Answer to John De Albines, Answer to discourse · Chapter 20
The XX. Chapter.
THƲS you ſee that Ieſus Chriſt was anounced among the Gentiles, before the comming of the Apoſtles, who notwithſtanding this, did not let to ſet forth the doctrine that they were ſent to preach, vvith manie notable miracles, although they did not teach but that doctrine that was verie ancient. And although that their doctrine vvas newe and vnknowen to the Gentiles, yet you cannot alleadge, that it vvas ſoaYes it is evident that the true doctrine both of his perſon and office was new and ſtrange vntounto thē vntounto the Iewes: for they beeing ſtudied and learned in Moſes lawe, they hearde nothing of the Apoſtles, but had beene prophecied by the Prophets. Doeth not Saint Paul ſaie, at the beginning of his Epiſtle to the Romanes, that hee was ſeperated to preach the Goſpell, the which God promiſed by the holie Scriptures.*Act. 3. Saint Peter talking with the Iewes, doeth giuegive them plainelie to vnderſtande, that his vvas no newe doctrine, becauſe that hee did preach Ieſus Chriſt, of vvhom Moſes had prophecied long before, ſaying thus.*b Deut. 16. God ſhall raiſe a Prophet among your brethren, bDeut. 18. you would ſaie.you ſhall obey him, as you doe me, and hee that doeth refuſe it, ſhalbe put to death. Saint Peter ſaieth afterwarde: All the Prophets that hauehave beene from Samuel vntounto this time, doe announce vntounto you theſe daies, that is to ſaie, the doctrine that wee doe preach. That that the Apoſtles did preach vntounto the Iewes, that is to wit, the remiſſion of their ſinnes, by the death and paſſion of Chriſt, it was no newe thing: for as*Act. 10. Saint Peter ſaied vntounto Cornelius, All the Prophets hauehave vvitneſſed, that thoſe that beleeue in him, ſhall obtaine remiſsion of their ſinnes: for it had beene ſo prophecied by Eſay. c53▪ you ſhould hauehave ſaied.cap. 55. vntounto the people, aboue eight hundreth yeares, ſaying that hee had laied vponupon his ſonne all our iniquities, as it doeth appeare in his booke, in the vvhichwhich he doeth ſhew himſelfe more an Euangeliſt then a Prophet: for there hee doeth vvrite the tormentes of our Sauiour, euen as if hee had beene preſent at his paſsion. Dauid likewiſe doeth talke of the like, where hee doeth mention, the extreame affliction of our Redeemer, and of the Gall, and Iſope, and the Ʋinager. Daniel did not onelie diſcrie the death of our Sauiour, but therewithall, the verie time that he ſhould come. And to bee briefe, all the Prophets hauehave announced vntounto the Iewes that, that the Apoſtles did preach vntounto them. Now, if wee deſire to knowe why this olde doctrine preached, aſwell to the Gentiles as to the Iewes by the Apoſtles, was confirmed vvith manie miracles, vvhichwhich they did in the name of God, vvho ſent them, the cauſe is this: the Deuill had ſo obſcured and hidden the trueth ouer all nations, that ſuperſtitious Idolatrie had taken place in ſteede of the true ſeruice of God, ſo that the poore Painims did not put their truſt in one God, but in a multitude of Gods. And in like maner, the true Religion giuen by God to the Iſraelites, had beene troubled, and almoſt cleane aboliſhed by the traditions of the Scribes and Phariſees, in the vvhichwhich they did truſt, for the iuſtification and remiſsion of their ſinnes.dAnd in your owne conſciences you cannot but ſee we hauehave iuſt cauſe. The like doe you report of vsus, and of your great curteſie yee are contente to match vsus vvith the ſuperſtitious Iewes, and Idolatrous Paynims, placing your ſelues in the degree of the pure Goſpellers, and the true children of God, taking vponupon you the ſucceſsion of the Apoſtles, and calling your congregation, the true Catholicke and Apoſtolical Church. This ſounds notablie well, but ſeeing that your cauſe is abſolutely to reforme the Church, as they did; preaching the ancient doctrine of God, as they did; and dealing with ſuperſtitious Idolaters, that cleaue more to the traditions of men, thē vntounto the pure word of God, as the Iewes. Seing then, that our caſe is reported vntounto the ſimilitude of the Iewes, and yours to the Apoſtles and Prophets, how comes it to paſſe, that you doe not as they did, ſeeing that you are ſent frō one maſter? WhyeBecauſe our doctrine being the very ſame that theirs was, their miracles ſerue ſufficiently to confirme it, to take away al excuſe from them, that will not beleeue it, to the worldes ende. doe ye not make your commiſſion appeare by ſignes and miracles ſeeing that God hath euer done the like heretofore, when he hath ſent the like Commiſsion to yours?
The XX. Chapter.
I hauehave ſhewed you my reaſon in the former Chapter, why you muſt ſtay (for all your premiſes) from the concluſion, that you beginne withall in this. For howſoeuer ſome few of them, thē heard in ſome ſort, that ſuch a Meſsias either ſhould come or was come, yet the particuler perſon, who that ſame was, was firſt preached by the Angel Gabriel, & ſecondly by Zacharie and Elizabeth his wyfe (Luke. 1.) before he was borne: then by the Angels to the ſhepheards the day of his birth, after by Simeon and Anna, Iohn Baptiſt, the Apoſtles of Chriſt, and the reſt, as it followeth ſet downe in the ſtory: Luke. 2. &c. But you ſay yet further, that though their doctrine concerning Ieſus Chriſt the Meſsias was vnknowen to the Gentiles, yet it was not ſo to the Iewes, for the Apoſtles preached nothing, but that which had warrant from the law and the prophets, as you proue (I graunt) wel out of the 1. to the Rom. and 10. of the Acts: conferring thoſe places with the 53. of Eſay (though wrong quoted by you) and out of the prophecy of Daniel. I graunt, they preached nothing, that ought to hauehave beene new vntounto them, foraſmuch as eueryevery thing that they preached, had ground in the olde Teſtament, but yet (as you after ſeeme to confeſſe) it was growen new not onelyonly to the Gē tiles, but alſo to the Iewes, in that they were miſſe-led in the vnderſtanding of the prophecies, that went before of him, both concerning his perſon and office, through their ignorance, corrupt gloſſes, & interpretations, that by falſe teachers were made thereof. Inſomuch, that when the Meſsias came and executed his office (though indeed all the ancient prophecies were yea & Amen in him, and moſt plainly in reſpect of eueryevery circumſtance verified) yet they could not be perſwaded, either that he was ſuch a one in perſon, or office, as he was, and therefore then once it was neceſſary by all other good meanes & miracles alſo, to confirme the doctrine concerning him, which was thorowly done by Chriſt and his Apoſtles in their tymes. Now whereas hereupon you would inferre, that ſeeing wee match you with the ſuperſtitious Iewes, and Idolatrous Painims, and our ſelues take vponupon vsus Succeſsion to the Apoſtles, and to the true catholique and Apoſtolique Church, and to reforme you of your errours, as they did theirs; therefore we preaching that ancient doctrine of God, and of his Chriſt, that they did: we now alſo ſhould confirme our doctrine & commiſsion by miracles, as they did. Beſide many other, there are two principal things, that let you from this concluſion. The firſt is, that howſoeuer other things were old, y they taught of God, & the Meſsias, yet this was new, who was the very perſon of the Meſsias. Wherin if they had erred (though otherwiſe they had rightly vnderſtood the generall doctrine both of his perſon, and office) it had bene moſt dangerous for thē: and therefore that doctrine eſpecially is vrged by thē; as for example you may ſee in Peters ſermon to Cornelius, Act. 10. And for the confirmation of that doctrin, they work al their miracles, not generally in the name of the Meſsias, but particulerly in the name of Ieſus Chriſt of Nazareth, as it appeareth Act. 3.6. &c. Which thing in reſpect of you, we hauehave not, for that is a thing agreed on betwixt vsus. Another ſtop to your concluſion is, ſeing that doctrine hath bene once ſufficiently confirmed by miracles, by Chriſt and his Apoſtles, yt we teach, and you hauehave the ſame doctrine and miracles ſet downe in the new Teſtament, whereunto you ſeeme to giuegive credit, as wel as we: it is thenceforth needles for the miniſters thereof, howſoeuer they meete wt people, that for Idolatry & ſuperſtitious errours match the Gentiles, & the Iewes in the Apoſtles times: to vſe any other proofe, thē from thoſe records of the ſcripture, which ought now to be accoūted ſufficient, & therefore now the calling for miracles to be out of time. To reaſon therfore as you doe, It was neceſſary for the Apoſtles in their time to worke miracles: Ergo it is neceſſary alſo now for vsus, though our doctrine be the ſame; is beſides and without reaſon. And yet for al this, we recant no whit for comparing you to the ſuperſtitious Iewes, and Idolatrous heathen. For if either be worſe then other, we thinke it is like to proue your ſelues, in that hauing far better meanes, and more knowledge of God, and his Chriſt, then they had, yet you multiply your Idolatries and ſuperſtitious conceites far beyond them. And euen for this, that notwithſtanding your better meanes to keepe you in the waies of God, and your more knowledge, then they had, when Chriſt and his Apoſtles came firſt vntounto them to preach this Goſpel; you match them in groſſe Idolatrie, and in multitude of ſuperſtitions, and falſe opinions; is it, that God, vouchſafing the better to conuert them, to worke miracles then; thinketh it fit to anſwere you now, as the rich glutton was enforced in the like caſe; ye hauehave Moſes and the Prophets; yea & alſo the books of the New Teſtament; and if you will not beleeue them, you would not beleeue, though one ſhould riſe from death againe; or what miracle ſoeuer els were wrought. But wher as you ſuppoſe, that the cauſe why the Apoſtles wrought miracles, was the blinde Idolatry of the heathen, & ſuperſtitions of the Iews onelyonly; and not any newnes of any part of their doctrine; you are much deceiued, as you may perceiue by that which I hauehave ſaied. Againe, if you would perſwade, that their doctrine was in no point new, becauſe in the doctrine of one God, and in the doctrine of the Meſsias, in ſome points it was not, or ought not to hauehave bene ſo, your logicke is flender. For in other points it might be new, as I hauehave tolde you, and ſo in reſpect thereof, though not of the other, miracles were neceſſary. But this your obiectiō of lacke of miracles, pleaſeth you ſo well, that you cannot hauehave done with it; let vsus therfore heare, what further you can ſay, touching this matter.