A Golden Chain

Our Consent.

I. We hold and believe a presence of Christ's body and blood in the sacrament of the Lord's supper: and that no feigned, but a true and real presence which must be considered two ways: first in respect of the signs, secondly in respect of the communicants. For the first we hold and teach, that Christ's body and blood, are truly present with the bread and wine, being signs in the Sacrament: but how? not in respect of place or coexistence: but by sacramental relation on this manner. When a word is uttered, the sound comes to the ear; and at the same instant, the thing signified comes to the mind; and thus by relation the word and the thing spoken of, are both present together. Even so at the Lord's table bread and wine must not be considered barely, as subsistāces and creatures, but as outward signs in relation to the body and blood of Christ: and this relation, arising from the very institution of the Sacrament, stands in this, that when the elements of bread and wine are present to the hand and to the mouth of the receiver; at the very same time the body and blood of Christ are presented to the mind: thus and no otherwise is Christ truly present with the signs. The second presence is in respect of the communicants, to whose believing hearts he is also really present. It will be said, what kind of presence is this? Ans. Such as the communion in the sacrament is, • uch is the presence: and by the communion must we judge of the presence. Now the communion is on this manner: God the father according to the tenor of the Evangelical covenant. gives Christ in this sacrament as really and truly, as anything can be given to man, not by part and peecemeale (as we say) but whole Christ, God and man, on this sort. In Christ there be two natures, the godhead • & manhood. The godhead is not given in regard of substance, or essence: but only in regard of efficacy, merits, & operatiō conceived thence to the manhood. And further in this sacrament Christ's whole manhood is given both body and soul, in this order. First of all is given the very manhood in respect of substance, and that really: secondly the merits and benefits thereof, as namely, the satisfaction performed by and in the manhood; to the justice of God. And thus the entire manhood with the benefits thereof, are given wholly and jointly together. For the two dislinct signs of bread and wine signify not two distinct giuings of the body apart, and the blood apart; but the full and perfect nourishment of our souls. Again the benefits of Christ's manhood are diversely given, some by imputation, which is, an action of God accepting that which is done by Christ as done by us: and thus it hath pleased God to give the passion of Christ and his obedience. Some again are given by a kind of propagation, which I cannot fitly express in terms but I resemble it thus. As one candle is lighted by another, and one torch or candle-light is conveyed to twenty candles: even so the inherent righteousness of every believer, is derived from the storehouse of righteousness, which is in the manhood of Christ; for the righteousness of all the members, is but the fruit thereof, even as the natural corruption in all mankind, is but a fruit of that original sin which was in Adam. Thus we see howe God for his part gives Christ: and that really. To proceed, when God gives Christ, he gives withal at the same time the spirit of Christ, which spirit creates in the heart of the receiver the instrument of true faith, by which the heart doeth really receive Christ given of God, by resting upon the promise, which God hath made that he will give Christ and his righteousness to every true believer. Now then, when God gives Christ with his benefits, & man for his part by faith receives the same as they are given, there riseth that union which is between every good receiver and Christ himself. Which vniō is not forged but a real, true, and near conjunction: nearer then which, none is or can be: because it is made by a solemn giving and receiving that passeth between God and man: as also by the bond of one and the same spirit. To come then to the point, considering there is a real union, and consequently a real communion between us and Christ, (as I have proved) there must needs be such a kind of presence wherein Christ is truly and really present to the heart of him that receives the sacrament in faith. And thus far do we consent with the Romish Church touching real presence.

The dissent.

We differ not touching the presence it self, but only in the manner of presence. For though we hold a real presence of Christ's body and blood in the sacrament, yet do we not take it to be local, bodily, or substantial, but spiritual and mystical; to the signs by sacramental relation, and to the communicants by faith alone. On the contrary the Church of Rome maintains transubstantiation, that is, a local, bodily, and substantial presence of Christ's body and blood, by a change and conversion of the bread and wine into the said body and blood.

Our reasons.

I. This corporal presence overturns sundry articles of faith. For we believe that the body of Christ was made of the pure substance of the Virgin Marie, and that but once, namely when he was conceived by the holy Ghost, and borne. But this cannot stand, if the body of Christ be made of bread and his blood of wine, as they must needs be, if there be no succession or annihilation but a real conversion of substances in the sacrament: unless we must believe contrarieties, that his body was made of the substance of the Virgin, & not of the Virgin; made once and not once but often. Again, if his body and blood be under the forms of bread and wine, then is he not as yet ascended into heaven, but remains still among us. Neither can he be said to come frō heaven at the day of judgment: for he that must come thence to judge the quick and dead, must be absent from the earth. And this was the ancient faith. Augustine saith, that Christ according to his majesty and providence and grace is present with us to the ende of the world: but according to his assumed flesh he is not always with us. Cyril saith, He is absent in body and present in virtue, whereby all things are governed. Vigilius saith, That he is gone from us according to his humanity: he hath left us in his humanity: in the form of a servant absent from us: when his flesh was on earth, it was not in heaven: being on earth, he was not in heaven: and being now in heaven, he is not on earth. Fulgentius saith, One and the same Christ according to his human substance, was absent from heaven whē he was on earth: and left the earth when he ascended into heaven.

Reason II. This bodily presence overturns the nature of a true body, whose common nature or essential property it is, to have length, breadth, & thickness, which being taken away a body is no more a body. And by reason of these three dimensions, a body can occupy but one place at once, as Aristotle said, the property of a body is to be seated in some place, so as a mā may say where it is. They therefore that hold the body of Christ to be in many places at once, do make it nobody at all; but rather a spirit, and that infinite. They allege that God is almighty; that is true indeed, but in this and like matters we must not dispute what God can do, but what he will do. And I say further because god is omnipotent, therefore there be some things which he cannot do, as for him to deny himself, to lie, & to make the parts of a contradiction to be both true at the same time. To come to the point, if God should make the very body of Christ to be in many places at once, he should make it to be nobody while it remains a body: and to be circumscribed in someone place and not circumscribed, because it is in many places at the same time: to be visible in heaven and invisible in the sacrament; and thus should he make contradictions to be true: which to do, is against his nature, and argues rather impotēcie then power. Augustine saith to this purpose. If he could lie, deceive, he deceived, deal unjustly, he should not be omnipotent. And, Therefore he is omnipotent, because he cannot do these things. Again, He is called omnipotent • by doing that which he will, and not by doing that which he will not: which if it should befall him, he should not be omnipotent.

Reason III. Transubstantiation overturns the very supper of the Lord. For in every sacrament there must be a sign, a thing signified, and a proportion or relation between them both. But popish real presence takes all away: for when the bread is really turned into Christ's body, and the wine into his blood, then the sign is abolished, and there remains nothing but the outward forms or appearance of bread and wine. Again, it abolisheth the ends of the sacrament, whereof one is to remember Christ till his coming again, who being present in the sacrament bodily, needs not to be remembered: because helps of remembrance are of things absent. Another ende is to nourish the soul unto eternal life: but by transubstantiation the principal feeding is of the body and not of the soul, which is only fed with spiritual food: for though the body may be bettered by the food of the soul, yet cannot the soul be fed with bodily food.

Reason IV. In the sacrament the body of Christ is received as it was crucified, & his blood as it was shed upon the cross: but now at this time Christ's body crucified, remains still as a body, but not as a body crucified; because the act of crucifying is ceased. Therefore it is faith alone, that makes Christ crucified to be present unto us in the sacrament. Again, that blood which ran out of the feet and hands and side of Christ upon the cross, was not gathered up again and put into the veins: nay, the collection was needles, because after the resurrection, he lived no more a natural but a spiritual life: & none knows what is become of this blood. The Papist therefore cannot say it is present under the form of wine locally: and we may better say it is received spiritually by faith, whose property is to give a being to things which are not.

Reason V. 1. Cor. 10.3. The fathers of the old testament did eat the same spiritual meat, and drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of the rock which was Christ. Now they could not eat his body which was crucified, or drink his blood shed bodily, but by faith: because then his body and blood were not in nature. The Papists make answer, that the fathers did eat the same meat, and drink the same spiritual drink with themselves, not with us. But their answer is against the text. For the Apostles intent is to prove, that the Jews were every way equal to the Corinthians, because they did eat the same spiritual meat, and drank the same spiritual drink with the Corinthians; otherwise his reason proves not the point which he hath in hand, namely that the Israelites were nothing inferior to the Corinthians.

Reason VI. And it is said, the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath: so it may be said, that the sacrament of the Lord's supper was made for man, and not man for it: and therefore man is more excellent then the sacrament. But if the signs of bread and wine be really turned into the body and blood of Christ, then is the sacrament infinitely better then man; who in his best estate is only joined to Christ, and made a member of his mystical body: whereas the bread and wine are made very Christ. But the sacrament or outward elements indeed are not better then man: the end being always better then the thing ordained to the ende. It remains therefore that Christ's presence is not corporal but spiritual. Again in the supper of the Lord, every believer receiveth whole Christ, God and man, though not the godhead: now by this carnal eating, we receive not whole Christ, but only a part of his manhood: and therefore in the sacrament there is no carnal eating, and consequently no bodily presence.

Reason VII. The judgment of the ancient Church. Theodoret saith, The same Christ, who called his natural body food and bread, who also called himself a vine, he vouchsafed the visible signs the name of his own body, not changing nature, but putting grace to nature, whereby he means consecration. And, The mystical signs after sanctification loose not their proper nature. For they remain in their first nature, and keep their first figure and form: and as before, may be touched and seen: and that which they are made, is understood, believed, adored. Gelasius saith, Bread and wine pass into the substance of the body & blood of Christ, yet so as the substance or nature of bread and wine ceaseth not. And they are turned into the divine substance, yet the bread and wine remain still in the property of their nature. Lombard saith, If it be asked what conversion this is, whether formal, or substantial, or of another kind, I am not able to define. And that the fathers held not transubstantiatiō, I prove it by sundry reasons. First, they used in former times to burn with fire that which remained after the administration of the Lord's supper. Secondly by the sacramental union of the bread and wine with the body and blood of Christ, they used to confirm the personal union of the manhood of Christ with the godhead against heretics: which argument they would not have used, if they had believed a popish real presence. Thirdly it was a custom in Constantinople, that if many parts of the sacrament remained after the administration thereof was ended, that young children should be sent for from the school to eat them ; who nevertheless were barred the Lord's table. And this argues plainly that the Church in those days, took the bread after the administration was ended, for common bread. Again, it was once an order in the Roman Church, that the wine should be consecrated by dipping into it bread, which had been consecrated. But this order cannot stand with the real presence, in which the bread is turned both into the body and blood. Nicholaus Cabasilas saith, After he hath used some speech to the people, he erects their minds, and lif • s their thoughts from earth and saith, Sursum corda, Let us lift up our hearts, let us think on things above, and not on things that are upon the earth. They consent & say, that they lift up their hearts thither, where is their treasure, and where Christ sits at the right hand of his father.

Objections of Papists.

I. Their first reason is, John. 6.55. My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed: therefore (say they) Christ's body must be eaten with the mouth and his blood drunk accordingly. Ans. The chapter must be • understood of a spiritual eating of Christ: his body is meat indeed, but spiritual meat, & his blood spiritual drink, to be received not by the mouth, but by faith. This is the very point that Christ here intends to prove, namely that to believe in him is to eat his flesh and to drink his blood are all one. Again, this chapter must not be understood of that special eating of Christ in the sacrament: for it is said generally, v. 53. Except ye eat the flesh of Christ, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you: and if these very words (which are the substance of the chapter) must be understood of a sacramental eating, no man before the coming of Christ was saved: for none did bodily eat or drink his body or blood; considering it was not then existing in nature, but only was present to the believing heart by faith.

II. Object. An other argument is taken from the words of the institution. This is my body. Ans. These words must not be understood properly but by a figure: his body being put for the sign and seal of his body. It is objected, that when any make their last wills and testaments, they speak as plainly as they can; now in this supper Christ ratifies his last will and testament: & therefore he spake plainly, without any figure. Ans. Christ here speaketh plainly and by a figure also: for it hath been always the usual manner of the Lord in speaking of the sacraments, to give the name of the thing signified to the sign: as Gen. 17. 10. circumcision is called the covenant of God: and in the next verse in the way of exposition, the sign of the covenant. And Exod. 12. 11. the pascal lamb is called the angels passing by or over the houses of the Israelites, whereas indeed it was but a sign thereof: and 1. Cor. 10.4. The rock was Christ. 1. Cor. 5.7. The passover was Christ. And the like phrase is to be found in the institution of this sacrament concerning the cup, which the Papists thenselves confess to be figurative: when it is said, Luk. 22. This cup is the new testament in my blood, that is, a sign, seal, and pledge thereof. Again the time when these words were spoken must be considered, and it was before the passion of Christ, whereas yet his body was not crucified nor his blood shed: and consequently neither of them could be received in bodily manner, but by faith alone. Again, Christ was not only the author, but the minister of this sacrament at the time of institution thereof: and if the bread had been truly turned into his body, and the wine into his blood, Christ with his own hands should have taken his own body and blood, and have given it to his disciples, nay, which is more, he should with his own hands, have taken his own flesh, and drunken his own blood, and have eaten himself. For Christ himself did eat the bread and drink the wine, that he might with his own person consecrate his last supper, as he had consecrated baptism before. And if these words should be properly understood, every man should be a manslaier in his eating of Christ. Lastly by means of popish real presence, it comes to pass, that our bodies should be nourished by naked qualities without any substance which in all philosophy is false and erroneous. To help this and the like absurdities, some Papists make nine wonders in the sacrament. The first, that Christ's body is in the Eucharist in as large a quantity as he was upon the cross • and is now in heaven, & yet excludes not the quantity of the bread. The second, that there be accidents without a subject. The third, that bread is turned into the body of Christ, & yet is not the matter of the body, nor resolved to nothing. The fourth, that the body increaseth not by consecration of many hosts, and is not diminished by often receiving. The fifth, that the body of Christ is under many consecrated hosts. The sixth, that when the host is divided, the body of Christ is not divided, but under every part thereof is whole Christ. The seventh, that when the priest holds the host in his hand, the body of Christ is not felt by it self nor seen, but the forms of bread and wine. The eight, that when the forms of bread and wine cease, the body and blood of Christ ceaseth also to be there. The ninth, that the accidents of bread and wine have the same effects with the bread and wine it self, which are to nourish and fil • . On this manner it shall be easy for any man to defend the most absurd opinion that is or can be, if he may have liberty to answer the arguments alleged to the contrary by wonders.

To conclude, seeing there is a real communion in the sacrament between Christ and every believing heart, our duty therefore is, to bestow our hearts on Christ, endeavoring to love him, and to rejoice in him, and to long after him above all things: all our affiance must be in him, & with him; we being now on earth must have our conversation in heaven. And this is the true real presence, which the ancient Church of God hath commended unto us: for in all these liturgies these words are used, and are yet extant in the Popish mass, Lift up your hearts: we lift them up unto the lord. By which words the communicants were admonished to direct their minds and their faith to Christ sitting at the right hand of God. Thus said Augustine, If we celebrate the ascension of the Lord with devotion, let us ascend with him, & lift up our hearts. Again, they which are already risen with Christ in faith and hope are invited to the great table of heaven, to the table of Angels, where is the bread.

Our Consent.

Our consent I propound in two conclusions. Conclus. I. That the supper of the Lord is a sacrifice, and may truly be so called as it hath been in former ages; and that in three respects. I. Because it is a memorial of the real sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, and contains withal a thanksgiving to God for the same, which thanksgiving is the sacrifice and calves of our lips. Heb. 13.15. II. Because every communicant doth there present himself body and soul a living, holy, and acceptable sacrifice unto God. For as in this sacrament god gives unto us Christ, with his benefits: so we answerable give up our selves unto God as servants to walk in the practice of all dutiful obedience. III. It is called a sacrifice in respect of that which was joined with the sacrament, namely the alms given to the poor as a testimony of our thankfulness unto God. And in this regard also, the ancient fathers have called the sacrament, an unbloody sacrifice: & the table, an altar, & the ministers priests: & the whole action an oblation not to God but to the congregation, and not by the priest alone but by the people. A canon of a certain Council saith. We decree that every Lord's day the oblation of the altar be offered of every man and woman both for bread and wine. And Augustine saith, that women offer a sacrifice at the altar of the Lord, that it might be offered by the priest to God. And usually in ancient writers the communion of the whole body of the congregation is called the sacrifice or oblation.

Conclus. II. That the very body of Christ is offered in the Lord's supper For as we take the bread to be the body of Christ sacramentally by resemblance and no otherwise: so the breaking of bread is sacramentally the sacrificing or offering of Christ upon the cross. And thus the fathers have termed the Eucharist an immolation of Chrtst, because it is a commemoration of his sacrifice upon the cross. Aug. Epist. 23. Neither doeth he he which saith Christ was offered. For if sacraments had not the resemblance of things whereof they are sacraments, they should in no wise be sacraments: but from a resemblance, they often take their names. Again Christ is sacrificed in the last supper, in regard of the faith of the communicants, which makes a thing past and done as present. Augustine saith, When we believe in Christ he is offered for us daily. And, Christ is then slain for everyone, when he believes that he is slain for him. Ambrose saith, Christ is sacrificed daily in the minds of believers, as upon an altar. Jerome saith, He is always offered to the believers.

II. The difference.

They make the Eucharist to be a real, external, or bodily sacrifice offered unto God: holding and teaching, that the minister is a priest properly: & that in this sacrament he offers Christ's body and blood to God the father really and properly under the forms of bread and wine. We acknowledge no real, outward, or bodily sacrifice for the remission of sins, but only Christ's oblation on the cross once offered. Here is the main difference between us, touching this point and it is of that weight and moment, that they stiffly maintaining their opinion (as they do) can be no Church of God. For this point razeth the foundation to the very bottom. And that it may the better appear that we avouch the truth, first I will confirm our doctrine by scripture, and secondly confute the reasons which they bring for themselves.

III. Our reasons.

Reason I. Heb. 9,15. and 26. and c. 10.10. The holy Ghost saith, Christ offered himself but once. Therefore not often: and thus there can be no real or bodily offering of his body and blood in the sacrament of his supper: the text is plain. The Papists answer thus. The sacrifice of Christ (say they) is one for substance, yet in regard of the manner of offering it is either bloody or unbloody, and the holy ghost speaks only of the bloody sacrifice of Christ: which was indeed offered but once. Ans. But the author of this epistle takes it for granted, that the sacrifice of Christ is only one, and that bloody sacrifice. For he saith, Heb. 9.25. Christ did not offer himself often, as the high priests did. and v. 26. For then he must have often suffered since the foundation of the world: but now in the ende he hath appeared once to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. and v. 22. without shedding of blood is no remission of sins. By these words it is plain, that the scripture never knew the twofold manner of sacrificing of Christ. And every distinction in divinity not founded in the written word, is but a forgery of man's brain. And this distinction be good, how shall the reason of the Apostle stand. He did not offer himself but once, because he suffered but once.

Reason II. The Romish Church holds that the sacrifice in the Lord's supper is all one for substance, with the sacrifice which he offered on the cross: if that be so, then the sacrifice in the Eucharist, must either be a continuance of that sacrifice which was begun on the cross, or else an alteration or repetition of it. Now let them choose of these twain which they will: if they say it is a continuance of the sacrifice on the cross, Christ being but the beginner and the priest the finisher thereof, they make it imperfect: for to continue a thing till it be accomplished, is to bring perfection unto it: but Christ's sacrifice on the cross was then fully perfected, as by his own testimony appears, when he said, Consummatum est, it is finished. Again, if they say, it is a repetition of Christ's sacrifice, thus also they make it imperfect: for that is the reason which the holy Ghost useth to prove that the sacrifices of the old testament were imperfect, because they were repeated.

Reason III. A real and outward sacrifice in a sacrament, is against the nature of a sacrament and especially the supper of the Lord: for one ende thereof is to keep in memory the sacrifice of Christ. Now every remembrance must be of a thing absent, past, and done: and if Christ be daily and really sacrificed, the sacrament is no fit memorial of his sacrifice. Again the principal ende for which the sacrament was ordained, is that God might give and we receive Christ with his benefits: and therefore to give and take, to eat and drink, are here the principal actions. Now in a real sacrifice God doth not give Christ & the priest receive him of God; but contrariwise he gives & offers Christ unto God, and God receives something of us. To help the matter they say, that this sacrifice serves not properly to make any satisfaction to God, but rather to apply unto us the satisfaction of Christ being already made. But this answer s • ill maketh against the nature of a sacrament, in which God gives Christ unto us: whereas in a sacrifice God receives from man, and man gives something to God: a sacrifice therefore is no fit means to apply anything unto us, that is given of God.

Reason IV. Hebr. 7.24,25. The holy Ghost makes a difference between Christ the high priest of the new testament, and all Levitical priests in this, that they were many, one succeeding another: but he is only one, having an eternal priesthood, which cannot pass from him to any other. Now if this difference be good, then Christ alone in his own very person must be the priest of the new testament, and no other with, or, under him: otherwise in the new testament there should be more priests in number then in the old. If they say, that the whole action remains in the person of Christ, and that the priest is but an instrument under him (as they say) I say again it is false; because the whole oblation is acted or done by the priest himself: and he which doth all, is more then a bare instrument.

Reason V. If the priest do offer to God Christ's real body and blood for the pardon of our sins, then man is become a mediator between God and Christ. Now the Church of Rome saith, that the priest in his mass is a priest properly, and his sacrifice a real sacrifice, differing only in the manner of offering from the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross: and in the very canon of the mass they insinuate thus much, when they request God to accept their gifts and offerings, namely Christ himself offered, as he did the sac • ifices of Abel and Noah. Now it is absurd, to think that any creature should be a mediator between Christ and God. Therefore Christ cannot possibly be offered by any creature unto God.

Reason VI. The judgment of the ancient Church. A certain Council held at Toledo in Spain, reproveth the Ministers that they offered sacrifice often the same day without the holy communion. The words of the Canon are these: Relation is made unto us that certain priests do not so many times receive the grace of the holy communion, as they offer sacrifices in one day: but in one day, if they offer many sacrifices to God, in all the oblations, they suspend themselves from the communion —. Here mark, that the sacrifices in ancient Masses were nothing else but forms of divine service; because none did communicate, no not the priest himself. And in another Council the name of the Mass is put only for a form of prayer. It hath pleased us, that prayers, supplications, Masses, which shall be allowed in the Council—, be used. A • d in this sense it is taken when speech is used of the making or compounding of Masses: for the sacrifice propitiatory of the body and blood of Christ admits no composition. Abbot Paschasius saith, Because we sin daily Christ is sacrificed for us mystically, and his Passion is given in mystery. These his words are against the real sacrifice: but yet he expounds himself more plainly, cap. 10. The blood is drunk in mystery spiritually: and, it is all spiritual which we eat. &c. 12. The priest —, distributes to everyone not as much as the outward • ight giveth, but as much as faith receiveth. cap. 13. The full similitude is outwardly, and the immaculate flesh of the lamb is faith inwardly—, that the truth be not wanting to the sacrament, and it be not ridiculous to Pagans that we drink the blood of a killed man. cap. 6. One eats the flesh of Christ spiritually and drinks his blood, another seems to receive not so much as a morsel of bread from the hand of the priest: his reason is, because they come unprepared. Now then considering in all these places he makes no receiving but spiritual, neither doth he make any sacrifice but spiritual.

IV. Objections of Papists.

I. Gen. 14. v. 18. When Abraham was coming from the slaughter of the Kings, Melchizedek met him, and brought forth bread and wine: and he was a priest of the most high God. Now this bread and wine (say they) he brought forth to offer for a sacrifice; because it is said he was a priest of the most high God: and they reason thus. Christ was a priest after the order of Melchizedek: therefore as Melchizedek offered bread and wine, so Christ under the forms of bread and wine offers himself in sacrifice unto God. Ans. Melchizedek was no type of Christ in regard of the act of sacrificing, but in regard of his person, and things pertaining thereto, which all are fully expounded, Hebr. 7. the sum whereof is this. I. Melchizedek was both king and priest: so was Christ. II. He was a prince of peace and righteousness: so was Christ. III. He had neither father nor mother: because the scripture in setting down his history makes no mention either of beginning or ending of his days: and so Christ had neither father nor mother: no father, as he was man: no mother, as he was God. IV. Melchizedek being greater thē Abraham blessed him, & Christ by virtue of his priesthood blesseth, that is, justifieth & sanctifieth all those that be of the faith of Abrahā. In these things only stands the resemblance and not in the offering of bread and wine. Again the ende of bringing forth the bread and wine, was not to make a sacrifice, but to refresh Abraham and his servants, that came from the slaughter of the Kings. And he is called here a priest of the most high God, not in regard of any sacrifice: but in consideration of his blessing of Abraham, as the order of the words teacheth, And he was the priest of the most high God, and therefore he blessed him. Thirdly, though it were granted, that he brought forth bread and wine to offer in sacrifice, yet will it not follow, that in the sacrament Christ himself is to be offered unto God under the naked forms of bread and & wine. Melchizedeks bread and wine were absurd types of no-bread and no-wine, or of forms of bread and wine in the Sacrament.

II. Object. The pascal lamb was both a sacrifice and a sacrament: now the Eucharist comes in room thereof. Ans. The pascal lamb was a sacrament, but no sacrifice. Indeed Christ saith to his disciples, Go and prepare a place to sacrifice the Passover in, Mark, 14.12. but the words to offer, or to sacrifice, do often signify no more but to kill. As when Jacob and Laban made a covenant, it is said, Jacob sacrificed beasts, and called his brethren to eat bread, Gen. 31.54. Which words must not be understood of killing for sacrifice, but of killing for a feast: because he could not in good conscience invite them to his sacrifice, that were out of the covenant, being (as they were) of another religion: secondly, it may be called a sacrifice, because it was killed after the manner of a sacrifice. Thirdly, when Saul sought his fathers asses, and asked for the Seer, a maid bids him go up in hast: for (saith she) there is an offering of the people this day in the high place, 1. Sam. 9. 12. where the feast that was kept in Rama, is called a sacrifice: in all likelihood because at the beginning thereof, the priest offered a sacrifice to God: and so the Passover may be called a sacrifice, because sacrifices were offered within the compass of the appointed feast or solemnity of the Passover: and yet the thing it self was no more a sacrifice then the feast in Rama was. Again, if it were granted that the Passover was both, it will not make much against us: for the supper of the Lord succeeds the Passover only in regard of the main ende thereof, which is the increase of our communion with Christ.

III. Object. Malac. I.II. The prophet foretelleth of a clean sacrifice that shall be in the new testament: and that (say they) is the sacrifice of the Mass. Ans. This place must be understood of a spiritual sacrifice, as we shall plainly perceive if we compare it with 1. Tim. 2.8. where the meaning of the prophet is fitly expounded. I will (saith Paul) that men pray in all places, lifting up pure hands, without wrath or doubting. And this is the clean sacrifice of the Gentiles. Thus Justin Martyr saith, That supplications and thanksgivings are the only perfect sacrifices pleasing God, and that Christians have learned to offer them alone. And Tertullian saith, We sacrifice for the health of the Emperor—: as God hath commanded with pure prayer. And Irenaeus saith, that this clean offering to be offered in every place, is the prayers of the Saints.

IV. Object. Hebr. 13.10. We have an altar, whereof they may not eat • which serve in the tabernacle. Now (say they) if we have an altar, then we must needs have a priest; and also a real sacrifice. Ans. Here is meant not a bodily, but a spiritual altar; because the altar is opposed to the material Tabernacle; and what is meant thereby is expressed in the next verse, i • which he proves that we have an altar. The bodies of the beasts, whose blood was brought into the holy place by the high priest for sin, were burnt without the campe: so Christ Jesus, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. Now lay the reason or proof to the thing that is proved, and we must needs understand Christ himself, who was both the altar, the priest, and the sacrifice.

V. Object. Lastly, they say, where alteration is both of law and covenant, there must needs be a new priest and a new sacrifice. But in the new testament there is alteration both of law and covenant: and therefore there is both new priest and new sacrifice. Ans. All may be granted: in the new testament, there is both new priest and sacrifice: yet not any popish priest, but only Christ himself both God and man. The sacrifice also is Christ as he is man: and the altar, Christ as he is God, who in the new testament offered himself a sacrifice to his Father for the sins of the world. For though he were the lamb of God slain from the beginning of the world, in regard of the purpose of God, in regard of the value of his merit, and in regard of faith which maketh things to come as present, yet was he not actually offered till the fullness of time came; and once offering of himself, he remaineth a priest forever, and all other priests beside him, are superfluous: his one offering once offered, being all-sufficient.

Our consent.

Our consent may be set down in three conclusions. I. We do not condemn fasting, but maintain three sorts thereof: to wit, a moral, civil, and a religious fast. The first being moral, is a practice of sobriety or temperance, when as in the use of meats and drinks, the appetite is restrained, that it do not exceed moderation. And this must be used of all Christians in the whole course of their lives. The second being civil, is when upon some particular and political considerations, men abstain from certain meats: as in this our common-wealth the Law enjoins us to abstain from flesh meat at certain seasons of the year, for these special ends; to preserve the breed of cattle, and to maintain the calling of the fisherman. The third, namely a religious fast, is when the duties of religion, as the exercise of prayer and humiliation are practiced in fasting. And I do now specially entreat of this kind.

Conclus. II. We join with them in the allowance of the principal and right ends of a religious fast, and they are three. The first is, that thereby the mind may become attentine in meditation of the duties of godliness to be performed • The second is, that the rebellion of the flesh may be subdued: for the flesh pampered becomes an instrument of licentiousness. The third, and (as I take it) the chief ende of a religious fast is, to profess our guiltiness, and to testify our humiliation before God for our sins: and for this ende in the fast of Nineue, the very beast was made to abstain.

Conclus. III. We yield unto them, that fasting is an help and furtherance to the worship of God; yea and a good work also if it be used in a good manner. For though fasting in it self being a thing indifferent, as eating & drinking are: is not to be termed a good work, yet being applied, and considered in relation to the right ends before spoken of, and practiced accordingly: it is a work allowed of God, and highly to be esteemed of all the servants and people of God.

The difference or dissent.

Our dissent from the Church of Rome in the doctrine of fasting stands in three things. I. They appoint and prescribe set times of fasting, as necessary to be kept: but we hold and teach that to prescribe the time of a religious fast, is in the liberty of the Church and the governors thereof, as special occasion shall be offered. When the disciples of John asked Christ, why they and the Pharisees fast often, but his disciples fasted not, he answered, Can the children of the marriage chamber mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them: but the days will come when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast, Math. 9.15. where he gives them to understand, that they must fast, as occasions of mourning are offered. Where also I gather, that a set time of fasting is no more to be enjoined then a set time of mourning. It was the opinion of Augustine, that neither Christ nor his Apostles, appointed any times of fasting. And Tertullian saith, that they of his time fasted of their own accordes freely, without law or commandment, as occasions and times served. And Eusebius saith, that Montanus was the first that made laws of fasting. It is objected, that there is a set time of fasting prescribed, Levite. 16.29. Ans. This set and prescribed fast was commanded of God as a part of the legal worship which had his ende in the death of Christ: therefore it doth not justify a set time of fasting in the new testament, where God hath left man to his own liberty, without giving the like commandment. It is again alleged, that Zechariah, 7.5. there were set times appointed for the celebration of religious fasts unto the Lord, the fifth and the seventh months. Ans. They were appointed upon occasion of the present afflictions of the Church in Babylon, and they ceased upon their deliverance. The like upon like occasion may we appoint. It is further objected, that some Churches of the Protestants observe set times of fasting. Ans. In some Churches there be set days and times of fasting, not upon necessity or for conscience or • eligions sake, but for political or civil regards, whereas in the Romish Church it is held a mortal sin, to defer the set time of fasting till the next day following.

Secondly we dissent from the Church of Rome touching the manner of keeping a fast. For the best learned among them allow the drinking of wine, water, electuaries, and that often within the compass of their appointed fast: yea they allow the eating of one meal on a fasting day at noon-tide, and upon a reasonable cause, one hour before: the time of fasting not yet ended. But this practice indeed is absurd, and contrary to the practice of the old testament: yea it doth frustrate the ende of fasting. For the bodily abstinence is an outward means and sign whereby we acknowledge our guiltiness and unworthiness of any of the blessings of God. Again they prescribe a difference of meats, as whit-meat only to be used on their fasting days, and that of necessity and for conscience sake in most cases. But we hold this distinction of meats both to be foolish and wicked. Foolish; because in such meats as they prescribe, there is as much filling and delight, as in any other meats: as namely in fish, fruits, wine, &c. which they permit. And it is against the ende of a religious fast to use any refreshing at all; so far as necessity of health and comeliness will permit. Thus the Church in times past used to abstain not only from meat and drink, but from all delights whatsoever, even from soft apparel and sweet ointments. Joel 2.15. — Sanctify a fast —: let the bridegroom go forth of his chamber and the bride out of her bride chamber. Dan. 10.3. I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine within my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three weeks of days were fulfilled. 1. Cor. 7.5. Defraud not one another, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer.

Again, we hold this practice to be wicked, because it taketh away the liberty of Christians: by which, unto the pure all things are pure. And the Apostle, Gal. 5. bids us to stand fast in this liberty, which the Church of Rome would thus abolish. For the better understanding of this, let us consider how the Lord himself hath from the beginning kept in his own hands as a master in his own house, the disposition of his creatures for the use of man, that he might depend on him and his word for temporal blessings. In the first age, he appointed unto him for mea • e every herb of the earth bearing seed, and every tree wherein there is the fruit of a tree bearing • eede, Gen. 1.29. And as for flesh, whether God gave unto him liberty to eat or not to eat, we hold it vncerten. After the flood the Lord renewed his grant of the use of the creatures, and gave his people liberty to eat the flesh of living creatures: yet so as he made some things unclean, and forbad the eating of them: among the rest, the eating of blood. But since the coming of Christ he hath enlarged his word, and given liberty to all both Jews and Gentiles, to eat of all kinds of flesh. This word of his we rest upon; holding it a doctrine of devils, for men to command an abstinence from meats, for conscience sake; which the Lord himself hath created to be received with thanksgiving. Socrates a Christian historiagrapher saith, that the Apostles left it free to everyone to use what kind of meat they would on fasting days, and other times. Spiridion in lent dressed swine's flesh, and set it before a stranger, eating himself and bidding the stranger also to eat: who refusing and professing himself to be a Christian, therefore (saith he) the rather must thou do it: for to the pure all things are pure, as the word of God teacheth us.

But they object Ier. 35. where Jonadab commanded the Rechabites to abstain from wine: which commandment they obeyed • and are commended for doing well in obeying of it: therefore (say they) some kind of meats may lawfully be forbidden • Ans. Jonadab gave this commandment not in way of religion, or merit, but for other wise and political regards. For he enjoined his posterity not to drink wine, not to build houses, not to sow • eed, or plant vineyards, or to have any in possession: but to live intents to the ende they might be prepared to bear the calamities, that should befall them in time to come. But the Popish abstine • ce from certain meats, hath respect to conscience and religion: and therefore is of another kind, and can have no warrant thence.

II. Object. Dan. 10.3. Daniel being in heaviness for three weeks of days, abstained from flesh: and his example is our warrant. Ans. It was the manner of holy men in ancient times, when they fasted many days together of their own accords freely to abstain from sundry things; and thus Daniel abstained from flesh. But the popish abstinence from flesh is not free, but stands by commandment, and the omitting of it, is mortal sin. Again, if they will follow Daniel in abstaining from flesh, why do they not also abstain from all pleasant bread and wine; yea from ointments: and why will they eat anything in the time of their fast; whereas they cannot show that Daniel ate anything at all till evening. And Molanus hath noted that our ancetours abstained from wine and dainties, and that some of them ate nothing for two or three days together.

Thirdly they allege the diet of John the Baptist, whose meat was Locusts and wild honey: and of Timothy, who abstained from wine Ans. Their kind of diet, and that abstinence which they used, was only for temperance sake; not for conscience, or, to merit anything thereby: let them prove the contrary if they can.

Thirdly and lastly, we dissent from them touching certain ends of fasting. For they make abstinence it self in a person fitly prepared, to be a part of the worship of God: but we take it to be a thing indifferent in it self, & therefore no part of God's worship: and yet withal, being well used, we esteem it as a prop or furtherance of the worship, in that we are made the fitter by it to worship God. And hereupon some of the more learned sort of them say, Not the work of fasting done, but the devotion of the worker, is to be reputed the service of God. Again, they say, that fasting in, or, with devotion, is a work of satisfaction to God's justice for the temporal punishment of our sins. Wherein we take it they do blasphemously derogate from Christ our Savior, who is the whole and perfect satisfaction for sin, both in respect of fault and punishment. Here they allege the example of the Ninevites, and Ahab's fasting, whereby they turned away the judgments of God denounced against thē by his Prophets. We answer, that God's wrath was appeased towards the Ninevites, not by their fasting, but by faith laying hold on God's mercy in Christ, & thereby staying his judgment. Their fasting was only a sign of their repentance: their repentance a fruit and sign of their faith, whereby they believed the preaching of • onas. As for Ahab's humiliation, it is nothing to the purpose: for it was in hyprocrisie: if they get anything thereby, let them take it to themselves. To conclude, we for our parts do not condemn this exercise of fasting, but the abuse of it: and it were to be wished that fasting were more used of all Christians in all places: considering the lord doth daily give us new and special occasions of public and private fasting.

Our consent.

Our consent I will set down in two conclusions. I. All true believers have a state of true perfection in this life, Matthew. 5.48. Be you perfect as your father in heaven is perfect. Gen. 6.9. Noah was a just and perfect man in his time, & walked with God. Gen. 17.1. Walk before me and be perfect. And sundry kings of Judah are said to walk uprightly before god with a perfect heart, as David, Josiah, Hezekiah, &c. And Paul accounteth himself with the rest of the faithful to be perfect, saying, Let us all that are perfect be thus minded. Phil. 3.15. Now this perfection hath two parts. The first is the imputation of Christ's perfect obedience, which is the ground and fountain of all our perfection whatsoever. Heb. 10.14. By one offering, that is, by his obedience in his death & passion, hath he consecrated, or made perfect, forever them that believe. The second part of Christian perfection is sincerity, or, uprightness, standing in two things. The first is, to acknowledge our imperfection and unworthiness in respect of our selves: and hereupon, though Paul had said he was perfect, yet he addeth further, that he did account of himself, not as though he had attained to perfection: but did forget the good things behind, and indeauoured himself to that which was before. Here therefore it must be remembered, that the perfection whereof I speak, may stand with sundry wants and imperfections. It is said of Asa that his heart was perfect with God all his days, and yet he pulled not down the high places, and being diseased in his feet he put his trust in the phisitians and not in the Lord. Secondly this uprightness stands in a constant purpose, endeavor, and care to keep not some few, but all and every commandment of the law of God, as David saith, Psal. 119.6. Then shall I not be confounded, when I have respect to all thy commandments. And this endeavor is a fruit of perfection, in that it proceeds from a man regenerate. For, as all men through Adams fall, have in them by nature the seeds of all sin, none excepted, no not the sin against the holy ghost: so by grace of regeneration through Christ, all the faithful have in them likewise the seeds of all virtues needful to salvation: and hereupon they both can and do endeavor to yield perfect obedience unto God, according to the whole law. And they may be termed perfect, as a child is called a perfect man: though it want perfection of age and stature and reason: yet hath it perfection of parts: because it hath all and every part and faculty both of body and soul that is required to a perfect man.

Conclus. II. There be certain works of supererogation: that is, such works as are not only answerable to the law, and thereupon deserve life everlasting: but go beyond the law, and merit more then the law by it self can make any man to merit. But where may we find these works? not in the person of any mere man, or angel, nor in all men and angels: but only in the person of Christ God and man: whose works are not only answerable to the perfection of the law, but go far beyond the same. For first the obedience of his life considered alone by it self, was answerable even to the rigor of the law: and therefore the sufferings of his death and passion, were more then the law could require at his hand: considering it requireth no punishment of him, that is a doer of all things contained therein. Secondly, the very rigor of the law requireth obedience only of them that are mere men: but the obedience of Christ was the obedience of a person that was both God and man. Thirdly, the law requires personal obedience, that is, that every man fulfill the law for himself, and it speaks of no more. Christ obeyed the law for himself, not because he did by his obedience merit his own glory: but because he was to be a perfect and pure high priest, not only in nature but also in life; and as he was a creature, he was to be conformable to the law. Now the obedience which Christ performed, was not for himself alone, but it serveth also for all the elect: & considering it was the obedience of God (as Paul signified when he said, feed the Church of God, which he purchased with his blood ) it was sufficient for many thousand worlds: & by reason the law requireth no obedience of him that is God: this obedience therefore may truly be termed a work of supererogation. This one we acknowledge, and beside this we dare acknowledge none. And thus far we agree with the Church of Rome, in the doctrine of the estate of perfection; and further we dare not go.

The difference.

The Papists hold (as the writings of the learned among them teach) that a man being in the state of grace, may not only keep all the commandments of the law, and thereby deserve his own salvation: but also go beyond the law and do works of supererogation which the law requireth not: as to perform the vow of single life, and the vow of regular obedience, &c. And by this means (they say) men deserve a greater degree of glory then the law can afford. Of perfection they make two kinds: one they call necessary perfection, which is the fulfilling of the law in every commandment, whereby eternal life is deserved. The second, is profitable perfection, when men do not only such things as the law requires, but over and besides, they make certain vows, and perform certain other duties which the law enjoins not: for the doing whereof they shall be rewarded with a greater measure of glory, then the law designeth. This they make plain by comparison: Two soldiers fight in the field under one and the same captain: the one only keeps his standing, and thereby deserves his pay: the other in keeping of his place, doth also win the enemies standard; or do some other notable exploit: now this man besides his pay deserves some greater reward. And thus (say they) it is with all true Catholics in the state of grace: they that keep the law shall have life eternal: but they that do more then the law, as works of supererogation, shall be crowned with greater glory. This is their doctrine. But we on the contrary teach, that albeit we are to strive to a perfection as much as we can, yet no man can fulfill the law of God in this life: much less do works of supererogation: for the confirmation whereof, these reasons may be used. I. In the moral law two things are commanded. First the love of God and mā. Secondly, the manner of this love: now the manner of loving God, is to love him with all our heart and strength. Luk. 10.27. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy thought, &c. As Bernard said, The measure of loving god, is to love him without measure, and that is to love him with the greatest perfection of love that can befall a creature. Hence it follows that in loving God, no man can possibly do more then the law requireth: and therefore the performance of all vows whatsoever, & all like duties, comes short of the intention or scope of the law.

II Reason. The compass of the law is large, & comprehendeth in it more then the mind of man can at the first conceive: for every commandment hath two parts, the negative and the affirmative. In the negative is forbidden not only the capital sin named, as murder, theft, adultery, &c. but all sins of the same kind, with all occasions and provocations thereto. And in the affirmative is commanded not only the contrary virtues, as the love of God, and the love of our neighbors honor, life, chastity, goods, good name, but the use of all helps and means, whereby the said virtues may be preserved, furthered, and practiced. Thus hath our Savior Christ himself expounded the law, Math. 5.6. upon this plain ground I conclude, that all duties pertaining to life and manners, come within the list of some moral commandment. And that the Papists making their works of supererogation means to further the love of God and man, must needs bring them under the compass of the law. Under which, if they be, they cannot possibly go beyond the same.

Reason III. Luk. 17.10. When ye have done all those things that are commanded us we are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do. The Papists answer that we are unprofitable to God but not to our selves: but this shift of theirs is beside the very intent of the place. For a servant in doing his duty is unprofitable even to himself, and doth not so much as deserve thanks at his masters hand as Christ saith, v: 9 • Doeth he thank that servant. Secondly they answer, that we are unprofitable servants in doing things commanded: yet when we do things prescribed in the way of counsel, we may profit our selves, and merit thereby. But this answer doeth not stand with reason. For things commanded, in that they are commanded, are more excellent then things left to our liberty: because the will and commandment of God gives excellency and goodness unto them. Again counsels are thought to be harder then the commandments of the law: and if men cannot profit themselves by obedience of moral precepts, which are more easy: much less shall they be able to profit themselves by counsels which are of greater difficulty.

Reason IV. If it be not in the ability and power of man to keep the law, then much less is he able to do any work that is beyond and above all the law requireth: but no man is able to fulfill the law, and therefore no man is able to supererrogate. Here the papists deny the proposition: for (say they) though we keep not the law, yet we may do things of counsel above the law, and thereby merit. But by their leaves, they speak absurdly: for in common reason, if a man fail in the less, he cannot but fail in the greater. Now (as I have said) in popish doctrine, it is easier to obey the moral law then to perform the counsels of perfection.

Objections of Papists.

1. Isaiah 56.4. The Lord saith unto Eunuchs that keep his Sabbath, and choose the thing that pleaseth him, will he give a place and name better then the sons and daughters. Now (say they) an Eunuch is one that lives a single life, and keeps the vow of chastity, and hereupon he is said to deserve a greater measure of glory. Answ. If the words be well considered, they prove nothing less: for honor is promised to Eunuchs, not because they make & perform the vow of single life, but because (as the text saith) they observe the Lord's Sabbath, and choose the thing that pleaseth God, and keep his covenant, which is to believe the word of God and to obey the commandments of the moral law.

Object. II. Mark. 16.12. Christ saith, There are some which have made themselves chaste for the kingdom of heaven: therefore the vow of single life is warrantable, and is a work of special glory in heaven. Ans. The meaning of the text is, that some having received the gift of continency, do willingly content themselves with single estate, that they may with more liberty without distraction further the good estate of the Church of God, or, the kingdom of grace in themselves & others. This is all that can be gathered out of this place; hence therefore cannot be gathered the merit of everlasting glory by single life.

Object III. Math. 9.21. Christ saith to the young man. If thou wilt be perfect go sell that thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven. Therefore say they, a man by forsaking all may merit not only heaven, but also treasure there, that is, an exceeding measure of glory. Ans. This young man being in likelihood, a strict Pharisee, thought to merit eternal life by the works of the law, as his first question importeth, Good master, what shall I do to be saved: and therefore Christ goeth about to discover unto him the secret corruption of his heart. And hereupon the words alleged are a commandment of trial not common to all, but especially to him. The like commandment gave the Lord to Abraham saying, Abraham take thine only son Isaac, and offer him upon the mountain which I shall show thee, Gen. 12.2.

IV. Object. 1. Cor. 7.8. Paul saith, It is good for all to be single as he was: and v. 38. he saith, it is better for virgins not to marry: and, this he speaks by permission not by commandment, v. 26. Answ. Here single life is not preferred simply, but only in respect of the present necessity, because the Church was then under persecution: and because such as live a single life, are freed from the cares and distractions of the world.

V. Object. 1. Cor. 9.15,17,18. Paul preached the gospel freely, and that was more then he was bound to do: and for so doing he had a reward. Answ. It was generally in Paul's liberty to preach the gospel freely or not to do it: but in Corinth upon special circumstances, he was bound in conscience to preach it freely as he did; by reason of the false teachers, who would otherwise have taken occasion to disgrace his ministry, and have hindered the glory of God. Now it was Paul's duty by all means to prevent the hindrances of the gospel and the glory of god: and if he had not so done; he had abused his liberty, v. 18. Therefore he did no more in that case then the law it self required. For an action indifferent, or an action in our liberty, ceaseth to be in our liberty and becomes moral, in the case of offense. What is more free and indifferent then to eat flesh, yet in the case of offense Paul said he would not eat flesh as long as the world stood, 1. Cor. 8.13.

Our consent.

Conclus. I. The true Saints of God, as Prophets, Apostles, and Martyrs, and such like, are to be worshipped and honored, and that three ways: I. by keeping a memory of them in godly manner. Thus the Virgin Marie as a prophetess foretelleth, that all nations shall call her blessed, Luk. 1.48. When a certain woman poured a box of ointment on the head of Christ, he saith, this fact shall be spoken in remembrance of her, wheresoever that Gospel should be preached throughout the world, Mark. 14.9. This duty also was practiced by David toward Moses, Aaron, Phineas, and the rest that are commended, Psal. 105. and 106. and by the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, upon the Patriarchs and Prophets, and many others that excelled in faith in the times of the old and new testament. II. They are to be honored by giving of thanks to God for them, and the benefits that God vouchsafed by them unto his Church. Thus Paul saith, that when the Churches heard of his conversion, they glorified God for him, or, in him. Gal. 1.13. And the like is to be done for the Saints departed. III. They are to be honored by an imitation of their faith, humility, meekness, repentance, the fear of God, and all good virtues wherein they excelled. For this cause the examples of godly men in the old and new testament, are called a cloud of witnesses by allusion: for as the cloud did guide the Israelites through the wilderness to the land of Canaan: so the faithful now are to be guided to the heavenly Canaan by the examples of good men, that have believed in God before us, and have walked the strait way to life everlasting.

Concl. II. Again their true Relics, that is, their virtues and good examples left to all posterity to be followed, we keep and respect with due reverence. Yea if any man can show us the bodily relique of any true Saint: and prove it so to be though we will not worship it, yet will we not despise it but keep it as a monument, if it may conveniently be done without offense. And thus far we consent with the church of Rome. Further we must not go.

The dissent.

Our difference stands in the manner of worshipping of Saints. The Papists make two degrees of religious worship. The highest they call Latria, whereby God himself is worshipped, and that alone. The second lower then the former is called Doulia, whereby the Saints and Angels that be in the special favor of God, and glorified with everlasting glory in heaven, are worshipped. This worship they place in outward adoration, in bending of the knee, and bowing of the body to them being in heaven: in invocation whereby they call upon them: in dedication of Churches and houses of religion unto them: in sabbaths and festival days: lastly in pilgrimages unto their relics and images. We likewise distinguish adoration or worship: for it is either religious or civil. Religious worship, is that which is done to him that is Lord of all things, the searcher and trier of the heart, omnipotent, everywhere present, able to hear and help them that call upon him everywhere, the author and first cause of every good thing: and that simply for himself, because he is absolute goodness it self. And this worship is due to God alone, being also commanded in the first and second commandment of the fist table. Civil worship is the honor done to men set above us by God himself, either in respect of their excellent gifts, or in respect of their offices & authority whereby they govern others. The right ende of this worship is to testify and declare that we reverence the gifts of God, and that power which he hath placed in those that be his instruments. And this kind of worship is commanded only in the second table and in the first commandment thereof. Honor thy father and mother. Upon this distinction we may judge, what honor is due to everyone. Honor is to be given to God, and to whom he commandeth. He commandeth that inferiors should honor or worship their betters. Therefore the unreasonable creatures, and among the rest images are not to be worshipped, either with civil or religious worship: being indeed far baser then man himself is. Again unclean spirits the enemies of God, must not be worshipped: yea to honor them at all is to dishonor god. Good angels, because they excel men both in nature and gifts, when they appeared were lawfully honored: yet so, as when the least signification of honor was given that was proper to god, they refused it. And because they appear not now as in former times, not so much as civil adoration in any bodily gesture is to be done unto them. Lastly, governors and Magistrates have civil adoration as their due: and it cannot be omitted without offense. Thus Abraham worshipped the Hittites, Gen. 23. and Joseph his brethren, Gen. 50. To come to the very point; upon the former distinction, we deny against the Papists that any civil worship in the bending of the knee or prostrating of the body, is to be given to the Saints, they being absent from us: much less any religious worship, as namely invocation signified by any bodily adoratiō. For it is the very honor of God himself: let them call it latria, or doulia, or by what name they will.

Our reasons.

Reason. I. All true invocation and prayer made according to the will of God, must have a double foundation: a commandment, and a promise. A commandment, to move us to pray: and a promise, to assure us that we shall be heard. For all and every prayer must be made in faith; and without a commandment or promise there is no faith. Upon this infallible ground I conclude, that we may not pray to Saints departed: for in the scripture there is no word, either commanding us to pray unto them, or assuring us that we shall be heard when we pray. Nay we are commanded, only to cal upon God, him only shalt thou serve, Mat. 4.10. And, How shall we call upon him in whom we have not believed? Ro. 10.14. And we have no promise to be heard but for Christ's sake. Therefore prayers made to Saints departed are unlawful. Answer is made, that invocation of Saints, is warranted by miracles and revelations, which are answerable to commandments and promises. Ans. But miracles & revelations had an end before this kind of invocation took any place in the Church of God: and that was about three hundred years after Christ. Again to judge of any point of doctrine by miracles, is deceitful; unless three things concur: the first is, doctrine of faith and piety to be confirmed: the second is prayer unto God, that something may be done for the ratifying of the said doctrine: the third is the manifest edification of the Church by the two former. Where any of these three are wanting, miracles may be suspected: because otherwhiles false prophets have their miracles to try men whether they will cleave unto God or no Deut. 13.1,3. Again miracles are not done, or to be done for them that believe, but for infidels that believe not: as Paul saith, 1. Cor. 14.22. Tongues are a sign not to thē that believe, but to unbelievers. And to this agree Chrysostom, Ambrose, & Isidore, who saith, Behold a sign is not necessary to believers which have already believed, but to infidels that they may be converted. Lastly, our faith is to be confirmed not by revelations and apparitions of dead mē, but by the writings of the Apostles & prophets, Luk. 16.29.

Reason II. To pray unto Saints departed, to bow the knee unto them while they are in heaven, is to ascribe that unto them which is proper to God himself: namely, to know the heart, with the inward desires and motions thereof: and to know the speeches and behaviors of all men in all places upon earth at all times. The Papists answer, that Saints in heaven see and hear all things upon earth, not by themselves (for that were to make them God's) but in God, and in the glass of the Trinity, in which they see men's prayers revealed unto them. I answer first, that the Saints are still made more thē creatures; because they are said, to know the thoughts and all the doings of all mē at all times, which no created power can well comprehend at once. Secondly I answer, that this glass, in which all things are said to be seen, is but a forgery of man's brain: and I prove it thus. The angels themselves, who see further into God then men can do, never knew all things in God: which I confirm on this manner. In the temple under the law, upon the ark were placed two Cherubims, signifying the good angels of god: & they looked downward upon the mercieseat covering the ark, which was a figure of Christ; & their looking downward figured their desire to see into the mystery of Christ's incarnation and our redemption by him; as Peter alluding, no doubt, to this type in the old Testament saith, 1 Pet. 1.12. which things the angels desired to behold : and Paul saith, Eph. 3.10. The manifold wisdom of God is revealed by the Church unto principalities and powers in heavenly places, that is, to the angels: but howe and by what means? by the Church ; and that two ways, first by the Church, as by an example, in which the angels saw the endless wisdom and mercy of God in the calling of the Gentiles. Secondly by the Church, as it was founded and honored by the preaching of the Apostles. For it seems that the Apostolical ministry in the new testament revealed things touching Christ, which the angels never knew, before that time. Thus Chrysostom upon occasion of this text of Paul saith, that the angels learned some things by the preaching of John the Baptist. Again, Christ saith, that they know not the hour of the last judgment, Math. 24. 23. much less do the Saints know all things in God. And hence it is that they are said to be under the altar, where they cry: How long Lord holy and true! wilt thou not revenge our blood? as being ignorant of the day of their full deliverance. And the Jews in affliction confess Abraham was ignorant of them and their estate. Isa 63.16.

Reason III. Math. 4.10. Christ refused so much as to bow the knee to Satan upon this ground, because it was written thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Hence it was, that Peter would not suffer Cornelius so much as to kneel unto him, though Cornelius intended not to honor him as God. Therefore neither Saint nor angel is to be honored so much as with the bowing of the knee: if it carry but the least signification of divine or religious honor.

Reason IV. The judgment of the ancient Church. August. We honor the Saints with charity, and not by servitude: neither do we erect Churches to them. And, Let it not be religion for us to worship dead men. And, They are to be honored for imitation, and not to be adored for religion. Epiphan. Neither Tecla nor any Saint is to be adored, for that ancient error may not overrule us, that we should leave the living God, and adore things made by him. Again, Let Marie be in honor: let the Father, Son, and holy ghost be adored: let none adore Marie; I mean neither woman nor man. Again, Marie is beautiful, holy, and honored, yet not to adoration. When Julian objected to the Christians that they worshipped their Martyrs as God, Cyril grants the memory and honor of them, but denies their adoration: and of invocation, he makes no mention at all. Ambrose on Ro. 1. Is any so mad that he will give to the Earl the honor of the King—?yet these men do not think themselves guilty, who give the honor of God's name to a creature, and leaving the Lord, adore their fellow servants, as though there were anything more reserved for God.

Objections of Papists.

I. Gen. 48.16. Let the angel that kept me bless thy children. Here (say they) it is a prayer made to angels. Ans. By the angel is meant Christ, who is called the angel of the covenant, Malac. 3.1. and the angel that guided Israel in the wilderness, 1. Cor. 10.9. compared with Exod. 23.20.

Object. 11. Exod. 23.13. Moses prayeth that God would respect his people, for Abraham's sake, and for Isaac and Israel his servants, which were not then living. Ans. Moses prayeth God to be merciful to the people, not for the intercession of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but for his covenants sake which he had made with them, Psal. 123.10,11. Again by popish doctrine, the fathers departed knew not the estate of men upon earth, neither did they pray for them: because then they were not in heaven but in Limbo Patrum.

III. Object. One living man makes intercession to God for another: therefore much more do the Saints in glory, that are filled with love pray to god for us; and we pray to them no otherwise then we desire living men to pray for us. Ans. The reason is naught: for we have a commandment, one living man to pray for another, and to desire others to pray for us: but there is no warrant in the word of God, for us to desire the prayers of men departed. Secondly there is great difference between these two: To request our friend either by word of mouth or by letter to pray for us: and by Invocation to request them that are absent from us & departed this life to pray for us: for this is indeed a worship, in which is given unto them a power to hear and help all that call upon them, at what place or time soever, yea though they be not present in the place in which they are worshipped: and consequently the seeing of the heart, presence in all places, and infinite power to help all that pray unto them; which things agree to no creature but God alone. Thirdly when one living man requests another to pray from him, he only makes him his companion and fellow member in his prayer made in the name of our mediator Christ: but when men invocate Saints in heaven, they being then absent, they make them more then fellow members, even mediators between Christ and them.

Our Consent.

Our consent with thē I will set down in two conclusions. Conclus. I. The saints departed pray unto God, by giving thanks unto him for their own redemption, & for the redemption of the whole church of God upon earth, Rev. 5. 8. The four beasts and the four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, — 9. and they song a new song, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: because thou wast killed and hast redeemed us to God— .13. And all the creatures which are in heaven—, heard I saying, Praise and honor and glory and power be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for evermore.

II. Conclus. The Saints departed pray generally for the state of the whole church. Reu. 6.9. And I saw under the altar, the souls of them that were killed for the word of God —, and they cried, 10. How long Lord holy and true! doest thou not judge and aueuge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? whereby we see they desire a final deliverance of the church, and a destruction of the enemies thereof; that they themselves with all the people of God might be advanced to fullness of glory in body and soul: yea the dumb creatures, Rom. 8. 23. are said to groan and sigh, waiting for the adoption, even the redemption of our bodies: much more then do the Saints in heaven desire the same. And thus far we consent.

The dissent or difference.

They hold and teach, that the Saints in heaven, as the virgin Marie, Peter, Paul, &c. do make intercession to God for particular men according to their several wants: and that having received particular men's prayers, they present them unto God. But this doctrine we flatly renounce upon these grounds and reasons.

I. Isa. 63.16. The Church saith to God, doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel know us not. Now if Abraham knew not his posterity, neither Marie, nor Peter, nor any other of the Saints departed know us and our estate: and consequently they cannot make any particular intercession for us. If they say that Abraham & Jacob were then in Limbo, which they will have to be a part of hell: what joy could Lazarus have in Abraham's bosom. Luk. 16.25. & with what comfort could Jacob say on his death bed: O Lord I have waited for thy salvation. Gen. 46.18.

II. Reason. 2. King. 22.20. Huldah the prophetess telleth Josiah, he must be gathered to his fathers, and put in his grave in peace, that his eyes may not not see all 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 the evil which God would bring on this place. Therefore the Saints departed see not the state of the Church on earth, much less do they know the thoughts and prayers of men. This conclusion Augustine confirmeth at large.

III. Reason. No creature, Saint, or Angel can be a mediator for us to God, saving Christ alone, who is indeed the only Advocate of his church. For in a true and sufficient Mediator there must be three properties. First of all, the word of God must reveal and propound him unto the Church, that we may in conscience be ass • red, that praying to him & to God in his name, we shall be heard. Now there is no Scripture that mentioneth either Saints or Angels as mediator in our behalf, save Christ alone. Secondly, a mediator must be perfectly just, so as no sin be found in him at all, 1. John. 2.1. If any man • inne we have an advocate with the father, Jesus Christ the righ • eous. Now the Saints in heaven, howsoever they be fully sanctified by Christ, yet in themselves they were conceived and borne in sin: and therefore must needs eternally stand before God by the mediation and merit of another. Thirdly, a mediator must be a propitiatour, that is, bring something to God, that may appease and satisfy the wrath and justice of God for our sins: therefore John addeth, and he is a propitiation for our sins. But neither Saint nor Angel can satisfy for the least of our sins: Christ only is the propitiation for them all. The virgin Marie and the rest of the Saints being sinners, could not satisfy so much as for themselves.

IV. Reason. The judgment of the Church. Augustine, All Christian men commend each other in their prayers to God. And who prays for all, and for whom none prays, he is that one and true mediator. And, This saith thy Savior, thou hast no whither to go but to me, thou hast no way to go but by me. Chrysostom, Thou hast no need of Patrons to God, or much discourse that thou shouldest sooth others: but though thou be alone and want a Patron, and by thyself pray unto God, thou shalt obtain thy desire. And on the saying of John, If any sin, &c. Thy prayers have no effect unless they be such as the Lord commends unto thy father. And Augustine on the same place hath these words, He being such a man said not, ye have an Advocate, but if any sin we have: he said not ye have, neither said he, ye have me.

Objections of Papists.

I. Reu. 5.8,9. The four and twenty Elders fall down before the lamb, having everyone harps and golden vyals full of odors, which are the prayers of the Saints. Hence the Papists gather, that the Saints in heaven receive the prayers of men on earth, and offer them unto the Father. Ans. There by prayers of the Saints, are meant their own prayers, in which they sing praises to God and to the Lamb, as the verses following plainly declare. And these prayers are also presented unto God only from the hand of the Angel, which is Christ himself.

II. Object. Luk. 16.27. Dives in hell prayeth for his brethren upon earth, much more do the Saints in heaven pray for us. Ans. Out of a parable nothing can be gathered, but that which is agreeable to the intent and scope thereof: for by the same reason it may as well be gathered that the soul of Di • es being in hell had a tongue. Again, if it were true which they gather, we may gather also that the wicked in hell have compassion and love to their brethren on earth, and a zeal to God's glory: all which are false.

III. Object. The angels in heaven know every man's estate: they know when any sinner repenteth and rejoiceth thereat: & pray for particular men: therefore the Saints in heaven do the like, for they are equal to the good angels, Luk. 20.36. Ans. The place in Luke is to be understood of the estate of holy men at the day of the last judgment: as appears, Math. 22.30. where it is said, that the servants of God in the resurrection are as the angels in heaven. Secondly they are like the angels not in office and ministry, by which they are ministering spirits for the good of men: but they are like them in glory.

Secondly we di •• ent from the Papists: because they are not content to say that the Saints departed pray for us in particular: but they add further, that they make intercession for us by their merits in heaven. New Jesuits deny this: but let them here Lombard, I think (saith he, speaking of one that is but of mean goodness) that he as it were passing by the fire shall be saved by the merits and intercessions of the heavenly Church: which doth always make intercession for the faithful by request and merit, till Christ shall be complete in his members. And the Roman Catechism saith as much. Saints are so much the more to be worshipped and called upon, because they make prayers daily for the salvation of men: and God for their merit and favor bestows many benefits upon us. We deny not, that men upon earth have help and benefit by the faith and piety which the Saints departed shown, when they were in this life. For God shows mercy on them that keep his commandments to a thousand generations. And Augustine saith, it was good for the Jews, that they were loved of Moses, whom God loved. But we utterly deny that we are helped by merits of Saints either living or departed. For Saints in glory have received the full reward of all their merits; if they could merit: and therefore there is nothing further that they can merit.

Our consent.

We hold that there is a kind of implicit, or vnexpressed faith: yea that the faith of every man in some part of his life, as in the time of his first conversion, and in the time of foam grievous temptation or distress, is implicit or infolded. The Samaritans are said to believe, John. 4. 14. be • ause they took Christ for the Messias, and thereupon were content to learn and obey the glad tidings of salvation. And in the same place, v.51. the Ruler with his family is said to believe, who did no m •• e but generally acknowledge that Christ was the Messias, and yielded himself to believe and obey his holy doctrine; being moved thereunto by a miracle wrought upon his young son. And Rahab Heb. 11.13. is said to believe, yea she is commended for faith even at the time when she received the spies. Now in the word of God we cannot find, that she had anymore but a confused, general, or infolded faith, whereby she believed that the God of the Hebrews was the true God, and his word to be obeyed. And this faith (as it seems) was wrought in her by the report and relation of the miracles done in the land of Egypt, whereby she was moved to join hir self unto the people of God and to believe as they did. By these examples then it is manifest, that in the very servants of God, there is and may be for a time an implicit faith. For the better understanding of this point, it is to be considered that faith may be infolded two ways: fi • st in respect of knowledge of things to be believed: secondly in respect of the apprehension of the object of faith, namely Christ and his benefits. Now faith is infolded in respect of knowledge, when as sundry things that are necessary to salvation are not as yet distinctly known. Though Christ commended the faith of his disciples, for such a faith, against which the gates of hell should not prevail; yet was it vnexpressed or wrapped up in regard of sundry points of religion: for first of all, Peter that made confession of Christ in the name of the rest, was at that time ignorant of the particular means whereby his redemption should be wrought. For after this, he went about to dissuade his master from the suffering of death at Jerusalem, whereupon Christ sharply rebuked him, saying, Come behind me Satan, thou art an offense unto me. Again, they were all ignorant of Christ's resurrection, till certain women who first saw him after he was risen again, had told them: and they by experience in the person of Christ had learned the truth. Thirdly, they were ignorant of the ascension: for they dreamed of an earthly kingdom, at the very time whē he was about to ascend: saying, Wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel • Act. 1.6. And after Christ's ascension, Peter knew nothing of the breaking down of the partition wall between the Jews and Gentiles, till God had better schooled him in a vision, Act. 10.14. And no doubt, we have ordinary examples of this Implicit faith in sundry persons among us. For some there be, which are dull and hard both for understanding and memory, and thereupon make no such proceedings in knowledge as many others do: and yet for good affection and conscience in their doings, so far as they know, they come not short of any; having withal a continual care to increase in knowledge, and to walk in obedience according to that which they know. And such persons though they be ignorant in many things, yet have they a meaning of true faith: and that which is wanting in knowledge, is supplied in affection: and in some respects they are to be preferred before many that have the glibbe tongue, and the brain swimming with knowledge. To this purpose Melancthon said well, We must acknowledge the great mercy of God, who puts a difference between sins of ignorance, and such as are done wittingly; and forgives manifold ignorances to them, that know but the foundation and be teachable; as may be seen by the Apostles, in whom there was much want of understanding before the resurrection of Christ. But, as hath been said, he requires that we be teachable, and he will not have us to be hardened in our sluggishness and dullness. As it is said psal. 1. he meditateth in his law day and night.

The second kind of implicit faith, is in regard of Apprehension; when as a man cannot say distinctly and certainly, I believe the pardon of my sins, but I do unfeignedly desire to believe the pardon of them all: and I desire to repent. This case befalls many of God's children, when they are touched in conscience for their sins. But where men are displeased with themselves for their offenses, and do withal constantly from the heart desire to believe, and to be reconciled to God, there is faith and many other graces of God infolded: as in the little and tender bud, is infolded the leaf, the blossom, and the f • uit. For though a desire to repent and to believe be not faith and repentance in nature, yet in God's acceptation it is, God accepting the will for the deed. Isa. 42.3. Christ will not quench the smoking flax, which as yet by reason of weakness gives neither light nor heat. Christ saith, Math. 6. 6. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be satisfied: where by persons hungering and thirsting are meant all such, as feel with grief their own want of righteousness, and withal desire to be justified and sanctified. Rom. 8.26. God hears & regards the very groans and sighs of his servants: yea, though they be unspeakable by reason they are oftentimes little, weak, and confused: yet God hath respect unto them, because they are the work of his own spirit. Thus when we see that in a touched heart desiring to believe, there is an infolded faith. And this is the faith which many of the true servants of God have: and our salvation stands not so much in our apprehending of Christ, as in Christ's comprehending of us: and therefore Paul saith, Phil. 3. 12. he followeth, namely after perfection, if that he might comprehend that, for whose sake he is comprehended of Christ. Now if any shall say, that without a lively faith in Christ none can be saved: I answer, that God accepts the desire to believe for lively faith, in the time of temptation, and in the time of our first conversion, as I have said. Put case, a man that never yet repented falls into some grievous sickness, and then begins to be touched in conscience for his sins, and to be truly humbled: hereupon he is exhorted to believe his own reconciliation with God in Christ, and the pardon of his own sins. And as he is exhorted, so he endeavoreth according to the measure of grace received, to believe: yet after much striving he cannot resolve himself, that he doth distinctly and certainly believe the pardon of his own sins: only this he can say, that he doth heartily desire to believe: this he wisheth above all things in the world: and he esteems all things as dung for Christ: and thus he dies. I demand now, what shall we say of him? surely, we may say nothing, but that he died the child of God, and is undoubtedly saved. For howsoever it were an happy thing if men could come to that fullness of faith which was in Abraham, and many servants of God: yet certain it is, that God in sundry cases accepts of this desire to believe, for true faith indeed. And look as it is in nature, so is it in grace: in nature some die when they are children, some in old age, and some in full strength, and yet all die men: so again, some die babes in Christ, some of more perfect faith: and yet the weakest having the seeds of grace, is the child of God; and faith in his infancy is faith. All this while, it must be remembered I say not, there is a true faith without all apprehension, but without a Distinct apprehension for some space of time: for this very desire by faith to apprehend Christ and his merits, is a kind of apprehension. And thus we see the kinds of implicit or infolded faith.

This doctrine is to be learned for two causes: first of all it serves to rectify the consciences of weak ones, that they be not deceived touching their estate. For if we think that no faith can save, but a full perswa • ion, such as the faith of Abraham was, many truly bearing the name of Christ must be put out of the role of the children of God. We are therefore to know that there is a growth in grace, as in nature: and there be differences and degrees of true faith, and the least of them all is this Infolded faith. This in effect is the doctrine of M. Calvin: that, when we begin by faith to know somewhat, & have a desire to learn more, this may be termed an vnexpressed faith. Secondly this point of doctrine serves to rectify and in part to expound sundry Catechisms, in that they seem to propound faith unto men at so high a reach, as few can attain unto it: defining it to be a certain and full persuasion of God's love and favor in Christ; whereas, though every faith be for his nature a certain persuasion, yet only the strong faith is the full persuasion. Therefore faith is not only in general terms to be defined, but also the degrees and measures thereof are to be expounded, that weak ones to their comfort may be truly informed of their estate. And though we teach there is a kind of implicit faith, which is the beginning of true and lively faith: yet none must hereupon take an occasion to content themselves therewith, but labor to increase and go on from faith to faith: and so indeed will everyone do that hath any beginnings of true faith, be they never so little. And he which thinks he hath a desire to believe, and contents himself therewith; hath indeed no true desire to believe.

The difference.

The pillars of the Romish Church lays down this ground: that faith in his own nature, is not a knowledge of things to be believed; but a reverent assent unto them whether they be known or unknown. Hereupon they build: that if a man know some necessary points of religion, as the doctrine of the Godhead, of the Trinity, of Christ's incarnation, and of our redemption, &c. it is needless to know the rest by a particular or distinct knowledge, and it sufficeth to give his consent to the Church, and to believe as the pastors believe. Behold a ruinous building upon a rotten foundation: for faith contains a knowledge of things to be believed, and knowledge is of the nature of faith: & nothing is believed that is not known. Isai 53.11. The knowledge of my righteous servant, shall justify many. and John. 17.2. This is eternal life, to know the eternal God, and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ. In these places, by knowledge is meant faith grounded upon knowledge, whereby we know and are assured that Christ and his benefits belong unto us. Secondly this kind of assent is the mother of ignorance. For when men shall be taught, that for sundry points of religion they may believe as the Church believes: that the study of the Scriptures is not to be required of them: yea that to their good they may be barred the reading of them, so be it they know some principal things contained in the articles of faith; that common believers are not bound expressly to believe all the articles of the Apostles Creed: that it sufficeth them to believe the articles by an implicit faith: by believing as the Church believeth, few or none will have care to profit in knowledge. And yet God's commandment is that we should grow in knowledge, and that his word should dwell plenteously in us, Col. 3.16. Again, the Papists say, that the devotion of the ignorant, is often service better accepted then that which is done vpō knowledge. Such (say they) as pray in latin, pray with as great consolation of spirit, with as little tediousness, with as great devotion and affection, and oftentimes more then the other, and always more then any scismaticke or heretic in his own language. To conclude, they teach that some articles of faith are believed generally of the whole Church only by a simple or implicit faith, which afterward by the Authority of a general Counsel are propounded to be believed of the Church by express faith. Roffensis against Luther gives an example of this, when he confesseth that Purgatory was little known at the first, but was made known partly by Scripture, and partly by revelation in process of time. This implicit faith touching articles of religion we reject; holding that all things concerning faith and manners necessary to salvation, are plainly expressed in Scripture, and accordingly to be believed.

Our consent.

We hold a Christian Purgatory, according as the word of God hath set down the same unto us. And first of all by this Purgatory we understand the afflictions of God's children here on earth. Ier. 3. The people afflicted say, thou hast sent a fire into our bones. Psal. 65.12. We have gone through water and fire. Malachi. 3.3. The children of Levi must be purified in a purging fire of affliction. 1. Pet. 1.7. Afflictions are called the fi • rie trial, whereby men are cleansed from their corruptions, as gold from the dross by the fire. Secondly, the blood of Christ is a purgatory of our sins, 1. John. 1.7. Christ's blood purgeth us from all our sins. Heb. 9.14. It purgeth our consciences from dead works. And Christ baptizeth with the holy Ghost and with fire: because our inward washing is by the blood of Christ: and the holy Ghost is as fire to consume and abolish the inward corruption of nature. To this effect saith Origen, Without doubt, we shall feel the unquenchable fire, unless we shall now entreat the Lord to send down from heaven a purgatory fire unto us, whereby worldly desires may he utterly consumed in our minds. August. Suppose the mercy of God is thy purgatory.

The difference or dissent.

We differ from the Papists touching purgatory in two things. And first of all, for the place. They hold it to be a part of hell into which an entrance is made only after this life: we for our parts deny it, as having no waraant in the word of God: which mentioneth only two places for men after this life, heaven and hell, with the twofold condition thereof, joy and torment, Luk. 16.25, 26. John. 3.36. Apoc. 22.14, 15. and 21.7,8. Matth. 8.11. Nay we find the contrary, Reu. 14.13. they that die in the Lord are said to rest from their l • bours: which cannot be true, if any of them go to purgatory. And to cut off all cauills: it is further said, their works, that is, the reward of their works, follow them, even at the heels, as an Acoluth or servant doth his master. Augustine saith well, After this life there remains no compunction or satisfaction. And, Here is all remission of sin: here be temptations that move us to sin: lastly here is the evil from which we desire to be delivered: but there is none of all these. And, We are not here without sin, but we shall go hence without sin. Cyril saith, They which are once dead can add nothing to the things which they have done, but shall remain as they were left, and wait for the time of the last judgment. Chrysost. After the ende of this life, there be no occasions of merits.

Secondly, we differ from them touching the means of Purgation. They say, that men are purged by suffering of pains in Purgatory, whereby they satisfy for their venial sins, and for the temporal punishment of their mortal sins. We teach the contrary, holding that nothing can free us from the least punishment of the smallest sin, but the sufferings of Christ, and purge us from the least taint of corruption, saving the blood of Christ. Indeed they say, that our sufferings in themselves considered, do not purge and satisfy, but as they are made meritorious by the sufferings of Christ: but to this I oppose one text of Scripture, Heb. 1. 3. where it is said, that Christ hath purged our sins by himself: where the last clause cuts the throat of all human satisfactions and merits: and it giveth us to understand, that whatsoever thing purgeth us from our sins, is not to be found in us but in Christ alone: otherwise it should have been said, that Christ purgeth the sins of men by themselves, as well as by himself: and he should merit by his death, that we should become our own Saviors in part.

To this place I may well refer prayer for the dead: of which I will propound two conclusions affirmative, and one negative. Conclus. I. We hold that Christian charity is to extend it self to the very dead: and it must show it self in their honest burial, in the preservation of their good names, in the help and relief of their posterity, as time and occasion shall be offered. Ruth 1.8. John. 19.23.

II. Conclus. We pray further in general manner for the faithful departed, that God would hasten their joyful resurrection, and the full accomplishment of their happiness, both for the body and the soul: and thus much we ask in saying, Thy kingdom come, that is, not only the kingdom of grace, but also the kingdom of glory in heaven. Thus far we come: but nearer the gates of Babylon we dare not approach.

III. Conclus. To pray for particular men departed: and to pray for their deliverance out of purgatory, we think it unlawful: because we have neither promise nor commandment so to do.

Our consent.

Touching the point of Supremacy Ecclesiastical, I will set down how near we may come to the Roman Church in two conclusions. Conclus. I. For the founding of the primitive Church, the ministry of the word was distinguished by degrees not only of order but also of power, and Peter was called to the highest degree. Eph. 4.11. Christ ascended up on high and gave gifts unto men, for the good of his Church: as some to be Apostles, some Prophets, some Evangelists, some Pastors and Doctors. Now, howsoever one Apostle, be not above another, or one Evangelist above another, or one Pastor above another: yet an Apostle was above an Evangelist: and an Evangelist above all pastors and teachers. And Peter was by calling an Apostle, and therefore above all Evangelists and Pastors; having the highest room in the ministry of the new testament both for order and authority.

Conclus. II. Among the twelve Apostles Peter had a threefold privilege or prerogative. I. The prerogative of authority. II. Of primacy. III. Of principality. For the first, by the privilege of authority, I mean a preeminence in regard of estimation, whereby he was had in reverence above the rest of the twelve Apostles, for Cephas with James and John are called Pillars, & seemed to be great. Gal. 2.6.9. Again he had the preeminence of primacy, because he was the first named, as the foreman of the quest. Math. 10.2. The names of the twelve Apostles are these, the first is Simon called Peter. Thirdly he had the preeminence of principality among the twelve, because in regard of the measure of grace, he excelled the rest: for when Christ asked his disciples whom they said he was; Peter as being of greatest ability and zeal answered for them all. Math. 16.16. I use this clause, among the twelve, because Paul excelled Peter every way, in learning zeal, understanding, as far as Peter excelled the rest. And thus near we come to popish supremacy.

The difference.

The Church of Rome gives to Peter a supremacy under Christ above all causes and persons: that is, full power, to govern and order the Catholic Church upon the whole earth both for doctrine and regiment. This supremacy stands (as they teach) in a power, or, judgment, to determine of the true sense of all places of Scripture: to determine all causes of faith: to assemble general counsels: to ratify the decrees of the said councils: to excommunicate any man upon earth, that lives within the Church, even princes and nations: properly to absolve and forgive sins: to decide causes brought to him by appeal from all the parts of the earth: lastly to make laws that shall bind the conscience. This fullness of power with one consent is ascribed to Peter, & the Bishops of Rome that follow him in a supposed succession. Now we hold on the contrary, that neither Peter nor any Bishop of Rome hath any supremacy over the Catholic Church: but that all supremacy under Christ, is pertaining to kings and princes within their dominions. And that this our doctrine is good, and theirs false and forged, I will make it manifest by sundry reasons.

I. Christ must be considered of us as a king two ways. First as he is God: and so is he an absolute king over all things in heaven and earth, with the Father and the Holy Ghost by the right of creation. Secondly he is a king as he is a redeemer of mankind: and by the right of redemption he is a sovereign king over the whole Church, and that in special manner. Now as Christ is God with the father and the holy ghost, he hath his deputies on earth to govern the world: as namely kings and princes, who are therefore in Scriptures called God's. But as Christ is Mediator, and consequently a king over his redeemed ones, he hath neither fellow, nor deputy. No fellow: for then he should be an imperfect mediator. No deputy: for no creature is capable of this office to do in the room and stead of Christ that which he himself doth: because every work of the Mediator is a compound work, arising of the effects of two natures concurring in one and the same action, namely the godhead and the manhood: and therefore to the effecting of the said work there is required an infinite power, which far exceeds the strength of any created nature. Again, Heb. 7.24. Christ is said to have a priesthood which cannot pass from his person to any other: whence it follows, that neither his kingly nor his prophetical office can pass from him to any creature, either in whole or in part: because the three offices of mediatiō in this regard be equal. Nay, it is a needless thing for Christ to have a deputy, to put in execution any part of his mediatourship: considering a deputy only serveth to supply the absence of the principal: whereas Christ is always present with his church by his word & spirit: for where two or three be gathered together in his name: he is in the midst among them. It may be said that the ministers in the work of the ministry are deputies of Christ. I answer, that they are no deputies but active instruments. For in the preaching of the word there be two actions: the first is the uttering or propounding of it to the ear: the second is, the inward operation of the holy Ghost in the heart: which indeed is the principal and belongs to Christ alone: the action of speaking in the minister being only instrumental. Thus likewise the church of God in cutting off any member by excommunication, is no more but an instrument performing a ministry in the name of Christ, & that is to testify & pronounce whom Christ himself hath cut off from the kingdom of heaven: whom he also will have for this cause, to be severed from the company of his own people till he repent. And so it is in all Ecclesiastical actions. Christ hath no deputy, but only instruments: the whole entire action being personal in respect of Christ. This one conclusion overthrows not only the Popes supremacy, but also: many other points of popery.

Reason II. All the Apostles in regard of power & authority were equal: for the commission apostolical both for right and execution was given equally to them all, as the very words import. Math. 28.19. Go teach all nations baptizing them, &c. and the promise, I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, is not private to Peter, but is made in his person to the rest, according as his confession was in the name of the rest. Thus saith Theophylact, They have the power of committing and binding that receive the gift of a bishop as Peter. And Ambr. saith, What is said to Peter, is said to the Apostles. Therefore Peter had no supremacy over the rest of the Apostles in respect of right to the commission: which they say belonged to him only, and the execution thereof to the rest. But let all be granted, that Peter was in commission above the rest, for the time of his life: yet hence may not any superiority be gathered for the Bishops of Rome: because the authority of the Apostles were personal, and consequently ceased with them: without being conveyed to any other: because the Lord did not vouchsafe the like honor to any after them. For • irst of all, it was the privilege of the Apostles to be called immediately, and to see the Lord Jesus. Secondly, they had power to give the gift of the holy Ghost by the imposition of hands. Thirdly, they had such a measure of the assistance of the spirit, that in their public sermons & in writing of the word, they could not err: and these writings were all denied to those that followed after them. And that their authority ceased in their persons, it stands with reason also, because it was given in so a • ple a manner for the founding of the church of the new testament: which being once founded, it was needful only, that there should be pastors & teachers for the building of it up unto the end of the world.

Reason III. When the sons of Zebedee sued unto Christ for the greatest rooms of honor in his kingdom (deeming he should be an earthly king) Christ answers them again, ye know that the Lord's of the Gentiles have dominion, and they that are great, exercise authority over them: but it shall not be so with you. Bernard applieth these very words to Pope Eugenius on this manner. It is plain, saith he, that here dominion is forbidden the Apostles. Go to then: dare if you will, to take upon you ruling an Apostleship, or in your Apostleship rule or dominion: if you will have both alike, you shall loose both. Otherwise you must not think yourself exempted from the number of them, of whom the Lord complaineth thus: they have reigned but not of me: they have been but I have not known them.

Reason IV. Eph. 4. Mention is made of gifts which Christ gave to his church after his ascension, whereby some were Apostles, some prophets, some Evangelists, some pastors and teachers. Now if there had been an office in which men as deputies of Christ should have governed the whole church to the ende of the world, the calling might here have been named fittely with a gift thereto pertaining: and Paul (no doubt) would not here have concealed it, where he mentioneth callings of lesser importance.

Reason V. The Popes supremacy was judged by sentences of scripture & condemned long before it was manifest in the world: the spirit of prophesy foreseeing and foretelling the state of things to come. 2. Thess. 2.3,4. The man of sin (which is that Antichrist) shall exalt himself above all that is called God, &c. Now this whole chapter with all the circumstances thereof, most fitly agrees to the sea of Rome and the Head thereof: and the thing which then stayed the revealing of the man of sin, v. 6. is of most expounded to be the Roman Emperor. I will allege one testimony in the room of many. Chrysostom saith on this place, As long as the Empire shall be had in awe, no man shall straitly submit himself to Antichrist: but after that the Empire shall be dissolved, Antichrist shall invade the state of the Empire standing void, and shall labor to pul unto himself the Empire both of man and God. And this we find now in experience to be true: for the See of Rome never flourished, till the Empire decayed, and the seat thereof was removed from the city of Rome. Again Reu. 13. mentioned is made of two beasts, one coming out of the sea, whom the Papists confess to be the heathenish Roman Emperor: the second coming out of the earth; which doth all that the first beast could do before him: and this fitly agreeth to the popes of Rome, who do and have done all things that the Emperor did or could do, and that in his very sight.

Reason VI. The judgment of the ancient Church. Cyprian saith, Dou • tlesse the same were the rest of the Apostles that Peter was: endued with equal fellowship both of honor and of power: but a beginning is made of unity, that the Church may appear to be one. Gregory saith, If one be called universal Bishop, the universal Church goeth to decaie. And chap. 144. I say boldly, that whosoever calleth or desireth to call himself universal priest, in his pride is a forerunner of Antichrist. And, behold, in the preface of the Epistle which ye directed unto me, you caused to be set a proud title, calling me universal Pope. Bernard. Consider that thou art not a Lord of Bishops, but one of them. Churches are maimed, in that the Roman bishop draweth all power to himself. Again Gregory himself being Pope saith to the Emperor, I which am subject to your commandment —; have every way discharged that which was due, in that I have performed mine allegiance to the Emperor, and have not concealed what I thought on God's behalf. And pope Leo the fourth after Gregory 200. years, acknowledged the Emperor Lotharius for his sovereign prince, and professed obedience without gainsaying to his imperial commandments.

To conclude, whereas they say, that there is a donble head of the Church, one imperial which is Christ alone, the other ministerial, which is the pope, governing the whole Church under Christ, I answer, this distinction robbeth Christ of his honor, because in setting up their ministerial head, they are fain to borrow of Christ things proper unto him, as the privilege to forgive sins properly, and the power to govern the whole earth, by making of laws that shall as truly bind conscience as the laws of God, &c.

Our Consent.

Conclus. I. We teach and believe that the sacraments are signs to represent Christ with his benefits unto us.

Conclus. II. We teach further; that the Sacraments are indeed instruments, whereby God offereth and giveth the foresaid benefits unto us. Thus far we consent with the Roman Church.

The difference.

The difference between us stands in sundry points. First of all, the best learned among them teach, that sacraments are phisicall instruments, that is, true and proper instrumental causes, having force and efficacy in them to produce and give grace. They use to express their meaning by these comparisons. When the scrivener takes the pen into his hand and writes, the action of writing comes from the pen, moved by the hand of the writer: and in cutting of wood or stone, the division comes from the saw, moved by the hand of the workman: even so the grace (say they) that is given by God, is conferred by the sacrament it self. Now we for our parts hold, that sacraments are not phisicall, but mere voluntary instruments. Voluntarie, because it is the will and appointment of God, to use them as certain outward means of grace. Instruments: because when we use them aright according to the institution. God then answerably confers grace from himself. In this respect only take we them for instruments and no otherwise.

The second difference is this: they teach that the very action of the minister dispēsing the sacrament, as it is a work done gives grace immediately if the party be prepared: as the very washing or sprinkling of water in baptism, and the giving of bread in the Lord's supper: even as the orderly moving of the pen upon the paper by the hand of the writer causeth writing. We hold the contrary: namely, that no action in the dispensation of a Sacrament conferreth grace as it is a work done, that is, by the efficacy and force of the very sacramental action it self, though ordained of God: but for two other ways. First by the signification thereof. For God testifies unto us his will and good pleasure partly by the word of promise, and partly by the sacrament: the signs representing to the eyes that which the word doth to the ears: being also types and certain images of the very same things, that are promised in the word and no other. Yea the elements are not general and confused, but particular signs to the several communicants, and by the virtues of the Institution: for when the faithful receive the signs from God by the hands of the Minister, it is as much as if God himself with his own mouth should speak unto them severally, and by name promise to them remission of sins. And things said to men particularly, do more affect, and more take away doubting, then if they were generally spoken to an whole company. Therefore signs of graces are as it were an applying and binding of the promise of salvation to every particular believer: and by this means, the oftener they are received, the more they help our infirmity, and confirm our assurance of mercy.

Again the sacrament confers grace, in that the signs thereof confirms faith as a pledge, by reason it hath a promise annexed to it. For when God commands us to receive the signs in faith, and withal promiseth to the receivers to give the thing signified, he binds himself, as it were in bond unto us, to stand to his own word; even as men bind themselves in obligations putting to their hands and seals, so as they cannot go back. And when the signs are thus used as pledges, and that often: they greatly increase the grace of God: as a token sent from one friend to another, renews and confirms the persuasion of love.

These are the two principal ways whereby the sacraments are said to confer grace, namely in respect of their signification, and as they are pledges of God's favor unto us. And the very point here to be considered is, in what order and manner they confirm. And the manner is this. The signs and visible elements affect the senses outward and inward: the senses convey their object to the mind: the mind directed by the holy Ghost reasoneth on this manner, out of the promise annexed to the sacrament. He that useth the elements aright, shall receive grace thereby: but I use the elements aright in faith and repentance, saith the mind of the believer: therefore shall I receive from God increase of grace. Thus then, faith is confirmed not by the work done, but by a kind of reasoning caused in the mind, the argument or proof whereof is borrowed from the elements, being signs and pledges of God's mercy.

The third difference. The Papists teach that in the sacrament by the work done, the very grace of justification is conferred. We say no: because a man of years must first believe and be justified, before he can be a meet partaker of any sacrament. And the grace that is conferred, is only the increase of our faith, hope, sanctification, &c.

Our Reasons.

Reason I. The word preached and the sacraments differ in the manner of giving Christ and his benefits unto us: because in the word the spirit of God teacheth us by a voice conveyed to the mind by the bodily ears: but in the sacraments annexed to the word, by certain sensible and bodily signs viewed by the eye. Sacraments are nothing but visible words and promises. Otherwise for the giving it self they differ not. Christ himself faith, that in the very word, is eaten his own flesh, which he was to give for the life of the world: and what can be said more of the Lord's supper. Augustine saith, that believers are partakers of the body and blood of Christ in baptism: and Jerome to Edibia, that in baptism we eat and drink the body and blood of Christ. If thus much may be said of baptism, why may it not also be said of the word preached. Again Jerome upon Ecclesiastes saith, It is profitable to be filled with the body of Christ and drink his blood, not only in mystery but in knowledge of holy Scripture. Now upon this it follows, that seeing the work done in the word preached confers not grace, neither doth the work done in the sacrament confer any grace.

Reason II. Math. 3.11. I baptize you with water to repentance: but he that cometh after me is stronger then I—, he shall baptize you with the holy Ghost and with fire. Hence it is manifest, that grace in the sacrament proceeds not from any action in the sacrament: for John, though he do not disjoin himself & his action from Christ, and the action of his spirit, yet doth he distinguish thē plainly in number, persons, and effect. To this purpose Paul, who had said of the Galatians, that he traveled of them and beget them by the Gospel, saith of himself that he is not anything, not only as he was a man, but as he was a faithful Apostle: thereby excluding the whole Evangelical ministry whereof the Sacrament is a part, from the least part of divine operation, or, efficacy in conferring of grace.

Reason III. The blessed Angels, nay the very flesh of the son of God hath not any quickening virtue from it self; but all this efficacy or virtue is in and from the godhead of the son: who, by means of the flesh apprehended by faith, deriveth heavenly and spiritual life from himself to the members. Now if there be no efficacy in the flesh of Christ, but by reason of the hypostatical union: how shall bodily actions about bodily elements confer grace immediately.

Reason IV. Paul, Rom. 4. stands much upon this, to prove that justification by faith is not conferred by the sacraments. And from the circumstance of time he gathereth that Abraham was first justified, and then afterward received circumcision, the sign and seal of his righteousness. Now we know that the general condition of all sacraments is one and the same, and that baptism succeeded circumcision. And what can be more plain then the example of Cornelius, Act. 10. who before Peter came unto him, had the commendation of the fear of God, and was endued with the spirit of prayer: and afterward when Peter by preaching opened more fully the way of the Lord, he and the rest received the holy Ghost. And after all this they were baptized. Now if they received the holy Ghost before baptism, then they received remission of sins, and were justified before baptism.

V. Reason. The judgment of the Church. Basil. If there be any grace in the water, it is not from the nature of the water, but from the presence of the spirit. Jerome saith, Man gives water but God gives the holy Ghost. Augustine said, Water toucheth the body and washeth the heart: but he shows his meaning else where. There is one water (saith he) of the sacrament, another of the spirit: the water of the Sacrament is visible, the water of the spirit invisible. That washeth the body and signifieth what is done in the soul. By this the soul is purged and healed.

Object. Remission of sins, regeneration, and salvation is ascribed to the sacrament of baptism, Act. 22.21. Eph. 5. Gal. 3.27. Tit. 2. Ans. Salvation and remission of sins is ascribed to baptism and the Lord's supper, as to the word; which is the power of God to salvation to all that believe: and that, as they are instruments of the holy ghost to signify, zeal, and exhibit to the believing mind the foresaid benefits: but indeed the proper instrument whereby salvation is apprehended is faith, and sacraments are but props of faith furthering salvation two ways: first because by their signification they help to nourish and preserve faith: secondly because they seal grace and salvation to us: yea God gives grace and salvation when we use them well: so be it, we believe the word of promise made to the sacrament, whereof also they are seals. And thus we keep the middle way, neither giving too much nor too little to the sacraments.

Our Consent.

Conclus. I. They teach it to be the property of faith, to believe the whole whole word of God, and especially the redemption of mankind by Christ.

Conclus. II. They avouch that they believe & look to be saved by Christ and by Christ alone, and by the mere mercy of God in Christ.

Conclus. III. Thirdly, the most learned among them hold & confess, that the obedience of Christ is imputed unto them for the satisfaction of the law, and for their reconciliation with God.

Conclus. IV. They avouch that they put their whole trust and confidence in Christ, and in the mere mercy of God, for their salvation.

Concl. V. Lastly they hold that every man must apply the promise of life everlasting by Christ unto himself: and this they grant we are bound to do. And in these five points do they and we agree, at least in show of words.

By the avouching of the five conclusions, papists may easily escape the hands of many magistrates. And unless the mystery of popish doctrine be well known, any common man may easily be deceived, & take such for good protestants that are but popish priests. To this end therefore that we may the better discern their guile, I will show wherein they fail in each of their conclusions, and wherein they differ from us.

The difference.

Touching the first conclusion, they believe indeed all the written word of God, and more then all: for they also believe the books Apocryphal, which antiquity for many hundred years hath excluded from the canon: yea they believe unwritten traditions received (as they say) from Councils, the writings of the Fathers, and the determinations of the Church: making them also of equal credit with the written word of God, given by inspiration of the spirit. Now we for our parts despise not the Apocrypha, as namely the books of the Maccabees, Ecclesiasticus and the rest, but we reverence them in all convenient manner, preferring them before any other books of men, in that they have been approved by an universal consent of the Church: yet we think them not meet to be received into the Canon of holy scripture, and therefore not to be believed, but as they are consenting with the written word. And for this our doing we have directiō from Athanasius, Origen, Jerome, and the Council of Laodicea. As for the unwritten Traditions they come not within the compass of our faith, neither can they: because they come unto us by the hands of men, that may deceive and be deceived. And we hold and believe, that the right Canon of the books of the old and new Testament, cōtaines in it sufficient direction for the Church of God to life everlasting, both for faith and manners. Here then is the point of difference, that they make the object of faith larger then it should be, or can be: and we keep our selves to the written word; believing nothing to salvation out of it.

In the second conclusion, touching salvation by Christ alone, there is a manifest deceit: because they craftily include and couch their own works under the name of Christ. For (say they) works done by men regenerate, are not their own, but Christ's in them; and as they are the works of Christ; they save, and no otherwise. But we for our parts look to be saved only by such works as Christ himself did in his own person: and not by any work at all done by him in us. For all works done, are in the matter of justification and salvation, opposed to the grace of Christ: Rom. 11.6. Election is of grace not of works: if it be of works, it is no more of grace. Again whereas they teach that we are saved by the works of Christ, which he worketh in us, and maketh us to work; it is flat against the word. For Paul saith, We are not saved by such works as God hath ordained that men regenerate should walk in. Eph. 2.10. And he saith further, that he counted all things even after his conversion loss unto him, that he might be found in Christ, not having his own righteousness which is of the law. Phil. 3.8. Again, Heb. 1.3. Christ washed away our sins by himself: which last words exclude the merit of all works done by Christ within man. Thus indeed the Papists overturn all that which in word they seem to hold touching their justification and salvation. We confess with them that good works in us are the works of Christ: yet are they not Christ's alone, but ours also, in that they proceed from Christ by the mind and will of man: as water from the fountain by the channel. And look as the channel defiled, defiles the water, that is without defilement in the fountain; even so the mind and will of man defiled by the remnants of sin, defile the works, which as they come frō Christ are undefiled. Hence it is that the works of grace which we do by Christ, or, Christ in us, are defective: and must be severed from Christ in the act of justification, or salvation.

The third conclusion is touching the imputation of Christ's obedience, which some of the most learned among them acknowledge: and the difference between us stands on this manner. They hold that Christ's obedience is imputed only to make satisfaction for sin, and not to justify us before God. We hold and believe that the obedience of Christ is imputed to us, evē for our righteousness before God. Paul saith, 1. Cor. 1.30. Christ is made unto us of God, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption. Hence I reason thus. If Christ be both our sanctification, and our righteousness; then he is not only unto us inherent righteousness, but also righteousness imputed. But he is not only our sanctification (which the Papists themselves expound of inherent or habitual righteousness) but also our righteousness: for thus by Paul are they distinguished. Therefore he is unto us both inherent and imputed righteousness. And very reason teacheth thus much. For in the ende of the world at the bar of God's judgment, we must bring some kind of righteousness for our justification, that may stand in the rigor of the law according to which we are to be judged. But our inherent righteousness is imperfect & stained with manyfold defects and shall be as long as we live in this world, as experience tells us: and consequently it is not suitable to the justice of the law: and if we go out of our selves we shall find no righteousness serving for our turns either in men or angels, that may or can procure our absolution before God and acceptation to life everlasting. We must therefore have recourse to the person of Christ, and his obedience imputed unto us, must serve not only to be a satisfaction to God for all our sins; but also for our perfect justification: in that god is content to accept of it for our righteousness, as if it were inherent in us, or performed by us.

Touching the fourth conclusion, they hold it the safest and surest course to put their trust and confidence in the mercy of God alone for their salvation: yet they condescend, that men may also put their confidence in the merit of their own works, and in the merits also of other men, so it be in sobriety. But this doctrine quite mars the conclusion: because by teaching that men are to put confidence in the creature, they overturn all confidence in the Creator. For in the very first commandment, we are taught to make choice of the true God for our God, which thing we do when we give to God our hearts: and we give our hearts to God, when we put our whole confidence in him for the salvation of our souls. Now then to put confidence in men, or in works, is to make them our God's. The true and ancient form of making confession was on this manner: I believe in God the father, in Jesus Christ, and in the holy ghost, without mention making of any confidence in works or creatures: the ancient Church never knew any such confession or confidence. Cyprian saith, He believeth not in God, who putteth not affiance concerning his salvation in God alone. And indeed the Papists themselves when death comes, forsake the confidence of their merits, and fly to the mere mercy of God in Christ. And for a confirmation of this I allege the testimony of one Vlinbergius of Colen, who writeth thus. There was a book found in the vestrie of a certain parish of Colen, written in the dutch tongue in the year of our Lord 1475. which the Priests used in visiting of the sick. And in it these questions be found. Doest thou believe that thou canst not be saved but by the death of Christ? The sick person answered, Yea. Then it is said unto him, Go too then, while breath remains in thee, put thy confidence in this death alone: have affiance in nothing else: commit thyself wholly to this death: with it alone cover thyself: dive thyself in every part into this death: in every part pearse thyself with it: infold thyself in this death. And if the Lord will judge thee, say: Lord, I put the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and thy judgment, and by no other means I contend with thee. And if he shall say unto thee, that thou art a sinner, say: Lord, the death of my Lord Jesus Christ, I put between thee and my sins. If he shall say unto thee, that thou hast deserved damnation, say: Lord, I oppose the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between thee and my evil merits, and I offer his merit for the merit which I should have, and have not. If he shall say, that he is angry with thee, say: Lord, I oppose the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and thine anger. Here we see, what Papists do, and have done in the time of death. And that which they hold and practice, when they are dying; they should hold and practice every day while they are living.

In the last conclusion they teach, that we must not only believe in general but also apply unto our selves, the promises of life everlasting. But they differ from us in the very manner of applying. They teach that the promise is to be applied, not by faith as • uring us of our own salvation: but only by hope, in likelihood conjectural. We hold that we are bound in duty to apply the promise of life by faith without making doubt thereof, and by hope to continue the certainty after the apprehension made by faith. We do not teach that all and every man living within the precincts of the church, professing the name of Christ, is certain of his salvation, and that by faith: but that he ought so to be, and must endeavor to attain thereto. And here is a great point in the mystery of iniquity to be considered: for by this vncerten application of the promise of salvation, and this wavering hope, they overturn half the doctrine of the Gospel. For it enjoins two things: first to believe the promises thereof to be true in themselves: secondly to believe, and by faith to apply them unto our selves. And this latter part, without which the former is void of comfort, is quite overturned. The reasons which they allege against our doctrine, I have answered before: now therefore I let them pass.

To conclude, though in coloured terms they seem to agree with us in doctrine concerning faith; yet in deed they deny and abolish the substance thereof, namely, the particular and certain application of Christ crucified and his benefits, unto our selves. Again they fail in that they cut off the principal duty and office of true saving faith, which is to apprehend and to apply the blessing promised.

Our consent.

Conclus. I. That, repentance is the conversion of a sinner. There is a twofold conversion, passive, and active: passive, is an action of God whereby he converteth man being as yet vncōuerted. Active is an action whereby man being once turned of God, turns himself: and of this latter must this conclusion be understood. For the first conversion, considering it is a work of God turning us unto himself, is not the repentance whereof the Scripture speaketh so oft, but it is called by the name of regeneration: and repentance, whereby we being first turned of God do turn our selves, and do good works, is the fruit thereof.

Conclus. II. That, repentance stands specially for practice, in contrition of heart, confession of mouth, and satisfaction in work or deed. Touching contrition there be two kinds thereof: Legal, and Evangelical. Legal contrition is nothing but a remorse of conscience for sin in regard of the wrath & judgment of God, & it is no grace of God at all; nor any part, or, cause of reap̄tance: but only an occasion thereof, & that by the mercy of God: for of it self, it is the sting of the law and the very entrance into the pit of hell. Evangelical contrition is, when a repentant sinner is grieved for his sins, not so much for fear of hell, or, any other punishment; as because he hath offended and displeased so good and merciful a God. This contrition is caused by the ministry of the Gospel, and in the practice of repentance it is always necessary, and goes before as the beginning thereof. Secondly we hold, and maintain that confession is to be made, and that in sundry respects: first to God, both publicly in the congregation, and also privately in our secret and private prayers. Secondly to the Church, when any person hath openly offended the congregation by any crime, and is therefore excommunicate. Thirdly to our private neighbor, when we have upon any occasion offended and wronged him. Math. 5.23. If thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee, go first and be reconciled to him: now reconciliation presupposeth confession. Lastly in all true repentance, we hold and acknowledge there must be satisfaction made; first to God, and that is when we entreat him in our supplications to accept the death and passion of Christ, as a full, perfect, and sufficient satisfaction for all our sins. Secondly it is to be made unto the Church, after excommunication for public offenses; and it stāds in duties of humiliatiō that fitly serve to testify the truth of our reap̄tāce. Thirdly satisfaction is to be made to our neighbor: because if he be wronged, he must have recompense and restitution made, Luk. 19.8. & there repentance may justly be suspected, where no satisfaction is made, if it lie in our power.

Conclus. III. That, in repentance we are to bring outward fruits worthy amendment of life: for repentance it self is in the heart, and therefore must be testified in all manner of good works: whereof the principal is, to endeavor day by day by God's grace to leave and renounce all and every sin, and in all things to do the will of God. And here let it be remembered that we are not patrons of licentiousness and enemies of good works. For though we exclude them from the act of our justification and salvation: yet we maintain a profitable and necessary use of them in the life of every Christian man. This use is three-fold, in respect of God, of man, of our selves. Works are to be done in respect of God, that his commandments may be obeyed, 1. John. 5.12. that his will may be don, 1. Thess. 4.3. that we may show our selves to be obedient children to God our Father, 1. Pet. 1.14. that we may show our selves thankful for our redemption by Christ, Tit. 2. 14. that we might not grieve the spirit of God, Eph. 4.30. but walk according to the same, Gal. 5. 22. that God by our good works may be glorified, Math. 5.16. that we may be good followers of God, Eph. 5.1. Again, works are to be done in regard of men: that our neighbor may be helped in worldly things, Luk. 6.38. that he may be woon by our example to godliness, 1. Pet. 3.14. that we may prevent in our selves the giving of any offense. 1. Cor. 10.32. that by doing good, we may stop the mouths of our adversaries. Thirdly and lastly, they have use in respect of our selves: that we may show our selves to be new creatures, 2. Cor. 5.17. that we may walk as the children of light, Eph. 5.8. that we have some assurance of our faith and of our salvation, 2. Pet. 1.8,10. that we may discern dead and counterfeit faith, from true faith, I am. 2. 17. that faith and the gifts of God may be exercised and continued unto the ende, 2. Tim. 1.6. that the punishments of sin both temporal and eternal may be prevented, Psal. 89.32. that the reward may be obtained which God freely in mercy hath promised to men for their good works. Gal. 6.9.

The difference.

We dissent not from the Church of Rome in the doctrine of repentance it self: but in the damnable abuses thereof, which are of two sorts, general and special. General are these which concern repentance wholly considered: and they are these. The first is, that they place the beginning of repentance partly in themselves, and partly in the holy Ghost, or, in the power of their natural freewill being helped by the holy Ghost: whereas Paul indeed ascribes this work, wholly unto God. 2. Tim. 2.15. Proouing if God at any time will give them repentance. And men that are not weak but dead in trespasses and sins, cannot do anything • that may further their conversion, though they be helped never so: no more then dead men in their graves, can rise from thence. The second abuse is, that they take penance, or rather repentance for that public discipline and order of correction that was used against notorious offenders in the open congregation. For the Scripture sets down but one repentance, and that common to all men without exception: and to be practiced in every part of our lives for the necessary mortification of sin: whereas open ecclesiastical correction pertained not to all and every man within the compass of the Church, but to them alone that gave any open offense. The third abuse is, that they make repentance to be not only a virtue, but also a sacrament: whereas for the space of a thousand years after Christ, & upward it was not reckoned among the sacraments: yea it seems that Lūbard was one of the first that called it a sacrament: and the school-men after him disputed of the matter & form of this sacrament: not able any of them certainly to define, what should be the outward element. The fourth abuse is touching the effect and efficacy of repentance: for they make it a meritorious cause of remission of sins and of life everlasting, flat against the word of God. Paul saith notably, Rom. 4.24. We are justified freely by his grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God hath sent to be a reconciliation by faith in his blood. In these words these forms of speech, redemption in Christ, reconciliation in his blood, by faith, freely by grace, must be observed and considered: for they show plainly that no part of satisfaction or redemption is wrought in us, or, by us: but out of us only in the person of Christ. And therefore we esteem of repentance only as a fruit of faith: and the effect, or efficacy of it, is to testify remission of our sins, and our reconciliation before God. It will be said that remission of sins and life everlasting, are promised to repentance. Ans. It is not to the work of repentance, but to the person which repenteth, and that not for his own merits or work of repentance, but for the merits of Christ, which he applieth to himself by faith. And thus are we to understand the promises of the Gospel, in which works are mentioned; presupposing always in them the reconciliation of the person with God, to whō the promise is made. Thus we see wherefore we dissent from the Roman Church touching the doctrine of repentance.

Special abuses do concern Contrition, Confession, and Satisfaction. The first abuse concerning contrition is, that they teach it must be sufficient and perfect. They use now to help the matter by a distinction: saying, that the sorrow in contrition, must be in the highest degree in respect of value & estimation. Yet the opinion of Adrian was otherwise, that in true repentance a man should be grieved according to all his endeavor. And the Roman Catechism saith as much, that the sorrow conceived of our sins must be so great, that none can be conceived to be greater: that we must be contrite in the same manner we love God, and that is with all our heart and strength in a most vehement sorrow: and that the hatred of sin must be not only the greatest but also most vehement and perfect, so as it may exclude all sloth and slackness. Indeed afterward it follows, that true contrition may be effectual though it be imperfect: but how can this stand, if they will not only commend but also pre • cribe and avouch, that contrition must be most perfect and vehement. We therefore only teach, that God requires not so much the measure, as the truth of any grace: and that it is a degree of unfeigned contrition to be grieved, because we cannot be grieved for our sins as we should. The second abuse is, that they ascribe to their contrition the merit of congruity. But this cannot stand with the all-sufficient merit of Christ. And an ancient Council saith, God inspires into us first of all the faith and love of himself, no merits going before, that we may faithfully require the sacrament of baptism, and after baptism do the things that please him. And we for our parts hold, that God requires contrition at our hands, not to merit remission of sins: but that we may acknowledge our own unworthiness, and be humbled in the sight of God, and distrust all our own merits: and further, that we may make the more account of the benefits of Christ, whereby we are received into the favor of God: lastly, that we might more carefully avoid all sins in time to come, whereby so many pains and terrors of conscience are procured. And we acknowledge no contrition at all to be meritorious, save that of Christ: whereby he was broken for our iniquities. The third abuse is, that they make imperfect contrition or att • ition arising of the fear of hell, to be good and profitable: and to it they apply the saying of the Prophet, The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. But servile fear of it self is the fruit of the law, which is the ministry of death and condemnation: and consequently it is the way to eternal destruction, if God leave men to themselves: and if it turn to the good of any, it is only by accident: because God in mercy makes it to be an occasion going before, of grace to be given: otherwise remorse of conscience for sin is no beginning of repentance, or the restrainment of any sin: but rather is and that properly the beginning of unspeakable horrors of conscience, and everlasting death, unless God show mercy. And yet this fear of punishment, if it be tempered and delayed with other graces and gifts of God in holy men; it is not unprofitable: in whom there is not only a sorrow for punishment, but also and that much more for the offense. And such a kind of fear, or, sorrow is commanded, Malac. 1.6. If I be a father, where is my fear? if I be a lord, where is my fear? And Chrysostom saith, that the fear of hell in the heart of a just man, is a strong man armed against thieves and robbers, to drive them from the house. And Ambrose saith, that Martyrs in the time of their sufferings, confirmed themselves against the cruelty of persecutors by setting the fear of hell before their eyes.

Abuses touching Confession are these. The first is, that they use a form of confession of their sins unto God, uttered in an unknown language, being therefore foolish and ridiculous, withal requiring the aide and intercession of dead men and such as be absent: whereas, there is but one Mediator between God and man the man Jesus Christ. The second is, that they in practice make confession of their sins not only to God but to the Saints departed: in that they make prayer to them, in which they ask their intercession for the pardon of their sins: and this is, not only to match them with God in seeing and knowing the heart, but also to give a part of his divine worship unto them. The third and principal abuse is, that they have corrupted Canonical confession by turning it into a private auricular confession: binding all men in conscience by a law made, to confess all their mortal sins, with all circumstances that change the kind of the sin (as far as possibly they can remember) once every year at the least, and that to a priest, unless it be in the case of extreme necessity. But in the word of God there is no warrant for this confession, nor in the writings of Orthodox antiquity for the space of many hundred years after Christ, as one of their own side avoucheth. And the commandment of the holy Ghost, Confess one for another, and pray one for another, I am. 5.17. binds as well the priest to make confession unto us, as any of us to the priest. And whereas it is said, Math. 3. that many were baptized confessing their sins: and Act. 19.18. Many that believed came and confessed and shown their works, the confession was voluntary and not constrained: it was also general and not particular of all and every sin, with the necessary circumstances thereof. And in this liberty of confession the Church remained 1200. years till the Council of Lateran; in which the law of auricular confession was first enacted: being a notable invention serving to discover the secrets of men, and to enrich that covetous and ambitious See, with the revenues of the world. It was not known to Augustine, when he said, What have I to do with men that they should hear my confessions, as though they should heal my diseases: nor to Chrysostom when he saith, I do not compel thee to confess thy sins to others. And, If thou be ashamed to confess them to any man, because thou hast sinned, say them daily in thine own mind. I do not bid thee confess them to thy fellow servant, that he should mock thee: confess them to God that cureth them.

The abuse of Satisfaction is, that they have turned canonical satisfaction which was made to the congregation by open offenders, into a satisfaction of the justice of God for the temporal punishment of their sins. Behold here a most horrible profanation of the whole Gospel, and specially of the satisfaction of Christ, which of it self without any supply is sufficient every way for the remission both of fault and punishment. But of this point I have spoken before.

Hitherto I have handled and proved by induction of sundry particulars, that we are to make a separation from the present Church of Rome, in respect of the foundation and substance of true religion. Many more things might be added to this very purpose, but here I conclude this first point: adding only this one caveat, that we make separation from the Roman religion without hatred of the persons that are maintainers of it. Nay we join in affection more with them, then they with us. They die with us not for their religion ( though they deserve it) but for the treasons which they intend and enterprise: we are ready to do the duties of love unto them enjoined us in the word: we reverence the good gifts in many of them; we pray for them, wishing their repentance and eternal salvation.

Now I mean to proceed, and to touch briefly other points of doctrine contained in this portion of Scripture, which I have now in hand. In the second place therefore out of this commandment, Go out of her my people, I gather that the true Church of God is and hath been in the present Roman Church, as corn in the heap of chaff. Though Popery reigned and overspread the face of the earth for many hundred years; yet in the midst thereof, God reserved a people unto himself, that truly worshipped him: and to this effect the holy Ghost saith that the Dragon, which is the devil caused the woman, that is, the Church to fly into the wilderness, where he sought to destroy her but could not, and she still retains a remnant of her seed which kept the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. Now this which I speak of the Church of Rome, cannot be said in like manner of the congregations of Turks and other infidels, that the hidden Church of God is preserved among them; because there is no means of salvation at all: whereas the Church of Rome hath the Scriptures, though in a strange language; and baptism for the outward form: which helps God in all ages preserved, that his Elect might be gathered out of the midst of Babylon. This serves to stop the mouths of Papists, which demand of us, where our Church was fourscore years ago, before the days of Luther: whereby they would insinuate to the world, that our Church and religion is green or new: but they are answered out of this very text, that our Church hath ever been since the days of the Apostles, and that in the very midst of the papacy. It hath been always a Church, and did not first begin to be in Luther's time: but only then began to show it self, as having been hid by an universal Apostasy, for many hundred years together. Again we have here occasion to consider the dealing of God with his own church and people. He will not have them for external society to be mixed with their enemies, and that for special purpose: namely, to exercise the humility and patience of his few servants. When Elias saw idolatry spread over all Israel, he went a part into the wilderness, and in grief desired to die. And David cried out: Woe is me that I am constrained to dwell in Meshech, and to have my habitation in the tents of Kedar, Psal. 120.5. And just Lot must have his righteous soul vexed with seeing and hearing the abominations of Sodom.

Thirdly by this commandment we are taught, what opinion to carry of the present church of Rome. It is often demanded, whether it be a church or no; and the answer may hence be formed on this manner. If by this church be understood a state or regiment of the people, whereof the Pope is head; and the members are all such as do acknowledge him to be their head, and do believe the doctrine established in the Council of Trent, we take it to be no church of God. Because Babylon, which I have proved to be the church of Rome, is here opposed to the church or people of God: and because we are commanded to come out of it: whereas we may not wholly forsake any people till they forsake Christ. Some will happily say, the church of Rome hath the Scriptures and the Sacrament of baptism. I answer first of all, they have indeed the books of holy Scripture among them: but by the rest of their doctrine they overthrow the true sense thereof in the foundation, as I have proved before. And though they have the outward form of baptism, yet they overturn the inward baptism, which is the substance of all, standing in the justification and sanctification of a sinner. Again I answer, that they have the word and baptism, not for themselves but for the true church of God among them: like as the lantern holdeth the candle, not for it self but for others. Secondly, it may be and is alleged, that if the Pope be Antichrist, he then sits in the temple, that is, the church of God, and by this means the Roman church shall be the true church. Ans. He sits in the temple of God, but mark further how: as God, that is, not as a member but as a manifest usurper: like as the thief sits in the true man's house. For the popish church and God's church are mingled like chaff and corn in one heap: and the church of Rome may be said to be in the church of God, and the church of God in the church of Rome, as we say the wheat is among the chaff, and the chaff in the wheat. Again he is said to sit in the temple of God; because the Roman church, though falsely, takes unto it self the title of the true catholic church. Some go about to delay and qualify the matter, by comparing this church to a man lying sick full of • oars, having also his throat cut, yet so as body and soul are joined together, and life is remaining still. But all things well considered, it is rather like a dead carcass, and is void of all spiritual life; as the popish errors in the foundation do manifest. Indeed a known harlot may afterward remain a wife and be so termed; yet after the bill of divorcement is given, she ceaseth to be a wife, though she can show her marriage ring: now the church hath received the bill of her divorcement in the written word, namely 2. Thess. 2. and Reu. 13.11,12, &c.

Furthermore in this commandment we may see a lively portraiture of the state of all mankind. Here we see two sorts of men: some are pertaining to Babylon, a people running on to their destruction: some again are a people of God severed from Babylon, and reserved to life everlasting. If any ask the cause of this distinction; I answer, it is the very will of God vouchsafing mercy to some & forsaking others by withdrawing his mercy from them, for the better declaration of his justice. Thus saith the Lord, Rom. 11.4. I have reserved seven thousand that never bowed the knee to Baal: & the prophet Isaiah saith, Vnles the Lord had reserved a remnant, we had been as Sodom and Gomorrhah. By this distinction we are taught, above all things to seek to be of the number of God's people, and to labor for assurance of this in our own consciences. For if all should be saved, less care would snffice: but this mercy is not common to all: and therefore the more to be thought upon.

Lastly, here I not • the special care that God hath over his own children. He first giveth thē warning to depart, before he begin to execute his judgment upon his enemies, with whom they live: that they might not be partakers of their sins or punishments. Thus, before God would punish Jerusalem, an angel is sent to mark them in the forehead that mourned for the abominations of the people. And in the destructiō of the first borne of Egypt the angel passed over the houses of the Jews, that had their posts sprinkled with the blood of the paschal lamb: & this passing over betokeneth safety & preservation in the common destruction to those that have their hearts sprinkled with the blood of Christ. This blessing of protectiō should move us all, to become true & hearty servants of God. Men usually become members of those societies & corporations, where they may enjoy many freedōes & privileges • Well, behold: in the society of the Saints of god, which is the true Church, there is the freedom from danger in all common destructions & from eternal vengeance at the last day. When Hester had procured safety for the Jews, and liberty to revenge themselves upon their enemies: it is said, that many of the people of the land became Jews. Evē so, considering Christ hath procured freedom frō hell, death, and damnation for all that believe in him: we should labor above all things to become new creatures, joining our selves always to the true church of God.

Hitherto I have spoken of the commandment: now followeth the reason thereof drawn from the end, that they be not partakers of her sins: and that they receive not of her plagues. Here I might stand long to show what be the sins of the church of Rome: but I will only name the principal. The first sin is Atheism: & and that I prove on this manner. Atheism is twofold, open, coloured. Open Atheism is, when men both in word and deed deny God and his word. Coloured Atheism is not so manifest: and it hath two degrees. The first is, when men acknowledge God the creator and governor of heaven and earth, and yet deny the father, son and holy Ghost. Thus the Ephesiās before they received the gospel, are said to be without God whom in their natural judgment they acknowledged: because they denied Christ, and consequently worshipped an idol of their own brain, in that they worshipped God out of Christ. And in this respect though the Samaritans worshipped the God of Abraham, yet our Savior Christ saith, they worshipped they knew not what. And the Psalmist saith of all the Gentiles that their God's are Idols. In this degree of Atheism are placed Turks and Jews at this day: the Anti-Trinitaries, and Arians, and all that conceive and worship God out of the Trinity. The 2. degree is, whē men do rightly acknowledge the unity of the godhead in the Trinity of persons: yet so, as by other necessary consequents partly of their doctrine, and partly of the service of God they overturn that which they have well maintained. And thus I say, that the very religion of the Church of Rome is a kind of Atheism. For whereas it makes the merit of the works of men to concur with the grace of god, it overthrows the grace of God. Rom. 11. In word they acknowledge the infinite justice and mercy of God: but by consequent both are denied. How can that be infinite justice, which may any way be appeased by human satisfactions? And howe shall God's mercy be infinite, when we by our satisfactions must add a supply to the satisfaction of Christ? Again, He that hath not the son, hath not the father: and he that hath neither father nor son, denies God. Now the present Roman religion hath not the son, that is, Jesus Christ, God and man, the Mediator of mankind: but hath tra • sformed him into a feigned Christ. And I show it thus. For one Jesus Christ, in all thing • like unto us in his Humanity, sin only excepted; they have framed a Christ, to whom they ascribed two kinds of existing: one natural, whereby he is visible, touchable, and circumscribed in heaven: the other not only above, but also against nature; by which, he is substantially according to his flesh in the hands of every priest, in every host, and in the mouth of every communicant, invisible, vntouchable, vncircumscribed. And thus in effect they abolish his manhood. Yea they disgrade him of his offices. For one Jesus Christ, the only king, lawgiver, and head of the Church; they join unto him the Pope not only as a Vicar but also as a fellow: in that they give unto him power to make laws binding conscience, to resolve and determine infallibly the sense of holy scripture, properly to pardon sin both in respect of fault and temporal punishment, to have authority over the whole earth and a part of hell: to depose kings, to whom under Christ every soul is to be subject, to absolve subjects from the oath of allegiance, &c. For one Jesus Christ the only real priest of the new testament, they join many secondary priests unto him, which offer Christ daily in the mass for the sins of the quick and the dead. For one Jesus Christ the all-sufficient Mediator of intercession, they have added many fellows unto him to make request for us, namely as many Saints as be in the Popes Calendar. Lastly, for the only merits of Christ, in whom alone, the Father is well pleased, they have devised a treasury of the Church containing beside the merits of Christ, the overplus of the merits of Saints to be dispensed to men, at the discretion of the Pope. And thus we see, that Christ, and co • sequently God himself to be worshipped in Christ, is transformed into a fantasy or idol of man's conceit. Again there is always a proportion between the worship of God, & our persuasion of him: and men in giving unto God any worship, have respect to his nature, that both may be suitable, and he well pleased. Let us then see what manner of worship the Roman religion affordeth. It is for the greatest part mere will-worship, without any allowance or commandment from God, as Durande in his Rationale in effect acknowledgeth. It is a carnal service standing of innumerable bodily rites and ceremonies borrowed partly from the Jews, and partly from the heathen: it is divided between God and some of his creatures: in that they are worshipped both with one kind of worship: let them paint it as they can. Thus then, if by their manner of worshipping God, we may judge howe they conceive of him, as we may: they have plainly turned the true God into a fantasy of their own. For God is no otherwise to be conceived, then he hath revealed himself in his creatures & word, and specially in Christ: who is the engraven image of the person of the Father.

The second sin is Idolatry: and that as gross as was ever among the heathen. And it is to be seen in two things. First that they worship the Saints with religious worship which without exception is proper to God. Yea they transform some of them into detestable idols, making them in truth mediators of redemption, specially the Virgin Marie, whom they call a Lady, a Goddess, a queen whom Christ her son obeyeth in heaven, a mediatresse: or life, hope, the medicine of the diseased: and they pray unto her thus: Prepare thou glory for us: defend us from our enemies, & in the hour of death receive us, loose the bonds of the guilty, bring light to the blind, drive away all devils. Show thyself to be a mother, Let him receive the prayers. Again, their idolatry is manifest, in that they worship God in, at, before images: having no commandment so to do, but the contrary. They allege th • t they use and worship images only in a remembrance of God. But this is all one as if an unchaste wife should receive many lovers into her house in the absence of her husband • and being reproved, should answer: that they were the friends of her husband, and that she kept them only in remembrance of him. Thirdly, their Idolatry exceeds the Idolatry of the heathen, in that they worship a Breadengod, or, Christ in and under the forms of bread and wine. And if Christ according to his humanity be absent frō the earth, as I have proved, the Popish host is as abominable an idol as ever was.

The third sin is the maintenance of Adultery. And that is manifest: first of all, in the Toleration of the stews flat against the commandment of God. Deut. 23.17. There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel: neither shall there be a whore keeper of the sons of Israel. And this toleration is an occasion of uncleanness to many young men & women, that otherwise would abstain from all such kind of filthiness. And what an abomination is this, when brother and brother, father and son, nephew and uncle, shall come to one and the same harlot, one before or after the other. Secondly, their Law beyond the fourth degree allows the marriage of any persons: and by this means, they sometime allow incest. For in the unequal collateral line, the person next the common stock is a father or mother to the brothers or sisters posterity, as for example.

Here Anne and Nicholas are brother and sister, and Anne is distant from James six degrees, he being her neecca far off: and the marriage between them is allowed by the Church of Rome, they not being within the compass of four degrees: which nevertheless is against the law of nature. For Anne being the sister of Nicholas, is instead of a mother to all that are begotten of Nicholas, even to James and James posterity. Yet thus much I grant, that the daughter of Anne may lawfully marry James or Anthony, the case being altered, because they are not one to another a • parents and children.

The fourth sin is Magicke, • orcerie, or witchcraft, in the consecration of the host in which they make their Breaden-god: in exorcisms over holy bread, holy water and salt; in the casting out or driving away of devils, by the sign of the cross, by solemn coniurations, by holy water, by the ringing of bells, by lighting tapers, by relics, and such like. For these things have not their supposed force, either by creation, or by any institution of God in his holy word: and therefore if anything be done by thē, it is from the secret operation of the devil himself.

The fifth sin is, that in their doctrine they maintain perjury, because they teach with one consent, that a papist examined may answer doubtfully against the direct intention of the examiner: framing another meaning unto himself in the ambiguity of his words. A • for example, when a man is asked, whether he said or heard Mass in such a place: though he did: they affirm he may say, no: and swear unto it: because he was not there, to reveal it to the examiner: whereas in the very law of nature, he that takes an oath should swear according to the intention of him that hath power to minister an oath: and that in truth, justice, ••• gement. Let them clear their doctrine from all defense of perjury, if they can.

The six • sin is, that they reverse many of God's commandments, making that no sin which God's word makes a sin. Thus they teach, that if any man steal some little thing, that is thought not to cause any notable hurt, it is no mortal sin: that, the officious lie, & the lie made in sport are venial sins: that, to pray for our enemies in particular is no precept but a counsel: and that none is bound to salute his enemy in the way of friendship, flat against the rule of Christ, Mat. 5.47. where the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , signifieth all manner of duty and courtesy: that, rash judgment, though consent •• me thereto, is regularly but a venial sin: that, it is lawful otherwhiles to fain holiness: that, the painting of the face is ordinarily but a venial sin: that, it is not lawful to forbid begging: whereas the Lord forbade there should be any beggar in Israel. Again, they teach that men in their choller, when they are chiding, and swear, wounds and blood, are not indeed blasphemers.

Lastly their writers use manifest lying, to justify their doctrine. They plead falsely that all antiquity is on the • r side; whereas it is as much against them as for them: and as much for us as them. Again their manner hath been and is still to prove their opinions by forged and counterfeit writings of men, some whereof I will name.

• 1 Saint James Liturgy.
• 2 The Canons of the Apostles.
• 3 The books of Dionysius Ariopagita, and namely De Hierarchia Ecclesiastica.
• 4 The Decretal Epistles of the Popes.
• 5 Pope Clements works.
• 6 Some of the Epistles of Ignatius.
• 7 Origen's book of repentance. His homelies in diuersos sanctos. Commentaries •• Job: and book of Lamentation.
• 8 Chrysostom's Liturgy.
• 9 Basils liturgy and his Ascetica.
• 10 Augustine's book de 8. quest. Dulcity. A book of true and false repentance. Ser. de festo commemorationis animarum. book de dogm. Ecclesiast. Sermon ad fratres in Heremo. Sermon of Peters chair. Book of visiting the sick, &c.
• 11 Justin Martyrs Questions and Answ.
• 12 Athanasius epistle to Pope Felix.
• 13 Bernard's sermons of the Lord's supper.
• 14 Jerome's epistle ad Demetriadem savoring of Pelagius.
• 15 Tertullian de Monogamia.
• 16 Cyprian de Chrismate & de ablutione pedum.
• 17 In the Council of Serdica the 3,4, and 5. canons are forged.
• 18 In the Council of Nice all save 20. are forged.
• 19 Certain Roman Councils under Sylvester are forged. For he was at this time dead, and therefore could not confirm them. Sozom. lib. 2.
• 20 To the sixth canon of the Council of Nice are patched these words, That the Roman church hath always had the Supremacy.
• 21 Lastly, I will not omit that Pope Sozimus, Boniface, and Coelestinus falsified the canons of the council of Nice, to prove appeals from all places to Rome; so as the Bishops of Afric were forced to send for the true copies of the said council from Constantinople and the Churches of Greece.

I might here rehearse many other sins which with the former call for vengeance upon the Roman Church, but it shall suffice to have named a few of the principal.

Now in this reason, our Savior Christ prescribes another main duty to his own people: and that is, to be careful to eschew all the sins of the Church of Rome, that they may withal escape her deserved plagues and punishments. And frō this prescribed duty I observe two things. The first is, that every good servant of God, must carefully avoid contracts of marriage with professed Papists, that is, with such as hold the Pope for their head, and believe the doctrine of the Council of Trent. For in such matches men hardly keep faith and good conscience, and hardly avoid communication with the sins of the Roman church. A further ground of this doctrine I thus propound. In God's word there is mentioned a double league between man and man, country and country. The first is the league of concord, when one kingdom binds it self to live in peace with another, for the maintenance of traffic without disturbance: and this kind of league may stand between God's church and the enemies thereof. The second is the league of amity: which is when men, people, or countries bind themselves to defend each other in all causes: and to make the wars of the one, the wars of the other; and this league may not be made with those that be enemies of God. Jehoshaphat, otherwise a good king, made this kind of league with Ahab: and is therefore reproved by the prophet, saying, Wouldest thou help the wicked, and love them that hate the Lord? 2. Chr. 19.2. Now the marriages of Protestants with Papists are private leagues of amity, between person and person: and therefore not be allowed. Again Malac. 2.11. Judah hath defiled the holiness of the Lord which he loved, and hath married the daughters of a strange God: where is • latly condemned marriages made with the people of a false god: now the papists by the consequents of their doctrine and religion, turn the true Jehovah into an idol of their own brain, as I have shown; & the true Christ revealed in the writ̄ word into a feigned Christ made of bread. Yet if such a marriage be once made and finished it may not be dissolved. For such parties sin not simply in that they marry, but because they marry not in the Lord, being of diverse religions. The fault is not in the substance of marriage but in the manner of making it; and for this cause, the Apostle commaundes the believing party, not to forsake or refuse the unbelieving party, being a very infidel (which no Papist is) if he or she will abide. 1. Cor. 7.13.

The second thing is, that every servant of God must take heed howe he travels into such countries where Popish religion is stablished, least he partakes in the sins and punishments thereof. Indeed to go upon ambassage to any place, or to travel for this end, that we may perform the necessary duties for our special or general callings, is not unlawful: but to travel out of the precincts of the chnrch only for pleasures sake, and to see strange fashions, hath no warrant. And hence it is, that many men which go forth in good order well minded, come home with crazed consciences. The best traveler of all is he, that living at home or abroad, can go out of himself, and depart from his own sins and corruptions by true repentance.

The first Principle.

Question. WHat doest thou believe concerning God?

A. There is one God, creator and governor of all things, distinguished into the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost. Prooues out of the word of God.

The second Principle.

Q. What dost thou believe concerning man, & concerning thine own self?

A. All men are wholly corrupted with sin through Adams fall, and so are become slaves of Satan, and guilty of eternal damnation.

The third Principle.

Q. What means is there for thee to escape this damnable estate?

A. Jesus Christ the eternal son of God, being made man, by his death upon the cross and by his righteousness, hath perfectly alone by himself, accomplished all things that are needful for the salvation of mankind.

The fourth Principle.

Q. But how mayest thou be made partaker of Christ and his benefits?

A. A man of a contrite and humble spirit, by faith alone apprehending & applying Christ with all his merits unto himself, is justified before God and sanctified.

The fifth Principle.

Q. What are the ordinary or usual means for the obtaining of faith?

A. Faith cometh only by the preaching of the word, and increaseth daily by it: as also by the administration of the Sacraments and prayer.

The sixth Principle.

Q. What is the estate of all men after death?

A. All men shall rise again with their own bodies, to the last judgment, which being ended, the godly shall possess the kingdom of heaven: but unbelievers and reprobates shall be in hell, tormented with the devil and his angels forever.

The first Principle expounded. Question.

WHat is God?

A. God is a spirit, or a spiritual substance, most wise, most holy, eternal, infinite.

Q. How do you persuade yourself that there is such a God?

A. Besides the testimony of the Scriptures, plain reason will show it.

Q. What is one reason?

A. When I consider the wonderful frame of the world, me thinks the silly creatures that be in it could never make it: neither could it make it self, and therefore besides all these, the maker of it must needs be God. Even as when a man comes into a strange country, and sees fair and sumptuous buildings, and yet finds no living creatures there besides birds and beasts, he will not imagine that either birds or beasts reared those buildings, but he presently conceives, that some men either were or have been there.

Q. What other reason have you?

A. A man that commits any sin, as murder, fornication, adultery, blasphemy, &c. albeit he doth so conceal the matter, that no man living know of it, yet oftentimes he hath a griping in his conscience, and feels the very flashing of hell fire: which is a strong reason to show that there is a God, before whose judgment seat he must answer for this fact.

Q. How many God's are there?

A. No more but one.

Q. How do you conceive this one God in your mind?

A. Not by framing any image of him in my mind (as ignorant folks do, that think him to be an old man sitting in heaven) but I conceive him by his properties and works.

Q. What be his chief properties?

A. First, he is most wise, understanding all things aright, and knowing the reason of them. Secondly, he is most holy, which appeareth in that he is most just and merciful unto his creatures. Thirdly, he is eternal, without either beginning or ende of days. Lastly, he is infinite, both because he is present in all places, and because he is of power sufficient to do whatsoever he will.

Q. What be the works of God?

A. The creation of the world, and of everything therein, and the preservation of them being created by his special providence.

Q. How know you that God governeth every particular thing in the world by his special providence?

A. To omit the Scriptures, I see it by experience: Meat, Drink, and clothing being void of heat and life, could not preserve the life of man, unless there were a special providence of God to give virtue unto them.

Q. How is this one God distinguished?

A. Into the Father which begetteth the Son: into the Son who is begotten of the Father: into the holy Ghost, who proceedeth from the Father & the Son.

The second Principle expounded.

Q. Let us now come to ours selves, and first tell me what is the natural estate of man?

A. Every man is by nature dead in sin as a loathsome carrion, or as a dead corps lieth rotting and stinking in the grave, having in him the seed of all sins.

Q. What is sin?

A. Any breach of the Law of God, if it be no more but the least want of that which the Lord requireth.

Q. Howe many sortes of sin are there?

A. Sin is either the corruption of nature, or any evil actions that proceed of it as fruits thereof.

Q. In whom is the corruption of nature?

A. In all men, none excepted.

Q. In what part of man is it?

A. In every part both of body and soul, like as a leprosy that runneth from the crown of the head, to the sole of the foot.

Q. Shew me howe every part of man is corrupted with sin?

A. First, in the mind there is nothing but ignorance and blindness concerning heavenly matters. Secondly, the conscience is defiled, being always either benumbed with sin, or else turmoiled with inward accusations and terrors. Thirdly, the will of man only willeth and lusteth after evil. Fourthly, the affections of the heart, as love, joy, hope, desire, &c. are moved and stirred to that which is evil to embrace it, and they are never stirred unto that which is good, unless it be to eschew it. Lastly, the members of the body are the instruments and tools of the mind for the execution of sin.

Q. What be those evil actions that are the fruits of this corruption?

A. Evil thoughts in the mind, which come either by a man's own conceiving, or by the suggestion of the devil; evil motions and lusts stirring in the heart, and frō these arise evil words and deeds, when any occasion is givē.

Q. Howe cometh it to pass that all men are thus defiled with sin?

A. By Adams infidelity and disobedience, in eating the forbidden fruit: even as we see great personages by treason do not only hurt themselves, but also stain their blood, and disgrace their posterity.

Q. What hurt comes to man by his sin?

A. He is continually subject to the curse of God in his life time, in the end of his life, and after this life.

Q. What is the curse of God in this life?

A. In the body, diseases, aches, pains: in the soul blindness, hardness of heart, horror of conscience: in goods hindrances, and losses: in name, ignominy and reproach: lastly, in the whole man, bondage under Satan the prince of darkness.

Q. What manner of bondage is this?

A. This bondage is when a man is the • laue of the devil, and hath him to reign in his heart as his God.

Q. How may a man know whether Satan be his God or not?

A. He may know it by this, if he give obedience to him in his heart, & express it in his conversation.

Q. And howe shall a man perceive this obedience?

A. If he take delight in the evil motions that Satan puts into his heart, & do fulfill the lusts of the devil.

Q. What is the curse due to man in the ende of this life?

A. Death, which is the separation of body and soul.

Q. What is the curse after this life?

A. Eternal damnation in hell fire, whereof every man is guilty, and is in as great danger of it, as the traitor apprehended is in danger of hanging, drawing and quartering.

The third principle expounded.

Q. If damnation be the reward of sin, then is a man of all creatures most miserable. A dog or a toad when they die, all their misery is ended: but whē a man dieth there is the beginning of his woe.

A. It were so indeed, if there were no means of deliverance, but GOD hath shown his mercy in giving a Savior to mankind.

Q. Howe is this Savior called?

A. Jesus Christ.

Q. What is Jesus Christ?

A. The eternal son of God made man in all things, even in his infirmities like other men, save only in sin.

Q. Howe was he made man void of sin?

A: He was conceived in the womb of a Virgin, and sanctified by the holy Ghost at his conception.

Q. Why must our Savior be both God and man?

A: He must be a man: because man hath sinned, and therefore a man must die for sin to appease God's wrath: he must be God to sustain and uphold the manhood, to overcome and vanquish death.

Q : What be the offices of Christ to make him an all-sufficient Savior?

A: He is a priest, a prophet, a King.

Q : Why is he a priest?

A: To work the means of salvation in the behalf of mankind.

Q : Howe doth he work the means of salvation?

A: First, by making satisfaction to his father for the sin of man: Secondly, by making intercession.

Q : How doth he make satisfaction?

A: By two means: and the first is by offering a sacrifice.

Q : What is this sacrifice?

A: Christ himself, as he is man consisting of body and soul.

Q : What is the Altar?

A: Christ as he is God, is the Altar on which he sacrificed himself.

Q : Who was the priest?

None but Christ, and that as he is both God and man.

Q : How oft did he sacrifice himself?

A: Never but once.

Q : What death did he suffer when he sacrificed himself?

A: A death upon the cross, peculiar to him alone: for besides the separation of body and soul, he felt also the pang • s of hell, in that the whole wrath of God due to the sin of man, was poured forth upon him.

Q. What profit cometh by his Sacrifice?

A. God's wrath is appeased by it.

Q. Could the suffering of Christ, which was but for a short time, countervail everlasting damnation, and so appease God's wrath?

A. Yea, for seeing Christ suffered God suffered, though not in his godhead: & that is more thā if all men in the world had suffered forever & ever.

Q. Now tell me the other means of satisfaction.