pope may dispense with all, but with some of them, Concil. Trid. sess. 24. can. 3. As they tooke vpon them to dispense with King error 35 Henry the 8. marriage with his brothers wife: their reason is, because some of those prohibitions were only iudicial and positiue constitutions, not grounded vpon the law of nature.

[Page]Argum. 1. If it be the lawe of nature not to marrie within those degrees, it should haue been in force before the law was made: but so was it not: for Abraham married his brothers daughter, and Iacob two sisters, Bellarm. cap. 27.

Ans. 1. As Augustine sayth of the marriage and copulation of Adams children, brothers and sisters together: Factum est compellente necessitate, It was for necessitie sake, because there were then no more women: so also may it be in some sort true of those Patriarkes, that hauing a necessitie to marrie amongst their owne kinred, and not with the Gentiles, there was no choise to be had of women of their owne kinred further off in degree.

2. Although this example of theirs both in marrying many wiues and so neere of kinne, cannot be altogether excused or iustified in them: yet because the law of nature was not yet so cleerely knowne, as afterward by the giuing of the law, which is nothing els but an exposition of the law of nature; the offence was not so great in them, but might better be tolerated: because as Augustine sayth, it was neither Contra morem illorum temporum, nec contra praeceptum▪ Neither against the custome of those times, nor against any flat precept. And to conclude, although those holy men had their imperfections, yet we must not iudge them in these things according to the euil and corrupt disposition of men in these daies, which might vse this great libertie in marriage, better then many vse lawfull marriage now: as Augustine sayth, Castiùs habebant plures, quàm nūc multi vnam: They vsed many wiues more chastely, then many now liue with one, De bon. coniug. cap. 10.

The Protestants.

WE affirme that it is vtterly vnlawfull for any Christian to marrie within the degrees prohibited: neither can any humane power dispense with such marriages: but the equitie of that lawe being grounded vpon nature, is in force for euer. Wherefore the Pope of Rome sheweth himselfe plainly to be Antichrist in dispensing against the law of God.

Argum. 1. Leuit. 18.24. The reason of that law is giuen concerning the forbidden degrees: They should not defile themselues in any one of those things, because the Gentiles defiled themselues thereby, and were cast out before them for it. Wherefore it is a naturall and perpetuall law, otherwise the Gentiles had not been bound vnto it.

Argum. 2. Mark. 6.18. Iohn sayth to Herode, It is not lawfull for thee to haue thy brothers wife: Ergo, the law was not abrogate, being in force in our Sauiour Christs time. Neither are they to alleadge, that Herodes brother was yet liuing, or that he had a child by Herodias, and therefore it was not lawfull for him to marrie her: for all this being graunted, which cannot be proued, yet it is plaine out of the text, that Iohn reproueth him in no other name, but because he married his brothers wife.

Augustine is against them, who speaking of the marriage of Consobrines or [Page] Cosin germanes, which had been sometime in vse, Quia id nec diuina prohibuit, De ciuitat. dei lib. 15. cap. 16. & nondum prohibuerat lex humana: It was as yet thought lawfull, because neither the diuine law forbad it, neither was it yet prohibited by mans law. If that then be thought lawfull, which Gods law manifestly forbiddeth not, that sure is vnlawful which it plainly forbiddeth. Wherfore to marrie within any of the degrees directly forbidden, Leuit. 18. is vtterly vnlawfull.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER ANY OTHER DEgrees may be by humane law prohibited, beside those directly forbidden in the law.

The Papists.

1. THey affirme, that by the law of Moses, those degrees onely are vnlawfull to marrie in, which are directly and by name set downe: & therefore it is error 36 not vnlawfull, by Moses law, for the vncle or Aunts husband to marrie his niece, because it is not by name prohibited: as Abraham married his brother Arams daughter: for Sara was his niece. The marriage also of Cosin germanes was lawfull by Moses law, and practized, Numb. 36. The daughters of Zelophehad married their vncles sonnes. Therefore by Moses law no degrees are forbidden, which are not directly named, Bellarm. cap. 27.

The Protestants.

1. COncerning Abrahams marriage what is to be thought, we haue shewed before: but it is a plaine case, that the vncle is no more to marrie his niece, then the nephew his Aunt: and this being by name prohibited, Leuit. 18, 14.20.2. the other also is necessarily included: for the same rules for degrees of kinred doe proportionably hold both in men and women: wherefore such marriage is vnlawfull, neither to be contracted, and if it be, to be dissolued.

2. Concerning the marriage of brothers and sisters children, there is a greater question. First, it cannot be proued that Zelophehads fiue daughters married their vncles sonnes, that is, their Cosin germanes: for the Hebrewes call the nephewes, sonnes: as Iethros daughters are called the daughters of Raguel their grandfather, Exod. 2.17. So it is very like that their husbands were their vncles sonnes sonnes, as in the 12. verse it may be gathered, where the text sayth, They were married into the families of the sonnes of Manasses: therfore not into one familie. But as touching the question in hand, the marriage of Cosin germanes seemeth also by some analogie to be forbidden by Moses law: for if the degrees of affinitie be limited to the fourth degree: as it is not lawfull for a man to marrie his wiues daughters daughter, Leuiticus 18.17. why should not the line of consanguinitie hold to the fourth degree likewise? And so neither the sonne to marrie his fathers brothers daughter, or the daughter the sonne: for heere are also foure degrees: the sonne, one: the [Page] father two, the fathers brother three, the brothers sonne foure. Yet this we grant, that this analogie or proportion is not so strong, nor doth conclude so necessarily as the other. Wherefore we thus determine of this matter, that it is well that the marriages of Cosin germanes are restrained by humane lawe, and so they ought to be: which kind of marriages may lawfully be hindered, and the contract loosed: but the marriage being consummate and finished, it is not for this cause to be dissolued.

De ciuitat. dei lib. 15. cap. 16. Augustine also writeth very well of this matter, Quis dubitet, honestiùs hoc tempore consobrinarum prohibita esse coniugia, etiamsi id diuina lex non prohibeat: cuius enim debet causa propinquitatis verecundum honorem, ab ea contineat quamuis generatricem libidinem? Who doubteth, but that the marriage of Cosin germanes is honestly forbidden, though the diuine lawe doe not prohibite it? for to whom a man oweth a shamefast reuerence for kinred sake, he ought to refraine his lust.

The Papists.

error 37 2. IT is lawful for the Church to restraine other degrees of affinitie and consanguinitie, besides those prescribed by Moses, and that the decrees of the Church in such cases doe bind in conscience, Concil. Trident. sess. 24. can. 3. As to prohibite marriage vnto the seuenth degree in naturall kinred. Also their Canons doe make a spirituall kinred, that commeth in by Baptisme & Confirmation: and suffer not the godfather to marrie the godchild, or the godfather the godmother. Likewise they haue found out an affinitie that commeth in by espousals onely of Matrimonie, which bindeth (say they) in the first degree by the Canon law, which is the first and second by the Ciuill law: as that it is not lawfull for the brother to marrie her which was espoused to his brother. Also another kinred and affinitie, by fornication & vnlawfull fleshly knowledge, which bindeth in the 2. degree Canonicall, which is the 3. and 4. Ciuil: as it is not lawfull for the sonne to marrie his fathers bastard, Bellarm. cap. 24. cap. 30.

The Protestants.

1. TO forbid more degrees in marriage, then are either directly or by necessarie consequence prohibited in the law, is a meere Antichristian yoke layd vpon the people of God: for the Lord (the author of that lawe) best did knowe, both what persons were fit for marriage, and how farre the line of marriage was to extend.

2. The inuention of spirituall kinred is but a popish tricke, to get the more monie for their dispensations: for by this reason no Christians ought to marrie together, because they are all of one spirituall kinred in Christ.

3. The new affinitie that commeth by espousals, is also but an humane inuention: for the law speaketh onely of the kinred of the flesh, which ariseth of carnall knowledge and copulation, not an intent or purpose onely of marriage, Leuit. 18.6.

4. The last we admit, for the sonne of the father begotten out of marriage, is [Page] of his fleshly kinred, though not lawfully: and therefore in marriage matters there is respect also to be had euen of this kinred of the flesh: as Ruben is cursed of his father because he lay with his concubine, Genes. 49.4. which notwithstanding was not his fathers wife.

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, OF OTHER impediments of marriage.

THere are some impediments which may hinder and dissolue the contract of marriage, before it be consummate, but not after: some, which both may error 38 hinder the contract, and dissolue the matrimonie euen after carnall knowledge.

The Papists.

1. BEllarmine reckoneth vp diuers impediments of both kinds, which may disanull the contract of marriage, and dissolue the matrimonie it selfe: but he maketh no mention of the consent of the parents. And indeed it is their opinion, that it is not a necessarie thing to be respected in marriage: neither that children are bound to require the consent of their parents, Cap. 19.

The Protestants.

FIrst, we doe not say, that the want of the parents consent may dissolue marriage consummate after mutuall coniunction: but that it may breake off the contract and espousals. Secondly, neither haue the parents power to bestow their children in marriage without their consent, Genes. 24.57. Thirdly, neither must the parents exercise a tyrannicall power ouer their children in forbidding them marriage, but must alway haue respect vnto their neede. And thus doing their consent is necessarie, and without it the contract hath no validitie, 1. Corin. 7.37.38. The parent hath power to giue in marriage or not to giue.

There are also other causes which may dissolue contracts and espousals made: as if the honest and lawfull condition propounded in the contract be not kept: or if there be an error in the person, he heareth afterward of her dishonestie, whom he tooke for an honest woman: both these may make voyd the contract,error 39 but not the marriage, if they be once ioyned together.

The Papists.

2. THey set downe many impediments, which may make a nullitie of marriage it selfe, after it be consummate: some of them we acknowledge, as afterward it shall appeare: but these following we doe renounce.

First, the vow of chastitie and entring into Orders doe loose the bond of marriage. Secondly, if one marrie with an Infidel, the marriage is not onely vnlawfull, but actually voyd, Bellarm. cap. 23. Thirdly, he that marrieth her with whom he committed adulterie before, is loose, euen after marriage, and the matrimonie voyd, Bellarm. cap. 22.

[Page]

The Protestants.

1. COncerning the inualiditie of vowes to disanull marriage, we haue declared the truth before, Controu. 6. de Monachis. For marriage lawfully contracted and consummate, is onely made voyd in the case of adulterie, as we haue before proued.

2. Neither doth the infidelitie of the one partie make a nullitie of marriage: for S. Paul sayth, that the woman in that case is not to forsake her husband, 1. Corinth. 7.13. Of this matter see more, quaest. 2. part. 2. of this controuersie.

3. Neither is the fault committed before the marriage, sufficient to disable the marriage once done: for thē question might haue been made of the strength of Dauids marriage with Bathsheba. And Augustine doubteth not thus to conclude,De bono coniug. cap. 15. Posse sanè fieri nuptias ex male coniunctis, honesto postea placito consequente: That marriage may very well stand betweene those, that once had vnlawfull carnall copulation, but afterward an honest purpose of marriage followed.

But there are certaine cases, wherein matrimonie vnlawfully contracted, yea consummate, may be dissolued: as first, if the consent of either partie be wanting, as when by tyrannicall coaction and compulsion they come together, and the consent is still withholden. Secondly, if the consent of both be wanting, as in the marriage of children, that are not able to giue consent. Thirdly, if there be an error of the person, as if one be thrust vpon a man in stead of another, as Lea was vpon Iacob: or an error in the condition of the partie, as if he or she be an Hermaphrodite, an Eunuch, or such like. Fourthly, if they marrie within the degrees forbidden by Moses law. In all these cases, Matrimonie thus vnlawfully begun and ratified, may be dissolued. But lawfull matrimonie cannot be abrogate but either by naturall death, or lawfull diuorce for fornication. In the case of desertion also and long absence of either partie, after the expecting of his returne some terme of yeeres, with probable intelligence of the parties death, or if he be wilfully absent, of his lewd and dishonest life, the innocent partie, by the wise and deliberate sentence of the Magistrate, may be pronounced free.

THE FIFT QVESTION, OF THE COMPARISON betweene Virginitie and Marriage.

The Papists.

error 40 VIrginitie is preferred before marriage, not onely for that it is a more quiet state of life, and freer from troubles in this world, but that it is more conuenient for the seruice of God, and that it hath a gratefull puritie and sanctitie, both of bodie and soule, which marriage hath not, Rhemist.

Argum. 1. Corinth. 7.32. The vnmarried careth for the things of the Lord, how she may please God: Ergo, virginitie is a fitter state of life to serue & please God in, Rhemist. ibid.

[Page]

The Protestants.

FIrst we graunt, according to the Apostles saying in this place, that virginitie is also a fitter state of life for the seruice of God, yet not simplie, but for those onely that haue the gift of continencie: for they which cannot abstaine, may and doe serue God with a more quiet mind being married, then many popish virgines which burne in the lust of concupiscence. Secondly, yet it followeth not, that virginitie is a more holy and cleane thing in it selfe, and more meritorious before God, then marriage is: for this were to make marriage vnholy & vncleane: whereas it is not the act of marriage, but the abusing thereof, that bringeth vncleannes with it: before God in themselues, neither is more holy then other.

Argum. It is faith which maketh vs accepted of God, not the merite of any worke: and therefore of all faithfull beleeuers it is sayd, Apocal. 14.4. These are they which were not defiled with women, for they are virgines. And he vnderstandeth all that are redeemed by Christ, from amongst men, and are the first fruites of the Lambe, vers. 4. And not onely those, which properly in common vse of speech we call virgines. True godlines therefore & a sincere faith, whereby we are diuorced from the world, and ioyned to God, is the true virginitie.

Augustine, Sicut non est impar meritum patientiae in Petro, qui passus est, De bono coniugal. cap. 21. & in Iohanne, qui passus non est: sic non est impar meritum cōtinentiae in Iohanne, qui nullas est expertus nuptias, & in Abraham, qui filios generauit: As there was no greater merit of patience in Peter that suffered, then in Iohn, who suffered not: so there was no greater merit of continencie in Iohn that was neuer married, then in Abraham that begat children. See then, by his iudgement, there is the same merit of married and vnmarried persons.

THE SIXT QVESTION, OF THE TIMES OF marriage prohibited.

The Papists.

THere are certaine seasons in the yeere, wherein for the holines of the festiuall times, they hold it vnlawfull to haue marriage solemnized: as from the Aduent error 41 to the Epiphanie: from Septuagesima Sunday (as it is called) to the octaues of Easter: from 3. daies afore the Ascension, to the octaues of Pentecost,Ex Tilem. Heshus. loc. 20. err. 14. Ruard Tapper. artic. 20. pag. 526. But the Councel of Trent hath somewhat moderated this time, and cut it shorter, thinking it vnreasonable that marriage should be prohibited the third part of the yeere (for so much the time interdicted ariseth to, if account be taken of the weekes.) The time of Pentecost therefore they haue dispensed with: and the time prohibited at Easter they would haue begun not from Septuagesima, but from Ashwednesday, Sess. 24. cap. 10. Vpon these times they hold it vnlawfull publiquely to haue marriage solemnized, both for the holines of so great feasts, and because of receiuing the Sacraments, Bellarm. de matrim. cap. 31.

[Page]Argum. God commanded the people to abstaine from their wiues, when he was to appeare vnto them in Mount Sinai, Exod. 19.15. And Sam. 21.4. Before the high priest would deliuer the shewbread to Dauid and his companie, he asked if the young men had kept themselues from women: Ergo, marriage is not lawfull at all times, Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. First, these places alleadged doe rather proue, that men in those interdicted times ought not at all to come at their wiues, thē that the solemnization of marriage should be restrained: but I thinke they would be ashamed to forbid men their wiues companie so long together, as fiue or sixe weekes at the Natiuitie, and eight or nine weekes at Easter: why then should not the one bee as lawfull as the other? Secondly, the abstinence from their wiues was commanded then, as a legall and ceremonial kind of sanctification, as was also the washing of their clothes, Exod. 19.10. And the companie of women was at some times counted as a legall pollution, not as a sinfull or vncleane act of it selfe: as the women after childbirth were commanded to purifie themselues, Leuit. 12. from a legall pollution onely, not from any sinfull or vncleane act: for then it had been a manifest iniurie to that holy birth, that Mary purified her selfe according to the lawe, Luk. 2.22. Wherefore seeing it was a legall kind of sanctification, it is not to be intruded & imposed vpon Christians now. Thirdly, neither can they proue that this kind of abstinence is necessarie alwaies before the receiuing of the Sacrament, though sometimes we denie not but it is conuenient: for it was not alwaies required, no not of the priests in the lawe, when they were to offer incense or sacrifice. For whereas the high priest, which was alwaies but one, was bound morning and euening to offer incense vnto the Lord, Exod. 30.8. He could not obserue this rule, vnlesse he had been inioyned perpetuall abstinence, which we see by the law was not imposed vpon thē. This doubt somewhat troubled Augustine: Quaest. sup. Leuitic. 15. for first he sayth, That it must needes followe, seeing the high priest was married, and did sometime goe in vnto his wife, that the offering of incense should some dayes be intermitted: but in his retractations he misliketh his former solution, and thus determineth, That the high priest first offered the morning incense, and afterward went in to his wife, and so was vncleane,Retract. lib. 2. cap. 85. vsque ad vesperam, but vntill the euening, not after the euentide, and then he offered the euening incense. To take this answer for this time, though it be insufficient: for the Hebrew word, which is translated the euen, or euentide [...], signifieth the twilight, when the Sunne is set, when light and darknes are mixed together: but the incense was renewed before the Sunne set: yet I say, admitting Augustines solution, the high priest did not abstaine one whole day before he offered: much lesse many dayes, much lesse many weekes, much lesse some moneths: as the popish Church prescribeth by interdicting so many daies.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THat not onely the publique solemnitie of marriage at some times may haue intermission, but all matrimoniall actes ought to cease, as when men either priuately doe giue themselues to fasting and praier, 1. Corin. 7.5. or when publique or generall fastes are by the spirituall gouernours thought meet, & by the Christian Magistrate proclaimed: we doe not denie, but in our iudgement allow it, and by our practise approue it: but that matrimonie at such set times as an vnholy and vncleane thing is to be forbidden and restrained, we take it to be popish superstition, and an Antichristian yoke.

Argum. 1. It disgraceth the holy institution of marriage, which the Apostle calleth honourable, Heb. 13.4. and S. Paul counteth the fruits of marriage, which are the children of the faithfull, holy, 1. Corin. 7.14. How is it then, that there can be any time so holy, the which holy matrimony is not beseeming? Againe, in thus doing they make difference of daies, esteeming some in themselues more holy then others, contrary to the Apostles rule, Galath. 4.10. Colossians 2.16.

Argu. 2. The Tridentine Chapter maketh but two holy times in the yeere, the Natiuitie and Ester: during which times, they would not haue matrimonie solemnized: and I pray you, why is Pentecost left out, is it not as festiual a time as the other?

Could there be a more holy place, then Paradise? or a more holy time, then while man was in his innocency? yet euen then and there Matrimonie was instituted.

Lastly, Is not the Sabboth or Lords day an holy festiuall time? and as holy as any is? what if I said more holie, for this onely immediately was instituted of God: but marriage may notwithstanding be fitly solemnized vpon that day, the abuses and disorders, which commonly fall out in such assemblies, being cut off: for Augustine is of opinion, that the marriage in Cana of Galile, was die Dominico, vpon the Lords day:Serm. de temp. 159. And it is most fit that matrimony should be solemnized in the face of the congregation, which is vsually assembled vpon that day: Ergo, it may as fitly and conueniently at any time be kept and solemnized, excepting the respects aforesaid.

THE SEVENTH QVESTION, OF THE ceremonies and rites of Matrimonie.

The Papists.

THe Iesuite reckoneth vp seuen. First, they which are to be ioyned in matrimony,error 42 are blessed of the Priest. Secondly, oblation is made for them in the [Page] sacrifice of the Masse. Thirdly, they are couered with a vaile. Fourthly, they are coupled together vitta purpurea & cādida, with a scarfe or riband, partly white, partly purple. Fiftly, the bride giueth to the bridegroome a ring, first hallowed and blessed of the Priest. Sixtly, he commendeth them to God in his praiers. Seuenthly, he exhorteth and admonisheth them of their mutuall dutie, Bellarm. cap. 33. de Matrimon.

The Protestants.

SOme of those rites we altogether allow and vse them our selues, as the 6. and 7. for both praiers are made vnto God for them, and they are by the Minister put in minde of their duety: and all is done with vs in the vulgare tōgue, much more to the edifying of the people, and comfort of the parties themselues: wheras their idolatrous Priest chattereth all in an vnknowen tongue: A goodly exhortation sure, when the parties exhorted vnderstand not one word thereof.

Some other of these rites we vtterly reiect, as the 2.3.4. for oblation or sacrifice, in their meaning, we acknowledge none: for the married parties to receiue the Communion, if there be a sufficient number, we neither hold it necessary as being of the essence of marriage, nor yet think it vnmeete.

But as for that coloured and painted attire of blew and white, we take it fitter for a May-game, then to be shewed in a solemne assemblie of Christians.

The rest we in part allow, as the ring, so it be vsed onely as a ciuill ornament, and token of mutuall loue: but that popish blessing either of the ring, or of the married couple with the fingers acrosse, and muttering of some fewe enchanting words, as though by the very acte of popish blessing there were a secret vertue and qualitie of holines infused into the things so blessed or enchanted; we condemne it as a superstitious toy. So we conclude, all such rites in matrimonie, as haue a comely and profitable vse, tending to edifying, we refuse not: the rest we reiect, and send them backe to Rome, from whence they came.

THE SIXTEENTH CONTROVERSIE, OF CONFIRMATION, ORDERS, EXTREME VNCTION.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF Confirmation.

THe partes of this question are these. First, whether it be a Sacrament. Secondly, of the partes thereof. Thirdly, of the effect of this ceremonie. Fourthly, of the rites, and whole order thereof.

[Page]

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER it be a Sacrament.

The Papists.

THat Confirmation is properly and truely a Sacrament, it was decreed in the Tridentine Councell, sess. 7. can. 1. and it is their generall opinion.error 43

Argum. Act. 8.17. They did lay their hands vpon them, and they receiued the holy Ghost: This imposition of hands, together with the praiers here specified, was no doubt, the Sacrament of cōfirmation: for here is an outward signe, and a spirituall grace: Ergo, a Sacrament, Rhemist. ibid. Bellarm. de Confirmat. lib. 2. cap. 2.

Ans. 1. These were miraculous gifts of the holy Ghost, as the gifts of tongues, of prophecying, healing, which were bestowed vpon the Disciples, whereof the imposition of hands was a signe at that time: but it is impossible to ground an ordinarie and perpetuall sacrament, vpon an extraordinary example: and that they were such visible graces of the spirite, it appeareth, because Simon Magu [...] saw that the holy Ghost was giuen them by laying on of hands. Secondly, the holy Ghost was obtained by their praiers, ver. 15. and not by the very laying on of hands. Thirdly, to make a Sacrament, it is not enough to haue a visible signe, and to shew some spirituall grace therewith to be bestowed: for then the spittle and clay that Christ vsed, the napkins also and partlets, which were carried to the sicke from the Apostles, and they were healed presently: all these should be sacraments; for here are outward signes, and some effect followed: yet because there was no institution of a sacrament by Christ, nor any commandement to vse them, neither these, nor the imposition of hands can be a Sacrament.

The Protestants.

WE graunt a ceremonie of imposition of hands vsed in the Apostles time, and after, so long as the miraculous gifts of the holy Ghost continued in the Church: there is also another kinde of imposition of hands, such as the Apostle speaketh of, Heb. 6.2. which may haue perpetuall vse in the Church, which is nothing else but a kinde of praier to be strengthened by the holy Ghost, and for the encrease of grace. But neither this nor the other doe we holde to be a sacrament.

Argum. 1. Euery sacrament must haue his appointment from Christ, consisting both of an outward element, and the word of institution: but the popish sacrament of confirmation hath none of these: the element they vse, is oyle, the word of consecration, I signe thee with the signe of the Crosse, and annoint thee with the Chrisme of health, in the name of the Father, the Sonne, and holy Ghost: but none of these haue their institution by Christ or his Apostles any where in the new testament: Ergo, it is no sacrament.

[Page] De Baptis. lib. 3.16. Augustine saith, Manus impositio, quid aliud est, quàm oratio super hominem? The imposition of the hands, what els is it but praier ouer a man? He saith not it is a Sacrament.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE MATter and forme of Confirmation.

The Papists.

THe matter of this popish Sacrament, they say, is oyle mixed and tempered error 44 with balme, Rhemist. Act. 8. sect. 6. First, halowed and consecrated by the Minister thereof, and striked in manner of a crosse vpon the forehead of him that is to be confirmed, Bellarm. cap. 8.

Argum. 2. Corinth. 1.21. It is God which establisheth vs, or confirmeth vs with you in Christ, and hath annointed vs. Here the Apostle speaketh of confirmation, and of the materiall part thereof, which is holy vnction, or anointing, Bellarm. ibid.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst the Apostle saith not, Which hath confirmed, but, Which doth confirme: which if it were meant of that external ceremony of confirmation, see what iniury you offer to the Apostle, that being a confirmer of others, he had neede now to be catechized and confirmed himselfe. Againe, he speaketh not of confirmation wrought by the ministerie of men: but God (saith he) confirmeth vs, that is, establisheth vs by his spirite.

2. It is to too grosse to vnderstand by this anointing, your greazie besmearing mens faces with your Chrisme, seeing the Apostle expoundeth himselfe in the next verse, He hath sealed vs, and giuen the earnest of his spirite in our harts, ver. 22. Of this holy anointing of our harts by the spirite, S. Iohn also maketh mention, saying, This Anointing teacheth you all things, 1. epist. 2.27. But doth the anointing of the face I pray you, giue men instruction?

Let vs heare Augustines exposition, Christus sit in corde, vnctio ipsius sit in corde: Tractat. in epist. Ioh. 4. inspiratio eius docet, vnctio eius docet: Let Christ be in your harts, let his anointing be in your harts: his inspiration is his anointing: you may be ashamed therefore, so grossely to abuse Scripture.

3. As for your oyle therefore mixed with balme: First, the true balme you know is not to be had, and therefore you abuse the people. Secondly, make the best of it you can, it is but a Iewish ceremonie. Thirdly, your benediction of it, is but a kinde of magicall inchantment, seeing you haue no word of God to consecrate creatures in that sort: for all things are sanctified by the word of God and praier: Ergo, without the warrant of God, there is no such sanctifying of creatures.

[Page]

The Papists.

2. THe forme of Confirmation is in the words which are pronounced, I signe thee with the signe of the crosse, and confirme thee with the Chrisme of error 45 saluation or health, in the name of the Father, the Sonne, and holy Ghost, Bellarm. cap. 10.

The Protestants.

1. THey must shew the institution of Christ, out of the word, for the forme of euery sacrament: which they can not doe for this, vnlesse they runne to their beggerly traditions, which they blasphemously call the word of God vnwritten.

2. Where haue they learned, that men are confirmed and established with the externall anointing of oyle? so said some amongst the Colossians, Touch not, taste not, handle not: to whom the Apostle answereth, Which things perish with the vsing, and are after the commandements of men, Coloss. 2.21.22. So is this anointing with oyle, a meere inuention of men, and hath no longer vertue or force, then in the naturall vse thereof.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE EFFIcacie and vertue of confirmation.

The Papists.

THe holy Ghost is giuen in confirmation, for force, strength, and corroboration, against all our spirituall enemies, and to stand constantly in the confession error 46 of our faith, euen to death, with great increase of grace, Rhemist. Act. 8. sect. 7. And in this respect it giueth more abundant grace, in strengthening of vs against the deuil, then Baptisme doth, Bellarm. cap. 11.

The Protestants.

FIrst, they doe offer great iniurie to the spirite of God, tying him as it were, to their beggerly elements, which haue power, as they say, to conferre grace: The Scripture saith, The spirite bloweth where it listeth, Ioh. 3. The spirite of God is free, and is giuen without Sacraments, as well as with them: but this tradition of yours is no Sacrament: if it were, yet could it not conferre grace, as we haue proued before.

Secondly, they doe greatly deface the Sacrament of Baptisme, making it imperfect without confirmation, saying, that he which is baptized, shall neuer [Page] be a perfect Christian,Tilem. Heshus. loc. 22 error. 22. vnlesse he be confirmed with Chrisme, Gerson. And that it is to be reuerenced with greater reuerence then Baptisme: See Fulk Act. 8. sect. 7. Yea they depriue Baptisme of the proper effect and vse thereof, which is a signe vnto vs of the assistance of Gods spirite, to fight manfully against the Deuill: for by baptisme we are buried into the death of Christ, Rom. 6.3. But Christ by his death triumphed ouer the Deuill, Coloss. 2.15. Ergo, Baptisme is a signe of our victorie against the Deuil: yet they rob Baptisme of this honor, and giue it to Confirmation. And thus they preferre their owne inuentions before the ordinance of God; no Sacrament before a Sacrament.

Augustine sheweth, what the Sacrament of Vnction is, Vnctionis sacramentum est virtus ipsa inuisibilis; Tract. in epist Iohan. 4. vnctio inuisibilis, spiritus sanctus: The sacrament of vnction, is the inuisible vertue: the inuisible anointing, the holy spirite: What is become now of your sacrament of vnction?

THE FOVRTH PART, OF THE RITES and ceremonies of Confirmation.

The Papistes.

THe ceremonies which they commonly vse in Confirmation, are these. First, error 47 the Bishop must breathe vpon the pot or cruze of Chrisme. Seōcdly, he saluteth it in these words, Aue sanctum Chrisma: Haile holy Chrisme. Thirdly, he giueth a kisse. Fourthly, he striketh him that is cōfirmed with his hand, to teach him patience. Fiftly, his forehead is bound about, least the Chrisme should run downe, which teacheth him not to lose the grace of God. Sixtly, seuen daies together he must neither wash his head nor face. And these with such like ridiculous toyes, are practised amongst them, Bellarm. cap. 13. lib. de confirmat.

The Protestants.

1. SOme of these ceremonies we condemne as ridiculous: as the breathing vpon the oyle, the striking of the party confirmed, which light gestures become not the grauity of the Ministers of the Gospell: all things should be done in the Church in decent and comely order, 1. Cor. 14.40. Secondly, one of them is meerely Idolatrous, to salute the oyle, as the Angel saluted Mary, to say Aue, All haile vnto it, making an Idoll of it, being a thing without sense or life. Thirdly, all of them are superstitious, hauing mysticall and typicall significations and shadowes, which agreeth not with the nature of the Gospel: for all shadows are now past, the body being come, Col. 2.17. Lastly, they are superfluous, cumbersome, and burdenous, as Augustine saith: Ipsam religionem, quam Deus paucissimis sacramentis liberam esse voluit, onerib. premunt. They oppresse religion with the burden of ceremonies, which God hath left free in few sacramēts. Againe, who seeth not how thus by their own traditions they doe euacuate the ordinance of God? for in stead of catechizing and instructing of the youth in the [Page] principles and foundation of religion, as of repentance from dead workes, faith toward God, of the resurrection and eternall iudgement, Hebre. 6.2.3. they haue brought in nothing else, but oyling, greazing, annointing of them, breathing vpon them, crossing, and such like: and whereas S. Paul giueth Parents a charge to bring vp their Children in the instruction of God, Ephes. 6.4. They bid them bring their Children to be anointed, crossed & chrismated, as they call it, and they haue done enough.

THE SECOND QVESTION, of Orders.

THe seuerall partes of this question, are these: First, whether it be a Sacramēt▪ Secondly, of the efficacie and vertue thereof. Thirdly, of the ceremonies.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER THE receiuing of orders be a Sacrament.

The Papists.

THat holy Orders are a sacrament rightly and properly so called, it was decreed in the Tridentine Councell sess. 23. canon. 3. And that not onely the error 48 three higher degrees of Priesthood, Deaconship, subdeaconship, but the foure inferiour orders, of Exorcistae, Acoluthi, Lectores, Ostiarij, doe belong vnto the same sacrament of Orders, and are sacraments as well as the other, Bellarm. cap. 8. lib. de sacram. ordinis.

Argum. 1. Timoth. 4.14. Despise not that gift which was giuen thee through prophesie, with the laying on of hands. Holy orders giue grace by an externall ceremonie and worke: Ergo, it is a Sacrament, Rhemist. in hunc locum.

Ans. 1. It cannot be proued out of this place, that imposition of hands giueth grace: for this was an extraordinary gift which S. Paul speaketh of, and doth not alwaies follow imposition of hands. Secondly, this gift was not giuen by the very ceremony of imposition of hands, but through prophesie and reuelation of the holy Ghost: for it was reuealed vnto the Church by the spirite of prophecie, that Timothie was a chosen vessell of God: therefore S. Paul saith, That worthie thing which is committed vnto thee, keepe through the holy Ghost, 2. Tim. 1.14. The holy ghost was both the conferrer of that grace, and the preseruer of it. Imposition thē of hands was but an outward signe of the presence of Gods spirit vpon those that were lawfully ordeined: for al vpon whom hands were laid, receiued not the holy ghost, but such only as were appointed of God: [Page] And therefore the Apostle chargeth Timothie to lay hands sodenly on no man, 1. Timoth. 5.22. which caueat was not needfull, if vpon whomsoeuer he had laid his hands, they should immediately receiue the holy Ghost.

The Protestants.

YOur seuen popish orders we do not at all receiue into the church, much lesse can we abide, that they should be sacraments: The lawfull ordeining of Pastors, teachers, and Deacons, we doe acknowledge, but no sacrificing Priesthoode, nor no ministring Deaconship at the Altar: such orders as we haue notwithstanding we doe not take to be Sacraments, much lesse yours, that are vtterly to be abolished.

Argum. 1. Sacraments must haue their institution from Christ: so haue not your orders: for Christ instituted onely Apostles and Disciples: Presbyters, and Deacons were founded by the Apostles: who notwithstāding had no commission to constitute new Sacraments. As for the other fiue orders, of Subdeacons, Readers, Acoluthi, Exorcistes, doore keepers, they are neither read in Scripture, nor ordeined of the Apostles, nor heard of for many yeeres after.

Secondly, your Sacrament hath neither outward element, nor word of institution: if you say, laying on of hands is the externall signe: we answere, that the visible signe in a Sacrament must not onely be an externall action, but a materiall element, as water in Baptisme, and bread and wine in the Lords Supper. The forme (you say) is in these wordes pronounced by the Bishop, Accipite potestatem offerendi sacrificium, Receiue ye power to offer sacrifice, Bellarm. ca. 9. We answere againe, that this sacrificing office, hath no foundation in Scripture: the Ministers of the Gospell are called dispensers of Gods Mysteries: namely, of the word and Sacraments, 1. Corinth. 4.1. Ministers for Christ, not sacrificers of Christ: wherefore neither haue ye any word of institution; and consequently no Sacrament.

And I pray you tell me, if you will make euery one of your orders a Sacrament; then must you needes haue as many Sacraments as there are orders: and so shall you haue sixe Sacraments more then you thought: for you doe distinguish all the orders in office and forme of consecration one from another: and therefore, they cannot all make one Sacrament.

Epist. 118. cap. 1. Augustine saith, Christus Sacramentis numer [...] paucissimis societatem populi colligauit: Christ hath ioyned together his people with most fewe Sacraments: and then he nameth Baptisme and the Communion: Et si quid aliud in Scripturis canonicis commendatur: and if any other be commended in Scripture: Ergo, there is no Sacrament of orders, because it is not found in Scripture, as we haue said.

[Page]

OF THE EFFICACIE, WHICH THEY ascribe to this sacrament.

The Papists.

THis sacrament of Orders, as they cal it▪ giueth a double grace. First, it giueth error 49 those that are ordayned, abilitie and power to execute their office: which is to consecrate and offer vp the body and blood of Christ; wherein chiefly the priesthood consisteth, and not in preaching the worde: for they may be priests, though they preach not, Concil. Trident. sess. 23. can. 1. By holy orders then the holy Ghost is actually bestowed, when those wordes are pronounced, Accip [...] spiritum sanctum, receiue yee the holy Ghost. Canon. 4.

The Protestants.

FIrst, the Gospell alloweth no externall sacrificing priesthood, but a spirituall onely, whereby euery Christian is made a king and priest to offer spirituall sacrifices of prayse and thankesgiuing vnto God, Apocal. 1.6. And the onely essentiall parte of the office of Ministers vnder the Gospell, is, to be able dispensers of the mysteries of the word and sacraments, 1. Corint. 4.1. 2. Corinth. 3.6.

So Augustine also sayth:In Apoc. hom. 2. ‘Quicunque aut Episcopus aut presbyter frequenter de Deo loquitur, & quomodo ad vitam aeternam perueniatur annuntiat, meritò Angelus Dei dicitur. Whosoeuer Bishop or presbyter doth speake freely of God, and preacheth the way to eternall life, is an Angel of God.’ This then is the onely principall office of true Pastors, to tea [...]h the way to the kingdome of God.

Secondly, it is also a great vntrueth, that the holy Ghost is straightway giuen to all those, vpon whomsoeuer hands are layd, and they admitted to Orders: For what neede then that triall and examination, which ought to bee had of those, which are to be ordayned, whereof Saint Paul speaketh, 1. Timoth. 5.22. if the only laying on of hands can make able Ministers?

Nostri sacerdotes, sayth one,Ex veter. testam. qu. 1 [...]9. inter opera Aug. super multos quotidie nomen Domini & verba benedictionis imponunt, sed in paucis effectus est: Our priests doe lay the word of blessing vpon many, calling vpō the name of God, but in few followeth any effect of that blessing: And he giueth the reason in another place, Dei est, effectum tribuere benedictionis: It belongeth vnto God, to giue effect to Priestly blessing. Ergo, it is not by onely act and vsing of the ceremony bestowed.

The Papists.

AN other effect of their sacrament of orders, they say, is to imprint a certaine error 50 indeleble marke & character in him that is ordayned, which can neither by sinne, Apostasie, or heresie bee blotted out, Rhemist. 2. Corinth. 1. sect. 7. And therefore a priest once ordayned can neuer lose his orders, or become [Page] a lay man agayne, Concil. Trident. sess. 24. can. 4. Bellarmin. cap. 10.

The Protestants.

FIrst, the practise of the popish Church is contrary to their owne rules: for I would haue them tell me, whether they tooke not the priesthood and anoynting from Iohn Husse, when with a payre of sheares they clipped off the skin of his head most cruelly, as they were busie in disgrading of him, in the Councel of Constance: Fox. p. 623. Or when they had grosly abused that reuerend father, Bishop Cranmer, and vnmanerly behaued themselues in his degradation, and clapt him in a poore beggerly, thread-bare, Lay mans gowne: did they not thinke, that they had dispoyled him of his priesthood? What is now become, masters, of your indeleble character? Or is it your meaning, that it may bee clipped or scraped off onely, but not washt off, or lightly rubbed away? Your owne cruell deedes doe ouerthrow your popish principles.

Augustine is agaynst you: ‘Constitutum est in ecclesia, ne quisquam post criminis alicuius poenitentiam clericatum accipiat, ad clericatum redeat, aut in clericatu maneat: It is a constitution of the Church, that no man after publike penance done for some notorious crime, should be either made a clerke, or returne to his clerkship or priesthood, or bee suffered to continue therein.’ If his priesthood were neither restored to him, nor hee suffered to remaine therein, then surely he had lost his priesthood.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE ceremonies.

The Papists.

error 51 THey doe anoynt the handes of such as are ordayned, with oyle, and doe enioyne them to shaue their crownes. And the higher degree of priesthoode they haue, so much broader must their shauen crowne bee, Tileman. Heshus. loc. 14. Err. 5. Bellarm. cap. 12.

The Protestants.

WE haue the same opinion of these ceremonies, as we haue of the popish orders themselues, counting them worthy of no place in the Church of God. As for the superstitious custome of anoynting, it is a Iewish rite, better beseeming Aarons order, then the Ministers of Iesus Christ: Looke howe hee was anoynted, so are wee: of him it is sayde, The spirite of the Lord is vpon mee, because hee hath anoynted mee, Luk. 4.18. So the inward working of the spirite is our anoynting, 1. Iohn 2.27. Agayne, in diuers places of the scripture wee reade of ordayning by imposition of handes, Act. 13.3. [Page] 1. Timoth. 4.14. & 5.22. 2. Timoth. 1.6. But there is no mention at all made of anoynting with oyle.

And as for the shauing of the crowne, it it is worse then a Iewish ceremonie: for it seemeth to haue taken beginning from the heathen: and the Iewes were forbidden to cutte or make balde their heads, Deuteronom. 14.1. Leuit. 19.28. In so much, as it was a signe of more holines amongst them not to suffer the rasor to come vpon their heads, as it is to bee seene in the lawe of the Nazarites, Numbers 6. The rest of the questions that concerne the calling of ministers, wee haue entreated of more at large, Controuers. 5. of Ecclesiasticall persons.

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF EXTREME VNCtion. First, whether it bee a sacrament. Secondly, of the efficacie. Thirdly, of the ceremonies.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER EXtreme Vnction be a sacrament.

The Papists.

THat extreme Vnction is rightly and properly a sacrament, which is error 52 (say they) the anoynting of those that are extreme sicke, to assure them of remission of their sinnes: it was concluded in the Chapter of Trent. sess. 14. can. 1. and is generally maintained by the Church of Rome, Bellarmin. cap. 2.

Argum. Iam. 5.14. The sacrament of extreme Vnction in this place is playnely promulgated by the Apostle, being instituted before by our Sauiour Christ, Mark 6.13. For here is remission of sinnes promised to the outward element, that is, the anoynting of the sicke with oyle: Ergo, a sacrament, Rhemist.

Ans. 1. This anoynting of oyle, was a signe onely of the miraculous gift of healing, that was then in the Church, and therefore was no longer to continue, then the gift it self. But it is not like, will they say, that euery one of the Elders had this miraculous gift of healing. Answer: Though euery particular Elder perhaps had it not, yet the whole company of the Eldership might haue it, as Saint Paul speaketh of the gift of prophesie giuen to the Eldership, 1. Timoth. 4.14. And it is not like that the Apostle would haue promised health by calling for the Elders, if the gift had not beene generall in euery congregation.

Ans. 2. Neither is remission of sinnes annexed to the element, but to the generall doctrine of prayer made in fayth. The prayer of fayth, saith the Apostle, shall heale the sicke.

[Page]

The Protestants.

EXtreme Vnction is no conuenient ceremonie at all to be vsed in the Church, as tending to superstition, and breeding a vayne confidence in terrene elements: much lesse is it to be holden for a sacrament.

Argum. 1. It hath no institution from Christ: For they themselues confesse, that Mark 6.13. there is but a preparatiue to the sacrament of extreme Vnction, Rhemist. the promulgation and publishing thereof is set forth by the Apostle, Iam. 5. But this is not to be admitted, that Christ was a preparer of sacraments onely, and that they were perfited and finished by his Apostles: Nay, they were not to adde any thing to the institution of sacraments, but to take them as Christ deliuered them, 1. Cor. 11.23.

Agayne, the place in Iames maketh nothing for their popish aneeling: for the Apostle would haue al the Elders called: but one priest is sufficient to bring your oyntment box. Secondly, if any man be sick, sayth Saint Iames, though it be not deadly or mortall sicknes, but whensoeuer he is sicke: But your Vnction is neuer ministred before the poynt of death. Thirdly, here health is certainely promised: But not one amongst tenne recouereth after your popish aneeling.

Argum. 2. Christ vsed sometime clay, and spittle, sometime other elements in healing the diseased, as the Apostles vsed oyle: why, I pray you then, may not they be sacraments as well as this? For they were signes of healing but for a time: no more was the anoynting with oyle.

Augustine sayth, ‘De latere Christi in cruce sacramenta ecclesiae profluxerunt: The sacraments of the Church issued out of Christs side vpon the Crosse:’ In Psa. 40. There gushed out▪ [...]is side, water and blood: but wee reade not that any oyle was shedde from [...]: therefore by Augustines argument, Vnction is no sacrament.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE effect and vertue of extreme Vnction.

The Papists.

error 53 FIrst, it giueth health of body. Secondly, it wipeth away the reliques of sinne: And therefore the priest thus sayth, Per istam sanctam Vnctionem, & suam pijssimam misericordiam, indulgeat tibi Deus quicquid deliquisti per visum, &c. By the vertue of this holy oyntment, and the most merciful fauour of God, the Lord forgiue thee, what thou hast offended by thy sight, hearing, &c. Bellarm. cap. 7.8.

The Protestants.

1 YOur popish aneeling is not able to heale the bodie, as wee see [Page] by daylie experience: for more die then liue after your anoynting: And they that doe recouer should doe as well without your aneeling. Wherefore this anoynting of oyle is not like to that vsed by the Apostles: for then health certainly followed, Iam. 5.14.

2 It is also a great blasphemie, to ascribe remission of sinnes to a terrene and beggerly element: The Apostle saith not the oyle, but the Prayer of fayth shall saue the sicke. The scripture also testifieth, that the Iust shall liue by fayth, Rom. 1.17. And we walke by faith, not by sight, 2. Corinth. 5.7. But he that ascribeth remission of sinnes to oyle or any other externall element, walketh by sight, not by fayth.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE MINISTER of extreme Vnction, and the ceremonies.

The Papists.

FIrst, they giue power only vnto their anoynted Masse priests, to aneele the sicke with oyle. Lay men haue no authoritie to doe it, nor whosoeuer are error 54 no Priests, Concil. Trident. sess. 14. can. 4. Secondly, for the rite and ceremonie, the Priest comming to the sicke must anoynt his fiue senses; his eyes, eares, nostrels, mouth, and hands: also the reines, which is the seate of concupiscence, and his feete, which are the instruments of execution, Bellarmin. cap. 10.

The Protestants.

1 THis anoynting which Saint Iames speaketh of, was done by the whole company of Elders in euery congregation, which were not all the Pastors of the Church: Yea, and it appeareth by their own Canons, Innocent. 1. Epist. 1. cap. 8. that it was lawfull for lay men and all Christians to vse this anoynting, see Fulk. annot. Iam. 5. sect. 5.

2 What neede the body be anoynted in so many places? It is meere superstition: of the like minde was Peter sometime, when he sayd to Christ, who would wash his feete; Lord, not my feete onely, but my hands and my head. To whom Christ answered: He that is washed, neede not saue to wash his feete, but is cleane all, Iohn. 13.9. Where, although the words of Christ haue a spirituall meaning: yet we see the euident and playne practise of them in Baptisme: In the which sacrament, we doubt not, but that infants are thorougly baptized though euery part be not touched with water. And euen so, if your aneeling were a sacrament: why might it not suffice, in some one part of the bodie to be anoynted, and not in so many? This we are sure of, that nowe you speake without booke. For the Apostle maketh no mention, of anoynting eyes, hands, or mouth, but onely generally of anoynting the sick. And thus it appeareth that your extreme Vnction is no sacrament, nor any of the other foure, which you haue inuented.

[Page]

THE CONCLVSION OF THIS treatise concerning the sacrament.

THus, I trust, we haue made it pliane by scripture, and euidence of argument, that there are but two sacraments onely, Baptisme, and the Supper of the Lord, left and enioyned to the people of God by our Sauiour Christ: for foure things are required to make a sacrament: First, the authority of Christ in commanding it. Secondly, the element or external signe, as the matter. Thirdly, the word of institution, as the forme. Fourthly, the end and vse, to be a seale of our fayth for remission of sinnes.

1 Concerning the efficient cause, we finde that two sacraments onely in the new testament, are commanded by Christ to be vsed for euer in the Church, Baptisme, and the Lords Supper: which both by his owne example and presence, as also his precept and commandement were established.

2 There must be an outward visible elementall signe, as is water in Baptisme, bread and wine in the Lords Supper. But so is there not in the fiue popish sacramēts: For in some there is no signe at all, as in Matrimonie, where they are driuen to say, that the parties that are maried are the signes: In some there is a signe, but not visible, as in absolution, the audible voyce of the priest ponouncing the words of absolution is, they say, the outward signe: But in all the sacraments of Christs institution, we finde a visible signe. In some there is an outward signe, but it is an action or gesture only, no material element, which is not sufficient, so is the imposition of hands in giuing of Orders. In some there is a materiall signe, as Chrisme in Confirmation, oyle in extreme Vnction, but they are not of Christs institution.

3 They also want a word of institution: In Penance the priest sayth, I doe absolue thee, after particular confession made of his sinnes. In Confirmation the words are, I signe thee with the signe of the Crosse, and confirme thee with the Chrisme of saluation, in the name of the Father, Son, &c. In Matrimony, I take thee to my wife. In giuing of Orders, Receiue thou power to offer vp the body of Christ. In extreme Vnction, God by the vertue of this oyle forgiue thee thy sinne. These, they say, are the wordes of the institution: But they can shew no word of God for them: for it is not euery word that sanctifieth, but only the word of God, 1. Tim. 4. Wherefore, seeing they haue no word of institution, they are no sacraments.

Lastly, they want the true vse and end of a sacrament, which is, to strengthen our fayth for the remission of sinnes: for in some of these there is no relation at all had to the forgiuenes of sinnes: As Matrimonie doth but performe, say they, the graces of mariage, as fidelitie, mutuall loue, and such like. Orders doe conferre the power of priesthood. Here is no signe or assurance of the grace of iustification. In the rest, remission of sinnes is ascribed to other instrumentall meanes, then to fayth onely, as to satisfactorie workes in Absolution, [Page] to Chrisme in Confirmation, to oyle in extreme Vnction. Wherefore we conclude, because they are no seales of the righteousnes of fayth, as Saint Paul defineth a sacrament, Rom. 4.11. that they are no sacraments of Christs institution, but superstitious ceremonies deuised by men.

HERE ENSVE SVCH QVESTIONS AND CONTROVERSIES AS ARE MOOVED CONCERNING THE BENEfites of our redemption, purchased vnto vs by the death of Christ.
THE SEVENTEENTH CONTROVERSIE.

ALl the benefites of our redemption may bee brought to these three heads. Our predestination, vocation, and iustification: as they are set downe by the Apostle, Rom. 8.30. These three then are the parts of this Controuersie.

THE FIRST PART, OF Predestination.

THe particular questions are these: First, whether predestination bee of the wicked to condemnation, as of the elect to saluation. Secondly, whether our electiō be of meere grace. Thirdly, whether it be certaine & vnchangeable.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF Reprobation.

The Papists.

GOd, they say, is not the cause of any mans reprobation or damnation, Rhemist.error 55 annot. Roman. 9.1. He intendeth no mans damnation directly or absolutely, but in respect of their demerites, ibid. sect. 5.

Argum. 1. Timoth. 2.4. God would haue all men to be saued and come to the knowledge of the truth: Ergo, the perishing or damnation of none must be imputed to God, Rhemist.

The Protestants.

An. 1 NO mā must impute his dānation to God, because the wicked are iustly punished for their sins, without any respect had vnto the secret counsel of God: yet it is certain, that God, to set forth his glory, as he hath made som [Page] the vessels of honor, so others are ordained to be vessels of wrath, without any respect had to their workes, either good or euill. And this notwithstanding standeth with the iustice of God, to saue some, and reiect others: for he might iustly condemne all to eternall death: Now if notwithstanding he haue mercy of some, his iustice in the condemnation of the rest is not to be complained of, but his mercy to be extolled in sauing of some.

God indeede would haue all men to bee saued, that is, sayth Augustine, Omnes homines, Enchirid. cap. 1 [...]3. omne genus humanum intelligamus: by all men we must vnderstand all sortes, or all kindes of men, not euery particular man. And this is agreeable to the Apostles meaning, which before exhorted men to pray for kings and princes: and then he giueth this reason, because God would haue all men to be saued, that is, high, and low, kings and people, of all sortes. And this place also is to be vnderstood not of the secret, but of the reuealed will of God, who offereth vnto all the outward meanes of their saluation. Thus also Augustine expoundeth these wordes, ‘Remota hac discretione, quam diuina scientia intra secretum iustitiae suae continet, syncerissimè credendum est, &c. Setting apart the consideration of the secret counsell and iustice of God, it is sincerely to bee beleeued, that God would haue all men to be saued, that is, offering vnto all the outward meanes of saluation, as his worde and sacraments, Contr. articul. fals. imposit. Art. 2.’

Argum. Rom. 9.22. The Apostle speaketh playnly, that as God hath prepared some vessels vnto glorie, so also, some are ordayned to wrath. And that the counsell of God is most iust herein: for as the Potter may dispose of the clay, as it seemeth best to himselfe, to make of it a vessell of honor or of dishonor at his pleasure: so the Lord hath as great right to deale with his creature. And seeing all things ought to be subdued to the glory of God, which is set foorth in the destruction of the rebellious, as in the election of the faythfull: it was necessary and requisite, that the Lord should get vnto himselfe both wayes a glorious name: therefore he saith, Rom. 9.17. That God had set vp Pharao, to shew his power in him.

Augustine sayth, ‘Tenenda est inconcussè haec regula, impios in peccatis antequam essent in mundo praescitos esse tantùm, Hypognost. articul. 6. non praedestinatos, poenam autem ijs praedestinatam. This rule we must vndoubtedly holde, that the wicked were only foreseene, or foreknowne of God in their sinnes, not predestinate: but their punishment was predestinate. So then God ordayneth not men to sin, but he ordayneth men to punishment, not hauing relation to their sinnes▪ but in his owne secret counsell.’ Yet are not the wicked to complayne, for they are iustly forsaken because of their rebellion and disobedience. Neither are the godly and faythfull by this doctrine to be discouraged: for as much as God hath not denied them the grace of his spirite, but hath giuen them fayth and repentance, and strength to walke before him in his feare: all which are pledges vnto them of their free election and saluation in Christ.

[Page]

THE SECOND QVESTION, WHETHER PREdestination proceede from the free will and purpose of God, without relation to our workes.

The Papists.

GOd doth not hate or reprobate any man but for sinne, or the foresight thereof,error 56 Rhemist. Rom. 9. sect. 2. Neither doth Christ appoint any by his absolute and eternal election, to be partakers of the fruite of his redemption, without any condition or respect of their own works, obediēce or free will. Rhem. Heb. 5.9.

Argum. Heb. 5.9. He is made the author of eternal saluation to al that obey him: they are not (we see) elected without condition of obedience, Rhemist.

The Protestants.

Ans. 1. GOd indeede electeth all that shall be saued, not with any condition on their behalfe, but on his owne behalfe: for vnto them, whome hee chooseth, he will giue grace to obey, will to beleeue in him, and to doe that hee appointeth. Secondly, this place is expounded by that other of Saint Paul, Ephes. 1.4. God hath chosen vs in Christ before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy: vpon the which words Augustine writeth thus: Elegit nos, vt essemus sancti, non quia futuri eramus, sed vt essemus, & secundum bonam voluntatem suam, non nostram, quae bona esse non posset, nisi ipse secundum bonam voluntatem suam, vt bona fieret, subueniret: He hath chosen vs, that we should be holy, not because he saw we should be holy, but to the end we might be holy: and according to his good pleasure, not after our owne will, which could not bee good, vnlesse he according to his good will should assist vs to make it good. See then, our holines and obedience is a fruite and effect of our election, no cause thereof: neither is there any free will or good disposition in man, till God make it free and good.

Argum. Rom. 9.16. Our election is not of the willer, nor of the runner, but of God, that sheweth mercie. Ergo, the mercie of God is the onely ground of our election: for if our faith or workes should be foreseene, then it were of the willer and of the runner, which the Apostle here denieth. And to this purpose the Apostle bringeth in the example of Iacob and Esau, ouer whome the Lorde had cast his lots: Iacob haue I loued, Esau haue I hated, before they were yet borne, or had done either good or euill: as Augustine saith,In epistol. ad Rom. 9. Vt totum, quicquid essent, secundum misericordiam se esse cognoscerent. And all to this ende, that they should ascribe all, whatsoeuer was in them, to the mercie of God. Yea the Rhemists confesse against themselues, that Gods meere mercie is seene in the elect, Rom. 9. sect. 2. Ergo, our election is a worke of Gods meere mercie: there is then no respect at all to be had to our workes, for then were it not of Gods meere and sole mercie.

[Page]

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF THE certaintie of Predestination.

The Papists.

error 57 1. THere are two partes of this question: first, whether Gods decree, concerning the election of men be certaine and vnchangeable: secondly, whether a man in this life may in himselfe bee assured of his election. The first our aduersaries dare not plainely affirme: for it were great blasphemie openly to say, that Gods decree may bee changed: yet they doe in circumstance of speech affirme it: as Rhemist. Act. 27. sec. 3. (Men cannot bee saued, though they bee predestinate, vnlesse they keepe Gods commaundements.) As though it were possible for men predestinate, not to keepe the commandements of God, or in the end not to be saued. Likewise it was concluded in the Councell of Trent, sess. 6. can. 23. that the grace of iustification may be lost: which is as much to say, that a man may lose his predestination: for none are iustified, but whome God before hath predestinate, Rom. 8.30. They cannot therefore fall away from the grace of iustification, vnles they fall away from predestination.

The Protestants.

THat the decree of God, concerning such as shall bee saued, remaineth sure and certaine, and that it is impossible for any of the Elect to fall away, the Scripture euery where proueth.

Argum. Whome God loueth, hee loueth to the end, Iohn. 13.1. The giftes and calling of God are without repentance, Rom. 11.29. My father is greater then all, and no man is able to take them out of his hand, Iohn. 10.29. Ergo, our election is certaine, for With God there is not so much as any shadow of change, Iam. 1.17.

Augustine saith, Horum, qui electi sunt, si quispiam perit, fallitur Deus, sed [...]emo eorum perit, quia non fallitur Deus: Of the Elect, if any perish, God is deceiued: but none of them can perish, because God cannot bee deceiued, De corrept. & grat. cap. 7.

The Papists.

error 58 FOr euery man to be assured infalliblie that he shall be saued without speciall reuelation, is a most damnable, false illusion, and presumption, Rom. 8. sect. 9. They call it a faithlesse perswasion of saluation, to bee confident of Gods grace and saluation, and fides daemoniorum, not Apostolorum, the faith of diuels, not of Apostles: Rhemist. 1. Corint. 9. sect. 9. So the Tridentine Councel call certitudinem remissionis peccatorum, vanam, & ab omni pietate remotam fi [...]uciam, the certaintie of remission of sinnes, a vaine and faithlesse perswasion. And therefore euery man, De gratia formidare, & timere potest, may stand in [Page] doubt, and be afraide, whether he be in the state of grace, sess. 6. cap. 9.

Argum. 1. Saint Paul saith: I know nothing by my selfe, yet am I not thereby iustified: Paul durst not assure himselfe, whether he were iustified, Rhemist.

Ans. Paul was most sure of Gods grace, and his iustification through faith, Rom. 8.30. But hee doth acknowledge, that hee is not iustified by his faithfull labours in the Gospell, or any other workes of his owne, although hee were cleare in conscience.

Argum. 2. Philip. 2.12. Worke your saluation with feare and trembling: Ergo, men must not be secure of their saluation.

Ans. We doe not teach men to walke securely, or presume of their election. But we protest vnto them, that seeing men are predestinate vnto good workes, that vnlesse they be careful to lead an holy life, they haue no part in predestination: yet wee teach men notwithstanding, assuredly to beleeue the promises of God made to all those that beleeue, to be saued. And this confidence doth very well agree with the feare of God.

The Protestants.

OVr securitie of saluation is no vaine presumption, but an assurance vpon the word of God, that through faith in God, and walking in that way which God hath appointed vs, we shall vndoubtedly come in the end to eternall life.

Argum. 1. As our election is certaine, sure, and vndoubted before God: so it is the Lords pleasure, that euery Christian while hee liueth, may and ought in himselfe to be assured thereof by a liuely faith: as Saint Peter teacheth vs to labour and giue our diligence to make our calling & election sure, 2. Pet. 1.10.

‘Argum. 2. ‘Rom. 8.38. S. Paul saith, I am sure, that neither death nor life, &c. shall separate vs from the loue of God in Christ Iesus’: Ergo, the Apostle was certaine of his saluation.’

Rhemist. First, the Apostle speaketh onely in generall: as if hee should haue saide, So many as are elected, cannot certainely perish.

Ans. It is false, for the Apostle pronounceth particularly of himselfe: As more plainely, 2. Timoth. 4 8. From henceforth there is laide vp for mee a crowne of righteousnes.

Rhemist. Secondly, Saint Paul might haue this perswasion by some especiall reuelation.

Ans. The ground of the Apostles perswasion is none other, but that which is common to all the faithfull, the loue of God in Christ. And so Augustine interpreteth this place, writing thus: Isti, significati sunt ad Timotheum, &c. These, of whome the Apostle speaketh, are signified in another place to ‘Timoth. 2.2.19. The foundation of God remaineth sure, the Lorde knoweth who are his:’ De corrept & gra [...]. 7. Ergo, this assurance and confidence is common, though not in the like measure to all faithfull Christians.

Augustine also saith: ‘Quia non secundum merita nostra sed illius misericordiam [Page]firma est promissio, nemo debet cum trepidatione praedicare, vnde non potest dubitare. Because the promise remaineth stedfast, not by our workes, but his mercie: we must not with trembling and fearefulnes pronounce that, whereof wee cannot doubt.’ No maruaile then if Papists doubt of their saluation, because their confidence is built vpon their workes: but if they would with the faithfull of God, renounce their owne workes, and be content to submit themselues to the faith of Christ, they would not thinke it so strange a thing, for Christians to haue a full and stedfast perswasion of their saluation.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE BENEFIT of our vocation, to the which belongeth the knowledge of sinne and the lawe.

THE FIRST QVESTION, of sinne.

THe partes of this question are these: first, of originall sinne: secondly, of the difference of sinnes: thirdly, of veniall sinnes: fourthly, whether all sinnes be remissible: fiftly, whether God bee the author of sinne: sixtly, whether the workes of the not regenerate are sinne.

THE FIRST PART, OF originall sinne.

The Papists.

error 59 COncupiscence (which wee also call originall sinne) remaining after Baptisme, is not properly a sinne, nor forbidden by commaundement, till it raigne in vs, and wee obey the desires thereof: it is called sinne, because it is the matter, effect, and occasion of sinne, Rhemist. Rom. 6. sect. 6. Concil. Trident. sess. 5.

Argum. Iam. 1.15. Concupiscence, when it hath conceiued, bringeth forth sinne: Ergo, it is not sinne of it selfe: but when the consent of will commeth, sinne is engendred, Rhemist.

The Protestants.

Ans. THe argument followeth not, concupiscence bringeth forth sinne, Ergo, it is no sinne: nay it shall the rather bee sinne: as one serpent bringeth forth another, so both the mother and daughter are sinne: for euill fruites doe shew an euill tree.

Argum. Saint Paul saith, that concupiscence is flatly forbidden by the law, which saith, Thou shalt not lust, Rom. 7.7. And vers. 17. He calleth it sinne dwelling in vs, though it doe not reigne in vs: Ergo, it is properly sinne.

[Page] Augustine saith, ‘Omnium malorum reatu caret, qui baptizatur, non omnibus malis: He that is baptized is cleared from the guilt of all euils or sinnes, but not from the euils themselues. Dimittuntur in Baptismo omnia peccata, & originaliter tracta, & ignoranter, vel scienter adiecta: All sinnes are forgiuen in Baptisme, both originall, and committed ignorantly or wittingly.’ Therefore originall sinne is no otherwaies taken away in Baptisme, then other sinnes are: but the guilt onely of other sinnes is remitted in Baptisme, the blot or staine remaineth still: Ergo, originall sinne ceaseth in respect of the guilt: for neither it, nor any other sinnes shall be imputed vnto those, which are iustified in Christ: But it is a sinne still, as the rest are. Augustine also dare call it a sinne: Concupiscentia peior est ignorantia. Concupiscence is worse then ignorance.Cont. Iulian. lib. 6. cap. 5. Epistol. 105 And in another place: Ignorantia in ijs, qui intelligere noluerunt, peccatum est: in ijs qui non potuerunt, poena peccati: But ignorance is in them which are able to learne, sinne: in those that cannot; a punishment of sinne. If ignorance be sinne, concupiscence worse then ignorance, is much more.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE difference of sinnes.

The Papists.

SOme sinnes are deadly or mortall, because all that doe them are worthie of error 60 damnation: others bee veniall, that is to say, pardonable of their owne nature, Rhemist. Rom. 1.11.

Argum. Sinne when it is finished, bringeth foorth death, Iam. 1.15. Ergo, not all sinne, but that which is consummate and perfited is mortall, Rhemist. ibid.

The Protestants.

Ans. OVt of this place it is gathered, that there are degrees of sinne, and that the more heynous sinne is worthie of more grieuous death and condemnation: but that concupiscence, or other lesse sinnes deserue not death, it is not hence proued: seeing the Scripture saith, That the wages of all sinne is death, Rom. 6.23.

Argum. That no sinne is veniall or pardonable of it owne nature, but that the least deserueth death, if God should deale with vs, according to the exact rule of his iustice, it thus appeareth. First, if all sinnes are not mortall, Christ died not for all sinnes: for he by his death did satisfie onely for sinnes, that deserued death: but Christ died for all sinnes, Iohn. 1.19. Secondly, all transgression of Gods lawe is sinne, and deserueth the curse of God, Galath. 3.10. But all sinne is the transgression of the lawe, 1. Iohn 3.4.

Augustine and other of the fathers doe vse this terme of veniall sinnes, but not in their sense, as though any sinne in it owne nature deserued pardon: but [Page] by veniall sinnes, they vnderstand the lesser and smaller faultes, which are more easilie forgiuen at Gods hand, then the greater. ‘Sunt venialiae peccata, there are certaine veniall sinnes, without the which a man cannot liue, saith Augustine: Propter omnia peccata baptismus inuentus est, propter leuia oratio dominica: For all sinnes Baptisme is a remedy, and the Lords praier for the lesse: De symbolo lib. 1.6.’ By veniall sinnes he vnderstandeth the smaller sinnes, which are not pardonable in their owne nature, for then it were not necessarie to aske forgiuenes for them in the Lords praier: they would vanish away of themselues. Wherefore wee cannot receiue this popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes, as they vnderstand it: as the Scripture vseth to speake, wee doe not greatly mislike them; that is, by grace and mercie in Christ, all sinnes euen the greatest, are not onely pardonable, but pardoned vnto vs, Isay 1.18. But vnto the wicked and impenitent euery sinne is mortall; they shall euen by their idle words be condemned, Matth. 12.36.37.

THE THIRD PART, OF THOSE, which they call veniall sinnes.

The Papists.

error 61 1. SInne is voluntarie, otherwise it is no sinne: and therefore the passions that are in men, hauing not the consent of wil, are farre from sinne, and are not imputed to any man: neither for them neede hee say vnto God, Forgiue vs our sinnes, Rhemist. Rom. 7. sec. 8.9.

The Protestants.

SInnes done without consent of the inward man, are neuer imputed: but this must be vnderstoode onely of the regenerate: in whome there is a new man, borne of the spirite.

Argum. That inuoluntarie lustes which arise in the heart, not hauing the consent of will, are in their nature sinne, it is euident by Saint Pauls words, Rom. 7.20. If I doe that I would not, then is it not I any longer, that doe it, but sinne that dwelleth in mee: he calleth it sinne, though he consent not vnto it.

In Psal. 105 Augustine saith, ‘Peccata negligentiae vel ignorantiae melius accusantur, vt pereant, quàm excusantur, vt maneant, meliusque purgantur inuocato Deo, quàm firmantur irritato Deo: The sinnes of negligence and ignorance are better accused and confessed, then excused, better by praying to God to purge them, then by prouoking God to confirme them.’ Ergo, forgiuenes must be asked at Gods hand for inuoluntarie sinnes, sinnes of ignorance.

[Page]

The Papists.

2. THe motions of the flesh in a iust man, whereunto the minde of man consenteth not, cannot any whit defile the operations of the spirite, but error 62 make them often more meritorious, for the continuall combate that hee hath with them: for it is plaine, that the operations of the flesh and the spirite doe not concurre together to make one act, Rhemist. Rom. 7. sect. 10.

The Protestants.

Ans. THough the operations of the flesh concurre not with the spirite in any one act: yet doe they hinder the workes of the spirite from perfection, and therefore defile them.

Argum. Rom. 7.19. Saint Paul saith, The good that I would, doe I not. Did not concupiscence euen in this blessed Apostle hinder the proceedings of the spirit, when it kept him from doing that good, which he desired? and whereas he cryeth out, and desireth to bee deliuered from that lawe of his members, vers. 24. it is not like that any merite, or good thing can be obteined by it: for then hee should rather haue beene desirous to haue giuen it entertainement still.

Augustine thus writeth of these smaller and lesse sinnes: ‘Quibus peccatis licet occidi animam non credamus, De sanct. serm. 41. ita tamen eam veluti quibusdam pustulis deformem faciunt, vt eam ad amplexum sponsi, sine grandi confusione venire non permittant. By the which sinnes, though the soule bee not slaine; yet the face is deformed as with pimples, that shee dare not without great blushing draw neere vnto her spouse.’ Let them tell me now, what great glorie is obteined, by this corruption in our members.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER all sinnes be remissible.

The Papists.

ALL sinnes are pardonable, so long as the committers of them bee in case error 63 to repent: as they are, so long as they liue in this worlde: It is great blasphemie therefore, which the Caluinists vtter, that Apostasie and certaine other sinnes of the reprobate, cannot be forgiuen at all in this life, Rhemist. 1. Iohn. 1.5. sec. 4. And therefore they say, that blasphemie against the spirite is saide to bee irremissible, because it is hardlie forgiuen: And they define sinne against the holy Ghost, to bee nothing else, but finall impenitencie, Rhemist. Matth. 12.4.

[Page]

The Protestants.

FIrst, sinne against the holy Ghost, is not finall impenitencie: euery one indeede that so sinneth, is finally impenitent, because hee shall neuer haue the grace to repent: But our Sauiour Christ meaneth some speciall sin, in calling it blasphemie against the holy Ghost: for many a wicked man may die impenitently, and yet not blaspheme. Augustine better defineth this sinne: Cum quis aduersus gratiam ipsam, qua reconciliatus est Deo, inuidentiae facibus agitatur: When a man maliciously doth oppugne that grace, whereby he was reconciled to God: lib. 1. de serm. in mont. 41. But most perfitly is this sinne described, Heb. 10.29. where there are set downe three circumstances that make this sin: first, the person; he must be such an one as hath been lightened with grace, and been in outward appearance sanctified: therefore Iewes, Turkes, or Infidels, cannot commit this sinne; because their mindes were neuer illuminate by the truth. Secondly, his affection must bee considered, which is most deadly and hatefull in the highest degree: blaspheming the spirite, and despiting the same, crucifying and persecuting Christ againe as it were, Heb. 6.6. Wherefore they which offend of ignorance, or infirmitie and weakenes, or which fall not into horrible blasphemies, are not guiltie of this sinne. Thirdly, it is the trueth which they hate and detest, which sometime they loued, and were thereby sanctified: They count the blood of the testament as an vnholy thing. Blasphemie then against the holy Ghost, is an horrible hatred and detestation of the trueth, and grace of Gods spirite, whereby hee that now blasphemeth, was before illuminate.

Secondly, this sinne not onely easily shall not be forgiuen, but not at all, as our Sauiour saith, Neither in this worlde, nor the world to come, Math. 12.32. And it is impossible for them to bee renewed by repentance, Heb. 6.6. Wherefore it is a great blasphemie in the Papists, so contrarie to the Scripture to affirme, that blasphemie against the spirite may be forgiuen.

THE FIFTH PART, WHETHER God be the author of sinne.

The Papists.

error 64 NO sinne standeth with the will or intention of God, but is directly against it, Rom. 3. sect. 4. And therefore Christs death was Gods act no otherwise, then by permission, Act. 3. sect. 2. Neither is God the author of sinne, otherwise then by permission, and withholding of his grace, Iam. 1.13. Rhemist.

The Protestants.

Ans. 1. ALL sinne is against the will of God reuealed in his worde, although nothing can come to passe, contrarie to the determinate and secret [Page] will of God. Secondly, God did not onely permit the Iewes to worke their malice vpon Christ, but most holily and most iustly he vsed their malice, to bring his purpose to passe: for the text is, That Christ was deliuered vp according to the determinate counsell of God, Act. 2.23. which must needs be more then a bare permission. Thirdly, although God be not any moouer vnto sinne, yet as a iust iudge he not onely permitteth, but leadeth into temptation those whom in iustice he deliuereth vp to Sathan.

Argum. It is a petition which we dayly rehearse in the Lords praier, Lead vs not into temptation: Likewise, Rom. 11.8. God gaue them the spirite of compunction. These speeches of leading and giuing, implie an actiue power in God, not a passiue and permissiue onely: for how is it possible, that God being omnipotent, should permit or suffer any thing to be done in the world, con [...] ry to his will?

Augustine vpon those words of Dauid, concerning Shemei, Let him alone, what know I, if God haue sent him to curse? Not, saith he,De libero arbitrio. cap. 20. that God bad him curse, for then his obedience should be commended: Sed quod eius voluntatem proprio suo vitiomalam, in hoc peccatum iudicio suo iusto & occul [...]o inclinauit: But because, God by his iust and secret iudgement did incline his wil being corrupt of it selfe, vnto this mischiefe. Loe he saith, inclinauit, he did incline his wil, which is more then permisit, he did suffer him.

THE SIXT PART, OF THE WORKES of those which are not regenerate.

The Papists.

THe works done before iustification, although they doe not proceed of faith, are not properly to be called sinnes, neither doe they deserue the wrath of error 65 God, Concil. Trident. sess. 6. can. 7. Andrad. Tilem. loc. 4. er. 6.

The Protestants.

THe works which were done of the heathen without faith, and of carnal men before they are called, how goodly soeuer they seeme in the sight of men, are nothing els but peccata speciosa, glorious and goodly sinnes.

Argum. Whatsoeuer is not of faith, is sinne, Rom. 14. And without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb. 6.6. Seeing then they could not please God with their faithlesse workes, they must needs be in danger of his wrath: Augustine writeth thus: Si ad consequendam beatam vitam, quam nobis fides, quae in Christo [Page]est, promittit, nihil prosunt homini virtutes, nullo modo possunt verae esse virtutes. If mens vertues helpe them not towards the attaining of eternall life,Cont. Iulian. lib. 4. cap. 3. which is promised onely by faith in Christ, they cannot be said truely to be vertues: but such are the workes of men before they haue faith: Ergo, if they be not vertuous actions, what are they els but vicious and sinfull?

THE SECOND QVESTION, CONCERNING the law, with the seuerall partes thereof.

THe partes of this question are these. First, whether it be possible in this life to keepe the law. Secondly, whether iust men doe sinne. Thirdly, of the workes of supererogation. Fourthly, whether God be to be serued for hope of reward, or feare of punishment. Fiftly, of the vse and office of the Law.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER IT BE possible in this life to keepe the Law.

The Papists.

1. IF any man say, that the precepts and commandements of God vnto a man error 66 iustified, and in the state of grace are impossible to be kept, let him be accursed, Concil. Trid. sess. 6. can. 18.

Argum. Rom. 8.4. That the righteousnes of the Law might be fulfilled in vs: Ergo, the law of God by the grace of Christ may be kept, and the keeping therof is our iustice. S. Iohn also saith, The commandements of God are not heauy, 1. Ioh. 5.3. And our Sauiour saith, His yoke is sweete, and his burden light: Ergo, the commandements of God are possible to be fulfilled in this life.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, the Apostle saith not, that the law is fulfilled by vs, but in vs by Christ, who is made our righteousnes and sanctification by faith, 1. Cor. 1.30. The law remaineth still impossible to be kept by vs through the weakenes of our flesh neither doth God giue vs ability to keep it: but, Christ hath fulfilled it for vs, we notwithstanding being bound to walke in obedience to the commandements of God, which is farre off from perfection, or keeping the law as Gods iustice requireth.

2. To him that is borne of God, and his sinnes pardoned by the grace of Christ, the commandements of God are not grieuous, not because they can perfitly be fulfilled, but because strength is giuen to keepe them in part, and [Page] the curse of the law is taken away, and our transgressions answered in Christ.

Argum. 1. If it were possible for any man to keepe the law, it is possible in this life to be without sinne: But if any man say he hath no sinne, he is a liar, 1. Ioh. 1.8.

Argum. 2. S. Iames saith▪ 2.10. If a man should keepe the whole law, and yet faile in one point, is guiltie of all. He then that will keepe the law, must keep it perfectly, and not faile in the least point: but so is no mortall man able to doe: wherefore it is an horrible blasphemie, to say, that it is possible for any mortall man to keepe the whole law.

Augustine thus expoundeth that place, Philip. 3.15. Let vs, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: by the which place the Rhemists would proue a perfection of iustice in this life, Potest quis esse perfectus iustitiae cognitor, licet non sit perfectus effector. A man may know the rule of iustice perfectly, though he be not a perfect doer: he vnderstandeth a perfection of knowledge, not a perfection of iustice.

The Papists.

2. THey say, that those sinnes which they call veniall, that is, the lesser & smaller error 67 offences, doe not hinder the iustice of men, but that they may truly be called and are indeede iust for all those sinnes: and may notwithstanding them keepe the law of God, and be free from the curse thereof, which is laide vpon mortall and great sinnes, not veniall and smaller offences, Rhemist. 1. Iohn 1. sect. 5. Galath. 3. sect. 4.

The Protestants.

THat men are iust before God, for all their daily transgressions of frailetie, and manifolde infirmities by the righteousnes of Christ, made theirs by a liuely faith; we deny not: but that there is no perfect inherent iustice in themselues, neither that they can perfectly keepe the law, because of those sinnes, thus we proue it out of the word of God.

Argu. They which doe but in the least point break the law, are subiect to the curse thereof: for it is written, Cursed is he that continueth not in all things written in the law to doe them, Galath. 3.10. And what is to be vnderstoode by all things our Sauiour declareth, Math. 5. where he sheweth how murder may be committed in the affection, and in the tongue, and adulterie likewise in the eye: Ergo, the smaller offences are also transgressions of the law: from the which seeing the most righteous men vpon earth are not free, they cannot perfectly keep the law, nor by their own iustice escape the curse thereof.

Augustine: Custodit vias Dei, qui non sic exorbitat, vt eas relinquat, De perfect. iustit. cont. Celest. sed in eis currendo proficit, et si aliquādo vt infirmus titubat, proficit tamen minuēdo peccata. [Page] He is saide to keepe the waies of God, which doth not so turne aside out of them, that he altogether leaue them: but doth dayly profite and goe forward in keeping of them: and although he sometime stumble, yet he profiteth by diminishing of his sinnes. As he therefore that stumbleth, and is turned sometime out of the way, doth not perfectly keepe the way: no more doth the righteous man perfectly keepe the law of God, which he transgresseth by his daily sinnes. In isto ergo conflictu induimur ea iustitia, qua ex fide viuitur: In this conflict therefore let vs put on the righteousnes of faith: he giueth counsell that men should leaue their own righteousnes, and rather labour to liue by faith, and be counted righteous in Christ.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER iust men doe sinne.

The Papists.

error 68 1. A Iust man in his good workes doth not sinne, so much as venially, that is, not in the least manner, no not at all, Concil. Trident. sess. 6. can. 25. Whervpon it followeth, that the good works of righteous men are so perfect, that the least imperfection or blot cannot be found in them.

The Protestants.

THe most righteous men vpon earth haue not onely their infirmities, and are in danger to sinne dayly: but euen their best and most holy workes are blemished with some infirmitie, and haue a smacke of sinne.

Argum. Iob saith, If I wash my selfe with snowe water, and purge my selfe most clean, yet mine owne clothes shal make me filthy, Iob 9.30. that is, though he should alleadge for himselfe, the best workes that euer he did, yet euen in those the Lord could finde out matter against him.

Yea, S. Paul saith, That he knew nothing by himselfe, his owne conscience did not accuse him, yet was he not thereby iustified, 1. Corinth. 4.4. The reason is giuen by S. Iohn, that Although a mans hart condemne him not, yet God is greater then our hart, 1.3.20. Wherefore there is no worke of any man so perfect, but before the Lord it may be found faulty: for All our righteousnes is as a stained clout.

Augustine vpon those words of Iob. 29.14. I put on iustice as a robe: Vestis ista belli magis solet esse, De perfect. iustit. cont. Celest. quā pacis, vbi adhuc expugnatur concupiscentia, non vbi erit plena sine aliquo prorsus hoste iustitiae. This garment, that is, a cloke or mantle, is rather for warre, then peace: for here we doe dayly fight against concupiscence, and there is no perfect righteousnes without some enemie. But if so be any work of ours could be perfect without sinne, righteousnes somtimes might be without an enemie, which Augustine denieth.

[Page]

The Papists.

2. MOrtall sinne, they say, cannot consist together with the grace of God, and error 69 cannot be committed by a man continuing the Sonne of God: for he that is borne of God, saith the Apostle, sinneth not: that is, falleth into no mortall sinne, Rhemist. 1. Iohn 3. sect. 5.

The Protestants.

FIrst, vnderstanding mortall sinne as they doe, for euery sinne that deserueth death, as are adulterie, theft, murder, their exposition is hereticall: for then Dauid should not haue beene the Sonne of God, when he committed adultery, and consequently should haue bene none of the predestinate: he that is once the Sonne of God, is alwaies euen to the end: For whom God loueth, he loueth to the end, Iohn 13.1.

Secondly, the Apostles meaning, when he saith, He that is borne of God, sinneth not, is no other then that which S. Paul hath, Rom. 6.12. That sinne should not raigne in our body, that is, the children of God, though they fal into sinne, continue not in it, nor delight therein, neither are wholly ouercome of it; for it is true of them, that it is not they that doe it, but sinne that dwelleth in them, Rom. 7.20.

Augustine, Quicun (que) in Dei prouidentiss. dispositione praedestinati sunt, De corrept. & grat. cap. 9. non dico nondum renati, sed etiam nondum nati, filij Dei sunt, & perire non possunt: Whosoeuer in the most wise counsell of God are predestinate to saluation, not onely before they are regenerate and borne againe, but euen before they are borne at all, are the Children of God, and cannot perish. If then the elect not yet called, or regenerate, are the Children of God, much more are they that are called and regenerate, though after their calling they doe fall into some sinne for the time.

THE THIRD PART, OF THE WORKES of Supererogation.

The Papists.

THey teach, that it is not onely possible for men to keep the Lawe of God in error 70 this life, but to doe more then is prescribed or commanded: and that men of their abundance may allotte vnto others such workes of supererogation, Rhemist. 1. Cor. 9. sect. 6. ex Tileman. loc. 3. er. 16.

Argu. 2. Cor. 8. sect. 3. As your abundance now supplyeth their want, their abundance also may supply your want, that there may be equality. Saints or other vertuous persons may in measure and proportion of other mens deseruings, [Page] allot vnto them as well the supererogation of their spirituall works as these, that abound in worldly goods, may giue almes of their superfluities, to them which are in necessitie, Rhemist. totid. verbi [...].

Ans. 1. This place prooueth no communication of merites of one to another: but that as euery one aboundeth in the gifts and graces of God, so they ought to communicate the vse thereof one to anothers benefite: for no man meriteth himselfe by any worke of his: therefore he cannot communicate that to another, which he hath not himselfe. Here also mention is made of mutuall communication, for one to supply anothers want: but he that doth supererogate to another of the abundance of his good workes, hath no need to haue his wants supplied by another mans deseruings: therefore there is no mutuall communicating betwene them, which is the thing whereof the Apostle speaketh in this place.

Argum. That no man is holpen by another mans deseruings, but all that a man can doe, is little enough and not sufficient for him selfe; it is plaine in the Gospell: where our Sauiour saith, That when we haue done all that is commanded, we are vnprofitable seruants, and did no more thē was our dutie, Luke 17.10. Ergo, a man can not doe more then his dutie.

We may also remember the parable of the Virgins, Math. 25. where the fiue wise refuse to giue of their oyle to the fiue foolish: least (say they) there will not be enough for vs and you. No man therefore hath attained to such a perfection of goodnes, that he is able to spare ought for his brother, but shal haue need thereof himselfe.

Augustine writing vpon this parable saith, Vnusquis (que) pro se rationem reddet, nec alieno testimonio quicquam adiuuatur apud Deum: In Math. serm. 22. et vix sibi quisque sufficit, vt sibi testimonium per hibeat conscientia sua. Euery man shall giue account for himselfe, neither is a man relieued by anothers testimonie before God: the testimonie of a mans conscience is hardly sufficient for himselfe. See more of this matter: Controu. 14. quest. 7. part. 4. & quest. 8. part. 3. articul. 2.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER GOD be to be serued for hope of reward, or feare of punishment.

The Papists.

error 71 1. MEn ought to doe good in respect and for reward and recompence in heauen for their good workes: the Apostle saith of Moses, Heb. 11. He had respect to the recompence of reward, Rhemist. ibid.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, we deny, that we ought to make account of heauen to be giuen as a iust recompence deserued by our workes: for Life eternall, as the [Page] Apostle saith, is the free gift of God, Rom. 6.23. 2. We graunt that men in their wel doing ought to haue respect to the reward, but not chiefely or principally: but the respect of Gods glory and their owne dutie ought to moue them more.

Argum. Psal. 34.8. Taste and see, how gratious the Lord is! We ought as dutifull children to yeeld obedience to the Lord, and delight in him, euen because of that pleasant taste, comfort and ioy, which we feele in his goodnes toward vs. Augustine saith well, Deus non propterea se amari vult, In Psal. 52. quia dat aliquid praeter se, sed quia dat se: God would not be beloued of vs, because he giueth or promiseth any thing beside him selfe, but because he giueth himselfe.

The Papistes.

2. EVen in right Christian godly men there remaineth doubt, mistrust, feare error 72 of hell and damnation: and the feare of Gods iudgements causeth iust men to humble themselues, least they should be damned. And so S. Paul saith, Worke out your saluation with feare and trembling, Philipp. 2. Rhemist. 1. Iohn 4. sect. [...].

The Protestants.

Ans. WE acknowledge a dutifull reuerence & feare of God alwaies remaining in the godly: but it is farre from that seruile and slauish feare, which is caused onely by the remembrance of hell fire and eternall iudgement: Augustine doth thus resemble the matter: The chaste wife (saith he) and the adulterous doe both feare their husbands, sed casta timet ne discedat vir, adultera, ne veniat: But the chaste wife is afraid least her husband should depart,In Psal. 127 the adulterous is afraid least he should come. Such a feare as is in the chaste wife, we graunt to be in the children of God, but not the other.

2. We also confesse, that the horror of hell is profitable to make a way and entrance for the calling of worldly and hard harted men, as the needle or bristle (as Augustine saith) maketh a way for the thread. But in a man already called, this feare is expelled by loue, as the Apostle saith, 1. Ioh. [...]. [...]8. For we must be of those that loue the appearing of Christ, 2. Tim. 4.8. Not of that number which feare it, and wish it were prolonged.

August. Si possumus efficere, fratres, vt dies iudicij non veniret, puto, quia nec sic erat, male viuendum. If we could bring it about, that the day of iudgement should not come at all, we ought not for all that to liue ill. His meaning is, that we ought not to liue well onely for feare of Gods iudgements.

[Page]

THE FIFTH PART, OF THE VSE of the Law.

The Papists.

error 73 THe law, they say, is by Christ, Ministratio vitae effecta, made the ministration of life, Andr. lib. 5. in qua omnis nostra salus consistit: wherein consisteth our saluation, Catech. Colom. ex Tileman. de leg. loc. 3. err. 14. they call it Verbum fidei, and verbum Christi, the word of Christ, and the word of Faith, to be obeyed and followed of all Christians, that which Christ vttered to the yong man: Math. 19.17. If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the commandements: Concil. Trident. sess. 6. cap. 7. So their opinion is, that the law is made vnto vs a meane and instrument of our saluation.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, our Sauiour vttered those words to the yong man, onely to humble him thereby, and to teach him to know him selfe: for otherwise the Apostles should haue taught contrary doctrine to their master, who exhort men onely to beleeue, and they shalbe saued, Act. 16.31.

Argum. The Law was not ordeined to saue men, but it serueth onely as a Schoolemaster, as S. Paul saith, to bring vs to Christ, Galath. 3.24. It also reuealeth and discouereth sinne, Rom. 7.7. The Apostle also calleth it the killing letter, and ministery of condemnation, 2. Cor. 3.6.9. How then can it procure our saluation? therefore what can be more opposite and contrary to Scripture, then this assertion of theirs?

Let Augustine speake: Testimonium legis eis, qui ea non legitimè vtuntur, testimonium est quo conuincantur, eis, qui legitimè vtuntur, testimonium est, quo demonstratur, quò liberandi confugere debeant peccatores. The testimonie of the law, to them which vse it not aright, is a testimony to conuince them; to them which doe, a testimony to teach them, to whom sinners ought to flie for their deliuerance: Ergo, the law doth not it selfe worke our deliuerance, but sendeth vs to our deliuerer.

THE THIRD PART, OF THIS controuersie of Iustification.

THe particular questions are these. First, of Free will, and the power thereof. Secondly, of Faith. Thirdly, of good workes. Fourthly, of the manner of our iustification.

[Page]

THE FIRST QVESTION of Free will.

THe parts of this question. First, whether free will in spirituall things were vtterly extinguished by the sinne of Adam. Secondly, of the power and strength of free will in vs.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER FREE WILL be vtterly lost by the transgression of Adam.

The Papists.

FRee will is not vtterly extinguished, but onely abated in strength, and attenuated,error 74 Concil. Trid. sess. 6. cap. 1.

The Rhemists also gather by the parable of the man in the Gospell that lay for halfe dead, Luk. 10. vers. 30. that neither vnderstanding, nor free will, and other powers of the soule, are vtterly extinguished and taken away, but wounded onely by the sinne of Adam, Rhemist. ibid.

The Protestants.

Ans. IT is but a feeble collection and of small force which they draw from this allegorie: for allegories and similitudes, as they know themselues right well, doe not hold in all things, but wherein onely they are compared: neither doe they necessarily conclude.

Argum. But that we are altogether dead in sinne by the transgression of Adam, the scripture speaketh plainly in many places without allegorie, Ephes. 2.1, 5. When we were dead in our sinnes, he hath quickened vs in Christ. Likewise, Coloss. 2.13. he sayth not, as in the parable [...], they left him for halfe dead, but [...], plaine dead men indeed.

Augustine sayth, Cum peccauit primus homo, non in parte aliqua, sed tota, qua conditus est, natura deliquit: When the first man sinned,Cont. Pela. articul. 3. he did not offend in any one part, but wholly in that nature wherein he was created. And in another place, Natura tota fuit per liberum arbitrium in ipsa radice vitiata: In Iohann. tract. 87. Our nature wholly was corrupted by free will, in the very roote or originall, that is, in Adam: Ergo, all the powers both of bodie and soule wholly corrupt and decayed in spirituall things.

THE SECOND PART, OF THE POWER AND strength of free will in man.

The Papists.

THey say not, that a man by his free will only is able to liue well, or to obtaine error 75 eternall life: but yet by the power of free will, stirred, prepared and assisted [Page] by the grace of God, he is able to doe it. The first stirring then and motion of the heart, they say, is of God. Then it is the part of free will to apprehend the grace offered, and to giue consent vnto it, and to worke together with it, Trid. Concil. sess. 6. cap. 5. can. 4.

Loc. 31. Eckius setteth downe foure steps or degrees to iustification. The beginning of our calling is onely of God, by inspiring of grace into vs: this is the first degree. The second is in our owne power, to giue assent vnto grace once inspired. Thirdly, to obtaine that, which by so assenting we doe desire, is onely of Gods gift, and this is the third degree, gratiae gratum facientis, of grace which maketh vs gracious, or acceptable. The fourth degree of perseuerance in the grace of saluation receiued, is partly in our power and free will, partly of the grace of God.

Our Rhemists thus define the matter: Man, they say, was neuer without free will: but hauing the grace of Christ he is truely made free, Iohn. 8. sect. 2. Againe, though our election, calling, or first comming to God, lye not wholly or principally vpon our owne will or workes: yet our willing or working of any good to our saluation, is the secondary cause; Gods speciall motion, grace and assistance is the principall, Rom. 9. sect. 4.

So then this is their sentence, that neither our free will is so corrupt, that it had neede wholly to be assisted by the grace of God, but that it worketh somewhat of it selfe: nor yet so perfect, that it is able of it owne strength to obtaine saluation: But their plaine meaning is this, that Gods grace and mans free will do worke actiuely together, as the Rhemists note. The Gentiles, though they beleeued specially by Gods grace and preordination, yet they beleeue also by their owne free will, Act. 13. sect. 2.

Argum. 2. Timoth. 2.21. If any man purge himselfe from these, he shall be a vessell of honour, 1. Iohn. 3.3. Euery man that hath this hope, sanctifieth himselfe: Ergo, man hath free will to make himselfe a vessell of saluation, or damnation. And this teacheth vs, that man may sanctifie himselfe by his free will, working together with the grace of GOD, Rhemist. in vtrumque locum.

Ans. First, these places of scripture doe not proue, that there is any freedome or libertie in mans will to doe good by nature: but that our will being enlarged by Gods spirit, consenteth vnto grace, not of it selfe, or by it owne power. This then is the difference betweene vs: We hold that our free will is wholly corrupt by nature, and can doe nothing, vnlesse it be holpen by grace: They say, that there is some strength left by nature in free will, and it worketh together with the grace of God.

Argum. 2. If there be no free will vnto good, what need exhortations, admonitions, precepts, lawes, reward, punishment, seeing nothing is left in a mans owne power? Eckius.

Ans. Though all good things doe come of God, and we haue no power in our selues to doe that which good is, yet this hindereth not exhortations, [Page] teaching, industrie and labour, no more then the doctrine of predestination doth: For as God giueth all grace, so he bestoweth them by meanes: faith is the gift of God, yet it commeth by hearing. The staffe of bread is the blessing of God, yet for all that the husbandman must not leaue tilling of his ground. So our will is directed by the grace of God vnto goodnes: but wee must vse the meanes notwithstanding, whereby the grace of God worketh in vs.

The Protestants.

THat it may fullie appeare wherein the chiefe poynt of this controuersie lyeth, we will first shewe what manner of free will we denye not to be in man.

1. We confesse that our first parents had free will before their fall, both to choose the good, and refuse the euill: as Augustine sayth, Magnas liberi arbitrij vires homo cum conderetur, accepit, sed eas peccando amisit: Man by creation had great strength in his free will: but hee vtterly lost it by his sinne.

2. We acknowledge a free will in man, that is, a gouernment of reason, Non per quod sit idoneum, quae ad Deum pertinent, sine Deo, inchoare & perficere, sed tantùm in operibus vitae praesentis, as Augustine sayth: Not a free will, whereby men are able to begin or finish any worke to Godward, without his grace: but onely in the affayres of this life: as to labour, to eate, to drinke, to build, to plant, and to doe other affayres of this life. These things hath God left vnto mans discretion, whom he hath endued with a reasonable soule: yet so, that al these things are gouerned and directed by the generall prouidence of God. And therefore in all these actions, we must say as the Apostle teacheth vs,Iam. 4.15. If the Lord will, I will doe this or that.

But in the preparing of our will vnto good, the generall prouidence of GOD is not sufficient, but there must be also a speciall influence of his grace.

3. A free will to doe euill also we graunt, free from compulsion or coaction, of it selfe inclined to euill without any enforcing: as Augustine sayth, Liberum hominis arbitrium ad malum sufficit, ad bonum parum est, De corrept. & grat. c. 11 nisi adiuuetur ab omnipotente bono: The free will of man sufficeth vnto euill, but it is of small force vnto goodnes, vnles it be holpen by the almightie Good.

4. Neither doe we so denye free will in good things, as though men were violently forced, and compelled against their will to the kingdome of GOD, as the Papists doe charge vs, Iohn. 6. sect. 3. But God so chaungeth our willes, that of vnwilling hee maketh vs willing: as Augustine, Ex nolentibus volentes facit: and giueth vs grace most gladlie to embrace Christ: as our Sauiour sayth, If the Sonne make you free, then are you free indeede. [Page] So man hath free will from coaction, both in euill things, to the which he is voluntarily enclined; as also in good things, wherein his will being regenerate, he walketh willingly without compulsion.

5. Neither doe we so take away free will from man, as though there were no more in him, then in a piece of clay, as our aduersaries falsely charge vs, Rom. 9. sect. 7. As Augustine sayth, Non sicut in lapidibus insensatis, aut in ijs, quae rationem non habent, Cont. Pela. 1.5. Deus salutem nostram operatur: God worketh not our saluation in vs, as in senseles stones, or in vnreasonable creatures: So we do not take away mans proper motions or thoughts, as the Rhemists accuse vs. 2. Corinth. 3. sect. 2. God giueth not a new mind, soule, will, or vnderstanding to the regenerate, but onely altereth and changeth it: so that it remaineth the same in matter and substance, but God by his grace, casteth it as it were into a new mould, and giueth a new forme and shape vnto it.

De bon. perseueran. lib. 2. ca. 13.So August. Cogitantes credimus, cogitantes agimus, quicquid agimus, sed tamen quod attinet ad pietatis viam, & verum Dei cultum, non sumus idonei cogitare aliquid ex nobis, sed sufficientia nostra ex Deo est: We by our owne thoughts beleeue by our owne cogitation we enterprise whatsoeuer is done, yet in the way of godlines, and in the worship of God, we are not able to thinke any thing of our selues, but our sufficiencie is of God. Wherefore two things are to be considered in our will and thoughts, the naturall power of willing and thinking, and the goodnes and holines of our thoughts: the first is in vs, and is properly ours by the gift of God: but the other commeth onely of God by his grace. The will, the vnderstanding, the thoughts are ours, but the goodnes is meerely and entirely wrought by the spirit of God: So that in respect of the goodnes inspired into our mindes, our willes are altogether passiue; in respect of the generall power and naturall motion of willing, thinking, and vnderstanding, they are also actiue.

The seuerall poynts then, wherein we and our aduersaries dissent about free will, are these.

1. They say, that man was neuer without free will, but it is made more free by grace, Rhemist. Iohn. 8. sect. 2. that is, our free will is not altogether corrupt, but there remaineth some freedome therein, euen before grace.

Ans. Cleane contrarie to S. Paul, who denieth that in his flesh dwelleth any good thing, Rom. 7.18. but sayth, he by nature was wholly sold vnto sinne, vers. 14. How then can there remaine any goodnes in our will without grace? Augustine consenteth, Laborant homines inuenire in voluntate, quid boni sit nostrum, quod non sit ex Deo, quod quomodo inueniri possit ignoro: Men doe labour to finde some goodnes in the will, that is of our selues, and not of God: but I am altogether ignorant how any such thing should be found.

2. The beginning of our calling, and the first motions and stirrings of the heart are of grace, but to consent is wholly in our power: so belike God beginneth the good worke and we continue it. This is right the old Pelagian heresie: [Page] Gratiam Dei non ad singulos actus dari: That the grace of God need not be giuen at euery assay: but it is enough if God giue a hint, and shewe vs the beginning, and we will performe the rest. This heresie is confuted by Augustine, Epistol. 106. And in another place, Nos eam gratiam volumus, saith he, qua non solum reuelatur sapientia, sed amatur, non suadetur bonum, sed persuadetur: De grat. Christ. 1.10 We vnderstand that grace, by the which wisedome is not only reuealed, but loued, we are not moued and stirred only to good things, but throughly perswaded. Wherefore it is not God that beginneth the good worke in vs onely, but also continueth and finisheth it: for all things are by Iesus Christ, 1. Corinth. 8.7. no good thing in vs but by him.

3. They also renew another heresie of the Pelagians, who taught: That, what men are commanded to doe by free will, facilius impleri per gratiam, is but more easily performed by grace. What els doe the Rhemists say,Haeres. 83. August. giuing this note, that although the Gentiles do especially beleeue by Gods grace, yet they doe beleeue by their free will? Act. 13.2. So grace helpeth them only more especially, fully, or easely to beleeue. Whereupon it followeth, that they may beleeue without grace, though not so especially.

Now then, we are to proue against our aduersaries, that our free will hath no power at all of it selfe to will or doe that which is good, no further then it is guided, and not onely in part assisted, but wholly directed by the spirit of God.

Argum. 1. Philipp. 2.13. God worketh in vs both the will and the deede: yea and the thought to, 2. Cor. 3.5. He sayth not, God and we worke, but he himselfe worketh: he is all in all.

Argum. 2. Iohn. 6.44. No man commeth to me, vnlesse my father draw him. But he is not drawne that giueth assent of his owne accord: for so they say, that God first toucheth the heart with his spirit, and then it is in the power of man to giue consent. But the scripture speaketh otherwise: how that God draweth vs, he draweth our will, and maketh vs to giue assent vnto his grace. He it is that taketh away the stonie heart, and giueth an heart of flesh, Ezech. 11.19. Ergo, he prepareth and addresseth the will wholly. For like as a stone hath no fleshy nature in it, no more hath the naturall will of men any goodnesse dwelling therein.

Augustine, Quicquid vult bonum, quicquid potest, à Domino est, Hypogno. cont. Pelag. articul. 2. quia sine me ait Dominus, nihil potestis facere, Iohn. 15. Whatsoeuer a man either willeth, or is able to doe, it is of God: as the Lord sayth in the Gospell, Without me you can doe nothing: Ergo, without grace the will is able to doe nothing: it is then wholly corrupt in it selfe. It followeth therefore, that our will and Gods grace worke not together: but God by his spirit worketh alone in vs.

THE SECOND QVESTION, of Faith.

THe parts of the question. First, what faith is. Secondly, of the diuers kindes of faith. Thirdly, of the forme of faith. Fourthly, how we are iustified by [Page] faith. Fiftly, whether faith be meritorious. Sixtly, whether it be in our owne power. Seuenthly, whether faith may be lost. Eightly, whether wicked men haue faith.

THE FIRST PART, WHAT FAITH IS, whereby we are iustified.

The Papists.

error 76 IVstifying faith, or faith that iustifieth, is not, that assured beleefe and confidence of the heart, whereby we are perswaded that our sinnes are forgiuen vs in Christ, Concil. Trident. sess. 6. can. 13. It is a generall or vniuersall beleeuing the articles of Christs death and resurrection, not any fond speciall faith, fiducia, or confidence, of each mans owne saluation, Rhemist. Rom. 4. sect. 9.

Argum. Abrahams faith was nothing els but his beleefe of a certaine article reuealed vnto him from God, and credite giuen to Gods speeches, Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. Abrahams faith was not onely a generall or historicall beleefe, that Gods speeches were true; but a sure confidence and trust in God, that his promises pertained vnto him: and that he himselfe should bee blessed in that promised seede: as our Sauiour testifieth, Iohn. 8.56. Abraham desired to see my day, and he sawe it, and was glad. For whereof sprang that exceeding ioy in Abraham, but vpon that certaine hope and perswasion which he had of his owne saluation in Christ?

The Protestants.

A Iustifying faith is not onely a generall beleefe of the articles of faith, that Christ was borne, dyed, rose againe for them that beleeue: but it is an assured and stedfast confidence, whereby euery faithfull man particularly doth applie to himselfe the generall promises of God, for the hope of remission of his sinnes in Christ, that Christ dyed, rose againe, and did all the rest, euen for him.

Argum. 1. Saint Iames sayth, The diuels also doe beleeue that God is, and doe tremble:Iam. 2.19. yea no doubt, but they beleeue the word of God is true, and confesse all the articles of the faith: for they acknowledge Christ to be the Sonne of the liuing God, Mark. 5.7. But the faith of diuels is no iustifying faith: Ergo, neither this historicall and generall faith.

Argum. 2. Saint Paul was saued by no other faith, then the common iustifying faith of all Christians: but this faith wrought a particular perswasion in him, From henceforth is layd vp for me a crowne of righteousnes, 2. Timoth. 8. Ergo, such ought the faith of all Christians to be.

[Page] Augustine sayth, Nos non simul omnes, In Psal. 106 sed paulatim & singulatim credentes congregamur in vnam quandam ciuitatem: We (sayth he) not beleeuing all at once, but euery man asunder and by himselfe, are gathered into one people. What this singulatim credere, meaneth, he sheweth a few lines after: Quicquid, cum loquor, agnoueris in te, quisquis expertus [...]s, crede contingere omnibus qui de manu inimicorū precioso sanguine redimuntur: That which I say, thou that hast the experience thereof in thy selfe, knowe that it is common to all that are redeemed by that precious blood: Ergo, euery man must haue a particular feeling and experience of his redemption in himselfe.

The Papists.

2. FAith a man may feele and knowe to bee in himselfe, because it is an act onely of vnderstanding, but a man cannot bee assured thereby, that error 77 his sinnes are forgiuen him, or that he is in the state of grace, Rhemist. 2. Corinth. 13. sect. 1.

The Protestants.

Ans. WE see what a poore miserable faith, the faith of popish Catholikes is: They say, it is but a bare act of the vnderstanding, which bringeth with it no certaintie or assurance of saluation. But the Apostle, Hebr. 11.1. defineth faith after another sort: It is the ground of things hoped for, and the euidence of things not seene. Faith then hath two parts, as it worketh the euidence and knowledge of heauenly things in the vnderstanding: so also it begetteth a strong hope and perswasion in the heart of the promises of God: it is not therefore onely an act of the vnderstanding.

Argum. But that by a liuely and true faith, men may knowe that they are in grace, and may bee assured of saluation, Saint Paul teacheth, Proue your selues whether you be in the faith: know ye not, how that Iesus Christ is in you, vnlesse yee be reprobates? 2. Corinth. 13.5. By faith therefore wee may knowe whether Christ bee in vs: Ergo, whether wee are in the state of grace: for Christ dwelleth onely by faith in the elect, and such as shall be saued, Ephes. 3.17.

Augustine, Vnusquisque inspiciat se intus, appendat se, probet se in omnibus factis suis: fides, quae operatur per dilectionem, si in vobis est, iam pertinetis ad praedestinatos: Let euery man looke into himselfe, examine, proue himselfe: if faith working by loue bee in you, euen now yee doe belong to the number and companie of the predestinate: Ergo, by a liuely faith men may bee assured of their election.

[Page]

THE SECOND PART, OF THE DIVERS kindes of faith.

The Papists.

error 78 1. THere is a kind of faith, called fides implicita, the faith of simple men and idiots: who although they are not able to giue a reason of their beleefe, yet it is enough for them to say they are Catholike men, & that they wil liue and dye in that faith which the Catholike Church doth teach, Rhemist. Luk. 12. sect. 3. This implicite faith, which, they say, is sufficient for common Catholikes, is nothing els but to beleeue as the Church beleeueth, though they knowe nothing themselues particularly.

The Protestants.

AS before they spoyled faith of the better part thereof, which is a stable and certaine perswasion of the heart: so now also they robbe it of the other part, which is an euidence and light of spirituall knowledge: for faith cannot stand with ignorance, but necessarily bringeth with it an illumination of the mind, as it worketh stablenes in the heart.

Argum. Wherefore it is not enough for a Christian to say, he beleeueth as the Catholike Church beleeueth: for we must be readie to giue account to euery one that asketh of that hope that is in vs, 1. Pet. 3.15. Ergo, euery true Christian must be able to giue account of his beleefe.

Augustine writeth, Ita apud omnes vulgatam & confirmatam esse catholicam fidem, Cont. Iuli. lib. 6. cap. 4. vt nec notitiam possit fugere popularem: That the Catholike faith was so common, and so plaine, that it could not bee hid euen vnto the popular sort. For now in these dayes the prophecie of Ieremie ought to bee fulfilled, They shall all knowe me, from the least of them to the greatest, Hebr. 8.11.

The Papists.

error 79 2. THey affirme, that the faith of miracles, spoken of 1. Corinth. 12.9. is of the same substance with the common iustifying faith: it differeth onely in an accidentall qualitie of more feruor, deuotion and confident trust, Rhemist. ibid.

Yea, that faith which Saint Iames calleth a dead faith, is notwithstanding a true faith, and the same which is called the Catholike faith, and which the Apostle defineth, Hebr. 11. and in substance all one with that which iustifieth, Rhemist. Iam. 2. sect. 11.

[Page]

The Protestants.

FIrst, the faith of miracles, and the iustifying faith, are not all of one nature: because the faith of miracles may bee in wicked men, Matth. 7.23. The iustifying faith can be in none but those that shall be saued, Mark. 16.16. They that beleeue shall bee saued. But what intolerable boldnes is this, to ascribe greater confidence and trust to that faith, which may be in wicked men, then to the true iustifying faith in the elect?

Secondly, the dead faith, that Saint Iames treateth of, is not of the same nature with the iustifying faith, nor that faith which is handled, Heb. 11. For by that faith the Patriarkes pleased GOD, and beleeued that hee was a rewarder of those which sought him, verse 6. But this dead faith hath no such operation.

Againe, it is great blasphemie, to make this dead faith, and a liuely iustifying faith, of one and the same kinde and nature: for as a dead man cannot be said properly to bee a man, no more can a dead faith bee properly called a faith. Nay further, the faith of diuels and the faith of Saints cannot bee of one nature and substance: but this dead speculatiue faith may be in diuels, Iam. 2.19. Ergo, it is a blasphemous assertion, that these two faiths are all of one.

Augustine saith, ‘Discerne fidem tuam a fide daemonum: daemones credunt, De verb. Apost. ser. 16. quod oderunt; distinguit Apostolus fides, quae operatur per dilectionem: Discerne thy faith from the faith of diuels; the diuels beleeue that which they hate. The Apostle doth distinguish them: faith which worketh by loue.’ Ergo, a dead faith which is fruitelesse, and worketh not by loue, is the faith of diuels, and so not of one nature with a true iustifying faith.

THE THIRD PART, WHEther charitie be the forme of iustifying faith.

The Papists.

IT is so affirmed by our Rhemistes, Iam. 2. sect. 11. Faith being formed,error 80 and made aliue by charitie, iustifieth. Loue is not as the instrument whereby faith worketh, but as the proper forme, Tapper. ex Tileman. Heshus. de fide err. 7.

Argum. Saint Iames saith, As the bodie without the spirite is dead, so faith without workes is dead, 2.26. But the soule or spirite giueth the forme and life to the bodie. Ergo, so doe the workes of charitie to faith, Rhemist.

[Page]

The Protestants.

Ans. WE must consider of what kinde of faith Saint Iames speaketh: not of a liuely or iustifying faith, but of a dead faith, which in deede is no faith, neither can possiblie receiue any life or quickening, to bee made a true and right faith. The words then are thus to be read, and distinguished: So faith without works is dead: that is, this kinde of faith, which neither worketh, nor euer shall: Not thus, Faith is dead without workes: as though a true faith were quickened by works. But euen as the bodie is dead, hauing neither soule, nor the operations thereof, life, motion, sense: so this vaine speculatiue kinde of faith is dead, both wanting the spirite and soule, that is, hauing not one sparke of true faith, neither the operations and fruites thereof, which a liuely faith sheweth by loue, as the soule worketh life and motion in the bodie: for a liuely faith can neuer bee without workes: And a dead faith will neuer haue workes, but remaineth dead for euer.

Wee must not therefore thinke, that it is one and the same faith, which sometime is dead without workes, and againe is made aliue and quickened, when workes come: But wee must vnderstand two kindes of faith: one altogether voide of good workes, which is onely a faith in name, and a verie dead faith. Another is a liuelie faith, alwaies working: and this can neuer become a dead faith, so neither can the other bee euer made a liuelie faith.

Argum. That charitie is not the forme or any cause of faith, but the effect rather and fruite thereof, we doe learne out of the word of God: Christ saith, Iohn 3.18. Hee that beleeueth, shall not bee condemned, but is alreadie passed from death to life, Iohn. 5.24. Faith then is able to saue vs, and alone iustifieth vs before God without loue (which alwaies foloweth a true faith▪ but is not ioyned, or made a partner with it in the matter of iustification) But faith could doe nothing without the forme thereof: Ergo, charitie is not the forme of faith. Saint Paul also faith: Faith which worketh by loue, Galath. 5.6. The being and substance of faith is one thing, the working another: Loue onely concurreth with faith in the working, it is no part of the essence or being of faith.

In Psal. 67. August. Ea sola bona opera dicenda sunt, quae fiunt per dilectionem, haec necesse est, antecedat fides, vt inde ista, non ab istis incipiat illa: Those onely are to bee counted good workes, which are wrought by loue: faith of necessitie must goe before: for they must take their beginning from faith, and not faith from them. Faith then goeth before loue that worketh, therefore loue is not the forme of faith: for forma prior est re formata, the forme should goe before the thing formed.

[Page]

THE FOVRTH PART, HOW MEN are iustified by faith.

The Papists.

WEe are saide to bee iustified by faith, because faith is the beginning,error 81 foundation, and the roote of iustification, Concil. Triden. sess. 6. cap. 8. Faith then by their sentence doth not fully iustifie the beleeuer, but is the beginning, way and preparation onely to iustification, Andrad. ex Tilem. de fide err. 11. Rhemist. Rom. 3. sect. 3.

The Protestants.

FAith is not the beginning onely of our iustification, but the principall and onely worker thereof: neither are wee iustified in part or in whole by any other meanes then by faith.

Argum. He that is at peace with God, is fully and perfectly iustified, his conscience cleared, and his sinnes remitted. But by faith wee haue peace of conscience: Ergo, by faith wee are fullie and perfectly iustified, Rom. 5.1. The Scripture also faith, The iust man shall liue by faith, Rom. 1.17. But wee liue not by iustification begun onely, but perfited and finished: Ergo, our full iustification is by faith.

Augustine vpon these words, Iohn 6.29. This is the worke of God, that yee beleeue &c. Si iustitia est opus Dei, quomodo erit opus Dei vt credatur in eum, nisi ipsa sit iustitia, vt credamus in eum? If iustice or righteousnes bee the worke of God, how is it the worke of God to beleeue in him, vnlesse it be righteousnes it selfe to beleeue in him? See then, it is not initium iustitiae credere, sed ipsa iustitia: it is not the beginning of iustice to beleeue, but iustice and righteousnes it selfe.

THE FIFT PART, WHETHER faith bee meritorious.

The Papists.

BY faith we doe merite eternall life, Catechis. Roman. p. 121. ex Tilemann. de error 82 fide. err. 20. Rhemists also ascribe meriting to faith, Rom. 3. sect. 3.

Argum. Faith is a worke: Ergo, if we be iustified by faith, wee are iustified by workes, and soe consequently by merite.

The Protestants.

Ans. FAith in deed is a worke, but not any of our owne works: it is called the worke of God, Iohn. 6.29. God doth wholly worke it in vs: Ergo, wee cannot merite by it.

[Page]Argum. Saint Paul saith, Ephes. 2.8. By grace are you saued through faith, not of yourselues: for it is the gift of God, not of workes, least any man should boast himselfe. Faith then is no meritorious cause of our iustification, but onely an instrumentall meanes, whereby we doe apprehend the grace of God offered in Christ: God giueth both faith and the end of faith. Vtrumque Dei est, (as Augustine saith) & quod iubet, Lib. 1. de praedestinat. 11. & quod offertur: Beleeue and thou shalt be saued: both come of God▪ the thing commanded, that is faith, and the thing offered, namely saluation, Ergo, all is of grace.

THE SIXT PART, WHETHER to beleeue bee in mans power.

The Papists.

RHemist. Act. 13. sect. 2. giue this note, that the Gentiles beleeued by their error 83 owne free will, though principallie by Gods grace: therefore, to beleeue, partly consisteth in mans free will, though not altogether: this is their opinion.

The Protestants.

FAith is the meere gift of God, Ephes. 2.8. and wholly commeth from God: it is not either in part or whole of our selues.

Argum. Rom. 11.36. Of him, through him, and for him are all thinges. ‘Ergo fidei initium ex ipso, neque hoc excepto ex ipso sunt caetera: Therefore saith Augustine, the beginning of our faith is of him; vnlesse wee will say, that all things else are of God, this onely excepted.’ And afterward hee sheweth, that our faith is wholly of God, not part of him, part of our selues. ‘Sic enim homo, quasi componet cum Deo, vt partem fidei sibi vendicet, partem Deo relinquat.’ So man shall as it were compound with God, to chalenge part of faith to himselfe, and leaue part for God.

THE SEVENTH PART, WHEther faith may be lost.

The Papists.

error 84 A Man may fall away from the faith, which once truely he had: as Saint Paul saith of some, They had made shipwrack of faith, 1. Timoth. 1.19. Rhemist. ibid. Ergo, true faith may be lost.

The Protestants.

Ans. THe Apostle saith, Some hauing put away a good cōscience, made shipwrack of faith. Such a faith in deed, yt hath not a good cōscience, may be [Page] lost: for it is not a true liuely faith, but a dead fruitelesse faith.

Argum. But hee that once hath receiued a true liuely faith, and is thereby iustified before God, can neuer fall away, neither can that faith vtterlie perish or faile in him: for He that beleeueth, is alreadie passed from death to life, Iohn. 5.24. If then it be possible for a man to be brought from life to death, from heauen back againe to hell, then may a faithfull beleeuer become also a faithlesse infidell.

Augustine doth plainely set downe his sentence of this matter:De corrept. & grat. ca. 7. ‘Horum fides, quae per dilectionem operatur, profectò aut omnino non deficit, aut siqui sunt, quorum deficit, reparatur antequam vita ista finiatur. Their faith, which worketh by loue, either neuer faileth at all, or if it doe fayle in any, it is repaired againe, before their life be ended.’

THE EIGHT PART, WHETHER wicked men may haue a true faith.

The Papists.

THe certaintie of remission of sins, with a sure confidence and trust in Christ,error 85 may be found euen amongst schismatikes, heretikes, and wicked men, Conc. Trident. sess. 6. cap. 9.

The Protestants.

IT is impossible, that a true liuelie faith, whereby wee are iustified before God, which worketh in vs a sure confidence and trust in God, should enter into the heart of a wicked man.

Argum. Christ saith, Hee that beleeueth in mee, shall neuer thirst, Iohn 6.35. And verse 40. This is the will of God, that hee that beleeueth in me, should haue eternall life: Ergo, if wicked men and reprobates may haue this faith; they also shall haue euerlasting life: which is a thing impossible.

‘Augustine, Nostra fides .i. catholica fides, iustos ab iniustis, non operum, Cont. 2. Epist. Pelag. li. 3.5. sed ipsa fidei lege discernit, quia iustus ex fide viuet. The Catholike faith discerneth iust men from vniust, not by workes, but by the lawe of faith: for the iust shall liue by faith. If then the difference betweene the godlie and wicked be onely faith, if the one may haue faith as well as the other, there should bee no difference betweene them.’

THE THIRD QVESTION, OF good workes.

THe parts of this question: first, what workes are to be counted good works: secondly, whether there are any good workes without faith: thirdly, of the [Page] vse and office of good workes, whether they bee applicatorie, expiatorie, meritorious: fourthly, of the distinction of merites: fiftly, the manner of meriting.

THE FIRST PART, WHICH BE the good workes of Christians.

The Papists.

THey doe not onely call them good workes, which are commanded of God, error 86 but which are also enioyned by the Church and the gouernours thereof; and that euen by such workes men are iustified, Concil. Trident. sess. 6. cap. 10. Tapper. ex Tileman. loc. 11. Err. 1.

The Protestants.

SAint Paul defineth good workes otherwise, namely those which God hath ordeyned, that we should walke in them, Ephes. 2.10. They are not the precepts of men, but the commandements of God in his word, the doing whereof hath the name of good workes. As for the traditions and iniunctions of men not warranted by Gods word, they are so far from being commended or commanded, that our Sauiour calleth the doing thereof, but a Worshipping of God in vaine, Mark. 7.7.

Augustine vpon those words, in the 103. Psalme vers. 18. The louing kindenes of the Lorde is vpon those that keepe his couenant, and thinke vpon his commandements to doe them, saith thus: Vide vt praecepta teneas: sed quomodo teneas? non memoria, sed vita: Memoria retinentibus mandata eius, non vt reddant ea, sed vt faciant ea: See that thou keepe Gods commandements: but how? not in thy memorie, but in thy life, not to say them by rote, but to doe them. Ergo, they are Gods commandements, which we must thinke of to doe them; for vnto such the blessing is promised, not to the obseruers of mens precepts or traditions.

THE SECOND PART, WHEther there bee any good workes without faith.

The Papists.

THough they dare not altogether iustifie the workes of the heathen and infidels, error 87 yet they doe excuse them, and doe blame vs for saying, that infidels doe sinne in honoring their parents, in fighting for their Countrey, and such like. They therefore doe discharge the heathen of sinne, in these workes of theirs, Rhemist. Rom. 14. sect. 4.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THese workes are not sinne in themselues, but in infidels they are, because they proceede of infidelitie.

Argum. It is the rule of the Gospell, that a corrupt tree cannot bring foorth good fruite, Matth. 7.18. But all infidels are corrupt trees, being without faith. Ergo, they can bring forth no good fruite.

The Pelagians thought to haue posed Augustine with the same question, which the papists propound to vs. Was it sinne in the heathen (say they) to clothe the naked? Augustine answereth, ‘Non per seipsum factum peccatum est, Cont. Iulian. lib. 4. c. 3. sed de tali opere non in domino gloriari, solus impius negat esse peccatum. The fact of it selfe is not sin, but in doing any such thing not to reioyce in the Lord, none but wicked men will denie it to be sinne.’

THE THIRD PART, OF THE vse and office of good workes.

THey make a threefold vse of good workes, as they call them: first, by them the merites of Christ, they say, are applied vnto vs: secondly, they doe purge our sinnes: thirdly, they are meritorious.

THE FIRST ARTICLE, WHEther bona opera be applicatoria.

The Papists.

BY any worke proceeding of faith and charitie, the merite of Christs passion error 88 is applied to vs, Soto. ex Tilemann. loc. 11. err. 21. Men by their sufferings and other workes, may applie to themselues the generall medicine of Christs merites and satisfaction, Rhemist. annot. 1. Coloss. sect. 4.

The Protestants.

IT is the propertie of faith onely, to apprehend, and applie vnto vs the benefits of Christs passion, and all other his merites.

Argum. Rom. 10.7.8. We neede not, saith the Apostle, to ascend to heauen, or descend into the deepe, to bring Christ from thence: it is the word of faith, which wee preach. By faith then we doe scale the heauens, and beholde Christ: it is not the doctrine of works, but the word of faith that performeth this. And therefore the Apostle defineth faith, to be the ground of things hoped for, and the euidence of things not seene, Heb. 11.1. This definition cānot agree vnto works, or vnto any other thing but faith: for then it were no good definition, [Page] nor yet description. Ergo, faith onely is the euidence of things inuisible: and therefore onely applieth Christs precious merites, which are things beleeued and not seene.

Augustine thus also describeth faith: ‘Rerum absentium praesens est fides, rerum,De Trin. li. 13. ca. 1. quae foris sunt, intus est fides, rerum, quae non videntur, videtur fides:’ Faith maketh things absent, present, things without vs, to bee within vs, things not seene to bee seene: Ergo, faith onely hath this applicatorie power, to applie Christs merites not present, nor seene, and to make them as our owne.

THE SECOND ARTICLE, WHEther bona opera be expiatoria.

The Papists.

THe workes of charitie and mercie, as almes deedes, and such like, haue error 89 force to extinguish our sinnes, as Saint Peter saith, Charitie doth couer a multitude of sinnes, Epist. 1.4.8. Rhemist. ibid.

The Protestants.

Ans. THe Apostle speaketh of mutuall charitie amongst our selues, whose propertie is to couer a multitude of our neighbours offences, as Solomon saith, Prou. 10.11. Hatred stirreth vp contentions, but loue couereth trespasses: what is this to the extinguishing of our sinnes before God?

Argum. It is an abominable and blasphemous opinion, that any man by his workes should be able to redeeme his sinnes: for the Scripture saith, that by himselfe Christ hath purged our sinnes, Heb. 1.3. If hee haue wholly done it by himselfe, he hath not giuen this power and force of redemption to any other meanes.

If they vnderstand by the force of extinguishing sinnes, the meanes onelie of applying Christs merites: in that sense, faith onely is saide to saue vs, Ephes. 2.8.

Augustine: Si merita nostra aliquid facerent, ad damnationem nostram veniret, sed non venit ad inspectionem meritorum, sed remissionem peccatorum. If our merites were auailable to any purpose, God should come to our condemnation: but hee commeth not to behold our merites, but to forgiue vs our sins. Ergo, by our merites, our sinnes are not forgiuen.

THE THIRD ARTICLE, WHEther our works be meritorious.

The Papists.

error 90 GOD giueth as well euerlasting life and glorie to men, for and according [Page] to their workes, as he giueth damnation for the contrary works, Rhemist. Rom. 2. sect. 2. And men by their workes proceeding of grace doe deserue or merite heauen, and the more or lesse ioy in the same, 1. Corinth. 3. sect. 2.

Argum. 1. He will render to euery man according to his workes, Rom. 2.6. Euery man shall receiue his reward according to his labour. Here we see the kingdome of heauen is a retribution, hyre, wages for workes: Ergo, our works are the value, price, worth and merite of the same. Rhemist.

Answ. Our labors and workes are a measure of the reward, according to the which God doth mete out and render vnto his Saints of the heauenly reward▪ but they are no meritorious or deseruing cause thereof. The reward is of mercie, not of desert; of grace, not of merite: for life eternall is the meere gift of God through Iesus Christ, Rom. 6.23. But the wages of sinne is death. Where the Apostle doth set a manifest difference betweene the reward of the righteous, and the iust recompence of the wicked: for life eternall is the free and gracious gift of God, not deserued: but eternall damnation is the due debt of sinne. Wherefore the Papists doe bid open battell to the Apostle, in saying, that the one is as due by debt as the other.

Argum. 2. Saint Paul sayth, 2. Timoth▪ 4.8. that there is a crowne of righteousnes layd vp for him, which God the iust iudge shal giue him. Ergo, the crown is giuen not of mercie, but of iustice, as a wages and iust recompence to the Apostle.

Answ. God rendreth heauen as a iust Iudge, not to the merite and worthines of our workes, but to the merite and worthines of Christ, and as due to vs by his promise made to vs in Christ. The reward therefore of heauen is of the mercie of God, who hath freely promised it vs in Christ: It is of his iustice, in that he is faythfull and iust in keeping of his promise made to vs. So that it is a debt, not in respect of any desert in vs, but in regard of his owne promise. As Augustine sayth: ‘Debitorem ipse se dominus fecit, non accipiendo, sed promittendo: Non ei dicitur redde, quod accepisti, sed redde, quod promisisti. God hath made himselfe a debtor, by promising, not by receiuing any thing at our handes: We say not to him, render that thou hast receiued, but giue that which thou hast promised, in Psalm. 83.’

The Protestants.

WE confesse a necessary vse of good workes: As first, they doe serue as notable meanes and instruments to set forth Gods glory by, Math. 5.16. Secondly, by them also our fayth is shewed, published and made knowen, for the good example of others, Iam. 2.18. Thirdly, our own conscience also is thereby quieted, and our election daylie made more sure vnto vs: we doe grow and increase in the certainty and assurance thereof, 1. Pet. 1.10. But we acknowledge no power, force, or efficacie at all in them to deserue and merite any thing at the hands of God, neither doth the scripture in any place so speake.

[Page]Argum. 1. If man consider his deserts, he shall finde, that he is worthy of nothing but death: To vs (s [...]yth the Prophet) belongeth shame, Dan. 9.9. There is nothing els by debt due vnto vs: as Augustine also sayth, ‘Nihil praecesserat in meritis nostris▪ nisi vnde damnari deberemus:In Psa. 18. exposit. 2. Nothing goeth before in our merites, but that whereby we ought iustly to be condemned. And agayne, Omne peccatum nostrae est negligentiae, omnis virtus & sanctitas est Dei indulgentiae: All euill and sin in vs, is of our owne negligence, all goodnes and holines, of the free mercy of God.In Math. serm. 8. Si misericordiae domini multae, multus egò in meritis: If the mercies of God be many, my merites are many.’ Gods mercies are our merites: our due debts are nothing els but punishment for sinne.

Argum. 2. Betweene the desert or merite, and the wages or recompence, there ought alwayes to be some proportion: a like stipend for a like labour: But heauen without comparison exceedeth the worthines of our workes, Ergo, it is not giuen as a debt, but as a free gift: therefore the Apostle sayth, that the afflictions that are present, are not worthy of the glory that shall bee reuealed, Rom. 8.18.Homil. 8. Augustine sayth, ‘Quàm paruo constat regnum coelorum? duob. minutis emit vidua regnum coelorum: How little doth the kingdome of God stand vs in? a certaine widow for two mites bought the kingdome of heauen. Shall we think that the widowes casting in of two mites deserued the kingdome of heauen?’ Farre be it from vs so to think: it is then a gift of [...]auour and mercie, not wages of debt.

Argum. 3. Saint Paul sayth, Fayth is counted to him for righteousnes, that worketh not, Rom. 4.5. If it be of grace, it is no more of workes, for then ‘grace were no more grace: If of worke, then not of grace; for then worke were no more worke, Rom. 11.9’ We see that the righteousnes of fayth or of grace, and the righteousnesse of workes, cannot stand together, nor be matched one with the other.

Our aduersaries haue here two euasions: First they graunt, that the beginning of our iustification, which they call the first iustification, is meerely of Gods grace, neither can we haue any acceptable works before we are iustified: but in the second iustification, which is the increase of the former iustice, a man may merite by good workes, Rhemist. Rom. 2.3.

Ans. This is but a late and new deuice of the first and second iustification: as afterward we wil shew in the proper place. ‘The scripture teacheth vs, that not onely the beginning of our righteousnes, but the finishing and perfiting of it is onely by grace in Christ, Ephes. 2.5.6. When we were dead in our sinnes, he hath quickned vs together in Christ, by whose grace yee are saued, and hath raysed vs vp, and made vs sit together in heauenly places:’ We see that this saluation by grace bringeth vs vp to heauen. Ergo, both the first & second iustification are of grace, for they can bring vs no further then to heauen.

Rhemist. 2. Workes done of nature without, or before fayth, cannot merite, but workes done by Gods grace may, and are ioyned with it as causes of saluation.

[Page]Ans. ‘Not onely the workes of nature, but euen of grace also are excluded. Wee are saued (saith the Apostle) by grace through fayth; not of workes: And then he sheweth what workes, namely good workes, such as the Lord hath ordayned for vs to walke in, Ephes. 2.9.10.’ Ergo, workes also of grace, wrought in vs by the spirite of God, are shut out from being any causes of our saluation. I conclude with Augustine, vpon those wordes of the Psalme, Let the Lord alway be magnified: ‘Peccatores? magnificetur, vt vocet: consiteris? magnificetur, vt ignoscat: iam iustè viuis? magnificetur, vt regat: perseueras vsque ad finem? magnificetur, vt te glorificet: Art thou a sinner? let God be magnified in calling thee: doest thou confesse thy sinnes? let him be magnified in forgiuing them: doest thou liue well? let him be magnified in directing thee: doest thou continue to the end? let him be magnified in glorifiing thee.’ God is as much to be praysed for all things wrought after our cal [...]ing and conuersion, as for mercy shewed before: All then is wholly to bee ascribed to Gods grace and mercie: nothing is left for our merite or desert.

THE FOVRTH PART, OF THE distinction of merites.

The Papists.

THey make two kindes of merite: Meritum de co [...]gruo, merite of congruitie:error 91 such are the preparatiue workes before iustification, as were the prayers & almes deeds of Cornelius, Act. 10. which though they be not simply meritorious, ex debito iustitiae, by the due debt of iustice, yet they deserue at Gods handes of congruitie, because hee doth graciously accept them, Act. 10. sect. 5. The other kinde, they call meritum de condigno, merite of condignitie, when the reward is iustly due by debt: such are the workes done in the second iustification, which are truely meritorious,Ex Tilem. loc. 11. error 22. and worthy of heauen, Gabriel. Biel. Rhemist. Rom. 2. sect. 3.

The Protestants.

FIrst, wee vtterly denie any such merite of condignitie: For Saint Paul sayth, that the afflictions of this life are not condigne of the glory to come, Rom. 8.18. Condignitie then is wholly remoued and taken away.

Secondly, a rewarde of congruitie in some sorte we graunt, but neither for any thing done before fayth or iustification, for it is impossible without fayth to please God, or doe any thing acceptable vnto him, Hebr. 6.6. Neither is it of congruitie for the merite of our workes: but it is (congruum) it is agreeable to the mercie and iustice of God in respect of his promise graciously made in Christ, to rewarde the faithfull obedience of his seruants: so then the congruitie is on Gods behalfe, not in respect of our workes.

[Page]We are iustified, sayth the Apostle, Gratis per gratiam, freely by grace, Rom. 3.24. Ergo, there is no merite either of congruitie or condignitie, seeing all is done freely.

Augustine sayth, ‘Quid ille latro attulerat de fauce ad iudicium, de iudicio ad crucem, In Psa. 55. de cruce in Paradisum? I pray you what merite did the theefe bring with him, from the prison to iudgemēt, from the iudgement place to the crosse, from the crosse to Paradise?’ Here was neither merite of congruitie nor condignitie.

THE FIFT PART, OF THE MANner of meriting.

The Papists.

OVr workes (they say) are pleasing and acceptable vnto God▪ euen after error 92 the same manner, that Christ and his workes were, Tapper. ex Tileman. loc. 11. Err. 14. Christes paynes of their owne nature, compared to his glorie, were not any whit comparable, yet they were meritorious and worthy of heauen, not for the greatnes of them, but for the worthines of his person. So our works, not of their owne nature, but as they are of grace, are meritorious of the ioyes of heauen, Rhemist. Rom. 8.18.

The Protestants.

FIrst, it is a great blasphemie, to say, that Christs passions in themselues deserued not that glory, which he hath purchased for vs: neither that there was any comparison betweene them: for then, how could he haue fully satisfied the wrath of God? Christ hath payed the ransome for our sinnes: Wee are redeemed with his precious blood, as of a lambe vnspotted, 1. Pet. 1.19. His blood was the price of our redemption: therefore, of it selfe meritorious: It was not in respect of Christ, of grace; but of merite in him: Vnto vs his redemption is of grace, Rom. 3.24. Wherefore his passion being the passion of the Sonne of God, was a full satisfaction, and worthy desert of that glory, which hee hath purchased for vs.

Secondly; it is another great blasphemy to match and compare in the way and maner of meriting, Christs workes and ours together. For first, there is no merite at all in vs vnto saluation: we haue no merites but Christs, and are saued onely by fayth in him, not by workes, Ephes. 2.8. Secondly, by your own confession, our works are not of their nature meritorious, but of grace. But Christs workes were of themselues full of merite, without any externall helpe, or accession of grace: for in himselfe did all fulnes dwell, Coloss. 1.19.

Augustine very well sheweth the great difference in the way of meriting betweene Christ and vs,Tract. 2. in Epist. Iohan. thus writing: ‘Quantum interest, cum duo sint in carcere, interreum, & visitatorem eius: illum causa premit, illum humanitas adduxit: sic in istu mortalitate nos reatu tenebamur, Christus misericordia descendit: Looke what difference there is, when two are in prison together, betweene [Page] the prisoner, and his friend that commeth to visite him; the one is there of necessitie, the other commeth of good will. Such difference is there betweene Christ & vs: for when we were deteined in the prison of this mortalitie, for the guilt of our sinnes, Christ came in mercy to visite vs.’ How can there now be any proportionable or like way of meriting, in the guiltie prisoner, and the innocent and friendly visiter?

THE FOVRTH QVESTION, of Iustification.

THe partes of this question. First, of the preparatiue workes to iustification.

Secondly, of the 2. kindes of iustification, the first & second. Thirdly, of inherent iustice. Fourthly, of Iustification only by fayth. They folow now in order.

THE FIRST PART, OF THE PREparatiue workes.

The Papists.

WOrkes done before iustification, though they suffice not to saluation,error 93 yet be acceptable preparatiues to the grace of iustification, and such as moue God to mercie: As were the almes deedes and prayer in Cornelius, Act. 10. sect. 5. Rhemist.

The Protestants.

Ans. COrnelius prayers and almes were not without fayth, as Augustine confesseth: ‘Non sine aliqua fide donabat, & orabat: De praedestinat. lib. 1. ca. 7 He did not giue almes & pray without some fayth. And he proueth it by that saying of the Apostle, Rom. 10.14.’ How shall they call on him, in whom they haue not beleeued? Seeing then Cornelius had fayth, his iustification also was begun: for so soone as fayth commeth, it iustifieth. These were not then workes preparatiue to fayth and iustification, but the fruites of his fayth and iustification begun.

Argum. Before fayth come, there can be no workes of preparation acceptable to God: because Without fayth it is impossible to please God, Hebr. 11.6.

Augustine also sayth: ‘Ea ipsa opera ante fidem, In Psal. 31. quae videntur hominibus laudabilia, inania sunt: those very workes which seeme to be commendable before fayth, are altogether vaine and vnprofitable. If they be vaine, they are no preparations to fayth.’

[Page]

THE SECOND PART, OF THE two kindes of iustification.

The Papists.

error 94 THere is a first iustification, which is meerely of grace without workes: as when an Infidel is made iust, who had no acceptable workes before to be iustified by. The second iustification is that, wherein hee that is in Gods grace daylie proceedeth in by good workes, Rhemist. Rom. 2.3. This iustification and sanctification are all one, Concil. Trident. sess. 6. cap. 7. And it is augmented and increased by the merite of worke, sess. 6. can. 24.

Argum. Of the first iustification S. Paul speaketh, where he saith, We are iustified by fayth without workes, Rom 3.28. Of the second Saint Iames intreateth: A man is iustified by workes, and not of fayth onely, 2.24. Rhemist.

Ans. This your deuice of first and second iustification, is but a new deuice, not yet 60. yeare olde: your second iustification is nothing els, but the effect & fruits of iustification before God, and a declaration, that wee are iust before men. Saint Paul and Saint Iames do speake of one and the same iustification by faith: But they take the word diuersly, for Saint Iames by iustifiyng meaneth nothing els, but a testifiyng or declaration of our iustification before men: And in this sense is the word taken, Math. 11.19. Wisdome is iustified of her children, that is, declared to be iust.

The Protestants.

FIrst, iustification and sanctification are two diuers things: We are iustified by fayth onely by the imputation of the righteousnes of Christ, Roman. 4.7. We are sanctified, when by fayth working by loue we walke in newnes of life. These two are perpetually distinguished in the scriptures, I meane iustification, and sanctification, 1. Corinth. 1.30. & 6.11. and Galath. 5.25. If wee liue in the spirite, let vs walke in the spirite. Our iustification is the liuing in the spirit, our sanctification the walking in the spirite.

Secondly, our workes can be no cause of the increase of our iustification, and the grace of God in vs: But both our iustification and sanctification are the free gifts of God: For what hast thou, that thou hast not receiued? 1. Corint. 4.7. This was the olde Pelagian heresie, that the grace of God is giuen according to our workes:Lib. 1. de praedest. cap. 1. confuted by ‘Augustine, Epistol. 106. Gratia iam non erit gratia, quia secundum merita datur, nam merces fidei auctae erit merces coeptae: Thus grace shalbe no grace: for it is giuen according to merite: for the increase of fayth or iustice, is made the hyre or wages of fayth, that is begun.’

Thirdly, the scripture speaketh but of one iustification, which glorification followeth, Rom. 8.30. Whom he iustified, them also hee glorified: vnles you will haue another iustification to come after our glorificatiō. Likewise, Rom. 4. [Page] Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen, ver. 7. The iustification in remission of sinnes doth make a man blessed: Ergo, it is the onely sufficient iustification. And Augustine accordingly sayth,‘In Psal. 100. Donando delicta fecit se debitorem coronae: by forgiuing our sinnes he hath made himselfe a debtor for the crowne or reward.’ We see heauen is promised at the first remission of our sinnes: what neede then any other iustification? Wherefore it is a false and blasphemous decree in the Councel of Trent, that wee are not iustified onely by remission of our sinnes, sess. 6. can. 11.

THE THIRD PART, OF inherent iustice.

The Papists.

THey teach, that men are not iustified by the onely imputation of the righteousnes error 95 of Christ, Trid. Concil. sess. 6. can. 11. Neither that wee are formally made iust by the righteousnes of Christ, can. 10. but by iustice inherent in vs, whereby we are not onely reputed and accounted iust, but are truely called iust, and are so indeede, sess. 6. cap. 7. Rhemist. Rom. cap. 2. sect. 4.

Argum. Rom. 2.13. Not the hearers of the law, but the doers are iustified: Ergo, we are iustified by an inherent iustice, Rhemist.

Ans. 1. Saint Paul speaketh of the iustification of the law, and proueth by this argument, that none could be iustified by the law, because none were able to doe it: And without performing of the law there was no iustification by the law: what is this to the iustification of fayth? 2. But if we will vnderstand it of the true iustification of Christians: it must so be taken, as August. saith, ‘Non vt factorib. iustificatio accedat, sed factores legis iustificatio praecedat:De spirit. & liter. cap. 26. not that iustification doth come to the doers, but that it goeth before the doers of the law.’

The Protestants.

WE acknowledge an inherent iustice in all faithful men & beleeuers: but it is imperfect, not able to iustifie them before God: it is no other then sanctification, which is a fruit of iustification. But that iustice, whereby we are iust before God, not falsely accounted, but made truly iust by God, is by the righteousnes of Christ onely, which we apprehend by fayth.

Argum. That iustice, whereby we haue peace with God, is the only iustice, whereby we are iustified before God: for vntil we are cleared and made iust before God, it is impossible to haue peace with him. But this is onely the iustice of faith, Rom. 5.1. Ergo, by this iustice onely are we iust before God.

August. hath a good speech, ‘Si dixerimus, quod nihil iustitiae habemus, De verbis. apost. ser. 16. aduersum Dei dona mētimur: si enim iustitiae nihil habemus, nec fidem habemus: si autem fidem habemus, iam aliquid habemus iustitiae: If we say we haue no iustice at all in vs, we do belye the good gifts of God: for if we haue no iustice, we haue no faith: But if we haue faith, then haue we some iustice in vs.’ Here Augustine acknowledgeth no inherent iustice, but onely the iustice of fayth:

[Page]

THE FOVRTH PART, OF IVSTIFIcation onely by fayth.

The Papists.

error 94 FAyth is not the only cause of our iustificatiō, but there are other also, as hope, charitie, almes deedes, and other vertues: Rhemist. Roman. 8. sect. 6. Yea, workes are more principall then fayth, in the matter of iustification, Iam. 2. sect. 7. Whosoeuer therefore sayth, that a man is iustified onely by fayth, and that nothing els is required to iustification, we pronounce him accursed, Trident. Concil. sess. 6. can. 9.

Argum. 1. Rom. 8.24. We are saued by hope: Ergo, not onely by fayth, Rhemist.

Answ. 1. We are sayd to be saued by hope, not because wee are thereby iustified, but because by hope we do expect and waite for our saluation, which is not yet accomplished: as it followeth, vers. 25. If wee hope for that wee see not, then doe we with patience abide for it.

Argum. 2. Galath. 5.6. Fayth, that worketh by charitie. Fayth then hath her whole actiuitie and operation toward saluation of charitie: It doth not therefore iustifie vs alone, but fayth and charitie together, of the which charitie is the more principall, Rhemist. ibid.

Answ. We graunt, that it is a working fayth that doth iustifie, as the Apostle here sayth: but not as it worketh, but as it apprehendeth and beleeueth. Charitie is a principall effect of fayth, and followeth it: how then can fayth receiue actiuitie from charitie? the effect doth not giue life to the cause. You know Augustine often sayth, ‘Opera non praecedunt iustificandum, sed sequuntur iustificatum: Workes goe not before vnto iustification, but followe in him that is already iustified.’ But if charitie should beget fayth, then workes proceeding of charitie, should goe before fayth by the which wee are iustified. The Apostle sayth, Without fayth it is impossible to please God, Hebr. 11.6. Ergo, neither doth charitie please God without fayth: Fayth giueth actiuitie to charitie; how then can it receiue that which it giueth?

Argum. 3. Iam. 2.24. We see how that of deedes a man is iustified, and not of fayth onely: Ergo, we are not iustified by fayth onely, Rhemist.

Answ. Saint Iames is not contrary to his fellow Apostle Saint Paul, who concludeth, Rom. 3.28. that We are iustified by fayth without workes: that is as much to say, as by fayth onely. And he excludeth not onely workes of nature, or of the law: but euen workes of grace, which God hath ordayned, Ephes. 2.10. Therefore S. Iames, in saying we are not iustified by faith onely, meaneth not that iustification, whereby we are made iust before God: for then he should impugne Saint Pauls principles. But by iustifiyng, or being iustified, he vnderstandeth nothing els but to be declared iust, as well before men as in the [Page] sight of God: which declaration is testified and shewed forth by our workes proceeding of faith. Thus the word iustified is taken, Rom. 3.4. That thou maist be iustified in thy words: that is, knowne or declared to be iust. Augustine also sayth, Iustificabuntur, id est, iusti habebuntur: They shall be iustified, that is,De spiritu & lite [...] 26 counted iust: as we also say, Sanctificetur nomen, id est, sanctum habeatur: Let thy name bee sanctified, that is, reputed and acknowledged to be holy amongst men.

The Protestants.

WE are not enemies to good workes (as our aduersaries falsely charge vs:) nay we preach good workes, we exhort to good workes, we establish good workes, teaching the right vse of them out of the word of God: which is not to concurre, or be ioyned with faith in our iustification, but to follow necessarily and issue out of faith, as liuely testimonies thereof, to the glorie of God, the example of others, and our comfort: but faith it is onely, which, as a liuely instrument ordained of God, doth assure vs of our iustification by grace in Christ.

Argum. 1. Saluation is ascribed onely to beleefe, Mark. 16.16. Act. 16.31. But it is the propertie of faith onely to beleeue, not of hope or charitie: the effect of hope is by patience to abide, Rom. 8.25. The operations also of loue are set forth, 1. Corinth. 13. Where amongst other, Loue is sayd to beleeue all things: that is, mutuall loue amongst men is not mistrustfull, but taketh all things in good part: but to beleeue the things of God, it is the propertie onely of faith: as Augustine vpon those words of the Apostle, How shall they call vpon him▪ on whom they haue not beleeued? In his duobus tria illa intuere: fides credit, spes & charitas orant: In these two behold those three: faith beleeueth,Enchirid. cap. 7. hope and charitie pray. Faith therefore onely beleeueth, and so consequently onely iustifieth, Enchirid. cap. 7.

Argum. 2. Our iustification and saluation is of the meere grace and mercie of God, not at al of any merite or desert in vs: Ergo, we are iustified only through faith: for it is of grace that we are saued through faith, Ephes. 2.8. That all is to bee ascribed onely to the mercie and grace of God, the Apostle euery where sheweth: Rom. 9.12. It is not in him that willeth or runneth, but in God that sheweth mercie. We are iustified freely by grace, Rom. 3.24. What hast thou that thou hast not receiued? Augustine saith, Intelligenda est gratia Dei per Iesum Christum dominum nostrum, qua sola liberamur à malo: De corrept. & grat. c. 2. We must vnderstand the grace of God by Iesus Christ, by the which we are onely deliuered from euill. Si quid boni est, magni, vel parui, donum tuum est, nostrum non est nisi malum: si quid boni vnquam habui, à te recepi: If there bee any good in vs, much or little, it is thy gift: nothing is ours but the euill in vs: Ergo, all good things are of God, and onely of his grace: and therefore our iustification.

Argum. 3. There are many euident places, which doe attribute our iustification to faith without workes, Rom. 3.28.11.8. Ephes. 2.8.9. In all these places [Page] in plaine termes, We are sayd to bee iustified by faith without workes. As for those friuolous euasions, that the Apostle speaketh of the first iustification, not of the second, or of the workes of nature, or of the lawe, not of grace, we haue answered before, Quaest. 2. part. 3. artic. 3.

If they will oppose that saying of S. Iames. 2.24. we answere with Augustine: In Psal. 31. Nec Apostoli sunt inter se aduersi: ille dicit, Abrahae opus omnibus notum in filij immolatione: magnum opus, sed ex fide: laudo fructum boni operis, sed in fide agnosco radicem: The Apostles are not contrarie one to the other: he sayth, Abrahams worke was knowne to all in offering vp his sonne: a great worke, but of faith: I praise the fruite, but it was rooted in faith. His meaning then is this, that Abraham was iustified, that is, declared to men to be iust by this worke.

HERE FOLLOW SVCH CONTROVERSIES AS doe arise betweene the Protestants and Papists, about the natures of Christ.

WE haue now through Gods gracious assistance entreated of all those questions, wherein we dissent from our aduersaries, both as touching all the offices of Christ, his propheticall office, kingdome and priesthood: as likewise concerning the benefites purchased by the death of Christ, the benefites of our redemption, and saluation. Now, in the last place we are to prosecute such matters in question betweene vs, as doe concerne the natures of Christ. And this treatise containeth three controuersies. First, of the humane nature of Christ. Secondly, of his diuine nature. Thirdly, of them both considered together.

THE EIGHTEENTH GENERAL CONTROVERSIE, CONCERNING THE HVMANE NATVRE OF CHRIST.

THis Controuersie is diuided into these questions. First, of the vbiquitie of the humanitie of Christ. Secondly, whether he encreased in wisedome. Thirdly, whether he suffered in soule. Fourthly, whether he descended into Hell. Fiftly, concerning the place of Hell.

THE FIRST QVESTION, OF THE VBIQVITIE OF the bodie of Christ, whether his humanitie be euery where.

The Papists.

THey doe seeme in words mightily to impugne this opinion of the Vbiquitaries, error 97 as they are called, which doe erroniously hold, that the humanitie of Christ is euery where, as his deitie is, and that the properties of one nature are [Page] really imparted vnto the other: whereupon it followeth, that the humanitie of Christ is euery where, because it is verely vnited, and made one person with the Godhead in Christ. This opinion the Papists would be thought to detest and abhorre: and the Iesuite bestoweth great paines by sundrie arguments to confute it: as by diuers places of scripture, Math. 28. He is risen, he is not here, vers. 6. Iesus sayd, Lazarus is dead, and I am glad, for your sakes, that I was not there, Ioh. 11.4. Ergo, Christ, as he is man, is not euery where. Againe, the opinion of the Vbiquitaries doth ouerthrow the article of Christs ascension: for if Christs bodie be euery where, as they hold, he can neither ascend nor descend, Bellarm. de Incarnation. verbi. lib. 3. cap. 11.12.

The Protestants.

IT is true Catholique and sound doctrine, that the humane and diuine nature are truely vnited in Christ, and doe make but one person, or hypostasis, neither by confusion of the natures, nor conuersion of one into the other, but by vnitie of person: for as the bodie and soule make one man, so God and man is one Christ. And the better to vnderstand this mysterie, we must set downe these three positions.

1. Though the two natures in Christ be so vnited, that they make but one person, yet neither the natures are confounded, nor yet the properties: but as Christ is both God and man, so there is in him a double power, will, and vnderstanding, one humane and created, the other diuine and vncreated.

2. By reason of this vnion, all the excellent graces of the spirit in the highest degree, and aboue measure, are giuen and bestowed vpon the humanitie of Christ, Ioh. 3.34. but such notwithstanding, as destroy not his humane nature, but are qualities created, as his humanitie also was created.

3. There is also a mutuall communication of the proprieties of both natures each to other, though not really in respect of the natures: So we say in Concreto, in the concrete, that is, taking the whole person of Christ, that Christus homo, that is, the man Christ is omnipotent, is euery where: and Christus Deus, that is, Christ being God, died for vs, was buried, rose againe: but in the abstract it is great blasphemie to say; that the Godhead of Christ died, was buried, or rose againe, or that the humanitie of Christ is omnipotent, or in euery place.

The Vbiquitaries now hold, that there is a reall communication of the proprieties of both natures: & therfore doubt not to say, that the flesh and bodie of Christ is euery where in all places at once. The Papists in outward shew are enemies to that opinion: but indeed, and in truth, as it shall now appeare, they are not farre off from being in the same error.

First, the same arguments which they vrge against the Vbiquitaries, doe returne vpon themselues: for although they will not say, that Christs bodie is euerie where, yet they hold that it may bee in a thousand places at once, yea and more to, if the Sacrament be at once in so many places celebrated: for Christs bodie is reallie and verely in the Sacrament. But those places alleadged, He is risen, he is not heere, and the rest, doe proue that [Page] Christ can be but in one place at once. This their opinion also is against the article of Christs ascension, and abiding in heauen till the day of iudgement: for if the same bodie wherein Christ sitteth in heauen, be in the Sacrament; either when he is present in earth, he is absent in heauen, contrary to the scripture, Act. 3.21. which sayth, The heauens must containe him till that all things be restored: or els, if he be in both places at once, they must needes make his bodie infinite, and so destroy the nature of his humanitie, which can be but in one place. If they say it is another bodie and flesh, which Christ by his diuine power maketh to bee present in the Sacrament, that were much more absurd: for then Christ should haue many bodies, and other flesh then that which was borne of the Virgine Mary. We see then they are not farre off from the opinion of the Vbiquitaries.

Annot. Apocal. 6. sect. 1.2. The Rhemists doe approue that argument, whereby Hierome proueth that the Saints may euery where be present at their bodies & monuments: ‘They follow the Lambe, whither soeuer he goeth: but the Lambe is in euery place: therefore they that be with the Lambe Christ, be present euery where.’ Whereupon it followeth, that the Lambe Christ in humanitie must be euery where: for how can he be present els in innumerable places at once, where any reliques or monuments of Saints are? Neither can they excuse this vbiquitarie presence of the humanitie of Christ and the soules of Saints, by their agilitie and celeritie: because they can quickly passe from one place to another: for if they must bee present at their monuments, whensoeuer they are called vpon, they must of necessitie be often in many places at once: for in one and the same instant, men may resort to their monuments which are in diuers places farre asunder. Thus they are driuen not onely to graunt an vbiquitie or omnipresence of the humanitie of Christ, but euen of Saints also: which those whom they call Vbiquitaries would neuer graunt.

3. The bodie of Christ is visible and palpable now in heauen, and hath a place according to the quantitie of his bodie: Bellarmine confesseth as much, cap. 12. But that bodie which is in the Sacrament hath none of these properties, it is neither seene, nor felt, neither hath a place according to the quantitie of a bodie, for they close it vp in small round cakes. Wherfore destroying these properties of the humanitie of Christ, they may as well, and do in effect, take away the other, namely, the being of Christs bodie in one place: for it is as proper to the bodie of Christ to be seene and felt, as to be in one place at once.

4. Bellarmine granteth, being vrged with that argument, that Christs soule was in Paradise after his passion, and therefore not in hell: he confesseth, that it was not impossible that Christs soule should be in two places at once, Lib. 4. de Christi anima. cap. 15. Yea he sayth, that Christ may, if he will, turne al the world into bread, and the bread so made conuert into his flesh; and so his bodie may be as well in euery place of the world, as now it is in the Eucharist, Lib. 3. de incarnat cap. 11. What great oddes now, I pray you, is there between the opinion of the Vbiquitaries and of the Papists? but that they say, that the bodie of Christ [Page] is euery where ordinarily by the power of the Godhead: the other say, his flesh is in many places at once by a miracle. The one sayth, Christs bodie actually is in euery place: the other, that it may be if Christ will.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER OVR SAVIOVR Christ did verily encrease in knowledge and wisedome as he was man.

The Papists.

CHrist, they say, in the very first creation of his soule, and from his conception,error 98 was endued with the fulnes of al wisedome, grace, and knowledge: neither can he be sayd properly to haue encreased in any of these gifts.

1. Christ was anoynted from his mothers womb, and then the spirit of God was vpon him: for the Angels that appeared to the shepheards call him Christ, Luk. 2.11. And Iohn sayth, The word was made flesh, full of grace and truth, 1. vers. 11. Therefore euen then he had receiued all abundance of grace and knowledge, Bellarm. de Christi anima. lib. 4.2.

Ans. 1. We grant, that our Sauiour was the Iesus & the Christ euen from his natiuitie: not that thē he actually straightwaies entred into those offices, or receiued plenarie power of all the graces of the spirit, but because he was euen from his mothers wombe consecrated and appoynted thereunto: for it no more followeth, because he is called Christ, that he then had his actuall anoynting, then, that because he was called Iesus from his natiuitie, that he had actually performed our redemption. The full anoynting of the spirit was fulfilled in his baptisme, when the holy Ghost came downe in the likenes of a Doue: and then beginning to preach, in his first sermon at Nazareth, he sheweth the accomplishment of the prophecie of Esay, The spirite of the Lord is vpon me, &c. Luk. 4.18.

2. Neither doe the words of Iohn import so much, as they gather. The word was made flesh, and dwelt amongst vs, full of grace and truth: which is not to be vnderstood of the very first assuming of the flesh, but of the dwelling of the word in the flesh amongst vs, and so appeared to be full of grace and truth.

Argum. 2. Christ was the Sonne of God in his very incarnation, and euen then was the humanitie perfectly vnited to the Godhead: therefore immediatly vpon this vnion and coniunction of both natures in one person, must needes follow the fulnes of grace in the humane nature. Againe, Adam was created in perfect wisedome, therefore much more the second Adam, Bellar. cap. 4.

Ans. 1. If presently vpon the vniting of the two natures together, it had been necessarie that the humane nature of Christ should haue receiued whatsoeuer by the presence of the diuine nature was to be conferred vpon it: then Christ straight waies must also both in bodie and soule haue been glorified: for it can not be denied, but that as the bodie of Christ after the resurrection receiued [Page] more glorie then before: so also his soule being the other part of his humanitie, was more glorified. By this it is euident, that the humanitie receiued not at once the fulnes of all grace and glorie, in the first vniting of the Godhead.

2. Adam was created perfect in bodie and soule: and if Christ therefore ought to haue the fulnes of the gifts of the soule in his creation as Adam had, why ought he not also to haue had a perfect bodie, as Adam was created withall? Wherefore as it was no dishonour to Christ to grow vp in stature of bodie, so neither was it to encrease in the gifts of the mind.

The Protestants.

THat Christ was euen from his birth and first conception perfect God, and perfect man; we doe assuredly beleeue, and that in the very incarnation, the diuine and humane nature were vnited together. Also we graunt, that the Lord Christ might haue created to himselfe a soule full of all wisedome and knowledge, as he might haue made himselfe a perfect bodie: but seeing it pleased him to bee borne of a woman, and first to dwell in the bodie of an infant, wee doubt not to say, as the scripture teacheth vs, that he also Encreased in wisedome.

1. He was in all things like to his brethren, onely sinne excepted, Heb. 2.17.4.15. Ergo, he grew vp and encreased in knowledge, according to the manner of men, which may be done without sinne.

2. The scripture sayth plainly, which cannot lye, that Iesus grew vp and encreased in wisedome and stature, Luk. 2.52. And lest they should answere, that this encreasing was onely in the opinion of men: it followeth, And in fauour with God and men: he increased in wisedome, stature and fauour, not onely in shew before men, but in truth before God: and as verily and indeed he grew vp in stature, so also in wisedome.

3. Christ testifieth of himselfe, That neither the Angels nor the Sonne of man, as he is man, knoweth of the day or houre of his comming to iudgement, but the father onely, Mark. 13.31. Ergo, Christ as hee was man had not at once all fulnes of knowledge. Bellarmine thus expoundeth this place, Filius dicitur nescire, quia non sciebat ad dicendum alijs: The Sonne is sayd not to knowe, because he knewe it, not to reueale it to others, but to keepe it secret to himselfe.

Ans. First, then by the same reason, the Angels doe knowe it also: but that they are charged not to declare it to men: for the text sayth, that neither the Angels, nor the Sonne of man knoweth the time. Secondly, in this sense also the father might be sayd not to knowe it: for neither hath he reuealed it to any. Lastly, although we doe affirme according to the scripture, that the child Iesus did increase in the gifts of the mind, as he did in the stature of his bodie: yet we do put great difference between him, and all other children that euer came into the world: for as his conception & birth were not after the cōmon manner; (for [Page] he was cōceiued by the holy Ghost, & brought forth without trauel and labour: as August. sayth, Nec concipiendo libidinē, nec pariendo perpessa est dolorē: In conceauing she felt no carnal desire; in bearing she suffered no payne:) So likewise,De 5. haeres. cap. 5. the holy and blessed babe, in the constitution both of bodie and soule excelled the common condition of all other infants: for as he was voyd of originall sinne, so he was without the effects and fruites thereof, which doe shewe themselues in children: for neither suffered he the like pangs and infirmities in bodie, being in his infancie, as other children doe, that are vexed and tormented in bodie: neither was he subiect to the vnreasonable and brutish motions of the minde, which are in children. Therefore Augustine sayth, Hanc ignorantiam & animi infirmitatem, quam videmus in paruulis, nullo modo fuerim in Christo paruulo suspicatus: This kind of ignorance and infirmitie of minde, which is in children, I cannot thinke to haue been in the babe Christ. And what ignorance and infirmitie he meaneth, afterward he expresseth,De peccat. merit. & remiss. 29. Cum motibus irrationabilibus perturbantur, nulla ratione, nullo imperio cohibentur: When their brutish and vnreasonable motions come vpon them, they are ruled neither by reason, nor any other gouernment. These infirmities both in bodie and soule wee denye to haue been in Christ: and yet we doubt not to conclude, that, as Christ grewe in stature of bodie: as Augustine sayth,Ibid. Mutationes aetatum perpeti voluit ab ipsa exorsus infantia: He passed through the ages of mans life, beginning with his infancie: so likewise, as the scripture sayth, he increased in wisedome, Luk. 2.52.

AN APPENDIX, OF THE MANNER of Christs birth.

The Papists.

THey say, Christ came out of his mothers wombe, the clausure not stirred: as error 99 he passed thorow the doores when he came in to his disciples, the doores being shut, Iohn. 20.19. and as he passed thorow the stone, arising out of the Sepulchre, Rhemist. annot. Iohn. 20. sect. 2. Bellarm. de Eccles. lib. 4. cap. 9.

The Protestants.

1. IT can neuer be proued, that Christs bodie came either thorowe the wood of the doores, or thorowe the stone of the Sepulchre, or clausure of his mothers wombe. And concerning the last, the scripture is euident to the contrarie, where it is sayd, that our Sauiour Christ was presented to the Lord, according as it is written: Euery male that first openeth the matrix, &c. Luk. 2.29.

2. We graunt, that both the birth of Christ, his rising out of the graue, his [Page] comming in, the doores being shut, was strange and miraculous, because one substance gaue place to another for a time, and after the passing of his bodie, the place remained whole and shut as before: but not in the very instant of passing. The red sea gaue place to the Israelites while they passed, and closed together againe: so did the prison doores open miraculously to the Apostles, Act. 5.19. An incredulous Iewe seeing the eare of Malchus so soone healed, would not haue thought that Peters sword went betweene it and his head, as we are sure it did: So we say concerning the birth of Christ, that the place gaue way while he passed, and closed vp afterward againe as before. Augustine bringeth in Christ, thus speaking, Ego viam meo itineri praeparaui: and a little after, transitu meo illius non est corrupta virginitas: De 5. haeres. cap. 5. I made a way for my selfe out of the wombe: neither by my passage was her virginitie lost. Christ had a way out of his mothers wombe: but if the clausure had not giuen place, there had been no way made.Epistol 57. Againe he sayth, Spatia locorum tolle corporibus, nusquam erunt, & quia nusquam erunt, nec erunt: Take away space of place from bodies, and they shall be no where, and if they be no where, then are they not at all. But the Papists in saying that Christ went thorow the very substance and corpulence of things, doe take away from his bodie his proper place: for two substances cannot be in one place, and therefore they destroy the nature of his bodie.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER CHRIST suffered in soule.

The Papists.

THey vtterly denie, that Christ felt any paine or anguish in soule vpon the error 100 Crosse, otherwise then for griefe of his bodily torments: but doe charge them with horrible blasphemie that doe so affirme, Rhemist. Math. 27. sect. 3.

1. The scripture doth ascribe the worke of our redemption and reconciliation only to the blood of Christ vpon the Crosse, Coloss. 1.20. Ephes. 1.7. Ergo, the death of the bodie of Christ, without any further anguish in soule, was sufficient, Bellarm. de Christi anima. lib. 4. cap. 8.

Ans. 1. By the blood of Christ vpon the Crosse, must needes bee vnderstood all the parts and circumstances of his passion, both his sufferings in bodie and soule: for if it should be vnderstood properly, the blood of Christ onely were sufficient, and so his bodie and flesh should be excluded: and if the shedding of his blood be taken simply, we shal finde, that it was no part of his death: for his side was pearced, whereout issued water and blood, after he had yeelded vp the ghost, and all the torments of death were past: yea after he had vttered these words vpon the Crosse, It is finished, that is, he had payd the full raunsome for mankind, Iohn. 19. vers. 30.34. Wherefore by his blood must be vnderstood, by a Synecdoche, when one part is taken for the whole, all the other paines and torments which he suffered in his flesh.

[Page]Secondly, yea and the paines of the soule to are by that speech fitly expressed: for the blood of euery creature, is the life thereof, Genes. 9.4. Leuit. 17.14. But the soule is the life of man: Ergo, not vnproperly by the shedding of Christs blood, euen the vexation, and at the last the expiration of his soule, and so his whole passion both in body and soule is signified. Wherefore as in those places alleadged, we read the blood of Christ, or the blood of the Crosse, so otherwhere in more generall termes the Apostles call it, The dying of Christ, 2. Cor. 4.10. And the suffrings of Christ, 1. Pet. 4.13.

Argum. 2. If Christ, when he cried out vpon the Crosse, O God my God, why hast thou forsaken me? had felt the wrath of God, and despaired of his help, he should most greeuously haue sinned: Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. 1. It cannot be, that Christ thus cried out for the paine of bodily death: for then he had beene of greater infirmitie then many of his seruants, that in the midst of extreme torments neuer complained. And therefore it must needs be the burthen of the wrath and curse of God, that he endured for our sinne, that made him so to cry out vpon the crosse.

2. Neither doth it follow that Christ vttered those words in despaire, but only to shew the great anguish, trouble, and perturbation of his spirite, being vpon the crosse considered now as a meere man, his diuine nature and power repressing and hiding it selfe for a time: and although in the vexation of his soule he thus cryed out, yet he was not altogether left comfortlesse in spirite, in that he said, My God, my God: which wordes must needs declare an inward confidēce and assured trust in God.

The Protestants.

WE holde, it was necessary for our redemption, that Christ should not onely suffer bodily paines, but also feele the very anguish and horror of soule: that as by his death we are redeemed both body and soule, so he should pay the ransome for both in his body and soule.

1. That our Sauiour suffered great anguish in soule, the scripture testifieth: for before his suffring in his body vpon the crosse, being in the garden, he saith of himselfe, My soule is heauy vnto death: at the same time being grieuously troubled: he sweat water and blood: and last of all, hanging vpon the crosse he cryed out. By those effectes it is euidently proued, that there was a greater feare in him, then of the death of the body: for many holy Martyrs haue without any shew of such griefe endured horrible torments in the flesh, and therefore consequently it followeth, that those things proceeded from the griefe of his soule, as the Apostle sheweth: Heb. 5.7. He offered vp praiers with strong crying and teares, to him that was able to saue him from death, and was heard in that which he feared. If it had beene onely feare of bodily death, what need such strong cries with teares? And the text is plaine, that he was heard, that is, saued frō the death which he feared: but he was not saued from the bodily death: for he died [Page] and gaue vp the ghost: wherefore it was the great horror of soule that caused him to feare.

Bellarm. answereth for all this, that it was the bodily death which he feared: but not of necessitie, because he could not otherwise choose, but willingly, he would abide this brunt also of the feare and sorrow of death: Voluit poenam maeroris & timoris subire vt redemptio esset copiosae. And heerein he exceedeth all other men that haue suffered: for they are ridde from feare, because God giueth them greater comfort, and they regarde not the present torment: but Christ willingly and of his owne accord drew himselfe into this agonie of feare.

Ans. 1. That Christ as he was God, had determined and set it downe to dye for the world, it is not to be doubted of: but that as he was man, he had not a desire to escape death, as being ignorant of Gods determination, it is contrary to the Scriptures: which make mention of his earnest praier that he made thrice, that the cup might passe, Math. 26. Therefore Christ willingly entred not into that agony of feare in his humane desire, but as submitting himselfe and his will in obedience to his fathers will.

2. He is contrary to him selfe, in saying that Christs bodily sufferings were sufficient for our redemption, and yet graunteth, that Christ, vt redemptio esset copiosa, That our redemption might be more full, would abide also the smart of the feare of death: If he feared but the bodily death, as he saith, yet was he troubled in soule, and therefore besides bodily paine, he suffered anguish in his soule.

Argum. 2. Act. 2.24. Whom God hath raised vp, saith S. Peter, and loosed the sorrowes of death, for it was impossible that he should be holden of it: Ergo, Christ suffered the sorrowes of death, and felt the wrath of God, which caused those sorrowes. The vulgare Latine hath the sorrowe, of hell (solutis dolorib. infern [...]) which pincheth the Papists very sore: for how could Christ be loosed from the sorrowes of hell, if first he had not beene helde of them?

That which Bellarmine answereth, that Christ loosed the sorrowes of hell for others, which were to be deliuered, is but a poore shift: for the text is plaine, It was impossible that he, that is, Christ himselfe, should be stil holden of it: it is spoken of the holding of Christ and not of any other.

Argu. 3. The prophet Esay saith, He was wounded for our sins, and broken for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was vpon him, and with his stripes are we healed, Esay 53.5. But we could haue no peace with God, vnlesse all the punishment due vnto vs for our sinne, had beene vndertaken by Christ: wherefore seeing we by our sinne, had deserued to be punished both in body & soule, it was necessary, that our redeemer should be wounded and broken wholly for vs: for how els by his stripes should we wholly be healed?

Augustine thus reasoneth against Felicianus the Arrian, and proueth that Christ tooke not onely humane flesh, but an humane soule. Si totus homo peri [...], &c. If man wholly were lost, saith he, he had wholly need of a Sauiour, and if he wholly needed a Sauiour, Christ by his comming wholly redeemed him: [Page] therefore Christ tooke vpon him the whole nature of man, both body & soule: for if, since the whole man hath sinned, Christ onely had taken our flesh, the soule of man should still remaine guiltie of punishment: haec Augustine cont. Felician. cap. 13. By the same reason we proue it was necessary that Christ should suffer both in body and soule: by the which Augustine inferreth, that Christ tooke both body and soule: he did assume them both, to redeeme both: But he redeemed vs, not in being borne for vs, or walking, or preaching heere vpon earth, (although these were preparations to his sacrifice) but by dying and suffering for vs: Ergo, he suffered both in body & soule the punishmēt due vnto sinners. They graūt that Christ suffered anguish in soule, yet not properly in the soule, but onely for the bodily death, which was no part of the punishmēt of the soule: which consisted in the very sense and feeling of Gods wrath, and the torments of hell due vnto mankinde for their sinnes. This punishment of the soule ought also necessarily to haue beene vndertaken by Christ, being the redeemer both of body and soule.

THE FOVRTH PART, WHETHER CHRIST descended in soule into hell, to deliuer the Patriarkes.

The Papists.

THey doe beleeue that Christ according to his soule went downe to hell, to error 101 deliuer the Patriarkes and all iust men there holden in bondage til his death, Rhemist. Act. 2. sect. 12.

Argum. 2. He that ascended, is he that descended first into the lowest parts of the earth, Ephes. 4.9. that is, into hell, the which is the lowest place in the earth, Bellarm. cap. 12.

Ans. 1. The earth it selfe is in respect of the world, the lowest part, so that here one parte of the earth is not to be compared with another: but the whole earth in respect of the high heauens hath the name of the lower partes: so is it taken Psal. 139. ver. 15. Thou hast fashioned me beneath or in the lower partes of the earth: But Dauid (I trust) they will not say, was borne in hell, because he speaketh of the lower partes of the earth, consul. Bez. in hunc locum. So that by the descending of Christ into the lowest partes of the earth, is meant nothing els, but the lowest and extreamest degree of his abasing and humiliation, Fulke annot. in hunc locum, as S. Paul saith, That he made himselfe of no reputation, and tooke vpon him the forme of a seruant, Philip. 2.7.

[Page]

The Protestants.

THat Christ our Sauiour by the vertue of his death, did ouercome hel and the deuill, we doe verily beleeue, which may be called a discent into hell: that he also suffered the torments of hell vpon the crosse, and so descended into hell for vs, to abide that bitter paine which we had deserued to suffer eternally, we doe also holde and teach: for what rather may be called hell, then the anguish of soule, which he suffered, when he being God, yet complained that he was forsaken of God Furthermore, if descending into hell, be taken according to the Hebrew phrase, For entring into the state of the dead: so we also graunt, that Christ descended into hell, Fulk Act. 2. sect. 11. But for the descending of Christ into hell, after your sense, to deliuer the Patriarkes from thence, when you can proue it out of Scripture, we will yeelde vnto you.

1. The soule of Christ which he committed into his Fathers hands, was in Paradise, where he promised the theefe should be with him, Luke 22.43. How then could his soule be three daies in hell, as you affirme, from the time of his death to his resurrection? Fulke Luke 11. sect. 4. Bellarm. answereth, that it was not impossible, that the soule of Christ should be in two places at once, cap. 15. which is an answere not worthy to be answered: for who hath taught them so boldly to builde their phantasies vpon Gods power, hauing no warrant not assurance of his wil? May not the Vbiquitaries by the same reason proue the omnipresence of Christs humanity, because he is able to make his soule and body to be in many places at once, as well as in two: and so consequently by his power, which is infinite as well in all places, as in many?

2. We beleeue that the Patriarkes and godly Fathers were in heauen or Paradise, as well before the resurrection of Christ as after: for in as much as they were iustified by faith in his blood, they receiued the same crowne and reward of righteousnes that we doe, being iustified by the same meanes. This we haue proued more at large, controu. 9. quest. 1. Wherefore seeing there were none in hell, which they call Limbus Patrum, to be deliuered, there was no such cause why Christ should descend into hell. Therefore he descended not to deliuer the Patriarkes that remained in darkenes.

3. They agree not among thēselues about this article of Christs descension, to deliuer the Patriarkes: Andradius saith, it cānot be proued out of Scripture: but Bellarmine and our Rhemists doe bring their best arguments for it out of Scripture: they alleadge also diuers causes of his descension: the Romane Catechisme rendreth two reasons, one, to set the Patriarkes at liberty, the other, to manifest the power and vertue of his death in hell: but that, S. Paul saith, was sufficiently manifested and made knowne vpon the crosse, Colos. 2.15. Thomas Aquinas beside these, addeth a third, that as Christ died for vs to free vs from death, so it was conuenient that he should descend into hell, to deliuer vs from the descension into hell: as though Christ by his death did not fully deliuer vs from eternall [Page] damnation: Some other holde, that Christ went thither to suffer the torments of hell, that he might fully pay our raunsome by suffering the whole punishmēt due vnto mankinde: but this is a very grosse and erronious opinion: for Christ suffered fully in body and soule vpon the Crosse, when he cried, Consummatum est, It is finished: that is, he had fully appeased the wrath of God by his sufferings.

Augustine saith plainely, that he knew not what good Christ wrought for the iust soules that were in the bosome of Abraham, when he descended into hell: a quib. eum secundum beatificā praesentiam diuinitatis, Epistol. 99. nunquam video recessisse: From whom I finde hee was neuer absent or withdrew himselfe by the blessed presence of his diuine power: Ergo, in his iudgement Christ descended not to deliuer the Patriarkes. And concerning the soule of Christ, he writeth flatly: Si mortuo corpore anima latronis ad Paradisum mox vocatur, quempiam adhuc tam impium credimus, qui dicere audeat, quoniam anima Saluatoris nostri triduo illo corpor [...]ae mortis apud inferos custodiae mancipetur? If the soule of the theefe straightway being gone from the body, was called vp to heauen: is there any man so wicked, to say that the soule of our Sauiour was kept three daies in the prison of hel? By his sentence then, the soule of Christ passed straight to heauen, and descended not to hell.

AN APPENDIX, CONCERNING the place of Hell.

The Papists.

THe place where damned spirites are tormented, they say, is about the center of the earth, the lowest of all places, and nothing lower then it, Bellarm. de error 102 Christi anima. lib. 4. cap. 10.

Their Limbus Patrum, the place of darkenes, where the Fathers were before Christ, is, say they, in the highest parte, and as it were the brimme of hel, Rhemist. Luke 1 [...].22. Betweene these two places there is a great gulfe or space, and there is Purgatory, Rhemist. Luk. 16. sect. 8. Wherefore they conclude, veros inferos esse loca subterranea: That the subterrestriall and infernall places doe properly make hell, Bellarm. cap. 8. And so hell should be properly a place of punishmēt: because of the farre distance from heauen: whereas not so much the distance of place, as the absence of Gods spirite, and losse of his fauour, maketh it a place of horror and miserie.

Argum. 1. Math. 12.40. As Ionas was three daies and three nights in the belly of the Whale, so the sonne of man must be in the hart of the earth: but the graue is not in the hart, but the brimme of the earth: Ergo, we must needes vnderstand Hell, which is in the midst of the earth. Bellarm. cap. 12.

[Page]Ans. 1. This place cannot otherwise be applied, then to signifie the burial of Christ, and his abode in the graue, and his rising againe the third day: of his soule it cannot properly be meant: for Christ saith, he will giue them the signe of Ionas in himselfe: but a signe is conspicuous, visible and apparent: how could then the descending of his soule be a signe vnto them, which they knew not, neither could see? But the laying of his body into the graue, and the remaining there to the third day, they were all eye witnesses of: Also there is great affinity betweene the two Greeke words [...], a signe, which is there vsed, Math. 12.40. and [...], which signifieth sepulchrum, a graue, the one word being fitly deriued of the other: what better, [...], then could he giue them, then, [...], his owne graue or Sepulchre? Secondly, to be in the hart of the earth, is nothing els but to be within the earth, according to the Hebrew phrase, as Exod. 15.8. The hart of the Sea, that is, within the Sea: So Christs body was in the earth, it lay hid as it were in the bowels of the earth.

3. This exposition is against themselues: for if Christ went downe to the very hart and midst of the earth, which is the center, then he descended to the place of the damned: for neither Limbus Patrum, nor Purgatory, are in the center or lowest part of the earth by their opinion: but they themselues holde the cōtrary: for they say, that Christ by descending, deliuered soules out of the two vppermost hels, Limbus, and Purgatory, but not out of the nethermost hell, which is the place of the damned, Rhemist. Luke 16. sect. 8. Also it should follow of this their interpretation, that the soule of Christ was as long in hell, as his body in the graue, which is against the opinion of many Papists.

Argum. 2. Luke 8.31. The Deuils desired Christ, that he would not send them into the deepe: what is that els but the lowest region of the earth, where hell is, which Saint Paul calleth the lowest partes of the earth? Bellarmine.

Ans. We deny not but that God hath prepared, and that there is a place of vnspeakable torments ordeined for the deuill and his angels, and all damned soules: but that this place should be in the center of the earth, the places alleadged proue not: for the word Abyssus translated, the deepe, is sometime taken figuratiuely in a metaphore, as Rom. 11.33. O the deepenes of the wisedome of God: the word is [...], not much varying in signification from abyssus: so the place of their punishment is saide to be a great depth, that is, a place of vnsearchable and vnspeakable miserie and horror. Neither must this word abyssus, of necessitie be referred to the earth, for there are abyssi maris, the depths of the Sea, Exod. 15.8. as well as of the earth.

The lower places which S. Paul speaketh of Eph. 4. may be either vnderstood generally of the whole earth, which is pars mundi infima, the lowest part of the world, or els of the great abasing of Christ▪ from heauen to earth, being God, to become a seruant: as also the graue of Christ was that lowest part of the earth: for the Apostle saith in the comparatiue, [...] ▪ not [...], the lower, not the [Page] lowest: and so your vulgare Latine translateth, inferiora, not infima terrae: but hel is the lowest part, the graue is saide to be the lower.

The Protestants.

THat there is a locall place of torment prepared for the deuill and his angels, we doubt not, being so taught in the Scripture, Math. 25.41. A place of darkenes, 2. Pet. 2.4. Farre distant from the heauenly mansions of the blessed, Luke 16.26. Neither doe we deny but that it may be in the earth, or wheresoeuer els it pleaseth God: but wheresoeuer hel is, there is but one: that deuision of hell into three or foure regions, we vtterly condemne, as a meere deuise of man without Scripture: and this we say, that the place of hell causeth not the torment, but the wrath and curse of God: for euen out of hel God may make a man to feele the torments of hell, as we doubt not but our Sauiour Christ did for vs and our redemption vpon the crosse.

Argum. 1. It is possible to feele the paine of hell in the soule, although not [...]n the proper and appointed place of hell: as Iob complaineth, The arrowes of the Almightie are in me, the venime thereof doth drinke vp my spirit, and the terrors of God fight against me. And therefore he saith, his griefe was heauier then the sand of the Sea, Iob. 6.4.14. Iob felt euen the hell of conscience in himselfe for the time: yea our Sauiour bare the burthen of his fathers wrath vpon the Crosse, as we haue shewed before: Ergo, it is not the place that maketh hell.

Argu. 2. Hell is nothing els as the Scripture defineth it, but to be cast into vtter darkenes, There shalbe weeping and gnashing of teeth, Math. 25.30.22.13. The darkenes causeth weeping & horrible gnashing of teeth, the vnspeakable punishment both of body and soule: this darkenes is not the absence of the light of the sunne: for neither shall the Saints in heauen haue that light, because they neede it not, Apoc. 22.5. And it shalbe a place of darkenes to the damned angels, which haue no vse of the Sunne light: they also are reserued in chaines of darkenes, Iude 6. as they are no materiall chaines, so neither is it an outward darkenes: but the absence of Gods fauour and the light of his countenance: as the people are saide to haue sit in darkenes, before the light of the gospell by the preaching of Iesus Christ, did shine vnto them, Math. 4.16. But they much more shalbe and are kept in darkenes, that are condemned to hell, where they feele nothing but the horror of Gods wrath, his eternall and endlesse curse, with vnspeakable torments now in soule, and afterward both in body & soule, without all comfort or hope of refreshing, vtterly excluded from the presence of God: wherefore it is not the place, but the wrath of God, and absence of his spirite, that causeth such endlesse and vnspeakable punishment.

Argu. 3. As for your distinction of hell, the brim whereof you say is Limbus patrum, the middle parte, Purgatory, the lowest and nethermost hel it selfe, the place of the damned, in Augustines time it was not knowne: for first that the [Page] bosome of Abraham was part of hell, he vtterly denyeth: Apparet non esse membrū inferorum, tantae illius foelicitatis [...]inum: That bosome of so great blisse can be no mēber or part of hel, Epist. 99. Again Purgatory he vtterly refuseth, acknowledging but two places: heauen for the faithfull, hell for the damned and vnbeleeuers: Tertium locum penitus ignoramus, imo nec esse in scripturis sanctis inuenimus. A third place we are vtterly ignorant of, yea we finde in holy Scriptures that it is not. August, hypognost.

THE NINETEENTH CONTROVERSIE, OF MATTERS WHICH ARE IN QVESTION concerning the diuine nature of Christ.

THis controuersie containeth three Questions. First, whether Christ be [...], God of him selfe. Secondly, whether he be mediator as God, or man, or as both. Thirdly, whether he haue by his desertes purchased any thing for himselfe.

THE FIRST PART, WHETHER CHRIST be [...], God of him selfe.

The Papistes.

error 103 THey deny that Christ is [...], God of himselfe, and affirme, that he had not onely his person, but his substance of his Father: whereupon they are bolde to charge Caluine with blasphemy, for saying, that Christ is God of himselfe as well as the Father, Rhemist. Ioh. 1. sect. 3.

Argum. The word was with God, to wit, the sonne is with and of the father, and not the father of the sonne: Ergo, the sonne is God, with and of his father: Rhemist. ibid.

Ans. This place proueth, that the sonne of God, as he is the sonne, is of God: for to be the sonne of God, the word, the wisedome of God, 1. Cor. 1.30. His image, Heb. 1.3. doe belong vnto his person: So then as he is the sonne, the wisedome of God, or the word, so he is of God, namely in respect of his person: but as the sonne is God, he is of himselfe, neither taketh he his essence but person onely of his Father.

The Protestants.

THat we may fully know the state of this question, we must first set downe certain propositions▪ First, we do worship one eternal, omnipotent, & onely wise God, one and the same in power, essence, eternitie: but three in person, the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost: there is the same nature, essence, and [Page] deitie of them all, though they be distinguished in person: As there is one nature of the light, the heate thereof and the shining brightnes, Lucis, splendoris, caloris, as Augustine putteth the example: which three differ amongst themselues in propertie and quality, yet haue one and the selfe same nature and substance: God the father is as the light, Iam. 1.17. God the Sonne is as the brightnes of his glory, Heb. 1.3. God the holy Ghost is as the heate or fire, Heb. 12.29. Thus these three are one in nature and essence, but three in person.

2. There is somewhat communicable to them all, as the Godhead and diuine power and nature: Somewhat incommunicable, as the seueral proprieties of the persons: for it is proper onely to the father to beget, proper to the Sonne onely to be begotten, proper onely to the holy Ghost to proceede from them both. There is no essentiall difference in the Trinitie: for there is one essence and diuine nature common to them all. But there is both a real and rational difference: The persons differ one from another really, though not essentially. But the persons differ onely rationally or in respect from the essence of the Godhead: as the father and the sonne amongst men differ not essentially, for they are both men. But they are really, verily, and indeede distinguished; for it is one thing to be the father, another to be the sonne: yet from their owne essence their persons onely differ in respect and relation, not verily, non re, sed ratione: for the father is a man, the sonne also is a man: but in one respect he is a father, & in an other he is man: so likewise of the sonne, yet one and the same, is both father and man; one and the same is both sonne and man: so is it in the Trinitie. Now to the poynt of the question, which wee haue in hand. The Sonne therefore in the blessed Trinitie is begotten of his fathers essence, and hath the whole essence of his father, not by propagation, partition, profluence, but onely by communication. The sonne is not [...], Sonne of himselfe, because he is sonne of the father: But he is [...], that is, very God of himself: The essence or Godhead of the Sonne is of himselfe, not of the father: for it is one and the selfesame essence, which the father hath. He is indeede, Deus de Deo, lumen de lumine, God of God, light of light: But not as he is God, is he of God, but as he is the Sonne. It is one thing for the person of the Sonne to be begotten of the essence of the Father, which we graunt: another thing, for the essence of the Sonne to be begotten, which we must not yeeld to. So we conclude, that Christ as he is the Sonne, is of God the Father, as he is God, he is of himselfe.

Argum. 1. The essence of the Father is of himselfe, not begotten of any: but the essence and Deitie of the Sonne is the same and all one with his Fathers. Ergo, it is not begotten of any other. Agayne, he is not God whose essence is not of himselfe: therefore if Christs essence be not of himselfe, he should not be God.

Argum. 2. Our Sauiour himselfe sayth, As the Father hath life in himselfe, so hee hath giuen to the Sonne also to haue life in himselfe, Iohn 5.26. The Sonne then hath life in himselfe: Ergo, hee is GOD of himselfe. Augustine vpon these wordes writeth: Non quasi mutuatur vitam, nec quasi particeps [Page]vitae, In Iohan. tract. 19. sed ipse vitam in se habet, vt ipsa vita sibi sit ipse: He did not as it were borrow life of his father, neither is made partaker of life, but he hath life in himself, he is life vnto himselfe. But lest any man should thus mistake the wordes of the text, that because the Father gaue to the Sonne to haue life in himself, therefore hee gaue him to be God: (for to haue life in himselfe is to bee God) Augustine thus expoundeth them: Dedit filio vitam habere in se, breuiter dixerim, genuit filium: He gaue to his Sonne to haue life in himselfe, in fewe wordes, He begat his Sonne. As if we should say, the Father which hath life in himselfe, that is, is God, gaue to his Sonne to haue life in himselfe, that is, begat God the Sonne: he begat him not as he was God, but as he was his Sonne: yet because of the neere vniting and coniunction of the person with the Godhead and diuine power to haue life in himselfe, which really cannot be distinguished, but onely in respect, as we haue shewed: the Father is said also to giue vnto the Sonne to be God, and to haue life in himselfe, not directly or properly but obliquely and by a consequent, because his Sonne whom he begat from all eternitie, must also necessarily be God.

And that it cannot be the proper meaning, that God the Father gaue to the Sonne power to haue life in himselfe, it appeareth by the words themselues: for as the Father hath life in himselfe, euen so hath hee giuen to the Sonne: but the Father hath life in himselfe, without beginning from any other. Ergo, so hath the Sonne.

There should els be a contrarietie and repugnancie in the speech: for if Christ receiued life from his father, he could not haue it in himselfe. It must therfore of necessity be vnderstood of the person in the Trinity, not of the diuine essence. And so we determine that it is true in the concrete, in concreto, if wee say, Deus Pater genuit Deum Filium: God the Father begat God the Sonne, but not in abstracto, Deitas Patris genuit Deitatem Filium, that the Godhead of the Father begat the Godhead of the Sonne. But in respect of his person onely as he is the Sonne the second person in Trinitie, so is hee begotten and hath his beginning of God. But in respect of his diuine nature as he is God, hee is begotten of none, but of himselfe as God the Father is.

THE SECOND PART, WHETHER CHRIST bee our mediator, as he is man onely, or as hee is both GOD and man.

The Papists.

error 104 THey doe teach that Christ onely exercised his priesthood & the office of the mediator, as he was man, not as he was both God & man, Rhem. Heb. 5. sect. 4 His obedience, sacrifice, prayer, satisfaction, entring into the heauens, was all performed by & in his manhood only, Secundum formam serui, as he was in the [Page] forme of a seruant, not secundum formam Dei, as he was in the forme of God, Bellarm. de Christo, lib. 1. cap. 1.

Argum. 1. If he were priest as he is God, he should be inferior and not equall to God, and so be Gods priest and not his Sonne: for he to whom sacrifice is offered, is greater then he that offereth it, Rhemist. ibid.

Answ. It followeth not, that because Christ is our priest and mediator as God and man, that therefore he should performe all the dueties of the Priesthood as he was God: all the partes of his priesthood that required obedience, seruice, homage, subiection, as were his sufferings and sacrifice, he exercised as man: but the authority of reconciling vs to God, he wrought both as God and man.

Argum. 2. There is one God, and one Mediator of God and men, the man Iesus Christ, 1. Timoth. 2.5. Why sayth the Apostle, The man Iesus Christ, but to signifie, that according to his manhood onely he is our Mediator. Bellarm. cap. 3.

Ans. 1. You may as well conclude out of this place, that the Mediator is onely man and not GOD, as that hee is mediator onely as man and not as GOD: but if out of these wordes it may bee prooued, that the Mediator is both GOD and man, as it necessarily followeth, (for how else can he be a Mediator of God and men?) it dooth as well follow that hee is Mediator both as God and as man. Indeede the Apostle sayth, The man Iesus Christ, not God and man, for the one he had sayd before, There is one God; in that speech including our Sauiour Christ, who is one God with his Father. Secondly, what Saint Pauls meaning is, it appeareth in the next verse, who gaue himselfe a ransome, vers. 6. As Christ therefore gaue himselfe a ransome, so is hee Priest and Mediator: but he gaue himselfe as he was God; as he was man, hee was giuen: Ergo, as God he is Mediator.

The Protestants.

IN the office of the Priesthood two things must be considered, a ministerie, and an authoritie: In respect of the ministeriall parte Christ performed the office of his priesthood as man, but in respect of authoritie of entering into the holyest place, and reconciling vs to God, which was the principall parte of his Priesthood, he did performe it as the Sonne of God, as the Lord and maker of the house, and not as a seruant. And so we holde that Christ neither according to his humanitie alone, nor his Godhead alone, but that whole Christ is a Priest, both as God and man.

Argum. 1. Saint Paul sayth, God was in Christ, reconciling the worlde to himselfe, 2. Corinth. 5.19. Ergo, Christ, as God, is our reconciler and mediator. Againe, Christ as he is without Father and mother, hath no beginning of his dayes, nor end of his life, so is hee a Priest after the order of Melchisedech: but Christ as he is God and man hath neither father nor mother: as he is God hath no beginning of dayes, and in his whole person no end of his life, therefore as God and man he is a Priest of Melchisedechs order.

[Page]Argum. 2. Saint Paul sayth, The lawe was giuen by Angels in the hand of a Mediator, Galath. 3.19. But then Christ was God onely: Ergo, hee is Mediator also as God. Bellarmine sayth, that hee is called Mediator, because that person was appointed afterward to bee Mediator: But the text is playne, that he then actually performed the office of a Mediator, so much as pertayned to his Godhead: for the Lawe was giuen in the hand of a Mediator, which kinde of speech sheweth a present execution of the Mediatorship.

Augustine sayth, Non mediator homo praeter diuinitatem, diuina humanitas, Homil. de. ouib. ca. 12 & humana diuinitas mediatrix: The man Christ is not mediator beside his diuine nature, the diuine humanitie, and the humane diuinitie, is the Mediatrix. Ergo, Christ Mediator both as God and man.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER CHRIST merited for himselfe.

The Papists.

error 105 CHrist, they say, by his passion and sufferings, hath not onely merited eternall life for vs, but euen by his owne merite obtayned his owne glorification, Rhemist. annot Hebr. 2.1.

Argum. 1. Philip. 2.9. He humbled himselfe vnto the death of the Crosse, wherefore God hath also highly exalted him, and giuen him a name aboue all names. Ergo, Christ merited his exaltation, Rhemist. in hunc locum.

Ans. 1. This place sheweth a sequele of the exaltation of Christ after his humiliation, it maketh not one the cause of another, as our Sauiour himselfe sayth, Luk. 24.26. Christ ought to haue suffered, and so enter into his glory. Secondly, the exaltation which the Apostle here speaketh of, is the fame, which God chalengeth to himselfe, Isai. 45.22. Euery knee shall bow vnto me, and euery tongue shall sweare by me. But it were most grosse to affirme, that the diuine power and glory can be merited: Christ hath his diuinity by nature, and not by merite.

The Protestants.

IT is not in any wise to be thought, that Christ merited his glory, which is due to him in respect of his diuinity: but that by the glorious work of our redemption, he hath declared himselfe to be a person worthy of all honour and glory, Apocal. 5.9. the place is so to be vnderstoode.

Argum. 1. If Christ had respect vnto himselfe in his sufferings, to gayne or merite any thing for himselfe, his loue should greatly bee obscured and darkened, which Saint Paul so greatly cōmendeth, In that he died for his enimies, Rom. 5.10. For now should not his loue bee whole and entire towards vs, [Page] as though for our cause he onely had died: But it is now a diuided and halfe loue: for he died, as they say, partly to merite for himselfe, partly to merite for vs. But the scripture speaketh cleane contrary, Iohn 17.9. For their sakes sanctifie I my selfe: he sayth not, partly for their sakes, partly for mine owne.

Argum. 2. All glory that Christ hath, was from euerlasting due to his person, because he is the eternall Sonne of God: As hee himselfe sayth, Iohn 17.5. And now glorifie mee with thine owne selfe, with the glory which I had with thee, before the world was, and this glorie was due vnto Christ so soone as he was incarnate by the right of his Godhead. Hebr. 1. When he bringeth in his first begotten Sonne into the worlde, hee sayth, Let all the Angels of God worship him. And the Rhemists themselues confesse, in their Annotat. vpon these wordes, that straight vpon Christs descending from heauen, it was the duetie of Angels to worship him. Ergo, hee merited not his glorification by his death, which was due vnto him euen at his first incarnation.

Argum. 3. If Christ merited his owne glorification, then hee also merited the hypostaticall vnion, that his manhood should bee ioyned to his Godhead in vnitie of person; for his glory, maiestie, and power giuen to his manhood, doth issue and arise from the vniting of his Godhead therewith in one person: but his humanity deserued not to be vnited to the Godhead: Nemo tam caecus est, sayth Augustine, No man is so blind, that he dare say,De corrept. & grat. cap. 11. that Christ by his well liuing merited to be called the Sonne of God. And hee prooueth it out of the first of Luk. vers. 35. Therefore shall that holy thing bee called the Sonne of God: not for any workes going before, but because the holy Ghost came vpon her. Wherefore the diuine glorie which Christ hath, was not merited, but his owne it was from the beginning, which glory the humane nature in Christ is made partaker of, not for any merite, but because it is vnited to the Godhead in the same person, through the abundant and vnspeakable grace and loue of God vnto mankinde, which of his free grace rather tooke vnto himselfe the nature of men, then of Angels. Wherefore Christ by his perfect obedience and blessed sacrifice, hath merited abundantly for vs, remission of sinnes, and eternall life: but by his merites he hath gayned nothing for himselfe: neither had he any respect to the bettering of his own estate in his sufferings, but onely to pay a raunsome for vs.

[Page]

THE TWENTIETH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE, CONCERNING THE COMMING OF CHRIST TO iudgement: which appertaineth to his whole person, as he is both God and man.

THis controuersie hath two partes: First, concerning the signes which must come to passe before his appearing. Secondly, of the time and maner of his appearing. The first part contayneth three questions: Frst whether the Gospell bee already preached to the whole world. Secondly, whether Henoch and Elias shall come in the flesh, before the day of iudgement. Thirdly, of the great persecutions toward the end of the world.

1

THE FIRST QVESTION, WHETHER the Gospel be already preached thorough the worlde.

The Papists.

error 106 THey denie that the Gospell hath beene already published to all nations of the worlde: for there are many great countries, which neuer heard of the Gospell, as they affirme. But before the comming of Christ to iudgement, they say, it shal be preached to the whole world, Bellar. de Roman p [...]ntif. lib. 3. cap. 4.

Argum. 1. Math. 24.14. Christ sayth, ‘This Gospell of the kingdome shall be preached thorough the whole worlde, for a witnes vnto all nations, & then shall the end come.’ The end of the world shall immediately follow the generall preaching of the Gospell: which if it hath been performed, it is most like to haue been done in the Apostles time: then the world should haue ended long agoe, Bellarm. ibid.

Ans. This word, Then, doth not alwaies in the scripture signifie a certaine and definite time presently to follow, as Math. 9.1. Then he entred into a ship, and so forth. Luke also setteth foorth the same storie, cap. 5.18. Then brought they a man lying in a bed: But in saying Then, they haue not relation to the same time; for they keepe not the same order, in rehearsing the storie: Matthew setteth downe one thing, that was immediatly done by our Sauiour Christ before, and Luke another. And so is the word, Then, vsed in other places, not to describe a consequence of time, with relation to that which went before,August. de consensu Euangel. 43. but absolutely without any such respect to name the time present only, wherein any thing is done. So, tunc, then, signifieth as much as in illo tempore, [Page] in that time, not which shall immediately follow vpon the generall publishing of the Gospel, but which God hath appoynted. We must also consider who it is, that sayth, Then, namely, God himselfe, with whom a thousand yeares is as one day, and one day as a thousand yeares. Christ (Then) may come many hundred yeares after, and yet it shall be true, that then shall the end be. But we rather take the first sense, that (Then) is here taken indefinitely, as it is thorough the whole chapter, as vers. 21. Then shall be great tribulation, which cannot haue relation to that which he spake of before; for then it must be vnderstoode of the destruction of Ierusalem: but our Sauiour meaneth by (Then) the time towards the ende of the world: as vers. 29. Immediately after the tribulation of those dayes, the Sunne shalbe darkened: Then shall the signe of the Sonne of man appeare.

Argum. 2. We see the Gospel hath been preached in great countreyes of late, which neuer heard the Gospel afore, as it is thought, Rhemist. Math. 24. sect. 4.

Ans. 1. They speake doubtfully, they cannot tell: as it is thought, say they. 2. They meane the preaching of their Friers, in those newe found countreyes, which was not the preaching of the Gospel, but of vile superstition, not to conuert the people to God, but to robbe and spoyle them, and make a pray of them, killing & slaying them without al mercy: reade Benzo in historia noui orbis. 3. We deny not but that the Gospell may be reuiued and renued in many countreyes, where notwithstanding it was planted many yeares afore: As this countrie of ours in ancient time called Britanie, was first instructed in the faith by the preaching of Ioseph of Arimathea, as Gildas saith: or as Nicephorus saith, by Simō Zelotes: yet after that, the foundation of the faith thus begun,Fox p. 106. it was confirmed afterward in king Lucius daies, by the preaching of Fagane & Damiane, which at Lucius request were sent into the land from Eleutherius, B. of Rome: and so may it come to passe in other countreyes: a second preaching therefore taketh not away the former, but confirmeth and reuiueth it.

The Protestants.

THat the Gospell was by the Apostles preached to all the knowen and inhabited nations of the worlde, we cannot but affirme, being so taught by the scriptures.

Argum. 1. Our Sauiour saith to his Apostles, Ye shalbe my witnesses to the vttermost partes of the earth, Act. 1.8. which is spoken to the persons of the Apostles, not in them to all Pastors and preachers▪ as some expound it: for in the same vers. there is mention made of the comming of the holy Ghost, and howe first they should begin to witnesse at Ierusalem: which things were indeede so accomplished in the Apostles.

Saint Paul also Rom. 10.18. expoundeth that place of the Psalme, Their sound is gone forth into all the worlde, of the Apostles.

[Page]Agayne, seeing the Apostolicall calling and gift is now ceased, neither are we to looke that men should be immediatly called from heauen, and the preaching of the Gospell to all nations is an Apostolicall worke, for the which the Apostles also receiued the gifts of tongues: seeing now we haue neither Apostolike men, nor Apostolike giftes, wee are not to doubt, but that this promise and prophesie of the vniuersall preaching of the Gospell, is performed already.

Argum. 2. It appeareth in Ecclesiasticall histories, that the Apostles dispersed themselues into all partes of the worlde, euery where preaching the Gospell. Thomas preached to the Parthians, Medes, Persians, also to the Germanes: Fox. p. 32. Simon Zelotes, in Mauritania, Africa, and in Britania: Iudas, called Thaddaeus, in Mesopotamia: Mark, in Aegypt: Bartholomaeus to the Indians: Andrew preached to the Scythians, Sogdians, Aethopians: So that there were fewe or no knowen countreyes in the world, which heard not of the fame of the Gospell.

But here two things must be obserued: First, that the Gospel was to bee preached in the habitable or knowen world: the word is [...]: Many countreyes are inhabited now that were not habitable then,Matt. 24.14 or at the least not inhabited: wherefore it was sufficient, that the people of the world heard of the Gospel, howsoeuer afterward they were propagated into other vnknowen places. Secondly, as Augustine sayth, Omnes gentes promissae sunt, non omnes homines omnium gentium: All nations were promised to heare of the Gospel, not all the men and inhabitants of euery nation.Epistol. 80. And so we doubt not but the Apostles did lay the foundation of fayth through the whole worlde, and were first planters of the Churches in euery nation. But their plantings were watered and encreased, and continued by others.

Wherefore, seeing the world hath once already beene generally lightened with the truth of the Gospell, we are not to looke any more for a solemne legacie and ambassage to be sent from the Lord vnto all nations: But those countreyes rather, which somtime had the trueth, and now haue lost it, ought now to seeke vnto those places that haue it, as the Queene of Saba went a long iourney to heare Salomons wisdome: They therefore that yet doe expect an vniuersall preaching, may sooner see Christ comming in the cloudes, then haue their expectation satisfied.

THE SECOND QVESTION, OF THE comming of Henoch and Elias before the day of iudgement.

The Papists.

error 107 THeir common and receiued opinion is, that Henoch and Elias doe yet liue in their bodies in Paradise, and shall come in person, to oppose themselues [Page] against Antichrist, and by their preaching to conuert the Iewes, Rhemist. Apocal. 11. sect. 4.

Argum. Malachie 4.5. I will send you Eliah the Prophet, before the great and fearefull day of the Lorde. These are also the two witnesses spoken of, Apocal. 11.3. Which shall be slaine and rise vp againe the third day. Ergo, Eliah and Henoch shall come before the day of the Lorde, Bellarm. de Roman. pontif. 3.6.

Ans. First, the prophesie of Malachie was fulfilled in Iohn Baptist, who came in the spirite of Elias, as it is thrise in the Gospell applied: once by the Angel, Luk. 1.16. twise by our Sauiour Christ, Matth. 11.14. & 17.13.

Bellarmine saith, it is not properly vnderstoode of Iohn Baptist, but onely in an allegorie. First, the Prophet speaketh of the great and fearefull day of the Lord: but the comming of Christ was the acceptable time.

Ans. Here the Iesuite bewrayeth great ignorance: As though the comming of Christ in the flesh, as it brought comfort to the Elect, & to as many as were ordeined to saluation, was not also hastening of the iudgement of God against the wicked: and therefore Iohn saith, The axe was laide to the roote of the tree, Matth. 3.10. and that Christ came with his fanne in his hand, verse 12. The Apostle, Heb. 12.26. applieth that saying of the Prophet: Once againe wil I shake not onely the heauens, but the earth, to the preaching of the Gospell: wee see then in what sence the first comming of Christ is called a fearefull and terrible day.

Ans. Secondly, by the two witnesses, is vnderstood the small, yet sufficient number of the true seruants of God, which shall witnesse the truth euen in the whottest persecution of Antichrist: there is no mention made of Henoch or Elias. And if you will needs vnderstand that literally, of their rising againe, why not the rest also, how fire shall proceede out of their mouthes to consume the wicked, and they shall turne water into blood? The meaning is nothing else, but that God will alwaies haue faithfull witnesses in his Church, which shall alwaies stand vp, in the stead of the Prophets and holy men gone before.

The Protestants.

LIke as the Pharisies deceiued the Iewes with vaine expectation of Elias, and so hindred their beliefe in Christ: so the Papists would not haue men to acknowledge the manifestation of Antichrist, vnder this false pretence, that Henoch and Elias must first come before Antichrist bee reuealed, which wee doe hold as a Iewish fable and popish dreame.

Argum. 1. The Prophesie of Elias comming is properly fulfilled in Iohn Baptist, and therefore wee are not to looke for any other accomplishment thereof: neither now is there any Paradise remaining but Heauen, 2. Corinth. 12.4. And to affirme that Henoch and Elias went vp to Heauen in their bodies, before the ascension of Christ, out of Scripture it cannot be proued: it is [Page] euident that they were taken vp aliue into heauen, but not that they continued aliue.

Argum. 2. The varietie of opinions concerning the personall appearance of Henoch and Elias, declare that it is an vncertaine thing, and but deuised of men. Hilarye saith, they shalbe Moses and Elias: Chrysostome granteth that Elias shall come, but not Henoch. Iustine thinketh that not onely Henoch and Elias are aliue, but all those, whose bodies rose at the resurrection of Christ: Hippolytus is of opinion, that Iohn the Diuine shall come with them and some say Ieremie also, whose death is not read of, Fulk. Apocal. 11. sect. 4. And thus it is no meruaile, if men run mad as it were in their foolish conceites, hauing no warrant for their opinions out of Scriptures.

The nation of the Iewes wee grant, according to the manifest prophesie of Saint Paul, Rom. 11. shall in the end be conuerted: but not in such sort, by the personall preaching of Moses and Elias: for the Apostle setting downe at large the mysterie of their calling, would not haue left out so necessarie a thing.

Augustine by the two witnesses, vnderstandeth the two testaments, the Old and the new. But hee denieth vtterly, that any shall rise before the comming of Christ:In Apocal. Homil. 8. as the Apostle saith, 1. Corinth. 15.23. The first fruites is Christ, Then they that are Christs at his comming, but not before. Vnde (saith he) excluditur omnis suspicio quorundam, qui putant hos duos testes duos viros esse, & ante aduentum Christi coelum in nubibus ascendisse. Their suspition therefore, or opinion is vtterly excluded, which thinke these two witnesses to bee two men, which should ascend into heauen before the comming of Christ. Augustine we see is flat against them.

THE THIRD PART, WHETHER THE most grieuous persecutions that euer were, shall be toward the end of the world.

The Papists.

error 108 THe most grieuous persecution (say they) that euer was, shall be vnder Antichrist, who is not yet come, but shall bee reuealed toward the end of the world, and shall raigne vpon the earth three yeares and an halfe, making great hauock of the Church of God. Bellarmine de Roman. pontifi. lib. 3. cap. 7.

Argum. Matth. 24.21. There shall bee▪ then such great tribulation in the world, as was not since the beginning of the world, neither shall bee: Ergo ▪ the greatest persecution toward the end of the world.

Ans. 1. It is plaine by the text, that this great tribulation is prophesied to come vpon the Iewes: for in the next verse before he saith, pray that your flight be not in the winter: And then it followeth, there shall bee then, or as Marke saith, In those dayes, there shall be such tribulation, 13.19. and in the 17. verse Woe shall be to them that giue suck in those dayes. Which must needes bee [Page] vnderstoode of the destruction of Ierusalem: for at the comming of Christ, there shall be one and the same case of all, whether of those that giue suck, or of those that giue none.

Secondly, it cannot be meant of the last tribulation in the world, because the words are, that as there was none such since the beginning of the world, so there shall be none such after. Ergo, there shall be tribulation after, though none such.

The Protestants.

OVr hope and trust is, that the greatest persecution of the Church of God is ouerpast: because the kingdome or rather tyrannie of Antichrist beginneth to decay, and wee trust, shall more and more bee shaken, till it come to vtter ruine.

Argum. 1. The Scripture telleth vs, that hard vpon the end of the worlde there shall bee great securitie, men shall say, Peace peace vnto themselues, 1. Thesal. 5.4. They shall eate and drinke, marrie and bee married, as it was in the dayes of Noah, Matth. 24.38. And therefore Luke saith, 21.34. Take heede you be not ouercome of surfeiting and drunkennes, least this day come vpon you vnawares, For as a snare shall it come, &c. All this proueth, that there shall be rather generall securitie, as in the dayes of Noah, then generall tribulation. And there is greater danger of surfeiting & wantonnes in time of prosperitie and abundance, then in the dayes of persecution.

Also the text is plaine, speaking of warres, troubles and persecutions, but the end shall not be yet, Mark. 13.7. Wherefore it appeareth, that the troubles and persecutions of the Church, shall be well slaked toward the end of the world.

Argum. 2. Antichrist, though he shall not vtterly bee extinguished before the comming of Christ, yet shall be deadly wounded: and hee shall begin to be iudged euen in this world, Apocal. 16.6. God shal giue them blood to drink, Apocal. 17.16. The ten hornes, that is the kinges of the earth, shall hate the whore and eate her flesh. The Church of God shall reward her, as she hath rewarded vs, and giue her double according to her workes, Apocal. 18.6. By these places it is gathered, that Antichrist shal haue a great ouerthrow before the comming of Christ, who shall vtterly abolish him with the brightnes of his comming, 2. Thes. 2.8.

Antichrist is alreadie come▪ and hath raged a long time against the Church: The persecutions of the heathen did neither continue so long, neither were in exquisite crueltie and bitternes to be compared to the outragious practises of the Antichrist of Rome, and his adherents against the Church of God: which would fill a whole volume by themselues▪ nay not one, but many and infinite volumes to be declared at large.

Augustine saith, Prima persecutio violen [...] [...] tormentis, In Psal. 9. [...]lterafraudulenta est per haereticos, tertia superest per Antichristum [...] ▪ qu [...] nihil est [...]ericulosius, quia & violenta & fraudulenta erit. The first persecution of the [Page] Church was violent with torments: the second was by fraudulent heretikes: the third shal be vnder Antichrist, the worst of all, it shal be both violent, and fraudulent. This persecution vnder the Popes of Rome, the Church of God endured a great while: who both dealt fraudulentlie, in poysoning them with corrupt doctrine, and cruellie also, in punishing with sword and fire the innocent members of Christ: wherefore seeing it is a plaine case, that Antichrist is, and hath been many a day reuealed to the world, and that the Church of God beginneth to haue some respit and libertie from his thraldome; wee doubt not, but that the greatest stormes of persecution are ouerpast, if by our sinnes wee bring not back againe the thick and mistie cloude vpon vs.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS CONtrouersie, about the manner of Christs comming to iudgement.

The Papists.

error 109 1. THe faithful shal iudge and giue sentence with Christ (say they) at the latter day, Rhemist. 1. Corinth. 6. vers. 2. They shall sit in thrones with Christ, Matth. 19. vers. 28. Ergo, iudge together with him, Rhemist. ibid.

The Protestants.

Ans. 1. TRue it is, that the Saints shal iudge the world, 1. Corinth. 6.2. But only Christ shall giue sentence, Matth. 25. and is properly and onelie the iudge of the world: for the father hath committed al iudgemēt to the Sonne, Iohn 5.22. If all, then there is no part left for any other. The Apostles therefore and Saints are said to iudge, as Christ saith of his word, that hee will not iudge the vnbeleeuers, but his word shall iudge them in the last day, Iohn 12.48. That is, shall bee a witnesse against them, accuse them, lay in matter of iudgement against them. So the word preached by the Saints vpon earth, and practised in their liues, shall bee the condemnation of the worlde. And not onely so, but they shall bee aduanced to greater honor: They shall sit in thrones and seates: that is, they shall not stand amongst the wicked to receiue sentence, but shall meete Christ in the ayre, and bee caught vp in the cloudes, 1. Thess. 4.17. Yea, they shall in the sight and beholding of the vngodly enter into the kingdome of God, Luk. 13.28. But in any other sence they cannot be iudges of the world: for shall we thinke, that Christ in that day shall neede vnder officers and iudges, as Moses did? Exod. [...]8. Augustine saith, Sancti sedebunt cum domino attendere, In Psal. 121 qui fecerunt misericordia [...]: The Saints shall [...]it with the Lord, not to iudge, but to marke and attend, and to witnesse, who haue followed the workes of m [...]cie.

[Page]

The Papists.

2 THey are so bold as to appoint the place, where Christ shall appeare, namely error 110 in the East: for his comming shall bee as the lightening that shineth from East to West, Matth. 24.27. Bellarm. de cultu sanctor. lib. 3. cap. 3.

The Protestants.

Ans. FIrst, by that similitude Christ onely sheweth the suddennes of his comming: therefore it must be prest no further, then to that purpose for the which it serueth. Secondly, our Sauiour saith plainely, that the kingdome of God commeth not with obseruation, Luk. 17.20. either of time, or place: And therfore, when men say vnto vs, Behold here, or beholde there, we ought not to beleeue them, vers. 23. As though they would point out Christs comming with the finger, either in the East or West. Whereas Mathew therefore nameth the East and West, in the similitude of the lightening, Luke leaueth them out, saying, As the lightening shineth from one part of the Heauen to the other, 17.24. Least we should thinke any great matter to be in nomination of those partes.

Augustine saith notably, Non ab Oriente veniet, nec Occidente: quare? quia Deus iudex est: si in aliquo loco esset, non esset Deus: In Psal. 74. quia vero Deus iudex est, non homo, noli illum expectare de locis: He will not come, either from the East, or from the West: why so? Because God is iudge: if he were tied to any place, hee were not God: but because God is iudge, and not a meere man: wee must not looke for him from any place.

The Papists.

3. THe Sonne of man shall appeare in the day of iudgement, with the signe error 111 of the Crosse borne before him. Then shall the signe of the Sonne of man appeare in Heauen, Matth. 24.3. that is (say they) the signe of the Crosse, Bellarm. de sanct. lib. 2. cap. 28. Rhemist. in hunc locum.

The Protestants.

Ans. 1. THe signe of the Sonne of man in the Heauens, is nothing else, but his conspicuous and glorious appearing, who shall come in great glorie, as a signe in the heauens to bee seene of all the worlde. It cannot signifie any such visible signe as they imagine: for Mark. 13.26. Luke 21.27. wee reade thus: Then shall they see the Sonne of man. So then, the signe of the Sonne of man, is the Sonne himselfe in his glorious appearing. Secondly, it is great presumption therefore, so boldly to affirme, that it shall be the signe of the Crosse, hauing no Scripture for it. Other signes wee finde, that Christ hath appeared [Page] with, as the signe of the rayne-bowe, Apocal. 10.1. with a two edged sworde, Apocal. 1.16. with a booke in his hand, Apocal. 10.2. We haue better reason, that Christ may appeare with those signes, by the which he hath sometime shewed himselfe, then they haue for the signe of the Crosse.

3 It is more like, that Christ at his comming should shew the markes and prints of the nailes and speare in his bodie, then the signe of the Crosse: for those were felt and seene in his bodie after his resurrection, so was not the other. But it is a loose coniecture, and a vaine surmise, without any ground of Scripture, that the woundes are either now in heauen to be seene in the glorious bodie of Christ, or that they shall bee beheld and looked vpon in the daie of iudgement. The wicked in deed shall behold him, whom they pearced: but it followeth not thereupon that he should appeare as pearced. How is it possible, that either the bodie of Christ being perfectly glorified, should still retaine any spots or blemishes, or that they could be espyed in so glorious a bodie, which with the brightnes thereof shall obscure the Sunne?

Homil. de temp. 147. Augustine giueth this iudgement: Sic voluit resurgere Christus, sic voluit quibusdam dubitantibus exhibere in illa carne cicatrices vulneris vt sanaret vulnus incredulitatis. So it pleased Christ to arise, and to shew in his flesh vnto some that doubted, the skarres of his woundes, to heale and take awaie the wound of their incredulitie or vnbeleefe. This then being the onelie cause, why Christ would at that time haue the printes and markes in his flesh to bee seene, namelie to confirme the faith of them which doubted: the cause being now ceased, for is it to bee thought that there are any doubtfull persons in heauen, which may be confirmed by beholding Christs woundes, or shall vnbeleeuers finde any reliefe in the day of iudgement? The cause being remoued, wee haue no warrant to thinke, that there are any such skarres, either now to bee seene in the glorious bodie of Christ, or which shall appeare in the day of iudgement. And seeing there is no ground for this opinion, the shewing forth also of the signe of the crosse in that day, is also but a wandring and a foolish conceite.

The Papists.

error 112 4. SVch is their boldnes, that they dare assigne the very yeare, moneth, and day of Christs comming to iudgement: for they say, that Antichrist shall raigne three yeares and an halfe, and one moneth, 1290. dayes, and counting 45. dayes after that, they shal see Christ comming in the cloudes: Blessed is hee, saith Daniel, that waiteth and commeth to the 1335. dayes, Dan. 12.12. Bellar. de pontif. Rom. lib. 3. cap. 8.

The Protestants.

Ans. 1. THe prophesie of Daniel we haue alreadie shewed, Controuersie 4. Quaest. 9. to haue been fulfilled before the first comming of Christ, [Page] in Antiochus that cruell tyrant and persecutor of the people of God: how hee should cause the daily sacrifice to cease 1290. dayes, that is, three yeares and seuen moneths, 2. Macchab. 11.33. And that 45. dayes after, Antiochus being dead, the Church should finde ease, 1. Macch. 6.16. Wherefore, seeing this prophesie hath once alreadie had his effect, it is not necessarie to looke for any other: as Augustine saith of another prophesie of Daniel, Quae prophetia si tempore primi aduentus impleta est, non cogit intelligi, Epistol. 80. quod etiam de fine seculi implebitur: Which prophesie if it hath been fulfilled in or before the first comming of Christ, it need not be vnderstoode of the latter.

2 This presumption of theirs is flat opposite and contrarie to Scripture, which saith, That the houre and day of Christs comming is not knowne to the Angels, nor to the Sonne of man, but to the Father onely, Mark. 13.33. How then dare they presume beyond the knowledge of Angels?

Augustine saith, Vtiliter latere voluit Deus illum diem, In Psal. 36. conci. 1. vt semper sit paratum cor ad expectandum, quòd esse venturum scit, & quando venturum sit, nescit: The Lorde to great purpose would haue that day kept secret, that our heart should bee in continuall expectation of that, which it is sure, shall come, but knoweth not when it shall come.

Thus haue I through the Lords gracious assistance, now at the length finished and brought to an end this long and tedious worke, which I trust shall not be so yrkesome to the Christian Reader, as it was wearisome and painefull to the flesh, in the collecting and compiling thereof: and yet not so painefull, but that God hath made me able and willing to endure this, and greater paines, and that with comfort for the good of his Church.

I excuse not, whatsoeuer hath fallen out of my pen in this worke, if I haue failed any where in the manner of handling: But as for the matter handled therein, I trust I haue throughout maintained the truth: in the prosecuting whereof, if sometime I chance to misse, I say with Augustine, Nunquam errari tutius existimo, quàm cum in amore nimio veritatis, Lib. 1. de mendac. cap. 1. & reiectione nimia falsitatis erratur: I thinke a man can neuer more safely erre, then when he erreth in the too much loue of the truth, and the reiecting of falsehoode.

I haue labored in this worke, to set downe not onely the chiefe and principall, but euen the most, and in a manner all the controuersies of religion, betweene vs and the Papists, maintained this day: If any thing bee missing, I say againe with Augustine, Tale esse arbitratus sum cui mea responsio necessaria non fuisset, siue, quia ad rem de qua agitur, non pertinet, Defid. & operib. c. 27 siue quod tam leue esset, vt à quolibet redargui facillimè posset: I thought it to be such, as vnto the which mine answere was not needefull, either because it was not pertinent to the matter in hand, or else of so small moment, that euery man might easilie answer vnto it.

I haue no more to say, but this: If thou findest thy selfe any thing profited or helped (good Christian Reader) by these simple labou [...]s of mine, giue God [Page] the praise, and I will praise him with thee: but one thing, let mee pray thee: Quisquis legis nihil reprehendas, August. nisi cum totum perlegeris, atque ita forte minus reprehendes: Whosoeuer readest in this booke, reprehend nothing, before thou hast read the whole, and so perhaps thou wilt be more sparing in rephending. The Lorde giue vs all grace to loue the truth, that they which knowe it, may liue thereafter, and they which as yet knowe it not, may seeke for it: and wee all may embrace the Counsell of the wise man, to Buy the trueth, but in no wise to sell it: that is by all possible meanes to labour for it: and hauing attained thereunto, for no earthly respect, for feare or fauour to depart from it. The Lord God, Iesus Christ, Iehouah, Emmanuel, our blessed Sauiour and Redeemer, who is the way, the truth, and the life, giue vs of his heauenlie grace, that wee may walke obediently in his waies, and constantly professe his truth, that in the end he may bring vs to eternall life. Amen.

Soli Deo immortali patri, Filio cum Spiritu sancto sit omnis honor & gloria.

A PARTICVLAR INDEX OR TABLE OF ALL THE CONTROVERSIES, WITH THEIR SEVERAL questions contained in this treatise.

[Page]

The contents of the first Booke.
This Booke containeth seuen Controuersies.

The first Controuersie of the Scriptures hath seuen questions.

1. quest. Of the number of the Canonicall bookes of Scripture. pag. 2.

2. Of the authenticall edition of Scripture. pag. 12.

3. Of the vulgar translation of Scripture, and of publique prayers in the vulgar tongue. pag. 16.

4. Of the authoritie of Scripture. pag. 20.

5. Of the perspicuitie and plainnes of Scripture. pag. 23.

6. Of the interpretation of Scripture, 3. parts:

1. Of the diuers senses of Scripture. pag. 26.

2. Who ought to expound Scripture. pag. 28.

3. Of the manner of expounding Scripture. pag. 30.

7. Of the perfection of Scripture, 3. parts:

1. Whether the Scripture be absolutely necessarie. p. 33.

2. Whether they be sufficient. pag. 35.

3. Of vnwritten traditions beside Scripture. pag. 38.

The second generall Controuersie concerning the Church, containeth fiue questions.

1. quest. Of the definition of the Church, 2. parts:

1. Whether wicked men be members of the Church. pag. 43.

2. Whether the Church be inuisible. pag. 46.

2. Whether the Church may erre, 2. parts:

1. Whether the Catholike Church may erre at all, or not. pag. 49.

2. Whether the visible Church vpon earth may fall into Idolatrie, or Apostasie. pag. 52.

[Page] 3. Of the notes and markes of the Church:

1. Antiquitie. pag. 55

2. Vniuersalitie. pag. 57

3. Succession. pag. 59

4. Vnitie. pag. 60

5. Miracles. pag. 63

6. The gift of prophecying. pag. 66

4. Of the authoritie of the Church, 2. parts:

1. What authoritie it hath in matters of faith, and whether wee are to beleeue in the Church. pag. 73

2. Of the ceremonies of the Church. pag. 76

5. Of the Church of Rome, two parts:

1. Whether it be the Catholike Church. pag. 78

2. Whether it be a true visible Church. pag. 79

The third controuersie of generall Councels containeth eight questions.

1. quest. Whether Councels be absolutely necessarie. pag. 81

2. By whom generall Councels ought to be summoned. pag. 83

3. Of what persons Councels ought to consist. pag. 84

4. Who ought to be the president in Councels. pag. 88

5. Whether Councels may erre or not. pag. 90

6. Of the authoritie of Councels. pag. 93

7. Whether they be aboue the Pope. pag. 95

8 Of the conditions requisite in generall Councels. pag. 98

The fourth controuersie of the Bishop of Rome called the Pope, ten questions.

1. Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall. pag. 100

2. Whether Peter were Prince of the Apostles, and assigned by Christ to be the head of the Church. pag. 105

3. Of Peters being at Rome, two parts:

1. Whether Peter were at Rome. pag. 112

2. Whether Peter were Bishop of Rome. pag. 116

4. Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter. pag. 118

[Page] 5 Of the primacie of the See of Rome, sixe parts:

1. Whether the Bishop of Rome be aboue other Bishops. pag. 120

2. Concerning appeales made to Rome. pag. 122

3. Whether the Pope bee subiect to the iudgement of any. pag. 124

4. Whether the Pope may be deposed from his Papacie. pag. 125

5. The originall of the primacie of Rome. p. 128

6. Of the names and titles of the Bishop of Rome. pag. 131

6. quest. Whether the Pope of Rome, as likewise, whether the Church of Rome may erre. pag. 134

7. quest. Of the spirituall iurisdiction of the Pope, two parts:

1. Whether hee may make lawes to binde the conscience. pag. 141

2. Whether all Bishops do receiue their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from the Pope. p. 145

8 Of the temporal iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, two parts:

1 Whether the Pope be aboue Kings and Emperours. pag. 148

2 Whether he be a temporall prince. pag. 151

9 Of the Popes prerogatiue, 3. parts:

1 Of his power dispensatiue pag. 154

2 Of his power exemptiue Ibid.

3 Of his power transcendent Ibid.

10. Of Antichrist, 9. parts:

1 Whether Antichrist shalbe one particular man pag. 155

2 Whether Antichrist be yet come, and how long he shall raigne pag. 157

3 Concerning the name & character of Antichrist. p. 162

4 Of the generation of Antichrist pag. 168

5 Of the seate and place of Antichrist pag. 169

6 Of the doctrine of Antichrist pag. 172

7 The miracles of Antichrist pag. 176

8 The warres and kingdome of Antichrist pag. 179

9 Whether the Pope be Antichrist pag. 182

The fift controuersie of the Clergie, sixe questions.

1. quest. Of the name of Clerkes or Clergie men. pag. 190

2 Of the election of Bishops and Pastors, and of the election of the Pope. pag. 197

3 Of Ecclesiasticall degrees and orders, 3. parts:

1 Of the seuen degrees of popish priesthood. p. 199

2 Of the difference of Bishops and other Ministers. pag. 201

3 Of the office of Cardinals. pag. 205

[Page] 4 Of the keyes of the Church, 4. parts:

1 Wherein the authoritie of the keyes consisteth pag. 206

2 To whom the authoritie of the keyes [...]s committed. p. 208

3 Whether the Pastors of the Church haue absolute power to remit sinnes pag. 210

4 Of the effect of binding and loosing pag. 212

5 Of the marriage of Ministers three parts:

1 The marriage of Ministers lawfull pag. 214

2 Men may be admitted to Orders after second marriage pag. 219

3 Whether perpetuall abstinence be required in married Ministers pag. 221

6 Of the maintenance of Ministers by tithes, two parts:

1 Whether the paiment of tithes bee necessarie pag. 228

2 By what right tithes are due pag. 229

The sixt controuersie of Monkes and Friers, sixe questions.

1. quest. Of the originall of Monkes, and of their diuers sects pag. 232

2 Of the difference betweene Euangelicall Counsels and precepts pag. 236

3 Of vowes in generall, three parts:

1 Whether it be lawfull for Christians to vow. pag. 239

2 Wherein lawfull vowes consist pag. 241

3 Whether voluntarie vowes properly be any part properly of the worship of God pag. 242

4 Of Monasticall vowes, 3. parts:

1 Of the vow of voluntarie pouertie. pag. 244

2 The vow of Monasticall obedience. p. 246

3 Of the vow of chastitie pag. 247

5 Of Monasticall persons, foure parts:

1 Whether the younger sort ought to professe Monkerie pag. 251

2 Whether children may be made Monkes without their parents consent pag. 253

3 Whether married persons may with mutuall consent become votaries pag. 254

4 Whether marriage not consummate, may without consent bee broken for the vow of continencie. pag. 256

6 Of the rules and discipline of Monasticall life, foure parts:

1 Of the solitarie & austere life of Monks. pag. 257

2 Of the habite and shauing of Monkes. pag. 259

3 Of their Canonicall houres pag. 261

4 Of the maintenance of Monkes. pag. 262

[Page]The seuenth generall controuersie of the Ciuill Magistrate, foure questions.

1 Of the authoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters, foure parts:

1 His authoritie ouer Ecclesiasticall persons pag. 266

2 Ouer Ecclesiasticall goods pag. 267

3 In causes Ecclesiasticall pag. 268

4 Whether the Prince may be sayd to bee the head of the Church in his kingdome pag. 271

2 The authoritie of the Prince in punishing heretikes:

1 Whether the iudgement of heresie any way belongeth to the Prince pag. 274

2 How an heretike is to be tried pag. 275

3 How heretikes are to be examined and punished Ibid.

3 Whether the positiue lawes of Princes doe binde in conscience

4 Whether the Prince may be excommunicate of the Pope

THE SECOND BOOKE CONTAINETH SIXE CONTROVERSIES.

The first controuersie, which is the eight in the whole, is concerning Angels, three questions.

1. quest. Of the hierarchie of Angels, 2. parts:

1 Of the degrees of Angels. p. 291

2 Whether Michael be the Prince of the Angels pag. 292

2 Of the ministerie of Angels, three parts:

1 Of their externall ministerie in the protection of the Church pag. 293

2 Of their spirituall office about our prayers pag. 295

3 Whether Angels know our hearts pag. 296

3 Of the worship of Angels, 2 parts:

1 Of their worship in generall pag. 299

2 Of the inuocation of Angels pag. 300

The ninth generall controuersie concerning Saints departed, two parts.

[Page]1. part. Of those that suffer punishment being departed, two questions:

1 Of Limbus Patrum, and of the apparition of Samuel pag. 302.305

2 Of Purgatorie, foure parts.

1 Whether there be any Purgatorie pag. 307

2 Of the circumstances of Purgatorie pag. 310

3 Of prayer for the dead. p. 312

4 Of burials & funerals p. 315

2. part. Of the Saints that are in ioy and blisse after their departure. 9. quest.

1. quest. Of the blessed estate of the Saints, and of Canonizing of Saints pag. 320

2 Of the adoration of Saints. 3. parts.

1 Whether they are to bee adored: and of othes & vowes made to Saints. pag. 325

2 Of the diuers kindes of worship pag. 330

3 Of the kissing of holy mens feete pag. 331

3 Of the inuocation of Saints, three parts:

1 Whether prayers are to be made vnto them. pag. 332

2 Whether they pray for vs pag. 334

3 Whether they vnderstand our praiers. p. 335

4 Of the reliques of Martyrs, foure parts:

1 Of the worshipping of Reliques. pag. 338.

2 Translation of Reliques. pag. 340.

3 Preseruing of Reliques. pag. 342.

4 Miracles of Reliques. pag. 343.

5. question,

1. Of Images, foure parts:

1 Of the difference of Idols & Images. p. 347

2 Whether it bee lawfull to haue Images. pag. 348

3 Whether to be worshipped. pag. 350

4 What manner of worship it should be. p. 353

2. Of the signe of the Crosse, 4. parts:

1 Of the Crosse whereon Christ suffered. p. 355

2 Of the image of the Crosse. pag. 357

3 Of the signe of the Crosse. pag. 359

4 Of the power or efficacie of the Crosse. p. 360

5 An appendix concerning the name of Iesus. pag. 361

[Page] 6. quest. Of Temples and Churches, fiue parts:

1 Of the situation and forme of Churches. pag. 3 [...]2

2 Of the ende and vse of Churches, three parts. pag. 365

1 Whether they are built for sacrifice. pag. 365

2 Whether they be holy places in thēselues. pag. 367

3 Whether they may be dedicate to saints. pag. 368

3 Of the adorning of Churches. pag. 370

4 Of the dedication of Churches. pag. 372.

5 Of thinges hallowed for Churches. pag. 373

7 Of Pilgrimages and Processions, and of the holy land. pag. 375

8 Of holy and festiuall daies, fiue parts:

1 Of holy dayes in generall. 378

2 Of the Lords day. 379

3 Of the festiuall dayes of Christ and the holy Ghost. pag. 386

4 Of the festiuities of Saints.

1 The number of them.

2 The manner of keeping them. pag. 388

3 Of their vigils. p. 391

5 Of Lent and Imber daies. pag. 392

9 Of the Virgin Mary.

1 Whether she were conceiued without sinne. pag. 398

2 Whether she vowed virginitie. pag. 400

3 Of her assumption into heauen. pag. 401

4 Of the worship due vnto her. pag. 402

5 Of the merites of the virgine, and of the Aue Maria. pag. 404

The tenth controuersie hath but one question concerning the mediation, and intercession of Christ. pag. 406.

The eleuenth controuersie concerning the Sacraments in generall, three questions.

1. quest. Of the definition and nature of a Sacrament.

1 Of the efficient cause, or institutor of the sacrament. pag. 408

2 Of the forme & manner of consecration. pag. 409

3 Of the instrumentall cause, which is the Minister. pag. 413

4 Of the vse, whether the Sacraments be seales. pag. 414

[Page] 2. quest. Of the efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments.

1 Whether the Sacramēts confer grace. p. 416

2 Of the difference of the olde and new sacraments. pag. 418

3 Of the character imprinted by the Sacraments. pag. 419

4 Of the necessitie of the sacraments. pag. 420

3 Of the number and order of the Sacraments.

1 Of the number of them, pag. 42 [...]

2 Of their degrees amongst themselues, pag. 424.

The twelfth controuersie of the sacrament of Baptisme, eight questions.

1 Of the name and definition of Baptisme. pag. 426

2 Of the partes, that is, the matter and forme of Baptisme. pag. 427

3 Of the necessitie of Baptisme, and whether baptisme may by any other way be supplied. pag. 428

4 Whether women and lay men ought to baptise. pag. 432

5 Of the baptisme of infants, and whether they haue faith, and of the baptizing of bels. pag, 434.436

6. Of the effectes of Baptisme.

1 Whether our sinnes be cleane taken away in baptisme. pag. 436

2 Whether baptisme be onely for sinnes past. pag. 438

3 Of the priuiledges of Baptisme. pag. 439

7. Of the difference between the baptisme of Christ, and the baptisme of Iohn p. 441

8. Of the ceremonies and rites of baptisme. pag. 442

The thirteenth controuersie of the Eucharist or Lords Supper, two parts.

1▪ part. Of the sacrament it selfe. 10. questions.

1 Of the Real presence. pag. 445

2 Of Transubstantiation. pag. 455

3 Of the reseruation of the Sacrament. pag. 459

4 Of the elements of bread and wine. pag. 461

5 Of the words of consecration. pag. 463

6 Of the proper effect of the Lords Supper. pag. 465

7 Of the manner in receiuing the cōmunion, & whether it ought to be receiued fasting. pag. 467

8 Of receiuing in one kinde. pag. 468

9 Of the adoration of the Eucharist. pag. 472

10 Whether the wicked receiue the body of Christ. pag. 473.

[Page] 2. part. Of the sacrifice of the Masse. 8. quest.

1 Of the diuers representations of the death of Christ. pag. 475

2 Of the sacrifice.

1 The name of the Masse. pag. 476

2 Of the sacrifice it selfe. pag. 477

3 Of the name of priests. pag. 481

3 Of the vertue and efficacie of the Masse. pag. 483

4 For whom the Masse is auaileable. pag. 484

5 Of priuate Masses. pag. 485

6 Of the manner of saying Masse. pag. 487

7 Of the idolatrous ceremonies of the Masse. pag. 488

8 Of the forme, which is the Canon of the Masse. pag. 490

THE CONTENTS OF THE THIRD BOOKE.

The fourteenth controuersie of Penance, nine questions.

1 Of the name of penance. pag. 501

2 Whether it be a Sacrament. pag. 502

3 Whether any other sacrament of repentance beside baptisme. pag. 504

4 Of the materiall partes of Baptisme.

1 Of the matter and forme. pag. 504

2 Of the three partes.

Contrition, pag. 505.

Confession, pag. 505.

Satisfaction. pag. 505.

3 Whether repentance goe before faith. pag. 506

5 Of Contrition. pag. 507

6 Of Auricular confession. pag. 510

7 Of Satisfaction.

1 Whether the punishment remaine after the sinne is pardoned. pag. 514

2 Whether a man may satisfie the wrath of God by his workes. ibid.

3 Whether one man may satisfie for another. pag. 516

8 Of penall iniunctions.

1 Whether penall workes be necessary to repentance. pag. 517

2 By whom they are to be enioyned. pag. 518

3 Of pardons and indulgences. pag. 519

9 Of the ceremonies and circumstances of Penance. pag. 522

The fifteenth controuersie of Matrimony, seuen questions.

[Page]1 Whether Matrimonie be a sacrament. pag, 524

2 Of Diuorcement.

1 Whether there be any other causes of diuorce beside fornication. pag. 525

2 Whether mariage be lawfull after diuorcement for adulterie. pag. 528

3 Of the degrees prohibited in mariage three partes:

1 Of the supputation of degrees. pag. 529

2 Whether any of the degrees prohibited in Moses law, may be dispenced with. pag. 531

3 Whether any other degrees by humane law may be prohibited. pag. 533

4 Of the impediments of marriage. pag. 535

5 Of the comparison between virginitie, and the married estate. pag. 536

6 Of the times of mariage prohibited. pag. 537

7 Of the ceremonies of marriage. pag. 539

The sixteenth controuersie, three questions.

1 Of Confirmation.

1 Whether [...] be a sacrament. pag. 541

2 Of the matter and forme thereof. pag. 542

3 Of the efficacie and vertue. pag. 543

4 Of the rites and ceremonies. pag. 544

2 Of Orders.

1 Whether it be a Sacrament. pag. 545

2 Of the efficacie. pag. 547

3 Of the ceremonies. pag. 548

3 Of extreame Vnction.

1 Whether it be a Sacrament. pag. 549

2 Of the vertue and efficacie. pag. 550

3 Of the minister and the ceremonies. pag. 551

The seuenteenth controuersie of the benefites of our redemption, three partes.

1 part▪ Of Predestination.

1 Of the reprobation of the wicked. pag. 553

2 Our election free without respect to our workes. pag. 555

3 Of the certaintie of predestination. pag 556

[Page] 2 part▪ Of our Vocation.

1 Of sinne.

1 Of Originall sinne. pag. 558

2 The difference of sinnes. pag. 559

3 Of veniall sinnes. pag. 560

4 Whether all sinnes be remissible. pa. 561

5 God no author of sinne. pag. 562

6 Of the works of the not regenerate. 563

2 Of the law, 5. parts:

1 Whether it be possible in this life to keep the Laws. pag. 564

2 Whether iust men doe sinne. pag. 566

3 Of the works of supererogation. p. 567

4 God not to be serued for feare. pag. 568

5 Of the vse of the Law. pag. 570

3. part. Of iustification.

1. Of freewil.

1 Whether it be vtterly lost. pag. 571

2 Of the power of free will in man. Ibid.

2. Of Faith.

1 What faith is. pag. 576

2 Of the diuerse kindes of faith. pag. 578

3 Charitie not the forme of iustifiyng faith. pag. 579

4 How men are iustified by faith. pag. 581

5 Whether faith be meritorious. Ibid.

6 Whether faith be in mans power. pag. 582

7 Whether it may be lost. Ibid.

8 Whether wicked men haue faith. pag. 583

3. Of good workes.

1 Which be the good workes of Christians. pag. 584

2 Whether there be any good workes without faith. Ibid.

3 The vse of good workes.

1 Whether they be applicatorie. pag. 585

2 Expiatorie. pag. 586

3 Meritorious. Ibid.

4 Of the distinction of merites. pag. 589

5 The manner of meriting. pag. 590

4. Of Iustification.

1 Of preparatiue works to iustification. pag. 591

2 Of two kindes of iustification. pag. 592

3 Of inherent iustice. pag. 593

4 Of iustification onely by faith. pag. 594

The 18. controuersie concerning the humanitie of Christ, fiue questions.

[Page]1 Of the vbiquitie or omnipresence of the bodie of Christ pag. 596

2 Whether Christ encreased in knowledge pag. 599

3 Of the manner of our Sauiours birth pag. 601

4 Whether Christ suffered in soule pag. 602

5 Whether Christ descended in soule to Hell to deliuer the Patriarkes pag. 605

6 Of the place of Hell pag. 607

The 19. controuersie concerning matters belonging to the diuine nature of Christ, three questions.

1 Whether Christ be [...], God of himselfe pag. 610

2 Whether Christ be our Mediatour as man onely pag. 612

3 Whether Christ merited for himselfe pag. 614

The 20. controuersie of Christs comming to iudgement, three questions.

1 Whether the Gospell be alreadie preached through the world pag. 616

2 Whether Henoch and Elias shall come before the day of iudgement pag. 618

3 Of the grieuous persecutions toward the end of the world pag. 620

4 The manner of Christs coming to iudgement:

1 Whether the Saints shall be iudges pag. 622

2 Of the place of Christs appearing pag. 623

3 The maner, whether with the signe of the Crosse. Ibid.

4 Of the time of his appearing pag. 624

FINIS.

Faults escaped.

In the Prefa. p. 5. lin. 18. read nosse. lin. 36. legeritis. In the book. p. 4. which our, p. 7. lin. 42. pru [...] p. 13. l. 12. Simmachus. p. 16. l. 5. interprete [...]. p. 21. l. 18. Iddo. p. 23. l. 25. fift. p. 29. l. 27. so. p. 32. l. 40. prae [...] dentis lingu [...] ▪ p. 35. l. 26. there is. p. 39. l. 3. are iudged. p. 46. l. 26. proposition. p. 115. l. 24. euasio [...] p. 125. l. [...]8. Pighius: the Iesuite. p 129. l 7 de turre cremata, lin. 40. for heresie, p. 130. l. 37. he shou [...] p. 146. l. 34. they were. p. 156. l. 18 the beast. p. 171. l. 11 who should. p. 179 l 29 dele Agrippa. p. 197 l. [...]7. dele not. p. 200. l. 20. for vnable, reade other p. 201. l. 16▪ then readers. p. 203. l. 7, 8, 9, 10 dele p. 205. l. 11. their especial. p. 216. l. 19. for, say we, read, saith he. p. 220. l. 23. frō hauing. p. 248. l. 6 he would not. l. 13. not caring. p. 252. l. 3. for not one to none. p. 253. l. 3. primus. p. 276. l. 41. his posie p. 329. l. 4. for, or alio, reade oratio, p. 331 l. 9. [...]. p. 399. l. 25. absolutely. p. 442.23. pugnaciter. p. 462. l. 4. good friday. p. 465. l. 5. reade, was not, without the colon. p. 468. l. 31. reade, is not of p. 471. l. 24. the counsel. p. 500. l. 25. permisit p. 517. l. 35 in punishing and chastising. p. 522. l. 6. prescriptions, for presumptions. p. 530. l. 18. read epist. Iud. 14. p. 538. l. 35. [...]. guerebh. p. 592. l. 34. read merc [...]s fidei coeptae erit fides aucta.

[Page]

Information about this book

Title statement

Synopsis papismi, that is, A generall viewe of papistry wherein the whole mysterie of iniquitie, and summe of antichristian doctrine is set downe, which is maintained this day by the Synagogue of Rome, against the Church of Christ, together with an antithesis of the true Christian faith, and an antidotum or counterpoyson out of the Scriptures, against the whore of Babylons filthy cuppe of abominations: deuided into three bookes or centuries, that is, so many hundreds of popish heresies and errors. Collected by Andrew Willet Bachelor of Diuinity.

Willet, Andrew, 1562-1621.

Edition statement

1592

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2005-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A15422

ID [STC]

STC 25696

ID [STC]

ESTC S119956

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

99855161

ID [PROQUEST]

99855161

ID [VID]

20636

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A15422)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 20636)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1475-1640 ; 1503:1)

Source

— Synopsis papismi, that is, A generall viewe of papistry wherein the whole mysterie of iniquitie, and summe of antichristian doctrine is set downe, which is maintained this day by the Synagogue of Rome, against the Church of Christ, together with an antithesis of the true Christian faith, and an antidotum or counterpoyson out of the Scriptures, against the whore of Babylons filthy cuppe of abominations: deuided into three bookes or centuries, that is, so many hundreds of popish heresies and errors. Collected by Andrew Willet Bachelor of Diuinity., Willet, Andrew, 1562-1621..

Extent

[14], 154, 153-278, [6], 291-626 p.

Printed by Thomas Orwin, for Thomas Man, dwelling in Pater noster row at the signe of the Talbot,. At London :: 1592.. (Books 2 and 3 each have separate dated title page; register and pagination are continuous.) (Reproduction of the original in Cambridge University Library.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.