Two Popish Heretics Confuted, Rejoinder · Article 8
The eight Article.
That many strange and wonderful miracles were wrought by the signe of the crosse.Martial.
If this article were granted in manner and fourme as it is set downe and meant by the author:Fulke. namely, that God by the signe of the crosse hath wrought miracles, yet doeth it not followe, that the signe of the crosse is nowe to be vsed of vsus, nor that we should repose any confidence therein. By the rodde of Moses great miracles were wrought, yet was neither the signe of that rod to be esteemed, nor hope of health to be placed in it, nor the rodde it selfe to be worshipped.
The Apostles by annointing with oyle,Marke. 6. did worke great miracles, yet neither the signe of that annointing is of vsus to be vsed, nor the oyle to be worshipped: wherefore if God to shewe the vertue of him that was crucified, hath wrought miracles, by the crosse, or signe thereof, it followeth not, that the signe is still to be vsed, or the crosse honoured, but he that was crucified. Whereas M. Calfhil saide, that miracles are done by the deuil and his ministers, although Martial cannot deny it, yet he saith it followeth not that all miracles, or those of the crosse were done by the deuil. Wheras M. Calfhils meaning is plaine, that we ought not to beleeue all thinges that are commended to vsus by miracles, but to examine all doctrine by the word of God, against which we must beleeue no miracles, no prophets, no Angels, Gal. 1. But whereas Martial laboboureth to proue, that miracles done by signe of the crosse, were done by God, he should first hauehave proued substantially, that miracles were done in deede by the crosse, and after prooued, by what power they were done. For we may not beleeue eueryevery reporte of miracles, especially when they are alledged to confirme false doctrine. Let vsus therefore consider the first miracle which he rehearseth of the crosse of Christ, that Helena found: if she found any, for Eusebius that knew Helena, and speaketh much of her commendation, and of her doinge at Hierusalem, as I take it, would not hauehave concealed such a notable inuention, if any such had bene, in his story, and therefore the note in his Chronologie seemeth to bee a late addition. But to the miracle, that the crosse was discerned from the other two by a sicke Gentlewoman vppon whome it was laide, wherevppon as soone as it touched her, she recouered. This report of Rustinus seemeth to be vncertaine, first because Ambrose sayeth, the crosse was knowen by the title, without speaking of any miracle: secondly, because the reporte of other writers is, that the miracle was of a dead woman, and some of two dead persons, wherof to see more I referre the reader to mine answere to D. Sanders booke of Images cap. 13. or 12. Concerning the rest of the Miracles, reported by Paulinus, Epiphanius, Augustine and others, let thē hauehave such credite as their authors deserue, which is not to build faith or doctrine vponupon them, or their writinges, let it be that some were true and wrought by God, yet followeth it not, that al that hauehave bene since reported in the Popishe Legendes were either true or not wrought by the deuil: whereabout Martiall maketh much wrangling, but neither affirmeth nor concludeth any thing vniuersally. None vse more crossing then witches and coniurers, the deuil seemeth to be afraide to come neare them, certaine strange works are brought to passe by them Let Martial affirme any vertue included in the crosse, or signe thereof absolutely, & then we may deale with him accordingly For while he telleth vsus what may be done by faith & ye signe of ye crosse, and what God hath done by good men with that signe, it is nothing to the authorizing of that signe, seeing the deuil by credulitie in wicked men hath don the like by the same signe.
And this is a true position of M. Calfhil, though Martiall will not vnderstand it. That it is not a sufficient proofe to make a thing good, or to shew it to be good, (because he cauilleth like a calfe a… the worde of making▪) to say that miracles were wrought by it. Martial asketh first, whether the miracles of Christ were not a sufficient proofe of his diuine power? Where he flyeth from the position, which speaketh not of the principal efficient cause, out of a ceremonie, a meane, or instrument. More pertinently he asketh of the hemme of Christs coate. Saint Paules napkins, whether they had not a vertue by his body. I answere no. No more then Iudas lippes that kissed Christe, and Peters shadowe, which could neither be holy, nor efficient of any thing, because it was nothing but the priuation of the light by comming betweene of his body. So I say of coates, napkins, ashes of Martyrs, and signe of the crosse, if any miracles were done by meanes of them, they are not thereby holy, neither hauehave they any vertue in them. The Lord hath giuen vsus a generall rule to examine all miracles, and miracle workers, by the doctrine they teache. Deut. 13.
If there arise among you a prophet or dreamer of dreames (and giuegive thee a signe or wonder, and y• signe, & the wonder which he hath told thee, come to passe) if he say let vsus goe after other Gods which thou hast not knowen, and let vsus serue them: thou shal not hearken vntounto the words of that prophet, or vntounto that dreamer of dreames: for the Lord your God proueth you, to know whether you louelove the Lord your God with al your heart, and with all your soule. Ye shal walk after the Lord your God and feare him, and kepe his cōmandements, and hearken vntounto his voyce, and ye shall serue him, and cleaue vntounto him. By this scripture we are taught to examine all miracles, whether they tende to the honour of the only true God and the maintenance of his true worshippe according to his worde: whiche Martiall him selfe in a manner confesseth: saying, that miracles done by heretikes are not able to commende a thing. But he findeth great fault with Maister Calfhil for coupling the generation of a childe in adultery or feeding by stollen breade, to be miracles, because they be not extraordinarily miracles and yet he can not deny but they be great wonders, and the reason of the meanes is all one in both.
Nowe let vsus see howe he aunswereth those three reasons of Maister Calfhils, why miracles make not for the crosse. And first he aunswereth to a question, Why the durt in the streete by whiche Christe wrought a miracle, should not be honoured as well as the crosse on the altar? He aunswereth because the crosse was an instrument by which all the worlde was saued. So was Iudas, so was Pilate. The second, He saith the crosse is a liuely representation of Christes death. Nay a dombe and dead idoll which is good for nothing. Abacuc. 2. The thirde The crosse is effectuous euer since. A deed efficient.
The crosse is commaunded of God to be made and vsed by diuers Reuelations from heauen. Nay by the diuell from hell, and yet if Angels from heauen had taught the crosse to be made and vsed as another Gospell, as it is accounted of the Papists, as great as circumcisiō was of ye Iewes, not preached by the Apostles, not conteyned in the Scriptures, we might safely accurse them.
But now to the reasons: the first is: Why should not such external meanes as Christ and his Apostles vsed, & scripture mentioneth, be had in administration, rather then the idle deuice of man, of which there is no lawfull president. Martiall answereth, the crosse is no idle deuise, but a tradition of the Apostles, whereof they hauehave lawful presidentes. But seeing no president is lawfull to builde our faith vponupon, but the holy scriptures, which the Papistes hauehave not for their crosse, the reason standeth vntouched.
The second reason, If miracles were done by the signe of the crosse, yet not onelyonly by it, therefore the crosse should not only be magnified without the rest. Martial affirmeth that hee would not hauehave the crosse magnified without the rest, as prayer and faith. How doeth he then magnifie the crosse in Iulians storie, which was without prayer and faith?
The third reason. If miracles were done by the crosse, yet it should not be had in estimation, except all other thinges by which miracles were wrought, as the he… of Christes garment, the spitle and clay, the shadowe of Peter and napkins of Paule, were likewise honoured and esteemed. Martial aunswereth, this is but his assertion, for which he hath neither scripture, councel, nor Doctor. As though an argument A paribus, were not good except the conclusion were expressed in Scriptur, doctor, or councel. Yet he replieth, that the crosse is the principall meane, by which miracles hauehave ben wrought. But the Scripture is against that, for Christ wrought no miracle by the signe of y• crosse. Nay I slander him, for he reasoneth not ad idem, but the crosse is the cheefe and principal instrumente of our redemption, yet not holier then the speare, the reede, and the sponge, as Athanasius affirmeth Ad Antioch. que. 16. But euen the hemme, the spettle, and clay, if he had them, Martial would honor, worship & esteeme for his sake whose pretious body they touched. Then let him worship the sunne that touched him with his beams of light, or if that be too farre of, let him worship Iudas lippes that kissed him, if he can come by them. Concerning the person of Helena, I would wish nothing to be spoken of her, but to her honour, except in case where her honour should be an hinderance of the honor of Christ. Martial to iustifie her in al things, raileth vponupon M. Calfhil, for charging her with superstition as though he had bene the first yt had so written of her, when it is reported of her that she was vsus que ad superstitionem pia, deuout euen to superstition. And yet her superstition, appeareth not so great in any thing, as in this supposed inuention of the crosse.
The varietie in time that is in the witnesses of the inuention of the crosse, the blasphemous beast is not ashamed to compare with the apparence of varietie which is in the Euangelistes, where in deede there is none, wheras this discord can not be reconciled. Yet will he not hauehave the tale discredited for the discorde in time, as though there were none other discorde. The manifest contradiction that is betweene Ruffinus, saying, Titulus non satis evident…r dominici prodeba… signa patibuli, The title did not shewe euidently the signe of our Lordes gibbet. And Ambrose saying, Titulo crux salutaris patuit, by the title the healthfull crosse was manifestly knowen. This contradiction I say, he denyeth to bee any, affirming that a simple Logitian would proue it to be none. Thinking that s…tis euidenter euidently inough, would excuse the matter, as though we knewe not what patet doeth signifie, as well as Maister vsher of Winchester. That a shippe would not carrie the peeces of the crosse that are shewed in so many places, he counteth it an impudent lye of Caluine, whome he rayleth vponupon like a ruffian, and slaundereth like a diuel. Yet Erasmus affirmeth the same in his Peregrinat. relig. erg. And he that will beleeue neither of them both, let him consider beside so many whole crosses as are shewed in steede of that one, and of great boardes yt are kept in many places as part of it, so many thousand churches & Abbeys as either now shew or hauehave shewed chips & pieces of it, & he shall not think their report to be in credible. The talk of the nayles which were but three at ye first, & al bestowed at the time of ye inuention, yet are now multiplyed to 13. or 14. which bewrayeth an horrible impudencie in the Popish idolaters. Martiall refuseth as impertinent, yet will he not confesse ye forgerie, which is a token of a wicked & diuelish conscience. Where M. Calfhill sayeth that miracles were not done by the crosse to establish a worshipping or hauing of it, Martiall requireth proofe by scriptures, Councels or Doctors. I reason thus a paribus out of the scripture, myracles were done by oyle, shadowe, & other things, not to establish a worshipping or hauing of them: the like reason is of myracles done by the crosse. Beside that y• scripture is plentiful in challenging all honour & worship to the author, & not to the meanes or instruments. Peter and Iohn, meanes of the healing of the lame man refused all honour and worship in respect of his healing, Act. 3. vers. 12. yet were they other manner of meanes then ye crosse euer was in doing of myracles.
That M. Calfhill sayeth, myracles teach vsus not to do the like, but to beleeue the like. Martiall sayeth, they teach vsus to do the like if we may: and he proueth it by him that teacheth that almes couereth sinne, who thereby teacheth to do almes, &c. Thus the wise man compareth miracles & men together, facts & doctrin; act & possibilitie, euen as right as a rammes horne. But how shal we come by this power to worke miracles by the signe of ye crosse? for to assay without assurance of Gods power, is to tempt God. Therefore wee may no more crosse vsus against diuels, because God hath sometime chased thē away by y• signe, then wee may annoynt blind mens eyes with clay, to proue if they will see after it, because Christ wrought a myracle by y• meane, which as Martial saith, teacheth vsus to do the like if we may. What estimatiō Paulinus a superstitious man had in his piece of the crosse, which was perhaps a piece of another tree, then euer came in Iewry. Wee hauehave not to followe him in his follye. That myracles wrought of holy men by the signe of the crosse, &c. is not a sufficient reason to proue that ye figne of the crosse should be had, kept, set vp, and honoured, I hauehave alreadie proued out of the scripture by ye like or equall, & yet it is against reason, when we deny your arguments whose consequence you ought to proue, y• we should be driuē to proue that they follow not. Where M. Calfhill sayeth, y• myracles onelyonly ought not, or may not cōmend a thing, you pick quarels to him without cause, obiecting the miracles of Christ, who tooke witnesse not only of his miracles, but also of ye holy scriptures. When you hauehave vrged the miracle done by ye signe of ye crosse out of Epiphanius, as much as you can, yet proueth it not ye honouring and setting vp of ye signe of ye crosse in these days, as M. Calfhill telleth you, seing y• we liue not among Turkes or Sarazens, y• we need to hauehave any such signe whereby we might be knowen to be worshippers of Christ. But you would faine learne, what if a Portingal or one of ye new conuerted Ilāds of India, cōming by chance into England, of which he neuer heard before, & seing neither images nor crosses in church nor streate, how he should knowe in whome wee beleeue. And I would learne of you, what skilleth it, if such a man as neuer came here, nor euer by any likelyhood shall come hither, yet supposed to be driuen on a boarde out of India into Englande, what skilleth it I say, if he know not in whom we beleue, and so depart as wise as he came? What remedy but we must hauehave al places filled with images & crosses, for such a man to knowe what we holde of, who shalbe neuer the better thereby, nor the worse if he know not. But you think that happily strangers of Greece, Cōstantinople, Iewry, & India, may come to our coastes, and therfore wee ought to hauehave the signe of the crosse in churches, chapels, & high wayes, to signifie of whome we hold. We hauehave not many such strangers, but when they arryue we hauehave bookes of the holy scripture in Greeke, Hebrue, Chaldee, Syrian, Arabike, Sclauonian tongues, in which they may be instructed that are desirous to vnderstand what religion we professe. The Lorde God thought it sufficient to hauehave his lawe written vppon great stones, at the entrance into the holy land, to let all strangers knowe, both whome, & after what manner the people of Israell did honour and serue their God. Deut. 27. 3. But as for images and pillers he vtterly forbad them to set vp any for any vse of religion, Deut. 12. 1. & 16. ver. 2.