TWO DISCOURSES.  
THE FIRST, Concerning the SPIRIT of MARTIN LUTHER, and the ORIGINAL of the REFORMATION.  
THE SECOND, CONCERNING THE CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY.  
Printed at OXFORD. An. 1687.   

CONSIDERATIONS Concerning the SPIRIT of M. LUTHER, and the ORIGINAL of the REFORMATION.   

CONTENTS.  

PRoperties of the good, and evil Spirit. §. 1.  
By which the spirits of New Teachers are to be tried Luther's Holy life whilst a Monk. §. 2.  
The several degrees of his fall. §. 3. n. 1.  
The first degr. his taking up a new doctrine, whilst yet a Monk, (as more consolatory,) of Justification by Faith alone. Ib.  
And devising new Comments on the Epistle to the Romans, and Galatians, prejudicial to good works proceeding from Grace. §. 4.  
Where 

1. That the Church's doctrine concerning Justification was much mistaken, or much mis-related, by him. §. 6.  
2. That his new opinion concerning it is detested by many judicious Protestants. §. 7.  
3. Void of Consolation, and contradicting itself. §. 8.    
The 2d. degree upon the former doctrine, his holding a parity of all justified, as to their future reward. §. 9  
And vilifying Religious vows and works of Mortification, and Penance, especially Celibacy. §. 10.  
Writing against Monastic Vows. §. 11. n. 2.  
And much recommending the state of Marriage, vilifying Celibacy. §. 11. n. 3.4, 5, 6, 7.  
Throwing off his Monk's Hood, and marrying a Nun. §. 12.  
Leaving off his Canonical hours of Prayer. §. 13.  
The 3d. deg. His rejecting the authority of the present Church. §. 14.  
The 4th. deg. His denying the then present to be a true Church; or the Clergy thereof a true Ministry, affirming the Pope to be Antichrist, amp; c. §. 15. n. 1. and §. 16, 17, 18.  
The 5th. deg. His rejecting the authority also of the former, and ancient Church; Councils, and Fathers. §. 15. n. 2. and §. 19, 20. 

Some instances, and testimonies-  
1. Concerning his rejecting the present Church-authority. §. 16.  
2. Maintaining the Pope to be Antichrist. §. 17:  
3. The former Ordinations of Clergy invalid. §. 18.  
4. His rejecting Councils. §. 19  
5. And Fathers. §. 20.    
The 6th. deg. His setting up his own authority, and maintaining his own doctrines, as certain and infallible truths. §. 21. n. 1. and §. 24. n. 1.  
(Tho these in his former, and latter time much varying. ib.)  
The 7th. deg. Impatiently suffering opposition, excommunicating and anathematising any others, though Reform, that contradicted his doctrines. §. 22. and §. 25.  
The 8th. deg. His altering the public Service,— ordaining a new Ministry;— Abrogating and burning the former Canon Law. §. 23. 

Instances and Testimonies for these.  
1. Concerning his certainty of the truth of his own doctrines. §. 24. n. 1.  
Of those also that he maintained against other Reformed, §. 24. n. 3.  
2. Concerning his censuring and condemning those of the other Reform opposing him. §. 25.  
Where also of their reciprocal censures of him for it. §. 26.  
3. Concerning the instability of his doctrine. §. 27:    
9th. deg. His fierce, contentious, and railing spirit discovered in all his controversy-writings. §. 28.  
Some instances thereof. 30.  
10th. His frequent Communications with the Devil, acknowledged by himself. §. 32.  
Where 

Of the great variety and subtlety of Satan's temptations. §. 34.  
When this Tempter is undiscovered. §. 35.  
When this Tempter is discovered. §. 37.    
And that Luther had no secure ground to rely on, that he was not by him most miserably deluded. §. 38.  
11. In particular; concerning Satan's famous disputation with him, touching the Mass; Nullity of the present Clergy; Justifying Faith; etc. and Luther's behaviour therein. §. 39: 

Remarks upon it, and the invalidity of those Arguments of Satan, that prevailed with Luther. §. 40. amp; c.  
Of Zuinglius his being in like manner deluded by Satan. §. 44. etc.    
12. That probably Luther discovered not these wiles of Satan, but served him ignorantly. §. 46. 

And therefore was a more dangerous instrument of his. §. 47.  
And that there wanted not specious pretences for several things in his Reformation. §. 49:  
Nor some personal qualities that rendered him acceptable to his sect. §. 50.    
13. The resemblance of Luther's change of Religion in several particulars to that former of Mahomet.  
14. The Trial of Luther's spirit (as before described) whether this were good, or bad, by the properties of these two spirits mentioned in the begnning of the Discourse. §. 58.  
Where 

1. That Truth and Holiness, Error and Vice, have a necessary connexion. §. 60.  
2. That where more corrupt doctrines are believed, and taught; there, for the general, must be found more dissolute lives. §. 61.  
The several bad fruits springing from Luther's doctrine, that presently appeared, and were confessed, in his own time. §: 62.    
15. The manner of his Death. §. 64.  
Conclusion.  
Where concerning the just limits of blaming, or censuring other men's lives and actions.    

CONSIDERATIONS Concerning the SPIRIT of MARTIN LUTHER, and the Original of the REFORMATION.  

Properties of the good  §. 1. THE Spirit of God is described by the Apostle (1 Cor. 13.) in its properties to be— long-suffering, kind, not envying, nor vaunting itself, not puffed up, not easily provoked, thinking no evil, bearing all things, etc. and the fruits thereof to be— love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, continency, temperance, Gal. 5.22.— And the wisdom that is from above to be— pudica, pacifica, modesta, suadibilis: chaste, pacific, modest, easy to be entreated. Jam: 3.17.— And the Spiritual man to be— Non litigans, mansuetus ad omnes, docibilis, patience, cum modestia corripiens, etc. No wrangler, mild towards all men, docible, patiented, correcting with modesty. 2 Tim. 2.24, 25. When he is reviled, to bless; when he is defamed. to entreat; when persecuted [without resistance] to suffer it. 1 Cor. 4.12.— Is described to wage a continual war against the flesh; in watch, in fastings, in various castigations, subjections, and mortifications of the body, 1 Cor. 9.27. 2 Cor. 11.27. These are the Properties of the good Spirit.  

And evil Spirit.  On the contrary, the Spirit of Satan, and of this world, and those acted therewith, are described by the Apostle Rom. 1.29. to be— Pleni invidia, contentione, malignitate, detractores, contumeliosi, superbi, parentibus [superioribus] non obedientes, inventores malorum, incompositi, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉:— full of envy, contention, malignity, detractors, contumelious, proud, disobedient to parents [superiors,] inventors of evil, unsettled, and dissolute, without natural affection, without fidelity.— And (2 Tim. 3.1.) to be, seipsos amantes, elati, superbi, parentibus [superiorbus] non obedientes, sine pace, incontinentes, tumidi, voluptatum amatores, pietatis speciem habentes, virtutem ejus abnegantes: lovers of themselves, haughty, proud, disobedient to parents [superiors,] unpeaceable, incontinent, puffed up, lovers of pleasures, having an appearance of piety, but denying the virtue of it. And by St. Judas, v. 8. etc. to be carnem maculantes, dominationem spernentes, Majestatem blasphemantes, in via Cain abeuntes: Defilers of the flesh, despisers of Dominion, blasphemers of Majesty, who have gone in the way of Cain. [departing out of the Church.] (Gen. 4.19).) And— Errore Balaam effusi:" have poured out themselves in the error of Balaam; [cursing the Church and people of God: Num. c. 22.] And, in contradictione Core theuntes;" Perished in the contradiction of Corah: [opposing Moses the Lawgiver, and Aaron the Highpriest, Num. c. 16.] And much-what the same by St. Peter, (2 Ep. 2.10. etc.) to be— Dominationem contemnentes, audaces, sibi placentes, Sectas non metuentes introducere, blasphemantes, or, Majestates non metuentes blasphemare: Contemners of Dominion, bold, self-pleasers, not fearing to introduce Sects, blasphemers, or, not fearing to blaspheme Majesties. I recite so many places, to show the unanimous consent of the Holy Scriptures, and writers, in describing the qualities of this evil Spirit, reduced principally to these two. 1. Fleshly Lusts. 2. Contention and disobedience. These are the properties of the evil Spirit, by which the Spirit of new Teachers is to be tried.  
Now so often as the Teachers of new and strange Doctrines come into the world, professing opposition to those received from our present Superiors, and to the common tenants of the Church, Christians are directed by St. John c. 4. v. 1. to try such Spirits whether they be of God.— And are instructed, by our Lord, Mat. 7.16. that they shall know and discern them by their fruits; and then, by the Apostles (as you have seen) what in particular these fruits are.  
Dr. Luther then being one of these, and the last that hath appeared (when the Church of God was at peace, and unanimous in her doctrine and discipline) to have broached new ones, and departed out of this fold, and become the Founder of another Model of Religion; it seems reasonable, and of much concernment, that all Christians, so soon as any is acquainted herewith, do put themselves in the same posture now, as they should have been in, had they lived at the first appearance of Luther, when all remained in the bosom, communion, and faith of that Church which he opposed; and first try his new Spirit by the marks or fruits here premised, before they any longer follow it; or stray from the fold of this Church, to hearken to the voice of that Stranger. Which trial the more to facilitate to them, it seemeth to me no uncharitable act, having heretofore for my own satisfaction made some search into this man's writings, opinions, and actions, to present them with a brief relation of such passages of his Life, and branches of his Doctrine, drawn chief from his own Testimony, or those of his Friends, and fellow-Reformists, (i.e. the persons most favourable to his good reputation) as I esteem to serve best to this purpose. I pray God it may any way serve for advancing his glory, and his truth, for which it is intended. Amen.  
§. 2 This man then, after having taken his degree of Master of Arts at Erford, an University in Germany, 
〈◊〉 holy 〈◊〉 w●●●st 〈◊〉.  being much terrified by the sudden death of an intimate friend and companion, slain (some say) by a thunderbolt, put himself into a Monastery of the Augustine Friars there, against his Parent's consent; and after his Probationer-ship ended, took the three Vows of Religion, Poverty, Celibacy, and Obedience, about the 22th. year of his age. [See Melancthon, in praefat. 2. tom. op. Luther.— Luther. de votis Monastic. praefat. ad Patrem. where he saith, Se terrore & ago mortis subitae circumvallatum, vovisse etc. That being surrounded with the terror and agony of a sudden death, he had vowed etc.] Here for some time he lived in his profession a very strict, chaste, and sober life, and most obedient to his Superiors. Himself several times professeth so much of it:— Vixi Monachus (saith he, De votis Monasticis,) non sine peccato quidem, sed sine crimine: I lived whilst a Monk, though not sinless, yet without grievous crime. And on Gal. 1.14. (in imitation of the great Apostle,)— Si quisquam alius certe ego, ante lucem Evangelii, pie sensi, & zelavi pro Papisticis legibus, & Patrum traditionibus (saith he.)— Qua potui diligentia conatus sum eas praestare: plus inedia, vigiliis, orationibus, & aliis exercitiis corpus macerans, quam omnes illi qui hodie tam acerbe oderunt, & persequantur me, etc. Before the light of the [new] Gospel, if ever any, certainly I, had pious sentiments, and was zealous of the Papistical laws, and traditions of my Fathers.— I endeavoured to keep them as diligently as I could; macerating my body with fastings, watch, prayers, and other [spiritual] exercises, more than they all, who at this day so bitterly hate and persecute me, because I now detract from those [good works] the glory of justifying. For in the observation of them I was so over-diligent, and superstitious; that I laid a greater burden on the body, than without endangering its health it could well bear. I reverenced the Pope out of pure conscience, not for the sake of preferments.— Again, ibid. on vers. 15. Ego in Monachatu externe non eram sicut caeteri homines, raptores, injusti, adulteri ●●sed servabam castitatem, obedientiam, paupertatem; denique liber a curis praesentis vitae totus eram deditus jejuniis, vigiliis, orationibus, legendis Missis, etc. Whilst a Monk, I was not outwardly, as other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers; but I observed chastity, obedience, and poverty: and lastly, disengaged from the cares of this present life, I wholly gave myself up to fastings, watch, prayers, saying Mass, etc. And— Tanta erat autoritas Papae apud me, ut vel in minimo dissentire ab Ipso putarem crimen aeterna damnatione dignum. So great with me was the authority of the Pope, that in the least to descent from him I judged a crime worthy of eternal damnation. And thus Melancthon of him, (Praefat. in 2. tom. Luther.) Receptus [in Monasterium] jam non solum acerrimo studio doctrinam Ecclesiae discit, sed etiam summa disciplinae severitate se ipse regit, & omnibus exereitiis lectionum, disputationum, jejuniorum, precum, omnes longe superat. Vidi continuis quatuor diebus, cum quidem recte valeret, prorsus nihil edentem, aut bibentem. Being admitted [into the Monastery] he not only learns by very hard study the doctrines of the Church, but practices her discipline also with the utmost rigour and severity; in all exercises of lectures, disputations, fasts, prayers, etc. surpassing all others. I have known him, when in perfect health, neither eat nor drink for four days together. [For there was also a Monastery of Augustine Friars at Wirtenberg, wherein Luther lived for many years, after he was removed from Erford to that new-founded University for his pregnant parts and learning.] Neither did Luther leave off his Monk's hood till 1524. sixteen years after his coming thither; after which the means of this Monastery was given to the Elector, and he became a private Housekeeper; and the next year after, a married man. (See Melch. Adam's vita Luther. p. 128. 131.)— And it appears by what is objected to him by the Devil, in his book de Missa angulari, or privata, & unctione Sacerdotum, that for fifteen years after his entry into the Priesthood, (which was in 1507. a year before his remove to Wirtenberg,) he ceased not almost daily saying Mass; against the idolatry of which he afterward so much enveighed.— Audisne Excellentissime Doctor, (saith Satan here,) num ignoras, te quasi per annos quindecim privatas Missas quotidie fere celebrasse? Hear you this, most excellent Doctor? Don't you know, there was scarce for fifteen years together a day, in which you missed saying private Mass?  
Luther having begun thus in the works of the Spirit, 
§. 3. n. 1. The several degrees of his Fa●●.  if shutting out the cares of this life, chastity, temperance, fasting, and most strict obedience to his Superiors, (which usually is joined with great humility, and low esteem of ourselves) may be called so; now see how by gentle degrees he fell from them, and finished his course in the liberties of the flesh. Which thing came to pass in this manner. Melancthon relates of him, (Praefat. in 2. tom. Luth.)— Saepe eum cogitantem intentius de ira Dei & mirandis poenarum exemplis, subito tantos terrores concussisse, ut pene exanimaretur. That ofttimes, whilst meditating intently on God's wrath and wonderful examples of judgements against sinners, on a sudden such terrors struck him, that he was left almost dead. And in this desolation (saith he) Senis cujusdam sermonibus in Augustiniano Collegio Erphordiae saepe se confirmatum narrabat; cui cum consternationes suas exponeret, audivit eum de fide multa disserentem; seseque deductum aiebat ad Symbolum, in quo dicitur, Credo remissionem peccatorum. Hunc Articulum etc. He used to tell, how he had been confirmed by the words of an old Friar of the Monastery at Erford; whom upon his relating to him his consternations, he often heard discoursing many things about Faith, and was at length brought by him to that article of the Creed, in which it is said, I believe the forgiveness of sins. This Article the old man expounded thus: That it was not enough to believe only in general (as the Devils also do) the remission of sins to others; but that God commands every one to believe his own sins remitted to him in particular. [True, we performing some conditions besides only believing this; but these are not spoken of.]  

The pedigree of his fall, his taking upa new Doctrine, whilst yet a M●nk, as more consolatory, of Justification by Faith alone.  Thus the old man taught him; and this, as himself saith (de Missa privata,) the Devil also urged to him, and he believed him. Primum nosti; nullam tunc [i.e. when a Monk, and a Roman Catholic] habuisti cognitionem Christi, nec veram fidem; & quod ad fidem attinet, nihilo melior fuisti quovis Turca, etc. First you know, you had then [i.e. when a Monk and a Roman Catholic] no knowledge of Christ, nor true faith; in point of which you were no better than any Turk. For the Turks, and even the Devils themselves believe the history of Christ's Nativity, Passion, etc. but Turks and we damned Spirits do not trust in God's mercy, [i.e. towards ourselves.] And in the same manner teacheth he himself, (in Peter 1.2.) Cognitio Dei veraea est, quod sentias Deum & Christum, tuum esse Deum, tuum Christum; id quod Diabolus, & falsi Christiani non possunt credere.— Hujusmodi fiduciam nequeunt habere malae conscientiae, i.e. [saith he, expounding malae conscientiae] sincera fide vacantes. The true knowledge of God is this; That you believe God and Christ to be your God, and your Christ: which thing the Devil and false Christians cannot do:— Such a firm confidence as this guilty consciences cannot have: guilty consciences, i. e. [saith he, expounding himself] voided of true faith. Accordingly he saith in his 11th. Article, asserted by him against the condemnation of Pope Leo.— Crede fortiter te absolutum, & absolutus vere eris, quicquid sit de contritione: Do but stoutly believe that you are absolved, and absolved you will be, whether you have contrition or no. Where if he say, that none not-contrite can possibly credere se absolutum; whence gathers he this? For in other things we often believe, or are strongly persuaded of, things not true. Again, if he hold every one so believing to be necessarily contrite; why saith he quicquid sit," whether contrite or no, and not rather quoniam sic constat de contritione?" from your contrition it must be so. Again, in his 15th. Article:— Magnus error (saith he) est eorum, qui ad Sacramentum Eucharistiae accedunt; huic innixi, quod sint confessi; quod non sint sibi conscii alicujus peccati mortalis; quod praemiserint orationes suas, & praeparatoria; omnes illi judicium sibi manducant, & bibunt. etc. They err greatly, who come to the Sacrament of the Eucharist, relying on this; that they have confessed to a Priest; that they are conscious to themselves of no mortal sin; that they have said their prayers, and done other preparatories thereto: All such eat and drink damnation to themselves. But if they did but believe, and were confident, that they should obtain grace there, this faith alone were sufficient to render them clean, and worthy. Again, Article the 6th.— Contritio quae paratur per discussionem, collectionem, & detestationem peccati, qua quis recogitat annos praeteritos vitae suae, etc. The contrition that is got by examining, recollecting, and detesting ones sins; whereby a man calls to mind his whole life past, in the bitterness of his soul, pondering on the heinousness, the multitude, and the filth of his sins, the loss of eternal bliss, and condemnation to everlasting woe: this contrition, I say, makes a man a hypocrite, nay even a greater sinner than he was before. Of which being questioned, he expounds himself;— Se loqui de contritione naturali, & impia, extra fidem:" that he speaks of a contrition natural, and impious, without faith. But why so freely then condemneth he such a contrition as he describes with facit hypocritam etc. as if these are not, or cannot be consistent with faith? unless he means with his faith, believing our sins are forgiven, for this cause only on our part, because we believe they are so. So in Captiv. Babyl. cap. de Baptismo, he saith,— Quam dives est homo Christianus, vel baptizatus, qui etiam volens non potest perdere salutem suam quantiscunque peccatis, nisi nolit credere? O the riches of the grace of a Christian, or one baptised; who cannot, if he would, lose his salvation, though by never so great sins; unless he obstinately refuse to believe. [As if this (his sort of faith) were the only condition required of us to be made partakers of the application of Christ's merits to us; a compendious and easy way of salvation.]  
§. 3 So he disparaged, and vilified all his former acts of piety and devotion when a Monk, as increasing his sin, on this manner. 
n. 2.  (Com. ment. on Gal. c. 1. v. 15.)— Ego in Monachatu Christum quotidie crucifixi, & falsa mea fiducia, quae tam perpetuo adhaerebat mihi, blasphemavi.— Servabam castitatem, obedientiam, & paupertatem; denique liber a curis praesentis vitae totus eram deditus jejuniis, etc. Whilst a Monk, I daily crucified and blasphemed Christ by my false confidence, which so perpetually adhered to me.— I observed Chastity, Obedience, and Poverty: finally, being free from the cares of this world I gave myself wholly to fastings, watch, prayers, saying Mass, etc.— Meanwhile, under this sanctity and confidence in my own righteousness, there lurked in me a perpetual diffidence, [viz. then destitute of his own new-minted faith, crede fortiter te absolutum, & vere eris absolutus; Stoutly believe that you are absolved, and absolved you shall be,] ' doubting, dread, hatred, and blasphemy towards God. And that righteousness of mine was no other than a mere stinking jakes, and most delightsom kingdom of the Devil. For Satan loves dearly such kind of Saints, as destroy themselves body and soul; and defraud and deprive themselves of all the blessings and good things of God. Meanwhile in such there reigns their own impiety, blindness, doubting, contempt of God, ignorance of the Gospel, etc. And— Quo sanctiores fuimus, hoc magis excoecati eramus, & purius Diabolum adorabamus. Nemo nostrum non erat vir sanguinis, si non opere, tamen cord. The more holy we were, the greater our blindness, and the more entirely did we worship the Devil. Not one of us but was a man of blood, in Thought at least, though not in Deed. Here not to meddle out of what intention himself did perform, and live in, such pious practices, which, it seems, was as expecting, Justification, or Salvation from the perfect righteousness of these his works, abstracting from God's mercy, (for Christ's merits and perfect righteousness) forgiving sins; yet, why presumes he to condemn any other Religious at all, as if they did their good works on this account? For who can we imagine amongst them, since it was the common doctrine of the Church then as now (excepting himself) that did not hold their liability to commit sin still, as long as they lived; and who believed not remission of these their sins, as well those after Regeneration, as those before, through and for the Merits of Christ, and his perfect righteousness and sufferings, or that held all their own good works pure and void of all imperfection, or venial sin?  
§. 4 Hence misinterpreting the 7th. chapter to the Romans, he went on to disparage the goodness of man's works proceeding from sanctifying Grace, 
And devices new Comments on the Epistle to the Romans and Galatians, prejudicial to g●od works, proceed●ng from ●race.  which is infused by God into the Regenerate, for Christ's Merits; maintaining, in the 32 Article asserted by him, that— Opus bonum optime factum est veniale peccatum secundum misericordiam Dei, sed mortale peccatum secundum judicium Dei. That a good work, never so well done, is a venial sin in respect of God's mercy; but a mortal one in respect of his justice. And that— Nemo est certus se non semper peccare mortaliter, propter occultissimum superbiae vitium:" No man is certain, that he does not sin always mortally; by reason of that hidden pride lurking in every one. Therefore also he expounds that text, 1 Pet. 1.17. [Qui judicat secundum uniuscujusque opus" who judges according to every one's work,] and other the like texts on this manner: i.e. saith he, ex operibus te Deus judicabit, & evincet, si eredideris: By thy works God will judge, and manifest thy faith, if thou believest. Much also he spoke of the captivity of man's Will, and its servitude, as unable to do any good; and of liberum arbitrium, ' , that it is figmentum in rebus, and titulus sine re;" a mere fiction, and empty name; of which he speaks thus. (Assertio Artic. 36.)— In caeteris Articulis, de Papatu, de Conciliis, Indulgentiis, aliis non necessariis, magis ferenda est levitas & stultitia Papae, & suorum, etc. In the rest of the Articles about the Papacy, Councils, Indulgencies, and other unnecessary matters, the levity and folly of the Pope and his followers is somewhat more tolerable: but in this the very chiefest and best article, and indeed the sum and substance of our religion, their miserable error and madness is to be lamented and bewailed. And he is said to have preferred his book de servo arbitrio, before any other part of his works, (Melch. Adam's vitae Luth. p. 170.) which thing I suppose was done by him, the stronglier to support his new doctrine of imputative Justification solely by Christ's righteousness: but which seems to have a very malignant influence upon men, inducing the neglect of their endeavour to observe the divine commands; unless at the same time man's ability to do good by God's grace be maintained as great, as it is, in our own corrupted will, small, or none; but Luther here made no such recompense. And in this new doctrine of his, he saith, (Comment. on Gal. 1.11, 12.) he was much encouraged, and confirmed by the commendations which he then received from one Dr. Staupitius, one of the same Order; who said, It pleased him much, that the doctrine, which he preached, yielded glory, and all things else unto God alone, and nothing unto man. This Staupitius, a great man amongst the Augustine Friars, was at first a great encourager of Luther in his disputations concerning Indulgencies, but afterwards withdrew himself from him, exhorting him to humility, and obedience to the Pope. To whom Luther afterwards in an Epistle to him, (see Adams vit. Staupitii, p. 19)— Quantum tu me ad humilitatem exhortaris, tantum ego te ad superbiam exhortor: tibi adest nimia humilitas, sicut mihi nimia superbia. Et reprehendit (saith Adam's) quod judicio Papae se submisisset. I exhort you as much to Pride, as you me to Humility, You are as much too humble, as I too proud. And he reprehends him for submitting to the judgement of the Pope.  
§. 5. n. 1. Upon this, this man began to make new Comments on St. Paul's Epistles to the Romans and Gal. to extol his new fiduciary faith, depress good works in the manner you have heard; and this nine or ten years before the Controversy about Indulgences began; his doctrine herein (as new things usually do, especially those that tend to liberty) taking many; and applause making him still to seek after the discovery of more faults in the Church's former doctrines. At this time (saith his Scholar Melancthon, Praefat. in 2. tom. Luther. who also was translated to the new-founded University of Wirtenberg, some years after Luther, for his famed learning in the Greek tongue,) Eruditis gratum erat, quasi ex tenebris educi Christum, Prophetas, Apostolos; conspici discrimen legis, & Evangelii; promissionum legis, & promissionis Evangelicae; quod certe non exstahat in Thoma, Scoto, & similibus. The Learned were well pleased to see the doctrine of Christ, the Prophets, and Apostles, as it were brought to light; and the difference betwixt the Law and Gospel, the Legal promises and the Evangelical one now cleared to 'em; which in the writings of the Schools, Thomas, Scotus, etc. were not at all, or but obscurely, to be met with. Concerning which error in Justification (the chief matter surely in all our Christianity) he there also saith; That— Origenica aetas effudit hanc persuasionem, mediocrem rationis disciplinam mereri remissionem peccatorum, & esse justitiam, de qua diceretur, Justus ex fide sua vivet. Haec aetas pene amisit totum discrimen Legis, & Evangelii; & sermonem Apostolicum dedidicit. In Origen's time first arose that persuasion, That a little disciplining of reason was sufficient to merit remission of sins; and was that Righteousness, whereof it is said, The Just shall live by faith. We of this age have well nigh lost all distinction of law and gospel, and unlearnt the doctrine of the Apostle. [O ridiculous pride, and self-conceit!]  
§. 5. n. 2. Hence Luther also proceeded to such bold speeches both concerning the Fathers, and also in comparing the writings of the New Testament in order to his doctrine of sole Justification by Faith, of which in his Preface to his Enarrations on Pet. he saith,— Qui hoc potissimum & majori prae caeteris studio tractarunt, quod sola in Christum fides justificet, two omnium optimi sunt Evangelistae, etc. Those, that more particularly and diligently than the rest treat of this doctrine, That Faith alone justifies, they are the best Evangelists of all. Hence may you more properly say, The Gospel of St. Paul, than of Matthew, Mark, Luke; these latter being little more than a bare Historical narration of the works and miracles of Christ. [What not of his Doctrines, and Sermons also, and of the way to salvation he taught us?] And afterwards, censuring the Fathers, on c. 1. v. 8. Benedictus Deus etc. O Deus (saith he) quam parum de hac praedicatione [viz. Omnia nobis dona a Patre donata ex mera misericordia citra nostrum meritum] in omnibus libris invenitur, etiam iis, qui optimi habentur? etc. O God How little of this doctrine [viz. All our Gifts bestowed on us by the Father, out of his mere mercy without our merits] is there to be found in all even reputedly the best books? In all the writings of St. Hierome, and St. Augustine, how is there nothing at all, not so much as the words? [i.e. his sense of the words of St. Peter, a sufficient autocatacrisis.] We ought thus to preach Jesus Christ, viz. That he died, and risen again; and why he died, and why he risen again; that men moved by such preaching may believe in him, and believing be saved. [Here must be interposed his solum, else what more frequent in St. Austin, and St. Hierome?] This is indeed preaching the true Gospel; and whatsoever by whomsoever is preached otherwise, Gospel it is not. And a little below: Ind facile discitur, Epistolam Divi Jacobi nomine scriptam haud quaquam Apostolicam esse Epistolam etc. Thence may we easily learn that to be no Canonical Epistle that is ascribed to St. James; [this makes sufficient way for his straminea & arida, worthless, and dry as a straw,] there being scarcely the least tittle of this doctrine in it. [But then, how much do we read there contrary?]  
§. 5. n. 3. Yea, so strangely affected was Luther himself also with this his new invention, That abstracting from this device, he (most impiously) makes bold, much to prefer the Mahometan and Turks religion, as to good life and practice, before the Christian. It is necessary I set you down his words, that what I say here may be believed. Thus than he in an Epistle before a Treatise De Moribu● & Religione Turcarum, joined with the Alcoran, and some other Treatises against the Alcoran, published by him, as he saith, on purpose; because those, who had writ against the Alcoran, concealed the good things of the Mahometan Religion, but mentioned and confuted the odious; but that Author had declared it with much integrity. Now- Ex hoc libro (saith he) videmus Turcarum seu Mahometi religionem caeremoniis, poene dixerim & moribus, esse multo speciosiorem, quam nostrorum etiam Religiosorum & omnium Clericorum. Nam ea modestia & simplicitas victus, vestitus, etc. By this book we see the Religion of the Turks or Mahomet is much more plausible for show and ceremony, I had almost said, and for good life too, [that word stuck a little with his modesty at first,] than that even of our Religious, nay all the Clergy put together. For no where amongst us are to be seen that modesty and simplicity of diet, apparel, houses, all things; or the like fasts, prayers, public conventions of the people, as this book recounts. Then the miracles, and the prodigious abstinencies and severities of their Religious whom of our Monks do they not quite put down and shame? And this is the reason why from the Christian faith so many revolt, and so pertinaciously adhere to Mahometanisme. Again,— Christiana Religio longe aliud & sublimius aliquid est, quam Ceremoniae speciosae, rasura, Cucullus, pallor vultus, jejunia, horae Canonicae, & universa illa facies Ecclesiae Romanae per orbem, etc. Christian Religion is quite another and far more sublime thing, than a few specious ceremonies, shaved crowns, cowls, pale countenances, fastings, Canonical hours of prayer, and all that outward pomp of the Roman Church all the world over: for in all these the Turks infinitely go beyond us. [Will he stay here? No.] Christiana religio longe aliud est quam boni mores, seu bona opera. Name in his quoque ostendit is liber Turcas long superiores esse Christianis nostris. Christianity is quite another thing than a good life, [now without a paene dixerim,] or good works; for even in these also, as this book shows, the Turks far outdo us Christians. And— Nunc video quid causae fuerit, quod a Papistis sic occuleretur religio Turcica; cur solum turpia eorum narrarunt, sc. Quod senserunt id quod res est; si ad disputandum de religione veniatur, totus Papatus cum omnibus suis caderet, etc. Now I see the reason of the Papists concealing many things of the Turkish Religion, and relating only the deformities thereof, viz. because they were sensible (which is the plain truth of the business) that should Religion once come to be disputed, the whole Papacy with its adherents, unable any longer either to defend their own religion, or to confute the Mahometan, must needs fall to the ground; since they would be obliged to confute those things, themselves most of all allow of, [i. e. good life, good works, fastings, ceremonies, etc. named before.] Yet worse, Discant (saith he) religionem Christi aliud esse quam caeremonias & mores; atque fidem Christi prorsus nihil discernere, utrae caeremoniae, mores, & leges, sint meliores, aut deteriores: sed d●scant, omnes in unam massam contusas ad justitiam nec esse satis, nec ●is esse opus. Let them know (saith he) that Christianity is something else than ceremonies, and good living; and that the faith of Christ says not one word, whether their ceremonies, customs, and laws, or ours, be better or worse of the two: but let them know this, that all these pounded in one heap together would neither be sufficient nor needful to justification. And again:— Si quis hos articulos teneat (scil. quod Christus sit filius Dei, mortuus pro nostris peccatis, resuscitatus ad vitam nostram; Quod side in Illum justi, & peccatis remissis salvi sumus, etc.)— Quid illi noceat, etc. If one does but believe these articles, (viz. That Christ is the Son of God, who died for our sins, and risen again for our justification; That being justified by faith in him we obtain remision of our sins and salvation thereby) what worse is he, though he neither fast, pray, watch, nor use abstinence so much? though he be not altogether so modest in his diet, apparel, carriage, housekeeping, etc. Let both Turks and Papists excel in these things if they please; yet at the same time void of true [i.e. his] faith, etc. Thus, if we may believe this new Doctor, and unless we will take his new fiduciary faith for the substance of Christian Religion, Mahomet (notwithstanding all the assistances of Grace and the Holy Spirit acting in the Church, and so dearly purchased for it by our Lord,) hath outdone Christ, and the Alcoran the holy Scriptures; as to the producing and establishing of Sanctification and good Works, as to mortifying the flesh and worldly lusts, as to the devout service of God, praying, watching, fasting, etc. And our Lord, who gave himself for us, that he might purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works: Titus 2.14. and who gave himself for his spouse the Church, that he might sanctify, cleanse, and purify it unto himself, not having spot or wrinkle etc. Eph. 5.26, 27. is in this his chief end much outgone by other Religions, and their working upon the bare stock of Nature, Nature depraved, without Regeneration, without God's Spirit of Grace. At tibi imperet Dominus, ' the Lord rebuke thee. If Christian Religion be not the holiest Religion, it is not God's. As for the Relation he urgeth, it gives no such character of the Mahometan Religion as he pretends; secondly, did it, it must deliver a lie; nor ought any Christian to give more credit to it than to Mahometanisme.  
§. 6 And thus I have discovered unto you the main root of the first Reformation by Luther. Wherein first, he hath shamefully mistaken, 
Wh●re 1. That the Church's doctrine concerning Justification was mistaken, or mis-related.  or misreported, the common doctrine of the Church in all ages, (as indeed the reformed Religion chief subsists by misrelating or misconstruing the Catholic tenants; and the greatest mischief the Devil doth in the world, is by his lying:) He hath shamefully misreported the Church's doctrine, I say; which doctrine holds our Justification to consist, not only in infused Grace, or inherent Righteousness through Christ's merits, (though it is most true, that the Regenerate are formally made just, holy, and righteous, of formerly sinners, and impious, by Grace infused into them by God for Christ's merits sake,) but also in remission of sin through Christ's merits; and in remission of sins, not only before our Regeneration, but after it also; in which also they acknowledge, that in multis offendimus omnes, ' in many things we offend all. [See Conc. Trent. sess. 6. c. 7. Justificatio non est sola peccatorum remissio, sed & renovatio interioris hominis per susceptionem gratiae, etc. Justification is not only remission of sins, but also renewal of the inward man by susception of grace; therefore, not renewal alone, but also remission of sins.— And Bell. de Justif. 2. l. 6. c.— Vtraque pars Justificationis; id est, remissio peccatorum, & donum renovationis: Both parts of Justification; i.e. remission of sins, and the gift or grace of renovation of the inward man. And see Cassand. consult. on Art. 4.] This is the faith and profession of the Monks, that watch, fast, and pray; ancient, and modern; (Luther excepted.)  
§. 7 He hath broached a doctrine detested by the most learned of the modern Reform. [See what Dr. Hammond, of Fundamentals, 
2. That his new opinion, concerning it, is detested by many judicious Protectant.  c. 12, 13. Mr. Thorndike, Epilog. 2. l. 7. c. p. 41. Just Weights, c. 9 p. 57, 95. and others have written against the Solifidian, and Fiduciary, as most pernicious errors:] Nay, I may say, at least the consequence thereof, even detested by Luther himself in his latter time. For thus he,— In visitatione Saxonica, Multi, dum audiunt [from the Evangelical Teachers]; ut solummodo credatur, omnia ipsius remitti peccata, fingunt sibi fidem, etc. Many being taught, that they need only believe that their sins are remitted, devise a new faith to themselves; and fancying themselves clean become temerarious, and self-secure thereby. Which carnal security is worse than all the errors that were ever heard of to this day. Elsewhere in a Sermon super Evang. Dominicoe jae Adventus. he observes his reformed, magis vindictae cupidos, magis avaros, magis ab omni misericordia remotos, magis immodestos, & indisciplinatos, multoque deteriores, quam fuerint in Papatu; to be more revengeful, covetous, cruel; more immodest, unruly, and much worse than under Popery. And in his Preface to the Gal. he mentions a new Sect, [quam minime omnium (saith he) praevidissem, aut sperassem,] i.e. which of all things he should least have forethought or looked for] of such as taught; That the ten Commandments ought to be taken out of the Church. Thus as he saw the bad weeds, that grew up out of his doctrine, he endeavoured, but in vain, to tread down, and stifle them: and the bad influence which this new tenant speedily had on many of Luther's Disciples, was observed by many others. Thus Erasmus complains in an Epistle to P. Melancthon, 1524.—  largiamur esse vera quae docet Lutherus,— quid inutilius ad Christianam pietatem quam haec audire vulgus indoctum, hoec instillari auribus adolescentum? Pontificem esse Antichristum; Episcopos, & Sacerdotes esse larvas; Constitutiones hominum esse haereticas; Confessionem esse pestiferam; opera, merita, conatus, esse voces hoereticas; nullum esse liberum arbitrium, sed omnia necessitate geri; nihil refer, qualia sunt hominis opera. Haec a nonnullis nuda circumferuntur, & ab improbis in pessimam partem rapiuntur. etc. Supposing Luther's doctrines true; yet what can be less tending to promote Christian piety, than to have it taught the vulgar, and instilled into the ears of young men; That the Pope is Antichrist, Priests Hobgoblins, Humane Constitutions heretical, Confession pernicious; works, merits, endeavours, heretical words; That there is no freewill, but all things governed by fatal necessity; no matter, whether a man's works be good or bad? These things without any welt or guard thus plainly taught, by the simple are greedily catched at, and interpreted even in the worst sense by the bad. I know you will say the follies of some, whom you deservedly call monsters and the worst of villains, are not to be imputed to Luther. Yet these very monsters are cherished by those whom Luther himself owns for the champions of the Evangelical doctrine. The first preaching of our Saviour's Gospel produced a new sort of men to the world: what sort of men this new Gospel has brought forth, I list not to tell you. Perhaps with you they are otherwise, but here I assure you they are such, as were I to make a bargain, I had rather deal with any Papist than them. Lastly, some, I have formerly known excellent men, and even by nature very virtuously inclined, I now see grown much worse.— And ad Vulturium Neocomum.— Proffer mihi, quem istud Evangelium ex commessatore sobrium, ex feroci mansuetum, ex rapaci liberalem, etc. Bring me one, who by this new Gospel is become from a drunkard sober, from fierce mild, from covetous liberal, of a reviler well-speaking, of shameless modest: and I will show you a great number made thereby worse than themselves. And in another Epistle (fratribus inferioris Germaniae:)— Quos antea (saith he) noveram puros, candidos, & fraudis ignaros, eosdem vidi, ubi se sectoe dedissent, loqui coepisse de puellis, lusisse aleam, etc. Some persons, whom I knew formerly innocent, harmless, and without deceit, no sooner have I seen joined to that Sect, but begun to talk of wenches, play at dice, leave off prayers; grown extremely worldly, most impatient, revengeful, vain, like vipers tearing each other. I speak by experience. Calvin. l. 6. de Scandalis.— Cum tot hominum millia cupide (saith he) ut videbantur, nomen dedissent Evangelio, quam pauci, obsecro, a suis vitiis resipuerunt? Imo, quid prae se major pars tulit, nisi ut excusso superstitionum jugo, solutius in omnem lasciviam diffluerent, homines Lucianici & Epicurei? Of so many thousands, seemingly eager in embracing the [new] Gospel, how few since have amended their lives? Nay, to what else do the greater part pretend, but by shaking off the heavy yoke of superstition, to lash out more freely like Epicures, or men of Lucian's faith and temper, into all manner of looseness and lasciviousness. Musculus loci come. c. de Decalog.— Evangelici nostri adeo sibi ipsis facti sunt dissimiles, ut cum in Papatu fuerint in erroribus ac superstitione Religiosi, in luce veritatis agnitae sint ipsis hujus saeculi filiis prophaniores, leviores, vaniores, & temerariores. Our [new] Gospelers are grown so unlike themselves, that whereas under the errors and superstitions of Popery they had yet some sense of Religion in them: now since the light of the Gospel has shined to 'em, they are become more profane, light, vain, and temerarious, than the very children of this world.  
§. 8 
3. Void of consolation, and contradicting it s●lf.  Thirdly, he broached a doctrine full of fraud and delusion in itself, and when it is thoroughly examined, void of all that consolation and security it pretends; though few, that are taken with it, discern this. For first, he grants this full persuasion, that their sins are forgiven them, to be such a faith, as some may feign it to themselves, and think they have it when they have it not. So that, though all fully persuaded are certainly justified, yet we may believe ourselves fully persuaded, and from this justified, when we are not so. 2ly. That it is such a faith when true, as hath always good works joined with it, as the fruits, and signs thereof; by which ourselves and others, and God at the last day, try it, whethe true. For so he is pleased to interpret the Scriptures, of God's judging every one according to his works, that is, by his works God tryeth him, whether he hath this true faith: so that, though not when he is justified, yet when he hath this true faith, or full persuasion, whereby he comes to be justified, every one must go about trying this by his own good works; the way by which other men, and also God tryeth it. Since then some may fully believe that their sins are forgiven, that do not rightly believe so; and there is no sure sign, but the necessary fruit of it, Good works, or Christian Virtues, (to which I add Repentance and Contrition) to know this true faith from the false; are not we still reduced to the performance of these at least, as the necessary fruits of true faith, and to the reviewing of these for the discerning our spiritual condition? And are not Monks to look upon their fasting, and prayers, and mortifications, contrition, and repentance, their temperance and continency, and obedience, and other Christian virtues, from these at the least to collect the truth of their Faith? and from that to collect the truth of their Justification? and is not Luther left still, as well as when he was a Monk, for trial of the truth of his faith, in the same solicitude, and doubtfulness, concerning his good works? First, That they be externally such; and then, That they be also inwardly sound, and free from Hypocrisy and Pride: which if they be not, the Monks before he was born known and taught, as well as he, that they were nothing worth. I say not, solicitous that they be every way perfect, and without sin: for no Monk unless it were Luther) believes, that it is necessary they should be so; because they believe Remission of all their sins in all their works, us well those after their Regeneration, as before, through the sole merits of Christ; and say every day, dimitte nostra debita, ' Forgive us our trespasses. Now what avails it then here to tell me; that nothing, but non-believing can damn me; when this is tacitly reserved; that when ever good works are not in me, I am necessarily an unbeliever? And to tell me, that if I strongly believe that I am absolved, lamb absolved from my sins, quicquid sit de contritione, ' whether contrite or no? When this is reserved, that if I have not contrition, I never do or can with a true faith strongly believe that I am absolved from my sins.  
§. 9 But these were secrets not observed by many well pleased with his doctrines. 
The 2d. upon the former doctrine, his holding a parity of all just s●ed as to the future reward.  Luther having made this progress in discovering a new Evangelical Faith; whereby he placed man's Justification only in it obtaining the application of Christ's merits, and the imputation of his righteousness unto us; and on the other side much vilified the righteousness inherent in the regenerate by infused Grace, (yet which Grace also was obtained for them through Christ's merits); he proceeded to hold a kind of equality in dignity and honour, and celestial reward, amongst all that are once justified, notwithstanding the great difference of their works and inherent holiness: to which purpose, on 1 Pet. 1.3. he saith,— Quia. vero renati sumus Filii atque Haeredes Dei, pares sumus in dignitate & honore Divo Paulo, Petro, & Deiparae Virginia ac Divis omnibus. Habemus enim etc. Forasmuch as being regenerate we are thereby the sons and heirs of God; we are also equal in dignity and honour to St. Peter, St. Paul, the Bl. Virgin, and all the Saints. But we have the same treasure, and all good things from God in as large a measure as they; since it is required, that they be regenerate too, as well as we. Wherefore they have no more than any other Christians. And— Fidei simplicitas (saith he) nos omnes ante conspectum Dei pares facit: (Exeg. in 1 Cor. 7) i. e. the simplicity of saith makes us all equal in the sight of God. And on 1 Pet. 1.2.— In sanctificatione Spiritus;— Cogita (saith he) te ideo sanctum esse, quod Verbum Dei habeas, quod regnum Coelorum tuum sit, quod solide justus ac sanctus per Christum evaseris. Reckon yourself therefore holy, because you have the Word of God, because yours is the Kingdom of Heaven, because you are become truly justified and sanctified by Jesus Christ. [Which all the faithful partake alike.] And— Quod super terram vivimus (saith he) nulla alia, fit causa, quam ut etiam aliis adjumento simits,— ut ad fidem & alios adducamus: That we are continued alive still, [after thus sanctified by faith,] it is for no other reason, but that we may help others, and bring them to the faith.  
§. 10 Upon this principle also he began much to disrelish and vehemently to oppose all Counsels of perfection, humane Ordinances, 
●nd vilifying religious V●ws, and works of Mortification and Penance, especially Celibacy.  and religious Discipline, instituted for withdrawing souls from temptations and occasions of sin; Vows of Poverty, or not retaining more than necessaries; Obedience to Superiors Commands, i. e. in all things not unlawful; retiredness, Canonical hours of Prayer; fastings, disciplines, etc. used in Religious houses, as being; the seeking of Justification, or Salvation, per opera legis, per legem factorum, traditiones & inventiones hominum; justitias carnis, etc. by the works of the Law, the law of Works, Traditions, and huma mane inventions, carnal righteousness, etc. To which purpose he saith, (Adversus falsum nominatum Ordinem Episcoporum.)— Illi insani, ignarique fidei prorsus, & Spiritus, imperiti prorsus rerum etc. in his Tract entitled, Against the Episcopal Order falsely so called; Those mad, ignorant fellows as to faith and the spirit, knowing nothing at all what belongs to spiritual things, seek to further and advantage them by their pitiful, sorry, little good works forsooth; their fasts, hair-cloths, scraps of prayers, confining themselves to such a part of the Monastery. Thus also he in his Comment on 1 Pet. 1.5.— Qui in virtute Dei custodimini per fidem in salutem.— Ratio huc atque illuc ducitur de uno opere in aliud, quip quae cupiat suis operibus in coelum conscendere, hinc illa tot Collegiorum, Monasteriorum, Altarium: etc. On those words, Who in the virtue of God are kept by faith unto salvation: Reason (says he) is tossed this way, and that way, from one work to another, as seeking to scale heaven by its own works. Hence such an inundation of Colleges, Monasteries, Altars, Priests, Monks; but in us, who believe, God keeps a right mind in all things, etc. For many seek to take heaven by force, [as St. Paul, 1 Cor. 9 I chastise my body, and bring it into servitude,] and straight break in upon it. And therefore voluntarily they lay a cross upon themselves. So impossible is it for humane reason not to boast of its own works; but those things God condemns. And thus he writes in an Epistle to Stanpitius, an encourager of his for some time, but afterwards alienated from him; who in his advice to him told him, that— Poenitentia vera non est, nisi quae ab amore justitiae & Dei incipit: That is not true repentance, that does not spring from the love of rightness, and of God. [Words most true indeed: for without the love of God, and righteousness, or holiness, can be no acceptable Repentance.] Haesit (saith he) hoc verbum tuum in me, sicut sagitta potentis acuta; his inhaerens ausus sum putate eos falsos esse, qui operibus poenitentiae &c, Those words yours were to me as the sharp arrow of the mighty; and whilst I thought on them, at length I was so bold as to dare to think those deceived, who attribute so much to works of repentance, that they have scarce left us any thing at all thereof of besides certain formal satisfactions, and most dull tedious Confession, etc. [As if these did not proceed from the love of God, and of holiness; and the greatest mortifications usually were not of those who more fervently love God and virtue; or mortifying the flesh, and having, or being led by the Spirit, were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inconsistent.] And in his Colloquies, c. 37. p. 392.— That no man ought to lay a Cross upon himself, or to make choice of a Tribulation, (as is done in Popedom): but if a Cross or Tribulation cometh upon him, then let him suffer it patiently; and know that it is good and profitable for him; for we must learn (saith he) that Satan is a liar, and a murderer, and that heaviness of spirit cometh of the Devil, who out of mere hatred wisheth that we might not enjoy so much as one hours' solace, or comfort. He adviseth his also to shun solitariness.— ' The Papists (saith he p. 406.) do teach it, that if we intent to know Christ, and to keep our hearts pure, than we should covet to be solitary, and alone, and not amongst much fellowship: a man should be a Nicholas-brother, &c— ' The same (saith he) is a Devilish persuasion, directly against the first and second Table of God's commandments; which teach, that we should do good to our neighbours; therefore we should use their company and fellowship. The same allegation is also against Matrimony, against House-laws, and Temporal Government. We see that our Saviour Christ (when he was here on earth) led no such solitary kind of life, he was not much alone; there was always a tumult of many people about him; he was never alone but when he prayed. More and greater sins are committed when people are alone, than when they keep themselves to fellowship. When Eve in Paradise walked alone, than the Devil utterly misled and deceived her. I have myself found, that I never fell into more sin, than when I was alone. God hath created mankind to fellowship, and not to solitariness; which with this strong argument is approved: God in the Creation of the world created man, and woman, to the end that man of the woman should have a fellow. Solitariness inviteth Melancholy; and one beting alone hath offensive, heavy, and evil cogitations. To conclude; when one is alone, so hath he strange thoughts, and construeth a thing always in the worst sense, etc. Melancholy is an instrument of the Devil, through which he accomplisheth many things. [The less reason he hath to commend solitude it seems, who found his own so comfortless, and peccant.] Such language as this, this man useth, contrary to the Spirit of our Lord, (Mat. 19.12.) and St. Paul, (1 Cor. 7.1, 7, 8, 34, 35, 38, 40.) and the Church of God in all ages. And thus was he a new kind of Reformer, from restraint of Laws to Christian liberty; from Mortifications to Evangelical Indulgences; from the having an active holiness and righteousness in ourselves, to the procuring of a passive righteousness in Christ; without our working at at all as necessary to it derived to us, and put upon us; wherewith being clothed, we reply to the Devil, Have I sinned, let Christ answer for it? (Colloq. 14. c. Comment. in Gal. Praefat.)  
§. 11. n. 1. 
His writing against Monastic Vows.  This he also frequently inculcated to his followers:— That all heaviness of mind and melancholy (i. e. about matters of salvation) cometh of the Devil; and thus God hath sent his Son into the world, not to fright but to comfort sinners. (Colloq. c. 37. p. 392.) That in their anxieties concerning faith and salvation, the chiefest Physic for such a disease was firmly to hold, such cogitations not to be theirs, but that mod sure and certain they come of the Devil; therefore they must use the highest diligence to turn their hearts upon other thoughts, and beat out such cogitons; to repair to Godly company, and avoid being alone. I mention this only to show, that, though this his counsel according to some circumstances is very good, yet, considering his notion of faith nursing all men in security concerning their own works, and obedience, it may be very pernicious to many persons in shaking off, and discarding the wholesome admonitions of their own Conscience, (which should move them to a sorrow-working repentance, and reformation,) as the suggestion of Satan.  
§. 11. n. 2. Now also he writ a book against Monastic Vows, (dedicating it to his Father, to make amends for his formerly taking such Vows much against his will, and rejoicing with him that now he had broken this yoke, saying, that such Vows did— adversari fidei, praceptis Dei, Libertati Evangelicae; were contrary to faith, the commands of God, and Evangelical liberty: And when told of the many former great Saints that had happily lived in such observanee;— Non nego (saith he) sanctos viros hac perversitate faeliciter usos, & miraculo divino servatos: That holy men have happily made use of this perverseness, and miraculously been preserved, I deny not.  

〈◊〉 much rec●●●● ding the st●●● of Matri●●●● and vilifying Celibacy.  He writ also much in recommendation of Matrimony, and disparagement of Celibacy, contrary to the judgement and doctrine of our Lord, and of St. Paul, and of the Fathers, and former Church, For whereas our Lord saith, Matt. 9.12.— That there be those, who have made themselves Eunuches for the Kingdom of Heaven-sake; [which implies their Eunuchism to be from such a gift of God as is attained by their endeavours; and that this is pursued by them for a better attainment of the Kingdom of Heaven]; and so recommends such an Eunuchism to all, with a Qui potest capere, capiat, ' He that can receive it, let him receive it: and whereas after him St. Paul doth the same, 1 Cor. 7. from v. 32. to the end, preferring Celibacy before Marriage, to those who have power over their own will, and a firm resolution thereto, v. 37. for many reasons that are advantageous to salvation; as for their being freed from the cares and troubles in the flesh; for their minding the things that belong to the Lord, how they may please the Lord: that they may attend wholly upon him without distractions; that they may be holy both in body and spirit; whereas the married care also for the things of the world, how to please a husband, or a wife, and so are in some sort divided; I say, whereas such things are delivered by our Lord and St. Paul, recommending much a single state of life before marriage, for the better serving of God therein here, and so receiving an higher reward for this better service hereafter in heaven: This man, as if possessed with a contrary spirit, saith,— Christus ipse non consuluit [coelibatum,] said potius deterruit; manifestavit solum & laudavit. (De Votis Monastic.) Christ himself did not advise us to, but rather deterred us from, Celibacy: he only told us of it, and commended it. And the like he faith of St. Paul, in 1 Cor. 7. * urging, to prove this he saith, our Lord's words,— Non omnes capiunt verbum illud, sed quibus datum est: All receive not this word, but those only to whom it is given. [Whereas indeed it is given to all those, who use a just endeavour for it; like to those who, he said before, made themselves Eunuches; * and urging St. Paul's words,— unusquisque proprium Donum habet ex Deo, Every one hath his proper gift of God, [Proprium donum, ' proper gift indeed, but this according to the endeavour he useth for it, getting the mastery over his will, etc.]  
§. 11. n. 3. He acknowledged Contineney to be a gift of God; but then he will have it a gift no way acquirable by us, as other gift s and graces are, but such as Miracles be, no way in our power to be procured by our prayers, or attained by our industry.— Cast (saith he, Epist. to Wolphgang us Reisembusch.) & integre vivere, tam non est in man nostra quam omnia reliqua Dei miracula. gratia, & opera: To live chaste, and undefiled, is no more in our power, than the either Miracles of God, his grace, and his works. And ibid.— Deus improbat istud votum, non secus ac si vovissem Dei Matrem me velle fieri, aut novum coelum condere velle; God disapproves such a Vow as that, all one as if we should vow to become the Mother of God, or the maker of a new world. A Gift he admits, but so rare, as— Vbi unus castus est, ibi plusquam centies milie eonjugatorum esse debent: There aught to be more than one hundred thousand married persons, for one chaste person not so. (Exeges. in 1 Cor. 7.) And therefore, though not knowing anything of particulars, he accuseth most impiously all monastics and Religious generally of living in continual fornication or uncleaness.  
And therefore as the Apostle adviseth to Celibacy so many as can master their Wills, so Luther adviseth all to Marriage; not considering first with himself, whether they may not have this gift; nor yet showing, since he makes it so singular, and unacquirable, how it may, by those that have it, be known: yet whereas surely it concerns so many as have vowed to God perpetual Celibacy, and also have received from God this gift of Continency, not to break such their Vow which they are able to observe, and wantonly change it for Matrimony; and will not all such fall under St. Paul's censure, as those Widows did he spoke of in 1 Tim. 5.11.— That they waxed wanton against Christ, and married? And upon these terms at least it seems to have concerned Luther also, both for himself, and Katherine Bora his wife (both these having vowed) first to have cleared the point, that they were denied the gift of continency; of which denial every motion of lust that ariseth can be made no certain sign, since he saith, that the continent also may have some lustings, as is showed by and by. And if he might discern his own inconsistent with that gift, yet how he could also know the Votaress Katherine also to be so, I am to learn. But also concerning his own Gift, since he discerned no lustings which he suffered in the heat of his youth, and when a Friar, to have been inconsistent with the gift of continency in him; it seems strange how he could be assured, those that assaulted him after forty years old (had he used the due means of quenching them) to be so. Meanwhile as St. Paul recommends Celibacy, so thus he pleads for the necessity of Marriage, in his Epistle to Wolphgangus, mentioned before, without taking notice of any such gift as Continency;— Qui se hominem esse agnoscit, ille in audiat, quam Deus super omnem carnem pronuntiat sententiam, dicendo nimirum se nolle quenquans vivere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, sed multiplicare, Gen. 2.— Qui vero adeo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 manere statuit, ille nomen hominis a se de●onat, plane faciens se Angelum esse, aut Sp●ritum. Hoc enim a Deo nulla modo conceditur, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vivere volens plane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Non video hic quicquam consultius, quam clausis animi oculis quantocius ipsum opus aggredi ad quod a Deo creatos nos esse videmus & sentimus, dum magnis flammis quotidie in carne nostra adurimur.— Ne quaeso conemur sanctiores esse Abrahamo. He that owns himself a man, let him hear the sentence pronounced by God upon all flesh, saying he would have none live celibate, but multiply. Gen. 2.— But if any one does resolve to live single, and without the care and trouble of children, let him lay aside the name of man, since he makes himself a downright Angel, or Spirit. For so impossible is it to live unmarried, that to attempt it is plainly to fight against God. What can be more adviseable therefore, than with all possible speed to set about that very work, for which we plainly perceive, by the hot scorching flames daily burning within us, we are created. [But not those perfons, I hope, who have the gift of Continency; among whom might be the person he writ to, who had also made a vow of it.— Pray thee let us not strive to be holier than Abraham And from such a necessity he held of the act of Marriage, and the want of the gift of Continency, it is that in his Sermon de Matrimonio he thus states the point.— Vbi alter alteri se subduxerit, ut debitam benevolentiam persolvere nolit, hic opportunum est, ut maritus dicat; Si tu nolueris, alia volet. Si Domina nolit, adveniat Ancilla. Si publice & ante conspectum Ecclesiae renuat, repudia eam; & in vicem Vasti Ester surroga. Where the one withdraws and witholds due Benevolence from the other, [speaking of the Married,] hear the husband may very well say to the wife, If you will not, another woman will; For lack of the Mistress, welcome the Maid. If she refuse, publicly and in the face of the congregation put her away, and put Ester in Vashti's room.  
§. 11. n. 4. And yet when this man is consulted concerning a husband's being divorced for his wife's sickness, he saith, (Sermo de Matrimonio) Si te continere non posse improperes, te plane mentiri respondebo. Nam haud dubie Deus tibi robur impertiet: If you so far slander yourself, as to say you cannot contain; I must tell you plainly you lie; for without doubt God will enable you. [I hope without miracle, and yet not without such a man's cautious endeavours thereof] In case also of one's having a bad and unsufferable wife, he gives this advice.— Si ferre minus potest [i.e. illius malitiam,] ne pejus comittat, divortium faciat, & perpetuo inconjugatus permaneat: If he cannot bear with her [frowardness] rather than do worse let him divorce her, and not marry after. [He hear also presuming of the husband's Continency.] He saith also of himself, that during his Monastical life, in which he passed all the heat of his youth, not marrying till after forty, he lived continently. He grants also those that have the gift of Continency not to be without lustings, but these such as they conquer. Neque dubium est, (saith he speaking of the Apostles— Melius nubere quam uri, ' better to marry than burn,) quiniis quibus castitatis donum concessum est, quandoque libidinem sentiant, eaque tententur; sed quia transit & passim deperit, ideo eorum res in summa non est ustio: No doubt, says he, but they that have the gift of continency sometimes feel some lusting within them, and are tempted with it; but because it passes away, and dyes, [quenched doubtless by their rejecting and diverting their thoughts, as their passions are more tameable, and their affections to continency stronger,] theirs in fine is not burning. And it is seen often, that men, at some time much given to lust and fornication, have afterwards lived most chastely their whole life without marrying, who could not have done so without having this gift from God; and therefore this gift seems such, as without their own fault and neglect they might have had from God sooner.  
§. 11. n. 5. Again, upon St. Paul's— De Virginibus praeceptum Dei non habeo; ' as concerning Virgins, a commandment of our Lord I have not. 1 Cor. 7.25. (to which the next words are, Consilium autem do, but council I give,) he grants that here the Apostle, Virginitatem cuique liberam relinquit," as to Virginity leaves every one to his own liberty. But than saith he, Vbi praeceptum non est, ibi nec meritum, nec merces, coram Deo relinquitur, sed libertas quaedam per sese; where there is no precept, there is no place left for merit or reward before God; but bare liberty only, and no more. Quite contrary to St. Paul. c. 9.18. What is my reward, etc. and contrary to our Lord's— Qui potest capere, capiat," he that can, let him receive it; and St. Paul's— Consilium autem do," Counsel I give; and his Bene facit," Does well, said of Marriage; but Melius facit," Does better, of a single life: And is there then a reward with God for doing well, but none for doing better? And if Continency be a means of serving God more constantly, and free from distraction, hath it not in this a sufficient reward why it should be preferred?  
§. 11. n. 6. Again, he grants also Celibacy and Continency to be a thing in some respect better than Marriage, (for how can he that comments on St. Paul's 1 Cor. 7. say otherwise?) but than he will have it better only as to the enjoying tranquillity and quiet in this present life. To which purpose he saith, (Exeg. in 1 Cor. 7.)— Hoc vere est Virginitatem pradicare, ejus tum altitudinem, tum merita coram Deo non adducere, merum otium & tranquillitatem ejus in hac terra commendare. This is truly to commend Virginity, not to praise its height and excellency before God, but the bare quiet and tranquillity it affords in this life. And upon St. Paul's— Bonum est hominem sic esse, 'tis good for a man so to be, 1 Cor. 7.26. he comments— De caducis hujus temporis Apostolus locutus est bonis, the Apostle speaks of the fading and temporary things of this life. And upon— Qui non jungit melius facit, v. 38. ' He that joineth not [his Virgin in Matrimony] doth better, De bonitate hujus mundi (saith he; intelligendum est, It is to be understood in respect of this world only. As if the Apostle had not expressed himself before sufficiently, for its being much better in order to the things not of this, but of the next, world, and to the serving of God. But now to the contrary hear we Luther concerning the state of Marriage, what advantages as to men's salvation that hath before Celibacy. Christiano (saith he), quem alia post hanc manet vita, prudenter impendio agitur, ut hic pauciores bonos dies transigat, quo in futura patria incessanter melioribus abundet; (Exeg. in Cor.) Sic quoque; Domino bene visum est, quum marem & faeminam condidit, & coadunavit: In a Christian, who looks for another life and country, it is exceeding prudent to take care to have as few good days as he can here; that so he may incessantly enjoy the more hereafter. For so it was the will and pleasure of God, when he created male and female, and made them both one flesh: [viz. that neither of them might see many good days here.] Again, to the same tune afterwards: Debebant (saith he) haec inverti, ut matrimonium verus Spiritalis (status), id quod res est, appellaretur; Ordines autem Religiosorum veri saeculares & mundani status, id quod sunt, nominarentur: These things ought to be inverted, [i.e. the calling of the state of the Religious Orders Spiritual, and the Conjugal, Mundane,] Matrimony should have been called the Spiritual state, as indeed it is; and Religious Orders the Secular and Mundane, as really they are. For, saith he, Perpende sacras Religiones etc. quid aliud est, quam eum statum quaerere, in quo non opus sit nec oculos quidem in coelum attollere, quotidiani panis expectandi gratia.— Sin uxorem duxeris, primus insultus adest tibi; Qui te, etc. For consider the Religious Orders: what are they else but such a state of life, wherein a man needs not so much as lift up his eyes to heaven to beg his daily bread?— But are you married? immediately the first outrageous onset is this, How will you now maintain yourself, your wife, and children? which is enough, not only to teach and stir you up to think of God's grace and goodness, but enforce you also to have faith in him, whether you will or no.  
Thus he, not minding well what he saith: As if our Lord, Mark. 4.19.— Luk. 8.14.— 21.34.14.20. and St. Paul, 1 Cor. 7.28, 32, 34, 35. had not named cares of this life as great obstructions to piety. He further proceeds, comparing these two states.— De usu vel abusu statuum in praesenti nihil disserimus, caeterum de conditione & natura statuum in sese; ac concludimus Matrimonium velut esse aurum, Spiritualem vero statum [i.e. Religiosorum] ut stercus; propterea quoa illud ad fidem, is vero ad impietatem promoveat: With the good or bad use made of these two states I meddle not at present, but only their different natures and qualities in themselves; and I conclude, that the state of a Married life is as Gold, of a Religious as Dung: because the former tends to faith, the latter to impiety, [i.e. by its plenty and want of cares, and because non ex labore suo vivit, it does not live by its own labour.] But if he speaks further how a Spiritual estate or Celibacy may be abused, he seems before to abstract from this.  
§. 11. n. 7. He much accused also the Father's Encomiums, and practice thereof; and saying (in Colloq, 50. p. 451.)— That the Devil, who stirs men up to lustful thoughts, laughed in his fist at St. Jerom's striking himself with stones at his remembrance of the Virgin he had seen dancing at Rome; at St. Bennets rolling himself in thorns; St. Francis' embracing Snowballs; St. Bernard's chastising himself, and by his rigours getting a most loathsome stinking breath: and saying, That he much marvelled that the holy Fathers suffered themselves so fiercely to be tormented with such foolish tribulations; well to be remedied, as long as Maidens are forth coming. Most rashly condemning the monastics and Religious generally of strange lusts, and uncleanness. Yet of the most 〈◊〉 whom he could know nothing of any such inchastity, or incontinency, and he presumed it of them, even contrary to his own experience of himself, when a Monk; who testifies of himself,— se servasse castitatem; & vixisse Monachum, non sine peccato quidem, sed sine crimine: that whilst a Monk, he had lived chastely, (in that only happy time of his;) and though not sinless, yet without any grievous crime.  
§. 12 Nor stays his Anticelibacy here; but that after himself had so solemnly taken the Vow of Chastity, and, 
His throwing off his Monk's Hood, and marrying a Nun.  as you have heard him say, even in the greatest heat of his youth so strictly kept it; so that he might reasonably presume Continency a gift that was in his power, though it should not be in all men's; and therefore his vow of it, as of a thing in his power, obliging; in the forty second year of his age, when the boilings of Nature were now well assuaged and passed over, he boldly dissolved this his Vow, and took a wife; and her not a woman dis-engaged from a single life, but who was a Votaress also to Christ, of preserving her Virginity; of which, for any thing he could know, she might also have the special gift. Her name was Katherine de Bora, a professed Nun; who with some others corrupted by the doctrine of Luther, and other new Reformists, had not long before deserted her Cloister. And thus these two Votaries (to use the Apostle's language) having cast off their first faith and promise of serving God in a single life, and waxing wanton against our Lord (whom they had formerly taken for their only Spouse) married to one another. And the reason Luther gave for such his marriage, was not this, burning, or fear of incontinency; but that he might leave his own Doctrine confirmed also by his own example. (Epist. ad Mich. Stifel.)  
Yet a thing it seems it was, which himself also not long after much regretted, as may be conjectured from those words of Camerarius, in vita Melancthonis, p. 102. and Adam. vit. Luth. p. 130. who saith, that— Melancthon non modo Lutheri dolorem moderatus est, sed illum quoque consolando crexit; & tristitiam molestiasque ejus hilaritate colloquiorum levavit, & ad pristinam eum alacritatem reduxit: When Luther was in his dumps, [concerning his marriage, and the offence given by it,] Melancthon's jests and merry talk etc. made him laugh, etc. And by Luther's procurement Melancthon also himself, when now forty years old, took a wife; nuptias conciliante potissimum Luthero, ' Luther chief making the Match, saith Adams vit. Melancthon. p. 350.— And of it thus Luther in an Epistle to Langius: Philippo ducitur Katherine Crappin; quoth me Authore agi clamant: Ego homini, siquae sunt, optima facio, nihil moratus universorum clamorem: Philip has married Katherine Crappin, by my means, they cry. I do for the man that which is best for him, [to account marriage optimum, best, he must know Melancthon not to have the gift of Continency,] ' not mattering all their clamours. Thus he.— In the same year also that himself married, and probably a little before it, he writ an exhortatory Letter to Wolfgangus Reissenbuch. (in 7. tom. Operum.) of the Order of St. Anthony, one tied with Vows as himself was, to break them, and take a Wife; telling him his Vows were unlawful, because impossible; ' as, saith he, if I should vow to be the Mother of God: urging to him (instead of Matt. 19 Qui potest capere capiat, he that can reecive it, let him receive it, and 1 Cor. 7.— volo omnes sicut meipsum, ' I would all men to be as myself,— and— qui non jungit, melius facit, ' he that joineth her not in marriage, doth better) the 2d. of Gen. v. 18. Non est bonum esse hominem solum, it is not good for man to be alone,— and Gen. 1.28. the precept, Crescite, & multipl●●amini, ' increase, and multiply. And, Adae filii sunt, (saith he) & manebunt homines: hanc ob causam debent, & coguntur, iterum ex se relicto semine, procreare homines: Men as being, and still like to be, sons of Adam, are under not only duty, but necessity of begetting others to leave behind 'em.— And— Qui adeo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 man●re statuit, ille nomen hominis a se deponat; plane faciens se Angelum esse, aut Spiritum; Homini enim a Deo nullo modo conceditur: He that resolves to continue single, let him renounce the name of Man, since 'tis plain he must be an Angel or Spirit. For God has given no such gift to man.  
Nam non duxi uxorem, ut diu viverem, sed ut meam doctrinam, forte mox post meam mortem conculcandam, iterum proprio exemplo relinquerem confirmatam, pro infirmis: I married a wife not to live the longer, but to leave my doctrine, [what of the lawfulness of Votaries to marry? not such, I hope, as have the gift of Continency,] (which perhaps, when I am dead, may be trampled upon) backed by my own example and practice, for the weak brethren's sake.  
§. 13 Again: as to the former task of his daily Prayers when he was a Monastic, 
As leav●ng ●ff his Canonical Hours of Prayer.  the recital of his Office, or Canonical Hours, wherein the whole book of Psalms is entirely repeated every week, besides many other Lections out of the Scriptures and Fathers, in his declining from the Church he by little and little threw off this yoke also; first deferring these Devotions to dispatch them altogether on Saturday; then discharging himself of them quite, and instead of them being satisfied with the recital only of the Lord's prayer. Of which thus Hospinian, (Hist. Sacram. parte altera fol. 4.) Lutherum etiam post impugnatum Papatum aliquot annos se macerasse recitandis Horis Canonicis; cum autem per labores crescentes non posset illis quotidie vacare, totam diem Sabbati septies repetendis impendisse; done● a Philippo admonitus eam superstitionem abjecerit, motus hac Philippi oratione; Si peccatum esset, etc. Luther, after he had impugned the Papacy, yet still for some years macerated himself in reciting the Canonical Hours. Afterwards when through business he could not attend it every day, he employed every Saturday for the repeating them seven times together, till advised by Philip he rejected that Superstition. The argument that moved him was this: If the omission of the recital of those Prayers was a sin, he was guilty already in not performing it daily as the law required: if no sin, why should he lose so much time from more profitable and better things? Luther answered, the advice was good, and from thence forward he would instead of the Hours recite the Lord's Prayer. Tho I find it is said in his life, Melch. Adams. p. 166.— that— Sumsit sibi fere quotidie certum tempus ad Psalmos aliquot recitandos: That he daily allotted himself some time for the recital of some Psalms. And himself saith in an Epistle Tom. 1. p. 222.— Psalterium exigit integrum virum, the Psalms alone are enough to take a man's whole time. Which makes me believe, that he never totally cast off this Holy Exercise.  
§. 14 After the discovery of such gross Errors (as he fancied them) in the Church, and his new Comments made on the Scripture, 
His rejecting 3ly. the Authority of the pre●●●● Church.  not displeasing to many, as yielding much comfort to great sinners, and relaxing strict life; the next thing which followed, was the throwing off his Obedience to her Authority. But this by certain degrees. Questioned for his Doctrines, and upon this cited to Rome, he made friends to have his cause heard in Germany. Herd, and condemned in Germany (by Card. Cajetan for one, a moderate and learned Prelate,) he now appealed to Rome, and to the Pope. But well perceiving also, that his doctrine would be most certainly condemned there (as it was) he suddenly intercepted this Appeal with another (see Adams vit. Luth. & opera Luth. 1. tom.) made from the Pope to a Council. But perceiving that neither thus (the usual former laws of Councils being observed; or only this law of all Assemblies, that the much major part shall conclude the whole) his doctrine could stand, (as indeed it did not) he appeals yet again from Councils to Scripture: where now he knew himself safe (as any Heresy, though never so absurd, would be) in choosing that to be the Judge, or decider of the Controversy, which could never deliver any new sentence on any side; and concerning the meaning of whose former sentence is the present Controversy. But if he means here an Appeal to the Scriptures, i.e. to that which either Christian Princes, or the common professors of Christianity in general (for such he names for his Judges sometimes) shall declare to be the true sense of them; here first, it seems unreasonable, concerning the meaning of God's Word, to prefer the judgement of the Laity before that of the Clergy; of the Church's subjects, before that of their Governors. Secondly, Thus also his cause is lost; for after all his allegations of Scripture produced, and divulged in his writings, the Princes and the Common people also of Christianity, that condemn his doctrine, did then, and do still very much outnumber those who approve it.  
§. 15. n. 1. 
The 4th. his denying the then present to be a true Church, or the Clergy thereof a true Ministry, affirming ●he P●pe to be Antichrist.  He stayed not here, only in an absolute disobedience [not only of non-assent, but also of open contradiction] to all Church-authority; but proceeded so much farther, as to deny the present visible Church, or that of many former Ages, to be a true Church, (he, De judicio Ecclesiae de quavis doctrina, making this the only note of the true Church, that therein the Gospel be purely and sincerely preached); or to have in it any true Clergy, or Ministry. And again, from this defect of a true Clergy he argued, that there had been formerly in celebrating the Eucharist no true Consecration of the Elements for operating the presence of the Body and blood of Christ, [though the meanwhile he justified his own, and his Disciples Consecration to be effectual herein]: and therefore that the people had continually committed idolatry in worshipping the naked bread as Christ's Body. This urged to him, as he saith, (De Missa privata & unctione Sacerdot.) by the Devil, to reduce him, for many years guilty of such Non-consecrations, to despair, he assented to, and afterwards maintained. Next from this he made yet a further discovery, of the chief Bishop in the Church, the Pope, his being Antichrist; the Bishops his Apostles; and the Universities his Lupanaria, or Brothel-houses, (for the Universities much afflicted him.)  
§. 15. n. 2. 
the 5th. his rejecting the authority also of the f●rmer and ancient Church, Councils, & Fathers.  Thus having cast off, blasted, and defied to the uttermost all present Church-Authority; next, solicited that, at least concerning the sense and meaning or right exposition of the Scriptures, he would stand to the judgement of the ancient Church, and be tried by it: This also he expressly renounced, frequently vilifying the doctrine of the Fathers, their weak interpretations of Scriptures; and accusing them of many errors and contradictions.  
§. 16 
Some Instances and testimonies. 1. Concerning h●s rejecting the pres● t church-authority.  For these things it were easy to produce out of his Writings a multitude of testimonies.  
For the newness of his opinions, and his marching alone against the Doctrines of present, and former Church, he every where acknowledgeth it, not to say glorieth in it, as a thing arguing his singular illumination and wisdom. Nay Erasmus (Ep. to Justus Ionas) saith it was observed of him; That where he agreed in Sense, yet he strove to express himself contrary to the former usual doctrine. Aiunt Lutherum, aliquoties, quum eadem doceat quae caeteri, tamen verbis ipsis id videri conari, ut diversissima videatur adferre; as particularly appears in his Expositions of some of his condemned assertions. (Assertio Articulorum.)— See his book de Captivitate Babylonica, in the entrance of his discourse on the Mass, where— (Rem arduam (saith he) & quam forte sit impossibile convelli aggredior; ut quae tanto saeculorum usu firmata, omniumque consensu probata, sic insedorit, ut necesse sit majorem partem librorum, qui hodie regnant, & pene universam Ecclesiarum faciem tolli, & mutari, penitusque aliud genus caeremoniarum induci, seu potius reduci. Sed majori cura verbum Dei oportet observare, quam omnium hominum, & Angelorum intelligentias. A hard, and perhaps unfeisible task, the abolishing that, which being ratified by the practice of so many ages, and approved by general consent, is at length so settled, that the greatest part of books now in vogue, nay almost the whole face of the Church must be taken away and changed, and quite another kind of ceremonies induced or rather reduced. But the word of God is more to be regarded than all the wit of men or Angels. And in his Preface to his book de abroganda Missa privata.— Quot medicamentis (saith he), quam potentibus, & evidentissimis Scripturis meam i● sius conscientiam vixdum stabilivi, aut auderem unus contradicere Papae, & credere eum esse Antichristum, Episcopos ejus esse Apostolos, Academias esse ejus Lupanaria? quoties mihi palpitavit tremulum cor, & reprehendens objecit eorum fortissimum etc. With how many powerful remedies, and most evident Scriptures, and yet all little enough to my wavering conscience, did I bring myself at length to dare (one single man) to contradict the Pope, and believe him to be Antichrist, the Bishops his Apostles, the Universities his Brothel-houses? How often have I trembled, and quaked for fear, and chidingly objected to myself that their strongest and only argument? Are you, alone in the right? Is all the world besides in the wrong? In the Preface to his book, Adversus falso nominatum Ordinem Episcoporum, he, as it were repenting of his former respects, thus defies them, and withdraws his doctrine from theirs, and all humane cognizance and censure.— Jam ante pronuncio, me de c●tero (quandoquidem palam veritati resistitis) non tantum honoris habiturum vobis, ut me, aut meam doctrinam, vestro, vel ullius Angeli de Coelo, judicio subjicere digner. Satis enim nunc datum est stultae huic humilitati etc. I now declare before hand, that for the future I will not vouchsafe you so much honour, as to submit myself or doctrine to your judgement, or an Angels from heaven. Enough of this foolish humility already.— As for those pertinacious hypocrites and Pharisees, let 'em know, that [Doctrine] is not only past the judgement of men, but (as the Apostle says) of Angels too.  
§. 17 Concerning the Pope's being Antichrist, all his Works are full of it, 
〈◊〉 The P p●'s be●●g Antichrist.  which was the foundation of all his animosity and courage against the Church Catholic; an error corrected of late by many learned Protestants, Grotius, Hammond, Thorndike, and others.  
§. 18 Concerning the nullity, and invalid Ordination of the former Church's Clergy, 
3. The inv●l●d●ty of the Clergy.  the Devil seems to have been the first discoverer thereof to Luther, by this, as Luther apprehends, to make him despair. He therefore (de Missa privata & Vnctione Sacerdotum, as Luther himself relates it) strongly accused him of his and the people's committing idolatry, so often as he had said Mass, (which was usually every day) in adoring only a piece of Bread; and this because he was no true Priest, nor rightly ordained, and therefore neither rightly consecrated; but the Elements still remained Bread and Wine. Again: proved, that he was no true Priest formerly, no more than the Turkish Priests are truly so, because he had no right faith, nor was a true believer, [i.e. after Luther 's new way of faith, of which both the Disputants were agreed that it was the right]. Again, neither rightly ordained according to our Lord's Institution, because— Non in Sacerdotem Sacramenti, sed in Sacerdotem Oblationis Ordinatus est; Ordained a Priest, not to consecrate a Sacrament, but offer a Sacrifice: and because, sibi soli, non Ecclesiae ministravit, ' ministered to himself alone, [viz. in private Masses, etc.] and not to the Church. After which Satan thus concludes, voce gravi, & forti, ' in a grave and strong voice: Ergo nunc hoc urgeo, te non consecrasse in tua Missa, sed obtulisse, & adorasse tantum Panem & Vinum & aliis adorandum proposuisse; This therefore ●urge, That in your Mass you did not consecrate, but offered only, and yourself adored Bread and Wine; and elevated it to be adored by others. These Arguments, how weak soever they may seem to you, or me, and for all that the Father of Lies spoke them, persuaded Luther; and, convinced, he would not give the Devil the lie, but fairly, upon this conference, dismissed his former private Masses, and his Sacerdotal unction.— In summa (saith he) nos ab ipsorum Pri●atis Missis, ab unctione Episcoporum liberati sumus: viderint ipsi nunc Domini Papistae;; &c quomodo sua Pergamon defendant: In fine, we are freed from their private Masses, and the Ordination of Bishops: Let the Lordly Papists &c. now see to defend their Posts. And afterwards in the same discourse argues thus against the Clergy that then was:— Sieve in ipsorum Missa adsit Corpus Christi, sive non adsit, de quo ipsi fint solliciti, tuno extra gravem culpam non sunt. Si enim tantum adest Panis, & vinum, (ut res dubia est, & periculo plena,) ipsi sunt maximi impostores sub Sole, etc. si adest, ipsi maximi sacrilegi; etc. In their Mass whether Christ's Body be present or no, (about which let them be as solicitous as they please) they are greatly to blame. For if there be only bread and wine (as the question is doubtful and dangerous) they are the greatest impostors under the Sun. But if Christ's body be there, they are most sacrilegious, in not communicating it to others, as well as receiving it themselves. Thus Luther, perceiving the former Priesthood or Ministry invalid, and uneffective, fell to ordaining, and raising another Ministry of his own; that ever since, when it consecrateth, faileth not to produce in the Eucharist a Consubstantiation of Christ's Body at least; so the people may safely adore. This of his nullifying the former Church's Clergy.  
§. 19 Next concerning the Councils of the Church, he saith in his 29th. Article, (Assertio Artic.) Ego docco Conciliis dissentire, 
Hi rejecting Councils.  & r●sistere, si quando contraria Scripturae statuunt: Scripturam, inquam, volo judicem esse Conciliorum: I teach men to descent from, and resist the Decrees of Councils, when contrary to Scripture. [He must mean here contrary to what he apprehends to be the sense of Scripture.] ' I will, I say, have Scripture to be the Judge of Councils. Again, in his book, De judicio Ecclesiae de gravi doctrina, he saith,— Christus adimit Episcopis, Doctoribus, & Conciliis, tum jus, tum potestatem, judicandi de doctrina, ac tradit illa omnibus Christianis in genere: Christ takes from the Bishops, Doctors, and Councils, both the right and power of judging Controversies, [he means so as to oblige others,] and gives them to all Christians in general, [he means as to judge every one for himself; quoting there for it, Jo. 10. Oves meae vocem meam audiunt; alienum autem non sequuntur, sed fugiunt, etc. My sheep hear my voice, they follow not a stranger, but flee from him. And 1 Thes. 5. Omnia probate, ' Try all things.] So in Assertio. Art. 36. contra Regem Angliae— Attendite a falsis Prophetis, ' beware of false Prophets. Mat. 17.15.— Haec sola authoritas satis esse queat adversus oninium Pontificum, omnium Patrum, omnium Conciliorum, omnium Scholarum sententias, quae jus judicandi & discernendi solis Episcop●s & Ministris tribuerunt.— In ipso Concilio Nicaeno, omnium optimo jam tam incipi●bant leges condere, & jus istud sibi vindicare— Quare si talis error, tantum sacrilegium, tanta longitudine temporis regnavit, semel volo tot Sophistarum os obstructum etc.— Jus condendi leges solius Dei est. This one Text (says he) may suffice against the authorities of all the Popes, Fathers, Councils, and Schoolmen, who attribute to Bishops and Ministers the sole power of judging and deciding Controversies.— In the very Council of Nice, the best that ever was before or since, even than began they to make laws, and claim that power.— Wherefore since such an error and so great sacrilege has been able to prevail so long, I will once for all that these Sophisters leave their prating &c.— The right of making laws is God's alone. And, in Articulis de Papatu, de Conciliis, Indulgentiis, aliisque non necessariis etc. In the Articles (saith he) about the Papacy, Councils, Indulgences, and other unncessary trifles, the levity and folly of the Pope and his followers is more tolerable, etc. In Assert. Art. 28. concerning the Church's Laws in things indifferent: Sieve Papa, sive Patres, sive Concilium sic aiunt, sic sentiunt, nemini debent etc. For the Pope, or Fathers, or Councils saying, or thinking this or that, it ought to prejudice no man: but let every one, in things not necessary to salvation, abound in his own sense. And the abrog. Miss.— Quod sine verbo Dei ordinatur, non ab Ecclesia, sed a Synagogo Satanae sub Ecclesiae nomine ordinatur: What is ordained without the word of God, not the Church but the Synagogue of Satan, under her name, ordains it. And in the distractions of the new Reformation some motioning a Synod to be called amongst them, as necessary for settling them, he gives his grave judgement of Synods thus, (in tom. 2● p. 243.) Quantumvis bono zelo tentata, est res mali exempli, ut probant omnia Ecclesiae Concilia ab initio: A thing, however zealously attempted, yet of ill example; as all the Councils of the Church do show. [So far, as not to spare that of the Apostles, Act. 15.] Ita ut in Apostolico Concilio, fere de operibus & traditionibus magis quam de fide etc. In the Synod of the Apostles was treated in a manner of works and traditions, rather than of faith; but in all others since, never at all of faith, but always of opinions and questions. Insomuch that I begin to suspect and hate, as much almost the name of Councils, as of Freewill. Whence we may gather that a Council was appealed to by him, only because he hoped none would be called, or assembled, and that he was content to stand to a Judge that would never hear his cause; and that this was like the thief's appeal from God and the Country, to be judged by Christ and his twelve Apostles. At length when he saw that a Council was already called, and likely would be convened; he, to prevent the damage it might do to his new Religion, (which he well foresaw,) took his pen, and writ a book of Councils, A. D. 1539. five years before the Council of Trent began, and before that he could raise any particular quarrel against it; wherein he forbears not to asperse even the most sacred and famous Councils that ever were, the Apostolical, Act. 15. and the first Nicene; arguing from the in junction of the first, to abstain from blood, and things strangled, (which was only temporary), that it is lawful not to obey the decrees of Councils; and saying of the second, That its Canons are foenum, stramen, ligna, stipulae;; ' Hay, straw, wood, stubble: And concerning the third Canon, prohibiting the Clergy, Ne haberent secum mulierem extraneam, nisi forte sit mater, aut soror, aut avia, aut amita, aut matertera; That they should not have with them [in their ' house] any woman that was a stranger, unless their Mother, Sister, ' Grandmother, or Aunt, se non intelligere Sanctum Spiritum in hoc Concilio," That he did not understand the Holy Ghost in this Council: Again, An vero nihil aliud est negotii Spiritui Sancto in Conciliis, quam ut impossibilibus, periculosis, non necessariis legibus suos ministros obstringat, & oneret? Has the Holy Ghost nothing to do but to bind and burden its Ministers with impossible, dangerous, and unnecessary laws? Lastly, affirming, Majus lumen accedere Doctrinae Christianae ex Catechismo puerili, quam ex omnibus Conciliis, That the Christian doctrine received more light from the children's Catechism, than all the Councils. Not considering the end of these great meetings, not to prescribe Catechisms, or known Principles, but to decide matters controverted, and to support the Church's Doctrine or Discipline, where some pertinacious adversaries, or corrupt manners have invaded them. Lastly, we may judge how he would have received the sentence of another Council against himself, by his censure of the Council of Constance its condemnation of J. Husse; concerning which he useth this language etc. (Assert. Art. 30.) Omnes articulos Johannis Huss Constantiae esse damnatos ab Antichristo, & suis Apostolis, in Synagoga illa Satanae, ex sceleratissimis Sophistis congregata, & in faciem tuam, sanctissime Vicarie Christi, tibi libere dico, omnia damnata Johannis Huss esse Evangelica, & Christiana, tua autem omnia prorsus impia, & Diabolical: All John Huss'es' Articles were condemned at Constance by Antichrist and his Apostles, in that Synod of Satan made up of those wicked Sophisters; and I tell you plainly to your very teeth, you most holy vicar of Christ, That all John Huss'es' condemned doctrines are Evangelical and Christian, but all yours altogether impious and Diabolical.  
§. 20 Come we now to the ancient Church, and to the Fathers, to see what price he sets on them. 
〈◊〉 A●d Father's.  In the conclusion of his book contra Reg●m Angliae, he saith: Non ego quaero, quid Ambrose, Augustinus, Concilia, & Vsus saeculorum dicunt.— Miranda, est stultitia Satins, quae iis me ●mpugnat, quae ipse impugno; & perpetuo principium petit.— Pro libertate ego pugno, Rex pro captivitate: I care not what Ambrose, Augustin, Councils, and the practice of Antiquity says. A strange folly of Satan thus to oppose me with those very arguments I impugn; and always beg the question.— I fight for liberty, the King for slavery. [Slavery, in submitting to the Fathers.] 〈◊〉 In ass●rtione Articul.— Jam quanti errores in omnium Patrum scriptis inventi sunt? Quoties sibi ipsis pugnant? Quis est, qui non saep us Scripturas torserit? In the writings of every one of the Fathers, how great errors are there? How oft do they contradict themselves? Who is there of them, who does not very many times wrist the Scriptures? And (in the beginning,)— Primum scire cont●statosque eos volo, me prorsus nullius sancti Patris authoritate cogi velle, nisi quatenus judicio divinae Scpipturae fuerit probatus, etc. I will have 'em know, and do take 'em to witness, That I will stand to no Father, further than he shall be allowed by the Word of God, [i. e. his own sense of it,] which thing I know they will take very ill.— And they say the Holy Scriptures are not to be interpreted by a private spirit.— And— Curio non liceat hodie, aut solum, aut pri● 'em sacris literis studere, sicut licuit primitivae Ecclesiae? Why may we not now, as well as they of the primitive times, study only or chief the Scriptures? [as if nothing descended by Tradition.]— In his Protestation before his book De abrogatione Missae.— Protestor imprimis (saith he) adversus eos, qui insanis vocibus in me sunt clamaturi; quod contra ritum Ecclesiae, contra statuta Patrum, contra pro●atas Legendas etc. First of all I protest against those, who shall furiously cry out of me, for teaching contrary to the rites of the Church, the doctrine of the Fathers, approved Legends, and most ancient custom, That I will hear none of these things.— Be it known to the ignorant Popes, wicked Priests, sacrilegious Monks, etc. that we are not baptised, nor do believe in the name of Augustin, Bernard, Gregory, etc. Tell not me, Bernard lived and wrote so and so; but so he ought, according to the Scriptures, to have lived and writ. Concerning the chief Controversy, that of the Mass, being pressed by King Henry the 8th. with the authority of the ancient Church concurring with the present, that it is a Sacrifice; and using it as such, he answers thus.— Vltimo dicta Patrum inducit Rex pro Missario Sacrificio, & ridet meam stultitiam; quod solus vellem sapere prae omnibus. Hoc est quod dixi, etc. Lastly, the King alleges the Fathers for the Sacrifice of the Mass, laughing at my folly, that would be wiser than all the world besides. Is it not as I said? these blockheaded Thomists have nothing to produce for themselves but a multitude of Authors, and ancient custom.— And Captiv. Babylonica, he resolves,— Si nihil habetur, quod dicatur, satius est omnia negasse, quam Missam Sacrificium esse, concedere. Is there nought to be replied? [i. e in answer to the Fathers.] Better however to deny all, than grant the Mass to be a Sacrifice. And on the same matter, in Missa privata:— Hic non moramur (saith he) si clamitent Papistae, Ecclesia, Ecclesia; Patres, Patres; quia, ut dixi, hominum dicta aut facta nihil in tam magnis causis curamus. Scimus enim ipsos Prophetas lapsos esse, adeoque Apostolos: etc. Here we value not the Papists crying, the Church, the Church; Fathers, Fathers: because, as I said, what men say or do in such cases as these, it matters not. For we know, the very Prophets, nay even the Apostles themselves, have erred. By the words of Christ [i. e. by that which he apprehends to be the sense thereof; wherein why may not he be mistaken, if others are?] we judge the Church, the Apostles, nay even the Angels. Lastly, see his Colloquies c. 27, 29, 30. what a character he gives of the Fathers to his companions: That God's Word of itself pure, bright, and clear, through the doctrines, books, and writings of the Fathers, (like milk strained through a Coal-sack) is very sorely darkened, falsified, and spoiled.— That there is great darkness in the Books of the Fathers, concerning Faith. That Austin wrote nothing to the purpose concerning Faith:— For he was first roused up and made a man by the Pe●agians.— That at the first he willingly read Austin; but when the door of St. Paul was opened unto him, (insomuch that he knew what was the righteousness of faith,) than he had done with St. Austin; and that the Fathers were of very small value.— That Chrysostom was only a talker; Bazil, merely a Friar; Cyprian, a weak Divine; Tertullian, amongst the Church-teachers a mere Carolostadius. That Bernard did nimium tribuere praeceptis, & libero arbitrio, attribute overmuch to precepts and freewill. That Macarius, Antonius, and Benedictus, brought apparent mischief to the Church with their Monkery; that they lead a private grizly kind of life, far from a Holy. That he knew none among the ancient Teachers of the Church that he hated like Jerom; for he writeth only of fasting, of victuals, of virginity, etc. teacheth nothing neither of faith, nor hope, nor love, nor of the works of faith.— That the Fathers stumbled ofttimes, and mingled in their books many impertinent and Monkish things.— That the Apology of P. Melancthon surpasseth all the Fathers of the Church, yea St. Austin.— And in his Preface to his Works he saith: Non in omnibus omnium Patrum scriptis, tantum reperiri Eruditionis Theologiae, quantum in locis hisce Communibus: Et si omnia, illorum Scripta conflentur, & colliquescant, non tamen Locos Philippi inde prodituros: Moore learning to be found in those Common-places, than in all the Fathers; which all melted in one lump together, would not make one such book as Melancthons'. Such stuff as this it seems he usually vented; and his friend's Aurifaber, and others, who heard them from him, had not the discretion to conceal them, and to cover his shame and nakedness.  
§. 21. n. 1 
The 6th his setting up his own authority, and maintaining his own doctrines as certain and infallible truth.  This his contempt and low esteem of all other humane authority, and of their doctrines, was accompanied (as usually) with a most high esteem of his own; so greatly liable to mistakes and errors he thought others, so little himself; and how much uncertainty he put in their opinions, so much certainty in his own; confidently styling by the name of God's word his Expositions, and sense thereof, though these contrary to that formerly delivered; using frequently such expressions; That if an Apostle or an Angel from Heaven should come, and teach contrary to such his Expositions, let him be Anathema; and,— That if he was deceived, God had deceived him; and such things he said, not only of those Expositions of his against the Church of Rome, but those made against other Protestants; those made against Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, etc. and of the contrary of which his Protestant-posterity think themselves most certain; equally certain always of his being in the right: and having no less affirmed his certainty even in those things wherein himself afterwards changed his opinion: who is much noted, both by his enemies, and friends to have contradicted in his latter, many things in his former Works: (as better discerning truth, say the one, as more still departing from it, say the other); and to have contradicted those Expositions of Scripture concerning the Lord's Supper in his latter writings against Carolslad, and Zuinglius, which he delivered for certain in his former against Catholics. See the particulars— showed by Hospinian hist. Sacram. 2. part. fol. 8, 9, 12. and so of many things, whereof he was once certain, he became afterwards as certain of the contrary.  
§. 21. n. 1 
Tho these in his latter, and former times much varying.  For example, see in his doctrine of Consubstantiation, wherein he was opposed by other Protestants, he pretended as much certainty, and as clear revelation thereof in God's word; as in any of those, wherein he opposed the former Church.— Si quisquam mihi persuadere potuisset (saith he Ep. ad Argent.) in Sacramento praeter panem & vinum esse nihil, magno beneficio me sibi devinctum reddidisset; gravibus enim curis anxius, in hac excutienda materia multum desudabam; omnibus nervis extensis me extricare & expedire conatus sum; etc. Can any man have persuaded me, these was nothing but bread and wine in the Sacrament, he had much obliged me. For being in great perplexity, I took great pains in discussing this point; I endeavoured with all my might to extricate and free myself, as well perceiving I should thereby very much incommode the Papacy, in the first place. But I see I am caught, no way of escaping left me: For the words of the Evangelists are too plain and clear to be forced to any other meaning. Again:— Declaring against the new Sacramentarians, (Epist. qua se excusat de Sacramentario errore apud Hospin. fol. 133.)— Haec mea in Sacramenti negotio fides est, de qua certus sum, quam etiam nemo mihi hominum eripiet unquam: etc. In the business of the Sacrament this is my faith; whereof I am certain, and which no man shall ever take from me: which also I profess, that all may see, that I assent to the clear and manifest words of Scripture against all errors ancient and modern; and resist the malice and wiles of the Devil; for Christ our Lord will not lie to me. So contra Regem Angliae, Decerno (saith he) impium esse, & blasphemum, si quis dicat Panem transubstantiari; Catholicum autem, & pium, si quis cum Paulo dicat, Panis, quem frangimus, est corpus Christi, Anathema sit qui aliter dixerit, & jota vel apicem unum mutarit: To say with Paul, The bread which we break is the Body of Christ, [i. e. in his way of Consubstantiation,] I aver to be orthodox and pious; as, That the Bread is transubstantiated, wicked blasphemy. Let him be Anathema that shall say otherwise, and change one jota or tittle. Yet besides that, Zuinglius, Calvin, and his followers tell me, that Luther's certainty in this point was but a delusion, and God's Word revealing no such thing as he pretended; a little before his going to Islebium, and but a few days before his going out of this world, Jan. 23, 1546. it is reported, that his former certainty in this point vanished; and Melch. Adams in his life, p. 165. relates such discourse as this passing between him and Melancthon, and sets down several witnesses of it; and the same story is yet further confirmed by Hospinian (fo. 201. etc.)— Lutherum fateri, se longius in Controversia Sacramentaria progressum. Tum. Melancthonem suasisse, ut leni scripto edito sese explicaret. Ad id respondisse Lutherum:— Hoc modo totam doctrinam suspectam seredditurum. Luther confessed he had gone too far in the Sacramentarian controversy. Then Melancthon advised him, by publishing some moderate Treatise, to explain himself. To which Luther answered, That by this means his whole Doctrine would become suspected. None of his Doctrines having been to his followers more assured by him, more zealously maintained than this; and I suspect some artifice of his in such his assurances of his doctrines, from that Apology made by him to those who blamed his mordacity, and railing.— Video (saith he, 2. tom, Ep. p. 6) quae nostro saeculo quiete tractantur, mox cadere in oblivionem, nemine eacurante:" I see now adays, things modestly written [such as are delivered without asseverations of the truth thereof] are quickly forgotten, none regarding them. [Without crying, verbum Dei, the Word of God, he would have found few followers.]  
§. 22 
T●● 7●●. impatiently suffering ●pposition; 〈◊〉 m●ru●icating, & anathematising ary others, though re●●rme●i, that contradicted his doctrines.  From this his great self-opinion, in his own so freely dissenting from, and opposing all other Ecclesiastical Magistrates, yet he was noted to suffer impatiently any opposition made to himself, and could not well brook any Reformation different from his own; as appears in his disallowance of those made at Wirtenberg, in his absence, and in his quarrels with Carolostadius; not indeed requiring conformity to his doctrines, out of any authority he claimed to impose them, which authority he renounced; but yet (which is somewhat more) from a certainty of divine truth, which he pretended to be in them; and whilst he refused any obedience given to him as a Magistrate, he seems willingly to have admitted it to him as an Oracle. But yet as he had thrown off the yoke of the Church-authority; so many others that pursued the Reformation, saw no reason, why they should be subject to his; but took the same liberty to descent where they pleased, from him, as he had done from die Church; and by the measure he had meted, it was measured to him again. So that within a little time after his revolt there grew, in the Reformation, Sect after Sect, accusing one another of error, as all of them did the Church; Anabaptists, Zwinglians, Antinomians, etc. insomuch that in his Preface to his Comment on the Galat. he saith, himself had encountered above twenty Sects, but (as he fancied,) laid them a gasping, and crushed all he grappled with. Ego (saith he) qui jam sum in ministerio Christi viginti annis, quanquam nihil sum, vere possum testari, me plus quam viginti sectis esse petitum, etc. In the twenty years I have been a Minister of Christ, although I am nothing, (2 Cor. 12.11.) I can truly attest, above twenty Sects have assailed me. And in Gen. c. 6. published not long before his death:— Quantum Sectarum excitavit Satan nobis viventibus? Quid futurum est nobis mortuis? Profecto tota agmina Sacramentariorum, Anabaptistarum, & Satan that has raised so many Sects while we are alive, what will he do when we are dead? Truly whole swarms of Sacramentarians, Anabaptists, Antinomians, Servetians, Campanists, and other Heretics, (who, vanquished by the purity of the Gospel, and assiduity of preaching, now lie lurking, and only wait for an opportunity to set up their doctrine,) he will then bring out? Again, in cap. 24. Muncerus, & Sacramentarii, neglecto & Sacramentis, nihil aliud nisi Spiritum sonant, idque nobis viventibus, docentibus, etc. The Sacramentaries neglecting the Word and Sacraments talk of nothing but the Spirit, and this even whilst we are yet living, preaching against, and opposing them: what will they do then, when we shall be silenced by the Grave? Again, thus he, concerning the Sacramentarians, in an Epistle to Fred. Michonius.— Habet Sacramentaria Secta jam, ni fallor, sex capita uno anno nata; mirus Spiritus, qui sic dissentiat sibi. Hi omnes Spiritus invicem diversi argutis dimicant argumentis etc. If I mistake not, six heads of the Sacramentarian Sect have sprung up in one year. A strange spirit, that is thus at odds with itself! All these Spirits, whereof no two are alike, combat one another with subtle arguments. They all pretend revelations, obtained by prayers and tears; and yet against us they are agreed, It is well for us through Christ, who makes them thus wrangle among themselves for our sakes,  
§. 23 Upon the same presumption of his unerring judgement, he by his single authority altered the former public Liturgy, and reform the Service of the Mass, 
The 8●●. ●is ●l●ering the public Service; Ordaining a new M●nist●y●● abrog t●●g, and burning the fo●mer Canon Law.  (apud Hosp. fol. 20) and remitted the former obligation of Confession of sins to the Priests, and Fasting before receiving the Communion; and generally held in matters of Religion no Ecclesiastical [i.e. humane] laws obliging: (see before §. 19) Began a new Ordination of Bishops and Ministers (vita p. 129.) descending from him; after having declared their former Unction null, and God's Church to be only that where the Gospel was purely preached; that was his. By the same authority, assisted with the power of the Prince, he made new Bishops, and put them in the places of the deceased. Against the Canonical Election of another, made his intimate friend Ausdorse Bishop of Neoburg, (see M●lch. Adam vita p. 150.) and Georg. Anhal●tinus Bishop of Mersburg. By the same Authority he sentenced the Canon-law consisting of the former decrees amassed, as well those of Councils, as those of Popes, to the fire; and assembling the University solemnly burned it in Wirtenberg. (vita. p. 115.) By the same he frequently pronounced Anathema's and Excommunications to those reformed, that dissented from him in Opinion.  
§. 24. n. 1. 
〈…〉.  For the things said here, it is easy to produce a multitude of testimonies. Concerning his presumption of his own Doctrines, and Expositions of God's Word, he saith, (see before §. 16.)— Illum see, aut ●●●am doctrinam, Episcoporum, aut ullius judicio Angeli de Coelo subj●cere non dignari: he scomed to submit himself or his Doctrine to the judgement of the Bishops, or an Angel from Heaven. And— Extra aleam positam esse eam omnis humani judicii, sed & omnium Angelorum; ' passed the censure of men or Angels. [All this only out of a high presumption, that his Exposition of the Scriptures was true, the Church's false.] And in an Epistle to Melancthon, (Adam. vit. Luth. p. 138:)— De publica causa satis magno, & otioso animo sum, qui scio certo ipsam esse justam, etc. Certainly knowing the public cause [i. e. his own reformed Tenants] to be just and true, and Christ's and God's, I am courageous and unconcerned enough about it.— The threaten of these bloody Papists I value not a—: if we come to the ground, Christ will tall with us.— I had rather fall with Christ, than stand with the Emperor. In his answer to the Emperor's Edict. 1531. concerning his way of Justification by Faith alone, opposing the Church's former doctrine in this point:— This Artide (saith he) will they, nill they, [the Pope, Emperor, &c] will stand, Hell-gates cannot prevail against it; the Spirit of God doth dictate this unto me, this is the true Gospel, etc.— Casting the Pope's Bull, the Canon-law, and the writings of his Aduersaries into the public fire in Wirtenberg, he used this insolent speech, joined with that insolent act: (vit. Luth. Adams p. 115.)— Quia tu conturbasti Sanctum Domini, conturbet te ignis aeternus: because thou hast disturbed the Holy of the Lord, get thee into eternal flames,— And upon Gal. 1.11, 12. he thus answers an Objection made against the newness of his Doctrine taught, contrary to that of the former Church, by so inconsiderable a person; which answer, because it seems to contain all the defence he could make for himself, I will set you down at large.  
§. 24. n. 2. First then he frames this Objection, as made by the false Apostles against St. Paul, fitting the application thereof to himself.— Quod Paulus long inferior esset reliquis Apostolorum Discipulis, qui, quod docerent, & servarent, acceperant ab Apostolis.— Curio igitur inferiori vellent obtemperare, & authoritatem iposorum Apostolorum, qui Doctores essent omnium Ecclesiarum totius orbis terrarum, contemnere? Valde igitur (saith he) speciosum, & robustum hoc argumentum Pseudo-Apostolorum fuit; etc. Paul being much inferior to the other Disciples of the Apostles, who had received from the very Apostles what they did and taught;— why therefore should they obey him that was inferior, and despise the authority of the Apostles themselves, who were constituted Masters of all the Churches in the world? This then (saith he) was the specious and great-argument of the false Apostles, which even now adays retains its force with many. What! say they, the Apostles, the Holy Fathers, and their Successors, have taught so, and so; the whole Church judgeth so, and believeth so, and 'tis impossible for Christ to permit his Church to err for so many ages. And do you now pretend to be wiser than so many holy men, than the whole Church & c? Thus it is, that the Devil transforming himself into an Angel of light, treacherously sets upon me by the virulent tongues of certain Hypocrites: We stand not much upon, say they, either Pope, or Bishops.— Nay we detest the hypocrisy and impostures of Monks etc. But we cannot in the least suffer the authority of the most holy Catholic Church to be infringed. There are so many ages now, that she has constantly judged so, and taught so; all the Doctors of the Primitive Church, most holy men, much greater and more learned than you, have still judged and taught the same. And who now are you, that dare departed from all these, and force upon us different tenants? His answer to this is: Quando Satanas hoc urget, & conspirat cum carne & ratione, perterresit Conscientia, & desperate, nisi constanter adte redeas, & dicas; Sive Sanctus Cyprianus, Ambrose. Augastinus, sive Sanctus Petrus, Paulus, aut Johannes, imo Angelus de Calo al●t●r doceat, tamen hoc certe scio quod humana non suadeo, sed divina; he●●st, quod Deo omnia tribuo, hominibus nihil: Memini initiom●● causae Do●●orem Staupitium tunc summum virum, & Vicarium Ordinis Angustini, ad me dicere: Hoc mihi, inquit, placet, quod hac Doctrina, quam pr●dicas, gloriam, & omnia soli Deo, tribuit, hominibus nihil. Deo a ●●m 〈◊〉 quod luce clarius est) nimium gloriae, bonitatis, etc. attrib●i non potest. Haec vox vehementer me tum consolabatur, & consirmabat● Malto aus●ta ●●tias est tribuere nimium Deo, quam homi●●bus. Ibo 〈◊〉 cum ●id 〈◊〉 dicere possum; Esto sane, Ecclesia, Augustinus, & alii Doctores, item Petrus Apostolus, imo Angelus de Coelo diversum doceant, tamen mea doctrina est ejusmodi, quod solius Dei gratiam, etc. When Satan urgeth thus, and conspires with flesh and reason against us, our conscience is troubled, and will certainly despair, unless we resolutely stir up ourselves, and say, Tho St. Cyprian, St. Ambrose, St. Angustin, though St. Peter, Paul, and John, yea an Angel from Heaven teach the contrary, yet this I certainly know, that the things I propose are not humane but divine, i. e. I attribute all to God, and nothing to men. I remember well what Dr. Staupitius, a prime man then, and Vicar of St. Augustin's Order, told me in the beginning of my preaching: I like well, said he, that this Doctrine you teach gives glory, and indeed all things to God, and nothing to men; for who sees not, that too much honour, goodness, etc. can never be attributed to God? These words of his comforted and strenthned me extremely;— Much safer is it to give too much to God, than men. For than I may boldly say, let the Church, and St. Augustin, with the rest of the Doctors, let St. Peter the Apostle, nay an Angel from Heaven teach otherways, yet certain it is, that my Doctrine [of Justification by faith alone without our works] is of that nature, that it illustrates and extols the grace and glory of God alone, and condems [in the matter of salvation] whatsoever wisdom and righteousness of men. Here I cannot be mistaken etc. A second time he renews the Objection; At ais; Ecclesia est sancta, Patres sunt sancti, But you tell me, the Church is holy, the Fathers are holy: and answers it thus; Bene; sed Ecclesia, quamlibet sancta, tamen cogetur orare, Remit nobis debita nostra.— Ergo neque mihi, neque Ecclesiae, neque Patribus, abque Apostolis, neque Angelo e Coelo credendum est, si quid contraverbum Dei docemus.— Alioquin hoc argumentum Pseudo-apostolorum maxim valuisset contra Pauli Doctrinam. Quia profecto magna, magna, inquam, res fuit, opponere totam Ecclesiam cum toto choro Apostolorum, Galatis, contra Paulum unicum, & eum recentiorem, & minimum authoritatis habentem: nec enim libenter dicit, Ecclesiam errare; & tamen necesse est dicere, eam errare, si extra vel contra verbum Dei aliquid docet. Petrus Apostolorum summus vivebat, & docebat extra verbum Dei, etc. Well, but though the Church be never so holy, yet she is fain to pray, forgive us our trespasses.— Therefore there is no believing either me, or the Church, or the Fathers, or Apostles, or an Angel from Heaven, if we teach any thing against God's word. Otherways this argument of the false Apostles would have run down St. Paul's doctrine. For, believe me, to the Galatians it was no small difficulty to oppose the whole Church with all the Apostles against St. Paul alone, and him the latest, and of least authority amongst 'em.— Neither was he willing to say the Church erred; yet 'tis necessary to say she errs, if she teaches any thing besides, or against the word of God. Peter the chief of the Apostles did live, and teach otherways than he ought by the word of God, therefore he erred. [Taught and erred, false; his Example, not Doctrine, was false.] Neither did Paul then connive at his error, (though it appeared slight,) because he well saw the evil, that might thence arise to the whole Church.— Therefore neither Church, nor Fathers, nor Apostles, nor Angels are to be believed, unless they teach the pure word of God. Yet still the Objection will not be thus satisfied, but returns on him again. Hoc argumentum (saith he) & hodie maxime praegravat causam nostram. Nam si neque Papae, neque Patribus, neque Luthero, etc. cedendum est, nisi doceant purum Dei Verbum, cui tum credendum est? Quis interim certas faciet Conscientias, utri purum Dei verbum doceant; nos, an adversarii nostri? Non & ipsi jactant, se purum Dei verbum habere, & docere? Nos Papistis non credimus, quia verbum Dei non docent, neque docere possunt. Econtra ipsi acerrime nos oderunt, & insectantur, ut pestilentissimos Haereticos, & seductores. Quid hic faciendum? Num cuivis fanatio spiritui permittendum, ut doceat quae velit; & This argument, saith he, even at this present time does much molest our party. For if we must neither believe Pope, nor Fathers, nor Luther, etc. unless they teach the pure word of God, who then shall we believe? who will be able to assure our hearers, whether I, or rather my adversaries stick to the pure word of God? for do not they also boast that they have and teach it? We reject the Papists, because they neither do, nor can, teach the pure word of God: and they on the other side mortally hate and persecute us as pestilential Heretics, and seducers. What can be done in this case? Must every fanatical spirit be licenced to teach what he pleases; whereas the world can neither hear nor endure my doctrine [any better than theirs.]— For though we openly profess with Paul, that we preach the pure Gospel of Christ, it avails us nothing; and we are forced to hear that this profession of ours is not only proud, temerarious, and vain, but blasphemous also, and diabolical; on the other side to submit ourselves, and yield to the fury of our enemies, is to make both Papists and fanatics grow proud and insolent: these, by bringing up and teaching, what the world never heard before; those, by obtruding again and confirming their old abominations. To this again he briefly replies: — Quisque igitur videat, ut certissimus sit de sua vocatione, & doctrina, ut cum Apostolo certissime, ac securissime ausit dicere; Etiamsi vos aut Angelus e Coelo etc. Let every one therefore take great care to be most certain and secure of his vocation and doctrine, [alluding to what the Apostle saith, Gal. 1.8, 15.] that with all security he may venture to say with the Apostle, Tho an Angel from Heaven etc. The fu●r me of which triple Reply is agreeable to our former observation:— Certissimus sum de mea vocatione & doctrina: I am most certain of my vocation and doctrine. And— Hoc certe scio, quod humana non suadeo, sed divina; ' This I certainly know, that the things I teach, are not humane, but divine: and the applying to himself against the Fathers the answer of St. Paul against St. Peter, and others,— Etiamsi vos aut Angelus de Coelo etc." Tho an Angel from Heaven etc. as if like this Apostle he also had some extraordinary calling to his Ministry; or, as if his opinions were like his faith; that being assured of their truth, makes them truth.  
§. 24. n. 3. 
Of those also that h● m●i●●●●●●d ag●●●st other Reform.  And this presumptive certainty, and plerophory this man had, not only of those tenants of his maintained against the Papists, but in those also maintained against any other Reform. In his greater Confession, answered by Zuinglius, wherein he maintains Consubstantiation, he saith: Si incertus, & obscurus contextus, & sensus omnino habendus; illum potius habere velim, quem ex Dei ore progressum certe scio: If it be necessary to have some context or sense that is obscure, above all others let me have that, which I am certain comes out of God's mouth. The Landgrave of Hasse calling the assembly at Marpurg of the Saxon and Helvetian reform Divines, chief inviting Luther to it, he returns this answer; Nihil fructus ex Colloquio sperandum, nisi pars adversa accedat animo cedendi: siquidem cedere ipsis non posse, qui certus sit de Verbi sententia: There is no good to be hoped of any meeting, unless my adversaries come with a mind prepared to yield: for 'tis impossible for me to yield to them, being most certain of the sense of the Word, [i.e. of his Consubstantiation.] Here I cannot but put him in mind of an Observation he makes (Colloquio c. 35. p. 352.) of some other Sectaries of his time, with whom he had much bickering: who (he saith) were so spiritually bewitched by the Devil, that they were so far from confessing and acknowledging their errors, that they firely boasted, yea would not stick deeply to swear, that they have the most assured truth. And when some of them he confuted by many sentences of Holy Scripture, (especially those that are the chief, and ringleaders of such Heresies; yet all labour is lost; for they quickly have their glosses, wherewith they make babbling and idle Oppositions against the sentences of Scripture; insomuch that by our admonitions they are not only nothing bettered, but are the longer, the worse obdurate, and hardened. This (saith Luther) should I never have believed, (that the Devil in such sort could trim up his lies, and make them so like unto the truth,) if the open experience of these times had not delivered the same unto me. [Alas! what he saw in others, why feared he not in himself, straggling from the Church?]  
§. 24. n. 4. Carolostadius, upon some provocation of ill language, taxing something in his doctrine concerning the Eucharist, as they were together in an Inn; he presently grew so hot, and impatient, that he challenged him to a public Encounter of writing one against another; and the other desiring to have this controversy rather privately composed; He, too confident of the victory, in a war that hath lasted ever since amongst the Reformed, and divided them into two bands even until this day, further obliged his adversary to it, by delivering to him a Crown of Gold, as a gage of the quarrel.— Ex concitato isto animi fervore (saith Hospinian Hist. Sacram. 2. part. 4.32.) aureum nummum extractum ex pera ipsi [Carolostadio] offered [Lutherus], inquiens: En accipe, & quantum potes animose, contra me dimica. Quod et si recusaret primum Carolostadius, & rem cognitioni piae permittendam moneret, ac peteret: tandem tamen cum urgeretur, hunc aureum nummum accepit, & marsupio suo recondidit; Luthero manum in sponsionem pactae & susceptae Contentionis porrigens: pro cujus confirmatione Lutherus ipsi vicissim haustum vini propinavit, &.— In the heat of his passion he [Luther] pulled out of his purse a Crown of Gold, and offering it to the other, [Carolostadius;] Here, take this, says he, and do thy worst against me. And although Carolostadius stood off at first, and desired and asked him to consider a little better on it, yet at last being more provoked, he took the Gold, and put it up, and gave Luther his hand, to show he accepted the challenge, which Luther for his part ratified, with a glass of wine. And— Haec, Christiane Lector, fuerunt infelicissimi istius certaminis, quod ex pacto & sponsione susceptum tot jam annis Ecclesiam gravissime exercuit, infausta auspicia: quae si quis diligenter apud se animo, sepositis affectibus, expendat ex quo spiritu fuerint profecta, tanto rectius & aequius, non solum de toto hoc certamine, sed etiam de Polemicis Lutheri scriptis, in quibus, quod semel in invidiam Carolostadii, & adversariorum suorum adio defendendum susceperat, quoquo modo asserere, & tueri, quam cuiquam opinione sua cessisse videre maluit, est judicaturus. etc. These were, Christian Reader, (as Hospinian goes on) the unhappy beginnings of that unfortunate contention and strife, which undertaken by pact and agreement has now for so many years grievously torn our Church: which things whosoever, setting all biased affections aside, shall seriously ponder from what spirit they came, shall be much better thereby able to judge, not only of this whole quarrel, but also of Luther's other Polemical writings; in which whatsoever he has once set down to the prejudice of Carolostadius, of other adversaries, he shall find him defend, and hold it any way, rather than to seem in the least to yield to any. Neither will he hereafter much admire (such is the lamentable state of humane frailty) why Luther appeared so vehement, and upon occasions so various and changeable, in this his affected passion for contention and victory. [Prosecuting more eagerly the conquest of his Enemy, than the discovery of Truth.]  
§. 25 
2d. Concerning his consuring & condemning those of the other reform opposing him.  For his censuring and condemning such other reform doctrines as were contrary to his own, as freely as the Roman, pronouncing them Heretical, and upon this, removing them from his Communion, as fathering also on the Devil whatever opinions differed from his, and making especially all his Protestant adversaries Sathanized, Super-sathanized, and throughly possessed by him; and amongst other ill names, frequently also calling them Devils: See what Oecolampadius writeth concerning this to his friend Zuinglius, (Ep. ante, respons. ad Luth. Confess.)— Suavissima (saith he,) amicissimaque, si non etiam frequentissima, sunt Suermeri, Nebulones, Daemons, & alia hujus generis quamplurima, quae, quam infirma sit humnae naturae conditio, nos erudire debent: His most sweet and friendly, if not most usual terms, are Suermers, Knaves, Devils, and other such like, which must be a document to us of the infirmity of humane nature. Neither did ever any yet, I think, in his invectives and reproaches use this word so much as he hath done, boldly pronouncing also of Oecolampadius, and other adversaries of his, whom he heard died suddenly, that they were strangled by the Devil. (See below §. 32.). See his answer ad Argentinenses.— Respondere non posse, si damnare non liceat; that 'twas in vain for him to answer, without they would give him leave to condemn. And— Alterutros esse Satanae ministros, vel ipsos, vel se; that either they [the Zuinglian Divines] were the Ministers of Satan, or he himself [Luther.] And elsewhere, (— Liber contra Sacramentarios.) Haereticos serio censemus, & alienos ab Ecclesia Dei Zuinglianos, etc. We do without all question judge the Zwinglians to be Heretics, and aliens from the Church of God, etc. And— Quicunque credere nolit, in Eucharistia panem (post verba Consecrationis) esse verum, & naturale Christi Corpus, is a me abstineat Epistolis, scriptis, vel sermone, neque ullam meam expectet communionem: whosoever does not believe that the bread in the Eucharist (after the words of Consecration) is the true and natural body of Christ, let him never dare to write or speak to me, nor expect in any way to communicate with me. And in his Confessio parva, he saith,— se nullius fanatici, (sieve is sit Stenkfeldius, sive Zuinglius, sive Carolostadius, sive Oecolampadius, sive quisquam alius haereticus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hoc est, Christi hostis, & blasphemi, consortium recipere, nec literas, libros, salutationes, benedictiones, scriptiones, aut nominationem, intra animi sui penetralia admittere, nec visu vel auditu dignari, decrevisse: That he will neither keep company with any Fanatic, (whether it be Stenfeldius, or Zuinglius, or Carolostadius, or Oecolampadius, or whatsoever other Heretic, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i.e. bread-eater, winedrinker,) that is, with any enemy of Christ, and blasphemous person, nor receive either letters, books, salutations, benedictions, or writings from them, nor even name them, or vouchsafe so much as to hear or see them. Ib. Neminem pro illis orareposse, peccare enim eos ad mortem: that none can pray for them, because they sin unto death. Ib.— Malle centies discerpi, vel comburi, quam illorum doctrinae consentire: that he had rather a thousand times be torn in pieces, and burnt, than assent to their doctrine.— And— Hoc testimonium, hancque gloriam ad Tribunal Jesus Christi secum allaturum, quod Suermeros, Sacramentorum hosts, Carolostadium, Zuinglium, Oecolampadium, Stenkfeldium, eorumque discipulos, Tiguri, & ubicunque sint, toto pectore damnarit atque vitarit: that he would carry this testimony and glory along with him to the Tribunal of Christ, that with all his might and main he had condemned and avoided the Suermers, enemies of the Sacraments, as also Carolostadius, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, Stenkfeldius, and their disciples, whether at Zurich, or wheresoever else they be. And concludes his major Confession with a Protestation; That if at any time hereafter, I shall say or write otherwise than now I hold in this my Confession, (especially about the Sacrament,) it is false, and comes from the Devil. He is said also in his later time, perceiving some variety of opinion, especially by Melancthon's indifferency, to begin to spread itself at Wirtenberg, to have mediated a prescribed form of doctrine, (though contrary to his former principles,) in which, siquis aliter quam ipse sentiret, Wirtenbergae non duraturum; if any should be of a contrary opinion to him, he should not stay at Wirtenberg. Upon which foreseen by Melancthon he writes thus to Calvin:— Totos jam annos viginti expecto exilia, propterea quod ostendi me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non probasse: Every day for this twenty years have I expected to be banished, for showing a dislike to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. Bread-worship. [He means of the Lutheran party.] See Hospinian. fol. 193. etc. and 249. And all this he saith chief in opposition of or to Calvin's way of Real presence; how orthodoxly, how certainly, let Calvin's followers judge; and by this judge of the certainty of his other doctrines also, so authoritatively maintained by him against the former Catholic Church of God.  
§. 26 
Where also of their reciprocal censures of him for it.  Therefore for this great fault of self-pleasing, and confidence in his own opinions, expositions of Scripture (when, as they say, he most grossly erred); and for the frequent contradictions observed in his former, and later writings, inconsistent with such certainty, yet which he always pretended, as much in his first (till these recanted), as in his last, Tenants; as likewise for the varying of his doctrine according to his adversary; expounding Scripture a contrary way, as he had occasion to make use thereof against the Church of Rome, or against his anti-sects Reform; of which see many instances Hospinian, f. 8. &c: I say, for all these, he hath not escaped a heavy censure even of his brethren, when they found themselves to suffer from such his exorbitances. Thus speak of him the Tigurine Divines in their Confession: Proprii cerebri figmenta usque adeo illi placent, ut quotquot illa, haud secus ac Dei Oracula, & Revelationes, non recipiunt, pro asinis habet, & nihil intelligere putet: ' He dotes so far upon the fictions of his own brain, that he takes for mere fools and asses, all those, who receive them not as Oracles and divine Revelations. And again,— In omnibus Correptionibus suis plurimum maligni spiritus, quam minimum vero amici & paterni animi deprehenditur: In his reprehensions you may frequently find marks of a malign spirit, but little or nothing of a friendly and fatherly affection. And thus Conradus Gesnerus in his Bibliotheca:— Illud non est dissimulandum virum esse Lutherum vehementis ingenii, impatientem, & qui, nis●per omnia sibi consentientes, far nesciat: It cannot be concealed, that Luther is a man of a vehement spirit, impatient, and of such a humour, as can endure none but those who side with him in all things.— And thus Zuinglius, in resp. ad lib. Luther. de Sacrament. as to Protestant Controversies, accuseth Luther's new Expositions of Scriptures, for as erroneous as confident.— Tu leges fingis, juxta quarum Praescriptum Scripturae sanct●e intelligi debeant, quas alioquin in tuo sensu minus tueri ac asserere potes. Eas Traditiones praescribis, quae Dei verbum nusquam tradidit; nec traditas quoque ullo modo admittere, aut ferre potest: You frame laws to yourself for the understanding of the Scriptures, which other ways you would not be able to assert, and abett, in the sense you would have them. You prescribe such Traditions, as never were delivered by the word of God, nor can be suffered or admitted by it. And again in his answer to Luther's Confessio magna, p. 478 En (saith he) ut totum istum hominem Sathan occupare conetur? cum in verborum sensu misere fallitur, & errat, Dei est, ut ipsum excuset, & pro ipso satisfaciat: Behold (saith he) how wholly Satan has possessed that man! when he grossly mistakes the sense of the words, no less than God must be brought upon the Stage, to make the excuse, and satisfy for him. Again,— Clandestinum quoddam effugium sibi hoc modo praeparare conatur, hoc videlicet; Si seductus aut falsus sum, Deus me seduxit, & fefellit, nam hujus verbo me totum commiseram. etc. A fecret refuge upon occasions he thus prepares for himself; If I am seduced, says he, if I am deceived, God has seduced me, God has deceived me, for to his word alone I gave myself over. And in the mean time he does not consider, that the very Pope of Rome, and all other Heretics may say the same. etc. And again,— Non ex verbis modo, quae non alia arma, quibus se defendat, quam convitia, probra, & immites increpationes continent, verum etiam ex ipsis sententiis, & violenta Scripturarum tractatione, ipsum non aliquo Fundamento vere solido inniti videre liceat. Tot enim sententias absurdas, etc. You may gather, not only out of his words, which have no force in them, besides strong calumnies, and merciless reprehensions; but also out of his citations, and perverse using of Scripture, that he is not grounded upon any solid foundation. For he brings so many weak and absurd sentences to confirm his doctrine, that if they were true and infallible, all the knowledge we have of God would become obscure, all the authority of Scripture would be called in question.  
§. 27 
3. Concerning the instability of his doctrine.  Concerning the instability and fluctuation of his doctrine, notwithstanding that whatever he held for the present of that he was most certainly assured, thus Hospinian Histor. Sacram. parte altera fol. 4.— Per totam vitam tam varius, & sibi dissimilis fuit in Articulo de persona Christi, praesertim autem de sacra ejus Coena, ut minimum quinque sententiae de illa in scriptis ipsiusreperiantur: through his whole life he was so various, and contrary to himself in that Article concerning the person of Christ, especially touching his last Supper, that you may see in his writings at least five different opinions about it. And so. 12. Eadem varietas, & inconstantia, & crebra tanquam tempestatum, sic sententiarum commutatio, in aliis quoque de Sacramento Eucharistiae articulis, apud Lutherum, in suis scriptis invenitur: The same variety and inconstancy, and change of doctrines, as of the winds, may be found in Luther's other writings, concerning other articles of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. So fol. 8, 9 he observes, that he persecutes those Expositions of our Lord's words, Jo. 6.— Caro non prodest quidquam, ' the flesh avails nothing; and of St. Paul, 1 Cor. 10.— Panis quem frangimus, the bread which we break; when these brought against him by his Reformed adversaries, Carlostade, and Zuinglius, which himself formerly gave against the Papists:— and so he observes fo. 12.— that when he was in contention with the Sacramentaries,— tanto impetu ab illis, quibus indignabatur, deflexit; ut●rursus, ad ipsam usque Transubstantiationem, quam sub Papatu approbarat, postea de ea dubitarat, tandem abjecerat, tanquam fluctus marinus ad scopulos allisus, revolveretur. Cum autem urgebatur etc. Corporis Christi, tum demum, potius quam se victum fateretur, in mediam paludem ubiquitariam se praecipitem dabat: from those he was incensed against, he fling away with that violence, that he even cast himself again upon Transubstantiation; which, when a Papist, he had approved, afterwards called in question, and lastly thrown away, tossed thus to and fro, like the waves of the Sea, rolling to, and dashed from the rocks. And again, when he was urged with Christ's body etc. rather than seem overcome he would cast himself headlong into the abyss of the Ubiquitarians.— The same thing Zuinglius complains of in his Preface to his answer to Luther's Confession.— Contentionis aestu eo se abripi patitur; ut ea, quae ante pie simul, & bene tradita ab ipso sunt, potius subvertere velit & negare, quam ab instituto suo vel latum unguem cedere: He suffers himself to be so carried away with the spirit of contention, that rather than yield a hairs breadth, he would deny and subvert what he had well and piously established before. This from §. 21. of Luther's great confidence or certainty in his own opinions, attempting upon it such bold Reformations; and of his violent condemning of all Adversaries and Anti-doctrines whatever; and of the small reason which his own fellow-Reformers conceived he had for either of these.  
§. 28 
9th. His fierce contentious, ●rd railing spiri● discovered in all his controversy-writings.  From this Self-presumption of his also is discovered in all his writings that— amaritudo, ira, indignatio, clamour, mentioned by the Apostle, Eph. 4.31. a most strange, quarrelsome, reviling stile, fierce and impatient of any coercion, or contradiction; not sparing his Spiritu●l Mother the Church that brought him forth; nor his Spiritual Fathers that made him a Christian, a Priest. He the first that so openly pronounced the present Catholic Church the Whore of Babylon; and the Bishop of Rome the prime Patriarch therein, Antichrist; the Bishops, Antichrist's Apostles; the Universities, Stews. See the rail of his Book entitled,— Contra falso-nominatum Ordinem Episcoporum. Not sparing the Supreme Civil Magistrates; not Kings. See the Rail of his book written against Hen. 8th not sparing his younger brethren of the Reformation, and his own disciples, when they modestly taking that liberty in some things to descent again from him, which himself formerly had taken to descent from the whole Church-Catholick; and excepting their difference in judgement as to some points, otherwise by all possible means courting his friendship. See the Rail of his Confessio magna, and parva, written against them.— Above all not sparing his brethren the Religious, into whose bosom and education very pious (if we may believe himself) he was so charitably received in his youth. In whom notwithstanding he censures, and every where declames against, actions and works externally good, as their fastjngs, watch, Single life, strict obedience to their Superiors commands, often reiterated prayers, etc. as done out of hypocrisy, with much inward— diffidentia, dubitatione, pavore, odio, & blasphemia Dei, [to use his own words, and this because they wanted his new faith]; done with an intention of meriting their salvation by them, and not expecting, as the Remission of their other sins, so of the imperfections of these very works through Christ's passion, and merits: their Celibacy, as lived-in with all uncleanness of spirit, (though he confessed his own, when a Monk, void of any such stain); their prayers, as said or repeated by rote without any inward attention of mind accompanying them: things, of which he could have no knowledge, and out of charity ought to have judged the contrary; or if by some outward circumstances he might discover the intentions of some, yet from this could have no sufficient ground to charge all, and to inveigh, as he doth at a Monastic life in general upon this score, that their good works yet were not well or rightly done by them.  
§. 29 For this great fault when much reproached by his Enemies, and often admonished by his friends, instead of amending it, sometimes he justified it, by the example of our Lord, calling the Jews an adulterous generation, a generation of vipers, children of the Devil; and of St. Paul calling his Adversaries, Dogs, foolish talkers, seducers, unlearned; imo qui (saith he) Act. 13.9, 10. sic invehatur in Pseudoprophetam, ut videri possit insanus: So sharply inveighs he against the false Prophet, Act. 13.9, 10. that one would think him mad. vid. Melch. Adam's vit. Luther. p. 191. and— opera Luth. tom. 1. Ep. p. 291. [That is, a private Presbyter, when reproaching all his Superiors and Governors, the Bishops and Fathers of the Church, justifying it by the Lord of heaven and earth, and who seethe hearts, his reproving his rebellious subjects, the incorrigible and blaspheming Pharisees; and by the great Apostle full of the Holy Ghost (as it is in the same verse he quotes) denouncing God's judgement against a Conjurer blaspheming the Gospel of Christ; as if when only he can show that such words are used, it mattered not, by, or to whom.] Sometimes again he lays the blame of his choler on those who, he saith, provoked him to it. Non negare possum (saith he) me esse vehementiorem quam oportuit, quod cum illi non ignorant, sane irritare non debuerunt: That I am too passionate I cannot deny, and they know very well; and so ought not to have provoked me. Sometimes also he pretends a profitable design of such his passion; for (saith he)— quae quiete dicuntur, cito cadunt in oblivionem, nemine illa curante. (See Adam. vit. Luth.) endeavouring, it seems, to add weight to his words by personal Invectives, as others by Oaths. Add to this, that the fault is not observed in his latter time to have decreased in him, but to have grown with his age; and his last writings to have been most violent, and passionate, (as his Confessio parva, written but a little before his death,) though against those, whom his friends thought of all dissenters from him the most innocent, that is Zuinglius, Buce's, and Calvin's party. So when by the importunity of his friends he had written three or four submissive letters; one to Henry the 8th, (after that his bitter book written against him); and another to George Duke of Saxony; another to Cardinal Cajetan; and a fourth to Erasmus; these only instead of his other contumelious writings, he is said to have repent of, as doing some prejudice to a just cause. Adam. vit. Luth. p. 132.  
§. 30 
S●me Instance●●●th r●o●.  If you would taste a little the maledicency and bitterness of this man's spirit, (which those who do not examine can hardly believe) do but look into those two books of his, which of all other one would think he should have written with most respect; that Contra Henricum Regem Angliae; because a King; and that against Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, and Bucer's party, his Confessio parva; because these his brethren reform: the latter also written when now his blood was i'll, and cold. In one single leaf of his former book, taken at adventure, fol. 338. edit. Wirtenb, 1562. I find all this railing stuff against that Learned Prince.— Elinguis defensor, linguax in nugis.— Rex pro suo more satis fortiter mentitur.— Rudis & indoctus Laicus.— Cum obstinata, & impudenti nequitia Henrici agendum.— Non hic mentitur modo, sicut scurra leviss mus; sed nunc audet, nunc fingit, etc. ut nequissimum nebulonem si non superat, certe egregie aequat.— Quod virulentum & nequam hunc Thomistam sensisse hoc argumento quod etc.— Nihil potest pro ingenio suo nisi perpetuo mentiri, fallere, simulare, illudere.— Revelemus sceleratam hanc, & Regiam nequitiam.— Larvatus Thomista Anglorum.— Non in animo ejus scintilla boni viri.— Sophistica malitia, & impudentia, quae de industria adversus cognitam veritatem insanit.— Plane vas Electionis iste est Satanae.— Totus suus blasphemus & sacrilegus libellus.— Cavendus ut sentina mortis. etc. Jejune Defender of the Faith, copious upon a trifle.— The King, as his manner is, lies stoutly enough.— A rude and ignorant Lai●.— We have to do with Henry's obstinate and impudent knavery.— Here he not only lies like a whiffling buffoon, but sometimes he is bold and daring; sometimes he feigns, etc. insomuch as he fairly matches, if not outdoes the greatest villains.— That this virulent rascal of a Thomist was of this opinion, I have this argument for it etc.— His only talon is in perpetual lying, deceit, counterfeiting, buffoonery.— Let us unmask this wicked and truly Princely knavery.— England's Thomist in disguise.— Not one dram of an honest man in him.— Malicious Sophistry and impudence, thus to set himself to rave against the known truth.— Certainly this man is a chosen vessel of the Devil.— His little book topful of sacrilege, and malice,— To be shunned as the sink of death.— Not mistake but mere knavery, and inveterate malice, bend upon lying and blasphemy. This is the extract of his raging choler in one leaf taken casually. How much is there in the book? Now you may be pleased to call to mind his Rule,— Quae quiete tractantur etc. and join another with it, Calumniare fortiter, aliquid haerebit.  
§. 31. n. 1. Concerning the other book I mentioned, his Confessio parva, thus heavily complain the Tigurine Divines, in the Preface of their Apology written upon it: Libellus hic tanta Diabolorum atque selectissimorum, & a Christiana fide imprimis abhorrentium convitiorum copia scatet, tant a verborum immodestia, faeditate, & impuritate turget, tanto denique iracundiae, maledicentiae, furoris, & insaniae impetu furit, ut quotquot illum legere dignantur, (modo non ipsi quoque cum illo insanire coeperint,) non sine gravi animorum stupore, infelix hoc, & inauditum hactenus exemplum admirari coguntur: etc. So fraught is this little book with nicknames, as Devil etc. and other unchristian terms of reproach, picked out of the choicest Authors; so crammed with lewd, nasty, ribaldry-stuff; nay so ranting and thundering with anger, maledicency, fury, and madness; that none (that is not as crazed as Luther himself) can read it without great admiration and astonishment at so unfortunate and unheard of an example: To see so great a man in his old age, after having been enured and taught by long experience, and with many still in great esteem, yet so hurried away and transported with unruly passions, and that in so unseemly manner, as to render himself vile and contemptible to all sober men. Elsewhere thus they (respons. ad Luth. cont. Zuingl.) censure his great Pride. Prophetae & Apostoli Dei gloriae, non privato honori, non suae pertinaciae, & superbiae studebant: Lutherus autem sua quaerit, pertinax est, insolentia nimia effertur; & in omnibus correptionibus suis plurimum maligni spiritus etc. deprehenditur: The Prophets and Apostles studied the glory of God, not their own honour, pride, and obstinacy: but Luther seeks his own, is pertinacious, and too too insolent; and in all his correptions there is much of the evil spirit, etc. And another Zuinglian (Conradus Rheg. contra Hessum, de coena Domini,) saith, that— Deus propter peccatum superbiae, qua seize Lutherus extulit, quemadmodum pleraque ejus scripta testificantur, verum illi spiritum abstulit, ut Prophetis illis 3 Reg. 22. atque ejus loco iracundum, fastuosum, atque mendacem spiritum dedit: God for Luther's pride, and vaunting himself in most of his writings, hath taken from him as from the Prophets (3 Kings 22.) the good spirit, and given him a waspish, haughty, lying one in its stead.  
§. 31. n. 2. Thus also Calvin (who liked well, and himself to some degree imitated Luther's reviling spirit, when he wrote against the Church, yet censures, and condemns it, when turned upon his own party) in an Epistle to Bullinger: (Calv. Ep. p. 325.)— Audio (saith he) Lutherum tandem cum atroci invectiva non tam in vos, quam in nos omnes prorupisse; I hear that Luther has wrote a bitter invective, not so much against you, as us all. Then counselling the Tigurines to forbear him: Ne invicem se mordendo & lacerando consumerentur: lest biting and eating one another, they should be consumed one of another. Sepe dicere solitus sum (saith he) etiam si me Diabolum vocaret, me tamen hoc illi honoris habiturum, ut insignem Dei servum agnoscam: qui tamen, ut pollet insignibus virtutibus, it a magnis vitiis laborat. Hanc intemperiem, qua ubique ebullit, utinam magis fraenare studuisset; vehementiam autem, quae illi est ingenita, utinam in hosts veritatis semper contulisset; non etiam vibrasset in servos Domini. utinam recognoscendis suis vitiis plus operae dedisset. Plurimum illi obfuerunt adulatores, cum ipse quoque natura ad sibi indulgendum nimis propensus esset: I have often said, that should he call me Devil, [an usual reproach with Luther,] yet I would honour him as an eminent servant of God; one, who has, though great virtues, yet no less vices. That overboiling heat and passion in all his writings I wish he had studied more to assuage, and moderate● and always employed against the enemies of the truth, that vehemency which is natural to him; and not have turned it also against the servants of the Lord. Would to God he had been more vigilant in looking to his own faults. He met with flatterers that did him harm, being withal by nature over-apt to follow his own fancy. Vehementia ingenita,— and— Ad sibi indulgendum propensus natura. Thus the evil habits of an unmortified Will are charged upon Nature: And thus tenderly his friend handles those sores, which he could not cover.  
§. 31. n. 3. Lastly, hear old Erasmus thus schooling him in a letter, (Ep. p. 828.) after he had been formerly too much a cherisher of his Novelties, and also a pattern to him of scoffing at Religious persons, and other sacred things: thus, I say, he in his wiser old age, when he had felt the smart of Luther's virulent pen in his servo Arbitrio;— Cujus ingenii sis, jamorbis novit; stilum vero sic temperasti, ut hactenus in neminem scripseris rabiosius, imo, quod est detestabilius, malitiosius. Hic videlicet tibi succurrit, te peccatorem infirmum esse, quum alias postules tantum non pro Deo haberi.— Quid faciunt ad argumentum tot scurrilia convitia, tot criminosa mendacia, me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse, me Epicureum, me Scepticum in his quae sunt Christianae professionis, me blasphemum esse, & quid non? plusquam tertiam voluminis partem his occupare libuit, dum tuo morem geris animo.— Illud mecum optiseditioso, totum orbem exitiabili dissidio concutis.— Breviter sic tractas Evangelii causam, ut sacra profanaque omnia commisceas, etc. What disposition you are of, the world now sees; and to show your moderation you have hitherto writ against none more outrageously, and, which is worse, more maliciously, than against me. Here you remember yourself to be a poor sinful creature, when at another time you look to be worshipped as a God. To the matter in in hand what are so many scurrilous reproaches, so many slanderous lies, of my being an Atheist, Sceptical in Religion, a blasphemer, and what not?— Above a third part of your Book is taken up with such stuff as this, I suppose, to please your own capricious humour.— To see the world rend and torn with dissension by your arrogant, saucy, and turbulent wit, is that which grieves me, and every good man.— Your way of handling things of the Gospel, is to turn all topsy turvey; as if afraid the storm should blow over.— That which torments me is the public calamity, disorder and confusion irremediable; and all caused by your unruly wit; stubborn and deaf to the good advice of your friends, but flexible to the suggestions of certain knaves, that carry you whither they list. He concludes:— Optarem tibi meliorem mentem, nisi tibi tua tam valde placeret. Mihi optabis quod voles, modo ne tuam mentem, nisi tibi Dominus istam mutaverit: Were you not so much pleased with the mind you are in, I should wish you a better; and till God make it so, may you wish me any thing rather than it. Thus he, A. D. 1526. But also when more indulgent, and not yet stung with Luther's bad language, he familiarly complains in an Epistle to Melancthon on this manner. (Erasm. Ep. p. 630.)— In doctrina Lutheri multa me offendunt; illud imprimis, quod quicquid suscepit defendendum, ibi impendio vehemens est; nee unquam facit finem, donec perferatur ad hyperbolen. Eam admonitus adeo non mitigat, ut omnia reddat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I am displeased with many things in Luther's way of writing, but chief in this, That whatever he has once undertaken to defend, he does it with too much vehemency; nor ever stops, till he comes to an hyperbole; and when told thereof, so little does he mitigate, that he makes things still more extravagant.  
This discovery Christians have of Luther's spirit. And it is not to be omitted here, (though I step a little out of my way to show it,) that much-what the same may be observed in the either Co-founder of Protestancy, Calvin, that we may see they both learned of one Master:) As may appear to any, that will only cast his eye upon two little discourses of his Tractatus Theologici; first, his Antidotum Concil●● Tridentini; and 2ly, his Scholia on the Epistle of Pope Paul 3. to the Emperor. In the former of which he frequently styles the Reverend Fathers of that Council,— Impudentes, Stultos, Nebulones, Bestias, Cornutas bestias, Asinos, Porcos, Simias; Impudent, fools, knaves, beasts, horned-beasts, asses, swine, apes, and such like; vilifies their persons, learning, manners, decrees, in such terms as these:— Ne quidem unciam sidei Tridentinam Synodum obtinuisse.— Vix unum esse versum— qui non aliquo notabili errore conspersus sit.— Nullum esse tam nugatorium figmentum, quod inter fidei dogmata ab istis asinis non censeatur.— Non unquam vel crassissimi subulci judicio permitere ausos fuisse suas insulsitates, nisi Concilii larvam sperassent oppositam fore omnium oculis.— Istos nebulones ex suo capite fabricare ausos esse, quod nullum habet in verbo Dei fundamentum.— Nec tamen pudere istos Porcos territandis simplicibus denuntiationem saevam intonare. etc. That the Council of Trent had not one dram of faith, not one line [spoken of the 6th. Sess.] without some considerable error: No fiction so trifling but is reckoned by these asses amongst articles of faith.— Had they not hoped for the vizard of a Council as a blind to men's eyes, they durst never have ventured their senseless fooleries to the judgement of the meanest Swineherd.— That these rascals should dare to frame things of their own heads, without any ground in Scripture: and yet these Swine are not ashamed to thunder out their Anathema's to fright the simple.— A good many of the Popes scarce ever learned their Grammar.— Hardly one of an hundred ever read over one of the Prophets, Epistle of the Apostles, or an Evangelist.— Certain prating, impudent Monks, whereof some look for Mitres, others for Cardinal's caps, first taught the Reverend Fathers their lesson, that so they might chant it out to us afterwards.— After a noise and brawling together, like the croaking of Aristophanes' frogs, out come their goodly Decrees, forsooth, which henceforth must be vaunted for mere dictates of the Spirit. And Blateronem quempiam ex Monachis, qui Concilium regunt, commentum suum recitasse; Patres ad sesquipedem usque auritos, annuisse: Upstarts one of those prating Monks, that lead the Council by the nose, and tells a tale of a tub; to which the Fathers, with their ears a foot and half long, give their assent. That the former Councils, whose Decrees they pretended to follow, were held, Post extinctam sanae doctrinae lucem, quibus meri asini, & crassi boves interfuerunt, qui nihil prae se ferebant antiquae dignitatis: After the extinguishing the light of sound doctrine; and made up of mere asses and dull blockheads, not the least shadow of the dignity of ancient Councils appearing among 'em. And— Innocentium tertium cum pauculis cornutis bestiis lacqucum hunc populo Christiano induisse, quem Patres Tridentini astringunt: Innocent the 3d. with a few more as very beasts as himself, brought this snare upon Christians; and the Council of Trent ties the knot faster. As for their piety and manners,— Nihil mirum tam esse audaces, qui nullo unquam serio divini Judicii affectu tacti sunt: no wonder of their impudence, that were never touched with a true sense of God's judgements.— Facile esse Patribus Diabolica securitate ebriis temporales vocare poenas; quibus peccatum fere nullum est, nisi quis hominem occiderit; quibus scortatio vix leviculumest peccatum, quibus foedissimae libidines virtutis sunt exercitia, quae in laude ponunt; qui nullum occultum conscientiae vulnus pilo aestimant. Hanc sententiam abominantur Cornuti Patres.— Porci isti in contrariam partem detorquent.— Non attendant stulti homines., Well may the Fathers [speaking of degrees of Punishment for sin] drunk with a devilish security, talk of temporal punishments, who scarce count any thing a sin under murder, with whom fornication is a mere peccadillo; and the filthiest lusts virtuous exercises, and praiseworthy; who make no account of the hidden wounds of a guilty conscience.— These Fathers with horns on their heads abominate this doctrine. These nasty Swine wrest it to a contrary sense.— These Blockheads do not consider:  
This is enough. Such his language of so many Reverend Bishops, his Canonical Superiors assembled from several parts and nations, sitting in Council. It is an hard matter that a person so proud should not also be erroneous. Neither useth he (in his other writings mentioned before) his Patriarch and the chiefest Governor in the Church any whit more civilly:— Quis (saith he) non fustibus magis & lapidibus compescendum hunc impuri Canis latratum dicat: Who would not think sticks and stones the fittest to quiet this filthy barking Cur? And— Quid tibi cum hac S. Apostoli voce sceleste Apostata, imo omnis Apostas●●e Princeps; qui cum dies in machinandis perditionibus, in fraudibus excudendis, in moliendo innocentium exilio, in destruenda Ecclesia, etc. consumis; reliquum tempus vel cum Epicureis suaviter te oblectas, vel in medio scortorum grege te volutas, inst●r Porci: etc. What are the Apostles words (upon the Pope's saying, That he was afraid with St. Paul, lest evil Communications should corrupt good manners,] to thee, thou wicked Apostate, nay Prince of all Apostates? for your daily employment is only plotting and contriving murders, inventing some or other new frauds, proscription of innocent persons, ruin of the Church, etc. the rest of your time is sweetly spent, either in merriment with Epicures, or wallowing like a swine amidst a heard of impure courtesans, where you neither hear nor discourse of any thing but what savours either of some execrable impiety, or rank obscenity, thereby to provoke that thy shameful lechery; which though outworn and grown impotent with age, yet itches still. To speak this with any truth one would think he must be one of the Pope's Bedchamber, and Privy-Council; and to speak it with any piety, or good conscience,— that he must never have heard of St. Paul's— Brethren, I witted not that he was God's Highpriest etc. Mean while by this let sober Protestants judge, how well this spirit of their two chief forefathers; Luther, and Calvin, agrees with the character of the Holy Spirit, let down before §. 1. And whether so great Pride is likely to discover to the world any great store of Truth, or rather to betray inch persons to strong delusions? To leave this second, and return again to our Prime-Founder.  
§. 32 
Io●y, His frequent communications with the Devil acknowledged by himself.  Hitherto I have showed you, out of his own, and the writings of other Reformed, the spirit and temper of this man, and the several steps of his bold march against the Governors, common Doctrines, and Laws of the present and former Church. In all which he seems to have suffered most strong Delusions from Satan; and as he deceived many others, so to have been first by him miserably deceived himself. Which the better to discover, it is necessary that I premise the extraordinary negotiations, the familiar Disputes and Conferences, the several Temptations and Skirmishes, which he relates himself to have had with, and to have suffered from, this Enemy of Mankind; and the manner of his behaviour in them.  
This then in his de Missa Privata, & Sacerdotum Vnctione, speaks of the Devil, as of one whose Arts and Practices by long experience were very well known to him. A me ipso (saith he) exordiri, & confessiunculam aliquam facere institui— Quondam intempesta nocte e somno evigilavi, & mox Sathan hujusmodi disputationem in animo meo (quemadmodum scilicet multas noctes mihi satis amarulentas, & acerbas reddere ille novit) mecum instituit: Audisne Excellentissime Doctor? I am resolved to begin with myself, and make a piece of a Confession. Once about midnight I awaked, and presently Satan (as he knows very well how to make me many a sad and bitter might) thus began a Disputation with me in my own mind: Do you hear (saith he) most Noble Doctor?— And afterward— Haec illo dicente, sudor subortus est, & cor mihi tremere, subsultare coepit. Diabolus sua argumenta fortiter figere, & urgere novit. Voce quoque gravi, & forti utitur. Nec longis & multis disputatationes ejusmodi transiguntur, sed momento uno & quaestio, & responsio absolvitur. Sensi quidem, & probe expertus sum, quam ob causam illud nonnunquam evenire soleat, ut sub auroram quidam mortui in stratis suis inveniantur. Corpus ille perimere vel jugulare potest: nec id modo, verum, & animam quoque disputationibus suis ita urgere, & in angustum coarctare novit, ut in momento quoque illi excedendum est; quo sane me quoque non semel, tantum non perpulit.— Credo equidem quod Emserus, & Oecolampadius, etc. At these words I began to sweat; and my heart fell a beating and panting. The Devil knows where to fix, and how to urge home his arguments. He has also a grave and strong voice. Nor do these Disputations take up much time or talk; both question and answer last but a minute. I now find by experience how it comes to pass sometimes, that some have been found dead in their beds. He can kill and destroy the body; and not only so, but with his disputations also he can so press and straiten the soul, that it must instantly expire; as he has been very near serving me oftener than once. I am persuaded that Emserus [one of his Adversaries] and Oecolampadius, were struck with these fiery darts of Satan, that they died suddenly: for no mortal man, without the singular help and assistance of God, is able to undergo and endure them. He is pleasant at disputation; he makes quick work on it, nor dodges, if so be he find a man at home all alone. Add to this what Melch. Adam's saith in his life (p. 162.168.) That he had very frequent temptations and buffet from the Devil, some in that extremity, as they made him lie as one dead. (Which Melancthon also attesteth in his Preface to the 2d. Tom. of Luther's Works.) But (saith he) by reading of Scripture, particularly the Epistle to the Galatians, and singing of Psalms, which he requested of those about him, he was recovered, and eased of those affrights. In horto (saith he) domi suae apparuit ei Diabolus Apri nigri forma: In his own garden the Devil appeared to him in the shape of a black Boar.— And— apparuerunt ipsi aliquoties faces ardentes, quarum conspectu pessime habu●t. Ib. ' Oft-times upon the apparition of fiery torches, he has been taken very ill. Melancthon also faith of him in his Preface in 2. Tom.— Saepe eum cogitantem de ira Dei, aut de mirandis Poenarum exemplis, subito tanti terrores concutiebant, ut paene exanimaretur: that when he has been thinking of God's anger, and wonderful examples of his judgement, such terrors have shaken him, that he has been almost dead. And himself in his Epistle to his Father, preceding his railing Book de Votis Monasticis, speaks thus of his younger years.— Videtur mihi Satanas a Pueritia mea aliquid in me praevidisse ●orum, quae nunc patitur. Ideo ad perdendum impediendumque me insanivit incredibilibus machinis; ut saepius fuerim admiratus, ego n● solus essem inter mortales, quem peteret: It seems as if Satan had foreseen in me from a child those things, which to his sorrow he now feels; so mad is he with me, and by such incredible stratagems does he seek to hinder and destroy me. Insomuch as I have often wondered whether I am the only mortal that he thus assaults. These words also in the same letter seem to imply strange troubles and frights in his mind, and suspicions of Satan's intermeddlings.— Memini (saith he to his Father) nimis praesente memoria, cum implacatus mecum loquereris, & ego de coelo terroribus me vocatum [ad Monachismum] assererem. (Neque enim libens & cupiens siebam Monachus, sed terrore & ago mortis subitae circumvallatus vovi coactum & necessarium votum.) utinam, aiebas, non sit illusio, & praestigium. Id verbum (saith he) quasi Deus per os tuum sonaret, penetravit & insedit in intimis meis. Sed obfirmaham ego cor. etc. I remember too well, when you was angry with me, and to appease you I alleged a call [to Monachism] from heaven by terrors, (for indeed neither was I desirous nor willing to become a Monk, but being frighted by the sudden death of my friend I made a forced and necessitated Vow:) I pray God (said you) it be not some illusion and cheat. Which words, as if God had spoken them by your mouth, pierced and sunk deep into me; but I plucked up a good heart, etc. [Here seems he not to attribute these terrors to Satan?] Such things I find also in his Colloquies Ch. 35. p. 381. English translation.— There he saith, That after his return from Worms, when he was in his Patmos, (as he called it,) the Castle of Wartburg, lying in his chamber remote from company, the Devil much molested him; cracked some nuts he had in a box upon his bed-poll; tumbled, as it were, empty barrels down stairs, etc. That when he could not be rid of him with uttering sentences out of the Holy Scriptures, than he made him often My with jeering and ridiculous words; yet that he did put him into a bitter sweat, Ib. p. 389.— In my age (saith be) I am vexed and tormented with nothing, but only with the tribulations and temptations of the Devil; who walketh with me in my bedchamber; he strongly scowleth upon me; he oftentimes afflicts me touching prayer; he striketh cogitations into my breast, as if I did neglect to pray diligently: [I suppose he means his discharging himself of that long office of the Canonical Hours, daily recited by all Catholic Priests; which at the first he diminished, and deferred till Saturdays; then at Melancthon's advice totally laid aside:] although I know, that in one day I pray more than all the Popish Priests and Friars; but I babble not so much.— Again, (c. 37. p. 391.) The Devil (saith he) oftentimes assaulteth me, and objecteth; That out of my doctrine great offences, and much evil hath proceeded; wherewith many a time he vehemently perplexeth me. And though I make him this answer; That much good is also raised thereby, which by God's grace is true); yet, notwithstanding, he is so nimble a Spirit, and so crafty a rhetorician, that Master-like he can pervert the same merely into Sin. (See §. 13.) What I teach, writ, or preach, I direct and square all the same by the Gospel,— upon the Gospel do I ground my cause; yet notwithstanding all this, [i.e. his sense thereof, and this sense, as his conscience must needs tell him, contrary to that of the former Church,] the Devil bringeth it so near unto me with his crafty disputing, [would not one think it were his conscience rather,] that the sweat of anguish droppeth from me: insomuch as many times I feel, and understand, that he sleepeth nearer unto me than my wife Kate doth; that is, he disquieteth me more, than she comforteth, or pleaseth me. Ib. c. 14. p. 234. I (saith he,) can never be rid of these cogitations, in wishing I had never begun this business with the Pope. And p. 396. he saith, That evil cogitations plagued him more than all his labours, which had been innumerable.— Oftentimes (saith he) I took business in hand,— thereby intending to drive away the Devil; but all would not do; he would neither departed, nor surcease. Therefore he that feeleth such devilish cogitations, and spiritual temptations, him I truly advise, that soon, and quickly he expel them. Let him think on somewhat else that is pleasant; let him take a merry cup; let him jest, or play; or let him take in hand some other honest and civil matter, and seriously meditate thereon. But above all things let him steadfastly believe in Christ Jesus; for he came to comfort, and to revive, and will destroy the works of the Devil Adams also in his Life, p. 168. mentions this complaint of Luther in his Epistle to a friend, (Tom. 2. Epist. 361.)— Valemus omnes praeter Lutherum ipsum, qui corpore sanus, foris a toto mundo, intus a Diabolo patitur, & omnibus Angelis ejus:; We are all well except Luther, who sound in body, yet is persecuted from without by the whole world, and inwardly by the Devil and all his Angels.— And in an Epistle to Melancthon, (vid. Adam's vita Lutheri, 1529.) he professeth, as his strength in public conflicts with men, so his weakness in private ones with Satan.  
§. 33 By all this you may observe, I. Strange tumults in this man's spirit; sometimes even to a deliquium, and fainting away; as Adams and Melancthon relate of him, which he endeavoured to remove sometimes with singing or repeating Psalms, he and others with him— Venite, inquit, in contemptum Diaboli Psalmum de profundis quatuor vicibus cantemus: Come, says he, in defiance of the Devil let us sing four times the Psalm De Profundis: as Adam's reports of him, vit. Luth. p. 162. (which puts me in mind of Saul's Spirit removed with David's Music:) Sometimes with reading the Epistle to the Galatians, (out of which chief he solaced himself with Justification by our Faith alone without our Works;) sometimes with wine, and going into company, and using other divertisements. Also see Colloq. p. 404.  
Secondly, that he most readily discharged all the storms, anguishes, and pinches that he had within him, on the Devil, as he also advised others to do; telling them that the chiefest Physic for the cure of anxiety concerning faith and salvation, was firmly to hold such cogitations not to be theirs, but to come of the Devil. See before §. 11. n. 1.— And the remedy he used for things that troubled him within, he applied also to the things that afflicted him abroad; any Doctrines contrary to his own, though of his Fellow-Reformists, he pronounced them all Doctrines of the Devil; and was pleased to fancy the authors of them no better than persons possessed, Sathanizati, as he called them, which hath been hinted before, (§. 25.— 31. n. 1.) his Polemical writings being everywhere full of this terrible name, Devil, as St. Paul's Epistles are noted for the frequency of the saving name, Jesus. Now this indeed, viz. that that which troubles us comes from the Devil, were it true, affords a man the greatest consolation that can be: for he presently stops his cars, makes resistance, believes nothing hereof, as being spoken by the Father of Lies; the stronglier he is opposed, the greater Saint he takes himself to be; the more he is charged, the more innocent; and finally the friend, and beloved of God, because the Devil is his enemy, and impugns him. And the Devil spreads no net, with which he catcheth so many, as this; to make men mistake the chastisement or the justice of God, for the malice and persecutions of the Devil; the truth of God, for the illusions and lies of the Devil; the motions and admonitions of the Spirit of God, or of their own conscience, or also of their friends to amend and reform them, for the external, or internal suggestions of the Devil to pervert and discourage them. Therefore perhaps it will not be amiss here to sift this matter a little more narrowly; wherein I am afraid this poor man was most miserably cozened, and deceived by that most subtle adversary.  
§. 34 
Where, Of the great variety, and subtlety of Sat●n's temptations.  We must know then, that there are three Agents that work very intimately in us; our own Conscience, the good Spirit of God, and this evil Spirit; and did we know exactly concerning our internal motions, from which of these three they sprung; who would not be a Saint? For who, when he knew the Holy Spirit of God motions any thing to him, would neglect to defer it; or, when he knows the evil one doth so, would not resist it? but it is very hard, in every stirring, or suggestion of the mind, or fancy, to discern these three without error. So when our own Conscience, not yet quite seared, and hardened, or also God's Holy Spirit, brings our former life, or our present practices before us to produce our amendment, and to cast us into a wholesome sadness, or melancholy, and grief, not to be grieved for; we may father this on the Devil, (since all these things are acted only in the Soul,) as endeavouring to reduce us to despair, and to dishearten our faith in Christ's Redemption, when as the Devil's temptation at the very same time is another quite contrary; and not the sadness, but the apprehension that this sadness is wrought by him; and the haste that they are prompted to, to dispatch it away, and shake their hands of it, as coming from him, is the only thing that comes from him; only the apprehension, I say, that it is from the Devil, is from the Devil. And there being two things, which he labours to effect, the one to reduce us by any means into an evil condition; and the other to breed in us a security in such condition: this way he takes, in our flying from the net of despair, which we think is spread before us, to drive us into another snare of presumption, in our thinking that our life is righteous, and holy, when it is not; or Christ's merits applied to us by faith without such holiness, and performing the Covenant of the Gospel, when they are not; and when Godly sorrow and compunction comes to work in us what is defective, and reform what is amiss, the Devil begets this fancy in us, that it is the Devil, that by this sadness would plunge us into melancholy, and despair; and so strait we labour to divert our thoughts, and to encourage ourselves in our former courses; and we borrow of the Devil these wings to fly from him, which carry us just the contrary way.  
§. 35 
When this Tempter is undiscovered.  Indeed the Devil's temptations are very various, and contrary one to another; and to catch those who think themselves wary, he often changeth his snares, and his colours. 1. Often he transforms himself into an Angel of light, and is not discovered by us to be the Devil; and then he tempts us by delivering lies to us for truths, and consequently evil for good, (whilst our wills do follow our judgements,) and so misguides us accordingly in our practices. Again, thus undiscovered, he not unfrequently, on the contrary also, represents truths to us as lies; and so good as evil, virtue as vice, (his property being to work evil out of good, as God's to work good out of evil.) Truths, I say, he represents as lies, inspirations as temptations; and in a dissembled holiness none so zealously as he, in God's name, persecutes these truths as coming from the Devil. None is so ready to discover all his stratagems, and subtileties as himself is; nor none commonly more strongly possessed with him, than those that most rail at, and abuse, (if I may so say,) and defy him; when as Saints usually are more modest in their behaviour, and go no● beyond an, Imperet tibi Dominus: for he is a cursed creature, that stands little upon his credit, when it is for his gain. So amongst other false persuasions, which he insinuated into the Pharisees, this was one of the most perilous, (Jo. 8.41, 44, 48.) That they believed that our Lord acted all by the power of the Devil; and the Devil made them hate him chief on that account, as dealing with the Devil; and they having a Devil, and being children of the Devil, did by his suggestions rail at our Lord, that he had a Devil, and did cast out other Devils by him, and frighted the people from him on this account. So he represents and owns the works of God's grace within us, and the dictates of right reason, and of our conscience, that hath as yet some sense of faults, as his works, and as temptations that come from him: and on that score of being his, procures us to reject, cast off, and avoid them.  
§. 36 And by this disguise of Satan seems this poor man especially overthrown; who, when God's Spirit, or his own Conscience, spoke to him sad things of his former courses for producing some amendment thereof, apprehended strait that it was the Devil, who endeavoured thus to disturb his proceed; and resisted them as his temptations to despair. So when these set before his eyes the many ill consequences of his new Doctrine; the great licentiousness of life that followed it; the disobedience of Subjects, both to their Ecclesiastical, and Civil Superiors; shaking off all laws, and discipline; the many new Sects that sprung up every day, and those in his own judgement very impious; the many tumults, wars, slaughters, etc. and when these things struck him into very great affrights and pensiveness, here he betook himself to the remedy which also he prescribed to others, charged all on the Tempter of mankind, presumed for a great enemy of his Reformation; sought to divert himself from such sad thoughts, as Satan's suggestions; when as this only was Satan's suggestion, that he should think them so, and so divert himself from them.  
A temptation of the same kind with the former, and a very perilous one it is, when the Devil urgeth a known truth, as the Scriptures, in a wrong sense, and so makes it a lie; whereby he drives the tempted, casting their eye chief upon the text, and not suspecting the comment, unawares into evil practices. In this manner he urged it to our Lord; and ever since doth great mischief in the Christian world even with the word's of God; and from this art also of the Devil, Luther in his misinterpretation of the Scriptures, especially to the great prejudice of works of Piety, and Penance, seems to have suffered much delusion.  
§. 37 
●●en this Tempter is ●●●vered.  Thus for Satan's temptations when he seethe himself undiscovered by the tempted; by which he ordinarily endeavours to keep sinners in security: But when he is discovered, he takes another way. Here than he often speaketh to them the plain truth, and which they know to be so, thereby to discompose, and dishearten, and drive them into despair. So he urgeth the Scriptures to us against past sins, but always with some false gloss annexed. Such was the temptation that Luther (but mistaken) apprehended in the Devil's disputation with him about the Mass. Here also sometimes he urgeth truth to us, as truth; by this to continue us more firm, whilst we give no credit to him in a contrary error: for since we know him for the Father of lies, and know it also to be his voice, who would not embrace the contrary still to what he persuades, or argues for, and do just the opposite to what he counsels? As if the Devil known and discovered should tell Luther, that his Reformation was a most wicked act, and that infinite of Souls should be eternally ruined thereby, who can think but that Luther from hence would remain much confirmed, that his act was good, because the Devil disparaged it; and so the Devil, to overshoot him, accordingly tells him, that his Reformation was evil, and the many mischiefs it had done etc. i. e. tells him a truth, so to make him think it good, and more fix him in his error. This stratagem Mr. Chillingworth is willing to acknowledge in the Devil, in his opposing so strongly the Mass, as he thus imagining to keep Luther the closer to it; but than that Luther was here too hard from him, and out-witted him, yielding to his arguments, and the truths he proposed; and prosecuting them, for this, the more eagerly. Sometime again here he urgeth our own present errors to us as truths, because we already take them to be so; or he also further confirms them to us, if need be, with arguments of his own; hereby to drive us into despair, when we are conscious that our former actions have been contrary to our present persuasions. Nay yet further (for who can discover all the subtle wind of that old Serpent?) he insinuates, and confirms such an error to us for truth, and pretends thereby to cast us into despair, when as he intends only by such proofs and arguments the more to establish us in such errors, and in our prosecution of them, that so we may expiate our former actions against them. Thus the Devil seems indeed to have ministered arguments to Luther, in that famous conference of his against the Mass; such as he saw also would sway him, the more to misperswade Luther, that the Mass was unlawful; whilst Luther apprehended, that the Devil did this only to persuade him, seeing the Mass was clearly unlawful, that he had formerly for many years in using it, incurred a most horrid sin, for which God's Justice would never pardon him. Thus the Devil useth to represent to us the former good we have done, as evil; the former faith and truth we have held, and maintained, as error, or idolatry, or blasphemy, etc. seeking many times thereby to beget, in good people also as well as bad, a diffidence in God. Here therefore all aught to be suspected that he saith, all his proofs well weighed; and though when God, and our own conscience, or our friends accuse us of our sins, it is a commendable humility in us to be most ready to confess them; yet when the Devil will make us a roll of them, it is no such virtue here to confess them such, because he calls them so, or trust him with such an office; for if we do, he will throw into the account all our virtues too, and require repentance and reformation for our good works. Therefore in the assaults of this enemy, as we are to fence ourselves, for things ill done, from despair by God's mercy and Christ's merits: so are we very warily to examine, whether the actions he blames have incurred God's displeasure, and be really faulty.  
§. 38 
And that Lu●her had no secure ground that he was not by him most miserably deluded▪  These several ways and subtleties of the Devil well considered, I see no sure ground, or motive that Luther had (in such frequent negotiations as he pretends with him,) whereby he can secured that he was not miserably deluded, and deceived by him. Neither the great plerophory, and confidence he had in his opinions, and in his singular interpretations of Scripture; of which confidence see more below (§. 47.) that it is many times an operation of the evil spirit in us. Neither the strong imagination he had touching the regrets he felt within himself touching his Reformation, that these were Satan's suggestions, and temptations, only thereby to make him despair, or desert truth. For why might not this imagination rather be from Satan, and this regret from a relenting Conscience, or God's Holy Spirit? And strange it is, how he makes the Devil here blow both hot, and cold; for, when he was as yet in the bosom of the Church, than the Devil objected gross errors to him, and by his Arguments disputed him into a Reformation: and when gone out of the Church, and having so Reform, it must be the Devil again, that, with terrifying his conscience, and telling him, that his new Doctrines had undone the world, endeavours to drive him back again, and make him undo his former work. But if he gathered from the later of these attempts of Satan, that because this Fiend would persuade him his Reformation was full of guilt, therefore it was just and right; why in his former attempts concluded he not, That because the Devil opposed his saying Mass, and such other things, therefore he rightly performed them?  
Neither is this any sure argument of Luther's not being deceived by him, viz. his frequent railing, and inveighing against the Devil; his discovering, and slighting of his arts and wiles; his vilifying and triumphing over him, as a routed and vanquished enemy. (See §. 32.) (Whose subtleties holy men use to speak of with much more modesty, and fear of being deceived.) For (as I have said before §. 35.) none rail more at the Devil, than the Devil will do for his own advantages; nor profess a greater hatred of him, or be more ready (but this is a greater plot) to discover his plots. In fine then, in the great uncertainty of the Author of the several thoughts and scruples that do arise within us, and in such variety and disagreeing shapes of Satan's suggestions and temptations, I know no safeguard for Luther, or any other, to stand upon, but this; to be sure not to be gotten out of the Circle (which encloseth all Catholics) of their obedience to their Superiors; and to subject their own private holy Spirit (if I or they may so call it) to the public Holy Spirit, that dwells in God's Church; and to entertain no private senses, and expositions of God's Word, contrary to the general one of the Church, from whomsoever these singular senses come; much less when they know they come from Satan. As Luther relates in his Disputation with him, (de Missa private. & Sacerd. unctione,) many of those to have done; according to which he regulated his Reformation.  
§. 39 
11. In particular concerning Satan's famous Disputation with him, touching the Mass, nullity of the present Clergy, Justifying Faith, etc. and Luther's behaviour therein.  Which famous disputation of Satan with him I think not amiss to view more particularly; because several things appear from it very prejudicial to Luther's new doctrine, which it concerns Christians to take notice of. For whatever Satan's design in that disputation might be; whether by his defending and proving such things for truth, to drive Luther into despair, for having so long practised contrary to them, (the thing which Luther imagined); or, whether by the strength of his reasons, though not by the credit of his authority, to confirm Luther the more in his new opinions; which indeed was the issue of this disputation, (he having yielded the field to the Devil in this combat as Conqueror), 1. There seems great evidence from this disputation, that the whole platform of the Reformation (be Satan's design therein what it will, He deceiving Luther, or deceived himself) proceeded originally from the Devil. For many of these very arguments against the former Church-doctrine, and Faith, which the Devil now openly owned, and urged to Luther in this disputation, held A.D. 1522. (i.e. as he saith, fifteen years after he was made Priest, and said Mass, which was in 1507, (Melch. Adam. vit. p. 104.) were the very same that had been urged by Luther some years before; who began to publish them to the world about A.D. 1518. And who was, as he saith of himself, (Prefat. 1. Tom.) Concionator, & Doctor Theologie, he Preacher and Doctor of Divinity, in 1517. Was made Doctor 1513; writ a Book de abroganda Missa privata, ' of the abrogating private Mass, in 1521. using such arguments against it then, as Satan brought afterward, (as also then his Book against Monastic Vows:) and gins thus another Treatise, De Abominatione Missae privatae; quam Canonem vocant, ' Of the Abomination of private Mass commonly called the Canon, written in 1523. Toties hactenus, cum pro concionibus, tum editis libellis docui, de ratione abrogandae horribilis istius profanationis Missae Papisticae etc. Oftentimes heretofore, both in Sermons and printed books, have I shown, why that horrible Profanation, the Popish Mass, was to be abrogated etc. Such Arguments than we see he used before this Disputation; and by it it appears from whose suggestion he used them. And though this Disputation was not made known by him to the world till ten or eleven years after it happened, (when he had some experience of many being swayed by them,) viz. in his book de Missa privata & Sacerdotum unctione, ' Of private Mass and Priest's unction, writ in 1533: yet the Reasonings of this evil Fiend were urged by him against the Church as Truth, both before and after his Colloquy through his whole ensuing life; the strength of these arguments, with him overpoising the mendacity of the Author. And therefore this disputation of the Devils against the Mass and former religion hath had with many a contrary effect to what it had with Luther, either causing them to return to the Church, (as amongst others it had once such an operation upon Mr. Chillingworth; one of the motives of his reconcilement to the Roman Catholic Religion being set down by him thus, (in his Preface sin.)— Because (saith he) Luther to preach against the Mass (which contains the most material points now in controversy) was persuaded by reasons suggested to him by the Devil, himself disputing with him, as himself professeth in his book de Miss. private. that all men (saith he) might take heed of following him, who professeth himself to follow the Devil); or causing them more firmly to persevere therein. Tho Luther, whether out of vainglory to show his more intimate acquaintance, and negotiation with the inhabitants of the incorporeal world, and his defeat of their designs; or out of a conceit, that by the unanswerableness of the arguments, though taken from a prohibited Author, he should promote his cause; or rather out of the merciful providence of God, to show to all the world, by Luther's own Confession, the Original Founder, and Abetter of the Reformation, the more to deter all from believing such a lie, was forced (to the great regret of many of his followers, for the scandal given thereby) to publish to the world this his Confession, as he calls it, of the things that secretly passed between him and the wicked Fiend. 2ly. For the disputation itself, the Devil's arguments are vain, and of no weight to persuade what he pretends, and Luther's weakness very great in yielding to them, and in afterwards using them, especially known to come from the Father of lies; which to clear to you, I will give you the story with some animadversions upon it.  
§. 40. n. 1. Luther's own relation of it, after his telling us how vigorously, and convincingly, and in short periods the Devil disputes, is this.— Quondam intempesta nocte e somno evigilavi, & mox Satan hujusmodi disputationem in animo meo (quemadmodum scilicet multas noctes mihi satis amarulentas & acerbas reddere ille novit) mecum instituit. Audisne, dixit, Excellentissime Doctor? Num ignoras te quoque per annos quindecim privatas Missas quotidie fere celebrasse? Quid vero si Missis hujusmodi meram Idololatriam exercuisses, & non Christi corpus & sanguinem, sed nudum panem; & vinum illic, & tu adoravisses & aliis quoque exhibuisses adorandum? Respondebam sic. Atque Sacerdos sum ad istud muneris consecratus, qui & Christma, & Consecractionem ab Episcopo olim habui; praeterea omne hoc ex meorum Superiorum jussu, & obedientiae debito per me factum est. Cur ergo non Consecravissem, sum verba ipsa diligenti study pronunciaverim, & summa qua potui devotione in Missis celebrandis usus sim. Vere equidem hoc dicis (Respondit Satan,) said & Turcae, & Ethnici omnes quaecunque in templis suis agunt, exjussa & studiosa devotione facere solent. Sacerdotes Jeroboam faciebant etiam omnia certo zelo & study contra veros sacerdotes in Jerusalem. Quid si tua Ordinatio & Consecratio falsa esset; sicut Turcarum & Samaritanorum falsi Sacerdotes, falsus & impius cultus est? Some time since, about midnight I chanced to awake out of sleep, and behold the Devil (as he had known well enough how to occasion me many troublesome and restless nights) began a disputation with me in my interior soul. Dost thou hear, said he, most Excellent Doctor? Can you be ignorant, that you also for fifteen years together have almost daily celebrated Private Masses? what if in those Masses you have practised downright Idolatry in adoring there, and exhibiting to others to be adored, not the body and blood of Christ, but the naked bread and wine? I made answer after this manner. I am certainly a Priest consecrated to that holy function [of offering the body of Christ,] having long ago received both Chrism and Consecration from a true Bishop. Besides, all this I did by the command of my Superiors in due obedience to them. Why might not I therefore in celebrating those Masses be said truly to consecrate, when with all possible care I pronounced the very words [of Consecration] in the greatest devotion I was able?— You say very true, (answered the Devil), but even Turks and all Heathens perform what they do in their Temples as by command, and with a sedulous devotion. So Jeroboam's Priests acted all things with a constant zeal and fervour, though contrary to the true Priests at Jerusalem. What if your Ordination and Consecration also should be false, as amongst the Turks and Samaritans false Priests, false and impious worship? [As yet Luther 's Ordination is questioned by Satan as false, but not proved.] Satan then proceeds to give these Reasons thereof.  
§. 40. n. 2.— 1. Primum nosti, inquit, nullam tunc habuisti cognitionem Christi, nec veram fidem: First, you know, said he, you had then no knowledge of Christ, nor true faith. [Nosti: This Colloquy, then, was after Luther's reforming the former Doctrine concerning Faith, and his holding it the sole Instrument or Condition of our Justification; which Truth Satan (contrary to his custom surely) confirms to Luther. Should he not rather have been jealous here of this his new Doctrine concerning true Faith, from Satan's recommending it? And might he not here have replied, That, doubtless, when a Roman-Catholick, he had veram cognitionem Christi & veram fidem, ' true knowledge of Christ and true faith, or else God's Church then had none; and then how could any salvation be had in it; or how have not the Gates of Hell prevailed against it? Lastly Satan's and Luther's vera fides, the Solifidian doctrine, is now exploded by the better-understanding Protestants; Satan discovered a liar in it, and his Disciple Luther deceived.]— Et quod ad fidem attinet, nihilo melior fuisti quovis Turca. Nam Turca, adeoque omnes diaboli etiam credunt historiam de Christo, ipsum esse natum, crucifixum, mortuum, etc. Sed Turca & nos Spiritus rejecti non fidimus illius misericordiae, neque habemus eum pro Mediatore aut Salvatore, sed exhorrescimus ut saevum Judicem: And as to matters of Faith you are no better than a Turk. For the Turks, and so the Devils themselves also believe the history concerning Christ, that He was born, crucified, dead etc. But neither Turks, nor we Damned Spirits do confide in his mercy, or so much as own him as a Mediator or Saviour, but dread him as a severe Judge. [Here alto Luther might easily have replied, that there is a medium between an historical, or the devil's faith, and his new belief of Justification by faith alone; and that if his former faith was such, as did not fidere misericordiae Christi, nec habuit eum pro-Mediatore, sed exhorruit ut saevum Judicem, confide in the mercy of Christ, nor acknowledge him for a Mediator, but tremble at him as a severe Judge; yet such was not the faith of the Church which he deserted.]— Ejusmodi fidem, non aliam, & tu habebas, cum ab Episcopo unctionem acciperes, & omnes alii ungentes simul & uncti sic sentiebant, & non aliter, de Christo: This kind of faith, and no other, had you, when you received Holy Orders from a Bishop: and all others likewise, Ordaining and Ordained, did so believe concerning Christ. [This indeed, if true, would make one sweat; but might he not here have told Satan, he lied, if not concerning his own, yet concerning the Church's faith; and have required a further proof of his word?]— Ideo a Christo tanquam crudeli Judice, confugiebatis ad S. Mariam, & Sanctos; illi erant Mediatores inter vos & Christum; sic erepta est gloria Christo. Hoc neque tu neque ullus alius Papista poterit inficiari: Therefore flying Christ as a cruel Judge you address yourselves to St. Mary, and other Saints, making them Mediators between you and Christ. So was Christ robbed of his Glory▪ This neither you, nor any other Papist can deny▪ [Here also Luther might truly have told Satan, that he belied and misrepresented the Doctrine and practice of the Church; which desires the Intercessions of the Blessed Virgin, or Saints deceased, to God, or Christ, in no other manner, than she doth the intercessions of Saints living; the desiring of which intercessions of Saints living is granted lawful, without inferring Christ a cruel Judge, or these Saints living, and not Him, our Mediators, etc. Nor do any make their addresses so to Saints, but that the same do also to Christ himself. Meanwhile here we may observe how zealous Satan is to rectify Luther concerning Invocation of Saints, so prejudicial to our Lord's Mediatorship &c. and accordingly Luther and his followers have endeavoured to rectify the Christian world herein.]— Ergo uncti estis, consecrati & rasi, & sacrificastis in Missa ut Gentiles, Ethnici, non ut Christiani. Quomodo ergo potuistis is in Missa consecrare, aut veram Missam celebrare? Ibi deficit (quod secundum vestram propriam doctrinam vitiat) personae habens potestatem consecrandi: — Ye were Ordained therefore, Consecrated, and offered Sacrifice in the Mass like to Gentiles, Heathens, not like Christians. How therefore could ye in the Mass consecrate, or celebrate true Mass, when-as there was wanting (what according to your own doctrine destroys the whole) a person having the power of consecrating. [i.e. Without a true faith and knowledge of Christ no true Priests, and so no true Ordination by them, and so no true Consecrating or offering of Christ's true Body and Blood; and so the Adoration of that which is taken for such Body is committing Idolatry. This seems the Sum of the Devils arguing. But the contrary appears by what hath been already said: viz. That there was a true faith and knowledge of Christ retained in the Church before Luther's times; and so a true Priesthood: and if there was not so before, how can there be any since? for none may make himself a Priest, nor is there any other to make him, if the former Priesthood perished. But whatever Satan might persuade Luther, his followers are wiser, than to deny a true Priesthood in the Roman Church; and so might he, had not Satan been his Doctor.]  
§. 40. n. 3. 2.— Vnctus es tunc in Sacerdotem, & Missa abusus es contra institutionem, contra mentem & sententiam Christi instituentis.— Nam Christus voluit Sacramentum inter pios communicantes distribui; ad edendum & bibendum Ecclesia porrigi. Sacerdos enim verus est Minister Ecclesiae, constitutus ad praedicandum verbum, & porrigenda Sacramenta, sicut hoc habent verba Christi in Coena, & sicut Paulus 1 Cor. 11. de Coena Domini loquitur. Vnde & a veteribus Communio appellata est, quod non solus Sacerdos debeat uti Sacramento juxta institutionem Christi, sed reliqui Christiani fratres una cum ipso. Nunc annos quindecim totos semper solus privatim pro te in Missa usus es Sacramento, & non communicasti aliis: You was then ordained a Priest, and have ever since abused the Mass contrary to the Institution of it, contrary to the mind and intent of Christ the Instituter. For Christ would have it as a Sacrament distributed amongst the pious Communicants, given to the Church that all may eat and drink of it. Because a true Priest is a Minister of the Church, appointed to preach the Word, and administer the Sacraments, according to the words of Christ in his last Supper, and according to St. Paul 1 Cor. 11. where he speaks of the Supper of our Lord. From whence also by the Ancients it was called the Communion, because according to Christ's Institution the Priest ought not to celebrate this Sacrament alone, but other Christian brethren together with him. Now for fifteen whole years together you have constantly received this Sacrament by yourself, and not communicated it to others. [Here again he might have answered, that he in all his his Masses, wherein himself received the Sacrament, was ready also to have administered it to oaths, nor ever in any of them denied it to persons rightly prepared; much less held it unlawful, or was prohibited, to exhibit it to them. That therefore his partaking it alone was not his, but their, fault; if any other were obliged to accompany him in it; but neither this their fault, who were no way engaged to receive it so often, as he offered it; nor lastly, that he is obliged by any precept of our Lord's to forbear offering to God the Father this Commemorative Sacrifice of the Death of his Son, (from which Christianity obtains so many benefits,) and consequently the partaking it himself, when others do not also communicate with him. And lastly, concerning the sense of any Scriptures that should be pressed by Satan to be such a precept, that he was to adhere not to Satan's or his own, but the Church's judgement thereon.] He goes on,— Ideoque interdictum tibi erat, ne porrigeres totum Sacramentum aliis: And therefore was you forbidden the giving this Sacrament in both kinds to the people. [Here again Luther might have answered Satan, as the Church doth other Adversaries; That there is no precept of our Lord's commanding a necessary communicating or receiving of the Sacrament in both kinds. And to Satan, if urging the words of Institution for such a precept, might have rejoined; That neither modern nor ancient Church so understood the sense of it; as appears concerning the ancient Church in their giving the Eucharist frequently to sick, and to Absents from the Public Service, only in one kind; holding doubtless that they offended herein against no Command or Precept of our Lords; and that (as hath been said) Luther was obliged to prefer the Church's sense of our Lord's words before Satan's. And if Luther (on whom Satan's words had so great an influence) should think in this case Antiquity ought to be slighted; (for to this purpose sound those words in this very Tract,— Neque hic moror clamores quibus geminantur Ecclesia, Ecclesia, Patres, Patres; S. Gregorius, Bernardus, tales Missas celebrarunt, [i.e. Missas privatas.]— Name in vita aut operibus Patrum, in certamine Conscientiae, nemo tuto innititur; sed tantum verbo Dei fidendum est: — Nor do I here regard those that cry out, the Church, the Church, the Fathers, the Fathers, St. Gregory, St. Bernard, celebrated such [i.e. private] Masses.— For in the conflicts of Conscience none are to rely on the lives or works of the Fathers, but in the Word of God only put their confidence. urging Matt. 24. Surgent Pseudoprophetae etc. ita ut in errorem inducantur (si fieri potest) etiam electi. Vbi clare ostendit Christus fore, ut in Ecclesia inter Christianos Verbum & Sacramentum &c. in tantum abusum vertantur, ut vix Electi salvandi sint: There shall rise false Prophets etc. so that the Elect also (if it be possible) may be induced into error. Where Christ plainly foretells, that the time would come, when in the Church amongst Christians themselves, the Scriptures and Sacraments etc. would be turned into so great abuse, that even the Elect should scarcely be saved:) It may again be replied;— That this Ecclesia & Patres are appointed our guides in the Exposition of Scriptures in certamine Conscientiae; and that the Pseudoprophetae or false-prophets, in all times are to be thus discovered, and convinced, viz. by their opposing the sense of Scriptures given by the Fathers and by the Church. Nor have we any other Basis or steadiness of the Catholic Religion, when Satan and these Pseudoprophetae cite the letter of Scripture, as well as the Church.] Satan goes on:— Cujusmodi nunc hoc est Sacerdotium? cujusmodi unctio? cujusmodi Missa & Consecratio? cujusmodi tues Sacerdos, qui non pro Ecclesia, sed pro teipso ordinates' es? De hoc Sacerdotio, de hac Vnctione, (certum est), Christus nihil novit, nec eam agnoscit: — Now what kind of Priesthood is this? what kind of Unction? what kind of Mass and Consecration? what kind of Priest are you, who was not ordained for the Church, but for yourself? [i.e. receiving the Sacrament alone, and not distributing it to others? of which before.] Such Priestbood, such Unction (it is certain) Christ neither instituted, nor acknowledges. [Words.]  
§. 40. n. 4. 3.— Mens & sententia Christi est, sicut verba clare habent, ut tractantes Sacramentum mortem ejus annunciemus, & confiteamur; Hoc facite, inquit, in mei commemorationem, etc. Et sicut Paulus inquit, donec veniat. Tu vero Missator privatus in omnibus Missis tuis ne semel quidem praedicasti, aut confessus es Christum: The mind and intention of Christ was, as his words plainly signify, that we celebrating this Sacrament, should show forth and confess his Death, (Do this, saith he, in commemoration of me, &c:) and as St. Paul saith till he come. But you a Private-Mass-Priest in all your Masses never so much as once preached or openly confessed Christ. [Is not here also Preaching at the celebration of the Eucharist made by Satan a Precept? If it be made so, might not Dr. Luther have answered him, that an Annunciation of Christ's death is made in the very form of the Mass, and this not only in the Commemoration and Representation of the Sacrifice on the Cross to God the Father, but also to the persons that either are or may be present in such private Masses; but that a Sermon is not required ex Praecepto.] Tu solus usus es Sacramento, & apud teipsum demurmurasti sibilo quodam tibi soli verba Coenae. Haeccine est Institutio Christi? Cum hisne tuis factis profitebere te Sacerdotem Christi? An hoc Christianum est & pium agere Sacerdotem? Ad hoc ne ordinatus es? You celebrated alone, and with a kind of murmuring muttered to yourself the words of the last Supper. Was this Christ's Institution? can you approve yourself a Priest of Christ by these your actions? Is it pious and Christianlike thus to act the Priest? was you ordained to this purpose? [Words.]  
§. 40. n. 5. 4.— Mens, & sententia, & clara institutio Christi est, ut Sacramento communicent & alii Christiani, verum tu unctus es non ad distribuendum Sacramentum, sed ad sacrificandum: The mind, and intention, and manifest institution of Christ was, that other Christians also should communicate in this Sacrament: but you was ordained not to give this Sacrament to others, but to offer sacrifice. [Here, if Satan had said truth, neither had the ordained Priest any authority to give the Sacrament to himself. But sacrificare in the Ordination, as the Church understands it, includes also the eating, and communicating, and distribution of the Sacrifice. Nor is the Priest ordained in the Church's Form of it, only celebrare Missam, to celebrate Mass, (which also expresseth a participation of the Eucharist,) or offer sacrificium Deo pro vivis & defunctis, offer sacrifice to God for the living and the dead; but in totum Presbyteratus officium, remittere, & retinere peccata; benedicere, praeesse, praedicare, baptizare, etc. but to the whole office of Priesthood, [which besides, to offer sacrifice, is] to remit, and retain sins; to bless, govern, preach, baptise, etc. Nor may we doubt, that Luther in that fifteen years sometimes distributed the Eucharist to others, prepared, and desiring it from him.] Et contra institutionem Christi Missa usus es pro Sacrificio: And contrary to Christ's Institution you used the Mass as a Sacrifice. [But our Lord's Institution is otherwise understood by Ecclesia & Patres, ' the Church and Fathers, as making it to be a Representative or Commemorative Sacrifice and Oblation to God the Father of that only Satisfactory one of the Cross, to be continued in the Church till our Lord's second coming: which S. Paul seems also to have indicated, and so expounded it clear enough in 1 Cor. 10.16. etc. comparing and making it run parallel with the offering and eating the Sacrifices of the Heathens offered to Devils. Nor ought Luther here to have taken Satan's bare word against the Church and Fathers without more proof. Meanwhile we see from what Author (zealous forsooth of the right understanding of Christ's Institution, and of God's Truth, and vindicating it from former errors) the Reformed have learned their Opposition to the Evangelical Sacrifice of the Altar.] Sic enim verba ungentis suffraganei clare sonant. Cum enim juxta traditam ceremoniam Calicem in manus dat jam uncto, Accipe, inquit, potestatem consecrandi, & sacrificandi pro vivis & mortuis. Quae (malum) haec est prorsus sinistra & perversa unctio & ordinatio, quod Christus instituit adedendum & bibendum pro tot a Ecclesia, & porrigendum a Saderdote una communicantibus etc. ex hoc tu facias Sacrificium propitiatorium coram Deo? So indeed the words of the Suffragan [Bishop] ordaining plainly signify. For when according to the traditional ceremony he delivers the Chalice into the hands of the then Ordained, he saith, Take thou power of Consecrating and Sacrificing for the living and the dead. What a [mischief!] sinister and perverse Unction and Ordination is this? what Christ hath instituted, (and ordained to be eaten and drunk) for the whole Church; and what ought to be given by the Priest to other communicants etc. of this do you [in private] make a propitiatory Sacrifice before God. [Here also Luther might have expounded to Satan the sense of the Church, and so have expected his Reply; viz. The Church styling the Sacrifice of the Altar propitiatorium only in the application of the sole satisfactory Sacrifice of our Lord offered on the Cross. As also there were Sacrifices under the Law truly and properly styled Propitiatory; yet only so with relation to our Lord's made at his death on the Cross.] O abominatio super omnem abominationem, O abomination of abominations!  
§. 40. n. 6. 5.— Mens & sententia Christi est (ut diximus) ut Sacramentum distribuatur Ecclesiae & communicantibus ad erigendam & firmandam ipsorum fidem in quovis agone variarum tentationum peccati, diaboli, etc. ad subinde renovandum & praedicandum beneficium Christi. Tu autem ex hoc fecisti proprium opus quod tuum sit, quod tu facias sine aliis, quod possis impartiri gratis, vel pro pecunia aliis: The mind and intention of Christ was (as I said), that this Sacrament should be given to the whole Church, even all those that should communicate, to raise and strengthen their faith in every agony of the various temptations of sin, of the Devil, etc. thereby to renovate and set forth this benefit of Christ. But you have made it your own work, in that you celebrate alone, without any others there present; whether gratis, or for money.— [Spoken-to before; the Church repels none, denies the Sacrament to none worthy at any time; sells it to none. If Luther did, the Church must not answer for his guilt.] What follows next, is a Recapitulation, designed as it were only to fasten and rivet these truths better into Luther's mind, in which he was afterward to instruct the world; and the matter of it replied to before.— Hic forsan dices, etiamsi aliis in Ecclesia non porrigam sacramentum, tamen ipse sumo, ipse mihi porrigo. Et multi in coetu etiam Sacramentum aut etiam Baptisma accip●unt, qui tamen increduli sunt; & tamen ibi est verus Baptismus, & verum Sacramentum; quare tunc in mea Missa non esset verum Sacramentum? Sed hoc non est simile (saith Satan), quia in Baptismo sunt ut minimum duae personae, baptizans & baptizandus, & saepe multi alii de Ecclesia. Et Baptizantis officium ejusmodi est, quod aliis de Ecclesia quid communicat ut membris; non aliis subtrahens sibi soli sumit, sicut tu facis in Missa. Et omnia alia quae ibi geruntur, tum opus ipsum fit secundum jussum & modum institutionis Christi; tua autem Missa contra institutionem Christi: ' Hear perhaps you will say, [in defence that it is verum Sacramentum, a true Sacrament, and verum corpus Christi, true Body of Christ, though the Consecrator doth not rightly administer it, or is incredulous, and hath no right faith] although I do not administer this Sacrament to others in the Church, yet I myself take it, I give it also to myself.— There are many also in the Church receive this Sacrament, as that also of Baptism, which yet do not believe, nevertheless it is true Baptism, and a true Sacrament; why then in my private Masses may there not be a true Sacrament? But the case is not the same (saith the Devil,) because in Baptism there are two persons at the least, the baptizer and the baptised, and often others also of the Church. And the office of the baptizer is such, that he communicates something to others of the Church, not takes any thing from them to himself, as you do in the Mass. And all other things that belong to that Sacrament, even the whole action is according to the command and manner of Christ's institution, but your Mass is contrary to the Institution of Christ.  
§. 40. n. 7. 2. Quare non docetis quod quis possit baptizare seipsum? etc. Quare rejicitis Confirmationem, si quis more vestro confirmaret seipsum? Quare non est Absolutio, siquis absolveret seipsum? Quod si nunc nullum ex Sacramentis vestris aliquis ipse pro seipso facere potest, aut tractare; quì fit ut tibi soli hoc sacrum sacrificium facere velis & c? Scio (saith Satan) quilibet Minister aliis porrigens etiam pro se sumit; sed ipse non consecrat sacramentum pro se, sed sumit cum aliis & Ecclesia: Why then do you not teach, that any one may baptise himself? etc. Why do you deny Confirmation to be good, if according to your practice [in the Eucharist] any one should confirm himself? Why not Absolution valid, if any one should absolve himself? But now if no one can consecrate or celebrate any of the [other] Sacraments for himself, how comes it to pass that you offer sacrifice for and by yourself alone? I know (saith the Devil) that every Priest communicating others, receives also himself; but he consecrates not the Sacrament only for himself, but receives it together with others and the Church. [First, here if Satan proves any thing by his instances, it is this; that if no man may baptise, or absolve, or confirm, therefore neither may he communicate, himself. But all Sacraments must not be made in every thing alike. 2ly, Neither in the Sacrament of the Eucharist doth any Priest consecrate or offer only for himself, nor take this Sacrament only to or for himself, if others be present, and prepared to communicate with him: but yet 1. he may give it to himself, as well as to others; and, 2. again, to himself, when not to others, if none offer themselves to receive it with him. For himself hath a share therein, and benefit therefrom, as well as others; nor doth their foregoing this benefit, infer or necessitate his.]  
— In his angustiis (saith Luther,) in hoc ago, 
§. 〈◊〉. n. ●▪  contra Diabolum volebam retundere hostem armis, quibus assuetus eram sub P●patu: objici●bamque intentionem & fidem Ecclesia, scil. Quod Missas privatas in 〈◊〉 & intention Ecclesiae celebrassem. Etiamsiego, inquam, non recte e●●didi, aut sensi, tamen hoc recte credidit Ecclesia. Verum Satan e contrae, Age, inquit, prome, ubi scriptum est, Quod homo impius, incredulus, possit assistere Altari Christi, & consecrare, & conficere in fide Ecclesiae, etc. ubi jussit, aut praecepit hoc Deus? Si nunc verbum Dei non habes, sed homines hoc docuerunt sine verbo, tunc tota Doctrina haec est mendacium. Intentio Ecclesiae non est contra clara verba & intentionem Christi.— Ergo (saith Satan non consecrasti, sed solum panem & vinum, ut Ethnici, obtulisti: In these straits, in this agony, (saith Luther,) as I was contending with the Devil, I thought to have vanquished this great enemy with those weapons I was wont to make use of whilst a Papist. I urged therefore to him the Intention and Faith of the Church; viz. That in virtue of the Church's Faith and Intention, I had celebrated private Masses. If I did not (said I) rightly believe, and intent, yet the Church always rightly believes. But the Devil on the contrary said; Show me, if you can, in Scripture where it is written, that a wicked, faithless man may assist at Christ's Altar, and consecrate, and make the Sacraments in virtue of the Church's faith, etc. where hath God commanded or enjoined any such thing? If now you have not the word of God for it, but men have [traditionally] taught you this without God's word, than this whole doctrine is a Lye. The Intention of the Church [if the true Church] cannot be contrary to the plain words and intention of Christ. Therefore (saith Satan you did not consecrate, but only offer, as Heathens might do, the naked bread and wine. [There is more such like stuff. Here for what the Devil would persuade Luther, that, Nullus impius aut incredulus potest consecrare, etc. no impious or unbelieving person can consecrate etc. it hath been an opinion always exploded by the Church, and affirmed, that Gratiae gratis datae ' extraordinary gifts and graces are communicable to wicked persons; and the Augustane Confession, made before Luther writ this book, Art. 8. granteth,— Licere uti Sacramentis quae per malos administrantur, That it is lawful to communicate of those Sacraments which are administered by evil men; (quoting Matt. 23.2, 3. Sedent Scribae & Pharisaei in Cathedra Moysi, etc. ' In the chair of Moses have sat the Scribes and Pharisees &c.) And— Sacramenta & Verbum propter ordinationem & mandatum Christi esse efficacia, etiamsi per malos exhibeantur: ' the Sacraments and Word of God are efficacious, although by evil men dispensed. As for any intention of the Church, it is only to confer the Sacrament according to what it believes to be the Ordination and Institution of our Lord. And that its intention and faith is contrary to the Word of God and Institution of Christ, is a thing said here by Satan, but not proved to Luther; nor ought he to have yielded the matter till a further evidence of it; nor ought he to prefer Satan's, or his own sense of Scripture, before the Church's; nor to account his sense clearer, where so many against him think another so. Meanwhile here again we see from whom the first Reformer learned such language, Vbi scriptum est? ubi jussit aut pr●cepit Deus? Where is it written? where hath God commanded, or enjoined it? And to plead Verbum Dei against the Church; i.e. their own sense thereof against the Church's; (for what the word's of Scripture be, both are agreed;) and this with an addition of clara verba Scripturae, 'plain words of Scripture on their side, when a thousand men to one think the contrary; when as no words of Scripture, how clear soever, are interpretable so, as to contradict any other Scripture; and the Clarum Verbum, 'plain Text, must comprehend not one sentence affirming what we would have, but the whole word of God as not where gainsaying it. And than who so fit to judge of the whole, as the Church?  
§. 40. n. 9 This Encounter of Satan discovering, as he imagined, so much new Truth to him, and so many of his former Errors, but with this ill design, as he imagined, the intending thereby to cast him into despair, (for no man can think Satan to treat with him on any other terms than to deceive, and do him mischief: only his frauds are very various; and we may fancy, he proposeth one, when he doth another,) put him, as he saith, into a great sweat and anguish of spirit, as hath been related before, §. 32. According therefore to this suspicion of his, but quite mistaken in Satan's design, after the relation of this Colloquy in his Book de Privata Missa, he goes on thus:— Hic respondebunt mihi sanctissimi Patres, An ignoras Diabolum esse mendacem? ' Here the Holy Father's [the Popish Bishops] will answer me, Who doth not know that the Devil's a Liar? To which he answers,— Verum quidem hoc est, quod mendax sit; sed ejus mendacia non sunt simplicis artificii, sed longe callidiora & instructiora ad fallend●m. Ille sic adoritur ut apprehendat aliquam & solidam veritatem, qu● negart non potest; atque eam adeo callide & versute urget, & acuit, & adeo speciose fucat suum mendacium, ut fallat vel cautissimos. Vti cogitatio illa, quae Judae cor perc●ssit, vera erat, Tradidi fanguinem innocentem; hoc Judas negare non poterat. Sed hoc erat Mendacium, Ergo est desperandum de gratia Dei. Non mentitur Satan, quando accusat aut urget magnitudinem peccati etc. sed ibi mentitur Satan, quando ultra urget ut desperem de Gratia. In summa (saith he) nos ab ipsorum privatis Missis, ab unctione Episcoporum liberati sumus.— Viderint ipsi quomodo sua Pergamon defendant: It is true that the Devil's a Liar, but then his Lies are not of the common make, but far more subtle, and abler to deceive. He so accosts, as to gain some solid and undeniable truth on his side; and that he so craftily and acutely urges, and so speciously colours over his lies, as almost to deceive even the most cautious. As when Judas' heart smote him, that Thought of his was true, I have betrayed the just blood; this Judas could not deny: but that was a Lie, I must therefore despair of the grace of God. The Devil doth not lie, when he accuseth or presseth the greatness of a sin but he than lieth, when he farther presses, that I must despair of forgiveness. In sum (saith he) we are delivered [by this discovery of their faultiness to him by Satan] from private Masses, from the Ordination of Bishops; how they can defend their Church see they to it. [Against Satan's Arguments.] And from the time of this Disputation for ever after he desisted from saying Mass. See Adam. vit. p. 104.  
§. 41 The Lie then, that Luther apprehended to be in Satan's discourse, was this; That since Luther had lived so long in so gross errors, and committed such great faults, amongst which Satan (as the Reformed after him do still) reckons his Idolatry in Adoration of the Eucharist, therefore his present condition was desperate. But Luther presently avoided this rock of Despair, and instead thereof, cozening the Devil, made haste to Reform his Practice and Doctrine for the future, and persuade the same to others; according to the truths discovered to him by Satan, and confirmed by him (as he thought) by plain Scripture, quite contrary to the Devil's purpose and intention. Thus Luther conceited. But on the other side, the Devil's design seems to be, (in seeing a young man bold and given to novelties, and already, in the opposing of Indulgences, quarrelling with his Superiors, of whom Mellerstadius said (see Adam. vit. p. 104.) when he yet taught Philosophy,— tantam esse vim ingenii in hoc viro, ut plane praesagiat, mutaturum esse vulgare doctrinae genus, quod tunc in Scholis tradebatur,) under a show of driving him into despair, to make him swallow those things for truths, which, with the best arguments and art he could, he set forth unto him, and so to become the miserable Author, of a pretended Reformer, of the former corrupt Church-doctrines, and practices.  
§. 42 And indeed the Devil's labouring to convince us of any truths, and his laying open our sins before us, is a temptation that is very cautiously exercised by him, lest it should have another effect than he approves of, viz. our repentance, and amending what he hath showed to be amiss. Therefore this is a sort of temptation he useth not to men as yet young and vigorous, and beginning the world, as it were; but when we are come to an end of it, and now have no more time allowed us for a Reformation. Nor can we imagine that old Serpent so silly, as not to consider, in the discovering so much new truth to Luther, and giving him such unanswerable arguments for it, what might happen, if, instead of Despair, he should prove a Reformer. Nor could he but discern, that the gain he sought or hoped by Luther's distrusting the Divine mercy, was no valuable in comparison of the damage he hazarded by Luther's being his Convert. The most obvious interpretation therefore of such a Temptation is, that the Devil with his best skill meant to persuade him lies; that he might, according to the bold and fiery temper he saw in him, already inflamed against his Superiors, propagate and disseminate them all abroad.  
§. 43 But in this spreading of them it seems God would not suffer Luther to conceal the first Author. As for Chillingworth's answer, as touching this Conference of Luther with the Devil, (in his returning to Protestantisme,) to his motive for relinquishing it, that is recited before §. 39 — That (if this Conference were real) the Devil might persuade Luther from the Mass etc. hoping by doing so to keep him constant to it; or that others would make his dissuasion from it an argument for it, (as we see Papists do,) and be afraid of following Luther, as confessing himself to have been persuaded by the Devil.— To the first excuse; we see that Luther had no such thought, but that Satan's design was to make him despair. Again; it concerned the Devil, if having such a design, to have urged either no arguments, or such as in Luther's account should have been very weak, to leave him less shaken or doubtful of those opinions wherein he found him; and not to have so much overacted his part. To the second excuse; Luther's revealing his Author seems to have been none of Satan's design (which Author, as I said, for ten years Luther thought best to conceal, till he had seen many others swayed with these arguments, as well as himself; and so thought such a story of the black Author would not prejudice them,) but God's special Providence in behalf of his Church: of which the Christian world doth well to make that good use Mr. Chillingworth speaks of; to dehort men from such, at the first, Satanical Inventions.  
§. 44 And, now I am speaking of these Providential discoveries of Satan's wiles and works, a not-unlike accident to this of Luther happened also to Zuinglius, the 2d. Innovator in, and Reformer of, the former Doctrine of the Eucharist; and contending for a virtual only, not real, Presence; and, Hoc est, ' this is, to mean only, Hoc significat, Corpus meum, ' This signifies my Body; He then being on a certain day to confirm his new doctrine in a Sermon to the people, and very cogitative and solicitous to find out some new place, and to clear all exceptions, (Coepimus, saith he, omnia cogitare, omnia evolvere, etc. some former instances of his being rejected, because extracted out of Parables, as that Luk. 8.11. The seed is the Word of God,) the night before in his sleep had, as he saith, an extraordinary Monitor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the sky, but after an albus he knew not, who suggested a text of Scripture to him; which being the next day urged and dilated on, fully satisfied his Audience, so that they afterward wholly acquiesced in his opinion. Upon which good success, he afterward writing a Tract De subsidio Eucharistiae, of the succour he received concerning the Eucharist, thought himself obliged to acknowledge the favour done him by such an extraordinary Messenger. And his Relation (to give it you in his own words) is this. Cum vero tredecimus dies [Aprilis] adpeteret, vera narro, ad●oque vera, ut celare volent●m conscientia cogat effundere, quod Dominus impertiit; non ignorans quantis me contumeliis risibusque exponam; Cum, inquam, 13. Aprilis lux adpeteret, visus sum mihi in somnio multo cum taedio contendere cum Adversario scriba, sicque obmutescere, ut quod verum scirem, negante lingua benesicium suum, proloqui non possem. Qui me angor (ut solent nonnunquam somnia fallaci ludere nocte, nihil enim ●ltius quam somnium narramus, quod ad nos attinet, tamet si leve non sit quod per somnium didicerimus gratia Deo, in cujus, solius gloriam ista prodimus) vehementer turbare videbatur. Ibi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 visus est Monitor adesse; Ater fuerit, an Albus, nihil memini; somnia enim narro; qui diceret, Quin ignave, respondeas ei, quod Exod. 12. scribitur; Est enim Phase, hoc est Transitus Domini. Protinus ut hoc phantasma visum est, simul expergefio, & e lecto exilio, locum apud Septuaginta primum undique circumspicio, ac de eo coram tota Concione pro viribus dissero, qui Sermo, ubi acceptus est, omnibus sacrarum literarum Candidatis, qui adhuc nonnihil propter Parabol● obstaculum haerebant, omnem nebulam dicussit. When the 13th. of April drew near, (what I tell you is true, nay so true, that though I would willingly have concealed it, yet my Conscience forced me to utter what the Lord hath imparted to me, notwithstanding the many scoffs and jeers to which I know I shall expose myself thereby:) the night, I say, before the 13th. day, I dreamed that I had a hard tug with the Scribe my Adversary, [one that had disputed before in the Assembly against his new Opinion,] and was so struck dumb, that, my tongue refusing to do its duty, I was not able to speak what I knew to be true. At which me thought (as in ones dreams such thoughts are not unusual, for also what I relate, for my own part I take it to be no better than a dream; though what I leaned by it is no small matter, thanks be to God, for whose glory alone I now declare this,) I was exceedingly troubled and perplexed; when lo a Monitor (whether black or white I now remember not) as it were sent from above to assist me, seemed to say to me, Why, Dullard, dost not answer him what is written Exod. 12. It is the Lords Passeover? As soon as this Phantasm appeared to me, I awoke, leapt out of bed, looked out the place in the Septuagint; and the next day discoursed thereon before the whole Assembly, to the great satisfaction of all the young Students in Divinity, who before stuck a little by reason of the Parable. Here Zuinglius, the Head of the Sacramentarians, we see, had a spiritual Monitor to instruct him, as well as Luther; and in the same manner, after he saw his Opinion take, he confessed it; and if we may believe, of this Monitor, Luther, who writ an Answer to Zuinglius, (called Defensio Verborum Domini in Coena,) and among other Texts gives one to this of Exodus, he saith, It was no better than the Devil deluded him.— Luce meridiana clarius est, hanc Haeresin nihil aliud esse, quam acerbam & effraenem Diaboli petulentiam, & ludibrium; qui prae nimia securitate studio id sibi habeat, ut nos suis frigidis & versutis glossematis, & interpretationibus indignis modis irrideat: It is as clear as the Sun at Noonday, that this Heresy [so he calls that of Zuinglius,] is nothing else but the bitter and unruly petulancy and mockery of the Devil, who by reason of too much security [our not being cautious enough to observe his frauds,] makes it his business basely and unworthily to shame us with his sorry, but crafty, glosses and interpretations. This Account I thought fit to give the Reader of Luther's Relation of his Colloquy and Disputation with the Devil; who therein delivered to him the seeming truths of the Reformation.  
§. 45 Tho indeed the Arguments, wherewith he persuaded him, are very frivolous, and many of them also now laid aside by the Reformed his followers. As 1. the Nullity of Luther's faith, whilst yet a Roman-Catholick, urged by Satan in order to the verity of the Solifidian Tenent, now by learned Protestants much exploded. 2. The Nullity of his Holy Orders, and Priesthood; whereby his Consecration of the Eucharist is argued defective. But the Reformed grant the Holy Orders conferred in the Roman Church, and such as Luther received, valid and good; and from these would secure their own. 3ly, His using the Eucharist not only as a Sacrament, but Sacrifice, and his Ordination thereto. But this use of the Eucharist, as such, as it occurs every where in the Fathers; so is justified by learned Protestants. Of which Mr. Mede his Sermon on Malachy 1.11. hath treated copiously. Where p. 475. he saith, — That as Praise and Prayer may be called the sacrificium quod, the sacrifice which is offered by Christians, so the Commemoration of Christ's sacrifice on the Cross is the sacrificium quo, the sacrifice whereby the other is accepted. And p. 495. saith,— That our Blessed Saviour ordained this Sacrament of his Body and Blood as a Rite to bless and invocate his Father by; instead of the manifold and bloody Sacrifices of the Law. And afterward, that — Instead of the slaying of Beasts, and burning of Incense, whereby they called upon the name of God in the Old Testament, the Fathers, I say, believed our Saviour ordained this Sacrament of Bread and Wine, as a Rite whereby to give thanks and make supplication to his Father in his Name. The mystery of which Rite they took to be this; That, as Christ by presenting his death, and satisfaction to his Father, continually intercedes for us in Heaven; so the Church on Earth semblably approaches the Throne of Grace, by representing Christ unto his Father in these holy Mysteries of his Death and Passion. Quoting also Perkins in his Demonstratio Problematis de Sacrificio Missae, where he saith,— ' Veteres Coenam Domini, seu totam Coen●e actionem & formulam vocarunt Sacrificium; tum aliis de causis, tum quia est Commemoratio, adeoque Repraesentatio Deo Patri sacrificii Christi in Cruse immolati. The Ancients called the Supper of our Lord, or the whole Action and Canon of the Mass a Sacrifice; as for other reasons, so also because it is a Commemoration, and consequently Representation, to God the Father, of the sacrifice of Christ offered upon the Cross. Lastly, p. 504. contends,— That there may be a Sacrifice, which is a representation of another; and yet a Sacrifice too: And such is this of the New Testament; a sacrifice, wherein another sacrifice, that of Christ's Death upon the Cross; is commemorated. And whereas the same Mede would relieve himself and the Reformed in denying the Eucharist to be a Sacrifice really and properly so called, (for something must be said to free themselves from Popery,) yet he sticks not to grant the former Sacrifices under the Law, proper and real, notwithstanding that they were commemorative of another, that on the Cross; and this Sacrifice of the Eucharist to be ordained in their stead: whilst the Caholicks on the other side do also make this Sacrifice on the Altar a commemoration of that of the Cross. I have set down this to show, how different the Sons are to their first Father, as to this point of the Christian sacrifice of the Altar; and how false in this Satan was to Luther.  
§. 46 
12. That probably Luther discovered not these wiles of Satan, but served him ignorantly.  In all this said of Luther's communication with the Devil, I do not make Luther any confederate with him, but only a person miserably deceived by him. I do believe, that he in persecuting the Church of God, and its former truth, as the Jews in persecuting our Lord, and his Doctrine, thought he did God good service, and therefore the Devil great disservice; and that he really took God for his friend, and the Devil for his enemy, as they also did: of whom nevertheless our Lord declared, that they were the Devil's Children, and he their Father; and that they did the works of this their Father, and spoke his words. (Jo. 8.41, 44.) But neither do I apprehend this gross misperswasion of his to have excused him any more than theirs did; since he wanted not sufficient testimony, and evidence on every side, especially from the voice of the whole Church Catholic, that he was deceived; and the merciful God, without his own first shutting his eyes and hardening his heart, would not have given him up to such a blindness, and strong delusion.  
§. 47 
And therefore was a more dangerous instrument of his.  Meanwhile, a great advantage this is to Satan, (and therefore he labours it much,) when they that do his business do not know so much. For such persons do it much more zealously, resolutely, and without all remorse, whilst they fancy themselves Saints, and Martyrs; and not them, but their adversaries the instruments of the Devil: whereas he acts but timorously, whose Conscience meanwhile trembles, and is continually questioning his endeavours, and recalling him from his work. And the Devil well sees, that Hypocrites, and dissemblers, though these are a higher sort of his servants, yet do not do his business half so well: For, in some thing, or other, these flag at length, and detect themselves, at least they will hardly be Martyrs for him. As therefore this evil spirit in other things emulates and strives to resemble the Good, so in this; that, as the Holy Ghost inspires into God's Ministers a very great boldness, (Act. 4.29, 31.) and confidence, and full persuasion in delivering of divine truths, and undergoing any sufferings in testimony thereof; even so this evil spirit instils also a strange plerophory of blindness, and delusive credulity, into his Ministers, in the believing, and teaching a lie, not to be discerned from the other many times, even when it comes to laying down of lives. Which we may be certain of, as often as we see (truth being but one) some dye at Smithfield by fire, and others at Tyburn by suspension, with an externally appearing equal resolution and courage, for two contradictories; one therefore dying for a lie. And this is the more remarkable, in that even in defence of Atheism, some (doubtless strongly deceived by the Devil) have sacrificed their life, (as that desperate person Vaninus in France,) merely out of love to this doctrine, as a truth; for he, who held no God, looked for no future reward of his Martyrdom; nor feared any future punishment for his disavowing such Atheism, and so saving of his life. And this strange confidence Luther himself meeting with, and admiring in some Protestant sects that opposed him, readily acknowledged it in them a bewitchment of the evil spirit; yet in himself he (as also his followers) took this confidence for a signal operation of the good.  
§ 48 To this end also the Devil is glad to maintain several virtues in his servants, (though this in other respects much against his will,) so to make their bad wares saleable: and some small stock of good his instruments commonly have, which he leaves undefaced, and diligently mixeth with that evil which he hath planted in them, so to make this the more current, and all easily swallowed down together by the imprudent, and credulous. For all men avoid those in whom appears no good; and the wolves that raven most put on sheeps-clothing. Even Satan, to set off himself, he is so ugly a creature, is forced, though he hates such a habit, partly to dress himself like a good Angel: who if he should always wear horns, and cloven feet, he could get few or none to follow his colours. Had Luther been a much worse man than he was, he had done less mischief, and Satan less service; and had this Fiend handled him so roughly at his death, as some tell us; perhaps his Reformation, by the world's being frighted thereat, would have been strangled, and deserted in its birth: whereas now the show of some Christian virtues lest in him, his inveighing every where against Satan as his sworn enemy, his protestation of all sincerity and conscientiousness in his discourses and dealing, his confidence, or, as he calls it, certainty, that his doctrine came from above, his justly blaming (as also did the Catholic Doctors) several corruptions of manners in the Church, etc. drew many aster him unawares into the same nets of the Tempter, and propagated his errors to posterity.  
§. 49 
And that there wanted not specious pretences for several things in his Reformation.  Very speciously therefore, I grant, this man began to rail at the Pharisaical humour of many Religious, (and perhaps some such Religious there were), who relied on the purity and merits of their own works, and holiness; against whom he preached Christ's Merits, and our Justification in remission of our sins. Speciously afterward he preached, and writ against Indulgences; and perhaps rightly, as to several abuses wherein they were by some misunderstood, and practised; and this perhaps done by him not out of any emulation, or envy of some benefit thereof accrueing to another Religious order, the Dominicans, but out of conscience: though this his action, free from envy or avarice, might be stained with some tickling of vainglory, fed by the popular applause that followed him. So at the first he did not cast off all obedience to his Superiors, or intended it, (as himself often professeth,) nor yet intended at the first a Reformation of the Church's doctrines in so many points as he invaded afterward, but some amendment in manners rather; and afterward, when time and company had emboldened him to do this, yet he still supported such fact with this pious intention, that he did it for defending the truth; and that he only disobeyed his other Superiors to obey God the Supreme. Neither is it likely, that he ever intended by his preaching down he Evangelical Counsels of perfection, the three vows of Religion, Sacramental Confession, Penances, etc. to introduce such a licentiousness of life as he saw afterwards followed upon it: nor by his throwing off the yoke of authority, to lay the open for so many Sects, as he saw crowded in suddenly after it, besides his own. Such might be the Devil's designs from the first, but not Luther's; and had Satan pulled off his Mask, and discovered to Luther at the beginning all the evil he meant to make of him, or introduce by him; doubtless this man would have startled, and recoiled; and this subtle enemies plots are sooften spoiled and frustrated, as they are fully discovered.  
§. 50 
Nor some personal qualities that tendered him acceptable to his sect.  And as I esteem Luther from the beginning not abandoned of all good intentions, so neither deprived of all moral virtues; these seem to me two very faulty extremities, to represent any man's life so wicked, as to have nothing good in it; or so holy, as to have no faults. For any thing I can find, this man was very free from the vice of Covetousness; but than it is true, that some men are freed from this only on this score, that it cannot thrive near, or cohabit with the vice of Ambition, or Vain-glory. He is reported by his friends to have been very charitable to the poor; but this also may be done (though I cannot say his was so) with an eye in our charity to humane praise, as well as to our neighbour's necessities. So Melancthon notes of him, that he exceedingly opposed taking up arms in defence, or for propagation, of Religion; which yet might ground itself on no better foundation, but only a consciousness in his time of the weakness of the Protestants power in comparison of their Adversaries; and he might be averse from it, more because he thought it not expedient, than not just. He seems likewise to have been a man of great and indefatigable industry; of a resolute, and undauntable courage; of which see what is said before §. 47. But these are reckoned amongst good or bad things according to their effect; and so far as they tend to God's service, or to any others benefit, men may hope for a just recompense from God in accession of glory, or diminution of punishment; so far as they tend to God's dishonour, or another's harm, they must needs proceed from an evil root; and from him they may expect their wages, whose work they do, and whose cause they promote.  
§. 51 If such things as these may be urged for him; yet what more do they show, than, some of them, that he was not at his worst at first; and other, that he was never so bad as he might have been: but what are these to recompense, or make satisfaction, for that spirit of pride and contention; of licentiousness, and rebellion; of anger, and impatiency; self-admiration, and contempt of others; of railing and blaspheming against the Catholic Church, (styling it the Whore of Babylon, and the Spouse of Antichrist, and that for many ages before his own time,) and against the spiritual Fathers thereof ancient and modern, Prelates and Councils, (pronouncing even of the first Council of Nice,— Se non intelligere Spiritum sanctam in hoc Concilio (see before §. 19); against the Grace and Spirit of God, as it inhabits in his Saints, and brings forth fruits in them of a most sweet smelling savour to God; of which he said for his advancing of Justification by Faith alone, that— Opus bonum opt●me factum was peccatum mortale secundum judicium Dei:— and that— Ae●●ocertus se non semper peccare mortaliter; against Chastity and Abstinency, against Solitude and Watching, against Fasting and Haircloth, against the diurnal and nocturnal Offices of the Church, and the Canonical hours of Prayer; against hard treatment of the Body, poverty and lowness of Spirit, and preferring our Superiors reason and will, for the conduct of our life, before our own? What are some good things found in this person (as none is every way bad) to counterpoise those vices (so opposite to the fundamental virtues of Self-abnegation, Humility, and Charity,) which do appear in this former discourse to have so fully possessed, and reigned in this man; pride, anger, contention, disobedience, sensuality, breach of lawful and sacred vows, & c? Who is there, that will absolve a Traitor arraigned for murdering his Prince, because his neighbours come in, and witness, that he was charitable to the poor, or a good housekeeper? Or who will absolve the Pharisee for blaspheming our Lord's Spirit and Doctrine, because he paid Tithe meanwhile of his Mint, and Cummin? Whereas therefore those, who have been sent by God in several ages, since our Lord's departure, for the reforming of Christian manners, and advancing of piety, and religion, have appeared to be persons of extraordinary sanctity, and strictness, and austerity of life, of great humility, and meekness, and punctual obedience to their Ecclesiastical Superiors; and their Reformations, and new Institutions still licenced by the Same: so it is that this person appeared in an opposite to all the former, in casting down their works; and in magnifying himself as a discoverer of new truth; in throwing off all obedience to his spiritual Superiors; in calling Christians to more liberty, (not strictness,) and casting the work of their salvation wholly upon Christ's shoulders; yet how much he magnified the works of God the Son for the faithful, so much depressing and vilifying the operations of God the Holy Ghost within the faithful.  
§ 52 
13. The refe●● blance of Luther's change of Religion, in several particulars, to the f●rmero● Mahomet.  Where feeing that there have been, since our Lord's time, only two most famous Innovations made in Religion against Church-Authority, that have drawn many Nations after them, and divided them one from another in the worship of God; the first of Mahomet, the second of Luther; this second Innovator may be observed to have resembled the former in several particulars.  
1. In his overthrowing and rejecting the Sense & exposition of the Scripture received in former times. This later Innovator urging, That the true sense and meaning of God's word was falsified for many ages, as the other did, that the words and writings thereof. [Of which see before §. 20.— Quanti errores in omnium Patrum scriptis.— Quisest, qui non saepius Scripturas torserit, etc. And— Scire eos volo me nullius Patris authoritate cogi velle etc. And— Si nihil habetur quod dicatur, satius est omnia negasse [i. e. in Patribus,] quam concedere Missam etc.— And— Eruditis gratum erat (saith Melancthon) quasi ex tenebris educi Christum, Prophetas, Apostolos, etc. Sec before §. 5. And of these his new Doctrines and Expositions Luther saith §. 24.— Illum se aut suam doctrinam Episcoporum, aut ullius Angeli de Coelo subjicere judicio non dignari; satis nunc datum esse stultae huic humilitati. See before § 16. And— Si nos ruimus, ruit Christus und. And Zuinglius observes of him,— Clandestinum effugium sibi hoc modo praeparat, Si seductus aut falsus sum, Deus me seduxit, & fefellit. (See before §. 26.) Such language this as never any Doctor, or Reformer used before him, unless Mahomet.]  
§ 53 Secondly, In his coming not with the power of the Spirit, and Miracles; nor with the spirit of temperance, meekness, and patience, in worldly affronts; but instead of these, with the spirit of fury, defiance, and railing; as the other said that he was sent not with Miracles, but a Sword. [Hence that observation of the Tigurine Reform Divines concerning his writings,— Tanta selectissimorum convitiorum copia scatere, tanta verborum immodestia, foeditate, & impuritate turgere, tanto denique iracundiae, maledicentiae, furoris, & insaniae impetu furere, ut quotquot illum legere dignantur, non sine gravi animorum stupore, infelix hoc, & inauditum hactenus exemplum admirari coguntur. (See §. 31.) And §. 26.— In omnibus correptionibus suis plurimum maligni spiritus, quam minimum vero amici, & Paterni animi deprehendi.— And Erasmus tells him in a letter, (§. 31.) Se suo isto ingenio tam arroganti, procaci, seditioso, totum orbem exitiabili dissidio concussisse. And from such fierceness observed in him to all dissenters, it was, that Melancthon, though his intimate friend, writes from Wirtenberg in this complaining manner to Mr. Calvin, (see §. 25.)— Totos jam annos viginti expecto exilia. And a spirit this was that never left him, but rather more and more possessed him; his last writings being observed to be the most violent.]  
§ 54 Thirdly, In his indulging Sensuality, and the natural appetites of the flesh, much pleading for the necessity of Marriage, holding an equality of grace and glory in all justified; and generally opposing those formerly esteemed Counsels of Perfection, and of a stricter life, (from which many imagine Protestanism, as well as Mahometanis●n, to have gained so great an acceptation in the world,) as Celibacy, Monastical Poverty, Abstinence, Solitude, Obedience, leng Prayers, etc. [Concerning Marriage urging frequently Gen. 2.18.— Non est bonum esse hominem solum; and God's command also for it, Gen. 1.28.— Crescite, & multiplicamini. And §. 12. Adae filii sunt, & manebunt homines; hanc ob causam debent, & coguntur, iterum ex se relicto semine procreare homines.— And— concerning other mortifications of the flesh he ordinarily slights them on this manner, (§. 3.)— Ejusmodi sanctos diligit Satan, qui sua ipsorum corpora, & animas perdunt; qui defraudant, & privant se omnibus benedictionibus bonorum Dei. And contends (§. 10.) That no man ought to lay a Cross upon himself, or to make choice of a tribulation.— And— Illi insani (saith he) ignarique fidei prorsus, & spiritus, imperiti prorsus rerum spiritualium, conantur iis rebus, per opuscula sua frigida, jejumis, vestibus, preculis, statis Monasteriorum carceribus, consulere. Elsewhere— Crede fortiter (saith he §. 3.) te absolutum, & absolutus vere eris, quicquid sit de contritione. And— Baptizatus, etiam volens, non potest perdere salutem suam quantiscunque peccatis; nisi nolit credere.]  
§ 55 4. In his attempting to degrade the formerly received head of the Church upon Earth, as the precedent Reformer Mahomet did, the Head thereof in Heaven; pronouncing him Antichrist, and the Church of God his Spouse; and so far befriending that his Predecessor, as to apply all those things to the chief Pastor of Christ's flock, which properly belong to that great false Prophet, whose steps himself follows. In his degrading also the former Clergy of God; declaring them (convinced herein by the Devil's Arguments) to have been no true Priests, (see before §. 18); and setting up a new Church-Ministry of his own; and composing a new Ordination of Bishops, and Ministers descending from himself, (see §. 23.) And himself exercising the Episcopal function in Excommunications, etc. though only a Presbyter: Abrogating the former public Liturgy of the Church, and himself ordering a new one as he thought meet, to be used by all his followers, (a thing never attempted by any Reformer before him, except Mahomet); and lastly burning in public the former Ecclesiastical Canons, as well those of Councils, as Popes; by all this, as it were, making himself the Founder of a new Religion, and an independent Supreme; and, as Erasmus told him, (which suits also well in this comparison with Mahomet,) postulans tantum non pro Deo haberi, (see before §. 31. n. 3.) suitable to which he authoritatively pronounceth of the other Reformists dissenting from him, (see before §. 25.)— see nee corum consortium recipere, nec literas, libros, salutationes, benedictiones, scriptiones, aut nominationem, intra animi sui penetralia admittere, nec visu, vel auditu dignari decrevisse. Concerning which former bold undertake his Conscience often checked, and thus replied upon him, (see §. 24. n. 2.) Impossibile est, quod Christus tot seculis Ecclesiam suam errare sinat. Tu certe solus non sapis plus, quam tot sancti viri, & tota Ecclesia.— Sic senserunt & docuer●nt omnes primitivae Ecclesiae Doctores, viri sanctissimi, multo majores, & doctiores te. Quis tu es qui ausus ab omnibus his dissentire, & nobis diversum dogma obtrudere? To which he answers,— Si sanctus Petrus etc. aliter doceant, tamen hoc certe scio, quod humana non suadeo, sed divina.— And— Quisque videat, ut certissimus sit de sua vocations, & doctrina. (&. 24. n. 2.) So elsewhere about his changing the Mass, his Conscience thus suggests:— Rem arduam (§. 16.) & quam forte sit impossibile convelli, aggredior; ut quae tanto saeculorum usu firmata, omniumque consensu probata sic insederit, ut necesse sit majorem partem librorum, qui hodie regnant, & paene universam Ecclesiarum faciem tolli, & mutari, penitusque aliud genus caeremoniarum induci, seu potius reduci. To which his Answer is:— Majori cura Verbum Dei oportet observare, quam omnium hominum & Angelorum intelligentias; as if he had received some new illumination from heaven concerning a new sense of the Scriptures.  
§ 56 5ly. If I had a mind to extend this parallel any further, I might say; he resembled also the former Changer of Religion, in that he had his deliquiums, and swooning fits [see before §. 32. what Adams saith, and what himself,— Quo sane me quoque non semel tantum non perpulit] as the other had; though not ascribed by both of them to the same cause; one imputing them to the temptations of a bad Angel; the other to the visitations of a good; but yet of this Angel of Mahomet's no Christian doubts, that he was also a bad one.  
§ 57 
14. The trial 〈◊〉 ●●ther's spirit (is b●●●re descr●●●) ●●●ther this 〈◊〉 good, 〈◊〉 bid, 〈◊〉 the pro●●●●● 〈…〉 in the b●●● 〈…〉  If you please then, after all this, to review the two contrary Spirits described by the Apostle, and mentioned before, §. 1. you may from the precedents in this Discourse, discern this person not to have been possessed with the first, but the latter. Now the Rule or Mark that our Lord hath left to his sheep, thereby for ever to know, and avoid false teachers, is the fruits which they see them bear. Beware (saith he) of false Prophets, that come to you in sheep's clothing, [like true members of Christ's flock and fold;] ye shall know them by their fruits: Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs from thistles? The meaning of which surely cannot be this (Matt. 7.15.) only by their fruits, i.e. their doctrines ye shall know the persons, whether they be true, or false prophets or teachers; or by their doctrines ye shall know whether they teach false doctrines; for so still I have no direction lest me whereby to know their doctrines to be false; yet for which their false doctrines ●am warned chief to be ware of these false teachers. But the meaning thereof in reason must be, that by their fruits of an holy, or bad life, by the fruits of the Spirit, or of the flesh which they bear, which fruits the sheep do see, and can judge of, when they cannot so well of the doctrines; by these both the good or bad Spirit of the Doctor, and the truth or falsity of his doctrines, may be known.  
§ 58 First, the Teacher's Spirit whether it be of God, or of the flesh, and the Devil, may be discerned by these fruits. For if this Spirit be of God, the Apostle hath told us, (Gal. 5.22.) that the fruits thereof are love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, continency, or temperance: if of the flesh, and Satan; the works or fruits are fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, drunkenness, revel, hatred, variance, emulation, wrath, strife, sedition, envyings, etc. Now Christians, having once discerned thus by these fruits the Spirit of the Teachers, where they have ground of presumption that it is a bad one, have all reason to suspect his doctrine, and his reasons, and arguments, and his expositions of God's word in confirmation thereof to be so too. To be so too, I say, where ever the Church doth not authorise and secure such doctrine to them; for the Scriptures are of no private interpretation, i. e. not of every private man's interpretation out of his own brain; because they are dictated by the Holy Ghost; and by the Holy Ghost, the meaning of the Holy Ghost in them can only be expounded. By the Holy Ghost, I say, either in the private Expositor, or the Church; in which the Spirit of God for ever resides, and guides it into all truth; from which Church he must learn such Exposition, or with which Church he will concur in it; if he learn it from God's Spirit. But this man's new Doctrine entered into the world neither with Miracles, nor (if we consider all said) with the signs of a good Spirit; nor yet owned, or defended (nay also rejected, and condemned) by the Church.  
§ 59 
Where, 1. That truth and holiness, error and vice, have a necessary cenrex●●n.  2ly. By their fruits of a strict, and holy, or of a corrupt, and dissolute life, are the truth and falsity also of Doctrines discovered. For first, as truth, and goodness, so error, and vice, have a most intimate, and natural connexion; so that I may say, if there be any doctrine, that really and naturally tendeth to produce in us more sanctity and purity of life than the contrary; that most certainly is truth, and the contrary error; and therefore is an orthodox faith so much laboured for, because it is the foundation of a good life; and therefore Satan becomes the Father of all evil in us, because he is first the Father of lies to us. Tho then it be not here denied, but that a teacher of something that is false, may bring forth the fruits of a good life; and contrary, the teacher of truth, the fruits of a bad: yet 1. here the fruit of good life can never proceed from the false doctrine taught by the one; nor the fruit of a bad life, from the truth that is taught by the other. But the teacher of truth brings forth bad fruit from his lusts carrying him against the truth known by him: and again, the teacher of some errors brings forth good fruit from the truth which he possesseth; mingled indeed with error, but yet predominative thereof. But if he be such a Teacher of errors, as that the truths he holds (as none err in every thing) are, in the operation which they might have upon his manners, mastered, and seduced by them; here his life also must needs be corrupt; whether he be supposed to practise according to his errors, (as if he indulged some forbidden lusts because conceived lawful), or whether he practise contrary to them; for so he doth what is right indeed, but against his conscience; all acting against which, though when it errs, becomes evil. Again, if he be a teacher of such errors as are expressly condemned by the Church, or, at Jest, as he knows to be so, whatever truths he may hold, or some kind of virtues practise according to those truths, yet his life in general can never be styled holy, or himself good, because he wants the two fundamental and cardinal virtues of Obedience and Humility. Lastly, neither can a good man, teaching some errors, be so good, as if rectified in these, he might have been; but that he must also be so far faulty, and defective in his manners, as his false opinion any way tendeth to the depraving and leavening thereof. This of the natural connexion of error and vice, as of truth and goodness.  
§ 60 
〈◊〉; That where more corrupt doctrines ●re believed, and taught, there for the general are ●ound more dissolute 〈◊〉.  2ly. Hence it will follow; That though (as hath been said) it may not be affirmed, that where ever a dissolute and bad life is seen in a teacher or others, there it ariseth from their false opinions, or doctrines; because many times our life is evil, where our tenants are generally orthodox; and true Catholics are sometimes bad men, from our lust's warring, and carrying us headlong against our knowledge, and our faith; yet in any Sect, wherein more erroneous and corrupt doctrines are believed, and maintained, especially such as give more manifest liberty to the flesh, there for the general must needs be more carnal, corrupt, and dissolute lives; seeing that there are here both the same lust's warring against the Soul, which are also tempting the Catholic and Orthodox to an evil life; and moreover many gross mispersuasions and pernicious doctrines, siding with, and countenancing such lusts, or at least not curbing them. For if our lusts, even against knowledge, are so powerful over us; how swiftly will they move us, when our errors go along with them, and blow these Sails? This I say for the general. For as to particulars I do not deny, but that the life of some persons, labouring under many erroneous principles, yet may be very regular, both by reason of other truths believed; which, though this not observed by them, do contradict the other false ones, and may suspend the bad influences of them upon their practice; as also by reason of an extraordinary good inclination of their nature, and helps also of God's restraining grace; for even amongst the Heathen-errors have been some persons of an external virtuous, and unreproachable conversation, and therefore much more may they be so amongst any Sect of Christians, who cannot but have many Catholic truths mingled with their errors; and yet much more may they be so amongst such reformed, as have since cast off, and renounced many of Luther's more malignant doctrines, and especially his Solifidian error. Which Reform methinks should have a great jealousy of the rest that were taught by him, whom they have found miscarrying in so fundamental a point, and that which was the first stone that he laid of the Reformation: (See before §. 3. etc.) yet so far may their other errors be rationally conceived to retard, and hinder even the very best amongst them, as never to equal in sanctity the lives of those holy men, that enjoy the light and guidance of the Catholic Faith.  
§ 61 
The several bad fruits springing from Luther's doctrine, that presently appeared, and were confessed ●n his own time.  According to these positions, if we examine concerning Luther's Doctrine, what fruit it brought forth, and that in his own time, (for it becomes not me to make a scrutiny further, when it spread over Kingdoms; or to compare, and decide the holiness of Nations according to their present various professions of Religion:) if we inquire, I say, in his own time, what fruit it bare; especially in respect of the four main heads thereof, in his gross way of delivering of them; 1. The Nullity, and Antichristianism of the former Ecclesiastical Prelacy, and Clergy, and the non-obligation of their Constitutions and Laws. 2. The inutility of Works, of Penance, Mortifications, etc. 3. The Servitude of man's Will, and inability to good even in the Regenerate. 4. The sole Sufficiency of Faith in us for our Justification; and this Faith an assurance that Christ's merits are applied to us in particular, and that we in particular are justified by them; and that every one by believing he is justified, truly becomes so. To which may be annexed his holding a parity of future glory to all justified, and one in Heaven as great as another, without consideration of their own different good works, or sufferings in this present life. We shall find in the effect, (as in reason it could not be otherwise,) That out of the first of these (the band of Ecclesiastical Authority being dissolved) sprang immediately a multitude of Sects invading one another, as well as all of them the Church, many gross Heresies, and grievous Schisms, and Seditions, even sober Protestants being the judges here of; all which must needs be accompanied with a strange spiritual or intellectual pride, in thinking themselves wiser men, and better interpreters of the Scriptures than their spiritual Superiors, than the Doctors, Fathers, and Councils of the Church, both of the present, and many former ages. And that out of the three latter, (people from them discovering no great utility, or necessity of our own, either penal or pious works) grew a great dissoluteness of life on one hand, and great worldliness, and covetousness, and its daughter oppression on the other; as not believing, that the laying out of their goods here could purchase for them a treasure in another place; but rather such works of their own diminish their confidence in Christ's works, and so ruin their Justification, and cast them our of the Evangelical, into the Legal Covenant.  
§ 62 For these fruits appearing in his followers see the testimonies alleged before, §. 7. and amongst the rest the witness of Luther himself; the thing he confessed, but the cause thereof he made to be the people's, or their Reformed teachers ignorance, and mistaking of his Doctrines; how truly this latter, let the indifferent judge by what hath been here before produced out of him writings; for which review his propositions before §. 3. And see Dr. Hammond's description of the natural fruits and effects, that must needs grow out of one of his tenants, the Solifidian error. (Of Fundamentals. 〈◊〉, 13.) The sum of which is; That, such a one by his full assurance, as it excludes all fear and doubting of his estate, and also asserts the priority of such an assurance and faith before his repentance or amendment of life, is fortified and secured by this one deceit from all obligation to superstruct Christian practice, or holy living, upon such his faith. For if assurance of his good estate be the one thing necessary, than nothing else that is distinct from it (as a good life is affirmed to be) is so. And if his estate be already safe, (and if it be not, than his believing it so is believing a lie) than it needs no supply from a good life at all to make it a safe estate, or to give him grounds to believe it such. Nor if he be justified before he amends his life, can this hinder the continuing of his Justification, or intercept his Salvation, if he shall never amend it, especially, when it is said by them, that the once justified can never be unjustified. Nor will this amendment and good life be necessary, though not to his Justification, yet to the approving of it, or of his faith to himself, or others; because his faith being a full assurance includes this approbation of his Justification to himself: and the approbation of it to others must needs be a thing  and impertinent to his Justification, nor can man's disapproving it any way annul it. etc. See the Author. Again, For the mustiplying of Sects, by throwing off the yoke of Ecclesiastical Government, (without casting off which Luther could not have made way for his own Sect; nor could he find any reason, he doing no miracles, whereby to stop this gap made by him to all men besides himself,) Luther acknowledged no less than twenty sprung up in his own days, (see §. 22.) One of them concerning the ten Commandments; that they ought to be taken out of the Church, (and indeed all the use of the observance of them that Luther taught, was only for signs and testimonies of a true faith: Ex operibus te Deus judicabit (saith he,) id est, si credideris. See before §. 3.) And another of them concerning a feigned faith: of which new doctrine he saith, that it was— pejor omni errore, qui ante hoc tempus unquam fuit. (See before §. 7.) And by reason of these Sects following his Reformation so close at the heels, and in some piece or other thereof supplanting it, he often foretold that the true Religion [i. e. his] should not continue long after his death; [but if so, it cannot be the true Religion, for against this we are certain the Gates of Hell shall never prevail, or Sects abolish it.] See his Colloquies c. 44. of Seducers. — Who would have thought (saith he) of that mischievous Sect, the Antinomians? I have outlived and endured three abominable tempests, Munster, the Antinomians, and the Anabaptists. Now seeing they are stilled, and gone, [no such matter,] others do approach, insomuch that there will be no end in writing,) [how should there, where no Judge to decide matters?] I desire no longer to live, for there is no more hope of peace. Ancient Bernard said well: We should preach of four particulars; of Virtues, of Vices, of Rewards, and Punishments. [And lay the preaching of sola sides aside.] And in his Comment on Gen. published not long before his death; (See §. 12.) Quantum Sectarum (saith he) excitavit Satan nobis viventibus? Quid futurum est nobis mortuis?— And again— Muncerus etc. nihil aliud nisi spiritum sonant, idque nobis viventibus, docentibus, & repugnantibus; quid futurum est, cum conticuerit nostra doctrina? And not unlike Suspicions of Posterity hath Calvin upon the like experience of the multiplying of Subsects, where no restraint by Authority. (Praefat. Catechism. Geneven.)— De posteritate (saith he) ego sic sum anxius, ut tamen vix cogitare audeam: nisi enim mirabiliter Deus de coelo succurrerit, videre mihi videor extremam barbariem impendere orbi. Atque utinam non paulo post sentiant filii nostri fuisse hoc verum potius vaticinium, quam conjecturam: Concerning Posterity I have such anxious thoughts, as indeed to dread the very thoughts thereof. For unless Almighty God from Heaven wonderfully prevent, I seem to foresee extreme barbarity [as to a Christian and Orthodox faith] hanging over the world. And I wish our children, when we are gone, may not find this to have been rather a Prophecy than Conjecture. Thus he. And who is there, that hath not observed the Reformation still dividing into more and more subdivisions, and fractions to this day; and the stating of the points in controversy in their descent to posterity, varying much from the former, (I say not whether to the better;) and by often handling spun much finer than the first gross thread thereof, that was drawn out by Luther? As if the reforming were running still more and more backwards towards the Church.  
§ 63 
The manner of his death.  Thus much concerning the doctrines of Luther, and the fruits thereof; and in general concerning his Life, Spirit, and Manner of Reformation.  
If in the last place you should long to know, what his Death was, after such a Life, and in what manner he went off the Stage, who had filled the world with so many new Opinions, and Tumults; as I find the story of it related by a Protestant, and a Friend, extant in Cocleus his Acta & Scripta Lutheri, (where also is exhibited another story written by a Catholic much different;) It hath indeed some circumstances in it which one would not wish for himself, though yet which may also happen to a good man. For it surprised him at a time of much mirth, and feasting, when aged now 63. years he was in great state sent for, and attended with above 100 horsemen to Islebium, the place of his Birth, and habitation of his Kindred, for compounding some differences, not in Ecclesiastical, (unless it were about sharing some former Church-revenues,) but rather some Secular matters between the Counts of Mansfield then at variance. Here after some three week's stay, and having preached several Sermons very invective, as some of them against the Pope, Roman Clergy, and Monks, and the Church he had fallen away from, (as also one of the last books he writ a little before this journey bears this title,— Contra Papatum a Diabolo institutum, ' Against the Papacy instituted by the Devil. See Melch. Adam. vit. Luther. p. 153.) so others against the newer Sects fain away from him, and his Reformation; (calling them Tares sown altogether without his knowledge,) one day in the beginning of February 1546, after he had dined with much cheer, company, and mirth, non in suo hypocausto, sed inferne in amplo triclinio, not in his private Stove, but below in a large Dining-room, (saith his friend in his relation,) before supper he complained of a great pain in his breast; but this afterward being a bated again, he supped in the same place, saying,— Solitarium esse non adfert gaudium [i.e. hujus seculi,] and, as his disciple saith, omnem excutiens tristitiam jocis & facetiis. But after Supper his pains returned, and after some rest about one in the morning he fell mortally sick, and was dead before three, and before the Physician and Apothecary came to afford him their help. He is said formerly to have been subject to some Fits, or swoundings, wherein he lay without sense or motion, and these sometimes to have been caused by some molestations from the Devil. (See before §. 32.) The Catholic story of his death (but I know not with what truth, being an enemy) reports that— visa est tortura oris, & dextrum latus totum infuscatum, ' his mouth distorted, and his right side turned all of a duskish colour. Some of his dying speeches, related by the Lutheran, seem to have a greater relish of the Pharisee than of the Publican.— There Pater coelestis (saith he) tu mihi Filium tuum dilectum Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum revelasti; hunc docui, hunc professus sum, hunc amo, etc. Quem impii persequuntur, calumniantur, criminanturque: or, as Justus Ionas,— quem abominabilis Papa, & omnes impii, vituperant, persequuntur, & blasphemant, suscipe jam ad te animam meam: My Heavenly Father, thou hast revealed to me thy beloved Son our Lord Jesus Christ; him have I preached, him have I professed; him I love, etc.— whom the wicked persecute, calumniate, and falsely accuse; or,— whom the abominable Pope, and all the wicked revile, persecute and blaspheme, receive my soul. Whereas we meet with never a— Miserere mei, nor humble Confession of, or act of Contrition for, his sins. That Epitaph also, if composed by himself, as it is said, (Pomeranus orat. Funeb. — Pestis eram vivens, moriens ero mors tua Papa. savours much of his, but not of a sober spirit; nor his Prophecy therein of much truth. Thus much of the circumstances of Luther's death in Feb. 1546.  
Now, as I said, we all wish a long preparation for our last end, nor especially to be suprized therewith in a time of jollity and feasting, we wish some sequestration also then from Secular affairs, in which he was at that time much involved, and that not his own but others. But on the other side 'tis dangerous to censure any man for such accidents which happen also many times to very good Christians; and these also at their death have frequently discovered an holy confidence in God. Not unfrequently also the chief Authors of Sects and Heresies have nothing in their life or death exorbitant, or monstrous, or much differing from other sorts of men. Of which perhaps one reason of the Divine Providence so disposing things may be, because seeing that it is meet that Heresies be, so also that these receive no check or blasting in their first growth by any extraordinary disasters, or judgements showed upon the Founders; when-as God hath otherwise left evidences and arguments (such as, I suppose, are some of those  in this Discourse) sufficient to deter the considerative and sober from embracing such new Doctrines, or following such Leaders.  
FINIS.   

A DISCOURSE CONCERNING THE CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY.  
At OXFORD Printed, Anno 1687.   

CONTENTS.  

1. CElibacy a better state than Marriage. §. 1. 

A holiness of the Body, as well as of the Soul. §. 2.  
As a holiness of it, that is opposite to fornication; so that is opposite to Marriage. §. 2.  
To the married, on pious occasions, forbearance of the acts of marriage advised. §. 3.  
Forbearance of second marriages commended; in some cases, enjoined. §. 4.    
2. Having a greater reward in the world to come. §. 5. 

Continency especially necessary for the Clergy. §. 6.  
That it is the gift of God. §. 7. 

Given to very many. §. 8.  
For some space of time, at least, to all.      
That none, from not exercising the act of continency, can say, he hath not the power. §. 9  
That he, who, having this gift, doth not exercise it, in living unmarried, sinneth not. §. 10.  
Whether the gift of Continency (supposing it to be given only to some) may by them be certainly known.  
That though all have not, yet all may have, the gift of continency. And that God denies it none, at no time, they using the means. §. 12.  
That it may be vowed. §. 15. 

Yet it more difficult, than the matter of any other vow. §. 25.  
Therefore not hastily to be vowed. §. 26.  
Yet not unlawful for the Church, and very beneficial to restrain the sacred function of the Ministry to single persons. §. 27.      
Ambros. de Viduis. 
— Scit Creator omnium affectus esse varios singulorum; & ideo praemiis virtutem provocavit, non infirmitatem vinculis alligavit.— Sunt spadones, qui se castraverunt &c: sed hoc non omnibus imperatur, sed ab omnibus stagitatur.— De Virginibus 3. l.— Dominus, qui sciret praedicandam omnibus integritatem, imitandam paucis, Non omnes (inquit) capiunt verbum istud.  Hierom contra Vigilantium 2. Ep. 
— F xortus est subito Vigilantius, qui damnandas dicat esse vigilias, etc. continentiam haeresin; pudicitiam, libidinis seminarium dicat etc. (dicat)— proh nefas! Episcopos sui dicitur sceleris hahere consortes etc. qui nisi praegnantes uxores viderint Clericorum, etc. Christi Sacramenta non tribuunt. Quid facient Orientis Ecclesiae? Quid Aegypti, & Sedis Aposcolicae? Quae aut virgines Clericos accipiunt, aut continentes: aut, si uxores habuerint, mariti esse desistunt.—  Conc. Trident. Sess. 24.9. Can. 
— Si quis dixerit, Clericos in sacris Ordinibus constitutos posse ma●rimonium contrahere, non obstante lege Ecclesiastica vel voto,— anathema sit. cum Deus id [donum castitatis] recte petentibus non deneget, nec patiatur nos suprae id quod possumus, tentari.  Bellarmin. de Clericis. 1.18. c. 
— B. Thomas d●serte docet, votum continentiae esse annexum Ordinibus sacris ex solo Ecclesiae decreto, ac proinde dispensabile esse,— quod ego verissimum puto. Again, ibid.— In tota Scriptura nullum tale extat praeceptum, viz. ut Sacerdotes non ducant uxores.]— Ib.— Ecclesia Romana multis jam saeculis permisit Graecis sacerdotibus usum uxorum, ●●as ante Ordinationem duxerant, ut pat●t ex c. Cum olim de Clericis conjugatis.   

CONCERNING CELIBACY.  
§. 1 
Celibacy a better state than Marriage.  I. IT must be granted, concerning Celibacy; That it is a better condition of life than Marriage, for prayer and fasting, and all other service of God without distraction, and so for gaining the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 19.12.); for works of charity to our neighbour; for avoiding covetousness, worldly cares and impediments, (and this in all, not only in afflicted, times;) for enjoying our liberty, (1 Cor. 7.4.) which, when we can have, we are rather to use it. 1 Cor. 7.21. See for these 1 Cor. 1, 8, 26, 32. to the 37, 38. Lu. 14.20.— 1 Cor. 7.5.  
§. 2 II. As there is a purity and holiness of the body, as well as of the soul, (see 2 Cor. 7.1.— 1 Thes. 4.4.— Jud. 23. compared with 8. and 2 Pet. 2.10, 14.) opposite to fornication and uncleanness, 
A hol●nes of the body as well as of the soul.  [which uncleanness is more especially opposed to holiness than other vices, (see Rom. 6.19. 1 Thes. 4.7.— Eph. 5.3.) and hath a natural shame and guilt upon it, which makes it seek privacy beyond any other sin whatsoever; (see the shame of our First Parents upon the first appearance of concupiscence, Gen. 2.25. compared with Gen. 3.10.)] and enjoined to be observed in reference to Christ, he being now the husband of the body, and it his spouse, (see 1 Cor. 6.20. compared with 13, 18, etc.): 
As a hol●nes of it that is opposite to fornication; so, th●t is opposite to marriage  so there seems to be a greater degree of this purity of the body opposite to Matrimony. See 1 Cor. 7.34. and Rev. 14.4. where defilement with women is opposed to virginity, as another defilement is opposed to matrimony; Heb. 13.14. the marriagebed is undefiled, that is, with sin; (for this was appointed, as for a means of propagation to Adam innocent, so for a remedy against fornication (1 Cor. 7.2.) to man fallen, and troubled with concupiscence): yet the virgin's-bed, it seems, is more undefiled, more Angellike in respect of corporeal purity: [undefiled] being opposed to an imperfection of chastity virginal, as well as to the sin of lust; to the act of concupiscence, as well as to prohibited copulations: therefore (hereafter) not to marry, nor be given in marriage, but to be like the Angels of God, is reckoned as a thing more honourable for the body. Lu. 20.35. And concupiscence, one cause now of marriage, and which, could it be remedied, the Apostle would not advise so many to marriage, was not known by Adam when perfect; and was a thing, when appearing upon his fall, which he was ashamed of, and sought to hid, as his posterity ever since do, those acts, even of the lawful bed. To a higher degree (then▪ of this primogeneal virginal purity of the body I suppose that expression relates, 1 Cor. 7.34. The virgin careth etc. that she may be holy both in body, and in spirit.  
§. 3 And for this reason it seems to be, that we find abstinence from the acts of (if I may so call it) lawful lust advised (for the better performance of holy duties, 
To the mared, on pious occasions, forbearance of the acts of marriage advised.  or in times of humiliation etc.) even to those, who are in the state of marriage, (as doubtless conjugal chastity also hath many degrees in it, and in some men is far more pure than in others, and the permissions of matrimonial privileges very easily transgressed). See Exod. 19.15.— three days sanctification, and not coming at their wives;— 1 Sam. 21.4.— women kept from them about three days, and the vessels of the young men holy, i.e. from their wives;— Zech. 7.3. where we see, that, in times of more earnest addresses to God, this separation from carnality was continued. Neither is this only Old-Testament-ceremonial holiness: but see 1 Cor. 7.5. a place parallel to these; Defraud ye not one the other except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer. Where it may be noted, that as fasting hath no good correspondence with the acts of the conjugal bed, (sine Cerere etc.) so these also are as prejudicial to fasting, and its companions. And suitable to these Scriptures were the Decrees of the ancient Church:— Diebus orationis, & jejuniorum, & praeparationis ad Eucharistiam a conjuge abstinendum. And this, because carnal pleasures are some way or other always enemies to spiritual exercises; either proceeding to excess, and so rendering us faulty; or too much either heightening, or also debilitating our temper, and so making us undisposed; or dividing, and diverting some portion of that love, and of those intentions to things inferior, which are always all incomparably best spent upon, and consecrated to, God the supreme good.  
§. 4 Again, we find, after one marriage, the abstaining from a second both commended, (see Lu. 2.36.) and, to some persons, to wit, 
Forbearance of second marriages commended; in some cases enjoined.  those entertained in the pious or holy Services of God, or the Church, enjoined: as appears in the widows of the Church, 1 Tim. 5.9. of whom it is there required, that such widow have been the wife of one man; which words being capable of several senses, either that she have not had two husbands at once, or not two successively; again, not two successively, either by a divorce from the former, or upon the death of the former: seeing that no woman might have two husbands at one time, nor any women at all were allowed remarrying upon divorce; (see 1 Cor. 7.11.) it follows, that the Apostle's widow must be understood to be such, as had not had a second husband after the first dead. For this injunction seems to have something singular in it, the same caution being given no where to any, but only to Church-officers, and servants. Nor is it probable (as some against the current of Antiquity interpret it) that the Apostle here restrained only the admission of such a widow as had causelessly turned away her husband, and unlawfully married another man, (which is granted was done sometimes, but seldom and without any permission of Moses law; (see Mar. 10.12.) or, as had many husbands at the same time, (of which there are some rare examples amongst the heathen,) because such things cannot well be imagined (though possible) to have happened in the Church; or when they happened, not to have been severely punished with excommunication; as we see the incestuous Corinthian was. And the Apostle seems here rather to require something of extraordinary example and goodness above others, in such as were thus to be devoted to the Church's Service, and maintained by her Charity, than only to caution, that they should not be of the worst wicked amongst Christians. Which is further confirmed by St. Paul's displeasure against those Church-widdows that remarryed, ver. 11. And if this interpretation be admitted for the widows, much more may it, upon the like expression [a husband of one wife] for the Bishops of the Church, 1 Tim. 3.2. and for the Deacons, 1 Tim. 3.12.  
§. 5 III. Tho Celibacy, as it occasions larger fruits of righteousness to many, yet if a married condition also produceth the same, 
Having a greater reward in the world to come.  it hath no pre-eminence in this beyond wedlock: yet, as in itself, it is a stronger resistance of the lusting of the flesh, and a greater subduer of the natural concupiscence, which all have less or more; whose importunities it heroically repelleth, whilst the married only lawfully satisfies them; thus, it seems worthy of, and so to have promised to it, a higher reward and crown in the world to come, and is one of the eminentest of all the virtues; as not moderating, but subduing the most violent of passions. See Esai. 56.4, 5. where Eunuches, who as dry trees under the law were much disparaged, (Deut. 23.1.) yet under the Gospel have ample promises beyond those who beget children.— See Matt. 19.12. where the Kingdom of heaven being inheritable without it, the using of this means seems to be for something singular in that Kingdom, as well as for the more easy or certain attaining it. But however this be, those who grant there several degrees of glory, proportioned to those here of sanctity, must give the highest to Virgins; because if supposed only equal with the rest in all other graces, they are granted in one to be superior. See Act. 21.9. where Virgin seems to be a term of honour.  
§. 4 IU. Single life, being so advantageous for having our liberty (freed from any other conjugal fetters) to bestow ourselves wholly on Christ, 
Continency of e●●●lly nec ss●●y or the Clergy.  and to wait upon him without distraction, freed from cares, and holy in body and spirit; seems, though worthy to be sought for by all, yet so necessary to none as to those of the Clergy, so far as they find themselves capable of it: that perfection, which others, as it were unnecessitated thereto, attain by it, being their constant duty and profession as it were; especially, that; to give themselves unto prayer, [1 Cor. 7.5.— Act. 6.4.] and to wait upon the Lord without distraction, [v. 35.] and to take a special care of the poor. Act. 6.3.  
§. 5 V. 'tis plain, that this Continency, and the power of living a single life, 
That it is the gift of God.  is the gift of God; both 1. such a cool and moderate temper, and calm passions as do not so eagerly provoke and kindle the fire of lust in us; and 2ly. the grace to be able to abstain and quench these fires, when we are provoked, if we will use the means; and 3ly. the actions or means, which we use, by them to procure the grace to abstain, (as prayer, mortifications of the body, avoiding all temptations, constant and diligent employment,) are the gift of God. For so also are all other good things said to be, both natural, and moral, and spiritual; even all those things which we have most in our power, and which our industry most procures; and the powers themselves, and every action of them. So, to be rich, to be honourable; the condition of a freeman, or of a servant, etc. are the gift of God. See 1 Cor. 7.17.— Deut. 8.17, 18. Jo. 3.27. And if we cannot, of ourselves think a good thought, much less refrain the most violent of our lusts, except from the gift of the Almighty.  
§. 8. n. 1. VI Taking this ability to contain, 
Given to very many.  not for a power of being freed from all concupiscence, and from the first motions of lust; (for so none at all have this power,) but for a power to suppress these first motions, and quench these lesser sparks, before they break out into a flame, 1. either into fornication, therefore [v. 2.] marriage is opposed to fornication, as it is [ver. 9] to burning; or, 2ly. into uncleanness, [which uncleanness, contradistinct from fornication, is no small guilt, but every where marcheth along with it as its fellow in the catalogue of those sins that exclude us from heaven, (see Gal. 5.19. Eph. 5.3. Col. 3.5. 2 Cor. 12.21. etc. some kinds of this uncleanness being advanced above any other sin, except that in Spiritum Sanctum; see 2 Pet. 2.10. Rom. 1.24. Eph. 4.18, 19 Rev. 22.15.] or 3ly. into morose delectation, fomenting first, and heating ourselves by it, before we put it out, [see 1 Cor. 7.9. expounded by the 2.] in respect of which, virginal continency in several persons is less or more pure: This power, I say, thus understood, (i.e. of being able to contain, if they be not wanting to themselves, is given to very many; nay, for some time at least, to every one. For this I suppose granted; that whenever marriage, or the use of it, is unavoidably hindered, or by God himself also prohibited, there also is given by him the power to contain. And this happens in very many instances; before, in, and after, marriage.  
§. 8. n. 2. For 1. before marriage, 
For some space o● time at least, to Al●  there being many ceremonies to be observed in it, many surprisals of lust seize upon youth that are more liable to it, when in an unripe age (of 12, 13, 14, years old perhaps), which for the present, that way, cannot be remedied, who many times may not marry without the licence of their Superiors; as it happens to youth yet under the power of their parents, (to whom the Apostle allows a power in disposing of them, 1 Cor. 7.36. etc. and 'tis there to be noted, that he considers much more the father's inclinations, towards her single life, or marriage, than the virgins); and to servants, not yet made free from their Masters. Besides that, many other causes of delaying marriage may intervene, as when it is not permitted to any at certain times of the year set aside for humiliation; Lent, &c: So, when external impediments occur; as being in a journey, or imprisoned, or upon the Sea, &c, and in many other cases; and these happening most-what in the age too wherein concupiscence is in its greatest strength; here, if some have not the power of continency, nor yet of the remedy, marriage, how will incontinency become a guilt?  
§. 8. n. 3. 2. Again, in the state of marriage, there is necessary power of continency always required in respect of concupiscence toward any person whatsoever (notwithstanding the many temptations the world presents) saving one, i e. his wife; and toward all absolutely, when any sickness happens to that one party, to which we are confined; or when any casual debility, though never recoverable; so also, in all necessary absence about the affairs of life, in journeys, in being taken captive by the Turks, or others, &c, we must allow this gift. Else how can husbands, when busied abroad by employments, embassies, warfares, &c, be secure of the honesty of their wives? or how can the State, who many times permit not their wives to follow them, lawfully make such a separation, by which they shall necessitate them to sin? So, when the woman is menstruous, and after childbirth, before she is churched, at least to those that were under Moses his law. See Leu. 18.19.— 20.18. Ezec. 18.6. which abstinence in the birth of a maidchild was enjoined for eighty days, almost a quarter of the year. See Leu. 12.5. etc.  
§. 8. n. 4. 3. And so after marriage dissolved, we must allow this gift to all that are (justly or unjustly) divorced, who are prohibited under pain of adultery a second contract, all or most of them; to the Bishops; to the widow's forenamed. Add to this; that of those that marry, few (if we examine things well) do it, because they want the power of continency, but for other reasons; as appears, in many forbearing marriage, as long as their places or other secular respects consist not with it; and presently, when quit of these, engaging in it: and in most, wedding after the heat and concupiscence of their youth is already in the wane and declination. And when we see so many, without marrying, at length reclaimed from former vicious courses, and becoming in a singular manner continent, we have reason to presume, that God was not wanting to them, in affording the like power to them before; but they rather wanting to the grace of God, and to themselves.  
§. 9 
That none ●●●m not exercising the act of continency, can say, he h●th not the p●w●r.  VII. Since many that certainly have from God the power to contain, (as the divorced, the one party when the other is debilitated, etc.) yet do not, or with some difficulty (yea more than the never-married have, because otherwise accustomed,) and not without temptations to the contrary, do, contain; none can gather (neither the delinquent, or others) from not containing, or from some difficulty therein, that he hath not power from God to contain, unless also he use the means; nor, in using the means, can he certainly know it yet, unless certain that he hath used all the means, and in that manner these as he ought; (hence none can say, that any of those, who, vowing chastity, proved afterward incontinent, had not power to contain;) or if he perceiveth that as yet he hath not the power, yet knows he not, whether for the future he may receive it; as many do, that of debauched, without marriage, at length become chaste. Therefore can none gather from an act of uncleanness or fornication committed by him, that he cannot have the gift of continency for the future; or that absolutely from one such experience of himself he is obliged to marry. But it remains still true concerning him, as well as others; that, as it is melius nubere, quam uri; so 'tis melius continere, quam nubere; if then at length he shall seriously attempt to quench such burning with prayers, solitude, fasting, &c, the prime and more noble, rather than by wedlock, the second, and much inferior, remedy.  
§. 10 VIII. It seems, that he that hath, and yet doth not exercise, 
That he who having this gift doth not exercise it in living unmarried, sinneth not.  the gift of Continency, nor practise our Saviour's precept or advice of Celibacy, Matt. 19.12. doth not sin in so doing. For then marrying, to some persons, would be a sin. Which 1. the Apostle saith, it is not, even to those, whom, upon the gift of continency, he adviseth to Celibacy. See 1 Cor. 7.27, 28, 36, 38.— and Heb. 13.4. 2. If it were; it would follow, (since there is no divorcement upon any such title,) that there would be a sin which a man was bound to live in, and having committed it once, to commit it always; and whether would not the children here also be illegitimate, where the marrying is unlawful. 3. Then Celibacy can be recommended to no persons in respect of any times of distress, (as yet we find it was by the Apostle 1 Cor. 7.26.) since, after puberty, all men sin, either in marrying, or else in abstaining: for those who have not the gift of continency in the most afflicted times, aught to marry; and the other, in the most prosperous, to forbear. 4. Those, 
Whether the gift of continency (supposing it to be g ven only to s●me) can by them by certa nly know.  whom such supposed precept of Celibacy should oblige, must someway certainly know it; else how can they either forbear, or repent of, a sin, which they know not when they commit. And, as soon as they know it, they are bound, either presently to marry, if they find they have not the gift of continency; or for ever to abstain, if they have: so that those who marry not, as soon as capable of marriage, and marry afterward, either sin in marrying then; or sinned in not marrying before. 5. But how any one can certainly know this gift in him, I see not. First, by what signs shall he know if he hath it? In being free from temptation? So none is. In overcoming them? But who foreknows the success of future conflicts? May not he marry then, if much tempted, to prevent sinning? May he not marry, unless he first burn? But then in marrying before burning, perhaps he hath the gift; and so sins in marrying. But if by the effect only of resisting, or yielding to, a temptation, we know the gift; it follows, that none can know he wants the gift, but by (at lest once) sinning, yet, to prevent which sin none may, first, marry. 2. Again, how shall he know if he have not this gift? by burning or any one act of any uncleanness? 1. None can argue from not exercising the act of continency, that he hath not the power, (as is showed before §. 9) till he knows whether this failing proceeds from the absence, or from his own ill managing, of God's gift. For that it oft proceeds from our ill husbandry of grace, is manifest in many of those mentioned before §. 7. who having certainly from God the power to contain, yet are many times very incontinent. If in this case therefore he should go and marry, having the gift, but abusing it, what thus would this be, but a multiplying of sins, the sin of lust begetting the sin of wedlock? 2. If thus, after any such uncleanness, all (as being denied the gift of continency) were obliged to marry, than all, who remain not in a pure virginity, would be sinners in a single life.  
§. 11. n. 1. But then; these are likewise fit things to be known; whether the gift once had may not aferward be withdrawn? for if so; at several times, to the same person to marry, or live single, may be a sin. Again, whether not being given at first, it may be given afterward? for then, after some act of incontinency we need not cast ourselves presently into the bonds of marriage; upon the hopes we have, from our prayers &c, of recovering this gift: neither indeed is every one by the Apostle, after burning, bound to marry, (unless he find himself refractory, and unwilling to use the means to quench such burning, as well as to remove all occasions of this flame, apt from his temper, temptations, &c, continually to break our again▪) because he is not by this certain, that for the future he may not by the grace, and other means used, be freed from ever falling again into this fire. Since many, after such burning, have attained, without marrying, to the highest degree of Continency. As S. Austin, after long incontinency, received this gift, so soon as 〈◊〉 humbly, and earnestly, and mortifiedly sought it.  
§. 11. n. 2. Now if this once be granted from what is premised; that marriage to no person (I mean in relation to his power to contain) is a sin, nor celibacy to any absolutely necessary; it follows, our Saviour's advice Matt. 19.12. is not a precept or command of absolute duty to any, under pain of sinning if he not observe it; but only a Counsel of greater perfection, under the penalty (if I may so say) hereafter of a less reward if he not practise it. (See 2 Cor. 9.6.) Note, that by counsel or precept of perfection, (wherever this expression is found referring to celibacy, abandoning of riches, &c,) I mean this: The advising us of, and to, a means, whereby we may, more easily, and free from impediments) attain the diminishing of sin, and the increase of virtue and grace in us; in which greater purity from sin, and greater practice of holy duties and habits of grace, and not in the means prescribed, consists that degree of perfection, to which we by this means attain: which perfection also may, possibly, but not so easily, be acquired without it.  
§. 12 IX. Next: It seems also, to be a counsel or precept of greater perfection, not only to some particular persons, 
That though al. h●ve no●, yet all may have, the gift of continency: and that God denies it to n●ne, a● n● time, they using the means.  (as some others in the next place would limit it,) but to all; and that, though every one hath not, (Matt. 19.11.) yet every one may have this gift of Continency (and so may practise the precept or counsel of celibacy) if he please to use those means and endeavours, upon which God gives it; and that every one may make himself an Eunuch, if he please, for the kingdom of heaven. (1). For, first, were it a singular gift gratuitally given only to some men; then, as we have showed before, that it is necessary for those, to whom we hold it is given as a precept of duty, by some signs certainly to discern it, for their avoiding of sin; so 'tis necessary also to these to whom we hold it is given as a counsel of perfection, to know it, for their endeavouring to do that which may more please God; that such gracious gifts may not be bestowed in vain, and their salvation suffer much impediment; if men endeavour not, or their endeavour be not only in vain, but displeasing to God, ne quis incontinentia laborans, dum coelibatum appetit, cum Deo luctetur, saith Calvin; and exposing them to sin, if God give not.  
Now the difficulties of discerning any such thing, see before: yet without discerning which (unless all be capable of this gift) there can be no alacrity in our endeavours; nor will any labour to make themselves Eunuches. Especially, when one sees any evident signs, or also hath once felt the effects of incontinency, none should dare any further to defer marriage, or any further entertain any endeavour of attaining this gift contrary to such indications of God's denial of it to him; yet is this much contrary to the practice of many holy men. (2.) There seems no sufficient reason, to make this grace, which is conversant about the strongest of all passions, and the very root of sin; upon which depend so many excellent advantages in serving God &c, (confessed by all,) and granted also to be given to all, at all times, when the remedy of marriage cannot (as often it can not) be had; to make this grace, I say, when there is opportunity of marrying, then only, a gratuital grace given to some; others being denied it, though never so earnest after it. And thus to restrain this grace, only upon such a pretence, because though denied the gift of continency, they have a sinless way of satisfying their concupiscence: when as indeed this appointed remedy of marriage (as it refers to incontinency, not to progeny) may argue only the difficulty in some, not the impossibility in any, of attaining this gift; and, being instituted for a help of our weakness, ought not to be made an argument of the restraint of God's goodness and bounty. Again; no reason, to make this grace only particular to some few; when as all other graces whatsoever, conversant about the like object, i. e. the moderating and subduing of our passions, are proclaimed to be general; and all men capable of them, who are not wanting to God and themselves. So we do not say that any are necessitated to be immoderate in meat, or drink, or sleep, in the love of riches, or honour, but, upon doing their endeavour, grace sufficient to be given to all, to bridle the appetite, and master the affections; only the extremities of concupiscence it is that we affirm some men are dis-enabled upon any means whatsoever to suppress. When as meanwhile it must be granted, that to those singular favourites, to whom God pleaseth to give it, it is, both gotten by means; else why are any said to make themselves Eunuches? and preserved by means: for none that have the gift (as those who in marriage have their bedfellows sick or absent) are free from temptations, and do only by means and resistance overcome them; which means experience shows to be powerful, not only for subduing lust in men, but in the brute beasts also. Whereas therefore there are two sorts of God's gifts to us; 1. some to the obtaining of which is required our endeavour joined or subservient to God's both preventing and assisting grace, or aid; such as are Faith, Hope, Charity, Patience, etc. which, though always God's gifts, yet may be said in some sense to be in our power also, in as much as we are to presume, that God denies them to none, by his aid rightly first seeking and labouring for them. 2. Others given gratis by him without any cooperation of ours, (though we may also desire and pray for them. 1 Cor. 14.1.) Note that there is not any other of those usually called gratiae gratis datae, (which are divided to every man as the Spirit pleaseth, mentioned 1 Cor. 12.) any way like unto this of continency. 1. They being not conversant about passions, or bettering ourselves, but edifying and profiting others. 1 Cor. 12. ver. 7.— 2. Not by our means procured, or conserved, but conferred without our cooperation or endeavour; therefore we find no exhortations to the practice of them, as if they were in our power, as we find to continency: 1 Cor. 7. We find it not said concerning them, There be Prophets that have made themselves Prophets, or,— He that can receive them, let him receive them. 3. Those who have them sinning, if they be not used: the contrary of which is proved in continency. 4. Lastly, neither is there any thing said of continency, as restraining it to some particular person; which is not said of those other gifts, and graces of God of the first kind, as particularly of that of Faith. See 23. §. (3). Concerning the other great precepts or counsels for attaining perfection, as that in particular by quitting superfluous riches (and so by this, all the cares and temptations of them,) (of which may be said, what is said of marrying, 1 Cor. 7.34. and v. 30, 31. compared with 29.— 2 Tim. 2.4) so often recommended, See Matt. 19.21. presently after the recommending of continency, v. 12. and both of them to be done for the Kingdom of Heaven. See likewise Lu. 12.33. Lu. 3.11.— 6.35.— Matt. 5.42.— Lu. 16.9.11.— Matt. 19.29. compared 27. (where, as we must grant, that, though marriage be lawful, yet the continent doth better; so, though possession of riches is lawful, yet he that parts with, and bestows, most of wealth superfluous upon the poor, doth better, than he that keeps or spends more or it upon himself:) Concerning this counsel, I say, we do not contend, but that all are capable of receiving it: and yet our Saviour, upon occasion of the young man's not receiving so hard a saying, and so difficult a lesson, seems to put the same difficulty in it, as in continency: for when he breaks out upon it, [verily I say a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom&c. and again, Camels shall as easily be threaded thro' Needles, ver. 23, 24. see 1 Cor. 1.26.] he saith only, (if we well observe,) It is hard for rich men to receive this saying, [go and sell,] i. e. of parting with their superfluous wealth. For, be this hardness of rich men's entering into heaven, from their trusting in their riches, or from having continual temptations of excels, and fuel for all their lusts ministered by wealth; or from continual cares▪ and distractions from▪ them, Matt. 13.22. (which also he names, from marriage, 1 Cor. 7.35): all is presently remedied in receiving this saying, (yet foolish men take no notice of it,) sell that ye have, [i. e. superfluous,] and give it away in alms, (where the charity is not so much to others, as to ourselves.) For in parting with his riches, he is sure at once to part with his trust in them, cares, temptations of them, &c. for no man trusts in, or is tempted with, what he hath not. I have stayed the longer upon this general offer of the gift of continency on God's part; because the conceit of it as of a private gift is very discouraging (as we see by their practices, where this doctrine is taught,) for the attempting that heavenly condition of life (so much recommended by our Saviour, and St. Paul) after they first believe, that for some men no means can procure it; and then, by the strong assaults of their lusts (from which none are free) believe that themselves are such. And hence, whilst we are in suspense, whether there be a possibility of it, or no, in respect of us, (as there is to none a possibility, who are destitute of the gift) we cast all our care, not upon mortifying and refraining our lust; but upon the observance of the Symptoms of this gift, and the several rise and heights of our lusts, accordingly to shape to ourselves that future condition of life, to which our present seems to lead us. And all this without cause, whereas we may make ourselves what we are not; and God's providing a remedy for an innocent satisfying of that concupiscence, which cannot (by our deficiency) otherwise be allayed, was by reason of our ordinary weakness, not of our absolute necessity; to whom he (in some times) indulged a facile changing also of those to whom men were joined: but it likewise not for their necessity, but for the hardness of their hearts. Matt. 19.8.— Whereas now it is a fruit of the Evangelical perfection, that husbands (by mutual consent) do separate from their wives (without taking others) for the Kingdom of God, (Lu. 18.29. compared 28.) always secure of the gift of continency from God, (if resolute in their endeavours of preserving it): Else this would be an act most unlawful, which our Saviour makes so heroical, and promiseth to it so great a reward.  
§. 13 It seems therefore, that God, this gift being so advantageous to his service, (see parag. 1. and so common, (see par. 7.) not denied upon repentance and prayer &c to many grievous sinners, after long contrary habits, without their using the remedy of marriage; that God, I say, denies not this power to any at all, who first have power over their own will; decree and stand steadfast in their heart; 1 Cor. 7.37. resolutely undertake and offer this their singleness to God for such an end, as is so much approved by him; and then practise also the means conducing to it, which are observed (as abstinency, for example,) naturally to cure the burn of lust, even in brute beasts.  
§. 14 Which thing to confirm yet further, both from the Scriptures, and from the primitive times of the Church: first, had God denied this gift to any, [1.] it seems that St. Paul could not justly have blamed the widows, when some of them young, for remarrying; whose marriage, he saith, was out of wantonness, and that they had damnation, for having cast off their first faith and promise, (i.e. of living single, and attending wholly to those charitable duties &c.) which they had made to Christ, and the Church: but if God had not given them the power of observing their vow, the Apostle should have allowed their remarrying, and blamed their vowing; who ordered also for the future, that such young women should no more be admitted to such vows or duties, for public service of the Church; not because they could not, but ordinarily would not, abstain.  
§. 15 [2.] Neither would our Saviour have recommended the like resolution and attempt, in those, who, he saith, made themselves Eunuches for the Kingdom of Heaven, Matt. 19.12. if he would not also be assistant to them with his grace; as he approved their purpose, and design; to which also they were alured by his Encomiums of that happier condition. Nor would he have (and that in the general) commended those, who leave the pleasures of marriage for the Kingdom of God's sake, that is, for the better serving God in any way, (see 1 Cor. 7.34, 35.) or, those who have forsaken their wives, (i.e. by mutual consent, 1 Cor. 7.4, 5.) see Lu. 18.29. compared with Matt. 19.29. There is none that hath left, (or, every one, that hath forsaken,) wife etc. who shall not receive etc. Forsaken, i.e. as the Apostles did, in local separation from them, (see Matt. 19.27.) unless continency were a gift; which all pious purposes, using the means for conserving it, and intending God's glory in it, may presume upon. Tho, where we do not subdue our lust, S. Paul as much prohibits any long separation, as our Saviour here encourageth it. See 1 Cor. 7.5.  
§. 16 [3.] Neither would S. Paul have approved the same resolution in those, who could master so far their own will: 1 Cor. 7.37. who doubtless, what he praiseth in the father, (who yet might be necessitated to go against his will, by the virgin's incontinacibility) he would much more have approved in the virgin. Neither is that need (ver. 36.) necessity absolute, as appears by what follows, [do what be will,] the other doing better.  
§. 17 [4.] The prohibition likewise in the primitive times, (though not in all Churches, that no married person might be admitted to sacred Orders, or that every one, upon these received, must separate from his wife, yet) that none single, when entering into holy Orders, (I mean of Priesthood) might afterward marry, shows the persuasion of Antiquity to be; either that continency was denied to none using the means, &c. or else, that, it being a special gift only to some, every one, before taking Orders, or making a Vow, might certainly know, not only, whether he had the gift for the present, but whether he might also persevere therein to his death, (forasmuch as concerned God the Donor thereof.) But here it is unintelligible, how such assurance can arise, only to some particular persons; nor can any direct, how such a special gift, not only for the present, but the future also, may be discerned. Meanwhile concerning the prohibitions and practice of Antiquity, see and compare together Can. Apostol. 27.— Conc. Chalcedon. can. 13.15.— Constantinop. in Trullo. can. 6.12, 13, compared Can. Apost. 6. In brief, you will find the issue to be much-what to this purpose: That no Presbyter may marry after his taking Orders, nor Bishop after his Consecration: That of those who, being before married, are admitted afterward into holy Orders, some Churches required that they should ever after (by mutual consent, [which was known before Orders conferred]) abstain from their wives; as the Roman Church: Some, that Bishops only should abstain universally; and simple Presbyters, only abstain then when they were to officiate; as the Greek Church.— See likewise Provincial Councils celebrated about the time of the Nicene Council, and approved afterwards by the Constant. Conc. in Trullo. can. 2.— Ancyran. Conc. can. 10.— Neoc●sar. can. 1. etc.  
§. 18 But I think it best, for saving the labour of seeking, to set you down some of them: which you will find so clear, as that I think nothing can be replied to them.— Apostol. Canon. 27. In nuptiis autem qui ad Clerum evecti sunt, Praecipimus ut, si voluerint, uxores accipiant, sed lectores cantoresque tantummodo; not the higher Orders of Bishop Presbyter, Deacon, etc.— Conc. Ancyranum (before the first Council of Nice) Can. 10.— Diaconi quicunque cum ordinantur, si in ipsa ordinatione protestati sunt, dicentes, velle se habere uxores, n●c posse se continere, (where posse is taken as expounded §. 24.) high postea si ad nuptias venerint, maneant in ministerio, propterea quod his Ep scopus licentiam dederit. Quicunque sane tacuerunt & susceperunt manus impositionem, professi continentiam, si postea ad nuptias venerint, a ministerio cessare debebunt. [But note, that, si protestati sunt, is here said of Deacons only.]— Conc. Naeocaesar. (before Nice) c●n. 1.— Presbyter si uxorem duxerit, ab ordine suo illum depom debere.— Conc. Nicaenum can. 3.— Omnibus modis interdixit sancta Synods; neque Episcopo, neque Presbytero, etc. omnino licere habere secum mulicrem extraneam, nisi forte sit mater, aut soror, aut avia, aut amita, vel matertera. In his namque solis personts, & harum similibus omnis, quae ex mulieribus est, suspicio declinatur. Whereas might they have entertained a wife, neither would there have been cause of such suspicion; nor would it have been reasonable, nor safe, to deprive their wives of all Women-attendance or Society. As for the story of Paphnutius in this Council, [which makes so great a noise amongst us; so that this instance stands for a bulwark against all the other evidence, in this point, of Antiquity, (see Calvin Institut. 4. l. 12. c. 26. and generally all our writers,)] this is the All of it: That, motion being made by some in the Council, that the married Presbytery, (i.e. such as were married before made Presbyters,) should after their Ordination be separated from their wives: [which separation the Greek Church allows not to this day; and of which the 6th of those called Canons Apostolical, saith thus, (notwithstanding that the same Canons prohibit marriage after Ordination except to Lectores & Cantores:) Episcopus aut Presbyter uxorem propriam nequaquam sub obtentu religionis abjiciant: (Some conceive this to be meant, * without her consent; others, * not for cohabitation, but for maintenance only:) Si vero rejecerit, exeommunicetur.— And Concil. Gangrense, because some held it unlawful to receive the Communion from a Presbyter formerly married, was necessitated to make this Canon. 4.— Quicunque discernit, a Presbytero, qui uxorem habuit, (here 'tis habuit, not habet,) quod non oporteat eo ministra●te de oblatione percipere, Anathema sit.] That, such a motion being made, I say, Paphnutius, a Reverend Bishop, and a Confessor, though never married, withstood it, saying, Grave jugum, etc. neque a singulorum uxoribus fort ass eam castimonioe normam posse servari. But now mark what follows:— Illud satis esse, ut qui i●● Clerum ante ascripti erant quam duxissent uxores, high secundum veterem Ecclesiae Traditionem deinceps a nuptiis se abstinerent; non tamen quenquam ab illa quam jampridem, cum laicus erat, uxorem duxisset, sejungi deb●re. The story is in Socrates Eccl. Histor. 1. l. 8. c. and in others from him. Sozomen. 1. l. 22. c. Judge now what cause there is, to urge Paphnutius for the marrying of the Clergy, after H. Orders received by them when as single. I go on.— Conc. Romanum under Silvester, in the time also of Constantine the Great, Can. 7.— Nullum autem Subdiaconorum ad nuptias transire praecipimus, ne aliquam praevaricationem sumpserit.— Elibertin. Council. about the same time in Spain; Can. 33. Placuit in totum prohibere Episcopis, Presbyteris, Diaconis, ac Subdiaconis, positis in ministerio, abstinere se a conjugibus suis, & non generare filios. Quod quicunque fecerit, ab honore Clericatus exterminetur. Which Canon plainly shows; That at that time in the Western, though not in the Eastern, Churches, not only marriage after Holy Orders was forborn, but abstinence from their wives, by those who were married before, was commonly practised; since he, who should do the contrary, was so highly punished.— Conc. Arelatense secundum under the same Silvester, Can. 2.— Assumi aliquem in Sacerdotium in vinculo conjugii constitucum, nisi fu●rit praemissa conversio, non oportet. Two Councils, in which S. Austin was present, * 1. Conc. Carthag. 2. Can. 2.— Placuit & condecet sacro-sanctos Antistites & Dei Sacerdotes, necnon & Levitas) (i.e. Deacons &c, continentes esse in omnibus etc. ut quod Apostoli docuerunt, & ipsa servavit antiquitas, nos quoque custodiamus. Ab universis Episcopis dictum est, omnibus placet, ut Episcopi, Presbyteri, &c, pudicitiae custodes etiam ab uxoribus se abstimeant. Hence S. Austin, (Confess. 10. l. 30. c.) speaking of his continency, before obliged by Priesthood to it, saith,— Et quoniam dedisti factum ●st, & antequam dispensator Sacramenti tui fierem. And * 2. Conc. Africanum cap. 37.— Praeterea cum de quorundam Clericorum quamvis erga uxores proprias incontinentia referretur; placuit Episcopos, & Presbyteros, & Diaconos, secundum prior a statuta etiam ab uxoribus continere. Quod nisi fecerint, ab Ecclesiastico removeantur officio. Caeteros autem Cleri os ad hoc non cogi, sed secundum uniuscujusque Ecclesiae consuetudin m observari debere.— These were before the third General Council.— Add to these the fourth General Council of Chalcedon. Can. 13.— Quoniam in quibusdam provinciis concessum est Psalmistis & Lectoribus, (se Apost. Can. 27. quoted before,) uxores ducere, constituit sancta Synodus prorsus cuiquam ex his non licere alterius sectae accipere uxorem, etc. Where 'tis plain, that other Clergy besides psalmist and Readers might not marry at all.  
§ 19 Hitherto I have kept within the times of the first four General Councils, to which we promise much conformity, I will join to these a Canon or two in Constantinopol. Conc. in Trulio, reckoned by the Eastern Church for a part of the sixth General Council, though it was not consented to by the Roman Patriarch; Can. 6.— Quoniam in Apostolicis Canonibus dictum e●t, eor●m qui non duct a uxore in Clerum promoventur, solum lectores & cantores uxorem posse ducere, & nos hoc servantes decernimus, ut deinceps nulli penitus Hypodiacono, vel Diacono, vel Presbytero, post sui Ordinationem, conjugium centrahere liceat. etc. Canon. 12. Jubet omnino Antistites, (i. e. Bishops,) postquam sunt ordinati, a propriis uxoribus secedere: and here they take notice of the 6th. Apostol. Canon, quoted before in the last §, and yet advance beyond it: quoniam Apostoli (say they,) come sides incip●ret, ad sidelium imbecillitatem se magis demittebant etc. & Can. 13.— decernunt, Presbyteros a prioribus suis legitimis uxoribus non separari, sed eo tempore quo sacrificant; & expellentes suas uxores pietatis praetextu, excommunicandos. And this (say they) notwithstanding the contrary customs of the Roman ●hurch. Thus the Council in Trullo. And ever since have the same laws and customs been preserved in the Eastern Churches, as we may see in the Answer of Jeremias Patriarch of Constantinople, in Epilogo to the Reformed, soliciting his approbation of their innovation in this matter, and remembering him of the Apostle's rule, Melius est nubere quam uri,— and his order,— Oportet Episcopum esse unius uxoris virum: to which he replies this;— Proinde & nos illis sacerdotibus, qui in virginitate persistere non possunt, priusquam tamen consecrentur, & Sacerdotes [i.e. futuri] fiant etc. Ille autem [Sacerdos, entering into Orders, or others vowing Virginity] qui semel virginitatem professus est, virgo permaneat, nec jam illi ullam amplius licentiam post votum susceptum nubendi damus. Nemo enim mittens manum ad aratrum, & respiciens retro, idoneus est consequendo coelesti regno. [Here is Priests, after their consecration, or others vowing Virginity, for ever after denied marriage.]— This the modern law of the Greek Church; and if the prohibiting them afterward, makes them the more, who intent Priesthood, to take wives before, and so many of the Greek Clergy de facto are married, to enjoy this liberty more than for necessity; yet this is an abuse no ways countenanced by their Ecclesiastical Canons. Much less may we imagine that they are obliged by any such law (ne periculo for●icandi se exponant) to take wives before they may enter into this Holy profession, so contrary both to the Apostle's Counsel, 1 Cor. 7. and the Church's former Injunctions, when-as even all secular employments have at least the liberty of a single life; and the Reformed themselves, so great friends to marriage, yet impose no such yoke upon their Clergy, nor hath any that I know of entertained such a fancy save Vigilantius.  
Out of the Canons then recited above you may observe, 1. That the Greek Church, who acknowledge and practise these Canons in this point to this day, allow indeed the use of their wives, except when they officiate, (but what if they officiate every day, as many Priests do?) to Priests married before Ordination, but not so to Bishops; but permit not that any Ordained unmarried may afterward marry at all. 2ly. Again, That those married persons, who were to be made Presbyters in the Roman Church, and Bishops in the Oriental, might not separate from their wives without consent, received from the wives before such Ordination or Consecration of them. 3ly. That such continency was annexed to Holy Orders only by Ecclesiastical Constitution, and was rather Lex Continentiae, than Votum. which therefore hath been capable of many dispensations, and the Conon's about it somewhat differing; and the Clergy more restrained by some of them than by others. But this seems to be a received ground amongst them all in those primitive times, that Continency is a general gift, at least in potentia remota, i.e. which is by God denied to none using the means, and rightly preparing himself for it, etc. Else how could they prudently make such laws, strictly prohibiting marriage for such a number of men, involving also the Deacons, and Subdeacons', upon penalty of degradation from their office, (which laws you see, the Reformed, because they hold continency a particular gift, only possible to some, generally decry.) How could they allow of a separation (by consent once given) of a man and his wife for ever, required, in the Roman Church, of all; in the Eastern, of Bishops; notwithstanding what the Apostle saith, 1 Cor. 7.5? unless you will say, that the Church-Officers in time of Ordination could discern who had this gift, who not. Or, that there was no party coming to be ordained, or contenting to such a separation, but was able to discern it in himself, and that not only for the present, but always for the future; and likewise that none would present himself, that knew he had it not.  
§ 20 Neither doth the Apostle's declaring from the Spirit, 1 Tim. 4.1. etc. that in the latter times there should arise Apostates &c, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, any way prejudice these injunctions and practices of ancient Church, (nor consequently of the latter times, herein following only her example.) 1. Because the Apostle, by opposing to such error, that every ●●eature and ordinance of God is good, (according to Gen. 1.31. and 2.23, 24.) and therefore being sanctified first, by the ●ord of God and prayer, may lawfully be used, (see 1 Tim. 4.3, 4, 5.) showeth, that he means such Apostates, as abstain from, or prohibit, marriage and meats, as in themselves unlawful, and unclean, and contaminating. Which thing can neither be objected to the ancient, not modern Church-practice, using abstinence from some meats for the chastisement of the body, not for any uncleaness in the food; and not forbidding marriage to any single person absolutely, but only upon his voluntary undertaking such an employment, with which they imagine a married condition not so well to suit. In which case if necessary abstinence from marriage be a fault, the Apostle himself may seem to comply with it in those expressions of his 1 Tim. 5.11.12.— 2ly. Because experience hath manifested the Apostle's prophecy to have been most eminently fulfilled in other persons of these latter times, (whom these Fathers even in these points most vehemently resisted,) affirming downright all marriage, especially with reference to procreation of children [therefore the married were advised by them, in such manner to use their wives, as to avoid this, (see S. Aust. de moribus. Manich. 18. c.)] to be unlawful, and the work or design of the Devil, as likewise flesh-diet to be unclean and defiling. Animata abominantes interdicunt (saith Epiphanius haer. 47.) non continentiae gratia, neque honestae vitae, sed ob timorem, & imaginationem ut non contaminentur ab animatorum esu. Vino vero omnino non utuntur, Diabolicum esse dientes.— And S. Austin contra Faust. 30. l. 5. c. Ipsam creaturam immundam dicitis, quod carnes Diabolus operetur faeculentio●e materia, mali.— And de haeres. 46. c. Non vescuntur carnibus, tanquam de mortuis vel occisis fugerit divina substantia.— Vinum non bibunt, dicentes, fell esse principum tenebrarum. Such were some of the Gnostics, Encratites, Montanists, Marcionites, and in the last place the Munichees, being as it were the last extract and quintessence of all those former gross errors, not a little potent even in S. Austin's times; who, not holding all things to have been created by the same good God, but this lower world by an evil principle, or by the Prince of darkness, as they call him, affirm, in the begetting of a man, that the Soul, which they account to be a part of the substance of God himself, becomes fettered and-imprisoned in the walls or handiwork of the devil, i.e. the body, from which it is again released only by death; (therefore was marriage, occasioning such imprisonment, forborn by all their elect; and though this permitted to their auditors, yet (saith Austin) it was, non dicentes non esse peccatum, sed peccantibus veniam largientes, propterea quod illis necessaria ministrabant. con. Faust. Man. 30. l.) Likewise that the same part of God was continually more defiled, and enclosed by such and such gross nourishments of the body. And when of such errors they were accused by the Fathers, it was ordinary with them to recriminate the Orthodox with the same things; both for their frequent abstinencies from flesh, and some other fruits; and for their (to some persons at least) recommending virginity; who in this matter were answered by them after the same manner, as the Protestants, objecting the same things, are now by the Church of Rome. See concerning this the contest between Faustus the Manichee and S. Austin, (cont. Faust. Manich. 30. l.) and see concerning such Heretics in the Church before the Manichees, Irenaeus adv. Haers. l. l. 22. c. there, of Saturninus and Basilides, he saith, Nubere autem & generate, a Satana dicunt esse. Multi autem ex iis & ab animalibus ebstinent etc.— See Clem. Alexand. Strom. 3. near the beginning. Marcionistae quidem dicunt malam esse naturam ex mala materia etc.— qua quidem ratione nolentes implere mundum, qui factus est a Creatore, volunt abstinere a nuptiis, resistentes suo Creatori etc.— See much what the same relation with that of Irenae●s, in Epiphan. Haeres. 23. and 46. and 47. Continentiam hic (i.e. Tatianus) praedicat, asserens nihil differre matrimonium a scortatione, sed idem esse. H●r. 46. And the judgement of the Father's commenting on this place of Timothy, applies it to the same men. See S. Ambrose, or the Author of those Comments in his works. Doctrina, saith he, quae nunc in Marcionistis, (quamvis pene defecerint, vel Patricianis, aut maxinee in Mamchaeis denotatur. Hi enim & Christum natum negant, & nuptias prohibent, & abstinendum a cibis tradunt.— Chrysostom. de Manichaeis, & Encratistis, & Marcionistis, omnique illorum officina hic loquitur etc.— After whom see Dr. Hammond on 1 Tim. 4. note b. and the authorities there cited by him. And in the last place consider what Mr. Mede himself (Apostasy of the latter times, p. 113) granteth; namely, That errors about marriages and meats were no novelties in the Apostles own times, as the diligent Reader may easily collect out of their own Epistles: which makes it improbable, that he would specify the apostasy of latter times in these alone. Thus much Mr. Mede. Neither will that expression [in latter times] (the like expressions to which are found in many other places; see 2 Tim. 3.1.— 4.3.— 2 Pet. 3.3.— 1 Jo. 2.18.— Judas.— 2 Thes. 2.3.) carry the purpose of this prophecy beyond the days, of these ancient Herericks. For first, this expression doth not seem in the Apostle's drift so to indicate the future times, as altogether to exclude the present; they reckoning even their own times also a part of the last times, (see 1 Pet. 1.20. Heb. 1.2. Act. 2.17. 1 Jo. 2.18. 1 Cor. 10.11.) and therefore, when they describe such wicked persons, advising those they writ to for the present to beware of them, to resist them, to teach contrary doctrine, etc. See 1 Tim. 4.6 etc. 2 Tim. 3.14.— 4.2. 2 Pet. 3.2. 1 Jo. 4.1. Or, 2ly. if they do; yet thus, either we must free the Father's times from any such imputation, as living before these latter times here prophesied of, (and consequently in all future times we must absolve all those, who in these matters affirm no more than the Fathers did,) or, if these latter times involve the days of the Fathers also, (as Mr. Mede fancies them to begin about 360, or 410, (Apostasy p. 84.) yet in the same times we find also these heretic's contemporaries with, and much combated by, the Fathers. And therefore whether the prophecy (eyeing those times) is likely to mean them, [i. e. the asserters of marriage and meats to be in themselves utterly unlawful and unclean,] or to mean the Fathers rather, their Antagonists in these points, I leave to the Readers judgement.  
§ 21 [5ly.] The same persuasion, in Antiquity, of the universality of this gift to all seeking it, may be gathered from the vowing 1. of virginity, much used, allowed, recommended by them. Of which also we find something in the ancient Councils. See Conc. Ancyran. before that of Nice, Can. 19 Quot quot virginitatem pollicitam praevaricati sunt, professione contempt a inter digamos haberi debebunt. Here the practice thereof appears.— Conc. Elibertin. about the same time with that of the Nicene, Can. 13. Virgins quae se Deo dedicaverunt, si pactum perdiderint virginitatis, atque libidini servierint, non intelligentes quid amiserint, placuit nec in fine dandam eis esse Communionem etc.— Conc. Romanum at the same time under Silvester, Can. 10. Nullus Episcoporum virginem sacratam maritali consortio (i.e. to receive the veil, and the solemnity of her marriage unto Christ) expetierit benedicere, nisi eam probaverit 72 annorum esse constitutam, ubi probabitur judicium verae pridicitiae, ut in 72 annis requirens Virum Christum pudicitia custodita, uncta vertice introducatur ad nuptias Christi, velamen capitis ferens, non cordis, (alluding, I suppose, to 2 Cor. 3.) This admission was not, of her to vow at 72 years, who was sacrata before, but of her, having so long faithfully kept her vow, to such an honour as this ceremony imports. In this same time, namely of the Emperor Constantine, were some former Roman-laws, prejudicial to Celibacy, abrogated by him for their sakes, who had vowed to keep their virgin-chastity inviolate. Euseb. de vita Constant. 4. l. 26. c.— Concil. Carthaginense 3. Can. 33.  virgines sacrae, si privatae fuerint parentibus, a quibus custodiebantur, providentia Episcopi, vel Presbyteri, ubi Episcopus absens est, in Monasterio virginum vel gravioribus foeminis commendentur, ut simul habitantes invicem se custodiant, ne passim vagantes Ecclesiae laedant aestimationem.— And Carthag. 4. Can. 104. Si quae vidue quantumlibet adhuc in minoribus annis positae, & matura aetate a viro relictae, se devoverunt Domino, & veste Laicali abject a, sub testimonio Episcopi & Eeelesiae religioso habitu apparuerint, postea vero ad nuptias saeculares transierint, secundum Apostolum, damnationem habebunt, quoniam fidem castitatis, quam Domino voverunt, irritam facere ausae sunt. Tales ergo personae sine Christianorum communione maneant, etc. And afterward. De talibus ait Apostolus: Quum luxuriatae fuerint nubere volant, habentes damnationem etc. These two Councils were before the fourth General Council of Chalcedon, and both subscribed by St. Austin. Lastly, see Conc. Chalced. with which I will conclude; Can. 14. Diaconissam non debere ante annos 40 ordinari statuimus, & hoc cum diligenti prohatione, si vero— positea se nuptiis tradiderit, injuriam faciens gratie Dei, haec Anathema sit cum eo qui in nuptiis illius convenerit.— And Can. 15. Siqua virgo se dedicaverit Deo, similiter Monachus, non licet as nuptiis jungi. Si vero inventi fuerint hoc facientes, moneant exeommunicati.  
§ 22 Again, in the Fathers nothing is more frequent, and that in the most ancient. S. Ignatius in Ep. ad Tharsenses, & ad Antiochenses, making mention of Virgin's Deo sacrae in his time. In the first, after Viri diligite sponsas vestras, etc. he saith, Eas, quae in virginitate, honorate ut sacras Christi; eas, quae in honestate viduas, ut altare Dei, etc. In the second,— Populus subjiciatur Presbyteris & Diaconis, Virgins cognoscant, cui consecraveruntseipsas. This in the copies approved by Archbishop Vsber, and Dr. Hammond. Tertullian and S. Cyprian before A. D. 300, writ Tracts; one de velandis virginibus (i.e. sacris,). That they should cover their faces with veils, &c: where he mentions votum continentiae— viderit ipsum continentiae votum, p. 200.— and distinguisheth between virgins hominum, and virgins Dei,— Ambiunt virgines hominum adversus virgines Dei, etc. p. 193.— and near the end he saith to such Non mentiris nuptam. Napsisti enim Christo; illi tradidisti carnem tuam: illi sponsasti maturitatem tuam, etc. And of those who should offer to pull off this veil, he saith; O sacrilegae manus, quae dicatum Deo habit 'em dehabere potuerunt! etc.— The other, de disciplina & habitu virginum (i.e. sacrarum,) of whom he saith there:— Quaese Christo dicaverunt, & a carnali concupiscentia recedentes tam carne quam ment se Deo voverunt,— and that they were flos Ecclesiastici geminis &c gaudere per illas, atque in illis largiter florere Eeelesiae matris gloriosam foecunditatem; and that those of them who afterward yield to lust, are adulterae Christi.— And see his Epistle to Pomponius, about some that lived unchastly, after that ex fide se Christo dicaverant, sanctitati suaese destinarant, propter regna coedorum se castraverant, etc. To these, that you may know that anciently also those who lived Monastic lives made vows thereof, (the contrary of which some endeavour to persuade us,) I will add only two other testimonies: one out of S. Basil, praefat. constitut. Monast. Nuptias velut compedes fugit; vitam suam Deo consecrat, & castitatem prositetur, ut neque facultas ipsi sit conversionis ad nuptias: the other out of S. Austin, in Psalm. 75. upon [Vovete & reddite Domino Deo nostro.]— Alii virginitatem ipsam ab ineunte aetate vovent etc. isti voverunt plurimum.— Alius vovet relinquere omnia sua distribuendo pauperibus, & ire in communem vitam, in societatem sanctorum; magnum votum vovit.— Nescio quae castimonialis nubere voluit. Aliquid mali voluit? mali plane. Quare? Quia jam voverat Domino. Quid enim dixit de talibus Apostolus Paulus? (Cum dicat, viduas adolescentulas nubere si velint,) Quid autem ait de quibusdam, quae voverunt, & non reddiderunt? habentes, inquit, damnationem, quia jam fidem irritam fecerunt. Nemo ergo positus in Monasterio Frater dicat; Recedo de Monasterio. Neque enim soli, qui sunt in Monasterio perventuri sunt in regnum coelorum.— Respondetur ei; sed illi non voverunt, tu vovisti. And concerning the married, by consent vowing continency, and obligation afterward for ever to observe it, see S. Anstin's 199 Epistle to Ecdicia. The argument of which Epistle I will transcribe you.— Mulier quaedam [i.e. this Ecdicia] inscio marito susceperat votum Continentiae. Post tamen maritus assensus est, & continenter cum ea vixit, non sinens tamen ut Monachae vestem sumeret. Tandem inscio marito facultates omnes duobus [Monachis] veluti pauperibus erogavit, cum haberet filium puerum ex eodem viro. Maritus suspicans eos Monachos esse ex eorum numero, qui penetrant & praedantur domos alienas, resiliit a proposito, & coepit maechari.— Now in this Epistle St. Austin blames Ecdicia indeed, for all the things above named, which she had done without the consent of her husband, commanding her to submit, and ask his pardon, etc. but as to the vow of Continency, to which they had once both consented (not withstanding his fornicating,) he holds them both for ever obliged to it, and exhorts her, at least, to perseverance therein.— Quod enim (saith he) Deo puri consensu ambo voveratis, perseveranter usque in finem reddere ambe debuistis; a quo proposito si lapsus est ille, tu saltem constantissime persevera. Thus Herald As tor other quotations of Fathers, I refer you to the Controvertists: instead of which I will set you down the confessions concerning them of Calvin, Instit, 4. l. 12. c. 27. s.— Secuta sunt deinde tempora,; (he means after the Conc. Nicen.) quibus invalait nimis superstitiosa coelibatus admiratio, etc. Haec, quia videbantur reverentiam Socerdotio coneciliare, magno plausu etiam antiquitus recepta esse fateor. Now the reason, why he censures not the times till after Nice, is the story of Paphnutius, from which he gathers, those former times Conjugium in Sacerdotio tolerasse, not observing, or concealing, that it was only Conjugium contracted before Ordination. Himself meanwhile condemning the Canons which these times approved; quibus vetitum est, ne matrimonium contraherent, qui pervenissent ad sacerdotii gradum. (Sect. 27. & Sect. 29.28.) Nulla omnino conditione dandum esse locum iis Canonibus cenfeo, qui vinculum Caelibatus Ecclesiastico ordini injiciunt. Concerning vows of fingle life, (13. c. 17. §.) Hoc, inquiunt, ab ultima memoria fuit observatum, at se alligarent continent●ae voto, qui totos se Domino dicare vellent. His Answer. Fateor certe antiquitus quoque receptum fuisse hunc morem: sed cam aetatem sic ab omni vitio liberam fuisse non concedo, ut pro regula habendum sit quicquid tunc factum est.— And the conlession of Pet. Marty● de Coelibatu & Votis.—  quod verum est fateamur, eos in hac causa habemus iniquiores. Statim enim ab Apostolorum temporibus nimium tribui coeptum est Coelibatui. And of St. Austin he saith; Ist● vir Dei scribit (speaking of Vows) ut homo deceptus. Now the objections which are made, by the opposers of the law of Celibacy, for those entering into Holy Orders; or of vows of Celibacy, for other persons, out of the Canons of Councils, or the writings of the Fathers, are not against any thing here affirmed: but either, concerning some, who, having wives before Ordination, were noi obliged afterward to abstain from them, (allowed still by the G●●●k Church, except to Bishops only,), * or concerning marriages contracted after Ordination or Vows, that such are not irrita; of which opinion S. Ausbin is clearly, De bono Viduitatis, c. 8, 9, etc. a thing granted by all after only simple vows; and after solemn, disputed still;; whether such persons, who have so solemnly delivered, and made over themselves in a particular espousal to God, are made illegitimate for any Secular marriage afterward jure Divino, or only jure Ecclesiastico. (See Bell. de Monach. 2. l. 34. c. sect. Respond: convenit.—) For the Church hath always claimed much power (as being not retrained by the Levitical law, qua talis, but only by that of Nature, nor prescribed any thing by Christ) in ordering the matters of marriage; and in hindering some persons from marrying, (even not to making the marriage illieitum to be done, but irritum when done,) who are not restrained there from by the Divine law, or the law of Nature. See if you please the discourses of this in Estius 4. sent. 40. d. 3. s. etc.— 28. d. sect. 4, 8, 9 * or, concerning those, who, after vowing continency, live in fornication and uncleanness, that such, notwithstanding their vow formerly made, had better marry than thus offend. Which is granted by all, after a simple vow: (hear what Bellarm. saith, (the Monach. 2. l. 34. c. sect. Est autem.—)— Licet sine peccato contrahi nequeunt, tamen verae nuptiae sunt: & ideo aliqito modo minus malum est nubere post votum ejusmodi, quam assidue fornicari, tum ob fidem conjugii, tum ob prolem legitimam, tum ob alia bona, etc.) * But let it be granted them after a solemn also: but if from hence they would prove the lawfulness of marriage after vowing continency, the places they produce will no way bear it. They are three, much pressed: one of S. Cyprian, Epistola ad Pomponium 62. Quod si ex fide se Christo die averunt, pudice & caste sine ulla fabula persevent; it a forts & stabiles praemium viginitatis expectent: si autem persever are nolunt, aut non possint, melius est ut nub ant, quam in ignem delictis stuis cadant. The second of S. Hierom, Ep. ad Demetriadem 8. Sanctum Virginum propositum & calestis Angelorumque familiae gloriam quarundam non benese agentium nomen infamat; quibus aperte dicendum est, ut ant nubant, sie non possint tontinere; an't contineant, si nolunt nubere. The third of S. Austin, de sancta Virginitate, 34. c. upon that of the Apostles, 1 Tim. 5. Nubere volunt.— Hae igitur (he speaks of those who have vowed chastity) qua nubere volunt, & ideo non nubunt, quia impune non possunt, (quae melius nuberent, quam urerentur) quas poenitet professionis, & piget confessionis, nisi correctum cor dirigant, & Dei ti more rursus libidinem vincant, in mortuis deputande sunt. etc. 1 Tim. 5.6.— But in these places the Fathers, only of two evils, if one of them they will do, wish rather the less to be done; and prefer marriage, being in itself, though not to them after a vow, lawful, before living in fornication, and other uncleanness, neither to them after vows, nor before in itself, lawful: therefore they say, si nolunt continere, or perseverare, nubant. Which marriage yet none at all allow lawful; namely to none who can keep their vows. As for the non possunt, they speak it not of them as no way able to keep their vow, (for then indeed I grant, marriage would he lawful, if the vow of virginity were impossible to be kept,) but of them as, by their own fault (which they may redress [therefore S. Austin saith, nisi correctum cor dirigant, &c,]) impotent. Which may clearly appear (to any who delight not rather to make the Fathers to contradict themselves, even where their speeches are most easily reconciled) both by the same Fathers allowing these perpetual vows, and their holding in all the possibility of continency; shown before. Of which also hear S. Hierom, (comment. in Matt, 19 c.) upon [Non omnes capiunt.] Nemo putet sub hoc verbo vel fatum vel fortunam introduci: quod hi sunt virgins, quibus a Deo datum sit, aut quos quidam casus ad hoc adduxerit: sed his datum est, qui petierunt, qui voluerunt; qui ut acciperent laboraverunt. Omni enim petenti dabitur, & pulsanti aperietur, etc.— Qui potest capere, capiat; qui potest pugnare, pugnet; superet, ac triumphet.— And adversus Jovinianum 2. l. 19 c. to this Apostate Monk, who equalled a virginal and conjugal state, he saith: Virgin's tuae, quas prudentissimo consilio quod nemo unquam legerat nec audierat, de Apostolo docuisti [melius est nubere, quam uri] occultos adulteros in apertos verterunt maritos. Non suasit hoc Apostolus, non electionis vas; Virgilianum consilium est,  
Conjugium vocat, hoc praetexit nomine culpam.  
See S. Austin (Confess. 6. l. 11. c.)— Putabam me miserum fore nimis, si foeminae privarer amplexibus: & medicinam misericordiae tuae ad eandem infirmitatem sanandam non cogitabam, quia expertus non eram: & propriarum virium credebam esse continentiam, quarum mihi non eram conscius; cum tam stultus essem, ut nescirem, sicut scriptum est, (Wisdom, seu Sapient. 8. c. 21.) Neminem esse posse continentem, nisi tu dederis. Vtique dares, sigemitu interno pulsarem aures tuas, & fide solida in te jactarem curam meam. & (De adulterinis Conjugiis 2. l. 20. c.) Solemus eyes [qui propter adulterium dimissis conjugibus suis, alias volunt ducere, & quum prohibentur, infirmitatem nobis carnis opponunt] proponere etiam continentiam Clericorum; qui plerumque ad eandem sareinam subeundam capiuntur inviti, eamque susceptam usque ad debitum finem, Domino adjuvante, perducunt. Dicimus ergo eye; Quid si & vos ad hoc subeundum populorum violentia caperemini, nun susceptum caste (i.e. in celibacy) custodiretis officium, repent conversi ad impetrandas vires a Domino, de quibus nunquam antea cogitastis? See the like in Psalm; 137. Nemo praesumat viribus suis reddere quod voverit: Qui te hortatur, ut voveas; ipse adjuvat, ut reddas. So other Fathers also. Chrysost. Comment, in Matt. 19 His datum est qui sponte id eligunt: Quod ideo dixit, ut ostenderet; superiore nobis auxilio opus esse; quod quidem omnibus paratum est, si volumus in hae lucta evadere superiores. Add to this that place of S. Austin in Psal. 75. quoted before §. 22. and that 104. Can. of Conc. Carthag. 4. subscribed by him, quoted before §. 21. with some others there to the same purpose, where they deny marriage lawful to Votaries, and Anathematise them, To which I will add that of S. Ambrose ad Virginem lapsam, 5. c. Quae se spopondit Christo, & sacrum velamen acc●pit, jam nupsit; jam immortali; juncta est viro, & jam si voluerit nubere communi lege conjugii adulterium perpetrat.— And that of S. Chrysostom, spoken by way of caution to young Theodorus deserting his Monastic life. Paraen. 2.— Honorabile, inquit, connubium, & cubile immaculatum. Sed tibi jam non est integrum jura connubii servare; coelesti enim sponso semel junctum illum relinquere, & uxoris laqueis implicari, adulterii crimen incurrere est. Quamvis millies hoc ipsum nuptias voces, ego tamen & adulterio (that is, the adultery of another man who hath not vowed, not his, as I conceive him) illud tanto pejus affirmo, quanto major ac welior mortalibus Deus. Nunc autem nihil in te penitus tui juris est.— Nam si mulier proprii corporis non habet potestatem, sed vir: multo magis high, qui Christo potius, quam sibi vivunt, ditionem corporis sui habere non possunt. So S. Austin, who holds not the marriages of Votaries to be null, or no true marriages, (see de bono Viduitatis, c. 8, 9, 10, 11.) yet saith in the same place, c. 11. Non possum quidem dicere foeminas a proposito meliore lapsas si nupserint adulteria esse, non conjugia: sed plane non dubitaverim dicere lapsus & ruinas a castitate sanctiore, quae vovetur Deo, adulteriis esse pejores. Si enim ad offensionem Christi pertinet, cum membrum ejus fidem non servat marito, quanto gravius offenditur, cum illi ipsi non servatur fides in eo, quod oblatum exigit, qui non exegerat offerendum? This in answer to those places, wherein 'tis pretended, the Fathers held marriage lawful after vows; or continency to seem not possible. But the Apostle sufficiently decides this business (at least as the Fathers understood him) in 1 Tim. 5. who affirms his young votaries to have damnation, (i.e. great guilt upon them,) for breaking their former faith or vow by marrying. Now this denying of marriage, the remedy of incontinency, to all such as have passed a vow, argues that the Fathers held the gift of continency denied to none such. Which if it be true, the only considerable objection (that I know of) against a Monastic life is here also removed. For as concerning the other two vows, * That (commonly called) of Poverty, provided, that one remain still either possessed of what in humane probability is enough to supply him with necessaries, or have a trade or a profession (amongst which I reckon preaching of the Gospel one) wherewith from time to time to get his living, (for the labourer is worthy of his hire, as our Saviour told his disciples, when he sent them abroad to preach without any provision), and may in reason presume he shall receive it; and * That of Obedience, provided, it be engaged only for things lawful, about which lawfulness, when any doubt happens, he is to be guided by the Church's, not his private Superiors judgement: (Which I think, in no Monastical institution that ever was, can be showed to be peremptorily denied to any, for the ordinary plea of many of the Roman Doctors is contrary; namely, that no Authority less than infallible (which Superiors are not) can oblige to absolute obedience and submission to their judgement in matters credible or practicable in order to our salvation (See Notes of Infallibility;) Thomas those who are under Authority are prudentially advised, rather to submit in all things to their Superiors (most likely) better judgements, than (with very little sign of humility) indulge their own; and caussesly afflict their Society with appeals and contests:) These two vows, I say, thus qualified, are not liable to any just exceptions. And indeed the former we see done frequently amongst us, in many parting for ever with their estates (only what is necessary reserved) to their Son: why not then to the poor? and the latter in Servants promising, or also swearing obedience to their Masters; why not to a Spirtual Superior?  
§ 23 Neither is there (besides the examples we have of this vowing both in Scriptures and the Fathers) as seems to me any argument to be drawn from reason, why we may not presume on God's assistance, and enablement of us, to perform such vow; either because it is vowing of a thing not absolutely necessary to salvation; or because we are not certain of our ability, and command of our will, to use the means, which ability also we have not from ourselves, but from God. For 1. are not most of our vows (yet these granted lawful) about things, which, as some way advantageous, yet, are not absolutely necessary to our salvation? as the vowing, * of abstinence from the further ule of some sensual, the lawful pleasure, formerly tp us an occasion of sin; * of giving such a proportion of alms (suppose half of our estates) to the poor, (such a one was Ananias his vow, Act. 5. whose fault, so much aggravated by S. Peter, seems to be more in his keeping back part, after his devoting it to God, than in pretending, by a lie, to bring it all: see the inference ver. 3 But Peter &c.) * of using every day two or three times of prayer extraordinary; * of not drinking wine, because of many former temptations by it to excess. And 2ly, is not the performance of all these only by the power God gives us, (who cannot think a good thought, much less curb the least appetite, without him,) and therefore we give him thanks also for the performance of them? 3. And again, make we not in baptism a vow of things necessary to salvation, i.e. of repentance, and of saith? but the expressions concerning which in Scripture are the same as those concerning continency. to wit, that they are not given to all: [See Jo. 6.37, 39.64, 65.— 2 Tim. 2. 2●.— Matt. 13.11. It is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.] Not as if God absolutely denied such a gift to them, but only upon their non-preparation, and other obstacles, which by their own fault hindered them from receiving it; for so our Saviour expounds himself in the next words, ver. 12. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given. In the same manner may it be said of continency; non omnibus datur; but habenti (i.e. to men using those endeavours and preparations towards it, which God hath given them, power to use) dabitur. (Jo. 12.39.— Eph. 2.8. compared 2 Thes. 3.2. Act. 13.48.) For which expressions if we make the vow of continency unlawful, why not the other? Now who is there that may not lawfully vow, to repent of his sins, to believe in God to his lives end, to observe God's commands, & c? (118. Ps. 106.108. v.) yet as S. Austin saith, Nemo praesumat viribus suis reddere quod voverit. Qui te hortatur ut voveas, ipse adjuvat ut reddas. [In Psalm. 137.] Here it is said; there is not the same reason: because Faith is a thing necessary to salvation, not so Virginal Continency, therefore we cannot justly have the same confidence, that God, surely not wanting to us in necessaries, must needs supply us also in superfluities. Resp. Doubtless, since God, as he hath commanded duty, so also hath advised perfection, as not in the one, so neither in the other, is he wanting in his gift, to those that seek it; especially the latter undertaking (as higher) deserving more encouragement. Else why is not [petenti dabitur] restrained also to necessaries? and why may a man lawfully make vows in other things, that he conceives profitable, but acknowledgeth are not absolutely necessary to his salvation, (as in the things mentioned before, as also in other rules of perfection, 1 Cor. 9 Luk. 12.33. Matt. 19.29.) if he may not presume on God's assistance in such things only profitable, without which he is able of himself to do nothing profitable. 4. Again, I know not why, if we may safely vow the keeping of any of God's commandments, and may make a covenant with our eyes, not to look upon a woman to lust after her, why, I say, we may not also, to guard our passion from being set on fire, and from burning; since the former seems to be the more difficult.  
§. 24 5. To which this further may be added: That Continency, as any other thing advantaging us in God's Service, from Vows receives a much higher value, which may invite us to such pious engagements) than without it; whilst it proceeds from an affection more confirmed and steadfast in good. A resolute vow having the virtue of an habit; and to act good, as it were necessarily, being Angelical: and he that vows offering up and sacrificing to God, not the act only of continency with others for the present; but the power or faculty thereof for ever; and the fruit, together with the tree that bears it. Therefore find we frequent exhortations and examples of vowing in Scripture: see Ps. 76.11. Jon. 1.16. Is. 19.21. etc. And very expedient doubtless it is (after some trial and experience of our having a reasonable command over ourselves, and of our not suffering a very tyrannical mastery of our passions) to pass a vow in such matters to fortify ourselves against temptations, and the mutability of our inclinations; by which the less former tye we have of ourselves, the easilier we are seduced. Faelix necessitas, quae ad meliora compellit, saith S. Austin of Vows.  
As for those places of the Apostle which are urged, against vowing, at least before sixty, or for leave given to marry, though it be after vows, upon incontnency; [as 1 Tim. 5.9. Let not a widow be taken into the number under 60 years old:— and 14. I will therefore, that the younger women marry etc. and 1 Cor. 7.9. If they cannot contain let them marry: and v. 35. I speak not that I may cast a snare upon you.] In answer to them, I take this first for granted; that all those (young or old) who have the power to be continent, may safely vow it; since the reason given by the Reformed, why it may not be vowed, is, because it is a thing not in our power. Again, I say, that if these places prove, either that continency before 60. may not be vowed, or marrying after a vow may be lawful, upon this reason, because some persons before sixty, and after vowing, cannot contain; then the Apostle will be made to contradict himself. For according to this he could not say of the Juniors, (whose particular gift of continency he could not know, but had rather reason to presume, from the miscarriage he saw in them, that they had it not,) that they had damnation, for marrying; or for not keeping their vow or promise to Christ, which they could not keep; but damnation, for making such a vow, which they must necessarily break▪ For, Non est peccatum violare, quod servare impossibile est; and it was as lawful to break such a vow, as unlawful to make it. But yet notwithstanding this, the Apostle plainly saith, damnation they had for marrying, and for breaking this promise, not for making it. I conclude therefore, that the Apostle's advice here of marriage is not * to Votaries, nor absolutely to all other younger women: for so his volo juniores nubere hear would be contrary to his volo omnes esse sicut meipsum, 1 Cor. 7.7. and would lay an obligation on all young folks to marry: But * to those that are in such a manner qualified, as those were that miscarried: so qualified; not from want of power from God to contain, but want of will, and of a steadfast purpose to make use of that power, (as S. Paul describes it 1 Cor. 7.37.) which instability of the will, and proneness to incontinency (that is in some much more than in others) every one ought well to examine before they vow; that so they may make use of the lawful remedy, which in the second place God hath provided for it, namely marriage; if they do not aspire to the higher cure thereof by prayer, and mortifications. See Dr. Hammond in his Paraphrase, expounding it thus, [That those who have not attained to such gravity of mind, and command over themselves, do, in that case, betake themselves to a married life:]— So, in that text, [if they cannot contain, let them marry.] (Where note, that our Translation renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If they cannot contain; and so Matt. 19.11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, All men cannot receive this saying etc. without rule or precedent, that I know of: for the Vulgar hath it, omnes non capiunt: & si non se continent.) The advice is not, to any that have an obligation to contain, (though actually perchance they do not so), as it is not to the married; though one party be sick, absent, or impotent; nor to those who have vowed, it being proved, that such may contain, from the Apostle's saying, they have damnation in marrying, who yet actually non se continebant: But the advice is to those only, that are free from any obligation against marriage; that if they perceive themselves so affected, as that they have much temptation, and no steadfast purpose to contain, if they have gotten (which yet is by their own defect) so little power and mastery over their will, (which mastery is acquired by some pains and practice) as that they cannot (not cannot possibly but cannot without much difficulty) contain, (for we say we cannot do a thing, though in our power, which we can hardly do): that then they should make use of the common remedy allowed by God for it. All which weaknesses, since they are by industry remediable, excuse none from continency, who have already made any engagement to it. To the 3d. place, 1 Cor. 7.35. I grant a vow rashly undertaken to be a dangerous snare: rashly, I say, i.e. without well proving before it what mastery we have over our carnal inclinations. Lastly, for the admission of none under sixty, the Apostle seems to prescribe this age with respect: to their impotency then to get their living, and liableness to want, (see ver. 4, and 16.) and to their staydness and gravity, [see v. 13, 14.] as much or more than to their continency, in which a lesser age would have rendered them secure. But suppose the Apostle chief to have reference to this, yet was it not done as if any lesser age hath not a power of continency; or experiencing their ability to live single, might not also resolve it: but because the Church had not the same means to be assured of their inclinations, and was much concerned in her first growth, after the experience too of some miscarriages, thus to prevent all scandal. But later Church, upon experience of the chaste behaviour of such persons from the power of more discipline, due restraint, etc. thought not herself obliged by this rule fitted for the Apostles days. But as S. Paul, from the lapsibility of younger women, admitted them at 60: so the 4th. General Council of Chalcedon, Can. 14. cum diligenti probatione admitted them at forty.  
§. 25 
Yet it more difficult, than the m●tter of any other Vow.  X. As God hath encouraged us to single life by recommending it; and denies the power to none at all, taking the pains, and using the means, that are necessary to procure it; So I grant, that the act and exercise of Continency, and purity, is much more difficultly attained, than any other matter of a Vow whatever; and the sin, which the undiscreet attempters thereof fall into, if they miscarry, very abominable. Therefore is there nothing in all the Scripture recommended with so much caution, and putting men in mind of their own abilities, as this: which appears both in our Saviour's limitations, Matt. 19.11, 12. and in the Apostle's proceeding so tenderly in this point, and with such cautious and suspended steps, (see 1 Cor. 7.2, 6, 7, 25, 28, 55, 36.) tho much commending it, yet warily recommending it: looking doubtless as on one side at the heavenly perfection of this virtue, so on the other at the heinousness and filthiness of those crimes, and the great peril of those snares, that men, avoiding, and obstinate against, the common merciful remedy of marriage, were endangered to fall into, in an unmortified pursuit of this grace. More difficultly, I say, is this grace attained, both by reason of this strong impression made in our nature by the most wise providence, for the necessary use of propagation; and by reason of the concupiscence of the flesh; which, as it was the first exorbitancy appearing in Adam, (They saw that they were naked, Gen. 3.7. being only a modest expression of the rising of concupiscence; compared with Gen. 2.25. therefore followed by shame); so retains it its strength in all his sons, beyond any other passion whatsoever: to which likewise one person (and in him one age of his life) may have yet a far greater pronity than another, by the greater heat of their constitution; natural impetuosity of their passion; more liberal diet; much rest and vacancy from employment; conversation amongst tempting objects, etc. so that such, without extreme difficulty, cannot contain, as it also many times happens even to them after divorce, &c, (who, all grant, have from God the power of containing, if they will use their best endeavours). And in respect of the great strength of the temtations of lust, beyond all other, and of these great impediments in some, more than in others, (i.e. the natural temper, age, condition of life, former habits, &c, and of most men's averseness to undergo those rigours and mortifications, which procure and preserve continency, &c,) I conceive it is; that our Saviour answered his forward disciples voting, upon his discourse, that none should marry; * that to all this was not given, and that some only could receive it; and so the Apostle by the same spirit, * that every one hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that, 1 Cor. 7.7. and * that there was a necessity to some parents of giving their virgin in marriage, (ver. 36, 37.) therefore he saith, it is not given to all, i. e. without such painstaking as some other gifts are; Nor do all receive it:] For tho power to contain is given to any who use the means, subdue their passions, etc. yet few there are, who can without much difficulty and resolution so master their will, subdue their passions; few, who have a temper naturally so calm, or artificially so rebated, that they can arrive to such a power. And so, every one hath his proper gift of God, etc.] i. e. First, in respect of gifts of nature; men are of several tempers and abilities, some inclined more to one passion, as enamour'dnes, some to another, [as continency,] some more, some less, subject to be tempted; some fitted for one sort of life, some another; which all yet are the distributions of God, (see 1 Cor. 7.17.) So that some can more easily, some not without almost insuperable difficulty, contain; for we say, we cannot do, though a thing in our power, what we can hardly do, or which is very troublesome to us to effect. See Luke 14.20. 2 Cor. 8.3.— Such phrases are not unfrequent in Scripture, Jo. 13.36. Luke 14.26, &c, to 34. Jo. 6.65. spoken in things, of which we do not deny an absolute possibility, whilst by prayer &c may be attained stronger inclinations; but yet in them we suppose to some a present impotency, and impromptitude of their will, and waywardness of their inclinations; especially where the thing requires a strong conatus, and a stout spirit, as Peter's dying for Christ; their forsaking friends, and all they had, for Christ. Luk. 14.26. and 33. Their believing in Christ, especially at that time, when appearing to them in such weakness of our flesh; none of these things (tho) being absolutely impossible to them. 2ly, in respect of gifts of grace every man hath his proper gift of God; some, superior; some, inferior, graces; some, Virginal, some only conjugal, chastity, (1 Cor. 7.9.) according to every man's capacity, (Matt. 25.15.) or endeavours: which not premised, the grace is not bestowed. For we must know, that God always gives not his habitual graces at first, but excites and assists our endeavours for them; and afterwards crowns these endeavours with them. And hence, because most do not well employ God's former grace, (in which he is not wanting to those, whom he questions for want of the latter) the other happen to be given but to a very few. See Matt. 13, 11. concerning that necessary grace of Spiritual illumination, [To you it is given; to them it is not given;] and Jo. 12.39. concerning faith; [Therefore they could not believe.] See §. ● and so Mar. 6.5. concerning the favours of God, that he is ready to do for us, but we are uncapable of receiving; [And he could there do no mighty work.] In all which the deficiency is not to be understood to proceed from the want of will in God to give, but from the want of preparation in them to receive. (See Matt. 13.11. compared with 12. Mar. 6.5. compared with 6.) If they receive not, because God gives not; Matt. 19.11. and if God gives not, because they do not by prayer, and other means, prepare themselves for it; it follows, the prime reason, why they receive not, is because they are unmortified, or unprepared. Now the exhortation ver. 12. He that is able to receive it, let him etc. See Mat. 20.22. plainly supposeth, * that God gives it to those that are able; and the instance in some that make themselves Eunuches, proveth, * that men also make themselves able; able, by God's concurrence, and preventing and assisting aid, or grace, from whom is all ability. Which ability also supposes that he gives to some, not others, only in the same sense as he gives faith, and other graces; (see Eph. 2.8. compared with 2 Thess. 3.2.) yet notwithstanding, as all may both pray for faith, and upon their endeavour presume they shall receive it; and may promise and vow unto God to be faithful; so notwithstanding the former expressions (if no other reason be alleged) we may say the same of Continency; That it is a gift attainable by all, as it is a gift by few attained. Thus much concerning the grace. But 3ly, in respect of the faculty itself, and the using of it well, in our endeavours to attain such a grace, 'tis true also, that our being willing to do a thing is frequently called God's gift; and there is nothing, of which we can say, 'tis our fault or infirmity that we do it not, but that we may as truly say, it is God's gift, if we do it. (See Phil. 2.13. Jer. 10.23. Prov. 16.1. Ex. 4.11. 2 Chron. 18.31.— 10.15.— Ezr. 6.22 Matt. 13.11.) Therefore also this our desiring such a grace to be given us, or our entertaining such a grace offered us, is also in some sense another gift or grace of God to us, without which we should not have possessed his other grace; and so, our own endeavour, as well as the grace we seek for, is all gift and grace, though we should go in infinitum; till we also find (as the most ordinary doctrine of the School is) that the first motion of the will to embrace God's grace is also the grace, gift, or work of God in us: else if this motion of the will were from itself, in any sense contradistinct to that of being from God, then there would be some good in us, not from God; then something, which we had not received; and so, place for merit, and boasting; contrary to Rom. 4.2, 4.— 3.17. But I conceive, 'tis not said of these first gifts of God, (i.e. of his first excitings of the will; his both preventing and assisting aids and helps of the will, in its using the means to attain his further, and richer, habitual, and inherent graces,) that non omnibus data sunt; but of those other second graces, which are given but to few, because the means, and his former commoner aids are used by few: of which it is said, that, only to him that hath, shall be given. Of those first aids therefore we may safely say, that they are so far common to all, (to whom is come the sound of the Gospel, and who shall be judged at the last day by the Gospel) that it is their fault, in any duties, which are absolutely commanded them, and their defect, in any counsels of perfection, if they, by not making use of them, come short of such duty or perfection; and, that any thing being thus said to be God's gift hinders not, but that it likewise may be said also to be in man's power, (meaning a power, in man, but, from God,) as long as the tender of such a gift is made to him, and ability also to acquire it given to him. But of this more in my Notes of Grace. Yet since, there are some that allow not the means to attain faith, or other duties commanded, common to all to whom the Gospel is preached, (therefore P. Martyr, 3. class. 7. c. Commun. locorum. argues thus: Magis videretur debere commune esse omnibus hominibus donum efficacis vocaticnis ad sidem in Christum, quam donum ad Coelibatum.— Sed inter illos qui eandem praedicationem audiunt, non omnes a Deo trahuntur. Where he quotes Jo. 6.44. Nemo venit ad me:) Let but so much be granted from them, of the means to attain continency, as is, to attain faith; and this will serve our turn, without reasoning the point any further in this place; for then fee what will follow §. 23. In granting therefore, that the using of the means also to obtain graces from God is the gift of God; yet we affirm, that it is only by their own default (for which see Luk. 12.57. Matt. 11.21. Mar. 12.34. Matt. 23.37. Jer. 18.4.— 8.10.) if in things absolutely commanded, and their own defect, if in things recommended for their greater perfection, that such do not use the means, and that they may use them if they will. Because these must consist together, i.e. * that we can do no good (small or great) but from God; and * that we have freewill to do good, and if we do not good, 'tis by our own default; and * that when we do any good, 'tis not without our own endeavour. Else we should be free from sin in not observing the divine exhortations; and there would be no vice, nor virtue; and consequently no (just) punishment, or reward. See concerning this S. Austin, De Gratia & libero Arbitrio 4. cap. Nunquid non liberum arbitrium Timothei est exhortatus Apostolus, dicens, Contine teipsum? 1 Tim. 5.23.— Et in hac re potestatem voluntatis ostendit, ubi ait, Non habens necessitatem; potestatem autem habens suae voluntatis, ut servet virginem suam. 1 Cor. 7.37. Et tamen non omnes capiunt verbum hoc, sed quibus datum est, etc.— Itaque ut hoc verbum, quod non ab omnibus capitur, ab aliquibus capiatur, & Dei donum est, & liberum arbitrium etc. Neither will this be sufficient to hinder a vow, because it is only of God's gift (that we are willing to use the means) to keep and fulfil it. For also we cannot do any thing he commands, unless he gives us the will; and yet may we vow to do any thing he commands.  
§. 26 
Therefore 〈◊〉 st●●y to be●●●wed.  XI. And in respect of these considerations, as all aught to endeavour and covet this the most happy condition of life, and many men are much wanting to their own perfection, the Service of God, and of the Church, etc. who, out of neglect to this gift, and not out of, or from, any strength of temptation cast themselves into the impediments of marriage, and might receive it, and do not: so I conceive it is not so safe for any, who are not very well practised first in mortification, and experience in much piety and devotion, to vow it. Not safe; not out of any diffidence in God, as if he would be wanting in his assistance proportionable to our endeavour; but in reference to the flesh, lest it should happen, in this chiefest piece of its strength, if we do not find that we have a strong command over ourselves, to overmaster us; and our good resolution become a snare to us, 1 Cor. 7.35. beginning to build, and not able to finish. In which S. Paul's wariness may be a sufficient precedent to ours; who, * finding the young widows after such purposes (by their own fault indeed) remarrying, and * considering the greatness of internal and external temptations incident to youth, (thro' the indulgent discipline the infancy of the Church was then capable of, not so restrained as latter times have since provided,) ordered that none under sixty should be admitted into public service upon such strict bonds and obligations. And indeed in the business of continency, in which some degree of burning is in the most pure, it is very hard, till long experience hath as it were assured us, at any one time exactly to measure our own strength, constancy, and steadfastness, whether we shall be able to contain for the time to come; and, by the intervening of new temptations &c. (unless we resolve wholly to shut up ourselves from them) our future, is not easily judged by our present, complexion. And as, when I look at the heavenliness of a single life, I would advise all men to abstain; so when at the great difficulty of such a purity, as shall not be contaminated with one uncleanness, than which the Apostle adviseth rather to marry, I would counsel all men to marry; [See Conf. 2. l. 3. c. how S. Austin complains of his parents not preventing by marriage the many exorbitancies of his wanton youth:] seeing the single person much hazards a great sin, whilst he attempts as great a glory. But yet the zealous Servant of God can do all thro' Christ that strengtheneth him. Nor shall he in this be tempted above his power, 1 Cor. 10.13. if he first tempt not himself; and the reward is well worthy the pains.  
§. 27 
yet not unlawful for the Church, and very beneficial, to restrain the sacred function of the Ministry to single persons.  XII. 'tis not only lawful, but of singular benefit, that those offices more nearly conversant about the public service of God, or the Church, should be discharged only by single persons, wholly sequestered from the world. Which if the Apostle saw fitting in the ministering widows, the Deaconesses, (Rom. 16.1.) how much more is it in the Clergy? Tho he, loath to lay such a hard burden on the tender shoulders of the Infancy of the Church, therefore nourished by him with milk, rather than strong meat: * when there was not so much choice of Pastors, and they of necessity to be admitted to such functions much sooner than the widows; and * when single life and Eunuchism was as yet, especially to the Jew, a strange proposal, (which may partly be the reason, why he, who became all things to all men, in the 1 Cor. 7. recommends single life so modestly, and after the way of delivering only his advice and judgement, (a phrase unusual in his other doctrines,) see 1 Cor. 7.6, 8. compared with the 10, 25, 40,) restrained then the Clergy only to one wife. Yet (where there is sufficient plenty of single persons that are worthy, and not else) it seems no way unlawful or unjust, if the Church (which is * in this left to her liberty (for S. Paul, restraining the Clergy only to one wife, obligeth them not by this, to have a wife) and * hath power to establish what the H. Scriptures no way prohibit) shall ordain (which is a means to make many more zealous of this excellent gift) * that single persons only shall be admitted into such employments, or at least into those functions amongst these of the more eminency and moment; and if these persons should afterward engage in marriage, * that they shall no longer stay in the same office. Which wisdom, since the world frequently shows in many other places of less consequence, they cannot be excused for omitting it in the Church-affairs, to which it is most proper.  
Neither do I see what hurt or scandal can come thereof; if only the Ecclesiastical Canons were strictly executed: 1. If none, but after long probation of their temperance, continency, gravity, mortification, were admitted into such sacred employments, (see what trial the Apostle requires before such admission, 1 Tim. 3. and elsewhere, [not a novice, lest he fall into the temptation of the Devil; one of a good report, and found blameless; even the Deacons to be proved, before they use that office, 1 Tim. 3.10.]) 2. if all necessary restraints from the ordinary occasions and temptations of incontinency were used to such persons after admitted. 3. If the Church's censures were vigorously executed against the offenders.  
Else, as Celibacy is better than Marriage, so Marriage is always honourable; but unchaste celibacy, especially in the Ministers of Christ, most abominable, and for ever void of excuse. And even after such vows, (in which petenti dabitur, nec patietur Deus nos supra id quod possumus tentari,) yet if such a one will not contain, I conceive (supposing no Ecclesiastical law to intervene, which may render marriage to such, when contracted, invalid, or not to be a marriage) he sins much less in marrying, i. e. in doing a thing in itself lawful, but against his vow, than in fornication, i.e. in 〈◊〉 a thing eternally unlawful, being against God's command● 〈◊〉 one fault is against God's law, the other only against his own▪ And if some, in comparing marriage with some one act of fornication or uncleaness, may affirm the first to be more opposite to a 〈◊〉 than the latter; as rendering one uncapable of observing his vow at all for the future, which the latter doth not: yet in this all will agree, that even to a Votary the living in Marriage, than living in continual Fornication, or other uncleaness, is a life to God less offensive. S. Austin de Bono Viduitatis, 9 c.— Non quia ipsae nuptiae vel talium, i.e. voventium, damnandae judicantur, sed damnatur propositi fraus, damnatur fracta voti fides, etc.— Postremo damnantur tales, non quia conjugalem fidem posterius inierant, sed quia continentia primam fidem irritam fecerunt.  
FINIS.