all the decretals of Popes before Siluesters time are counterfet and saith that he hath prooued it Multas supra in praefatione rationes adduxi saith he quibus omnium Pontificum qui Siluestrum praecesserunt decretales falsas esse manifestè ostendi but in Plantins edition of the canon lawe they haue taken away this Preface with notorious impudency couering their grosse falsities Thus we see how they haue forged whole bookes treatises epistles lawes other instruments if then they haue dealt so falsly in whole instruments books we may not thinke that they are more scrupulous in adding or taking away words or sentences and falsifying parts c. in canonicis dist 19. in the rubricke they tell vs that the Popes decretales are numbred among canonicall Scriptures and pretend Augustines authoritie but he saith no such thing lib. 2. de doctr Christ c. 8. they adde these wordes ab ea alij vnto the words of S. Augustine Dist 1. de consecrat c. Iacobus they say that Iames and Basil did deliuer to vs missae celebrationem that is the forme of celebrating Masse and cite Synodum sextam c. 32. whereas it is onely said that they taught how in the holy celebration of the Lords Supper the cup was filled with wine and water C. species dist 2. de consecrat these words species similitudo illarum rerum vocabula sunt with the rest following are pretended to be taken ex Paschali Gregorij papae but most falsely C. vtrum de consecrat dist 32. these words vtrum sub figura an sub veritate hoc mysticum calicis sacramentum fiat with all the chapter following are alledged as spoken by S. Augustine yet neither is the place signed nor can those words be found in any place of S. Augustine In the chapter in Christo dist 2. de consecrat taken as is pretended out of Hilary lib. 8. de trinit these words corpus Christi quod sumitur de altari are foisted into the text Into the words of consecration of the cuppe they haue thrust in these words eterni mysterium fidei committing falshood in the very canon of the Masse Durand Rat. diuin lib. 4. c. 4. alleadgeth Pope Cyprian for proof of holy water Cyprianus Papa ait quod ideo aqua benedicta homines asperguntur quia valet ad sanctisicationem saith Durand but neither can he find a Pope of that name nor any such words in the writings of Cyprian Pius quintus in his Missall out of the 2. booke of Machab c. 12.46 writeth Peccatis mortuorum for peccato and for 2. M. writeth 12. M. Turrecremat a lib. 2. c. 12. summae de ecclesia maketh Chrysostome to call Peter the prouost and head of his brethren and to affirme that they ought to preach Peter matters neuer thought of by Chrysostome Pope Syricius alledgeth these words S. cerdotes mei semel nubant out of Moyses but no where in all the fiue books of Moyses are any such wordes to be found in the 3. action of the 2. synod of Nice Basil is made to say that the honour giuen to the image redoundeth to the originall but such words are no where found Bellarmines forgeries are infinit in his 2. booke de Pont. Rom. c. 31. he falsifieth the wordes of Hierom in an epistle to Damasus writing hanc Petram for illam Petram as if Hierome called Damasus the foundation of the church where he expresly meaneth Christ the rocke In his booke de reliquijs cap. 3. he alledgeth certaine obscure bookes and counterfet testimonies for the proofe of the worship of reliques in the same place alledging Eusebius his historie lib. 4. c. 14. he maketh him say that S. Iames his chaine is had in great veneration whereas he saith no such thing but rather sheweth in what honorable account holy men were holden in ancient time Lib. 1. de sanct beat c. 13. citing Eusebius de praeparat euangel lib. 13. he maketh him to vse these wordes nos quotidie id factitamus nam verae pietatis milites vt dei amicissimos honoramus whereas no such wordes are to be found he saith onely that Christians honor the blessed soules of such as contend for true pietie Lib. 2. de pont Rom. c. 31. he falsifieth the wordes of the councell of Chalcedon making the same to say that Leo did preside and gouerne the church as the head the members for neither was this epistle that is cited the act of the councel nor is it said there that Leo was head of the church as Bellarmine would haue it but that he ruled his clerkes as the head the members Likewise in the same booke and Chapter rehearsing the titles giuen to the bishops of Rome he saith that Eusebius in his chronicle anno D. 44. doth giue them the title of Pontifex Christianorum but Eusebius doth not so much as once mention the bishops of Rome in that place Lib. de monachis c. 31. he changeth Chrysostomes words in c. 19. Matth. making him to say that it is easie to absteine from marriage where he saith onely that it is possible and in his booke de Monachis c. 27. alledging a place out of the 15. homily of Chrysostome vpon the first to Timothy he addeth these words id est Christo nubit It were infinit to rehearse all the places which he hath falsified and not necessary considering that I haue set downe so many in diuers treatises written against him alreadie the false allegations of Harding are particularly noted by bishop Iewel of reuerend memorie Stapleton is conuinced of falsehood both by D. Fulke and D. Whitaker of Parsons and Kellisons forgeries and false allegations I haue spoken my selfe somewhat largely and shall percase haue occasion to speake of them further hereafter Wherefore if it be the propertie of heretikes and not of catholikes to mangle the sentences of fathers then Papists heerein doe declare themselues to be heretikes and not Catholikes non conuenit orthodoxis say the fathers of the 8. councel act 8. circumtruncatas patrum voces deflorare hareticorum hoc potius proprium est heerein therefore they shall neuer be able to cleare themselues of a speciall note of heretikes CHAP. XLIII That Popery cannot be well vpholden without calumniations and lies AS iustice is accompanied with trueth so wicked causes cannot be vpholden without lies and calumniations a matter cleerely verified by the practise of the papists whose false and erromous doctrine is built vpon lies and calumniations as vpon two pillers by their calumniations they seeke to bring good men into obloquie and hatred by lies they would willingly grace their owne false religion and bring a scandale vpon the truth To make proofe heereof we need not to goe farther then to their wicked libels lately published against Luther Caluin Zuinglius Oecolampadius Beza and all that haue been actors in the defence of truth to the lying traditions and legends of the synagogue of Rome to the feined miracles of supposed Romish
Trinity we may say three eternals adiectiuely which is direct against the Creed of Athanasius The Friers of the order of Dominicke and Francis anno D. 1243. as Matth. Paris testifieth in Henrico 3. p. 593. taught that the diuine essence is not formally the same in the holy ghost that is in the father and the sonne which may not stand with the deity of the holy ghost Augustine Steuchus in princip genes saith that coelum empyreum was coeternall with God hee might as well haue made two Gods The same man in Genes 2. saith that Adam should haue died although he had neuer sinned he denieth also that sinne is the cause of death opposing his opinion to the Apostles doctrine Rom. 5. Hector Pintus in Danielis 12. denieth the resurrection of infants dying not baptised To let others passe for this time and to talke only of the rubicundious Cardinal Bellarmine whom our chatemiticall Masse-priests call master first lib. 2. de Christo c. 26. hee saith that it is not repugnant to one person to be both the sonne and the holy ghost as if there could be three persons there being but two onely Secondly euery act whereby virginity is lost he calleth coinquination and turpitude lib. 1. de matrimonio c. 5. as if the mariage bed were not truely vndefiled as the Apostle saith Heb. 13. Thirdly he saith that Christ neuer had but the Christian church for his spouse de cleric lib. 1. c. 24. which excludeth the church of God before Christ from his espousals and from the right of the Catholike church which is truely his spouse Fourthly in his booke de bonis operibus hee seemeth to allow community of wiues In his second booke de amiss grat c. 18. he teacheth that the magistrate sinneth not in appointing a seuerall place of the city to common whores like a lusty Cardinal allowing whores but like a false Apostle condemning mariage In his booke de monachis c. 14. he saith the Saints doe participate the nature of God but better diuines than hee define that Gods essence is incommunicable In his first booke de purgatorio c. 10. he confesseth that a man may be called his owne Sauiour and Redeemer thus he hath brought his schollers to a faire passe for diminishing and denying the merit of Christ in our formall iustification and redemption he would make them beleeue that euery man may redeeme and saue himselfe And thus you haue seene a large packe of popish heresies at the first suruey but wee shall adde more if neede bee at our next CHAP. IX A catalogue of diuers notorious impicties and blasphemies contained not onely in Popish bookes but also in the corps of Popish religion IF it be no small sinne to take the name of God in vaine how haynous a sinne is it to blaspheme the holy name of God all sinnes compared to blasphemy saith Strabus in Isaiae c. 18. may seeme light so grieuous it is that the scriptures sometime auoid the naming of it and in liew thereof vse the word of a Iob. 1. Benediction yei is blasphemy so common in the mouthes and writings of Papists that al the rest of their impieties though otherwise intolerable seeme small in comparison hardly can they speake without blaspheming the Roman catechisme in the exposition of the third commandement or the second as the Papists recken confesseth against them this abuse quis non videat say the authors of the catechisme omnia iureuirando affirmari omnia imprecationibus execrationibus referta esse that is who seeth not that all things are affirmed with oathes and that all mens mouthes are full of cursings and execrations whosoeuer hath beene conuersant among Papists knoweth this to be true they teare God in peeces and neither respect the lawes of God nor man albeit the emperor in the law ne quis luxurietur c. calleth this tearing and blaspheming vnnaturall luxurie They teach that the body of Christ is in the Sacrament blood flesh and bone and call it their Lord and God and yet like Canibals they cate and swallow downe their Lord and God and make no bones of it Blasphemously also they affirme that a dogge or a hogge eating a consecrated hoste doth eat Christs true bodie If a dogge or hogge b p. 4. q. 45. saith Alexander Hales should eat a consecrated hoast I see no cause but the Lordes body should go therewithall into to that dogges or hogges belly and Thomas Aquinas 3. p. sum where some of his fellowes were ashamed of this error reprehendeth them for it allowing this beastly deuouring of Christs body Gregory the seuenth as we read in Beno Cardinalis consulted with this God of paste when he could receiue no answere threw him into the fire Ioannes Portuensis as he reporteth disclosed the matter tale quid fecit Hildebrandus vnde deberemus viut incendi saith he this fact saith Beno was that he threw the sacrament of the lords body into the fire because he could receiue no answere of it against the emperor Pius the fist cast one agnus Dei into the water of Tiber another into the fire as saith Hierome Catena in Pius his life Cresciuto il Teuere saith he pio vi gittò vn agnus dei il fuoco appreso in vna casa piena di fieno vi si git to vn altero if then latria be due to the images of Christ then did Pius cast that into the fire and the water that he worshipped as God Clement the sixth in the chapter vnigenitus ext com de poenit remiss maketh the Romanistes thus to cry to the Pope domine aperi eis thesanrum tuum fontem aquae viue Lord open to them thy treasure the founteine of liuing water as if the Pope had with him a treasure of graces and as if his indulgences were the water of life The Masse-priests euery day sell Christ and that for meere trifles Brigit therefore as one reporteth in a treatise called onus ecclesiae c. 23. saith they are worse then Iudas for he sold Christ for good mony these sell him for euery commoditie pro omni mercimonio The honour of God they ascribe to the Virgin Marie and to Saints Confessing their sinnes they ioyne Mary with God and leaue out Christ saying consiteor deo omnipotenti B. Mariae semper virgini c. Likewise in a certaine prouinciall constitution beginning authoritate dei omnipotentis de sent exc they pronounce excommunication by the authority of God and our lady and vouchfase not once to name Christ Against the breakers of their lawes they denounce the anger of Peter and Paul as appeareth commonly in late decretales Christ they quite forget Horatius Tursellinus in an epistle to Peter Aldobrandini prefixed before the history of our Lady of Loreto and allowed much by the Iebusites saith that God made the Virgin Mary as much as could be companion and partaker of his power and Maiesty and gaue to her the rule
Bishops of Rome or else he must know that whatsoeuer he fableth of his three supposed conuersions the same will make for the destruction of Popery and the ouerthrow of the cause which he mainteineth Secondly we are able to prooue that all these corruptions of doctrine superstitious deuises impieties blasphemies which we refuse haue beene receiued and established in the synagogue of Rome not onely since the Apostles times but also since the time of Eleutherius and Gregory the first the idolatrous worship of images was first confirmed by the second coūncell of Nice vnder the Empire of Irene and by little and little brought into the Westerne church being long oppugned by the bishops of France Germany and Britain That the images of the crosse and Trinity should be worshipped with latria was not allowed in that idolatrous councell but first taught by Thomas Aquinas and his followers and grounded not vpon Gods word but vpon this rule of Philosophy that the same motion is directed to the image and the thing imagined which rule by him is mistaken being meant of the species or representation of things in our vnderstanding and not of materiall images that come not within our vnderstanding The Popes authority began to be established first by the rebellion of Gregory the second and Gregory the third that caused Italy to reuolt from the Emperour vnder pretence of worship of images and afterward the same was confirmed by Gregory the seuenth and his successors that by force and violence ouerthrew the empire and made way by the diuisious of Christendome to the victories and conquests of the Turkes and Saracens Boniface the third obteined of Phocas that the church of Rome should be reputed head of other churches Boniface the 9. as Theodoric à Niem in his booke of schisme testifieth by fraude vsurped first the temporall gouernment ouer the Citie and territorie of Rome which before that belonged either to the emperor or to the citizens and thus by fraud and violence the Pope made himselfe great and by little and little exalted himselfe in the church and erected the kingdome of Antichrist The carnall eating and presence of Christs body in the sacrament was first decreed by Nicolas the second in the Chap. ego Berengarius dist 2. de consecrat for there we read first that Christs true body is handled with the hands of Priests broken and torne with the teeth of the faithfull his words prescribed to Berengarius are verum corpus sanguinem domini nostri Iesu Christi esse sensualiter non solum sacramentum sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Transubstantiation got reputation first by the decree of Innocent the 3. as we read in the chapter Firmiter de sum Trin. fid cath for there he decreeth that the bread is transubstantiate into the body and the wine into blood by the power of God but yet two inconueniences will heere fall out if we yeeld to his words for there he saith that Christ is both the priest and the sacrifice and that this transubstantiation is wrought by the power of God whereof the first ouerthroweth the priesthood of the polshorne priests of Baal the second doth take away the efficacie from these wordes hoc est enim corpus meum and hic est sanguis meus and ascribeth all to the power of God absolutely In the conuenticle of Constance we finde it first resolued that the accidents of bread and wine doe remaine without subiect and that the Pope is Christs immediate vicar and sess 13. that although Christ did institute the eucharist in bread and wine yet lay-men were onely to receine it vnder one kinde Auricular confession was established by Innocent the 3. in the chap. omnis vtriusque sexus de poenit remiss for before that it was free to confesse or not to confesse the doctrine of confession was enlarged by the canonistes and schoole-men In the conuenticle of Florence we reade that the forme of ordring masse-priestes of popish confirmation and extreme vnction and of other popish sacraments was then first setled by law there also Purgatorie and the Popes supremacy was first enacted by force of law Clement the 6. in the chapter vnigenitus extr de poenit remis did first deuise the treasure of indulgences Boniface the 8. and Sixtus the 4. ordred the Popish Iubiley That the Pope is aboue the Councel it was first decreed in the councel of Lateran vnder Leo the 10. who also begā first to thunder out his excommunications against M. Luther Finally the conuenticle of Trent gaue finall complement to the Popish doctrine of Traditions of the Latine vulgar translation of concupiscence of formal iustification by charitie and works of seuen sacraments of the sacrifice of the masse of purgatorie and indulgences of framing the images of God the Father and the holy Ghost and the rest of their heresies and abuses for what before the schoolemen had taught vainlie that began now by the decrees of the Pope and his complices to be established and held for law then also the missals breuiaries offices and other rituall bookes began to be confirmed by the Popes authoritie Thirdly it is an easie matter to prooue that the doctrine of S. Peter and of the times wherein Ioseph of Arimathaea Eleutherius and Gregory the first liued is direct contrarie in diuers points to popish religion S. Peter 1. ep 2. exhorted all Christians to submit themselues to kings and gouernors but the Pope commandeth subiects to rebell and take armes against princes and excommunicateth such as refuse so to doe as appeareth by the excommunication of Paul the 3. against king Henry the 8. and of Pius the fift against Queene Elizabeth both which are extant in Sanders his libell de schismate S. Peter 1. ep 1. would haue Christians to trust perfectly on gods grace the Papists teach their disciples to distrust gods grace and to doubt of their saluation and to trust rather in their owne works and merits he saith we are not redeemed with corruptible things but with Christes most precious blood these teach that men are redeemed after a sort by indulgences and by the satisfaction and merites of Saints to whom Bellarmine in his booke of indulgences doubteth not to giue the title of redeemers S. Peter exhorteth Christians to desire the sincere milke of Gods word that they may grow thereby the papistes barre men from hearing Gods word in tongues which they vnderstand and send them to beleeue the traditions of the church of Rome and the impure trash of the schoolemen and the Popes decretales he excludeth the lordship of Popes ouer Gods inheritance these false teachers enforce it he exhorteth vs to make our election sure these fellowes teach that Christians cannot be assured of their election or make it sure Ioseph of Arimathaea and the godly bishops that liued in his time and diuers hundred yeeres after him continued we doubt not in
of her image there to be idolatrous 14. They celebrate the feast of our Ladies conception and of the assumption of her body into heauen as appeareth by their missals and breuiaries but Catholickes drslike both as grounded vpon apocryphall fables and lying legends S. Bernard epist 174. speaking against the feast of her conception saith she needed no false honours 15. Catholickes neuer beleeued that Christ had a body inuisible impalpable and not comprehended in a place S. Augustine de essentia diuinitatis saith that Christ according to his humane nature is visible corporal and local but our aduersaries teach that his true body is in the sacrament where it is neither seene felt nor circumscribed in a place 16. They speake reuerentlie of Christs body and hold it blasphemy to say that the same may be cast into the fire or eaten of dogs or hogs or other brute beasts but the Papists doe not so much as goe about to cleare themselues of this blasphemy 17 They teach that Christ had a body like to ours in all things sin except the Papists beleeue that his body is really in the sacrament and conteined in the compasse of a consecrated host and that the same is inuisible and able to penetrat other solide bodies without the dissolution of their substance but such abodie no man euer yet had nor by nature can haue 18 They beleeue that euery body is continued to it self or as Logicians call it continua quanutas but Papists beleeue that Christs body is in heauen and earth and euery altar and yet not in the middle places whereby it followeth that Christs head in heauen is not continued to his feet being in a consecrated host in earth 19. Vigilius lib. 4. cont Eutych saith that Christs body being now in heauen is not on earth and that is the faith of Catholickes but the false and pretended catholickes beleeue that his body is both in heauen and earth and diuers distant places at one time 20. Catholickes beleeue that Christ only is our redeemer for so the Apostle teacheth vs Rom. 3.1 Cor. 1. and diuers other places but Bellarmine in his first booke of indulgences teacheth vs that saints and others may be called redeemers all his consorts also teach that the Pope by his indulgences redeemeth soules out of purgatorie 21. Catholickes acknowledge that Christ is our iustice for so the Apostle 1. Cor. 1. expresly saith they beleeue also that we are iustified by faith in him as we read Rom. 5. but Kellison in his suruey and his consorts teach that he is onely the meritorious cause of our iustification and that we are formally iustified and saued by our owne workes 22. Catholickes doubt not to make their election sure and being iustified by faith haue peace with God and are perswaded that nothing shall separate them from the loue of God for all this is Apostolike doctrine but Papists teach their followers to doubt of their election and of the grace of God towards them and depriue them both of peace of conscience and of all assurance of Gods grace 23. Catholickes beleeue that Christ was wounded for our transgressions and that he hath borne our infirmities and that by his stripes we are healed for so the Prophet Isay cap. 53. teacheth vs. but the pretended popish catholickes do lash themselues and hope by their owne stripes to heale their sinnes and to satisfie for them and without this satisfaction they beleeue that no man can obteine remission of sinnes 24. Catholickes euer spared their owne bodies but certaine heretickes and idolaters did vsually afflict their bodies and lash themselues before their idols in lashing of themselues therefore the Papists imitate the Priests of Baal and not true Catholickes 25. Catholickes beleeue that their sinnes are purged by the bloud of Christ as we read Hebr. 1. but Papists beleeue that their sinnes are purged in purgatory and by their owne satsifactions 26. The Greekes to this day neuer beleeued Purgatory neither doe any of the ancient fathers beleeue that after our sinnes are remitted Christians are to satisfie for temporall paines either in this life or in purgatory the doctrine therefore of purgatorie will neuer be proued Catholicke 27. The Apostles and ancient fathers neuer knew nor heard of the doctrine and treasure of the Popes indulgences this doctrine of Papists therefore is to bee abolished as not Catholicke 28. True Catholickes neuer beleeued that Christians were iustified by mariage the master of the sentences saith it is onely a remedy against sinne but Papists hold they are iustified by marriage aswell as by other Sacraments 29. The doctrine of the conuenticle of Florence concerning the forme of priesthood popish confirmation extreme vnction and their number of seuen sacraments cannot bee proued to be Catholicke 3. Bellarmine lib. 2. de effectu sacrament c. 3. and other his consorts affirme that Christians are instified by the sacraments ex opere operato or by their owne act and worke wrought whereby it followeth that they are iustified by greasing crossing and such like acts but this doctrine is not catholicke the Greekes to this day acknowledge no such doctrine nor is any such thing to bee found in ancient writers 31. The Greekes to this day renounce the Popes supremacy the ancient fathers neuer heard of a triple crowned Pope with a crossed slipper and a guard of Suitzers the doctrine therefore of the Popes generall vicarship taught by Bellarmine in his bookes de pontisice Rom. and by others is not Catholicke 32. Papists teach that some sinnes are done away by holy water and without repentance and that such sinnes deserue not death but the Apostle Galat. 3. sheweth him to be accursed that abideth not in all the words of the law to doe them and Rom. 6. saith that the wages of sinne is death this is also the faith of all Catholickes but of the efficacy of holie water to doe awaie sinnes true Catholickes say nothing 33. Papists offer the sacrifice of the masse pro redemptione animarum suarum for the redemption of their soules but Catholikes doe not hope for redemption but by the sacrifice of Christ once offered vpon the crosse 34. They make Christians eaters of mans flesh and drinkers of mans blood really and literally as their words in the chapter ego Berengarius dist 2. de consecrat do import but our Sauiour saith that the spirit quickeneth and Saint Augustine tract 25. in loan sheweth that Christs flesh is not to be receiued with our mouth or teeth vt quid paras dentem saith he why doest thou prepare thy teeth 35. They make their Priests creators of their creator as Innocentius in his bookes de myster missae stella Clericorum and Boner in his speech to the Priests in Queene Maries time in expresse words doe declare but Christians and Catholikes abhorre to heare Priests called creators or God to be made a creature 36. They make the Priest to intercede for Christs bodie and blood saying supra quae propitio
all the fathers almost denie publicke penance to Priests and Deacons fallen into notorious crimes but the popish faction regardeth them not one iote Bellarmine lib. 1. de eucharist c. 11. saith that Augustine did not well weigh these words of Luke I will drinke no more of the fruit of the vine Augustine lib. 22. de ciuit Dei c. 10. saith that Christians doe not worship martyrs or erect remples in their honour lib. 1. de morib eccles c. 3. he denieth that we are to adore any ereature Hierome also ioineth with him in this opinion mepist ad Riparium but the popish sect doth not regard what they say nor followeth their doctrine Finally it were an easie matter to shew the fathers to bee aduerse to popery in all materiall controuersies but what shall wee neede to doe it seeing their late corruptions and false allegations of fathers doe plainlie testifie that they doe not hope for victory if the fathers may be truely alleadged of late they haue set out indexes expurgatory teaching Printers how to falsifie fathers Sixtus Senensis inepist ad Pium 5. ante biblioth sanct sheweth how that Pope had caused the fathers to bee purged or rather corrupted expurgari fecisti omnium authorum catholicorum saith he praecipuè veterum patrum scripta Pameluts hath most shamefully corrupted Cyprian and the like course all Papists take with the bookes of the fathers lately set foorth Somtime also they confesse the corruption of fathers Aeneas Sylu. lib. 1. de gest concil Basil sheweth how Popes stand vpon these words vocaberis Cephas and lanch into the deepe and such like neglecting the exposition of all the holy doctors posthabitis omnino omnium sanctorum expositionibus Alan Chartier saith they reiect the holy doctrine of fathers sanctâ—â— patrum doctrine reiectae posthabitae sunt Matth. Paris in Wilhelmo Conquest speaking of Hildebrandes decree against maried Priests saith it was made without consideration and against the iudgement of holy fathers inconsiderato iudicio contra sanctorum patrum sententiam CHAP. XIX That Popish religion was neuer testified by the blood of Christian martyrs STrange it were if the martyrs of Christ should turne from Christ and testifie for Antichrist yet because the aduersaries of truth doe boast of ancient martyrs and Bristow in his 15. motiue doth place Martyrs as setters foorth of the Popes glorious kingdome we are briefly to shew that the testification of Martyrs maketh nothing for popish religion and that appeareth first for that the Papists refuse to bee tried by the doctrine of the Apostles which were principall Martyrs Secondly we haue shewed that the principall points of Popery were neither taught nor receiued during the time of the primitiue Martyrs nor many ages after and that many points now taught and receiued among Papists were then refused as heresies Thirdly Papists adore idols and burne incense vnto them but the ancient Martyrs were therefore martyred cruelly put to death because they would not consent to the worship of idols nor burne incense to them Fourthly the practises of Papists declare that they are more like to the heathen Emperors and persecutors of Christians then to the ancient martyrs of Christs church for as they massacred Christians for maintenance of the Apostolike faith so do the Popes and their complices massacre all that stand for the same as they by sword and fire sought to vphold idolatry so doe these as they hated them deadly which taught the true faith so doe these Finally the confession of the faith published by Pius the fourth and that doctrine which the conuenticle of Trent hath of late confirmed and commanded to be taught and beleeued is in many points contrarie to the faith of ancient martyrs and in all points of controuersie betwixt Papists and vs vtterly vnknowne to them The holy Apostles commend scriptures and so doe ancient martyrs but Papists accuse them of insufficiencie obscuritie flexibility and call them a nose of waxe and a killing letter Ancient martyrs were burned and put to death because they would not deliuer holy scriptures to be burnt the Papists doe burne scriptures and suspect such for heretikes as reade them in vulgar tongues The Apostles and Primitiue martyrs beleeued the scriptures because they came from God the Papists will not haue scriptures to bee belecued vnlesse they be deliuered by the Pope They taught neither heresie nor impiety nor noueltie but Popish religion as before is declared is full of heresies impieties nouelties In ancient time the Bishops of Rome were martyrs now those that call themselues their successors doe murder Gods Saints and make them martyrs Ancient martyrs taught that one God was to bee adored the Papists giue diuine honour to the crosse and crucifixe and call the Sacrament their Lord and God Ancient martyrs did breake downe images now the Papists erect them fall downe before them and worship them Finally ancient martyrs neuer beleeued that either doggs or hogs could eate Christs body or that the same was in any place where it could neither be felt nor seene or that the same was both in heauen and earth and euery pixe at one time or that bread is transubstaÌ„tiated into Christs body or that Christians do with their teeth eate mans flesh or with their throats swallow mans blood or that the bishop of Rome is lord and monarch of the church or that he can fetch souls out of Purgatorie or that there is a treasure of Saints merites out of which indulgences are granted or that Christians are iustified by extreme vnction or eating fish and such like Popish deuises Neither is it materiall that these holy martyrs are put in Popish calenders for the Iewes bragged of their father Abraham and adorned the sepulchers of the Prophets although they neither abode in the faith of Abraham nor followed the doctrine of the Prophets Further Bristow telleth vs that S. Stephen helped all those that sought vnto him but his proofes are drawne out of legendes and certeine counterset sermons of S. Augustine in his 22. chapter de ciuit dei c. 8. there is no such matter and yet these reports that are there inserted seeme to be none of S. Augustines but suppose certein superstitious persoÌ„s should pray to S. Stephen yet S. Stephen neuer taught them so to do nor allowed such formes of praiers Lastly he talketh of Fisher More the Charterhouse monks and diuers that died in king Henry the 8. the late Queens reigne for the Popes cause and telleth vs that they were of his religion but it is first denied that they were martyrs and next that Fisher and More were of the moderne Romish religion the first is proued for that they died for the Pope and not for Christ Secondly they died as traitors either by open rebellion or by ouert act oppugning the Princes authoritie the second is euident for that diuers of them died before the conuenticle of Trent which hath now published a new forme of faith and decreed many things
of all men and not to be iudged of any Againe where we read in the Gospell behold heere are two swords he presumeth the meaning of those words to be that the Pope hath two swords he doth also in the same place abuse the words of God Hierem. 1. ecce constitut te hodie super gentes regna in the same manner that Innocentius did as is shewed before In the chapt per venerabilem qui filij sunt legitimi Innocentius concludeth that Deuteronomy is to be obserued of Christans because Deuteronomium importeth as much as the second law By the place which the Lord hath chosen spoken of Deut. 17. he vnderstandeth the Popes see locus quem elegit dominus Apostolicasedes esse cognoscitur saith he By the priests of the stocke of Leui he vnderstandeth the Cardinals his words are these sunt sacerdotes leuiticâ— generis fratres nostri Vocaberis Cephas id est caput thou shalt be called Cephas that is a head saith Anacletus in a certaine decretale epistle and c. sacrosancta dist 22. Suscitabo super eos pastorem vnum saith God by his prophet Ezech. c. 34. that is I will set ouer them a shepherd and he prophecieth of Christ but Turrecremata lib. 2. sum c. 2. applieth these words to the Pope The priest sprinkling himselfe and the altar with holy water as is conteined in the missale in the consecration of holy water saith thou shalt sprinkle me o Lord with hysope and I shall be cleane as if the Prophet had prophesied of holie water When a church is consecrated the Bishop without saith attollite principes portas vestras and then answereth a certein quidamet fellow within quis est ille rex gloriae and then out steppeth a fellow with a mitre and saith I am the king of glory thus doe they play with the words of holy scripture and blasphemously applie the words spoken of Christ to a mumming Masse-priest Alexander the third treading vpon the Emperours necke vttered these words of the 91. Psalme to his disgrace thou shalt walke vpon the Lion and Aspe and Boniface the eigth for these words remember man that thou art dust said to the bishop of Genua remember man thou art Gibelline and with them thou shalt be beaten to dust The canonists in the chapter translato c. de constitutionibus beleeue that the Pope hath power to make lawes because the Apòstle saith translato sacerdotio necesse est vt legis translatio siat but in these words the Apostle speaketh not of the Pope but of Christ and his priesthood Turrecremata lib. 1. sum c. 90. finding these words 2. King 7. I will establish the seate of his kingdome for euer imagineth that this prophecy sheweth how the Popes kingdome shall endure for euer and lib. 2. sum c. 80. by the faithfull seruant set ouer the whole family Luke 22. hee vnderstandeth the Pope which as hee saith is set ouer the whole Church and lib. 1. c. 8. expounding these words Apocalyps 4. sedes posita est in coelo supra sedem sedens in circuitu eius sedil 〈◊〉 24. super thronos 24. seniores by the seat he vnderstandeth the Popes see and by heauen the church of Rome and by him that sate vpon the seat the Pope and by the 24. elders the Cardinals Isay 40. we reade quis appendit tribus digitis molem terrae and by these words Hosites confess Petricou c. 10. supposeth to bee meant that the signe of the crosse is to bee made with three singers Bellarmine in his preface vnto his booke de Pontif. Rom. doth wrest the words of scripture spoken of Christ the corner stone laid in the foundation of the Church and draweth them most impudently to the Pope These words of the Prophet adducentur regi virgines post eam which are meant of the church the synagogue of Rome in their missal vpon the feast of S. Catherine wrest so as if they had beene meant of her On the feast of Clement in their missall they apply these words thou art a Priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech to Clement On the feast of Cecilia likewise in the missall these words audi filia vide inclina aurem tuam c. which are spoken of the church they applie to Cecilia These words ego ex ore altissims prodiui primogenita ante omnem creaturâ—â—â— they applie in their breuiaries to the Virgin Mary as if she were the first borne before all creatures Thus it were an easie matter to bring infinite examples out of the bookes of our aduersaries and to make it apparent that they make no conscience of wresting scriptures but these are sufficient for this first taste CHAP. XXIII That the Pope and the principall proctours of his cause are great forgers and falsifiers of fathers profane writers and of publicke records SEing then they make so little scruple to wrest the words of holy scriptures wee may not thinke that our aduersaries will be scrupulous in falsifying either publicke records or the writings of the fathers and other authors for first wee find diuers counterfet writings auouched by them which were neuer written by those who are pretended to be the authours vnder the names of the Apostles they haue set forth canons which conteine diuers errors in the 46. canon they condemne the baptisme of heretickes in the 84. canon Ezdras and Nehemias is omitted and Clements epistles put among canonicall scriptures Leo c. Clementis dist 16. and Isidore c. canones in the same distinction and Gelasius c. sancta Romana dist 15. doe reckon them among apocryphall writings which they would not doe vnlesse they were counterfet 2. They haue also falsified the acts of councels of the acts of the councell of Sinuessa Peter Crabbe setteth out 3. copies neuer a one agreeing with the other the stile is so simple that it can no way agree with the forme of speech of those times the like falsitie is committed in the acts of the councell of Rome supposed to bee assembled vnder Syluester Russine reporteth onely 20. canons made in the councell of Nice and Stephen bishop of Rome c. viginti dist 16. confirmeth his saying but Gratian vnder colour of the authority of Athanasius saith there are 70. as appeareth by the chap. septuagint dist 16. now one Alphonsus of Pisa a Iebusite hath published 80. canons of that councell translates as he saith out of Arabicke In the sixth councel of Carthage Sozimus bishop of Rome was conuicted manifestly to haue falsified a canon of the Nicene councell concerning appeales to the bishop of Rome Paschasius one of the Popes agents in the 16. action of the Councell of Chalcedon thrust in a peece of counterfeit stuffe into a canon of the councell of Nice as if that councell had said that the church of Rome had alwaies the primacie this he did or at the least some vnder his name as appeareth in the acts of that councell Likewise Bellarmine lib. 2. de
in 1. sent dist 2. hold contrary Richardus in 1. sent dist 3. holdeth that the mysterie of the Trinitie may be demonstrated by naturall reasons Scotus Maronis and Thomas affirme the contrary About the faculties of the soule called potentiae the schoolemen are diuided into three sectes as may appeare by their disputes lib. 1. sent dist 3. some hold they are all one with the substance of the soule others that they are accidents the third that they are betweene substances and accidents Abbot Ioachim and Richard de sancto victore taught that the diuine essence might generare gigni the contrarie is taught by Peter Lombard and his followers Peter Lombard lib. sent 1. dist 17. taught that charity wherewith we loue God and our neighbour is the holy ghost and that it is not any thing created but now most of his followers in this point forsake him In the 24. dist of his first booke of sentences Peter Lombard saith that the words of number spoken of God are spoken only relaturely and that the word Trinity implieth nothing positiuely but onlie priuatiuely which because it ouerthroweth the mysterie of the holy Trinity is almost generally contradicted by his followers In the 44. distinction of the same booke he saith that God can alwaies doe whatsoeuer he could euer doe and that he willeth whatsoeuer hee would at any time and knoweth whatsoeuer hee knew at any time but his Disciples hold direct contrary Thomas p. 1. q. 46. art 2. holdeth that the world or at the lest some creature might haue beene from euerlasting so likewise holdeth Bonauenture and some others Richardus maintaineth the opposite opinion and that rightly for that the other sauoureth of Arianisme The master of sentences in 4. dist 1. and Gabriel and Vega lib. 7. pro Conc. Trid. c. 13. hold that not onely substances but accidents also are created Alexander Hales q. 9. m. 6. q. 10. m. 1. and Thomas p. 1. q. 45. art 4. affirme that onely substances are created About this question an omnium aeuiternorum sit vnum aeuum vel multiplex there are 5. different opinions the first of Scotus the second of Thomas the third of Durand the fourth of Henricus the fifth of Bonauenture Likewise about this question quae sit ratio formalis cur Angelus sit in loco there are fiue opinions all repugnant one to another Thomas and Richardus doe affirme that two Angels cannot be in one place together Scotus Occham and Gabriel hold the contrarie Thomas holdeth that Angels haue not intellectum agentem possibilem Scotus doth directly contradict him Scotus and Gabriel teach that both Diuels and good Angels doe vnderstand naturally both our thoughts and the thoughts one of another but to Thomas p. 1. q. 57. art 4. this seemeth absurd Antisiodorensis lib. 2. sum saith that Christ had Angelum custodem other schoolemen denie it Scotus in 2. sent dist 1. holdeth that the soule and an Angel do not differ as two diuers kinds others teach contrary Some doctours hold that Angels consist of forme only others hold contrarie as appeareth by their disputes in 2. sent dist 3. The second councell of Nice Act. 5. determineth that Angels soules are corporall nemo dixerit saith the councell vel angelos vel daemones velanimas incorporeas but this opinion will not now bee beleeued of any learned Papists Why then should they rather beleeue that synode in the article of worship of images than in this Scotus saith that the will is the only subiect of sinne Thomas denieth it Concerning the place of paradise there are three different opinions some hold that it reacheth to the circle of the Moone Thomas in 2. dist 17. and Bonauenture doe place it vpon a high mountaine they know not where others place it in the East Concerning the nature of free wil there are diuersities of opinions among schoolemen and others as Iosephus Angles in lib. 2. sent dist 24. and 25. sheweth particularly Richardus holdeth that freewill cannot be changed by God others for the most part hold the contrary Thomas Bonauenture and Setus hold that grace is not a qualitie infused but a qualitie inherent in the soule Alexander Hales and Scotus hold that it is a quality infused Iosephus Angles in lib. 2. sent dist 26. rehearseth three seuerall opinions of schoole-doctors about the diuision of grace in gratiam operantem cooperantem whereby it may euidently appeare that Papists in talking of grace goe about to shut out Gods grace Most schoolemen and others affirme that Adam and Eue beleeued not Gods words concerning the forbidden fruit Bellarmine lib. 3. de amiss grat c. 6. saith they beleeued In the same booke c. 9. Bellarmine saith Adams offence was greater then that of Eue contrary both to ancient doctors and to schoolemen Lib. 5. de amiss grat c. 17. he sheweth great diuersities of opinions among his schoolemen fellowes about orginall sinne and himselfe dissenteth from all About the conception of the blessed Virgin whether it was in originall sinne or not there haue beene not onely contradictions but also tragicall stirres and contentions Certeine schollers of Aquinas beleeue and teach that no man being of yeares of discretion can be iustified by the absolute power of God without the act and concurrence of free will Scotus Vega and Caietan hold contrary both their opinions are touched by Iosephus Angles in 2. sent dist 27. Richardus in 2. dist 27. art 2. q. 1. Scotia in 1. dist 17. q. 1. art 1. and Durand in 1. dist 17. q. 2. and others hold that a man may merit the first grace do Congruo Gregorius Arimineusis in 2. dist 26. Lyra in Ioan. 1. Waldensis and others denie it Sotus lib. 2. de not grat c. 4. saith that the former opinion is neere to Peligiamsine Gregorius Ariminensis and Capreolus in 2. dist 27. q. 1. hold that no man without the illustration of Gods speciall grace can attaine to the knowledge of any moral truth but Thomas and Scotus in 2. dist 27. doe hold contrary Durand placeth originall sinne in the carnall appetite Thomas placeth it in the whole substance of the soule Scotus differeth from both and placeth it in the will of man Iosephus Angles in 2. dist 27. rehearseth three seuerall opinions about this question whether a sinne of omission may be committed without a positiue act The same man reckoneth 5. different opinions about the difference of mortall and veniall sinnes and three opinions concerning this question what is sinne of malice Catharin and Caietan doe striue about faith of infants and diuers other matters and greater would the contention haue beene if the matter had not been taken vp or at least silence commanded by the Pope Bellarmine lib. 1. de pontif Rom. c. 12. saith that the keies of the church are nothing but order and iurisdiction the Master of sentences and Caietan de iust auth pontif Rom. hold that they containe somewhat more Pighius lib. 4. hierarch eccles c. 8.
clergie there was neither religion nor good life nor shame afterward he taxeth the luxuriousnesse of all estates but especially the furiousnesse of lusts the ambition couetousnesse and superstition of the Romish Clergie Marcellus Palingenius in virgine complaineth of a generall corruption of manners throughout the world imo libenter saith he Destituam hunc mundum innumerisque refertum Fraudibus atque dolis incestibus atque rapinis Est vbi nulla fides piet as est nulla nec vlla Iustitia pax requies vbi crimina regnant Omnia He saith that all vices reigned and that there was neither faith nor piety nor iustice in the world viz. among the Papists Matthew Paris in Henrico tertio complaineth that religion was trodden vnder foote and that vsury and simony reigned Erasmus de amicab concord saith that if a man looke neerely he shall find all filled with fraudes iniuries rapines si quis propiùs inspiciat inueniet fraudibus iniurijs rapiniâ—referta omnia Hereupon Petrus de Aliaco lib. de reformat ecclesiae complaineth that certaine barators had destroied the church which the fathers had formerly built primitius theologi ecclesiam aedificauerunt quam nunc baritatores destruxerunt Simony and Vsury among the Romanists is so common that as Matth. Paris saith they accompt the first no sinne the second a small sinne Felin in c. ex parte de offic potest iudic delegat saith that without the rent of Simony the popes sea would grow contemptible heu Simon regnat per munera quaeque reguntur saith one in hist Citizensi Theodoric à Niem lib. 2. de schism c. 7. saith that vsury did then so much preuaile that it was accompted no fault Paul the 4. and Pius the 4. in their times were great banquiers and vsurers as we may see in their liues written by a Parasite of the Popes called Onuphrius If we should speake of particular men we should find no end of their villanies Wernerus speaking of Iohn the 12. saith he was wholy giuen to lust totus lubricus Beno Platina and others testifie that Siluester the 2. and Benedict the ninth were Magicians and the Diuels sworne sernantes Gregory the 7. was deposed by the councell of Brixia as a notorious necromancer possessed with a diabolicall spirit Iohn the 23. was conuicted in the councell of Constance to be an incestuous person a Sodomit and an atheist denying the immortality of the soule as we reade in the actes thereof Clement the 5. as Hermannus testifieth was a publike fornicator the same is also testified by Mattheo Villani hist l. 3. c. 39. against Clement the sixt Sixtus the 4. passed Nero in cruelty and all villany Gaude prisce Nero saith one vincit te crimine Sixtus Hic scelus omne clauditur vitium Marullus and others testifie against Innocent the 8. that he had sixteene bastards and was a dull fellow giuen to carnall pleasures Of Alexander the 6. we reade that he wasted the world ouerthrew law and religion neither could Onuphrius dissemble his vices He that listeth to see the like testimonies against Masse-priests Monkes Friers and their complices let him reade the second booke of my answere to Rob. Parsons his warne-warne-word But what should proofes neede in so plaine matters if the Popes whom they call most holy be such we must not imagine that their base slaues and dependants are better The practise of this sect doth iustifie this charge most fullie of late time they haue murdred millions of Gods Saints In England of late they attempted to destroy the King and his house to blow vp the Lords Commons in Parliament assembled and to cut the throtes of all good men they neither respect King nor friend old nor yoong oath nor promise Among themselues there is neither iustice nor honesty poore people are abused with superstitious shewes and dissembled grauity through the practises of Popes Christendome is diuided and the kingdome of Turkes enlarged Can those therefore bee good men that doe such leud acts and haue they reason to boast of works whose liues are so defiled with all vices CHAP. XXXI That in Popery a base accompt is made of Princes and all lay-men HOly scriptures doe giue honorable titles not only to Kings and Princes but also to all the people of God Princes Rom. 13. are called superior powers and Gods ministers for our good and in diuers places they are dignified as Gods anoynted Christians are also called Saints and Gods heritage and his sonnes and children and heires of Gods kingdome annexed together with Christ but the Masse-priests and polshorne crew make but a base reckoning of them for first they appropriat to themselues the title of Gods inheritance calling themselues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and clericos as if the Popes greasie shauelings were only Gods inheritance and the rest were profane and common persons Secondly in the church they diuide themselues from lay-men as if lay-men were not holy inough to communicate with them in Gods seruice or else as if they were vnworthy to come neere the Popes poleshorne and greasie complices Thirdly they call themselues only spirituall men as if the lay-people were grosse and carnall and without sense and feeling of piety they doe call themselues also Gods annointed interpreting these words touch not mine anointed of their owne greasie company Fourthly the state of matried folkes is termed a damned state of life as appeareth by their decretales de conuersione coniugatorum where they talke of married folks entring into monasteries no otherwise then as if they should talke of the conuersion of sinners Syricius c. plurimos dist 82. doth talke of maried folkes as of men profane and vnholy and Innocentius in the same distinction c. proposuisti doth interpret these words of the Apostle those that are in the flesh cannot please God of married folkes as if they were in the flesh and could not please God for otherwise his conclusion is of no valew Fiftlie they call lay-people imperfect for that is a worde vsed by Faber contra anatomen missae the state of perfection they ascribe commonly to Monkes and Friers some call them doggs and hoggs and proue that scriptures are not to be permitted to be read in vulgar tongues because holie things are not to bee giuen to dogs nor pearles cast before swine Thomas Aquinas 2.2 q. 2. art 6. compareth Gods people to asses holding that it is sufficient for them to adhere to their superiors in matters of saith because we read Ioh 1. that the oxen were at plow and the Asses fedde by them Summa Rosella and Siluester in his summe in verb. fides doth take lay-men and simple people to be all one and commonly they call them idiots and rude fellowes 6 Pops Alexander trod vpon the Emperors necke calling him a lion basiliske and Boniface the 8. indeuoreth to make Kings his subiects 7 They make Kings and Princes their hang-men exequutioners forcing them to put Gods Saints to death whom the
say as much and greatly complaineth of Roman Caursins and vsurers Are not then our moderne Papists simple to continue vnder the gouernment of Antichrist where they are pilled both aliue and dead and spoiled by diuers fraudes and brought to extreme pouerty through manifold oppressions and exactions CHAP. XLI That the Popish church hath no true Bishops nor Priests THe gouernment of the Popish church being so burdensome and dangerous cannot well be tolerated by rules of policy but if the same be against both scriptures and canons of the church then as repugnant both to religion and Christian policy it is to be abandoned of all Christian common-wealthes let vs then consider what allowance it may haue either of scriptures or ancient canons The Apostle Act. 20. saith that the holy ghost hath appointed Bishops to gouerne the Church of God in quo vos spiritus sanctus posuit Episcopos regere ecclesiam dei saith he speaking of the Bishops of Asia but the popish church hath no true Bishops and that is prooued first for that bishops cannot be orderned but by true Bishops but the prelats of the Romish church are ordeined by the Pope that is no Bishop the proposition is granted of the assumption the first part is not denied in the second part our aduersaties insist firmely and affirme the Pope to be a true bishop but how can he be a Bishop that neither preacheth nor can preach nor administreth the Sacraments nor succeedeth the Apostles in their Apostolicall office the Apostle 1. Tim. 3. sheweth that the office of a bishop consisteth in the worke and not in the title qui Episcopatum desiderat bonum opus desiderat Secondly antichrist can ordeine no true bishops but that the Pope is antichrist I haue declared in my fist booke de Pontif. Rom. and it is apparent in that he teacheth doctrine contrary to that which we haue receined from Christ Iesus and is plainly described in the Reuelation by the whoore of Babylon Apocalyps 17. and by the beast like a lambe rising out of the earth Apocalyps 13. which are figures of Antichrist Thirdly none but the successors of Christs apostles can ordaine true bishops but the Pope succeedeth Iulius Caesar rather then Simon Peter for Simon Peter fed Christs flocke he murdreth Christs lambes Fourthly neither heretikes nor simoniacall persons haue power to ordeine bishops as the master of the sentences lib. 4. dist 25. prooueth by the authoritie of Cyprian Innocent the first and Leo. and this is the practise of the Romish church at this day who refuseth to allow them for bishops that are ordred by such as they repute heretikes or schismatikes some determine otherwise but they repugne against the Romish churches practise Finally no woman can ordeine bishops but Pope Ioan was a woman and therefore all ordeined by her and their successors are no bishops by the confession of the aduersaries themselues Howsoeuer it is the Papists cannot assure themselues that they haue any bishops for no man is ordeined bishop vnlesse he that ordeined him had an intention to order him a bishop but of this intention no man can assure himselfe Furthermore the Popish synagogue hath no true priests for their priests are all ordred to sacrifice for quicke and dead The forme of priesthood say the Masse-priests assembled at Florence is this accipe potestatem offerendi sacrificium in ecclesia pro vinis mortuis and this is prooued also by their rituall bookes and by Bellarmines confession lib. deord c. 9. but such priests were neuer appointed by Christ or his Apostles neither is there any footestep of such an ordination to be found in ancient fathers Secondly no true priests can be ordeined by other then true bishops and the Apostles successors but such bishops the synagogue of Rome wanteth Lastly true priests and ministers of the Gospell are ordeined to preach Gods word truely and to administer the Sacraments sincerely but popish priests are not ordered to this end If then that cannot be the church that wanteth priests and bishops then are we not to looke for the true church among the papists but Hierome in dialog contr Lucifer denieth that to be the church that hath no priests and Cyprian lib. 4. epist 9. teacheth that the church is a people or flocke vnited to the bishop Againe if all the ordination of bishops and priests in the Romish church dependeth vpon the Pope and the Pope be not mentioned either Ephes 4. or 1. Cor. 12. where all the ministers of the church giuen to the same by Christ are mentioned then doth the ordination of Roman priests and prelates take his beginning not from Christ but from Antichrist Lastly if the function of masse-priests doth consist in saying Masse and the Masse be prooued to be an humane inuention then is the Romish priesthood an humane inuention but otherwhere we haue sufficiently declared that the Masse was by little and little peeced togither and is a meere humane inuention nay an inuention contrarie to Christs institution of the Sacrament of the Eucharist CHAP. XLII That Popery cannot be mainteined without forgery and falshood THis point of it selfe alone would require a large discourse if we should prosecure particularly and distinctly whatsoeuer our aduersaries haue herein offended for whether we respect the diuers kinds of forgeries or the places of authors forged and falsified by them it were a great worke to comprehend them all we will therefore choose out some few examples out of many whereby all true Christians may haue cause sufficient to suspect them in the rest First then we charge them with falsity for that as much as in them lieth they haue gone about to suppresse Gods eternall word comprised in the old and new testament that this is falsitie it is apparent by the law qui testamentum ff ad legem corneliam de falsis for by that law they are condemned qui testamentū amouerint celauerint that is which shall amooue or conceile a testament but the Pope and his complices forbid expressely all translations of the new testament made by our doctors and only grant certaine translations made by themselues and that with hard conditions as is declared in the index of forbidden bookes reg 3. and 4. but publikely they will not haue scriptures red in vulgar tongues Secondly they burne the holy scriptures vnder pretense of false translations but the law formerly cited doth pronounce him a falsarie that shall abolish or cancell or burne a mans testament the words of the law are these si quis testamentum deleuerit that is if any shall cancell a testament Thirdly it is falsity to cancell or breake the seales of a testament as the practise of the law of this land declareth how then can the Popish synagogue of Rome excuse it selfe that depriueth the lords people of the cup which our sauiour Christ calleth the new testament in his blood is not this all one as if the same should breakē the seales of Gods testament
Fourthly they haue added their owne traditions to the old and new testament receiuing with like affection and reuerence both scriptures and traditions as they write sess 4. synod trid Bellarmine speaketh no otherwise of traditions then as if they were the word of God not written but to adde to a mans testament is forgery hominis testamentum saith the Apostle Galat. 3. nemo spernit aut superordinet no man despiseth a mans testament or taketh vpon him to adde vnto it Fiftly they haue added to the canon of the old testament the bookes of Tobia Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdome the Machabies and certaine fragments not extant in the originall bookes of scriptures but to ascribe bookes to the spirit of God which were not published by the authority of Gods spirit is an audacious kind of falsity that they are not canonical scriptures it is proued by the testimony of the councell of Laodicea of Hierome in prologo Galeato Athanasius in synopsi Nazianzen in carminibus and diuers others Sixtly certaine Friers anno D. 1256. in Paris for Christs gospell published an other gospell which they termed eternall fratres noua quaedam praedicabant legebant docebant deliramenta ex libris Ioachim abbatis incipitque eorum liber Euangelium aeternum as Matthew Paris testifieth but no greater falsitie by men pretending Christianity can be committed then in exhibiting a false Gospell S. Paul Galath 1. pronounceth such teachers accursed Finally the conuenticle of Trent hath committed an egregious falsity in making the old Latine translation of the bible authenticall for the same in many places dissenteth from the orginall bookes as by conference it appeareth and as Isidore Clarius in his preface to the translation of the bible Erasmus Caietane and diuers other learned interpreters confesse and declare diuers editions also of this Latine translation doe much differ as appeareth by the bibles set foorth by Sixtus quintus Clement the eight and diuers others but that cannot be true that discordeth with it selfe quod dissonat verum esse non potest neither can they excuse themselues of falsity that exhibit a false copy for the true originall and authenticall bookes of scriptures Likewise haue our aduersaries corrupted and falsified both the acts of councels and the writings of the fathers for first they suppresse the true acts of many councels and the true bookes of many fathers such especially as touch the authority of the bishop of Rome Posseuin in his select bibliotheke counselleth his consorts to keepe the Greeke originall bookes of councels and fathers from the view of yong students but to suppresse the depositions of witnesses all law adiudgeth falsity Secondly they haue set foorth diuers false actes and canons vnder the names of the Apostles of the synode of Nice of Rome vnder Siluester of Neocesaria Sinuessa and other synods which themselues cannot denie to be diuersly falsified Isidore c. canones dist 16. and Leo c. Clementis dist ead and Gelasius c. sancta Rom. dist 15. doe number these canons among apocryphall writings the canons themselues condemne the baptisme of heretikes c. 45. and once dipping in baptisme c. 49. and Saterdaies fast c. 65. and alloweth the 3. booke of Machabees and Clements epistles for canonical scriptures and yet pope Adrian c. sextam synodum dist 16. alloweth them Russin in his history and Stephen Bishop of Rome c. viginti dist 16. allowe only 20. canons of the councel of Nice others in c. septuaginta ead dist say there are 70. one Alphonsus of Pisa of late in his summe of councels hath set out 80. canons of that councell Sozimus in the 6. councell of Carthage was taken alleaging a false canon of that councell for appeals to Rome Paschasius or some vnder his name corrupted a canon of that councell as if the same had decreed that the Church of Rome had alwaies had the primacy Pius the fifth in certaine letters of his to the Emperor alledgeth that the councell of Nice made the Pope of Rome gouernor of all Christian Princes the falsification is notorious and is extant in his letters set out by Hierome Catena Of the acts of the councell of Sinnessa there are 3. copies extant in Surius and different each from other they contradict themselues also for where in the latter end it is said that the first See shall not be iudged of any the fathers of that councell notwithstanding condemned Marcellinus damnauerunt eum extra ciuitatem The actes of the councels of Neocaesarea and Ancyra are so simple and so repugnant to the state of those times that blindemen albeit void of sight may feele them to be counterfet in ancient stories there is no mention of them nay in times of persecution and before Constantines time it is not likely that so many bishops could meete or would make such acts and canons as are imagined to be made in those councels The synode supposed to be assembled at Rome by Siluester contemeth diuers fabulous points as namely the report of Constantines leprosy of Nunnes professing virginitie after the age of 72. yeres The bishops names are barbarous the stile is Gothike the number of bishops there assembled is incredible it is therfore meere impudency to affirme the acts of that synode to be authenticall The 18. canon of the councell of Chalceden and the 36. canon of the 6. synode that giueth equall authority to the see of Constantinople and Rome is falsified both by Gratian and Gregory the 13. in his new edition of the canon law for vnder colour of those canons they determine quite contrary to canons that the Church of Constantinople should not be equall to Rome The fift councell of Carthage c. 3. determineth that bishops priests and deacons should absteine from their wiues in the time of their turnes or seruice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the Romanistes dist 33. c. placuit haue falsified this canon by adding subdeacons and excluding bishops priests and deacons from their wiues at all times The councell of Mileuis c. 22. forbiddeth Priests and inferiour clerks to appeale to Rome but Gratian falsifying the canon addeth these words nisi forte sedem Rom. appellauerint which is direct contrarie to the meaning of the councell In the 35. canon of the councell of Laodicea the worship of Angels is termed idolatrous and expressely forbidden but Carranza in his summe falsifieth the canon and for Angelos writeth Angulos Bellarmine lib. 1. de sanct beatitud c. 19. sheweth that in latter editions of councels his consorts haue established the inuocation of Saints by the 7. canon of the 6. synode but all ancient copies declare both him and his consorts to be notorious forgers of false canons It were an easie matter to shew the falshood of our aduersaries in diuers other canons but the breuitie of this discourse will not permit any larger number of witnesses in this point Thirdly vnder the names of fathers they haue set out diuers counterfet treatises and haue falsly both translated the Greeke fathers and
saints to the Popes decretals and decrees and to the diuers treatises set foorth of late time in defence of their faction and heresie Against Luther they haue hired one Staphilus a rinegat Christian and Cochleus a fellow not woorth a cochle shell to speake as much shame as their malicious wits could deuise from these two Surius Laingeus Stapleton and all the kennell of curres let loose to barke against him haue borrowed the subiect of their slanders if any thing more be obiected by later libellers that proceedeth of late inuention Bellarmine de notis ecclesiae in praefat de Christo and others charge him with teaching that Christ suffered according to his diuinity he in his booke de concilijs from whence the ground of this slander is taken saith onely that he had to do with certeine Nestorians which denied that the diuinity could suffer so it appeareth these words were the Nestorians and Luther disputing against them sheweth that the person of Christ consisting of two natures could and did suffer and if he did say the diuinitie did suffer he tooke the word of the nature for the person as auncient fathers and namely Vigilius contra Eutychem haue done Vigilius saith the diuinitie of Christ was nailed with nailes consixa clauis Campian rat 8. Bellarmine in praefat in controuers de Christo charge Luther to haue said that his soule hated this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a meere slander he saith onely if he shoulde hate the worde and beleeue the thing defined in ancient councels that he should not therefore be an heretike Bellarmine lib. 4. de ecclesia militante c. 13. Cregorius de Valentia and others say that Luther learned of the diuel that the Masse was naught but Luther hath no such wordes he saith onely that the diuell went about to make him despaire hauing so long saide Masse which long before he had learned to be naught Others adde that in a certeine disputation at Lipsia Luther should say that the contention begun by him against popish abuses was neither begun for Gods honour nor would end for Gods honour but wickedly that which Luther spoke of his aduersaries that for to please the Pope tooke vp the bucklers against him they apply to Luther himselfe and his own actions Some say that he taught if the wife refuse the husband may goe in to his maide whereas he declareth onely how husbands vse to threaten their froward wiues not commending either any such act or threates His life is traduced by them commonly as if he were giuen to wine but not onely all that knew him and speake indifferently testifie the contrary but also Erasmus his aduersarie that had reason to reprooue him if there had beene cause Lutheri vita omnium consensu probatur saith Erasmus in ep ad Thomam Card. Eboracensem id non leue praeiudicium est tantam esse morum seueritatem Luthers life is approued by consent of all and that is no small preiudice that such is the sinceritie of his manners that his enemies can not sinde what to calumniate Finally they obiect that endeuouring to cast out a diuell he was euill entreated by the party possessed and that going to bed merry he died the same night but the first is refuted by Luthers doctrine who commonly taught that Christian doctrine is not now to be confirmed by miracles the second is a slander falsely deuised by such as neither were at Luthers death nor desirous to vnderstand the truth Sleidan lib. 16. reporteth that he was long sicke before and that feeling his sicknesse to grow extreme he called his friends and spending his time in praier pious exhortations quietly departed this life and this is also confirmed by Melancthon in Luthers life and was testified by al that were present at his end The principall libeller that vndertooke to raile against Caluin was Bolsec a rinegat frier who hauing either himselfe written or suffering others to publish diuers impudent slanders in his name did in a publike synod in France retract the same but his recantation they regard not his first malitious reports they wilfully embrace Campian rat 8. chargeth Caluin with saying that God is the author of sinne but his words instit lib. 1. c. 18. doe euidently discharge him flagitiorum causa extra humanam voluntatem quaerenda non est saith he Bellarmine lib. de notis eccles c. 9. telleth vs how Caluin taught that hell was nothing else but the horror of conscience but no such words could euer yet be found in Caluin he saith that the horror of conscience is a part of hellish paines but that Hell should bee nothing else he neuer saied nor thought Caluin is also charged for speaking contumeliously against Saints and calling them shadowes monsters and such like names but he is much wronged for either he spake of Christopher and Catherine and such like forged Saints or of Dominick Medard and such like superstitious fellowes who are rather for their cruelty and other vices to be hated then honored for any holinesse Posseuin lib. 3. de notis verbi dei c. 74. chargeth Caluin with atheisme for teaching that the sonne of God was God of himselfe or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Bellarmine excuseth him and dischargeth him confessing he said well if he spoke of the son in respect of his diuine essence The Rhemists in their annotations on the 5. to the Hebrews affirm that Caluin taught that Christ despaired and the same sclander was also bruted abroad by Campian Rat. 8. but neuer did any such words passe from his mouth or his penne and if the Papists will not beleeue me let them beleeue Bellarmine who lib. 4. de Christo c. 8. expresly affirmeth that Caluin saith that Christ despaired not Calumus dicit saith he Christum non desperasse Others giue out that he was conuicted of Sodomy and burned on the backe for his offence at Noyon but the notorious wickednesse of those that first deuised this slander may be refuted by diuers plaine arguments first Sodomites are not burned on the backe in France but burned at a stake secondly neuer was he conuented before any iudge either for that or other matter Lastly the sincerity of his life repugneth to such beastlinesse neither was it like that he would haue so violently pursued the Romanists for their vnnaturall abominations vnlesse he had beene cleere of all suspition in that behalfe Bellarmine lib. 4. de eccles c. 14. saith that Caluin went about to worke a miracle by compact with one Bruley but he sheweth himselfe therein miraculously impudent for in the same chapter he confesseth that Calum in the preface to his Institutions should complaine that wrong was offered christians by those that required miracles at their hand seeing they taught the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles which was confirmed by innumerable miracles further it is a shamelesse tricke to alledge the testimony of Bolsec who was hired to write what he could against Caluin
Gods worship and persecuted their enemies like most cruell tyrantes that afterward they might with more security satisfie their lusts when there was none to controll them Ioannes Marius de schism part 3. c. 5. testifieth that all the euils of christendome haue proceeded from the malice ambition and auarice of wicked Popes a malitia ambitione auaritia sceleratorum paparum omnia mala in mundo proueniunt Robert Grosted as Matthew Paris testifieth in Henrico 3. did bitterly inueigh against the couetousnesse vsury simony rapines excesse and luxuriousnesse of the court of Rome neither doth Budaeus de Asse or Valla contra Donationem Constantini say lesse against the Popes then he Next to the Popes the Cardinals Masse-priests Monks and Friers and of late yeares the Dominicans Franciscans and Iebusites are the chiefe aduancers teachers and defenders of Romish heresies of which if we say litle men may suppose there is no more to be said if we say what they deserue and is in authenticall bookes reported of them it would exceede the proportion of this short Suruey onlie thus much we say of many things that may be said Brigit in her reuelations testifieth that Cardinals are excessiue in pride couetousnesse al delights of the flesh 4. Brig 49. cardinales extenti effusi sunt ad omnem superbiam cupiditatem delectamentum carnis Pelaguis lib. 2. de planct eccles art 16. saith they are encreased in riches but much diminished in pietie aucta est possessio diminuta religio The same man lib. 2. de planct leccles art 20. saith the prelates of the church haue declared their sinnes like Sodome Peccatum suum sicut Sodoma praedicauerunt Mantuan Alphonsi lib. 6. saith that the priests hate their flocks and care not to feed them but to poll them and mocke them Pastores saith he odere pecus nec pascere curant Sed tondere greges pecorique illudere tonso Catherine of Siena c. 125. saith that religious men pretend angels liues but for the most part are woorse then diuels Religiosi collocati sunt in religione velut angeli sed quam plurimi sunt daemonibus deteriores What the Iebusites are I report me to the French carechisme of Iesuites set out by a Papist and a learned man and to the discourses of the secular priests against them they shew they are couetous false proud cruell malicious and diuels incarnate for the rest I referre them ouer to the 2. booke 2. chap. of my answer to Rob. Parsons his warn-Warn-word a man in whom most of the capitall vices of the Iebusites may be specified The chiefe mainteiners of Popery in our times if we speake of lay men were Charles the 9. of France Henry the 3. his brother Philip the 2. of Spaine the duke of Alua the duke of Guise and his brethren the earle of Westmerland the head of the rebellion in the North. but if we seeke all histories we shall hardly finde woorse men Charles the 9. was a notorious sweater a perfidious and licentious prince Henry the 3. was superstitious and altogether giuen to carnall delights What Philip the 2. was his wiues and sonne and the innocents done to death by him for religion will speake one day the Duke of Guise and Alita were cruell and bloodie men perfidious and wicked atheists the first more giuen to pleasure the second to auarice Charles of westmerland was a rebell to his prince and a man consumed with his own delights and pleasures Is it not then a matter ridiculous that Masse-priests should so excessiuely commend this religion that had such founders and fauorers as these are and which as we see was inuented and confirmed by wicked men and vpholden by fraude and force CHAP. XLVII That Popery in many points is more absurd and abominable then the doctrine of Mahomet THe impieties and abominations of Turkish religion are so many that hardly can we recount them and so odious and horrible that no Christian can take pleasure to heare them and yet if we please to looke into the secret mysteries of Popery and to examine all the odious and abominable doctrines of the Romish synagogue we may well make question whether of the two religions deserueth more to be abhorred and hated for first the Turkes do speake well of the law and the Prophets and handle books of scriptures with great reuerence Antonie Geoffrey in his 2. booke of Turkish ceremonies reporteth how the Turkes accompt the gospels among holy scriptures inter sacras literas habent nostra euangelia saith he but the Papists speake euill of scriptures and call them sometimes a dead and killing letter sometimes a matter of strife sometime a nose of waxe they doe also handle them very rudely and without respect Lastly they will not haue them to be authenticall in respect of vs without the Popes consignation and testimony The Turkes neuer burned their Alchoran or the writings of the Prophets and Apostles vpon pretence of false translations but the Papists haue often times burned holy scripturs as appeareth by the ecclesiasticall histories of France England Germany and other places Postell in his history of Turkes sheweth how they teach that perfection is conteined in the gospell and Gifford lib. Caluinoturcis 3. c. 9. confesseth that they beleeue all religion to be therein conteined but Papists doe rather hope to finde perfection in the rules of Monkes and Friers then in the gospell and therefore accompt rather the state of Monks to be a state of perfection then the liues of Christians after the rule of the Gospell the Masse-priests of Trent doe make traditions equall to scriptures and commonly they deny scriptures to be a perfect rule of life and doctrine The doctors of Turkish religion were neuer so simple as to thinke the traditions of their church to be equall to the Alchoran of Mahomet But the Masse-priests of Trent will haue traditions not written and holy scriptures to bee receiued with equall affection Such as blaspheme Christ are punished by the Turkes most seuerely but Papists teare him in pieces with their blasphemies and such are thought to be most cleare of heresie which sweare most wickedly and blasphemously Auerroes of all religions accompteth Popery to bee most absurd for that Papists worship a peece of a Masse-cake for their God and yet presently deuoure him and swallow him downe into their bellies No Turkes euer allowed the eating of mans flesh or beleeued that it were possible for a man to swallow downe a whole and perfect man without hurt or diminution or brusing of his body but Papists make their followers eaters of mans flesh and say that euery one eating the sacrament doth eate vp Christs body whole and entire and yet beleeue that they neither breake his flesh nor digest it Euery Mahometan albeit he beleeueth not Christ to be God yet would be ashamed to say that doggs and hogges and other brute beasts may eate Christs body but the Papists albeit according to the Christian faith they