3-3. THE THIRD SERMON: BEARING AND ABIDING TRIALS.

Of the patient bearing and abiding of sundry calamities and miseries:
and also of the hope and manifold consolation of the faithful.

I will not do amiss, I think, my reverend brethren,[975] if to the treatise which I have already made about earthly riches, and of their use and abuse, I also add here a discourse about the diverse calamities with which man, so long as he lives in this frail flesh, is continually vexed and daily afflicted. For since many men either lose their temporal goods, or else cannot get them by any means, these are the causes why they are oppressed with penury and neediness. It can only be profitable and very necessary for every good man to know, from the word of God, the very reason and ground of his consolation in his miseries — lest, being swallowed up by too great a sorrow, and entangled in utter desperation, he gives himself over to be Satan's bond-slave.

iii.65

Now this treatise serves for the whole life of man. For I do not mean to speak of any one calamity alone, such as poverty or penury, but generally of all the miseries that happen to man. Truly, since man is born to grief and misery, as birds are born to flying [976] and fishes to swimming; his life can never possibly be sweet or quiet, unless he knows the manner and reason of his calamity. And if he knows the reason of it, religiously taken and derived from the word of God, then his life cannot choose but to be sweet and quiet, however otherwise it seems to be most bitter and intolerable. The mind of man, truly, is sorely afflicted and grievously tormented with lamentable miseries. But, on the other side, it is sweetly eased and mightily upheld by the true knowledge of those miseries, and by holy consolations, derived and taken from the word of God.

First of all, it is requisite to lay before our eyes and reckon up the several kinds and special sorts of calamities of mortal men. The evils which daily fall upon our necks truly are innumerable. But those which most usually happen are the plague or pestilence, sundry and infinite diseases, death itself, and the fear of death, whose terror to some is far more grievous than death can be. To these may be added the death and destruction of most notable men, or those of whom we make most account; robberies, oppressions, endless ill chances, poverty, beggary, lack of friends, infamy, banishment, persecution, imprisonment, forced torments, and intense punishments of sundry sorts and terrible to think about, unseasonable and tempestuous weather, barrenness, dearth, frost, hail, deluges, earthquakes, the sinking of cities, the spoiling of fields, the burning of houses, the ruin of buildings, hatred, factions, secret grudges, treasons, rebellions, wars, slaughters, captivity, cruelty of enemies, and tyranny; also the lack of children; or troubles, cares, and hellish lives [977] by unfit mates matched in wedlock, by children disposed to nothing, maliciously bent; disobedient and unthankful to father and mother; and lastly, care and continual grief in sundry sorts for sundry things, which never cease to vex our minds.

iii.66

For no man, in however long a catalog, can reckon up all the evils to which miserable mankind is woefully endangered, and every moment tormented. New miseries rise up every day, of which our elders never heard; and they are appointed to be felt and suffered by us, who with our new and never heard of sins, daily deserve new and never seen punishments — when the miseries which our forefathers felt would otherwise have been enough, and sufficient to plague us all.

But now, the good and godly worshippers of God, as well as the wicked contemners of his name, are troubled and put to use with these evils. Indeed, the saints are afflicted and vexed throughout their lifetime, when contrarily, the wicked abound with all kinds of joy and delightful pleasures. Upon this, it happens that great temptations and complaints arise in the minds of the godly. The wicked gather by their happy state and pleasant life, that God likes their religion, and accepts their manner of dealing, by which they are confirmed and grounded in their errors. And on the other side, because of the miseries which they have long suffered, the godly revolt from godliness, and turn to the ungodly, because they think that the state of the wicked is far better than theirs. Now it is good to know and learn all this out of the scriptures. It is to be manifestly seen in the example of Abel and Cain, that since the beginning of the world, the godly as well as the wicked are and have been afflicted. For, as the one was pitifully slain by the other for his sincere worshipping of God, so the other was made a vagabond for the murder; out of fear, he dare not abide in any place to take his rest. Jacob, surnamed Israel, is read to have been vexed with many calamities. The same is also reported of the Egyptians while they persecuted the Israelites. Saul was vexed, and David was afflicted. The Lord our Saviour, with his disciples, bore the cross of grief and trouble. Again, on the other side, the Jews who cruelly persecuted Christ and his disciples, were horribly destroyed, and that was worthily too, for their villainous injury.

iii.67

The evils that the church of Christ suffered in those ten most bloody persecutions,[978] before the reign of Constantine the great, are unspeakable. But Orosius, the notable, diligent, and faithful historiographer, mentions that due and deserved punishments were unstoppably laid upon the necks of those persecuting tyrants, about whom I will say something in a convenient place.[979] And by the testimonies of both God and man, and also by manifold experience, we see it proved that the godly as well as the ungodly are touched with miseries. Yes truly, the best and holiest men, for the most part, are troubled and afflicted, when the wicked and worse sort are free from calamities, leading their lives in ease and pleasures. And while the good suffer persecution and injuries, the wicked rejoice at it. For the Lord in the gospel says to his disciples: "Truly, truly, I say to you, you shall weep and lament, the world shall be glad; but you shall be sorrowful." ^{Joh 16.20}

But now, what kind of temptations are those which arise in the hearts of the godly through their tribulations. The scripture, in many places, teaches us what those men, who are not altogether godless nor the enemies of God, gather from the felicity of the wicked, especially in that wonderful discourse of Job and his friends. The prophet Habakkuk complains thus:

"O Lord, how long shall I cry, and you do not hear? How long shall I cry out to you for the violence that I suffer, and you do not help? Why am I compelled to see iniquity, spoiling, and unrighteousness against me?

iii.68

Why do you regard those who despise you, and hold your tongue while the wicked treads down the man that is more righteous than himself? The wicked circumvents the righteous; and therefore wrong judgment proceeds." ^{Hab 1.2-4}

In Malachi, the hypocrites cry:

"It is but vain to serve God: and what profit is it that we have kept his commandments, and that we have walked humbly before the face of the Lord? [980] Now, therefore, we call the proud and arrogant blessed and happy: for the workers of wickedness live happily and are set up; and they tempt God, and go on in their wickedness, and are delivered." [981]

The holy prophet Asaph describes all this most fully and significantly in the Psalm, where he says:

"My feet were almost gone, my treadings had well-near slipped: for I was grieved at the wicked, when I saw the ungodly in such prosperity. For they are in no peril of death; they are, I say, troubled with no diseases by which they are drawn to death, but are lusty and strong. They come into no misfortune like other men; but are free from the evils with which other folks are plagued: and this is the cause that they are so held with pride, and wrapped in violence as in a garment. Their eyes swell with fatness, and they do whatever they lust. They stretch forth their mouth to heaven, and their tongue goes through the world. Yes, and they dare to say, Tosh, how would God perceive it? Look, these are the ungodly, these prosper in the world, and these have riches in possession. Then I said, I have cleansed my heart in vain, and washed my hands in innocence; and I bear punishment every day. And while I thought thus to myself, I had almost departed from the generation of God's children." ^{Psa 73.2-15}

Now, since this is so, it consequently follows to beat out the causes of these calamities. For in so doing we will be better able to judge rightly about the miseries of both the godly and wicked sort of people.

iii.69

The causes of calamities are many, and of many sorts; but the general and especial cause is known to be sin. For by disobedience, sin entered into the world, and death by sin.^{Rom 5.12} And so, consequently, diseases and all the evils in the world entered in. Those who refer these causes to, I cannot tell what — blind constellations, and the movings of planets — are very light-headed and vain fellows. For, by our evil lusts and corrupt affections, we heap up day by day one evil upon another. And at our elbow stands the devil, who whispers [982] in our ear, and eggs us on; and as helps to spur us on, there is a crew of naughty packs,[983] who never cease to train us in it; and daily there rise up diverse instruments of tribulation, with which the most wise and just God allows us to be exercised and tormented.

But the same causes of affliction are not always found in the holy worshippers of God, as in the wicked despisers of His name. The saints are often afflicted so that, by their trouble, the glory of God may be known to the world. For when the disciples of Christ saw the blind man in the gospel, who was blind from his mother's womb, they said to the Lord: "Master, who sinned — this man, or his parents — that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither this man sinned, nor his parents; but that the works of God might be made manifest in him." ^{Joh 9.2-3} Likewise, when the Lord heard say that Lazarus was sick, "This disease is not unto death, but to the glory of God, that by it the Son of God may be glorified." ^{Joh 11.4} And yet, if we touch this matter at its heart, none in the world can be found who are without sin; so that, if the Lord were to mark our iniquities, he would always find something to be punished in us. This is declared at large in the book of Job.

Furthermore, the Lord allows his spouse, the church — which he loves full dearly — to be troubled and afflicted to this end and purpose: that he may openly declare that the elect are defended, preserved, and delivered by the power and aid of God, and not by the policy or help of man.

iii.70

For Paul says: "We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellence of the power may be God's, and not of us. While we are troubled on every side, we are not made sorrowful; we are in poverty, but not in extreme poverty; we suffer persecution, but are not forsaken in it; we are cast down, but we do not perish; we always bear about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life of Jesus might also be made manifest in our body. For we who live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that also the life of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh." [984] The apostle also says: "Virtue is made perfect in infirmity." [985]

Again, the afflictions of the holy martyrs and faithful saints of Christ are testimonies of the doctrine of faith, as our Saviour says in the gospel, "They shall deliver you up to councils, and they shall scourge you in their synagogues; indeed, you shall be brought before kings and rulers for my sake, that this might be for a witness to them and the people." ^Mk
13.9 Even so, in like manner the saints, overladen with miseries, are made examples for us to learn how to overcome and despise [986] the world, and aspire to heavenly things.

Finally, the Lord tests those who are his, by laying the cross upon their necks, and he purges them like gold in the fire. He cuts from us many occasions of evil, that he may bring us to bearing greater and more plentiful fruit. The wisdom of the Lord in this follows the manner of goldsmiths, who put their gold into the fire to purge and not to mar it. And he also imitates good husbandmen who, when their corn is a bit too rank, mow it down; and prune their trees, not to destroy them, but to make them bear more abundant fruit. And this flesh of ours, truly, in peace and quietness is luskish,[987] lazy, drowsy, and slow toward good and honest exercises; it is content, and seeks no further than earthly things; it is wholly given to pleasures; it utterly forgets God and godly things. Now, therefore, it is not only expedient, but very necessary, to have this dull and sluggish lump stirred up and exercised with troubles, afflictions, and sharp persecutions.

iii.71

The saints in this are like iron which is somewhat worn and diminished by use; but by lying still, unoccupied, it is even more eaten with rust and canker. Most truly, therefore, St. Peter said, "Dearly beloved, do not think it strange that you are tried with fire, which is to test you, as though some strange thing happened to you. But rather rejoice in that you are partakers of the afflictions of Christ; so that, when his glory is revealed, you may be merry and glad." [988] For Paul says to Timothy:

"Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel; for which I am afflicted as an evil doer, even unto bonds: and yet I suffer all things for the elect's sakes, that they might also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. It is a faithful saying: For if we are dead with him, we shall also live with him: if we are patient,[989] we shall reign with him: if we deny him, he shall also deny us." [990]

For in his epistle to the Romans he says: "Those whom he knew before, he also predestined, that they should be like-fashioned to the shape of [991] his Son, that he might be the first-begotten among many brethren. Moreover, whom he predestined, he also called; and whom he called, he also justified; and whom he justified, he shall also glorify." [992] Again, in the same epistle he says: "We rejoice also in tribulations; knowing that tribulation works patience; patience proof; proof hope: and hope does not make ashamed," etc. [993] The private examples of the saints, and public examples of the whole church, very plainly declare this. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, would never have known that God's helping hand had been so faithful and always present with them — they would never have been grounded in so sure a hope, nor shown such especial fruit of their excellent patience — if they had not been exercised with many perils and oppressed with infinite calamities. From this it comes that David cried: "It is good for me, Lord, that you have troubled me." ^{Psa 119.71} The church of Israel was oppressed in Egypt, but to the end that it might be delivered with more glory, and pass into the land of promise.

iii.72

The Jewish church was afflicted by those of Babylon and by the Assyrians, so that their temple was overthrown, and the saints carried captive with the worst of the people. But the godly sort in their very captivity feel the wonderful help of God. And by that means, they are made better by their afflictions, so that the name of the Lord was widely known among the Assyrians, the Chaldees, the Medes and Persians, to His great glory and renown, as declared at large in the histories of Daniel, Esther, and Ezra. [994]

Here it is also to be noted that certain punishments are applied as appointed by the Lord, such as plagues for certain sins. So that, most commonly, a man is plagued by the very things in which he sinned against the Lord. David offended God with murder and adultery; and therefore he is punished with the shame of his own house, with whoredom, incest, and the detestable murder of his own children; and lastly, he is driven out and banished from his kingdom. It was pride and arrogance in which Nebuchadnezzar sinned; and therefore, being disordered [995] in his wits and turned into a beastly madness, he led his life for a certain time with beasts of the field. But just as Nebuchadnezzar was restored to his kingdom when God thought it good, so David, at a convenient time, felt the mercy of the Lord in settling him in his seat again. For this saying of the Lord is firmly ratified forever, not only to David, but to everyone that believes, which set down in the scriptures is in these words: "If his children forsake my law, and do not keep my commandments, I will visit their sins with rods, and their iniquities with scourges: yet will I not utterly take my goodness from him; I will not break my covenant, nor will I change the thing once it has gone out of my mouth." Therefore, it is to our profit that the Lord afflicts us, as He himself testifies in the revelation of Christ,[996] uttered [997] by John the evangelist, saying: "Those whom I love I rebuke and chasten." ^{Rev. 3.19}

iii.73

And long before that, Solomon said: "My son, do not refuse the chastening of the Lord, neither faint when you are corrected of him. For whom the Lord loves, him he chastens; and yet he delights in him, as a father in his son." [998]

I will now touch on the persecutions and terrible plagues laid upon the neck of the whole church of God, or several martyrs of them. They were, for the most part, breathed out by worldly tyrants against the saints for their open confession and testimonies of their faith, and of the truth of the gospel. Thus, the causes of those broils most commonly were the sins and offences of the saints, which the justice of God visited on his holy ones, no doubt to the good and salvation of the faithful. For from that bloody persecution under the emperors Diocletian and Maximinian, which caused many thousands, indeed, many millions of martyrs to come to their end, we read the following in the history of Eusebius of Caesarea. He learned it, not by hear-say, but was himself an eye-witness:

"When the manners of the church were utterly marred and its discipline corrupted by too much liberty and wantonness; while among ourselves we envy one another, and diminish one another's estimation; while among ourselves we snatch at and accuse ourselves, fomenting deadly war among ourselves; while dissimulation sits in the face, deceit lurks in the heart, and falsehood is uttered in words, so that one evil is heaped on another — the Lord begins little by little with the bridle, to check the mouth of his tripping church. And reserving the untouched congregations, he begins first to allow those who served as soldiers in the camps of the Gentiles to feel persecution. But the people could not be made to remember themselves by that means, insofar that they did not cease to persist in their wickedness. And the very guides of the people and chiefs of the church, unmindful of God's commandment, were set on fire among themselves with strife, envy, hatred, and pride — such that they might think to exercise tyranny rather than the office of ministers, because they had forgotten Christian sincerity and pureness of living. Then at length the houses of prayer and churches of the living God were thrown to the ground, and the holy scriptures were set on fire in the broad and open streets." [999]

This much, word for word, out of the eighth book of his Ecclesiastical History.

iii.74

And yet here I differentiate between sin and sin. For the saints sin, and yet they commonly abstain from heinous crimes — though now and then they too fall into them, as evidenced by the example of David. Yet, for the most part, they flee from theft, murder, whoredom, and other grievous [1000] sins like these. And while the saints are afflicted by tyrants, it is not for neglecting justice and true religion, but for contemning superstition, and steadfastly sticking to Christ and his gospel. The Lord therefore forgives and washes away the sins of the holy martyrs in the blood of Christ, reputing them to suffer death, not for the sins which they have committed, but for their zeal and love of true religion. He also punishes the tyrants for the death of his martyrs, because, in putting them to death, they follow their own tyrannous affection, and not the just judgment of the living God. The Lord's mind, truly, was to chasten his people Israel by tyrants. But the tyrants (as Isaiah witnesses in his tenth chapter) did not take it to be so; but rather, following their own affections, they passed all measure in afflicting them, and never sought after justice and equity. Therefore, they are punished by the Lord for killing his innocent and guiltless servants.

iii.75

For the thing which the Lord persecuted in his people (I mean, their sins and offences), the tyrants neither punished nor persecuted. But the thing that pleased God (I mean, the love of true religion, and the utter detesting of idolatry), that they are mad about, and persecute it with sword and fire and unspeakable torments. Therefore, to this belongs that saying of Peter: "See that none of you is punished as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evil-doer, or as a busy-body in other men's matters. But if any man suffers as a Christian, do not let him be ashamed, but rather glorify God on this behalf." ^{1Pet 4.15-16}

Yet, for all this, I would not have heinous offenders despair one whit. They have the example of the thief that was crucified with Christ; let them follow that: let them, I say, confess their faults, believe in Christ, commit themselves wholly to his grace and mercy, and lastly, suffer patiently the pain of their punishment; and in so doing, there is no doubt that they shall be received by Christ into Paradise, and live there forever, as the thief does with Christ.

And although the godly is slain among transgressors, yet he is no more defiled by suffering with them than Christ our Lord was, being hanged among thieves. For though the godly and ungodly are wrapped and coupled together in like punishment, yet they are severed by their unlike ending. After this bodily death, the wicked is carried to hell, there to burn without intermission; and the godly is taken immediately into heaven, to live with Christ his Lord, to whom he committed and commended [1001] himself. Touching this matter, and the causes of the afflictions of the holy men of God, I will not be aggrieved to recite to you, dearly beloved, a notable passage from St. Augustine out of his first book De civitate Dei.

"Wherever good men suffer the same and like punishment that the evil sort do, it is not to be thought that there is no difference between them, just because there is no difference in the thing they suffer. For in one and the same fire, gold shines and chaff smokes; and under one flail, the husk is broken and the corn is purged; and note that the scummy froth is not mixed with the oil, even though the weight of the same press crushes both at once. Even so, one and the same misery, falling upon the good and the bad, tries, refines, and melts the good; and on the other side, it condemns, wastes, and consumes the evil sort.

iii.76

Thus it comes to pass that in one and the same affliction, the evil detest and blaspheme the Lord, while contrarily, the good pray to and praise His name for what he lays upon them. So there is much that happens in afflictions to mark not what, but with what mind, every man suffers. For if you stir up dirt and sweet ointments alike, one will stink filthily, and the other will give off a sweet-smelling aroma. Therefore, in that hurly-burly and irruption[1002] made by the barbarous people, what did the Christians suffer that was not rather to their profit, while they faithfully considered those troubles? This is especially because, humbly considering the sins for which God (being angry) filled the world with so many and such great calamities — and even though Christians are far from committing heinous, grievous, and outrageous offences — they do not repute themselves to be so clear of all faults, that they do not judge themselves worthy to suffer temporal calamity for the crimes they do commit every hour and moment. Over and above this, every man who perhaps lives laudably enough, yields a little to carnal concupiscence in some points, even if not to the outrageousness of horrible sins, or to the gulf of heinous offences and abominable iniquities. Yet, notwithstanding, he yields to some sins which either he haunts very seldomly, or else he commits those which are less, all the more often. Besides this, I ask you, what man is there, when he sees and knows very well the men for whose pride, lascivious lives, covetousness, and damnable iniquity God plagues the earth (as he has threatened), who so esteems these men as they should be thought of, and so lives with them as he should live with such people? For often many things are wickedly dissembled [1003] if wicked-doers are not taught, corrected, chided, and admonished for their evil behaviours. This is either because we think the pain is too much to tell them their faults; or we are afraid to have the heavy looks of those with whom we live; or else we avoid their displeasure, lest they hinder or hurt us in temporal matters — when either our greediness desires to have something more, or our infirmity fears to lose the things which it already holds and possesses.

iii.77

So that, although the life of the wicked displeases the good (but for which they do not fall into the same damnation which is prepared for the evil after this life), yet since the good bear with and forbear their damnable sins, because they fear them in lighter and smaller trifles, they are justly scourged with them in this temporal life, even though they are not punished with them eternally. While they are punished by God with the wicked, they justly feel the bitterness of this life, for the love of whose sweetness they would not be bitter in telling the wicked of their offences. Therefore, this seems to me to be no small cause why the good are whipped along with the evil, when it pleases God to punish the naughty manners of men with the affliction of temporal pains. They are scourged together, not because they lead an evil life together, but because they love this temporal life together. I do not say alike, but together; when the better sort should despise it, so that the evil ones, being rebuked and corrected, might obtain eternal life. If they would not be our fellows and partners in getting eternal life, they should still be carried and lovingly drawn, even while they are our enemies — because, so long as they live, it is always uncertain whether their minds will be changed to be better or not. This is why they do not have a like cause, but a far greater cause to admonish men for their faults, to whom the Lord says by the mouth of the prophet: 'He truly shall die in his sin, but I will require his blood at the hand of the watchman.' ^{Eze 3.18} For to this end, the watchmen (that is, the guides of the people) are ordained in the churches: that they should not forbear rebuking sin and wickedness. And yet for all this, that man is not altogether excusable for this fault which, although he is no guide or overseer of the people, he nevertheless knows many things worthy of control, and yet he winks at them in those with whom he lives and converses, because he will give no offence to them, for fear he might lose those things in this world which he uses as he should not, or he is delighted in them as he should not be." [1004]

And so forth. I have previously repeated all this out of St. Augustine.

iii.78 [an extensive Latin passage from the footnote on p. 77, is omitted here – WHG.]

iii.79

The last and hindmost cause of the calamities which oppress the holy saints of God is because, in afflicting his friends, the Lord thereby gives a most evident testimony of his just judgment which shall fall upon his enemies for contemning his name and majesty. For St. Peter says:

"The time has come that judgment [1005] must begin at the house of God. If it first begins with us, what shall the end be of those who do not believe the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely are saved, where shall the ungodly and sinner appear?" ^{1Pet 4.17-18}

This is like that notable sentence of the Lord's, which he spoke when he went to the place of execution, saying: "If they do this in a moist tree, what shall be done in the dry?" ^{Luk 23.31} If the saints (by whom are meant the fruitful trees that produce most precious fruits of good works) are so miserably tormented and wrongfully vexed in this world by the sufferance of God, then what shall we say, I ask, about the wicked, who are so far from virtue and good works? They shall, undoubtedly be plagued with unspeakable pains and punishments.

For touching the causes of those calamities with which the wicked are tormented, they can be none other than the heinous crimes which they commit from day to day. And they are therefore punished by God's just judgment, to the end that all men may perceive that God hates wicked men and wickedness alike. So we read that Pharaoh was afflicted. Saul fell upon his own sword, and was slain in the mount Gilboa, with many thousands of Israelites, because he had sinned against the Lord, who purposed to destroy him as an example of His judgment, and as a terror to those who would follow after. Antiochus Epiphanes, Herod the Great, Herod Agrippa, and Galerius Maximianus, the emperor, were taken horribly with grievous diseases, and died of them.[1006]

iii.80

The reason was, because they sinned against God and his servants. He determined to take vengeance on them, and to make them proofs of His just judgment — thus to be examples for tyrants to perceive what plagues remain for those who seek the blood of the godly and faithful. Our good God ordains all things to the best for his creatures;^{Rom 8.28} and in a way, He sends all calamities and miseries to draw us from wickedness. Yet, because hypocrites and wicked people despise the counsels and admonitions of God, and will neither acknowledge God when he strikes, nor turn to him when he calls them, all things turn to their destruction (even as all things work to the best, for those who love the Lord). Therefore they perish in their calamities. For in this world they feel [1007] the wrath of the almighty God in most horrible punishments; and in the world to come, once they have departed out of this life, they will forever bear far greater and more bitter pains than any tongue can tell.

But if it happens that the wicked and ungodly sort do not feel any plague or grievous affliction in this life, then they will be punished so much the sorer in the world to come. There is no man who does not know the evangelical parable of the rich unmerciful glutton who, while he lived in this life, lusted in surpassing delights. Notwithstanding, in hell he was tormented with unquenchable thirst, and parched with hellfire which never ceased burning. Therefore, the felicity of the wicked in this life is nothing but extreme misery. For St. James the Apostle says: "You have lived in pleasure on earth, and been wanton; you have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter." [1008] This, I say, will return to you, as to well-fed beasts that are fattened to be slain, to make meat of them. [1009]

iii.81

For Jeremiah goes to work a little more plainly, and says:

"O Lord, you are more righteous than for me to dispute with you. Yet notwithstanding, I would talk with you. How does it happen that the way of the ungodly prospers so well, and that it goes so well with those who, without shame, offend in wickedness? You have planted them, they take root, they grow, and bring forth fruit." And immediately after: "But draw them out, O Lord, like a sheep to be slain, and ordain or appoint them [1010] for the day of slaughter." ^{Jer 12.1-3}

With this also does that agree, which the prophet Asaph, after he had roundly and largely reckoned up the felicity of the wicked, adds, saying:

"You, truly, have set them in slippery places; you shall cast them down headlong, and utterly destroy them; they are oppressed with such sudden calamities; they are perished and swallowed up by terrors! Even as a dream that vanishes as soon as one awakes, you Lord, shall make their image contemptible in the city." ^{Psa 73.18-20}

For David before him also cried out, saying:

"Yet a little, and the ungodly shall be nowhere; and when you look in his place, he shall not [1011] appear. I have seen the ungodly in great power, and flourishing like a green bay-tree; and I went by, and lo, he was gone; I sought him, but he could not be found." ^{Psa 37.34-36}

In like manner, Malachi the prophet also witnesses that there is a great difference, in the day of judgment, between the worshipper and despiser of God, and between the just and unjust dealer:

"For the day of the Lord shall come, in which the proud, and those who work wickedness, shall be burnt as stubble with fire from heaven, so that there shall remain for them neither root nor branch." ^{Mal 3.18, 4.1}

Those who are wise, therefore, will never be offended hereafter by the felicity of the wicked. They will never desire and long to be made partakers of their unhappy prosperity. They will not grudge at all, to bear the misery of the cross, which they daily hear is laid by God upon his saints, to the end that they may be tried and refined of the dross of the flesh and of this unclean world. Thus far I have sufficiently reasoned about the causes of calamities.

iii.82

Let us now see, my reverend brethren,[1012] how, and in what order, the godly and sincere worshipper of God behaves himself in all calamities and worldly afflictions. His courage does not draw back, [1013] but rather kicks all desperation aside, because he understands that in faith he must manfully bear all sorts of evils. Therefore he arms himself with hope, patience, and prayer. Among men there are some, truly, who as soon as they feel any affliction, quickly cry (as commonly said) that it would be best if they had never been born, or else destroyed as soon as they were born.[1014] This is a very wicked saying, and not worthy to be heard in a Christian's mouth. But far more wicked are those who do not hesitate to destroy themselves,[1015] rather than be compelled by living, to suffer any longer some small calamity, or abide the taunts of the open world. And yet on the other side again, men must reject the unsavoury opinion of the Stoics, touching their indolentia or lack of grief. Touching this, I will recite to you, dearly beloved, a most excellent discourse from a notable doctor in the church of Christ, [John Calvin], set down in the following words:

"We are too unthankful towards our God, unless we willingly and cheerfully suffer calamities from his hand. And yet such a cheerfulness is not required of us, that it would take away all sense and feeling of grief and bitterness. Otherwise there would be no patience in the saints' suffering of the cross of Christ, unless they were both pinched by the heart with grief, and vexed in body with outward troubles. If there were no sharpness in poverty, if no pain in diseases, if no sting in infamy, and no horror in death, what fortitude or temperance would it be, to take small account of and set little by them? But since every one of them naturally nips the minds of us all with a certain bitterness engrafted in them, the valiant stomach of a faithful man shows itself in these: if being pricked with the feeling of this bitterness, however grievously pained with it, notwithstanding this, he worthily vanquishes and quite overcomes it by valiant resisting and continual struggling.

iii.83

Patience proves itself in this: if when a man is sharply pricked, notwithstanding, he so bridles himself with the fear of God, that he never breaks out to immoderate unruliness. Cheerfulness clearly appears in this: if a man, once wounded with sorrow and sadness, quietly rests himself upon the spiritual consolation of his God and creator. The apostle Paul has finely described this conflict which the faithful sustain against the natural feeling of sorrow and grief, while studiously exercising patience and temperance, in the following words: 'We are troubled on every side, but not made sorrowful: we are in poverty, but not in extreme poverty: we suffer persecution, but are not forsaken in it: we are cast down, but we do not perish.'^{2Cor 4.8-9} You see here, that to bear the cross patiently, is not to be altogether senseless and utterly bereft of any kind of feeling.

The Stoics of old foolishly described the valiant man as one who, laying aside the nature of man, should be affected alike in adversity and prosperity, in sorrowful matters and joyful things — indeed, as one who should be moved by nothing whatsoever.[1016] And what had they done, I ask you, with this exceeding great patience? [1017] In truth, they painted the image of patience, as it has never been found among men, nor possibly could be. Indeed, while they went about having patience that is overly exquisite and too precise, they took the force of it out of the life of man. Also among Christians in our day, there are certain new upstart Stoics, who think it is a fault not only to sigh and weep, but also to be sad and sorrowful for any matter. And these paradoxes for the most part, truly, proceed from idle fellows who exercise themselves in contemplation [1018] rather than in working; they can do nothing else but daily breed such novelties and paradoxes. But we Christians have nothing to do with this iron-like philosophy, since our Lord and master has not only in words, but also with his own example, utterly condemned it. For he groaned at and wept over both his own and other men's calamities, and taught his disciples to do likewise.

iii.84

'The world (He says) shall rejoice, but you shall be sorrowful, you shall weep.' ^{Joh 16.20} And lest any man make that weeping to be their fault, he pronounces openly that happy are those who mourn. ^{Mat 5.4} And this is no marvel: for if all tears are disapproved, what should we judge about the Lord himself, out of whose body bloody tears trilled? [1019] If all fear is noted to proceed from unbelief, what shall we think of the horror with which we read that the Lord himself was struck? [1020] If we disapprove all sorrow and sadness, what shall we think of that place where the Lord confesses that his soul is heavy unto death? ^{Mat 26.38}

I was minded to say this much, with the intent that I might keep godly minds from desperation — lest perhaps, out of hand, they forsake seeking patience because they cannot utterly shake off the natural motions of grief and heaviness. That cannot help but happen to those who make patience to be a kind of senselessness, and turn a valiant and constant man into a senseless block, or a stone without passions.[1021] For the scripture praises the saints for their patience while they are so afflicted with the sharpness of calamities, that their stomachs are not broken by it, nor their courage utterly quailed; while they are so stung with the prick of bitterness, that they are filled with spiritual joy; while they are so oppressed with heaviness of mind, that they are yet cheerful [1022] in God's consolation. And yet that repugnancy is still in their hearts, because the natural sense flees from and abhors the thing it feels contrary to itself. On the other side, the motions of godliness even through these difficulties, by striving, seeks a way to the obedience of God. The Lord expressed this repugnance when he said to Peter: 'When you were younger, you girded yourself, and went where you would: but when you are old, another will gird you, and lead you where you would not go.' It is unlikely, indeed, that Peter, when it was needed that he glorify God by his death, was drawn to it with much ado, against his will.

iii.85

For if it had not been so, his martyrdom would have deserved little or no praise. However, with great cheerfulness of heart, he obeyed the ordinance of God; and yet, because he had not laid aside the affections of his flesh,[1023] his mind was drawn in two different ways. For while he saw before his eyes the bloody death which he had to suffer, he was undoubtedly struck through with the fear of it, and with all his heart he would have escaped it. And on the other side, when he remembered that he was called to it by God's commandment, overcoming and treading down all fear, he willingly and cheerfully yielded himself to it.

If therefore we mean to be Christ's disciples, our chief and especial study must be to have our minds endued with so great an obedience and love [1024] of God, as to be able to tame and bring under control, all the contrary motions of our minds to the ordinance of His holy will. And thus it will come to pass that, with whatever kind of cross we are vexed, we may constantly retain quiet sufferance and patience, even in the greatest troubles of our minds. For adversity will have a sharpness to nip us with; likewise, being afflicted with sickness and diseases, we will groan and be disquieted and wish for health; being oppressed with poverty, we will be pricked with the sting of care and heaviness. In like manner, we shall be struck with the grief of infamy, contempt, and injury done to us; also, at the death of our friends, nature will move us to shed tears for their sakes. But this must still be the end of our thoughts: 'Why, the Lord would have it so.' [1025] Let us therefore follow his will." [1026]

Thus much has Calvin on this.

This is why the faithful, once over-taken and entangled with calamities, chiefly remedy their miseries with patience, which (as Lactantius says) "is the quiet bearing, with an indifferent mind, of those evils which are either laid or done upon our pates." [1027]

iii.86

For the faithful man, by patience, having his eyes thoroughly fastened upon the word of God in faith and hope, sticks fast to God and clings to his word. He suffers whatever adversities may happen to him, always moderating the grief of his mind and the pains of his body with wonderful [1028] wisdom. So that at no time, being overcome with the greatness of grief or sorrow, does he revolt from God and his word, to do the things that the Lord has forbidden. By patience, therefore, he vanquishes himself and his affections; he overcomes all calamities; and he stands still steadfastly, with a quiet mind and a heart well-disposed toward God. Though the faithful Christian suffers all things with patience, he still finds fault with those things that are wicked, and will hardly bear with anything that is against the truth. For our Saviour, Christ Jesus, the only perfect example of patience, most patiently yielded his hands and his whole body to be bound by the wicked; yet nevertheless, he reproved their iniquity, saying: "You have come out as a thief with swords and clubs, although I was with you daily in the temple: but this is your hour and power of darkness." [1029]

To this now belongs that excellent description or living image [1030] of patience, laid down by Tertullian in the following words:

"Go to now, let us see the image and habit of patience. Her countenance is calm and quiet; her forehead smooth, without furrowed wrinkles, which are the signs of sorrow or anger; her brows are never knit, but slack in cheerful wise, with her eyes cast attractively down to the ground, not for the sorrow of any calamities, but only for humility's sake. Upon her mouth she bears the mark of honour, which silence brings to those who use it. Her colour is like those who are near no danger, and are guiltless of evil. Her head is often shaken at the devil, and she has a threatening laughter with it. Moreover, the clothes about her breasts are white, and close to her body, as that which does not wag with every wind, nor toss with every blast. For she sits in the throne of that most meek and quiet spirit, which is not troubled with any tempest, nor overcast with any clouds; but is plain, open, and of a goodly clearness, as Elijah saw it the third time.^1Kng
17.21 For where God is, there also is Patience, ^{1Kng 19.12} his darling, which he nourishes." [1031]

iii.87

Moreover, the blessed martyr Cyprian, in his sermon De bono patientiae, reckons up the force or works of patience, and says:

"Patience is that which commends us to God, and preserves us. Patience is that which mitigates anger, which bridles the tongue, governs the mind, keeps peace, rules discipline, breaks the assaults of lust, keeps under [1032] the force of pride, quenches the fire of hatred, restrains the power of the rich, relieves the need of the poor, maintains unspotted virginity in maidens, chastity in widows, inseparable charity in married people; which makes humble in prosperity, constant in adversity, meek in taking injury; which teaches you to forgive quickly those who offend you, and never ceases to crave pardon when you offend others; which vanquishes temptations, which suffers persecutions, and finishes with martyrdom.[1033] This is what surely grounds the foundations of our faith; this is what augments the increase of our hope; this is what guides us, so that we may keep the way to Christ, while we go by the suffering of it; this is what makes us continue as the sons of God — while we imitate the patience of our Father." [1034]

Thus much from Cyprian.

iii.88

To this, if it pleases you, you may add for a conclusion, that short but very evident sentence of the Lord in the gospel, "Through your patience, possess your souls;" ^{Luk. 21.19} and also these words of the apostle, "Do not throw away your confidence, which has great recompense of reward. For you need patience, so that after you have done the will of God, you might receive the promises. For yet a very little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. And the just shall live by faith: and if he withdraws himself, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. We are not of those who withdraw ourselves unto perdition: but we turn in faith unto the winning of the soul." [1035]

But since patience is not born in and together with us, but is bestowed by God from above, we must beseech our heavenly Father that he will grant to bestow it upon us, according to the doctrine of James the apostle, who says: "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all men indifferently, and casts no man in the teeth:[1036] and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, not wavering." [1037]

Now the sound hope of the faithful upholds Christian patience. Hope, as it is used now-a-days, is an opinion about things to come, commonly referred to good as well as evil things. But indeed, hope is an assured expectation of, or looking for, those things which are truly and expressly promised by God, and believed by us, by faith. So then, there is a certain relation of hope to faith, and a mutual knot between them both.

iii.89

Faith believes that God said nothing but truth, and lifts up our eyes to God; and hope looks for those things which faith has believed. But how should you look for anything, unless you know that the thing that you look for is promised by God, and that you will have it in convenient time? Faith believes that our sins are forgiven us, and that eternal life is prepared for us through Christ our Redeemer. Now, hope looks and patiently waits to receive in due time the things that God has promised us, however it may be tossed with adversities in the meantime. For hope does not languish or vanish away, even though it does not see what it hopes for. Indeed, it does not quail, even if things fall out clean cross and contrary to it, as if the things which it hopes for, were not so. And therefore Paul said: "We are saved by hope: but hope that is seen, is no hope. For how can a man hope for what he sees? But and if we hope for that we do not see, then we abide with patience."^Rom
8.24-25 Abraham hoped that he would receive the promised land, when as yet he did not possess one foot of ground in it, but saw it inhabited by most powerful nations. Moses hoped that he would deliver the people of Israel out of Egypt, and place them in the land of promise, when as yet he did not see the manner and means of how he would do it. David hoped that he would reign over Israel, and yet he felt the peril of Saul and his servants hanging over his head,[1038] so that more than once he was in danger of his life. The apostles and holy martyrs of Christ hoped that they should have eternal life, and that God would never forsake them; yet nevertheless, they felt the hatred of all sorts of people; they were banished their countries; and lastly, they were slain by various torments. So (I say) hope is the hope, and looking for, of things not present, and things not seen. Indeed, it is a sure and most assured looking for, of things to come. And that is not of whatever things, but of those things which we believe in faith, and of those which are promised to us by the very true, living, and eternal God. For St. Peter says: "Hope perfectly in the grace which is brought to you." [1039] Now, they hope perfectly who, without doubting, commit themselves wholly to the grace of God, and assuredly look to inherit everlasting life.

iii.90

Furthermore, the apostle Paul calls hope the safe and sure anchor of the soul. ^{Heb 6.19} And by however much the promise of God is made surer, by so much is hope made firmer and more secure. For hope is not looking for anything whatsoever, but hope is of faith; that is, hope is for the thing that faith has believed, and which we know to be promised to us in the word of God. And therefore Paul expounds faith by hope, where he says: "Faith is the ground of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." ^{Heb 11.1} Faith is therefore the foundation upon which hope rests; and so God himself, and his infallible word, is the object to our hope.^{1Tim 1.1} And for that reason, Paul calls God our hope, and so also do the prophets. To this belongs the ninety-first Psalm, where the faithful cries: "You are my hope, Lord; you have set your house very high." [1040] You will find innumerable places like this in the book of the Psalms. But hope cannot be sure where there is no sound faith and an express promise of God. Now, since God's promises are about temporal things as well as eternal things, hope is also about transitory things as well as everlasting things.

And as faith is the gift of God's grace, and not the power or effect of our own nature, so too hope is given to us from above, and it is confirmed in us by the Spirit of God. For in our looking for things, there are both groanings and longings for them. Temptations assail and urge us sorely, as though the thing which is deferred for a season, were utterly denied; or as though God did not know our state and condition, because he seems sometimes, as if it were forever, to neglect and not consider our earnest expectation. This is why our hope needs great consolation and confirmation by the Spirit of God. If it is sound, hope sustains and upholds the mind of man [1041] however overladen it is with very weak infirmities.

iii.91

And when the Lord defers his promises, and seems somewhat too long either in neglecting our calamities, or in laying more troubles on our backs which are otherwise sufficiently afflicted — then comes hope, which doing her duty, bids us to encourage our hearts, and await the Lord's leisure. Just as He cannot possibly hate those who worship him, so he can never fail nor in the least point deceive them; for he himself is the eternal truth and everlasting goodness.

Here now, the passages of scripture touching on the certainty of hope are very profitable to teach that the people who hoped in God were never confounded, even though He long delayed aiding them with his helping hand. The Lord promises the land of Canaan to the seed of Abraham, but four hundred and thirty years first come about, before he settles them in possession of it. Indeed, before he brought them to it, he led them about in the wilderness a whole forty years. He delivers the Israelites from the captivity of Babylon, but not till seventy years were spent. What may be thought about this also: that having promised his only Son immediately after the beginning, notwithstanding, God did not send him till and toward the latter end of the world? The saints must therefore still endure, and always await the Lord's good leisure,[1042] because truth cannot possibly fail them, and all who hope in it are surely saved. David cries: "Our fathers hoped in you; they hoped in you, and you delivered them. They called upon you, and were saved: they hoped in you, and were not confounded." [1043] And again: "The Lord is good; happy is the man that hopes in him."^{Psa 34.8} And again: "Those who hope in the Lord shall be like mount Zion; they shall not be moved, but shall stand fast forever." ^{Psa 125.1} And Paul, in his temptations, cries out in his Epistle to the Philippians, saying: "I know that my affliction shall turn to my salvation, according to my earnest expectation and my hope, that I shall be ashamed in nothing." ^{Phi 1.19-20}

iii.92

I have said this much up to here, to teach you how the faithful behave themselves in sundry calamities. For they do not despair, but confirm their hearts with assured hope, and suffer all evils with a patient mind, quietly waiting for the Lord in their troubles, who is the only hope of all the faithful. Now, I mean to add to the end of this a few general consolations which may further confirm the hope of the faithful, induce them to patience in suffering calamities, and cheer up their heavy spirits under all manner of afflictions.

First of all, let the afflicted weigh with himself where affliction comes from. Evil men, the devil, sickness, and the world, are what afflict us — but not without God, who suffers them to do it. Satan could not trouble Job, either in goods or body, except by God's sufferance. And the prophet David cries: "You are He that took me out of my mother's womb; you were my hope when I still hung upon my mother's breasts. I was left to you as soon as I was born. You are my God; my time is in your hand." [1044] And the Lord says in the gospel: "Are not two sparrows sold for one farthing? and not one of them lights upon the ground without your Father. Yes, even all the hairs of your head are numbered." ^{Mat 10.29} Now God, by whose government all things are ruled, is not a God and a Lord only, but also a Father to mortal men. And his will is good and wholesome toward us; beside this, whatever he does, he does it all in order and justly. But if the will of God is good toward us, the thing cannot help but be good to us, which happens by the sufferance and will of Him who loves us so dearly. And in this, the children of the world differ much from the sons of God. For these (I mean the sons of God),[1045] in comforting one another in their calamities, say this: Do not suffer and grudge at the thing that you cannot alter; it is God's will that it shall be so, and no man can resist it; suffer, therefore, the power of the Lord, unless you would rather double the evil that you cannot escape. But the worldlings, on the other side,[1046] are asked if they will suffer the hand of the Lord; and submit themselves to God or not? They give this answer: "I must do so, whether I will or not,[1047] since I cannot withstand it."

iii.93

We may gather from this, therefore, that if they could withstand it, they assuredly would.[1048] But the children of God patiently bear the hand of God, not because they cannot withstand it, nor because they must suffer it by compulsion; but because they believe that God is a just and merciful Father.[1049] For thereby they acknowledge and confess that God, of his just judgment, persecutes the sins of those who have deserved far more grievous and sharp punishment than he lays upon them. They also acknowledge that God, as a merciful father, chastens them to amend their lives and safeguard their souls. And therefore, for chastening them, they yield hearty thanks to him; and utterly forsaking themselves and their opinions, they wholly commit themselves into the Lord's hands, whether they live or die. The Apostle, going about settling this in the hearts of the faithful, says:

"God speaks to you as to his sons; My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when you are rebuked by him. For the Lord loves those he chastens, and scourges every son that he receives. If you endure chastening, God tenders you as his sons; for what son is it that a father does not chasten? But if you are without chastisement, of which all are partakers, then you are bastards and not sons. Since, therefore, when we had fathers of our flesh, they corrected us, and we reverenced them, should we not much more rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits, and live?" ^{Heb 12.5-9}

Secondly, let the faithful believer who is oppressed with calamities, consider and weigh the causes for which he is afflicted. For either he is troubled and persecuted by worldlings for the desire that he has for righteousness and true religion: or else he suffers due punishment for his sins and offences. Let those who suffer persecution for righteousness' sake rejoice and give God thanks, as the apostles did, ^{Act 5.41} for He thinks them worthy to suffer for the name of Christ.

iii.94

For the Lord said in the gospel: "Blessed are those who suffer persecution for righteousness' sake; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when men revile and persecute you, and say all manner evil against you [1050] for my sake: rejoice, and be glad; for great is your reward in heaven: for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you." ^{Mat 5.10-12}

But if any man feels the scourge of God for his sins, let him acknowledge that God's just judgment has fallen upon him; let him humble himself under the mighty hand of the Lord; let him confess his sins to God; let him meekly require pardon for them, and patiently suffer the plague which he has worthily deserved with his sins. Let him follow the examples of Daniel and David. Daniel confesses his sins to the Lord, and says: "We have sinned, we have committed iniquity, and have done wickedly; we have not obeyed your servants the prophets, who spoke to us in your name. Lord, righteousness belongs to you, and open shame to us. You have visited and afflicted us, as you foretold by Moses your servant." ^{Dan 9.5-11} And David, when he was compelled to forsake Jerusalem and go in exile through Absalom's treason, said to the priests who bore the ark after him: "Carry the ark of God back into the city again. If I find favour in the eyes of the Lord, he will bring me back again, and He will show me both himself and his tabernacle. But if he says thus, 'I am not delighted in you,' [1051] then here I am, let him do with me what seems good in his eyes." ^{2Sam
15.25-26}

And truly, it is much better and more expedient to be punished in this world, and then, after this life, to live for ever, than it is to live here without afflictions, and to suffer everlasting pains in another world. Paul, truly, plainly says: "When we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord, so that we may not be damned with the world." ^{1Cor 11.32} And the very end of all chastenings and calamities with which the saints are exercised, tends toward nothing but this: that by despising and treading down the world, they may amend their lives, return to the Lord, and so be saved. But we have spoken about the end of afflictions, before.

iii.95

Furthermore, the men who bear the yoke of afflictions, lay before themselves the plain and ample promises of God. They never turn their eyes from these, and from the examples of the saints. There are innumerable examples of those who have felt God's helping hand, ready to aid and deliver them in all their needs. Now our good God promises to help and deliver not only those who are afflicted for righteousness' sake, but also those whom he visits for their faults and offences. For David says: "The Lord heals the contrite of heart: The Lord looses those who are bound in chains: The Lord gives sight to the blind: The Lord sets up again those who fall. He is not angry forever; nor does he always chide. He does not deal with us according to our sins, nor reward us according to our iniquities. And how wide the east is from the west, so far has he set our sins from us." [1052] To this belongs the whole thirtieth chapter of Jeremiah's prophecy. And Paul bears witness to this, saying: "Just as the afflictions of Christ are many in us, so our comfort is great through Christ." ^{2Cor 1.5}

Nor are we without examples enough by which to prove this, and to lay before our eyes the present delivery of the saints, and the repentance of sinners in extreme calamities. Our ancestors, the patriarchs, Noah and Lot, along with their families, were delivered by the mighty hand of God from the deluge that drowned all creatures under the heavens, and the horrible fire that fell upon Sodom. Jacob and Joseph, being wrapped in sundry tribulations, were unwound and rid from all, by their merciful God; even as the children of Israel were also brought out and delivered from the servile bondage of Pharaoh in Egypt. The people of Israel in the wilderness, under their guides and judges, often sinned grievously against the Lord, for which they were punished roundly, and sharply scourged; but they were quickly delivered again by the Lord, as often as they acknowledged their sins, and turned to Him again. There are also notable examples of God's deliverance of his people in David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Manasseh, and many others.

iii.96

There are innumerable places in the gospel, where Christ delivered his professors [1053] from sin, from diseases, from perils, and from the devil. In the Acts of the apostles, may be found most excellent patterns of quick delivery by the mighty hand of God. The apostles are imprisoned, and fast bound in fetters; but they are loosed and brought out by the angel of God, and placed in the temple to preach the gospel openly. Peter likewise is delivered out of prison, ^Act
5.18-20 when Agrippa had determined to make an end of and dispatch him the next day. The apostle Paul, being oppressed with an infinite sort of calamities, always felt the present hand of God at all times ready to rid him out of misery. ^{Act 12.6-10} And setting this tribulation and delivery of his as an example to all the faithful, he says to Timothy: "You know my persecution and afflictions [1054] which came to me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; I suffered these persecutions patiently. But the Lord delivered me from them all. Yes, and all who would live godly in Christ Jesus, shall suffer persecution." ^2Tim
3.10-12 The apostle reckons up many more examples in the eleventh chapter to the Hebrews. All this, I say, the saints consider; and in times of temptation and affliction, they comfort and strengthen themselves with it. For so Paul teaches us, where he says: "Whatever is written, is written for our learning, that through patience and the comfort of the scriptures, we might have hope." ^{Rom 15.4}

Beside this also, the faithful call to their minds the commandments of Christ our Lord, with which, commending patience to us, he has laid the cross upon us all. For he says in the gospel: "If any man would go after me, let him forsake himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whoever would save his life shall lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake will save it. For what advantage is it to a man, to win the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what will a man give for a ransom of his soul? For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels: and then he shall reward every man according to his work." ^{Mat 16.24-27} And again, in another place he says: "If any man comes to me, and does not hate his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, indeed, his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whoever does not bear his cross, and come after me, he cannot be my disciple." ^{Luk 11.26-27}

iii.97

After these words the Lord brings in certain parables, by which he teaches us to test our ability before we receive the profession of the gospel. The faithful apostles Peter and Paul, had an especial eye to the precepts of their master Christ, exhorting us to patiently bear the cross of Christ. "For Christ," Peter says, "was afflicted for us, leaving to us an example, that we should follow his steps." ^{1Pet 2.21} And Paul said, "Through many tribulations, we must enter into the kingdom of God." ^{Act 14.22}

Another comfort that the faithful have in their afflictions is this: that the time of affliction is short; that the joy and reward in the world to come is unspeakably larger and more excellent than the tribulation of this life is troublesome — so that, there can be no comparison between the joy of the one and the grief of the other. And lastly, our good God does not lay burdens on us that we are not possibly able to bear.

Touching all these points, I think it convenient here to repeat proofs out of the scriptures, to prove them true. St. Peter calls the time of affliction short, or momentary.[1055] And the prophet Isaiah, or rather, the Lord in Isaiah's prophecy, long before Peter's time, said: "Go, my people, enter into your chambers, and shut the doors after you; hide yourself a little while, until my indignation is past." ^{Isa 26.20} Paul also says: "The fathers of your flesh for a few days chastened you according to their own pleasure; but the Father of Spirits (for a short time) corrects you to your profit, that you might be partakers of his holiness. But no chastising for the present seems to be joyous, but rather grievous. Nevertheless, afterward it brings the quiet fruit of righteousness to those who are exercised by it." ^{Heb 12.9-11} Again he says: "We suffer with Christ, that we may be glorified with him. For I am certainly persuaded that the afflictions of this time are not comparable to the glory that will be shown upon us. For the momentary lightness of our affliction wonderfully, above all measure, produces for us an everlasting weight of glory while we look, not for the things that are seen, but the things that are not seen: for the things that are seen are temporal; but the things that are not seen are eternal." [1056]

iii.98

Again, in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, the same Apostle says: "God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted above what you are able; but with the temptation, He will make a way to escape, that you may be able to bear it." ^{1Cor 10.13} But if it so happens that the Lord seems to us to extend our tribulation longer than justice would seem to require, then we must later remember that we may not prescribe to God any end of his will, but must permit him freely to afflict us without any control — for so much, so long, and by such means, as seem best to His godly wisdom. He who is himself the eternal wisdom, and loves us entirely well, knows well enough his time and season, when to make an end of our miseries, and rid us from afflictions. In the scriptures are sundry examples to comfort the men whose afflictions endure for any length of time. The woman in the gospel who was troubled with an issue of blood for the span of twelve years, which had almost driven her to utter despair of recovering her health.^Mar
5.25-26 Another lay bedridden [1057] a whole eighteen years. By the pool Bethesda [1058] lay the weak creature who had been diseased thirty-eight years.^Joh
5.2-9 This span of time, surely, was very troublesome. Yet at last they were all restored to health again by God, who knows best at what time and season his help is most expedient and profitable for mankind. Let us therefore wholly submit ourselves to his good, just, and most wise will, to be delivered when and how he thinks best.

But the chief comfort and greatest hope in tribulation is that no force or misery can possibly separate the faithful and elect servants of God from God himself. For the Lord in the gospel cries out, and says: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish, nor shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, who gave them to me, is greater than all; and no man is able to take them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one." ^Joh
10.27-30

iii.99

To this belongs that outcry [1059] of St. Paul, which he uses to encourage us Christians, where he says:

"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? [1060] Shall tribulation, or anguish, or persecution, or hunger, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For your sake we are killed all day long, and are counted as sheep for the slaughter. Nevertheless, we overcome in all these things through him that loved us. For I am sure, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rule, nor power, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." ^{Rom 8.35-39}

I confess, the saints feel grief and many discommodities in their calamities; yet it is such that even in their discommodities, they have far more commodities. They are therefore diminished in one way, but augmented in another way, so that the cross of theirs is not their destruction, but an exercise for them, and a wholesome medicine. And therefore I think that that same worthy and golden sentence of St. Paul can never be too often beaten into our minds, where he says: "We are troubled on every side, yet are we not without shift; we are in poverty, but not in extreme poverty; we suffer persecution, but are not forsaken in it; we are cast down, but we do not perish." ^{1Cor 4.8-9} Therefore, the faithful in this world may lose their earthly riches; but do they thereby lose their faith? Do they lose their upright and holy life? Or do they lose their riches [1061] of the inner man, which are true riches in the sight of God? The apostle cries: "Godliness is a great lucre with a mind that is content with what it has. For we brought nothing into the world, and it is certain that we may carry nothing away: but having food and raiment, we must be content with that." ^1Tim
6.6-8

iii.100

And the Lord, truly, who out of his goodness has created heaven and earth and all that is in them for the use of men, who even feeds the ravens' young ones, will not cause the just man to die with hunger and penury. Moreover, that man who gathers treasure as the Lord has commanded him, does not lose his treasure in this world. The faithful know that a most wealthy treasure is laid up in heaven for them, those who for their Lord and master's sake, are spoiled of their terrestrial goods in this world. Job, that worthy and notable servant of God, cries, "Naked I came out of my mother's womb, and naked I will return to the earth again:[1062] the Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; as the Lord pleased, so has it happened.[1063] Blessed be the name of the Lord." ^{Job 1.21}

Last of all, it is manifest that to deny the truth in order to thereby escape persecution, is not the way to keep our wealth and quiet estate; rather, it is the means to lose them; indeed, by so doing we are made infamous to all good men of every age and nation. For we see that those who would not hazard their riches for Christ and the cause of his truth, but rather choose to keep their worldly wealth by dissimulation and renouncing of the truth,[1064] retained infamous reproach forever, and they daily augment the most terrible torments. This horribly vexed their guilty conscience. They nevertheless lost, in the devil's name, the wealth which they would not risk even once in the cause of their Saviour. But on the other side, those who jeopardized themselves and all their substance in the quarrel of Christ, manfully despising all dangers that could happen, always found a sweet and pleasant comfort, which strengthened the minds of their afflicted bodies. For they cry with the apostle: "We have learned, in whatever state we are, to be content with it. We know how to be low, we know also how to exceed: everywhere and in all things, we are instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to have plenty and to suffer need. We can do all things through Christ who strengthens us." ^Phi
4.11-13

iii.101

They know that the same apostle has said: "You have suffered with joy the spoiling of your goods, knowing that you have in heaven a far more excellent substance, which will endure." ^{Heb 10.34} For the Lord in the gospel also said: "Truly I say to you, There is no man that has forsaken house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake and the gospel's, who shall not receive a hundredfold now, at present, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life." ^{Mk 10.29-30} So then the saints and faithful servants of God are oppressed with servitude in this present world: but with this, they know and consider that the Lord himself became a servant for us; by this, those who are servants in this world are made free through Christ; and by terrestrial servitude, a way is made to celestial liberty.

The faithful are exiled, or banished from their country. But the heathen poet says, "A valiant-hearted man takes every country for his own." [1065] Truly, in whatever place of the world we are, we are in exile as banished men. Our Father is in heaven, and therefore heaven is our country. Therefore, when we die, we are delivered from exile, and placed in the heavenly country and in true felicity. In like manner, those whom the tyrant kills with hunger and famine, those he rids of innumerable evils. And again, whomever famine does not utterly kill but only torments, it teaches to live more sparingly, and afterward to fast longer and more devoutly. Now, in this case the faithful who suffer famine, call to remembrance the examples of the ancient saints, whom Paul speaks of when he says: "They wandered about in sheep skins and goat skins; being destitute, afflicted, and tormented; of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in wilderness and mountains, in dens and caves of the earth." ^Heb
13.7-8 Christians also consider that the state of famished Lazarus — who died among the dogs that licked his sores ^{Luk 16.21} — was far better than the surfeiting of the strut-bellied glutton who, being dead, was buried in hell.[1066]

iii.102

Moreover, it is to be abhorred, detested, and (yet) lamented by all men, to see a crew of barbarous villains and unruly soldiers violently abuse not only honest matrons, but tender virgins also, who are not fit yet or ripe for a man. But the greatest comfort that we have in so great a mischief and intolerable ignominy is that chastity is a virtue of the mind. For if it is a treasure of the mind, then it is not lost even though the body is abused. In the same way, the faith of a man is not thought to be overcome, even though the whole body is consumed with fire. And chastity is not lost, truly, where the body is deflowered; because the will of the abused body perseveres to still use that chastity, and does what it may to keep it undefiled. For the body is not holy because the members of it are undefiled, or because the secret parts of it are not indecently touched. Consider that the body, being wounded by many casualties, may suffer filthy violence; and that for health's sake, physicians may do things to its members that otherwise are unseemly to the eyes. Therefore, so long as the purpose of the mind remains (by which the body must be sanctified), the violent deed of another's filthy lust does not take from the body that chastity which the persevering continence of the deflowered body seeks to preserve. And meanwhile, there is no doubt that the most just Lord will sharply punish those shameless beasts and monsters of nature, who dare undertake to commit such wickedness.

The saints are confirmed in their tribulation by the innumerable examples of their forefathers, by which they gather that it is no new thing that happens to them. From the beginning, God has exercised his servants and the church — his spouse, whom he loves so dearly — with many afflictions and tribulations. Here I think it is very expedient, and comforting for afflicted minds, to reckon up the best and choicest examples that are in the scriptures, many of which are both private and public. The chances and pilgrimages of the latter patriarchs (because I do not mean to speak of those before the deluge) are those which I call private examples.

iii.103

For our father Abraham is called by the mouth of God out of Ur of the Chaldeans to go into Palestine, from where he is driven by a famine into Egypt. There he is again put to his shifts, and feels many pinches. After that, when he came into Palestine again, even till the last hour of his life, he was never without one mishap or another to trouble and vex his mind. His son Isaac felt famine also, and had one misfortune upon another to plague him with. It is not sin to call Jacob the most wretched man who lived in that age, considering the infinite miseries with which he was vexed. While he was still in his mother's womb and saw no light, he began to strive with his brother Esau. Afterwards, as a stripling, he had much ado to escape Esau's murdering hands by exiling himself from his father's house into the land of Syria; there again he was kept and exercised sharply in the school of afflictions. On his return to his country, he was wrapped in and beset with perils enough, and endless evils. The detestable wickedness of his untoward children would have been enough to kill him at his age. In his latter days, for lack of food, he goes down as a stranger into the land of Egypt, where in true faith and patience he gave up the ghost. The scripture testifies of Moses, the great and faithful servant of God, that in his youth he was brought up in the Egyptian court; but when he came of age, he refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, choosing to be afflicted with the people of God, rather than enjoy the temporal commodities of this sinful world.[1067] He counted the rebuke of Christ greater riches than all the treasures of the Egyptians. ^{Heb 11.24-26} This same Moses was grievously afflicted, first by Pharaoh and his princes, and after that afflicted again by those of his own household, and by his own countrymen whom he had brought out of the land of Egypt. David also, the anointed of the Lord, was troubled a great while with his master Saul, who was a madman and would have brought him to his end.

iii.104

But having obtained the kingdom at last (despite all that Saul could do), afflictions did not cease to follow David; for after many troublesome broils, he was thrust from his kingdom by Absalom, and very strictly dealt with. Yet in the end, God out of his goodness set him up again.

In the new Testament, Christ himself, our Lord and Saviour, and also that elect vessel of his, the apostle Paul, are excellent examples for us to take comfort by. The Lord in his infancy was compelled to flee the treason and murdering hands of cruel tyrants. He was not free from calamities his whole life; and at his death he was hanged among thieves. And Paul, speaking of himself, says:

"If any others are the ministers of Christ, I am more; in labours more abundant, in stripes above measure, in imprisonments more plenteous, in death more often. From the Jews, five times received I forty stripes less one; three times I was beaten with rods, once stoned; three times I suffered shipwreck; a day and a night I have been in the depth; in journeying often; in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own nation, in perils among the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in labour and travail, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. Beside those things that outwardly come to me, the trouble which daily lies upon me, is the care of all the churches." ^{2Cor 11.23-28}

These, I say, are private examples.

We have a public example in the church of Israel afflicted in Egypt, many times troubled under their kings and judges, and lastly led captive by the Assyrians and men of Babylon. Afterward, being brought home again by the goodness of God, they pass many brunts, and are sharply afflicted under the monarchies of the Persians, Greeks, and Romans. What shall I say of the apostolic church of Christ? Even when it first began, like an infant creeping on the ground,[1068] it shortly felt the cross, and yet it still flourished in those afflictions which even to this day it patiently suffers. Histories mention ten persecutions with which the church of Christ was terribly shaken and sharply afflicted (from the eighth year of Nero, till the reign of Constantine the great, a span of three hundred and eighteen years). [1069] This was without intermission or a time of respite in which to breathe, and to rest itself from troublesome broils and merciless slaughters.[1070]

iii.105

That beast and lecherous monster, Nero, raised against the Christians the first persecution of those ten,[1071] in which it is said that Peter and Paul, the Apostles of Christ, were brought to their ends. The second was moved by Flavius Domitianus, which banished the Apostle John to the Isle of Patmos. The third persecutor after Nero was Trajan the emperor, who published most terrible edicts against the Christians. Under him, the notable martyr and preacher Ignatius, with many other excellent servants of Christ, was thrown to wild beasts, and cruelly torn in pieces. The Emperor Verus most bloodily stirred up the fourth persecution through all France and Asia; in this, the blessed Polycarp was burnt alive in fire, and Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyons, was beheaded with the sword.[1072] In the fifth persecution of the church of Christ, Septimius Severus, throughout many provinces, bloodily crowned many a saint with the garland of martyrdom; among whom is reckoned Leonidas, the father of Origen. Julius Maximinus was the sixth after Nero to play the tyrant against the church. In that persecution, especially the preachers and ministers of the churches were murdered. Among them, beside countless other excellent men, were slaughtered Pamphilus and Maximus, two especially notable lights.

iii.106

The seventh blood-sucker after beastly Nero, was Decius the Emperor, who proclaimed most horrible edicts against the faithful. In his time, St. Laurence, a deacon of the church, was broiled on a grate-iron; and the renowned Virgin Apollonia, for her profession, leaped into the fire alive. Licinius Valerianus was as cruel as the rest in executing the eighth persecution against the faithful professors of Christ and his gospel. In that broil were slain many millions of Christians, and especially St. Cornelius and Cyprian, the most excellent doctors in the whole world. Valerius Aurelianus purposed, rather than put into execution, the ninth persecution: for a thunder rushed before him to the great terror of those who were around him; and shortly after, he was slain as he journeyed; and so his tyranny was ended by his death. But Caius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus, Maximinianus Maxentius, and Marcus Julius Licinius, not being terrified by this horrible example, raised the tenth persecution against the church of Christ. Enduring for the span of ten whole years, this brought to destruction an infinite number of Christians in every province and quarter of the world. Eusebius of Caesarea surpassingly [1073] paints this broil for the eyes of the reader: for he himself was an eye-witness and on-looker of many a bloody pageant and triumphant victory of the martyrs, which he repeats in the eighth book of his Ecclesiastical History. In that slaughter [1074] were killed the first apostles of our Tigurine church, both martyrs of Christ and professors of his gospel, S. Felix and his sister Regula.[1075]

After those ten persecutions followed many more and more terrible butcheries, stirred up by many kings and barbarous men, in sundry quarters of the earth; on the heels of these, followed the merciless blood-sheddings committed by the Saracens, Turks, and Tartars.[1076]

iii.107

Moreover, the butcherly bishops [1077] of Rome extremely annoyed [1078] the church of God, by shedding more Christian blood in civil and foreign wars, than any tongue can possibly tell. Nothing new therefore happens to us today, who in the church of Christ suffer diverse persecutions and afflictions; for we have examples of great efficacy, both new and old, to confirm our hearts, so that they do not faint in calamities.

And therefore the prophets and apostles, and their Lord and master, Jesus Christ, foretell these perils, calamities, and all persecutions. This is because they would have us fortify our minds against these miseries at all times and seasons, lest, by being shaken with them unawares, we would revolt from our faith, and forsake our profession. The Lord says to his disciples:

"Because I have chosen you out of the world, the world therefore hates you. Remember the words which I spoke to you, saying, The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my words, they will also keep yours. But they will do all these things to you for my name's sake, because they do not know the one that sent me. I have said this to you, so that you will not be offended. They will drive you from their synagogues: and the time is coming when whoever kills you, will think he is doing God good service." [1079]

At this time I do not mean to recite out of the prophets and apostles, the rest that is like this, because it cannot be briefly repeated.[1080] Let everyone pick out, and apply to his own comfort, the plainest and most evident testimonies that he lights upon by reading.

And although the saints do not rejoice at the destruction of their persecuting enemies, whom they could wish to be converted, and so saved, rather than be punished in this present world, and be damned forever in the world to come to. Yet they are glad when they see the Lord punish their afflicters, because thereby they perceive that God has a care for those who are his servants.

iii.108

They also gather, by the present vengeance of God upon the wicked, that as afflictions are for the health and amendment of the faithful, so they are to the hurt and destruction of unbelievers. For while they persecute others, they themselves are destroyed; and while they trouble the church of the living God, they kindle a fire of the wrath of God against themselves, that will never be quenched. For in the prophecy of Zechariah, we thus read what the Lord speaks touching his church:

"Behold, I make Jerusalem a cup of poison [1081] to all the people that are round about her: yes, Judah himself shall be in the siege against Jerusalem.[1082] And in that day I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all people; so that all those who lift it up shall be torn and rent, and all the people of the earth shall be gathered together against it."

The Lord has a like saying in Jeremiah, where he speaks against the persecutors of his church:

"Take this wine-cup of indignation from my hand, and make all the people to whom I send you, drink of it; so that when they have drunk from it, they may be mad, and out of their wits, for fear of the sword which I will send among them. For I begin to plague the city called by my name; and do you think then that you shall escape unpunished? You shall not go unpunished." [1083]

And this is what St. Peter alludes to saying:

"The time is that the judgment of God begins at the house of God: if it first begins with us, what shall the end of them be, who do not believe the gospel?" ^{1Pet 4.17}

I have briefly repeated above the ten persecutions in order, which the Roman emperors stirred up against the church of Christ. Now, histories mention that there was not one of them that was not requited with some notable calamity. And beside the particular revenges that followed every persecution, it is to be noted that the most just Lord began to more abundantly requite the death of his saints upon the necks of blood-thirsty Rome after the space of three hundred and forty-two years (for that many years are reckoned from the last of Nero to the second year of the emperors Honorius and Theodosius [1084]).

iii.109

For within the space of one hundred and thirty-nine years, Rome was six times taken and brought into subjection to the barbarous nations.[1085] For in the four hundredth [1086] year of grace, which was the second year of Honorius' and Theodosius' reign, the Visigoths, under their captain Alaric, both took and sacked the city, nonetheless using great mercy in their victory. After that, the Vandals under their guide Genserichus, again broke into the city cruelly, and spoiled it very greedily.[1087] After them came the Herules, and the remnant of Attila's army, with their captain Odacer, who took the city, and got the kingdom for themselves, utterly extinguishing the rule of the Romans in the western part of the world.[1088] Then again, when about fourteen years had come and gone, in comes Theodorieus Veronensis with his Ostrogoths, who slew the Herules, and obtained the city.[1089] But being recovered by the faith and industry of the valiant captain Belisarius, and restored to Justinian the emperor of the east, it was immediately taken again by Totylas,[1090] a prince of the Goths. With fire and sword he sacked it, pulled down houses, and overthrew a great part of its walls. Rome was so defaced by this, that for a certain span of days, no man dwelt there. That spoil of the city happened about five hundred and forty-eight years after Christ's incarnation.[1091] And thus Christ, in revenging his church, lay deserved plagues upon the necks of bloody Rome, beside other miseries which it suffered by the Huns and Lombards (I pass over that).[1092]

iii.110

For this is enough to show how miserably Rome was plagued for afflicting the church of Christ which nevertheless remained safe despite the tyrants' heads, and overcame those brunts; and it shall reign with Christ forevermore. In like manner, the Saracens were extinguished and utterly destroyed when they had suffered many a great overthrow, and had been plagued throughout the whole world with sundry mishaps and adverse calamities. The Turks also daily feel their woes and miseries, and are likely hereafter to feel sharper punishments. Moreover, the popes [1093] are slain with poison by one another, and are strangely vexed with awful terrors. They are nowhere sure of their lives, but even in the midst of all their friends, they are beset with miseries; they live in fear continually, the whole pack of them. Furthermore, even those among them who live most happily, rot away with the disease that follows filthy pleasures; there is no kind of death either sharper to the patient, or more detested among all men, than this. And their adherents, who by setting on to persecute the church of Christ, either dropped away with a similar disease that waits upon filthy lust, or they were consumed little by little, as Herod and Antiochus were;[1094] their death came long before it dispatched them, and tormented them beyond all measure. Yes, and besides these bitter plagues, they destroy one another with endless civil wars. The Lord therefore is righteous, and his judgments are just and equal; he never forgets to revenge his friends by finding out his own and his servants' enemies, to punish them for their deserts.

Since then, my brethren, the case so stands, I beseech you: let us patiently suffer the hand of the Lord our God, as often as we are touched with any calamity, or tempted by the Lord our God, knowing this: that the Lord strikes us that he may heal us, and troubles us that he may comfort us and receive us to himself, into joys everlasting. And that we may so do, since we are otherwise too weak by ourselves, let us pray to our Father which is in heaven, through Jesus Christ our Lord, that he will grant to be present with us in our temptations, and guide us in the way of constancy, peace, and righteousness.

iii.111

And for an example, let everyone set before his eyes the order that Christ our Saviour and master used — who, a little before the cross of his passion, took himself to prayer. For going up into the mount of Olives, he beseeches his Father humbly, and prays to him ardently. He is instant in prayer, and presses Him earnestly; and yet, he submits all to his Father's will and pleasure. Let us also do the same, that we may have a trial of our Father's present aid with the effectual comfort of our minds, and that we may give him praise forevermore for his goodness. Amen.

ii.125

3-5. THE FIFTH SERMON: THE CEREMONIAL LAW.

Of the ceremonial law of God, but especially of the priesthood,
time and place appointed for the ceremonies.

IN the partition of God's laws, we placed the ceremonial law next after the moral law.[1124] And therefore, since the moral law is already expounded, by the help of God I next have to treat the law of ceremonies. And that I may not hide anything from you, note this by the way: some write Ceremoniae, and some Cerimoniae. These are two words used for ceremonies, but consider that various men have various opinions touching where the word comes from. For some (following the opinion of Servius Sulpitius) think that they are called Ceremoniae a carendo.[1125] But Festus asserts that [1126] ceremonies first took their name from the town Caeres, or Caerete.[1127] For Livy, in his fifth book, says that the relics [1128] of the Romans were kept by the townsmen of Caeres during the French wars, at the time the Frenchmen invaded Rome.[1129] By this occasion, it is likely that as a remembrance of the benefit, all the worship due to God, and all the holy rites or customs, were called ceremonies, after the name of the town. But wherever the word is derived from, we use it in this treatise for the holy deed of worshipping God, and the ecclesiastical rites of sacred religion.

Now, ceremonies are holy rites belonging to the ministers of religion, and also to the place, time, and holy worship exhibited to God. The ceremonial laws, exactly teach and precisely describe all these: how they ought to be kept and observed as they should be. Ceremonies, therefore, are the actions and rites which the laws or rules, called ceremonial, frame or appoint.

iii.126

Now ceremonies are ordained either by God, or men. Touching those which God has instituted, they are of two sorts: the one sort he ordained in the old Testament to the ancient Israelites; and the others, he ordained at the coming of Christ, to us who are the people of the new Testament or covenant. I mean to speak of the ceremonies of the new Testament, when I treat the church and its sacraments. At this time, I will discourse about the ceremonies of the old Testament, which were holy rites and actions ordained and delivered by God himself to the people of Israel until the time of amendment. They were partly to represent and show [1130] the mysteries of God in a shadow; and partly to worship God by them. They were also to keep the people of God in a lawful religion with them, and in the society of one ecclesiastical body.

But men have also brought in many and sundry sorts of ceremonies. Among the heathen, the arch-flamines [1131] did this, who were the priests and ministers of idols, which the offices and places of both their kings and princes sometimes supplied. Among the Hebrews, Jeroboam, king of Israel, to the destruction of him and his followers, changed the ceremonies which God had ordained, into his own — that is, into men's inventions and detestable blasphemies. ^{1Kng 12.26-33}

In this latter age of the world, in which we live, there is no halt to ceremonies instituted daily by brain-sick [1132] people — the misery of which many learned men have (and still) lament and bewail today. Augustine complains that, in his time, ceremonies increased too fast in the church of God. What do you think he would say, if he were alive to see them now-a-days? [1133] But I will speak of this at another time.

iii.127

Now, because the word ceremonies is attributed as a name to any heathenish rites whatsoever, in this treatise I would have you know that I speak not of every ceremony, but only of those which were delivered of God by Moses to the people of Israel; not at the will of Moses, but at the will of God, by the means or ministry of Moses, as it was said to him: "See, that you do all things according to the pattern that was shown to you in the mountain." [1134] The origin, therefore, or the beginning of these ceremonies which we treat, are referred to God himself, the most true and assured author of them. And they therefore pleased God, because they were godly, and they might be exhibited in faith. Contrarily, the ceremonies in religion that are devised and ordained by men are utterly condemned, as seen in the twelfth chapter of Deuteronomy. Also, in the seventeenth chapter of second Kings we find: "Israel walked in the ordinances, or ceremonies, which they themselves had made to themselves." ^2Kng
17.8 It is known to all men, what happened to Jeroboam and his household, and all the kings of Israel that walked in the ways of Jeroboam.[1135] So then, these ceremonies of ours (the ceremonies of which I speak) are actions and rites not in profane but holy matters, which God himself first ordained, and which God's people use and exercise.

These ceremonies were not delivered to all people or all nations, but only to the people of Israel. And that too, as the apostle says, was only "until the time of amendment," [1136] as that which should lie upon the shoulders of the Jews till the coming of Messiah. At that time, they would be taken away, and after that appear no more. And in this sense, truly, the apostle Paul calls the law the schoolmistress [1137] until Christ.

Moreover, we have to note the end to which ceremonies were ordained. Ceremonies especially belong to the doctrine of piety and faith. For they were added to the first tablet as a shore, or a prop, to uphold or fix it.

iii.128

For they teach the outward worship of the true God, which godly men give to Him. And the Israelites were not only drawn from strange gods by them, but from strange worship also, with which they were too much and too long inured and trained up in the land of Egypt. This was to the end that they would not have any occasion to receive or admit any strange kinds of worship, when God's worship was furnished and wrapped as it were, in such exquisite sorts of curious ceremonies. Moses in the twelfth chapter of Deuteronomy makes this the reason why God appointed such busy ceremonies. Therefore, ceremonies, and the use of ceremonies, are expressly called in the scripture, the worship of God. For it pleases God to be worshipped with them; and with them he retained his people in the true worship of him, and in the true religion and communion of one ecclesiastical body. For the church is severed and divided by admitting or bringing in new or strange ceremonies, as evident in the states and dealings of Solomon and Jeroboam. Moreover, the apostle Paul said, "Are not those who eat of the sacrifice, partakers of the altar,"^{1Cor 10.18} and consequently of the whole religion? Furthermore, the chief or especial mysteries of Christ and his church were shadowed in ceremonies,[1138] and were the sacraments of the Jewish people with which the Lord would bind them to himself, put them in mind of his benefits, and lastly, keep the piety, obedience, and faith of his people in use and exercise. And the Lord especially required faith and faithful obedience at the hands of his servants in observing these ceremonies.

Therefore, as often as the people were ignorant of the meaning of the secret mysteries contained in those figurative shows, those ceremonies did not please but utterly displeased His majesty: as often, I say, as they were without faith, and observed only the outward actions or ceremonies, without any inward zeal or touch of conscience. For the Lord in Jeremiah cries out saying:

"Heap up your burnt-offerings with your sacrifices, and eat the flesh: for when I brought your fathers out of Egypt, I spoke no word to them of burnt-offerings or sacrifices; but this I commanded them, saying, Hearken to and obey my voice, and I will be your God and you shall be my people." ^{Jer 7.21-23}

iii.129

And yet, in another place we read that the offering of sacrifices, and that external action of the people in worshipping God, was acceptable and of a sweet-smelling savour in the nose of the Lord.[1139] Now, upon what does this diversity arise, I pray you, if not upon the difference of the minds of those who worship the Lord? For sacrifices pleased him, and the honour that was done to him in simple obedience and faith alone, pleased him too. But he utterly disapproved of that religion in which he was worshipped with outward shows, and not with the faith and sincere obedience of the inward heart. We read that Cain sinned in this way; for God commanded not to sacrifice in the manner that Cain did.

Again, he commanded to sacrifice and to worship him with external ceremonies, [1140] in faith that Christ would come to be the Saviour of the world.[1141] It was not that they should hope to be justified by the external action, but by the one who was prefigured in all their ceremonies, Christ Jesus, the sacrifice once to be offered to save them all;[1142] who was the life and meaning to which all those ceremonies led, that are expressed in the law.

But it is not amiss here, to particularly examine and look into not all and every one, but the chief ceremonies, and those which are more significant than the rest. Let this labour of mine not seem to any man to be more curious than needed, or less profitable than it shows for. For it is undoubtedly available for the sound understanding of the abrogation of the law.[1143] All things whatsoever that God has laid down in the holy scriptures, are altogether profitable to our edification, and carry with them a divine authority by which we may confirm our minds. Therefore, they are veritable fools and godless people, or to use a gentler term, they are shuttle-witted,[1144] and ignorant of all good things, whose stomachs are turned at the ceremonies that God has taught, and whose ears are offended to hear a sober and godly treatise upon the exposition of those divine ceremonies.

iii.130

There are some (and that is no small number) who think it very profitable and an excellent thing to construe Homer and Virgil allegorically. In divine ceremonies, only foolish heads are persuaded that no profit or wisdom lies secretly hidden — when indeed, in the whole world there is nothing more profitable, pleasant, excellent, or full of wisdom in allegorical types, than the ceremonies that God has ordained. For in them the mysteries of Christ and his catholic church are very finely, plainly, and notably described.

Now, in reckoning up and touching these several ceremonies, I will chiefly follow the very natural order. Ceremonies pertain to the ecclesiastical worship of God. Therefore, it is necessary that there should be persons appointed in the church to be the masters, or rather the public ministers of those ceremonies, to exercise and put them in practice as the Lord ordained them. It is necessary that there also be a certain place and time appointed at which God should be especially worshipped, rather than another place or time. Moreover, the holy rites (that is, the ceremonies) must be appointed and certainly numbered, so that the worshippers of God may know what and how great the honour is that they are bound to give to him. And first of all, I mean to say something about the persons (that is, the priests or Levites) still referring the hearers to the reading of the holy Bible, in which the whole is fully contained and largely described.

The beginning of priesthood among the old people is derived almost from the creation.[1145] For they say that in every family, the first-begotten were always the priests. It is certain that when the firstborn of Egypt were slain, the Lord by a law consecrated to himself the first-begotten of the Israelites. ^{Exo 13.2, 15} And the preeminence, or dignity, of the first-begotten has always been very great by the civil law. The first-begotten always ruled and bore sway in his father's house, and he was, as it were, a king among his brethren. To the first-begotten, the inheritance was due; to the other brethren, portions were given. The first-begotten excelled the rest in the dignity of the priesthood. Therefore, when Cain and Abel strived about their birthright, they did not contend about a trifle, but about a matter of very great weight.[1146]

iii.131

Thus, when the mother-virgin is said in Luke to have borne the first-begotten son, let no man think that she was the mother of the second-begotten, or many more sons. For Luke calls Christ her first-begotten son, ^{Luk 2.7} in which his dignity and excellence is noted. For to Christ our Lord belong the kingdom, priesthood, and inheritance. And by his bountiful liberality, we are adopted to be his partners both in the kingdom, priesthood, inheritance of life everlasting, and in all heavenly things.

But to return to our purpose again, the dignity of priesthood among the people of Israel, of right belonged to Reuben, because he was the first-begotten. But by committing detestable incest, he lost his right.[1147] Next to him, therefore, was Levi, who also lost that dignity for the sin which he committed in killing the men of Shechem traitorously, and profaning the sacrament of circumcision.[1148] But because the tribe of Levi behaved itself manfully, not only in bringing the children of Israel out of Egypt, but also in punishing idolaters — I mean, the men that worshipped the golden calf — they therefore received the office or dignity of priesthood in reward for their virtue. And at that time, the Levites were chosen to the place of the first-begotten of all the seed of Israel. For thus we read: "And Moses said to the Levites, Consecrate your hands unto the Lord this day, every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that a blessing may be given to you this day." ^{Exo 32.29}And again:

"And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, Behold, I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel, for all that first opens the womb among the children of Israel; and the Levites shall be mine; because all the firstborn are mine. For the same day that I struck all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, I hallowed to myself all the firstborn in Israel;" and so forth. ^{Num 3.12-13}

By this it appears that the tribe of Levi was appointed to the priesthood in the church of Israel. Moreover, this dignity or ministry, was singularly confirmed to this tribe immediately upon the insurrection of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, by the wonderful miracle that the Lord wrought upon Aaron's rod.

iii.132

It alone budded among the other eleven twigs, as a witness that God had appointed the tribe of Levi alone to the office and function of holy priesthood. And for that cause, the same rod was put into the ark and kept in the tabernacle: to the end that no other tribe would affect the priesthood at any time thereafter. All of this is largely declared in the sixteenth and seventeenth chapters of the Book of Numbers.

Now, there was a certain order among the Levites. There were degrees and appointments to various offices. For the Levites were divided into three families, that is, into the Kohathites, Gersonites, and Merarites. And those were again parted into four orders. For first of all, princes were chosen out of the family of Kohath to bear sway and rule the rest. The remnant of the Kohathites, and the other two orders (the Gersonites and Merarites), were subject to them, and obeyed the first order of Kohathites who were their governors. For the chief priest, Aaron, along with his sons Ithamar and Eleazar, had preeminence among the rest. Thus we read in the third chapter of Numbers:

"And you shall give the Levites to Aaron and to his sons; for they are given to him from the children of Israel. And you shall appoint Aaron and his sons to attend to their priest's office; and the stranger that comes near shall be slain." Num 3.9-10

In this, the chief priest Aaron bore the type or figure of Christ, who is the true, best, and greatest king and bishop — the one to whom all Christians are subject as their chief bishop and head, whose dwelling is in heaven.

And here, observe that all the Levites did not serve in the tabernacle, nor did they all instruct and teach everywhere throughout the land of Israel. There were certain ordinances touching the choice and refusal of those among the Levites who were to be called to the ministry or priesthood. Time will not serve me to reckon all the laws appointed for that purpose; but the chief of them may be seen in the twenty-first and twenty-second chapters of Leviticus. In the eighth chapter of the book of Numbers, the age is appointed for those who were thought to be fit for the ministry: that is, from the twenty-fifth to the fiftieth year of their age.

iii.133

The priests who were called and chosen to the ministry, were also consecrated. The manner of consecrating them is far larger and busier than what I can declare in few words. By their consecration was meant that those who serve the church in the office of priesthood ought to be adorned with various gifts, and endued with holy conversation. For to this especially belongs the anointing of the priests, which is a type of the Holy Ghost. Unless an ecclesiastical minister is so endued, he exercises the office to his own destruction. This ceremonial anointing of priests is set down by Moses in the twenty-ninth chapter of Exodus, the eighth chapter of Leviticus, and the eighth chapter of the book of Numbers. We must also add to this, the habit or apparel that the priests used. When they did not minister in their charge or office, the priests wore the same kind of garments as laymen did, as we may gather out of Ezekiel.[1149] But when they did serve in the ministry, then they wore ceremonial raiment according to God's commandment. Moses sets down a very large description of this in the twenty-eighth and thirty-ninth chapters of Exodus.

There are nine sorts of ceremonial garments,[1150] though some count only eight. Josephus makes it ten.[1151] First of all, before they went about their offices, the priests washed themselves in water,[1152] and then put on their holy garments. Among those garments, some were indifferently used by both the inferior and chief priests. And first, their privates are hidden with linen breeches coming down to their knees and hams; the upper part of these was tied above their hips with a gathering band, like the upper part of our common trousers.[1153] This was to the end that, if they were to fall while they were busy killing their sacrifices, or in bearing burdens to and fro, those parts which shame bids us to cover, would not appear.

iii.134

Upon their linen breeches they had a close coat, made of double linen which (as Josephus says) was made of silk.[1154] That was plain, or close to the body, without plait or gathering, and it came down just to the calf of the leg. Such were what soldiers usually wore, and called cassocks.[1155] These were so fit for their limbs, and close to their bodies, that they were light, and allowed them either to run or fight. And therefore, making themselves ready for the ministry of God, the priests put on such a cassock that, notwithstanding being attractively clad, they might discharge their office, and exercise their ministry, with much expedition.

The third kind of raiment was a belt or girdle, which girded that cassock around the priest. This girdle was woven of purple, scarlet, and blue silk, like an adder's skin, hanging down beneath the knee, but in the holy ministry, it was tucked back upon the left shoulder.[1156]

The fourth kind of ornament was a mitre, or a little round cap, which covered his head almost to the ears; in fashion, it was as if a man had cut a bowl in half, and set the upper part upon his head.[1157]

Then there was the ephod. Mention of this is not made in Exodus, where the ceremonial garments are reckoned, as it were, by purpose; but it is made in other places of holy scripture. This garment was indifferently common to all the priests.[1158] This ephod is thought to have been a linen cloak, such as David wore when he danced before the ark.^{2Sam 6.14} We read of the priests whom Saul had slain by the hands of Doeg the Edomite: "And he killed that same day eighty-five men who wore linen ephods." ^{1Sam 22.18} His meaning is not that they were slain while the ephods were on their backs; but that they were killed when they were of that age and order that they might wear an ephod — that is, that they might minister in the priesthood of the Lord.

iii.135

Therefore in Hosea we read, "You shall be without ephod and teraphim;"^{Hos 3.4} that is, without priesthood and religion. For the term ephod began to be used for the very priesthood; it was the garment or sign, for the thing signified. But if any man takes these words of Hosea to be spoken about the more notable ephod (of which I have cause to speak shortly), I will not greatly challenge him. Now this linen ephod seems not to differ much from that which the Papists call a surplice. The chief priest and under-priests used these five garments alike. The other four properly belong to the high priest alone.

The first of these four was called megil, and was a coat down to the ankles;[1159] a garment of all blue silk, from the neck down to the sole of the foot, being close on every side, except for the places at which to put his head and arms out. At the hems beneath hung seventy-two bells, and as many pomegranates, so placed that between two bells hung one pomegranate, and between two pomegranates hung one bell. The reason made for this, is that the sound might be heard when the high priest went into the holy of holies — because he might later die the death unless he did so.[1160]

Now follows the ephod of the high priest, which differs much from that which I spoke of before. For it was not made of linen, but woven with weaver's work of diverse colours of gold, purple, and silk. It was unlike the other in shape and making, for it belonged to the high priests alone. It was a breast-lap, coming over the bulk from the neck to the hips — for, like a curet,[1161] it covered the breast. It came over the back part of the shoulders, and around both sides under the arm-holes. It bore the same fashion that women's stomachers [1162] do today, which we Switzers call libli.[1163] This ephod was worn on top of his megil, and came down to the ankles.[1164]

iii.136

Upon each shoulder he bore an onyx-stone, called schoham;[1165] in which were graven the names of the children of Israel. Against the breast there was nothing woven in it, but a place was left void for the breast-lap of judgment. For the breast-lap of judgment, which is called hosen, was the eighth ornament of their attire; and it was a woven cloth made of gold, purple, and silk, about a hand-breadth square, doubled, and hemmed on every side, because it should not unravel. Woven in that were precious stones of wonderful greatness (for their kind) and marvellous price. These were placed in four sundry rows, so that every rank contained three stones. In these, as in the onyx-stones, were graven the names of the children of Israel.[1166] They glistered with a wonderful brightness; for no stones were set in the breast-lap except those which as shone exceedingly. By this it seems that Urim and Thummim was nothing but these rows of precious stones: for Urim and Thummim ^{Exo 28.30} signify light and perfectness; for just as these stones gave great light, so they were pure and without any manner of spots. And they thought that the high priest never spoke rightly in a matter of weight, nor when asked, did he truly utter the answers and oracles of God, except when the breast-lap of judgment hung on his breast. Now this breast-lap of judgment was tied to the ephod, or the other breast-lap, by golden rings beneath; and above, it hung down the shoulders by golden chains, that were fastened under the onyx-stones. This was the most precious and excellent part of the high priest's apparel. For it was the coffer of wisdom, and treasury of all law and knowledge, of equity and justice. The Israelites fetched from this as it were, the determinate answers to those doubts which they stuck upon at any time. This is the reason (it seems) that some have translated Urim and Thummim into the Greek δήλωσιv καὶ ἀλήθεια; [1167] that is (they say), doctrine and truth are in the priest's breast.

iii.137

The last of all is the golden plate. For upon the high priest's head there was a blue silk lace, upon which this plate was put, which was broad beneath and sharp above. In fashion, it was somewhat like the label of a bishop's mitre, in which was written, "Holy to the Lord," or "The holiness of the Lord." For Christ our Lord, alone, is holiest of all, and the one who sanctifies us all. He that usurps that name or title is an antichrist. Some think that in that plate was written that name of God [1168] which was not lawful for any man to utter.[1169] This plate was tied to the cap,[1170] full upon the forehead, with a blue silk lace; and it was a crown upon his head, as it were.[1171] Thus, I say, were the high priest and under-priests arrayed at the start.

These sundry ceremonies have sundry and godly significations. The Lord declared by Moses that the use and end of these ordinances was to be for glory and comeliness' sake.[1172] For they were invented, partly for winning credit and authority for the ministers of religion, and partly for the commendation or advancement of religion itself — because the things that are most regarded, are set forth with such great solemnity. Moreover, it was profitable and especially necessary to set the people to work with these busy ceremonies. If they had been without such ceremonies of their own, they were profane, and ready to embrace the idolatrous rites of heathen nations.

Furthermore, those ceremonial clothes used by the priests, Aaron's successors, offer to us the beholding of Christ, who is the true and highest priest. He was apparelled with the garment of righteousness, temperance, and virtue, which garment is common to us also. For all Christians must put on and be clad with Christ. And yet Christ has pre-eminence, as the high and chief priest among us all — not only because he sanctifies us, and endues us with virtue; but also because he has certain properties peculiar to himself, such as being both God and the Saviour of the world.

iii.138

He bears us upon his breast and shoulders, as Aaron bore the precious stones: for we are not vile, but very dear in the sight of God. Out of the breast of our high priest, Christ, glisters and shines the light of eternal wisdom. For in him, as the treasury of God's eternal wisdom, are all the riches of knowledge and wisdom laid up and locked. He is the light of the world; he is both truth and perfectness; so that the whole world should by right, require and seek from Christ alone, its laws, ordinances, answers, and whatever else is needful to perfectness and true happiness. He is the Holy of holies, the very majesty and holiness of God. Upon his head the crown of glory is very rightly placed, as he alone sanctifies, reigns in glory, and lives forevermore.

Besides all this, the priests were taught by these ceremonies, to understand by their very apparel, what was required from their hands, and what kind of men they ought to be. Let the priests be always ready to execute their office; let them walk honestly before God and men; let them be temperate and far from lust and sensuality; let their loins be girded with the belt of justice and verity; let their breast, their sides and back, be furnished with the word of God; let their head be covered with the helmet of salvation — upon that let Christ Jesus, the Saviour, be placed; and let him be the chief of the ministers and of the ministry. But chiefly, let the priest be heard in the church. For if he is dumb, he shall die the death; but if he rings out the name of the Lord, and preaches his law, then he stirs up in the church a savour in the nose of God, far surpassing the smell of sweet pomegranates. Therefore, under these clothes is hidden the signification of the priests' manners, of their virtues and vices. Next after a man's talk, there is nothing that commends him sooner than his apparel. For as the man is, such is his talk, such is his clothing. Therefore, the raiment denotes what conversation the priest ought to have. Consequently, in the scriptures we are bid to put on other clothing — when the meaning of the Holy Ghost is that we should change our wicked conversation. So their very garments partly instruct the priests as to what they have to do, and what is seemly for them.

iii.139

But now the time and course of this treatise invites me to say something about the priests' office. Their office consisted in many things, but especially in teaching and instructing. For the chief reason why the priests were ordained by God, was to instruct the church in true piety, and to teach the people the law of God. For thus we read that the Lord said to Aaron: "You and your sons that are with you, shall drink neither wine nor strong drink when you enter into the tabernacle of witness, lest you die. Let it be an everlasting ordinance among your posterities, that you may differentiate between holy and unholy, and between clean and unclean; and that you may teach the sons of Israel all the statutes which the Lord has spoken to them by the ministry of Moses." ^{Lev 10.10} Ezekiel almost repeats the same law in as many words in the forty-fourth chapter of his prophecy. And Malachi declares it also, as seen in the second chapter of his prophecy. Therefore, those who think that the Levitical priests were appointed only to kill the sacrifices, are utterly deceived. Moreover, the Lord everywhere in his laws ministers matter for the Levitical priests to instruct the people in; and that matter was not heathenish philosophy, the edicts of kings, or decrees of senators, but the very word of God, delivered to them by God himself. And that this doctrine might be more commodiously uttered to the people, the priests appointed certain holy days in which the people should assemble together, to hear them preach the word of God.

The next point of their duty,[1173] after teaching, was to bless the people. That blessing was not free for every priest to use as he wished, but was bound to a certain form of words, very solemnly uttered, as expressed in the sixth chapter of Numbers:

"And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, In this way you shall bless the children of Israel, and say to them: The Lord bless you and keep you: the Lord show his face to you, and be merciful to you; the Lord lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace."^{Num 6.22-27}

iii.140

They undoubtedly used this manner of blessing in their holy assemblies, especially at the breaking up of the congregation, when the people departed. In another place it is said that God blessed; but here it says that Aaron and his sons blessed the people. Upon this, we have to note that God works inwardly, and performs in the faithful, whatever the priests wished to the people in that form of blessing; so that, to bless is still the sole and proper work of God alone. And therefore, very significantly, after that solemn blessing uttered by the mouth of the priest, God adds: "And they shall call, or put, my name over, or upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them." The priests, therefore, lay before the people the name of the Lord; they commend to them the mighty power of his Godhead; and they show them that all goodness flows from God; they teach them how they may obtain it through faith in Christ, who is the blessed Seed that blesses all those who call upon his name.

Now, in this solemn blessing, six principal points are chiefly contained. First the priest says, "The Lord bless you:" that is, may the Lord bestow upon you whatever belongs to the safety of your body and soul. Secondly he says, "The Lord keep you;" for it is not sufficient to receive good things at the hand of the Lord, unless they are preserved by his power, and not taken from us by his wrathful indignation, nor lost again by our own negligence. Thirdly he says, "The Lord show you his face," or, "the Lord make his face shine upon you." The Lord, then, shows us his loving face when, after his anger, he shows us his favour, and becomes good and gracious to us. And therefore, in the fourth clause follows a plainer exposition, where the priest says, "The Lord be merciful to you:" as if he had said, The Lord always be gentle and favourable to you in all that you go about, either in words or deeds. The fifth blessing is, "The Lord lift up his countenance upon you." Now the Lord lifts up his countenance when he looks upon us, when he watches over us, and directs and guides our ways.

iii.141

The last desire is, "Peace;" which is taken for the salvation and chief goodness that happens to mankind, even though in another sense it is put contrary to war or battle — and the peace of the conscience is no small felicity to mortal men.[1174] These were the good things that the priests wished to light upon the people, teaching them by this, to beseech the Lord for those blessings with ardent prayers and earnest supplications. Even to this day, there remain the psalms that the priests made for the people's sake, to sing. For after David had brought music into the temple, then playing upon musical instruments with a sweet melody and the singing of psalms, begin to be taken as an office among the priests. The first book of Chronicles says very much touching this music used in the temple, where it treats David and his dealings, how he distributed the singers into twenty-four orders, and that was done by course. ^{1Chr 24}

Moreover, the priests were commanded [1175] to minister the sacraments, and to sacrifice. For they circumcised the infants;[1176] their office was to see the Passover eaten, and to offer sacrifices of sundry sorts to the Lord. I will speak about this afterward, in a convenient place. And so that they might more commodiously offer their sacrifices, David, by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, divided the two families of Eleazar and Ithamar into twenty-four orders: for they ministered by course, as seen in the twenty-fourth chapter of first Chronicles. All the while that their turn to minister lasted, the priests remained within, and never set foot outside the temple. For there were houses built within the temple for the priests to dwell in when their lot came to serve the Lord; they never went to their own houses until their course had expired, and their time to minister was fully finished. The priests also kept the holy vessels and cleaned them; they kept the candles burning, and the holy fire, so that it would not go out. To be short, they had charge of all things which seemed to belong to the service of God, such as oil, frankincense, and similar things.

Now before the temple was erected, and the Israelites had obtained a place to settle in the land of promise, the priests' office was to see the tabernacle pitched, and taken down again, and carried to and fro.

iii.142

For in the third chapter of Numbers, we read this: "The Levites shall keep all the instruments of the tabernacle of the congregation, and have charge of the children of Israel, to do the service of the tabernacle." For the tabernacle was so appointed, that when they journeyed it might be taken into many pieces.[1177] Therefore, when the Israelites were ready to remove their camp, Aaron and his sons came with the coverings appointed for the purpose, to wrap up and carry the holy vessels in. The Kohathites bore the ark, the table, the altar, and instruments belonging to it. The Gersonites had charge over the cords, the coverings, the hangings, the curtains, the veils, and ropes, belonging to the tabernacle. The Merarites bore the harder stuff that was made of wood and brass, such as the pillars, bars, stakes, and planks. Whoever desires to understand all of this more closely, let him read the third and fourth chapters of the book of Numbers. When the temple was built, there were porters and warders of the temple appointed among the Levites. The trumpets also, with which the congregation was called together, were in the Levites hands, [1178] as we read in the tenth chapter of Numbers. The priests also were appointed to be ready and serve in the wars, as seen in the twentieth chapter of Deuteronomy. For the Lord would not have the laws be hushed where armour clattered; for victories avail greatly to godliness and to the study of religion.

Beside this, the priests also had another office: that was to judge between cause and cause, between clean and unclean. Both of these are more largely declared in the seventeenth chapter of Deuteronomy, and in the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of Leviticus. As often as any difficult matter happened to arise among them, its hearing was brought to the mother city, Jerusalem.[1179] And if any man was suspected of being a leper, the Levitical priests judged of his disease according to the laws prescribed to them. So up to here, I have summarily laid down the offices of priesthood among the old people, reckoning up only the especial parts belonging to their service.

iii.143

Now, as those priests served the Israelite church, so they lived from the revenues of the church. For the Lord appointed them certain stipends and dwelling-places in the land of promise. For he assigned forty-eight cities for them to inhabit in the land of Israel, six of which were cities of refuge for men to flee to as sanctuaries. Moreover he commanded to lay out and appoint, for the sustenance of the priests' cattle and families, the suburbs and farms outside the walls of the cities, within a thousand cubits' compass on every side.[1180] In those cities were schools, so conveniently placed throughout all the land, that all men might easily go with very small pain from the places thereabout to the synagogues, to hear the word of God. In those cities, no sacrifice was made, for they were commanded to sacrifice in one place alone. And so, three times a year they went up to the temple to sacrifice to the Lord. But every sabbath-day the law was taught in every town where there were synagogues. Moreover, the rents belonging to the priests were great and ample, as seen in the eighteenth chapter of the book of Numbers, and in the last chapter of Leviticus. The wealth of the priests was enough and sufficient to maintain their families, and to live honestly. And those with that stipend did not give themselves to riot and idleness; but living moderately, they applied themselves to learning, and to teaching the people. This much up to here touching the persons belonging to the ministry of holy religion.

And because by law they could not sacrifice except in one place alone, a certain place was appointed to the people, in which (as in a holy shop) the priests would exercise their holy ministry in sacrificing to the Lord. And therefore, the very order and course of this argument now requires that I say something touching that holy place.

That place in the beginning was the tabernacle built by Moses; and afterward it was the temple which Solomon made. The law which forbade them to sacrifice anywhere but in that one place alone, unless it was by dispensation, is extant in the twelfth chapter of Deuteronomy, and in the seventeenth chapter of Leviticus. And that place contains the mystery of Christ, who was offered up but once, and in one place, to cleanse the sins of the world. I will speak of him somewhat more later.

iii.144

Now that tabernacle, or tent was called the tabernacle of appointment,[1181] because the Lord appointed it both to give answers in it, and to have his lawful worship duly accomplished in it. It was appointed to the people in place of a temple, so long as they wandered and dwelt in the wilderness. For insomuch as they wandered forty years in the desert, it was not convenient for them to have a settled temple, but such a one as they might carry to and fro in their journeys, as often as they moved. That tabernacle was erected in this order, and in its manner, it was of the following form and fashion. First of all, silver sockets were stuck into the earth, close to the ground, to fasten in and set boards upon, with which to make a wall. Under every plank, or board, were two sockets. For every board had two tenons, like pikes, by which they were stuck into the sockets.

The boards on either side of the tabernacle, north and south, were twenty in number. At the upper end, which was toward the west, were ten boards, or planks, all overlaid with gold, and ten cubits high apiece. These, when they were set up, were stuck or fastened into the sockets. On the back sides, those boards had golden rings, through which were thrust bars of sittim wood (which is thought to be white-thorn). ^{Exo 26.15-29} This was partly to join the boards close together, so that they might be like a wall without chink or crevice; and partly, it was to make them stand steadfast without wagging to and fro. The sanctum on the east side was closed with a veil. ^{Exo 26.31-33} Moreover, ten curtains, or hangings, were made of broidered work,[1182] which were coupled together with loops or taches.[1183] These curtains were laid on top of the boards that were set upright, as if it had been the rafter or roof of a house. Over these, curtains were three coverings more, the uppermost of which was made of taxus leather,[1184] well able to keep water out in rain.

Now the tabernacle was thirty cubits in length, and ten cubits in breadth; as may be gathered by the measure of the boards. ^Exo
26.1-14 It was also divided into three parts: the first was called sanctum sanctorum, holy of holies, and adytum aedis (the house into which no man came but the high priest alone), or the chancel [1185] of the temple.

iii.145

The second was the sanctum, whose length was twenty cubits, as the length of the first was ten. The third part was called atrium, the court, which was a hundred cubits in length, and fifty in breadth. This atrium was compassed about with fifty-three pillars, that were fastened down into brazen sockets. These were five cubits in height; on these hung net-works, through which a man might easily see. At the very entry, a veil twenty cubits long was hung on four pillars. The sanctum sanctorum was divided from the sanctum by the most precious veil, hung on four pillars of silver. And the sanctum was severed from the atrium with the second veil, which was very precious; it hung upon five pillars overlaid with gold. In the midst of the atrium stood the inner house, by which I mean the tabernacle. That was divided (as I just said) into the sanctum and the sanctum sanctorum.

Into the sanctum sanctorum no man entered but the high priest only, once in a year. In this was laid the ark of the covenant of our Lord, between the cherubim. Some (based on the apostle's words) add the golden censer to this (Heb 9.4). But others think that Qumiathrion (Thumiaterion) meant the incense altar, and not the censer. It would seem thereby (if these fellows are not deceived), that at the time when the apostle wrote, the golden altar did stand within the veil in the sanctum sanctorum. But it is manifest by the fortieth chapter of Exodus, (as I mean to show you shortly,) that the golden altar from the beginning was placed in the sanctum before the veil. And this agrees with what may be gathered out of the first chapter of St. Luke.[1186] But however it was, this is sure: that the ark of the covenant was not seen by any mortal man, except the high priest alone, when he offered incense in the sanctum sanctorum, once in a year. For it was hidden with the first veil; the staves with which it was borne appeared a little within the Sanctum by holding up the veil, which was somewhat pushed out by the ends of the staves. Thus, whoever stood anywhere near the sanctum might easily discern it; but someone that stood farther off could hardly perceive it. For in the eighth chapter of the third book of Kings you read: "And they drew out the staves, that the ends of them might appear out of the sanctum sanctorum into the sanctum, but they were not seen from without." ^{1Kng 8.8}

iii.146

The sanctum was open daily for the priests, who of course supplied the place of ministry before the Lord. In the sanctum, before the veil, the golden table was placed on the north side, furnished with showbread.[1187] Right opposite, on the south side, was set the golden candlestick. Now, in the middle between [1188] those two, before the veil and the ark, stood the golden altar, called the altar of incense, which was consecrated for burning sweet perfumes. And in the atrium, not very far from the second veil of the sanctum, appeared the altar of burnt-offerings; and between the altar and the veil was put the laver, out of which the priests washed themselves when they set about their ministry. All the people who came to the sacrifice, might easily on every side, see the altar. And this was the setup of the holy tabernacle, which was in place of a temple for the Israelites. Touching this, whoever looks in the twenty-sixth, twenty-seventh, thirty-sixth, thirty-eighth, and fortieth chapters of Exodus, may read more largely and fully about it.

Now, what I have said up to here touching the building of the tabernacle, has a very good end to be applied; and it contains and comprehends no obscure signification. For first of all, it was profitable to nourish and maintain the unity of the catholic faith. For with that one tabernacle, as with a sure bond, the Israelites were tied first to God and his religion, and then to one another — sundry members were compacted and knit into one body as it were. For the whole people was gathered to that tabernacle, as to one parish-church, to worship and pray to one God and Lord. And because the children of Israel dwelled in tabernacles, it pleased the Lord to also have a tabernacle built for himself, and placed in the midst of them. Thereby he might testify that he dwells in the midst of his people. The tabernacle therefore being the palace of God as it were, the most high and mighty king stood in the midst of the people as a testimony of his divine presence, to strike the fear and reverence of God into the hearts of all his subjects.

iii.147

We men lay up in our tabernacles, or houses, the things that we have; and we will be sought and inquired after at our houses. Therefore, the Lord placed in the tabernacle the holy things — as it were his treasure. And He would be inquired after in the tabernacle, promising that there he would hear the prayers and requests of all the faithful who called upon his name.

Moreover, in those ceremonies are contained the secret mysteries of Christ and his church. For Paul calls us the temple of God, and our bodies the tabernacle of the Lord: for the Lord dwells in us. The boards of the tabernacle are the rafters, beams, and pillars of the church as it were. And the church has her pillars, which are doctors and other excellent men inspired with the Holy Ghost.[1189] And each faithful man is a board overlaid with gold, if he keeps sincerity, and remains in the unity of the faith. The boards of the tabernacle were joined together with bars: and so must sound doctrine keep all the faithful (which are the boards of the mystical tabernacle) in their duty and quiet concord, without crack or crevice. The curtains, though they were many, yet were they knit together with golden loops, as if they had all been but one piece: and therefore the sundry members of the church must be gathered together, and be knit together in one by charity, that they may be one among themselves, and as it were, a roof of righteousness in the church of God. The coverings of the church, to keep out storms, are faith, repentance, and the desire to do good. Christ himself is the socket of it; "for no other foundation can be laid than what is already laid, even Christ Jesus." ^{1Cor 3.11} Moreover, the veil that was spread before the sanctum sanctorum signifies, as the apostle [1190] says, that the way of the saints, by which they had to go in, was not as yet made manifest, so long as the first tabernacle stood. Therefore, when Christ had come, and had finished all with his death, then the veil that hung in the temple was rent from the top to the very ground.

iii.148

By this, all men might understand that the way was opened into the sanctum sanctorum, that is, into the very heavens; and that satisfaction was made for all men in respect to the law.[1191] In the tabernacle also hung other veils, which were as shadows of the flesh [1192] of Christ. Those veils hung at the very entry into the sanctum and the atrium. Now Christ, our Lord, is the way and the door, by whose incarnation and death we have an entry made into the kingdom of God. Yes, Christ himself is our tabernacle in whom we dwell and live, and in whom we worship and please our God; he is the curtain and ceiling, the rafter and ornament of his church; he is the trusty and most assured covering that defends us from the injuries of man and the devil; he is the bar of the church, which joins its members together, and keeps them in the unity of faith.[1193] He is the pillar and socket of his church; he is the head,[1194] and only all-in-all both of our life and true salvation. Hidden in those figures, therefore, those of old had the chief mysteries about Christ and the church. Christ is not now to be beheld other than he was beheld in the beginning of the world by the ancient patriarchs; namely: as very God and very man, the only and highest king and priest, the true Saviour of the world, in whom and by whom alone the faithful have their whole salvation.

To proceed now: this tabernacle, by the Lord's appointment, was erected in Shiloh, as soon as they came into the land of promise, and it continued there until the time of Eli; as is evident in the eighteenth chapter of Joshua, and first and third chapters of first Samuel. Under Eli, the ark was taken by the Philistines and carried into Palestine;[1195] from there it was restored again, and placed in Beth Shemesh; from there again to Kiriath-jearim, into the house of Abinadab in Gibeah, that is, on the hill; for his house was set on a high place. For in the sixth chapter of the second book of Samuel we read: "David went with all the people to Baale Judah (which in the fifteenth chapter of Joshua is called Kiriath-jearim), to fetch from there the ark of God."

iii.149

And shortly after; "And they fetched it out of the house of Abinadab that was in Gibeah," that is, on the hill. For there was a high place in Kiriath-jearim, in which Abinadab dwelt. Some others, who take Gabea for the proper name of the town,[1196] say that the ark was transported from Palestine into Gabea. But this is sure, the ark was conveyed from the house of Abinadab into the house of Obed-edom, and from there into the city of David, that is, into Zion. For so the city of David is expounded in the eighth chapter of the third book of Kings.[1197]

In Zion, David pitched a new tabernacle for the ark of God, in which he placed it; and he appointed priests to minister there before the Lord, as it is described at large in the sixteenth chapter of the first book of Chronicles. And yet, in building that new tabernacle, David did not neglect the old tabernacle of appointment. For after the time of Eli, and the taking of the ark by the Philistines, it seems that it was transported diversely from place to place. Shiloh, in which it was first placed, was desolate, as seen in Psalm seventy-eight and the seventh chapter of Jeremiah. Therefore, when Saul reigned, it appears to have been pitched in Gilgal, where he offered peace-offerings as a sign of thanksgiving to the Lord for the victory against the Ammonites, as seen in the eleventh chapter of the first book of Samuel. In the twenty-first chapter of the same book, it is apparent that the tabernacle was in Nob for a time (a town not very far from Jerusalem, Isaiah 10). That is where Ahimelech, the priest, gave David the fresh showbread that was taken from the golden table. In the time when David reigned, the tabernacle was erected in Gibeon, a city of the Benjamites: for in the twenty-first chapter of first Chronicles we read: "The tabernacle of the Lord, which Moses made in the wilderness, and the altar of burnt-offerings, was at that time (when the angel appeared to David with a sword ready drawn) in the hill of Gibeon." [1198] It was also in that place during the reign of Solomon, and he went to that hill to pray to the Lord before the temple was built.

iii.150

For in the first chapter of the second book of Chronicles we find: "And Solomon, with all the congregation, went to the high place that was at Gibeon; for there was the tabernacle of God's appointment, which Moses the servant of the Lord made in the wilderness. But the ark of God David had brought from Kiriath-jearim into the place which David had prepared for it: for he had pitched a tent for it at Jerusalem. Moreover, the brazen altar that Bezalel the son of Uri had made, was there before the tabernacle of the Lord: and Solomon and the congregation went to visit it." Therefore, though we read in the third chapter of the third book of Kings, "Solomon loved the Lord, and walked in the ways of his father David; only he sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places:" that is not spoken in dispraise, but in praise of Solomon, as one who did not risk sacrificing in every place, but in the high places — namely, upon that consecrated altar which was appointed by the Lord, of which I just spoke before. There are others who think that Solomon was not simply blamed in these words for offering on the altar of burnt-offerings (for that was altogether lawful), but because he had deferred till then the building of the temple. But what goes before and follows, greatly tend towards those words being spoken in that sense and signification which I first alleged. The same Solomon, when the temple was built, commanded and saw that the old ark, with all the instruments belonging to it, were brought by the priests as a precious treasure from Gibeon, and placed in the temple which he had built for that purpose. The holy scripture bears witness to this: "And they brought the ark of the Lord, and the tabernacle of appointment, and all the holy vessels that were in the tabernacle — the priests and Levites, I say, brought them into the temple" — the third book of Kings, eighth chapter, and the second book of Chronicles, fifth chapter.[1199] And so the tabernacle of the Lord, which stood four hundred and seventy-eight years,[1200] was abrogated at the end, and the temple was erected in its place.

Touching the temple of the Lord, which was prepared by David, but built and finished by Solomon, I need not use many words in its description, because it is very busily set down in the third book of Kings and second book of Chronicles, and painted out in full.

iii.151

The place where the temple was afterward built, is reported to have been shown to David by the angel of the Lord; and David first sacrificed there to the Lord, adding these words: "This is the house of the Lord God, and this altar is for the sacrifice of Israel."^{1Chr 22.1} It is as if he had said: This plat of ground is appointed for the temple; in this piece of land the house of the Lord shall be built; yes, here shall be offered that only and effectual [1201] sacrifice for all men, the very Son of God, Christ Jesus incarnate. For all the interpreters of the holy scriptures agree that the place where Abraham had once offered his son Isaac, was at Jerusalem, on mount Moriah; and they agree that the temple was erected in that appointed or fatal place; and that the hill Golgotha, or Calvary, was not far off, but at the very top of mount Moriah. This was the place and holy hill in which the holy gospel testifies that Christ was offered for the sins of the whole world. This was prefigured in a type of the ancient sacrifices and other ceremonies belonging to the temple.[1202] The use and end of the temple was none other than the use and end of the tabernacle before.

Jeroboam and the kings of Israel therefore sinned most grievously, when they forsook the temple to make sacrifices in the high places, in their cathedral churches at Bethel and at Dan, and in other high and pleasant places. The people of Judah with their kings sinned most grievously, either for sacrificing to God in the high places, or else because they did not utterly cut down those high places. For the Lord's will was to be worshipped in one place, which he had chosen for himself. The plain law touching that matter is found in the twelfth chapter of Deuteronomy, and expressly set down in the seventeenth chapter of Leviticus in these words:

"Whoever of the house of Israel kills an ox, or a sheep, or a goat, inside the camp or outside the camp [namely: as a sacrifice to the Lord — for otherwise they might lawfully kill a beast for their sustenance in any place whatsoever], and does not bring it to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, to offer his sacrifice before the dwelling-place of the Lord; blood shall be imputed to that man, as if he had shed blood.

iii.152

Therefore, when the children of Israel bring their offerings, let them bring them to the Lord before the door of the tabernacle of appointment, to the priest, that he may offer them. And let them no longer offer their offerings to devils, after whom they have gone a-whoring. This shall be an ordinance to them forever in their generations. And he that does not do this, shall be rooted out from among his people." ^Lev
17.3-4

There are three things to be noted in these words: first, that it was not lawful to sacrifice except in that one place only, which was before the altar of burnt-offerings. Secondly we have to mark that this commandment was given to the end that all men should understand that the sacrifice was made to God, to whom the tabernacle belonged. Thirdly, that to offer a sacrifice outside the place, against God's commandment, was to make a sacrifice to the devil — that the offerer was to be judged a murderer; and that he was excommunicated by the Lord God, as excluded from the company of God and his holy saints. But though Samuel, Elijah, and certain other patriarchs, by God's sufferance, made sacrifices upon some special causes in other places, and not before the altar in the tabernacle, they did it by dispensation.

Therefore, those who sacrifice in high places, not to strange gods only, but even to the very true God, sinned first of all by disobedience: for God disapproves, indeed, he curses, all the worship done to him which we ourselves first invent without the warrant of his word — it is faithful obedience that pleases Him best. Secondly, they sinned by making a schism in the unity of the ecclesiastical body. Thirdly, for despising the mystery of Christ that was to be offered at mount Golgotha; and for not referring the meaning of their sacrifices to Christ, the only truth of all their typical ceremonies. Lastly, they sinned by trusting in their sacrifices, as in well-wrought works, unto justification; and by neglecting the worship of God, and changing it into trifles of their own inventions.

The temple stood four hundred and forty years, from the time that Solomon first built it until the first destruction of it under king Zedekiah.[1203]

iii.153

And from its reparation of it to the utter overthrow [1204] under Vespasian, it stood five hundred and eighty-two years.[1205] There are others who reckon it otherwise. Thus, I have spoken a little up to here, of a great deal that concerns the temple.

Now it remains for me to touch and lightly review [1206] the holy instruments belonging to the tabernacle and temple of the Lord. Among these, the ark of the covenant was chief. ^{Deu 31.26} The ark was so called because of the tablets of the covenant that were put in it. It was also called the ark of the Lord God of hosts, who dwells upon it between the cherubim; and by that means, the Lord himself was called by this name: "he that sits between the cherubim," because from there he gave answers to his servants, and he had placed the ark in the midst of his people to be a sign that his presence was always among them.

I will say nothing here, touching the stuff of which, and the form in which, the ark was made. For the matter and fashion are, in their colours, painted very lively in the twenty-fifth chapter of Exodus. I will now say something about the meaning, mystery, and use of the ark. We men lay up in our coffers and chests, the treasures that we set most store by. And therefore we understand that in the ark was laid the treasure of the church, and all the substance of which the faithful took most account. We must not therefore seek these things in men: not in Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, St. Mary, John, Peter, or Paul; much less in the Romish indulgentiary.[1207] But we seek our treasure in the one in whom all fulness dwells, and in whom all the treasures of God's wisdom and knowledge are heaped up in store; the one who is not seen here on the earth, but in the sanctum sanctorum, in heaven above, I say. And he is called Jesus Christ — whose divinity is figured by the purest gold, and his humanity by the sittim-wood, that is, of cedar, or rather, white-thorn.

iii.154

For he took flesh upon himself, in all points like our sinful flesh — the very flesh that we have, except that it was not sinful.[1208] Out of this ark, the faithful fetch all good and necessary things for the use of their life and eternal salvation. For we read that the tablets of the covenant, the pot of manna, and Aaron's rod that budded there, were laid in the ark. For we heard that in Christ were hidden the jewels of the church. Christ is our wisdom, the word [1209] of the Father, and the fulfilling of the law. He is just himself, and he is our righteousness also. In Christ is the heavenly food: for he is the bread of life that came down from heaven, to the end that everyone who eats of it may live eternally. In Christ the priesthood budded again: it seemed at the death of Christ upon the cross, truly to have been cut down for growing anymore. But at his resurrection, it budded again; and he took the everlasting priesthood that will never be ended. For even now, as he stands at the right hand of the Father in heaven, he makes intercession to Him for us. Moreover, the ark was compassed with a crown, because Christ our Lord is a king who delivers us, his faithful servants, from all evil, and makes us the sons of God.

We read that upon the ark was placed the mercy-seat, which was either the cover of the ark, or else a seat set upon the ark. As the apostles John and Paul interpret it,[1210], it prefigured Christ our Lord, who is the throne of grace, and the propitiation for our sins — not only for our sins, but also for the sins of the whole world. Out of the propitiatory, or mercy-seat, were also uttered the oracles and answers of God. For we read in the holy scripture, that the use of the mercy-seat had been this: that Moses, entering into the tabernacle, received at the mercy-seat the answers and commandments of God, which he declared to the people. ^{Exo 25.21-22} And Christ alone is the one whom we are to hear, the one by whom our heavenly Father declares his will to us, saying, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased; hear him." ^{Mat 17.5}

iii.155

Two cherubim have their faces turned toward the mercy-seat, and they look toward one another. St. Peter says of this, that "the angels desire to behold" ^1Pet
1.12 the Saviour of the world, who is declared in the gospel. The same angels always serve our Lord and Master — and are ready at his beckoning — as the one who is Lord over all. Now, none carried the ark of the Lord except the priests alone. For only those who are anointed by the Holy Ghost, and endued with true faith, receive Christ and are made partakers of his heavenly gifts. Neither must we wink at and let pass the note given in the fourth and fifth chapters of the first book of Samuel. There it is said that, for abusing the ark and turning it to another use than that for which it was given, and for attributing to it more than the scripture willed, the Israelites were slain by the Philistines, and the ark was carried into captivity. This was to the end that all men might learn by it, not to attribute more to the sacraments and mysteries of God than is convenient;[1211] and not to apply them to any use other than that for which the Lord has ordained them. For the ark was not ordained to be taken for God, even though it bore the name of God;[1212] nor was it made to the end that they should look for grace and help to proceed from it, as we read they did. But it was given to them as a token that God, their confederate, was in the midst of his people, so long as they kept the tablets of the covenant that were enclosed in the ark, and clung to God alone, at whose hands they should look for all good things through Christ, his Son, who was prefigured by the ark.

Next to the adytum, or sanctum sanctorum, in the sanctum, stood the golden table, the matter and fashion of which is declared in the twenty-fifth chapter of Exodus. Upon the table we men set our food and sustenance; by the table we are refreshed; and at the table we forget our cares, and are merry and jocund.

iii.156

Therefore, the table can be none other than Christ our Lord, and Christian doctrine: for Christ is the sustenance of our life; he is the joy and mirth of the faithful. The table was made of gold without, and all wood within, because Christ, our table,[1213] is both God and man. The table [which is the type of Christian doctrine] [1214] is set out in the church. Therefore, it is not to be sought at Athens, among the sophisters, nor among the Gymnosophists of India,[1215] nor in the Jewish synagogues. On the table are set twelve new loaves, divided into two parts. For the bread of life, which is new and sweet, feeds and fills both the Jews and the Gentiles. Moreover, that bread was holy and not profane, and none might eat it but the priests alone. In like manner, only the faithful are worthy of Christ, the bread of life, and only those who believe may receive it.

The loaves were called showbread, or the bread of sight;[1216] by this is meant that the bread of life [which is Christian doctrine] should always be in sight before our eyes. And just as those loaves were always to be set before the Lord in the sight of all men; so must the doctrine of Christ not be secretly hidden, but openly shown to all people. A vessel with frankincense was set upon the showbread, because those who eat the heavenly bread offer prayers and thanksgivings to God without intermission — these are as sweet to God as frankincense. In the twenty-fourth chapter of Leviticus it is declared at large in what way the showbread is prepared.

The golden candlestick is in the sanctum; it stands before the veil on one side, or over against the table. We have the description of it in the twenty-fifth chapter of Exodus. Candles are set up in our common houses to give light to all those in the house. And Christ our Lord has come as a light into the world, that whoever follows him should get the light of life.^{Joh 8.12}

iii.157

Out of Christ proceed, and upon Christ stick, other noses of candlesticks, which have their light from Christ, the chief candlestick. For the Lord said to the apostles, "You are the light of the world." So then, Christ is the shank or shaft of the candlestick, upon which shank many snuffs or noses stick,[1217] which hold the light up to the church.[1218] for whatever light is in the ministers of the church, they have it all from Christ, who is the head of light, and very light itself. The candlestick is wholly of gold. And Christ is very God indeed, the light and wisdom of the Father: and the ministers of Christ must be sincere and thoroughly extinguished from all affections of the flesh: and to that end belongs the use of the snuffers that pertained to the candlestick.

In the middle, between the table and the candlestick, before the veil, in the sanctum, stood the golden altar of incense, which is exactly painted out in the thirtieth chapter of Exodus. That altar was ordained for two uses. First, incense or perfume was offered on it every day, which it was not lawful to prepare or offer to any other god or creature. That was done twice every day, at morning and at evening. Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, was in that ministry when he saw the angel, and for unbelief's sake he was made dumb for a season. ^Luk
1.9-20 Secondly, incense was offered on that altar in a certain solemn manner once a year at the feast of cleansing, as declared in the sixteenth chapter of Leviticus.

Now, incense or perfume is understood to mean the prayers of the faithful, as David witnesses where he says: "Let my prayer be set forth in your sight as the incense; and let the lifting up of my hands be an evening sacrifice." ^Psa
141.2 Now there was but one incense altar alone. Whoever built any more was condemned of blasphemous wickedness. That sole altar prefigured Christ our Lord, both God and man, the mediator and intercessor between God and man, by whom the saints offer all their prayers to God, their Lord and heavenly Father.

iii.158

Many altars are built, therefore, by those who choose creatures to be their intercessors, by whose mediation they desire to obtain what they lack from the hands of God. In the end of the thirtieth chapter it is expressly said: "Whoever makes incense like it, to smell it, shall perish from among his people." ^{Exo 30.38} Therefore, the faithful church of Christ offers her prayers to God the Father through Christ alone. This altar of which we speak, was bound about with a crown of gold: for Christ, our Lord and altar, is a very king and priest, and wears the crown of glory. Now we must pray at morning and evening, that is, continually and very earnestly. And we must always pray in and through the name of Christ. And it is Christ alone through whom God has been pleased with the prayers of those who have prayed in the morning, that is, at the beginning of the world; and is today pleased with those who pray to him at evening, that is, at the end and last days of the world. Therefore, those who offered incense in the high places everywhere, sinned most grievously against the Lord. For just as they were rebellious and disobedient to God, preferring their own inventions before the laws of God (which they neglected), so they despised the mystery of Christ, the only mediator, in departing from that sole altar.

In the court or atrium, stood another altar which was called the brazen altar, or the altar of burnt-offerings, which is finely described in the twenty-seventh chapter of Exodus. This also was one of a kind. For it was not lawful for any religious man to sacrifice in any other place, except in the holy place where this altar was located, unless by some singular dispensation. Therefore, when the Reubenites with their confederates had built an altar by the banks of Jordan, and its fame was brought to the ears of the other tribes of Israel, they all agreed with one consent, that the crime was to be punished with open war.^Jos
22.10f From this we may gather again the greatness of their fault in neglecting that altar, and offering sacrifices in the high places, of which I spoke before.

iii.159

Now, our sole and catholic altar is Jesus Christ, who offered himself a living sacrifice for us to God. Nor is there any sacrifice in the whole world that can cleanse sin, except that one alone. Nor do any sacrifices of the faithful please the Father, except those that by faith are offered upon the altar, Jesus Christ. For Christ sanctifies us; and being sanctified, we offer by him the sacrifice that he well accepts. I have taken this from the apostle's doctrine in the thirteenth chapter to the Hebrews, and the twelfth chapter to the Romans.

The last of the holy vessels was the brazen laver, which was placed in the atrium, between the veil of the sanctum and the altar of burnt-offerings. It is described in the fortieth chapter of Exodus. ^{Exo 40.30} In it was contained the water with which the priests, who ministered before the Lord, washed themselves. By that laver Christ was signified, which is the washing of the faithful. And by it was meant that holy things were not to be handled with unwashed hands and feet. Those who are purified by the Holy Ghost, and made fit for the ministry by the grace of God, wash themselves. But those who are not partakers of the grace of life, are in danger of death.

Other instruments beside these are also reckoned among those belonging to the tabernacle. But in a way, these are chief. I thought it not good, by busily beating out every particular, to repeat every small thing, lest by too long a treatise I should be too tedious for your patience.

Now, the same holy vessels that were in the tabernacle, were also in the temple; except that in Solomon's temple, there was far more show and pomp than in the tabernacle. For no other cause, undoubtedly, than to have the mysteries of Christ and of the church increase more and more every day in the sight of the world. Christ, the true Solomon and king of peace and tranquility, the very eternal felicity itself, has raised up in this world a church for himself, which stretches to the ends of the world; the prophets have spoken very largely of this — Zechariah especially, and the famous prophet Nathan, second Samuel, chapter seven. This much up to here, about the holy place.

iii.160

After the holy place in the sacred ceremonies, next to be handled is the holy time. For just as a certain place was given to outward religion, so also an appointed time was assigned to it. Holy days are to be employed for holy actions. For actions are either those which we call handiworks, invented to get victuals, clothing, and other things necessary for the use of our bodies; or else they are holy or religious, which are done for the exercise of outward religion. We must not consume all our time in handiworks and secular business; nor can we bestow all our time on outward religion. But those actions are not without time: for every action is contained in time. Therefore, God has divided the time into sundry parts for sundry actions. Thus he would have some working days, to serve for handy actions; and other holy days for the exercise of outward religion. It is not that working days are not holy and dedicated to the Lord (for he claims all days and times fir himself, and he would be worshipped in heart at all seasons). But holy days are singularly, and more precisely, consecrated to the outward worship of God, than working days are.

Therefore, the festival or holy day which is holy to the Lord by God's appointment, was kept for the devout exercise of God's outward worship. Thus, those days are not holy, nor are those feasts lawful, which are not held to the one and only God, Jehovah. Nor are those holy days lawful, in which the lawful service of God is not lawfully exercised. And for those reasons, in the prophets, the sabbaths and festival-days of the Israelites are many times rejected, because they were unlawfully solemnized, without pure faith and sincere affections.

Now all holy days had one common name, though they were called sabbaths, feasts, holy days, meetings, and assemblies. All holy days, by whatever name they were called, were ordained to God alone, not to creatures, not for surfeiting and wanton chambering.[1219] All holy days were invented for the health, profit, and recreation of mankind. For holy days are no burden, but for the easing of our burdens. Secular works, I confess, are profitable; but ease is also necessary. For without rest, labour cannot continue.

iii.161

The Lord's will, therefore, is to give man a time of recreation, and He bids his servants to be merry on the holy days in holiness and modesty; so that their ease may be an honest recreation, and not a reproachful sensuality. Again, ease is not good of itself, but it is good in respect to another thing. God bids us to cease from work, yet he sets us to work another way; he wills us to cease from bodily labour, and begin to work in the heart and mind, and wholly apply ourselves to his holy service. Therefore it is needful to have holy assemblies, the reading of the holy scriptures, public prayers, sacrifices (for what they ought to offer at every feast and holy day is prescribed in the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth chapters of Numbers), the celebration of the sacraments, and whatever else the Lord has commanded to be done at festival-days and solemn seasons. For one thing especially is required here, which Mary found as she sat at the feet of Jesus, and heard his word. ^{Luk 10.39,42} Moreover, all feasts generally contain the memory, and put us in remembrance, of notable things: every feast according to the name. The sabbath did put them in mind of God's good benefit in creating the world for our benefit and profit. It was also, as Moses witnesses (Exodus 31.13), a sign of the true sanctification which God alone bestows upon the people who call upon his name. The other holy days beat into them the memory of the other benefits that God had shown them, and had their several significations (as I will shortly declare).

Now there was a certain measure and number of holy days, which were distinguished and very wisely ordered: first into seven-nights, in which the seventh day was a sabbath: then into months; for the first day of every month was holy to the Lord, and was called the feast of the new moon: and lastly, they were divided into yearly feasts, which returned once every year at an appointed season. There were three such yearly feasts: the Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles.[1220] Besides these, other days were made holy days also. God had not commanded these, but they were received by the church to the glory of God in remembrance of his great benefits.

iii.162

For the feast of lots, which they called Purim, and was brought in by Mordecai, was received by the whole church, as seen in the ninth chapter of Esther. The feast of dedication was ordained by Judas Maccabeus, with the consent of the whole church, in memory that the temple was restored and the people delivered from the tyranny of king Antiochus, as we read in the fourth chapter of the first book of Maccabees. And Christ our Lord honoured that feast of dedication with a holy sermon. ^{Joh 10.22f} Moreover, there were solemn fastings appointed to be kept among the people of God: as in the fifth month, in which the city was set on fire; in the seventh month, in which Gedaliah [1221] was slain; and in the tenth month, in which Jerusalem was besieged. The prophet Zechariah speaks of these fastings in his seventh and eighth chapters. And in the time of Esther, a fast was ordained in the month Adar, as a remembrance of the calamity which was wrought, or rather purposed, against the Jews by the wicked Haman.^{Est 9.20}

I spoke a little about the sabbath and its signification above, and in another place also, where I expounded the Ten Commandments.[1222] The sabbath was observed by a natural and divine law from the first creation of the world, and it is the chief of all other holy days. For it was not first ordained by Moses, when the Ten Commandments were given by God from heaven. Rather, keeping the sabbath was received by the saints from the beginning of the world. And therefore we read what the Lord said in the commandments: "Remember that you keep the sabbath-day holy." Before the law was given, there is evident mention made of the sabbath in the sixteenth chapter of Exodus,^{Exo 16.23} and the second chapter of Genesis. ^{Gen 2.3}

The second kind of holy days were the new moon, solemnized at the beginning of every month. Mention is made of it in the 10th and 28th chapters of the book of Numbers, 1Samuel 20, Psalm 81, Ezekiel 46, and 2Chronicles 2.

iii.163

That solemnization is reported to have been ordained in remembrance of the light created; to admonish the people not to ascribe the months to Janus or Mars, or any other planet, but to the one and only God, the maker, governor, and ruler of all things and seasons. Moreover, it was a sign of the reparation or renewing of faithful minds by the heavenly illumination. We Christians may truly and indeed solemnize the new moon when being brought out of darkness into the light by the Son of God, we walk as becomes the children of light, and we reject the works of the devil and of darkness.

The third kind of holy days were the yearly feasts that return once every year; of which I find three: the Passover, the Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles. Now, the Lord's will was that in these three feasts, there should be general assemblies and solemn meetings in the holy place: namely, at the tabernacle, and after the tabernacle, at Solomon's temple. For thus says Moses in Deuteronomy:

"Three times a year, every male shall appear before the Lord your God in the place which he has chosen; that is, in the feast of sweetbread,[1223] in the feast of weeks, and in the Feast of Tabernacles. Nor shall he appear empty-handed in the sight of the Lord: every one according to the gift of his hand, and according to the blessing of the Lord your God, which he has given you." ^Deu
16.16-17

That is to say, every man shall offer to the Lord what he can, according to the measure of riches which the Lord has given him. Now those three solemn feasts were divided into three separate months, most apt to journey and travel in. In the spring time the Passover was held, when the corn first began to spindle,[1224] or turn into ears. About harvest time, when the first work belonging to husbandry was done and finished, they kept the feast of Pentecost. And lastly, when all their fruits were in, they went up to the Feast of Tabernacles. As many went to it as could possibly go. Some are of the opinion that those who appeared once a year before the Lord, were dispensed with, and they might lawfully tarry at home at the other two feast-times.

iii.164

But I think truly that religious men seldom used such dispensations. In one place, the Lord promises that he will defend and keep the bounds and substance of those who travel to seek his name. However those dispensations may have been admitted, this is most sure (as appears by all histories): that at those feasts were very great assemblies.

Now the feast of Passover was called by many names,[1225] but it was especially termed the feast of sweet or unleavened bread: for they fed on unleavened bread for the span of seven whole days. The ceremonies of that feast, with the sacrifices that were to be offered there, are described at large in the twelfth chapter of Exodus, and the twenty-third chapter of Leviticus. In that feast the paschal lamb was eaten, in no other place than at the tabernacle, or afterward at the temple (Deu 16), as a remembrance of that notable deliverance of Israel and all the faithful out of Egyptian servitude and slavery. In that feast, God would have the first-fruits of their land offered to him, in token of the manna with which he fed their fathers. Moreover, that feast signified the passing over and delivering of the faithful, which was accomplished by Christ in the shedding of blood. Whereupon the apostle said, "Christ our Passover is offered up." 1Cor 5.7. But I will speak more of the Passover in my next sermon.

The Pentecost was also called the feast of weeks, and new corn; ^{Exo 34.22} for showbread was set out at that feast, made from the new year's corn.[1226] They reckoned seven weeks from the next day after the Passover, that is, fifty days; and upon the fiftieth day they celebrated the memory of the law of God, revealed and given by God himself from heaven to his people Israel. For on the fiftieth day of their departure out of Egypt, we read that the Lord himself spoke to them at mount Sinai, and gave them the law of the ten commandments. Thus Pentecost was a memorial that, just as then, the church was illuminated with the very word of God. The old Pentecost was a figure of the day in which Christ the Lord, being the end of the law, sent the Holy Ghost upon his disciples, and illuminated his spouse the church.

iii.165

The ceremonies belonging to this feast are expressed by Moses in the twenty-third chapter of Leviticus. They kept the Feast of Tabernacles in the seventh month, as Moses commanded in Deuteronomy, saying:

"When you have gathered in the crop of your land and vineyards,[1227] then you shall keep the Feast of Tabernacles for the span of seven days: and you shall be merry in your holy day, you and your son, and your daughter, your manservant, and your maidservant, the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, all that are within your gates. Seven days you shall keep holy to the Lord your God, in the place which the Lord has chosen for himself; because the Lord your God has given you happy success in all your fruits, and in all the work of your hands. See therefore that you rejoice."

Moreover, the manner of this feast, solemnly celebrated, is to be read in the eighth chapter of Nehemiah, where whoever looks, will find it described to the full.

Now this Feast of Tabernacles of the seventh month was divided into four solemnities.[1228] For the first day of the month was the feast of trumpets, or the sounding of trumpets. This was a memorial of those troublesome wars which the people happily won by the help and aid of God, against the Amalekites, and all other heathen enemies of theirs. And by that feast, it was signified that the whole life of man on earth is continual warfare.

On the tenth day of the same month, the feast of cleansing was held. In that feast, the priest, in a solemn form of words, began to confess aloud the people's sins; and every man, quietly following in the same words, recited them privately to himself, and in his mind he quietly spoke to the Lord.[1229] To those confessions was added the ceremony used with the scapegoat, and the sacrifice, which is set down at large in the sixteenth chapter of Leviticus.

iii.166

And so the sins of the people were cleansed: which was a type of the cleansing that would come through Christ; who being once offered, took away the sins of the world with the only sacrifice of his body. It also contained the doctrine of true repentance.

On the fifteenth day began the Feast of Tabernacles. ^Lev
23.42-43 For the people dwelt in tabernacles for the span of seven whole days; that is, from the fifteenth to the twenty-second. The scripture declares the end of this ceremony to be, that their posterity should know that the Lord placed their forefathers in tabernacles. By this, they were put in mind of the good that He did to them while they were in the wilderness. For they were kept forty years in the wilderness, so that they lacked neither victuals nor clothing. And we are warned by that feast, that the life of this world is but a stage, and that we have no abiding place to stay forever here, but are still looking for the world to come; as the apostle Paul taught us in 2Cor 5, and Heb 13.

The fourth feast of this month was held on the twenty-second day. It was called the congregation, or assembly. On that day, the offering and stipend was gathered and given to the ministry, for reparations of the temple, for the cost of sacrifices, and the maintenance of the ministry.[1230] It is thought that the eighty-fourth Psalm was sung in that feast: "How pleasant are your tabernacles," etc., and certain other Psalms called Torculares Psalmi,[1231] which they used. This much up to here concerning the feasts that occur once in every year.

Here also I think it necessary to mention the Year of Jubilee. Now this year of jubilee was every fiftieth year as it fell by course, which is described at large, with all the ceremonies belonging to it, in the twenty-fifth chapter of Leviticus. It was declared to all the people in the land of promise by the sound of a trumpet made of a ram's horn, with a proclamation of freedom to all those who were wrapped in servitude or bondage.

iii.167

In that jubilee was contained, very evidently, the mystery of Christ our Lord, who declared to us the meaning of that ceremony out of the sixty-first chapter of the prophecy of Isaiah. In St. Luke's Gospel, chapter 4, he says that he is the one who indeed proclaims the jubilee, the true freedom and acceptable year of the Lord. Now, he has pronounced remission and freedom to all the faithful, not with a trumpet made of a ram's horn, but with the gospel. For by the mercy of God in the merit of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, all debts or sins are forgiven to all the faithful who live on the face of all the earth, on the condition that we whose sins are forgiven, should likewise forgive the trespasses of those who offend us. And in Christ, truly, we have the true and everlasting rest that shall never fail us. By Christ we are granted return to our possession or country,[1232] from where we were fallen — that is, to heaven, the place of the faithful.

This much I have said about the holy time or holy days, as briefly as I possibly could. The rest is to be seen in full in Exo 23, Lev 23, Num 28 and 29, and Deu 16. What remains touching this argument (I mean, touching the Jewish ceremonies) I will by God's leave make an end of in the next sermon. Now let us make our humble prayers and supplications to God, etc.

3-6. THE SIXTH SERMON: THE JEWISH SACRAMENTS.

Of the sacraments of the Jews; of their sundry sorts of sacrifices,
and certain other things pertaining to their ceremonial law.

IN my last sermon I spoke of the holy persons (I mean, the ministers of God's religion, the Levitical priests); and the place and time assigned to God's service. There now remains for us to consider the holy thing which those holy persons exercised in the holy time and place — I mean, the very worship and holy rites so ordained, taught, and prescribed by God himself, that all men might easily understand how to do service, and what honour to give to the Lord. In this treatise, we must first consider the Jewish sacraments, and then their sacrifices.

iii.168

The ancient church of the saints had two especial sacraments; circumcision, and the paschal lamb. I will speak separately about both, and agreeably to the word of God, according to the grace which the Lord grants to me.

Now circumcision was the holy action by which the flesh of the foreskin was cut away as a sign of the covenant that God made with men. Or to describe it more largely, circumcision was a mark in the private members of men, as a token of the eternal covenant of God. It was ordained by God himself, to testify of his good-will toward those who were circumcised, to warn them about regeneration and cleanness, and to distinguish between the confederates of God, and other people or nations.

Therefore, the author of circumcision is God himself: and its beginning is of great antiquity. For the Lord says in the gospel: "Circumcision did not begin at Moses, but at the patriarchs." ^Joh
7.22Moses truly renewed or repaired the law or custom of circumcision; but Abraham, the renowned friend of God, was the first to be circumcised, in the ninetieth year [1233] of his age, and on the very same day that God, making a covenant with him, first ordained the use of circumcision. For he added circumcision as a seal to the league which he made with Abraham and with his seed forever. The place is found in the seventeenth chapter of Genesis.^{Gen 17.10} It was first ordained in the 2046th year after the creation of the world, 390 years after the deluge, when Shem, the son of Noah, was 487 years old. So that Moses is found to have been born 320 years after the first institution of circumcision. By this it appears that circumcision was in use among the patriarchs 400 years before the law was given to the Israelites by the hand of Moses.[1234]

iii.169

Now because circumcision is added as a sign or seal to the league that was made between God and Abraham, I must briefly, and by a short digression, touch the manner or order of that covenant. God, in making leagues, as he does in all other things, applies himself to our capacities, and imitates the order which men use in making confederacies. By leagues, as by most sure and steadfast bonds, men bind themselves to the society and fellowship of one body or people. In this society, they mutually risked both lives and livings, the one in defence of the other's liberty, to the end that they may be safer, and live more quietly from the wrongs and injuries of all other nations. In these leagues, they precisely express who makes the confederacy, upon what conditions, and how far the covenant will extend. And therefore, when God's mind was to declare the favour and good-will that he bore toward mankind, and to make us partakers wholly of himself and his goodness, by pouring himself out upon us to our great good and profit, it pleased him to make a league or covenant with mankind. Now, he did not first begin the league with Abraham, but He renewed with him the covenant that he had made a great while before. For He first of all made it with Adam, the first father of us all, immediately upon his transgression, when he received him, a silly wretch,[1235] into his favour again. And He promised his only-begotten Son,^{Gen 3.15} in whom He would be reconciled to the world, and through whom he would wholly bestow himself upon us, by making us partakers of all his good and heavenly blessings, and by binding us to himself in faith and due obedience. This ancient league, first made with Adam, He afterward renewed with Noah; and after that again, with the blessed patriarch Abraham. And again, after the space of four hundred years, it was renewed under Moses at mount Sinai, where the conditions of the league were written at large in the two tablets; and many ceremonies were added to that. But most excellently of all, most clearly and evidently, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ himself displayed that league. Wiping away all the ceremonies, types, figures, and shadows, he brought in place of them, the very truth, and he most absolutely fulfilled and finished the old league.

iii.170

He brought all the principles of our salvation and true godliness into a brief summary which, for renewing and fulfilling all things, and for the abrogation of the old ceremonies, he called the new league, or New Testament. In that testament, Christ alone is preached, the perfectness and fulness of all things; in it there is nothing more desired than faith and charity; and in it holy and wonderful liberty is granted to the godly. I will speak of that at another time. But now I return to the league which was renewed with Abraham.

We are expressly taught in Genesis, who they were that made the league; that is, the living, eternal, and omnipotent God, who is the chief maker, preserver, and governor of all things; and Abraham with all his seed, that is, with all the faithful, of whatever nation or country they may be. For so the Apostle expounds the seed of Abraham, especially in his epistle to the Galatians, where he says, "If you are Christ's, then are you the seed of Abraham, and heirs by promise." ^{Gal. 3.29}

How long this league should endure is eternal, and without end or term of time. In the renewings or declarations of the league, many things were added which afterward vanished away — especially when Christ had come in the flesh. Yet, notwithstanding, in the substantial and chief points, you can find nothing altered or changed. For God is always the God of his people. He always demands and requires their faithful obedience, as may be most evidently perceived in the new Testament.

For there are two points, or especial conditions, contained in this league: the first declares what God promises, and what he will do for his confederates — I mean, what we may look for from his hands. The second comprehends the duty of man, which he owes to God, his confederate and sovereign prince. Therefore, for his part God says, "I will be your God, and Saddai,[1236] that is, your fulness and sufficiency; I will be your God, and the God of your seed after you." God of himself is wholly sufficient to most absolute perfectness and blessedness; nor does he need the help of any other, since whatever is anywhere, it is both of him, and it has its abiding by him. God alone suffices man, and He alone is the giver of all that men desire, or that belong to perfect felicity.

iii.171

And therefore, Saturnus (perhaps by occasion of the word Saddai) took his name among the heathen; it signifies to suffice, or satisfy. For God alone is able to satisfy or suffice all, who is himself very fulness and sufficiency itself. But now God shows, by two arguments, that he will be the sufficiency, or all in all, to the seed of Abraham. For first he says: "To your seed will I give the land of Canaan." [1237] In this promise he comprehends all earthly and bodily benefits: namely, great wealth, felicity, tranquility, abundance of all things, health, glory, notable victories, and whatever else pertains to the preservation and temporal happiness of mankind. Now, the holy scripture declares how he performed this promise to the seed of Abraham. By that means, he teaches us that the very true God was the God of Abraham's seed, as he had promised their father Abraham. Secondly, he promises that Seed in which all the nations of the earth were to be blessed; ^{Gen 12.18} namely, Christ the Saviour, whom he had promised to Adam many years before. To bless is to enrich with all spiritual benediction. In this he comprehends all the spiritual gifts of God; the forgiveness of sins, the reviving of life, and glory everlasting. To bless is also to take away a curse; so this promise of God's to Abraham is the same promise he made to Adam, saying; "The seed of the woman shall tread down the serpent's head." ^Gen
3.15 For the head of the old dragon is nothing else but the power and kingdom of Satan. His power is the curse: sin and death. Therefore, when his head is crushed or trodden down, the curse is taken away; and instead of the curse, a blessing succeeds. By this, I say, he declares that He will be the God of Abraham and of his seed.

The second condition of the league between God and man, prescribes to man what he must do, and how he must behave men himself toward God, his confederate and sovereign prince. "Walk before me," says God to man, "and be upright." ^{Gen 17.1} Now, those who walk before God, direct all their life, words, and works, according to the will of God. His will is that we should be upright. That uprightness is gotten by faith, hope, and charity; in these three are contained all the offices of saints, who are the friends and confederates of the Lord. Therefore, this latter condition of the league teaches the confederates what to do, and how to behave themselves before the Lord;

iii.172

namely, to take him for their God, to stick to him alone, who alone is their all in all, to call upon him alone, to worship him alone, and through the Messiah, to look for sanctification and life everlasting. These were the conditions of the covenant. The number of ceremonies were not added to it in Abraham's time, but were given to the Israelites afterward, under the leading of their captain Moses.

To this confederacy, the Lord added circumcision as a sign or seal to confirm it. Seals are put to writings for an effectual enforcement, and for confirmation's sake. The tablets, or writings, contain and give evidence of all the points of the whole league. Circumcision, therefore, is added to the league in place of the writing [1238] and of the seal. For that reason, circumcision is called the league itself [1239] — even as the writings or letters of covenants among us are commonly called the very covenant, when indeed they are but evidences of the league. They contain in writing all the order of the confederacy, and they confirm it with a seal. It is usual that the signs take the names of the things which they signify. It is thus no marvel that circumcision is called the league, when indeed the league is not the cutting of the skin, but the communion of fellowship which we have with God. In the seventeenth chapter of Genesis, thus says the Lord touching this sign of outward circumcision: "This is my covenant, which you shall keep between me and you, and your seed after you; every male shall be circumcised among you. You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be for a sign of the covenant between me and you," etc. ^{Gen 17.10-11}Look, in these words of the Lord's, circumcision is first named the covenant here; and afterwards, for exposition's sake, it is called the sign of the covenant. In the same sense, St. Stephen calls it a testament, in the seventh chapter of Acts, when he meant that it was the sign or seal of the testament.^{Act 7.8}

iii.173

Moreover, the manner of circumcision is declared: "You shall," says God, "circumcise the flesh of your foreskin." The cutting or taking away of this flesh was called circumcision. But now, we do not find expressed whose office it was to cut that skin away. It appears that, before the law, the most honourable in every house or family circumcised; I mean, the first-begotten or the ancient of every household. This office was turned over to the priests, once the law was given.[1240] It is a singular example, and no more are to be found like it, that Zipporah, the wife of Moses, circumcised her son. ^{Exo 4.25}

Now also, the time of circumcision is set down: namely, the eighth day, when the new-born child began to have a little more strength. And we gather from the fifth chapter of the book of Joshua, that they did not circumcise them with knives of iron, but of stone. For in that chapter the Lord in express words commanded to circumcise the sons of Israel with knives of stone.[1241] But it is manifest by the rites of the sacraments, that God alters nothing in the ceremonies of the sacraments. And therefore we conjecture and gather, that Abraham used none other but knives of stone, especially since we read that Zipporah, Moses' wife, circumcised her son with a stone.

The rest of the Jewish trifles, which they sow abroad touching circumcision ceremonies, I let pass here on purpose: for they are utterly unworthy to be heard, and have no mystery contained in them. But the knife of stone is of force in the exposition of the mystery of circumcision — for circumcision had a mystery and a most certain meaning hidden within it.

For, first, circumcision signified that the whole nature of man is unclean and corrupt; and therefore, all men have need of cutting and regeneration. And for that reason, cutting was made in the member with which man is begotten.[1242] For we are all begotten and born the sons of wrath in original sin. Nor does any man deliver us from that damnation, but he alone that is without sin: namely, the blessed Seed, Jesus Christ our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, and born of the virgin Mary. With the shedding of his blood (which was prefigured in the blood shed in circumcision) he cleanses us from sin, and makes us heirs of everlasting life.

iii.174

And now, this circumcision argues sorely against those who deny original sin; and it puts them to their shifts,[1243] who attribute justification and salvation to our own strength and virtue. For if we were clean, if we could get salvation by our own power, why did our fathers need to be cut in that way? The things that are cut off are either impure, or else superfluous. But God made nothing impure or superfluous. Now he made the flesh of the foreskin. If the flesh of the foreskin had been evil, God would not have made man with the flesh of the foreskin. The skin, therefore, is not evil of itself, nor is it superfluous. But the cutting of the foreskin rather teaches us to understand that we are corrupt by our birth and nature; we cannot be cleansed from that corruption except by the knife of stone. And for that reason, truly, circumcision was given in that member, and in no other. I will shortly add another reason out of Lactantius, why it was given in no other part of the body.

Moreover, circumcision signified and testified that God Almighty, of his mere grace and goodness, is joined to us with an indissoluble bond of covenant. His will is first to sanctify us, then to justify us, and lastly to enrich us with all heavenly treasures through Christ, our Lord and reconciler. For that was the meaning of the stony knife: because Christ, the blessed Seed, is the rock of stone out of which flow most pure and cleansing waters; and by his Spirit he cuts from us whatever things hinder the mutual league and amity between God and us. He also gives and increases in us both hope and charity in faith, so that we may be knit and joined to God in life everlasting, which is the blessed and happy life indeed.

Now, here it is expedient to hear the testimonies of the law and the apostles. In the thirtieth chapter of Deuteronomy, Moses says: "The Lord your God shall circumcise your heart, and the heart of your seed, that you may love the Lord your God." ^{Deu 30.6}Now the outward and visible cutting was a sign of this inward circumcision.

iii.175

And Paul also, speaking of Abraham, says: "And he received the sign of circumcision, as the seal of the righteousness of faith which he had, being yet uncircumcised; that he should be the father of all those who believe, though they were not circumcised; so that righteousness might be imputed to them also," etc. ^{Rom 4.11} Look here, Abraham's circumcision was a sign that God had justified Abraham by His grace. He received this justification by faith before his circumcision. This is an argument that whose who believe, though they are not circumcised, are nevertheless justified with faithful Abraham; and again, it is an argument that the Jews, who are circumcised, are yet [1244] justified of God by faith. And for that reason, circumcision was given in the very body of man, that he might bear in his body the league of God, and thereby be admonished that he is justified by grace through faith.

By this we also gather that the grace of God (and the justification of the godly) is not tied to the sign. For if it had been, then Abraham would not have been justified before his circumcision, but in his circumcision. Furthermore, if it had been so, then the Lord, whose will is to have mankind saved, would not have given the commandment to have them circumcised on the eighth day — for many children died before the eighth day, and never came to circumcision; and yet they were not damned. To this we may add that Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, Jochebed, and Miriam (Moses' sister), with countless more matrons and holy virgins, could not be circumcised; and yet they were saved by the grace of God through faith in the Messiah that was to come. The grace of God, therefore, was not tied to the sacrament of circumcision. Yet it was not despised and neglected by the holy saints of the old church, but it was used to the end for which it was ordained: that is, to be a testimony and a seal of free justification in Christ,[1245] who circumcises us spiritually without hands, by the working of the Holy Ghost. ^{Col 2.11}

Furthermore, by the outward and visible sign, God gathered into one church those who were circumcised. In this number, those whom he had chosen beforehand, he joined to himself with the bond of his Spirit.

iii.176

St. Paul, for the very same reason, called the people of one religion the circumcision, as is evident by the fifteenth chapter to the Romans, and the third chapter to the Philippians. Therefore, by circumcision God separated his people from the unbelieving nations. Upon this, to be called uncircumcised was as great a reproach among them, as to be called a dog is now among us. For an uncircumcised person was considered to be an unclean and profane man,[1246] and someone who had no part in God or in His covenants.

Finally, circumcision put the circumcised in mind of their duty their whole life long; namely, that every man should think that he had taken it upon himself to profess God, and to bear in his body the sacrament of the Lord. For that is the reason why the Israelites were named, or had their names given to them, in their circumcision. For it is evident in Luke,[1247] that John the Baptist and Jesus our Saviour had their names given to them at their circumcision; even as the first circumcised, whose name was Abram before, was called Abraham at his circumcision. ^{Gen 17.5}

It admonished the circumcised of his duty, in giving his name to the Lord, his confederate, to be enrolled in the register of God among the names of those who give themselves to the Lord. Therefore, by covenant and duty, he should frame his life, not after his own lust and pleasure, but according to the will of God, to whom he entrusted himself. For the condition of the covenant was that the circumcised should not defile themselves with idolatry and strange religions; that they should not pollute with unclean living, the bodies and minds that were hallowed to the Lord; but that, persevering in true faith, they should pursue godliness, show the works of repentance, and be obedient to God in all things. For thus says Moses in the tenth chapter of Deuteronomy: "Circumcise the foreskin of your hearts, and do not harden your necks any longer." The prophet Jeremiah alludes to these words in his fourth chapter, saying: "Be circumcised to the Lord, and cut away the foreskin of your heart." And the martyr St. Stephen, rebuking the unbelieving Jews, says: "You stiff-necked people, of uncircumcised heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Ghost." ^Act
7.51

iii.177

Very rightly, therefore, the holy apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans, second chapter, declares that there are two sorts of circumcision: the one of the letter, in the flesh, the outward circumcision made with hands; the other in the heart, of the Spirit, the inward circumcision made by means of the Holy Ghost. The circumcision of the heart, God well likes in those who are his; but circumcision in the flesh he utterly disapproves of, if the heart is not circumcised as the flesh is. The liking and disliking of these two circumcisions, was so plainly declared before, that I need not stay upon it any longer.

And here I think it is not amiss, before I make an end of circumcision, to repeat to you, dearly beloved, the words of the ancient writer Lactantius, where he speaks of circumcision thus:

"The meaning of circumcision was that we should bare our breasts: namely, that we should live with a simple and plain-dealing heart; because that part of the body which is circumcised, is partly like a heart, and partly an object of shame. The reason why God commanded us to bare it, was that he might by that sign admonish us not to have a covered heart; that is, that we should not cover within the secrets of our conscience, any crime of which we ought to be ashamed. And this is the circumcision of the heart of which the prophets speak, which God has translated from the mortal flesh to the immortal soul. For the Lord, being wholly set and fully minded according to his eternal goodness, to have a care for our life and safeguard, set repentance before our eyes for us to follow — as a way to bring us to it. So that, if we bare our hearts, that is, if by confession of our sins we satisfy the Lord, we should obtain pardon (which is denied to the proud and those who conceal their faults) by God, who does not behold the face as man does, but searches the secrets of the breast." [1248]

This much up to here, that ancient writer of the church, Lactantius Firmianus, has declared to us touching the mystery of circumcision.

iii.178

Now all this, which I have said up to here touching the meaning and mystery of circumcision, was set forth, as in a picture, to be seen by all men's eyes, so often as circumcision was solemnized in the church. There, the league which God made with men, was renewed as it were. There the grace of God, his sanctification, and our corruption, was declared. In this, Christ appears, the rock of stone, who with his Spirit, cuts and washes away all the spots of the church. Moreover, the worshippers of God learned by that sign (as by all the holy ceremonies), that being in one celestial [1249] body, they ought to endeavour by pureness of living, to win the favour of God, their confederate. This is because, in a way, by visible circumcision an open confession was made of the true religion, of free consent to the true religion, and of a binding by promise to it. Therefore, anyone who despised or unadvisedly neglected that holy ceremony was sharply punished, as may be gathered by the seventeenth chapter of Genesis, and the fourth chapter of Exodus. So much up to here concerning circumcision.

Now follows the second sacrament of the ancient church; I mean, the Paschal Lamb. It is a Hebrew word, not signifying a passion, as it would seem if it were derived according to the Greek etymology; but it signifies a skipping, leaping, or passing over: for the Hebrew signifies to leap or pass over.[1250] Moses shows the cause of this word in the law, where he says: "The Lord shall go over to strike the Egyptians; and when he sees the blood on the upper post, and the two side posts of the door, the Lord will pass over that door, and will not allow the destroyer to come within your houses."^Exo
12.23

iii.179

This sacrament is also known and called by other names. For it is called a sign, remembrance, solemnity, holy assembly, the feast of the Lord, worship, observation, oblation, and sacrifice. But though that ceremony is called a passing over, that is not done without a trope.[1251] For the passing over was the very benefit, in which the angel of the Lord passed over the Jews, left their houses untouched, and saved their lives. But because the paschal lamb was a memorial and a renewing of that benefit, it therefore took the name of the benefit: even as I admonished you before,[1252] that it is usual in sacraments for the signs to be called by the names of the things they signify, because of the likeness and mutual proportion between them.

Let us see now what the Passover was, and what kind of ceremony belonged to it. The Passover was a holy action, ordained by God, in the killing and eating of a lamb. This was partly to the end that the church might keep in memory the benefit which God did for them in the land of Egypt — to be a testimony of God's good will toward the faithful, and to be a type of Christ. And partly it was to gather all its partakers into the fellowship of one body, and put them in mind to be thankful and innocent.

This sacrament was first ordained by God himself, and not by man. For Moses delivered to the children of Israel whatever he received from the Lord's hand: as seen at large in the twelfth chapter of Exodus. And he instituted that ceremony at that very time when he brought the Israelites out of Egypt. Now since this ceremony came first from God, it consequently follows that all the Passovers which followed it, even until that Passover which the Lord held with his disciples a little before his death, were holy and divine actions. To flesh and worldly wisdom, many points, I might say all the parts, of this sacrament, seem to be merely absurd and altogether needless. But faith, which looks up to God, who is the author of this sacrament, has a great regard for, and greatly reverences, all the mysteries contained in it.

iii.180

For even as God is the chief and most absolute wisdom, so all his ordinances are most absolute and surpassing profitable.

Here now is noted the time when this sacrament was first delivered to the church of Israel: namely, in the four hundred and thirtieth year (counting from the promise made to Abraham, or from the time that he first departed from his country), which was the 2447th year from the beginning of the world, 791 years after the general flood.[1253] The time is also appointed when the Passover should be held, namely, every year, in the month of Nisan, which takes part of our March and April. Moreover, the very day is named, that is, the fourteenth of the month, beginning their account at springtime's equinoctial.[1254] For on the tenth day, they chose the lamb that should be eaten, and on the fourteenth day they killed it. There is also set down the hour of the day when it should be slaughtered: that was, about eventide,[1255] namely, between three and five o'clock in the afternoon, according to the course of our dials; and as the Jews usually reckoned the hours of the day, it was to be killed between nine and eleven o clock. And this meaning lies hidden in killing the lamb at eventide: that Christ should be slain in the latter days of the world; yes, the very hour and moment in which Christ should die, was foretold in this: for he gave up the ghost about the ninth hour. St. Peter says about this, that the prophets searched at what moment, or minute of time, the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, signified that Christ would come and suffer.[1256]

iii.181

Furthermore, there was a certain appointed place assigned to this sacrament. In Egypt, truly, they ate it by companies here and there in several houses. But once they had come into the land of promise, it was not lawful to hold Passover in any place but at the tabernacle of appointment; and after that, at the temple in Jerusalem. Being divided into several houses at Jerusalem, therefore, they ate it by companies, as seen in the twenty-second chapter of St. Luke's gospel. And that was a type that Christ, who was to be offered but once at mount Calvary, should be effectual forever to cleanse the sins of all his people.

It was also appointed there, who should hold the Passover: namely, the whole circumcised congregation of Israel, being assembled by houses and families, in companies sufficient to eat a lamb.[1257] For as Christ is the Saviour of us all, so all sinners (for we all are sinners) are the reason why Christ our Lord was offered on the altar of the cross.

Moreover, there is great diligence [1258] used in describing the manner of killing and eating the lamb. First, they chose this lamb for themselves from among other lambs and kids. The fifth day after, they cut its throat and saved [1259] the blood in a platter. With a bunch of hyssop, made like a holy-water stick, they sprinkled the blood on the two sides and upper posts of the door. The lamb itself they ate publicly, not boiled with water, but roasted with fire. And they also ate it whole: I mean, both head and feet, and appurtenance too; and they ate with it lettuce or sour herbs, and unleavened bread. And while they were at it, they stood about it with their loins girded, shoes on their feet, and staves in their hands. They ate it in haste: they neither broke nor tossed a bone of it to the dogs, but burnt the bones with fire. From evening until morning, no man set one foot out of doors.

iii.182

All these ceremonies had their ends to which they tended. They contained great mysteries, and bore a very evident signification of things past, things present, and things to come. They also joined the whole congregation, or Jewish church, into one body and a profession of one religion. And they also warned all those who ate of the lamb, to be thankful to God, and zealous in religion. I will touch upon this by parts, and teach you as briefly as I can.

First of all, the Lord's will was to keep in memory, and to forever prolong the remembrance of that great benefit which he once did for his people of Israel, [1260] in marvellously preserving His chosen flock. He slew in one night all the first-born of the Egyptians; and the next day, He led his elect out of Egypt, where for a long time they had sustained great misery in bondage. He would not only have this benefit preached by word of mouth — for it is certainly sure that, in that feast, most effectual sermons were made touching God's benefits and grace shown to their fathers; — but he would also have laid before their eyes a holy action and ceremony, a lively picture and mirror as it were; as though their deed were newly done again before their faces. For the visible action, in a way, made a sermon for their eyes and other senses. This is why Moses said, when he interpreted the ceremony and holy action: "When your children ask you, What does this worship of yours mean? You shall say to them, This sacrifice is the passing over of the Lord, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he slew the Egyptians, and delivered our houses." ^Exo
12.26-27

But this ceremony was the signification of a thing already past. And therefore it should have little availed that age of man which followed, to celebrate a benefit which did not at all belong to them, unless the Lord had applied it to every age and season. God would therefore have this be a testimony to their posterity, of His favour, goodness, and perpetual assistance;[1261] to put them in mind that he was not only the God of their fathers and ancestors, but that he would be the God of all the posterity of the Israelites; that he would bear with and spare them for the blood of Christ; and finally, that he would and could defend them from all evil, and bestow upon them all good and fatherly blessings.

iii.183

For we read in Psalm 136: "O praise the Lord, for he is good, because his mercy endures forever: who struck the first-born of the Egyptians; for his mercy endures forever: with a strong hand and an outstretched arm; for his mercy endures forever," [1262] Therefore, besides the remembrance of the benefit which God did for their fathers, their posterity used that ceremony to stir up their faith, to believe that God would have mercy on and do good for them according to his natural goodness, even as he did for their fathers before them. And by that means, this ceremony was no small exercise of faith in the children of Israel.

Furthermore, those ceremonies contained the mysteries that were to come, of Christ, the Saviour of us all. For in them was prefigured what Christ should be, what he should do for the world, by what means the faithful should be partakers with him, and how they should behave themselves before him. For among many other beasts, none was thought to be more fit for this sacrament than a lamb. This was not so much for the signification of simplicity and patience that was in Christ, like the quietness of a lamb, as it was because a lamb was the daily sacrifice that was offered to the Lord. For Paul says: "Christ our paschal Lamb is offered up." ^{1Cor 5.7} And by the law, a lamb was offered up in sacrifice every morning and evening.^Exo
29.38-39 For Christ is the Lamb that was killed since the beginning of the world;^{Rev 13.8} of whom John the Baptist testified, saying, "Behold the Lamb of God, that takes away the sins of the world." [1263] And because we all went astray like sheep, every one after his own way, the Son of God came down to us, and became a sheep, of our very substance and nature. Yet he was sound and without spot — without sin and wickedness — conceived by the Holy Ghost, and born of the virgin Mary.

iii.184

He was a male and a year old. That is to say, he was strong and whole, the same today that he was yesterday, and the same forever: namely, the Saviour of the whole world. The ceremonial lamb was chosen and taken from among other lambs and goats: for Christ descended lineally from righteous men and sinners — as seen in the first chapter of Matthew's Gospel. Likewise, for the shedding of the lamb's blood, God forbore with the whole church of the Israelites. For the blood of Christ [of which the lamb's blood was a type][1264] was to be shed, so that all the faithful might be cleansed by it; and by shedding it, the anger of God the Father might be appeased, and be reconciled again to the church. The blood was sprinkled upon the upper and two side-posts of the house with a bunch of hyssop. Hyssop, truly, is a base herb of small account; just as the preaching of the Gospel seems to be foolish, vile, and of no value. And yet, by preaching the gospel, the blood of Christ for the remission of sins is sprinkled on us, who are the house of God.

Now, we receive the Lamb unto life when we eat; that is, when we believe that Christ suffered for us. For Christ is eaten by faith, as declared at large in the sixth chapter of St. John. The lamb is dressed with fire, and not with water: it is not eaten raw, but roasted. For Christ was not man alone, but very God also, the true burnt-offering. He is able to fully absolve us, so that no addition of ours is needed. All our additions are mere water, and altogether cold. Moreover, the whole Lamb was to be eaten: the head, the feet, and appurtenance. For unless we believe that Christ is very God and very man, and that he is our wisdom and righteousness, we do not eat him wholly. Those who deny that Christ is God, do not eat the head; those who deny that Christ is man, do not eat the feet; those who do not acknowledge the gifts that are in Christ, which he communicates to the faithful: namely, righteousness, wisdom, sanctification, redemption, and life, do not eat the appurtenance. The bones of the Lamb were neither broken nor thrown to the dogs, but burnt with fire — for in Christ not one bone was broken, as the apostle John bears witness in the nineteenth chapter of his gospel.

iii.185

In this also lies hidden another mystery. For although the Son of God suffered in his humanity, yet in his divinity he still remained without any passion. Now the things in Christ which we cannot attain because of the excellence of his Godhead, we earnestly wish for and greatly desire. Moreover, Christ is the food of the reasonable and faithful soul, and is not to be cast to dogs and unbelieving miscreants.^{Mat 7.6} The Lamb was to be eaten in haste, without delay: for Christ must be eaten by faith, out of hand, without foading off;[1265] and that too, with a sharp desire and eager appetite. They were commanded to eat sour herbs and unleavened bread with the lamb: for the faithful must repent of their life ill-spent, and wholly take themselves to a purer trade of living. For here follows the manner of how they ought to behave themselves toward their Redeemer. They stood to eat the lamb, having their loins girded, with shoes on their feet, and staves in their hands. Such was the habit of wayfaring men, or pilgrims. We therefore must so behave ourselves in this present world, as become pilgrims and strangers who contemn this world, and look for another country.^{Heb 11.16} In their journey, therefore, let them give themselves to temperate modesty; let their feet be shod with the preaching of the gospel of peace; ^{Eph. 6.15} let them wholly lean upon the staff of God's aid and succour; and let them depart with as much haste as possible, from the bondage and corruption of this naughty world.

This very same ceremony was, as it were, a confession of the true religion, and as a cognisance, by which the people of God were known from other people and nations. Therefore, all the Israelites were gathered together into one church and society in which, by celebrating the Passover, they professed that they were the redeemed, the libertines,[1266] and the people of the living God.

iii.186

For to this belongs the commandment which charged them that no stranger should eat of the lamb, but the circumcised alone should partake of it; that it should not be divided into many parts; that it should be eaten nowhere but in one place alone, and that was to be done by companies of all the Israelites; and lastly, no man should once set foot out of doors until the next morning. By this it is given to us to understand that neither Christ, nor our salvation, is to be found outside the church, in the sects or schisms of wicked heretics. Christ, the Lamb of God, gathers all the faithful into one church, in which he keeps them, and saves them at last.

Last of all, this ceremony put God's people in mind of their duty, of thankfulness especially,[1267] of the study of godliness and harmless innocence. Therefore, they gave thanks to God for these and all his other benefits; they praised his name; and utterly abstained from all leavened bread. For you will find nothing so severely forbidden in this ceremony, as eating leavened bread. "Whoever eats leavened bread," says the Lord, "his soul shall perish from among the congregation of Israel, whether he is a stranger, or born an Israelite."^{Exo 12.19} The same saying is often repeated afterward, and thoroughly beaten into their brains. Now the apostle Paul, whose cunning and learning was great in the law of Moses, expounding what was meant by leavened bread, says: "Therefore, let us keep the feast, not in the old leaven, nor in the leaven of malice and unrighteousness, but in unleavened bread, that is, in sincerity and truth." [1268] This much up to here touching the eating of the paschal lamb.

To these sacraments were also added sacrifices of sundry sorts and many kinds. These were not first invented and taught by Moses, but were taken up and used immediately after the world was created. For Cain and Abel offered burnt sacrifices to God, the maker of the world: the one sacrifice was of the fruits of the earth; and the other of the cattle in his flock.

iii.187

Likewise Seth, Noah, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, with all the other patriarchs, are known to have sacrificed to the Lord. Now, the heathenish sacrifices of the Gentiles, as the heathen writers themselves testified, were partly like, and in many points, one with the Jewish sacrifices. It is not unlikely, therefore, that every one of the grand patriarchs of the Gentiles, taught his own nation the manner of sacrificing which they had learned from their forefathers, Shem, Ham, Japheth, and from the holy patriarch Noah himself. But it is undoubtedly certain that the holy fathers brought in nothing of their own invention, nor added anything more to the sacrifices than they had received and learned from God, who is the author of all goodness. Even though Moses more precisely distinguished and certainly ordered the sorts, kinds, and differences between sacrifices, yet whatever he did, he did at the Lord's appointment. God instructed Moses in all that he did. For the book of Leviticus — in which are specially described all the kinds of sacrifices — immediately after the beginning, testifies that Moses was called by God, and that he learned from the Lord all the ceremonies of the sacrifices which he commanded the Israelites to keep. And in the seventh chapter of the book of Numbers we read: "And when Moses came into the tabernacle of appointment, he heard the voice of God speaking to him out of the mercy-seat."

Now, as I was about to say, there were diverse sacrifices variously differing in many points among themselves, and yet having many things in common and general with one with another. It was general to all sacrifices, that they were not to be offered anywhere but in the one appointed place alone. It was general to all sacrifices, that of duty they ought to be offered by faith, as they were taught by the word of God. It was general to all sacrifices, that they be made according to the Lord's commandment, with holy fire, and not with strange fire, or fire that was profanely kindled. Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, were slain for nothing else but because they used profane or strange fire in sacrificing to the Lord. For when the Israelites, or Levites, first sacrificed as the Lord had commanded them, in the tabernacle of appointment, then God gave a token that he liked that manner of sacrifice, by sending fire from heaven. ^{Lev 9.24}

iii.188

Thus, in the sixth chapter of Leviticus the priests are charged to maintain or keep the holy fire always burning, first in the tabernacle, and then in the temple. It is manifest that the heathen imitated this, in commanding the vestal virgins at Rome to always keep the holy fire burning. By this perpetual fire is meant the perpetual working of the Holy Ghost in the church of Christ — which must be kept active and stirred up in the hearts of the faithful with fervent prayers, with the sincere doctrine of the Lord, and with the right use of the holy sacraments. It was also general to all sacrifices, that neither wild nor unclean beasts were offered to the Lord. Moreover, this general rule of sacrifices is given by Moses in the twenty-second chapter of Leviticus, saying:

"Let no deformity be in the thing that you offer: if it is blind, or lame, or maimed; if it has pushes,[1269] or scabs, or tetter,[1270] you shall not offer it to the Lord, nor shall you put any of it on his altar." ^{Lev 22.21-22}

Truly, if any man had brought a deformed oblation to the Lord, he plainly showed himself to be a contemner, and utterly unthankful toward his maker. And therefore in Malachi the Lord cries out, and says:

"When you bring the blind for sacrifice, do you not sin? And when you bring the lame and sick, do you not sin? Offer it, then, I pray you, to your prince or captain. Will he be content with it, or will he accept your person? says the Lord of hosts. And so I say: My name is held in contempt and is of no estimation among you." ^Mal.
1.6-8

The just and true God, therefore, at all times requires truth, liberality, sincerity, and integrity in those who worship him; and on the other side, he abhors and utterly detests uncleanliness, lying, and hypocrisy.

There are certain other things also, which are generally common to all sorts of sacrifices. But I will not particularly recall every jot or minute at this time. But what peculiarities every sundry sacrifice has, will evidently appear in the exposition of their sundry sorts, which I will now speak of in order, as they lie.

iii.189

I. First of all, I will expound to you that kind of sacrifice which in the scripture is called Holocaustum.[1271] That sacrifice was wholly consumed with fire, so that nothing but the skin or hide of the beast was left for the priest. The word is derived from the Greek: for it is called holocaustum, as one would say olon kanston [olon kanston]; that is, wholly burnt or consumed with fire.[1272] This sacrifice was of three kinds: I mean, it was made in three sorts, namely, with greater, little, and less, living creatures: namely, with an ox, a bullock, or a calf. Or, if any man's ability were not sufficient to stretch to that expense, then he offered a lamb, or a kid. And still again, if he could not offer that because of his poverty, it was lawful for him to sacrifice birds — not geese, roosters, or other unclean fowls, but turtles, doves, and other kinds of clean birds.

Now the manner of making this burnt sacrifice was in the following order. The beast that was to be offered was placed at the one side of the altar on which the priest shortly laid his hands, and cut its throat. The blood was saved, to be sprinkled round the altar; the skin was flayed from the slaughtered beast, and that alone was all the fees that fell to the portion or share of the priest. The legs were chopped off, and washed together with the appurtenance. Immediately after, a fire was made on the altar, on which was laid the whole sacrifice: namely, the head, body, legs, and appurtenance. These were altogether burnt on the altar before the Lord. But if it so happened that a turtle or a dove were offered for a sacrifice, then the priest with his finger wrung and broke its neck, and the blood was let drop around the sides of the altar. The feathers were also tossed at the one side of the altar, into a place where ashes lay; the wings were jointed;[1273] and last of all, the whole body was burnt on the altar. This was the manner of the sacrifice, or oblation, which they commonly called a burnt-offering. The signification of this was most cheerful and pleasant to those who were persuaded of it, that the burnt-offering prefigured the very Son of God, to be incarnate by the unspotted virgin, and be sacrificed once for the cleansing of all the sins of the whole world.

iii.190

For in the mirror of that sacrifice, they beheld the cross and passion of the Lord, who took our sins upon himself and, being slain, shed his blood for the remission of sins, offering himself wholly to God the Father in the fire of charity and heavenly zeal. The very same Christ is the turtle or pigeon.

Moreover, beside these ceremonies in the burnt sacrifice, it was required that no burnt sacrifice of beasts should be made at any time without that kind of offering which they called minha.[1274] That oblation was a handful of corn, or meal, or crusty bread soaked in a caldron, or a bowed piece of bread (which we call a cracknel) baked in an oven or in a frying-pan, which was burnt with oil and frankincense on the altar of burnt sacrifices. And truly, Christ is the bread of life, who by the eternal Spirit, as the apostle says, offered himself to God the Father for us, to be the meat and preservation of our life.^{Heb 9.13-14}

In the number of burnt sacrifices are reckoned the daily sacrifices that were offered every morning and every evening, and the sacrifices for the anointing or consecrating of priests. A large exposition is made about the daily sacrifice in the twenty-ninth chapter of Exodus and the sixth chapter of Leviticus. It was called the daily offering, because every morning and evening two lambs were offered, namely, one in the morning, and another at the evening. In these lambs, Christ was most manifestly prefigured; who is that Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world; whose virtue is always effectual and has power to take away the sins of the faithful. For the Lamb [1275] was killed from the beginning of the world; he was once slain upon the cross, yet his merit and effectual power still endures, and absolves all those who are delivered from their sins.

iii.191

Now the sacrifices of consecrating — I mean, of the priests, the tabernacle, and all the vessels or instruments belonging to the holy ministry — are in many points the same as the burnt-offerings; but in some things they differ from them. This may be fully seen in the twenty-ninth chapter of Exodus and the eighth chapter of Leviticus. And Christ our Lord first began the priesthood by his passion; after that, he hallowed all the faithful to be priests to himself.^1Pet
2.9

II. The second kind of sacrifice was the oblation, which they called minha. It was a gift, reward, or sacrifice of a wheat cake; by another name it was called a meat-offering. This sacrifice was of the fruits of the earth, and was not always offered of one sort: for there are three kinds of this sacrifice. What was offered was either parched wheat sticking in the ears; or wheat out of the ears; or else clean meal, unbaked; or at least, it was meal made into bread. This bread, again, was made three different ways, in three fashions. For either it was baked in an oven or furnace; or else soaked in a pot or caldron; or else fried in a frying- pan, like cakes. To these was added, as sauce for the sacrifice, salt, oil, and frankincense.

Honey and leaven, by a general rule, were utterly barred from all sorts of sacrifices. For cakes made with honey were never allowed nor admitted in their offerings. Yet, in the feast of thanksgiving they did eat leavened bread. Therefore, when any man offered wheat, it was first anointed by the priest with oil, then seasoned with salt, and last of all, it had frankincense put on it. After that, the priest took out one handful from the whole (but in the sacrifice for the priest all of it was burnt), and burnt it on the altar; the rest he reserved as a share for himself. ^{Lev 6.23} And frankincense was always used in all meat-offerings, except in the sacrifice for sin and in the sacrifice for jealousy; as seen in the fifth chapter of Leviticus and the fifth chapter of Numbers. Whoever desires to know the rest that belongs to the full rites and ceremonies of the meat-offerings, will find them in the second chapter of Leviticus. For I do not mean to particularly recall here, every jot and tittle of their accustomed ceremonies.

iii.192

Now even as Christ was prefigured in beasts and birds, so he is represented in this bread or cakes. For he is the bread of life, and has sundry fashions of infirmity and glory. You will not find any leaven In Christ — that is, no sin, uncharitableness, hypocrisy, or pride. In Christ there is no sweetness or honey-like taste, of worldly or wicked pleasures. But you may find salt in him, a well-seasoned temperateness, altogether heavenly, and most absolute wisdom. Because of Christ, and for his sake, all things of ours are acceptable to God; and for Christ's sake our prayers are heard by God the Father. Upon Christ, therefore, there is a sweet-smelling frankincense in the nose of God the Father.

In these ceremonies are also foreshadowed the manner and matter of our sacrifices: namely, that they would be without hypocrisy, bitterness, hatred, envy, and fleshly pleasure, and they should be seasoned with godly and continual prayers.

With the meat-offerings we may place the drink-offerings also. For in those sacrifices, wine was poured out to the Lord, as evident in the twenty-ninth chapter of Exodus, the twenty-third chapter of Leviticus, and the twenty-eighth chapter of the book of Numbers. Now Christ is our wine, our drink, and joy unto eternal life. He pours himself into the minds of the godly, that he may fill them with joy, and live in them and they live in him. And therefore he consecrated in wine, the memory of his blood that was shed for us, for the remission of our sins.

With these meat-offerings may be joined the sacrifices of the first-fruits, of the first-begotten, and of the tenths. Touching all this, there is much to be read in various places of the law; such as the thirteenth and twenty-third chapters of Exodus, in the eighteenth chapter of Deuteronomy, and the eighteenth chapter of the book of Numbers. Now, Christ is the first-begotten and the first-fruits of all the faithful, for whose worthiness and merit we are all spared, and by whom we (being sanctified) are made the sons and heirs of God. To him, as to our Maker and Redeemer, we owe our very souls as tithes, and whatever else is dear to us, and good in us. Moreover, it is a point of thankfulness to frankly bestow part of our earthly riches on God, which we have from his hands, for the maintenance of his true worship, and the relief of all who are in poverty.

iii.193

III. The third kind of sacrifice is that which is offered for sin, and is therefore called Hattah, a cleansing, or Ascham, a sacrifice for sin. In a word, we may call it a cleansing sacrifice. For it was offered for sin committed unwittingly or by ignorance (these were divided into four sorts by the degrees of the sinners; such as, if the chief priest sinned, if the whole church sinned, if the prince sinned, or if some man of the meaner sort sinned). Or, they offered it for sin committed willingly, or out of a set purpose, which was yet an excusable sin; or else for a great and heinous crime, which ignorance could by no means excuse. The ceremony used in this sacrifice is very ample and large; thus, I do not mean presently to touch it. It is most exquisitely set down in the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters of Leviticus.

Nor is it to be doubted that Christ was laid before their eyes in that sacrifice, as well as in all their other oblations. For Christ is the end of the law, [and the mark to which the ceremonial laws tended].[1276] And Isaiah in the fifty-third chapter of his prophecy says: "Though he never committed unrighteousness, nor was any deceitfulness was found in his mouth; yet has it pleased the Lord to strike him with infirmity; that when he had made his soul an offering for sin," (for here is put Ascham,) "he might see his seed, and prolong his days, and that the advice of the Lord might prosper in his hand." ^{Isa 53.9-10} To this belongs that whole disputation of the apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews, in which he shows that Christ is the true sacrifice for sin that cleanses the whole church and its sins. In this ceremony were shadowed the disposition of sins, the passions of Christ, and the power and strength of death.

iii.194

Now these many and sundry sacrifices appointed for sins, were kept uncertainly, because they were usually offered by those who sinned, at the very time they committed the sin: but the certain, yearly, and universal sacrifice was that which is described at large in the sixteenth chapter of Leviticus; it may be referred in that place to the number of cleansing sacrifices. For in the feast of atonement, on the tenth day of the seventh month every year, was solemnized the sacrifice of cleansing or atonement, for all the sins universally of all the people. I will not over-busily describe the manner of this general sacrifice at this time, since it is set down clearly as light in that place in Leviticus which I just cited; and since, in expounding the mystery of it, I mean to show and make plain, as many shadows in it as need to be marked. For I will say something touching the meaning and mystery of it.

In that most pleasant mirror, was figured the whole passion and effect of the passion, of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour, who by that sacrifice every year, was laid before the eyes and renewed to the minds of all the faithful church of God. For this manner of representing our redemption and salvation pleased God — by sacraments rather than by pictures, colours, or stage-plays, which are greatly regarded today (although scarcely godly) by no small number of trifling and fantastical heads.[1277]

Now, mark that the high priest alone, did all that was to be done in this solemn sacrifice — except that two ministers joined him, the one to lead away the scapegoat, and the other to carry out from the camp, the bullock and he-goat that was to be offered. Indeed, charge is very precisely given, that no man should join the high priest when he enters the tabernacle, and makes an atonement for the sins of the people. "Let no man," says the Lord, "be in the tabernacle of appointment when he goes in to make sacrifice in the sanctuary, until he comes out again."^{Lev 16.17}For no man must be joined to Christ in finishing the work of our salvation and redemption.

iii.195

For he alone is the Saviour; he alone has trod the press, and he alone was crucified for us. The patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, and all other creatures, are utterly excluded from having any thanks for our redemption and salvation. Christ alone remains the Saviour and Redeemer of the world. To attribute our salvation to creatures, to our own works and our own merits, is to admit creatures into the tabernacle, with the high priest, and to incur the indignation — that is, the terrible curse, of the almighty, true, and ever-living God. For the Jewish high priest prefigures Christ our Saviour, who has a priesthood, as the apostle Paul says, which cannot go by succession from him to any other.[1278]

Now, Aaron took a bullock of his own for a sin-offering, and a ram for a burnt-offering; and he took two he-goats from the people. Therefore, Christ our Lord, the true and only priest of his church, offered for us the thing that he took from us: namely, the substance of our flesh. There is also added, that Aaron (whose name, we understand, refers to each one that was the high priest among the people of God), when he went to sacrifice, clothed himself with the usual and common garments of the other priests (I mean, those which the other priests usually wore) — except that they were holy and without spot. For, although Christ the Son of God took our nature upon himself, and became like us, being clad, as it were, in the usual garment of men; yet notwithstanding this, his fleshly garment (I mean, his body that was like ours) was altogether free from corruption,[1279] and clean without spots of sin.

Aaron first of all killed a steer for himself and his family: by this he declared that he was not the very and true high priest, but the type of him that was the true priest. For Paul says: "Our high priest had no need, as those high priests had, first to offer sacrifices for their own sins, and then for the sins of the people. For he did that once, when he offered up himself." ^{Heb 7.26-27} Afterwards, Aaron drew lots at the door of the tabernacle, to test between the two goats, which should be slain for the sacrifice, and which should be sent away as the scapegoat into the desert.

iii.196

The two goats signify Christ our Lord, very God and very man, in two unseparated natures. He is slain, and dies in his humanity; but he is not slain nor does he die in his divinity. Yet, being one and the same Christ, unseparated, he is the Saviour of the world, and works the redemption of us mortal men. So a mystery was hidden in the two goats.^{Pro 16.33} And because, as Solomon says, the lots are guided by the Lord's will, it was not without the especial will of the Father, that the Son was sacrificed and killed on the cross.

Moreover, the high priest took the blood, first of the bullock, then of the slain goat, and with a censer in his hand, he went within the veil. There, with the incense, he made a cloud of smoke before the mercy-seat; and with his finger, he sprinkled the blood seven times toward the mercy-seat. The apostle Paul expounded all this in the ninth chapter to the Hebrews, saying, "Christ did not enter into the tabernacle made with hands, but into the very heavens; not with the blood of a bullock, or a goat, but with his own blood, and found for us a perpetual cleansing and remission of our sins." ^{Heb 9.11} For "he is our propitiation; not for our sins only, but also for the sins of the whole world." ^{1Joh 2.2} And the apostles alluded to this, as often as they called Christ our propitiation; as St. Paul did in the third chapter to the Romans, and St. John did in the second and fourth chapters of his first epistle.

Now, sprinkling the blood seven times was a token of the full perfection, or perfect fulness, of the cleansing. We too need to be sprinkled with the finger, not of man, but of Christ [1280] Jesus, our Lord and Saviour — whose finger is the Holy Ghost, by whom our cleansing comes upon us. To the sprinkling of the blood is also added sweet-smelling incense. [1281] For, as the apostle testifies, Christ, our high priest, offered prayers for us with tears, and was heard in that which he feared.[1282] Whereupon, by the cloud of smoke (that is, by the great quantity of smoke) was noted the great efficacy of earnest prayers.

iii.197

When that was done, the high priest again went into the sanctum, and set the blood on the golden altar of incense. For in the work of our redemption, both innocent blood, and earnest prayer for us, must be joined together. Out of the sanctum, he again came to the altar of burnt-offerings, which stood in the court (called the atrium). There he gave the other goat to a convenient man to be taken into the wilderness. But in delivering the goat, he used a precise manner and singular ceremony. For the high priest laid both his hands upon the goat, and confessed over its head the sins of the people, who themselves also confessed their sins, following the priest clause by clause in the entire confession [1283] which he recited. Then, as soon as all the sins were laid upon the head of the goat, it was sent away, so that by that means it might carry away the sins of all the people [1284] into the desert.

From this ceremony, the Gentiles undoubtedly borrowed their kind of cleansings or purgings of the people, which in Greek is called Kaqarmata,[1285] and in Latin piamina. For their manner was that, in extreme perils, one should give himself for the rest. They took him and either killed and burned him on the altar, or they threw him into the water — praying that all their evil luck might go with him, and that the gods (being pacified with his death) might again be favourable to the rest. But the wretches erred as far as heaven is wide: for Christ the Son of God was made sin for us, that is, he was made a sacrifice for sin; indeed, he became a curse for us, that by him we might receive a blessing. For the prophet Isaiah had an eye to this, when he said: "We all went astray like sheep; every one turned after his own way: but the Lord has thrown down upon him all our sins," Again: "He was wounded for our offences, and struck for our wickedness." And again: "The pains of our punishment were laid upon him, and he bore our griefs." [1286]

iii.198

Now the goat carried the sins into the desert, not that the sins should cease to be, but that they should no longer be imputed to them. For in the church, there is sin in the saints, truly; but it is not imputed to them. Sin is imputed to all those who are outside the church, in the desolate wilderness. The convenient man that would carry away the scapegoat, can be none other than Christ himself, who in the days of his flesh, observed the convenient time and fit occasion — often repeating that his hour had not yet come. But at last, when the convenient time had come for him to die, he then said that his hour had come. And by dying, he conveniently carried away the scapegoat, I mean, the sin of the whole world.

When this also was thus accomplished, the high priest again washed himself; and putting off the common garments of the inferior priests, he again put on his high priest's attire. Now this often and manifold washing in the holy ceremony, is a shadow or type of the most absolute remission of sins; even as the changing of a garment is also a sign or figure of glorification — as seen fully in the third chapter of Zechariah's prophecy. And Christ, being glorified, entered into heaven to appear there in the sight of God, as the only and effectual sacrifice for us mortal men. Therefore, Aaron sacrificed a ram for a burnt-offering: for Christ is the sacrifice which endures always, and purges all the faithful.

Moreover, Aaron sent the bullock and the other goat to the holy place outside the camp, that they might be burned there. Paul thus expounds about this: "The bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the holy place by the high priest for sin, was burnt outside the tents: therefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his blood, suffered outside the gate." ^{Heb 13.11-12}

Although in what I have alleged up to here, I have declared by fits,[1287] the end and fruit of this ceremony, I do not think it necessary to particularly repeat it again — since I see that the Holy Ghost takes pains in the scripture to very busily beat it into our heads.

iii.199

The end of all this stir and solemnity is,[1288] that all the sins — I say, all the sins of God's universal church — by the one and only sacrifice, offered only once, are most perfectly blotted out and absolutely purged. Let us therefore hear the very words of the Holy Ghost, who speaks most plainly and evidently in the scripture, saying: First, "And the high priest shall confess over the goat all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their trespasses and all their sins." [1289] Secondly, "And the goat shall bear all their misdeeds into the desert, upon itself." Thirdly, "The same day the priest shall make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, so that you may be clean from all your sins before the Lord." Fourthly, "And let this be an everlasting ordinance o you, to cleanse the children of Israel from all their sins once every year."

Who is such a sot or dull-head as to think that all the sins of the people are washed away with the blood of beasts? "If," says the apostle, "they had once fully cleansed sins, then they would have ceased to offer any more." ^{Heb 10.1-2} By this ceremony, therefore, the mystery of Christ to come was beaten into all men's brains; and once every year it was laid out for the eyes of all men to behold. Zechariah borrowed his prophecy of Christ from this ceremony, in his third chapter, where he says: "Behold, I bring forth the Branch, my servant. For behold, the stone that I lay before Joshua: on one stone shall be seven eyes. Behold, I will cut its engraving, says the Lord of hosts, and I will take away the sin of this land in one day." ^{Zec 3.8-9}The Lord promises the Messiah, who was prefigured by the priests, and especially by the high priest Joshua. Christ is the stone on which the eyes of all men are steadfastly fixed, as upon their only Saviour. He is dug into and cut, in his passion; and by suffering and dying once, he purges the sins of the whole earth.

From this ceremony, and from this place in scripture, Paul, the holy apostle of Christ, borrowed almost his whole discourse in his epistle to the Hebrews, touching the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all the sins of the whole world. In this discourse, he often repeats from the law the word "once"; and he does that with a certain emphatic vehemence.

iii.200

Now, to appoint other priests, to institute another time, and to ordain another manner of sacrifice, is utterly to kick at, and tread underfoot, this heavenly and most evident truth. But this doctrine of the only sacrifice of Christ is the true, ancient, sound, unreproveable, and everlasting doctrine. By this sacrifice, all those are saved who are saved, and by this sacrifice, all those have been saved, who have been saved since the beginning of the world. Paul, the apostle of Christ and of the Gentiles (whose skill in the law was inferior to no man's), calls the enemies or adversaries of this doctrine fools, mad, inconstant, light-headed, carried with every puff of wind, wicked, apostates who have revolted from Christ, liars, false apostles, deceivers, schismatics, dogs, enchanters, witches, detestable, and cursed. Therefore, if an angel from heaven teaches us anything else, let him be accursed to us.[1290]

By the way, this must not be concealed: that in that yearly sacrifice, it was required and looked for at men's hands, first, that they should confess their sins; then, that they should be sorry in their minds, in good earnest and indeed, for the sins they committed; and lastly, that they should keep the sabbath, I do not mean an idle resting from honest business, but a quietness in the faith of Christ, and ceasing from ill deeds. Whoever so prepares himself in the feast of atonement — that is, in the time of the preaching of the grace of God through Christ — he is without doubt thoroughly cleansed by that one sacrifice of Christ Jesus. Up to here, I have not without good cause spoken so largely about this, as you perceive I have. For this one place gives a wonderful light, both to the understanding of many places in the scriptures, and also of the mystery of our redemption, and of Christ our Redeemer, and does it so plainly, that no other place [1291] so clearly expounds, sets forth, and lays them open before our eyes to be seen and looked at. It also teaches us to understand the words of Christ our Lord in the gospel of St. John, where he says, "There is one who accuses you, even Moses in whom you hope: for had you believed Moses, you would then have believed me; for he wrote of me." ^{John 5.45-46}

Now with the sacrifice of atonement and the other cleansing sacrifices, we advisedly include the sacrifice of the red cow;^{Num 19.2} I mean, of the cleansing, or of the cleansing or holy water, which was ordained against all sorts of defilings and uncleannesses.[1292]

iii.201

For there were sundry kinds of uncleanness, about which there is a large discourse to be seen in Moses' law. And in these, a type for our corrupt nature and continual sins is laid before us. There is fully described in the nineteenth chapter of the book of Numbers, first the very ceremony and sacred rite; then is declared how to make the holy cleansing water against all defilings; lastly is added the use and effect of that holy water.

A red cow would be brought to Eleazar the priest, without spot and had never felt the yoke. Out of hand, it was carried out and slain outside the camp. Part of the blood was saved by the priest, and with his finger he sprinkled it seven times towards the tabernacle of appointment. But he burnt the whole cow with fire, so that no part of it was left; and into the fire he cast cedar-wood, hyssop, and a scarlet lace. Once this was done, the priest washed himself in water; and another priest, who was clean, took his place. Gathering the ashes, he laid them up in a clean place. Therefore, as often as required, they put those ashes into an earthen vessel, into which they poured running water. The holy cleansing water was always prepared in that way; and with a sprinkler made of hyssop, they sprinkled it on all those who were defiled. This was the manner and ceremony of the cleansing, the use and end of it immediately follows.

The apostle Paul testifies that the circumstances of this ceremony laid before us a most evident type of Jesus Christ. For in the ninth chapter to the Hebrews he says: "If the ashes of a young cow, sprinkled, sanctifies those who are partakers of it, to the purifying of the flesh, then how much more shall the blood of Christ!" ^{Heb 9.13-14} Therefore, both the priest and the cow bore the type of Christ. The cow being female, denotes the infirmity of man's nature; the red colour admonishes us about the Lord's blood, by which we are washed from our uncleanness. There was no spot to be found in Christ; for he was the Holy of holies, and altogether free from and without any sin. He was not brought to death by the yoke of necessity; for he offered himself of his own free will.

iii.202

Indeed, he offered himself willingly to go to his death, and that was outside the camp, or walls of the city, at mount Calvary: which the apostle Paul touches in the thirteenth chapter of Hebrews. Christ, both God and man, was wholly offered in body and soul. His blood is wholesome for us, if it is sprinkled in our hearts by the Holy Ghost. The faithful also must die with Christ; they must be humbled, and burn with love toward God as red as scarlet: [1293] that was the meaning of the cedar-wood, the hyssop, and the scarlet lace, which were thrown into the fire.

Moreover, the ashes which came from the sacrifice were gathered up and preserved to purify and cleanse with. Those ashes were nothing else than the type or figure of the effect of Christ's death or sacrifice — I mean, the very cleansing and remission of our sins. Therefore blood and water gushed abundantly out of the pierced side of Christ,[1294] that we might learn that out of the death of Christ flows our cleansing and our life. For life consists in blood, and water purges and is a sign of cleansing. The ashes were gathered by a man who was clean, who nevertheless was made unclean, and remained so, until evening. Finally, the water was sprinkled on the defiled with a sprinkler made of hyssop, to the end that he might be sanctified or purged by it. The water was kept in a holy place: for pearls [1295] and that which is holy, should not be thrown to dogs and filthy swine. The Lord also requires preachers to teach the effect of Christ's passion, and to lay before the world, in the contemptible and lowly [1296] preaching of the gospel, our redemption and sanctification in the death and blood of Christ. He requires, I say, holy teachers who are themselves faithful and cleansed in the blood of Christ.

iii.203

And yet those teachers still pray, with the whole church beside, even till evening (I mean, till the end of their lives) "Forgive us our trespasses." For the Lord himself said; "He that is washed is clean, and needs only to wash his feet." ^{Joh 13.10} To this pertain the frequent washings used in this ceremony, which signify that all sins are purged by the grace of God; that the saints always have a holy care to watch against the assaults of sin; and that those sins are cleansed in no other way than by the water of Christ's grace. Lastly, it is most often and earnestly repeated in the law, that they all remain unclean, however many, being once denied, are not again cleansed with the holy water of separation. For the Lord said to Peter, "Unless I wash you, you shall have no part with me."^{Joh 13.8}

My meaning is not to run through every particular point of this ceremony, but to touch the especial matters only. Therefore, I now proceed to that which remains.

To these cleansing sacrifices may also be added the sacrifices by which the bodily defilings, which were figures of the defilings of sin, were purified and cleansed. Of this sort were the defilings of the seed, eating and touching unclean creatures, leprosy, and the woman in child-bed. Moses largely handles all these from the twelfth to the fifteenth chapters of Leviticus. And in all this, nothing else is prefigured to the church of God, but our natural corruption and original wickedness, with their free cleansing by the grace of God, in the blood of Christ our Saviour. With these we may also number the sacrifice for jealousy. This sacrifice is thoroughly treated in the fifth chapter of Numbers, although the manner and order of it rather seems to belong to the judicial laws of God.

IV. The fourth kind of sacrifice, was the sacrifice of thanksgiving, which they called schelamim, or scholomim, the sacrifice of health, or the peace-offering: for it was offered to give thanks either for the recovery of health, or for felicity and prosperity. By this, I mean when they had received some good turn at the hands of God, or else had escaped by His aid, the brunt of some mishap or evil fortune. In this sacrifice, they used a beast either from the herd or from the fold.

iii.204

It was not lawful to offer birds; for it was done either with a bullock or a heifer, with a male or a female lamb, or with a he or she-goat. It was slain before the atrium: its hide or skin was the priest's fee. The blood was sprinkled around the altar. The kidneys, the caul of the liver, the rump of the lamb, and all the fat, was burnt on the altar of burnt-offerings. The right shoulder was heaved, and the breast was waved toward the ends of the world. (For thruma and thnupha,[1297] that is, the heaving and waving, were not kinds of sacrifices, but were ceremonies only, which the priests used in making their sacrifices and oblations. The heaving signified that Christ would be heaved or lifted up; and once lifted up, he would draw all men to himself.^{Joh 12.32} The waving of the breast toward every part of the world was a token that the preaching of Christ should be spread in every corner of the world.) The breast and the shoulder were both the priest's portion, together with the jaw-bone and the paunch or belly. The rest of the flesh was returned to the man who made the oblation, and was eaten by him in a holy banquet. The remnant of ceremonies belonging to this sacrifice are to be found in the third chapter of Leviticus. ^{Lev 7.1-13} For if it were thoda [1298] — a confession, praise, or protestation — then a cake of pure wheat flour and salt steeped in oil was added to the sacrifice, or sodden cracknels, or bread baked in pans. Part of this was heaved and fell to the priest's share; the rest was returned to the offerer; even leavened bread was allowed to be eaten in the banquet.

Now, Christ was also preached in this kind of sacrifice, with the effect and power of his death and passion; and in it was shown the whole manner and order of giving thanks to God for his good benefits. There are sundry sorts of benefits. If a man received a good turn, or if an ill turn had not befallen him, or if he recovered his health or escaped some misfortune, then he offered a sacrifice to the Lord.

iii.205

There were also other ancient benefits common to all men.[1299] Such as, the fact that God made the world and all that is in it; and that through Christ he has redeemed all the faithful. There are daily benefits; and ultimately, all things are full of God's good benefits. For all these benefits, we must offer our sacrifice to God alone, and not to any creatures which he has made. Indeed, we must offer these to him with all our hearts; all our affections must be hallowed to the Lord. For out of the beasts which were sacrificed to the Lord for thanksgiving, those parts in which the especial power of life consists, were chosen and given to the Lord. For in the kidneys is the power of generation; in the blood the vital spirit; in the liver the spring of all the blood, etc. Now, we must give thanks by a sacrifice — that is, by Christ — for [1300] we are saved for Christ's sake; and all good things are bestowed on us by God, not for our own sakes, nor for any creatures' sakes, but for Christ's sake, our only Saviour and Redeemer. To those who offered a sacrifice, a sober and merry banquet was allowed, because the felicity of those who are not unthankful, is for the most part augmented two-fold, double. The knowledge of Christ is a banquet of delicacies, and a continual feast.

Those offerings which are called vows and free-will-offerings,[1301] much agree with sacrifices of thanksgiving The free-will-offering proceeded from mere good will and devotion of the mind, without the necessity or compulsion of any law or ordinance — as when a servant gives his master the thing he does not owe him, as a declaration only of the good will he bears toward him. But the free-will-offerings differ in this from the sacrifice of thanksgiving, because in the sacrifice of thanksgiving, a charge was given that whatever was left, which was not spent the first day, should not be eaten on the morrow, but be burnt with fire. On the other side, in the free-will-offerings it was lawful for them to eat the remnant on the second day, and [1302] to burn their leftovers on the third day. Now, the vowed sacrifices were those which were offered by a covenant to the Lord; for example, a man in peril might vow to make a sacrifice to God, if he is delivered out of that imminent danger.

iii.206

If it happens that he is delivered, and he offers the sacrifice for his delivery, then the thing that is offered is called a vowed sacrifice. The ceremonies of the two [1303] wholly agreed with the sacrifice of thanksgiving. More about them may be seen in the seventh chapter of Leviticus.

The meaning of these sacrifices was that all good benefits are bestowed on us for Christ's sake; and [1304] we receive with those benefits the very good will which we have to serve the Lord.

I have said this much up to here touching the sacrifices of the people of God. I have not touched every point, but only those of most importance. In these sacrifices, as in a lively action, Christ our Lord was set forth: his passion and the effectual merit of his death. So that, we may call the holy actions of these sacrifices, sermons on the passion of Christ and instructions [1305] about our redemption by our Lord and Saviour.

Now, because we have previously spoken about vowed sacrifices, we must borrow leave here for a digression, to say something about their usual vows. For vows belong to the Jewish ceremonies. There is a large discourse in the law of God about making, performing, and redeeming vows, but especially in the twenty-seventh chapter of Leviticus. To vow is to promise anything [1306] with a solemn oath, either for our own welfare or another's. And therefore a vow was an action referred to God alone, and that too was in a holy and lawful thing. But there was a difference in vows; because vowed things were divided into four kinds. For sometimes they vowed men, sometimes they vowed other living things, sometimes houses, and sometimes lands or other immoveable substances.[1307] Again, there was a difference in men according to their ages, and according to their ages they might be redeemed. No redemption was permitted at all for clean living creatures. But they were free either to leave houses to the use of the ministry, or else to redeem them with such a sum as the priest valued them at.[1308]

iii.207

In lands, redemption was sometimes permitted, and sometimes not permitted. And in the thirtieth chapter of the book of Numbers a precise commandment is given touching the votaries,[1309] when their vows have force and when their effect is small. It is diligently beaten into their heads, that vows lawfully made to God are not to be reneged on, but strictly kept and thoroughly performed. Rash or unlawful vows, the Lord never liked nor received.

The prophet speaks of lawful vows, and those made to the true and only God, where he says, "Make vows, and pay them." ^Psa
76.11 We do not read that any of the godly sort made vows to any saints or any other creatures; nor that they vowed anything which was not in their power to vow, nor which was contrary to the will of God to whom they vowed it, nor which was to their neighbour's hindrance, nor which lacked some evident commodity. And truly, these kinds of vows were permitted to the Israelites, till the time of amendment, for no other reason than to remain in the worship of the one true God, and not make their vows to any other strange God.

To the treatise of vows belongs the discipline and order of Nazarites. There is a large discourse about this in the sixth chapter of the book of Numbers. The Nazarites were those who would take upon themselves, of their own accord, a stricter and more severe course of life than the common people used. This was either because they wished to attend more freely to God's service, without hindrance; or else because they had previously lived too licentiously. They kept this vow as a discipline, to make other men follow their example of virtue and of honest living. Thus, some have taken it that the Nazarites have their name from the word separation, because Nazir among the Hebrews signifies a separation. Separating themselves from the common course of life that other men led, the Nazarites gave themselves to a peculiar form of living for God and godliness' sake. That severe and strict discipline continued in some all their life, as it did in Samson and Samuel.[1310]

iii.208

Moreover, those who wholly gave themselves to the study of the scriptures were called Nazarites by the prophets Amos and Jeremiah.[1311] This was because of their most temperate life (which is required of students), and because they were wholly dedicated to the ministry of God. Sometimes it also endured only for a certain span of days or months. These Nazarites, according to the commandment of the law, abstained from certain things from which they were not barred by any other law, and which were not unlawful for other men to use outside the necessity of that vow. First of all, they abstained from wine, from all things that the vine brought forth, and whatever else made men drunk. But it is manifest that, as wine is the good creation of God, so no drink is forbidden by the law. Yet, because the Nazarites were consecrated to the Lord, and sanctified by a certain peculiar kind of living; and because wine is the means that leads to drunkenness (which is the gulf of all sin and filthiness), the Nazarites did not therefore abstain from wine without cause. They also took heed of idleness, the mother of mischief, and utterly despised all worldly pleasures.

Furthermore, so long as the time of their vow endured, they did not clip their hair, but let their locks grow out at length. Thereupon, some think they took their names, and were called Nazarites, insofar as Nazer signifies hair. They suppose they were called Nazarites, as if to say they were long-locked or shaggy-haired people.[1312] But the apostle Paul bids the woman to pray, or to come into the congregation to hear a sermon, with her head covered, for no other reason but that she is not in her own power, but is subject to another: that is, to her husband. And therefore, the Nazarites let their hair grow because, by the vow which they had made to God, they were no longer in their own power, but were wholly yielded into the power of God. And the head, which is the tower of the body and the most excellent part of it, being covered [1313] with a bush of hair, was a token that the whole man was given to the Lord by vow, to whom alone he ought to have an eye, and upon whom alone he should wholly depend.

iii.209

Moreover, it was required at the hands of the Nazarite, that he should not defile himself with the contagious company of wicked and naughty persons. To this also belongs the commandment which charged the Nazarite not to be present at the death or burial of his parents, or children, or wife, or brethren, or sisters. For he ought to settle the eyes of his mind on God alone, and in comparison to Him, to lightly treat and loathe the things which were most dear and precious to him. But if he were caught unawares,[1314] and was defiled by seeing a dead body,[1315] he was not thereby acquitted of his vow, as if his life prior to that point was sufficient for its performance. He was commanded to sanctify himself the seventh day, and then again undertake to keep his vow.

By all this, we may plainly perceive what and how great the sin of Samson was, who was a Nazarite to the Lord — because he not only lurked in the brothel-house with the harlot, but he also betrayed the secret of God to her. He tossed aside the covenant made with God, of which his hair was a sure testimony. Therefore, the Lord forsook him, and that wonderful strength which he had from heaven was clean taken away from him. For the strength of Samson did not lay in his hair, so that by cutting off his hair, his strength was also cut away. Rather, it lay in the Spirit of the Lord, who was given to him from God above. And therefore we so often find this sentence in the scripture: "And the Spirit of the Lord came upon Samson." [1316] Therefore when the Spirit of God departed, his strength also departed. But it departed from him when, being wholly joined to the harlot, he was made one soul with her, and preferred her before God and his commandment. Thus he allowed his hair to be lopped off,[1317] and utterly revolted from the ordinance of the Lord. For by that means, the Spirit of God forsook him. Upon this, he was immediately after placed into the hands of his enemies, the Philistines. There, when he was miserably vexed, and when he heard evil spoken of the name of God,[1318] and blasphemed because of his captivity, he repented heartily, and called upon the name of the Lord.

iii.210

By this it came to pass that, when his hair grew out again, his strength returned; that is, the Spirit of the Lord came upon him again, being brought to him, not by the growth of his hairs, but by his repentance and earnest calling upon the Lord. Nor did Samson desire to revenge his own private injury, so much as to suppress their blasphemous mouths, and to deliver the people of God [1319] from fear and slavery. The strength of God therefore returned again, with which, bending the pillars of the theatre, Samson was himself slain with the fall of the palace; and at his death, he slew many more than he had killed during his lifetime before.

But now we return again to the purpose: to add the other ceremonies that belong to the exposition of the vow of the Nazarites.

When the time had expired, therefore, which the Nazarite had taken upon himself to observe, he came to the tabernacle of the Lord, and offered the sacrifices that are prescribed in the law. He testified that he was a sinner, and plainly confessed that any goodness and virtue [1320] that was to be found in him, was given and bestowed from God above. And therefore he shaved his head, and cast his hair into the fire,[1321] in which the peace-offering was burning. At last, when all this was accomplished in this manner, it was lawful for the Nazarite, as one loosed of his bonds, to return to his old life again. This much up to here touching the discipline of the Nazarites.

Now, touching the clean and unclean, there is a long discourse in the law of Moses. In my former treatise, I lightly touched on and passed over certain things. But now at last (for here I mean to make an end of speaking about ceremonial laws) I will add something touching the choice of meats — I mean, of clean and unclean meats.

In the beginning, God, truly, created all things; and he so created them that, as the Creator is good, even so, all his creatures (even today) are good also. Nor does he contradict himself now, when he forbids certain meats, as though something in itself were unclean. There are other mysteries that lie hidden under this doctrine of the choice of meats.

iii.211

The laws, which are given touching meats and victuals, seem to be small and of little value; but it pleased the Lord in a small thing to admonish us what we have to do in a greater thing; and that even in the smallest things, the authority of his Godhead ought to be regarded. For the authority of the law depends upon God: God is the lawgiver, and the law is his invention. This suppresses the impudence [1322] of mortal men, which makes, undoes, and every day devises new laws and ordinances. Therefore, in these kinds of laws, God commends to his people that faithful obedience be shown to him — even as, in the beginning, he commanded Adam not to taste of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thereby requiring that faithful obedience be shown to him. Truly, the obedience and faith in the Maccabees, in old Eleazar, and in certain other godly men who stood against king Antiochus, even to the point of shedding their blood and suffering a most bitter death, pleased the Lord exceedingly.[1323] Others abstained from swine's flesh, for which they obtained neither praise nor glory among wicked men.[1324] When the word of God says that a thing is holy, it is holy indeed, because He is holy that commands it. When God says that anything is unclean, it is unclean indeed, so that to eat anything against the word of God, is to defile the eater. "You now are clean," says the Lord in the Gospel, "because of the word which I spoke to you." ^{John 15.3} It is needful, therefore, that we believe the word of God, and that obedience go before faith.[1325] Then it can only be that the deed or work done by faith, as Eleazar's was (who would not taste the swine's flesh), must be acceptable to God, with whom whatever is not of faith, is sin and wickedness. ^{Rom 14.23}

Moreover, in his laws [1326] touching the abstaining from the flesh of certain living creatures, the Lord had a great regard for the health and soundness of mortal men's bodies.

iii.212

For some of those meats which he forbids eating, are thought by physicians to be scarcely wholesome for our bodies. And thereupon the saints gather this syllogism: If God cares for the health of our bodies, he is truly far more careful for the preservation of our souls. What may be thought of this: that many nations have tempered [1327] themselves from eating and touching some living creatures? The people of Israel were sufficiently superstitious and curious of themselves. Therefore, that they should not be their own carvers, and invent toys [1328] as they thought best, God gave them such laws for the choice of their meat, that they contained hidden mysteries in them, thereby drawing Israel away from their own devices, and severing them from all other nations. Moses testifies of this in the fourteenth chapter of Deuteronomy, saying: "You are a holy people to the Lord your God; and the Lord your God has chosen you from among all the nations on the face of the whole earth, to be a peculiar people for himself." In the Acts of the Apostles, a vision is shown to St. Peter,[1329] in which the unclean beasts meant the Gentiles. Lastly, God would have the nature and disposition of the beasts that he forbade being eaten, be thoroughly scanned. For in their diet at the table, he laid the heavenly philosophy before their eyes in figures. He gave them occasion, even in their meat, to think and speak about the true holiness of the mind, to the end that men should not be filthy, impudent, foul, and unclean. And therefore, this clause is repeated so many times: "I the Lord your God am holy." [1330] It was as if to say, All these ceremonies tend to this end: that you may give yourselves to holiness. Therefore, in those figures he taught the godly what to follow, and what to flee from.

Now, in the law of the clean and unclean, he first of all put certain generalities; and then he descends by specialities; and in a catalog, he reckons up certain particular things in a very natural course and order. The place is set out in full, in the eleventh chapter of Leviticus and the fourteenth chapter of Deuteronomy.

iii.213

Those beasts were allowed to be eaten, which cleave the hoof, and chew the cud. Here are two things set down, in which the duty of a good man is notably contained: for if we would be clean, we must divide the hoof, and also chew the cud. Our affection [1331] is the foot of our minds; this affection must not be followed, without discretion to judge between affections in all things. And as in a cleft, there are two parts or sides, the right and the left, so a good man chooses the good, and flies from the evil. Chewing the cud is our judgment. For we must not admit everything which we hear and see, but only those things which we have examined exactly, and found to be contrary neither to God nor to his law.

Many living things are then particularly recited, which were not lawful to be eaten among the people of the Lord. Those were either four-footed beasts upon the earth, or fishes, or birds, or those which creep upon the ground. Of four-footed beasts, four by name we are especially forbidden: the camel, whose long and lofty neck teaches us that pride and arrogance must be eschewed;[1332] the coney or mountain mouse,[1333] for God utterly disapproves the men who are altogether overwhelmed in the earth, like coneys, and never lift their minds to heaven;[1334] the hare, a fearful beast, which warns us to shake off all cowardly fearfulness; even as the hog also puts us in mind to avoid all uncleanness, for a hog is the very type and picture of nasty filthiness; from that comes the byword to call an uncleanly person a beastly swine.[1335] And as the fable goes, Circe with her enchantments turned Ulysses' men into a sort of loathly hogs.[1336] Furthermore, of fishes, those were allowed for meat that have fins and scales on them. If they lacked either of them, they were forbidden — such as the eel which, though it has fins, it lacks scales, and therefore it was not to be eaten. For just as the bodies of fishes are ruled with the fins, so the whole man must be governed by hope. [1337]

iii.214

The scales are hard and cover the body. And unless we are constant and patient in the Lord's work, we are worthy to be abhorred by the Lord our Maker. Of birds, those are forbidden, which are the greatest raveners, devourers; which love and live by unclean meats; which fly abroad at owl-light, at midnight, and in the dark; and those which are crafty, unstable, and uncheerful.[1338] In this, therefore, what is commended to us is well-doing, abstinence, temperance, simplicity, light, constancy, cheerfulness, soundness, and pureness of living. Lastly, no small number are noted of those creatures which creep on the ground: for men altogether wrapped in worldly muck, utterly displease the Lord.

I have on purpose not reckoned up all the names of the forbidden creatures, partly because it would have been too tedious for you, and partly because the interpreters of the Bible vary widely in the interpretation of their names. Thus, I cannot marvel enough at the extreme blind stubbornness of the Jewish people, in keeping the choice of their meats so strictly, when their own rabbins vary, and cannot tell certainly, what creatures the Lord forbids them.

To this belongs that command — even before the law, in the time of Noah — by which God forbade eating the blood and the flesh, with the blood of anything torn by wild beasts, or strangled. Before the deluge, the fathers ate the herbs and fruits of the earth. After the flood they had leave to eat the flesh of living creatures; yet, they were to cut the throat, and drain the blood out of the body. The place is found in the ninth chapter of Genesis.^9.3-4 Moreover, the Lord with great severity says in the law: "Whatever man of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eats any manner of blood, I will set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people." Leviticus 17.10. And the same law is repeated in the nineteenth chapter of the same book, and in the twelfth and fifteenth chapters of Deuteronomy. It is again repeated in the third and seventh chapter of Leviticus. Nor is it without very just and great causes, that he so severely forbade the eating of blood. For first of all, after the words recited above, he immediately adds: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls: for blood shall make an atonement for the soul. Therefore I said to the children of Israel, Let no soul among you eat blood," etc. ^Lev
17.11-12

iii.215

Look, a most evident reason is given in these words, why it was not lawful to eat blood: because blood was the most excellent and precious thing, as that which was ordained for the sanctification of mankind. For God gave blood to be the price with which sins should be cleansed; to be the price of redemption, I say, by which men should be absolved of their sins. Blood is also the life, that is, the nourishment of life.

The blood, therefore, was a sign of the blood of Christ that was to be shed upon the cross. By his blood, as a most full and absolute atonement, the faithful are cleansed and thoroughly sanctified; and in his blood is the nourishment of the soul unto life everlasting. It was not lawful to eat the flesh of the sacrifices whose blood was carried into the sanctum [1339] for sin, but it was to be burnt outside the camp. So too, it was unlawful to eat the [1340] blood, which [1341] was the cleansing for their sins. Therefore, he is considered to eat blood, who attributes to his own strength or works the atonement which was made by the blood of Christ — esteeming Christ's blood to be profane, and not attributing to it the full satisfaction for all sins. Again, he is considered not to eat it, but to pour the blood at the altar, who ascribes the benefit of our redemption to the only merit of Christ, and esteems it of so great a value as it should be esteemed by right.

Lastly, God would have it deeply printed in the minds of men, that no man should shed another's blood, nor live by the blood and bowels of other men — as mercenary soldiers, covetous persons, usurers, and cozeners do, in sucking out and shedding the blood of silly people with subtle sleights and open injury. And God, talking with Noah, with terrible threats [1342] beat a horrible fear into all murderers, saying: "If men are slack, I will take vengeance upon the shedding of blood." ^{Gen 9.5-6} For man was made to the image and likeness of God. How can God choose, then, not to take the reproach as done to himself, which is done to his image? For whoever throws down the image of the king, offends against the king, and is accused of treason.

iii.216

But now, touching strangled, this law was given: "Do not eat with blood." And again, "Do not eat of that which dies of itself, nor of that which is torn by wild beasts," etc. [1343] But strangled and carrion that dies of itself, signified dead works. Whoever desires to get God's favour, [1344] is bid to purge himself of these. Therefore, whoever lives in wickedness, without repentance, not regarding the blood of Christ his Saviour, eats of what is strangled.

Now also, the touching of unclean things is set down in the law by these three notes: if you touch an unclean thing, or if you carry it, or if it falls by chance into some vessel or garment of yours. Whoever sins unwittingly, truly, is defiled by the "falling" of an unclean thing. But whoever sins willingly, and of a set and pretended purpose [i.e., "carries it"], sins more heinously. But whoever upholds wickedness [i.e., "touches it"], and compels others to commit it, sins most grievously of all. In touching unclean things, and also in other instances, it is said that the uncleanness shall abide till evening. That is an evident prophecy of Christ: namely, that the Messiah should come at evening, that is, at the end of the world, to purge the sins of all the earth.

Summary

I have stayed in and stuck upon the ceremonial laws enough, and long enough, by two whole sermons thus far (I pray to God it may be to your profit, dearly beloved). Therefore, that I may now come to an end, I will bring the chief points about which I have spoken, into a brief summary.

I divided the whole treatise about the ceremonial laws into three especial branches. For I spoke of the holy persons, of the holy time and place, and of the holy things which these holy persons exercised in the sacred place — I mean, the sacraments, the sacrifices, and other holy ceremonies. The holy persons are the priests. I showed you their first beginning, their ordering, their mystical apparel, and their sundry offices.

iii.217

When I spoke of the holy time and place, I described the tabernacle to you, and noted for you what was within the tabernacle: namely, the ark of the covenant, the golden table, the golden candlestick, the altar of incense, the altar of burnt-sacrifices, and the brazen laver: I declared the mysteries of all these to you. In the treatise about the holy time, I touched all the kinds of holy-days and solemn feast-days, with all their certain and uncertain holy-days. Last of all, in our discourse on the holy things,[1345] I told you of the two sacraments of the old church, circumcision and the Passover; and also of the sacrifices, some of which were burnt-offerings, some meat-offerings, some peculiar, and some of thanksgiving.[1346] In these, we also spoke somewhat touching free-will-offerings and vowed sacrifices. Finally, we spoke of vows, of the discipline [1347] of the Nazarites, of clean and unclean creatures, of the choice of meats, of blood and strangled, and of touching unclean things.

The Lord Jesus enlighten your hearts, that all this may tend to the glory of his name, and the health of your souls! Amen.

3-8. THE EIGHTH SERMON: THE OLD & NEW TESTAMENTS.

Of the use or effect of the law of God,
and of the fulfilling and abrogating of it:
of the likeness and difference of both the testaments and people,
the old and the new.

Up to here, in large sermons, I have laid out [1390] the law of God by several parts. Yet, I think I have not said all that should be said, nor made an end as I should, unless I now add a treatise about the use, effect, fulfilling, and abrogating of the law of God — even though I have touched this argument here and there in my sermons. Now, by this discourse or treatise, dearly beloved, you will understand that the Testament of the old and new church of God is all one; and that there is but one means of true salvation for all those who either have been, or at present are saved in the world. You will also perceive in what the old Testament differs from the new. Moreover, this treatise will be necessary and very profitable both to the understanding of many places in the holy scripture, and to the easy perceiving and most wholesome use of those things which I have said up to here touching the law. God — who is the author, wisdom, and perfect fulness of the law — give me grace to speak those things that will set forth his glory, and be profitable for the health of your souls.[1391]

iii.237

The use of God's law is manifold and of sundry sorts; and yet it may be reduced to three especial points, and we may say that its use is threefold or of three sorts.

First of all, the chief and proper office of the law is to convince all men that they are guilty of sin, and are the children of death by their own fault. For the law of God sets forth for us the holy will of God; and in setting it forth, it requires a most perfect and absolute kind of righteousness from us. And for that reason, the law is usually called the testimony of God's will, and the most perfect exemplar of his divine pureness. To this belong those words of the Lord in the gospel, where briefly recounting the sum of God's commandments, he says:

"The first of all the commandments is this: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord: and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength. This is the first commandment. And the second is like it: you shall love your neighbour as yourself. There are no other commandments greater than these."^{Mar 12.29-31}

Therefore, to this also pertains that saying of the apostle Paul: "The end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and unfeigned faith." ^{1Tim 1.5} But since the law requires at all our hands, most absolute righteousness, charity, and [1392] a pure heart, it [1393] condemns all men of sin, unrighteousness, and death. For in the law of God it is expressly said: "Cursed is everyone who does not abide in all that is written in the book of the law, to do it." [1394] But which one of us fulfills all the points of the law? What man, I ask, either has had, or today has, a pure heart within him? What man has ever loved or now loves God with all his heart, with all his soul, and with all his mind? What man never lusted after evil? Or who now does not lust every day? Therefore, imperfection and sin is revealed in mankind by the law, or by betraying the law.

iii.238

What shall we say to this? Where, I pray you, does there appear in any man, that divine and most absolute righteousness which the law requires? Job cries, "I know truly that a man, compared to God, cannot be justified." [1395] Or, "How shall a man be found righteous, if he is compared to God? If he argues with him, he shall not be able to answer one for a thousand.[1396] If I have any righteousness in me, I will not answer him, but I will beseech my judge." [1397] Likewise, these are the words of the apostle John, who says: "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." Again, "If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us." ^{1Joh 1.8,10} Therefore, by this means the law is a certain mirror [1398] in which we behold our own corruption, frailness, imbecility, imperfection, and our judgment — that is, our just and deserved damnation. For the apostle expressly says that the law was given to the end that it might make manifest men's transgressions, and by that means drive them to acknowledging their imperfection and guilt in sinning. For none of us looks into his own bosom, nor into the secrets of his own breast, but we all flatter ourselves, and will not be persuaded that our thoughts and deeds [1399] are as corrupt as they are indeed; and therefore the law creeps in, and lays open the secrets of our hearts, and brings to light our sin and corruption. "Before the law," says the apostle, "although sin was in the world, yet it was not imputed." [1400] The same apostle also says: "The law works wrath; for where there is no law, there is no transgression." And again, "By the law comes the knowledge of sin." [1401] For in the seventh chapter to the Romans the same apostle says more fully:

"I would not have known sin except by the law: for I would not have known lust, unless the law had said, you shall not lust.

iii.239

But sin, taking occasion [1402] by the commandment, worked in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law, sin was dead. I once lived without law; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I was dead. And it was found that the same commandment which was ordained for life, was for me an occasion of death," etc. ^{Rom 7.7-10}

A good part of that chapter is spent in that matter. Therefore, the proper office of Moses, and the principal use and effect of the law, is to show man his sin and imperfection.

As for those who stop here, and go no further to make any other use and effect of the law — as though Moses did nothing but kill, and the law did nothing but slay — they are diversely and not lightly deceived. I repeat it here again, and tell them that the very proper office of the law is to make sin manifest; and also that Moses' chief office is to teach us what we have to do, and to urge it with threatenings and cursings, especially when the law is compared with the gospel. For in the third chapter of the second epistle to the Corinthians, Paul calls the law the letter; and immediately after, he calls it the ministration of death; then again, he calls it a doctrine written in letters and ink, and figured in tablets of stone — which should not endure, but perish and decay. The same apostle, on the other side again,[1403] calls the gospel the ministration or doctrine of the Spirit, which endures and does not decay, which is written in men's hearts, and gives life to believers.[1404] Upon this, we freely confess that the law properly manifests our infirmity;[1405] but the gospel gives a medicine and a remedy to that which was almost past hope.

And now, here, we must think that our holy ancestors did not have the law alone to convince them of sin; nor did Moses do nothing else but kill and slay; nor was Moses given to wound them, but to heal them.[1406] And he did that, not by his own power or virtue, but by guiding them to Him that cherishes the contrite in heart, and heals all their sorrows: that is, Christ Jesus, who also worked by the ministry of Moses.

iii.240

For we must not think, from the beginning of the world, nor from Moses' time till the coming of Christ, that only the bare letter was preached, and that the grace and Spirit of God was idle and not wrought in the minds of the faithful. For the law shows us, and invincibly proves to us that the perfection which the most holy and perfect God requires of us in his law, is not in us — I mean, in our flesh. In this, it revokes and pulls back mankind (not by virtue of itself, but by the power of the quickening Spirit of Christ) from confidence in the flesh, in which there is no health nor jot of perfection. And consequently, it gives us occasion to turn to Christ our mediator, who alone is our sanctification and perfection. And so, for this occasion, the law is a path and ready way, and as it were, a schoolmaster given to us by God, to draw us away from all confidence in our own strengths, from all hope of our own merits,[1407] and from trust in any kind of creatures. And thus the law leads us directly by faith to Christ, who was made by God (as I said just now) our "righteousness, sanctification, and redemption." ^{1Cor 1.30} Without him, there is no salvation under the sun. Therefore, Moses not only urged the law, but also preached Christ and life in Christ. For the Lord in the gospel says to the Jews: "Do not think that I will accuse you to my Father; there is one that accuses you, even Moses, in whom you trust. For if you had believed Moses, you would undoubtedly have believed me: for he wrote of me." ^{Joh 5.45-46} And Paul says to the Galatians:

"If there had been a law given which could have given life, then no doubt righteousness would have been by the law. But the scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by the faith of Jesus Christ would be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, and shut up for the faith which would afterward be revealed. Therefore, the law was our schoolmaster unto Christ, that we should be justified by faith." ^{Gal 3.21-24}

iii.241

Look, what could be said more plainly than that the law has confined all under sin? But to what end? "That the promise by the faith of Christ Jesus would be given to those who believe." And again: "Before faith came," that is, before the one came to whom our faith is directed, and upon whom it is grounded, "we were kept under the law." How? In truth, being shut up for the faith that was to be revealed. Therefore our fathers were shut up in the law, so that they would not break out at any time, and seek life and salvation anywhere else but in Christ alone. Therefore, the law led us [1408] by faith directly to Christ. And yet more plainly he says: "The law was our schoolmaster unto Christ." Look, here again the law brings us to Christ. And again he adds; "That we should be justified by faith." Therefore the law sets forth the true doctrine of justification, teaching plainly that we are justified by faith in Christ, and not by the merits of our own works. In this point, it is openly like the gospel, and takes to itself the office of the gospel: and this is no marvel, since to many men, through their own fault, the gospel [1409] becomes and is made the letter. Furthermore, the same apostle in another place says that "in sacrifices they called their sins to remembrance;" ^Heb
10.2-3 and we know that the purging of sins was prefigured in them. [1410] Therefore, even the ceremonial laws also led them to Christ, testifying and teaching them that he alone cleanses us from all our sins. I conclude from this, that the office of Moses and of the law, both was and is, to expose to us our sin and judgment; and yet it was not to condemn us only, but also by occasion to lead us to Christ.

By this we also learn that the law not only teaches us the first principles and rudiments of righteousness, but the very true and absolute righteousness. For Moses expressly says that he taught a most perfect and absolute kind of doctrine, as that in which both life and death wholly consist.^{Deu 30.15}

iii.242

And the apostle says that the law leads us by the hand to Christ, so that we should be justified by faith. Now, the righteousness of faith is the most perfect righteousness. Therefore, though the precepts of the law are called in some places the rudiments of the world,[1411] that is for two especial causes: the first is because the law is, as it were, the first instructions or elements, which are finished when the doctrine of the gospel comes, and so it gives way to the gospel as to more absolute principles; the second is because ceremonies are taught under outward things or signs, those outward things prefigure, and set forth to be seen, the inward things — even Christ himself and his holy mysteries.

And out of what I have said up to here, we may also learn that the ancient saints, who lived under the old testament, did not seek righteousness and salvation in the works of the law, but in the one who is the perfection and end of the law, even Christ Jesus. And therefore they used the law and the ceremonies as a guide and school mistress to lead them by the hand to Christ their Saviour. For as often as they heard that the law required perfect righteousness from their hands, they understood by faith through grace, that in the law Christ was set forth to be the most absolute righteousness, to whom all men ought to fly to obtain righteousness. So often as they met together in the holy congregation to behold the holy ceremonies which God ordained, they did not look upon the bare figures only, nor did they think that they pleased God and were purged from their sins by that external kind of worship. Rather, they cast the eyes of their minds and of faith upon the Messiah to come, who was prefigured in all the ceremonies and ordinances of the law. Therefore, the law was abused by those who thought they were acceptable to God, and served him as they should, because they were busy in those ceremonial works. The prophets in their sermons sharply accused, and evermore cried out against those thoughts and persuasions. And in that sense, and for that cause, the people of Israel are many times called a carnal people. It was not that all the patriarchs and fathers before the coming of Christ were carnal or fleshly.

iii.243

It was because they yet lived under those external shadows and outward figures; and because there were perhaps some among the people who did not perceive the spiritual things that were shadowed under those external figures, and perhaps thought that they were acceptable to God for working and doing that external work.[1412]

The second use, and another office of the law is, to teach those who are justified in faith by Christ, what to follow and what to eschew, and how the godly and faithful sort should worship God. For the law of God comprehends a most absolute doctrine both of faith in God, and also of all good works. For in the first use of the law, I declared how the moral and ceremonial law teach us faith in God and in Christ his Son, and how it brings man to the knowledge of himself, so that he may understand how in himself — that is, in the nature of man — there is no good thing nor any life; but that all the gifts of life, virtues, and salvation, are of God the Father, the only well-spring of all goodness, through Christ his Son our Saviour.

In this second argument about the end, use, or office of the law of God, we must acknowledge all the forms of virtues, and the treasure of all goodness, set forth to us in the law of the Lord; and that the apostle applies the precepts of the law to exhortation and consolation. The first of the two tablets of the moral law, teaches what we owe to God, and how he will be worshipped by us. The second tablet frames the offices of life, and teaches us how to behave ourselves toward our neighbour. The ceremonies also belong to religion;[1413] and the judicials teach the government about a house or a commonweal, so that by them we may live honestly among ourselves and holily towards God. Therefore, the law teaches all justice, temperance, fortitude, and wisdom, and it instructs a godly man in every good work in which a holy worshipper of God must necessarily be instructed.

iii.244

This is why, as often as the holy prophets of God would set up again and restore the worship of God, and the true religion that had decayed, they would cry out against and rebuke the faults and errors of men; and lastly, when they would teach them to do those good works, which are good works indeed, they always led them to the law, and cited all their testimonies out of the law. We have evident examples of this in the fifteenth Psalm of David, and in the first and thirty-third chapter of Isaiah's Prophecy, and in the eighteenth chapter of Ezekiel also. Paul in the thirteenth chapter to the Romans refers all the offices of our life to the law of charity; for the Lord himself, before Paul, had done the same in the gospel. Moreover, the prophet David in the ninety-fourth Psalm cries, "Blessed is the man, Lord, whom you instruct in your law;" and in the seventy-eighth Psalm, "He made a covenant with Jacob, and gave a law in Israel, that the posterity might know it, and put their trust in the Lord, and not forget the works of God, but keep His commandments." Again, in the nineteenth Psalm he says:

"The law of the Lord is an undefiled law, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, and gives wisdom to the simple: the statutes of the Lord are right, and rejoice the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, and gives light to the eyes. The fear of the Lord is holy, and endures forever: the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether:[1414] they are more to be desired than gold and precious stone; and sweeter than honey and the honeycomb." ^{Psa 19.7-10}

And to this end tends the sense of all the alphabetical psalm, number 119 in order.

The third use or office of the law is to repress the unruly; and the law commands us to constrain with punishment, those whom no reason can move to orderliness — so that honesty, peace, and public tranquility, may be maintained in Christian commonweals.[1415]

iii.245

For there are some, and that is no small number of people, who refrain from doing evil, and live somewhat tolerably, not so much for the love of virtue, as for the fear of punishment that will ensue from their inordinate living. Therefore it pleased the goodness of God, by giving the law, to put in a caveat, and to make a proviso for the tranquility of mankind. And it seems that the apostle had an eye to this when he said:

"We know, that the law was not given to the just, but to the unjust, to the lawless and disobedient, to the ungodly and to sinners, to the unholy and unclean, to murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, to manslayers, to whore-mongers, to those who defile themselves with mankind, to manstealers, to liars, to the perjured; and if there is anything else that is contrary to wholesome doctrine," etc. ^1Tim
1.9-10

After the declaration of the use, the end, and the office of the law, I next have to teach you how, and by means, the law of God is fulfilled. It is impossible for any man, of his own strength, to fulfil the law and fully satisfy the will of God in all points. For it is manifest that in the law, not only is the outward work required, but also the pureness of the inward affections, and as I just said, a certain heavenly and absolute perfectness as it were. For the Lord himself in one place cries, "Be perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." ^{Mat 5.48} But so absolute a perfectness is not found in us so long as we live in this flesh: for the flesh, even to the very end of our life, still keeps her corrupt disposition; and even though many times it is overthrown by the spirit that strives against it, yet it still renews the fight.[1416] So that there is not found in us, nor does there remain in our strength, that heavenly and most absolute perfectness. But let us hear the testimony of the holy apostle Paul touching this matter, who says: "We know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For what I do, I do not allow: for what I would do, that I do not; but what I hate, that I do." ^Rom
7.14-15

iii.246

And again: "I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, no good thing dwells: for to will is present with me; but I find no means to perform what is good." Again: "I delight in the law of God after the inward man: but I see another law in my members, rebelling against the law of my mind, and subduing me to the law of sin which is in my members." Rom 7. And at the end, he concludes, and says: "So then, with the mind I serve the law of God; but with the flesh, I serve the law of sin." Now there are some who think that Paul spoke these words not of himself, but of others who were carnal men and not as yet regenerate. But the very words of the apostle force the reader, whether he will or not, to confess, that the words recited may be applied even to the man that is most spiritual. Augustine says (i. Lib. Retractat. cap. 23) that he himself was at one time of the opinion that those words of the apostle ought to be expounded about the man who is under the law, and not under grace. But he confesses that he was compelled by the authority of others' writings and treatises to think that the apostle spoke them about those men who were most spiritual, and of his own person — as Augustine at large declares in his book [1417] against the Pelagians.[1418] Even St. Jerome also, who is said to have thundered out a most horrible curse against those who taught that the law commanded impossible things,[1419] expressly writes to Rusticus that Paul is speaking of himself in this place.[1420]

iii.247

But if the flesh with its corrupt disposition remains, by which it incessantly strives with the spirit, then truly, that heavenly perfectness is never perfect in us so long as we live; and consequently, so long as we live, none of us fulfills the law.

Here also is to be inserted that disputation of Paul, where he proves that no mortal man is justified by the works of the law. His meaning is not that no man is justified by the very works of the law, but that no man is justified by the works of our corrupt nature,[1421] which does not perform what the law of God requires — for it is not able to perform it, as the apostle says. And very well and truly he says; "We know that a man is not justified by the deeds of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ: and we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the deeds of the law; because by the deeds of the law no flesh shall be justified." ^{Gal 2.16} Nor must we understand the deeds of the law to refer only to the ceremonies. For even as the ceremonies do not justify us, so likewise the morals do not. The apostle speaks of the morals, when he speaks of the deeds of the law. For in the third chapter to the Romans, the apostle says: "By the deeds of the law no flesh shall be justified in His sight." And immediately after he adds the reason why, saying: "for by the law comes the knowledge of sin." But in the seventh chapter he shows by which law it comes: namely, the moral law. For the moral law says, "You shall not lust." But the apostle says, "I would not have known sin except by the law; for I would not have known concupiscence, if the law had not said, you shall not lust." In his epistle to the Ephesians, ^{Eph 2.9} he speaks to the Gentiles, and says simply that works do not justify. But speaking to the Gentiles, he could not have meant it about ceremonial laws, but about moral virtues, that is, all kinds of works that seemed good. To the Galatians he says: "As many as are of the deeds of the law are under the curse." ^{Gal 3.10}

iii.248

And to prove that, he adds; "For it is written, Cursed is everyone that does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." Now unless we understand the morals as well as the ceremonials to mean the deeds of the law, I do not see how his proof can be consistent with what went before. For he says expressly, "in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." Now who does not know that the ceremonials were not written alone, but that the morals were written also? And St. Augustine in his book, De Spiritu et litera, cap. viii., proves by many arguments that Paul understood the deeds of the law to mean the morals also.[1422]

Now, so that we may conclude this place, I will here recite the words of the apostle in the eighth chapter to the Romans,[1423] saying:

"What the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God performed by sending his own Son in the similitude of sinful flesh, and by sin condemned sin in the flesh — that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk after the flesh, but after the spirit."

In these words, the apostle teaches us two things: first, that the law cannot now, nor ever could, justify us. The fault of this weakness or lack of ability, he does not cast upon the law, which of itself is good and effectual and is the doctrine of most absolute righteousness; but he lays the fault of it upon our corrupt flesh. Our flesh neither could, nor can, perform that which is required of us by the law [1424] of God. Thus, in the council held at Jerusalem, St. Peter said: "Now, therefore, why do you tempt God by putting on the disciples' necks, the yoke which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?" ^{Acts 15.10}

iii.249

The latter is inferred upon the first: namely, when the law could not give us life, and we were unable to do what the law required at our hands, then God, who is rich in mercy and goodness, sent his Son into the world, that he, being incarnate, should die for us, and so take away the sin of our imperfection, and bestow on us his perfectness and fulness of the law.[1425] It is therefore manifest that Christ has fulfilled the law, and that he is the perfectness of all the faithful in the world.

But here this place requires a fuller exposition of how Christ has fulfilled the law, and how he is made our perfectness. First of all, whatever things are promised and prefigured in the law and the prophets, Christ our Lord has fulfilled all those. For these promises; "The seed of the woman shall crush the serpent's head;" "In you shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed;" [1426] and countless others like these, our Lord fulfilled when, being born into this world, he made atonement for us and brought us back to life again. In like manner, he fulfilled all the ceremonials while he himself, being both priest and sacrifice, offered himself up, and is now and ever an effectual and everlasting sacrifice, and an eternal high priest — always making intercession at the right hand of the Father, for all faithful believers. He also spiritually circumcised the faithful, and has given them the sacrament of baptism instead of circumcision. He is our Passover, who instead of the paschal lamb has ordained the Eucharist, or supper of the Lord. Finally, he is the fulfilling and perfectness of the law and the prophets. Moreover, our Lord fulfilled the law, in that he most absolutely satisfied the will of God in all points, being himself the holiest of all, in whom there is no spot, no evil concupiscence, nor any sin. In him, the love of God is most perfect, and righteousness is altogether absolute. He freely communicates this righteousness to us, who are most imperfect, if we believe and have our hope fast settled in him.

iii.250

For he forgives us our sins, being made a cleansing sacrifice for us, and he makes us partakers of his own righteousness. For that reason, it is called imputed righteousness, to which the testimonies of the apostle pertain. "God," says Paul, "was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their sins to them. For him who knew no sin, was made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God by him." [1427] Again: "Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness, without works. So also, if we believe in God through Christ, our faith shall be imputed to us for righteousness." ^{Rom 4.3,24} For by faith we lay hold on Christ, whom we believe to have made most absolute satisfaction to God for us; and consequently, we believe that God is pleased with us for Christ's sake, and that his righteousness is imputed to us as our own (and is indeed our own by gift), because we are now the sons of God.

These things being diligently weighed, it is easy for us to answer those who question and demand this: Since no mortal man of himself exactly satisfies the law, how then are righteousness, life, and salvation, promised to those who observe the law? Our answer is, in truth, that this promise respects the perfect righteousness of Christ, which is imputed to us. Otherwise it is assuredly certain that the holy scripture does not so much as in one jot disagree or depart in any point from itself. The apostle plainly says: "If there had a law been given which could have given life, then righteousness would have been by the law: but now, the scripture has confined all under sin, so that the promise might be given by faith to those who believe."^{Gal 3.21-22} This is why the one who does the thing for which the law was chiefly ordained, keeps or fulfils the law, even of the Ten Commandments. But the law was chiefly ordained (as I declared a little earlier) to the end that it might convince us all of sin and damnation, and so by that means send us from ourselves, and lead us by the hand to Christ, who is the fulfilling of the law unto justification for everyone who believes. ^{Rom 10.4}

iii.251

And therefore, someone fulfils and keeps the law, if he has no confidence in himself and his own works, but committing himself to the true grace of God, he seeks all righteousness in the faith of Christ. Thus it is now evident that these two sentences of Christ our Lord are of one sense and meaning; "Whoever believes in me, has life everlasting:" and, "If you would enter into life, keep the commandments." [1428] For Paul also, in the thirteenth chapter of the Acts, says: "Be it known to you, brethren, that through Christ is preached to you the forgiveness of sins; and by him all who believe are justified from all the things, from which he could not be justified by the law of Moses." ^{Act 13.38} And to this place now belongs all the work [1429] of justification, of which I have disputed at large in another place.[1430]

Now that faith with which we believe that Christ has satisfied the law, and that he is our righteousness and our perfection, is neither of our own nature nor of our own merits, but is poured into us by the grace of God through the Holy Spirit which is given into our hearts. This Spirit abiding in our hearts, inflames our breasts with the love and desire for God's law, to endeavour to express and show the law in all our works and conversation. This desire and endeavour are never fully accomplished because of the flesh's frailty, or the weakness of man's nature — which remains in us till the last gasp and end of our life. Notwithstanding, it is acceptable to God by grace for Christ's sake alone. Nor does any godly man put any confidence in this other, but only in the first fulfilling of the law, as that alone which is absolute and perfect. For Paul in his epistle to the Romans cries out: "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" [1431] And yet immediately after, he answers, "I thank God," namely, because he has redeemed me from death, "through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then, I myself with the mind serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin. There is then [1432] no condemnation for those who are grafted in Christ Jesus, who do not walk after the flesh, but after the spirit," etc. ^{Rom 7.25-8.1}

iii.252

Thus, since we are in Christ, we are in grace, and therefore God is pleased with our works, which being given to us by faith and by the liberal Spirit,[1433] proceed from a heart that loves God, the giver of them all.[1434] For John said: "This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments; and his commandments are not grievous." He also adds the reason for it, and says; "For all who are born of God overcome the world:" now everyone is born of God, who believes; as declared in first John.[1435]

By this, it is easy to reconcile these two places, which at first blush seem to jar one with another: The laws of God are heavy, which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear: and, The laws of God are not grievous, nor heavy to be borne.[1436] For they are not heavy for the faithful who are in Christ, and those which have the gift of God's Spirit — that is, those who are reconciled to God by Christ their Lord and Saviour. Without Christ and faith in Christ, they are most grievous and heavy for every unbeliever to bear.[1437] So the faithful, being stirred up by the Spirit of God, voluntarily and of his own accord, does good to all men so far as his ability allows him; and he will not in any case do harm to any man — not because he fears the punishment that in the law has appointed for the disobedient, unjust, and wrongful dealers; but because he loves God. And so he also fulfills the judicial law.

Here I know full well that you will make this objection and say that, if the law is fulfilled, and the fulfilling of it [1438] has a place in the saints and faithful ones, then why, I ask you, did I need the abrogating of the law? [1439]

iii.253

Why did Paul and all the best divines need to dispute so largely about the abrogation of it? I will therefore say something about the abrogation of the law, first generally, and then by parts in particular. But first of all, these words of the Lord in the gospel must be beaten into the head of every godly hearer:

"Do not think," he says, "that I have come to destroy the law or the prophets: indeed, I did not come to destroy, but to fulfil them. Truly, I say to you, heaven and earth shall pass away, but not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away, till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore looses one of the smallest of these commandments, and teaches men to do so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whoever does and teaches them, shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." ^{Mat 5.17-19}

Let everyone therefore be assuredly persuaded that the law of God, which is the most excellent and perfect will of God, is forever eternal, and cannot be dissolved at any time, either by men, or angels, or any other creatures. Let every man think that the law, so far as it is the rule for how to live well and happily — so far as it is the bridle with which we are kept in the fear of the Lord; so far as it is a prick to awake the dullness of our flesh; and so far as it is given to instruct, correct, and rebuke us — that so far, I say, it remains unabrogated, and even today has her commodity in the church of God. Therefore, the abrogating of the law consists in this that follows.

I told you that God's commandments require the whole man, and a very heavenly kind of perfectness. Whoever does not perform this, is accursed and condemned by the law. Now, no man fulfils that righteousness; therefore, we are all accursed by the law. But this curse is taken away, and most absolute righteousness is freely bestowed on us, through Christ Jesus. For Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made the curse, righteousness, and sanctification for us. And so, it is in this sense that the law is abrogated; that is, through Christ the curse of the law is taken from the faithful, and true righteousness is bestowed upon us through grace, by faith in the same Christ Jesus.[1440]

iii.254

For he is that blessed Seed in whom all the kindreds of the earth are blessed. ^{Act 3.25} He is our righteousness. For Paul says, "By him everyone that believes is justified from all things, from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses."^{Act 13.39} Therefore, the law is put for the curse of the law: or else the law of God is taken for that which is revealed or made manifest by the law, that is to say, it is taken for sin; for by the law comes the knowledge of sin. Therefore the law is abrogated (that is, sin is taken away), not that it should not exist, or should not express itself [1441] in us, but that it should not be imputed to us and condemn us; "for there is no damnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." [1442] Moreover, the law is taken for the vengeance or punishment which is appointed by the law for transgressors. Therefore, the law is abrogated, because the punishment appointed by the law is taken from the necks of the faithful believers; "for the law is not given to the righteous man." ^1Tim
1.9 For Christ delivered the faithful from eternal punishments, while he, being guiltless, suffered afflictions for wicked sinners. Furthermore, the apostle says: "The fleshly mind is enmity against God: for it is not obedient to the law of God, nor can it be."^{Rom 8.7} But now this hatred or enmity of God's law is by faith pulled out of the hearts of the faithful; and in its stead, the love of God's most holy will is engrafted. Thus, the law is said to be abrogated in this sense also, because the hatred of the law is taken away. And therefore the apostle compares those who are under the law, to bond-slaves, and those who are free from the law, to sons and children. He also attributes to them the spirit, not of bondage, but of adoption. "For because you are sons," he says, "God has sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, which cries, Abba, Father," etc. ^{Gal 4.6} To these it may be added that the law of God has types and shadows; and the ceremonies are very burdensome, for which the whole law is also called a yoke. But now the Son of God came into this world. Fulfilling the figures, he showed us the very truth, and abolished those types and shadows; so that now no man can condemn us for neglecting or passing over those ceremonies or figures.

iii.255

And so again, in that sense, the law of God is abrogated — that is to say, that kind of government which Moses ordained came to nothing, once Christ came and his apostles began to teach. For without regard to the ecclesiastical regiment appointed by Moses, they congregated churches, to whom they did not teach that kind of regiment which Moses had ordained. For they constantly rejected the priesthood of Aaron, the sacraments, sacrifices, choice of days, meats, and apparel, which Moses had taught their elders; and instead of all those rites, they preached Christ alone, and his two sacraments, etc. [1443]

I have said this much up to here, generally touching the abrogation of the law. Now I will more largely expound on it again, in several parts. The whole law is divided into the moral, ceremonial, and judicial laws.

The moral law is contained in the Ten Commandments, the first precept of which teaches us to honour and worship one God alone, and not to compare any strange gods with him. Our Lord Jesus in the gospel so earnestly urged and diligently taught this commandment, that we may perceive very well that nothing in it is altered. The second precept forbids idolatry, that is, the worshipping and honouring of all manner of images, whether they are the images of God himself, or of any of his creatures. But it is known that the apostles, in the doctrine of the gospel, used all the means that they could to banish and drive away all kinds of idolatry. Paul and John cry, "Flee from idolatry." [1444] And because Christ and his apostles most diligently teach us to sanctify and glorify God's holy name, they thereby give their consent to establishing the third commandment, which forbids defiling God's name by taking it in vain. The fourth commandment, concerning sanctifying the sabbath-day, is alone called ceremonial by St. Augustine.[1445]

iii.256

But it must not be understood simply as ceremonial: for so far as the outward worship of God requires a certain appointed time to be exercised, and carries with it the sacrifices of the law, that is how far, I say, it is ceremonial. But in that it teaches us to meet in holy-assemblies to worship God — to pray, preach, partake of the sacraments, and offer spiritual sacrifices — in these things, it is eternal and not ceremonial, as I declared before in the exposition of the sabbath.[1446] The fifth precept, touching the honour due to parents, the Lord himself ratifies in the fifteenth chapter of Matthew's gospel; he also diligently teaches the sixth against murder, and the seventh against adultery, in the fifth chapter of the same gospel. The eighth, which is against theft, is revived by the apostle, who charges that no man deceive [1447] his brother, and that no man steal any more; but that everyone should labour with his hands, so that he may have things necessary for himself, and be able to give to the one that lacks.[1448] The ninth precept — which is for bridling the tongue so that no lie is made, nor false witness borne against our neighbour — is confirmed by Christ himself and his apostles, so often as they give rules for ordering the tongue, and charge every man to speak the truth to his neighbour. And they also condemn evil lusts and affections, by which they do not abrogate but affirm the tenth commandment, which forbids all manner of concupiscence. Therefore, the whole abrogation of the Ten Commandments, so far as they are abrogated, consists in those points which I just spoke about: namely, that Christ in faith is our perfect and absolute righteousness, etc. The apostle, bearing witness to this, says: "What the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, having sent his own Son in the similitude of sinful flesh, even by sin, condemned sin in the flesh — that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk after the flesh, but after the spirit:" as seen in the eighth chapter to the Romans.[1449] I have therefore more briefly discussed this matter here, because I have spoken of it at the full in the treatise about the Ten Commandments.

iii.257

I have now come to speak of the ceremonials. These ceremonials were given and granted until the time of amendment — namely, until Messiah should come. Messiah has already come; therefore all the ceremonies, even to the coming, death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ our Lord into the heavens, have come to an end; they have no place any longer in the church of the Christians. And yet, here we must and do differentiate between the writings concerning the ceremonies, and the very things of the ceremonies that are set down in writing — I mean, the very ceremonies themselves, or the actions that were used. For the writings concerning the ceremonies, which were set forth by the Spirit of God, are not taken away from Christians,[1450] nor abrogated, so that they may not be read, retained, or used in the church (as I declared in the second sermon of the first decade).[1451] For they are effectual to instruct us in Christ Jesus, when we behold in them the manner how Christ was preached and prefigured to the ancient church of the holy fathers. Paul, truly, most significantly preached Christ out of the ceremonies; no man will deny this, who diligently reads his epistle to the Hebrews. For in that epistle, Paul wonderfully lays Christ and all his gifts before the eyes of the whole church. Therefore, the ceremonials both may and ought to be read in the church, so that Christ is sought in them; and when he is found, he is aptly preached. For that reason, in the fifth and sixth sermons of this decade (where I handled the ceremonials), I annexed to them certain notes about their significations, so that I might open a way for the students of the scriptures and lovers of Christ to go forward and proceed in that kind of argument.

Now the ceremonial [1452] things (or the stuff of the ceremonies) — such as the priesthood, the place, time, sacrifice, and whatever else is like these — are utterly abrogated, so that from then on, they are not used, nor do they have any place in the church of Christ.

iii.258

Jeremiah foretold this in the third chapter of his prophecy, saying: "In those days they shall no longer boast of the ark of the Lord's covenant: no man will think about it, nor shall any man mention it; for from then on it shall neither be visited, nor shall such things be done anymore." ^{Jer 3.16} By the ark, the prophet means those points of the law which are abolished by the coming of Christ. From the promise that God made to Jeremiah, saying that "he would make a new covenant," ^{Jer 31.31} St. Paul gathers this observation, in his epistle to the Hebrews: "In that he says, A new covenant, he has worn out the first; for that which is worn out, and grown old, is ready to vanish away." ^Heb
8.13 The same apostle says to the Ephesians: "Christ is our peace, who has made both one, and broken down the middle wall that was a block between us; taking away in his flesh the hatred, even the law of commandments contained in the ordinances, to make of two one new man in himself, so making peace." ^{Eph 2.14} God truly severed the Jews from the Gentiles while he chose and consecrated them to be a peculiar people to himself — not only by the calling of the word, but also by the sacraments. For there were ceremonies prescribed and given, which would encompass and contain [1453] the heritage of the Lord, as a middle wall between the Jews and the Gentiles. So that the note of difference consisted in the ceremonies, by which the Jews were known to be the lawful heirs of God's good promises, and of which the Gentiles had no part or portion. But Christ came into the world, with the intent that from two peoples, the Jews and the Gentiles, he might make one church. And therefore, he broke down the middle wall that parted them; that is, he clean took away the ceremonial ordinances which were a block between them. [1454]

iii.259

For Christ in that case did the same thing that princes usually do, when they go about bringing two nations at variance, into one kingdom and under one authority. They first take away the diversity of arms,[1455] which are the evidences of their ancient hatred — so that when the cause of the remembrance of the grudge is taken from their eyes, they may better agree between them in mind and behaviour. Even so, Christ took away circumcision, the sacrifices, and all the ceremonies, to the end that he might make one church and fellowship of the Jews and Gentiles.[1456] To the Colossians, Paul compares the ceremonies to an obligation, or to a hand-writing,[1457] by which God has bound us, as it were, so that we cannot deny the guilt. But he says that we were so delivered by Christ from the guilt, that the obligation or hand-writing was cancelled or torn in pieces. But by cancelling the hand-writing, the debtor is acquitted and set at liberty. And therefore we read that at the death of our Lord, the veil of the temple was torn in pieces from the bottom up to the very top — so that thereby all people might understand both that their sins were then forgiven, and that the people of God were set at liberty from all the burden and yoke of the law. Truly, when the wicked, stiff-necked, and disloyal people of the Jews, after the death of Christ, went on to exercise, prorogue,[1458] and impose [1459] on all men, the ceremonies which were finished and abrogated at the coming of Messiah [1460] — then Christ, sitting at the right hand of the Father, by means of the Roman princes, utterly defaced their city, and overthrew the temple in which they boasted.[1461]

iii.260

This is what the prophet Daniel, and Balaam many hundreds of years before Daniel's time, foretold and said would come to pass.[1462] Nor have they had up to now, for the span of 1500 years and more, any place to restore and set up again their city and temple.

In Theodoret [1463] and Ruffinus we read that in the reign of Julian the emperor, the Jews set about with very great hope and presumption, to build a new temple. And they sought the foundation of it in the place where that temple had stood, which was burnt by Titus, son and general [1464] to the emperor Vespasian. But Christ our Lord — who in the gospel, foretold its desolation out of Daniel's prophecy, said among other things, "And Jerusalem shall be trodden underfoot by the Gentiles, till the time of the Gentiles are fulfilled," — mightily repressed their wicked endeavours, and hindered their labour for going forward. For when they had gathered and brought together many thousands of bushels of lime and chalk, a whirlwind suddenly came with an awesome storm and blustering, which scattered abroad and carried away the stores provided by them. A terrible earthquake also happened, by which almost all the buildings of the place were swept away, and leveled to the ground. Finally, when a great company, who were busy in the work, remained that same night, taking their rest in a certain porch or gallery near the newly begun city and temple, the whole building and roof of it, falling down all of a sudden, slayed all who were within reach of it. In the morning, each of those who remained alive, ran to seek his friend among those who were slain by the ruinous building. And when those terrors could do no good, nor turn them from their purpose, then suddenly out of the nearby trenches, foundations, and storehouses, where their tools and other necessaries lay, a fearful fire sprang forth, which burnt many who urged the work, and compelled the rest to take to their heels. For in that one day, it broke forth at various times, and so at last repressed the stubborn rashness of that stiff-necked people. And because these things should not be thought to have happened casually or by coincidence, the night before and the night following, there appeared in the sky a bright or glistering sign of the cross, and the garments of the Jews were filled over with crosses, not bright but black, which could not be rid nor wiped out by any painstaking or manner of means.

iii.261

Therefore, in spite of their teeth,[1465] and full sore against their wills, being compelled by those horrible terrors, fearful judgments, and bitter plagues of Christ our Lord, they forsook the place. Every man fled to his house, leaving the work undone, and openly confessing that Jesus Christ, whom their forefathers had crucified, is a most mighty God. However, Julian, with Pharaoh, and the chief of the Jews, still persevered in their disloyalty and spiteful blasphemy against Him [1466] and his holy church.[1467]

But however the Jews may abide in their willful stubbornness, even today, the Lord declared from heaven openly enough, that he is no longer delighted with the ceremonial rites, because he destroyed all the instruments belonging to that ancient kind of worship; and he made the very shop of that old religion — I mean the temple and city of Jerusalem — level with the ground. Touching the temple, the Lord in the gospel spoke to his disciples, when they beheld it with wonder,[1468] and said: "Do you see all these things? Truly I say to you, there shall not be left here one stone standing upon another." [1469] And again, weeping over the unthankful city, he said: "They shall not leave in you one stone standing upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation." And now that all this was accomplished and fully finished, word for word, Josephus, who was an eye-witness, largely testifies of it in the eighteenth chapter of his seventh book De Bello Judaico.[1470] As I just told you, from one thousand five hundred years ago to this present time, the Jews never had any place given them to build their temple again. If they were not beside themselves, they might easily gather by this, that the Messiah has already come into the world, and that he has abrogated all the ceremonial rites.

iii.262

It is a very slender, or rather, it is no defence at all for the Jews to repeatedly allege the words in the law, where the ceremonies are described: "You shall keep it for an everlasting ordinance." For in this sense, "everlasting" is taken as long-lasting and unchangeable, so far as it respects the will or authority of mankind. For the Lord, threatening grievous punishments, forbid that mankind's unadvisedness should change or abrogate the holy ceremonies. And yet, since he ordained those ceremonies only until the time of amendment, God neither sins, nor incurs the crime of inconstancy, when he changes or takes away the ceremonies according to the determinate purpose which he intended from the beginning. Moreover, so long as the thing signified [1471] does not decay, and only the shadow or momentary figure vanishes away, it is assuredly certain that the ceremony yet remains in full effect and substance. The whole man lives forever; and yet the things that are temporal or corruptible in him, perish in death, and are abolished in his glorification.

But so that all these things may appear as clear as daylight, I will particularly run through and touch the more notable sorts of ceremonies. It is evident that the priesthood of Aaron is utterly abrogated, by the words which the apostle cites out of David, saying: "The Lord has sworn, and will not repent, you are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." [1472] Christ, therefore, is the one and only high priest, and an everlasting priest too, having an immutable priesthood which cannot pass from him by succession to any other man or angel. For now standing at the right hand of the Father in heaven — the true temple prefigured by the tabernacle and temple at Jerusalem — he makes intercession for us, and performs all the offices of a high priest. The apostle of Christ, St. Paul, speaks very largely about this in his epistle to the Hebrews.

iii.263

This Christ Jesus, our high priest, has consecrated all the faithful to be kings and priests unto himself. And yet, notwithstanding, he ordains ministers of the church to instruct the church by doctrine and examples, and to minister the sacraments; I do not mean those old and ancient ones, but those which the Lord has substituted in place of the old ones. He expressly declares what doctrine they must teach. The mystical attire and garments of the priesthood he neither commended to his apostles, nor left to his church, but took them away with all the ceremonies [1473] that are called the middle wall between the Jews and Gentiles. The Lord himself, and his apostle Paul, would have the pastors of the people be clad with righteousness and honesty; and they would precisely remove the ministers of the church from superiority and secular affairs. They would also appoint stipends for the ministers to live on; yet not those which the law allowed them, but those which were most tolerable and convenient for the state and condition of every church. [1474]

The Lord left free the place to serve and worship God in, without exception or binding us to any one prescribed or particular place. In the gospel according to John he said:

"The hour shall come, and is already, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father neither in this mountain, nor at Jerusalem, but in the spirit and in truth: for the Father requires such to worship him. God is a Spirit; and those who worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." [1475]

The apostle followed the Lord in this doctrine, and said; "I would that men pray in every place, lifting up pure hands, without anger."^{1Tim 2.8} Nor did the Lord, as I just showed you, allow the temple to be utterly overthrown in vain, considering that at his death he rent its veil. And yet, for all that, the ecclesiastical assemblies are not condemned by it. I spoke about this in the exposition of the fourth precept,[1476] "Remember to keep the sabbath-day holy." Truly, the tabernacle and the temple bore the type of the catholic church of God, out of which there are no prayers or oblations acceptable to the Lord. But the church is extended to the very ends of the world. And yet it does not follow from this, that all are in the church who are in the world.

iii.264

Those alone are in the church, who through the catholic faith are in the fellowship of Christ Jesus; and by agreement of doctrine, by charity, and by participating in the sacraments (unless some great necessity hinders them), are in the communion of the holy saints. But it is burning incense and sacrificing in high places, when someone seeks any other sacrifice than the one and only oblation of Christ Jesus; or looks for any other means to offer their prayers to God the Father, than Christ alone [1477] — as they are taught by the mouth of the pastor sincerely preaching the word of God. Moreover, the church of God has no need now for any ark, any table, any showbread, any golden candlestick, any altar either of incense or burnt-offerings, nor yet any brazen laver. For Christ alone is all in all to the catholic church. That church has all these things spiritually and effectually in Christ Jesus, and can seek nothing in any other creatures. If it perceives any man ushering in again either these or like ceremonial instruments, it sharply rebukes and bitterly curses him for his unwarrantable rashness and blasphemous presumption in the church of Christ. For what need does the church have of shadows and figures, when it now enjoys the thing itself, even Christ Jesus, whose shadow and figure the ceremonies bore? Moreover, the church has signs enough, in that it has received from Christ two sacramental signs, in which are contained all the things which the old church comprehended in sundry and numerous figures.

Furthermore, he has left the holy time to worship God in, free to our choice. In the gospel he says: "The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath: therefore the Son of Man is Lord also of the sabbath." ^{Mar 2.27-28} And the apostle Paul says: "Let no man therefore judge you in food, or drink, or in part of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths: which are the shadows of things to come; but the body is of Christ." ^{Col 2.16-17}

iii.265

I spoke of the Christian sabbath in the exposition of the fourth commandment.[1478] As for the new moons, they are not solemnized by the church of Christ, insomuch as Christ taught us to attribute to God [1479] not only the beginning of months, but also the whole year, and the commodity [1480] of it — with the light of the sun, the moon, and all the stars in heaven.

Moreover, Christians celebrate their Passover more spiritually than bodily; even as they also solemnize their Pentecost, or Whitsuntide.[1481] For just as he sent his Spirit upon his disciples,^{Joh 20.22} so he sends daily it upon all the faithful. That is the reason the alarm is struck in the faithful, to encourage them as soldiers to skirmish with their enemies.[1482] For the flesh lusts against the spirit, and the faithful are daily assaulted and provoked to battle by the world, and by the devil the prince of the world. Furthermore, the feast of propitiation, being finished on the cross, endures forever. Nor do the saints send out a scape goat anymore, to bear their sins into the desert; for Christ our Lord came once, and was offered up, and by his sacrifice he took away the sins of the whole world. Finally, since the faithful daily consider and bear in their minds that they have no abiding place in this transitory world, but look to a place to come,^{Heb 11.16} they need not, as the Jews did, celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles once a year. In the same way, the faithful no longer acknowledge a year of jubilee: for Christ came once, and preached that acceptable year to us, even the gospel, by which it is proclaimed that all our sins and iniquities are clearly forgiven us. For so Christ himself interprets it in the fourth chapter of St. Luke's gospel, taking occasion to speak of it out of the sixty-first chapter of Isaiah's prophecy.^{Isa 61.1} And thus, the holy time and festival days are abrogated by Christ in his holy church. Notwithstanding, it is not left destitute of any holy thing or necessary matter.

iii.266

But now, this present year in which this book is first printed, is the year of grace 1550; and according to the Romish tradition, it is called the Year of Jubilee. I am therefore compelled, by necessity as it were, to make a little digression, and say something about the Romish jubilee.

I call it the Romish and not the Christian jubilee, because, as I showed you just now, the church of Christ, after our redemption wrought by Christ and preached by the gospel, neither acknowledges nor receives any other year of jubilee. In the ancient Jewish year of jubilee, the meaning of the letter, and of the spirit, is to be considered. According to the letter, bondmen were set at liberty, and lawful heirs received back their patrimony and possessions, which had either been exchanged away, or otherwise gone from them. The meaning of that order is little regarded, and the care of the oppressed is utterly neglected by the holy pope, because it could not be brought back into all the kingdoms in these latter days, without troubling all estates. Thus, those who recently brought in the year of jubilee, and preached it to the foolish world, did so not for any zeal they had to help the oppressed, but for the desire they had to augment their own treasures, by robbing the world.[1483] The spiritual and hidden mystery of the jubilee commended to those of old, the free remission of all sins through Christ, by faith in Christ. This free grace cannot without reproach to Christ, be otherwise preached than it has already been taught by the holy gospel. Therefore, the church went without the observation of any year of jubilee for the span of 1300 years after Christ's incarnation. At last, the upstart Boniface VIII, bishop of Rome,[1484] first invented that wicked ordinance. For Platina says in the life of that Boniface, "This is he that first brought in the jubilee, in the year of Christ 1300, in which he granted full remission of all their sins, to as many as visited the apostolic see. And he ordained it to be observed every hundredth year."

iii.267

So then, the church of Christ went without this jubilee, without peril of salvation, for the span of 1300 years. And therefore, we may also be without it, without any peril and damage — indeed, to our great profit and commodity. For if our Romanists go on to impose it on the world as a thing necessary to salvation, then they would condemn the universal church which existed before pope Boniface's time, the one who first brought in this unfamiliar jubilee. Thus we are so far from not being able to be without it, that we should detest and abhor it by all means possible, as a very wicked and blasphemous ordinance — considering that we have to believe the jubilee is utterly abrogated by Christ, and that all sins are freely forgiven through Christ, for all who believe, in whatever place of the world they live and converse in.

This pope Boniface annexes the remission of sins to his false promise and impure place. Now, I doubt whether this blasphemous antichrist [1485] could do anything more horrible, and more against the honour of the Saviour.[1486] For in this is defiled the glory of the only-begotten Son of God, who is the only health [1487] of the whole world. In this is defiled the salvation of many thousands, for whom Christ died on the cross. And in this also is defiled the glory of the Christian faith, by which alone we are made partakers of eternal salvation. This ungracious and wicked pope was the one about whom that common proverb speaks: "He entered like a wolf, he reigned like a lion, and died like a dog." [1488] For truly, so blasphemous an ordinance was worthy of such an author; so foolish a people was worthy of such a pastor; and so devilish a pope was worthy of such an end.

iii.268

Platina writes that in that year of jubilee, such great heaps of people came to Rome, that although the city was fairly large, one man could not pass by another for the throngs.[1489] For the world is necessarily deceived. If it were not so, they would give ear to the Lord who cries, "O all you that thirst, come to the waters, and you that have no money, draw near. Why do you spend your money on nothing," etc., Isaiah 55.1, and John 4.14, 7.37. Now, all the while that the world was thus set on madding, the righteous Lord was not asleep, nor did he dissemble how much they displeased him with that devilish [1490] invention. For the very same year, He stirred up Ottoman,[1491] the patriarch and first founder of the Turkish empire, by whose means He notably scourged the church of Rome and the corrupt manners that had crept into Christendom. A few years after, succeeded Clement the sixth,[1492] Paul the second, and Sixtus the fourth,[1493] as wicked men as he, and as may be found in the histories of their lives — men who changed the year of jubilee from every hundredth to every fiftieth year, and at last to every twenty-fifth year, so that they might suck more advantage out of men's foolishness. But now back to the matter at hand.

iii.269

The sacraments of the ancient Jews are also flatly abrogated, and in their places are substituted new sacraments, which are given to the people of the new covenant.

Instead of circumcision, baptism is appointed. The apostles, in the synod held at Jerusalem, opposed themselves to those who were of the opinion that circumcision was necessary to salvation; and in that council they admitted Paul's doctrine, who both thought and taught the contrary. For in one place Paul says; "Look, I Paul say to you, if you are circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. For I testify to every man who is circumcised, that he is a debtor to the whole law, to do it. Christ is made of no effect to you: as many of you as are justified by the law, have fallen from grace." ^{Gal 5.2-4} Nor is it right or convenient that in the church of Christ there should remain so bloody a sacrament as circumcision was, once His blood had been shed on the cross — which staunches and takes away the blood of the old Testament.

Instead of the paschal Lamb, the Lord's Supper is ordained, which is called by another name: the eucharist, or a thanksgiving. For so the Lord himself expounds it in Luke, as he ate the last Passover with his disciples. At the end of it, he immediately ordained the sacrament of his body and blood, which he bids them to celebrate in remembrance of him,[1494] until he returns again in judgment. Therefore the Lord left [1495] the supper as an unchangeable sacrament until the end of the world.

Moreover, I suppose that no man would once deny that all sorts of sacrifices contained in the law are utterly abrogated, if he but considers that both the temple and the two altars, with all the holy instruments, have been utterly overthrown and come to nothing. I told you that those sacrifices were remembrances of sins, and types or figures of the cleansing and atonement that was to be made by Christ Jesus.[1496] Therefore, when Christ had come and was offered up for the sins of the whole world, then truly all the sacrifices of the ancient Jews came to their end. For where there is a full and absolute remission of sins, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.

iii.270

And in the new Testament, there is a full remission of sins; therefore in the new Testament there is no longer any sacrifice offered for sins. For Christ, only and alone, is in place of all the sacrifices. For he was offered up once, and after that he is offered no more. By once offering up himself, he has found eternal redemption — so that all who are sanctified, are sanctified by no other oblation than that of Christ, made upon the cross once for all. This is why Christ, being once offered upon the cross for the sins of the whole world, is the burnt-offering of the catholic church. He is also the meat-offering, which feeds us with his flesh offered on the cross unto eternal life, if we receive and feed on him by faith. [1497] Moreover, he is the drink-offering of the church, which quenches with his blood the thirst of the faithful unto life everlasting. He is the purging and daily sacrifice of the church, because he is "the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world." [1498] His death and passion cleanses all men from their sins, from their errors and iniquities. Finally, he is the church's sacrifice of thanksgiving, because by Christ we offer praise to God, and by Christ we render thanks to the Lord.[1499]

To conclude: the only supper of the Lord, which we call the eucharist, contains in it all the kinds of ancient sacrifices which, in effect, are of but two sorts: namely, purging and atonement, such as those which were offered for sin; or else of thanksgiving, such as those which rendered thanks and offered praise to the Lord. Now, the supper is a testimony, a sacrament, and a remembrance of the body of Christ which was given for us, and of his blood that was shed for the remission of our sins. For the body and blood of our Lord, which were but once offered upon the cross,[1500] and neither can nor ought to be offered any more by men, are not sacrificed afresh in the celebration of the supper. But in celebrating it, there is reiterated a remembrance of the thing, I mean, of the oblation, which was made but once, and in once offering, it was sufficient.

iii.271

Again, in the supper we render thanks to God for our redemption, for which also the universal church offers praise to his name. Therefore, the supper of the Lord comprehends the whole substance and matter which was prefigured in those ancient sacrifices; so that, in that point, the church is not destitute of any good or necessary thing, even though it no longer retains those sacrifices of the former church. Indeed, they should no longer be solemnized in the church, because they were nothing but the figures, types, and sacraments of Christ to come. But the church now believes, and rightly too, that Christ has already come, and has fulfilled and accomplished all things — as he himself testified when he cried out on the cross, saying, "It is finished."

Moreover, all vows have come to an end, because all sacrifices, in which the vows consisted, are vanished and gone. Likewise, the discipline of the Nazarites is now dissolved, because the temple with all the ceremonies belonging to it has faded away. There still remains in the church, a Christian and moderate discipline, but not what is described in the law. And the saints perform to God the vows which they have made in the church, that are not contrary to faith and godliness; but they are sparing, wary, and very religious in making vows. For what do we have to give to God, which we have not first received from his hands; and to perform, that we were not previously bound to in baptism?

Christ does not distinguish between clean and unclean in the gospel, as Moses did in the law. "That," he says, "which enters into the mouth does not defile the man; but that which comes out of the mouth."^{Mat 15.11} And the apostle Paul flatly says that "to the clean all things are clean." ^Tit.1.15 He speaks much like this in the fourteenth chapter to the Romans, and more in other places. In his epistle to the Colossians he says: "If you are dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, then why, as if living in the world, are you led by traditions (do not touch, do not taste, do not handle), all of which perish in abusing?" [1501] And so forth.

iii.272

To Peter it is also said: "What Blood and God has sanctified, do not call unclean." In the synodal epistle, set forth by the apostles in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts, both blood and strangled things is forbidden and exempted from the meat of men. Yet, that commandment was not perpetual, but momentary, for a time only. For it pleased the apostles, for charity's sake, to bear with the Jewish nation in this, who otherwise would have been too stubborn and self-willed. The Jews at that time, every day, rifely [1502] heard the reading of the law, which expressly forbade them to eat blood and strangled things, as if the preaching of the gospel had not begun to be sown among them. And therefore, they could not help but be greatly offended to see the Gentiles so lavishly use the prohibited things. This is why the apostles would have the Gentiles for a time abstain from the things that were otherwise lawful enough, to see if perhaps by that means they might win the Jews to the faith of Christ. For the epistles, which Paul wrote a few years after the council at Jerusalem, sufficiently argue that the decree of the apostles against blood and strangled things was not perpetual. But the commandments given against things offered to idols, and against fornication (in the use of which the Gentiles thought they did not greatly offend) are perpetual, because they are morals, and in the number [1503] of the Ten Commandments. But I have spoken of that matter in another place.

And now, because I have mentioned the synodal decree ordained by the apostles and elders of the council at Jerusalem, I think it is not amiss to recite to you, dearly beloved, as a conclusion to this place, the whole epistle sent by the synod, because it bears an evident, full, and brief testimony, that the law is abrogated in the manner which I have declared. Now, this is their epistle, or constitution:

"The apostles, and elders, and brethren, send greetings to the brethren which are of the Gentiles, that are in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia. For we have heard that certain ones who departed from us have troubled you with words, and encumbered your minds, saying you must be circumcised, and keep the law — we gave them no such commandment: it seemed good therefore to us, when we had come together with one accord, to send chosen men to you, with our beloved Paul and Barnabas, men who have jeopardized their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

iii.273

We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall tell you the same things by mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to charge you with no more than these necessary things; (that is to say) that you abstain from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled things, and from fornication. If you keep yourselves from these, you shall do well. So fare you well." ^{Act 15.23-29}

This is word for word the catholic, the synodal, apostolic, and ecclesiastical epistle of the council held at Jerusalem, both brief and easy. For just as the speech of truth is simple, so also may true religion and Christian faith be easily laid down in very few and evident words.

Immediately at the beginning, in their accustomed manner of subscribing and inscribing their epistle, they out of hand turn to and address the false apostles with whom Paul and Barnabas were in controversy. And they declare what kind of doctrine the false prophets held, which up till then they had preached to the churches as the catholic, true, and apostolic doctrine: namely, that those who would be saved, must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses. For these false prophets did not think that faith in Christ, without the help of the law, was sufficient for full and absolute justification. They boasted that they were sent from Jerusalem,[1504] by the apostles and disciples of the Lord, who all taught with one consent the same doctrine that they preached. And they said that Paul alone, with his companion Barnabas, sowed a certain doctrine in the churches that was peculiar to himself, schismatic-like, touching faith which justified without the works of the law. This is why the apostles, immediately after the beginning of their epistle, declare what they think of such false teachers and their unwarranted doctrine: "We confess," they say, "that those false teachers went from here, out of Jerusalem, but we deny that they were either sent or instructed by us. For we gave no such commandment to anyone." And so they testify that what those fellows taught is utterly false: namely, that the apostles and disciples of the Lord preached that the law is requisite to full justification.

iii.274

Indeed, they go on yet more plainly to declare what the doctrine of those false apostles was: "They trouble you," they say, "with words, and encumber your minds, commanding you to be circumcised and to keep the law." The sum of their doctrine, therefore, was that unless a man were circumcised and kept the law, he could not be saved: whereby they ascribed salvation to keeping the law, or to the merit of their works.

The apostles attribute two perilous effects to this doctrine. The first is, "They trouble you with words." They are words, they say, which amaze, rather than appease, comfort, or pacify your minds; indeed, they trouble you so, that you cannot tell what to believe, or what to trust. And moreover, they stir up strifes, discords, and jarrings among you. Paul seems to have alluded to these words of the apostles in his epistle to the Galatians, saying: "I marvel that you have so soon turned from Christ, who called you by grace, to another gospel; which is not another gospel indeed, but there are some who trouble you, and intend to pervert the gospel of Christ." The second effect is this: "They encumber or weaken your minds."^{Gal 1.6-7} For those who lean on the law and works, have nothing stable or steadfast in their minds. For since the law requires a most exact and absolute righteousness, and thereby kills (because such righteousness is not found in us) those minds are therefore weakened and subverted, that are taught to lean on the works of the law, which law no man rightly keeps as he should.

Therefore, Paul says to the Romans: "If those who belong to the law are heirs, then faith is vain, and the promise is made of no effect." And immediately after, again: "Therefore the heritage is given by faith, according to grace, that the promise may be sure to all the seed," etc. The false apostles therefore subverted and weakened minds, by teaching that salvation is obtained by the law. Truly, this is a grievous judgment against those who, along with them, teach the same.

iii.275

Then with like liberty, they go on to the other side to show their opinion of Paul and Barnabas. Indeed, they adorn them, as their messengers, with a most holy testimonial, to the end that they may have more authority among all men, and that all men may understand that there was a full agreement and consent of doctrine and religion, between them and the other apostles. "We being gathered together with one accord," they say, "have sent messengers to you." See here, about the false apostles, they testified that they did not send them, nor give them any command: but these men they do send, and with one accord, they give them a command. But whom do they send? "Our beloved Paul and Barnabas, who have jeopardized their lives for the name of Christ Jesus." These two are most choice apostles, and they are holy, glorious martyrs, our dearly-beloved brethren, being of the same religion and doctrine with us, who have declared what their lives and doctrine are, by their manifold virtues and manful suffering of peril and dangers.

But because Paul and Barnabas were themselves no small doers in that controversy and disputation, they joined to them two other chosen men, Judas and Silas, to the end that they might indifferently, without suspicion, declare the things which were alleged in the council for both sides — as I mean to show you in the exposition of the general decree.

For now, in a few words, they comprehend the very decree of the whole and universal synod; in laying it down, they first of all name the author of the decree, saying: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us." They first set down the Holy Ghost, and then themselves; making Him to be the author of truth, and themselves to be the instruments by which He works: for he works in the church by the ministry of men. But men's authority, without the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, is none at all. Therefore the apostles very significantly say: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us:" that is, after we had assembled in that synod to treat the matter of justification and the law (about which Paul and his adversaries stood in controversy), we did not follow our own judgments, nor did we use proofs of our own inventing; but searching out and hearing the doctrine of the Holy Ghost, we write this to you upon His warrant.

iii.276

In the second place, they set down the sum of the decree, saying: "That we might not charge you with greater burdens than these necessary things, (that is to say) that you abstain from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled things, and from fornication." Therefore, they say, the doctrine of the gospel which Paul has up to now preached with us, is sufficient to obtain life and salvation. We do not intend to lay any greater burden on you than the doctrine of the gospel, and abstinence from those few things. In this sentence, they seem to have had an eye to the opinion of St. Peter, who in the council said: "You know that, being called by God, I went to the Gentiles, and preached salvation to them through the gospel. You know that as I was preaching faith in Christ Jesus to them, being neither circumcised nor keeping the law, the Holy Ghost was given to the Gentiles from above — so that their hearts were purified by God himself, by faith and not by the law — and that they were made heirs of eternal life."^{Act 10.45} And upon this he infers: "Now therefore, why do you tempt God by laying upon the disciples' necks a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be saved, even as they." ^{Act 15.10} See here, that St. Peter called the law a burden and a yoke. And therefore, where the apostles say that they will not lay upon the church any greater burden, they thereby signify that the law is flatly abrogated. Therefore, they set the church free from the burden of the law, and acquit it from all burdens like the law.

We now gather by those words of the apostles, that those burdensome and innumerable ceremonies, which the church has received by councils and synods since the time of the apostles, were laid upon the church unjustly, and against the apostolic spirit, and today they are wickedly retained and defended in the church. For in express words they said: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to burden you with no more than these necessary things."

But if any man objects, and says that those ceremonies were laid upon the churches' necks for the ignorance of the people, as a rule or instruction [1505] to guide or teach them by — my answer is that such instruction is clean taken away; and whoever tries to minimize it, desires nothing else but to bring in Judaism again.

iii.277

God knew very well what kind of church he purposed to gather together of Jews and Gentiles; and yet he abolished those external ceremonies. Now who better knows than God what is expedient, or not expedient, for his church? Therefore the things that he abolished were not expedient for the faithful: upon which the apostles rightly and very well pronounced, "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us not to lay upon you any greater burden." Therefore let them be ashamed of their doings, who lay so great a burden on the shoulders of the church, that otherwise ought to be most free.

Now, here is also added the conclusion of the sentence: "than these necessary things, (that is to say) that you abstain from things offered to idols," etc. In these words they had an eye toward the sentence of St. James, the apostle and brother of the Lord. For, confirming and allowing St. Peter's opinion touching justification by faith, and of not laying the law on the Gentiles' necks, he alleges a testimony of scripture out of Amos; ^{Amo 9.11-12} who foretold that the Jews should be cut off because of their sins, and that the Gentiles should be taken in their place, among whom the true church of God should be. This was prefigured by the ruin and reparation of David's tabernacle. The same prophet also foretold a reason how, and a cause why, the Gentiles should be received into the church: not for circumcision's sake, nor by the help of the law, but by grace through faith. For he says: "The remnant of the men shall seek after the Lord, and all the heathen upon whom my name is called, says the Lord, who does all this. All these works of God are known to him from before the world began." ^Act
15.17-18 Look here, they shall seek the Lord, and shall be received into his fellowship, upon whom his name shall be called. This phrase of speech signifies that those who are elect shall be the sons of God; for the name of the Lord is called upon those who are named the sons of God, and are his elect. Now the whole scripture attributes that to faith. By faith, therefore, we are made the members of the church, and sons and heirs to God our maker.

iii.278

But if any man murmurs against the counsel of God, and says, Why does God do so? let him think that this deed is the deed and work of God, whom it is not lawful for man to challenge; and all of whose works are known from the beginning of the world to have been done in judgment and righteousness. From this, it consequently follows that this counsel of his is good and righteous, by which he joins to himself and sanctifies [1506] the heathen nations, through faith in Christ. [1507]

Now upon these words of the prophet St. James (subscribing, as it were, to St. Peter's opinion) gathers and infers this: "Therefore, my sentence is that we do not trouble those who have turned to God from among the Gentiles;" that is to say, I think they are not to be molested, or charged with the observation of the law. But lest the Gentiles upon hearing that the law was abolished, thereby think they might freely do whatever they would, and by that means abuse their liberty; and also, against all charity, despise and give offence to the Jewish brethren, James therefore adds: "But I think it best for us to write to them, that they abstain from the filthiness of idols." For there were at that time certain converts of the Gentiles, who thought it lawful for them to enter into idol-temples, and partaker of things offered to idols — because an idol is nothing, since there is but one God alone. From this they gathered that those sacrifices were nothing, that they did neither good nor harm; and therefore Christians might with a safe conscience partaker of them. But St. James and Paul also, 1Cor 8, 9, and 10, would have the heathen converts abstain utterly from the worship of idols: that is, from the idols themselves, and from those things which are offered to false and feigned gods in the idol-temples.

Moreover he adds: "Let them beware of fornication." The Gentiles, truly, forbid by good laws the adulteries and defilings of virgins and matrons, with very sharp punishments suppressing the violent deflowerers of honest women. But they thought of it very lightly (and in a way, as no fault at all) for someone to commit whoredom, who of their own accord put their chastity for sale; or if an unwedded man dealt so with a single woman.

iii.279

And therefore the apostle James (as Paul also did in 1Cor 6 and 1Thes 4) very severely requires the holy and pure use of the body, without any filthy and unclean beastliness.

Last of all,[1508] he would have the Gentiles restrain from eating blood and strangled things. He adds the reason why, saying, "For Moses of olden times, has those in every city who preach him in the synagogues, where he is read every sabbath-day." I spoke somewhat about this constitution (i.e., touching blood and strangled things), before I made this digression.

Now, therefore, since the matter is at that point, it is evident that they are offended without cause, who think that St. James made and published this decree without any right and reason; and who think that the fruit of that synod was very perilous, not at all wholesome, and flat contrary to Christian liberty. For it is assuredly certain that the meaning of James in no point differed from the mind of St. Paul, who very well and praiseworthily said,

"Let us follow the things that make for peace, and things with which we may one edify another. Do not destroy the work of God for meat's sake. All things are pure; but it is evil for that man who eats with offence. It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything by which your brother stumbles or falls, or is made weak," etc. ^{Rom 14.19-21}

It is also most certain, that St. Paul — who was so sharply set to defend the Christian liberty, that he withstood Peter openly [1509] at Antioch — would not have been hesitant to resist St. James, if he thought this constitution either had been, or should be, prejudicial to Christian liberty. Truly, he would neither have preached, nor yet commended, this tradition of the apostles to the churches of the Gentiles, if he had not thought that it was both wholesome and profitable for them all to embrace. But he did preach and commend it to the churches, as seen in the sixteenth chapter of the Acts. And therefore, some murmured against St. James without cause, because he forbade them to eat blood and strangled things.

iii.280

Finally, the conclusion of their epistle is: "If you keep yourselves from these, you do well; so fare you well." They praise that abstinence, and teach it as a good work, because it is also commended to us in all the scriptures.

Thus, I have not digressed far from our purpose, I trust, to speak of the decree of the apostolic synod held at Jerusalem. This much at this time, touching the abrogation of the ceremonial laws.

It remains here for me to say something concerning the abrogation of the judicial laws. Now therefore, the judicial laws seem to be abrogated in this sense: because no Christian commonweal, no city or kingdom, is compelled to be bound and to receive those very same laws, which were published and set out by Moses in that nation of old, according to its time, place, and state. Therefore every country has free liberty to use those laws which are best suited and most requisite for the estate and necessity of every place, and of every time and persons. Yet this is to be done in such a way, that the substance of God's laws is not rejected, trodden down, and utterly neglected. For the things which are agreeable to the law of nature and the Ten Commandments, and whatever else God has commanded to be punished, must not in any case be either clean forgotten, or lightly regarded. Now the end to which all these laws tend, is that honesty may be nourished, peace and public tranquility be firmly maintained, and judgment and justice be rightly executed. Because I have disputed about these at large in the exposition of the precept,[1510] "You shall not murder," I am content to be much briefer here.

The holy apostle Paul commands us to obey the magistrate. He allows the authority of the sword, which he confesses that the magistrate does not have in vain, received from the hand of God. And therefore, he did not disallow or find fault with the election of the magistrate, the use of the sword, the execution of judgment and justice, nor with upright and civil laws.

Now, whoever confers the laws and constitutions of princes, kings, emperors, or Christian magistrates, he must confess that they draw very near in likeness, and very well agree with one another and with these judicial laws of God.[1511] Such laws are to be found either in the Code, in the book of Digests or Pandects, in the volume of New Constitutions,[1512] or else in other books containing the good laws of various nations.

iii.281

The emperor Justinian forbade by law either to sell or otherwise make away with the possessions of the church [1513] and things consecrated to God. For the sincere confessing and pure maintaining of the catholic faith, the emperors, Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodosius, made a most excellent and holy law.[1514] Constantine the great charged Taurus, one of his lieutenants, to shut the idol temples, and to destroy with the sword those rebels who went about to open them, and to sacrifice in them.[1515] Laws were made for the relief of the poor, and so that kings and emperors had care over them. This is to be seen in more places than one in the emperor's laws and constitutions. It is very certain, that whoever reads the Code, Lib. i. tit. 2, he will find much that belongs to this argument.[1516] For honestly training up children, and liberally sustaining aged parents, there are very commendable laws in the books of the heathens.[1517] Concerning the authority that parents have over their children, much is written and many things are to be found. Honorius, Arcadius, and many other princes, have made very tolerable and laudable decrees concerning wedlock, incest, and unfit marriages: where they also speak very well and wisely of the law of divorce.[1518]

iii.282

But if I go on to add or contrast every title of the judicial laws contained in this sermon, with the sundry and particular laws of the decrees of Christian princes, I know I will be too tedious for your patience. For then this treatise would surpass the time of an ordinary sermon. Let it therefore suffice for the time being, that by declaring these notes, [1519] I have clarified and made a way for the diligent lovers of the truth, to come to the understanding of other things, which we have omitted here — and that they may believe that the substance of God's judicial laws is not taken away or abolished, but that ordering and limiting them is placed in the will and arbitrement [1520] of good Christian princes. Yet, in such a way that they ordain and appoint what is just and equal, as the estate of time, place, and persons best requires. Thus honesty and public peace may thereby be preserved,[1521] and God the Father may be duly honoured through his only-begotten Son Christ Jesus, to whom all praise is due forever. For we see that the apostles of Christ neither required nor commanded any nation, in the administration of political affairs, to bind themselves to strictly keeping Moses' law. This rule must always be kept and observed.

St. Peter simply commands and says, "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake; whether it is to the king, as having preeminence, or to rulers, as to those who are sent by Him for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of those who do well." ^1Pet
2.13-14 And yet the same apostle affirms that "we should obey God than men," ^{Acts 5.29} so often as men publish laws against true religion, justice and equity. I spoke concerning this, in the exposition about the common place of the magistrate.[1522] And so, I thought it good to say this much touching the abrogation of the judicial laws.

iii.283

Now if every one of you thoroughly ponders the things that I have said up to here touching the law of God, the parts of the law, the use or effect of it, the fulfilling and abrogating of it — then it will not be difficult to determine what everyone ought to think concerning the point or title of this treatise, which I promised in the beginning of this sermon. I said that I would speak somewhat toward this end: namely, that the testament of the old and new church [1523] is all one, and that there is but one way of true salvation to all who either are, or have been, saved in this world; and also, how the new testament differs from the old. I have already shown [1524] that all the points of the law have a respect and a kind of relation to Christ; and that in the law, he was preached to the fathers as the only Saviour, in whom alone they were to be saved. Who cannot perceive that they had no other way to be saved than the very same one which we enjoy today by Christ Jesus? [1525] And yet, that this may appear more evident, I will not hesitate to take some pains to make this matter more manifest to you, with as plain a demonstration as possible — although it is not likely that there is a plainer one than I have already shown you.

Truly, no difference is to be found among the people, testament, church, or manner of salvation, of those who share one and the same doctrine, faith, Spirit, hope, inheritance, expectation, invocation, and sacraments. Therefore, if I am able to prove that all these things were indifferently common to those of the old church as well as to us, then I have obtained what I shot at: namely, that in respect to the substance there neither was, nor is, any more than one testament — that the old fathers are one and the same people that we are, living in the same church and communion, and saved not in any other but in Christ alone, the Son of God, in whom we also look for salvation.

I thus prove that they and we have one and the same doctrine: our doctrine is the doctrine of the gospel; and the fathers were not without the same doctrine, as it is made evident by St. Paul, who testifies: "God truly promised the gospel of God beforehand by his prophets in the holy scriptures, about his Son, who was made of the seed of David after the flesh, and has been declared to be the Son of God with power by the Spirit," etc. ^{Rom 1.1-4}

iii.284

What could be said more plainly? The gospel which is preached today,[1526] was promised of old by the prophets in the holy scriptures: namely, that the Son of God would come into the world to save all faithful believers. This gospel also teaches that the faithful are not justified by the works of the law, but are freely justified by grace through faith in Christ.[1527] St. Paul says: "By the deeds of the law, no flesh shall be justified in his sight: for by the law comes the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God is declared without the law, being witnessed by the testimony of the law and the prophets. The righteousness of God comes by the faith of Christ Jesus to all, and upon all that believe." ^{Rom 3.20-22} St. Peter fully agrees with Paul, where he says in the synod held at Jerusalem, "Neither we nor our fathers were able to bear the yoke of the law, but believe, as they did, to be saved through the grace of our Lord Christ Jesus." ^{Act 15.10-11} Consequently, in all other substantial and material points, there is no difference in doctrine between us and them.

To proceed now: those whose doctrine is one, must of necessity have one faith; "for faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." ^{Rom 10.17} How does that argue that Abraham and the rest of the [1528] holy fathers are set before our eyes as examples of faith for us to follow? We see that it is so in the holy gospel of the Lord, and in the sacred writings [1529] of the apostles. But who would give us such foreign examples to imitate, which do not concern the thing for which they are given? Paul shows in many places, but especially in the fourth chapter to the Romans, that faith must be imputed to us for righteousness; as we read that it was imputed to Abraham. Now that faith of his was not another faith, but the very same faith as ours, which rests upon the promise of God and the blessed Seed. For Paul calls Abraham the father, not only of those who are born of the circumcision, but also of those who walk in the steps of the faith which was in Abraham before he was circumcised.^{Rom 4.12}

iii.285

Besides that, the confirmation of the Christian rule (by which I mean the Apostles' Creed or articles of our belief) is fetched out of the scriptures by the fathers of the old Testament. This is undoubtedly a most obvious argument that their faith and ours are the very same faith. They believed in the Messiah who was then to come; and we believe that he has already come, and we more fully perceive and nearly see all that which was spoken of before in the prophets — as I will shortly declare, when I come to show the difference between the two Testaments.

Who can doubt that one and the same Spirit governed our forefathers and the people of the new covenant, considering that the Spirit of God is one alone; and that St. Peter expressly testifies that the Spirit of Christ was in the prophets? ^{1Pet 1.11} And St. Paul also says: "Since we have the same spirit of faith, according to that which is written, I believed, and therefore I spoke; and we believe, and therefore we speak." ^{2Cor 4.13} Therefore, although the apostle says in another place, that the faithful "have not received again the spirit of bondage unto fear, but the spirit of adoption, whereby they cry, Abba, Father;" ^{Rom 8.15} he does not deny that the faithful fathers had the same spirit that we have. For they too cried to God as to their father, although they did not obtain it by the law (which terrifies), but by the grace of Messiah. Again, the same apostle says: "Whoever is led by the Spirit of God, are the sons of God:" ^Rom
8.14 We may thus convert this sentence and say that the sons of God are led by the Spirit of God. But unless someone never read the scriptures, who would deny that the ancient fathers were the sons of God, and were so called both by the Lord himself, and also by his servant Moses. [1530]

Moreover, what may be thought about this: that our forefathers were called kings and priests, and consequently, they were a royal priesthood and a priestly kingdom? St. Peter applied these names to the faithful believers in Christ Jesus. [1531] Now such a kingdom and priesthood cannot exist, or remain, without the unction of the Spirit.

iii.286

I confess that the holy apostle John said in his gospel: "The Holy Ghost was not yet, because Jesus was not yet glorified." ^Joh
7.39 But he was not speaking of the substance of the Holy Ghost, which is co-eternal with the substance [1532] of the Father and of the Son; nor does he altogether deny that the fathers had the Holy Ghost. For in that place, he speaks of the excellent gift, which after the ascension of the Lord was poured out upon the people who believed. For John, interpreting himself, immediately before says this: "These words, 'Whoever believes on me, out of his belly shall flow rivers of the water of life,' spoke of the Holy Ghost,[1533] which those who believe on him would receive." Therefore, when the Lord spoke those words, the gift of the Holy Ghost was not at that time as commonly and plentifully poured out upon all men, as it was upon the faithful after the glorification of the Lord Jesus.

And truly our forefathers and the holy prophets could not have so precisely and expressly foretold all the mysteries of Christ and the church, which the evangelists and apostles testify is now accomplished and fulfilled,[1534] unless they had been governed in their prophecies by the very same Spirit with which the apostles were afterward instructed. For it is a wicked thing for us to think that the prophets and patriarchs, like madmen, did not know what they babbled, and spoke words which they did not understand. Abraham saw the day of Christ, and he was glad of it. ^{Joh 8.56} For by that spiritual sight of his, he had and felt within himself a certain kind of spiritual joy. How many times David in the Psalms testifies that the service of God and the holy congregation delighted him at his very heart! He did not utter these words so much for the joy that he had in the external ceremonies, but that, by the Spirit and by faith, he beheld in these ceremonies the true Messiah and Saviour of the world.[1535] And since it is evident that our forefathers were justified by the grace of God, it is manifest that this justification was not wrought without the Spirit of God; through this same Spirit our justification today is wrought and finished. Therefore, the fathers were governed by the very same Spirit that we of this age are directed by.

iii.287

St. Augustine was of this opinion, whose words, dearly beloved, I mean to recite to you word for word out of his second book, de Peccato Orig. contra Pelag., et Celest. Cap. 25.

"Things to come," he says, "were foreseen by the prophets by the same spirit of faith, by which they are believed by us to be already finished. For those who could prophesy these things to us of faithful love, could not choose but to be partakers of the same thing themselves. And thus the apostle Peter says, Why do you tempt God, to lay upon the disciples necks the yoke that neither our fathers nor we were able to bear; but we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be saved even as they were. Why does Peter say this, I ask, if not because they are saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and not by Moses' law — the law which brings not the salving, but the knowledge of sin? But now the righteousness of God is made manifest without the law, as witnessed by the law and prophets. Therefore, if it is made manifest now, at this time, then it must be that it existed before, though it was hidden then. The hiddenness of it was prefigured by the veil of the temple which was rent in pieces when Christ died, to signify that it was then revealed. And therefore, this grace of the only Mediator of God and man, the man Christ Jesus, was then in the people of God, but it was hidden in them — like rain hidden in a fleece, which God separates unto his inheritance — not of duty, but of his own voluntary will. But now that fleece is wrung out, in a sense — that is, the Jewish people being reprobated — it is openly seen in all nations, as if [spread] on the bare ground in an open place." [1536]

This much out of Augustine.

iii.288

Now there was also set before the eyes of Israel, a carnal and temporal felicity, which was not yet all that they hoped upon; for in that external and transitory felicity was shadowed the heavenly and eternal happiness. For the apostle, in the fourth and eleventh chapters to the Hebrews, says that the fathers, out of that visible and temporal inheritance, hoped for another invisible and everlasting heritage. Nor was Christ so expressly promised to them for any other end; nor was the blessing and life in Christ so plainly laid before them for any other purpose; nor was Christ himself so often prefigured in almost all their ceremonies, for any other intent than this: that they might thereby have hope of the very same life into which we are received through Christ our Redeemer. For the Lord says in the gospel, that we shall be gathered into the kingdom of heaven, into the same glory with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.^{Mat 8.11}

But here an objection is made, that life and salvation was only promised to the fathers, and not performed; but being shut up in prison, they looked for the coming of Messiah. For my part, I do not find anything in the scriptures written about such a prison into which the holy patriarchs were fast locked up. Peter, truly, mentions a prison; but he would have the disobedient spirits in that prison, and not the obedient ones. But if any man objects that Christ descended to them below, we truly do not deny it. Yet we say with it, that he descended to the departed saints; that is, that he was gathered to the company of the blessed spirits, which were not in the place of punishment (that is, in torments), but in the joys of heaven; as the Lord himself confirms when, being ready to descend to them below, he said to the thief, "This day you shall be with me in Paradise." ^{Luk 23.43}

iii.289

It may also be proved by many places of scripture, that the ancient holy fathers, from Adam's time until the death of Christ, at their departure out of this life, for Christ's sake they immediately entered not into prison, but into eternal life. For our Lord says in the gospel of St. Mark: "God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." ^{Mk 12.27} And he is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Consequently, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, live or are now alive; and yet not in body, corporally; for their bodies being buried, were long since rotten. Therefore, their souls live in joy; and their very bodies shall rise to judgment again. In the gospel of St. Luke,the Lord mentions Abraham's bosom, into which are gathered all the blessed spirits; and he testifies about it, that it is placed aloft, and that it is not a place of pain and punishment, but of joy and refreshing.^{Luk 16.22-23} And therefore, we often read in the scriptures of the holy fathers, that they were gathered to their people — that is to say, they were received into the fellowship of those fathers with whom, in this world, they had remained in the same faith and same kind of religion. For the sequences and circumstances of those places manifestly declare that those words cannot be expounded of the burial of the body corporally. Again, in the gospel of St. Matthew, the Lord says: "I say to you, that many will come out of the east and out of the west, and shall rest themselves with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven: but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into utter darkness, where there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." ^Mat
8.11-12 Now if the Gentiles must be gathered into the kingdom of heaven, and that they must be placed in the fellowship of the fathers; then it must be that the fathers were already in heaven, and felt the joys of it at that very time when the Lord spoke these words. In the gospel of St. John, he also says plainly: "Abraham was glad to see my day; and he saw it, and rejoiced." ^Joh
8.56 This saying, although we understand it to be spoken of the justification and joy of the conscience, yet we do not separate it from the joy of eternal life; because the one of necessity depends on and follows the other.

iii.290

Moreover, we must consider here the occasion on which these words of the Lord seem to have been spoken. The Lord had said: "Truly, truly, I say to you, if a man keeps my saying, he shall never taste of death." The Jews took hold of these words and said, "Abraham is dead, and the prophets are dead; and yet you say, If a man keeps my saying, he shall never see death. What, are you greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are also dead. Who do you make yourself?" The Lord answered, and showed that Abraham is quickened, or else preserved in life and heavenly joy, through faith in the sayings of Christ Jesus; and however he may be dead in body, yet notwithstanding this, his soul lives in joy forever with God, in whom he put his trust. To this may be added that David in the sixteenth psalm, calling God his hope, his expectation, and his inheritance, among other things says:

"The Lord is always at my right hand. Therefore my heart is glad, my glory rejoices, and my flesh shall rest in hope. For you will not leave my soul in hell, nor will you allow your Holy One to see corruption. You will make me know the path of life. In your presence is the fulness of joy, and at your right hand there are pleasures forevermore." ^{Psa 16.10}

In the Acts of the Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul apply this testimony of David as a thing spoken propheticly about Christ Jesus; yet notwithstanding this, no man can deny that the same testimony may refer to David, in a way, who in that psalm makes a profession of his faith, declares his hope, and expresses his Michtam, that is, his delight, or the arms or emblem by which he would be known.[1537] Therefore, those words first pertain to Christ, and then to David, and then to all the faithful: for the life and resurrection of Christ is the life and resurrection of the faithful. Again, in another place the same prophet says: "I believe truly to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living." ^{Psa 27.13} Now, in the land of the living there is neither death nor dolour (grief), but fulness of joy and everlasting pleasures. By faith David looked to obtain these joys and delights at the hand of God, through Christ his Saviour, and indeed, according to his hope, he possessed it immediately after he departed this life, even though it would be many years after his death before Christ came in the flesh — even as we today are also saved by him; even though it is now one thousand five hundred odd years [1538] since he departed from the earth in his flesh.

iii.291

In the eleventh chapter to the Hebrews, Paul says; "And all these holy fathers, having obtained a good report through faith, did not receive the promise, because God had provided a better thing for us, that they should not be made perfect without us." But I think, simply, that this must be understood of the perfect or full felicity in which the holy fathers are not consummated or made perfect without us — because there is yet remaining the general resurrection of all flesh, which must come first. And once that is finished, then the felicity of all the saints is consummated or made perfect. This felicity shall not be given to the soul alone, then, but to the body also. St. Peter also constantly affirms that salvation is first of all purchased by Christ for the souls of the holy saints; then immediately upon their bodily death, they are received to be partakers of the same salvation, by the same Christ; and lastly, that at the end of the world, the bodies of the saints being raised from death, as the bodies of all men will be, they shall appear before Christ to be judged by him. "The Lord," he says, "shall judge both the quick and the dead. For to this end the gospel was preached to the dead, so that in the flesh they should be judged like men, but in the spirit they should live with God;" ^{1Pet 4.5-6} — that is to say, the death of Christ is effectual to the fathers who died in the faith. Thus, they now live with God in soul, and they are again to be judged in their flesh, like all other men, at whatever time the Lord comes to judge the quick and the dead. Therefore, our salvation is not yet perfect nor consummated, but shall be made perfect at the end of the world.

iii.292

Moreover, our forefathers did not pray to any other, but to God alone, the only Creator of all things; and they believed truly that he would be merciful to mankind for the blessed Seed's sake. They did not call upon God as we usually do today, through the Mediator and intercessor Christ Jesus, even as the Lord himself testified and said in the gospel: "Up to now you have not asked anything in my name: ask, and you shall receive;" ^{Joh 16.24} And yet, they were not utterly ignorant of the Mediator, for whose sake they were heard by the Lord. In the ninth chapter of his prophecy, Daniel makes his prayer, and he desires to be heard by God for the Lord's sake, that is, for the promised Christ's sake.

Finally, as often as the holy saints said in their prayers, "Remember, Lord, your servants, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob," they did not look back to the persons or souls of the deceased patriarchs, but ahead to the promise that was made to the patriarchs. Now, since that promise is, "In your seed all the kindreds of the earth shall be blessed;" and since Paul testifies that Christ is that blessed Seed; it consequently follows that in their prayers, the holy fathers had an eye to the blessed Seed, and that they desired God to hear them for Christ's sake. For in one place also, the Lord promises deliverance to king Hezekiah, saying: "I will defend this city for my own sake, and for my servant David's sake." ^2King
19.34 But in the seventh and twenty-eighth chapters of Isaiah's prophecy, it is manifest that the city was spared for Christ's sake, the son of the virgin, who is the foundation placed in Zion — the one whom Ezekiel in the thirty-fourth chapter calls by the name of David, and the gospel calls David's son.

Last of all, the apostle Paul shows that the ancient fathers had among them the very same sacraments which we now have; as in other places he also makes us partakers and applies to us both circumcision and the Passover, the sacraments which were given to those of old; as it appears in Colossians, the second chapter, and 1Corinthians, the fifth chapter. In the tenth chapter he threatens grievous punishment to the Corinthians at the hands of God, unless they abstain from things offered to idols, and from all heathenish sensuality. And he then brings in the example of the Israelites, which he applies to his purpose in this manner:

iii.293

"I would not have you be ignorant, brethren, that our fathers were the church of God, and that they had the same sacraments which we have today. For they were all baptized unto Moses (that is, by Moses, or by the ministry of Moses) in the cloud and in the sea (for the cloud and the sea were figures of baptism). And they also ate of the same spiritual food, and drank the same spiritual drink."

And immediately after, he interprets his own meaning, saying: "For they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them, which rock was Christ." ^{1Cor 4.10} Manna truly, and the rock typically, represent the spiritual food with which Christ refreshes both us and them, for he is himself the bread and drink of eternal life. But although they bodily, outwardly, and visibly received their sacraments, yet because they were destitute of faith and the Holy Ghost, because they were denied with worshipping of idols, with surfeiting and fornication — they displeased God, and were destroyed by him in the desert. And therefore, unless you also abstain from those filthy vices, neither shall baptism and the sacrament of the Lord's Supper [1539] avail you, but you shall undoubtedly be destroyed by the Lord.

Therefore, since it is declared by the most evident proofs of scripture, [1540] that the old fathers had the same sacraments, the same invocation of God, the same hope, expectation, and inheritance, the same Spirit, the same faith, and the same doctrine, which we have today, I hope the mark at which I shot is fully hit. And I trust that I have sufficiently proved that the faithful fathers of the old testament, and we the believers of the new covenant, are one church and one people, who are all saved under one congregation, under one testament alone, and by one and the same means: namely, by faith in Christ Jesus.

I have said this much up to here touching the likeness, agreement, and unity between the old and new Testaments, or the people of God. I will now add something touching the diversity between them, and the things in which they differ.

Truly, you can find no diversity in the substance — the difference between them consists in the manner of administration, in a few incidentals and certain circumstances.

iii.294

For there were annexed to the promise or doctrine of faith, and to the chief and principal laws, certain external things, which were added until the time of amendment; so that the whole ecclesiastical regiment, the manner of teaching the doctrine of godliness, and the outward worship of God, was of one sort among the old fathers, and of another sort among us. But the especial things in which they differ may be recited and set down in these few principal points.

First and foremost, all things of the new covenant are clearer and more manifest than those of the old testament. The preaching [1541] of the old covenant always had in it, for the most part, some misty or cloudy thing; it was still covered and wrapped up in shadows and dim displays. But the publishing of the new testament is clear and manifest, so that it is called the light which is without any mists and darkness. Moses covered his face with a veil, nor could the children of Israel behold his countenance. But we, beholding not only the countenance of Moses which is now uncovered, but the pleasant and amiable face of Christ himself, greatly rejoice to see our salvation openly revealed before our eyes. In that sense, the Lord said that his disciples were happy, where he broke into these words: "Happy are the eyes which see the things that you see. For I say to you that many prophets and kings desired to see the things you see, and did not see them; and to hear the things you hear, and did not hear them." ^{Mat 13.16-17}In this sense, the just man Simeon called himself as happy a man as lived, upon which he was ready to die, saying: "Lord, now let your servant depart in peace, according to your word. For my eyes have seen your salvation; which you have prepared before the face of all people; to be a light to enlighten the Gentiles, and to be the glory of your people Israel." ^{Luk 2.29-32}

But although our forefathers did not have as much light as shines to us in Christ since his coming in the flesh, yet that little light which they had was sufficient to get salvation by faith in Christ. Even we ourselves, although we see him far more clearly than our forefathers did, notwithstanding that, we behold him but in a mist,[1542] compared to the brightness in which he shall appear.

iii.295

For hereafter we shall see him face to face in the glory of his majesty; [1543] and yet, even this sight of him which now we have, is sufficient to salvation. Therefore, it is a very fine similitude, and prettily said by some, "Although at daybreak the brightness of the sun is not as great as it is at noonday, yet wayfarers or travellers do not stay till the sun is at the highest, but take the morning before them to go on their journey, and have light enough to see the way." For in like manner, they think that to our forefathers, even that little portion of light in the morning, was sufficient by the leading of faith, to bring them through all impediments to eternal felicity. In the meantime, we have great cause to rejoice [1544] that Christ, the very sun and light of righteousness, after the misty light of the daystar of the law,[1545] shines forth to us in the new testament.

Moreover, the forefathers in the old testament had types, shadows, and figures of things to come; but we have now received the very thing itself which was prefigured to them. Therefore, the thing which God promised to them, he has performed and given to us. They truly believed that Christ would come and deliver all the faithful from their sins; and we believe that he has already come, that he has redeemed us, and has fulfilled all that the prophets foretold of him. Therefore, the Lord said in the gospel: "The prophets and the law prophesied till John; since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and suffers violence by every man."^{Luk 16.16} From this it is gathered that, when the thing prefigured has come and is present, the figures and shadows which foreshowed the things to come, then come to an end and vanish away. Therefore, the yoke and burden which our fathers bore, is thereby taken from our necks.

iii.296

The worshipping of God, which they did externally, was very busy [1546] and burdensome — such as the Aaronic priesthood, the tabernacle or temple that was to be thoroughly furnished with most exquisite things and instruments, their sundry sorts of sacrifices, and many more ceremonies like these. Now, we who are the people of the new covenant, are freely disburdened and set at liberty from all this cost and business. And the one by whom we are disburdened is Jesus Christ, in whom alone we have all things necessary to life and salvation. For it pleased God the Father to recapitulate in him, and as St. Paul says, to bring into a sum,[1547] all things requisite to life and salvation; that the things which seemed before to be dispersed here and there, should be fully exhibited and brought to us in Christ alone. For Christ is the fulfilling of all the types and ceremonies — by whose Spirit, since we now possess the thing prefigured, we no longer need the representing types and shadows. The external things that Christ has ordained are very few, and of very small cost. Therefore, the people of the new testament enjoy a surpassing great and ample liberty.

To this, I suppose, belongs that excellent passage of St. Paul, which may be seen in the fourth chapter to the Galatians. ^{Gal 4.24-26} There, in handling this matter diligently, he conceives that there are two mothers. The one engenders [1548] to bondage, and the other to liberty. He does this under the type of Hagar and Sarah, by which he denotes the two doctrines: that of the law, and that of the gospel. That of the law engenders to bondage, but that of the gospel engenders to liberty. Therefore, the law engenders the holy fathers and the prophets to bondage, not that they should abide as bond-slaves forever, but that it might keep them under discipline — indeed, that it might lead them to Christ, the full perfection of the law. The liberty of the fathers was so oppressed and covered by the weight and heap of ceremonies, that although they were free in spirit before the Lord, yet notwithstanding, in outward show they differ little or not at all from true bond-slaves, because of the burden of the law that lay upon their shoulders. For insomuch as the law was not as yet abrogated, they were compelled to precisely observe it. But when Christ had come and fulfilled all things, then the shadows vanished away, and that heavy yoke was taken from the neck of us Christians.

iii.297

So by this means, our mother Sarah engenders us to liberty. She is the mother of us all. Of that mother (which is also called the holy mother church) we have the seed of life. She has fashioned us, and brought us forth into the light; she collects [1549] us in her bosom, in which she carries both milk and meat (the word of God) to nourish, save, and bring us up.

Now, the bonds being cancelled, and the middle wall which was a barrier, being broken down, God more liberally rules his church, and He does not retain it any longer under so strict a custody. For the people of God are not contained within the bounds of the land of promise — they are dispersed to the ends of the world; nor are the circumcised His people now, and those who keep the law. Although it is not to be doubted that even then, when circumcision was in force,[1550] he had some who were his people among the Gentiles, such as Job and others, whom He himself knew. Rather, those who acknowledge Christ are his people, although they are neither circumcised nor busied with the law. This is a new people, gathered together out of the whole world by faith and the Holy Ghost. Christ has given his own name to this new testament in which the Jews have no inheritance, unless they forsake their stubborn opinion of the law, and cling to Christ alone without affiance [1551] to the law. All the books of the prophets are fully fraught with testimonies touching the calling of the Gentiles to the communion and fellowship of God, and also touching the reprobation of the Jews, who are utterly rejected for their unreclaimable [1552] affiance to the law.

Furthermore, the apostle Paul puts another difference between the two testaments, alluding to the prophecy of Jeremiah, as seen in the eighth chapter of Paul's epistle to the Hebrews. For he attributes certain excellent gifts to the people of the new testament: namely, absolute and full remission of their sins. For he says, "Because I will be merciful to their unrighteousness,[1553] and I will remember their sins and iniquities no more."^{Heb 10.17} He also attributes to the people of the new testament a most exquisite reformation and absolute illumination of their minds.

iii.298

For he says, "I will plant my laws in their minds, and write them in their hearts; and then no man will teach his neighbour or his brother, saying, Know the Lord; for they shall all know me, from the little to the great." ^{Jer 31.33-34} But of the law it is written that it was graven in tablets of stone. Yet for all this, let no man think that the fathers obtained no remission of their sins. For as they had free forgiveness of their sins by faith, so God both wrote his law and poured his Spirit into their hearts. For which of us today can say that we excel in knowledge and in faith,[1554] either Abraham, Moses, Samuel, David, Isaiah, Daniel, or Zechariah? So then, the difference is not that the fathers of the old testament were without the remission of sins and the illumination of the Holy Ghost, and that we alone have obtained them, who are the people of the new testament. Rather, the difference consists in the greatness, ampleness, largeness, and plentifulness of the gifts: namely, because they are more liberally bestowed and more plentifully poured out upon more now, than they were of old. For all nations, being called, draw the water of life not by drops, but by whole handfuls. The Lord pours out his Spirit upon all flesh.^Act ^2.17 Of old, God was known only in Jerusalem; but now, since Christ has come into the world, his disciples have gone through all the corners of the earth, and taught all kingdoms to know the Lord. Of old, the worthy men [1555] and prophets were not so many that they might not be numbered — because the land of promise alone, in a way, bred such good and holy men. But who today is able to reckon all the kings, princes, noblemen, prophets, bishops, doctors, martyrs, and excellent persons of every sex, estate, and age, who have been and are today bred, not only in Jerusalem, but also in Arabia, Idumea, Phoenicia, Mesopotamia, Persia, Asia, Egypt, Africa, Greece, Italy, the east, the south, the west, and the north? Free remission of sins is preached to all countries and kingdoms. All the faithful in every nation under heaven, are received into the grace and favour of God the Father, through Christ. All have received in great abundance the gift of the Holy Ghost. All have prophesied. All have known the Lord.

iii.299

Finally, the law makes no man perfect.[1556] The gospel simply makes perfect, and directly leads us to Christ, without any barrier, and causes us to rest and to content ourselves in him alone.

Last of all, I will not slip over this difference, although it is of little weight, and it is such that others like it may be easily observed: that the law, appointing a certain land, peculiarly separated from other nations, promised to the fathers of old, the possession of it, so long as they kept the law. But if they transgressed the law, then it threatened that they would be uprooted and utterly cast out of that good land.^{Lev 18.26-28} But to us, no one limited land is expressly promised: "for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness of it; the round world, and all that is in it."^{Psa 24.1} But although He does not here assign to us any certain or particular thing, as he did to our forefathers of old, yet he does not at any time neglect us; for he feeds, blesses, and preserves us in every land and nation. Therefore, the promises which were made of old to our forefathers concerning the land of promise, now having come to an end, they have utterly vanished. Thus those who, for an age or two ago, incited many nations to arm themselves to recover the holy land, seem to have been besides their wits.[1557] By his coming into the world, Christ has sanctified the whole earth: for in every nation of the world, there are some sons and heirs of God and his kingdom.

I have spoken more briefly, touching the likeness and agreement, and the unlikeness and difference, between both the old and new Testaments or people, because I already handled the same matter in the first sermon of the first decade, and in the sixth sermon of the third decade. Finally, I but briefly touched the abrogation of the law, because a good while ago I set forth two treatises: the one, Of the Ancient Faith,[1558] and the other, Of the Only and Eternal Covenant of God.[1559] I know these treatises are familiar among you.

iii.300

I will not here, in the conclusion, recapitulate the special points of this sermon; partly because I have already been somewhat too long; and partly because I have, I hope, used so plain an order, that every point is indifferently well-settled in every man's memory. Thus, by God's grace and sufferance, I have made an end to treating God's holy law, in which I have been occupied a good sort of days, by several sermons. Blessed be God and our heavenly Father, world without end, whom I beseech to bless us all through Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. Amen.

3-9. THE NINTH SERMON: OF CHRISTIAN LIBERTY.

Of Christian liberty, and of offences.
Of good works, and their reward.

I HAVE already discoursed long upon God's laws, through many sermons. Now, therefore, because upon the consideration and handling of the law, certain points arise, these are not [1560] to be omitted. These depend upon and are annexed hand in hand to the law. Of this sort are Christian liberty; good works and the reward of good works; and lastly, sin and the reward or punishment of sin. I will speak of them in order, as God puts it into my mouth — whom I desire you to pray to with me, beseeching him not to allow me to speak in these or other points of holy doctrine, the thing that will sound against his holy will.

Christian liberty depends upon and follows the abrogation of the law, as the effect of it. This liberty ministers to us an occasion to speak about offences.

Now, the most holy apostle of Christ, St. Paul, has reasoned very diligently and largely concerning Christian liberty. From this, we may gather that the consideration of Christian liberty is neither of no weight, nor is it of little profit.

iii.301

And this treatise about it is especially necessary to us of this age, among whom there are no small number of men who either do not understand what Christian liberty is, or else, if they do know it, they foully abuse it, thereby fulfilling the lusts of the flesh. I will therefore tell you who is the deliverer that sets us at liberty; who he sets at liberty; and in what and how far they are set at liberty. Once these things are known, it will be an easy matter to perceive what Christian liberty is, what the property or disposition is of those who are so set at liberty, and how far they must beware of giving offence to any man, and thus abusing their granted liberty.

There is no other deliverer promised, given,[1561] and preached to us, than Christ Jesus, the Son of God. For the one that delivers other men, must himself be free from the bands which tie those who wish and look to be set at liberty. But throughout all ages, none is to be found in the whole world, nor yet in heaven, except Jesus Christ [1562] alone, the Son of God. For that cause, the gospel says, "If the Son sets you at liberty, then you are free indeed." ^{Joh 8.36}

Now, those whom the Lord delivers, are bond-slaves; this is why he delivers them from bondage, and incorporates them in the liberty of the sons of God. He sets all bond-servants at liberty, excluding none but those who exclude themselves by their own fault: their own unbelief and disobedience. For the coming of the Son of God was to set all those at liberty who were entangled in bondage. Therefore, he delivers us so far as we are bond-servants. For bondage and liberty are so opposed and contrary to one another, that without the consideration of the one, we cannot conceive the meaning of the other. Thus I think it best here to speak as much about bondage as this present argument seems to require.

First, bondage is nothing else but the state or condition in which bond-servants find themselves. Now those who are in bondage are either born bondmen, or else they are made bond-servants. The children that issue from bond-servants are born bond-slaves. The others that are made bond-servants, are made so by captivity (from which they take their names), and are called captives.

iii.302

For Pomponius says, Slaves were so called because the captains commanded them to be sold for money when they were taken captives in wars by their soldiers — to spare their life and save them by that means. In Latin, these bondmen are also called Mancipia, eo quod ab hostibus manu caperentur,[1563] because they were taken prisoners by the hand of their enemies. Or else they are made bondslaves by the civil law — as when a freeman, above twenty years of age, for profit's sake, allows himself to be sold for money.[1564] Therefore, bondmen have lost all liberty, and wholly hang on their master's government, in whose power it lies to kill them if they so desire.

Now, there are two sorts of bondage: political [1565] and spiritual. Political bondage is not, by grace and the preaching of the gospel, removed from the church of the faithful, so that there should be no bondmen at all; or that they should not do their duty, or the service that they owe of right. For the apostle Paul says:

"Let every man walk according to how he is called. And so I ordain in all churches. Are you called being a servant? Do not care about it: yet if you may be free, rather use it." ^{1Cor
7.17, 21}

And again:

"Servants, obey those who are your bodily masters, with fear and trembling and singleness of heart, as to Christ; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; with good will, serving the Lord and not men; knowing that whatever good thing any man does, he shall receive that back again from the Lord, whether he is bond or free." ^{Eph 6.5-8}

And in his epistle to Timothy he says:

"Let as many servants as are under the yoke, count their masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine is not blasphemed. And those who have believing masters, do not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather serve them, for they are believing and beloved, and those who are partakers of the benefit." [1566]

iii.303

And yet, in this bondage, the faithful have this comfort by the preaching of the gospel: that however they are bonded in body, they are free in mind and soul. For the apostle again says: "He that is called a bondman in the Lord, is the Lord's freeman; likewise, he that is called free is bonded to Christ." ^{1Cor 7.22}

This is a comfort to the faithful in all their afflictions, who know that their spirit is safe and free, however their body may be strictly imprisoned or sharply tormented. Therefore, the saints are at liberty, however narrowly they may be looked to and shut up in custody; they are victors and vanquishers, however they may be bound and oppressed; finally, they enjoy the most exquisite pleasures even when they are vexed [1567] with most infinite evils. I know that the children of this world mock and scoff at these pleasures and the liberty of faithful believers, as though they were mere dreams and fantasies of fools and asses. But God [1568] soundly pays them back for their scoffs and mockery, not only in the world to come, but also in this present life. Meanwhile, like miserable caitiffs, [1569] being in extreme captivity, even slavery, [1570] they nonetheless think they are at liberty, and in most absolute felicity. For they serve a filthy service in detestable slavery, making themselves bondmen to abominable whoredom, to beastly mad drunkenness, to wicked mammon,[1571] and to other most vile pleasures, in which they die and rot with endless shame and infamy. But the apostle Paul speaks of the service and afflictions of the saints, who even in their afflictions enjoy their liberty and rejoice in the Lord. He says:

"We are troubled on every side, yet we are not made pensive; we are in poverty,[1572] but not in extreme poverty; we suffer persecution, but are not utterly forsaken in it; we are cast down, but we do not perish; bearing about always in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life of Jesus might also appear in our body." ^{2Cor. 4.8-10}

iii.304

And again:

"In all things we endeavour to show ourselves as becomes the ministers of Christ; in much suffering, afflictions, necessities, sorrows, stripes, imprisonments, seditions, labours, watchings, fastings; in glory and ignominy; in reproaches and praises; as deceivers, and yet speakers of truth; as unknown, and yet known; as dying, and look, we live; as chastened, and not killed; as sorrowful, and yet always rejoicing; as poor, and yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things." ^{2Cor
6.4-5, 8-10}

Look, here you see how the saints in extreme servitude have a cheerful consolation and are always at liberty: as seen by infinite examples in the Acts of the Apostles and other ecclesiastical histories.

Now we come to the second part of bondage. Spiritual bondage has a certain likeness to bodily servitude. For Adam became a bondman by his own fault; and from him, we are all born bondmen. He was once at liberty, and had the Lord as his friend and favourer; but he disloyally revolted from God, and got himself another master, the devil, a tyrant as cruel as possible, who having gotten power over him for his sin, like a merciless lord, miserably handled him like a bond-servant. Now, from our corrupt grandsire, we are born corrupt and sinners; and for our sin, we are also under the devil's dominion; we are in danger of [1573] the law, and of its curse: for we are the bond-slaves of sin; we are made subject to sundry calamities because of our sin. Therefore, this is called spiritual bondage, not because it is only in the mind of man, but only because it is opposed to bodily bondage.[1574] For sin has also made our body subject to the curse; nor do we sin in mind alone, but in the body also — for every part and all the members of our bodies are subject to sin, and infected with iniquity.

iii.305

Therefore, we serve in most miserable bondage while, being under the devil's dominion, we do the things that please the flesh, by egging on evil affections, bearing fruit to the devil, our cruel and our rigorous master, or rather to abortion at the peril of our lives; for this truly is our hardest and most lamentable servitude and bondage.

Now, on the other side, let us see what Christian liberty is — that is to say, from what, and how far, the Lord has made us free. In a word, Christ our Lord has delivered us from a grievous bondage — namely: he has made us free, so far as we were slaves and bond-servants by sin. We may more largely expound on this, and say that the Son of God came into this world; and having first oppressed the tyranny of Satan and crushed his head by his own death and passion, he has translated us into his own kingdom, and made himself our Lord and king. Secondly, he has adopted us to be the sons of God, and with his blessing took away the bitter curse of the law; for he took away all sins, and purged all the faithful from their iniquities. Thirdly, he most liberally bestowed the free gift of the Holy Ghost, to the end that the sons of God should willingly and of their own accord submit themselves to the will of God, and do the things that the Lord would have them do: for the hatred of the law does not remain, even though the weakness of the flesh still abides. Lastly, our Lord and King has taken from the shoulders of his elect, the burden of the law, the types and figures, with all the costs belonging to them; and once being set at liberty, he has forbidden us to entangle ourselves again with any laws and traditions of men.

All this being laid together, we make this definition: To deliver is to make free, and to set at liberty from bondage. Someone is free, or manumissed, who being delivered from bondage, enjoys his liberty. Therefore manumission, or liberty, is nothing else but the state of the one made free; the commodity, I say, which a free-made man has received and enjoys by reason of his deliverance; namely:

That in being delivered from the tyranny of Satan, from sin, from the curse of the law, and from death, he is made the son of God and heir of everlasting life. And also,

iii.306

That he has received the Spirit of liberty, by which he wholly gives himself to be the servant of God, to serve Him all his life long. And lastly,

That being delivered from the law of Moses and from those of all mortal men, he altogether depends on the gospel only — having at liberty, the free use of external things, such as food, drink, clothing, and similar indifferent things.

Christian liberty chiefly consists in these last three recited points.

Now I will add to this, such testimonies of scripture as will better confirm and more plainly declare my exposition. And first of all, I will allege those testimonies which are to be found in the books of the holy evangelists; and then those in the writings of the apostles.

In his hymn of thanksgiving, Zacharias the priest, and father of John the Baptist, declares the truth and goodness of God in performing for us what he promised to our forefathers; namely, "That being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve him without fear in holiness and righteousness before him all the days of our life." ^Luk
1.73-75 In this testimony of his, we have true liberty — I mean, that freedom in which, being delivered by the Lord from all our enemies, both visible and invisible, we should no longer serve them with fear, but serve our God in joy and gladness. Also added is the manner and order of serving him: "in holiness and righteousness." Holiness cuts off and casts away all uncleanness and inconvenience; and righteousness gives to every man that which is due: namely, the things which we owe to every man out of duty; and it contains in it both freedom and benevolence. In this kind of service, those who are made free, serve the Lord their God — not for a day or two, or a few certain years, but all the days of their life. Therefore, true Christian liberty is the perpetual service which we owe and give to God.

iii.307

In the eighth chapter of St. John's gospel, addressing the Jews who bragged greatly about the vain and silly liberty which they received from their ancestors, Christ our Lord makes this objection: "Truly, truly, I say to you, that whoever commits sin, is the servant of sin. And the servant does not abide in the house forever; but the Son abides forever: if the Son therefore makes you free, then are you free indeed." ^{Joh 8.34-36} In these words, he mentions both bondage and liberty. Whoever commits any sin is a bondman to sin, as to a cruel master or a never-contented tyrant; for he obeys as one that is bound to sin. All the sons of men are such bondmen; their punishment is [1575] to have no inheritance in their Father's house, which is the heavenly Jerusalem.[1576] As for those which the Son of God restores to freedom, they are partakers of the heavenly kingdom, and fellow-heirs with the Son of God. But Christ makes none free but those who are faithful.[1577] Therefore, the sons of God and fellow-heirs of Christ are made free and set at liberty for Christ's sake, who is their only deliverer. Nor is there any other in heaven or on earth, beside Christ Jesus, who is able to set us at freedom and at liberty.

In the sixth chapter to the Romans, Paul says:

"Do not let sin reign in your mortal bodies, that you should obey it by the lusts of it;[1578] nor should you give your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin; but give yourselves to God, as those who are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. For sin shall not have power over you; because you are not under the law, but under grace."^{Rom 6.12-14}

In these words, he exhorts those who are purged and made free by Christ, to live holily in their spiritual bondage. Now, he does not say, Do not let sin be in you, or in your mortal body: but he says, "Do not let sin reign in you, or in your mortal body." But when does sin reign?

iii.308

In truth, sin reigns when we obey its lusts; that is, when we do not resist, but fulfil the lusts of the flesh. Sin therefore does not reign in our mortal body, so long as it is only felt in the body and not obeyed or permitted to rule, but rather resisted and trodden underfoot. He expounds that same sentence by another somewhat more easily understood one: I would not have you permit your members to sin, as to a tyrant, to use them as instruments to work all unrighteousness: I rather require you to give yourselves to be ruled and governed by God. For since He has set you free from death and brought you to life again, it is requisite [1579] that you give your members to God, as lively instruments, to work all righteousness. And you are easily able to do so, because "You are not under the law, but under grace."

The rest of that chapter, up to the end, depends on this:

"What then?" he says; "shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Do you not know, to whomever you commit yourselves as servants to obey, you are servants of the one whom you obey; whether it is of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, you were the servants of sin, but now you have obeyed with your heart, the form of doctrine into which you were brought.[1580] Being made free from sin, then, you have become the servants of righteousness." ^{Rom 6.15-18}

Yet he shows that the freemen of Christ do not abuse their liberty, and give themselves again to be governed by their old and tyrannous master, sin. For Paul makes sin and righteousness to be, as it were, two masters; and assigns to each of them the hire, or reward, that they give to their servants; the one being life, the other, death. Lastly, he says generally, that we are servants of the one to whom we give ourselves to obey. From this he infers, "Being redeemed by the grace of God from the bondage of sin, and from death, which is the reward of sin, we are translated into the bondage of righteousness (whose reward is life), that we may live by it."

iii.309

For he more significantly expresses his meaning in what follows, saying:

"I speak in the manner of men, because of the infirmity of your flesh. Just as you have given your members as servants to uncleanness — iniquity unto iniquity — even so, now give your members as servants to righteousness, unto holiness. For when you were the servants of sin, you were free from righteousness. What fruit did you have, then, in those things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now, being made free from sin and made the servants of God, you have your fruit unto holiness, and the end is everlasting life. For the reward of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." ^{Rom 6.19-23}

All this is so plain and evident, that it needs no larger exposition of mine. And yet in the next chapter, the seventh, he more fully expounds all that he said before, by using a comparison in a parable.

"The woman," he says, "who is in subjection to the man, is bound to the man by the law, as long as he lives. If while the man lives, she goes aside to another, she is considered an adulteress; but if the man is dead, she may couple herself with another man. Even so, I say, we are dead to the law." ^Rom
7.1-4

For Christ died for us, and in his body was offered up to be a sacrifice, or oblation, to cleanse and purge our sins, that we might then be united and coupled to him; and that we, being conceived and made with child [1581] by the Holy Spirit, may labour, give birth, and be delivered of an excellent issue and the holy fruit of good works — for while we served sin as our master, and gave birth to an ill-favoured babe of death (by which I mean, iniquity and wickedness), we were subject to sin, for which death is appointed and ordained as its punishment. But let us now hear the very words of the holy and blessed apostle, saying:

"Even so, my brethren, by the body of Christ we also are dead concerning the law, [1582] that we should be coupled to another, who is raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit unto God. For when we were in the flesh, the lusts of sin,[1583] which were by the law, worked in our members to bear fruit unto death. But now we are delivered from the law to which we were in bondage, [1584] and dead to it, that we may serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." ^{Rom 7.4-6}

iii.310

That place in the eighth chapter to the Romans is unknown to no one, where he says: "The law of the spirit of life through Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death."^{Rom 8.2} Immediately after, he adds the manner of this deliverance, saying: "For what the law could not do, God did by sending his own Son;" and so forth — for the words are sufficiently plain, and understood by all men.

In the seventh chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians he says: "You were bought with a price; do not become the servants of men." ^{1Cor 7.23} In these words, the holy apostle exhorts servants under the colour or pretence of worldly [1585] bondage, not to commit to anything for their earthly masters' pleasure, which sounds against sincerity and is repugnant to pure religion. That is, although [1586] they are called by the name of servants, yet they should not obey the wicked laws and ungodly ordinances of mortal men. The cause that should pull and draw us away from it, is because we are redeemed and set at liberty by the price of Christ's blood. It would therefore be too bad and unworthy a thing, if contrary to the effect of our liberty, we were to obey the naughty laws and ordinances of man.

This also is extended and stretches out to the laws of men which are made in matters of religion. For in the fifteenth chapter of the holy gospel written by the evangelist St. Matthew, the Lord and Saviour says, "In vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men;" and "Let them alone: they are blind leaders of the blind." And the apostle St. Paul says: "If you are dead with Christ to the rudiments of the world, why, as if yet living in the world, are you led [1587] by traditions, (do not touch; do not taste; do not handle; which all perish in the abusing) [1588] according to the commandments and doctrines of men? These things have a show of wisdom in superstition and humbleness of mind, and in neglecting the body; not in any honour to satisfying the flesh." ^{Col 2.20-23}

iii.311

First of all, he shows that the faithful ones of Christ Jesus have nothing to do with decrees of man's inventions, and that they are not bound to observe men's traditions, because they are dead to such traditions with Christ; that is to say, by Christ Jesus [1589] they are redeemed and set free from traditions; in Christ's death, these traditions finished and came to an end, while he made us his own and set us at liberty. Then, by imitation, he also mimicked the words of those who make those decrees, saying, "Oh, do not touch, do not taste, do not handle."

These three precepts stretch very far, and comprehend many petit decrees; all of which he immediately confuted with these probable arguments. First, because they appoint the worship of God in things that perish in their use; but the kingdom of God is neither food nor drink, but consists in spiritual things; what enters by the mouth does not defile the man. Secondly, because they are not made by God, the author of all goodness; but they have their beginning from man's inventions: "But in vain they worship me," says the Lord in the gospel, "teaching as doctrines the precepts of men." ^{Mat 15.9} Nor does the holy apostle St. Paul wink at and slily pass over them, because he will not answer to the things which most commend these traditions. First of all, they are commended for the show and appearance of wisdom that is in them; for they seem to have been (not without great wisdom) ordained by wise men, in that they so fitly serve every person, time, and place. The earnest defenders of men's traditions cry out, and say: Our ancestors were no fools, their laws are full of wisdom. But Jeremiah cries out on the other side, saying: "They have rejected the word of God; therefore what wisdom can there be in them?" ^{Jer 8.9} Another reason why traditions are commended is the Greeks' eqeloqrhskeia (ethelothreskeia); that is to say, a kind of worship which we have chosen from our own brains, and taken ourselves to serve and worship God with; for men gladly and willingly receive the traditions of men, because they are agreeable to their inclination.

iii.312

Indeed, Christ says in the holy gospel; "If you had been of the world, the world would have loved her own. Now, because I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you." ^{Joh 15.9} And again he says: "That which men set much store by, is abominable to God." ^{Luk 16.15} Moreover, men's traditions are commended for their humility, which is understood in two manners or respects. First, it is said to be humility if any man readily obeys and easily yields to what is urged, obtruded, and thrust upon him by men of countenance and authority. Secondly, the laws of men may seem to exercise humbleness, and keep men in humility; but such obedience and humility may rather be called sacrilege, because it is not ruled and directed by the word of God, as the thing by which alone it should be tempered and squared. Rather, it transfers and conveys the honour of God from Him to men. Last of all, men's traditions are commended for neglecting the flesh — Oh, that discipline and chastisement of the flesh seems a good thing to them, by which the wantonness of the flesh is somewhat bridled and tamed. The apostle adds finally, "Not in any honour to satisfying the flesh" — that is to say, although these things have a show of religion and holiness, nonetheless, they indeed have no honour at all, considering that those external things are ordained by God for the ease and relief of men's necessities. Indeed, Paul flatly finds fault with those decrees, because they give the body no honour for satisfying itself; that is, according to the measure of the body's necessity. For moderate care and looking to the body is not only permitted, but also commanded, lest we mar the body by too great a lack and strictness, and make it unfit to do good works. Nor is the care of the flesh forbidden anywhere, unless it tends toward lusts and sensuality. This is why the apostle says, "Do not cherish the flesh unto concupiscence." ^{Rom 13.14} Therefore, God has granted man, for his necessity, the use of food, drink, sleep, clothing, rest, allowable pleasures, and other necessary things.[1590]

iii.313

In the fourth chapter to the Galatians, St. Paul says: "When the fulness of the time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, and made under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive by adoption the right (or inheritance) [1591] of children. Now, because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Therefore you are no longer a servant, but a son: if you are a son, you are also a heir of God through Christ."^Gal
4.4

And immediately after, again: "Stand fast in the liberty with which Christ has delivered us, and do not be wrapped again in the yoke of bondage."

In the second chapter to the Hebrews he says: "Christ was made partaker of flesh and blood with us, to the end that, through death, he might expel the one who had lordship over death, that is, the devil; and that he might deliver those who through fear of death were all their life in danger of bondage." [1592] Thus, I hope these testimonies of scripture suffice for our purpose.

These things being well-weighed and thoroughly considered, will plainly teach what kind of liberty those have who are made free by Christ, and what their property and inclination is: namely, most religious, and altogether given to holy things; that is to say, in all points addicted to the Spirit, without which there is no liberty, and by which all the sons of God are always governed. The Lord's freemen most diligently beware that they not unadvisedly offend any man by their liberty, or vainly abuse their purchased freedom; for they continually have before their minds and eyes, the weighty sayings of the holy apostles of their Lord Christ Jesus. St. Peter in the second chapter of his first Epistle says: "As free, and not using liberty as a cloak for maliciousness, but even as the servants of God." ^{1Pet 2.16}

iii.314

And Paul says: "Brethren, you have been called to liberty; only do not let liberty be an occasion for the flesh, but by love serve one another. For though I am free, I have made myself servant to all, that I may win the more." [1593]

Therefore, those specially [1594] abuse Christian liberty, who seeking after carnal things under the colour and pretence of the Spirit and of liberty, brag that by the preaching of the gospel they are set free from all bodily debts and duties: and therefore they deny to their masters, creditors, magistrates, and princes, the duty that they owe them; and by that means they revolt and rebel against them.[1595] These fellows are seditious stirrers, not reverencers of evangelical doctrine. Paul cries: "Give to every one that which is due: tribute to whom tribute belongs; custom to whom custom is due; fear to whom fear; and honour to whom honour pertains. Owe nothing to any man, but this: that you love one another."^{Rom 13.7-8}

Moreover, those also abuse Christian liberty who, when they have not [1596] received the Spirit of liberty and of the sons of God, when they are not yet delivered from Satan nor justified by Christ, notwithstanding, they promise liberty to all men. They think that, for the opinion which they have conceived of their liberty, they may do whatever it pleases them; by that means questioning good laws and severe discipline, with exclamations and outcries that liberty is entrapped by laws, that it is betrayed and trodden underfoot. Against such men, and especially against the teachers of that vain and pernicious liberty, St. Peter takes exception, and says:

"These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest, for whom the mist of darkness is reserved forever. For when they have spoken these great swelling words of vanity, they entice through lusts in the voluptuousness of the flesh, those who had clean escaped from those who are wrapped in error, while promising them liberty — though they themselves are the bond-servants of corruption. For by whomever a man is overcome, he is brought into bondage," ^{2Pet 2.17-19} and so forth, as follows.

iii.315

Now when men abuse liberty in that manner, that licentious lust is not worthy to be called by the name [1597] of liberty.

Last of all, those abuse Christian liberty, who abuse indifferent things, and have no regard for their weak brethren, but offend them unadvisedly. In this case, therefore, we must always have in mind this notable saying of St. Paul: "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things do not edify." [1598] Touching this matter, there is more to be seen in the fourteenth chapter of St. Paul's Epistle written to the Romans.

And here by occasion (indeed, being rather compelled by necessity), I will speak a little, and as much as requisite for the godly-disposed to know, touching offences. Scandalum, a word which the Latins borrow from the Greeks, signifies a falling, a tripping, a stumbling-block, an offence, a block or hindrance. Such are street stones which stick up higher than the rest, or traps that on purpose are subtly set or hidden to snare the feet of those who pass over them. For those who either step on or stumble over them, either fall or are turned from the straight path.

Now this kind of snare or stumbling-block, by a metaphor, is transferred to the estate of religion and the manners of men. For someone gives offence who with contrary, foolish, or unseasonable words or deeds, either does or says to another man, anything by which he takes occasion to sin. Therefore scandalum is an occasion given to sin and to act wickedly — the very impulse or drive to a fall or to wickedness. There are others who define scandalum as an offence joined with contempt [1599] — for an offence usually draws contempt with it; or as we may also say, an offence rises upon contempt. To conclude, therefore, it is an injury offered by one man to another.

iii.316

Now we offend other men either by our words, or else an offence is given by our deeds. The offence that is given by words is partly in evil, foolish, and unseasonable doctrine, and partly our daily talk or communication. The greatest offence is that which arises from wicked doctrine, directly contrary to the true doctrine of the holy gospel. Next to this is that offence which arises from foolish and unseasonable doctrine — which although it is derived from the word of God, it is nonetheless either unaptly uttered, or unwisely applied. For the preacher may sin either by too much toleration or leniency; or else by too much sharpness and contrariness to waywardness, so that the hearers, being offended, wholly draw back from all hearing of the gospel. And yet, for all this, the light of the gospel must not be hidden, nor the truth slily winked at, because men will be offended by it. But preachers must with all their diligence take heed that the word of God is wisely presented and aptly dispensed.[1600] Whatever things are against the laws of God, must be accused most constantly, and confuted without fear, most diligently — however much the world and worldlings may storm against it.

Now, their brethren may be caused to stumble by their daily talk: that is, whoever lets their tongue run loose to talk about they care not what; and whoever at their pleasure, without advice, babbles they care not how. This sort of daily talk includes filthy speech and ribaldry, but especially those blasphemous words that are irreverently uttered against God, the holy scriptures, and the articles of our faith — for evil words corrupt good manners.^{1Cor 15.33} I do not exclude here, the letters or writings of men who unadvisedly offend their brethren.

Lastly, stumbling-blocks of offence are laid before many men either by promises, or else by threats. I mean, someone may be turned from the right path of truth into byways and errors, by alluring enticements of many fair promises; or else by terrible threats and torments. For so Pharaoh lay a stone of offence before king Zedekiah, by causing him to make a league with him, and by that means to trust more in the power of Egypt than in the mighty hand of God.[1601]

iii.317

Tyrants often give weak Christians causes of offence, when by torments, they drive them to deny the name of their master Christ.

Now the deeds, by which men are offended, are of two sorts: they are either lawful and at our free choice, or else they are unlawful and utterly forbidden. But even lawful deeds are made unlawful by abuse. For it is lawful for the faithful to eat what they desire: for to the clean all things are clean. But your eating is made unlawful, if you eat with the offence of your weak brother. For he does not understand that it is lawful to eat indifferently every kind of thing; and you know very well that if you eat, he will be offended — and yet, notwithstanding this, you eat and despise him. Assure yourself that in so doing, you give cause for offence, and you do not sin a little against your weak brother. To this we add all unseasonable [1602] use of free and indifferent things.

But here we must note that the doctors of the church diligently distinguish and differentiate between weak brethren and stubborn persons. The weaklings are utterly ignorant in some points of religion; and yet, notwithstanding, they are tractable enough, and fear the Lord. They do not err on purpose with malicious contrariness, but are touched with a certain weakness of faith and religion, nevertheless allowing themselves to be willingly instructed. The apostle says about such believers: "Receive the one who is weak in faith, not to strifes over disputations." ^{Rom 14.1} But the stubborn and obstinate people are those who, when they know the truth and liberty of the saints, notwithstanding harden their minds, and set themselves against the truth of liberty [1603] which they know; desiring to have much granted to them, and for every man to bear with them. This is not so much that they ever mean to give way to the truth, as to the end that, by this occasion — once granted to them — they may at last subvert the truth and Christian liberty, and in its place, set up their trifles and superstitious vanities. The Lord speaks of such men in the gospel, saying: "Let them alone; they are blind leaders of the blind." ^Mat
15.14

iii.318

And Paul in the second chapter to the Galatians says: "Titus, being a Greek, was not circumcised because of incomers, false brethren, who came in to secretly spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage. We did not give way for subjection to them for so much as an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you." ^{Gal 2.3-5}

Moreover, to this place is referred the difference that some men very wisely make between giving and taking an offence.

An offence is given then, when by your fault, by your inappropriateness and levity,[1604] you either do or say something for which your brother has cause to be offended. The other kind of offence is not given, but taken or picked out, not by your fault, but by the malice or wickedness of someone else. For example, when you do not sin either in word or deed, when your deeds are not all insolent, nor your words unseasonable — when you either say or do something that is both free and lawful for you to say and do — and yet another "takes pepper in nose" [1605] and is offended with that liberty of yours. This is the same as a man walking in a plain path, [1606] who happens to trip or stumble, and quickly quarrels with his companion,[1607] as though he had laid a block in his way.

Now, the unlawful and forbidden deeds with which men are offended, tend against God and his laws; they are done contrary to all seemliness, equity, right, and reason, and they stir up others to imitate similar revels and a desire for ill rule: such are idolatry, murder, whoredom, covetousness, pride, and luxury. So wicked king Jeroboam set up the golden calves to be a stumbling-block for all the people of Israel. And in like manner many, with their drunken tippling and audacity in gaudy apparel,[1608] not only offend others, but also make them worse, and by their ill example draw them into similar and more foolish vanities.

iii.319

Finally, giving offence is a very great sin, as the saying of the Lord in the gospel affirms. For in Matthew he says: "Woe to the world because of offences. Offences must come; but woe to the man by whom the offence comes! Whoever offends one of these little ones that believes in me, it would be better for him that a millstone were hung around his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." ^{Mat 18.6-7} And Paul the apostle says, speaking to the brethren who give offence: "Through giving offence your brother perishes, for whom Christ died." And again: "And so, sinning against your brethren, and wounding their weak consciences, you sin against Christ himself." ^{1Cor 8.11-12} What can be devised that is more heinous than to sin against Christ? Let us all therefore take heed, that we give no occasion for offence to the weak, by abusing our Christian liberty, but that we always do the things that belong to charity.

Last of all, we must especially confirm our minds against the enemies of the gospel, who do not cease daily to lay innumerable heaps of offences upon the preachers and zealous followers of evangelical doctrine. "You," they say, "are the causes of all the broils, seditions, wars, and hurly-burlies,[1609] with which the world is disquieted today." Against these offensive outcries, I say that we must confirm our minds with that notable saying of Christ in the gospel: "I did not come to send peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man at variance with his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law: and a man's foes shall be those of his own household."^{Mat 10.34-36} Here we must call to remembrance, and lay before our eyes, the notable examples of the prophets and apostles. King Ahab said to Elijah the prophet, that he was the disturber and plague of the kingdom; but the prophet replies that it was not he, but the king, who was the troubler of the country. ^{1King 18.17-18} The rebellious Jews objected to Jeremiah that, since the time they began to leave the worship of their [idol] gods, and to hearken to the preaching of the word of God, they never had one bit of felicity, but that mishaps by troops fell upon one another's necks. To this objection, the prophet answered that those misfortunes lighted upon them because of their sins, and especially for their rebellion, and for unthankfulness' sake.[1610]

iii.320

The unbelieving Jews at Thessalonica cried out against Paul and Silas, saying: "These fellows, who have troubled the whole world, have also come here." ^{Act 17.6} But Paul said, speaking against the Jews, his enemies and persecutors:

"Just as they have killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, so they persecute us: they do not please God, and are adversaries to all men — resisting us so that we may not preach the gospel to the Gentiles to their salvation — that they may still fulfil their sins; and thus at last, the endless anger of God may fall upon them." ^{1Thes 2.15-16}

Let the faithful think about and have in their minds these sayings and similar ones; and let them still persevere with constancy and patience, to spread abroad the doctrine of the gospel, however the world may fret and cast offences in the way.

This much up to here touching offences.[1611] It remains now, as I promised in the beginning, to say something at the end of this sermon concerning good works. For we have learned that Christian liberty is not licentiousness, but an adoption into the number of the sons of God, which bestows their whole life upon the study of godliness and virtues. We have learned that the law of God is the rule and doctrine of good works. The course of order, therefore, now requires that we have something said touching good works.

First of all, let us determine the true and certain signification of works, because the word is used diversely, and has ample signification. For works are the labours and busy exercises of men, by which they get their livings. For Paul commands every man to work with his own hands; the law forbids us to do any work on the sabbath-day; and the Israelites were oppressed in Egypt with hard and wearisome work and toil. There are also workmen, to whom in the gospel the Lord commands they be paid the hire that is their due.^{Mat 18.34} A work also is the thing which is made or expressed by the artificer or workman; for the prophet Jeremiah says of a potter: "He made a work upon a wheel." ^{Jer 18.3} Moreover a work signifies an office or duty; for Paul says, "Do the work" (meaning the office) "of an evangelist." ^{2Tim 4.5}

iii.321

And speaking in the church at Antioch, the Holy Ghost says, "Separate to me Paul and Barnabas for the work to which I have chosen them." ^{Act 13.2} Furthermore, the works of the Lord are called the mighty deeds of God, by which he declares his power and goodness to men — and in that sense, heaven, earth, and man himself, are said to be the works of God's hands. Works also are the benefits of God bestowed upon us. For in the gospel he says: "I have shown you many good works:" ^{Joh 10.32} (as if he had said, I have done you many good turns).[1612] There are also evil works, I mean works of iniquity, for which some men are called workers of iniquity; their deeds are the works of the flesh and of darkness.[1613] Again, there are good works, I mean various virtues, or the fruits of faith. Of this sort are justice, temperance, charity, patience, hope, etc. For the Lord said in the gospel: "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify the Father which is in heaven." ^Mat
5.16 The apostle says that we are made for good works, to walk in them. ^Eph
2.10 Those are called the fruits of repentance, and works worthy of repentance.[1614] They are called the works of light,[1615] and the fruits of the Spirit. ^{Gal 5.22} These are the works of humanity, benevolence, and charity, as commended in Tabitha, who is said to have been full of good works. ^{Act 9.36} Paul says: "Let us work good to all, while we have time; but especially to those of the household of faith." ^{Gal 6.10} Mary bestowed a similar work of humanity and charity upon Christ our Saviour, who said: "She has wrought a good work on me." ^{Mat 26.10} This being declared, we will now describe good works in their colours and qualities.

Good works are deeds or actions, wrought by those who are regenerate by the Spirit [1616] of God, through faith, and according to the word of God, to the glory of God, the honesty [1617] of life, and the profit of our neighbour. I will explicate [1618] this brief description by parts, and expound it as well as the Lord gives me grace.

iii.322

First, I will show by proof, that there are no other well-springs from which good works flow, than God himself, who is the author of all good things. For the prophet says: "All men are liars; God alone speaks the truth." [1619] And the Lord says in the gospel: "None is good but God alone." ^Mat
19.17 Good works, therefore, must have their beginning, not of man (who is a liar and corrupt), but of God himself (the well-spring of all goodness). And God renews all men by his Spirit and by faith in Christ Jesus; so that once regenerated, they no longer do their own works of the flesh, but the works of the Spirit, of grace, and of God himself. For the works of those who are regenerate, grow by the good Spirit of God that is within them. Even as sap gives strength to trees to bring forth fruit, this Spirit in like manner causes sundry virtues to bud and branch out of us, as the Lord himself testifies in the gospel: "I am the vine, you are the branches. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine; so also you cannot, unless you abide in me. Whoever abides in me, and I in him, brings forth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing." ^{Joh 15.4-5} When we say that a good work is done by faith, we refer that to the same cause. For faith is the gift of God, by which we lay hold on Christ, and through which we are both justified and quickened. As the scripture says, "The just shall live by his faith." ^{Hab 2.4} And in another place Paul says: "By faith Christ dwells in our hearts." [1620] And again: "I live; yet not I, but Christ lives in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." ^{Gal 2.20} Now, he that lives does works of life through the one, no doubt, by whom he is quickened; and he that is justified does works of righteousness through the one that justified him.

iii.323

That is, the righteous work righteousness through Christ; and righteousness contains the whole company of virtues. So then, God alone still remains the only well-spring and author of good works.

But let us now see the testimonies of scripture, by which we may evidently learn that the works of those who are regenerate, are attributed to God himself — who works in the hearts of the regenerate by his Spirit and by faith. Moses testifies, saying: "The Lord shall bless you, and the Lord your God shall circumcise your heart, and the heart of your seed, that you may love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, that you may live." ^{Deu 30.5-6} Look here, the reason that godly men rightly love the Lord, proceeds from the circumcision of the heart. Now who, I pray you, circumcises the heart beside the Lord? The prophet Isaiah more plainly says: "You, Lord, shall ordain peace: for even you have wrought all our works in us." ^{Isa 26.12} In the gospel of St. John our Saviour says: "He that works verity comes to the light, that his works may be seen, because they are wrought by God." And again: "Whoever abides in me, and I in him, he brings forth much fruit; for without me you can do nothing." [1621] Paul also says to the Philippians: "To you it is given, for Christ, not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." ^{Phi 1.29} And yet again more plainly: "It is God who works in you, both to will and to do according to the good purpose of the mind." ^{Phi 2.13}Likewise, St. James also says: "Every good giving, and every perfect gift, is from above, and it comes from the Father of lights." ^{Jas 1.17} Moreover, St. Peter, ascribing all the parts of good works to God, says: "The God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory through Christ Jesus, restore, uphold, strengthen, and establish you." ^{1Pet 5.10} For "we are not able of ourselves," Paul says in another place, "to think anything as being of ourselves; but all our ability is of God." ^{2Cor 3.5}

iii.324

Therefore, God alone still remains the only well-spring of all good works, from whom, as from a spring-head, good works flow into the saints, as into sundry streams and channels.[1622]

Yet here, this must be added by the way: that good works, although they indeed proceed from God, and in a very true and proper phrase of speech, they are the fruits of the Spirit and of faith, both are ours, and they are also said to be ours — that is to say, the works of faithful men. This is partly because God works them by us, and uses our ministry in doing them; and partly because we are by faith the sons of God, and are therefore made brethren and joint-heirs with Jesus Christ. For by this right of inheritance, all the works of God (which are God's gifts in us), are not another's, but our own and proper works. Indeed, the scripture attributes them to us as to sons and freeborn children. For the Lord says in the gospel: "The servant does not abide in the house forever; the son abides forever." ^{Joh 8.35} Therefore, just as all things in the father's house come to the son by right of inheritance and title of propriety — even though the son has not gotten them by his own industry, nor gathered them by his own labour, but has received them by the liberality of his parents — even so, the works of God which he works in us and by us, which are God's gifts bestowed upon us, both are, and are said to be our own because we are the sons of the household by adoption; and therefore, we are the lawful heirs. Thus it would be the sign of a very unthankful mind for an adopted son, being forgetful of his father's beneficence and liberality, to brag that all those goods which he enjoys by right of inheritance, were gotten and come by through his own labour and travail. Of this Paul said very religiously: "What do you have that you have not received? If you have received it, then why do you boast as though you did not receive it?" ^{1Cor 4.7} Very well thought was the holy martyr of Christ, St. Cyprian, who was prone to say: "We should boast of nothing, because we have nothing of our own." [1623]

iii.325

To this belongs that saying of the prophet Isaiah: "Will the axe boast against the one that hews with it; or the saw brag against the one that draws it?" [1624] Truly, we are the instruments or tools of God by which He works; for the apostle says: "We are joint-workers with God; you are God's husbandry, you are God's building. According to the grace which God has given me." ^{1Cor 3.9-10} Therefore, according to the meaning of the apostle's writing, St. Augustine writes in the sixth chapter, Lib. de Gratia et libero arb.:

"When grace is given, our merits begin to be good, and that is through grace. For if grace is taken away, man falls — not being set up by free will, but thrown down by it headlong. This is why, when man begins to have good works, he must not attribute them to himself, but to God — to whom it is said in the Psalm, 'Be my helper: do not forsake me.' In saying, 'Do not forsake me,' he shows that if he is forsaken, he is able to do no good by himself." [1625]

So then, St. Augustine plainly enough declares in these words that good works are ours in that way. Yet, notwithstanding, they do not cease to be the works of God; indeed, they should be ascribed to the grace of God that works in us.[1626]

Now, by what we have alleged up to here out of the scriptures, touching the true origin and cause of good works, we may easily understand how and in what way the scripture attributes righteousness to our merits. For in another place [1627] I have sufficiently declared (and I will again say something when I come to the treatise about the gospel) that faith justifies us in the sight of God, not works. This is the especial point and chief foundation of evangelical and apostolic doctrine.

iii.326

All our works generally, are either the works of nature (or the flesh), or the works of the law, or else the works of faith or grace. Now the works of nature or the flesh do not justify, but they condemn us, because "that which is born of flesh is flesh." And "the lust of the flesh is death, and enmity against God." ^{Rom 8.6-7} What the apostle thought and said touching the works of the law, I declared in my previous sermon: "By the works of the law," he says, " no flesh shall be justified." ^{Rom 3.20} But if we beat out and examine the works of grace and faith, we will find that such works both are, and have been, done by faithful and just men.

From this it is manifest, that justification always went before the works of righteousness. For the just man works righteousness; thus righteousness is the fruit that the just produce. Man, truly, is justified freely by grace, and not by works which follow after justification. What may be said to that place where the scripture says that even Abraham, the father of all who believe, was not justified by the works of grace and faith? He lived 430 years before the law; ^{Gal. 3.17} he believed in God; and by true faith, he did most excellent works. And yet he was not justified by his works of faith. For Paul plainly argues this way:

"If Abraham were justified by works, then he has something to boast in; but not before God. For what does the scripture say? Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. To him that works, the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of duty;[1628] but to him that does not work, but believes on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." ^{Rom 4.2-5}

Now, though we conclude that we also shall be justified according to the example of Abraham, by faith and not by works, we ground that conclusion, not upon our own minds, but upon the apostle's doctrine, who says: "Nevertheless it was not written for him only, that faith was imputed to him for righteousness; but it was written for us also, to whom it shall be reckoned, if we believe in Christ." ^{Rom 4.23}

iii.327

Touching this matter I have already disputed in the sixth sermon of the first Decade. I truly am persuaded that this doctrine of the apostles and evangelists ought to be laid up in the bottom of every faithful heart: that we are justified by the grace of God, not by merits; through faith, and not through works.

But while we urge and repeat this doctrine to the people, we are said by many to be the patrons of all naughtiness, and utter enemies to all good works and virtues. But by preaching our doctrine of justification by faith only, we do not contemn good works, nor think they are superfluous. We do not say that they are not good; but we cry out against the abuse of good works, and the corrupt doctrine of good works, which is defiled with the leaven of the Pharisees. For we teach to do good works. But we will not have them put up for sale, to be bought in what order of bargaining I cannot tell. We will not have any man put his confidence in them; we will not have any man boast of the gifts of God; we will not have the power to justify, or to merit life everlasting, attributed simply to them. For by that means, Christ would grow vile and contemptible;[1629] for with his death alone, he merited for us the heavenly kingdom of God Almighty. Nor by this do we separate good works from faith, as many think we do. Our doctrine is that works and faith are not severed, but cling together as closely as possible. Yet, notwithstanding, justification is properly ascribed to faith, and not to works. For works consist in our worthiness; but faith clings to the promise of God, which sets before us both righteousness and life in the only-begotten Son of God, Christ Jesus our Saviour. And Christ is sufficiently able of himself, and by his own power and virtue, to justify those who believe in his name, without any aid or help of ours at all.

I will not wink at some men's objection; but I freely confess that the scriptures here and there, in a way, attribute both life and justification to good works. But the scripture is not contrary to itself.

iii.328

Therefore, we must search good works, and examine in what sense, and how, life and justification are ascribed to our works. St. Augustine answers this objection, by referring our works to the grace of God. For in his book, De gratia et libero arbitrio, the eighth chapter, he writes this:

"If eternal life is, by duty, given for good works, as the scripture most plainly testifies, saying, 'Because God will reward every man according to his works,' ^{Mat 16.27} then how is eternal life of grace, considering that grace is not given as due to works, but given freely and without deserving? As the apostle Paul says, 'To him that works, the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of duty.' ^{Rom 4.4} And again, 'The remnant,' he says, 'are saved by the election of grace.' ^{Rom 11.5} And immediately after he adds, 'If it is of grace, then it is not now of works; for then grace is no more grace. How then is eternal life, which is gotten by works, a gift?' ^{Rom 11.6} Or else, did the apostle not say that everlasting life is a gift? Yes, truly; he said it so plainly that we cannot deny it. Nor are his words so obscure that they require a sharp understander, but only an attentive hearer. For when he said, 'The reward of sin is death,' he adds straightaway: 'But the gift of God is life everlasting in Jesus Christ our Lord.' ^{Rom 6.23} I think therefore, that this question cannot be otherwise resolved, unless we understand that even our good works, for which eternal life is given, must be referred to the grace and gift of God; because the Lord Jesus says, 'Without me you can do nothing.' ^{Joh 15.5} And the apostle, when he had said, 'You are saved by grace through faith,' ^{Eph 2.8-9} immediately adds, 'and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.'" [1630]

This much up to here out of St. Augustine.

iii.329

Now although this answer of St. Augustine is godly and plain enough to anyone who simply searches for the truth, I am sure there are some who will never be answered with it. They will, I know, proceed to infer from St. Augustine's words, that works, and not faith alone, justify us. For they argue thus: We are justified and obtain eternal life by grace; good works belong to the grace of God; therefore, good works justify us.

Now it is not amiss to close and buckle hand to hand with these disputers, so that in this little [refutation], you may perceive that these are mere shifts of sophistry, which they put for sale under the name and colour of sound arguments. First of all, there is no man so foolish, if he has read the doctrine of St. Paul, who does not know very well that those two propositions cannot hang together: we are justified by grace; and, we are justified by works. For that sentence of St. Paul is as clear as the sun, where he says, "If it is of grace, then it is not of works: for then grace would not be grace." ^{Rom 11.6} We freely grant both their propositions; namely, that we are justified by grace, and that works belong to the grace of God, or are the gift of God. But we deny their consequence, and say that it is false; namely, that works justify. For if that is true, then we may in like manner truly say, A man sees; a hand belongs to a man: and thereupon infer that a hand sees. But who would gather so vain a consequent? For all of us understand that a man consists of sundry members, and that every member has its effects [1631] and offices. Again, who does not know that the grace of God, which is otherwise undivided, is divided and distinguished according to the diverse operations which it works? For in God there is a certain general grace, by which he created all mortal men, and by which he sends rain upon the just and unjust alike: but this grace does not justify; for if it did, then the wicked and unjust would be justified.

iii.330

Again, there is that singular grace whereby he adopts us to be his sons, for his only-begotten Christ's sake. I do not mean that he adopts us all, but only believers. He does not reckon their sins, but imputes to them the righteousness of his only-begotten Son our Saviour. This is that grace which alone justifies us in very deed. Moreover, there is a grace which, being poured into our minds, brings forth good works in those who are justified. This grace does not justify, but it engenders the fruits of righteousness in those who are justified. Therefore, we confess and grant that good works belong to grace, but only in a certain manner, order, and fashion.

Again, they object and say, But grace or faith, and works, and also justification and sanctification, are so joined together, that they cannot be severed from one another. Therefore, the thing that agrees with one is applicable to the others also.

Truly, I neither dare nor in any case question that faith and works cling together; but I utterly deny that the two are all one, so that the thing which is attributed to the one may also be applied to the other. For although faith is weak and imperfect in us, notwithstanding, it leans and stays on Christ's perfection alone, and only thus far does it justify us. But our works have in them some sprinkling of vice, and some sparkle of error (I use the mildest phrase of speech), because of the original disease that is natural in us all. But it does not follow therefore, that the grace of God is polluted by any vice or fault of ours — which would follow of necessity, if because of the strait knot between them, the properties of the one were common to the other. Although the light of the sun is not separate from its heat, yet the light is not the same as the heat. Nor is it a valid argument to say that the sun gives light to the world; therefore the heat of the sun gives light to the world, because the sun's heat and light cannot be separated. Rather, it is in respect to its light that the sun lightens the world, not in respect to its heat. And yet the sun both warms and lightens the earth at once.

iii.331

In like manner, we are freely justified by the merciful grace of God, for Christ's sake, our Lord and Saviour — not in respect to and in consideration of the works of grace that are found in us, even though these works are engendered and brought forth by that free grace. And so we must attribute all glory wholly to the grace of God, and not part stakes with him, and take any part of his glory as our own share.

These wranglers have yet another shift, claiming: "Although we say that eternal life is given by God to all faithful believers, it is not only for faith in Christ Jesus, but also for works of faith. All the glory nevertheless redounds to God, since we acknowledge and confess that those works are wrought in us by the power and grace of God."

Our answer to this, is that glory must be so given to God as he pleases to have it given to him. If the will, purpose, and counsel of God were to receive us into his friendship for works' sake, which his Spirit and grace bring forth in us, then He would have sent his only-begotten Son into the world unadvisedly and without discretion; and would have rashly appointed him to terrible pangs of bitter death. But God, in all that he has created, either in heaven or earth, much less in this case, which is the greatest that belongs to man — the chief and most excellent creature that he has made — never at any time did anything rashly, without great advisement. Therefore, it is assuredly certain that it was never the counsel and purpose of God, for our own good works [1632] and virtues, to redeem us from the tyranny of Satan and to accept us for his sons; but it was for the only sacrifice and satisfaction of his only-begotten Son Christ Jesus, our Lord and Saviour. For the judgment of Paul in this matter remains firm and invincible, where he says: "If righteousness comes from the works of the law, then Christ died in vain." ^{Gal. 2.21} And that divine saying of St. Peter remains forever uncontrollable: "There is salvation in no other." ^{Act 4.12}

Again, they lay certain places of scripture together, and thereupon argue thus: Although Paul in one place says, "You are saved by grace through faith;" ^{Eph 2.8} yet in another place the same Paul says, "We are saved by hope." ^{Rom 8.24}

iii.332

Now who does not know that hope is upheld and strengthened by patience as it were? Christ himself in the gospel, agreeing to this, says, "In your patience you shall possess your souls." ^{Luk 21.19} Therefore it is not faith only, but also hope and patience that bring us to salvation.

To this, we answer thus: The holy apostle sufficiently expounds himself, if a man will take the pains to read him throughout, and weigh with himself the end and cause for which he spoke each separate sentence. "You are," he says, "saved by grace through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast," etc. In these few words, has he not most evidently declared what his belief is touching grace or faith, and works? Who would desire plainer speech? There is none who is so much a dorhead, [1633] that he does not understand that the benefit of salvation is wholly and merely ascribed to grace. For Paul does not divide salvation or justification partly to faith or grace, and partly to works; nor does he attribute the first place to faith, and the second place to works. He utterly excludes all boasting. "You are," he says, "saved by grace through faith." And immediately after he adds, "and that not of yourselves." He annexes the cause: "it is the gift of God." And again: "not of works." He shows why: "Lest any man should boast." He that does not understand this, undoubtedly understands nothing at all. He that twists this, or otherwise cavils at it, speaks against the sun, and says that the light is darkness. Now, although the same apostle in another place says, "We are saved by hope," ^{Rom 8.24} it is by marking the whole place to be gathered, that his meaning is understood. It is as if he had said, "I told you that those who believe in Christ are the sons and heirs of God, and thereby they have their salvation and felicity. But I would have everyone understand it in hope and expectation — not in enjoying the very thing itself, and its present fruition." Now, who can infer from this, "Therefore hope justifies"? Rather, we make this argument: Patience is not patience at all, unless the patient man is first justified by true faith. Therefore, the commendation of patience wholly depends upon faith, and not the praise of faith upon patience — even though faith is declared and shown by patience.

iii.333

For it is an utterly unworthy sentence to come out of a Christian man's mouth, to say that faith is made perfect by good works; that is to say, where faith lacks a piece, good works patch it up. For when we name faith, we do not simply name the quality of believing what is in our minds, but we have an eye to Christ himself, our Lord and Saviour, together with his righteousness and heavenly gifts. Our faith rests and firmly stands upon Him alone, as upon a base and sure foundation. But to go about supplying the want of anything in Christ Jesus, is nothing but to disgrace the Son of God with devilish blasphemy. The faith of saints, I confess, declares and shows itself by works; but it does not follow from this, that works therefore make perfect what seems to be lacking in Christ's perfection. For there is nothing lacking in our deliverance, redemption, and justification wrought by Christ. The apostle James said indeed, "Do you see how faith was made perfect by works?" ^Jas
1.22 But his meaning was only to say, Do you see how faith, by the works which followed it, declared itself to be a true and righteous faith, and not a hypocritical faith? For before these words he said: "Do you see how his faith was effectual through works?" Again, the apostle Paul said: "I fulfil [1634] that which is lacking in the afflictions of Christ in my flesh, for his body's sake, which is the church." But you may better translate the Greek ta usterhmata [ta usteremata] to be what is left behind, rather than what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ. For the Greeks use this term not only for those things that are lacking, but also the remnant (which word St. Ambrose used) [1635] — I mean, the remnant and those things that remain behind.

iii.334

And St. Peter says, that "Christ suffered for us, leaving behind him an example for us, that we might follow his trace and footsteps." ^{1Pet 2.21} Therefore, the apostle affirms that by suffering, he fulfilled the remnant left behind.

After this, they again allege the words of the apostle Paul, where he says: "If I have all faith, so that I can remove mountains out of their place, and yet have not charity, I am nothing." ^{1Cor 13.2} For they infer from this, "Therefore not only faith, but also charity, indeed, charity rather than faith, justifies."

But we say that in this sentence, Paul neither denies that faith alone justifies, nor does he attribute the justification of the saints to charity. For when we affirm that we are justified by faith, or when we make faith the cause of justification (which must be beaten into our memories by repeating it often), we do not understand that faith, as it is a virtue in us, works — and by the quality that sticks to us, faith merits — righteousness in the sight of God. But so often as we mention faith, we understand the grace of God exhibited in Christ, which is freely applied to us through faith, and received as the free gift of God bestowed upon us. And in that sense, Paul uses the term faith, when he affirms that faith justifies. But in this place, the thirteenth chapter to the Corinthians, he does not use the term faith this way, but uses it for the power of working miracles. This is manifest by that which follows, where he says, "so that I can remove mountains." Such faith does not comprehend Christ wholly, but only the power in showing miracles. Therefore, such faith may sometimes be found in an unjust man and a hypocrite; as it was in Judas Iscariot, to whom the faith of miracles profited nothing, because he was without justifying faith — which is never without charity, but of itself engenders charity.

Again they object, using that saying from the gospel of St. John, "Whoever knows my commandments and keeps them, he it is that loves me; and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our abiding in him;" ^{Joh 14.21-23} Thus God is joined to us for observing the commandments; that is, for our works' sake.

iii.335

Again, we allege this saying of the same evangelist and apostle John: "By this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he has given us of his Spirit." ^{1Joh 4.13} But that Spirit of God is a free gift: therefore we are joined to God by mere grace, free grace.

It follows in John: "And we have seen and testify, that the Father has sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world." ^1Joh
4.14 You hear, I hope, what it is that the world is saved by, and what Christ the Saviour of the world is.[1636] Now, who does not know that he was sent to us from the Father by the mere and only grace of God? It follows now, how that grace is received: "Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God." But in the sixth chapter of John, instead of 'confesses,' the word 'believes' is used, and that is no marvel, since out of a true faith a true confession arises. By faith, therefore, we are saved; and by faith we are joined to God. But letting pass these wranglers, who will never be without a store of such sophistical shifts, we again return to our purposed argument, which is to show you how, and in what sense, life and justification are attributed to works.

Those who are well-exercised in reading the holy scriptures, so that they may reconcile the places of scripture that seem at a blush to be at discord, teach that faith and works in very deed are not separated one from another. For the same Holy Spirit who gives faith, also with that, regenerates the understanding and will, so that the faithful one ardently desires, and endeavours in all things, to do service to God his maker. Therefore, for the inseparable knot between faith and good works, which always keep company and attend upon faith, we say, that which is sometimes somewhat improperly attributed to works, is somewhat more properly to be attributed to faith: namely, justification. But most properly of all, justification is to be ascribed to Christ, as apprehended by our faith; for indeed, he is the foundation and subject of our faith.

iii.336

I will yet try to make this more manifest. In true faith there are two things to be considered: reconciliation and obedience — reconciliation, because by faith we understand and truly believe, that God is reconciled to us for Christ's sake, by whom we are adopted into the number of the sons of God — and obedience, because those who are reconciled wholly yield themselves to the one to whom they are reconciled, with earnest desire and zeal to do his will and pleasure. So then, we say that faith [1637] is of two sorts: justifying faith, and obeying faith.[1638] St. Paul mentions justifying faith [1639] where he says: "Being justified by faith, we have peace toward God through the Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we are reconciled." ^{Rom 5.1-2} Again, he mentions obeying faith,[1640] where he says: "Do you not know, that to whom you give yourselves as servants to obey, you are his servants to whom you obey; whether it is of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?" ^{Rom 6.16} That is to say, this obedience makes you do the things that are righteous, and to be the servants of righteousness, which will turn to you to eternal life; and not the servants of sin, which turns you to death. Now, therefore, justification is properly attributed to the reconciling righteousness which is through faith in Christ Jesus; and it is improperly ascribed to the obeying righteousness, or the righteousness of obedience. For the obeying righteousness is from the reconciling — and without the reconciling righteousness, obedience should not be called righteousness. To which this also is to be added: that those who are justified do not put any confidence in this obedience, as that which is always spotted in this world because of our flesh.

To this also agrees this other explication which I will annex here. The most proper work of faith is purification and sanctification. For St. Peter expressly says that by faith our hearts are purified. ^{Acts 15.9} But the holy scriptures show there are two especial things in sanctification: first, all the faithful are freely purified by the blood of Christ Jesus; for again St. Peter says: "You know that you are redeemed not with transitory things, such as gold and silver; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of an unspotted Lamb." ^{1Pet 1.18-19}

iii.337

St. Paul says: "You are sanctified [1641] by the will of God through the oblation of the body of Jesus Christ, made once. For with that one oblation, he made perfect forever those who are sanctified." [1642] St. John also says: "The blood of Jesus Christ the Son of God cleanses us from all sin." ^{1Joh 1.7} Therefore, the most proper phrase of speech is to say that we are sanctified through faith by the blood of Christ, who said: "I sanctify myself for them, that they also may be sanctified through the truth." ^{Joh 17.19} The latter is that those who are sanctified by the blood of Christ through faith, day by day sanctify themselves, and give their minds to holiness; to the doing and study of which, the apostles most earnestly exhort the saints. For Peter says: "As he which called you is holy, so also be holy in your conversation;[1643] because it is written, Be holy, for I am holy." St. Paul says: "This is the will of God, even your holiness," etc. ^{1The 4.3} St. John says: "Now are we the sons of God; and yet it does not appear what we shall be: but we know that when he appears, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, even as he also is pure." ^{1Joh 3.2-3} Now this purging or purification, which is made by our care and industry, is called by the name of sanctification, not because it is made by us as of ourselves, but because it is made of those who are sanctified by the blood of Christ, in respect to Christ's blood.[1644] For unless that sanctification which is the very true and only sanctification indeed, goes before our sanctification (I mean, before that sanctification which we work), it is no sanctification at all. But if that goes before, then it is imputed for our sanctification, even though meanwhile the spots of sin remaining in us defile ours, so that we put no confidence in it. Therefore, as often as you read in the holy scriptures that righteousness is attributed to our good works, you should think straightway that it is done for no other causes than those which I have already declared to you. For the apostolic Spirit cannot be repugnant or contrary to itself.

iii.338

This will yet be made a great deal more manifest, if we call to remembrance and consider that the apostles had to deal with two kinds of men: the one sort affirmed that they were sufficiently able to satisfy or fulfil the law by their own strength, and that they could by their deserts and good works, merit eternal life; indeed, they affirmed that the merit of Christ was not sufficient to get salvation, unless the righteousness of men was added to it. Paul disputed against these constantly and pithily in all his epistles; for they made Christ and the grace of God of no effect. The other sort of men were those who, abusing the doctrine of grace and faith, wallowed like swine in all filthy sins, because they thought that it was sufficient for salvation if they said that they believed; but they never declared their faith or belief by any good works, even though occasion for that was given to them. St. Peter very well and wisely disputed against these in the first chapter of his second epistle; and St. James in the second chapter of his epistle. For he affirms, that Abraham was not justified by faith only, but by works: that is to say, that he was not justified by a vain opinion, but by faith which bore and was full of good works. For James uses faith and justification in one sense, and Paul in another. Paul uses faith as an assured confidence in the merit of Christ; and he uses justification as absolution and remission of sins, for adoption into the number of the sons of God, and lastly, for imputing Christ's righteousness to us. But in James, faith signifies a vain opinion; and justification imports, not the imputing of righteousness, but the declaring of righteousness and adoption. For it is undoubtedly true that the holy [1645] apostles of Christ, St. Peter and St. James, would not by their writings make void the grace and merit of Christ, to advance the merits of mortal men — but rather to withstand the impureness of those who put the faith of Christ in peril of being disgraced,[1646] and offend all good men, for meanwhile they live most wickedly in detestable sins, without repentance. Therefore, the apostles of Christ, requiring good works at the hands of the faithful, first of all require a true and living faith, and they refer them both to the grace of God.

iii.339

Let us therefore most firmly hold, that the apostles attribute justification, life, and salvation, to good works improperly; to true faith properly — but most properly to Christ, who is the subject and foundation of true faith. For although true faith is not without good works, yet it justifies without good works, by itself alone. For it is most certain that life and salvation are bestowed on us in the same manner that health and life was given to the children of Israel who were poisoned by the serpents in the wilderness. They had their health restored them not by any works, but only by beholding and looking upon the brazen serpent. Therefore, we also are made partakers of eternal life by faith alone, which is the true beholding and looking up to Christ. "As Moses," says our Saviour, "lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up; that every one who believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life." ^Joh
3.14-15 And the apostle Paul says: "You are saved by grace through faith; not of yourselves; it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast," etc. ^{Eph 2.8-9}

The testimonies of certain doctors of the church agree with this doctrine of the evangelists and apostles. I will recite some of them to you, dearly beloved, not because these testimonies of the scripture are not sufficient, but because we will not then seem to be the beginners and bringers of new doctrines. Although, in very deed, what is derived out of evangelical and apostolic doctrine cannot be new, even if all the doctors of the church were to question or deny it. Now, therefore, give ear to how some, even the best of them, show not only in words, but also by proofs, that faith alone justifies.

Origen, a very ancient writer, says upon the third chapter of St. Paul's epistle to the Romans:

"Paul says that justification by faith alone is sufficient for a man; so that every one is justified who believes only, even though no works are once wrought by him. Now if we require an example where anyone was ever justified by faith alone without good works, that thief I suppose is a good enough example.

iii.340

Being crucified with Christ, he cried from the cross, 'Lord Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.' In the writings of the evangelists there is no mention made of any good work which he did in his lifetime; and yet, because of his faith only, Jesus said to him: 'Truly I say to you, this day you shall be with me in paradise.' ^Luk
23.42-43 Therefore this thief was justified through faith, without the works of the law. For after this request and prayer of his, the Lord made no inquiry about what his works were during his lifetime; nor did he look at what works he would do after this expression of faith and believing; but immediately upon his confession, he both justified and took him as a companion to go with him to paradise. Moreover, to the woman mentioned in the gospel of St. Luke, it was not for any work of the law, but for faith only that he said, 'Your sins are forgiven you.' And again, 'Go in peace, your faith has made you safe.' ^{Luk
7.48, 50} Furthermore, in many places of the gospel we find that our Saviour used a similar kind of speech, always making faith to be the cause of men's salvation. And a little while after, the same apostle says: 'God forbid that I should glory in anything but in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world.' ^{Gal. 6.14} You see here that the apostle glories not in his own righteousness, or chastity, or wisdom, or other works or virtues of his own, but he most plainly pronounces and says, 'Let him that glories, glory in the Lord;' ^{1Cor 1.31} and so, by that means, all boasting is excluded." [1647]

And so forth, with many other sayings tending to this purpose.

iii.341

St. Ambrose said in his exposition on the third and fourth chapters of Paul's epistle to the Romans:

"They are freely justified, says St. Paul, because, when they work nothing, nor do anything for God again, yet they are justified through faith only, by the gift of God.[1648]

"According to the purpose of God's grace, says Paul, it was so ordained by God that, laying the law aside, the grace of God should require faith only, unto salvation." [1649]

"By the example of the prophet, this confirms the blessedness of the man to whom the Lord imputes righteousness without works: he calls them blessed, with whom the Lord has covenanted, that they should be justified before their Maker, without labour and the keeping of the law." [1650]

St. John Chrysostom, addressing faith, the law of nature, and the Holy Ghost, expressly says:

"I cannot prove that the one who works the works of righteousness, without faith, enjoys eternal life. But I can show, by good proof, that the one who believed, without works, both lived and obtained the kingdom of heaven. No man without faith has obtained life; but the thief believed only, and for his faith, he was justified by the most merciful God.

iii.342

And though here, perhaps, you will object that he lacked time to live justly, and to do good works, I answer that I do not greatly strive about that. But I stick to this only: that faith alone justified and saved him. For if he had lived any longer, and had neglected faith and works, he would undoubtedly have fallen from salvation. But the only end and argument at which I now shoot, is that faith of itself brings salvation, and that works of themselves never saved any workers that wrought them." Chrysostom declares this at large using the example of the centurion,[1651] Cornelius.[1652]

I suppose these testimonies are sufficient for those wits that will be answered and do not stand obstinately in quarrellings and janglings; otherwise I could allege a great number more. But I will not be over-tedious to you, dearly beloved, nor seem to be endless in an evident matter.

But now, because there is a question annexed to this treatise about the righteousness of works, which touches the merits of good works, I will therefore summarily say something about merits, or rather, about the hire and reward of good works. It is to this end, specially: lest any man, thinking irreligiously about the merits of good works, thereby obtains for himself, not good but evil works.

The name merits is an unfamiliar term, not used in the scriptures. For in that signification in which our merit-workers use it — namely, for meritorious works, meaning that for which both life and the grace of God are given, as a matter of duty, like a debt that is due — in that signification, I say, it obscures the grace of God, and it makes man too proud and arrogant.

iii.343

What, I pray you, can our works deserve, since none of the saints dare be so bold as to plead their merits before the Lord? Job cries: "If I were to justify myself, my own mouth would condemn me. If I were to go about showing myself to be an innocent, He would prove me a wicked-doer. If I wash myself with snow-water,[1653] and make my hands ever so clean at the well,[1654] yet You will dip me in the mire, and my own garments will defile me." ^Job
9.20-30 David cries: "Do not enter into judgment with your servant; for in your sight no man living will be justified." ^{Psa 143.2} Christ our Lord in the gospel says: "When you have done all things that are commanded, then say, We are unprofitable servants; we have done only what we ought to do." But a little before our Lord said: "Does the master thank the servant who does the things that were commanded him?" ^{Luk 17.9-10} The holy apostle St. Paul also cries: "I do not despise the grace of God: for if righteousness is of the law, then Christ died in vain." ^Gal
2.21 Again, in the gospel of St. Luke, the Pharisee is greatly blamed who was not content to put confidence in his own righteousness, but needed to boast of his merits also. ^{Luk 18.9-14} And Nebuchadnezzar felt no little plague for saying that the kingdom of Babylon came to him by his own art, industry, power, and virtue. ^{Dan 4.28-33} How much greater a punishment do we think they are worthy of, then, who are persuaded and brag that they have deserved or earned the kingdom of heaven by their merits?

And yet, all this does not tend to void the stipend of good works, or deny the reward that is prepared for virtues. For the one who promised is true, and what he promised he will perform. Now he promised rewards to those who work righteousness: even as, according to his justice and truth, he has threatened terrible punishments to wicked and impenitent sinners. But the promises of God are of two sorts: namely, they lay before our eyes the gifts and rewards of this present life, and of the life to come. For the Lord in the gospel of St. Mark says: "Truly I say to you, there is no man who has forsaken house, or brethren, or lands, for my sake and the gospel's, who will not receive a hundredfold now, at this present time, with persecutions — and in the world to come, life everlasting." ^{Mk 10.29-30}

iii.344

And Paul says: "Godliness is profitable to all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. This is a sure saying, and by all means worthy to be received. For therefore we both labour and suffer rebuke, because we have our hope settled in the living God," etc. ^{1Tim 4.8-10} And here it will do well to reckon up and cite the testimonies of scripture which concern the reward of good works. I will therefore recite a few, but such that are evident and pertain to the matter. The Lord in Isaiah cries: "Say to the just, that it shall go well with him; for he shall eat the fruit of his study, or travail. And woe to the wicked sinner; for he shall be rewarded according to the works of his hands." ^Isa
3.10,11 In Jeremiah we read: "Refrain from weeping; for your labour shall be rewarded to you." ^{Jer 31.16} And in the gospel the Lord says: "Blessed are you when men speak all kinds of evil sayings against you, lying, for my sake. Rejoice and be glad; for great is your reward in heaven." ^{Mat 5.11} The apostle Paul also says: "Glory, honour, and peace, to everyone that works good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile." ^{Rom 11.10} Again: "We must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, that every one may bear the deeds of his body, according to what he has done, whether it is good or bad." ^{2Cor 5.10}And again: "Every one shall receive a reward according to his labour."^{1Cor 3.8}

Now, let us remember that the reward is promised and great gifts are prepared for those who labour manfully. To sluggards and slow-backs, the evils of this present life are imminent, and also of the life to come. To those who strive lawfully, the garland is due. But if it happens that the reward is deferred, and that those who strive do not receive the promises later, out of hand — yet let the afflicted think that their afflictions tend to their commodity, and that they are laid upon them by their heavenly Father. Let not their courage therefore fail them, but let them show themselves to be men in the fight, and call to God for aid; for "whoever perseveres to the end, shall be saved." ^{Mat 24.13} Let everyone call to remembrance the old examples of the holy fathers, to whom many promises were made, the fruit of which they did not reap till many a day had come and gone, in which they strove against and overcame many a sharp temptation.

iii.345

The apostle Paul cries: "I have fought a good fight, I have fulfilled my course, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me in that day: not to me only, but also to those who have loved his appearing." ^{2Tim 4.7-8} They must lay before their eyes the truth of God, who says: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away." ^{Mat 24.35} The Israelites, truly, were held captive in Egypt a long time. But the Lord did not forget his promise; for in a fit and convenient time, he set them at liberty with abundant joy and glory for the triumph gotten over their oppressors. The Amalekites and Canaanites, I confess, exalted themselves in sin and wickedness a great while; but when the measure of their iniquity was fully filled, they were then thoroughly recompensed for their pains by Him that is the severe revenger of unrepented wickedness. The scripture therefore exhorts all men to have sure hope, persevering patience, and invincible constancy. I spoke of this in the third sermon of this third Decade. To this place, I suppose, belong those excellent words of St. Paul, where he says:

"It is a faithful saying: for if we are dead with him, we shall also live with him; if we are patient, we shall also reign with him; if we deny him, he shall also deny us; if we are unfaithful, he abides faithful; for he cannot deny himself." ^{2Tim 2.11-13}

And again:

"Do not cast away your confidence, which has great recompense of reward. For you have need of patience, that after you have done the will of God, you may receive the promise. For yet a very little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. Now, the just shall live by faith; but if he withdraws himself, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of those who withdraw unto perdition; but we pertain to faith, to the winning of the soul." [1655]

Yet, for all this, we must not abuse these and like testimonies touching the reward of works, nor the very name of merits, where it is found to be used by the fathers; nor must we twist it against the doctrine of mere grace, and the merits of Christ our Saviour.

iii.346

We must think that the kingdom of heaven and the other special gifts of God are not like the wage that is due to servants, but like the inheritance of the sons of God. For in the last day of judgment, the judge will reckon up many works for which he seems to recompense the elect with eternal life as it were; and yet, before that recital of good works, he will say: "Come, you blessed of my Father, possess the kingdom prepared for you since the beginning of the world." ^{Mat 25.34} Now if you demand, why he will mention works in the day of judgment rather than faith, my answer is that it is a point or usual custom in the law, for judgment not only to be just, but also by the judge's pronunciation, to have the cause made manifest to all men why it is just. And God deals with us according to the order of men. Therefore he not only gives just judgment, but he would also be known by all men to be a just and upright judge. But we are not able to look into the faith of other men, which consists in the mind; and therefore, we judge by their words and deeds. Honest words and works bear witness of a faithful heart; though dishonest pranks and statements betray a kind of unbelief. The works of charity and humanity declare that we have faith indeed — though the lack of these argues the contrary. And therefore the scripture admonishes us, that the judgment shall be according to our works. In the twelfth chapter of Matthew, this sense is agreed to, where it is said, "By your deeds [1656] you shall be justified, and by them you shall be condemned." ^Mat
12.37 To Abraham, after he had determined to offer his son Isaac, it was said: "Because you have done this thing, and have not spared your only-begotten son, I will bless you, and multiply you exceedingly," etc. ^Gen
22.16-17 But it is manifest that God made that promise to Abraham before Isaac was born; indeed, he made it as soon as Abraham was brought out of his country. Therefore, the promise was not first of all annexed as a reward to the works of Abraham, etc.

Therefore, God examines our works according to his own favourable mercy, and not with the extremity and rigour of law; and He rewards our works with infinite benefits, because they proceed from faith in Christ — though for the sin which abides in us, they are impure and not at all meritorious.

iii.347

Now, hereby he gives us a proof that he regards us and our works; because, in testifying of the greatness of his love toward us, he grants not only to honour us, but also his own gifts in us, which he has graciously bestowed upon us of his great goodness. Our bountiful God imitates in this, the manner of dealing which fleshly fathers use in this world toward their children: for they bestow gifts upon their children as rewards for their well-doing, thereby provoking them to greater virtues, when indeed all things belong to the children by right of inheritance. And the true and proper cause of this reward, which the father gives to the child, is not the obedience of the son, but the mere good-will and favour of the father. Moreover, two things are to be observed in this. First, although God, in the manner of men, allures us with rewards, draws us on with gifts, and keeps us in good works with manifold recompenses; yet the reward or recompense must not be the mark at which the worker ought to look, which would respect his own glory and commodity rather than the love and honour that he owes to God. God will be worshipped for love's sake only; and he will be loved out of mere good-will, and not for the hope of any reward. For as he requires a cheerful giver, so he looks for such an uncoacted [1657] affection, voluntary love, and free good-will, as children naturally bear toward their parents.

The last is that our works, which some call merits, are nothing else but the mere gifts of God. Now, a person would be very unthankful if, by another man's liberality, he has been given licence to occupy that man's land for his own best commodity, and yet at length he goes about translating the right to that land from the true owner, who lent it him, to himself. But I would be loath to detain you longer than reason would permit, by drawing out this treatise too far. I will therefore recite to you, dearly beloved, a notable conference of places in the scripture made by St. Augustine, from which you may evidently understand and infer this conclusion: that the rewards of good works, or the merits of the saints, are by the very free and mere grace of God.

iii.348

Therefore, in the seventh chapter of his book, De Gratia et Libero Arbitrio, Augustine says this:

"John the forerunner of our Lord, says, 'A man can receive nothing, unless it is given him from heaven.^{Joh 3.27} Therefore, if your good works are the gifts of God, then God crowns your merits, not as your merits, but as his own gifts. Let us therefore consider the merits of the apostle Paul (that is to say, the merits which he says are in himself), whether they are the gifts of God or not. 'I have,' he says, 'fought a good fight, I have fulfilled my course, I have kept the faith.' ^{2Tim 4.7} First of all, these good works would not have been good works, unless good thoughts had gone before them. Give ear, therefore, to what he says about those good thoughts: 'not because we can think anything of ourselves, as of ourselves, but our ability is of God.' ^{2Cor 3.5} Then let us also consider every individual particular. 'I have fought,' he says, 'a good fight.' I demand, by what power he did he fight? by that which he had of himself, or by that which was given to him from above? It is unlikely that so great a teacher of the Gentiles as the holy apostle St. Paul was, should be ignorant of the law, which in Deuteronomy is heard to say: 'Do not say in your heart, My own strength and the power of my own hand has done this wonderful thing: but you shall remember the Lord your God, because he gives you strength and power to do it.' ^{Deu 8.17-18} But what does it avail to fight well, unless the victory ensues? And who, I pray you, gives the victory, but he of whom St. Paul himself says, 'Thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ?' ^1Cor
15.57

And in another place, when he had cited the place out of the Psalms, where it is said, 'Because for your sake we are killed all day, and are counted as sheep appointed to the slaughter,' he immediately added, and said: 'But in all these things we overcome, or have the victory, through him which loved us.' ^{Rom 8.36-37} We have the victory, therefore, not through ourselves, but through him that loved us. After that, he again said: 'I have fulfilled my course.' But as he said this, so in another place he also says: 'It is not of the willer, nor of the runner, but of God who shows mercy.' ^{Rom 9.16} This sentence cannot by any means be so inverted, that we may say, It is not of God who shows mercy, but of the willer, and of the runner. For whoever dares to take it upon himself to so invert that sentence of the holy apostle, he openly shows that he flatly questions the words of St. Paul.

iii.349

Last of all he said, 'I have kept the faith.' ^{2Tim 4.7} But in another place he again confesses, saying, 'I have obtained mercy that I might be faithful.' ^{1Cor 7.25} He did not say, I have obtained mercy because I am faithful; but that I might be faithful,' declaring by this, that faith itself cannot be obtained without the mercy of God; and that faith is the gift of God, as he most evidently teaches where he says, 'You are saved by grace through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.' ^{Eph 2.8} For they might say, We have therefore received grace, because we have believed — by that means attributing faith to themselves, and grace to God. But, to prevent that insinuation, the holy apostle St. Paul, when he had said, 'By faith,' he straightway adds, 'And that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.' Again, lest they say that they meritoriously deserved such a gift by their works, he quickly annexes, 'Not of works, lest any man should boast.' ^{Eph 2.9} This is not because he denied good works, or made them void, considering that he says that God rewards every man according to his works — but it is because works are of faith, and not faith of works. And so, by this means our works of righteousness proceed from Him, from whom that faith also comes, touching which it is said, 'The just lives by faith.' [1658]

iii.350

All this, up to here, I have recited word for word out of St. Augustine. In it, all that may be said concerning the merits of good works are sufficiently well contained, and so soundly confirmed by proofs of scripture, that I do not mean to add anything to them. For I see it sufficiently manifest for all to understand, what and how the ancient fathers thought and taught about the merits of sinful men. For what can be said more briefly, sincerely, and fully, than that a reward is prepared for the good works of men? Yet, that reward is nothing else but the grace of God; and the merits or good works of the saints are the gift of God. As he crowns these merits, he crowns his own gifts. Thus, in all this, the ecclesiastical and apostolic doctrine remains immutable and unreproveable. We are justified and saved by the grace of God [1659] through faith, and not through our own good works or merits.

We now return again to good works, and come to expound the description or definition of good works, which we set down in the beginning of this treatise.

iii.351

Now, therefore, unless our works spring in us from God through faith, they cannot have the name of good works. And contrarily, if they proceed from God through faith, then they are also framed according to the rule of the word of God. And for that reason, in the definition of good works, I significantly said that they are done by those who are regenerate by the good Spirit of God, through faith, according to the word of God. For God is not pleased with the works which we imagine and devise of ourselves, of our own brains and authority,[1660] without warrant from his word. For the thing he most of all likes and looks for in us is faith and obedience, which is most evidently seen in the very example of our grandfather Adam.[1661] And contrarily, he disapproves and utterly rejects the works of our own choice and our good intents, which spring in and arise from our own minds and judgments; as I will declare to you by these testimonies of scripture.

In the twelfth chapter of Deuteronomy we read: "Every man shall not do that which is righteous in his own eyes. Whatever I command you, you shall observe it; nor shall you add anything to it, nor take anything from it." ^{Deu 12.8} Moreover, in the history of Samuel, a notable example of this matter is to be seen. For Saul, the king of Israel, received a commandment to kill all the Amalekites, with all their beasts and cattle; but contrary to the precept, through his own good intent (he thought), and for the sake of a religious zeal of his own choosing, he reserved the fattest oxen for sacrificing. And for that cause, the prophet came and said to him, "Is a sacrifice as pleasant and acceptable to the Lord as obedience? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice; and to hearken is better than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness [1662] is as the vanity of idolatry." ^{1Sam 15.22-23} Look, here in these few words you have the goodly praise and commendation of a religion of our own inventing, and of our own good works which arise from our own good intents and purposes. Those who neglect the precepts of the Lord, to follow their own good intents and forecasts, are flatly called [1663] witches, apostates, and wicked idolaters.

iii.352

They seem in their own eyes truly to be jolly fellows, and true worshippers of God, and zealous followers of the traditions of the holy fathers, bishops, kings, and princes: but God, who cannot lie, flatly pronounces that their works do not differ at all from witchcraft, apostasy, and blasphemous idolatry; nothing more heinous than these can be devised by any means. In the Gospel, therefore, citing that place out of Isaiah's prophecy, the Lord plainly condemns, rejects, and treads underfoot all those works which we choose for ourselves, which have their beginning from our own good intents and purposes. He says, "In vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Every planting, which my Father has not planted, shall be plucked up by the roots. Let them alone; they are blind leaders of the blind." ^{Mat 15.9, 13-14}And thereupon St. Paul boldly affirms that the precepts of men are contrary to the truth, and are mere lies.^Tit
1.14In one place, Paul says, "Whatever is not of faith is sin:" and in another place, "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." [1664]

Upon this we may gather that the works which are not framed by the express word of God, or by a sure consequence derived from it, are so far from being good works, that they are plainly called sins. I pray you, force however great a good turn upon a man against his will, and see what favour you win from his hand, and how you will please him with that forced benefit. Therefore, good works first of all require the precise and express observing of God's will, to which alone they ought to tend.[1665] In his epistle to the Colossians, the same apostle openly condemns the Greek eqeloqrhskeian (ethelothreskeian); that is, the voluntary religion which they brought in to be observed, of their own choice and mind. And what need do we have, I pray you, to invent for ourselves other new kinds of good works, considering that we have not yet done those works which God himself [1666] prescribes, and in express words requires at our hands? Now, our adversaries may perceive by this, that we do not altogether simply condemn good works, but those alone which — by rejecting the word of God — we first set abroach [1667] by our own imaginations and fantastic inventions. Of this sort are many upstart works of our holy monks and sacrificing shavelings. But to conclude: the works that are repugnant to the word of God, are by no means worthy of any place or honour.

iii.353

And that we may more rightly perceive the sense or meaning of good works, we must in my opinion diligently observe these words of the apostle: "We are created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God has before ordained, that we should walk in them." ^{Eph 2.10} He makes two notes here concerning those that are good works indeed. The first is, "We are created in Christ Jesus for good works." It therefore necessarily follows that good works are wrought by the one who is grafted in Christ Jesus by true faith: for unless the branch abides in the vine, it cannot bring forth fruit. All the works of the unfaithful, therefore, however they may shine with the title of righteousness, they are notwithstanding that, not good works indeed. The latter is, "Which God has before ordained, that we should walk in them." We must not therefore account that all the works which men may do are to be counted good works indeed; but only those which God has ordained of old, that we should walk in them. Now what works those are, the Lord has very plainly expressed in his law (which is the eternal will of God). Thus the Lord, in the gospel, being demanded to answer questions concerning eternal life and true virtues, sends the demander to the law. He says: "What is written in the law?" ^{Luk 10.26} And again; "If you would enter into life, keep the commandments." ^{Mat 19.17} Therefore, the Ten Commandments are a most sure and absolute platform of good works. So that you may better understand, I will briefly recapitulate, and lay it before your eyes in a picture as it were.

To the first precept, belong the fear, faith, and love of God, with assured hope, persevering patience, and invincible constancy in trouble and afflictions. To the second belongs the true and sincere worship with which God is pleased, with the utter refusal of all superstition and perverse religion. The third depends upon the reverence of God's majesty, the free confession of his might, the holy [1668] invocation of his name, and the sanctification of it.

iii.354

In the fourth precept is comprehended the moderate conservation of the ecclesiastical ceremonies, the preaching of God's word, public prayers, and whatever else belongs to the outward service or external worship due to God. To the fifth you may annex the natural love of children toward their parents, of men toward their country and kinfolks, the due obedience that we owe to the magistrates and all those in authority, and lastly, the offices of civil humanity. To the sixth you shall join justice and judgment, the protection of widows and orphans, the delivering of the oppressed and afflicted, well-doing to all men, and doing hurt to no man. To the seventh you shall add the faith of wedded couples, the offices of marriage, the honest and godly upbringing of children, with the study of chastity, temperance, and sobriety. To the eighth is to be reckoned upright dealing in contracts, liberality, bountifulness, and hospitality. Under the ninth is couched the study of truth throughout our lifetime, faith in words and deeds, with decent, honest, and profitable speech. In the tenth and last, you may remember good affections, holy wishes, with all holy and honest thoughts. And so, this is the compendious platform of good works. Now, if you desire to have it more briefly expressed than this that you see, then turn yourself, and hearken to the words of Christ our Lord, who gathers these ten into two principal points, and says: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind; and your neighbour as yourself. Whatever therefore you would have men do to you, even so, do to them." [1669]

All the faithful who desire to do good works, must surely fix their eyes upon these precepts of the Lord. And they must do that all the more diligently and constantly as they more surely and evidently perceive and see this: that God in the law and the prophets, requires nothing else nor any other works, at the hand of his elect and chosen servants.

Now, therefore, let us hear out of the holy prophets, those evident testimonies touching good works, which consent and wholly agree with the law of the Lord. Moses in Deuteronomy cries: "And now, Israel, what does the Lord your God require of you, but to fear the Lord your God, and to walk in all his ways, to love him, and to serve the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul; that you keep the commandments of the Lord, and his ordinances, which I command you this day?" ^{Deu 10.12-13}

iii.355

And in the fifteenth Psalm, the kingly prophet David asks this question: "Lord, who shall dwell in your tabernacle?" and presently he answers it himself, saying: "Even he that walks uprightly, and does the thing that is just and right;" and so forth,^{Psa 15.1}as it is contained in the Ten Commandments. Isaiah also, in his thirty-third chapter, moves the same question, and answers it even as David had done before him.^{Isa 33.15} Jeremiah, in the twenty-second chapter, urges and reiterates these words to the Jews: "Thus the Lord commands: keep equity and righteousness, deliver the oppressed from the power of the violent, do not grieve nor oppress the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow, and shed no innocent blood in this place." ^Jer
22.3 And Ezekiel, in his eighteenth chapter, knits a catalog of good works, in no point unlike these, except that it is somewhat more largely amplified.^{Eze 18.5-20} In Hosea, the Lord says: "I desire mercy more than sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than whole burnt-offerings." ^{Hos 6.6} Micah diligently inquires what the worshipper of God should do to please him, and what works he should do to delight the Lord? And immediately, by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, he answers, saying: "I will show you, man, what is good; and what the Lord requires of you: namely, to do justly, to love mercy, and with reverence to walk before your God." ^{Mic 6.8} In like manner, the prophet Zechariah, to those who demanded of him certain questions touching virtues and those good works which please the Lord, gave this answer: "Thus says the Lord of hosts: Execute true judgment; every man show mercy and loving-kindness to his brother: do no wrong to the widow, the fatherless, the stranger and the poor; let no man imagine evil in his heart against his brother, nor be lovers of false oaths. For these are the things which I hate, says the Lord." [1670]

The preaching of the evangelists and apostles fully agrees with this doctrine of the prophets. In every place, they taught that charity, righteousness, and innocence are the scope and sum of all good works. The apostle James says: "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their adversity, and to keep himself unspotted of the world." ^{Jas 1.27}

iii.356

It now remains for me to draw to an end, and in what is left to be said touching the description of good works, to confer places of the scripture for the confirmation and plain exposition of it. Now, we said that good works indeed are wrought by those who are regenerate, to the glory of God, the ornament of our life, and the profit of our neighbour. For the Lord in the gospel prescribes this end to good works: "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."^{Mat 5.6} Also the apostle Paul, more than once, exhorts us to good works; and as a most effectual reason to pursue them, adds this: "That by those works of ours, we may adorn the doctrine of our Lord and Saviour Christ Jesus." ^{Tit 2.10} And just as an attractive and cleanly garment adorns a man, so good works showcase the life of Christian people. For upon this it rises, that the apostles of Christ so often persuaded us to put off the old man, and put on the new, which is created in the similitude and likeness of God.[1671] For thereby we obtain both honour and glory; we both are, and are called, the servants, and indeed, the sons of our Lord God, whose property and virtue shines in us, to the glory and praise of his holy name. And as he requires good works at our hands, if we do them, then on the one side we please and delight him, and on the other side, he honours us in turn — as may be proved by many testimonies of the holy scripture. But the thing itself is so plain and without any controversy, that it needs no business to prove it at all. He truly augments his gifts in us every minute, while we are intent to do good works. For in the gospel he says: "To every one that has shall be given, and he shall abound; and from him that does not have, shall be taken even what he has, and it shall be given to him that has." ^{Mat 25.8, 29} To this may also be added that God is favourable to those who work righteousness, and enriches them even with many temporal gifts, and at last he brings them to everlasting life. For the apostle Paul expressly says: "God shall reward every man according to his deeds; to those who, by continuing in well-doing, seek glory, honour, and immortality, eternal life." ^{Rom 2.6-7}

iii.357

And again, "Glory, and honour, and peace, to every one that works well:" ^{Rom 2.10} although the godly in all their good works do not (as I told you before) respect so much the recompense and reward at God's hand, as the advancement of God's glory, the fulfilling of his will, and the profit of our neighbour. For Paul says: "Do all things to the glory of God:" and again, "Let no man seek his own, but every one another's profit: even as I do in all things please all men, not seeking my own commodity, but the profit of many, that they may be saved." [1672] Therefore, all the godly so direct and temper their works, that they may please, delight, and honour God, and profit many men; for in so doing, they express or represent the nature of God, whose sons they are, and are also called. For he liberally pours out his benefits on all creatures; therefore, his sons are beneficial and bent to do good to all men.

I had this much to say up to here touching the nature or property, cause, end, and effect — that is, the very true and right meaning — of good works. By this I hope it is evidently perceived, how and in what sense the Lord in the scriptures is said to attribute the name of righteousness and justification to the good works of the saints, his servants: and that true principle of our religion remains firm and unreproveable, in which we confess and hold that "we are justified by the grace of God for Christ's sake through faith, and not for works."

Now, therefore, nothing more is left except this: for us to make our humble petition to God for true faith in Christ our Lord, and that by his grace he will so guide us, that we may now in works, put into practice that which up to here we have been taught in the words of this treatise — that is to say, that we may indeed express in good works, the faith that we have in Jesus Christ our Lord, which we profess in words. Amen.[1673]

ii.358

3-10. THE TENTH SERMON: ORIGINAL AND ACTUAL SIN.

Of sin, and of the kinds of it: namely, of original and actual sin,
and of sin against the Holy Ghost;
and lastly, of the most sure and just punishment of sins.

WE have now lastly to discourse about sin, which, as I told you, is to be referred to the treatise of the law. That I may lawfully, religiously, rightly, and profitably speak of this to the edifying of you all, I desire you to make your humble prayers with me to God the Father, in the name of Christ his Son, our gracious Lord and Mediator.[1674]

Sin is taken for error, by most men; I mean, that by which we not only err from the thing which is true, right, just and good, but we also follow and decline toward that which is nothing. The Latins derive their word peccatum, sin, from pellicatus, whore-hunting. This is a fault of wedded people who are corrupted with the spirit of fornication, as when men prefer harlots before their lawful wives. And this definition, truly, wonderfully agrees with this present treatise. For all we who believe, are pledged [1675] to our God by faith, as to our spouse and husband. If we therefore prefer other gods before him, or choose rather to serve them — if, I say, we let pass the true goods indeed, to follow the shadow of goods, vain hopes, and the pernicious pleasures of this world, then we sin indeed, and we commit fornication against our spouse and husband.[1676] But the learned sort, for the most part, differentiate between peccatum and delictum, both of which, in effect, signify sins.[1677] But when the thing is not done that should be done, they call that delictum; and when that is done that should be left undone, they call that peccatum. St. Jerome seems to have used delictum for the first fall to sin.[1678]

iii.359

St. Augustine says that peccatum is committed by one who sins wittingly, and delictum by one who sins from ignorance.[1679] I see that those words are confounded in some places, and that the one is used for the other. In some places the error, or delictum, is used as the milder term; peccatum, in a more grievous sense; and a heinous crimen, a mischief, a revolting or wickedness, for the greatest of all.[1680] For St. Augustine says: "Neither is every peccatum crimen,[1681] because every crimen is peccatum." Therefore we say, that the life of a man [1682] living in this transitory world may be found to be without that heinous offence, crimen, for which the whole world cries out and accuses him.[1683] But "if we say we have nullum peccatum, no sin," (as the apostle says) "we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." ^1Joh
1.8 Among the Hebrews, sin is called by sundry names, which import and signify perverseness, a fault, an error, a revolting, infirmity, vice, ignorance, and transgression. For transgress signifies to depart from the truth,[1684] from our duty or office, not to keep the right path, but to turn away from the prescript rule of the law of God. Now that rule, or law of God, the Hebrews called Torah — that is to say, a direction, or a leading by the hand;[1685] for it directs a man in the ways that are acceptable to the Lord. And therefore the Greeks call sin by the names anomia and paranomia (anomia and paranomia). Again, in the Hebrew tongue, sin is the same as saying a turning away from good to evil; also a revolting, as when you draw your neck out of the yoke of someone's power to whom you are a servant. Finally, it signifies the crime or guilt by which we endanger ourselves to the rod of punishment.

iii.360

Truly St. Augustine takes great pains to discover a proper definition of sin. In his second book, De Consensu Evangelistarum, he says: "Sin is the transgression of the law." [1686] Ad Simplicianum, Lib. i.: "Sin is an inordinateness or perverseness of man; that is, a turning from the more excellent Creator, and a turning to the inferior creatures." [1687] De Fide contra Manichaeos, cap. 8, he says: "What else is it to sin, but to err in the precepts of truth, or in the truth itself?" [1688] Again, Contra Faustum Manichaeum, Lib. xxii. cap. 27: "Sin is a deed, a word, or a wish, against the law of God." [1689] De duabus animabus contra Manichaeos, cap. 11, says: "Sin is a will to retain or obtain that which justice forbids, and is not free to abstain." [1690] And In Retract. Lib. i. cap. 15, he says: "That will is a motion of the mind, without compulsion, either not to lose or else to obtain, some one thing or other." [1691]

As I do not utterly reject all these definitions, I wish this to be considered and thought of with the rest: Sin is the natural corruption of mankind, and the action which arises from it, contrary to the law of God, whose wrath it brings upon us, both death and sundry punishments. You hear how well this definition consists in its parts. You hear of our natural corruption in it; and in naming that, it appears how this definition does not agree with the sin of our first parents, in whom there was no natural corruption.

iii.361

I mean to speak of this in a convenient place. You hear the action named, which arises from our natural corruption, and how it is repugnant to the law of God. You hear that sin brings upon us the wrath of God, that is, death and sundry sorts of punishments appointed by the mouth of God to plague us for our sins. I will speak of these in order as they lie, so far as the Lord gives me grace and ability.

Now, it therefore seems that this treatise may most aptly begin at discussing the original cause and beginning [1692] of sin. There are some who derive the original cause of evil or sin from the influence of the planets, saying, "I sinned, because I was born under an unlucky planet." There are others who, when they sin and are rebuked for it, give this answer: "It is not I, but the devil who is at fault, that I have committed this grievous crime." And sometimes, laying aside all excuses, they cast the blame on God directly, and say: "Why, God willed that it should be so; for if he would not have it so, I would not have sinned." Another says: "Since God could have prevented it, and would not, he is the cause and author of my sin." But it is no new thing now, that men whet their blasphemous tongues against God, the maker and ruler of all things. For our first parents, when they had sinned and were accused of it by God himself, found a shift to translate the sin which they committed, from themselves to the other, and would not confess the truth as it was in very deed. Such is the abominable wickedness of man. For Adam, answering God contrarily, casts the fault of his offence not only [1693] upon his wife, whom God had coupled to him, but also upon God himself. "The woman he says, "whom you gave to be with me, gave me from the tree,[1694] and I ate." ^{Gen 3.12} It is as if he had said: If you had not given me the woman, I would not have sinned. But the Lord coupled him to a wife, not to the end that she should be an occasion for evil, but that the man might be in a better case and condition. Again, the woman simply imputes the cause of that evil to the devil, saying: "The serpent beguiled me, and I ate."

iii.362

Look, these are most corrupt, false, wicked, and detestable opinions touching the original cause of sin, with which the justice and truth of God is mightily offended. Nor is the nature of man the cause of sin. For God, who created all things, also created the nature of man, and made it good, even as all other things which he created were good. Therefore the nature of man was good. For it is an incidental quality that happened to man either in, or immediately after, his fall; it was not a substantial property, to have his nature so spotted with corruption as it is now.[1695] Now we, being born in sin, of sinful progenitors, have sin as our natural property by descent; for St. Augustine, writing, De Fide contra Manichaeos, cap. 9, says: "And if we say that any men are evil by nature, we mean that they are evil because of the original descent of our first parents' sin, into which we mortal men are wholly born." [1696] But this now requires a more exact and ample declaration.

This greatly argues that the devil alone is not the author of sin, such that when we sin, the blame for it should redound to him, and we who sinned may escape without fault. It is in his power to egg and persuade us, but not to force a man to do evil. For by his power, God restrains the devil from being able to do the thing that he would do: he can do no more than God permits him to do. For if he had no power over a herd of filthy swine, then how much less authority he has over the excellent souls of God's most excellent creatures! He has, I confess, great subtleties, and he has more than rhetorical force with which to persuade us. But God is stronger, and never ceases to prompt good and wholesome counsels unto the souls of his faithful servants.

iii.363

Nor does he permit more to Satan than is for our commodity, as seen in the example of that holy man, the patient Job; and also in the example of Paul, 2Cor 12, and in his words, saying, "God is faithful; he will not allow us to be tempted above what we are able to bear." ^{1Cor 10.13} Therefore, those are vainly seduced, who cast the fault of their sin upon the devil's shoulders.

To proceed: if you demand of those who lay the blame for their sin on their evil destiny, 'What is destiny?' they will answer either that it is a course knit together by eternity and linked to itself, like a certain chain and continual row of counsels and works necessarily following one upon another, according to the disposition and ordinance of God; or else they answer that destiny is the evil stars or planets. Now, if you demand again, 'Who made the stars?' they have no other answer but God. It consequently follows, that they force the cause of their sin upon God himself. But all the ancient and best philosophers never pretended or alleged destiny [as the cause of sin], much less those Christians who freely confessed the mighty power of their God and Maker. And even among our men, I mean those who seemed to be Christians, those who held the opinion of destiny and constellations were those kinds of fellows that wise men would be ashamed to follow as authors. Bardesanes [1697] imputed to destiny the conversations of mortal men. And the Priscillianists, who were condemned in the first council held at Toledo, thought and taught that man is tied to fatal stars — that he has his body compact according to the twelve signs in heaven, placing Aries in the head, Taurus in the neck, and sequentially, every sign in his several limbs.[1698]

iii.364

St. Augustine, In opusculo lxxxiii. quaestionum, Quaest. 45, soundly confuting the destinies of planets, among other reasons says this:

"The conceiving of twins in the mother's womb, because it is made in one and the same act, as the physicians testify (whose discipline is far more certain and manifest than that of the astrologers), happens in so small a moment of time, that there is not so much as two minutes between conceiving the one and the other. Therefore, how does it come about that in twins of one bearing, there is so great a diversity of deeds, wills, and chances, considering that of necessity they must have one and the same planet in their conception, and that the mathematicals give the constellation of them both, as if it were but of [one] man?" [1699]

Great light may be added to these words of St. Augustine, if you annex to them and examine narrowly the example of Esau and Jacob's birth, and their sundry dispositions. Augustine, writing to Boniface against two epistles of the Pelagians, Lib. ii. cap. 6, says:

"Those who affirm that destiny rules, will have not only our deeds and events, but also our very wills, depend upon the placing of the stars at the time in which every man is either conceived or born; this placing they usually call constellations. But the grace of God not only goes above all stars and heavens, but also above the very angels themselves. Moreover, these disputers for destiny, attribute to destiny both the good and the evil that happen to men. But God, in the evils that fall upon men, duly and worthily recompenses them for their ill deserts. But the good which they have, he bestows upon them not for their merits, but of his own favour and merciful goodness through grace, that cannot be looked for from duty; laying both good and evil upon us, not through the temporal course of planets, but by the deed and eternal counsel of his severity and goodness. So then, we see that the falling out of good or evil has no relation to the planets." [1700]

iii.365

Therefore, this place may be concluded with the words of the Lord in the prophet Jeremiah, saying: "Thus says the Lord, you shall not learn according to the manner of the heathen, and you shall not be afraid for the tokens of heaven; for the heathen are afraid of them. Yes, all the observations of the Gentiles are vanity." [1701] For the planets have no force to do either good or evil. And therefore the blame for sins is not to be imputed to them.

I have now to prove to you, that God is not the cause of sin, nor the author of evil. "God," they say, "would have it so. For if he would not have had it so, I would not have sinned; for who may resist his power?" ^{Rom 9.19} Again, "Since he could have prevented it, and would not, he is the author of my sin and wickedness" — as though we did not know the crafty quarrels and subtle shifts of mortal men. Who, I pray you, does not know that God does not deal with us by his absolute power, but by an appointed law and ordinance; I mean, by commodious means and a probable order? I know God could, by his absolute power, stave off all evil; yet he neither can nor will either corrupt or mar his creature and excellent order. He therefore deals with us in the manner of men: he appoints us laws, and lays before us rewards and punishments. He commands to embrace the good and eschew the evil. For performing these, he neither denies us his grace (without which we can do nothing), nor does he despise our diligent good-will and earnest travail.

iii.366

If man is slack in this, the negligence and fault is imputed to man himself, and not to God, even though He could have kept off the sin [1702] and did not; for it was not His duty to keep it off, lest perhaps he disturb the order and destroy the work which he himself had made and ordained. Therefore, God is not the author of sin or naughtiness. Touching this matter, I will first add some testimonies of the holy scripture; then I will answer sundry objections of the adversaries of this doctrine; and lastly, I will declare the original cause or headspring of sin and wickedness.

The testimonies which teach that God is not the author of sin or naughtiness are many in number. But among them, this is an argument of greatest force and probability: because God is said to be good naturally; and all which he created was made good in its creation. This is why Solomon [1703] says:

"God has not made death; nor has he delight in the destruction of the living. For he created all things, that they might have their being; and the beginnings of the world were healthful; and there is no poison of destruction in them; nor is the kingdom of hell upon the earth, for righteousness is immortal. (but unrighteousness brings death);[1704] and the ungodly call it to themselves both with words and works, and thereby they come to nothing," ^{Wis 1.13-16} and so forth.

This is seen in the first chapter of the book of Wisdom; and these words surpassingly agree with the first chapter of that most excellent prophet Moses.[1705]

In the fifth psalm, David says: "You are the God that takes no pleasure in wickedness: nor shall any evil dwell with you. The unjust shall not stand in your sight: for you hate all those who work iniquity. You shall destroy those who speak falsehood;[1706] the Lord abhors both the bloodthirsty and deceitful man." ^{Psa 5.4-6} Look, you can devise nothing more contrary to the nature of God than sin and naughtiness, as you may perceive more at large in the thirty-fourth chapter of the book of Job.

iii.367

The wise man says: "God created man good; but they sought out many inventions of their own." ^{Ecc 7.29} And therefore the apostle Paul derives sin, damnation, and death, not from God, but from Adam; and from God he fetches grace, forgiveness, and life, through the mediator Jesus Christ. That passage of Paul is far more manifest than to need any large exposition. Let it only be considered and diligently weighed by the readers and hearers. I would wish them always to bear in mouth and mind the very words and meaning of this notable sentence: "Even as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin," etc. ^{Rom 9.10}

The same apostle in the seventh chapter to the Romans evidently declares that the law is holy, the commandment is good and just; and thereby he insinuates that in God, or in His will — and in his law, which is the will of God — there does not spring any spot or blur of sin or naughtiness. In our flesh, Paul says, evil lurks, and out of us iniquity arises. "I know," he says, "that in me, that is in my flesh, there is no good." ^{Rom 7.18} In that chapter, there are many sentences to be found which wonderfully confirm this argument.

Again, in the third chapter to the Romans, the same apostle says: "If our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who takes vengeance? (I speak In the manner of men)," [that is, I use the words of wicked people.] "God forbid: for how then shall God judge the world? For if the truth of God has more abounded through my lie to his glory; then why am I still judged as a sinner?" etc. ^{Rom 3.5-7}

Truly, if God were the author of sin and of all evil, and he would have the wicked be such as indeed they are, then why, I pray you, would he judge or punish them as transgressors, since they fulfilled his will by sinning? ^{Rom 9.19-20}

iii.368

To this place also belongs that testimony of the blessed evangelist and apostle John, in his canonical epistle, where he says: "If any man loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, such as the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but of the world. And the world passes away, and the lust of it. But he that fulfills the will of the Father [1707] abides forever." ^{1Joh 2.15-17} Look here, God is utterly free from all evil. Evil, he says, is not of the Father, but of the world. And the one who does the will of the Father does not do what the world wills, but what God wills. Therefore, these two — good and evil, sin and the will of God — are directly opposed and repugnant to one another. These testimonies, though few in number, are notwithstanding, in my judgment, sufficiently significant and able to persuade a godly-disposed hearer.

Now, upon this we first infer a conclusion, and we boldly warrant that point of Catholic doctrine which, ever since the apostles' time, has been defended with much diligence against the impure philosophy of some. Yet I do not utterly condemn all the parts of philosophy, knowing very well that some points of it are very necessary and profitable to zealous lovers of God and godliness. This conclusion is that God is not the author of evil, nor the cause of sin. Then, out of the same testimonies, we gather that the original cause of sin or evil is derived from man himself, and his suggester and provoker, the devil; in such a way, we say, that the devil, being first corrupted himself, then corrupted man. Nevertheless, he was not able of himself to have done anything, if man had not, of his own accord, consented to evil.

And here we must set before our eyes the fall of our first father Adam, that by the consideration of it, we may better be able to judge the original cause of sin and iniquity.

God created Adam, the first father of us all, according to His own similitude and likeness. That is to say, God made him good, most pure, most holy, most just, and immortal, and adorned him with every excellent gift and faculty; so that there was nothing lacking to Adam in God, which was requisite to perfect happiness. [1708]

iii.369

Touching this similitude or likeness to God, I will take occasion to speak afterwards, upon the words of Paul. So then, Adam was endued with a very divine, pure, and sharp understanding. His will was free, without constraint, and absolutely holy. He had power to do either good or evil. Moreover, God gave him a law, which might instruct him what to do and what to leave undone. For in saying, "You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil," ^{Gen 3.3} God simply requires faith and obedience from his hands, and that he should wholly depend upon God. He had to do all of this, not by compulsion or necessity, but of his own accord and free good-will. For the wise man very truly and holily wrote in the fifteenth chapter of Ecclesiasticus,[1709] saying: "God made man in the beginning, and left him in the hand of his counsel. He gave him His commandments and precepts: if you will, you shall keep my commandments, and they shall preserve you." ^{Wis 15.14-16}

Therefore, when the serpent tempted the mind of man, and persuaded him to taste of the forbidden tree, man knew well enough what peril was laid before him, and how the serpent's counsel was flatly repugnant to the Lord's commandment. In the meantime, God neither compelled him, nor did Satan in the serpent, force him to sin, while he resisted and withstood him. For God had said: "You shall not eat of that tree, nor touch it: if you do, you shall die for it." Therefore, Adam was at his own free choice, and in the hand of his own counsel, either to eat or not to eat. Indeed, God declared his mind to Adam in giving a precise command that he should not eat of it; and he annexed to the commandment the danger of its breach, thereby drawing him away from eating the fruit, and saying, "Lest perhaps you die." And as Satan could not, so also he did not, show any violence, but used such probable words to counsel Adam as he could, and he did indeed at length persuade him. For when the woman's will gave ear to the word of the devil, her mind departed from the word of God. By this she rejected the good law of God, committed that sin of her own perverse will, and drew her husband into the fellowship of that same offence, who yielded of his own accord.

iii.370

The scripture most significantly expresses it in these words: "And the woman, seeing that the tree was good to eat of, and pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, took the fruit of it, and ate, and gave to her husband with her, and he ate also." Look, here you have the beginning of evil, the devil. You have heard what moved the mind or will of man to that evil: namely, the false persuasion of the devil, or his subtle praise of the fruit of the tree, and consequently, a mere lie; and the pleasant appearance of the delicate tree. But what our first parents did, they did of their own accord and free will, being led by hope to obtain a more excellent life and profounder wisdom, which the seducer had falsely promised them. We therefore conclude that sin does not spring from God, who hates and prohibits all evil, but from the devil; from the free election of our grand-parents and their corrupted will, which was depraved by the devil's lie; and from the false appearance of feigned good. So then, the devil, and the yielding or corrupted mind of man, are the very causes of sin and naughtiness.

To proceed now: this evil flows by descent from our first parents into all their posterity, so that today sin does not spring from elsewhere, but from ourselves. That is to say, it springs from our corrupt judgment, depraved will, and the suggestion of the devil. For the root of evil yet remains in our flesh by reason of that first corruption; this root produces a corrupt branch, like itself in nature; and as he has always done by his sleights, subtleties, and lies, Satan even now cherishes, tends, and tenders this branch, as an imp of his own planting. And yet, notwithstanding, he labours in vain unless we yield ourselves to his hands to be framed as he wishes.

Now, therefore, so that there may appear less doubt or darkness in this, for confirmation's sake I will add two most evident testimonies. The one is out of the writings of the evangelists, and the other out of the doctrine of the apostles.

The Lord in the gospel says: "The devil was a murderer from the beginning, and did not stand in the truth, because the truth is not in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own; because he is a liar, and the father of lies." ^{Joh 8.44}

iii.371

By these [1710] words of the Lord, we gather that evil is to be referred to the devil, who being created in truth and goodness, did not stand fast in truth and goodness, but degenerated from his nature in which he was made good; and he fell [1711] into another corrupt and wicked nature, and out of himself has dispersed all evil into the world (as it appeared by the history of our first parents); namely, murder and lies (under which are comprehended all other evils) of which he is expressly said to be the father — that is, the cause, the author, the well-spring, and beginning. This is not because he was made such by God, but because he did not stand fast in the truth. To those, therefore, who demand from what beginning Satan came, and whether God made him or not? our answer is that God indeed made all the angels, and also those which afterward became reprobates and wicked devils. But we do not therefore say that the cause of evil redounds to God. For we know that in the beginning, God made all the angels good; for all things which he made were good.

Furthermore, it is said that the devil did not stand in the truth; that is, he revolted from the truth, from which he could not have revolted if he had never stood in it. Therefore, in the beginning God placed all his angels in the truth. He required from them truth, faith or fidelity, and the duty that they owed him. They were able to have done this, if they themselves would. But they disloyally fell from their allegiance, and sinned against the Lord, as the apostle Peter testifies.^{2Pet 2.4} And therefore, the fault of their falsehood and of all their naughtiness, was not in God, but in the rebellious and revolting angel. For since the time of his fall there is no truth, no fidelity, no integrity, no fear of God, no light or goodness to be found in him. Therefore, St. John said truly in the canonical epistle: "He that commits sin is of the devil; for the devil sins from the beginning." ^1Joh
3.8 For he is the first sinner, and the beginning of sin. This note may also be added to this: that by Peter and John, the devil is said to sin. For sin is repugnant to the will of God.

iii.372

Therefore, God would not have had him perish. But since he did perish, it follows that he perished, not by the fault of God, but by his own fault.

Let us now hear the other testimony concerning the corrupt will of man, which is indeed the cause of sin. "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted by God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, nor does he tempt any man. But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away and enticed of his own concupiscence. Then, when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is finished, brings forth death." ^{Jas 1.13-15} In these words, St. James, I hope evidently enough, shows God to be free from all fault of sin, and that it derives it from us ourselves — showing, by the way, the beginning and proceeding of sin. Nor does James in this place question the place in Genesis where Moses said, "God tempted Abraham." ^Gen
22.1 For in Moses, "tempt" signifies a trial or a proof of something. But in this argument of ours, it signifies stirring or drawing someone to evil, to thus corrupt us. Therefore, just as God cannot be tempted by evil — that is to say, just as God is good and uncorrupt by nature — so God does not corrupt, deprave, or defile any man with evil; for that is contrary to the nature of God. Where then does sin have its beginning? The holy apostle answers, saying: "Yes, every one is tempted, corrupted, and drawn into evil, when he is drawn away and enticed by his own concupiscence." ^{Jas 1.14} Look here, sin begins from our concupiscence, and it is accomplished and finished by our own work and labour.

Note here, by the way, what a weight and emphasis every one of the apostle's words carries with it. For first, he makes concupiscence our own, or proper to us all, even as the Lord had said of Satan, "When he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own." Now, because concupiscence is our own, sin is therefore our own also. For concupiscence draws us away from that which is true, just, and good, to that which is false, unjust, and evil. The same concupiscence entices us, that is, it deceives us by making a show of false hope — just as fowlers use meat to entice birds into their nets; once they have deceived them, they catch up and kill them. I ask you, what could be spoken more plainly?

iii.373

We are cast into evil by our own concupiscence: this concupiscence draws us from God; it entices and utterly deceives us. And then, having laid the foundation of sin and opened the well-spring from where it flows, James very properly alludes and by an allegory shows us the genealogy, that is, the beginning and proceeding of sin. That concupiscence, he says, which is proper to us all, conceives sin in us, as if it were a womb; and immediately after, it gives birth to it: namely, when our lust bursts out into the act, when we greedily prosecute what we lusted after, and once obtained, we enjoy it against the law of God. Death, without intermission, follows on the heels of this; "for the reward of sin is death." ^Jas
1.15

I trust that by these evident proofs of scripture, I have plainly declared that God is not the cause of evil; but it is our corruptible will or concupiscence; and it is the devil who stirs, provokes, and inflames our depraved nature to sin and wickedness, as he is the tempter and utter enemy to mankind and his salvation.

It will not be amiss here to hear the objections to this doctrine by certain cavillers,[1712] and to learn how to answer them according to the truth. There are some, when they see that we do not derive sin from the nature of God, but from the corruptible will of man, and from the false suggestion of the devil, immediately object that God created Adam, and consequently He created sin in Adam. To this we answer that sin is the corruption of the good nature made by God, and not a creature created by God either in or with man. God created man good; but man, left to his own counsel, through the persuasion of Satan, by man's own action and depraved will, corrupted the goodness that God created in him: so that now sin is proper to man — I mean, to man's corrupt action against the law of God; it is not created in him by God. To this they reply: But were the will and ability that were in Adam, from somewhere else than from God himself? Undoubtedly, no: it was from God. Therefore, they say, sin is of God. I deny it; for God did not give Adam will and the power of working, to the end that he should work evil; for by express commandment, God forbade Adam to do wickedness.

iii.374

Therefore Adam himself naughtily applied the will and power which he received from God, by using them untowardly.[1713] The prodigal son received money from his father's hand; the intent was not that he should waste it prodigally with riotous living, but that he might have something upon which to live and supply the want of his necessities. Therefore, when he had lavishly squandered it, and utterly undone himself, the fault was in himself for abusing it, and not in his father for giving it to him. Furthermore, to have the power to do good and evil, as Adam had from God, is a thing without fault in itself; even as having poison, bearing a weapon, or wearing a sword, is a thing that no man can worthily blame. They have in them a force to do good or harm; they are nothing unless they are abused: and the one that gives them to you, leaves to you the use of it. If he is a just man, he puts them into your hand not to abuse, but to use as equity and right require. Therefore, if you abuse them, the fault is imputed to you, and not to the one who gave them to you. Now, since God is most absolutely just, of himself, and He gave Adam that will and power, it consequently follows that He gave them to Adam not to do evil, but good. Why then is the most just God blamed in such a case where sinful man is entirely to blame? We therefore conclude this: that because affection in Adam, being moved by sense and egged on by the serpent, persuaded him to eat of the forbidden fruit, when his understanding yet held the word of God which forbade him to eat; and his will had free choice and liberty to incline to whichever part it pleased him; he notwithstanding [1714] willed and chose that which God had forbidden him — we therefore conclude, I say, that sin is properly imputed to man who willingly transgressed, and not to God [1715] who charged him that he should not sin.

iii.375

Here again the adversaries ask this question, Why did God create man so frail, that of his own will he might incline to evil? Why did God not rather confirm in man the goodness and perfect soundness of nature, so that he could not have fallen or sinned? To this the scripture answers, saying: "Who are you that disputes with God? Woe to him that strives with his Maker! Woe to him that says to the father, Why did you beget? and to the mother, Why did you give birth?" [1716] Unless God had made man fallable,[1717] there would have been no praise of his works or virtue; for he could neither have willed nor chosen, but would have been good by necessity. Yes, what if man should be made altogether fallable? For so the counsel of God required him to be. God does not give his own glory to any creature. Adam was a man, and not a God. But to be good of necessity is the proper glory of God, and of none but God.[1718] And as God is bountiful and liberal, so he is also just. He does good to men; but with that, He wills that men acknowledge him and his benefits, and that they obey him, and be thankful for it.

He had bestowed innumerable benefits upon Adam. Nothing was lacking, therefore, but to give him an occasion to declare and show his thankfulness and obedience to his good God and benefactor. He offered Adam this occasion by making that law, or giving his commandment. We see therefore that God did not ordain that law to be a stumbling-block in Adam's way, but rather to be a staff to keep him from falling. For in the law, God declares what he would have him do. He shows that he does not wish the death or destruction of Adam. He teaches him what to do, so that he may escape death and live in felicity and perfect happiness. For this reason, He also provided that the law should be a plain and easy commandment: "You shall not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil," says the Lord; "for if you do, you shall die the death: but you shall eat of any other tree in the garden." What else was this, than as if he had said, You shall have an eye to me in all things; you shall stick to me, obey me, be subject to me, and serve me; nor shall you fetch the forms of good and evil from anywhere else than from me; and in so doing, you shall show yourself obedient and thankful to me your Maker.

iii.376

Did God desire any unjust thing in this, or more than he should at the hands of Adam? He showed him the tree as a sacrament or [1719] sign of what he enjoined him by giving the law; namely, that the tree might be a token to put him in memory that he ought to obey the Lord alone, as a wise, bountiful, excellent, and greatest God and Maker. I pray you, what difficulty or darkness was there in this? St. Augustine is of the same opinion with us, who in his book De Natura Boni adversus Manichaeos, cap. 35, says:

"He therefore forbid it, that he might show that the nature of the reasonable soul ought to be, not in man's own power, but in subjection to God; and that it keeps the order of her salvation by obedience, which it corrupts and mars by disobedience. And for this, God called the tree which he forbade, by the name of the tree of knowledge of good and evil: because if Adam touched it against the Lord's commandment, he would by trial feel the punishment of his sin. And by that means, he would know the difference between the good that follows obedience, and the evil which ensues the sin of disobedience." [1720]

Now, therefore, when the serpent had crept in and began to tell man of other forms of good and evil that were directly contrary to the law of God, and once man had received them as things both true and credible,[1721] he disloyally revolts against God, and by his own fault, he wrought his own destruction through disobedience. Therefore God always dealt justly with him; and man contrarily dealt too unjustly, and was utterly unthankful, however men may go about cloaking or not hearing of their unthankful stubbornness.

iii.377

But though we say that man was made fallable, we will not have it so understood, that any man should think that there was in Adam any one jot or prick of infirmity before his fall. For just as he was most absolutely perfect in all points, so he was in no point created so frail that he must sin or perish by death. For God, who is one in substance and three in persons, said: "Let us make man in our image, after our own likeness." ^{Gen 1.26} Note here, that Tselem (image) signifies the picture or counterfeit of another thing, and that Demuth (likeness) imports the very pattern by which any picture is drawn or image portrayed.[1722] Therefore, God is the example or pattern, to which a picture or similitude was framed as a resemblance. But that representing likeness cannot be this body of ours; for God is a Spirit, and is in no point like the nature of dust and ashes. Therefore, we must of necessity resemble the image of God as to spiritual things, such as immortality, truth, justice, and holiness. For so the apostle Paul has taught us, where he says, "Be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and put on that new man, which is shaped after God in righteousness and holiness of truth." [1723] Therefore, there was no lack in our grandfather Adam, of anything that was requisite to absolute perfectness. Thus, even a blind man may perceive that man was not created for death and destruction, but for life, felicity, and absolute blessedness.

But, they say, God foreknew the fall of man which, if he would, he could have withstood it; now, since he could and would not, God is to be blamed because Adam sinned. It is a weighty matter indeed,[1724] when all fear of God being laid aside, men at their pleasure flatly fall to railing against the majesty of God almighty. I answered this objection in the beginning of this discourse; yet I would moreover add this here: that upon God's foreknowledge, no necessity follows that Adam sinned of necessity, because God foreknew he would sin.

iii.378

A prudent father foresees by some untoward tokens, that his son will one day come to an ill ending. Nor is that father deceived in his foresight: for his son is slain, being taken in adultery. But the son is not slain because his father foresaw that he would be slain; rather, it is because he was an adulterer. Therefore, St. Ambrose, or whoever was author of the second book De Gentium Vocatione, cap. 4, speaking of the murder which Cain committed, says: "God truly foreknew to what end the fury of the madman would come. And yet, just because God's foreknowledge could not be deceived, it does not follow that the necessity of sinning urged the crime upon him," etc. [1725] And St. Augustine says, De Libero Arbitrio, Lib. xiii. cap. 4:

"Just as your memory does not compel those things to be done that are gone and past, so God by his foreknowledge does not compel those things to be done which are yet to come. And just as you remember some things that you have done, and yet have not done all those things which you remember; so God foreknows all things which he does, and yet He does not do all of what he foreknows. But God is a just revenger of that of which he is not the evil author." [1726] And so forth.

Another objection like this, is made by those who say: Before all beginnings, God determined with himself to deliver mankind from bondage. Therefore, it could not be otherwise, but that we should first be tangled in bondage. Thus it benefited us to be drowned in sin, so that by this means the glory of God might shine more clearly. As the apostle said, "Where sin was plenteous, there was grace more plenteous." ^{Rom 5.20} But it is a marvel that these cavillers do not better consider that God, of himself and without us, is sufficient unto himself for absolute blessedness and most perfect felicity; and that his glory of itself could (as it does) reach above all heavens, even if there had never been any creature brought into light.

iii.379

Is not God without beginning? But we his creatures had a beginning. God is glorious from before all beginnings: therefore he is glorious without us; and his glory would be as great as it is, even if we did not exist.[1727] What dullard is so foolish as to think that the eternal light of God draws any brightness of glory from our darkness, or out of the stinking dungeon of our sin and wickedness? Would God's glory be no glory, if it were not for our sins? The wise man in Ecclesiasticus says: "Do not say it is the Lord's fault that I have sinned: for you shall not do the thing that God hates. Do not say, He has caused me to do wrong; for he has no need of the sinner," for the wicked are not necessary to him. "God hates all abominations of error; and those who worship God will love no such things." ^{Wis 15.11-13}Therefore, why do we not change our manner of reasoning, and consider the matter as it is indeed? God, of his eternal goodness and liberality, whereby he wishes himself to be shared among us all to our felicity, determined from everlasting to create man in his own similitude and likeness. But because he foresaw that man would fall headlong into a filthy and miserable bondage, he therefore ordained by the same his grace and goodness, a deliverer to bring us out of thraldom;[1728] to the end that he might communicate himself to us — that we might praise his gracious favour, and render thanks to his fatherly goodness. And so, whatever we have sinned and turned to our own destruction, God converts it again to our commodity and salvation: even as we read he has done in the case of Joseph and his brethren — which is a type of spiritual things [1729] and of our salvation as it were. We must wholly endeavour to do what we may, in reasoning about this argument, to so turn it that all glory may be given to God alone, and to us, nothing but silence in the sight of God. [1730]

iii.380

Now, last of all, there are still some places of scripture which must be run through and expounded along the way. The apostle Paul truly says: "God gave them up to a reprobate sense." ^{Rom 1.28} But this kind of giving over is, as Augustine also says,[1731] a work of judgment and justice; for they were worthy to be given up to a reprobate sense. The cause is prefixed in the words of the apostle. For God had made himself manifest to them; but they were not only unthankful towards him, they also grew wise in their own conceits, and set about to intrude on Him [1732] I know not what manner of religion and worship. Therefore, that they might see by proof that they were fools and ungodly, God gave them up to filthy lusts. In like manner, king Amaziah would not give ear and hearken to the Lord, because God had determined to punish his iniquities; as may be seen in the fourth book of Kings, the fourteenth chapter, and second Chronicles [1733] twenty-fifth chapter. Likewise, the Lord put the spirit of error into the mouths of the false prophets, and they seduced Egypt (Isaiah nineteen). A seducing spirit also went out from the Lord of judgment, and was a lying spirit in the mouth of all the prophets: as seen in the last chapter of the third book of Kings. ^{1Kng
22.19-23} Now the Lord does all these things with just and holy judgment.

Again, God is said to blind men's eyes when he revokes or takes away the light of his truth and sincerity from those who contemn it, leaving those who delight in darkness to walk and stay in their darkness still. Then the Lord permits his words to be preached to the unthankful and ungodly receivers of it, to their judgment or condemnation; for truly, so the evangelical and apostolic doctrine teaches us to think. "This is condemnation," says the Lord, or this is judgment, "that the Son of God, the very true light, came into the world, and the world loved darkness more than light." ^{Joh 3.19} And Paul said: "If the gospel is yet hidden, it is hidden in those who perish; in whom the God of this world has blinded the senses of the unbelievers," etc. ^{2Cor 4.3-4}

iii.381

In the same sense, God is said to harden man. For when the Lord calls man and man resists, making himself unworthy of the kingdom of heaven, God then leaves him to himself: that is, he leaves man to his own corrupt nature, according to which the heart of man is stony, which is mollified and made tractable only by the grace of God, Therefore, the withdrawing of God's grace is the hardening of man's heart; and when we are left to ourselves, we are hardened. Pharaoh, king of Egypt, offended the eyes of God's most just and heavenly majesty, by his murdering of the Israelite infants, by his tyranny, and many other vices horribly committed against the law of nature. Therefore, it is no marvel that he hardened his heart. But if any man will not admit or receive this exposition, he still cannot deny that God in the scriptures uses our kinds of phrases and manner of speech. Now, we customarily say, This father, by too much indulgence [1734] or dealing over-gently, mars or hardens his son; he makes him stubborn and stiff-necked. Yet, the father does not tender his son to destroy him, but to save him. Indeed, by the abuse of his father's clemency, the son both destroys and hardens himself. Therefore though the son is hardened, that comes by his own fault and not his father's, even though the father bears the name of having hardened him, or made him past grace. And truly, if you diligently consider the history of Pharaoh, you more than once find this sentence repeated: "And God hardened Pharaoh's heart," namely, when some benefit or delivery from evil was previously wrought. It is as though the scripture had said, By this benefit of delivering him from evil, God hardened the heart of Pharaoh, while he abused the goodness of God, and supposed that all things would afterwards be out of peril and danger, because God had taken away this present punishment and began to do him good. Yet I confess, that immediately upon calling Moses — before God had benefited Egypt, or laid any punishments on it — God said this: "I know that the king of Egypt will not let you depart;" and again: "See that you do all these signs and wonders which I have put in your hand before Pharaoh. But I will harden Pharaoh's heart, so that he shall not let the people go." ^{Exo 3.19; 4.21}

iii.382

But these sayings do not tend to this: that we should make God the author of all Pharaoh's falsehood, rebellion, and stubborn dealing against the Lord. Rather, they were spoken to the comfort and confirmation of Moses, who is therefore so forewarned,[1735] that, when he deals earnestly with the king and yet cannot obtain his suit, he should know that he had God's business in hand, and that by His long sufferance, God is the cause of that delay. Yet, in the end, He would temper all things to His own honour and glory. The case, by a similitude, is the same as if a householder were to send his servant to his debtors, saying to him, Go your way, and demand my debts; yet I know that you will receive none of them; for by my sufferance and gentle dealing, I will cause these debtors to be all the slacker to pay what is owed. Yet, do your duty; and meanwhile, I will see what is needful to be done.

To this may be added, that even in those very chapters where it is so often said, "God hardened Pharaoh's heart," this also is afterward annexed, which lays the hardening of Pharaoh's heart on Pharaoh's own head, saying, "He hardened his heart, and did not hearken to them." In the ninth chapter of Exodus, when Pharaoh was well whipped, he cries: "I have now sinned; the Lord is just, but I and my people are unjust or wicked:" and immediately after, again: "But when Pharaoh saw that it ceased raining, he sinned still more, and hardened his heart, and it was hardened." So then, these and like places must be conferred with these words, "I have hardened Pharaoh's heart;" and out of them must be gathered a godly sense — such a sense, I mean, that it does not make God the author of evil.

Now, the prophet Amos also says very plainly: "There is no evil in a city, that the Lord does not do it." [1736] But Augustine, contra Adimantum, cap. 26, very rightly wrote:

"Evil in this place is not to be taken for sin, but for punishment; for the word (evil) is used in two significations: the one is the evil which a man does; the other evil is the pain which he suffers. Now the prophet in this place, speaks of that evil which is the punishment that men suffer.

iii.383

For by the providence of God, who rules and governs all things, man so commits the evil which he will have, that he may suffer the evil which he would not have. Therefore, the evil that God does is not evil in respect to God, but it is evil to those on whom his vengeance lights. So then, in respect to Himself, God does good; because every just thing is good. That vengeance of His is just, and so consequently, it is good." [1737]

That place in Isaiah must also be understood in no other way, in his forty-fifth chapter, saying: "I am the Lord, and there is no other. It is I that created light and darkness: I make peace and evil: yes, I, even I the Lord, do all these things." ^{Isa 45.7} For here he takes evil for war, and he makes it the contrary to peace.

Again, St. Augustine, De Natura Boni contra Manichaeos chap. 28, says: "When we hear that all things are of him, and by him, and in him, we must understand it to be spoken of all the natures that exist naturally. For sins are not of God, because they do not keep nature, but defile it; the holy scriptures diversely testify of these sins, that they are of the will of those who commit them." [1738] This much from St. Augustine.

Nor is it a matter of any great difficulty to answer that sentence of Solomon's, where he says, "God created all things for his own sake; yea, the ungodly against the evil day." ^{Pro 16.4} For we believe that the most just God has appointed a day of affliction, judgment, or punishment, which shall come upon them in due time and season.

iii.384

But though the apostle says, "He has mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardens;" we must not so twist it as to say that God, of necessity, drives any man to sin, and that therefore He is the cause of sin. For the will of God is good and just, and He wills nothing but what is expedient, and not repugnant to nature, and to the word of God. Therefore the prophet cries: "The Lord is just in all his ways, and holy in all his works." Psa 145.

Thus, out of much that may be said, I have picked out a little, and laid it before your eyes, dearly beloved, for you to consider the cause of sin.

We have now come to demonstrate the first parts which were set down in the description of sin at the beginning of this sermon. They are two in number. The first is, "Sin is the natural corruption of mankind;" the second is, "And the action that rises from it, contrary to the law of God." Some truly, in setting down the kinds or differences of sins, very well and advisedly say, "Of sins, one is original, and another actual." I mean to speak of both in order, so far as God shall give me grace.

And first, I will speak of the natural corruption in mankind; that is, of original sin. Now, it is called original sin, because it comes from the first beginning, being derived from our first parents, into us, all by lineal descent and continual course from one to another. For we bring it with us into this life, in our nature, from our mother's womb. ^{Psa 51.5}

There are many definitions for this sin. Though they do not disagree among themselves, yet one is more full and evident than another. Some say, Original sin is the corruption of nature from the first perfectness. Others say, It is the corruption of man's nature, which makes it that we do not truly obey the law of God, and are not without sin. Again; some call it a want, or defect; others call it concupiscence; which might better seem the fruit of original sin, that is, of our corruption. Others call it an inordinateness of appetites, which is left in nature. [1739]

iii.385

Anselm, a late writer, says: "Original sin is the lack of original righteousness." [1740] But this is thought to have been said somewhat too briefly; for the force of sin does not seem to be sufficiently expressed. For our nature is not only void and barren of goodness, but it is also most abundant and fruitful in all evils and naughtiness. Therefore, the definition of Hugo is taken as the better, who says: "Original sin is ignorance in the mind, and concupiscence in the flesh." [1741] Yet this seems to be a far fuller and better definition: "Original sin is the vice or depravation of the whole man, whereby he cannot understand God and His will; but from a perverse judgment of things, perversely acts, and perverts all things." [1742]

And now, among all these definitions, I wish you, dearly beloved, to consider this also: Original sin is the inheritably descending naughtiness or corruption of our nature, which first makes us endangered to the wrath of God, and then brings forth in us those works which the scripture calls "the works of the flesh." Therefore, this original sin is neither a deed, nor a word, nor a thought; but it is a disease, a vice, a depravation, I say, of judgment and concupiscence; or a corruption of the whole man — that is, a corrup0tion of the understanding, will, and all the power of man — out of which, in the end, flow all evil thoughts, naughty words, and wicked deeds.

This sin takes its beginning from Adam; and for that reason, it is called the inheritably descending naughtiness and corruption of our nature. I have already spoken sufficiently concerning the corruption and sin of Adam, out of whom we are all born sinners. I treated the cause of sin;[1743] and later will follow somewhat more of the same argument. So I have no need to repeat anything here. I will therefore now pass on to the rest.

iii.386

The Pelagians denied that this evil of original sin was hereditary; for these are the very words of Pelagius himself: "As without virtue, so we are also born without vice; and before the action of our own will, that alone is in man which God created." [1744] These words of his are somewhat obscure; but Coelestius, the partner of Pelagius, more openly spewed out this poison, and said:

"We did not therefore say that infants are to be baptized into the remission of sins, to the end that we would seem thereby to affirm that sin is ex traduce, or hereditary; which is utterly contrary to the catholic sense: because sin is not born with man, but is afterward put in use by man, because it is declared to be, not the fault of the nature, but of the will." [1745]

Again, Pelagius said this: "That first sin did not hurt the first man only, but all mankind also, his issue and offspring:" but he immediately adds, "not by propagation, but by example;" that is to say, not that "those who came from him drew any vice from him, but because those who sinned afterward, in sinning themselves, imitated the one that sinned first and before them." [1746] This is to be seen in Aurelius Augustinus, De peccato originali contra Pelagium et Coelestium, Lib. ii. cap. 6, 13, and 15.

We therefore must prove by the testimonies of holy scripture, that the evil is hereditary in man; and that original sin is born together with us, that is, that all men are born sinners into the world. The prophet therefore plainly cries, Psalm 51.5, "Behold, I was born in wickedness, and in sin has my mother conceived me."

iii.387

Or as another translation out of the Hebrew says: "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin my mother cherished or warmed me;" [1747] that is to say, sin then immediately clung to me, once I was conceived and nourished in my mother's womb. Now, that undoubtedly happened, not by any vice of matrimony (for the wedlock-bed is holy and undefiled;) but ex traduce,[1748] and by propagation. For Job, in his fourteenth chapter, says manifestly: "Who can make or bring forth a pure or clean thing from that which is unclean? [1749] Nobody undoubtedly is able to do it." ^Job
14.4 There are also many other sayings of that sort in the fifteenth and twenty-fifth chapters of the same book. And Paul, the holy apostle of Christ, in the fifth chapter to the Romans, most evidently says:

"As by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; even so death entered into all men, insomuch as all have sinned. For until the law, sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, over those also who had not sinned with like transgression as did Adam," etc. ^{Rom 5.12-14}

In these words, does the apostle not manifestly show the propagation of sin, by saying, "Sin entered by one man into the world; death entered into all men, insomuch as they have all sinned;" — namely, insomuch as they are all subject to corruption? And, showing that no men either before or after Moses might be excepted, he adds: "Death reigned from Adam to Moses, over those also who had not sinned with the like transgression as did Adam;" that is to say, over those who had not sinned of their own will, as Adam had, but drew original sin from him by propagation. St. Augustine more fully examines [1750] and handles this argument in his first book De peccatorum meritis et remissione, in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters, and the rest as they follow in order.[1751] Again, Paul in the seventh chapter to the Romans, calls this evil the sin that dwells in us,^{Rom 7.17} that is to say, the sin that is begotten and born with us.

iii.388

For he adds, "I am carnal, sold under sin;" and, "I know that in me (that is, my flesh) there dwells no good." And therefore the blessed apostle and evangelist John tells us, that "if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." ^1Joh
1.8 He says very significantly, 'we have,' and not 'we have had,' or 'we shall have;' for by our corrupt nature we have that proper to us. Therefore, it is manifest that the fiction of the Pelagians is false, whereby they affirm that we are born without vice. It is false that only the voluntary action is sin, and not the corruption or depravation which has not yet given birth to the deed. [1752]

And Augustine in one place calls even that voluntary sin, original sin; and that is in two different ways. First, not simply of itself, but in respect to Adam; because being committed by the naughty will of Adam, it is drawn and made hereditary in us. Secondly, because a naughty lust may be named a will.[1753] For Lib. Retract, i. cap. 15, he says: "If any man says that even the very lust is nothing but will, yet such a will as is vicious and subject to sin, he does not need to be challenged: for where the thing is manifest, we must not strive about terms and words. For so it is proved, that without will there is no sin either in deed or in propagation;" [1754] that is, neither actual nor original.[1755] This much from Augustine, who also alleges other sayings like this in his third book, Contra Julianum Pelagianum, chap. 5. [1756] It will be sufficient even without them, to learn by the testimonies of the holy scriptures, that sin is not only a voluntary action, but also a hereditary corruption or depravation that comes by inheritance.

iii.389

Not unlike all of this, is that sentence in Ezekiel, where the Lord says: "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, but every man shall die in his own sin." ^{Eze 18.20} For Adam's fall would do us no harm, if it were not that even from him, there is sprung up in us such a perverseness as is worthy of God's just judgment. But now, since all the inclination, disposition, and desire of our nature, even in a child that is but one day old, is repugnant to the pureness and will of God, which is only good. Therefore, no man is punished for his father, but every one is punished for his own iniquity; and calamities fall even on the youngest babes, whom we see are touched with many afflictions by the holy and just judgment of the most just God.

Neither is their objection any whit stronger, who say that the children of holy parents cannot draw or take any spot from their parents; for they have their lineal descent from the fleshly generation, and not from the spiritual regeneration. The apostle said, "The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: otherwise your children would be unclean; but now they are clean;" ^{1Cor 7.14} yet this is not repugnant to our former allegations. For those children are called holy, not by the prerogative of their birth or generation, as though children were born [1757] holy without any spot or vice at all; but because, being born corrupt by nature, they are made pure by virtue of the covenant and grace, and uncleanness is not imputed to them for Christ's sake, or for the remission of sins which is pronounced in these words: "I will be your God, and the God of your seed after you." For of old, even those children of the seed of Abraham, who were holy and blessed, nonetheless received the sign of circumcision. Now, I pray you, what need did they have for circumcision or purging, if by their birth they had had no uncleanness in them?

Therefore, what you heard just now is utterly false, which Coelestius the Pelagian uttered in these words: "We did not therefore say that infants are to be baptized into the remission of sins, to the end that we should thereby seem to affirm that sin is ex traduce, or hereditary; which is utterly contrary to the catholic sense."

iii.390

For it is catholic and true doctrine, that the children of the Jews were circumcised, not so much because they were partakers of the divine covenant, as because all the antiquity of holy fathers so confessed that in infants, there was something which needed cutting — that is, which needed to be remitted by the grace of God, and not be imputed to them unto death. It is catholic and true doctrine, that the infants of Christians are baptized, not so much because they are the children of God and freely received into the covenant; as because there is in them, even from their birth, something which the Lord washes away by his grace, lest it bring death and damnation upon them. Yes, that cannot be catholic, which so manifestly repugns so many evident places of scripture, which prove that in infants, there is sin by propagation. To confirm this we may add, that St. Augustine in his first book Contra Julianum Pelagianum, cap. 2, gathers together the testimonies of the most excellent learned bishops and doctors in the primitive church, by which he proves that all the ministers of the churches, even from the apostles' time, both acknowledged and openly taught original sin. In that place he cites the testimonies of Irenaeus, Cyprian, Reticius, Olympius, Hilary,[1758] and Ambrose, his father and master in Christian doctrine,[1759] Innocent, Gregory, Basil, and John Chrysostom. And at length he infers this: "Will you now call so great a consent of catholic priests, a conspiracy of naughty men? Do you think that St. Jerome is to be contemned, because he was but a priest, and not a bishop? Being skilful in the Greek, Latin, and Hebrew tongues, and passing from the west to the east church, he lived in holy places and studied the sacred scripture, even to his crone [1760] and crooked age. He read all, or almost all, the works of those who in both parts of the world wrote about ecclesiastical doctrine. And yet, he neither held nor taught otherwise about this point of doctrine." [1761]

iii.391

And again, Augustine says in his third book, De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione, cap. 6:

"Jerome, expounding the prophecy of Jonah, when he came to that place where mention is made that even the little children were chastened with fasting,^Jon
3.5 says: 'It began with the eldest, and came even to the youngest. For there is none without sin; no, not even he which is but one day old, nor he whose grey head has seen many years. For if the stars are not clean in the sight of God, how much more unclean are dust [1762] and putrefying earth, and those who are subjected to the sin of Adam's transgression.'"

To these words of Jerome, Augustine himself annexes this that follows:

"If it were possible that we might easily ask this most learned man, how many teachers of the holy scriptures in both tongues, and how many writers of Christian treatises would he reckon up, since the time that Christ's church was first planted, who themselves have neither thought, nor learned from their predecessors, nor taught their successors, anything other than this doctrine touching original sin! Truly, though I have read nothing so much as he, I do not remember having read any other doctrine of Christians which admits or receives both the testaments, whether they were in the unity of the catholic church, or in schisms and heresies. I do not remember having read any other thing in them, whose writings I could come by touching this matter, if either they followed, or thought that they followed, or would have men believe that they followed, the canonical scriptures." [1763]

iii.392

Augustine teaches in the very beginning that all the saints, by a full consent and agreement in doctrine, most expressly granted and confessed that original sin is even in new-born infants. I think that St. Jerome, not only in Jonah, but also much more evidently in Ezekiel, confesses and affirms original sin. His words are to be seen in Comment. lib. xiv. in cap. 47, ad Ezekielem, and they are verbatim as follows:

"What man can boast that he has a chaste heart? Or to whose mind, by the windows of the eyes or (to use a milder term) the tickling of the mind, does the deadliness of concupiscence not enter in? For the world is set in wickedness; and even from his childhood the heart of man is set to naughtiness; so that not since the very first day of a man's nativity, is his nature free from sin and naughtiness. Whereupon David says in the Psalm: 'For behold, I was conceived in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me;' ^{Psa 51.5} — not in the iniquities of my mother, or in my own sins; but in the iniquities of our mortal state. And therefore the apostle says, 'Death reigned from Adam to Moses, over those also who had not sinned with the like transgression as did Adam.'" [1764]

This much has Jerome. Up to here, we have alleged all these sayings, to the end that we might prove that original sin is the natural or hereditary corruption of man's nature.

iii.393

Let us now see what and how great the hereditary naughtiness or corruption of our nature is, and what power it has, to work in man. Our nature before the fall, as I showed you above, was truly most excellent and pure in our father Adam. But after the fall, by God's just judgment, it became corrupt and utterly nothing. And in that naughtiness, it is derived into all of us who are the posterity and offspring of Adam, by propagation or ex traduce — in sucklings or infants, as well as those of riper years — which both experience and the thing itself evidently declare. For even babes give manifest tokens of evident depravation as soon as they are able to do anything; yes, even before they can perfectly sound one syllable of a whole word.

All our understanding is dull, blunt, gross, and altogether blind in heavenly things. Our judgment in divine matters is perverse and frivolous. For there arise in us the most horrible and absurd thoughts and opinions touching God, his judgments, and wonderful works. Indeed, our whole mind is apt and ready for errors, fables, and our own destruction. And when our judgments are nothing but mere folly, we still prefer them far above God's wisdom, which we esteem but foolishness in comparison to our own conceits and corrupt imaginations.

For Paul did not lie when he said: "The natural man does not perceive the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." ^1Cor
2.14 Now, Paul calls him the natural man, who lives naturally by the vital spirit, and is not regenerate by the Holy Ghost. And since we are all such, we are therefore wholly overcome and governed by philautia, that is, too great a self-love and delight in ourselves. By this, all things that we ourselves work, highly please us. We look very busily to ourselves and our own commodity, while in the meantime we neglect all others; indeed, we rather afflict them. Nor did Plato unadvisedly esteem that vice of self-love, as the very root of every evil.[1765]

iii.394

Furthermore, our whole will is led captive by concupiscence, which infects all that is in man, like a root envenomed with poison. It inclines, draws on, and drives men to things that are carnal, forbidden, and contrary to God, to the end that he may greedily pursue them, put all his delight in them, and content himself with them. Moreover, there is no power or ability in us to do any good: for we are slow, sluggish, and heavy to do good; but we are lively, quick, and ready enough to do any evil or naughtiness. And that I may at last conclude and briefly express the whole force and signification of our hereditary depravation and corruption, I say that this depravation of our nature is nothing else but the blotting of God's image in us. There was in our father Adam, before his fall, the very image and likeness of God. This image, as the apostle expounds it, was a conformity to and participation in God's wisdom, justice, holiness, truth, integrity, innocence, immortality, and eternal felicity. Therefore, what else can the blotting or wiping out of this image be, but original sin; that is, the hatred of God, the ignorance of God, foolishness, distrustfulness, desperation, self-love, unrighteousness, uncleanness, lying, hypocrisy, vanity, corruption, violent injury, wickedness, mortality, and eternal infelicity? This corrupt image and likeness is derived into us all by propagation, according to that saying in the fifth chapter of Genesis: "Adam begat a son in his own similitude and likeness." ^{Gen 5.3} Therefore, as our father Adam was himself corrupted, depraved, and full of calamities, so he has begotten us his sons, likewise corrupt, depraved, and full of miseries. [1766] So that all of us who descend from his impure seed, are born infected with the contagious poison of sin. For from a rotten root, spring rotten branches, which in like manner push their rottenness into the little twigs that shoot out and grow upon them.

And this evil truly, this corruption and this sin, even though it lies hidden in infants, and because of their tender age, it does not break out into any evil deeds — yet notwithstanding, it is a sin. And it is such a sin that truly makes them endangered to God's wrath, and separates them from the fellowship of God. For with the most holy God, who "is a consuming fire," no man can abide, except the one who is unspotted and clean from the filthiness of sins. And Paul says: "All have sinned, and are destitute, or have need, of the glory of God."^{Rom 3.23}

iii.395

This glory of God is the very image of God. And because they are destitute of it, being corrupted with original sin, they are worthily excluded from the fellowship of God. To this place belongs the whole treatise about concupiscence in the fourth sermon of this third Decade. There I taught you that bare concupiscence, which has not yet burst forth into the deed, is a sin; and that too is such a sin that it makes all men subject to the curse of God. For it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not abide in all things that are written in the book of this law." [1767] Therefore, the first effect of original sin is this: it brings wrath, death, and damnation upon even infants, and consequently upon all mankind. So that it may be more firmly settled in every man's mind, without any scruple of doubting, I will make manifest proof of this to you by some store of testimonies out of the scripture, not repeating those places which I have already cited in this sermon, and in the fourth sermon of this third Decade.

The Lord in the gospel says to Nicodemus: "Truly, I say to you, unless a man is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God." And again: "Unless a man is born of water and of the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." ^{Joh 3.3-6} In these words are comprehended two things worthy to be remembered, and very consonant to our present argument. First, none enter into the kingdom of heaven except those who are regenerate from above by the Holy Ghost. Therefore, our first birth tends to death, and not to life; for in our first nativity, we are born to death. The second is, "That which is born of flesh is flesh." Therefore, in our first nativity we are all born flesh. But touching the disposition of the flesh and the force of it, the apostle says: "The fleshly mind is enmity against God: for it is not obedient to the law of God, neither can be." ^{Rom 8.7} Therefore, that fleshly birth engendered us, not the friends and sons of God, but His enemies; and consequently, it makes us endangered to the wrath of God.

iii.396

In his second chapter to the Ephesians, Paul says: "We were by nature the sons of wrath, even as other." ^{Eph 2.3} In these words, he pronounces that all men are damned. For all those who are damned, or are worthy of eternal death, and all those with whom God has good cause to be offended, he calls the "sons of wrath," in the proper phrase of Hebrew speech. For the wrath of God signifies the punishment which is laid upon us by the just judgment of God. And the one who is adjudged or appointed to be killed, is called the child of death. So also is "the son of perdition," etc. ^Joh
17.12 Now, mark that he calls us all the sons of wrath, that is, the subjects of pain and damnation by nature, in birth from our mother's womb. But whatever is naturally in all men, is original. Therefore, original sin makes us the sons of wrath; that is, for our original corruption, we are all made subject to death and utter damnation. This place of Paul is worthy to be remembered for the proof of this argument.

The same apostle in the first chapter to the Colossians says: "God has delivered us from the power of darkness, and has translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son." ^Col
1.13 Now if we are translated into the kingdom of the Son of God, then we were once in the kingdom of the devil. And to this place belong very many testimonies of the same apostle in the fifth chapter of his Epistle to the Romans: "By one man's sin, many are dead." Again; "By one that sinned came death; for judgment came by one unto condemnation." Again; "For the sin of one death reigned by the means of one." And again; "By the sin of one, sin came upon all men unto condemnation." Finally, original sin is expressly called sin by David and Paul. Therefore, death is due to original sin; for "the reward of sin is death." ^{Rom 6.23}

We therefore conclude that infants bring damnation with them into this world, even from their mothers' wombs, because they bring a corrupt nature with them. And therefore, they do not perish by any others' fault, but by their own fault and naughtiness. For although St. Augustine in one place seems to call this sin Peccatum alienum, that is, another's sin (so that he may thereby show how it is derived from another into us by propagation), yet he confesses that it is in very deed and truly proper to all and every one of us.[1768]

iii.397

And although it is so, that for lack of age in a newborn babe this disease has not already brought forth the fruit of his iniquity; yet notwithstanding, the whole nature of the babe is nothing but filthy corruption, and a certain seed of sin and wickedness, which cannot help but be abominable to the Lord: for God hates all manner of uncleanness.[1769]

This agrees with that sentence of Paul, where he says: "Where there is no law, there is no transgression." ^{Rom 4.15} For the apostle does not absolutely say that the sin or transgression (which is indeed sin in the sight of God) is not sin; rather he refers to the estimation of men, how they repute it. For before sin appears and is opened to them by the law, men do not repute or think of sin as it should indeed be esteemed. In another place Paul says: "Sin without the law was once dead:" and, "I once lived without law; but when the law came, sin revived." ^{Rom 7.8-9} If it is so, that sin is now revived, then it lived before the law, before it was stirred up by the law, even if it did not display its strength and force as living then, as it does now. To this also is to be added that saying of Paul: "Sin was in the world even to the law; but sin is not imputed when there is no law." ^{Rom 5.13} Look here, sin was in the world before the law, but it was not imputed — not because God did not impute it, but because men do not impute it to themselves. Fire lies hidden under cinders; it is fire indeed, but because it does not cast a flame or light of itself, it is not thought to be fire.

iii.398

And for that reason, the learned and godly man of famous memory, Ulderick Zwingli,[1770] diligently distinguished between sin and disease or infirmity. He once had occasion to dispute about original sin, which he chose to call a disease rather than sin, because all men understand the term sin as the naughty act committed by our own consent and will against the law of God. But by the term disease or sickness they understand a certain corruption and depravation of the nature that was created good, and the miserable condition of bondage into which it is brought — even as we also read [1771] before, that Augustine called this original sin peccatum alienum, another's sin. Thereby he might give us to understand that it is hereditary, and that it descends from others into us; and yet he did not deny that it is proper to every one of us. In like manner, Zwingli did not deny original sin, as some falsely slandered him. He did not think that by itself it is unhurtful to infants; but it is made harmless to them so far as it is [healed] by the grace of God, through the blood of Jesus Christ, in the virtue of God's promise and covenant.[1772] His mind was to make a keen difference between actual and original sins.[1773]

iii.399

For in rendering an account of his faith in the council held at Augusta,[1774] the year of our Lord 1530, he said:

"I acknowledge that original sin is, by condition and contagion, born in and with all those who are begotten by the act of a man and a woman; and I know that we are the sons of wrath. Nor am I in any way against this disease and condition being called sin, as Paul terms it. Indeed, it is such a sin that all those who are born in it, are the enemies and adversaries of God Almighty. For the condition of their birth draws them to it, and not the committing of wickedness, except in so far as our first parent committed it. The very true cause of our disloyalty and death, therefore, is the crime and wickedness which Adam committed; and that in very deed is sin: and this sin which clings to us, is indeed a disease and condition, yes, it is a necessity of dying;" [1775]

And so forth as follows; for up to here I have repeated his very words.

There now remains the other effect of original sin for me to expound. It breaks out and produces in us those works that the scriptures call the works of the flesh; even like an oven set on fire casts out flames and sparks; or as a fountain that ever springs, pours out water in great abundance. There is no quietness in the nature of man: for covetousness with filthy lust arises in it; ambition clings to it; anger invades it; pride puffs it up and causes it to swell; drunkenness delights it; and envy torments both yourself and others. Therefore, the Lord says in the gospel: "Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, whoredoms, thefts, false witness-bearings, and evil speakings." ^{Mat 15.19}

iii.400

Again, in the fifth chapter to the Galatians, Paul reckons up no small number of the works of the flesh; even as he does in the first and third chapters of his epistle to the Romans. In the fourth chapter to the Ephesians he very properly describes those works of the flesh, which spring out of the natural corruption of all those who are not regenerate by the Holy Ghost. "This I say and testify to you,[1776] that from now on, you no longer walk as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind; darkened in cogitation, being alienated from the life of God by the ignorance that is in them, by the blindness of their hearts: which being past feeling have given themselves over to wantonness, to work all uncleanness with greediness." ^{Eph 4.17-19} Though it is only a little, this shall suffice for this place; for I will more largely prosecute it in the treatise about actual sin. I will shortly handle that, as soon as I have admonished you that, thus far, I have not without good cause spoken of the cause of original sin in many words — that is, about man's depravation and the corruption of all his strength.

For as the veins of pure doctrine are opened in these, so are placed in them the foundations of our faith and whole belief. For if there is no original sin, then is there no grace: or if there is any grace, it will have nothing to work in us. If our own strength is whole and sound, then we have no need for any physician. Therefore, the Son of God came into the world in vain;[1777] for then men would be saved by their own strength and ability: and the foundation of our faith would be quite turned upside down. Therefore, St. Augustine is very vehement in this cause. I will recite his golden words to you, dearly beloved, out of his second book, De Originali Peccato contra Pelagium et Coelestium. In the twenty-third and twenty-fourth chapters I find written as follows:

"There is a great difference between these questions which are thought to be beside the articles of faith, and those in which (keeping sound the faith by which we are Christians) it is either not known what is true, and so the definitive sentence is suspended; or else the truth is guessed at by human and unassured suspicion, and it is other than the thing is in fact. For example, when it is demanded what paradise is like, and where it is, and where God placed man whom he had made from the dust of the earth — when notwithstanding these questions, Christian faith does not doubt that there is a paradise."

iii.401

And after reciting a few more such questions, he says at last:

"Who may not perceive in these and similar varied and countless questions, both that many things are unknown without any peril to Christian faith, and also that men err in some points without any crime of heretical doctrine? Such questions pertain either to the most secret works of God, or to the darkest and most intricate places of the holy scriptures, which are hard to comprehend or define in any certain order.

But concerning the two men, mark this: by the one we are sold under sin, and by the other we are redeemed from sin; by the one we are cast headlong into death, and by the other we are made free unto life — because that first man in himself destroyed us by doing his own will and not the will of the One who made him; but this second man in himself has saved us by doing not his own will, but the will of the One who sent him. Therefore, Christian faith properly consists in the consideration of these two men. For there is one God and one Mediator between God and Man, the man Christ Jesus, because there is no other name under heaven given to men in which they must be saved;^{Act 4.12} and God has appointed all men to trust in him, raising him up from death to life. Therefore, Christian verity does not doubt that without this faith — that is, without faith in the only Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus; without belief, I say, in his resurrection which God has prescribed to men, which cannot truly be believed without belief in his incarnation and death; without faith, therefore, in the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ — none of the ancient just men could be cleansed and justified by God from their sins. This is true whether they were in the number of those just men whom the holy scripture mentions; or in the number of those just men whom the scripture does not name, and yet are believed to have lived either before the deluge, or between the deluge and the law, or in the actual time of the law; not only among the children of Israel, as the prophets were, but also outside that people, as Job was. For their hearts were cleansed by the same faith in the Mediator; and charity was poured into them by the same Holy Spirit, who breathes where he wishes — Christ not chasing merits, but working the very merits themselves.

iii.402

For God's grace will not exist by any means, unless it is free by all means. Therefore, even though death reigned from Adam to Moses, the law given by Moses could not overcome it; for there was no such law given that could quicken, but such a law whose office was to show that the dead, for whom the quickening of grace was necessary, were not only overthrown by the propagation and dominion of sin, but they were also condemned by the hidden [1778] transgression of the law itself. It was not that everyone should perish who then understood grace in the mercy of God, but that everyone, being appointed to punishment through the dominion of death, and convinced of the transgression of the law, should seek the help of God; that where sin abounded, grace might more abound, which alone delivers us from the body of this death. Therefore, even though the law given by Moses could not rid any man from the kingdom of death, yet in the very time of the law, the men of God were not under the terrifying, convincing, and punishing law, but under the delectable, saving, and delivering grace. There were some among them who said, 'I was conceived in iniquity, and in sin my mother has fed me in her womb.'" [1779]

And so forth; for up to here I have cited the very words of St. Augustine.

iii.403

I have thus far spoken of original sin, of the native and hereditary corruption of our nature, which is the first part in the definition of sin. Here follows now the second part; namely, the very action which arises from that corruption, the actual sin, I say, which is called ab actu, that is, an act or deed. For that corruption which is born together with and is hereditary in us, does not always lie hidden; but it works outwardly and shows itself, and at last brings forth an imp [1780] of her own kind and nature. This imp is actual sin; therefore, we define actual sin to be an action, or work, or fruit, of our corrupt and naughty nature, expressing itself in thoughts, words, and works against the law of God, and thereby deserving the wrath of God.

iii.404

So then, the cause of actual sin is known to be the very corruption of mankind, which shows itself through concupiscence and evil affections.[1781] Affections entice the will; and the will, being helped by the other faculties in man that work together with it, finishes actual sin. And so that you may more clearly perceive what I say, I wish you to note that our mind has two parts: the understanding, i.e., the reason or judgment; and the will, or appetite. In the reason are the laws of nature, to which must be added the preaching, or reading, or knowledge of God's word. And now, there are two especial causes of good works in man; namely, sound judgment well-framed by the word of God, and a will that consents to and obeys it. And yet, notwithstanding, there is principally required the coming of the Holy Ghost from heaven, to illuminate the mind and move forward the will. Even so, we may properly say that actual sin is finished when anything is committed against the law of God, of a set purpose, with advised judgment and the consent of our will. And yet, other outward causes, both visible and invisible, many times happen to these. For evil spirits move men, and evil men [1782] move men, and there are other infinite examples of corruption that are in the world. Hope, fear, and weakness, also move men. Augustine says, Quaest. in Exodum xxix.: "The beginning of vice is in the will of man: but the hearts of men are moved by various accidental causes, now this, now that. Sometimes the causes are the same; the difference is in the manner and order, according to each one's proper qualities, which arise from each individual will." [1783] Again, of the seventy-ninth psalm he says:

"There are two things that work all sins in mortal men: desire and fear. Consider, examine, and ask your hearts, search your consciences, and see if any sins can occur except by desiring, or else by fearing. You are promised, if you sin, to be given such a reward as you delight in; and for your desire of that gift, you crack your conscience, and commit sin.

iii.405

And again, on the other side, though perhaps you would not be seduced with gifts, yet being terrified with threatenings, for dread of what you fear, you commit the iniquity that you otherwise would not. For example, some man or other would corrupt you with gifts to bear false witness. You quickly turned yourself to God, and said in your heart, What does it advantage a man, if he gains the whole world, and suffers the loss of his own soul? I will not be hired with gifts, to lose my soul for the gain of money. Thereupon, the one who enticed you before, now turns to terrifying you; and because his gifts failed to hire you, he begins to threaten you with damage, banishment, wounds, and death. In such a case, now, if greediness could not cause you to sin, yet fear perhaps might." [1784]

Augustine again, in his book De Sermone Domini in Monte, says:

"There are three things by which sin is accomplished: suggestion, desire, and consent. Suggestion is wrought by the memory, or the senses of the body; such as when we see, hear, smell, taste, or touch anything. Now, if we are delighted to have it, unlawful delight must be restrained. For example, when we fast, if our appetite arises at the sight of food, it is not done without desire; yet we must not give our consent to that desire, but suppress it with the power of reason. For if the consent is given, then the sin is accomplished. These three things correspond to the circumstances of the history written in Genesis. So that the suggestion was made by the serpent; the desire was in the carnal appetite in Eve; and full consent appeared in the reason, as it did in Adam — which, being finished, man was expelled out of paradise; that is, out of the blessed light of righteousness, into death and damnation." [1785]

This much says Augustine touching the cause of sin.

iii.406

But here we must especially note in the definition of actual sin, the very property or difference by which this action is discerned from all other actions, and by which the most proper note of sin is made manifest. This action, therefore, just as all other sins do, directly tends against God's law. But in my former sermons, I have declared at large what the law of God is. Truly, it is none other than the very will of God. Now the will of God is that man should be like His own image; that is, that he should be holy, innocent, and so consequently saved.

God expressed this will of his, first by the law of nature, then by the law which he wrote on two tablets of stone, and lastly by the preaching of the holy gospel. Now those three tend to one end: namely, that man should be holy, innocent, and so consequently saved. And whatever things are done by men, either in thought, word, or deed, against that holy law of God, they both are, and are called, actual sins. Therefore, in judging or esteeming men's sins, only the law of God must be looked to; for the things that are not contrary to God's law are not sins. Nor does any man have authority to make new laws, for the transgressing of which, men should be accounted sinners. That glory belongs to God alone, to whom David cries: "To you alone have I sinned, and against you have I wrought wickedness." ^Psa
51.4

iii.407

Nor is it any part of our office to take it upon ourselves, by our own judgments, to determine which are the smallest and which are the greatest sins. For which of us would think that it is sin to say to our brother, "You fool?" ^{Mat 5.22}And yet in the gospel, the Lord pronounces it to be sin. In the same gospel he also affirms that we "shall give an account for every idle word at the latter day of judgment."^{Mat 12.36} Very rightly, therefore, St. Augustine says in his second book, De Bapt. contra Donatistas, capit. 6:

"In esteeming sins, let us not bring in deceitful balances in which to weigh both what we wish, and as we wish, according to our own mind and fantasy, saying, 'This is heavy, and that is light.' But let us bring in the weights of God's holy scriptures, as out of the secret treasuries of the Lord. And let us weigh by them what is heavy, and what is light — no, rather, let us not weigh them, but acknowledge and so accept them as they are weighed by the Lord." August. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 80. col. 3. Par. 1531.

Though this might seem to sufficiently declare the nature of actual sin, yet we will consider more at large the sundry sorts or kinds and differences of sins. The Stoics were of the opinion that all sins were equal. Perhaps Jovinian [1786] was following them (as the patriarchs of heresies are said by Tertullian to be philosophers [1787]), of whom it is written that he affirmed this; as extant in St. Augustine's catalogue of heretics.[1788] The holy scripture teaches us that God is just. From this we conclude that all sins are not therefore equal; for we see that God, as he is a just judge, punishes some sins more sharply than others.

408

For in his gospel the Lord says: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees; hypocrites! who devour widows' houses under the pretence of long prayer: therefore you shall receive the greater damnation." ^{Mat 23.14} And again; "It will be easier," says the Lord, "for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for the city" that rejects the preaching of the gospel.^{Mat 10.15} Likewise in the eleventh chapter of Matthew he says: "It shall be easier for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment, than for you." ^{Mat 11.22} To Pilate also he said: "The man that delivered me to you has more sin." ^{Joh 19.11} Again: "The servant that knew his master's will, and did not prepare himself, nor do according to his will, will be beaten with many stripes. But he that did not know, and committed things worthy of stripes, will be beaten with few stripes." ^{Luk 12.47-48}

To proceed now, sins arise by steps, and they increase by circumstances. For first, there is a hidden sin, contained in the very affection or desire of man. But I already told you that affections and desires are of two sorts: namely, natural affections, which are not repugnant to the law of God (of this sort are the love of children, parents, and wife, and the desire for food, drink, and sleep). Although I know and do not deny that sometimes those affections are denied with the original spot. Again, there are carnal desires or affections in men, which are directly contrary to the will of God. Those affections are nourished and increase by vain thoughts and carnal delights increasing in your bosom; and at last they break out into the sin of the mouth, and yes, after that, to the deed or the actual sin itself. For example: you lust after another man's wife, and settle the lust in the bottom of your heart, still delighting yourself with vain cogitations as you call to mind her surpassing beauty and the lines of her body. By your frequent and vehement imagination, you both delight and set yourself on fire; and not being content with this alone, you do not cease to solicit her, whom you love, with words and writings to spot her chastity. And if occasion serves you, you defile her by your deed, and you also repeat the sin which you once committed; and lastly, laying aside the fear of God's plague and the shame of the world, you frequent it daily, and openly use it. Do you see here, by this example, how one and the same sin increases by degrees, and requires a still sharper punishment, according to the greatness and enormity of the crime?

iii.409

Truly, the Lord confirms this in the gospel of St. Matthew, and says: "You have heard how it was said to them of old, you shall not kill: Whoever kills shall be in danger of judgment. But I say to you, That whoever is angry with his brother unadvisedly shall be in danger of judgment: and whoever says to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of a council: but whoever says, You fool, shall be in danger of hell-fire." ^{Mat 5.21-22} In these words of the Lord, you hear first the differences between sins such as anger — the tokens of angry minds — and open scoldings, which for the most part end in open fights; and then you hear that as the sin increases, so the greatness and sharpness of the punishment is still augmented. It was not therefore an unapt or silly distinction that they made in actual sin, who said that there is one sin of the thought, another of the mouth, and another of the deed. These they again divided into certain kinds and sorts, reducing them again partly into Scelera, and partly into Delicta.

Scelera are those heinous crimes which are conceived and committed by set purpose and pretended malice. Of this sort are those especially which are called the crying sins, such as murder, usury, oppression of the fatherless and widows, sodomy, and withholding the hire of the needy labourer. For touching murder, the voice of the Lord in Genesis says: "The voice of your brother's blood cries to me." ^Gen
4.10 And in the twenty-second chapter of Exodus he says: "If you vex the fatherless and widows, and they cry to me, I will hear them and slay you." ^{Exo 22.22-23} The word of God with bitter quips, bates usury and utterly condemns it. The sin of the Sodomites ascended up to heaven, requiring vengeance to light upon the villainous beasts. And James the apostle says: "Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped your fields, which you have kept back by fraud, cries out; and the cries of those who have reaped have entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth." ^{Jas 5.4} To these sins, other men also annex those seven principal vices of pride or vain-glory, anger, envy, sloth, covetousness, gluttony, and lechery. Yes, they make these the seeds and first beginnings of all sins and wickedness; and therefore they call them the principal sins; as seen in the Sentences of Peter Lombard.[1789]

iii.410

Moreover they call those sins delicta, which are committed from infirmity or unwittingly; namely, when the good is forsaken, and duty to God or man is neglected, by a certain kind of sluggishness; perhaps to be numbered among these are the sin of ignorance, the sin called alienum, and the sin of unwillingness; although, even these are oftentimes made both heinous crimes and detestable offences.

Ignorance is said to be of two sorts: the one is natural and true ignorance, which springs from original sin; the other is affected or counterfeit, which rises from a set purpose and pretended malice. The natural ignorance is a disease, a fault, and a sin; because it springs from a poisoned origin, and it is a work of darkness, as it appeared above by the testimony of the apostle St. Paul.[1790] Truly St. Augustine in his third book De Libero Arbitrio, cap. 19, says:

"That which everyone by ignorance does not do rightly, and that which he cannot do though he wills rightly, are therefore called sins, because they have their beginning in the sin of free-will. For that precedent deserved to have such consequents. For we call the tongue, not only that member which moves in the mouth as we speak, but even that which follows upon the moving of that member: namely, the form and tenour of words which the tongue utters. According to this figure of speech, we say that there are diverse tongues in a man, meaning the Greek and Latin tongues. Even so, we not only call that sin, which is properly called sin (for it is committed wittingly of a free will), but also that which follows, upon its punishment." [1791] I have said somewhat about this before.

iii.411

Others cloak their ignorance with that saying of the Lord in the gospel: "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have a cloak for their sin," ^{Joh 15.22} or they would have had no sin. For from this they infer that those to whom nothing has been preached are therefore free from blame and accusation of sin. But the Lord did not say so. For first, he spoke of their pretended colour,[1792] and not of their innocence; and every pretence is not just and lawful. He said, I confess, "they would have had no sin:" but he adds immediately, "Now have they nothing to cloak their sin with." Secondly, he does not universally acquit the ignorant from all kinds of sin, but only from the sin of rebellion. For St. Augustine says upon John: "They do not have an excuse for every sin, but only for this: that they did not believe in Christ, because he did not come to them. For all who have neither heard nor do hear, may have this excuse; but they cannot escape condemnation. For those who have sinned without law, shall perish without law." [1793] And Paul also, in the first epistle to Timothy, first chapter, says: "I thank Him because he has counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry — who before was a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and an oppressor. Yet I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly, in unbelief." ^{1Tim 1.13} Look, here the apostle says that he obtained mercy because he sinned through ignorance: this ignorance he derives of unbelief, and he attributes to it the most filthy fruits.

iii.412

Furthermore we call it false and counterfeit ignorance, when out of malice it is feigned by obstinate and stubborn people. It is as if, when a thing displeases you, you say that you do not understand it; or when you may understand it, you will not. Such is the ignorance that was in the Jews, the professed enemies of God's grace in Christ.[1794] For Paul says: "I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to set up their own, they were not subject to the righteousness of God." ^Rom
10.2-3 For the Lord said to the Pharisees in the gospel, when they demanded to know if they were blinded also; "If you were blind, you would have no sin: but now you say, We see; therefore your sin abides." ^Joh
9.40-41

The sins called aliena are not those which we ourselves commit, but those which other men commit, yet not without us; namely, while we allow, help forward, persuade, command, wink at, give occasion to, or do not resist or challenge them when we may. The apostle Paul forbids Timothy to lay hands on any man hastily, nor to share in other men's sins.^1Tim
5.22 Therefore, to give an unfit man [church] orders, and place him in the ecclesiastical ministry, is that kind of sin which we call another's sin. For whatever unseemliness is committed against God and his church by the ignorance of the man whom you have so ordained, is worthily imputed to you. Those sin another's sin, who offer violence, and by torments and threats, compel men to deny the truth, or to commit some heinous offence. For the denial of the truth is peccatum alienum, another's sin, to the one who compels the denier to renounce it. And thus to that man, his own sin, in respect to himself, is impiety, tyranny, sacrilege, and murder, for causing the other to renounce the truth.

Here, by the way, we are well admonished that some sins are willful, and some are unwillful or enforced.[1795]

They call that an unwilful sin, which is committed either by another man's enforcing, or else by our own ignorance. Therefore, that which is done neither by compulsion, nor by ignorance, is concluded to be the voluntary or willful sin.

Again, they make two sorts of enforced sin; one of which they call absolute, the other conditional. Now they think that the absolute violent sin is when it does not lie in us either to do or not to do something, but when it comes from some other man, without the consent of the one to whom the violence is offered.

iii.413

It is as if the wind drove us to someplace unlooked for; or if the king's officers by force compel your hands to offer incense to idols, while you resist to your power, and deny it so far as you can. In such a case, they acquit the man so compelled, from all blame, punishment, and reproach.[1796] Now, touching the second kind of violent sin, which they call conditional, they think that it rises from sundry causes. But that we may not stick too long upon this point, we simply say that the unwilful or violent sin either has, or has not, the consent of the one who is compelled. If he gives his consent, as for example, either to renouncing the evangelical truth which he has previously professed, or to committing other grievous and horrible crimes, then the uncompelled man is not void of blame. For neither the fear of death, nor torments, can be an excuse for him. Choose death rather than deny the truth, commit any heinous crime, or be compelled to consent to a wicked and horrible sin.[1797] If you choose to die rather than do a filthy deed, the tyrant will not enforce or compel you against your will. He may indeed kill you; but he is not able to compel you to do evil against your will; for by dying, you confess the truth; and by dying, you declare that while you live, you will not do that which they exact from you. And by that means, they neither overcome nor compel you; but they are themselves overcome and compelled to see and test that which grieves them sorely. Antiochus Epiphanes did what he might to have polluted the holy bodies of the Maccabees with the use of unclean and forbidden meat. But choosing to die rather than be defiled by living, they overcame the tyrant by dying, and could not be compelled. And truly, it is a thing received and approved among all professors of sound religion, that death and all extremities whatever, must sooner be tasted than committing anything which by nature is filthy and repugnant to religion.

414

To proceed now; if consent is not given, but mere and unavoidable violence is offered to a godly man (here we distinguish between the one who yields to do wickedness upon compulsion, and the one who cannot be brought to it by compulsion), that violence does not spot his uncorrupt and holy mind. For example; if a godly man, having his feet bound and arms fast pinioned, is brought into an idol temple by force, and compelled to be present at their detestable sacrifice; or if an unspotted virgin or honest matron is villainously abused in the wars or barbarous broils, without consent to the deed, and has no leave to die untouched rather than be so indecently handled, assure yourselves, she is unspotted before the face of God. For St. Augustine very wisely said: "Not to suffer unjustly, but to do unjustly, is sin before God." [1798] Lib. de Libero Arbitrio, in. cap. 16. Again, De Mendacio ad Consentium, cap. 7, he says: "What the body violently suffers, where lust did not go before, should be called vexation rather than corruption. Or if all vexation is corruption, yet all corruption is not filthy; but only that corruption which lust has procured, or to which lust has consented." [1799] Again, in his first book De Civitate Dei, capit. 18, he says: "Where the purpose of the mind remains constant by which the body is sanctified, the offered violence of another's lust does not take the purposed holiness from the body, which the constant perseverance of the party's own chastity still retains." [1800] He has much more like this in the same place, and also in the sixteenth, nineteenth, and twenty-eighth chapters of the same book, etc.

So also, we must think the best of the unwilful death of men who are beside their wits, who kill themselves in their madness. For otherwise, it cannot be found in the canonical books of holy scripture that God either gave leave or commandment to us mortal men to kill ourselves, to thereby obtain immortality the sooner, or to avoid imminent evil.

iii.415

For it must be understood that we are forbidden to do so by the law which says, "You shall not kill:" namely, since he does not add, "your neighbour," as he did in another precept where he forbids us to bear false witness. [Because he does not name your neighbour in that precept, he includes yourself also.] [1801] Therefore, the doctrine of Seneca is to be utterly condemned, which counsels men in misery to despatch themselves, that their misery may be ended by death.[1802] And St. Augustine, disputing against those who therefore murder themselves because they will not be subject to other men's filthy lusts,[1803] says this:

"If it is a detestable crime and a damnable sin for a man to murder himself, as the truth manifestly cries that it is. Who is so mad as to say, Let us sin now, lest we happen to sin later; let us commit murder now, lest perhaps we fall into adultery later? If iniquity has the upper hand so far that, not innocence but mischief is most regarded, then is it not better by living, to hazard the chance of an uncertain defloration in the future, than by dying, to commit a certain murder in the present? Is it not far better in such extreme times of calamity to commit a fault that may be forgiven by repentance, than to do such a sin by which no time is left to repent? I have said this because of those willful men and women who, to avoid not another's sin but their own, lest under another's lust they might consent to their own lust being stirred up, think they should rid themselves of it by shortening their lives. But far be it from a Christian mind, which trusts in our God, and with a settled hope stays on Him as his surest aid; far be it, I say, from such a mind to yield to any pleasures of the flesh so as to consent to filthiness. But if the concupiscent disobedience which yet dwells in our mortal members, is stirred up or moved against the law of our will, by a law of her own, then how much more is it without blame in the body of one who does not consent, if it is without blame in the body of one who sleeps!" [1804] This much out of Augustine. We now return to our purpose.

iii.416

To proceed, therefore: they divide actual sins into hidden or private sins, and into manifest or public sins. Hidden sins are not those which are hidden from men, and known to none but God; hypocrisy and the depravation of man's disposition are of this sort. Rather, they are those which are not utterly without witnesses, even though they are not openly known and made manifest to all men. For on the other side, manifest and public sins are committed with the knowledge and offence of the whole church. And of the two, these public ones truly are the greater, and the others the lighter, because these touch the church and procure the offence of many men. The apostle touches upon these in the fifth chapter of first Timothy.

But the most vulgar and apt distinction of actual sin, which in a way contains in itself all the other kinds and parts of it, is that which is called either mortal or venial sin.[1805] They think that mortal sin is every sin which is committed by an unfaithful person; and that venial sin is every sin that is done by a faithful man.

iii.417

I simply and according to the scriptures suppose that all the sins of men are mortal; for they are done against the law or will of God. And death is due to sins, for the prophet cries: "The soul that sins shall die;" ^{Eze 18.20} and the apostle says: "The reward of sin is death." ^{Rom 6.23} Yes, and deadly sins take the name of death. To this, now, belong these testimonies of the apostle: "This you know, that every fornicator, or unclean person, covetous person, which is a worshipper of idols, has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God." [1806] The same sentence, being again repeated in the fifth chapter to the Ephesians, is again found in the fifth chapter to the Galatians, and the fifth and sixth chapters of first Corinthians.

But the sins which are mortal by their own nature, are made venial through grace in the faith of Jesus Christ; because they are forgiven through Christ by God's great favour and mercy. And therefore, the apostle in the sixth chapter to the Romans did not say, "Let not sin be in your mortal body; but, "Let not sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it through its lusts." And again; "There is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk after the flesh, but after the spirit." And again; "Brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to walk after the flesh. For if you live after the flesh, you shall die: but if by the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live." [1807] Therefore, there is always sin in our body so long as we live; but by grace it is not imputed unto death. And those to whom it is not imputed, by all means endeavour to walk after the spirit, and not after the flesh; and yet they very often slip and fall. These falls and slips are nevertheless counted sins, together with that infirmity of mortal men — I mean, they are pardonable sins, and not to be punished eternally.

Now, that sin which is called the sin against the Holy Ghost, ^{Mat 12.31} is especially referred to mortal sins; some suppose, not without cause, that is it most properly called mortal sin. I will speak of this once I have somewhat briefly answered certain questions that depend on this argument.

iii.418

First of all, it is demanded here, Whether that sin or disease which remains in infants after baptism, is sin indeed? [1808] Now, it is manifest that concupiscence remains in those who are baptized; and that concupiscence is sin; and therefore that sin remains in those who are baptized. This sin, notwithstanding, is not imputed to them through the grace of God in the merit of Jesus Christ. So St. Augustine resolved this knot in the first book De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione, cap. 39, where he says:

"In infants truly, it is so wrought by the grace of God, through the baptism of Him who came in the likeness of sinful flesh, that the flesh of sin should be made void. And yet it is not made void in such a way that the concupiscence which is spread and bred in the flesh while it lives, should suddenly be consumed, vanish away, and not be — but that it should not hurt the one, now being dead, in whom it existed even at his birth. For it is not given in baptism to those of more years,[1809] that the law of sin which is in their members, and which is contrary to the law of their mind, should be utterly extinguished and not exist at all — but that all the evil (whatever is said, done, or thought by man when he served that concupiscence with his captive mind) should be utterly wiped out, and so reputed as though it had never been done." [1810] This much has Augustine.

Another question is, Whether those works that the Gentiles do, which have a show of virtue and goodness, are sins, or good works? It is assuredly true, that God had his elect even among the Gentiles. Now, however many were among them, were not without the Holy Ghost and faith. Therefore, their works which were wrought by faith were good works, and not sins. For in the Acts of the Apostles, it is mentioned that the prayers and alms-deeds of Cornelius the centurion, were held in remembrance before God; and he is said to have been a devout man and God-fearing. ^{Act 10.2, 4} From this, I infer that he was faithful; and afterward, his faith was made fully perfect, and the gift of the Holy Ghost was more plenteously bestowed on him.

iii.419

Moreover, the worthy deeds of the heathens are not to be despised nor utterly contemned. For as they were not altogether done without God, they much availed to preserving and restoring the tranquility of kingdoms and commonweals. And therefore, the most just Lord enriched certain excellent men and commonweals with many and ample temporal gifts; for he bestowed riches, victories, and abundant glory upon the Greeks and many Roman princes; and truly, civil justice and public tranquility was held in great estimation among many of them. Others received infinite rewards because they constantly and manfully executed the just judgments of God on the wicked rebels and enemies of God. Nor is it to be doubted that the Lord granted that invincible power to the Roman empire under Octavius Augustus and other Roman princes, to the end that by their strength He might break and bring down the invincible malice of the Jewish people, and so revenge by the Romans the blood of his Son, his holy prophets, and blessed apostles, which had been shed by those furious and blasphemous beasts. Note here, that immediately after the subversion of Jerusalem, the Roman empire began to decline. Now let us return to the matter again.

Lastly they demand, Whether the good works of the saints and faithful ones are sins or not? Truly, if you respect our corruption and infirmity, then all our works are sins, because they are the works of those who are not without filthy spots; and therefore the works which are wrought by us cannot be so perfect as otherwise they ought to be in the sight of God. And yet the very same works, for faith's sake in us, and because we are received into the grace of God, are wrought by us who are now the sons of God by grace; therefore, they both are indeed and are also called good. For to this end tends that saying of the apostle: "With the mind I, even I, serve the law of God; but with the flesh, the law of sin." ^{Rom 7.25} Look here, one and the same apostle, being regenerate, retains in himself two differing dispositions; so that his very work, working in differing respects, is both sin and a good work also. For inasmuch as he serves God in his mind, he does a good work; but insomuch as he again serves the law of the flesh, his work is not without spot in that.

iii.420

For a little before in the seventh chapter, he said: "I find, when I would do good, that evil (Gr. parakeitai parakeitai) is present with, by, and in me." This evil undoubtedly, always making a show of itself in all our words, works, and thoughts, causes the work which is done by us when we are regenerate, to be not as pure as God's justice expects it should be. Only by the grace and mercy of God, therefore, is it reputed and esteemed as pure.

To this now belongs that sentence of our Lord in the gospel of St. John, where he says: "He that is washed has no need to wash, except his feet; but he is clean every whit." ^Joh
13.10 For if he is clean every whit, what need does he have to wash his feet? But if his feet must be washed, how then is he clean every whit? And yet these sayings are not contradictory — just as that saying is not contradictory, where we say that good works are sins. For, according to the plentifulness and imputation of God's grace and mercy, we are clean every whit, being thoroughly purged from all our sins, so that they shall not condemn us. And yet, because the law of sin is always in us, which shows itself in us so long as we live, our feet (that is, those evil motions and naughty lusts of ours) must therefore be resisted and repressed according to our power. Finally, we must acknowledge that we ourselves and our very works are never without an imperfection; and consequently, all our works and we ourselves stand in need of the grace of God. These questions being thus resolved, we have now come to expound the sin against the Holy Ghost.

The sin against the Holy Ghost is a perpetual blaspheming of the revealed and known truth; namely, when against our conscience, falsely revolting from the known truth without intermission, we both inveigh and rail against it. For blasphemy is the evil speech or spiteful taunts with which we inveigh against or slander any man, by broadcasting wicked and detestable statements against him, by which his credit and estimation is either cracked or utterly disgraced.

iii.421

We therefore blaspheme the magistrates, our elders, and other good men, when we not only withdraw our obedience and the honour due them, but we also bait them with reproachful words, not ceasing to call them tyrants, blood-suckers, wicked heads, and odious guides.[1811] But we especially blaspheme God when we detract from his glory, question his grace, and of a set purpose, stubbornly contemn and dispraise [1812] his truth revealed to us, and his evident works declared to the whole world.

Every sin truly is not blasphemy; but all blasphemy is sin. Because it tends against God and his will, it is sin. But this property of sin has more singularity: it also despises God and speaks reproachfully against his works. Many sin against the doctrine of the truth, because they either neglect and do not receive the truth; or else because, when they have received it, they do not reverence and promote it. Though they are sinners, this kind of men do not deserve to be called blasphemers. But once they begin with taunts and quips, to mock the doctrine which they neglect, calling it heretical, schismatic, seditious, and devilish, then they may rightly be termed blasphemers.

This is why the property of the sin against the Holy Ghost is, not only to revolt from the truth, but also, against all conscience, to speak against the truth, and with flouts, [1813] to incessantly overwhelm both the very work and most evident revelation of the Lord. For the conscience, being convinced by the evidence of the revelation or work of the Holy Ghost, suggests or tells them that they should not only temper themselves from reproachful statements, but that they should do another thing too: that is, that they should yield to the truth, and give to God his due honour and glory. But now, to exclude this inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to reject and overwhelm it with stubborn falsehood, flat apostasy, wicked contradiction, and perpetual contempt, is to flatly commit sin against the Holy Ghost. And this truly takes its beginning from original sin; it is nourished and set forward by devilish suggestions, by our perverse affections, by indignations, envy, hope or fear, by stubborn and self-wilful malice, and lastly by contumacy and rebellion.

iii.422

But now, the course of the matter requires us to hear what the Lord said in the gospel concerning this sin. In the twelfth chapter of Matthew, he says: "Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men; but blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven men. And whoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come." ^{Mat 12.31-32} The same sentence of our Saviour is thus expressed in the third chapter of St. Mark's gospel: "All sins shall be forgiven to the children of men, and blasphemies with whatever they blaspheme: but he that speaks blasphemy against the Holy Ghost never has forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation." ^{Mar 3.28-29} In the twelfth chapter of St. Luke, these words are uttered in this way: "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but to him that blasphemes the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven."^{Luk 12.10} In these words of the Lord, we have mention made of blasphemy against the Son of man, and blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is utterly unpardonable, but against the Son of man it is altogether venial. Blasphemy against the Son of man is committed by the ignorant, who are not yet enlightened; and it tends against Christ, whom the blasphemer thinks to be a seducer because he does not know him. The word of the Lord manifestly testifies that Paul before his conversion, and a great part of the Jews, were such blasphemers; for upon the cross the Lord prayed, crying: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do;" ^{Luk 23.34} and the apostle Paul says: "If they had known the Lord of glory, they would not have crucified him." ^{1Cor 2.8} Upon this, St. Peter says in the Acts, speaking to the Jews, "I know that you did it through ignorance; now therefore turn and repent, that your sins may be wiped out." ^{Act 3.17-19} But blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is said to be a continual fault-finding or a reproach against the Holy Spirit of God; that is, against the inspiration, illumination, and works of the Spirit. For when he so evidently works in the minds of men that they can neither question it nor pretend ignorance, yet they resist, mock, despise, and continually snap at the truth,[1814] which in their consciences they know to be most wholesome and true.[1815]

iii.423

In so doing, they blaspheme the Holy Spirit and the power of God. For example: the Pharisees, being convinced in their own minds by most evident reasons and unreproveable miracles, could not deny that the doctrine and works of our Lord Jesus Christ were the truth and miracles of the true God. And yet, against the testimony of their own consciences, out of mere envy, rebellious doggedness, and false apostasy, they continually caviled that Christ did it all by the means and inspiration of Beelzebub,[1816] the devil.^{Mat 12.24} Little or no better than the Pharisees, are those in our day [1817] who, having understood that the very truth and assured salvation are most simply and purely set forth in Christ, notwithstanding forsake it, and allow contrary doctrine, condemning. and with mocks [1818] railing at the sound and manifest truth; yes, and what is more, they do not cease to clap their hands and hiss at it, as a damnable heresy.

As this sin is the filthiest of all others, it is not venial, but utterly unpardonable; for the Lord has expressly said in the gospel: "It shall not be forgiven, neither in this world, nor in the world to come." This sentence is thus pronounced in St. Mark: "He never has forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation." The cause is manifest. For without faith it is impossible to please God; without faith there is no remission of sins; without faith there is no entrance into the kingdom of God. And the sin against the Holy Ghost is mere apostasy and flat [1819] rebellion against the true faith which the Holy Ghost pours into our hearts by his illumination. These untoward apostates incessantly call this illumination darkness, a mere seduction, and openly blaspheme it with taunts. Therefore, this sin is never forgiven them; for they tread underfoot the grace of God, and despise and mock the way which leads to salvation.[1820]

iii.424

This is why St. Paul says in the tenth chapter to the Hebrews: "If we sin willingly after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment and violent fire, which shall devour the adversaries." ^Heb
10.26 Now, I pray you, what is it to sin willingly? In truth, to sin willingly is not to sin through infirmity, or to fall into the same sin often. But to sin willingly, is to sin with a most stubborn contempt toward sin — as those usually do, who wittingly and willingly reject and spurn the grace of God, not ceasing to mock the cross and the death of Christ, as though it were foolish and not effectual to purge all our sins. For to such men, there is prepared no other sacrifice for sins. And the apostle calls them the adversaries, that is, the contemners and enemies of God. And therefore, the same apostle in the sixth chapter of Hebrews says: "It cannot be that those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted of the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, and they fall away, that they should be renewed again into repentance, crucifying the Son of God afresh themselves, and making a mockery of him." ^{Heb 6.4-6} He does not speak here of every fall of the faithful; but of willful and stubborn apostasy. For Peter fell and was restored again through repentance: which happens to more than Peter alone; for all sinners are daily restored through repentance. But unrepentant Judas is not restored, because he was a willful apostate. Mockers and blasphemers are not restored through repentance, because they obstinately stand against the known truth, and do not cease to blaspheme the way by which alone they are to be led to eternal life. Therefore, those places of St. Paul never do a whit for the Novatians;[1821] rather, they expound to us the nature and envenomed force of the sin against the Holy Ghost.

iii.425

St. John the apostle and evangelist, disputing about this sin in his canonical epistle, says: "If any man sees his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and He shall give him life for those who do not sin unto death. There is a sin unto death; I do not say that you should pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he that is begotten of God keeps himself, and that evil does not touch him."^{1Joh 5.16-18}

St. John mentions here two sorts of sins: the one unto death, that is, mortal and unpardonable, for which we must not pray — that is to say, prayers cannot obtain pardon for it. That sin is a contumely reproach against the Holy Ghost, revolting apostasy, and incessant mocking of the gospel of Christ. For in the gospel of St. John we read: "Truly, truly, I say to you, if a man keeps my sayings, he shall not see death forever;" and again: "If you do not believe that I am, you shall die in your sins." ^{Joh 8.52, 24} And apostasy is indeed iniquity, and a purposed and perpetual sin; for what is more sinful or unjust than to strive against,[1822] and mock [1823] the known truth? The other sin is venial, not unto death. St. John declares what sort it is when he adds: "We know that every one who is born of God does not sin." ^{1Joh 3.9} Now that saying must not be so absolutely taken, as though he did not sin at all. Rather, we must understand that he did not sin unto death; for otherwise the very saints are sinners, as it is evident by the first chapter of this epistle. Furthermore, that which immediately follows in John makes manifest what went before: "He that is begotten of God," he says, "keeps himself;" that is, he stands steadfastly in the known truth, and takes heed to himself, that that evil does not touch him; that is, that it does not entrap him, stir him up against God, or retain him in rebellion. I have said this much up to here touching the sin against the Holy Ghost,[1824] which Augustine in one place called final impenitence, which follows upon apostasy, blasphemy, and contempt of the Holy Ghost, or contempt of the word of truth revealed by the Holy Ghost.

iii.426

And although I have already partly touched the effects of sin, in handling original sin and sin against the Holy Ghost, yet to conclude this treatise, I will briefly show you something touching the just and assured punishment that shall be laid upon sinners. For in the definition of sin, I said that sin brought upon us the wrath of God with death and sundry punishments. I mean to speak of this here. It is as manifest as what is most manifest by the scriptures: that God punishes the sins of men — yes, that he punishes sinners for their sins. For many places in the scriptures declare that God is angry and grievously offended at the sins of mortal men. David cries: "The Lord loves the just; as for the wicked and violent, his soul hates them. Upon the ungodly he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, storm and tempest; this shall be their portion to drink. For the righteous Lord loves righteousness; with his countenance He beholds the thing that is just." ^Psa
11.5-7 In like manner, Paul says: "The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and uncleanness of men, who withhold the truth in unrighteousness." ^{Rom 1.18} And what may be thought of this, moreover: that the wrath of God would by no means be appeased for the sins of men, except by the death of the Son of God? In this, truly, the excellence of the great price of our redemption argues for the greatness and filthiness of our sin. To all of this, we may add that the good Lord, who loves mankind so well, would not have overwhelmed us with so many pains and exceeding calamities, if our sin had not been surpassing horrible in the sight of his eyes. For who can make a full catalog of all the calamities of miserable sinners? [1825] For our sins, the Lord absents himself from us. But if the sun has gone out of the earth, how great are the mists and cloudy darkness in it? If God is away from us, how great is the horror in minds of men? Here therefore, as punishments due to sinners, are reckoned the tyranny of Satan, a thousand torments of conscience, the death of the soul, dreadful fear, utter desperation, innumerable calamities of body and of our other faculties, which Moses the servant of God recites at large in the twenty-sixth chapter of Leviticus, and the twenty-eighth chapter of Deuteronomy. And now, since new sins are daily scourged with new kinds of punishments, what end is any man able to make, I pray, if he went about reckoning them all?

iii.427

It is not to be doubted, truly, that the Lord punishes sinners justly; for He is himself a most just Judge. And because it is a madman's part to doubt the justice, omnipotence, and wisdom of God, it therefore follows that all religious and godly men hold for a certainty that the punishments which God lays upon men, are laid upon them by most just judgment.

But how great and what kind of punishment is due to every fault and individual transgression, belongs to God's judgment to determine, rather than for mortal men to inquire too curiously. St. Augustine says upon this, Tracta. in Joan. 89: "There is as great a diversity of punishments, as of sins; how it is ordained, the wisdom of God more deeply declares than man's conjectures can possibly seek out, or utter in words." [1826] In his law given to men, He truly gave this for a rule: "According to the measure of the sin, so shall the measure of the punishment be;" [1827] being most equal and just himself, He does not exceed measure in His judgment. Abraham, in the notable communication he had with God, which is reported in the eighteenth chapter of Genesis, says among other things: "Will you destroy the just with the wicked? Far be it from you, that you should do such a thing, and slay the righteous with the wicked, and that the righteous should be as the wicked. That is not your part, who judge all the earth, to make such a judgment." [1828] To this also belongs that notable demonstration which the Lord uses toward [1829] Jonah, who was angry with the Lord because of his judgments.

iii.428

For He shows that he justly cares for the infants, yes, and even the cattle in Nineveh. The place is well-known in the fourth chapter of Jonah's prophecy. Let us therefore steadfastly hold that the Lord, when he punishes, does injury to no creature which he has made. Here, therefore, the disputations and questions come to an end, in which men are prone to demand, Why the Lord sometimes uses such sharp torments towards infants or sucklings? Or why he rewards temporal offences with eternal punishments? "For the Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works." ^{Psa 114.17} As David most truly witnessed, where in another place he says: "You are just, Lord, and your judgment is right." ^{Psa 119.137} Blessed is he that does not stumble here, and does not murmur against the Lord.

But if it so happens that the Lord at any time somewhat long defers the judgment and punishment, we must not therefore think that he is unjust, because he spares the wicked, and sharply corrects [1830] his friends and their vices. Let us rather lay before our eyes the evangelical parable of the rich glutton and poor silly Lazarus. For Lazarus, though he was the friend of God, notwithstanding died for lack of food; the other, though he was God's enemy, spent his life in dainty fare and pleasures, and felt no ill. But hearken what their judgment was, after this life. Abraham says to the rich glutton: "My son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good, and Lazarus likewise received evil; but now he rejoices, and you are tormented." ^{Luk 16.25} Therefore, if the godly are at any time afflicted in this present life, they will be abundantly rewarded for it in the life to come. But if the wicked are spared in this world, they are more grievously punished in the world to come: for God is just, and He [1831] rewards every man according to his merit.

Therefore, if you chance to see the wicked living in prosperity, do not think later that God is unjust; do not suppose that His power is abated;[1832] and do not say that He sleeps and does not see them. For that saying of the prophet, which is also used by the apostle Peter, is assuredly true: "The eyes of the Lord are upon the just, and his ears are open to their prayers."

iii.429

Again: "The eyes of the Lord are upon those who do wickedness." [1833] We must in such a case fortify our minds with the just examples of God's judgments, gathered together out of the holy scriptures. Let us consider that the world was destroyed with the general deluge, when God had looked a long time in vain for repentance. Let us remember that Sodom, Gomorrah, and the cities adjacent thereabout, were burnt with fire sent down from heaven. Let us think upon Egypt, how it was struck with diverse plagues,[1834] and the inhabitants drowned in the Red sea. Let us call to mind the things that happened by the holy and just judgment of God to the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Amalekites, and even the Israelites, first under their judges, then under their kings. Their measure was at last fully filled. Nor did they at any time despise God and his word, but were at last paid in full for their labour. They never sinned and went scot free for long.[1835] The history of Paulus Orosius, yes, the universal history of the whole world, provide us with countless examples like these, declaring the certainty of God's judgment.[1836] Let us think that God does not therefore allow sins because he is slack in punishing them; but let us persuade ourselves that by prolonging punishment, out of his unmeasurable goodness, He both looks and waits for the repentance and conversion of miserable sinners. For in the gospel, the Lord bids us not to cut down the barren fig-tree, because he looked to see if it would bring any fruit the next year.^{Luk 13.6-9} The apostle Paul says:

"Do you despise the riches of His goodness and patience and long-sufferance, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? But after your stubbornness and a heart that cannot repent, you heap upon yourself wrath against the day of wrath, and declaration of the righteous judgment of God, which will reward every man according to his deeds: to those who by continuing in well-doing seek for glory, and honour, and immortality, eternal life; but to those who are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall come indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man who does evil." ^Rom
2.4-9

iii.430

This, I say, let us firmly hold, and with this let us content ourselves, not grudging to see [1837] the wicked live long in prosperity, without pain or punishment. The holy, just, wise, and mighty God knows best what to do, how to do it, and why and when to do everything conveniently. To Him be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

To this also belongs, that God afflicts the temporal as well as the bad. Touching this, I spoke at large in the third sermon of this Decade.[1838] Now here, there are some who therefore demand to know why God, with diverse punishments, persecutes those sins which he has already forgiven men? For he forgave Adam his sin, and yet he laid on him both death and innumerable calamities of this life beside. We read that the prophet Nathan said to David, "The Lord has taken away your sin." And yet, immediately after, the prophet adds: "The sword shall not depart from your house." ^{2Sam 12.13, 10} To this we answer simply that these plagues, which are laid on us before the remission of our sins, are the punishments due to our sins. But after the remission of our sins, they are conflicts and exercises with which the faithful do not make satisfaction for their sins — which are already remitted by grace in the death of the Son of God — but with which they are humbled and kept in their duty, having an occasion given for greater glory.

And here I will not hesitate to recite to you, dearly beloved, St. Augustine's judgment touching this matter, in his second book, De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione, chap. 33 and 34, where he says: "God absolves or remits the guilt of things, to the end that after this life they should do no harm; and yet he allows them to abide for the contest of faith, that men may be instructed and exercised by them, profiting in the contest of righteousness," etc. [1839] And immediately after: "Before forgiveness, they are the punishments of sinners; but after remission, they are the contests and exercises of just men." And after a few more words, Augustine again says:

"The flesh which was first made was not the flesh of sin, in which man would not keep righteousness among the pleasures of paradise. This is why God ordained that after [Adam's] sin, the flesh of sin being increased, he should endeavour with pains and labours to recover righteousness again. ^{Gen 3.19}

iii.431

And for that cause, Adam being cast out of paradise, dwelt opposite Eden — that is, opposite the place of pleasures; which was a sign that with labours, which are contrary to pleasure, the flesh of sin was then to be inured.[1840] Having been in pleasures, it had not kept obedience before it was the flesh of sin. Therefore, even as our first parents, by living justly afterward, whereby they are rightly thought to be delivered from utter punishment by the blood of Christ, did not yet in that life deserve to be called back into paradise again. So also, the flesh of sin — even though when sins are forgiven, a man lives righteously in it — does not quickly deserve not to suffer that death which it drew from the propagation of sin. Such a thing is insinuated to us in the book of the Kings, concerning the patriarch David. The prophet was sent to him, and threatened the evils that would come upon him through the anger of God, because of the sin which he had committed. By the confession of his sin, David deserved forgiveness, according to the answer of the prophet who told him that his sin and crime was forgiven him. And yet those things happened to him, which God had threatened: namely, that he would be humbled by the incest of his son, etc. And for what reason do some not demand, If God threatened that scourge for sin, then why, when he had pardoned the sin, did he fulfil what he threatened? Unless it is because they know (if they demand that question) that they will rightly be answered, that the remission of the sin was granted to the end that the man would not be kept by his sin, from obtaining eternal life. But the effect of God's threatening followed after the remission of the sin, to the end that the godliness of the man might be tried and exercised in that humility. In like manner, God laid bodily death for sins as a punishment upon the body of man; and after the forgiveness of sins He has not taken it away, but left it in the body to be a means to exercise righteousness." [1841]

iii.432

Now, concerning the punishments of the wicked (if the most just God in this world touches them with any), let us know that they are the arguments [1842] for God's just judgment. In this world, He begins to punish them temporally, and in the world to come He does not cease to plague them everlastingly. The wicked, truly, perish through their own fault; for God begins to whip them in this life, to the end that, being chastened, they may begin to be wise, and turn to the Lord. [1843] But by his chastisement, they are more hardened, and murmur at the judgments of God, converting what was ordained for their health, to their own destruction. Just as all things work to the best for those who love God, so all things work to their utter destruction for those who hate the Lord. This argument might be extended still further; but because I have already spoken a great deal to this effect in the third sermon of this third Decade, what is left out here may be found there. And therefore, I refer you to looking at that.[1844] And so now, up to here touching sin.

I have with somewhat too long a sermon, dearly beloved,detained you here for more than the space of two whole hours. That I may now therefore make an end, let us humbly acknowledge our sins, and meekly cry with prayers to the Lord, who sits in the throne of grace, saying: Have mercy upon us, O Lord, for against you have we sinned, and we confess our offences. We are Your debtors; forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Amen.

The End of the Third Decade of Sermons.

THE

FOURTH DECADE OF SERMONS

WRITTEN BY

HENRY BULLINGER.

4-1. THE FIRST SERMON: OF THE GOSPEL.

Of the gospel of the grace of God, who has given His son to the world, and in him all things necessary to salvation,^{^[1845]} that we, believing in him, might obtain eternal life.

AFTER the exposition of the law, and those points of doctrine that depend upon the law, I think it best now to come to handling the gospel, which has been often mentioned in the exposition of the law and other places. Now therefore, dearly beloved, as I have been helped up to here with your prayers to God, so here again I request your earnest supplications with me to the Father, that by his holy Spirit, I may speak the truth to your edification [1846] in this present argument.

Evangelium is a Greek word; but it is received by the Latins and Germans, and today it is used as a word of their own. It is compounded from eu, which signifies good, and aggellw to tell tidings. For it signifies the telling of good tidings, or happy news, as tends to be blown abroad when our enemies being foiled, we lay siege to their city, or obtain some notable victory over our foes. The word is attributed to any joyful and lucky news concerning any matter luckily accomplished.

iv.2

The apostles willingly used that term, not so much because the prophets had used it before them,[1847] as because it wonderfully contains, and lays before our eyes as it were, the manner and work of our salvation accomplished by Christ. To this work, they have applied the word Evangelium. The prophet Isaiah, as Luke interprets it, introduces Christ our Lord, speaking in this manner: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me euaggelisasqai (euaggelisasthai);" that is, He has sent me to preach the gospel, "to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captive, and the recovering of sight to the blind, to freely set at liberty those who are bruised, and to preach the acceptable year of the Lord." [1848] Look here, the Saviour of the world, in the prophet and in the evangelist, expounds to us what Evangelium is, and to what it tends: "The Father," he says, "has sent me to preach Evangelium, the gospel, to the poor." And immediately after, to show who those poor would be, he adds: "who are broken-hearted, or broken-minded;" namely, those who find no soundness or health in themselves; but utterly despairing of their own strength, they wholly depend upon the help of Christ, their skilled and willing physician.[1849] Now the gospel, or good tidings, which is shown to the afflicted, is this: that the Son of God has descended from heaven to heal the sick and diseased souls. He also adds another cause to this, to make it more evident,[1850] saying that the Son of God has come "to preach deliverance to captives, and the recovering of sight to the blind," etc. For all men are held captive in the bonds of damnation. They all serve a sorrowful slavery under their cruel enemy, Satan. They are all kept blind in the darkness of errors; and it is to them that redemption, deliverance, and the acceptable year of the Lord, is preached. Now, these joyful tidings are called Evangelium, the gospel.

iv.3

Therefore, the gospel is defined in this manner by all men: The gospel is a good and a sweet word, and an assured testimony of God's grace toward us, exhibited in Christ to all believers. Or else, the gospel is the most evident sentence of the eternal God, brought down from heaven, absolving all believers from all their sins, and that is freely too, for Christ's sake, with a promise of eternal life. These definitions are gathered out of the testimonies of the evangelists and apostles. For St. Luke brings in the angel of the Lord speaking to the amazed shepherds, saying: "Fear not; for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, that shall be to all people: for to you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord." Look here, he takes from the shepherds all manner of fear, by bringing good tidings — that is, by preaching health — which is a thing that is full of joy and always brings gladness with it. The tidings are, that there is born the Saviour of the world, even the Lord Jesus Christ. He is born to us and for us: that is, to the health and salvation of us mortal men. St. Paul says that "the gospel was promised before by God through the prophets in the holy scripture, of his Son who was made of the seed of David after the flesh. He has been declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit that sanctifies, by his resurrection from the dead." ^{Rom 1.1-4} And again: "The gospel is the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation,[1851] which has been kept close from before the beginnings, but is now made manifest, and by the writings of the prophets, it is opened to all nations to the obedience of faith, according to the appointment of the eternal God." ^Rom
16.25-26 And yet again, he says more briefly: "The gospel is the power of God unto salvation for all who believe;" ^{Rom 1.16} that is to say, the gospel is the preaching of God's power, by which all those who believe are saved. And Christ is the power of God: for he is said to be the arm, the glory, the virtue, and brightness of the Father. Now, Christ brings salvation to everyone who believes, for he is the Saviour of all.

iv.4

From all this we now gather this definition of the holy gospel:

The gospel is the heavenly preaching of God's grace toward us, in which it is declared to the whole world, which is set in the wrath and indignation of God, that God the Father of heaven is pleased in his only-begotten Son, our Lord Christ Jesus. He promised him to the holy fathers of old, and has now exhibited him to us in these latter times. And in him God has given us all things belonging to a blessed life and eternal salvation, as he that was made incarnate for us, dead, and raised from the dead again, was taken up into heaven, and is made our only Lord and Saviour, on the condition that, acknowledging our sins, we soundly and surely believe in him.

This definition, I confess, is somewhat long. Yet, with this I would have you think that the matter which is described in this definition is itself very large and ample. I have therefore, in this long definition or description, with as great a light as I could, endeavoured to make this manifest to all men. This is why I neither could nor should have expressed it more briefly. This definition consists of just parts. Once they are severally expounded and thoroughly opened, every man, I hope, will evidently perceive the nature, causes, effects, and whatever else is good to be known, concerning the gospel.

First of all, what most argues that the gospel is tidings come from heaven and was not begun on earth, is that God our heavenly Father first preached those tidings to our miserable parents after their fall in paradise. He promised his Son who, being incarnate, would crush the serpent's head. Then again, the apostle Paul in express words says: "God in time past, at sundry times, and in diverse manners, spoke to the fathers by the prophets, and has in these last days spoken to us by his Son." ^Heb
1.1-2 And John before him testified, saying: "No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared him." ^{Joh 1.18} And again: "He that comes from on high is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaks of the earth: he that comes from heaven is above all. And what he has seen and heard, that he testifies." ^{Joh 3.31-32}

iv.5

To this belongs, that the prophets were believed to have prophesied by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Now in the holy scriptures, they foreshadowed the gospel: the especial or chief points of which were declared to men by angels descending from heaven. For the incarnation of the Son of God is first told to the holy virgin by the archangel Gabriel, and after that, again to Joseph, the supposed Father of Christ, and tutor [1852] of the unspotted virgin. The same angel preached to the shepherds, the birth of the Son of God. Moreover, the angels declared to the women who came to the grave, minding their country-manner to anoint the body of the Lord; that he was risen from the dead again. The same angels testified to the apostles at the Lord's ascension, whose eyes were turned and surely fixed into the clouds, that he was taken up into heaven, and that from there he would come again to judge the quick and the dead. And to all these testimonies may be added the voice of the eternal Father himself, uttered from heaven upon our Lord and Saviour, saying, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am pleased; hear him." [1853] This testimony of the Father is repeated by the blessed apostle Peter, in the zeal of the Spirit, in the first chapter of his second epistle. Therefore, the preaching of the gospel is a divine speech, unreprovable, and brought down from heaven. Whoever believes it, believes the word of the eternal God; and those who do not believe it, despise and reject the word of God. For it does not cease to be the word of God because it is preached by the ministry of men. For we read that the Lord said of the apostles: "It is not you that speak, but the Spirit of my Father which is within you." ^{Mat 10.20} And therefore, we read that they did not depart from Jerusalem until they were first instructed from above, and had received the Holy Ghost. Nor is there any reason why the word of God should be tied to the apostles only, as though no man preached the word of God after the apostles. For our Lord plainly says in St. John's gospel: "Truly I say to you, He that receives whomever I send, receives me; and he that receives me receives him that sent me." ^{Joh 13.20} Now our Lord, the high priest and chief bishop of his catholic church, sends not only apostles, but also all those who are lawfully called, and who bring the word of Christ.

iv.6

Therefore, we understand it to be spoken concerning all the lawful ministers of the church, where the Lord says, "Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you retain, they are retained:" ^{Joh 20.23} and again, "Whatever you loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven; and whatever you bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven." ^{Mat 18.18} For in another place the Lord says: "Truly I say to you, it shall be easier for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than for that city that does not receive you, and does not hear your sayings." ^{Mat 10.15} Now, who does not know how filthy and horrible the sin was with which the men of Sodom defiled themselves; and that the Lord rained fire, brimstone, and pitch from heaven, with which he burnt up both the city and her inhabitants? Therefore, who cannot gather from this, that rebels and blasphemers of the gospel of Christ sin more grievously than the Sodomites did; and that God, who is a sure revenger, will surely plague them for it with unspeakable miseries and endless torments, either in this life, or in the world to come, or else in both? Let us therefore believe the gospel of the Son of God, first preached to the world by God the Father, then by the patriarchs, after that by the prophets, and lastly by the only-begotten Son of God, Christ Jesus — and by his apostles, whose heavenly voice even today sounds to us in the mouths of the ministers, sincerely preaching the gospel to us.

Secondly, we have to consider what the heavenly preaching of the gospel shows to the world: namely, the grace of God our heavenly Father. For the apostle Paul, in the twentieth chapter of the Acts, says that he "received the ministry of the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God." ^{Act 20.24} Therefore, I will at present say as much about the grace of God as is sufficient for this place.

The word "grace" is diversely used in the holy scriptures, even as it is used in profane writings also. For in the Bible it signifies thanksgiving, and also a benefit, and alms, as in 2Cor 8.1-2. Moreover, it signifies praise and recompense, as where the apostle says: "If, when you do well, you are afflicted, and yet bear it — that is praiseworthy before God." [1854]

iv.7

It also signifies faculty or licence; as when we say that one has gotten grace to teach and execute an office. For the apostle says that he received grace; and to expound his own meaning, he immediately adds, to execute the office of an apostle. Moreover, the gifts of God are called grace, because they are given gratis, and freely bestowed without looking for any recompense. And yet Paul, in the fifth chapter to the Romans, distinguishes a gift from grace: for grace signifies the favour and good-will of God toward us; but a gift is a thing which God gives us of that good-will, such as faith, constancy, and integrity. They are said to have found grace with God, whom God dearly loves and favours more than others. In that sense, Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord; Joseph found grace in the eyes of the lord of the prison; and the holy virgin is read to have found grace with the Lord, because she was beloved by God, and very dear to the Lord, as the one whom he had singularly chosen from among all other women. But in this place and present argument, "grace" is the favour and goodness of the eternal Godhead, with which, according to his incomprehensible goodness, He gratis — freely, for Christ's sake — embraces, calls, justifies, and saves us mortal men.

Now here, before we go any further, I think it is not amiss to examine and search out the cause of God's love exhibited for us. For we see that there is a certain relation between the favour of God and men, to whom his favour is so bent. It is a matter neither hard nor tedious to be found out. For there is nothing in us with which God can be in love, or with which he may be moved or stirred up to embrace us. Yes, insomuch as we are all impure sinners, and God is holy, just, and a revenger of iniquities, he has enough to find in us for which he may be angry, and plague us with just revenge. So then, the cause of God's love towards us must of necessity not be in us, nor in any other thing beside God (considering that nothing is more excellent than man); but it must be in God himself.[1855] Moreover, the most true scripture teaches us that God, of his own inclination, is naturally good, gentle, and as Paul calls him, philanthropon,^Tit
3.4 a lover of men, who has sent his own Son, of his own nature, into the world for our redemption.

iv.8

Upon this, it consequently follows that God freely, of himself and for his Son's sake, loves man, and not for any other cause. Whereby all the preparations, incitements, and merits of men, being dissolved by the fire of God's great love, fade and pass away like smoke. For the grace of God is altogether free; and unless it is so, I cannot see how it can be called grace. But it benefits us in a thing so weighty (to cite some evident testimonies of the holy scripture), to confirm our minds with against all sophistical trifles and temptations of the devil. Our Lord in the gospel said: "God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son for the world, that everyone who believes in him should not perish, but have life everlasting." ^{Joh 3.16} Look here, this good-will of God, which is the favour and love with which God embraces us, is the cause of our salvation. For Christ, having suffered for us, is our salvation. Now God, [1856] out of very love, has given Christ both to us, and for us. Nor may we think that God was first moved by our love toward him, in order to show a like mutual love back to us, and to give his Son for us. For he had determined before the beginning of the world, to work our redemption through Christ his Son. And John the Evangelist says in his canonical epistle: "In this is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be an atonement for our sins." ^{1Joh 4.10}

Though these testimonies are sufficiently plain and strong enough, I will yet add some proofs out of the apostle Paul, so that this argument may be more evident, and that the great agreement there is between the evangelists and apostles in this doctrine of grace, may appear. Paul therefore says, "All have sinned, and stand in need of the glory of God; but are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." ^{Rom 3.23-24} Again, he says to the Ephesians: "You are saved through grace by faith, and that not of your selves, it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast." ^{Eph 2.8-9}

iv.9

Again, to Titus: "The grace and love of God our Saviour towards all men has appeared, not of the works of our own righteousness which we did, but according to his mercy he has saved us." [1857] Likewise, in the second Epistle to Timothy, first chapter, he says: "God has saved us, and has called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given to us in Christ Jesus." I think, truly, that if a man had a set purpose to imagine anything for the defence of this matter, he could not have framed any sentence so fit and evident as these words. So now it is manifest that the grace of God is altogether free, as that which excludes all our works and merits; and this free love of God is the only cause and true beginning of the gospel, for which cause Paul calls the gospel the preaching of grace.

But now, although the grace of God does not depend on us or our works, yet it does not idly abide in God, as if it were utterly outside of us and altogether far from us, as a thing that is neither felt nor at work in us. For we understood by the cited testimonies, that grace is the favour of God with which He loves us; we understood that men are saved by grace. For since God loves men, he would not have them perish; and therefore he has, through grace, sent his Son to deliver them from destruction, and that in him the justice and mercy of God might be known to the whole world. But none are delivered save those who believe. Therefore grace has something by which to work in man.[1858] For, by pouring the Holy Ghost into our hearts, the understanding and will are instructed in the faith. To be short, grace (as I already told you) [1859] calls, justifies, saves, or glorifies the faithful. Thus, we must take account that the whole work of our salvation, and all the virtues of the godly, proceed from the grace of God alone, whose working we acknowledge and confess at all times.

iv.10

And that again is proved both by divine and human testimonies. Paul says to the Romans: "Those whom he knew before, he also predestined: and those whom he predestined, he also called: and those whom he called, he also justified: and those whom he justified, he also glorified. What shall we say then to these things? If God is on our side, who can be against us? Who did not spare his own Son, but gave him for us, how shall he not with him also give us all things?" ^{Rom 8.29-32} Again, in the first chapter of his Epistle to the Ephesians, he has referred the whole work of election and salvation, with all the parts of it, to the grace of God. Moreover, the holy fathers in the council Mileventanum, [1860] among whom St. Augustine was also present, made this decree touching the grace of God:

"If any man says that mercy is without the grace of God bestowed upon us from above — believing, willing, desiring, endeavouring, studying, asking, seeking, and striving as of ourselves — and does not confess that even to believe, to will, and to be able to do all these things as we should do, is wrought by the pouring in and inspiration of the Holy Ghost — if he joins the humility or obedience of man as a help to grace — and if he does not consent that it is the very gift of grace even that we are humble and obedient — then he is directly contrary to the apostle, who says, 'For what do you have that you have not received?'^{1Cor 4.7} and, 'By the grace of God, I am what I am.'" ^{1Cor 15.10} This much they had to say.

iv.11

Now these divine and human testimonies being thoroughly considered, there is none, I hope, who may not understand that the grace of God is the same as I told you: namely, the favour and good-will of the eternal Godhead, with which, according to his incomprehensible goodness, He embraces, calls, justifies, and saves men freely for Christ's sake, our Lord and Saviour.

The blessed man Aurelius Augustine had a sharp conflict with Pelagius the Briton, concerning the grace of God. For the heretic understood nothing by the term grace, except the benefit of the creation. Augustine did not deny this to be of grace, but he also vehemently urged that the apostle especially spoke of that free grace by which, without any merit of ours, we are freely saved for Christ's sake. He therefore urged this all the more earnestly, because he saw that [1861] the heretic affirmed that his own human nature was sufficient for him,[1862] not only to do, but also to do perfectly, the commandments of God by free-will. But St. Augustine very largely and religiously disputes about these matters in his ninety-fifth Epistle, Ad Innocentium.[1863]

Many of the late writers, for teaching's sake, have divided grace into grace that does acceptable things, and grace that is gratis or freely given. Again, they have divided it into working grace, and joint-working grace. Finally, they part it into grace that goes before, and grace that follows after. And the very same writers also reckon up the operations or effects of grace in this manner: grace heals the soul, and first, makes it to will well, and then to work effectually the thing that it wills. So it causes the soul to persevere in goodness, and at length to come to eternal glory.[1864]

iv.12

I will not take care to reckon up the sentences of writers, to show you each one's separate opinion (which would be both an excessive labour, and also more than my ability can do). But I am willing to cite the places of scripture (which is the one and only rule for how to think, and how to judge rightly) to show you thereby, what the scripture would have you think. I hope I have both briefly and evidently enough, declared the grace of God to you in my former treatise. And also the discourse about Christ, which follows after this (through whom the Father has poured the most excellent and heavenly grace into us) will help to make up that which seems to be lacking here.

But now, before I depart from this argument, I thought it good to admonish you, that the sentences of God's word do not conflict with themselves, when we read and hear in various places: first, that we are saved freely or by the grace of God; then, that we are saved by the love of God; thirdly, that we are saved through the mercy of God; fourthly, that we are saved through Christ; fifthly, that we are saved through the blood, or death, or incarnation of Christ; and lastly, that we are saved through faith in Christ, or in the mercy or grace of God. For all these statements tend to one and the same end, and they ascribe the whole glory and cause of man's salvation to the very mercy or grace of God. The pledge of grace, yes, and our only Saviour, is the only-begotten Son of God, betrayed unto death. Sincere faith lays hold on mere grace in Christ, and nothing else.

Now therefore, having thus expounded according to my small ability, that which I had to say in general about the grace of God, I descend here to handle that singular or particular work of God's grace, which is nothing else but this: that the merciful Father has exhibited to us his Son, in that manner and order which he promised in the old prophets; and that in him he has fully given us all things requisite to eternal life and absolute felicity. This is because he is the Lord and Messiah, or the only and true Saviour, who was incarnate, dead, raised to life, and taken up into heaven for us and our salvation.

iv.13

For Christ is both king and high priest, that is, our Saviour; he is the mark, the star, and the very sunlight of the preaching of the gospel. Now in expounding these things particularly, I will use the following course and order. First of all, I will recite to you out of the law and the prophets some evident promises of Christ made by God to the church; these will be especially those that the apostles themselves have already touched and expounded. Secondly, I will prove to you that God has now performed what he promised so long ago; namely, that he has already exhibited to us his only-begotten Son; and that he is that true and so long-looked-for Lord and Messiah, who would come to save the world. Lastly, I will show you how, the Father is pleased and reconciled to the world again, in this Son. In him he has also fully given us all things requisite to eternal life and absolute felicity. For us and for our salvation, he was incarnate, dead, raised to life again, and taken up into heaven, there to be a Mediator forever and advocate to his Father. And in these points lie the lively veins of the gospel, which flow with wholesome waters unto eternal life; for the sound consolation of the faithful, and the enduring tranquility of a quiet conscience, consist in them; and without them, there is no life or quiet rest.

The promises made by God concerning Christ, which are uttered in the holy scriptures, are threefold, or of three sorts. Therefore, to make them plainer to you, I will divide the promises of one and the same sort according to the times. The first promises were made to the patriarchs or ancient fathers before the giving of the law: and these again consist of two sorts; for one sort are plain, uttered evidently in simple words, without any types and figurative shadows; the other sort are figurative and couched under types.

The first and most evident promise of all was made by the very mouth of God to our first parents, Adam and Eve, being oppressed with death, calamities, and the horrible fear of God's revenging hand for their transgression.[1865] This promise is, as it were, the pillar and base of all Christian religion, upon which the preaching of the gospel is altogether founded, and out of which all the other promises in a way are derived.

iv.14

That promise is contained in these words of the Lord: "I will put enmity between you" (meaning the serpent, I say, the devil in the serpent) "and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; and it shall tread down your head, and you shall tread upon his heel." ^{Gen 3.15} In these words, God promises seed; the seed, I say, not of man, but of woman; and that too, is of the most excellent woman, namely, that most holy virgin Mary, the woman that was blessed among all other women. For she conceived, not by any man, but by the Holy Ghost; and being a virgin still, she was delivered of Christ our Lord. By dying and rising again, he not only vexed or wounded, but also crushed and tread down, the head: that is, the kingdom of Satan — namely, sin, death, and damnation. He took away and made utterly void all the power and tyranny of our enemy and deceiver. Meanwhile, Satan trod on Christ's heel; that is to say, by his members — Caiaphas, Pontius Pilate, the Jews and Gentiles — with intense torments and death, he vexed and killed the flesh, which was the lowest part in Christ, even as the heel is lowest in the body. For in the Psalms, the Lord says: "I am a worm, and no man. They have brought my life into the dust." ^{Psa
22.6, 15} But he rose again from the dead. For if he had not risen again, he would not have trodden down the serpent's head. But now, by his rising, he has become the Saviour of all who believe in him. Out of this promise is derived that singular and notorious one, which the angel of the Lord recites to our father Abraham in the following words: "In your seed all the nations of the world shall be blessed." ^{Gen 22.18} But Paul, in his epistle to the Galatians (Gal 3.16),declares in express words that that blessed seed which was promised to Abraham, is ours.[1866] Now our Lord is called by the name of Seed because of the first promise made to Adam and Eve, and because he was made incarnate and true man for us.

iv.15

Nor is this promise repugnant to the first: for although Christ our Lord is here called the seed, or son, of Abraham; yet he is in no other way referred to Abraham than by the virgin, which was the daughter of Abraham and the mother of Christ. Now what good does the son of Abraham do to us by his incarnation? In truth, he blesses us. But a blessing is the contrary to a curse. Therefore, whatever curse we drew from the sin of Adam, Christ heals that in us, and he blesses us with all spiritual blessing. Nor does he bestow this benefit on a few alone, but upon all the nations of the world that believe in him.

The patriarch Jacob, being inspired with the Holy Ghost, foretold what would happen to his children; and at length, when he came to Judah among the rest, he says: "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, and a law-giver from between his feet, till Shiloh comes; and to him shall be the gathering of the people." ^{Gen 49.10} Look here, in these words the Messiah is not only promised, but the very time when he would be incarnate is also prescribed, with a declaration of both what and how far forth he would be. The kingdom, he says, shall remain under Judah until the coming of the Saviour: and even though the tribe of Judah will not always have kings to govern them, yet it will not lack nobles, captains, lawgivers, learned men and sages, to rule the people. And therefore, the evangelical history faithfully witnesses that Christ came at that time when all power, authority, and rule was translated to the Romans, to whose emperor, Octavius Augustus, the Jews were forced to pay taxes and tribute. Now, Shiloh signifies felicity, or the author of felicity; it signifies plenty, store, and abundance of all excellent things. For Christ is the treasury of all good things. And the Chaldee interpreter, where he finds Shiloh, translates it Christ. Finally, all people shall be gathered to him, as to their Saviour: as the prophets afterward most plainly declared, Isaiah in the second, and Micah in the fourth chapters of their books or prophecies.

iv.16

Furthermore, the types and figures of Christ are given in Noah preserved in the ark; for in Christ the faithful are saved; as St. Peter testifies.^1Pet
3 Abraham offers up Isaac, his only-begotten son on top of the same mountain where many years after, the only-begotten Son of God was offered on the cross.[1867] Joseph is sold to the heathen by his brethren, and cast in prison; but being delivered, he becomes their Saviour, and is called by all the people, the preserver of the Egyptian kingdom. Christ our Lord was prefigured in all these things.

The later promises also are of two sorts; either openly uncovered, or hidden under a veil or figure as it were. They are contained in the law and the prophets even till the time of the captivity of Babylon. In the third chapter of the Acts, the blessed apostle Peter cites the prophecy of Moses touching the coming of the greatest of all prophets. The prefigured promises [1868] of Christ are the sacrifices which Paul briefly declares in a wonderful summary in his epistle to the Hebrews. In the fifth chapter of first Corinthians, he applies the paschal lamb to Jesus Christ. ^{1Cor 10.4} Peter does the same in his first epistle. Again, the stony rock that was struck and gushed with water,[1869] St. Paul calls Christ.^{1Cor 10.4} And in the gospel of St. John, Christ himself says that he was prefigured in the brazen serpent which was lifted up in the desert ^{Joh 3.14-15} — I have more fully declared the mystery of this in another place.[1870] There are many more like these. I already touched a good part of them when I had occasion to treat the ceremonies and their signification;[1871] someone who is inclined may read of it at large there.

The unfigured and uncovered promises are almost without number in the Psalms and the prophets. Indeed, the Lord himself in the gospel of St. Luke testifies that the description of all his office and business is contained at large in the law, the prophets, and the Psalms.^{Luk 24.44} And when St. Peter had preached the gospel, in which he promised both Christ and the full remission of sins to all who believed, he immediately added this:

iv.17

"All the prophets from Samuel and those that followed in order, as many as have spoken, have likewise told you of these days." ^Act
3.24 David truly, in the second, twenty-second, and hundred and tenth Psalms, has notably set down the two natures of Christ: his Godhead and his manhood. Again, he has laid before all men's eyes his wholesome preaching, his eternal priesthood, his everlasting redemption, and his most bitter death and passion.[1872] What shall I say of the prophet Isaiah? By no small doctor of the church of Christ, [1873] he was very worthily called an evangelist rather than a prophet. So truly did he foretell the state of Christ, that it was as if he had written a story of things already past and done by Christ, and not of things that would be done. Now, he proposes Christ to be very God and very man, born after the flesh of the unspotted virgin, who had to preach the word of life. Like a good shepherd, he had to feed his fearful sheep, to be the light of the Gentiles to the utmost parts of the earth, to give sight to the blind, to heal the lame and diseased; to be betrayed by his own, to be spit upon, to be struck, to be hung between thieves, to be offered up as a sacrifice for sin, and finally to make intercession for transgressors — that he himself being just, he might justify all who believe in his name. Read Isaiah, the seventh, eighth, ninth, eleventh, twenty-eighth, fortieth, forty-ninth, fiftieth, and fifty-third chapters; and also the last chapters of all his prophecy, in which he most fully describes the church or congregation of Christ Immanuel.[1874] Jonah bore the most manifest type of the Lord's sharp death and joyful resurrection.[1875] Micah also names Bethlehem as the place in which Messiah would be born, whose beginning (namely, his divine nature) he regards as before all beginnings. ^Mic.
5.2 He also foretells that the preaching of the gospel would be sown abroad from Jerusalem through all the compass of the world. ^{Mic 4.2}

iv.18

Jeremiah says that God would raise up from David a true seed or branch, that is, the looked-for Messiah; ^{Jer 23.5} and in that prophecy, he alluded to the law concerning the raising up of a seed for the deceased brother. For the virgin, conceiving by the Holy Ghost, brought forth a Son, whose name is Jehovah, being very God in very deed, whom Isaiah calls Immanuel, ^{Isa 7.14} who is the true righteousness of all who believe in him; for by Christ the faithful are justified. In the thirty-first chapter, Isaiah promises in Christ full or absolute remission of sins and abundant grace of the Holy Ghost, ^{Isa 31.33-34} which Joel also did not conceal. ^Joel
2.28-32 Thus, out of many testimonies I have picked out only these few in number; for the whole of the books of the prophets are occupied in the description of Christ and his offices.

The last promises concerning Christ were revealed to the prophets by God, and by them they were declared to the church of God, even in the very time of the captivity at Babylon, or else immediately upon their return to Jerusalem.[1876] Ezekiel prophesies of the shepherd David, and of the sheep receiving that shepherd. In St. John's gospel, the Lord himself expounds these prophecies. ^Joh
10 The same prophet treats very much about grace, and the frank and full remission of sins through the Saviour Christ, especially in the thirty-fourth, thirty-sixth and thirty-seventh chapters of his prophecy. Daniel, truly, has visions and many dreams; but in them he so sets out Christ to us, that it is impossible to have him better or more evidently and excellently described. In his second chapter, Daniel teaches us about his eternal kingdom, and tells us that Christ would come under the Roman monarchy, at which time the Roman princes, being allied by affinity, would destroy one another mutually in battle. This was fulfilled when Pompey and Julius Caesar, Antony and Octavius Augustus, maintained civil war. Moreover, Daniel's weeks [1877] are unknown to no man, in which, as it were, he points with his finger at Christ, the coming of Christ, and the reprobation of the Jews because of their disloyalty and unbelief.

iv.19

Haggai the prophet foretold the manner how the temple would be built, I mean, the true temple indeed: namely, the church of Christ.[1878] Zechariah excellently paints for us many mysteries of Christ; he lays before us the kingdom and priesthood of our Lord and Saviour; he commends to us that one and only eternal sacrifice, which is effectual enough to cleanse the sins of the whole world — Zech. third, ninth, and fourteenth chapters. Yes, he prophesies of nothing else but of Christ and his kingdom. Malachi foreshows the forerunner of the Lord, and handles no small number of mysteries concerning Christ. By these we perceive that Paul wrote most truly in the first chapter to the Romans, saying that God promised the gospel before by his prophets in the holy scriptures. ^{Rom 1.1-2}

Now by these holy promises we gather this also: that there are not many or different gospels (although we do not deny that the same gospel was penned by different evangelists); but that there is one gospel alone, and that too is eternal. For the very same gospel which is preached to us today, was preached to our first parents at the beginning of the world.[1879] For it is assuredly certain that Adam, Eve, Abel, all the patriarchs, prophets, and faithful people of the old Testament, were saved by the gospel, which we have declared at large in another place.[1880]

We now come to the second part, where we have to show you that God the Father has faithfully performed for us, that which he promised to our forefathers, in giving to us his only-begotten Son, who is that true and looked-for Messiah, who is blessed world without end. The evangelists and apostles of our Lord have taken great pains to make this matter manifest, and have set it forth so well and faithfully, that it cannot be bettered.

iv.20

They show that Christ comes from the stock of David, descending lineally from the seed of Abraham. They tell that his mother was the virgin, who conceived by the Holy Ghost, and still being a virgin, brought him into the world. They note the time in which Christ was revealed, corresponding in all points to the prophets' prophecies. They add that the place of his nativity corresponded to that which Micah foretold. In the East a star appears, which moves the princes, or wise men, to go and salute the newborn King. Therefore they come, and openly profess even in Jerusalem, [1881] that the Messiah is born, and that they have come out of the East to worship and honour him. According to their words, so were their deeds. For once they had found him by the leading of the star, they fall down before him, and by offering to Christ the gifts that they brought, they did not obscurely declare how joyful they were, and how much they regarded their Lord and Saviour.[1882] In the very city of Jerusalem, the most just man Simeon, with great joy of heart and godly congratulation, openly testifies in the temple that God, according to his eternal goodness [1883] and constancy, had given to the world his only-begotten Son, whom he had promised to the fathers; and with this, he attested that he was ready to die.[1884] He adds the cause; "For my eyes have seen your salvation," namely, that Shiloh, the Saviour, whom you, O God, have determined to "set before all people, a light to enlighten the Gentiles, and to be the glory of your people Israel;" ^{Luk 2.30-32} that is, that shaking off all darkness, he would bring the light of truth and life unto the Gentiles, to enlighten them with; and that he would be the glory and life of the people of Israel. To this also belongs the testimony of that notable man Zechariah, the holy priest of God, saying: "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he has visited and redeemed his people, and has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; as he spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets, who have been since the world began;" and so forth, as seen in the first chapter of Luke's gospel.

iv.21

Moreover, John the son of this Zechariah, surnamed the Baptist, of whom we read that none more holy was ever born of women, ^{Luk 7.28} pointed at Christ Jesus with his finger, and openly declared that he is that looked-for Messiah whom all the prophets promised; and that by giving him to the world, God has done what he promised, and wholly poured himself with all his benefits into and upon all faithful believers. "And as the people waited" (says Luke), "and thought in their hearts of John, whether he was the Christ; John answered, saying to them all, Indeed I baptize you with water; but one stronger than I comes after me, whose shoelace I am not worthy to untie; he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." ^{Luk 3.15-16} And in the Gospel of St. John we read: "The next day John sees Jesus coming to him, and says, Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. This is the one of whom I said, 'After me comes a man which is preferred before me, because he was before me;' and I did not know him — only that he would be declared to Israel. Therefore I have come baptizing with water. And immediately after he says: "I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abided on him. And I did not know him. But the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'Upon whom you see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, he is the one who baptizes with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bore record that this is the Son of God." ^{Joh 1.29-34} Again, when the disciples of John envied the happy success of Christ, and it grieved them to see their master John neglected as it were, in comparison to Christ, John said to his disciples: "You yourselves are witnesses that I said, I am not Christ, but I was sent before him. He that has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices because of the bridegroom: therefore my joy is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease. The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into his hand. He that believes in the Son has life everlasting: he that does not believe in the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." [1885]

iv.22

These testimonies are firm, clear, and evident enough, and might suffice for the confirmation of this cause. But let us yet pick out and add a few more from many which may declare that Christ is already exhibited to us. Therefore, our Lord himself, whom we believe to be Messiah, when he had a long while been greatly commended by the testimony of John, at length goes abroad and preaches the word of life. But it is not read that in any age, before or since, there was ever any who taught with so great a grace. And with this he showed almost incredible and wonderful miracles, which easily argue for who he was; and these were sufficient to win a man with whom no words might possibly prevail. He was loving and gentle to sinners, continually repeating and beating into their heads that he had come to save them, and call them to repentance. Therefore, when the disciples of John came to Christ once, and asked, "Are you the one that would come, or shall we look for another?" he answered, "Go and tell those things to John, which you see and hear: the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised to life, and the glad tidings of the gospel are preached to the poor." ^{Mat 11.3-5} Now by these, — I mean by his doctrine, and his works or miracles — his mind was to show that he was exhibited to the world as the true Messiah, and no other is to be looked for. Moreover, in the synagogue at Nazareth, where he read and expounded Isaiah's prophecy of the coming of Messiah, he declared that this scripture was fulfilled in himself. And to this history is immediately annexed: "And all bore witness to him, and wondered at the gracious sayings that proceeded from his mouth." ^{Luk 4.16-22} Again, in the tenth chapter of St. John's gospel: "The Jews came around the Lord and said, How long will you make us doubt? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly. Jesus answered them, I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name, bear witness of me. But you do not believe, because you are not of my sheep." ^Joh
10.24-26 And shortly after he adds:

iv.23

"You say that I blaspheme, because I said, I am the Son of God. If I do not do the works of my Father, then do not believe me. But if I do, and you do not believe me, believe my works — that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him." ^Joh
10.36-38

In the seventh chapter of John we read: "Those who believed in him said, Will Christ, when he comes, show more signs than this man has shown?" ^{Joh 7.31} That is to say, Even if we were to grant that there is another Christ to be looked for, this is most sure: that the other Messiah cannot do more and greater miracles than this man does. Let us therefore believe that this is the true Messiah. Before Caiaphas, the high priest, and the whole council of the peers of Israel, and also before Pontius Pilate in the judgment-hall of the Roman empire, our Lord Christ openly, and in express words, confessed that he is that true and looked-for Messiah.

As the prophets foretold of him, he truly and of his own accord died for sinners; the third day after that, he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God the Father. And the evangelists, reciting faithfully the words and deeds of Christ, always add to the most notable ones: "All this was done or said, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet." Thus it would not be worth the labour here to gather together the prophecies of the prophets, to examine the words and deeds of Christ by them, and by the manifest agreement between them, to conclude this: That God has performed for us that which he promised to our fathers, in giving to us his only-begotten Son Christ Jesus, who is the true and looked-for Messiah. For the evangelists have already done this, and with such great faith and diligence, that it cannot be bettered for its plainness. To this you may now refer all that I have said in my former sermons touching the signification, or mysteries, in the fulfilling and abrogating of the law.

And to content ourselves with a smaller number of testimonies, might not this one, in the fourth chapter of St. John, be used instead of several thousand confirmations? The woman of Samaria says to the Lord: "I know that the Messiah shall come, who is called Christ. Therefore, when he comes, he will tell us all things. Jesus answered her, I am he that speaks to you." ^Joh
4.25-26 Look, what could be said more plainly?

iv.24

"I am the Messiah," he says, even I, who even now speaks to you, and at first said, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that says to you, Give me a drink, you would have asked of him, and he would have given you the water of life. For whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him, shall never more thirst: but the water that I give him shall become a well of water in him, springing up into eternal life." ^{Joh 4.10, 14}

Those, therefore, are the most thirsty and unfortunate of all men, who long and look for another Messiah besides our Lord and Saviour Christ Jesus. The apostle St. Peter in an appropriately long oration, well-grounded and confirmed with scripture and strong reasons, in the second chapter of the Acts, shows that our Lord Jesus is that true Messiah. For he closes his sermon with this sentence: "Therefore let all the house of Israel surely know, that God has made this Jesus both Lord and Christ, whom you have crucified." To the same mark tends that large and learned oration of the first martyr St. Stephen, which may be seen in the seventh chapter of the Acts.[1886] Out of Isaiah's prophecy, Philip declares to the eunuch of Ethiopia that Jesus is Christ. St. Paul, in all the Jewish synagogues, puts forth no other proposition to preach on but this: Jesus is Christ, that is, Jesus is the king, the bishop, and the Saviour of the faithful. And in the thirteenth chapter he at large declares and proves that proposition true.

So now, these most evident and clear testimonies of holy scripture cannot help but suffice for those heads who are not set to purposely cavil and wrangle. At present, I will not too busily and curiously dispute against the contrary Jews, who look for another Messiah, and deny that our Lord Jesus, the Son of God and the virgin Mary, is the true Messiah. The wretches feel it to be true, which the Lord foretold them in his gospel, saying: "When you see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place, let him who reads this understand. Then let those who are in Jerusalem flee to the mountains. But woe to those who are with suckling child in those days; for the affliction shall be great." [1887]

iv.25

And again, speaking of the city of Jerusalem, he says: "The days shall come upon you, that your enemies shall compass you with a trench, and hem you in, and lay siege to you on every side, and make you even with the ground, and your sons that are within you; and they shall not leave in you one stone standing upon another; because you do know not the time of your visitation." ^{Luk 19.43-44} And again; "There shall be wrath upon this people; and they shall fall with the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all nations; and Jerusalem shall be trodden underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled." ^{Luk 21.23-24} Now, since they feel these things are finished, [1888] as they were foretold in the gospel by Christ, why do the wretches not give God the glory, and believe the gospel in other things, acknowledging that Jesus Christ, the Son of God and the virgin Mary, our Lord and Saviour, is the true and looked-for Messiah? What do they have they to cloak their stubborn incredulity? Now for the span of more than a thousand and five hundred years, they have been without their country — I mean, the land of promise that flowed with milk and honey; they have lacked their prophets, and lacked their solemn service and ceremonial rites. For where is their temple? Where is the high priest? Where is the altar? Where are the holy instruments? Where are the sacrifices that ought to be offered according to the law?

All the glory of God's people is now translated to the Christians. They are the ones who now enjoy being called the sons of faithful Abraham; they enjoy the promises made to the fathers; they talk about and mention the fathers; they judge rightly about the law and covenant of the Lord; they have the holy scriptures, and have great dexterity in expounding them; they have the true temple, the true high priest, the true altar of incense and burnt-offerings, even Christ Jesus, the Lord and Saviour; they have the true worship which was only prefigured in those external ceremonies of old — as I have already declared to you in that place where I handled the Jewish ceremonies. The Gentiles are called out of every quarter of the world to Christ Jesus. All the promises touching the calling of the Gentiles have been most abundantly fulfilled up to now, even today.

iv.26

Now we are the chosen flock,[1889] according to the doctrine of St. Peter: "We are the royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; being called to it so that we should preach the power of Him who has called us out of darkness into his marvellous light."^{1Pet 2.9} Therefore, let the unhappy Jews turn to Christ by faith, and together with us begin to worship him in whom their fathers hoped, and in whom alone is life and salvation — unless, perhaps, they would rather be entangled in greater errors, to be vexed daily with endless calamities, and so at last perish eternally.[1890] For, to conclude this place with the apostle's words, "God was made manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen by the angels, preached to the Gentiles, believed in the world, and received in glory. ^{1Tim 3.16} And everyone who believes in him shall live eternally, and never be confounded." ^{Rom 9.33}

Now remaining, we have the last part to expound — the contents of which, are that God the Father, who before was angry with the world, is now pleased in his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

First of all, therefore, I have to show you that God was angry with the world, which is no hard matter to prove. For God is angry at sins. But the whole world is subject to sin; therefore, of necessity, it must be that the most just God is mightily angry with the whole world. Paul says: "The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men." ^{Rom 1.18} Again, the apostle says that "all men are subject to sin." ^{Rom 3.9} To confirm this, he cites these sentences from the holy scriptures, saying:

"There is none righteous, no, not one: there is none that understands, or seeks after God; they have all gone out of the way; they have all become unprofitable; there is none that does good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; they have used their tongues to deceive; the poison of asps is under their lips; their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are swift to shed blood. Heart's grief and misery are in their ways; and they have not known the way of peace. There is no fear of God before their eyes." ^{Rom 3.10-18}

iv.27

Now, lest the Israelites answer that these things do not pertain to the people of God, but to the heathen and ungodly alone, he adds: "We know that whatever the law says, it says it to those who are under the law; that every mouth may be stopped, and that the whole world may be endangered [1891] to God." ^{Rom 3.19} No man is excepted here. For the apostle says to the Galatians: "He has shut up all under sin, that he may have mercy on all." ^{Gal 3.22} It follows, therefore, that the whole world was subject to the wrath or indignation of the most just and righteous God, as proved at large in the second, fourth, and fifth chapters to the Ephesians.

But the heavenly Father is appeased, or reconciled to this wicked world, through the only-begotten Son our Lord Jesus Christ. And I hope I will abundantly prove this only by the testimony of God himself. For the Father sent down a voice from heaven to earth upon Christ — first, after his baptism, as he newly ascended out of the water; and then again, at his transfiguration in the sight of his disciples. He significantly says: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am delighted, pleased, or reconciled; hear him." ^Mat
17.5 This testimony was foreshown in the forty-second chapter of Isaiah's prophecy. And Peter the apostle repeats it in the first chapter of his second epistle. Paul also expounded this as it were, and said, "It pleased the Father that in the Son should dwell all fulness; and by him to reconcile all things to himself, since by him He has set at peace, through the blood of the cross, both the things on earth and the things in heaven." ^{Col 1.19-20} In heaven is God, and we men are here upon earth. Now Christ is the Mediator, who goes between us, and reconciles us to his Father, so that now we are the beloved of the Father in his beloved Son. For in the epistle to the Ephesians the same apostle says: "He has made us accepted in the beloved; in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace." ^{Eph 1.6-7} All this shall be more fully understood by what follows.

For now I must prove that God the Father has given us in his Son, all things that are necessary to a happy life and eternal salvation. I name here two things: a happy life, and everlasting salvation.

iv.28

By a happy life, I mean a holy and godly life, which we live and lead quietly and honestly in this present world. Eternal salvation is that felicity of the life to come, which with assured hope we truly look for.

Now, we have in Christ a most absolute doctrine of a happy life, taught to us by the gospel, in which we also comprehend the example of Christ, his own trade of life. Truly, our heavenly Father has made him our teacher in saying, "Hear him." And in the gospel of St. Matthew, he himself says: "Do not be called masters; for you have one master, even Christ;" ^{Mat 23.8} In the gospel of St. John, he is called "The light of the world." ^{Joh 8.12} In another place also, he testifies that his doctrine is contained in the holy scriptures, from which it comes that he refers his disciples to the diligent reading of the holy scriptures. Touching these scriptures, Paul, the teacher of the Gentiles and so the universal church of Christ, says: "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction which is in righteousness — that the man of God may be perfect, instructed in all good works." ^{2Tim 3.16-17} This is why, even if the whole world were mad, and they were obstinate defenders of traditions rather than the scriptures, and they sharpen their teeth out of anger — yet, despite their heads, the word of the apostle abides most firm,[1892] in which he testifies that the doctrine of the scriptures, otherwise called Christian doctrine, is in all points most absolute and thoroughly perfect. Touching this matter, because I have already spoken of it in the first sermons of the first Decade, I may therefore be a great deal briefer here.

Now concerning the eternal salvation fully purchased for us by Christ, you must think thus: eternal salvation is seeing and enjoying the eternal God. Consequently, it is an inseparable joining or knitting to him. For David says, "There is fulness of joys in your sight; and at your right hand are pleasures forevermore." ^{Psa 16.11}

iv.29

And St. John says, "Now we are the sons of God, and yet it does not appear what we shall be; but we know that, when he appears, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." ^{1Joh 3.2} Moreover, the Lord says in the gospel, "Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God." ^{Mat 5.8} But all men are endued with impure hearts: therefore no man shall see God; because no uncleanness abides in consuming fire (and God is a consuming fire [1893]). Therefore we cannot be partakers of salvation unless we are purely cleansed. But without the shedding of blood there is no cleansing or remission of sins: I do not mean the blood of rams or goats, but of the only-begotten Son of God, our Lord Christ Jesus. He [1894] therefore took on our flesh and blood; he came into the world, died willingly for us, and shed his blood for the remission of our sins; and by that means purged the faithful — so that now, being clean, they may be able to stand before the most holy God, who is a consuming fire. To this may be annexed the consideration of the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, his death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven, which I mentioned above in the definition of the gospel. For the whole mystery of our reconciliation consists in those points. Touching this, I will speak that much more briefly in this place, because in the exposition about the Apostles' Creed,[1895] I handled so much as concerns these points of doctrine. Whoever would know this, may look and find them there.

Now, that Christ alone is our most absolute life and salvation, it may be gathered from what has already been said. And yet, notwithstanding, I will here allege some further testimonies, to the end that the verity and sincerity of the evangelical truth may be firmer and more evident to all men. In Christ alone our life and salvation consists; so that without Christ, there is no life and salvation in any other creature. The Lord himself testifies of this [1896] saying: "Truly, truly, I say to you, He that does not enter by the door into the sheepfold, but goes in some other way, is a thief and a robber. Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep: as many as came before me are thieves and robbers." ^{Joh 10.1, 7-8}

iv.30

Look here, there is only one door through which the way to eternal life lies: and Christ is that door. Therefore, those who strive to come to life and salvation by other means than through Christ, are thieves and robbers; for they steal from Christ's honour and glory, considering that he both is and he abides as the only Saviour: and in so doing, they kill their own souls. The same Saviour in the gospel says: "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father but by me." ^{Joh 14.6} In these few words, has he not rejected and utterly excluded all other means of salvation, making himself alone our life and salvation? This certain phrase of speech, "No man comes to the Father but by me," is the same as this: "Through Christ alone we come to the Father." Moreover, the Lord's apostles have laid Christ alone before our eyes in such a way that no man can help but understand that without Christ Jesus, there is no life to be found in any other creature. The holy apostle St. Peter says in the Acts: "There is in no other any salvation: for there is no other name under heaven given among men in which we must be saved." ^{Act 14.12} And St. Paul, in the fifth chapter to the Romans, repeats that "by the righteousness of one man, Jesus Christ, all the faithful are justified." ^{Rom 5.17} Again, Paul says: "Through him is preached to you the remission of sins; and through him, everyone who believes is justified from all the things, from which you could not be justified by Moses' law." ^{Act 13.38-39} He also has other testimonies like this in the second chapter of his epistle to the Galatians. ^{Gal 2.16} It is manifest, therefore, that through Christ alone the forgiveness of sins and life everlasting are freely bestowed upon all the faithful. These gifts, just as they are not without Christ at all, so are they not bestowed by any other means than through Christ alone. Concerning the remission of sins, which is the chief tidings of the gospel, I have already discoursed at large in the ninth sermon of the first Decade, and in other places.

Now for the proof that our Lord fully absolves from sins, fully remits sins, and fully saves repentant sinners,[1897] so that nothing more can be desired or wished for; and consequently, the Lord himself is the most absolute fulness of all the faithful, without whom those who believe, neither do nor can wish for anything else unto life, salvation, and absolute felicity. In the gospel, He himself says again:

iv.31

"Everyone that drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water which I shall give him, he shall live eternally." ^{Joh 4.13-14}And again: "I am the bread of life; he that comes to me shall not hunger, and he that believes in me shall never thirst." ^{Joh 6.35}The apostles therefore, after they had eaten this celestial bread — that is, once they had believed in Christ, when many departed and forsook Christ — being questioned whether they also would leave him, answered this: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. And we believe and know that you are Christ, the Son of the living God." ^{Joh 6.68-69} Look here, they neither will nor can forsake Christ, because there is no other to whom they may join themselves. For he alone is the life and salvation of those who believe; and that too, is so absolute and perfect, that in him alone they may content and stay themselves. The doctrine of the apostles fully agrees with the writings of the evangelists. For Paul says to the Colossians: "It pleased the Father that in the Son all fulness should dwell." ^{Col 1.19}And again: "In the Son dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; and you are fulfilled in him." ^{Col 2.9-10} And in the Epistle to the Hebrews, he affirms that the faithful have full remission of sins, because sacrifices for sin cease to be offered; ^{Heb 10.2} and God promises by the prophet Jeremiah, so absolute a remission of sins, that he will not so much as once remember or think on them afterward.[1898] To this place belongs the whole epistle written to the Hebrews, and the conclusion of the eighth sermon in the first Decade, in which I recounted to you the treasures that God the Father gives to us in Christ his Son, our Lord and Saviour.

Upon this it now consequently follows that those who attribute to Christ Jesus our Lord, the true Messiah, either not exclusively, or else not fully, all things requisite to life and salvation, have not yet rightly understood the gospel of Christ, nor sincerely preached it.

iv.32

It is a wicked and blasphemous thing to ascribe either to men, or to things inferior and worse than men, the glory and honour due to Christ. The principal exercises of Christian religion cannot, by derogating from the glory of Christ,[1899] claim anything for themselves. For sincere doctrine directly leads us to Christ. Prayer invocates, praises, and gives thanks in the name of Christ. The sacraments serve to seal and represent to us the mysteries of Christ. And the works of faith are done out of duty, although also of free accord; because we are created for good works. Yes, through Christ alone they please and are acceptable to God the Father; for Christ is the vine, we are the branches. So all glory is reserved untouched to Christ alone: which is the surest note to know the true gospel by.

Thus, up to here we have heard that God, the Father of mercies, according to his free mercy, taking pity upon mankind when it stuck fast and was drowned in the mire of hell, sent his only-begotten Son into the world, as he promised by the prophets, that he might draw us out of the mud, and fully give us all things requisite to life and salvation. For God the Father was reconciled to us in Christ, who for us and our salvation was incarnate, dead, raised from death to life, and taken up into heaven again.

By all this, it may be indifferently well gathered to whom that salvation belongs, and to whom that grace is rightly preached. And yet, the matter itself seems to require us to expressly show, in flat words, that Christ and the preaching of Christ's grace, declared in the gospel, belongs to all. For we must not imagine that two books are laid in heaven. In one of them, the names are written of those who are to be saved; and they will be saved of necessity, so that whatever they do against the word of Christ, and however committed to so heinous offences, they cannot possibly help but be saved. In the other book are contained the names of those who, whatever they can do, and however holily they live, they cannot avoid everlasting damnation.

iv.33

Let us rather hold, that the holy gospel of Christ preaches generally to the whole world, the grace of God, the remission of sins, and life everlasting. And in this belief, we must confirm our minds with the word of God, by gathering together some evident places of the holy scriptures, which manifestly prove that it is so. Of this sort are the following sayings: "In your Seed, all the nations of the earth shall be blessed," ^Gen
22.18 "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved," ^{Joel 2.32} "We have all gone astray like sheep; and God has laid upon him the iniquity of us all," ^{Isa 53.6} "Come to the waters, all you who thirst," ^{Isa 55.1} There are countless places of this sort in the old Testament. Now, in the gospel the Lord says: "Everyone who asks receives; and he that seeks finds," etc. ^{Mat 7.8} "Come to me, all you who labour and are heavy laden, and I will ease you of your burden," ^{Mat 11.28} "Teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father," etc. ^{Mat 28.19} "Go into the whole world, and preach the gospel to all creatures: whoever believes and is baptized, shall be saved," ^{Mark 16.16} "God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that everyone who believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life," ^{Joh 3.15} In the Acts of the Apostles, St. Peter says: "Of a truth, I perceive that there is no respect of persons with God; but in every nation, he that fears Him, and works righteousness, is acceptable to him," ^{Act 10.35} Paul says in the third chapter to the Romans: "The righteousness of God by faith in Jesus Christ comes to all, and upon all those who believe." ^{Rom 3.22} And in the tenth chapter he says: "The same Lord over all, is rich to all those who call upon him." ^{Rom 10.12} In his Epistle to Titus he says: "There has appeared the grace of God, that is healthful to all men." ^Tit
2.11 And in first Timothy, the second chapter, he says: "God would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth." ^1Tim
2.4 These and similar are the manifest testimonies, upon which all the faithful firmly stay themselves.

But now. if you demand how it happens that all men are not saved, since the Lord would that all should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, the Lord himself answers you in the gospel, saying: "Many indeed are called, but few are chosen." ^{Mat 20.16}

iv.34

In the fourteenth chapter of St. Luke's gospel, he more plainly expounds this sentence, where he shows in a parable the reasons why most mortal men do not obtain eternal salvation, preferring earthly and transitory things, before celestial or heavenly matters. For everyone had a separate excuse to cloak his disobedience with: one had bought a farm; another had five yoke of oxen to test; the third had newly married a wife. ^{Luk 14.18-20} And in the gospel of St. John, the Lord says: "This is condemnation, because the light came into the world, and men loved darkness more than the light." ^{Joh 3.19} That saying of the apostle in 2Cor 4, agrees with this doctrine of the evangelists. And in first Timothy, the fourth chapter, he says: "God is the Saviour of all men, especially of those that believe." ^{1Tim 4.10} From this we gather that God, in the preaching of the gospel, requires faith in every one of us: and by faith it is manifest that we are made partakers of all the goodness and gifts of Christ. And truly there is a correlation between faith and the gospel; for in the gospel of St. Mark, the Lord annexed faith to the preaching of the gospel.^{Mark 16.15-16} And Paul says, that "to him was committed the preaching of the gospel, unto the obedience of faith." ^{Rom 1.5-16} Again he says: "The gospel is the power of God unto salvation for all those who believe." ^{Rom 1.16} And in the tenth chapter to the Romans, he shows by gradation that the gospel is received by faith. ^{Rom 10.9} But, that faith may be rightly planted in the hearts of men, it is needful that the preaching of repentance first goes before. For this reason, in the latter end of the definition of the gospel, I added, "So that we, acknowledging our sins, may believe in Christ." That is to say, the Lord will be our Saviour and give us life everlasting, if we acknowledge our sins, and believe in him. And therefore, here may now be annexed the treatises about faith and repentance. Touching faith, I have already spoken largely in the fourth, fifth, and sixth sermons of the first Decade. I will later speak concerning repentance, in a separate sermon by itself. In this place, I will only summarily touch on those points of repentance [1900] which seem to demonstrate the gospel.

iv.35

Our Lord Christ Jesus, in the preaching of the gospel, requires faith and repentance. Nor when he preached the gospel, did he himself proceed any other way. For Mark has: "Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe the gospel." ^{Mark 1.14-15} Nor did he otherwise instruct his disciples when he sent them to preach the gospel to all nations. For St. Luke says: "Christ said to his disciples, So it is written, and so it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise again the third day from the dead; and that in his name should be preached repentance and the forgiveness of sins to all nations." ^{Luk 24.46-47} St. Paul, like a good scholar following his master, says in the Acts of the Apostles: "You know that I have held back nothing that was profitable to you, but I have shown you, and taught you openly and throughout every house, witnessing both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, the repentance that is toward God, and the faith that is toward our Lord Jesus Christ." ^{Act 20.20-21} In his Epistle to the Romans, where he compendiously [1901] handles the gospel, he takes occasion to begin preaching it at sin, convincing both Jews and Gentiles to be subject to it. Now he begins at sin to this end and purpose: that every one, looking into himself, may see and acknowledge that he has no righteousness in himself, but that by nature [1902] he is the son of wrath, death, and damnation. It is not that such acknowledging of sins, of itself, makes us acceptable to God, or make us deserving of remission of sins and life everlasting; but in a way, it prepares a way in the minds of men to receive faith in Christ Jesus, and by that means, to embrace Christ Jesus himself, who is our only and absolute righteousness; for "the whole do not need the physician, but those who are sick and diseased." ^Mat
9.12 Therefore, those who think they are clear without sins, and are righteous of themselves, utterly reject Christ, and make his death of no effect.[1903]

iv.36

But on the other side, are those who feel the diseases of the mind, and from the bottom of their hearts confess that they are sinners and unrighteous, not putting any trust in their own strength and merits, who even pant from the haste that they make to Christ. And when they do, then Christ offers himself in the gospel, promising them remission of sins and life everlasting, as he that came to heal the sick and to save repentant sinners. But the promise is received by faith, and not by works: therefore the gospel, and Christ in the gospel, are received by faith. For we must diligently distinguish between the precepts and the promises. The promises are received by faith: the precepts are accomplished by works.

Upon which Paul said: "If the inheritance is of the law, then is it not now of promise: but God gave Abraham the inheritance by promise." ^{Gal 3.18} The same apostle, comparing the law and the gospel, says to the Romans: "The righteousness which is of the law says, Whoever does these things shall live by them; but the righteousness of faith says, If you believe, you shall be saved." ^{Rom 10.5,6} The law therefore is grounded upon works, to which it seems to attribute righteousness: but because no man fulfils the law in works, no man is justified by works, or by the law. The gospel is not grounded upon works: for sinners acknowledge nothing in themselves but sin and wickedness; for they feel in themselves that they are wholly corrupted. And therefore, they flee to the mercy of God, in whose promises they put their trust, hoping truly that they will freely obtain remission of their sins, and that for Christ's sake, they are received into the number of the sons of God.

I would speak more in this place concerning faith in Jesus Christ, the remission of sins, and the inheritance of life everlasting, if I had not already declared them at large in the first Decade. Here you have to remember, by the way, that the gospel is not sincerely preached when you are taught that we are made partakers of the life of Christ for our own deserts and meritorious works. For we are freely saved[1904] without respect to any works of ours, either first or last.

iv.37

Although I have more than once handled this argument in these sermons of mine. Yet, because it is the hook on which the hinge of evangelical doctrine hangs (which is the door to Christ), [1905] and this doctrine (namely, that Christ is received by faith, and not by works) is greatly resisted by many men — I will, for the declaration and confirmation of it, produce only two places here; but they are apparent and evident enough to prove and confirm it by. The one is out of the gospel of Christ our Lord, the other out of Paul's Epistles.

In the gospel of St. John, our Lord Jesus Christ was about to briefly teach Nicodemus the way to true salvation; that is, to preach the glad tidings of life. He first of all begins at repentance, and wholly takes Nicodemus away from himself, leaving him no merits of his own in which to put his trust. For utterly condemning the first birth of man, in which nothing is available to obtain eternal life, what does he leave Nicodemus, I beseech you, in which he may brag or make his boast? For he expressly says: "Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless a man is born from above,[1906] he cannot see the kingdom of God." If the first birth and its gifts [1907] were able to promote a man to the kingdom of God, then what need would he have to be born the second time? The second birth is wrought by the means of the Holy Ghost, which, being poured into our hearts from heaven, brings us to the knowledge of ourselves, so that we may easily perceive, assuredly know, and sensibly feel, that in our flesh there is no life, no integrity, nor righteousness at all; and consequently, no man is saved by his own strength or merits. What then? The Spirit in truth inwardly teaches us that which the sound of the gospel outwardly tells us: that we are saved by the merit of the Son of God.[1908] For the Lord says in the gospel: "No man ascends into heaven, except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of man that is in heaven." ^Joh
3.13 For in another place he more plainly says: "No man comes to the Father but by me." ^{Joh 14.6} And again, he says to Nicodemus: "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up; that everyone who believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life." ^{Joh 3.14-15}

iv.38

Now Moses hung up the brazen serpent for the health and recovery of those who were poisoned [1909] by the serpents' bites. For those who were stung by the serpents quickly died, unless they immediately looked up to the brazen serpent; for at the very sight of it, the poisoned sting lost all force, and the envenomed person was restored and cured again out of hand. Nor was there any other medicine in the host of Israel except that alone; and whoever despised it, died without remedy. For the force of the poison was not expelled, and the life of the infected was not preserved, either by the power of prayers, or the multitude of sacrifices, or medicinal herbs, or any kind of medicine, or other means of man's invention.[1910] If anyone would escape the peril of death, it behoved him to behold the brazen serpent aloft. Now, that brazen serpent was a type or figure of Christ our Lord, who being lifted up upon the cross, is ordained by God to be the only salvation. But now, to whom does that saving health befall? To those, in truth, who behold him being so lifted up. The Lord himself tells us what "to behold" signifies; and in its place he puts "to believe." Therefore, no works, no other means or merits of ours, save us from eternal death and from the force of sin — that is, from the poison with which we are all infected by the old serpent, our adversary Satan. Faith alone — by which we believe in Christ, who was lifted up for the remission of our sins, and in whom alone our life and sure salvation assuredly consists — is the only thing that quickens us, who are already dying by the envenomed sting of Satan, which is sin.[1911], Moreover, hear what the Lord adds, instructing Nicodemus yet more fully in the true faith, and making the only cause of our salvation to be the mere grace of God alone, which is received by faith in Christ.

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that everyone who believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son [1912] to condemn the world; but that the world might be saved by him. He that believes in him is not condemned: but he that does not believe in him is already condemned, because he does not believe in the name of the only-begotten Son of God." ^{Joh 3.16-18}

iv.39

Look, what could be spoken more plainly? By faith we are made partakers of Christ. By repeating faith so often, his meaning was to beat it into our heads, that no man should hereafter even once doubt so manifest and evident a piece of doctrine. But if here, you now set little by the authority of Christ, then whose authority will you esteem? But you will not, I know, reject his testimony. Yet even if his warrant is sufficient, give ear to that disciple whom the Lord loved, who in his epistle expounding the words of the Lord, and by way of exposition, repeating and beating them into all men's minds, strongly cries out:

"If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he testified of his Son. He that believes in the Son has the testimony in himself. He that does not believe God, makes Him a liar, because he did not believe the record that God gave of his Son. And this is the record: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that has the Son has life; and he that does not have the Son of God, does not have life." ^{1Joh 5.11-12}

But what else does it mean to have the Son of God, than to believe in him? For this sense is gathered from what went before. It is so evident of itself, that for me to add anything to it, is to do nothing but, as it were, go about with a tallow-candle to help lighten the sun at its rising.

Now we have come to the place of St. Paul, which is seen in the third and fourth chapters of his epistle to the Romans. "The righteousness of God without the law," he says, "is made manifest, being witnessed by the testimony of the law and the prophets." ^Rom
3.21 Paul in this place preaches the gospel most evidently; for I do not know any other place in which he does it more plainly. He teaches here how we are justified before God, what is true righteousness and the salvation of mankind, and by what means it comes to us. He says, that the righteousness of God, that is to say, the righteousness which God bestows, or which prevails before God, is revealed without the law.

iv.40

That is to say, it comes to us without the help of the law, namely, without the aid and merits of the works of the law. For touching the testimony of the law and the prophets, they witness together that those who believe are justified by the righteousness of God. Now what that righteousness is, he immediately declares, saying: "The righteousness of God comes by the faith of Jesus Christ to all and upon all those who believe."^{Rom 3.22} He says the righteousness of which we speak,[1913] is not human or of mortal man, but altogether divine, or of God himself. For as God alone is just, so the righteousness of God is the true and only righteousness that saves us. God makes us partakers of this righteousness by that faith of Jesus Christ; namely, if we believe in Christ, and hope in him to be saved.[1914] Neither is there any man excluded here from righteousness and salvation; for Paul plainly says, "to all and upon all who believe." This is why God reputes and esteems all those to be righteous, who believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord and Saviour. Now he presently annexes the reason why he attributes salvation to the righteousness of God, and not of man, or why the gospel commends the righteousness of God to us, saying: "For there is no difference; all have sinned and have need of the glory of God;" ^{Rom 3.22-23} This is because all men, of their own nature, are destitute of the glory of God; that is, they are without the true image of God, in whose likeness they were created in the beginning. Therefore, all men, truly, are unrighteous and sinners. From this it follows that there is no righteousness in them, and that they have nothing in which to boast before the righteous God. For what else, I beseech you, do sinners carry from the judgment-seat of God, but confusion and ignominy? And because all men are in that state, the apostle therefore wisely adds: "But they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus; whom God has set forth to be a propitiation, or reconciliation, through faith in his blood.^{"
Rom 3.24-25}

iv.41

This is the same as if he had said: Men are justified for Christ's sake by the mere grace or mercy of God, without any help or merit of their own, if they only believe that God has given his Son to the world, to shed his blood, and to reconcile the purified sinners to his Father in heaven. In these words, there are most fully and plainly declared the whole manner and order of sanctifying, purifying, and justifying sinners.

But it is good here to repeat the apostle's words, and to more closely examine and deeply consider them. "They are," he says, "freely justified." But why freely? Because, in truth, they are justified by the mere grace of God, without the help of their own works or merits. For all men are sinners; therefore, they have nothing of themselves to allege for their justification. It follows from this, that since some are justified, they are justified freely by the grace of God. For in the eleventh chapter to the Romans, the apostle says: "If we are saved by grace, then it is not now of works, for then grace is no longer grace: but if by works, then is it is not now grace." ^{Rom 11.6}

But there immediately follows in Paul, what makes that argument still more manifest, which is manifest already: "through the redemption," he says, "that is in Christ." Our righteousness and salvation is the work of mere grace, because we are redeemed. For in respect to ourselves, our works, and merits, we were the servants of death and the devil, insofar as we were sinners and subject to sin. But by sending his Son, God redeemed us when, still being his enemies, we were bound to the devil, his open adversary.[1915] Therefore, he freely redeemed us — as Isaiah the prophet, in his fifty-second chapter, plainly foretold that it would come to pass. And true salvation is not in any other, whatever he may be, save in Christ alone, our true Lord and Saviour. For the heavenly Father, by his eternal counsel, set forth his Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, to be our propitiation; namely, that he might be our reconciliation, for whose sake alone the Father, being pacified, adopts us into the number of the sons of God. This is accomplished by no other way than through faith in his blood; that is, if we believe that the Son, being sent by the Father, shed his blood, to thereby set us before his heavenly Father, cleansed, justified, and sanctified. We see in this, again, that our salvation freely consists in faith in Jesus Christ.

iv.42

These points being thus unfolded, the apostle proceeds to show how far the benefit of redemption and justification stretches. He immediately adds: "To declare his righteousness by the forgiveness of the sins that are past, which God suffered, to show his righteousness at this time." ^{Rom 3.25} God, he says, has set forth Christ to be the only propitiation, that he might show that there is but one and the same righteousness in all ages: Christ himself, I say, who is the righteousness of all who believe. Now here he mentions two separate times: that ancient age of the fathers, and this present time in which we now live. The ancient age is that which went before the coming of Christ; this latter age of ours, is what begins at Christ, is now at this present time, and shall be extended to the end of the world. And God truly, by his long sufferance, bore with and suffered the sins of that old age for Christ's sake, by whom, and for whom, he has forgiven them. Nor does he set before us today any other righteousness, save Christ alone, to be received and embraced by faith.

For the apostle does not obscurely add afterward: "That he might be just, and the justifier of those who believe on Jesus." As if he had said, Now the meaning of all this, is that we should understand that all men are unrighteous and altogether sinners; God alone is righteous, without whom there is no righteousness at all: and he communicates his righteousness to all those who believe in Christ: namely, those who believe that for Christ's sake, the Father is pleased and reconciled to us, and we are reputed both just and holy, for him.

Two very wicked and blasphemous errors of certain fellows are notably refuted by these words of the apostle. The one is by those who say that our fathers were justified, not by faith in Christ, but by the law and their own merits; they assert that Christ suffered not for the fathers, but only for those who lived when he was on earth, and those who followed after his death.

iv.43

The other error is by those who say that Christ offered up his body for the fathers, for original sin only, and not for us and all our sins; therefore, we must make satisfaction for our own sins. But the apostle Paul in this place condemns both these opinions. And the holy evangelist John, agreeing with Paul, says: "The blood of the Son of God cleanses us from all sin. For he is the propitiation for our sins; not for our sins only, but for the sins of the whole world." ^{1Joh 1.7; 2.2} Therefore, the merit of Christ's redemption extends to all the faithful of both the testaments.

The apostle Paul proceeds, and infers from what he said: "Where is the boasting? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith." He gathers by the evangelical doctrine [1916] taught previously, that all the boasting of every man's own righteousness, and all the bragging of every one's merits, is utterly taken away, altogether exempted, and vanished. And this is not by the law of works — that is, not by the doctrine concerning works, which is prone for the most part to puff men up and make them swell — but by the law of faith, that is, by the doctrine concerning faith, which empties and leaves in us nothing but a humble confession and acknowledging of our own lack of merits, attributing all our help to grace in Christ Jesus. And at the last, gathering the chief proposition, he says: "We therefore hold that a man is justified [1917] without the works of the law."

This is the sum and breviary of the whole gospel: that we are justified — that is to say, we are absolved from sins, from the definitive sentence of death and damnation; and we are sanctified and adopted into the number of the sons of God — by faith, that is, by an assured confidence in the name of Christ, which is given by the Father to be our only Saviour. And here works are excluded, to the end that there should be given to us no occasion to entangle faith with works, or to attribute to works the glory and title due to faith alone — or rather to Christ, upon whom our faith is grounded and upheld.

iv.44

Once this proposition is put forth, he quickly confirms with arguments, showing that this salvation is common to both the Jews and Gentiles, saying: "Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, even also of the Gentiles: for it is one God who shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith." ^Rom
3.29-30 He fetches the confirmation of what he said, from the nature of God. There is but one God who, of his own nature, is both life and righteousness; and he is the God both of the Jews and the Gentiles; therefore he is the life and righteousness of both the people. He bestows this righteousness on them by faith: therefore faith justifies, or makes them both righteous.

This is declared by the example of Cornelius the centurion. For he is justified, or I should rather say, once being justified, he is declared acceptable to God, by sending down the Holy Ghost upon him in a visible form — when being neither circumcised, nor having kept the law, but having only heard the preaching of the gospel, he had believed in Jesus Christ. Now, God did not justify Cornelius alone this way, but He will also justify all other nations by faith; even as he will not justify the Jews by any other means than by faith alone.

It follows in Paul: "Do we then destroy the law through faith? God forbid! Rather, we maintain the law." ^{Rom 3.31} For the defenders or the disputers in the defence of works, or rather justification by works, are prone to object: If faith alone in Christ justifies, then the law, or the doctrine of the law, is altogether unprofitable. For to what end are we commanded to do good works, if good works do not justify? The apostle answers that, The law is not abolished by faith, but rather it is maintained. For since faith directly tends to Christ, in whom alone it seeks and finds all fulness; and the law itself is the school-mistress for Christ, and shuts up all under sin, so that justification by faith is given to the faithful — it is most evident that the law is not destroyed or darkened, but confirmed and made light, by the doctrine of faith.

The apostle goes on in his confirmation, and says: "What then shall we say that Abraham our father found, as pertaining to the flesh? For if Abraham were justified by works, then he has something to boast in; but not before God. For what does the scripture say? Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." ^{Rom 4.1-3}

iv.45

There are truly many examples of the holy fathers: but among all the rest, the apostle chose [1918] to handle this one at large, out of Abraham. For in the scriptures he is called the father of those who believe. ^{Rom 4.16} From which it is assuredly certain that the children shall be justified in the same way that their father was; as the apostle taught in express words at the latter part of the fourth chapter. Moreover, Abraham was famous for good works above all the rest of the holy fathers. Therefore, if any other could have been justified by his good works or merits, then Abraham even more so, above all the rest. But because he was justified by faith and not by works, it is therefore manifest that all the saints also have been, and are, justified by faith and not by works. Furthermore, Abraham lived 430 years before the law was revealed by Moses.[1919] From this it follows that his works cannot be called the works of the law by those who deny justification by faith without the law. Therefore, the works that he did, he did by faith, and his works were the works of faith; and yet he was not justified by them, but by faith. Therefore, the glory of justification by faith remains sound, unspotted, and unmingled with anything else. "What shall we say that our father Abraham found concerning the flesh?" Namely, so far as he is a man, and we are also men from him? What, I say, shall we say that he deserved? [1920] To this demand, this answer must be added: He found nothing, and by his works he deserved nothing. For the proof follows: If he deserved anything by his works, or was justified by his merits, then he has something in which to boast. But he has nothing in which to boast; therefore, he is not justified by his works. For God alone is righteous, and keeps this his glory to himself alone, without any partner or joint-possessor with him, freely justifying those who are of the faith of Jesus Christ, to the end that his grace may always be praised.

But Paul himself, by bringing in a passage of scripture, shows that Abraham had nothing ion which to make his boast. "For what," he says, "does the scripture say? Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." ^{Rom 4.3}

iv.46

Look here, the scripture most plainly says that Abraham was justified by faith; or rather, that faith was imputed to him for righteousness; and therefore, for his faith, Abraham was counted righteous before the most just and righteous God.

But let us hear Paul, how he applies this passage of scripture to his purpose. It follows then: "To him that works, the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of duty. But to him that does not work, but believes in him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." These words, truly, may be briefly reduced into this kind of argument: whoever deserves anything with his works, the reward is given to him as a thing that is due out of duty, and not imputed freely as though it were not a debt. But faith is imputed to Abraham unto righteousness; therefore he received righteousness, not as a reward out of a duty owed to him, but as a gift that is not due, but is freely given to him. And again: "To him that does not work, but believes in him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness." But for Abraham, faith was imputed unto righteousness; therefore he obtained righteousness by faith, and not by works.

Now, there is an emphasis in what he says, "But believes in him that justifies the ungodly." For thereby is signified that the one who is to be justified, brings nothing with him except the acknowledgement of his own misery and ungodliness, to seek mercy at the hand of the Lord. For he understands that he is destitute of good [1921] works, and one who may abide the trial of God's just judgment. He therefore flees to the mercy of God, presuming certainly that the righteousness of faith is the aid or help of the sinner, who must be freely saved by the grace of God.

Here, by the way, you must note, that Christians' righteousness both is, and is said to be, imputative righteousness: this alone is able to break the neck of all our boasting; for imputation is the contrary to debt. God is not bound to us out of duty, either for our own sakes, or for our works' sakes; but only so far as he has bound himself to us by his free grace and goodness. And there are many things in us that hinder the perfection of righteousness in us.

iv.47

Whereupon David cried: "Do not enter into judgment with your servant: for in your sight no man living shall be justified." ^Psa
143.2 Therefore God freely imputes to us the righteousness of faith; that is, he reputes us as righteous because we believe Him through his Son. So the Lord said, as we read in the evangelical parable, "But when the debtors were not able to pay, he forgave them both the debt." ^{Luk 7.42} For God also forgives us our debts or sins, not reputing them to us, but counting us as righteous for Christ's sake. For the same apostle, most evidently testifying the same thing in the second epistle to the Corinthians, says: "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, by not imputing sins to men." ^{2Cor
5.19, 21} And after that, again: "Him who knew no sin, he made sin for us, that we might be the righteousness of God in him." What can you require that is more evident than this: we are counted righteous before God, because our sins are so purged by Christ's sacrifice, that afterward we should no longer be held with the guilt of them?

We now proceed to reckon up the other arguments of St. Paul, as firm and manifest as these were that have already been recited.

In the same chapter, therefore, it follows: "Even as David describes the blessedness of the man to whom the Lord imputes righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose unrighteousnesses are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is that man, to whom the Lord will not impute sin." In the beginning, with clear and evident words, he expresses the thing that he intends to prove or confirm; namely, that God imputes righteousness to the saints without works. What could be said more plainly? And, to prove it is so, here he infers the testimony of David, which in a manner contains three different members or clauses: first, "Blessed," he says, "are those whose unrighteousnesses [1922] are forgiven;" then, "Blessed are those whose sins are covered;" and lastly, "Blessed is that man to whom the Lord will impute no sin." ^{Rom 4.7-8}

Now the force of the argument or demonstration consists in the words, Forgive, Cover, and Not impute. The creditor forgives the debtor what he has not paid him, whether he is able to pay it to him or not.

iv.48

In respect to our sins, which are our debts, we are able to pay nothing to God. Forgiveness of those debts or sins of ours is therefore the gift of God's mere grace and liberality. For the creditor cannot forgive the thing that is already paid to him; for when he gives back the thing that he has received, in so doing he does not forgive, but gives; and that deed in the scriptures is called Donum, a gift, not Remissio, a forgiving. Whereupon St. Paul says, "God gave the inheritance to Abraham:" therefore Abraham did not merit it with his works. Secondly, some filthy thing that offends the eyes of men is usually covered; and yet notwithstanding, the filthy thing abides filthy still,[1923] even though it does not appear outwardly to the eyes of men. And our merciful God has covered our sins, not that they should cease to be, but that they should not appear or come to judgment; which is the gift of grace, and not of merits. For the covering is nothing else than the blood of the Son of God — because for his blood's sake, we sinners are not damned. Lastly, God might by right and justice impute sin to us; but of his grace he does not impute it. And all these laid together, confirm and prove that righteousness is freely imputed to us by faith, without works.

This very same passage from St. Paul, taken out of David, discusses and makes plain to us other points of doctrine also, about which there is some controversy. For we learn that justification is nothing else but sanctification,[1924] forgiveness of sins, and adoption into the number of the children of God. We learn that St. Paul speaks not only of the ceremonial works of the law, but also of the saints' good works of every sort. Furthermore, we learn that both sins and iniquities, that is, all manner sins of the faithful, are freely pardoned and utterly forgiven. Moreover, we learn that sins are fully remitted — not only the fault, but also the punishment. This punishment, some say, is retained; but God does not impute sins. In another place He says that, " he will not have any remembrance of our sin at all." [1925] Lastly, we learn that man's invention of satisfactions for sin, is a most vain lie, and flatly opposite to the apostle's doctrine.

iv.49

Up to here I have alleged two most evident places: the one out of the gospel of Christ, the other out of St. Paul's epistle written to the Romans. By these I meant to prove that Christ, being preached to us by the gospel, is received not by works but by faith; and I hope that by divine testimonies, I have so declared this matter of importance, that no man will afterward need either to doubt, or to waver in it. To all this I now add this note, which is still most necessary to observe: that all good and holy men in the church of Christ, must endeavour with all their power [to ensure] that this doctrine of the gospel may abide sincere and utterly uncorrupted. For they must in no case admit that justification is partly attributed to faith and the mercy of God, and partly to the works of faith and our own merits: for if that is admitted, then the gospel loses all force and virtue. I therefore think that all men must solely and incessantly urge this: That the faithful are justified, saved, or sanctified [1926] by faith, without works, by the grace and mercy of God through Christ alone. And I suppose, truly, that this doctrine of the gospel must be kept sincere and uncorrupted in the church for very many reasons, but among all others, for these especially which follow.

First of all, the oft-repeated doctrine of the grace of God, which works justification in his only Son through faith alone, is manifest by so many divine testimonies, even from the beginning of the world, by so many demonstrations, and by so many determinations of unreproveable councils, and it is so plainly declared and thoroughly inculcated — that the very consent of all ages in the truth revealed from heaven, and the authority of the most holy men in the whole world, sufficiently invite us to retain, maintain, and keep that doctrine uncorrupted. We have the justification of our blessed father Abraham briefly [1927] expounded above by no obscure author, but by Paul, the teacher of the Gentiles and the elected vessel of God himself. We have the doctrine of justification that was taught by the most glorious king and prophet, [1928] David, a man after God's heart's desire — the great grandsire of Christ our Lord — declared and expounded by the same apostle Paul.

iv.50

Now Abraham and David were always men of chief account in the church of God. The whole company of the prophets wholly agree with these two. For the apostle Peter says, "All the prophets bore witness to Christ, that by his name everyone who believes in him should receive remission of his sins." ^{Act 10.43} And even now, by the mouth of Paul, we heard it said that by the testimonies of the law and the prophets, it is proved that the righteousness of God is freely bestowed by faith, without the law.

We also have the very Son of God, Jesus Christ, our Lord, whose authority, far excelling the whole world's beside, may confirm us well enough in this piece of doctrine.[1929] For, as if it were in certain assembled councils, he determined and decreed what we in this place counsel all men to retain. For having gathered together his disciples at Caesarea Philippi, he demanded of them, what men thought of him. Now when they answered diversely, according to the diversity of the opinions that the common people had of him, he inquired what they themselves thought of him.[1930] Then Peter, in the name of all the rest, said this: "You are that Christ, the Son of the living God." To whom the Lord replied: "Happy are you, Simon Bar-jona; for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father which is in heaven." ^{Mat 16.16-17} In these words, he concludes two separate things: first, that true faith makes us happy. Nor is it to be doubted that "to make happy" is used here in that signification which you just heard from Paul, and in which David used it. Lastly, sanctifying [1931] faith is not the work of our own nature, but the heavenly gift of God. Then, upon that notable confession of true faith, Christ also takes occasion to give a new name to Simon Peter, to eternally commemorate it,[1932] and to imprint the signification of that mystery in all men's minds. Peter confessed that Christ was a stone, or rock; ^1Pet
2.8 therefore Christ surnames Peter a Petra, that is, a stone. It is as if one were to call him a living stone laid upon a living stone, or of Christ a Christian.

iv.51

Yes, and lest any man tie the thing universally belonging to the whole church, to Peter alone, the Lord himself applies it to the whole church, and says: "And upon this stone will I build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." It is as if he had said, That which now is done in you, Peter, shall afterward be done in all the faithful. By faith you are laid upon me, the stone, and are made a member of the church. I therefore ordain that whoever confesses me to be the stone, shall be a member of the church, sanctified,[1933] justified, and delivered from the devil and the power of death. Your confession (that I am Christ, the Son of God) shall be the foundation of the church; whoever is laid [1934] upon this foundation, shall be justified [1935] and freely saved. For Paul also said: "Another foundation cannot be laid than what is already laid, which is Christ Jesus." ^{1Cor 3.11} And the apostle John says: "This is the victory that has overcome the world, even your faith." ^{1Joh 5.4} Now, lest Peter and his fellow-disciples not know the way by which other men should be admitted into the fellowship of the church and received into the communion of Christ, he adds immediately: "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven," etc., ^{Mat 16.19} He gave the keys when he sent the apostles to preach the gospel. Therefore, by the preaching of the gospel (which is the key of the kingdom of heaven), heaven is opened, and the way is pointed out how we, being grafted into Christ and the church, may be made the heirs of eternal life; namely, through faith in Christ, which we are taught by the gospel of Christ. This much touching the council of which Christ himself was president, held at Caesarea Philippi.[1936]

There is found in John another council, held at Capernaum, ^Joh
6.59both famous and full of people. For in a great multitude of his disciples and other men, Christ establishes that eternal life is gotten by faith in him; and that there is no other way for us to come to life than this: "to eat My flesh, and drink My blood;" ^Joh
6.54 that is, to believe in him. And when there was a schism among the audience because many revolted from Christ, he demanded of those who were his nearest disciples, whether they too would forsake him?

iv.52

Then Peter in the name of all the rest answered: Since in you, Christ, there is life and salvation, if we depart from you we cannot be partakers of life; and therefore by faith we will firmly stick and cling close to you forever. ^{Joh 6.67-69}

Moreover, here are to be reckoned two other councils that were held by the apostles: the one which no man can deny was general or universal; for in it there were devout men of every nation under heaven. In that council Peter the apostle teaches in express words, that Christ is the Saviour of the world; whoever believes in him, shall have life everlasting. The place is known in the Acts of the Apostles, second chapter. Before the chief of the Jews, that same apostle declares that there is salvation in no other than Christ alone. The place is found in the Acts of the Apostles, the third chapter. He says the same to the first-fruits of the Gentiles, Cornelius and his household, in the tenth chapter. The second council, which was also famous and surpassingly adorned with all good gifts, is described in the fifteenth chapter of Acts. In this council, this proposition was allowed: that faith without works justifies freely. Touching this matter, I have spoken at large in another place.[1937]

Now, by all this I would have it proved that the doctrine of Faith that justifies without works, ought to be retained unmingled and uncorrupted in the church because, if I may say so, it is most catholic and altogether unreproveable. The apostle adds this curse or anathematism for its breach, saying: "If we, or an angel from heaven, preaches to you any other gospel than that which we have preached, let him be accursed." ^Gal
1.8

The second cause why it is expedient that this doctrine be kept sincere in the church, is because once it is put out of joint, the glory of Christ will be in danger of wrack,[1938] and put in jeopardy. For the glory of Christ is darkened and corrupted in the minds of men (even though, of itself, it remains always sound and clear) if we begin to divide the righteousness by which we stand and appear before God, attributing it to our own merits and our own good works. For this is the glory of the Son of God, that "under heaven there is no other name given to men in which they must be saved." ^{Act 4.12}

iv.53

Upon this Paul says: "Christ is made of no effect to you, whoever are justified by the law; you have fallen from grace." ^Gal
5.4 Again: "I do not despise the grace of God; for if righteousness were of the law, then Christ died in vain." ^{Gal 2.21} If he died in vain, then the glory of Christ's cross has perished.

The third cause is the certain and assured reason of our salvation. Our salvation would be utterly uncertain if it depended on our works and merits. Because of our natural corruption, unless we are beside ourselves, we say or ought to say with Job: "If I have any righteousness, I will not answer, but humbly beseech my judge." ^{Job 9.15} Therefore Paul very rightly said: "If the inheritance is of the law, then faith is void, and the promise is made of no effect. Therefore, it is of faith, according to grace 3; that the promise may be firm to all the seed." ^{Rom 4.14, 16}

The fourth cause is because, by this doctrine especially, there is repaired in us the image of God, the likeness of which we were created in at the first. For by faith, Christ dwells and lives in us; he is also delighted in our humility. But then the image of the devil is stirred up in us, once we begin to be proud in ourselves, and to usurp the glory of God. Undoubtedly, this is done as often as we attribute our righteousness and salvation to ourselves, as though we had deserved the kingdom of God by our own works or merits. The devil swells with pride, and endeavours to rob [1939] God of his glory. The saints know and acknowledge that they are saved by the true grace and mercy of God; and therefore they attribute to him all honour and glory, and to themselves confusion and ignominy. To this undoubtedly belongs the parable in the gospel, of the Pharisee boasting in his good works, and of the publican praying and saying, "God be merciful to me, a sinner." ^Luk
18.9-14 Of these two, the publican is said to have gone down to his house [1940] justified, rather than the other.

iv.54

The fifth cause is the value or estimation of the sin. For that seems to be no great fault, if it may be blotted out before God by men's works. But the holy scripture teaches that sins could be cleansed by no other means, than by the death and innocent blood of the Son of God. Now, every man that has any understanding, may easily gather by this, that sin in the sight of God is a most abominable and detestable thing. From this there arises in the faithful saints a careful and diligent watching against sin, and a continual bewailing of our miserable condition, with a surpassing humility and intense modesty.

I could yet add to these some more causes why all men ought to strive and endeavour to keep this doctrine sincere and uncorrupted in the church of Christ (e.g., that the catholic church is justified by the grace of God in his only-begotten Son, through faith, and not through works). But these I hope are sufficient for those who are not purposely set to quarrel against us. And yet, notwithstanding, there is no peril that good works would be neglected by this doctrine. I have spoken of this in a convenient place.[1941] But if there are any who do not cease to cavil on purpose against the manifest truth of the gospel, I use against them this saying of Paul: that neither we, nor the churches of God, stand to wrangle in so manifest a light. ^1Cor
11.16

To conclude, the sum of all that I have said up to here touching the gospel is this: That all men in the world who, of their own nature, are the servants of sin, the devil, and eternal death, cannot be loosed or set at liberty by any other means than the free grace of God, and the redemption which is in the only-begotten Son of God our Lord Christ Jesus. Only those who believe and trust in him, are made partakers of this redemption. For whoever receives Christ Jesus by true faith, through the preaching of the gospel, are thereby justified; that is, they are acquitted from their sins, sanctified, and made heirs of eternal life. But those who do not receive Christ, by their unbelief and hardness of heart, are given over to the eternal pains and bonds of hell; for "the wrath of God abides on them." ^{Joh 3.36}

Let us therefore give hearty thanks to God our Redeemer, and humbly beseech him to keep and increase us in the true faith, and at the last, to bring us to life everlasting. Amen.

iv.55

4-2. THE SECOND SERMON: OF REPENTANCE.

Of repentance and its causes; of confession and remission of sins; of satisfaction and indulgences; of the old and new man; of the power or strength of men, and the other things pertaining to repentance.

I PROMISED in my last sermon about the gospel of Jesus Christ, to add a discourse about repentance; by the help of God and your good prayers I purpose to perform it in this sermon.

Among the Latins, those who are aggrieved at or ashamed by the thing that they have done, are said to repent. You have done a good turn, and think that the one for whom you have done it, is unworthy of it; and for that reason you are sorry to yourself. That sorrow of yours is repentance. We Germans call it Den reuen. The Greeks name it Metanaeam. Now, those who are skilful in that tongue say that metanoein signifies to think afterward: so that Metanaea is properly used where a man, once he has slipped by doing something foolish, at length comes to himself again, and truly purposes to correct his own error.[1942] It therefore refers not only to the thought of the mind, but also to the deed that is done. For he that perceives that he has offended, devises for himself how to amend it. Now the thing begins to displease you, which pleased you before; so now you eschew the thing that you pursued before.[1943] Moreover, the Hebrews call repentance Theschubah, that is, a conversion, or returning to the right way or right mind again.

iv.56

The metaphor seems to be taken from those who once strayed from the right path, but at length return again into the way: this word is related to the mind, manners, and deeds of men.

But now this word is diversely used; for repentance signifies the changing of the purpose, or of any other thing, once it is conceived. For the Lord says by Jeremiah: "If they turn from evil, I will also repent of the evil which I meant to lay upon them." ^{Jer 18.8} Therefore, God repents when he changes his purpose: he does not repent when he does not alter it. Paul says: "The gifts and calling of God are without repentance." ^{Rom 11.29} And David said: "The Lord has sworn, and will not repent." ^{Psa 110.4} Elsewhere, repentance is figuratively attributed to God, like the affection of mortal men; as when he says, "I repent that I have made man." ^{Gen 6.7} For God of his own nature does not repent as men do, so that he should be touched with grief, and that he should now disapprove of that which he approved before; rather, he barely alters what he has done. Among ecclesiastical writers, those are said to repent who, according to a prescribed manner of punishment, do penance for the sins they have committed. In another place, the scripture uses it for the whole effect and matter of the gospel. For in the Acts we read that God granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life. ^{Act 11.18} But, in this disputation of ours, we will use repentance for a converting or turning to the Lord; for acknowledging sins; for the grief conceived for sins committed; for mortification, and beginning to lead a new life; and finally, for the change, correction, and amendment of the life lived, from evil to better — that which we Germans call Bekeerung, Enderung oder Besseruny.[1944]

And repentance is defined just as diversely by the ecclesiastical writers. Nevertheless, all agree that it is a conversion or turning to the Lord, and an alteration of the former life and opinion. We therefore say that repentance is an unfeigned turning to God, by which, being of a sincere fear of God (once humbled), we acknowledge our sins; and so, by mortifying our old man, we are renewed afresh by the Spirit of God.

iv.57

This definition consists in its parts which, being somewhat more largely opened and diligently expounded, will declare to us and lay before our eyes the whole nature of repentance.

First, we say that repentance is an unfeigned turning to God. For I will afterward show you that there are two sorts of repentance; namely, feigned and unfeigned. And the apostle Peter says: "Repent, and turn, that your sins may be blotted out;" ^{Act 3.19} — expounding, as it were, the first by the last, namely, repentance by returning; (he means) returning to Him from whom they had turned away. For there is a certain relation between turning to and turning fro. If you had never turned away, then you would have had no need to turn back again. But we have all turned away from the true, just, and good God, and from his holy will, to the devil and our own corrupt affections. And therefore, we must again turn from the devil, and from our old naughty life and will, to the living God and to his most holy will and pleasure. We say here, significantly, to God, and not to creatures or to any help of man. For the Lord says in Jeremiah, "If, Israel, you will return, return to me." Jer 4.1 Whoever therefore does not turn to God, nor make themselves conformable to his holy will, however they may turn to creatures and other means of man's invention, they are not [1945] esteemed or counted penitents.

Now, none is so blind as not to see that to stir us up to repentance, the preaching or doctrine of the truth is needful and requisite, to teach us what God is to whom we must be turned; what goodness and holiness are, to which we must be turned; who the devil is, and what the evil and wickedness are, from which we must be turned; and lastly, what the thing is that must be amended in our mind and life, and also how it must be altered and amended. Truly, the prophets and apostles of the Lord, in exhorting men to repentance, travail much and stay long in describing God's nature, goodness, righteousness, truth and mercy; in painting the laws and offices of the life of man; and in accusing and heaping up [1946] the sins of men.

iv.58

To this they add the grievous and horrible tokens of God's just judgments: as very rifely found in every place of the prophets' writings. And therefore, there are some who bid us even now to preach the law to those men whom we would draw to repentance. I do not question this, but very well like it, so I admonish them that the preaching of the gospel also confronts men with their sins, and grievously accuses them. For the Lord says in the gospel: "When the Holy Ghost comes, it shall convict the world of sin, because they did not believe in me." ^{Joh 16.8} Whereupon St. Peter, in the Acts of the Apostles, upbraiding the Jews for the sins they committed, and preaching Christ to them, and faith in Christ, he exhorts them to repentance. The places are very well known, Acts 2 and 3. St. Paul, preparing to draw the Athenians to repentance, says: "God, who has up to now winked at the times of this ignorance, now preaches to all men everywhere, that they should repent because he has appointed a day in which he will judge the world with righteousness through Christ." ^{Act 17.30-31} Let those, therefore, to whom charge is given to draw men [1947] to repentance, learn here to use much liberty and wisdom, so that all men may acknowledge their sin and the greatness of their iniquity. Moreover, God stirs men up to repentance, not by his word only, but also by diverse afflictions and various sorts of punishments. Yes, all the calamities that happen in the world are certain sermons, as it were, persuading and drawing us to repentance. That I may pass over in silence what is written in the prophets, did not our Lord himself in the gospel, when he heard tidings of the slaughter which Pontius Pilate had made upon the Galileans, and the death of the eighteen men upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, quickly say, "Do you think that they were greater sinners than the rest? No, truly; but unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish." ^{Luk 13.1-5} It is assuredly certain, therefore, that war, famine, and plagues always invite us to repentance; that is, they premonish us to be converted to God, by laying sin aside, and to give ourselves wholly to sincere integrity.

iv.59

But repentance is preached to us in vain, unless by fear and trembling conceived in our minds, we reverently dread the wrath and judgment of Almighty God conceived against us because of our sins and wickednesses. Now, this fear is outwardly stirred in us by the external preaching or discipline of the minister,[1948] as I told you before; but that external doctrine avails nothing, unless inwardly, that is, in our hearts, we are moved by the Holy Spirit of our heavenly Father. And therefore Jeremiah in his Lamentations cries: "Turn us, O Lord, and we shall be turned." ^{Lam 5.21} And in the thirty-first chapter: "Turn me, Lord, and I shall be turned; because you are the Lord my God. And after I was turned, it repented me of evil." ^Jer
31.18-19 We read that St. Peter, being provoked by the words of the damsel who kept the door, and by the soldiers, foully denied his master Christ. But being revoked [1949] at the cock's crowing, he repented his fault or folly from the bottom of his heart. And yet it was not the crowing of the cock of itself alone, that stirred that motion in him; but that and the word of Christ together, who had said to him: "Truly I say to you, the cock shall not crow till you have denied me three times." Upon which St. Matthew says; "And Peter remembered the words of the Lord, who had said to him, Before the cock crows, you shall deny me three times," etc. ^{Mat 26.34, 75} With these is also joined a more secret touching of Peter's mind; for the good Lord touched the heart of Peter, as the evangelist testifies, saying: "And the Lord, turning himself about, looked upon Peter." ^{Luk 22.61} That looking back of the Lord made Peter's heart melt, and drew it from the destruction into which it was about to fall. Therefore, if our ears are pierced with the word of God, and our hearts touched with his Holy Spirit, then like true penitents, we will unfeignedly reverence and dread the Lord.

And with this, being humbled before the most just and holy God, whom with our sins we so much offend and provoke to wrath and indignation, we confess his judgment to be just against us, and freely acknowledge all the sins and iniquities that in the word of God are objected against us, crying out and saying with the prophets:

iv.60

"You, truly, Lord, are righteous; you are true, and your judgments are just; but we are most unrighteous, liars, wicked, and wholly overwhelmed with detestable iniquities. There is nothing sound or sincere within us. All that we have is corrupt and miserable. We have sinned, we have been wicked, we have done unjustly, we have forsaken you. We have questioned your servants the prophets, we have not obeyed the words of your mouth. Righteousness belongs to you, therefore, God; and to us wretches, belong shame and confusion." [1950]

God requires of penitent sinners, this humiliation and free confession of sin. I will afterward say something more touching this; for now, I return to more fully expound the fear of the Lord.

At present I speak of the sincere fear of God: for we confess that the fear of God is of two sorts, sincere and insincere. The sincere fear of God is perceived in the faithful, and it is a godly reverence consisting in the love and honour of God. For the prophet brings in God saying: "The son honours the father, and the servant the master: therefore if I am a father, where is my honour? if a lord, where is my fear?" ^{Mal 1.6} And Paul says: "You have not received the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but you have received the spirit of adoption, by which we cry, Abba, Father." ^{Rom 8.15} Therefore, the sincere fear of God in those who repent is not the servile dread of punishment, but a careful study mixed with the love and honour of God. An honest wife fears her husband, and a gracious daughter fears her father;[1951] and yet with that, each of them loves — the one her father, the other her husband; and each of them with a holy love endeavours to keep his favour, and fears lest at any time she should do anything to lose it. And therefore penitents, being taught by the Spirit of God, not only fear because they know they have committed sins for which they deserved to be forsaken by the Lord; but they also love Him as their merciful Father, and are therefore sorry with all their heart for the sins they have committed; and above all things, they most ardently require to be reconciled again to their merciful God and loving Father.

For with this sincere fear of God, is joined the grief or sorrow which is conceived by the Spirit of God for our sins that we commit. St. Paul mentions two sorts of sorrows. "The sorrow that is toward God," he says, " brings forth repentance, [1952] not to be repented of; but contrarily, the sorrow of the world brings death." ^{2Cor 7.10}

iv.61

The king and prophet David sorrowed toward God, when he cried: "Your arrows stick fast in me, and your hand presses me sorely. No part in my flesh is whole because of your displeasure; there is no rest in my bones because of my sin;" ^{Psa 38.2} and so forth, as seen in the thirty-eighth Psalm. Although it was written about his grievous disease or sickness, yet, as if it were in a shadow, it shows us the great grief that is found in the saints for offending their good and gracious Father with their continual [1953] sins. In St. Luke, the sinful woman was sorry toward God. Falling prostrate at the Lord's heels, she washed his feet with tears, and wiped them with her hair.^{Luk 7.38} St. Peter was sorry toward God, and bitterly wept (as we read) for his offence.^{Luk 22.62} The godly are greatly grieved because, so often, they so foully offend so good a God and gracious Father. No words, I think, can possibly express the grief and sorrow that they conceive. But the prophet Jeremiah, describing the contrary affection of impenitent sinners, says of them:

"Do men so fall, that they may not rise again? Does any man go so astray, that he may not turn back? How does it happen, then, that these people of Jerusalem are turned away so stubbornly? I gave ear and listened, but they did not speak rightly: none repented of his wickedness, so as to say, What have I done? Every one of them turned to his own course, like a fierce horse, headlong to the battle." ^Jer
8.4-6

Worldly grief is the sorrow of those men who do not know God, and are without faith and the true love of God; indeed, of those who yield under the burden of sorrow, adversities, and [1954] sins. Like this also, in a way, is the consideration of the insincere fear of God. For the wicked, with their head, the devil, do not fear God as a father whom they are sorry to offend, and to whom they desire to be reconciled as a father; rather, they fear God as a tormentor, because they know that he will revenge their evil deeds. And therefore, with Judas, [1955] they run [1956] to the rope.^{Mat 27.5} There is no love of God in them, no honour, no good-will, no reverence, but mere hatred,[1957] horror, and utter desperation.

iv.62

But John the apostle and evangelist, denied that such fear is found in charity, saying that "perfect charity casts out all fear." ^1Joh
4.18 I do not mean the fear of the Lord which is the beginning of wisdom, but that fear about which I have spoken all this while — the fear, I mean, that is in the devil, and wicked men who are his members. [1958]

And now, by this we gather that faith in God, and the merit of Christ, is most of all and especially needful for penitents. It is in this sense, I think, that many have made faith a part of repentance. I do not greatly deny this. Yet I see that St. Paul made a distinction between faith and repentance when, in the twentieth chapter of the Acts, he says that "he witnessed to both the Jews and Gentiles, the repentance that is toward God, and the faith that is in Jesus Christ." Therefore, repentance and faith seem to be diverse. It is not that true repentance can exist without faith; but they must be distinguished, and not confounded. We all know that true faith is not without works — that of necessity, it produces good works. Yet we differentiate between faith and works, without separating them or rending the one from the other. And in like manner, we acknowledge that true faith and true repentance are undividedly knit together, and closely fastened one to the other. I will not argue whether faith is a part of repentance, or by any other means depends upon it. It seems to me a notable point of folly to go about tying matters of divinity to precepts of logic, for we do not learn that from the Lord's apostles. I admonished you in a previous sermon about the gospel [1959] (which I repeat here), that acknowledging sins does not, of itself, obtain grace or forgiveness of sins; even as the bare acknowledging of a disease is not the remedy for it. For even damned men acknowledge their sins, and yet they are not thereby healed. Acknowledging sin is a certain preparative to faith; just as acknowledging a disease provides an occasion to think about a remedy.

iv.63

We add to this, at present, that it is not the very fear of God, however sincere it is; it is not the very sorrow conceived for our sins, however great it is; nor is it the very humiliation, however submissive it is, of themselves, that make us [1960] acceptable to God. Rather, they prepare an entrance and make a way for us to the knowledge of Christ, and consequently, they lead us to Christ himself, being incarnate and crucified for us and our redemption; and they lay us upon Christ alone, to be quickened and purely cleansed by him. For one who is truly converted to God is utterly turned from himself and from all hope of worldly aid. Whoever truly fears God and is sorry indeed from the bottom of his heart, fears and is sorry for sins that he committed; and not for that alone, but because he finds himself wholly corrupted, and to have no soundness or integrity in himself. Indeed, because he reverences God as his Father, he discloses his wounds to Him, as he would to a surgeon, desiring to be instantly reconciled to Him as to his loving Father. True godliness cries that no man can be reconciled to God the Father except by the only-begotten Son. And here, the penitent lays hold on the Son by faith, and so he seeks the means of his reconciliation.[1961] Faith is grounded on the only grace or mercy of God exhibited to us in Christ Jesus, and the penitent believes that he is accepted by God for Christ's sake alone. Therefore, he makes his supplications to God, committing himself wholly to His mercy, as we read that David did, and the prodigal son in the fifteenth chapter of St. Luke's gospel. To this place might be annexed the doctrine of the gospel, of faith in Jesus Christ, and of the remission of sins. I have already spoken touching these things.

And here, I think it is not amiss to say that the minds of penitents must by all means be confirmed with many and evident places of scripture, plainly uttered, concerning the full remission of sins. This is to the end that from then on, there is no scruple of conscience to cause us to despair or doubt in our temptations. Notwithstanding, I repeat again and again this note, which is to be thoroughly marked for the confirmation of the glory of the only-begotten Son of God, our Lord Christ Jesus: that penitent sinners have their sins remitted, not for their repentance, in the respect that it is their work or action; but in the respect that it comprehends the renewing of man by the Holy Ghost, and true faith which delivers us to Christ our physician, that he may heal all our diseases and bind up all our griefs.[1962]

iv.64

This treatise properly belongs in the common place of faith and the gospel, which I have already discussed as briefly as I could. Yet, notwithstanding, I will here recite some evident sentences touching the grace of God, and free remission of our sins. David says in the hundred and third psalm:

"Praise the Lord, my soul, and do not forget the things that he has done for you; who forgives all your sins, and heals all your infirmities; who saves your life from destruction, and crowns you with mercy and loving-kindness. He has not dealt with us according to our sins, nor rewarded us according to our wickedness. For look how high the heaven is in comparison to the earth; so great is his mercy toward those who fear him. And look how far the east is from the west; so far has he set our sins from us. Yes, like a father pities his own children, so the Lord is merciful to those who fear him. For he knows that we are frail (prone to sin), and He remembers that we are but dust." ^Psa
103.1-14

Isaiah in the first chapter of his prophecy says: "Thus says the Lord, Though your sins are red as scarlet, they shall be made whiter than snow; and though they are red as purple, they shall be made like undyed [1963] wool." ^{Isa 1.18} Again, in the forty-third chapter he brings in the Lord saying: "I am He that blots out your transgressions — and that is for My own sake, and I will not remember your sins." ^{Isa 43.25}

The Lord says in the thirty-first chapter of Jeremiah,^31.24 which is also alleged by Paul in the eighth and tenth chapters to the Hebrews: "This is my covenant that I will make with them after these days; I will be merciful to their iniquities, and not remember their sins any more." ^Heb
8.12

In the thirty-sixth chapter of Ezekiel, the Lord says: "I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be cleansed from all your uncleanness. A new heart I will also give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; as for that stony heart, I will take it out of your flesh, and give you a fleshy heart. I will deliver you from all your uncleanness. But I will not do this for your sakes, says the Lord; be sure of that," etc. ^Eze
36.26f

iv.65

Daniel, in his ninth chapter, leaves us a manifest example of a confession of sins. He says in express words that by the Messiah, our sins are forgiven, our iniquity is purged, and instead of it, everlasting righteousness is brought in.[1964] So the prophet Zechariah affirms in his third chapter, that the iniquity of the earth is purged by the only sacrifice of Christ Jesus.

In the gospel of St. Matthew, The Lord says: "The healthy do not need the physician, but those who are sick. Nor did I come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." ^{Mat 9.12-13} And therefore he is called Jesus, that is, a Saviour: for the angel said, "He shall save his people from their sins." ^{Mat 1.21} And St. Paul says to Timothy: "It is a sure saying, and by all means worthy to be received, that Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners." ^1Tim
1.15

In the same gospel, the Lord says: "Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men; but blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven men. And whoever says a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whoever speaks a word against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come." ^Mat
12.31-32 Concerning sin against the Holy Ghost, I have already spoken in another place.[1965] Now to this place belong all the examples of that most liberal kind of forgiveness which is expressed in the gospel — for example, of the sinful woman, Luke 7.39f; also [the woman at the well], John 4.5f and [the demon-possessed man], Matthew 8.28f; of Zacchaeus,^{Luk 19.2f} St. Peter,^{Luk 22.32f} and the thief on the cross.^{Luk 23.39f} But who is able to briefly reckon them all? To this also pertain the three parables in the gospel according to the evangelist, St. Luke.[1966]

In the gospel of St. John, the forerunner of the Lord cries out, saying: "Behold the Lamb of God, that takes away the sins of the world." ^{Joh 1.29} And the Lord himself said to his disciples: "Whoever's sins you forgive, they are forgiven." ^{Joh 20.23}

iv.66

The apostle Peter cries out in Acts, saying: "All the prophets bear witness to Christ, that whoever believes in him, would receive remission of sins by his name." ^{Act 10.43} The apostle says again in his Epistle: "Christ himself bore our sins in his body upon the cross, that we, being dead to sin, might live to righteousness, by whose stripes you are healed." ^{1Pet 2.24}

The apostle Paul, in the fifth chapter of his second epistle to the Corinthians says: "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their sins to them. For he that knew not sin, was made sin for us; that through him we might be made the righteousness of God." ^2Cor
5.19 And in the tenth chapter to the Hebrews he has: "Christ, having offered one sacrifice for sin, has sat down at the right hand of God forever; from then tarrying till his foes are made his footstool. For with one offering has he made perfect forever those who are sanctified." ^{Heb 10.12-14}

Moreover, the blessed apostle and evangelist John testifies no less truly than evidently, saying: "The blood of Jesus Christ the Son of God cleanses us from all sin." ^{1Joh 1.7} And again: "And he is the propitiation for our sins; not only for ours, but also for the sins of the whole world." ^{1Joh 2.2}

But now, the Novatians and Anabaptists are the most vain and the very messengers of Satan himself, who pretend that by baptism we are purged into an angelical life, which is not polluted with any spots at all. But if it is polluted, then the one who is so defiled can look for no pardon at all.[1967] For (passing over many other places of holy scripture), was not St. Peter consecrated to God in baptism? Had he not tasted of God's good grace? [1968] After that notable confession which he made, the Lord said to him: "Happy are you, Simon Bar-Jona; flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father which is in heaven." ^{Mat 16.17} Again, when the Lord demanded of his disciples, saying, "Will you depart also?" then Peter in the name of them all answered; "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life; and we believe and know that you are Christ, the Son of the living God." ^{Joh 6.67}

iv.67

And yet this very same Peter, after his baptism and tasting of the grace of God, sinned notwithstanding — and that too was not lightly,[1969] in denying and forswearing his Lord and Master. Now, was he altogether unpardonable for this sin of his? Was his return to God again stopped up by his stumbling? No, truly. For when he heard the cock crow, he quickly remembered the words of the Lord, descended into himself, considered what he had done, wept bitterly, and mourned lamentably. And yet he was not long tormented in that grief without consolation. For the third day after, the angels said to the women who came to the Lord's sepulchre, "Tell his disciples, and Peter, that he is risen, and goes before you into Galilee." Look here, the Lord would have it known to Peter, by name, that he was risen. And why to Peter by name? Because, in truth, he had sinned more grievously than the others. Not that the Lord liked Peter's sin; but because he would thereby declare to us, that penitents obtain forgiveness of their sins, so often as they turn to the heavenly grace of God again. Not many days after, he restored Peter to the ministry again, commending to him the charge of his sheep. ^{Joh 21.15-17}

Moreover, in Jeremiah the Lord speaks to the people of Israel, saying: "If any man puts away his wife, and she [1970] marries another man, will her first husband return to her? But is this land not defiled? Have you not committed fornication with many? Yet return to me, says the Lord." ^{Jer 3.1} And the Galatians, having been rightly instructed by the apostle Paul, but afterward seduced by false apostles, revolted from the truth and the preaching of the gospel. Yet, notwithstanding, they obtained pardon. The Corinthians also, after they had received grace, wittingly and willingly sinned in many things. Yet, upon repentance, the apostle Paul promised them forgiveness of their sins at the hands of the Lord.

And what is more manifest than this, that all the saints pray daily, in earnest and truly, not hypocritically or falsely, saying, "Forgive us our trespasses?" Those who thus pray, plainly confess that they are sinners; and the Lord promises to hear those who pray with faith. Therefore, even those sins are forgiven at the prayers of penitents, which are committed after the grace of God is known and obtained.

iv.68

Now the places in the epistle to the Hebrews, which the Novatians allege to confirm their opinion, I have so thoroughly discussed in another place,[1971] that I need not busily stay here too long upon them.

But now, to gather a sum of those things which I have said up to here concerning repentance; let us hold, that repentance is a turning to God which, even though he stirs it up in us by his word and other means, is so wrought in us, notwithstanding, especially by the Holy Ghost, that with fear we love, and with love we fear our just God and merciful Lord, from whom we were turned back, being sorry now with all our hearts that with our sins, we ever offended so gracious a Father. For being humbled before his eternal and most sacred majesty, we acknowledge the sins that are objected against us by the word of God. Yes, we acknowledge that there is no integrity or soundness in us; but we heartily desire to be reconciled with God again: and since that reconciliation cannot be made otherwise than by the only Mediator, the Lord Christ Jesus, we lay hold on him by faith, by whom we, being acquitted from all our sins, are reputed by God to be righteous and holy. Whoever sincerely acknowledges this benefit, cannot help but hate sin, and mortify the old man.

I would therefore now add other members belonging to this treatise of repentance; namely, the mortification of the old man, and the renewing of the spirit, were it not that the very matter itself requires to have something said touching the confession of sins and satisfaction for it. For there are some who, when they speak of repentance, say some things that are contrary to the truth. Therefore, dearly beloved, to the end that you not be ignorant of what to think about these points according to the truth, I will not hesitate to stay awhile in the exposition of them. And I hope that, out of my words, you will gather such fruit that you will not afterwards repent of it.

iv.69

To confess, or a confession, is diversely used in the holy scriptures. For it signifies to praise the Lord, and to give him thanks for the benefits that we receive from his hands; and therefore confession is used for praise and thanksgiving. For the prophet says: "O praise the Lord; for he is good, and his mercy endures forever." Paul says in his epistle to Titus, speaking of hypocrites, "In words they confess that they know God, but in their deeds they deny him." ^{Tit 1.16} Here, confess signifies to say, profess, or boast. In another place it is taken for trust, to stay upon God's goodness, and to testify of that confidence, by words as well as deeds. And St. John used it in that sense in the fourth chapter of his epistle, and Paul in the tenth chapter to the Romans. Moreover, to confess is to give glory to God, and freely acknowledge your sin and the judgment which is objected against you for your sin. Solomon in the twenty-eighth chapter of his Proverbs says: "Whoever hides his iniquities" (or as it were, defends them), "nothing shall go well with him: but whoever confesses and forsakes them, mercy shall be shown to him." ^{Pro 28.13} The Hebrew tongue uses the word Jadah for what we call "confess." Now Jadah signifies to let slack, or loose, as when a bent bow is unbent again. And Modeh, which comes from Jadah,[1972] is as if one were to say, confessing, yielding, or granting to be vanquished.[1973] For God accuses us, and pleads us guilty of sin and endangered [1974] to punishment: which our flesh does not quickly acknowledge, but remains stiff like a bent bow, until at length, when that stiffness is unbent, it acknowledges everything that God objects against us. The acknowledging is called Modeh, that is, a confession.

iv.70

And we Germans say, Es hat gelassen, Er hat geschnellt,[1975] when we mean something has yielded, or a man has at last confessed what before he either flatly denied or else dissembled.

But now, confession of sins is of more than one sort; for the one is divine, the other human. I will first speak of the divine confession, then of the human.

We call it a divine confession, for which there are evident testimonies or examples in the holy scriptures, and which is instituted by God himself. It is a free acknowledging and flat confession of the sin which God objects against us, by which we attribute all glory to God, and all shame and confusion to ourselves; and with this, we crave pardon of God, and of our neighbour, against whom we have sinned. Now, sin is objected against us by God himself, who pleads us guilty of sin, and endangered to punishment, doing this outwardly by the word or the ministry of men, and sometimes by signs and wonders; and inwardly by the secret operation of his Holy Spirit — thus requiring from us a free and voluntary confession of our sins. For He likes a free and voluntary confession, not a feigned or extorted one.[1976] Truly, the citizens of Jerusalem and people of the Jewish religion of their own accord came to the baptism of John, confessing their sins, which John had objected against them in his preaching. And after the ascension of Christ into heaven, St. Peter accused of the Jews of their sins; and immediately upon the accusation it follows in the history: "When they heard this, they were pricked in their hearts, and said to Peter and the other apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?" and so forth, as follows in the second chapter of the Acts. Likewise also, the keeper of the prison at Philippi,[1977] feeling the earthquake, sprang out, and being instructed with the apostle's words, confessed his sins and was baptized.[1978] And the men of Ephesus who were given to magical arts, when they heard the calamity which the devil brought upon the sons of Sceva, their fellows and practisers in magic and sorcery, exceedingly feared, and came and confessed their sins. The confession of sins especially arises upon these causes, for the most part.

iv.71

Again, there are two sorts of confession instituted by God, one of which is made to God, and the other to our neighbour. That which is made to God is either private or public.

We make our confession to God privately, when we disburden our hearts before God, open the secrets of our hearts to him alone, and, in acknowledging the sins that are in us, we earnestly beseech him to have mercy upon us. This confession is necessary to obtain pardon for our sins. For unless we acknowledge our own corruption and unrighteousness, we will never by true faith lay hold on Christ, by whom alone we are to be justified. Here we do not think that penitents must hasten to confess their sins to any other confessor but God alone; for He alone forgives and blots out the offences of penitents.[1979] He is the physician, to whom alone we must reveal and open our wounds. He is the one that is offended by us, and therefore we must desire forgiveness [1980] and reconciliation from Him. He alone looks into our hearts and searches our reins;[1981] to Him alone we must therefore disclose our hearts. He alone calls sinners to him. Let us therefore make haste to him, prostrate ourselves before him, confess our faults to him, and crave pardon from Him. This confession, if it is made of a zealous mind toward God, even if it cannot be made by word of mouth because of some impediment or lack of the tongue,[1982] it is notwithstanding acceptable to God,[1983] who does not so much respect the mouth, as the mind of man. On the other side, if we make confession with the mouth, and are not thoroughly bent in heart to it, even though we make that confession to God or to the high-priest, yet the Lord does not regard so vain a confession.

I have already spoken concerning that true confession to God, though in the definition of repentance, I said that penitents acknowledge their sins. The scripture in many places speaks of this substantially.

iv.72

David confesses in the Psalms, "Have mercy upon me, God, according to the greatness of your mercy. For I acknowledge my sins, and my sin is ever before me. To you alone have I sinned, and done evil in your sight." ^{Psa 51.1} And so forth. And in another Psalm,^32.5 "I have made my fault known to you, and I have not hidden my unrighteousness. I said, I will confess my unrighteousness to you [1984] against myself, and you have forgiven the wickedness of my sin." In the gospel, the Lord teaches us to pray, and to confess in prayer, saying, "Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." And, when we pray so, he bids us to go aside into our chamber,^{Mat 6.6} that our heart and the devotion of our hearts may there appear to our heavenly Father alone. The prodigal son in the field, where none but swine were to be seen, privately makes and offers the confession of his sin to his father.[1985] And the publican in the gospel, which is compared with the Pharisee, beats his breast, and confesses with a lamentable voice, "Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner." ^{Luk 18.13} Let us now also hear John, the holy apostle and evangelist, comprehending all that may be truly spoken touching this confession, in this one saying: "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all iniquity." ^1Joh
1.8-9To this private confession, which is made to God, is always joined that voluntary confession which is made before men. For penitents are humbled as often as the matter, the glory of God, and the safeguard of our neighbour requires, and they openly testify before men that they have sinned against God. For so David, when Nathan the prophet told him of his sin, cried out, saying: "I have sinned against the Lord." ^{2Sam 12.13} So also Zacchaeus, understanding that the Lord was upbraided for receiving him,[1986] openly confesses his sin, and promises amendment. ^{Luk 19.8}

iv.73

Truly, we publicly make our confession to God, as I told you a little earlier; but so much the better when, after the hearing the word of truth in that public or solemn manner, we either in the church, or otherwise in some congregation or holy assembly,[1987] recite our sins that we have committed, and cry to God for mercy and pardon of it. Truly, the Lord appointed in our forefathers' days, that the priest should lead the people with words premeditated for the purpose, and the whole people should follow him word for word, and openly confess their sins in the temple.[1988] From this, undoubtedly, it is received today in the church of the Christians, that with the pastor or doctor of the church leading in conceived words at the end of the exposition of the scriptures, and before the assembly is dismissed, all the people should openly in the temple confess all their sins against God, and heartily desire that He forgive them, of His mercy.[1989] The public confessions of sins are notably known, which were made by Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. And I say plainly [1990] that it was a public confession of sins, which St. Matthew in his third chapter says that the Jews made. For all Jewry came out to John, the forerunner of the Lord, "and were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins." ^{Mat 3.6} For when they publicly received baptism, they thereby declared and openly confessed their sins. For baptism is the sign of the cleansing of sins. Therefore, those who are baptized confess that they are sinners.

iv.74

Those who were not baptized, thought they were otherwise purged and did not need any sanctification. The Ephesians publicly confessed their sins when, gathering their books of witchcraft together, they burned them in the fire. For by burning those books, they confessed that they had committed wickedness that was to be purged with fire.

Now, the confession that is made to our neighbour is of this sort: You have offended your brother, or perhaps he has done you injury, for which you are both at discord, and hate one another. In this case, truly, you must think of reconciliation. Let the one therefore go to the other and confess, and ask pardon for the fault committed; and let the one that is innocent in the matter [1991] freely forgive the one who confesses his fault, and so become his friend again. The apostle James spoke of this confession, saying: "Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that you may be healed." ^Jas
5.16 And our Lord and Saviour, before James taught us, said: "If you offer your gift at the altar" (for he speaks to those among whom at that time the sacrifices of the law were still in use), "and remember there that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way; first be reconciled to your brother, and then you may come and offer your gift." ^{Mat 5.23-24} To this also belongs that parable which the Lord puts forth and expounds in the eighteenth chapter of St. Matthew, about the one who was cast into perpetual prison because, when he had found favour at his Lord's hand, he was overly cruel to his fellow-servant, to whom he would not forgive so much as a farthing. For in the sixth chapter of St. Matthew, the Lord says: "If you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, no more will your Father forgive you your trespasses." ^{Mat 6.14-15} It is not that by forgiving others, our sins are forgiven us; for then forgiveness of our sins would not be free, but would come by our merits, and as the recompense of our deserts. But when our sins are freely forgiven through faith, truly that unreconcilable and hard heart is an assured argument that there is no faith in a hard, stubborn, and unappeasable man.

iv.75

And where there is no faith, there is no remission. Therefore, voluntary forgiveness in a man towards his neighbour is not that for which we are forgiven by God our Father. Rather, it is an evident sign and natural fruit of true faith, and of the grace of God in us.

To these two kinds of confession some men add that consultation by which those who are oppressed in conscience with any grievous sin, consult or ask counsel either of the pastor of the Lord's flock, or else of some other who is expert and skilful in the laws of God. But that is rather to be termed a consultation than a confession; and it is not commanded or forbidden in any place [of Scripture], and therefore it is left free to every man's choice. Therefore, no man ought to be compelled to this consultation. But if any brother demands counsel either of the minister of the church, or of any other private brother, then charity commands you to satisfy him, if you can. Indeed, if he does not demand, and you see your brother in danger, charity again commands you to admonish the one who is thus in danger, and to handle him as a brother. For Paul says to the Galatians: "Brethren, if a man is prevented in any fault, you who are spiritual should restore such a one in the spirit of meekness, considering yourself, lest you also be tempted. Bear one another's burden, and so fulfil the law of Christ." ^{Gal 6.1} But this does not belong to confession at all; therefore we return to our purpose again.

We have said this much up to here touching the confession of sins which God has instituted. Now we will annex something touching the confession of sins that men have ordained. That confession also is of two sorts: the one is public ritual or ceremonial, which for the most part they call exomologesis; the other is private or secret and is called auricular.

I call the public confession ritual, not so much because it is the acknowledging or confession of sin, as because it is the penitential action for the sin committed.

iv.76

For Isidore the bishop, in Libro Etymol. [1992] vi. cap. 18, says: Exomologesis "is the discipline of prostrating and humbling men in habit, in living, to lie in sack and ashes, to deface the body with filth, to mourn and lament with a sorrowful mind, and through sorrow to amend that in which they sinned before." [1993] I would not have recited these words of bishop Isidore to you, dearly beloved, who is not a very famous author, unless I had seen the same words in the book which Tertullian wrote about repentance;[1994] and unless I had found an example of it in Eusebius, who in the fifth book and last chapter of his Ecclesiastical History says:

"Natalis the martyr,[1995] being seduced by heretics, and at length understanding his error, rises up in the morning, and puts on a sack cloth, sprinkling himself with ashes, and with many tears bewailing his error. He casts himself prostrate at the feet of Zephyrinus the bishop and all others — not only clerics, but laymen also — with great lamentation and exceeding sorrow. He provoked all the congregation with earnest and continual prayers, to request of Christ Jesus, to pardon his offence." [1996]

I will speak later touching the rites of repentance. Now, this ritual or ceremonial repentance, as it was used among those of old, appears not to have been commanded by God, such that whoever today commits any sin, should be compelled to quickly confess it openly in this same way that they were in the habit of doing.

iv.77

For where is it read that such penance was enjoined of the sinful or adulterous woman that is mentioned in the gospel? [1997] Many other sinners are received by Christ into the grace of God without such outward penance. For it is very well known how Christ dealt with Matthew, with Zacchaeus, with Peter who denied him, and with many others. Therefore, we do not amiss believe that the old bishops and priests invented that public kind of penance for discipline's sake, and that of their times, they might have less liberty to sin. Truly Hermius Sozomenus Salaminius,[1998] that notable writer of the Ecclesiastical History, in his seventh book, sixteenth chapter, says: "In the beginning, it pleased the priests that, as if it were in a theatre, all the congregation might bear witness of the sins of offenders being openly punished." Look here, he says, "It pleased the priests." He also adds that there was a priest appointed, to whom those who sinned would come and confess their sins, and hear from him the penance, namely, what they should do, or how they should compensate [1999] for their transgression. Immediately after, he describes the manner of penance used in the Romish church. And to that, he again adds that,

"in the church at Constantinople, there was a priest appointed to hear penitents; this office remained till at length, a certain gentlewoman, who for the sins that she had confessed, was enjoined by such a penitentiary to fast, and to pray to God. Thereby, having occasion to be long in the church, she was at last exposed to have played the whore with a deacon. For this reason, the priests were spoken evil of. But Nectareus the bishop, devising how it would be best to deal with such a grievous crime, deprived the deacon who had committed the sin, of his deaconship. And because some persuaded them to leave it free to everyone, according to his own conscience and confidence, to come to the communion of the mysteries, he quite removed the office of that penitentiary priesthood. And ever since that time, that counsel given to Nectareus has prevailed, and endures even to this day." And so forth.

In the beginning of the chapter, [Hermias] says: "Nectareus, the bishop of Constantinople, first removed from the church the priest who was appointed to hear the confession of penitents, whom all the other bishops in a manner followed." [2000]

iv.78

But the bishop Nectareus would not have abrogated that exomologesis (being so holy a man as indeed he was), if he had understood that it had been instituted by God himself: nor would it have been lawful for him to have abrogated it. Therefore he knew, even as Sozomen also confesses, that by the counsel of the bishops, that order of penance was usurped in the church. Nor do we read that John Chrysostom, who succeeded Nectareus,[2001] and was a very diligent and severe bishop, ever restored that ritual penance which his predecessor had abrogated before him. For in the thirty-first homily on St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews, he writes:

"I bid you not to betray yourself openly, nor yet accuse yourself to others; but I would have you obey the holy prophet, who says, Open your way to the Lord. Therefore confess your sins before God, the true and upright Judge, with prayers for the injury committed:[2002] not with your tongue, but with the memory of your conscience. And then at length believe that you may obtain mercy, if you have it [2003] in your mind continually," [2004] and so forth.

iv.79

Again, on the fiftieth Psalm: "If you are ashamed to tell your sins to any man because you have sinned, yet say them daily in your own heart. I bid you not to confess them to your fellow, that he should upbraid you: tell them to your God who regards them. If you do not tell them, God is not ignorant of them; for He was at hand when you did them." [2005] And again in another place he says: "I do not bring you forth into the theatre of your companions. I do not compel you to reveal your sins to mortal men. Repeat your conscience before God, and declare it to him. Show your wounds to the Lord, your best physician, and ask from him a salve for them." [2006] Again: "Take heed that you not tell a man of your sins, lest he betray you and upbraid you for them. For you need not confess them to your companion, that he should repeat them abroad, but to the Lord who has the care of you, who also is a gentle physician. Therefore, you shall show your wounds to him." [2007] Moreover, he brings in the Lord saying: "I do not compel you to come into the open theatre, and to make many privy to your sins: tell your sin privately to me alone, that I may heal your sore." [2008] This much out of Chrysostom. Now, all this manifestly argues that this ceremonial penance (as it was once used in the church), was not instituted by God; it was taken out of the church without any injury; and it was not restored again by the bishops who succeeded.

iv.80

They do not altogether in vain tell us that some relics of that ritual repentance still abided in the Roman church.[2009] But what have we to do with what every church has taken to itself, either to keep or else to lay away? Rather, we ought to inquire what Christ has delivered to us, and what his apostles have taught us — whose doctrine I think I have spoken enough about already.

The private or secret confession of sins was customarily made when none was nearby but the priests alone. For one goes secretly, and whispers his sins in the ear of the priest who was appointed to hear those secret confessions; and being absolved by him, the penitent thinks that by the recital of a few ordinary words, he is purged from all his sins. Therefore, I call it auricular confession. This was unknown in the apostles' times. And although it is now a good many years since it first took root, yet notwithstanding, it was free from the beginning. At last, we read that it was commanded and roughly extorted by the bishop of Rome, when the state of the church was most corrupted, about the year of grace 1215. And yet it was about eighty years or more in controversy, before it was laid upon all men's necks by decree, "whether it was enough for a man to confess himself to God alone, or else to a priest also, for the purging of his sins?" Hugo, in his book about the church's power to bind and loose, says: "I dare boldly say, if before the priest's absolution any man comes to the communion of the body and blood of the Lord, that he assuredly eats and drinks his own damnation, however much he repents, and ever so greatly laments his offences." [2010] Hugo said this boldly, without God's warrant, unless the word of God instructs us falsely.

iv.81

He lived about the year of our Lord 1130. A little while after him arose Peter Lombard, commonly called the Master of Sentences, because he gathered together the sentences of the fathers, and laid out their doctrine in summary form. I do not mean to give here my judgment about his work. It is thought that he flourished about the year of Christ 1150.[2011] He first shows by the authority of the fathers, Sententiarum, Lib. iv. Dist. 17, and 18, that it suffices to make the confession of sins to God alone. Then he annexes other sentences which teach the contrary; and lastly he concludes, of himself, "By these it is undoubtedly proved, that we must offer our confession first to God, then to the priest, and that otherwise we cannot enter into paradise, if we may [i.e., unless we have a priest]." Again: "It is certified that it is not sufficient to confess to God without a priest; nor is someone truly humble and penitent, who does not desire the judgment of a priest." [2012] Gratian, who gathered the decretals together,[2013] was somewhat more honest than Peter Lombard; he lived and flourished at the same time with Lombard. He determines nothing definitively; but showing sentences for either side — both that we must confess our sins to the priest, and not confess them — he leaves it indifferently to the reader's judgment.

iv.82

For thus he concludes: "We have briefly declared here, on what authority and reasons both the opinions of confession and satisfaction are grounded. But as to which of these we should rather stick, that is reserved for the reader to choose; for both parts have wise and religious men as their patrons and defenders." [2014] Gratian says this about the end of the first distinction of penance.

About fifty years later, followed Lotharius Levita,[2015] a doctor of Paris, the scholar and earnest follower of Peter Lombard. Once he had been made bishop of Rome and named Innocent the Third, he called together at Rome a general council called Lateranense,[2016] in which he made a law, which Gregory the Ninth recites in his decretal of penance and remission, Lib v. chap. 12, almost in these very words:

"Let every person of either sex, after they have come to the years of discretion, faithfully confess alone, at least once a year, their sins to their own proper priest, and endeavour with their own strength to do the penance that is enjoined of them; receiving reverently at Easter at least the sacrament of the Eucharist, unless perhaps by the counsel of their own priest, for some reasonable cause, they think it good to abstain for a time from receiving it. Otherwise, in this life let them be prohibited from entering into the church; and when they are dead, from being buried in Christian burial." [2017]

iv.83

This is that new law which contains many absurd and wicked blasphemies. And, to let pass many other absurdities, I will recite to you only one or two of the foulest of them. Is it not a wicked thing, to send a sinner to I know not what kind of priest of his own, when Christ has given only ministers and preachers to his church, still being himself the universal priest, and the proper priest to everyone in the church, even until the end of the world — to whom alone all the faithful ministers send sinners from themselves, to confess their sins to him? For John said: "I am not Christ, but have been sent before him to bear record of him." ^Joh
3.28 What may be said to this, moreover: that it is a detestable blasphemy to attribute the remission of sins to our own confession and the priest's absolution, as to the works of mortal men? And who, I pray you, is able to reckon up all his sins to the priest? Does not Jeremiah cry, "The heart of man is evil and unsearchable?" ^{Jer 17.9} Does not David say, "Who knows his sins? Cleanse me from my hidden faults." ^Psa
19.12 It is impossible for a man to confess all his sins. Therefore, while a man is compelled by the law, and he considers these reasons and ponders them in himself, he cannot help but be drowned in the bottomless depth of desperation. So great a burden is laid upon the free necks of Christ's faithful people, as a thing so necessary that without it, they cannot obtain eternal salvation — and yet it is directly contrary to the apostles' decree seen in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts. And lastly I ask, what is a sinner able to do by his own strength? What power, I ask, do we silly wretches [2018] have to do good, of ourselves?

It grieves me, and I am ashamed of these men's impudence, to see that they would have this auricular confession be instituted by God, and that they go around upholding and confirming it by the scriptures.

iv.84

They guilefully [2019] twist that place in the gospel where the Lord says to the leper, "Go your way, show yourself to the priest." ^{Mat 8.4} Now they do not impudently twist this place alone, contrary to its true sense; but they also corrupt all the other testimonies of holy scriptures which they are prone to cite. Among all the rest, I will tell you of this one. Bonaventura,[2020] in his Commentaries, Ad Sententias Magistri, Lib. iv. Dist. xvii. Quaest. 3, imagines two things to be in confession: the one formal, namely, absolution, or the power to heal; and this he says was instituted by the Lord at giving the keys. The other is material, namely, disclosing the sin; and this he says the Lord himself did not institute, but only insinuated. For immediately after he adds these words:

"And therefore, confession was insinuated by the Lord, instituted by the apostles, and openly proclaimed by James the bishop of Jerusalem. For as he proclaimed the decree of not keeping the ceremonial laws, Acts 15; so he also published and laid upon all those who sin, the necessity of confession, saying, Confess your sins one to another."

This much Bonaventura has.[2021] Who would not wonder at the blindness of that age? This writer acknowledged that auricular confession was not instituted by the Lord, but says obscurely [2022] (as it were, by conjectures about the consequents), that the apostles expounded the mind of Christ and instituted it; and that St. James in the name of all the apostles, openly proclaimed it by a decree. He adds that the words of the proclamation were, "Confess your sins one to another." ^{Jas 5.16} Now what else is it, to twist the scriptures, if this is not to twist them?

iv.85

Even the blindest easily sees that these champions are unweaponed in this combat. [2023] They produce a spear made of a wrapped-up wisp of hay,[2024] which they shake and make a noise with,[2025] as if it were the lance-staff of Hector or Achilles. It is most evident that the apostle does not speak not of secret and auricular confession, but of that confession which by a certain reciprocation is made by those who have mutually offended one another. And now, freely confessing to one to another, they are mutually reconciled, and pray for one another again. I already said something about this a little earlier. They do not see that there are two things in the apostle's words, which being diligently considered, make them mere laughing-stocks to those who perceive them. For first, the apostle uses the word allhlouv (allelous) in that place, which signifies mutually, one another, one for one, or reciprocally. Thus we may infer this: If according to the apostle's precept, we must confess ourselves to one another, and allelous signifies mutually or reciprocally — that is, that we must confess ourselves by turns, first I to him and then he to me, as it indeed signifies — then it must be that after the laymen have confessed themselves to the priests, the priests should confess themselves back to the laymen; for that is what it means to make confession one to another. For we say, filousin allhlous (philousin allelous) that is, they love one another mutually: he loves him, and that one loves him back. But if this troubles the priests,[2026] to have their confessions heard by laymen,[2027] then let them then acknowledge that this place of the apostle does nothing [to support] their secret and auricular confession, which they have devised for their own commodity. Then the apostle adds: "And pray for one another, that you may be healed." He therefore associates, and joins under one yoke as it were, both confession and prayer. And from that we again gather that, if we must confess to none but priests, then must we pray for none but priests.[2028] But we must not pray for priests alone; ergo, we must not confess to priests alone, but each one to one another.

iv.86

That place in James must not be understood to speak of secret and auricular confession, but of that open or public confession by which they return to charity again, by mutually confessing their faults which had previously offended each other, causing mutual injuries. And now being reconciled again, they pray for one another, that they may be saved. We therefore leave this as an undoubted truth: that those who argue for auricular confession have neither proved, nor can prove, that it was instituted and ordained by God.

But when they see that this confession will lead to wrack,[2029] they go around with weak props, God knows, to shore it up and say that such confession is to still be retained in the church, if for nothing else than discipline's sake, to make men blush when their sins come to light, as a reason for men to sin less often. And they also say that it is to be retained for private absolution, and for particular or singular consolation of the godly. But if auricular confession is so needful and profitable for the church as they would to have it, then how did it chance that for the span of a thousand years [2030] after the apostles' times, the church was utterly without it? It is marvel, then, that the apostles in no place either used it or commanded it. And again, it is manifest that in the times before the coming of Christ, this confession was not once dreamed of. Nor did the apostles leave the church of God destitute of anything necessary to salvation. Now, the abominable deeds and wicked acts that ensued after it was planted in the church of God, plainly declare what discipline this auricular confession is. For both he that confesses, and he that heard the confession, learned horrible wickedness by the examination and beating out of the circumstances of the sins committed. By that means, causes and occasions for whoredoms and adulteries were given and taken. Under the pretence of those confessions, the chastity of matrons and virgins has been assaulted and corrupted, more often and in more ways than it is decent to name. [2031]

iv.87

Those confessors fished out the secrets of every man's conscience, which availed greatly to establish their tyranny. By those confessions, the confessors could cunningly spoil and rob their shrift-children,[2032] as they called them, of their goods and substance — because they knew what riches each one had, and how he came by them. And when the peers [2033] of every commonwealth knew that the priests were privy to their faults, they could not help but fear the priests. And so it came to pass that they did not, as strongly as they might, set themselves against the extreme corruption and lust of the priests, which was otherwise not to be suffered. They have been heard to say: "I have learned by confessions, and know at my fingers' ends, what kind of men, women, and maidens are in this city. I know how to handle each one according to his disposition. They all fear and stand in awe of me, because they know that I am privy to their most secret deeds, and thoughts of their minds." The secrets told in confession are many times foolishly babbled abroad with the peril of the silly soul that first confessed them. By means of confessions, no small and many treasons are hatched and put in practice. And surely it is a weighty matter when, by means of one man (as some term him, our "spiritual father"), we cease to sin for fear or carnal blushing — rather than ceasing for the sincere fear that we have of God; when indeed, we do not blush at all to think that God shall be a witness against our conscience, nor fear the severity of his judgment that will alight upon us. What may be said to this moreover: that by this auricular confession, once established in the church, nothing else is wrought, but that the word of God would be the less regarded through our traditions, and we would be made all the more slack to confess our sins to Him, to whom we ought to confess them by right? For as often as we remember our sins, we earnestly [2034] put them away until the time of confession comes again. And when it has come, then who, I ask, goes to it with a cheerful mind? Let wise men therefore judge what kind of discipline this is, and how well it pleases God. [2035]

iv.88

That which they allege of private absolution is a mere device of man's invention, which has not in the sacred scriptures any precept or example to back itself with. For indeed, none absolves us from sin, blame, and punishment, but God alone, to whom alone that glory does belong. The minister, by the preaching and consolation of the gospel, pronounces and testifies to the faithful, that their sins are forgiven. Therefore, this preaching of forgiveness, being fetched from the mouth or word of God, is the absolution with which the minister absolves. Nor is that absolution made any whit more effectual, if the minister privately whispers it into the sinner's ear. The public preaching of the gospel, as it is instituted by Christ our Lord, satisfies a faithful mind, which does not so much respect the demeanour of the minister, as it regards the truth of Him in whose name the minister does it. But if a sinner, they say, privately hears said to him, "I absolve you from your sins," and that is by the virtue of the keys, then he far better understands that his sins are remitted than when forgiveness of sins is generally preached and publicly pronounced. But in this case, we set against them the apostle's example, whom when the men of Jerusalem had heard him preach, they were pricked in the heart, and said: "Men and brethren, what shall we do? Peter answered them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Christ Jesus for the remission of your sins, etc. And there were added to the church that same day about three thousand souls." ^Acts
2.37-41

Now, who does not understand that baptism was at once bestowed upon so great a multitude, and the remission of sins was universally preached to them all? Each one did not have this saying or the like whispered separately into his ear: Brother, your sins are forgiven you? And truly, a godly-minded man may learn true faith in Jesus Christ (through which his sins are forgiven) by the public preaching of the gospel, as well as by the private whisperings of privy penitentiaries and absolving confessors — since public preaching contains the commandments of God, while those whisperings do not.

iv.89

And finally, the public preaching of the gospel applies the grace of God to everyone, and the sacraments testify of the remission of sins and the heavenly gifts prepared for all those who [2036] believe in Jesus Christ. And yet, I do not say this because I think it amiss if the minister privately preaches the gospel of our Lord to one or two, when occasion serves to do so; or in the words of Christ, he promises remission of sins to someone who believes. But here I argue against those who suppose that public and general preaching, as it was used by the apostles — declaring to all and every man, the remission of sins — is not sufficient, unless the sinner, going to the priest, confesses his sins, and privately asks and receives private or particular absolution from him. For they think that, for private absolution's sake, this private or auricular confession must be retained in the church.

But we would not have, they say, that all and every peculiar sin with its circumstances should be reckoned up or repeated. What of that then? Who, I pray you, commanded us to whisper any sins at all into the priest's ear? The primitive church was used to confessing to the priests, neither few nor many sins, nor any sins at all. Bonaventura recorded that, before pope Innocent the Third, they were not considered heretics, who affirmed that confession made to God alone, without any priest, is sufficient for whose who faithfully believe. But after he published the decree that confession was to be made by every man to his own priest, they were judged heretics who taught men to confess to God only;[2037] as though it lay in pope Innocent to make a new article of faith, which the church had been without for more than twelve hundred years after Christ.

iv.90

Therefore, if all those who lived before Innocent were without suspicion of heresy in that point; and since we read that Nectarius and the church of Constantinople was not condemned for heresy by abrogating and casting out of the church their exomologesis (which seems to be far better than this auricular confession) — no godly man undoubtedly will condemn us, who maintain that the confession instituted by God, ought to be made to God and our neighbour; but only reject and hiss at that secret and auricular confession which brings more discommodity than honest profit to the church of God.

Because I have said this much up to here about secret or auricular confession, on which the treatise about satisfaction depends, of necessity I should say something here about satisfaction. But I have sufficiently spoken of it in my other sermons from this work — such as in the sixth and ninth sermons of the first Decade, and in the third Decade, where I treat the saints' affliction; in the tenth sermon of that Decade, and also in this fourth Decade, where I spoke about the gospel. The priests and monks teach that repentance of the sin committed, and faith in Christ, are not sufficient for purging sins without the satisfaction of our own works and merits; which they make to be the wearing of sackcloth, fasting, tears, prayers, alms-deeds,[2038] offerings, sundry afflictions of the body, pilgrimages, and many other odd knacks [2039] like these. For they affirm that by these means, the penalty due to sins (the guilt of which, they say, is only pardoned) is washed away, as with a shower of water poured down on it.[2040] But we have already taught out of the canonical scriptures, that God not only forgives freely the guilt, but also the penalty of our sins. We have already taught that men are not justified by their own works and merits, but by the mere grace of God through the faith of Christ Jesus. For otherwise, he would have taken our flesh upon himself in vain, and Christ would have given himself to the most bitter and reproachful death of the cross in vain. Now we add, If we are not justified by works, then we do not make satisfaction for our sins with our works.

iv.91

For in effect. both justification and satisfaction come to one end (although I acknowledge that there is a difference between them, and I do not confound them). By the justification of Christ we are absolved: by the satisfaction of Christ, or rather for his satisfaction's sake, we are also absolved. Christ is our righteousness, and therefore he is also our satisfaction. The price of our redemption is in Christ, not in ourselves. If we make satisfaction for ourselves, then the price of our redemption is in ourselves. And therefore are we both Christ and Saviour to ourselves: this flatly makes Christ of no effect, and therefore is it extreme blasphemy. Moses in his law, with little or no effort, dissolves all the arguments for satisfaction wrought by our works. For where he describes the manner of cleansing sins, he places no jot of it in the works of men, but shows that it all consists in the ceremonial sacrifices. Now, we all agree and jointly confess that in those sacrifices, the sole sacrifice of Christ was plainly prefigured. And to this is added, that the only preaching and promise of the new testament is this: "I will be appeased for their unrighteousness and sins, and I will remember their iniquities no more." ^{Jer 31.34} Now, where there is such a remission, there is no oblation or satisfaction for sin. And in the creed, truly, we believe the forgiveness of sins. But if the debtor makes satisfaction to the creditor, then what, I ask, does the creditor forgive? Therefore, this article of our faith, the principal promise and preaching of the new testament, is utterly subverted if we admit the doctrine of the satisfaction of our works for sin.

We acknowledge that tears, fastings, wearing sack-cloth, alms-deeds, and the other works of piety, humiliation, and charity, have a place in repentance; and I will speak about them in a convenient place. But we deny that we make satisfaction for our sins with them, lest we make the price of Christ's redemption of no effect. We acknowledge that sometimes the Lord has whipped those whose sins he has forgiven, as he did to our parents, Adam and Eve, and to king David after his adultery, and his murder of Uriah.

iv.92

But I have already shown you [2041] that those afflictions were not satisfactions for the sins which God had pardoned, but exercises of God's discipline and humiliation. By those means, He keeps his servants in their dutiful obedience, and declares to all men how heartily He hates sins, even though he freely forgives and pardons them. Therefore, lest we be more inclined and prone to sin because of that free forgiveness, he punishes those whom he makes examples for us to take heed by.

Nor do we read that the saints simply attributed the benefit of justification or satisfaction to their afflictions. I confess that Daniel the prophet gave counsel to the most mighty king Nebuchadnezzar, and said: "Let your sins be redeemed in righteousness, and your iniquities in showing pity to the poor." [2042] But in these words, the king was taught how to lead the rest of his life that still remained, and how to rule the state of his kingdom. The king had up till then oppressed many nations, and sinned in merciless cruelty. Whereupon Daniel persuades him to change his old kind of life, to embrace justice, and to deal well with all men. Therefore, Daniel does not speak of the satisfaction of Nebuchadnezzar's sins before God, but before men. For there is salvation in no other than in Christ alone. But if any man stubbornly sticks to the letter, we say that the righteousness of Christians is faith, by which their sins are properly cleansed. And that faith is not without good works and charity, to which justification is improperly ascribed. I spoke of this matter in the treatise that I made about good works. [2043]

Therefore, when St. Peter cites that place in Solomon, "Charity covers a multitude of sins;" the word "covers" is not used there for purging; for only by the blood of Christ are all sins purged and wiped away. But it is taken for turning away. For just as self-love, in a way, is the root of all sins, so charity is thought to drive away all mischiefs; for "love does no ill to his neighbour." [2044]

Now, they object to that sentence of the gospel, where the Lord says, "Many sins are forgiven her, because she loved much." [2045]

iv.93

But they miss in this, because they do not understand that the word oti, which is commonly rendered because, or, for that, is here a note inferring something; and no other sense is gathered than this: "Many sins are forgiven her, therefore she loved much; or, from which it comes, that she loves much." Nor do we twist here the words of the gospel, to maintain a wrong opinion. For in the history, there goes before, first, "When they were not able to pay, he forgave them both." If he forgave them, and if they were not able to pay, then he did not forgive them for their love; for if they had been able to pay, he would not have forgiven them. Secondly, there goes before it, Which of these will love him more?" Simon says, "He to whom he forgave more." Therefore, the Lord's answer could, in its effect, be nothing else but this: "I have forgiven her very much, therefore she has loved much." So then, I say, love is from forgiveness, and not forgiveness from love. And then it follows immediately: "And he said to the woman, your faith has saved you, go in peace." We therefore conclude that there is but one satisfaction alone for the sins of the whole world: namely, Christ once offered up for us who are made partakers of him, by faith.

But now, because we do not acknowledge or admit the satisfactions pushed on us in the doctrine of the priests and monks, so by all means we detest the indulgences of the bishops of Rome. They called these indulgences a beneficial pardoning of crimes, or a remission of the punishment, or of the guilt, or both; namely, by the power of the keys bestowed by the Lord; and for the merit of the martyrs' blood (so they say) granted or given to those who are rightly contrite in heart, and confess their sins. For these fathers of indulgences are prone with their indulgences, to remit the rigour and severity of the satisfaction, which lies in them to order at their discretion. Truly, as one said, "The fathers' gentle indulgence makes the children nothing;" [2046] so their indulgences have utterly corrupted true repentance.

iv.94

But nowhere can you read that such power [2047] was given to the popes, as they feigned. We read that the keys were given to the apostles by the Lord. But those keys were nothing more than the ministry of preaching the gospel, as I will show you in a convenient place. Now, the gospel promises us remission of both the guilt and the penalty, for Christ's sake, and faith in Christ. And it admonishes us that in the latter times, men will come who will say, We are Christs; ^{Mat 24.5} that is, who attribute to themselves the things that properly belong to Christ alone, especially the forgiveness of sins. But it commands us to flee from them, and by all means to beware of them, as wicked seducers.

The same evangelical truth teaches that the faithful are cleansed by the only blood of the Son of God. Their indulgences promise men the cleansing of their sins through the blood of St. Peter, St. Paul, and other holy martyrs. And for that cause, they are the profanation of the blood of the Son of God. The saints wash their garments in the blood of the Lamb, not in the pardoning bull, or box of indulgences, nor in the martyrs' blood. Yes, Paul himself denies that either he, or Peter, or any other of the saints, was crucified for the church of God. Yet these indulgences were so presented, as though God were pleased with us for the blood of the martyrs. Therefore, their indulgences are flatly contrary to the apostles' doctrine. I admonished you in my sermon about good works [2048] in these words of Paul, "I fulfil that which remains of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh, for his body's sake, which is the church;" that fulfilling does not refer to the work of the purging or propitiation of Christ, which is finished; unless Christ testified falsely at his death, saying, "It is finished." ^{Joh 19.30} Rather, it refers to those afflictions with which the members of Christ, that is, the faithful, are exercised by the cross, so long as they live in this frail flesh. Truly, the Lord takes account of the afflictions laid upon the faithful, as his own. For he said to Paul, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?" Moreover, when he says, "For the church," he does not mean for the expiation of the church, but for the edification and profit of it.[2049]

iv.95

And Paul sustained grievous afflictions at the hands of the Jews, because he preached the gospel to the Gentiles. It was expedient that in him, the church would be shown an example of patience so rare that it could not lightly be found again. Yes, others have often objected against these indulgence-defenders. Take this godly saying of the holy man, pope Leo, in his eighty-first epistle: "Although the death of many saints is precious in the sight of the Lord, yet the slaughter of no man subject to sin, is the propitiation for the sins of the world." Again, "The righteous have received, not given, crowns of glory. And from the manful constancy of the martyrs have sprung examples of patience, not the gifts of righteousness. For their deaths were singular; nor did anyone by dying, pay the debt of another, since there is one Lord Jesus Christ, in whom they are all crucified, dead, buried and raised up again." [2050] This much out of pope Leo.

We have therefore, by divine and human testimonies, evidently proved that the indulgences given to sinners by the merit or treasure of the martyrs' blood, are mere blasphemies against God, and open injuries against his holy martyrs.

I have up to here spoken of those indulgences which were freely bestowed of old by the popes of Rome, although today they are few in number and also curtailed. Now, therefore, I will say something about their indulgences which, for the most part, they sell and traffic in. To sell indulgences in the church of God is a sin so detestable that it is hard to name any one more horrible. And yet it is and has been a common practice and merchandise [2051] these many years with the bishops of Rome and their factors,[2052] whom they call apostolics, not having any word in the scripture with which to cloak that wicked invention.

iv.96

And now, I slip past and will not show how indulgences are nothing but a bare name without any stuff or matter; and that under that vain name, miserable men and silly souls are foully deceived. Yet, note that Christ, the chief and only high priest of his catholic and holy church, in the days of his flesh drove the buyers and sellers (like impudent dogs) out of the church [2053] of God with a whip. He did this twice; once at the beginning of his preaching, and another time a little before his passion. The first time he added: "Away with these things from here, and do not make my Father's house a house of merchandise." ^{Joh 2.13-16} The latter time he said: "It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but you have made it a den of thieves." ^{Mat 21.12-13.} And Simon Magus also, in the Acts of the Apostles, seeing that the Holy Ghost was given at the laying on of the apostles' hands, offered them money, saying: "Give me this power also, that on whomever I lay my hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost." But note how Peter accepts his petition. "Your money (he said) perish with you; because you thought that the gift of God may be obtained with money. You have neither part nor fellowship in this business; for your heart is not right in the sight of God." ^{Act 8.18-21}Look, the gifts of God are not gotten with money. Look, their heart is not right who make merchandise of religion. Look, they have no part or fellowship in the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven, or in the preaching of the glad tidings. Therefore, what shall we now say about the indulgences which the pope's apostolics sell for money? What shall we say about the indulgence dealers, and the pope himself, whose hirelings they are? We must confess, truly, that they are the fellows of Simon Magus. For by the just sentence of God, Peter cursed such merchants: "Your money (he says) perish together with you." This is a heavy and terrible, yet a most just judgment of the most just God. Foreseeing that there would be many such merchants in the church, Peter says in his last epistle:

iv.97

"There were false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who secretly bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord who has bought them, bringing upon themselves swift damnation. And many will follow their damnable ways, by whom the way of truth shall be spoken evil of. And with covetousness, through feigned words, they will make merchandise of you." ^{2Pet 2.1-3}

For what is it, "with feigned words through covetousness, to make merchandise of the miserable idiots," if not this: saying they will give full remission of sins to all those who are contrite, and confess their sins? For if any man acknowledges his sins, and with a true faith converts himself to God through Christ, even without their indulgences he obtains plenary remission of all his sins. Those foxes therefore make money from smoke, deceiving simple souls,[2054] and selling for coin the thing which they never had, nor can possibly be purchased with money.

This much up to here about bought and sold indulgences, about which other writers have made very long discourses. I suppose that by this little, any man may easily understand how to judge them rightly.

We have now at length come past those rocks and shelves toward which we purposely sailed, so that when we had viewed the most perilous places, we might admonish the unskilful passengers to take heed lest they crash on them and make shipwreck of their souls, by thinking that in these indulgences lies the true force of sufficient repentance. There is nothing in this, but the utter displeasing of God's most holy majesty. Therefore, letting that alone as it is, we now return to declare the last members of repentance, by which we said that penitents mortify the old man, and are renewed spiritually.

First of all, therefore, it seems good to tell, What the old man is, What the new or regenerated man is, and What the power or strength of man is. For by demonstrating these, we will better understand what it means to mortify the old man, and to be renewed in the spirit.

iv.98

We say that the old man is all that which we have by nature, or from our first parents — namely, not only the body or the flesh (meaning the grosser and substantial part of the body); but even the very soul, with its strength, power, and faculties. Therefore, though in some places of the holy scriptures the flesh is put for man, we must not understand it as only the massy substance and grosser part of the body; but the very flesh together with the soul and all its faculties — that is, the whole man not yet regenerate. For the Lord says in the gospel: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit." ^{Joh 3.6} And this he says concerning regeneration, which is not according to the flesh (as Nicodemus falsely imagined), but according to the spirit. The word "flesh" therefore imports [2055] the natural power and faculties [2056] of man. I mean, all that which we have or take from our first grandsire, Adam. The new man is said to be one who is regenerate by the Spirit of God in Christ, or is renewed according to the image of Christ, with all the gifts and virtues of the Holy Ghost. And because the flesh is usually put for the old man, so the spirit, by an antithesis, is commonly used and taken for the new man.

Now, here the very place requires me to discourse somewhat about the power and virtues of man. Although I have discussed this elsewhere already, as in the sermon about freedom and bondage, and the one about sin,[2057] yet I will again touch those points which I think will suffice for this present argument.

There are two parts or faculties of our soul: Understanding and Will. Understanding discerns what to receive or what to refuse in objects. It is the light and guide of the soul as it were. The Will chooses, for in it lies both to will and to nill.[2058] These are again impelled by other powers and faculties. Now, the Understanding is of two sorts; for we understand either earthly or heavenly things. I call those earthly things, which do not pertain to the life to come, but to the present life: this refers to all liberal arts and handicrafts, governing public weals, and ruling private houses.

iv.99

By heavenly things I understand God himself, eternal felicity, and life everlasting, the knowledge of God and all kinds of virtues: faith, hope, charity, righteousness, holiness, and innocence of life.

Now let us see what this understanding of man is able to do, and what power it has. The judgment and understanding of man about earthly things is not altogether nothing: yet, God knows, it is weak and very small. The understanding that is in man, therefore comes from God. But as it is small and weak, that comes from man's own fault and corruption. But the bountiful Lord augments in men those gifts of His, by which it comes that man's wit brings wonderful things to pass. For this cause, we read in the holy scriptures that the arts and wits of men are in the hands of God. But in the knowledge or understanding of heavenly matters, there is not one small spark of light in man. His wit, of itself, is nothing but darkness, which at the beginning was created by God to be most sharp and lightsome. But afterwards, by man's corruption, it was utterly rebated [2059] and darkened again. This is why Christ said in the gospel: "No man comes to me, unless my Father draws him." ^{Joh 6.44} And it is written in the Prophets: "All shall be taught by God." And Paul says: "The natural man does not perceive the things that are of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know, because they are spiritually discerned." ^{1Cor 2.14} The natural man (that is, that old man which is not yet regenerate by the Holy Ghost) is not altogether a block, without any sense or feeling. For if he were utterly without any of the discourses of reason, then how would the preaching of the gospel seem foolishness to him? By the gift of God, he therefore hears and understands the words and sense of the holy scripture; but because of his natural corruption, he is not touched by them, and he does not rightly judge about them. They seem mere folly to him. Nor does he perceive that they must be discerned spiritually, because he is not regenerate; he is yet without the true light of God's most holy Spirit. For in another place the apostle says: "We are not able of ourselves to think any good, but all our ability is of God." ^{2Cor 3.5}

iv.100

And thus it is, that we so often find in the scriptures, mention of enlightening or illumination. These would be expressed or named without cause, if man's understanding were clear, and of itself not dark and misty. There is therefore born with all men, a blindness of heart and mind, a doubting in the promises of God, and an unbelief and perverse judgment in all heavenly things. For even if man had received understanding at God's hand, yet because of his own corruption, ignorance is a particular and proper heritage belonging to man. For he is then in his kingdom, when he is blind, when he errs, when he doubts, when he does not believe, nor rightly use as he should the gifts that God has given him, that is, to his own salvation and the glory of his Maker.

Let us now see what the will of the old man is able to do. Therefore, since this will follows a blind guide (God knows), that is to say, a corrupt affection, it is unknown to no man what foolish choices it makes, and what it tends toward. And however true and good the understanding is, yet the will is like a ship tossed to and fro with stormy tempests, that is, by affections. For it wallows up and down with hope, fear, lust, sorrow, and anger, so that it chooses and follows nothing but evil. For the holy apostle, speaking of himself, says: "I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, there dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but I find no means to perform what is good. For the good that I would, I do not: but the evil which I would not do, that do I do." ^{Rom 7.18-19} But now, since the apostle said this about himself when he was regenerate, what, I ask, will we say about the will of the old man? The old man wills all things which God does not will, and breaking into all kind of wickedness, he foully fulfils his filthy lusts. That is to say, the old man gives his members as servants to uncleanness and wickedness, from one iniquity to another. We have very many examples of this exhibited to us, both by the holy scriptures and by daily experience.

Let us now oppose or set against this, the new man; that is, the man who is regenerate by the Spirit of God through the faith of Jesus Christ.

iv.101

Now regeneration is the renewing of the man, by which through the faith of [2060] Jesus Christ, we who were the sons of Adam and of wrath, are born again as the sons of God, and therefore put off [2061] the old man, and put on the new, which both in understanding and will, freely serves the Lord. This regeneration is the renewing of the mind, not of the body: as we heard in another place, out of the third chapter of St. John's gospel.[2062] The author of this regeneration is the Holy Ghost, who is given to man from heaven, I mean, given to a faithful man. For the gift of the Holy Ghost is given for Christ's sake, and to none but those who believe in Christ. This Spirit of God testifies with our spirit that we are the sons of God, and therefore the heirs of his kingdom. ^{Rom 7.16-17} We are therefore a new creature, now repaired according to the image of God, and endued with a new nature or disposition. By this it comes to pass that we daily put off that old man, and put on the new. This is done when we walk, not in concupiscence according to the carnal inclination of the flesh, but in newness of sense, according to the working of the Holy Ghost by whom we are regenerate. The same substance and form of the body still abides; the mind is changed, the understanding and will are renewed. For by the Spirit of God, the understanding is illuminated, our faith and the understanding of God and heavenly things are plenteously bestowed, and by the Spirit, unbelief and ignorance, that is, the darkness of the old man, are utterly expelled. This is according to that saying of the apostle, "Through Christ you are made rich in all things, in all speech and knowledge." Again, "We have not received the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God, to know what things are given to us by Christ." And again, "We have (or know the spirit or) [2063] the mind of Christ." [2064] And again, "You have no need for any man to teach you: but as the very anointing instructs you about all things, and is true, abide in it." [2065]

iv.102

And in this regeneration of man the will also receives a heavenly virtue, to do the good which the understanding perceived by the Holy Ghost. So that it wills, chooses, and works the good that the Lord has shown it; and on the other side, it nills, hates, and repels the evil that the Lord has forbidden it. For Paul says: "I know how to be humble, and I know how to exceed. I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me." [2066] And again, he says to the Philippians: "To you it is given for Christ, not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." And again he yet more plainly says: "It is God that works in you both to will and to perform, according to the good purpose of the mind." [2067] But now note this: that whatever they do, who are regenerate by the Spirit of God, they do it freely, not by compulsion, nor against their wills. For just as God requires a cheerful giver, so "where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is free liberty and hearty good-will." [2068] And Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist, said: "That we, being delivered from the hands of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him all the days of our life."^Luk
1.74 Yes, and our Lord himself says in the gospel: "If you abide in my sayings, you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." And again: "If the Son sets you at liberty, or makes you free, then shall you be free indeed." ^{Joh 8.31-36} Touching this liberty of the sons of God, I have already discoursed about it in the ninth sermon of my third Decade.

This liberty of the sons of God we willingly acknowledge and freely confess. But we utterly reject and flatly deny the arrogant disputations of some blasphemous praters [2069] concerning free-will, as though it were in our power of ourselves to do any heavenly thing. And yet we do not make man subject to fatal necessity, nor turn upon God the blame for iniquity, as we have elsewhere declared more at large.[2070] And St. Augustine in his controversy with the Pelagians so tempered his disputation, that he attributed the good to the grace of God, and the evil to our nature. So that, the sense being sound, uncorrupted, and well-weighed, he attributes free-will (which he grants is in us), to the grace that works in us, indeed, to the regeneration of the Spirit, rather than to ourselves or our own power.

iv.103

I will here recite and repeat to you, dearly beloved, only this one testimony out of all his writings, seen in the first chapter of his book, De Correptione et Gratia, where he says:

"We must confess that we have free-will to do both evil and good: but in doing evil, everyone is free from righteousness, and bound to sin; but no man can be free in doing good, unless he is made free by the one who said, 'If the Son makes you free, then shall you be free indeed.' And yet this is not so that, when everyone is set free from the condemnation of sin, he should then stand no more in need of his deliverer's aid. Rather, where he hears his deliverer say, 'Without me you can do nothing,' he should quickly say back to him, 'Be my helper; O do not forsake me.' And truly, I am glad that I found this faith in our brother Florus, which, without a doubt, is the true, prophetic, and apostolic faith. For here must be understood the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord. By this grace alone, we men are delivered from evil; and without it, we do no good, either in thought, will, love, or deed. Not that by the showing or teaching of grace, men should know no more than what is to be done; but also that by the very working and performing of grace, they should with love do the thing that they know." [2071] And so forth.

Up to here I have repeated St. Augustine's opinion touching free-will. This is sufficient for an incidental note. Now I return to my purpose again.

iv.104

We have heard what the old man is, what the new man is, and how we are renewed by the Holy Spirit. Now therefore, when we say that penitents mortify the old man, and are renewed by the Spirit (or spiritually), we are only saying that to all penitents, the affections, senses, or lusts of the flesh (I mean, even the very understanding which we have from the old Adam, together with the will) are not only suspected, but also convicted of impiety. And therefore, in all their thoughts, words, and deeds, they never admit their affections into their counsel, but resist them by all means, and continually study to break the neck of them. And on the other side, in all our counsels, words, and deeds, we admit and receive — and yes, call to ourselves with prayers — that heavenly guide, the Spirit of Christ. By His conduct and leading, we may perceive, judge, speak, and work — that is to say, either omit or do — that which we have learned in our grand pattern, Christ. We must be reformed according to his likeness, that from now on we may apply ourselves to holiness, righteousness, and good works toward God.

But we will understand all this more rightly and plainly by the words of the apostle, where he says:

"This I say and testify in the Lord, that from now on, you walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their minds, darkened in cogitation, being alienated from the life of God by the ignorance that is in them, and by the blindness of their hearts. Being past feeling, they have given themselves over to wantonness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. But you have not so learned Christ, if you have heard him, and have been taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus: to lay down the old man, according to its former conversation, which is corrupt according to the lusts of error, and to be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and to put on that new man, which is shaped according to God, in righteousness and holiness of truth." ^{Eph 4.17-24}

And so forth, as it follows in the fourth chapter to the Ephesians.[2072]

iv.105

In the third chapter to the Colossians, the apostle says:

"Mortify your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection,[2073] evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry; for these things the wrath of God comes upon the children of disobedience, among whom you also walked once, when you lived in them. But now, also put off all these things: wrath, fierceness, maliciousness, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old man with his works, and have put on the new man, which is renewed into the knowledge and image of Him that made him. Put on therefore — as the elect of God, holy and beloved — bowels of mercy, kindness, modesty, meekness, long-suffering; forbearing one another, and forgiving one another if any man has a quarrel against anyone; " and so forth. ^{Col 3.5-13}

If you add to this what the apostle has about the same matter in the sixth chapter to the Romans, every point will be more express and plain to the hearer.

Now these words of the apostle not only teach us what the old man is, what the new man is, what it means to mortify the old man, and how penitents are renewed in the newness of the spirit, or of the mind; but they also show what the fruits are that are worthy of repentance — namely, those recited virtues, or those offices of life, toward God and our neighbour. We owe God our fear and reverence, humbleness of mind, the knowledge of ourselves, faith, hope, the hatred of sin, the love of righteousness; charity towards our neighbour,[2074] well-doing towards all men,[2075] and innocence in all things. The holy man, John the Baptist, required these kinds of fruits from the Jewish nation, when he said: "Bring forth fruits that become repentance." ^{Luk 3.16f} For in St. Luke, being demanded by the people, by the publicans, and by the mercenary or garrison soldiers,[2076] what things they should do that are worthy of repentance, he prescribes none other than what we just now recited. For the Lord himself, by Isaiah in the fifth chapter of his prophecy, recited no other fruits than those.

iv.106

And in the revelation [2077] that was made to St. John, speaking to the minister of the church of Ephesus, he says: "Remember from where you have fallen, and repent, and do the first works." The words of St. Paul agree with this, speaking to Agrippa, and saying: "I have preached to the Jews and Gentiles, exhorting them to repent, and turn to God, and do those works which become those who repent." ^{Act 26.20} And again, in the seventh chapter of second Corinthians, he says: "Sorrow toward God causes repentance unto salvation not to be repented of. For behold, this same thing that made you sorry toward God, how much carefulness it has wrought in you; indeed, what clearing of yourselves; indeed, what indignation; what fear; what vehement desire; what zeal; yes, what punishment!" Now this carefulness is an intentional diligence to correct what is amiss. Truly, out of careless looseness arises an inured habit to commit sin, and negligent security. Penitents do not stand in defence of their sins, but make their supplicant apology to God, to have them remitted. Hypocrites excuse themselves, and seek out shifts and loopholes, not confessing freely their sins and offences, nor praying to God to have them forgiven. He that repents truly and indeed, is angry with himself because of his wicked manners, and a life already lewdly spent. The punishment which he exercises on himself prevents and turns away the revenging and imminent wrath of God. Moreover, with fear he takes heed how he sins any more; for the contempt of God is the origin of mischiefs, and the bond of an impenitent life. Furthermore, he that truly repents, is ravished with the surpassing vehement desire or love of God and heavenly things. He burns with zeal by which it comes to pass that he neither foads [2078] off from day to day, nor coldly and slackly goes about what he has learned by the word of God, is required to be done and performed by his hand. Briefly, whatever he does, he does it with all his mind, even from the very bottom and root of his heart.

iv.107

For thus says the great prophet of God, the holy man Moses: "If you will turn to the Lord your God, and hearken to his voice with all your heart, and with all your soul; the Lord your God shall also return you from captivity, and show pity on you in the bowels of mercy." ^Deu
30.2-3 This much touching the fruits of repentance.

Now, from all these premises we infer this consequent: that repentance (whose only scope to which it tends, is the renovation by the Spirit of Christ, of the image of God, which was defiled by Adam's fall of old) is not a work of a day or two, or of a prescribed number of years, but a continual observance of our whole life; and so, consequently, it is a daily putting off and renewing of the old man forever. For those who are regenerate by the Holy Spirit of God, are never so purged that they feel no motions of the flesh, of sin, and of carnal affections. There is always objected to the eyes of the faithful, this sentence of St. Paul, that cannot by any means be plucked out of their minds: "I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, there dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but I find no means to perform that which is good. For the good, that I would do, I do not do; but the evil, that I would not do, that I do." ^{Rom 7.18-19} For we bear about the relics of the flesh throughout our life. From this it comes that there is a perpetual and very sharp battle in the saints. For they partly obey the spirit, and are partly weakened by the flesh. By the spirit they are lifted up to the contemplation and desire of heavenly things; but by the flesh they are thrust down to earthly things, and troubled with the allurements of this naughty world. For even the apostle, feeling that combat in himself, said: "The flesh lusts contrary to the spirit, and the spirit contrary to the flesh. For they are so at enmity between themselves, that what you would, you cannot do." ^{Gal 5.17} And in another place he says: "Even I, myself, serve the law of God in the mind, but in the flesh, I serve the law of sin." ^{Rom 7.25} And to help the matter forward, there lacks no deceit, no craft, and a thousand temptations, by the subtle crafts-master, our enemy the devil. Therefore, the labour and peril of the true penitent, that is, of a Christian man, is far greater than our prayers are, comparable to it.

iv.108

But now, who does not perceive here how great the watching, what needful things abstinence, constancy, fortitude, and patience are in penitents, in those who repent? What great need they have of earnest and continual prayers? In this sharp conflict, let us lay before our eyes the instruction of that valiant champion, the apostle Paul; for what he says may be used instead of a large and ample commentary. For in few words, he will surpassingly instruct us how to behave ourselves in this troublesome combat, how to vanquish, and how to triumph when the victory is gotten. In his epistle to the Ephesians, he says thus:

"Brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on all the armour of God, that you may stand against the assaults of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood only, but against rulers, against powers, against worldly governors of the darkness of this world, against spiritual subtleties in heavenly things. Therefore take to yourself the whole armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and having finished all things, to stand fast. Stand therefore, having your loins girded with the truth, and having on the breast-plate of righteousness, and your feet shod in the preparation of the gospel of peace. Above all, take the shield of faith, with which you may quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God; praying always in all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching for this with all urgency." ^{Eph 6.10-18} And so forth, as follows in the sixth chapter to the Ephesians.

Here also are to be repeated the outward exercises of repentance, or rites of penance, with which the saints exercise themselves, partly to tame and keep under the motions of the flesh, and partly to testify of their repentance to the congregation. Those exercises are carelessness for the flesh, tears, sighs, sackcloth, fastings, weeping, lamenting, neglecting and hatred of a diet of delicacies, trimming of the body and also of allowable pleasures. If these are done, and yet do not proceed from the very heart and from true faith, they will avail nothing for the one who uses them. But it is best here to learn, as if it were on a painted table, to behold them pictured in the word of God. The prophet Joel says:

iv.109

"Turn to me, says the Lord, with all your hearts, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning. Rend your hearts, and not your garments, and turn to the Lord your God; for He is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great goodness, and he will repent of the evil. Who knows whether the Lord will turn and take compassion, and leave behind a blessing? Blow a trumpet in Zion, proclaim a fast, call an assembly, sanctify the congregation, gather the people, gather the elders, assemble the children and suckling babes. Let the bridegroom come out of his chamber, and the bride out of her closet. Let the priests, the Lord's ministers, weep between the porch and the altar, and let them say: Spare your people, O Lord, and do not give over your heritage to reproach, that the heathen should rule over them. For which those among the heathen would say, Where is their God?" ^Joel
2.12-17

To these divine and evident precepts, let us annex that notable example of the truly repentant Ninevites out of the holy scriptures; of whom the holy prophet Jonah has left this in writing: "The men of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth from the greatest of them to the least. And word came to the king of Nineveh, who arose from his throne, and put off his robe, and covered himself in sackcloth, and sat down in ashes." ^{Jon 3.5-10} Moreover, by the king's commandment, a proclamation was made throughout the city, saying: "Let neither man nor beast taste anything; neither eat, nor yet drink water. But let both man and beast put on sackcloth, and cry mightily to God; indeed, let every man turn from his evil way, and from the wickedness that is in his hands. Who can tell whether God will turn, and be moved with repentance, and turn from his fierce wrath, so that we do not perish?" And now it is good to hear how effectual true repentance is in the sight of the Lord. Therefore, it follows in the same chapter: "And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil ways, and He repented of the evil which he said he would do to them, and did not do it."

iv.110

And here also, dearly beloved, you must note that repentance is of two sorts: namely, private or secret, and public or manifest. Each one repents to himself privately, when he has sinned against God, descends into himself, and with the candle of God's word, searches all the corners of his heart, and confesses to God all his offences. Being grieved that he has offended Him, he yet turns to God, believing truly that he will be reconciled to him in Christ his Saviour; and for his sake he utterly hates sin, and entirely loves righteousness and innocence, in following them as near as he can. Public or solemn repentance is used in great calamities, in dearth, pestilence, and war. It is of that repentance that the prophet Joel speaks, whose words you heard a little before. And yet, private repentance is in many points the same as public. For Peter weeps bitterly; and private penitents fast privately, and abstain severely even from all allowed pleasures, much more then from the allurements and baits of the world.[2079] But those who truly repent, either publicly or privately, do hate and must specially hate, coloured hypocrisy and vain ostentation. Moreover, both kinds of repentance are free and voluntary, not extorted or coacted, but proceed from a willing mind. The pastor of the church and teacher of the truth, I confess, severely calls upon all sinners without delay to repent themselves truly for the sins they committed. Yet by express law, he lays upon no man's neck any precise order, prescribing the time, manner, place, or number to be confessed; but he leaves it free to each one's choice, so that they do the decent thing, according to the prescribed rule in the word of God. But public repentance is usually proclaimed for the most part, and openly received by the whole congregation, so often as piety requires it, and necessity compels it; and out of the word of God is declared what and how all things must be done and decently ordered.

Again, it is manifest that there are two sorts of repentance more: for there is true repentance and false repentance. True repentance is that which someone exercises who is regenerate by the Spirit of God;[2080] and is without any colour and craft, containing in it all those things that I previously told you about.

iv.111

The scriptures contained in the old and new Testaments, minister to us many examples of true repentance, which I have presented to you at large in what I have already spoken. Those examples are excellent, which we find of our parents Adam and Eve, of the people of Israel often repenting, in the thirty-third chapter of Exodus, in the book of Judges, and the books of Kings. Yet more excellent than the rest, is that of David in the twelfth chapter of second Samuel, 13, 16, and 21; and that of Manasseh, 2Chr 33, and Josiah, 2Chr 34. In the gospel, we also have the examples of Matthew, Zacchaeus, the sinful woman, and Peter, besides others that for shortness' sake, I wittingly pass over here.

But false or counterfeit repentance proceeds from a feigned heart: and though at a blush it seems to have the circumstances of true repentance, yet because it lacks a turning to God and a sound confidence in him, it is insincere and utterly false. For of all others, it is most certain that the repentance of Judas Iscariot was false and counterfeit: and yet he confessed his sin, he bore record to the truth, and with much anger and sorrow he restored to the priests the price which he took for the innocent blood. But because he did not wholly turn to Christ and put his whole confidence in his mercy and goodness, all his repentance was without any fruit. And without any profit, hypocrites and those who are without the faith of the gospel, torment themselves, and make a show of outward repentance.

But those are most happy and in a heavenly case, who with all their hearts truly repent with unfeigned faith. For they receive infinite goodness from their most bountiful and liberal God, who is at one again with penitents. He now loves those who, before, he most heartily and yet most justly hated and abhorred for their sins. The punishments also, which he determined to lay upon them, he turns into benefits. For he fills and loads penitents with all manner of good things, both temporal and eternal. Now, you understand, dearly beloved, by my former sermons, that God bestows such great benefits upon us, not for our works of repentance, but for Christ's sake, in whom alone the saints trust, not putting any confidence in their own works of repentance, however holy and commendable they may be.

iv.112

For insomuch as the Father loves Christ, and we are grafted into him by faith, God therefore loves us, and our works please him. These works of ours, when he recompenses, he does not crown our works as our own works, but crowns in us the grace which He himself has given us.

Again, it must be that unrepentants are most unhappy. They hear with what sins and transgressions they have offended God, and provoked his just vengeance against themselves. But with this, they do not think how to prevent the wrath of God being ready and imminent to take vengeance on them, nor how to obtain his favour again. Therefore, what else remains behind for them, but a most certain and just destruction of both body and soul, of all their goods, and whatever else they most esteem in this transitory life. It is good to call to mind here, that notable sentence of the Lord Jesus in the gospel, saying:

"Woe to you, Chorazin; woe to you, Bethsaida: for if the wonders that have been done in you had been done in the cities of Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long before this, in sackcloth and ashes. But I say to you, it shall be easier for Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom in the day of judgment, than for you."^{Mat 11.21f}

The parable of the unfruitful fig-tree is known to all men, mention of which is made in the gospel. It was withered by the judgment of God as an example to teach and terrify all impenitent sinners.^{Mat 21.19f} What will fall on the men of these days, may we think, who so boldly despise the repentance so plainly preached to them for so many years now, and beaten into their heads? There are some who outwardly, and for show's sake, seem to be desirous of the evangelical truth. Others are utter enemies, contemners, and persecutors of the gospel. And you will find an infinite rabble of Lucianists,[2081] Epicures,[2082] Nullifidians,[2083] and Atheists.

iv.113

Now, since all these equally, in a way, sweetly deride or rather scoffingly mock at this hearty repentance, we cannot do otherwise than expect and look for the terrible judgment of God's mighty arm to fall upon such unrepentant sinners. Let those who wish well to themselves, speedily turn to the Lord, and consider continually and earnestly how great the damage is to keep the transitory joys of this present life, and thus lose the eternal joys of the kingdom of heaven. Let each one make haste to do what he perceives can be done that much better, and that much sooner, once it is taken in hand.

And yet I would not have any man despair in his sins, if he does not stubbornly despise the remedy of repentance; nor maliciously, by way of contempt, defer repentance till the very end, because of the facility and gentleness of his heavenly Father. Nor would I have any man fall into desperation if he is hindered by the flesh, the world, and the devil, so that repentance is late, or before he applies his mind to it.

Now, because I have drawn out this discourse about repentance somewhat longer than I had intended, and that at last I may make an end of my sermon here, instead of a conclusion I will recite to you these golden words of the holy martyr St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, where he writes against Demetrian to this effect which follows:

"Believe and live; and you who now persecute us for a time, will rejoice with us forever. Once you are out of this life, there is then no place for repentance, nor any effect of satisfaction. [Eternal] life is either won or lost in this world. In this world, eternal salvation is provided for by the unfeigned worshipping of God, and the fruits of true faith. Let no man, either by his sins or years, be held back from coming to lay hold of salvation. So long as a man is yet in this world, no late repentance comes out of season. The entry is open to God's indulgence, and the path to pardon is surpassingly plain to those who seek and understand the truth. Even at the very end and last gasp of this temporal life, ask pardon for your sins at the hands of Him who is the true and only God; call to Him for the confession and faith of His knowledge. Pardon is granted to him that confesses; and salvation is given to him that believes; and even he, upon his departure, immediately passes to immortality.

iv.114

Christ communicates this grace. He attributes this gift to his own mercy, by making death subject to the triumph of the cross, by redeeming the one who believes, with the price of his blood, by reconciling man to God the Father, by quickening the mortal by the heavenly regeneration. Let us all, if it is possible, follow him. Let us all profess his sign and sacrament. He opens the way of life to us. He brings us to paradise again. He leads us to the kingdom of heaven. We shall always live with him; and being made the sons of God by him, we shall always rejoice with him, being restored by the shedding of his blood. We shall be Christians glorified together with Christ, blessed in God, rejoicing with perpetual pleasure, always in the sight of God, and evermore giving thanks to God. For the one who was once in danger and in fear of death, is now made secure in immortality, and he cannot help but be merry always, and thankful." [2084]

THE OTHER EIGHT SERMONS

OF THE

FOURTH DECADE,

Written By

HENRY BULLINGER.

4-3. THE THIRD SERMON: OF GOD AND THE TRINITY.

Of God; of the true knowledge of God, and of the diverse ways how to know him;
that God is one in substance, and three in persons.

I HAVE up to here, in thirty-two sermons, discoursed upon the word of God, and the lawful exposition of it; upon Christian faith, the love of God and our neighbour. I have also spoken of the law of nature, of man's law, and God's law, and of the parts of God's law, namely, the moral, the ceremonial, and the judicial laws; of the use of the law, and of the fulfilling and abrogation of it; of the likeness and difference between the two testaments and people, the old and the new; of Christian liberty; of offences; of the effect and merits of good works; of sin, and the various sorts of it: and also of the grace of God, or the gospel of Jesus Christ, in whom our heavenly Father has given us all things belonging to life and eternal salvation. Finally, I have treated repentance, and of the things that especially seem to belong to it. Our purpose is to argue discreetly upon the principal points of Christian religion.

And in the premises, we have often heard mention of God, of the knowledge and worship of God, of Jesus Christ, of the Holy Ghost, of good and evil spirits, of the church, of prayer, of the sacraments, and similar holy things. Since we have now come to an end of those former points, necessity itself requires that we now say something here about all and every one of these latter principles according to the holy scripture, so far as the Lord gives me grace and the ability to do that.

iv.124

Concerning God, there were many erroneous opinions of old, not only among the ruder sort of people, but even in the whole pack of philosophers, and the conventicles of false Christians. Touching philosophers, that ancient and learned writer, Tertullian, was prone to say that philosophers are the patriarchs of heretics.[2085] and touching false Christians, the apostle John said, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us." ^{1Joh 2.19} Nor do I see what gain you would get by it, if I were to proceed to reckon up for you all their opinions. It is good, perhaps, to know in what they erred, lest we also strike upon the same rock that they did. Therefore, if any that have a desire for it, wish to see the opinions of the heathens and heretics concerning God, let them search Plutarch in his Placitis Philoso. lib. i. chap. 7, or in other heathen writers; or in Cyril's first book Contra Julianum; and in the 4th chapter of Dogmatum vel definitionum Ecclesiast.[2086] I will not at this time trouble the attentive ears and minds of the godly hearers with that burden. That diversity of opinions is derived from no other fountain than from the boldness and unskilfulness of men who are not ashamed, out of their own device and brain, to add and apply to God the things from which he is furthest and free.

And now, that I may not stay long here in declaring the narrow straitness and misty darkness of man's wit, I ask you, Who is able with his understanding, to conceive the being of God, when indeed no man ever fully understood what fashion the soul of man is, of what sort many other things are that are in man's body, and what manner of substance the sun and moon are made of? There are many reasons given by natural philosophy; but the work of God still abides greater and more wonderful than the wit or speech of man is able to comprehend or express.

iv.125

Therefore, let no man who goes about to know any certainty about God, descend into himself to search Him out with thoughts of his own;[2087] nor let him ground his opinion on men's determinations and weak definitions. For otherwise he will always worship the invention of his own heart, mere folly, trifles, and foolish fantasies. But on the other side again, the man cannot help but think rightly, judge truly, and speak well of God, who attributes nothing to himself, devises nothing by his own brain, nor follows the toys of other men's inventing; but in all things, he gives ear to the word of God, and always follows His holy revelation. Therefore, let this stand as if it were for a continual rule: that God cannot be rightly known except by his word; and God is to be received and believed to be such a one as he reveals himself to us in his holy word. For truly, no creature can better tell what, and what kind of one God is, than God himself.

Now, since this God in his word, by the workmanship of the world, by the holy scriptures, and by his oracles, uttered by the mouth of the patriarchs, prophets, and apostles — indeed, and the very minds and consciences of men — testifies that He exists, the kingly prophet David therefore says: "The fool has said in his heart, There is no God." ^{Psa 14.1} For he must be an ass or a fool, who denies the thing that is evident to all men in the world, who are not out of their wits, namely, that there is a God. Consider that even Cicero, a heathen author, in his book de Natura Deorum, says, "It is bred and born together with men, and grafted in their hearts, to think that there is a God." [2088] Truly, those who deny God, deny the one they nevertheless fear; and therefore, they confess by that fear that he exists, and by that means they convict themselves of lying and falsehood.

Again, this is to be noted: that in demanding who and what God is, even though that question is made and arises by beating out and discussing the scriptures, yet a measure is to be kept, and in any case observed.

iv.126

To go about over-curiously inquiring after, searching out, and seeking the very eternal being of God, is both perilous and also flatly forbidden. Solomon cries, "As it is not good to eat much honey; so an over-curious [2089] searcher of God's majesty shall be confounded by His glory." [2090] Before that singular and notable communication, in which our God talked with the whole people of Israel at mount Sinai, it is said to Moses: "Set bounds for the people round about the mountain, and say to them, Take heed to yourselves that you do not go up into the mount, or touch the border of it. Whoever touches the mount, let him die the death," etc. ^{Exo 19.12} Look here, it was quick death to pass the limits or bounds prescribed. Therefore our studies are and ought to be definite, not infinite.[2091] Truly, we read in many places of the holy scriptures that the most entire and excellent friends of God stood amazed and trembling, whenever God in any outward show of his own accord, offered himself to their eyes. I need not busy myself too much in reckoning up examples. You know how Abraham behaved himself in the talk which he had with God, in Genesis 18. You know what the parents of Gideon said in the book of Judges;[2092] and what Elijah spoke, in 1Kings 19. Peter, after the miraculous taking of the great draught of fishes, understood that Christ was more than a man. He cried out, saying: "Go away from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man." Therefore, if this is so in any other matters belonging to God, then especially in this, the saints are to be humble, modest, and religious — understanding that His eternal and incomprehensible power and unspeakable majesty are altogether uncircumscriptible,[2093] and cannot be comprehended in any name whatsoever.

Tertullian, in his book De Trinitate, says very eloquently, truly, and godly:

"The proper name of God cannot be uttered, because it cannot be conceived. For what is called by a name, is conceived by the condition of its own nature.

iv.127

For a name is the significant noting of that thing which may be conceived by the name. But when the thing which is handled is of such a sort that it cannot be rightly conceived by our very senses and understanding, then how will it be rightly named by an apt term and fit nomination? While it is beyond understanding, it must also be above the significance of the term by which it is named. So that when God, for certain causes or occasions, annexes or declares His name to us in words, we may think and know that the actual property of the name is not expressed so much in words, as a certain significance is set down by it. Men may run to this name while in prayers, that they may be able to call upon God and obtain His mercy." [2094]

And again he says:

"Concerning God and those things that are of him and in him, the mind of man is not able to conceive what they are, how great they are, or of what fashion they are; nor does the eloquence of man's mouth utter in speech, words that in any point correlate to this majesty. As to thinking upon and uttering his majesty, all eloquence is mute and dumb, and the whole mind is too little, for it is greater than the mind; nor can it be conceived how great it is. This is because, if it could be conceived, then it must be less than man's mind in which it may be comprehended. It is also greater than all speech and cannot be spoken; because if it may be spoken, then it is less than man's speech by which, if it is spoken, it may be compassed and made to be understood. But whatever may be thought of Him, will still be less than he is. And whatever is shown of Him in speech, compared with Him, will be much less than He is.

iv.128

For in silence, to ourselves, we may partly perceive him. But to express him in words, as He is, is altogether impossible. For if you call him Light, then you name a creature of his rather than him, but him you do not express. Or if you call him Virtue, then you name his power rather than him, but him you do not declare. Or if you call him Majesty, then you name his honour rather than him, but him you do not describe. And why should I prolong the time, in running through every individual title? I will declare it all at once. Say everything you can about Him, whatever it is, and you still name some thing of his, rather than himself. For what can you fitly say or think of him, that is greater than all your words and senses? Unless it is in this one way: that as we can, and as our capacity will serve, and as our understanding will let us — we will conceive in our mind what God is, only if we think that he is that which cannot be understood, nor can possibly come into our thoughts, whatever kind of thing, and however great. For just as our eyes so dazzle and dim at seeing the brightness of the sun, that our sight cannot behold the very circle of it because it is overcome by the brightness of the beams that are opposed against it — even so, it fares with the sight of our mind in all our thoughts of God; and however much more she settles herself to consider God, by that much more she is blinded in the light of her cogitation. For (to repeat the same thing again) what can you fitly think about Him that is above all loftiness, higher than all height, deeper than all depth, lighter than all light, clearer than all clearness, brighter than all brightness, stronger than all strength, more virtuous than all virtue, fairer than all fairness, truer than all truth, greater than all greatness, mightier than all might, richer than all riches, wiser than all wisdom, more liberal than all liberality, better than all goodness, juster than all justice, and gentler than all gentleness? For all kinds of virtues must be less than He that is the Father and God of all virtues: so that God may truly be said to be such a being that nothing may be compared to Him. For he is above all that may be spoken." [2095]

Up to here I have cited the words of Tertullian.

iv.129

Now, although these things are so, and no tongue either of angels or of men can fully express what, who, and of what manner God is, seeing that his majesty is incomprehensible and unspeakable; yet the scripture, which is the word of God, tempering itself to our imbecility, ministers to us some means, forms, and phrases of speech, to bring us by them to some such knowledge of God as may at least suffice us while we live in this world.

iv.130

Yet notwithstanding, we should still think that the thing which is incomprehensible cannot be defined, but that by those phrases only an occasion is given by which we are brought to greater things through the illumination of the Spirit; and in this disputation we should still have before the eyes of our mind, that true and assured sentence of the eternal God to his servant Moses, saying: "You can not see my face; for no man shall see me and live." ^{Exo 33.20} For once we have departed out of this life, and are unburdened of this mortality and mortal frailty, then we shall see the majesty of God; for the apostle St. John said: "We know that when he appears, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." ^{1Joh 3.2} And let us annex to these, the words of the apostle Paul, where he says: "Now we see in a glass, even in a dark riddle;[2096] but then we shall see face to face." ^{1Cor 13.12} Therefore, let no man go beyond the limited bounds, or prevent the time appointed, nor yet presume by wicked boldness and curiosity in this life to behold the face, that is, the very essence or being of God. Let that revelation of God suffice everyone whom God himself grants in his word to open to us: namely, so much as of his goodness he thinks necessary and profitable for us to know. And I here with warrant say this: that wisdom is the true wisdom, which will not in this matter go about to know or savour more than the eternal wisdom teaches us to know.

The first and chief way to know God is derived from the very names of God attributed to him in the holy scripture. Those names are many and of sundry sorts, because his virtue, his wisdom — by which I mean his goodness, justice, and power — are altogether infinite. I will reckon up and expound to you the most excellent and usual among the rest, according to my skill.

Among all the names of God, that is the most excellent which they call Tetragrammaton, that is (if we may so say), the four-lettered name: for it is compounded of the four spiritual letters, and is called Jehovah.

iv.131

It is derived from the verb-substantive, Hovah, before which they put Jod and make it Jehovah, that is to say, Being, or I am; as he that is autousia (autousia), a being of himself, having his life and being not from any other, but of himself; lacking nobody's aid to make him be, but giving being to all manner of things — namely, eternal God, without beginning and ending, in whom we live, we move, and have our being. ^{Act 17.28} To this, those words especially belong which we find had passed between God and Moses in the third chapter of Exodus:

"And Moses said to God, Behold, when I come to the children of Israel, to whom you now send me, and say to them, The God of your fathers has sent me to you; and they ask me, saying, What is his name? the what answer shall I make them? And God said to Moses, I am that I am; or, I will be that I will be: and he said, Thus shall you say to the children of Israel, I am, or Being, or I will be, has sent me to you." ^{Exo 3.13-14}

That is, I am God that will be, and he has sent me who is himself Being, or Essence, and God everlasting. For their future tense contains three sundry times, He that is, He that was, and He that will be, has sent me. Truly, in his Revelation, the evangelist and apostle John seems to have had an eye to these words of the Lord, which he also went about interpreting, saying in the person of God: "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, RSV's, or the first and the last, says the almighty Lord, which is, and which was, and which shall be."

There are some who observe this for a note, that in almost all tongues, even the barbarous sort, the name of God is written with four letters. Concerning his name in Hebrew it is assuredly so; and in the Greek, Latin, and German tongues it is also true. For God in Greek is called Qeov (Theos); in Latin Deus; and with us Germans he is called Gott. They add, moreover, that the Persians call him Surh (Surh), and the Egyptians Qwuq or Qeuq (Thuth or Theuth), and by contraction, Qwq (Thuuth). And in the four letters, the Cabalists say that there are wonderful mysteries contained. As others have written very diligently about this, I would rather not stand on them here, nor trouble your patience with them.

iv.132

Also like this are these names of God: Jah (or Yah), and Hu. The first is found in the Psalms more than once: for David says, "Hallelu-Jah" that is, "Praise you the Lord." The latter is also mentioned by David, saying, Hu, that is "he," I say, God, the Being and creator of all things, "spoke the word and it was done; Hu, he commanded and it was." In Isaiah the Lord says: "I am the Lord, Hu is my name, and I will give my glory to no other." Now, those words also are derived from being, and they teach us that God is always like himself, an essence which of itself is eternally, and which gives being to all things that are — as He by whom, in whom, and to whom all things are, being himself a perpetual and most absolute or perfect havingness.[2097] But the Hebrews do not read or express the four-lettered name of God by calling it Jehovah; instead they use the word Adonai. For they say that Jehovah must not be uttered. Now, all interpreters in their translations, where they turn it into Latin, call it Dominus, that is, Lord: for God is the Lord of all things, both visible and invisible. Nor is there any other Lord in the whole world, except this one (and he alone), to whom all things in the world are subject, and obey. For he has a most complete dominion and absolute monarchy over all his creatures. And therefore, for plainness' sake, the word Sabbaoth is sometimes annexed to the name of God;[2098] which some translate "the Lord of powers," and some "the Lord of hosts." For God, being almighty, displays by his power or strength, and declares in his host, what mighty things he is able to do, and how great a power and might he has. For since he is the God of all creatures, and he disposes and uses them as a captain uses his soldiers, to work mighty and marvellous things, he declares even by small things [2099] how great he himself is, and how great his power is. In the host of God are all the angels, of whom Daniel said, "A thousand thousands and hundreds of thousands ministered to him." One of these angels killed in the Assyrians' camp in one night, one hundred eighty-five thousand soldiers under the banner of the most powerful king Sennacherib.

iv.133

In the host of God are all the winds, all the stars, and all the fiery, airy, and watery impressions. In the host of God are all evil spirits, all men, kings and princes, all the warlike furnishings of every nation, and finally, all creatures, both visible and invisible. And all these He uses according to his own pleasure, yes, according to his own good and just will, when, how much, and how long he wishes, to finish and bring to pass his own will and judgments. In punishing the first world at the deluge, he used water. In destroying Sodom and the cities thereabout, he used fire. And in rooting out the Canaanites and Jews, he used the means of mortal men, or soldiers.

Sometimes there is ascribed to the Lord the word Eleon, and the Lord is called Eleon, that is to say, high. For in the one hundred-thirteenth psalm we read: "The Lord is higher than all nations, and his glory is above the heavens. Who is like the Lord our God, who sets himself so high in his habitation?" ^Psa
113.4-5 And in the ninety-seventh psalm he says: "You, Lord, are higher than all that are in the earth; you are exalted far above all gods." ^{Psa 97.9}

Again, God is called El, because of his strength. For what he wills, that he can do, and therefore is he called a strong God, or a giant. For Jeremiah says: "The Lord is with me as a strong giant." ^{Jer 20.11} Isaiah says: "The Lord shall come forth like a giant, he shall stir himself up [2100] like a man of war, he shall roar and overcome his enemies." ^{Isa 42.13} And like this is the word Eloah, whose plural number is Elohim. That name betokens the presence of God, which never fails his workmanship and worshippers. Jeremiah brings in God speaking, and says: "Am I God, that sees only the thing that is near at hand, and not the thing that is far off? [2101] May any man hide himself, so that I shall not see him, says the Lord? Do I not fill heaven and earth?" ^{Jer 23.24}

iv.134

For before him, also David said: "Where shall I go from the breath of your mouth? And where shall I flee from your countenance? If I ascend into heaven, you are there: and if I descend into hell, you are there also. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there your hand shall rule me, and your right hand shall hold me fast." ^{Psa 139.6-10}Therefore the apostle Paul says: "God is not far from every one of us. For by him we live, we move, and have our being." ^Act
17.28 And for that reasons perhaps, God was called Qeov (Theos), namely, apo Qeein (apo Theein) by the Greeks, because of his readiness and immediate succour; because he never fails mortal men, but always and in all places aids and relieves them. Likewise, Plato in Cratylo, and his interpreter Proclus, think that Qeov (God) is derived apo tou Qeein, that is, running. But that course, or running, does not refer to the presence or help of God, but to another thing.[2102] For when men saw the sun, moon, stars, and heaven itself, still turned around by running, they thought that they were gods. There are some who will derive it apo tou deouv (apo tou deous), that is to say, of fear or dread: for fear of religion believes and persuades men that there is a God. The Latins perhaps framed their Deus (God) from the Greeks' Qeov. But some rather think that Deus is derived a dando, of giving, because he gives all things to all men. For so among the Hebrews he is called Qeov (as I will shortly declare), or Shaddai, because he is sufficient to himself; he lacks nothing, but gives to all men all good and necessary things.[2103] Some others would have God called in Latin, Deus, quod ipsi nihil deest, that is, "God, because there is nothing lacking in him."

But now, the scripture attributes the plural number, Elohim, not to God alone, but also to angels, to judges, and to men in authority: because God is always present with them while they labour in that office which he has appointed them to. And by their ministry, He works the things which he himself wills, and which are expedient for the welfare of mortal men.

iv.135

And although the word Elohim is plural in number, yet it is set before verbs in the singular number. In the first chapter of Genesis, we find, "In the beginning," Bara Elohim, Creavit Dii, "God created" (for Bara, created, is the singular number) heaven and earth. That phrase of speech shows to us the mystery of the reverend Trinity: for Moses seems to have said in effect, In the beginning, God in the Trinity created heaven and earth. In the seventh chapter of the second book of Samuel, verse 23, Elohim in the plural number is joined with verbs of the plural number, to declare that there is a difference of persons in the blessed Trinity.

Moreover, in the league which God makes with our father Abraham God gives himself another name. For he says: "I God am Shaddai" that is, sufficient, or sufficiency. ^{Gen 17.1} Therefore, God is called Shaddai. Some in their translations turn it Vastator, a destroyer, as if God would name himself a just revenger. But Moses Egyptius [2104] says: "The noun Shaddai is compounded from the verb Daii (which signifies, he suffices) and the letter Shin, which has the same meaning that Ascher has, and signifies, he that. So that Shaddai is as the same as saying, "he that suffices to himself, and is the sufficiency or fulness of all things." Perhaps the heathen have on this occasion derived their Saturnus, which name they gave to those whom they wickedly took to be gods. For as Diurnus comes from Dies, a day; so Saturnus is derived a saturando, of satisfying or filling.[2105] Therefore, God is that One to whom nothing is lacking, who in all things and to all things is sufficient to himself; who needs no man's aid, yes, who alone has all things which pertain to the perfect felicity both of this life and of the world to come; and which he alone can fill and suffice all his people and other creatures. For this reason, the Germans call him Gott, as if to say Guot, good, or best;[2106] because, as He is full of all goodness, so he most liberally bestows upon men all manner of good things. The German word is not unlike the ancient name by which the Egyptians called God; for they called God Theuth, or Thoth: now if we put G for Th, then it is Goth, and we say, Gott.

iv.136

The Lord himself, in the sixth chapter of Exodus, puts these two names together, Shaddai and Jehovah, as two of the most excellent names that he has, and says: "I am Jehovah. And I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Shaddai: but in my name Jehovah I was not known to them;" ^{Exo 6.3} — not that the patriarchs had not heard or known the name Jehovah. For that name began to be called upon in the time of Seth, immediately after the beginning of the world. Therefore, it seems that the Lord in effect meant this: "I opened myself to the patriarchs as God Shaddai, who is able in all things to sufficiently fill them with all goodness; and therefore I promised them a land that flows with milk and honey: but I was not yet known to them by my name Jehovah, that is, I did not perform unto them that which I promised." For we have heard already that he is called Jehovah, of that which he brings about; and therefore he brings his promise to performance. "Now therefore" (he says) "I will indeed fulfil my promise, and show myself to be, not only Deum Shaddai, an all-sufficient or almighty God, but also show myself to be Jehovah, an essence or eternal being, immutable, true, and in all things like myself, or standing to my promise." [2107]

Last of all, we read in the third chapter of Exodus, that God said to Moses: "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, The Lord God of our fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from one generation to another." ^{Exo 3.15} So then, here we now have another name of God; for he would be called the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob. "This," he says, "shall be my memorial from one generation unto another; namely, that in which I will keep in memory my benefits bestowed upon those patriarchs, so that by them the posterity may know and remember me." For when we hear the names of those patriarchs, they put us in mind of all the excellent and innumerable benefits which God bestowed on our forefathers.

iv.137

These are not in vain, and with such great diligence, particularly reckoned up by Moses in his first book called Genesis. For He will be our God, even as he was theirs, if we so believe in him as they did. For to us who believe, he will be both Shaddai and Jehovah, eternal and immutable truth, being, life, and heaped-up storehouse of all manner of good things.

And now, by the way, it is not without a mystery that, when he is also the God of other patriarchs, such as Adam, Seth, Enosh, and especially Enoch and Noah, yet out of the number of them, he picked those three: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And to every one of their names he severally prefixed his own name, saying: "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." He evidently did this to teach the mystery of the Trinity in the unity of the divine substance, and that each one of the persons is of the same divinity, majesty and glory; that is, that the Father is very God, the Son is very God, and the Holy Ghost is very God; and these three are one God; for he says, "I am God," etc. I will speak of this in a convenient place.

This much up to here concerning the names of God, out of which a general knowledge of God may easily be gathered. I know that one Dionysius [2108] has made a busy commentary upon the names of God. But I know too, that the godly sort, and those who are studious of the apostles' doctrine, understand that the disciples of the apostles far more simply handled matters belonging to religion. I know that other take account of seventy-two names of God out of the scriptures and books of the Cabalists. As I have repeated these in another place, [2109] so I will hereafter repeat to you the chief of them, out of Exodus.

Secondly, God is exhibited to be seen in the word of God, to be beheld, and to be known by visions and divine mirrors, as though in a certain parable; while he is set before our eyes by Prosopography, Prosopopoeia, or mortal shapes.

iv.138

And yet we are warned not to stick on those visible things, but to lift up our minds from visible things, to invisible and spiritual things. For God is not bodily in his own substance, just because in visions he is exhibited to us in a bodily shape like a man. Nor did any of the old saints before the birth of Christ express God in the shape and picture of a mortal man, just because God had exhibited himself in that shape so as to be seen by the patriarchs and prophets. It is the doting [2110] error of the Anthropomorphites [2111] to say that God exists bodily, and that he has members like a mortal man. And so that no man in this case deceives himself by attributing falsely to God the thing that is against his honour, I will here, instead of a remedy against that poison, recite to you, dearly beloved, the words of St. Augustine. Out of the pure understanding of the holy scriptures, and assured testimonies of catholic true doctors, he wrote to Fortunatus — De Videndo Deo, against the Anthropomorphites:

"Concerning the members of God, which the scripture mentions in every place, know this: lest any man believe that, according to the fashion and figure of this flesh, we are like God, that same scripture also said that God has wings, which it is manifest that we men do not have. Therefore, just as when we hear wings named, we understand God's protection and defence; so when we hear of hands, we must understand his operation; when we hear mention made of feet, we must understand his present readiness; when we hear the name eyes, we must understand his sight, by which he sees and knows all things: and when we hear of his face, we must understand his justice, by which he is known to the whole world: and whatever else like this that the same scripture mentions, I believe truly that it must be understood spiritually. Nor do I alone, nor am I the first that thinks this; but even all those who with a basic understanding of the scriptures, withstand the opinion of those who, for that reason, are called Anthropomorphites.

iv.139

I mean to allege here one testimony out of the writings of St. Jerome. I will not cite too much, so as not to cause too long a stay. For when that man, who was most excellently learned in the holy scriptures, expounded the Psalm, where it is said, "Understand, you unwise among the people; you fools, at length be wise. He that planted the ear, shall he not hear; or he that made the eye, shall he not see?" ^{Psa 94.8-9} Jerome said among other things,

"This place most of all works against the Anthropomorphites, who say that God has members even as we have. For example, he is said to have eyes. 'The eyes of the Lord behold all things; the hand of the Lord makes all things.' And 'Adam heard the sound of the feet of the Lord walking in paradise.' They understand these places simply as the letter lies, and refer mortal weakness to the magnificent mightiness of the immortal God. But I say that God is all eye, all hand, and all foot. He is all eye, because he sees all things; all hand, because he works all things; all foot, because he is present everywhere. Therefore, mark what he says: 'He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? or he that made the eye, shall he not see?' He did not say, therefore He has no eyes. But he said, 'He that planted the ear, shall He not hear; or He that made the eye, shall He not see? He made the members, and gave them the efficient powers.'

And a little afterwards, St. Augustine says:

In all this which I have cited out of the saints and doctors, Ambrose, Jerome, Athanasius, Gregory [Nazianzen], and whatever else like these from other men's works that I could ever read or come by (which I think would be too long to recite here individually), I find that God is not a body, nor does he have members like a man; neither is he divided by the distance of places, but by nature he is unchangeably invisible. And with the help of God, I believe without wavering, and so far as he gives me grace, I understand that when in the holy scriptures he is reported to have been seen with corporal eyes, he did not appear to those to whom he appeared, by that same invisible nature and substance, but by a visible shape taken to himself, as it pleased him."

This much out of Augustine. [2112]

iv.140

To these I will now also add the words of Tertullian, a very ancient ecclesiastical writer, in his excellent book De Trinitate.

"By members, are meant the efficient powers of God, not the bodily fashion of God, or corporal lineaments. For when the eyes are described, it is set down because he sees all things; and when the ear is named, it is named because he hears all things; and when the finger is mentioned, then a certain signification of his mind is declared;

iv.141

and when the nostrils [2113] are spoken of, the receiving of prayers as sweet smells is thereby noted; and when the hand is talked of, it argues that He is the author of all creatures; and when the arm is specified, thereby is declared that no nature can withstand the power of God; and when the feet are named, that puts us in mind that God fills all things, and that there is no place where he is not present. For neither members nor the offices of members are necessary to Him, whose will alone all things obey and are ready at hand, without any words. For why should He require eyes, when he is himself the light? Or why should he seek feet, when he is himself present everywhere? Or why should he go in, since there is nowhere to go out from himself? Or why should he wish for a hand, whose will works all things without words? Nor does he need ears, who knows the most secret thoughts. Or why should he lack a tongue, whose thinking alone is a command? For these members were necessary to men, and not to God; because the counsel of men would have no effect, unless the body fulfilled the thoughts. But they are not needful to God, whose will the very works not only follow without any stirring business, but immediately proceed and go forward with his will. He is all eye, because he wholly sees. He is all ear, because he wholly hears. He is all hand, because he wholly works; and He is all foot, because he is wholly everywhere. For whatever is simple does not have in itself any diversity — not of itself. But whatever things are born to dissolution, those things fall into a diversity of members; but things that are not concrete, cannot feel diversity." [2114]

And as follows. For all these, up to here, are the words of Tertullian.

iv.142

Therefore, when we read that Moses saw God face to face, and that Jacob, Israel, and the prophets saw God plainly and not obscurely, what is meant is that a vision most manifest, effectual, and very familiar was exhibited to them. For truly, said Theodoret, the bishop of Cyrus: "We say that the fathers did not see the divine nature or substance — which cannot be circumscribed, comprehended, or perceived in the mind of man, but itself comprehends all things. But we say that they saw a certain glory and certain visions, which correlated to their capacity, and did not surpass the measure of it." [2115] For these assured sentences of the holy scripture always remain most true: "No man ever saw God at any time." ^Joh
1.18 "God dwells in the light that no man can attain unto, whom no man has seen nor can see;" ^1Tim
6.16 and again, "No man shall see my face, and live;" ^{Exo 33.20} that is, so long as he lives on this earth in the corruption and imperfection of his flesh no man shall behold the essence of God, which is eternal and light that cannot be looked upon. For once we are delivered from this corruption and are glorified, then we shall see him as he is. ^{1Joh 3.2}

iv.143

Therefore, God is said to have been seen by the fathers, not according to the fulness of his divinity, but according to the capacity of men.

Tertullian thinks that all things in the old Testament were done of God the Father by the Son, who, taking upon with himself a competent shape, appeared to men and spoke to the fathers. In the beginning of his epistle to the Hebrews,^2.14 Paul significantly speaks of the Son of God incarnate, not absolutely denying that the Father ever did anything by the Son. Tertullian says:

"To the Son was given all power in heaven and on earth. But that power could not be of all things, unless it were of every time. Therefore, it was the Son who always descended to talk with men, from Adam to the patriarchs and prophets, in vision, in dream, in a mirror, and oracle. So it always pleased God to be familiar with men in the earth, being none other than the Word who afterward was to be made flesh. And it pleased him to so make a way for us to faith, that we might more easily perceive that the Son of God descended into the world, and that we might know that such a thing was done." [2116]

And so forth as follows; for all these are the words of Tertullian. After this introduction,[2117] we will now add the visions of God's majesty exhibited to holy men.

God exhibited to his servants many and sundry visions in which, in a way, he foreshadowed his majesty to them. It would be too long a labour for me to repeat and expound to you all of these visions. You shall find the most notable ones in Exodus 19, Isaiah 6, Ezekiel 1, Daniel 7, and in the Apocalypse of the blessed evangelist and apostle John. It is sufficient to put you in mind of them. But now, the most renowned and excellent one of all, I will recite here and handle at large. It is found in the thirty-third and thirty-fourth chapters of Exodus.

iv.144

Moses had trial of the facility and goodness of God, and that there was nothing which he obtained that was not at God's hand. Therefore he takes it upon himself to boldly ask this also of the Lord: to see God in his substance, glory, and majesty; which all the true wise men of every age only wished and longed for. For Moses says: "Because I understand that you, O God, wish me well, and that you can deny nothing, I beseech you, then: show me your glory." That is, allow me, I pray you, to see you as you are in your glorious substance and majesty. Now, in answering this request, which is the greatest of all others, God says to him: "I will make all my goodness pass before you, and I will cry the name of the Lord, or in the name of the Lord,[2118] before you." ^{Exo 33.19} In these words, he promises two things to Moses. The one is, "All my goodness shall pass before you." But this chief good of God can be nothing else than the good and mighty God himself, or rather, the Word of God — I say, the very beloved Son of God, in whom we believe that all the treasures of wisdom, divinity, goodness, and perfection are placed and laid up. For he set before Moses' eyes his appearance in a human and visible shape, that same appearance he would have at the end of the world, incarnate. The other thing that he promised is this: "I will cry the name of the Lord, or in the name of the Lord, before you;" that is, I will proclaim the names of my glory, by which you may understand who I am, and see me in your mind.

But now, so that no man should attribute so excellent a vision to the merit of Moses, the Lord adds a subsequent sentence. This vision does not happen to you because of your own merit. For "without man's merits I reveal myself to whom I will, and without respect of persons I will have compassion on whom it pleases me." This consideration of the free grace and liberal goodness of God greatly belongs to the true knowledge of God.

iv.145

Then the Lord continues, and more significantly declares to Moses in what manner and order he will exhibit or show himself to him. "You may not in this life see my face;" that is, you may not fully see me in my substance; for that is reserved for the blessed spirits and glorified bodies in the world to come. I will therefore show myself to you in this fashion. You shall go up into the mountain; there in a rock I will show you a cleft, in which you shall place yourself: and I will lay my hand upon you, that is, a cloud, or some such thing, so that, as I come toward you, you may not look directly in my face. In that phrase of speech, the Lord imitates the fashion of men, whose order is to spread their hands over the eyes of the one whom they would not have narrowly behold anything. The Lord then adds: And in the meantime, I will pass by; that is, the image which I take, namely, the shape of a man, in which I will exhibit myself to be seen, shall pass by before you. And once I am past, so that you can not see my face, I will take away the hand with which I hid your eyes, and then you shall behold the back of the figure, or my hinder parts. Now the hinder parts of God are the words and deeds of God, which he leaves behind him, so that we may learn by them to know him. Again, beholding God's face is taken for the most exact and precise knowledge of God; but those who see the back only, do not know as well as those who see the face. And in the hinder or latter times of the world, God sent his Son into the world, born of a woman;[2119] whoever beholds him in faith, does not see the Godhead in his humanity, but by his words and deeds, they know who God is, and so they see the Father in the Son. For they learn that God is the chief good, and that the Son of God is God, being co-equal and of the same substance with the Father.

Now let us see how God (according to this promise he made) exhibited himself to be seen by Moses. Moses, rising up in good time, ascends up into the mountain cheerfully to the rock which the Lord had shown him, placing himself in the cleft. He looks greedily for the vision or revelation of God. At length, the Lord descended in a cloud, and came upon the mountain to the cleft of the rock in which Moses waited for him.

iv.146

And presently, when Moses' face was hidden, the figure of God passed by before him — that is, the shape of a man which God took upon himself. And when the back of the figure was toward Moses, so that he could no longer see its face, the Lord took his hand away, and Moses beheld the hinder parts of him. By this he gathered that God would one day, that is to say, in the hinder times of the world, be incarnate and revealed to the world. We will afterward say something more about this revelation. Once the Lord had gone past, he cried out as he promised, and as in a certain catalogue, he reckoned up his names by which, as in a shadow, he declared His nature. For he said, "Jehovah, Jehovah, God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abounding in goodness and truth; keeping mercy in store for thousands, forgiving wickedness, transgression, and sin: and yet not allowing the wicked to escape unpunished, visiting the wickedness of the fathers upon the children and children's children, to the third and fourth generation." ^{Exo 34.6-7}What else is this, than if God had said,

'I am the uncreated essence, being of myself from before all beginning, who gives being to all things, and keeps all things in being; I am a strong and almighty God; I do not abuse my might, for I am gentle and merciful; I love my creatures, and man especially, on whom I wholly yearn in the bowels of love and mercy; I am rich and bountiful, and ready at all times to help my creatures; I freely, without recompense, give all that I bestow; I am long-suffering, and not irritable to anger or hasty to revenge, as mankind is; I am no niggard [2120] or envious, as wealthy men in the world usually are; I am most liberal and bountiful, rejoicing to be shared among my people, and to heap up benefits upon the faithful. Moreover, I am true and faithful; I deceive no man; I lie about nothing; what I promise, I stand to, and faithfully perform it. I neither can nor do so waste my riches that, at length, all is spent and I myself am drawn dry. For I keep good turns in store for a thousand generations, so that even if the former age never lived so wealthily with my riches, yet those who are still to come and be born, even till the end of the world, shall nevertheless find in me enough to suffice and satisfy their desire.

iv.147

For I am the well-spring of good that cannot be drawn dry; and if any man sins against me and afterward repents of it, I am not unappeasable. For of my own free-will I forgive errors, sins, and heinous crimes. And yet, let no man therefore think that I am delighted with sins, or that I am a patron of wicked-doers. For I, even I, punish wicked and impenitent men, and chasten even those who are my own, that thereby I may keep them in order and office. But let no man think that he may sin and escape unpunished, because he sees that his ancestors sinned and were not punished — that is, sinned and were not utterly cut off and wiped out. For I reserve revenge till a just and full time, and I so behave myself, that all are compelled to confess me to be a God of judgment.'

Now, when Moses the servant of God had heard and seen these things, he made haste, and fell down prostrate to the earth, and worshipped. Let us also do the same, being surely certified that the Lord will not grant, so long as we live in this transitory world, to reveal himself and his glory any whit more fully and publicly,[2121] than he was exhibited to us in Christ his Son. Therefore, let the things that sufficed Moses suffice us also: let the knowledge of Christ suffice and content us.

For thirdly, the most evident and excellent way and means to know God, is laid out before us in Jesus Christ, the Son of God incarnate and made man. For we just heard, even now, that the shadow of Christ was set before Moses, when it pleased God to most familiarly reveal himself to him. And the apostle Paul places the illumination or appearing of "the knowledge of the glory of God, in the face of Jesus Christ." ^{2Cor 4.6} And in another place, the same Paul calls Christ "the brightness of his Father's glory, and the living image of his substance." ^{Heb 1.3} Truly, he most plainly says himself in the gospel, "No man knows the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him." ^{Mat 11.27} For he is the way to the Father, and the Father is seen and beheld in him. For we again read in the gospel, "No man has ever seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he has revealed Him to us." ^{Joh 1.18}

iv.148

But again the apostle says, "Since, in the wisdom of God the world through their wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of preaching to save those who believe." ^{1Cor 1.21} That which he calls "the wisdom of God" in this place, is the very creation and workmanship of the world, and the wonderful works of God, in which God would be known to the world. And in beating out and considering this, all the wisdom of all the wise men till then, altogether lay. But because the consideration of those things did them no good, because man's wisdom for the most part referred the causes of things to something other than God, who is the true and only mark to which they should be referred. And while men thought themselves wise, as the same apostle [2122] teaches us, they became fools in their own reasonings. Thus, it pleased God to be known to the world by another way; namely, by the foolish preaching of the gospel, which indeed is the most absolute and perfect wisdom; but to the worldly wisdom of mortal men, it seems foolishness. For it seems a foolish thing to the men of this world, that the true and very God, being incarnate or made man, was resident with us here in the earth, in poverty, hungry, suffered, and died. And yet, even this is the way by which God is most evidently known to the world, together with His wisdom, goodness, truth, righteousness, and power. For the wisdom of God, which no tongue can utter, shines out very brightly in the whole ministry and wonderful dispensation of Christ — but far more publicly, if we discuss and beat out the causes (of which I spoke elsewhere), and thoroughly weigh the doctrine of Christ. In the incarnation of the Son of God, it appears how God wishes the world well, it being sunk and drowned in sin, as that to which he is bound by an indissoluble league. And through Christ He adopts the sons of death and the devil, into the sons and heirs of life everlasting. Now, Christ most exactly fulfils all those things which the prophets foretold of him by the revelation of God; and he most liberally performs the things which God the Father promised about him; and that declares how unchangeable and true the eternal God is.

iv.149

In the deeds or miracles of Christ our Lord — in his resurrection, in his glorious ascension into heaven, and the most plentiful outpouring of his holy Spirit upon his disciples, but especially in converting the whole world from paganism and Judaism to the evangelical truth — appear the power, long-suffering, majesty, and unspeakable goodness of God the Father. In the death of Christ, the Son of God, shines the great justice of God the Father, who having once been offended with our sins, could not be pacified except with such and so great a sacrifice. Finally, because He did not spare not his only-begotten Son, but gave him up for us who are his enemies and wicked rebels — even in this, is that mercy of His made known to the world, which is very rightly commended above all the works of God. Therefore, in the Son and by the Son, God most manifestly makes himself manifest to the world; so that whatever is needful to be known about God or his will, and whatever belongs to heavenly and healthful wisdom, that is wholly opened and thoroughly perceived and seen in the Son.

Therefore, when Philip said to Christ, "Lord, show us the Father, and that will suffice us;" we read in John that the Lord answered, "Have I been so long with you, and do you not yet know me? Philip, he that has seen me has seen the Father; and how can say you, show us the Father? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?" ^{Joh 14.8-10} Now, in this he calls back all the faithful from over-curious searching after God, laying before them the mystery of the dispensation in which he would have us rest and content ourselves, namely this: that God was made man. Therefore whoever desires to see and know God truly, let them cast the eyes of their mind upon Christ, and believe the mystery of him contained in words and deeds, learning by them what and who God is. For God is such a one as he exhibits himself to be known in Christ, and in that very knowledge, he appoints eternal life to be, where he says: "And this is eternal life, that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." ^{Joh 17.3}

iv.150

Let him that wishes himself well, take heed that he not go about to know any more than God himself teaches us in Christ. But whoever follows the rule and subtleties of man's wit, neglecting Christ, truly comes to nothing and perishes in his thoughts.

The fourth means by which to know God, is fetched out of the contemplation of His works. David says, "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows forth the works of his hands." ^{Psa 19.1} And the apostle Paul says, "His invisible things, being understood by his works through the creation of the world, are seen, that is, both his eternal power and Godhead." ^{Rom 1.20} Look, the power and Godhead of God are these invisible things of God; and yet they are understood by the consideration of God's works. Therefore, even God himself is known by the works of God.

But now, the works of God are doubly considered, or are of two sorts. For either they are laid before us to be beheld in things created for the benefit of men, as in the heavens and earth themselves, and those things that are in heaven and on earth, and are governed and preserved by the providence of God. Of this sort are the stars and the motions or courses of the stars, the influence of heaven, the course [2123] of time, living creatures of all kinds (trees, plants, fruits of the earth), the sea and whatever is in it, stones, and whatever things are hidden within and dug out of the earth for the use of men. St. Basil and St. Ambrose have written about these very learnedly and godly in their books entitled, "The Work of Six Days," which they called Hexaëmeron.[2124] Here may be inserted that history of nature, which the glorious and worthy king David in the Psalms, especially the hundredth psalm, most fitly applies to our purpose. But lest we make the course of this present treatise entangled and intricate, I will hereafter speak of the creation of the world, and of God's government and providence, as the same. At present, it shall suffice to know [2125] that heaven and earth, and all that is in them, declare to us, and set before our eyes as it were, an evident argument that God, just as He is most wise, is also most mighty, wonderful, of an infinite majesty, of an incomprehensible glory, most just, most gracious, and most excellent.

iv.151

Isaiah therefore, a faithful teacher of the church, giving good counsel for the state of mortal men, says to them: "Lift up your eyes on high, and consider who has made these things that come forth by heaps,[2126] calling them all by their names; whose strength is so great, that none of them fails." ^{Isa 40.26} For although, even from the beginning, the stars have shined to the world, and have performed in their course, that for which they were created — yet they are not worn by use, nor consumed away or darkened ought at all by their continuance; for they are preserved whole, by the power of their maker. Jeremiah also cries: "Lord, there is none like you. You are great, and great is your name with power. Who would not fear you, O king of the Gentiles? For yours is the glory: for among all the wise men of the heathen, and in all their kingdoms, there is none that may be likened to you." ^{Jer 10.6-7} And immediately after, again:

"The Lord God is a true and living God and king. [2127] If he is angered, the earth shakes, nor can the Gentiles abide his indignation. He made the earth with his power; with his wisdom he orders the whole compass of the world; and with his discretion he has spread the heavens out. At his voice, the waters gathered together in the air; he draws up the clouds from the uttermost parts of the earth; he turns lightning to rain, and brings the winds out of their treasuries." ^{Jer 10.10-13}

Or else, the works of God are set forth for us to behold in man, the very lord and prince of all creatures, not so much in the workmanship or making of man — which Lactantius and Andreas Vesalius [2128] have surpassingly painted out for all men to see — as in the works which toward man, or in man, or by man, the Lord himself finishes and brings to pass.

iv.152

For God justly punishes some men; and by punishing them he declares that he knows the dealings of mortal men, and hates all wrong and injury. Upon others, he heaps up very large and ample benefits; and in being bountiful to them, he declares that He is rich, yes, that He is the fountain of goodness which cannot be drawn dry; and that he is bountiful, good, merciful, gentle, and long-suffering. There are innumerable examples of this in the history of the Bible. Cain, for the murder committed upon his brother, lived a miserable and wretched life here on earth. For the just Lord revenges the blood shed of the innocent. The first world was drowned in the deluge;[2129] a plague was laid on it for the contempt of God; but Noah and his were saved in the ark by the mercy of God. God brings Abraham from Ur of the Chaldees, and places him in the land of Canaan, blessing and loading him with all manner of goods. He wonderfully keeps Jacob in all his troubles and infinite calamities. Through great afflictions, he lifts up Joseph from the prison [2130] to the throne of Egypt. He grievously plagues the Egyptians for the tyranny shown in oppressing Israel, and for the contempt of his commandment. But it would be too long and tedious to make a catalog of all the examples.

Now, by these and like works of God we learn who, and how great, our God is, how wise he is, how good, how mighty, how liberal, how just and rightful; and with this we learn that we must believe him, and obey him in all things. For Asaph says:

"The things that we have heard and known, and such as our fathers have told us, those we will not hide from our sons; but will show to the generations to come the praise of the Lord, his mighty and wonderful works which he has done: that the children which are born, when they come to age, may show their children the same; that they may put their trust in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments." ^Psa
78.3-7 And as follows in the seventy-eighth Psalm.

Another means to know God, fifthly, is that which is gathered from comparisons. For the scripture compares all the most excellent things in the world with God, whom it prefers before them all; so that we may gather by this, that God is the chief good, and that his majesty is incomprehensible.

iv.153

This one place in Isaiah may take the place of many, where in the fortieth chapter he says:

"Who has measured the waters with his fist? Who has measured heaven with his span? Who has held the dust of the earth between three fingers, and weighed the mountains [2131] and hills in a balance? Who has directed the Spirit of the Lord? Who gave him counsel? Who taught him? Who is of his counsel, to instruct him? Behold, all people are in comparison to him are a drop in a bucket-full, and counted as the least thing that the balance weighs. Yes, he shall cast out the isles as the smallest crumb of dust. Lebanon is not sufficient to provide Him wood to burn, nor its beasts enough for one sacrifice to him. All people in comparison to him are reckoned as nothing; and if they are compared with him, they are counted as less than nothing... Do you not understand this? Has it not been preached to you since the beginning? Have you not been taught this by the foundation of the earth? It is he that sits upon the circle of the world, whose inhabiters are (in comparison to him) but as grasshoppers. He spreads out the heavens as a covering, and stretches them out as a tent to dwell in. He brings princes to nothing, and makes the judges of the earth as though they did not exist." ^{Isa
40.12-17, 21-23} And so forth.

Now, to this place belong the Prosopopoeial [2132] statements of God. You may find many sundry examples of them, besides the visions we placed in the second way or means of knowing God. But the most excellent are found in the eighteenth Psalm, and in the fifth chapter of Solomon's Ballad. [2133] I passed over both of these, untouched, because I did not mean to keep you too long; for we must descend to the other points.

Last of all, sixthly, God is known by the sayings or sentences uttered by the mouths of the prophets and apostles. Of this sort is that notable speech of Jeremiah, where he says:

iv.154

"Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, nor the strong man in his strength, nor the rich man in his riches: [2134] but let him that glories glory in this: that he understands and knows me, that I am the Lord, and do mercy, judgment, and righteousness upon earth. Therefore I am delighted in such things alone, says the Lord." ^{Jer 9.23-24} Now, by the mercy of God we are saved and adorned with sundry great benefits; by his judgment he punishes the wicked and disobedient according to their deserts, and with this he keeps equity: even as his righteousness also truly performs that which he promises. Therefore, we say that God is a Saviour, a liberal giver of all good things, an upright Judge, and assured truth in performing his promises.

And here, now, is to be referred the doctrine of the prophets and apostles, which teaches the true knowledge of God, acknowledging Him to be one in essence, and three in persons. Concerning the unity of the divine essence (by the allegation of which, the plurality of the heathen gods is utterly rejected and flatly condemned), I will cite those testimonies out of the holy scripture which seem to be more evident and excellent than all the others — which are so many in number, that a man can hardly count them all. The most notable is that which is grounded upon prophetic and evangelical authority. It is cited out of the sixth chapter of Deuteronomy, ^6.4 and set down in these words in the twelfth chapter of Mark: "Jesus said, The first of all the commandments is, Hearken, Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength. This is the first commandment. And the second is like this, You shall love your neighbour as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these." ^{Mar 12.29-31}It now follows in the gospel: "And the Scribe said, Well, Master, you have said the truth; that there is one God, and that there is no other but he; and that to love him with all the heart, with all the mind, with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love a man's neighbour as himself, is greater than all the burnt-offerings and sacrifices." ^{Mar 12.32-33} All the other notable testimonies in the law, agree with this one.

iv.155

For in the twentieth chapter of Exodus, we read that the Lord himself said with his own mouth at mount Sinai: "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage; have no other gods but me." [2135] Again, at the end of his song Moses brings in God saying: "See now, how I am God, and there is no other God but me. I kill, and make alive again. I wound, and I heal, nor is there any who can deliver out of my hand." ^Deu
32.39 The testimonies of the prophets also agree with those in the law. For in the eighteenth Psalm, David says: "The way of God is an undented way, the word of the Lord also is tried in the fire. He is the defender of all them that put their trust in him. For who is God but the Lord? or who has any strength [2136] except our God?" ^{Psa 18.30-31} There are many of this sort in other places in the volume of the Psalms.

The Lord says in Isaiah, and cries by Isaiah, "I am the Lord, Hu [2137] is my name, and my glory I will not give to any other, nor my honour to graven images." ^{Isa 42.8} "I am the first and the last, and beside me there is no God. And who is like me? (If any are), let him call forth and openly show what is past, and lay before me what has happened since I appointed the people of the world;[2138] and let him tell what will happen afterward, and come to pass." ^Isa
44.6-7 "I the Lord do all things; I alone spread out the heavens, and only I have laid out the earth by myself." ^{Isa 42.5} "I make the tokens of witches of no effect, and make the soothsayers fools. As for the wise, I turn them backward, and make their wisdom foolishness. I set up the word of my servant, and fulfil the counsels of my messengers." ^Isa
44.25-26 "I am the Lord, and there is no other; who creates [2139] light and darkness, and makes peace and trouble: yes, even I the Lord do all these things." ^{Isa 45.7}

To these testimonies of the prophets we will now add one or two out of St. Paul, the great instructor and apostle of the Gentiles. In his epistle to Timothy he says: "There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." ^{1Tim 2.5}

iv.156

And again he says: "One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, which is above all, and through all, and in you all." ^{Eph 4.5} Again, the same apostle says to the Corinthians: "There is no other God but one. And if others are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, (as there are many gods, and many lords) yet to us there is but one God, even the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him." ^{1Cor 8.4-6} Now I suppose these divine testimonies are evident enough, and sufficiently prove that God is one in substance, of incomprehensible essence, eternal, and spiritual.

But under the one essence of the Godhead, the holy scripture shows us a distinction of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Now, note here that I call it a distinction, not a division or separation. For we adore and worship no more Gods than one; but we neither confound, nor yet deny or take away the three subsistences or persons of the divine essence, nor the properties of it. Noetus (indeed Anoetus) [2140] and Sabellius the Libyan, a godless, bold, and very rude ass, from whom sprang up the gross heresy of the Patripassians, [2141] taught that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost imported no distinction in God, but that they were diverse attributes of God. For they said that God is called the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, in no other sense than when he is named good, just, gentle, omnipotent, wise, etc. They said the Father created the world; and only in the name of the Son, he took on flesh and suffered; and again, merely changing his name, he was the Holy Ghost who came upon the disciples. But the true, prophetic, and apostolic faith expressly teaches that the names of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost show us what God is in his own proper nature. For naturally and eternally, God is the Father, because from before beginnings, he unspeakably begot the Son. The same God is naturally the Son, because he was begotten of the Father from before beginnings. The same God is naturally the Holy Ghost, because he is the eternal Spirit of them both, proceeding from both, being one and the same God with them both.

iv.157

And when in the scriptures, he is called a gentle, good, wise, merciful, and just God, it is not so much expressed by this what he is in himself, as what a God he exhibits to us. The same scripture openly says, that the Father created all things by the Son; and that the Father did not descend into the earth, nor did he take our flesh upon himself, nor suffer for us. For the Son says, "I went out from the Father, and came into the world;" again, "I leave the world, and go to the Father." ^{Joh 16.28} The same Son, falling prostrate in the mount of Olives prays, saying, "Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me." ^Mat
26.39 Again, in the gospel he says, "I will pray to the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter." ^{Joh 14.16} Look, here he says the Father shall give you another Comforter. And yet again, lest we separate or divide the divine nature because of those persons and the properties of those persons, the Son says in the gospel, "I and the Father are one." ^{Joh 8.16} For when he says "one," he overthrows those who separate or rend the divine substance or nature. And when he says, "We are," and not "I am," he refutes those who confound the subsistences or persons in the Trinity. Therefore, the apostolic and catholic doctrine teaches and confesses that they are three, distinguished in properties; and of those three, there is but one and the same nature or essence — the same omnipotence, majesty, goodness, and wisdom. For although there is an order in the Trinity, there is no inequality at all. None of them is before another in time, or worthier than another in dignity. But of the three, there is one Godhead, and these three are one and eternal God.

The primitive church, truly, under the apostles and in the times that came after them, believed so simply, despising and rejecting curious questions and needless disputations. And even then, overly pestilent men arose in the church of God, speaking perverse things, whom the apostle for good cause calls "grievous wolves, not sparing the flock." ^{Act 20.29}They first brought in [2142] very strange and dangerous questions, and sharpened their blasphemous tongues against heaven itself. For they took the stance that three persons could not exist in one nature or essence; therefore, by naming the Trinity (they said), Christians worshipped many Gods, as the heathen do.

iv.158

Again, since there can be but one God, they consequently infer that the same God is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost unto himself. It was thus agreeable that they should dote in folly, whom the word of God did not lead, but the gross imagination of mortal flesh. And by these means, God punished the giant-like boldness of those men, whose minds, being without any reverence and fear of God, wickedly strived to fasten the sight of the eyes of the flesh upon the very face of God. But the faithful and vigilant overseers and pastors of the churches were compelled to drive such wolves from the folds of Christ's sheep, and to valiantly fight for the sincere and catholic truth — that is, for the Unity and Trinity, for the monarchy and mystery of the dispensation. Such strife bred diverse words, with which it was necessary to hold and bind those slippery merchants.[2143] Therefore, immediately after the beginning, these terms sprang up: Unity, Trinity, essence, substance, and person. The Greeks for the most part used ousia, hypostasis, and prosopon, which we call essence, subsistence, and person.

From these again sprang up new and fresh contentions in the churches.[2144] They disputed sharply about the essence and subsistence, whether they are the same or different things. For Ruffinus Aquileiensis,[2145] in the twenty-ninth chapter and first book of his ecclesiastical history, says:

"There arose a controversy about the difference between substances and subsistences, which the Greeks call ousia and hypostasis. For some said that substance and subsistence seem to be the same; and because we do not say that there are three substances in God, we should not say that there are three subsistences in him. But on the other side, those who took substance for one thing, and subsistence for another, said that substance denotes the nature of a thing and the reason on which it stands; but that the subsistence of every person shows that very thing which subsists." [2146]

iv.159

Basilius Magnus wrote a learned epistle to his brother Gregory about the difference between essence and subsistence.[2147] And Hermius Sozomenus, in the twelfth chapter of his fifth book of Histories, says:

"The bishops of many cities, meeting together at Alexandria, together with Athanasius and Eusebius Vercellensis,[2148] confirm the decrees of Nicaea, and confess that the Holy Ghost is co-essential with the Father and the Son, and name them the Trinity. They teach that the man, which God the Word took upon himself, is to be accounted perfect man, not in body only, but in soul also; even as the ancient doctors of the church also thought. But because the question about Ousia and Hypostasis troubled the churches, and there were contentions and disputations concerning the difference between them, they seem to me to have determined very wisely, that those terms should not at the first presently be used in questions about God. That is, unless a man were compelled to use them to beat down the opinion of Sabellius, lest by lack of words, he seemed to call one and the same by three names — when he should understand each one particularly, in that three-fold distinction." [2149]

Socrates adds this in the seventh chapter and third book of his History: "But they did not bring into the church a certain new religion devised by themselves, but that which, from the beginning even till then, the ecclesiastical tradition taught, and prudent Christians evidently set forth." [2150] And so forth.

iv.160

Therefore, away with the pope's champions, to the place where they are worthy. For when we teach that all points of true godliness and salvation are fully contained and taught in the canonical scriptures, by way of objection, they demand to know in what passage of scripture we find the terms Trinity, person, essence, and substance; and finally, where do we find that Christ has a reasonable soul? For although those specific words, consisting in those syllables, are not to be found in the canonical books (which were written by the prophets and apostles in another tongue, and not in Latin), yet the things, matter, or substance which those words signify, are most manifestly contained and taught in those books. All and every nation may likewise express these things in their language, and speak and pronounce them for their commodity and necessity. Away also with all sophisters, who think it is a great point of learning to make the reverend mystery of the sacred Trinity, dark and intricate with their strange, curious, and pernicious questions. It is sufficient for the godly, according to the scriptures and the apostles' creed, to simply believe and confess that there is one divine nature or essence, in which are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Nor is it greatly material whether you call them substances, or subsistences, or persons, so long as you plainly express the distinction between them, and each one's individual properties — so confessing the unity, that you do not confound the Trinity, nor spoil the persons of their properties.

And here now, it will do very well [2151] to cite out of the scriptures evident testimonies that may evidently prove the mystery of the Trinity, with the distinction and several properties of the three persons. The Lord says in the Gospel of Matthew: "All power is given to me in heaven and on earth: go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you." ^{Mat 28.19-20}

iv.161

Tertullian, alleging those words against Praxeas, says: "He last of all commanded his disciples to baptize into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. We are baptized not into one, nor once, but three times, at every name, into every several person." [2152] This much from Tertullian. Now as every several person is severally expressed, so the divinity of them all is singularly taught to be one and common to them all, because he bids us to baptize, not only into the name of the Father, but also of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. The apostle and elected vessel, Paul, flatly denies that any man either ought to be, or ever was, baptized into the name of any man, who is nothing but a mere man. "Were you," he says, "baptized in the name of Paul?" ^{1Cor 1.13} So then, the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, into whose name we are baptized.

The Lord says in the Gospel of St. John: "When the Comforter comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is, the Spirit of truth," ^{Joh 15.26}"he will lead you into all truth. He shall not speak of himself: but whatever he hears, that he shall speak. He shall glorify me, for he shall receive of mine, and show to you. All things that the Father has are mine: therefore said I to you that he shall take of mine, and show to you." ^{Joh 16.13-15} In these words of the Lord's, you hear mention made of the person of the Father from whom the Spirit is sent, of the person of the Son who sends him, and of the person of the Holy Spirit who comes to us. You also hear of the mutual and equal communion of the divinity and all good things between the three persons. For the Holy Ghost speaks not of himself, but that which he hears. "He shall," says the Son, "take of mine." And again: "All things that the Father has are mine."

iv.162

And therefore, what things the Son has, those are the Father's: and the divinity, glory, and majesty of them all is co-equal.

Two manifest testimonies of John the Baptist agree with these most evident statements. First he says: "He whom God has sent speaks the words of God; for God does not give the Spirit by measure to him. The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into his hand. He that believes on the Son has everlasting life," etc. ^{Joh 3.34} Look, here again, in the one Godhead you hear the three persons distinguished by their properties. For the Father loves and sends the Son, and gives all things into his hand; the Son is sent, and he receives all things; but the Holy Ghost is given by the Father, and received by the Son according to fulness. Then the Baptist cries out the second time, and says:

"I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode on him. And I did not know him; but He that sent me to baptize with water, said to me, Upon whomever you see the Spirit descending, and still tarrying upon him, this is He who baptizes with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God." ^Joh
1.32-34

Here again are shown to us, as clear as daylight, the three persons distinguished and not confounded. For He that sends John is the Father. The Holy Ghost is neither the Father, nor the Son, but appears upon the head of Christ in the likeness of a dove. And the Son is the Son, not the Father, and the Son of the Father too, on whose head the Holy Ghost stayed. And now to this place belongs the testimony of the Father, uttered from heaven upon his Son Christ. For he says: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." ^{Mat 3.17} But one and the same cannot be both father and son to himself. The Father is one, and the Son is one: and yet they are not diverse, but one and the same God, of one and the same nature. For the Son in one place most plainly says: "I and the Father are one," etc. ^Joh
10.30

Moreover, what could be more clearly spoken for the proof of the express distinction and properties of the three persons in the reverend Trinity, than where the archangel Gabriel in St. Luke, declaring the sacrament [2153] of the Lord's incarnation.

iv.163

He evidently [2154] says the following to the virgin, the mother of God: "The Holy Ghost will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore also, that holy one who shall be born will be called the Son of God." ^Luk
1.35 What, I pray you, could have possibly been invented on purpose, to be more manifestly spoken for the proof of this matter, than these words of the angel? You have here the person of the Highest, that is, of the Father. For in the words of the angel, a little before, it is said: "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest." ^{Luk 1.32} Now the Son is the Son of the Father. We also have the persons of the Son and of the Holy Ghost expressed, with their properties neither mingled nor confounded. The Father is not incarnate, nor the Holy Ghost, but only the Son. To the Father is born of the virgin, a Son, even he that was the Son by the eternal and unspeakable manner of begetting. But the Holy Ghost, which is the power of the Most Highest, overshadowed the virgin, and made her with child. And so, by this means you see here the persons distinguished, not divided; and how they differ in properties, not in essence of deity, or in nature.

Here now (although these places might seem to suffice any reasonable man [2155]) I will add yet other testimonies of the holy apostles, and the three most excellent among all the apostles. St. Peter, preaching the word of the Gospel before the church of Israel, as Luke testifies in the Acts of the Apostles, says among other things: "This Jesus God has raised up, and exalted him to his right hand; and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he has shed forth what you now see and hear." ^{Act 2.32-33} Look, God the Father raises up and exalts the Son; the Son is raised up, exalted, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and the Son, receiving the Holy Ghost from the Father, bestows it on the apostles. Therefore, the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, subsisting in his own person, but being one and the same Spirit of them both. Moreover, in the sermon made at Caesarea in the congregation of the Gentiles, that is, in the house and family of Cornelius the centurion, the same apostle just as plainly expresses the person of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; and knits the Trinity together into one essence of the divine nature. ^{Act 10}

iv.164

St. Paul says in the beginning of his epistle to the Romans, that he was "appointed to preach the gospel of God, which he had promised beforehand by his prophets in the holy scriptures, about his Son; who was made of the seed of David after the flesh, and has been declared to be the Son of God with power after the Spirit that sanctifies." ^{Rom 1.1-4} Again, he says to the Galatians: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, that by adoption we might receive the right of sons. And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father." ^Gal
4.4-6 And again, he says to Titus: "God, according to his mercy, has saved us by the fountain of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost,[2156] which he shed on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." ^{Tit 3.5} Therefore, St. Cyril, speaking very truly of the apostle Paul, Libro in Joan. ix. cap. 45, says: "That holy man rightly knew the enumeration of the sacred Trinity. And therefore he teaches that every person properly and distinctly subsists; and yet he preaches openly the immutable self-sameness of the Trinity." [2157] Concerning this matter, if any man would gather together and reckon up all the testimonies that Paul has for the proof of it, he must of necessity recite all his epistles.

In his evangelical history as well as in his epistle, the blessed apostle and evangelist John, more strongly and evidently than the others, affirms and sets forth the mystery of the Trinity and the distinction of the persons. Among many, this one will be sufficient at this time. In his canonical epistle, he says: "Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is Christ? He is antichrist, who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son, does not have the Father... Therefore let that abide in you which you have heard from the beginning." ^{1Joh 2.22-24}

iv.165

And a little after, he says again: "You do not need that any man teach you, as the same anointing teaches you about all things, and it is true, and not lying." ^{1Joh 2.27} In these words, you hear the Father, you hear the Son, you hear the anointing, that is, the Holy Ghost. The Father is not the Son; the Son is not the Father; neither is the Holy Ghost the Father, or the Son: but the Father is the Father of the Son, the Son is the Son of the Father, and the Holy Ghost [2158] proceeds from them both. And yet, those persons are so joined and united, that he who denies one of them, has none of them in him. Indeed, whoever denies this Trinity is pronounced to be antichrist, for he denies God, who is one in Trinity and three in Unity. And consequently, by confounding or taking away the properties of God, he denies that God is such a one as He is indeed.

Now, I suppose that these many and so manifest testimonies will suffice the godly. For they believe the scriptures, and do not over-curiously pry into the majesty of God. They are content with those things alone in which it has pleased God of his goodness, to appear and shine to us mortal men. There are some who endeavour by certain parables or similitudes to shadow this matter; that is to say, to show how the three persons are said to be distinguished, and yet notwithstanding to be one God. But in all the things that God has made (as I admonished you in the beginning of this treatise), there is nothing which can properly be likened to the nature of God. Nor are there any words in the mouths of men that can properly be spoken about it. Nor are there any similitudes of man's invention that can rightly and squarely agree with the divine Essence. St. Basil, disputing in de Ousia et Hypostasi, says: "It cannot be that the comparisons of examples should in all points be like those things, the use of which the examples serve." [2159] You may say that injury is done to the majesty of God if it is compared with mortal things. But because the holy scripture greatly condescends and tempers itself to our infirmity, I will propose a similitude, although indeed it is much unlike that which is usually taken and commonly used.

iv.166

Behold the sun and the beams that come from it, and then the heat that proceeds from them both. Just as the sun is the headspring of the light and the heat, so the Father is the headspring of the Son, who is light of light. And just as the heat comes from the sun and the beams together, so the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son together. But now, imagine that the sun were such that it never had a beginning, nor will ever have an ending; I ask you, would not the beams of this everlasting sun then be everlasting too? And would not the heat, which proceeds from them both, be everlasting, as well as they? Finally, would not the sun still be one in essence or substance, and yet three by reason of the three subsistences or persons? Tertullian used this parable of the sun. His words, which also contain other solitudes,[2160] I will not be grieved to recite to you:

"I would not doubt to call both the stalk of a root, the brook of a spring-head, and a beam of the sun, by the name son; for every original is a parent, and everything that issues from that original is a son. Much more, then, even the Word of God may properly have the name of Son. And yet, just as the stalk is not separated from the root, nor the brook from the spring-head, nor the beam from the sun — no more is the Word separated from God. Therefore, according to the fashion of these examples, I profess to say that there are two: God and his Word, the Father and his Son. For the root and the stalk are two things, but joined in one; and the spring-head and the brook are two kinds, but undivided; and the sun and its beams are two forms, but both clinging one to the other. Everything that comes from anything must be second to that out of which it comes; and yet it is not separated from that from which it proceeds. But where a second exists, there are two; and where a third exists, there are three. For the third is the Spirit of God and of the Son; even as the third from the root is the fruit of the stalk, the third from the spring-head is the river of the brook, and the third from the sun is the heat of the beam: yet none of these is alienated from the matrix from which they take the properties that they have.

iv.167

So too the Trinity, descending by annexed and linked degrees from the Father, does not work against the monarchy [or unity of the Godhead], and it defends the economical state — that is, the mystery of the dispensation. Understand that I profess this rule everywhere, in which I testify that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, are unseparated from one another — and you shall know how everything is spoken." [2161]

And so forth; for all these are the words of Tertullian, who flourished in Africa, not long after the age of the apostles.

But letting pass the parables, similitudes, or comparisons of man's invention, let us steadfastly believe the evident word of God. What man's capacity cannot attain to, let faith hold that fast. What the sacred scriptures declare to us, what Christ in his flesh taught us, what was confirmed by so many miracles for our sakes,[2162] what the Spirit of God in the true church tells us, that must be thought more true and certain than what is proved by a thousand demonstrations, or what all your senses are able to conceive. Paul denies that he would listen to an angel, if it were to speak anything contrary to the gospel of Christ. Yes, surely it is a prank of arrogant foolishness, to doubt the things that are laid out and taught with such great authority in the scriptures. But it is a greater madness if a man will not believe the oracles of God, and for no other cause than that our understanding cannot attain to the knowledge of all things, when nevertheless we know that our understanding is naturally blind and hates God.

iv.168

Among philosophers, the one rejects the authority of any notable and approved writer, is considered an impudent fellow. It was enough to persuade the scholars of Pythagoras for a man to say to them, autov efh "he said it." Then would a Christian dare to seek loopholes, and jangle about, asking curious questions, when it is said to him, God said it, and taught you to believe it? No man doubts the king's letters patent,[2163] if its seal is acknowledged. Therefore, what a folly it is to doubt the divine testimonies, which are so evident, and firmly sealed with the Spirit of God!

Therefore, that I may here recapitulate and briefly express the principal sum of our exposition, I will recite to you, dearly beloved, the words of the holy father Cyril, which are to be found in Libra in Joan. ix. cap. 30, in the following sense:

"True faith is in God the Father, and in the Son, not simply, but incarnate, and in the Holy Ghost. For the holy and consubstantial Trinity is distinguished by the differences of names, that is, by the properties of the persons. For the Father is the Father, and not the Son: and the Son is the Son, and not the Father: and the Holy Ghost is the Holy Spirit proper to the Father and the Son. For the substance of the Deity is all one, or the same. Therefore we preach not three, but one God. Therefore we must believe in God; but distinctly and more fully expounding our faith, we must so believe, that we may refer the same glorification to every person. For there is no difference of faith. We should not have a greater faith in the Father than in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost; but the measure and manner of it must be one and the same, equally consisting in each of the three persons, so that by this means we may confess the unity of nature in the trinity of persons. This faith must be firmly grounded in our minds, which faith is in the Father, and in the Son, (and the Son, I say, even after he was made man), and in the Holy Ghost." [2164]

This much out of Cyril.

iv.169

Now, all these points shall be thoroughly confirmed with fuller testimonies, once we come to prove the divinity of the Son of God, and of the Holy Ghost; which I mean to reserve till a convenient time.

But let no [2165] man think that this belief of the unity and trinity of the Godhead was either invented by the fathers or bishops of the churches, or first of all preached by the apostles immediately upon Christ's death and ascension. For all the holy patriarchs, prophets, and elect people of God, even from the beginning of the world, believed and grounded their faith in this same way that I have declared to you up to here. Although I do not deny that the mystery of the Trinity was more clearly expounded to the world by Christ, yet it is evident by some undoubted testimonies (which I will add shortly), that the mystery of the Trinity was very well known to the patriarchs and the prophets. But first, I will admonish you by the way, that the holy patriarchs and prophets of God held themselves content with the bare revelation and word of God, not raising curious questions about the unity and trinity of God. They clearly understood that there is one God, the Father of all, the only Saviour and author of all goodness; and that without or beside him there is no other God at all. And they again evidently saw that the Son of God, that promised Seed, has all things in common with the Father. For they most plainly heard that he is called the Saviour, and is the Redeemer, from whom all good things proceed and are bestowed upon the faithful.

iv.170

By this it was now easy for them to gather that the Father and the Son are one God, although they differ in properties. For insomuch as they were assuredly certain that the damnable doctrine of the plurality of gods sprung from the devil, they did not worship many, but only one God, whom notwithstanding they believed to consist of a trinity of persons. For Moses, the undoubted servant of God, in the very first verse of his first book says: "In the beginning (creavit Dii) God created heaven and earth." He joins here a verb of the singular number to a noun of the plural number, not to make incongruity of speech, but to note the mystery of the Trinity. For the sense is as if he had said, That God which consists of three persons created heaven and earth. For a little after, consulting with himself about the making of man, God says, "Let us make in our image." Look, here he says, "Let us make," and not, "Let me make," or, "I will make." And again he says, "In our image," and not, "In my image." But lest any man think that this consultation was had with the angels, let him hear what God himself says in Isaiah: "I the Lord," he says, "make all things, and stretch out the heavens alone of myself," (that is, of my own power, without any help or fellow with me) "and set the earth fast." ^{Isa 44.24} Therefore, the Father consulted with the Son, by whom also he created the world. And again, lest any man think (as the Jews object) that these things were according to the order and custom of men, spoken by God in the plural number for honour's sake and worship,[2166] you may hear what follows in the end of the third chapter: "Behold, this man has become as one of us, in knowing good and evil." Now here, by enallage [2167] he puts these words, "has become," for "shall become," or, "shall happen:" so that his meaning is as if he had said, "Behold, the same will happen to Adam that will come to one of us," that is, to the Son; namely: that he would have a trial of good and evil; that is, he would feel sundry fortunes — namely sickness, calamities, and death — and (as the proverb says) feel both sweet and sour; for that is the lot or condition of man.

iv.171

But the Son being incarnate for us, not the Father nor the Holy Ghost, was found in shape as a man, and had a trial of sundry fortunes and of death. This was foretold to Adam, as it is manifest, for consolation's sake, and not in the way of mocking. For the good Lord with a garment, strengthened the body of our first parent [2168] against the unseasonableness of the air, when for Adam's sin God purposed to banish him out of paradise; so he comforted and cheered up his sorrowful mind with a full example of the Son's incarnation and suffering. And when he had so armed him in body and soul, he casts him out of the garden of felicity, into a careful and miserable exile.

There are in every place, many examples of this matter like this. For Abraham saw three; but with those three, he talked as with one, and he worshipped one. ^{Gen 18} And "The Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven, and overthrew those cities." ^{Gen 19.24} But lest any man interpret it and say, The Lord rained from the Lord, that is, from heaven; he presently adds, "From heaven." For as the Father created all things by the Son, so he preserves all things by him, and even still, works all things by him.

Next after Moses, the most notable prophet, David, says in his Psalm: "By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the hosts of them by the breath of his mouth." ^{Psa 33.6} So here you hear that there is one Lord, in whom is the Word and the Spirit, both distinguished but not separated. For the Lord made the heavens, but by the "Word; and the whole furniture of heaven stands by the breath of the mouth of the Lord. The same David says: "The Lord said to my Lord, Sit on my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool." ^{Psa 110.1} Note that in another place, David flatly says that beside the Lord there is no other. And yet here again he just as plainly says, "The Lord said to my Lord;" meaning the Father, who had placed the Son, who was David's Lord, at His right hand in heaven.

iv.172

Out of Isaiah may be gathered very many testimonies. But the most notable of all is that which Matthew the apostle cites in these words: "Behold, my Son whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is pleased: I will put my Spirit upon him," etc. ^{Isa 42.1} With this agrees that which Luke cites,^4.18 saying: "The Spirit of the Lord upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; He has he sent me," etc. ^{Isa 61.1} In these testimonies here, you have the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. A few out of many; for I do not wish to turn over the entire scriptures of the old Testament.

So then, this faith with which we believe in God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, we have received from God himself, being delivered to us by the prophets and patriarchs, but most evidently of all, declared by the Son of God himself, our Lord Jesus Christ, and his holy apostles. From this we now easily gather why it is that all the sincere bishops or ministers of the churches, together with the whole church of Christ, have ever since the apostles' time, maintained and held this faith in honour, with so firm a consent. It would be truly a detestable impiety to leave this catholic and true rule of faith, and to choose and follow one newly invented. There are extant even today, most godly and learned books of ecclesiastical writers, in which they have declared and defended this catholic faith by the holy scriptures, against all wicked and blasphemous heretics. There are extant sundry symbols of faith, but all tending to one end, set forth and published in many synodal assemblies of bishops and fathers. There is extant today, that creed commonly called the Apostles' Creed, learned and repeated by the universal Church and all its members, both learned and unlearned, and by every sex and age. In it, we profess nothing else than what we have declared up to here: namely, that we believe in one God — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. And because this consent of all the saints concerning this true faith has been so sure and firm ever since the beginning of the world, it was very well and godly provided by ancient kings and princes, that no man should once dare be so bold as to either call into doubt, or with curious questions and disputations, to deface or make intricate, this belief concerning the unity and trinity of the almighty God. [2169]

iv.173

Of old among the Israelites, the man was struck through and slain, who passed beyond the limited bounds that the Lord had set. And we also have certain appointed bounds about the knowledge of God; to pass them is hurtful to us; indeed, it is punished with assured death.

God grant that we may truly know, and religiously worship, the high, excellent, and mighty God, even so, and even such, as He himself is. For up to here I have, as simply, sincerely, and briefly as I could, discoursed about the ways and means to know God, who is one in substance, and three in persons. And yet we acknowledge and freely confess, that in this entire treatise up to here, there is nothing spoken that is worthy of or comparable to His unspeakable majesty. For the eternal, excellent, and mighty God is greater than all majesty, and than all the eloquence of all men; so far am I from thinking that by my words I, in one jot, come near to his excellency. But I humbly beseech the most merciful Lord, that he will grant of his inestimable goodness and liberality, to enlighten in us all the understanding of our minds with sufficient knowledge of his name, through Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. Amen.

4-5. THE FIFTH SERMON: OF WORSHIPPING GOD IN TRUTH.

Of adoring or worshipping, of invocating or calling upon, and of serving the only, living, true, and everlasting God: also of true and false religion.

TOUCHING God, what he is in person, quality, and substance, I have told you already; not as I should, but as I was able. I have likewise outlned how good and ready his will is towards man, whom he has ordained to life everlasting in his only-begotten Son; whom he has also made Lord of all things in this present world, all things being brought in subjection to him.

Now, so that man should not be ignorant of what he owes to so mighty a God, and to a Father so loving and liberal, I will shortly engage in a disputation touching this living, true, and everlasting God, to be adored, called upon, and worshipped by man. For man is neither created nor born to behold and gaze upon the stars, as the philosopher doted;[2194] but he was created to be the image and temple of God, in whom God might dwell and reign. And he should therefore acknowledge God, reverence, adore, call upon, and worship Him, and also [2195] be joined to God, and live with him eternally.

iv.195

First of all, I will speak of adoring God; next of calling upon God; and lastly, of serving God. Upon doing so, we will perceive without any trouble at all, which is the true religion, or which is the false. The places truly expounded are plentiful. But I will comprehend in few words what the scripture teaches us concerning these things — not every one particularly, but the chief ones, and as much as seems sufficient for our salvation and sound knowledge.

To adore or worship, in the holy scriptures, signifies for honour's sake to uncover the head, bend the body, incline or bow the knee, or to lie prostrate with the whole body on the ground, falling flat on the face at someone's feet in the fashion of suppliants or petitioners, as a token of humility, submission and obedience. It refers chiefly to the posture or habit of the body. The Hebrews use one only word Schahah,[2196] which all interpreters have expounded by the word adorare, to adore — to bend, bow, and lie along the ground with the face downward. The Grecians have expounded it by the word proskunew (proskuneo), that is, I bow the knees, I uncover or make bare the head, I humbly beseech or adore. And proskunhsiv (proskunesis), adoration, is so called either for kissing, or removing the hat; for kunew (kuneo) signifies, I kiss. That a kiss was sometimes a sign of worshipping, reverencing, or adoring, is gathered out of the thirty-first chapter of Job.^31.27 What, and is it not a fashion that is very much used even today, for honour and reverence' sake to kiss the hand? Again, kuuh (kuue) signifies a hat, a bonnet, or a cap; so that, to adore, is to make bare and uncover the head for reverence' sake. The Latinists also, perhaps, had an eye to the habit of the body; for orare, to pray, signifies both to crave as well as to say something. He therefore adores who, casting his countenance on a man, craves something suppliantly. It is likely that the Germans also regarded this: for they turn adorare, to adore, by the word anbatten; which moreover might have been turned to Zu fussen fallen.[2197]

iv.196

In the ninth chapter of Matthew you read: "Behold, a certain ruler came to Jesus, and worshipped (or adored) him." ^Mat
9.18 But Mark, writing the same history, says "And behold, there came one of the princes of the synagogue, whose name was Jairus; and when he saw him, he fell down at his feet, and besought him instantly (or much);" ^Mar
5.22 thus expounding to us what adore is: namely, to fall down at one's feet, and to submit and beseech like a suppliant. For so we read in the old Testament about Jacob Israel, our father: "And, going before them, he bowed himself to the ground seven times, until his brother Esau approached and drew near." ^{Gen 33.3} Thus we read of David and Abigail in Samuel: "When Abigail saw David, she hastened, and alighted off her donkey, and fell before David on her face, and worshipped on the ground, and she fell at his feet, saying: Let that iniquity be counted mine, my lord," etc. ^1Sam
25.18 Likewise of Nathan the prophet, it is thus written: "And when he had come in to the king, he worshipped" (or made obeisance) "with his face on the ground." ^{1Kng 1.23} For God, communicating this honour, allows it for men, either for their old age, their authority, or for worthiness' sake: for man is the living image of God. And it pleases God himself to call men who excel others in authority, gods. Whereupon the apostles of Christ, Peter and Paul, instructing the people of God, taught them, truly, "Fear God, honour the king;" ^{1Pet 2.17} and this, "The magistrate is God's minister: give therefore to all men, honour to whom honour belongs; fear to whom fear is due." ^{Rom 13.6-7} In the law, the Lord says: "In the presence of a hoary (grey) head, rise up;" ^Lev
19.32 and "Honour your parents." ^{Exo 20.12} In consideration of this commandment of God, the godly reverence the aged, their parents, and magistrates; and also please God with faithful obedience.

But to adore, worship, or honour images, whatever representation or likeness they bear, the Lord nowhere likes or allows; for he says in the law: "You shall not bow down nor worship them." [2198] And by his prophet Isaiah, "None (he says) considers within himself about this matter, and says, I have burnt one piece of the wood in the fire, I have baked bread with its coals, I have roasted flesh with it, and eaten it; and should I now make from the residue an abominable idol, and fall down and worship a rotten piece of wood?" ^{Isa 44.19}

iv.197

In the same prophet, you read with much pronounced indignation: "Their land is full of vain gods (or idols); before the work of their hands they have bowed themselves and adored it; yes, even before the thing that their own fingers have made. There kneels the man, there the man falls down (before them): therefore do not forgive them." ^{Isa 2.8-9} Therefore that ancient writer, Lactantius, inspired with a prophetic spirit, disputing against the Gentiles, has left it thus written:

"The images themselves which are worshipped are representations or counterfeits of dead men. And it is a perverse and an absurd thing, that the image of a man should be worshipped by the image of God, namely, by a man; for he worships the thing that is worse and weaker. Besides that, the very images of saints, which most vain men serve, are void of all sense and feeling, because they are earth. And where is he that does not understand that it is a wicked and sinful act for an upright and straight creature to be bowed down, and to adore and worship earth — which is under our feet to the end that it should be trodden upon, and not adored by us. We are therefore made to go upright and look upward, that we should not lie grovelling downward, that we should not cast this heavenly countenance to the earth; but instead we look there and direct our eyes, to where the condition of their nature has guided them? Whoever therefore endeavours to maintain the mystery of man's creation, and to hold the reason for his nature, let him raise himself up from the ground, and with a raised mind, bend his eyes to heaven. Let him not seek a god under his feet, nor dig from under his footsteps, that which he may adore or worship; because whatever lies under or is subject to man, must be inferior to man. Rather, let him seek aloft, let him seek in the highest place; because nothing can be greater than man, but that which is above man. And God is greater than man: he is therefore above, and not beneath; nor is he to be sought in the lowest, but rather in the highest region or place. This is why there is no doubt that wherever an image exists, there is no religion. For if religion consists in divine things, and nothing is divine unless it is among heavenly things, then images lack religion — because there can be no heavenly thing in that which is made of earth.

iv.198

This matter, even by the very name itself, may be apparent and manifest to a wise man. For whatever is counterfeit, must be false. Nor can that which is a representation or a gloss of the truth, at any time take to itself the name of truth. If then, not every representation or counterfeit is made in earnest, but is a toy and a sport as it were, then religion is not found in images; but there is less religion where they are found. Therefore, that which is true is to be preferred before all things that are false. Earthly things must be trodden underfoot, that we may get or obtain heavenly things." [2199]

We have not unadvisedly recited these words up to here out of Lactantius. We now return to our purpose.

iv.199

The outward posture or habit of the body is commonly framed according to the inward quality of the mind; and the outward habit of the body of someone who adores, shows that it submits, yields, and subjects him who worships, to him who is worshipped. Therefore, adoration is likewise translated to the inner man. So that, to adore is to reverence and respect God, to bequeath ourselves wholly to him, to cling inseparably to him, and in all things to hang upon him only and alone, and to have recourse to him in all our necessities whatsoever. Furthermore, outward adoration immediately, when it is needful and ability is granted, follows a mind rightly endued with true faith and a holy fear of God. For adoration is two-fold, or of two sorts: one of the mind or spirit, which is inward, sound, sincere and true; and another of the body, which is outward, unsound, counterfeit, and false, and which may proceed from someone in whom there is no sparkle of religion. True adoration is the fruit of true faith and a holy fear of God; namely, a lowly or suppliant yielding and humble consecrating, whereby we bequeath ourselves, yield and submit ourselves to our God, whom we understand to be our best and most merciful Father, and also to be our most high and almighty God. Therefore, upon Him alone we wholly depend, and to Him only we have respect; which also, as soon as occasion is ministered to us, we quickly express and testify by outward adoration. We will better understand all this by the following testimonies from the scripture. David says:

"Come, let us sing unto the Lord; let us heartily rejoice in God our salvation. Let us come before his presence with thanksgiving, and show ourselves joyful in him with psalms. For the Lord is a great God, and a great king above all gods: because in his hand are the corners of the earth, and the height of the hills are his. For the sea is his and he made it, and his hands fastened the dry land. O come let us adore (or worship) and fall down, and kneel before the Lord that has made us: because he is the Lord our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hands."

You perceive, therefore, that we must adore or worship God, and that we must cling to him, and sing praises to his name, because he is the most mighty God, Creator of all things, yes, our Creator, our Father, and our Shepherd. Likewise, in the gospel according to Matthew, adoration follows faith; it grows out of it and is nourished by it, as it were.

iv.200

For after the disciples, being taught by miracles, believed that Jesus was Christ, they came (says Matthew) and adored (or worshipped) him, saying: "You are truly the Son of God." ^{Mat 14.33} Again, you read in John that the Lord asked the blind man that was excommunicated or cast out of the synagogue, to whom he restored his sight, "Do you believe in the Son of God?" The blind man responded, "Who is he, Lord, that I might believe in him?" Jesus answered and said: "You have both seen him, and it is he that talks with you." Moreover, it follows upon this in the history: "But he said, I believe, Lord; and he worshipped him." ^Joh
9.35-38Now, up to here belongs that which the Lord said to the Samaritan in the gospel: "The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth." ^{Joh 4.23} For the Lord allows spiritual and inward adoration or worshipping — not outward, counterfeit, or hypocritical worshipping, but that which proceeds from a mind regenerated by faith through the Holy Ghost, and that tends sincerely towards one God. For we read in the history of the old Testament, that those princes worshipped in truth, who consecrated and made themselves holy to one God with their whole heart, and depended on him only Again, that those who did not worship the Lord with their whole heart, who being destitute and void of sincere faith, depended also upon creatures. Now a reason for this adoration or worshipping the Lord adjoins in the gospel. Worship (he says) should in all points agree with Him that is worshipped. But God who is worshipped, is spirit and truth, and He is delighted with spiritual worship and unfeigned faith. He must therefore be worshipped in spirit and truth.

Therefore, the saints have a special care and regard that the inward worship of the mind is sound, and that first of all they worship in heart, and truly, with a sincere faith and a reverence for God's majesty. And while they are so occupied inwardly, they no less outwardly, falling on their faces with humility, worship in God's presence. For the outward worship is a companion of the inward, and follows it. Hypocrites also worship God in body, suppliantly and lowly enough; but because their minds go wool-gathering, and neither with faith nor reverence cling to the Lord, they hear this spoken of the Lord by the prophet:

iv.201

"This people honours me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. They worship me in vain, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men." ^{Mat 15.8-9} And this truly is the counterfeit and false worshipping. And that worshipping also is false, indeed, it is most wicked and abominable, with which the creatures are worshipped, either with God, or for God, or without God. And, to say it truthfully, they do not worship God at all, who neither fear God, nor believe in God, nor yet depend or hang only upon God.

All men confess truly that God must be worshipped, but not everyone sincerely acknowledges and confesses that God only and alone is to be worshipped. It therefore remains to be declared, that God only and alone is to be worshipped by men. Adoration or worshipping is joined with true faith and perfect or sincere reverence of God's majesty. Seeing that these are due to God alone, it follows that God alone is to be worshipped. And therefore this saying is so often cited and beaten upon in the law and the prophets: "You shall worship the Lord your God, and a strange god you shall not worship." Now, a strange god is whatever you choose to worship for yourself, that is outside and beside the only, living, true, and everlasting God.[2200] Therefore, the only and alone true, living, and everlasting God is to be worshipped. In the history of the gospel, we read that the devil tempted our Lord Christ; and having led him up into a high mountain, showed him from there all the kingdoms of the world and their glory, and said: "All these I will give to you, if you, falling down, will worship me." And the Lord answered: "Away Satan; for it is written, you shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve." ^{Mat 4.8-10} And surely, worshipping and serving are mutually linked, one with the other, so that they cannot be severed or put asunder. From this it follows, seeing that the Lord requires the He only and alone is to be served, that doubtless in like manner He only and alone is to be worshipped. Elijah, the great prophet of God, teaching that God can in no case abide having another joined to him in worship, cries out to the people worshipping God and with him their god Baal: "How long will you halt between the two? If the Lord is God, follow him; if Baal is god, go after him." ^{1Kng 18.21}

iv.202

It is as if he said, You cannot worship God and Baal at once. "No man can serve two masters." For the Lord our God requires, not a piece, but our whole heart, our whole mind and soul. He therefore leaves nothing for us to bestow on any other. In the epistle to the Hebrews, Paul shows that Christ is more excellent than angels, because angels adore or worship Christ; but they are not to be worshipped in turn. If the angels are not to be worshipped, then whom shall we grant deserves to be worshipped, beside the living, true, and everlasting God? Therefore, God only and alone is to be worshipped. For in the revelation of Jesus Christ, made to the blessed apostle and evangelist John, we read this: "And I saw another angel flying through the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth, and to all nations, and kindreds, and tongues, and people, saying with a loud voice: Fear God and give him honour, because the hour of his judgment has come; and worship Him that has made heaven and earth, the sea, and fountains of waters." ^{Rev 14.6-7}

And again, in the same book we read: "And I fell down before the feet of the angel, to worship him. And he said to me: See that you do not do this; I am your fellow-servant and of your brethren having the testimony of Jesus; worship God." ^{Rev 19.10}Again, in the end of the same book you read: "And after I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who showed me these things. And he said to me, See that you do not do it; for I am your fellow-servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book." ^{Rev 22.8-9}

When Cornelius the centurion fell down and worshipped at his feet, what St. Peter said and did does not greatly disagree with this. Peter said, "Arise, I myself am also a man;" ^{Act 10.26} and with that, laying his hand on him, which lay along, lifted him up, and set him on his feet. Right religiously, therefore, Augustine wrote in his book [2201] touching true religion:

"Do not let religion be for us the worshipping of man's handiwork, for better are the workmen themselves who make them, whom notwithstanding we should not worship. Do not let religion be for us the worshipping of mortal men, because if they have lived godly, they are not to be esteemed as those who would seek such honours; but it is their will that [Christ] should be worshipped by us, who enlightening them, they rejoice that we are made fellow-partakers of his merit. They are therefore to be honoured for imitation's sake, not worshipped for religion's sake. And if they have lived badly, they are not to be worshipped, wherever they are." [2202]

iv.203

Augustine in his first book, De consensu Evangelistarum, the eighteenth chapter, wrote about the consent of the evangelists, reasoning why the Romans never accepted both the God of the Hebrews, and the worship of their God, considering that they accepted almost all the other gods of the Gentiles for worship. He answers that it came to pass by no other occasion, than because the God of the Hebrews would be worshipped only and alone, without a mate or partner. If anyone requires his words, they are these:

"There remains nothing for them to say, as to why they have not received the holy rites and worship of this God, save only because he would be worshipped alone; and He has forbidden them to worship the gods of the Gentiles, whom nevertheless these people did worship. For the sentence or opinion of Socrates (who, as ratified by oracle, was the wisest of all men) is that every god should be worshipped as he himself has commanded. Therefore, the Romans were of necessity forced not to worship the God of the Hebrews; because if they worshipped him in a fashion other than He himself said He would be worshipped, they would not then worship him, except in manner that they themselves had devised and made. And if they worshipped him in that manner which He himself prescribed, then they saw that they were debarred from worshipping other gods, which He forbade to be worshipped. Upon this, they refused the worship of the only true God, with the intent they might not offend many counterfeit and false gods — thinking that the anger of them would be more to their disprofit than the good-will of Him would be to their benefit." [2203] Thus says Augustine.

iv.204

Although these things are written concerning the worship and service of God, and we dispute about adoring God's majesty, yet notwithstanding, they are not impertinent or beside our purpose; for worshipping and serving God are inseparably linked and knit together. We will say more afterward about serving God. But by the words cited before, we gather that the true, living, and everlasting God is to be worshipped only and alone, according to that commonly known sentence of the law: "You shall worship the Lord your God; you shall fear him; you shall serve him only; you shall cling to him; and you shall swear in his name." ^{Deu 10.20}

Furthermore, God has promised and performed from the beginning — yes, and will perform while this world stands — great rewards to his true worshippers. Contrariwise, we believe that great mischiefs or punishments are prepared for those who either do not worship God at all, or else worship strange gods instead of the true God. The Lord says in his Revelation shown to John the apostle: "The fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their portion in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death." ^{Rev 21.8}

We have spoken these things up to here about worshipping God. We will now, in the second place, speak about invocation, or calling upon God, which we promised to speak about.

iv.205

To call upon, and calling upon, is diversely taken in the scriptures. For it signifies bringing forth a witness, or calling to witness. So Moses calls heaven and earth to witness against the children of Israel,^{Deu 30.19} by the figure Prosopopoeia. Again, the name of anyone to be called upon or over another, is to be called by, or after, his name. "Let my name" (Jacob says) "be called upon them," ^Gen
48.16 that is, upon Ephraim and Manasseh — let them be named by my name, as if they were my children; and let them be called, not the sons of Joseph, but the sons of Jacob Israel. So the wives say to their husbands,[2204] "Let your name be called upon us;" that is, allow or give leave, that we may be named by your name, and that we may be made your wives: for those women, through the knot of wedlock, take for themselves their husbands' names. In the same manner, we oftentimes read in the prophets and holy history of the Bible, "The house upon which your name is called;" ^{Jer 7.10} that is, the house which is called after your name, and is named the Lord's house. Likewise Joab, general of the king's army, says to David: "Take the city" (Rabbah, the chief city or royal seat of the Ammonites), "lest I take it, and my name be called upon it;" ^{2Sam 12.28} that is, lest I be called the conqueror of Rabbah. Therefore, they are most ignorant and unskilful of the scriptures and the phrases of speech used in the scripture, who cite that saying of Jacob, which we just now declared, in defence and maintenance of the invocation of saints, as though Jacob would have his name be called upon his posterity and offspring. In Daniel you read, "A people upon whom the name of God is called:" ^{Dan 9.19} which signifies nothing else than a people who are called God's people.

Here is no mention of invocation, by which we ask for or desire anything. Furthermore, invocation, or calling upon, is taken for religion. For Luke says in the Acts: "Saul had power (or authority) to bind all those who called upon the name of the Lord." ^{Act 9.14} And Paul says: "Let everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord depart from iniquity." ^{2Tim 2.19} Also, "Seek after peace with all those who call upon the name of the Lord," ^{2Tim 2.22} that is, who are of the true Christian religion. Lastly, to invoke or call upon, signifies to cry or call for help, and to crave something with continual outcries.

iv.206

Therefore, that invocation or calling upon God which we are treating at this time, is a lifting up of man's mind to God in great necessity or in some desire, and a most ardent craving for counsel and assistance by faith; and it is also bequeathing or committing ourselves into the protection of God, taking ourselves to his sanctuary and only safeguard as it were. Therefore, in true invocation, first of all, a faithful mind is required, which acknowledges God as the author and only giver of all good gifts; who is willing to hear those who call upon him, and is able to grant us all our requests and desires whatever. An incessant and ardent petition or beseeching is also required. But more will be said about these points, when God gives us leave, in our sermon about the prayer of the faithful — for invocation is a kind of prayer.

Now, truly, I will show that in all our desires, God is to be called upon — yes, and to be called upon only and alone. There are surely express commandments of God, charging us to call upon the name of the Lord, who promises that for the good will and love which he bears us, he will hear our requests and suits, and largely give to us those things tending to our health and benefit. Out of many testimonies, I will cite one or two. Solomon, the wisest of all men, teaches us to call upon God in all and every one of our necessities, making particular mention of men's special desires.^{1Kng 8.30
ff} Solomon's father, that most holy king David, handles the same argument throughout the whole hundred and seventh Psalm. He therefore reckons up the diverse casualties, chances, and miseries of men, their affliction or oppression, their wanderings and dangers in their journey, their bonds and imprisonments, their diseases, and the fear of death (which is sometimes more terrible and hideous than death itself), their jeopardies on the sea and rough waters, barrenness, scarcity, calamities, contempt, shame, and ignominy. 'Those crosses,' he says [in effect], 'if they light on any man, let him not ascribe them either to his [false] god to whose defence he has committed himself, or to fortune, or to his constellation and destiny; but to that God who knows all things, and can do all things, and let him call upon that God earnestly by faith.'

iv.207

For the prophet often repeats these words: "And when they cried to the Lord in their tribulation, he delivered them out of their distress." ^{Psa 120.1} And for that cause, he so often reiterated those words, to the end that, having conceived a perfect trust in our hearts and sure belief, we might learn in all circumstances to call upon the name of the Lord. For Solomon says yet again in his Proverbs (18.10): "The name of the Lord is a most strong tower; the righteous man runs to it, and he shall be advanced," [2205] or, he shall be set free from danger. Asaph also says in his holy songs: "Sacrifice to the Lord a sacrifice of praise, and pay your vows to the Most High." ^{Psa 50.14} And, "Call upon me in the day of trouble, and I will deliver you, and you shall glorify me." ^{Psa 50.15} And he brings in the Lord himself speaking, and requiring sacrifices, not of beasts, not of gold or silver, but of praise and invocation. With this, He promises help; and He witnesses that he is honoured (or glorified) by invocation and praising. Upon which David said: "In my trouble I will call upon the Lord, and I will cry unto my God; and he shall hear my voice out of his holy temple, and my cry shall enter into his ears." ^{Psa 18.6} Joel also said: "Everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be safe." ^Joe
2.32 And the Lord by the prophet Jeremiah says: "You shall call upon me, and you shall live:[2206] you shall pray to me, and I will hear you; you shall seek me, and you shall find me, if you seek me with your whole heart." ^{Jer 29.11-13} Furthermore, we do not read that our holy and blessed fathers in their petitions and requests, whether they were small or great, called upon any other than that God who lives everlastingly, world without end. For the Lord himself says by Asaph: "In your extremities and troubles, Israel, you called upon me, and I delivered you." ^{Psa 81.7} Also David says: "Our fathers hoped in you, and you delivered them. To you they cried, and were delivered; in You they trusted, and were not confounded." ^{Psa 22.4-5}

iv.208

Now add to all these, the commandment of Christ our Lord: "When you pray, say, Our Father," etc. Add also the words which follow in Luke 11.9, and Matthew 7.7. "Ask, and it shall be given to you;" and so forth. We conclude, therefore, that the true, living, and everlasting God should be called upon by all men in all their necessities.

But perhaps it is to no purpose that I take pains in this point, seeing that there are but a few, or none at all, who would deny that God is to be called upon. This seems to require a more diligent declaration, that God only and alone is to be called upon. For many doubtless call upon God, but certain chosen patrons are called upon together with God, or for God; from which it follows that they do not call upon God only and alone. Now, we declare that He alone is to be called upon in this way. By invocation, or calling upon, we require help or succour, either that good things may be given to us, or that evil things may be turned away from us. This needs no further proof, seeing that it cannot be denied by anyone who is ruled by his right wits. Now, God only and alone is our helper, who only gives good things, and takes away evil things. For the Lord says in the gospel: "There is none good but one," ^Mar
10.18 namely, God; where one is taken for one only and alone. Again in the law, by the mouth of Moses, the Lord says: "Behold, that I am God alone, and that there is no other God beside me." ^{Deu 32.39} And again by Isaiah: "Am not I the Lord? and there is no other God beside me: a just God and a Saviour; there is none other beside me." ^{Isa 45.21} And David: "Who," he says, "is God, besides the Lord? and who is mighty (or a rock), save our God?" ^{2Sam 22.32} In very evil part therefore the worshippers of God took it, so often as men asked of them those things which are in the Lord's hands only to give. Rachel said to Jacob: "Give me children, or else I die." ^{Gen 30.1} But the scripture then adds: "And Jacob being angry said, Am I in God's stead, who has denied you" (or withheld from you) "the fruit of the womb?" ^Gen
30.2 So when the king of Syria desired and sought Joram, the king of Israel (I know, a not so godly king), that he would heal Naaman who was infected with the leprosy, Joram says: "Am I a God, that I should be able to kill and to give life? For he sends to me, that I should heal a man from his leprosy." ^{2Kng 5.7}

iv.209

Therefore, it is most certain that it belongs to God only to give good things, and to turn away evil things. It consequently follows that God only and alone must be called upon. For if those patrons who are called upon as helpers and succourers, are able either to give those things that are good, or to turn away those things that are evil, then certainly there is not one God only; for those would likewise be gods. But they are not gods, because there is but one God, who only and alone gives (or bestows) good things, and takes away (or removes) evil things. God only and alone, therefore, is to be called upon. Patrons are not to be called upon, as they are unable to do us either good or harm. Touching that, some object here (of their own heads), that patrons do us good and harm, not of themselves, but of God. But this is doubtful — indeed, it is most false. For the Lord himself says by the prophet: "I am the Lord: Hu (this or being) [2207] is my name; and I will not give my glory to another, nor my praise to a graven image." ^{Isa 42.8} So that all glory belongs to God, because He only [2208] and alone, is not only the well-spring of all good graces, which is never drawn dry, but also a most just and equal distributer of them; and for that cause he is called upon, worshipped, and served by men. Psalm 1.

Furthermore, insofar as we should sacrifice only to one God, it is certain that we must worship only one God. The Lord cries in the law: "He that offers to gods other than to the only God, let him be rooted out." ^{Exo 22.20} And therefore, when the people of Lystra were preparing sacrifices to offer to the apostles, Paul and Barnabas tore their clothes at it, as an intolerable blasphemy. For in the law of the Lord we read again: "Whoever makes for himself a composition (or perfume) of incense, to smell like it, he shall be cut off from among his people." And the sacrifices of the godly are prayers, thanksgivings, and invocations upon God's name.

iv.210

For David says: "To you I will sacrifice a sacrifice of praise, and I will call upon the name of the Lord." ^{Psa 116.17} And again: "Let my prayer be directed in your sight as incense; and the lifting up of my hands as an evening sacrifice." ^{Psa 141.2} Paul likewise says: "By Christ we offer the sacrifice of praise always unto God, that is, the fruit of lips which confess his name." ^{Heb 13.15} For the prophet Hosea bids us "offer the calves of our lips." ^Hos
14.2 Therefore, as only one God is to be sacrificed to, only one God is to be called upon. Nor is possible for those who do not call upon the only God, but upon heavenly patrons, if those patrons are saints, to require this manner of invocations by men. No indeed! These invocations rather offend both God and the saints, ascribing to the saints, that which no blessed spirits acknowledge. St. Augustine says that they are not the angels of the good God, but wicked devils, who would not have the only and most high God, but themselves, be worshipped and served with sacrifices.[2209] Besides that, the blessed spirits (or saints) during the time that they lived in their mortal bodies, prayed "Your will be done, as in heaven so on earth." ^{Mat 6.10} Therefore, now being delivered and set free from all corruption, they much more fully, indeed, most perfectly agree with the will of God, which commands all men to worship and call upon the only God.

Again, the One who looks into and sees the hearts of those who call upon him, hears their petitions or requests, and is able to fulfil the desires of all men living, [is the only One who] is lawfully and fruitfully called upon. And surely it is requisite and necessary that He know all things, that he be almighty, and the searcher of hearts. Therefore, seeing that he is the only God, without further question, the only God should be called upon. Solomon testifies that only God is the searcher of hearts, that he is comprehended in no place but present everywhere, and that He is omnipotent, saying so in these words:

iv.211

"Behold, the heavens and the heaven of heavens are not able to contain you. How much more unable, then, is this house that I have built! You therefore shall hear in heaven, in the place of your habitation (or, in your dwelling-place), and shall have mercy. For only you know the hearts of the sons of men. You shall do (and give) to each one according to all his ways, Who know his very heart." ^{1Kng 8.27 ff}

As for the "heavenly patrons," as these men call them, they neither know the thoughts of men; nor is their power spread throughout the heaven, the earth, and the seas; nor do they know all things; nor yet are they everywhere present, or omnipotent. For if it were so with them, then they would be transformed and changed into a divine nature, and would cease to be creatures anymore. But although they enjoy everlasting blessedness by Christ, yet notwithstanding, they remain creatures still; nor do they know all things, nor are they almighty. And therefore they are to be called upon at no one's hand. In one prick and moment of time, truly innumerable thousands of mortal men offer up their vows, and make their petitions: so that he truly who hears, must at a pinch, and in a single moment (not at sundry seasons or degrees of time) know and be able to do all things — indeed, and in a moment also reach out his helping hand to all. No creature, however excellent, can do this. Thus, the only God alone, who knows all, and is omnipotent, can do all things. And therefore, He only and alone is to be called upon.

I know well what the defenders of heavenly patrons (or saints) object against what I have spoken; namely, that of their own nature, they neither see nor hear what is done by us on earth; but in the face of God, as in a well-lit mirror, they see all things, whatever God grants to reveal to them, so that they have an under-knowledge of all our affairs, and also help us.[2210] But this imagination or forgery (in all points doubtful) can be proved by no authority out of the holy scriptures. But touching the celestial saints, the scripture rather affirms the flat contrary. For in Isaiah, the people of God cry out: "You, God, are our Father. Though Abraham is ignorant of us, and Israel does not know us; You, O Lord, are our Father, and our Redeemer." ^Isa
63.16

iv.212

If, then, the patriarchs — so studious and careful for their people — did not know what they did, which of the saints (I ask you) would we grant or point out, who knows what we do, and intermeddles with the affairs of the living? Doubtless, it is true what that holy psalm sounds: "Because my father and my mother have left (or forsaken) me, the Lord has taken me up."^{Psa 27.10} If our parents forsake and leave us, then how (I ask you) can they tell, or do they care, how it fares with us? Let that suffice us, with which David held himself thoroughly content, saying: "The Lord has taken charge over me." We read that Josiah was translated out of this life into another, to the end he would not see the mischiefs (or plagues and punishments,) which the Lord determined to bring upon the Israelite people for their most wicked and naughty life. ^{2Kng 22.20} The blessed souls, therefore, enjoy the sight of God, and thereby partake of light and endless joy or gladness. They know none of our affairs, nor is it needful that they should know them, considering that the Lord alone has all things in his government.

Now, that is also most certain, that invocation springs from faith, just as the fruit springs from the root. For Paul, using that saying from the prophet, "Whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be safe," ^{Joe 2.32} then adds: "But how will they call upon him, in whom they have not believed?" ^{Rom 10.13-14} See how the apostle brings in one upon another: He is not called upon, who is not believed. This is why the one in whom we believe, we also call upon. But we believe in God only and alone; therefore, on we call upon him only. For wherever true faith is found, there likewise is the gift of the Holy Ghost.

For the apostle says: "If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." ^{Rom 8.9} And again: "You have not received again the spirit of bondage unto fear; but you have received the spirit of adoption, by which we cry, Abba, Father." ^Rom
8.15 Those, therefore, who are endued with a true belief in God, call upon God, whom they acknowledge and confess to be the only Father of all. ^{Eph 4.6} Nor might so much as the least part in that solemn form and order of invocation, delivered to us by the Son of God, ^{Mat 6.9} be attributed by any means to patrons, or saints. The only God is therefore to be called upon.

The heart of sinful man trembles and quakes to approach near to so great a majesty. For who may seem worthy in himself to appear and come before the presence of the most holy, the most just, and the most terrible [2211] God?

iv.213

Here, therefore, some supply and make up the matter with the patronship or intercession of celestial saints, by whose mediation and making way before us, passage lies open for us to God. But they produce this without the warrant of the scripture. The scripture has laid calling upon God before us as a law, as it were, and to this has been annexed the most ample or large promises. So the commandment sets before us, by and through whom we should call upon God, adding to it a most excellent promise, and opening for us the only ready way to the Father, through Christ Jesus. For in the gospel, the Lord says: "Truly, truly, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in my name, he shall give it to you. Up to now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask, and you shall receive, that your joy may be perfect," (or full). ^Joh
16.24 And, "Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it; that the Father may be glorified by the Son. If you shall ask anything in my name, I will do it." ^{Joh 14.12} What could be spoken more fully and clearly than these words? Christ bids us by (or in) his name to call upon God the Father, and he promises that he will give the faithful whatever they ask in Christ's name. Who doubts, now, any whit at all of the truth and constancy of the one who promises? Therefore, why do we henceforth need the intercession of saints? We have no testimony of scripture, we have no promise, of calling upon them, or of coming to God by their mediation. To this I add that, whoever seeks to come to the Father by any other than by Christ and his intercession, contemns the commandment and precept of God. He that obeys the commandment of Christ, and makes invocation in his name, does not need the mediation of saints at all. Does he not have all things plentifully in Christ? We therefore say and affirm that only Christ is the mediator, intercessor, and advocate with the Father in heaven, of all men who are on earth, and the only one of that sort — that after him, it is needless to have other advocates.

Many grant that Christ is given to us an intercessor with God; but because they join many others with him, they do not surely send all to him alone, nor preach only one mediator.

iv.214

They imagine that Christ is the mediator of redemption, yes, and the only mediator; yet he is not the only mediator of intercession, but together with him, there are many more. But as the scripture sets forth Christ as the only mediator of redemption, so it also sets him forth as the only mediator of intercession. The office of a mediator touching redemption and intercession, is one and the same office. A mediator puts himself in the middle between those who are at variance or disagreement; and he is joined to each in disposition and nature. An intercessor puts himself in the middle between those who are at strife and dissension; and unless he is indifferent to either side, he cannot be an intercessor. On both parts, reconciliation [2212] (or atonement) is required and looked for. There must therefore be a certain cause of discord; which being taken away, the discord or debate also ceases. The cause of discord is sin. It is therefore the duty of a mediator or intercessor to quite erase sin, that disagreement may no longer remain. For this, there are no amends or satisfaction to be made with words or with prayers, but with blood and death. ^{Heb 9.22} From this we necessarily gather that only Christ is the mediator or intercessor with the Father. For only Christ [2213] may set himself in the middle between God and men, because only he is partaker of both natures. The saints have but one nature; for they are men; but Christ is both God and man. Furthermore, he that is an intercessor must also be a reconciler, or an atonement-maker. For the end at which the intercessor shoots, is reconciliation. But Christ is the only reconciler of men, and therefore he is also the only intercessor. For it belongs to an intercessor to dissolve the cause of contention and discord, that is to say, to abolish and take away sin. But Christ alone takes away sin, and no creature. It therefore remains that Christ is the only intercessor. Up to here now, pertain the testimonies of scripture. Paul says: "There is one God, and one reconciler (or mediator) of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as the price (or ransom) for the redemption of all." ^{1Tim 2.5-6}

iv.215

And although the apostle speaks expressly of redemption, yet notwithstanding, these words are placed in the middle between the disputation and the invocation of God, which is done by Christ, who is the only-mediator of redemption and intercession. For just as he alone redeemed us, so being redeemed, he alone even now commends us to the Father. Touching this, let the apostle be heard once again, saying to the Romans: "Christ, when as yet we were sinners, died for us: much more therefore now being justified (or made righteous) by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." ^Rom
5.9 And yet again, somewhat plainer: "For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." ^{Rom 5.10} For in another place the same apostle says: "Christ ever lives" for this end, "to make intercession for us." ^{Heb 7.25} And again: "It is God that justifies: who is he that can condemn? It is Christ that died; indeed, that is raised up; who is also at the right hand of God, and makes intercession for us." ^{Rom 8.33-34} The same Christ opens the way, or makes access for us to the Father.[2214] Hebrews, chapter 4. and Ephesians, chapter 2. For in the gospel the Lord Jesus himself does not show us many doors, but one only door. "I am the door," he says. ^{Joh 10.7} And again: "I am the way, the truth, and the life. None comes to the Father but by me." ^{Joh 14.6} The one who says, "I am the way, the truth, and the life," indeed, says it in such a way, that there is access to the Father by none other than by me, that is, by me only and alone. Does that not exclude all other means, all other ways, and all other patrons or advocates whatsoever? Also, in another place of the gospel, in his own person, he plainly and lovingly calls all to him and to the benefit of his defence, cries: "Come to me, all you who labour and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest." ^{Mat 11.28} He does this lest anyone be hindered from calling upon God in the name of Christ, and committing themselves to Christ's defence of them – hindered through shame, knowledge of their own unworthiness, and guiltiness of sins, or the majesty and glory of Christ the Son of God.

iv.216

Out of the epistle to the Hebrews may be gathered no less evident testimonies than these, and in good supply. Among others, this one is excellent: "Christ, because he endures forever," says the apostle, "has an everlasting priesthood. Therefore he is able to perfectly save those who come to God by him, seeing that he ever lives (for this end) to make intercession for them. For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, (who is) holy, harmless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens," etc. ^{Heb 7.24-26} Mark how many arguments we have in this testimony of Paul, to prove that Christ, of all the faithful in heaven, is the only intercessor with the Father. The proper or particular office of the priest is to make intercession. But only Christ is priest in the presence of God. Therefore, he is the only intercessor. Now, the priesthood of Christ is also everlasting, or unchangeable. Therefore, he has redeemed us not only by once offering himself up for us (being made the only and alone Mediator of redemption), but he is also the everlasting and perpetual Mediator of intercession, making intercession for us even till the end of the world. For even though our Lord is a judge, yet notwithstanding, he is a judge of the unfaithful, a defender and upholder of the faithful, and at length, when the world is at an end, a judge of all. And if he has an everlasting priesthood, and (aparabaton) it is not conveyable, or removeable, — that is, if it cannot pass over to any other, either by succession, resignation,[2215] or part-taking — then certainly Christ only and alone remains intercessor of the faithful. Moreover, there is no cause why we should choose and take other intercessors for ourselves, either after Christ, or with Christ. For he is able to work our salvation to the full, by himself alone; this leaves nothing at all to others with which to busy themselves. Let us also, first of all, [2216] note what he expressly adds, "That come to God by him;" — "by him," that is, by our mediator, priest, and intercessor, Christ. For the way lies open for us to go to the Father, by him only and alone. To this also is annexed, "That he lives; and (for this end) he lives to make intercession for us." The heavenly saints also live in the kingdom of God with Christ. But they live for themselves (or for their own benefit), and not for us (or our advantage). Christ lives for us, and he makes intercession for us: therefore he alone makes intercession. Saints do not make intercession.

iv.217

These reasons prove to us most manifestly, I think, that the apostle speaks of the mediation of intercession, and not of redemption. Last of all, he requires those marks (or properties) in an intercessor, which cannot be found in anyone except Christ the Lord, only and alone. For although the angels are innocent and harmless, yet they are not higher than the heavens. The heavenly saints, although they are now purged and made clean from sins, yet for all that, they are not separated from sinners by nature, nor are they made higher than the heavens, as being lords over angels and over every creature. Only the Son is such a one, and this glory is reserved and kept for him. Therefore, He alone is the intercessor of the faithful with the Father.

To these testimonies of Paul, we will join yet another from St. Peter, and another from the most blessed apostle and evangelist John. St. Peter teaches that the saints, that is, we who are faithful in this world, are laid as living stones upon Christ the living stone, by faith; and we are made a spiritual building (or house), and a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Look, we are laid, not upon saints, but upon Christ, the living stone; by whom we are both quickened and preserved in the building. We are made a spiritual house, and a holy priesthood, for this end; that we should offer, not sacrifices beasts, but spiritual sacrifices, namely, ourselves and our prayers, unto God by Jesus Christ, not by saints. For they also are the spiritual house with us, the living stones, laid upon Christ, and living through Christ.

Furthermore, John writes: "My babes, these things write I to you, that you do not sin; but if any man sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the just (or the righteous). And he is the propitiation (or reconciliation) for our sins; and not for ours only, but also (for the sins) of the whole world." ^{1Joh 2.1} I do not think anything could be devised or spoken [2217] that is more agreeable to our purpose, more evident, stronger, or better than this. We hear that Christ is appointed by God and made unto us not only a mediator of redemption, once to redeem, but to be an everlasting mediator, indeed, of intercession.

iv.218

He stands as an advocate before God the Father, so often as sinful man offends and needs his help and defence; to whom the guilty may also boldly have access, and commit their cause to him, to be pleaded before God. "If any man sins," says John, "we have an advocate with the Father." Look, John calls him an advocate, whom the defenders (or maintainers) of the patronship of saints call a mediator of intercession. For advocatus, παράκλητος (parakletos) an advocate, signifies a tutor, a defender, a favourer, a comforter, a patron, or a proctor, who pleads, or handles our cause. But mark whom he defines and sets forth to be our advocate: not the holy virgin, not Peter or Paul, not himself or Stephen, but Jesus Christ. If he had thought or believed that the patronship of heavenly saints had been additionally necessary and wholesome for men, then he would have joined them with Christ the Lord. But now, here he sets forth unto us Christ alone. He adds, "the just" (or the righteous); as if he had said, there is no cause why any should distrust or stand in doubt of his patronship, or think him a patron who is not in his Father's favour and love. He is the Son, he is Christ, he is the just or righteous: therefore he is highly in his Father's favour, and most acceptable; who in the presence of the most just God, may appear for us who are unjust. Such righteousness is not found in any one of Adam's children, but it is required in an intercessor. Indeed, he communicates his righteousness to the saints by faith; but that righteousness is imputed to the saints, and it is imputative.[2218] In Christ, righteousness is natural and born in him as it were; indeed, it is properly his own. For Christ Jesus is the only righteous in heaven and on earth; who does not need either to pray or to offer sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the offences of the people; for only he has no sin, and is the righteousness of all. Therefore, only he can make intercession with the Father, because no one naturally and properly is righteous but Christ alone. And it is not amiss in this place, first of all [2219] to mark that Christ is called a propitiation, or satisfaction, not for sinners or people of one or two ages, but for all sinners and all faithful people throughout the whole world.

iv.219

One Christ is therefore sufficient for all: one intercessor with the Father is set forth for all. For however often you sin, that often you have ready a righteous intercessor with the Father. Not that we should imagine in heaven, as in a court, the Father upon his throne to sit as a judge; and the Son our patron, as often as we sin and offend, to fall down on his knees, and plead or entreat for us. But we understand with the apostle, that Christ is the advocate and the universal priest of the church, and that only he appears in the presence of the Father. This is because, just as the power and force of his death is always effectual (he does not die daily), so the virtue of his intercession is always effectual. Let us therefore draw near and come to God by Christ, the only mediator of our redemption and intercession, our only intercessor and advocate. We cannot help being acceptable to God the Father, if we are commended to him by his only-begotten Son.

Furthermore, the arguments are weak with which the maintainers of the heavenly patrons go about establishing their patronship or intercession. The Spirit, they say, makes intercession for us according to the doctrine of the apostle; [2220] therefore Christ alone does not make intercession. I answer that Paul does not speak of another intercessor in heaven, but of the spirit of man praying in this world; being enlightened and kindled with the Spirit of God, he groans and makes intercession for the saints. The words of the apostle are plain.

Yet these men add this: We read in scripture of the prayers of angels, and that they offer the prayers of the faithful in God's presence. ^Rev
8.4 Therefore, it is not Christ alone who prays or makes intercession for us in heaven, but also the saints. We deny that this follows, because the scripture teaches that angels are ministering spirits; and according to their office, they offer prayers only as ministers in the presence of God, but not to make intercession. Nor are men heard for angels' sakes, but for Christ's sake, who makes intercession, and for whose sake the prayer which is brought and offered to God is acceptable to Him. Now, if they bring forth the same thing touching the blessed souls of the saints, and reason a simili, from that which is alike, then let them first teach that souls are appointed and made ministering spirits.

iv.220

But they cannot. And if they could, they would still not have proved that the heavenly saints are intercessors. For doubtless, the angels themselves are not intercessors, just because they offer the prayers of men to God.

[Heavenly saints] agree to us, they say, and are knit to us in the same knot of charity and love. And because the spirits of the blessed who live in heaven love us here on earth, therefore, according to the nature and disposition of this love, they also pray for us. We answer that they gather this from scripture without warrant. For we may grant them this without wrangling: that the saints in heaven are not without the love of their neighbour. And yet, notwithstanding, we add that this love in the heavenly saints no longer has that nature or disposition, and those offices, which it had on earth in times past. Otherwise, we would attribute many more absurdities to the saints; as though they either did or suffered those things which they neither did nor suffered. While they lived on earth, according to the disposition and nature of love, they were sorry, and they were glad, and they prayed with us; yes, they also made intercession for us. But now that they have put off this corruption and have left us, leading their lives in heaven with the Lord, they neither know our affairs, nor are moved with any earthly affections. They understand that it is surpassing well with us [2221] without their help. They likewise understand that the work of our salvation is already wrought and accomplished,[2222] so that they may quiet themselves, and rest from their labours, and rejoice in Christ. Doubtless, he is the only intercessor with the Father of all men living in their misery, because he knows all, and can do all. Nor is he moved at, wearied or tired with, nor yet ignorant of anything. But whatever things are incident or belong to an intercessor, he takes upon himself most absolutely, and dispatches all these things. The [heavenly saints] understand that this glory agrees to the only Son of God; and therefore they do not go busily about it, that in Christ's stead they might appoint or make themselves intercessors. For here the love that they bear to God surpasses the love of their neighbour.

iv.221

But these men object, that the saints do not pray in heaven in the rite and fashion of that only intercessor, but in the same manner that they prayed for their fellow-brethren while on earth. Just now we said that it did not follow: they did this on earth, therefore they do the same in heaven. Nor can it be proved by manifest scriptures that the saints in heaven pray for us. Why then do they set forth doubtful opinions as certain? For we may grant that the saints pray in heaven, (which not a few of the fathers have written [2223]); yet it does not follow that the heavenly saints are to be called upon. For that sentence from St. Augustine is very well known, which is written in his book De civitate Dei, xxii. chap. 10:

"The Gentiles built temples, made altars, ordained priests, and offered sacrifices to their gods. But we do not erect temples to our martyrs, as to gods, but only as remembrances to dead men, whose spirits live with God. Nor do we set up altars there, on which we might sacrifice to martyrs; but we sacrifice to one God, who is the sacrifice both of the martyrs, and also our sacrifice — according to which sacrifice, as men of God who have overcome the world in confessing Him, these things have their place and order. Even so, they are not called upon by the priest who sacrifices, because he is God's priest, and not theirs. Now the sacrifice itself is the body of Christ, which is not offered to the [heavenly saints]; because they themselves are also the same." [2224]

Thus he says, testifying plainly enough, that the saints are not called upon, nor to be called upon, because sacrifice belongs to God, and not to the saints.

iv.222

The adversaries add that for many years the church called upon the saints, and that the church did not err; therefore, those who now call upon the saints do not err. We answer that the church does not err when she hears the voice of her Bridegroom and Shepherd. But she does err when, neglecting the voice of her Shepherd, she follows her own decrees. The whole church of Israel erred, together with their high priest Aaron and the elders of the people, when — transgressing the law of God — they worshipped God represented by an image, with singing and dancing, otherwise than God himself had appointed. Nor are the Israelites absolved from error and sin, when for many years they did not pull down their high places.

They add again, that the saints have helped when they have been called upon; therefore, they are to be called upon. Oftentimes, that which is instituted against the word of God turns out well. But who can gather from this that what is instituted against the word of God, is good? It is as though the innocent and harmless were therefore to be destroyed with war, because we see that merciless soldiers grow rich by war. The gods of the Gentiles likewise seemed to hear the petitions of their suppliants; but are the gods of the Gentiles therefore to be called upon?

But we do not mean to answer every one of their arguments, because we have already done that elsewhere, according to our talent.[2225] We conclude, therefore, that the word of truth, uttered out of the mouth of God, teaches us the invocation of God's name by the mediation of Jesus Christ. Nor do we read that any holy man, either in the old or new Testaments (of whom the scripture has undoubtedly mentioned), called upon any patriarch or prophet who had departed this life, however excellent, nor upon any apostle, or apostle's disciple — other than by the name of Jesus Christ. Let us therefore hold fast to this doctrine which is most perfect and most safe, which bids us all to call upon God alone by his only Son, which is what God himself requires of every one of us, and by which, when we obey, we please God.

iv.223

The last place remains, touching the serving of God. This word colere is of large signification in Latin. For we say, colere amicitiam, to maintain friendship, colere literarum studia, to love learning, colere arva, to till or husband our lands, and colere senes, to reverence old men. In this place, we use colere for servire, that is, to be dutiful in all points like a servant, and to show ourselves obedient to reverence or to venerate, and to worship. The Hebricians use their word abad, which the Latin interpreter translated servivit, coluit, or sacrificavit;[2226] that is, he served, worshipped, or sacrificed. In the book of Kings you read: "And Ahab served Baal, and worshipped him." ^{1Kng 16.31} The Grecians call this service either latreia (latreia) or douleia (douleia). The one is taken for the other, though indeed, servire, to serve, is more than colere, to worship. For you can abide without much ado in worshipping some man; but to serve him, you cannot so well get away with much. We therefore say that the service of God is a service by which men submit themselves reverently to God, and obey him, and worship him according to his will. Therefore, those who serve[2227] God earnestly, behave themselves dutifully in obeying him — serving him inwardly and outwardly, as he has appointed.

For the service of God is twofold, or of two sorts; the true and the false. The true is called true religion, true faith, and godliness. The false is called superstition, idolatry, and ungodliness. For the true service of God springs from the true fear of God, from a sincere faith, which submits itself in all things to the will of God.[2228] The false service consists in the contrary: touching which we will say more when we come to speak of superstition.

The true service of God is divided again, for perspicuity or plainness' sake, into the inward service of God, and the outward. The inward service is known to God alone, who is the searcher of hearts. For it is occupied in the fear of God, and perfect obedience, in faith, hope, and charity, from which spring the worship of God, calling upon him, thanksgiving, patience, perseverance, chastity, innocence, well-doing, and the rest of the fruits of the Spirit.

iv.224

For God, who is a Spirit, is truly served with these gifts of God and spiritual things. Without these, no service is allowed by God, however gay, glorious and pure it may seem in the sight of men. This service of God has testimonies both divine and human; but first of all from the law, the prophets, and the apostles. For Moses says in the law:

"And now, Israel, what does the Lord your God require of you, but that you should fear the Lord your God, and walk in all his ways, that you should love him, and that you should serve the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, that you should keep the commandments of the Lord, and his ordinances, which I command you this day for your wealth?" ^{Deu 10.12-13}

Micah the prophet ^{Mic 6.8} brings in someone asking questions concerning the true service of God, in what it consists of, and Micah answers: "I will show you,[2229] O man, what is good, and what the Lord requires of you: surely to do justly (or judgment), to love mercy, and to humble yourself to walk with your God." [2230] St. Paul the apostle says: "I beseech you, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you give your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God (which is) your reasonable serving of God. And do not fashion yourselves like this world, but be changed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, and what is good and acceptable and perfect." ^Rom
12.1 The same apostle says, comprehending in a few words the true service of God, which is turning from idols to God and the faith of Jesus Christ: "Those of Macedonia and other nations (or quarters), show how you have turned to God from idols, that you might serve the living and true God, and look for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, who delivers us from the wrath to come." ^{1Th 1.9-10}Moreover, St. James the apostle ^{Jas 1.27} says: "Pure religion and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit the fatherless (or orphans) and widows in their adversity, and to keep himself unspotted by the world." [2231]

iv.225

These divine and evident testimonies of holy scripture declare plentifully enough, dearly beloved, which is the true inward service of God. Nevertheless, there are many human testimonies, in no way disagreeing with the divine, found everywhere in ecclesiastical writers. Lactantius says: "Therefore the knowledge of God and his service is all in all. In this consists all the hope and salvation of man. This is the first step (or degree) of wisdom: that we should know who our true Father is, that we should reverence him alone with due godliness, that we should obey him, and most devoutly serve him; and to obtain his favour, let all labour, care, and industry be bestowed." [2232] The same author cites six other manifest testimonies of this kind, also largely in the tenth chapter of the same book, and in the first chapter of his book, de vero Dei Cultu.[2233] But instead of many, we like citing that one testimony, touching the true service of God, freely uttered by the mouth of a Roman martyr [2234] before judge Asclepiades, at the Roman consistory. For after he had both courageously and religiously told what God is in His person and in His substance, he adds this:

You know God: now understand as well

The form and manner how he served is;

What kind of church it is where he does dwell;

What gifts to give he thought it not amiss;

What vows he asks: whom he (beside all this)

Will have his priests, and in his church likewise

What he commands to bring for sacrifice.

Unto himself, even in the mind of man,

A church he has vouchsafed up to rear;

iv.226

A lively, feeling, breathing church, which can

Not sundred be, fair, beautiful, and clear,

And never like destruction's dint to fear,

With lofty top, and painted pleasantly

With colours fresh of great diversity. God's priest.

At th' holy porch a priest is standing there,

And keeps the doors before the church which been.

Faith is her name, a virgin chaste and clear,

Her hair tied up with fillets like a queen.

For sacrifices simple, pure, and clean,

And which she knows are pleasing, bids this priest

Offer to God, and to his dear Son Christ;

A shamefac'd look, a meek and harmless heart,

The rest of peace, a body pure and chaste,

The fear of God, which sinners does convert:

The rule likewise of knowledge truly plac'd,

A sober fast from all excessive waste

Of gluttony, a hope which does not faint,

A liberal hand which gives without restraint.

From these oblations a vapour does arise,

Which savours sweet by virtue's force compels:

It does ascend and pierce the azure skies;

The scent of balm and saffron it excels,

Yea frankincense, and Persian spices smells:

From earth to heaven it mounts up aloft,

And pleases God therewith delighted oft. [2235]

iv.227

And so forth as follows to this purpose. These things I think are sufficient, concerning the inward service of God. I confess, in the meanwhile, that they may also be somewhat referred to the outward service of God.

The outward service of God springs from the inward. Nor is it known to God alone, as this other is, but it is open to the judgment of man. And it is keeping or executing the rites instituted by God himself, by which we both testify to men that inward service and also practise these rites to the glory of God and our profit. Among the ancient people, this kind included the temple, the priesthood, and all the ceremonies instituted by God, which are very often called the service of God. And this service had its appointed limits; for it was not lawful for everyone to feign service of God according to their own pleasure, as shown at large in the law and the holy history.

Now, I declared when I was in hand with the Jewish [2236] ceremonies, that outward service to the glory of God and the profit of the faithful. Furthermore, just as Christ abrogated those old rites, so he placed again a very few in their stead. For he instituted a holy assembly, in which His will is that his word should be preached and expounded out of the holy scripture to his own glory and to our profit; common prayer is to be made; and the sacraments are to be ministered and received. A convenient place, fit time, due order, and holy instruments are necessary to these things. In these things, again, the godly follow their own wills in none of it; for they fetch the whole manner and order of serving from the word of that God whom they serve. Something is said of this in the fourth commandment of the first tablet, and more will be said at large, in its due place and order.

iv.228

To be short, God is served outwardly by those who, by faith and obedience, gather themselves into the holy assembly at fixed times; who keep the ecclesiastical discipline derived from the word of God; who hear the word of God, or the holy exposition of the sacred scriptures; who pray publicly with the church; who religiously participate in the sacraments; and who observe other lawful and wholesome rites or ceremonies. By their service they glorify God among men, and receive from God no small reward,[2237] namely, his blessing, and increase of heavenly gifts.

I think there is no need in this place, from testimonies of scripture, to confirm these things that we have said up to here touching the outward service of God. For very many are to be found everywhere in the history of the Gospel, in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles. For the Lord Jesus everywhere gathers holy assemblies together, to whom he preaches the gospel, and commends prayer. He says of Mary sitting at his feet and hearing his preaching: "This one thing is necessary; Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken from her." And in another place: "Blessed are they," he says, "who hear the word of God, and keep it." Surely the Lord himself instituted and put in use the sacraments. For when John did not consent to baptize Jesus at his request, John said, "I need to be baptized by you, and you come to me?" Jesus answered, "Let it be so now: for it becomes us to fulfil all righteousness." The apostle Paul, diligently commending ecclesiastical discipline to the churches, likewise most decently ordained holy assemblies for it. The places are very well known to all; 1Cor 11.14, 16; 1Tim 2.1, 8-12; and elsewhere.

But before I conclude this place, I will show that only God is to be served. And surely the service itself, which we have treated up to here, cannot be bestowed upon any creature, nor upon angels or celestial saints; it is for God alone. Therefore, none is so blind as not to see that God alone must be served with these. And when God requires his service or duty from us, he requires our whole heart: nothing therefore is left for us to bestow upon others.

iv.229

Moses, full of the Spirit of God, says in his law: "You shall walk after the Lord your God, and fear him; his commandments you shall keep; and you shall hearken to his voice, and him you shall serve, and cling to him." Nor does it matter that here the word "alone" is not added, seeing that the words are uttered with an emphasis or force. For when he says, "him you shall serve, and to him you shall cling," what else do we understand, than it is to him and not to any other, and thus to him alone? Furthermore, in the sixth chapter of Deuteronomy, you do not read, "You shall fear the Lord your God, and you shall serve him alone, and you shall swear by his name;" Rather, "You shall fear the Lord your God, and him (emphatically) you shall serve, and you shall swear by his name." Furthermore, in the gospel the Lord, brings these words of the law against the tempter, making the emphasis plain, "It is written," (he says), "You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve." Doubtless, this testimony only, being most effectual and pithy, is sufficient for our demonstration, that God alone is to be served.

I will add to this, moreover, the testimony of a man, yet established by divine authority, which we also set down elsewhere in our books. St. Augustine, de Quantitate Animae, shows that God alone is to be served in this way:

"Whatever the soul serves as God, it is needful that she thinks it better than herself. But we must believe that neither the earth, nor the sea, nor the stars, nor the moon, nor the sun, nor anything at all that may be felt, or seen with these eyes — to be short, not heaven itself, which cannot be seen by us — is better than the nature of the soul. Indeed, assured reason convinces that all these are far worse than any soul." [2238]

iv.230

And shortly after;

"Therefore, if there are any other things that God has created, some are worse, and some are as good as the soul — worse, such as the soul of a beast; and equal, such as the angels; but nothing is better. And if some of these happen to be better, this comes to pass by sin and not by nature. Notwithstanding, if it is made less bad by sin, the soul of a beast is still not to be preferred before it, nor is it to be compared with it. Therefore, God alone is to be worshipped by the soul, for He alone is the author of it. And as for any other man, however wise and perfect, or any soul that is endued with reason and most blessed, these are to be loved and followed only according to merit and order. Only that which agrees with and is fitting for them is to be exhibited to them. For it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve." [2239]

These are St. Augustine's words. And this far we have treated one God only that is to be served — living, true, and everlasting.

Moreover, those who cling to God with a sincere faith, and worship, call upon, and serve one God lawfully, are rightly named religious. Their study and actions are true religion. Some would have religion derived a relinquendo,[2240] because thereby we leave or forsake false gods, all errors and earthly desires, and seek after the true God, after truth and heavenly things. Massurius Sabinus says: "That is religious for which we severally set aside some things for holiness' sake. The word 'religion' has its name a relinquendo, as Ceremonies a carendo." [2241] But M. Cicero supposes that Religio is so-called a relegendo (from selecting or putting apart), because those who are religious carefully choose all things which seem to belong to the service of the gods.

iv.231

But he is confuted, in many words, by Lactantius Firmianus, an ancient writer of the church, Lib. Instit. iv. cap. 28. Among other things, he says:

"We are born on this condition: that being born, we might do just and due service to God, that we should know him alone, and that we should follow him. We are strictly bound and tied to God with this bond of godliness, from which religion itself took her name... We said that the name of religion was derived from the bond of godliness, because God has tied and bound man to himself in godliness: for it is needful that we serve Him as a lord, and obey Him as a father." [2242]

Also other ecclesiastical writers such as Jerome and Augustine, following Lactantius, derived religion a religando, i.e., from tying or binding. For Jerome says in his commentary on the ninth chapter of Amos: "This bundle of the Lord, who is one, is tied up with religion. Religion therefore took her name a religando, from tying together, and binding into the Lord's bundle." [2243] And Augustine in his book de Quantitate Animae, chapter 36, says: "True religion is where the soul ties herself through reconciliation to one God, from whom she had broken away, as it were, through sin." [2244] The same Augustine says in his book, de Vera religione, last chapter: "Let religion tie us to one God Almighty, from which it is believed to be named religion." [2245]

iv.232

We say, therefore, that true religion is none other than a friendship, a knitting, and a unity (or a league) with the true, living, and everlasting God — to whom being linked by a true faith, we worship, call upon, and serve him alone. We wholly depend upon him, living in all things according to his will, or according to the prescript, rule, and law of his word. Therefore, the whole matter of salvation and faith is most rightly comprised in this one word, religion. Elsewhere in scripture it is called a league or covenant; and again, a marriage or wedlock. For just as those who are confederate are united and made one by a league, so God and man are knit together by religion: and just as the husband and wife are made one body by marriage, so we are knit into a spiritual body with God by religion, as with a husband; ^{Isa 54.5} and with the very Son of God as our bridegroom ^{Mat 9.15} and head. ^{Eph 5.23} Therefore, to this belongs whatever things are said in the scriptures about keeping a league or covenant, and about the faithfulness of marriage. Whoever is not knit to one God by faith, and does not worship him alone, call upon him through Christ, and serve him as He himself said in his word he would be served, are truce-breakers, disloyal, and infamous through their adultery.

They are also called superstitious. For superstition is false religion, which does not serve God but something else for God, or not God alone, or not rightly or lawfully. This word superstition stretches itself even to old wives' tales and doting errors: for in Dutch we call superstition, aberglauben, mis-glauben, und mis-bruch. But Lactantius reasoned most exactly about this word. In his fourth book, Institutions, twenty-eighth chapter, he writes in this way:

"Religion is the service of the true God; superstition is the service of the false god. Those who wish their children to outlive them are not said to be superstitious (for we all wish that); but those are called superstitious who either reverence the memory of the dead; or else those who — while their parents were alive — worshipped their images within their houses, like household gods. For those who took for themselves new rites, with the intent they might, instead of gods, honour the dead, whom they thought were taken from among men and received into heaven — those (I say) were called superstitious.

iv.233

But those who worshipped and served public and ancient gods, they called religious, upon which Virgil says:

Vain superstition, ignorant

Of the old and ancient gods.

But seeing that our ancients, in a similar manner, have been consecrated gods after their death, those who serve such false gods are therefore superstitious. But we are religious, who pray and make our supplications to one God, being the true God," etc. [2246]

Superstition consists chiefly in these points: (1) when the Lord is not served, but other gods are served in his stead, with the only one, true, and living God being left and forsaken; or (2) when the Lord is served, but not alone; other strange gods are served together with him; or (3) when he is served, it is not with his lawful service.

The Gentiles offended in the first kind of superstition. [2247] They did not know the true God; and so, instead of Him, they worshipped false, imagined, or strange gods. And the holy prophet Jeremiah is a witness that the Israelites, God's people, were also sick with the same madness. Expostulating and reasoning the matter with the people, he says:

"Hear the word of the Lord, house of Jacob and all the families of the house of Israel. Thus says the Lord, What iniquity have your fathers found in me, that they have gone far from me, and have walked after vanity, and have become vain? For did they not say, Where is the Lord that brought us out of the land of Egypt; that led us through the wilderness, through a desert and wasteland, through a dry land, and by the shadow of death, by a land that no man passed through, and where no man dwelt?

iv.234

And I brought you into a plentiful country, to eat the fruit and commodities of it. But when you entered, you defiled my land, and made my heritage an abomination. The priests did not say, Where is the Lord? And those who should minister the law, did not know me. The pastors also offended against me; and the prophets prophesied by Baal, and went after things that did not profit (or they followed idols). Therefore I will yet plead with you, says the Lord; and I will plead with your children's children. For go to the isles of Chittim [2248] and behold; and send to Kedar, and take diligent heed; and see whether there are such things. Has any nation exchanged their gods, which yet are no gods? But my people have exchanged their glory for that which does not profit (or for an idol). O you heavens, be astonished at this; be afraid, and utterly confounded, says the Lord. For my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and they have dug themselves pits,[2249] even broken pits, that can hold no water." ^Jer
2.4-13

You hear that the people of Israel forsook God, the living spring, by a heinous offence, and for which no amends might be made; and they dug broken pits for themselves. The "waters" signify the perfect good, with which the desire of both the soul and body may be satisfied. Such a plentiful spring is God alone, the highest, most excellent, and most perfect good. This being forsaken, they dug — that is, with very great pains and costs, they provided themselves pits. They turned to creatures, things that are not gods, and are unable to satisfy their desires. This mischief is also common even today. Many, having forsaken God, have turned to celestial saints, from whom they desire that which was to be desired from God — things that cannot be given except by God alone.

Here idolatry is found — that is, in worshipping images. For not only are those superstitious who imagine false gods for themselves (having forsaken the true God), or that put their trust in things that are nothing; but also those who worship and reverence the images either of God, or of gods. For images or counterfeits are set up either to the true God himself, or else to false gods — they are set up to creatures (I say).

iv.235

But it is not lawful to represent, by any image or counterfeit, the exceeding great, everlasting, and living God, world without end. Nor is it lawful to worship or serve him, expressing it by an image or likeness. Much less, therefore, is it lawful to consecrate images or counterfeits to creatures, to worship and serve them. There are very many testimonies of scripture against idolatry, as in Exo 20.4-5; Isa 40.18-19; 44.9-17; Psa 115.4-8; 1Cor 6.9, 10.7; Rom 1.22-24; Gal 5.19-20; 1Th 1.9; 1Pet 4.3; 1Joh 5.21; Jer 10.1-5; etc. Furthermore, I diligently admonish the simpler sort here, that they not allow themselves to be deceived. For none can avoid being called an idolater, who worships, reverences, and fears images; who puts some part of his confidence in them; who lies down before them; who offers them gifts; who keeps them in a place of solemnity and honour; who sticks up tapers and burns incense to them; who loves, beautifies, maintains, enriches, and serves them with any kind of sacrifice or holy service whatsoever. But concerning idolatry, we have spoken very largely elsewhere. [2250]

Furthermore, they served the God of Israel (who doubts it?); yet not the true God alone, but with other gods also. We read of this in the history of the kings: "And yet they served (or feared) the Lord: and they appointed priests (even of the basest) for themselves for the high places, who prepared for them sacrifices in the houses of the high places. And when they served the Lord, they served their own gods also, in the manner of the nations from which they were brought into Samaria." And again: "So these nations feared the Lord, but served their images also; so did their children, and their children's children: as their fathers did, so they do to this day." This mischief, in like manner, is altogether common today. For a man may find worshippers and servers of God who will not be persuaded by anyone that God alone is to be served — even boldly affirming that it is flat and damnable heresy to deny that saints are to be worshipped, called upon, and served together with God. We have sufficiently argued against them elsewhere,[2251] and in our present sermon also.

iv.236

Next to be likewise marked here, comes the diverse manner and sundry fashion of serving God superstitiously. For someone serves God superstitiously, first, who pretends or imagines a god in his mind, and then expresses that same god by an image or counterfeit. He later offers sacrifices and incense to this image; and lying prostrate on the ground, he worships in its presence, and suppliantly serves it with all reverence. This is not the only way, but someone also principally serves God superstitiously, by communicating the incommunicable properties of God to creatures, even if he does not express God by a representation, likeness, or counterfeit. Or he serves superstitiously, if he thinks that the gifts which he has received from heaven at the hands of God, are given and bestowed on him by celestial saints. Furthermore, the incommunicable properties of God are to do all things, know all things, be present in every place, hear all things, help, succour, or assist, and being loving, bountiful, just, righteous, and merciful.

Truly Isaiah, the best learned of the prophets and of singular authority, proves and convinces by the strongest and most substantial arguments or reasons, that the gods of the Babylonians and Gentiles, are not gods: "Because they cannot foretell or know things that are to come later, nor can they do good or evil." For being able to enrich and store with all manner of benefits, and to chastise with due deserved punishments — also, to know all things, and have the power to compass and do all things — these are the properties of God alone, communicable to no creature. Someone is superstitious, therefore, who attributes these properties to celestial saints, and for that cause serves and calls upon them. Hosea the prophet very sorely inveighs against the Jews, who gave and attributed the gifts of God to strange gods, insomuch that he says their synagogues are of a strumpet or harlot. "I will have no pity on her children (God says), for they are the children of fornications. For their mother has played the harlot. She who conceived them has done shamefully. For she said, I will go after my lovers who give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, my oil and my drink." ^Hos
2.4-5 And shortly after: "Now she did not know that I gave her corn, and wine, and oil; and multiplied (or gave her much) her silver and gold, which they bestowed even upon Baal." ^{Hos 2.8}

iv.237

And it is still done much today, to ascribe to celestial saints and not to the only God, the increase of the earth, and the temperate or sharp seasons of the year, as though they came from them. But that is superstition, not godliness or religion.

Furthermore, God is superstitiously served, when indeed he is served alone, yet not in a lawful manner. Unlawful service proceeds from the will and imagination of men; and it is contrary to the word and ordinance of God. For God is lawfully served, when he is served according to his own will and word. In the law, the Lord commanded has thus: "Beware that you do not seek after the gods of the Gentiles, saying, How did these nations serve their gods, that I may do likewise? You shall not do so to the Lord your God, etc. (Therefore) whatever I command you, take heed that you do it. You shall add nothing to it, nor take anything from it." ^{Deu 12.30-32} Nadab and Abihu offer strange fire to the Lord: therefore they are burned up in the presence of the Lord with fire from heaven. ^{Num 3.4} Uzzah also perished, because he handled the ark of God otherwise than the Lord had commanded in his law. ^{2Sam 6.6-7} In the book of Judges, Micah instituted an image, an altar, a chapel, and a service to the true God, whose name is Jehovah. ^Jdg ^17.5 But it is reproved in the sacred scripture, because it was not only not fetched outside of the holy scripture, but in all respects it was quite contrary and utterly against the law of God. Jeroboam also ordained a surpassing sumptuous service; he instituted cathedral churches, and set up golden images, all to the God of Israel. ^{1Kng
12.27-33} But because they were not agreeable to the word of the Lord, they are altogether utterly condemned for execrable and accursed sacrileges. Indeed, what are we to think in general about all the services which are neither instituted by God, nor agreeable with the word of God, but conceived with a good intent and meaning of our own? That unique testimony of the most excellent prophet Samuel declares it to us, when he pronounced it against Saul and his sacrifices in these words: "Has the Lord as great a pleasure in burnt-offerings and sacrifices, as when the voice of the Lord is obeyed? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken is better than the fat of rams. For rebellion is like the sin of witchcraft, and transgression is wickedness and idolatry." ^{1Sam 15.22}

iv.238

This supports what we read in Isaiah: "He that kills a bullock is as if he slayed a man; he that sacrifices a sheep, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offers an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that remembers incense, as if he blessed an idol. They have chosen all these things in their own ways, and their soul is delighted in their own abominations." ^{Isa 66.3} Vain and abominable, therefore, are those services which are not kept and framed to the pure word of God. For the same prophet says, "In vain they serve me, teaching doctrines of men." ^{Isa 29.13}

May the living, true, and everlasting God, who would and should only and alone be worshipped, called upon, and served, give true religion to all men, and deliver them from all vain superstition, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

THE

FIFTH DECADE OF SERMONS

WRITTEN BY

HENRY BULLINGER.

5-1. THE FIRST SERMON: OF THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Of the Holy Catholic Church; what it is, how far it EXTENDS, by what marks it is known, from where it springs, how it is maintained and preserved, whether it may err.
Also of the power and studies of the church.

The order and course of things [2521] lead us next, after God — the workman and author of all things — to speak of His most excellent work: namely, the Church. For so great is the goodness of our good God and most loving Father, that he is not desirous to live happily and blessedly alone, but moreover to bestow and pour all kinds of blessedness upon us, his beloved creatures, that we should enjoy his goods by all means possible. And with that intent, he chooses men for himself who live in this world, that he may translate them to himself, in whom also he may dwell (even while they live here on earth), whom he may enrich with all his goods, and in whom he may reign. He chooses that they should be called by his name — namely, a people, a house, a kingdom, an inheritance, a flock, a congregation, or a church, of the living God. I will speak of this church (aided with your prayers) those things which the Lord of the church grants to me to utter.

v.4

This word Ecclesia, which signifies a church or congregation, is a Greek word used and received among the Latins. It signifies, as I said, a congregation, communion, or assembly (in the Dutch tongue, Ein Gemeind), or a people called together to hear about matters of the commonwealth. For St. Luke so used this word in the nineteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. But it was translated to a holy use, and began to be called a congregation, assembly, or company of the faithful, calling upon the name of the Lord. St. Paul says that he persecuted the congregation or church of God. ^{1Cor 15.9} In another place he says, "I received authority from the high priests to bind all those who call upon the name of Christ;" [2522] for now he refers to them as those who call upon the name of Christ, or Christians, whom he previously called the church. Or else this word Ecclesia, the church or congregation, is used for calling together: for in the Greek tongue ekkalew (ekkaleoo) signifies to call forth [to summon]. For God calls forth all believers from all parts of the wide world, and from the whole congregation of men, together with their seed,[2523] that they may be his peculiar people, and that he again may be their God; that is to say, that they may be the church of the living God. In times past, the congregation or assembly of the Jewish people, being God's flock, was called a synagogue; for this word synagogue signifies the same as Ecclesia, the congregation. But because of the stubbornness of the Jews, and the unappeasable hatred which they bear towards Christian religion, this word synagogue is not esteemed, but has almost grown out of use. But we will not dispute by due and right order about the churches either of the Jews or the Turks, or of other foreign churches of the Gentiles,[2524] of which we know there are many sorts and kinds. We will speak of the Christian church and congregation of the faithful: which the Germans call Die kirch, alluding perhaps to the Greek word kuriakh (kuriake). For they call kuriakhn (kuriaken) anything belonging to the Lord, namely, a house or a people — just as the Germans call Die kirchen both the people of God themselves, and also the place in which they assemble together to worship God. But first of all, we will describe a little more plainly what the church or congregation is.

v.5

The church is the whole company and multitude of the faithful, partly now in heaven, and partly still remaining here on earth where it agrees plainly in unity of faith or true doctrine, and in the lawful partaking of the sacraments. Nor is the church divided, but joined and united together in one house and fellowship as it were.

This church was usually called catholic, that is to say, universal. For she produces her branches in all the places of the world, in all times of all ages, and generally comprehends all the faithful of the whole world. For the church of God is not tied to any one region, nation, or kindred; to condition, age, sex, or kind. All the faithful generally, and each one specially, wherever they may be, are citizens and members of this church. St. Paul the Apostle says: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither bondman nor free, neither man nor woman; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." ^{Gal 3.28}

The church is distinguished into the triumphant and the militant. The triumphant is that great company of holy spirits in heaven, triumphing for the victory gotten against the world, sin, and the devil, still enjoying the sight of God, in which consists all fulness of all kinds of joy and pleasure. Upon this they set forth God's glory, and praise his goodness forever. St. John the Apostle sets forth this church very notably in his Revelation, saying: "After this I saw, and, behold, a great company which no man was able to number, of all nations, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne, and in the sight of the Lamb, clothed in white raiments, and palms in their hands: and they cried out with a loud voice, saying: Salvation belongs to him that sits on the throne of our God, and to the Lamb." ^{Rev 7.9-10} A little after this he says:

v.6

"And one of the elders answered and said to me: These who are clothed in white garments, who are they? Or where do they come from? And I said to him, you know, Lord. And he said to me, These are the ones who have come out of great affliction, and have spread abroad [2525] their garments, and have made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore, they are before the throne of God, and serve day and night in his holy temple. And he that sits on the throne shall dwell over them. They shall neither hunger nor thirst anymore; nor shall the sun shine on them, nor any heat; because the Lamb, who sits in the midst of the throne, shall govern them, and bring them to the springs of the water of life. And the Lord shall wipe away all tears from their eyes." ^{Rev 7.13-17}

Brethren, you have heard a notable [2526] description of the triumphant church in heaven, and triumphing truly through the blood of Jesus Christ, by whom they conquered and now reign. For Christ is that "Lamb of God, that takes away the sins of the world;" ^{1Joh 1.29} by whom all who are sanctified are sanctified, and shall be sanctified, and live, from the first creation of the world to the end of all times. St. Paul, in a certain place, also giving us a notable description of this church, tells us that we who are as yet busied in the militant church, shall sometime be translated to the triumphant church, and be made fellows with the angels of God, received among the orders of the patriarchs, and placed in the company of the blessed spirits, with the most high God himself, and the mediator, our Lord Jesus Christ. Preaching the greatness of God's grace brought to us by the gospel, and exhorting us to receive it with a true faith, he says:

v.7

"You did not come to mount Sinai, to a fire, to a whirlwind, a stormy tempest, and darkness; ...but to mount Zion, to the city of the living God, to heavenly Jerusalem, and to the innumerable company of angels, and to the church or congregation of the first-begotten which are written in heaven, and to God the judge of all, and to the spirits of the perfect just, and to the mediator of the new Testament, Jesus Christ,[2527] speaking better things than the blood of Abel spoke." ^{Heb 12.18,
22-24}

And therefore, all the saints in heaven belong to our company; or rather, we belong to their fellowship; for we are companions and fellow-heirs with the saints from Adam to the end of all worlds, and God's household. This contains the greatest comfort of all man's life, and moves us most of all to the study of virtue. For what more worthy thing is there, than to be of God's household? Or what may be thought more sweet to us, than to think ourselves fellows with the patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, of all angels and blessed spirits? This benefit, I say, Christ has bestowed on us. To him, therefore, be praise, glory, and thanks for ever and ever. Amen.

The militant church is a congregation of men on earth, professing the name and religion of Christ, continually fighting in the world against the devil, sin, flesh, and the world, in the camp and tents, and under the banner, of our Lord Christ. This church is to be considered two ways. For either it is to be taken strictly, comprehending only those who are not only called but are indeed the church: the faithful and elect of God, living members, knit to Christ — not only with bands and other outward marks and signs,[2528] but in spirit and faith — and oftentimes by these means without the others. We will speak of this matter afterward. This inward and invisible church of God may be well named the elect spouse of Christ, known only to God, who alone knows who are his. When we are first taught to know this church, we confess her with the Apostles' creed, saying:[2529] "I believe the holy catholic church, the communion of saints."

v.8

And in these few words we comprehend that there is a church, also what the church is, and what manner of church it is. For first we confess that there has been, and is, a church of God, and that it shall continue forever. Then, professing what it is, we add this, "The communion of saints." That is to say, we believe the church to be nothing else but the company of all those saints who are, have been, and shall be, in this present age as well as in the world to come, who enjoy all good things in common granted to them by God. Also, we express what manner of thing the church is, namely, holy — even the spouse of Christ, cleansed and blessed. For St. Paul calls those holy, who are cleansed with the Spirit and blood of our God, a great part of whom have received crowns of glory; the remainder labour here on earth, hoping to receive them in heaven. And truly, in consideration of the church, the chief matter is that through the grace of God we are made the members of Christ's body, and partakers of all heavenly gifts with the angels;[2530] for we confess none to be more holy than ourselves.[2531]

The church more largely considered, comprehends not only those who are the very faithful and holy indeed, but also those who — although they do not believe truly or sincerely, nor are clean or holy in the conduct of their life — yet they acknowledge and profess true religion with the true believers and the holy men of God. Indeed, they speak well of and approve virtues, and reprove evil, and they do not sever themselves [2532] from the unity of this militant holy church. In consideration of this, no more than the wicked and hypocrites (such as we read were in the church in the time of Christ and the apostles, such as Judas, Ananias and Sapphira, Simon Magus, also Demas, Hymenaeus, Alexander, and many others) are excluded and put from the church. Such a church may well be called the outward and visible church.

v.9

But this church of which we speak, is to be reasonably considered both in part, and as the whole; for it is to be considered particularly and generally. And the particular church is that which is comprised of a certain number, and is known by some sure and certain place. For takes its name from the place, being called by the names of cities, such as the churches of Zurich and Berne, etc. The Greeks called those particular churches paroikiav (paroikias) which we commonly call parishes. And we call a parish, that which has dwelling-houses and streets joined together in neighbourhood. But in cities and towns, [2533] to certain portions are usually ascribed both churches and parish priests to serve them, and that whole circuit is called a parish [2534] — in the Dutch tongue, Ein barchi,[2535] oder pfarkirch, oder ein kirchhory. And in olden times, the parish priest was a provider. For the Parish and he provided for and gave necessaries to strangers, chiefly salt and wood.[2536] Some called him the maker of the feast; others call him a preparer of virgins.[2537] And the pastors of churches are, as it were, preparers of virgins for the Redeemer and head of the church, who is Christ; they bring him a chaste and undefiled virgin. In short, because they themselves provided things that were most necessary for the people of God, and also prepared heavenly meats and banquets, the pastors of the Lord's flock are very well called parish priests, or the curates of souls.[2538] The Lord in the gospel, speaking of the particular church, says: "If he that offends the church will not heed when he is warned, complain to the church." ^{Mat 18.17}

v.10

But it is not possible for the universal church, throughout the whole world, to assemble and come together so that the rebellious and obstinate might be brought before it. Therefore, judgment to be given on the stubborn is referred to the particular churches. To conclude, the universal church consists of all the particular churches throughout the whole world, and of all the visible parts and members of it. This is the same thing we outlined recently, when we spoke more at large about it. [2539]

But the catholic church of God (as we began to say a little earlier) abides with us continually from age to age, from the beginning; and it is at this time dispersed throughout the whole world, both visibly and invisibly. The Lord's people and God's house will continue on earth to the world's end. For there was never yet any world, nor shall there be any age, in which God has not sanctified or will not sanctify some for himself, in whom he will dwell. And they shall be his flock and holy house: for the testimonies of ancient prophets record that the church is perpetual. For thus we find it written in the 132nd psalm: "The Lord has chosen Zion, he has chosen her for a habitation for himself. This is my resting-place for ever and ever; here I will dwell, because I have chosen her." ^{Psa 132.13-14} And again: "I have sworn to David in my holiness, his seed shall remain for ever, and his seat shall continue before me as the sun." ^{Psa 89.35-36} But who does not know that all this is to be understood about Christ, the Son of David, and about his throne and spiritual Zion, which is the church? He also says in the gospel, signifying the continuance of the church: "I will remain with you continually to the end of the world." ^{Mat 28.20} And again: "I will ask of my Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, the Spirit of truth, that he may abide with you forever." ^{Joh 14.16} To this also belongs that saying in the gospel: "And the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church." ^{Mat 16.18} This saying truly is a great comfort to the faithful in so many and such great persecutions intended to utterly destroy and overthrow the church.

v.11

But just as Christ has always had, now has, and shall forever have his church here on earth, so likewise the devil, as long as the world continues, will never lack his people in whom he may reign. This church of the devil took her first beginning from Cain, and will continue to the last wicked person, comprehending all those evil peoples that live between the beginning and the end. But living here on earth, they have society and share in common with those who are tormented in hell. For just as all who are godly, make one body under one head who is Christ, so all the wicked, under one head Satan, are one corporate body. This may worthily be called the wicked church,[2540] Sodom and Gomorrah, Babylon, the congregation of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, a synagogue, a school, and a stew of the devil, the kingdom of antichrist, or any other similar names. In this church are reckoned up all those who are wicked and infidels, separating themselves from the society of our holy mother the church, or forsaking its communion; and especially those who are mockers of God and his holy word, blasphemers and persecutors of Christ and his church. These days, such are the heathen, Turks, Jews, heretics, schismatics, and generally all those who are professed enemies to Christian religion.

And to these we may also add hypocrites; for hypocrisy is no small offence that the Lord himself so earnestly persecutes and blames in every part of the gospel. Among other things he says: "The Lord of that servant will come on the day in which he does not look for him, and in an hour he will not know of, and will divide him, and will give him his portion with hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." ^{Mat 24.50-51} Beyond all doubt, he signified the greatness of the offence by the sharpness of the punishment. This church follows the motivations of the devil, and the devices or imaginations of her own heart. And she is busied and exercised in all kinds of blasphemy and wickedness, in which she excels herself; and at last sinks down to hell, so that she is not in any place separated from that head to whom she has so diligently, or rather obstinately, joined herself.

I know right well that you will object that I have reckoned hypocrites to be in the outward communion and fellowship of the militant church, and now I again account them to be of the company of the devil's church.

v.12

Moreover, you will say that it is impossible that the same hypocrites may take part in both churches, which differ between themselves. For the Lord says: "Either make the tree good and the fruit good, or else the tree nothing and the fruit nothing." And St. Paul also says that there is no "fellowship between Christ and Belial, between light and darkness, between truth and lying;" ^{2Cor 6.14-15} and that hypocrisy is lying and darkness.

Therefore, I perceive that here is a fit place to show by what means and how far I may account hypocrites to be among the congregation of the church. First, we will make a distinction or difference between hypocrites. For there are certain hypocrites who put their confidence in their human justice and equity, doing all their works openly so that they may be seen by men, firmly trusting to and stiffly standing in men's traditions. It is a custom and property of these men not only to flee from the church which teaches the righteousness of Christ, but also to curse, detest, and persecute it with all cruelty. Such people were the Jews and Jewish Pharisees with whom our Lord Jesus Christ had much contention, and with whom the church contends and makes wars even today. These are the plain and visible members of the devil's church, and they are not to be counted among the outward [2541] church, yes, they are not even once worthy to be named in the church of Christ. Again, there are some kinds of hypocrites that are dissemblers, who neither give any confidence to their own righteousness and justice, nor yet greatly regard the traditions of men. These kinds of people neither hate the church, nor flee from it, nor persecute it; but outwardly they agree with it, professing the same faith, and participating in the same sacraments. But inwardly and in mind, they neither believe unfeignedly and sincerely, nor do they live holily. Some of this sort will cling to the fellowship and company of the church for a season; and having any occasion given to them, they will fall from it, as heretics and schismatics are prone to do; those who were friends, become enemies. There are still others who never fall from the church, but keep themselves in the fellowship of the church all their lifetime, outwardly pretending and feigning religion; but inwardly giving themselves up to their own errors, faults, and wickedness. For these, without a doubt, the outward behaviour and fellowship does not profit at all.

v.13

For we ought to live forever and participate in all heavenly gifts with those who desire them, to join in fellowship [2542] with the church of God — not only by outward and visible society, but by inward communion and fellowship, in which consists life and salvation. We will speak of this matter in a convenient place. Such hypocrites or dissemblers, hanging on the ecclesiastical body, are called members of the body, and are said to be of the church. So that it may be better understood by you all, we will set forth this matter by certain parables.

We say that the wicked or hypocrites are of a sort in the church, as chaff is in the corn; which indeed is of another nature, and is not corn at all. Therefore, just as the members of men's bodies may be either dry, or rotten, or feeble, these hypocrites, even though they have no society and take no part with the living members in the vital spirit, by coupling together and by tying certain strings, they cling fast to the living members. By this means, they too are called members and parts of the body. But lest [diseased limbs in a body] infect the others, men cut them off — though sometimes they leave them alone, lest by cutting them off, the life of the whole body be endangered. Even in the same way, we say that hypocrites are in the church of Christ, even though they are not united to the church either by the bond of the Spirit, or by faith and love. Nor are they to be taken as living members; yet they are allowed, lest some worse mischief happen to the whole body of the church; and often they are cut off, by which better health may come to the ecclesiastical body.

But let us hear what the evangelical and apostolic testimony says. The Lord says plainly in the gospel, that in the Lord's field tares [2543] grow up, sown by a wicked man; which the Lord forbids to be plucked up, lest the corn be plucked up with it.^{Mat 13.25} Behold, tares sown by an evil man (I say the devil himself) which is not corn; yet it increases, and it is in the Lord's field. Again, the Lord says in the gospel: "The kingdom of heaven is like a net, which, being cast into the sea, draws all manner of things with it; and when it is filled, it is brought to the shore; and there men sit, reserving what is good in a vessel, and what is evil they cast away."^{Mat 13.47-48}

v.14

Again, behold how you may see both good and bad drawn in the self-same net; and therefore, in the self-same kingdom, both good and evil are to be reckoned. Also in another parable, someone enters in among the guests, who does not have on his wedding-garment. He is allowed for a time, but at last he is cast out of doors by the lord of the feast. ^{Mat 22.1-13} In another place, it is said that he has a fan in his hand, and he cleanses the floor, and burns the chaff with unquenchable fire. ^{Mat 3.12} In his epistle to the Corinthians, St. Paul differentiates between the professed and open enemies of Christ's church, and the impure sort of men who as yet are not quite repugnant, nor adversaries of the church and the name of Christ.[2544] "If any man who is called a brother is a thief, or a whore-monger, or a covetous person, etc. see that you do not eat with such a man. For what is it to me to judge those who are outside? For God judges them." ^1Cor
5.12-13 Outside (that is to say, outside the bounds of the church) he places those who are not called brethren — namely, those who do not acknowledge the name of Christ or of the church. Inside, that is, inside the society of the church (the outward church), he counts those who yet acknowledge the name of Christians, and withstand ecclesiastical discipline, though in the meantime they are defiled and spotted with much mischief.[2545] St. John the apostle spoke plainly about all such men, saying: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have stayed with us." ^{1Joh 2.19} This seems to be a new kind of speech. For if those who go out of the church had not been in the society of the church, then how could they go out of the church? Can a man come out of a place, to which he never came, or in which he never was?

v.15

Therefore, if hypocrites and evil men have gone out of the church, then surely they were in the church at sometime; thus, when they had not yet gone out of it, they plainly showed what kind of Christians they were indeed. Again, because they went out of the church, they manifestly showed that they were never indeed the true and living members of Christ and the church; and yet for a while they were numbered among the members of the church. The apostle gives the reason: it is the disposition of Christ's true members never to forsake Christ and his church, but to continue and also to prosper and increase daily, more and more. The saints and holy men truly offend or fall [at times], but they do not utterly forsake Christ. David, having committed adultery and manslaughter, cries out, saying: "Make me a clean heart, Lord, and renew a right spirit within me. Do not cast me away from your presence, and do not take your Holy Spirit from me. O give me the comfort of your help again, and establish me with your free Spirit." [2546] St. Peter denies the Lord, and the weak flesh overcame a good spirit. But he repented immediately (the Lord stirring up his heart), and departing from evil company, he adjoins himself to the good fellowship of the Lord, who foretold him of this great fall, and added these words to it: "I prayed for you that your faith should not fail; and you, when you have turned back,[2547] confirm your brethren." ^{Luk 22.32} The same Peter, also in another place, what time many fell from Christ, being demanded whether he also provided to depart, answered: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the word of eternal life. And we believe and know, that you are Christ, the Son of the living God." ^{Joh 6.68-69} This is why St. John said very truly: "They went out from us, but they were not of us." He adds the reason: "If they had been of us, they would have stayed with us." Therefore, because they did not continue with us in the society of Christ and the church, they showed by their defection and falling away, which sort they were. We considered them to be members of the church, but by falling away, they declared that they were chaff in the Lord's corn.

v.16

For chaff, not being [2548] stirred or fanned, seems to be heavy with a grain of wheat in it, but once fanned, it appears empty and light, and is separated from the corn. So too, hypocrites, being light because of their defection,[2549] manifestly prove that they were never heavy with the seed of God's word, and that they were never of the true corn of Christ.

From this, a general and ancient [2550] opinion is gathered that all who are said to be the church, and who beautify themselves with the title of the church, are later found not to be the church. For St. John plainly adds: "But that it may be evident, that all are not of us." We read how St. Paul says to the Romans: "They are not all Israelites who came from Israel; nor are they all children directly, just because they are the seed of Abraham. But in Isaac your seed shall be called." ^Rom
9.6-7 Therefore, the faithful are the true and living members of Christ and of the saints. Meantime, so long as hypocrites or wicked persons (not yet putting off their visors [2551]) declare they are Christians by their sayings and doings, they may not lawfully be cut from the church. They do not yet break away of their own accord; they do not yet forsake Christ in the open field, and flee to the tents of antichrist or the devil. And so they are known and taken to be the true inhabitants of the church, and are called the church and the members of the church, even though God, who beholds the hearts of all men, well enough discerns them.[2552]

I will again make this matter plain by an example. As long as Judas, the betrayer of Christ and a manslayer, did not utter his crafty or rather most wicked device, either by open deed or word, and did not forsake the company of Christ and the apostles, but preached and provided necessary things for the household of Christ, he was accounted an apostle and the steward of Christ — yes, and as a member of the apostolic church.

v.17

Yet the self-same Judas was called a devil by the Lord; and when He spoke of the elect and of his true and living members, Judas was most plainly excluded. Yet there is no occasion to doubt that Judas was not a member of the inward and holy church of God, even though he was a member of the outward church, being counted in the number of the holy men. And therefore, those who said of God's church, that there is one visible and outward, and another invisible and inward, do not speak without great advice. The visible and outward church is that which is outwardly known by men as a church, by hearing God's word and partaking of his sacraments, and by the public confession of their faith. The invisible and inward church is so called, not because men are invisible, but because it is not to be seen with man's eye, and yet it appears before God's eyes, which member believes truly, and which feignedly. For the true believers are the true and living members of this inward church, which I previously called the militant church, more strictly considered. But the other visible church, comprehending both good and bad, is more largely considered.

Now, since we have said that the church militant on earth is marked by God with certain tokens and marks by which it may be known in this world, it next follows that we speak about those outward marks of the church of God. And there are two special and principal marks of it: the sincere preaching of the word of God, and the lawful partaking of the sacraments of Christ. Some would add to these the study of godliness and unity, patience in affliction, and calling on the name of God by Christ; but we include them in these two that we have set down.

Writing to the Ephesians, St. Paul says: "Christ gave himself for the congregation, that he might sanctify it, and cleanse it in the fountain of water, through the word." ^{Eph 5.25-26} We have in this testimony of the apostle, the marks of the church: namely, the word and the sacrament by which Christ makes himself a church. For with his grace he calls, and with his blood he purifies, what he shows [2553] by his word is to be received by faith. He seals them with sacraments, so that the faithful should not doubt anything touching their salvation obtained through Christ. And truly, these things properly belong to the faithful and holy members.

v.18

Though hypocrites are not purified, the fault lies in themselves, and not in God or his holy ministry. They are surely sanctified visibly, for which they are counted holy among men; and these things do improperly belong to them. St. Peter does not differ in this point one whit from St. Paul. When Peter preached the word of God to the people of Jerusalem, and they demanded what they should do, Peter answers: "Repent, and every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." ^{Act 2.38} St. Peter therefore joined baptism with doctrine, the sacrament with the word. He had learned this from our Saviour himself in the gospel written by St. Matthew, saying: "Teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." ^{Mat 28.19} Thus you read in the Acts no other mysteries about the word and sacraments of the church, than are recounted [2554] in these words: "They continued in the doctrine of the apostles, and in doing almsdeeds,[2555] and in breaking of bread, and prayer." ^{Act 2.42} Here you may see the supper of the Lord, another sacrament, adjoined to the sacrament of baptism — also, the desire for and study of unity and love, and calling upon the name of God.

Notwithstanding that these things are sufficiently plain and firm enough, I will add still other testimonies out of the holy scriptures. Concerning the token of God's word, or the preaching of his gospel, the Lord himself speaks by Isaiah the prophet, saying: "I will make this covenant with them, My Spirit that has come upon you (the church), and my words which I have put in your mouth, shall never go out of your mouth, nor out of the mouth of your children's children, says the Lord, from this time forth forevermore." ^{Isa 59.21} For also in the gospel, the Lord Jesus says: "He that is of God hears the word of God." ^{Joh 8.47} Again, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and I give to them everlasting life; and they shall not perish forever." ^{Joh 10.27-28} And again, "He that loves me will keep my commandments; he that does not love me will not keep my commandments." ^Joh
14.23-24

v.19

Again, "Whoever is of the truth, will hear my voice." ^{Joh 18.37} Now, touching the marks and tokens of the sacraments, St. Paul says about holy baptism: "Through one Spirit we are all baptized in one body." ^{1Cor 12.13} And also, speaking of the Lord's Supper, he says: "Though we are many, yet we are one bread and one body; for we are all partakers of the same bread. Is not the cup of blessing which we bless, partaking of the blood of Christ?" ^{1Cor 10.16-17} It is most certain therefore (for it is approved by testimonies from the holy scriptures), that the outward marks and tokens of the church are the word and the sacrament. For these bring us into the society of one ecclesiastical body, and they keep us in it.

All these testimonies properly (as I said a little earlier) belong to the elect members of God, being endued with faith and true obedience. But they do not belong to the hypocrites at all, who are devoid of faith and due obedience. Notwithstanding, because they also hear the voice of the shepherd outwardly, and they pursue virtue, and they are openly or outwardly annexed to the elect and true believers in partaking of the sacraments, they are indeed annexed to the true body of Christ. For the sake of those outward signs, they are considered to be in the church, so long as they do not depart from it. In this point, for perspicuity's sake, having treated the marks of the church, we must add this to it: that by common order, these marks declare and denote the members of the church. For there are certain special members who, although they lack these marks, yet they are not excluded from the society and communion of the true church of Christ. For it is most evident that there are many in the world who do not hear the ordinary preaching of God's word, nor do they come into the congregation and the company of those who call upon God, nor receive the sacraments. It is not that they despise them, or that it is a delight to them to be apart from sermons and the preaching of God's word; but through necessity, such as imprisonment, sickness, or being constrained by some other urgent cause,[2556] they cannot attain what they earnestly desire. And yet, despite all that, they are the true and living members of Christ and of the catholic church.

v.20

In times past, the Lord instituted or appointed to the people of Israel a visible church, which he established by a certain law, and set it forth by visible signs. If any man had despised this church, or refused, when he might, to hear the doctrine of the church, and to enter in among the holy company, and to sacrifice — or else, if he had railed against it; or instead of the order of worshipping God that was appointed, he had embraced any other kind of order — then truly, he was not at all considered to be of the order and number of the people of God. And yet it is certain that there were an innumerable company of men dispersed throughout the whole world among the gentiles, who never did, nor could, communicate with this visible company and congregation of God's people; and yet, notwithstanding they were holy members of this society and communion, and the friends of almighty God. There were a great many of the children of God, along with Jehoiakim and Coniah, [2557] who were taken prisoners by Nebuchadnezzar and brought captive into Babylon. This was no prejudice to them, nor did these things hurt those who were separated from the people of God, from the church, and from worshipping God, which was then being visibly upheld by Zedekiah at Jerusalem. Indeed, it little availed a great many, to be in the visible assemblies and congregations with the people of God in God's temple, when their minds and hearts were not sound and perfect.

We may today find a great many of the faithful dispersed on the seas, condemned to the galleys for their confession of the true faith.[2558] We may find many who are held in captivity under antichrist, which we will speak about in the next sermon. We may also find a surprising number in Grascia, Natolia, Persia, Arabia, or in Africa — servants of Jesus Christ and worthy members of the catholic church of Christ — who are being excluded and barred from the holy mysteries of the Christians, through the impiety and cruelty of Mahomet.

v.21

Nevertheless, we will find them most nearly joined together in one spirit and one faith with all the true members of the church, and also marked [2559] with the visible signs. Therefore, the word and the sacraments, by common decree, are the marks of the church — not separating or distinguishing the faithful from the communion and society of other believers who, by some necessity, are being shut out from the visible company of the faithful.[2560]

But to perfectly understand the marks of the church, this too (and most principally) applies: that it is not enough to brag about the word of God, or the scripture, unless we also embrace, retain, and determine the true sense of it, and what agrees with the articles of faith. For if we corrupt the sense of the scripture, and urge it in the church, then you do not bring forth the sincere scripture itself, but your own opinion and fancies which you have devised from your own mind. The church of the Arians did not refuse the word of the Lord, but rather laboured to beautify and defend their own blasphemous errors with the testimonies of holy scripture. That church denied that our Lord Jesus Christ is of one substance with God the Father, saying that the sense of the scriptures, and of the ancient [2561] faith, both affirm and urge this heresy among the principal points of our faith. Truly, that church did not allege the sincere and pure word of God (however it may have boasted of it), but an adulterated word was substituted for the true and perfect meaning of the holy scripture, to defend its heretical opinion. And therefore, it did not have the true mark of the church, nor was it the true church of God. We may judge all other churches of heretics by this one unhappy example. Though seemingly they are not devoid of the testimony of God's word, yet for all that, they indeed have no purity of God's word in them.

What we said concerning the word of God, is also necessarily to be understood about the use of the sacraments: For unless they are used in an orderly and lawful fashion — in that order in which the Lord himself instituted them, they are not marks or signs of the church of God.

v.22

Jeroboam truly sacrificed, yes, he sacrificed to God; but because he did not sacrifice lawfully, he was accounted a stranger, and fallen from the true church of God. Indeed, David himself brought the ark of the Lord of hosts with great devotion, and with much joy and melody. But because he did not carry it lawfully on the shoulders of the priests, instead of great joy, the exceeding sorrow which followed later, declared that it is not enough to use the sacraments and ordinances of God, unless you use them lawfully. If you do this, God will acknowledge you as his. Moreover, those of old, who were baptized by heretics, were not for that reason baptized again by the ancient catholics. This was because the heretics did not baptize into the name of any man, or into the society of their errors [2562] or heresies, but they baptized "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost." Nor did they invoke their own name, or the name of arch-heretics, but of Jesus Christ. Therefore, it was not the baptism of heretics, but the baptism of the church, though ministered by heretics. Though not refusing it, they did not allow the churches of heretics to be known as true, by true signs. Yet they acknowledged that heretics used things properly belonging to the true church. Nor does it at all derogate, or take away from a good thing, if any wicked or evil man administers it. We do not acknowledge today the upstart Romish church of the pope as the true church of Christ (we do not speak of that old apostolic church). Yet we do not rebaptize those who were baptized by the priests imbrued [2563] with popish corruption. For we know that they are baptized with the baptism of Christ's church, and not of the pope, in the name of the holy Trinity, according to the articles of the catholic faith, not according to errors, superstitions, and papistic impieties. Finally, we confess that today, the unworthiness of the minister cannot derogate anything from the service of God. In the same way, we also do not refuse the Lord's prayer, or the Apostles' Creed, or the canonical scriptures themselves, just because the Romish church also uses them. For she does not have them of herself, but she received them from the true church of God.

v.23

This is why we use them in common with her; it is not for the Romish church's sake, but because they came from the true church of Christ.

Beside those outward marks of the church which the true believers have common with hypocrites, there are certain inward marks that specially belong only to the godly; or if you prefer, call them bonds or proper gifts. These make the outward marks fruitful; and even without the outward marks (which may be absent by some necessity), they make men worthy or acceptable in the sight of God. For without these inward marks, no one can please God. In these, therefore, is found the true mark of God's children. And those are the fellowship of God's Spirit, a sincere faith, and double charity.[2564] For by these the faithful, being the true and living members of Christ, are united and knit together, first to their head Christ, then to all the members of the ecclesiastical body. And the consideration of this chiefly belongs to the knowledge of the true church of God, which even though she suffers rotten members, yet she is not defiled by them through their outward conjunction; for with continual study, she labours by all means to keep herself undefiled to God.

And first of all, the evangelical and apostolic doctrine teaches us that Christ is joined to us by his Spirit, and that we are tied to him in mind or spirit by faith, that he may live in us and we in him. For the Lord cries out in the gospel, saying: "If any man thirsts, let him come to me and drink. He that believes in me, as the scripture says, 'shall have streams of living water flowing out of his belly.''' ^{Joh 7.37-38} To this saying, the evangelist then adds this: "But this he spoke concerning the Spirit, which those who believed in him would receive." ^{Joh 7.39} Again in his gospel, promising his Spirit to his disciples, yes, even to all his faithful who would abide with them forever, he says: "In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you;" ^{Joh 14.20} namely, by the Holy Ghost. John the apostle, expounding it, says, "By this we know that he dwells in us, by the Spirit that he gave to us;" ^1Joh
3.24 and again: "By this we know that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he has given of his Spirit to us." ^{1Joh 4.13}

v.24

St. Paul, the vessel of election, does not differ from St. John, writing and saying to the Romans: "If any man does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His."^{Rom 8.9} And "whoever are led by the Spirit of God, they are the children of God." ^{Rom 8.14} Now, touching true faith, which ties us to the Lord, St. Paul says: "I live now; yet not I, but Christ lives in me. But the life which I now live in the flesh, I yet live through the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." ^{Gal 2.20} And again he says: "Christ dwells in our hearts through faith." ^{Eph 3.17} St. John the apostle says, again agreeing with these statements: "Whoever confesses that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, God dwells in him, and he in God." ^1Joh
4.15 For the Lord himself, before that, said in the gospel: "He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in him." ^Joh
6.56 And whoever believes, eats Christ's flesh and drinks Christ's blood. Therefore, Christ our Lord is joined to us in spirit, and we are tied to him in mind and faith, like the body to the head. Therefore, those who lack this knot and bond, that is, who do not have the Spirit of Christ, nor true faith in Christ, are not the true and living members of Christ; the Lord himself witnessing to this in the gospel, says: "If a man does not abide not in me, he is cast out as a branch and withers; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they burn." ^{Joh 15.6} The apostle, imitating these words of our Saviour (as we just said) said: "He that has not the Spirit of Christ is none of his."^{Rom 8.9} But those who are not destitute of the Spirit of Christ, are inflamed with the love of God. Nor do we separate love from faith — the same St. John, so teaching us, says: "God is love; and he that dwells in love dwells in God, and God in him. For the Lord says in the gospel: "If a man loves me, he will keep my word; and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will dwell with him." ^1Joh
4.16

But although, properly speaking, faith joins us to our head Christ, yet the same faith also knits us to all Christ's members on earth. For though there is but one faith for them all, and therefore the same Spirit, there cannot help but be the same mouth, the same mind, and the same statements among them all. Although faith, now, is not understood only as a confidence in the mercy of God through Jesus Christ, but also as an outward confession of faith.

v.25

For by confessing one faith, and one and the self-same head, with one spirit and mouth, we profess together that we are all members of one and the self-same body. Nor is there anything else in the world that more unappeasably dissevers the minds of men, than the differences of faith or religion. And therefore, there is nothing that may more nearly join us together, than unity of faith.

We now come to speak of love, which I said joins together the members of the ecclesiastical body mutually among themselves. The Lord says in the gospel: "A new commandment give I to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men shall know that you are my disciples, if you have love one to another." ^Joh
13.34-35 It is therefore beyond doubt that next after faith, the only mark of the church is love, a bond most firmly knitting together all the members. This grows from the communion of Christ and unity of the Spirit. For insomuch as Christ is the king, the head and high bishop, of the catholic church, enduing us all with one and the same Spirit, he has made us all his members. We are the sons of God, brethren and fellow-heirs, whom he undoubtedly loves tenderly. Every faithful man cannot choose but to embrace with fervent love, the members and fellow-heirs of their king, their head, and their high bishop. For John the apostle says: "Every one who loves him who begot, also loves him who is born of him." ^{1Joh 5.1} "If any man says, I love God, and hates his brother, he is a liar: for how can he that does not love his brother whom he has seen, love God whom he has not seen?" ^1Joh
4.20 To the end that he might properly express this unity and agreement of the members before our eyes as it were, that we might view and behold it, Paul uses a parable taken from the members of a man's body. He says: "For just as we have many members in one body, and all the members do not have one function; so being many, we are one body in Christ, and every one, one another's members." ^{Rom 12.4-5} He speaks more largely and plainly in the twelfth chapter of first Corinthians, expounding the joining together of the heads and members, chiefly by the metaphor of the members of a man's body, publishing it very eloquently. He witnesses that, between the highest members of the church and the lowest members of the church, there is a very great and apt consent; and moreover, there is a diligent care and help that is both continual and most faithful.

v.26

From all of this, it appears that the marks of the true and living church of Christ are the communion of the Spirit of Christ, sincere faith, and Christian charity; without these things, no man is partaker of this spiritual body. By these things it will also be easy to judge whether you are in the fellowship of the church, or not.

Moreover, out of those things which we have argued up to here touching the marks of Christ's church, we gather her origin, and also how the church is planted, spread abroad, and preserved. Her origin is heavenly; for St. Paul, speaking of the church, says: "Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all." ^{Gal 4.26} Therefore, he calls the church heavenly, not that it dwells altogether in heaven, but that, being here on earth, she has a heavenly beginning. For the children of God are not born of flesh and blood, but from heaven, by the renewing of the Holy Spirit, who through the preaching of God's word, plants faith in our hearts; by this faith we are made the true members of Christ and his church. For Peter says: "You are born anew, not of mortal seed, but of immortal, by the word of God, which lives and lasts forever." ^{1Pet 1.23} And Paul says: "I begat you in Christ Jesus through the gospel." ^1Cor
4.15 And the same apostle says in an-other place: "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing comes by the word of God." ^{Rom 10.17}

Since therefore faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, and that specially by the word of God, the church truly can by no means spring or be built by the decrees and doctrines of men. Therefore, we affirm that only the word of God is apt for building up the church of God. Men's doctrines set up men's churches, but Christ's word builds the Christian church. For the doctrines of men proceed from flesh and blood. But Peter, confessing Christ with a pure faith, and therefore grounded upon Christ who is the foundation of the church, heard these words of Christ himself: "Flesh and blood has not revealed these things to you, but my Father who is in heaven." ^{Mat 16.17} And therefore Paul says: "When it pleased God that I should preach his Son among the gentiles, I did not confer about the matter with flesh and blood," etc. ^{Gal 1.16}

v.27

Also, most manifestly abolishing all doctrines of men from setting up and building faith and the church, and commending only the word of God, he says to the Corinthians: "My words and preaching did not stand in the enticing speech of man's wisdom, but in plain evidence of the Spirit, and of power;[2565] so that your faith would not be in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." ^{1Cor 2.4-5} To this now pertains these testimonies of Christ. "He that is of God hears God's word." ^{Joh 8.47} Again, "He that is of the truth will hear my voice." ^{Joh 18.37} And again, more plainly he says, "The sheep will follow the shepherd, because they know his voice. They will not follow a stranger, but will run away from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers." ^{Joh 10.4-5} But under the voice of strangers, we include all traditions and decrees of men differing from the doctrine of Christ. The apostle St. Paul attributes the shape of wisdom to these traditions, but the truth he denies them, and calls them superstitious. For our Lord himself in the gospel brings forth from the prophet Isaiah that immutable saying: "They worship me in vain, teaching for doctrines men's precepts." ^{Mat 15.9} Let us therefore hold that the true church is not built by man's decrees, but that she is founded, planted, gathered together, and built only by the word of Christ.

We add that it is beyond doubt that the church of God is preserved by the same word of God, lest at any time it be seduced, or slip and perish; and that it cannot at any time be preserved by any other means. Paul, again witnessing, says:

"Christ has given some to be apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, for the gathering together of the saints, for the work of the ministry (that is to say, to teach and preach the word), and for the edification of the body of Christ; till we all fit together in the unity of faith, and knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, and to the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ; that we no longer be children, wavering and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the deceit of men (mark, I beg, how men's doctrines are condemned again with great and inviolable authority), and with craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive.

v.23

But let us follow the truth in love, and in all things grow up into him who is the head, who is Christ; by whom the whole body, being coupled and knit together by every joint, for the equipping of it (according to the effectual power which is in the measure of every part), receives the increase of the body to edifying itself in love (increases the body to edifying itself through love.)" ^{Eph 4.11-16}

These words of the apostle are so plain, that they need no better exposition than they have of themselves.

In this place also, the order and manner of the church by the preaching of God's word, should of right be set down, which many term and call "the ministry of the word," or of the church. But we will speak of that (God willing) in the third sermon. It will be sufficient here, to defend that our Lord God, having given doctors (teachers) to the church, founds, builds, maintains, and enlarges the church by his word — indeed, by his word only.

Two things now come to be considered.

First, the church of God, for the continual and constant study of the word of God, is called prophetic and apostolic, yes, and also orthodox. For it is called prophetic or apostolic, because it was first built by the travail of the prophets and apostles, and it is preserved by their doctrine even at this time, and shall be spread abroad by it, even to the end of the world. It is called orthodox, because it is sound of judgment, opinion, and faith. For without the church, there is no true faith, nor any perfect doctrine touching true virtue and felicity. The faith and doctrine of the church was revealed from God himself [2566] by Adam and the patriarchs, by Moses and the prophets, and by Christ and the apostles. For this reason, she is elsewhere called a mother, which we will speak of in the next sermon.

v.29

Secondly, the succession of doctors or pastors of the church proves nothing by itself, without the word of God. The champions and defenders of the papistic church boast that they have a most certain mark of the apostolic church, namely, in the continual succession of bishops coming from St. Peter by Clement the first, and so to Clement the seventh, and to Paul the third who died recently, and so continuing to Julius the third, not long ago created.[2567] Moreover, they add that all those members are cut off, who separate themselves from that church in which only that apostolic succession is found. And we do not deny that the right succession of pastors in the primitive church was of great weight. For those who were then called pastors, were pastors indeed, and they executed the office of pastors. But what manner of pastors they have been for a great many years — the parade of cardinals, mitred bishops, and sophisters that have been called pastors [2568] — none is ignorant, except those who are altogether without any understanding.

The prophet Zechariah heard these words spoken to him from the Lord: "Take for yourself the instruments of a foolish shepherd; for look, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, who will not look for the thing that is lost, nor seek the tender lambs, nor heal what is hurt, nor feed what stands up: but he will eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their hoofs in pieces. Woe to the idle [2569] shepherd, who forsakes the flock," etc. ^{Zec 11.15-17} Therefore, these men who do not teach the word of God sincerely, nor execute the office and duty of pastors, prove nothing more by their continual succession of bishops, than if they were to set a company of idols before the eyes of the world. For who dares to deny that a great part, yes, the most part of the bishops of Rome, since Gregory the Great, were such idols, and such wolves and devourers, as those described by the prophet Zechariah? What then, I ask you, can the continual succession of such false pastors prove? Yes, and those of recent times, did they not fill almost the universal church with the traditions of men, and partly oppress the word of God, and partly persecute it? [2570]

v.30

In the ancient church of the Israelites there was a continual order of succession of bishops, [2571] without any interruption of it, even from Aaron to Uriah [2572] who lived under Ahaz, and to other wicked bishops also falling from the word of God to the traditions of men, yes, and also idolatry. But for all that, this succession did not prove the idolatrous bishops, with the church that clung to them, to be the true bishops of God, and the true church of God. Truly, the true prophets of God, the sound and catholic fathers, preaching only the word of God without men's traditions, yes, clean against all traditions, were not able to reckon up any continual succession of their predecessor priests to whom they themselves should succeed. And yet, notwithstanding, they were most excellent lights, and worthy members of the church of God; and those who believed their doctrine were neither schismatics nor heretics, but even to this day are acknowledged to be the true church of Christ. When Christ our Lord, the blessed Son of God, taught here on earth, and gathered together his church, the succession of bishops was on his adversaries' part. But they were not, for that reason, rulers of the true church of God, and Christ of the heretical church. The apostles of our Lord could not allege for themselves and their doctrine an uninterrupted succession of bishops. For they were ordained by the Lord, who was himself called by God the High Priest forever, according to the new order of Melchizedek, ^{Heb 5.10}outside the succession of the order of Levi. ^{Heb 7.11} And yet the church that was gathered by them is acknowledged by all men to be the true and holy church. The apostles themselves would have no others accounted as their true fellows and successors, except those who walked upright in the doctrine and way of Christ; for notable and manifest is this saying of Paul: "Be the followers of me, even as I am of Christ." ^{1Cor 11.1} And though he speaks these words to all the faithful, and not only to the ministers of God's word, yet those he would chiefly have follow him, were the remainder of common Christians; that is to say, every man in his vocation and calling.

v.31

The same apostle, speaking at Miletum with the bishops of Asia, says among other things: "I know this, that after my departing, grievous wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Moreover, men will arise from among yourselves, speaking perverse things, to draw disciples after themselves." ^{Act 20.29-30} Paul the apostle fetches the wolves and devourers of the church, from no other place than the apostolic church itself — yes, out of the company or assembly of apostolic bishops and pastors. But could not these (do you think) allege the apostolic succession for themselves and for their most corrupt cause; that is, that they are descended from apostolic pastors? But because they have forsaken the truth, and fallen from the faith and doctrine of the apostles, the offspring and apostolic succession does nothing at all to help their case. Therefore, we conclude that the continual succession of bishops, by itself, proves nothing; rather, that which lacks the purity of the doctrine of the scriptures and of the apostles, is no lawful succession.

And therefore Tertullian, though greatly esteeming (worthily) the continual succession of pastors in the church, still requires them to be approved by the sincerity of their apostolic doctrine. And so he acknowledged that those churches which are instructed with pure doctrine, and yet have no succession of bishops, are apostolic churches. If any man requires the words of the author, they are these:

"But if there are any churches that dare presume to plant themselves in the very age of the apostles, so that they may therefore seem to have been planted by the apostles, because they were under the apostles, we may say this: Let them present the first beginning of their churches; let them turn over the order of succession of their bishops, so that by successions from the beginning, their first bishop is found to have had for his author and predecessor, one of the apostles and apostolic sort of men, and continued with the apostles. For by this means, the apostolic churches give their judgment: for example, the church of Smyrna testifies that they had Polycarp placed there by St. John; and the church of Rome shows that Clemens was appointed by St. Peter; and in like manner, others show for themselves, that they are offspring of apostolic seed, placed in their bishoprics by the apostles. Let heretics feign some such thing. For after their blasphemies, what is unlawful for them? But even if they do feign it, they shall not prevail.

v.32

For their own doctrine being compared with the doctrine of the apostles, the diversity and contrariety of it will show that it had neither apostle nor apostolic man for the author; because, as the apostles taught nothing that was contrary among themselves, even so, apostolic men set forth nothing contrary to the apostles. Only those who fell away from the apostles, taught other doctrine." [2573]

Therefore, those churches may appeal in this manner, which even though they can present as their founder, none of the apostles or apostolic men (as those of a far later time are only now being erected daily) — yet, agreeing in one faith, they are nevertheless counted apostolic, for the likeness of their doctrine.

The self-same author, speaking of the ancient church of church of Rome, and gathering the sum of what it either taught or learned, said:

"Happy is that church to which the apostles have uttered all their doctrine with their blood: where Peter in suffering is made like the Lord; where Paul is crowned with the same end that John had; where the apostle John, after he was plunged in hot scalding oil, felt no pain, and was banished to the isle. Let us see what it learned, and what it taught, and how it agrees with the churches of Africa. It acknowledged one God, the maker of all things, and Jesus Christ the Son of God, the creator, born of the virgin Mary; and the resurrection of the flesh.

v.33

It joins the law and the prophets with the doctrine of the evangelists and apostles, and drinks from them that faith; baptizes with water, clothes with the Holy Ghost, feeds with the Lord's Supper, exhorts with martyrdom; and contrary to this institution, it receives no man. This is the institution." [2574] Thus far Tertullian in his book entitled, Of the Prescription of Heretics.

The last thing that is to be noted is this: that the Lord God, not only of old and up to this time, but also in these days, gives doctors and pastors to the church: doctors, I say, and not leaders [2575] and captains of hosts and armies of men,[2576] not princes, not soldiers, not crafty men, using deceitful means which in these days they call "practices." For by no other means or manner, nor by any other instrument than by the doctrine of truth and sound and simple godliness,[2577] is that holy and catholic church of God built up, fenced, and preserved. At the beginning, simple men and Christ's apostles laid the foundation of it by preaching the gospel. Paul therefore removes all worldly wisdom, and says: "I was among you, Corinths, in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling; nor did my word and my preaching stand in the enticing speech of man's wisdom, but in plain evidence of the Spirit and of power; that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." ^1Cor
2.3-5

v.34

The same apostle also banishes all crafty counsel with all sorts of deceit. When writing to the Thessalonians, he says: "Our exhortation was not by deceit, nor by uncleanness, nor by guile. But as we were allowed by God, that the gospel should be committed to us, even so we speak — not as those who please men, but God, who tries our hearts. Nor did we ever use flattering words, as you know; nor coloured covetousness, as God is our record; neither did we seek the praise of men," etc. ^{1Thes 2.3-6} Therefore, he is greatly deceived and mad, who thinks the church can either be gathered together, or once gathered, can be maintained and preserved with such practices, that is to say, with crafty counsels and subtle deceits of men. It is truly said among the common people, that "those things are overthrown by man's wisdom, which were first built by man's wisdom." Besides this, the Lord himself removes force and arms from the building of the church, since he forbids his disciples the use of the sword. And to Peter, ready to fight, he says, "Put your sword into the scabbard." Nor do we ever read that any were sent by the Lord as soldiers, who would bring the world in subjection with armed force; but rather the scripture witnesses that the great enemy of God, Antichrist, will be destroyed with the breath of God's mouth.

Therefore, there is no doubt that all those things which are read in various places of the prophets, and chiefly in the twelfth chapter of Zechariah, concerning wars that are to be made against all nations by the apostles and apostolic men, ought to be figuratively expounded. For the apostles, according to their manner, fight as apostles — not with the spear, sword, and bow of carnal warfare, but spiritually. The apostolic sword is the word of God. Yet in the mean time, no man denies that the weapons of carnal or corporal warfare have been profitable sometimes to apostolic men and to the church, and they do good even today. No man denies that God often uses the help of soldiers and magistrates in defending the church against the wicked, and tyrants. Indeed, all men will rather confess that a good and godly magistrate owes a duty toward the church of God. For it is not without great cause that the worthy prophet of God, Isaiah, calls "kings nursing fathers, and queens nursing mothers." ^{Isa 49.23}

v.35

Paul, being oppressed by the Jews in the temple of Jerusalem for preaching the gospel among the gentiles, is taken away and rescued by the army of Claudius Lysias, the Roman tribune. And not long after, no small company of soldiers was sent with the apostle by the same tribune, namely, a troop of horsemen and certain companies of footmen, by whom he was brought safely to Antipatris and Caesarea, before Felix the proconsul of Judea. This is remembered at large by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles, not rashly, and with great diligence. ^{Act 23.15f} The ecclesiastical history recites many examples of holy princes who have defended and succoured the church. But I have treated these things in some manner in another place, in the seventh and eighth sermons (as I remember) of the Second Decade. And we have spoken this far about the origin of the church of God, and of its increase and preservation.

It seems to me that the famous question, whether the church of God may err, may not unfitly be handled or briefly expounded at this point. So that it may more plainly be understood, I will briefly discuss the parts of this question. I have taught that the catholic church of God comprehends, first, the blessed spirits in heaven, and then all faithful Christians here on earth. I said that the wicked, or hypocrites, clung to them, feigning faith for a season. Now therefore, if we understand the church to be the blessed spirits in heaven, the church can never err. But if we understand that the wicked or hypocrites are joined and mingled with the good, and the wicked alone by themselves can do nothing else but err, then as they are joined to the good and faithful, and follow them, they either err, or do not err. For the church of the good and faithful here on earth errs, and does not err. We will declare this once we have weighed the diversities of errors, and gathered the number of them together in a whole bundle. Some errors are about doctrine and faith, and some are about life and manners: and what manner either one of them are, I think no man knows. Let us see then, whether the church of the faithful on earth errs or not; and if it errs, in what point or how far it errs. Concerning the manners and life of the church, it cannot wholly and clearly acquit itself from errors; that is to say, from sin.

v.36

For so long as it is living here on earth, it always prays heartily: "And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." And for his mercy's sake, God always purges all dregs and infirmities in his saints, as long as they live in this world, continually renewing and refining the elect. I am not ignorant what may hinder you, faithful hearer. If the church (you say) is not holy and pure, then how can the apostle call it holy, without spot and wrinkle? ^{Eph 5.27}I answer, If you acknowledge no church on earth except that which is altogether without blemish, you will be forced to acknowledge none at all. For there will never be any such church remaining on earth, where the most righteous God, as the scripture witnesses, "has shut up all things under sin, that he might have mercy on all men." ^{Gal 3.22} St. Paul therefore calls the church pure, without spot or wrinkle, through the benefit of Christ's sanctification. It is not that by herself, while she is in the flesh, the church is without spot; but that those spots, indeed otherwise clinging to her through the innocence of Christ, are not imputed to those who embrace Christ by faith. Finally, because the self-same church will be without spot or wrinkle in the world to come. For having put off the flesh and cast off all miseries, it will at length be brought to pass that she will lack nothing. Besides this, it is said that the church is without spot because of the continual study of the church, by which she labours and travails by all means, so that as far as possible, she may have as few spots as possible. And by that means, and chiefly by the benefit of imputation, the church does not err, but is most pure and without sin.[2578]

Moreover, as touching doctrine and faith the church of Christ does not err. For it hears the voice of the shepherd only, but the voice of strangers she knows not: for she follows her only shepherd Christ, saying: "I am the light of the world: he that follows me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." Paul also says to Timothy: "These things I have written to you up to here, that you may know how you ought to behave yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth." ^{1Tim 3.14-15}

v.37

But the church is the pillar and ground of truth for being established on the foundation of the prophets and apostles, Christ himself. He is the everlasting truth of God and the only strength of the church. She receives this by fellowship which she has with him, so that she also might be the pillar and foundation of the truth. For the truth of God is in the church; and through the ministry of the church, that truth is spread abroad. And being assaulted and warred against by the enemies, but abiding sure, she is not overcome. So far as being made one body with Christ, she perseveres in the fellowship of Christ, without whom she can do nothing. Again, the same church errs in doctrine and faith as often as, turning from Christ and his word, she goes after men and the councils and decrees of the flesh; for she then forsakes the word of God and Christ, which is what stayed her up to here, so that she did not err. I think no man would deny that the great congregation of the people of Israel in the desert, was an excellent church of God, with which the Lord made a covenant, and to which He bound himself by sacraments and ordinances. And yet, how shamefully she erred while neglecting God's word. No man is ignorant that Aaron, the high priest of religion, not constantly and earnestly resisting, she made a molten calf, and worshipped it as a god.

Here, surely, it will also be necessary to look more diligently into, and mark the whole number of the church. For because many in the church err, it follows that no church is free from error. For in the church of Israel, the Lord reserved for himself a remnant who never worshipped the calf (I mean Moses, Joshua, and undoubtedly many more), both in that congregation and outside. Thus, there is no doubt that, even though many err in the church, the Lord preserves a certain number for himself through his mercy, who both rightly understand, and by whose faithful diligence, errors are destroyed — and the wandering flock of the Lord is brought back again into the holy fold.

v.38

The church is therefore said to err when a part of it errs, having lost God's word. And it does not err wholly and altogether, in as much as certain remnants (through the grace of God) are reserved, by whom the truth may again flourish, and again be spread abroad in every place. St. Paul called the churches of the Corinthians and Galatians "the holy churches of God." Yet they erred greatly in doctrine, faith, and practices. And yet, who doubts that there were many among them who were most sincere followers of the pure doctrine preached by St. Paul? That holy church erred, therefore, so far as it did not continue steadfastly in true doctrine. And it did not err, so far as it did not depart from the truth delivered by the apostles. From this it plainly appears to the whole world, that they are most vain liars who commend to us churches that are not built on the foundation of the prophets and apostles, but on the decrees of men. And they are not ashamed to commend these churches to us as most true churches which cannot err. Paul [2579] cries out: "Only God is true, and every man a liar." [2580] Jeremiah also cries: "They have rejected the word of the Lord, and what wisdom is in them?" ^{Jer 8.9} Therefore, such churches err, nor are they the true churches of God. The true church grounds itself upon Christ Jesus, and is governed by his word alone.

Similar to this treatise about the word of God — which is the only rule by which all things are done in the church — is the disputation about the power of the church of God on earth, and about its studies, which also are directed according to the word of God. But before I present my judgment, that is to say, the judgment delivered by the scriptures, I will briefly repeat the sum of those things which the papists have left in writing concerning this matter, and which they undoubtedly maintain as sound doctrine. John Gerson (who is not much amiss, unless he has an evil interpreter) has defined ecclesiastical authority to be "a power supernaturally and spiritually given by the Lord to his disciples and to their lawful successors, to the end of the world, for the edification of the church militant according to the laws of the gospel, for obtaining eternal felicity." [2581]

v.39

But cardinal Peter de Aliaco says that this authority is six-fold: namely, consecration; administering the sacraments; appointing ministers of the church; preaching; judicial correction; and receiving things necessary to this life. [2582]

They call the power of consecration, that by which a priest, being rightly ordered, may consecrate the body and blood of Christ on the altar. This power, they say, was given to the disciples of the Lord by these words: "Do this in remembrance of me." But the priests these days, think it is given by the bishop in giving the chalice with the bread, and saying: "Receive power to offer up and consecrate Christ's body, both for the quick and the dead." Moreover, they call it the power of orders, and say it is a mark or character that cannot be wiped out. The power of administering the sacraments, and chiefly the sacrament of penance, they call the power of the keys. They make out the keys to be of two sorts: the keys of knowledge — that is to say, the authority of knowledge in the cause of a sinner making his confession — and the keys of giving sentence and judgment, of opening and shutting heaven, or forgiving or retaining sins. They say that this power was promised to Peter in Matthew, where the Lord says, "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven." ^Mat
16.19 But in John, that was given to all the disciples, Christ saying, "Whoever's sins you forgive, they are forgiven them." ^{Joh 20.23} These days it is given to the priests by the bishops, in their consecration, laying their hands on the priests at giving them their holy orders. [2583] They say, "Receive the Holy Ghost; whoever's sins you forgive, they are forgiven them." They call the power of placing ministers of the church ecclesiastical jurisdiction, consisting in a certain prelacy; and the fulness of it rests only in the pope, having respect to the whole universal church.

v.40

For it belongs only to the pope to appoint rulers and prelates in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, because it was said to him, "Feed my sheep." Moreover, they say, all ecclesiastical jurisdiction comes from the pope to the inferior rulers, either mediately or immediately. [2584] Authority in these things is at the pleasure of the one who has the fulness of power; for a bishop has authority only in his diocese, and a curate only in his parish, etc. Power of apostleship or preaching the word of God, they call the authority of preaching, which the Lord had given to his disciples, saying: "Go into the whole world, preaching the gospel to all creatures." But doctors these days affirm that none should be sent to preach except by Peter, that is, by his successor, mediately or immediately, etc. They say that the power of judicial correction was given to Peter by God, to whom he said, "If your brother offends or trespasses against you," etc. for the words of the Lord are known well enough in St. Matthew, chap. 18.15-17. Thus, they say, God gave authority to priests not only to excommunicate, but also to determine, judge, and establish commandments, laws, and canons; because it is said in that passage, "Whatever you bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven." ^Mat
18.18

To conclude; they say that the power and authority to receive things necessary for this life, in reward for their spiritual labours, was given by these words of the Lord: "Eating and drinking whatever they have." ^{Luk 10.7}

These men teach these things concerning ecclesiastical power, not only foolishly, but also falsely. We have often said in other places, how vain and foolish the power of consecration and sacrificing is; [2585] and perhaps we will say more (if God grants life) in a convenient place and time. We will dispute about the power of the keys (God willing) at the end of the next sermon; and we brought something about it to bear when we disputed about penance and auricular confession.[2586] But these are foolish and shameless trifles which they babble of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, of the fulness of the high power — that is to say, the power of the bishop of Rome. I do not doubt these were known well enough to the whole world, long ago.

v.41

And some arguments about that matter will follow afterwards in our sermons, to confute it. Though they usurp for themselves the office of teaching, and cry that no man can lawfully preach except those who are ordained by them, they thereby seek the overthrow of God's word, and the defence and assertion of their own errors. This will also be treated in its due place. They have so filthily and shamefully abused the power of excommunicating, that the church (through their negligence and wicked presumption) has not only lost true discipline, but excommunication itself has been for a great many years, nothing else than fire and sword with the bishops of Rome — with which they widely raged against the true professors of God's word, and persecuted the innocent worshippers of Christ. Moreover, we will show in a convenient place, that there is no power given by God to the ministers of the church, to make new laws. The authority and power to receive things with which to live, they have executed to the uttermost: but in recompense for their temporal harvest, they have not sown spiritual things. Rather, being asleep, they have allowed our enemy to sow tares in the Lord's field, and that was not by any other means than their own. For not being contented with things that are necessary for this life, have they not under that colour, subtly invaded kingdoms, and most shamefully and cruelly possessed them? Therefore, if someone does not see that the ecclesiastical authority, as affirmed and put into practice by these men, is but a mere tyranny over simple souls, it is plain that he sees nothing at all.

We will now join to this a true, simple, plain, and manifest doctrine concerning ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Power is defined to be a right which men have to do something. It is called in Greek 'Exousia (Exousia), and Dunamis (Dunamis): of which the first word signifies right and power; and the second signifies the ability to execute that power or authority. For it often comes to pass that a man has the authority to do a thing, but he is destitute of the ability to perform it. But God can do both; and has given them both to the apostles, against those who were possessed with devils, as Luke witnesses: ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς δύναμιν καὶ ἐξουσίαν (edooken autois dunamin kai exousian): "He gave them power and authority over all devils," etc. ^{Luk 9.1}

v.42

And there is also one sort of power, which is free and absolute; and another sort of power which is limited, which is also called ministerial. Absolute power is that which is altogether free, and is neither governed nor restrained by the law or the will of any other. Of this sort is the power of Christ, which he speaks of in the gospel, saying: "All power is given to me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them," etc. ^{Mat 28.18} Speaking again of this power, in the Revelation shown to St. John the apostle, He says: "Fear not; I am the first and the last; and I am alive, but was dead; and behold, I am alive forevermore. And I have the keys of hell and of death." ^{Rev 1.17-18} And again: "These things he says who is holy and true; who has the key of David, which opens and no man shuts, and shuts and no man opens." ^Rev
3.7 The power which is limited is not free, but is subject to an absolute or greater power of another. It cannot of itself do everything, but only what the absolute power or greater authority allows to be done, and allows under certain conditions. Ecclesiastical jurisdiction is surely of this sort, and it may rightly be called ministerial power. For the church of God, by her ministers, uses the authority committed to her for this purpose.

St. Augustine says, acknowledging this distinction, and speaking of baptism in his fifth treatise on John:

"Paul baptized as a minister, but not as someone who had that power of himself; but the Lord baptized as the one who had the power of himself. Behold, if it had pleased him, he could have given this power to his servants, but he would not. For if he had given this power to his servants, so that what was the Lord's would also have been theirs, then there would have been as many sundry baptisms as servants," etc. [2587]

In the church, Christ reserves that absolute power to himself; for he continues as the head, king, and bishop of the church forever. Nor is that head, who gives life, separated from his body at any time. But he has given limited power to the church.

v.43

The church should acknowledge this: namely, an ecclesiastical jurisdiction, hemmed in with certain laws, which proceeds from God. And it is effectual for that reason; and therefore, it should have chief regard to God in all things; and that ecclesiastical jurisdiction is given to the church for this purpose: that it might be put into practice for the profit of the church. For St. Paul says: "The Lord has given us power, with the intent we should edify, and not for the destruction of the church.'" ^{2Cor
10.8; 13.9} And therefore, that power which tends to the hindrance and destruction of the church, is a devilish tyranny, and not an ecclesiastical power proceeding from God. It behoves us to diligently mark and retain that this is the end of ecclesiastical power.

But the limited power of the church consists very near in these points: namely, in ordaining the ministers of the church, in doctrine, in discerning between doctrines, and finally, in the ordering of ecclesiastical matters. We will speak a little about every one of these points, in order — declaring what manner of authority the church has, and how far it is limited in every part of it.

The Lord himself appointed the chief doctors of the church, who were the apostles, so that all men might understand that the ecclesiastical ministry is the divine institution of God himself, and not a tradition devised by men. And therefore, after the Lord had ascended into heaven, St. Peter, calling the church together, speaks out of the scriptures, about placing another apostle in the place of the traitor Judas; by that very fact, he shows that power was given to the church, by God, to elect ministers or teachers. The same church, not long after, by the persuasion of Peter and the apostles (who undoubtedly persuaded by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost), chose seven deacons. The church of Antioch, being manifestly instructed by the Holy Ghost, ordains and sends Paul and Barnabas, even though they were assigned to the ministry long before that time. It is also read in the Acts of the Apostles, that by the commandment of the apostles, the churches ordained doctors for the holy ministry, as often as need required. And yet, notwithstanding, they did not ordain everyone without choice, but only those who were fit for that office.

v.44

That is to say, those whom they described afterward by express laws; namely, "If any man is faultless, the husband of one wife, watchful, sober," etc. ^{1Tim 3.2} The rule set down by the apostle is sufficiently known, as it appears in 1Timothy, chap. 3. But touching the ordaining of ministers (God willing), we will speak in the third sermon of this decade. But if the church has received power to appoint fit ministers for the church, I think no man will deny that the church has the authority to depose unworthy and wicked deceivers; and also to correct and amend those things which, being lacking, may seem necessary for this order.

And because ministers are chosen chiefly to teach, it must follow that the church has the power to teach, exhort, comfort, and the like, by her lawful ministers. And yet, she has no power to teach everything, except what she received, being delivered to her from the Lord by the doctrine of the prophets and apostles. "Teach them," says the Lord, "that which I commanded you." ^{Mat 28.20} "Go, and preach the gospel to all creatures." ^{Mat 28.19} And St. Paul says: "I have been set apart to preach the gospel of God, which he promised before by his prophets in the holy scriptures." ^{Rom 1.1-2} But this ministry and office of preaching is nothing else but the power of the keys which the church has received; the office (I say) of binding and loosing, of opening and shutting heaven. In another place, also, the apostles received power from the Lord over all — over all, I say — not absolutely, but over all devils, and not over all angels and men. And yet, that authority and power they received over devils, they did not receive it absolutely; for it is added that they should expel and cast them out. ^{Luk 9.1}

And therefore, they could not deal with devils according to their own fancy, but only and so far as He would have them do, who has absolute power over all devils — that they might cast devils out of men, but not send them into men, however much they might have desired it. And also, touching diseases, they could not do whatever they would. Otherwise Paul would not have left Trophimus sick at Miletum,^{2Tim 4.20} who might have been greatly profitable to him in the holy ministry. If they had been able to do whatever they would, the two disciples would have commanded fire from heaven to fall upon Samaria, and would have taken vengeance on the discourteous and barbarous people of Samaria, for they refused to harbour the Lord Christ. ^Luk
9.54

v.45

In like manner, the apostles received keys, that is to say, power to bind and to loose, to open and shut heaven, to forgive and to retain sins; but it was fitly limited. For they could not loose what was bound in hell, nor bind those who were living in heaven. For he did not say, whatever you bind in heaven, but "Whatever you bind on earth;" nor did he say, whatever you loose in hell, but "Whatever you loose on earth." Again, they were not able either to bind or loose whomever they would, not even those on earth. For they were not able to loose, that is to say, to pronounce a man free from sin, who was without faith. Again, they could not bind, that is to say, pronounce condemned, someone who was lightened with faith, and was truly penitent. And surely those who teach other doctrine than this, touching the power of the keys, deceive the whole world. We will more largely treat this in a convenient place. Likewise, the church has received power from Christ to administer the sacraments by ministers, but not according to the church's own will and pleasure, but only according to God's will and the form and manner set down by the Lord himself. The church cannot institute sacraments, nor alter the ends and use of the sacraments.

Finally, it appears that the church has power to give judgment about doctrines, as shown by this one sentence of the apostle Paul: "Let the prophets speak two or three at a time, and let the others judge." ^{1Cor 14.29} And in another place he says: "Prove all things, and keep what is good." ^{1The 5.21} And St. John says: "Dearly beloved, do not believe every spirit; but test the spirits, whether they are from God." ^{1Joh 4.1} But there is also a certain order to this kind of power to judge. For the church does not judge at her own pleasure, but according to the sentence of the Holy Ghost, and according to the order and rule of the holy scriptures. And here also order, moderation, and charity, are observed. Therefore, if at any time the church of God, according to that authority which she has received from the Lord, calls a council together for some weighty matter, as we read that the apostles of the Lord did in the Acts of the Apostles, she does not lean to her own fleshly judgment, but gives herself over to be guided by the Spirit, and examines all her doings by the rule of the word of God and by the twofold charity.[2588]

v.46

This is why the church makes no new laws. As the church of Jerusalem says, or rather the apostolic church: "It seems good both to the Holy Ghost and to the church, that no other burden should be laid upon" faithful Christians, but only a few and very necessary things, neither beside nor contrary to the holy scriptures. Now, ecclesiastical matters are of diverse sorts, the good ordering and well-disposing of them is in the power of the church, for the commodity of men. Of this sort, are those things which concern outward worship as to place and in time; such are prophesying, or the interpretation of tongues, and schools. Also, the church has to judge in causes of matrimony; and chiefly it has the correction of practices, admonitions, punishments, and also excommunicating, or cutting off from the body of the church. For the apostle also says that this power is given to him, and yet with the intent that he should edify with it, and not destroy. For all these things which we have remembered, and similar things, are limited with the rule of the word and of love, also with holy examples and reasons that may be deduced out of the holy scriptures. We will perhaps speak more largely about these things in their place.

I have said this much up to here concerning ecclesiastical power. I have also declared with how open a mouth our adversaries publish the contrary of it. Yet, they handle these matters so grossly, that it may appear even to children, what they seek or what they would defend; namely, not ecclesiastical power, but their own covetousness, lust, and tyranny. The canonical truth teaches us that Christ himself holds and exercises absolute or full power in the church; and that he has given ministerial power to the church, which executes it for the most part by ministers, and religiously executes it according to the rule of God's word.

These things being considered in this way, it will not be greatly laboursome to know the studies of the holy church of God. For it most carefully and faithfully executes that power which it has received from God (as I just said), to the end that it may serve God, that it may be holy, and that it may please Him.

v.47

And now I may reckon up some of her studies specially. First of all, it worships, calls upon, loves and serves one God in Trinity; and it takes nothing in hand, without first having consulted the word of this true God. For she [2589] orders all her doings according to the rule of God's word. She judges by the word of God. And by that same word, she frames all her buildings; and being built, she maintains them; and being fallen down, she repairs or restores them again. She fervently furthers and loves the assemblies and congregations of saints on earth. In these things, the church hearkens diligently to the preaching of the word of God. She partakes of the sacraments devoutly, and with great joy, and with a desire for heavenly things. The church prays to God by the intercession of our only mediator Christ, with a strong faith, fervently, continually, and most attentively. It praises the majesty of God forever, and with great joy gives thanks for all his heavenly benefits. It highly esteems all and every institution of Christ, nor does it neglect any of them. But chiefly it acknowledges that it receives all things belonging either to life, salvation, righteousness, or felicity, from the only Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ. He alone chose her, and then by his Spirit and blood, he sanctified her, and made her a church, that is, a chosen people, whose only king, redeemer, high priest, and defender he is, and without whom, there is no salvation. Therefore, she rests only in God alone by our Lord Jesus Christ; she desires and loves Him only; and for his sake she rejoices to lose all things that pertain to this world, yes, even to spend her blood and her life. And therefore, the church inseparably clings to Christ by faith; nor does it hate anything more bitterly than falling away from Christ, or separation. For without Christ, nothing in this whole life seems pleasant. With Satan, as with a deadly enemy, she has unappeasable enmity. It strives both constantly and wisely against heresies and errors. It most diligently keeps the simplicity of the Christian faith, and the sincerity of the doctrine of the apostles. As much as it lies in her, she keeps herself unspotted from the world and from the flesh, and from all carnal and spiritual infection.

v.48

And therefore, she flees from and by all means detests all unlawful congregations and profane religions, with all wicked men; and she willingly and openly confesses Christ both by word and deed, even with the damage of her life. The church is exercised with afflictions, yet never overcome. It keeps unity and concord carefully. She most tenderly loves all and every member of her body. It does good to all men, as much as power and ability will allow. It hurts no man. It forgives willingly. It bears with the weak brothers, till they are brought forth into perfection. She is not puffed up with pride, but through humility is kept in obedience, in modesty,[2590] and in all the duties of godliness. But who (I ask you) is able to recite all and every one of the studies of the church [2591] in a very large discourse, much less in this short recital? And who would not desire to be a member of so divine and heavenly a congregation?

I would by and by join to this, that which remains touching the unity of the catholic church, of the division of it, and of other things belonging to the consideration of this, but I perceive that you, being already weary of hearing, earnestly look for an end to this sermon. There-fore, we will put off the residue till tomorrow. And now, lifting up our minds into heaven, let us give thanks to the Lord our God, who through his beloved Son has purified us and gathered us together, to be a chosen people for himself, and to be heirs of all his heavenly treasures. To him, therefore, be all praise and glory, world without end, Amen.

v.49

5-2. THE SECOND SERMON: THERE IS ONE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

There is one catholic Church: without the Church there is no light or salvation. Against schismatics. Why we depart from the upstart church of Rome.
The church of God is the house, vineyard, and kingdom of God; and
the body, sheepfold, and spouse of Christ; a mother and a virgin.

I see you are assembled, brethren, with attentive minds to the exposition of those things which remain to be spoken about the catholic church of God; which we affirm to be one and unseparable, according to the holy oracles of the sacred scripture. Solomon in his Canticles says: "One is my dove and my beloved." ^{Sol 5.2} The doctor of the Gentiles doubtless had respect to this, when he said: "There is one body, and one spirit; even as you are called in one hope of your vocation. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, which is above all, and through all, and in you all." ^{Eph 4.4-5} To these heavenly testimonies agree the testimonies of men. For Cyprian, the bishop and martyr, in his book De Simplicitate Clericorum, says:

"The church is one, which is spread further and further abroad by fertile increase: even as there are many beams of the sun and but one light, and many boughs of a tree, yet but one oak grounded on a steadfast root; and though many brooks issue out of one spring, though the number seem to be increased by the abundance of the store, yet is it but one spring at the head. Pluck a beam of the sun from the globe; that one beam, once separated, is void of light. Break a bough from the tree, and it can produce no fruit. Cut a brook off from the spring, and being cut off, it dries up. Even so, the church, enlightened with God's light, spreads abroad the beams of her light through the whole world; yet it is but one light which is spread everywhere, nor is the unity of the body separated. She extends her branches with plenteous increase throughout all the earth, she sends out her plentiful rivers all abroad; yet there is but one head, and one spring, and one mother, plentiful with fertile succession." [2592] And so forth.

v.50

Moreover, where we read that diverse names are given to the church, we must not imagine that there are many-churches in the world, nor is that body to be separated which can bear or suffer no kind of division. Writers call the church catholic, which undoubtedly signifies universal, because it is but one; nor can there be any more. For even if this is distinguished into the church triumphant and militant; into the church of the old fathers, and the congregation of people of the latter time; yet all these members remain perpetually knit together in one body under one head, Christ. And even as the several conditions of bond and freemen does not separate a kingdom or commonwealth into parts, neither does the quiet rest or felicity of the blessed spirits triumphing in heaven, and the labours and sorrows with which we still war in this world under Christ's ensigns, make two churches. The holy angel says to St. John in the Apocalypse: "I am your fellow-servant, and of your brethren the prophets." ^{Rev 22.9} He therefore acknowledges that both the prophets and the apostles are the sons and servants of one God. We read of this in the gospel, that only one vineyard was let out to husbandmen, not two or different ones, even though they were divers. Even so, there is but one church of the old fathers who lived before the coming of Christ, and ours, or the new people since Christ's coming, taken out of the Gentiles.

v.51

But in what they differ from us, or we from them, has been said in the eighth Sermon of our third Decade. Again, evil men and hypocrites are mingled with the holy church; but the church is not separated for evil men. For even as undiscovered traitors mingled with citizens do not make two commonwealths; so too, even though evil men cling to good ones, yet they are both gathered into one church. And when hypocrites depart from the unity of the church, the church is not torn in pieces, but it becomes purer. For St. Augustine excellently [2593] says that evil men or hypocrites in the church, are like chaff among wheat, cockle [2594] in standing corn, traitors in a city, and runagates [2595] among soldiers. But it is plain, that wheat is the cleaner, standing corn the lustier, citizens the safer, and soldiers the stronger, when renegades, traitors, cockle and chaff, are separated from them. Yes, and unless rotten members of the church are sometimes cut off from the ecclesiastical body, the church cannot be in safety. And particular or several churches are like towns or cities in a kingdom: the multitude of cities does not divide a kingdom. Particular churches — dispersed throughout the whole world as with a body of many members — are gathered and compacted together in the catholic and universal church, which is the fellowship of all the saints. Therefore, it is most certain that there is only one church of God, not many, of which the only monarch is Jesus Christ; to whom be glory.

The unity and united society of this church of God is so great, that no people found outside of her fellowship are acceptable to God; nor is there any true salvation or safety, any light or truth; for no wholesome pastures are found outside the pale of God's church; all are infected with poison. No religion pleases God outside of the church of God. If in olden times any man had sacrificed to God in the high places, outside the tabernacle or temple, he was considered to have sacrificed to devils, and esteemed to have shed innocent blood. Therefore Cyprian, the blessed martyr and bishop of Carthage, rightly wrote this:

"Whoever, separated from the church, is joined to an adulterous church, is separated from the promises of the church. Nor does one who has left the church of Christ, retain Christ's merits. He is a stranger: he is unclean; he is an enemy.

v.52

He cannot now have God his father, if he does not have the church as his mother. If someone might escape who was outside the ark of Noah, he may also escape what is abroad outside the church. He must be a most wicked man, whoever he is, who leaves his own country and the fellowship of very good men, and falls in with the enemies." [2596]

Lactantius therefore most truly says: "It is only the catholic church that retains true religion. Here is the fountain of truth: this is the household of faith: this is the temple of God; into which if anyone does not enter, or out of which if anyone departs, he is excluded from the hope of salvation and life everlasting." [2597] For our Saviour first said that life is not found outside of the sheepfold. ^Joh
10.7-10

Therefore, I cannot marvel enough at the corrupt and schismatic manners of certain men, who separate themselves for every light cause, from the most wholesome and pleasant company or society of the church. For these days you will find not a few captious [2598] and ludicrous men, who for many years have had fellowship with no church, nor ever had fellowship with any; for they find some kind of fault in every man; it is only in themselves that they find nothing worthy of reprehension. Therefore, they conceive with themselves a wonderful fashion of the church, which unless they see it established somewhere, in that fashion which they themselves have devised, they contend (with shame enough) that there is as yet no true church of Christ in the world. They are surely worthy to be master-builders in Utopia or Cyribiria,[2599] where they might set up a building fit for themselves.

v.53

But it seems to them they have just cause for schism. For they will not communicate [2600] with our church; it seems the doctrine of the ministers in the church is not yet sufficiently cleansed and polished for them, nor lofty (as they themselves term it, Hoch gnug gericht), subtle, and spiritual enough. Elsewhere they complain that diverse customs are used in our churches. Furthermore, they desire the rigour and severity of discipline; and finally, an exact pureness of life; for they fear they will be defiled with the unclean company of certain men. Because of the faults and vices of certain ministers, many either forsake or flee the congregation of the church. Today, the anabaptists are of this sort. [2601] But there is as yet no sufficient cause alleged by these men, for which, of right, they should not either be joined to us, or for which they may be separated from us. We acknowledge that there are just causes for which the godly both may and should separate themselves from wicked congregations. These are ones in which not only the lawful use of the sacraments is altogether corrupted and turned into idolatry, but sound doctrine is altogether adulterated; their preachers or pastors are not prophets, but false prophets, who persecute God's truth; and finally, they minister poison to those who sit to receive the food of life. But they cannot object any of these things against us (God be thanked!).

For concerning doctrine, it consists partly in sure opinions, and those are numbered, firm, and immutable. Of this kind are the articles of faith, those which are without addition and corruption, lawfully and sincerely understood. And of that sort are also these principles: That all men are sinners, conceived and born in sin; That none but those who are regenerate can enter into the kingdom of God; That men are justified by faith, not by their own deserts, but through the grace of God, by the merits of Christ alone; That once sacrificed for sin, Christ is no more sacrificed; That he is the only and perpetual priest; That good works are done by those who are justified; and those are good works indeed, which the Lord has prepared for us to walk in; That the sacraments of the Lord and of the church are to be received, and not to be despised; That we must pray continually, and that is to be done in that manner which the Lord has appointed us; And any more of the same sort.

v.54

But it suffices if these and other similar grounds are uniformly, purely, and simply taught in the church according to the scriptures, though no rhetorical figures or painted eloquence should be heard. For the blessed martyr Irenaeus aptly says, according to the rule of faith set out in his first book against heresies, "Since there is but one faith only, the one who can say much about it, says no more than he should; nor can the one who says little about it, thereby diminish it." [2602] Therefore, when the doctrine of ministers expounds those things in the church, which are agreeable to the true and sincere faith, and which also are not corrupted, then what do these captious smatterers of rhetoric and self-learned [2603] need to require, though eloquence and plentiful learning are lacking in the teachers? "Was not the doctrine of the apostles and prophets most simple and most free from all subtlety, so that it might rightly be said, the simpler it seemed, the safer it was? But in the meantime, I do not despise true eloquence (as a singular gift of God), as I have often witnessed elsewhere.

And partly, doctrine consists in the daily expounding of the scriptures, and in applying them to our time, place, and affairs. There has ever been great variety and diversity in that kind, for which, notwithstanding, no wise man ever yet separated himself from the fellowship of the church. For it comes to pass very often, that two or three, or even more, may expound the same passage not in one manner only, but in most diverse ways. One may expound it very darkly, and another more plainly; this man hits the mark, the other does not come near it; this man applies a passage very fitly, another does not have a similar simplicity of application — and yet, notwithstanding, he says nothing contrary to the soundness of faith and the love of God and of our neighbour; and he uses all things for edification. I say that, from this diversity, no man has just occasion to depart from the church. For all godly men prove all things, and keep what is good; and in all sermons and holy exercises, they refer their whole study only to edifying.

v.55

And moreover, the preachers agree well among themselves, and direct all things to this: that both themselves and their hearers may become better — not that they may seem more learned, nor to have uttered what no man saw before. And so, the most learned do not loathe sermons which are not so learned. For even if they do not seem to have altogether hit the mark, yet so far as they taught wholesome things, they are praised and not condemned (though in a fit time and place, they may sometimes be admonished in a friendly manner). Again, those who are unskilful do not envy the gifts of the learned, nor do they refuse to labour for more perfection; nor do they loathe or condemn the learned sermons of those who are better learned. Rather, they praise God, and being warned, they strive to more perfection. For St. Aurelius Augustine said wisely in his first book of Christian doctrine, the thirty-sixth chapter:

"Whoever seems to himself to have understood the holy scriptures or any part of them, and he does not gather from that understanding, the twofold love of God and of his neighbour, he understands nothing. But whoever gathers a sense of it that is profitable to him for the increase of love, and yet he does not gather that sense which was probably meant in that place, he is not perniciously deceived, nor does he lie at all." [2604]

And shortly after, he says:

"Notwithstanding, he is to be corrected and he must have it shown to him how much more profitable it would be for him not to leave the highway, lest by habitually straying, he is forced either to go cross-wise or crooked." [2605]

Therefore, where an ecclesiastical interpreter errs grossly, it is lawful for a better-learned brother to admonish him; but it is not lawful to make a schism. Those who lightly create a schism, are somewhat proud and arrogant, and swelled with envy; and therefore they are void of all charity and modesty. [2606] They allow nothing but what they themselves produce, nor will they hold anything in common with others.

v.56

They are always musing about some higher matter, and nothing that is common or simple., The saying of the apostle Paul well applies to these men: "Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies." ^{1Cor 8.1} Therefore, godly teachers in the church, and also godly hearers, should not leave or forsake the fellowship of the church for doctrine which is not altogether foolish, even though it may be somewhat gross — so long as it is godly and tends to edification. Neither should they strive or contend about it, but rather use charity in all things.

If the ministers' lives are attached to grievous vices, and yet they are faithful in teaching, admonishing, exhorting, rebuking and comforting, and if they lawfully distribute the lawful sacraments, then no man has just occasion to forsake the church. The Lord expressly says in the gospel: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. Therefore, whatever they bid you to observe, observe and do that; but do not follow their works; for they say, and do not do." ^{Mat 23.2-3} Behold, the Lord says that they say, and do not do; therefore, the teachers' lives were not agreeable to their doctrine. Yet because they stood in Moses' seat — that is to say, because they taught the word of God lawfully and sincerely — he bids them to receive their sincere doctrine; but because their life is not agreeable to their doctrine, he bids them to refuse it. And therefore, the Lord forbids is to make a schism for the sake of the preachers' evil lives. He surely commands us to flee from false prophets; what makes a false prophet is not an evil life, but false doctrine. The holy father St. Augustine had a great conflict with the Donatists about this matter, who contended that the ministry has less power through the imperfection of the ministers: this case is to be considered in another way.

But now, what cause do they have to leave [2607] and forsake our churches, for the unlikeness or variety of ceremonies? In the baptism of children, they say, you do not observe one order: and so too in the celebration of the supper. Some sitting, take the bread of the Lord in their hands; some come and take it from the hands of the ministers, who also put it in the mouths of the receivers.

v.57

Some celebrate the communion often; some seldom, and only on set days. And you do not use one form of prayer. Nor do all your assemblies have one manner, nor do they meet at one time. How will we believe that the spirit of unity and peace is in you, in whom such great diversity is found? Therefore, we do not communicate with you for just causes. We will speak more fitly about these customs, in their proper place. But it is marvel that men who are not altogether rude and ignorant of ecclesiastical matters, bring no other arguments to defend their wicked schism. Are the poor wretches ignorant of how great a diversity there has always been in our ceremonies? Notwithstanding, unity always remained undivided in the catholic church. Socrates, the famous writer of the ecclesiastical history, in the fifth book of his history, twenty-second chapter, sets out at large the diversity of ceremonies in the church of God. Among other things he says: "No religion," he says, "keeps all ceremonies of one kind, even though it agrees in doctrine about them. For whose who agree in faith, differ in ceremonies." And again: "It would be both laboursome and troublesome, indeed impossible, to describe all the ceremonies of all the churches in each city and region.'' [2608] The blessed martyr Irenaeus, writing to Victor, bishop of Rome, recites the great diversity of the churches in their fastings and keeping the feast of Easter; and then he adds:

"And yet notwithstanding all these, even when they varied in their observations, they were both peaceable among themselves and with us, and still are; nor does the disagreement about fasting break the agreement of faith." [2609]

And again:

"Blessed Polycarp when he came to Rome under Anicete,[2610] and had some small controversy about certain other matters, they were later reconciled; but they did not contend a whit about this kind of matter.

v.58

For Anicetus could not persuade Polycarp that he should not observe those things which he had always observed with John, the disciple of our Lord, and with the rest of the apostles with whom he had been familiar. Nor did Polycarp persuade Anicetus not to keep that custom which he said he was to keep by the tradition of those elders to whom he succeeded. And, these matters thus standing, they had fellowship one with another." [2611]

Moreover, the ancient church used great liberty in the observation of ceremonies, yet always so as not to break the bond of unity. Yes, and St. Austin, prescribing to Januarius what he should either do or follow in this diversity of ceremonies, does not bid him to make a schism. But judging moderately and wisely, he says, "No rule in these things is better than a grave and wise Christian, who does what he sees every church do to which he comes by chance. For what is not contrary either to faith or good manners, is commanded to be considered indifferent, and is to be observed according to their society among whom we live." Again, lest under the pretence of this rule and counsel, anyone might force on every man whatever ceremonies he would, he adds: "The church of God, placed amidst much chaff and cockle, suffers many things; and yet, whatever is contrary either to faith or good life, she does not allow, nor does she hold her peace, nor does she do it." [2612]

v.59

Last of all, these men think that there is no true church where faulty manners are still to be seen, and they are in fear of being polluted unless either they do not come to the church, or else they quickly forsake it. They fall into the madness of the heretics called Catharoi, [2613] who deceived with the false imagination of exact holiness, and using sharp cruelty, fled from those churches in which the fruits of the doctrine of the gospel did not plainly appear. We set against these, both the prophetic and apostolic churches; namely, the most holy churches. For Isaiah and Jeremiah, rebuking the manners of their time, greatly inveigh against the corruption of doctrine and manners; nor do they charge them with light and common faults, but heinous ones. Isaiah cries that "from the crown of the head to the sole of the foot, there is no wholesome place;" ^{Isa 1.6} and yet he did not depart from the church, nor did he plant himself a new one,[2614] even though he kept himself very diligently from all ungodliness and corruption. How many faults — no, how many errors — were among the apostles of Christ themselves! "What, did our Lord depart from them? The church of Corinth was corrupted, not only in manners but also in doctrine. There were contentions in it, factions and brawlings, undoubtedly whoredom and breaking wedlock was common among them. What do you think of that: that many of them were present at profane sacrifices? Surely it was no small error that they esteemed baptism according to the worthiness of the minister. They had defiled the Lord's Supper with their private and prodigal banquets; yes, and they did not think rightly about the resurrection of the dead.^{1Cor 15.12} But for that cause, did the apostle either depart from them himself, or command others to depart? Indeed, he rather calls them a holy church; ^1Cor
3.17 and greatly rebuking their contentions, he exhorts all men to observe [2615] the unity of the church in the sincerity of truth. It is not to be doubted, therefore, that those who abstain from the fellowship of our church, or rather the catholic church, greatly sin. Even though there is great corruption of life in it, yet the doctrine is sincere and the sacraments are purely ministered.

v.60

But these men object this: "You admit all men without exception to receiving the Lord's Supper — wicked men, drunkards, covetous men, soldiers, and those men with whom the holy apostle forbids us to eat common bread. This is how far off it is, from what he grants regarding those with whom we are to be partakers at the Lord's table. Therefore, unless we like to be defiled with the fellowship of the wicked, it is needful either not to join with this society, or else to flee from it altogether." But, if I live, I will speak of the Lord's Supper and receiving it, in another place that is apt for it. At this time, we bring only this against them: that Paul, the most faithful servant of Jesus Christ, was not sharper than his master. But it is manifest that Jesus admitted Judas to the holy table, whom he knew, as it is usually said, intus et in cute, that is to say, thoroughly within and without; and yet he did not put him aside. But surely he would have rejected him, if he had known the rest of his disciples would have been polluted by his company. Judas himself was polluted, for his mind and conscience were corrupt; but the rest of the apostles, whose minds were pure through perfect faith, could not be defiled by another man's treachery. Therefore, Paul the apostle says: "Let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup." He bids every man to prove himself, not to judge another man's servant, who stands to his Lord or falls. If you are endued with faith, and lawfully participate at the Lord's table, you are not defiled with another man's wickedness. Therefore, to avoid pollution, there is no reason why you should be separated from the church in which you see the bad mingled with the good to be partakers of the Lord's Supper. But if you are separate, you plainly declare yourself, being hardened with arrogance, to partake with those whom St. Augustine in his third book against Parmenian, the first chapter, paints with these proper and lively colours:

v.61.

"They are evil children who, not for the hatred of other men's iniquities, but through the study of their own contentions, go about either to wholly allure or at least to divide the simple people, provoked with the bragging titles of their names, puffed up with pride, foolish with frowardness, subtle with slanders, troublesome with seditions. Lest they be detected to lack the light of truth, they pretend the shadow of sharp severity. And those things which are commanded in the holy scriptures for the correction of the faults of their brethren — saving the sincerity of love and keeping the unity of peace ^Eph
4.2-3 — in which moderation should also be used, they usurp for the sacrilege of schism, and an occasion for cutting off."

The same author, among other things, reverently and wisely disputes in the two chapters following, giving this counsel to modest wits:

"They should quietly correct what they may; and what they cannot mend, they should patiently suffer and lovingly mourn, till God himself either amends it, or in the day of judgment, fans away the chaff." [2616]

Furthermore, concluding this place, I will recite to you the words of the blessed martyr Cyprian. In his third book, third epistle, he has written this:

"If cockle appears to be in the church, yet neither our faith nor our charity should be abated, such that we ourselves depart from the church because we see cockle in the church. We must rather labour to be good corn, so that when the corn is laid up in the Lord's barn, we may receive the fruit of our labour and travail. The apostle says in his epistle: 'But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth; some vessels of honour, and some of dishonour.' ^{2Tim 2.20}

v.62

Let us endeavour and labour what we may, so that we may be a vessel either of gold or of silver: but only the Lord has liberty to break in pieces the earthen vessels, the one to whom also is given an iron rod. The servant cannot be greater than his Lord. Neither let any man think it is lawful for him to claim for himself, that which the Father has given only to his Son, that he might now be able to purge the floor, or fan the chaff, or by all the wit that man has, to separate all the chaff from the corn. This is a proud obstinacy and a wicked presumption, which lewd fury takes to himself. And while some men always take to themselves a further dominion than peaceable justice requires, they perish from the church: and while they proudly lift themselves up, blinded with their own presumption, they are bereft of the light of the truth." [2617]

The Lord Jesus reduces the wandering sheep into the unity of the catholic church, and living in unity, he keeps and upholds them. Amen.

These adversaries of ours being overcome, there arise new and cruel enemies, that is to say, the defenders of the Roman monarchy and of the apostolic see, as they call it, and the most ancient church. For they cry until they are hoarse, that we are guilty of the same crime of which we condemned the anabaptists and certain other ludicrous fellows.

v.63

For they say that we, with wicked schism forced by no necessity, have forsaken the old Romish church, and have set up new and heretical synagogues for ourselves. And they allege that the holy scripture still has her authority in the church of Rome, that it is still read in all the churches,[2618] and that they fetch their disputations out of it in all their schools — indeed, and also that the sacraments have their right place and use. And therefore, we are wicked schismatics, who without any necessary cause, have departed from the catholic church, most of all, for the faults of some of the clergy and of the bishops. I must therefore digress a little, and contend with these defenders of the popish church, and show that we never departed from the catholic church of Christ.

And because in this matter it chiefly behoves us to know who is truly said to be a heretic or who is a schismatic, I will first of all say these few words about these matters. St. Augustine thinks that there is this difference between a heretic and a schismatic: a heretic corrupts the sincerity of faith and the doctrine of the apostles with his wicked doctrine; and a schismatic, although he does not sin at all against pure doctrine and sincere faith, yet he rashly separates himself from the church, breaking the bond of unity.[2619] And surely, someone is properly a heretic, whoever he may be, that contrary to the scripture, which is the word of God, against the articles of faith, or against the sound opinions of the church which are grounded on the word of God, through hope of some temporal commodity, of his own brain and fleshly choice — chooses, receives, teaches, and follows strange things; and stiffly retaining these, he both defends them and spreads them abroad. By the imperial edict of Augustus Caesar Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodosius,[2620] catholics or Christians are defined to be those who continue in that religion which St. Peter taught the church of Rome, and which blessed Damasus and St. Peter, bishop of Alexandria, taught. That is to say, those who confess — according to the teaching [2621] of the apostles and the doctrine of the gospel — the only Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, in equal majesty and in a holy Trinity.

v.64

And again, those are declared by them to be heretics, who follow contrary opinions, whom they account both mad and infamous and worthy of punishment.[2622] And he is a schismatic, whoever he may be, that separates himself from the unity of the true church of God, and either gathers together new assemblies, or joins himself to congregations gathered by others, even if he errs little or not at all in doctrine. And I think no man can either desire or challenge anything in these descriptions.

And therefore, the defenders of the Romish monarchy greatly offend against us, evermore having in their mouths against us, the most heinous crimes of heresy and schism. For we teach nothing against the sincerity and truth of the holy scriptures, nor against the articles of faith, nor against the opinions of the catholic church, which are sound and established by the canonical scriptures. If we wanted to seek earthly commodity, we would surely have continued in the popish doctrine, in which all things are gainful; but because we have received the doctrine of Christ, we are open to every man's reproach. We were not ignorant of this when we departed from the doctrine of the pope. Therefore, it is not for any hope of temporal commodity that we embrace the doctrine of Christ; nor do we affirm anything presumptuously [2623] — for if any man can teach us any better out of God's word, we will not refuse to embrace what is better. And moreover, with open voice and with all our hearts, we condemn all heresies and heretics, whoever they may be, which the ancient church, either in general councils or outside of councils, has killed with the sword of God's word. But we strive against the false doctrine of the pope, his new decrees which fight against the word of God, and against the most filthy abuses and corruptions in the church. The bishops of Rome, with their conspirators, have taken to themselves a tyranny over the church, playing the part of veritable antichrists in the temple of God.

v.65

We therefore flee and refuse their tyranny and anti-Christianism — we do not refuse Christ and his yoke; we do not flee the fellowship of saints. Indeed, rather to the end that we may remain in that society, and become the true members of Christ and of his saints, we have fled from the popish church, and have gathered together again into one holy catholic and apostolic church. We acknowledge this church to be the very house of God, and the proper sheepfold of Christ our Lord, of which he is the shepherd.

For we freely confess, and with great joy, giving thanks to God who has delivered us, we publish abroad that we have departed from the Romish church, and that at this day, we also abhor that church. But first of all, we distinguish and differentiate between the old church of Rome, and the recent upstart church. For at one time there was a holy and faithful church at Rome, which apostolic men and the apostles of Christ themselves established and preserved by the word of God. This ancient church was not only without the ceremonies used and received there today, but if she had but seen them, she would surely have cursed them. That ancient church lacked the decrees upon which the church of Rome today altogether stays herself; she was ignorant of that monarchy and all that stately court. Therefore, we never departed, nor will we ever depart, from that ancient and apostolic church of Rome. We acknowledge, moreover, all who are at Rome today, who worship Christ and keep themselves from all popish pollution, as our beloved brethren — we do not doubt that Rome has a great many of this sort. Finally, we do not acknowledge as the true church of Christ, that upstart church of Rome which acknowledges and worships the pope as Christ's vicar on earth, and is obedient to his laws. Therefore, we cannot be schismatics who, leaving the church of Rome, have not departed from the true church of God.

For the holy catholic church clings to her only shepherd Christ, believes his word, and lives holily. But you will find that all things are quite contrary in the church of Rome, so that it cannot come within the compass either of the outward and visible church, nor of the inward and invisible church of God.

v.66

The godly bear with many things in the church, that is to say, in the members of the church, and in the ministers (as I recently showed when I spoke against schismatics). But in that upstart church of Rome, you will not find small and tolerable faults, either of doctrine or of life or of errors: for all these faults in her are heinous, desperate, and abominable. What manner of charity would it be, therefore, that could hope for better from the most untoward and lamentable things? Hypocrites and evil men are accounted to be part of the outward and visible church of God, and are suffered in it. But these Romanists are neither evil men nor hypocrites; rather, they are the very worst and most cruel enemies of Christ's truth, openly blaspheming the gospel, and persecuting those who believe in Christ. And therefore, they have neither the outward nor the inward marks of the church. The Spirit of the Lord rests upon those who tremble at the word of God.^{Isa 66.5} But these men fret and fume if any man unfeignedly reverences the word of God. True faith attributes only to Christ, all the means by which it comes to everlasting life. These men persecute the faithful, because they attribute to Christ Jesus alone, all the means by which they attain everlasting life, and will not part stakes in the means of salvation, with popish fancies. Instead of charity, they exercise cruelty against their brethren and against their neighbours. What should a man say about those who abuse the public goods of the church, and spend them according to their own private lusts? For that which the faithful from olden times, have given by charity for the use of the church, and to sustain the poor, these men have wasted, living most lecherously and filthily upon it. Concerning these things, the elect apostles of the Lord, Peter and Thaddeus, foretold the church of God. ^{2Pet 2.1-3; Jude}

And touching the outward marks of the church, what shall I say? These men say that the canonical scripture has authority in the church of Rome, and that the same word is read both in their churches and in their schools, and that the sacraments have force and are effectual among them. But I can show the contrary. First of all, they will subject the interpretation of the holy and sacred scriptures to their see; and they give the right of judgment in all cases to their idol, the pope of Rome.

v.67

For every man knows this canon: "Whatever [the pope] decrees, whatever he establishes, is to be observed by all men forever, inviolably." [2624] And again: "The whole church throughout the universal world knows that the holy church of Rome has authority to give judgment about all things; nor is it lawful for anyone to give judgment about her judgments." [2625] Therefore, she also judges the scriptures and expounds them, and turns and winds them whichever way she inclines. I will not now recite how, by manifest words, the standard-bearers of that see write that the canonical scripture takes her authority from the church,[2626] abusing this sentence of the ancient father St. Augustine, "I would not have believed the gospel, if the authority of the holy church had not moved me," etc. [2627] I will affirm this, which can only be manifest to all men, that the Romish church, or the rulers of that church, take away the natural sense and true meaning of the holy scriptures, and have set down a strange sense in its place. To the end it may be better liked by men, they call this sense the sense of the holy mother the church; they also urge this sense with such great wickedness, that if you set against it the native sense, you will receive for your labour, the reproachful name of a heretic. To put it in a few words: unless you bring out the whole scripture twisted according to their mind and gain, that is to say, tempered with their devilish decrees as with poison, it will be said that you have not brought out the holy scriptures, but that you have taught heresy. The matter will be made plainer by examples. The scripture teaches that Jesus Christ is the only head of the church: ^Col
1.18 but unless you also join the pope as the head of the church militant on earth, you will be called a heretic.

v.68

The scripture teaches that Jesus Christ is the only intercessor or mediator, priest, and only propitiatory sacrifice of the faithful. But they say, unless you join to this, that Christ is indeed the mediator of redemption, but that the saints together with Christ are the mediators of intercession, and that the priests daily offer an unbloody sacrifice, so that the saints may be acknowledged as intercessors together with Christ in heaven, and that the priests on earth daily offer in their mass a sacrifice for the quick and for the dead, you will be called a heretic. The scripture teaches that Jesus Christ is the righteousness of the faithful, and that we receive this righteousness by faith. But they say, unless you part stakes between this righteousness of Christ and works or men's merits, you will be called a heretic. The scripture teaches that Christ ascended into heaven, and has established [2628] a vicegerent power, namely, the Holy Ghost; and also that he will not come again into the world bodily, but only at the day of judgment. But they say, unless you acknowledge the same Christ to be corporally present in the bread of the sacrament, and also worship him there, you will be called a heretic. Christ our Lord said at his last supper, extending the cup to his disciples, "Drink you all of this;" but if you contend that both kinds of the sacrament should be given to all the faithful, you will be called a heretic. God said in his law, you shall not make an image, you shall not worship it, you shall not serve it. But they say, unless you understand an image to mean the idols of the gentiles, such as Saturn or Mercury, but not an image of the true God or any saint, you will be called a heretic.

I could bring forth many more things of this sort, if I were speaking to those who are ignorant. What authority therefore, or what place, would we say the word of God had in that see of Rome? Who does not see that these filthy beasts tread underfoot as a captive, the most holy word of God; that they establish and re-establish laws of God according to their own giant-like boldness? It is therefore as clear as anything may be clear, that the Romish church is destitute of the holy word of God. I have shown plainly in the first sermon of this decade,[2629] that it is not enough to boast of the words of the holy scripture, unless along with that, the natural sense is retained uncorrupted.

v.69

The church of Rome has corrupted the sense and meaning of the holy scriptures, and thrust upon the simple people, opinions that are contrary to the scriptures: and therefore, the church of Rome is not the true church of Christ.

We do not reiterate the sacrament of baptism ministered by popish priests, for they baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost (as I have shown in the first sermon of this decade [2630]). Yet, as to the breaking of bread, or distribution of the Lord's Supper, they have so defiled and corrupted it with doctrines contrary to the sound faith, and turned it into such a filthy merchandise, that no man of sound judgment can, with a safe conscience and without corruption of his religion, communicate [2631] with them. I will say nothing at this time about the most filthy life and wicked manners of the priests of the Romish church. For I do not doubt that it already appears to those who are not willfully blind,[2632] that the see of Rome does not have the outward marks of the true church of God, joined with the pure word of God,[2633] and sound preaching of the gospel. It lacks (I say) a heavenly ministry, and lawful ministers of the church, and also the wholesome use of the Lord's Supper. And therefore, it is not the true church of God from which no man may depart without being guilty of schism.

By this means, someone will say, Christ will have no church left in the earth; for those who are the governors of the church, if they err and corrupt and forsake the word of God, what hope (I ask you) remains for the church? Or where the marks of the church do not appear, where (I pray you) is the church? I answer that Almighty God — in such calamities of the church, in which the governors fall away from the word and the true worship of God, and embrace and introduce new laws and new ordinances into the church, the true outward marks of the church being for a time either darkened or fallen out of use — notwithstanding these, God reserves for himself a church on the earth. This church He also furnishes [2634] and repairs with true teachers whom he sends into it, even though they are not acknowledged as true ministers and teachers of God's church by those who would seem to be the true and ordinary governors of the church; rather, they are condemned as seditious disturbers of the church, and execrable heretics.

v.70

The matter will be made more manifest by examples taken out of the scriptures. In the time of Ahaz king of Judah (Uriah the high priest winking at it, and the princes of the land and priests not resisting it) the king shut up the temple of the Lord, and took away the holy altar. The scripture expressly witnesses to this. And therefore, both the ministry of the word and the lawful or ordinary ministration of the sacraments ceased. Yet, notwithstanding, there was a holy church in the kingdom of Judah, in which extraordinarily (if I may say so), no man doubts the prophet Isaiah with certain others preached. Under Manasseh, the nephew [2635] of king Ahaz, true doctrine and administration of the sacraments was banished, except for circumcision. And that falling away continued until the church was reformed by that most godly king Josiah. And yet, prophets were sent in the meantime, and God had his church in Judah, even though most people, along with their governors, both followed and defended the wickedness and defection of Manasseh.

In the kingdom of Israel, king Jeroboam thrust from their offices, the teachers and preachers of the law of the Lord and of the sound truth. And in their place, he gave the people profane and unlearned priests and rulers; and moreover, he built new temples, yes, and those were cathedral churches; and he set up new idols or calves, a new religion, new altars, and new feasts; and by this means, he abrogated the true religion of God to the end that no outward marks of the church of God might appear in Israel at all. And yet, there is no doubt that God had a notable church in Israel, for which from time to time God sent his prophets for the preservation and repairing of it, even though they were not acknowledged to be the true prophets of God, at the hands of the false church and of the false prophets. Under Jeroboam, the second of that name, Amos the prophet, a shepherd or neatherd of Tekoa, taught and preached the true word of God.

v.71

But he heard from Amaziah, the high priest of the kingdom, "Get here quickly, and go into the land of Judah, and prophesy or preach there; but prophesy no more at Bethel, for it is the king's chapel, and it is the king's court." Furthermore, when Ahab had surpassed all the kings before him in wickedness, and moreover added the abominable religion of Baal to the ungodliness and falling away of Jeroboam, ^{1Kng 12.27-33} he filled the whole kingdom of Israel with superstitions, idolatries, enchantments, and sacrileges — yes, and most cruelly persecuted the pure word [2636] of God in his prophets — there was yet found in Israel a most famous church of God. Elijah, that great and most excellent prophet of God — because of that horrible falling away from God, and the loathsomeness of that most miserable people, in whom there appeared not one token of the true church of God — fled into the wilderness, and hid himself in the corners. And being asked by the Lord, what he was doing there, he answered: "I have been very jealous for the God of hosts; for the children of Israel have forsaken your covenant, cast down your altars, and slain your prophets with the sword; and only I am left, and they seek my life, to take it away." ^{1Kng 19.10} But immediately he is sent back into the land of Israel from which he had fled; and moreover, he heard these words: "I have left myself seven thousand men in Israel, who have neither bowed their knees to Baal, nor kissed him." ^{1Kng 19.18} Behold, this mighty prophet thought that only he himself had been left of all the number of the faithful in Israel: but he heard that God had reserved seven thousand holy men who had not bowed their knees; that is to say, who had never served Baal so much as with outward reverence. But who does not know that the prophet understood by the number "seven," an exceedingly great number of the true servants of God, who undoubtedly were not circumcised into the covenant of Baal, but into the covenant of the eternal God? These men did not lack faith. And therefore, they were not without doctrine, though it was not so common, nor did it seem to the Baalites to be either ordinary or catholic. But undoubtedly, they wanted the use of the sacrifices. For seeing that they were not lawfully offered, they would not partake of those which were unlawful; but meanwhile, they were not destitute of the things which were signified by the outward signs or sacraments, being partakers through faith, of all the gifts of God.

v.72

In the same way, the bishop of Rome, in the manner of king Jeroboam, has forsaken the sound preaching of the gospel, and corrupted the first and simple institution of the Lord's Supper, and depraved and twisted to his own profit, other commandments [2637] of God. And he has placed himself in the throne or temple of God, or in the church of God, bragging that he is a God on earth. Surely then, the church of God, oppressed with grievous tyranny, could hardly be discerned by outward marks. For instead of the sincere preaching of the gospel, a certain kind of doctrine was set forth, mixed and corrupted with men's decrees; and instead of the Lord's Supper, the popish mass was celebrated; and instead of other ordinances of God, a high heap of foolish and superstitious ceremonies came in, to which a great number of men yielded, making themselves subject to the see of Rome. In the meantime, notwithstanding, the church of God was not utterly extinguished throughout the whole world, nor was the holy ministry of the word of God and the true worship of God utterly decayed among all men. For not a few men were found spread abroad in every place, who neither allowed the pope and his conspirators, nor his corruption in matters of the church. But they worshipped the Lord Christ, whom they acknowledged to be the only author of salvation; and therefore, they kept themselves free from popish filthiness. And God also sent in almost every age since the beginning of popedom, men who were grave, godly, and learned, who grievously accused the pope's kingdom and tyranny (even as the prophets of old, in the days of Jeroboam, accused that idolatrous corruption), constantly requiring the reformation of the church from popish corruptions — and also teaching the true doctrine of salvation, and the true use of the sacraments. Even though a pure reformation could not be obtained because of antichrist's tyranny, a continual study of purity was found, and a godly desire for the lawful use of the sacraments.

v.73

As I just said, this was found in the elect members of the true church of God even in the days of Jeroboam, Ahab, Manasseh, and in the time of the captivity of Babylon. But even as in those times, the true prophets of God were not acknowledged as true prophets by the priests of Baal, but were condemned as schismatics and heretics; even so in certain ages past, the bishops of Rome along with their conspirators, excommunicated and persecuted godly and learned men who preached the word of God and called for the reformation of the church. They put many of them to death with fire and sword. Our Lord and Master himself, with the prophets and apostles, foreshowed that this would come to pass.

Moreover, God could undoubtedly reserve to himself a mighty church even under the papism; even as we have no doubt that he has reserved a great many under Mohammedanism: for who would think that no members of the church of God remain in all of Asia and Africa? Could not our merciful God with his mighty power, in that last calamity and ruin of God's church, reserve again (as he once did) seven thousand men, none of whom had ever worshipped the beast or received his mark? What has been done in Turkey, or what is being done today, let those declare who can do it best and most rightly. No man can deny what has been done among us in these last ages. Through the great goodness of God, we see it has come to pass that even as circumcision, the sign of God's covenant of old, was given to the people of God even in the midst of falling from God; so also today, in the greatest darkness of antichrist, most holy baptism was given to the Christians to be a seal of the forgiveness of sins and inheritance of the children of God. Surely the pureness of doctrine was profaned with infinitely gross traditions by the pope's sworn friends; and yet, in the meantime, it was not altogether abolished. For — not repeating anything which I have said about godly and learned men sent by God, crying for reformation of the church, and greatly profiting with the children of God — was it not received with certain universal consent, as most certain and undoubted, that in the decalogue, or Ten Commandments, a short and most absolute sum of all the commandments of God was set down?

v.74

And that in the Lord's prayer, a most ample form of prayer to God was taught to us? And that the Apostles' Creed contained a most perfect rule of faith, or that which was to be believed? Surely the custom was to recite the creed to almost everyone departing out of this world, and at their last gasp, as a most perfect rule of that faith which brings salvation.[2638] Nor do we doubt that the merciful God and Father of mercies (who granted to save the thief on the cross even at giving up his life) had mercy on those who were oppressed with the tyranny of antichrist. And through His unmeasurable grace, he touched the hearts of men, both living and ready to die, and taught them by his Holy Spirit. He has sanctified those who confess [2639] one God the Father and Maker of all things, and one Jesus Christ the Son of God, redeemer of the world, who suffered and rose again, and one Holy Ghost, and finally the holy catholic church, forgiving them all their sins. And he has translated the souls of such faithful men into life everlasting (as they believed); we believe our flesh (being raised again) will also be carried into this place at the end of the world. Therefore, they have their answer here also, who ask whether all our elders who died before these last times in which the gospel is revealed, are damned? Therefore, let those who are alive rather look to this, lest for their contempt of the word of God and their contentions raised against the word of God, they come to a worse end than their forefathers. Therefore, though we do not acknowledge the popish church to be the true church, yet it does not follow from this that there neither is nor was any church of God in the earth. For we say that the true church of God is that which believes in Christ and does not forsake his word, which we have plentifully enough described. We know moreover that we ourselves, who today believe in Christ, are the true church of Christ our Lord. For as we cling by faith to our only head Christ, and to all the members of the catholic church, so we are not destitute of the true marks of the true church of God.

v.75

But they say, we do not read that under the bishops, priests, and kings of the church of the Jews, either the prophets (i.e., the guides of the faithful), or the faithful themselves, departed from the high priest, from the king, and from their universal church, and ordained for themselves new particular sacrifices, as you do today. For, departing from the bishop of Rome, from kings and governors, and from the universal church, you congregate for yourselves a church far unlike the universal church, both in preaching and ministering the sacraments. To this I answer that the old fathers, before the coming of our master Christ, for a certain prescribed cause, did not seek places in which to offer new sacrifices, though the temple was abused [2640] and defiled with idolatry. For it was unlawful to offer sacrifice outside the bounds of the temple, as seen in the seventeen chapter of Leviticus and the twelfth chapter of Deuteronomy. Nor was there any other reason why the people offered no sacrifices, being kept in bondage for the span of seventy years in the captivity of Babylon. Yet notwithstanding, it is most certain that both the prophets of God, and the holy and true worshippers of God, separated themselves from the worship and sacrifices used there, being contrary to the word of God.

Surely we read in all the sermons of the prophets, that both those sacrifices and that church were condemned. For this cause, they themselves were also condemned by the high priest and other priests of Baal, as most abominable heretics and schismatics; even as now-a-days we too are thrust through with the darts of your curses, for we will not communicate with the popish church and her holy service, and we reject their holy service itself. To this it may be added that the sacrifices of the law now being fulfilled and abrogated by the Lord,[2641] the apostles with manifest defection, departed not only from the high priests and the church of Jerusalem, but moreover, they gathered to Christ a new church by the preaching of the gospel and the badge of the sacraments. We have described this church in the Acts of the Apostles; and all churches should of right be reformed according to its pattern, even as many as would be called apostolic churches.

v.76

Therefore, how have we offended now-a-days, by reforming churches in the likeness of the apostolic church? For those churches were of old profaned by that see of Rome and its members. We read that the church of God, before the coming of Christ in the flesh, was often defiled with filthy pollutions of corrupt men, and that it was purged again and renewed in the likeness of the old church, according to the word of God. And why should we not take the same course in our own age, in the very same cause?

Moreover, there remain prophecies of our Saviour Christ and of the holy apostles and prophets, lively depicting this grievous oppression of the church of Christ under the fury of antichrist's tyranny, in this our last age. There remain most weighty commandments, to flee from anti-Christ, from idolatry and false prophets. For the Lord says in St. Matthew's gospel: "There shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and they will show great signs and wonders; so that, if it were possible, they would deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you beforehand. Therefore, if they say to you, Behold, he is in the desert, do not go; if they say behold, he is in the secret places, do not believe it." ^{Mat 24.24-26} And again: "Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."^{Mat 7.15} Also: "Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?" ^{Mat 15.14} St. Peter also says very gravely: "Save yourselves from this froward generation." ^{Act 2.40} And also in his second and third chapters of his second Epistle, he treats this matter largely. And also St. Paul, agreeing in all things with the holy gospel and with St. Peter, depicting antichrist and those last times of antichrist and corrupt men, not just lights but firebrands of the church, commands the saints to depart from them, and to gather themselves together unto Christ and his sincere truth. If any man asks for the places, he will find them here: 2Thess. 2; 1Tim 4; 1Cor 10; 2Tim 3 and 4. The same apostle says in another place, even as the apostle John say: "Flee from idolatry." ^{1Cor 10.14} And in the sixth chapter of second Corinthians, by express words and most manifest opposition, he shows that there can be no agreement between Christ and Belial, light and darkness, and between idols and the temple of God. ^{2Cor 6.14-15}

v.77

And thus he adds shortly after: "Therefore, come out from among them, and separate yourselves (says the Lord), and touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you." ^{2Cor 6.17} To this pertains what the blessed apostle John in his Revelation was shown by the Lord Christ. Seeing the works of Babylon, he also hears with it a voice coming from heaven, commanding this: "Go out of her, my people, that you not partake of her sins, and that you do not receive her plagues." ^{Rev 18.4} The same apostle often threatens everlasting destruction to those who worship the beast, but life and glory to those who forsake and flee from the beast, so that they cling only to the only Saviour of the world, Jesus Christ. Therefore, that departure of ours from the see or church of Rome, is not only lawful, but also necessary, as that which is commanded by the Lord himself and by his holy apostles, to whom unless we obey, we cannot be saved.

Otherwise, we are not ignorant that fallings away are altogether abominable and to be blamed. Notwithstanding, unless we distinguish among these fallings, it will not plainly appear what we either allow or disapprove, or what we follow or flee from. There is a defection of apostasy in which, through their hatred of faith or religion, atheists or godless men, out of mere ungodliness and contempt of God, with their wicked ringleaders Lucian and Julian the Apostate,[2642] fall away from the sound and catholic faith, and finally from the fellowship of the faithful. Moreover, they blaspheme and rail against Christian verity, and either scornfully laugh at, or persecute, the very church of God. There is also a heretical defection in which, along with Valentine, Marcion, Arius, Manicheaus, Artemones, [2643] and other such monsters, certain proud, arrogant, and malapert [2644] wicked persons, either refuse the scripture; or twisting it, they despise and tread it under their feet. Or else they deny, overthrow, and resist certain articles of faith, and the sound and ancient opinions of the church of God, and they affirm the contrary. So they frame heretical churches for themselves, and depart from the true, ancient, and catholic church.

v.78

There is, moreover, a schismatic defection: such as the Donatists, who separated themselves from the true church of God under the pretence of obtaining a more absolute kind of holiness. [2645] I spoke of this very largely a little earlier. And the two kinds of defection recalled above are altogether abominable and wicked, even as the third kind can also by no means be defended. But none of all these can be imputed to us now-a-days, by our departing from the church of Rome. For the departure is void of all crime, and it is made not from the true, but from the false church; not from the people of God, but from the persecutors of God's people; not from the articles of faith and sound opinions of the church, but from errors which obscure the articles of faith and from the wicked traditions and corruptions of men. Moreover, this is made not done lightly, but of necessity; not for innovation,[2646] but for true religion's sake,[2647] so that leaving the fellowship of darkness we may be gathered together again with Christ, the true light, and all his members. And it is in this way, now-a-days, that we have forsaken that see of Rome, flowing with false doctrine, idolatry, and the blood of innocent martyrs; and embraced the doctrine of the gospel and of the apostles, and therefore Christ himself the head of the church, which is the fellowship of all saints believing in Christ.

I have said this much up to here by digression. I now return to the treatise of the catholic church, so that I may make an end of those things which remain to be said. And to that end, so that greater light and force may be added to those things which I have previously spoken about the church, I will now bring out certain parables from the holy scriptures, by which those things are [2648] painted before our eyes as it were.

v.79

And thus it will be easy for every man to differentiate between the inward and the outward church; and to know either what properly pertains to every one, or else what is not proper.

First of all, the church is set forth for us under the shape and fashion of a house. A house is built to this end, that men may dwell in it; and it is built by workmen of all sorts, made of wood, stones, and mortar, the foundation being first laid, upon which walls are set, which are joined together with a cornerstone. Last of all, the roof is added or placed aloft, without which the whole building, rotting little by little, would fall down and decay. I said that the church is the house of God, the chief master-builder of which is God himself. In the figure of it, that is to say, in the tabernacle made by Moses and the temple built by Solomon, God delivered both to Moses and David, the fashion of the temple, according to which pattern they should build it. For from the beginning, God kept the angels so that they would not fall; and He repaired man who had fallen into sin and death immediately after the beginning of the world — sanctifying a church for himself, which he also severed out, compassing it about with his word. And it is altogether needful that we keep this fashion of the church, and that we do not receive any other fashion, either by emperor or pope, or delivered by any other man. The true master-builder of this house of God. It says in the gospel: "Upon this rock I will build my church."^{Mat 16.18} For it is the same Son of God who makes us worthy of his kingdom; he gives us faith, by which we are made true members of the church of God. But even though the Lord himself is the only and principal builder of his church, yet he does not refuse the labours of men in the building. Indeed, he rather joins men with him in building the church, whom also he granted to call master-builders.[2649] For Paul says: "As a skilful master-builder, I have laid the foundation." ^{1Cor 3.10} And again: "Who is Paul, and who is Apollos, but the ministers by whom you believed, and as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that plants anything, nor he that waters, but God who gives the increase." ^{1Cor 3.5-7}

v.80

Again: "We together are God's labourers. [2650] You are God's husbandry and God's building." ^{1Cor 3.9} We will make the matter plain by an example.

At the time which God would raise up a house for himself among the Gentiles, he first of all endued Cornelius with his grace, the governor of the Italian regiment placed by Caesar,[2651] or the captain and centurion of it. Later, after sending the apostle Peter, he prepared and made ready that house for himself. For Peter teaches and baptizes; Cornelius with his household hearkens, believes, is baptized, and becomes the house of God, the true church; the Lord dwells in this church by his Spirit. For even as a house is dwelled in by men, so God dwells in the church, as Paul witnesses, saying, "The temple of God is holy, which you are." ^{1Cor 3.17} Again: "Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, which is in you?"" etc. ^{1Cor 6.19} The foundation of this house is Christ; for Christ says by Isaiah: "Behold, I put or lay in Zion (i.e., in the church) a stone, a tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation. He that believes shall not make haste." ^{Isa 28.16} The Lord expounds this prophecy in St. Matthew's Gospel, and applies it to himself as the foundation of the church. Peter has confessed that Jesus is the true Son of the living God, the Messiah that was looked for. Jesus says, "And upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not overcome it." ^{Mat 16.18} There is to be added to this, the exposition of St. Peter the apostle who, reciting the very same words of the prophet Isaiah, and alluding to that saying of David, "The stone which the builders refused is the head of the corner," ^{Psa 118.22} expressly says that Christ is that "living stone, refused by men, but chosen by God, a sure foundation, upon whom whoever stays shall not be confounded." ^1Pet
2.6-7 And also Paul the apostle agrees with Peter. For he says: "And the rock was Christ." ^{1Cor 10.4}

And again: "No man can lay another foundation than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." ^{1Cor 3.11} Therefore, though in another place he names the self-same foundation as the foundation of the prophets and apostles, it is not to be taken as if the apostles and prophets were the foundation of the church; but that they laid Jesus Christ as the foundation of the church, and built the whole building on this foundation; yes, even themselves also.^{Eph 2.20}

v.81

For mortal men cannot be the object of faith and the foundation of the church, upon which the faithful may stay. David cries: "The way of God is uncorrupt: the word of the Lord is tried in the fire: he is a shield to all that trust in him. For who is God, besides the Lord? And who is mighty (or a rock),[2652] save our God?"^{2Sam 22.31-32}And Jeremiah says: "Thus says the Lord, Cursed be the man that trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm, and withdraws his heart from the Lord. Blessed be the man that trusts in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is." ^{Jer 17.5, 7} So the writings of the prophets and apostles with one consent show us that the rock, that is to say, the foundation of the church, is Christ, and that it is he only and alone.

They greatly err therefore, whoever they may be, who attribute to the bishop of Rome this divine praise, power, and prerogative, which is due only to the Son of God. And if they object that many interpreters, both Greek and Latin,[2653] have understood the rock to be Peter himself, we refuse man's authority, and affirm and bring forth heavenly authority. Christ did not say, I will build my church upon you, but upon a rock; and it is that self-same rock that you have confessed. Yes, and Peter takes his name of Petra, which signifies a rock,[2654] even as a Christian of Christ. And Peter himself understood the rock to be Christ. To this comes the authority of Paul, saying: "The rock was Christ." ^1Cor
10.4 And, "No other foundation can any man lay, than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." ^{1Cor 3.11} For David before him said: "Who is God, besides the Lord; or who is a rock, save our God?" ^2Sam
22.32 I do not repeat these testimonies unadvisedly: for all those who are not out of their wits will confess that more credit is to be given to these most manifest testimonies, witnessing that Christ alone is the rock, and placing him as the foundation of the church, than to those who teach that both Peter and the bishop of Rome, together with Christ, are the rocks and foundations of the church.

v.82

I will use no sharper speech against them at this time, for it is most manifest to all men what kind of men they are: most unworthy to be reckoned with Peter, but most worthy to be counted among Simoniacs. Peter foresaw what kind of men they would be; and therefore, lest anyone be deceived by them, he painted them in their colours in the second chapter of his second epistle. But leaving them, we will return to the exposition of the parable we had in hand.

The matter of the house, such as the walls and other parts, are faithful men, built upon the foundation Christ. Those famous and principal workmen of this building, Peter and Paul, witness and explain this in the following words. Peter says: "You come to Christ as to a living stone, disallowed by men, but chosen by God, and precious. And you, as living stones, are made a spiritual house, and holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." ^{1Pet 2.4-5} And Paul says: "Now therefore you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom all the building coupled together, grows unto a holy temple in the Lord: in whom you are also built together to be the habitation of God by the Spirit." ^{Eph 2.19-22} Therefore, by the authority of the apostles we learn that Christ is the cornerstone in the house of God, who, lest the walls fall down, couples them together, and upholds the whole building. He is also the roof of the church, that is to say, the defender and ruler, under whose defence the church lives safe, happy, and blessed. To this pertains the consideration of the tabernacle of Moses, and of the temple of Solomon: for either of them is called the house of God. The tabernacle was distinguished into the holiest of all, the holy place, and the court. And even though these several parts are named, it is still called one house of the Lord, because there is only one universal church, which nevertheless has her parts. "The holiest of all" is a figure of the triumphant church in heaven, where our fellow-servants and brethren are: the patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, and all the blessed spirits.

v.83

There Christ our Lord always appears in the sight of God; he is our ark, in which are contained the treasures of the church — there we have the fulfilling of the law, the certainty of the covenant, and our propitiation; there we have our oracles. In this part of the temple, all things are sumptuous, gold and precious stones; for in heaven, perfect joy is attained. In the temple are forms of angels, palms and flowers, for in the life to come the elect will be as the angels of God. ^{Mat 22.30} Here, those who overcome are green forevermore. "To him that overcomes," says the Lord, "will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God." ^{Rev 2.7} Here all things shine: for in Christ and in the life to come, we shall be made bright. "The holy place" represents to us the militant and inward church, sanctified with the blood of Christ; which not only has a show of godliness, but godliness itself: for by faith they cling fast to God, and with mutual charity they are knit together among themselves. They serve God in spirit, hearing God's word, and being partakers of the sacraments. In the holy place, therefore, Solomon placed ten candlesticks, ten tables, and ten caldrons; for in the church, the saints are daily enlightened, nourished, and purged through repentance. Finally, "the court" received the whole assembly of the people; for the church is the assembly of all those who profess faith, having hypocrites also mingled with them. Between the holy place and the court (or porch) are two pillars in Solomon's temple, dedicated to the posterity of David; for it is Christ who bears up the church, by whom the way is open into the church. Through the benefit and power of Christ, the church has obtained, that if she continues in Christ, she will also be "the pillar and ground of the truth." But besides the tabernacle and temple of God, besides the church, there is no place in which God receives the service done to him; God is only favourable in the church of his saints.[2655] Let the Jews, Turks, and Saracens, therefore, do works which are ever so excellent in outward show; yet, without Christ and his fellowship, no man pleases God. ^{Heb 11.6}

Again, the church of God is compared by Isaiah to a most excellent vine, who says by plain words: "The vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah are his pleasant plant." ^{Isa 5.7}

v.84

And also in the gospel, our Lord plainly expounds in the parable of the vine, that men are the branches of this vine. Yes, and in John he says:

"I am that true vine, and my Father is a husbandman. Every branch that does not bear fruit in me, he takes away; and every one that bears fruit, he purges it, that it may bear more fruit. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, no more can you, unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches: he that abides in me, and I in him, bears much fruit: for without me you can do nothing. If a man does not abide in me, he is cast out as a branch, and withers; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they burn." ^{Joh 15.1-6}

There is one church therefore; for it is one vine. Out of her come branches, partly fruitful, and partly unfruitful: for both the good or godly and true worshippers of God, and evil men or hypocrites, are counted to be in the church; but hypocrites in their time are cut off, and thrown into everlasting fire. The good remain in the vine, and are not cut off, but bear fruit that are they indebted for to Christ, the foundation of the church, and also its head and preserver; by his spiritual and living juice, he makes them fruitful in good works. In this most evidently appears the knitting together of the head and the members, Christ and the faithful. We spoke of this at first, and the Lord adds in the gospel: "If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask what you will, and it shall be done to you." ^{Joh 15.7}

Moreover, this church of the faithful is called the kingdom of God. For the Son of God himself, Christ Jesus, is the king of the church, that is to say, of all the faithful — who governs the church by his Spirit and word; and she in return willingly submits herself to his government. Nor are there many kingdoms in the world, because there is one only King of glory, Christ. I treated this king and kingdom in the seventh sermon of my fourth decade.

Now we have also said often, that the church is likened to man's body. In the body, the head is the chief, which is never absent from the body; and being struck off, it leaves a dead body, void of sense.

v.85

And even though this body has many members, there is a most pleasant agreement of them all among themselves; every one agrees and consents together among themselves: they sorrow one with another, and they each help one another. What one member does for another member, all faithful people likewise perform towards one another. They are united to their head Christ by faith; the head itself is joined to the members through grace and the Spirit. Christ is never separated from the church: nor does she have life anywhere else than from Christ. Although he is absent in body from the militant church, yet he is continually present in spirit, in operation, and in government. Thus he needs no vicar on earth, since he governs alone, and continues forever as the only head, the only king, the only priest and saviour of his church. For the Lord says in Ezekiel: "I will raise up over my sheep a shepherd, who shall feed them, namely, my servant David: he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd. And I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David shall be their prince among them. I the Lord have spoken it." ^{Eze 34.23-24} This last thing he added, lest any should doubt the faith and certainty of those things which are spoken. God is the eternal truth, and he has spoken it: therefore that which he has spoken must be most true. But what has he spoken? That there shall be and is one pastor and prince of the church. Behold, it is not without significance that he said one. But who is that one? He expounds that, and says, "my servant David," namely, Christ Jesus, that branch of David's posterity whom the authority of the gospel everywhere calls the Son of David. He shall be a shepherd, not in name and title only, but in deed; for he shall feed his sheep, and therefore he shall be in the midst of them. For in the gospel he says expressly: ""Wherever two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." ^{Mat 18.20} And again: "Behold, I am with you always, even to the end of the world." ^Mat
28.20 Now, if he is present with his church, then she has no need of a vicar; for a vicar supplies the place of the one who is absent. "Wherever Christ's vicar is acknowledged, therefore, there is no Christ, and therefore anti-Christ reigns there. This will be made yet more clear and sure, if we weigh what it means that Christ is said to be the head of the church.

v.86

The head is the life, salvation, and light, or that which gives light to the church, the supreme governor of the faithful, who both can and will always be present to the whole congregation of saints, of all ages, and dispersed throughout the whole world. He will hear her prayers and requests, and moreover, send her succour in all things. And briefly, he is able perfectly to govern the whole church, and both provide for and bring to pass all her matters, in all things. But this privilege, I think, can be given to no creature without blasphemy and sacrilege. Therefore, only Christ, perfect God and man, is and remains the only head of the church. Those who acknowledge the pope of Rome as the head of the church militant, either do not know what they do and say, or they willingly and wittingly blaspheme the Son of God, whom they will not have to reign over his church alone.

But let us now hear the testimonies of St. Paul the apostle of this matter.

"God has raised up Christ from the dead, and set him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principalities and powers, and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not in this world only, but also in that which is to come. And he has made all things subject under his feet, and he has appointed him over all things, to be head to the church, which is his body, even the fulness of him that fills all in all things." ^{Eph 1.20-23}

Behold, Christ is the head, for he rules all things in heaven and on earth; he governs all things; he has all things subject to himself; and he makes the church his body, ministering to her those things which she has need of, and fulfilling all her desires. Again, the same apostle says: "Christ is the head of the church, and he is the saviour of the body." ^{Eph 5.23} It is the part of the head to preserve and govern the body: but no man performs that, except Christ. He remains, therefore, the only head of his church; especially since the church is the spiritual body of Christ, and therefore it cannot have a carnal head, unless you would make a poetical monster of the church: for Christ is the head of the church, not because he is man, but because he is God and man.

But if the defenders of the Romish idol and champions of the monarchy of Rome understand the head to be the prince or governor on earth, as the scripture called Saul the head over Israel, and they understand this of chief bishop ruling in the chief see — then et them again hear the scripture itself confuting their filthy error, saying:

v.87

"And there also arose a strife among the apostles, which of them would seem to be the greatest. But Jesus said to them: The kings of the Gentiles reign over them, and those who bear rule over them are called gracious lords. But you shall not be so. Rather, let the greatest among you be as the least; and the chief, as he that serves. For who is greater, the one who sits at the table, or the one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at the table? And yet I am among you as the one who ministers (serves)." ^{Luk 22.24-27}

That primacy of the church of Rome is therefore of men; it is not of the doctrine or institution of Christ: yes, it is rather quite contrary and repugnant to the institution, doctrine, and example of Christ; who would not have the apostles or apostolic men reign like the princes of this world. He instituted ministers of the church, who should serve the church. She sits at the table; the ministers set that food before her which they receive from the Lord, and rightly divide the word of the Lord. Did not Christ himself refuse a crown on earth, and did he not minister, who is Lord of all? Does he not disallow any minister to seek any prerogative in respect to eldership? "He that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger." ^{Luk 22.26} He therefore commands an equality among them all. And therefore St. Jerome judges rightly, saying that by the custom of man, and not by the authority of God, some one of the elders is placed over the rest, and called a bishop — even though of old, an elder or minister and a bishop were of equal honour, power, and dignity.[2656] And it is to be observed that St. Jerome does not speak of the Romish monarchy, but of every bishop placed in every city above the rest of the ministers.

v.88

I do not bring this out, to the end we should stay upon the authority of man; but to the end that I might show that even by the witness of man, it may be proved that the majority, as they call it, does not have its origin from the Son of God and from God's word, but out of man's brain;[2657] and therefore that Christ remains the only head of his church, and the bishop of Rome is something less than the head of the church militant. [2658] And with this, we cling most steadfastly to the sacred and holy gospel, and to the undoubted doctrine of the apostles. This doctrine takes away all pride of supremacy, and commends to us a faithful ministry and the equal authority and humbleness of the ministers. The apostles again witnesses this, saying: "Let a man think of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the secrets of God." ^{1Cor 4.1}

To this belongs almost the whole tenth chapter of John, in which the Lord named himself the true and also the only shepherd of the universal church. The only sheepfold of this shepherd is the catholic church, gathered together by the word out of the Jews and Gentiles. And sheep of this fold are all the faithful people in the world, hearing and giving themselves over wholly to be governed by this chief shepherd Christ. Even though he also communicates this name of pastor or shepherd, to the ministers appointed to the ministry of the church, he retains for himself the charge of the chief shepherd, and also the chief power and dignity. Men that are pastors of churches are all ministers, and are all equal: Christ our Lord is the universal pastor, and chief, and Lord of pastors. The more that worthy diligence and trust is in the pastors, the more worthy it makes them. Therefore, when the Lord said to Peter, "Feed my sheep," ^Joh
21.16 he did not commit to Peter any empire either over the world or over the church, but a ministry on behalf of his redeemed. "Teach my sheep," he says, "and govern them with my word; my sheep, I say, whom I redeemed with my blood;" for Paul says: "Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock of which the Holy Ghost has made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he has purchased with his own blood." ^{Act 20.28}

v.89

The bishop of Rome is therefore deceived, who by the Lord's word spoken to Peter, thinks that full power is given to him over all in the church.[2659] Let the apostle Peter himself be heard, talking with his fellow-elders, opening those words of the Lord spoken to him: " The elders who are among you," he says, "I beseech, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that will be revealed. Feed the flock of God, which depends upon you, caring for it not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but from a ready mind. Not as though you were lords over God's heritage, but that you may be examples to the flock." ^{1Pet 5.1-3} Peter does not speak of any empire and lordship — indeed, by express words, he forbids lordly dignity. For just as he is appointed by the Lord to be a minister and an elder, not a prince and a pope, so too he appointed no princes in the church, but ministers and elders, who should feed Christ's flock with the word of Christ, and do that willingly and lawfully, all wicked devices at once set aside. To this belongs the whole thirty-fourth chapter of Ezekiel, which we alleged a little earlier. But if the heart of the bishop of Rome and his men had not been hardened, and their eyes blinded, they would long ago have seen that they could in no part nor by no means have been numbered among the shepherds of the church and disciples of Peter. They would at least have marked that sentence of their own Gregory, which he recites to Maurice the emperor, almost in these words: "I boldly affirm that whoever he is that calls himself the universal priest, is a forerunner of antichrist." And shortly after: "But because the truth itself says, 'Everyone who exalts himself shall be brought low,' I thereby know that the more swollen the puffing, the sooner it is broken." [2660] These are his sayings.

v.90

Last of all, the estate of Christ and the church is shadowed by the similitude of marriage between the husband and the wife; for Christ is called the husband of the church, and the church is called the spouse of Christ. St. John says to his disciples: "You yourselves are my witnesses, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. He that has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. This my joy is therefore fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease." ^{Joh 3.28-30} And this allegory is very common in the prophets. In a certain place, a damsel is pretended, despised and polluted, lying in her filthiness; and a certain nobleman comes by who, plucking her out of the mire, and making her clean from her filthiness, and also sumptuously apparelling her, chose her for his wife. And even though this allegory declares that heavenly benefit which God showed to his people being in bondage in Egypt, by their wonderful deliverance, and adopting them into his peculiar people — notwithstanding this, who does not see that all mankind, from its origin, is defiled with sin and wickedness, and sticks fast in the mire of hell? Who does not know that the Son of God came down from heaven, and washed all mankind in his blood; and having purged her, he has joined to himself a glorious church, having neither spot nor wrinkle, nor any such thing? ^Eph
5.27 Surely, marriage is a mutual participation in common between those who have contracted about all their goods; it is a certain knitting together into one body as it were, not to be dissolved. Therefore, when Christ took our flesh upon himself, he became ours in all things, and we also became members of the same body — of his flesh, and of his bones. In us there is infirmity, sin, and death: our husband has also taken these same things to himself, so that he might make them harmless to us. In Christ our husband is justification, sanctification, and life; he communicates these same things to us, his spouse, so that in him we might be just and holy, and might live through him.

From that lawful joining together of the Lord and the church, are born lawful children to God; for which the church is called a mother, and a freewoman, that is, a matron and a mistress.

v.91

For the apostle Paul says: "Jerusalem which is above is free; which is the mother of us all." ^{Gal 4.26} For just as children are born through the joining of man and woman together, by the propagation of their seed, so Christ has coupled the church to himself, in which he has left the seed of his word. By the word our mother, the church, children are born (which I admonished you about before, when I spoke of the origin of the church [2661]); that is to say, while retaining the seed of the word, by the preaching of the word, she fashions and nourishes us in her womb, and then she brings us forth into the light; afterwards she nourishes us with milk, and brings us up with stronger food, until we all grow up into a perfect man. But just as there is no mother without a husband, and without true faith being plighted, and without seed — even so, without Christ, without true faith and the seed of God's word, the church is not our mother, that is, a free woman and our mistress. By these things we have by the way learned why the church of God is called a mother.

Notwithstanding, she is also called a virgin; for before all things, the Lord requires the faith and integrity of this holy mother, the church. For the apostle Paul says: "I have coupled you to one man, to present you a chaste virgin to Christ." ^{2Cor 11.2} Therefore, it is the part of the spouse, to bring her virginity to her husband as her dowry, and to keep it undefiled. But what manner of virginity is that? Sincere faith in Christ, which wholly, or with all her mind, clings forever to one. This comes to pass when we give ear only to our spouse, and love none but him alone — to be brief, when we persevere in the simplicity of the gospel. For it follows in the words of the apostle: "But I fear, lest it come to pass that, as the serpent deceived Eve with his subtlety, so your minds would be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."^{2Cor 11.3} That simplicity acknowledged Christ as the means of salvation, the recovery [2662] of life and all heavenly treasures; without him there is no salvation, nor any good thing. But who would call someone a chaste matron, if she listens to bawds, and sets her heart on the love of others, and does not content herself with her husband only? Would not all men cry out that she is a naughty pack,[2663] an adulteress, by lying with others, and bearing children of strange seed?

v.92

Spiritual adultery and fornication is much spoken about in the holy scriptures. All the sermons of the prophets are full of such allegories. They call those men or churches who receive strange seed — that is to say, doctrine differing from the word of God — adulterers, whoremongers, and fornicators. For they go a whoring from God; they do not cling to God only; they do not love God alone with all their heart; they do not worship, serve, and call upon him only. Rather, they choose others for themselves, whom they may worship and call upon, either instead of God, or together with God. A good part of the fifth chapter of Jeremiah pertains to this, and the whole second chapter of Hosea. Among other things, the Lord says: "I will not have compassion on her children, because they are children of fornications, for their mother has played the harlot; she has said, I will go after my lovers," etc. ^{Hos 2.4-5}

Since these things are this way, brethren, there is no reason why any man should reverence the church of Rome, decking herself with the title and beauty of the holy mother, the church. For she is not the holy mother church; she is not an uncorrupted matron and virgin. For where is the husband, who is the only husband of this chaste matron? Where is the faith and integrity kept with her husband? Has she not defiled herself with strange seed? Has she not received and taught a new and strange doctrine from the word of God, and by that means begotten many children — not to Christ, but to antichrist? St. John, beautifying this church with her apt title, calls her, "Great Babylon, the mother of whoredoms and abominations of the earth; and a woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus Christ." ^Rev
17.5-6 Our holy mother, the church, is an undefiled virgin, hearing only the voice or doctrine of her only well-beloved husband, placing all the means of life and salvation in him alone, and depending only upon him in all things.

The scripture paints the mystery of Christ and the church with many other allegories: but it suffices to have spoken this much of it. The Lord Jesus, the true and only Shepherd of his church, lovingly bring home again the wandering sheep into his fold; and being gathered together in his church, preserve them forever. Amen.

5-5. THE FIFTH SERMON: OF PRAYER, SINGING, & THANKSGIVING.

Of the form and manner of how to pray to God; that is, of calling
on the name of the Lord: where also the Lord's Prayer is expounded;
and also singing, thanksgiving, and the force of prayer, is treated.

The ministry of the word of God in the church of Christ being handled, I think I have a convenient place to treat the prayer of the faithful, which godly ministers never leave, to stir up the church.

Praying

The word prayer is widely used among writers, and it is in daily use. At present, we will use it in the same manner that David the prophet used it, saying: "Hear my prayer, God; and let my cry come to you." ^{Psa 102.1} For prayer is a humble and earnest laying forth of a faithful mind, by which we either ask good things from God's hands, or else we give him thanks for those things which we have received. And there are chiefly two parts of prayer: invocation (or asking), and thanksgiving. By petition, we lay open to God the requests and desires of our heart; beseeching him to give us good things, and that he will turn evil things away from us, as it may be to his glory and good pleasure, and according to our necessity.

v.164

In invocation or petition, we comprehend obsecration,[2814] which is a more vehement prayer; and also intercession, by which we commend other men's matters to the Lord. For we offer prayers to the Lord our God, not only for ourselves, but also for our brethren, and for their manifold necessities; for those who are distressed with perils; for those who are sick; for those who suffer persecution, or are oppressed in some way with other calamities and afflictions. Nor do we exclude beseechings, by which we earnestly desire evils to be turned away from ourselves or from others. There are also complaints, by which the saints in their prayers holily expostulate with God. Thanksgiving comprehends both divine praises, and it also celebrates with a joyful spirit God's noble power, and the benefits received from his hand. A great part of the Psalms is referred to this. One part pertains to invocation or calling upon God; other parts serve to teach or instruct; and some serve to declare or expound. There is no place to speak of this at present. Paul, the blessed apostle of Christ, acknowledging these parts of prayer in writing to the Colossians, says: "Continue in prayer, and watch in this with thanksgiving." ^{Col 4.2} And to the Philippians he says: "Let your requests be shown to God, in prayer and supplication with giving of thanks." ^{Phi 4.6} And again to Timothy: "I exhort, therefore," says Paul, "that first of all prayers, supplications, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men." ^{1Tim 2.1}

The Kinds of Prayers

Kinds of prayers are these: there is a private prayer of every faithful man; and there is also a public prayer of the whole church.

Private prayer is made to God by every faithful man, in whatever place, either in the house or out of doors, in the closet of his heart and temple of his own body. For St. Peter went up into the uppermost part of the house and prayed. St. Paul says, "I would, therefore, that the men pray everywhere, lifting up pure hands;" ^1Tim
2.8 and Christ our Lord, very often departed even out of the temple into the mount to pray. And in the gospel he says: "When you pray, enter into your chamber; and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in secret." ^{Mat 6.6}

v.165

Public prayer is that which is used by the church; these prayers are made to God in the holy assembly, according to the accustomed order of every church. Now the pastor's duty is, as Paul also admonishes in 1Timothy 2 (and as we repeated in the sermon before this), to gather together, instruct, and preserve the assemblies, in which supplications or common prayers are made. And those who are more negligent than becomes them in this, are greatly to be blamed; nor indeed are those pastors to be suffered, who seldom or never teach diligently, and are cold in stirring up a desire in men, to pray. Men by nature are slow and slack in the study of religion; and therefore we need a sharp spur; and the charge and office of stirring up, and provoking, is committed to the pastors of churches. The prophets somewhere cry: "Blow the trumpet in Zion, assemble a congregation." ^{Joe 2.15} For in a holy congregation, three things are chiefly used: the teaching of the gospel, faithful prayers, and religious celebration or administration of the sacraments: and sometimes there is a collection made for relieving the poor and the church. The holy scripture witnesses that these things are not instituted at the will and pleasure of man, but by the authority of God; yes, and immediately after the first beginnings; and they were also used by the most holy worshippers of God. There is no doubt they were used by the most ancient patriarchs, both those before the flood and those who followed immediately after. For the scripture plainly witnesses this about Jacob himself, the grandson of Abraham, that he erected an altar in Bethel, at which he assembled his whole household, though exceedingly great; and there he offered sacrifice to God. He instituted holy assemblies in Moses' time by the law, in most evident commandments. Indeed, he diligently commands in the Ten Commandments to sanctify the sabbath-day, which also comprehends holy assemblies. The holy prophets of God everywhere praise and commend the ecclesiastical assemblies of God's people. Nor did Christ our Lord disallow them, when he came in the flesh. For it was in the most notable assemblies and feasts that he taught with great diligence; even so, he gathered and assembled together both the people and his disciples, whom he specially commanded that they not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father. When they were gathered together in an assembly and in prayer, we read in the Acts that this was then performed.

v.166

There also, the assembly of the faithful is commended to us; as it appears both in the 11th and 14th chapters of Paul's first epistle to Corinth. Those supplications which Paul commands to be made for all those who are set in authority, are made chiefly in holy assemblies. Truly, Pliny, a heathen author, writing to Trajan the emperor, makes obvious mention of holy assemblies.[2815] Holy assemblies in olden times held very excellent promises; as we may see in the prayer of Solomon, which is described to you in the first book of Kings, 8th chapter. And today, the church of Christ has promises that are not at all inferior to them. Christ our Lord says: "I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth touching anything that they ask, it shall be done for them by my Father who is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them." ^{Mat 18.19-20} Behold, the Lord himself is in the midst of the assemblies of saints; and where the Lord is, there is both plenty and the treasure of all good things. And therefore, the experience which we have about matters, teaches us that the supplications of the church are effectual; for the Lord hears the prayers of the church, and delivers from evil those whose safety the church commends to Him. We have oftentimes experienced that those who were in extreme danger have found very present help, even at the same instant in which the congregation has offered their prayers to the Lord. Moreover, the example moves very many who are otherwise hard-hearted and barbarous; for they see the devout godliness of the holy congregation, and the fervency of the faithful in assemblies, and they are thereby moved; so that looking within themselves, they acknowledged that they are miserable, and desire to be partakers of this fellowship, according to the saying of St. Paul:

v.167

"If therefore, when the whole church comes together in one place, and all speak strange tongues, and those who are unlearned come in, or those who do not believe — will they not say that you are out of your wits? But if all prophesy, and one who does not believe comes in, or one who is unlearned, he is rebuked by all men, and judged by all. And so the secrets of his heart are made manifest; and so he will fall down on his face, and worship God, and say plainly that God is in you indeed." ^{1Cor 14.23-25}

With what confidence, therefore, and how shamefully, some dare to treat holy assemblies lightly; and not only that, but tjeu also scorn them, as if they were assembled together without any profit at all. David in his banishment complains of nothing so much as being compelled to wander in the wilderness, and be shut out from holy assemblies. For he promises the Lord, he will enter into his holy congregation if he is ever restored again. ^{Psa 22.22} Truly, when the Lord says in the gospel, "He who is of God, hears God's word;" ^{Joh 8.47} it follows that those who love the congregation, in which the word of God is preached, have the natural mark of sons of God.

But many not only loathe holy assemblies, but also say that prayers are altogether superfluous, vain, and unprofitable. Therefore, before we proceed any further, we will show that the godly must pray, and that the prayers of the faithful are both effectual, profitable, and necessary. They say, All things are done by the providence of God, and therefore prayers are unprofitable; for what God has foreknown, he will truly bring to pass in the manner of his foreknowledge; nor can it be hindered by prayers. But these men abuse the providence of God; for out of it they gather what the holy scriptures do not teach them to gather. For in Deuteronomy, Moses has left written in express words: "The Lord had determined to destroy you; therefore I made intercession to the Lord, and I found favour." ^{Deu 9.19} Jonah threatens such certain destruction to the Ninevites from the Lord, that he even foretold the number of days. But when the men of Nineveh believed the Lord, and repented, the Lord became favourable to them again; nor did he destroy them when they repented.

v.168

Moreover, Isaiah had spoken to Hezekiah out of the mouth of the Lord, "You shall die, and not live." ^{Isa 38.1} But when the king poured out his prayers, from the bottom of his heart to the Lord, God changed his sentence that he had pronounced. For the Lord himself says in Jeremiah: "I will speak suddenly against a nation or a kingdom, to pluck it up, and to root it out, and to destroy it. But if this nation against whom I have pronounced, turns from its wickedness, I will repent of the plague that I thought to bring upon them," etc. ^{Jer 18.7-8} Therefore, the prayers of the faithful are effectual, staying the wrathful judgments of God, yes, and removing them.

They object again, that prayer is a declaration of things which we require of the Lord; and God foreknows all things; therefore, these things are unprofitably and superfluously declared to him which he already knows; and for that reason, prayer is unprofitable. This is confuted by Christ our Lord himself, who plainly said, "Your heavenly Father knows what things you need, before you ask of him." ^{Mat 6.8} Nevertheless, adding a form of prayer, he then teaches us to pray. In another place, he commands and stirs us up to pray often: "Watch and pray, lest you fall into temptation." ^{Mat 26.41} And Paul says: "Rejoice always; pray continually." ^{1The 5.16-17} In every place there are many precepts of this kind. Nor do we declare our matters to him as to one who does not know them; but we utter them to the one who understands the desires of our heart, and humble ourselves at the feet of his majesty. We ask of him what we know we lack, and yet it is certainly to be received from him, who is the author of all goodness; for we believe his sure and infallible promises. In the meantime, prayers are not superfluous, for the Lord would assuredly give what we asked. The Lord promised the delivery of his people, which the godly did not doubt at all. Yet they prayed to the Lord with incessant supplications, crying, "Deliver us, O Lord our God;" ^{Psa 106.47} nor did they think they laboured in vain.

v.169

The anabaptists [2816] pretend absolute pureness. Therefore, being pure, they neither can nor should pray, "Forgive us our debts," ^{Mat 6.12} since [they claim] there remain no debts. The most holy evangelist and apostle John answers such a claim, saying: "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we acknowledge our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us." ^1Joh
1.8-10 For as long as we live in this world, there remain remnants of sin to be washed away every moment by the grace of Christ.

Moreover, they object that it is written, "We know that God does not hear sinners;" ^{Joh 9.31} and we are all sinners. Therefore, God hears none of us, and so men's prayers are found to be unprofitable. We answer, that some sinners are altogether ungodly and despisers of God: those God does not hear. There are again repentant men, and those who fear God; they are nevertheless sinners, and rightly called such because of the remnants of sin: those God hears. This might be shown by the examples of David, Manasseh, Peter, the thief crucified with Christ, and many others, who were sinners; and yet when they prayed, they were heard.

Therefore, we say that the prayers of the faithful are not only profitable and effectual, but also necessary for men. For we men are defiled with sin, destitute and void of all goodness. "Every good giving, and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights." ^{Jas 1.17} He commands us to pray, and offers very large promises to those who pray. Therefore, our fathers were often exercised and very fervent in prayer; by their example, they teach us that prayers are necessary. The scripture also diligently and at large recites how they obtained great things by their prayers in very weighty affairs and dangers, indeed, in most necessary matters, from our most true and most bountiful Lord and God. The apostles pray for the Holy Ghost, faith, and the increase of faith; and they received their requests, not sparingly, but liberally, being made partakers of all kinds of graces from Christ. In the gospel, the publican prays in the temple, and says: "God, be merciful to me, a sinner;" ^{Luk 18.13} and immediately he found the Lord merciful to him. The holy history records what and how great were the things that Elijah obtained from the Lord by his prayers.

v.170

And the blessed apostle James applies his example to us also, that in faith we too should call upon God. I repeat this, lest any man think that it does not pertain to us at all. Again, it would take too long to recite how much the faithful prayers of Moses, David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, and other valiant men prevailed in wars, in famines, in sickness, and in other exceedingly great dangers. These examples prove that prayer is always necessary to men, and also very effectual. For we plainly see that God is moved with the prayers of his faithful; for he is good and merciful; he loves us; he took on flesh that he might be touched by feeling our infirmities, lest we be dismayed at him. He is true and faithful, performing those things faithfully which he promises. What? Does he not freely, liberally, and bountifully call all men to him, offering himself wholly to those who call upon him in faith?

But just because those who pray do not always receive what they ask, it does not prove that prayer is altogether unprofitable; for it is oftentimes profitable for the one who prays, not to receive his requests. There are, moreover, many causes for which God either puts off the things that are asked, or does not grant them. There is a kind of man who prays, of whom it is written: "He that shuts his ear at the cry of the poor, will cry himself, and not be heard."^{Pro 21.13} Again: "Though you make many prayers, yet I will hear nothing at all, seeing that your hands are full of blood." ^{Isa 1.15} So again in Solomon, Wisdom cries out, testifying that she will not hear those who call on her, because they would not first hear her giving a warning in time. ^{Pro 1.20-30} All these things are gathered in a way from the person who prays: what follows is derived from the thing which they pray for. St. James says: "You ask and do not receive, because you ask amiss, to consume it upon your lusts." ^Jas
4.3 For the Lord, in answering two of his chosen disciples, who demanded the highest places in the kingdom of Christ, says this: "You do not know what you ask." ^{Mat 20.22} Furthermore, when holy men ask for holy and necessary things, or at least not unjust or evil things, which nevertheless they do not receive from the Lord, they immediately think that God is a God of judgment and justice, and therefore that he will not immediately deliver them out of afflictions: yet desire they deliverance with continual prayers.

v.171

""Whom the Lord loves he chastens." ^{Heb
12.6, 10} And whom he chastens, he does not chasten to destroy them; but "that they should not be condemned with the wicked world." ^Gal
1.4 For it is lawful in such distress to pray with David, "Do not rebuke me in your anger, O Lord; nor chasten me in your displeasure;" ^Psa
38.1 and with Jeremiah, "Lord, correct me in judgment, not in fury;" ^{Jer 10.24} and with Habakkuk, "When you are angry, remember your mercy."^{Hab 3.2} The godly doubt nothing of the power and goodness of God toward men. That which God wills, and which is profitable for the children of God, God can do. The old and new Testaments afford us countless examples of this. Therefore, when we are not delivered, when we do not obtain our desires, it is most sure that God would have it so, and that it is profitable for us that it should so be. By this means he hears our prayers when he hears us. For our prayers tend to this end only: that it might go well with us. God, since he is only wise, knows what can profit and what can hurt us, and he does not give us what we ask; and yet, by not giving, he indeed grants what is good for us. Therefore, the lawful prayer of the faithful is always effectual, and it evermore obtains his purpose; the Lord granting to his people, what he knows to be good.

Furthermore, the Lord defers performing what is asked, yes, and at times he seems to neglect our prayers altogether. But by prolonging, he tests his people, that he may make their faith more fervent, and his gifts more acceptable; they are that much more joyfully received, by how much they are looked for with an ardent desire. In this temptation, let that saying of the prophet comfort us: "Can a woman forget her child, and not have compassion on the son of her own womb? Though they forget, yet I will not forget you." ^{Isa 49.15} For the church would have said, "God has forsaken me, and my Lord has forgotten me."

The Manner of Prayer

Let us now consider what manner of prayer it should be, which he that calls upon God uses. That question cannot be better resolved, than by weighing the chief circumstances.

v.172

First, therefore, let us consider who must be called upon by those who pray. None truly, but the one and only God. For three things are required of the one who is prayed to: first, that he hear the prayers of all the men in the whole world; that he pierce and exactly know their hearts; indeed, that he know more rightly and better, all the desires of men, than men themselves can utter them; secondly, that he be present everywhere, and have power over all things in heaven, on earth, and in hell; and has in his power all the ways and all the means to help; thirdly, that his will be exceedingly good and ready prepared; that what he can do, he may also be willing to do. And these properties are found in God only. For only God searches the reins and the hearts; only he sees and hears all things; only he knows more perfectly those things which are within and without man, than man himself; only he is present in all places; only he is almighty; only he is wise. The will of God alone embraces man with most perfect goodness, and is always ready, and faithfully procures only that which is profitable for man. Therefore, only God should be called upon. But if these properties were attributed to the most chosen souls in heaven, who could do so without blasphemy and sacrilege? Therefore, the souls in heaven, living with God, are not to be called upon, especially since the scripture in plain words testifies, that "Abraham and Jacob do not know us;" ^{Isa 63.16} and it commands us to call on God, and forbids us to communicate those things which are God's, to creatures. And if we say nothing else, to whom, I ask you, of all the saints or angels in heaven, can we say without blushing, "Our Father, which art in heaven," ^{Mat 6.9} and then what follows in the Lord's prayer? Let us therefore call upon God only, that heavenly Father, whom alone all the saints or godly men, as many as have been in the church, have called upon.

No mortal man, however good [2817] he seems to be, is worthy to come into the sight of the eternal and most holy God — which all men confess with one voice. And yet, many and diverse patrons, intercessors, and advocates, are chosen and received by those who pray; by whose intercession either they themselves might be brought to God, or their prayers might be presented to God.

v.173

This is why some have chosen angels for themselves; others have chosen apostles; others the most holy and among all other women, that most blessed virgin, the mother of Christ; [2818] some others have chosen others, as they have put confidence in this man or that man. But they have forged these things for themselves out of the imagination of their own heart, and have not learned them from the mouth of the Lord. The scripture, that only rule of truth, sets forth for us one mediator, intercessor, patron, and advocate, by whom we may come to God, and by whom we may present our prayers to the Lord. All the prayers of all men are unpleasant and abominable, which are not made by Jesus Christ. Nor does true faith teach us to forge and imagine another advocate for Christ, or some other with Christ, in the sight of God; nor should we ourselves alone, without our advocate Christ, rush into the presence of God the Father. Here, true Christians are separated from Jews, from Turks,[2819] yes, and from papists also. For, despising the Son of God, they call upon the Father alone, without the mediation of Christ Jesus. But the voice of God, by the gospel and his apostles, pronounces against them. In the gospel, we read that the Lord said: "The Father has committed all judgment to the Son, because that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honours not the Son, the same honours not the Father which has sent him." ^Joh
5.22-23 And again: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father, but by me." ^{Joh 14.6} And John, the apostle and evangelist, says: "Whoever denies the Son, does not have the Father." ^{1Joh 2.23} But these men do not acknowledge Christ as the only intercessor; but they teach that saints in his stead, or with Christ, should be called upon as patrons before God. But the same John, showing who is an advocate for Christians, did not appoint himself; he did not lay before us saints instead of Christ, nor them along with Christ; "but," he says, "we have an advocate with God the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." ^{1Joh 2.1} Nor does Paul show us any other in 1Timothy chapter 2, and Hebrews chapter 7.

v.174

To the Ephesians, in chapter 3, Paul says: "By Christ we have boldness and entrance with confidence, by faith in him." ^Eph
3.12 Christ is sufficient for those who believe, as the Father has stored up all good things in him alone, commanding us to ask those things in him and by him, through prayer. These things are sufficient for minds that do not desire contention. Those who would, let them search further in the fifth sermon of the fourth decade.[2820]

The Spirit of Prayer

I have told you who is to be prayed to or called upon by the godly worshippers of God, and by whom: namely, to God alone, through the only Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ. Let us now see, what should stir up man to call upon God. Surely, the Spirit of our God principally; for prayer is rightly counted among the gifts of grace. For we could neither earnestly nor heartily call upon our God, unless we are stirred up and provoked to it by the Spirit of God. For even though the commandment of God wills us to pray, and present necessity and danger drive us to pray, and the example of others allure us to pray; yet all these things would do nothing, unless the Spirit forces our minds to His will, and guides and keeps us in prayer. Therefore, though there are many concurring causes which move men to prayer, yet the chief origin of prayer is the Holy Ghost. Whoever prays with any fruit, begs with a holy preface at the entrance of all prayers, for His motion and government. To this pertain these words of the holy apostle:

"The Spirit also helps our infirmities; for we do not know what to pray as we should; but the Spirit itself makes requests for us with sighs which cannot be expressed. But he who searches the hearts knows what the meaning of the Spirit is; for He makes requests for the saints according to the will of God." ^{Rom 8.26-27}

Indeed, the Spirit of God is said to make intercession; not that he indeed prays and groans; but because he stirs up our minds to pray and to sigh. And he brings to pass, according to the pleasure of God, that we should make intercession or pray for the saints; that is to say, for ourselves.

The Ability to Pray

But let us consider with what abilities someone must be furnished, who comes to purposefully pray to God.

By God's Mercy. First, it is necessary that he lay aside all opinions of his own worthiness and righteousness; that he acknowledge himself to be a sinner, and to stand in need of all good things; and so let him yield himself to the mere mercy of God, desiring by His mercy to be filled with all things that are good.

v.175

For that great prophet of God, Daniel, says this: "We do not present our prayers before you in our own righteousness, but in your manifold mercies." Also, you read a similar prayer offered to God in Psalm 79. For the people of the Lord cry out: "Help us, O Lord of our salvation, for the glory of your name: deliver us, and be merciful to our sins, for your name's sake. Do not remember our sins of old; make haste, and let your mercy deliver us." ^{Psa 79.8-10} In the new Testament, the Pharisee in Luke, trusting in his own righteousness, is put aside and cast off from the Lord; but the publican, freely confessing his sins and craving mercy from God, is heard and justified. ^{Luk 18.10f} For unless we acknowledge our nakedness, weakness, and poverty, who, I ask you, would pray to God? "For it is not those who are strong, but those who are sick, that need the physician." ^Mat
9.12 And the Lord in the gospel says: "Ask, and you shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened to you; seek, and you shall find." ^Mat
7.7-8 Therefore, he that is commanded to ask so that he may receive, does not yet have what he asks for; he that knocks, by knocking, signifies that he stands outside the door; and he which seeks, has lost what he yet seeks. Therefore, being shut out from the joys of paradise, we seek and ask by prayer for what we have lost and do not have. Therefore, though David and Hezekiah and other saints of God, allege in prayer their own righteousness, for which they seem to worthily demand to be heard — truly, they do not regard their own worthiness, but rather the truth of God. He has promised that he will hear those who worship him. Therefore, the godly say, Behold, we are your worshippers: therefore it is fitting that you not neglect us, but deliver us.

Meanwhile, in other places they speak in such a way about their righteousness, that we cannot doubt that in their prayers they mention their righteousness with a certain measure and limitation. "Do not enter into judgment with your servant," says David; "for in your sight no man living shall be justified," etc. ^{Psa 143.2}

In Faith. Furthermore, and what is chief of all, it is needful that those who pray must have a true and fervent faith. Let the doctrine of faith, therefore, in the matter of prayer, show us light as the morning-star; and with an assured hope to obtain from God the thing which is asked, let him that prays make his petition. ^{Mar 11.24; 1Joh 5.15}

v.176

"Let him ask in faith," says St. James, "nothing wavering: for he that wavers is like a wave of the sea, tossed by the wind, and carried with violence. Nor let that man think that he will receive anything from the Lord." ^{Jas 1.6-7} And Paul also says: "How shall they call upon him, on whom they have not believed?" ^Rom
10.14 I have spoken of faith in the fourth sermon of the first decade. But to the end that faith may increase in just measure, and flourish and continue stable, we must labour in the promises and examples from every place gathered together. We will recite a few. In the book of Psalms we read: "Offer to God thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the most High." ^Psa
50.14 And: "Call upon me in the day of trouble, and I will deliver you, and you shall glorify me." ^{Psa 50.15} Again: "The Lord is near to all who call upon him, to all those who call upon him in truth (or faithfully). He will fulfil the desire of those who fear him: he will also hear their cry, and will save them." ^{Psa 145.18-19} Again, in Isaiah the Lord says: "And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer them; and while they are still thinking how to speak,[2821] I will hear them." ^{Isa 65.24} In Matthew, the Lord says: "Ask, and it shall be given to you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you. For whoever asks receives, and whoever seeks finds, and to him that knocks it shall be opened," etc. ^{Mat 7.7-8} In the same gospel, the Lord says: "And whatever you ask in prayer, believing, you shall receive it."^{Mat 21.22} In the 11th chapter of Mark, the same sentence is put this way: "Whatever you desire when you pray, believe that you have it, and it shall be done for you." ^Mar
11.24 Again, in the gospel of St. John the Lord says: "Whatever you ask in my name, that I will do." ^{Joh 14.13} Again: "Truly, truly, I say to you, Whatever you shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it to you. Ask, and you shall receive." ^{Joh 14.13-14} David frames an argument from the example of the fathers, and says: "Our fathers hoped in you, they trusted in you, and you delivered them; they called upon you, and they were helped; they put their trust in you, and were not confounded." ^Psa
22.4-5

v.177

From this, David gathers that he also will not be forsaken by the Lord. In the history of the gospel, there are very many examples to be seen, which exceedingly confirm and establish the faith of the godly.

With Godliness. But since faith is not a vain imagination, but an effectual power, working by the Holy Ghost all kinds of good works (though they neither trust to these, nor think they will be heard in consideration of them), yet nevertheless, those sinners who are faithful do not impudently, and without repentance, trust to their own wits,[2822] dealing only in words with the Lord; but they join a holy life to their prayers. For Solomon says: "He that turns his ear from hearing the law, his prayer will be abominable." ^{Pro 28.9} And the Lord says in Isaiah: "Though you make many prayers, yet will I hear nothing at all, seeing your hands are full of blood." ^{Isa 1.15} About such impenitent persons, we understand that in the gospel: "God does not hear sinners." But what is more, the saints will obtain nothing if they continue in prayer for them. For Jeremiah, praying earnestly for his people who were otherwise being obstinately wicked, hears this:

"You shall not pray for this people; you shall neither give thanks nor bid prayer for them; make no intercession for them; for in no way will I hear you. Do you not see what they do in the cities of Judah? The children gather sticks, the fathers kindle the fire, the women knead the dough to make cakes for the queen of heaven. They pour out drink-offerings to strange gods, to provoke me to wrath." ^Jer
7.18

In the same manner, the Lord says in Ezekiel: "If I send a pestilence into this land, and if Noah, Job, and Daniel, were in it," (or in the midst of it,) "as truly as I live, says the Lord God, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter, but save their own souls in their righteousness." ^{Eze 14.19-20}

v.178

Therefore, it follows that the supplications of unrepentant men, impudently persevering in their sins, even though they cry without ceasing, "Help us, O God, our Saviour; deliver us, Lord; we beseech you to hear us," these are altogether fruitless; for they desire to be preserved, so that they might take their further pleasure and commit wickedness. And though God gives us freely those things which we ask, yet it is necessary that an affection or desire to live well accompanies such great benefits received from the hands of God. For here we should most diligently to take heed, that we not think we will be heard for our virtues' sake, but for the mere mercy of God in Christ Jesus.

Heavenly-Minded. Moreover, whoever desires to have his prayers acceptable to God, let him lift up his mind toward heavenly things from earthly things. Touching this, the blessed martyr of Christ, Cyprian, eloquently and holily entreats us, saying:

"When we stand occupied in prayer, we must with our whole heart watch, and be diligent in prayer. Let all worldly and fleshly thoughts depart; neither let the mind think upon anything else at that time, except that which it prays. Let your breast be shut against the adversary, and let it be open to God only; nor let it allow the enemy of God to enter into it in the time of prayer. For he oftentimes steals upon us, and enters in; and subtly deceiving us, he turns our prayers away from God, so that we have one thing in our heart, and another thing in our mouth. It is not the sound of the voice, but the mind and sense, that ought to pray to God with an unfeigned affection." [2823]

But that the mind of him who prays may be lifted up from earthly things to heavenly things, is chiefly the work of the spirit of true faith, the steadfastness of hope, and the fervent love of God — if we also remember the dreadful majesty of God, before whose eyes we stand praying.

v.179

All the creatures in heaven and earth worship and reverence Him; thousands upon thousands of angels serve Him. Let us think to ourselves how profitable and necessary are the things that we ask of God, without which we cannot be happy. Let us moreover remove from us all those things which either detain and keep us in this world, or which pull us back to earthly things. Of this sort are slothfulness, covetousness, and surfeiting — and to be short, all other sins like these. And contrariwise, let us apply ourselves to watchfulness, soberness, gentleness, and liberality.

With Fasting. Surely the scripture almost everywhere joins fasting and mercy to prayer; for these virtues make us more cheerful and ready to pray through faith. Daniel says: "I turned my face to the Lord God, and sought him by prayer and supplication, with fasting, sackcloth, and ashes." Nor do Jonah and Joel teach unlike this. Indeed, in the gospel and writings of the apostles we hear everywhere: "Watch; be fervent in prayer; be sober." For if the belly is full, either no prayers at all are made, or else fat and unwieldy ones. We read that St. Augustine said of this: "Would you have your prayer fly up to God? Then make it upon two wings: fasting and alms-deeds." [2824] For in the Acts of the Apostles the angel of the Lord says to Cornelius the centurion: "Your prayers and alms-deeds are held in remembrance in the sight of God." ^{Act 10.4}

With Charity. And surely God requires fervent prayer from us; but it cannot choose but be cold, if not inflamed with charity. Therefore, those who are cruel and unwilling to forgive their brethren their trespasses, and still retain hatred toward their brethren, cannot pray before God, who says: "And when you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against any man, so that your Father who is in heaven may also forgive you your trespasses." ^{Mar 11.25} And again: "If you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father shall also forgive you: but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your heavenly Father forgive you your trespasses." ^{Mat 6.14-15} And in another place he says: "Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." ^{Mat 5.23-24}

v.180

For otherwise, all your gifts will not be acceptable to God. Let us therefore willingly forgive, and let us love and do good to our neighbours, so that our prayers will pierce the heavens.

Mindful. Agreeable to this, is that we pray not only with the mouth or voice, but with the mind and inward affection of the heart, and with the spirit and fervency. There was no voice heard from Moses nor from Hannah, the mother of Samuel, when they prayed; but they cried to God most earnestly in spirit. God heard Moses, and led him safely with all the people of Israel through the Red sea, out of the most bloody hands of the Egyptians. And God made Hannah fruitful, who before was barren. And contrariwise, we read in the gospel, that the Lord alleged these words against the Pharisees, out of Isaiah: "This people draws near to me with their mouth, and honours me with their lips, howbeit their heart is far from me: but in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines precepts of men." ^{Mat 15.8-9} Therefore, Paul aptly said: "I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also." ^{1Cor 14.15} Here he calls the living breath and voice of man "spirit." [2825]

Freely Offered. By these heavenly testimonies, their prayers are condemned, who with a marvellous rolling and swiftness of the tongue, babble many words in a short space. And their prayers are maimed and curtailed, who utter words without sense; for their mind is otherwise occupied. No other desire is felt by them, unless this happens to be a desire: that they pant and blow, hasting to make an end of praying. Monks and priests are chief among this kind of men; they pray for money and for their hire; that is, they sell nothing for a great price to mad people. Not that prayers are vain of themselves, but because, being used in that way, they become vain. In the gospel, the Lord pronounces this against such men: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for you devour widows' houses, and do it under a pretence of long prayer; therefore you will receive the greater damnation." ^{Mat 23.14} I know what those sophisters here bring forth and allege for the defence of prayers said for reward or stipend; but in a few words I give them this knot to loose.

v.181

These men who pray in this way, either have faith and charity, or else they do not. If they have it, then they pray without reward, for charity's sake; and if they do not have it, then their prayers are of no effect. And therefore, it is with a false show that they deceive ignorant people, who pay their money for lawful prayers, but are requited with unlawful ones; and if they were lawful, then they were to be neither sold nor bought.

In God's Will. This is also required of the one who prays: that he does not desire things that are unworthy for God to grant, nor require those things that are contrary to the laws of God. For St. John the apostle says, "If we ask anything according to his will, he hears us." ^{1Joh 5.14} Therefore, when we ask things that unworthy for God to grant, he does not hear us. Moreover, always and in all our prayers, our will and our desires ought to be obedient to God and his will. Therefore, let no man go about wickedly tying God to certain circumstances; let no man prescribe to God at what time, in what place, or in what manner, he will bring to pass anything that he will do. God, who is only wise, knows when it is time to help. He is also both faithful and omnipotent, and indeed able to do greater things than we can either ask or understand; We also read that Paul has said this. ^Eph
3.20

Therefore, that most honest widow, Judith, was not without cause very angry with Ozias the priest,^{Jdt 8} because he appointed a set number of days to God, which being ended, God should deliver, or otherwise they would give up the city. For Judith says:

"What manner of sentence is this to which Ozias has consented: to deliver this city to the Assyrians if relief does not come to us within five days? And who are you that tempt the Lord? This is not a sentence likely to obtain mercy, but rather to provoke wrath and kindle displeasure. You have set the mercy of God a time limit, and have appointed him a day according to your own phantasy. But because the Lord is patient, let us rather repent, and crave pardon from his hands, by pouring out tears." ^{Jdt 8.10-14}

Therefore, being in extreme danger, we read that David spoke this most godly: "If I find favour in the eyes of the Lord, he will bring me back; but if he says to me, I have no delight in you; behold, here I am; let him do with me what seems good in his eyes." ^{2Sam 15.25-26}

v.182

Persistent. And now, long continuance is also very needful in prayers. The Lord says in the gospel, "Ask, and it shall be given to you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you." ^{Mat 7.7} By heaping together these words, he reminds us [2826] of continuance in prayer. "Ask," he says, earnestly and constantly, as those do who require things they stand in need of; "seek," as those do who search for things that are hidden and precious; "knock," as those do who with earnest desire long to come to their friend. For all these sayings not only signify a desire, but also a continual study to obtain the things required. In the gospel of St. Luke, the Lord presented a parable tending "to this end, that we should always pray, and never be wearied." ^Luk
18.1 For Paul also says: "Rejoice always; pray continually; in all things give thanks." ^{1The 5.16-18} Yet, let no man think that by these words of the Lord and the apostle, the error of the heretics Psallini, or Euchitae,[2827] is confirmed. They did nothing else but pray. The Lord commands us to pray always; that is to say, as often as we conveniently may, at all times and in all places, we are to be of an upright heart toward God [2828] in all things, who should always wait for good things from God's hand, and give him thanks for the benefits received; who should also continually ask favour from Him. Such an endeavour is commended to us in Anna, the daughter of Phanuel. Luke mentions that she "did not depart from the temple, but night and day served the Lord with fastings and prayers." ^{Luk 2.36-37} It was not that she did nothing else, having no regard for her body, nor did not at any time eat, drink, or sleep; but because prayer was her continual and chief business. For today, speaking in the same way, we say that the husbandman labours without ceasing, and the student reads night and day. All men understand that this kind of speech signifies a continual and exceedingly great diligence in work and reading. The woman of Syrophoenicia, in Matthew, chapter 15, [2829] shows us a notable example of unwearied continuance in prayer or invocation. But if God seems to neglect us, or to defer our requests longer than seems fit, let us always remember what the prophet Habakkuk has said: "Yet a little while, and he that comes will come, and will not tarry;" and, "The just shall live by faith," etc.^{Hab 2.3-4}

v.183

Timely. From this it will be very easy to show the time of prayer — when we ought to pray. We should therefore privately pray always; for continually while we live, there is diverse and manifold matter offered to us for prayer. Pray therefore as often as the Spirit moves you, and as often as necessity itself or matter provokes you to pray. Yet, let nothing here be done by constraint; let all things proceed from a willing and free spirit. But public prayers are restrained as to time; for there are set and appointed hours to pray. Set hours are those certain times received by the church, during which the whole congregation assembles together in the morning or evening, to hear the word of God, to pray, and to receive the sacraments. Socrates bears witness in his history, that the ancient churches in times past did not meet together in a holy assembly all at one time, and at the same hours. And there is no danger in this diversity.[2830] Let it be left to the discretion of the churches to come together [2831] for the service of God, whenever it seems most necessary, customary, fitting, and profitable for themselves. Moreover, appointed hours of prayer are those which are set or forewarned for a certain time by the church, for present necessity's sake. In dangerous times, and in weighty affairs, the holy apostles appointed prayers and fastings; these are also lawful today, without superstition, and with just moderation. And it appears from these words of the prophet Joel, that this is a most ancient ordinance: "Blow the trumpet in Zion, sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly, gather the people together," etc. ^{Joe 2.15-16} Does the apostle not command man and wife privately to separate themselves for a time, and to abstain from their lawful delights, so that prayer in necessity may be more fervent? ^{1Cor 7.5}

The Place of Prayer

And now, it will also not be hard to judge about the place of prayer; for I said in the beginning of this sermon, that holy men may pray at all times privately, and also in all places.

v.184

For the true prayer of holy men is not tied to any place, nor is it judged better in one place than in another; for the goodness or worthiness of the prayer is not esteemed by the place, but by the mind of the one who prays. For the Lord says in the gospel: "The hour will come, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit to pray in and in truth," etc. ^{Joh 4.23} But those who are persuaded that the godly may pray in no other place than at home in their chamber, are in no way passed over in this passage. In confirmation of this, they twist these words of our Saviour: "But when you pray, enter into your chamber; and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father, who is in secret; and your Father, who sees in secret, will reward you openly." ^{Mat 6.6} But these words are an antithesis, or a contrary sentence, to that which goes before it; and this is what goes before it: "And when you pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites are; for they love to stand praying in the synagogues, and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men." ^{Mat 6.5} Against this he immediately opposes: "But you, when you pray, enter into your chamber." In reproving the abuse of prayer, he did not condemn the place properly, but rather he spoke figuratively in this manner: The Pharisees, with their prayers which they make in the streets, hunt for praise and commendation by the people; so on the contrary part, by mentioning a chamber, he did not mean that the place itself makes the prayer either better or worse; but he taught by figurative speech, that we should pray with an upright mind, and be most free of hunting for the praise of men. For he that prays with a mind not troubled with affections, having regard only to God, "prays in his chamber," whether he prays in the church or in the street. For otherwise, the Lord prayed with his disciples in the temple, in the city, in the field, and wherever occasion was offered. It also follows: "And the Father, who sees you in secret, will reward you openly;" that is to say, the Father, who allows a mind that is not proud, but humble and free from ambition, will reward you openly. But public prayers are used in the church or assembly of saints. If any man despises them, saying prayer should not to be tied to any place, I cannot think he is worthy of the name of a Christian, since he shamefully abuses Christian liberty. Finally, I have spoken before about assemblies;[2832] and we will perhaps say more in the last sermon of this decade.

v.185

The Posture of Prayer

Here, the posture of those who pray also comes to be handled. But let all riot, all pride, all immoderate trimming of the body, be far from those who come into the church of Christ to pray. Someone would seem to filthily scorn the godly magistrate, who in coming to crave pardon for his fault, would lay aside his mourning clothes; and putting on white apparel, proudly appear before the assembly of grave and godly senators. Such a person might be judged worthy, not only to be denied his request, but also to be cast into prison. And who would deny that they more shamefully mock God, who coming into the church to ask His pardon, and being oppressed with the burden of their sins, yet in that place are so far from being humble, that they rather appear before the presence of God and his saints having their bodies so attired, as they thereby both provoke anew the wrath of God against them, and grievously offend the most godly who are in the church? Therefore, Paul teaches at large that modesty, proper and humble behaviour, is to be used in the church. This is seen in the eleventh chapter of first Corinthians. What remains about this matter, the blessed martyr of Christ, Cyprian, comprehends in these words:

"Let the words and prayers of those who pray, be governed in an orderly way, keeping modesty and shame-facedness. Let us think that we stand in the sight of God. God's eyes must be delighted both in the posture of our body, and the manner of our words. For just as it is the part of an impudent person to use clamorous shouts in praying; so contrariwise, it is fitting for a shamefaced person to pray with modest prayers." [2833]

Some foolishly imagine, that prayer is made either better or worse by the posture of our bodies. Therefore, let them hear St. Augustine, Lib. ii. ad Simplicianian, Quaest. 4, saying:

v.186

"It does not matter in what way our bodies are placed, so long as the mind, being present with God, brings her purpose to pass. For we pray standing — as it is written, 'The publican stood afar off;' — and kneeling, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles; — and sitting, as David and Elijah did. And unless he was praying lying down, it would not have been written in the Psalms, 'Every night wash I my bed.' ^{Psa 6.6} For when any man seeks to pray, he places the members of his body in a manner which seems most fit to him at the time, to stir up his devotion. But when prayer is not sought, but an appetite or desire for prayer is offered — when anything comes suddenly to our mind, by which we are devoutly moved to pray with sighs that cannot be uttered; ^{Rom 8.26} in whatever manner it finds a man — doubtless, prayer is not to be deferred until we have sought in what place we may sit, or where we may stand or kneel down." [2834]

Tertullian, in his Apology against the Gentiles, mentions the behaviour of the Christians of his time when they prayed. He says: "We Christians are all of us evermore praying for all men, looking up into heaven with our hands spread abroad, because we are harmless; we are bare-headed, because we are not ashamed; to be short, we need no one to put us in remembrance, because we pray from the heart." [2835]

v.187

Notwithstanding, what we must chiefly remember is the doctrine of our Saviour in the gospel, saying: "When you pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites are; for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, so that they may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you, they have their reward." ^{Mat 6.5} For above all things, we must beware that we neither pray privately nor publicly to this end; nor should we fashion the posture of our body in order to get the vain praise of the people, so that we may seem to be renowned and considered holy before men. It suffices that we please God, and are allowed by his judgment.

The Subjects of Prayer

In the discourse of prayer, no man would say that it is the smallest thing to know what you ought to pray, what you should ask for from God, or for whom you should pray. Here the persons and things of prayer are to be considered. Persons are either public or private.

Public persons are bishops, teachers, magistrates, and all who are set in authority. The writings of the prophets, evangelists, and apostles, command us to pray for these men. Paul more than once requires intercessions to be made by the church to the Lord for him, that he might be delivered from disordered and froward men; and that he might freely preach the gospel, as it became him to preach it. [2836] The same Paul commands us to pray for all those who are set in authority, "that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty." ^{1Tim 2.2}

Private persons are our parents, wife, children, kinsfolk, allies, neighbours, citizens, friends, enemies, sick persons, captives, those who are afflicted, and, to be short, all who are nearby us, whose health and safety, both nature and Christian charity would have us commend to God by prayers. And there are testimonies and examples of these in the scripture.

But the things we should pray for are those good things that are to be desired; some of which are heavenly, spiritual, or eternal; and others which are earthly, corporal, or temporal. Moreover, some things truly are common, and others again are private. Those things that are common pertain to the whole church and commonwealth; nor do they belong to a few, as private things do. And spiritual things are chiefly reckoned to be these: faith, hope, charity, perseverance, and that whole company of virtues, the profit and safety of the church, forgiveness of sins, and life everlasting. Among these are not unfitly reckoned the gifts of understanding, the liberal sciences,[2837] well ordered schools, faithful teachers, godly magistrates, and upright laws.

v.188

Corporal things are a peaceable commonwealth, strong and valiant armies for war, health, strength, a handsome body, abundance or sufficient wealth, the safe prosperity of wife and children, the protection and defence of friends and citizens, peace, a good name, and other things of this kind. But no man is ignorant, that we ought to have a greater care for spiritual things than corporal things, and to principally desire heavenly things. And there is also a choice to be made in corporal things: that the profit of the commonwealth be preferred before our own private gain. For if the commonwealth continues in safety, the citizens may also be safe; and so long as schools and universities or places of learning are maintained, there is hope that the commonwealth will never be destitute of wise and upright governors. In temporal goods, some things are also better than others. Those that are best, the saints or godly men therefore chiefly require from the Lord. Nevertheless, those which are of less value, they understand to come from Him, and therefore they also ask for them from the Lord. Those who are poorly exercised in the scriptures assert that it is not lawful in prayer to ask for corporal goods from the Lord; but they are confuted by many examples from the scripture. For not only the patriarchs and prophets, but also the apostles of Christ, asked for temporal goods from the Lord — such as defence against their enemies, a good report, and other things necessary for the body. We will learn this shortly by the form of prayer which the Lord himself has taught us, diligently showing us what we should ask for.

The Language of Prayer

This also comes in question, In what tongue must prayer be made? Those who assert that we must pray in Latin privately and publicly, seem in my judgment to be out of their wits, unless they speak of those who are skilful in the Latin tongue. For since we must pray not only with our mouth and voice, but also with our heart and mind, how, I ask you, will someone pray with heart and mind, who uses a language he does not understand? Indeed, he utters godly words, but he does not know what he says. For it all comes to one reckoning: to never pray at all, or to babble words which are not understood. Let every nation therefore pray in that language which it understands best and most familiarly.

v.189

And it is no less madness to use a strange language in public assemblies. This has been the root of the greatest evils in the church. Whatever the priests who were ordained by God, and the prophets who were sent from him, spoke or repeated to the people of olden times in the church, they did not speak or recite in the Chaldean, Indian, or Persian tongue, but in the Hebrew tongue — that is, in their vulgar [2838] and mother-tongue. They also wrote books in their vulgar tongue. Christ our Lord, together with his apostles, used the vulgar tongue. He furnished the apostles with the gift of tongues, that they might speak to every nation; and because in that age the Greek tongue was most plentiful and common of all, the apostles did not write in the Hebrew tongue, but in the vulgar Greek tongue. Truly, it behoves us that those things which are done in the public church for the holy assemblies' sake, should be understood of all men; for otherwise so many men would be assembled together in vain. From this it is clearer than daylight that those who have brought strange tongues into the church of God, have troubled all things, have quenched the fervency of men's minds, yes, and banished out of the church both prayer and the use of prayer, and all the fruit and profit that would come of things done in the church. And truly, the Roman and Latin prince [the pope] has brought this Latin abomination into the church of God. He cries out that it is wickedly done if Germany, England, France, Poland, and Hungary, both in prayer and other kinds of service in the church, do not use the Roman or Latin tongue, but use Dutch or German, English, French, Polish, or the Hungarian language. St. Paul, handling this controversy once, says in plain words:

"If I pray in a strange tongue, my spirit or voice prays, but my understanding is without fruit. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, but I will pray with the understanding also. I will sing with the spirit, but I will sing with the understanding also.

v.190

Otherwise, when you bless with the spirit, how will the unlearned say Amen at your giving of thanks, seeing that he does not know what you say? You may truly give thanks well, but the other is not edified. I thank my God, I speak languages more than you all: yet I would rather speak five words in the church with my understanding, that I might also instruct others, than to speak ten thousand words in a strange tongue." ^{1Cor 14.14-19}

And truly, Justinian the emperor cites this very place In Novell. Const. 123, where he strictly commands bishops and ministers to recite the holy oblation and prayers used in holy baptism, not secretly, but with a loud voice which might be heard by the people, with the intent that the minds of the hearers might thereby be stirred to set forth the praises of God with greater devotion.[2839] Moreover, it is evident that Gregory himself, who is called the Great, spoke to the citizens in the city of Rome in their country's language. He himself witnesses to this in the preface of his commentary on Ezekiel, to Marianus the bishop.[2840] Of the Greek bishops, no man is ignorant that in their churches they had their whole service in their native language, and they have left their writings to us in the same tongue. We might therefore be worthily judged mad and void of understanding if we too did not use our own language in the administration of divine service in the church. Because so many and such excellent examples have gone before us from the most famous churches, and the most singular bishops and governors of the church, I will not speak again about this most express and manifest doctrine of St. Paul the apostle.

v.191

Singing

This place now requires that I say something about singing in the church, and of canonical hours. But let no man think, that prayers sung with man's voice are more acceptable to God than if they were plainly spoken or uttered; for God is neither allured with the sweetness of man's voice, nor is he offended if prayer is uttered in a hoarse or a base sound. Prayer is commended for faith and godliness of mind, and not for any outward show. Those outward things are used rather as a means to stir us up; even though they have little effect unless the Spirit of God inflames our hearts. Nor can any man deny that the custom of singing is very ancient; for the holy scripture witnesses that the Levites sang in the ancient church, long before the coming of Christ; yes, and they sang at the commandment of God. And again; I think no man can deny that the same skilled kind of music brought into the church of God by David, was both accounted among the ceremonies, and it was abolished together with the temple and the ceremonies. We do not read that our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the true Messiah and full perfection of the law, sung in any place, either in the temple or outside the temple; or that anywhere he taught his disciples to sing, or commanded them to ordain singing in the churches. For what is read in Matthew and Mark — "And when they had sung a hymn, or psalm, they went out into the mount of Olives,"^{Mat 26.30}— is such a saying, that it does not necessarily force us to understand that the Lord sang with his disciples. For a hymn, which is the praise due to God, may be humbly uttered without the voice quavering.[2841] Truly, the old translation in both places, in Matthew as well as in Mark, consistently interprets it: Et hymno dicto exierunt in montem Olivarum; that is to say: "When they had said a hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives." In Matthew, Erasmus has translated it, Et cum hymnum cecinissent; "When they had sung a hymn:" but translating Mark, he says, Et cum hymnum dixissent; "When they had said a hymn:" but in either place it is umnhsantev (umnesantes). And umnew (umneoo) signifies, to praise, or to set forth one's praise; which has customarily been done both by singing, and also without singing.

v.192

We do not read that the Lord himself commanded singing to his apostles, nor that they ordained singing in the church; nor do we read in the Acts of the Apostles that they themselves sang in holy assemblies. Yet Paul did not rebuke the church at Corinth, which began to sing, either of her own accord, or by a certain imitation of the old church; because he saw their manner of singing differed much from the old. He therefore allowed the singing of psalms; but in the meantime, he preferred prophecy above it, or the office of preaching. He also required of those who sang, a measure to be kept, and also that it should be done with understanding; without this, doubtless, both prayer and singing is not only unprofitable, but also hurtful.

"I will pray with the spirit," says the apostle, "and I will pray with the understanding also. I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also." ^{1Cor 14.15} Nor do I know of any place else where the apostle mentions singing in holy assemblies; unless we're inclined to apply here, what Paul has left written in the 3rd chapter to the Colossians (though that may seem to be a private institution). For he has left these words written in the epistle to the Ephesians: "Do not be drunk with wine, in which is excess; but be fulfilled with the Spirit; speaking to yourselves in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord in your hearts; giving thanks always for all things to God, even the Father, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." ^Eph
5.19-20 What manner of saying this is, is easily judged by the occasion and order of the words. For he says nothing about the public singing customarily used in the church, but of the private manner of singing. For he refers to riotous banquets where, for the most part, songs which were not very honest used to be sung by those who were well tippled [or tipsy]. "Therefore, do not be drunk with wine," says the apostle, lest you sing songs that are scarcely honest; rather, if you are inclined to sing, then sing psalms and spiritual songs. To this may also be added that even in those kinds of songs, he requires the song to be of the heart, rather than the warbling of the voice. This is far from at any time allowing unattractive shriekings, either public or private.

v.193

Even so, the sense and meaning will be simpler and plainer, if we understand that in corde (which signifies "in the heart" ^{Eph 5.19}) is used in that verse instead of "joyfully," or "from the heart." This is why no man can or should disallow moderate and godly singing of psalms, whether it is publicly-used in holy assemblies, or at home in private houses. And truly, you will find many testimonies in the ecclesiastical history written by Eusebius and Sozomenus, declaring that the eastern churches, even immediately after the time of the apostles, used to sing psalms and hymns to Christ our Lord. [2842] You will also find this: that it was ordained by certain decrees of councils, that nothing else should either be read or sung in holy assemblies except the canonical scripture.[2843] For early on, a mean [2844] was not kept in the church, nor was only the canonical scripture used, for certain men intermixed their own songs.

Yet here, dearly beloved, I thought it good to put you in -mind of two excellent things concerning this matter. The first of them is that the singing of the ancient church was a far different kind of singing than what is used today. For Erasmus Rotterdam rightly judges that the singing used in the ancient churches was none other than a distinct and measured pronunciation, such as used today in some places in pronouncing the Psalms, the Gospel, and the Lord's Prayer.[2845] Truly, Pliny, who was the proconsul in Asia, by a diligent search or examination of matters, found out that Christians met at certain appointed times before daybreak, and sang a psalm among themselves to Christ their God. That place from Pliny may be seen in book 10 of his Epistles to Trajan the emperor.[2846] Also Rabanus Maurus says, lib. Instit. Cler. 2. cap. 48: "The primitive church sang in such a way, that with a little altering of the voice, it made the one who sang heard further; the singing was more like a loud reading than a song." [2847]

v.194

These things he borrowed out of the 33rd chap. of St. Augustine's 10th book of Confessions. In that one place, he plainly confesses that he sins when he is more delighted with the sweetness of the voices than with the sense of the words. And therefore he desires that all the melodious tunes of sweet songs, with which the Psalter of David is replenished, might be removed from his ears and from the hearing of the church. For it seemed safer, which he remembered he had often heard concerning Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria: he made the reader of the psalm utter it with such little straining of the voice, that he seemed to read rather than to sing. [2848]

By the things I just said, I would put you in mind that singing, however ancient an institution it may be, was nevertheless never universal, nor thrust upon the churches as a necessity; rather, it was free; nor was it always used in all churches. To this may be added what Sozomenus witnesses: that those churches which sang, did not use the very same kinds of prayers, or psalms, or readings, or the very same time.[2849] Socrates also says in the 5th book of his history, chap. 22: "To be short, in all countries, everywhere, you will not find two churches which in all points agree together in prayer." [2850]

v.195

And it appears that it was a long time before the western churches received melody, or the custom of singing, even by the testimony of Augustine. In his 9th book of Confessions, chapter 7, he recounts that Ambrose, being oppressed with the snares and persecutions of Justina, the Arian empress, ordained that hymns and psalms should be sung according to the custom of the eastern parts. Since that time, the custom of singing has been retained and also received by other parts of the world.[2851] Nevertheless, before the western churches received the order of singing, they were esteemed by all those of the east to be true churches; nor did it enter anyone's head, that therefore they were heretical and schismatic churches, or not rightly governed, because they were destitute of song or melody. No man gathered that because the eastern churches sing, and the western churches do not, that therefore they are not churches.

If this uprightness and liberty had remained safe and unaltered [2852] — that is to say, if, according to that ancient use of singing, nothing had been sung but canonical scriptures; if it had still been in the liberty of the churches to sing or not to sing — then truly there would be no controversy in the church today about singing in the church. For those churches, which use singing in the ancient manner practised in singing, would sing only the word of God and the praises of God; nor would they think that they surpassed other churches in this point; nor would they condemn those churches that do not sing at all — and these would not despise those which used to sing soberly and reverently. For if godly men persevere in the study of godliness, and in daily [2853] prayers, even though they do not sing, yet they nevertheless remain the sons of God.

v.196

Nor does all singing edify in every place; nor are all churches fit to sing. Rabanus says in the same place that I just now cited, "The custom of singing is instituted in the church for fleshly-minded men's sake, and not for those who are guided by the Spirit; so that those who are not moved by words, may be allured with the sweetness of the melody." etc. [2854]

But the singing, about which there is controversy today, is not that sort of ancient singing; but it is more that, both in matter and tune, for the most part, it is clean contrary to the old. The common sort call it Gregory's singing. Doubtless it is not referring to Gregory the Great who, it seems, was not very friendly to singing. This appears from his constitution, described in the Registry, in the fifth part of it, chapter 44. [2855] We would therefore seem to judge more truly, if we refer it to Gregory the fifth, who is said to have been enthroned about the year of our Lord 995, and moreover to have used the help of one Robertus Carnotensis.[2856] Yet there are some who ascribe it to Vitalianus, some to Gelasius.[2857] It would irk me to repeat what Durandus has patched together about this matter in his Rat. Divin. lib. v.; for I give it little weight.

There are many things in this latter kind of singing to be discommended. First of all, many things, even most things, are sung contrary to true godliness; nor are all things that are sung taken out of the holy scriptures, but instead out of I know not what kind of legends and the traditions of men. And those things which are sung out of the scriptures are for the most part so twisted and corrupted, that no part of the heavenly sense or meaning remains. Creatures and dead men are called upon. Moreover, this kind of singing is commanded by them; and they do not sing of their own accord or good will, but under constraint. Indeed, they sing for money, and to the end that they may get an ecclesiastical benefice, as they term it.

v.197

Only clerics hired for that purpose sing now-a-days; not the whole church of Christ, as was customary in times past. Nor is there any end or limit in their singing; they sing day and night. And there is more attributed to this foolish and ungodly kind of singing, as if to a heavenly or meritorious work, than true faith allows. A man may well say that it is so much babbling, which the Lord in Matthew forbids and condemns as a heathenish superstition. ^Mat
6.7 Moreover, they sing in a strange tongue, which few understand; and that is done without any profit at all to the church. A long sound is heard, quavered,[2858] and strained to and fro, backward and forward, of which a man cannot understand one word. Often the singers compete for the excellence of their voices. By this it comes to pass that the whole church rings with a hoarse kind of yelling, and through the strife that arises between their voices, the hearers little understand what is sung. I say nothing at present about their music, which they call "figurative," and about their musical instruments, all of which in a way are contained in their "organs" as they term them. I say nothing about their dirges, or prayers for the dead. I treated this in another place.[2859] But these, and other like things, so occupied the whole time of divine service in the church, that very little or none was left for true prayers, and for the holy and heavenly preaching of the word of God. Therefore, it was for most just causes that those who believe the gospel, neither use such singing, nor allow it in the church of God. They seem to deal very devoutly and most wisely, who bestow most of the time (or even the whole time) of ecclesiastical assemblies, in fervent and quiet prayers, and in the wholesome preaching of the word of God, omitting such singing. This is especially true since it is a hard thing to limit or restrain singing which is otherwise tolerable, lest it exceed and go beyond the appointed bounds at some point.

Furthermore, all the holy scripture witnesses in many places that our ancient predecessors had certain canonical and appointed hours, in which they prayed both privately in their houses and publicly in assemblies.

v.198

David more than once in his Psalms says that he would go to the Lord in the morning and evening. Daniel prayed to the Lord at three separate hours or times of the day. ^{Dan 6.10} Again, David says: "Seven times in a day I praise you;" ^{Psa 119.164} but by seven times he means many times. For elsewhere we read: "I will strike you for your sins seven times;" ^{Lev 26.24} and again: "The just man falls seven times, and rises up again;" ^{Pro 24.16} and also: "If your brother sins seven times in a day, and returns seven times in a day to you," etc. ^{Luk 17.4} In diverse places, therefore, as in this place of David, seven times is used for many times. And Christ our Lord has tied the private prayers of the faithful (as we told you before [2860]) neither to place, nor to time. He has not taken away public prayers; for he is not the Lord of confusion, but of order. But his disciples, when they were in the land of Jerusalem, also observed the customary hours of praying which that nation kept, out of liberty, not necessity, and especially for the assembly's sake. For Peter and John go up into the temple at the ninth hour of prayer. ^Act
3.1 In the day of Pentecost, all the saints with one accord were gathered together, and received the Holy Ghost, at the third hour of the day. ^Act
2.15 And it is also read, that Peter privately went up into the upper part of the house about the sixth hour. ^{Act 10.9}

The temple being destroyed, and the Jews scattered abroad, the churches gathered out of the gentiles did not observe the same hours of gathering together, or assemblies; but at their own liberty, as it seemed most fitting and convenient to every church. Truly, the ecclesiastical history also mentions this diversity;[2861] yet for the most part, there were hours in the morning and evening used for assemblies. St. Jerome, in his epitaph on Paula, does not expound the rite or order of the universal church as to what it should do in holy assemblies, but what the companies of solitary virgins usually did of their own accord. He says: "In the morning, at three, six, and nine o'clock, at evening, at midnight, they sang the Psalter in order. Only on Sunday they went to the church, near which they dwelt," etc. [2862]

v.199

So it pertains to private institution. The same sort of thing is written to Lacta, touching the institution of her daughter;[2863] and to Demetriades, De Custodienda Virginitate.[2864]

And truly, the greater or more famous and solemn churches (which today they call cathedrals, namely, from cathedra, a chair, or from the order of prophets teaching or professing there; as at one the church of Antioch, Corinth, Alexandria, and similar ones, seemed to have been), at certain hours, namely, in the morning, at noon, yes, and evening also, assembled to expound or discuss the holy canonical scriptures. The foundations of that observation seem to be laid in the church of the Corinthians; of which the apostle abundantly witnesses in 1Corinthians 14th chapter. Eusebius, in the fifth book of his ecclesiastical history, ninth chapter, mentions an ecclesiastical school at Alexandria. He says: "From a long time ago, the doctrine and exercise of the holy scriptures flourished among them. This custom also continues even to our time; which we have heard also to be instituted by men mighty in eloquence, and in the study of the holy scriptures;" [2865] namely, following the example of the Corinthian church. Some marks [2866] of this most wholesome rite or custom appeared at some time in the occidental or western church, as gathered from the writings of St. Ambrose and Augustine.

v.200

But truly, in these very times, and in the times immediately following, all nations were in a way held by the ears with perpetual wars. The Roman empire was torn in pieces in revenge for the blood of Christ, and of his holy apostles and martyrs, according to the prophecy of Daniel and St. John the apostle and evangelist. It was made the prey of all people [2867] — the Goths or Germans rushing them on this side, the Huns and other barbarous soldiers assaulting Rome sharply on the other side — the best schools were destroyed, extensive libraries were burned, honest and good studies perished. For this reason, doctors or teachers were given to the churches, who were most unlike the ancient doctors and teachers; they were not furnished with such an ability that they could deal in the holy scriptures with the same dexterity and fruitfulness as their predecessors. In this disorder and downfall, lest nothing remain untouched of the canonical scriptures, it is evident that men rose up who were not altogether negligent of the canonical doctrine, who divided the whole canonical scripture into such parts, that they might read over the whole bible once in the course of a year, and the psalter more often — yes, even in a sevennight. [2868] They used the Psalms instead of prayers; and as time went by, many other prayers were also joined to these. And lest the very reading of the scriptures seem to lack all exposition, the readings, lectures, or homilies of the fathers were at length added to it. It was not that the priests should read them secretly to themselves (as they are prone to do today), or that they should with a post-haste reading, mumble them in place of matins;[2869] but that they should thoroughly handle them in the open church, as an exercise before the people, to the edification of the church. [2870] I need not repeat that this rite was not received by all men, so far is it from being strictly commanded. There remain some tokens or proofs of this In Distinct. 15. Sancta Rom. [2871]

v.201

Furthermore, it is from reading the canonical scriptures at specific hours, that they are named canonical hours; [2872] just as the canons [2873] are also named from studying and reading the canonical scriptures. But at what time this was done, and who did it, is not certainly known. Some attribute some part of it to Jerome, others to Damasus, and some to Pelagius (the second of that name); also some others to Gelasius and Gregory. [2874]

Not a few homilies and lectures were said to be Bede's, and other doctors of later times.[2875] In the end, many other things are read in those hourly prayers, which do not savour a whit of antiquity. And thus, truly, because it is an institution patched up in various ways and at sundry times, it is far newer than the papists think or take it to be. Nor are there any lacking who, at the request of Carolus Magnus, Paulus Diaconus (or monk) of Cassina, and monk Isuard, ordained and delivered to the church selected or chosen lessons, especially those which concern the saints and are customarily read at these hours. [2876] But however the matter stands, it is most certain that those hours commanded today, and called canonical, are the invention of man and not of God. They are rasped or rotten relics or shadows of the old law. [2877] Beside this, it cannot be denied that there are many fables, toys, and follies annexed to it. Truly, today there appears such a mingle-mangle or hodgepodge, that it seems utterly unworthy either to be used or suffered any longer in the church of Christ — unless we would rather that care be taken for the bellies of some, than for the good state and welfare of the whole church. This much and thus far about this.

v.202

The Lord's Prayer

It remains, in the last place, to discuss how we must pray; what words, or what form of prayer, we must use. Truly, there are many forms of prayer; but none is better than that which our Lord, the only-beloved Son of God the Father, has delivered. Nor is there a more certain form comprehending all in all in few words. In this summary, he has prescribed what is worthy of him, what is acceptable to him, what is necessary for us, and to be short, what he is willing to grant. Expounding the Lord's Prayer, St. Cyprian says of this, among other things:

"He that made us to live, has also taught us to pray; even of his bountifulness by which he has granted both to give and to bestow all other things whatever. So that, when we speak with the Father in that prayer and supplication which the Son has taught us, we may be more easily or readily heard, and may truly and spiritually worship him. For what prayer can be more spiritual, than that which is given to us by Christ, from whom also the Holy Ghost is sent to us? What prayer before the Father is more true than that of the Son, proceeding out of his mouth, who is truth itself? So that, to pray otherwise than he has taught is not only ignorance, but also offence, since he himself has set down and said: 'You cast aside the commandment of God to establish your own tradition.' ^{Mar 7.8} Therefore, dearly beloved brethren, let us pray as God our master has taught us. It is a friendly and familiar prayer, to call upon God in such manner that he has taught us, when that prayer of Christ comes to his ears. Let the Father acknowledge the words of his Son when we pray. He that dwells within the heart, let him also be in the tongue. And since we have him as our advocate with the Father for our sins, and being sinners, when we ask pardon for our offences, let us utter the words of our advocate. For since he says, 'Whatever you ask the Father in my name, he will give it to you,' how much more effectually do we obtain what we ask in the name of Christ, if we ask it in his prayer!" [2878]

v.203

From here arises a question, "Whether we are so tied to the words of the Lord's Prayer, that we may not pray in other words at all? I answer that the Lord would not tie us to his words set down and conceived, as though it were not lawful to use other words or another form; but he set forth certain universal things for us, to which we might refer all our prayers. For Augustine writing to Proba about praying to God, de Orando Deo, shows that there is nothing in any place in the holy scriptures that is prayed for, which is not comprehended in the Lord's Prayer. "For," he says, "if you run over and through all the words of all holy prayers, you will find nothing which this prayer of the Lord does not comprehend and contain." He immediately adds: "So that it is free to use such and such words in praying, if it is to say the same things; but it is not free to speak other things." [2879] Therefore, they most warily and wisely act, who refer all their prayers to the Lord's Prayer, to which they attribute the chief and principal place; and keeping it continually in their mind, they meditate on it, and exercise themselves in it.

There is usually another question also to be asked, "What need there is to express and open our desires in words to God, since he already knows all things? We told you shortly after the beginning of this sermon, that prayer is humbling ourselves before the majesty of God.

v.204

To this, moreover, we add this: we do not express and open our desires to God, as though he did not know them, or as though we would teach him, being ignorant; or that we would entreat and get God's favour with our intricate, laboursome, and eloquent prayer. But it is for our own sakes that we use words with which to stir ourselves up. And to this end also the most holy men of God are, in the Psalms and holy histories, said to have largely declared their desires to the Lord. "We are not," says St. Jerome, "declarers, but cravers. For it is one thing to declare a thing to someone who is ignorant, and another thing to crave a thing from someone who knows — in that, it is a declaration; in this, it is a duty; there we faithfully declare; here we lamentably beseech." [2880] And St. Augustine says: "Words are needful for us, with which we may be moved and diligently consider what we should ask; not with which we should believe that the Lord is either taught or entreated." [2881]

Therefore, when the Lord forbade much babbling or vain lip-labour in prayer, he did not simply tie the prayer of the faithful to the sum of a few words. Rather, he forbids us, in the way of heathens,^{Mat 6.7} to pour out many words without wit, reason, meaning, and understanding; and so to think that we will be heard for the sake of much babbling, and oft-repeated prayers; as they falsely think today, who say a certain number of prayers which they call Rosaries. [2882]

v.205

For the Lord adds: "They think they will be heard for the sake of babbling much." ^{Mat 6.7} St. Augustine differentiates between babbling much, and praying much.

"To babble much in praying, is to make many superfluous words in a necessary matter. But to pray much, is to call to him whom we pray to, with a long and godly stirring up of the heart. This business, for the most part, is accomplished more with sighings than with speakings... It is not wicked and fruitless to pray longer, when we have leisure; for it is written about our Lord himself, that he spent the whole night in prayer, and prayed a long time. What else did he do in this, but give us an example?" [2883]

And if it is a hard matter for any man to pray long and continually, he may break off his prayer. However, he must go to it again, and oftentimes renew it afresh; for such short speaking in prayer is praiseworthy. And that we may make an end of this place, let no man think that in praying, he declares our affairs to God as if not knowing them. Let no man think that he is heard for his presentation, and even for his laboursome and exact presentation, and that being often repeated, and with most earnest outcries instilled or poured into the ears of God. Let no man think that his prayer must stand on a certain number — that is to say, that Paternosters must be summed up for our God as if He did not have a good memory, and to a Lord who is ill to be trusted, upon corals and beads put together on a lace,[2884] serving to keep a reckoning or account as it were.[2885]

And because I have said what all godly men throughout the whole world confess, that a most perfect platform of praying is delivered to us in the Lord's Prayer by our Lord Jesus Christ himself, it remains that we cite word for word that most holy form of praying

v.206

It is orderly made with most divine words even by the mouth of the Lord, as Matthew the apostle has left it recorded for us. And then we will expound it as briefly and plainly as possible, with the intent that everyone may better understand what he prays, and feel a more effectual working inwardly. This is the form of that most heavenly prayer:

O our Father, which art in heaven; hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done, as well on earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses [or debts], as we forgive those who trespass against us [or our debtors]. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Amen. ^Mat
6.9-13

This most holy prayer of our Lord Jesus Christ, our saviour, our doctor or teacher, and highest priest, delivered to the catholic church to be a catholic form or rule to pray to God, is usually divided into a little preface, and six petitions. Some reckon seven. Some say, that the three former petitions serve chiefly to spread abroad God's glory; the three latter concern the care of ourselves, and ask those things that are needful for us. But they all seem to contain both in manner.

Preface — The little preface is this: "our Father, which art in heaven." By this we call upon God; and, dedicating ourselves to him, we commit ourselves wholly to his protection and mercy. And every word has his high mysteries; for our Lord would have us pray with understanding rather than with words. These therefore admonish us, and suffice to be thought upon. But the mind, being instructed with the Holy Ghost (which I told you is needful above all things for those who pray), and being lifted up to behold God and heavenly things, devoutly and ardently meditates on these things.

And truly the word, "Father," puts us in mind of many things together. For first, it teaches us that all our prayers ought to be offered to none other than to Him who is a father; that is to say, that only God is to be called upon, and not another for him, or another with him.

v.207

For our God and Father is one, the fulness and sufficiency of all good things, in whom only the faithful are quieted and rest, and without whom they seek nothing that is truly good. And truly this prayer can be offered to no creature. For to which of the angels, or the saints, can you say without sacrilege: "Our Father, which art in heaven?" etc.

Furthermore, this word Father teaches us through whom we should call upon this Father; not by the mediation or by the mouths of saints, but by Jesus Christ our Lord — through whom alone we are made the sons of God, who were otherwise children of wrath by birth and by nature.^{Eph 2.3} Who, I pray you, dares come before the presence of the most high and everlasting God, and call him "Father," and call himself "son," unless the Father in his beloved and natural Son had adopted us as the sons of grace? Therefore, when we say "Father," we speak from the mouth of the Son, who has taught us so to pray, and by whom we are promoted into this dignity. So that it is not at all needed to add the name of Christ, and to say, We pray you, heavenly Father, for Christ's sake; since in the first word "Father," we comprehend the whole mystery of the Son of God and our redemption. For insomuch as he is our Father, we are his sons, and that is by the merit of Christ. Therefore, we call upon the Father, and so we call him through Christ; to repeat, we pray so from the mouth of Christ. Moreover, this sweet and favourable word, "Father," clean disburdens us from all distrust of heart; for we call him "Father" not so much in consideration of his creating of all things, as for his singular and fatherly good-will toward us. Thus, even though he is Lord God, and indeed a great Lord, and an Almighty God — yet when we pray, we attribute none of these names to him; but we call him Father because indeed he wishes us well, loves us, takes care and charge over us, and having pity upon us, he desires to store and heap upon us all good things whatever; indeed, this is of his own accord and good-will toward us. To this pertain the testimonies of the prophets, especially that of David:

"The Lord is full of compassion and mercy, slow to anger, and of great kindness. He will not always chide, nor keep his anger forever. He has not dealt with us according to our sins, nor rewarded us according to our iniquities. For as high as the heaven is above the earth, so great is his mercy toward those who fear him.

v.208

As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our sins from us. As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him. For he knows what we are made of, and he remembers that we are but dust." ^{Psa 103.8-14}

A very excellent example of this is to be seen in the gospel of St. Luke, where the loving father is painted with wonderful affections, receiving into favour again that prodigal son and waster of his wealth.

To this is added the word "Our;" which puts us in mind of two things. For first, it is not enough to acknowledge God to be the God and Father of all, or to be the God and Father of others, unless we also believe that he is our Father; unless we dedicate and yield ourselves wholly into his faith and protection, as our Father, who wishes us well, loves us, cares over us, and at no time and place neglects us. For unless we believe so, our prayer is not commended either with faith or with the love of God; and therefore, it is not a whit acceptable to God. But we understand that the best and greatest God is our God, by his manifold benefits, as well as (and especially by) the mystery of our redemption through Christ. We have spoken of this elsewhere.[2886] Furthermore, since immediately, at the very beginning, he bid us to pray "Our Father," and not "My Father;" he requires love from us. For his will is that we should not only take care for our own salvation, but for the salvation of all other men. For we are all the members of one body — upon which each individual one prays not individually for themselves, but every one prays for the safety of all the members, and also for the whole body. Touching this matter, I spoke before, when I treated the manner of praying to God.[2887]

There is later added, "Which art in heaven;" not that God is shut up in heaven as in a prison. Solomon, the happiest and wisest king of all, confuting that error long ago, said: "If the heavens of heavens are not able to contain you, then how much less this house!" ^1Kng
8.27 To these words I think may be annexed those which Stephen alleged in the Acts of the Apostles (out of Isaiah^{Isa 66.1}) concerning the same thing. ^{Act 7.49} God is therefore said to be in heaven, because his divine majesty, and power, and glory, shines most of all in the heavens.

v.209

For in the whole course of nature there is nothing more glorious, nothing more beautiful, than the heavens. Moreover, the Father exhibits and gives himself to us to be enjoyed in the heavens. Heaven is the country common to us all, where we believe God and our Father dwells, and where we worship God and our Father; even though we believe that he is in every place, and is always present with all. For as heaven compasses and covers all things, and is everywhere distant from the earth by even spaces, so the presence of his Majesty also fails us in no place. We have heaven everywhere in our sight; we are everywhere in the sight of God. But beside this, by the mention of heaven, we are put in mind of our duty and of our wretchedness. It is our duty to be lifted up in our minds, by praying into heaven, and to forget earthly things; and to be delighted with that heavenly Father and country more than with this earthly prison and exile. It is our wretchedness, that being banished out of that country for our sins, and wandering in this earth, we are subject to diverse calamities; and therefore, being constrained by necessity, we never cease crying to the Father. By first of all saying, "Which art in heaven," we differentiate between the Father whom we call upon, saying "our," and our earthly father; attributing almightiness to God. Surely the one who is called upon and ought to hear, must know all, see all, and hear all; yes, and moreover, He wills and is able to do all. Therefore, we expressed his good-will toward us in these words, "Our Father." And to this we now join His knowledge of all things, and His power to do all things, by adding, "Which art in heaven." By these words, the faith of those who pray is stirred up and confirmed.

Six Petitions – Now six petitions follow in order.

The first is, "Hallowed be your name." We have called God our Father, and ourselves his sons. But it is the part of sons to honour or glorify their father; and therefore immediately at the beginning, we desire that the name of the Lord God, and our Father, might be sanctified or hallowed. Truly, it is always holy and undefiled in itself; nor is it made any whit better or worse by us. Thus we pray that what is and remains holy in itself, should be acknowledged as such by us, and always sanctified by us.

v.210

A name is the definition of anything whatsoever; and names are invented to differentiate one thing from another — a means by which they might be known among themselves. But God is infinite and unmeasurable; moreover, he is one. Therefore, he does not have a name by which to be defined; and he does not need a name by which to be discerned from other gods. Those names that are attributed to him in the scriptures are attributed for our infirmity; to the end that, by some reason and comparison, we might understand some things that are said about the One who is unmeasurable and infinite. Therefore, the name of God is indeed God himself, with all his majesty and glory.

To "sanctify," or "hallow," otherwise signifies to separate things from a profane to a holy use. In this place, it signifies to magnify, to praise, and to glorify. We therefore desire that God himself, who of his own nature is a good, holy, and forever blessed, gentle, bountiful, and a merciful Father, might (as he is in himself) be acknowledged and magnified by all of us; that all nations, leaving their error and heresies, might consecrate themselves in truth to this one and only Father and God; that all things which defile the name of the Lord — of which sort are wicked deceits or practices, ungodliness, epicurism, an unclean life, and especially corrupt and anti-Christian doctrine — may be taken away; and that, being enlightened, we might sanctify or hallow the name of the Lord.

Therefore, in this petition we desire the Holy Ghost, the only author of all true sanctification; we pray for true faith in God by Christ throughout the whole world; we pray for holy thoughts and a pure life, with which we might glorify the name of the Lord. This is done while each one does his own duty; while Satan, the author of all uncleanness, is cast out; while corrupt doctrine is taken away, and deceit ceases; and while the filthiness of the world is banished. The most excellent king and prophet David presents this petition in these words: "God be merciful to us, and bless us, show us the light of his countenance, and be merciful to us; that your way may be known upon earth, your saving health among all nations. Let the people praise you, God; indeed, let all the people praise you;" and as follows in the 67th psalm. To this belongs the whole prayer of our Saviour, described by St. John in the 17th chapter of his gospel.

v.211

The second petition is, "your kingdom come;" for the name of God and our Father cannot be sanctified or hallowed unless he reigns in us. There is one kingdom of God, another of the devil. Furthermore, one kingdom of God is said to be of glory, and another rightly of grace. The kingdom of glory is not of this world, but of another world. The kingdom of grace is the kingdom of Christ in this world. In this kingdom, Christ reigns by the Holy Spirit in his faithful ones, who of their own accord submit themselves to him to be governed, saying and doing those things which beautify and befit Christians. The devil also reigns, but in the children of unbelief, who yield themselves to him to be governed according to his ungodliness and wickedness — doing those things which are not only delightful to the flesh, but which turn to the reproach of God's majesty. After this life, by the just judgment of God, the devil, the king of the ungodly, is caught unto hell, into the kingdom of death and judgment, there to continually burn. Moreover, the earthly kingdom, which princes of this world govern, is called either the kingdom of God, or the kingdom of the devil, as it fashions and frames itself to one of the two. All these things we knit up in few words, because we have more plentifully treated them in another place.[2888] Thus, we pray in this second petition, that Christ might reign and live in us, and we in him; that the kingdom of Christ might be spread abroad and enlarged, and prevail throughout the whole world; that doctors or teachers, and ecclesiastical magistrates, and finally, that princes, and, yes, schools too, and whoever may further the kingdom of Christ — being anointed and watered with His graces, may flourish, overcome, and triumph. Furthermore, we pray that the kingdom of the devil and antichrist may be broken and vanquished, lest it hurt and trouble the saints; that along with the kingdom of the devil, all ungodliness may be dashed and trodden underfoot — to be short, that all the weapons and armour of anti-Christianism may be broken into slivers, and come to nothing.

v.212

Lastly, we pray in this second petition, that, after we have sailed out of the tempestuous gulf [2889] of this world, we might be received and gathered to Christ and all the saints, into the everlasting kingdom of glory. For as we desire the kingdom of God to come to us, and God to reign in us, so we pray to come or to be received into his kingdom, and to live forever with him most holily.

The third petition is: "your will be done, on earth as well as it is in heaven." God does not reign in us, unless we are obedient to him. Therefore, after his kingdom, we desire the grace of perfect obedience. For we do not desire that God does what he will; for God's will is continually done, even though we never pray for it, and even though we wrestle and strive against it with all our might. For the prophet says: "Our God is in heaven; he has done whatever pleased him in heaven and on earth." ^{Psa 115.3} We ask, therefore, that what he wills, he may make us both to will and to do. For his will is always good; but through the corruption of sin, our will is evil. Therefore, we pray him to be present with us with his grace, that our will may be regenerated and framed to the good will of God; that of its own accord, it yield itself to the Holy Ghost to be framed; that his grace wills what he inspires;[2890] that he finish in us what he has well begun, and gives us, moreover, strength and patience for it; that in prosperity as well as in adversity, we may acknowledge the will of God,[2891] lest we will anything of ourselves, and swell and be puffed up in prosperity, and also faint and perish in adversity. Rather, we pray that we may apply ourselves in all things, and through all things, to be governed by his will; namely, to submit our will to his will in this manner. Furthermore, if we ask anything contrary to his will, that he would not grant it, but rather pardon our foolishness, and weaken our own will (for our will is not good for us); to instruct and teach us in His good will, to the end that we may doubt nothing, that this will is always to be followed, that this will is always good, and that this will works all things for our commodity and benefit.

v.213

In this point, the faithful feel a very great battle in themselves. Paul witnesses to this, saying: "The flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. And these two are at mutual enmity between themselves, that what things you would do, you cannot do." ^Gal
5.17 Therefore, we do not desire any kind of framing of our will to God's will, and yet we add: "On earth, as well as it is in heaven" — that is, Grant, O Father, that your will may be done in us earthly men, as it is done in your saints,[2892] the blessed spirits. These spirits do not strive against your most holy will in heaven. But being in one mind, they only will that which you will, yes rather, in this one thing they are blessed and happy: that they agree and quiet themselves in your will. Truly, it is not the least part of felicity or happiness in earth, to will what God wills; it is the greatest unhappiness, not to will what God wills. And truly, this might be declared by infinite examples. I will allege only one, and a common one too. Someone is grievously sick, and feels pains and torments scarcely tolerable; but in the meantime, he acknowledges that he suffers these things by the commandment and will of God, his most good, bountiful, and just Father, who wishes him well, and has sent this grievous calamity for his salvation and for his own glory. Does he not, in the midst of his torments, by submitting himself to the will of God, feel refreshing? And that which seemed most sharp and most bitter to man, by this voluntary and free submission, he makes it delightful and most sweet. Again; another is sick, though not vexed with a very great disease; but this man does not acknowledge that this sickness is laid on him by the good will of God. Rather, he thinks that God does not know about the disease, that God does not care about the disease. Therefore this man attributes it to diverse and sundry causes, and he imagines and seeks diverse means to heal it. And in these things, he is awfully vexed and afflicted; and yet, by striving so against the will of God, he feels no refreshing or comfort at all. Therefore, not willing what God wills, what else does he do (as they are prone to do) than double the evil, by using ill means to avoid it?

v.214

Therefore, the foundation of all happiness is faithful obedience, by which we fully submit ourselves and whatever else belongs to us, to the good will of God. And therefore, in this greatest petition, we pray to the Father that he would give us regeneration or newness of heart, true obedience, persevering patience, and a mind that is always and in all things agreeing with and obeying God.

The fourth petition is such: "Give us this day our daily bread." For the will of God cannot be done in us, unless we are nourished and strengthened with the bread of God. Bread, among the Hebricians, signifies all kinds of food, and the preserving or sustenance of the substance of man. Thus we read in the prophet: "I will break the staff of bread." ^{Eze 4.16} But man consists of two substances, the soul and body. The soul is the spirit; the body is made of earth and other elements. Therefore, it is preserved with two kinds of bread, spiritual and corporal. The spiritual food of the soul, by which it is preserved in life, is the very word of God, proceeding out of the mouth of God; out of the law, ^{Deu 8.3} the Lord repeats and says: "Man does not live by bread only, but by every word that comes out of the mouth of God." ^{Mat 4.4} And because this presents to the faithful, the eternal and incarnate Word of God — I mean, the very Son of God — we rightly acknowledge that he is the food of the soul, indeed, the food of a whole faithful man. For he himself witnesses that he is "the bread that came down from heaven; of which those who eat, shall not die," but have life everlasting. ^{Joh 6.51} Corporal bread consists of elements, and it is earthly; it comprehends food, drink, raiment, prosperous health of body, maintenance — to be short, the safety and good estate of man's life.

And this bread, truly, we call ours; not that it is not the gift and benefit of God, but because it is appointed for us, and pertains to our preservation, and is necessary for us. Yet, when we call it daily, we signify that it is the most excellent of all, which alone can sustain and preserve our substance — as much as is sufficient and as long as it is fitting, and altogether in the same manner and order which is needed. For we said before, it is not our part to prescribe to God the manner of doing or giving.

v.215

To this also pertain the following words, "Give us this day:" for it belongs only to God to give; nor does this petition apply to any creature. David says: "All things wait upon you, that you may give them food in due season. When you give them, they gather it; when you open your hand, all things are filled with good." ^{Psa 104.27-28} Again: "The eyes of all things do look upon you, O Lord, and you give them food in due season; you open your hand, and fill with your blessing every living creature." ^{Psa 145.15-16} Now, we pray "Give us," and not "Give me." This puts us in mind again both of brotherly love and unity. For we should not only seek our own, but also to pray for the safety and preservation of all other men. The word, "this day," appoints us a measure. For we are saying this: Suffice us, Lord, daily and every moment, with as much as is necessary and enough for us, which you alone know best of all. For we are admonished, by the way, that we should not burn with immoderate desire for transitory things; and we should not lavish them riotously when we have them, losing both our goods and our souls. And therefore, that wise man has said:

"Two things have I requested of you; do not deny me these before I die. Remove far from me vanity and lies; give me neither poverty nor riches; only feed me with food convenient for me: lest perhaps being full, I should deny you, and say, Who is the Lord? or being oppressed with poverty, fall to stealing, and forswear the name of my God." ^{Pro 30.7-9}

Therefore, in this fourth petition, we yield ourselves wholly into the care and tuition of God the Father, and commit ourselves to his providence — that he who alone is able to save us, might feed, defend, and save us. For unless he pours his blessing upon us, unless he gives us strength by those things that are the means of our sustentation [2893] and maintenance, all things are of no force. We pray for the happy course of the word of God; for the pastors of the church themselves; for the maintainers of the commonweal; for the safety of the church and commonweal. We crave that the bountiful Father would supply all wants, and give whatever things are necessary for the sustentation both of the body and the soul.

v.216

The fifth petition. Furthermore, lest anyone think himself unworthy of the daily bread, because it is for children and not dogs, ^{Mar 7.27} and therefore that he should pray hesitantly, and with less courage, the Lord, preventing [2894] this cautiousness of the godly, adds the fifth petition. It is this: "And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." In these words, we ask forgiveness of our sins. And that we may obtain forgiveness of our sins, it is needful that we confess ourselves to be sinners. For unless we do this, how will we pray that our sins should be forgiven? Truly, all the saints use this order of praying; therefore, all of them acknowledge themselves to be sinners. For there remain relics, yea, even in the regenerate and most holy men, which daily burst out into evil thoughts, evil sayings and doings, yea, and often into heinous offences. But whatever our faults and sins, first, truly we confess them humbly to God the Father, and afterward pray him to forgive them. We call our sins "debts," as God himself teaches us, because we are indebted for the punishment of them (as the price) due to God. And he forgives our debts, when he does not punish us as we deserve. He judges us as if we were not indebted to him at all. For the allusion is made to corporal debts: which if the creditor forgives the debtor, he has no further power to cast into prison, or to punish the one who was his debtor. Therefore, not only is the fault forgiven us, but the punishment also. Nor do we speak any words about our merits to the Father.; but we say, "Remit, or forgive, us our debts." The word remission means a free forgiveness of sins; he forgives us, because we are not able to pay. Thus we read in the gospel: "When the debtors were not able to pay, he forgave them both their debts." ^Luk
7.42 The same is set down in Matthew 18.25. Therefore, it is by no merits of ours, by no satisfaction of ours, but by the bountifulness of God through Christ, that we pray that all our sins may be forgiven. Nor do the saints doubt the certainty of forgiveness here; for the Lord says in the gospel: "Whatever you ask in my name, believing, you shall receive it." Therefore, those who pray in faith, do not doubt that their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake; for so we also confess in our creed: "I believe the forgiveness of sins."

v.217

We quickly add to this: "As we forgive our debtors" —not that we should think, through our forgiveness, that we deserve or obtain forgiveness of our sins; for otherwise the reason for remission would not be certain. For if someone either brings or does anything for which his sin is taken away, or if he satisfies for his sin, nothing is forgiven. Rather, he is recompensed as he deserves. Therefore, these things seem to be added for other causes. First, as much as we care about forgiveness (which many may doubt), the Lord's will is to comfort our insecurity by adding this phrase. It is a sign, as it were, by which we might understand that our sins are surely forgiven by God, so far as we are sure that we have remitted and forgiven others their offences with which they have offended us. Furthermore, his will was to drive out of us all old grudges, hatred, and malice; and to drive into us the study and desire of love and charity; and to admonish us of our duty, that, if as yet there stuck in our minds any part of old enmities, we may know that it should altogether be laid aside and cast out of our stomach — yes, and that even now, we must call upon the Lord to move our hearts, that we may be able to do it. Surely, it is hard [2895] to lay down old injuries and offences. But it is fitting that we forgive our brethren lesser faults, when we have obtained pardon of very great sins by our most gracious Father. That is, unless we wish to haply test our fortune, like the one in the parable of the gospel. He had proof of the great bountifulness and liberality of his Lord in forgiving him, while he was fierce and cruel toward his brother, in exacting from him a very small and trifling debt. The parable is very well known in the eighteenth chapter of St. Matthew. ^Mat
18.23-35

The sixth and last petition is: "And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil;" for sin is never so forgiven, that concupiscence does not remain in the flesh, which temptations stir up, and lead us into diverse kinds of sins. And these temptations are of diverse sorts. For first, God tempts us when he bids us do any thing by which to prove us, such as when he asked Abraham to offer up his son; or else, when he sends adversity upon us, so that with the fire of temptation, he may both exercise our faith, and cleanse away the dross of our misdeeds. These temptations of God tend to the salvation of the faithful. Therefore, we do not simply pray not to be tempted: for the temptation of God is profitable. For the man who suffers temptation is said to be blessed:

v.218

"For when he is tried, he will receive the crown of life." ^{Jas 1.12} We also pray that we are not led into temptation: for the devil likewise tempts us; and we are tempted by the world, and by our flesh. There are temptations on our right hand and on our left, tending to this end: to overthrow us, to drown us in the bottomless pit of our sins, and thereby to destroy us. When that is done, we are not only tempted, but we are led into and also entrapped in temptation. Therefore, we make such a petition as this: If it pleases you, heavenly Father, to exercise us with your wholesome temptations, we beseech you to grant that we may be found approved. And do not allow us to be led by a devilish and wicked temptation, so that, leaving you, and being made bond-slaves to our enemy, and drowned in the gulf of wickednesses, we are caught and kept by him in evil, sin, and in our own destruction.

For now we add the contrary clause, which also expounds the former. Others say it is the seventh petition: "But deliver us from evil;" apo tou ponhrou; I say, from that evil, namely, from Satan, who elsewhere is called a tempter. Deliver us from Satan, and from all evils which he sends: deliver us from snares, crafty practices, deceivings; from war, famine, captivity, plague; from all those things which are evil, hurtful, and dangerous. Those things which our heavenly Father knows very well, to whom we say here: "Give us healthful and good things; take away from us those things which you know to be hurtful and evil."

And so, we briefly conclude the Lord's Prayer, adding moreover, "Amen." That confirmation and giving of assent, was common and usual of old, as we see in Deu. 27, Neh. 8, and 1Cor. 14. To begin with, it expresses our desire; for we confess that we heartily desire those things which we pray for. Besides that, it declares the certainty of our faith, as if we were to say, I believe assuredly that these things are granted to me by God. For "Amen "is the same as saying, "So be it." And the Lord in the gospel oftentimes says, "Amen, Amen, I said to you" — that is, of a certainty I tell you the truth; or I utter and pronounce to you the undoubted truth. And so the faithful, after they have offered prayers to God, having their minds pacified, now joyfully wait for the gifts of the Lord.

v.219

Furthermore, before the word, "Amen," immediately after reciting these words, "But deliver us from evil," some add, "For yours is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen." But Erasmus Rotterdam, in his annotations on the new Testament, witnesses that those words are not found in any old Latin copy, but are found added in all Greek copies; and yet they are not expounded by any of the interpreters, except by Chrysostom and his follower Theophylact. And therefore, they seemed to him to be added to the Lord's Prayer, as some have added these to the Psalms: "Glory be to the Father, to the Son," etc. Erasmus immediately adjoins:

"Therefore, there is no cause why Laurentius Valla should stomach the matter, that a good part of the Lord's Prayer was curtailed. Their rashness was rather to be reproved, who did not fear to patch their own toys to so heavenly a prayer. For I may call them toys, in comparison to that which God has taught, whatever has proceeded from men; especially if that which men have added and put to, is compared with Christ the author of prayer." [2896]

Nor did only Erasmus doubt this addition. For the Spanish copy, called Codex Complutensis, has this: "It seems more credible that these words are not a part of the Lord's prayer, as a member of the whole, but was put in through the fault of some certain writers, or printers."

v.220

In the same book is shortly added:

"And even though St. Chrysostom in his Commentaries on Matthew, Homil. xx., expounds these words as if they were of the text; yet it is conjectured to be more true that even in his time, the originals in his treatise were corrupted. Thus, none of the Latins, not of the ancient interpreters or commentators, has made any mention of these words." [2897]

And surely, this is truly said. For the most diligent interpreters, each of whom has taken in hand to expound the Lord's Prayer word for word, as did St. Cyprian, Jerome, and Augustine, have not spoken so much as one word about this addition.

I have said this much up to here about the Lord's Prayer, and about calling on God's name; of which Solomon, the wisest that ever was, most truly pronounces: "The name of the Lord is a strong tower; the righteous runs to it, and is exalted;" [2898] that is, he stands and is preserved in a safe, or in a high place, out of the reach of any weapon.

Thanksgiving

We will say something (as we have done with this) about thanksgiving, another kind of prayer. And though this is also comprehended in the Lord's Prayer (for it comprehends all things belonging to true prayer, therefore it contains thanksgiving also), after expounding that, I would also treat this by itself, lest by mingling things, there arise a confusion or disorder in our minds. And truly, the Lord requires thanksgiving of us — of which there are not a few arguments for it in the holy scriptures. For how many praises, rejoicings, and thanksgivings, are read in the Psalms, written and left both by David and other prophets! And in the law also, the Lord instituted a particular kind of oblation and sacrifice, which we have said is called the Eucharist, or the sacrifice of thanksgiving.[2899]

v.221

What else was the supper of the Passover, but a thanksgiving for deliverance out of Egyptian captivity? Surely, our Lord Jesus Christ, instituting a remembrance of all his benefits and specially of the redemption purchased by his death, and knitting up all the sacrifices in brief, delivered the Eucharist, or sacrament of thanksgiving, to his church. We will declare this in a convenient place; and we partly showed it in our former sermons.[2900] Mankind in prosperity is all about lustiness and jollity, and seldom thinks to himself, where prosperity comes from. So he does not regard those spiritual mysteries and benefits so much as he otherwise would. But they seem to be swine, and not men, who not only fail to regard the benefits of God as they should, but moreover contemn them, and tread them underfoot. The heavy judgment of God waits for them.

Furthermore, the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving is due to God only: for he is the only giver and author of all good things; though in the meanwhile He uses the means and ministry of men and other creatures. Some prince sends you a most royal gift; and that is done by a courtier not of the lowest degree, but a most chosen man. Yet nevertheless, though he is a nobleman, you do not give thanks to him, but to the prince from whom the gift came. In the meanwhile, however, you honestly confess that the courtier in this bestowed his labour for your sake. But he would not have bestowed it unless his prince had so commanded. And so the whole benefit at length redounds to the prince himself, and to him alone. As all our invocation or calling upon God is acceptable to God the Father through Jesus Christ our Lord, so no thanksgiving of ours is acceptable to God, unless it is offered through Jesus Christ. To this pertains the mystery of the altar of incense, which is mentioned in the ceremonies of the law.[2901] But the apostle also says: "Give thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." And again he says: "By him we offer a sacrifice of praise always to God, that is, the fruit of lips confessing his name."

But that we may be thankful for all the benefits of God, and offer continual thanksgiving to God, it is needful to first acknowledge and weigh well with ourselves, the benefits of God; for if these are not yet known or rightly weighed, our mind is not set on fire to give God thanks for his benefits.

v.222

And these are quite diverse; indeed, they are infinite: for they are private and public, general and special, spiritual and corporal, temporal and eternal, ecclesiastical and political, singular and excellent. But who can reckon up all their kinds and parts? God created, beautified, garnished, and made this world fruitful for man. To the ministry of this, he severally appoints angelic spirits, whom he had created to be ministers for himself. He gives us souls and bodies, which he furnishes and stores with infinite gifts and abilities; and, that which far passes all other benefits, he loosed man, being entangled in sin; he delivered him, being a bond-slave to the devil. For the Son of God sets us free into the liberty of the sons of God. By dying, he quickens; by shedding his blood, he purges and cleanses;[2902] he also gives us his Spirit, by which we may be guided and preserved in this banishment, until we are received into our everlasting and true country. Those who consider these things with a true faith cannot help but be rapt into the praise and setting forth of God's goodness, and into wonderment at a thing that is doubtless to be marvelled at — that the gracious and mighty God has such a special care for men, than whom this earth has nothing more wretched or miserable.

Here the saints of God are destitute of words, nor do they have words fit enough for so great a matter. David cries: "O Lord our God, how wonderful is your name in the whole world; for you have set your glory above the heavens;" and following in the eighth psalm. ^{Psa 8.1}And again, "Who am I, O Lord God, and what is the house of my father, that you have brought me here (or so advanced me)? And what can David say further to you? for you, Lord God, know your servant;" and so forth, as follows in the 2nd book of Samuel, chap. 7. ^{2Sam 7.18-20} This David has set down a most notable form of blessing, or praising, or giving thanks to God, in the 103rd Psalm, which begins thus: "Bless the Lord, my soul; and all that is within me, bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits; who forgives all your wickedness;" and so forth.

v.223

But what need is there of any more words? The Lord's Prayer may be a most perfect form of praising God, and giving thanks to God for all his benefits, and serve instead of many. For as the preface and all the petitions call to our remembrance, and absolutely set forth for us, God's greatest benefits which are most liberally bestowed upon us, and also upon all others. So, if we consider that it is our duty to give thanks to God for every one of these, and later begin, even at the beginning of the Lord's Prayer, to weigh this chiefly with ourselves, that God the Father, of his unspeakable mercy toward us, has adopted us miserable sinners into the number of sons, by whom we will be sanctified, and in whom God will reign, and at last also translate to his everlasting kingdom. What a plentiful matter of praising God and giving thanks to him is to be ministered here, to say nothing of all the other petitions! But these things are better and more rightly understood by good, godly, and devout exercise, than by precepts, however diligent.

And the Lord so much esteems this thanksgiving, offered to him with true humility of mind, and also faith, that he receives it and considers it a most acceptable sacrifice. There is often mention of this in the old Testament, as when it is said: "Whoever offers me thanks and praise, honours me. I will not reprove you because of your sacrifices. I will take no bullocks out of your house, nor goats out of your folds.[2903] Offer to God the sacrifice of praise, and pay your vows to the most High; and call upon me in the day of trouble; I will hear you (and [2904] deliver you), and you shall glorify me." ^{Psa 50.14-15, 9} Again: "I will offer you the sacrifice of thanksgiving, and I will call upon the name of the Lord." ^{Psa 116.17} And Hosea also says: "Take these words with you, and turn to the Lord, and say to him, O forgive us all our sins, and receive us graciously (Nim rechtfur gut); and then will we offer the calves [sacrifices] of our lips to you." ^{Hos 14.2} Accordingly, Malachi has also left written: "I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts; nor will I receive an offering at your hand. For from the rising of the sun to its going down, my name is great among the gentiles; and in every place, incense and a pure offering shall be offered to my name: for my name is great among the gentiles, says the Lord of hosts." ^{Mal 1.10-11}

v.224

Furthermore, [2905] with great consent, all the old interpreters (Irenaeus chiefly, and Tertullian) understand this "pure offering" to be Eucharistia — that is to say, praises and thanksgivings, and prayer proceeding from a pure heart and a good conscience and an unfeigned faith.[2906] Truly, the ancient fathers have called the Eucharist, or mystical supper of Christ, a sacrifice, for no other cause than in it praise and thanksgiving are offered to God. For the apostle Paul shows that Christ was once offered, and cannot be offered often nor any more.

For great is the worthiness, power, and virtue, not only of praise or thanksgiving, but also of prayer wholly; I mean of the invocation too. Although I have already said something about this, [2907] where I declared that our prayers are effectual, yet I add these few words. The saints truly had a most ardent desire for praying, because of the wonderful force of prayer. For, to say nothing of those most ancient fathers before and shortly after the flood, did not Abraham pray when he received the promises? And as often as he changed his dwelling, did he not call upon God? At Abraham's prayer, king Abimelech is delivered from death and from barrenness, which the Lord, being displeased, laid upon his house; he is cured. ^{Gen 20.17-18} Jacob poured forth most ardent prayers to God, and received inestimable benefits from Him. In Exodus, Moses prays, not once, but often; and takes away the plagues from the Egyptians, which the Lord had brought upon them by his just judgment. At the prayer of Moses, the Amalekites turn their backs; and when he ceased or left off, the Israelites fled away.^{Exo 17.9-11} Again, when the fire of the Lord devoured the outlying tents of Israel, they cried to Moses; and Moses again cried to the Lord: and suddenly the fire that devoured them was consumed. ^{Num 11.1-2}

v.225

Again, the people murmured against the Lord, and vengeance is prepared; but Moses by mild and continual prayer quenches the wrath of God; for it is said to him: "I have let them go according to Your word." shortly after, when the people began afresh to murmur against Moses and Aaron, and the vengeance of God had already consumed fourteen thousand and seven hundred men, Aaron, at the commandment of Moses, burns incense, and standing between the dead and those that were living, though near and appointed to death, he pleads for and obtains pardon by prayers. ^{Num 16.41-48} Innumerable others of this kind are read about Moses. By prayers Joshua, Moses' successor, made the course of the sun and moon stay so long, until he had revenged himself upon his enemies. ^{Jos 10.12-13}

By prayer, without any audible voice, Hannah puts away from her the reproach of barrenness, and immediately is made a fruitful mother of very many children. ^{1Sam 1.13; 2.21} Samuel, the most godly son of godly Hannah, vanquishes the Philistines by prayer; at harvest time, a mighty tempest of thunder and rain was suddenly raised up. ^{1Sam 7.8-11} We also read things not unlike Elijah. Jonah in like manner prayed in the whale's belly, and was cast on the shore safe. ^{Jon 2.1-9} Jehoshaphat and Hezekiah, most religious kings, by prayers that were poured forth to God by faith, triumph over their most powerful enemies. Nehemiah asked nothing of his king before he had first prayed to the Lord of heaven; ^{Neh 1.4; 2.5} therefore he obtained all things. ^{Neh 2.8} By prayer, the most valiant and virile Judith overthrew and slew Holofernes, the most proud enemy of God's people, and the terror of all nations. ^Jdt
13.3-11 Daniel brought all his affairs to pass by prayers to God; so too, Esther took a deed in hand that was necessary for God's people, and with three days' fasting and daily [2908] prayers, brings it to a happy end. ^{Est 5.1f} In the most blessed and most desired birth of our Lord Jesus, companies of angels are heard singing praises together to God. ^Luk
2.13 What, and when our Lord's life was in extreme danger, did he not take himself to prayer; and later heard the voice of an angel comforting him? The apostles, together with the rest of the church, prayed with one accord about the third hour or the day, and shortly after, they received the Holy Ghost. ^{Act 2.1-15}

v.226

And when the apostles were in danger, the church cries suppliantly for God's help, and without delay, quickly finds succour. ^{Act 12.5} They receive great liberty to speak, and work very great signs and miracles among the people. Peter is brought out of a very strong and fenced prison by an angel of God. ^{Act 5.19} What should I say about Paul and Silas praying and praising the Lord in prison? Is it not read, that the foundations of the prison were all shaken with an earthquake, and by that occasion the keeper of the prison was turned unto God? ^{Act 16.25-26} I could bring countless examples of this sort, truly; but I am persuaded that for the godly, these are sufficient. And faithful men do not attribute these forces, effects, or virtues, to prayer, as though to a work of ours, but as proceeding from faith; and so they attribute them to God himself, who promises these things, and performs them for the faithful.

For the judgment of Paul touching these is known in the11th chap. to the Hebrews: that all glory is due to one God: may He grant to so illuminate all our minds, that our prayer may always please him. Amen.

5-6. THE SIXTH SERMON: OF SIGNS & SACRAMENTS.

Of signs, and the manner [2909] of signs; of sacramental signs: what a sacrament is; of whom, for what causes, and how many sacraments were instituted by Christ for the Christian church; what things they consist of; how these are consecrated; how the sign and the thing signified in the sacraments are either joined together or distinguished; and of the kind of speech used in the sacraments.

The treatise on the sacraments remains, which we heard is joined to the word of God and prayer. But in speaking of sacraments, delivered by Christ our king and high-priest, and received and lawfully used by his holy and catholic church, I will, by God's grace and assistance, observe this order: first, we treat them generally, and then particularly or severally.

v.227

Signs defined. And here, beforehand, I will determine the certain signification of a sign or sacrament. If I am somewhat long or tedious in this, dearly beloved, I crave pardon; for I hope it will not be altogether fruitless.

Signum, a sign, the Latin writers call a token, a representing, a mark and show of something that has signification. So say Tully [2910] and Fabius. Fabius says: "Some call signum shmeion,(semeion) though some term it indicium; some others vestigium, a mark or token by which a thing is understood, such as slaughter by blood." [2911] St. Aurelius Augustine, the famous ecclesiastical writer, cap. 4, De Magistro, says: "We generally call all those things signs, which signify something; where we also find words to be." [2912] Again, Lib. ii. De Doctrina Christiana, cap. 1, he says: "A sign is a thing beside the semblance which it lays before our senses, making of itself something to come into our mind or thought; such as, by seeing smoke, we believe there is fire." [2913]

The said Aurelius Augustine divides signs into natural signs and given signs. "He calls those natural which, without any will or desire to signify, beside themselves, they make something else known, such as smoke signifying fire; for smoke does not have any will in itself to signify. Given signs are those which all living creatures give to one another, to declare as well as they can, the affections of their mind, or anything which they conceive, mean, or understand." And given signs he divides again by the senses. For some belong to the eyes; as the ensigns or banners of captains, the moving of the hands, and of all the members.

v.228

Some again belong to the ears; as the trumpet and other instruments of music, yea, and words themselves, which are chief and principal among men, when they intend to make their meaning known. To smelling he refers that sweet savour of ointment mentioned in the gospel, whereby it pleases the Lord to signify something. To the taste he refers the supper of the Lord; for, he says, "by taking the sacrament of his body and blood, he gave or made a sign of his will." He also adds an example of touching: "and when the woman by touching the hem of his vesture is made whole, that is not a sign of nothing, but signifies something." [2914] St. Augustine has treated the kinds and differences of signs in this way.

Others also, whose opinion does not differ at all from his, distinguish signs according to the order of times. For they say about signs, that some are of things present, some of things past, and some of things to come. They think that signs of things present, represent current things: ivy-garland lets us understand that wine is sold wherever it is hung up. The signs that our master Christ worked, signified that the Messiah and the kingdom of God had come, promised by the prophets.

v.229

Signs past comprise all tombs, monuments of the dead, and those stones stacked by Joshua in the midst of the Jordan, signifying to those who came after, what was done in previous times. Gideon's fleece gave a sign of things to come; that is to say, it was a sign of the victory which he would have over his enemies.

But these signs, being well-considered and not neglected,[2915] may more amply and plainly be divided into other signs: some are given by men, and some ordained by God himself. Signs or tokens are given by men, to show and signify something, to keep it in memory among men, or in a way, to seal up what they would have certain and sure. In this sense, every demonstrative description or picture is called a sign. In Ezekiel chapter 4, Jerusalem, portrayed in a tile,[2916] is called a sign. ^{Eze 4.1} Also in ancient times, they treated the images of the dead as signs, because by those images they would renew afresh the memory of those [who had died], and keep them in remembrance, as if they were alive. Yes, and the holy scripture calls idols signs; as it appears in Isaiah chapter 45, ^{Isa 45.20} and the 2nd Paralip. 33.[2917] So stones being set up or laid down to mark out anything, such as landmarks, and all tombs and monuments, are signs. Rahab of Jericho said to the Israelites:[2918] "Give me a sign by oath, that you will show mercy to me; and they gave her a rope to hang out of her window." ^Jos
2.12,21 Behold, the rope was a sign of their faith and truth, with which (as we would say) they sealed themselves surely and without any dissimulation, to take diligent heed that Rahab would not be destroyed. We Zwicers [2919] term such signs that are given or received in confirmation of faith and truth, wortzeichen, because they are added to the words, and seal them, as it were; and also wahrzeichen, because we give witness by them, as it were, that in good faith and without any fraud or guile, we will perform in deed what we promised in word.

v.230

Now these kinds of signs are of diverse sorts. Some are mute or dumb, and pertain to the sense of the eyes. Of this sort are the standards used in war, such as crosses, banners, and flaming fires, which are mentioned in Numbers 2, Psalm 73, etc. Nor is any man able to reckon up all those of this sort. For new ones come in constantly and quickly, as it pleases men. Judas gave a sign to his company: "Whomever I kiss," he says, "that is the one: take him." ^{Mat 26.48} The joining of right hands which pertains to the sense of feeling, is a sign of faithfulness, help, and fellowship; indeed, it is the silent sign that Paul calls "the right hand of fellowship." ^{Gal 2.9} To this belong various movings and gestures. Some of them pertain to the voice. These are perceived by hearing, and uttered by man's voice, or by the sound of things which have no life. By man's voice are uttered words, whistling, and other things of this kind. To this may be added watch-words uttered by the voice, such as Shibboleth in the twelfth chapter of Judges. ^{Jdg 12.6} Voices without life are those made by trumpets, flutes, horns, guns, drums, by ringing bells and sounding instruments, which also extend very far and largely.

Now signs are given by God to this end: to teach and admonish us about things to come, or about things past: either to lay before the eyes of their beholders, and represent in a certain likeness, the things of which they are signs; or else to seal, as it were, the promises and words of God with some visible ceremony celebrated by men by God's institution. To be short, they are given that they might exercise our faith, and gather together in one assembly or company, those who are scattered. And these are not all of one sort, but they greatly differ between themselves. For some have their beginning from natural causes, and yet they are nevertheless given as signs by God, to put us in mind of things, or to renew His promises,[2920] and to teach men of things that have been done — such as the rainbow mentioned by Moses in Genesis 9.

v.231

For when the flood ceased, God made a new league with Noah, and ordained the rainbow for a sign of his covenant. He did not make it anew; but being made long before, and appearing by natural causes, he consecrated it by a new institution, with the intent that it might cause us to call the flood to remembrance, and renew the promise of God as it were — that is to say, that it would never come to pass again, that the earth would be drowned with water. Now, this sign does not have any ceremony ordained, by which it might be celebrated among men; nor does it gather us together into the society of any body or fellowship. But this sign is referred chiefly to God, saying: "I will set my rainbow in the clouds,[2921] that when I see it, I may remember the everlasting covenant made between me and you." Not much different than this, are signs and wonders — signs, I say, given in the sun, moon, and stars, which forewarn men of destruction and calamities to come, unless they amend by repentance. But neither do these have any ceremony ordained to celebrate the remembrance of them, nor to gather us together, etc.

Again, there are other signs that are altogether miraculous; they are not natural, even though there are natural things in them. Of this sort is Gideon's fleece, and the shadow of the sun going backward on the dial of king Hezekiah. These signs, just as we read they were shown only once, so they are not commanded to be followed by any institution, or to be celebrated for some particular end. They were given to Hezekiah at that time, to signify and witness the victory which he would have against his enemies, and the recovery of his health. Altogether and merely marvellous, are those things which our Lord Jesus Christ, in the last chapter of Mark, called signs, gifts, means of healing, and speaking with tongues.[2922] These were given to and bestowed upon men, not by any power of man or virtue of healing in him, but by the power and virtue of Christ only. Those signs declared to men that it was the true and undoubted preaching of the gospel, by which Christ is declared to be Lord of all — Lord of life and death, and of Satan, and also of hell itself.

v.232

For now, when the dead rise, and diseases are driven out, through the name of Christ — by these very signs, it is proved that what is said is true: that Christ is Lord of all things. So the wonders which Moses and Aaron wrought in Egypt, Exodus 4, are called signs in the scripture; for they were witnesses both of God's lawful sending, and tokens of his mighty power to be executed against Egypt. But neither of these had any ceremony with them, nor did they gather anyone together into a society.

Now, we also read that some signs are paradigmatic. That is, they are indeed used by men, but it is not without God's commandment — so that these may also be said to be signs from God. They are altogether free from miracles; indeed, they are not only fetched from natural things, but also from things that are common and usual. Such were the bonds, pitcher, and chains of the holy prophet Jeremiah. ^{Jer 27.2f} Being willed by God to do so, Jeremiah laid these things before them in a certain evident form and figure; I mean, as a visible sign to be seen with men's eyes, which by his preaching, he had prophesied would befall them. We may see similar things in Ezekiel, the 17th and 24th chapters. In some things, these paradigmatic signs are like those exercises of rhetoric called chriae activae; rather, they are mixed chriae, so-termed because they consist partly in words and partly in deeds.[2923] Aphthonius defines an active chria, "to be that which declares and plainly shows a thing by action, deed, or gesture: as when Pythagoras was asked how long man's life lasted; he stood still for a while, so that they might look at him; but shortly he shrunk away, and withdrew from their sight: this action signified that man's life is but short and momentary." [2924]

v.233

But for the most part, chriae mixtae are set down in the scripture, consisting of word and deed — as when Christ took a child,[2925] and set him in the midst of his disciples, and spoke these words: "Truly I say to you, Unless you turn, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." ^{Mat 18.3} But these actions or signs do not have the institution and commandment of God, charging us to renew this very action by solemnly celebrating it. Nevertheless, sacramental signs have some affinity with these — namely, baptism and the Lord's Supper; for they are given to us from above, and are taken from natural things, without any miracle; indeed, they are instituted in the form of natural and sensible things, and in very common things, such as water, bread, and wine. They have this in common with other signs given by God, in that they renew things past, and foreshadow things to come, and represent things by a sign. They differ peculiarly from other signs, in that they have ceremonies joined with the commandment of God, which He has commanded his church to solemnize. And this is also peculiar to them: that being seals of God's promises, they couple us visibly to God and to all the saints; and they are dedicated to the most holy mysteries of God in Christ. I will treat these more largely and diligently later.

The sacramental signs of Christ and of Christ's church, namely, those which Christ our Lord has delivered to his church, and which his church has received from him and lawfully uses,[2926] are called "sacraments" by Latin writers. But the word is not found in the whole of scripture except as used by interpreters.[2927] Yet, the word "sign" is often used in the scriptures; what helps for our purpose, is most significantly set down in Genesis 17 and Romans 4. Meanwhile, we do not reject the Latin word sacramentum, a sacrament, by regarding it lightly; nor do we reject it by forging or devising a new one. I like the word sacrament well enough, as it is used lawfully.

v.234

St. Augustine, in his fifth epistle to Marcellinus, says: "It would take too long to dispute about the diversity of signs which, as they pertain to holy things, are termed sacraments." [2928] From this doubtless sprang this common definition or description: "a sacrament is a sign of a holy thing." [2929] Though it cannot be rejected, it is clear to see that the nature of the thing is not fully comprehended or expressed in it; nor is it separated from other things which are also holy signs. There is another definition, therefore, that is suggested and used, which is indeed more perfect than the first: "a sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace." [2930] But because this also does not express the nature of the thing in all points, the following definition seems more allowable to many, stated this way: "Sacraments are ceremonies with which God exercises his people, first to stir up, increase, and maintain their faith; then to the end of testifying of his religion before men." [2931] This is a true and right definition. But what if you define a sacrament somewhat more fully and largely in this manner?

"Sacraments are holy actions, consisting of words or promises of the gospel, or of prescribed rites or ceremonies, given to the church by God from heaven, for this end: to be witnesses and seals of the preaching of the gospel, to exercise and try faith, and to represent and set before our eyes the deep mysteries of God, by earthly and visible things. In short, to gather together a visible church or congregation, and to admonish them of their duty."

v.235

This definition truly is far-reaching, large, and manifold; a definition, I say, gathered of many parts. But we mean to go at it simply and plainly, and to lay out the whole matter before your eyes to be seen; then will we make manifest every part of it, and confirm it with testimonies of scripture.

Now, that I may more fully treat the names that are given to this thing, I find that Latin writers call a sacrament an oath, or a religious bond. This is because it was not thoroughly done (I think), and to the proof, without certain ceremonies. M. Varro, in his second book De Lingua Latina, declaring what it means to contend with an oath, says:

"In some things, the plaintiff and the defendant each bet [2932] five hundred pieces of silver at the place appointed for that purpose; and in other things, they gaged a set number of ounces; so that the one who recovered in judgment would receive back his gage; but the one who lost would forfeit it to the treasury." [2933]

Interposing holy things for the gage, [2934] through partaking of the sacraments, we are bound to God and to all the saints, as if by obligation; and also God himself, by the testimony of the sacraments, has bound himself to us by an oath. It therefore appears that the name sacrament is very aptly and properly applied to our signs. We also read in Latin writers, about an oath that soldiers used to take; for it was not lawful for them to fight unless they were put to their oath and sworn. They took a solemn oath, having someone recite the form of the oath to them word by word (as Yegetius says in his book De Re Militari [2935]), that they would stoutly and readily do whatever their captain commanded them, and that they would never forsake the field in the defence of the commonweal of Rome.

v.236

They had a donation given to each of them as a pledge or earnest; they gave their name to be enrolled; and they were marked so that they might be known from other soldiers.[2936] Now, because we are received and enrolled as Christ's soldiers by our sacraments (especially by baptism); and by receiving the sacraments, we profess and testify that we are under the banner of Christ our captain;[2937] the signs of Christ and his church are therefore not mistakenly called sacraments, nor without reason. Meanwhile, I will not stoutly contend that the word sacrament was, for that cause, chiefly attributed by those in ancient time to these, our signs.[2938] For Erasmus Rot., a man very well gifted in the tongues, and thoroughly tried in old and ancient writers,[2939] none better, says in Cathe. sua Symb. v.:

"Those who speak most exquisitely call sacramentum an oath or bond, confirmed by the authority of God and the reverence of religion. But our elders used this word for what the Greeks call a mystery — which a man may call a religious secret, because the common people were excluded from meddling with them." [2940]

Therefore, the old writers [2941] called those signs sacraments, instead of mysteries. For the same signs are called mysteries by the Greeks, which the Latin writers for the most part interpret as holy and religious secrets — holy secrets, I say, which the profane common people were excluded and debarred from celebrating. For Caelius in Lectio. Antiqui. supposes that they were called mysteries, oti dei musantav threin endon, because it behoved those who hid them, or administered them, to keep them close, and not show them to any common person.[2942]

v.237

Thus mysteries may well be called separated and holy secrets, known only to those who were ordained for that purpose, [2943] and to be celebrated only by saints or holy men. Yet it may seem that the Greek musterion is derived from mustes and muoo, just as apoduterion is derived from apo and duoo — so that the etymon [2944] of it may have no more force with the Greeks than testamentum has among the Latins, which is a witness-bearing of the mind (although I am not ignorant what some also reason in this case). Sacraments, therefore, are called mysteries, because in a dark speech [2945] they hide other things which are more holy. And Paul willingly uses this word in his epistles. There is a plain reason why this word was attributed to the holy signs of the Christian church: for these things are known only to the faithful, and are hidden from those who are profane and unholy. And surely the preaching of the gospel itself is called, "The mystery of the kingdom of God;" ^{Mar 4.11} this is to teach us that the unclean being shut out, it is revealed only to the children of God. For our chief interpreter of mysteries says: "Do not cast your pearls before swine, nor give that which is holy to dogs." ^{Mat 7.6} And Paul: "If our gospel lies hidden as yet," he says, "it is hidden in those who are lost, in whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of those who do not believe," 2Cor 4.

Furthermore, many of the Greek doctors of the church have called our sacraments symbola; this word is also received and often used by the Latins. It is derived from symballoo, that is to say, confero, to confer or compare together; for by comparing one thing with another, symbols are made apparent and rightly perceived. Symbolum therefore signifies a sign which has relation to some other thing, as we said about the standard, etc.

v.238

And truly, among the Grecians in olden times, the use of symbols or signs was diverse; for in their sacrifices [2946] they had their symbols, signs (I say) allegorically meaning something — as in the sacrifices of Bacchus, a sieve was their symbol or sign, and they carried it about when they were well tippled;[2947] thereby it signified that those who are drunk are blabs, and can keep nothing secret. What if I can prove by an allegory or dark speech, that the opinions of men, containing something of deep understanding, are called symbols? For Pythagoras' symbols are known well enough. So mystical divinity began to be called symbolic, because it was wrapped in more hidden and secret mysteries. So that which is darkly uttered and in the manner of a riddle, is mystical; [2948] it has in it a far more contrary meaning than it seems to offer by words. Again, the gift and token of faith and truth, which by mutual consent passes between the bride and the bridegroom, whereby it is not lawful for them to shrink or go back from their word, promise, or covenant, is called a symbol. Furthermore, soldiers serving under one and the same banner, were given symbols or badges. In the same way, certain confederated cities that were joined together in a league of friendship, to the end that they might go safely to the bordering cities, and to those which took part with them, were given symbols or mutual signs — that is to say, tokens. These being shown and seen, gave each other gentle and courteous entertainment [2949] by their league-fellows, companions, and singular friends.

The ancient writers therefore applied this word symbol to our sacraments, because they represent and show us the exceedingly great and deep mysteries of God. They are allegorical and enigmatic, hard and dark to understand. And lastly, by the institution of his sacraments, the Lord himself has bound himself to us; and by partaking them, we in turn bind ourselves to him and to all the saints, testifying and openly professing to fight stoutly and valiantly under the Lord's banner.

v.239

Moreover, these holy symbols and signs admonish and put us in mind of brotherly love and concord, so that we remember to love most entirely and with all our heart, as God's children and our brethren, those who are communicants or partakers with us at the same table, and are washed clean by the same baptism.

This much concerning sacraments: what they are, by what names they are called, and why they are so called. Let what we have briefly noted be sufficient.

Sacraments. Setting aside all other things, it seems necessary, first of all, to declare and show who was the author of the sacraments, and for what causes they were instituted. All men in a manner confess that God alone is the author of sacraments, and not men — nor yet the church itself. For there is one among the schoolmen, who teaches the church this lesson: namely, that she should remember she is no lady or mistress over the sacrament, but a servant or minister; and that she has no more power or authority to institute any form of a sacrament than she has to abrogate any law of God.[2950] Aquinas also, part. iii. quaest. 46. articulo 2. says: "He institutes, or he is the author of a thing, who gives it force and virtue: but the virtue and power of the sacraments comes from God alone; therefore God alone has the power to institute or make sacraments." [2951] And indeed, God alone has the power to institute true service and worship: but sacraments belong to his service and worship; therefore God alone institutes sacraments. If anyone in the old Testament had offered a sacrifice which God had not commanded, or did not offer it in the manner that God willed it to be offered, it was not only not available to him, but also his offence in doing so was rewarded with most terrible and fearful punishment. Who does not know that the sons of Aaron, for offering strange fire, were horribly burnt and scorched with fire which fell down from heaven?

v.240

Such sacrifices therefore displease God, as profane or unholy; nor do those sacraments deserve to be called lawful, which do not have God himself for their author. To this is added that sacraments are testimonies, and seals as it were, of God's good-will and favour toward us. Who, I pray you, can better, more uprightly, or more assuredly bear witness of God's good-will toward us, than God himself? In no way does that deserve to be called or considered the seal of God, to which he neither set his hand, nor imprinted with his own mark. [2952] Indeed, it is a counterfeit seal, because it does not come from God; yet, in the meantime, it bears an outward show of the name of God. In behalf of this is that saying of St. Augustine, which is in every man's mouth: "The word is added to the element, and there is made a sacrament." [2953] By this we gather that in the institution of sacraments, the word of God obtains the principal place, and has the most ado; the word, I say, of God, not the word of men, nor yet of the church. From this it follows that the sign ought to have its proceeding from God himself, and not from any manner of men, however many, however cleric-like or learned, however harmless and holy of life. So that, now, there can be no other author of sacraments than God himself alone.

As we receive the word of salvation and grace, so it is also needful that we receive the signs of grace. Although the word of God is preached to us by men, yet we do not receive it as the word of man, but as the word of God, according to the saying of the apostle: "When you had received the word of God which you heard from us,[2954] you did not receive it as the word of men, but (as it is indeed) the word of God." ^{1The 2.3} It behoves us to have respect for its first author who said when he sent his disciples abroad: "Go into the whole world, and preach the gospel to all creatures, ^{Mar 16.15} teaching them to observe whatever I have commanded you; and baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." ^{Mat 28.20}

v.241

"He that hears you hears me; and he that despises you despises me." ^{Luk 10.16} And therefore, though the sacraments are ministered by the hands of men, they are not received by the godly and religious as though proceeding from men, but from the hand of God himself, the first and principal author of them. To this belongs the question which Christ our Lord asked in the gospel: "The baptism of John, was it from heaven or of men?" ^{Mat 21.25} Truly John, who baptized, was a man; but in baptizing, he baptized according to God's institution and ordinance. And therefore, the baptism of John was from heaven, though the water with which he baptized flowed out of the bottomless depth into the river Jordan, and John himself was resident on the earth. To this also notably agrees what Paul expressly says: "That which I delivered to you I received from the Lord." ^1Cor
15.3 Therefore, although St. Paul was a man, yes, and a sinner too, yet what he delivered to the church, he did not deliver as from himself, or as any invention of man, but as Christ has delivered it; so that it is not his, nor man's, but [2955] Christ's tradition, a divine and heavenly tradition. Besides this, our high priest and everlasting bishop works even today in his church, the one whose ministry they execute, that is, at whose commandment they baptize; and according to whose institution, those who are the stewards or dispensers of the mysteries of God, minister the holy sacraments of the Lord's Supper.[2956] The institution of the sacraments,[2957] therefore, must be acknowledged [2958] by us to be the very work of God. This far touching the author of sacraments.

Peter Lombard, in his Sentences, reckons up three causes why sacraments were instituted; that is to say, why spiritual and heavenly things were delivered and committed [2959] to us under visible signs, forms, and ceremonies. The first of these is so cold and weak, that I am loath to recall it to memory.

v.242

He places merit in this: that by God's government and direction, man seeks salvation in things that are baser and inferior to himself. He adds this afterward: although he seeks salvation not in them, but in God through them. This also he has uttered unadvisedly enough, and has not sufficiently considered. The other two causes, namely, that sacraments were invented and ordained under visible signs for our instruction and exercise, do not seem altogether absurd or disagreeable to reason.[2960]

The truest and most proper reason why sacraments are instituted under visible signs, seems to be partly God's goodness, and partly man's weakness. For we hardly reach for the knowledge of heavenly things, if they are laid before our eyes without visible form, [2961] and as they are in their own nature, pure and excellent. But they are better and more easily understood if they are represented to us under the figure of earthly things — that is to say, under signs that are familiar to us. Therefore, our bountiful and gracious Lord covertly and darkly — no, rather evidently and notably — set the kingdom of God before us, to view it in parables or dark statements. [2962] Even so, by signs it pleased him to lay before our eyes, in a way, the very same thing, and to point it out to us, as if painted in a table; to renew it afresh, and to maintain the remembrance of it among us, by a lively representation. John Chrysostom admits this cause as a chief and proper cause. In his eighty-third homily on Matthew, he says:

"The Lord has delivered to us nothing that is insensible. The things indeed are sensible, yet they have altogether a spiritual understanding or meaning. So baptism is ministered under a sensible element, namely water; but what is wrought by it, that is to say, regeneration and the new birth, spiritually enters into the mind.

v.243

For if you were a bodiless creature, he would have delivered to you all these gifts bare, naked, and bodiless, according to your nature. But since you have a reasonable soul coupled and joined to your body, he has therefore delivered to you in sensible signs and substances, those things which are perceived with a spiritual understanding." [2963]

I do not allege this as if I would take the testimony of man for my stay; but I do it because I see St. John Chrysostom's speech according to the manner observed and used in the scripture. For who does not know that the scripture is full of parables, similitudes, allegories, and figurative phrases, which the Holy Ghost uses, not for his own sake, but for ours? In the gospel, the talk which Christ had with Nicodemus touching heavenly regeneration is very well known. By using the hidden and covert terms of air, wind, and water, etc., he reasons, saying: "If I have told you of earthly things, and you do not believe, how will you believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" ^{Joh 3.12} What he calls "earthly things," is his doctrine of heavenly regeneration or new birth, figured to us under the earthly signs of water and the spirit, or of air and the wind; and what he means by "heavenly things" is that self-same doctrine of heavenly regeneration, nakedly delivered to Nicodemus without any imagination, without similitude or sensible signs. Thus the Lord signifies that men more easily conceive and understand the doctrine of heavenly things, when it is shadowed under some dark and covert sign of earthly things,[2964] than when it is nakedly and spiritually delivered — that by comparing things not too unlike, it may appear that the sacraments were for no other cause revealed or instituted, [2965] than for the sake of demonstration: that heavenly things might become more familiar and plain to us.

v.244

In this, we have to mark the analogy, which is a certain aptness, proportion, or (as Cicero terms it) a convenience;[2966] or a fit agreement of things known by their signs. If they are slightly [2967] passed over without this analogy, the reason for a sacrament cannot be fully and perfectly understood. But this analogy, if diligently discussed and observed to the full, offers to the beholder, without any labour at all, the very anagwgh, (anagooge) that is to say, the hidden and secret meaning of a sacrament. When we come to treat these things, we will do what we can to make them manifest by examples.

Whoever therefore thoroughly weighs the institution [2968] of sacraments, cannot help but extol with praises the exceeding great goodness of the Lord, who not only opens to us miserable men the mysteries of his kingdom, but he takes singular care for man's infirmity. Framing himself to our capacity, in a way he stutters and stammers with us. Regarding our dullness and the weakness of our wit, he clothes and covers heavenly mysteries with earthly symbols or signs. Thereby he most plainly and pithily opens them to us, laying them before our eyes, to be evidently beheld.

In this same institution of the sacraments, we have reason to extol and praise the wisdom of God, if we take it in hand [2969] to compare great and small things together. For this custom is received as a law throughout the whole world: that all the wisest men, when they had occasion to speak of high mysteries of wisdom, they did not do it by words alone; rather, by signs and words together, they commended them to their hearers. This was to the end that the two most noble senses in man, namely, hearing and seeing, might both at once be vehemently moved, and forcibly provoked, to consider the matter. The volumes of heathenish philosophers are full of examples. What do you say to the Jews, God's old and ancient people? Did not God himself show very many such examples among them?

v.245

Again, in making leagues or confirming promises in earnest and weighty matters, men use signs or tokens of truth, in order to win credit for their words and promises. Even so, acting in the manner of men,[2970] the Lord has added signs of his faithfulness and truth in his everlasting covenant and promises of life; the sacraments, I mean, with which he seals his promises and the very doctrine of his gospel. Nor is this rare or strange to him. Men swear even by the Lord himself, when they would make others certainly believe, and in no case to mistrust the truth of their promises. Therefore, it is read in the holy scriptures, that the Lord himself took an oath and swore by himself, ^{Jer 22.5} when he meant "most abundantly to show to the heirs of the promises," as the apostle says, "the stableness of his counsel." ^{Heb 6.17} Moreover, it was the accustomed manner among those of old, as they were making their league or covenant, to take a beast, and to divide him in pieces, and each of them to pass through and between the pieces so divided. They testified by that ceremony, that they would yield themselves to be so divided and cut in pieces, if they did not steadfastly hold to what they promised in their league or covenant. In the same manner, making or renewing a league with Abraham (which Moses describes at large in the 15th chapter of Genesis), the Lord commands Abraham to take a heifer, a she-goat, and a ram, each three years old, and to cut them in half, and to lay each piece opposite the other. When Abraham had done this, the Lord himself, in the likeness of a smoking furnace or firebrand, went between the pieces, so that thereby Abraham might know that the land of Canaan would certainly be given to him and to his seed to possess; and that all the things which He had promised in that league, would be brought to pass. Therefore, since the good and true Lord is always like himself, he now frames himself toward His church in the same manner as we said he did then. I ask you, what wonder or strange thing is it then, that he should leave to us also today, under visible things, signs and seals of his grace, and of the mysteries of the kingdom of God?

v.246

Up to here we have treated the chief causes of sacraments, for which they were instituted.

Kind and Number of Sacraments. Touching the kind and number of sacraments, which is next, there are diverse opinions among the writers, especially of later times. For among the old and ancients, this question drew quickly to an end, as an undoubted and well-known perfect principle. But whoever diligently searches the scriptures, will find that those of the old Testament had sacraments of one kind, and those of the new Testament had sacraments of another kind. The sacraments of the people under the old Testament were circumcision and the paschal lamb, to which were added sacrifices. I abundantly spoke about this in the third decade, sixth sermon.[2971] In like manner, by the writings of the apostles, the sacraments of the people under the new Testament (that is to say, of Christians) are two in number: "baptism" and "the supper of the Lord." But Peter Lombard reckons seven: baptism, penance, the supper of the Lord, confirmation, extreme unction, orders, and matrimony.[2972] The whole rabble of interpreters and rout of schoolmen follow him.

But all the ancient doctors of the church, for the most part, reckon two principal sacraments. Among those doctors, Tertullian, in his first and fourth book Contra Marcionem, and in his book De Corona Militis, very plainly mentions only two — that is to say, baptism, and the Eucharist or supper of the Lord.[2973] And Augustine also says, Lib. iii. De Doctr. Christiana, cap. ix.: "The Lord has not overburdened us with signs; but the Lord himself, and the doctrine of the apostles, have left us a few certain things instead of many. And those are to be most easily done, most reverently understood, and most purely observed: such are baptism and the celebration of the body and blood of the Lord." [2974]

v.247

And again he says to Januarius, Epist. cxviii.: "He has knit and tied together the fellowship of a new people, with very few sacraments in number; they are easily observed, and very excellent in signification: these are baptism, consecrated in the name of the Trinity; and partaking of Christ's body and blood; and whatever other thing is commended to us in the canonical scriptures — except those things with which the servitude of the old people was burdened according to their hearts and the time of the prophets.[2975] These are found in the five books of Moses." [2976] By the way, mark that he does not say, "And whatever other things are commended to us in the canonical scriptures;" but, "whatever other thing," etc. This plainly proves that he is not speaking of sacraments, but of certain observations both used and received by the church — as the subsequent words of Augustine declare. Yet I confess without dissimulation, that the same Augustine elsewhere mentions the sacrament of orders. [2977] Nevertheless, this seems to me to be also considered: that the self-same author applies the name sacraments to anointing, and to prophecy, and to prayer, and to certain other things of this sort,[2978] as well as to orders. And now and then, he reckons among them, the sacraments of the scripture.[2979]

v.248

Thus we may easily see that, in his works, the word "sacrament" is now used one way, and sometimes another. He calls all these sacraments because, being holy, they came from the Holy Ghost; and also because they are holy institutions of God, observed by all who are holy. And yet these differ from those other two sacraments, which are holy actions consisting of words and ceremonies, and which gather together its partakers, into one fellowship. But Rabanus Maurus also, bishop of Mentz,[2980] a diligent reader of Augustine's works, Lib. De Instit. Cleric, cap. xxiv. says:

"Baptism and unction, and the body and blood, are sacraments; they are called sacraments for this reason: because, under a cover of corporal things, the power of God works our salvation more secretly, as signified by these sacraments. Hence, they are also called sacraments for their secret and holy virtues." [2981]

This Rabanus Maurus was famous about the year of the Lord eight hundred and thirty; so that even by this we may gather that the ancient apostolic church had no more than two sacraments. I make no mention here of Ambrose, even though in his books about sacraments, he does not number as many as the company of schoolmen do. This is because some of those works published in his name, are not accepted by all learned men as Ambrose's.[2982] So too, I little force the authority of the works of Dionysius, which I need not declare what price and estimation they have among learned and good men.[2983] But however the case stands, the holy scripture, which is the only infallible rule of life and of all things that are to be done in the church, commends only baptism and the Lord's Supper to us, as the solemn institutions and sacraments of Christ.

v.249

Those two are therefore sufficient for us; so that we need not be moved, whatever the subtle invention of man's busy brain may at times bring against or beside these two. Why? Because God never gave power to anyone to institute sacraments.

Meanwhile, we do not contemn the wholesome rites and healthful institutions of God, nor yet the religious observations of the church of Christ. We have declared elsewhere, what we think and teach touching penance and ecclesiastical order.[2984] Of the remainder, which latter writers authorise as [2985] sacraments, we will speak in their convenient place. Also elsewhere, so far as we thought requisite, we have treated the likeness and difference between sacraments of the people of the old and new Testaments.[2986]

Now, let us see what things sacraments consist in. By the testimony of the scripture and by all the godly men, they consist in two things: namely,

· in the sign and the thing signified;

· in the word and the rite;

· in the promise of the gospel and in the ceremony;

· in the outward thing and the inward;

· in the earthly thing, I say, and the heavenly;

and as Irenaeus witnesses in his book, the martyr of Christ,[2987]

· in the visible thing and the invisible;

· in the sensible thing and the intelligible.

To this belongs what St. John Chrysostom says upon Matthew: "Christ delivers nothing to us that is sensible except under visible things; the outward things are sensible, yet they are all spiritual." [2988] But he calls those things aistheta, sensible, which are perceived by the outward senses, such as seeing, hearing, tasting, and touching; but those things he calls noeta, intelligible or mental, which are perceived by the mind, the understanding, consideration, and the discourse or reasoning of the mind — not of the flesh, but of faith.

v.250

By the testimony of the scriptures, this thing shall be made manifest.[2989] The Lord says to his disciples in the gospel: "Go into the whole world, and preach the gospel to all creatures; and he who believes and is baptized shall be saved. ^{Mar 16.15-16}You shall baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." ^{Mat 28.19} The same gospel says of John the Baptist: "John baptized in the wilderness, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."^Mar
1.4 So also St. Luke witnesses that St Peter said to the Israelites: "Repent, and be baptized everyone of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." ^{Act 2.38} In baptism, therefore, water or sprinkling water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and all that which is done by the church, is a sign — a rite, ceremony, and outward thing; it is earthly and sensible, lying open and made plain to the senses. But remission of sins, partaking of (everlasting) life, fellowship with Christ and his members, and the gifts of the Holy Ghost which are given to us by the grace of God through faith in Christ Jesus, is the thing signified — the inward and heavenly thing, and that intelligible thing which is not perceived except by a faithful mind.

In the same manner, the scripture says, bearing witness also of the supper of the Lord, which is the other sacrament of the church: "The Lord Jesus when he had taken bread, gave thanks, and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body which is given for you. Likewise he took the cup, and gave it to them, saying, Drink you all of this; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Do this in remembrance of me." [2990] Now, therefore, all that action which is done by the church [2991] following the example of Christ our high-priest (I mean, the breaking and distributing of bread, and yes, the banquet or receiving of bread and wine), is the sign, rite, ceremony, and the outward or earthly thing — that sensible thing which lies open before the senses. But the intelligible thing and thing signified, the inward and heavenly thing, is the very body of Christ given for us, and his blood shed for the remission of sins, and our redemption and fellowship which we have with Christ and all the saints which, indeed, he chiefly has with us.

v.251

By these things it will be easy to determine with certainty about the names or terms now given to the sacraments. For they are called external or outward signs, because they are corporal or bodily, entering outwardly into those senses by which they are perceived. Contrariwise, we call the things that are signified, inward things — not because the things included in the signs lie hidden, but because they are perceived by the inward faculties, or the motions of the mind, wrought [2992] in men by the Spirit of God. So also, those signs are termed both earthly and visible, because they consist of things taken from the earth: namely, water, bread, and wine; and because they are manifestly seen in these likenesses. To be short, the things signified are called heavenly and invisible, because their fruit is heavenly, and because they are discerned with the eyes of the mind or of faith, not the eyes of the body. For otherwise, the same body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which in the supper are represented to the faithful in the form of bread and wine, are not heavenly or invisible of their own proper nature; for the body of our Lord, touching his substance and nature, is consubstantial, or of the same substance as our bodies. Now, it is called heavenly for its deliverance from corruption and infirmity, or else because it is glorified, and not because his own nature is brought to nothing, or laid aside.[2993] The same body of his, of its own nature, is visible, not invisible, and resident in heaven; yet it is seen by the godly celebrating the supper, not with the eyes of the body, but with the eyes of the mind or soul. Therefore, in respect to us it is called invisible, which of itself is not invisible.

Now, in the sacraments the word is called, and it is indeed, a witnessing of God's will, and a remembrance and renewing of the benefits and promises of God; yes, and it is the institution and commandment of God, which shows the author of the sacrament, along with the manner and end of it. For the word in baptism is the very same word that we just now recited: "Go into the whole world," etc.

v.252

In the supper of the Lord, the word of God is, "Jesus took bread," etc. And the rite, custom, and manner of how to celebrate the supper,[2994] is to be sought from the example of the Lord going before it in holy action. This action comprehends both prayers, and those things which are recited from the word of Christ. For just as he broke bread and divided it, and [distributed] the cup in like manner, so we likewise follow in this holy action, with holy imitation and sacramental rite. As he gave thanks, so we also give thanks. By certain prayers in baptism, we request the assistance and grace of the Lord; we recite certain verses out of the gospel which we know are requisite in the administration of baptism; and we usually do the same in the celebration of the Lord's Supper also. But it is not my intention at present to speak largely and exactly about the rites of the sacraments. Notwithstanding, we hold those to be best, which are taken out of the holy scripture, and do not exceed its bounds. These will be spoken of in their place.

Some, instead of "the word" use "promise;" and instead of "rite," use "ceremony." But truly, I see no danger at all in the word "ceremony" if it is understood to be the outward worship and rite which the Lord himself commended to us by his example, and left to be used in the celebration. And indeed, sacramental signs are not simple or bare signs, but ceremonies or religious actions. So too, there seems to be no danger in the word "promise" if by promise we understand the preaching of the gospel, and the commemoration or remembrance of God's promises, which we often use in the preaching of the gospel and in the celebration of the sacraments. That is to say, God receives us into his fellowship for Christ's sake through faith, washes away our sins, and endues us with various graces; Christ was given for our sins; he shed his blood to take away the sins of all the faithful. For in celebrating baptism, we use these words of the Lord: "Suffer the little children to come to me; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven," etc. ^{Mar 10.14}

v.253

In the celebration of the banquet of God's holy children, we use these holy words of our Lord: "And after supper Jesus took bread, and after he had given thanks he broke it, and gave it to them, saying, Take, eat: this is my body which is given for you. This is my blood, which is shed for you for the remission of sins: do this in the remembrance of me," etc. [2995] For those remembrances and recitations are the promises of the gospel, promising forgiveness of sins to believers, showing that the Lord's body is given for them, and his blood shed for them; this faith, truly, is the only and undoubted means to obtain life and salvation. Christ is the strength and substance of the sacraments, by whom alone they are effectual, and without whom they are of no power, virtue, or effect.

But if anyone understands "promise" to mean "covenant," by which the Lord singularly binds, or you might say, ties himself to the signs in which or with which he would be present bodily, essentially, and really — in this, he says more than he can show or prove by the scriptures. For in no place has Christ promised to be present corporally— that is, with his true body, in the signs, or with the signs. Otherwise, I am not ignorant of how God sometimes appeared to our fathers in a bodily figure, that is, in some visible form or shape. For example, when he showed himself to Jacob, who was named Israel, leaning on a ladder, and to Moses in the hole of a rock, as if in a mirror. But these do not properly pertain to this purpose where we treat the corporal presence of Christ, and the sacramental signs. But because many twist these words of the Lord, "This is my body, this is my blood," to prove a corporal presence of the Lord's body in the supper, I answer, that those words of the Lord are not to be roughly expounded according to the letter, as though bread and wine were the body and blood of Christ substantially and corporally; but only mystically and sacramentally. So that the body and blood of Christ abide in their substance and nature, and in their place — I mean, in some certain place of heaven. But the bread and wine are a sign or sacrament, a witness or a sealing, and a lively memory of his body given and his blood shed for us. But we will treat this more at large in a convenient place.

v.254

By these things which we have spoken of, it sufficiently appears how sacraments consist of two things: the sign and the thing signified; of the word of God, and the rite or holy ceremony.

There are some, notwithstanding, who think there is such a force grafted by God into the words, that if they are pronounced over the signs, they sanctify, change, and in a way, bring with them, or make present, the things signified; they plant or include them within the signs, or at least they join them with the signs. For these kinds of statements are heard about it: that the water of baptism regenerates by the virtue of the words; and that, by the efficacy of the words, the bread and the wine in the supper, are made the natural flesh and blood of the Lord. But the sacraments of Christ and his church consist of the word and the sign. It seems that we must diligently search out what must be understood by "the word."

I said just now, that "the word" in the sacraments was a witness-bearing of God's will, and the commandment of God, or the institution of God, which declares to us the author, manner, and end of a sacrament. By this word, I say, and commandment of God, by this will and institution of God, the sacraments are sanctified. It is not that the words are so pronounced by the ministers, that they are to be read before as if recited by the Lord himself, or delivered by his apostles; but it is because God would have it so, did so, and commanded his apostles to do so. For whatever God does, or commands us to do, is sanctified by the very commandment or deed of God. For all things which he has done are exceedingly good; therefore, these things which he commands us to do, cannot help but be holy, because he is holy and the only sanctifier. Thus, the sacraments are sanctified by the nature, will, deed, and commandment of God, and not by the pronunciation of any words.

v.255

To this, the faithful obedience of men is necessarily required, so that it may be applied to man and do him good. This should altogether make us put our trust and confidence in the mercy and power of God; in no way should we despise or cast behind us the institution of God, even though it seems base and contemptible in outward appearance. This will appear more plainly in the example of Naaman, the captain of the king of Syria his band. ^2Kng
5.1-14 He heard from the prophet, undoubtedly at the Lord's commandment, that he should wash himself seven times in Jordan: for so it would come to pass that he would be cleansed from his leprosy. Here you hear the word, the will and commandment of God, I say. But you do not hear that any words were repeated either over the Jordan, or over Naaman; nor that any words were prescribed by the prophet that Naaman should repeat, by which there is any force of purifying or cleansing given to the water. Naaman, by faith, obeys the commandment of God, and he is cleansed from his leprosy — not by his own merit, nor by the benefit of the water of the Jordan, but by the power of God and his own faithful obedience. Lepers also in the gospel, and not a few of them, are cleansed by the power and will of Christ, through faith, and not by the pronouncing or speaking of words. The Lord indeed said, "I will, be clean." ^Mat
8.3 But if anyone today were to recite the same words a hundred times over any leper, it would avail nothing. By this, it is manifest that no force is given to words, to work health by pronouncing them.

The apostles indeed said to the sick, feeble, and lame, "In the name of the Lord Jesus, arise and walk;" and they rose up and were healed;[2996] yet they were not healed by the benefit of the words, but by the name — by the power, I mean — and virtue of Christ. For Peter, who said to the lame man in Jerusalem, "In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, arise and walk," ^{Act 3.6} said in the midst of the council of Jerusalem: "If this day we are examined about the deed done to the sick man, by what means he is made whole, let it be known to you all, in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth this man stands here whole." ^{Act 4.9-10}

v.256

And to the people he said, "And his name, through faith in his name, has made this man sound, whom you see and know; and the faith which is by him, has given to this man health." ^{Act 3.16} Beside these verses, we read in the Acts of the Apostles, that the sons of one Sceva, a priest, being exorcists or conjurers, called on the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had evil spirits; but these spirits were so far from giving way to their exorcisms and conjurings, that they ran at and overcame them, so that they scrambled [2997] to escape alive. ^{Act 19.14-16} It is most apparent there, that those exorcists used almost the same form in their enchantments, which the apostle used; for they tried to cast out the foul spirit in the name of the Lord Jesus; but they were not able so to do. Who cannot see and perceive, that the words pronounced do not prevail at all? Nor is it any obstacle or hindrance at all, that those exorcists were without faith; for this is something that is very well known and received by all men, that sacraments are no less effectual when they are ministered by wicked ministers, than when they are ministered by the best ministers.

But here, this saying of the apostle is objected against us: "Christ gave himself for the church to sanctify it, cleansing it in the fountain of water by the word," or in the word. ^{Eph 5.25-26} Behold, they say, men are cleansed by the water of baptism, which by the word has the force of sanctifying put into it. Therefore, it must be that words have force to sanctify. But I will confute them by an evident demonstration, that the apostle did not mean what they suppose.

The apostle prescribes to married Christians their duty. To the plainer and pithier setting forth of which, he uses the example of Christ and his church, commending the exceeding love which Christ bears toward his church. Being inflamed with this love, he gave himself for the church to this end: to make it a pure [2998] and glorious spouse for himself.

v.257

Here, by the way, he sets down the manner of purging; for he says the Lord Jesus himself has cleansed it. For it is Christ's office alone to purge and to cleanse. Now the manner of purging follows: "In the fountain of water by the word:" Because it is briefly spoken, it has some obscurity in it. He mentions two things which the Lord uses to cleanse those who are his, "the fountain of water," and "the word." "The fountain of water" is baptism, which is the outward action and witness-bearing of the inward purifying or cleansing, wrought by the grace and Spirit of God. As the apostle says, "According to his mercy he saved us by the fountain of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed upon us richly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour." ^{Tit 3.5} For he adds, by way of interpretation, "and renewing of the Holy Ghost," of which the fountain of water is a sign. Moreover, "the word" is the very preaching of the gospel, testifying that, by the grace and mercy of (God) the Father, his only Son was given to us; and being given for our sins, he makes those who believe in him, heirs of eternal life. So that now, these words of Paul to the Ephesians, fifth chapter, very well agree with this commandment of the Lord mentioned in St. Mark: "Go into the whole world, and preach the gospel to all creatures: he which shall believe and be baptized, shall be saved," etc. ^{Mar 16.15} For by these words, the Lord also shadows for us the manner and means of our salvation: that it is he alone who purges us by faith. Yet, meanwhile, he wills believers to be signed with baptism; and that it should be preached openly in the world, that it is he who pardons sins; yes, and who freely gives everlasting life. But how do all these things, I ask you, fit their purpose, who would prove by those words of Paul, that there is force and virtue in the words themselves to sanctify baptism? These words of the Lord spoken to his apostles, make our point even more manifest: "Now are you clean," he says, "through the word which I have spoken to you." ^{Joh 15.3} Shall we say here, that through the words which Christ recited, the disciples of Christ were made clean? Why then did he need to be crucified the next day, and to have died?

v.258

What, was it to the end that he might purchase that power for the words? In that case, all the glory would be given to the words. Do not faith and godliness tell us that "by the word of the Lord" means, that which is declared by the preaching of the Lord — that is, by the death and redemption of Christ, whereby those who believe it are cleansed? For in another place he says, "purifying their hearts by faith." Therefore they err, because they do not rightly judge about the word or speech. For the Lord speaks of the word preached and believed; and they understand it to mean the word pronounced, as though being pronounced, it had force from the Lord to sanctify. St. Augustine also supports us; in his 80th treatise upon John, he says:

"From where does such great virtue and power come to the water, that it should touch the body and wash the heart, unless it is through the working of the word — not because it is spoken or pronounced, but because it is believed? For in the word itself, the sound passing away is one thing, and the virtue which remains is another thing. 'This is the word of faith which we preach,' says the apostle; 'because if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is the Lord, and believe with your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved. For with the heart man believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.' ^{Rom 10.9-10} Thus we read in the Acts of the Apostles, 'purifying (or cleansing) their hearts by faith.' ^{Act 15.9} And St. Peter says in his epistle, ^{1Pet 3.21} 'So also baptism saves us; not putting away the filth of the flesh, but in that a good conscience makes its request to God.' [2999] This is the word of faith which we preach, and undoubtedly by which baptism is also consecrated, that it may have power to cleanse. For Christ with us the vine, with his Father the husbandman, has loved his church, and given himself for it. Read the apostle, and mark what he adds, saying: 'that he might sanctify it, cleansing it by the fountain of water in the word.' It would be in vain, therefore, that cleansing should be attributed to a frail and fading element, unless this were added: 'in the word.'" [3000]

v.259

And so forth; for I have recited St. Augustine's words, not that I stay myself upon man's testimony, or that I would have any man urge it, or that I am content to be ruled by the witness of man; but because in these words he has gathered together some testimonies out of the scripture, bearing witness from the word. By this we may understand, that it is the word of faith preached, and not the word spoken or pronounced, which ought to be received. This word, I say, truly cleanses; that is to say, the grace of Christ alone purifies, to which both the word and faith are directed. And it is for that cause that he expressly said, "Not because it is spoken, but because it is believed." Shortly after, he says: "The word of faith which we preach." Furthermore he says: "By the word of faith, baptism is consecrated, that it might have power to cleanse." What else is this, than if he had said, the very substance of faith makes baptism effectual? For this follows: "It would be in vain, that cleansing should be attributed to the fading and corruptible element, unless this were added, 'in the word.'"

Now if a man considers the mysteries of the saints or holy men in olden times, he will not find in the celebration of circumcision, the feast of the Passover, or the sacrifices, any words were spoken by which these sacraments were formed and created as it were, and made effectual. To which this belongs: John the Baptist not only baptized the common people without respect to person, but he also baptized the Lord Jesus himself in the water of Jordan.

v.260

No words were pronounced in the meantime, by which he called and drew down the heavenly grace over or upon the water of baptism. Again, when Christ our high bishop instituted his supper in the gospel, he commanded nothing to be spoken or pronounced, by virtue of which the elements might either be changed, or the things signified (being drawn down from heaven) should be present with or joined to the signs. Rather, the evangelists have declared what the Lord has simply done, and that we should do what his will was, according to the manner and end he instituted his supper. We read in no place that the Lord said, As often as you speak or pronounce these my words, "This is my body, This is my blood," it shall come to pass by virtue of my words, that the substance of the sign will be made void; and at the same point of time in which the words are spoken, it will begin to be the true body and the true blood of the Lord, in the forms or likenesses of bread and wine; or that the forms or likenesses and the truth of the sign remaining, it will begin at once, with the bread and wine, to be the very body and blood of Christ. Therefore, in pronouncing or speaking the words of the Lord in the supper, there is no power or virtue either to call down the things signified, or to change the things present.[3001] These imaginations rather seem to maintain superstition more than religion — as though the words, pronounced according to the form conceived, had the power to call down out of heaven, to bring from one place to another, to restore health, to draw to, to put from, or to transform or change anything. St. Augustine reckons among superstitious vanities, those things which are tied or fastened about the body as remedies against diseases, which medicine also takes no account of; whether it is in charming, or in certain signs called characters, or in hanging certain things about some part of the body. The place is seen in Cap. 20, Li. De Doct. Christ. 2. [3002]

v.261

Chrysostom, being very angry with those who hang the written gospel about their neck, has these words upon Matthew chap. 23:

"In what does the force or power of the gospel consist? In the form and figure of the letters, or in the understanding of the meaning and sense of them? If it is in the form of letters, then you do well to hang it about your neck: but if it is in understanding the meaning, then it is better that they were laid up in your heart." [3003] This is what he says.

And there is the same reasoning about the figures, and about the pronunciation of the letters or words of the gospel; for just as the figure of the letters has no power to do anything, there is no force or virtue either in the pronunciation or the sound of words. Pliny, a heathenish writer, alleges many heathenish examples, in which he declares that words are effectual; yet, among other things which he brings up, he has this to say: "It is a question whether words or enchanting phrases have any force: but everyone who is wise is so far from believing it, that even man by man, they utterly deny it." The place may be seen in Lib. xxviii. cap. 2. [3004] But most worthily, the true word of God itself is preferred above all these, by which Moses, Deu 18, forbids and condemns with great severity, all kinds of superstitions and enchantments.

I know what the adversaries will object here; namely, that it is a blessing or consecration, and not a superstition, that they use. Besides this, they bring many examples out of the scripture, set down in their canonical decrees, by which very foolishly and doubtless most unaptly, they set about proving that the natures of things are changed by blessing or consecration (as they say); from this they also gather that the bread is turned into flesh, by the words of blessing or consecrating.

v.262

Their examples are of this sort: the water flowed out of the rock after it was struck with Aaron's rod; the river Nile turned into blood; the water at the marriage in Cana of Galilee turned into wine; the bitter waters of Meribah changed into sweet water; and Moses' rod turned into a serpent. But, I beseech you, what make these to the Lord's Supper, with which they have no manner of similitude or likeness? So, this must be an unapt and doltish comparison [3005] which they make: The river Nile was turned into blood, therefore the bread is turned into flesh: the water at the marriage in Cana was changed into wine, therefore the wine in the Lord's Supper is changed into the blood of Christ.

It's true that the water gushed out of the rock when it was struck, the river Nile was turned into blood, the water at the marriage was changed into wine, the bitter waters of Meribah became sweet, and Moses' rod was turned into a serpent. But truly, the water, the blood, the wine, the sweet water, and the serpent, were so turned and changed, that they were not in the form or likeness of those things which they were before; nor were they at once that which they were before, and also that which they were then made into. But the water of the Nile was truly blood, not water and blood together; nor was there invisible blood under the visible form of water. And so the case also stands in the other examples.

Therefore, they do not at all agree with the sacramental signs; but they are so far from being like them, that they are altogether unlike them. Moreover, who can tell by what pronunciation of words Moses made the water burst out of the hard rock, or turned the river Nile into blood, or changed the bitter waters into sweet? Who knows what form of words the Lord used when he changed water into wine? Therefore, they unfitly apply these examples to their blessing or consecration, as to changing the natures of things, since it cannot be shown what manner of blessings the saints or holy men used. Likewise we do not read that Moses and Joshua pronounced any words of blessing by which they divided the channel of the Erythrian sea, [3006] and the river Jordan.

v.263

Elisha is not read to have uttered any words of blessing when he made the axe swim, and took it out of the water by the handle. The power of God worked in all these things; but we must not imagine whatever we intend to proceed from that. For it is weakness, and not power, which is repugnant to justice, and which takes things in hand which are contrary to God's truth; but the mighty works of God are of such a sort, that any man may understand and manifestly see that they are such as they are said to be. The Lord said, "Let there be light; and there was light." It was that kind of light, I mean, which was called light — and according to the nature of light, it also gave light. That which was light indeed, was not called or made light, if it did not also give light. So too, the bread is called the body of Christ, though it does not have so much as one jot of the [physical] body of Christ in it.

Furthermore, this word "blessing" is not so used in any place in the scriptures, as they would have us believe. To bless, in the scriptures, is to thank, to praise, to salute, to bid farewell, to speak well of anyone, to wish well, to rejoice, to highly extol, to give thanks for a good turn, to increase, to enrich, to multiply, or to make fruitful. I could, if need be, bring examples to prove each of these. But a man nowhere reads that to bless is the same as changing the nature of things by the words of God, nor by good words and prayers pronounced in a set manner. They say, "We read in the gospel, that the Lord took bread and blessed it: yes, and Paul also calls the bread and cup by that name, i.e., 'The bread and cup of blessing,' undoubtedly the bread and cup of consecration; and by this consecration, the substance of the signs is miraculously changed." I answer that the words both of the gospel and of the apostle are wrongfully twisted to that sense, which never came into the mind of the Lord or his apostles. For to declare the meaning of that place in the gospel: To bless is not to make the sign of the cross with the gesture of the hand; nor to lay one's mouth to the bread and cup, and to whisper in a low voice the set syllables of the words of consecration. Rather, it is to sing praises to God, or to give thanks for His benefits bestowed on us.

I will confirm what I said, by the authority of the evangelists and apostles. For the apostles and evangelists use the word blessing or thanksgiving indifferently.

v.264

For where Mark has εὐλογήσα (eulogesas), that is to say, "blessing," Matthew, Luke, and Paul have εὐχαριστήσας (eucharistesas), that is to say, "giving thanks:" Mark also uses this word a little after: "And when he had taken the cup," eucharistesas, that is, "when he had given thanks, he gave it to them." [3007] Therefore, to bless, as the apostles themselves interpret it, is to give thanks, since they put the one word for the other. The diligent reader may also see this in 1Cor 10.30; we will fully and wholly treat that passage in what follows. Our adversaries have therefore not yet proved from the scriptures, that to bless is the same as changing the things; or that by words, pronunciation, or reciting words, the things which are signified are brought into, or made present [with the sign].[3008] Truly, the ancient writers mentioned a mystical blessing, but it was in a far different sense than these consecrators. We will speak of true consecration shortly; and in another place, we will also confute whatever things they have brought concerning the blessing or consecrating of baptism.

Now we will make an end of what we began. Words of themselves were instituted by God to this end: to signify, and by signifying, to bear witness and to admonish. Beside this, they do not have any hidden force to change the natures of things, nor to cause the things themselves to be corporally present; nor do we read that holy men ever used them in this way. Therefore, those who use them other than as they were instituted, sin and deceive men. For Aurel. Augustine acknowledges the very same thing in his Enchiridion ad Laurent. Capit. 22. He says: "And truly, words are instituted to this purpose: not that men should deceive one another by them, but by which one might make another know his meaning. Therefore, to use words for deceit, and not to that end to which they were ordained, is sin." [3009]

v.265

The same Aurelius Augustinus, making a summation of his whole book entitled De Magistro, asks this question: "But now, I would have you tell me what your opinion is about all this that I have spoken to you?" Later he answers this: "I have learned, being admonished by the words, that a man is taught nothing else by words, than to learn; and that it is a very small matter, that by speech or talk, we partly know what the speaker thinks. But whether the words which he spoke were true, that teaches he only, who admonished that he dwelt in the heart when the other spoke with the tongue." [3010] This much he says in the last chapter of his book De Magistro. To this purpose pertain the words of Solomon the wise, in the book about the Preacher,^{Ecc 12.11} saying: " The words of the wise are like pricks and nails that pierce by the authors of these gatherings,[3011] which are given by one shepherd." [3012] Here we willingly acknowledge that there is a great force in eloquence and in the prayers of the just;[3013] as the Grecians signified by Hercules of Gallia; Cicero also has very plentifully declared it, in Lib. i. De Oratore. [3014] But what they forge and imagine about Pitho, or Suada, or Suadela, the lady and mistress of eloquence,[3015] we truly attribute to the Holy Ghost, who gives grace to the speaker, and who also prepares and stirs up the minds of the hearers. By these things, I think it is manifest to all men that it is a new forgery of man, and not a doctrine from Oracle, to say that in the celebration of the sacraments, there is such force grafted into the words recited, that they turn and change the things, or make the things signified to be present, and either put them on or join them with the signs.

v.266

But we will show later, that the signs are not changed or mingled with the things signified, but that both of them still remain in their own nature and property. It will be sufficient if we attribute to the words, what the scripture attributes: namely, the office of signifying and admonishing, of moving and stirring up, which they have from God. For those who deck them with strange and falsified titles, defile and blemish the words of God.

We acknowledge indeed, that all the power of almighty God is attributed to the word of God. But who does not see that what is spoken and meant of the everlasting Son of God, is called "the Word of God" in the scripture? Who is such a dorhead,[3016] that he cannot rightly distinguish between the everlasting Word of God — who is the Son of God, the second person in the reverend Trinity — and the word that is repeated, spoken, or pronounced by man? The everlasting Word of God, in his own substance and nature, remains a creator and not a creature: it is not mingled, grafted, or incorporated into man's voice. The word which proceeds from man is a creature, not a creator, and it still remains a creature; for it is a sound which passes away. Nevertheless, what still remains is a virtue, if it is sincere and not adulterated, and it is received by faith; for so it preserves. Yet this is not by its own proper virtue or power, or because it is pronounced by man, but through His power or virtue who revealed the word, and who is true, and therefore preserves those things which he promises to preserve by his word. So that, now indeed, God himself preserves, who said that by his word he would preserve those who believe. ^{Wis 16.26} The word, therefore, which God has revealed to us by his servants the prophets, and by his chosen apostles, is not, nor is it called, the word of God, as if the sound of syllables, words, and voices, are of their own nature the word of God — that very same word, I mean, who of his own substance is the Son of God — but because the revelation of the word was made from God, in the Holy Ghost, through the word or wisdom of God.

v.267

This is why, although their origin is from God and not man, the words which the prophets and apostles uttered are man's words; nor can they do anything else but give signification. Even so, I would not disparage the due force of the external word of God, and those things imputed to the literal word, which are proper to God.[3017] I acknowledge all those things which, with a sound understanding or judgment, are attributed to the word of God. But I have discoursed about this more at large elsewhere. [3018]

But now, some will say: If, sacraments are not sanctified or consecrated by reciting the words of God, then from where do they have this, so that they are and are called sacraments, or holy signs? Is the consecration vain and of no force? Surely, that consecration which the papists have feigned is vain and of no force. But in the beginning of this chapter, I spoke about consecration or true sanctification; I will now set this forth a little plainer and more abundantly.

The holy scriptures, when they mention holy things, they very often use this Hebrew word קַדֵּשׁ (qadash),^{Gen 2.3} which the Greek interpreters commonly translate by agiazw (hagiazoo), the Latins by Sanctifico, Consecro, and Initio. The use of this word reaches very far: for it signifies to sanctify, to offer to God, to purify or cleanse, and to justify; also to sever or put apart, and to separate — to separate (I mean) from profane use, and to dedicate them to holy things; to call a thing by some name, to apply, and to appoint. Therefore we say, that to consecrate, in this place, is nothing else but to sanctify, to dedicate to God, and in a way, to separate, or to make something holy which was profane. But who does this? Or by what means or instrument does the one who sanctifies do it? Who, I beg you, consecrates, or makes holy? Is it God? Or is it man? Truly, it is God, and not man. For God, instituting anything, and testifying and declaring by his word what he has instituted, and to what end he has done it, of his own holy, just, and good will, and by his own only institution, I say, without any other means, He consecrates the thing which He himself has already instituted.

v.268

For as He is holy, just, and good, so that whatever He commands is holy, just, and good. And man — understanding by the word of God, that God has instituted anything for a holy, just, and good use — accepts, receives, and uses that institution for holy, good, and just ends. Therefore, by uttering certain words, man does not consecrate and make holy the institution. And because he believes that all the institutions of God are holy and good, he therefore also celebrates this institution of God, even as God has ordained, and gives God thanks, depending altogether upon God and the rule of his word.[3019] The apostle says, speaking in another place about this manner of sanctification:

"Now the Spirit speaks evidently, that in the latter times there will rise deceivers, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God has created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused, if it is received with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer." ^1Tim
4.1-5

Look, he says, "meat is sanctified by the word of God and prayer." But the word of God in this passage (as Paul the apostle expounds it) is a testimony of the scripture and of the will of God, by which we are taught that all things which God has made are exceedingly good, and that they are clean, and not unclean; God has created them to be eaten and for our use. In the Acts, St. Peter hears, "Arise, Peter, slay, and eat;" for he saw in a vision before him, all living creatures of the earth and the air. "Peter answered, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean." Therefore, he heard again: "What God has cleansed, do not call common." ^{Act 10.13-15} But when, I ask you, did God make them clean? When he made and gave them for the use of man. Prayer is annexed to the word, not as a charm or enchantment, but as a faithful thanksgiving. For the apostle more than once or twice mentions thanksgiving, so that by the general word, that is to say, by prayer, nothing else might be understood by it than the special word, by which I mean, thanksgiving; for we might say that prayer is to invocation and thanksgiving, as the root is to the branches.[3020]

v.269

Therefore, he says the meat is holy because God, who is good, has made and appointed it for the use of man; and also because it is received by man with faith and thanksgiving. For meat is not holy and good to many men, not through any fault in the meat (which is always the good creature of God), but the fault is in those who do not acknowledge by faith the benefits of God, or who abuse them, and glut themselves contrary to the word of the Lord.

So too stands the case with the matter of sanctification, which we must also apply to the sacraments. God, of his own good will, and for the commodity of men, ordained sacraments. He chose for himself, out of his good creatures, water, bread, and wine. And appointing them to some certain end, he laid a platform, and commanded us to use and celebrate them. Now therefore, by the commandment and choice of God, the water, bread, and wine, are consecrated, and he signs them with his word, and declares that he would have them counted sacraments, and shows the manner in which he would have them celebrated. So that the consecration of sacraments is made through the will, institution, choice, or commandment of God, and the seal of his word. Therefore, when water, bread, and wine, are used in a common way, or not as they are chosen and instituted by God, the word of God is slandered as it were,[3021] and they are altogether common and profane. But being used holily, according to the choice or commandment of God, and the word or sign being added to them, they become sacraments, which they were not before. The same substance still remains in them, which they had before; but they are instituted for another end and use, for they are sealed with the word and commandment of God, and therefore they are hallowed. To this may also be added their holy use: setting forth by a true faith, the benefit of our redemption, and giving thanks [3022] by faithful prayers to our bountiful Redeemer.

v.270

To suit this purpose, we may fetch examples from civil government, in which some things, adjoined for certain new causes, having their substance still remaining, are now made into that which they were not before. For silver or gold, not yet being coined with the magistrate's mark, is nothing but silver or gold. But if by the commandment of the magistrate, a new form is added by an imprint, it is made into money, which it was not before, even though it is the very same substance which it was before. Wax, before it is sealed, is common and usual wax; but when by the king's will and commandment, what is engraved in the king's seal is imprinted in the wax, and it is applied to evidences and letters patents, [3023] it is then so esteemed, that whoever defaces the sealed evidences [3024] is arrested as guilty of treason. I trust you see plainly by this, that the true sanctification or consecration of sacraments consists in the will and institution of God, for a certain end and holy use of them, as declared to us in the word.

I have perhaps spoken more at large about this than some may think needful. But the godly reader will pardon my tediousness, since my desire is to open all things faithfully, diligently, and at large. Now that I have defended the lawful use of the word, and declared the virtue of it, and opened to you the true sanctification or consecration of sacraments, as occasion served, I will return to where I left. And because I taught that sacraments consist of two parts, the sign and the thing signified, it remains to show that those two parts retain their distinguished natures, not communicating their properties. By declaring this, both as to those things which go before and those which follow (yes, as to the whole substance of the sacrament), without doubt, a wonderful light will appear. But I will speak about communicating these names or terms in their convenient place.

Each part retains its distinguished nature, without communicating or mingling its properties. This may be seen by this: that many are partakers of the sign, and yet they are debarred from the thing signified. But if the natures of the parts were united or naturally knit together, it must be that those who partake of the sign, must also partake of the thing signified.

v.271

Examples from scripture, just as they are ready, so are they evident. For Simon Magus, in the Acts of the Apostles, received the sign and he was baptized: but he had not received so much as one iota of the thing signified. And Judas Iscariot, a cruel and faithless traitor of his master, likewise ate the bread of the Lord, but he did not eat the Lord;[3025] otherwise he would have lived happy, just, and blessed forever: for the Lord himself says, "he who eats me, shall never die." ^{Joh 6.54} But Judas died everlastingly; therefore, he did not eat that food of life.

To these evident testimonies of scripture I will now add certain testimonies of St. Augustine's pertaining to that purpose, who in his treatise on John 26 says:

"We receive visible food this day: but the sacrament is one thing, and the virtue of the sacrament is another. How many receive the things upon the altar, and when they have received it, die! Thus the apostle says, 'He eats and drinks his own damnation.' ^{1Cor 11.29} Was not the morsel poison, which the Lord gave to Judas? And yet he received it, and after he had received it, the enemy entered into him — not because what he received was evil, but because being evil himself, he received that good thing unworthily."

And immediately after he says:

"The sacrament of the thing, that is, of the knitting together of the body and blood of Christ, is received at the Lord's table, by some unto life, by others unto destruction: but the thing itself, of which it is a sacrament, is received by all men unto life, by none to destruction, whoever are partakers of it."

And again he says:

"He who does not dwell in Christ, nor Christ in him, without doubt he neither eats his flesh, nor drinks his blood spiritually, although carnally and visibly he chews with his teeth the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. But he rather eats and drinks the sacrament of so great a thing to his own damnation." [3026] And so forth.

v.272

He has similar words in his book De Civit. Dei,[3027] xxi. 25. cap. And in his book De Doctr. Christ, iii. cap. 9. he shows that "in the conjunction of natures, there needs to be a distinction, lest we stick too much upon the outward sign." [3028]

Now we come to the proofs of the scripture. The apostle witnesses in 1Cor chap. 10, that "all our fathers were baptized, and all ate of one spiritual food, and all drank of one manner of spiritual drink;" ^1Cor
10.3-4but the Lord had no delight in many of them. Though, if they had eaten that spiritual food and drunk that spiritual drink spiritually by faith, undoubtedly the Lord would have delighted in them. "For without faith," as He himself says, "it is impossible to please God." ^Heb
11.6 Therefore, God is well pleased with those who have faith. Thus our fathers truly were partakers of visible sacraments, but they were destitute of invisible grace. From this it follows that the sign and the thing signified retain their natures; they are not confounded or mingled, but distinguished and separated. Besides this, the words of the gospel have some affinity, or at least some likeness, with sacramental signs; otherwise, the words are preferred far above the signs. The apostle says that he "was sent to preach, and not to baptize." ^{1Cor 1.17} But many hear the word of the Lord with their outward ears, who for all that, because they are void of faith, are also without the inward fruit of the word.

v.273

Paul says yet again: "For the gospel was preached to us, as well as to them; but the word which they heard did not profit them, because it was not coupled with faith." ^{Heb 4.2} For so it comes to pass, that many receive the visible sacraments, and yet they are not partakers of the invisible grace, which is received by faith alone. From this it yet again follows that the sign is not confounded with the thing signified, but both of them retain their substance and nature, distinguished. What, and does the scripture not expressly and pithily differentiate between the outward ministry of man, and God the inward worker and giver of spiritual gifts? For John the Baptist says: "I baptize you with water, but he (Christ) will baptize you with the holy Ghost."^{Mat 3.11} What Peter said agrees with this: "Baptism saves us, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but in that a good conscience makes its request to God." [3029]

To this now pertains that evident testimony of St. Augustine, iii. Quaest. lib. in Levit. Quaest. 83, written in these words:

"We must diligently consider that, as often as he says, 'I the Lord who sanctify him,' he speaks of the priest. Yet he also said to Moses, 'and you shall sanctify him.' How, therefore, do both Moses and God sanctify? It is because Moses does not sanctify for the Lord; but Moses sanctifies in the visible sacraments by his ministry, and the Lord by the invisible grace by his Holy Spirit, where the whole fruit of visible sacraments is also. For without this sanctification of invisible grace, what profit do we have by visible sacraments?" [3030]

Just as John the Baptist made a distinction between his own ministry in baptism, and the power of Christ, even so he also distinguishes between the ministry of preaching, and the drawing of the spiritual teacher:

v.274

"I am the voice of a crier in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord."^{Joh 1.23} And again: "He that comes from on high is above all; he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaks of the earth; he that comes from heaven is above all; and what he has seen and heard, that he testifies," etc. ^{Joh 3.31-32} Agreeing with this, St. Paul says:

"Who is Paul, what is Apollos, but ministers by whom you believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So that neither is he that plants anything, neither he that waters; but God that gives the increase." ^{1Cor 3.5-7}

Even so, the comparison of ministers with the signs do not altogether agree in every part (which I told you before), because ministers are fellow-labourers with Christ according to their office; but the signs (which are without life) are not so, unless we transfer to them that which is the ministers'. By still other proofs, I suppose it is made plain that the sign and thing signified retain their distinguished natures in the sacraments.

These things especially, disprove and convince those who are persuaded of that papistic transubstantiation of bread and wine into the substance of the body and blood of Christ. For these men utterly deny that the bread and wine, being consecrated in the mysteries, remain in their own substances. For they contend that the substances (of bread and wine) are annihilated and turned into the very body and blood of the Lord; so that after the consecration, the accidents [3031] of bread and wine remain, and no part of the substance of them at all. For they say that the Lord, in express words, pronounced over the bread and wine, "This is my body, this is my blood;" and that the Lord can easily bring to pass by his own omnipotence, that what he said may be as he said. For proof of this, they allege these and not a few similar places: that the Lord, in truth, fashioned man out of the clay of the earth, and later made woman from the rib of man, and also turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt; and therefore, by the self-same power, he can make his body from bread, and his blood from wine.

v.275

And these truly are their bulwarks. But in another place, we have plentifully disputed about the meaning of the Lord's words, "This is my body;" so that it is superfluous to make a long repetition of them here. I also told you that, from the omnipotence of God, we must not gather and determine whatever comes into our brain; and also that God's power does nothing against truth, nor against itself; and that no godly man ought to take in hand, under the pretence of the power of God, that which is repugnant to the plain scriptures and the articles of the catholic faith. [3032]

Now it is evident and plain that after consecration there remains in the sacrament the substance of bread and wine; and we need no other witnesses in this than our own senses, which perceive, see, taste, and feel, no other thing than bread and wine. But while clay was turned into a man's body, the rib into a woman, and Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, they were not what they were before, as with the sacrament of the supper; nor did there appear to the senses any iota of the clay, of the rib, or of Lot's wife. These examples are therefore very foolishly and unaptly applied to the mystery of the Lord's Supper, with which they do not agree: we also touched on this before.[3033]

The gospel, very diligently describing the most holy institution of the Lord's Supper and the manner of it, makes no mention of miraculous transubstantiation;[3034] but it calls the bread and wine — which the Lord took and distributed to his disciples, and which they also received — by the names bread and wine, after the words of consecration were spoken (as they term it), as well as before the consecration. Does not the Lord in the 26th chapter of Matthew, call the wine, being consecrated, not only wine, but the fruit of the vine, in a more vehement and emphatic kind of speech, lest any be ignorant that the wine was wine indeed, and remained so? In Mark we read this about the cup: "And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank of it; and he said to them, This is my blood of the new Testament," etc. ^Mar
14.23-24

v.276

Look, they all drank of the cup (he says) before the words of consecration (as they term it) were spoken; therefore, they drank wine. Now, if they answer that this place of the evangelist is to be expounded by the figure hysteron proteron, that is, when anything is declared out of order preposterously,[3035] then they admit that there are tropes and figures in the celebration of the supper; notwithstanding this, they have contended it should be understood simply, without the help of tropes or figures. But the apostle Paul also, in 1Corinthians, chap. 10, calls the bread of the Lord, now being in very holy use and consecrated (if I may say so), by the name bread. And in the 10th chapter of 1Cor., he calls it bread a third time. ^{1Cor 10.,16-17} Furthermore, the Acts of the Apostles testify how the churches of the apostles call the whole mystical action the breaking of bread, not the breaking of his body or distribution of his blood. It is manifest, therefore, that the substance of bread and wine in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper remain in their own nature, and that transubstantiation is a sophistical imagination.

This also is a sophistical and a notable papistic forgery: [3036] in that they say the bread and wine, consecrated in the supper, is called bread and wine by the apostles, because they were bread and wine before. That is done now, they say, which is read in Exodus to have been done in times past, where Aaron's rod is said to devour the enchanters' rods, which nevertheless were not rods then, but serpents; but they are named rods now, because they were rods before they were so changed — those which now are serpents, and not rods. But again; who does not see this example has no similitude or likeness with the bread and wine of the Lord? For the rod truly was called a rod; but meanwhile it was, and plainly seemed to be, not a rod, but a serpent. But the bread is called bread, and it does not appear to be anything else but bread. Here no form of flesh is seen, as there it was seen in the form of a serpent.

v.277

Beside this, the rod is said to be turned into a serpent, and is shown as a wonder or miracle; but nowhere do you read that the bread was turned into flesh by any miracle: but a sacrament is instituted, which indeed loses the name and nature of a sacrament, when the substance of the sign is annihilated and made void, and nothing remains but the thing signified; for what they triflingly say about accidents miraculously subsisting without their subject, and remaining instead of a sign, is to no purpose. If we were to go about boasting of our dreams as miracles, there would be nothing so absurd and foolish, that we would not colour it with our fancies and lies. What if this word transubstantiation manifestly proves that this whole trifling toy is not fetched from the simple and plain doctrine of the apostles, but from the subtle school of quarreling sophisters? The apostle Paul charges us to beware of both philosophy and strange words; [3037] though at present we not only treat new words, but also new matter and new doctrine, that are in all points contrary to the apostles'. For this doctrine of transubstantiation is clean contrary both to the doctrine of the apostles and evangelists — touching the true incarnation of our Lord, and the true nature and property of his human body — and also the true raising up again of our bodies. For they are constrained to forge many things that are altogether miraculous; such as the invisible body of Christ, and the subtle body of Christ piercing by his subtlety through the gate and the stone, I mean, the one which covered his sepulchre; or the Lord's very body being entirely and [3038] at one time in many places and filling all things; and other countless things of this stamp, absurd and wicked.

v.278

Now, also Joan. Scotus, a subtle doctor, in his work, Sentent. Distinct, ii. Lib. 4. quaest. 3, says that the article of transubstantiation is neither expressed in the creed of the apostles, nor in those creeds of the ancient fathers; but that it was brought in and invented by the church (so he says, meaning the Romish church,) under Innocentius the third, in the council of Lateran. From this we gather that the doctrine of transubstantiation is of recent times and newly started; we have elsewhere more largely compiled the history of it.[3039] But by what I have said, I think it plainly and effectually enough declared, that the signs are not mingled with the things signified, nor changed into them; but that each of them remain in their separate natures. Though the parts retain their own nature without mixture, those two agree in one sacrament; and being joined together and not divided, they make one perfect and lawful sacrament. For water alone, both privately and ordinarily sprinkled, is no sacrament, unless it is applied and used according to the institution of Christ. Purifying also, or the washing away of sins, and the engrafting or receiving into the league and fellowship of God and all saints, is no sacrament of itself, unless there is also a sprinkling of water in the name of the blessed Trinity. In like manner, it is no sacrament, if we eat bread in a common assembly, and drink wine from the same cup in the common manner; nor is it a sacrament if, through a faithful remembrance, you consider that the Lord's body was betrayed for you, and his blood shed for you, for which you also give thanks. But so far as they are all mysteries of God and our salvation, they are generally termed sacraments, [3040] that is, secret and spiritual mysteries of God and our salvation. For in a perfect and lawful sacrament, both the holy action (corporal or sensible), and the spiritual celebration of it (for which this sacramental action was invented and put into practice), must go together.

But here, some raise many and diverse questions touching the sacramental union, whether it is personal, real, or rational.

v.279

Because I see nothing of this matter doubtfully delivered by the apostles, and that the thing which is plain of itself, is made dark, doubtful, difficult, and obscure by such sophistications, I will simply and plainly say this: that the sign and the thing signified are joined together in the sacraments by God's institution, and by faithful contemplation and use — to be short, in the signification and likeness of the things. But I utterly deny that those two things are united together in nature, so that the sign in the sacrament becomes what the thing signified is in its own substance and nature. I deny that the thing signified is joined corporally with the sign, or that if the sign still remains in its own substance and nature, yet nevertheless, in the meantime, the thing signified is corporally joined to it — so that thereby, whoever partakes of the sign, partakes of the thing itself, by the sign or with the sign. The reason why I so constantly deny this is sufficiently apparent, I think, by those examples which I have declared up to here, and which will be declared afterward.

Furthermore, I say that the sign and the thing signified are coupled together by God's institution, because the one who instituted the sacraments of baptism and the supper, did not institute it to this end: that with water we might wash away the filth of the body, as the custom is to do by daily baths; nor that we should have our fill of the bread and wine. But it is that under visible signs, He might commend to us the mysteries of our redemption and his grace, and to be short, of our salvation — by representing them to renew them, and by sealing them to confirm them. I am saying that they are coupled together in a faithful contemplation, because those who religiously partake of the sacraments, do not fasten their eyes on sensible things only, but also on things that are insensible, signified, and heavenly. So that the faithful have in themselves both these things coupled together, which otherwise are not knit together with a bond, in the sign or with the sign. For they corporally and sensibly receive the signs, but they spiritually possess, comprehend, renew, and exercise the things that are signified. I say they are coupled together in the signification and likeness of the things, because the sign is a token of the thing signified. And unless signs have a likeness with those things for which they are signs, they would not then be signs.

v.280

They have, therefore, a most apt and very near affinity between themselves. For as water washes away the filth of the body, and as bread and wine satisfy and make merry the heart of man, even so, the people of God are purified by the grace of God; even so, the body and blood of the Lord, which was given for us, apprehended by faith, both satisfies and makes merry the whole man, so that he may yield himself wholly to thanksgiving, and obedient toward God. I would speak here more largely about the analogy, or about the sign and the thing signified, but I see that I may do it later in a more convenient place. I think I will not need any more places out of the scripture to open these things more evidently, since they follow of their own accord from that which we have confirmed up to here by testimonies from scriptures, and which we will confirm more at large later.

Moreover, in respect to the likeness of the sign and the thing signified, the name of the one is given to the other, as I will prove by most evident testimonies of scripture. In Genesis 17, the Lord says thus to Abraham:

"You shall keep my covenant, therefore, both you and your seed after you in their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep between me and you: every man-child among you shall be circumcised. You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be a token of the covenant between me and you." ^{Gen 17.10-11}

The mouth of the Lord has spoken this. Who would question the word of God? The word of God calls circumcision a covenant; therefore the name of the thing signified is given to the sign. For indeed, circumcision is not the covenant itself; for the covenant is the bargain and agreement between God and men, which has certain conditions and articles. This is why, by interpretation, the same circumcision is then called "a token of the covenant." And who would find fault with this interpretation of God? The signs therefore, yes, God being the interpreter, take the names of the things signified.

"So you may read in the twelfth chapter of Exodus: "You shall eat the lamb in haste, for it is the Lord's Passover."^{Exo 12.11} Again: "And the blood shall be to you a sign in the houses wherein you are," etc. ^{Exo 12.13} And again: "This day shall be a remembrance for you," etc.^{Exo 12.14}

v.281

What can be spoken more plainly, than that the lamb is called the Passover? But what is the proper meaning of the Passover? Let us give ear to the Lord, here again expounding himself, and saying: "I will pass through the land of Egypt this same night, and will strike all the first-born of Egypt, from man to beast; and when I see the blood (of the lamb), I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you." ^{Exo 12.12-13} Behold, the Passover, God himself interpreting it, is that passing over by which the angel of God, passing over the houses of the Israelites which were marked with the blood of the lamb, spared the first-born, and slew the first-born of the Egyptians. If you are ignorant of what and what kind of lamb it was, listen again to the Lord instructing you, and saying: "In the tenth day of this month, every man take for himself a lamb according to the household; and let your lamb be without blemish, a male of a year old, which you shall take out from among the sheep and from among the goats."^{Exo 12.3} And here the lamb is plainly called the Passover. And who does not see, that the lamb is not the Passover? Yet, because it is a sign or remembrance of the Passover, as the mouth of the Lord says, surely it takes the name of the Passover, or passing by.

Again, you read in the nineteenth of Numbers: "Thus spoke the Lord to Moses: Speak to the children of Israel, that they bring you a red cow without blemish, and you shall give her to Eleazar the priest, that he may bring her outside the camp, and cause her to be slain before his face, and burnt whole; ...and a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes of the cow, and lay them outside the camp in a clean place; and it will be kept for the multitude of the children of Israel [3041] for a water of separation (or sprinkling); for it is sin." ^{Num 19.2,3,9} Mark again the way the scripture speaks. A heifer or cow is sin, that is, a sacrifice for sin; as Christ is said to be made sin for us, ^{2Cor 5.21} that for (or by) sin [3042] he might condemn sin; ^{Rom 8.3} which means that by the oblation of his body alone, he might cleanse and purge us from sin.

v.282

To this also belongs what the apostle says, speaking about sacrifices to the Hebrews: "But in these sacrifices mention is made of sins every year; for it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins."^{Heb 10.4} Therefore, whenever sacrifices — such as heifers, goats, bulls, and lambs — are called sanctifications, cleansings, or sins, the signs take the names of the things signified. For these were certain types and figures of the priest who was to come, and of Christ, upon whom all our sins are laid; for he truly is "the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world."^{Joh 1.29}

Now we have come to the sacraments of the new Testament, whose signs also bear the names of the things signified. For Peter says in Acts 2: "Let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins."^{Act 2.38} And Paul too hears, in the Acts of the Apostles: "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins by calling on the name of the Lord." ^{Act 22.16} Therefore, truly, baptism is called a cleansing, or washing away of sins. And Peter also elsewhere says: "Baptism saves you, not by putting away the filth of the flesh, but in that a good conscience makes its request to God." [3043] And Paul also says: "You are washed, you are sanctified, you are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."^{1Cor 6.11} Therefore, the due and right comparison of these places between themselves, manifestly proves that the name of the thing signified, is given to the sign of baptism, which is water.

In the same way, it is to be seen in the institution of the Lord's Supper, or Eucharist. The bread is called the body of Christ, and the wine is called the blood of Christ. But the right faith believes that the true body of Christ ascended out of this world, lives and is now in heaven, and that the Lord will not return into this world again until he comes in the clouds of heaven to judge the quick and the dead. Thus every man understands that the names of the things themselves (namely, the body and blood of Christ), are given to the sign (namely, the bread and the wine) — through communicating the names.

v.283

Many other phrases used in the scripture and in our daily talk are not unlike the phrases used in the sacrament. We read that Christ is, and is called, a lion, a lamb, a shepherd, a vine, a door, a way, a ladder, the day, the light, the sun, the water, the bread, a spring, and a rock. If anyone today were to rigidly urge or contend that Christ is a lamb indeed, a door in substance, a natural vine, etc., who, I beg you, could abide him reasoning in such a way? We would hiss and drive such a one out from among us as a mad man, and a perverter of God's oracles. We read indeed, "And that rock was Christ."^{1Cor 10.4} Meantime, consider what would follow. For if that rock really and indeed had been Christ, none of those who drank from that rock would have been reprobates; for all who are partakers of Christ are acceptable to God. "But the Lord had no delight in many of those who drank of the rock; for they were slain in the wilderness." ^{1Cor 10.4-5} Therefore, those who drank from the rock, which was Christ, were not made partakers of Christ. Therefore, the rock was not Christ really and indeed. Also, seeing the standards of kings, princes, and cities, we call the signs by the names of the kings, princes, and cities: for we say, This is the king of France, This is the prince of Germany, This is Tigure,[3044] This is Berne. So too, if we see the marriage-ring, or the image of any prince, we call it the faith and troth of wedlock, or man and wife; yes, and we say it by the image, This is the prince. For matrons, showing their wedding-ring, say, This is my husband: when we show any man the picture or image of the duke of Saxony, we say, This is the duke of Saxony. If anyone went on obstinately affirming that the sign indeed is the thing signified, just because it bears its name, would not all men cry out that such a person was without wit or reason, and that he should by all means be abhorred as an obstinate brawler?

Therefore, those who are skilful in these things, understand that it is and has been catholic, received by all men, and also sound, which we showed just now at large; namely, that the signs borrow the names of the things, and do not turn into the things which they signify.

v.284

And therefore, the ancient fathers started no strife or contentions about the sacraments, as there are among us today. For as they beautified the signs with the names of the things they signified, so they acknowledged the kind of speech it was; nor did they rigidly urge the words, as though the signs were really and corporally the same as what they signified. Therefore, this canon or rule is so often repeated and beaten upon by Aurelius Augustine, that "the signs take or borrow the names of things signified." [3045] By the same canon or rule he makes certain dark places plain; we will now set down some testimonies about this thing. In his Epist. 23. ad Bonifacium, de Parvulorum Baptismate, Augustine says:

"If sacraments did not have some likeness with those things of which they are sacraments, no doubt they would not be sacraments; for the most part, they take the names of the things themselves from this likeness. As the apostle also says, speaking of baptism: 'We are buried with Christ by baptism into his death.' He does not say, we signify the burial; but he flatly says, 'we are buried.' Therefore he called the sacrament of so great a thing, by nothing else than the name of the self-same thing." [3046]

And in Tract, super Joan. 63:

"When the unclean person is gone, all who remain are clean. Such a thing will occur when the world, being overcome by Christ, passes away, and no unclean person remains among the people of God; when the tares are separated from the wheat, the just will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. The Lord foresaw that this would come to pass, and witnessed that it was signified when Judas fell away: the tares being separated, and the holy apostles remaining as wheat. For he says, 'Now the Son of man is glorified.' It is as if he had said, 'Behold what will happen when I am glorified, when there shall be no wicked person, and no good man shall perish.'

v.285

For he does not say, 'Now the glorying of the Son of man is signified; but he says, 'Now the Son of man is glorified.' Likewise, it is not said, 'The rock signified Christ.' but 'The rock was Christ.' Nor is it said, 'The good seed signifies the children of the kingdom,' but he says, 'The good seed are the children of the kingdom; and the tares are the children of the wicked.' The scripture is therefore prone to call the things which signify, as the things that are signified. Even so, the Lord spoke, saying, 'Now the Son of man is glorified,' after that wicked Judas was separated; and his holy apostles remaining with him, his glorification was signified when the wicked, being divided out, he remains eternally with the saints." [3047]

The same Aurelius Augustine, in his epistle to Evodius 102, says:

"The sound of the voice, and the bodily shape of a dove, and cloven tongues like fire, came upon every one of them; likewise, those things in mount Sinai, were done in a most fearful manner; and that pillar of cloud by day, and that pillar of fire by night — these things were ordained and set for some operation which they signified. In this, we must especially take heed that none be persuaded or believe that the nature and substance of the Father, or of the Son, or of the Holy Ghost, is changeable, or may be turned. Nor let any man be disturbed that sometimes the thing which signifies, takes the name of that thing which is signified. The Holy Ghost is said to descend and remain upon Christ in the bodily shape of a dove. So also the rock is said to be Christ — but only because it signifies Christ." [3048]

v.286

By these examples alleged out of the scripture, it is plain that the signs borrow the names of the things, and not their natures and substances. Whereupon it is undoubtedly true that those people err as far as heaven is wide, who are persuaded that the sacramental phrases are not to be expounded as figurative and borrowed, but are proper and literal. By that means, the water, bread, and wine, would not be only signs and tokens of regeneration, and of the body of Christ given and of his blood shed for us, but they would then be regeneration itself, and the substantial body and blood of our Lord Jesus. Being of this opinion, they are offensive to the common manner of both speaking and interpreting which has been used in all ages; they are also repugnant to true faith — yes, and to common sense. Whereby it comes to pass that, by confounding the sign with the thing signified, they introduce a servile weakness, and (if I may use St. Augustine's words) "a carnal bondage." For, Li. iii. de Doct. Chr. chap. 9, treating the sacraments of Christians, he says:

"The Lord himself, and the apostles in their doctrine, have left us few things instead of many; and those are most easy to do, most reverend in understanding, and most pure in observing. Such are baptism and the celebration of the body and blood of the Lord. When every man receives these sacraments, being instructed, he acknowledges what they refer to, so that we will not worship them with carnal servitude or bondage, but rather with spiritual freedom or liberty. To follow the letter, and to take the signs instead of the things which are signified by them, is a point of servile weakness — to so unprofitably expound the signs, is a point of evil-wandering error." [3049]

v.287

And Augustine speaks yet more plainly, chap. 5:

"First of all, you must beware, lest you take a figurative statement according to the letter. For what the apostle says, agrees with this: 'The letter kills, but the spirit gives life.'^{2Cor 3.6} For when that which is spoken figuratively, is taken as though it were spoken properly, it is carnally understood. Nor is there anything that may more agreeably be termed 'the death of the soul,' than when that in which we excel beasts — which is understanding or knowledge — is made subject to the flesh, by following the letter. For he that follows the letter understands words that are translated or borrowed, as being proper or natural; nor does he refer that which is signified by a proper word, to another signification. For example, if he hears mention made of the sabbath, he understands it in no other way than as one day of the seven which come and go by continual course. And when he hears mention made of sacrifice, what comes out of his head is only that this means what was usually done about offering beasts and fruits of the earth. To be short, this is the miserable bondage of the soul: to take the signs for the things themselves, and not to be able to lift up the eyes of the mind above the bodily creature, in order to obtain everlasting light." [3050]

v.288

By these words of Augustine, we gather that those who reverence the sacraments by spiritual liberty, do not stick to the letter, nor do they worship and reverence the visible things and elements (such as water, bread, and wine) instead of the things signified; rather, being admonished and stirred up by the signs, they are lifted up in their minds, to behold the things that are signified.

This same Augustine, in the same book, chapter 15, teaching when and in what manner a trope or figure is to be received or acknowledged, says:

"In figurative speech, this manner of rule shall be kept: that you view what is read, with diligent consideration, until the interpretation comes to the rule of charity. For if it is not repugnant to charity, then do not think it is figurative speech." [3051]

And yet more plainly he adds in the 16th chapter following:

"If it is imperative speech, either forbidding a heinous offence or wicked deed, or else commanding any profitable or good deed, it is not figurative speech. But if it commands any wicked deed, or forbids any deed of charity, then it is figurative. 'Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you.' He seems to command some horrible offence or wicked deed; therefore, it is figurative speech: it commands us to communicate with the passion of Christ, and to comfortably and profitably lay up in our remembrance, that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us. The scripture says, 'If your enemy hungers, feed him.' Here no man doubts that he commands well-doing; but what follows, 'for in so doing you shall heap coals of fire upon his head,' a man would think that a wicked and evil deed was commanded: therefore do not doubt it is figuratively spoken." [3052]

v.289

And so forth. All these things convince them of their error, who interpret sacramental speech as literal, and reject all figures and tropes, especially in the institution of the supper.

Nevertheless, I am not ignorant what they set against this last testimony of St. Augustine: that the words of our Saviour, in the sixth chapter of John, say nothing about the interpretation of the administration of the sacrament; and therefore the passage from St. Augustine does not suit our purpose at all. But it is manifest that in the same book, St. Augustine disputes about signs and sacramental phrases. It is also manifest by many other places out of St. Augustine, that he often alleged these words of our Saviour, out of the sixth chapter of John, to expound the celebration of the supper. But why do they not pertain to the celebration of the supper? Does he speak of one body in the supper, and of another body in the sixth chapter of John? Should we believe that the Lord had and has two bodies? Our Lord Jesus has but one body which, just as it does not profit to be eaten corporally according to John 6.53, even so that body, being corporally eaten, does not avail anything according to Matthew 16.11-12. But we have handled this matter elsewhere.[3053]

And of just as little force, is this unsavoury objection of theirs that the consequence is false when we argue thus: Circumcision is the covenant, the lamb is the Passover, sacrifices are sins, and sanctifications or cleansings are sacramental phrases — mystical and figurative. Therefore, "This is my body," is also mystical and figurative speech.

v.290.

For since in sacraments there is like reasoning, why may we not frame arguments from the one to the other? And it is accepted by all those who acknowledge the truth rightly, that sacraments have like reasoning. This will be proved afterward to the full. But if it is not lawful to reason from the sacraments of the old Testament, and in a certain comparison, to interpret ours by them, and to make theirs plain by ours, then truly, the apostle did not do well when, by a "false consequent" from such a comparison, he argued from their sacraments to ours in 1Corinthians 10, and Colossians 2. But now we return to our purpose.

To at length make an end of this place: they are sacramental and figurative phrases, when we read and hear that the bread is the body of Christ, and the wine the blood of Christ; and that those who eat and drink the sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord, eat and drink the body and blood of Christ; also, that those who are baptized in the name of Christ, are purged from their sins and regenerated into a new life; and that baptism is the washing away [3054] of our sins. The scripture speaks in this manner, and the old doctors of the church kept this form of speech. None who is wise dispraises them for doing so. Nor can one discommend any man who speaks in this manner, for he also abides in the same sincerity in which it is manifest that those holy men of God walked. For just as they used those phrases willingly and simply, so they did not rigidly and rigorously strain the letter and phrases. They interpreted them in such a way that none was so unskilful, that he might not understand that the signs were not the thing itself which they signified, but that the signs took the names of the things. Therefore, they used words significatively, sacramentally, mystically, and figuratively.

Now though some would not have the sacramental phrases be expounded — as though, not being expounded, they had more authority, majesty, and worthiness. This draws after it a sore danger, and it gives a most grievous offence, and it is repugnant to the rule of the apostles, to sound reason, and to the custom of those of old. For when these kinds of phrases are presented and uttered to the simple sort, not being expounded — namely, "That bread is the body of Christ; When you drink the wine of the Lord, you drink the very blood of the Lord; Baptism saves us," etc., — what else is presented, I ask you, than a snare of carnal bondage, and a most dangerous offence of idolatry?

v.291

This matter does not need many words, since experience abundantly shows what has been done in this point, and what is done today.[3055]

The rule of the apostles commands that the divine oracles be expounded in the church, and to lay out all the mysteries of the scripture, so that they may be soundly understood, as we see in 1Corinthians 14. And reason itself teaches us that the mind of man is little or not at all moved, if the things themselves are not understood. What fruit therefore shall the simple sort receive by the sacraments, to whom the meaning of the sacraments has not been opened? Therefore, the ancient fathers did better, not only in expounding all the mysteries of the kingdom of God, and especially the sacraments, but also in teaching that they ought to be expounded. Although this is made plain enough by those things which go before, I will yet add two examples out of St. Augustine touching this matter. In chap. 6. De Catechisandis Rudibus, he says:

"Let the new Christian man be taught concerning the sacraments, that they are visible signs of heavenly things, and that invisible things are to be honoured in them; nor is that sign, after it is blessed and sanctified, to be so taken as it is daily used. It must also be told what that phrase signifies which he hears; and what thing is given in the sign, for which it is a representation. Moreover, on this occasion he must be taught that if he hears anything even in the scriptures that sounds carnal, even though he does not understand it; yet he is to believe that some spiritual thing is signified by it, which belongs to holy manners and the life to come," etc. [3056]

v.292

The same Augustine, Lib. iv. De Doctr. Chri. cap. 8. utterly forbids the doctors and teachers of the church to think that they should therefore speak obscurely about the mysteries of the scripture, because they see that these things are delivered somewhat intricately and darkly in the scripture; rather, he requires light and plainness in them. If any man desires to hear his words, they are these:

"If we fetch examples of the manner of speaking, out of the writings of our canonical authors and doctors (which are easily understood), yet we should not think to also follow them in those phrases in which they have used a profitable and wholesome obscurity. These were to exercise and quicken the readers' minds as it were, to take away loathsomeness, and to stir up the studies of willing learners; and also to make the minds of the wicked zealous, so that they may either be turned to godliness, or else excluded from the mysteries. For they so spoke, that those who came after them, and could understand and rightly expound them, might reveal a second grace, unlike the former, still ensuing in the church of God. Therefore, those who expound them should not speak as though by the same authority, they would offer themselves to be expounded. But in all their kinds of speech, let them labour chiefly and first of all, to be understood, speaking as plainly as they can, so that only one who is very dull and slow-witted does not understand; or at least, do not let the fault of the hardness and subtlety of the things which we set about to open and declare, be in our own speech, whereby what we speak takes somewhat longer to understand." [3057]

Let what I have said up to here about sacramental phrases be sufficient. The Lord be praised. Amen.

v.293

5-7. THE SEVENTH SERMON: OF SACRAMENTS, GRACE, & FAITH.

We must reason reverently about sacraments; they do not give grace by themselves,
nor do they have grace included in them. Again, what the virtue and lawful end
and use of sacraments is. They do not profit without faith; they are not
superfluous to the faithful; and they do not depend upon
the worthiness or unworthiness of the minister.

Yesterday, dearly beloved, I told you what a sacrament was; who was the author of them, and for what cause sacraments were instituted; of what things they consist, that is to say, of the sign and the thing signified. I also told you what a sign is and what is the thing signified, and by what names they are termed; how they are consecrated; that the sign is not mingled with the thing signified, but that both of them remain in their own nature and property of nature; that the sign is not taken away or miraculously turned, nor is the thing signified so joined with the sign, that whoever partakes of the one, partakes of the other also. To be short, I declared how and in what manner the sign and the thing signified are coupled together to make a full, perfect, and lawful sacrament; I also treated sacramental phrases.

v.294

Therefore, it now remains that I also consequently speak of the nature, virtue, and efficacy of sacraments, and of those things which are joined and have affinity with them. For so the order which I used in my division requires.

Touching the virtue and nature of sacraments, that is to say, what they work in man, writers have disputed diversely and plentifully. It seems to me that reverence must be used in this disputation, and that heed must be taken that I do not incline either to the right hand or to the left; that is, that I do not attribute too much to them, to the derogating of the doctrine of the evangelists and apostles; nor that I diminish or take away from them, to my own damnation, that which the scripture, the word of God, attributes to them. But we will plentifully give great praise and glory to the ordinances of God if we say about them, that which the Spirit of God has set down in the holy scriptures. To be willing to attribute more to them, is not only an error in man, but a great fault which brings death and horrible destruction. This is declared to us in the holy scripture by examples that are most worthy of remembrance. The ark of the covenant, given by Moses to the people of Israel, was a witness of God's presence among the people, and of the league and friendship between God and man. For in these words God made a league with the people: "I will make my dwelling-place among them, and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people." ^Eze
37.27 Concerning this ordinance and agreement, the ark itself was called, "The Lord God of hosts, sitting between the cherubim;" as we see in 2Sam 6.2, and in 1Chr 13.6. It was also called, "The ark of the covenant of the Lord." ^{Num 10.33} For when the prophets of God attributed these things to the sacrament of God, they thought and spoke plentifully and reverently enough about the sacrament of God. But when the ignorant and malicious priests, and the people corrupted by them, attributed far greater things to the ark or the sacrament of God, I ask you, what then came to pass? Give ear first to what they attributed to the ark:

v.295

"The elders of Israel said, Why has the Lord cast us down this day before the Philistines? Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shiloh to us, so that when it comes among us, it may save us out of the hands of our enemies."^1Sam
4.3 You have heard what they attributed to the ark. Now give ear to what they did. "So the people sent to Shiloh, and brought from there the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts, which sits between the cherubim. And it came to pass that when the ark of the covenant of the Lord came into the host, all Israel shouted out a mighty shout, so that the earth rang back. And when the Philistines heard the noise of the shout, they said, What does the sound of this mighty shout mean? And they understood that the ark of the Lord had come into the camp. And the Philistines cried, Woe be to us! God has come into the camp. Who will deliver us out of the hands of those mighty gods that struck the Egyptians?" ^{1Sam 4.4-8} But listen now to what happened; and how God declared that the ark was not God, as it was called and accounted by the unskilful in holy things; and how he punished the sins of the people, because they attributed too much to the sacrament. It then follows: "And the Philistines fought; and Israel was struck down, and fled every man into his tent; and there was an exceeding great slaughter; for there were overthrown of Israel thirty thousand footmen; beside that, also, the ark of God was taken, and the two sons of Eli were slain." ^1Sam
4.10-11 All these things may be read in 1Sam 4.

Again, when the sacrament of God was irreverently handled by the swinish Philistines, they were struck with a loathsome and deadly plague. They boasted that their gods and the religion of the Philistines had overcome the God and the religion of the Israelites; but the gods of the Philistines fell down and were broken in pieces, and their heathenish religion confounded. What, and did not the Israelites perish with a more grievous plague than before, when they lightly handled, and contrary to the law of God in Numbers 4, looked into the sacrament brought back by the Philistines into Beth Shemesh? "For the Lord struck fifty thousand and seventy men." 1Sam 6.19. When Moses negligently defers the circumcising of his children, he fell into great danger. ^{Exo 4.24-25} The Shechemites were destroyed for receiving circumcision rashly. ^Gen
34

v.296

And Simeon and Levi, for profaning the sacrament, are cursed by their father, Genesis 49.5-6. What the apostle says about those who celebrate the supper unworthily, agrees with this: "For this cause many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep." To this also belongs the example of Uzzah, a man not altogether evil, who touched this same sacrament, which was not lawful for him to do. Therefore the Lord struck him with a sudden death; and not privately in the tabernacle, but in the sight of all the people. ^{2Sam 6.6} David, speaking of this deed of God, says to the Levites in the congregation and church of the Israelites: "The Lord has chosen the Levites to bear the ark of the Lord" (and not that cattle will draw it in a new cart); "therefore, see that you are holy, that you may bring the ark of the Lord God of Israel into the place which I have prepared for it. because you did not this at the first, our Lord God has made a rent among us; for we did not seek him as to the fashion it ought to be done.'' ^{1Chr 15.1-2;
12-13} And it follows immediately: "The priests and Levites sanctified themselves to fetch the ark of the Lord God of Israel. And the children and Levites bore the ark of God on their shoulders with staves, as Moses commanded, according to the word of the Lord." ^{1Chr 15.14-15} All these things may be seen in 1Chronicles, chap. 15. From this we gather that the Lord will have none of our good meanings or intentions, and pompous celebrations of the sacraments. But he only requires that we so judge and speak about the sacraments, as he judges and speaks by his word; and that we so use and celebrate them, as he himself has instituted and celebrated them. Therefore, the one who attributes to them what God himself grants to them in the holy scriptures, sufficiently sets forth the dignity of the sacraments.

Let us therefore, first of all, search out what dignity the sacraments have had for the most part in our time, so that we may thereby better understand what is to be attributed to them, and what is not to be attributed to them. The common sort of priests and monks have taught that the sacraments of the new law are not only signs of grace, but are also causes of grace — that is, they have power to give grace.

v.297

For they say that they are like instruments, pipes, and certain conduits of Christ's passion, by which the grace of Christ is conveyed and poured into us. But the signs of the old Testament, they say, given to the fathers, were signs only, and not also causes of grace — they had force to signify, but not to give grace.

They seem truly to have sucked that error from St. Augustine's words, wrongly understood. For he writes this upon the 73rd Psalm: "The sacraments of the new law are more wholesome and happy than those of the old law, because they promise, these give." [3058] But St. Augustine meant to say nothing other than what he says in another place, this way: "The sacraments of the old law foreshowed that Christ would come, but ours show that he has come." [3059] For against Faustus, Lib. xix. cap. 14, he also calls the sacraments of the old law "promises of things to be performed; but our sacraments are tokens of things that are already performed." [3060] This is why he says upon the 73rd Psalm: "The sacraments of the old law are given to signify the very thing; but ours witness that it is given, and signify that it is present." [3061] I confess that he says more than once, that our sacraments are more adequate and effectual;[3062] but he said it for no other reason than this: the Messiah being already revealed and given to us in the new Testament, our sacraments [3063] are more perfect, more enlightening, and more beautiful. For Christ has brought all signs to an end; therefore ours have a fuller significance, and in a way, are livelier. But if Augustine had been altogether of that opinion which these men favour and follow, would not godliness itself persuade us to forsake the authority of men, and cling to the word of truth?

v.298

Let us therefore see what may be gathered out of the word of truth, that is, out of the canonical scriptures, touching the likeness and difference between the sacraments of the old and new Testaments. This we hold for a certainty out of the scriptures: that there is but one everlasting and unchangeable God and Lord of either Church; that there is but one faith in God through Christ, of either church; that there is but one way laid down in either church, to attain the promises of salvation. In short, there is but one church of the only living God, gathered together out of both people, Jews and Gentiles. I think no large confirmation of these things is needed out of the scripture, because in the eighth decade, third sermon, I handled them in full. Now that I have fortified and confirmed these things before by the writings of the apostles, I conclude this, not of my own brain, but by the authority of God: Those who always have one everlasting and unchangeable God, one way of salvation set forth for all in Christ from the beginning — one faith, one church, one baptism, and the same spiritual food and drink; ^Eph
4.4-6 cannot help but have the self-same sacraments, as to their substance.

The Jews and Christians have one God, one faith, one way of salvation, which is by Christ— in short, one church. Therefore, they also have the self-same sacraments, except that ours are given under other signs; and through the revelation of the Sun of righteousness (I mean Christ), they are made more lightsome and manifest. I further say that the scripture witnesses that the sacraments of the old Testament and ours are of the same force, insomuch that Paul calls those who are baptized circumcised, and those who are circumcised baptized. And he also teaches that our fathers ate that spiritual food which we eat, and drank of that spiritual drink — that is, the rock. But then he adds: "And that rock was Christ." The words of the apostle are well known, and are read in 1Cor 10.4. The same apostle, in the second chapter to the Colossians, says: "In Christ you are complete (or made perfect); in whom also you are circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, subject to sin, by the circumcision of Christ; buried with him in baptism," etc. ^Col
2.11-12

v.299

What, I pray you, can be said more plainly? "Circumcision made without hands," is the circumcision of Christians, which is baptism. But in the former place to the Corinthians, we must mark (as I put you in mind elsewhere [3064]) that to be baptized into Moses is not the same as being baptized into Christ. For to be baptized into Moses is the same as if he had said, to be baptized by Moses, or through the ministry of Moses. For it is manifest that Moses brought the people who were committed to his charge, to God only.

You will read the same in many places in Aurel. Augustine. No matter how our adversaries may foist on Augustine this difference between the sacraments of the old law and ours, it is of their own introducing. For in Lib. ii. Cont. Literas Petil. cap. 27, he says: "The sacraments of the Jews were different from ours in the outward tokens, but in the things which were signified, they were equal and all one." [3065] Also Tract, in Joan. 26. upon this place,

"[Christ] is the bread which came down from heaven, Manna signified this bread; the altar of God signified this bread. Those were sacraments. They are diverse in signs, but equal in the thing signified."

You may read similar words in Lib. xix. Contra Faustum Manicheum, cap. 13, 16, 17. [3066] And again, Tract, in Joan. 45:

"Before the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, when he came humbly in the flesh, there were just and righteous men, who so believed in him that was then to come, as we believe in him that now has come. The times were changed, but not the faith;" [3067] and so forth.

v.300

And shortly after:

"All is one faith, in diverse signs — it is as diverse in signs, as it is in words, because words change their sounds by the times; and truly words are nothing but signs. For they are words in what they signify; but if we remove the signification from the word, it is an empty sound. Therefore, all words are significations. Did not those who ministered those signs in the old law, then believe those things which we now believe were prophesied before and by them? No doubt they did believe them; but they believed they would come, and we believe they have come." [3068]

Also upon the 77th Psalm:

"They had the same food and drink in their sacraments, which we have in ours; they were the same in signification, but not in likeness. For the self-same Christ was figured to them in the rock, but manifested to us in the flesh. But God was not well pleased with all of them. All truly ate one spiritual food, and drank one spiritual drink, which signified some spiritual thing. But God had no delight in all of them. And though the sacraments were common to all, yet grace was not common to all, which is the pith of the sacraments. Even as faith is now revealed today, which then was hidden, the fountain of regeneration is common to all who are baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost — but the inward grace, of which these are the sacraments, and by which the members of Christ with their head are born anew, is not common to all." [3069]

v.301

This far from Augustine. He teaches that the signs or sacraments are not unequal or unlike, for those who have the same faith and religion; but whatever difference there is, rests in the diversity of the times; otherwise they do not differ.

Now that I have made an end of the similarity and difference between the sacraments of the old and new Testaments, and receiving an opinion that the sacraments of the new law confer or give grace of themselves, let us also consider what manner of thing this is.

First; touching the word "grace,'' I will give you these few things to note. Grace is the favour and good-will of God, with which God the Father embraces us for Christ's sake, purifies, justifies, and endues us with his good gifts, and saves us. For the writings of the apostles plainly call it grace by which we are saved and justified, or made righteous,[3070] by faith in Jesus Christ. It is written about this grace, "I do not make the grace of God of no effect; for if righteousness comes by the law, then Christ died in vain."^{Gal 2.21} It is written about this grace, "Christ has become unprofitable to us: for as many as are justified by the law, have fallen from grace." ^{Gal 5.4} Of this grace it is written: "If it comes by grace, then is it not of works; for otherwise grace is no longer grace."^{Rom 11.6} What, is not the Son of God himself called "the grace and gift of God?" John 4 and Titus 2nd chapter.

Now to confer grace:[3071] what is it other than to give, or frankly and freely bestow something on a man, which he did not have before? Therefore, if the sacraments give grace to those who receive them, then truly they give those things which they signify, to those who did not have them — I mean, Christ with all his gifts.

v.302

That is to say, they make them pleasant and acceptable to God; they justify and save; yes, and they do that of themselves — insomuch as they are said to have received virtue to sanctify from the passion of Christ, and not just to signify, help, commend, or further. Yes, and they also attribute this receiving of grace to our work, by which we receive the sacrament. But I will now declare how contrary this doctrine is to the truth of his holy prophets and apostles.

It was an old error among the Jews, that sacraments justified. It comes from this: that the holy prophets of God, reasoning and rebuking the people of God committed to their charge for still savouring false opinions, cried that their labour which they bestowed upon their ceremonies and sacrifices was in vain; and that God is delighted with faithful obedience, with faith, I say, charity, innocence, and also with true godliness. Among them, Jeremiah says:

"Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Heap up your burnt-offerings with your sacrifices, and eat the flesh: for when I brought your fathers out of Egypt, I spoke no word to them about burnt-offerings and sacrifices; but this I commanded them, saying, Hearken and obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people; so that you walk in all the ways which I have commanded you, that you may prosper."

A similar passage is found in Isaiah, first chapter. The Lord has not despised, nor have his holy prophets contemned, all sacrifices in general, since He himself instituted them by Moses; but they sought to suppress and beat down that false opinion and vain confidence which the people had in sacrifices. It is a vain confidence and a false opinion to believe and think that sacrifices of themselves, and for our works' sake, make us acceptable to God; for faith makes us acceptable to God by the Messiah. And the Lord did not institute sacraments or sacrifices so that, being offered, they might give grace, or justify us; but to be witnesses of the grace of God; and that his people might be kept by them, and drawn [3072] in due order, from idols and heathenish worshippings, and led to Christ the high priest and only sacrifice (or oblation) for the whole world.

v.303

For these were certain schoolings or exercises, as Paul proves by saying: "The law was our schoolmaster until Christ, that we should be justified through faith; but after faith has come, we are no longer under a school-master."^{Gal 3.24-25} Therefore the sacrifices of the old law [3073] did not give grace to those who sacrificed, nor did they work their justification; but they were tokens and testimonies that God sanctifies and justifies by and through the sacrifice appointed before all worlds [3074] — the Messiah, I mean; bringing us to faith in Him, as a schoolmaster guiding us.

And truly, when the apostles preached the pure and sound doctrine of the gospel — that the faithful are saved by the only grace of God in Christ — this ancient error of their elders had taken such deep root in the minds of the Jews, that even those who had received Christ, stood in contention nevertheless, that Christ was not able to fully sanctify and justify without the help of the Jewish sacrifices. The apostles, disputing against them with great gravity and the invincible power of the Spirit, plainly proved that a Christian, without any observations of the ceremonial law, nor with the help of any works, by the mere and free grace and mercy of God in Christ alone,[3075] is sanctified, purified, justified, and saved. This undoubtedly is the helm and stern (as commonly said) of the evangelists' and apostles' doctrine. Doubtless, whoever denies it, has no part in the inheritance of Christ and his gospel. Nor is it obscure or doubtful, which I just presented in these few words; for who is ignorant of that memorable dissension between the chief apostles of Christ, Paul and Barnabas, kindled against those who taught that, "unless the Christians were circumcised in the manner of Moses, they could in no way be saved?" ^{Act 15.1} Against them, Peter makes this conclusion: "That our hearts are purified by faith; and we who believe [3076] will be saved by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ." ^{Act 15.9,11}

v.304

It is true that the adversaries would bring back what the apostles abrogated and took away. But in the meantime, it is also undoubtedly true that the apostles strongly battered and beat down flat to the ground as it were, their adversaries' bulwark in defence of sacraments that purify. They used no other forcible engine than this: "That we who believe shall be saved by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ." And even though they add in almost every place, "Not by the law, not by ceremonies or other ritual observations" do we think they would admit that sacraments have such power and virtue, seeing that they are comprehended under rites and ceremonies, and are so accounted? [3077] Christian faith attributes the grace of God, remission of sins, sanctification, and justification, fully and wholly to the free mercy of God, and to the merit of Christ's passion. Indeed, Christian faith attributes these spiritual benefits to [God's grace] in such a way,[3078] that beside it, nothing at all is allowed to take part with it. Therefore, even though Lombard says that "sacraments have received power to confer or give grace by the merit of the passion of Christ;" [3079] it is of his own forging. For Christ does not give his glory to anyone, either saint or mortal man, much less to a creature without life; even so, he who believes that he is fully justified by the death and resurrection of the Lord, seeks no further grace and righteousness in any other thing than in Christ alone, upon whom he stays — whom also by faith, he feels in his heart or mind, already exercises His force by the Holy Ghost. For to this pertain these things in the gospel: "Go in peace, your faith has saved you:"^{Luk 7.50} and also: "He that drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of that water which I shall give him, shall never thirst," etc. ^Joh
4.13-14 To this pertains the saying of Paul also: "Therefore being justified by faith, we are at peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: by whom also we had an entrance by faith unto this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God."^{Rom 5.1-2}

v.305

I am not ignorant of the crafty sleights of some, who imagine there is a certain general faith, and also a special faith. They call general faith, that by which we believe that we are truly justified by the death and resurrection of Christ. But they call special faith, that by which we believe that by the sacraments, and by our own works, the gifts of God are applied particularly to every one of us, one by one. But to what purpose was it, being in a land where they might be fed with manna, to look back to the pottage-pots and (unsavoury) leeks of Egypt? ^{Num 11.5} What, I ask you, do Christians have to do with the distinctions of subtle sophisters? Or how will they prove this distinction of theirs to us? Truly, there is but one faith; and it is no different in the use of the sacraments, than it is without the use of them. Without the use of them, we believe that we are sanctified by the death and resurrection of Christ. In baptism and the Lord's Supper, we practise no other faith than that by which we believe we are purged from our sins by the grace and mercy of Christ — and that by his body given for us, and his blood shed for us, we are redeemed from death, and become heirs of eternal life. It is not the sacraments, but faith through the Holy Ghost, that applies these things to us. All the writings of the apostles witness to this; but such feigned glosses obscure and darken them. To be short; there is one God and Saviour of all, one salvation, one redemption and purging, one faith by which we receive salvation offered to us by God in Christ through the Holy Ghost. This is declared or preached to us in the word by the minister, and is represented and sealed by the sacraments.

And now, who does not know that Paul the apostle, in all his writings only labours to prove that those who believe are justified by faith in the Lord Jesus, and not by any works? Again, who is ignorant that the receiving and celebration of sacraments are also counted among our works? I will add this: that sacraments do not give what they do not have themselves: and they do not have grace, righteousness, and heavenly gifts — therefore, they do not give them.

But from this springs up another disputation for us to handle: Whether the grace of God and a certain heavenly power is put or included in the sacraments, and is as it were, contained in them, so that it might be conveyed from them into the receivers?

v.306

The whole rabble of priests and monks, in word as well as in deed, have betrayed themselves, in thinking that heavenly grace is included in the bare signs; yes, and that God himself is comprehended in them. From no other fountain did their careful disputations spring concerning what the mouse eats, when it eats the sacrament of the body of Christ.[3080] Pope Innocent, Libro quarto, De Sacramento altaris, Capite undecimo, says:

"Miraculously the substance of bread returns again; not that bread which was turned into flesh; but it comes to pass that instead of it, other bread is miraculously created, which bread is eaten," etc. [3081]

Behold, here is a certain witty and miraculous kind of divinity. On purpose, I pass over many others of this kind.

Add to this, that by crossings and certain secret words, gestures, and breathings, they consecrate the water of baptism; all of which they beautify with the name blessing. And among other things, they sing this:

"God, by the secret mixture of his light, make fruitful this water prepared to regenerate men with; that, being sanctified and born again of the immaculate womb of the heavenly fountain, it may come forth a new creature. Let this holy and innocent creature be free from all the assaults of the adversary. Let him not entrap it in his snare. Let it become a living fountain, a regenerating water, a purifying river; that all who are dipped in this wholesome laver, the Holy Ghost working in them, may attain to the excellence of perfect purification. Therefore, you creature of water, I bless (or conjure) you, by the living God, by the true God, by the holy God, by the God who in the beginning separated you by his word from the dry land," etc. [3082]

v.307

Again breathing three times on the water, he quickly utters these words: "You, Lord, bless with your word these waters which make request to you, that beside their natural cleanness which in washing they may give to our bodies, they may also be effectual to purify our souls." Then the priest takes a burning wax candle, and puts it three times in the water consecrated to baptism, saying: "Let the power of the Holy Ghost come down into this plentiful fountain." He adds: "And let it make the whole substance of this water fruitful with the fruit of regeneration." [3083] And so forth.

All these things they understand and expound to be spoken literally and without tropes or figures; which evidently enough declares what these men attribute to holy or consecrated water, and how they think that the holy things themselves are contained in the signs., Bonaventura has wonderfully busied himself about this matter. In his writing, In 4. Maaistri Distinct. Quest. 3. among other things at length he says:

"We must not say by any means that grace is contained substantially in the sacraments, as water in a vessel, or as a medicine in a box; indeed, to understand it so, is erroneous. But they are said to contain grace, in that they signify grace; and because, unless there is a lack on the part of the receiver, grace is always given in them: so that you must understand that grace is in the soul, and not in the visible signs. For this cause, they are called also vessels of grace.

v.308

They may be also called vessels in another way; because, as that which is in a vessel is not part of it, nor comes from it, and yet nevertheless is drawn out of it; so grace comes neither of nor by the sacraments, but springs from the eternal fountain, and is drawn out from there by the soul in the sacraments. And as a man, when he would have liquor, goes straight to the vessel; so he that seeks after the liquor of grace, and does not have it, must have recourse to the sacraments." [3084]

This far from Bonaventura, who rightly referred grace to God, the fountain of all good things. I wish he had also more purely and simply set down the rest. He also said [3085] truly, that the soul of man was the seat or receptacle of grace and of the gifts of God, and not things that are without sense. For the holy scripture teaches everywhere, that the mind of man, not any element, or whatever is forged by man's device, is the mansion-place of the grace of God; and that it is not to be sought for, or worshipped as included in any insensible thing. "If the heaven of heavens," says Solomon, "is not able to contain you, how then should this house do it, that I have built?" ^{1Kng 8.27} The most constant martyr of Christ, Stephen, alluding to this, says: "He that is highest of all does not dwell in temples made with hands, as the prophet says: Heaven is my seat, and earth is my footstool. What house will you build for me? says the Lord; or which is the place of my rest? has not my hand made all these things?" ^{Act 7.48-50} That great apostle of Christ, Paul, following this says: "God who made the world and all that are in it, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; nor is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed anything, seeing that He himself gives to all life, and breath, and all things," etc. ^Act
17.24-25

v.309

Christ himself in the gospel speaks more expressly about this: "The hour comes when you will worship the Father neither in this mountain, nor at Jerusalem. But the hour comes, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth." ^{Joh 4.21,23} The faithful therefore lift up the eyes of their mind from earthly and visible things, to heavenly things. Whereupon our godly forefathers, when they celebrated the Lord's Supper, heard that saying repeated or sung to them, which is most agreeable to such holy mysteries, "Lift up your hearts:" all the people answered together, "We lift them up unto the Lord." Does not the very gross absurdity of the thing, plainly prove that grace is not contained in the signs? For if you understand grace to be the favour and good-will of God; the pardon and forgiveness of sin; the cleansing and justifying of the believers; and finally, the gifts and graces of the Spirit; then what, I ask you, can be imagined that is more absurd and senseless than this: that such excellent things should be kept enclosed in water, bread, and wine? The signs, truly, have no need of grace, nor any pardon and forgiveness of sins. To what purpose, then, should grace be contained within sacraments? What profit, I ask you, would redound to men? Or who does not know that all the institutions of God were ordained for the commodity of man? Or should we rather say that grace is therefore kept included within the sacraments, so that from there it might be conveyed to us by channels? But the scripture does not speak in that way. For grace, as it has now been often repeated, is the favour and good-will of God, by which he himself — not by sensible matters, but of his own accord and through his power and might — is brought to us. These things are spiritual; and therefore they are brought to pass by the gift and mediation of the Holy Ghost. God is joined to us by his Spirit; and we are coupled to him by faith, through the gift of the Holy Ghost. This is everywhere to be seen in the writings of the evangelists and apostles.

v.310

Moreover, the words of the canon of the council of Nicaea are not to be understood in such a gross and rude manner: "Our baptism is not to be considered with bodily eyes, but with the eyes of the mind. You see water; weigh the heavenly force which lies hidden in the water," etc. [3086] For it is a sacramental statement, which truly everybody at that time understood — just as also today, it is not a new or hard kind of thing to say that in the seal there is faith and truth; in a marriage-ring there is the faith and love of wedlock; or in a sceptre and crown, is the king's authority. For no man is so foolish to think that, by using this kind of phrase, he affirms that the things themselves are contained and enclosed in the signs. Every man knows this kind and manner of speech.

To this also pertains that John the Baptist baptized in the river Jordan; and that the apostles themselves also baptized with water. They neither consecrated nor prepared it with any enchantments, breathings, or crossings, such that it might receive the grace of God into it, and make those who are baptized, partakers of it. The Ethiopian, in the Acts of the Apostles, saw a fountain. It was not mingled with oil, nor consecrated with any holy charms, nor moreover prepared with any breathings or putting in wax-candles or pictures of crosses. Nevertheless, he said to Philip the apostle: "See, here is water; what keeps me from being baptized?" ^{Act 8.36} Philip required of him only faith in the Lord Jesus; and upon his confession, he immediately baptized him. No consecration of the fountain was first provided for, by which somehow he might call down the grace of the Holy Ghost and the power of regeneration into the water; and might immediately apply it to the purifying of the Ethiopian.

And if we proceed to include the grace of God within the elements, and include the things themselves within the signs which represent them, who does not see how great the danger is, especially among the simple sort? For we would give them an occasion for idolatry, and to cling to the visible signs. They would also require and ask from these things, what should be asked only from God, the author of all goodness, with minds lifted up into heaven.

v.311

For though it is objected that by a certain heavenly covenant, it is appointed by God that sacraments should have grace in themselves, and should from themselves, as by pipes, convey abroad the water of grace to those who are thirsty — this is alleged without warrant from the scripture, and it is repugnant to true religion. We think this is sufficiently apparent by those things which have been handled and disputed up to here; yet we also add the following.

First of all, the holy and elect people of God are not, then, partakers of the grace of God and heavenly gifts when they receive the sacraments; for they enjoy these things before they are partakers of the signs. For it is plainly declared to us that Abraham our father was justified before he was circumcised. And who does not gather from this, that justification was not exhibited and given to him by the sacrament of circumcision; rather, the righteousness which he possessed by faith before, was sealed and confirmed to him by the sacrament? Moreover, who will not gather from this that we, who are the sons of Abraham, are justified in no other manner than it appears our father was justified; and that our sacraments work no further in us than they did in him — especially since the nature of the sacraments of the people of the old Testament, and the nature of ours, is the same? I will speak of this a little later, more at large, when I expound the passage from the apostle in the fourth chapter to the Romans.

The eunuch, of whom I just spoke from the Acts, as he journeyed and saw water, said to Philip: "See, here is water; what keeps me from being baptized? Philip said to him; If you believe with all your heart, you may. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." It then immediately follows: "And they both went down into the water, and he baptized him." ^{Act 8.36-38} The eunuch (says the evangelist) believed with all his heart, that is to say, he believed truly and without deceit.

v.312

Now let us see what the scripture says concerning such a faith. St. John, the apostle and evangelist, says: "Whoever believes that Jesus is Christ, is born of God." ^{1Joh 5.1} He again says: "Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwells in him, and he in God." ^{1Joh 4.15} Also Paul, that elect vessel and doctor of the Gentiles, says: "If you acknowledge with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you shall be saved." ^{Rom 10.9} And again, St. John says in his epistle: "He that believes on the Son of God has the witness in himself. And this is the record, how that God has given unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that has the Son has life, and he that has not the Son has not life." ^{1Joh 5.10-12} Briefly, from all these things we gather this: the eunuch believed before he received baptism; therefore, before he received baptism, he was born of God in whom he dwelled, and God dwelled in him. He was just and acceptable in the sight of God; moreover, he also had life in himself; and therefore the baptism which followed did not give to the eunuch, what he had before; but it became a testimony to him of the truth, and a seal of the righteousness which came by faith;[3087] and it assured him of the continuance and increase of God's gifts.

In the same manner we read of Cornelius the centurion in the same Acts of the Apostles: that by believing the preaching of the apostle Peter, he also received the Holy Ghost in a visible shape, as the apostles did at Jerusalem in the day of Pentecost; and when Peter knew it, he said: "Can any man forbid water, so that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" Therefore, just as Cornelius with his household received the Holy Ghost before they were baptized, it is manifest that he did not obtain the Holy Ghost as if first given by baptism, or with baptism. Again, we read in the Acts of the Apostles: "Those who gladly received the word of Peter, were baptized." ^{Act 2.41} Therefore, before they were baptized by Peter, they had obtained the grace of God through faith.

v.313

Why, I ask you, do we baptize our infants? Is it because they believe with their heart and confess with their mouth? I think not. Do we not baptize them because God has commanded them to be brought to him? Because he has promised that he will be our God, and the God of our seed after us? To be short, because we believe that God, out of his mere grace and mercy, in the blood of Jesus Christ, has cleansed and adopted them, and appointed them to be heirs of eternal life? Therefore, baptizing infants for these causes, we abundantly testify that nothing is first given to them in baptism; but that what they had before is sealed and confirmed by it. [3088]

Let us also join to these things a testimony of the Supper of the Lord. The apostle, teaching how the godly should prepare themselves to come to the Lord's table, says: "Let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of this bread and drink of this cup." ^{1Cor 11.28} But to examine or prove signifies to search, as much as we can, the heart, or mind, and to sift one's conscience through diligent inquisition. And God is said to prove our hearts.^{Psa 139.23} And the same apostle wills us "to prove what is the good and acceptable will of God."^{Rom 12.2} But this proof cannot be without knowledge and judgment; and the knowledge and judgment of Christians is faith. Therefore, whoever proves himself before he comes to the supper, has faith; and if he has faith, then he does not lack those things that are coupled with faith. And therefore, those heavenly benefits are not first received in the supper, but thanks are given for those already received.[3089] I have hereby shown and proved, I suppose, that sacraments do not confer grace.

I know well enough that those who are persuaded that sacraments give grace, and contain within them the things signified, object that we evacuate the sacraments and make them of no effect; that we teach that the faithful receive in them, or by them, nothing but bare water, and bare bread and wine; and by that means, they say, God is accused by us of falsehood and lying.

We briefly answer this: If they set void or empty things against full things, so that those signs are void or empty which do not include the things signified in them, then truly, I would rather confess they are void than full.

v.314

But if by void or empty, they mean profane or unholy things — that is to say, those things which do not differ from profane signs — and if by bare, they mean things of no force; then we openly profess that we have sacraments which are holy, and not profane; effectual, and not without force; garnished from above, not naked; and therefore they are full, not void or empty. For they are holy things and not profane, because they are instituted by God, and for godly men, not for profane persons. They are effectual, and not without force. For in the church, with the godly and faithful, they work the same effect and end to which they are ordained by God (more about this later). Those things which have the word of God itself, with which they are most beautifully adorned, are also worthily said to be beautified and adorned by God, and are not bare things. And therefore, they are also full and not empty sacraments, because they have those things which make a perfect sacrament.

We will repeat here the parables, or similitudes (which we also alleged above, mostly treating consecration), with the intent to give clearer light to this treatise. While wax is not applied to letters patents [3090] or other public instruments for confirmation and witness' sake, it is common, void, and bare wax; that is to say, it is nothing but wax. But once it is sealed and fastened to those public instruments, it is then neither void nor bare wax; for it is called the testimony of the truth. The coat of arms of a prince or any commonwealth, is a bare sign if painted in a window or on a wall. But if it is fastened to writings, or set to letters, there is a great difference between this and the other; for now it declares and witnesses the will of the prince or of the commonwealth. It is then so esteemed among men, that whoever defaces it, or sets it to any other charter, contrary to the will of the prince and commonweal, is accounted guilty of counterfeiting and high treason. A stone is bare and void when it is not set as a marker or boundary of fields. That is to say, it is a common stone, for which it is not an offence to tread it underfoot, or to remove it from its place. But being set to part the boundaries of a field, it is no longer a bare and void stone, but a witness of lawful division and just possession. To then move this stone out of its place, is accounted a heinous offence. ^{Hos 5.10}

v.315

And therefore, water, bread, and wine, without the institution and use of the sacrament, are nothing but water, bread, and wine. But being used in the celebration of the sacrament, they differ very far from what they were before; they are sacraments signed of Christ by his word, ordained for the salvation of the faithful.

Therefore, those who partake of the sacraments "do not receive nothing," as these men say, unless the institution of God is to be esteemed as nothing. He instituted sacraments to be testimonies of his grace, and seals of the truth of his promises. I will shortly declare this more at large. Therefore, just as God is true and cannot lie, so the seals of his promises are most true. He has promised that he will be ours, and that in Christ he will communicate himself to us, with all his gifts. Therefore, of a certainty, he shows himself to be such, and communicates himself to us. Although, he does not first do it when we receive the sacraments, as if he poured himself into us by them, like conduit pipes, or was included in them, as in vessels. For at the very beginning of the world, God promised his grace to us; and as soon as we first believed, he began to show himself as such to us, and shows himself more and more through the whole course of life. We receive him and comprehend him spiritually and by faith. Therefore, when we partake of the sacraments, he proceeds to communicate himself to us in a special manner; that is to say, as proper to sacraments. And so, in the celebration of the sacraments, we who before were made partakers of Christ, continue and strengthen that communion or fellowship spiritually and by faith, outwardly sealing it to ourselves by the signs.[3091]

v.316

Now, who would then say that those who think this way about the sacraments, and partake of them by this faith, have nothing but empty shows, and receive nothing in them — though we neither include grace in the signs, nor derive it from them? If a man has any other opinion of God and his ordinances, that would not be falsehood in God, nor should God be accused of untruth. This is like someone charging a just man with a lie, because he did not perform what his accuser looked for, when meantime the accused man did not promise the thing looked for. Rather, through his corrupt and false opinion, the accuser only dreamed that it was promised to him. And thus far, by occasion, I have shown what agreement and difference there is between the sacraments of the old and new Testaments, and that our sacraments neither confer nor contain grace.

Now we return to what we began; I mean, to the principal ground of this disputation. As we have taught what sacraments do not work, so we may now set down at length what they work indeed. That is to say, we may now expound what is the power, end, and lawful use of the sacraments, for which they are ordained by God. We handled the reasons why they were instituted, in the beginning of the sixth sermon. [3092] But now I will add other things which pertain to this purpose, and treat each thing by itself, more fully and at large.

The chief end of sacraments is this: that they are testimonies to confirm the truth, by which the Lord in his church even visibly testifies, that the things now uttered by preaching the gospel, and by the promises assured to the faithful from the beginning of the world, are in every point so brought to pass, and are so certainly true, as to be declared and promised in the word of truth. Even so, baptism is the heavenly and public witness in the church of Christ, by which the Lord testifies, that it is he who receives men freely into favour, and who cleanses them from all blemishes, and to be short, who makes us partakers and heirs of all his goodness. For in the same way, circumcision in times past was a public and heavenly testimony that it is God who purges and adopts us. For Moses says, "The Lord your God will circumcise your heart, and the heart of your seed, that you may love the Lord your God with all your heart," etc. ^{Deu 30.6}

v.317

In the same way, the Lord himself, instituting the holy supper in his church, openly bears witness by the present signs, that his body was certainly given for us, and his blood truly shed for the remission of our sins; and also that he is that living food which feeds us to eternal life. Therefore we read in Chrysostom's 83rd Homily upon Matthew, these words:

"As in the old law, so here in the same way, he has left with us a memory of the mysteries, stopping and bridling the mouths of heretics by it. For when they ask, By what does it appear that Christ was offered? and many other mysteries, we allege these things, and thereby shut their mouths. For if Jesus is not dead, whose representation or sign is this sacrifice?" [3093]

You perceive, I suppose, how this writer brings against heretics the sacrament of the supper as the testimony of truth — that is to say, of the Lord's true death.^{1Cor 11.26} Therefore, as the gospel is called a witness, and the preachers of the gospel are called witnesses, so too we call sacraments witnesses of the same truth which, even though they are silent, yet they are nevertheless visible. On this account, St. Augustine calls them "visible words." [3094] For the preaching of the gospel, consisting of words heard with the ears, is a speaking witness; but sacraments, which consist of signs, seen with the eyes, are speechless witnesses — remnants and remembrances of the preaching of the gospel.

Indeed, sacraments were instituted by God to that end: that they might visibly confirm [3095] for us the ready good will of God toward us, and also the preaching of the gospel, and all the promises of life and salvation; and that they should be, as it were, seals set and fixed to the gospel and promises made by God, which might testify and confirm that faith in Christ is true righteousness.

v.318

What I have said, I will confirm by the writings of the apostles. But I taught a little earlier that the sacraments of the old Testament and of the new have but one ground, only a few things excepted; so that now by very good right, comparing both together, we may estimate and utter what the force [3096] and use of our sacraments is. Paul therefore says to the Romans, fourth chapter:

"We say that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousness. How was it then imputed? When he was circumcised, or when he was uncircumcised? Not when he was circumcised, but when he was uncircumcised: after he received the sign of circumcision, as the seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had when he was uncircumcised, that he should be the father of all those who believe, not being circumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also; and be the father of circumcision, not only to those who are of the circumcised, but also to those who walk in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham, which he had when he was uncircumcised."^{Rom 4.9-12}

All these are Paul's words. Among them, first of all, some words are fit [3097] to be expounded; then we must seek the sense and meaning of the apostle's words: and last of all, we must apply them to our purpose, touching the sacrament.

The apostle uses two words here: the sign and the seal. Signum, the word for sign, is more general and stretches very far; but a seal is a word that properly belongs to sacraments, which are seals and confirmations. For not all signs seal; the duty of some is accomplished by mere signification; but properly, sfragizein (sphragizein) is to seal in order to assure and confirm our faith or credit. Thus sfragiv (sphragis) is a seal which is set to keep and confirm our faith and promise, without any danger of deceit. Here, as very often elsewhere, the Lord imitates the manner of men. For by setting our seals to our writings, covenants, and faithful promises, we men tend to confirm what we said before by word. It appears plainly by these testimonies of the scriptures, that this has always been the cause for instituting and using seals.

v.319

When the children of Israel under Ezra made a covenant with the Lord, they later set down their covenant in writing, and sealed the writing as a testimony of the truth, as in Nehemiah, 9th chapter.^{Neh 9.38} And in Haggai, 2nd chapter, you may read: "I will take you O my servant, Zerubbabel, you son of Shealtiel," says the Lord, "and make you like a sign or sealing ring; for I have chosen you;"^{Hag 2.23} as if to say, All men will certainly learn that the continuance of the posterity of the Messiah consists and remains in the son of Shealtiel. Jeremiah thus writes in chapter 22: "As surely as I live, says the Lord, if Coniah, the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet or seal on my right hand, yet will I pluck you there." ^{Jer 22.24} This is as much as saying, Though you were the one in whom I would keep my promises, yet you will be led captive into Babylon. This agrees with what Matthew wrote of the Jews: "So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, and sealed the stone" (without doubt, against deceitful practices); "they also appointed a watch." ^{Mat 27.66} It therefore appears by these testimonies, what purpose seals serve.

These things being thus declared, let us now diligently search out the counsel and meaning of the apostle's words. Paul shows, that justification happens to men by the power and virtue of no works, of no ceremonies or sacraments, but by the sole merit of Christ, through faith. To prove this, he brings the example of Abraham, about whom the scripture has pronounced: "Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness." There he gathers that Abraham was justified by faith; yes, that it was imputed to him for righteousness. He most strongly reasons, both by the word or force of imputation, and by the whole statement of Moses, showing that righteousness is imputed by faith, through grace. To this he also joins a testimony out of David, touching righteousness by imputation. I handled that place in the first sermon of the fourth decade.[3098] Then he returns again to the example of Abraham, and applies to his purpose, that place alleged out of Genesis, weighing the circumstances of the manner and time of his justification.

v.320

He says, "How was it then imputed? When he was circumcised, or when he was uncircumcised? Not when he was circumcised, but when he was uncircumcised." These things, truly, are plainer than to require any exposition. But because the Jew might object; "Why then, the institution and use of circumcision had no force, but was void, unprofitable, and vain; for if Abraham were justified before he was circumcised, how could circumcision profit him further? And if it brought nothing further, then surely it was superfluous and unprofitable: Paul, preventing that objection, answers: "And he received," he says, "the sign of circumcision, as the seal of the righteousness of faith," etc. Circumcision, Paul says, was neither void nor unprofitable. For even though it did not justify, nor cleanse, nor apply the gifts of God, yet it does not therefore follow that there is no further use for it: for it has another end. For he received the sign of circumcision as a certain seal of the righteousness of faith. That is to say, God instituted circumcision, so that it would be a seal to ratify and confirm — yes, and also to visibly testify — that faith is righteousness, and that men are justified through faith. I say that, in the same way that faith is imputed to them for righteousness, it was imputed to Abraham. For it follows: "That he might be the father of all who believe, though they are not circumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also;" and so forth.

Although these things are clearer than daylight, I will endeavour to open it still further by a parable. For suppose that a king, out of his favour and mere liberality, introduced some servant into his court, making him a partaker of all his goods. And moreover, he also extended this benefit to the children and posterity of the servant whom he adopted; and he immediately commanded that this covenant, privilege, and favour which was granted by living words, should also be put in writing. This he might confirm by setting his seal to it, to the end that it might be a sure testimony for his posterity, against all challengers, that this same favour and adoption pertains to them also, and that the prince should continue his good and favourable kindness to the posterity of the one whom he had adopted, if they also continue faithful to their prince.

v.321

Even in the same way, Almighty God, the King of kings, and most bountiful of all princes, freely and not by any merit of ours going before it, chooses Abraham, upon whom he bestows innumerable benefits, and to whom he offers a covenant, and participation in all goodness. And this is not to him only, but also to all his posterity, saying: "I, the Almighty [3099] God, will be your God, and the God of your seed after you; I will bless you and your seed; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed." ^{Gen 22.18} He also sanctified this privilege, confirming it with an oath. Later he commands that it be delivered to their children, hand to hand as it were, instead of in writing. And afterward, he wills his servants the prophets to set it down in writing. Last of all, he himself, by instituting circumcision, as it were setting his seal to the letters patents, or charter, would have it confirmed and ratified to those who would come after, to the end that they might certainly know that it also pertained to them.

Notwithstanding, it seems this must not be ignored by us, such that sacraments have a greater and more effectual force than any sealed charters can have. For privileges, which princes give, are written on parchment, and their seals are set to the written parchment; but God imprints his seal into the very bodies of those who are his. For he caused circumcision to be on the private member of man, by which his issue is raised, increased, and continued — that as a mark imprinted in their very bodies, it might more than seal and witness that the blessing and partaking of all good things pertains to the circumcised, if they abide faithful to the Lord God who entered into league with men. And therefore, very significantly, circumcision is called by Paul, not "the seal of righteousness," but "the seal of the righteousness of faith;"^{Rom 4.11} —that is, a ratifying and assurance that faith is righteousness, that it is faith by which we are justified, that righteousness is due to those who believe, that God assuredly will bless the faithful and impute righteousness to them by faith, as he also imputed it to Abraham. [3100]

v.322

Now, since sacraments have similar reasoning, we may apply these things to our sacraments. Christ therefore, the anointed of the Lord, after he had redeemed the world from the power of Satan, by his guiltless and undeserved death, and now being ready to ascend into heaven to the Father, called his disciples about him, and said: "Go into the whole world, and preach the gospel to all creatures; he that believes and is baptized," etc.^Mar
16.15-16 The preaching of the gospel lays open and abroad, the great, precious, healthful, living, bountiful, royal, and divine privilege, that from being the children of the devil, we are made the children of God, the heirs (I say) of God, and joint-heirs with Christ, who by shedding his blood has purchased for us this inestimable salvation. None is excluded from this grace of God, except the one who excludes himself through disobedience, by his own corruption and fault. For touching the children and infants of believers, the Lord pronounces this in the gospel: "Suffer the young children to come to me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God."^Mat
19.14 And again:

"Truly I say to you, Unless you turn, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives such a little child in my name, receives me. Take heed that you do not despise one of these little ones; for I say to you, that in heaven their angels always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven." ^{Mat 18.3,5,10}

Nor is it likely, now that Christ has come, that God is more unmerciful than he was before he came into the world. But then he said: "I will be your God, and the God of your seed after you." That is now of more force, therefore, since the Lord has come to seek and save that which was lost;^{Luk 19.10} to be short, to pour out most liberally his grace and good gifts upon all flesh.

Therefore, that royal, ample, and divine privilege, comes first by the very preaching of our Lord Christ, and then by the doctrine of his apostles, revealed to the world. And afterward, the Lord so commanding, that same privilege was set down in writing by the apostles and evangelists. Now, the Lord himself added this sacrament as a sign and seal to his preaching and to the scripture, ordaining baptism in place of circumcision, because that was a bloody thing, and concluded as a sign of the blessed seed which was to come — for he was then revealed, and that [former sign] should thus be abrogated.

v.323

And baptism itself, succeeding circumcision, is also a seal of the righteousness of faith, an evidence and sealed charter,[3101] that God assuredly cleanses us and makes us heirs of eternal life; and that the whole grace of the gospel pertains to those who are baptized, if they stand steadfast in true faith.

But you may say, the infants of Christians, who are to be baptized, do not believe. I grant it. No more did the infants of the Jews believe, who nevertheless were circumcised, and were in league with God, and made partakers of all good gifts. So that true godliness bids us attribute the same to our infants. When the offspring of the Jews grew in age and wickedly transgressed, they fell from the covenant of God. So likewise the infants of Christians, when they come to age and commit wickedness, fall from the grace of the gospel: yet they are received again by faithful repentance into the same grace from which they fell. [3102]

But to our purpose. Baptism, the seal of the righteousness of faith, is not set to parchment, or to the writing of the gospel, but it is applied to the very bodies of the children of God, and is marked and imprinted in them as it were. For we are wholly dipped with our bodies, or wholly sprinkled with the water of baptism. This truly is a visible sealing, confirming that the true God is our God, who sanctifies and purifies; and that purification, and every good gift of God, is due to us as the heirs of God. And setting forth this matter, is that evident place of Paul, which in the Epistle to the Galatians, reads thus: "For you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For all you who are baptized, have put on Christ;" and so forth. ^{Gal 3.26-27}

The supper of the Lord has like reasoning, which is also a seal of the righteousness of faith. For the Son of God died; and by his death he redeemed the believers; also, his body and blood are our food and drink unto eternal life. Truly, this singular and excellent privilege, given to the faithful, is declared and set down in writing by the apostles. But it is consecrated and sealed by the Lord himself, by the sacrament of his body and blood. By this, he seals in us an assurance that we are justified by faith in the death of Christ, and that all the good gifts of Christ are communicated to us, and that we are fed and strengthened by Christ.

v.324

Moreover, so that this sealing might be livelier, he does not set the seal to written parchment, but it is brought and given to be eaten by our bodies so that we might have a witness within ourselves, that Christ with all his gifts is wholly ours, if we persevere in faith. For the Lord himself says in the gospel: "He that eats me shall live by means of me." ^Joh
6.57 And he eats, who believes. For in the same place, the Lord says: "I am the bread of life; he that comes to me shall not hunger, and he that believes in me shall never thirst." ^{Joh 6.35}

From this we gather the sum of the whole matter: that the sacraments seal up the promises of God and the gospel. And therefore, this occurs so often as mention is made in the church of evidences or letters patents, or charters, and seals of the preaching of the gospel and the promises of God; and the whole mystery of our salvation is renewed and continued — that is, so often as those actions, instituted by God (i.e., sacraments), are celebrated in the church.

To this I think belongs what the faithful minister of Christ, Zwingli, says upon the sacraments, delivered in these words: "Sacraments bear witness of a thing that has been done. For all laws, customs, and ordinances, show their authors and beginnings. Therefore baptism, since it sets forth in signification the death and resurrection of Christ, it must be that those things were done indeed." [3103] These words are to be found In Expositione Fidei ad Regem Christianum. The same Zwingli, ad Principes Germaniae contra Eggium, says:

"That noble man, journeying into a far country, distributing bread and wine, far more lively and particularly gave himself to us when he said, 'This is my body,' than if he had said, 'This is a token or sign of my body;' even though he took away his natural body and carried it into heaven.

v.325

Nevertheless, in what pertains to faith and grace, he gives himself wholly by these words, as if he had said: Now I go to die for you, and after a while I will wholly depart from here; but I would not have you doubt my love and care toward you. However much I am, I am altogether yours. In witness of this, I commend to you a sign of my betraying and testament, with the intent that you might maintain the memory of me and of my benefits. So that, when you see this bread and this cup ministered to you in the supper of my remembrance, you may be mindful of me — that is, that I delivered myself up for you, as if you were to see me with your eyes face to face, as you now see me eating with you, and as you will later see me being led from you, to die for you." [3104]

Up to here I have recited Zwingli's words, and shortly I will repeat other words of his again. It is not that I stay myself upon them, or upon any testimonies of man, but that it may be made manifest that this man did not (as some have falsely thought) contemn the sacraments.

Meanwhile, we acknowledge these testimonies of the holy scripture: "And it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us: who has also sealed us, and has given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts;" 2Cor 1.21-22. And also: "After you believed, you were sealed with the holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, unto the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of his glory;" Eph 1.13-14. And again: "Do not grieve the holy Spirit of God, by whom you are sealed unto the day of redemption;" Eph 4.30

v.326

We acknowledge the truth of God to be sufficiently sound, true, and certain of itself; nor can we have a better confirmation from elsewhere, than out of God's word. But if our mind is not confirmed on every side, it wavers. God therefore frames himself according to our weakness, and upholds us by his sacraments, as much as possible. Yet such that we refer all the benefit of our confirmation to the Spirit himself and to his operation, rather than to the elements. Therefore, just as we attribute confirmation to doctrine and to teachers, even so we attribute sealing to the sacraments. We read in the Acts of the Apostles, chapters 14 and 18.: "The apostles returned and strengthened the disciples' souls again, and exhorted them to continue in the faith." ^{Act 14.22} Again, in 1Thes 3.2: "We have sent Timothy (says Paul), our brother and minister of God, to confirm or establish you, and to comfort you concerning your faith." Nevertheless, unless the inward force of the Spirit draws and quickens the hearts of the hearers, the outward persuasion of the teacher, however forcible and vehement, will avail nothing. But if the Holy Spirit shows his might, and works with the word of the preacher, the souls of the hearers are most mightily strengthened. And so it stands with the mystery of the sacrament. For if the inward anointing and sealing of the Holy Ghost is lacking, the outward action will be considered but a toy to the unbelievers, nor will it work at all the sealing of the sacraments. But when faith, the gift of the Holy Ghost, goes before, the sealing of the sacraments is very strong and sure. Some also have said it very well: If our minds are destitute of the Holy Ghost, the sacraments no more profit us, than it does a blind man to look at the bright beams of the sun. But if our eyes are opened through the illumination of the Spirit, they are wonderfully delighted with the heavenly sight of the sacraments.[3105] Zwingli, in Libello ad Principes Germaniae, says: "It does not offend us, if all the things which the Holy Ghost works are referred to the external sacrament, so long as we understand that they are spoken figuratively, as the fathers spoke." [3106]

v.327

And although sacraments do not seal the promises to the unbelievers, because they mistrust them, nevertheless the sacraments were instituted by God that they might seal. The wicked and ungodly person does not receive the doctrine of the gospel; yet no man therefore gathers that this doctrine was not instituted by God to teach. There are some who will not give credit to a sealed charter; yet it does not therefore follow, that the sealed charter does not serve to assure or confirm one's faith. Therefore, since the doctrine of the gospel works nothing in someone who is obstinate and rebellious; and since the sacraments do not move someone who is profane and unholy, nor profit the wicked by any means — that does not come to pass through Him that instituted them, nor through the word and sacraments,[3107] but through the fault of the unbeliever. In the meantime, they are themselves instituted to profit and to seal, and to have their holy use and end in the holy. And this much I have said of the principal virtue of sacraments: that they are testimonies of God's truth and of his good will toward us, and are seals of all the promises of the gospel — sealing and assuring us that faith is righteousness, and that all the good gifts of Christ pertain to those who believe.

There is another end and use of sacramental signs: they signify, and in signifying, they represent. It would be superfluous to prove this by many testimonies, since it is most manifest to all men, at least by what we said before. Now, to signify is to show, to declare and point out anything, by signs and tokens. But to represent does not signify (as some dream) to bring, give, or make what was taken away at some point, corporally present again. It only resembles it in likeness, and by a certain imitation; it calls it back to mind again, and sets it before our eyes as it were. For we say that a son represents or resembles his father, when in some way he favours his father in expression and likeness of manners; so that someone who sees him may truly think that he sees the father present, as it were.

v.328

And in this manner, sacraments stir up and help our faith, while we see outwardly before our eyes, that which stirs up the mind, works in us,[3108] and warns us of our duty. Indeed, that very thing which we shortly before comprehended in our mind, is now, in a way, visibly offered to our senses in a similitude, parable, type, or figure — to be viewed and weighed in our mind, so that they might mutually help one another. The similitude, therefore, or the analogy of the sign to the thing signified, is by the way to be considered here.

I told you before,[3109] that analogy is an aptness, proportion, and a certain convenience of the sign to the thing signified; so that what is signified may be seen as in a mirror. The matter will be made manifest by examples.

The bountiful and gracious Lord, of his mere mercy, receives mankind into partaking of all his good gifts and graces, and he adopts the faithful, so that now they are not only joined in league with God, but are also the children of God. This thing is most evidently laid before the eyes of all men by representation, by the holy action of baptism in its stead (the sign or the very sign itself). For the minister of God stands at the holy font, to whom the infant is offered to be baptized; whom he receives and baptizes into the name, or in the name, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, for we may find both "into the name" and "in the name". So that to be baptized "into the name of the Lord," is to be sealed into his virtue and power (for the name of the Lord signifies power), into the favour, mercy, and protection of God — yes, to be engrafted and fastened as it were, to be dedicated, and to be incorporated into God. To be baptized "in the name of the Lord," is to be baptized by the commandment or authority of God, I mean, by the commission or appointment of God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It is to be received into the company of the children of God, and to be accounted of God's household, so that those who are baptized are, and are to be called, Christians, and named with the name of God,^{Num 6.27} being called the children of God the Father, etc. ^{Joh 1.12} His words therefore somewhat resemble what we read elsewhere, that "the name of God was called upon or over some one." [3110]

v.329

In a way, this is like saying that someone is called by the name of God — that is, to be called "the servant and son of God." Therefore, those who before, by grace, are invisibly received by God into the society of God, those self-same believers are now, by baptism, visibly admitted into the self-same household of God, by the minister of God. And therefore, at that time they also receive a name, that they may always remember that in baptism they gave up their names to Christ, and in like manner, they also received a name. In this manner, by a most apt analogy, the very sign resembles the thing signified. To be short, baptism is done by water; and water in men's affairs has a double use: for it cleanses filth and, as it were, renews man; it also quenches thirst, and cools someone in a heat. So too, it represents the grace of God when He cleanses his faithful ones from their sins, and regenerates and refreshes us with his Spirit. Beside this, the minister of Christ sprinkles, or rather pours on water — or being dipped, he takes them out of the water — by which it is signified that God very bountifully bestows his gifts upon his faithful ones. It also signifies that we are buried with Christ into his death, and are raised again with him into newness of life. Pharaoh was drowned in the gulf of the Red sea, but the people of God passed through it safe. For our old Adam must be drowned and extinguished; but our new Adam must be quickened day by day, and rise up again (out of the water). Therefore, the mortification and vivification of Christians is excellently represented by baptism.

Now, in the Lord's Supper bread and wine represent the very body and blood of Christ. The reason is this: just as bread nourishes and strengthens a man, and gives him the ability to labour, so the body of Christ, eaten by faith, feeds and satisfies the soul of man, and furnishes the whole man to all the duties of godliness. Just as wine is drink to the thirsty, and makes merry the hearts of men; so the blood of our Lord Jesus, drunk by faith, quenches the thirst of the burning conscience, and fills the hearts of the faithful with unspeakable joy. Therefore, in the action of the supper, the bread of the Lord is broken, and the wine is poured out.

v.330

For the body of our Saviour was broken, that is, he was by all means afflicted, and his blood gushed and flowed plentifully out of his gaping wounds. And we ourselves truly break with our own hands the bread of the Lord; for we ourselves are at fault that he was torn and tormented. Our sins wounded him, and we ourselves crucified him; that is to say, he was crucified for us, so that by his death he might deliver us from death. Furthermore, we take the bread into our hands, and we likewise take the cup into our hands, because he said, "Take, eat; take and divide it among you." We do not lay them aside or hide them, nor do we give them out to others: but once we have received them, we eat and drink them, swallowing them down into our bodies. Then afterward, we communicate and offer them to others. For those who lawfully celebrate the Lord's Supper, not only believe that Christ suffered, or that he suffers, for others and not for them; but they believe that Christ suffered for themselves. They believe that Christ does, and as it were, has already communicated all his gifts most liberally to them. Therefore, just as the sustenance of bread and wine, passing into the bowels, is changed into the substance of man's body; even so Christ, being eaten by the godly, by faith, is united to them by his Spirit — so that they are one with Christ, and he is one with them. Food that is plentifully prepared, daintily dressed, but only seen upon the table, does not assuage hunger. So too, if you hear Christ reverently preached to you, and you do not believe that Christ is yours, with all his good gifts, then neither the word, though reverently preached, nor the board, though abundantly stored, will profit you at all. And it does much for the reconciling, renewing, and maintaining of friendship, that we are all partakers of one bread, that we offer bread to our brethren, and that we drink of the cup which we receive at our brethren's hand. For upon no other cause, the ancient fathers seem to call the supper synaxis, a communion. But we will say something about that elsewhere.

This much have I brought for example's sake, touching the analogy of the sign and the thing signified. I would say more, but I trust to those who are diligent, that this is sufficient; for I have given occasion to think upon, and to find out more and greater things.

v.331

By this short treatise touching the analogy, I think it is plain that [3111] sacraments stir up and help the faith of the godly. For while our mind comprehends and considers the benefits of God, Christ's blessing, our redemption, and His other good gifts; and while it enjoys them with great pleasure of the spirit; and while it is glad and rejoices in them — sacraments are also outwardly given. This visibly represents those things to our eyes, and makes them enter into all our senses as it were, which the mind inwardly comprehends, considers, and meditates upon. [3112] This is because the whole action which consists of the words and the rite or ceremony, is counted with the sign. Our eyes see the signs and all things which are done in the whole action of the signs, all of which speak as it were: our ears hear the words and institutions of Christ. And by touching and tasting, we also feel and perceive how sweet and good the Lord is. So that now, the whole man as it were, both body and soul, is caught up into heaven; he feels and perceives that his faith is stirred up and helped — in short, that the fruit of faith in Christ is surpassing sweet and comfortable. All these things take place in those who believe. In those who do not believe, the signs remain as they are, without life. Therefore, these things are brought to pass by the virtue or power of faith, and by the Spirit working in the lawful use of the sacraments. Without faith and the Holy Ghost, they are not felt or perceived.

There is a like efficacy or force in the preaching of the word of God also. For when this word by parables, by examples, and by description, is presented to the hearers, if the Spirit and faith shine in their mind, they not only seem to hear things expounded by these, but to see them with their eyes. In consideration of this, I think, Paul said: "O foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, that you should not believe the truth; to whom Jesus Christ was described before your eyes, and among you crucified?"^{Gal 3.1} For it is certain that Christ was nowhere either described or crucified among the Galatians. Paul therefore speaks of his plainness in preaching the word, by which things are indeed shown, and yet with such force and efficacy, that in a way, they were laid before their eyes. There is the same reasoning in sacraments; for that cause, those of old called them "visible words."

v.332

In his book, Ad Principes Germanice contra Eggium, Zwingli treats these things in this manner:

"When he feels his faith likely to fall, does a faithful man not desire to be upheld and restored to his place? And where in the whole world would he hope to find that more conveniently, than in the very actions of the sacraments, so much as belongs to all sensible things? For let it be, that all created things allure and provoke us to contemplate or behold God's majesty; yet all that allurement or provoking is silent: but in the sacraments, there is a lively provoking and speaking allurement. For the Lord speaks, and the elements also speak; and they speak and persuade that to our senses, which the word and Spirit speaks to our mind. However, all these visible things are nothing to this, unless the sanctification of the Spirit goes before." [3113]

He handles these things more at large, first in his annotations on the 27th chapter of Jeremiah; and afterward, In Expositione Fidei ad regent Christianum.[3114]

Furthermore, we read that St. Augustine, disputing against the Manicheans, Lib. xix. contra Faustum, cap. 11, said: "Men cannot be gathered together into any name of religion, either true or false, unless they are knit together in some fellowship of visible signs or sacraments," etc. [3115]

v.333

We acknowledge that this opinion of St. Augustine, fetched from the scriptures touching the sacraments, teaches that we are gathered and knit together by them into the unity of the body of Christ, and are separated from all other religions, fellowships, and assemblies. And moreover, we are bound by them, as by an oath, to the true worship of one God, and to one sincere religion. We openly profess that we agree and give our consent to this, with all those who are partakers of the sacraments. Chiefly to be marked, is that the gathering or knitting together into the unity of the body of Christ, has a double respect. For we are joined with Christ — he is in us, and we live in him — and we are coupled with all the members of Christ — namely, with Christ's faithful servants, by which I mean the catholic church itself. Furthermore, we are knit together with Christ in spirit and faith. But we are joined to the church, or to the members of Christ, by the unity of faith and of the Spirit, and by the bond of charity. All of these, truly are the inward gifts of the Spirit, which are freely bestowed on us by the Lord alone, and not by any creatures, nor by any elements.[3116] Sacraments, therefore, visibly graft us into the fellowship of Christ and his saints, who were invisibly grafted by his grace before we were partakers of the sacraments. But by receiving the sacraments, we now open and make manifest whose body we would be and are members of. The Lord, with his signs, or by his minister also,[3117] visibly marks us as his own household, and as his own people. We will more fully open and make manifest these things by the scriptures.

Those who were the people of God in times past, by the force of the covenant, by the grace, mercy, and promise of God, were visibly gathered together into one church, and knit together into one body, by circumcision. For the apostle St. Paul says to the Ephesians: "Therefore remember that you, who in times past were gentiles in the flesh, are called uncircumcision by those who are called circumcision in the flesh made with hands; that at that time, I say, you were without Christ, and were aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenant of promise," etc. ^Eph
2.11-12

v.334

By this it is easily understood how the Jews were distinguished by circumcision from other religions and fellowships, and for this cause, "circumcision" is used in another place for those who are circumcised, and why the name "uncircumcised" was reproachful. For those who were uncircumcised were considered ungodly and unclean persons, who had no fellowship, or part, or inheritance, with God and his saints. Something is said in my former sermons about baptism being ordained in place of circumcision. And also the apostle sets it out most plainly:

"As the body is one, and has many members, and all the members of the body, which is one, though they are many, are yet but one body; even so is Christ. For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body, whether we are Jews or Gentiles, whether we are bond or free; and we have all been made to drink into one Spirit." ^{1Cor
12.12-13}

We are therefore knit together by the sacrament of baptism into the unity of the body of Christ; so that to have broken this bond, and to yield ourselves into another fellowship of religion and brotherhood, may worthily be called sacrilege and treason. The apostle seemed to refer to this when he asked the Corinthians: "Are you not baptized into the name of Christ?" [3118] declaring thereby that those who are baptized into the name of Christ have openly sworn and bound their faith before the church of Christ, so that now they neither can nor should rejoice in any other name than in the name of Christ, into whose household they are received by baptism. So we are separated from all other religions by baptism, and we are consecrated only to the Christian religion.

There is a similar place, in all points touching the supper of the Lord, in 1Cor 10. For when the apostle would declare to the Corinthians, that it is far from all godliness, unseemly, yes, and sacrilegious, that Christians should eat things offered to idols in the idols' temples, and be partakers of the gentiles' sacrifices, reasoning from the manner and nature of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. He says:

"Flee from idolatry; I speak as to those who have understanding; judge what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we who are many are one bread, and one body, because we are all partakers of one bread.

v.335

Behold Israel according to the flesh; are not those who eat of the sacrifices, partakers of the altar? What am I saying then? That the idol is anything? or that what is sacrificed to idols is anything? No, but rather I say this: that those things which the gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God; and I would not have you fellowship with the devils. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of the devils. You cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils," etc. ^{1Cor 10.14-21}

Paul says all this. Since it notably serves our purpose and is very plain, I will but briefly run over it.

First, he lays down the state and scope of the matter, to which he immediately directs his whole discourse. "Flee idolatry," he says. And by the word "idolatry," he means whatever pertains to idolatry, especially eating meat offered to idols. But if you do not know what idolothytum means (the word he uses there),[3119] understand that it is a Greek word which Paul uses in this case; and it signifies a thing sacrificed to an idol, or a thing publicly consecrated to an idol, in a sacrifice. It was the way of the Corinthians to sacrifice at the altars of their gods in idol-houses, that is to say, in their idol-temples, and to call Christians to attend their sacrifices. When they came, they sat and ate what was offered to idols, eating indifferently with the idolaters, thinking that they might do it without any fault at all. This is because, by the bright shining of the gospel, it appeared that neither the idol, nor that god whom the idol represented — and therefore, also the things that were offered to idols — were nothing but vain names and things of no price or estimation. But disputing against these from the eighth to the eleventh chapters, Paul teaches that it is far from Christianity to partake of the gentiles' sacrifices. He says, I will speak to you as to those who have discretion, so that after I have outlined for you the way in which to walk, by the sharpness of your wit you may understand what is true and what is false, and in short, which way you must incline. Then he scatters certain grounds of arguments, which discussing afterward, they might polish and perfect by their diligence.

v.336

Those, he says, who are partakers of the supper of the Lord (in which the bread of the Lord is broken, and the cup of the Lord is drunk) are of the same communion, fellowship, or body with the Lord. For koinwnia, (koinonia) which Paul uses here, and which interpreters have translated communion or partaking (though fellowship is better than partaking; as in the Dutch translation "Gemeind" is better than "Gemeindchafft" [3120]), is not taken actively (if I may say so) for distributing, giving, or extending Christ's body by the minister; but it is taken passively, for the fellowship and society, for the body, I say, of the church — as when the church is called a communion, that is, an assembly, a gathering together and society of saints or godly Christians.[3121] Furthermore, the church is called koinwnia (koinonia), or a communion of the body and blood of Christ, because it is redeemed by the body and blood of Christ, and being a partaker of Christ, it lives by him. For he lives in the godly Christians, communicating to them all his good gifts of life. And he declares that partakers of the supper of the Lord are the body and communion of Christ, for the following reason: "Because we, who are many, are one bread and one body." He later adds to this another more evident reason, for interpretation's sake, saying: "For we are all partakers of one bread." In that we are partakers of one bread, he says, we openly testify that we are partakers of the same body with Christ and all his saints. In these words, he notably respects the analogy. "As one bread or one loaf is made by uniting together many grains;" Cyprian says; "and as one wine is pressed out of many clusters of grapes; so out of many members, grows and is made the body of the Church, which is the body of Christ." [3122]

Now in the words of Paul, these things offer themselves to us to be marked. First, what he named a communion before, he now calls a multitude, or many, by a word expressing his mind belter.

v.337

A communion, therefore, is nothing but a multitude or congregation. For he said, "The bread is the partaking of the body of Christ;" but now he says, "We being many are one bread, one body." "We being many," he says; that is, all we who are a multitude and a congregation or church, redeemed by the body of Christ given, and by his blood shed for us. Then he says, "We being many are one body:" he does not say, are made one body. For we are not first grafted into the body of Christ (as we have already repeated often) by partaking of the sacraments; but we who were before engrafted by grace invisibly, are now also visibly consecrated. Again, by like reasoning about sacraments, or by an example of the scripture taken from the sacraments of the people of the old Testament, he shows that the partakers of the sacraments are one body, both with him to whom they offer, and with those with whom they offer, or with whom they eat things offered to idols. "Behold the Israelites who offer sacrifices after the flesh. Are not those who eat of the sacrifices, koinwnoi (koinonoi); that is, are they not communicants, fellows, or partakers of the things of the temple or of the altar?" ^{1Cor 10.18} For he comprehends under the word for the things of the temple or of the altar (qusiasthrion thusiasterion is his word), whatever belongs to the worship and religion of the God of the Jews. So that, the sense or meaning may be this: Are they not all one body, one communion, one people, both with the God of Israel and with his people, who eat of the sacrifices offered to the God of Israel by the Israelite people? It is as if he had said: There is none who is ignorant of it, or can deny it, since it is confessed and manifest among all men. By these things, he leaves it to the Corinthians, of their own accord, to gather this much. Therefore, those who are partakers of the sacraments of the Gentiles, are one body and one fellowship with the gods of the Gentiles, and the Gentiles who sacrifice. Now by the figure occupatio (which means when answering, we prevent an objection that may be made) [3123] he places these words between: "What am I saying then? That the idol is anything? Or, that what is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?" [3124]

v.338

To which he then adds: "But this I sense, that the things which the Gentiles offer in sacrifice, they offer to devils, and not to God." Thus he might lawfully have inferred this: Therefore, if you continue to be partakers of things offered to idols, you will truly be one body and one fellowship both with the devil himself and all his members. But because this might have been taken by many to have been spoken bitterly, he adds another saying somewhat milder and gentler. He says: "And I would not have you be koinwnoi," that is, "communicants, or partakers, and have fellowship with devils." After these words, by comparing the contrary parts, he sums up the whole matter to which he directed all his reasons, and says: "You cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: you cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils." And so forth. The sacraments, therefore, separate us from all other worshippings and religions, and they bind and consecrate, yes, and also make us of the same body with the one true God and with sincere Christian religion as it were; because being partakers of them, we openly profess that we are the members of Jesus Christ — which no man in his right mind would take and make the members of fornication and of idols.

What Zwingli, that learned man, has In Expositione fidei Christianae ad Regem Christianum, is not impertinent to this purpose.

"Sacraments are instead of an oath. For sacramentum is also used by the Latins for an oath. For those who use one and the self-same sacraments, are one particular nation, and a holy sworn congregation. They are knit together into one body and into one people. Whoever betrays them shall perish. Therefore, the people of Christ are knit into one body by eating his body sacramentally. Now, he who is faithless, and yet dares to be so bold as to make himself one of this society or fellowship, betrays the body of Christ in the head as well as in the members," etc. [3125]

v.339

By this it is easy to understand, that sacraments put us in mind of our duty: especially if we mark in the writings of the apostles, how they frame their exhortations considering the manner of sacraments. Here again, the analogy being considered, it has very much light and force in it. Trees are pruned, and all that is dry, barren, and superfluous in them is cut away. And so too by circumcision, those who were circumcised were put in mind to cut away with the knife of the Spirit, whatever grew up from the flesh that was against the law of God. Moses referred to this when he said, "Circumcise, therefore, the foreskin of your heart, and no longer be stiff-necked." ^Deu
10.16 Following him, Jeremiah says in the 4th chapter: "Be circumcised in the Lord,[3126] and cut away the foreskin of your hearts," etc. ^{Jer 4.4} Those things which the apostle taught touching the celebration of the Passover, are plainer than need to be repeated here; and I have already treated them at large in the sixth sermon of my third decade. The very same apostle, in his epistle to the Romans, says: "Do you not know, that all we, who have been baptized into Jesus Christ, have been baptized into his death? We are buried then with him by baptism into his death; so that likewise, just as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we should walk in newness of life," etc.^{Rom 6.3-4} So we are put in mind by the mystery of baptism, to renounce and forsake Satan and the world, to mortify and subdue the flesh, and to bury the old Adam, so that the new man may rise up again in us, through Christ. Furthermore, the supper of the Lord admonishes us about brotherly love and charity, and of the unity that we have with all the members of Christ.

v.340

It also warns us of purity and sincerity in faith, so that, because we have openly professed that we are united to Christ and to all his members, we would have a special care and regard that we are not found faithless and untrue to our Lord Christ and his church; that we should not defile ourselves with foreign and strange sacrifices. We are also admonished about thankfulness, to magnify the grace of God who has redeemed us, according to that saying: "As often as you eat of this bread, and drink of this cup, you present his death until he comes." ^{1Cor 11.26}

Thus far have I treated the force, the end, and the effect of sacraments; to which I have, I think, attributed no more or less than I should; that is, as much as may be proved out of the scripture to be due to sacraments. They are the institutions of Christ; therefore they do not care for counterfeit and strange praises. They have sufficient praise, if they have those praises which he that instituted them — namely God, and Christ Jesus, the high priest of the catholic church — granted to attribute to them.

Now, because mention is often made about faith in this whole book, I will further show that without faith, sacraments profit nothing; and again, that they are not superfluous or vain to those who receive them by faith. For this seems as yet to belong to the full exposition and consideration of sacraments. It is easily proved that sacraments without faith, do not profit. For it is said that sacraments are seals of the preaching of the gospel, and things pertaining to it. For if the preaching of the gospel is heard without faith, it not only profits nothing to life, but it rather turns to judgment for the one who hears it. The Lord himself bears witness to this, saying: "If any man hears my words, and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. The word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day." ^{Joh 12.47-48} This saying of the apostle agrees with that of the Lord: "For the gospel was preached to us, as well as to the fathers: but the word which they heard did not profit them, because it was not coupled with faith by those who heard."^Heb
4.2 Who, now, is such a dorhead that he cannot gather that sacraments without faith, are unprofitable? Especially since the same apostle says, "Whoever eats this bread and drinks this cup unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." ^{1Cor 11.27}

v.341

But all our worthiness before God consists in faith; the same apostle yet again witnesses from the prophet, "The just shall live by faith;" ^{Rom 1.17} and "By faith the elders (or fathers) obtained a good report."^{Heb 11.2} To this also belongs what is read in the gospel: "Those who were bid were not worthy." ^Mat
22.8 From which it follows that worthiness consists in faithful obedience. To this may also be referred (I think) those examples which were mentioned more than once already: "All our fathers were baptized, and all ate of one spiritual food; but God had no delight in many of them."^{1Cor 10.1-3} And Paul again says: "Without faith it is impossible to please God." ^Heb
11.6 Therefore, without faith sacraments profit nothing. The examples of Simon Magus and Judas the traitor are very well known — one of whom was baptized, and the other admitted to the supper. Yet neither had any fruit of the sacraments, because they lacked true faith.

To these pithy and divine testimonies of God we will now add some places from St. Augustine. Out of his nineteenth book against Faustus, twelfth chapter:

"Peter says, 'Baptism saves us;' and lest they think that the visible sacrament was sufficient, by which they had the form of godliness, and should deny its power through their evil manners, by living lewdly and desperately, he then adds: ' Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but in that a good conscience makes its request to God.'" [3127]

Again, Lib. ii. Contra Literas Petiliani, cap. 7, he says:

"They should not therefore be thought to be in the body of Christ (which is the church or congregation) because they are corporally partakers of his sacraments. For in such, they are also holy; but to those who use and receive them unworthily, they will be enforceable to their greater judgment.

v.342

For they are not in that society of Christ's church which, as members of Christ, grow into the fulness of God, by being knit together and touching one another. For that church is built on a rock. As the Lord says, 'Upon this rock will I build my church.' But they build on the sand; as the Lord also says, 'He that hears my words and does not do them not, I will liken him to a foolish man.'" [3128]

And again in Augustine's treatise on John 13:

"The syllables of Christ's name and his sacraments profit nothing, where the faith of Christ is resisted. For faith in Christ and his sacraments, is to believe in him who justifies the ungodly, to believe in the Mediator, without whose intercession we are not reconciled to God." [3129]

An objection is made: If sacraments do not profit at all without our faith, then they depend on our worthiness or unworthiness; so that they are not perfect.[3130] I answer, that among the wicked and unbelievers, sacraments of themselves are sufficiently ratified and confirmed by the institution of God; nor does their perfectness depend on the condition and state of the partakers — they are neither better among the good, nor worse among the bad. For what the Lord has instituted remains perfect and sound, and he retains his institution always good, however men may vary and be faithless. For the apostle says: "Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid! Yes, let God be true, and every man a liar." ^{Rom 3.3-4}

v.343

But I have also touched this matter somewhat before. Yet, because it is one thing to offer, and another thing to receive, truly of his goodness, God offers his bountiful gifts to men to this end: to profit and to save them, and to make them whole, as the physician does by ministering medicine to his patient. But because a foolish and mad man does not acknowledge the benefit, like a sick patient who refuses to have medicine ministered, the benefit which is offered no more profits the one, than medicine not received does any good to the other. It is not through the fault of the one who offers the benefit, nor of the one who ministers the medicine, but through the folly of the one who refuses and will have none of it.

In this manner St. Augustine also disputes about this matter. For Lib. iii. De Baptismo cont. Donat. cap. 14, he says:

"When the perfectness and holiness of the sacrament is in handling, it does not matter what he believes, and what manner of faith he has, who receives the sacrament. Truly, it avails very much in the way of salvation; but for the question of the sacrament itself, it makes no matter." [3131]

Also Contra Literas Petiliani, Lib. ii. cap. 47, he says:

"Remember that the lewd life and corrupt manners of evil men do not hinder the sacraments of God at all, so as to make them not holy, or less holy; but to the ungodly, they are a testimony of their damnation, and not a furtherance of their salvation." [3132]

Also, Tract. in Joan. 26, he says: "If you receive the sacrament carnally, it does not cease to be spiritual; but to you it is not so." [3133]

v.344

The objection that baptism does not profit infants is just as easily confuted if we still say that sacraments without faith do not profit; for infants have no faith. Thus they babble. We answer, first, that the baptism of infants is grounded upon the free mercy and grace of God, who says: "I will be your God, and the God of your seed;" ^{Gen 17.7} and again: "Allow the children to come to me; for of such is the kingdom of God," etc. ^{Mat 19.14} Infants are therefore numbered and counted among the faithful by the Lord himself; so that baptism is due to them, as much as it is due to the faithful. For by the imputation of God, infants are faithful. To this pertains this saying of our Saviour: "He that offends one of these little ones who believe in me," etc. ^{Mat 18.6} For he manifestly calls "little ones" believing; doubtless for imputation's sake, and not for confession, which is not yet in little ones by any means. To this may also be added that the father of the infant therefore desires to have his child signed with the mark of the people of God (namely, baptism) because the father believes the promises of God — that is, that his infant is of the household of God; therefore, there is faith in the baptism of infants. But even if the father does not believe, that is no hindrance to the infant; for in the faith of the church he is brought to be baptized. The church, truly, believes that infants ought to be brought to the Lord; the church believes that they are of the household and people of God: therefore she commands them to be partakers of the mysteries. So that again, in the baptism of infants a man may find faith. St. Augustine adds this to it, saying, Lib. i. De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione, cap. 19: "Therefore infants are rightly called faithful, because in a way they confess their faith by the words of those who bear them." [3134] He reasons more touching this matter in his twenty-third epistle to Boniface,[3135] where he that desires may find more.

But all these things, they say, do not prove that infants have faith of their own; for the faith of their parents, of their bearers, or the faith of the church, is another's faith, and not theirs. Let it be so. Yet most certain is that saying that the Lord counts infants among his own, that is, among the faithful; so that now they are not baptized only in another's faith, but in their own faith, that is to say, that faith which it pleases the Lord to impute to them.

v.345

Furthermore, that is not another's, which is common to the self-same body. And infants are in the very same body of the church, whereby that which is the church's is their own, and not another's. Nor can any man easily tell what motions of the Holy Spirit infants have beside, etc. For insomuch as they are of God, they have the Spirit of God; "and whoever does not have it, they are not of God," Rom 8.9.

Just as they decline too much to the left, who are persuaded that sacraments (yes, without faith) profit the receivers, so they go too far to the right, who think that the sacraments are superfluous for those who have faith. Faith, they say, fully acquits us; so that after we have faith, sacraments can increase nothing in us. Therefore it must be that they are unprofitable. In times past, such we read were the heretics called Messaliani,[3136] who were called both Euchitae,[3137] and enqousiastai (enthousiastai or "enthusiasts") — that is, divine men in truth, and inspired of God —for they contend that the faithful, after they receive the Holy Ghost, have no need of sacraments. These men are very injurious even to God himself, who did not institute his sacraments for the faithful without good cause, nor unprofitably. And "Truly, Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness, and he was counted the friend of God," just and holy, and doubtless, not being void of the Holy Ghost. Yet he also "received circumcision, the seal of the righteousness of faith which was before he was circumcised."^{Rom 4.11} It is said to the same Abraham: "Every man-child, whose foreskin is not circumcised, shall be cut off from my people, because he has broken my covenant."^{Gen 17.14} Truly, the angel of the Lord is ready to kill Moses, because he delayed circumcision in his children longer than was lawful, either by his own negligence, or through the fault of his Midianite wife. What, will anyone be found more righteous and holy than the Son of God who, having received the fulness of the Spirit, pours plentifully of it into his members? Being himself the head, yet he came to John the Baptist, and requests to be baptized by him in the Jordan.

v.346

And when John refused and said, "I need to be baptized by you, and you come to me?" he hears: "Allow it to be so now; for thus it becomes us to fulfil all righteousness." ^{Mat 3.14-15} Certainly righteousness gives to every man that which is his own. Faith, therefore, which is the righteousness of Christians, gives glory to God; and it believes that, being wonderfully wise, God wishes well to men — and therefore that He has instituted nothing unprofitably, but all things are for the salvation of his faithful ones. A faithful man therefore uses all the institutions of God without any reasoning or questioning. Nor is there any here, I think, who would say that this deed of Christ does not pertain to him, by which undoubtedly he laid before us an example to follow. Yes, that which he himself did, he willed others to do also, when he sent out his disciples, and said: "Go into the whole world, and preach the gospel to all creatures; baptizing them in the name of the Father," etc. "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved." ^{Mar 16.15-16} Here, truly, he joins together both faith and baptism, which doubtless he would not have done if sacraments were superfluous where faith is found.

By this it manifestly appears that they are wrong, as far as heaven is wide, who think that sacraments are indifferent, that is to say, something left to our own will and choice, either to use or not to use. We already heard a flat commandment concerning baptism; so too, instituting and celebrating the supper, the Lord says: "Do this in remembrance of me." ^{Luk 22.19} Therefore, he who despises these commandments of God, I do not see how he can have the faith by which to be invisibly sanctified. To this now belongs what the faithful prince of Ethiopia confesses, that he believed with all his heart in the Lord Jesus; nevertheless, as soon as he saw water, he said: "Behold, here is water; what keeps me from being baptized?"^Act
8.36 He does not say, I believe with all my heart, and I feel that I am justified and cleansed; why then should I be washed with water, having no filth remaining? Therefore, wherever there is true faith, sacraments are not contemned or refused, but more desired. For also Cornelius the centurion, after he had received the Holy Ghost, does not challenge Peter, who said: "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" ^{Act 10.47}

v.347

Peter was a faithful preacher of the gospel, a skilful teacher of the truth; therefore he deceives no man. And he teaches us by his own deed, that faith then specially provokes us to partake of the sacraments, when it is true in the faithful. Paul, his fellow-minister, agrees with him, saying: "Let everyone prove himself, and then let him eat of this bread, and drink of this cup;" ^{1Cor 11.28} but that proving is made by faith. Therefore it is not faith, but unthankfulness,[3138] that contemptuously rejects the sacraments.

Truly, I am not ignorant that very many have been sanctified without the use of visible sacraments, and are also sanctified today without them. But none of them despised or contemned them. They were not partakers of the sacraments, being driven to it by necessity; as there are some today who are held captives under the tyranny of antichrist and the Turk, and for the time, believe with their whole heart in the Lord Jesus. Therefore, the examples of these or others like them are no defence for those who may receive the sacraments, if they regard the ordinances of God, and set as much by them as they should, out of duty. I will note here, for the singular benefit of the readers, St. Augustine's disputation, because it notably fits our purpose. In Quaest. lib. in Levit. iii. cap. 84 he says:

"It is demanded, not without cause, whether invisible sanctification has any profit without those visible sacraments with which a man is visibly sanctified? Without doubt, this is absurd. For it may be said more tolerably, that this sanctification is not without them, than to say that it has no profit if it is without them, since all their profit consists in sanctification. But we must also weigh this: how it is rightly said that sanctification cannot be without the sacraments. For visible baptism did not profit Simon Magus, to whom invisible sanctification was lacking. But because this invisible sanctification profited those who had it, in like manner, those who were baptized also received the visible sacraments. And yet it is not shown that Moses himself was sanctified with visible sacrifices or oil. Yet, notwithstanding, he visibly sanctified the priests. But who would dare to deny that he was invisibly sanctified, his grace being so great, surpassing, and excellent? This may also be said of John the Baptist. For he was first a baptizer, before he was seen to be baptized.

v.348

We can by no means deny that he was sanctified; and yet we do not find that it was visibly wrought in him before he came to the ministry of baptizing.[3139] This may also be verified of the thief crucified with Christ, to whom the Lord said, as he hung with him on the cross, 'Today you shall be with me in Paradise.' ^{Luk 23.43} For he could not have partaken of so great a felicity, unless he had been invisibly sanctified. From this we gather that invisible sanctification has been present with some, and profited them, without the visible sacraments; we also gather that visible sanctification, wrought by visible sacraments, may be present without this invisible sanctification, yet it may not profit us. Nevertheless, the visible sacrament is not therefore to be contemned; for the contemner of it can by no means be invisibly sanctified. Thus Cornelius and those who were with him, when they appeared to be invisibly sanctified by the Holy Ghost poured into them, notwithstanding, were baptized. Nor is a visible sanctification, which had invisible sanctification going before it, considered superfluous." [3140] This far from Augustine.

v.349

With this disputation, another question also has some affinity or likeness — which is, Whether sacraments depend upon the worthiness of the ministers, and whether they are hindered in their force by the unworthiness of the ministers? Cyprian, in more than one place, contends that, "They cannot baptize who lack the Holy Ghost." [3141] This error springs from this: that he attributes too much to the ministry of baptism. He thinks that men are purified or cleansed by baptism: so that he thereby gathers that an unclean person cannot purify or cleanse, and therefore cannot baptize; and that baptism by an unclean person is not baptism. From this he derives anabaptism, or rebaptizing. But if that holy man had rightly and religiously distinguished between power and ministry, between the sign and the thing signified, between the outward and inward sanctification; he would undoubtedly have understood that we are invisibly sanctified by the mere grace of God, and that this inward sanctification is outwardly represented and sealed by the ministry. There he might have understood that sealed evidences may be published by an evil minister as well as by a good one. God's sacraments are [3142] to be referred to God, the author of them, who is faithful and true in all his ordinances, however false and faithless men may be. Although Judas was a thief, he preached and baptized; his doctrine and baptism was the doctrine and baptism of Christ, as well as Peter's and Andrew's, James' and John's. And no man ever doubted the perfectness and pureness both of the doctrine and baptism done by the ministry of Judas — as though those whom he taught and baptized were never taught or baptized. For he did not baptize in his own name, but in the name of Christ; he did not preach his own doctrine, but the doctrine of Christ. In the meantime, he is called by the Lord himself, not just a devilish man, but a very devil.

v.350

To conclude, the Lord out of his goodness, for his truth's sake and not for Judas' sake, worked in the faithful. Another's ungraciousness and maliciousness could not hinder this working of Christ, just as today, it does not hinder a whit. Truly, we must do what we can to have holy and unblameable ministers, so far as we are able to procure and bring it to pass by our care and diligence. Indeed, let us deprive and disgrace those whom we find behaving themselves unworthy of their function. But in the meantime, let us not doubt at all the pureness of the sacraments that were ministered to us while such men were in office, that is to say, in the same manner and form as the Lord instituted. Truly, just as the faithful do not fasten their minds on the elements, so they do not fasten their minds on the ministers. In all things, they look only to God, the author of all goodness, and to the end of those things which the Lord ordained.

St. Augustine handled this matter very diligently, excellently applying very effectual arguments to these things. I will record his words from Lib. iii. Contra Donatist. de Baptismo 3, cap. 10:

"The water is not unholy," he says, "or defiled, over which the name of the Lord is called upon, even though it is called upon by unholy and unclean persons; because neither the creature itself, nor the name, is unclean. And the baptism of Christ, consecrated with the words of the gospel, is holy, both by those who are unclean and in those who are unclean, even though they are defiled and unclean; because his holiness cannot be polluted, and a divine power is present in his sacraments, either to the salvation of those who use them well, or to the condemnation of those who use them ill. Does the light of the sun or of a candle, when it shines through a filthy sink, gather any uncleanness from there; and can the baptism of Christ be polluted with any man's wickedness? For if we apply our minds to the visible things under which sacraments are delivered, who does not know that they are corruptible? But if we ascend to what is figured by them, who does not see that they are incorruptible, even though the men by whom they are ministered, are either rewarded or punished according to their deservings?" [3143] And so forth.

v.351

I could allege many examples of this kind, if I thought them necessary. For I think that it is largely and plainly enough declared by them, that the perfectness and pureness of the sacraments are not to be esteemed by the worthiness or unworthiness of the ministers, but by the truth of God who instituted them. To Him be glory, power and dominion, for ever and ever. Amen.

5-8. THE EIGHTH SERMON: OF HOLY BAPTISM.

Of holy baptism; what it is; by whom, and when it was instituted, and that there is but one baptism of water. Of the baptism of fire. Of the rite or ceremony of baptism; how, of whom, and to whom it must be ministered. Of baptism by midwives; and of infants dying without baptism. Of the baptism of infants. Against anabaptism or re-baptizing;
and of the power or efficacy of baptism.

Now I have to treat particularly holy baptism, and the holy supper of the Lord; which may be done much more briefly, as we have already spoken largely about sacraments in general. May Christ our Lord open your minds, and guide my tongue to the glory and praise of his blessed name forever!

v.352

Baptism is a word fetched from the Greeks, who use both these words baptismus and baptisma, (both of which signify baptism), as the Latins also do; and baptism is a dipping, which is the word Tertullian willingly uses.[3144] For baptw (bapto) signifies to dip or dip in; and baptizo, (baptizo) to plunge or put far in. Whereupon, baptize is also used for plunge in, wash away, or cleanse; and baptizings in the scriptures are put for washings and purifyings, as it appears in St. Mark, the seventh chapter, and in Paul to the Hebrews, the ninth chapter. To be baptized with the same baptism, is proverbially spoken of someone who partakes of the same danger or misfortune; [3145] and to be baptized with blood, is to be imbued with blood.

They define baptism, for the most part, to be a token or recognition of our cleansing, indeed, of our initiation, whereby we are received into the church among the number of God's children. But describing the nature of baptism more at large, we say that it is a holy action instituted by God, and consisting of the word of God and the holy rite or ceremony by which the people of God are dipped in the water in the name of the Lord — in short, by which the Lord himself represents and seal to us our purifying or cleansing, gathers us into one body, and puts the baptized in mind of their duty. [3146]

In this description of baptism, these things seem chiefly to be considered: who instituted baptism; what things it consists of; whether it is simple (one thing), or drawn into many parts; what rite or ceremony of baptizing is delivered to the church; what the end and force of baptism is.

It was no man that instituted the sacrament of baptism, but God himself; yet it took the name by man; [3147] that is, it was ministered by John, who was called the Baptist from it. That we might understand this, the evangelists confirmed in many places that John's calling was from heaven.

v.353

We may gather thereby, that his ministry was from heaven. [3148] He says in express words: "He who sent me to baptize with water, said to me, Upon whomever you see the Holy Ghost," etc. ^{Joh 1.33} Also our Lord in the gospel, arguing that the baptism of John was not from men but from God, demands of the Pharisees: "The baptism of John, where was it, from heaven, or of men?"^{Mat 21.25} Therefore the godly, even today, receive baptism from the hands of God himself as it were, though they are baptized through the ministry of men. For the Lord, establishing his institutions by his Spirit, works salvation in the elect. Thus it must follow that the virtue or efficacy of baptism is not hindered by an evil minister: This has been already been spoken of elsewhere,[3149] and will be again later.

Truly, baptism was instituted and began at the time of John the Baptist, when he began to preach openly that the time was fulfilled, and that Christ was exhibited and given to the world. But the thing signified being present, the signs of things to come or of things which would be revealed, should no longer remain, but be changed into other signs. And circumcision was a sign of the blessed seed which was to come; I mean, of the Messiah himself, who by shedding his blood would bestow his blessing upon the whole world. Therefore, once he had come and would soon shed his blood, it was needful that circumcision be changed into baptism. This will be spoken of afterward.

Now, baptism consists of the sign and of the thing signified; of the word or promise of God and of the holy rite or ceremony. The sign is the outward action, that is, the sprinkling of water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, with calling upon the name of God. The promise or word of God is, "baptizing them:" "He that believes and is baptized will be saved." And so forth. We spoke abundantly enough about this in the sixth sermon.

v.354

Many in olden times have distinguished between the baptism of John, and the baptism of Christ and his apostles. [3150] For some of them deny that forgiveness of sins was comprehended in the baptism of John. But if we diligently view and weigh the doctrine of the holy scripture, we will find that the baptism of John, and of Christ and his apostles, is one and the same. Certainly, the doctrine of John, and of Christ and his apostles, is everywhere one and the same; for with one mouth they all preach the gospel, and by it, repentance and the remission of sins in the name of Christ. Let him who would, confer those things which John the Evangelist writes about the doctrine of John the Baptist in the first and third chapter, and what Luke writes about the doctrine of Christ and his apostles in the four and twentieth chapters of his gospel, and in the Acts of the Apostles, and he will say that all of their doctrine is one and the same. And baptism is set to their doctrine, as a seal is set to evidence. Who therefore believes that there are different seals for their doctrine, or different baptisms? [3151] St. John baptized with water: the Lord commended to his disciples no other element than water; nor did they baptize otherwise than with water.

They themselves baptized into Christ, into repentance and remission of sins. But St. Mark writes 0f John the Baptist, "John baptized in the wilderness, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." And St. Paul, speaking of the doctrine and baptism of John, says: "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying to the people, that they should believe on him who should come after, that is, on Jesus Christ." By these testimonies, who cannot gather that the baptism of John and of Christ are altogether the same? — unless perhaps this seems to any man to make a difference: that John baptized in him who was to come and would be revealed, but the apostles baptized into him who was already revealed.

v.355

But I do not see how such a little space of time can bring any difference, especially since John spoke so much, from the beginning of his preaching, about him who would be revealed. For he both pointed him out quickly with his finger, and he bore witness that he was present and revealed, and that he would come no more or be revealed. To this is added that Christ was baptized with none other than with the baptism of John. For if John's baptism were another baptism beside the baptism of the church of Christ, then it would follow that Christ was not baptized with our baptism, nor are we baptized in the baptism of Christ. But Christ sanctified with his body the baptism of John, and he granted to be baptized with us into the same fellowship; so that we are also baptized today, not with the baptism of John, but of Christ, who instituted baptism by John; and he himself consecrated it. Therefore in Matthew, the 28th chap., and in Mark, the 16th chap., Christ does not abrogate the baptism which John began; he does not institute a new one; but he commands us to continue and to minister the same one to those who believe: "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

Now, though John himself says, "I baptize with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Ghost:" ^{Mat 3.11} he marks no difference between his own baptism of water and Christ's baptism. But he attributes somewhat more to Christ, in which no man or minister had a part with him (for they erred who in times past baptized with fire); but he alone gives the baptism of fire, that is, the singular gifts of the Holy Ghost — but primarily, the use of tongues in the form of fire. For so this matter is expounded in the Acts, first by the Lord Christ himself and then by experience in the church. For the Lord says: "Do not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which you have heard from me. For John truly baptized with water; but you shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost after these few days." ^{Act 1.4-5} And consequently, on the day of Pentecost, they were baptized with the baptism of Christ; not with water again, but they were all filled with the Holy Ghost; cloven tongues, fiery as it were, sitting upon each one of their heads; and they began to speak with other tongues.

v.356

In the Acts, citizens of Samaria are baptized by Philip with the baptism of Christ in water, lawfully and fully. But afterward the very same people are baptized with the particular baptism of Christ, when by the laying on of hands by Peter and John, they receive the Holy Ghost. Not that they were altogether void of the gift of the Holy Ghost previously (for how could they believe without the Holy Ghost?); but because they were baptized with the visible baptism of fire beside, and they received the gift of tongues and other excellent graces. As it is also said of Cornelius who truly, being first baptized with fire, I mean, with the peculiar baptism of Christ, spoke with tongues, and afterward he was baptized with water. Contrariwise, those twelve disciples at Ephesus were first fully baptized with the baptism of John, and with the baptism of the water of the Christian church or congregation; and afterward, Paul the apostle laying his hands on them, they are not baptized with water again, but with fire. Luke bearing witness, says: "The Holy Ghost came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied."^Act
19.6

But this baptism of fire, and the visible ministration of the gifts, ceased together with miracles; nor is it usual or common in the church today. But the baptism of water remains, which is one and the same, whether it is ministered by the hands of John or by the apostles, or by diverse hands of the ministers of the church; for diverse hands do not make diverse baptisms. Therefore, we rightly believe that there is but one simple baptism of the faithful in all ages. For Paul says in express words: "There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father of all." ^{Eph 4.5-6}

To this also tends this saying of the same apostle: "I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; lest any should say that I had baptized in my own name." ^{1Cor 1.14} Upon this apostolic truth, the reverend fathers of the council of Constantinople made this confession in their creed: "I believe one baptism for the remission of sins." [3152] For there is but one church, one body, one head, and one king, prince, and high priest of the catholic church.

v.357

Now I have come to expound the rite or ceremony of baptism. It was simple and the same from the beginning, and not chargeable or burdensome to the church through immoderate ceremonies. John baptized in Aenon beside Salim, because much water was there; and he baptized in the name of Christ. The apostles did likewise. Whereby it remains for an undoubted truth, that the very best form of baptizing is that which is done by water, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost; for so the Lord commanded in the 28th chap. of Matthew. Do you ask how it comes to pass, that Luke in the Acts [3153] mentions that Peter and Paul baptized in the name of the Lord, and does not say that they baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost? I answer that the mystery of the Trinity is comprehended under the name of the Lord. For when the Lord said, "I and the Father are one," he that is baptized into the Lord is also baptized into the Father, and so in like manner into the Holy Ghost which is not divided from them; for truly, they have one and the same Spirit. For truly, Luke says that they were baptized by the apostles in the name of the Lord, whom the apostles baptized according to the Lord's institution. Some say Christ is the accomplishment or fulfilling, and he is the proper object of baptism. Therefore it is no marvel that the apostles baptized into the name of the Lord, who nevertheless were commanded to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost; for all the mysteries of baptism are laid forth for us in the only Son of God.

Truly we say both: "To baptize into the name of the Lord," and "To baptize in the name of the Lord." The use of speaking in the first manner is read in the 28th chap. of Matthew, and in Acts, 19th chap.; for both have eis to onoma, In nomen, "into the name." And also Tertullian interprets it, contra Praxeam, saying: "He commanded that we should be baptized into the Father and the Son," etc. [3154] Luke uses the latter manner in the Acts, 10 and 11, saying, en tir onomati (en tir onomati) and epi ty onomati (epi ty onomati) that is, "In the name."

v.358

Moreover, I told you in the sermon before last,[3155] what it means to baptize into the name, or in the name, of the Lord — that it is, to be enrolled into God's household, that the one who is baptized may now receive the name of God and be called the son of God, yes, and as it were, be registered into the roll of the children of God, citizens of the kingdom of heaven. Whereupon we have also names given to us in baptism, that as often as we hear ourselves named, we may remember our baptism and its mysteries. Nor is it a new thing or foreign to the scriptures, that names are given to us in baptism; for so it was also used in circumcision, which may be seen in Luke, 2nd chapter. [3156]

Furthermore, the question is asked, Whether we ought to baptize with these bare words, "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost;" or whether it is lawful to add or join something else? I think we ought to answer that it is the servant's duty to add nothing to his Lord's institution, but to diligently keep what he has delivered; yes, and to advisedly mark what the Lord himself and his apostles did in baptism, and to holily imitate it, so that in the church of God, as Paul has commanded, all things may be done decently and in good order. ^1Cor
14.40 But according to that most holy form of baptism set down and delivered, we see two things that are to be observed in holy baptism and in its use. First, the apostles and those who were with the apostles, each taught very significantly about the promises of God and faith in Christ; which is apparent in the Acts of the Apostles. It is therefore lawful, in the action or administration of baptism, to recite the promises of God, to repeat the belief, and require faith, either of those who are to be baptized, being of mature age, or else of those who bring the infants to be baptized. Moreover, when the Lord was baptized by John the Baptist in Jordan, he prayed; which Luke reports of him in his history of the gospel. It is therefore lawful in the use of baptism to pray, and to solemnly call upon the name of the Lord. At first the prayers were moderate and short, not of a great length and tedious; but in the process of time no measure was kept, not only in tedious blessings, but also in diverse ceremonies which those who came after added to it. It does not seem altogether unprofitable to repeat some things about this out of the old doctors.

v.359

Tertullian, in his book De Corona Militis, says:

"When we go to the font, there and also a little before in the church, the bishop laying his hand on us, we confess that we forsake the devil, his pomps, and all his angels. Then we are dipped in the water three times, not answering anything more than the Lord has set down in the gospel. When we are taken out of the font, we taste of milk and honey mingled together; and from that time, we abstain from daily washing for the span of a whole week." [3157]

We hear in this an utter denying or renouncing, a third dipping, a tasting of milk and honey, and after baptism an abstinence from bathing by a week's space. In his first book against Marcion, he also mentions oil.[3158] Truly, milk is fit for children. Those who are of mature age, being baptized, are likened to them. Beside this, in the old Testament there is often mention made of the land of promise flowing with milk and honey. Those things were first offered to be tasted by those who are baptized, to help them understand that Christ Jesus being their captain, and having passed over the Jordan, they might by an infallible hope have an inheritance in the land of promise.

St. Jerome witnesses that wine was mingled with milk, and says, Com. Lib. 15. ad Isaiam: "The Lord provokes us not only to buy wine, but also milk; ^{Isa 55.1} which signifies the innocence of infants. This type and custom is kept in the western churches even to this day, to give wine and milk to those who are born anew in Christ." [3159]

v.360

At this day, neither of them is given to infants, no, not even by those who would seem to be zealous maintainers of the old ceremonies. Meanwhile, they believe that omitting these ceremonies is without sin, and needs no satisfaction.

Now, we may also gather out of the sixth book of Augustine De Bap. Contra Donat. cap. 24. that they used diverse prayers, whatever they thought good about baptism.[3160] The same Augustine Contra Pelag. et Celest. Lib. ii. cap. 40. says: "In baptizing children, they first conjure and blow away all contrary power. Also the infants, by the words of those who bear them, answer that they renounce these." [3161] He also mentions this ceremony in Libro Primo de Nup. et Concup, ad Valer. cap. 20. and Libro ii. cap. 18. [3162] It is said in the ecclesiastical decrees, that the holy church throughout the world used that ceremony.[3163] Again, Augustine says, In Epistola ad Bonifa. 43., that the godfathers answer for the faith of the children, and confess their faith. "We ask those who offer the infants, 'Does he believe in God?' (being of that age, he does not know whether there is a God or not). They answer, 'He believes;' and so they answer every question which is asked." [3164]

v.361

The same Augustine, in his book de Trinitate. 15. cap. 26, also mentions oil, with which those who were baptized were anointed. [3165]

Rabanus Maurus, bishop of Mentz, a long time after Augustine,[3166] reckons up many more ceremonies of baptism. For in Libro de Institutione Cleri. i. cap. 27, he says:

"They are marked in the forehead and heart with the cross in baptism, that the devil, seeing that mark, may know that this sheep is not of his fold. Also, consecrated salt is put into the child's mouth, that being seasoned with the salt of wisdom, he may be free from the stink of wickedness, and no longer rot with the worms of sin. His ears and nostrils are touched with spittle, saying the word, Ephaiha, used by our Saviour, being added to it, so that by the virtue of Christ the high priest, his ears may be opened to receive the knowledge of God, and to hear the will and commandments of God. Then the child is blessed, and his breast anointed with holy oil, so that no relics of the enemy may lurk and remain in him. After this, he is baptized in the name of the holy Trinity, being dipped three times in the water."

And in his 28th chapter: "And being baptized, he immediately is signed in the forehead with the chrism, together with a prayer following, that he may be made an inheritor of the kingdom of Christ, and of Christ may be called a Christian." And in the 29th chapter: "After baptism there is delivered to the Christian a white garment, signifying pureness and innocence." [3167]

v.362

Also for this cause, the baptized were clothed with white garments, so that they might now remember that they were set free, and from being servants and bondslaves of the devil, they are made the freemen of Christ Jesus. Moreover, white colour in times past was consecrated to victories and triumphs. By this, it may seem that the white garment was therefore given to those who were baptized, that they might be mindful that while they live here on earth, they must continually fight and overcome in Christ; for the life of man is a warfare upon earth. And certainly, though offerings also began to be given to the baptized by the godfathers, that seems to have been borrowed from warfare. For by the offering or earnest (which we Switzers call Die ynbindeten [3168]) the one who is baptized is warned of his faith given in baptism, to always be mindful of what a captain he forsook, and into what garrison he was entertained, in which he must keep his faith given to his new captain Christ.

Many other things of this kind, which I find among writers of this latter age, I willingly pass over, lest I abuse your patience and gentleness. And who does not perceive that others of this kind, indeed countless new devices, are added to baptism today? Therefore, the safest and surest way is to build upon the first foundations of the blessed apostles. For if antiquity seems to bolster the last invented ceremonies, who dare deny that the authority of the apostles excels it many ways?

v.363

For the apostles were before all those who have lately invented and delivered those manifold ceremonies to be used in baptism.

This also comes into question: Whether we ought to baptize with plain clear water, or with consecrated water; and why the Lord commanded us to baptize with water? St. Cyprian, Epist. Lib. i. Epist. 12, says; "The water ought to be cleansed and sanctified beforehand by the priest, to wash away the sins of the man who is baptized." [3169] But the examples and testimonies of the holy scripture more prevail with me than the authority of Cyprian, or any other man, whoever it may be. This good man of God was also deceived in another place about the mystery of baptism; [3170] so that we must read his writings with judgment. The scripture tells us that John the Baptist, and the apostles and faithful disciples of Christ, baptized with water that was not consecrated. For what can be spoken or read more plainly, than that "John baptized in Jordan;" yes, that Christ himself and his apostles also baptized in the river Jordan? Where or how did the apostles consecrate the water of baptism in the Acts of the Apostles? When the eunuch showed him water as they journeyed, Philip baptized him out of that pure and clear fountain. Beside this, I declared in the sermon before last, how little pureness is in the common form of baptism, by which the font is consecrated. But if any man thinks that we ought to baptize with consecrated or holy water, and he does not understand "consecrated" to mean anointed, or prepared with crosses, or sanctified with charms, but chosen for holy uses, then I would never contend with him a whit. For the water of baptism is indeed holy — not in respect to the words recited, nor by crosses and other signs that are made — but because God instituted it, and in respect to the holy use and prayers of the godly. I spoke of this not long ago, when I treated the sanctification or consecration of the sacraments.

v.364

And Christ commanded his disciples to baptize with water for various reasons. For types or figures went before baptism in water — such as the flood, the Red sea through which the people of Israel passed, and the various cleansings and set washings mentioned in the law. Nor do the apostles of Christ ignore those things. For Peter says that Noah was saved in the water of the flood, but the wicked drowned in the water. Paul affirms that all our fathers were baptized by Moses in the cloud and in the sea. Therefore, mortification and vivification is prefigured. And truly, the principal badge of the new Testament is baptism, witnessing that full remission of sins is brought to us by Christ. And the holy prophets of God, by the mouth of the Lord foreshowing and promising this, have willingly shadowed out this inestimable benefit by water. Therefore, baptism must be ministered in water. This also notably served to represent the mystery: of which I spoke in my last sermon,[3171] when I treated the analogy or likeness of signs. And chiefly for these reasons, baptism ought to be ministered in water, and not in any other element.

There is also contention about whether the one who is baptized ought to be dipped or sprinkled with water once, or three times. Truly, the apostles have not commanded anything particular in this cause; so that it is free either to sprinkle or to dip. Sprinkling seems to have been used by the old fathers (for honesty and modesty forbid us to uncover the body; and the fragile state of infants for the most part cannot endure dipping), since sprinkling does as much as dipping. And it is the choice of the one who administers baptism, to sprinkle either once or three times, according to the custom of the church of which he is minister. Tertullian, contra Praxeam, says: "The Lord commanded us to baptize into the Father, and into the Son, and into the Holy Ghost. Not into one: for we are baptized not once but three times, at each name, into each person." [3172] And Gregory, answering Leonard the bishop, says: "A diverse custom is no hindrance to the holy church, if it is done in one faith. By dipping three times, we signify the mystery of Christ's lying in the grave three days." [3173]

v.365

Again, the reverend fathers in the fourth council held at Toledo allow but one dipping in baptism, and then immediately add this reason:

"And lest any have doubts about the mystery of this sacrament, why we allow but one dipping, he may see in this our death and resurrection. For dipping into the water is going down into the grave as it were; and coming up again out of the water is rising again out of the grave. Also, he may perceive that in this is shown the unity of the Godhead, and the Trinity of the persons. The unity is figured when we dip once; the Trinity, when we baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." [3174]

I do not allege this in order to stay myself upon man's testimony; but by man's testimony to show that we are free to follow that which most serves to edify the church.

Also, there is a question touching the place of baptism: Whether it is not lawful to baptize in any other place than in the church. I say, that the church is consecrated to ministries and the worship of God, and therefore that propriety [3175] of itself requires us to baptize openly in the church, But if necessity will not permit this, the baptism of Christ is tied to no place; for we hear that Philip baptized out of the fountain in the broad field. Yet let us take heed, that we do not make necessity a pretence for our lewd affections; but let all things in the church which pertain to baptism be clean. Let all superfluity be laid aside; let all filth and uncleanness be banished; let all things (as the apostle says) be done honestly and in order.

v.366

Touching the time, there is no law prescribed by the Lord. That is left free to the judgment of the godly. Those who believed the preaching of St. Peter at Jerusalem in the day of Pentecost, also the eunuch whom Philip baptized, likewise Cornelius the centurion, Paul the apostle at Damascus, Lydia the purple-seller (a religious or devout woman), the keeper of the prison, those of Philippi, and also other faithful men or women, as soon as they had tasted of the gifts and graces of Christ and believed his word, they immediately desired to be baptized: they did not put it off [3176] till another time. Therefore, those who do not linger in receiving baptism for themselves or their families, do very well. Delaying circumcision in his children did not fall out well for Moses. ^{Exo 4.24-25} Therefore, just as we grant that the time of the baptism is free, so it ought to be our duty to take heed that we not abuse our liberty; always being mindful of these words spoken by God: "The uncircumcised man-child, in whose flesh the foreskin is not circumcised, shall be cut off from his people, because he has broken my covenant." And we are not ignorant that baptism took the place of circumcision. Therefore, omitting baptism is not free. There were some in Cyprian's time who held the opinion that baptism should be received on the eighth day, in the manner of circumcision. But Cyprian, and the sixty-six bishops and elders who were with him in the council, ordained the contrary; namely, that everyone should receive baptism without any delay, and speedily procure it for their family. That place is extant in Epist. Lib. iii., Epist. viii. [3177]

v.367

Furthermore, Socrates the historiographer, Lib. v. ca. 22, says: "I know also another custom in Thessaly, according to which they baptize only on the days of Easter. By this it comes to pass that, except for a very small number, they die unbaptized." [3178] But after a time a law was made, that the infants of the faithful should not be baptized except at the feasts of Easter and Whitsuntide. They excepted the time out of necessity. We may read this in Decret. Syricii Pont. in Isidore; and in the epistles of Pope Leo to the bishop of Campania and Sicilia, which in order are reckoned to be fifty-seven and sixty-two.[3179] But the things that moved them to this may be easily disproved and overthrown. Truly, from the beginning, the time of baptism was not so limited. Nevertheless, that law of baptizing the faithful at the feast of Easter and Pentecost was renewed by Pipine, Charles, Lodovick, and Lothar, French kings, and was spread as far as their dominions reached.[3180] Many things are sung in the service of the papists at the time of Easter and Whitsuntide, which are not understood except by this law and custom. At length it fell into disuse, and the faithful were baptized as occasion and opportunity first served.

This also is in controversy: Who ought to baptize, and what does the baptizer work? I will speak of the last, first.

The baptizer visibly gives the sacrament of regeneration, and a testimony of the remission of sins; but by his Spirit, the Lord invisibly regenerates, and forgives sins, and seals the regeneration.

v.368

John and the apostles baptize with water: Christ baptizes with the Holy Ghost; not only with the visible sign of fire and the gift of tongues, but he alone gives all spiritual gifts. That they might expressly declare this, the ancient fathers diligently distinguished between power and ministry. For Augustine says, Tract, in John 5:

"It is one thing to baptize by way of ministry, another thing to baptize by power. Our Lord Jesus Christ, if he would, could have given power to any servant to give his baptism, as in his stead; and he could translate or remove from himself the power to baptize, and place it in one of his servants, and give as great force to this baptism which was translated or removed into his servant, as it would have if given by the Lord. He would not do so for this purpose: that the hope of those who were baptized should hang on him, by whom they acknowledge they are baptized. Therefore, he would not have a servant settle his hope in a servant. And therefore, cried the apostle, when he saw men willing to put their hope and trust in him: 'Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?' Paul therefore baptized as a minister, not as the power itself; but the Lord baptized as the power."

And again:

"John the Baptist learned by the dove, 'Upon whomever you see the Spirit descending, like a dove, and tarry still upon him, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Ghost.'' Therefore, O dove, let not deceivers seduce you, who say, We baptize. O dove, acknowledge what the dove taught: 'This is he who baptizes with the Holy Ghost.' By the dove it is known that it is he; and do you think that you are baptized by his power, by whose ministry you are baptized? If you are of that mind, then you are not yet in the body of the dove; and if you are not in the body of the dove, it is no marvel, because you do not have simplicity; for simplicity especially is figured by the dove. John learned by the simplicity of the dove, that this is he who baptizes with the Holy Ghost." [3181]

v.369

Furthermore, the minister of the church, being lawfully ordained, ought to baptize. The Donatists contend that none can baptize except someone who is pure and holy. They boldly avouched that any baptism administered by a lewd-living minister, or who was defiled with wicked vices, was fruitless and void of effect. Augustine gravely disputed against them, and convinced them by the truth of the scripture. In his 166th epistle he says:

"See how perversely and wickedly that is spoken, which you usually say: Because if he is a good man, he sanctifies the one whom he baptizes; but if he is an evil man, and the one who is baptized does not know it, then God sanctifies him. If this is true, then men should rather wish to be baptized by ministers unknown to be evil, than by those who are known to be good, so that they may be sanctified by God rather than by man. But may this madness be far from us. Why then do we not speak truth and are rightly wise? Because grace always belongs to God, for the sacrament is his, and only the administration is committed to man. If he is good, he clings to God, and works with God; but if he is evil, God works by him the visible form of the sacrament, but God himself gives the invisible grace. Let us all be wise in this, and let there be no schisms or divisions among us." [3182]

v.370

The same Augustine, in his third book contra Literas Petiliani,[3183] cap. 49, plentifully sets forth the same matter. And because we have also handled it in the end of our sermon before last, it is needless to speak one thing twice.

Here is a question objected to us, touching the baptism of midwives: Whether women midwives should and may baptize at the point of necessity — that is, when the infant is in jeopardy of dying before he comes to be baptized at the hands of the ecclesiastical minister? We answer, that baptism is a sacrament of the church, and that women are forbidden to minister in the church; therefore they neither can nor should baptize, just as they are by no means permitted to teach. The laws of the apostle are well known. "But I do not allow a woman to teach," says Paul, "nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." ^{1Tim 2.12} The same law is repeated by the same apostle, in first Corinthians, fourteenth chapter, and confirmed by God's law. Man's testimonies agree with God's. For Tertullian, in his book De Velandis Virginibus, says: "It is not permitted for a woman to speak in the church, much less to teach or to baptize, nor to offer; nor to take to herself the execution of any man's office, much less the priest's." [3184] This also is repeated in the fourth council of Carthage,[3185] where Aurelius Augustine is said to have been present.

v.371

Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis in Cyprus, disputing against diverse heresies and confuting Marcion, says: "He also gives women leave and licence to baptize." [3186] He says as much of the Quintilian and Peputian heretics.[3187] Reasoning against the heretics Collyridiani, he also says:

"If women were commanded to sacrifice to God, or to execute any regular thing in the church, then Mary should rather sacrifice in the new Testament, who was made worthy to carry in her own arms the King of all kings, the heavenly God, the Son of God; whose womb was made a temple and dwelling for the dispensation of the Lord in the flesh, being prepared for that purpose through the bountifulness and marvellous mystery of God. But it did not so please God. And neither was it committed or granted to her to baptize; otherwise her Son might have been baptized by her rather than by John."

The same author adds:

"And truly there is in the church an order of women-ministers called women-deacons; but they are not permitted to sacrifice, nor to attempt anything except for reverence sake of women-kind, or for the hour of bathing, or visiting, or for affection and travel." [3188]

Though they offer in objection to this, the example of Zipporah the Midianite, wife of Moses, who circumcised her son in the time of necessity, ^{Exo 4.24-25} that does not establish a common law; just as the example of Deborah does not make all women judges.

v.372

For there are many peculiar things done in the scripture, that if any man set abut drawing general rules and common laws from them, he would bring in countless absurdities. What if Moses, in the same place, only describes his wife's deed as being moved to perform this ministry to God out of anger and displeasure, and not for religion's sake? For, grudging [3189] against her husband, yes, and against God, she took the foreskin of her son which was cut away, and in reproach, threw it at his father, at her husband's feet, saying: "You are a bloody husband to me." As if to say: Ich habb woll ein bluotigman an dirr. [3190] And though the angel was appeased with Moses because he seemed to allow the deed of the woman as well pleasing to God, that is more to be imputed to the mercy of God, than to the righteousness of the woman's deed. It grievously displeased God that David had slain Uriah, and moreover had taken Bathsheba as his wife; and yet, of His goodness and singular mercy, He granted to call Solomon, who was born of Bathsheba, by the name Jedidiah,[3191] because the Lord loved him. So the gracious Lord is also reconciled with Moses, who either by his own negligence or through the fault of his Midianite wife, lingered in the circumcision of his son, against the law, longer than was fitting. And God is content with, and accepts in good part, the circumcision which the woman performed from indignation rather than for religion. Yet He would not, following her example prevented, have other women circumcise.

But, you say, baptism ministered by a woman prevents the peril of death or eternal damnation into which the infant would fall if he departs this world without baptism. My answer is that when the infant, newly delivered out of his mother's womb, departs with too speedy a death, so that the parents cannot (however they might desire it), bring him to be baptized by the minister of the church, this pinch of necessity, truly, is not to the damnation or death of the infant. For being received into the covenant by the grace of God, he is delivered from death through the blood of the Son of God. We are not destitute of testimonies of scripture duly serving to prove this.

v.373

It was not lawful in the law to circumcise an infant before the eighth day. And it is certain that very many departed out of this world before the eighth day. Yet, meanwhile, if any man-child had departed on the third or fourth day after his birth, no condemnation was imputed to him. For otherwise David — a very sound man in religion, and one who loved his children dearly, and one who was very desirous of the salvation of his household — when his child was dead, which was begotten and born to him by Bathsheba, could not have shown himself so cheerful to his courtiers. He said to them, among other things, that he would go to the dead child, namely, into the land of the living.^{2Sam 12.23} Also, if it was no danger to women-children to die uncircumcised (for they were saved without circumcision), then truly, neither is it damnable for men-children to die unbaptized at the point of necessity. For we have often said that holy baptism entered in and took the place of circumcision. To this pertain the testimonies out of the law and the prophets. In the law, the Lord protests more than once, that he has a most certain care and regard of infants. In Jonah he expressly professes that he has a consideration and a respect for those who have not yet come to the years of discretion: for the Lord spared the most famous city of Nineveh partly for their sakes. [3192]

You say, These testimonies of the old Testament do not pertain to us all, who live under the new Testament. I answer that God, after Christ had come in the flesh, is not more rigorous to us than he was before Christ's coming. For if it were so, should we then say that Christ did not come to fulfil, but to weaken and abolish the promises of God? After all, in times past among those of old, the grace and the promise were effectual in necessity without the sign. But now, among us, being without the sign, these promises somehow become void and of no force?

Therefore, trusting to God's mercy and his truth and undoubted promise,[3193] I believe that infants, departing out of this world by too precipitous a death, before they can be baptized, are saved by the mere mercy of God, in the power of his truth and promise through Christ, who says in the gospel: "Suffer the little ones to come to me; for of such is the kingdom of God."^{Mat 19.14}

v.374

Again: "It is not the will of my Father who is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish." ^{Mat 18.14} For truly God, who cannot lie, has said: "I am your God, and the God of your seed after you." ^{Gen 17.7} Whereupon St. Paul also affirms that they are born holy who are begotten of holy parents: not that any holy thing is born of flesh and blood; for "that which is born of the flesh is flesh:" ^{Joh 3.6} but because that holiness and separation from the common seed of men is of promise, and by the right of the covenant. For we are all by nature and natural birth born the sons of wrath, death, and damnation; but Paul attributes a special privilege to the children of the faithful, with which by the grace of God, those who by nature were unclean, are purified. So the same apostle in another place gathers holy branches of a holy root; and again elsewhere he says: "If by the sin of one many are dead, much more the grace of God and the gift of grace, which by one man Jesus Christ, has abounded to many."^{Rom 5.15} And therefore Augustine did not doubt to say:

"As all who die, die in no other way than in Adam; even so, all who are made alive, are not made alive except in Christ. And upon this, whoever says to us that anyone, in the resurrection of the dead, can be made alive other than in Christ, he is to be abhorred and detested as a common plague of the Christian faith." [3194] Ad Hiero. epi. 28.

Some object that,

By this means, the use of baptism is made void and is quite taken away; indeed, Pelagianism has sprung up again, which St. Augustine, with many other learned and holy men, beat down and kept under with such great travail. And God falsely spoke when He said: "The soul, whose foreskin is not circumcised, shall be cut off from his people, because he has broken my covenant." ^Gen
17.14 Jesus falsely spoke when he said: "Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless a man is born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." ^{Joh 3.5} For if these statements are true, and children are not baptized, then truly, the sequel is that those dying without baptism are not saved.

v.375

I answer that by no means do I weaken holy baptism, much less take it quite away, when I defend that infants in the pinch of necessity, not being guilty of the contempt of God or wicked negligence, are not damned though they die unbaptized. For then salvation would be tied to the sign, and the promise of God would be made void — as though that promise alone, without the sign at the point of necessity, were vain, and could work nothing; as if the hand of God were shortened and bound to the sign, as it were. For otherwise I teach, by all means, that infants are to be baptized, that baptism is not to be delayed negligently, nor put off maliciously. But in the meantime, if they depart unbaptized by too speedy death, I exhort and charge that a good hope and confidence is to be had in the truth and mercy of the Lord, who promises in the law and the gospel, that he is the God of young infants, and that his will is that not so much as one of his little ones should perish.

We have nothing to do with Pelagius and Pelagians. Nor are we ignorant what St. Augustine has written to Jerome in this cause, Epist. 28.

"Whoever says that infants who leave this life, not having partaken of Christ's sacrament of baptism, are quickened and made alive in him, this man doubtless sets himself against the preaching of the apostles, and he condemns the whole church. It is for this cause that they [i.e., the church] hasten and run with their children to have them baptized: for without doubt, they believe that they could be made alive in Christ by no other means." [3195]

And against the Pelagians, Epist. 106: "The apostolic seat, dealing against Pelagius, curses those who said that unbaptized infants have life everlasting." [3196]

v.376

The same Augustine, Lib. i. De Ani. etc. cap. 9, to Renatus, disputes against Vincentius Victor, who grants that infants are enslaved to original sin, yet, they are nevertheless saved though they are not baptized. Against them, he produces this saying of our Saviour: "Unless a man is born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." [3197] But we, who condemn both Pelagius and Pelagians, affirm both those things which they deny; namely, that infants are born in original sin, and therefore the sanctification of Christ is necessary for them, without which they are not saved. Again, we defend and maintain that the same infants ought to be baptized if it is possible, though by the right of the covenant, they belong to the body of Christ and are sanctified by the blood of Christ. Pelagius taught that infants should not be baptized; for he held the opinion that they are without any fault, or any sin, blame, and offence. Therefore, this wicked and ungodly man did not acknowledge either our own corruption, or the benefit which God has performed by, in, and through Christ. Yet you can find neither of these in our assertion and doctrine. Therefore, we take no part with the Pelagians. St. Augustine, in that same epistle to St. Jerome, expressly says: "You are not of those who say that no guilt is drawn from Adam, from which the infant should be washed by baptism." [3198] And against Julian also, Lib. i. cap. 2, [3199] he proves by the statements of the holy fathers, that infants have original sin; and he gathers from this, that infants should therefore be baptized, because they have sin. The Pelagians gathered the clean contrary: infants have no sin; therefore they are not to be baptized. For the council of Carthage writes thus to Innocent: "The Pelagians deny that infants are to be baptized: for these, they say, did not perish, nor is there anything to be saved; because there is nothing in them that is corrupt or wicked," etc. [3200]

v.377

But we believe that infants are born in sin, yes, and that they are born the children of wrath, and are also corrupt and wicked. Moreover, we believe that the Son of God was born without sin of a pure virgin, to fulfil and confirm God's promises — which do not exclude infants from salvation, but let them in as joint partners in the league; therefore, we hold and defend that they are to be baptized. And therefore, we simply cannot allow this reason gathered from Augustine:

"Outside of the fellowship of Christ, no man comes to life. But by baptism, we are joined as members into the body of Christ, and have fellowship with him. Therefore, infants who are not baptized are outside the fellowship of Christ, and they are therefore condemned." [3201]

For we do not deny that we are grafted into the body of Christ by partaking of the sacraments (as we declared in our last sermon about sacraments, immediately before this one). So too, we have shown elsewhere, too often already and very largely, that the beginning of our union or fellowship with Christ is not wrought by the sacraments. Rather, the same uniting or fellowship which was founded and grounded upon the promise, and by the grace of God through the Holy Ghost, was indeed communicated to us and ours before the use of the sacraments; it is merely continued and sealed to us by participating in or receiving the sacraments. Therefore, though an infant dies without baptism, and by necessity is shut out from having fellowship with Christ,[3202] so that he is neither a partaker nor yet sealed by the visible sign of the covenant — yet, he is not altogether an alien or stranger from Christ, to whom he is fastened with the spiritual knot of the covenant, by virtue of which he is saved.

v.378

The place in Genesis 17, alleged about cutting off the uncircumcised from the people of God, in consideration of the time, it fitly corresponds to those who are of mature age and well grown in years, and not to babes or infants. This is seen in Moses, whom the angel of the Lord, would have slain [3203] for neglecting circumcision, or for delaying it longer than was lawful, as he testifies about himself. Nor am I ignorant that certain old interpreters [3204] do not apply that to Moses, but to Eleazar, the son of Moses. But the very course of the history and of its circumstances, sufficiently prove that the danger lay on the father's neck, and not on the son's. What if a reason were added in the words of the law, which by no means corresponds to infants? "Therefore the uncircumcised shall perish," he says, "because he has broken my covenant." So, if we consider that circumcision in the very same place was commanded not only to infants, but to those who were of mature age, such as to Abraham, Ismael, and others desiring to be visibly joined into the fellowship of God, we should not marvel that destruction is threatened to the disobedient. For if any man today understands and knows the Lord's ordinance comprehended in His words, "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved," and yet he will not be baptized, but boasts that faith is sufficient for him unto salvation, then that baptism is irrelevant; for he has despised the ordinance of God, and is condemned as a rebel and an enemy [3205] of God.

Furthermore, that passage from John 3 is not to be understood about the outward sign of the holy baptism, but simply of the inward and most spiritual regeneration of the Holy Spirit. When Nicodemus did not understand this perfectly, the Lord figured and made it manifest to him by parables about water and the spirit, that is to say, about the wind or the air, by elements that are very basic and familiar. For later he adds: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh," etc. Again, "The wind blows where it wishes," etc.; this must be meant about the air; for the other part of the comparison follows: "So is every one who is born of the Spirit." ^{Joh 3.6,8}

v.379

Furthermore he adds: "If I tell you of earthly things, and you do not believe; how will you believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" ^{Joh 3.12} But the argument which he put forth was not altogether earthly; for this is the argument of his whole disputation: "Unless a man is born from above he cannot see the kingdom of God:" ^{Joh 3.3} that is to say, unless a man is renewed, and as it were born again by the Spirit of God, which is given from above (that is to say, poured into him from heaven), he cannot be saved. The doctrine is altogether heavenly; but the means by which he delivered, declared, and presented this heavenly doctrine, is earthly. For by things taken from the earth, he shadowed out to man (who is coarse in understanding and earthly), a spiritual and heavenly thing, and laid it open to the view of his eyes, as it were. As the qualities of bodies are often changed by water and air, and as the effect and working of water and the air in bodies is marvellous; so likewise is the working of the Holy Ghost in the soul of man, which it changes, purifies, and quickens, etc. For so the Lord himself afterward expounds another parable about the Spirit (as I just told you).

Because all old writers, for the most part, understood water to mean sacramental water, that is, holy baptism, we also accept this interpretation. For we willingly grant that baptism is necessary to salvation, in those who are of mature age as well as babes or infants, so that necessity does not constrain the contrary. For otherwise, if with St. Augustine we stubbornly set about condemning infants by this passage, then truly we would also be compelled to condemn those who are baptized, if they depart this life without partaking of the body and blood of Christ. For St. Augustine, infected with a similar error, argues that the sacrament of the Lord's Supper be put into the infants' mouth,[3206] or else they are in danger of death and damnation,[3207] because it is written: "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you."^{Joh 6.53}

v.380

Therefore, he places these two sentences in this same order: "Unless a man is born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot see the kingdom of God;" and, "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," etc. So that if you obstinately persist in St. Augustine's argument, truly you would condemn the whole church today, which denies the Lord's Supper to infants. But if a suitable interpretation is allowed in this, and the same place and reasoning are not disagreeable to it, why are you so rigorous and obstinate in another?

What would you say if, in this opinion, Augustine himself does not satisfy you, not in all and every point? A layman might think it is a venial sin [3208] if he baptizes in time of necessity. He cannot tell whether it is reverently said that baptism ministered by a layman ought to be iterated or redone.[3209] But how much better and safer it would have been, letting the necessity of baptism pass, which has no lawful basis, in order to hold the opinion that infants, if they are not prevented by death, should be baptized by the minister of the church, in the church, with their parents procuring it at the first opportunity? And to hold that too speedy and sudden a death (which we call "the pinch of necessity") is no hindrance to salvation for those who are not yet baptized? Augustine trembles and is afraid to determine the punishment of damned infants for not being baptized; nor does he truly know what he might say with certainty. In his first book, De Anim. etc., cap. 9, he says: "Let no man promise to unbaptized infants a middle place of rest or felicity, whatever it is, or wherever it is, between hell and the kingdom of heaven." [3210] But that statement, for the most part, is accepted by all men. Thus the infants are buried in the churchyard in a certain middle place between the profane and holy ground.

v.381

And again Augustine writes, contra Julianum Pelagianum, Lib. v. cap. 8: "Those infants, of all others, will come in the easiest damnation." And immediately he adds: "Although I cannot describe what kind and how great that damnation will be, I dare not say it would be better for them not to be born, than to be there." [3211] And again, in his epistle to St. Jerome, 28, he says: "When I come to determine about the punishments of little infants, believe me, I am driven into narrow straits, nor do I find anything at all to answer." [3212] Here also may be added that which he disputes about in Lib. iv. contra Donatist. cap. 22 and 23, touching the thief who was crucified with Christ. Among other things, Augustine says: "Baptism, then, is fulfilled invisibly, when it is not contempt of religion, but the point of necessity, that excludes and shuts one out from visible baptism." [3213] Why then should we not also believe that baptism is invisibly performed in infants who depart by too timely a death, since it is not contempt of religion, but the extremity of necessity which cannot be avoided, that excludes and bars them from visible baptism? And since many today grant that any man of mature age may be saved without baptism, at the point of necessity, if he has a desire for baptism, why then may not the godly desires of the parents acquit their newly born infants from guiltiness? But this much up to here.

Touching this also, there has been bitter jarring, both in times past and in our age, concerning who is to be baptized. Pelagius in times past, denied that infants should be baptized, which we just heard.

v.382

Before Pelagius' time, Auxentius Arianus,[3214] with his sectaries, denied that infants are to be baptized.[3215] Some in the time of St. Bernard denied the same, as we may gather from his writings.[3216] The anabaptists today, the kind of men raised up of Satan to destroy the gospel, likewise deny it.[3217] But the catholic truth, which is delivered to us in the holy scriptures, simply pronounces that all those are to be baptized whom God acknowledges as his people, and it pronounces that they are partakers of purification or sanctification, or the remission of sins. For in this entire treatise concerning the sacraments I have already shown and now show that baptism is a badge or emblem of the people of God, and an assured token of our purification by Christ. Therefore, since the young babes and infants of the faithful are in the number or reckoning of God's people, and partakers of the promise touching purification through Christ; it follows of necessity, that they are to be baptized, as well as those who are of mature age who profess the Christian faith.

But there, a busy disputation begins. Who are the people of God, and partakers of the remission of sins by Christ? The disputation touches the secret election of God, and other hard questions that depend on this. But we can rid our hands of this briefly and simply. We say that the people of God are acknowledged either by men's confession of the Christian faith, or else by the bountiful promise of God.

By men's confession — for we acknowledge them to be the children of God, who now being grown to mature age, openly confess the true God, that God is their God, and that Jesus Christ is their Saviour. But this confession is made either unfeignedly, or hypocritically: unfeignedly when we confess, as St. Peter did, "You are Christ, the Son of the living God;" or when the eunuch says, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." But this can be hypocritical, as when Simon Magus says in the Acts of the Apostles, that he believes in Jesus Christ.

v.383

Whether a man believes unfeignedly or hypocritically when he makes an open confession of his faith in Christ (God alone sees the secrets of the heart; for he alone is rightly believed to be the searcher of men's hearts), it does not belong to us, if he makes a right confession, to separate or cast him away from the people of God. For Philip did not cast off or push away Simon Magus; but upon his confession, he received him as a faithful man, and baptized him as a faithful man, even though indeed, and before God, he was a hypocrite. In the first sermon of this decade, [3218] we declared that hypocrites are also reckoned among those in the church, till they are revealed. But concerning remission of sins, only those among them of mature age, who unfeignedly believe, will obtain it. This is often shown in another place. St. Peter said to Simon Magus, even though he was baptized, "You have neither part nor fellowship in this business, because your heart is not right in the sight of God." ^{Act 8.21}

Furthermore, by the free and bountiful promise of God, and not only by the confession of men, we esteem and acknowledge the people of God. For to whomever the Lord promises that he will be their God, and whomever he receives and acknowledges as his own, those no man may exclude from the number of the faithful, without a horrible offence. And God promises that he will not only be the God of those who confess him, but of infants also; he promises to them his grace and remission of sins. Who therefore, challenging the Lord of all things, would yet deny that infants belong to God, are his, and that they are made partakers of purification through Christ? And that God acknowledges infants for his own, and sanctifies them, is made manifest by the very sum of the covenant. "I will make my covenant between me and you," says the Lord to Abraham, "and your seed after you in their generations, by an everlasting covenant; that I may be God to you, and to your seed after you." ^{Gen 17.7} Circumcision is added as a sign of sanctification, which I spoke about abundantly when I treated circumcision in order.[3219] Nor is there any reason why any man should fear that the promise is abrogated with circumcision and the ceremonies of the law, and that the covenant is broken and annihilated by the coming of Christ.

v.384

For we said just now, that Christ came to fulfil the promises of God, not to break them. ^{Mat 5.17} And therefore, the Lord in the gospel speaks of infants, that is to say, those who have not yet confessed the faith, and says: "Suffer little children to come to me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God." ^{Mat 19.14} And though it is said "of such," and not "of those;" yet no man is so ignorant as not to understand that there is a likeness between those things which are compared between themselves. Therefore, if the kingdom of God belongs to those who are of mature age because they have become like little children, then surely it follows of necessity, that the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven also belongs to infants or little children. For it follows in the gospel: "Whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall in no way enter it." ^{Mar 10.15} Therefore it behoves the heirs of the kingdom of God to first be infants or little children. And who does not know that no man, unless he is sanctified and purified, will enter into the kingdom of heaven? Children enter into the kingdom of God: therefore they are purified, namely, by the grace of God. For by their nature and birth they are unclean, and sinners; but for Christ's sake they are purified,[3220] who said that he "came to seek and save that which was lost." ^{Luk 19.10} Paul also expressly testifies that "by the sin of one, Adam, sin came on all men to condemnation; and that by the righteousness of one, Christ, good came upon all men to the righteousness [3221] of life." ^{Rom 5.18} It is therefore certain that infants are partakers of purification and remission of sins through Christ, even though they do not confess remission of sins. What, does the Lord not say in the gospel, "It is not the will of your Father who is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish?" ^Mat
18.14 Again: "He who receives such a young child in my name, receives me; but he who offends one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better that a millstone were hung about his neck," etc. ^{Mat 18.6} See therefore, and "take heed, that you do not despise one of these little ones: for I say to you, that their angels in heaven always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven."^{Mat 18.10} Behold, what could be more manifestly spoken? It is not the will of my heavenly Father that infants should perish. Therefore he receives them freely into grace and favour, even though they have not yet confessed.

v.385

Moreover, he that receives such a little one (namely, whom he set in the midst of them) for Christ's sake, is said to receive Christ himself. Look, he attributes to the receivers of infants, what he promised to the receivers of the prophets. He adds: "But he who offends one of these little ones who believe in me..." He manifestly calls the little ones, who are not yet able to confess, believers, because, of his grace, he reputes them to be believers. Nor is this any wonder or strange thing, since God indeed imputes righteousness for faith, to those who are of mature age. For in all points, righteousness, acceptation, or sanctification, is free and imputative, so that the glory of his grace might be praised. Furthermore, his will is that little ones should not be despised, much less be cast out from among the number of the saints. Indeed, he affirms that angels are given to them to be their keepers. Though they are ministers of God's majesty, yet they are given and granted to little children to be their guard. So that hereby we may judge what great store the Lord sets by infants, and learn not to wipe them from the score of God's people, to whom the inheritance of life is due. We attribute nothing here to the birth which is after the flesh, but all things are attributed to the grace and promise of God. Now it is evident by all these testimonies, that the infants of the faithful are to be baptized, as well as those of mature age who confess the faith.

Now, on the contrary, the anabaptists contend that none is to be baptized, except he alone who is able both to be taught, and to believe, yes, and to confess his faith also. And to confirm this, they bring these sayings of our Saviour, out of St. Matthew, "Go therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father," etc. ^{Mat 28.19} Out of Mark, "Go into the whole world, and preach the gospel to all creatures: he that believes and is baptized, shall be saved," etc. ^{Mar 16.15-16} Behold, they say, teaching goes before baptism; therefore, those who are not able to be taught should not be baptized. Furthermore, to believe goes before, and to baptize follows after: infants do not believe, therefore they are not to be baptized. Upon all these, they heap examples out of the Acts of the Apostles, those which prove that it is the faithful, that is to say, those who confess their faith, who were baptized by the apostles.

v.386

They also reckon up the newly-instructed Christians [3222] of olden times, for whom (they say) if they had baptized infants, no place had been given. I answer: If the order of the words makes any difference in this matter, we also have some in readiness to serve our turn. For in Mark we thus read: "John baptized in the desert, preaching the baptism of repentance." ^{Mar 1.4} In this place we see that baptizing goes before, and preaching follows after. Yes, I would also show that the place which they allege for themselves out of Matthew, also makes an argument for us. For Matthew's words are these: "All power is given to me both in heaven and on earth," says the Lord. "Go therefore," and maqhteusate (matheteusate), that is to say, discipulate (if I may coin a word); that is, make me disciples, or gather together all nations. Yes, he also teaches them the ways and means to gather disciples for him out of all nations, or gather all nations, by baptizing and teaching them. By baptizing and preaching, you will gather together a church for me. And he sets them out severally, one after the other, sweetly and shortly, saying: "Baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things which I have commanded you."

Now, therefore, baptism goes before teaching. But we do not gather from this, that only those nations which never heard anything before about God and the Son of God and the Holy Ghost, are to be baptized; nor would the apostles have borne that. But we allege these things to declare how fickle the foundation is on which the anabaptists build. And we simply say that what these men imagine, is not true: that the Lord commanded his apostles only to baptize them whom they taught. Nor does he point out here, who are to be baptized in the whole world;[3223] but he speaks of those who are of mature age, and of laying the first foundations of faith and of the church among the gentiles, being as yet rude and altogether ignorant in religion. Those who are of mature age are able to hear preaching or teaching: infants are not. Those who are of mature age are able to believe and confess: infants are not. Therefore, he says nothing here about infants.

v.387

Yet they are not therefore debarred from baptism. It is a general law, "He that does not labour, let him not eat;" ^{2The 3.10} but who is so cruel and unnatural to think that therefore infants are to be starved to death? The Lord, when true religion began to be spread abroad, sent his apostles into all nations, to those who were ignorant of God and also strangers to the testaments of God. Truly, it behoved them not to baptize first, and teach afterward; but to teach first, and then baptize. If today we were to convert or turn the Turks to the faith of Christ, truly we should teach them first, and afterward baptize the servants of Christ and those who would yield themselves into his subjection. So the Lord himself, in times past, first renewed his covenant with Abraham, and instituted circumcision as a seal of the covenant; and Abraham was circumcised after that. But when he understood that infants were also partakers in the covenant, and that circumcision was the seal of the covenant, he afterward not only circumcised Ismael, being thirteen years of age, and all who were born in his own house, but also infants, among whom we reckon Isaac. Even so, the faithful who by the preaching of the gospel were turned from gentilism, and confessed Christ, were baptized. When they understood that their infants were counted among the people of God, and that baptism was the badge of God's people, they also had their infants baptized. As it is written of Abraham, that he circumcised all the male children in his house; so we often read in the Acts and writings of the apostles, that after the master of the house has turned to Christ, the whole family is baptized.

But concerning the newly-instructed Christians in olden times, they came from the Gentiles daily into the church, were instructed in the principles of faith (being ignorant of them), and afterward they were baptized. But the ancient fathers themselves nevertheless also baptized the infants of the faithful — which we will shortly declare.

Nor do they lawfully reason, when they conclude in this way: He who believes and is baptized, will be saved; infants do not believe; therefore they are not to be baptized. For again, it is certain that it is spoken of those who are of mature age, as in Matthew.

v.388

And because he requires faith and confession of faith by those who are of mature age, it does not follow from this that he requires the same of infants. For he accounts infants as his own, of his mere grace and free promise, without their confession. So that from the contrary, we reason thus: Those who believe are to be baptized (which our adversaries also confess); infants believe, for God reckons them among the faithful, as I manifestly proved before. Therefore, infants are to be baptized.

They object that infants do not understand the mystery of baptism; and therefore it is not only repugnant to religion, but to common sense and reason, to baptize infants; for to baptize an infant is to baptize a log, since neither of them has the use of reason. But these filthy knaves, let their tongues run at random against the very majesty of God. God commanded us to circumcise the infants; and circumcision contains high mysteries, which infants do not understand. But has God ordained anything against reason and common sense? Go, you false knaves, go with your blasphemies to the place which you deserve! It is a most filthy deed, yes, and more than barbarous, to compare infants to logs; for we already taught you out of the gospel, what great store God sets by infants. But men who now begin to use sound reason, are diligently and earnestly to be taught and admonished to remember that they are baptized, and to endeavour, by calling on the name of the Lord, in all points to be answerable in life and conversation to their promise and profession. For Abraham instructed his son Isaac, and all the holy fathers instructed their children.

But letting pass these brainsick, frantic, and foul-mouthed railers who (as we have heard) never lack words to wrangle, however much, however often, and however earnest a conference we have had with them, [3224] let us proceed to declare in a few yet manifest arguments, that infants are to be baptized, and that the apostles of Christ our Lord have baptized infants.

v.389

The Lord commanded us to baptize all nations, and therefore infants; for they are comprehended under the phrase "all nations." Again, whomever God reckons among the faithful are faithful. For Peter hears in a vision: "That which God has cleansed do not call common or unclean." ^{Act 10.15} God reckons infants among the faithful; therefore they are faithful: unless we would rather resist God, and seem to be stronger than He. And now we consider it beyond all controversy, that the apostles of Christ baptized those whom Christ commanded them to baptize. And he commanded to baptize the faithful; therefore the apostles baptized infants.

The gospel is greater than baptism: for Paul says, "The Lord sent me to preach the gospel, and not to baptize." ^{1Cor 1.17} It is not that he absolutely denied that he was sent to baptize, but because he preferred doctrine; for the Lord commended them both to his apostles. Furthermore, in the gospel children are received by God, and not refused. Who then, unless he is willfully obstinate, can debar them from the lesser of the two? In sacraments, the thing signified and the sign are both considered. The thing signified is more excellent; infants are not debarred from that. Who, then, would deny them the sign? Truly, the holy sacraments of God are more esteemed by the word than the sign. By the word we gather that women are not excluded from the supper of the Lord. Although we do not read that they were in the first institution, and sat at the first table of the Lord, nor that there is any express law which commands us to admit them to the supper — yet nevertheless, without fear or doubt, and by a perfect argument, [3225] we admit them.

St. Peter could not deny the baptism of water to those whom he saw the Holy Ghost was given, which is an assured token of God's people. For he says in the Acts of the Apostles: "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" Therefore, the holy apostle Peter did not deny baptism to infants. For he assuredly knew by the doctrine of his Lord and Master (to say nothing now of the everlasting covenant of God), that the kingdom of heaven is for infants. No man is received into the kingdom of heaven, unless he is the friend of God; and these are not destitute of the Spirit of God: "For he who does not have the Spirit of Christ, is none of his." ^{Rom 8.9}

v.390

Children are God's; therefore they have the Spirit of God. And therefore, if they have received the Holy Ghost, as well as we; if they are accounted among the people of God, as well as we who are grown in age, then who, I ask, can forbid them from being baptized with water in the name of the Lord? At first the apostles murmured, not being sufficiently instructed then against those who brought infants to the Lord. But the Lord rebuked them, and said: "Suffer little children to come to me." Why then do the rebellious anabaptists not obey the commandment of the Lord? For what other things do they do today, who bring children to baptism, than what others did in times past, who brought infants to the Lord? And the Lord received them, laid his hands on them, and blessed them. To be short, by words and gestures, he notably signified that children are the people of God, and are most acceptable to God. But why then, they ask, did he not baptize them by the same means? Because it is written that "Jesus himself did not baptize, but his disciples did." ^{Joh 4.2} Now, since it is so plainly determined from the thing signified, why do we still contend about the sign? Up to here, good men are satisfied; but contentious persons go on to busy themselves with questions.

Beside this, circumcision among the old people of God was given to infants; therefore baptism ought to be given to infants among the new people; for baptism took the place of circumcision. For St. Paul says: "By Christ you are circumcised with circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh subject to sin, by the circumcision of Christ; buried with him in baptism." ^{Col 2.11-12} Look, Paul calls baptism the circumcision of Christians, "made without hands;" not that water is not ministered by hands, but that no man is hereafter circumcised with hands, the mystery of circumcision nevertheless remaining in the faithful. Nor will you read any of the old interpreters of the church who have not confessed that baptism took the place of circumcision. Indeed, the likeness and similitude of them both, shows a manifest succession.

v.391

Join this to what I have said: the servants of God have always been careful to give the signs to those for whom they were ordained. That I may pass over all others, did not Joshua diligently provide that the people should be circumcised before they entered into the land of promise? And since the apostles, the preachers to the whole world, have been the faithful servants of Jesus Christ, who may hereafter doubt that they baptized infants, since baptism took the place of circumcision?

Undoubtedly, the apostles of Christ framed all their doings to the types and figures of the old Testament. Therefore it is certain that they framed baptism also, and therefore baptized infants, because they were in the figure of baptism; for the people of Israel went through both the Red sea and the river Jordan with their children. And though they are not always expressed in the holy scriptures, as women are not; they are comprehended and understood by them.

To this pertains what is clearly set down in the scriptures: that the apostles baptized whole houses or families. In houses, first of all, children are comprehended, as the greatest and most beautiful part of the house. So then, the apostles baptized children or little ones, and not only those of mature age. And it may be declared very easily that a house especially comprehends infants or little ones. First, out of Genesis 17, which I just alleged. Next, Joseph sent for Jacob his father with his whole house, out of the land of Canaan into the land of Egypt, lest his house have perished with hunger. There are many places of this kind in the law and the prophets, and in the whole scripture. But say there were no infants in those houses which the apostles baptized (which these janglers object); nevertheless, they pertain to the house, and they are counted part of it; so that if they had been in the house, without doubt they would have baptized them. Therefore, though they contend that they were not baptized in those families or houses, truly I say that the fault was neither in the children, as though they had been unworthy of baptism, nor in the apostles, as though they were not inclined to baptize infants; but simply because they were not present: for if they had been present, they would have been baptized. Why? Because the apostles baptized whole houses to which children did belong.

v.392

Now I can show by the writings of the old doctors, that baptism of infants has continued from the apostles' time even to us; nor was it ordained by any councils, or by the decrees of any pope, or any other men; but it was instituted and delivered by the apostles from the scriptures. Origen says, Lib. Enarrat. in Epist. Pauli ad Rom v. expounding the 6th chap.: "The church of Christ received baptizing infants from the apostles themselves." [3226] St. Jerome mentions baptizing infants, Lib. iii. Contra Pelagianos, [3227] and in his epistle to Laeta.[3228] St. Augustine cites the place of Chrysostom, cited by Julian, chap. ii. [3229] He also says to Jerome, Epist. 28: "St. Cyprian, making no new decree, but most steadfastly keeping the faith of the church, was of this opinion with certain of his fellow-bishops, that the new-born child might rightly be baptized." [3230] The place of Cyprian is to be seen in Epi. ad Fidum; as also I declared before, when I spoke of the time of baptism.[3231] The same Augustine against the Donatists, Lib. iv. cap. 23 and 24, boldly affirms, that "baptizing children was not fetched from the authority of men, or of councils, but from the tradition or doctrine of the apostles." [3232] Cyril, Lib. in Levit. viii. both approves the baptizing of children,[3233] and condemns re-baptism.[3234]

v.393

I do not allege these to build baptizing children upon man's witness, but to teach that man's testimonies agree with the testimonies of God, and that the truth of antiquities is on our part. Lies and new forgeries are on the shameless anabaptists' side, who pretend that baptizing children was commanded by the pope.

Now I think it is not lost labour to say something about anabaptism. In the time that Decius and Gallus Caesar were emperors, there arose a question in parts of Africa about re-baptizing heretics. And St. Cyprian and the rest of the bishops, being assembled together in the council of Carthage, liked anabaptism well. But Cornelius, bishop of Rome, indeed a holy and learned man, and a martyr also, together with many other bishops of Italy, disapproved of it. For they would have heretics, after they had renounced their wicked opinions and confessed the right opinion, be cleansed only by the laying on of hands. You may read this in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Lib. vii. There is also extant a treatise of that matter in the Ecclesiastical Decrees, cap. 52.[3235] But we must understand that St. Cyprian affirmed nothing obstinately in this cause. For in the end of his epistle to Jubaianus he writes: "These things I have briefly sent to you in writing, in our mean capacity, most dear brother, commanding no man to follow them, nor preventing any man's opinion; but that every bishop, having liberty of his own judgment, may do what he thinks best." [3236] After that time, both the Arians and Donatists re-baptized. Historiographers write of this, especially Sozomenus, Lib. vi., [3237] touching the Arians. Ecclesiastical writers also touch the same thing elsewhere in their works.

v.394

St. Augustine disputed with other learned men against the Donatists. There is also an imperial law made by Honorius and Theodosius, that holy baptism should not be iterated. [3238] Justin. Caes. has published that In Cod. Lib. i. Tit. 6, in these words: "If any minister of the catholic church is found to have rebaptized anyone, let both him who committed the unappeasable offence (at least if he is punishable by age), and also him who is won and persuaded to it, suffer punishment of death." [3239] Moreover, Valentin., Valens, and Gratianus, charged Florianus, superintendent of Asia, in these words:

"That same minister who by unlawful usage, iterates holy baptism, we account him unworthy of an ecclesiastical function. For we condemn their error, who tread underfoot the precepts of the apostles; and having obtained the sacraments in Christ's name, they do not purify again by a second baptism, but defile and deflower them under the name of cleansing." [3240] This much they say.

And truly, those who rebaptize and are rebaptized, both defile the name of God, which was invoked over the baptized in the former baptism, and cast from them the institution of God as vain and vicious. Christ, we read, was baptized but once. The apostles were not baptized twice. All the saints of God are baptized only once. Yes, those whom Judas baptized once, we do not read were baptized again by a worthier minister. For I showed in my last sermon, that the pureness of the sacraments does not depend upon the worthiness or unworthiness of the minister. Nor can you read that anyone in olden times was twice circumcised, not even those who were manifestly known to be circumcised by idolatrous priests before the reign of Hezekiah and Josiah. They were not baptized [3241] into idolatry, but into the covenant of the Lord God; which I admonished you about elsewhere.

v.395

Therefore, it is a horrible offence to iterate the ceremony of baptism, and it is without example. Nor is there any necessity in this matter. For to what end is it to baptize again, when baptism once given is sufficient for the whole course of a man's life? Beside this; since anabaptism is nothing but a confederacy, conspiracy, and certain linking together by one mark into a new and seditious, or at least superstitious, company; into a new and schismatic church; and into a new and strange kind of doctrine. It is as contrary as can be to the doctrine of Christ and his apostles; truly it is no marvel that the obstinate anabaptists are suppressed and punished by common laws. For otherwise these things are damnable, and not to be ignored or suffered by a Christian magistrate.

The anabaptists quickly object using these two places. The first is out of the fifth chapter of Joshua, where we read in these words: "Make sharp knives (of stone), and go to again, and circumcise the children of Israel the second time." Behold, they could not be circumcised the second time, they say, unless they had been circumcised before. I answer: To circumcise the second time, or to do a thing once again, does not signify to do that which was done before. For once the foreskin was cut off, how could it be cut off again? Therefore, what was left undone for a certain space is now again renewed, and so it is said to be done the second time. So that the second time is not applied to those who should be circumcised, but to the time in which those who were uncircumcised should be circumcised. For they were first solemnly circumcised in Egypt, before they ate the Passover. Now, entering into the land of Canaan, those are solemnly circumcised "the second time," who were not previously circumcised, because of the wilderness and journeying. And so it immediately follows in the same chapter, that all the males who came out of Egypt died in the wilderness, and their sons were uncircumcised; so that now it was expedient for them to be circumcised, as their fathers were before them. The anabaptists thus have no defence at all in this testimony of the law.

v.396

The latter testimony to maintain anabaptism, or rebaptizing, they bring out of the 19th chapter of Acts; where they say that those twelve men of Ephesus were once baptized by Apollos with the baptism of water, and likewise with that of John's; but the same men afterward are rebaptized by Paul in the name of Christ.^{Act 191-7} I answer that those twelve men were not baptized again by Paul with water; they were baptized with water once, which was sufficient for them. But neither could Paul minister another baptism of water than that of John's. For I taught and evidently proved, shortly after the beginning of this sermon, that the baptism of water ministered by John, Christ, and his apostles, is one and the same. I declared there, that the baptism of fire, or of the Spirit, is peculiar and proper to Christ. Therefore, those men of Ephesus were baptized with the baptism of water, as the Samaritans were by Philip; but they were not yet fully instructed about the baptism of fire, nor were they baptized with fire. Indeed, they confess that they do not know whether there is any such baptism, that is, whether there is a holy Ghost who in the visible form of fire, should come down upon men. For they could not be altogether ignorant that there was a Holy Ghost, without whom, undoubtedly, they would not have believed; indeed, in whom they would have believed if they had rightly believed. Therefore, they were only ignorant of that baptism of fire. As Peter and John laid their hands on the Samaritans, and they immediately received the Holy Ghost, so Paul lays hands on the men of Ephesus, and they received the Holy Ghost. For Luke says: "When they heard these things, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." ^{Act 19.5} And lest any man understand this to mean the baptism of water, he later adds the manner of it in a plain exposition, saying: "And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came upon them." This, I say, he called baptizing in the name of the Lord Jesus; for it follows: "And they spoke with tongues, and prophesied." This has always been the fruit and effect of the baptism of fire in the primitive church, as I declared shortly after the beginning of this sermon. Therefore, the anabaptists have no testimony out of the scriptures for their anabaptism, nor for re-baptizing. So that all who gather their wits about them, plainly see that they are to be forsaken and shunned by all good men. But it seems we have sufficiently disputed against them. Now we go forward to expound those things that remain to be opened touching baptism, which are not the last and of least account.

v.397

Now that we have come to treat the virtue and efficacy of baptism, we will follow that order which we outlined in the description of baptism, knitting up at least the particulars,[3242] because we have spoken largely of them in the general consideration of sacraments. Yet nevertheless, it is good, first of all, to know what the adversaries of the church have sometimes thought touching the force of baptism.

The Manicheans baptized none of their sect; for they taught that baptism availed the receivers nothing towards salvation.[3243] The Seleucians, who are called also Hermiani, likewise treated baptism as nothing.[3244] The Messalians, who are called Euchetes, or prayer-makers (as I showed at the end of my former sermon), and the Enthusiastes, inspired, I say, by some heavenly power (or rather by some hellish fury), are persuaded that baptism neither profits nor hinders any man. For so they attributed all means of salvation to the inward working of the Spirit, yes, to man's prayers, so much that they loathed and abhorred all outward helps, yes, and doctrine also, as unprofitable and without force. Theodoret in his Ecclesiastical History, Lib. iv. cap. 11, repeats as much from them.[3245]

But the holy scripture teaches that we are washed clean from our sins by baptism; for baptism is a sign, a testimony and sealing, of our cleansing. For God truly has promised sanctification to his church, and for his truth's sake, he purifies his church from all sins by his grace through the blood of his Son, and he regenerates and cleanses it by his Spirit; this cleansing is sealed in us by baptism, which we receive.

v.398

And from this, the scriptures call it cleansing, and remission of sins, purifying, new birth, regeneration, and the laver or fountain of regeneration — just as circumcision is called the covenant; and sacrifices are called sins and sanctifications. For we read in the gospel of St. Mark: "John baptized in the desert, preaching the baptism of repentance, for the remission of sins." ^{Mar 1.4} The same is also mentioned in Luke 3.3. In the gospel of John, the third chapter, baptism is called purifying. In the Acts of the Apostles, Peter says to the people who demanded what they should do: "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins." ^Act
2.38 Ananias also says to Paul: "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, in calling on the name of the Lord." ^{Act 22.16} And now Paul himself says: "Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it, to sanctify it, when he had cleansed it, in the fountain of water in the word." ^{Eph 5.25-26} Thus the promise, indeed, the truth of sanctification and free remission of sins, is written and engraved in our bodies when we are baptized. For God by his Spirit, through the blood of his Son, has newly regenerated and purged again our souls, and even now regenerates and purges them.

And baptism is sufficient and effectual for the whole life of man; yes, and it reaches and is referred to all the sins of all those who are baptized. For the promise of God is true. The seal of the promise is true, not deceivable. The power of Christ is ever effectual to thoroughly cleanse and wash away all the sins of those who are his. However often we have sinned in our lifetime, let us call to remembrance the mystery of holy baptism, with which we are washed for the whole course of our life, that we might know and not doubt that our sins are forgiven by the same God and our Lord. Yes, and forgiven by the blood of Christ, into whom we are grafted once by baptism, that he might always work salvation in us, till we are received out of misery into glory. Nor is there any doubt that his whole life, Abraham had the mystery of circumcision continually in his mind, and rested in God and the seed promised to him. Yet I think that what St. Augustine often pithily and plainly cited, should be diligently marked: [3246]

v.399

"Our sins are forgiven, or purged, in baptism — not that they are no longer in us (for as long as we live, concupiscence bears sway, and always breeds and produces in us something like itself) — but that they should not be imputed to us. Nor that we may not sin,[3247] but that it should not be hurtful for us to have sinned, and that our sins may be remitted when they are committed, and not suffered to be continued." [3248]

De Fide et Operib. cap. 20. And Gratian also recites many more of this kind, Distinct, iv. de Consecrat. [3249]

Beside that, by baptism we are gathered together into the fellowship of the people of God. Thus some call it the first sign or entry into Christianity,[3250] by which an entrance into the church lies open to us. It is not that we did not belong to the church before: for whoever is of Christ, and a partaker of the promises of God and of his eternal covenant, belongs to the church. Baptism is therefore a visible sign and testimony of our ingrafting into the body of Christ; and it is rightly called a planting, incorporating, or ingrafting into the body of Christ. For I said in the general discourse about sacraments, that by baptism we were first joined with Christ, and afterward joined with all the members of Christ, our brethren. For Paul says: "All you who are baptized have put on Christ." ^{Gal 3.27} But to put on Christ is to be made one with him, and to be joined and incorporated in him as it were, that he may live in us and we in him. [3251] For he alone by his Spirit regenerates and renews us, and most liberally enriches us with all manner good gifts; which the same apostle in another place expresses in these words: "God saved us by the fountain of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." ^{Tit 3.5-6}

v.400

Yes, and therefore Christ our Lord is baptized in our baptism, to declare that he is our brother, and we are joint-heirs with him. ^Rom
8.17 Therefore, St. Augustine said very well: "Baptism is thus far forcible: that being baptized, we are incorporated into Christ and counted his members." [3252] The same Augustine calls baptism "the sacrament of Christian fellowship." [3253] For we are visibly gathered again by baptism into the unity of one body with all the faithful, as many as have been, are, and shall be. For Paul also says: "By one Spirit we are all baptized into one body."^{1Cor 12.13} And it follows from this, that baptism serves for our confession, and is rightly called the token of Christian religion. For it is a badge or emblem, by which we witness and profess that we consent and are linked into Christian religion. We confess that by nature, we are sinners and unclean, but sanctified by the grace of God through Christ. For if we were clean by nature, then what need did we have for any cleansing? But now, since we are cleansed, who doubts the truth of God? Therefore, when we receive baptism, we truly and freely confess both our sin in which we were born, and also the free forgiveness of sins.

Lastly, the remembrance and consideration of the mystery of baptism puts us in mind of the duties of Christianity and [3254] godliness — that is to say, to weigh diligently with ourselves all our life long, whose body we are made members of, to deny ourselves and this world, to mortify our flesh with its concupiscences, and to be buried with Christ into his death, that we may rise again in newness of life, and live innocently; to love our brethren as our members, with whom, by baptism, we are knit together into one body; to remain in the bond of concord and in the unity of the church, and not to follow strange religions; being mindful that we are baptized into Christ, to whom alone we are consecrated, and far separated and divided from all other gods, worships, or religions, and, in short, from all heresies.

v.401

Let us also think that we must constantly and valiantly fight against Satan.[3255] Therefore, as often as we remember we are baptized with Christ's baptism, so often are these things put into our minds, and we are admonished of our duty. But the apostle handles this matter more at large in the sixth chapter of his epistle to the Romans, where he expressly mentions that by baptism, we are made grafts of Christ, that is to say, that we might grow out of him as branches out of the vine, and feel in our minds and bodies, both the death and resurrection of Christ.

For since we are endued with the Spirit of Christ who works in us, our body truly dies daily, but our spirit lives and rejoices in Christ. To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

5-9. THE NINTH SERMON: OF THE LORD'S HOLY SUPPER.

Of the Lord's Holy Supper; what it is, by whom, when, and for whom it was instituted;
in what way, when, and how often it is to be celebrated, and its ends. Of the true
meaning of the words of the supper, "this is my body." of the presence
of Christ in the supper. Of the true eating of Christ's body. Of the
worthy and unworthy eaters of it: and how every man ought
to prepare himself for the Lord's Supper.

To the holy baptism of our Lord Christ, is coupled the sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord, which we call the Lord's Supper. [3256] For those whom the Lord has regenerated with the laver of regeneration, he also feeds with his spiritual food, and nourishes them unto eternal life. Therefore, it necessarily follows that next we treat the holy supper of the Lord.

v.402

This has many names, even as the feast of Passover does, and it is instituted in its place. In olden times it was called,[3257] The passing over, or the Lord's Passover; which was indeed a memorial of the Passover — also, a remembrance, sign, solemnity, a festival or holy day, a meeting together, or a holy assembly, an observation or worshipping, a ceremony and sacrifice of Passover. a sacrifice or offering. We have spoken of this in a convenient place.[3258] This is called "the Lord's Supper" by St. Paul the apostle, because this ceremony was instituted by the Lord at his last supper, and because it is offered to us as a spiritual banquet. Paul terms it "the Lord's table," and doubtless for no other causes. Paul also called it the communion; not so much because we have communion or fellowship with Christ, and he with us, as because, being many, we are one bread and one body, who partake of the same bread. Luke calls it the "breaking of bread," naming the whole by a part. And it is evident that our forefathers of old did not give a morsel to the receivers of the Lord's Supper, but they broke the bread among themselves. In time past, firm leagues were performed by breaking bread. It is also called a memorial and remembrance of the Lord's passion; for the Lord said: "Do this in remembrance of me." ^Luk
22.19 It is named a thanksgiving, because when we celebrate the Lord's Supper, we thank him for all his benefits, and especially for his death, by which we are redeemed. It is called also a token and a mystery, and a sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord. Our forefathers termed it by this word synaxis. Synaxis is a joining together, a knitting, a closing, or an agreement. For the church is joined and united to Christ in the holy supper by a most strait league. And to conclude, the members are joined very fast together with it.

v.403

Furthermore, it is called an assembly of saints, a holy company, and a gathering together. For in olden times, it was never customarily celebrated except in the common assembly of the church; this is plainly proved by the words of the apostle in 1Cor. 11.20-29. To conclude, we do not offend at all, if we call the supper of our Lord the testament and will of God and of our Lord. For in this sacrament you will find all things that belong to a full and perfect testament. For Christ is the testator; all faithful Christians are appointed heirs; the legacy is the forgiveness of sins and life everlasting, obtained by the body of Christ given, and his blood shed. The letters or table of this testament or will, are the words of the Lord's Supper, witnessing by a public writing as it were, that Christ is the food and life of the faithful; the order and observance of it is the seal, as it were.

Therefore, just as we call that which has sealed letters, a testament — it contains a testament both by writing and sealing — so the Lord himself called his supper a testament; for "this cup," he said, "is the new testament in my blood." ^Luk
22.20 For the new testament is the remission of sins, which Jeremiah the prophet plainly testifies in the 31st chapter, ^{Jer 31.31-35} and Paul to the Hebrews, in the 8th chapter. ^{Heb 8.8-13} This holy mystery has various other names; but these for the most part are the chief and most commonly used. We will speak elsewhere of the other names.

They define (for the most part) the Lord's Supper as a spiritual banquet, with which the Lord both keeps his death in remembrance, and also feeds his people unto life everlasting. But let me set down a larger description of it for you. The supper of the Lord is a holy action instituted for the church, from God, in which the Lord, by setting bread and wine before us at the banquet, certifies to us his promise and communion, shows us his gifts, lays them before our senses; visibly gathers us together into one body, and in short, would have his death kept in remembrance by the faithful; he admonishes us of our duty, and especially of praise and thanksgiving.

v.404

First, we say that the supper of the Lord is an action or deed. For when the Lord made his supper, he gave thanks to God; he broke bread and gave the cup, and said, "Do this in remembrance of me." Yet, it cannot be every action. For at the table where we eat meat, we also give thanks to God, and we break bread and give the cup — but it is a holy action, because it is from God and instituted for the church. Therefore, it far differs from our ordinary suppers; for it is specially instituted by the Son of God for the church; and also because it has the word of God and the peculiar example of Christ. Therefore St. Paul, differentiating between this and common eating, says: "If any man hungers, let him eat at home; lest you come together to your condemnation." ^{1Cor 11.34} And again: "Do you not have houses to eat and drink in?" ^{1Cor 11.22} As if he had said, This supper is mystical. Again, what manner of action it is, immediately appears by what follows, where the Lord, by setting bread and wine before us at the banquet, assures us of his promise and communion, etc. This supper, therefore, has his peculiar limits. Athough I spoke of them generally when I treated the virtue of the sacraments, I will repeat certain ones that most serve this purpose, when I draw toward an end of this sermon.

But concerning the description of this supper, these things are chiefly to be considered and declared. First, who instituted it, and who the true author and maker [3259] of the Lord's Supper is. It is not any man, but the very Son of God himself, the wisdom of the Father, very God and man. So that, we do not come to the table of men, even though the minister is the chief man there; nor do we receive holy signs at the hands of the minister only, but also at the hand of our Lord himself;[3260] whose guests we are, if we are faithful. He has consecrated the supper for us, and yet he consecrates it by his holy word, his will, and his power. We spoke of this before. And because the faithful understand and know these things, they sit down to the holy and heavenly banquet with Christ, being wholly occupied in heavenly things, both in mind and soul.

v.405

He instituted the supper the same night he was betrayed; and the next night by his death and blood-shedding, he confirmed the new testament. For as soon as he had eaten the figurative lamb with his disciples, and had plainly told them that from that time forward, this ceremony should not be used, the supper was established in place of what was abolished. Just as the bloody lamb signified that Christ would suffer, even so the bread, which is without blood, witnesses that Christ (who is the bread of life) is already baked upon the cross, and has suffered, and been made food for all believers. Therefore, that night was worthy to be observed and celebrated, and that last supper is full of mysteries. For commonly, we most of all account the words and deeds of our dearest friends, which they use just before their death. Therefore, just as all Christ's doings are beloved and precious to us, so [3261] his last supper should be most dearly beloved and precious in our sight.

The supper consists of the word and manner, the promise and ceremony. The word is this: that Christ is preached to have been given up to death for our sins, and that he shed his blood for the remission of our sins. Promise is made to all who believe, that their offences will be forgiven. The same thing is also expressed by the manner. The manner is diligently set down in writing by St. Matthew, Mark, and Luke, from whom St. Paul did not at all vary. I will recount the words to you, dearly beloved, as they are gathered out of these four into one text:

"The same night, in the evening in which he was betrayed, the Lord came with the twelve; and when it was time, he sat down, and the twelve with him. And while they were eating, Jesus took bread; and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, Take, and eat; this is my body which is given (or broken) for you. Do this in remembrance of me. Likewise taking the cup (after he had supped), he gave thanks, and delivered it to them saying: Take this, and divide it among you; drink you all of it. And they drank all of it.

v.406

And he said to them, This is my blood, which is of the new Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of their sins. This cup is the new Testament in my blood (which is shed for you). Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me. Truly I say to you, that I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine, until that day comes that I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom."

These are, word for word, the solemn and most holy words of the Lord spoken at his last supper.

The high bishop of the catholic church, Christ our Lord, celebrated his supper with his disciples in this way, as we have now seen and heard, without any pomp — simply, plainly, and sparingly. He took away the over-busy ceremony of the law, appointing another, very easy to be had, and not at all sumptuous. Most things pertaining to the law were troublesome, and all belonging to the gospel was easy, with nothing sumptuous. The Lord sits down with his twelve disciples. By this we learn that, first of all, there must be a company gathered together, which must celebrate the supper. The Lord does these things in his assembly. First of all, he preaches most diligently to his disciples, about those things especially which concern the mystery of his passion and of our redemption. And wherever we find the preaching and hearing of the word of God or of the gospel of Christ, there are also groanings and vows or prayers of the faithful.

Therefore, those who intend to celebrate the supper of the Lord, before all things, according to the example and institution of the high bishop Christ our Lord, they most diligently hear the preaching of the gospel, and also pray most earnestly. Afterward he took bread; and the Lord blessed it and broke it; moreover, he gave it to his disciples, and bid them to eat. Shortly he shared the cup among them, commanding them all to drink of it. And thereupon he plainly and expressly commanded them, saying, "Do this;" namely, as you have seen me do. Therefore, the disciples ate the bread, and drank all of the cup. Therefore, those who celebrate the Lord's Supper lawfully, one to another, break, distribute, and eat the Lord's bread, which they receive at the hands of Christ's ministers; and likewise, they distribute and drink all of the Lord's cup, which they receive at the hands of Christ's ministers.

v.407

And as the high bishop Christ bid them to do it in remembrance of him, so those who celebrate the Lord's Supper remember the death of Christ and all his benefits. Moreover, as the Lord has gone before us in his example, in giving thanks to God the Father, so likewise the faithful end this holy mystery by giving thanks, and praising his goodness and mercy because he is good, and his mercy endures for ever. This is the simplest and best manner of the Lord's Supper, which the apostles received from Christ, and delivered to be observed by all nations.

Therefore, when these questions are asked — whether it is lawful to sup according to another rite or manner; whether it is lawful to add to or take anything from the manner that was left and delivered, or to change anything in it; whether the supper of the Lord should only be celebrated in the manner already delivered and not in any other — there is no small folly and rashness; indeed, there is rather great ungodliness betrayed in this. For what end is served by the simplest, plainest, best, and most perfect form of the supper, that was delivered by the Lord himself, and received by his apostles, if we devise another? Who, I ask you, would deliver a better one than the Son of God himself, the high priest of the catholic church, has already delivered? Or who, I beseech you, in his right wits, would either add to or take anything from the ordinance of God? Who dares to be so bold as to change what is delivered by the everlasting wisdom of God? All the sayings and doings of Christ are most perfect. Therefore, the form of the Lord's Supper is also a most perfect form of a right singular and excellent ordinance or institution. The rites or ceremonies of celebrating the sacraments of the old Testament were most perfect. They were so delivered from their first institution, that nothing was added to or taken from them by those who were religious, not even many years after. For Hezekiah the king celebrated the Passover; so likewise Josiah celebrated it; but not according to any other rite or manner than what was delivered from Moses. The fathers circumcised their infants; but not according to any other manner or rite than what was first instituted. In times past, whoever had not sacrificed in the same place and according to the same manner which God commanded by Moses, was accused of murder under the law.

v.408

Nadab and Abihu are struck with lightning from heaven for bringing strange fire into the tabernacle. Uzzah is struck with sudden death, for the ark of the Lord of hosts was not handled in the way commanded by the law. And therefore, that manner of celebrating the Lord's Supper, as it was instituted by the Lord and delivered to the church by the apostles, is to be observed with great religion. That is, unless we believe that the institutions and manners of celebrating our sacraments are more imperfect than those of olden times; or that God the Father less regards the profanation or religious observation of his Son's institution now-a-days, than those of Moses and the fathers in olden times. But Paul, the vessel of election, knows that Christ's institution is most perfect, and that it should still be kept simply and without any addition in the church. He says to the Corinthians: "I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you." ^{1Cor 11.23} For he thought it a heinous offence, to deliver anything else to the church than what he had received from the Lord. Therefore, let us hold fast with great religion, what was delivered to us by the Lord and the apostles. For the apostle delivered nothing else to the Corinthians — indeed, many years after the Lord's ascension into heaven —than what was faithfully set down for us in writing by the holy apostles and evangelists, St. Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

Certainly, it is well known how for a hundred years after the death of the apostles, this simple manner of celebrating the Lord's Supper was held in the church. For the pastor or minister of the church, after he had preached the gospel, and given public thanks to God in open prayer, then came out into the midst of the holy assembly. Before the face of the people stood a table furnished with bread and wine, behind which the minister stood and blessed the people, saying, "The Lord be with you." The people answered, "And with your spirit," Then the minister replied, "Lift up your hearts;" admonishing the congregation that the holy mysteries are to be celebrated, and therefore they must lift up their minds from visible things to invisible.

v.409

The people answered: "We lift them up to the Lord." Afterwards, exhorting the whole company to give thanks, he cried aloud: "Let us give thanks to the Lord our God." The congregation answered, "It is fitting and right to do so." Then the minister proceeded, saying: "It is very fitting and right, our bound duty, and it behoves us," (turning himself then to the Lord,) "that we give thanks always, and in all places to you, Lord, holy Father, almighty and everlasting God, through Christ our Lord, who the day before he suffered his passion, took bread, gave thanks, broke it, and gave it to his disciples;" with the remainder, as follows in the gospel. These things being repeated out of the gospel, the minister proceeded further, saying: "Let us pray. Being admonished by wholesome precepts, and instructed by divine institution, we are emboldened to say, Our Father, which art in heaven," etc. After the recital of the holy mysteries,[3262] the people received the holy mysteries and communed together; and after they had given thanks and praised God, they were dismissed. And there remain to be seen certain footsteps of this form in the writings of the ancient fathers, namely, in St. Cyprian, St. Augustine, and others. But in latter times, the prayers, blessings, and ceremonies grew to be very great. Moreover, Christ's institution was changed, and turned into a strange use; and in fine, the mass was patched together, in which there appears but little antiquity. But I have treated these matters very largely in another place,[3263] and you yourselves are very well seen in this point. We who defend and hold that the institution of our Lord Christ, which was delivered to us by the apostles, is most pure and perfect, do not regard either what any man, or any bishop, has at any time added to the holy rite, or taken away or changed. Rather, we regard what the one who is before and above all, first commanded to be done. If the authority of him that instituted it, or if learning and holiness, or if antiquity, may be of force, then the victory is ours, who have Christ on our side with the best chosen company of the apostles. For from these, we have what we celebrate; and what we hold, all godly men ought to celebrate.

v.410

Why the Lord instituted this mystery under the form of bread and wine, is evident. For bread comforts, and wine makes glad, the heart of man. I also touched on this, where I treated the proportion and agreement of the sacraments. [3264] Moreover, our fathers in the figure of manna, ate bread which rained down from heaven. Also, they used bread and wine in their gratulatory sacrifices, and those of thanksgiving, and in their drink-offerings. But there has sprung a great contention concerning the substance of the Lord's Supper; some holding the opinion that it ought to be celebrated with unleavened bread, and others, with leavened bread.

But among our forefathers of old, there was no such contention about these; for the churches used both indifferently as it pleased them. It may seem that at the first supper the Lord used unleavened bread at the table, according to the ancient manner of celebrating the Passover; upon which many churches used unleavened bread. [3265] Notwithstanding, they did not condemn others of heresy who used leavened bread. The pope and his adherents, conceiving no small displeasure at this,[3266] have deeply accursed the Greek church for so trifling a matter. But the Artotyrites were justly condemned by the ancient fathers; Epiphanius [3267] mentions them, between the Pepuzianes and the Priscillians, setting bread and cheese upon the table in their celebrating, contrary to Christ's institution.

It is further disputed whether unmingled wine, or wine mingled with or diluted with water, is to be used at the supper by the faithful.

v.411

Cyprian the martyr holds the opinion that in this mystery [3268] the wine should not be unmingled, but diluted with water, and be so offered — that is to say, drunk by the faithful. For thus he has written:

"Because Christ has borne us all, and also bore our sins, we may perceive that in the water, the people are to be understood; and in the wine, the blood of Christ is to be understood. For when water is mingled with the wine in the cup, the people are united to Christ; and the multitude of the believers is coupled and joined to him in whom they believe. And thus, in blessing the Lord's cup, water alone may not be offered, nor in the same way may wine alone be offered. For if any man offers only wine, the blood of Christ begins to be without us; but if it is water only, then the multitude begins to be without Christ. But when they are both mingled together, and are joined with a thorough mixture between them, then a heavenly and spiritual sacrament is wrought there." [3269]

By these words truly St. Cyprian shows us a good mystery. But why do we seek to be wiser than Christ, and to mingle together [3270] more mysteries than we have received from him? The holy scripture mentions no water, but rather it reports that the Lord used nothing else but mere wine. For the Lord says: "Truly I say to you that henceforth I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine." ^{Mar 14.25} Plainly, [3271] he did not say the wine, but, "the fruit of the vine," so that we would not mingle it in any way. But what if that holy martyr of God, St. Cyprian himself, has laboured by all the means he might, to show that what is to be followed by the faithful in celebrating the Lord's Supper, is only what they have received from our Lord Christ himself?

v.412

And because that testimony greatly supports our treatise concerning Christ's supper — that it is to be celebrated according to the words of the gospel — I will recite it word for word out of the second epistle of the 3rd book of Cyprian's Epistles.

"We must not depart in any respect from the doctrine of the gospel. And those things that our Master taught and did himself, the scholars should also observe and do. The blessed apostle in another place speaks more constantly and stoutly, saying, 'I marvel that you are so soon changed from him that called you to grace, to another gospel, which is nothing else; but there are some who trouble you, and set about to overthrow the gospel of Christ. However, if we ourselves, or an angel from heaven, preach to you any other thing than what we have taught, let him be accursed. As I have said before, so I now say again, If any man preaches any other thing to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.' ^{Gal 1.6-8} Since, therefore, neither the apostle himself, nor an angel from heaven, can preach or teach other than what Christ himself has once taught and his apostles have preached, then I greatly marvel from where this custom has grown that in some places, contrary to the doctrine of the gospel and the apostles, water is offered in the Lord's cup, which being taken alone, cannot express the Lord's blood."

And again:

"There is no cause, dearly beloved brother, that any man should think that the custom of certain men is to be followed, if there are any who up to now have supposed that water alone is to be offered in the Lord's cup. For it must be demanded of them, whom they have followed in this. For if in the sacrifice, which is Christ, none is to be followed but Christ, then doubtless we ought to hearken to and do what Christ has done and commanded to be done, since he himself says in his gospel: 'If you do what I command you to do, I will no longer call you servants, but friends.' ^{Joh 15.14-15} And that Christ alone should be heard, the Father himself also witnesses from heaven, saying, 'This is my well-beloved Son, in whom I have delight: hear him.' ^{Mar 9.7} Therefore, if only Christ is to be heard, we should not regard what any others before us have thought it fit for us to do, but what Christ first did, who is before all others. Nor in any case should we follow the custom of men, but the truth of God; considering what the Lord said by the prophet Isaiah, 'They worship me in vain, teaching the commandments and doctrine of men.'^{Mat 15.9}

v.413

Again, the Lord repeats the same words in the gospel, saying: 'You set God's commandments aside, to establish your own traditions.' ^{Mar 7.9} And in another place he says: 'He that breaks any one of the least of these commandments, and in this sort teaches men, shall be accounted least in the kingdom of heaven.' ^{Mat 5.19} If it is not lawful to break the least of the commandments of God, then how much more heinous is it to break things so great, so weighty, and so much belonging to the Lord's passion and the sacrament of our redemption — or to change it into any other order by man's traditions, than is instituted by God?" [3272]

And so forth as follows.

v.414

No man can deny that these things have no authority against the author himself. For neither by the scriptures, nor by the example of Christ, can it be proved that water was mingled with the wine at the supper. As for the authorities and testimonies which the author allows, every man may perceive how little they serve the purpose; indeed, that they are twisted from their natural meaning. The gospel plainly pronounces that the Lord drank of the fruit of the vine with his disciples. And as often as Paul mentions the cup, in no place does he teach that water was mingled with the wine, or that it ought to be mingled with it. Therefore, these water-men, that is to say, those who use only water in celebrating the Lord's Supper, are justly condemned: such as the Marcionites and Tatians were.[3273] However, it is an indifferent matter whether you use red wine or white in the supper.

Again, why did the Lord not deliver the sacrament of the supper to us under one form, bread or wine only, but rather under both kinds? The doctors of the church by one consent suppose this is the cause: that he would signify, or rather testify, to us that he took both soul and flesh upon himself, and gave them both for us, and has also delivered our souls and flesh from everlasting destruction. For although there are two kinds, they make but one sacrament, and they may not be separated. Nor is their opinion or judgment to be allowed, who of their own private authority, or rather sacrilegious authority, corrupt the institution of Christ. They offer only the one kind to lay people who communicate: the bread. And they grant both kinds to priests; and so they claim both kinds for themselves alone.[3274] But the apostle Paul received the authority from the Lord himself, to admit all the faithful people of Christ to the Lord's cup. Therefore, let these bold fellows consider from whom they received the command to exclude the laity, and to forbid them the cup which is granted to them by the Lord our God.

v.415

For Christ in plain words — as it were by the spirit of prophecy, foreseeing what would come to pass in the church — did not say of the bread, "Eat you all of this;" but when he took the cup he added, "Drink you all of this." St. Mark also adjoins to this, not without deep judgment, "And they all drank of it." ^{Mar 14.23} To this also pertains what the Lord says in St. Luke: "Take this, and divide it among you." ^{Luk 22.17} St. Paul the apostle, having a special regard for this excellent and plain institution of Christ, three or four times joins the cup to the bread, saying: "As often as you eat of this bread, and drink of this cup, you express the Lord's death." Again: "Whoever eats of this bread, or drinks of the Lord's cup unworthily, will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." And again he says: "Let a man examine himself, and then let him eat of the bread, and drink of the cup."Again: "Whoever eats and drinks unworthily," etc. ^{1Cor 11.26-29} These testimonies are manifold, and are worthy to be believed absolutely; and to which all traditions of all men whatsoever, should give way. The Lord instituted the cup of the supper for all the faithful; therefore the apostles presented it to all the faithful. For if the sacrament of the blood of Christ were given to the apostles only, then surely the thing itself, namely, the remission of sins which is obtained through Christ's blood, belongs only to the apostles. However, the Lord says plainly: "This is the blood of the new Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." ^Mat
26.28 It is also manifestly set down in other places of the scripture, that Christ's blood was shed for the remission of the sins of all the faithful. Therefore, if the laity is capable of the thing, then how much more the sign of it? Now if our adversaries proceed further and say that only the apostles sat at the supper (who represented the figure of the priests), and that the use of the cup was granted only to them, and is not to be granted to others, but only to those who were present at the first supper — then we demand of them, by what authority they give the Lord's bread to the laity, or by what right do they admit "simple women" to the Lord's Supper? For it is manifest that neither the one nor the other sat at the Lord's table (according to their statements in this matter).

v.416

And in this point, being taken tardy,[3275] they can go no further. But they object the danger of the cup: that if it is given to all without exception, then it would come to pass, through the folly and negligence of men, that some great offence might be committed in letting it fall, or pouring it on the floor.[3276] They would say that the eternal providence has not foreseen so great an offence, which these "wise men" at the end of the world, now well perceive; and so they would amend what the Son of God missed. For they cry out that one kind is enough for the lay people, because it follows by a necessary coherence, that where the body of Christ is, there is his blood also; and thus it must follow, that the other is in vain.[3277] But the Lord distinctly first offered the bread, and afterward the cup; and the Lord instituted nothing in vain. Therefore, since the Lord has so commanded, both kinds ought to be shared among all the faithful. Whoever has read the writings of the ancient fathers, will report that this was ever observed, almost to the time of the council of Constance.[3278] Many of these [3279] have not been afraid to say that dividing this sacrament in this manner could not be done without sacrilege.

The matter and substance of the supper being declared, some lightly question the form, or the consecration of the bread and wine. But because I treated this in the general consideration of the sacraments,[3280] there is no reason why I should, with loathsomeness to the hearers, repeat it again. We do not acknowledge that any transubstantiation is made by force of words or characters. Rather, we affirm that the bread and wine remain as they are in their own substances, but there is added to them the institution, will, and word of Christ, and so they become a sacrament, and so they differ from common bread and wine, as we said elsewhere.

v.417

Consequently, the question ensues touching this point: Who should administer the supper: that is to say, whether anyone in the congregation should be chief in celebrating the supper: if so, then who should that be? Surely, the thing itself requires, and nature also commands, that everything be done decently and in good order. And religion requires that all things pertaining to the supper be done according to Christ's example. He was the chief dealer in the supper. And likewise, he has appointed ministers of the church, by whom he would have the sacraments administered. Therefore, just as every man does not baptize, but the lawful minister of the church; so it does not pertain to every man to prepare and administer the holy supper, but it pertains to the minister who is ordained by God. In this, now, we disprove the papistic doctrine which allows private masses, and teaches that the priest offers up the body and blood of our Lord for bystanders; and that by the mass, he applies the merit of redemption to those who with devotion come to that sacrifice. For there is not one word of the Lord, that commands the priests to sacrifice, or to privately apply the supper for others, or that promises anything to those who stand by and look at it. For he says, "Do this; eat and drink you all in remembrance of me." ^{Luk 22.19} He does not say, Look at the priests only, while they are eating and drinking for you. So Christ is not bodily present in the bread and wine; he is joined to our hearts and minds by his Spirit; for it would be of no effect that he remained in the bread. And if he were indeed present there, he could not be sacrificed, both because he offered himself up once upon the cross, nor can the most worthy and only-begotten Son of God be offered up again to God the Father by a sinful man — just as there is no need for him to offer himself again. For St. Paul says: "Christ, being one only sacrifice offered up for sin, sits forever at the right hand of God, looking for that which is yet to come, until his enemies are made his footstool. For by one oblation he has made forever perfect, those who are sanctified." ^{Heb 10.12-14} And again he says: "Where there is full remission of sins, there is no more oblation for sin." ^{Heb 10.18}And we have full remission of sin by the death which Christ once suffered: therefore, there is no sacrifice in the church for sin.[3281]

v.418

Indeed, the church celebrates the memorial of the sacrifice which was once perfectly finished upon the cross; but the church does not offer up sacrifice anymore, either with blood or without blood. Praise and thanksgiving are a most acceptable sacrifice to the Lord: the minister does not offer it for others, but with others. Here now, we therefore ascribe no other thing to the minister but the ministry: that he is the president or chief dealer to recite the prayers in the celebration of the supper. And after the holy prelection [3282] and pronouncing the solemn words, following the example of Christ, let him begin to break the Lord's bread and distribute his cup, and let him also receive the sacrament for himself, as the other faithful people do, as companions of the faith. And when the communion is done, let him end the holy action with thanksgiving and some holy exhortation.

Concerning the place where the supper is to be celebrated, I find no contention among the most ancient ministers of the church. It is read how our Lord Jesus used the hall of a certain private man's house (Acts 20). And also the apostle Paul both preached and broke bread in a certain dining-place at Troas. The ancient church, which ensued immediately after the death of the apostles, almost to the time of Constantine the Great, had none or very few large and public churches; for it was scarcely lawful or safe in so troublesome a time, for the Christians to creep abroad. In the meantime, they used very honest places, in which they met together in holy assemblies, having places of prayer. At present there seems no place more worthy or commodious to celebrate the holy supper, than that which is appointed for doctrine and prayer. For so we learned from St. Paul, 1Cor 11. Even if tyrannical power would not allow us to have a church, what keeps us from reverently celebrating the supper in honest private houses?

Touching the holy instruments belonging to the supper, the matter also requires us to say something in this place. In the time that the apostles lived, they supped at tables set out and furnished for the purpose; they had no fixed altars built of stone, which are more fit to make a fire, and burn beasts on for a sacrifice.

v.419

A removable table agrees better with the example of Christ. Notwithstanding, we do not condemn standing altars, if they serve only for the lawful use of the supper. St. Paul, in first Corinthians, calls the Gentile altars tables; so we need not marvel that the ancient fathers termed our tables altars. For it is an easy matter to move from one to the other; and it would seem that they alluded only to the altar of the tabernacle of God. In olden times, the tables were covered, some with a fair cloth, some with a linen tablecloth or towel; from this perhaps were borrowed those things which are called corporals.[3283] As for that outward bravery and worldly trimming,[3284] it was not then used on the altars of Christians. We read how it is forbidden by the law, that there must be no altar built of hewn stone; by this proviso, all cost and bravery in religion is forbidden.

Thus it is manifest that in ancient times there were no precious or costly vessels used at the supper. For Christ and the apostles taught that frugality should be used in all places, thus condemning superfluity, and beating into us the contempt for gold and silver. So too, in those holy mysteries, they have not overthrown that doctrine of theirs, nor given occasion for excess. After long persecution, when peace was restored to the church, then began the custom of celebrating in the church with vessels of gold and silver. But then there were also some who brought back its old frugality and simplicity. Chrysostom cried out (as I declared in another place [3285]), that in receiving the Lord's Supper, we should have golden minds, not golden vessels. [3286] And St. Ambrose says: "The sacraments do not require gold, nor are those things pleasant in gold, which are not bought with gold. The ornament of the sacraments is the redemption of captives." [3287]

v.420

St. Jerome commends St. Exuperius, bishop of Toledo,[3288] who carried the Lord's body in a basket of wicker, and the blood in a glass, and had expelled covetousness from the church.[3289] And truly that canon of the Triburcan council, still extant in the pope's decrees, forbidding any priest to administer this holy mystery in wooden vessels, sufficiently proves that certain churches, more than eight hundred years since Christ's passion, used to drink the blood of Christ in wooden vessels. Therefore, wooden cups in the supper are most ancient of all. Bonifacius the archbishop (though I alleged his example elsewhere, I am forced to repeat it here, for it agrees so fitly with this present matter), long since being asked, Whether it would be lawful to administer the sacraments in vessels of wood, answered: "In olden times," he says, "golden priests used wooden cups; but now contrariwise, wooden priests use golden cups." [3290] But if any man brings vessels made of other stuff, without excess and superstition, I would not greatly strive with him, if he also acknowledges that those who use the wooden ones do not offend. For touching the form and matter of the cups, all are free and lawful for the faithful church to use.

Moreover, it is evident that the Lord in the first supper, yes, and the apostles also in celebrating that supper, used their own usual and decent apparel. And therefore, it is not disagreeable from the first institution, if the minister comes to the Lord's table covered with his own garment, if it is attractive and honest.[3291]

v.421

Surely the communicants wear their own usual apparel. We must take heed, then, that no superstition creeps in. Our forefathers, it seemed, wore a cloak thrown over their common garments. They did not do this following the example of Christ or the apostles, but according to man's tradition. At length, that garb which is used today, was adopted to imitate the priest's garments of the old law, and it was appointed to be worn by the ministers who would celebrate the supper. Nor does Innocent III, ignore this in the 4th chap, and 4th book of his work, De Sac. Altar. Mysterio.[3292] As for us, we have learned [3293] that all Levitical matters are not only put away, but are not to be brought into the church again, by anyone. Therefore, because we remain in the light of the gospel, and not in the shadow of the law, we reject that Levitical massing apparel for good cause.

I also declared in another place [3294] that it has been the manner in olden times,[3295] that every nation has used their own native and vulgar tongue [3296] in administering the sacraments. Of the gestures which the ministers use in celebrating the Lord's Supper, we can say nothing else out of the gospel than what we have learned: "The Lord took the bread, blessed it, broke it, distributed it," etc. If the minister follows these things, he does not need to be careful of other gestures. Those who today, by the invention of men, are received into the celebration of the mass, are so far off from giving any majesty to the mysteries, that they rather bring them more into contempt. I will say nothing else that may seem more grievous.

v.422

The matter is indifferent, whether the church takes the supper sitting down, or going to the table; whether a man takes the holy mysteries in his own hand, or receives it into his mouth at the hands of the one who ministers. It is most agreeable with the first simplicity and institution of the supper, to sit, and to receive the sacraments in a man's own hands by the one who ministers; and afterwards to break it, eat it, and to divide it for others. For as the Lord sat at table with his disciples, so he reached out the mysteries,[3297] saying: "Take, and divide it among you." Moreover, while there is more quietness and less stir in sitting at the supper, as the ministers carry the holy mysteries around the congregation, it is well known by histories of antiquity, that the sacrament has been delivered into the hands of the communicants. It is mere superstition and repugnant to the doctrine of the apostles, to scrape the hands of the lay people who have touched the holy sacrament of the supper. Why, by the same law, do they not also scrape the lips, tongue, and jaws of the communicants?

From these things, handled before, springs another question: What is to be thought of the remnants and leftovers of the Lord's Supper — whether any part of it should be reserved; and whether what is reserved or stored, should be adored? This question seems to have no godliness at all in it, but is altogether superstitious and very hurtful. For who does not know that bread and wine, outside the holy and lawful use appointed for it, are not a sacrament? Shall we proceed to demand with these sophisters, what the mouse gnaws when he gnaws the Lord's bread? These questions are most unworthy to be asked, and should be raked up in holy oblivion. As for storing the sacrament, the Lord teaches us not one word in the gospel, much less about worshipping it. "Take," he says, "eat, and divide it among you." He does not say, Store it and worship it; for true worshippers worship the Father in spirit and truth. Moreover, we read how the Lord plainly said in the gospel: "If they say to you, Behold, he is in the desert, do not go out; behold, he is in the innermost parts of the house, do not believe." He sets down the reason for his commandment: "For as the lightning comes from the east, and appears in the west, so will the coming of the Son of man be." ^{Mat 24.26-27}

v.423

The coming again of the Son of man,[3298] he says, will be glorious and not obscure; nor will he come again except to judge both the quick and the dead. And therefore St. Paul the apostle, teaching us true religion, would have us worship Christ, not upon the earth, but with our minds lifted to heaven, where he sits at the right hand of his Father. And who would be so frantic, I beseech you, to worship the holy sign instead of the holy thing itself? It appears by the decrees made of late, that these things were invented by man's device. Fr it is certain that the feast of Christ's body, commonly called Corpus Christi, was instituted only in recent years under pope Urban, in the year of our Lord, 1264; as it appears in Clement, the 3rd book, title 16, the chapter beginning, Si Dominum. [3299]

It remains that we discuss the question concerning the time of celebrating the Lord's Supper, and what season is best for it, morning or evening; whether we should sup together; whether we must receive it after fasting, or once we have dined; also, how often we must celebrate the supper, once, or more often, or more seldom. It is known evidently enough, that Christ sat down at the table with his disciples in the evening; but it does not follow from this, that the supper cannot be rightly celebrated at any other time than evening. The Lord, on the occasion of the feast of the Passover, and because he would be betrayed that night, both ate the supper that evening with his disciples, and also instituted that supper for us. Notwithstanding, he left us the liberty to move this mystery to the morning; for when we are sober, we are most fit to deal in all matters, specially in religion, for which we are then fitter than when our bellies are full of good cheer. Therefore, this banquet requires fasting and empty guests; yet not so much that a man may not taste something beforehand for his health's sake. For St. Paul says: "If any man is hungry, let him eat at home." ^{1Cor 11.34} The same apostle also would not have any other feast received together with the Lord's mystical supper. Therefore, we say that we should not receive it with other food.

v.424

Tertullian writes that Christians often used to eat other food with it. This kind of supper, he writes, was called agaph (agape), that is, mutual love or charity, borrowing the name from love.[3300] For the poor were refreshed with feasting of the richer sort. However, provision of food, drink, and other necessaries, might well enough be made for them outside the church. Paul would not permit in one place, both public feasts, and also celebrating the mystical supper of the Lord.

Furthermore, how many times a year the faithful ought to receive this sacrament of the Lord's Supper, the apostles have given no commandment, but left it indifferent to every church's discretion. For what is plainer than what St. Paul said: "As often as you eat of this bread, and drink of this cup, you declare the Lord's death until he comes?" ^{1Cor 11.26} For the Lord (as the same apostle records it), first commanding, said: "Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." However, let no man think that the celebration of the Lord's Supper is left so freely to him, that he need never receive it; for that would be no lawful liberty, but most unlawful licentiousness. Those who celebrate the supper of the Lord at certain and ordinary times of the year, would not have it brought into contempt or loathed because they frequent it daily. For they have some consideration of their own people; and they would have the supper celebrated worthily, and that the people have a desire for it. But those who celebrate it often, suppose that what is unfit, is that good things should be despised by often frequenting them. They say, the better the thing is, the more often it is to be used. Both these sorts desire to serve the Lord, and would have what the Lord has left free, done to great and good effect. If St. Augustine were made an umpire and judge between them, doubtless he would pronounce no other judgment than what he has already pronounced about it. Writing to Januarius, he says:

"He best decides this strife between them, who advised them especially to abide in the peace of Christ; and that according to his faith, every man do what he is persuaded is good and godly. For neither of them dishonours the body and blood of our Lord. Only, that food must not be contemned." [3301]

v.425

Now we have also to consider for whom this holy supper is instituted, and to whom it is to be administered. It seems that it is instituted and to be given to all faithful Christian people, of whatever sex, men and women, high and low. Therefore, so great a mystery is not to be cast to swine and dogs, to be contemned and trodden underfoot. Before it is administered, all men are to be earnestly and effectually admonished to whom this food pertains, namely, to those who acknowledge their sins, who are sorry for their faults, and who believe in Christ. All are to be admonished that, looking within, he prove himself; and afterward, so eat of this holy bread and drink of this holy drink, that he does not eat and drink it unworthily to his condemnation. But after this severe admonition, if anyone approaches the table and sits down, and by sitting down openly profess as it were, both that they are, and also desire to remain, true worshippers of Christ, by whom they trust to have remission of their sins — surely they are not to be excluded by the ministers, nor are the holy mysteries to be denied them. For the Lord himself, who is the searcher of hearts, severely, diligently, plainly, and in many words at his last supper, before he distributed the mysteries, admonished Judas, who was a hypocrite, thief, traitor, murderer, yes, a parricide, blasphemer, and forsaker of his master. But being admonished, and notwithstanding, Judas did not depart from the table, but stayed among the saints, the Lord did not violently push him away, nor openly bid him to depart. Nor did he withhold the Lord's bread from him, but gave it to him as he did to the others, even though he assuredly knew what he was. The ministers of the church do not always know this so certainly about those who sit down at the table. The Lord did not offend at all in doing this, nor did he cast what was holy to the dogs.

v.426

For the Lord warned him diligently about all matters of which he was to be warned; and yet, hearing and understanding them all, Judas remains among the saints, vaunts himself as one of the faithful, not as a hog; and as one of the faithful, he takes part of the bread and the cup. By this hypocrisy, he provoked the heavy judgment of God against him; even as today this holy food and holy drink turns to the destruction of both the body and soul of all hypocrites. Nor did the presence of the hypocrite at the Lord's Supper defile the other faithful disciples of Christ, who sat at the table. Likewise, neither are the faithful polluted today, even though they see many hypocrites sit down at the table with them; for they do not sup with them as with hypocrites, but as with the faithful. Meanwhile, the hypocrite hurts himself, and not others; he falls and perishes to his own destruction; he eats and drinks his own damnation; but the faithful lives by his own faith. We have treated this in other sermons.[3302]

And although infants are reputed to be of the church and in the number of the faithful, yet they are not capable of the supper. In this point, the ancient fathers shamefully erred. I have also noted this in the sermon about Baptism.[3303] Infants are not deprived of everlasting life, even if they depart out of this world without receiving this mystical food. This was instituted for those who are of lawful years, and not for infants. "Let a man examine himself," says the apostle, "and let him so eat of the bread, and drink of the cup." And the Lord says: "Do this in remembrance of me." And again: "Declare the Lord's death until he comes." All these sayings take place in people of lawful years, not in infants. Our children must be diligently instructed from their infancy, so that they may rightly understand those mysteries, and frequent them. This is what the Lord commanded the children of Israel, saying: "If your children say to you, What manner of worship is this? You shall answer, It is the sacrifice of the Lord's Passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel when he struck the Egyptians and delivered our houses."^Exo
12.26-27 Surely we must not show ourselves more slack in informing our children than they were, since we have received a more noble benefit than they did.

v.427

Like this question are these others: Whether the supper is to be celebrated privately for every cause or necessity? Whether it is to be carried to the sick and those who keep to their beds? Whether it be to be applied to the dead, that is to say, offered for the dead, to obtain rest for them? Touching these matters, I know what is commonly said and done. Some pestilence, famine, war, or tempest occurs, and then the supper is commanded to be celebrated, so that by this "sacrifice" as it were, [3304] the present calamity may be taken away. Again, one is sick; another perishes with hunger, and afflicted for lack of all kinds of necessaries; it requires the priest to have the Lord's Supper administered to him, so that thereby the disease may be cured by a quick and approved "remedy," and his hunger and poverty released. This is not the due celebration of the supper, but a filthy profanation of it. For the Lord has not instituted it to be a cleansing sacrifice against all calamities, by which he would be pleased; it is to be a memorial of his death, and a dutiful thanksgiving. For when we are at the supper, we offer nothing to him for which he should be favourable to us, and turn away such an evil from us, and give us such a good thing as we desire of him. Rather, we give thanks for the benefits which we have already received. Otherwise, it is lawful for those who are oppressed with troubles, to offer up their vows to the Lord (that is, their prayers); but it is not lawful to convert his holy mysteries to any other purpose than he has appointed. Nor do we have any examples to prove that any holy man ever used the Lord's Supper to any such end as these men use it.

The children of Israel received the feast of the Paschal Lamb in remembrance of their deliverance out of Egypt, that they should continue thankful to so beneficial a Lord. How great an offence they would have committed if they had so often eaten their banquet because, being oppressed with calamities, they desired to be delivered, and desired it by doing that deed! They received the ark of the covenant from the Lord in token of his divine presence and assured help; but when, contrary to the end for which it was appointed, they bore it into the camp with the intent that they might obtain the victory by it, they themselves were put to flight and slain, and the ark was carried away by the Philistines into captivity.

v.428

Again, if the Lord's Supper is a public holy feast of the whole church gathered together in one, in which there should be breaking, distributing, eating and drinking, and thereby the communion of the body and blood of Christ are declared and sealed — then it follows, that the Lord's Supper should not be ordained for anyone in health or sickness, nor for anyone lying sick in his bed or at the point of death, whether privately at home, or openly at church. Nor can the godly require the Lord's Supper for any such private uses. For the institution of Christ our Lord must not be altered by any human authority or custom. Truly, St. Paul requires a public assembly of the church and a general meeting for the due celebrating of the supper. "When you meet together therefore in one place, this is not to take the supper of the Lord," that is to say, "You do not eat the Lord's Supper." The reason is, "For everyone, when they should eat, takes his own supper," etc. Therefore, he would not have anything done privately in this. Likewise, in the same place, he says that they meet together and eat the Lord's Supper to their own damnation, when they hasten to the supper, not waiting for the congregation, until they all meet and eat and drink together. For he says: "Therefore, my brethren, when you meet to eat and drink, wait one for another (if any man is hungry, let him eat at home, namely, so that he is not constrained [3305] to eat before the others arrive), so that you do not meet together to your condemnation." Therefore, the Lord's Supper is not a private, but a public supper, to be given to no man privately. And because that assembly is not public or general, when four or five communicate with the sick, their statement is nothing who say that the supper may be ordained for the sick, if others sup with them.[3306] Moreover, who would deny that the example of Christ and the apostles is to be perpetually followed? [3307]

v.429

But it is evident enough that Christ celebrated his supper in a common dining place, having gathered the church to him, as well as it might be gathered at that time. St. Paul says that he followed the example of the Lord in that point, and that he delivered no other thing to the church than what he received from the Lord. Nor do we read in any place of the scriptures, that the other apostles of Christ carried the sacrament to the sick, or that they ordained the holy supper privately for someone to appease his trial. But all the apostles command us in every place to confirm and strengthen the sick and afflicted conscience [3308] with the Lord's word. They also teach us to succour the distressed with diligent prayer. St. James has diligently set down in writing, how the faithful shall behave themselves towards the sick and those who are departing out of this world. ^{Jas 5.13f} But touching celebrating or carrying the sacrament to them, he says not one word. Nor is it likely, that the apostles, the most faithful doctors of the church, would ignore the matter, if they had thought it pertained chiefly to our salvation. They warned us often of things of far less importance. And it is certain that they have taught the church all things that belong to true godliness and salvation. but as for this matter, they have not mentioned one word of it.

Some object from the Acts of the Apostles this authority: "And breaking bread from house to house, they ate meals together with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God." ^{Act 2.46} But that is to be understood about bodily and nourishing food, not mystical food: "They received food or sustenance together." For we read in the 58th chapter of Isaiah, that breaking bread is the same as feeding; it signifies that here also. For the richer gave food to the poorer, which they did with a cheerful, not with a sorrowful heart; and those who received the benefit praised God.^{Act 2.44-46} But if any man stubbornly contends that the apostles supped in private houses, we answer that it says nothing of the present matter of the sick, and of private communion; for as I said before, at that time they used private houses instead of churches.

v.430

And therefore, they supped in private houses, not to feed the sick with the bread of the sacrament, but because the universal church in that place was gathered together in those houses, as it appears in the 20th chapter of the Acts; as is the way during persecutions.^{Act 20.23}

They object, moreover, that the ancient fathers sent the sacrament to those who were bound in prison, and to those who were departing,to feed on as they went on their way. But I have declared elsewhere,[3309] why the ancient fathers did so. To this we also add that man's custom cannot prejudice the word of God. The blessed martyr Irenaeus writes that the bishops of Rome usually sent the sacrament to other bishops who came to Rome from other places, as a token of concord and agreement.[3310] But that custom was not used by all bishops, nor is it used in the church at present. From this it follows that many things were used by the ancient fathers (such as what we said before, in giving the sacrament to infants) which, notwithstanding, are no law for us. Good men today may also allow a private supper for a time, for those who do not yet understand the full use of the supper. But who would gather from this, that every man should do what is permitted for some out of sufferance? If we continue to contentiously affirm that it is a relief for us in our travels, then it will grow to this (which we saw happen about a hundred years ago): that hope and confidence will be put in receiving the sacrament, as though we were acceptable to God because of it, and when we depart out of this life we would fly immediately up into heaven — but without receiving the sacrament, we would be thrown directly down to hell. There must also arise sundry other errors from it. Nor is there any necessity that constrains us to administer the sacrament to the sick. For just as prisoners are absent from receiving the Lord's Supper without danger to their salvation, so likewise are the sick and those who are ready to die. For being gathered to the body of Christ by perfect faith, though absent in body, they are present with the congregation in mind; and thus, they too are nevertheless made partakers of all spiritual good things.[3311]

v.431

And it is sufficient for them, that as long as they have been in health, they have always been present at the holy mysteries. The feast of Passover was not celebrated everywhere, but only at Jerusalem, in one place. But how many were there, do we think, that because of their bodily health, impaired by sickness and old age, could not travel to Jerusalem from so large and wide a kingdom? Even though no one brought home for them a piece of the paschal lamb in their pockets, notwithstanding, they communicated with the whole church of Israel. And who doubts that by the coming of Christ, the condition of the Christians is not improved? [3312]

Our Lord Christ did not institute his mystical supper for the dead, but only for the living. Therefore, it is not to be celebrated for the dead, to be applied to their redemption. Those who die without faith, immediately fall under the judgment of damnation; but those who are dead in Christ are already joined to the company of the elders, and stand before the Lamb, singing Hallelujah forevermore. For I have declared in my sermon about the soul,[3313] that the salvation of faithful souls who are departed by corporal death, is most undoubted. And where some object that the ancient fathers have mentioned offerings for the dead, we suppose that it does not pertain to us. For we believe the canonical scriptures without contradiction. We do not believe the church fathers further than they can prove their own sayings by the canonical scriptures; nor would they themselves have believed otherwise. And therefore, if the fathers think that the supper is a sacrifice, and that it is to be offered to procure rest for departed souls, we do not receive that opinion. For it does not agree with the canonical scriptures, which teach that the Lord did not institute his supper for that purpose; and therefore, God is displeased rather than pleased by such an abuse of the supper. Indeed, no work of man can sanctify, however good it may be, much less if it is against God's word, since that prerogative belongs only to the merit of the Son of God. And moreover, departed souls are not in any such state in that other world, that they can or should be helped by any works in this world.

v.432

But if the ancient fathers understand an oblation or offering to mean the sacrifice of praise or thanksgiving, we will not strive against them. But oblations may be made for the dead, that is to say, thanks may be given to God and his goodness praised, who has called out of this miserable world those who were endued with true faith, and has joined them to the companies of angels and all the blessed saints in that everlasting kingdom of all joy and felicity. But surely there is no truth or godliness that would have us celebrate the supper for the dead.

And we make a distinction between a sacrifice and an oblation. For there is a sacrifice of expiation, and there is a sacrifice of confession or praise. The sacrifice of expiation is offered to cleanse or purge sins, and also as satisfaction for sins. This cannot be accomplished without death and blood, as St. Paul the apostle plainly shows in the 9th chapter to the Hebrews. The sacrifice of Christ was such a sacrifice (the figures of which were all the sacrifices of all the holy fathers of the old Testament). Being both priest and sacrifice, he offered up himself once to God the Father, while he suffered upon the cross, and shedding his most innocent blood, gave up the ghost there. The supper today is no such sacrifice, but a commemoration of the death or of the sacrifice once offered upon the cross. For Christ neither should nor can be sacrificed again; being once offered, he is sufficient to cleanse all the sins of all ages. Why then should he be sacrificed again? Nor can the Son of God be sacrificed by any man, since he offered himself once to God for that same cause, being a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek. Therefore, in the church, the minister of the church does not sacrifice the body and blood of Christ in the supper for the living; but together with the whole church, he celebrates the remembrance of the sacrifice which was once offered upon the cross. As I have said about this elsewhere, [3314] the supper may also be called a sacrifice, because it is a sacrament or sign of the sacrifice which was once offered by Christ, as Augustine has also left written.[3315]

v.433

The sacrifice of confession is a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, which we offer to God for the redemption and benefits of God, freely bestowed upon his church. And since we always offer it to God in prayer, but chiefly when we are joined in the sacrament of the eucharist or celebrating the supper, the ancient fathers therefore called it a "sacrifice," because in it we give thanks to God for our deliverance from death, and for the inheritance of everlasting life which is given to us. We told you before that this sacrifice is generally offered by the universal church in celebrating the supper, and not by the minister of the [particular] church alone, for those who live in that church.

Now, up to here we have discussed certain circumstances or questions which are prone to be asked about the Lord's Supper, so far as the necessity of the matter seemed to require, and as much as our small ability was able to perform. It remains that we descend further to declare for what reason the Lord's Supper was instituted by the Lord. This truly is not rashly reckoned among the chief questions, for we mentioned it immediately upon beginning this sermon. For the Lord, by setting bread and wine before us in the holy banquet, would have his promise and communion testified to us, and his gifts represented unto us, and made manifest to our senses; and he would also gather us visibly into one body, and retain the memory of his death in the hearts of the faithful; and finally, he would put us in mind of our duty, chiefly of praise and thanksgiving. We have severally expounded all these things, having discoursed about them at large in the general consideration and treatise of the sacraments. And therefore, at present we will do no more than touch them briefly for memory's sake, meaning to handle those things somewhat more largely, which by occasion arise as they are treated.

By this word communion, I mean, the society, conjunction, or partaking of the Lord Christ, by which, through his Spirit, he wholly knits and joins himself to us, and we are made partakers of him by faith, and are coupled to him. So that, being delivered from sin and death by him, we may live in him, being made heirs of everlasting life; and that he may live in us and be wholly ours, as we are wholly his.

v.434

Nor do we say that the communion of the Lord's body and blood is anything else. For by his body which was delivered over to death for us, and by his blood which was shed for the remission of our sins, it has come to pass that we, being purged from our sins, are made his members; and he now quickens us and sustains us, as food which gives life. For this reason, we are also said to eat and drink him as the food and drink of life. ^{Joh 6.53} The promise, therefore, which we just mentioned, is none other than the word of God, which declares to us that life is in Christ alone. For Christ delivered his body to death, and shed his blood, for the remission of sins, so that we, believing in him, may have life everlasting. But this promise and communion of Christ is not first of all given in the supper, nor by the supper. For the Lord our God, immediately after the creation of the world, promised life and remission of sins to Adam and his seed through Christ; and afterward He renews the same promise with Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David, and the other fathers. And the fathers communicated [3316] with Christ and were partakers of his goodness, as Paul the apostle witnesses, with the whole scripture.

But this great goodness did not happen only to the fathers. For the promise was made to us also, and the communion of Christ was conveyed to us, and is conveyed particularly to every one of us in holy baptism, and also in the manifest preaching of the gospel. Moreover, we receive it by faith, by which we are joined to Christ, and are made his members. Therefore, as we are not void and without Christ before the supper, but are quickened by him and made his members or partners, so in the very action or celebration of the supper, the promise is renewed to us, and we renew and continue that fellowship which we have in Christ by the body and blood of Christ spiritually, truly participating in his life and all his good gifts through faith. And by this means, we eat the Lord's body, and we drink his blood. Moreover, the Lord visibly declares and seals to us that spiritual communion and promise of life made through Christ, by visible signs (the banquet of bread and wine) joined to his word or promise (that it is a quickening bread and drink).

v.435

And we, having received the signs by faith and obedience, being sealed to them, take upon us the promise and communion of Christ,[3317] by imprinting or transferring into our bodies the seal or sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. The apostle also treated this in 1Corinthians chap. 10, and Romans, chap. 4. We also said more about it in the general treatise about the sacraments.

But before I further treat the other ends of the supper (consisting in its description), I will recite what some others allege about the promise and communion of Christ. They condemn our doctrine as heretical. For they contend that the Lord promised that he would give to the faithful his very body and blood, to be eaten and drunk in the form of bread and wine. Therefore, they say, it must by all means, and without any contradiction, be believed that the bread is the Lord's natural body, and the wine his blood; and that these ought to be eaten and drunk, not only spiritually, but also corporally, unto life everlasting. And they prove that Christ is bodily present in the supper, and that the bread is his body and the wine is his blood, by this reasoning: That which the Lord speaks cannot be false, for he is the truth itself; and he says, that the bread is his body, and the wine is his blood; therefore, the bread and wine of the sacrament are truly, really, and essentially the body and blood of Christ. This truth, they say, must be believed literally, even though reason itself, the whole world, all our senses, and nature itself, is against it.

We answer that indeed all things are very true which the Lord has spoken, who is truth itself; but it is in that sense which he himself said and understood it, and not in that meaning which we would force upon his words. Therefore, before all things we must search out the true sense of the Lord's words in the supper, "This is my body," "This is my blood," etc.

These men cry out, saying, that the Lord's words ought to be expounded literally, and according to the letter; for they are the words of a testament; and that does not permit his words to be expounded by a trope or figure.

v.436

But we say that all the evangelical and apostolic books are included under the title "testament"; and therefore, throughout all and every place of the scripture, nothing must be corrupted, nothing added, nothing diminished, unless we would be subject to the curse of God. And yet we are also constrained to confess that there are infinite statements in the holy scriptures, which if we proceed to expound them literally,[3318] according to the letter, we would overthrow the whole scripture and the true faith, or we would seem to charge the scriptures with lies and contradictions. I will bring out one or two examples of this sort.

The evangelist St. John writes: "The Word became flesh." Now if we cling to the very words, then we must say that God was changed into man. But this sense is contrary to the faith and to the scriptures. For God is immutable. And Christ is true God and man, and therefore he is without any mixture or conversion of natures, but they remain in their own properties. And so we allow that exposition which declares that the Word took flesh, and that God was made man. And this sense is not against scripture; for Paul says that the Son of God in no way took upon himself the nature of angels, but the seed of Abraham. Moreover, the catholic fathers, together with the apostle, expound this word est, by this word assumpsit, took upon himself. Theodoret has treated this at large in his Polymorphic, Dialog, i.[3319] Again, the Lord says in the same gospel of John: "The Father is greater than I."^{Joh 10.29}

v.437

We would force an inequality upon the holy Trinity,[3320] if we were to contend that the Lord's words are to be literally understood, without interpretation. But by comparing with other places and taking advice from faith, we say that the Son is equal with the Father touching his divinity, but inferior to him in respect to his humanity, according to that saying of the prophet, which is alleged by the apostle to that purpose: "You have made him little inferior to the angels." ^Heb
2.7 We read in the gospel, that Christ our Lord had brethren, and that St. John the apostle was called the son of Mary, and Mary was called the mother of John. But who, unless he were infected with the heresy of Helvidius [3321] would stand on this: that these places are to be expounded according to the letter? [3322] — especially since other places of the scripture manifestly prove that those were called "brethren" who indeed were brothers' and sisters' children, cousin-germans,[3323] kinsmen, or near in blood. Also, the circumstances of the place in the 19th chapter of St. John prove that Mary was committed to John, as a mother to her son. Therefore, if they still have a desire to wrangle, as up to now (at their own pleasure) we have found them doing — crying out and reiterating, "This is my body, This is my blood; This is, This is, This is, This is; Is, Is, Is" — then we will also repeat: "The word was made, was made, was made flesh: The Father is, is, is greater than I: Christ has brethren; I say, he has brethren, he has brethren. The scripture has it so. The truth says so." But now, tell me, what benefit redounds to the church by these troublesome and odious outcries and most froward contentions? How will the hearers be edified? How will the glory of God be enlarged? How will the truth be presented? Necessity therefore constrains us to confess that in some places we must forsake the letter, but not the sense. And that sense is to be allowed which faith itself, compared with other places of scripture, and which the context of the place (the first being compared with the last), yield of their own accord as it were. Yet, we also cry out and repeat again and again, that we should not without great cause, go from the simplicity of the word. [3324]

v.438

But when the absurdity (not of reason, but of piety), and the repugnancy of the scriptures, and the contrariety to the articles of our faith, force us — then we say, affirm, and contend that it is godly, indeed necessary, to depart from the letter and from the simplicity of the words. And these places [3325] which we just alleged, constrain us to depart from the letter in these words of the Lord: "This is my body, This is my blood." We will prove it by sound arguments, taken from the scriptures, once I have briefly declared the true and ancient sense and meaning of those usual and solemn words.

The Lord, sitting at the table with his disciples, reached out the bread to them with his own hand. And having only one true, human, and natural body, with that very same body, he delivered bread to his disciples, and not any other man's body, nor his own. Nor does that trouble us, which St. Augustine recites from David, in expounding the 34th Psalm, "And he was borne in his own hands;" [3326]to which Augustine immediately adds:

"Who is borne in his own hands? A man may be borne in the hands of other men, but none can be borne in his own. This is therefore meant about David, not Christ. For Christ was borne in his own hands, when he said, commending his body to them, 'This is my body:' for that body was borne in his own hands." [3327]

By these words, St. Augustine does not pretend that Christ has two human bodies; but he means that the human body borne in his hands was the sacramental body, that is to say, the bread which is the sacrament of the true body; for he speaks plainly, saying: "Commending his body, he bore that body in his own hands." For in the second sermon, almost in the same words, being but a little changed, Augustine asks: "How was he borne in his own hands? For when he had commended his body and blood, he took that in his hands which the faithful know; and in a way, he bore himself, when he said, This is my body." [3328]

v.439

By these words he manifestly declared that he did not mean that Christ in his natural body delivered his natural body to his disciples; but he meant what the faithful know, namely, the sacrament or mystery. For it follows: "And he bore himself in a way (I beg you, mark this saying, "in a way"), when he said, This is my body." Therefore, those solemn words, "This is my body which is broken for you;" and likewise, "This is my blood which is shed for you;" can have no other sense than this: This is a commemoration, memorial, or remembrance, a sign or sacrament, of my body which is given for you; This cup, or rather the wine in the cup, signifies or represents to you my blood which was once shed for you. For there follows in the Lord's solemn words, that which notably confirms this meaning: "Do this in the remembrance of me." As if he had said: Now I am present with you, before your eyes; I will die and ascend into heaven, and then this holy bread and wine will be a memorial or token of my body and blood given and shed for you. Then break the bread and eat it, distribute the cup and drink it; and do this in remembrance of me, praising my benefits bestowed on you in redeeming you and giving you life.

Although this interpretation is most slanderously reviled and has become abominable in the sight of many, yet it is manifestly the true, proper, and most ancient interpretation of all others. Tertullian, Lib. iv. contra Mart., says: "Christ, taking the bread, and distributing it to his disciples, made it his body, in saying, 'This is my body,' that is to say, the figure of my body." [3329] Jerome on St. Matthew's gospel says: "As in prefiguring Christ by Melchizedek, the priest of Almighty God, so in giving bread and wine, he might represent the truth of his body." [3330]

v.440

Chrysostom also says, in his 83rd homily on Matthew: "If Jesus is not dead, then whose token and sign is this sacrifice?" [3331] Ambrose says on first Corinthians, chap. 11: "Because we are delivered by the Lord's death, being mindful of it, in eating and drinking we signify the flesh and the blood which were offered for us." [3332] Augustine also, in many places, heaps up many figures of speech like this: "The blood is the soul; The rock was Christ;" and "This is my body." Let us hear then what he says about these phrases, so that we may understand what he thinks of the true interpretation of this text, "This is my body." In the 3rd book of Questions, in the 57th question on Leviticus, he says:

"It remains that what is called the soul, is that which signifies the soul; for the thing that signifies is usually called by the name of that thing it signifies; as it is written, 'The seven ears of wheat are seven years;' he did not say, signify seven years; and, 'Seven oxen are seven years' and many like things. In the same way it is said: 'The rock was Christ.' He did not say, The rock signifies Christ, but said it as though it were so indeed; yet it is not the same in substance, but only by signification. So likewise the blood: because through a certain vital substance it signifies the soul, in the sacraments it is called the soul." [3333]

v.441

The same Augustine, against Adimantus, cap. 12, also says: "So blood is the soul, as the rock was Christ." And again in the same place he says: "I may also expound that the precept [3334] of the blood and soul of the beast, etc., consists in the sign. For the Lord did not hesitate to say, 'This is my body,' when he gave the sign of his body." [3335]

This much from Augustine. There is no fool so doltish [3336] as to say that these words of Augustine are dark or doubtful. Whoever wishes may add to this what that same author has plainly written concerning figurative speech, Libro ii. Contra Advers. Legis. cap. 2. [3337]

But let us leave behind citing men's testimonies concerning the proper and most ancient exposition of Christ's words, "This is my body." Let us proceed to allege sound arguments from the scriptures, as we promised — to prove thereby, that sometimes we must of necessity depart from the letter, and that Christ's words are accordingly to be expounded by a figure, as I said.

First, it is evident that the Lord at present instituted a sacrament. By this it is manifest that the Lord spoke in the same way he tends to speak [3338] in other places of the scripture concerning sacraments; such as when he says that circumcision is the Lord's covenant; that the lamb is the Lord's Passover; that sacrifices are sins and sanctifications; and that baptism is the water of regeneration. But we declared in the sixth sermon of this decade, that all these kinds of phrases remain to be expounded. This saying or phrase, "This is my body," "This is my blood:" is therefore to be expounded as sacramental. For it admits the common interpretation which was most truly and certainly used and received by the catholic church, ever since the time of the apostles; yes, and ever since the time of the patriarchs until this day — namely, that signs receive the terms and names of those things which are signified. Thereby, they receive no part of the substance of those things, but signs continue and remain in their own proper nature.

v.442

For this reason, in the gospel written by St. Luke, our Lord Christ joined the banquet of the Passover with our Lord's Supper in such a way that he substituted the one in place of the other. Thus, it would not have seemed strange if he said in this supper, "This is my body;" for in solemnising the feast of Passover it is said, "The lamb is the Lord's Passover." ^{Exo 12.11} This kind of speech was not too dark to be understood by the apostles, who understood that this lamb was a remembrance of the passage once past. By that means also, they understood that the Lord's bread, given to them by the Lord, is a remembrance of his body. For in other matters of much less weight they diligently questioned and inquired of the Lord touching the proper sense and signification of the words; but they never once doubted or asked any question about these words: for all sacramental phrases were very well known to the holy fathers.

Moreover, if we continue to understand the words of the supper simply, according to the letter; it follows, that the Lord has delivered to us his body and blood, to be received corporally. And, I ask you, to what end would he deliver them if not that we might live, receiving them corporally? But the universal canonical scripture teaches that our life or salvation, and our justification, consists in faith alone. We repose this faith in the body which was given and the blood that was shed for us (which is the spiritual eating) — not in any work of ours, much less in the bodily eating of Christ's body. In another place, he shows us that this is not available at all. So then, since there is but one means by which to obtain life and justification, and that means is most simple — namely, by faith alone, and not by the work of our eating — the scripture is not repugnant to itself. Surely then, the Lord has not instituted any such work of eating; and therefore, the solemn words of the supper admit some other exposition.

v.443

If the bread were the Lord's true and natural body, it must follow that even the wicked, being partakers of this bread, would eat Christ's body, and that truly his flesh would be food to feed their bellies — since those who eat it lack both the mind and the faith to do otherwise. But all holy men abhor that thought as absurd and most unworthy (I will further treat this matter later). Therefore, the saying of Christ, "This is my body," allows for an exposition.

The whole universal canonical scripture witnesses that our Lord Jesus Christ took a body of the undefiled virgin, consubstantial in all points to our bodies, that is to say, a human body. Indeed, he was made like us in all respects, except sin. Now, it is manifest that he spoke of his true sensible body when he says, "This is my body;'' for he adds, "Which is broken or given for you." But the true, natural, sensible, or human body was delivered up and died for us. And this does not appear in the bread, nor under the bread. [3339] Therefore, the Lord's words must be expounded.

Surely, if it had been the Lord's will to make his body of bread and his blood of wine, according to the power by which he made all things with his word; as soon as he said, "This is my body," the bread would have been the body of Christ, and that very body of which he spoke, would have been mortal, passible, and felt and seen. For "he spoke the word, and they were made; he commanded, and they were created." He said, "Let there be light," and light was made; and it was such a light as might be perceived and shine. But in the supper, we see nothing in Christ's hands but bread, no body. And therefore, it was not our Saviour's meaning by, "This is my body," to create or make his body of the bread. For if he had meant to do so, surely it would have been done.

Nor is there any reason why they should cast their mists before our eyes as it were,[3340] and apply their coloured interpretation to a rotten construction, using words like "unspeakably, supernaturally, invisibly, not qualitatively, not quantitatively, not in a place." [3341] For by these terms, intending to bring something else to pass, by the wonderful judgment of God they quite subvert and overthrow all that is their own.

v.444

For if their mystery is unspeakable, then why do they use these terms, "essentially, substantially, really, corporally"? For those who speak so, utter and truly set down the manner of his presence. If the bread is supernaturally the body of Christ, then why do they add "naturally?" And if the bread is Christ's body invisibly, then it cannot be corporally, nor can it be a true body, whose property is to be visible. Who would not laugh if he heard that fire burnt and gave no heat, and that light shined and gave no light? If Christ is not present in quality, quantity, and in a place, then he is not corporally present. For, I ask you, do not qualities, quantities, and a place, belong to the body? Hear what Augustine says to Dardanus touching the presence of God:

"Take the space of place from bodies, and they will be nowhere;[3342] and because they will be nowhere, they will not be at all. Take the bodies themselves from the qualities of bodies, and they will be nowhere; and therefore, it must be that they cannot be at all." [3343]

Let us not therefore rob or spoil the Lord's body of its properties, and so deny the truth of his body. Again, so that we do not bring so many contrary and absurd things into one and the same opinion, we interpret the words of the Lord, "This is my body," as "This is a memorial or remembrance of my body;" or else, "This signifies my body."

Moreover, if this word est, "is," is to be understood substantively in the Lord's words, "This is my body," then it follows that the bread is changed into Christ's body. But all our senses witness that this is not so; the very substance remains, not just the accidents (the qualities) of the bread. It is necessary, therefore, that our adversaries understand that in this, with this, or under this, is Christ's body. But then they have left the simplicity of the Lord's words, who said, "This is my body," and not, "Under this is my body."

Again, if we are so tied to the words recited above, that upon pain of sacrilege we may not depart from them a hair's breadth, then I beseech you, how dare Luke and Paul recite the words which belong to the cup far otherwise than Matthew and Mark?

v.445

For these first two set down the words belonging to the cup in this way: "This is my blood which is of the new Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of their sins." But the second two recite them thus: "This cup being the new Testament through my blood, which is shed for you;" and, "This cup is the new Testament in my blood." But should we think that there is no difference between the blood of Christ and the new Testament? St. Paul defines the new Testament, after Jeremiah, to be a full remission of all sins; and he same says that this remission of sins is obtained through the blood of Christ. But who would so impudently contend and dare to affirm that the very cup, or the wine in the cup, is really and substantially the remission of sins? What reason is there, if we hold onto and stick precisely to the letter, why we should be forced to confess that the cup — not the wine, nor the drink — is either the blood of Christ, the new Testament, or the remission of sins? For the Lord does not say, "This wine," but "This cup." However, to avoid absurdity in this place, we willingly admit a trope. Why then are we not indifferent [3344] in a matter of equal importance? Therefore, just as the cup or wine is the testament, or the remission of sins, so likewise the cup or wine is Christ's blood; and in like manner, the bread is Christ's body. Yet the cup is not substantially the remission of sins or blood, but the sacrament of Christ's blood, by which the new testament was dedicated, and full remission of sins was obtained for us. Therefore, the bread is the body of Christ, because it is the sacrament of the body of Christ.

Surely it is a strong and firm argument that we have produced. And of no less force and strength, we hope, is what remains, which we will now produce. The Lord at the celebrating of the holy supper says: "Do this in remembrance of me." These words do not import that we should determine that the one whom we ought to remember is really present; for who would be said to "remember" those things which he physically beholds before him?

v.446

But we must go from the simple signification of remembrance or memory, especially since Paul says: "Declare the Lord's death until he comes." For this is what we gather by it: the one whose remembrance is repeated until he comes or returns, is surely not considered present, but is looked for to come. Therefore, the Lord's body which was given for us, the remembrance of which is celebrated in the mystical supper, is not present, but is looked for to come.

Now those places touching Christ's leaving the world and departing there, do not simply admit the interpretation of the words of the supper. "It is expedient for you," he says, "that I depart: for if I do not go away, the Comforter will not come to you; but if I depart from you, then I will send him to you." ^Joh
16.7 Also: "I went from the Father, and came into the world."^{Joh 18.37} Again, "I leave the world and go to the Father." ^Joh
13.1 And again: "Henceforth I am not in the world; but these are in the world, and I come to you." ^Joh
17.11 These sayings, truly, are opposed: That he went from here; That he is no longer in the world; That he left the world — and this, That his natural body is still in the world, and it is given and received really and substantially in the supper. Nor is it lawful to figuratively interpret the testimonies which are taken from St. John's gospel concerning Christ's departure; for the apostles confess that the Lord spoke plainly or simply, without any parable.^{Joh 16.29} Therefore, since the apostles testify that this speech of the Lord was simple and simply pronounced, it is needful that those other words which contradict "This is my body," be taken figuratively, so that the scripture does not oppose itself.

Moreover, those places which bear record that Christ's body, after the resurrection, was circumscribed by place, was seen and felt, and which also differentiate between Christ's glorified body and the angelic spirits (by the way, we may see here that no place is left for the device of the definitive mean), do not allow for the bare interpretation of the solemn words of the Lord. The angels say: "He is risen, he is not here. Behold the place where they laid him." ^{Mar 16.6} Also: "He will go before you into Galilee; there you will see him." ^Mat
28.7 And again he himself says to his disciples: "Feel me, and see: a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see me have."^{Luk 24.39}

v.447

These sayings about the glorified body (which ascended and sits at the right hand of the Father) conflict wholly with ubiquity or being in every place, and the insensibility of Christ's body. Notwithstanding, this must be granted if we proceed to force the real presence of Christ's body out of the words about the supper, as simply understood. To this belongs what the apostle says, disputing about the resurrection of the dead: "If the dead do not rise, then neither is Christ risen." ^{1Cor 15.16} But "Christ is risen, being the firstfruits of those who sleep;" ^{1Cor 15.20} and therefore we shall rise also. Therefore, our own bodies being raised again, and it appearing what manner of body Christ's glorious body was, or is, our bodies will be made alike. And our bodies will be true bodies, consisting of sinews, veins, flesh, skin, and bones, visible, not invisible, and remaining in some certain place in heaven, not everywhere. From this it follows that the Lord's body is not invisible and everywhere. But if any man thinks that is not a good argument, which is fetched from our raised bodies to the Lord's raised body, or that it is contrariwise, let him accuse St. Paul, who taught us this by his example. Therefore, the catholic and right ancient faith constrains us to expound the words of the supper by a trope or figure.

Finally, when the Capernaites heard the Lord dispute about eating his body and drinking his blood, and thought and imagined a carnal eating and drinking, he said that he would ascend into heaven: namely, that they should not think about eating his natural body, since he would ascend into heaven in the same body. Nor is there left here any place for the new and frivolous device of certain men,[3345] who pretend that to ascend into heaven is nothing else than to lay down the weak state and condition of the body, and to receive a supernatural one.

v.448

For St. Luke —whom we must altogether believe rather than such subtle devices or rather follies — says that the Lord was lifted up on high, and carried up into heaven from the sight of his disciples. Moreover, that his body was received by a cloud; and that his disciples looked up into heaven after him, until they heard the angels say to them that he would return again in the very same manner as they saw him depart. But who does not know that he will come again in the clouds of heaven? Therefore heaven, into which the Lord ascended, is the name of a place, not of a state or condition. Also in the gospel he promises us a place with himself, saying: "If I go to prepare you a place, I will come again, and take you unto me; that where I am, there you may be also."^{Joh 14.3} Yes, he laid down all the conditions and infirmities of a mortal body in his resurrection; so that he had no need to lay them down at his ascension.

I suppose none of the faithful would deny that the Lord instituted nothing for us in vain, or without some singular and special commodity to us. But when the Lord said in the gospel, that his flesh being corporally eaten availed nothing; and where he speaks of no other body than that very same one of which he spoke in the words of the supper, namely, which he gave for us; it follows without any contradiction, that the Lord delivered nothing to us in the supper but what would profit us. But he would have delivered that which would not have profited us, if he had given us his body to be eaten corporally. It is therefore evident that it is very necessary that the words of the supper should be expounded.

To this belongs the notable prophecy and manifest commandment of our Lord Jesus Christ, saying in the gospel:

"Then if they say to you, Look, here is Christ, or there is Christ, do not believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will arise, and they will work great signs and wonders, so that if it were possible, the very elect would be brought into error. Behold, I have told you beforehand. If therefore they say to you, Behold, he is in the wilderness; do not go out. Behold, he is in the inner-most parts of the house,"

That is, in the closets or coffers, for this word, en tameioiv, en tameiois, signifies the most secret and inner-most parts of all the house, in which we usually lay up those things which we would keep safest; in Dutch we call it Schryn, schloss, und ghalt);

"do not believe it. For just as the lightning comes out of the east, and appears in the west, so shall the coming of the Son of man be."^{Mat 24.23-27}

v.449

But although this place is used to explain many of the calamities of the Jews, what St. Jerome confesses cannot be denied, that likewise the destiny of the whole world is prophesied about, even to its end.[3346] Therefore this place which we have alleged, concludes with the saying concerning Christ's last coming into the world at the day of judgment. And moreover. it cannot be denied that the Lord absolutely condemns that doctrine which claims that Christ remains or is present in diverse places of the world, in boxes or enclosed places. Not only do the books of the teachers of transubstantiation claim this, but tabernacles are erected to Christ's body [3347] (which they call meat-tents [3348]), and also chapels with famous temples and monasteries. In all and every one of these places, I say, they show us "Christ," saying, "Look, here is Christ, and there is Christ; behold the bread of angels. Christ is wholly in all these sacrifices, and he is fully and wholly in every part of them, in the same way he was when he was born of the virgin Mary, and hung upon the cross." They confirm this by and by with "miracles" and "wonders"; they also present it with proclamations, saying that such great mysteries are not to be inquired about, but simply to be believed; and that these things were wrought unspeakably and invisibly by the omnipotence of God. Nor did the Lord ignore how much this error would increase. There will be so many people who receive this error, running after Christ into the deserts and innermost places of their houses, that even the elect will be in danger.

v.450

But meanwhile, in such great a peril and danger of things, what does Christ teach his elect to do? Immediately he adds: "Do not believe it." What, do not believe that Christ is here or there on earth, in the wilderness, or in the innermost parts of the house, or even in the midst of the cities, or in the fields? He adds moreover: "Do not go out." Do not follow the multitude, which seeks Christ in a distant place, as if he were still resident on the earth. Therefore now, if the whole world, and all the councils in the world, all the kings and princes, indeed, if all the angels and saints, were to command us to believe that Christ is here or there corporally, the commandment of our only Redeemer Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the wisdom of the Father, by whom all things were made, forbids us to believe it. It should have that authority among all the godly, that they may know that they must not believe as creatures command them, but only as the Creator has commanded them.

Moreover, the Lord in this very same place in the gospel, grants us a reason for his doctrine. For why must we not believe that Christ is resident or bodily present upon the earth, but invisibly? Because, just as lightning comes from the east and appears in the west, so shall the coming of the Son of man be. This is like saying, The Son of God came once humbly into the earth, to redeem us through his humility and death on the cross; this being finished, he forsook the earth, and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father. From there he will not return into our regions except for judgment. But then he will appear glorious, noble, to be seen by all men, like the clearest sun, or rather like a lightning, right terrible to all the wicked. And therefore, there is no cause why, from the time of his ascension until his coming to judgment, we should look for him to come invisibly, and to remain corporally present with us. St. Jerome, expounding the same place, says:

"This also must be said, that the second coming of our Saviour will not be shown in humility as before, but in glory. It would be foolish therefore, to seek him in a little corner, or in some secret place, who is the light of the whole world." [3349]

v.451

But lest I seem to stand on some human authority, I will repeat what St. Paul teaches us in his epistle to the Hebrews, saying:

"Christ appeared once before the end of the world, to put away sin by offering up himself. And as it is appointed to men to die once, and after this comes the judgment, even so Christ, once being offered up to take away the sins of many, will the second time be seen by them without sin, who look to him for their salvation." ^Heb
9.26-28

Because our Lord came once into the world, he was once offered up; but he will come again, or the second time, at the end of the world. Therefore truly, he does not come again every day into the world. And because he has forbidden us to believe it, if any man wants to show Christ to us, present here or there in this world, then it must follow that he may be shown present here or there, indeed, in all places where the sacrament of thanksgiving is celebrated, only if we understand the words of the supper according to the letter. Therefore, it follows without any contradiction, by comparing places, that the words of the Lord's Supper should not be expounded according to the letter.

Having said this, I think I have satisfied those who are not of a contentious disposition. For undoubtedly their meaning is that we should speak of the sacraments sacramentally, and that sacramental phrases ought to be expounded sacramentally. Besides that, we should believe nothing that is repugnant to the rule of belief. But by the miracles and omnipotence of God, produced and alleged in this place for setting out and persuading us of an evil matter, they do no good at all after so many and such manifest arguments of truth. Miracles are joined to the word as if they were seals; the Lord God himself testifies of this in St. Mark. If then, they are repugnant to the word, and affirm what the word altogether denies, then who would not perceive them as that kind of miracle which the apostle speaks of in the second chapter of the second epistle to the Thessalonians — and which we just heard the Lord warned us about in the gospel, that we should in no case believe them?

v.452

The Lord can do all things, but he does not therefore do all things.[3350] The prophet says: "Whatever the Lord would do, that he did, both in heaven and on earth." Moreover, he will not do such things as are contrary to his word and his faith; therefore, he cannot do that he will not do. Theodoret, in his third dialogue entitled Polymorphus, says:

"The Lord God will do nothing that is not in him of his own nature; he can do whatever he wills; but he will do only such things as are fit and agreeable to his nature. Therefore, of his own nature, God is true; he cannot do what is contrary to his word." [3351]

Other sound writers add: Not that he cannot do all things, but that he will not do what is contrary to his nature, and it does not become him to act against himself.

In the meantime, I expressly profess that I do not flatly condemn nor am I against all manner of Christ's presence in the church, even in the supper; for I am flatly against that bodily presence of Christ in the bread, which the papists defend and force upon the church of God. But I confess and acknowledge with open mouth and sincere heart that the spiritual, divine, and quickening presence of our Lord Christ, both in the supper and out of the supper, by which he continues to pour himself into us — not by signs which lack life, but by his Holy Spirit — to make us partakers of all his good graces, to justify, quicken, nourish, sustain, and satisfy us. We also feel this presence in ourselves through faith, by which we are both sustained, nourished, and satisfied. For Christ is the head of his church, and we have fellowship with him. But how would a living body be without its head? How would we be partakers of Christ, if we did not feel him present, indeed, living and working in us? But we have also treated these matters more at large in a convenient place.[3352]

v.453

There are some, I know well enough, who are not otherwise injurious to the truth, who question these things, crying out because the manner of Christ's presence in the supper is not fully enough expressed, especially since he himself has also said elsewhere, "Behold, I am with you continually to the world's end." ^{Mat 28.20} I am with you, he says, wholly, not just my power or divinity, not just my spirit or my strength. Moreover, it is a risk lest we seem to tear Christ in pieces, seeing that he cannot be wholly with us, unless he is present with us in body as well as in divinity. But we wonder what is in their heads. Do they not understand, that the Lord in that divine statement, spoken both at the very supper and also immediately after the supper, beat upon nothing so much as that very thing against which they set their shoulder? [3353] Namely, that Christ would be absent in body, but present in spirit; and that this presence would be more profitable to the church than his bodily presence? Do they not also understand why he took on flesh, and was nailed on the cross — that is to say, what the effect and use is of Christ's body? It was namely, that the sacrifice of his body being once offered for us upon the earth, he might carry it up into heaven, in token that both our bodies and souls after our death, through his merit, also be carried there? Therefore, after the Lord's body had fulfilled on earth what it came to fulfil, there is no reason why it should do anything else upon earth. He now sits, and ought to sit, at the right hand of the Father, so that he may draw all us there to him. If there is anyone who does not yet fully believe what we say, let him read the doctrine of St. Paul the apostle in the ninth and tenth chapters of his epistle to the Hebrews. Let him also read the fourteenth and sixteenth chapters of St. John's gospel. But if it is a pleasure to them to yank on the rope of contention, [3354] and to stick precisely to these words of the Lord, "I am with you to the world's end," as well as to these, "This is my body, This is my blood," let them then expound to me these holy testimonies of the holy scripture.

v.454

Paul says that Christ dwells in our hearts, and that Christ lives in him, and he in Christ. The Lord says to the thief: "This day you shall be with me in paradise." And the evangelist says of the Lord being dead: "They laid him into the sepulchre." The scripture does not say, they laid flesh and bones into the sepulchre; but, they laid him into the sepulchre. The Lord did not say to the thief, your soul shall be with my spirit, or soul, in paradise; but, "Truly I say to you, this day shall you be with me in paradise." Nor does St. Paul say that Christ's Spirit and life live in him, or that they are what dwell in our hearts; but he says simply, that Christ dwells in our hearts. Who is so foolish and given to contention that, for these words and places of the scripture, he would contend that Christ's divinity was buried with his body; or that Christ's body was with his soul in paradise on that same day in which either of them departed this life; or that Christ's body together with his Spirit dwells in the hearts of the faithful, and lives in Paul, and that Paul lives in Christ's flesh? All men willingly admit the catholic sense of the catholic church, gathered from the word of God, which is that Christ in his Spirit is present in his church even to the world's end, but he is absent in body; and the thief's soul was present in paradise with Christ's soul that day, not with his body.[3355] So it judges about the rest. But if any man mistrusts my interpretation, let him hear St. Augustine in his treatise upon John:

"He speaks of the presence of his body when he says, 'The poor you shall always have with you, but me you shall not always have.' ^{Mat 26.11} For what he said in respect to his majesty, of his providence, and of his unspeakable grace, is fulfilled in this: 'Behold, I am with you always, even to the world's end.' ^{Mat 28.20} But what he said or the flesh which the Word took upon himself in respect to being born of the virgin, taken by the Jews, nailed to the cross, taken down from the cross, wound in a sheet, laid into the sepulchre, and manifested at the resurrection, is fulfilled in this: 'You shall not have me with you always.' And why is this so? Because, touching his bodily presence, he was resident forty days with his disciples, who accompanied him but did not follow him. He then ascended into heaven, and is not here; for there he 'sits at the right hand of the Father:' and he is here; for he has not gone from here in respect to the presence of his majesty." [3356]

v.455

But if, disregarding all that we have said, they still proceed to urge this saying of the Lord out of Matthew, "Behold, I, even I, am (μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν meth umoon) with you;" ^{Mat 28.20} we will object this saying of the Lord out of the gospel: "It is expedient for you that I depart;" ^{Joh 16.7} (look, here they also have this word 'I'). We also object against them this testimony of the angels out of Luke: "This Jesus, who is taken up (ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν aph umoon) from you into heaven," etc. ^{Act 1.11} They will at length be constrained (whether they would or not) to reconcile such places that seem to be repugnant, and admit the general understanding which we have alleged and defended up to here.

Nor is there any danger of dividing Christ here; nor do we divide Christ's person, as Nestorius does, since we defend the propriety of both natures in Christ against the Eutychians. While Christ our Lord in body was still resident upon the earth, he himself witnesses in the gospel that nevertheless he was also in the heavens. And indeed Christ, who was both God and man all at once, was then in heaven, when he was crucified and resident on earth, although his body was not crucified in the heavens. Christ did not divide himself, even though being in heaven, he was notwithstanding resident and crucified in his body on earth, and not in heaven; so neither do we divide Christ, who is both God and man, even though we say he is present with us when we celebrate the supper, and that we communion with him.

v.456

Yet, we nevertheless affirm that he remains in heaven in his body, where he sits at the right hand of the Father; and so let us keep ourselves within the compass of the scripture. I have reasoned at large about this matter, where I treated both natures in Christ as unmixed in the one person. [3357]

Up to here I have spoken about the natural meaning of the words of the Lord's Supper as briefly and plainly as I possibly could. I will not need to use many words touching the passage from Paul in first Corinthians, chap. 10, "The cup of blessing which we bless," etc., along with such other texts which are alleged to prove his bodily presence, for we already handled that passage once or twice.

It therefore remains that we examine and weigh what these people deliver to us touching the eating of Christ's body; and what the canonical scriptures teach is to be thought about that eating. What the Lord has promised, they say, he most surely and fully performs. They add: And he promised that he would give us his true body and very blood to be eaten and drunk in the form of bread and wine unto everlasting life. They gather that he has therefore given his very body and blood to the faithful, in the form of bread and wine, for food and drink unto everlasting life. For this reason, it must be eaten corporally, because it is corporal. To confirm this, they allege the Lord's words, as written in the 6th chapter of John's gospel.

We answer: God most perfectly and fully performs what he has promised. But we add, that he does not performs according to that meaning which we devise, but as his word truly imports. We must therefore see, first of all, in what sense the Lord promised to give his flesh for bread, and his blood for drink to the faithful; and next, how we should eat his flesh and drink his blood. These things truly, which the Lord promises here, are nearly all allegories and parables. The Lord promises that he will give us his flesh for bread or food, and his blood for drink.

v.457

But because food and drink are ordained and given to men to preserve their bodily life, and the Lord in the 6th chapter of John does not speak of the life of the body but of the soul, a passage is made from bodily things to spiritual things. When the Lord therefore promised that he would give us his flesh for bread or food, and his blood for drink, what did he promise other than that he would give his body to death, and shed his blood for the remission of sins? For by the death of Christ, we are preserved and delivered from death by food, as it were. By Christ's blood we are washed from sin, and our souls are spiritually drunk as it were with drink. Therefore, the Lord says nothing here about the bread of the Lord's Supper, nor does he promise that at the supper he will make the bread his flesh, nor that he would give his body in the form of bread. My exposition about Christ's words, concerning giving his body or flesh in the form of bread, etc., would be false and feigned, unless I confirm it by the words of Christ.

The Lord said in the gospel: "Seek the food that does not perish, but remains to life everlasting, which the Son of man will give you." ^{Joh 6.27} Then he adds, by interpretation, "And the bread which I will give you is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." ^Joh
6.51 I said that I would give you bread or food (for this word "bread", in the Hebrew manner, is used by the Lord for food and all manner of sustenance); but he says, This bread or this food is my flesh, and therefore I promise to give you my flesh, when I promise to give you the bread of life. Here you have to expressly understand that the Lord, by bread, did not mean bodily bread, or the bread of the supper. But how does he promise to give his flesh for bread, that is to say, to be food for us, or to quicken us? The Lord repeats this word, "I will give;" and he says, "Which I will give for the life of the world." I will give it, that is to say, even to the death, that through my death I may quicken you. Therefore, by dying, my flesh will feed, that is to say, it will quicken. This much concerning the promise of his flesh for bread. Now follows the eating of it.

v.458

The holy scripture sets down in every place, without trope or allegory, that through faith we are made partakers of Christ's death, or of his body which was given for the world unto life. In this present place, by a trope or allegory, he bids us to eat and drink the flesh and blood of Christ unto everlasting life. Therefore, to eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood is nothing else but to believe that Christ's body was given for us, and his blood shed for us to the remission of sins; and consequently, that we remain in Christ, and have Christ remaining in us. For the faith which we spoke of, is not only an imagination or a thought concerning things past and exceeding our capacity; but that faith is a most certain assurance, and a feeling of heavenly things received within us, to our great commodity. For not only faith, but also the virtue and force of faith, is signified by the Lord in John's gospel, by the allegory both of eating and drinking. Food does not pass into the substance of our body without delight. So also by faith, through a great desire of the spirit, we are joined with Christ, that he may live in us, and we may live in Christ, and be partakers of all his good gifts. This is the spiritual eating of Christ, who never thought, nor so much as dreamed in this place, of the gross and bodily eating, which indeed is unprofitable. Because the whole point of the controversy consists in these words about eating and drinking the flesh and blood of the Lord: they interpret the words bodily, and we interpret them spiritually. It seems good to show that by these words about eating and drinking, the Lord meant nothing else than to believe, and consequently to abide in Christ, and to have Christ abiding in us. Therefore, by comparing places in the scripture, we will produce six evident testimonies in confirmation of our assertion.

1. "I am," says the Lord, "that bread of life: whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall not thirst for ever." ^{Joh 6.35} But who would deny that there is a relation between eating and not hungering, drinking and not thirsting? Therefore, [if this were meant bodily, then] when the Lord said, "He shall not hunger," he should first have said, "Whoever eats me." But rather he used the word coming, and said, "Whoever comes to me shall not hunger." Therefore, to eat is to come, and to come is to eat. And he immediately expounds on what it means to come to him, saying: "Whoever has heard from the Father, and has learned, is the one who comes to me;"^Joh
6.45 that is to say, who receives me, and believes in me. For Paul also says: "Whoever comes to God must believe." ^{Heb 11.6}

v.459

These testimonies prove without contradiction, that "eat" is nothing else but "believe." Yet what follows is more manifest: "And whoever believes in me shall never thirst." And whoever drinks shall not thirst. Therefore, he has put "drink," for "believe." Therefore, to drink is to believe; for faith satisfies and pacifies our minds. Here is an answer to those who make this objection: Whether the Lord did not have words by which he might declare his mind, that by eating and drinking he meant believing? They have here, I say, a clear testimony by which he uses the one for the other.

2. Again, in the same treatise, the Lord says: "Whoever eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, has everlasting life; and I will raise him at the last day." ^{Joh 6.54} And again in the same treatise he says: "This is the will of him that sent me, that whoever shall see the Son, and believe in him, may have everlasting life; and I will raise him at the last day." ^Joh
6.40 Look, here you have again these words, to eat Christ's flesh, to drink his blood, and to believe in Christ, all in one sense.

3. Again, the Lord says: "I am the living bread which came down from heaven."^{Joh 6.51} And again he says: "Truly I say to you, he that believes in me has life everlasting... Whoever eats of this bread shall live forever." ^{Joh 6.47, 58} Then to eat Christ, and to believe in Christ, are all one.

4. And again he says: "Whoever eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, abides in me, and I in him." ^{Joh 6.56} Moreover, in his canonical epistle John says: "Whoever confesses," that is to say, believes, "that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God." ^{1Joh 4.15}

5. Again: "Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you can have no life in you." ^{Joh 6.53} And the same Lord also says in the 8th chapter of John: "If you do not believe that I am he, you shall die in your sins." ^Joh
8.24And again: "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever keeps my word, shall never see death." ^{Joh 8.51}

v.460

6. Again the Lord says: "Just as the living Father has sent me, and I live by means of the Father; so likewise, whoever eats me will also live by means of me."^{Joh 6.57} And in the 5th chapter, John says: "As the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself." ^Joh
5.26 And likewise, in his canonical epistle he says: "Whoever believes in the Son of God has a testimony in himself." ^{1Joh 5.10} And, "Whoever has the Son has life." ^{1Joh 5.12}

To these most evident testimonies of God, we will now join the testimonies of men who say the very same thing: that to eat Christ is nothing else but to believe in Christ and to abide in Christ. St. Augustine in his 25th treatise upon John, expounding these words of the Lord, says:

"This is the work of God, that you should believe in him whom he sent:" ^{Joh 6.29} as he left written: "This is therefore to eat the food that does not perish, but which remains unto everlasting life. Why then do you prepare your teeth and your belly? Believe, and you have eaten." [3358]

In his 26th treatise he says the same again:

"To believe in him, is to eat the bread of life. Whoever believes in him eats invisibly and is filled, because he is born invisible."

And again, in the same treatise he says:

"This is to eat that food and drink that drink: to abide in Christ and to have Christ abiding in him; and by this means, whoever does not abide in Christ, and in whom Christ does not abide, doubtless he does not eat his flesh spiritually," etc. [3359]

v.461

The same Augustine, Lib. de Doctrina Christiana, cap. 16, showing when figurative speech is to be admitted and when not, says this:

"If it is an enjoining speech, or forbidding some heinous offence or trespass, or commanding some profit or good deed to be done, it is not figurative. But if it seems to command some heinous offence or trespass, or to forbid some profit or good deed, then is it figurative. 'Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you can have no life in you;' this seems to command a heinous offence and trespass: therefore it is figurative, willing us to be partakers of the Lord's passion, and to sweetly and profitably keep in memory, that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us." [3360]

Thus said Augustine, who doubtless set down not only his own meaning in this, but also the meaning of the whole catholic church at that time. Let our adversaries therefore take heed what they do, who would drive all the faithful to this wickedness and offence: namely, that we should corporally eat Christ's body.

Furthermore, to this is to be added what almost surpasses all that we have alleged before, because of the perspicuity and plainness of it. The Lord himself answered those who wondered, or rather murmured, after he had declared the sum of the true faith. They asked, "How can he give us his flesh to eat?" ^{Joh 6.52} "Does this offend you?" ^{Joh 6.62} he asks, that I said I would give you bread which came from heaven, even my flesh, to be food for all believers? — I suppose that offence will have no just place, when you see me ascend into heaven, from where I came down to you, and where I was with my Father before all beginning. Then you will perceive by my divine ascension that I am the heavenly bread, the natural Son of God, and the life of the world: you will perceive, moreover, that my flesh is not to be eaten bodily, and to be consumed and torn in morsels, but is carried up into heaven for a pledge of the salvation of mankind. And then he says: "It is the spirit that quickens; the flesh avails nothing." ^{Joh 6.63} And he says still more plainly: "The words which I speak to you are spirit and life." It is certain that Christ's flesh avails very much, and is more profitable to the world than any tongue can express, yes, even the most eloquent. Indeed, the Lord has warned us beforehand, that we will have no life unless we eat his flesh.

v.462

Then the Lord denies that his flesh avails us anything at all, if it is eaten as the Capernaites understood it, that is to say, bodily. For being eaten bodily, it avails nothing; but being eaten spiritually, it quickens. And the Lord plainly professed that he spoke of spiritual eating, in which life consists.

These things being declared and confirmed in this way, we will gather them into a short summary, in which we think a sufficient answer is made to our adversaries' objection. The proposition is true, which holds that the Lord certainly performs what which he has promised. But the second proposition is false, which says that, by the word "bread" in the sixth chapter of John, the Lord meant the material bread of the sacrament, and that he promised he would convert it into his flesh. For by "bread" he did not mean the material bread of the sacrament, but food to live with, according to the propriety of the Hebrew tongue. Indeed, his very flesh was delivered to death to be food, I say, so that we might live through Christ's death. Therefore, the argument should have been framed this way:

What God promises he performs; but he promises that he will give us his flesh for bread — that is to say, to be food and life for us. Therefore, he has given his flesh to be food — that is to say, he has given himself up to death, so that by his death we might live.

This being true, surely the food of which the Lord speaks is not bodily food, even though the Lord has a true, human, and natural body, of like substance to ours. Rather it is spiritual food: not that the flesh is converted into the spirit, but because it should be received spiritually, not bodily. It is eaten spiritually by faith, not with the bodily mouth. For just as chewing or eating makes us partakers of the food, so we are made partakers of the body and blood of Christ through faith.

But you may say, How does it come to pass that bread (of which mention is made in the 6th chapter of John) does not signify the bread of the supper — which almost all the doctors, interpreters, and ministers of the church, apply these words to the Lord's Supper? I answer that these words of the Lord may be applied to the matter of the Lord's Supper for other reasons, even though the bread does not signify the bread of the sacrament.

v.463

Yes, I confess that these words of the Lord, about eating his flesh and drinking his blood, bring great light to the matter of the Lord's Supper. St. Augustine, Lib. de Consensu Evangelistarum tertio, capite primo, says: "John said nothing in this place (John 13) about the body and blood of the Lord, but plainly witnesses that the Lord has spoken more at large of it in another place." [3361] He says this, undoubtedly referring to the 6th chapter of John. Since it is therefore one and the same [3362] body of our Lord which he speaks of in both places (in the 6th chapter of St. John and the 26th chapter of Matthew); and in both places, that body is said to have been delivered to death for us, or for our life; and likewise, because there is but one means to partake of Christ, which is by faith in his body, which was delivered up and his blood shed; and finally, because it is the catholic or universal and undoubted doctrine, that eating Christ's flesh bodily avails nothing — surely the things written in the 6th chapter of John are agreeable with and fully open (clarify) the matter of the Lord's Supper.

With the intent that these two kinds may be better understood, I will recite what testimonies have always been alleged by the church out of the holy scriptures, concerning the two kinds of eating of Christ. Christ's body is eaten and his blood is drunk spiritually; it is also eaten and drunk sacramentally. The spiritual manner is accomplished by faith, whereby being united to Christ, we are made partakers of all his goodness. The sacramental manner is only performed in celebrating the Lord's Supper. The spiritual eating is perpetual for the godly, because faith is perpetual for them. They communicate with Christ both outside the supper and in the supper; and by it they increase and continue their new beginnings, as we showed before. [3363] Now, by adjoining the holy action, all things are done more manifestly and plainly. As for unbelievers and hypocrites, with their captain Judas, they never communicate with Christ — neither before the supper, nor in the supper, nor after the supper — because they continue in their unbelief. They partake of the Lord's sacraments to their own judgment and condemnation. ^{1Cor 11.29}

v.464

I know what some teach here, and how they devise a third kind of eating Christ, which is neither spiritual nor sacramental, but compounded of sacramental and corporal. For they also hold the opinion that the true and natural body of Christ is received bodily by unbelievers in the forms of the sacrament. However, it will more easily appear by certain sound arguments from the scripture, that this is but a device of man. We will apply these arguments to the traitor Judas, so that by this one example, all the ungodly (impious) may learn what they eat and drink at the Lord's Supper. For the judgment which is made of the head being revealed to us, it will be easier for us to pronounce of the members.

Some truly doubt whether Judas was present at the supper, when the Lord distributed the holy mysteries; among them is St. Hilary.[3364] However, the evangelical history plainly says that the Lord sat down to meal with the twelve; yes, Luke so handled his narration, that we cannot doubt that Judas received [3365] the mysteries with the rest of the apostles; which St. Augustine also avouches, Libro de Consensu Evangelistarum tertio, capitulo primo;[3366] and likewise in the 62nd treatise on John,[3367] and on the 10th Psalm,[3368] and in his 163rd epistle.[3369] Yes, moreover, Aquinas also, responding to St. Hilary in this point, approves it with us, Parte tertia Quaesti. 81. Art. 2. [3370] Now, it being manifest that Judas was at supper with the rest of the apostles, it seems needful that it was known what he received of the Lord. He received the sacrament of Christ's body, as the other disciples did; but because he did not have faith, as the others had, he did not partake of Christ, nor did he eat and drink the Lord's body and blood.

v.465

For as many as eat the Lord's body and drink his blood, do not hunger or thirst; for they dwell in Christ, and Christ in them; they are Christ's members; and they never die. The contrary appears in Judas and all his fellows. Thus, unbelievers neither eat the Lord's body nor drink his blood. Moreover, it is beyond all doubt, that there is no agreement between Christ and Belial; for the apostle has pronounced this out of the general consent of the scriptures. ^{2Cor 6.15} But Judas is called Satan by Christ himself; therefore, Judas did not communicate with Christ. Now, if we contend absolutely that Judas ate the Lord's body, then truly we would be constrained to wickedly affirm that it is not only an unprofitable, but also a hurtful food. However, godliness teaches us that Christ is always a wholesome food for all those who eat him truly. St. Augustine also denies that Judas ate the Lord's body or drank his blood. In the 59th Treatise on St. John he says, "The apostles ate the bread which was the Lord, but Judas ate the Lord's bread against the Lord. They ate life, but he ate punishment." [3371] Again, in the 26th treatise:

"Whoever does not dwell in Christ nor Christ in him, doubtless he neither eats his flesh spiritually, nor drinks his blood: even though carnally and visibly he breaks the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ in his teeth; but rather, he eats and drinks the sacrament of so great a matter to his condemnation," etc. [3372]

He writes the same, and almost plainer, in the 21st book and 25th chapter, De Civitate Dei.[3373] Against these they object the authority of Paul, saying that those who eat unworthily are not guilty of the bread and cup of which they have eaten and drunk, but are guilty of the Lord's body and blood; and also, that they eat and drink their own damnation, for they do not discern the Lord's body. From this it necessarily follows that they have eaten and drunk the Lord's body unworthily, and not just the sacraments of Christ's body and blood.

v.466

We answer, that Paul says this in plain words: "Whoever eats of this bread and drinks of the Lord's cup," etc.^{1Cor 11.27} Mark this: he says, "Whoever eats this bread and drinks of this cup unworthily;" he does not say, Whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood unworthily. For those who eat the Lord are not without faith, and Christ dwells in them and they in him. If you marvel how unbelievers can be guilty of the Lord's body and blood eaten only sacramentally, learn it from other places of the scripture. The Lord says in John: "Truly, truly, I say to you, He that receives whomever I send, receives me; and whoever receives me, receives him that sent me." ^Joh
13.20 Therefore, whoever does not receive an apostle, does not trespass against the apostle, but against God himself, even though meanwhile he has not seen God, nor would he seem to have repelled him. We read how the Judge will say to those on his left hand: "Depart from me, you wicked, into everlasting fire: for I was hungry, and you gave me no food: I was thirsty, and you gave me no drink," etc. ^{Mat 25.41-42}

But now, listen to how the reprobate takes exception to this sentence of the Judge. "Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty, and did not minister to you?"Then hear again what the Judge will answer: "Truly I say to you, in that you did it not to one of the least's these, you did it not to me." ^{Mat 25.44-45} Therefore, one who sins against a minister or a beggar, sins against Christ himself, though meanwhile he has not hurt Christ's person in any point. So also, whoever receives the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of Christ, though meanwhile he has not received the very body and blood of the Lord. Paul says in another place, that revolters crucify again for themselves the Son of God. ^{Heb 6.6} In another place, he also denies by all means that it is possible for Christ to be crucified or to die any more. ^{Heb 10.26} Therefore, Christ cannot be crucified again by apostates or revolters; however, their shameful falling away from him is esteemed as if they had crucified the Son of God. Therefore, even though the wicked do not eat the Lord's very body nor drink his blood, nevertheless they are guilty of betraying the Lord's body and blood as far as it lies in them to do so.

v.467

If a rebel treads under his foot the seal or letters of the prince or magistrate, even though he does not touch the magistrate himself nor tread him under his foot, he is said to have trodden the magistrate under his foot; and is not accused for hurting the seal or defiling the letters, but he is charged with treason, and accused of treading the prince under his feet. What marvel is it, then, if we hear it said that those who eat the Lord's bread unworthily, are guilty of the body and blood of Christ? For the bread and the mystical cup are a sacrament and seal of it.

Up to here we have disputed about eating the body of Christ, and drinking his blood, handling every point of it with as much brevity as we could. Now we will knit up the other ends of the Lord's Supper, being placed in Lord's the description of the supper. We said that the supper was instituted by the Lord, so that it might visibly represent the gifts of God to the church, and lay them out before the eyes of all men. But we have learned by the whole discourse of this matter, that Christ himself is a most full and rich treasure of all the gifts of God — namely, being delivered unto death for us, we have from him all things belonging to life, remission of sins and life everlasting. Since these things are invisible and gotten by faith, they are also visibly, that is to say, by sacraments, represented to almost all the senses — to the sight, hearing, taste, and feeling — with the intent, that man, being wholly moved with these, both in body and soul, may celebrate this most comforting mystery with great rejoicing in his heart. To this now pertains that analogy I spoke of before in the seventh sermon of this decade,[3374] by which I would have these things better learned.

Furthermore, we said that the supper was instituted by the Lord, that he might visibly gather together into one body all his members, who were in a way dispersed throughout all the world. And we said somewhere else [3375] that the holy men called the supper a league or confederacy. We are invisibly knit with Christ and all his members by unity of faith and participation in one Spirit; but in the supper, we are joined together by a visible conjunction.

v.468

For now we are very nearly knit and joined together not by words, but by deeds also, by a mystery, by a sacrament, revealing and declaring to all men, by celebrating the supper, that we are also of the number of those who believe that they are redeemed by Christ, and that they are Christ's members and people. And we bind ourselves together to Christ and the church, that we will keep the sincere faith, and also promise that we will use good deeds and charity towards all men. Look for more touching this matter in the seventh sermon of this decade.[3376] Regarding this truly, St. Paul proved that it was not lawful for those who receive together at the Lord's table, to eat meat offered to idols, and take part in profane sacrifices.^{1Cor 10.20-21} Today, if many would rightly weigh and consider this, they would not be seen so busy in strange and foreign sacrifices.

We also said that the Lord instituted the supper, that thereby he might keep his death in memory, so that it would never be blotted out with oblivion. For Christ's death is the summary of all God's benefits. He would therefore have us keep in memory the benefit of his incarnation, passion, redemption, and of his love. And although the remembrance of a thing that is past is celebrated (namely, his death), yet it greatly belongs to us, and it quickens us. Nor must we think that this is the least end; for there is none so diligently expressed as this. For the Lord recites, "Do this in remembrance of me."^{Luk 22.19} But that holy rite or holy action, joined with the word or with the preaching of Christ's death and the redemption of mankind, marvellously renews that benefit from time to time, and does not let it be forgotten!

Last of all, we said that the supper was ordained by the Lord, that thereby we might be admonished of our duty, praise, and thanksgiving. It is our duty to be sincere in the faith of Christ, and to embrace all our brethren with Christian charity for the Lord's sake, and to beware that we do not defile our bodies with the filth of the world, since we are cleansed with the blood of Christ. Paul the apostle says: "As often as you eat of this bread, and drink of the Lord's cup, declare the Lord's death until he comes." ^{1Cor 11.26}

v.469

But to declare the Lord's death is to praise the goodness of God, and to give thanks for our redemption obtained through his death; for the apostle Peter says: "You are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people set at liberty,[3377] that you should show forth virtues of him that has called you out of darkness into his marvellous light." ^{1Pet 2.9} But we have spoken of this also in another place. [3378]

This much I thought it good to repeat in few words, touching the ends of the supper, which every godly man being instructed by the Holy Ghost diligently considers. I would now let you go, dearly beloved brethren, except that I see it will be a common commodity to teach in few words, how every one should prepare himself for the Lord's Supper, so that he does not come to it unworthily. But it would not be a lost labour to first of all search out who worthily or unworthily eats and drinks of the Lord's bread and cup. No man can deny that there are degrees in our worthiness and unworthiness, if he rightly examines the judgments of God, and looking narrowly into the nature of our religion, is able to judge it. The chief degree of unworthiness is to come to the holy mysteries of faith without faith. He comes worthily, who comes with faith; and he comes unworthily, who comes without faith. Those works which are said to be worthy of repentance in the gospel, are penitent works, or appropriate for those who profess repentance.[3379] But what is more seemly, more fitting and just, than that the one who is to celebrate the Lord's Supper, believes that he is redeemed by Christ's death, who was offered up as a price for the whole world? And that for that reason, he is desirous to give thanks to Christ his Redeemer. Contrariwise, what is more unseemly and unjust, than to receive that pledge of Christ's body, and meanwhile have no communion or fellowship with Christ; to come to thanksgiving, and yet not give thanks from the bottom of his heart? For what else unites us to Christ, or makes us partakers of all his benefits, and also thankful, but faith? What separates us from Christ, and spoils us of all his gifts, and makes us most loathsome, but unbelief? Therefore, faith or unbelief makes us partakers of the Lord's table worthily or unworthily.

v.470

In the Acts, Paul the apostle says to the Jews who, through unbelief, rejected or treated as nothing the preaching of the gospel, "The word of God should first be preached to you; but because you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles." ^{Act 13.46} How did the Jews pronounce that they were unworthy of everlasting life, and like judges, pronounce sentence against themselves? In setting themselves against God's word through unbelief; by not apprehending Christ by faith, who is the life and righteousness of the world. Therefore, the chief and greatest portion of our worthiness or unworthiness consists in faith or unbelief. St. Peter witnesses that our hearts are purified by faith. ^Act
15.9 True faith, therefore, is the cleanness of Christians. About which St. Augustine says:

"The unbeliever does not eat the flesh of Christ spiritually, but rather he eats and drinks the sacrament of so great a thing to his own condemnation; because being unclean, he presumed to come to Christ's sacraments; which no man receives worthily except he that is clean. Of him it is said, 'Blessed are the clean in heart; for they shall see God," etc. [3380]

Moreover, they eat and drink of the Lord's Supper unworthily who, although they are not destitute of faith, yet by abusing it, they pervert the right institution of the Lord. Such seems to have been the error of the church of Corinth, which mingled the private and profane with the ecclesiastical and mystical banquet, and did not differentiate between the Lord's bread, which is called Christ's body, and common food. For Paul says: "Whoever eats and drinks unworthily, he eats and drinks his own damnation, not differentiating the Lord's body." Therefore, to see no difference with the Lord's body, is to unworthily eat the Lord's bread and to drink of his cup. For this word diakrinein (diakrinein); to judge or differentiate, is to weigh and consider a matter exactly with judgment, to the uttermost of a man's power, to judge it, and differentiate between that and all other things. Furthermore, the Lord's body is not only that spiritual body of the Lord — namely, the church of the faithful — but it is that very body which the Lord took of the virgin, and offered up for our redemption, and that now sits at the right hand of the Father.

v.471

To be short, the bread of the sacrament in the supper is the Lord's body; it is, I say, the sacrament of the true body which was given for us. Whoever, therefore, does not differentiate between this, the Lord's mystical bread, and profane food, but comes to Christ's table as he would to a table of common and gross food, and has not acknowledged that this heavenly food differs far from other human food, does not come in the way the Lord instituted, but follows his own reason. Surely he does not differentiate the Lord's body, but eats and drinks his own damnation.

Paul again expounds, saying: "Therefore, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another, so that you do not meet to condemnation." ^{1Cor 11.33-34} Whoever therefore precludes the public supper by eating his own private supper, that is to say, whoever does not sup as the Lord has appointed, eats and drinks unworthily. For before, unworthy eaters and drinkers are said to eat and drink their own damnation; and here they are said to meet together to their condemnation, who hasten to the supper, not waiting for their brethren; and they do not differentiate the Lord's body. St. Augustine in his 62nd treatise upon John says:

"The apostle speaks of those who received the Lord's body without difference and carelessly, as if it had been any other kind of food whatever. Here therefore, if the one is reproved who makes no difference about the Lord's body, that is to say, does not discern the Lord's body from other foods, how then should not Judas be damned, who came to the Lord's table feigning that he was a friend, but was an enemy?" etc. [3381]

How much more grievously they seem to sin today, who, perverting the lawful and first use that was instituted by the Lord, establish their own abuse with great contention; yes, and grievously persecute those who cry out against it and will not receive it!

v.472

Furthermore, since by experience we find every day that there are many things lacking in our faith, by means of which diverse vices spring up among us, of which our own unworthiness is the lightest or least of all.[3382] For the Lord of his grace may easily wash these away, and almost wipes them away by sending his cross upon us — not imputing such infirmities to us to our condemnation. For in another place the apostle says, "there is no condemnation for those who are grafted into Christ Jesus, and do not walk after the flesh, but after the Spirit." ^{Rom 8.1}

Neither does our most just Lord punish these sundry sorts of unworthiness with equal punishment. Let us therefore see what the blessed apostle teaches us concerning the punishment of those who eat unworthily. He says: "Whoever eats this bread, or drinks of the Lord's cup unworthily, will be guilty of the Lord's body and blood." By these words he means that chief and most foul unworthiness of all others: namely, unbelief. For he is guilty of the Lord's body and blood, to whom the fault of the Lord's death is imputed — that is to say, to whom Christ's death becomes death, and not life. As it also happened to those who crucified Christ, through unbelief and wickedness; for Christ's blood seemed profane to them, as if it had been the blood of some beast, murderer, or wicked person, worthily shed for his offences. And I ask you, what else does he think, than that Christ's blood is profane, who does not believe that it was shed for the sins of the world? And yet he dares take part of the Lord's Supper, so that he may worthily be said to be guilty of the Lord's body and blood. It is a very great offence to eat the Lord's bread and to drink of his cup unworthily, through unbelief. This is laid before our eyes by the example of Judas. He did not believe in the Lord Jesus. Indeed, he conceived how to deliver him into the hands of thieves and murderers; yet he nevertheless sat down to meal, and took part of the Lord's Supper. Therefore, in the end the devil worthily claimed him wholly for himself.

v.473

For St. John witnesses, that about the end of the supper, the devil entered into Judas. It is not that he was not in Judas before he came to the supper (for he had begun to dwell in him before, and to stir him forward); but because, after so many admonitions from our Lord Christ, and after that, profaning the mysteries of Christ, and trodding them underfoot as it were, the devil wholly entered into him, and fully possessed him.

The apostle Paul threatened damnation to those who do not differentiate the Lord's body, who are placed, as it were, in another degree of unworthiness, saying: "For whoever eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks his own damnation." He sets down the reason for it in this sentence: namely, why we should not rashly and carelessly come to the Lord's table, for we then approach to our condemnation. But condemnation or judgment is the pain or punishment which the Lord lays upon his faithful people when they sin, not in another world truly, as he does upon unbelievers, but in this world. For it follows in the words of the apostle, which conveys the same sense to us: "For this cause, many are weak and feeble among you, and many sleep. For if we had judged ourselves, we would not have been judged. But when we are judged, we are corrected by the Lord, so that we should not be condemned with the world." ^{1Cor 11.30-32}The apostle plainly distinguishes between the unworthy eaters who are subject to God's correction, and worldly men, that is to say, unbelievers, whose punishment the Lord defers to that other world. But upon his faithful people, who yet offend through negligence, and come to the supper insufficiently instructed, he lays diverse and sundry afflictions, such as pestilence, famine, sickness, and the like, to shake off their drowsiness. For it follows: "If we had judged ourselves," that is, if we ourselves had restrained our vices, and separated ourselves from evil, "we would not have been judged," that is to say, punished and corrected. For he immediately adds: "But when we are judged, we are chastised by the Lord." To be judged, therefore, is to be chastised. But hereby we learn from where so many mischiefs flow into the church, namely, by the unworthy use of the Lord's Supper.

v.474

But some man will answer here, If the matter is so, it would be better to wholly abstain from the Lord's Supper. But if anyone wholly abstains, he also thereby sins against the Lord, and does so grievously. For he treats as nothing the Lord's commandment, who says, "Do this;" yes, he treats as nothing both the Lord's death and all the gifts of God. Therefore, the one who omits to celebrate the supper has not escaped danger. We have said this before. You must go another way to work, if you desire to avoid both danger and sin. Hear the counsel of Paul, very compendiously saying: "Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup." ^{1Cor 11.28} And we must mark that in this examination, he sends no man to another, but sends every man to himself. The papists bid you to, "Go to an auricular confessor," to confess yourself there, to receive absolution, and to make satisfaction for your sins according to the form you are commanded; and so they bid you, as if sufficiently cleansed, to go to the Lord's table. But Paul, the doctor of the Gentiles and the vessel of election, does not say a word about those things, but simply says: "Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup." For just as God is the searcher of the hearts, and requires the affection of the mind, and hates hypocrisy, so none knows what is in the heart of man, or what affections we bear toward God, except we ourselves.

Therefore, he would have us, ourselves, examine everything in ourselves; that is to say, he wills every man to descend into himself, and to examine himself. This examination cannot be made without faith and the light of God's word. But the faithful man, having the light of God's word shining before him, and faith exerting her force and power, inquires of himself whether he acknowledges all his sins which he has manifoldly committed against God, and whether he is sorry for having committed them; and whether with sincere faith of heart, he believes that Christ has washed away and forgiven all his sins; and whether he freely confesses with his mouth, as he believes in his heart, that life and salvation consists in Jesus Christ alone, and in no other; and whether he has determined with himself to die in this confession; and whether he means to diligently and earnestly apply himself to innocence and holiness of life; and whether he is ready to love and help all the members of Christ's body, of whom he is also a member, and is ready to spend his life for them, according to the example of Christ;

v.475

and whether he has remitted or pardoned all anger and enmity; and whether he is desirous to call to mind Christ's passion and the whole mystery of our redemption, and to give thanks to God for our redemption, and for all other gifts of God already received and to be received. This is the right examining, which agrees with receiving the mystical supper. And when we have done so, we may, in humbleness and fear of the Lord, and with gladness,[3383] approach the supper of our Lord Christ.

But here the faithful tremble, who are privy as it were, to their own imperfection and infirmity; for they do not find these things to be so perfect in their minds, as otherwise they know a just perfection requires. Satan comes, and he throws in many and great obstacles, with the intent that he may draw us back from the celebration of the supper. Therefore we say, if any man supposes that none is to be admitted to the supper except one who is purged from all sin and infirmity, surely he would drive away and exclude all men, however many live in this world. Indeed, he would altogether deprive them of the Lord's Supper, so that it would no longer be for sinful men but for angels. We must remember that this examination rests within its own bounds, and that God here also, as everywhere else, uses his clemency and mercy towards us. He knows our weakness and corruption, and can bear with us our infirmities. The Israelites under king Hezekiah, not being fully cleansed, took part of the paschal lamb. But the king prayed, and said: "The Lord, who is good, will have mercy on all men who with all their heart seek the God of their fathers, and will not impute it to them, such that they are not sanctified." And to this is added in the holy history, 2Chron. 30th chap.: "And the Lord heard Hezekiah, and he was pleased with the people." The worthiness which is inquired after by an exact examination, is not absolute perfection, but a will and mind instructed by God, which humbly acknowledged its own unworthiness, and therefore humbly prays for an increase of faith and charity, and [3384] all perfection in Christ alone.

v.476

At that first supper the apostles were Christ's guests, and among these was Judas; but because he lacked faith and was a traitor, indeed, a murderer, he was made guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. The other apostles were also sinners themselves, but not wicked; they believed in Christ; they loved Christ, and they loved one another like brethren. Therefore, they did not eat the Lord's Supper unworthily, as Judas did; although in the meantime, at the same table, they showed tokens of great imperfection. For Peter, not without great contempt and reproach by his brethren, prefers himself before them all. Moreover, they contend among themselves for honour, which of them would seem to be greater than another. I will not now recite that right after they arose from the table, they shamefully forsook their master and ran away, and in many ways behaved themselves unworthily. But all these things were easily washed away, for faith had taken very deep root within them.

Nor will I hesitate here to recite word for word the comfort of Master John Calvin, a godly and learned man, who with great commendation teaches in the church today, my fellow-minister and most well-beloved and dear brother, which he has set down for the afflicted in this case.

"Let us call to remembrance that this holy banquet is a medicine for the sick, a comfort for the sinful, a largess to the poor; which to the healthy, righteous, and rich, if any such could be found, would bring small vantage. For seeing that in this banquet Christ is given to us to be eaten, we understand that without him we faint, fail, and are forsaken. Moreover, seeing that he is given to us to be our life, we understand that without him, we are but dead. Therefore, this is the greatest and only worthiness which we can give to God: if we lay before him our own vileness and unworthiness, that through his mercy he may make us worthy of himself; if we despair in ourselves, that we may be comforted in him; if we humble ourselves, that we may be lifted up by him; if we accuse ourselves, that we may be justified by him. Moreover, if we strive for that unity which he commends to us in the supper; and if, as he makes us all dwell in him, we likewise wish there were one soul, one heart, and one tongue in us all — if we well weigh and meditate on these things, then these thoughts will never trouble us.

v.477

We who are naked and destitute of all goodness, we who are stained with spots of sin, we who are half dead, how could we worthily eat the Lord's body? Let us rather think that, being poor, we come to a plentiful giver; we who are sick come to a physician; we who are sinful come to a Saviour; so that the worthiness which is commanded by God, consists chiefly in faith, which reposes all in God and nothing in ourselves: secondly, it consists in charity; and such charity that it is sufficient if we offer it to God imperfect, so that he may increase it to the better, seeing that we cannot perform it absolutely as it ought to be." [3385]

I said this much up to here about the most holy supper of our Lord Jesus Christ, the most excellent and wholesome sacrament of Christians. For even from the very beginning, while the apostles were yet living, Satan, the most deadly enemy to our salvation, lying in wait, has set about to overthrow it by many corruptions and defilings. Now faithfully cleansed from these for a time, Satan does not leave it so, but intermingles and throws a heap of contentions into this, which was made a token to the church, of a covenant never to be broken.[3386]

v.478

For which the thing itself, and our salvation, requires that we be circumspect, and give no place to the tempter; but agreeing altogether in Christ, and being joined into one body by the faithful celebrating of the supper, we may love one another, and give everlasting thanks to our Redeemer and Lord Christ; to whom be praise and glory now and forever. Amen. Amen.

5-10. THE TENTH SERMON: THE INSTITUTIONS OF THE CHURCH.

Of certain institutions of the church of God. Of schools. Of ecclesiastical goods,
and the use and abuse of them. Of churches and holy instruments of Christians.
Of the admonition and correction of the ministers of the church,
and of the whole church. Of matrimony. Of widows. Of virgins.
Of monks. What the church of Christ determines concerning
the sick; and of funerals and burials.

There remain certain things, but a few truly, which are to be expounded to you, dearly beloved; which partly pertain to the institution of the ecclesiastical ministry and its preservation; there are partly certain peculiar ordinances of the church, which the church cannot lack. In this last sermon of this Decade, so far as the Lord gives me grace to speak, I intend to treat these things as briefly as I can.

First of all, we must know that the Lord our God has not burdened his church with too many laws and institutions. Rather he has set down a few, easily numbered, and those are not costly, intricate, or long, but profitable, simple, plain, and short. In times past, the Lord appointed under the law a costly and sumptuous worshipping of him for the people, notwithstanding that all things in it were certain, numerable, and moderate; nor would he have anything added to, or taken from it, at the pleasure of men, or to be used other than he had appointed.

v.479

Who then would think that after abrogating the law, the Lord would deliver to the church of his new people, a sumptuous and infinite discipline? Therefore, it is partly the covetousness of the pastors and estates of the church, and partly the monstrous superstition of the common people, that has made everything so sumptuous and infinite in the church. Let us stick to this, that the Lord our God has instituted in his church but very few things, and only such as are necessary. And therefore, we should all endeavour that the church not be over-burdened with traditions and institutions which did not proceed from God himself. The church of God is decked and furnished gorgeously enough, if she just retains and keeps the institutions of her God and Lord.

The chief and principal points of the godliness of the church of God are, the sincere teaching of the law and the prophets, of Christ and the apostles; faithful prayer offered to her only God through Christ alone; a religious and lawful administration and receiving of Christ's sacraments; all of which we have treated up to here through five decades. To this belongs charity also, which is a communicating of riches or well-doing. We have said something about this already in the first decade,[3387] and we will say something else in this sermon. Nor does Luke in the Acts mention any other things that describe what manner of church the faithful primitive church of Christ was, being founded by the apostles, and what were its principal points. "They were continuing," he says, "in the doctrine of the apostles, in communicating, in the breaking of bread, and in prayer."^{Act 2.42} Under these few points, all godliness is comprised.

To the ecclesiastical ministry are joined these that follow. Christian schools have the first place, which produce a plentiful increase of prophets or ministers of the church. All nations have understood, unless they were altogether barbarous, that without schools, no kingdoms or commonweals can happily be maintained. And therefore, not only Moses in the book of Genesis,[3388] but also Strabo in the 17th book of his Geography, reports how the most famous colleges for priests and philosophers were instituted among the Egyptians.

v.480

Histories also mention that the most noble men of the whole world travelled into Egypt to obtain wisdom. Plato also is said to be the first among the number of the chief and principal philosophers.[3389] Neither is it unadvisedly written in the book of the Kings, that Solomon excelled the wise men of the Egyptians in wisdom. And not only the Egyptians, but also the Palestines, a nation more famous for wars than for learning, are said to have had their priests, of whom they asked counsel in matters of doubt, as Samuel writes in his holy history. ^{1Sam 6.2} And Daniel also witnesses that the Babylonians had most famous schools; as also the Medes and Persians did, from where sprang their Magi, I should say wise men, notable in all parts of philosophy. I need not say anything about the Greeks and Romans, since there is no man who does not know their most famous city of Athens, which is so much spoken of by all learned men, and also the goodly colleges of their priests and soothsayers. But, omitting foreign examples, let us allege our own, or those which are ecclesiastical.

God, who gave to his people a most absolute form of a happy commonweal and kingdom, distributed schools through forty-eight towns of the realm. Those towns, because of the philosophizing Levites, were called Levitical. For he had consecrated all the Levitical tribe to the priesthood and to studies — not that it was unlawful for gentlemen of other tribes to study philosophy or wisdom, but because the Levites were peculiarly appointed to holy studies.[3390] For it is evident that Isaiah and Daniel, two of the brightest lights of those who prophesied, were of the tribe of Judah. Other tribes also have produced men right singular in all kinds of knowledge. And those towns likewise were called Levitical and priestly, not that only priests dwelt in them, but because they had synagogues in them. But at the tabernacle in Shiloh, and especially in the city of Jerusalem, there was a school surpassing all others, in the manner of a university as they call them now-a-days. And the same holy history witnesses that the most famous men governed those schools.

v.481

For we read in Rama that Samuel, who was highest in all wisdom, godliness, and learning, was governor and principal of Naioth, that is to say, the burse (as they term it) or college of prophets. Elijah and Elisha, the clearest lights of the church of Israel, were rulers over the school of Jericho and Gilgal. That naughty Jeroboam pulled down the schools, and trod underfoot the order of the priests, and put in their places, without any choice, some who were the refuse of the people. But the men of God, Elijah and Elisha, knew well that without schools, sound doctrine could not flourish or be preserved; and therefore they applied themselves wholly to renewing the schools. And when lawful tributes were denied to them, being bestowed by wicked princes on flatterers and bellies, that is to say, on priests of the idols of calves and of Baal, it came to pass by the goodness of the Lord, that some good men bestowed something on those who were desirous of learning — those who, contenting themselves with a mean living, behaved themselves valiantly in that most corrupt age. But those notable men, those wise men and prophets who governed schools, were called fathers; for which their disciples and scholars were termed the sons of the prophets. Amos and Jeremiah call them Nazarites.[3391] For Amos says, "I am not a prophet, nor the son of a prophet;" ^Amo
7.14 namely, he was not brought up in the knowledge of liberal arts. And the same man says again: "I have raised up prophets from your sons, and Nazarites from your young men." ^{Amo 2.11} And Jeremiah commends the manner of those who studied; and in his Lamentations he bewails those who perished altogether in the captivity. ^{Lam 4.8} They are further called the sons of the prophets for the affection which they bore towards their schoolmasters, as if they had been their parents, and for their obedience and daily study towards them. But the nobler and wiser the princes were, the more diligence they employed in repairing schools, and restoring ecclesiastical order.[3392] A man may see this, not only in David and Solomon, but also in Jehoshaphat and Hezekiah and Josiah, who were most virtuous and most happy princes. In the captivity and after the captivity of Babylon, the Lord's people were dispersed and scattered into many kingdoms far and wide.

v.482

But wherever they were carried, they erected schools or synagogues; and when the city of Jerusalem was restored, they often came to it. Therefore, the Acts of the Apostles mentions that when St. Paul preached the word of God among the Gentiles, he went into the synagogues and taught. And St. James the apostle says: "Moses had of old, those in every city who preached him in the synagogues." ^{Act 15.21} He does not speak of the cities of Judea and Galilee, but of the cities of the Gentiles, in Syria, Cilicia, and Asia. And what we read in the Acts shows that, being dispersed and scattered abroad, they sometimes came to the holy city of Jerusalem. "There were dwelling at Jerusalem certain Jews, religious men, from all nations under heaven." ^{Act 2.5} And also what St. Paul recites about himself, confirms it; that being born free in the city of Tarsus, he travelled to Jerusalem to Gamaliel's feet,^{Act 22.3} that is to say, with the intent to hear the instruction and to be a scholar under Gamaliel. So likewise, we read that at Jerusalem there were colleges or synagogues of the Libertines, Cyrenians, Alexandrines, Cilicians, and Asians. ^{Act 6.9} This use of schools continued until Christ's time, yes, and after his ascension into the heavens, almost until the destruction of the city; although in the meantime it may appear to have been depraved at various times.

Christ also, the Son of God, our king and high bishop, instituted the most famous school of all, calling to it the twelve apostles and the seventy disciples; chosen men, I say, eighty-two in number. Indeed, the apostles drew very many disciples to themselves. And primarily, St. Paul, the chosen instrument of God to convert the Gentiles, we read had in his company Sopater of Berea, Luke of Antioch, Mark of Jerusalem, Barnabas, Sylva or Sylvanus, Caius and Timothy, Aristarchus and Secundus, Tychicus and Trophimus, Titus and Linus, Crescens and Epaphras, Archippus and Philemon, Epaphroditus and Artemas, and many others. He has also commended most diligently to good men the studious and the ministers of the churches, exhorting all men to liberality, that they may lack nothing. And writing to Titus: "Bring diligently, Zenas the lawyer and Apollo on their way, that they may lack nothing." ^{Tit 3.13}

v.483

Moreover, it may be gathered by plain and manifest proofs out of the thirteenth chapter of the Acts, that there was a very famous and apostolic school at Antioch in Syria. Eusebius, also of Caesarea, abundantly witnesses what noble schools were at Alexandria in Egypt, and in other renowned churches.[3393] We also declared that more at large, when time served, in a book we wrote about the institution of bishops.[3394] But in the process of time, when all things pertaining to the church began to decline for the worse, ecclesiastical schools also degenerated into abbeys, or into colleges of canons and monks.

But of all these things about which we have spoken, I think it is not unknown to anyone, that schools principally belong to the preservation of the church, and to the maintenance of the holy ministry. In these schools, good arts might be exercised very profitably, to further the study of the holy scriptures. Of this sort, chief of all are the studies and knowledge of holy tongues, of logic, natural philosophy, and the mathematics; and these should be moderately known, and directed to the certain scope and end of godliness. For a man may sometimes find his wits worn and grown old in diverse arts and disciplines, and yet not once meddling or inured with holy exercises and studies. But I would to God that the wicked, being too glutted with profane study, would also stop contemning holy scriptures as plain barbarous. A man also may find some wits so busied in the study of the mathematics, that they are better fit to be masters of buildings, than governors or pastors of churches. Indeed, they have so far crept into the study of astronomy and the astronomer's heaven, that they quite forget the blessed heaven, [3395] which is the seat of the blessed saints, and anything pertaining to them. Instead, they will be sufficiently happy if they can but once attain to the knowledge of the motion of the visible heaven, and to the course of the stars.

v.484

There are those who meddle too much with the study of philosophy, and the trifles of logic, and the rules of rhetoric, and never attain to any end, nor earnestly think of directing their travails to edifying the church. Commonly they become contentious and brawling disputers for the most part, and arrogant controllers. To them, nothing seems to be neatly and aptly enough spoken or done by others, except what is tempered, and as it were tuned, to their great conceiving heads, thus agreeing with prescribed rules that they do not swerve from, even so much as a hair's breadth. These men snarl [3396] and entangle all things with their doltish disputations, puffing out nothing but quarrelling controversies, most arrogantly taking upon themselves to judge all men's doings and sayings whatsoever. Indeed, though others are good and tolerable, they snap at them, and maliciously cavil against them, being vain babblers rather than philosophers — yes, the very plagues of schools and churches. They spit out the poison of debates, contentions, variances, strifes, and divisions, at and into the church. Against these, St. Paul the apostle seems to speak to Timothy. For after he had briefly set down the sum of sound doctrine, he adds to it:

"Teach and exhort this. Whoever teaches otherwise, and does not hold himself contented with the healthful word of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the doctrine which is according to godliness, is puffed up, knowing nothing, but spending his time about questions and contention in words; from this grows hatred, strife, slander, evil suspicions, vain conflicts of men who are corrupt in heart and destitute of the truth, who suppose godliness is for gain. Avoid the company of such." ^{1Tim 6.2-5}

Truly, it never went well with the church, when learned and studious men, forsaking the plainness and pureness of the word of God, turned their eyes another way, and did not aim at the word of God alone. Those in ancient times [3397] did not contemn the word of God. But meanwhile, they attributed more to traditions than was convenient. And by that means, they gave occasion for errors, and also confirmed those abuses which were already brought in.

v.485

Certain years past and gone, Gratian and Lombard,[3398] with other ecclesiastical writers, set about to systematize [3399] the opinions, and gather together a perfect and certain sum of divinity. But thereby they not only carried the schools away from the scriptures, but also intruded strange doctrines into the church. After these, followed Alexander, Albertus, and Thomas,[3400] who not only depended on those Sentences and commended them to others, but also endeavoured to mingle philosophy with divinity, and to couch [3401] them together into one body. And from this it came to pass that we had so many ways and sects, so many puddles crawling full of frogs, so many schools, so many abbeys, and so many sophisters. And if today we likewise continue unhappily to couple philosophy with the holy scriptures, and superstitiously call them into disputation, and subject them to examination by human rules, or to handling by the arts; then we will also corrupt them in the schools, perverting the integrity [3402] of the apostolic doctrine, to the great detriment of the church. Meanwhile, it is certain that good arts and learning do much for perspicuity and plainness, but only if moderately and religiously applied with judgment, so that the scriptures may have the upper hand, and all other arts obey them.

Therefore, let pure godliness be taught in ecclesiastical schools, yes, let godliness be the end of all our studies. At first, let the studious be diligently taught the catechism, and let them never rest until such time as they have learned it perfectly, and made it familiar to themselves. Then let this newborn godliness be daily increased with lectures and holy sermons. Let the writings of the holy evangelists and apostles be always read to them, so that they may become perfect in them in due season. Let them also commodiously learn the tongues and good arts, and let them be exercised in writing and reasoning. But above all, let dissoluteness and wantonness be banished from the godly-instituted and Christian schools. Let discipline, yes, even if it is somewhat sharp, flourish.

v.486

For if youth are corrupted in the schools and grow up in that corruption, what, I ask you, should we look for from their hands when they are set in authority over the church? Let us not believe that they will be the salt of the church, who as they are most dissolute and blockish, so they cannot abide sharpness in others. Do we think they will become lights of the church, who themselves hate the light, and are delighted in darkness and in the works of darkness? Therefore, what the sons of Eli were in the church of Israel, the corrupt sons of the prophets in the church of Christ will be, and are. Therefore, they will likewise perish with the people who are committed to them. And therefore, now-a-days there is great offence committed through too much leniency in the schools; a mischief which will never be washed away. For a man will come into many schools, where he thinks he sees so many soldiers and ruffians (not scholars and students), whom they commonly call "clerics." Neither their fare, their apparel, their manners, their words, nor their deeds, declare them to be of any good disposition, honest, or studious. I know that much is to be ascribed to our unhappy and most dissolute age, in which the stubborn and rebellious will not listen to the counsel of the eiders; and again, I know that there are great offences committed through the negligence and indulgent [3403] gentleness of those who are in authority. But since the welfare of the church consists in well-ordered schools, we should all use great diligence, that in this behalf no offence may be committed through our carelessness and negligence. I said have this much concerning ecclesiastical schools, in as few words as I might conveniently use. For I have treated this more at large in my book about the institution of bishops. [3404]

Furthermore, to the end that schools, and the whole ministry, may be maintained, together with all holy buildings and ecclesiastical charges, there needs to be sufficient wealth and a corresponding ability. Therefore, this place admonishes us to say something concerning ecclesiastical goods.[3405]

v.487

God, in that commonwealth which he would have excel all others by being best furnished with all necessary things, appointed standing fees to be paid to the holy ministry of the common charge — namely, the tithes, first-fruits, and various other kinds of offerings.[3406] These things are expressed in many words in the law by Moses, the man of God. He did not fear that in handling that matter, he would be accused of greedy desire or covetousness. For those things which God commanded him to declare plainly to the people, he faithfully uttered to them. Indeed, the law of nature commands us to reward the one who takes pains, and to maintain common costs by common contribution. And those revenues or tributes that were publicly gathered, were not bestowed except to public uses; for they were partly given to the ministers for their ministry and service, partly disbursed on public buildings and holy charges, and partly employed to relieve the poor. And although the Levitical law, along with the whole priesthood, is abrogated by the new Testament, it is notwithstanding certain that the same universal law which commands that public charges be levied by public contributions, is not abolished.

For we read that our Lord Jesus Christ, although he did not live by the tithes and revenues of the priests, yet he lived by the contributions of the godly (for he executed a public function).^{Luk 8.1-3} And sending his disciples abroad to preach, he expressly says to them: "I would not have you be concerned for food and apparel; for the labourer is worthy of his hire." ^{Luk 10.7} Therefore, the primitive church which the apostles have gathered to Christ, bestowed their houses, lands, and money, for the preservation of the ministry and other things necessary for the church. ^Act
4.34-35 The priests and Levites at that time possessed the holy revenues, not giving one iota to the apostolic church, which they rather wished might starve; but the godly and faithful people knew very well that earthly substance and riches were very necessary for the preservation of the church. For God has appointed men, and not angels, to be ministers of the church; and has recommended poor men to the church to stand in his stead. But, as men are prone to do, they lack and are destitute of many things. Therefore, through the moving of the Holy Ghost, good men contribute together and bestow money, houses, lands, and other goods, by which both the poor, and also the holy ministry, may be maintained.

v.488

And from this it is also evident that the church of the people of the new Testament, ever since the time of Christ and the apostles, had goods and possessions publicly gathered and received; and they also laid out and bestowed them again for public and common commodity.

Gregory, the first of that name, bishop of Rome,[3407] says that it was the custom in his time, and also before his time, that there should be four portions or parts of the church of God; one for the bishop and his family, another for the clergy, the third for the poor, and the fourth for repairing the churches.[3408]

The first part. There are a great many who say that a bishop should not receive wages from the church. Let us therefore examine what Christ and his apostles teach us touching that matter. Christ our Lord, who never committed any unjust thing, received maintenance from those women whom he taught, who "ministered to him from their substance."^{Luk 8.1-3} Also, sending his disciples abroad, and not wanting them to be concerned for food and drink and raiment, says further: "The labourer is worthy of his hire." The Lord judges it to be worthy, fit, and right, to administer necessaries to preachers. Therefore, they do no unworthy deed, who receive wages, to thereby provide necessaries for themselves and their family. Indeed, he compares preachers not to idle bellies, not to those who freely eat other men's bread, nor to beggars, but to labourers. For the Lord sets down in the law, how it is a great offence to deny labourers their hire; even so, their offence is not small, who allow those who are faithful feeders of the flock, to perish and decay through need. For in another place, the Lord speaks to his disciples, saying, "You have freely received it, and therefore freely give it." ^{Mat 10.8}But he speaks of the gift of working miracles, and of the benefit of health to be bestowed on the sick, diseased, and oppressed; for thus it is written: "Heal the sick, cleanse the leprous, raise the dead, cast out devils."^{Mat 10.8}

v.489

And to these words he added this: "You have received it freely, and therefore bestow it freely." Therefore, though the apostles received a reward from those to whom they preached, yet never has any man read that they took anything for the gift of healing, which they received in the Lord's name. Elisha would not take anything at all, even though it was freely offered to him by Naaman the Syrian captain, for Naaman was healed of the leprosy by his counsel; yet Elisha did not refuse the gift of the man who came to him from Baal-Shalisha. ^{2Kng 4.42} From the same gospel of Christ our Lord, ministers have to learn to what use they should put the wages they have from the church. For when the Lord commanded Judas to depart, who carried the purse, the remainder of the disciples thought that he had been commanded to go and buy those necessaries which would serve for the holy day, or else to bestow something on the poor. Therefore, it is plain that the Lord used the stipend he received, to provide necessaries for himself and his disciples, and also to give alms from it.

Mark well, then, that the ministers of the church may provide things necessary for their living, function, and maintenance of their household, out of the wages they receive from the church. Again, they may also from the same wages give alms to the poor, as though it was of their own goods, truly gotten. For the Lord says plainly in the law, that the sacrifice of the Levites, made from tithes and other oblations or holy revenues, would be as acceptable to him, as their sacrifice who offer anything out of their own chest, store, or possessions. Truly, if a labourer offers to God anything from his hire or wages, that is to say, if he gives to the poor, does it not seem a very acceptable sacrifice to God? The alms that the minister of the church bestows, proceeding from the wages of the holy ministry, are very acceptable then. Take the case of a labourer who is building a church, and receives his wages from the church-goods. Should a man therefore say that the labourer took alms, and that one alms should not be given out of another? He received wages for his work, for he laboured; and therefore, he gives alms from his wages, and from his own lawful and proper goods. Why then should the minister of the church be thought to live by alms, and should not give alms from alms, notwithstanding that he labours for his wages, and should therefore receive the reward of his work, just as a labourer does, to whom the Lord himself compares the minister? [3409]

v.490

If any man is so far past honesty to think so, then he may not hear what I say, but let him hear what Paul the apostle says: "If we sow spiritual things to you, is it a great matter if we mow your carnal things?"^{1Cor 9.11} And again: "Those elders who govern well are worthy of double honour, and chiefly those who travail in preaching and teaching. For the scripture says, You shall not muzzle the mouth of the ox treading out the corn; and, The labourer is worthy of his hire." ^1Tim
5.17-18 Behold, therefore, the apostle does not think that that inestimable goodness of the ministry can by any means be recompensed with a vile thing, I mean, with earthly wages. Again, "Those who labour," he says: those who labour, I say, not those who loiter in teaching. These he compares to an ox, which is a toiling beast, and thrashes out corn;[3410] and also to a labouring man. What I so greatly warn you about, is because in our wicked and unthankful world, certain men (rather most unthankful monsters) are to be found, who are persuaded that ministers do nothing at all, even those who most faithfully do their duty. For they cry out, saying, They eat their bread as beggars do, and it costs them nothing.[3411] By this name and infamy they terrify many fine wits, and make them forsake the study of good learning and divinity, so that they utterly abhor the ministry, as if it were something most beggarly and dishonest. For in such a way the devil can devise to enlarge his kingdom, abusing, or rather fitly using to his purpose, our ingratitude and malice. But why do they not allow themselves to be numbered with Christ and the holy apostles, who were fed and maintained by the church's stipend, than to be reckoned among those unthankful and proud people who have scraped and gathered all their goods together, for the most part by usury and other wicked means? Or at least, if they have not gotten their goods by sinister means, they have received them through the liberality and mere goodness of God, for which they never sweat or took pains?

v.491

St. Paul proves by strong and many arguments, the right to receive a stipend for the holy ministry. "Do we not have," he says, "the power and authority to eat and drink, or may we not carry about with us a woman sister?" ^{1Cor 9.4-5} He means the lawfulness and authority to receive anything necessary for himself, his wife, and his whole household. And for that he asks a question, to show what he means,[3412] that thereby he may declare a plain truth and equity among all men. And he adds examples to this, not of every man severally, but of all generally, and specially of the chief apostles of Christ, and of those who were kin to Christ by blood, saying: "Even as the other apostles, and brothers of our Lord, and Cephas?" ^{1Cor 9.5} And who is that Cephas but Peter? The Lord said to this Cephas in the first chapter of St. John: "You will be called Cephas, which if a man interprets it, signifies stone." ^{Joh 1.42} But Peter was also surnamed a rock with the intent that the interpretation of the name might always fall on him. And who, I pray you, are the Lord's brethren, but John and James, and James the brother of Judas, and Judas and Simon, the brethren of James? All these, says St. Paul, lived from the stipend they had, being gathered from the common assembly of the church. To these examples he adds others like them, commonly put in practice. "Who," he says, "goes to war at his own costs and charges? Or who plants a vineyard, and does not eat the fruit of it? Or who feeds a flock, and does not drink the milk from it?"^{1Cor 9.7} Surely he brings forth these similitudes very finely, and properly applied to them and not to any others.[3413] For the ministers of the church are sometimes called soldiers or vineyard-keepers, sometimes husbandmen and shepherds. And who, I pray you, is so far from reason, that he would deny food and clothing to soldiers, husbandmen, and shepherds, for the pains they take in warfare, husbandry, and about cattle?

v.492

True-hearted men, therefore, and those who are of an indifferent judgment, acknowledge that the ministers of the church may live by the ecclesiastical ministry. But lest any object that these human parables and similitudes, taken from common use, prove nothing in an ecclesiastical cause, Paul quickly adds: "Do I say these things according to man? Does not the law also say the same thing? For it is written in the law of Moses, you shall not muzzle the ox that treads out the corn." ^{1Cor 9.8-9} It is as if he had said: I have in a readiness, to confirm our right, not only human similitudes, but also testimonies from the holy scripture. And he alleges a place out of the 25th chapter of Deuteronomy, concerning the nourishing of labouring oxen. Again, lest any man say that place is not to be understood about preachers, but simply about oxen, he adds: "Does God take care for oxen? Or does he not speak it altogether for our sakes? Doubtless he has written it for our sakes, so that the one who ploughs may plough in hope, and the one who threshes in hope may partake of his hope.'' ^{1Cor 9.98-10} The Lord, he said, in his law would provide for us.

For he would have equality gathered by a certain syllogism or a kind of argument, in this or in a similar way: If the Lord provided for beasts and cattle, and would have them be considered, then how much more true of men! It would truly be a very unjust thing if a husbandman laboured with his ox without hope, that is to say, in vain, and without commodity. Therefore, it would also be a most unjust thing for the minister to exercise ecclesiastical husbandry in the church without hope or a due stipend. Moreover, where it is again objected here, that no corporal reward belongs to the spiritual ministry, but a spiritual reward, the apostle answers: "If we sow spiritual things to you, is it a great matter if we reap your temporal things?"^{1Cor 9.11} He therefore thinks that the Corinthians give nothing when they give their temporal things, namely if they are compared with eternal good things, which the ministers bring by teaching. For look how far the soul excels the body; by so much more, spiritual things are better than temporal. The apostle also conceals an evident argument in these words, where he admonishes that it is fitting that the one who sows should also reap. Thus, there is also great inequality in this point: that ministers sow the better, but reap the worse.

v.493

Because men treat God and the divine ministry lightly, they therefore think that the ministers do nothing. St. Paul again confirms his own right by the example of others, saying: "If others are partakers of this right over you, why rather are we not?" For seeing none had taken more pains among the Corinthians than St. Paul, no man was more worthy of reward. Moreover, he confirms his right by the example, commandment, and ordinance of the Lord, saying: "Do you not know that those who take pains in holy things, eat of the holy things; and those who minister at the altar, are partakers of the altar? Even so, the Lord has ordained that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel." ^{1Cor 9.13-14} Where has the Lord ordained this? In truth, when he said in the gospel that "the labourer is worthy of his hire." But I judge this especially to be observed, which the apostle says in plain words: that the Lord instituted his ordinance concerning the maintenance of the ministers of the church to imitate the ancient laws of the Jewish people. From this we gather that we do not miss the mark much, if in this and like cases, we do not utterly reject the ancient institutions of the fathers.

But just because St. Paul did not use his authority as he might have done, it says nothing against these things. For one question is about the deed, and another about the right of the thing. Indeed, Paul took nothing from the Corinthians for various reasons; notwithstanding, he took from other churches. Nor did he receive anything from the church of Thessalonica. Yet for all that, this is not prejudicial to the equity of the right; for he says to the Corinthians:

"I have robbed other churches, having received wages from them, with the intent that I might do you service. And when I was with you and lacked, I was not burdensome to any man; for the things that were lacking for me were given to me by the brethren who came from Macedonia." ^{2Cor 11.8-9}

And to the Thessalonians he says:

"We have not behaved ourselves inordinately among you, nor did we take our bread for nothing; but with labour and pain, doing our work both night and day, with the intent that we would not be a burden to any of you. Not that it is unlawful for us to do it; but because we would set ourselves down as a pattern for you to follow after." ^{2Thes 3.7-9}

v.494

And again, the same St. Paul says to the Thessalonians:

"I beseech you, that you acknowledge those who labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you that you keep them in singular love, through love for their work's sake. Be at peace with them." [3414]

Therefore, let so much of the church-goods, as is sufficient, be given to the ministers and teachers, so far as honest necessity requires. And this much we have spoken concerning the portion that is due to pastors.

In times past, the second part of ecclesiastical goods was allotted to clerics. And clerics are the harvest of pastors, studious of divinity, and wholly disposed to the holy ministry. And because they have dedicated themselves and all they have, wholly to the church and its ministry, it is most fitting that they be nourished and maintained by the costs of the church. But it is convenient they be nourished frugally; they should be an example of lowly and thrifty living to others. For being brought up in luxury does not agree with the ministries of the church. And therefore, Amos found fault that the Nazarites drank wine; for drunkards would not maintain the church, but utterly destroy it. We spoke of this matter in another place.[3415] Moreover, it is fitting that due portions be paid to priests, schoolmasters, scholars, and to all other ecclesiastical persons whatsoever.

The third part of ecclesiastical goods are appointed for the poor. And there are diverse sorts of poor folk, such as widows, pupils, orphans, and infants cast out (whose parents are not known [3416]), also those who are worn with old age and spent with diseases. There are infinite kinds of diseases, of which the most grievous are these: leprosy, fury, and madness, the French pox, or the scab of India or Naples, the palsy, the gout, and a great many more.

v.495

Not only are poor men born within the land, but also strangers who are banished from their country and home for righteousness' sake, and for the word of God. There are others who have not yet come to extreme poverty, but are even now ready to fall into it, so that, if they are not helped a little with ready money, they later come to be kept by the church-box. Again, there are some who are consumed by imprisonment, by wars, by great floods of waters, by fire, and diverse other mishaps, such as by hail, frosts, and other storms and distemperatures of the air. Of all those whose health and safeguard the Lord willed us to be mindful of, he says that whatever we bestow upon the poor, we bestow it upon him. Therefore, if we despise and disregard the poor, without any doubt we despise and neglect even our Lord God himself in the poor. We should of duty succour the poor of our own good will by counsel, comfort, medicines, cures,[3417] money, food, drink, clothes, lodgings, succouring, and by any other means that we may have, and in all such matters and cases as they need our help. If the church-goods are not sufficient to perform all this to the full, then let the abundance of all other good faithful people supply their want.

And if there are sufficient goods laid up in store, which were contributed in times past by the liberality of the godly, and which are taken away through the negligence or wickedness of the governors, so that the necessity of the poor cannot thereby be succoured — then for that reason truly, most sharp tempests of infelicities are poured out on both commonwealths and kingdoms. Why? For they are very sharply punished, who do not give to the poor from their own private goods, if they are able. With how much more grievous calamities may we think they will be plagued, who wickedly, sacrilegiously, and forcibly take away for their own private uses, those riches which were given by others for the common use of the poor! He that has this world's substance, and sees his brother in need, and shuts up his affection from him, is cruel.^1Joh
3.17 Therefore, he that takes from the poor, that which is already given to them, is even more cruel, and commits sacrilege.

v.496

We read that the Sodomites with their fellow-cities were burned, because they did not strengthen the hand of the poor, but rather weakened it. The Moabites and Canaanites are destroyed for disdaining strangers, and for having no care of the poor. But why do we fetch examples so far off? Why do we not call to mind the last sentence of the high Judge, uttered from his heavenly judgment-seat which is established in the clouds, pronounced in this manner:

"Come, you blessed children of my Father, possess the kingdom which was prepared for you from the beginning of the world. I have been hungry, and you have given me food: I have been thirsty, and you have given me drink: I was a stranger, and you harboured me: I was naked, and you clothed me: I was sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me."^{Mat 25.34-36}

The evangelist also adds what agrees very much with our purpose:

"Then the just will answer, and say, Lord, when did we see you hungry, and gave you food? thirsty, and gave you drink? "When did we see you harbourless, and lodged you? or naked, and clothed you? Or when did we see you sick or in prison, and came to you? The King answering will say to them, Truly I say to you, In that you did it for one of the least of these my brethren, you did it for me. Then he will also say to those who are on his left hand. Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, which is prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry, and you gave me no food: I was thirsty, and you gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and you did not harbour me. I was naked, and you did not clothe me: I was sick and in prison, and you did not visit me. Then they will answer, and say to him, Lord, when did we see you hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and not minister to you? Then he will answer them, saying, Truly I say to you, In that you did not do it for one of the least of these, neither did you do it for me." ^{Mat 25.37-45}

v.497

It then follows: "And they will go into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into everlasting life." ^{Mat 25.46} The Lord also [3418] in another place in the gospel, substituting the poor in his stead, says: "You have the poor with you always, and when you will, you may do them good; but me you shall not always have." ^{Mar 14.7} And therefore we read that the primitive church was careful in providing for the poor, even to working miracles. [3419]

St. Paul in all places commends the poor to the church of God. He made collections for the poor in almost all churches; and the blessings which he had gathered, ^{2Cor 9.5} he distributed with great judgment, faith, and diligence; as it will appear in almost all his epistles, especially in the 15th chap. to the Romans, in first Corinthians, 16th chapter, in second Corinthians, the eighth and ninth chapters; and to the Galatians: "While we have time," he says, "let us do good towards all men, especially towards the household of faith." ^{Gal 6.10} In the first epistle to Timothy he warns that consideration be given as to who should be helped, and who not to be helped. ^{1Tim 5.3f} In the same epistle he charges Timothy and all the bishops, how to deal with the richer sort in the church, saying:

"Command those who are rich in this world, that they not be high-minded, nor put their trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who gives us all things abundantly to enjoy; that they may do good, that they may be rich in good works, that they may be ready to give, and bestow willingly, laying up for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may take hold of life everlasting." ^1Tim
6.17-19

And to the Hebrews: "Do not forget to do good and to distribute: for with such sacrifice God is pleased." ^{Heb 13.16} Therefore, riches were gathered even in the time of the apostles, to succour the necessity of the poor with. Deacons were appointed by the church as providers and stewards. The Acts of the Apostles mentions who among those first deacons were most famous, and there was also the notable martyr of Christ, Laurence.[3420]

v.498

The writings of the ancient fathers testify that with those ecclesiastical goods, prisoners were redeemed out of captivity; poor maidens of lawful years were married; hospitals, almories, spittals, harbours, hostels, and nurseries, were built, namely to entertain poor travellers, for the maintenance of the poor who were born in that country, for the relief of the sick and diseased, for the necessity of old men, and for the honest bringing up of pupils and orphans.[3421] Concerning these matters, certain imperial laws are still extant.

Therefore, in reforming churches, very diligent heed must be taken, that no offence be committed in this through oversight or on purpose; that the poor not be defrauded; and that in taking away one abuse, we do not bring in many. If there are plenty of goods, let them be kept; if there are none, let them be gathered from the rich. Then let the state of the poor be searched, and what every man needs most, or how provision may best be made for everyone. This being known, let what is fitting and necessary for everyone be done speedily, gently, and diligently. Then, if any of the common goods remain, let them be kept against such calamities as may ensue. Let nothing be consumed unprofitably or irreverently. Again, do not let the treasure of the poor unhappily be detained from them by fraud [3422] and to the increase of their poverty. For there may be a like offence committed on both sides; for on each side the poor are defrauded of their goods. Touching liberality, we have treated that in another place in these decades;[3423] and about providing for the poor, in another of our works.[3424] And Lewis Vives has written very well about relieving the poor.[3425]

v.499

The fourth and last part of the goods of the church pertains to holy buildings, such as churches, schools, and houses belonging to churches and schools. Churches, because of the companies gathered together in them, are also called congregations. They are the houses of the Lord our God. Not that God, whom the wide compass of the heavens cannot comprehend, dwells in such houses; but because the congregation and people of God meet together in those houses to worship and perform due honour to God, to hear the word of God, to receive the Lord's sacraments, and to pray for the assistance and presence of God. Churches, therefore, are very necessary for the church and people of God. Touching holy assemblies, I have said something in the disputations about prayer. [3426]

At the commandment of God, Moses built a moveable church; and afterward, the most wise king Solomon founded a standing church, not without great cost. Notwithstanding, we must not therefore think that God likes such great charges after he had sent Christ and fulfilled the [Old Testament] figures. For before the law was made, it is not to be found that the patriarchs ever built any great churches;[3427] even after disannulling the law in the church of Christ, a mean and sparing cleanliness pleases God best. For God disapproves those foolish and mad kinds of buildings, not unlike those of Babylon,[3428] venturing to set the top of the tower above the clouds. God does not like the riotousness [3429] of churches, for without any riot, He gathers his church together from all the parts of the world; he has also taught this church both sparingness and contempt for all riot. A church is large and big enough, if it is sufficient to receive all who belong to it; for the place is provided for men, and not for God. But above all things, let that place be clean and holy. A church is hallowed or consecrated not (as some superstitiously think) by repeating certain words, or making signs and characters, or with oil, or purging fire; but with the will of God and his commandment, bidding us to assemble and come together, promising his presence among us; and it is also hallowed by the holy use of it.

v.500

For the holy church of God is gathered together in the temple; the true and most blessed word of God is also declared in the temple; the holy sacraments of God are received in the temple; and also prayers are poured forth to God in the temple, which are most acceptable to him. Truly, of itself, the place is not at all holy. But because these holy things are done in that place, in being done there, the place itself is called holy. Therefore, it is not without great cause that all profanation and filthiness be far from the holy temple of the Lord. The senator's court or seat of judgment, is accounted so holy a thing that whoever used himself irreverently towards it, in word or deed, was to be accused of treason. And yet in this [earthly] court, the senators are gathered and assembled together only to hear the matters of suitors in transitory things, that will pass away and perish. By how much more then, should reverence be given to temples, into which the children of God come to worship him, to hear the true word of God, and to receive his holy sacraments! And therefore, just as we hate and abandon all superstition in temples, so we do not love the profanation of them; rather, I say, we cannot abide it. Nor do we have leisure at this time, in the consideration of temples, to repeat and search out open and plain superstitions.[3430] We have spoken of this matter in another place.[3431]

I find it a matter of controversy among the fathers of olden times, to which part of the world we should to turn when we pray. Socrates, the historiographer, in his fifth book, cap. 22, speaking of the most ancient apostolic church of the whole world at Antioch, says: "At Antioch, which is in Syria, the church is set contrary to others; for the altar does not look towards the east, but towards the west." [3432] It may be that they imitated the fashion of the old people in building and setting their tabernacle, and in the fashion of their temple. For they worshipped God turning towards the west, without doubt, because of the coming of Christ in the latter time and at the end of the world.

v.501

Otherwise, men commonly worship with their faces towards the east. But in all these matters, so that there is no superstition, dissension, licentiousness, and offence, a man may do what he wishes.

But there should be no temple built for worshipping the saints. For to God only, to whom all honour and worship is due, we ought to build churches; which we are taught by the examples of ancient fathers, and the determination of the whole scripture. The heathenish idolaters built temples to creatures, sinning against the true and eternal God in committing a grievous offence. St. Augustine, in his book De Civitate Dei, says plainly: "We do not build temples to our martyrs." [3433] And again, in his first book against Maximums, a bishop of the Arians, Augustine says:

"If we were to build a church of timber and stones to some excellent holy angel, would we not be accursed by the truth of Christ and the church of God, because we do that service to a creature, which is due only to God? Therefore, if we would commit sacrilege in making a temple to every creature whatsoever, how may it be that God is not true, to whom we make no temple, but we ourselves are a temple for him?" [3434]

Therefore, they are to be accounted liars, who affirm that temples were built by certain religious men in the worship of the apostles, while they were alive. We have spoken of this matter in times past, as we have against both the riotousness of the church, and the unprofitable expenses of it, in the first book entitled De Origine Erroris, the 21st chap.

Instruments belonging to the church ought to be holy, clean, and void of all riot, and far from any kind of superstition. The instruments are these: a holy seat or pulpit, in which the minister may teach and preach; convenient seats for the congregation; a font ready to baptize infants in,[3435] and the Lord's table, with those things that are necessary for it, such as water, bread, wine, books, candles, baskets, and cups.

v.502

These were sometimes all of gold; but good and godly bishops have often melted them, and delivered prisoners out of captivity with it, and fed those who were likely to perish from hunger.[3436] I have gathered many examples of this sort in my book about the Institution of Bishops, the 9th chapter. As for candles, which we just mentioned, it is sure that the ancient fathers used them in the churches to drive away the darkness of the night, as it appears in the twentieth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. But it is a foolish matter and not at all religious, to use lights in worshipping God. Lactantius cries out:

"Shall we judge him to be in his right mind,[3437] who offers the light of a burning wax-candle, or a taper, as a present to the author and giver of light? He requires another kind of light at our hands, and that is not smoky, but clear and bright: namely, the light of the mind." [3438]

But a man may commonly see, these days, a great part of worshipping God is reposed in offering candles, which is clean against the manifest truth.

Among other instruments of the church, are reckoned bells. They are to us these days, as trumpets were to the people of God in olden times. For they serve to call the congregation together, and they are included among tokens and warnings. There is a fanciful superstition about bells. They are christened by bishops; and it is thought that they have power to drive away any great tempest. In olden times, men were stirred to prayer by ringing bells whenever any grievous tempest arose. But now, the very ringing of bells, because of their consecration, seems to have a peculiar kind of virtue in it. Who can help but marvel and be astonished at this extreme blindness? Moreover, they use bells to bewail the dead. All these things are superstitious, and are to be utterly contemned. [3439]

v.503

Because the true use of church-goods consists in those things which we reckoned up before, it followed that the abuse of them must be in the contraries, whether we offend in one kind or in many. Justice and equity is to be kept in these, as well as in all other things. We should not take from one man and give to another; but we must give to everyone that which is his own. Therefore, we may not take anything from the poor, and give it to the ministers of the church: nor is their portion and necessaries to be taken from them, so that the poor may live off them. The holy scripture gives one portion of the church-goods to the ministers of the church; and the same scripture wills us to give to the poor their portion. Therefore, if bishops or ministers of the church claim all the church goods for themselves, and do not give the poor the portions that are due them, they defile themselves with sacrilege. If the ministers do not claim for themselves all the goods of the church, and yet they unjustly take either more than it becomes them, or than need requires, or otherwise than the decree of God and the apostles allow — or else, if they spend unthriftily that portion which is due them — then they grievously offend. But they sin greatly, indeed, most horribly, if they waste the goods of the poor in hunting, dicing, drinking and rioting, whore-hunting, or else in warfare; and in the meantime, have no regard for the church, nor care what is done there or how.[3440] But if a just and good portion falls to the poor, perhaps there will be a fault in this point: the steward or almoner,[3441] through favour or hatred, allows those who have the most need to have nothing, and the least worthy to have the most; in this case there is also great offence committed through filthy abuse.

But of all abuses, what seems to be the most shameful, is what now-a-days is most common. We bestow great costs and charges upon stones and stocks — that is to say, upon idols that are void of all understanding — but no regard is had for the poor, who are the perfect images of God. These kind of madness is heathenish and extreme folly. But since others have already largely spoken about the abuse of church-goods, and we too have set down certain matters concerning them elsewhere,[3442] I will for now make an end of speaking about it.

v.504

I would now treat the holy time. [3443] This treatise is altogether like that about the holy place, which we argued elsewhere. We also discoursed about it in expounding the Ten Commandments.[3444] I add only this at present: that there should be no odious contention in the church concerning this matter, but that in this and other cases like it, discipline with charity is to be constantly observed. For it behoves us to be mindful of the most pernicious contention about keeping Easter. With much danger and great detriment, this has troubled the churches of the east and west for a long time.[3445] And beware, in any case, that there not be a gap left open for Satan to enter in through contention. It would be profitable, in my opinion, both in this case and in like cases, to remember the counsel which St. Augustine gives in the 118th epistle to Januarius [3446] —what is enjoined of us, that is not against either faith or good manners, is to be considered indifferent, and it is to be observed according to the society of those with whom we live.

discipline and the correction of ministers also belong to the holy ministry. How necessary this is, may be gathered by these words of our Lord Christ: "You are the salt of the earth. If the salt has lost its saltness, what will be salted with it? [3447] It is good for nothing else, but to be thrown out of doors, and be trodden underfoot by men." ^{Mat 5.13} I know there are some who boast of having certain privileges, by which they are exempted from all discipline. But they are deceived; for the Lord has made all the ministers of his church subject to discipline. Whoever would therefore be exempted from discipline are not Christ's ministers. Or who, I ask you, would say that he is free from discipline, whom the Lord would have altogether subject and bound to it? Against the commandment of God there is no pope's law, no privilege of king or emperor, of any force; for no man can abrogate the decree of the high God: and the Lord commands us to warn and correct every brother who does amiss.

v.505

Therefore, he would have us also sharply admonish the ministers of the churches, who are negligent and go astray. Truly, he himself often and very sharply reproved the whole order of the priests of the church of Jerusalem. Eli, the Lord's priest, is ill-reported in the holy scripture, for he did not bridle his sons, being priests, with sharper discipline. We read how the prophets of the Lord very bitterly blamed all the colleges of priests, and also the high priests. Examples are to be found in every place throughout the holy history, and in the writings of the prophets. Indeed, St. Paul reproved the most holy apostle St. Peter at Antioch in Syria, in the sight of the whole congregation, for he did not teach directly according to the prescribed rule of the gospel. ^{Gal 2.11-12} And to be short, Christ himself, in the revelation made to St. John the apostle, very sharply admonishes and reproves the angels, that is to say, the ministers of the churches. ^{Rev 1.11, 20} Again, St. Paul the apostle says: "Receive no accusation against an elder, except under two or three witnesses. But those who offend, reprove before the whole congregation, that the others may stand in fear." ^{1Tim 5.19-20} There are also found in the scriptures many notable examples of most holy princes, who by their laws have restrained even the chief ministers of the churches, and have thrown from their chairs and degrees those who did not well discharge their duties.[3448] Yes, necessity itself and the good estate of the people of God, requires that the naughty ministers of churches be deposed. And it would be better that a few evil ministers were troubled, than so many congregations brought into danger of body and soul. For the churches and congregations are utterly destroyed through the negligence and ungodliness of wicked pastors. Therefore, let them be deposed with speed.

But to the end that the ministers of churches might better and the more easily be kept in their function and calling, the ancient fathers in olden times solemnly held convocations of the clergy once or twice in a year, applying them as remedies for the diseases of the ministers. And that I may not bring anything far-fetched here, I will recite to you, dearly beloved, what is read in the Imperial Constitutions of the emperor Justinian, commanding us in this way:

v.506

"The ancient fathers solemnly held convocations of the clergy twice a year in every province, that those things which have grown up may be examined there, and amended by competent correction. Not being previously observed, it now seems necessary to bring this to the right way. And since we ourselves, because of this negligence, have found many to be entrapped with sundry errors and sins, we command them all, that in all provinces every year, either in the months of July or September, one synod be held, and that the priests meet together, either at the patriarch's or the bishop's, and that matters of faith be handled there, and also canonical questions, and the administration of ecclesiastical things, or of reproveable life, or other matters which require correction. These things being thus observed, the laity will also reap much profit concerning the true faith and honest life, and amend themselves for the better."

Then he adds these words:

"Moreover, we command the lieutenants of the provinces, if they see this is negligently looked to, that they urge the bishops to assemble synods. But if they perceive that they seek delays and are negligent in this, then let them certify us of it, so that we may proceed with due correction against such lingerers." [3449]

v.507

This much have I reported out of the Caesarian decree. Therefore, let bishops take heed, that no fault be committed in this through their negligence; and if they forget their duty, let the magistrate beware that he does not wink at their sluggishness, to the destruction of the whole church and all the ministers of Christ.[3450] Many vices continually creep in, for the disposition of the flesh is very corrupt. Therefore, unless there is admonition in the church and correction continually put in use, those things which we think are most firm will fall into decay and perish sooner than we suppose.

Just as the Lord would have the transgressing ministers of the churches be admonished and corrected, so he extends the commodity of that admonition and correction to the whole church. And therefore, the ancient church had a holy senate of elders, who diligently warned those who transgressed in the church, corrected them sharply, yes, and excluded them from ecclesiastical fellowship — namely, if they perceived that there was no hope of amendment to be looked for in them. But in the latter times, the popes and bishops have tyrannically taken that kind of punishment into their own hands, and exercise it sacrilegiously, contrary to the first institution. They have turned a wholesome medicine into a hurtful poison, making it abominable both to the good and bad. St. Paul, teaching that this kind of punishment was permitted by the Lord to restrain the licentiousness of many,[3451] says:

"I have decreed that, when you are gathered together in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and my spirit with you, together with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, the one who has committed this offence be delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."^{1Cor 5.3-5}

v.508

Look, this is the power and revenge of the elders of the church. The means is the destruction of the flesh: the end is the safety of the spirit, or saving a faithful man. For the same apostle has these words for the Thessalonians:

"If there is any man who does not obey our words, signify it to me by an epistle, and see that you have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Nor would I have you consider him an enemy, but warn him as a brother." ^{2Thes 3.14-15}

The same apostle also plainly shows in another place, who ought to be punished by the ecclesiastical sword. It is not those who are offenders through weakness of the flesh; nor good men being adjudged heretics, only by the bishops or their company; nor poor men for not paying their duty to their ordinary [3452] or their official. Rather, they are wicked doers, and pernicious men: "If any man that is called a brother, is a whore-hunter, or a covetous person, or an idolater, or a slanderer, or a drunkard, or a thief, see that you do not eat with him." ^{1Cor 5.11} St. Augustine allows for moderation in giving punishment; especially when, through punishment, what is to be feared is not the edifying, but the destruction of the church.[3453] This fear might perhaps seem either vain, or too excessive, if the same apostle who commanded the incestuous adulterer to be delivered to Satan, had not said in the second epistle to the Corinthians: "I fear that when I come, I will not find you such as I wish; and I will mourn for many who offended before and have not repented of their uncleanness, nor of their whoring and wantonness which they used," etc. ^{2Cor 12.20-21} Truly, he severely threatens them, as though he will not spare them. But because he perceived that it tended toward the utter destruction and overthrow of the church, rather than to gathering it together and increasing it, if he delivered them to Satan (as he did with the adulterer), he used moderation according to God's commandment: "Allow both of them to grow, lest when you pluck up the tare, you also pull up the wheat by the roots." ^{Mat 13.29} It is necessary, therefore, that holy judgment be used, lest offence be committed either by too much favour, or too much extremity.

v.509

Moreover, let speedy reconciliation be enforced among those who are repentant. St. Paul says: "It is sufficient for such a man, that he be blamed or chided thus." ^{2Cor 2.6} St. Peter, who shamefully denied the Lord, hears from women on the day of Christ's resurrection, the gospel that was preached by angels. [3454]

Moreover, we have shown that there is a magistrate in the church, with authority to execute the sword upon evil-doers; a magistrate who judges and exercises the sword, yet is reckoned among the true members of the church; and that magistrate is very necessary for the church in respect to his office, as set down in our 7th and 8th sermons of the second Decade.

The special institutions and ordinances which God has appointed in the church, are these that follow. And truly, among all the ordinances of the church, wedlock is not to be accounted least. If it is well used, it produces a great company of good fruits in the church. But if it is not well ordered, it breeds a number of offences and deadly mischiefs in the church. For they judge uprightly who say that a church is most holy and best assembled, which is gathered together out of many well-ordered houses. Then again, a wicked church is assembled out of many wicked houses. Therefore, in his holy word God diligently appoints couples, and garnishes wedlock very beautifully. But it is not our purpose at present to show the praise of matrimony. For it suffices to know that God himself is the author of wedlock, and that he first instituted it in Paradise. And he did it to this end: that man might live well and pleasantly with a fellow.

To conclude, he first coupled man and woman together, and being coupled, he blessed them. And so, the most holy friends of God — the patriarchs, princes, prophets, kings, bishops, wise men, and priests — lived in this kind of life. Of this perhaps, St. Paul said: "Wedlock is honourable among all men, and the bed undefiled." ^{Heb 13.4} In another place he calls the doctrine that forbids wedlock, "The doctrine of devils."^{1Tim 4.1} For it is evidently known that Christ's disciples and the apostles were married men; nor did they put away their wives when they took the office of preaching, though some most shamefully pretend that they did.

v.510

It is notable, that the apostle requires at the hands of a bishop or an elder, to be the husband of one wife; ^{Tit 1.6} and in another place he plainly says that it is lawful to carry about a Christian wife, being in the calling of the apostleship; and he claims it both for himself and Barnabas. ^{1Cor 9.5-6} What will I say moreover, that it was pronounced in the council of Nicaea, namely, that to lie with a man's own wife is chastity? [3455] For St. Paul had said before: "Let every man have his own wife, to avoid fornication." ^{1Cor 7.2} And, "The bed of wedlock is undefiled." ^{Heb 13.4} Again: "If a virgin marries, she does not offend." ^{1Cor 7.28} Therefore, we judge that papistic doctrine which forbids marriage to ministers, is what the blessed apostle St. Paul termed the doctrine of devils. The very papists themselves, who have not yet put all shamefacedness away, will confess it with us. For if we judge the tree by the fruits, I ask you, what fruits of a single life may we recite? What filthiness, what bawdry, what adulteries, what fornications, what ravishings, what incests and heinous copulations may we recite? Who today lives more unchastely or dishonestly than the rabble of priests and monks do? For as they have no care or regard to obey God's word and his laws, and to glorify God with their holy life in chaste wedlock; even so, through the desire of their hearts, God has given them up to all uncleanness, so that their bodies may be stained with reproach.

But first of all, the holy scripture diligently teaches all men to have a special care, that they contract matrimony devoutly, holily, soberly, wisely, lawfully, and in the fear of God; and that no evil disposition of covetousness, desire for promotion, or fleshly lust, may lead and provoke them; and that wedlock not be entered into other than either the laws of man or of God [3456] will permit.

And here we must consider of the degrees of consanguinity and affinity, of public honesty, of the reverence of blood, of offence towards others, and that no man takes as his wife a heathen woman, or one of a contrary religion; for we are expressly forbidden to yoke ourselves with unbelievers. ^2Cor
6.14

v.511

Again, we are taught to enter into the knot of wedlock lawfully, reverently, and holily, with prayer and the receipt of godly blessings in the temple of the Lord, both in the sight and with the prayer of the whole congregation; and to beware, that in any case we not be stained in this point with all profanation of the filthy world. Nor are we ignorant in this case, that men of this world are commonly prone to celebrate their weddings in a way more fitting for the devil than God,[3457] with rioting, pride, surfeiting, drunkenness, and all kinds of wantonness. Moreover, we are taught to dwell with our wives according to knowledge, moderation, patience, faith, and love; and also to bring up our children virtuously and honestly, and also to place and bestow them in holy wedlock, when time requires it.

But if for adultery, or some other matter more heinous than that, necessity forces us to break wedlock, the church will do nothing unadvisedly in this case. For she has her judges, who will judge [3458] in matters and causes of matrimony according to right and equity, or rather according to God's laws and the rule of honesty. The holy apostle would not have the faithful contend and stand at law in the court of the unfaithful. Therefore, he exhorted them to take umpires to make friendly agreements between those who were in contention. But in causes and matters of matrimony, there are far greater matters that forbid the parties that sue, or are sued, to come before unbelieving judges. Therefore, the church of God has very well appointed a court to try matters of matrimony. But because we spoke about wedlock in the tenth sermon of the second Decade, and have also presented at one time a book specially concerning it,[3459] I have knit up this matter in these few words touching Christian wedlock.

The church of God has widows in it, but such as the apostle of Christ describes this way, saying: "She that is a widow, and a lone woman indeed, trusts in God, and continues in prayer and supplication night and day. But she that lives in pleasures and delights, is dead even though she is alive." ^{1Tim 5.5-6} Paul would have the younger sort marry, have children, and govern the house, and not give any occasion at all for the enemy to speak evil of them. The place is evident in the first epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, the fifth chapter.

v.512

The church also has virgins. These are concerned only for those things that belong to the Lord, and are true virgins, without any deceit or hypocrisy. Paul says: "A virgin cares for what belongs to God, that she may be holy both in body and spirit." ^1Cor
7.34 There are many who rule and govern their bodies, but not their minds. God requires both, and especially the mind. It is an easy matter to deceive men, but we cannot by any means deceive God. In the first epistle to the Corinthians, seventh chapter, St. Paul sets forth the praise of virginity; and by comparing a virgin to a married wife, he shows how great the goodness of virginity is. Notwithstanding, it is lawful for virgins to marry if they want to, as the apostle plainly shows in the same place.

The testimony of man is also agreeable to this testimony of God. For Cyprian, with his fellow-bishops and elders, answering a question demanded by Pomponius, says:

"Do you desire that we write you what we think of those virgins who, once they determine to continue their state continently and steadfastly, are found to have lain and continued in the same bed with men? Concerning this, because you desire to know our judgment, you should understand that we do not depart from the traditions and ordinances of the gospel and the apostles, or we would so much less strongly and stoutly provide for our brethren and sisters; and ecclesiastical discipline should by all means be kept for their profit and safety."

And it follows:

"But if through faith they have vowed to Christ, and continue chastely and shamefacedly without ceasing, let them steadfastly and stoutly look for the reward of virginity. But if they will not or cannot continue, then it is better that they marry, than fall into the fire of their delights and pleasures." [3460] And so forth.

v.513

St. Augustine, disputing about the words of the apostle, "Having greater damnation, because they broke their first promise and faith," [3461] does not ascribe this damnation to the marriage that follows, but to the inconstancy going before. "They are damned," he says, "not because they entered into the bond and promise of wedlock, but because they broke the first promise made by continence and chastity." And a little after that, he adds these words: "Therefore, those who say that such marriages are no marriages indeed, but rather adulteries, it seems to me that they speak foolishly and without consideration." [3462] And that much he says about it.

I understand that the apostle uses this word "condemnation," or "judgment," [3463] to mean "reprehension," which we Switzers term, "Ein auzrichten oder nachred." [3464] For many speak evil of them for they have broken their first faith, that is to say, they have broken the promise of continence. Therefore, the apostle thinks it much better for young women to match themselves in marriage, than to set themselves such an order of life from which, even though necessity forces them into it, they cannot depart without the reprehension of men. But in that place he does not speak of virgins, but of widows. St. Cyprian speaks simply of virgins.

Monks and nuns were altogether unknown in the primitive church of Christ and the apostles. The latter ages had monks, but not the sort we have now-a-days, who are their own rule and law, whose monasteries abound in all filthiness and uncleanness. Though we should hold our peace, to be true, truth itself and experience will sufficiently declare this. And those who seem to be governed by more severe discipline, are defiled with hypocrisy. I will say nothing else.

v.514

Touching the first monks, they did not dwell in cities, nor meddle with worldly affairs. We have declared in another place [3465] how a writer of the middle ages, being made an abbot, requested that he might leave from being a cleric; for no man could well be both a monk and a cleric, since the one is an impediment to the other. They did not live off the common revenues of the church then, but from the work of their own hands, as lay people do. St. Jerome, disputing about the origin of monks, in the life of Paulus, has written thus:

"Among many it has often been asked, Who of the monks first began chiefly to dwell in the wilderness? Some, fetching it from somewhat far astray, begin to reckon from Elijah the holy prophet, and St. John. Of these, Elijah seems to us to have been more than a monk, and St. John began to prophesy before he was born. But others (whose opinion most people agree with) affirm that St. Antony was first to begin that order; this in part is true.[3466] For he was not only the first, but also the motivator of all others. Amathas and Macarius, St. Antony's scholars, the first of whom buried his master's body, now affirm that Paulus Thebius was the first of that way. We also confirm this, not only in name, but also in opinion."

And shortly he adds that Paulus, forsaking the city, and being forced to do that for fear of torments under the persecutors Decius and Valerianus, departed into the wilderness, where he found a cave, and hid in it until he was found by St. Antony.[3467]

v.515

The emperors Decius and Valerianus governed the empire about the year of the Lord 260; but it is said that St. Antony died when he was a hundred and five years old, in the year of our Lord 360. St. Augustine, who in his 80th epistle to Hesychius witnesses of his own time, that he lived in the year of our Lord 420 [3468] (but Eutropius and Bede report that he died in the year of our Lord 430 [3469]). In the thirty-first chapter of the manners of the catholic church, reciting the manners and institutions of the monks in his time, Augustine reports things that are very far from the orders and institutions of our monks now-a-days. [3470] In the time of Justinian the emperor, who made certain laws concerning monks and monasteries, there lived one Benet, whom many of the monks now-a-days call father, whose life I will recite to you out of Trittenheymius,[3471] who died about fifty years ago, with the intent that you may understand what power and dignity they obtained in the process of time, who at the beginning were contemned and of no authority.

"Benet, abbot of Cassina, first founder, beginner, and governor of the monks in the west, wrote in eloquent style and with grave judgment the rule for monks, in one book which begins, 'Give ear, my son, to my precepts,' etc. and it contains seventy-three chapters. He died in the year of our Lord 542. But Marianus Scotus supposes that he died in the year of our Lord 601, in the last year of the emperor Maurice." [3472]

v.516

He also writes about twenty orders of monks who were under Benet's rule.[3473] Of St. Benet's order, there have been eighteen popes in the see of Rome, over two hundred cardinals, one thousand six hundred archbishops in various churches, almost four thousand bishops,[3474] fifteen thousand seven hundred famous abbots who excelled in life, doctrine, and writings, fifteen thousand six hundred who are canonized.[3475] And so that I may not recite many other orders of monks, it is known that the mendicant monks and friars,[3476] being the faithful, diligent, and valiant Roman champions of the pope and the spiritual monarchy, were confirmed by Honorius about the year of our Lord 1222. [3477]

Hereby I declare only this: that all men should understand that monkery was devised by man's invention. It was not delivered to the church of Christ by the apostles; at first it seemed to be tolerable, but afterward it became altogether intolerable. Experience teaches how unprofitable it is to the commonwealth. And whoever does not know that it is quite repugnant to true religion, knows nothing.

v.517

They pretend that it is meritorious before God, and it is the state of perfection. But who does not see how repugnant it is to Christ's merit, and to the sincere doctrine of the gospel? What godliness or necessity is it that moves us, after we have wholly taken ourselves to one God in baptism, to also take ourselves and make our vows to saints, and to bind ourselves by religion of an oath to observe their rules? True religion forbids us to vow ourselves to saints, or by any means to depend on them in the way of religion. True religion forbids us to choose us any other fathers or masters. True religion forbids us to devise new manners of worshipping or new religions, or to receive those that are devised by others. The example of Jeroboam and his fellows makes us afraid. True religion forbids us to swear by the names of other gods.

Religion refers [3478] us to one God by faith and obedience. Superstition breaks this band, and admits creatures. St. Paul says to the Corinthians: "Every one of you says, I am Paul's, I am Apollo's, I am Cephas', and I am Christ's. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" ^{1Cor 1.12-13} Behold, Christ is our Redeemer and our Master. The faith of Christ has made us one body. By baptism we are baptized into one body, that we might be called Christians, not Petrines or Paulines. St. Paul would not allow Christians to take their name from the apostles. How much less would he abide that some today should be called Benedictines, some Franciscans, some Dominicans? [3479] We are the Lord's inheritance and possession; it is not lawful for us to bind ourselves to the service of men. Whoever so bind themselves, tear asunder the unity of Christ's body; they profane the cross and the baptism of Christ. The apostle plainly says: "Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" And therefore, even though they are commonly called "spiritual persons," yet are they not spiritual at all. For the apostle says: "When one of you says, I am Paul's, and I am Apollo's, are you not carnal?" To what end is it to invent new rules, after receiving the gospel of Christ Jesus and the doctrine of the apostles, which contain and deliver to us all godliness?

v.518

For truly, once these monks had found out certain peculiar laws and means of living, they separated themselves from the common sort of Christians in all outward manner of living, in their behaviour, and in all their apparel, with the intent that by that means they might make evident to all men, that they would live apart from that common, lay, and imperfect church as it were, to live more holily, perfectly, and spiritually. But how well that has framed or now frames them, the whole world speaks of today.

The vows which they vow are most foolish. They vow chastity, which they do not have. Chastity is the gift of God, and it is not incident to all men. And St. Paul says: "Whoever cannot live continently, let him marry: for it is better to marry than to burn." He said "to burn" generally, whether it was in a vow, or out of a vow. Nor is it lawful for a human vow, which was foolishly taken in hand and vowed, to prejudice the law of God. Experience teaches what manner of poverty is in the abbeys. They put off poverty, when they put off their common garments; and with their cowl, they put on great riches — for monks are made princes, which in olden times would have seemed a strange and monstrous thing. The common sort of them live idly, and eat their bread freely and for nothing, against the apostle's rule in the 2nd epistle to the Thessalonians, chap. 3, where it is also accursed. They forsake their parents and kinsfolk, whom they are bound to serve and obey by the law of God; and they take themselves to strange men, by whom they are forced to infinite superstitions. And those who are thus freely set at liberty by their parents, are either set at liberty through superstition, or with the intent that they may have all the days of their life in which to lie and riot in idleness. So it is evident that they put on the cowl for their belly's sake, not for any religion. What obedience is it, which is quite contrary to the obedience revealed by the word of God? When the magistrate commanded [3480] them to sustain and bear public burdens with the rest of the faithful, they are instead evermore free and exempted.

v.519

In olden times, ministers of strange religions, under the kings of Judah, had princely privileges and customs confirmed by prescription of long standing; but because their ministry was not allowed by the word of God, but rather was repugnant to the word of God, they were not ungodly, nor unjustly, nor sacrilegiously, broken and dissolved by holy kings.

Who can well abide to hear their excuse, who being admonished to do penance for the sins which they have committed, they make this exception: that they are bound to their monkish order by virtue of their oath, so that they cannot depart from it with a safe conscience? For it is evident, that the oath which they pretend, is altogether a rash oath; which is not to be performed, as I have declared in the third sermon of the second Decade.[3481] What, I beg you, can a bond bind one to, which is made by man without God, indeed, which is rather against the word of God, especially being made unwisely or unadvisedly? [3482] If the cross of Christ is of so great a virtue, that it has released us from the curse to which we were all subject, then how much more will it deliver us from outward bonds, with which we were entrapped, not by God, but otherwise through the folly or wickedness of men, or the craft of the devil! The apostle St. Paul cries out: "You were bought for a price; do not become the servants of men." But if haply, through the malice of men or our own folly, we become servants, the godly must endeavour that through true faith and obedience, they may be restored to the liberty of the children of God. Truly, the gospel is preached to us with the intent that we should be delivered from all unjust captivity, and serve God in spirit and truth.

Moreover, where some object that it would be good and convenient for all monasteries throughout the whole world to be reformed and brought back to the first simplicity — we answer that in our unhappy age, it would be in vain, indeed, plain folly, to hope for it. They cannot be reduced to their ancient simplicity, nor will the princes and monks allow such a reformation to be made: for they know that then they must part not only with many of their profits, honours, and pleasures, but with all of them together. [3483]

v.520

Yet, they would rather that the whole world were held together by the ears, than they would surrender to God his kingdom, which they have enjoyed up to now. But even if this thing were easy enough to accomplish, who will persuade us that if abbeys were reformed according to the ancient institution, that in our own age they would be as well or better governed than they were in olden times? We see what a beginning they had, how they have gone forward, and how they have increased. We see what hypocrisy, ambition and covetousness, pleasure and idleness could do, and to what point all things have come. Do we think that men's desires today will be more moderate? Do we think that discipline will now be less corrupted by us and our posterity, than it was by our forefathers? Indeed, we are constrained not to hope for the better, but to fear the worse, who every day experience that which is worse than others.

For we live in the dregs of the world and in the very end of all ages, in which the dragon of the bottomless pit, through the malice and ungodliness of men, has gotten for himself great power and force to disturb and corrupt all things that are in the whole world. However, in such great perils this comforts us not a little, which is written in the word of truth, that for the elect's sake those days will be shortened; ^Mat
24.22 and that he will be loosed for a short time, ^{Rev 20.3} and then shortly be cast into the lake that burns with fire and brimstone. ^Rev
20.10 Moreover, if we make a just reformation, we must go to the fountains themselves. But in the primitive church we read of nothing set down in the doctrine of Christ and his apostles concerning monkery; [3484] and thereby we understand that it is not necessary for the church; indeed, we have learned by experience that it is noisome and hurtful to the church. Therefore, true reformation persuades us to altogether abrogate monkery. In the meantime, let us not reject or neglect those who repent, whom the wickedness of the times has made unprofitable both for themselves and others; but gently receive them into the care and alms of the church.

v.521

This much up to here concerning monkery, we have said by occasion, and by the way. We declared that it had no place in the primitive church of Christ and his apostles. Let us therefore return to other necessary institutions of the church.

Likewise, the faithful church of Christ uses discipline about the sick and dying —those who are departing out of this life. Neighbours and brethren come about them, and every one for his part shows the duties of love and charity. They relieve the needy with their goods, and if the sick are not needy, then they show other duties of good-will. The minister of the church also comes who, in comforting the sick person, prepares him to die, by first making his confession of sins to God. The minister pronounces from the word of God that these are forgiven, if he steadfastly believes. He also requires of him that he forgive, and be in love and charity with all men, and that he keep no old grudge or malice in his heart. After this, some public prayer is made to God by the sick person, and by those who are about the party that is at the point of death. He is also admonished about sundry things; he is confirmed in the faith; he is called to patience; he is instructed according as his goods and everything else requires; and he is taught that, at his departing out of this world, he commend his soul into the hands of God the Father, according to the doctrine and example of our Redeemer, who at the very point of death cried aloud, saying, "Father, into your hands I commend my spirit."

We have learned this discipline from the apostles of our Lord Christ. For the apostle St. James says:

"If any are sick among you, let him send for the elders of the church; and let him pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer which is made in faith will deliver the sick; and the Lord will raise him up again. And if he is in sin, they will be forgiven him. Confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be safe; for the hearty prayer of the just is of great force," etc. ^{Jas 5.14-16}

This is the apostolic discipline. But if you say to me, Where is the oil? I answer that in St. James the apostle's time, and in certain ages after, there yet remained in the church the miraculous gift of healing the sick.

v.522

We read of this in St. Mark's gospel: "And the disciples, going out, preached the gospel, that they might repent; and they cast out many devils, and they anointed many with oil who were sick, and healed them." ^{Mar 6.12-13} And again in the same place says: "Moreover, these signs shall follow those who believe. In my name they shall cast out devils," etc. ^{Mar 16.17} And shortly he says: "They shall lay their hands upon the sick, and they shall be healed." ^{Mar 16.18} And because this benefit still remained in the church, St. James bids us to use oil,[3485] and to use it in the name of the Lord, as the Lord commanded. But this gift has now ceased in the church, and we find by experience that oil does no good for the sick. Thus, according to the times, and as our duty binds us, we do the best we can to assuage and cure the diseases of the sick by medicines that are most convenient for the sickness, being applied in the name of Christ.

I know how, by this testimony of the apostle, the papists go around setting out and commending their extreme unction, or last anointing; but they labour in vain. Let it pass that St. James says nothing about the hallowed oil; and that they do not permit this medicine except in extremity, where St. James commands us to anoint everyone who is sick. I ask you, how can they defend from St. James' words, what the priest demands of the sick person: "Do you believe, that the Lord will hear our prayers for the merits' sake and prayers of the saints?" The sick man answering, "I do believe;" he then says, "Let us therefore pray to God and his saints." Or where, I beseech you, has St. James, or any other apostle of Christ, taught what they say in their anointing? "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, I anoint you with holy oil, that by this anointing you may receive full remission of your sins."

v.523

What scripture, I ask you, teaches us that full remission of sins is obtained by that anointing? These things are manifestly done against the principal article of our religion, which teaches that we are purged from all our sins by the blood of Christ alone, and that is most fully. To him alone is the glory due, not to the oil, nor to any creature in the whole world.

Moreover, the church of Christ does not reject the bodies of the dead, as if it were a dead dog. For it acknowledges that their bodies have been the temples of the Holy Ghost, which has dwelt in them; it acknowledges, that they are buried in hope of the resurrection and of the glory of life everlasting. Therefore, the church in a most reverent manner, takes the bodies, winds them in a sheet, and covers them very decently. And being put into the coffin carefully, it carries them to the place of burial, or the church-yard, with near friends, neighbours, and brethren following after, and accompanying the corpse. While the body is set down and laid in the earth, there are public prayers made by those who brought the corpse. For they give thanks to God, for he has called the deceased party out of this world in the true faith; and they also pray, that it may please the Lord to likewise take them to him speedily, being enlightened with the true faith. Moreover, the name of the dead brother or sister is recited in the public assembly of the church with honour; and all the people are put in mind of their own destiny, and to speedily prepare themselves to die. And in this manner, we read in the scriptures that the ancient fathers buried their dead, yea, the most holy of them. We read nothing about canonizing, worshipping relics, or oblations for the dead for months and years, which are offered to the end that the departed should be delivered from the pains of purgatory. There are certain burials described to us in the old Testament, such as the burial of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, Aaron, Miriam, Joshua, Samuel, and David, etc.; and in the new Testament of John the Baptist and Stephen — but they were all sparing, and without any manner of superstition.[3486]

v.524

In Joseph's bones being carried out, they were carried in a mystery, that the Israelites might gather from it that they would be brought into the land of promise. To this also belongs the fact that the patriarchs chose a burial in Hebron. ^{Gen 25.9-10} Otherwise, the place avails nothing to purchase better or worse speed for the body buried in it. We must think that, because the bodies of the saints and holy men are buried there, the place is sanctified in a way, or at least called holy: not that the bodies get any holiness or safety by the ground. Therefore, unless it seems otherwise good to the divine providence of God, the saints would gladly lie with their ancestors in the same place of burial. But if it pleases God otherwise, they acknowledge that they are nonetheless received into the same earth without exception; and that they are not separated from their ancestors by distance. Therefore, there is no superstition in the church of God about burials and graves; but no man can declare in a few words how much there was in the time of popery.

These are the necessary institutions of the church of God, and they are religiously observed by the faithful without superstition, to their edification. As for other matters which are only devised by the invention of man, the godly give them no weight. I know what things may be objected here: that truly, the ancient people of the old Testament had sundry and manifold rites and ceremonies instituted of God by his prophets, because being rude,[3487] they needed such instruction; and since the common sort of Christians are also ruder than might be wished, so many sundry and diverse ceremonies were not devised by the ancient fathers without the moving of the Spirit, which Christians must also obey. I answer that this is not true nor sound reasoning, from which the weak in faith may receive a benefit. For surely, then, the apostles of Christ would have said something about it. Moreover, experience teaches that the state and condition of the weak and simple is such that the more ceremonies that are left to them, the more their minds are diversely disposed, and less united to Christ, to whom alone all things are to be ascribed.

v.525

For it pleased the Father that all fulness should dwell in Christ, and to heap together in him [3488] all things pertaining to our life and salvation. Indeed, the divine wisdom of God has taken away that whole external discipline and instruction, differentiating between us and them. We would therefore proceed to bring Judaism back, if we did not stop multiplying and heaping together rites and ceremonies, according to the manner of the old church. For in olden times, those ceremonies had their use, although they were not infinite, but comprised within a certain number. At present there is no use or place for them in the church. Nor do we lack most grave authority to prove it. The apostles and elders in a great assembly, met together at Jerusalem at a council. There the apostle Peter plainly tells them that they tempt the Lord in laying the yoke of the law upon the free necks of the Christians. There is also a synodal epistle written, ^{Act 15} in which by one consent they testify that it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to them, to lay no other burden on the church of Christ than what they recite in few words. This was with the intent that thereby it might be evident [3489] that the doctrine of the gospel is sufficient for the church, without the ceremonies of the law. If He would not then have the rites, which were instituted by God in olden times, joined to the gospel, then how much less should we at present couple the inventions of men with it! To this, moreover, is wickedly ascribed either the preparation for the grace and worshipping of God; or else part of our salvation. We may say no less today than St. Paul said long ago:

"After you have known God, how does it happen that you return again to weak and beggarly elements, which you would begin to serve anew? You observe days and months, times and years. I am afraid lest I have taken pains about you in vain." ^{Gal 4.9}

To all these things, this is also to be added: that this instruction about ceremonies, which they speak of, belongs to worshipping God; but we are forbidden to devise for ourselves any strange worshipping. We are also forbidden to add to or take away anything from the institution or word of God.

v.526

Therefore, the church of God neither ordains nor receives such constitutions from any others. We have also spoken of this matter somewhat before, where we treated the abrogating of the law and of Christian liberty.[3490]

I trust that in these fifty sermons I have, as shortly and conveniently as possible, comprehended the whole matter of faith, godliness or true religion, and also the church. That which I often repeat in all my sermons and my books, I repeat again in this place; that the learned may with my good-will and thanks, gather and embrace better things out of the scriptures.[3491] To the Lord our God, the everlasting [3492] Fountain of all goodness, be praise and glory, through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

Aaron, iii. 132, 138, 140, 142, 194, 198; iv. 222; v. 30, 37, 132, 225, 232; death of the sons of, 239.

Aaron's priesthood and Christ's compared, iii. 154; rod, iii. 132, 154; changed, v. 262, 276.

Aaronism, v. 139.

Abel, iii. 131, 185; iv. 399.

Abijah, ii. 325, 335, 384; iii. 7.

Abiathar, ii. 330.

Abihu struck, iii. 187; v. 408.

Abimelech, punished for taking Sarah, ii. 410; relieved by Abraham's prayer, v. 224.

Abinadab, iii. 148.

Abiram, iii. 131; v. 11.

Abishai, ii. 276.

Abortion, iii. 305.

Abraham, iii. 169, 170, 171, 172, 176; iv. 400; v. 102, 434; a prophet, i. 40; his age, 41; iv. 45; example of, i. 59, 87; how justified, 115; iv. 44; swears reverently, ii. 210, 246, 247; delivers Lot, 308; the father of faith, iii. 18; his hospitality, 59; his hope, 89; his afflictions, 103; receives the sign of circumcision, 175; always of chief account in the church, iv. 49; the God of, 136; his burial of Thara and Sarah, 399; God's covenant with, v. 245; was justified before he was circumcised, 311; the justification of, 318-320; burial of, 523.

Abraham's bosom, i. 139.

Abram, iii. 176.

Abrogation of the law, iii. 252; of the ceremonial law, iii. 257; of the judicial law, 280.

Absalom, ii. 280, 290, 376, 412; iii. 104; defiles his father's bed, iii. 431.

Absolute power, v. 42.

Abuse of church goods, v. 503.

Abuses of Christian liberty, iii. 314.

Ekron, iv. 357.

Accusations, false and wrongful, iii. 114; that be just, 117.

Ahab, ii. 242, 307; v. 71, 73.

Ahaz, ii. 236; iii. 9; v. 30, 70.

Acoluthi, or Acolytes, v. 114, 115.

Actual sin, the cause of, iii. 404; repugnant to the law of God, 406; Christ suffered for, iv. 43.

Adam, ii. 395, 400, 409; iii. 120, 169; v. 28, 102; to what end God gave the law to, iii. 375; no corruption in, before the fall, 377; life promised to, v. 434.

Adam and Christ compared, i. 113.

Adam's life, the length of, i. 40.

Admonition before punishment, ii. 361.

Adoration spiritual, iv. 198; of two sorts, 199.

Adore, to, what it is, iv. 195.

Adultery, ii. 203; iii. 227; against, ii. 410; Christ absolves, 413; what forbidden under the name of, 414; spiritual, v. 91.

Adversary, a name of the devil, iv. 355.

Ælius Lampridius, v. 135.

Ænon, v. 357.

Aërius, iv. 399; his error condemned, ibid.

Affection, vehement, ii. 348.

Affinity of the word of God and sacraments, v. 273, 280.

Afflicted, promises made to, iii. 95; consciences, a comfort for, v. 475.

Affliction, of the godly, an argument of God's judgment against the wicked, iii. 79; from whence comes, 92; causes of, 93; time of short, but the reward of ample, 97; in exile, 101; in famine, ibid.; in wars, 102.

Afflictions, kinds of, iii. 65; come on good and evil, 66; we are delivered out of by the goodness of the Lord, 69; testimonies of the doctrine of faith, 70; we are tried by, ibid.; causes of, in the wicked, 79; none separate the godly from God, 98; examples of in the patriarchs, 102; of Isaac, ibid.; of the old church, 104; of Christians foretold, 107.

Africa, v. 20, 73, 393; churches of, 32.

Agabus, v. 105.

Aged persons meant by parents, ii. 269.

Agrippa Herod, iii. 79; iv. 342, 400; the death of, ii. 318; v. 126.

Agrippa, king, v. 95, 97.

Ahimelech, iii. 149.

Alaric, iii. 109.

Albertus Magnus, v. 485.

Alexander, v. 8.

Alexander the Great, iii. 219.

Alexander Hales, the irrefragable doctor, v. 485.

Alexander Severus, v. 135.

Alexandria, v. 199; patriarch of, 112; school at, 483.

A-life, iii. 117.

Allegories, v. 243.

Allurements forbidden, ii. 418.

All-to, entirely, iii. 9.

Altar of incense, iii. 145, 157; of burnt-offering, iii. 158; of the Lord, v. 418; of the tabernacle, 419.

Altars of Christians, v. 419.

Amalekites, iii. 165, 429; v. 224.

Amaziah, ii. 384; iii. 8.

Amaziah, v. 71.

Amathas, v. 514.

Ambrose, ii. 250; iii. 390; v. 195, 199; his book of sacraments disallowed, 248.

Amen, v. 218.

Amnon, ii. 413.

Amon, iii. 10.

Amos, v. 7, 12, 13, 70, 71, 494.

Amram, i. 41.

Amri, ii. 336; iii. 12.

Anabaptism, i. 9; history of, v. 393; confuted, 395.

Anabaptists, ii. 215, 293, 308, 370, 385, 387, 388; iii. 18,21, 57; iv. 66; v. 53, 94, 161, 168; deny that infants are to be baptized, v. 382; by what arguments, 385; confuted, 385-8; imperial laws against, 394.

Analogy of the sign and thing signified, v. 244, 281; in baptism, 328; in the Lord's Supper, 329.

Ananias, ii. 242, 359; iv. 302; v. 8.

Ananias, Paul referred to, v. 95.

Anathematism of Paul, iv. 52.

Angel, meaning of the word, iv. 327.

Angelici, iv. 348.

Angelo, St, the mount of, iv. 348.

Angels will not have themselves worshipped, iv. 210, 344; the prayer of, 219; that there are, 328; what they are, ib.; are created, 329; when created, ib.; are substances, ib.; what manner of substances, 330; are bodily substances, ib.; what bodies they take, 331; are incorruptible, 332; are most swift and free, 334; the strength of, 335; the knowledge, multitude, and order of, 336; the names of, 337; God uses the ministry of, 338; what the ministries of are, 340; serve God, ib.; love the truth, 341; too much may not be attributed to them, 344; the worshipping of, condemned, 347; of the fall of, 349.

Anger, ii. 300.

Anicetus, v. 57, 58.

Anna, the prophetess, iv. 278; v. 182.

Anoetus, iv. 156.

Anoiling, v. 522.

Anointing, sacrament of, v. 247; with oil, 521.

Anthemius, ii. 264; v. 130.

Anthony, St, v. 514.

Anthropomorphites, ii. 225, 230; iv. 138, 315.

Antichrist, v. 34, 162.

Antioch, v. 43, 105, 199; patriarch of, 112; school at, 483.

Antiochus, king, ii. 377; iii. 13, 79, 162, 211, 413; the death of, ii. 318; iii. 110.

Antipatris, ii. 377; v. 35.

Antithesis, v. 184.

Antonianus, v. 131.

Antoninus Caesar, ii. 382.

Antony, iv. 18.

Antony Verus, v. 540.

Apelles, iv. 256.

Aphthonius, v. 232.

Apollinarius, v. 537; the doctrine of, iv. 260, 374.

Apollonia, the death of, iii. 106.

Apollonius, ii. 434.

Apollos, v. 79.

Apostasy, iii. 425.

Apostle, meaning of, v. 105.

Apostles, the, Creed of, i. 12, 122: authority of, very great, 53; set down in writing the whole doctrine of godliness, 63; were married men, 396, 402; councils of, iv. 52; master-builders of the church, v. 105; how did bind and loose, 148; prayers of, 225; baptized in water not consecrated, 310; were baptized with fire, 355; baptized infants, 388, 391; received wages, 491.

Apostles, false, doctrine of, iii. 273.

Apostolic churches, v. 76.

Apostolici, iii. 24.

Apotactites, the, iii. 24.

Apotheosis, iv. 373.

Apparel, continence in, ii. 421.

Appeal, an, iii. 225.

Appeals to Rome forbidden, iv. 120.

Appearing of spirits, iv. 400.

Application of scripture necessary, v. 155.

Aquinas, Thomas, v. 485.

Arabia, v. 20.

Arad, ii. 378.

Arcadius, ii. 331; v. 539.

Arch-angels, iv. 337.

Arch-bishops, v. 112, 117, 118.

Archdeacon, v. 112, 114, 115.

Archippus, v. 153.

Arch-priests, v. 117, 546.

Arguments from the sacraments of the old Testament to the new, v. 289.

Argus, iii. 218.

Arianism, v. 155.

Arians, iv. 246; v. 21; re-baptized, v. 393.

Aristocracy, ii. 310.

Aristotle, i. 50.

Arius, iv. 243; v. 77; the doctrine of, i. 12; iv. 260.

Ark of the covenant, iii. 145; history of, 148; signification and mystery of, 153; use and abuse of, 155; abused by the Israelites, v. 294.

Armasius, ii. 264; v. 130.

Armenians oppressed by Maximinus, ii. 378.

Arms, a comparison from the use of, v. 314.

Artaxerxes, ii. 318, 326; iii. 13.

Artemones, v. 77.

Article of the Christian Faith, the first, i. 124; the second, 127; the third, 130; the fourth, 134; the fifth, 140; the sixth, 143; the seventh, 152; the eighth, 155; the ninth, 157; the tenth, 164; the eleventh, 168; the twelfth, 177.

Artotyrites, v. 410. Asa, ii. 221, 384; iii. 7.

Asaph, iv. 207.

Ascension-day, ii. 200.

Ascension of Christ, i. 143; the force of, 144.

Asclepiades, iv. 225.

Asia, v. 73, 190; persecution in, iii. 105.

Asians, v. 537.

Assembly of saints, the Lord's Supper called, v. 402.

Assemblies, holy, v. 165, 499.

Assyrians, v. 181.

Asturia, ii. 416.

Astyages, i. 51.

Athaliah, ii. 358; iii. 8.

Athanasius, iv. 260; v. 194; Creed of, i. 29.

Atheists, iv. 112.

Athens, iii. 156; v. 100, 480.

Attila, iii. 109.

Augusta, Augsburgh, iii. 399.

Augustine, St, v. 199, 220, 409; has controversy with Pelagius, iv. 11; defends that infants must receive the Eucharist, 398; says I would not have believed the Gospel, etc. v. 67; taught not that sacraments give grace, 297; teaches that the sacraments of the Jews and ours are all one, 299; calls sacraments "visible words," 317; teaches that sacraments received without faith are unprofitable to the receiver, 341; taught that infants must receive the Lord's Supper, 379; his opinion about lay-baptism, 380; and about unbaptized infants, ib.

Aurelian, iii. 100.

Auricular confession, iv. 80; not to be proved from Scripture, 83; mischief of, 87.

Authority of pastors, v. 160; of the apostles, i. 53.

Auxentius, Arianus, denies that infants are to be baptized, v. 382.

Baal, v. 71,73, 75,481.

Baal-salisa, v. 489.

Baasha, iii. 12; stock of, ii. 235.

Babbling forbidden in prayer, v. 204.

Babylon, v. 11, 20; captivity in, 73, 75, 481; tower of, 499.

Babylonians, the, had famous schools, v. 480.

Bacchus, the sieve of, what it signified, v. 238.

Backbiting pernicious, iii. 118.

Balthazar, iii. 13.

Baptism, instead of circumcision, iii. 269; of the church of Rome not reiterated, v. 69; the sign and thing signified in, 250; the fountain of water, 257; called cleansing, 282; how it seals, 321; to give and take names in, 329; of infants, 343; Cyprian's error touching, 349, 363; meaning of the word, 352; what it is, ib.; who instituted, ib.; when instituted, 353; of what consists,i6.; one only, 354; of John, of Christ, and of the apostles one and the self-same, ib.; of fire, 355, 396; of the rite or ceremony of, 356; the words of, 358; ceremonies added to, 869; the deluge and the Red Sea types of 364; sprinkling and dipping used in, ib.; of the place of, 365; of the time of, 366; may not be omitted, ib.; of infants is of God, 388; has lasted from the time of the apostles, 392; of the force of, 397; effectual for man's whole life, 398; gathers us together to be the people of God, 399; serves for our confession, 400; puts us in mind of the duties of Christianity and godliness, ib.; the water of regeneration, 441.

Baptize in and into the name of, v. 357; who should, 869; whether midwives may, 370.

Baptized, who are to be, v. 381; into the remission of sins, 398.

Baptiser, the, what works, v. 367.

Bardesanes, iii. 363.

Bargaining, whether lawful, iii. 29.

Barnabas, iv. 209; v. 43,132.

Basil, iii. 390.

Bastards, iii. 230.

Bearing witness, iii. 112.

Beasts, varieties of, iii. 213.

Bed undefiled, ii. 400.

Bede, ii. 253; iv. 400; v. 201.

Beelzebub, iv. 357; v. 159.

Bathsheba, v. 372.

Belial, iv. 357; v. 465.

Belief in the church forbidden, i. 158.

Believer has eternal life and is justified, i. 110.

Believers a priesthood and kingdom, iii. 285.

Belisarius, iii. 109.

Bells, v. 502; the Christening of, ib.; the ringing of, ib.

Benedictines, v. 515.

Benefices, plurality of, v. 144; the spoil of the church, ib.

Benefits of God to be acknowledged, v. 221.

Benet, iv. 295; v. 515; order and celebrated men of, ib.

Benjamites, the, ii. 375; slain for the Levite's concubine, 417.

Bernard, St, iv. 117; v. 382.

Berne, v. 9, 283.

Beseechings, v. 164.

Bethel, v. 165.

Bethesda, iii. 98.

Bethsaida, iv. 112.

Beth Shemesh, iii. 148; v. 295.

Bezalel, iii. 150.

Bind and loose, how apostles did, v. 148.

Birth of Christ, i. 133.

Bishops, v. 116, 117; succession of, 28 and elders, equality between, 109 when the prerogative of, began, 110 the dignity and prerogative of, increased, 112; courts of, ib.; alone have not power to make ministers, 133; the oath of, 141, 530; not permitted to make new laws, 151; of the holy and unblameable life of, 158; the Greek, 190.

Blasphemy, what it is properly, iii. 421; against the Son of man, 122; against the holy Ghost, ib.

Blessing and thanksgiving, v. 263; in Sacrament, whether it changes the natures of things, 201; Romish, in baptism, 306.

Blood, vengeance taken of, iii. 108; eating of, forbidden, 214, 272.

Bodily presence in the Lord's Supper, opinion of, confuted, v. 436.

Body, a glorious, i. 173; a vile, 175; a clarified, ib.; a natural, and a spiritual, 170; the care of the, iii. 312; of Christ, iv. 248.

Body of the Lord, how to differentiate it, v. 470.

Bodies, the same which die rise again, i. 169; in what sort rise again, 172; of what fashion in the resurrection, ib.) of the wicked rise again, 177.

Bonaventure, says grace is not contained in the sacraments, v. 307.

Bondage, iii. 229; what it is, 301; two sorts of, 302; bodily, ib.; spiritual, 304.

Boniface VIII., iii. 266, 267.

Bosom, to conceal in privacy, iii. 28.

Both kinds given and received in the Lord's Supper, v. 414.

Bow down to, what it is, ii. 231.

Bowed, bent, iii. 190.

Bread, what signifies among the Jews, v. 214; leavened or unleavened, to be used in the Lord's Supper, 410.

Bread and wine remain in their substance after consecration, v. 276; whether so called after consecration for their former substance, ib.

Breaking of bread, meaning of, v. 276, 429; name of the Lord's Supper, 402.

Breast-lap of judgment, iii. 136.

Breast-plate of the high priest, iii. 135.

Brent, burnt, ii. 411.

Brentius, v. 447.

Brephotrophia, ii. 286; v. 498.

Brim, public, iv. 147.

Brion, iv. 295.

Buildings, continence in, ii. 422.

Bullinger, the Decades of, i. 8, 11; v. 557; the chronology of, i. 42.

Burial of Christ, i. 136.

Burials, v. 523.

Burnt-offering, the, iii. 189; altar of, 158.

Buying, iii. 228; whether lawful, 29.

Cabala, iv. 131.

Cabalists, iv. 137.

Caesarea, i. 85; v. 35, 80, 99.

Kohathites, the, iii. 132, 111'.

Caiaphas, ii. 244; iv. 14, 23.

Cain, ii. 210, 290, 306; iii. 129, 131, 184; iv. 152; v. 11. Calamities, kinds of, iii. 65; good and evil afflicted with, 66; causes of, 68. Called to the ministry, how they that are, should be ordained, v. 138.

Called upon in prayer, who is to be, v. 171.

Calling to the ministry, v. 128; heavenly or secret, ib.; by favour and gifts, 129; of private affection, 131; necessary in the church, ib.

Calvary, iii. 151.

Calvin, commendation of, iii. 82; the Institutions of, i. 8; opinion of, quoted, i.9; his definition of a sacrament, v. 234.

Cana, water changed into wine at, v. 262.

Canaan, v. 245.

Canaanite, the Romish, v. 139.

Canaanites, iii. 429; cast off for sin, ii. 374.

Candace, queen, v. 94.

Candlestick, the golden, iii. 156.

Canonical hours, iv.197, 201; scripture, v. 538.

Canonici, v. 201.

Capernaites, the, v. 447.

Captains, ii. 384.

Captive Christians, v. 20.

Card of ten, ii. 312.

Cardinals, v. 117.

Carding, iii. 40.

Care of the body, iii. 312.

Carefulness, a part of repentance, iv. 106.

Carmelites, the, v. 516.

Carnal people, iii. 242; bondage, v. 287.

Carolus Magnus, v. 201.

Carthusian monks, iii. 57.

Cassina, v. 201.

Cassock, the priests', iii. 134.

Catalogue of the books of scripture, i. 54; v. 540.

Catechesis, v. 145.

Catechisers, v. 145.

Catechising, v. 145; benefit of, ib.

Cathari, v. 59.

Cathedra, v. 199.

Catholic Church, i. 161; v. 5.

Cause of sin and evil, iii. 368.

Causes of Christ's incarnation, i. 130.

Cecrops, iii. 218.

Celebration of the Lord's Supper, v. 406.

Cenchrea, v. 107.

Censure and examination of ministers, v. 135.

Cephas, v. 491.

Ceremonies, what generally, iii. 125; human, 126; divine, 127; to what end ordained, ib.; when God approves, and disapproves, 128; the knowledge of, not unprofitable, 129; sum of the, 130; the middle wall of partition, 258; the hand-writing, 259; how perpetual, 262; unjustly thrust on the church, 276; diversity of, v. 56; added to baptism, 359.

Ceremony in the sacraments, v. 252.

Cerinthus, ii. 363; v. 535.

Chaldean tongue, v. 189.

Ham, ii. 210,287.

Hamber, to pray in the, v. 184.

Chananaei, merchants, iii. 45.

Canaanites destroyed, v. 496.

Chaplains, v. 116.

Charity, i. 180; double, 181; the pith of, 190.

Charms, v. 261.

Charondas, iii. 219.

Chawes, jaws, i. 4.

Cherubim, iii. 154; iv. 338.

Children, to be instructed in religion, ii. 291; precepts for instruction of, 293; to be taught manners, 294; must learn an occupation, ib.; cockering of, 296; duty of, 297; the begetting and bringing up of, 400.

Coniah, iii. 11, v. 20, 319.

Chorazin, iv. 112.

Chorepiscopi, v. 112.

Chriae, v. 232.

Christ, duration of the ministry of, i. 38; chief contents of the doctrine of, 62; apostles of, ib.; authority of, very great, 53; makes void the ceremonies of the law, 59; spoke and did many things which are not written, 62; has taken and cleansed our sins, 107; compared with Adam, 113; died not in vain, 114; our Lord, 129; meaning of name, ib.; the causes of the incarnation of, 130; the manner of his conception, 131; why conceived pure, 133; birth of, ib.; did suffer, 135; under Pontius Pilate, ib.; was crucified, ib.; was buried, 136; descended into hell, 137; the resurrection of, 140; on the third day, 142; the ascension of, 143; went into heaven, 145; at God's right hand, 146; sits, 147; the humanity of, local, but the god-head of, incomprehensible, 151; v. 453; a judge, i. 152; all heavenly treasures given in, 156; no image may be made of, 230; the anointed, 326; the spirit of, in the prophets, 327; conveys himself away from being made a king, 387; honours wedlock, 396; absolves adultery, 413; against drunkenness, 423; our example in afflictions, iii. 104; the first-begotten, 131; the light of the world, 137; the holy of holies, ib.; our foundation, 147; our wisdom, 154; our righteousness, ib.; our heavenly food, ib.; our propitiation, ib., 196; the priesthood of, compared with Aaron's, 154; our food, 156; our light, 157; king and priest, 158; our only sacrifice, 159, 166; the washing of the faithful, 159; our passover, 164; our freedom, 167; the rock of stone, 174, 178; to be slain in the latter days of the world, 180; our Mediator, 192; the bread of life, ib.; our only Saviour, 195; without sin, ib.; an everlasting sacrifice, 195, 198; the only sacrifice of, sufficient for the whole world, 200; without spot, 201; dies freely, ib.; the blood of, purges, 202; the blood of, 215; Moses leads to, 240; has fulfilled the law, 49; is the perfectness of the faithful, ib.; has taken off all burdens, 293; the promises touching, iv. 13; very God, 18; prophecies fulfilled in, 19; Jesus is, 21; all things requisite to salvation given in, 27; alone our eternal salvation, 29; our life, ib.; fully works our salvation, 30; how received, 36; received by faith, and not by works, 37; how preached the gospel, ib.; whom redeemed, 42; suffered for the fathers, and for actual as well as original sin, ib.; the foundation, 51; the glory of, 52; our satisfaction, 91; the alone intercessor with God, 213; the only reconciliator, 214; the priesthood of, unchangeable, 216, 287; our advocate with the Father, 218; is just or righteous, ib.; the intercession of, what manner of, 219; a confession concerning, 212; the natural Son of God, 247; the incarnation of, 254; of the true humanity of, ib.; after his resurrection laid not aside his true body, 257; has a reasonable soul, 259; the heresy and the truth of the incarnation of, 260; the godhead and manhood of, united, 261; the two natures of, unconfounded, 262, 264; v. 455; undivided, iv. 266; v. 455; the person of, not divided, iv. 271; is king of all, 237; is a monarch, 274; how he reigns on earth in his kingdom, 276; the bounds of the kingdom of, on earth, 278; the seat of, as king, 279; the kingdom of, everlasting, 280; the high-priest, 282; v. 96; how does the office of a priest, iv. 283; is anointed, ib., 289; is the teacher of the church, ib.; makes intercession, 284; blesses, sacrifices and sanctifies, ib.; the priesthood of, 285; the ascension of, a pledge of ours, 380; is in heaven, 387; v. 68; the blood of, purges from all sin, iv. 391; our only propitiation, ib.; has the absolute power over the church, v. 42; the only head of the church, 67, 86; the only mediator, 68, 173; the righteousness of the faithful, ib.; the corner stone, 82; the king of the church, 84; David's branch, 85; the perfection of the law, 191; prayers of, 225; our high-priest, 250; not present corporally in the sacraments, 253; absurd statements concerning the body of, 277; the words of, in John vi. make much for the interpretation of the words of the supper, 289, 462; the true eating of the body of, 456; how the flesh of, given for bread, ib.; the body of, how eaten, and his blood how drunken, 457; the age of, 536.

Christian, a, may be a magistrate, ii. 385; named of Christ, iv. 50; of the name of, 289; most ancient name, 291.

Christianism, v. 155.

Christians, the righteousness of, imputative, iv. 46; are kings, 289; are priests 290; there are hut few, 293; against false, 295; how they prayed, v. 186; are soldiers of Christ, 230.

Christmas-day, ii. 260.

Chrysostom, iii. 390; v. 219, 419; the saying of to Gaina, ii. 391; his doctrine of confession, iii. 78; commendation of, 395; on the cause of sacraments, v. 212.

Chuff, rough clown, iii. 15.

Church, the, v. 3; I believe in, i. 158; Catholic, 161; v. 5, 8; true, i. 162; holy, ib., v. 7, 17; afflictions of, iii. 104; ten persecutions of, 105; pillars of, 1 17; things out of order may be reformed by every Christian, iv. 119; what is, v. 5; triumphant and militant, ib.; visible, 8, 17; comprehends the wicked, 8; particular,9; of God always exists, 10; of the devil and of Antichrist, ib.; all that be in are not the church, 10; outward marks of, 17; how these marks declare, 19; a body, 25; original of, 20; heavenly, ib.; not built by the doctrines of men, ib.; preserved by the word of God, 27; prophetic, apostolic, and orthodoxical, 28; not built by war or deceit, 33; whether may err, 35; how holy, 30; pillar and ground of the truth, 37; power of, 38; power to dispose of the affairs of, 40; studies of, 47; one holy, 49; of old fathers and ours one, 50; no salvation or light without, 51; though the governors of it err, God reserves to himself, 09; though the Romish church be not the church, God has in the earth, 72; house of God, 79; God's vine, 83; God's kingdom, 84; shadowed out by man's body, ib.; has no vicar, 85; Christ's sheepfold, 88; Christ's spouse, 90; a mother, ib.; a virgin, 91; of the manner of teaching, 154; not a mistress over the sacraments, 239; not burdened with infinite laws, 478; the chief points of true godliness in, 479; whether needs legal instruction, 524.

Church of Jerusalem, v. 131; of Antioch, ib.

Church of Rome, the, of departing from, v. 02; a tyranny, 04; a free confession of departure from, 05; new and upstart, ib.; not the church, ib.; has not the inward marks of God's church, 00; nor the outward, ib.; has corrupted scripture, 09, 532; departure from commended, 70; not the holy mother-church, 92; claims to expound scripture, 543.

Churches, the east and west, iii. 390; whether they that will reform must stay for the determination of a council, iv. 110; particular, v. 51; ornament and size of, 499; not to be built to saints, 501.

Church-goods, ii. 286; v. 486; exist under the new Testament, v. 487; how bestowed in olden times, 488; the poor to be relieved by, 494; abuse of, 503.

Church-reform, a sufficient platform of, in scripture, iv. 122.

Church-robbers, iii. 40.

Ciboria, v. 449.

Cicero, v. 244.

Circe, iii. 213.

Circumcision, iii. 168; the original of, ib.; the sign or seal of the covenant, 172; the manner of, 173; the mystery of, ib.; the grace of God not tied to, 175; the circumcised gathered into one body by, ib.; puts a man in mind of his duty, 176; twofold, 177; the sum of, 178; called God's covenant, v. 280; of Christians, 299; a sign of the blessed seed to come, 353; a sign of sanctification, 383; given to infants, 390.

Circumcision of Christ, the festival of, ii. 200.

Claudius Caesar, v. 536.

Claudius Lysias, v. 35.

Clean creatures, iii. 210.

Cleansing, the feast of, iii. 105.

Clerics, v. 113.

Clement I., v. 29, 31.

Clement VI., iii. 268.

Clement VII., v. 29.

Codex Complutensis, v. 219.

Codrus, ii. 278.

Coelestius, iii. 386.

Coenobia, ii. 236.

Coil, noise, iv. 85.

Collyridian heretics, v. 371.

Commandment, the first, ii. 215; what it requires, 217; contains the mystery of our redemption by Christ, 219; the second, 222; the end of it, ib.; the third, 237; the fourth, 253; the fifth, 207; the sixth, 298, the seventh, 394; the eighth, iii. 17; the ninth, 111; the tenth, 120.

Commandments, the ten, ii. 212; the order of, 254; not heavy, iii. 252; a platform of good works, 353; of bearing the cross, iii. 90.

Common, all things in the apostles' age, iii. 20.

Common cost, or treasures, ii. 392.

Communication of properties, iv. 270.

Communion of saints, v. 8; of Christ, 433.

Communion, the Lord's Supper, v. 330, 402.

Complaints, v. 164.

Concupiscence, iii. 121; condemned by the Gentiles, ii. 204.

Confess to, diversely used, iii. 71.

Confession auricular, iv. 80; when first commanded, 82; not to be proved from scripture, 83; whether to be received for discipline's sake, 80; mischiefs of, 87; whether to be retained for private absolution's sake, 88.

Confession of sins, iv. 69; ordained of God, 70; privately made to God, 71; public, 73; made to our neighbour, 74; Chrysostom's doctrine on, 78.

Confessions of sins, ordained of men, iv. 75.

Congregation, the, iii. 166; v. 3, 4, 165.

Conjunction with Christ and with the church, v. 338.

Conjurers, ii. 221.

Conscience, ii. 194; a quiet, iv. 313.

Consciences, a comfort for afflicted, v. 475.

Consecration, power of, v. 39; order of, 138; in the Lord's Supper, 267, 416.

Consistory of Hume, v. 143

Consolations, general, iii. 91.

Constantine the Great, ii. 380, 384; iii. 281; v. 418; acts in religious matters, ii. 327; the donation of, v. 1 23.

Constantinople, patriarch of, v. 112,

Constitutions, the new, iii. 2S0.

Consultation, a part of repentance, iv. 75.

Continence, ii. 419; in tongue, 420; in apparel, 421; in buildings, 422; in food and drink, 423.

Conversion to God, iv. 55.

Corinth, v. 105, 199; church of, 59.

Cornelius, bp. of Rome, misliked anabaptism, v. 393.

Cornelius, martyrdom of, iii. 100.

Cornelius, the centurion, ii. 292, 387; iii. 312; iv. 44, 52; v. 80, 95, 179,366; received the Holy Ghost before he was baptized, v. 312; was baptized, although he had received the Holy Ghost, 346; was baptized with fire, 356.

Corporals, v. 419.

Corporal, things, v. 188; presence in the Lord's Supper, 253.

Corpus Christi, feast of, v. 423.

Correction, ii. 295; power of judicial, v. 40.

Corruption of nature, what and how great, iii. 393; the blotting out of God's image, 394.

Corruption of schools, v. 484.

Cost, common, ii. 392.

Country, our native, meant by parents, ii. 268; honouring of, 275; fighting in defence of, 276; lovers of their, 278; we must pray for, 279.

Council a, power to call, v. 4".

Council, at Caesarea Philippi, iv. 51; at Capernaum, ib.; of Cartilage HI., v. 193, 539; IV., v. 114, 136, 139,370, 376; of Chalcedon, i. 14; not contrary to Cyril, 19; of Constance, v. 416; of Constantinople I., i. 13; II., i. 14; of Ephesus, i. 14; of Gangra, iii. 24; of Jerusalem, iii. 272, 275; of Laodicea, v. 192; of Lateran IV., iv. 82, 86; v. 278, 557; of Matiscon, v. 367; of Mavence, ib.; of Milevi, iv. 10; of Nicaea, i. 12, 56; v. 309; of Orange II., iv. 10; of Paris VI., v. 367; of Toledo I., i. 22; iii. 363; iv. 268; IV., i. 25; v. 365; of Trent, iv. 119; v. 529; design of, v. 529; indiction of, 530; decrees of, 531, 532; of Triburia, v. 420; of Worms, v. 367.

Councils, holy scripture the guide of, i. 13; general, what today Christians may look for by, iv. 117; the four general, i. 12; of the apostles, iv. 52; what have been held in latter ages, 110.

Cousins, meant by parents, ii. 269.

Court of the tabernacle, iii. 1 IV. v. 83.

Covenant, of God and man, iii. L69; between whom made, 170; how long to last, ib.-what conditions required of men, 171; circumcision, the sign or seal of, 172; all things more evident in the new, 294; in sacraments, v. 253.

Covenants, manner of making, v. 245.

Coveting, iii. 120; what forbidden, 123.

Cow, the sacrifice of the red, iii. 201; v. 281.

Creation of the world, i. 43; the history of, contained in few words, iv. 174; David celebrates, 177.

Creed, the apostles', i. 12, 122; partition of, 123; recited to dying persons, v. 74; of Athanasius, i. 29; of council of Chalcedon, i. 19; of council of Constantinople 1., i. 16, 158; iv. 310; v. 356; of council of Constantinople II., i. 14; of Damasus, i. 32; of council of Ephesus, i. 17; of Innocent III. v. 557; of council of Toledo I., i. 22; of council of Toledo IV., i. 25.

Cribble, coarse flour, ii. 429.

Cross, the bearing of, iii. 96; the saints feel no new miseries in suffering, 102.

Cud, chewing of the, iii. 213.

Cups, golden, in the church, v. 419, 502.

Curet, corslet, iii. 135.

Custody, things left in, iii. 228.

Cyaxares II. i. 51.

Cyprian, v. 220, 409; martyrdom of, iii. 106; his error on baptism, v. 349, 363; his opinion touching the time of baptism, 366; concerning mixing water with the wine in the Lord's Supper, 411; approved of anabaptism, 393.

Cyribiria, v. 52.

Cyrus, ii. 318, 326; iii. 13.

Dasmoniacus, iv. 356.

Dagon, i, 224.

Daintrel, a delicacy, ii. 424.

Damage, by taking away, iii. 38; the doing and receiving of, 230.

Damascus, v. 366.

Damasus, i. 34; v. 63, 201; Creed of, i. 32.

Daniel, i. 171, ii. 292; v. 175, 177, 179, 480; Polyhistor, i. 51: v. Add.; evangelist rather than prophet, i. 51; and his three companions, 270; cast into the lions' den, 318; confession of, iii. 94; the wisest man of all the east, iv. 180; prayers of, v. 225.

Darius, son of Hystaspes, ii. 318,325; iii. 13.

Darius, the Mede, Priscus, ii. 317, 325; iii. 13.

Dathan, iii. 131; v. 11.

David, v. 122, 167, 169, 170, 175, 186, 191,481; swears rashly, ii. 251; how behaves under Saul, 316; brings the ark to its place, 325; a captain, 384, 386; the adultery of, 413; the happiest of kings, iii. 6; the hope of, 89; the humility of, 94; the afflictions of, 103; brings music into the temple, 141; divides the priests into 24 orders, ib.; humbled by the sin of Absalom, 431; what thought of justification, iv. 47; always of chief account in the church, 49; corrected for his sin after it was forgiven, 91; celebrates the creation, 175; offended in carrying the ark, v. 22; faith of, 551.

Day, of judgment, i. 44; the Lord's, 260; Christmas, new year's, Easter, ascension, ib.; man's last, iv. 405; this, v. 215.

Deacons, v. 107, 112; women, 107.

Dead, prayer for the, iv. 395; useless, 399.

Deadly sins, the seven, iii. 410.

Death of the cross reproachful, i. 135; of Christ fruitful, 136; of madmen unwilful, iii. 413; no man may hasten his own, ib.; of souls, iv. 380; v. 288.

Debts, for sins, v. 216.

Decades, the, design and method of, iii. 15; v. 556.

Decalogue, the, ii. 212; division of, 213.

Deceit, iii. 39,230.

Deceiver, a name of the devil, iv. 356.

Decii, ii. 278.

Decius, iii. 106; v. 393, 514.

Dedication, feast of the, iii. 162.

Deflowering of women, iii. 102.

Deborah, v. 371.

Deliverance, examples of God's, iii. 96.

Deliverer, our, who he is, iii. 301.

Demas, v. 8.

Demetriades, v. 199.

Democracy, ii. 310.

Denial of God's truth in persecutions, no way to keep our goods, iii. 100.

Departure from the church of Rome confessed, v. 65.

Descent of Christ into hell, i. 137.

Destiny, not the cause of sin, iii. 363.

Devil, the, alone not the cause of sin, iii. 362; what he is, iv. 349; is a creature, ib.; was not created evil, ib.; everlastingly condemned, 352; is quick, crafty, and mighty, 354; meaning of the name, 355; is a serpent, 356; a roaring lion, a murderer, ib.; a tempter, 357; an evil and unclean spirit, ib.; the god of this world, 358; the prince of this world, 359; the operations of, 360; the power of, limited, 363; we must fight manfully against, but not fear, ib.; members of, v. 338.

Devils will have themselves worshipped, iv. 210; that there are, 348; are spirits and substances, 353; what manner of bodies they take, 354; there is an infinite rout of, 356.

Dicing, iii. 40.

Didymus, Alexandrinus, iv. 302.

Difference of the old and new Testaments and people, iii. 282; between poena and culpa peccati, iv. 90; to be made of the Lord's body, v. 470.

Digests, the, iii. 280.

Dinah, ii. 416.

Diocaesarea, iv. 257.

Diocletian, iii. 73, 106.

Dionysius, the Areopagite, iv. 137; v. 248.

Diphyes, iii. 218.

Dipping in baptism, once or three times, v. 364.

Disciples, the, v. 70, 117; at Ephesus baptized with fire, 356.

Discipline and correction of ministers, v. 504; of schools; v. 485.

Discipulus (John Herolt), sermons of, v. 557.

Discommodities, the saints suffer, recompensed with other commodities, iii. 99.

Discretion of the judge, ii. 356.

Disinheriting, iii. 226.

Dispensation, mystery of the, iv. 158.

Dissemblers, v. 12, 13.

Divinity, mystical and symbolic, v. 238.

Division of goods, iii. 228.

Divorcements, iii. 228; v. 511.

"Do this in remembrance of me," v. 445

Docetse, i. 132.

Doctors, v. 106, 116.

Doctrine of the fathers and ours one, iii. 283; in what it consists, v. 53, 54; whence to be fetched, 149; when good, not to be rejected for the evil life of ministers, 161.

Doctrines, power to judge of, v. 45.

Dodkin, a small coin, iii. 59.

Dominicans, v. 517.

Domitian, iii. 105.

Donation of Constantine, v. 123.

Donatists, the, i. 161, ii. 357; v. 56, 78, 161; how teach who should baptize, v. 369; re-baptized, 393.

Donatives of princes, v. 144.

Doorkeepers, v. 113.

Dor, a drone, ii. 332; v. 266.

Dorset, Marquis of, v. 528; sprung from the royal line, 545.

Doubting, twofold, i. 88. Draco, iii. 219.

Dragon, a name of the devil, iv. 356.

Drawing of the predestinate to life, iv. 189.

Drink, continence in, ii. 423.

Drink-offerings, iii. 191.

Drunkenness, ii. 423; a certain sense of it in Scripture, iii. 57.

Durandus, v. 114.

Dutch tongue, v. 189.

Duty of parents towards their children, ii. 291; of children, 297; of a good pastor, v. 153.

Ease, ii. 257.

Easter, question about, v. 57, 504, 537; day, ii. 260; a time for baptism, v. 867.

Earth, the, iv. 175.

Ecclesiastical, privileges, ii. 333; power, v. 38; jurisdiction, 43; in what points consists, ib.', persons, 114; goods, 486; order, 249; admonition and correction, 507.

Ecclesiasticus, the book of, iii. 369, iv. 185; v. 540-541.

Edward VI., dedication to, iii. 3; iv. 115.

Egyptians, v. 471); gods of the, ii. 224; midwives of the, iii. 115.

Elders, v. 106; and bishops, equality between, 109.

Eleazar, iii. 211.

Eleazar, the exorcist, v. 114.

Eleazar, the priest, iii. 131, 132, 141.

Eleazar, Moses' son, v. 378.

Elect, the, v. 7.

Elected, who is, iv. 187.

Election, a sore temptation about, iv. 187.

Election of ministers, v. 128; of magistrates, ii. 318.

Elgg, v. 546.

Eli, ii. 295, 312, 330, 375; iii. 148, 149; v. 158, 505; sons of, v. 486.

Elijah, ii. 358, 431; iii. 7, 152; iv. 311; v. 71, 122, 109, 186; v. 225; ruler of a school, v. 481.

Eliazar, iii. 18.

Elisha, ii. 358; iv. 343; v. 124; makes axe to swim, v. 263; ruler of a school, 481; refuses Naaman's present, but not of the man from Baal-salisa, 489.

Eloah, iv. 133.

Elohim, iv. 133, 134.

Eloquence not to be despised, v. 54.

Elymas, ii. 359, 363, 377.

Emperors' law for keeping the sabbath, ii. 264.

Enallage, iv. 170.

Encratites, the, ii. 432; iii. 24.

End of the ministry, v. 101; of the sacraments, v. 316.

Endangered to, iv. 70.

Ends of the Lord's Supper, v. 433, 467.

England, v. 189, 528.

Enoch, iv. 193; v. 102; prophecy of, i. 39.

Enosh, v. 102.

Enthusiasts, v. 94, 345; set baptism at nothing, 397.

Envy, ii. 301.

Ephatha, v. 361.

Ephesus, v. 105, 396.

Ephod, the priests', iii. 135; the high-priests', ib.

Epictetus, iv. 386.

Epicures, iv. 112.

Epiphanius, v. 370.

Equinoctial, the, iii. 180.

Eradius, v. 133.

Erastus, ii. 387.

Erithian sea, v. 262.

Error in the apostolic church, v. 303; of those who will not have sacramental phrases expounded sacramentally, 286. Errors, some of doctrine and faith, some of life and manners, v. 35.

Esau, birth of, iii. 364.

Isaiah, v. 70,122,480.

Essence, iv. 158, 344; of God one, 154.

Esther, iii. 162; prayers of, v. 225.

Ethan, the Ezrachitc, iv. 180.

Ethiopia, church of, ii. 292.

Eucharist, v. 224; given to infants, iv. 398.

Eucharistia, v. 224.

Euchitae, v. 94, 182, 345; set baptism at nothing, 397.

Eudoxius, i. 13.

Eunuch of queen Candace, i. 73, 387; iii. 23; iv. 24; v. 94, 310, 311; believed before he was baptized, 312; baptized, though he believed, 346.

Euripus, v. 212.

Eutyches, i. 14; the error of, iv. 261; v. 455.

Eve, ii. 400, 409; iv. 375; v. 102.

Evangelists, v. 105.

Evil, v. 218; God not the author of, iii. 365; the true cause of, 368; how God said to do, 382; senses of, 383; spirits, iv. 34S; life of ministers, v. 161.

Examination, what manner of, the old bishops used, v. 136.

Examples of undoubted faith, i. 91; of Jews, whether they pertain to Christians, 326; of war out of the scripture, 384; of God's deliverance, iii. 96; of afflictions in the patriarchs, 103; of repentance, iv. Ill; v. 549, 554.

Excommunication, power of, v. 40.

Exercises of repentance outwardly, iv. 108.

Exomologesis, iv. 76.

Exhortation to love, i. 191.

Exile, iii. 101.

Exorcists, v. 114, 256.

Exposition of God's word, i. 72; ancient of, "This is my body," v. 438.

Extravagants, v. 119.

Exuperius, St, v. 419.

Ezra, v. 318.

Fabius, his definition of a sign, v. 227.

Face of God, i. 179.

Faith, i. 44, 81; v. 24; definitions of, 82; description of true, 84; the beginning and cause of, ib.; planted by the word of God, ib.; we must pray for true, 86; is an undoubted persuasion of the mind, 87; believes not every thing, 90; examples of undoubted, 91; whereunto it leans, 92; two chief points of, 94; seeks all good things in God through Christ, 95; believes the holy Scriptures, 96; is one alone, 97; the Indian, 98; of the Georgians, ib.; increases and decreases, ib.; general, and particular, 99; inspired and gotten, 100; formal, ib.; power and effect of, 101; is true knowledge, ib.; makes happy, 102; quickens, 103; joins to God, ib.; justifies, 104; Gentiles as well as Jews justified by, 115; not without effect, 117; shows itself by good works, 11 8; only justifies, ib.; root of all good works, 120; the victory of all Christians, ib.; the gift of God, 363; whether lawful to compel one to, 364; and hope, iii. 88; the fathers and we have one, 284; and love, the places of that seem to disagree, reconciled, 335; justifying, 336; obeying, ib.; the apostles against the abuses of, 338; justifies without works, 339; the foundations of, 400; Christian, in what it consists, 401; works of, iv. 32; taught by the gospel, 35; needful in them that repent, 62; cannot be reformed but by the word of God, 121; has increasings, 191; invocation springs from, 212; chiefly needful to them that pray, v. 175; life of him that prays must be answerable to his, 177; general and special, the fantasy of confuted, 304; stirs up to prayer, 551; of Abraham, ib.; of David, ib.

Faithful, hope of the, iii. 88: are saved iv. 34.

Fall of angels, iv. 349.

Falling away, kinds of, v. 77.

False Christians, iv. 295.

Famine, iii. 101.

Fast, the true, ii. 430.

Fasting, ii. 428; two kinds of, public and private, ib.; the manner and time of,

Fastings, v. 183; of what quality and kind should be, ii. 429; the end of, 430; difference in, 432; must be free^ 434; Jewish solemn, iii. 162.

Father, name of God, v. 206.

Fathers, the power and authority of. ii 226. J

Fathers, the old, sacraments of, i. 58 • and we are one church, iii. 283; have' one doctrine with us, ib.; and one faith, 284; and one spirit, 285; and the same hope and inheritance, 288 • salvation not only promised but performed unto, ib.; have one manner of invocation and the same sacraments with us, 292; Christ suffered for, iv. 42; moved no contentions about the sacraments, v. 284; communicated with Christ, 434.

Fear of God, of two sorts, iv. 60.

Feast of dedication, iii. 162; of tabernacles, 165, 166; of trumpets, 165; of cleansing, ib.; of the new moon, 162.

Feat, employment, iii. 31.

Felix, v. 35.

Felix, martyrdom of, iii. 106.

Fellowship of God's Spirit, v. 23.

Fighting in defence of our country, i 276.

Figurative phrases, v. 283; how to be received, 288.

Final impenitence, iii. 425.

First-born, iii. 1-iv.

Flattery, iii. 119.

Fleece of Gideon, v. 229, 231.

Flesh, works of, brought forth by original sin, iii. 399; the old man, iv. 98; remains in the regenerate, 107; profits nothing, v. 461.

Flesh and blood not in heaven, i. 176.

Flood, the, a type of baptism, v. 364.

Florianus, v. 394.

Florus (Blumen), John, v. 546.

Foad off, iii. 38; iv. 106.

Font necessary in a church, v. 501.

Forehead, signed in baptism, v. 361.

Foreknowledge of God, iv. 185.

Forgiveness of sins, iv. 48; v. 216, 550.

Form of the Lord's Supper, v. 406.

Forms of knowing God, iv. 129.

Fornication, ii. 414; spiritual, v. 91.

Found things, iii. 36.

France, v. 189; persecution in, iii. 105.

Francis, St, iv. 295.

Franciscans, v. 517.

Frederiches, the, v. 134.

Free, how far Christ has made us, iii. 305; the estate, property, or duty of them that Christ has made, 313.

Freewill, iv. 102; offering, iii. 205.

Freedom from laws and ordinances of men, iii. 310.

Freyamt, v. 546.

Friars, v. 516.

Friendship of men to be preserved, ii. 197.

Frock, the priests' close, iii. 134.

Fruits, worthy of repentance, iv. 106.

Funerals, iv. 400; v. 523.

Gabaa, iii. 149.

Gabriel, iii, 341, 343; v. 95.

Gadara, the lake of, iv. 353, 364.

Gaged, impawned, iii. 36.

Gaina, ii. 391.

Galeatus, Jerome's prologue, v. 540.

Galilee, women from, iii. 22.

Gallus, Caesar, v. 393.

Gamaliel, v. 482.

Gangra, synod of, iii. 24.

Garganus, Mons., iv. 348.

Garment, to be worn at the Lord's Supper, v. 420.

Gelasius, v. 196, 201.

Gennesaret, the lake of, iv. 364.

Gensericus, iii. 109.

Gentiles, as well as Jews, justified by faith, i. 115; knew God, 196; against images, 200; keepers of religion, 202; honouring of parents among, ib.

Gentilism, against, iv. 181.

Georgian's, faith, i. 98.

Germans, v. 200.

Germany, v. 189.

Gerontochomia, ii. 286; v. 498.

Gerson, John, v. 38.

Gersonites, the, iii. 132, 112.

Gesture [or posture], of those who pray, v. 185; at the Lord's Supper, 421.

Gibeah, the citizens of, ii. 417.

Gideon, v. 229, 231.

Gehazi, v. 124, 130.

Gifts, of the Holy Ghost, iv. 321; of healing, a sign, v. 231.

Gigglot, a wanton, ii. 398.

Gilgal, v. 481.

Gill, a woman, ii. 398.

God, word of, what it is, i. 37; mouth of, 38; the league of, 44; the worship of, 45; the teaching of, to be praised, 60; will have his word understood, 71; faith joins to, 103; the testament of, 113; one in substance, and three in persons, 124; faith in, ib.; a Father, 126; almighty, ib.; maker of heaven and earth, 126"; the right hand of, 146, 148; has given in Christ all heavenly treasures, 1.56; alone forgives sins, 166; the face of, 179; the love of, 181; how to love, 182; alone to be loved, 183; the name of, highly esteemed by the Gentiles, 202; the law of, what it is, 209; all-sufficient, 215; the true is our God, 218; will not be likened to any thing, 224; suffers not a mate, 233; visits sins of fathers on the children, 235; a spirit, 238; names of, ib.; the name of, how sanctified, ib.; how abused, 240; punishment of those that abuse the name of, 241; an oath, a special honour to, 248; sanctifies, 200; the honour of, always foremost, 209; faith, the gift of, 363; why punishes the good with the evil, iii. 75; hope, the gift of, 90; faithful and just, though he delay his promises, 91; examples of the deliverance of, 96; requires pureness in man, 123; the worship of, 128; when likes, and when mislikes ceremonies, ib.; covenant of, with man, 169; is all to his confederates, 170; the grace of, not tied to circumcision, 175; why forbade the eating of certain meats, 211; of the use and effect of the laws of, 237; how said to reward good works, 346; not the author of evil, 365; is good in himself, 366; created all things good, ib.; sin not chargeable on, 373; to what end gave law to Adam, 375; the image of, 377; did foreknow the fall of man, ib.; gives men over to a reprobate sense, 380; is said to make men blind, ib.; hardened Pharoa's heart, 382; how said to do evil, ib.; all things of, by, and in, 383; the blotting out of the image of, in us is our depravation, 394; sin repugnant to the law of, 406; punishes sinners justly, 427; punishes most sharply, 428; examples of the sharp punishments of, 429; the long forbearing of, ib.; a lover of men, iv. 8; the grace of, exhibited in Christ, 12; has performed through Christ what he promised to our forefathers, 19; being angry with the world is pleased with it in Christ, 26; the righteousness of, 40; the image of, 53; how said to repent, 56; conversion to, ib.; the fear of, in all penitents, 59; the fear of, twofold, 60; afflicts them whose sins he has forgiven, 91; liberty of the sons of, 102; sundry opinions concerning, 124; whence the true knowledge of, must be fetched, ib.; that there is a, 125; a measure to be kept in enquiring what he is, ib.; the name of, unspeakable, 120; the form and manner of knowing, 129; names of, 130; of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, 136; visions of, 137; prosopography of, ib.; how members attributed to 138; how the patriarchs did see, 142; did all things with the fathers by the Son, 143; shadowed in visions, ib.; gives his gifts freely, 144; how showed himself to Moses, 145; what he is, 140; does most evidently open himself through Christ, 147; the wisdom, goodness, and truth of, 148; the power, long-suffering, justice and mercy of, 149; is known by his works, 150; the works of, two ways considered, ib.; is shadowed to us by comparisons, 152; is learned by the sayings of the prophets and apostles, 153; is one in essence, 154; a distinction of persons in, 156; a disputation of, 157; all things to be believed of, contained in scripture, 160; governs all things, 178; the providence of, ib.; the goodwill of, learned by his providence, 184; the predestination of, 185; the foreknowledge of, ib.; the true worship of, 200; only to be worshipped, 201; rewards for them that worship, 204; punishments for them that do not worship, ib.; invocation of, what it is, 206; to be called on, ib.; alone to be called on, 208; alone hears everywhere, all persons, and always, 211; the intercessor with, 212; the' service of, is twofold, 223; the inward service of, ib.; the temple of, 225; the priest and sacrifices of, 226; the only, to be served, ib.; the outward service of, 227; to forsake, what it is, 233; not to be represented by an image, 235; the properties of, not to be assigned to strange gods, 236; the gifts of, not to be attributed to strange gods, ib.; to serve unlawfully, what it is, 237; of the kingdom of, 275; of the unity and Trinity of, 325; uses the ministry of angels, 338; who be the house of, v. 82; why defers to give that which he means to give, 171; only to be called on in prayer, 172; by whom called upon, ib.; what things provoke men to call upon, 174; with what abilities he must be furnished which comet h to pray unto, ib.; what we must ask of, 187; why we must express in words our desires to, 203; name of, 210; will of, 213; thanksgiving owed only to, 221; how the godly give thanks to, 222; to be praised for instituting the sacraments, 244; the wisdom of, shines in the institution of the sacraments, ib.; omnipotence of, 263; how the almighty power of, attributed to the word, 266.

God, of the Philistines, ii. 224; of the Egyptians, ib.

Godhead and manhood of Christ united, iv. 267.

Godly, the, afflicted while the wicked live in pleasures, iii. 67; how behave in calamities, 82; how give thanks to God, v. 222; are justified and received into favour, before they are made partakers of the sacraments, 311.

Gods, strange, forbidden, ii. 219; what they are, 220; no cause to choose, 232; what it is to serve, iv. 233; served with the true God, 235.

Golden plate, of the high priest, iii. 137.

Golgotha, iii. 151,152.

Gomorrah, v. 11.

Good, do, to whom, iii. 63; how, 64; how far, ib.

Good counsel, iii. 51.

Good doctrine, not to be rejected for the evil life of ministers, v. 161.

Good Friday, ii. 260.

Good man of the house, ii. 258.

Goods, church, ii. 286; earthly, supply our necessity, iii. 55; serve to relieve the poor, 61; not kept by denying the truth, 100; the division of, 228; temporal, v. 188.

Gospel, the, iv. 1; what it is, 3; definition of, ib.; tidings from heaven, 4; the word of God, though uttered by men, 5; preaches grace, 6; the cause of, 9; the first, 16; not diverse, 19; the insincere preaching of, 31; the sum of, 32; the salvation of, belongs to all, ib.; teaches repentance and faith, 35; not grounded on works, 36; how Christ preached, 37; how Paul preached, 39; a witness, v. 317.

Goths, ii. 416; v. 200.

Governors, v. 107; of schools, 480.

Grace, by Christ, i. 43; of God, not tied to circumcision, iii. 175; the apostles against the abuse of, 338; meaning of the word, iv. 6; the gospel preaches, ib.; of God, what it is, 7; cause of, ib.; working of, 9; kinds of, 11; we are justified by, 12; of God, exhibited in Christ, ib.; kingdom of, on earth, 276; to confer, what it is, 301; given freely and received by faith, 302; whether contained in the sacraments, 305; the seat of, 308.

Graecia, v. 20.

Gratian, the emperor, i. 34, ii. 328, 331, 384; iii. 281; v. 63, 394.

Gratian, iii, 81, 82; v. 201; his Decretum, iv. 81; v. 484.

Greek tongue, v. 189; bishops, 190; original of scripture to be referred to, 542.

Greeks, the, had famous schools, v. 480.

Gregory Nazianzene, iii. 390.

Gregory I., the Great, v. 29, 113, 139, 190, 488.

Gregory V., v. 196.

Gualter, Rodolph, v. 546; commentaries of, on the small prophets, i. 8.

Guardians of fatherless children meant by parents, ii. 208; honour due to, 281.

Guilty, punishment of the, iii. 231.

Gymnosophists, i. 102; iii. 150.

Hagar, iv. 342, 345.

Hallow, to, what it is, v. 210.

Hallowed be your name, v. 209.

Hanani, ii. 336.

Hannah, v. 180, 225.

Happiness, a good part of, to will that which God wills, v. 213.

Harden, to, iii. 381.

Harpies, v. 122.

Head of the church, v. 85.

Heathen, whether the virtuous works of, be sins, iii. 418.

Heaven, meanings of, i. 145; flesh and blood not in, 176; the abode of God, v. 208; a place, 448.

Heavenly things, v. 243; in sacraments, 251.

Hebrew tongue, v. 189; original of scripture to be referred to, 542.

Hebron, v. 524.

Helena, ii. 417.

Helvidius, v. 437.

Henry IV., v. 134.

Henry V., v. 134.

Henry VIII., iii. 15.

Hercules of Gallia, v. 265.

Heremites, ii. 280.

Heretical baptism, v. 22.

Heretic, who is an, v. 63.

Heretics, iii. 231; v. 11, 12; philosophers the patriarchs of, iii. 407; iv. 124; the baptized of, not to be re-baptized, v. 22.

Hermiani set baptism at nothing, v. 397.

Herod Agrippa. See Agrippa.

Herod the Great, iii. 79; the death of, ii. 318; iii. 79.

Herules, the, iii. 109.

Hezekiah, ii. 325, 384; iii. 9, 14, 45, 95; v. 168, 170, 175, 394, 407, 475, 481; commands priests and Levites, ii. 330; careful for ministers' stipends, 335; prevalence of prayers of, v. 225; shadow of the sun goes back in the dial of, 231.

Hidden sins, iii. 416.

Hierocles, ii. 278.

Hieropolis, v. 537.

High places, the sin of them that sacrifice in, iii. 151; what it is to sacrifice in, 264. High priest, breast-plate or ephod of the, iii. 135; the megil of the, ib.; the breast-lap of judgment of the, 136; the golden plate of the, 137; Christ our, iv. 282; v. 96. Hilary, iii. 390.

Hilkiah, iii. 10.

Hin, iii. 35.

Hinds, husbandmen, iii. 39. Hire, the withholding of labourers', iii. 37; due, 346.

Hirelings, v. 102.

Ho, stop, iii. 126.

Holiest of all the, iii. 144, 145; v. 82.

Holiness, whence perfect proceeds, v. 6.

Holocaustum, iii. 189.

Holofernes, iii. 11.3; v. 225;

Holy buildings, v. 498.

Holy church, v. 7.

Holy days, to what end ordained, iii. 100; a measure in, 101.

Holy Ghost, the, i. 155; sin against, iii. 417, 421; blasphemy against, 422; what He is, ill. 298; very God, 300; neither minister nor instrument, 304; a substance, not an accident, 305; the proceeding of, ib.; proceeds from the Father and the Son, 300; the proceeding of, is twofold, 307; temporal, ib.; eternal, 308; is not limited, 309; increasings of, 311; of the effect and power of, ib.; is the sanctifier, 312; the spirit of God and of the Son, ib.; the comforter, 313; the spirit of truth, 314; the spirit of promise, ib.; the finger of God, 315; is called water, and a living fountain, 310; is fire, ib.; is a mighty wind, 317; is a fiery tongue, ib.; is a dove, oil and anointing, 318; is the earnest of our inheritance, ib.; is love or charity, 319; is the spirit of wisdom and understanding and counsel, ib.; is the spirit of strength, knowledge, and fear, 320; does mortify, and quicken, ib.; reveals the mysteries of the kingdom of God, ib.; foreshows things to come, 321; operations of, 319; gifts of, diverse, 321; the vicegerent of Christ, v. 08; does properly seal, 325.

Holy instruments, v. 501.

Holy parents, to be born of, ii, 389.

Holy place, the, iii. 143; v. 83.

Holy secrets, v. 230.

Holy things, iii. 224.

Holy time, iii. 159; v. 504; is free, iii. 204.

Holy-water clerics, v. 114.

Homer, iv. 385.

Homilies, the, i. 9, 10; bp. Ridley's opinion of, 10.

Honesty, ii. 402.

Honey used in baptism, v. 359.

Honorius, ii. 331; iii. 109; v. 394, 539.

Honorius III., v. 510.

Honour to, what it is, ii. 209.

Hooper, bp., iv. 115.

Hope, of the faithful, iii. 88; is of things absent, 89; and of things most certain, ib.; the gift of God, 90; need of in penitents, v. 553.

Hospinian, Hadrian, v. 540.

Hospitalia, ii. 280; iii. 44; v. 498.

Hospitality of the patriarchs, iii. 59.

Hours for prayer, v. 183; canonical, 197.

Householder, office of the, ii. 201.

Householders in captivity, counsel to, ii. 290.

Houses, meaning of, v. 391.

Hu, iv. 209.

Hugo, John, v. 540.

Humanity of Christ, the true, iv. 251.

Humiliation, need of, v. 549.

Humility, iv. 59.

Hungary, v. 189.

Huns, the, iii. 109; v. 200.

Hurting, all forbidden, ii. 303.

Hymenaeus, v. 8.

Hyssop, iii. 184.

Hypocrites, iv. 106; v. 11; how accounted in the church, ib.; of different sorts, 12; like chaff and rotten members, 13; in the church, 51.

Idiot, uneducated, i. 71; iii. 3.

Idleness condemned, ii 27.

Idolatry, iii. 224; iv. 223, 234.

Idols teach not, ii. 232; are sins v. 229.

Ignatius, the martyrdom of, iii. 105.

Ignorance, sin of, iii. 410.

Illumination, iv. 100.

Image graven, forbidden, ii. 223; of God forbidden, v. 08.

Image of God, iii. 377; iv. 53; blotted out in man's depravation, iii. 394.

Images, forbidden to be worshipped, ii. 228; how far not lawful, 231; of the dead are signs, v. 229; profusely adorned, 503.

Immanuel, i. 130.

Impenitence final, iii. 425.

Importable, unsupportable, i. 3.

Improve, reprove, i. 3.

Imputative righteousness, iv. 40.

Incarnation of Christ, iv. 254; heresy and truth, of, 200.

Incense, meaning of, iii. 157; altar of, ib.

Incest, ii. 417.

Increasings of the spirit, iv. 311.

Indian faith, i. 98; tongue, v. 189.

Indolentia of the Stoics, iii. 82.

Indulgences, iv. 93; the filthy mart of, 95.

Indulgentiary, the Romish, iii. 153.

Infants, whether sin remaining in after baptism, be sin, iii. 417; why baptized, v. 313; which believe not are baptized, 323; of the baptism of, 343; counted among the faithful, 344; of the salvation of, departing without baptism, 372; why the Pelagians denied the baptism of, 375-381; to be baptized, 382; confessing or believing, 385; the Lord's Supper not intended for, 420.

Infelicity of the ungodly, iii. 80.

Infirmity, sins of, iii. 417.

Inheritance, iii. 220; proceeds of the parents' good-will, 340.

Innocent I., iii. 390.

Innocent III. v. 114, 278, 421; the creed of, 557.

Innocent IX., v. 118.

Institution of a king or princes, iii. 222; of sacraments, v. 239; of baptism, 352.

Intercession of Christ, of what manner, iv. 219.

Intercessor with God, iv. 212; Christ alone, ib.

Intercessors, v. 172.

Interpretation of scripture, v. 154.

Invisible things in sacraments, v. 251.

Invocate, to, what it is, iv. 204.

Invocation, v. 163; of God, what it is, iv. 206; springs from faith, 212.

Inward things, in sacraments, v. 251.

Irenaeus, iii. 390; v. 224, 430; creed of, i. 26; martyrdom of, iii. 105.

Isaac, i. 44; v. 388; afflictions of, ii.103.

Isaiah, an evangelist, i. 51; iv. 17. See Isaiah.

Isauria, iv. 257.

Isidorus, ii. 250; iv. 75; v. 114.

Ismael, v. 378.

Israel, kings of, iii. 11, 12; some saved beside, but not without, Christ, 401; church of, in the desert, v. 37.

Israelites overcome the Benjamites, ii. 375, 376.

Isuard, v. 201.

Italian band, the, v. 80, 95.

Italy, v. 393.

Ithamar, iii. 132, 141.

Jacob, ii. 405; v. 165,224, 253; the life of, i. 41; buries idols, 210; drinks freely, what it means, iii. 57; the afflictions of, 103.

James, St, allows St. Peter's opinions, ii, 277; defended, 279; does not sanction auricular confession, iv. 84.

Janus, iii. 162.

Jealousy, iii. 227.

Jerome, v. 201, 220.

Jeconiah (Coniah, or Jehoiachin), iii. 11; v. 20.

Jedidiah, v. 372.

Jehoiachim, ii. 236, 242; iii. 11; v. 20.

Jehovah, iii. 137; iv. 130, 136.

Jehu, ii. 336; iii. 12.

Jeremiah, v. 168; prays for Joiachim and Zedekiah, ii. 316; forbidden to pray for the Jews, v. 177, 552; the signs of, 232.

Jericho, v. 481.

Jeroboam, iii. 11,126; iv. 237; v. 22, 70, 72, 73, 101, 517; house of, ii. 235; threatened, 335; pulls down schools, v. 481.

Jeroboam II., iii. 12.

Jerusalem destroyed, iii. 259; had a famous school, v. 480.

Jesus, i. 128; is Christ, iv. 21.

Jethro, v. 133.

Jezebel, ii. 242, 307.

Jews, v. 83, 173; at Babylon, ii. 279, 292; whether examples of, pertain to Christians, 326; deny that Christ is come, and that Jesus is Christ, iv. 24; enemies of the Christian religion, v. 11; and of Christ, 12; an old error among, that sacraments justified,302.

Joab, ii. 276.

Jeconiah, iii. 11.

Joash, iii. 8; commands the priest, ii. 330.

Job, i. 39; iii. 67; iv. 364; v. 177.

Jocabeth, iii. 176.

Joel, v. 179.

John, the apostle, v. 31, 57; banished, iii. 105; saved out of the burning oil, v. 32; and Cerinthus, v. 535.

John the Baptist, i. 53; iii. 157; iv. 400; v. 97, 102, 241, 250, 259; makes a difference between himself and Christ, v. 273.

Joida, ii. 330, 358; iii. 8.

Jonah, iii. 427; v. 167, 170,551; an evidence of the resurrection, i. 170; a type of Christ, iv. 17; his prayer, v. 225.

Jonathan, ii. 270, 271; iii. 115; a captain, ii. 384.

Joram, ii. 236, 336; iii. 7; iv. 208.

Jordan, v. 241, 255, 263.

Jehoshaphat, ii. 313, 324, 349, 378, 384; iii. 7, 95; v. 170, 481.

Joseph, ii. 210, 287; iii. 57; refuses Potiphar's wife, ii. 410; burial of, v. 524.

Joseph of Arimathea, ii. 386; iii. 22; iv. 278.

Josephus, v. 114.

Joshua, ii. 324, 325, 362, 375, 377; v. 37, 229, 395; set before Eleazar, ii. 328, 329; a captain, 384, 386; his prayers, v. 225.

Josiah, ii. 325, 358; iii. 10; iv. 212; v. 394, 407; destroys the false priests, ii. 335; slain by the Chaldees, 375; the example of, in reforming, iv. 121.

Jotham, iii. 8.

Jovinian, iii. 407.

Jubilee, the year of, iii. 166; the Christian, 265; the Romish, 266.

Judah, kings of, ii. 324; tribe of, v. 108.

Judas Iscariot, iv. 61; v. 8, 16, 394, 463, 473, 476, 489; a willful apostate, iii. 424; example of, iv. Ill; admitted to the Lord's table, v. 60, 464; his kiss, 230; did not eat bread, the Lord, 271; had no fruit of the sacrament, 341; preached and baptized, though a thief, 349; what he received at the Lord's Supper, 464; called Satan, 465.

Judas Maccabeus, ii. 377, 384; iii. 162.

Judas Thaddeus, iv. 350.

Judge to, what it is, i. 152; iii. 219.

Judge, the office of, described, ii. 346; a good, must hear and know, 347; must judge justly, ib.; ought, to have God for his pattern, 348; discretion and clemency of, 356.

Judges, faults of, ii. 348; the laws of, iii. 220.

Judges, the, make war, ii. 384.

Judgment, what it is, ii. 345; pertains to the magistrate, 346; power of, v. 40.

Judgment, the last, picture of, i. 153.

Judgments, not abrogated among Christians, ii. 350.

Judicial laws, iii. 217.

Judith, iii. 115; v. 181, 225; book of, uncanonical, v. 540.

Julian, iii. 261; v. 77.

Julianus, ii. 416.

Julius Caesar, iv. 18.

Julius III., v. 29, 529.

Jurisdiction, power of, v. 39.

Justification, i. 104,100; by faith alone, 112; not by works, 113; a free gift, 117; in what sense attributed to good works, iii. 327; cavils of them which attribute, unto works, 329; by grace, iv. 12; the manner and order of our, 41, 49; what David thought of, 47; without works, why the doctrine of, to be kept uncorrupted, 49; illustrated by a parable, v. 320.

Justify, to, what it is, i. 105.

Justina, v. 195.

Justinian, iii. 109; his codex, 280; makes laws of monasteries and monks, v. 51.5.

Kahal, life of, i. 41.

Keys, the, v. 127; preaching of the gospel, iv. 51, 88, 94; the power of, v. 39, 44; of the church, 146.

Killing, the manners of, i.304; of tyrants, 318.

King, the institution of a, iii. 221.

Kingdom, of God, iv. 275: v. I'll; two ways considered, 276; of grace on earth, ib.; spiritual, 277; of glory in heaven, 280; of the world, 281; of Satan, v. 211; earthly, ib.; of heaven, keys of, 140.

Kingdoms, whence the felicity and calamity of, iii. 5; whence destruction of, v. 528.

Kings, foreign, iii. 13.

Kinsfolk meant by parents, ii. 209; honour due to, 284.

Kiriath-jearim, iii. 148.

Knives of stone, iii. 173.

Korah, iii. 131, v. 11.

Labour, time enough allowed for, ii. 250; commanded, iii. 27.

Labourer's hire, iii. 37.

Laeta, v. 199, 302.

Lamb, a type of Christ, iii. 183; the Lord's passover, v. 441.

Last day, the, iv. 405.

Latin tongue, v. 188, ISO; prince, 1S9.

Laver, brazen, the, iii. 159.

Law, what it is, ii. 193.

Law of God, what it is, ii. 209; moral, ceremonial, and judicial, 210; the moral endures still, 211; the majesty and dignity of, 212; two tablets of, ib.; the contents of the, 214; the ceremonial, iii. 125; the judicial, 217; what these be, 219; they belong to the Ten Commandments, 220; the moral not abrogated, 255; the ceremonial, how far abrogated, 257; abrogation of the judicial, 280; sin repugnant to, 400.

Law of nature, ii. 194; two especial points of, 190; answerable to the written law, 197.

Laws, division of, ii. 193; of men, 200; of policy, ib.; ecclesiastical, 207; superstitious, ib.; necessary for kingdoms, 337; to put to, to take from, 339; what manner of, the magistrate ought to use, .ill: written, are needful, ib.; civil, what manner of, they be, 343; of honesty, ib.; of justice and equity, ib.; of peace and unanimity, 344; of war made by the word of God, 380; judicial, are profitable, iii. 217; the most ancient, 218; the church not burdened with infinite, v. 478.

Law, the. i.50; even before Moses' time, 210; of the use and effect of, ii.?.i7; requires absolute perfectness, ib.; makes our sin manifest, 238; not only ldlls,239; teaches perfect righteousness, 241; the precepts of, are the rudiments of the world, 242; frames the life of man, 243; bridles the unruly, 244; impossible for us of our own strength to fulfil, 245; no man justified by the works of, 247; life promised to them that keep, 250; how we may keep, 251; of the abrogation of, 252; the bondage of, in the old Testament, 290; to what end God gave to Adam, 375; grounded on works, iv. 30; not destroyed through faith, 44.

Lawrence, St, v. 497; martyrdom of, iii. 106.

Laying on of hands, iii. 221; v. 138.

Lazarus, iii. 69.

Leagues, manner of making, v. 245.

Learners, two sorts of, v. 154.

Leese, lose, i. 44.

Legio fulminea, ii. 383.

Leo, pope, i. 100.

Leo, X., iv. 119.

Leonidas, martyrdom of, iii. 105.

Lepers, cleansed by Christ, v. 255.

Letter, the, when to depart from in interpreting scripture, v. 437.

Levi, ii. 410; iii. 131; v. 30; cursed, v. 295; tribe of, 101.

Levita, Lotharius, iv. 82.

Levites, iii. 31; v. 108, 191, 480; chosen to be priests, iii. 131; such chosen to the ministry as most fit, 132; appointed to bear the ark, v. 296; offerings out of tithes of, acceptable to God, 489;

Levitical, cities, iii. 142; v. 480; matters put away from the Christian church, v. 421.

Lex Julia, ii. 203, 412.

Lex Pompeia, ii. 288.

Lex talionis, ii. 304.

Liberty, Christian, ii. 200, 205; iii. 305; of Christians, iii. 300; who they are that Christ sets at, 301; a paradox of, 303; testimonies of Christian, 300; abuses of, 314; of sons of God, iv. 102.

Libya, sands of, v. 110.

Licentiousness, iii. 315.

Licinius, iii. 106.

Lie, a, iii. 114; a jesting, ib.; an officious, 115; Origen's opinion of, ib.

Lies, condemned among the Gentiles, ii. 204; the kinds of, iii. 114.

Liefer, rather, iv. 131.

Life, by Christ, i. 43; promised to them that keep the law, iii. 250; all things requisite to, given in Christ, iv. 27; Christ alone our, 29; of him that prays must be answerable to his faith, v. 177.

Life eternal, i. 41, 178.

"Lift up your hearts," v. 300, 408.

Lights of the world, the clearest, i. 40.

Likeness of the old and new Testaments and people, iii. 282.

Limited power, v. 42.

Lip labour forbidden in prayer, v. 204.

Lither, lazy, iii. 32.

Lombard, Peter, iv. 81; v. 241; on Sacraments, v. 241, 240; the Sentences of, 484.

Lombards, the, iii. 109.

Lord, i. 129; of hosts, iv. 132; the high, 133.

Lordships, a name of angels, iv. 338.

Lord's prayer, the, v. 200; divided, ib.; offered by Christ, 207.

Lord's table, v. 402, 418; necessary in a church, 501.

Lot, ii. 307; iii. 95; v. 162; hospitality of, iii. 59; deliverance of, v. 555.

Lotharius, Levita, iv. 82.

Lot's wife, v. 275.

Lout, to, to bow, iii. 28.

Love, v. 25; whence it is, i. 180; of God, 181; overcomes all evils, 182; fashions to the will of God, ib.; order and measure in, 185; of neighbour sincere, 180; fulfilling of the law, 190; an exhortation to, 191.

Lucian, v. 77.

Lucianists, iv. 112.

Lucretia, ii. 417.

Luskish, inclined to laziness, iii. 70.

Lycurgus, iii. 219.

Lydia, iii. 22, 23, 31; v. 366.

Macarius, v. 514.

Maccabees, the, iii. 413; the book of, not canonical, iii, 390; v. 538.

Macedonia, v. 493.

Macedonius, the heretic, i. 13.

Macedonius, the hermit, ii. 305.

Madmen's death unwilful, iii. 413.

Magi, v. 480.

Magistrate, the, may kill, ii. 307; what is, 308; must be obeyed, 311; ordained of God for man's good, 313; good and bad, 314; whether evil be of God, ib.; must be sound in religion, 319; office of, 323; whether the care of religion belongs to, ib.; office of, not to be confounded with that of the minister, 329; is law endued with life, 339; judgment pertains to, 340; v. 509; revenge taken by, ii. 351; when ought to punish offenders, 355; whether may punish for breach of religion, 357; whether may make war, 370; let the people obey when, commands war, 373; obedience to laws of, 390; owes a duty to the church, v. 34; bears the sword in the Christian church, 509. Magistrates, meant by parents, ii. 208; honour due to, 279; three kinds of, 309; causes and beginnings of, 312; election of, 318; what kind of men to be chosen, 319; manner of consecrating, 322; what laws concerning religion, ought to appoint, 333; Christians may be, 385.

Mahomet, v. 21.

Mohammedanism, v. 73.

Malcom, ii. 248.

Man, is convinced of sin, iii. 122; why created frail, 375; God foreknew the fall of, 377; the old and new, iv. 98-100; the power of, 98; the chief of the works of God, 151, 175; the last day of, 405.

Manahem, iii. 12.

Manasseh, ii. 230; iii. 9, 95; v. 70, 73, 109.

Mancipation, iii. 229.

Manhood and Godhead of Christ united, iv. 207.

Manicheans, the, ii. 357; opinion of the soul, iv. 374; did not baptize, iv.397.

Manicheaus, iv. 257; v. 77.

Manifest sins, iii. 410.

Manna, v. 410.

Manumission, iii. 229.

Marcion, iv. 250; iv.77.

Marianus, v. 190, 515.

Marks of the church, outward, v. 17; how declare the church, 19; inward, 23.

Marlorat's Commentaries on John, i. 8.

Marriage, iii. 220; the excellence of, ii. 394; causes of, 397; how to be contracted, 403; reverend behaviour required in the state of, 405; the forbidding of, a doctrine of devils, iv, 509; contracts of, to be soberly made 510.

Marriages, second and third, ii. 405 must be begun with religion, 409.

Married folks, must be faithful, ii. 400 must dwell together with knowledge ib.; must beget and bring up children 408.

Marry, to, no man forbidden, ii. 402.

Mars, iii. 102.

Martha, v. 107.

Martin, Micronius, v. 142.

Martin, St, on continence, ii. 424.

Martyr's, Peter, Commentaries on the Judges, i. 8.

Martyrs, iii. 105.

Mary [Miriam], i. 48; iii. 170.

Mary, Virgin, iv. 14; v. 33.

Mary, the mother of John Mark, iii. 21.

Mascelzer, ii. 381.

Masses, private, v. 417.

Massilia, the citizens of, ii. 294.

Masters, duties of, ii. 281.

Mathematical, ii. 221; iii. 2:11.

Matrimony, of Christian, v. 509.

Matthias, it. L31, 132, 133.

Mauritius, v. 139, 516.

Maxentius, death of, ii. .318.

Maximinian, iii. 73, 79, 106.

Maximums, ii. 378; iii. 105.

Maximus, martyrdom of, iii. 10".

Means, good, not neglected by the saints, iv. 181.

Meat, continence in, ii. 423.

Meat-offering, the, iii. 191.

Meats, the choice of, ii. 431; why God forbade the eating of certain, iii. 211; the choice of, abrogated, 271.

Medes, the, had famous schools, v. 480.

Mediator, i. 130; of redemption and intercession, iv. 213.

Meetings, the Jews' three yearly, iii. 163.

Megil of the high-priest, iii. 135.

Melchizedek, iv. 282; v. 30, US, 432, 439.

Melito, bishop of Sardis, v. 540.

Memorial of the Lord's passion, a name of the Lord's Supper, v. 402.

Men, the two, iii. 401; wherefore all not saved, iv. 33.

Men-stealers, iii. 47.

Menelaus, ii. 417.

Mentz, v. 248.

Merarites, the, iii. 132, 142.

Mercurius, Trismegistus, iii. 218; iii.3S5.

Mercury, v. 68.

Mercy-seat, the, iii. 154.

Mercy, works of, i. 190.

Mere, a boundary, iii. 38, 230.

Meribah, bitter waters of, made sweet, v. 202.

Merits, iii. 342; no good, in man, ib.

Messalians, v. 94, 345; set baptism at nothing, 397.

Messiah, v. 228; lineal descent of, i. 44; Jesus is, iv. 21, 23.

Meteors, iv. 183.

Methuselah, length of life of, i. 40.

Metropolis, v. 118.

Metropolitans, v. 112, 118.

Micah, instituted a strange serving of God, iv. 237.

Michael, iv. 343.

Michael, St, mount of, iv. 348.

Michal, iii. 115.

Michtam, iii. 290.

Midwives, of the Egyptians, iii. 115; whether may baptize, v. 370.

Miletus, v. 30, 44, 106.

Milk, used in baptism, v. 359.

Millenarians, v. 537.

Mind, the, must be lifted up to heavenly things in prayer, v. 178.

Minister, the unworthiness of, derogates not from the service of God. v. 22.

Ministers, of the church, meant by parents, ii. 209; honour due to, 283; contempt of, 284; Hezekiah careful for the stipends of, 335; are lights, iii. 157; are shepherds, v. 88; how to be heard, 102; names of, interchanged, 108; ordination of, 128; who may choose, 131; what manner of men to be ordained, 134; good doctrine not to be rejected for the scarce good life of, 161; ought to be rewarded, 488; discipline and correction of, 604; must accuse sins, 546.

Ministry of men, wherefore God uses in building his church, v. 93; some take from, 96; some exalt too much, ib.; must be duly limited, ib.; not appointed in vain, 97; end of, 101; beginning and worthiness of, 102; the scripture makes a difference between, and the operation of the Spirit, 273.

Ministry of the word of God remains in i lie church, v. 103.

Ministries of angels, what are, iv. 340.

Minos iii. 219.

Miracle-plays, the, iii. 194.

Miracles, joined to the word of God as seals, v. 451.

Mirammelinus, ii. 416.

Moabites, overthrown for sins, ii. 374; v. 496.

Monarchy, ii. 309.

Monasteries, v. 513; laws of, made by Justinian, 515; whether can be reformed, 519.

Monastical vows, v. 518.

Monkery, repugnant to Christ's gospel, v. 516.

Monks, ii. 280; v. 513; the counterfeit holiness of, ii. 408; Carthusian, iii. 57; not to be abbots, v. 113, 514; origin of, 514; laws of, made by Justinian, 515; mendicant, 516.

Monothelites, the, i. 14; iv. 261.

Montanus, ii. 434.

Moon, the new, iii. 162; signs of, v. 231.

Moral law, the, ii. 209; endures still, 211; dignity of, 212.

Moriah, iii. 151.

Mordecai, iii. 102.

Morocco, the straits of, ii. 416.

Mortal sins, iii. 416.

Mortification, of Christians, represented in baptism, v. 329.

Moses, iii. 169; v. 28, 37, 102, 122, 133, 165, 170, 180, 232, 434, 479, 487; the first of the holy writers, i. 39; the age of, 42; writes by the Spirit, 46; authority of, very great, 47; the law of, not to be enforced on kingdoms, 342; a captain, 384, 386; the hope of, iii. 89; the afflictions of, 103; not only slays, 239; does also lead to Christ, 240; desires to see God in his majesty, iv. 144; how God showed himself to, 145; the chair of, v. 161; prayers of, 224, 225; rod of, turned into a serpent, 262; God appears to, 253; how did sanctify, 273; to be baptized into, what it means, 299; punished for neglect of circumcision, 345, 366, 372.

Moses Egyptius, iv. 135.

Mothers, turmoils of, ii. 274.

Mow, a heap of corn, iii. 231.

Murder, iii. 233; condemned among the Gentiles, ii. 203; all things in which it consists forbidden, 299; causes of, 304; how great an offence, 305.

Murderer, a name of the devil, iv. 356.

Mussbus, iv. 385.

Musculus, Common-places of, i.8.

Muzta, ii. 416.

Mystery, a, what it is, v. 236; of the kingdom, 237.

Mysteries, holy, v. 233, 236; Christ our chief interpreter of, 237.

Mysteries, the, iii. 194.

Mystical, what it is, v. 238; divinity, ib.

Naaman, iv. 208; v. 124, 255, 489.

Naboth, ii. 307.

Nebuchadnezzar, ii. 325; iii. 11, 13, 72, 343; iv. 92, 344; v. 20.

Nadab, struck, iii. 187; v. 408.

Nahash, ii. 379.

Naioth, v. 481.

Name of God, v. 210.

Name, given in circumcision, iii. 176; in baptism, v. 329.

Names of God, iv. 130.

Natalis, iv. 76.

Nathan, iii. 159.

Natolia, v. 20.

Nature, i 194; powerless without grace, 205; of man not the cause of sin, iii. 362; what and how great the corruption of, 393.

Natures, the two in Christ unconfounded, iv. 262, 264; v. 456.

Natures of things changed, v. 261.

Nazarites, v. 113, 481; the discipline of, iii. 207; abrogated, 271; complained of by Amos, v. 494.

Nazir, iii. 207.

Nectareus, iv. 77.

Nehemiah, v. 225.

Neighbour, who is our, i. 184; how must be loved, 186; love of, must be sincere, ib.; must be loved as ourself, 187; be loved as Christ loved us, ib.; how stand in stead, 188.

Nemesis, ii. 273.

Nero, ii. 315; iii. 105, 108; v. 124.

Nestorius, i. 14; the error of, iv. 261, 267; v. 455.

New birth, iv. 98; v. 378.

New man, the, iv. 98, 100.

New-year's day, ii. 260.

Nicodemus, iv. 37, 98; v. 157, 243,378.

Nicolas, pope, v. 125.

Nile, the, turned into blood, v. 262.

Nineveh, iv. 109; v. 167, 373, 554.

Ninevites, punished for cruelties, ii. 374; repentance of, iv. 109; v. 554; prayers of, v. 167.

Nob, iii. 149.

Noe, ii. 210; iii. 95, 169, 187; iv. 193; v. 102, 162, 177, 434; length of life of, i. 41.

Naomi, ii. 285.

Noetus, iv. 156.

Nosocomia, ii. 286; v. 498.

Novatians, the, iii. 424; iv. 66; v. 59.

Novellae, the, iii. 281.

Nullifidians, iv. 112.

Numa, ii. 201; iii. 219.

Numantines, ii. 252.

Oath, of an, ii. 244; what it is, 246; a special honour to God, 248; conditions of a holy, 249; best to break an ill, 250; of soldiers, v. 235.

Oath of Romish bishops, v. 141, 530.

Oaths, ii. 241: wicked, whether to be performed, 250; religious, to be kept, 252; large reward to those who keep, 253

Obadiah, the prophet, ii. 374; v. 95.

Obedience to magistrates' laws, ii. 390.

Occupation, what a godly man ought chiefly to use, iii. 31.

Occupations needless, iii. 28; sundry kinds of, 30.

Ahaziah, ii. 336; iii. 7.

Octavius, Augustus, iii. 419; iv. 18.

Odoacer, iii. 109.

Offence, given and taken, iii. 318; to give, a great sin, 319.

Offences, iii. 315; how and by what means given, 316; arise, not of the gospel, but of its enemies, 3L9.

Offenders, whether it be lawful to kill, ii. 352; for what causes God commanded to kill, 354; what to be punished in, 357.

Offering, the burnt, iii. 189; the meat, 191; the drink, 192; the sin, 193; the free-will, 205.

Og, ii. 378.

Oil used in baptism, v. 361.

Old man, the, iv. 98; how mortified and renewed, 104.

Old men, honour due to, ii. 285.

Oligarchy, ii. 310.

Olives, mount of, v. 191.

Olympius, iii. 390.

Omnipotence of God acts not contrary to his nature, v. 451.

"One baptism for the remission of sins," v. 356.

Operations of the Holy Ghost, iv. 319; of the devil, 360.

Opportunity of prayer not to be let pass, v. 186.

Oppressed, the, how should behave themselves under tyrannical princes, ii. 316.

Oracles, iv. 362.

Orator, prayer-man, iii. 16.

Order, what manner of, remains in the church, v. 108.

Orders, what the Lord has instituted in his church, v. 104; why not received at the hands of popish bishops, 140; sacrament of, 247.

Ordination, power of, v. 43; of ministers, 128.

Origen, iii. 105; his opinion of a lie, 115; of the soul, iv. 374; on the number of the books of the old Testament, v. 540.

Orosius, iii. 429.

Orphanotrophia, ii. 286; v. 498.

Orphans, ii. 288.

Orpheus, iv. 385.

Hosea, iii. L2.

Uzziah, king, ii. 323, 384; iii. 8; the priest, v. 181.

Ostrogoths, the, iii. 109.

Ottoman, iii. 268.

Ought, owed, iii. 371; iv. 46.

Our Father, v. 208.

Owe, own, iv. 70; Add.

Uzzah, dies suddenly, v. 296, 408.

Pack, a lewd person, iii. 69.

Palestines, v. 480.

Pall, the, v. 139; in olden times freely given, ib.

Pamphilus, martyrdom of, iii. 105.

Pandects, the, iii. 280.

Paphnutius, ii. 401.

Papias, v. 537.

Papists, v. 173.

Parables, v. 242.

Paradise, v. 509.

Parents, honouring of, among the Gentiles, ii. 202; what meant by the name of,268; the honour due to, 271; promise to them that honour, and threatenings to them that despise, 286; the duty of, to children, 291; and children to, iii. 225; to be born of holy, 389.

Paris, ii. 417.

Parishes, v. 9.

Parish-priests, v. 9, 116.

Parmenian, v. 00.

Paschal Lamb, the, iii. 177; v. 246, 427; a type of Christ, iii. 183; called "the passover," v. 280.

Pasquil, iii. 117.

Passion, of Christ, i. 135.

Passover, the, iii. 164; v. 280; what it was, iii. 179; the first author and beginning of, ib.; place for eating of, 181; guests at, ib.; manner of eating, ib.; end whereto it tended, 182; kept the Lord's benefit in memory, ib.; testimony of God's good will to his people, ib.; a badge and confession of faith, 185; warned the communicants of their duty, 186; the Christian, 265; sundry names of, v. 402; celebrated only at Jerusalem, 431.

Pastor, the office of, not a lordly dignity, v. 89.

Pastoral watchfulness, the need of, i. 3.

Pastors, v. 106; the scope and drift whereunto should aim, 1.53; prayer for faithful, 15S; authority of, 160.

Paternosters, v. 205.

Patience, the image of, iii. 86; the force and effects of, 87; need of, v. 553.

Patriarchs, the, i. 39-42: iii. 31; v. 28; had ceremonial and judicial laws, ii. 211; hospitality of, iii. 59; the afflictions of, 103; how saw God, iv. 142.

Patriarchs, v. 117.

Patripassians, iv. 156.

Patrons, fault of, i. 7.

Patrons, against heavenly. iv. 211.

Paul, St, i. 53; iv.43,60, 551; beheaded, ii. 315; uses the benefit of judgment, 351; strikes Elymas blind, 359, 377; avails himself of the protection of the magistrate, 377; v. 35; delivered out of tribulations, iii. 96; an example in afflictions, 104; the death of, 105; v. 32: the doctrine of, commanded to the churches, iii. 274; how preached the gospel, iv. 39; equal in apostleship to Peter, v. 128; did not rebuke those who sung in churches, 192; prayers of, 220; brought up at Gamaliel's feet, 482; received wages, 193.

Paul II., iii. 268.

Paul III., v. 29, 529; decrees of, confirmed by council of Trent, ib.

Paul, of Samosata, iv. 267.

Paulines, v. 517.

Paulinus, v. 540.

Paulus Diaconus, v. 201.

Paulus Sergius, ii. 363.

Paulus Thebius, v. 514.

Pawns, iii. 36, 228.

Pekah, iii. 12.

Pekahiah, iii. 12.

Pelagians, the, iii. 386; v. 370.

Pelagius, i. 14; iii. 386; iv. 11: v. 376; controversy of Augustine with, iv. 11; v. 201.

Pelbart, sermons of, v. 557.

Penance, v. 249.

Penitents, the fear of God in all, iv. 59; faith needful in, 62; what things necessary in, 108; true are in a happy case, 111; instances of, v. 554.

Pentecost, iii. 104, 265; v. 198.

People of God, who be, v. 382; gathered together by baptism, 399.

Peputian heretics, v. 371, 410.

Percher, a large wax candle, ii. 199, 238.

Perfect, no man living is, iii. 237.

Perfectness, the law requires absolute, iii. 237.

Persecution, in France, iii. 105; in Asia, ib.

Persecutors, recompensed for their tyranny, iii. 107.

Persia, v. 20; had famous schools, 480.

Persian tongue, v. 189.

Person, iv. 158; of Christ, not divided, 271.

Persons, a distinction of, in the one essence of God, iv. 150.

Peter, St, v. 29, 31, 32, 63, 169, 250, 312,476; crucified, ii. 315; slays Ananias and Sapphira, 3-59; delivered out of prison, iii. 96; v. 220; the death of iii. 105; forgiven through repentance, 424; a stone, iv. 50; patrimony of, v. 110; not the foundation of the church, 81; chief of the apostles, 122; a pillar, 123; heals by Christ's power, 255; repentance of, 549.

Peter, bp. of Alexandria, i. 34; v. 63.

Peter, de Aliaco, v. 39.

Petilia, the citizens of, ii. 252.

Petition, v. 103.

Petrines, v. 517.

Phanuel, v. 182.

Pharaoh, ii. 352; iii. 79, 261, 381, 382; punished for taking Sarah, ii. 410; God hardens the heart of, iii. 381; drowned in the Red sea, v. 329.

Pharaohs, the, iii. 13.

Pharisees, v. 12, 180, 184.

Pherecydes, iv. 385.

Philemon, iii. 22.

Phileni, ii. 278.

Philip, the deacon, iii. 22; iv. 278; v. 310, 311, 383, 396; an evangelist, v. 105; baptized in a field, 365.

Philip, king of Macedon, iii. 219.

Philippi, the jailor of, v. 366.

Philistines, the, v. 295; god of, ii. 224.

Philosophers, the patriarchs of heretics, iii. 407; iv. L24.

Phoebe, v. L07.

Phoroneus, iii. 219.

Photinus, iv. 267.

Pight, pitched, v. 96.

Pillars, Peter, James, and John, v. 123.

Pindar, iv. 385.

Pitho, or Suada, v. 265.

Pity, foolish, ii. 353.

Plato, i. 50; iii. 219, 393; v. 480; his opinion of the soul, iv. 385.

Platonists' opinion of the soul, iv. 374.

Pleasure, allowed, not excluded by necessity, iii. 55.

Pleasures, granted, ii. 420.

Plebani, v. 116.

Pledges, iii. 36, 223.

Ploughing, on the sabbath, ii. 265.

Plurality, of benefices, v. 144.

Poland, v. 1S9.

Poll, plunder, iii. 47.

Polycarp, ii. 248; v. 31, 57, 58; martyrdom of, iii. 105.

Polygamy, against, ii. 404.

Pompey, iv. 18.

Pontius Pilate, i. 134; iv. 14, 23.

Poor, the, iii. 225; care of, v. 157, 497; not to be defrauded of their portion, 495.

Pope, the, v. 118; power and prerogatives of, iv. 118; a god on earth, v. 72; not the head of the church, 86; is Melchizedek, 118; supreme head of the church, 119; not to be judged, ib.; the .laws of, to be received as from the mouth of Peter, ib.; the authority of, greater than of the saints, ib.; has one consistory with God, ib.; cannot be brought in order by any man, ib.; has no fellow, 120; has all laws within his breast, ib.; there is a general council where he is, ib.; has both swords, ib.; is above the emperor, ib.; can depose the emperor, ib.; may take away privileges, ib.; is lord of lords, ib.; is the ordinary of all men, ib.; that every man be subject to, is of necessity of salvation, ib.; has a heavenly power, and alters the nature of things, 121; is antichrist, 122.

Popes, poisoned, iii. 110.

Power, ecclesiastical, v. 38; of consecration, 39; of the keys, 39, 44; of jurisdiction, of preaching, of judicial correction, to receive, 4U; what it is, 41; two kinds of, ib.; absolute, limited, 42; of ordination, 43; to teach, 44; to administer the sacraments, to judge of doctrines, to call a council, 45; to dispose of the affairs of the church, 46.

Powers, a name of angels, iv. 338.

Pray, we must, v. 167; why they that pray do not always receive that they ask, 170; not with the mouth only, but with the heart, 180; when we must, 183; in what tongue, 188; how we must, 201; toward what part of the world we must, 500.

Prayer, iv. 32; for the dead, 395; useless, 399; for faithful pastors, v. 158; what it is, 163; definition of, ib.; private, 164; public, 164, 183; objections against, 16^, 169; who must be called on in, 171; what things provoke men to, 174; our minds must be lifted up to heavenly things in, 178; must proceed from love, 179; we must require no unworthy thing for God to grant, and contrary to his laws, 181; we must continue in, ib.; set hours for, 183; the place of, ib.; the force or virtue of, 244; sacrament of, 247.

Prayer, the Lord's, v. 206-220; whether we be tied to, 203.

Prayers, of angels, iv. 219.

Prayers, kinds of, v. 164; are necessary, 169; God is moved with, 170; of Jacob and Moses, 224; of Samuel and Nehemiah, 225; of Paul and Silas, 226; of saints, 539.

Preaching of the word, a mark of the church, v. 17, 18; power of, 40; of the gospel, called the mystery of the kingdom, 237.

Predestined to life, who is, iv. 187; the drawing of the, 189.

Predestination, of God, iv. 185.

Presbyter, v. 106.

Presuls, v. 118.

Priest of God, iv. 226.

Priesthood, the, iii. 130; beginning of, ib.; abrogated, 262; of Christ, iv. 285; is unchangeable, 216, 287; of Christians, 290.

Priests, the, certain degrees among, iii. 132; raiment of, 133-135; meaning of the apparel of, 137; office of, 139; must teach and bless, ib.; must sacrifice and minister sacraments, 141; carry the tabernacle and its vessels, ib.; appointed to serve in war, 142; judge causes, ib.; the stipends and dwellings of, 143.

Priests in the Christian church, v. 107.

Priests, parish, v. 9; of Rome, the filthy life of, 69; regular and secular, 116.

Primates, v. 117.

Princes, have dealt in religion, ii. 330; have appointed orders for religion, 331.

Principalities, a name of angels, iv. 338.

Priscillianists, iii. 363; v. 410.

Priscillianus' opinion of the soul, iv. 374.

Private masses, v. 417.

Proba, v. 203.

Proceeding of the Holy Ghost, iv. 305; is twofold, 307.

Proclus, iv. 134.

Prodigality, to be avoided, iii. 32; forbidden, 53.

Promise, the, not without effect, i. 117; made to godly worshippers large, 236; in the sacrament, v. 351; in the Lord's Supper, 405, 434.

Promises, made to the afflicted, iii. 95; added to the sabbath, 203; touching Christ, iv. 13; open and hidden, 16.

Property, of another man not to be possessed, iii. 49.

Properties, communication of, iv. 270.

Prophecy, sacrament of, v. 247.

Prophet, v. 105.

Prophets, the, v. 28; authority of, very great, i. 50.

Prophets, in the Christian church, v. 105.

Prophets, false, iii. 131.

Propitiation, the Christian feast of, iii. 205.

Proportion in sacraments, v. 244.

Prosopography of God, iv. 137, 138.

Prosopopoeia, iv. 133, 153.

Prosper, of Aquitaine, i. 13.

Protestants, are not heretics nor schismatics, v. 64.

Proverbs, i. 79, 256, 294, 295, 297, 311, 312, 340, 341, 343, 376,404,420; iii. 29, 33, 153, 318, 332, 428; iv. 69, 85, 97. 181, 261; v. 34, 60, 441, 480, 548.

Psallini, v. 182.

Psalmists, v. 114.

Ptochotrophia, ii. 286; v. 49S.

Pulpit, necessary in a church, v. 501.

Punishment, how laid on us, i. 11"; of them that abuse God's name, 241; of blasphemers, 242; pertains to the magistrate, 346; kinds of, 355; what order must be had in, 360; admonition before, 361; of sinners just and certain, iii. 426; of those that eat and drink the Lord's Supper unworthily, v. 472.

Punishments, certain appointed to certain sins, iii. 72; for them that do not worship God, iv. 204.

Pureness, what God requires, iii. 123.

Purgatory, iv. 389, 390.

Purification, the manner and order of our, iv. 41, 49.

Purim, iii. 162.

Push, a pimple, iii. 188.

Put case, suppose, iii. 52.

Pythagoras, iii. 219; iv. 168, 385; v. 232, 238; his opinion of the soul, iv. 374, 385.

Pythonisse, ii. 242.

Pyx, v. 449.

Quick and dead judged, i. 154.

Quintilian heretics, v. 371.

Rabanus, Maurus, iv. 400; v. 114, 218, 361; on the Sacraments, v. 248, 361.

Rachel, iii. 176.

Rahab, iii. 115; v. 229.

Rainbow, the, v. 230; sign of God's covenant, 231.

Rama, v. 480.

Rapes forbidden, ii. 415.

Readers, v. 113, 114.

Rebecca, iii. 176.

Rebels, iii. 283; against seditious, ii. 280.

Receive, power to, v. 40.

Reconciliator, Christ the only, iv. 214.

Redemption by Christ, i. 43; mediator of, iv. 213.

Red sea, the, a type of baptism, v. 364, 390.

Reformation in religion not to stay for a general council, iv. 116; of churches to be made, v. 498.

Regeneration, iv. 37, 101.

Regensperg, v. 646.

Regula, martyrdom of, iii. 106.

Regular priests, v. 116.

Relics, the true, ii. 212; no worshipping of, among the ancient fathers, v. 523.

Religion, ii. 233; v. 517; princes have dealt in, ii. 330; of true, iv. 230; what it is, 232.

Religions, sundry, i. 98.

Remission of sins, iv. 30, 36.

Remnants of the Lord's Supper, how to be used, v. 422.

Renatus, v. 375.

Repent, to, iv. 55.

Repentance, taught by the gospel, iv. 35; diverse use of the word, 56; what it is, ib.; how and what it is in God, ib.; the preaching of the truth needful to, 57; sum of the doctrine of, 68; worthy fruits of, 105; carefulness a part of, 106; a work of all our life, 107; the outward exercises of, 108; public and private, 109; must be voluntary, 110; false and true, ib.; examples of, 111; not to be deferred, 113; never comes too late, ib.; true, v. 552; of believers, not vain, 555.

Respect of persons, ii. 348.

Respublica, Utopiana, ii. 385.

Restitution, iii. 230; necessary, 49; when to whom, how much to be made, 50, 51.

Resurrection of Christ, i. 141; of this body, i. 76; what it is, 141; of the flesh, 168; testimonies of the true, 171.

Retiring, iii. 390.

Reuben, ii. 210; iii. 131.

Reubenites, the, iii. 158.

Reward and punishment most certain, i. 154.

Reward, given to good works, iii. 343; places which confirm, not to be abused, 345; how God is said to give 346.

Rewards, to whom promised, iii. 314; for them that worship God, iv. 204.

Rhadamanthus, iii. 218.

Rich men, the false doctrine concerning, condemned, iii. 24.

Riches, the lawful getting of, iii. 24; mind not to beset upon, 52; the gift of God, 63; must serve to do honour, 58.

Rick, a heap of corn in the field, iii. 231.

Ridley, bp., on the homilies, i. 10.

Rifely, iii. 272, iv. 58.

Right hand of God, i. 146; of fellowship, v. 230.

Righteousness, of the ancient world, iii. 242; of works, the apostles against, 337; of God, iv. 40; of Christians imputative, 46; v. 319.

Rite, in the sacrament, v. 251.

Rites, how perpetual, iii. 262; of the church, not to be contemned, v. 249.

Robbery, iii. 39.

Robert, or Rodbert, iv. 295.

Robertus, Carnotensis, v. 196.

Rehoboam, ii. 236; iii. 7.

"Rock, the, was Christ," v. 285.

Rodericus, a rape committed by, ii. 416.

Romans, the, why never received the God of the Jews, iv. 203; had famous schools, v. 480.

Romanus, the martyr, iv. 225.

Rome, six times subdued by the barbarians, iii. 109; appeals to, forbidden, iv. 120; of departing from the church of, v. 62; the bishop of, not the foundation of the church, 81; the patriarch of, 112; the barbarians sharply assault, 200.

Romish church, denied to be the true church of Christ, v. 22.

Romulus, iii. 219.

Rosaries, v. 204.

Round to, to whisper, iii. 69.

Ruddock, a gold coin, iii. 59.

Ruffle, to, to discompose, iii. 51.

Ruth, ii. 285.

Sabbath, the, ii. 254; iii. 161, 162, 264; iv. 132; is spiritual, ii. 254; the outward institution of religion, 255; master of the house must teach the keeping of, 256; the Lord did keep, 258; the Lord blessed, 259; the Christian, ib.; sanctification of, 261; abuses of, 262; promises and threatenings added to, 263; emperor's law for keeping, 264; ploughing on, 265; made for man, ib.

Sabellius, iv. 156.

Sacellani, v. 116.

Sacrament, signification of, v. 227, 233; definition of, 234, 240; taken for an oath, 235; of orders, anointing, prophecy, and prayer, 247; diverse uses of the word, 248; what constitutes a perfect, 278.

Sacramental signs, v. 253; severed from other signs, 233.

Sacramental phrases, v. 283; expounded sacramentally, 286; may be used, 290; are to be expounded, ib.

Sacramental union, v. 278.

Sacraments, of the synagogue, iii. 168; of the Jews, abrogated, 269; to what serve, iv. 32; the lawful partaking of, a mark of the church, v. 17-19; how to be used, 21; power to administer, 45; are called mysteries, 237; and symbols, 238; God the only author of, 239; are testimonies and seals of God's good will, 240; are to be received as, at the hands of Christ, ib.; why instituted in visible things, 241; the causes of, 242; the number of, 246; in what consist, 249; consist of the sign and the thing signified, 250; not made effectual by the words spoken, 259; how consecrated, 269; the sign and the thing signified, retain their several natures in, 270; the wicked not partakers of the thing signified in, 271; affinity of, with the word of God, 272; how the signs and the things signified are joined together in, 281; the ancient fathers moved no contentions about, 284; reverence to be used in disputing of, 294; too much not to be attributed to, ib.; a great sin, not to attribute what scripture attributes to, 295; said to give grace, 296; of the old and new Testaments, likeness and difference of, 298; do not confer grace, 302; whether the grace of God is contained in, 305; to include grace in, causes idolatry, 310; the godly are justified and accepted before they be made partakers of, 311; not made void by protestants, 313; are holy and not profane things, 314; are witnesses of the truth, 316; called by Augustine "visible words," 317; do visibly confirm God's good will toward us, ib.; are seals, 318; have a more effectual force than any sealed charter, 321; seal nothing to unbelievers, 327; represent things, ib.; stir up and help faith, ib.; how stir up faith, 331; visibly gather together into one religion, and distinguish from others, 333; they are members of the devil, who are partakers of unlawful, 338; put the faithful in mind of their duty, 339; profit nothing without faith, 340; depend not on our worthiness or unworthiness, 342; not superfluous to them that have faith, 345; not indifferent, 346; many are sanctified without visible, 347.

Sacrifice, the daily, iii. 190; the yearly, 194; of the red cow, 201; of jealousy, 203; of thanksgiving, ib.

Sacrifices, commanded to the Jewish priests, iii. 141; the beginning of, 186; have some things common, and some things peculiar, 187; for defilings of the body, 203; of the Jews abrogated, 269; of God, iv. 220; not lawful without the temple, v. 75; called "sins," 281, 441; of two sorts, 432; of expiation, ib.; of confession, 433.

Sacrificers, v. 116.

Sacrilege, iii. 44, 230. Sadness, seriousness, iii. 61, Saguntines, ii. 252.

Saints, the, why afflicted, iii. 69; sins of, of what kind, 74; the discommodities of, recompensed with other commodities, 99; in suffering the cross feel no new miseries, 102; must abstain from some things, 278; good works of, whether they be sins, 419; the suffering of, not our redemption, ill. 95; do not neglect good means, 181; that they pray for us in heaven, not to be proved by scripture, 221; the church's worship of, 230; will not be worshipped, 344; vows to, v. 517.

Saints, the communion of, i. 163.

Salamis, v. 370.

Salem, iv. 282; v. 357.

Solomon, i. 50; iii. 149, 152; v. 166, 481; punished for idolatry, ii. 235; removes Abiathar, 330; wisest of kings, iii. 6; and of all men, iv. 206; v. 480; the proverbs of, 540.

Solomon's ballad, iv. 153; proverbs, v. 540.

Salt, used in baptism, v. 361.

Salvation, not only promised but performed to the fathers, iii. 288; all things requisite to, given in Christ, iv. 27; eternal, 28; Christ alone our, 29; Christ fully works our, 30; preached in the gospel belongs to all, 32; certainty of, 33; none without the church, v. 51.

Samaria, v. 44.

Samaritans, v. 396.

Samson, ii. 312; a Nazarite, iii. 209.

Samuel, iii. 152; iv. 237; v. 180, 225, 480; a captain, ii. 384, 386; appeared not to Saul after death, iv. 403.

Sanctification, iii. 337; the manner and order of our, iv. 41, 49; in the sacraments, v. 267.

Sanctify, to, v. 210.

Sanctuary, the, iii. 234.

Sanctuaries, ii. 305.

Sapphira, v. 8.

Saracens, the, iii. 106; v. 83.

Sarah, iii. 176; iv. 399.

Sardis, v. 540.

Satan, iv. 355; the subtleties of, 192; a roaring lion, 356.

Satisfaction, for punishment none, i. 167; of works, iv. 90.

Saturn, v. 68.

Saul, ii. 242, 307; iii. 79,351; head over Israel, v. 86.

Saved, wherefore all men are not, iv. 33; the faithful are, 34.

Scapegoat, the, iii. 194.

Sceva, v. 115, 256.

Shaddai, ii. 215; iv. 134-136.

Schibboleth, v. 230.

Shiloh, iv. 15, 20.

Schism, not to be made for diversity of doctrine, v. 53; nor for vices of ministers, or for diversity of ceremonies, 56; nor for impurity of life of men in the church, 58; nor for unworthy partakers of the Lord's sapper, 60; must be avoided, 61.

Schismatic, who is a, v. 63.

Schismatics, v. 1 1, 12.

Schneider, Nicholas, v. 546.

Schoham, iii. 136.

Scholars, duties of, ii. 281.

Schoolmen, a lesson concerning the sacraments from one of the, v. 239.

Schools, ii. 334; v. 113, 179; instituted by Christ and his apostles, v. 482; pertain to the preservation of the ministry, 483; the corruption of, 484; true end of, 485; discipline in, ib.; of the Levites, iii. 143; v. 480; governors of, ib.

Scripture, teaches all points of true godliness, i. 61; whether too dark to be profitable, 70; contains all things to be believed of God, iv. 160; the interpretation of, v. 154; application of, 155.

Scriptures, the canonical, only to be read in churches, i. 9; rule of faith and duty, 13; books of, 54; sound and uncorrupted, 55; difficulty in, 71; plain, 72; why some will not have them expounded, 74; not to be corrupted with foreign expositions, ib.; not to be expounded according to men's fantasies, 75; not to be expounded contrary to the articles of belief, ib.; exposition of, not to be repugnant to the love of God and of our neighbour, 76; in expounding, mark the context and circumstances, 77; to be expounded by conference of diverse places, 78; and with zealous heart and prayer, ib.; most perfect, iv. 28; give a sufficient platform of the reform of the church, 122; only infallible rule, v. 248; differentiating between the ministry of men and the operation of the Spirit, 273. Sea, the, iv. 175; the dead, ii. 418; the red, v. 180; the Syrian, i. 170.

Seals, to what they serve, v. 318.

Seats, a name of angels, iv. 337; necessary in a church, v. 501.

Sheba, ii. 376.

Secrets, holy, v. 236.

Secular priests, v. 116.

Sihon, ii. 378.

Seiler, John, v. 546.

Selathiel, v. 319.

Selling, iii. 228; whether lawful, 29.

Shallum, iii. 12.

Seleucians, the, set baptism at nothing, v. 397.

Shem, v. 102; length of life of, i. 41.

Shimei, ii. 290.

Sennacherib, ii. 242; iii. 9; iv. 133.

Senators, v. 106.

Seneca, iii. 415; faulty, ii. 200.

Sense, God gives over to a reprobate, iii. 380.

Sensitive powers of the soul, iv. 376.

Separation, the water of, iii. 201.

Separatists, against, v. 52.

Seraphim, iv. 338.

Serpents, the Egyptians worshipped, ii. 224; of the Egyptian enchanters, v. 276.

Serve, to, what it is, ii. 231; iv. 223.

Servetianism, i. 9.

Servile weakness, v. 287.

Seth, i. 40, 41; v. 102.

Severity, not cruelty, ii. 354.

Severus, iii. 105.

Sextons, v. 114.

Sextus IV. iii. 268.

Shebna, v. 555.

Sheep of Christ, i. 4.

Shew-bread, the, iii. 156.

Shuttle, light, iii. 128.

Shechem, ii. 416.

Shechemites destroyed, v. 295.

Sick, the, healed in the name of Christ, v. 255; how the church deals with, 521.

Sign, a, v. 227; called by the name of the thing signified, iii. 172; and thing signified, v. 250; retains its nature in the sacrament, 270.

Signs, division of, by St. Augustine, v. 227; natural, ib.; given, ib.; by sight, ib.; by hearing, 228; by smelling, taste, and touch, ib.; distinguished according to their times, ib.; of things present and past, ib.; of things to come, 229; given of men, ib.; ordained of God, ib.; diversity of, given by men, 230; diversity of, given by God, ib.; and wonders, 231; paradigmatic, 232; sacramental, severed from other signs, 233; external, 251'; earthly and visible, ib.; borrow the names of the things signified, 280.

Silas, the prayers of, v. 226.

Silly, weak, ii. 286, 351; iii. 45, 98, 169; iv. 83.

Shiloh, iii. 148; v. 480.

Simeon, ii. 416; cursed, v. 295.

Simeon, iv. 278.

Similitudes, v. 243.

Simler, Peter, v. 546.

Simon Magus, iv. 96; v. 8, 130, 271; had no fruit of the sacrament, v. 341; baptized, although a hypocrite, 383.

Simon the tanner, iii. 22.

Simoniacs, iii. 45; v. 82.

Simony, v. 130.

Simplicity, true, v. 368.

Simri, ii. 336.

Sin, the pain and offence of, taken away by Christ, i. 108; the cause of the church's persecutions, iii. 73; man convinced of, 122; the name of, whereupon it rises, 358; definition of, 360; the cause or beginning of, 361; the nature of man not the cause of, 362; the devil alone not the cause of, ib.; destiny not the cause of, 363; the true cause of, 368; springs of the devil's suggestion and our corrupt will, 370; not chargeable on God, 373; the differences of, 384; of ignorance, 410; remaining in infants after baptism, whether it is sin, 417; the estimation of, iv. 54.

Sin, actual, the cause of, iii. 404; repugnant to the law of God, 406; Christ suffered for, iv. 43.

Sin, against the Holy Ghost, iii. 420; beginning of, 421; not remitted, 423.

Sin and death, i. 43.

Sin-offering, the, iii. 193.

Sin, original, iii. 384; the beginning of, 385; born with us, 386; voluntary, 388; the catholic doctrine of, 389; all the holy fathers confess, 390; condemned, 394; proper to all, 396; brings forth the fruits of the flesh, 399.

Sin, voluntary, iii. 412.

Sins, the forgiveness of, i. 164; confession of, ib.; forgiven for Christ's sake, ib.; all forgiven, 165; how forgiven, 167; of the saints, of what kind, iii. 74; the kinds and sorts of, 407; all not equal, ib.; increase by degrees and circumstances, 408; the seven deadly, 409; hidden and manifest, 416; mortal and venial, ib.; of infirmity, 417; whether the works of virtuous heathen be, 418; good works of the saints, whether they be, 419; the plague of, 426; why plagued with temporal punishments, although they have been forgiven by the grace of God, 430; remission of, iv. 30, 36; forgiveness of, 48; acknowledging of, 59; fully and surely forgiven to penitents, 63; of the confession of, 69; of men, must be set forth and accused, v. 546; the way of accusing, 548; must be acknowledged and confessed, 549; penitents must believe the forgiveness of for Christ's sake, 550; of fathers hurt not penitents, 555.

Sinners, all men are, i. 114; punishment of, just and certain, iii. 426; punished of God most justly, 427; and sharply, 428; God's decree against, v. 554.

Sina, v. 94; assembly at, i. 46.

Singers, v. 114.

Singing in the church, v. 190; the ancient manner of, 193; agreement in, 195; Gregory's, 196; what things to be discommended in, ib.

Sinopis, ii. 422.

Zion, the church, iv. 275.

Sit, to, to be at rest, i. 147.

Sittim wood, iii. 153, 154.

Skinner, Robert, v. 544.

Sky, the, iv. 174.

Slanderers, iii. 233.

Slandering, iii. 117.

Slops, trowsers, iii. 133.

Smyrna, v. 31.

Socrates, iv. 356, 3S5; declared by an oracle to be the wisest of men, 203.

Sodom, ii. 419; iii. 429; v. 11, 555; people of, destroyed, v. 496.

Sodomy, ii. 418.

Soldier, a Christian, ii. 381; oath of Itoman, v. 235.

Soldiers, mercenary, ii. 277; what manner of, the ancient Christians were, 382; of Christ, Christians are, v. L'30.

Solon, iii. 219.

Son of God, faith in the, i. 127; who is the, ib.; consubstantial and co-essential, L28; begotten unspeakably from everlasting', iv. 238; consubstantial with the Father, 242; is true and very God, 247; the word, v. 266.

Son of man, blasphemy against the, iii. 422.

Song, always free in the church, but not universally used, v. 194.

Sons of the prophets, v. 481.

Soothsayers, iii. 231.

Sorcerers, iv. 302.

Sorrow to Godward, iv. 60; worldly, 61; need of true, v. 549.

Sort, number, v. 159.

Soul, the, two faculties of, iv. OS; diversely taken, 366; for breath and life, ib.; for a desire, 367; for the spirit of man, ib.; for the mind, ib.] bodiless, 372; of what manner of substance, ib.; is neither God, nor a part of God, 373; of the original of, ib.; philosophers' and others' opinions of, 374; the operations and powers of, 376; vegetative and sensitive powers of, ib.; is immortal, 378; separated from the body, 379; testimonies to immortality of, 381; returns to the body at the day of judgment, 388.

Souls, are substances, iv. 369; of the death of, 380; all wise men have thought immortal, 385; when separated from the body, where live, 386; how translated to their appointed place, 388; do not sleep, 3S9; not carried into purgatory, 390; do not wander in the earth, 401.

Souls of the blessed know not our affairs on earth, iv. 212; of the righteous, the works of, 378; at what time carried up into heaven, 389; are purged by the blood of Christ, 391, 393; are blessed immediately after death, 404.

Sozomen, iv. 77.

Spain, ii. 410.

Speaking with tongues, a sign, v. 231.

Spindle, to, to shoot with a long stalk, iii. 163.

Spirit, what it is, iv. 298, 299; the devil an evil and unclean, 357; of Christ in the prophets, ii. 327; of faith, the same to Jews and Christians, ib.

Spirits, appearing of, iv. 400.

Sprinkling in baptism, v. 364.

Stackered, staggered, i. 87.

Stars, the, iv. 174; signs by, v. 231.

Stein, v. 546.

Stephen, iv. 24, 400; v. 208, 308; burial of, 523.

Stoics, the, iii. 57, 82, 407; their opinion of the soul, iv. 374.

Stone, a comparison from the use of, v. 314.

Stork, the. ensign of natural love, ii. 273.

Strange, fire, ii. 221; woman, ib.; forbidden, 219; what they are, 220; no cause to choose, 232; to serve, what it is, iv. 233; served with the true God, 235.

Strangled, eating of, forbidden, iii. 214, 272.

Stubborn persons, iii. 317.

Students to be maintained by the wages of the church, v. 494.

Stumphius, John, v. 546.

Suada, or Suadela, v. 265.

Subdeacons, v. 112, III.

Subjects, duty of, ii. 389.

Subsistence, iv. 168.

Substance, iv. 158.

Substance, the proper owning of, iii. 18.

Substances, in Godhead, iv. 160.

Succession, of bishops, v. 28; of ministers, 140.

Successus, Cyril's Epistle to, iv. 257.

Suffering, of saints, not our redemption, iv. 95.

Suffragans, v. 112.

Sun, signs by the, v. 231.

Sunday, the, ii. 258.

Superstition, iv. 223, 232; v. 260.

Supper, of the Lord, instead of the passover, iii. 209; instead of all sacrifices, 270; to be received in both kinds, v. 68; the sign and thing signified in, 250; called the body and blood of Christ, 282; John vi. makes much for the interpretation of Christ's words in, 289; a seal of the righteousness of faith, 323; sundry names of, 402; what it is, 403; a holy action, 404; who is the author of, ib.; when instituted, 405; whereof consists, ib.; the words of, ib.; after what manner celebrated and instituted, 406; whether it be lawful to add anything to the rite of, 407; how in olden times celebrated in the church, 403; the performing of, changed, 409; why instituted in the form of bread and wine, 410; whether requires bread leavened or unleavened, ib.; whether requires water to be mingled with the wine, ib.; nothing to be followed in celebrating, but that which we have received of Christ, 412; both kinds to be given and received in, 414; consecration of the bread and wine in, 416; whether there must be one chief dealer in the action of, ib.; where to be celebrated, 418; vessels belonging to, 419; what tongue to be used at, 421; what gestures to be used at, ib.; taking it in the hands, 422; remnants of, ib.; whether to be shut up or adored, ib.; at what time to be celebrated, 423; how often to be celebrated, 424; for whom instituted, 426; not for infants, ib.; whether to be celebrated against imminent dangers, 427; not to be celebrated at home, or privately, 428; used to be sent to the absent, 480; not to be offered for the dead, 431; no sacrifice of expiation, 432; a sacrifice, because a sign of Christ's sacrifice, ib.; and because a giving of thanks for our deliverance, 433; the ends of, ib., 467; Christ's bodily presence in, confuted, 435; Christ's presence in, 452; Christ's body, how eaten, and his blood, how drunken in, 457; two kinds of eating of, spiritual and sacramental, 463; Judas Iscariot present at, 404; what he received at, ib.; a third kind of eating of, ib.; instituted to represent God's gifts to the church, and to gather together Christ's members, 407; called a league or confederacy, ib.; instituted to keep Christ's death in memory, and to admonish Christians of their duty, 408; the eating and drinking of, unworthily, 409; how we should prepare ourselves for, 473.

Supremacy of the pope, whether necessary, v. 122.

Surplice, the, iii. 135.

Susanna, iii. 114.

Suspicions, iii. 227.

Swear, to, whether it be lawful, ii. 244; for what causes we ought, 245; how, 247.

Swearing, ceremonies of, ii. 247.

Sword, the, ii. 352.

Sylvester, pope, v. 123.

Symbol, i. 123; what it is, v. 237.

Symbols, of Pythagoras, v. 238; examples of, ib.

Symbolic divinity, v. 238.

Synagogue, the, v. 4; of Libertines, etc. 482.

Synagogues, iii. 143; v. 482.

Synaxis, a name of the Lord's Supper, v. 402.

Synod, of Gangra, iii. 24; of Jerusalem, the decree of, 272, 275.

Synods, v. 505; to be held twice a year, 506.

Syrophoenisse, the, v. 182.

Tabernacle, the, iii. 143; fashion of, 144; veil of, 145; what things laid up in, ib.; meaning of, 146; history of, 149; figure of the church, v. 82.

Tabernacles, the feast of, iii. 105, 100.

Tabitha, iii. 21,23, 321.

Table, the golden, iii. 154; of the Lord, v. 402, 418.

Tales, carrying of, iii. 117.

Tarpeian rock, ii. 204.

Tarquinius Superbus, ii. 417.

Tartars, the, iii. 106.

Tatians, the, ii. 432.

Taurus, iii. 281.

Teach, power to, v. 44; how all may, 104.

Teachers, v. 100.

Teaching, the manner of, in the church, v. 154; private kind of, 157; what things to lie joined to, 158.

Tekoa, v. 70.

Temple, the, door-keepers of, iii. 112; of Solomon, 143, 150, 152; of the Jews, destruction of, 259; attempted restoration of, 200; of God, iv. 225; a figure of the church, v. 82.

Temples of Christians, v. 499.

Temporal goods, v. 188.

Temptation, v. 217.

Teraphim, iii. 185.

Tertullian, v. 224; his rule of faith, i. 28; his opinion of the soul, iv. 374.

Testament, God's, i. 114; ours and the fathers' one, iii. 283; the difference of the old and new, 293; a name of the Lord's Supper, v. 403.

Testament, the old, given to Christians, i. 59; whether Christians bound by proofs out of, iii. 19; and new, the likeness and difference of, 282; v. 249.

Testament, the new, is the fulfilling of all figures, iii. 293; the people of, are new and without number, and are called Christians, 297; gifts of, most ample and manifold, ib.; has no promise of any certain earthly country, 299.

Tetragrammaton, iv. 130.

Tetter, a scab, iii. 188.

Thaddeus, v. 66.

Thanksgiving, v. 163, 164, 220, 268; owed only to God, 221; to be given through Christ, ib.; a sacrifice, 223; a name of the Lord's Supper, 402.

Tarsus, v. 482.

Theft, iii. 34, 230; condemned among the Gentiles, ii. 203.

Theodoret, iv. 142.

Theodoric, iii. 109.

Theodorus, i. 14.

Theodosius, i. 34, ii. 328, 331,381, 384; iii. 109, 281; v. 63, 139, 394; reproved, ii. 305.

Theodosius, the Younger, ii. 433.

Theologia Domini, the Revelation, i. 170, ii. 418.

Theophylact, v. 219.

Theopompus, i. 48.

Theotectus, i. 48.

Thief, the dying, v. 551.

"This is my body, This is my blood," to be mystically expounded, v. 253, 43d; ancient exposition of, 438; figurative, 441.

"This cup" explained by a trope, v. 445.

Torah, i. 50.

Thoth, iii. 218; iv. 136.

Thrones, a name of angels, iv. 337.

Thummim, iii. 136.

Thy kingdom come, v. 211; will be done, 212.

Tiberius Caesar, v. 536.

Time of amendment, i. 59.

Timothy, v. 105.

Tip for tap, ii. 283.

Titus, v. 133.

Tobit, iii. 63, 64; book of, not canonical, v. 533.

Tongue, the, iii. Ill; continence in, ii. 420; in what we must pray, v. 188; to be used at the Lord's Supper, 421.

Torculares psalmi, iii. 166.

Totylas, iii. 109.

Toulouse, v. 420.

Tradition of the Apostles, iv. 396; v. 535.

Tradition of the fathers, iv. 397; the chief contents of the, i. 42, 45.

Traditions, of the fathers, compiled in Moses' history, i. 45; of the Apostles, against the feigned, 64; men's, 208; why commended, iii. 311; of the Jews, v. 533; living, 534.

Trajan, iii. 105; v. 166, 536.

Transubstantiation, the opinion of the papists concerning, confuted, v. 274.

Treacle, iii. 27.

Treasures, common, ii. 392.

Trident, iv. 266.

Trinity, the, i. 43; iv. 137; proved by testimonies of the Gospel, 160; the testimony of the Apostles concerning, 163; the mystery of shadowed by similitudes, 165; the certainty of the doctrine of, 167; the sum of things to be believed concerning, 16S; the mystery of, known to the patriarchs and prophets, 169; not to be joined with curious disputations, 172; and unity of God, 321.

Trittenheim, John de, v. 515.

Trophimus, v. 44.

Troy, ii. 417.

Trumpets, iii. 142; the feast of, 165.

Truth, the, to deny not the way to keep our goods, iii. 100; the doctrine of, needful to repentance, iv. 57.

Turkism, v. 155.

Turkey, v. 73.

Turks, the, iii. 106, 110; v. 11,83,173.

Tutor, guardian, iv. 5.

Tyranny, ii. 310.

Tyrants, the killing of, ii. 318.

Ubiquity of Christ's body, v. 447.

Ulysses, iii. 213.

Unbelievers, how guilty of the body and blood of Christ, v. 466.

Uncanonical books, v. 538.

Unclean creatures, iii. 210; things, v. 268; the touching of, iii. 216.

Understanding, iv. 98, 376.

Ungodliness, iv. 223.

Ungodly, the, infelicity of, iii. 80.

Unity, and Trinity of God, iv. 325; must be kept, v. 61.

Universities, the state of, i. 6.

Unjust, the, overcome them that have the juster quarrel, ii. 375.

Unkemmed, uncombed, i. 55.

Unrepentants, are unhappy, iv. 112; perish, v. 555.

Urban, pope, v. 423.

Uriah, iv. 91; v. 30, 372.

Urim, iii. 136.

Usurers, against, iii. 43.

Usury, iii. 40.

Utopia, ii. 385; v. 52.

Uxias, v. 70.

Valeria, v. 894.

Valentinian, i. 34, ii. 323, 331; iii. 281; v. 63, 394.

Valentinians, v. 536.

Valentinus, iv. 266; v. 77.

Valerian, iii. 106; v. 514.

Valla, v. 219.

Vandals, the, iii. 109.

Varro, Marcus, ii. 201.

Vegetative powers of the soul, iv. 376.

Veil, of the tabernacle, iii. 145; of the temple, rent, 259.

Vengeance taken of blood, iii. 108.

Venial sins, iii. 416.

Verbum, what it is, i. 37.

Verily, v. 213 "Verily, verily, ..." Joh 16.23

Verus, iii. 105.

Vespasian, iii. 153.

Vessels, belonging to the Lord's Supper, v. 419.

Vestal virgins, iii. 188.

Vicars, v. 112; general, ib.

Victor, v. 57, 537.

Vigilius, iv. 266.

Vigilius, Tapsensis, i. 29.

Vincentius Victor's opinion of unbaptized infants, v. 375.

Virgins, in the church, v. 512.

Vitalianus, v. 196.

Vives, John Lewis, v. 498.

Vivification, of Christians, represented in baptism, v. 329.

Vows, iii. 206; abrogated, 271.

Vows, monastical, ii. 232; v. 518.

Vulgate version of the bible, v. 541.

Wages, the hirelings', iii. 230.

War, iii. 235; full of peril, ii. 373; the scourge of God, 374; for profit, 375; causes of, 376; in defence of religion, ib.; commendation of, 379; laws of, made by the word of God, 380; examples of, out of the scripture, 384.

Warriors, commendation of, ii. 379.

Wars, unjust, ii. 379.

Warwick, earl of, v. 545.

Water, why the Lord commanded to baptize with, v. 363.

Water, of separation, iii. 201.

Water, unconsecrated, whether to be used in baptism, v. 363.

Wax, sealed and unsealed, example of, v. 270, 314.

Weaklings, iii. 317.

Wealth, by inheritance, iii. 29.

Wedlock, ii. 394; must be undefiled, 400; indissoluble, 403.

Weight and measure, iii. 231.

Werikon, v. 546.

Wesalius, Andrew, iv. 151.

Whit-Sunday, ii. 260; suntide, iii. 265; a time for baptism, v. 367.

White garments, used in baptism, v. 361.

"Whoredom, ii. 401; iii. 227.

Wicked, the, how punished, iii. 432.

"Widows, in the church, v. 511.

"Wife, the arm of her husband, ii. 398.

Will, iv. 98, 100, 376; of God, v. 213.

Winterthur, v. 546.

Wisdom, the book of, v. 540, 541.

Wisigoths, iii. 109.

Witches, ii. 221; iii. 231.

"Witness-bearing, iii. 112, 225; false, condemned among the Gentiles, ii. 204.

Wolf, Satan a, i. 5.

Women-deacons, v. 107.

Word, in the sacrament, v. 251; what it is, 254.

Word of God, what it is, i. 37; causes and beginnings of, 38; revealed by men, 39; how revealed, ib.; written and spoken, the same, 48; proceeding of, 4Q; revealed by the Son of God, 51; to whom revealed, 57; to what end revealed, 60; how to be heard, 64; diseases and plagues of the hearers of, 66; power and effect of, ib.; needs exposition, 70-72; faith planted by, 84; faith cannot be reformed but by, iv. 121; what manner of, the mark of the church, v. 21; a seed, 91; God works salvation by ministry of, 94; how almighty power of God attributed to, 266; efficacy or force in preaching, 831.

Word, the, Son of God, v. 266.

Words spoken, do not make sacraments effectual, v. 259; for what purpose instituted, and of what force, 264.

Works, good, i. 119; iii. 320, 353; what they are, 321; original cause of, 322; are imputed to men, 324; not rejected, but their abuse condemned, 327; in what sense justification attributed to, ib.; of the reward of, 342; a reward given to, 343; 'places which confirm the reward of", not to be abused, 345; how God is said to reward, 346; the Ten Commandments a platform of, 353; what be, according to the ancient prophets, 354; to what end must be done, 356; of the saints, whether they be sins, 419.

Works, what they signify in scripture, iii. 321; none justify, 325; cavils of them which attribute justification to, 329; the apostles against the righteousness of, 337: virtuous, of the heathen, whether they be sins, 418; justification without, iv. 49; satisfaction of, 90; man, the chief of God's, 151.

Works, of humanity, iii. 321.

Works, of light, iii. 321.

Works, of mercy, i. 190.

Works, of the flesh, original sin brings forth, iii. 399.

Worship, devisers of new fangled, accursed, ii. 335; of God, iii. 128; places of, free, 263; of saints, 222.

Worship, to, what it is, iv. 195.

"Worshippers, godly, large promises to, ii. 236.

Worshipping, spiritual, iv. 198; of two sorts, 199; true, what it is, ib.

Wrack, ruin, iv. 86.

Wullock, Andrew, v. 544.

Xenodochia, iii. 44; v. 498.

Year of jubilee, iii. 166.

Yer, before, iii. 16.

Zacchaeus, iii. 50; iv. Ill; v. 551.

Zadok, ii. 330.

Zaleucus, ii. 198.

Zedekiah, ii. 236, 242; iii. 11, 152; v. 20, 555.

Zeno, i. 50.

Zephyrinus, iv. 76.

Zipporah circumcises her son, iii. 173; v. 371.

Zerubbabel, v. 319.

Zurich, v. 9, 283.

Zurich-see, v. 546.

Zwicers, v. 229.

Zwingli, on original sin, iii. 397-399; his doctrine of the sacraments as a witness, v. 324; and how the sacraments uphold faith, 332; and of the binding power of the sacraments, 338.

[1] Adapted from Geoffrey Bromiley's Historical Theology (Eerdmans, GrandRapids, 1978), pp. 266-272.

[2] They were not formally married until December 31, 1529, at the cathedral in Zurich. — Bullinger's Diary. Miscell. Tig. Tom. i. par. 2. p. 4.

[3] Bullinger drily observes in his diary: "Intra hoc triennium secundo me vestivit parens; dedit praeterea aureos 33."

[4] In this same year, Bullinger's father set himself to oppose Samson, the preacher of indulgences, at Bremgarten. — D'Aubigne, Hist, of Ref. Book viii. chap. 7.

[5] Lactantius Firmianus (c. 240-320 AD) an advisor to the first Christian Roman emperor, Constantine I, and also a tutor to his son.

[6] See Bp. Cox's testimony; Zurich Letters, A. p. 244.

[7] In the course of the years 1525 and 1526 images were removed from the church, and the mass was superseded by the Lord's supper, at Cappel. The abbot also married in 1527. — Bulling. Diar.

[8] In his "Ratio Studiorum," p. 45, Bullinger gives a detail of some of these compositions, and says concerning them: "ne literam quidem inter tot chiliades eo animo scripsi ut ederetur." Several of these treatises, in Bullinger's handwriting, are yet extant in the library at Zurich; and a few were in the possession of Hottinger, when he wrote his "Schola Tigurinorum Carolina," a.d. 1664, where also the titles of most of them are to be found. — Append, i. p. 88

[9] Biblioth. Tigur. Mscr. F. 106.

[10] See Orig. Lett. p. 718, note 1.

[11] Bullinger was greatly attached to his abbot, Wolfgang Joner, and constantly in his writings refers to him as "Maecenas ille noster, omniumque studiosorum patronus." He was slain with Zwingle at the battle of Cappel.

[12] In February of tbis year Bullinger's father had publicly proclaimed at Bremgarten his conviction that he had previously, in the time of darkness, misled his parishioners; but that now he would endeavour to guide them in the right way of life, out of holy scripture alone, and through Jesus Christ, our only Saviour. — Hess, Lebensgeschichte Bullingers, Vol. I. p. 9. Zurich. 1828. He died at Zurich, April 8, 1533, aged 64 years.

[13] Six sons and five daughters were the fruit of this marriage. — See Zurich Letters, A. p. 30, note 2.

[14] This battle was fueled in part by the Augsburg Confession of 1530, following the first battle at Cappel. In this second battle, a Catholic force of 7,000 met a Protestant army of only 2,000 from Zürich, led by Zwingli. They arrived in scattered groups, exhausted by a forced march. About 500 Protestants were killed in the rout. Among the dead were Zwingli and twenty-four other pastors. Zwingli's body was burned by the Catholics, as a heretic. – WHG

[15] Sleidan. Comment, de Stat. Kelig. Lib. vm. p. 204. Francof. 1610. Orig. Letters, ed. Park. Soc. p. 552, note 1.

[16] In this unhappy crisis Bullinger had always recommended less warlike measures, and most publicly in a sermon preached at Bremgarten before a general diet in the summer of 1531. — D'Aubigne's Hist, of Reform. Book xvi. chap. 5.

[17] Johannes Oecolampadius (1482-1531), also Hussgen or Heussgen. A German reformer from the Electorate of the Palatinate. He worked with Erasmus and Zwingli, and influenced later Protestants such as Bullinger and Calvin.

[18] See letters of application in Biblioth. Tig. Mscr. F. 106. No. A. fol. 32, dated Nov. 27 and 28, 1531, from Basle; and fol. 33, dated Dec. 6 and 11, from Borne.

[19] It is stated sometimes, that Bullinger's writings are published in ten volumes. But this is a mistake. For his own convenience Bullinger collected the principal of them into ten volumes (Biblioth. Tigur. Mscr. F. 98. no. 6); but they have never been published in any complete form. See also Hottinger, Schola Tigur. Tig. 1664. Append. I. p. 75; and Gesneri Biblioth. Tigur. 1583.

[20] "That common father of the afflicted," is Pilkington's feeling description of Bullinger. — Orig. Lett. ed. Park. Soc. p. 135.

[21] Melch. Adam, in Vit. Bullingeri. p. 483. Francof. 1653. Hess, Lebensgeschichte H. Bullingers, Vol. i. p. 360. This moderation sometimes exposed Bullinger to unkindly suspicions. — See Orig. Lett. p. 611.

[22] Orig. Lett. p. 611, note 3.

[23] Ibid. p. 311, note 2; and p. 621, note 2.

[24] Ibid. pp. 608, 124.

[25] Ibid. pp. 316, 623, 624.

[26] Mentioning in his diary Traheron, and Partridge, and Eliot, Bullinger observes, "exposui illis multa Isaire capita." — Cf. Orig. Lett, pp. 623, 610.

[27] Orig. Lett. p. 235, note 7. Hess, L. II. B. Vol. I. p. 382. This was a Latin translation of the Old Testament; the Psalms

were translated by Leo Judae and Theodore Bibliander. It was published in 1543 in Zürich (i.e., Tigurina).

[28] Orig. Lett. p. 35, note 2.

[29] Ibid. pp. 34, 42, 254.

[30] Ibid. pp. 48, 50, note 1.

[31] Ibid. pp. 88, 121, note 2. 267, 479, 493.

[32] Bulling. Diar. A testimony to the value of Bullinger's Commentaries in Italy is found in Orig. Lett. p. 358.

[33] Orig. Lett. pp. 126-131, 136-7, 751. Zurich Lett. A. p. 87.

[34] Orig. Lett. p. 148. M'Crie's History of Reform, in Italy, p. 283. Lond. 1833.

[35] A minister of Hamburg, who revived the sacramentarian controversy.

[36] An Italian who, besides approving Lutheran sentiments offensively to the Swiss, advocated dangerous opinions concerning the two natures of Christ.

[37] A physician of Savoy, and a partizan of Socinus.

[38] A chief advocate of the Ubiquitaiian doctrine. — Zurich Lett. A. p. 108, note 8.

[39] Bernard Ochin, an Italian, of Siena, dangerously advocated polygamy, and is said to have impugned the doctrine of the Trinity.

[40] Zurich Lett. A. pp. 144, 171.

[41] Ibid. pp. 142, note 1; and 171, note 3.

[42] Ibid. pp. 142, 3. 151.

[43] Ibid. pp. 212, 216, 314. Ccepi hoc anno (1569) ex ischia regrotare, cui calculus accessit. — Bulling. Diar.

[44] See Zurich Lett. A. p. 317.

[45] See Bp. Cox's beautiful letter on Bullinger's death, Zurich Lett. A. p. 318. See also B. p. 268.

[46] Bishop Hooper urged Bullinger to dedicate one of his writings to King Edward at this time. Original Letters, Parker Soc. pp. 73, 78. Interesting particulars concerning the conveyance, presentation, and reception in England of this Volume occur, in chronological order, in the same Original Letters, as follows: pp. 662, 560, 665, 269, 88. See also Strype, Eccles. Mem. Book i. chap. 30, Vol. ii. part 1, p. 390, Oxf. 1822.

[47] As it were: as if it were really so. This phrase is copiously used throughout Bullinger's sermons.

[48] Idiots: uneducated persons. See p. i.71, n. 3.

[49] this one thing, 1577.

[50] aeterni, Lat. eternal monarch, ed. 1577.

[51] Profane: secular; not concerned with or devoted to religion.

[52] This Psalm is divided (probably for the advantage of memory), according to the number of letters which compose the Hebrew Alphabet, into twenty-two portions, of eight verses each; and not only every portion, but every verse of that portion, begins with the letter appropriated to it. See Bp. Home, Comment. on Psalms, Argum. to Psalm 119.

[53] Substituted for another word used by the translator.

[54] Latin omitted by the translator: "For by his instructions and watchful superintendence the king had regard in all things to the rule of the Lord's word."

[55] Cavil: to raise trivial objections; nitpick.

[56] 1Kng 12-15; 1Kng 15.33, 34 and 16.1-14; 1Kng 16.25-28.

[57] 2Kng 12-14.

[58] Strictly speaking, the number of the kings of Judah was 19, not including Athaliah's usurpation. According to Usher, the kingdom of Judah lasted 388 years; and the kingdom of Israel 254 years. Annal. Vet. Test.

[59] i. e., Darius the Mede, or Cyaxares the second, uncle of Cyrus. Bulling, in Apocalyps. Serm. LXXI. See also p. i.51.

[60] Dan. 4-6.

[61] See p. ii.318, note 1.

[62] 1Maccab. i.20-57. Prideaux's Connection, Vol. ii. pp. 172-188, ed. Mc Caul. Lond. 1845.

[63] Euseb, Hist. Eccles. Lib. vm. cap. 16. Oros. adv. Pagan. Hist. Lib. vii. capp. 7, 22, etc.

[64] Aug. de Civit. Dei, Lib. v. cap. 24. See also p. ii.385, n. 3.

[65] Not in the original Lat.

[66] Habet doctos, sapientes, pios, fideles in regno doctores et pastores multos, Lat. omitted by the translator: (your majesty) has in your kingdom many learned, wise, pious, and faithful teachers and pastors.

[67] Interesting particulars of the reception of this book in England in 1538 occur in Original Letters, Parker Soc. pp. 611, 618. See also p. 313 for a testimony to the usefulness of Bullinger's writings in England.

[68] antistites, Lat.; chuff, a word of no certain etymology, but signifying a rough uneducated clown of portly appearance. Toone's Glossary, in voc. Lond. 1834. See Shakspeare's Henr. IV. Part i. Sc. 2, Act 2, "You fat chuffs."

[69] 2Tim 2.15. Originally, "rightly mow."

[70] Originally, "yer": ere, before. See Tyndale's Doctrinal Treat. Park. Soc. p. 51, note 1, and 455, note 1.

[71] Bullinger fulfilled this promise in the following August. See Dedication prefixed to the Third Sermon of the fourth Decade.

[72] That is, Zurich.

[73] Orator: bead-man, or prayer-man. See note 3, Tyndale's Doctrinal Treatises. Parker Soc. ed. p. 331.

[74] See Orig. Lett. ed. Park. Soc. pp. 671, 673.

[75] See p. iii.16, note 4.

[76] Orig. Lett. ed. Parker Soc. Vol. i. p. 88.

[77] The difference between commonweal and commonwealth is that commonweal refers to the common good, while commonwealth is a form of government.

[78] Jer 8.8, 9; "the false pen of the scribes works for falsehood." Marg. Auth. Ver.

[79] That is, Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153). Bernard largely complains of the pride and corruption of the clergy, De Offic. Episc. capp. vii. ix; in Cantic. Serm. x. 3, LXXVII. 1.

[80] Riot: A wild gathering involving excessive drinking and promiscuity.

[81] See Bullinger Von den Conciliis, Par. ii. cap. 11. Zurich, 1561.

[82] Decretal: an authoritative order or decree; especially, a letter of the pope, determining some point or question in ecclesiastical law. The decretals form the second part of the canon law.

[83] as I have told them, not in Lat.

[84] homines, Lat.; men. The bull of Leo X. against Luther was issued June 15, 1520.

[85] Naughtiness: that which is evil, wicked, and morally reprehensible; used throughout the Decades.

[86] Bingham, Book ix. chap. 1. § 11; and xvii. chap. 5. § 14.

[87] Originally, "gad to and fro."

[88] Cyprian. Opp. Epist. LIX. p. 136. Oxon. 1682.

[89] ecclesias Christi Anglicanas, Lat.; most happy, not in Lat.

[90] his church, cd. 1577 ; ecclesiae suae, Lat.]

[91] Strype, Ann. book ii. chap. 10, p. 145, Vol. ii. part 2. ed. Oxf. 1824.

[92] Strype, Ann. ibid. p. 144. See also Strype, Mem. ii. 1, pp. 531, 532, and Zurich Letters, Parker Soc. ed. pp. 41, 111, 127, 205, etc. 2nd ed.

[93] See Original Letters, Parker Soc. ed. pp. 5, 9, 54, 70, 618, 620, etc. Zurich Letters, 2nd ed. pp. 39, 110, 205, 468. Strype, Ann. chap. 21, p. 383, Vol. I. part 1, and part 2. chap. 46, p. 195, and chap. 48, p. 221. Jewel styled Bullinger, "oraculum ecclesiarum." Zurich Letters, No. LXX. 1st series, p. 156. The University of Oxford, also, selected Bullinger's Catechism, as one of those books which the Tutors there were required to use, for the purpose of imparting sound roligious principles to their pupils: "ad informandum in vera religione juventutem." Wood. Hist, ct Ant. Univ. Oxon. Lib. I. p. 296. quoted in Preface, p. iv. to "Sermons on the Sacraments by Henry Bullinger." Cambridge, 1840.

[94] Cardwell a Synodalia, Vol. II. p. 562. Oxf. 1842. Strype's Whitgift, Vol. iii. p. 194. App. No. 32. Oxf. ed.

[95] Strype's Aylmer, p. 83. Oxf. ed.

[96] See Adami Vit. Germ. Theol. in vita Bullingeri; and "Bullinger," in Chalmer's Biograph. Dict.

[97] 1 So Tyndale's Versions, and Cranmer's Bible, 1539.

[98] Henry VIII of England, taking advantage of widespread Reformation sentiments, broke with the Roman Catholic Church over the issue of divorce. He established the Protestant Anglican Church throughout England. Henry died in 1547, leaving his son Edward VI, a frail 10-year old, to rule as king under Edward Seymour, the Lord High Protector of the Realm. Young Edward VI died in 1553, at which point a 5-year bloody contest ensued to seize the reins of power. It raged back and forth between loyal Roman Catholics and the opposing Protestants. Many died both inside and outside the Church hierarchy, until Elizabeth gained the throne in 1558, at the age of 25. She maintained an uneasy balance between both factions, showing no favor towards either side. The Pope repeatedly sent Jesuit insurrectionists to foment dissent and upheaval in England, but Elizabeth's intelligence advisor and personal henchman, Sir Francis Walsingham, sought out and "removed" all such threats to her throne. Once the Spanish Armada was defeated, Romish intrigues ceased. – WHG

[99] See Zurich Letters, reign of Q. Elizabeth, 2nd ed. Parker Soc. Pages 24, 38, 42, 55, 61, 101, 104, 115, 427.

[100] Patron here does not mean "benefactor" – it refers to the one who possesses the right to grant an endowed church office to a clergyman, thus providing an income for that clergyman. This endowment was paid by the Church of England. Corrupt patrons were soliciting bribes from clergymen to grant them a church office.

[101] An English translation of this work, The Institution of the Christian Religion, appeared for the first time in 1561. See Introductory Notice to Calvin's Institutes, ed. Calv. Soc. p. iii.

[102] Marlorat was a Protestant minister born in Lorraine: he wrote commentaries on Genesis, Psalms, Isaiah, and the New Testament, and was executed at Rouen by order of the Duke of Guise in 1562. Moreri. P.

[103] Cf. Zurich Letters, Second Series, Parker Soc. ed. p. 148.

[104] Burton similarly complained, in his odd way, that if our greedy patrons hold us to such hard conditions as commonly they do, they will make most of us work at some trade, as Paul did; at last turn taskers, maltsters, costermongers, grasiers, sell ale, as some have done, or worse." Anatomy of Melancholy, Preface, quoted in Sermons on the Sacraments, by Henry Bullinger, Preface, p. v. note 6. Cambridge, 1840.

[105] Michael Servetus published his heretical work on the Trinity in 1531; he was burnt at Geneva in 1553. P.

[106] See Hooker's Eccles. Pol. book v. §20.

[107] Calvin. Comment, in loc.

[108] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. iv. cap. 23. ed. Burton.

[109] Cent. 1. Lib. ii. 10. This is given as a quotation from Eusebius, Lib. in. cap. 16.

[110] Bucer. Script. Anglic. Bas. 1577, p. 465.

[111] Ibid. p. 466.

[112] Vol. vii. 654, ed. 1838.

[113] realm, Foxe.

[114] That is, it doesn't hurt to have more than you need (plenty is no plague).

[115] In his Latin Preface, Bullinger states that he prefixed to his Decades these Creeds of the most ancient councils and orthodox Fathers, that it might manifestly appear that the doctrine and faith of the Protestant churches, which was by many ill-reported and most undeservedly condemned as heretical, was perfectly agreeable with the teaching of the apostles and of the primitive church.

[116] viz. Councils at Rome and Carthage principally, in the matters of Novatus and Novatian, and concerning receiving back the lapsed into the communion of the church, and the validity of baptism by heretics.

[117] More correctly, A. D. 325. Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Vol. I. p. 386, n. 1. ed. Soames, 1845.

[118] The number should be 318: see Mosheim, ibid.; and Grier's Epit. of Gen Councils, p. 33.

[119] See Goode's Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, Vol. i. pp. 141-156, and Vol. ii. pp. 327-360.

[120] specially; Lat. significanter.

[121] Synodus Patrum CLXXX apud Constantinopolim celebrata est contra Macedonium, Spiritum-sanctum Deum esse negantem. Pros per. Aquit. Chron. Opp. Par. 1711, col 735.

[122] This Second General Council was assembled, A. D. 381, by the Emperor Theodosius the Elder, and was attended by 150 bishops, etc. – Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Vol. I. p. 404. For the heresies of Macedonius and Eudoxius, see Routh, Scrip. Eccles. Opuscul. Vol. I. p. 417, etc.; and Hammond's Canons of the Church, p. 53.

[123] This council of Ephesus was held, a.d. 431, under Theodosius the Younger (not the Great). Mosheim, Vol. I. p. 472; Grier, p. 74. For the heresy of Nestorius, see Hooker's Eccles. Pol. Book v. 52. Augustine died August 28, 430. Mosheim, Vol. I. p. 338, Soames note.

[124] The year of the assembling of this council was 451. Mosheim, Vol. i. p. 481. For the heresy of Eutyches, see Hooker, Book v. 52-54.

[125] Bedae de Sex AEtatibus Mundi, sive Chronicon, libellus. Opp. Tom. iii. p. 116. Col. Agrip. 1612.

[126] The year was 553. Mosheim, Vol. ii. p. 45; Hammond's Canons of the church, p. 113. "Contra Theodorum, et omnes haereticos," are the words of Bede.]

[127] This council was held A. D. 680, under the Emperor Constantine Pogonatus. The number of attending bishops increased to near 200. Mosheim, Vol. II. p. 101; Hammond's Canons, p. 125.

[128] Socr. Hist. Eccl. Lib. I. c. 8. cd. Reading. Cantab. 1720. P.

[129] Routh, Scriptor. Eccles. Opuscul. Vol. I. pp. 398, 9. Oxon. 1840.

[130] Bullinger's copy reads Credo; confiteor; and exspecto; and Spiritum Sanctum Dominum vivificatorem.

[131] Cyril of Alexandria. See Routh, Scriptor. Eccles. Opusc. Vol. II. p. 17, etc. The epistle was written a.d. 430.

[132] Cyril. Alex. Opp. Par. 1638, Tom. V. P. 2, p. 106.

[133] Isidore of Seville (c. 560-636) – Archbishop of Seville for over thirty years. He is widely regarded as the last of the Fathers of the Church. Montalembert called him, "The last scholar of the ancient world."

[134] Labb. Conc. Par. 1671. Tom. iv. fol. 566, 7. P.

[135] Vigilius contra Eutychen. Tigur. 1539. p. 97.

[136] Labb. Concil. Par. 1671. Tom. ii. col. 1227. P.

[137] "Docuisse"; for "doluisse"; is read in the Latin of Bullinger, by mistake: it ought to be "sorrowed."

[138] Labb. Concil. Par. 1671. Tom. v. 1703. P.

[139] About the year of our Lord 185.

[140] Iren. adv. Haeres. Lib. I. cap. 3. ed. Grabe. Oxon. 1702.

[141] Tertul. Opp. de Praesc. Haer. cap. 13. ed. Semler. Tom. ii. p. 13. Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD) was a Carthaginian; an apologist and defender against Gnosticism. He was the first known to use the term trinity (Latin: trinitas). In his last years, he was associated with the Montanists, who (like modern Pentecostals) promoted new revelation, asceticism, predicting the imminent return of Christ, speaking in tongues as evidence of salvation, and a future millennial reign.

[142] The best and latest critics, who have examined the thing most exactly, have no question that this creed is to be ascribed to a Latin author, Vigilius Tapsensis, an African bishop, who lived in the latter end of the fifth century, in the time of the Vandalic Arian persecution: first, because this creed is missing in almost all the manuscripts of Athanasius works: secondly, because the style and context of it does not suggest a Greek, but a Latin author: thirdly, because neither Cyril of Alexandria, nor the council of Ephesus, nor pope Leo, nor the council of Chalcedon, have ever so much as mentioned it in all that they say against the Nestorian or Eutychian heresies: fourthly, because this Vigilius Tapsensis is known to have published several other of his writings under the borrowed name of Athanasius, with which this creed is commonly joined. Bingham's Antiquities, ed. 1840. Vol. iii. 372. See also, for a full discussion of the question, Waterland's works. P.

[143] So also in the two liturgies of Edward VI. See Parker Society's edition, pages 38 and 229. The Latin is integram.

[144] Latin: fideliter.

[145] Latin: fideliter firmiterque.

[146] About the year of our Lord 376. Hieronym. Opp. ed. Par. 1693-1706. Tom. v. col. 122.

[147] Is (Petrus) Athanasii sudoribus particeps fuit. Hist. Eceles. Tripart. Lib. vii. cap. 37, p. 317. Petro revertente de Roma cum literis Damasi Romanae urbis Antistitis, confirmaritis consubstantialitatis fidem, et Petri Episcopi roborantis ordinationem. Ibid. Lib. viii. cap. 14. Cassiodor. Opp. p. 329. Rotomag. 1679.

[148] circa annum Domini, 382, Lat.

[149] Hist. Eccles. Tripart. Lib.ix. cap. 7. ap. Cassiodor. Opp. Rotomag. 1679. p. 334.

[150] πᾶν ῥῆμα — Luke 1.37- omne verbum, Lat. and Vulg.

[151] Isa 40.8; 1Pet 1.25.

[152] The duration of our Lord's ministry is now usually admitted to have been three years and a half. See Greswell's Harmon. Evang., and Dr Robinson's Harmony of the Gospels.

[153] Cf. Bullinger's Treatise, The Old Faith, translated in Coverdale's writings, etc. Parker Soc. ed. pp. 32, 36.

[154] There is some great miscalculation here; for Abraham, if born at all before Noah's death, could only have been in his infancy. Yet Calvin also says that "Abraham was nearly fifty years old, when his ancestor Noah died." — Comment, in Gen cap. ix. 28. But see note, p. i.42.

[155] Kohath – Vulgate Caath.

[156] It is scarcely necessary to observe that the system of chronology here used differs considerably from the received system according to Usher. Bullinger followed the vulgar Jewish chronology, upon which the arrangements of Scaliger, Petavius, and Usher were afterwards founded. See Hales' Chronology, Vol. I. The difference does not materially affect the argument. P. The line of the patriarchal tradition may be seen traced in Gray's Key to the Old Testament, pp. 80, 81. ed. 1797. Lond.

[157] Naughtiness: that which is evil, wicked, and morally reprehensible.

[158] Surfeiting: over-indulging one's appetite (for food, drink, sex, material goods, etc.).

[159] authentica, orthodoxa, et catholica, Lat. P.

[160] See Bullinger's treatise, The Old Faith, in Works of Bp. Coverdale, Parker Soc. Ed. pp. 27, 40.]

[161] Num 12.10. Miriam: Vulg. Maria.

[162] Theotectus tragaediarum scriptor, Lat. Theodectes, according to Suidas and Gellius x. 18, was a tragedian, and contemporary with Theopompus, who was an orator and historian, a pupil of Isocrates. Josephus, Lib. xn. cap. 2. Antiq. Jud., and Aristeas de LXX. Interp. relate the story referred to; namely, that each of these writers was preparing to put forth a part of the scriptures, as their own composition, when they were visited, the former with blindness, the latter with madness, which lasted thirty days. Ger. Vossius. Lib. i. c. 7. P.

[163] The word "doctors" is used throughout to refer to the gifted teachers of the church. – WHG

[164] Breviary: a compendium or extensive collection.

[165] Originally, Thora, תּוֹרַת [Exo 13.9], a verbo; instituere, docere. — Foster, Lex. Heb P. — quam Legem vulgo vertimus, Hebraeis ab indicando docendoque dicitur. Bucer. in Psalm, ii. ed. Steph. 1554. p. 16. See also Hooper's Early Writings, p. 88, Parker Soc. Ed.

[166] Commonweal: a community.

[167] tantum non adorarunt, Lat.; almost worshipped (adored).

[168] That Astyages, son of Cyaxares the first, is the Ahasuerus, and Cyaxares the second, Astyages son, the Darius the Mede, of scripture, see Prideaux's Connect. Vol. i. pp. 72, 104, 120, ed. McCaul, Lond. 1845.

[169] Originally, "an evangelist rather than a prophet..." Ita ut a quibusdam evangelista quam propheta potius diceretur (Esaias). Augustin. de Civ. Dei. Lib. xvm. cap. 29. Par. 1531. Tom. v. — Deinde etiam hoc adjiciendum, quod non tarn propheta, quam evangelista, dicendus sit (Isaias). Hieron. Prsef. in lib. Isai. Ed. Par.1693-1706. Tom. i. col. 473. See also Bullinger's treatise, The Old Faith, ap. Works of Bp. Coverdale, Parker Soc. ed. p. 66.

[170] Mat 10.2-4; Act 1.26.

[171] 1Tim 2.7; 2Tim 1.11.

[172] The canon of Scripture received by the church of Rome, containing most of those books which we call apocryphal, was first set forth by the council of Trent; and afterwards confirmed by the bull of pope Pius IV. a.d. 1564. On this subject see Burnet on the 6^th Article, with the notes in Page's Ed. 1839; and Bishop Cosin's "Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture." P.

[173] See before, page i.12, where the number is inaccurately stated.

[174] Act 10.

[175] spiritually, ed. 1577; spiritualiter, Lat. P.

[176] apostles, 1577; apostoli, Lat.

[177] Originally: "what they ought to fly, and what to ensue."

[178] Jas 1.5. Originally: "neither casts any man in the teeth..." a Middle English aphorism. NKJ: "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him."

[179] Deu 4.2; 12.32; Pro 30.6.

[180] John 16.12, 13. For this and the other texts, by which the Romanists maintain patristical and ecclesiastical tradition, see the treatise "Of Unwritten Verities", in Remains of Abp. Cranmer, Parker Soc. ed. chap, ix.]

[181] Albert. Pigh. Controversiarum praecipuarum, etc. Explicatio. Par. 1549. fol. 95. b. Controv. 3. de Ecclesia.

[182] comprehendam, Lat. "comprehend" or encompass.

[183] Rom 12.3: to think soberly. "For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith."

[184] Over-curious: too elaborate; in this case, nit-picking the finer points unnecessarily.

[185] Pro 25.27, according to the Vulgate version, which "He that is a searcher of majesty (viz. of God), shall be overwhelmed by glory." Douay Version. Calvin uses the text in the same sense, Instit. Lib. in. cap. 21. § 2.]

[186] Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 3.21-23.

[187] Naughty: evil, wicked, and morally reprehensible.

[188] Heb 4.2; 3.17; 4.11.

[189] Deu 8.3; Mat 4.4.

[190] Psa 19.9-11, and 119.72, 92.

[191] Maul: a heavy long-handled hammer used to drive stakes or wedges; a sledge-hammer.

[192] Psa 119.105; Jer 23.29; Eph 6.17; Psa 91.4. – a shield; armor carried on the arm to intercept blows.

[193] Albert. Pigh. Controv. Praecip. Explicatio. Par. 1549. fol. 93. Controv. 3. de Ecclesia.

[194] Hooker's Preface to Eccles. Pol. Vol. i. p. 180. ed. Oxf. 1820.

[195] Idiot: an uneducated person, P.

[196] 2Cor 4.3, 4. "Lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ..." Cranmer's Bible, 1539.

[197] A teacher of the new Testament, or of the Christian church.

[198] Originally, "comely."

[199] That is, a match to light kindling.

[200] 2Pet 1.20, 21. The translator has here omitted, "No prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation." P.

[201] Of this body. See below, page i.168.

[202] Aug. de Doct. Christ. I. 36. Par. 1531. Tom. iii. fol. 5. P. In other words, if he rightly applies the principle of love, he hasn't misled anyone, even if he misses the original intent of the passage.

[203] That is, if we say that magistrates must not strive with the wicked, then evil will go unrestrained and unpunished.

[204] Joh 14.28, and 10.30.

[205] Tertull. adv. Praxeam, cap. 20. Opp. ed. Semler. Tom. ii. p. 183. Hal. Mag. 1828.

[206] Bullinger is not suggesting that creeds should control the interpretation of Scripture. Rather, the Scripture having been interpreted, and its truths summarized into creeds, it would be unwise to reinterpret Scripture in such a way that those truths are contradicted. That would be "novelty." The Reformation was not filled with novel doctrines. Instead, it restored to the Church its original doctrines, which had been twisted or abandoned over time. – WHG

[207] Originally, "squares from faith;" veers away from it.

[208] אֱמֻנָת faithfulness from a word meaning to prop, stay, support, to be firm; and אֱמוּ truth.

[209] Cic. de Off. i. 7.

[210] In this exposition of Heb 11.1, Bullinger and Calvin agree, in several parts, word for word. See Calv. Instit. Lib. in. cap. 2. § 41.

[211] saying, ed. 1587, Lat. evidentissima mentis visio.

[212] Comprehensio, Lat. – comprehension.

[213] The editor has not succeeded in tracing this definition to its source.

[214] The editor has not been able to discover these exact words in Calvin's writings; but similar definitions are found in his Institutes, Lib. iii. cap. 2. § 42, and Vera Eccles. Reform. Ratio. Tom. viii. p. 275, ed. Amstel.

[215] Calvin. Vera Eccles. Reform. Ratio. Opp. Tom. viii. p. 275. a.

[216] A definition of Faith, almost the same as this, is found in Gropper's Enchiridion, attached to the edition of 1538 of the Canons of a synod of the province of Cologne... In Symbol. Apost. fol. 49. Colon. In a later work, also, Gropper says: Fides est praeteritorum, praesentium, et futurorum. Instit. Cathol. p. 232, Colon. 1554.]

[217] Strato's Tower was the earlier name of Caesarea Palestina. Relandi Palaestin. Illustr. Lib. in. in voc. Caesarea.

[218] August, ex Praef. in Lib. de Doctr. Christiana. Par. 1531. Tom. iii. fol. 2.

[219] Ad Circenses. Ep. cxxx. Tom. ii. fol. 124.

[220] In Joh cap. vi. Tract. 26. Tom. ix. fol. 47.

[221] "Stackered" in Tyndale's and Cranmer's Versions. Repeated as stacker, or stackering. It implies the fear and doubt that arise from unbelief; it is too much to grasp or bear; "to reel or stagger" under the weight of it. James Halliwell, Dict. of Archaisms and Provincialisms; vol II, 9^th ed., London, 1878.

[222] Bullinger's words here are very much akin to Calvin's, who writes on Rom 4.19, as follows: Duplex enim est fidei debilitas: una, quae tentationibus adversis succumbendo, excidere nos a Dei virtute facit: altera, quae ex imperfectione quidem nascitur, non tamen fidem ipsam extinguit. Nam nee mens unquam sic illuminata est, quin maneant multae ignorantiae reliquiae: nunquam sic est animus stabilitus, quin multum haereat dubitationis. — Comment, in loc. Amstel. Tom. vii. p. 29.]

[223] "Now dead," 1577. Rom 4:19-21 "And not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body, already dead (since he was about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah's womb. ²⁰ He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, ²¹ and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was also able to perform."

[224] Opponitur enim illi superiori, Lat. For there is opposed to that which went before. Omitted by the translator.

[225] Nam pius ideo credit, quia, etc., Lat. The translator read plus.

[226] For example, Bellarmine (1542-1621), de Justif. Lib. in. cap. 3. p. 949. Colon. Agrip. 1619.

[227] Mat 15.22-28; Mar 7.26.

[228] 2Sam 22.2, 3; Psa 31.2,3; Pro 18.10; Isa 33.6; Jer 17.13.

[229] That is, the heavens – sun, moon, and stars.

[230] Quicken: Bullinger uses it, as the KJV does, to mean regeneration: to make alive or give life (e.g., Joh 5.21).

[231] Ephes. i. 3 7. Qua caros nos reddidit per dilectum, Lat. and Erasmus' rendering.

[232] Originally, "squares from the word of God;" veers away from it.

[233] honorandi, Lat. And there is no et (and) in the original.

[234] The Georgians are a branch of the Greek Church. Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. Book iv. Cent. 16. Sect. 3, Ch. 2. 10. ed. Soames. Smith and Dwight's Missionary Researches in Armenia, Letter 8.

[235] For example, 1Cor 10.15; Eph 5.18; Phi 1.25; Col 2.7; 2Thes 1.3.

[236] Luke 19.26, where the reading of the copies is either "that which he has," or, "that which he seems to have.

[237] 1Tim 1.19; 2Tim 2.18.

[238] May not be perfect, 1587.

[239] The reader who is so disposed may find these points stated in Andr. Vega, de Justificat. Colon. 1572. Quaest. i. pp. 727, 728.

[240] August, de Praed. Sanct. c. 3. Par. 1531. Tom. vii. fol. 253.

[241] Originally, "one alone" – sufficient of itself to save; nothing else is needed.

[242] 2The 1:3 We are bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is fitting, because your faith grows exceedingly, and the love of every one of you all abounds toward each other... Rom 14:1 ^NIVAccept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2Tim 2:18 who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some.

[243] Bullinger, like most theologians prior to the 20th century, believed that Paul was the author of Hebrews.

[244] Gymnosophistae, Lat. A sect of Indian philosophers, who wore no clothing, and practised the severities of standing alternately on one foot, and of fixing their eyes on the sun. Plin. H. N. vii. 2. med. 2. Schelleri Lex. totius Latin, sub voc.

[245] Deus, Lat. [God]

[246] Rom 4. 7, 8; Psa 32.1, 2.

[247] Gal 3.11; Heb 10.38.

[248] Allege: here it means to report or cite.

[249] qui credit annunciate Christo, remittenti peccata, Lat. That is, "He that believes proclaims [faith in] Christ, blotting out (remitting) sin, and is also justified [by that faith]." – WHG

[250] beatificationem, Lat. This is the term which Bullinger employs in this Treatise of Justification, and which the translator, rather unhappily, has rendered sanctification. The idea intended by Bullinger is expressed in Rom 4.7, which he quotes. Cf. Calvin, Instit. Lib. in. cap. 11. § 4. & 22. — Rom 4:7-8 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; ⁸ Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin."

[251] Calvin, Instit. Lib. ra. cap. 4. § 29. See also Burnet's Expos. of the Thirty-nine Articles, ed. Page. Art. xxii. p. 285, and Palmer's Letters to Dr Wiseman, Let. II.

[252] livore ejus, Lat. and Vulg. (i.e., bruises)

[253] Rom 3.24; Eph 1.7.

[254] 1Tim 2.6. This passage is almost word for word Calvin's, Calvin. Instit. Lib. in. cap. 4. ed. Amstel. and Vol. ii. p. 221. ed. Calvin Translat. Soc. 1845.

[255] This is Erasmus' rendering, which Bullinger adopts: Ne miremini, dum per ignem exploramini, quae res ad experimentum vestri fit, perinde quasi, etc. The Vulgate is different.

[256] Isa 53.11 Potest hic tam active quam passive legi dictio; id est, cognitio vel scientia. Calv. Comment, in loc. Jesai. Accordingly, Bullinger introduces here Calvin's two renderings, cognitione sui, vel in scientia sua. The latter is the rendering of the Vulgate.

[257] Joh 6:69 "Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Cf. Joh 3.14.

[258] (εὑρηκέναι) quod invenisse reddunt, significat, testo Budseo, mereri. Bucer. Enarr. Epist. ad Rom in loc. cit. p. 226, Basil. 1562.]

[259] honorandi, Lat. (honored ones)

[260] Originally: "increase;" meritum, Lat. (merit)

[261] Hoec fulcit, etc., Lat. This (faith) is the prop, etc.

[262] beatificationem, Lat.

[263] et collatio, et indicium, Lat. a collation or indicator.

[264] Cypr. Expos, in Symb. Apost. in init. ed. Oxon. 1682. This tract is not Cyprian's, but was written by Ruffinus.

[265] Tuition: care or guardianship.

[266] Psa 33.9 and 148.5.

[267] That is, duke (commander) Joshua who succeeded Moses, and Joshua the High Priest in Zec 3.1.

[268] Erasm. Colloq. Inquisit. de Fide. Opp. Lugd. Bat. 1703. Tom. i. col. 729.

[269] Immanuel, Lat. Isa 7.14.

[270] The Docetae, an early heretical sect, maintained that the incarnation and sufferings of our Lord were not real, but phantastical (illusory). See Routh's Reliq. Sacr. Tom. i. p. 461. ed. Oxon. 1846; also Calvin. Instit. Lib. ii. cap. 13.

[271] 1Chr 17.11; Psa 132.11; 2Chr 6.16; Jer 23.5.

[272] See p. v.438 for more on the perpetuity of Mary's virginity. – WHG

[273] Heb 2.16, 17. assumit, Lat.; Erasmus' rendering. The Vulgate has apprehendit.

[274] non putative.

[275] August. Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. iii. p. 31. "The descent into hell is not in the creed expounded by St. Augustine, De Fide et Symbolo." Pearson on the Creed. Oxf. ed. 1820. Vol. ii. p. 278.

[276] Cypr. Expos, in Symb. in loc. p. 22. ed. Oxon. 1682.

[277] Gen 42.38. ad inferos, Lat. and Vulgate. Ainsworth translates the passage: You shall bring down my grey hairs with sorrow unto hell. See also Hutchinson's Works, p. 57. Parker Soc. ed.

[278] Bullinger here, almost word for word, adopts Calvin's argument, which is: Nam quoties loquutiones duae rem eandem exprimentes simul connectuntur, posteriorem esse prioris exegesin convenit. Calvin. Instit. Lib. ii. cap. 16. 8.

[279] Originally, "turmoils pitifully." Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. ii. fol. 86.

[280] This statement seems to be gathered out of the following passage in the Epistle of Augustine referred to: August. Epist. 57. Tom. ii. ed. Par. 1531.

[281] Tosh (orig. "tush"): a dismissive interjection, as if to say "That's silly!" or "It's trivial nonsense!"

[282] 1Cor 15.56; Rom 6.23; Heb 2.14.

[283] in prima ilia concione sua, Lat. Omitted by the translator: in his first sermon.

[284] Synecdoche: substituting a more inclusive term for a less inclusive one or vice versa ("counting heads").

[285] Mat 16.21, and 20.18-19.

[286] rather, "our whole manhood." totum hominem, Lat.

[287] Psa 104.2; 8.3; 147.8; 19.1.

[288] Conversation normally means our public life, how we conduct ourselves among others. In Phi 3.20, the Greek word is politeuma, sometimes translated "citizenship;" but it also means state, government, or commonwealth. – WHG

[289] August, de Agon. Christ, cap. xxvi. Op. Tom. iii. fol. 164. Par. 1531.

[290] August. Op. Par. 1679 1700. Lib. ad Dardan. Tom. ii. col. 692.

[291] Cypr. (Ruffin.) Expos, in Symb. fol. 25. Oxon. 1682.

[292] Allege: here it means to report or cite.

[293] That is , Jerome (347-420) – translator of the Latin Vulgate.

[294] Jerome, Comment, in Ep. ad Ephes. cap. i. Par. 1706. Tom. iv. par. 1, col. 335.

[295] Rom 1:25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

[296] De Fide et Symb. c. 7. Par. 1531. Tom. iii. fol. 31.

[297] Fulgentius of Ruspe (c. 462-527) bishop of Ruspe, in North Africa, during the 5th and 6th century.

[298] Mat 28.20. Fulgent. Op. Venet. 1742. ad Trasimund. Lib. ii. cap. xvii. p. 50.

[299] Vigilius of Trent (Italy) c. 353-405, not to be confused with pope Vigilius. He was said to be a patrician, educated at Athens, and a friend of John Chrysostom. In Rendena, he preached against the locals who worshipped Saturn. After saying mass, he overturned a statue of Saturn into the river. The locals stoned him to death.

[300] The words manhood and Godhead are transposed in the 1577 ed.

[301] Vigil, adv. Eutych. in Cassandr. Op. Par. 1616. Lib. I. p. 518.

[302] In a moment, 1Cor 15.52; in puncto, Lat.. Erasmus, in puncto temporis. Vulgate, in momento.

[303] Originally: "prevent;" Middle English for pre-advent – to precede an arrival.

[304] That is, Isaiah.

[305] Col 1.19; Eph 1.10. ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι (anakephalaiosasthai)

[306] indulgentiam, Lat. (indulgence).

[307] expiatorio, Lat. (expiatory or atoning sacrifice)

[308] securitas, Lat.

[309] All this is comprised in that principle, I believe the catholic church. And therefore the council of Nicea said, I believe in the church; that is, I believe and trust the same in all things. Annot. of Rhiems Test. in 1Tim 3.15.

[310] Originally, "wrest"; to twist or distort. Changed to "twist" throughout the text.

[311] Cypr. (Ruffin.) Expos, in Symb. Apost. fol. 26. Oxon. 1682.

[312] August, de Fid. et Symb. ed. Par. 1531. Tom. iii. fol. 32.

[313] Gratian. Decret. Par. in. de Consecr. Distinct. 4. can. 73. The Sermo ad Neophytos, which is quoted from, is not Augustine's. August. Opp. Tom. vi. Append. p. 290.

[314] Paschasius: a deacon of the Roman Church about 500; died after 511. Almost all we know of him is from Gregory the Great in his "Dialogues" (iv, xl).

[315] Paschas. de Spiritu Sancto, Lib. I. cap. i. in Biblioth. Patr. Par. 1624. Tom. ix. col. 180.

[316]'s. Gregorii Dialog, iv. 40. Rom 1613. III. 926. P.

[317] Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), Dominican friar, Catholic priest, and Doctor of the Church; scholastic philosopher.

[318] Aquinas, Sum. Tot. Theol. par. ii. Quaest. 1. Art. 9, p. 7, Tom. ii. Venet. 1594.

[319] Here the translator has omitted: "For all saints are united, just as the members in one body, which depend on one head. Therefore the aggregate and whole multitude of the faithful is called the church."

[320] For their own body, on account of the sanctity of its bishops, they (the Donatists) claimed exclusively the name of a true, pure, and holy church. This pestilence scarcely extended beyond Africa. Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Cent. iv. Book ii. part 2, chap. 5.

[321] orthodoxa, Lat.

[322] Conversation: our conduct in the sight of others; our way of living.

[323] See Pearson on the Creed, Oxf. ed. 1820. Vol. ii. p. 427.

[324] Originally, "parting" – participating, each having a part in the whole.

[325] 1John 1.3. societas vestra, Lat. But the Vulgate and Erasmus have nostra, as the Greek.

[326] Luk 15.21, and 18.13.

[327] We say, Christ's sacrifice is sufficient for the sins of all men for all time, but efficient only for the elect. – WHG

[328] 1Joh 5:16 If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that.

[329] Caviller: someone who cavils; he evades the point of an argument by raising irrelevant distinctions or objections.

[330] Auricular, confessing aurally or "by ear." Vocally confessing a sin to a priest in the confessional booth.

[331] Concupiscence: a desire for sexual intimacy; erotic desires.

[332] Originally, "in ure" – in active use, to exerise or practice something.

[333] See above, page i.109.

[334] See above, page i.144.

[335] Cypr. Expos, in Symb. Apost. fol. 28. Oxon. 1682. See also Becon's Works, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. ii. page 49.

[336] Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. iii. fol. 32.

[337] Jerome, Ep. xxxviii. ad Pam. adv. Error. Johan. Jerosol. ed. Par. Tom. iv. par. 2. col. 322.

[338] The Syrian Sea is that part of the Mediterranean about Caesarea. Relandi Palsestina, Lib. in. p. 675, ed. Traject. ad Rhen. 1714. in voc. Caesarea. Cf. Calvin. Comm. in Jon. i. 3, p. 253, ed. Amstel. 1667.

[339] in theologia Domini, Lat. The sense in which Bullinger gives this name to the Apocalypse, is not only because it is in some copies called the Revelation of John the Divine (see Horne's Introduction, Vol. iv. part 2, chap. 6, § 1), but because (as he writes in his Comment, in Apocalyps. p. 1. Basil. 1570), est doctrina de rebus ecclesisae Christi revelata coelitus a Christo in gloria, et compendium totius pietatis, et prophetarum explicatio et summarium.

[340] Cf. Works of Bp. Jewel, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. ii. p. 867.

[341] Col 1.18. Rev 1.5.

[342] Job 19.25 27. The last sentence of v. 27 is in the Vulgate as in Bullinger's Latin, "reposita est haec spes mea in sinu meo:" and in the Douay Version, "This my hope is laid up in my bosom."]

[343] Greek politeuma, citizenship; although, conversation means the conduct of our lives in public. – WHG

[344] Originally, "accidents" – meaning external characteristics, rather than essentials.

[345] Mat 13.43; Dan 12.3.

[346] See Sale's Prelim. Discourse to his translation of the Koran, Sect, iv.

[347] Mar 9.44; Isa 66.24.

[348] 1Cor 2.9; Isa 64.4.

[349] aenigmatibus, Lat. (enigmatic sentences)

[350] et omnem gentcm nostram, Lat. And all our race.

[351] Opp. Par. 1531, Tom. v. fol. 310.

[352] Curiously: artfully, subtlely, or elaborately.

[353] De Doct. Christ. Lib. in. cap. 10, Vol. iii. fol. 11.

[354] "Here are many propositions together, which we will explain singly and one by one a little more fully:" omitted. P.

[355] Commodity: something useful or valuable to us.

[356] Joh 14.23, 24; 15.9, 10.

[357] August, de Doct. Christ. Lib. i. cap. 30, Par. 1531, Tom. iii. col. 4.

[358] Lactant. Div. Inst. vi. 11, Lugd. Bat. 1660. p. 583. More correctly translated, "to whom unless you are liberal, they must die." P.]

[359] Ibid. p. 581.

[360] De Doct. Christ, i. 27, Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 4.

[361] c. 28, ib.

[362] Rom 12.9; 1Tim 1.5.

[363] Originally: "doubt to give."

[364] Heb 13.3. The Genevan Testament renders it, As if you were afflicted in the body.

[365] James the Apostle, son of Zebedee, was beheaded in 44 AD (Act 12.2). Today we think that the author of the book of James was James the Just, half-brother of Jesus, and elder of the church at Jerusalem (Act 15.13).

[366] Originally, "not much, I wis."

[367] Originally, "seely" which the previous editor defined as weak. It means pitiable, especially because of weak physical or mental condition.

[368] Originally: "not very inconveniently..." where inconvenient means inconsistent; hence it was appropriate or helpful.

[369] Froward: disobedient and contrary.

[370] Lactant. Div. Instit. Lib. vi. cap. 12, Opp. Lugd. Bat. 1660. pp. 585-588.

[371] non obscurus, Lat.

[372] Originally: "I wis," – meaning to gauge or reasonably assume something to be true.

[373] Lex est ratio summa, insita in natura, quae jubet ea quae facienda sunt, prohibetque contraria. Cicero, de Leg. i. 6.

[374] Eschew: avoid and stay away from deliberately; stay clear of.

[375] Æl. Lamprid. in Vit. Alexandri Severi apud Hist. August. Scriptores. Hanov. 1611. pp. 352, 3.

[376] See Early Writings of Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. page 275, note 2.

[377] quod respondeat Decalogo, Lat.

[378] Cyril. Alexandr. Contra Julian. Lib. I. Tom. vi. p. 30, ed. Paris. 1638. See also Early Writings of Bp. Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. p. 285.

[379] Zaleucus (7th c. B.C.) – said to have devised the first written Greek law code, the Locrian Code.

[380] Zaleucus ap. Stobaei Florileg. ed. Gaisford. Oxon. 1822. Vol. ii. pp. 197, 8.

[381] Cic. de Nat. Deor. Lib. ii. 28.

[382] The larger sort of wax candles, which were usually set upon the altar. Bailey apud Johnson in voc. See also Calfhill's Answer to Martiall, Parker Soc. ed. p. 300.

[383] Trivial nonsense.

[384] Senec. Opp. Par. 1607. Epist. ad Lucil. 95, p. 427.

[385] Bullinger quotes the passage (from de Benef. lib. iv. cap. 8) in his treatise de Origine Erroris, cap. viii. p. 36. Tigur. 1539.

[386] Bullinger. de Orig. Error. Tigur. 1539, cap. i. p. 5.

[387] Plutarch, in Vit. Numae. Lond. 1729. Tom. i. p. 141.

[388] Augustin. Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. v. fol. 57.

[389] Jusjurandum apud Romanos inviolate sancteque habitum servatumque. Id et moribus legibusque multis ostenditur. Aul. Gell. Noct. Attic. Lib. vii. cap. 18. init.

[390] Heraclitus of Ephesus (c. 535 – c. 475 BC) – a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher, and native of Ephesus.

[391] Hierocl. ap. Stobaei Floril. ed. Gaisford. Oxon. 1822. Vol. iii. p. 125.

[392] This word is substituted for that used by the translator. In the time of Augustus a lex was enacted (probably about BC 17) entitled Lex Julia de adulteriis coercendis. The chief provisions of this law may be collected from the Digest (48 tit. 5), and from Paulus (Sentent. Recept. ii. tit. 26. ed. Schultius). Smith's Diet, of Gr. and Rom Antiq. sub voc. Adulterium.

[393] See Smith's Diet, of Greek and Rom Antiq. sub voc. Sumtuariae leges; and Plutarch's lives of Lycurgus and Solon.

[394] Ausonius c. 310 – c. 395) — Roman poet and teacher of rhetoric; tutor to the future emperor Gratian.

[395] si turpia lucra Foenoris, et velox inopes usura trucidat. Auson. Idyll, xv. ed. Lond. 1823. Vol. ii. p. 593. P.

[396] Si falsum testimonium dicassit, saxo dejicitor. See also A. Gellius, Noct. Attic. Lib. xx. 1, 14; and Works of Becon, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. I. p. 391.

[397] Charondas ap. Stobaei Florileg. Vol. ii. p. 220.

[398] Juvenal. Sat. xiv. 173-6.

[399] Oracula is Bullinger's one word, which the translator has rendered, the voices of prophets.

[400] See Schleusner, Lex. N. T. in voc. ktisiv (ktisis) § 5.

[401] Originally: "fellowly."

[402] supplicationes, Lat.

[403] 1Cor 14.3, 40.

[404] piis obtrudere, Lat. – originally, "pop into the mouths of the godly."

[405] Mat 15.7- 9. docentes doctrinas prsecepta hominum, Lat. Erasmus , not the Vulgate, rendering.

[406] Cypr. Opp. Ep. 43, pag. 83, Oxon. 1682.

[407] ac religiose excussis, Lat. This refers to the hearers, and not to the preacher. The words should be rendered, and devoutly weigh and test them.

[408] Gen 4.3, 4, 26.

[409] aufert e sua familia, Lat. The translator misrepresents Bullinger's meaning by rendering, — took away with him.

[410] See above, page ii.46.

[411] ut proprie legis nomen obtinuit, ita nunquam abrogatur, Lat. – the Law is properly secured, as never to be abrogated.

[412] The Decalogue means a book, or exposition and collection, of commandments under ten chief heads.

[413] non cereas, Lat. not of wax.

[414] League: a tie or association between two or more people, here it is a unilateral binding together: Lev 26:12, "I will walk among you and be your God, and you shall be My people."

[415] Cf. Bullinger's Comment, in 2 Epist. Petri, cap. i. 12 15. p. 59. (published 1534) and Argument. Epist. ad Galat. ad finem. p. 340. (published 1535).

[416] Cf. Calvin. Instit. Lib. ii. cap. 8, § 12. Becon's Works, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. ii. pp. 59, 60.

[417] Joseph. Antiq. Jud. Lib. in. capp. 4 and 5, Amst. 1726. Tom. i. p. 129.

[418] Origen. Opp. ed. Benedict. Par. 1733. Tom. ii. p. 157.

[419] Ambros. Opp. ed. Bened. Par. 1690. Tom. ii. Append, p. 2-49. Comment, in Ep. ad Ephes. cap. 6 verse 3. But these Commentaries are generally admitted not to be the work of Ambrose. See James, on the Corruption of Scripture, Councils, and Fathers, Lond. 1843. p. 26.

[420] Pet Lombard. Lib. in. Distinct. 37. Par. 1575. fol. 293. The title of Distinct. 40 is, De sexto et septimo prsecepto secundse tabulee; and there the sixth commandment is, Non desiderabis uxorem proximi tui; and the seventh, Non concupisces domum proximi tui, etc. fol. 300.

[421] Id. Ep. Januar. 119. Tom. ii. col. 110.

[422] Tom. iv. fol. 150.

[423] Tom. vii. fol. 185. On this subject of the division of the Decalogue, see also Early Writings of Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. pages 349 351; and Calvin. Instit. Lib. ii. cap. 8. §12.

[424] exponit nobis qualis sit erga homines, imo qualis erga nos esse velit, Lat. Yea, what he desires to be to us.

[425] Appellatur (Dominus) etiam Saturnus, quia omnes suas creaturas exsaturat. Bullinger. de Origine Erroris, cap. viii. p. 36. Tigur, 1539. Saturnus autem est appellatus, quod saturetur annis. Cic. de Nat. Deor. Lib. ii.

[426] Copiae cornu, Lat. On this Divine name, Bullinger thus gives his opinion in his book, De Origine Erroris, cap. 1. p. 5: See also Early Writings of Bp. Hooper, ed. Parker Soc. p. 293.

[427] omitted by the translator: For he is of heaven and earth, and of all things which are therein, the Creator, Ruler, Preserver, and supreme and highest King and Prince.

[428] Bullinger. de Orig. Error, cap. 1. p. 5. From Heb yad (enough, sufficiency,) the Greeks likewise derived their Dis, Gen Dios, etc. (whence Lat. Deus, dius, divus.) Parkhurst, Heb Lex. in voc. yad.

[429] Deu 6.13; Mat 4.10.

[430] John 1.29; Acts 8.32; 1Pet 1.19; Rev. 5.6.

[431] ch. 2.16.

[432] pro tutelaribus. See Becon's Works, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. i. pp. 138, 9; Calfhill's Answer to Martiall, pp. 19, 20; and Works of Bp. Jewel, Vol. ii. pp. 922, 3.

[433] i.e., astrologers. Sequitur lauta ilia Astrologia seu Mathematica, etc. Luther, in Decem Praecepta. Opp. Witeb. 1582. Tom. i. p. 3. Olim Genethliaci et similes pro Mathematicis se venditarunt. Calvin. Opp. Amstel. Tom. i. p. 353. See also Early Writings of Bp. Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. p. 330; Bingham. Orig. Eccles. Book xvi. chap. 5. § 1

[434] Physic: medicine.

[435] That is, a monument – a symbol of power and reknown.

[436] Bullinger refers to the Heb word which signifies both trouble and an idol. And in Psa 16.4, the word עַצְּבוֹתָם (atstsebeth) is rendered by the Chaldee Paraphrast and others, their idols, and by the English version and others, their sorrows. And Bucer remarks in loc. molestias significat. See also Calvin. Comment, in loc. cit. ed. Calvin. Translat. Soc. Vol. I. note 1; and Hooper's Early Writings, p. 43, Parker Soc. ed.

[437] De Mor. Germ. c. ix. They think it not consistent with the greatness of celestial beings, etc.

[438] Marinum (i.e. piscis) ei (Dagoni) corpus; humana vero facies, manus, item et pedes. Selden de Dis Syris, Syntag. ii. cap. 3. et add.

[439] The worship of the serpent was in her (Egypt's) early history an important and conspicuous part of her idolatry. Deane, on the Worship of the Serpent, chap. 2. § 1.

[440] For traces of these heretics, see Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. Cent. 4. book 2. part 2. ch. 5. § 23; and Cent. 5. book 2. part 2. ch. 2. § 10. note 9; and ch. 5. § 20. ed. Soames, 1845.

[441] The name, Solomon, is not in the original Latin.

[442] Deu 4.12, 15-19, 23.

[443] In the original Latin the verbs in these three sentences are not in the future tense, nor are the sentences interrogatory. But the two former are interrogatory in the Vulgate.

[444] Isa 40.15-23, 25, 26.

[445] Bended hams: bent legs (hamstrings).

[446] See page i.150.

[447] Epiphan. Opp. Par. 1622. Tom. ii. fol. 317.

[448] August. Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. vi. fol. 3.

[449] Erasm. Symbol. Catec. vi. col. 1188. Opp. Lugd. Bat. Tom. v.

[450] Ibid. col. 1187.

[451] Trumpery: statements or beliefs that are untrue or make no sense.

[452] Affiance: a pledge of faithfulness and loyalty, as in a pledge of marriage.

[453] Cavil: to raise trivial objections; claiming a technicality voids accountability.

[454] Eze 18.2, 20.

[455] His son, Rehoboam, tainted by his father's sin and pride, splits the kingdom (1Kng 12).

[456] Rom 2.4-6. Bullinger has used Erasmus' rendering.

[457] omnia permeans, Lat. – all-permeating.

[458] See page ii.199. – a large candle, especially on an altar.

[459] Psa 119.71, as in Vulgate.

[460] ad magicas artes, Lat. (Of the magic arts)

[461] Deserts: things we deserve.

[462] Cf. Becon's Works, Parker Soc. cd. Vol. i. page 359; Latimer, Vol. i. page 231; Hutchinson's Works, page 20.

[463] Commination: A threat of divine punishment or vengeance.

[464] Saul pythonissam consulit; head-note of Vulgate in 1 Reg. xxviii. – the medium at En Dor (1Sam 28.7-20).

[465] Originally, "puissant": powerful.

[466] sagittis configitur, Lat.; with the sword, 2Kng 19.37; cum gladio, Vulg.

[467] 2Chr 36.6; 2Kng 25.7. It is not recorded in scripture, although it may be inferred that these two kings were brought to death by Nebuchadnezzar's treatment of them.

[468] 1Kng 22.; 2Kng 9 and 10.

[469] Justin. Auth. Collat. vi. tit. 6: Novell. 77. cap. 1, p. 323. Getting. 1797.

[470] Levit. 19.2; Mat 5.48.

[471] See H. Bullingeri adversus Anabaptistas Libri vi. mine primum e Germanico sermone in Latinum conversi per Josiam Simlevum, Tigurinum, Lib. v. cap. 11, pp. 197 202. Tiguri. 1560.

[472] 2Kng 23.3; 2Chr 15.12-15; Jer 34.8-10.

[473] Peers: elders or leaders – in England at the time, it referred to the nobles, the "peerage."

[474] Light-headed: empty-headed or simple-minded, not understanding what is being sworn, nor its consequences.

[475] Ita minus vilescct in popularium animis juramenti religio, Lat. omitted by the translator. By these means reverence for an oath will not be so much weakened in the minds of their people.

[476] Jusjurandum est affirmatio religiosa. Cic. de Offic. Lib. iii.

[477] pater fidei, Lat. See Gen 14.22.

[478] Zeph. 1.4, 5. Bullinger de Origine Erroris, cap. xii. p. 54, Tigur. 1539.

[479] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. iv. cap. 15. See also Early Writings of Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. page 478.

[480] Reference is here made to the well-known line of Euripides, Hippolyt. 608, and Bullinger uses the words of Cicero's version: Juravi lingua, mentem injuratam gero. De Offic. Lib. in. cap. 29.

[481] The case referred to by A. Gellius is that of the ten prisoners sent by Hannibal to Rome, after the battle of Cannae; two of whom evaded their oath, and remained in Rome. P. See also Cic. de Offic. Lib. i. cap. 13, and Lib. iii. cap. 32.

[482] Ambros. de Offic. apud Gratian. Decret. Par. 1583. Deer. sec. par. caus. xxii. Quaest. 4. can. 2. col. 1574.

[483] Isidor. in Synon. Lib. ii. ap. Gratian. Decret. ibid. can. 4. col. 1575. See also Becon's Works, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. i. p. 372.

[484] Isidor. ap. Gratian. Decret. ibid. can. 13. col. 1576.

[485] Bede (672-735) – also called the "Venerable Bede," and "The Father of English History."

[486] Beda in Homil. xliv. in natal, decoll.'s. Joan. ap. Gratian. Decret. ibid. can. 6. col. 1575.

[487] Augustin. ap. Gratian. Decret. ibid. can. 3. col. 1574. See Becon, Vol. i. p. 374.

[488] Gratian. ibid. can. 4. col. 1575, and August. Serm. Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. x. fol. 304.

[489] Liv. Lib. xxi. cap. 14, and xxiii. capp. 20, 30; Floras, Lib. ii. cap. 18; Valer. Max. Lib. vii. cap. 6. See also early writings of Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. page 336, and Augustin. de Civit. Dei. Lib. iii. cap. 20.

[490] "as he shall give us grace," not in the original.

[491] a cessation, rest. Lee's Heb Lex. in voc.

[492] Postremo adjicitur exemplum quoque ipsius Dei quiescentis et sanctificantis sabbatum. "Lastly is added also the example of God himself resting on the Sabbath-day and sanctifying it." Omitted by the translator. P.

[493] As Lord of the Sabbath, Christ himself is our spiritual rest, in whom we rest from all our labors forever.

[494] Quod caret alterna requie durabile non est, Lat, Ovid. Ep. iv. 89.

[495] Deu 5.15.

[496] paterfamilias, Lat.; an old term for the master of the house. Toone's Glossary. Cf. Mat 24.43.

[497] furaces, Lat. (thieves; pick-pockets)

[498] Handy: skillful.

[499] See Ignatii, Epist. ad Magnes. cap. 8 and 9.

[500] prima sabbati, Lat. – first of the week.

[501] D. Bullinger. Ep. ad Calvin, in Calv. Opp. Tom. ix. p. 63. Ed. Amstel. dat. Tigur. 29 August. 1551.

[502] Coloss. 2.16, 17. See authorised version, marginal reading.

[503] Peers: the elders or leaders.

[504] The answer is that England was not a theocracy as Israel was. In 1662, the Great Ejection taught a lesson to the church, that it must separate church and state, lest the state rule the Church, or lest the Church bear the sword. – WHG

[505] Originally, "dicing."

[506] Originally, "humours"; in the Middle Ages, that word referred to one of the four supposed fluids in the body whose balance was believed to determine your emotional and physical state.

[507] Awe: to frighten them into it by threats or intimidation.

[508] Originally, "sight" – a public event for entertainment.

[509] D. Id. Decembr. Constantinop. Zenone et Martiano Coss. Justin. Cod. Lib. iii. tit. 22. de feriis. p. 411. Tom. i. Lugd. 1551.

[510] D. Noti. Mart. Crispo II. et Constantino II. Coss. Cod. Just. Lib. iii. tit. 12. de feriis. p. 409.

[511] Exo 31.13; Eze 20.12.

[512] Pate: the top of the head.

[513] 2Kng 5.13; Isa 22.21, and 44.28; Jer 12.10, and 25.34; Micah 5.5.

[514] Xenoph. Cyrop. Lib. vii.

[515] Dan. 1. and 3; "set a button by" means they did not comply in the least with his command.

[516] Crabbed: irritable; easily enraged.

[517] Perforce: by necessity; by force of circumstance – here, as an inevitable consequence.

[518] Flout: to laugh at or treat contemptuously.

[519] antipelargein antipelargein, to cherish in turn (literally 'to act like a stork', i.e. look after one's parents). Liddell and Scott's Greek and Eng. Lex. 2nd ed. Oxf. 1845, from pelargov, a stork. Metaphora a ciconils, quae parentes senio jam confectos nutrire, et fessos ad terga recipere, dicuntur ab Aristotl. Scapula, in voc. See also, Calvin. Opp. ed. Amstel. Tom. i. p. 496, and Tom. ii. p. 608. Early Writings of Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. page 359, and Erasm. Adag. Chil. p. 282. Han. 1617.

[520] Lat. omitted: as when children requite their aged parents by nourishing and cherishing them.

[521] See Potter's Archaeol. Graec. Book i. chap. 26. Vol. i. p. 181. Lond. 1813.

[522] Isocrat. Orat. ad Demonicum. ap. Stobaei Floril. ed. Gaisford. Oxon. 1822. Vol. iii. p. 113.

[523] Anaximenes,ibid.

[524] Plato de Legib. Lib.xi. et ap. Stobaei Floril. ubi supra.

[525] Nemesis: (Greek mythology) the goddess of divine retribution and vengeance.

[526] Plato de Legib. Lib. iv. et ap. Stobaei Floril. Vol. iii. p. 116.

[527] Jerome, Opp. Par. 1706. Tom. v. p. 97. Epist. de Honorandis Parentibus. The Benedictine editors consider that this treatise is not Jerome's.

[528] 1Macc. 3.20-22, 43.

[529] Heb 11.33, 34. Aliants: aliens or foreigners.

[530] "In 1549, he (Bullinger) by his influence hindered the Swiss from renewing their league with Henry II. of France, representing to them, that it was neither just nor lawful for a man to suffer himself to be hired to shed another man's blood, from whom himself had never received any injury." Chalmers Biogr. Dict. Vol. vii. p. 280.

[531] Lat. omitted by the translator. Curtius, a most noble Roman youth, cast himself headlong into a vast gulph in the forum, that by his voluntary death he might preserve his country. Liv. Lib. vii. cap. 6.

[532] Liv. Lib. viii. cap. 9, and Lib. x. cap. 28. The Roman cavalry under Decius valiantly charged the Gauls, but were soon surounded by the enemy's infantry. An onslaught of Gallic chariots made his cavalry scatter, leaving the front lines of his own infantry unprotected. They were overrun. "Decius cried aloud on the name of his father Publius Decius. "Why," he asked, "do I seek any longer to postpone the doom of our house? It is the privilege of our family that we should be sacrificed to avert the nation's perils... He spurred his charger against the Gallic lines, where he saw that they were thickest, and hurling himself against the weapons of the enemy, he met his death."

[533] Justin. Lib. 11. cap. 6. Veil. Patercul. Hist. Rom Lib. i. cap. 2. Valer. Max. Lib. v. cap. 6. Codrus: the last of the semi-mythical Kings of Athens (ca 1089–1068 BC).

[534] Sallust. de Bell. Jug. p. 333. Lugd. Bat. 1654. The Cyrenes and Carthaginians contended for boundaries. Afer many conflicts, it was agreed that where two representatives from each city met, rushing from their city toward the other, that would be the boundary between them. The Phileni brothers from Carthage ran faster. The Cyrenes accused them of starting early. However, if they agreed to be buried alive at that spot, it would become the boundary. They consented (Silius Italicus, The Second Punic War, 1672) transl. Tho. Ross, bk. 15, p. 446, note (n).

[535] Hierocles ap. Stobaei Floril. cd. Gaisford. Vol. ii. pp. 75, 76.

[536] Bullinger is apparently attacking the pacifism of the Anabaptists.

[537] Psa 82.1, 6; John 10.34, 35. The Hebrew elohim, for gods, is also used for judges.

[538] Untoward – not in keeping with standards of what is right and proper; it also means acting contrary to one's own interests or welfare.

[539] The translator seems here to have missed Bullinger's meaning. The Latin is: Sit gratus fideliter docenti magistro, ut ssepius roganti de modo agendi dignetur fideliter indicare omnia. Bullinger still declares the duty of the apprentice to his master, and not of the masters to their apprentices.

[540] Toss-pot: a drunkard.

[541] non palato delicato et moroso, Lat. — not given to a delicate and fussy palate.

[542] non responsare, Lat. Shakspeare has tap for tap. King Henry IV. Part 2. Act II. Scene 1. Tip, to strike lightly. Wilson's Dict.

[543] conceptum, Lat. Originally, "pretended".

[544] Paul's arrest, accusation by Ananias, and trial before the Roman governor, Felix, described in Acts 23-25.

[545] chap. v. 12, 13. pacem habete cum illis, Lat., Erasmus version. "And be at peace with them," Tyndale's Test. 1525, and Cranmer, 1539.

[546] quae scriptura viscera vocat, Lat. See Gen 43.30; 1Kng 3.26; 2Cor 7.15, marg.

[547] silly, i.e., weak.

[548] Spittle (spital): A charitable house to receive and care for sick people, later distinguished from a hospital as being especially for those of a low class or meagre financial means.

[549] See also Bucer's Script. Anglic, de Regno Christi, p. 82. Basil. 1577. These are often mentioned in Novell. Justinian.

[550] Prodigally: wastefully.

[551] Calvin. Instit. Lib. ii. cap. 8. 37. Tom. ix. p. 101. Amst. 1667.

[552] Lex Pompeia de Parricidiis; passed in the time of Cn. Pompeius: "He who killed a father or mother, grandfather or grandmo ther, was whipped till he bled, sewn up in a sack with a dog, cock, viper, and ape, and thrown into the sea," etc. See Smith's Diet, of Gr. and Rom Antiquities, 286, a. P.; and Early Writings of Bp. Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. p. 368.

[553] Hom. II. Lib. xvii. 301. P.

[554] Orpheus ap. Stobaei Floril. ed. Gaisford. Vol. iii. pp. 111, 112.

[555] Eurip. Heracl. ap. Strobaei Floril. Vol. iii. p. 107.

[556] Menand. ap. Stobaei Floril. Vol iii. p. 112.

[557] Menand. Sentent. Moral. Lugd. 1817.

[558] Virg. Æn. vi. 608, 9, 21, 22.

[559] Hor. Od. Lib. iii. 2.13.

[560] Sil. Ital. Punic. Lib. vii. 553.

[561] "Ordinary magistrate" refers to the official having regular jurisdiction over a matter; a judge.

[562] 2Sam 16.58; 1Kng 2.8, 9, 36-46.

[563] 2Sam 15. and 18.14.

[564] Brood of vipers.

[565] Mat 23.33; John 8.38-44.

[566] Rom 16.5; 1Cor 16.19; Coloss. 4.15; Philem. 2. Bingham, Orig. Eccles. Book viii. cap. 1. § 13, and 14; Staveley's Hist, of Churches, chap. 3. pp. 26-34. Lond. 1712.

[567] Acts 8.27, etc., and Euseb. Eccles. Hist. Lib. ii. cap. 1. Vol. i. p. 85. ed. Burton. Oxon. 1838.

[568] Deu 6.4-8. Scribes quoque ea super postes domus tuse et in portis tuis, Lat. omitted by the translator. "And you shall write them upon the posts of your house, and on your gates." (v.9)

[569] Originally, "excellent pretty books" where "pretty" means sufficient, astute, or appealing.

[570] cunning means skillful; the Latin, fidis et peritis, means trustworthy and expert;

[571] Valer. Max. Lib. ii. cap. 6. § 7.

[572] Artem quaevis alit terra, Lat. Erasmi. Adag. Hanov. 1617. col. 368, a.

[573] The quotation is from Erasmus Adag. in loc. cit.

[574] Erasmi Adag. in loc. cit.; Justin. Lib. xxi. cap. 5; Cic. Tusc. Quaest, in. 12.

[575] Nip: like the nip of a dog that smarts, but does not rip the flesh.

[576] indulgentiam, Lat. – indulgence. Originally, "cockering."

[577] 1Sam 2.22-29. & chap. 4.

[578] Mat 18.14, 6.

[579] Frugalitas ac parsimonia magnum est vectigal, Lat. Cf. Erasm. Adag. Chiliad, fol. 269. a. Parsimonia summum vectigal.

[580] Mat 5.23-26. "The last penny" of what is due.

[581] Originally, "stomachs."

[582] calumniator, Lat. This exposition of St. Paul's words is taken almost verbatim from Erasmus Annot. in loc.

[583] invidentem fere torquet, urit, et excarnificat, Lat. The words between brackets are accidentally omitted in the translation.

[584] Paynims: a heathen; a person who is not a Christian (especially a Muslim).

[585] Virgil. Opp. Basil. 1613, p. 1981

[586] Hor. Ep. i. 2, 58.

[587] Sil. Ital. Punic. Lib. xvii. 188.

[588] Gaid, withes (a band or rope of twisted twigs or stems). Shaw's Gaelic and English Diet, in voc.

[589] Ovid. Met. Lib. ii. 768, etc.

[590] Lex talionis: the law of retaliation. See Smith's Diet, of Greek and Rom Antiq. sub voc. talio. Arnold's Hist, of Rome. Chap. xiv. 2. Vol. i. p. 286. Lond. 1840.

[591] i.e., designed, premeditated.

[592] Num 35.11, etc.

[593] Theodorit. Eccles. Hist. Lib. v. cap. 20. Ed. Reading. Cantab. 1720, pp. 219, 220. See also Calfhill's Answ. to Martiall. Parker Soc. ed. p. 22.

[594] 1Sam 15; 1Kng 20.42.

[595] 1Kng 21. & 18.13. Hooper's Early Writ. ed. Park. Soc. p. 476.

[596] i.e., repel, keep off. Johnson. So in Early Writings of Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. p. 107.

[597] Assay: to make an effort to accomplish something.

[598] The mischievous tenets of the Anabaptists rendered so necessary in the age of Bullinger, setting forth the true doctrine concerning civil magistracy. A summary proof of this necessity is given by Melancthon: Melanc. Loc. Com. Erlang. 1838. Vol. i. pars 2. p. 138.

[599] Aristot. Eth. Lib. V. cap. 6. In Polit. in. c. 16, Aristotle calls magistrates, nomofulakav kai uphretav toiv nomois.

[600] Plutarch ad Princip. Indoct.

[601] On this subject of the various forms of governments and their abuses, Bullinger seems to have borrowed from Aristot. Ethic. Lib. viii. cap. 10.

[602] Bear sway: to rule or govern; specifically, to exercise a controlling influence toward one side.

[603] And then democracy becomes either tyranny, or anarchy. – WHG

[604] A proverb signfying that it is perilous for a subject to speak against his prince. In English we say it is ill jesting with saints. The proverb most like this occurs in Ray, as the Italian form of our English one, "No jesting with edge tools, or with bell-ropes:" viz. "Tresca con i fanti, et lascia star i santi; i.e., Play with children, and let the saints alone." Ray's Proverbs, p. 124.

[605] Quoted from Hor. Od. Lib. ii. 16. 27.

[606] Causis nostris licet pessimis jus praetexamus et justitiam, Lat. The proverbial expression used by the translator occurs in Shakspeare's Taming of the Shrew, Act ii. Scene 1. ad fin. and, earlier still, in Skelton:

Fyrste pycke a quarell, and fall out with him then,

And so outface hym with a carde of ten.

The Bouge of Courte.

The phrase of a card of ten was possibly derived, by a jocular allusion, from that of a hart of ten, in hunting, which meant a full-grown deer; one past six years of age. Nares's Glossary, in voc. Card. I conceive the force of the phrase to have expressed originally the confidence or impudence of one who with a ten, as at brag [bluffing], faced, or out-faced one who really had a faced card against him. Ibid, in voc. to face it.

[607] That is, God did not appoint magistrates as a solution to fleshly desires, but to deal with those who oppose the law.

[608] Exo 22.28; Deu 1.17.

[609] Dan 2.36-40; 7.3-8 – the four kingdoms, generally interpreted as Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome.

[610] Paul is said to have been beheaded, and Peter crucified, at Rome, under Nero. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. ii. cap. 25.

[611] Isa 3.4, 8.

[612] 1Sam 24 and 26.

[613] Jer 7.16, and chap. 14.

[614] Dan. 3.

[615] See Prideaux. Connect. Vol. i. pp. 72, 104, 122, ed. McCaul. 1845. See also above, page 51, note 3.

[616] The Artaxerxes, who so much befriended the Jews in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, and whom, no doubt, Bullinger means, was Artaxerxes Longimanus. Yet the Jewish tradition makes Darius Hystaspis to be Artaxerxes, and Bullinger, perhaps, followed it. See Prideaux. Con. Vol. i. pp. 201, 244. ed. M c Caul, 1845.

[617] Prideaux's Connect. Vol. ii. p. 189.

[618] Ibid. p. 613. Euseb. Eccl. Hist. Lib. i. cap. 8.

[619] Acts 12.21 23, grandson of Herod the Great; nepoti, Lat. Euseb. Eccles. Hist. Lib. ii. cap. 10.

[620] Gibbon's Decline and Fall, etc. Vol. ii. chap. xiv. p. 232. ed. 1820. Euseb. Eccles. Hist. Lib. ix. cap. 9.

[621] See Jewel's Works. Parker Soc. ed. pp. 977-8.

[622] That is, their societal norm; their customary form of government.

[623] Justin. Anth. Collat viii. tit. 9. Novell. 109. Prarfat. p. 431. Getting. 1797.

[624] Surfeiting: indulging one's appetite to the full.

[625] Brunt: an adverse situation; an opposing blow.

[626] That is, single-minded to do what's right (as opposed to being ambivalent).

[627] a Deo inventum atque traditum, Lat. – invented by God, and handed down by tradition.

[628] Cf. Becon's Works, Vol. ii. p. 303. Parker Soc. ed. The Romish arguments on this topic are alleged and discussed by Melancthon. Corp. Reform. Tom. iii. No. 1520. pp. 240-58.

[629] Pro 20.28; 29.2, 4, 16, 18.

[630] Originally, "seventeenth."

[631] Jos 8.30, etc.

[632] Jakes: an outhouse; an outdoor building with a primitive toilet.

[633] Ezra 1.

[634] That is, Darius I, or Darius the Great.

[635] This is not Darius Hystaspis, but Artaxerxes Longimanus. Prideaux. Connect. Vol. i. p. 249. ed. McCaul. 1845. But, by some writers, Artaxerxes Longimanus is also called Darius. See Works of Bp. Pilkington, Parker Soc. ed. p. 14.

[636] Originally, "token to the people..."

[637] Theodorit. Eccles. Hist. Lib. i. cap. vii. Ed. Reading. Cantab. 1720. pp. 26, 27.

[638] Grat. Valent. et Theod. Edict, in Corp. Jur. Civil, a Gothof. Amst. 1663. Cod. Lib. i. Tit. i. 1. Tom. ii. p. 1. See also, page 34 above.

[639] Num 27.22; Deu 17.18. "Also it shall be, when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write for himself a copy of this law in a book, from the one before the priests, the Levites. (Deu 17:18)

[640] Idem rex mox jubet sacerdotes sacrificare Domino, Lat.; omit ted. "The same king presently commands the priests to sacrifice to the Lord." P.

[641] by, i.e., concerning; de, Lat.

[642] Episcopos convenit agitare, Lat. Impp. Arcad. et Honor. A. A. Apollodoro Proc. Afric. Quotiens de religione agitiir, episcopos con venit judicare, etc., Dat. 13 Kal. Septemb. Patavi. Theodoro. V. C. Cons. — Cod. Theodos. de religione. Lib. xvi. Tit. 11. p. 527. Par. 1607.

[643] See above, page ii.35.

[644] Justin. Auth. Collat. I. Tit. 3. Novell. 3. p. 18. Prsefat. Getting. 1797.

[645] Justin. Auth. Collat. ii. Tit. 1. Novell. 7. cap. 1.

[646] Justin. Auth. Collat. v. Tit. 12. Novell. 58. p. 269.

[647] Ibid. p. 270.

[648] Justin. Auth. Collat. v. Tit. 22. Novell. 67. cap. 3. p. 294.

[649] Justin. Auth. Collat. ix. Tit. 6. Novell. 123. cap. 44. p. 512.

[650] Ibid. cap. 10. p. 496.

[651] non sunt hoc quod audiunt, Lat.; are not that which they are called.

[652] Aequis, Lat. (fair, or equivalent)

[653] Corp. Jur. Can. Decret. I. Pars. Distinct. 40. xii. Joan. Chrysost. id est, Autor. Op. Imperf. in Mat Hom. 43. ad c. 23. ed. Par. 1687. p. 54.

[654] See Deu 17.18, 19; 2Kng 11.12.

[655] Jos 21.

[656] 2Chr 31.

[657] That is, contrivances or stop-gaps to avoid financial collapse.

[658] 2Kng 23.

[659] 2Kng 12.

[660] 1Kng 14.9, 10; 15.29; 16.2, 3, 9 13.

[661] 2Kng 9. and 10.

[662] The reigns of Ahab, Ahaziah, and Jehoram take up 37 years.

[663] emblematis, Lat. fond (i.e., silly) emblems.

[664] Plato de Legib. Lib. i. in init.

[665] Plutarch, adv. Colot. in fin.

[666] Demosth. Orat. adv. Aristog.

[667] Cic. Orat. pro A. Cluent.

[668] Referring to that saying of Cicero's (de Legg. Lib. iii. cap. 1.) Magistratum legem esse loquentem, legem autem mutum magistratum.

[669] Juv. Sat. vi. 223. P.

[670] Erasm. Adag. Chiliad. Hanov. 1617. p. 551. Odium.

[671] Chance-medley: a homicide arising from a sudden quarrel or fight.

[672] cf. Aristot. Ethic. Lib. v. cap. 10.

[673] Summum jus summa injuria, Lat. Erasm. Adag. Chiliad, p. 619. Rigor.

[674] The Latin means "before us." The full phrase is quae coram nobis resident, "things remain in our presence;" that is, they remain for appeal. The writ of coram nobis allows a court to correct its original judgment (1) if a substantive error is discovered that was not recorded in the original judgement, and (2) if known, it would have changed that judgment. — te in jus vocabunt, Lat. The colloquial phrase of the translator occurs in Latimer's Works, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. II. p. 348, and commonly in Foxe: see Acts and Monuments, Vol. v. pp. 291, 537. ed. 1838.

[675] Erasin. Adag. Chiliad, p. 504. Mira nova.

[676] Bibbing: consuming alcoholic beverages regularly.

[677] Stews: prostitutes.

[678] See above, page ii.297, note 8.

[679] Lat. omitted by the translator. Whoever injures another by violence or treacherously, let him be punished according to law.

[680] Assize: a court of law that issues writs to the sheriff for the recovery of property.

[681] qui tueatur, Lat. – to defend or advocate.

[682] Originally, "breaks forth to what kind..."

[683] Plutarch, in Vit. Alexandri. Lond. 1723. Tom. iv. p. 60. See also Early Writings of Bp. Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. page 408.

[684] Respect to persons: partiality.

[685] vel clientelam is the Latin, which is here translated, men of honours, letters – protection, dependency.

[686] Commodity: here it means a good or favorable outcome; an expectation of fairness.

[687] Mat 5.40, 25.

[688] Seely (silly), meek: innocuorum, Lat. – innocuous or harmless.

[689] Eze 21.9; 30.24.

[690] apparently, avenged. Comp. Syr., retribuit. Judg. 5.2." Lee's Heb Lex. in voc.

[691] "in the Church of Christ" does not mean vengeance within the church is acceptable; it means that public magistrates who are Christians may wield the sword as part of their public office. This would apply to police and soldiers as well.

[692] That is, for your good, as in commonwealth, i.e., for your welfare.

[693] The word for judges in the Old Testament is elohim: gods (see p. ii.279).

[694] 1Sam 15; 1Kng 20.

[695] facinorosos, Lat. – criminals.

[696] Rakehells: dissolute men (hell-raisers) - nebulones nefurios, Lat.

[697] Diminutio capitis, Lat. "A Roman citizen possessed libertas, civitas, and familia: the loss of all three, or of libertas and civitas (for civitas included familia) constituted the maxima capitis diminutio." Smith's Diet, of Gr. and Rom Antiq. voc. caput.

[698] Originally, "beadrow."

[699] Deu 25. 2. The last sentence, "according to his fault, by a certain number," is in the Vulgate, "Pro mensura peccati erit et plagarum modus;" which are the words that Bullinger quotes, and which are rendered in the Douay Version, "According to the measure of the sin shall the measure also of the stripes be."

[700] sexus, Lat. – sex, gender.

[701] Cozening: falsehood and dishonesty; cheating and artful deceit; trickery.

[702] That is, kidnappers, and presumably slave-traders.

[703] This is added by the Translator. P.

[704] Exo 32.

[705] 1Kng 18.

[706] 2Kng 9.

[707] 2Kng 11.

[708] Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. ix. fol. 22. P.

[709] Acts 5.

[710] D. Prid. No. Mar. Arbitrione et Lolliano Coss. Justin. Cod. Lib. i. Tit. ii. p. 100. Lugd. 1551. Tom. i.

[711] Impp. Theod. et Valentin. A. A. Isidore P. F. P. Cod. Theod. Lib. xvi. Tit. x. p. 526. Par. 1607. — Impp. Valentin, et Mart. A. A. Palladio. P. P. vii. Lib. i. Tit. ii. Cod. Justin. Tom. i. Lugd. 1551. p. 102.

[712] homicidre, Lat. (murderers) This is why the Anabaptists wanted to separate church and state. – WHG

[713] Rom 14.1. non ad dijudicationes disceptationum, Lat.; Erasmus' rendering.

[714] increpationibus, Lat. (correction)

[715] Jos 22.

[716] Justin. Auth. Collat. viii. Tit. x. Novell. 109. cap. 2. p. 432. Getting. 1797.

[717] Euseb. Eccles. Hist. Lib. iv. cap. 14. Milner's Church History, Cent. i. chap. 13. Vol. i. p. 102, ed. 1834.

[718] Augustine says, Noli ergo dicere, Absit, absit a nostra conscientia, ut ad nostram fidem aliquem compellamus. Facitis enim ubi potestis. Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. vii. fol. 29. P.

[719] Pro 13.24; 22.14.

[720] Donatists - The Carthaginian rigorists who, unlike their bishop, hadn't handed over the Scriptures as demanded by Diocletian during his persecution (300-305). The Donatists appointed their own bishops. When Constantine called a synod under pressure from the Donatists (who by then had appointed some 270 bishops), those of the "Catholic Church" refused to attend. Constantine tried to compel attendance by force, but later gave up. Augustine tried to act as mediator between the feuding groups but failed. The term "Donatists" generally refers to hard-liners and schismatics.

[721] That is, these "Donatists" were now loyalists, as if they had never broken ranks with "the catholic unity."

[722] Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 34. P.

[723] Aug. Ep. 48. ad Vincentium Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. ii. fol. 33. P.

[724] Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 42. P.

[725] Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 42. P.

[726] Latimer also mentions these doctrines of the Anabaptists, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. i. pp. 495, 6. See also Bullinger. adv. Anabaptist. Lib. v. cap. 10.

[727] Annoy: not just irritate, but molest; harm; injure.

[728] Rom 12.18; 13.4.

[729] See before, p. ii.277.

[730] Manichaeism: A religion founded by Manes in the third century; a synthesis of Zoroastrian dualism between light and dark, Babylonian folklore, Buddhist ethics, and superficial elements of Christianity.

[731] Opp. Par. 1531, Tom. vi. fol. 89. P.

[732] Visitation: here it means God's investigation of them; their trial and judgment is at hand.

[733] Luke 19.44; Matt, 23.34-38.

[734] Isa 16.

[735] Nah 3.19.

[736] Jer 13.9; Isa 5.11.

[737] Obad. 3, 4, 8, 9.

[738] Judg. 20.

[739] 1Sam 4.

[740] 2Kng 22.20, and 23.29. "In his days Pharaoh Necho, king of Egypt," etc. P.

[741] ne dum vitant carbonariam, incidant in calcariam, Lat. Cf. Erasm. Adag. Chiliad, pp. 493, 4. Hanov. 1617.

[742] Environs: extends on all sides simultaneously; encircles.

[743] a Saule, Lat. not Joshua.

[744] Or Antipatris: its ancient name was Capharsaba. Herod the Great enlarged and beautified it, naming it Antipatridis, after his Father Antipater. From there, they went on to Caesarea (Act 23.23).

[745] Acts 23. Romanorura militum, Lat.

[746] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. ix. cap. 8.

[747] Num 21.

[748] 2Chr 20.

[749] propellens, Lat. 2Sam 8.

[750] Jos 10.; 1Sam 11.

[751] That is, war is a last resort; but if a prince waits too long, the war may be lost.

[752] Sileant inter arma legos, Lat. See Cic. pro Mil.

[753] Mascelzer, Lat.; omitted by the translator. See Gibbon, Decl. and Fall. chap. xxix.; and Universal Hist. Ancient Hist. Vol. xvi. p. 473. Lond. 1748. Book iv. chap. 5.

[754] See Works of Becon, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. i. p. 239. – On Oct 7, 1571, in the Gulf of Lepanto on the Ionian Sea, the fleets of the Ottoman Empire and the Holy League clashed in one of the most significant battles in history. It was the first major victory of Europeans against the Ottoman Empire; and it occurred during Bullinger's lifetime. – WHG

[755] Tertul. ad Scapulam. cap. 4. pag. 162. Tom. iii. ed. Semler. 1829. Bullinger's quotation reads: et qui solus potens.

[756] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib.V. cap. 5.

[757] Gen 14.

[758] 1Sam 13.14; Rom 1.3.

[759] Originally, "Osia."

[760] Chap. xxv. "De prosperitatibus, quas Constantino Imp. Christiano Deus contulit," and xxvi. "de fide et pietate Theodosii Augusti." Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. v. fol. 69. P.

[761] a 28 cap. ad finem usque, Lat Pauli Orosii adv. Paganos Histor. Libri Septem. Mogunt. 1615. In the chapters of the 7th Book from the 28th are related the successes of Constantine, Gratian, Theodosius, etc.

[762] Sermon 2-5; p. ii.267.

[763] Utopianae reipublicae extructores, Lat. building a utopian republic. See Preface of Hooker's Eccles. Pol. Vol. i. p. 183. Oxf. 1820.

[764] Politic: marked by prudence, expedience, and shrewdness.

[765] The Vulgate has, "nobilis decurio;" but "honestus senator," which Bullinger adopts, is the rendering of Erasmus in Mark 15.43.

[766] Luke 23.50, 51; Mark 15. 43.

[767] See page ii.372.

[768] John 6.15. creare et salutarc regem, Lat.

[769] John 18.36; Luke 22.25.

[770] See page ii.367.

[771] Pro 16.10. divinatio, Lat.

[772] Eccles. 8.2. et rationem habere juramenti Dei, Lat.

[773] Tertul. Apol. cap. xxx. Tom. v. p. 62. ed. Semler.

[774] 1Pet 2.13; Rom 13.5.

[775] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. iv. cap. 15.

[776] Eccles. Hist. Lib. v. cap. 32. ed. Reading. Cantab. 1720, p. 232. Bullinger gives the history more at length in his treatise de Script. Sac. Author. etc. fol. 123. Tigur. 1538.

[777] calamitatibus publicis, Lat. – public calamities.

[778] Gen 2.24; 1Cor 6.16.

[779] Exo 20.14. duobus exprimitur verbis, Non moechaberis, Lat.

[780] Gen 2.18. adjutorium, quod ei cohabitet, Lat.

[781] Gen 2.24; Mark 10.7, 8.

[782] Nee puduit sanctum del Spiritum multis recensere et describere matrimonia ipsorum, Lat. Nor was the Holy Spirit of God ashamed to recount and describe their marriages in many words. Omitted by the translator.

[783] Bullinger, in his treatise de Scriptur. Authorit. et de Episcop. Instit. et Funct. establishes this statement by Euseb. Eccles. Hist. Lib. iii. cap. 30, and Lib. v. cap. 24, and Lib. viii. cap. 10; and Tripart. Hist. Lib. i. cap. 10, and Lib. ix. cap. 38. See also Jewel's Works, pp. 882, 3, and Original Letters, Vol. i. pp. 116, 146, and Becon's Works, Vol. iii. p. 235. Parker Soc. ed.

[784] Xenoph. OEcon. cap. vii. p. 39. Tom. v. ed. Schneider. Oxon. 1813.

[785] Hierocles ap. Stobaei Floril. ed. Gaisford. Oxon. 1822. Vol. iii. pp. 8, 10.

[786] Mat 15.11, 17, 18.

[787] 1Cor 7.14. intercedente matrimonio, Lat.; omitted.

[788] Probably Antipater of Tarsus (d. 130 BC) – Stoic philosopher.

[789] gigglot: a wanton; a lascivious girl Johnson's Dict.; Shakspeare, Measure for Measure, Act v. Sc. 1.

[790] gill (from gillian, the old English way of writing Julian, or Juliana): the appellation of a woman in ludicrous language. Ibid.

[791] Antipater ap. Stobeei Floril. Vol. iii. pp. 1719.

[792] Hierocles ap. Stobaei Floril. Vol. iii. pp. 12-14.

[793] Titus 2.35; 1Tim 2.14, 15.

[794] Eccles. Hist. Lib. i. cap. 23. See also Early Writings of Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. page 376.

[795] Nam primus est gradus castitatis sincera virginitas: secundus autem fidele conjugium. Chrysost. Opus Imperf. in Mat Hom. xxxii. p. 133. Tom. vi. Par. 1724. But this work is not Chrysostom's.

[796] De Bon. Conj. capp. 19, 20. Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. vi. fol. 165. col. i.

[797] Tom. ii. fol. 156. col. 3. P.

[798] 1Tim 3.2, 4; Titus 1.6.

[799] See Bullinger. de Episcop. Instit. et Funct. fol. 96 8. Tigur. 1538; and Jewel's Works, Park. Soc. ed. pp. 882, 3.

[800] Originally, "it is available..." – meaning valid or sufficient to bind.

[801] Handfasting: symbolic act of tying a couple's hands together, often with cords or ribbons, representing their union.

[802] Hierocles ap. Stobeei Floril. Vol. iii. p. 15.

[803] Plutarch, de Liberia Educand. See also Erasm. Adag. Chiliad. Hanov. 1617. p. 124. col. 2.

[804] correctionis tempora, Lat. Heb 9.10.

[805] 1Cor 6.16, and 7.2.

[806] Originally, "troth their plight."

[807] Indifferent: inconsequential, incidental, or immaterial.

[808] See Becon's Works, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. i. p. 29, n. 2.

[809] Hierocles ap. Stobaei Floril. Vol. iii. p. 12.

[810] Antipater ap. Stobaei Floril. Vol. iii. p. 16.

[811] patientes, Lat. Originally, "painful sufferers."

[812] oeconomicas, Lat. economical

[813] Not in the original Latin.

[814] Lat. omitted by the translator: namely, with the intent of corrupting his wife.

[815] Originally, "brent."

[816] "The Lex Julia, passed about BC 17, did not inflict the punishment of death on either party; and in those instances under the emperors, in which death was inflicted, it must be considered an extraordinary punishment, and beyond the provisions of the Julian Law. By a constitution of Constantino, confirmed by Justinian, the offence in the adulterer was made capital. The Julian Law, however, permitted the father in certain cases to kill the adulterer and adulteress." Diet, of Gr. and Lat. Antiq. s. v. Adulterium. P.

[817] Jerome, Epist. xvii. ad Innocentium de muliere septies percussa. Par. 1706. Tom. iv. col. 23-26.

[818] See Becon's Works, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. ii. p. 649; and Early Writings of Bp. Hooper, p. 376.

[819] 1Cor 6.18 and 10.8.

[820] servus Jesu Christi. Lat. So far was the servant of Jesus Christ, etc.

[821] Stews: prostitutes.

[822] Urban. Geograph. Lib. ii. p. 17, Basil. 1559. The author of the modern part of the Universal History, (Vol. xvi. p. 87, Lond. 1782) observes on this account, in a note: "The reign of Roderic was so short and so full of troubles, and his own personal character in other respects so fair, that nothing can be more improbable with respect to him than this imputation."

[823] Judges 20.

[824] See also Early Writings of Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. p. 354.

[825] Holyoke's Diet, in voc. 1677.

[826] in Theologia Domini nostri Jesu Christi, Lat. See p. 170, n. 6.

[827] Rev 20:15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

[828] That is, dressing or decorating the body in a way that sexually allures others.

[829] Cic. de Orat. Lib. ii. cap. 60.

[830] Eph. 4.29, 30. quoties opus est, Lat. Erasmus rendering.

[831] A comic dramatist of ancient Greece (342-292 BC)

[832] Joel 2.16. de velo suo, Lat. But edit. 1587 reads, his closet.

[833] Gauds: cheap showy jewelry or ornament on clothing.

[834] nihil peregrinum, leve et indecorum, Lat. – nothing strange, light (flimsy), and indecorous.

[835] Brave: here it means brightly colored and showy.

[836] discindere, Lat. – cut and tear.

[837] Vulg. sinopide; a red stone found in Sinopis in Pontus. Plin. Hist. Nat. Lib. xxxv. cap. 5. 13. Usus, si lignum colorare libeat.

[838] Jerome, Ep. xxxiv. ad Nep. de Vit. Cler. Par. 1706. Tom. iv. col. 263. See Bullinger de Scriptur. Sanct. Authoritate, etc. Lib. ii. fol. 115. Tigur. 1538. and de Orig. Error, cap. 21. fol. 102. Tigur. 1539.

[839] This expression is not in the original Latin.

[840] Heb 11.9, 10, 13-16.

[841] Victuals: a stock or supply of foods.

[842] Cloy: supply or feed to surfeit (to over-fill).

[843] epulones, Lat. – a guest at a feast; a carouser.

[844] sexus, Lat. – sex, gender.

[845] Delicates: addictive things like pleasure, luxury, and voluptuousness; things that allure.

[846] daintrel, a delicacy. Webster's Dict. 1831.

[847] Niggishness: niggardliness, stinginess.

[848] That is, your own station in life: your social class or status.

[849] Exactor: One who exacts or demands by authority or right; hence, an extortioner; also, one who is unreasonably severe in his injunctions or demands.

[850] D. Martini Episcopi Dumiensis formula honestse vitae, sive de quatuor virtutibus cardinalibus liber unus, ap. Max. Biblioth. Vet. Patr. Lugd. 1677. Tom. x. fol. 383. This Martin, a monk born in Pannonia, became abbot and bishop of Dumium (not in Germany, the translator's mistake), and finally bishop of Braga in Portugal, a.d. 563-583. Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. ed. Soames. Cent. vi. Book 2. part 2. chap. 2. p. 37, note 4. Bingham's Antiq. B. ix. chap. 6. §16.

[851] Acts 13.3. and 14.23.

[852] Hoc integro, perpetuo gaudet plus, Lat. This remaining unbroken, the godly man continually rejoices.

[853] cribble, coarse flour, or meal. Webster's Dict.

[854] Jerome, Opp. Par. 1706. Epist. xxxrv. ad Nepot. de Vit. Cler. Tom. iv. pars 2. col. 264.

[855] 1Cor 8.8. Erasmus' rendering.

[856] epulas, Lat. – viands, sumptuous food.

[857] Basil. Hom. ii. de Jejunio, T. ii. p. 15. Paris. 1722.

[858] See Bingham's Orig. Eccles. Lib. xxi. cap. 1. and cap. 2. § 1.

[859] The Tatiani or Tatianists, who were also called Encratitae, or abstainers, were the followers of Tatian in the second century of the Christian era. They held matter to be the source of all evil, and therefore discarded all the external comforts and conveniences of life, and fasted rigorously. Mosheim. Eccles. Hist. Book i. Cent. ii. part 2. chap. 5. § 9. Vol. i. p. 195. ed. Soames. See also Early Writings of Hooper, Parker Soc. ed. p. 375.

[860] Euseb. Histor. Eccles. Lib. v. cap. 24. ed. Burton.

[861] Not his, but the history compiled from him and others.

[862] The ecclesiastical history of Socrates Scholasticus. It comprised a history of the church, in seven books (hence the previous note), from the accession of Constantine, a.d. 305, to the 38th year of Theodosius II., a period of 140 years.

[863] Hist. Tripart. ap. Cassiodori Opp. Lib. ix. cap. 38. Tom. v. p. 348. Rotomag. 1679.

[864] Auctor Euseb. Ecclesiast. Hist. Lib. v. cap. 18, Lat. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. v. cap. 18. ed. Burton. The writer is Apollonius. Routh, Reliq. Sacr. Tom. i. p. 466. Oxon. 1846. See also Calvin. Comment, in i. Ep. ad Tim cap. iv. v. 3. Tom. vii. p. 455. ed. Amst.

[865] Prorogue: hold back to a later time.

[866] Dominum nostrum, Lat. our Lord.

[867] 1Thess. 4.1-7. immunditise causa, Lat. Erasmus rendering.

[868] 1Thess. v. 23. The rendering in Cranmer's Bible is more agreeable with Bullinger's text: viz. "So that in nothing you may be blamed in the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

[869] Originally, "cozening fetches are clean cut off."

[870] Particular (or peculiar) substance: what is separately owned and belongs to an individual.

[871] Propriety: here it means ownership of property.

[872] several: separate, particular.

[873] See Articles of Religion, Art. xxxviii. and Bullinger adversus Anabaptistas. Lib. i. cap. 9, p. 22, and Lib. iv. cap. 9, p. 143, Tigur. 1560.

[874] camels and asses, not in original Lat. of Bullinger.

[875] per Josue, Lat; by Joshua.

[876] Lev 25; Num 27.

[877] Bullinger adv. Anabap. Lib. ii. cap. 15, p. 74.

[878] Most of the ensuing arguments from scripture occur in Melancthon's Epist. adv. Anabap. Corp. Ref. Tom. i. col. 970-3, and Calvin's Instruct, adv. Libertinos, cap. 21, p. 393, Tom. viii. Amstel. 1667. See also Bullinger, adv. Anabapt. Lib. iv. cap. 9.

[879] Acts 2.44, erant conjuncti, Erasmus' rendering.

[880] Mat 6.21; 13.22, etc., 19.23, 24.

[881] The Synod of Gangra in Paphlagonia was held after that of Nicea, but before that of Antioch, i.e. between a.d. 325 and 341; but the exact year is not known.

[882] Zonaras in Can. Apost. etc. Lutet. Paris. 1618. p. 310.

[883] Opp. Par. 1531, Tom. vi. p. 4, col. 3. See p. ii.432, n. 3.

[884] Perhaps he means, by building a dam.

[885] Fiefment: creating a fiefdom, a feudal manor.

[886] Corp. Jur. Civil. Digest. Lib. xli. Tit. i. col. 1447, etc. Tom. i. Par. 1628. All these terms of the civil law are very fairly explained in the translation.

[887] Mat 6.22-23. Originally, "if your eye is single... if your eye is evil."

[888] theriaca, Lat.; a compound medicine against the bites of poisonous animals; treacle. Facciolati Tot. Lat. Lex. in voc.

[889] institutionem, Lat.; Erasmus rendering. See Fulke's Defence of Translations of the Bible, Parker Soc. ed. pp. 151, 166.

[890] to bosom, to conceal in privacy. Johnson's Dict.; lout, to bow, bend, or do obeisance; and hence a clown or rustic was so called. Toone's Glossary. Lond. 1834.

[891] Hesiodi "Epg. kai 'Hm. 301. Sophocl. Iphig. apud Stobaei Floril. Tit. xxx. ed. Gaisford, Vol. ii. p. 30.

[892] Engrosser: one who takes the whole; a purchaser of large quantities in a market, to raise the price.

[893] Frank: to shut up in a frank or sty; to pen up; hence, to cram; to fatten.

[894] negotiatione sequa, Lat.; by fair trading.

[895] and make amends for them; not in the original Latin.

[896] male partum male dilabatur, Lat. See Erasmi Adag. Chiliad, p. 727, Hanov. 1617.

[897] negotiatione justa, Lat. – just (judicious or balanced) trading.

[898] So Tyndale, 1534, and Cranmer, 1539; and the Vulgate and Erasmus agree with Bullinger's text, tanquam non utantur.

[899] non jubent nos nullum sperare lucrum, Lat. So 1577; not, is missing in 1587.

[900] feat: employment.

[901] So Tyndale, 1534, and Cranmer, 1539; and the Vulgate and Erasmus, as Bullinger, et si vixerimus.

[902] Scanned: examined minutely or intensely.

[903] lither, lazy, idle, slothful. (North-country word.) Grose's Provincial Glossary. Lond. 1787.

[904] This whole sentence is a paraphrase of the Latin; displicet (Deo) supina rei familiaris negligentia.

[905] Beati omnes qui timent Dominum, qui ambulant in viis ejus, Lat. omitted by the translator; Blessed are all they that fear the Lord, and walk in his ways. Psa 128. Prayer Book Version.

[906] telluris inutile pondus (a burden to the ground), Lat. See Erasmi Adag. Chiliad, p. 138, Hanov. 1617.

[907] See p. ii.197.

[908] Originally, "be argued of": be convicted of, found fault with for.

[909] The foregoing definitions of the Civil Law are collected in Jul. Pacii Isagog. in Instit. etc. p. 395, Traject. ad Rhen. 1680.

[910] Collybus autem, ait Pollux, est permutatio pecunte, Lat. omitted by the translator. Cf. Schleusneri Lex. N. T. sub voc.

[911] medium vel quartale, Lat. The ephah is generally reckoned to have been nearly equal to 6 ½ gallons of our dry measure. Horne's Introd. Vol. iii. p. 534, Lond. 1828.

[912] sextarium vel cyathus, Lat. The hin was 1 gallon, 2 pints, English. Ibid.

[913] gaged: impawned, Johnson.

[914] Deu 24.6, 10-13.

[915] Over-curious: too elaborate; fastidious; in this case, too rigid; ignoring a person's needs and condition.

[916] James 5.4, Sabaoth, Lat. In Cranmer's Bible, 1539, it is Sabbaoth; and in the Geneva New Testament, 1557, "the Lord of Armies."

[917] mere: a boundary, Johnson.

[918] To fode out, or fode forth, with words: to keep in attention and expectation, to feed with words. Nares Glossary in voc.

[919] hinds or husbandmen, colonis suis, Lat.; hind, a servant, Johnson; a peasant or rustic. Toone's Glossary.

[920] Codex Justin. Lugd. 1551, Tom. i. p. 515, Lib. iii. tit. 43.

[921] See Jul. Pacii Isagog. in Digest. Lib. xxii. tit. 1. pp. 189-200, Traject. ad Rhen. 1680.

[922] See page iii.33.

[923] Calvin. Comment, in quat. libr. Mosis. ed. Amstel. 1671, Tom. i. p. 528.

[924] Lev 25.36; Heb neshek, interest (from momordit) from its involving an injurious, biting, system. Lee's Lexicon in voc. and Calvin. Comment. Tom. i. p. 627, col. 2.

[925] nutaveritquo manus ejus tecum, Lat. (and his hand fails with you. Auth. Vers. Marg. reading;) id est, si facultas ejus apud te deficere inceperit, Lat., omitted by the translator: that is, if his means with you begin to fail.

[926] ad nimium, sive excessum, sive superabundantiam, Lat.; for too large, or for excess and superabundance of, increase.

[927] The authorised Version has "the new moon;" but in the margin "month."

[928] So Coverdale's Bible, 1535, has "sycle," from the Latin, siclum, shekel. See Becon's Works, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. ii. p. 109. The Coverdale Bible was the first complete English translation of the Bible (OT and NT). The NT was based on Tyndale's translation, who had been arrested in 1535, and was burned at the stake in 1536, for making an English translation. However, the 1539 folio edition carried the royal licence, making it an "authorized version" posthumously.

[929] Lucre: gain; the excess of revenues over outlays in a given period of time.

[930] See Seckendorf, Comm. de Luth. Lib. iii. Sect. 21. lxxviii. Add. 1.

[931] silly, see note pp. ii.286, ii.351.

[932] The title of this chapter, in the treatise de Officiis Ministrorum, is: Misericordiam etiam cum invidia propria largius exercendam: ad quod refertur memorabilis vasorum sacrorum in captivorum redemtionem ab Ambrosio fractorum historia, et pulcherrima de auri et argenti quae ecclesia possidet legitimo usu prsecipiuntur, etc. Ambrosii Opp. Tom. ii. col. 102, Par. 1690.

[933] In his treatise, De Episcoporum Instit. et Funct. Bullinger instances such an example of Achatius, Tripart. Hist. Lib. ii. cap. 16, and of Cyril, ibid. Lib. v. cap. 37. He alleges also the examples and words of Ambrose, Laurentius, Exuperius, Jerome, and Augustine: cap. 9. fol. 117, Tigur. 1538.

[934] Chananaei, Lat. See Hos. 12.7.

[935] See Jul. Pacii Isagog. in Digest. Lib. xlviii. tit. 14. p. 422, and Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, sub voc. Ambitus.

[936] See Jul. Pacii Isagog. in Digest. Lib. xlviii. tit. 13. p. 421.

[937] poll: plunder.

[938] happily, or haply; Lat. forte.

[939] A. Gell. Noct. Attic. Lib. xi. cap. 18. See also Becon's Works, Parker Soc. ed. Vol. ii. p. 600; and Calvin. Comment. Tom. i. p. 531. col. ii. Amstel. 1671.

[940] Plagium: kidnapping. See Jul. Pacii Isagog. in Digest. Lib. xlviii. tit. 15. p. 422, and Smith's Diet, sub voc. plagium.

[941] "By a law no less politic than humane, established among the cantons (of Switzerland), their troops were not hired out by public authority to both the contending parties in any war. This law the love of gain had sometimes eluded, and private persons had been allowed to enlist in what service they pleased, though not under the public banners, but under those of their officers." Robertson's Hist, of Charles V. book n. Vol. ii. p. 189, Lond. 1782.

[942] Codex Justin. Lugd. 1551, Tom. ii. p. 701, Lib. ix, tit. 20.

[943] Abigel - Jul. Pacii Isagog. in Instit. Lib. xlvii. tit. 14. p. 406, Traject. ad Rhen. 1680.

[944] Alms-deeds: works of charity.

[945] Aug. Opp. Par. 1531, Tom. ii. fol. 48, col. 4.

[946] This expression is the translator's.

[947] sadness: seriousness, earnestness.

[948] ruffling: to ruffle, to put out of form or discompose; but used by old writers to signify the acting in a rough, turbulent, or disorderly manner. Toone's Glossary.

[949] Originally, "put case," an elliptical expression for suppose that it may be so. Johnson.

[950] Psa 62.8-10. See Prayer-book Version.

[951] 1Cor 7.31. See page iii.30.

[952] Col 3.5; 1Tim 6.17.

[953] Deu 8.10-18. Lat. omitted by the translator; The Lord your God will give you a most excellent land, in which you shall not lack anything.

[954] Scruple: an ethical or moral principle that inhibits action, or causes uneasiness about it.

[955] 1Kings 4.20 (commonly called, The Third Book of the Kings, Auth. Ver ). — In Juda et Israela, Lat. omitted by the translator. What was called the First Book of the Kings, is now called First Samuel.

[956] There seems to be some oversight in the mention of Jacob. Concerning Gen 43.34, Ainsworth, in loc. remarks: "largely drank, or drunk themselves merry: were drunken, which word is used for large drinking unto mirth, but with sobriety, Hag. 1.6; John 2.10.

[957] Jocund: full of or showing high-spirited merriment.

[958] Bullinger, adv. Anabap. Lib. i. cap. 10, Tigur. 1560.

[959] The Carthusian order of Monks, so called from their first settlement at Chartreuse, near Grenoble in France, arose in the year 1084 or 1086. They were a branch of the Benedictines, and were the most austere of all the religious sects. Mosheim, Cent. xi. Part 2. Book 3. chap. 2. 27.

[960] ne quid nimis, Lat. – "do not do too much;" i.e., "all things in moderation."

[961] nulla Dei vel fequa lex, Lat.; no law of God or equity.

[962] quod non habet, Lat.; that which he has not.

[963] teruncium, Lat. Dodkin, a small coin, the eighth part of a stiver, a little doit: used as a contemptuous term for things of the smallest value. Toone's Glossary. – a pittance.

[964] This is a free translation of the original Latin, saccis indormiunt. Ruddock, the bird called the robin red-breast: it is also metaphorically used to signify gold coin. Toone's Glossary.

[965] Gen 19.1-3; the assumption is that, "sitting [or, dwelling] in the city gate", his home perhaps served as an inn, with extra rooms in it. Rahab's dwelling likewise was built in the city wall, and served as an inn (Jos 2.15).

[966] Is God good to me? Then come, dear men and good friends.

[967] Originally, " with a trice." – in a twinkling.

[968] congruit prophetica per omnia. Isaias enim etc., Lat.; the doctrine of the prophets agrees in all points. For Isaiah etc.

[969] See Bingham, Antiq. of Christ. Church, Book xvi. chap. 10. sect. 15.

[970] Tobit 4.7. This lesson is given by Tobit to his son, Tobias, according to the authorised Version; but in the Vulgate the names of the father and son are alike Tobias; as also in the earlier English translation of the Bible.

[971] Originally, "stand in stead": to be useful or of good service to someone; to help or benefit.

[972] p. i.188.

[973] Originally, "Tobias" – the son of Tobit; the Book of Tobit is also called the Book of Tobias.

[974] quomodo potueris, ita esto misericors, Lat. and Vulgate. This sentence, however, is omitted in the authorised Version, though retained in the service of the Offertory in the Book of Common Prayer, and given in Coverdale's Bible, 1535.

[975] fratres honorandi, Lat. – honored brothers.

[976] Job v. 7: homo nascitur ad laborem, et avis ad volatum. Vulgate. "Man is borne unto mysery, like as the byrde for to fle." Coverdale's Bible, 1535.

[977] miseriae, Lat. without any epithet.

[978] The persecutions of the Christians by the Romans have, for many ages, been counted ten in number. But the ancient history of the Church does not support precisely this number. Some Christians of the fifth century were led into a belief by certain passages of scripture, especially by one in the Apocalypse, that the Christian body was fated to undergo ten calamities of the heavier kind; they then accommodated history to this opinion, though against her will; however, not all in the same way. Mosheim Eccles. Hist, cent I. Book 1. part i. chap. 5. 4. ed. Soames, and note in loc. Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History (4th c.), and Foxes' Book of Martyrs (1563) standardized the ten persecutions. – WHG

[979] See p. iii.109, etc. Orosius frequently notices these punishments in the 7th book of his Histor. adv. paganos; and the title of the 27th chapter of the same book is, "Collatio populi Israelitici et Christiani, AEgyptiaci item et Romani, quomodo illi pro Deo in adflictionibus, hi a Deo in plagis, similia fere passi sunt."

[980] coram Deo exercituum, Lat.; God of hosts.

[981] Mal 3.14-15; qui Deum tentant, Lat.; "for they tempte God, and yet escape." Coverdale's Bible, 1535.

[982] Originally, "round", Johnson; to roun, Toone: to whisper or speak in secrecy.

[983] pack, a loose or lewd person. Johnson's Dict.

[984] 2Cor 4.7-11. Bullingerhas adopted the translation of Erasmus.

[985] 2Cor 12.9. This is the Vulgate, and not Erasmus , version.

[986] calcare, Lat.; to tread underfoot.

[987] luskish, somewhat inclinable to laziness or indolence. Johnson.

[988] 1Pet 4.12, 13; Erasmus' translation.

[989] So Tyndale's and Cranmer's translations.

[990] Erasmus' translation chiefly.

[991] So Tyndale's and Cranmer's translations.

[992] glorificabit, Lat.; the Versions have glorificavit.

[993] Erasmus' translation.

[994] Ezra and Nehemiah. See Sixth Art. of Religion; "First Book of Ezra, Second Book of Ezra." So also Vulgate.

[995] Originally, "distracted".

[996] in theologia sua, Lat. See p. i.170. n. 6.

[997] edita, Lat.; put forth, published.

[998] Pro 3.11, 12; et tanquam pater in filio delectatur, Lat.; "and yet delights in him even as a father in his owne sonne." Coverdale's translation, 1535.

[999] Bullinger has followed the Latin translation of Eusebius: Euseb. Eccles. Hist. Ruffino Aquil. interprete, lib. viii. cap. 1. p. 183. Basil. 1539.

[1000] morte expianda, Lat. – mortal sins (atone for death).

[1001] obtulit, Lat.; offered. "Father, into Your hands I commend My spirit.'" (Luk 23:46)

[1002] Hurly burly: a disorderly outburst or tumult; irruption: a sudden violent entrance; a bursting in.

[1003] Dissembled: masked or covered over; i.e., not to openly identify and correct sin, enables it to flourish. – WHG

[1004] August. Opp. de Civit. Dei. Lib. I. capp. 8, 9. Tom. v. p. 4, col. 4. p. 5, col. 1, 2, 3. Par. 1531.

[1005] Lat.; omitted by the translator: I mean, affliction and tribulation.

[1006] See p. ii.318. For the miserable end of Maximian see Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. viii. cap. 16, and Lactantius de Mor. Per- secut. cap. 33, and Gibbon, chap. xiv. p. 213. Vol. ii. ed. Lond. 1820.

[1007] persentiscere incipiunt, Lat.; they begin to feel.

[1008] James 5.5. Bullinger has adopted Erasmus' renderings.

[1009] In his Commentary Bullinger prefers the other explanation of this comparison: in deliciis lascive pascitis cuticulam vestram, quotidiana agitantes convivia, non minus splendida quam alii solent festo die mactata victima.

[1010] consecra sive destina, Lat.; sanctify or set apart; וְקִדַּשְׁתּ , Heb sanctifica, Vulg.

[1011] nuspiam, Lat. ; nowhere.

[1012] honorandi fratres, Lat.

[1013] Originally, "quail": to draw back, as with fear or pain.

[1014] Job was not a little afflicted when he cried out, "Why did I not die at birth? Why did I not perish when I came from the womb?" (Job 3.11) Bullinger is only saying that some like to say thisat every minor difficulty.

[1015] sibi ipsis violentam et armatam manum inferunt, Lat. – to self-inflict violence with an armed hand (suicide).

[1016] instar lapidis, Lat.; like a stone.

[1017] Calvin's word is sapientia [wisdom]; but Bullinger reads patientia [patience].

[1018] speculando, Lat. – speculation.

[1019] trill: trickle, fall in drops. Johnson.

[1020] non leviter consternatum, Lat. – no slight consternation (shock); perhaps referring to Jesus weeping at Lazarus' death (Joh 11.33-38); or in contemplation of Jerusalem's imminent destruction (Mat 23.33-39). – WHG

[1021] or a stone, etc. not in Lat. – the translator inserted it here from above (see prior note: instar lapidus).

[1022] exhilarati respirent, Lat. – breathless exhilaration.

[1023] humanitatem non exuerat, Lat. – human frailties.

[1024] observantia, Lat.

[1025] Atqui Dominus ita voluit; Well, but so is the will of the Lord!

[1026] Calvini Instit. Lib. iii. cap. 8. 8, 9, 10. ed. Amstel. Tom. ix. p. 185.

[1027] Patientia est malorum, quae aut inferuntur, aut accidunt, cum aequanimitate perlatio. – Lactant. Divin. Instit. Lib. v. cap. 22, p. 530. Lugd. Bat. 1660.

[1028] coelesti, Lat. – heavenly.

[1029] Luke 22.52, 53. Bullinger has adopted Erasmus translation. The Vulgate reads the former sentence interrogatively, as our English authorised version.

[1030] prosopopoeia, Lat. – figure of speech in which an absent or imaginary person is represented as speaking.

[1031] Tertull. de Patientia. ed. Semler. Tom. iv. p. 87. Hal. Mag. 1824.

[1032] That is, suppresses.

[1033] Bullinger has, persecutiones et martyria.

[1034] Cypr. Opp. p. 219. Oxon. 1682.

[1035] Heb 10.35-39. Erasmus' version. So also Tyndale's and Cranmer's translations. NKJ: "but of those who believe to the saving of the soul."

[1036] "Casts no man in the teeth" – God doesn't throw it in our face; i.e., He doesn't criticize us for needing to ask.

[1037] Jas 1.5; Patientia perficit, Lat.; omitted by the translator: Patience makes perfect; opus perfectum habet. Vulg.

[1038] Saulinos potentissimos, Lat.; the partisans of Saul, who were most powerful.

[1039] 1Pet 1.13, our Translation, hope "to the end:" in the margin, perfectly: the original is telios. Tyndale's, Cranmer's, and the Geneva Versions all render it, "trust perfectly on the grace that is brought to you." Bullinger has adopted Erasmus' translation.

[1040] Psa 91.9, Prayer-book Version.

[1041] Lat.; the mind of man, eagerly longing after good, however in the mean time, etc.

[1042] hoc potissimum nomine, Lat.; on this consideration above all.

[1043] Psa 22.4, 5. (DRA)

[1044] Psa 22.9, 10 (Prayer-book version), and 31.15.

[1045] The translator has made a great mistake here; for Bullinger now proceeds to describe the conduct and language of the children of this world, not of the sons of God, under afflictions.

[1046] For all this read, These (children of this world). On the other side, is not in Lat.

[1047] Bullinger here also gives the German phrase, Ich musz wohl.

[1048] The Latin is more lively: Si ergo possis, audio quid facturus sis. Had you then but the power, your words tell me what you would do.

[1049] justum et patrem benignissimum, Lat.; is just, and a most merciful Father.

[1050] mentientes, Lat.; speaking falsely.

[1051] neque mihi gratus es, Lat, omitted; neither are you pleasing to me.

[1052] Psa 147.3, and 146.7, 8; and 103.9, 10, 12.

[1053] his professors, not in the Latin.

[1054] patientiam afflictionesque, Lat.; my patience and afflictions.

[1055] 1Pet 1.6. ad breve tempus, Erasmus' translation, which Bullinger adopts.

[1056] Rom 8.17, 18. 2Cor 4.17, 18. Erasmus' translation.

[1057] Luke 13.11. Decubuit contracta, Lat.

[1058] Ad probaticam piscinam, Lat.; so the Vulgate, est autem Jerosolymis probatica piscina: and the Douay Version; Now there is at Jerusalem a pond, called Probatica. Bethesda is not in Bullinger's original.

[1059] tripudium ac celeusma, Lat.; triumph and encouragement.

[1060] a dilectione Dei, Lat. and Erasmus, from the love of God: but the Vulgate has, a charitate Christi.

[1061] bona, Lat.; good things.

[1062] Heb. שָׁמָּה hither, Auth. Vcr. Cyprian quotes it, naked also shall I go under the earth. Adv. Jud. Lib. iii. cap. 6.

[1063] So the Vulgate and Coverdale, The Lord has done his pleasure: and Cyprian.

[1064] vel retinere vel augere, Lat.; either to keep, or to increase.

[1065] Ovid. Fast. Lib. i. 493.

[1066] sepulti et demersi in inferos, Lat.; who was buried, and plunged into hell.

[1067] peccati, Lat.; of sin.

[1068] ab ipsis incunabulis, is Bullinger's phrase – from the cradle.

[1069] The persecution in Nero's reign began a.d. 64, (he became emperor a.d. 54), and Constantine succeeded Maxentius, a.d. 312; so that the interval is 248 years. See Burton's Hist, of Christ. Church, Chap. v. p. 128, and Chap. xvii. p. 392. Lond. 1845.

[1070] Bullinger's words are: Concessis tamen nonnunquam intervallis quibusdam, satis quidem accisis, quibus respiraret ecclesia: although indeed occasionally some intervals were granted, short enough in good sooth, wherein the church might take breath.

[1071] Aug. de Civ. Dei, Lib. xviii. cap. 52. Par. 1531. Tom. v. fol. 251. See Euseb. Eccl. Hist. iii. 18, 36; iv. 15; vi. 1, 41; vii. 11, 30, etc.

[1072] We have no account of the death of Irenaeus upon which we can absolutely depend; and there is a doubt whether he was martyred or not.

[1073] graphice, Lat. – graphically.

[1074] a.d. 306.

[1075] These martyrs (ex Thebeea legione) are thus mentioned in the Ephemeris, Bed. Opp. Tom. i. p. 206. Col. Agrip. 1612. Septemb. 3 Id. — They suffered September 11, a.d. 281. See Hospinian. de festis Christian, p. 143. Genev. 1674.

[1076] Tartarorum, Turcarum denique, Lat.; and lastly of the Turks.

[1077] pseudo-pontifices, Lat.; the false bishops: butcherly is not in the original.

[1078] Annoyed: here it means worried, like a dog tearing at the flesh, worrying it.

[1079] Joh 15.19-21; 16.1, 2.

[1080] The following texts are put in the margin of the Latin original of Bullinger; Psa 22, 69. Isa 49, 51. Dan 7, 8, 11. Zech 13.

[1081] Zec 12.2, 3. calix soporis, Lat.; a cup of trembling, Auth. Ver.; slumber, marg. reading.

[1082] So also Coverdale, 1535.

[1083] Jer 25.15, 16, 29.

[1084] Nero destroyed himself a.d. 68, and the second year of Honorius and Theodosius was a.d. 410. Usher's Annals, Vol. ii. p. 694. Lond. 1654. Gibbon's Dec. and Fall, ch. 32, Vol. v. p. 411. Lond. 1820.

[1085] Bullinger details more fully these invasions of Rome in his treatise on the Revelation. Sermons lvii. & lxxvl

[1086] 412th, Lat. and ed. 1577. The date in Gibbon is Aug. 24, 410. Vol. v. p. 310, ch. 31.

[1087] a.d. 455, June 1529. Gibbon, ch. 36, Vol. vi. p. 151.

[1088] a.d. 476, or 479. Gibbon, Vol. vi. p. 226, etc.

[1089] a.d. 493. Gibbon, ch. 39, Vol. vii. p. 15.

[1090] a.d. 536. Gibbon, ch. 41, Vol. vii. p. 224.

[1091] a.d. 546. Gibbon, chap. 43, Vol. viz. p. 366; and again, after a repulse, finally taken a.d. 549. ibid. p. 375.

[1092] a.d. 568-570. Gibbon, chap. 45, Vol. viii. p. 126, etc.

[1093] pseudo-pontifices, Lat.

[1094] See above, p. iii.79.

[1095] Beck: a nod or other beckoning gesture (as in "beck and call").

[1096] ut imago respondeat archetypo, is Bullinger's Latin.

[1097] Ainsworth translates, you shall not answer.

[1098] Pro 6.16, 19, & 19.5, 9.

[1099] Hist. Sus. 61-62. Susanna was martyred c. 295 AD. See Foxe's Monuments (i.e., Book of Martyrs).

[1100] Cozening: cheating or defrauding someone.

[1101] August. Opp.Par. 1531. Tom. iv. fol. 5. col. 1.

[1102] Exceptis jocis, quae nunquam sunt putata mendacia. August. Tom. iv. fol. 2.1 – except jokes (jocularity), which have never been considered lies.

[1103] fingo, Lat. to fitton, to form lies or fictions. Nares.

[1104] Judith 10, etc. (Apocrypha, Judith 13.8; also sp. "Holofernes").

[1105] Jerome, Apol. adv. Rufin. Lib. i. Tom iv. col. 369. Par. 1706.

[1106] Jerome, Comment, in. Ep. ad Gal. cap. ii. Opp. Tom. iv. col. 243.

[1107] Jerome's Epistle on this subject is Ep. 74. Opp. Tom. iv. col. 618-626. Augustine's letters are given in the same place, and in August. Opp. Ep. viii. ix. xix. Tom. ii. fol. 8, 9, 14, etc. Par. 1531.

[1108] August. Opp. ad Consent. Tom. iv. fol. IT. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[1109] Pasquils: satires - From the Latin Pasquillus, the name of a fictitious Roman author of satirical verses.

[1110] Originally "malapert": bold; forward; impudent; also saucy; pert (cheeky).

[1111] diabolos – 1Tim 3.11; Tit. 2.3; 2Tim 3.3. Schleusneri Lex. in voc.

[1112] aut minimum. Lat. omitted: or as gently as may possibly be.

[1113] Bullinger follows the Vulgate.

[1114] et increpabit me, Lat. omitted: and shall reprove me.

[1115] oleum autem peccatoris non impinguabit caput meum, Lat. after the Vulgate, Psa 141.5.

[1116] Facit autem. Lat. But this makes. See p. ii.213.

[1117] ad conservationem ac propagationem, Lat., to the preservation and propagation.

[1118] Originally "draught": a latrine, outhouse, sewer, or waste ditch.

[1119] Inde sequitur fere consensus, Lat. There usually follows consent.

[1120] in nobis latentem atque, Lat., omitted: which lurks in us, and.

[1121] Helvetice, Lat., in our Swiss phrase.

[1122] Prohibet furta, dolos, imposturas, Lat. omitted: it forbids thefts, cheatings, and impositions.

[1123] et noxias, Lat. omitted: and hurtful.

[1124] p. ii.209.

[1125] Macrob. Saturn. Lib. iii. cap. 3. See also Aul. Grell. Noct. Attic. Lib. iv. cap. 9. Augustine adopted this derivation. Retract, cap. 37.

[1126] alii existimant, Lat. omitted: some persons think that.

[1127] Festus, Lutet, 1576.

[1128] Sacra Romanorum, Lat.

[1129] Sacra in plaustrum imposuit (L. Albinius), et Caere, quo iter sacerdotibus erat, pervexit. Liv. Lib. v. cap. 40.

[1130] velandaque, Lat. and to veil.

[1131] In the religion of Rome during the Republic, a flamen was a priest assigned to one of fifteen deities with official cults. The most important three were the major priests, who served the three chief Roman gods of the Archaic Triad.

[1132] This epithet is not in the Lat.

[1133] August. Januario Ep. cxix. Par. 1531. Tom. ii. fol. 112. col. 1. A very similar passage, with the same quotation from Augustine, occurs in Wicliffe's Apology for the Lollards, Camden Soc. ed. p. 75. Lond. 1842.

[1134] Exo 25.49; Act 7.44; Heb 8.5.

[1135] See pp. ii.335, 6.

[1136] Heb 9.10 [time of reformation, or of restoration].

[1137] Gal. 3.24; paedagogia, Lat. – an instructor or tutor till a child comes of age.

[1138] velata abscondebantur, Lat.; being veiled, were hidden.

[1139] Exo 29.18, 25, 41-46; Num 15, etc.

[1140] legitime et, Lat. omitted: lawfully, and.

[1141] in fide Christi venturi Messiae, Lat. – the future Messiah.

[1142] the sacrifice — all; not in the original. Heb 7.27; 9.12, 26; 10.2, 10; 1Pet 3.18.

[1143] rather, of the law that has been abrogated: legis abrogatse, Lat.

[1144] temerarii, Lat. Shittle or shuttle; light, volatile, giddy. Richard son's Diet, in voc.

[1145] In his treatise do Episcop. instit. et funct. cap. i. Bullinger shows that here he follows the vetus Judoeorum traditio.

[1146] Esau and Jacob, instead of Cain and Abel. This correction of the translator is perhaps not necessary. Bullinger probably took Calvin's view. Conf. Calv. Comment, in loc.

[1147] Gen 49.3, 4; 1Chr 5.1.

[1148] Gen 34; 49.5-7.

[1149] Eze 42.14. alienis, id est, vulgaribus vcstimentis amicti (sacerdotes) multitudini admiscebantur. Oecolampadius, Comment, in loc. cit. fol. 264. Argent, 1534.

[1150] In the following account of the garments of the Jewish priests Bullinger has largely borrowed from Jerome's Epist. ad Fabiolam, de veste sacerdotali. Jerome, Opp. Par. 1693 1706. Tom. ii. col. 574, etc.

[1151] Joseph. Antiq. Lib. iii. cap. 7.

[1152] aqua munda, Lat. pure water.

[1153] caligarum nostrarum, Lat. Slops: trowsers, Johnson. Homily (Oxf. ed. 1832, p. 285) Against excess of Apparel. But the corresponding word in the auth. ver. of Isa 3.20, there quoted, is "the ornaments of the legs."

[1154] Joseph, ibid. § 2. Exo 28.40.

[1155] camisia, Lat. a linen coat, which soldiers wore close to their body. Ainsworth.

[1156] Joseph, ibid. 2.

[1157] Joseph, ibid. 3. Exo 28.40.

[1158] Jdg 17.5; 18.14; 1Sam 2.18.

[1159] vestis inquam sinuosa, Lat. omitted: a plaited garment.

[1160] Exo 28.31-35. Joseph, ibid. § 4.

[1161] curet, or curiet, a breastplate or corslet, from cuir, leather; breastplates being at first made of that material. Toone's Glossary in voc.

[1162] Stomacher: garment consisting of a V-shaped panel of stiff material worn over the chest and stomach in the 16th c.

[1163] The word which Luther's version has is leibrock.

[1164] Joseph, ibid. § 5. and de Bell. Jud. Lib. v. cap. 5. 7.

[1165] gemmae pretiosse, Lat. omitted: precious stones.

[1166] Exo 28.15-29. Josephus, ib. 5.

[1167] Lev 8.8 LXX. deloosis kai aletheia "manifestation and truth" LXE; Bullinger. de Epic, instit. et funct. Lib. ii. fol. 70.

[1168] That name was Jehovah, which wherever the Israelites found it written, they did not call Jehovah, but expressed it by the word Adonai, which signifies Lord: so greatly did they reverence the majestic name of God.

[1169] Jerome, Ep. ad Fabiol. Tom. ii. col. 581. Par. 1693 1706. Editor's marginal note: That name was Jehovah, which wherever the Israelites found it written, they did not call Jehovah, but expressed it by the word Adonai, which signifies Lord: so greatly did they reverence the majestic name of God.

[1170] commune omnium sacerdotum. Lat. omitted: which was common to all the priests.

[1171] Exo 28.36-38. Joseph, ibid. § 6.

[1172] Comeliness: here it means attractiveness, beauty or splendor.

[1173] non minimum officiorum, Lat.: and that, not the least of their duties.

[1174] juge convivium, Lat. : a continual feast. Pro 15.15.

[1175] rem facero divinam, administrarc inquam, Lat. : to perform the service of God, I mean etc.

[1176] The Mosaic Law did not require the priests to be the operators.

[1177] So ed. 1577: places, ed. 1584 and 1587; partes, Lat.

[1178] sacerdotum, Lat.: in the priests hands.

[1179] Jerusalem is not in the Latin.

[1180] A thousand cubits geometical makes one mile, and 500 paces, reckoning five feet to every pace. A synagogue was a place for people to assemble themselves together to hear the word or law of the Lord (Deu 16.16).

[1181] The tabernacle of the congregation. Auth. ver. (or tent of meeting, Exo 39.32, 40)

[1182] Pliny Hist. Nat. viii. 74.

[1183] Tache: used to catch or hold something in place.

[1184] badgers' skins. Auth. ver.

[1185] Chancel: the area around the altar of a church for the clergy and choir; often enclosed by a lattice or railing.

[1186] Exo 40.26, 27; Luk 1.9.

[1187] The Latin copy here squares [departs] from the words of the twenty-sixth chapter of Exodus, where we find (as I have turned it) that the table stood on the north side, whereas the Latin copy says, on the south side, and calls it pars australis.

[1188] Joseph. Antiq. Lib. iii. cap. vi. § 8.

[1189] referring to Psalm 50.14 (our Psa 51.12), which the Vulgate renders, spiritu principali confirma me.

[1190] as the holy apostle, ed. 1577.

[1191] et omnibus in lege satisfactum,Lat.

[1192] purissimae carnis, Lat.; of the most holy flesh.

[1193] ac omnis boni, Lat.; omitted: and of every good thing.

[1194] et virtus, Lat.; omitted: and strength.

[1195] in urbes Palaestinorum, Lat.; among the cities of the Philistines. 1Sam 5.

[1196] Accordingly, the one and self-same Hebrew word is rendered in our authorised version, in 1Sam 7.1, in the hill, and in 2Sam 6.3, in Gibeah.

[1197] 2Sam 6.10, 12. 1Kng 8.1.

[1198] vel excelso, Lat.; or high place.

[1199] 1Kng 8.4; 2Chr 5.5.

[1200] According to Usher, 486 years, viz. from 1490 BC to 1004 BC

[1201] aternum efficax, Lat.; everlastingly effectual.

[1202] quern sacrificia et tempi! et veterum omnia prsefigurarunt, Lat.: of whom all the sacrifices both of the temple and of the ancients were a type.

[1203] According to Usher, 416 years; viz. from 1004 BC to 588 BC

[1204] ad secundum excidium, Lat.; until the second destruction.

[1205] According to Usher, 585 years; viz. from 515 BC to 70 A. D.

[1206] Facciolati Tot. Lat. Lex. i voc. Erasmi Adag. Chil. p. 364. Hanov. 1617.

[1207] in cista Chananaica ac Romanensi indulgentiaria, Lat.; in the Canaanitish and Romish indulgence-chest. See above page iii.45, note 7.

[1208] nulla in eo peccati spina existente, Lat. omitted: there being in him no thorn of sin. The allusion in this phrase is, of course, to the white-thorn, or sittim-wood, mentioned above.

[1209] lex et verbum, Lat.; the law and word.

[1210] Rom 3.25; 1Joh 2.2.

[1211] Convenient: here it means suitable.

[1212] Bulling, de Episcop. Instit. et funct. cap. 6. fol. 88. Tig. 1538.

[1213] cibus noster, Lat.; our food.

[1214] The bracketed text is not in the original.

[1215] See p. i.102. note 3.

[1216] panes propositions, sive facierum, Lat. In Heb called bread of faces, or of presence. Ainsworth on Exo 25.30.

[1217] Snuff or nose: the burning part of a candle wick.

[1218] cannae in suprema parte habentes lumina, Lat.; reed-like branches having lights at their extremities.

[1219] Chambering: being lascivious, lewd, or lustful (taking to the bedroom).

[1220] The Latin is, et septimi mensis; and (the feast) of the seventh month.

[1221] Originally, "Godolias" (Jer 41.4 DRA).

[1222] See Decade 2. Serm. 4.

[1223] That is, unleavened bread.

[1224] to shoot into a long small stalk. Johnson's Dict.

[1225] See below, page iii.179.

[1226] two loaves, Levit. 23.16, 17.

[1227] de area tua et de torculari tuo, Lat. and Marg. of Auth. Ver.; your floor and your winepress.

[1228] Bullinger here recounts the chief religious anniversaries of the seventh month, Tisri, in which also the Feast of Tabernacles occurred: cohserent enim inter se festa quatuor, as he says in his Comment, in Joan. Lib. iv. fol. 78. Tigur. 1556.

[1229] Levit. 16.21. See Lightfoot's Temple Service, chap, xv.

[1230] For this statement Bullinger refers, in his Comment, in Joan. Lib. iv. fol. 78, to Lev 23 and Num 29.

[1231] Psa 8, LXXX, and 83, as they are numbered in the Vulgate, bear the title, Pro torcularibus, for the presses (Douay Bible): the title in our Auth. Ver. is upon Gittith.

[1232] veterem nimirum, ad terrain viventium, Lat.; that is, the ancient country, to the land of the living: 'that is — faithful,' is the translator's addition.

[1233] Nonagesimum nonum, Lat.; ninety years old and nine. Gen 17.24.

[1234] According to Abp. Usher, these dates are as follows: Circumcision was instituted A.M. 2107 [anno mundi, after the Creation], after the deluge 450 years, when Shem was 549 years old, before Moses birth 326 years, and before the giving of the law 400 years. But see page i.42, note; and The Old Faith, in works of Coverdale, Parker Soc. ed. p. 36.

[1235] jam profugum, Lat.; now become an outcast.

[1236] See p. ii.215, note 6.

[1237] Gen 15.18; 17.8.

[1238] tabularum, Lat.

[1239] See Gen 17.9, 13. My covenant, that is, the sign of my covenant, or testament, as is explained in verse 11. Ainsworth on Gen 17.10.

[1240] See above, p. iii.141.

[1241] verse 2, sharp knives, Auth. Ver.; marg. knives of flints. Obsidian knives are sharper than modern scalpels.

[1242] Cf. Augustin. Expos, in Evang. Joan. Tract. xxx.

[1243] Shifts: shifty arguments; contrived or deceptive explanations used when others fail.

[1244] sciant se, Lat.; may know that they are.

[1245] venture, Lat.; who was to come.

[1246] 1Sam 17; Act 11.

[1247] Luk 1.59; 2.21.

[1248] Lactant. Instit. Lib. iv. cap. 17. Lugd. Bat. 1660, p. 406.

[1249] ecclesiastico, Lat.; ecclesiastical, ed. 1577.

[1250] Passed or stood over for defence. Lee's Heb Lex. in voc.

[1251] Trope: a metaphor or other figurative language.

[1252] p. iii.172.

[1253] According to Abp. Usher the Passover was instituted, as Bullinger also says, 430 years after Abraham's call, Gen 12., but A.M. 2513 [anno mundi, after the Creation], and 857 years after the deluge. But see Bullinger's Treatise, The Old Faith, in Coverdale's Fruitful Lessons, etc. p. 36.

[1254] The Equinoctial is when the day and night are both of one length, and comes twice in a year, to with, the 8^th of April, and the 8^th of October. The Jews began to reckon from one to twelce, as we begin to reckon from seven in the morning till six at night; and so it was, that our three o'clock to them, and our five, eleven to them. The ninth hour of the Jews is three o'clock in the afternoon to us.

[1255] inter vesperas, Lat.; between the two evenings. Marg. Auth. Ver. Exo 12.6.

[1256] 1Pet 1.11. Bullinger has adopted the translation, not of the Vulgate, but of Erasmus. Calvin similarly understands the apostle's phrase: prophetas scrutatos esse quo temporis articulo advenerit Christi regnum. Comment, in loc. cit.

[1257] Exo 12.43-49. Joseph, de Bell. Jud. Lib. vi. cap. 9. § 3.

[1258] multa fide et diligentia, Lat.; great faithfulness and diligence.

[1259] excipiebant, Lat.; received.

[1260] in Ægypto, Lat.; in Egypt.

[1261] liberationis perpetuse, Lat. – perpetual liberation.

[1262] Psa 136.1, 10, 12. The eleventh verse is also quoted in the Latin.

[1263] John 1.29. peccatum mundi, Lat.

[1264] of which — a type, not in Lat.

[1265] See p. iii.38, note 3.

[1266] libertos, Lat.; freed men.

[1267] gratitudinis praesertim et, Lat.; especially of thankfulness, and, etc.

[1268] 1Cor 5.8, Erasmus' rendering.

[1269] push, a pimple, an eruption. Johnson's Dict.

[1270] tetter, a scab; a scurf; a ringworm. Ibid.

[1271] עוֹלָה (olah kaliyl)

[1272] The corresponding Hebrew name is וְכָלִיל (holocaust). Deu 33.10. Ps. 51.19.

[1273] Jointed: the meat was separated at the joint.

[1274] a gift to God in sacrifice, generally unbloody, and consisting of various fruits, flour, oil, etc. Lee's Heb Lex. in voc.

[1275] that Lamb, ed. 1577; agnus ille, Lat.

[1276] This sentence between brackets is an addition of the translator's.

[1277] Viz. the Miracle Plays, or Mysteries the Easter representations of our Lord's crucifixion and resurrection, etc. Brand's Pop. Antiq. Vol. 1. – fantastical: existing in fantasy only, or ludicrously odd.

[1278] Heb 8.24, "has an unchangeable priesthood; one that cannot pass on to a successor. See Schleusner. P.

[1279] his fleshly — to ours, not in Lat.; he is altogether, etc.

[1280] summi nostri Pontificis, Lat.; our High-priest.

[1281] incensum aromaticum contusum, Lat.; of beaten, pounded, aromatics.

[1282] Heb. 5.7, pro reverentia, Lat.; for his piety. Auth. Ver. marg. – εὐλαβείας (eulabeias) godly fear, reverence.

[1283] See Lightfoot's Temple Service, chap. 15. Works, Vol. i. p. 963. Lond. 1684. See above, p. iii.165, note 9.

[1284] totius ecclesiae, Lat.

[1285] Schleusner, in voc.

[1286] Isa 53.6, 8, 5. For the payne of oure punyshmet shal be layde upo him. Coverdale, 1535. But this last quotation in the Latin is of verse 4: Vere languores nostros ipse tulit, et dolores nostros ipse portavit.

[1287] By fits: in bursts or flurries of activity.

[1288] omnium, Lat.; stir and solemnity, not in Lat.

[1289] Lev 16.21, 22, 30, 34.

[1290] 1Cor 16.22; 2Cor 11.3, 13; Gal 1.8, 9; 3.1, 3; 5.4; Eph 4.14; Phi 3.2.

[1291] vix alius, Lat.; scarce any other.

[1292] This water was also called the water of separation, and the water of expiation; because those upon whom it was sprinkled, were separated for a time from the rest of the people, till they were cleansed by it.

[1293] ardere amore divino et extolli, Lat. 'As red as scarlet,' is the translator's addition.

[1294] morientis et jam extincti Christ!, Lat.; of Christ, when dying, and now already dead.

[1295] margaritae, Lat.; pearls, Mat 7.6.

[1296] coram mundo, Lat.; as the world esteems it. The translator missed the meaning of these words, when he rendered them, "to lay before the world." Bullinger had in his mind 1Cor 1.20-29.

[1297] thruma, a heave-offering; thnupha, waving, shaking of sacrifices before Jehovah, a particular rite in offering. Gesenius, Heb and Eng. Lex. in voc.

[1298] Heb. confession, praise.

[1299] common to all men, not in Lat.

[1300] porro, Lat.; further.

[1301] a vow; a voluntary offering.

[1302] jubebantur, Lat.; they were commanded.

[1303] of the two, not in Lat.

[1304] atque adeo, Lat.; and so too.

[1305] catecheses, Lat.

[1306] Deo, Lat.; unto God.

[1307] res inanimes, Lat.; lifeless things.

[1308] aestimatione cequa, Lat.; fair valuation.

[1309] Votary: the one making a vow.

[1310] Jdg 13.7; 1Sam 1.11.

[1311] Amos 2.11; Lam 4.7.

[1312] consecration. Hence by metonymy, the consecrated head (of a Nazarite); and even (the primary idea being neglected), the long, unshorn hair (of a woman). Gesenius, Heb. and Eng. Lex. in voc.

[1313] veluti obvelata, Lat.; covered as with a veil.

[1314] vel, Lat.; even at.

[1315] super mortuo, Lat.; by a dead body. Seeing of, not in Lat.

[1316] Jdg 13.25; 14.6, 19; 15.14.

[1317] Originally, "polled."

[1318] Rather, and when on his account the name of God (male audiret, Lat.) was evil spoken of.

[1319] ad quos vocatus fuerat, Lat. omitted; unto whom he had been called.

[1320] id est, si quid virtutis, Lat.; that is, whatever virtue.

[1321] craticulam, Lat.; gridiron.

[1322] Originally, " malapertness."

[1323] 1Macc 2.2; 2Macc 6.18, etc.; 2Macc 7.

[1324] among wicked men, not in Lat.

[1325] et praecedat obedientia fidei, Lat.; the obedience of faith go before.

[1326] in quibusdam, Lat.; in some of.

[1327] sibi temperarunt, Lat.; have abstained.

[1328] Toys: A vague fancy, a ridiculous idea or notion; a silly tale.

[1329] certe, Lat.; without a doubt.

[1330] Lev 19.2; 20.7, 8; 21.8, etc.

[1331] Affection: this is not emotion; rather, it is the passion, desire, or motivation that drives our actions. Desires may be good or bad, fleshly or spiritual. Now, hunger is an affection for food which is natural and acceptable. However, gluttony is an excessive affection, far exceeding the need. It is a distortion or corruption of a natural affection. The mind, having its judgment directed by God's word, must choose which affections are godly, and which limits are exceeded. – WHG

[1332] modis omnibus, Lat.; by all means.

[1333] the jerboa. The name is probably derived from the animal's burrowing. Lee's Lex. in voc.

[1334] and never heaven, not in Lat.

[1335] qui et proverbiis locum dedit, is the Lat. of this sentence.

[1336] Hom. Od. Lib. x.

[1337] spe firma, Lat. – firm hope.

[1338] alacres, Lat. – enthusiastic.

[1339] in sancta, Lat.; into the holy places.

[1340] blood, not the blood.

[1341] utpote, Lat.; inasmuch as it was.

[1342] et rationibus, Lat.; and reasons.

[1343] Exo 22; Lev 7.24; 19.26.

[1344] per divinam gratiam, Lat. ; by the grace of God.

[1345] et cultum sacrum, Lat.; and upon the holy worship.

[1346] gratulatoria seu eucharistica, Lat.

[1347] vel institute, Lat.; or institution.

[1348] ab optimo et sapientissimo Deo, Lat.; of the most excellent and most wise God.

[1349] universa historia sacra, Lat. ; all the sacred history.

[1350] He is by Augustine (de Civit. Dei, Lib. xviii. cap. 8 and 39) made a late contemporary of Moses.

[1351] In Euseb. Chron. A.M. 3765 are placed "Rhadamanthus et Sarpedon reges Lyciorum." Moses is there placed from A.M. 3608 to 3728. Augustine (de Civit. Dei, Lib. xviii. cap. 12.) places Rhadamanthus in the interval between the Exodus and the death of Joshua.

[1352] legislatorem suum, Lat.; their lawgiver. Lactantius, on the authority of Cicero (de Nat. Deor. Lib. iii.) having stated that there were five Mercuries, says: quintum fuisse eum, a quo occisus sit Argus: ob eamque causam in Ægyptum profugisse; atque Ægyptiis leges ac literas tradidisse. Hunc Ægyptii Thoth appellant. — Lactant. Div. Instit. Lib. i. cap. 6. pp. 29, 30. Lugd. Bat. 1660.

[1353] The one called Diphyes, that is, Geminus, or duplicis naturae, because he first ordained matrimony among the Grecians.

[1354] Cecrops is placed by Abp. Usher, BC 1556, a little after the birth of Moses. In Euseb. Chron. under date A.M. 3615, it is said: Quidam scribunt Athlantem fratrem Promethei, et Argum cuncta cernentem his fuisse temporibus; alii vero aetate Cecropis (i.e. A.M. 3640.)

[1355] Draco, BC 624. Solon, 594. Minos is placed by Euseb. Chron. thirty years later than Rhadamanthus. Charondas at Thurium, 446. Phoroneus is placed in Euseb. Chron. about the 110th year of Isaac's age. Lycurgus, 884. Pythagoras, 547. Romulus, 753. Numa, 715. Plato de Legibus, cir. 367. See also Polydor. Vergil, de rer. invent. Lib. ii. cap. 1; and Augustin. de Civit. Dei. Lib. xviii. cap. 3, 8, 25.

[1356] Cic. de Legib. Lib. 11. cap. 4.

[1357] See p. ii.339.

[1358] spectatae probitatis viros, Lat.; men of tried probity. Heb and Auth. Ver. known. Vulg. quorum conversatio sit probata.

[1359] Constitues tibi, Lat.; you shall make you.

[1360] non agnoscetis facies, Lat.; you shall not acknowledge faces. Auth. Ver. Marg. – i.e., show no favoritism.

[1361] ne flectas judicium, Lat.; you shall not wrest judgment. Auth. Ver. – Originally, "Do not decline in judgment."

[1362] Non enim justificabo impium, Lat. omitted by the translator; for I will not justify the wicked.

[1363] multis et validis rationibus, Lat. omitted; with many and powerful reasons.

[1364] statuas, Lat.; statues, or pillars. Auth. Ver. Marg.

[1365] lapidem figuratum, Lat.; a stone of picture, or figured stone. Auth. Ver. Marg.

[1366] Deu 19.15, 16, 18, 19.

[1367] Deo nuncupatum, Lat.; made to God.

[1368] Manumission: the formal act of freeing from slavery.

[1369] Originally, "nether lap."

[1370] See above, page iii.47.

[1371] Cozening: being false or dishonest with someone; deceiving them.

[1372] mere: a boundary. Johnson.

[1373] See above, p. iii.44-48.

[1374] Sustentat ex eo vitam suam, Lat. So Vulg. and Coverdale, 1535, "and his life (is) susteyned therwith." Ainsworth in loc.: "And unto it he lifts up his soul; that is, hopes for and desires it for the maintenance of his life."

[1375] mow, a heap of corn or hay; when laid up in a house, said to be in mow; when heaped together in a field, in rick. Johnson's Dict.

[1376] Exo 22.5, 6; Lev 24.18-21.

[1377] Codex Justin. Lib. viii. tit. 10, de sedificiis privatis. Tom. ii. Lugd. 1551.

[1378] Or, "a heavy and a light."

[1379] Exo 22.18; Deu 24.16.

[1380] Mathematicis, Lat. See p. ii.221, note 7. – astrologers.

[1381] Lev 19.31 – mediums.

[1382] Originally, "merced."

[1383] elohim, plural, which is used both for gods and judges. The KJV translates it "God."

[1384] The translator's addition.

[1385] Currish: base and cowardly.

[1386] That is, it is "an act of God."

[1387] bladers, latronibus, Lat. – armed thieves (cut-throats).

[1388] non veneficis aut parricidis, Lat. – not murderers or killers of family members.

[1389] quae fit voluntate destinata per insidias aut malevolentiam, Lat.; which is perpetrated of set purpose by lying in wait or malice.

[1390] qua potui diligentia, Lat.; with my best diligence.

[1391] nostrarum, Lat.; our souls.

[1392] adeoque, Lat.; and so a.

[1393] certe, Lat. undoubtedly.

[1394] Deu 27.26; Gal 3.10.

[1395] So the Vulgate; and Coverdale, 1535.

[1396] item, Lat.; – answer back.

[1397] Job 9.2, 3, 15.

[1398] Originally, "looking glass."

[1399] res nostras, Lat. – our affairs.

[1400] non imputabatur, vel reputabatur, Lat.; or not considered, Rom 5.13.

[1401] Rom 4.15; 3.20.

[1402] occasione accepta, peccatum per praeceptum genuit, Lat.; and Erasmus.

[1403] protinus, Lat.; and immediately.

[1404] to the believers, not in Lat.

[1405] morbum, Lat. – disease.

[1406] ut mederetur etiam, Lat.; but to heal also.

[1407] ab omni operum nostrorum respectu, Lat.; from all regard of our own works.

[1408] us, not in Lat.

[1409] ipsum evangelium, Lat.; the gospel itself.

[1410] also prefigured, Lat.

[1411] Gal. 4.3. Marg. Col 2.8, 20.

[1412] propter opus externum operatum aut perfectum, Lat. See also Bullinger, adv. Anabapt. Lib. iv. cap. 3.

[1413] ad cultum, Lat.; to the worship (of God).

[1414] justificata in semetipsa, Lat. and Vulg.; justified in themselves, Douay.

[1415] in Christian commonweals, not in the original.

[1416] usque tamen recurrit, Lat. Cf. Horat. Ep. Lib. i. 10, 24.

[1417] libris, Lat.; books, ed. 1577.

[1418] Retract, i. 23. Aug. Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. i. fol. 7. col. 3.

[1419] Symboli Explan. ad Damasum. Jerome, Opp. Tom. v. col. 124. Par. 1706. But this treatise is not Jerome's.

[1420] Jerome, Opp. Tom. iv. par. sec. col. 772. Ep. 95. Bullinger, Expos, in Ep. ad. Rom Cap. vii. p. 66. Tigur. 1537.

[1421] The translator has here (from, his meaning is, etc.) entirely mistaken Bullinger's words, which are: non legis quidem, sed corruptce naturae nostrae vitio: not indeed through any fault of the law, but through the fault of our corrupt nature.

[1422] Lib. de Spiritu et Litera. ch, viii. Aug. Op. Par. 1531, Tom. iii. fol. 172. col. 2. Several similar passages are contained in the same treatise.

[1423] verses 3, 4. Bullinger has adopted Erasmus' rendering. But see below, p. 256, note 5.

[1424] bona lege, Lat.; by the good law.

[1425] perfectionem suam nobis conferret in fide, qui est perfectio et plenitudo legis, Lat.; and bestow on us his perfectness in faith, being himself the perfectness and fulness of the law. Ed. 1577.

[1426] Gen 3.15; 12.3.

[1427] 2Cor 5.19, 21, per ilium, Lat.; Erasmus rendering. Calvin retains the "in ipso" of the Vulgate; melius enim quadrat menti Paulinae ilia significatio. Com. in loc. cit.

[1428] Joh 6.47; Mat 19.17.

[1429] negotium, Lat.

[1430] See Decade I. Serm. 6.

[1431] ex hoc corpore morti obnoxio, Lat.; Erasmus' rendering.

[1432] mine, Lat.; omitted: now.

[1433] ex liberali spiritu, Lat.; referring to Psalm 51.12, where Calvin and Bucer read, spiritu liberali. See also p. iii.147, note 6 (referring to Psa 51.14.)

[1434] the giver of them all, not in Lat.

[1435] 1Joh 5.3, 4, 12, 13.

[1436] Act 15.10; Joh 5.3.

[1437] and heavy — unbeliever, not in Lat.

[1438] the fulfilling of it, not in Lat.

[1439] That is, why did I need to have the law set aside? Why are we not still under the law? (Rom 6.14)

[1440] through grace — Jesus, not in Lat.

[1441] exserat suas vires, Lat. – exercise its power.

[1442] Rom 8.1, qui insiti sunt in.

[1443] et paucula sacramenta, etc., Lat.; and very few sacraments.

[1444] 1Cor 10.14; 1Joh 5.21.

[1445] Aug. Jan. Ep. 119. c. 12. Op. Par. 1531. Tom. ii. fol. 110. col. 4. In the Bened. ed. it stands ad Inquis. Jan. ii. 55. c. 12. P.

[1446] See Decade ii Serm. 4.

[1447] fraudet in negotio, Lat. – defraud in business.

[1448] 1Thes 4.6; Eph 4.28.

[1449] Rom 8.3, 4. Bullinger varies in this quotation from himself at page 248, and from Erasmus' rendering, in these points: he reads eo quod (which Calvin also prefers), instead of ea parte qua imbecillis erat; and sub specie carnis peccatricis, instead of carnis peccato obnoxiae; and instead of de peccato, per peccatum condemnavit peccatum.

[1450] from Christians, not in Lat.

[1451] p. i.59.

[1452] res ceremoniales, is Bullinger's own term.

[1453] includerent, Lat.; inclose.

[1454] which — them, not in Lat.

[1455] That is, various coats of arms, symbols of their differences; diversas tesseras, Lat.; the variety of badges.

[1456] and fellowship, not in Lat.

[1457] Col 2.14. Calvin's words, in his Commentary on this passage, are here again largely adopted by Bullinger. See also Calfhill's Answer, p. 123. The Romans would post the list of charges against a prisoner above his jail cell, and on the cross at his crucifixion (Mat 27.37).

[1458] prorogare, Lat.; to continue or prolong.

[1459] pietatis ergo in templo, Lat. omitted; as a matter of religion in the temple.

[1460] at the coming of Messiah, not in Lat.

[1461] in which they boasted, not in Lat. – speaking of the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D.

[1462] Dan 9; Num 24.

[1463] Theodoret of Cyrus (393-457), bishop of Cyrus Turkey; biblical commentator at the School of Antioch.

[1464] and general, not in Lat.

[1465] In spite of their determined opposition.

[1466] contra Christum, Lat.; and his holy church, not in Lat.

[1467] Vide Theodoret. Eccl. Hist. in. 20. et Ruffin. Aquil. Hist, Eccles. Lib. i. cap. 37. 38. 39.

[1468] commonstrantibus, Lat.; point it out.

[1469] Mat 24.2; Luk 19.44.

[1470] This reference is according to the Latin edition of Josephus, Basil, 1540. In the more modern editions the account is contained in the chapters of the sixth, and the first chapter of the seventh book, de Bell. Jud.

[1471] per ritum, Lat.; by the ceremony.]

[1472] Psa 110.4; Heb 5.6.

[1473] decretis, Lat. – decrees.

[1474] Mat 10.9; 1Cor 9.9.

[1475] Joh 4.21, 23, 24. The place to worship God in, is free for every man to choose where he wishes, and the congregation likes (marginal comment by the editor).

[1476] See page ii.255.

[1477] et alium in orando et sacrificando modum tenent, quam verbo pastoris in ecclesia est traditum, Lat.; and practise another method of prayer and sacrifice than, etc.

[1478] Decade ii. Serm. 4.

[1479] creatori, Lat. omitted; the maker of them.

[1480] proventum, Lat. – increase.

[1481] or Whitsuntide, added by the translator.

[1482] See above, page iii.165.

[1483] ut opibus suis plurimum accedat, is the Lat., rendered by, not for any — own treasures.

[1484] cujus nomine et Sextus Decret. prodiit, Lat. omitted; under whose name the sixth book of Decretals also was put forth.

[1485] "blasphemous antichrist" is not in the original.

[1486] et execrandum, Lat.; and to be abhorred.

[1487] Salvatoris, Lat.; Saviour.

[1488] See Homily for Whit-sunday, Part II. page 425. Oxford, 1832. "It is reported, that Celestine" (his predecessor) "prophesied of him, Ascendisti ut vulpes, Regnabis ut leo, Morieris ut canis, Of this Pope (Boniface) a certain versifier wrote thus: Ingreditur vulpes, regnat leo, sed canis exit; Re tandem vera, si sic fuit, ecce chimera."

[1489] Platin. de Vit. Pontif. Rom p. 245. Colon. 1568.

[1490] devilish, not in Lat.

[1491] From that very year (viz. of the institution of the jubilee), as most stories record, the Turks begin the first count of their Turkish emperors, of which the first was Ottoman. Foxe's Acts and Monum. Vol. ii. p. 586. ed. Lond. 1837. See also Bullinger in Apocalyps. Conc. xxx. on Rev. 6.14, and xli. on 9.12-19.

[1492] Platin. de Vit. Pontif. Rom p. 258.

[1493] Platin. p. 350. This was in confirmation of the bull of his predecessor, Paul the Second.

[1494] in remembrance of him, not in Lat.

[1495] ecclesiae, Lat.; to the church.

[1496] expiationis futurae, Lat. – future expiation or atonement.

[1497] si percipiatur, Lat.; if it (his flesh) is received.

[1498] John 1.29, peccatum, Lat.

[1499] Deo Patri, Lat.; to God the Father.

[1500] pro peccatis, Lat.; for sins.

[1501] Col 2.20-22, ipso pereant abusu, Lat.; and Erasmus: whych all peryshe thorow the very abuse. Cranmer, 1539.

[1502] Rifely: frequently.

[1503] legum primarum atque, Lat.; of the first laws and, etc.

[1504] ex urbe sancta, Lat. – from the holy city.

[1505] paedagogiam, Lat.

[1506] beatificat, Lat. See page i.106, note 6.

[1507] citra legis observationem, Lat. omitted; without keeping the law.

[1508] in tertio loco, Lat.; in the third place.

[1509] et in faciem, Lat.; and to the face.

[1510] Decade ii. Sermons 6, 7, 8.

[1511] Vol. i. pages 197-205.

[1512] The Code is the Codex Justinianeus, or collection of imperial constitutions in twelve books, each of which is divided into titles, which was promulgated at Constantinople, under Justinian, Nov. 16, a.d. 534. The Pandects, so called because of the comprehensiveness of the work, or Digests, so called because of the arrangement of its materials, was a compilation out of ancient juristical writings, which was ordered by Justinian, and finished in the close of a.d. 632. It contained fifty books, which were divided into seven parts, and sub-divided into titles. After the code was completed, Justinian supplied what was deficient in that work by a collection which he called No velise Constitutiones. Theodosius II. had published his code of laws, a.d. 438; and his Novelise, or additions, about nine years later. See Smith's Diet, of Greek and Roman Antiq., and Duck's Jur. Civil. Lib. i. cap. 3. § 8. and cap. 4.

[1513] Vol. i. page 331.

[1514] Vol. i. pages 34, 35, 328, 331.

[1515] Vol. i. page 359.

[1516] Pacii Isagog. in Cod. Lib. i. 3. p. 460.

[1517] Vol. i. pages 202, 273, 286, note 3, 288-290.

[1518] Bingham, Orig. Eccles. Book xvi. chap. 11.; and Book xxii. chap. 5.

[1519] et vestigiis, Lat.; and traces.

[1520] Arbitrement – the act of deciding as an arbiter; giving authoritative judgment.

[1521] in gente quavis, Lat. omitted; in every nation.

[1522] pages ii.269, 316.

[1523] ecclesiae Dei, Lat. – the church of God.

[1524] apertissime, Lat.; most clearly.

[1525] by Christ Jesus, not in Lat.

[1526] ecclesiae, Lat.; to the church.

[1527] in Christ, not in Lat.

[1528] patres nostri, Lat.; our fathers.

[1529] literis, Lat.; epistles.

[1530] Exo 4; Deu 14.

[1531] Exo 19.6; 1Pet 2.9.

[1532] essentiae, Lat.

[1533] de Spiritu, Lat.

[1534] ad verbum, Lat.; to the letter.

[1535] Christum, Lat.; the true world, not in Lat.

[1536] Aug. Opp. Par. 1531. De Peccat. Orig. cap. 25. Tom. vii. fol. 164. col. 3.

[1537] insignia, aureolum, aut cleynodium, Lat. – insignia, gold badge, or engraving; Michtam is a style of Psalm.

[1538] licet venerit ante annos mille quingentos quadraginta novem, Lat. ; one thousand five hundred and forty-nine.

[1539] aut spirituale epulum, Lat.; or the spiritual banquet.

[1540] his testimoniis, Lat.; these proofs.

[1541] revelatio, Lat. – revelation.

[1542] in senigmate, Lat.; 1Cor 13.12.

[1543] The Latin is only, in gloria, in glory.

[1544] et propter quod seternas Deo nostro agamus gratias, Lat. omitted; and we should render to our God everlasting thanks for it.

[1545] post luciferum istum et Stellas lucidissimas, Lat.; after that day-star and the very bright stars of the law, not in Lat.

[1546] operosus, Lat. – active.

[1547] Eph. 1.10. See page i.156.

[1548] Engender: to give rise to, or give birth to.

[1549] fovet, Lat. To coll: to embrace, or collect.

[1550] when — in force, not in Lat.

[1551] Affiance: a vow or pledge of fidelity, like a promise to marry ("till death do us part").

[1552] Unreclaimable: cannot be withdrawn or redeemed; it is either the law, or Christ (Gal 5.3).

[1553] Gr. anomia – lawless deeds.

[1554] illuminatione, Lat. omitted; and in illumination.

[1555] heroes, Lat. omitted.

[1556] Sed ducebat ad spem potiorem, Lat. omitted; but led to a better hope.

[1557] Bullinger is speaking of the crusades.

[1558] See the Old Faith, in Bp. Coverdale's Works, Fruitful Lessons, Parker Soc. ed. The Latin translation was published at Zurich, 1544.

[1559] This latter treatise, De Testamento seu Foadere Dei unico et seterno, Bullinger published at Zurich, a.d. 1534, and afterwards appended to his Commentaries in Epistolas Apostolorum canonicas septem.

[1560] non contemnenda, Lat. omitted; not to be thought lightly of.

[1561] exhibetur, Lat. – enhibited.

[1562] Jesus Christ, not in Lat.

[1563] Slaves, of the enemy's hand by which they are caught.

[1564] Corp. Jur. Civil. Par. 1628, Tom. i. p. 9, Instit. Lib. i. tit. 3, de jure personarum.

[1565] sive civilis, Lat. – civil.

[1566] 1Tim 6.1, 2, et qui beneficia rependere possunt, Lat.

[1567] acerbissime, Lat. – acrimony – rough and bitter treatment.

[1568] justo judici, Lat. omitted; the righteous judge.

[1569] Caitiff: a captive or prisoner, particularly a galley slave.

[1570] Rather, inasmuch as they are in most extreme captivity and three times as miserable, even then when they think themselves most at liberty, etc.

[1571] Luke 16.9; mammoneo iniquitatis, Lat. and Vulg.

[1572] laboramus, Lat. – labor.

[1573] subjicimur, Lat. Tyndale's Doct. Treat, ed. P.'s. p. 9, n. 6.

[1574] civili vel corporali, Lat.; to civil or bodily.

[1575] id supplicii conjunctum, imo irrogatum habentes, Lat.; whose punishment is adjoined, indeed imposed.

[1576] in coelesti utique patria, Lat.; which is the heavenly country.

[1577] credentes, Lat.; believers.

[1578] ut obediatis ei per cupiditates ejus, Lat. and Erasmus. That you shulde ther unto obey by the lustes of it. Cranmer, 1539.

[1579] sequum est, Lat.; it is just.

[1580] in earn in quam traducti estis formam doctrinse, Lat. and Erasmus: to the rule of the doctrine that you are brought to, Cranmer, 1539; to which you were delivered, Marg. Auth. Ver.

[1581] impraegnati, Lat.

[1582] legi, Lat.; to the law.

[1583] effectus peccatorum, Lat. – the effects of sin.

[1584] So Cranmer, 1539; and marginal reading of Auth. Ver., being dead to that in which we were held. Bullinger adopts Erasmus' rendering; mortui ei in quo detinebamur.

[1585] vel civilis, Lat.; or civil.

[1586] quia, Lat.; because.

[1587] tenemini, Lat.; are you bound.

[1588] quae sunt omnia in corruptionem ipso abusu, Lat., after Erasmus: whych all peryshe thorow the very abuse, Cranmer, 1539.

[1589] per mortem Christi, Lat. – the death of Christ.

[1590] In this exposition Bullinger borrowed literally from Calvin's Comment.; and both from Erasmus Annotations, in loc. cit.

[1591] ut adoptione jus filiorum acciperemus, Lat. and Erasmus: that thorow eleccion we myght receave the inheritaunce that belongs unto the naturall sonnes. Cranmer, 1539.

[1592] Heb 2.14. See page iii.304, note 5.

[1593] Gal. 5.13; 1Cor 9.19; liber sim ab omnibus, Lat.; when I am free from all.

[1594] primum, Lat.; in the first place.

[1595] See Bullinger, adv. Anabapt. Lib. ii. cap. 2, and Hooker, Eccles. Pol. Pref. Vol. i. p. 183, Oxf. 1820.

[1596] nondum, Lat.; not as yet.

[1597] sancto vocabulo, Lat.; the sacred name.

[1598] 1Cor 6.12; 10.23.

[1599] So Zwingli defines it, De vera et falsa religione, Comment, p. 412, Tigur. 1525.

[1600] recte secetur, Lat.; 2Tim 2.15.

[1601] 2Kng 24.20; Eze 17.15-21.

[1602] Unseasonable: ill-timed, or inappropriate to the circumstances.

[1603] veritati et libertati, Lat.; the truth and liberty, ed. 1577.

[1604] Originally, "by your importunity [i.e., inopportunity], and your lightness."

[1605] This proverbial term for an angry person (see Ray's Proverbs, pp. 140, 197. Lond. 1817) is added by the Translator.

[1606] in quo nulla positaest offensio, Lat. omitted; where no stumbling-block has been laid.

[1607] The mention of a companion is an addition of the Translator's.

[1608] Originally, "overnice bravery in gaudy apparel."

[1609] Hurly-burly: a tumult or uproar.

[1610] Jer 44.15-23; verse 18 NKJ: "But since we stopped... we have lacked everything, and have been consumed by the sword and by famine."

[1611] This treatise of "offences" is transferred by Bullinger from his Comment, in Mat cap. xviii. Lib. viii. fol. 172, Tiguri. 1542. Cf. Calvin. Instit. Lib. iii. cap. 19, 11, 12.

[1612] This parenthesis is the Translator's.

[1613] Job 34.22; Psa 5.5, etc.

[1614] Mat 3.8; Act 26.20.

[1615] The express phrase, works of light, does not occur in Scripture; but Bullinger seems to refer to Rom 13.12; for, in his exposition of that passage, he says: Hie palam audimus quoe (sint) opera tene-brarum, quae lucis, p. 106, Tigur. 1537.

[1616] spiritu bono, Lat.; by the good Spirit.

[1617] ornamentum et honestatem, Lat. – the ornament of honesty.

[1618] Originally, "prosecute."

[1619] Ps. 116.11; Rom 3.4: where the Vulgate has, est Deus verax; Erasmus renders, sit.

[1620] Eph. 3.17; in cordibus vestris, Lat.

[1621] Joh 3.21; 15.5.

[1622] as — channels, is the Translator's addition.

[1623] In nullo gloriandum, quando nostrum nihil sit Cypr. Testim. in. ad Quirinum 4. Op. Par. 1633, p. 373.

[1624] Isa 10.15; qui ipsam agitat, Lat. and Calvin.

[1625] Psa 27.9; Aug. Opp. Par. 1531, Tom. vii. fol. 268, col. 1.

[1626] Of. Calvin. Instit. Lib. II. cap. 5, 14.

[1627] Decad. i. Serm. 6, p. i.104.

[1628] See Tyndale's Doctrinal Treatises, Park. Soc. ed. p. 103.

[1629] et oppugnaretur, Lat.; and be fought against.

[1630] Aug. Opp. Par. 1531, Tom. vii. fol. 268, col. 3.

[1631] suas vires, Lat. – their strength.

[1632] opera fidei, Lat.; the works of faith.

[1633] Dorhead: bardus, Lat. Dor: a drone.

[1634] Col. 1.24. Suppleo vel adimpleo, Lat. The former is the rendering of Erasmus, the latter of the Vulgate.

[1635] Ambros. Comment, in Ep. ad Colos. cap. 1, v. 24, Tom. ii. Append, pag. 266, Par. 1690. But these commentaries are not genuine. See James' Corruption of Scripture, Councils, and Fathers, ed. Cox, Lond. 1843, p. 26.

[1636] rather, and who the Saviour of the world is, namely Christ.

[1637] justitiam, Lat.; righteousness.

[1638] faith, not in Lat.

[1639] faith, not in Lat.

[1640] faith, not in Lat.

[1641] Heb 10.10, 14, sanctificati sumus, Lat.

[1642] Heb 10.14 (DRA).

[1643] 1Pet 1.15, 16, in omni conversatione, Lat.

[1644] in respect to Christ's blood, is an addition of the translator's.

[1645] fidelissimos, Lat. ; the most faithful.

[1646] rather, which made a boast of faith in Christ to the offence, etc.

[1647] Orig. Comment, in ep. ad Roman. Lib. iii. Tom. iv. Par. 1733-59, pp. 516, 17.

[1648] Comment, in ep. ad Rom cap. ra. v. 24, Tom. ii. Append. Par. 1690, col. 46. But see above, page iii.333, note 7.

[1649] Ib. cap. iv. v. 5, col. 48.

[1650] Ib. cap. iv. v. 6, col. 48.

[1651] centurionis, Lat.; Originally "captain."

[1652] Chrysost. Serm. do Fide et Lege Naturee et Sancto Spir. Opp. Tom. i. Par. 1718, p. 826. But this treatise is not Chrysostom's.

[1653] quasi aquis nivis, Lat.; as it were with.

[1654] at the well, not in Lat.

[1655] Heb 10.35-39. So Cranmer, 1539.

[1656] verse 37; but Bullinger's Latin is ex dictis tuis, by your words.

[1657] uncoacted: uncompelled.

[1658] Augustin. de Grat. et Lib. Arb. ad Valentin. Opp. Par. 1531, Tom. vii. p. 268, coll. 2, 3, capp. 6, 7.

[1659] sola gratia Dei, Lat. – solely by the grace of God.

[1660] et intentione bona, Lat. omitted; and good intention.

[1661] Either it is evident by Adam's lack of faith and obedience, which led to the curse, or it should be "Abraham."

[1662] vel nolle obsequi, Lat. omitted; or unwillingness to be obedient.

[1663] a veritate divina, Lat. omitted; by the truth of God.

[1664] Rom 14.23; 10.17.

[1665] to which — tend, not in Lat.

[1666] jure, Lat. omitted; of good right. – justly.

[1667] To set abroach: to uncork or let out; open the sluicegates.

[1668] et perseverantem, Lat. omitted; and enduring.

[1669] Mat 22.37, 39; and 7.12.

[1670] Zec 7.9, 10, and 8.17.

[1671] Eph 4.22-24; Col 3.9, 10.

[1672] 1Cor 10.31, 24, 33.

[1673] The greater part of this ninth Sermon is extracted from Bullinger's treatise, De vera hominis Christian! justificatione, dated at Zurich, August 1543, which forms the preface to his Commentary on the Gospel of St. John.

[1674] The Father — Mediator, added by the translator.

[1675] Originally "handfasted": refers to a contract, agreement, or covenant (betrothal); to "shake hands on it."

[1676] and — husband, an addition of the translator's.

[1677] which — sins, the translator's.

[1678] Jerome, Comment, in Ep. ad Ephes. cap. 2, Tom. iv. col. 338, Par. 1706.

[1679] Aug. Quaest. sup. Levit. cap. 20, Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 43, col. 2, Par. 1531.

[1680] Crimen vero, scelus, defectionem et impietatem multo gravis-simam, Lat.; but crimen for heinous wickedness, etc.

[1681] Aug. Enchir. ad Laurent, cap. 64, Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 37, col. 4.

[1682] sanctorum hominum, Lat.; of saints.

[1683] for which — accuse him, added by the translator.

[1684] a recto, Lat. – what is right.

[1685] See Decade i. Serm. i. p. 49.

[1686] Aug. de Consens. Evang. Lib. ii. cap. 4, Tom. iv. fol. 85, col. 4.

[1687] Id. ad Simplic. Lib. i. Tom. iv. fol. 135, col. 3.

[1688] Id. de Fide con. Manich. cap. 8, Tom. vi. fol. 117, col. 4.

[1689] Id. cont. Faust. Manich. Lib. xxn. cap. 27, Tom. vi. fol. 84. col. 1.

[1690] Ergo peccatum est voluntas retinendi vel consequendi quod justitia vetat, et unde (Bullinger reads, et non, probably by mistaking the abbreviation in old copies et un.) liberum est abstinere — Id. de duab. anim. cont. Manich. cap. 11, Tom. vi. fol. 32, col. 2.

[1691] Id. Retract. Lib. i. cap. 15, Tom. i, fol. 6. col. 3.

[1692] et auctore, Lat. omitted ; and author.

[1693] non tarn — quam, Lat.; not so much upon his wife, as upon God.

[1694] dedit mihi pomum, Lat.; gave me the apple.

[1695] mox ab initio tails qualis mine est indita, Lat.; which is even from the first imparted so as it is now. That is, our corruption is not part of our original or essential nature as human beings; it is a consequential effect of the fall.

[1696] August, de Fide cont. Manich. cap. 9, Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 117, col. 4.

[1697] Bardesanes was a Syrian, of Edessa, and lived in the second century of the Christian era. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. iv. cap. 30. Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Book i. cent. 2, part 2, chap. 5, 8

[1698] August, de Haeres. cap. 70, Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 6, col. 4. Priscillian lived in the middle of the fourth century, in Spain. Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Book ii. Cent. 4, part 2, chap. 5, § 21, 22. The first council of Toledo was held A. D. 405.

[1699] Lib. de diverse, quaest. 83. quaest. 45, Tom. iv. fol. 116, col. 4.

[1700] Pelag. ad Bonifac. Lib. ii. cap. 6, Tom. VII. fol. 182, col. 2.

[1701] Lat. omitted: therefore, that the star of Saturn is called by astrologers unkind and harsh or cruel, and the star of Venus kindly and mild, is vanity of vanities.

[1702] potentia sua, Lat. omitted; by his power.

[1703] sapiens ille, Lat.; the wise man. Bullinger does not say Solomon. Cf. p. ii.225, note 12.

[1704] This parenthesis is not in Bullinger's Latin, nor in the Septuagint, nor Vulgate, nor Auth. Ver.; but it is in Coverdale's Bible, 1535.

[1705] Also Eze 33.11.

[1706] Originally, "leasing" – a lie; the act of lying, falsehood.

[1707] Dei, Lat.

[1708] Originally, "there was nothing wanting to him in God, which was available to perfect felicity." Available was used in its literal sense: Adam was capable of availing himself of "everything necessary to life and godliness." (2Pet 1.3)

[1709] verses 14-16, according to the Vulgate. Our Authorised Version is a little different, following the Greek LXX.

[1710] disertissimis, Lat.; most express.

[1711] sua culpa, Lat. omitted; by his own fault.

[1712] Caviller: a disputant who quibbles; someone who raises annoying petty objections.

[1713] Untowardly: not in keeping with what is right or proper; contrary to our own interests.

[1714] in pejorera inclinavit, Lat. omitted; incline to the worse part.

[1715] legislatoris, Lat.; not to the lawgiver.

[1716] Rom 9.20. Isa 45.9, 10. Coverdale's Bible, 1535, also has Why. Bullinger's Latin is Quid.

[1717] i.e., liable to fall; labilis, Lat.

[1718] But to be — but God, the translator's addition.

[1719] a sacrament or, not in Lat.

[1720] August, de Nat. Boni adv. Manich. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 115, col. 4, Par. 1531.

[1721] as credible, not in Lat.

[1722] Heb demuwth (likeness Str. 01823) is more than tselem (image Str. 06754): this expresses the general form or delineation — the conformity or resemblance of the parts. Parkhurst, Heb Lex. in voc. דְּמּת .

[1723] Eph. 4.23, 24. Marg. Auth. Ver.

[1724] egregia censebitur disputatio, Lat.

[1725] De Vocat, Gent. Lib. ii. cap. 4, col. 540, Ambros. Opp. Tom. iv. Par. 1614.

[1726] August, de Lib. Arbit. Lib. iii. cap. 4, Tom. i. fol. 141, col. 3, Par. 1531.

[1727] and his glory — were not, the translator's addition.

[1728] Thraldom: slavery; the state of being under the control of another person.

[1729] harum rerum, Lat.; of these things. The rest is the translator's paraphrase.

[1730] confusio faciei, Lat. Dan. 9.8. in — God, not in Lat.

[1731] Augustine treats these words of St. Paul in Psalm 57. enarr. Opp. Tom. viii. fol. 121, col. 2, and argues that these sins of the heathen are just punishments from God.

[1732] Originally, "obtrude unto him" – to ignore what God ordained, and to enforce their own form of worship.

[1733] Originally, "second Paralipom."

[1734] Originally, "cockering": treating with excessive indulgence.

[1735] Originally, "premonished."

[1736] Amos 3.6.

[1737] August. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 43, col. 3. Par. 1531.

[1738] Id. Tom. vi. fol. 115, col. 2.

[1739] The various definitions of original sin from the fathers and schoolmen, etc., are collected in Jod. Coccii Thesaur. Cathol. p. 100, etc. Colon. 1620.

[1740] Anselmi Opp. de Concept. Virg. et Orig. Pec. cap. 27. p. 106. Lutet. Par. 1675.

[1741] Hugo de's. Victore de Sacr. Fid. Lib. i. par. 7. Tom. iii. p. 397. col. 2. Mogunt. 1617.

[1742] Vid. Bucer. de Vera Eccles. etc. compos, p. 105. ed. 1543.

[1743] See above, page iii.371.

[1744] August, de Pec. Orig. contra Pelag. et Celest. Lib. ii. cap. 13. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 163. col. 2.

[1745] Ibid. Tom. vii. fol. 162. col. 3.

[1746] Ibid. fol. 163. col. 2.

[1747] Calvin, in loc. cit.

[1748] ex traduce: of the soul – having direct origin from the souls of the parents (hereditary).

[1749] ex immunda (nimirum massa) Lat.; out of an unclean (he means) lump.

[1750] Originally, "excusses"

[1751] Aug. Opp. Tom. vii. fol, 135. col. 1.

[1752] in opus pravum, Lat.; to the evil deed. – Jas 1.15

[1753] Aug. Retract. Lib. i. cap. 13. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 4. col. 3.

[1754] Id. ibid. cap. 15. Tom. i. fol. 5. col. 4.

[1755] that is — original; the translator's addition.

[1756] Id. contr. Jul. Pelag. Lib. iii. cap. 5. Tom. vii. fol. 204. col. 4.

[1757] sic, Lat. omitted; under these circumstances.

[1758] Hilary of Poitiers (c. 310-c. 367) – Bishop of Poitiers and a Doctor of the Church.

[1759] in Christo, Lat.

[1760] crones: old ewes who have lost their teeth. Grose's Provincial Glossary, in voc.

[1761] Aug. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 197. col. 1.

[1762] vermis, Lat.; a worm.

[1763] August. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 148. col. 4.

[1764] Rom 5.14; Jerome, Opp. Tom. iii. col. 1055. Par. 1704.

[1765] Stobaei Floril. Tit. xxiii. Tom. i. p. 427. ed. Gaisford. Oxon. 1822.

[1766] corrupt — miseries, the translator's addition.

[1767] Deu 27.26; Gal 3.10.

[1768] August. Marcellino de Baptism. Parv. Epist. 16. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 180. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[1769] This paragraph is borrowed almost literally from Calvin, Instit. Lib. ii. cap. 1. 8.

[1770] de Vera et Falsa Relig. Comment, p. 116. Tiguri. 1525.

[1771] audivimus, Lat.; heard, ed. 1577.

[1772] Id. De Baptismo. Tom. ii. pp. 90, 89.

[1773] Id. De Pecc. Orig. ad Urban. Rheg. Tom. ii. p. 110.

[1774] Augsburg. See Sleidan. Comment, de Statu Relig. Lib. vii.

[1775] Id. ad Carol. Rom Imp. Fidei ratio. Tom. ii. p. 539.

[1776] per Dominum, Lat. omitted; by the Lord.

[1777] missus, Lat. omitted; being sent.

[1778] The translator read abdita for addita.

[1779] August. Opp. Par. 1531. Tom. vii. fol. 164. col. 2. 3. de Pecc. Orig. contra Pelag. et Celest. Lib. 11. capp. 23, 24, 25.

[1780] Imp: a young shoot of a plant or tree; an offspring or child; but a troublesome and mischievous one.

[1781] Affections: desires or lusts which "affect" us by moving us toward the object of our desire, to obtain it. – WHG

[1782] homines, Lat.; not evil men. – that is, "men" and not "evil men."

[1783] August. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 29. col. 2.

[1784] Id. Tom. viii. fol. 185. col. 4.

[1785] Id. Tom. iv. fol. 248. col. 3, 4.

[1786] Jovinian (340-405) – an opponent of Christian asceticism and condemned as a heretic at synods convened in Rome under Pope Siricius, and in Milan by St Ambrose in 393.

[1787] Tertull. adv. Hermog. cap. 8. Tom. ii. p. 68. ed. Semler. Hal. Mag. 1828. Also de Anim. cap. 3. Tom. iv. p. 185.

[1788] Aug. de Haeres. No. 82. Tom. vi. fol. 7. col. 1.

[1789] Lombard, lib. Sent. Lib. ii. distinct. 42. fol. 221. Par. 1575. – also called the seven deadly or mortal sins.

[1790] See page iii.394.

[1791] August. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 145. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[1792] praetextu, Lat. – pretext or pretense.

[1793] Id. Expos, in Evang. Joan. Tract. lxxxix. Tom. ix. fol. 94. col. 3, 4.

[1794] in Christ, not in Lat.

[1795] i.e., coerced.

[1796] Rom 2.12; laude et vituperatione, Lat.; praise and blame.

[1797] Aug. de Mend, ad Consentium, 9. and 10. Tom. iv. col. 4. and fol. 4. col. 1, 2.

[1798] August. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 144. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[1799] Id. Tom. iv. fol. 3. col. 3.

[1800] Id. Tom. v. fol. 8. col. 4.

[1801] This explanation is the translator's.

[1802] Si pugnare non vultis, licet fugere. Senec. de Provident, cap. 6. In his Comment. in Mat chap. 16.25. Lib. vii. p. 613, Bullinger's reference on this topic is to Senec. ad Lucil. Ep. 71.

[1803] et peccent, Lat. omitted; and commit sin.

[1804] August. de Civ. Dei, Lib. i. cap. 25. Opp. Tom. v. fol. ii. col. 2, 3.

[1805] Aquinat. prim. sec. par. Summse. quaest. 88. fol. 148, etc. Par. 1615.

[1806] Eph 5.5; Gal 5.19-21; 1Cor 5.11; 6.9, 10.

[1807] Rom 6.12; 8.1, 12, 13.

[1808] Roman Catholicism teaches that infant baptism removes original sin.

[1809] That is, adult baptism, as opposed to infant baptism. – WHG

[1810] August. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 141. col. 3.

[1811] execrandos, Lat.; guides is the translator's addition. – Originally, "odible": exciting hatred, aversion.

[1812] That is, disparage.

[1813] Flouts: contempt and derision.

[1814] revolationem aut operationem illam Spiritus, Lat.; that revelation or working of the Spirit.

[1815] contra conscientiam propriam, Lat. omitted; against their own conscience.

[1816] Beelzebub, not in Latin.

[1817] evangelica doctrina, Lat. omitted; by the preaching of the gospel.

[1818] contra animi sui sententiam, Lat. omitted; against the judgment of their mind.

[1819] perstans, Lat.; obstinate.

[1820] ad gratiam, Lat. – to grace (favor).

[1821] Their peculiarity was that they would not receive into the church persons who after being baptized fell into the greater sins. They did not, however, exclude them from all hopes of eternal salvation. Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Book i. Cent. 3. Part 2. ch. 5. § 18.

[1822] indesinenter, Lat. omitted: without ceasing.

[1823] medium ostendere digitum, is the proverb which Bullinger uses.

[1824] Peccatum in Spiritum Sanctum est finalis impoenitentia: do qua dicit Aug. — Gratian. Decret. Par. ii. caus. 1. quaest. 1. cap. 81. p. 673. Par. 1583. The treatise De Ver. et Fals. Poenitent. in which occur the words — Soli peccant in Spiritum Sanctum, qui impoenitentes existunt usque ad mortem, is considered to be spurious.

[1825] peccatorum poenas, Lat.

[1826] August. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 94. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[1827] Deu 25.2. cf. page ii.356, note 4.

[1828] Gen 18.23, 25. Vulgate.

[1829] prophetam, Lat. omitted; the prophet.

[1830] interim, Lat. omitted; in the mean season.

[1831] ergo, Lat.; and therefore.

[1832] Noli putare Deum esse ficulneum, Lat. See Erasmi Adag. Chiliad, p. 95. col. 2. auxilium infirmum.

[1833] Psa 34.15, 16; 1Pet 3.12.

[1834] primum deinde, Lat. omitted; first, and then.

[1835] Cf. above, page 613.

[1836] justi judicii, Lat.; the justice of God's judgment.

[1837] Rather, however the wicked may, etc. utcunque, Lat.

[1838] See above, page iii.75.

[1839] Originally, "conflict of faith" and "conflict of righteousness" – i.e., the testing of our faith. – WHG

[1840] Inured: made tough by habitual exposure.

[1841] August. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 147. col. 1. 2. 3.

[1842] i.e., proofs, evidences.

[1843] non convertuntur ad se percutientem, sed, Lat. omitted; are not turned to him that strikes them, but, etc.

[1844] See above, page iii.79.

[1845] verse salutis omnia, Lat.; all things pertaining to true salvation.

[1846] with me — edification, the translator's addition.

[1847] Bullinger refers to the Hebrew word which the LXX often renders by euaggelizw. See his Comment, in Mat fol. 1. Tigur. 1542. from which also much of this definition of the gospel is extracted.

[1848] Isa 61.1; Luk 4.18.

[1849] cunning (skilful) and willing, not in Lat.

[1850] alia, Lat.; other benefits.

[1851] revelationem mysterii, Lat.

[1852] i.e., guardian.

[1853] Mat 3.17; Luk 9.35.

[1854] gratia apud Deum, Lat.; 1Pet 2.20. Auth. Marg. thank.

[1855] ejusque natura, Lat. omitted; and in his nature.

[1856] Pater Dous, Lat.; God the Father.

[1857] Titus 3.4, 5, erga homines, Lat.

[1858] Rather, therefore again grace has something to work in man.

[1859] in finitione, Lat. omitted; in the definition.

[1860] There is a mistake in the reference: the following is the canon meant: Concil. Arausic. ii. can. 6. Concil. Labb. et Cossart. Tom. iv. col. 1668. Par. 1671. This second council of Orange was held a.d. 529. Augustine was dead long before.

[1861] Pelagium, Lat. omitted.

[1862] Rather, that human nature was sufficient unto itself.

[1863] Aug. Ep. 95. (in the Benedictine Edition, 177.) Op. Par. 1531. Vol. ii. fol. 83. col. 2. In the course of this epistle, it is charged against Pelagius, and Pelagius affirmed, just as Bullinger alleged here.

[1864] 1. Gratiam gratum faciens; 2. Gratia gratis data; 3. Gratia operans, et gratia cooperans; 4. Gratia praeveniens, et gratia subsequens.

[1865] of God's — transgression, not in Lat.

[1866] Christum illud esso semen benedictum, Lat.; that that blessed seed is Christ.

[1867] See page iii.161.

[1868] Rather, the promises in a figure.

[1869] Rather, and the water that flowed out. Cf. Bullinger, Comment, in loc. cit.

[1870] See p. iii.339; also, The Old Faith, p. 44.

[1871] See Decade iii. Serm. 6.

[1872] See The Old Faith, p. 63, etc.

[1873] Augustine. See p. i.51.

[1874] Immanuel, an addition of the translator's.

[1875] The epithets [descriptions] are the translator's.

[1876] Some say these prophetic books were recorded at Babylon, others say it was afterward.

[1877] in chap. 9, Lat.

[1878] chap. 2.7-9. Haggaeus templum extruit, is Bullinger's phrase.

[1879] Rather, was from the beginning of the world preached to the fathers.

[1880] This is the topic of Bullinger's treatise, The Old Faith. See also page iii.283.

[1881] in urbe Hierosolymorum regia, Lat.; in the royal city.

[1882] quanti Christum faciant, Lat.; how joyful they were, the translator's addition.

[1883] veritate, Lat.; truth.

[1884] tranquillissimo animo, Lat.; with most peaceful mind.

[1885] Joh 3.28, 20, 30, 35, 36.

[1886] in chap. 8. Lat.

[1887] Mat 24.15, 16, 19, 21.

[1888] ad verbura, Lat.; to the letter.

[1889] genus, Lat.; nation.

[1890] juxta Christ! Domini comminationcm, Lat. omitted; according to the threatenings of Christ the Lord.

[1891] See Tyndale's Doct. Treat, ed. Parker Soc. p. 502, n. 1.

[1892] stat stabitque, Lat.; abides and shall abide.

[1893] The translator's addition.

[1894] Dei filius, Lat.; the Son of God.

[1895] See Decade 1, Sermon 7.

[1896] in evangelio, Lat.; in the gospel.

[1897] repentant sinners, not in Lat.

[1898] Jer 31.33; Proinde quicunque Christum fide possident, plenissime omnia vitoe et salutis possident, Lat. omitted; And therefore, whoever has Christ by faith, has most abundantly all things belonging to life and salvation.

[1899] by derogating — Christ, not in Lat.

[1900] of repentance, not in Lat.

[1901] methodice, Lat. – methodically.

[1902] sua natura, Lat.; by his own nature.

[1903] and make — effect; an addition of the translator's.

[1904] per fidem, Lat omitted; through faith.

[1905] which — to Christ, not in Lat.

[1906] So Marg. Auth. Ver. John 3.3.

[1907] facultates, Lat. – faculties.

[1908] fide, Lat. omitted; by faith.

[1909] morientum e vencno, Lat.; that were dying of the poison.]

[1910] See The Old Faith, p. 44.

[1911] which are — sin; an addition of the translator's.

[1912] in mundum, Lat.; into the world.

[1913] quae justificat et salvat, Lat. omitted; which justifies and saves.

[1914] and hope — saved, not in Lat.

[1915] to the devil, his open adversary; an addition of the translator's.

[1916] de fide justificante, Lat. omitted; concerning the faith that justifies.

[1917] fide, Lat.; by faith.

[1918] solius, Lat.; alone.

[1919] Gal. 3.17. See page iii.180.

[1920] See p. i.116, and note 3.

[1921] perfectis, Lat.

[1922] Greek anomia: without the law, i.e., lawless deeds, iniquities, or wickedness.

[1923] latet adhuc sub tectorio, Lat.; still lurks under the covering.

[1924] beatificatio, Lat. See page i.106, note 6. [explaining the hapless translation, "justification by sanctification".]

[1925] Jer 31.34; Heb 10.17

[1926] beati, Lat.; blessed.

[1927] paucis, Lat.; in few words.

[1928] and prophet, not in Lat.

[1929] may — doctrine, not in Lat.

[1930] certam confessionem, Lat.

[1931] beatificantem, Lat.

[1932] ad aeternam rei memoriara — alluding to the opening phrase of the decrees and bulls of the popes, etc.

[1933] beatus, Lat.

[1934] fide, Lat.; by faith.

[1935] beati, Lat.

[1936] Haec de Caesarien. concilio hactenus, is all that Bullinger says.

[1937] See the order of the Acts of the Apostles, and the eighth sermon of the third decade.

[1938] Wrack: the destruction or collapse of something ("wrack and ruin").

[1939] ad so rapere, Lat. ; to take to himself.

[1940] Originally, "gone heavy to his house"; descendisse, Lat.; to have gone down. Heavy is doubtless in all the editions a misprint for home, which Tyndale's and Cranmcr's versions have.

[1941] p. i.118.

[1942] Bullinger here refers to Erasmus' annotation on Mat 3.2: metanoia dicta est a metanoein, hoc est, a posterius intelligendo, ubi quis lapsus, re peracta, tum demum animadvertit erratum suum.

[1943] cupidissime, Lat. omitted; most eagerly.

[1944] bekehrung, conversion ; aenderung, changing ; besserung, correction.]

[1945] revera, Lat. omitted; in truth.

[1946] exaggeranclis, Lat.

[1947] doctrina, Lat. omitted; by doctrine.

[1948] of the minister, not in Lat.

[1949] Revoked: drawn back; intercepted.

[1950] Jer 12.1; Psa 119.75; Isa 64.6; Dan 9.5, 6, 8, 9.

[1951] parentem, Lat.

[1952] ad salutem, Lat. omitted; to salvation.

[1953] continual, not in Lat.

[1954] adeoque et, Lat.; and so of their sins also.

[1955] Iscariotha, Lat. omitted.

[1956] tandem, Lat.; at last.

[1957] odium Dei, Lat. – hatred of God.

[1958] the fear — members, not in Lat.

[1959] See above, p. iv.35.

[1960] poenitentes, Lat. – penitents.

[1961] and so — reconciliation; an addition of the translator's.

[1962] contritiones, Lat. – contrition.

[1963] nativa lana, Lat. – native or natural wool.

[1964] instead of it, not in Lat.

[1965] See p. iii.420.

[1966] Luk 7 (two debtors); 15.11f (prodigal son); 16.1f (shrewd manager).

[1967] See p. iii.424. n. 3. and Bullinger, adv. Anabapt. Lib. i. cap. 11.

[1968] Certe, Lat. omitted; unquestionably.

[1969] sed gravissime, Lat. omitted; but most heinously.

[1970] ab ipso divertens, Lat. omitted; turning aside from him.

[1971] See p. iii.424.

[1972] וּמִתְ yadah (03034) to cast, cast forth, cast out. תוֹדָה . towdah (08426) confessing. Parkhurst, Heb Lex. in voc.

[1973] herbam praebens, Lat. For this proverbial phrase see Erasm. Adag. Chil. p. 707. col. 1. Hanov. 1617.

[1974] endangered to. See Tyndale's Doctr. Treatises, ed. Park. Soc. pp. 236, 502.

[1975] "It has left; he has rushed."

[1976] As with Adam in the Garden (Gen 3.11), Cain's murder of Abel (Gen 4.9-10), Achan at Ai (Jos 7.19), etc.

[1977] magister careeris Philippici, Lat. Acts 16.26-33.

[1978] and was baptized, not in Lat.

[1979] of penitents, not in Lat.

[1980] pax, Lat. Bullinger here borrows largely from Calvin. Instit. Lib. iii. cap. 4. 9.

[1981] Reins: inward parts.

[1982] because — tongue, the translator's addition; meaning, having no words to express it.

[1983] cordium inspectore, Lat.; who looks at the heart — who — man, is the translator's paraphrase.

[1984] Domino, Lat.; unto the Lord.

[1985] Rather, Among the swine frames the confession of his sin, and offers it to his father alone. Luke 15.18.

[1986] for receiving him, added by the translator.

[1987] or holy assembly, not in Lat. coram hominibus, Lat. omitted; before men.

[1988] Leviticus 16. See above, pages iii.165, iii.197.

[1989] The divines of Cologne, in the Enchiridion appended to the canons of their provincial Council, 1538, having referred, as Bullinger does here, to Nehemiah 4 and 9, also observes: Hinc finita concione, generalem et publicam confessionem ad populum pronuntiat (sacerdos) ac monet, ut se pronuntiantem populus eisdem verbis prosequatur. fol. 140. In the reformed churches, the general confession of the minister and people was ordinarily placed at the opening of public worship. Durel's View of the Government, etc. in Reformed Churches beyond the seas, p. 35. Lond. 1662. Sect. i. 38. But see The Order of the Church in Denmark, etc. Works of Bp. Coverdale, ed. Park. Soc. p. 472.

[1990] interpreter, Lat. (I interpret this to mean)

[1991] that is innocent in the matter, not in Lat.

[1992] Hispalen. Episcopus, Lat.: Bishop of Seville, a.d. 595.

[1993] Isidor. Opp. Etymolog. Lib. vi. cap. 19. 79. Tom. iii. p. 292. Rom 1798.

[1994] Tertulliani Opp. de Poenit. cap. 9. Tom. iv. p. 52. cd. Semler. Hal. Mag. 1824.

[1995] I find him otherwise called Natalius.

[1996] Euseb. Eccles. Hist. Lib. v. cap. 28. Ruffinus translation, which Bullinger adopts. Basil. 1539. p. 126.

[1997] Luk 7; Joh 8.

[1998] Sozomen (c. 380-447) Early church historian. His first work covered church history from the Ascension to the defeat of Licinius in 323. His second covered the period between 323 and 425. His source was largely the writings of Socrates Scholasticus. But he went back to the principal sources, often including more than Socrates did. He also used the writings of Eusebius, Athanasius, Rufinus, Sabinus ond Olympiodorus of Thebes, as well as oral tradition. CCEL.

[1999] Originally, "aby"; quid luendum, Lat. – what will purge; to compensate or make reparation for wrong-doing.

[2000] Hist. Eccles. Lib.vii. cap. 16, pp. 299, 300. ed. Reading. Cantab. 1720. Tom. ii. See also Works of Bp. Pilkington. ed. Parker Soc. p. 553.

[2001] Socratis Hist. Eccles. Lib. vi. cap. 2. Sozomen. Hist. Eccles. Lib. vin. cap. 2.

[2002] Bullinger has here read, delicta pro injuria, for delicta pronuncia, as this passage is quoted, Lombard. Sentent. Lib. iv. distinct. 17. c.

[2003] it, wanting in ed. 1587.

[2004] Chrysost. Hom. xxxi. in Ep. ad Hebr. cap. 12. Tom. xii. pp. 289, 290. Par. 1718-38.

[2005] Id. Hom., in Psa L. Tom. v. p. 589. But this treatise is spurious.

[2006] Id. de Incomprehens. Dei Nat. Hom. v. Tom. i. p. 490.

[2007] Chrysost. Cone, de Lazaro. iv. Tom. i. p. 757.

[2008] Ibid. p. 758. See also Calvin. Instit. Lib. iii. cap. 4. 8.

[2009] Enchirid. Colon. fol. 145.

[2010] Scoti Opp. Colon. Agrip. 1621. Tract, de Potest. Ligandi et Solvendi. cap. xxi. p. 519. par. i. He died abbot of St. Victor, a.d. 1173. Gall. Christ. Tom. vii. p. 669. Watt's Biblioth. Brit. Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Vol. ii. p. 439. ed. Soames, note 7. Hugo of St. Victor, whom Bullinger names by mistake, was born a.d. 1096, and died 1140. Mosheim, ibid, note 6.

[2011] He died bishop of Paris, A. D. 1164. Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Book in. cent. 12. part ii. chap. 2. 23. ed. Soames. Vol. ii. p. 440, note 2.

[2012] The title of Sentent. Lib. iv. distinct. 17 c. is, Si sufficit soli Deo confiteri; and there Lombard says, Quibusdam visum est sufficere, si soli Deo fiat confessio sine judicio sacerdotali et confessione ecclesise: p. 340. But the title of the following section is, Quod non sufficit soli Deo confiteri, si tempus adsit, si tamen homini possit; and then Lombard concludes in the words quoted by Bullinger: Ex his aliisque pluribus indubitanter ostenditur, oportere Deo primum, et deinde sacerdoti offerri confessionem, nec aliter posse perveniri ad ingressum paradisi, si adsit facultas; p. 341: and in the next section, e. p. 342, Certificatum est, quod non sufficit confiteri Deo sine sacerdote: nee est vere humilis et poenitens, si non desiderat et requirit sacerdotis judicium.

[2013] He completed his Decretum about a.d. 1151. Mosheim, Eccles, Hist. Vol. ii. p. 411, note 2.

[2014] Gratian. Decret. pars ii. caus. 33. quaest. 3. de Poenitent. dist. 1. cap. 89. ad fin.

[2015] Lothaire Conti, born in a.d. 1160 or 1161, studied in the university of Paris, and was elected pope a.d. 1198. Mosheim, Vol. ii. p. 508, note 7. Lotharius Levita, or the Deacon, was the name under which he wrote before he became pope. Centur. Magd. cent. xii. Watt's Biblioth. Brit.

[2016] The Fourth Lateran, called by the Romanists the Twelfth General Council, was held a.d. 1215. Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Book in. cent. 13. part 2. chap. 3. 2. Vol. ii. p. 559. n. 2.

[2017] Concil. Lateran. iv. in Concil. stud. Labb. et Coss. Tom. xi. par. 1. coll. 172, 3. Lutet. Par. 1671. See also Decret. Gregor. ix. Lib. v. tit. 38. fol. 314. col. 4. Lugd. 1510.

[2018] silly (weak) wretches, not in Lat.

[2019] proferunt, Lat.; guilefully wresting, the translator's paraphrase.

[2020] Bonaventure of Bagnoregio (1221-1274).

[2021] Bonavent. Opp. Sent. Lib. iv. dist. 17. quaest. 1. par. 2. art. 1. quaest. 3. Tom. v. p. 224. Mogunt. 1609.

[2022] implicite, Lat. – implicitly.

[2023] inermes in hac palaestra, Lat. – defenseless in this arena.

[2024] telum hujusmodi, non fraxineum, sed prorsus betaceum – a weapon of this sort, it is not ash, but it is betaceum: made of beet.

[2025] Originally, "keep a coil with": noise, tumult, difficulty. Nares Gloss.

[2026] presbyteris, Lat. – elders.

[2027] to have — laymen, the translator's addition.

[2028] This argument is also Calvin's, Instit. Lib. iii. cap. 4. 6.

[2029] wrack: ruin, destruction. Johnson.

[2030] amplius mille, Lat.; more than a thousand.

[2031] quam prosit aut, Lat.; than it is expedient or decent...

[2032] Shrift, from shrive, means confessing to obtain remission of sin.

[2033] Peer: a nobleman (duke, marquis, earl, viscount or baron) who is a member of the British peerage.

[2034] securi, Lat.; carelessly, 1577.

[2035] Cf. Works of Bp. Pilkington, Parker Soc. ed. p. 554. Remains of Bp. Latimer, Vol. ii. p. 179. Foxe, Monuments, Vol. iii. p. 205; V. p. 191. Lond. 1838.

[2036] Rather, testify that remission of sins and heavenly gifts are theirs who, etc.

[2037] Bonavent. Opp. Sentent. Lib. iv. par. 2. dub. 1. Tom. v. p. 220. Mogunt. 1609.

[2038] That is, works of charity.

[2039] odd knacks, translator's phrase.

[2040] See p. i.108, note 6. Lombard. Sent. Lib. iv. distinct. 10. cap. 10.

[2041] See p. iii.430.

[2042] justitia redimantur, Lat. Dan. 4.27.

[2043] See p. iii.327.

[2044] Rom 13.10. Bullinger has here borrowed from his Commentary on St. Peter, loc. cit.

[2045] Luke 7.47. peccata ejus, Lat. – her sins.

[2046] Joan. Baptist. Mantuan. Parthen. Lib. i. 164. Tom. i. Par. 1531.

[2047] clavium potestatem, Lat.; power of the keys.

[2048] See page iii.333. the Ninth Sermon, Of Christian Liberty.

[2049] Calvin's words, Instit. Lib. iii. cap. 5. 4. Foxe, Acts and Mon. Vol. v. p. 611. Lond. 1838.

[2050] Leon. Opp. Ep. lxxxiii. ad Falsest. Episc. p. 152. The same is repeated in Ep. xcvii. ad Leon. Aug. cap. 2. pp. 171, 172, and Serm. xii. p. 59. Par. 1662.

[2051] and merchandise, not in Lat.

[2052] Factor: a businessman who buys or sells for another, in exchange for a commission.

[2053] e templo, Lat.

[2054] Cf. Erasm. Chiliad. Adag. p. 305, imposturce.

[2055] comprehendit, Lat. – comprehends.

[2056] naturalis animae, Lat.; the powers and faculties of the natural soul.

[2057] See Sermons 9, 10. of the Third Decade.

[2058] That is, to choose to act (to will), or choose not to act (to nill).

[2059] rebated: blunted. Johnson.

[2060] per Spiritum sanctum in fide J. C.,Lat.; through the Holy Spirit in the faith of.

[2061] in diem, Lat. omitted; day by day.

[2062] See above, p. iv.37.

[2063] The parenthesis is the translator's.

[2064] 1Cor 1.5; 2.12, 16.

[2065] 1John 2.27, in ea, Lat. and Erasmus; in it, Marg. Auth. Ver.

[2066] Phi 4.12. cxcellere, Lat. and Erasmus; exeede, Tyndale, 1534.

[2067] Phi 1.29; 2.13. See above, p. iii.323, note 6.

[2068] 2Cor 3.17, and hearty good-will, not in Lat.

[2069] blasphemous praters, not in Lat. – prater: someone who talks too much or foolishly.

[2070] See Decade iii. Serm. 10.

[2071] August. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 272. col. 2. Par. 1531

[2072] verses 17-24, holiness of truth, Marg. Auth. Ver.

[2073] mollitiem, Lat. and Erasmus; unnatural lust, Tyndale 1534, and Cranmer 1539.

[2074] Rather, to our neighbour (we owe), etc.

[2075] towards all men, not in Lat.

[2076] In his Comment, in loc. cit. Bullinger explains at length what soldiers these were.

[2077] revelatione sua, Lat.; his revelation, chap. 2.5.

[2078] foads off. See page iii.38, note 3. [i.e., he keeps God's words in his attention and expectation.]

[2079] carnis ac mundi, Lat.; of the flesh and of the world.

[2080] in fide Jesu Christi, Lat. omitted; in the faith of Jesus Christ.

[2081] Lucian (c. 240-312) - He taught that the Logos was a divine spiritual power or being, created by God, which became incarnate in Jesus. The Logos assumed a human body, but not a soul; thus Jesus was not fully God nor fully man. The leaders in the Arian movement received their training under Lucian.

[2082] Epicure: A person devoted to refined sensuous enjoyment (especially good food and drink).

[2083] Nullifidians (faithless ones), not in Lat. Cf. Becon, ed. Park. Soc. Vol. iii. pp. 401, 503: and for Lucian, see Abp. Grindal's Works, ed. Parker Soc. p. 8. A sceptic or unbeliever, who rejects religion (a humanist).

[2084] Cyprian. Tract, ad Demetrian. fin. p. 196. Oxon. 1682.

[2085] See p. iii.407, note 5.

[2086] A treatise among the works of Augustine.

[2087] to search — his own, the translator's addition.

[2088] Cic. de Nat. Deor. Lib. i. cap. 17.

[2089] Over-curious: presumptuous.

[2090] Pro 25.27. See p. i.65, note 6.

[2091] not infinite, not in Lat.

[2092] So Latin also, Gedeonis, for Samson. Both Gideon and Manoah expressed the same apprehension. Judg. vi. 22, and xiii. 22.

[2093] nulla definitione, Lat.; by any definition.

[2094] Lib. de Trinitate. cap. iv. Tertull. Opp. Par. 1664, p. 709.

[2095] Ibid, cap. n. pp. 707, 708. This treatise, de Trinitate, is found among the works of Tertullian, but is an abridgment of a book of Tertullian's by Novatian.

[2096] in a riddle. Marg. auth. ver.

[2097] pcrfectihabia, Lat.]

[2098] Dicitur enim Dominus Sabaoth, Lat. omitted; for he is called the Lord of Sabaoth.

[2099] minima, Lat.; the smallest.

[2100] Originally, " take stomach to him;" So Coverdale, 1535.

[2101] Coverdale, 1535, renders the sentence as the translator here.

[2102] Platon. Cratyl. ed. Bekker. Tom. iv. p. 224. Lond. 1826.

[2103] See p. ii.216, note 3.

[2104] Moses Maimonides, a celebrated Jewish rabbi, born at Cordova, in Spain, lived long, and died in Egypt, a.d. 1204.

[2105] See p. ii.215, notes 5, 6.

[2106] das hochstc oberist gut, German, omitted; the highest good over all.

[2107] or — promise, not in Lat.

[2108] Dionys. Areop. ad Timoth. episc. Ephes. lib. de div. nom. This work is spurious: it is supposed to have been written in the fourth or fifth century.

[2109] Bulling, de Orig. Error, cap. i. fol. 6.

[2110] Doting (orig. "doating") – excessive fondness; reverence.

[2111] See p. ii.225, note 9

[2112] August, ad Fortunat. Ep. cxi. Opp. Tom, 11. fol. 101. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[2113] Originally, "nose-thrills."

[2114] Originally, "but the things that are not compact together, cannot feel diversity." In ed. 1577, diversity is placed within brackets. Novat. de Trin. Lib. apud Tertull. Opp. Par. 1664, p. 710.

[2115] Theodoret. Opp. Dial. i. p. 15. Tom. iv. Lut. Par. 1642.

[2116] Tertull. Adv. Prax. cap. 16. Tom. ii. pp. 176, 177. ed. Semler.

[2117] Originally, "after this premonition."

[2118] Exo 33.19. in nomine Domini, Vulgate.

[2119] Cf. August, de Trinitate. Lib. ii. cap. 16.

[2120] Niggard: A selfish person who is unwilling to give or spend.

[2121] Originally, "brimly" - publicly.

[2122] idem doctor gentium, Lat.; the same teacher of the Gentiles.

[2123] vicissitude, Lat.

[2124] Basil. Opp. Tom. i. pp. 1 87. Par. 1721. Ambros, Opp. Tom. i. pp. 2-142. Par. 1686.

[2125] agnoscero, Lat.; to acknowledge.

[2126] producens in numero exercitum eorum, Lat.; Coverdale's rendering, 1535, is like the translator's.

[2127] Deus et rex sempiternus, Lat.; God and an everlasting king.

[2128] Lactantii de Opificio Dei, capp. 8 19. Andrew Vesalius, a celebrated anatomist and physician, born at Brussels about a.d. 1514, wrote a work, De humani corporis fabrica.

[2129] immisso coelitus, Lat. omitted; which was sent from heaven.

[2130] from the prison, not in Lat.

[2131] in statera, Lat. omitted; in scales.

[2132] Prosopopoeia: representing an abstract quality or idea as a person or creature.

[2133] Solomon's Balettes, called Cantica Canticorum; Coverdale, 1535. See Fulke's Defence, etc. ed. Parker Soc. pp. 571, 572.

[2134] nequo glorietur, Lat.; repeated in these two sentences, but omitted by the translator.

[2135] coram me, Lat.; before me. Exo 20.2.

[2136] quis est petra, Lat.; who is a rock, Auth. Ver.

[2137] See above, page iv.132.

[2138] populum seculi, Lat. – or, the secular (worldly) populace.

[2139] created, ed. 1577.

[2140] Noetus is much the same as a man of understandng, which was the proper name of a man. Anoetus signifies a fool, or one without understanding. Noetus was a presbyter of the church of Asia Minor about AD 230, and a modalist.

[2141] That is, Monarchianism (modalism, adoptionism) which denies that God is a trinity. It was deried as Patripassianism (from the Latin patri- "father" and passio "suffering"), because it purports that the Father suffered on the cross.

[2142] contexuerunt, Lat. – in the habit of, accustomed to, usually.

[2143] homines, Lat. – men.

[2144] posterioribus annis, Lat. omitted; in later years.

[2145] Rufinus of Aquileia (c. 340-410). Translated Greek patristic material into Latin, esp. the work of Origen.

[2146] Eccles. Hist. Ruffino autore. Lib. x. cap. 29. ed. Basil. 1539.

[2147] Basil. Opp. Ep. 43. ad Gregorium fratrem de ousiav et upostasewv differentia. Tom. ii. p. 28. Basil. 1540. Or Tom. iii. p. 115. Ep. 38. Paris, 1721.

[2148] Eusebius of Vercelli (c. 283-371) Italian bishop, who with Athanasius, affirmed the divinity of Jesus against Arianism.

[2149] Sozomen, H. E. Lib. v. cap. 12. p. 198. ed. Reading. Cantab. 1720.

[2150] Socrates, II. E., Lib. iii. cap. 7. p. 178. ed. Reading.

[2151] praestat, Lat.; it is better.

[2152] Tertull. adv. Prax. cap. xxvi. Tom. ii. p. 199. ed. Semler.

[2153] sacrament: mystery.

[2154] Evidently: unmistakably; visibly clear; in an evident manner.

[2155] any reasonable man, not in Lat.

[2156] Per lavacrum regenerationis ac renovationis, etc. – By the washing of regeneration and renewal, etc.

[2157] Cyril. Opp. Lib. ix. in Joann. Tom. iv. p. 812. Lutet. 1638.

[2158] unctio autem, Lat.; and the anointing.

[2159] Basil. Opp. Epist. 38. Tom. iii. p. 169. Paris. 1839.

[2160] Solitude: a singularity, or one of a kind – a unique statement, illustration, or characterization.

[2161] Tertull. adv. Prax. capp. 8 and 9, pp. 157, 158.

[2162] for our sakes, not in Lat.

[2163] Letters patent: an official document granting a right or privilege.

[2164] Cyril. Opp. Lib. ix. in Joann. Tom. iv. p. 762. Lutet. 1638.

[2165] let a man, was an error in all the editions.

[2166] What we call the "royal we," in which a monarch speaks of himself in the plural.

[2167] Enallage: a substitution of part of speech, gender, number or tense etc. (e.g., the editorial 'we' for 'I')

[2168] protoplastorum, Lat.; parents.

[2169] See p. i.34.

[2170] externorum domesticommque sapientum, Lat.; of wise men both without and within the church.

[2171] So ed. 1584 also: but ed. 1577 has, fruit to feed him.

[2172] Novatian. de Trin. cap. 1. Tertul. Opp. Par. 1664.p. 707.

[2173] Theodoret. Haeret. Fab. Lib. v. cap. 10. p. 275. Tom. iv. Lut. Par. 1642.

[2174] A melding of Psa 146.10 with Psa 145.13.

[2175] A melding of Psa 145.14, with Psa 146.7-9.

[2176] That is, fate; "ethnic" here means a foreign or cultural concept, as opposed to biblical.

[2177] This is fatalism, not providence, and often leads to license instead of liberty: "God will stop me, or make me..." It is a passive or indifferent response to God, instead of taking responsibility (Mat 25.26; Col 1.29). – WHG.

[2178] Shifts: contrivances and schemes.

[2179] Assay: to weigh in a scale, to assess options, and then determine a prudent course of action to take.

[2180] omnemquo movero lapidem, Lat. Erasmi Adag. Chiliad, p. 228, experientiae.

[2181] Meteors, impressions, or appearances, which sometimes for their rareness and strangeness make men marvel.

[2182] neque temere, Lat. omitted; nor by chance.

[2183] propter sua merita, Lat.; for any merits sake of theirs, ed. 1577.

[2184] agnoscunt modum, ut in rebus omnibus, ita in his imprimis, servandum; Lat. omitted; they acknowledge that, as in all things, so in these matters especially, moderation is to be kept.

[2185] The Book of Sirach is in the Apocrypha; it is also known as the Book of Wisdom, or Ecclesiasticus.

[2186] debeant, Lat.; who ought.

[2187] placatus est nobis, Lat. ecaritwsen significat, gratificavit, sibi caros, gratos, ac dilectos reddidit, adeoque et placatus est. Bulling. Comment, in Eph. i. 6. See p. i.96, note 1.

[2188] per vel propter Christum, Lat.; through or for the sake of Christ.

[2189] propagatur bonum, Lat.; and Bibl. Lat. Tigur. 1544, and Erasmus' version.

[2190] eundemquo ut petamus inspirare, Lat.; and that it is even he that puts it into our hearts to ask.

[2191] Cf. Orig. Lett. ed. Parker Soc. cliv, clv.

[2192] Beck: a nod or other beckoning gesture.

[2193] institutorem, Lat.

[2194] Seneca, do otio Sapientis, cap. 32.

[2195] adeoque, Lat.; and so.

[2196] More correctly, the Hithpahel form of this verb signifies, to worship.'

[2197] to fall at the feet.

[2198] p. ii.231. Exo 20.4-5.

[2199] Lactant. de Orig. Error. Lib. 11. capp. 17, 18. pp. 227-230. Lugd. Bat. 1660.

[2200] p. ii.220.

[2201] Entitled De Vera Religione, c. 55.

[2202] August, de Vera Relig. cap. 55. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 155. col. 4. fol. 156. col. 1. Par. 1532.

[2203] August, de Consensu Evangelist. Lib. i. capp. 17, 18. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 81. col. 3.

[2204] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577 has rightly, husband; maritum, Lat.

[2205] exaltabitur, Lat.; is set aloft. Marg. Auth. Ver.

[2206] Bullinger appears to have read vivetis for ibitis (which also Bibl. Lat. Tigur. 1544 has), you shall go.

[2207] See above, page iv.133.

[2208] Rather, But the glory of God is this, that he is only, etc.

[2209] Aug. Enarr. in Ps. xcvi. Opp. Par. 1531. Vol. viii. fol. 220. col. 2.

[2210] Sentiments like the above are frequently met with in Romish writers: ex. gr. in Pighius, Controv. praecip. etc. fol. 194. Par. 1549.

[2211] Terrible: causing fear, dread or terror.

[2212] reconciliatio dissidentium, Lat.; reconciliation of parties at variance.

[2213] Originally, " principally Christ." Principio enim solus Christus, Lat.; For, in the first place, only Christ, etc.

[2214] Idem rursus aditum nobis ad Patrem aperit per Christum in epistola, etc.; the same (apostle) again opens for us access to the Father through Christ in his epistle, etc.

[2215] resignation, not in Lat.

[2216] imprimis, Lat.; especially or in particular.

[2217] vel confingi posse, Lat.; could even be devised: or spoken, the translator's addition.

[2218] That is, Christ's righteous must be imputed to believers, because it is inherent in him, and not in us who were all corrupted by the fall. His righteousness is imputed from his very nature, to become the essence our new nature, which is what makes us acceptable to God. Thus, his righteousness is necessarily and characteristically imputative. – WHG

[2219] in primis, Lat.; most especially.

[2220] Rom 8:26-27 ^NKJ Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. ²⁷ Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

[2221] nobis abunde consultum esse, Lat.; that we are full well cared for.

[2222] constitutum esso salutis negotium, Lat.; that the work of salvation is ordered.

[2223] Bullinger quotes some passages from Cyprian, Augustine, and Jerome in his treatise, De Orig. Error, cap. 14-17.

[2224] Augustin. de Civit. Dei, Lib. xxii. cap. 10. Opp. Tom. v. fol. 302. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[2225] Bulling, de Orig. Erroris, Lib. i. cap. 18, 19. Tigur. 1539.

[2226] Exo 20.5; 7.16. Vulgate.

[2227] timent, Lat.; fear him.

[2228] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577, which submits itself to God alone, and applies itself in all things, etc. So Lat.

[2229] So Coverdale, 1535, and Vulgate.

[2230] to be lowly, and to walk with your God, Coverdalc, 1535. et soli-citum (Bullinger adds, vel submissum, which word is used in Bibl. Lat. Tigur. 1544) ambulare cum Deo tuo. Vulgate.

[2231] So ed. 1577: but 1584, 1587, in the world; a mundo, Lat.

[2232] Lactant. Instit. Lib. vi. cap. 9. p. 676. Lugd. Bat. 1660.

[2233] et luculentissima de vero Dei Cultu, cap. 1. Lat.; and (the same author) gives the most clear description of the true worship of God in the first chapter (of the same book). The sixth book of Lactantius Institutes is entitled, De Vero Cultu.

[2234] Rather, of the martyr Romanus.

[2235] Prudentii Peristeph. Hymn. xiv. 341-365. Romanus, whose address to Asclepiades, prefect of the city, is thus versified, was a martyr at Antioch in the fourth century. Magdeb. Centur. Cent. iv. cap. 12.

[2236] Israeliticis, Lat.

[2237] utilitatem, Lat. – profit.

[2238] August, de Quant. Animae. cap. 34. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 130. col. 4. Par. 1532.

[2239] August, ibid.

[2240] p. iii.125, note 4. a relinquiendo – from leaving, or relinquishing.

[2241] Aul. Gell. Noct. Att. Lib. iv. cap. 9. p. 280. Lugd. Bat. 1700.

[2242] Lactant. Instit. Lib. iv. cap. 28.

[2243] Jerome, Comment. in Amos. cap. 8. Opp. Tom. iii. col. 1448. Par. 1693-1706.

[2244] Aug. Opp. Par. 1532. Tom. i. fol. 131. col. 1.

[2245] Aug. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 156, col. 3.

[2246] Lactant. Instit. Lib. iv. cap. 28. p. 445. Lugd. Bat. 1660.

[2247] fere, Lat.; generally.

[2248] i.e., Kittim or Cyprus.

[2249] Or cisterns.

[2250] Decade ii. Serm. 2.

[2251] Bulling, de Orig. Error. Lib. i.

[2252] Curious: here it means argumentative, hard to please, finicky.

[2253] Cyril. Opp. Lib. i. in Joann. Tom. iv. pp. 11, 2. Lutet. 1638.

[2254] Socrates, Hist. Eccles. Lib. i. cap. 8. p. 25. ed. Reading.

[2255] Strongs 05997 עֲמִיתִ֔י (Amiyth); meaning companion, partner, or fellow – hence co-equal.

[2256] Jerome proceeds to explain "vir cohierens Deo," by Joh 14.10, and Luk 23.46. — Jerome, Opp. Tom. iii. p. 1789. Par. 1704.

[2257] Identitate et essentia, Lat. – identity and essence.

[2258] See p. iii.130.

[2259] De Fide Orthodoxa cont. Arrian. cap. 5. Ambros. Opp. Tom. ii. Append. col. 352. Par. 1686-90. The Benedictines do not consider this to be a work of Ambrose. See also James on Corrupt, of Script. etc. p. 31. ed. 1843.

[2260] Aug. Pascent. Ep. 173. Opp. Par. 1532. Vol. ii. fol. 150. col. 3.

[2261] Id. Vol. vi. fol. 151. col. 1.

[2262] Tertull. Opp. Novatian. de Trinitate. cap. 24. p. 723. Par. 1664. See above, p. iv.129, note.

[2263] The translator's addition.

[2264] See above, page iv.132.

[2265] Rather, For the universal Shepherd, King and Priest, must be, etc.

[2266] confixorunt, Lat.; which pierced.

[2267] Isaurise Diocaesariensis, Lat. Diocaesarea was one of the dioceses in the province of Isauria, and under the patriarchate of Antioch. Bingham, Antiq. of Christ. Ch. Book ix. chap. 3. 16.

[2268] Cyrill. Epist. i. ad Successum. Opp. Tom. v. Part. n. pp. 139, 140. Lutet. 1638.

[2269] Theodoret. Dial. ii. pp. 83,84. Opp. Tom. iv. Lutet. 1642.

[2270] Augustin. de Haeres. cap. 55.

[2271] From the Athanasian Creed. See p. i.30.

[2272] Eutyches (c. 380-456) was a presbyter at Constantinople. At the First Council of Ephesus in 431, he opposed the teachings of Nestorius as heresy; but his equally extreme view described here, got him denounced as a heretic himself.

[2273] See p. ii.376. n. 1. Nestorius opponed the Arian heresy, but fell into a contrary error. Arians taught that Christ was a created being. To refute this, Nestorius argued that the Godhead joined with the human, as if a man entered a tent or put on clothes. Instead of depicting Christ as one unified person, Nestorius saw him as a conjunction of two natures so distinct as to be different persons who had merged. Nestorius also refused to call Mary the "Mother of God." He said that Jesus' acts and sufferings were of his human nature, not his Godhead. Cyril condemned Nestorius' works by issuing twelve anathemas against him. Nestorius responded in kind. Emperor Theodosius II called a council at Ephesus to settle the question. But Cyril and his allies deposed Nestorius before his Syrian supporters could reach the council. www.Christianity.com/church-history/timeline/301-600/the-nestorian-controversy-11629695.html

[2274] Rather, For one and the same Christ is according to, etc.

[2275] consequens est, Lat.; it follows.

[2276] Augustin. ad Dardan. Ep. LVII. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 63. col. 3. fol. 54. col. 2. fol. 56. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[2277] Id. Tom. ix. fol. 76. col. 3.

[2278] Id. Tom. vi. fol. 160. col. 3. This treatise is not genuine.

[2279] Id. Tom. iii. fol. 164. col. 2. P.

[2280] Vigilii contra Eutychen. Lib. iv. fol. .73. Tigur. 1539.

[2281] Socratis Hist. Eccles. Lib. vii. cap. 32. De Anastasio presbytero, a quo Nestorius ad impietatem perductus est. ed. Cantab, pp. 380, 381.

[2282] A synod at Toledo (Toletan), in the first half of the fifth century, professed "We believe in One God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit... and that the Spirit is the Paraclete who is neither the Father nor the Son, but proceeds from the Father and the Son." But the third council of Toledo in 589, made the Spanish Church the first to add the filioque ‎("and the son") to the Western form of the Nicene Creed. It indicates that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, as opposed to the Eastern churches which believe the Spirit proceeds from the Father alone. H.B. Swete, The Holy Spirit in the Ancient Church (MacMillan and Co., London, 1912), pp. 344-345.

[2283] Assertio Fidei Concil. Toletan. i. Magd. Centur. Cent. v. cap. 9. foil. 467, 468. Basil. 1624. The first of these three determinations is not found, and the second is given somewhat differently, in Concil. Labb. et Coss. Tom. ii. col. 1228. This last phase means that the Son is not the Father, and he is not the Spirit; he is not the Godhead. – WHG

[2284] Damasi Opp. Epist. ad Paulin. Thessalon. Episc. p. 116. Romae, 1638.

[2285] tam stupidus, Lat.; dor, a drone. Johnson. – so stupid.

[2286] Passion here refers specifically to Christ's sacrifice and blood atonement, not just to his pain and suffering.

[2287] Theodoret. Demonstrat. per Syllog. Opp. Tom. iv. p. 186. Lutet. Par. 1642-84.

[2288] Joan. Damascen (John Damascus). Orthodoxae Fid. Lib. iii. cap. 3. p. 174. Bas. 1575.

[2289] idiomatum communicatio, Lat. – an idiomatic communication.

[2290] Lib. ii. cap. 17. p. 50. Venet. 1742.

[2291] sive ad missionem, dispensationisque mysterium, Lat. – a mysterious dispensation.

[2292] idiomatum, Lat.

[2293] Theodoret. Dial. III. Opp. Tom. iv. pp. 129, 130.Lutet. Par. 1642.

[2294] symbolis, Lat. – representations.

[2295] Cf. p. iii.45, n. 7, and p. iii.153, n. 8; and see Bullinger. in Apocalyps. Conc. xxi. p. 58, and Conc. xxviii. p. 76, and Conc. lxxviii. p. 245. Basil, 1557.

[2296] Our Lord's phrase in Matthew is, The kingdom of heaven: in the other Evangelists, of God.

[2297] pp. ii.365-369.

[2298] 2Cor 12:10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ's sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong.

[2299] 2Cor 4:8-10 We are hard pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; ⁹ persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed – ¹⁰ always carrying about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our body.

[2300] adeoque, Lat.; and so.

[2301] Alioqui nullam in terris sedem vel palatium regni habet, Lat. omitted; Otherwise, he has no seat or palace of his kingdom upon earth.

[2302] Chapters 21 and 22.

[2303] That is, all the seats of authority in the Church, as Head over all.

[2304] negotia exequatur, Lat.

[2305] Sermon (not the last, but) v. pp. 212-219.

[2306] Decade iii. Sermon v.

[2307] summum pontificem, Lat. – high priest.

[2308] omnium peccatorum totius mundi, Lat.; of all the sins of the whole world.

[2309] Decade iii. Serm. v.

[2310] Suffragan: an assistant or subordinate bishop of a diocese.

[2311] See above, p. iv.219.

[2312] a chrismate, Lat. Cf. Tertul. de Baptismo, cap. 7. Tom. iv. p. 164. ed. Semler. Hal. Magd. 1824.

[2313] Tertull. Adv. Prax. Op. Par. 1634, p. 660.

[2314] Decade iii. Serm. ix.

[2315] page ii.258, note 2.

[2316] See above, p. iv.224.

[2317] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. i. cap. 4. Tom. i. pp. 31, 32. ed. Burton. Oxon. 1838.

[2318] Brunonis, Lat.; Bruno, founder of the Order of Carthusians.

[2319] Benedicti, Lat.; Benedict of Nursia (or Norcia), in Italy, established the Benedictine order about a.d. 529.

[2320] Robert or Rodbert, born at Arbrissel, near Rennes in France, founded the order of Fontevraud, a new sect of Benedictines, A. D. 1100.

[2321] St. Francis of Assisi, in Italy, established his order of Fratres Minores, or Minorites, about a.d. 1208.

[2322] August. Enarrat. in Psa 149. Opp. Tom. viii. fol. 361. col. 1. Par. 1532.

[2323] That is, Moses is the writer of Genesis, quoting the words of God to Noah.

[2324] For the Athanasian Creed, See p. i.30.

[2325] Augustin. de Trinitate. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 101. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[2326] Theodoret. Haeret. Fab. Lib. v. cap. 3. p. 258. Tom. iv. Lut. Par. 1642.

[2327] At, Lat.; But.

[2328] seduxit, Lat. – deceived or seduced.

[2329] Didymus the Blind (c. 313-398) – a Christian theologian in the Coptic Church of Alexandria. He led his famous Catechetical School for about half a century. Bullinger says Didymus is of the "Grecian churches" (p. iv.310).

[2330] Hieronymo interpreto. cap. 6. p. 265. Bibliotb. Vet. Pat. Tom. vi. Venet. 1770, or Jerome, Opp. Tom. iv. Par. i. col. 497. Par. 1706. In the works of Jerome the treatise is divided into three books.

[2331] alia, Lat. omitted; other.

[2332] Cyril. Dial, ad Hermiam presb. de Sancta Trin. cap. 7. De Sancto Spiritu, quod Deus sit, et ex Deo secundum naturam. Opp. Tom. v. Par. i. pp. 631, etc. Lut. 1638.

[2333] Athanasii Opp. de Trin. et Spir.'s. pp. 587, etc. Par. 1627.

[2334] The Macedonians.

[2335] See pp. i.13, 16, 17.

[2336] Accident: A quality or attribute in distinction from the substance itself – such as sweetness, softness.

[2337] creaturam, Lat. – creature.

[2338] Cyril, in Joann. Lib. x. cap. 33; Opp. Lutet. 1638. Tom. iv. p. 910.

[2339] August, de Trin. Lib. xv. cap. 26. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 101. col. 2. Par. 1532.

[2340] videmus, Lat.; we see.

[2341] August. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 101. col. 2.

[2342] See above, page iv.157 – the third sermon of this Decade, about the beginning.

[2343] Didymi Alex, de Spir. Sanct. capp. 25, 26, p. 273. Biblioth. Vet. Patr. Tom. vi. Venet. 1770. or Jerome, Opp. Lib. ii. coll. 509, 510. Tom. iv. Pars i. Paris. 1706.

[2344] See p. i.158, and Addenda, p. 436. [addenda excluded]

[2345] Novatian. de Trin. cap. 29. Tertull. Opp. Col. Agrip. 1617. p. 741.

[2346] So Manes and his followers.

[2347] The Spirit of wisdom (Deu 34.9), judgment (Isa 4.4), truth (Joh 14.17), holiness (Rom 1.4), adoption (Rom 8.15), etc.

[2348] Didymi Alex. ibid. cap. 9. p. 266. Jerome, ibid. col. 499.

[2349] The Latin Vulgate renders Psa 50.14 (our Psa 51.12), spiritu principali confirma me. Also p. iii.147, note.

[2350] vertiginis, Lat. and Vulgate; of giddiness, Douay Bible, Isa 19.14.

[2351] Didym. Alexandr. de Spir. Sanct. cap. xxv. Biblioth. Vet. Patr. Tom. vi. fol. 272. col. 2. Jerome, Opp. Tom. iv. Pars i. col. 509.

[2352] Acts 5.41

[2353] Spiritus impostor, Lat. omitted; a spirit which is a deceiver.

[2354] Rather, Because he was promised from God to the fathers by the prophets, and to the apostles and all who believe the doctrine of the apostles by Christ.

[2355] opifices, Lat. – offices or positions.

[2356]. Look in the third sermon of this Decade, what things are spoken against the heretics called the Anthropomorphites. See above, page iv.138. Exo 8.19.

[2357] Didym. Alex, de Spir. Sanct. capp. 20, 21. Biblioth. Vet. Patr. Tom. vi. pp. 270, 271. Jerome, Opp. Tom. iv. Par. I. col. 506. Exo 31.18.

[2358] historicus sacer, Lat. – the sacred historian.

[2359] Originaly, "maugre."

[2360] disertus, Lat.; living, A. V.

[2361] illustris, Lat.

[2362] certus, Lat. – certain or sure.

[2363] 1Joh 2.27. See above, p iv.286, and note 2.

[2364] in mentem, Lat. – in the mind.

[2365] beneficio spiritus, Lat. – generosity (beneficence) of spirit.

[2366] in rebus, Lat.; in the affairs.

[2367] Distinguish: to make something celebrated, eminent, or prestigious — in this case, by His presence.

[2368] 1Cor 12.3 — Execrable: deserving a curse.

[2369] Novatian. de Trin. cap. 29. Tertull. Opp. pp. 741, 742. Col. Agrip.

[2370] or spirits, not in Lat.

[2371] Angelus enim officii nomen est, non naturae. — August. Tract, de eo quod dictum est a Deo ad Moysen, Ego sum qui sum. (Incerti auctoris.) Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 179. col. 4. Par. 1532.

[2372] In his Commentary on 1Cor 11.10, Bullinger first explains "the angels "of the heavenly beings, and then says: Alii per angelos verbi ministros intelligunt.

[2373] Bulling. Comment, in 1Cor 6.3.

[2374] satellites, Lat.; heavenly, the translator's addition.

[2375] Augustini Steuehi Eugubini de perenni philosophia. Lib. viii. cap. 6, 8. in which he quotes Callimachus, Homer, Catullus, and Virgil. Opp. Tom. ii. foll. 140,142. Venet. 1591.

[2376] throni, Lat.

[2377] Epiphan, adv. Haef. Lib. ii. Tom. ii. p. 611. Opp. Tom. i. Par. 1622.

[2378] Augustin. de Genesi ad lit. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 102. col. 4. De Incarnat. Verbi. Tom. iv. fol. 209. col. 3.

[2379] G. Majoris Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 522. Witeb. 1569.

[2380] August, de Eccles. Dogm. capp. 11, 12. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 42. col. 3. Par. 1532.

[2381] Gen 18.1-4; 19.2.

[2382] Gen 32.23; Hos 12.4.

[2383] August. Enchirid. ad Laurent, cap. 59. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 37. col. 1.

[2384] Id. de Fide ad Petrum Diac. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 49. col. 4.

[2385] Id. de Vera Relig. cap. 13. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 149. col. 3.

[2386] Id. de Eccles. dogmat. cap. 61. Opp. Torn. m. fol. 42. col. 4.

[2387] That is, they have no need to reproduce, since they never die. Theodoret. Haeret. Fab. Lib. v. cap. 7. p. 265. Tom. iv. Lut. Par. 1642.

[2388] regiam, Lat.; the palace.

[2389] Embassage: an ambassadorship – the office of an ambassador, representive, or agent.

[2390] August. Enchirid. ad Laurent, cap. 58. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 37. col. 3. Par. 1532.

[2391] Id. lib. ad Orosium contra Priscillianistas et Origenistas. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 134. col. 1.

[2392] Cherubim, quod interpretatur scientice multitude. Jerome, Epist. 50. Opp. Tom. iv. Par. ii. col. 574. Par. 1693-1706.

[2393] nutu suo, Lat.; by his nod.

[2394] Exo 19; Deu 5.

[2395] See pp. i.84-86.

[2396] Tropically: by a trope – language used in a figurative or nonliteral sense.

[2397] Eze 3.12. Theodoret. Haeret. Fab. Lib. v. cap. 7. p. 267. Tom. v. Lut. Par. 1642-84.

[2398] For St. Peter testifies (1Pet 1.12) that the gospel of the Son of God is a most pleasant and grateful spectacle to angels.

[2399] veritatem Christianam, Lat. – the truth of Christ.

[2400] 1Christum Dominum, Lat. – the Lord Christ.

[2401] anti-Christianorum, Lat.

[2402] Lactant. Instit. Lib. ii. cap. 16.

[2403] Augustin. de Civit. Dei. Lib. x. cap. 12. Opp. Tom. v. Par. 1532.

[2404] Song of the three holy children, 3 Dan. iii. 26, (Apocryphal,) Vulgate.

[2405] Lactant. Instit. Lib. ii. cap. 16.

[2406] Assayed: attempted or sought out.

[2407] August. Confess. Lib. x. cap. 67. (alii 42).

[2408] Id. Opp. Tom. v. fol. 123. col. 3, 4.

[2409] Id. de Vera Relig. cap. 55. Tom. i. fol. 156. col. 2.

[2410] Angelici, in angelorum cultu inclinati, quos Epiphanius jam omnino defecisse testatur. Id. de Ilaeres. cap. 39. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 4. col. 3.

[2411] What might he have thought of the temple built to St. Michael in Mount Garganus? This highly-venerated church, dug out of the solid rock, is in a cave of Mount St. Angelo, the ancient Mons Garganus. Cramer's Italy, Vol. ii. p. 277.

[2412] August, contra Maxim. Lib. i. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 142. col. 1.

[2413] See above, p. iv.330, note 3.

[2414] See above, page iv.329.

[2415] Ecco qui serviunt ei non sunt stabiles, Lat. and Vulgate. He has found unfaithfulness among his own servants, Coverdale, 1535.

[2416] So in all the editions; but the Lat. is sub caligine – under a cloud.

[2417] Musculus, apud Maldonat. Expos. Eccles. in Isa 14.12.

[2418] OEcolampad. Comment, in Ezek. (28.11-19) fol. 173. Argentor. 1534.

[2419] See p. iii.366.

[2420] Theodoret. Haeret. Fab. Lib. v. cap. 8. p. 269. Tom. iv. Lut. Par. 1642.

[2421] August, de Vera Relig. cap. 13. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 149. col. 3. Par. 1532.

[2422] Id. Expos, in Evang. Joan. Tract. 42. Opp. Tom. ix.

[2423] See above, p. iv.330, note 3.

[2424] See Bulling. Comment, in Mat Lib. iv. fol. 88. Tigur. 1542.

[2425] Fulke's Defence of Translat. etc. ed. Parker Soc. p. 313.

[2426] Juggling: manipulative.

[2427] Rev 12.9; Joh 14.30; Eph 2.2; 1Pet 5.8.

[2428] See p. iii.118, note 1.

[2429] inimicum hominem, Lat.

[2430] ad nepotem ex sorore, Lat.: 1Chr 2.16

[2431] Plat. Cratyl. p. 226. Vol. iv. ed. Bekker. Lond. 1826.

[2432] Plat. Cratyl. ubi supr.

[2433] Hom. II. á. 222. 561. l. 480, etc.

[2434] fere, Lat.; generally.

[2435] Deu 15.9. "Beware that there be not a thought in your wicked (marg. Belial) heart, that there be not a poynte of Belial." Coverdale. 1535.

[2436] Eph 2.2; 6.12.

[2437] August. Tract, in Joan. 25. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 78. col. 2. Par. 1532.

[2438] Id. de Agon. Christ, cap. 1. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 162. col. 1.

[2439] Id. Tract, in Joan. 52. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 78. coll. 1,2.

[2440] conficit, Lat. – traverses or crosses them.

[2441] Luk 22:3 Then Satan entered Judas, surnamed Iscariot, who was numbered among the twelve. Joh 13:2 And supper being ended, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray Him... Joh 17:12 ...none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

[2442] Selden de Diis Syris. Syntag. II. cap. 6. et Add. Beyeri. p. 134. Amstel. 1680.

[2443] prope paludem Gadarenam apud Gadaram, Lat. See above, p. iv.353, note 4.

[2444] August. Enarrat. pars 2. in Psa xxxii. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 46. col. 1.

[2445] Rather, The order of things therefore, profit, and very necessity.

[2446] Act 20.10; 1Sam 26.21.

[2447] Lactant. de Opif. Dei. cap. 18.]

[2448] definitiones ecclesiasticae, Lat. – Church definitions, but here speaking of scholasticism.

[2449] August, de Eccles. dogm. cap. 15. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 42. col. 4.

[2450] Lactant. de Opif. Dei. cap. 17.

[2451] Cassiodor. Opp. de Anima. p. 286. Par. 1679.

[2452] August. Ep. 28. Hieronymo de Natura et Origine Animarum. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 19. col. 4. Par. 1532.

[2453] His vero significantius, Lat.; more expressively than these texts.

[2454] August, de Quant. Animae. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 122. col. 4.

[2455] See above, p. iv.368, n. 2.

[2456] a creatione sua, Lat.; from its creation.

[2457] Calv. Instit. Lib. i. cap. 15. § 5.

[2458] Aurelius Prudentius (348- c.413) Christian poet and hymnist.

[2459] Prudent. Apoth. 952-955.

[2460] Jerome, Epist. 78. (al. 82.) ad Marcollin. et Anapsych. Opp. Tom. iv. Pars 2. col. 642. Par. 1706.

[2461] Originally, "matrice" or matrix.

[2462] August, de Eccles. Dogm. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 42. coll. 3. 4. Par. 1532.

[2463] Psa 33.15; Jerome, ad Pammach. adv. error. Johan. Jeros. Ep. 38. Opp. Tom. iv. Pars 2. fol. 318.

[2464] Formationem patris nostri, Lat.; rather, the creation of our father, i.e. Adam. — God, is the translator's addition.

[2465] August, de Quant. Animae. cap. 33. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 130. coll. 1, 2. Par. 1532.

[2466] Gen 2.17; 3.6; August. de Fide et Symb. cap. 10. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 32. col. 3. Par. 1532. Works of Coverdale, ed. P.S. Remains, p. 201.

[2467] Id. de Trin. Lib. xiv. cap. 4. Opp. Tom. iii. fol, 91. col. 2.

[2468] to remain there; not in Lat.

[2469] Joh 6.51, 58; John 11, the raising of Lazarus.

[2470] August, de Eccles. Dogm. 16. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 42. col. 4. Par. 1532. – drawn from Ecc 3.21.

[2471] That is, Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.), Roman lawyer, politician, orator, and writer.

[2472] Cic. Tusc. Quaest. Lib. i. cap. 16.

[2473] Id. ibid.

[2474] Id. ibid. cap. 17.

[2475] Tot autem rationes attulit (Plato), ut velle ceteris, sibi certo persuasisse videatur. Cic. ibid. cap. 21.

[2476] Senec. Epist. 117.

[2477] Simplicii Comment, in Epictcti Enchirid. cap. 39.

[2478] Originally, "although other, by my lieve, very subtilly, " etc.

[2479] Dissolved: Greek analuo (Str. 360), to unloose or break up; literally, to de-part.

[2480] See page i.145.

[2481] Conversation here means the context in which souls interact, as with Lazarus and Abraham above.

[2482] Peter calls us "pilgrims" of the dispersion, and "sojourners" – 1Pet 2.1, 17; 2.11.

[2483] de angelis bonis, Lat.; of good angels, cd. 1577. See above, p. iv.335.

[2484] Bullinger. adv. Anabapt. Lib. iv. cap. 10.

[2485] Canones Concil. Trident. Sess. xxv. decret. de Purgatorio.

[2486] Dormitantii, Lat. See Jerome's play on Vigilantius' name. Jerome, Opp. Tom. iv. Par. ii. pp. 280, etc. Par. 1706. and Gilly's Vigilantius and His Times, pp. 349, 392. Lond. 1844.

[2487] See pages i.136, i.167; page iii.200.

[2488] Alexander de Hales. Sum. Theol. Par. iv. quaest. 8.

[2489] See above, p. iv.114.

[2490] Bellarmin. Controv. vi. Lib. i. cap. vii. col. 1358. Cranmer's Remains, ed. Parker Soc. p. 181.

[2491] excoquantur, Lat. – to boil or temper by heat.

[2492] expiatum, Lat. – expiated, or atoned for.

[2493] Tyndale's Exposit. ed. Parker Soc. pp. 161-163. Answer to More, p. 146. Doctr. Treat, pp. 244, 303, 318. Sermons of Latimer, p. 50.

[2494] Thomas Aquinas contra Gentiles. Lib. iv. cap. 91. Bellarmin. disput. de Controversiis, Lib. i. cap. 5. Controv. vi.

[2495] See Confutation of Unwritten Verities. Cranmer's Remains, etc. ed. Parker Soc. chap. ii. pp. 22-36.

[2496] Machabaeorum libros legit quidem ecclesia, sed inter canonicas scripturas non recipit. Jerome, Praef. in Prov. Solom. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 939. Par. 1693. See also Bp. Cosin's Scholast. Hist, of Canon of Script. Chap. vi. 71. p. 72. Lond. 1683. Fulke's Defence, etc. ed. Parker Soc. p. 24. Remains of Abp. Grindal, p. 23.

[2497] Bellarmin. Controv. i. Lib. iv. cap. 7. col. 164. Controv. vi. Lib. ii. cap. 16. col. 1404. Jewel's Defence of Apology, ed. Parker Soc. p. 559.

[2498] mortem suorum, Lat.; the death of their brethren. 1The 4.13.

[2499] Cf. Sermons of Abp. Sandys, ed. Parker Soc. p. 163.

[2500] August, de Verbis Apost. Serm. xxxii. Opp. Tom. x. fol. 84. col. 1. Par. 1532.

[2501] Id. Tom. iv. fol. 200, col. 2.

[2502] Id. Tom. vii. fol. 192, etc., and fol. 134, etc. Par. 1532.

[2503] Bellarmin. Controv. vi. Lib. i. cap. 2. col. 1325.

[2504] Philastrii Lib. de Haeres. p. 491. 44. Vet. Pat. Biblioth. Tom. vii. Ven. 1670. Epiphan. adv. Haeres. Lib. iii. Tom. i. 1. p. 905. Opp. Tom. i. Par. 1622. August. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 6. col. 1. Par. 1532.

[2505] Bellarmin. disput. do Controversiis. Controv. vi. Lib. i. cap. 7. coll. 1361, 2, 1375, 1384, 1390. Magdeb. Centur. Cent. viii. cap. 13. col. 498. Vol. ii. Cent. x. cap. 14. col. 385. Cent. xii. cap. 13. col. 886. Vol. iii. Basil. 1624.

[2506] Rabanus Maurus (c.780-856) – born in Mainz; an archbishop, Benedictine abbot, theologian, and scholar who was esteemed as a “Teacher of Germany” for his work in the German language.

[2507] Rabani Mauri de Instit. Cleric. Lib. ii. cap. 44. Tom. vi. fol. 27. col. 1. Col. Agrip. 1626.

[2508] ne beatas quidem animas, Lat. ; that not even blessed souls.

[2509] Tertull. de Anim. cap. 57. Opp. ed. Semler. Tom. iv. p. 287. Hal. Magd. 1824.

[2510] Dotard: An oldster in his dotage; someone whose age has impaired his intellect.

[2511] non errare hie, Lat.; do not wander up and down here.

[2512] Chrysostom. Hom. in Mat xxviii. (al. xxix.) foll. 336, 7. Tom. vii. Par. 1727.

[2513] Tertull. de Anim. cap. 67. ed. Semler. Tom. iv. p. 286.

[2514] Lib. ad Simplicianum ii. quaest. 3; and ad Dulcitii quaest. etc.; August. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 139. col. 1. and fol. 142. coll. 3, 4. Par. 1532.

[2515] Est praeterea, etc. Lat. Again the last day is. In these two senses Bullinger also explains "the last day" in Comment, in Joan, in loc. cit.

[2516] of the time past, not in Lat

[2517] Ascend to heaven from the very mouth.

[2518] So Tyndale, 1525; Coverdale, 1535; Cranmer, 1539; and the Geneva version, 1557. The Vulgate reads, Amodo jam dicit Spiritus, (From henceforth now, says the Spirit, Douay); but Erasmus notes: Graeci sic distinguunt, ut amodo sit finis sententioc, ut sit sensus, Post hac fore beatos, qui in Domino fuerint mortui. Annot. in loc.

[2519] aparti significat, ab instanti, ab illa hora, protinus et continue, einswegs, von stund an. Bulling, in Apoc. Conc. 65. p. 205. Basil. 1570.

[2520] in vita, Lat. omitted; in their lifetime.

[2521] rerum cohaerentium, Lat.: of things mutually related to each other.

[2522] Ananias says this about Saul. Acts 9.14.

[2523] ex hoc mundo, Lat. omitted: out of this world.

[2524] vel aliarum exterarum gentium, Lat.: or (of the churches) of other nations that are without.

[2525] So Bibl. Lat. Tigur. and Tyndale and Cranmer, "and made their garments large." Mea autem sententia rectius et simplicius legere videtur codex Compluten. et Aretas, Et eplunon, quod et vetus Interpres vertit, Abluerunt. — Bullinger. in Apoc. Conc. 36. p. 103. Basil. 1570.

[2526] elegantissimam, Lat.

[2527] and to the blood of sprinkling, omitted by Bullinger.

[2528] rather, with outward bands or marks.

[2529] Hanc in primis confitentes symbolo edocti apostolico dicimus, Lat. Confessing this church especially we say, as we are taught by the Apostles' Creed.

[2530] cum Sanctis omnibus, Lat.: with all the saints.

[2531] Rather, for we confess none more than ourselves to be holy.

[2532] adhuc, Lat. omitted: as yet.

[2533] et in agro, Lat.: and in the country.

[2534] Pacii Isagog. in Decretal. Lib. iii. tit. 29. de paroeciis.

[2535] parochie, Dutch translation, 1567.

[2536] Parochus (parocov), qui legatis et aliis iter facientibus necessaria (nominatim salem, lignum, foenum) publico sumtu proebenda suscepit vel redemit. Idem Latine a proebere (parecein) apud Ciceronem Offic. I. 15. dicitur proebitor. — Doering. in Hor. Sat. I. 5. 46.

[2537] paranymphum, Lat. The bride-man, as he rode in the carriage with the bride and bridegroom, was sometimes called the parocov. — Smith, Diet, of Antiq. p. 599. Lond. 1842.

[2538] Bullinger seems here to have borrowed from Polydor. Vergil. De Rerum Inv. Lib. iv. cap. 9.

[2539] Sermon iv-7. Christ as King, p. iv.273.

[2540] ecclesia malignantium, Lat.: Psalm 25.5. Vulgate.

[2541] vel exterioris, Lat.: even of the outward.

[2542] Rather; For they that desire to live for ever, and to participate in all heavenly good things, must join in fellowship, etc.

[2543] Originally, "cockle" – a field weed; but it should read darnel, or false wheat (a look-alike).

[2544] to the name of the church and of Christ, Lat.

[2545] That is, they claimed to be Christians, but their faith in Christ was a fabrication. – WHG

[2546] Psa 51.10-12; spiritu principali, Lat. See p. iii.147, note 6; and p. iii.252, note 4.

[2547] Originally, "when you have converted."

[2548] nondum, Lat.: not yet.

[2549] rather, by their light defection: levi sua defectione, Lat.

[2550] orthodoxa, Lat.

[2551] necdum deterao fuco, Lat. – not yet revealing their true colors.

[2552] rather, judges otherwise of them.

[2553] id quod annunciat, Lat.: which thing he proclaims.

[2554] Rather, So that you read recounted in the Acts no other tokens of the church than these of the word and sacraments.

[2555] beneficentia. Communicatio... e caritate Christiana est, et officia Christiana instituit, et opera misericordiae habet. — Bulling. Comment, in Act. loc. cit. Tigur. 1540.

[2556] aliorum malorura vi, Lat.: by the constraint of other evils.

[2557] Or Jehoiachin. See p. iii.11.

[2558] That was true of John Knox.

[2559] rather, who are also marked.

[2560] rather, which yet do not put aside from the communion of the faithful those believers, who by some necessity are shut out of the visible company of the faithful.

[2561] orthodoxae, Lat.

[2562] ignorantiae, Lat.

[2563] Imbrued: permeated or steeped in.

[2564] Double charity: to love God above all things, and love our neighbour as ourselves.

[2565] but in plain — power, the Translator's addition.

[2566] coelitus ab ipso Deo, Lat.: from heaven by God himself.

[2567] Paul III. died Nov. 10, 1549; and on Feb. 7, 1550, John Maria de Monte, who took the name of Julius III., was chosen to succeed him. — Sleidan. Comment. Lib. xxi. ad fin.

[2568] Romanse ecclesiae pastores, Lat.: pastors of the church of Rome.

[2569] vae pastori idolo (idol), Lat. Idle appears to be a mere mistake.

[2570] Referring to the charges in Luther's 95 theses, and to the suppression by the Roman Church, of vernacular translations of the Bible, including the execution of various translators, such as William Tyndale. – WHG

[2571] pontifices, Lat.: high-priests.

[2572] 2Kng 16.10. His name is omitted in 1Chr 6.

[2573] Tertul. de Prescript. Haeret. cap. 32. apud Script. Eccles. Opusc. ed. Routh. Vol. i. p. 147. Oxon. 1840.

[2574] 3 Id. ibid. cap. 36. p. 151.

[2575] doctores quidem, non ductores, Lat. – teachers, not leaders (a play on words in Latin).

[2576] and armies of men, not in Lat.

[2577] quam doctrina veritatis et pietatis sincera et simplici, Lat. – than the doctrine of the truth, and fear of the pure and simple.

[2578] velut impeccabilis, etc. Lat.: as it were without sin.

[2579] Originally, "David".

[2580] Psa 51.4-5; Psa 116.5, 11; Rom 3.4.

[2581] Gerson. de Potest, eccles. Opp. Tom. i. col. 3. Par. 1606.

[2582] Petri de Alliaco Tract, de ecclesiee auctoritate ap. Gerson. Opp. Tom. i. col. 898. Par. 1606.

[2583] in sacerdotum ordinandorum capita, Lat.: on the heads of the priests who are to be ordained.

[2584] That is, indirectly or directly.

[2585] See pp. i.157, i.165; p. iii.270. Bullinger. de Episc. Instit. etc. fol. 78. Tigur. 1538.

[2586] See pp. iv.75, etc.

[2587] August. Tract. 5. in Joan. Opp. Tom. IX. fol. 9. col. 2. Par. 1531. That is, when we baptize "in the name of," it is by the power and authority of that name, and not in our own power. To confer such power on the ministers of the church, would be to permit them to baptize in their own name. – WHG

[2588] Double charity: to love God above all things, and love our neighbour as ourselves. – WHG

[2589] Bullinger interchangeably uses "it" for the Church, and "she" for the Bride of Christ. – WHG

[2590] moderatione, Lat.

[2591] sanctae ecclesiae, Lat.

[2592] Cyprian. Lib. de Unit. Eccles. (al. de Simplicitate Praelatorum.) Opp. p. 108. Oxon. 1682.

[2593] eleganter, Lat.

[2594] Cockle: any of several field weeds, such as the corncockle.

[2595] Runagates: renegades; fugitives or deserters who have abandaned their cause.

[2596] Quisquis ab ecclesia segregatus adulters jungitur, a promissis ecclesia separatur; nec perrenit (Bullinger read pertinet), etc. — Cyprian. Lib. de Unit. Eccles. Opp. p. 109.

[2597] Lactant. Instit. Lib. iv. cap. 30. p. 450. Lugd. Bat. 1660.

[2598] Captious – overly critical; tending to find and call attention to faults.

[2599] Cyribiria: alluding to the character of a "Chameleon" – a creature the Renaissance believed to feed on air. Thomas Scot later declares (1616) that such a man "is in England a Familist, at Amsterdam a Brownist, further on, an Anabaptist. He lives by the air, and there builds Castles and Churches; none on the earth will please him. He would be of the triumphant and glorious Church, but not of the terrene militant Church, which is subject to storms, deformities, and many violences and alterations of time. He must discover Sir Thomas More's Utopia, or rather Plato's Community, and be an elder there (Philomythie, E5v; cited in Sullivan and Padberg, Supplement, 102) – Jeffrey Knapp, An Empire Nowhere (Univ. Cal. Press, Berkeley, 1992) p. 340.

[2600] Communicate: to share communion together (the eucharist or Lord's Supper) – a sign of unity in Christ.

[2601] Bullinger. adv. Anabapt. Lib. iii. capp. 2. 3. Hooker, Eccles. Pol. Preface. Vol. i. p. 179. Oxf. 1820.

[2602] See p. i.27.

[2603] erudituli, Lat. – erudite.

[2604] See p. i.77, note 9.

[2605] August, de Doct. Christ, i. cap. 36. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 5. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[2606] moderatione, Lat.

[2607] adversari, Lat.: to oppose.

[2608] Socrat. Hist. Eccles. Lib. v. cap. 22. Cantab. 1720. pp. 294. 298.

[2609] See p. ii.433, note 4.

[2610] Pope Anicetus (92-167) – became Bishop of Rome in 157.

[2611] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. V. Cap. 24. cd. Burton. Tom. i. p. 371. Oxon. 1838.

[2612] Ep. p. 118, 9. August. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 108. and 112.

[2613] An appellation of the Novatians. p. iii.424, note 3.

[2614] Novam sibi constituebat, Lat.: formed for himself a new church.

[2615] colendam, Lat.: to cultivate.

[2616] August, contra Epist. Parmen. capp. 1. and 2. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 11. col. 3. and fol. 13. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[2617] Cyprian. Ep. Liv. Opp. p. 100. Oxon. 1682.

[2618] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577, their churches. The Latin is, in omnibus templis.

[2619] August. Quaest. ex Matth. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 78. col. 1. Tar. 1531.

[2620] Augustus Gratian (359-383) – Eldest son of Valentinian I. In 367, his father made him emperor. When Valentinian I died in 375, Gratian's infant brother, Valentinian II, was declared emperor by his father's soldiers.In 379, Gratian promoted Theodosius I to imperial status, to govern the eastern portion of the Empire. Gratian and Theodosius then cleared the Illyricum of barbarians in the Gothic War (376-382). – WHG

[2621] disciplinam, Lat.

[2622] See p. i.34.

[2623] pertinaciter, Lat.: obstinately.

[2624] Corp. Jur. Can. Decret. I. par. distinct. 19. cap. 5. Tom. i. p. 24. Par. 1687.

[2625] Ibid. Decret. ii. par. caus. 9. quaest. 3. cap. 17. p. 211.

[2626] See Jewel's Def. of Apol. Park. Soc. ed. pp. 218, 247. part I.

[2627] August, contra epist. Manichaei. Opp. Tom. VI. fol. 24. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[2628] misisse, Lat.: has sent.

[2629] See above, p. v.21.

[2630] See above, p. v.22.

[2631] Communicate: to share communion together (the eucharist or Lord's Supper) – a sign of unity in Christ.

[2632] vel caecis, Lat.: even to the blind.

[2633] Rather, seeing it wants the pure word of God, etc.

[2634] fulcit, Lat. – supports.

[2635] nepote, Lat.: grandson.

[2636] doctrinam, Lat.

[2637] institutis, Lat.

[2638] Palmer's Antiq. of English Ritual, chap. viii. Vol. ii. p. 224. Oxf. 1832.

[2639] Rather, and that he has sanctified them, confessing, etc.

[2640] occupato, Lat. – occupied.

[2641] Rather, fulfilled by the Lord, and abrogated.

[2642][2642] Lucian of Samosata died a.d. 180: and Julian the Roman emperor declared his apostasy a.d. 361. — Mosheim, E. H. ed. Soames. Vol. i. p. 296.

[2643] Mosheim, E. H. Vol. i. pp. 199, 193, 205, 262, 381.

[2644] Malapert: impudent.

[2645] See p. i.161, note 5.

[2646] non novandi, Lat. All the editions read invocation for innovation.

[2647] Lat. omitted: that we may recover the true faith, according to the testimonies of eternal truth.

[2648] quibus ilia statuitur, Lat.: whereby it (i.e., the church) is. etc.

[2649][2649] architectos, Lat.

[2650] Dei sumul cooperarii, Lat. – God's gathered fellows (cooperators).

[2651] apud Ceasaream, Lat.: at Cesarea.

[2652] who has any strength, Prayer-Book Ver.: who is a rock, Auth. Ver.

[2653] Tertullian. de Pudic. cap. 21. Cyprian. Epist. ad Jubaian. and Cornel, and De Unit. Eccles. § 3. Chrysost. Homil. 69. in Petr. Apost.

[2654] which — rock, the translator's explanation.

[2655] Cf. pp. iii.147, 153.

[2656] Jerome, ad Evangelum. Ep. 101. Opp. Tom. iv. par. 2. col. 803. Par. 1706.

[2657] ex arbitrio hominum, Lat. – out of man's discretion.

[2658] Originally, "nothing less than the head of the church militant." Such wording would affirm that the Pope is head of the church on earth, which Bullinger flatly denies.

[2659] Cf. Jewel's Apology, etc. ed. P.S. p. 289.

[2660] Gregor. Mauricio Augusto. Opp. Tom. iv. Epist. 30. p. 203. Rom 1591.

[2661] See above, p. v.26.

[2662] recapitulationem, Lat. cf. p. i.156, note 1.

[2663] Pack: a loose or lewd person; tramp.

[2664] praestent, Lat.: supply.

[2665] Rather, and after that manner spoke, etc.

[2666] So the Messalians or Euchites were called. — Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Book ii. Cent. 4. Part 2. chap. v. § 24. ed. Soames. note 5. Vol. i. p. 409. But Bullinger probably referred to a sect of the Anabaptists, called Enthusiasts. See Bulling, adv. Anabapt. Lib. ii. cap. 1.

[2667] negotium, Lat. – the business or subject matter of a conversation (negotiations).

[2668] jubet [commands], Lat.: cf. p. i.86.

[2669] nemo non, Lat. – not one.

[2670] 1Cor 1.6; 2Tim 1.8, testimonium; 2Tim 2.17 , praeconium; Erasmus, and Bibl. Lat. Tigur. 1544.

[2671] 2 dispensant, Lat. – dispense.

[2672] August. Ep. 130. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 124. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[2673] Id. Tract, in Joan. 26. Tom. ix. fol. 47. col. 1. See also p. i.86.

[2674] praedicatores evangelli, id est, Christi spiritum conferentis. – the preachers of the Gospel, that is, the person who confers the spirit of Christ.

[2675] Originally, "householder."

[2676] See p. iii.128.

[2677] obsignaretur, Lat. – sealed or certified.

[2678] De Episcoporum Instit. et Funct. cap. 5.

[2679] August. Tract, in Joan. xxx. Opp. Tom. ix.

[2680] Rom 15.4-9; Heb 3.

[2681] Jer 31.34; Bullinger. adv. Anabapt. Lib. ii. cap. 4.

[2682] Sophistry: a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone.

[2683] Bullinger may be saying that there is a time and place to teach our children and neighbor, and a time and place to be taught by God-ordained ministers of the Word. Luther originally celebrated the liberty of every believer to read and interpret the Bible for themselves. But he quickly discovered that not all are gifted to read and understand it. The church needs its teachers to first instruct the body in God's unchanging truth, and then children and neighbors may be taught through catechisms, creeds, and confessions. – WHG

[2684] in antiqua historia, Lat.

[2685] See p. i.49.

[2686] [episkopous and phulakas] Budaei Comment. Ling. Graec. (p. 290. 1529.) apud Bullinger. Expos. in Heb 5.5, 6. p. 673. Tig. 1537.

[2687] The interpretation is the translator's.

[2688] mysteriorum, Lat.

[2689] chief rulers, Auth. Ver.: princes, marg.: Heb priests.

[2690] That is, they are not interchangeable terms, but distinct roles or offices, though often held by the same man.

[2691] 1Pet 5.1; Acts 1.20; 20.28; Tit. 1.5.

[2692] ostendi, Lat.: Bullinger. de Episc. Instit. et Funct. capp. 1. and 5.

[2693] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577, meaner: mediocres, Lat.

[2694] The translator's explanation.

[2695] disertis verbis, Lat.: – expressly said.

[2696] Cyprian, ap. Concil. Carthag. Opp. p. 229. Oxon. 1082.

[2697] You will find more on this place of St. Jerome elsewhere, in these words: "Let no man think that the holy man speaks of the primacy and monarchy of the bishop of Rome: for he speaks of the bishops of every several province. For in St. Jerome's time, the liberty of the church as yet remained safe. Therefore every several province chose for themselves, the one that was best, whom they called both bishop, superintendent, and metropolitan." — This extract from Bullinger's treatise De Episcop. Instit. et Funct. cap. 16, fol. 143, is not given in edd. 1577 and 1584; nor in the folio Latin ed. of the Decades, Tiguri, 1552. It appears however in the octavo edition of the Latin Decades, "Londini excudebat Henricus Midletonus;" no date.

[2698] Jerome, Comment, in Ep. ad Tit. cap. 1. Tom. iv. par. 1. col. 413. Par. 1706.

[2699] presbyteris, Lat.

[2700] The former part of this quotation is given above, p. 87. n. 5. Jerome then proceeds: Et in commune (norerint episcopi) dehere ecclesiam regere, imitantes Moysen, qui, quum haheret in potestate solus prteesse populo Israel, septuaginta elegit, cum qufbus populum judicaret — Jerome, Comment, in Ep. ad Tit. cap. 1. Opp. Tom. iv. par. 1. col. 413.

[2701] The translator's explanation.

[2702] sacerdotum, Lat. – priests.

[2703] Greg. Maximiniano Episc. Syracus. Regist. Lib. iii. indict. 12. Epist. XI. p. 98. Opp. Tom. iv, Rom 1591.

[2704] See Bingham, Antiq. Book I. chap. 5. § 7 — 9.

[2705] See p. iii.208.

[2706] See Bullinger, de Episc. Instit. et Funct. cap. 8. De scholis Christianorum priscis, etc.

[2707] Horum mentio fit in Carthaginen. Concilio iv. Lat. marg. These are mentioned in the fourth Council of Carthage. Labb. et Coss. Tom. ii. col. 1200. capp. 8, 9. Par. 1671.

[2708] Isidorus, Etymol. Lib. vii. cap. 12. Tom. iii. p. 339. Rom 1798. Rabanus, de Instit. Cleric. Lib. i. cap. 9. Opp. Tom. vi. Col. Agrip. 1626. Innocent. III. Epist. Lib. i. p. 44. Lib. ii. p. 452. Opp. Tom. i. Par. 1682. Durand. Rational. Divin. Lib. ii.

[2709] presbyter, Lat.

[2710] Rabani Mauri de Instit. Cleric, cap. 10. Opp. Tom. vi. p. 6. Col. Agripp. 1626.

[2711] Isidor. Etymol. Lib. vii. cap. 12.

[2712] See on the above mentioned orders of ecclesiastical persons, Bingham, Antiq. Book ii. chap. 21; and Book iii. ch. 1-7.

[2713] Sacerdotes qui et presbyteri, Lat.

[2714] The Liturgy of the Hours (or canonical hours), often referred to as the Breviary; the official set of prayers "marking the hours of each day and sanctifying the day with prayer."

[2715] The translator's explanation.

[2716] The dedicatory preface of the Latin original of the Decades is directed, "Clarissimis viris, Rodolpho Gualthero, Petro Symlero, etc. Decanis, seu archipresbyteris, etc. See Appendix.

[2717] Gratian. ap. Corp. Jur. Can. Decret. i. par. distinct. xxi. Tom. i. p. 26. Par. 1687.

[2718] Gregor. Decretal. Lib. i. tit. 24. cap. 2. col. 319. Par. 1585.

[2719] This explanation is the translator's.

[2720] quam alienissimum, Lat.: as alien as possible.

[2721] Rather, and he is also called apostolical, because he supplies the room of tho chief of the apostles; and chief bishop (et summus pontifex, Lat.) for he is etc. — See Epist. Decretal. Tom. i. pp. 342, 448, 49S, 553. Tom. ii. p. 644, Rom 1591.

[2722] Durand. Rat. Div. Offic. Lib. II. cap. i. 17. fol. 46. Lugd. 1565.

[2723] Pope Innocent IX (1519-1591), born Giovanni Antonio Facchinetti, Pope from October 29 to December 30 1591. He was a canon lawyer, diplomat, and chief administrator during the reign of Pope Gregory XIV.

[2724] Neque ab Augusto, neque ab omni clero, neque a regibus, neque a populo, judex judicabitur. — Corp. Jur. Can. Decret. Gratian. Decr. Sec. Par. Caus. ix. Quaest. iii. can. 13, col. 877. Concilium non potest papam judicare, ut Extravag. de Elect. Significasti. Unde si totus mundus sententiaret in aliquo negotio contra papam, videtur quod sententiae papae standum esset. — Gloss, ibid. Papam nullus mortalium judicare potest. — Ibid. Caus. xii. quaest. ii. col. 1238.

[2725] Clawback: A flatterer or sycophant.

[2726] Sic omnes apostolicae sedis sanctiones accipiendae sunt, tanquam ipsius divini Petri voce firmatae sint. — Agatho ap. Corp. Jur. Can. Decret. I. par. distinct. 19. Tom. i. p. 24.

[2727] The editor has not been able to verify this reference.

[2728] See Jewel's Works, ed. Parker Soc. Vol. i. pp. 69, 93, 443.

[2729] Hostiensis: (c.1200–71), Henry de Bartholomaeis or Henry de Susa. Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia from 1262. His main works are his Summa, which provides a synopsis of canon and Roman law designed for practical use, and the vast Apparatus or Lectura on the decretals of Gregory IX. Oxford Reference.

[2730] Hostiens. de Transl. Episc. Opp. fol. 75. Par. 1512.

[2731] The editor has not been able to verify this reference.

[2732] eam potestatem (papse) cui nulla par in terris esse potest. — Jo. Jerome, Albani. de Potest. Pap. par. II. num. 300. apud Tract, tract, tom. xiii. fol. 82. Venet. 1584.

[2733] The editor has not been able to verify this reference.

[2734] Romanus pontifex . . . jura omnia in scrinio pectoris sui censetur habere. — Bonifac. VIII. Corp. Jur. Can. Sexti Decretal, tit. ii. de Constit. cap. I. Tom. ii. p. 285.

[2735] — est hodie apud pontificem gladius uterque et utraque jurisdictio. Par. i. cap. 11. Papa . . . . eum (imperatorem) deponit .... sic ipse solus dici debet monarcha. cap. 5. — nullas sententias principis esse declarat (pontifex). cap. 9. — fateri oportet pontificem Caesare superiorem. cap. 44. Papa . . . debet juste dici princeps regum terrae, cap. 12. — quoniam Christus fuit Dominus terrenorum et judex .... ergo et papa, vicarius ejus. cap. 17. Pontifex. . . . habet plenitudinem potestatis, et . . . . ei est commissa .... administratio temporalium. Par. II. cap. 7. — cui (pontifici) cuncta temporalia et spiritualia subsunt. cap. 3. Papa solus omnibus et in omnibus praeest. cap. 4. — in terris dicitur habere coeleste arbitrium. — Anton, de Rosellis de Monarchia, apud Goldast. Hanov. 1611. The treatise abounds with similar statements.

[2736] ... cum dominus Papa sit judex ordinarius omnium hominum. Decret. Gregor. IX. Lib. ii. tit. xxviii. Gloss, in cap. 59. col. 962. Par. 1585. Universa Christianitas provincia sua (i.e. papa) intelligitur. Hostiens. Aur. Sum. Lib. i. cap. 6. fol. 36. Colon. 1612.

[2737] Bonifac. VIII. de Majorit. et Obed. Extrav. Comra. Lib. 1. tit. 8. cap. 1. Corp. Jur. Can. tom. ii. p. 394. Par. 1687.

[2738] Corp. Jur. Can. Decretal. Greg. IX. Lib. 1. De Transl. Episc. Tit. 7. Gloss, in cap. 3. col. 217. Lugd. 1624.

[2739] See above, page v.87.

[2740] Harpy: a bird that defiles all things she touches.

[2741] fidei, Lat. – over your faith. 2Cor 1.24.

[2742] presbyterorum, Lat. – priests (literally, eldership).

[2743] On the Donation of Constantine, see Fulke's Answers, ed. Parker Soc. page 360, note 4.

[2744] Ac regnum ejus non esse ex hoc mundo, Lat. omitted; and that his kingdom is not of this world.

[2745] Augustini Steuchi Eugubini Bibliothecarii contra Laurentium Vallam, De falsa Donatione Constantini. Libri duo. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 253, etc. Paris. 1577.

[2746] Imperium sine fine dedi. — Steuchi de falsa Don. Con. fol. 258. – empire without end.

[2747] Ibid. fol. 277.

[2748] Ibid. fol. 258.

[2749] Jakeshouse: an outhouse.

[2750] ed. 1577, his sacrilegious. Sacrilegis suis, Lat.

[2751] Cure: from care – a curate is the place in which pastoral care is exercised toward God's people.

[2752] See above, page v.88, and Bullinger de Episc. Instit. et Funct. cap. 13, fol. 137. Tigur. 1538.

[2753] auctoritatem, Lat. – authority.

[2754] nobis conveniat, Lat. – befits us.

[2755] parum sinceri, Lat. – not very sincere.

[2756] Originally: "of a good conversation."

[2757] vetustas, Lat. – of antiquity.

[2758] nunquam delendo probro, Lat. See Bingham, Orig. Eccles. Book iv. chap. iii. § 14; and Book xvi. Chap. vi. § 28.

[2759] Anthemius was Western Roman Emperor from 467 to 472.

[2760] Armasius, a pretorian prefect in 469 (also Armatus). Rev. N.A. Weber, A History of Simony in the Christian Church (Baltimore, J.H. Furst Co., 1909) p. 72.

[2761] Justin. Cod. Lib. i. tit. 4. cap. 29. Tom. i. p. 43. Lugd. 1551.

[2762] arbitrio, Lat. – arbitrarily.

[2763] Antonianus – a bishop who wrote to Cyprian (A.D. 252) to assure him of his adherence to him against Novatian.

[2764] Cyprian. Ep. iv. Opp. p. 104. Oxon. 1682.

[2765] See above, page v.43.

[2766] Bullinger. de Episc. Instit. etc. fol. 98. Tig. 1538.

[2767] Cypr. Opp. Epist. 67. pp. 171, 2. Oxon. 1682.

[2768] August. Ep. ex. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 100. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[2769] Justin. Novell. Constit. 123. p. 353. Basil. 1561.

[2770] This was Jethro's direction. Exo 18.21.

[2771] See Foxe, Acts and Mon. Vol. ii. pp. 125, etc. 174, etc. 190, etc. 455, etc. Lond. 1837; and Tytler's Elements of Gen Hist. Part II. Sect. 14 and 16.

[2772] These extracts from Bullinger's treatise De Episcop. Instit. et Funct. cap. 7, fol. 99, are not given in edd. 1577 and 1584; nor in the folio Latin ed. of the Decados, Tiguri, 1552; but they are found in the London ed. of the Latin, 8vo.-See above, p. v.111.

[2773] improve: convince.

[2774] AEl. Lamprid. Vito Alex. Sever. cap. 45. Hist. August. Scriptor. p. 570. Lugd. Bat. 1661.

[2775] Justin. Novell. Conatit. 123, p. 354. Basil. 1561.

[2776] Concil. Carthag. IV. Labb. et Coss. Tom. ii. col. 1198. Lut. Par. 1671. The date of this council is A. D. 398.

[2777] page iii.221.

[2778] Concil. Carthag. iv. Labb. ct Coss. Tom. ii. col. 1199.

[2779] A pall is a large cloth, black or white, covering a casket in a funeral, or placed over participants in other liturgical ceremonies (even in some reformed churches), ostensibly symbolizing being clothed with Christ. – WHG

[2780] instructiorem, Lat. – better disciplined, or instructed.

[2781] Cf. p. iii.45, note 7; and p. iii.153, n. 8.

[2782] In olden times, the pall was freely given.

[2783] Decret. Gregor. I. Concil. Gen stud. Labb. et Coss. Tom. v. col. 1587. Lut. Par. 1671.

[2784] See above, page v.28.

[2785] Abjure: formally reject or disavow a formerly held belief, usually under pressure.

[2786] Pontificale Roman, p. 63. Rom 1818. — Among the Simler MSS. in the City Library at Zurich is a letter from Martin Micronius, dated London, 14 April, 1553, in which he inquires of Bullinger, where he had taken this form of oath from: for he says; "Extat forma quredam juramenti episcoporum, Lib. II. Decretal, de juramento, titul. 24. c. 4. Ego N. sed ea non per omnia respondet formae a te perscriptae."

[2787] Depute: to appoint or empower.

[2788] fatui aut semimoriones, Lat. – originally, "daws and half fools."

[2789] Donative: A gift; grant; largess; gratuity; present.

[2790] his chancellor or the archdeacon, not in Lat.

[2791] Pontificale Rom p. 37. Rom 1818.

[2792] Or "shepherd" – in Greek, poimaino, to feed or tend a flock of sheep. – WHG

[2793] See above, p. v.38.

[2794] recto instituant, Lat.: rightly instruct.

[2795] propter, Lat: for and on account of.

[2796] Chrysost. Op. Imperf. in Mat Hom. xliv. p. 186. Opp. Tom. vi. Par. 1724.

[2797] jubet, Lat. – judges.

[2798] ecclesiae tradant, Lat. – committed to the church.

[2799] Tertull. de Praes. Haer. cap. 6. ap. Scriptor. Eccles. Opusc. ed. Routh. Vol. i. p. 126. Oxf. 1840.

[2800] See p. i.93; and above, p. v.26.

[2801] Rom 3.4; Psa 51.4; Psa 116.11.

[2802] definitam, Lat. – definitive.

[2803] articles of faith or, not in Lat.

[2804] catechistas, Lat. Bingham, Book iii. chap. 10.

[2805] See an incident in Zwingle's life. D'Aubigne's Hist, of Reform. Book viii. chap. 6.

[2806] Rather, the Third Sermon. See p. i.70, etc.

[2807] See above, p. v.101.

[2808] multos, Lat.: sort, number, multitude. Becon's Works, ed. P.'s. Vol. i. p. 5. n. 2.

[2809] Mosheim. Eccles. Hist. Book n. Cent. 4. part 2. chap. v. § 8. Vol.1, p. 379. ed. Soames. Bullinger. adv. Anabapt. Lib. iii. cap. 7.

[2810] See above, p. v.56.

[2811] Greg. Naz. Orat. xl. cap. 26. p. 713. Tom. i. Par. 1778.

[2812] depastures, Bullinger's one word for "false shepherds or wolves."

[2813] omnibus Sanctis, Lat.: all the saints.

[2814] Obsecration: to beseech; supplicate; implore.

[2815] Plin. Ep. Lib. x. Ep. 97.

[2816] See p. iv.66, note 2.

[2817] et sanctus, Lat.: omitted, and holy.

[2818] of Christ, not in Lat.

[2819] Mahumeticis, Lat. – Mohammedans (Islam).

[2820] See p. iv.212, etc.

[2821] So Coverdale, 1535; but Lat. adhuc illis loquentibus: while they are yet speaking.

[2822] ingenio indulgent, Lat.: rather, give loose to their lusts.

[2823] Cyprian.de Orat. Domin. Opp. p. 152. Oxon. 1682.

[2824] 5 August. Enarrat. in Psalm, xlii. 8. Opp. Tom. viii. fol. 81. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[2825] See p. iv.298.

[2826] inculcavit, Lat. – emphasizes.

[2827] Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Book ii. cent. 4. part 2. chap. 5. § 24. Vol. i. p. 409, note 5, ed. Soames. Bullinger. adv. Anabapt. Lib. i. cap. 12. Euchitae is Greek for the Messalian heresy of the fourth century, in which mystics saw ceaseless prayer as the only way to free a soul from the power of the demon, and the only path to spiritual perfection. Milan Loos, Dualist Heresy in the Middle Ages (Prague, 1974), p. 72.

[2828] erecto ad Deum corde, Lat.: a heart raised unto God.

[2829] Mat 15.22 with Mar 7.26.

[2830] Socratis Hist. Eccles. Lib. v. cap. 22.

[2831] Conveniant ecclesiae, Lat.: let the churches come together (convene).

[2832] See p. ii.261; iii.263.

[2833] Cyprian, de Orat. Domin. Opp. p. 140. Oxon. 1682.

[2834] August. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 139. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[2835] Tertul. Apol. adv. Gentes. cap. 30. ed. Semler. Tom. v. p. 63.

[2836] Eph 6.20; Col 4.4.

[2837] Liberal sciences were understood as a sequential path of disciplining the mind: from logic, to mathematics, things of nature, morality, wisdom, and divine things: "things which transcend the imagination and require a strong intellect." See Aristotle, in X Libros Ethicorum, VI, 1.7, no. 1211.

[2838] Vulgar: native and common - everyday language that is widely understood.

[2839] Corp. Jur. Civil. Auth. Coll. ix. Tit. xx. Novell, cxxxvii. 6. Tom. ii. pp. 196, 7. Amst. 1663.

[2840] Gregor. Pap. Homil. in Ezek. Praef. Tom. i. p. 1173. Par. 1705.

[2841] modulationo, Lat. – being modulated; referring to the affectation of Roman Catholic chants (see p. v.192, bottom).

[2842] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. iii. cap. 33. v. cap. 28. vii. cap. 30. Sozomen. Hist. Eccles. Lib. iii. cap. 16. viii. 8.

[2843] Can. 59. Concil. Laod. Labb. et Coss. Tom. i. col. 1507. Item placuit, ut praeter scripturas canonicas nihil in ecclesia legatur sub nomine divinarum scripturarum. — Can. 47. Concil. Carthag. in. Labb. et Coss. Tom. ii. col. 1177. Lut. Par. 1671.

[2844] Mean: a standard, or a range of acceptable music. Without one, many questionable things entered in. – WHG

[2845] Erasm. Annot. in 1Cor xiv. 26. Opp. Tom. vi. col. 731. Lugd. Bat. 1705.

[2846] See above, p. v.166.

[2847] Raban. Maur. de Instit. Cler. Lib. ii. cap. 48. Opp. Tom. vi. p. 28. Col. Agrip. 1626.

[2848] August. Confess. Lib. x. cap. 33. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 38. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[2849] Sozomen. Hist. Eccles. Lib. vii. cap. 19. p. 308. Cantab. 1720.

[2850] Socrat. Hist. Eccles. Lib. v. cap. 22. p. 297. Cantab. 1720.

[2851] August. Confess. Lib. ix. cap. 7. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 33. col. 3.

[2852] intemerata, Lat.

[2853] assiduis, Lat.

[2854] Raban. Maur. deinstit. Cler. Opp. Tom. vi. p. 28.

[2855] The reference is to Gregor. Regist. Epistol. Lib. iv. Indict. 13. Ep. 44, which contains a decree of a synod at Rome, ut sacri altaris ministri cantare non debeant, etc. — Opp. Tom. iii. p. 143. Rom 1591. Bullinger de Episc. Instit. et Funct. cap. 6. fol. 87. Tigur. 1538.

[2856] Platina de Vitis Pontif. in Greg. V.

[2857] Polydor. Vergil, de rer. invent. Lib. vi. cap. 2.

[2858] suspensus, Lat. – suspended or sustained.

[2859] See p. iv.395.

[2860] See p. iii.264; and above, p. v.183.

[2861] Trip. lib. ix. cap. 30.

[2862] Jerome, Ep. 86. ad Eustoch. Epitaph. Paulae matris. Opp. Tom. iv. par. 2. col. 682. Par. 1706.

[2863] Jerome, Ep. 57. ad Lactam de Instit. filiae. Ibid, col. 595.

[2864] Jerome, Ep. 97. ad Demetriadem de Servanda Virginitate, ibid. col. 793.

[2865] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. v. cap. 10. Tom. i. p. 336. ed. Burton.

[2866] vestigia, Lat. – vestiges or remainders.

[2867] See p. iii.109.

[2868] Seven-night: any period of seven consecutive days and nights. See Preface to Common Prayer, Concerning the Service of the Church.

[2869] precum loco, Lat.: prayers, not matins.

[2870] Bingham, Antiq. Book xiv. chap. 4. § 22.

[2871] Gratian. Decret. par. i. Distinct 15. cap. 3.

[2872] Bingham, Book vii. chap. 3. § 17.

[2873] Canonici, Lat.: Bingham, Book i. chap. 5. § 10.

[2874] Polydor. Vergil, de rer. invent. Lib. vi. cap. 2.

[2875] Bede (672-735).

[2876] Magd. Centur. Cent. viii. cap. 10. coll. 473-475. Basil. 1624.

[2877] veteris prophetiae, Lat. – ancient prophecy.

[2878] Cypr. de Orat. Domin. Opp. p. 140. Oxon. 1682.

[2879] August. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 121. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[2880] Jerome, Comment, in Mat cap. 6. Opp. Tom. iv. col. 20. Par. 1706.

[2881] August. Ep. 121. ad Probam. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 121. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[2882] et rosaria contexentes, Lat. The bead-roll, by which the private devotions of multitudes in the church of Rome are reckoned, was made up of tens of smaller beads, having a bead of a larger size between each decade. In the Rosary, properly so called, there were five of these decades: and the Ave Maria was repeated fifty times, the Pater Noster five times, and the Credo once.

[2883] August. Ep. 121. ad Probam. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 121. col. 1.

[2884] upon a lace, not in Lat.

[2885] Etenim talia non citra foedissimam superstitionem fiunt, Lat. omitted. For such things are not done but with most abominable superstition.

[2886] p. i.125.

[2887] See above, p. v.179 [concerning Charity].

[2888] See Decade iv. Serm. 7.

[2889] Euripo, Lat. See Erasmi Adag. Chiliad, p. 345. Hanov. 1617; incunstantice.

[2890] The German translation more correctly renders this sentence: — That it (i.e., our will) by the grace of the Holy Ghost may will that which he inspires into it.

[2891] bonam, Lat. omitted: to be good.

[2892] coelitibus tuis, Lat.: in your heavenly ones.

[2893] Sustentation: the act of sustaining life by food or providing a means of subsistence.

[2894] praeoccupans, Lat. – anticipating.

[2895] graviter, Lat. – seriously, or gravely.

[2896] Erasm. Annot. in Mat loc. cit. p. 31, 32. Basil. 1522.

[2897] Nov. Test. Compluten. Mat cap. vi.

[2898] Safe, Auth. Ver.; set aloft, Marg.

[2899] See p. iii.203.

[2900] See p. iii.269.

[2901] See p. iii.157.

[2902] expiat, Lat. – expiates or atones for.

[2903] nor — folds, not in Lat.

[2904] hear you and, not in Lat.

[2905] Ceterum, Lat. But.

[2906] Irenaeus contra, Haeres. Lib. iv. cap. 17. § 6, p. 249. Par. 1710. Tertullian. adv. Marcion. Lib. iii. cap. 22, Lib. iv. cap. 1. Adv. Judaeos. cap. 5.

[2907] See p. iv.206.

[2908] assiduis, Lat. – assiduous.

[2909] ratione, Lat. – the reason or rationale.

[2910] i.e., Marcus Tullius Cicero, de Invent. Lib. i. cap. 30.

[2911] Fabius Instit. Lib. v. cap. 9.

[2912] August, de Magistro, cap. 4. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 116, col. 2. Par. 1531.

[2913] Id. de Doctr. Christ. Lib. II. cap. 1. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 5, col. 3.

[2914] August, ibid. cap. 3, fol. 5, col. 3.

[2915] expensis ne rejectis illis quidem, poterunt signa, etc. Lat. These (definitions) being well considered, and not rejected, signs, etc.

[2916] in a tile, not in Lat.

[2917] 2Chr 33.7. Vulg. In Isa 45.20, Bullinger seems to have mistaken lignum [wood] for signum [sign].

[2918] ad exploratores Israelitas, Lat.: to the spies of Israel.

[2919] Germani, Lat.: Swiss.

[2920] so also ed. 1584; but 1577, to put us in mind of tbings past, or etc.: quae praeteritas res, aut etiam promissiones renovent, Lat.

[2921] Erit arcus in nube, Lat. Gen 9.15, 16.

[2922] So also ed. 1584; but 1577, gifts, I mean, of healing, and etc.: beneficia, inquam, sanitatis et linguarum, Lat.

[2923] so termed — in deeds, the Translator's addition.

[2924] Aphthon. Progymnas. p. 3. Genev. 1569.

[2925] So also ed. 1584; but 1577, a little child.

[2926] religiosissime custodit, Lat.: does most religiously keep.

[2927] In the Vulgate it is used both in the Old and New Testament for a secret and mystery. See Fulke's Defence of Translat. ed. P.S. p. 493.

[2928] August. Ep. v. ad Marcellin. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 3, col. 4. Par. 1531.

[2929] Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum. — Lombard. Sentent. Lib. iv. dist. 1. b. fol. 304. Par. 1575.

[2930] August, ap. Decret. Grat. par. III. de Consecr. dist. 2. can. 32. p. 2373. Par. 1583.

[2931] Calvin. Instit. Lib. iv. cap. 14. § 19. Opp. Tom. ix. p. 347. Amstel. 1667.

[2932] Originally, "gaged," which means to place a bet on something.

[2933] Varro. de Ling. Lat. Lib. iv.

[2934] sacris interpositis, Lat. – originally, "intermeddling of holy things."

[2935] Veget. de Re Milit. Lib. ii. cap. 5.

[2936] signabantur notis, is all that Bullinger says. – i.e., signed or sealed notes.

[2937] esse Christi milites, Lat. – Christ's soldiers.

[2938] sacris signis, Lat.

[2939] in sacris vetustisque scriptoribus, Lat.: in sacred and ancient writers.

[2940] Erasm. Symboli Catech. 5. Opp. Tom. v. col. 1175. Lugd. Bat. 1704.

[2941] ecclesiasticis, Lat. omitted: of the church.

[2942] Ludov. Caelii Rhodig. Lect. Antiq. Lib. xvi. p. 596. Basil. 1542.

[2943] solis initiatis cognita, Lat. – only for cognizant initiates.

[2944] That is, the etymology or origin of the word, the root of it.

[2945] involucro, Lat.: under a cover.

[2946] in sacris, Lat.: in their sacred rites.

[2947] quod circumferebant bacchantes, Lat. – that circulated when intoxicated.

[2948] symbolicum, Lat.

[2949] intelligebant offerentem humaniter esse tractandum, Lat.: they understood that they were to give courteous treatment to those who presented them.

[2950] The editor has not been able to verify this reference.

[2951] Aquinas, Summa Theol. par. in. quaest. 64. p. 133. Col. Agrip. 1622.

[2952] quod ab ipso Deo non est appensum, aut impressum, Lat.

[2953] August. Expos, in Evang. Joan. Tract, lxxx. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 91. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[2954] See above, p. v.95, note 12.

[2955] not his, or man's, but, not in Lat.

[2956] sacrum exhibent convivium, Lat.: sacraments of the Lord's, not in Lat.

[2957] The institution of the sacraments, not in Lat.

[2958] ingenue, Lat. omitted: candidly.

[2959] commendatae, Lat. – commended.

[2960] Lombard. Sentent. Lib. iv. dist. 1. b. fol. 305. Par. 1575.

[2961] involucro aliquo, Lat. – some envelope.

[2962] parabolis obtexit, imo illustravit ornavitque, Lat. – illustrative stories, even some enlightened ornamentation.

[2963] Chrysost. Hom. in Mat lxxxii. (al. lxxxiii.) Opp. Tom. vii. p. 787. Par. 1727.

[2964] of earthly things, not in Lat.

[2965] divinitus, Lat. omitted: by God.

[2966] Omologia is what Cicero explains by convenientia, de Fin. Lib. iii. cap. 6.

[2967] Rather, if it be.

[2968] hanc inventionem, Lat. – this revelation (discovery).

[2969] rather, it is permitted us: licet, Lat.

[2970] hac quoque in re, Lat. omitted: in this matter also.

[2971] page iii.178, etc.

[2972] Lombard. Sentent. Lib. iv. dist. 2. A. fol. 306. Par. 1575.

[2973] Tertull. adv. Marcion. Lib. i. cap. 28. iv. cap. 38. De Coron. Mil. cap. 3.

[2974] August, de Doct. Christ. Lib. iii. cap. 9. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 11. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[2975] So also ed. 1584; but 1577, Except those ceremonies, which through the hardness of their heart and the time of the prophets made the bondage of the old people more grievous.

[2976] August. Ep. cxviii. Januario. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 108. col. 2.

[2977] Sacramentum ordinationis. — Id. do Bono Conjug. cap. 24. Opp. Tom. vi.

[2978] August, de Bono Conjug. cap. 18. Contra litt. Petil. Lib. ii. cap. 104. Hom. 83. de Diversis. De Peccat. Merit. Lib. ii. cap. 26. Sentent. Excerp. 335. St. Hilary speaks of the sacrament of prayer, in Mat cap. v. 1.

[2979] August, de Ver. Relig. cap. 17. Enarrat. in Psalm. xciii.

[2980] He was archbishop of Mentz from a. d. 847-857. Mosheim, E. H. ed. Soames. Vol. ii. p. 195. n. 6. Lond. 1845.

[2981] Rab. Mauri, de Instit. Cler. Lib. i. cap. 24. Opp. Tom. vi. p. 8. Col. Agrip. 1626.

[2982] See James's Corruption of Scripture, Councils, and Fathers. Part i. treat. 45, etc.

[2983] See p. iv.137, note 9.

[2984] See p. iv.90; and above, pp. v.104, etc.

[2985] venditant, Lat. – sell.

[2986] See page iii.293.

[2987] Iren. Adv. Haeres. Lib. iv. cap. 34. p. 327. Oxon. 1702.

[2988] See quotation, above, p. v.243, note 7.

[2989] illustrior, Lat. – brighter.

[2990] This is a composite of several passages.

[2991] in coma Domini, Lat. omitted: in the Lord's Supper.

[2992] concessis, Lat. – granted.

[2993] See pp. i.143 and i.173.

[2994] how—supper, no in Lat.

[2995] SeeMiscell. Tigur. theil. ni. pp. 139-150, Zurich. 1724, where the Order of Baptism and of the Communion is given.

[2996] Rather, being healed, they rose up.

[2997] Originally, "they had much ado to escape alive."

[2998] purgatam, Lat. – purged.

[2999] So the Geneva Version, 1557.

[3000] August. Expos, in Evan. Joan. Tract, lxxx. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 91, col. 2. Par. 1531.

[3001] the things signified, the things present, not in Lat.

[3002] August. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 7, col. 4. Tar. 1531.

[3003] Chrysost. Op. Imperf. in Mat. Hom. xliii. Tom. vi. p. clxxxiv. Par. 1724.

[3004] Plin. Nat. Hist. Lib. xxviii. cap. 2.

[3005] collectio, Lat.: inference.

[3006] That is, the Red Sea.

[3007] Mark 14.22; Mat 26.26; Luke 22.19; 1Cor 11.24. Bullinger borrows here from Erasm. Annot. in Marc. 14.22.

[3008] Rather, or by words, etc., to bring or make present, etc.

[3009] August. Enchirid. cap. 22, Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 34. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3010] Aug.de Magistro. cap. 14, Opp. Tom.i. fol. 120. col. 1.

[3011] Ecc. 12. Authors of gatherings, he calls wise men, because they gather the sayings of the wiser sort of men in their books. [This is the translator's explanation.] – the one Shepherd, or Son, is the source and giver of all wisdom.

[3012] Ecc 12.11. Velut clavi plantati inter folia collectitia, tradita ab uno pastore, Lat. and Bibl. Lat. Tigur. 1544.]

[3013] Rather, and a perfect speech: orationi justre, Lat. – "the fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much," Jas 5.16

[3014] The translator's explanation: "Authors of gatherings he calls wise men, because they gather the sayings of the wiser sort of men in their books."

[3015] the lady — eloquence, not in Lat.

[3016] See p. iii.332, n. 1. — knucklehead, or dense.

[3017] The latter half of the sentence is the translator's addition.

[3018] Decade i. Serm. 1.

[3019] Of the world, edd. 1584 and 1587, by misprint: verbi ejus, Lat.

[3020] veluti genus ad, has species, Lat.

[3021] insculpta quodammodo nota verbi, Lat. The German translation renders this sentence: And (when) the word is not added to them as a sign, then they are, etc. Compare below, They are sealed with the word of God: Lat. habent nunc notam verbi Dei impressam.

[3022] Rather, the holy use of those who by a true faith set forth, etc. give thanks, etc.

[3023] Letters patents: (law) an official document granting a right or privilege.

[3024] aut eerum, Lat. omitted: or the wax.

[3025] August, in Evang. Joan. Tract, lix. Opp. Tom. ix.

[3026] August, in Evang. Joan. Tract, xxvi. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 47, coll. 2. 4. Par. 1531.

[3027] On this chapter, archbp. Cranmer wrote in the margin of his copy of Augustine's works, now in the British Museum: "Impii apostatae non manducant corpus Christi manducantes sacramentum." — Aug. Opp. Tom. v. fol. 293. col. 2.

[3028] Id. de Doct. Christ. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 11, col. 3.

[3029] 1Pet 3.21. See above, p. v.258, n. 3.

[3030] August. Quaest. super Levit. Lib. iii. cap. 84. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 49. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[3031] Accident: A quality or attribute in distinction from the substance itself – such as sweetness, softness.

[3032] See page i.90; and above, p. v.263.

[3033] See above, p. v.282.

[3034] conversionis, Lat.

[3035] This explanation is the Translator's.

[3036] forgery, not in Lat.

[3037] Col 2.8; 1Tim 6.3-4.

[3038] Rather, of the Lord's body, being a true body, and yet in the meanwhile, etc.

[3039] De Origine Erroris circa Coenam et Miss. Pap. cap. x.

[3040] Rather; excepting in so far as all mysteries, etc. are in a general way termed, etc.

[3041] ab ecclesia Israelitica, Lat. – the church or assembly of Israel.

[3042] de peccato, Lat. See p. iii.256, n. 5.

[3043] 1Pet 3.21; See above, p. v.273.

[3044] Zurich.

[3045] August. Quaest. super Levit. lvii.

[3046] Id. Epist. xxiii. ad Bonifac. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 18. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[3047] August, in Evang. Joan. Tract, lxiii. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 84. col. 3.

[3048] August. Epist. en. ad Evod. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 89. col. 1.

[3049] Id. de Doct. Christ. Lib. nr. cap. 9. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 11. col. 4.

[3050] August, ibid. cap. 5. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 11. col. 2.

[3051] Id. ibid. cap. 15. fol. 12. col. 2.

[3052] August, ibid. cap. 16. fol. 12. col. 1.

[3053] De Orig. Error, circa Coen. et Miss. Pap. cap. 10.

[3054] So also ed. 1584: but 1577, all our sins: omnium, Lat.

[3055] Rather, Experience, (that is,) what has happened, and what is daily happening, abundantly illustrate this point.

[3056] August, de Catech. Rud. cap. 26. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 208. col. 3.

[3057] Id. de Doct. Christ. Lib. iv. cap. 8. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 16. col. 3

[3058] August. Opp. Tom. viii. fol. 167. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[3059] August, contra Lit. Petil. Lib. ii. cap. 37. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 24. col. 2.

[3060] Id. con. Faust. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 72. col. 2.

[3061] The Translator has here mistaken Bullinger's meaning. The correct rendering is: "Wherefore on Psa 73. Augustine uses give for testify that it is given, or signify that it is exhibited." See quotation above.

[3062] See above, note 4; and August, con. Faust. Lib. xix. cap. 23. Alia (sacramenta) sunt instituta virtute majora, utilitato meliora, etc.

[3063] omnia nostra, Lat.: sacraments, not in Lat.

[3064] See page iii.293.

[3065] The chapter is 37; and Bullinger has given (in a sentence formed on the next quotation) the sentiment, and not the express words, of Augustine in the place.

[3066] Id. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 72, etc.

[3067] Id. in Evang. Joan. Tract, xlv. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 68. col. 4.

[3068] Id. ibid. fol. 68. col. 4.

[3069] Id. in Psa lxxvii. Enarr. Opp. Tom. viii. fol. 177. col. 4.

[3070] or made righteous, the Translator's addition.

[3071] grace, not in Lat.

[3072] Rather, might be kept in due order, or drawn, etc.

[3073] veterum, Lat.: of the ancients.

[3074] omnibus seculis destinatam, Lat. – destined before all ages.

[3075] Rather, grace of God, or mercy through Christ, etc.

[3076] Rather, they which believe.

[3077] and so accounted, the Translator's addition.

[3078] Rather, and so attributes, that, etc.

[3079] Ex ipsius (Christi) morte et passione virtutem sortita sunt (sacramenta.) Lombard. Sentent. Lib. iii. dist. 2. b. fol. 307. Par. 1575.

[3080] Quid mus sumit? "What does a mouse eat when it eats the echaristic bread? Does it eat the body of Christ [i.e., its substance] or only the species [its accident]? Is it possible to eat the species without thereby eating the Body of Christ?" This is a well-known dispute between Bonaventure and Aquinas (Commentary on the Sentences, c.1252). – WHG

[3081] Innocent. Pap. in. Myster. Missa?. Lib. iv. cap. 11. The title of the chapter is, Quid etiam a mure comedatur, cum sacramentum corroditur. Opp. Tom. i. p. 380. col. 1575.

[3082] These are sung in the Easter holy days at their consecration of baptism. The water to be used in baptism is blessed, in the church of Rome, on holy Saturday.

[3083] Brev. Rom.

[3084] Bonavent. Sentent. Lib. iv. Dist. i. Quaest. 3. Opp. Tom. v. p. 7. Mogunt. 1609.

[3085] sensit, Lat.: understood.

[3086] Gelas. Hist. Concil. Nic. Labb. et Coss. Tom. ii. col. 233. Lut. Par. 1671.

[3087] justitice fidei, Lat. – justified by faith.

[3088] Bullinger is clear that baptism does not save; nor is every child born of a believer elect by birth (or by blood). That would contradict Rom 4.11-13, and his own argument. Therefore, whatever the infant has – whether it is election and resurrection unto life, or resurrection unto judgment (Joh 5.29) – is sealed and confirmed by baptism, and acknowledged by it. Baptism is often said to bring the infant under the covenant of grace. But this grace is the blessing of being born into a Christian home and church, to be raised in the fear and admonition of the Lord; it is not saving grace. See also p. v.323.

[3089] pro acceptis, Lat.: for them as received.

[3090] Letters patents: a type of legal instrument in the form of a published written order issued by a monarch, president, or other head of state, generally granting an office, right, monopoly, title, or status to a person or corporation.

[3091] Rather, the signs sealing the same to us by sensible things.

[3092] Which is the previous sermon, 5-6, p. v.227.

[3093] Chrysost. Hom. in Mat. lxxxn. (al. lxxxiii.) Tom. vii. p. 783. Par. 1727.

[3094] Aug. contra Faust. Man. Lib. xix. cap. 16. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 72. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3095] obsignent, Lat. – seal.

[3096] finem, Lat. omitted: end.

[3097] videntur, Lat. – appear (apparent or obvious).

[3098] See page iv.44, etc.

[3099] omnisufficientia, Lat. See page iv.135.

[3100] Originally, "and impute faith unto them for righteousness, as he also imputed faith unto Abraham."

[3101] Rather, and charter, sealing that, etc.

[3102] Bullinger is not saying that every time we sin, we fall from grace and lose our salvation. Rather, children of believers who have been baptized into grace, may demonstrate by habitual sinning, that they do not yet have saving grace. But they may then profess Christ, as an adult, and receive saving grace for the first time, sealing them in Christ. See note on p. v.313 (infant baptism), also iii.98-99 (assurance in adversity); and iv.318-319 (of the Holy Ghost). – WHG

[3103] Zuingl. Christ. Fid. praed. Expos. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 555. Tigur.

[3104] Id. ibid. Tom ii. fol. 549.

[3105] Calvin. Instit. Lib. lv. cap. 14. § 9. Opp. Tom. ix. p. 344. Amstel. 1667.

[3106] Zuing. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 549.

[3107] Rather, by any fault of him, etc., or of the word and sacraments.

[3108] excitat, Lat. – excites in us.

[3109] See above, page v.244.

[3110] See page iv.205.

[3111] Rather, how, in what way: quomodo, Lat.

[3112] Rather, which meeting our eyes, and so likewise all our senses, visibly represent those things, which the mind, etc.

[3113] Zuing. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 547. Tigur.

[3114] Ibid. Tom. ii. fol. 551.

[3115] August, contra Faust. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 72. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[3116] The elements of the communion table or Lord's Supper, are the bread and the wine.

[3117] The minister instructs with the word of God, which conveys to the mind, the thing signified by the sacrament.

[3118] By inference from 1Cor 1.13.

[3119] The parenthesis is the Translator's.

[3120] Luther's Version has gemeinschafft.

[3121] or godly Christians, the Translator's addition.

[3122] Cyprian. Opp. Ep. lxix. p. 182.

[3123] This parenthetical explanation is the Translator's.

[3124] Rather, But I do not say this because the idol is worth anything, or that which is offered in sacrifice to an idol has any divine majesty about it.

[3125] Zuingl. Christ. Fid. Expos. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 556.

[3126] Domino, Lat.: to the Lord.

[3127] August. contra Faust. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 72. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[3128] August, cont. Lit. Petil. Lib. ii. cap. 108. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 34. col. 3.

[3129] August, in Evang. Joan. Tract. Lin. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 79. col. 3.

[3130] inter malos et infideles, Lat.: among the wicked and unbelievers. The Translator inserts the words in the next sentence.

[3131] August, de Baptismo contra Donatist. Lib. iii. cap. 14. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 83. col. 2.

[3132] Id. contra Lit. Petiliani, Lib. ii. cap. 47. Opp. Tom vii. fol. 25. col. 4.

[3133] Id. in Evang. Joan. Tract, xxvii. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 48. col. 3.

[3134] Id. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 136. col. 4.

[3135] Id. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 17, etc.

[3136] The Messaliani also referred to themselves as ‘Pneumatics’ (Πνευματικοί/Pneumatikoí, ‘endowed with spirit’), or ‘true Christians’. The participants of the 4th and 5th c. Christian synods condemned the Messalians. Theodoret writes, "Men who have become infected with this plague to its full extent, shun manual labor as iniquitous; and, giving themselves over to sloth, call the imaginations of their dreams prophesyings. Of this heresy, Dadoes, Sabbas, Adelphius, Hermas, and Simeones were leaders, and others besides, who did not hold aloof from the communion of the Church, alleging that neither good nor harm came of the divine food of which Christ our Master said, 'Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood shall live for ever.'" The Eccles. History of Theodoret, bk iv, ch. x.

[3137] Mosheim. E. H. Book II. Cent. iv. part 2. chap. 5. § 24. Vol. i. p. 409. note 5, ed. Soames. See also above, page v.94, note 6.

[3138] perfida, Lat. – treacherous (perfidy is deliberate betrayal).

[3139] It might be said the Baptist was sanctified from birth. Luk 1.15: "For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb." – WHG

[3140] August. Quaest. super Levit. Lib. iii. cap. 84. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 49. col. 1.

[3141] See especially Cyprian. Ep. lxx. p. 189, etc.

[3142] Rather, The sacraments are God's, and are, etc.

[3143] August, contra Donatist. Lib. in. cap. 10. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 83, col. 1.

[3144] intinctio. Tertull. de Poenitentia, capp. 2. 6. Tom. iv. pp. 38, 47. ed. Sender. Hal. Mag. 1824.

[3145] Erasmi. Adag. Chiliad, p. 478. mali retaliatio. Han. 1617.

[3146] That is, it is in the nature of a vow or commitment. – WHG

[3147] it took the name, not in Lat.

[3148] divinum, Lat.: of God.

[3149] See above, pp. v.343, 350.

[3150] Tertull. de Baptism, cap. x. August. Vincentio, Epist. 48. De Baptism, contr. Donat. Lib. v. capp. 9-15. Chrysost. Homil. in Matt, xiv.

[3151] ejusdam doctrinae diversa esse sigilla vel baptismata, Lnt.: that there are different seals or baptisms of the same doctrine.

[3152] pp. i.16, 17.

[3153] Act 10.48; 19.5; 22.16. Cf Act 8.16.

[3154] Novissime mandans (Christus) ut tinguerent (discipuli) in Patrem et Filium et Spiritum Sanctum. — Tertull. adv. Prax. cap. 26. Tom. ii. p. 199. ed. Semler. Hal. Magd. 1824.

[3155] See page v.255

[3156] See p. iii.179.

[3157] Tertull. de Coron. Mil. cap. 3. ed. Semler. Tom. iv. p. 293. Hal. Magd. 1824.

[3158] Id. adv. Marcion. Lib. i. cap. 14. Tom. i. p. 21.

[3159] Jerome, Comment, in Isa Troph. cap. lv. Lib. xv. Opp. Tom. iii. col. 401. Par. 1693 — 1706.

[3160] August, de Baptis. contra Donat. Lib. vi. cap. 25. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 95. col. 4.

[3161] Id. dePeccat. Orig. contra Pelag. et Celest. Lib. ii. cap. 40. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 166. col. 1.

[3162] Ibid. Lib. ii. cap. 18. fol. 174. col. 1.

[3163] De Eccles. Dogm. cap. 31. ap. August. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 43. col. 2.

[3164] August. Ep. 23. Bonifacio, Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 18. col. 3.

[3165] Id. de Trinit. Lib. xv. cap. 26. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 101. col. 2.

[3166] See above, page v.248, note 2.

[3167] Rabani Mauri de Instit. Cler. Lib. i. Opp. Tom. vi. Col. Agrip. 1626.

[3168] presents made to a godchild at the Christening.

[3169] Cyprian. Epist. lxx. Opp. p. 190. Oxon.

[3170] Bullinger doubtless refers to the sentiments of Cyprian on re-baptizing those who had been baptized by heretics.

[3171] See above, p. v.327.

[3172] Tertull. adv. Prax. cap. 26.

[3173] Greg. M. Lib. i. Indict, ix. Epist. 43. Opp. Tom. ii. col. 532. Par. 1705.

[3174] Concil. Toletan. iv. can. 5. (a.d. 633) Labb. et Coss. Tom. v. col. 1706.

[3175] Originally, "comeliness," i.e., attractiveness or beauty.

[3176] Originally, "foade it off." See p. iii.38, note 3.

[3177] Cyprian. Epist. lxiv. Opp. p. 158. ed. Oxon.

[3178] Socrat. H.E., Lib. v. cap. 22. p. 297. Cantab. 1720.

[3179] Siricii Papre ad Himerium Tarracon. Epist. Labb. et Coss. Tom. ii. col. 1018. Leonis I. Papa) ad universos episcopos per Siciliam constitutos. Epist. ibid. Tom. iii. col. 1299. These authorities are quoted Gratian. Decret. par. iii. de Consecrat.dist.4. can. 11-17.

[3180] See Concil. Matiscon. ii. Labb. et Coss. Tom. v. col. 981. Mogunt. Tom. vii. col. 1242. Parisians, vi. Tom. vii. col. 1603. Wormatiens. Tom. viii. col. 945.

[3181] August. in Evang. Joan. Tract, v. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 9. col. 2. and 4. Par. 1531.

[3182] Aug. Epist. 166. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 146. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3183] Id. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 40. col. 3.

[3184] Tertull. de Virg. Veland. cap. 9. Tom. iii. p. 15. ed Sender. Hal. Mag. 1829.

[3185] Mulier baptizare non praesumat. — Concil. Carthag. iv. can. 100. Labb. et Coss. Tom. ii. col. 1207.

[3186] Epiphan. adv. Haeres. Lib. i. haer. xxii. vel xlii. Opp. Tom. i. p. 305. Par. 1622.

[3187] Epiph. adv. Haer. Lib. ii. haer. xxix. sive xlix. p. 418.

[3188] Id. Lib. iii. haer. lix. sive lxxix. Opp. Tom. i. p. 1060.

[3189] impotenter obstrepens, Lat. – recklessly raising her voice (making a noise).

[3190] A full bloody husband I have in you! Luther's rendering is: Du bist mir ein blutbrautigam.

[3191] 2Sam 12.25. Jedidiah means "beloved of God."

[3192] Bullinger apparently reads Jonah 4.11 as "who have not reached the age to discern right from left." – WHG

[3193] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577, true and undoubted promise; veraci et indubitatae promissioni, Lat.

[3194] August. Epist. 28. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 21. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[3195] Id. ibid.

[3196] That is, that baptism is unnecessary for infants, at all. Aug. Ep. 106. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 95. col. 1.

[3197] Aug. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 236. col. 1.

[3198] Aug. Ep. 28. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 20. col. 1.

[3199] The title of this chapter is, Testimonia Doctorum de Peccato Originali. — August. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 193.

[3200] Labb. et Coss. Tom. ii. col. 1535.

[3201] Aug. de Pecc. Mer. et Remis. Lib. iii. cap. 4. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 148. col. 2.

[3202] from having — with Christ, not in Lat.

[3203] invadit, Lat. – attacked.

[3204] Tertullian adv. Jud. cap. 3. Augustin. Quaest. in Exo § 11.

[3205] non amico, Lat. omitted: and for one who is not a friend.

[3206] The title of the chapter is, Eucharistia etiam infantibus necessaria ut baptismus. — August. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 136. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[3207] de vita periclitaturis, Lat.: or else they are brought into danger as to life.

[3208] Venial sin: a minor and pardonable sin, entailing only a partial loss of grace.

[3209] August, cont. Ep. Parmen. Lib. ii. cap. 13. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 9. col. 3.

[3210] Id. de Anim. et ejus Orig. Lib. i. cap. 9. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 236. col. 1.

[3211] Aug. contra Julian. Pelag. Lib. v. cap. 8. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 213. col. 2.

[3212] Id. Epist. xxviii. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 21. col. 4.

[3213] Aug. de Baptismo contra Donat. Lib. iv. cap. 22. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 88. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3214] Probably referring to Arius (256-336), and the Arian heretics.

[3215] See Examinations, etc. of Archdeacon Philpot, ed. Park. Soc. pp. 274, etc. where much is borrowed, word for word, from this sermon of Bullinger's.

[3216] Bernard, in Cantic. Serm. lxvi. § 9. Tom. rv. col. 3071. Epist. 241. Tom. i. col. 506. ed. Par. 1839.

[3217] Bulling, adv. Anabapt. Lib. vi. cap. 2.

[3218] See above, p. v.12.

[3219] pp. iii.171-182.

[3220] As worded, this could mean either that all children of believers will be purified, or that all elect children of believers will be purified; either way, all children of believers are to be baptized. The sacrament is a sign and seal of the promise, just as circumcision was a sign and seal of the covenant (Gen 17.11). Yet, not all are Israel (Rom 9.6). Therefore, the sign, though applied universally, is not universally effective, then or now. That is, the sacrament cannot cause purification or salvation, just as Bullinger has consistently argued. That's why elect children dying before being baptized, are not in peril of damnation; for salvation is not by the will of man (nor by ceremony), but of God (Joh 1.13). Baptism is nonetheless necessary for infants as well as adults. It's a matter of obedience, not logical conclusions. – WHG

[3221] justificationem, Lat.

[3222] catechumenos, Lat.

[3223] in universum, Lat.: in all instances.

[3224] Bullinger had many conferences with anabaptists during his pastorate at Bremgarten; and in the years 1525, 1527, 1531, and 1532, public disputations with them were specially held in Zurich, Basle, Berne, and other neighbouring towns. — Bulling, adv. Anabap. Lib. i. capp. 5-7.

[3225] ex syllogismo, Lat. – from a syllogism (drawing a conclusion from two premises).

[3226] Origen. Comment, in Ep. ad Rom Lib. v. Opp. Tom. iv. p. 565. Par. 1759.

[3227] Jerome, adv. Pelag. Dial. Lib. iii. Opp. Tom. iv. par. 2. col. 545. Par. 1704.

[3228] Id. Epist. ad Laetam, lvii. Opp. Tom. iv. par. 2. col. 593.

[3229] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577, indeed, being cited by Julian he expounds it, Lib. i. contra Julian, cap. 2. Imo a Juliano citatum illustrat lib. contra Julian. I, cap. 2. Lat. — Aug. Opp. Tom. vii.fol. 195. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[3230] Id. Ep. xxviii. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 21. col. 3.

[3231] See above, page v.366.

[3232] Aug. de Bap. contra Donat, Lib. iv. cap. 24. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 88. col. 3.

[3233] Cyril. Alexand. Comment, in Levit. Lib. viii. fol. 33. Par. 1514.

[3234] Iterating of baptism: re-baptizing. Id. de Adorat. in Spirit, et Ver. Lib. vi. Opp. Tom. i. p. 176. Par. 1638.

[3235] Qui sint habendi pro baptizatis. — Aug. de Eccles. Dogmat. 52. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 44. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[3236] Cyprian. Jubaiano. Ep. lxxiii. p. 210. Oxon.

[3237] Sozom. H. E. p. 227. Cantab. 1720.

[3238] Iterated: repeated, performed again.

[3239] Justinian. Cod. Lib. i. tit. 6. II. p. 88. Lugd. 1551.

[3240] Ibid. p. 87.

[3241] Rather, but not into, etc.: they were baptized, not in Lat.

[3242] perstringentes saltern singula, Lat.: at least touching lightly on the several parts.

[3243] Aug. de Haer. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 5. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3244] Seleuciani vel Hermiani . . . baptismum in aqua non accipiunt — Id. ibid. fol. 6. col. 2.

[3245] Theodoret. H. E. Lib. iv. cap. 11. p. 162. Cantab. See also Epiphan. adv. Haeres. haer. lxviii. sive lxxx. Tom. i. pp. 1067, etc. Par. 1622.

[3246] inculcavit, Lat.: insisted on.

[3247] nec ut peccare liceat, Lat.: neither that we may take licence to sin.

[3248] Aug. de Fid. et Oper. cap. 20. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 17. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[3249] Dist. iv. col. 1986. Taurin. 1620.

[3250] initiate vel initiationis signum, Lat.: into Christianity, not in Lat.

[3251] Gal 2.20; Act 17.28.

[3252] See quotation above, page v.377, note 7.

[3253] qui (parvuli) post gravissimos cruciatus sine sacramento Christianse societatis expirant, etc. — Aug. de Nat. et Orig. Anima. Epist. xxviii. Hieronym. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 21. col. 2.

[3254] Christianity and, not in Lat.

[3255] and the whole kingdom of Satan, ed. 1577: omitted also in ed. 1584: et universum Satanae regnum, Lat.

[3256] In the Biographical Notice of Bullinger's life in this volume, p. v.xiii, is the following statement: "In the end of May of that year [1549], Calvin and Farell also came to Bullinger, and a 'consensus' or agreement was completed on the subject of the Lord's supper, between the churches of Geneva and Zurich." This came to be known as the Consensus Tigurinus. Zwingli believed the supper was a mere memorial, with nothing at all of Christ, either in the elements or the supper; the Lutherans believed that, although the elements were not physically transformed into the body and blood of Christ (called transubstantiation), Christ was somehow present "under" the elements (called consubstantiation). Calvin believed that the supper was imbued with the presence of the Spirit of Christ in an effective way; and thus the supper is a means of grace, and not a mere memorial. Calvin and Farell wanted a unity among their churches, rather than confusion or conflict. They therefore agreed upon the doctrine of the nature of the supper, in the Consensus Tigurinus of 1549. – WHG

[3257] More correctly: even as the feast of the passover, into the place of which it is instituted, was called, etc.

[3258] See page iii.178, etc.

[3259] hospes, Lat.: host.

[3260] accumbentes ad mensam Christi Domini nostri, Lat. seeing we sit down at the table of Christ our Lord.

[3261] merito, Lat. omitted: deservedly.

[3262] So also ed. 1584; but 1577, of the Lord's prayer: orationem Dominicam, Lat.

[3263] De Origine Erroris circa Coenam Domini Sacram et Missam Papisticam, cap. vii. Tigur. 1539.

[3264] analogia, Bullinger's one word. See above, pp. v.244, v.280.

[3265] See Bingham. Antiq. Book xv. chap. 2. § 5.

[3266] Rather, not without much scandal; non levi scandalo, Lat.

[3267] Epiphan. adv. Haeres. Lib. II. xxix. sive xlix. Opp. Tom. i. p. 417. Par. 1622.

[3268] propter mysterium, Lat.: by reason of a mystery.

[3269] Cyprian. Epist. lxiii. Opp. p. 154. Oxon.

[3270] comminisci, Lat: to devise.

[3271] significanter, Lat. – significantly.

[3272] Cyprian. Epist. lxiii. Opp. pp. 152, 155. Oxon.

[3273] See Mosheim. E. H. Book I. cent. 2. part 2. chap. 5. §7 and 9.

[3274] solis his, Lat.: to these (i.e., the priests) only.

[3275] Tardy has several meanings in Middle English; here it means brought up short, or shown to be without excuse.

[3276] Transubstantiation in Roman Catholicism, claims that the wine becomes the actual blood of Christ. Therefore, to spill it would be to spill his blood, not just the sign of it. Superstitious belief leads to superstitious practice. – WHG

[3277] Originally, "that the one kind is instituted in vain." – that is, that the wine is unnecessary for laymen.

[3278] a.d. 1414.

[3279] nonnulli, Lat. Gelasius. Decret. Gratian. Deer. Tert. Pars Dc Consecr. Dist. ii. Can. 12. col. 1918. See also Cyprian, Serm. de Lapsis.

[3280] See above, page v.267.

[3281] amplius, Lat. omitted: any more.

[3282] Prelection: a lecture or discourse read in public.

[3283] Fine linen cloths, on which the host is laid in the Romish churches.

[3284] Bravery: brightly colored and showy.

[3285] De Origine Erroris circa Coenam Domini Sacram et Missam Papisticam, cap. vi. fol. 207. Tigur. 1539.

[3286] Chrysost. in Mat Hom. I. Opp. Tom. vii. p. 518.

[3287] Ambros. de Officiis, Lib. i. cap. 28. Opp. Tom. iv. col. 61. Par. 1615

[3288] Rather, Toulouse; Tolosanum, Lat.

[3289] Jerome, Epist. ad Rustic, xcv. Opp. Tom. iv. par. 2. col. 778. Par. 1693 — 1706.

[3290] Gratian. Decret. par. in. de Consecrat. Dist. I. can. 44. col. 1900. Taurin. 1620. Labb. et Coss. Concil. Triburiens. can. 18. Tom. ix. col. 450.

[3291] This reference, which was introduced into ed. 1587, is to the joint letter of Bullinger and Gualther (Zurich Letters, 1st Series. Append. Let. in.) which was added to that edition of the translated Decades. — See title-page, Vol. i. — A similar reference is inserted in the margin of the London edition of the Latin Decades by Henry Middleton.

[3292] Innocent. Pap. III. Myster. Miss. Lib. iv. cap. 4. Opp. Tom. i. p. 376. col. 1575. Cf. Zurich Letters, p. 158. A.

[3293] See page iii.255.

[3294] De Origine Erroris circa Coenam. etc. cap. vi. fol. 208.

[3295] ab antiquo, Lat. – from antiquity.

[3296] et omnibus intelligibili, Lat. omitted: and that which all could understand.

[3297] The mysteries: Christ's flesh and blood signified by the bread and wine.

[3298] in mundum, Lat, omitted: into the world.

[3299] Corpus Jur. Can. Clement. Lib. iii. tit. 16. coll. 240, etc. Lugd. 1624. See Jewel's Works, ed. Park. Soc. Vol. i. p. 516.

[3300] Tertull. Apolog. cap. 39. Opp. Tom. v. p 75. ed. Semler. Hal. Mag. 1828.

[3301] Aug. Ep. cxviii. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 108. col. 3.

[3302] See page i.103; and above, page v.13.

[3303] See above, page v.379.

[3304] expiatione, Lat.

[3305] propter famem, Lat. omitted: because of hunger.

[3306] See Original Letters, ed. Park. Soc. p. 123. See also Zurich Letters, 2nd Series, p. 358.

[3307] hie, Lat. omitted: in this matter.

[3308] Rather, and the troubled in conscience.

[3309] De Origine Erroris circa Coenam, etc. cap. iv. fol. 198.

[3310] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. v. cap. 24.

[3311] ecclesiae, Lat. omitted: of the church.

[3312] So also ed. 1584; but ed. 1577, is made better? Minime factam esse deteriorem? Lat.

[3313] See page iv.404, etc.

[3314] De origine Erroris circa Caenam, etc. Lib. iv. fol. 199.

[3315] Nonne semel iramolatus est Christus in seipso? Et tamen in sacramento ... populis immolatur. . . . Si enim sacramenta, etc. — See quotation above, p. v.284. note 2.

[3316] Communicated: here, "communed" or enjoyed intimate union with Christ by faith.

[3317] Rather: And we, having received, etc., bear the promise and communion of Christ sealed upon us, etc.

[3318] Originally, "simply", meaning at face value, just what is stated; a literal or direct meaning or interpretation.

[3319] Theodoret. Eranist. seu Polymorph. Dial. I. Opp. Tom. iv. p. 13. Par. 1642 — 84.

[3320] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577, make an inequality in adoring the Trinity: inaequalitatem adorandte Trinitati obtrudemus, Lat.

[3321] August, de Haeres. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 7. Par. 1531. Helvidius (340-390) was the author of a work written prior to 383 against the belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary. The question which gave rise to it was whether Mary remained a Virgin after His birth. Helvidius maintained that the mention in the Gospels of the sisters and brethren of our Lord was proof that she had subsequent issue, and he supported his opinion by the writings of Tertullian and Victorinus. Jerome vigorously takes the other side, and tries to prove that the sisters and brethren spoken of, were either children of Joseph by a former marriage, or first cousins, children of Mary's sister (www.newadvent.org – Catholic ency.). Bullinger seems to accept her perpetual virginity, as he suggests in the first Decade, at the bottom of p. i.133, and here. – WHG

[3322] That is, literally, and not figuratively.

[3323] An obsolete term, meaning having a blood relationship – the same mother and father, aunt and uncle, etc.

[3324] That is, Scripture should be taken literally except where it creates contradictions or nonsense. – WHG

[3325] ilia ipsa, Lat.: those considerations.

[3326] Enerrat. in Psa xxxiii. Opp. Tom. VIII. fol. 49. col. 1. Par. 1531. (see citation in the next note)

[3327] Augustine, Expos. on the Book of Psalms, vol. I, Psa xxxiv, Serm. I, par. 10, (Oxford edition, London, 1847), p. 350. In his exposition on Psa 34.7, 9, "Lift up your heads, O you gates!" Augustine writes, " All things are not done in vain; neither were they in that madness of David, of which it is said, He [was] affected, and drummed upon the gates of the city, and was carried in His own hands, and fell down at the doors of the gate, and His spittle ran down over His beard." Then, relating it to Christ, Augustine writes, "He had compassion on our infirmities, and therefore would take upon Himself the same flesh, that therein He might destroy death... Therefore He was affected, because He came even to the death of the Cross. And because whoever is crucified is extended on wood; and to make a drum, flesh (that is, skin) is extended on wood; therefore it is said, He drummed, that is, He was crucified, He was extended on wood... He had affection for us, that He might lay down His life for His sheep. He drummed: How? upon the doors of tile city. The door is that which is opened to us, that we may believe in God. We had closed the door against Christ, and had opened it to the devil. Against Life Eternal we had closed our hearts. But He, the Lord our God, because we men had our hearts closed against life eternal, and would not see the Word, Which Angels see, with His Cross, opened the hearts of mortal men, that is, He drummed against the doors of the city. And was carried in His Own Hands," etc. – WHG

[3328] Id. ibid. fol. 49. col. 2.

[3329] Tertull. adv. Marcion. Lib. IV. cap. 40. Opp. Tom. i. p. 305. Hal. Mag. 1827. cd. Sender.

[3330] — Jerome, Comment, in Mat cap. xxvi. Lib. iv. Opp. Tom. iv. par. 1. col. 128. Par. 1693 — 1706.

[3331] See quotation above, page v.317, note 4.

[3332] Ambros. in 1Cor xi. p. 183. Opp. Tom. iii. col. 1616. But these commentaries are not genuine.

[3333] Aug. Quaest. sup. Levit. lvii. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 47. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3334] Precept: the principle or concept of a thing (the precept models its object).

[3335] Id. con. Adimant. cap. 12. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 39. col. 2.

[3336] Ne Choraebus dixerit. — See Erasmi Adag. Chil. p. 404. Hanov. 1617. in stupidos.

[3337] Aug. contr. Adv. Leg. et Proph. Lib. ii. cap. 9. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 130. col. 4.

[3338] Rather, as the scripture tends to speak.

[3339] Alluding to consubstantiation, where the body and blood of Christ co-exist with the consecrated bread and wine.

[3340] Rather, scattering mists abroad, throw them before us.

[3341] Aquinas, Sum. Tot. Theol. par. in. quaest. 57. Tom. viii. p. 218. Col. Agrip. 1639. Lomb. Sentent. Lib. iv. dist. 10. p. 310. Lugd. 1570.

[3342] That is, bodies must take up space, or they are not bodies.

[3343] See page iv.265, note 2.

[3344] sumus iniquiores, Lat.: are we more rigid.

[3345] Bullinger refers to the interpretation of Brentius and his followers.

[3346] Jerome, Comment, in Mat xxiv. Lib. iv. Opp. Tom. iv. par. 1. col. 114. Par. 1704.

[3347] quae ubique locorum cernuutur, Lat. omitted: which are to be seen in all places.

[3348] ciboria, Lat. The tabernacle (called by modern writers the ciborium) was a sort of turret or cabinet on the upper surface of the altar, containing the pyx in which the consecrated hosts were reserved. — Hart's Eccles. Records, p. 230.

[3349] Jerome, Comment. in Mat Lib. iv. Opp. Tom. iv. par 1. Col. 116.

[3350] See page i.91.

[3351] Theodoret. Dial. III. Impatibilis. Opp. Tom. iv. p. 122. Par. 1642.

[3352] See Decade iv. Serm. 8.

[3353] impugnant, Lat. – impune, or attack.

[3354] contentionis funem trahere, Lat. – Originally, "to hale at the gable of contention."

[3355] That is, Christ's body went into the tomb that day, and did not ascend till 40 days after his resurrection (Act 1.1-3).

[3356] Aug. in Evan. Joan. Tract, l. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 76. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3357] See Decade iv. Serm. 6.

[3358] Aug. in Evang. Joan. Tract, xxv. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 45. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[3359] Id. in Evang. Joan. Tract, xxvi. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 46. col. 3. et fol. 47. col. 4.

[3360] See page v.289, note 2.

[3361] Aug. de Cons. Evang. Lib. iii. cap. 1. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 100. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3362] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577, flesh and the same, etc.: una atque eadem caro et idem corpus, &c, Lat.

[3363] Above, p. v.434.

[3364] Hilar. Comment, in Mat cap. 30. Opp. col. 740. Par. 1693.

[3365] Originally, "communicated of the mysteries..."

[3366] Aug. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 100. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[3367] Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 84. col. 1.

[3368] Opp. Tom. viii. fol. 16. col. 1.

[3369] Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 143. col. 3.

[3370] Aquinas, Summa Theol. par. iii. quaest. 81. art. 2. p. 186. Col. Agrip. 1622.

[3371] Aug. in Evarg. Joan. lix. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 82. col. 4.

[3372] See above, page v.460, note 3.

[3373] Aug. de Civit. Dei, Lib. xxi. cap. 25. Opp. Tom. v. fol. 292. col. 4.

[3374] See above, page v.328.

[3375] See above. page v.402.

[3376] See above, page v.333.

[3377] populus acquisitionis, Lat. – a peculiar people.

[3378] See p. iv.288.

[3379] Rather, for such as are penitent, or for the profession of repentance: poenitentes vel poenitentiam professam decentia, Lat.

[3380] Mat 5.8; See above, page v.460, note 3.

[3381] Aug. in Evang. Joan. Tract, lxii. Opp. Tom. ix. fol. 83. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[3382] Rather, whence proceeds our unworthiness, yet it is the lightest of all; (that is, of all kinds of unworthiness) being such as the Lord of his grace easily washes away, etc. The Latin original is obscure; but this is evidently Bullinger's meaning. Haller in his German version understands the sentence in the same manner.

[3383] Rather, although in humbleness, etc. yet with gladness.

[3384] requirit, Lat. omitted: seeks.

[3385] Calvin. Instit. Christ. Rel. cap. xi. p. 341. Argent. 1539. Second Edition.

[3386] Rather, he does not cease to cast it in the way and to bring it in, as a kind of ball of contentions, though it is to the church a token of a covenant never to be broken.

[3387] Decade 1, sermon 10.

[3388] Bullinger seems to refer to Gen 47.22. See his treatise De Episcop. Instit. et Funct. cap. in. fol. 74. Tigur. 1538.

[3389] philosophorum Alpha, Lat. — Erasm. Adag. Chili. Dignitatis. p. 188. Hanov. 1617.

[3390] See pp. ii.334, etc. and pp. iii.133, 143.

[3391] See p. iii.207.

[3392] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577, orders: ordinibus, Lat.

[3393] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. v. cap. 10; and Lib. vi. cap. 30; and Lib. vii. cap. 32.

[3394] De Episcop. Instit. etc. cap. viii. p. 102. Tigur. 1538.

[3395] verum coelum, Lat.: the true heaven.

[3396] snarl, embarrass, twist. — Johnson.

[3397] Rather, Of the ancients some: ex veteribus quidam, Lat.

[3398] Gratian completed his Decrctum a. d. 1151. Peter Lombard, author of The Sentences, died a.d. 1164.

[3399] Originally, "to make an agreement of..."

[3400] Alexander Hales, called The Irrefragable Doctor, died a.d. 1245. Albertus Magnus, died a.d. 1280. Thomas Aquinas, called The Angelic Doctor, died a.d. 1274.

[3401] to couch, to include, to lay close to another. Johnson: redigere, Lat.

[3402] Rather, we also shall corrupt in schools the integrity, etc.

[3403] Originally, "fond gentleness."

[3404] De Episcop. Instit. etc. capp. iv., viii., and xviii.

[3405] See Zurich Letters. Second Series, Let. xcviii. p. 242.

[3406] See page iii.143.

[3407] Gregory I, or Gregory the Great (c. 540-604); he became pope in 590; he is said to have introduced purgatory.

[3408] Gregor. Epist. ap. Bed. Hist. Eccles. Vol. ii. p. 108. cd. Giles. Loud. 1843.

[3409] An vero dicet aliquis, ministrum ecclesire, suo fungentem munere fideliter, nihil laborare? Lat. omitted: But would any man say that the minister of the church, when he does his duty faithfully, does not labour at all?

[3410] et trituranti quidem, Lat.: and that when he is treading out the corn.

[3411] Bulling, adv. Anabapt. Lib. iii. cap. 9.

[3412] Rather, And he says what he means by a question.

[3413] Rather, Surely he brings forth these similitudes very finely, and most properly (brings forth) these, and not others.

[3414] 1Thes 5.12-13. Rather, as Bullinger here divides the words, Be at peace with them for their work's sake. — Cf. page ii.284, note 1.

[3415] See page iii.207.

[3416] The parenthesis is the Translator's.

[3417] cura, Lat.: care. A cure describes a local parish where the pastor (a curate) "cares" for his flock. – WHG

[3418] qui ascensurus erat in coelos, Lat. omitted: being about to ascend into heaven.

[3419] Rather, even to a miraculous extent: ad miraculum usque,Lat.

[3420] See page iii.106. Laurence (225–258) was one of the seven deacons of the city of Rome under Pope Sixtus II, who were martyred in the persecution by the Roman Emperor Valerian in 258.

[3421] Xenodochia, Ptochotrophia, Nosocomya, Gerontocomia, Brephotrophia, et Orphanotrophia. — Cf. page ii.286, note 3; and page iii.281, note 8.

[3422] Rather; let no evil treasure be heaped together by defrauding of the poor, etc.

[3423] See page iii.58, etc.

[3424] De Episcop. Instit. etc. cap. ix. fol. 113. Tig. 1538.

[3425] John Ludovicus Vives, born at Valentia in Spain, a.d. 1492, died a.d. 1537 (or 1541). He published a treatise, De Subventione Paupcrum, in two books, a.d. 1526. — Opp. Tom. ii. p. 889, etc. Basil. 1555. Mosheim. E. H. Vol. iii. p. 52. ed. Soames.

[3426] See above, page v.184.

[3427] So also ed. 1584: but ed. 1577,or: basilicas, Bullinger's one word.

[3428] furori Babylonico, Lat.: Babylonish madness. He then alludes to the tower of Babel (Gen 11).

[3429] By riotousness or riot, Bullinger means excessiveness or gaudiness, in contrast to simplicity.

[3430] Rather, to repeat and discuss all the manifest superstitions about the consideration of temples.

[3431] De Episcop. Instit. cap. ix. fol. 115. Tig. 1538. De Origine Erroris, Lib. i. cap. 21. fol. 102. Tig. 1539.

[3432] Socrat. H. E. Lib. v. cap. 22. p. 297. Cantab.

[3433] Aug. de Civit. Dei, Lib. viii. cap. 27. Opp. Tom. v. fol. 107. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[3434] See page iv.348, note 3. (It has the reference for this quote, which was differently translated in the text there.)

[3435] Rather, to baptize the faithful in: baptizandis fidelibus, Lat.

[3436] See page iii.45.

[3437] Originally, "well in his wits."

[3438] Lactant. de Vero Cultu, Lib. vi. cap. 2. p. 545. Lugd. Bat. 1660.

[3439] Cf. Early Writings of Bp. Hooper, ed. Park. Soc. p. 197.

[3440] See page iii.44.

[3441] Almoner: the one who uses alms (charitable donations) to meet the material needs of others; the deacon's duty.

[3442] De Episcop. Instit. etc. cap. 19. fol. 163. Tig. 1538.

[3443] That is, special times, days, seasons, and occasions for worship, including holidays.

[3444] Decade ii. Serm. 4.

[3445] Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. v. cap. 24. See p. ii.433. n. 4.

[3446] Aug. Ep. cxviii. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 108. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[3447] quo salietur, Lat. But Tyndale, 1534, and Cranmer, 1539, render the words as the translator does here.

[3448] Cf. page ii.331.

[3449] Justinian. Novell. Constit. 137. p. 365. H. Stephan. 1558.

[3450] Lat. omitted: But if in any quarter the wholesome ordinance of holding synods has grown out of use, let it be brought back, and with due solemnity renewed, for the preservation of the ministry and welfare of the churches.

[3451] Rather, that this revengement was not granted by God to the licentiousness of a few.

[3452] Ordinary: an officer of a church who has power to execute and enforce the ordinances of the church.

[3453] Aug. de Sermone Domini in Monte, Lib. i. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 251. col. 1. Par. 1531.

[3454] Mat 28.5-7 with Joh 20.2.

[3455] See p. ii.401. n. 6.

[3456] Rather, the laws, that is, either scripture, or the law of charity.

[3457] Rather, to the devil, and not to God.

[3458] Rather, who must judge.

[3459] See Works of Becon, ed. Park. Soc. Vol. i. p. 29. n. 2. and Biograph. Mem. of Bullinger, p. xviii. n. 26.

[3460] Cyprian. Epist. iv. Opp. p. 7 — Oxon.

[3461] 1Tim 5:11-12 But refuse the younger widows; for when they have begun to grow wanton against Christ, they desire to marry, having condemnation because they have cast off their first faith.

[3462] Aug. de Bono Viduitat. cap. 9. Opp. Tom. iv. fol. 229. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[3463] krima (krima), Bulling. Lat.

[3464] calumny or slander.

[3465] See above, page v.113, note 5.

[3466] St. Antony or Anthony (c. 251–356) was a Christian monk from Egypt. He is known as the Father of All Monks. Athanasius of Alexandria's biography of Anthony's life helped to spread Christian monasticism. Anthony was not the first Christian monk, but he was the first to go into the wilderness (about ad 270).

[3467] Jerome, Vita S. Pauli Eremitae. Opp. Tom. iv. par. 2. coll. 69, 70. Par. 1706.

[3468] August. Ep. lxxx. Hesych. Opp. Tom. ii. fol. 69. col. 4. Par. 1531.

[3469] Eutropius de Gestis Roman. Lib. xiv. p. 1S3. Basil. 1532. Beda deTemp. Ratione. Opp. Vol. vi. p. 317. ed. Giles. Lond. 1843. Augustine died 28 August, a.d. 430, aged 76 years. — Mosheim, E. H. Vol. i. p. 338, note 2. ed. Soames.

[3470] Aug. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 161. col. 4.

[3471] John Trithemius, or de Trittenheim, a celebrated abbot of the Benedictine order, was born at Trittenheim in the diocese of Treves, a.d. 1462, and died 1516. — Mosheim, E. H. Vol. hi. p. 50. ed. Soames.

[3472] Trithem. de Viris Illustr. ord.'s. Benedicti. Lib. ii. cap. 1. Opp. p. 29. Mogunt. 1605.

[3473] Ibid. Lib. i. cap. 3. p. 19.

[3474] Ibid. cap. 5. p. 20.

[3475] Ibid. Lib. iii. cap. 337. p. 114; Ibid. Serm. i. p. 531.

[3476] Mendicant monks live by begging.

[3477] The Carmelites, a subdivision of the Mendicant Friars, were placed by Honorius III. a.d. 1225, among the approved orders in the western church. — Mosheim, E. II. Book in. cent. xiii. par. 2. chap. 2. § 22.

[3478] religet, Lat. See p. ii.233. n. 5: and p. iv.231.

[3479] Cf. p. iv.295.

[3480] jubet, Lat. – judged.

[3481] See page ii.250.

[3482] Rather, either unadvisedly, or knowingly made: vel imprudenter vel scienter, Lat.

[3483] Rather, that together with their profits, etc., many, no, all things depart.

[3484] Rather, in the primitive church, in the doctrine, etc. we read of nothing set down concerning, etc.

[3485] apud regros, Lat. omitted: in the case of the sick.

[3486] Cf. page iv.399.

[3487] Rude: lacking in refinement and grace; uneducated.

[3488] ut compendio, Lat. omitted: as in a summary. See p. i.156.

[3489] ut vel inde inclarescat, Lat.: So that even from this it appears most clearly.

[3490] Decade III. Sermons 8, 9.

[3491] Rather, that being taught better things out of the scriptures, I will with good-will and thanksgivings embrace the better.

[3492] inexhausto, Lat. (inexhaustible)

[3493] This dedication is omitted in the English translation of Bullinger's Decades. It formed the preface to the fifth and last Decade. Portions of it had been translated and published in 1566, in a small work entitled: "The judgement of the Reverend Father Master Henry Bullinger, pastor of the church of Zurich, in certeyne matters of religion, beinge in controversy in many countreys, even where as the gospel is taught." These portions have been adopted in this translation by the Editor; and a star marks the beginning and end of them.

[3494] On this dedication see Orig. Lett. ed. Park. Soc. pp. 3, 7, 77, 82, 90, 393, 399,406,409,434.

[3495] See Orig. Lett. p. 675.

[3496] Pope Juliul III. published this bull Nov. 14, 16M.

[3497] That is, a reformation of the Roman Catholic Church itself, as opposed to the Protestant churches.

[3498] On Dec. 13, 16411

[3499] He died Nov. 10, 1649.

[3500] Bull. Resump. Concil. Trid. sub Jul. III.

[3501] — ad exstirpationem haeresum. — Can. Concil. Trid. p. 15. Lips. 1837.

[3502] Bull. Indict. Conc. Trident, p. 11. Lips. 1837.

[3503] See Decade v. Serm. 4. p. 141.

[3504] In sessions 8-12, no decrees were passed, nor canons ratified: only the council was prorogued.

[3505] Can. Concil. Trid. p. 19.

[3506] Ibid.

[3507] Ibid., p. 20.

[3508] Ibid.

[3509] Originally: "perfit" – Middle English for perfect.

[3510] Originally: "clout up and supply fitly."

[3511] mistranslation, for whole: tota, Lat.

[3512] Originally, "list."

[3513] they heard from our Saviour: so Lat.

[3514] Rather, "of you hypocrites, saying."

[3515] Gal 2.7-9; 2Pet 3.16.

[3516] This bracket is the Translator's addition.

[3517] 2Tim 3.15, 17. "and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. ¹⁶ All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, ¹⁷ that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."

[3518] Rather, the symbol which we today call the apostles'.

[3519] Rather, though they do not give it, etc.: redditum, Lat.

[3520] Tertull. de Praescrip. adv. Haer. cap. 20. Irenaeus adv. Haer. Lib. iii. cap. 4. See above, p. i.28.

[3521] Euseb. H. E. Lib. iv. cap. xiv.

[3522] Alibi abundeest demonstratum, Lat.: Bullinger does not necessarily refer to his own writings; yet see Bulling. De Script, sanct. auth. etc. Lib. I. cap. 13.

[3523] A mistake for, I will bring forth: proferam, Lat.

[3524] Irenaeus adv. Haer. Lib. II. cap. 40. p. 162. ed. Grabe. Oxon. 1J0 2. Quoting John 8.57.

[3525] That is, beginning with that age and working backwards...

[3526] Originally, "which our Lord having did teach,"

[3527] Irenaei adv. Haeres. Lib. II. cap. 39. p. 161. ed. Grabe.

[3528] Lactantium, Lat. Lactantius: and certain others, not in Lat.

[3529] Also known as the "Jewish Dream" or Chiliasm. The belief in a future thousand-year reign of bliss on earth. It is taught by the Plymouth Brethren, 7^th Day Adventists, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and many Dispensationalists.

[3530] Euseb. H. E. Lib. iii. cap. 39. ed. Burton.

[3531] who dared: ausus est, Lat. Originally translated "interpreted."

[3532] Socrat. Hist. Eccles. Lib. V, cap. 22, p. 292. Cantab. 1720.

[3533] 2Maccab. 12.43-45. See p. iv.396.

[3534] Aug. de Doct. Christ. Lib. II. cap. 8. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 6. col. 2. Par. 1531.

[3535] Sunt canonicae scripturae Genesis, etc... Tobias, Judith, ...Machabaeorum libri duo. — Ibid. can. 47. p. 1177. But see Cosin's Scholastical Hist, of Can. § 82.

[3536] Anno Christi 397 — Labb. et Coss. Tom. ii col. 1165. Lut. Par. 1671.

[3537] Aug. de Civit. Dei, Lib. xviii. cap. 36. Opp. Tom. v. fol. 244. col. 3.

[3538] Id. contra Gaudent. Ep. Lib. ii. cap. 23. Opp. Tom. vii. fol. 73. col. 4.

[3539] Id. de Doct. Christ. Lib. II. cap. 8.

[3540] Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Verus was emperor of Rome from a.d. 161 to 180.

[3541] Jerome, Opp. Tom. i. fol. 317. Par. 1693.

[3542] B. Melitonis Frag, apud Reliq. Sacr. Tom. i. pp. 119, 110. Oxon. 1846.

[3543] Origan, ap. Euseb. H. E. Lib. vi. cap. 25.

[3544] Jerome, Epist. L. Opp. Tom. iv. Par. 1706.

[3545] Jerome, Proleg. in libros Solomonis. Opp. Tom. i. fol. 939. Par. 1693.

[3546] Jerome is said to have died on the 30th of September, a.d. 420, aged ninety years. — Mosheim, E. H. Vol. i. p. 337, note, ed. Soames.

[3547] Ruffin. Expos. Symb. Apostol. p. 26. Cypriani Opp. Oxon. 1682.

[3548] Decret. Gratian. distinct, ix. can. II. Par. 1583.

[3549] Aug. contra Faust. Manich. Lib. xi. cap. 2. Opp. Tom. vi. fol. 51. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3550] Aug. de Doct. Christ. Lib. ii. cap. 11. Opp. Tom. iii. fol. 6. col. 3. Par. 1531.

[3551] Aug. ibid.

[3552] See Orig. Lett. pp. 401, 407, 409, 422.

[3553] Henry Grey, maiquis of Dorset, married Frances, daughter of Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, by Mary Tudor, sister of Henry VIII See Orig. Lett. p. 399, note 2.

[3554] See Orig. Lett. pp. 407, 409, 422.

[3555] For the reception of this letter and decade, see Orig. Lett, pp.3, 7,2/7, 279, 428, 429, 436, 498, 574.

[3556] This dedication also is omitted in the English translation. It was prefixed to the original edition of Decades i. and ii.

[3557] Florus, Lat.

[3558] Wirt. Germ.

[3559] Sarctorius, Lat.

[3560] See above, page i.117.

[3561] Classium, Lat. Haller translates the word, Capiteln.

[3562] Palliate: to lessen the seriousness or extent of something.

[3563] Psa 38.2-4, 18; 6.3, 6.

[3564] See page ii.277, note 5.

[3565] spiritu, Lat.

[3566] Refractory: stubbornly resistant to authority or control.

[3567] See page iii.147, note 6.

[3568] John Herolt, of the order of Dominicans, was commonly called Discipulus, because, as he himself says, he compiled his published sermons, " collecti ex diversis sanctorum dictis et ex pluribus libris, non per modum magistri, sed per modum discipuli." They are commended (ed. Nuremb. 1520) as "opus perutile simplicibus curam animarum gerentibus."

[3569] Pelbartus Osvaldus, an Hungarian Franciscan, who flourished a.d. 1501, and wrote many sermons. — Mosheim, E. H. Vol. III. p. 52. ed. Soames.

[3570] Decretal. Gregor. Pap. IX. Lib. I. tit. 1. p. 7. Par. 1585. See p. iv.82.]

[3571] Mat 16.18; 1Cor 10.4; 3.11.

[3572] Ames mentions (Vol. iii. p. 1461,) "Three Dialogues between the seditious libertine or rebel Anabaptist, and the true obedient Christian: wherein obedience to magistrates is handled. By Hen. Bullynger, and translated out of Latin by John Veron, printed at Worcester, etc. 1551." But Lowndes also notices; "An holsome Antidotus agaynst Anabaptistes, newly translated by John Veron," and published in 1548; and "A Dialogue between the seditious Anabaptist and the true Christian, about obedience to Magistrates," printed at Worcester, in 1549.

[3573] The greater part of the Commentary on the second chapter of the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians was published separately, in German, by Melchior Ambach, at Frankfort, in 1541, with the title, Vom Antichrist und seinem reich, — Of Antichrist and his kingdom.

[3574] Avoutry: adultery.

[3575] Qu. Is this the book referred to in Orig. Lett. p. 245?

[3576] Ames, Vol. ii. pp. 1007, 1147.

[3577] Herbert's Ames, Vol. 1. p. 634.

[3578] See Gerdesii Scrin. Tom. iv. par. 2. p. 440.

[3579] Ames, Vol. ii. p. 775.

[3580] See Zurich Lett. A. p. 302, note 1. B. pp. 98, 100, 274.

[3581] Orig. Lett. p. G81. See John-a-Lasco's opinion of it, Gerdesii Serin. Tom. lv. par. 2. p. 460.

[3582] Hottinger also mentions a tragedy of Bullinger's, "Brutus sive Lucretia," which was published (but without his name) and acted at Basle, a.d. 1533. — Schola Tigur. Append, i. p. 88. Tig. 1664.

[3583] Made, says Strype (Ann. II. ii. p. 144. Oxf. ed.) by a "person of eminency in the church."

[3584] In 1586 Newbery had a licence to print Bullinger's Decades in Latin. — Ames, Vol. ii. pp. 918, 1134.

[3585] Cardwell's Synodalia, Preface, page i.

[3586] Tom. i. fol. 131. a. Cardwell's Synodalia, Vol. ii. page 562.

[3587] Cure: a curacy.

[3588] Honoring the archangel Michael; a quarter day in England, Wales, and Ireland.

[3589] Strype, Whitgift, Vol. I. page 499.

[3590] Tom. i. fol. 132.

[3591] Strype's Life of Bp. Aylmer, p. 83. Oxf. 1824.

[3592] Tom. i. fol. 151. a.

[3593] Strype gives this letter as addressed to the bishops, — Whitgift, Vol. I. page 531. It appears in Wilkins' Concil. as directed to the bishop of London. — Vol. iv. p. 338. Lond. 1737.

[3594] Ames, Vol. ii. p. 697.

2-9. THE NINTH SERMON: OF WAR.