of the Church all the Churches of Asia together with others adioyning and very bitterly inveigheth against them by his letters Which fact of Victor Irenaeus and other Bishops sharpely reprooved in their letters to the said Victor Which thing Ruffinus plainely testifieth in these words Sed hoc non omnibus placebat Episcopis quin potius è contrario scribentes ei iubebant vt magis quae pacis sunt ageret concordiae atque vnanimitati studeret denique extant ipsorum literae quibus asperius obiurgant victorem velut invtiliter ecclesiae commodis consulentem Yet this his dealing pleased not all Bishops but contrariwise they wrote vnto him bidding him to practise rather that belonged to peace and to studie for concord and vnitie Finally their letters are also extant in the which they sharpely chide Victor as one that respected vnprofitably the good of the Church Thus saith Ruffinus In like manner though with more modestie dissented Anicetus an other bishop of Rome from S. Polycarpe bishop of Smyrna Of which variance thus writeth Eusebius Neque tamen Anicetus Polycarpo poterat persuadere vt suum observandi morem deponeret neque Polycarpus Aniceto persuasit vt consuetudinem Asiaticam vllo modo observaret Neither could Polycarpus perswade Anicetus to keepe the custome and tradition of Asia Now gentle Reader what neede more to be said for the vncertentie of traditions 1 For first these Bishops that thought thus diversly of traditions lived within one hundred yeeres of Christ at what time the Church was in good estate and stained with very few or no corruptions at all 2 Secondly the one side doubtles was seduced with false traditions 3 Thirdly S. Polycarpe and other holy bishops of that age made no more account of the bishop of Rome his opinion or authoritie then of an other mans 4 Fourthly they were so farre from acknowledging him to be the supreame head of the Church that they all reputed them selves his equals and controlled him as sharply for his doctrine as S. Paul reprooved S. Peter for his conversation 5 Fiftly if S. Polycarpe had cause in his time beeing the flourishing age of the Church to doubt of Romish traditions much more have we cause in these latter daies to stand in doubt thereof For now hath iniquitie the vpper hande nowe are corruptions more frequent no we doe errours in every place more abound Let vs therefore follow S. Augustines advise let vs admit nothing rashly let vs examine all doubtfull traditions and doctrines by the touchstone of veritie the holy Scriptures And least any man thinke S. Augustine to be of another minde these are his owne expresse wordes Non audiamus haec dico haec dicis sed audiamus haec dicit dominus sunt certe libri dominici quorum ant horitati vtrique consentimus vtrique credimus vtrique servimus ibi quaeramus ecclesiam ibi discutiamus causam nostram Let vs not heare I say this thou saiest that but let vs heare this saith the Lord for our Lord hath bookes whose authoritie we both admit we both beleeve we both obey let vs there seeke the Church let vs there decide our cause But what neede many words For either popish vnwritten traditions are repugnant to the Scriptures or consonant to the same If they be repugnant then is there great reason to reiect them if they be consonant that must be tried by comparing them to the Scriptures which is the conclusion I defend But the Papists perceiving them selves to be convinced by the Scriptures tell vs plainly that they must have their cause tried by other meanes For so writeth my L. of Rochester in these expresse tearmes Contendentibus itaque nobiscum haereiic is nos alio subsidio nostram oportet tueri causam quam Scripturae sacrae When therefore heretikes he meaneth all not Papists dispute with vs we must vse other helpe in defense of our cause then the Scripture Loe they dare not be tryed by the Scripture Which if a papist had not spoken who would haue beleeved it The Corollarie FIrst therefore since the written Word conteineth in it selfe every thing necessarie for our salvation secondly since no traditions are to be admitted but such as are consonant to the holy Scripture thirdly since Papists load vs with huge numbers of traditions without warrant of the written word fourthly since popish traditions were in old time most doubtfull and vncerten I conclude that it is a sufficient motive for me to renounce the Romish religion as false erroneous and pernicious doctrine Thus much of the ninth Motive CHAP. ix Of Popish auricular confession ALthough popish doctours doe wonderfully magnifie their auricular confession perswading the vulgar sort that they can not attaine salvation without the same yet is it in deede a meere invention of man the bitter torment of conscience and the readie way to desperation For manifest probation whereof I proceede in this manner The first Conclusion ALL Christians must confesse their sinnes to God with internall contrition of heart with full purpose to amend their lives and with stedfast hope of remission by the mercie of God through the merites of Christ his Sonne our sweete redeemer Of this kinde of confession the Scripture speaketh abundantly Delictum meum cognitum tibi feci iniustitiam meam non abscondi dixi confitebor adversum me iniustitiam meam domino tu remisisti impietatem peccati mei I have made my sinne knowne vnto thee and mine iniustice I have not hid I said I will confesse to the Lord my iniustice against my selfe and thou hast forgiven the impietie of my sinne Qui abscondit scelera sua non dirigetur quiautem confessus fuerit reliquerit ea misericordiam consequetur He that hideth his offenses shall not be directed but who shall confesse and forsake his sinnes shall attaine mercie Sidixerimus quoniā peccatum non habemus ipsi nos seducimus veritas in nobis non est si confiteamur peccata nostra fidelis est iustus vt remittat nobis peccata nostra If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs but if we confesse our sinnes c. That this confession must be ioyned with hope of remission S. Chrysostome teacheth in these words Quid proderunt lachrymae confessio sinulla adsit abolitionis fiducia What shal teares confession availe if there be no hope of forgivenes And that we must adde herevnto amendment of life S. Hilarie teacheth vs when he saith Quid aliud est confessio erroris quam confessio desinendi ab errore What other thing is the confession of errour then to confesse that we will forsake errour So then when we be wayle our sinnes confesse them and purpose to amend our former lives with stedfast hope of Gods mercie through attonement made in Christes bloode wee shall doubtlesse have remission of our sinnes Then though our
they may and must be dispossessed of their Scepters and Regalities Againe in the second Chapter he saith thus Quòd si Christiani olim non deposuerunt Neronem Diocletianum Iulianum apostatam ac Valentem Arianum similes id fuit quia deerant vires temporales Christianis If the Christians in times past deposed not Nero Diocletian Iulian Valens and such like Emperours the cause thereof was for that they wanted povver and force and vvere not strong ynough for that attempt Againe a little after he hath these vvordes At non tenentur Christiani immò nec debent cum evidenti periculo religionis toler are Regem infidelom But Christians are not bounde to tolerate a King that is an Infidell or not a Papist nay they must not tolerate such a one vvith the evident daunger of Religion And our said Iesuite yeeldeth this reason hereof because forsooth saith he De iure humanoest quod hunc aut illum habeamus Regem For it is by the Lavve of man that vve have this or that man to our King This is the doctrine of our Popes and lately hatched Iesuites out of vvhich most disloyall and unchristian assertion I inferre first that the Pope and Iesuites vvould most vvillingly deprive our most gratious Soveraigne of her Royall throne and Regalitie if they vvere of force and povver so to doe I inferre secōdly that our Iesuite doth here approve peremptorily First the diabolical excommunication of Pope Pius Secondly the disloyal fact of Murton vvho brought the same into this Realme Thirdly the publishing thereof by Felton Fourthly the practising of the curse by Sanders Fitz-morice Ballard and others their seditious complices Fiftly the renevving of the print and dispersing of the copies in Rome by our Iesuites Persons and Campion as a compendious preparative for their commodious entrance into this land I inferre thirdly that all subiects are by this doctrine stirred up and encouraged to manifest rebellion to have no scruple of conscience therein The reason hereof is evident because if kinges receive their authoritie frō man as this Iesuit auoucheth then may kings indeed be displaced by man as Romish parasites and irreligious politikes beare the world in hand yet Salomon the vvise replenished vvith holie inspiration teacheth vs another doctrine Per me inquit reges regnant legum conditores iusta decernunt per me principes imperant potentes decernunt iustitiam By mee saith God in Salōmon kings reigne and princes decree iustice By me princes rule and all nobles and iudges of the earth And the Apostle saith Omnts anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit non est enim potestas nisia Deo Let everie soule bee subiect to higher powers for ther is no power but of God But hereof more at large in the sixt chapter and third conclusion of the second booke Fourthlie Sylvester Pryeras that great popish Thomist telleth vs roundlie and malepertlie that empires and regalities are not from God immediatlie but from God by meanes of the pope And he saith further that royall power is so subordinate to poperie or papacie as is the Moone vnto the Sunne These are his owne wordes Nec obstat quod potestas imperialis est a deo concessa secundum multa iura quia est a Deo mediante papa quia eam concedit non vt homo sed vt vicarius Det. Nec sunt sic distinctae potestates spiritualis scilicet temporalis quin vna alteri subalternetur ad instar lunae solis nec sunt distinctae quasi semper sint in diversis sed quia sunt ordinatae ad distincta scilicet spiritualia temporalia in vno eodemque summo pontifiee est vtraque in summo It skilleth not that manie lawes affirme imperiall power to be of God For it is from God the Pope being the meane who graunteth it not as man but as the vicar of God Neither are the two powers the spirituall and the temporall so distinct but that they remaine subordinate the one to the other after the resemblance of the sunne moone neither are they distinct as being alwaies in diuerse subiects but as ordeined to distinct thinges spiritual and temporall For they both are in one and the selfe same pope even in the highest degree Fiftlie such as is the ruler of the citie saith Bellarminus our Iesuit such are the inhabitants thereof But pope Boniface the eight entred into his popedome as a Foxe reigned in it as a woolfe and died out of it as a dogge as I haue proved in my 2. booke in the 3. chapter second conclusion ergo all the citizens of Rome in his time began as foxes continued as wolves and ended their daies as dogges and consequentlie the whole church of Rome during the time of Pope Boniface was wicked diabolicall and meere antichristian what shall I say of kissing the popes foote of bearing the pope vpon mens shoulders of the popes dispensing with the law humane the lawe of nature and the law divine these may suffice to teach vs to walke warelie to looke about vs withall circumspection to be verie carefull what doctrine we embrace and ever to set before our eies the admonitions and premonitions of our sauiour Iesus Christ. Attendite inquit Dominus a fermento Pharisaeorum quodest hypocrisis Beware saith our Lord of the leven of the Pharises that is their false doctrine infected and infatuated vvith the traditions of men as it is expounded in another place of the gospel VVe must therefore here observe that in the scribes and Pharisees rested in those daies the ordinarie externall face power regiment and iurisdiction of the church For so saith our saviour in another place of the gospell In cathedra Mosis sedent Scribae Pharisaei omnia ergo quaecunque praeceperint vobis servare servate facite The Scribes and Pharisees sit in the chaire of Moses therefore whatsoever they shall commaund you to keepe that keepe and doe VVherefore since our Lord commaundeth vs to beware of the hypocriticall doctrine of the Pharisees who had the primacie in the visible Church of that age and since Christ commaunded this for no other end but because they had corrupted the sacred pure word of God with the mixture of their owne foolish traditions for that Christ obiected against them saying Quare vostransgredimini mandatum Dei propter traditiouem vestram why doe you trāsgresse Gods commaundement for the accomplishment of your own tradition and in another place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But in vaine doe they worship mee teaching doctrines the commaundements of men since I say our saviour thus commaundeth vs it followeth that we must refuse reiect and contemne all prelates all bishops all priestes and all whosoever have anie administration in the church by what name or title soever they be called if they deliver to vs the word of God impurelie or mixed
to be wished I haue charitably and faithfully penned it principally and chiefly for thy sake And I nothing doubt but through the power of God it will so sufficiently perswade thee to use the ordinary meanes of thy salvation that is humbly to read the holy scriptures which hath not heretofore bene thy custome diligently to frequent godly sermons which are nowe common in this Realme God be thanked and often to conferre with zealous preachers for thy better instruction and sound confirmation as thou wilt shortly be a greater enemy to popery then thou wast before a friend thereunto For in this small volume thou shalt perceive evidently that not only popish monkes fryers and Iesuites but also their schoolemen their Summists their Canonistes their Thomistes their Scotists their Abbots their Byshops their Archbishoppes their Cardinals yea and their greatest popes themselues haue all in their domesticall dissentions and ciuill warres so battered and made equall with the ground the bulwarkes of their popery as no forraine enemy shall henceforth need either to stand in feare of their fortresses or to make assaults against the same So surceasing to speak of their muttering upon beads their praiers in straunge tongues their consecrations of bells Churches altars chalices patines corporals copes vestments albes girdles tunicles chesibles miters their exorcismes or incantations ouer oyles chrismes ashes palmes candles salt water bread their sacrificing upon such altars in such Churches before such relikes to which their sacrifices such sanctimony and merits are ascribed as that seminary is deemed best disposed for English long intended invasion who hath occupied himselfe most busily in that their superstitious kind of doting their reservations of their bread-gods often putrified and now and then of myse devoured their idolatricall adoration of reliques especially of their so termed vultus sanctus surceasing I say from speaking of these and like popish deliraments and instantly wishing thy christian conversion in Christ Iesus I bid thee heartily fare-well The names of the auncient writers and holie fathers alledged in the treatise follovving DIonysius Areopagita Irenaeus Tertullianus Origenes Cyprianus Iustinus Lactantius Athanasius Hilarius Eusebius Caesariensis Basilius Ambrosius Hieronymus Augustinus Chrysostomus Beda Euthymius Ruffinus Platina The names of popish vvriters alledged in this volume who all are of great estimation amongest the papistes and highlie renowmed in the church of Rome Popes or Bishops of Rome Clemens Gregorius magnus Adrianus Innocentius Cardinalles to the popes or Bishops of Rome Caietanus Turrecremata These were popish archbishops of great learning Antonius Panormitanus Popish Bishops excellentlie wel learned Ioannes Roffensis Ambrosius Catharinus Melchior Canus Popish Abbots Rupertus Bernardus Popish Canonistes Gratianus Angelus Navarrus Covarruvias Popish summistes Sylvester Fumus These were popish monkes or Popish friers Alphonsus Victoria Dionys. Carth. Carranza Ioseph Ang. Bellarminus Popish scholemen Lombardus Albertus Alensis Richardus Bonaventura Aquinas Durandus Dom. Soto Paludanus Mayro Popish writers who though they were not equal in dignitie yet not inferiour in learning to the rest Lyranus Gersonus Almaynus Cusanus Abulensis Viguerius Snoygoudanus Burgensis Ben. Arias Matthias Thoring Ioan. de Combis Bryto These were popish Synodes Conc. Constantinopolitanum 6. Conc. Constantinop 8. Conc. Basiliense Conc. Lateranense 1. Conc. Later 2. Conc. Tridentinum Catholike Councels Concilium Nicaenum Conc. Chalcedonense Popish constitutions or bookes equall with popish synodes Decreta Decretalia Liber sextus Missale Romanum Popish commentaries of great accompt in the Romish Church Glossa decretalium Glossa decretorum Glossa ordinaria Glossa interlinialis THE FIRST BOOKE CONTEINING CERTAINE preambles for the better satisfaction of the simplie seduced Papistes as also that the motyues in the other booke following may be read with greater profite The first Preamble IN the church of Rome for many yeares together were learned and godly byshops vvho lived orderly preached the vvord of God sincerely and fed their flocke carefully but in successe of time by litle and litle the Romish bishops did degenerat from the godly life and holie doctrine of their auncestors and became vvolues vnto their flocks tirants vnto the vvorld This is prooved at large by the testimonies of approved popish doctors in the second booke and third chapter in the 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. conclusions The great popish scholeman and Spanish Frier Victoria vvriteth in this manner by litle and litle not all at once vve vvere brought to this in ordinat course and to this so miserable state that novv vve are neither able to endure our griefs nor such remedies as the church of Rome assigneth for the same but if vve had this day such good bishops or Popes as Clemens Linus and Sylvester vvere then might vvee commit all things safely vnto them but alas to say the best of them because I vvould not vvillingly reproove them the Popes novv are farre inferiours to the auncient bishops of Rome Read Victoria his ovvne vvordes in the fourth conclusion of the fift chapter in vvhich chapter the reader shall find much other vvorthie matter to the like effect as that the dissolute practise of the church of Rome is novv so intollerable that the vvorld is not able to endure it that not onely the simple sort but even the best of all are greatlie scandalized therevvith that none seeke for dispensations vvhether it be for mariages or for irregularities or for spirituall benefices but they roundlie obteine their suites that not so manie keepe the lavve as are dispensed to breake the lavv adde hereunto the seventh preamble for more perspicuitie The 2. Preamble BLinde Byardes that neither had anie thing neither knevv anie thing desirous to speake placentia and to flatter the Popes for their ovvne preferment began to vvrite glosses vpon the popish lavve and therein to ascribe lordlie and more then royall titles to the Pope so doubtles saith their religious Frier Victoria Reade his vvordes in the sixt chapter and third conclusion So then through ignorance and povertie our holie father aspired to his tyrannie The 3. Preamble THe Pope hath no povver coactive over anie king but is the Emperours subiect and ovveth him obedience Pope Gregorie surnamed the great doth confesse no lesse read the sixt Chapter The 4. Preamble POpe Iohn vvas enforced to recant his false doctrine before the king and the learned at Paris Read the third chapter and the fift conclusion ergo Peters faith failed in the Pope The 5. Preamble THe Pope in S. Cyprians time vvas esteemed but as fellovv and companion to other bishops for vvhich cause S. Cyprian contemned his opinion and reiected his determination though set dovvne by the consent of a provinciall councell vvhich doubtles S. Cyprian vvould never have done if hee had acknovvledged or graunted anie such authoritie to the Pope as the Pope this day chalengeth to himselfe Nay S. Cyprian thought himselfe everie vvay the Popes equall and the African counsel to be of as good authoritie as the Italian or Romish sinode and therfore reprooved the
all For first those for whome Iudas offred sacrifice prayer could not be holpen therwith because as the text recordeth they perished for their secretidolatry so saith the Glosse also and consequently Iudas erred grosly in praying and sacrificing for them and the author of the booke likewise in commēding Iudas his fact wherupon it followeth necessarily that the writer was not directed by the holy ghost because he concluded prayer for the dead upō a notorious known fact condēned by the scriptures Secondly this booke saith that the Iewes were led captives into Persia but they were translated indeed not into Persia but into Babylon as their owne Lyranus doth testifie Thirdly the second book saith that Iudas with others wrote their epistle to Aristobolus in the 188 yere but the first book affirmeth Iudas to be dead in the yere 152 so that he must perforce write his epistle 36 yeres after his death Fourthly the first book saith that Antiochus died in Babylon in his bed for sorow but the second book avoucheth that he was slaine in the tēple of Nannea Fiftly because the author of the books of Machabes desireth pardō if any thing be done amisse These be his words Si bene ut historiae competit hoc et ipse velim si autem minus dignè concedendumest mihi If I haue done well and as is decent for the historie that is my desire but if not worthily I must craue pardon And doubtlesse he that writeth by the direction of the holy ghost needeth no pardon at all Sixtly the wilfull murder of Razias is there commended which commendation can not proceed from the holy ghost Seventhly the authour of the Macchabees doeth onely conclude praying for the dead because Iudas offered sacrifice for the dead VVhich general illation vpon a particuler fact is not good in popish maner of proceeding For as their Maxime saith which is true indeede Privilegium paucorum non facit legem communem The privilege of a fewe can not establish a generall law neither will it helpe the papistes to say that saint Augustine and others alleaged this booke For so saint Paul alleaged the testimonies of Ethnickes Epimenides Menander and Aratus and popish divines alleage now and then Esops Fables But in what maner to what end S. Augustine alleaged this book I have shewed out of Augustine alreadie Neither yet will it helpe to say which some repute for a great argument that this booke is in the corps of the Bible For so is the fourth booke of Esdras within the corps of the bible yet doe the papistes themselves repute it no better then a fable yea which is more to be noted they will not haue the last end of the Lords praier to be canonicall albeit it be found in the greeke originall and placed in the corpse of the bible For the great popish linguist Benedictus Arias Montanus telleth the reader in his observation vpō that place that it is not of the text though he can not denie it to be in the greeke first originall To conclude neither did Iudas pray himselfe neither did he will others to pray for remission of sinnes unto the dead neither is it flatly so said in the Greeke copie neither did hee offer sacrifice for the sinnes of the dead but for the resurrection of the body vnderstanding by sinne the death and corruption of the bodie which proceedeth of sinne and followeth the same VVhich my interpretation may be gathered out of these wordes of the text it selfe Bene religiose de resurrectione cogitans Thinking well and religiously of tbe dead And therefore is the illation of the popish latine translation so highly commended and strictly commanded by the synod of Trent vaine frivolous and foolish He that penned the storie hath without all rime and reason infarced the same because no such conclusion can be truly gathered of Iudas his oblation and fact The Corollarie FIrst therefore since there is no purgatorie but Christs blood Secondly since after this life there is no place for merite or satisfaction Thirdly since the booke of Machabees is not Canonicall I conclude that it is a sufficient motive for me to renounce the Romish religion as false erroneous and pernicious doctrine Thus much of the sixt Motive The VIII CHAP. Of dissention amongest the Papistes ALthough nothing is more common with the Papistes then to charge protestants with dissention yet is it their owne peculiar badge as will appeare by due examination thereof The first article of dissention THe first erection of the English seminarie at Rome began with dissention betweene the students on the one part and Master Morice the VVelsh-man on the other part This Morice was appointed the rectour of the seminarie with whome tooke part doctor Lewes an other VVelsh-man who was Arch-deacon to the Arch-bishop of Cambrey and referendarie to the Pope at that time and also Cardinall Morone then the protectour of the English nation With the scholers tooke part the close and politike Iesuites who would seeme to doe nothing in the matter openly but in deede did all in all secretly For the space of some daies in which time the matter was hotely handled on both sides daily sutes being made and supplications exhibited unto his holinesse the Cardinall prevailed and the pope discharged the schollers But the Iesuites laboured so forcibly yet covertly that within three daies notwithstanding all the means that the Cardinall did and could make the schollers were againe restored to their places For Toledo the Iesuite was commaunded by the generall of their societie to fall prostrate on his knees before the popes holinesse and there to make a pitifull lamentation for the overthrowe of England that is forsooth that now were reiected the finest wittes the most towarde youthes the seed of poperie and the onely hope of the English nation who now exiled for zeale in religion and come to be his popish vassals must either be trained up in papistrie after the Iesuiticall maner or els should England never be reclaimed world without end VVhich sweete narration no sooner sounded in the popes eares but he commanded the schollers to be received into the Colledge againe And shortly after by Iesuiticall pollicie Master Morice was officiperda and a Iesuite made rectour in his place This dissention still continueth in that seminarie as in which have bene foure or five to speake of the least notorious combattes or endeavours betweene the rectour and the students who should expulse ech other And sometime the rectour hath so prevailed by pollicie that some fewe haue bene dismissed and other-somtime the generall of the Iesuites hath bin glad to change the rector so to appease the dissention The like agreement is amongst the papistes at home here in England for I pray you did not their holy confessor M. Sherewood even in the time of his bondes for poperie murder his brother
temeritate culpari I neither can nor dare denie but as in our auncestors so in my workes also are manie thinges which may iustly and without all temeritie be reproved yea the same saint Augustine opposeth only saint Pauls testimonie against all the writers Saint Hierome could alledge about the great controversie where saint Peter was reproved of saint Paul By which testimonie it is very plaine that S. Augustine did reverence the old writers but yet did think them men and to have their errors therefore would be not admit for truth what soever they wrote but only that which he fouÌ„d to be consonaÌ„t to the holie scriptures And because my L. of Roch. is so highly renowmed in the church of Rome he shal make an end of this conclusion where he writeth in this maner Nec Augustini nec Hieronimi nec alterius cuinslibet auctoris doctrinae sic ecclesia subscripsit quin ipsi locis aliquot ab ijs lice at dissentire nam in nonnullis ipsilocis se plane monstrarunt homines esse atque nonnunquam aberrasse sequitur quo fit vt tametsi propter aliquas humanas hallucinationes de multis quae dicti patre in commentarijs suis reliquerunt dubitare liceat sanctitatem tamen eorum haud licet in dubium revocare The church of Rome hath not so subscribed to the doctrine either of Augustine or of Hierome or of anie other writer but that we may dissent from their opinions in some places For themselves haue in certaine places shewed plainlie that they were men and wanted not their errours VVherefore albeit by reason of humaine frailtie we may lawfullie doubt of manie thinges which the said fathers have left behind them in their bookes yet may we not now call their holinesse into question In which wordes our great popish bishop teacheth vs three documents 1 First that their church giveth everie one libertie to dissent from Augustine Hierome and other writers whosoever 2 Secondlie that the fathers have plainlie declared themselves to be men and to haue had their imperfections accordinglie 3 Thirdlie that manie errours are to be found in the commentaries of the fathers So then our bishop is of my opinion and so also should the rest be if they would be constant in their owne doctrine which is published to the view of the world The 3. Conclusion NOt that which the greater part of the fathers or moe voices agree vnto is alwaies the vndoubted truth but often times that which the lesser part and fewer persons doe affirme For the proofe hereof Melchior Canus writeth thus Scimus frequenter vsu venire vt maior pars vincat meliorem scimus non ea semper esse optima quae placent pluribus scimus in rebus quae ad doctrinam pertinent sapientum sensum esse praeferendum sapientes sunt paucissimi cum stultorum infinitus sit numerus VVee know it often chaunceth so that the greater part prevaileth against the better vve know that those thinges are not ever the best which please the most we know that in matters of doctrine the iudge ment of the wise ought to be followed for wise men bee few and fooles infinite Iosephus Angles Thomas Aquinas and Petrus Lombardus affirme it to be the opinion of the old fathers of Basilius of Ambrosius of Chrisostomus of Hieronimus of Eusebius of Damascenus of Gregorius and of others that the world was created in 6. naturall daies successivelie as Moises recordeth the same yet this notwithstanding saint Augustine holdeth opinion against them all and saith that the 6. daies mentioned by Moises were metaphoricall not natural Moises dividing those things which were made by parts for the better capacitie of the rude and ignorant people to whom he spake which opinion of one onelie Augustine was ever preferred in the church as testifyeth Melchior Canus in these wordes At communis hic sanctorum consensus nullum argumentum certum theologis subministrat quin vnius Aug. opinio caeteris omnibus adversa probabilis semper in ecclesia est habita But this common consent of the holie fathers doth not yeeld any found argument to devines for the opinion of one onelie Augustine repugnant to the rest was ever thought probable in the church All the old writers Augustinus Ambrosius Chrisostomus Remigius Eusebius Maximus Beda Anselmus Bernardus Erhardus Bernardinus Bona ventura Thomas Hugo and all the rest without exception affirme vniformelie citing expresse textes of scripture for their opinion that the blessed virgin Marie was conceived in originall sinne yet doth the late hatched nest of Iesuits and sundrie other papistes avouche this day the contrarie for the truth Therefore saith their owne archbishop and greate canonist Panormitanus that we ought at all times to give more credite to one onelie prelate whosoever alledging the scriptures then to the resolution of the pope himselfe or of his counceil not grounded vpon the said scriptures The 4. Conclusion THe papistes themselues doe often reiect the generall and common opinion and follow their owne private iudgements never remeÌ„bring or litle regarding that they condemne the like in others This writeth their owne Melchior Canus Vbi ego si Thomistae omnes cum Scotistis existant sicum antiquis iuniores vellent contra me pugnare tamen superior sim necesse est non enim vt nonnulli putant omnia sunt in Theologorum auctoritate wherin though all the Thomistes stand with the Scotistes though the old writers with the yong fight against me yet shall I of necessity have the vpper hand ouer theÌ„ For al things rest not as some do think in the authoritie of divines Their owne Cardinal Caietain notwithstanding his zealous affection towards poperie his owne popish estate did for all that freelie acknowledge the truth in this point in so much that he preferreth a sense newly perceived but grounded vpon the scriptures before the old received opinioÌ„ of how many fathers so ever whose words because they are worthie the hearing and reading I wil alledge at large Thus doth he write Super quinque libris Mosis iuxta sesum literalem novumque scripturae sensum quandoque illaturus sub sâ—matris ecclesiae aec apostolicae sedis censura rogo lectores omnes ne precipites detestentur aliquid sed librent omnia apud sacram scripturam apudfidei christianae veritatem apud Catholicae ecclesiae documenta ac mores siquando occurrerit novus sensus textui consonus nec a sacra scriptura nec ab ecclesiae doctrina dissomus quamvis a torrente doctorum sacrorum alienus aequos se prebeant censores meminerint ius suum vni cuique tribuere solis scripturae sacrae authoribus reservata est authoritas haec vt ideo credamus sic esse quodipsiita scripserunt nullus itaque detestetur novum sacrae scripturae sensum ex hoc quod dissonat a priscis doctoribus sed scrutetur per spicacius textum ac
pope hath given this auctoritie to the priest But alas that can not possibly be graunted For this is a constant axiome with the papists par in parem non habet potestatem When two are of equall auctoritie the one can not make a law for or against the other Well since none of these waies can content his holines let vs heare what his owne deare vassals can say in his defense Iosephus Angles vnfoldeth this great difficultie at large when he thus writeth Canus affert tres opiniones prima est S. Thomae D. Bonaventurae quibus adhasit Turrecremata Secunda opinio est Paludani asserentis habere authoritatem absolvendi non à Papa sed à Christo. Tertia est Caietani dicentis iurisdictionem quam habet sacerdos absolvendi Papam nec esse à Christo neque à Papa neque ab ecclesia sed solum ex electione per hoc scilicet quod papa se subiicit illi illumque eligit Est quarta opinio qua tenetur quod quemadmodum in receptione ordinis datur vnicuique simplici sacerdoti potest as iurisdictionis respectu venialis mortalis quae poenitens alias confessus est etiam respectu cuiuscuÌ„que peccatoris in articulo mortis ita datur tunc iurisdictio eidem sacerdoti absolvendi papam Master Canus bringeth three opinions the first is of S. Thomas and S. Bonaventure to whome agreeth Turrecremata The second is the opinion of Paludanus who avoucheth that the Priest receiveth his authoritie not from the Pope but from Christ him selfe The third opinion is Caietans who affirmeth that the Priest hath authority to absolve the Pope neither from Christ nor from the Pope nor from the Church but onely by election to wit in that the Pope submitteth him selfe to the Priest and chooseth him And there is yet a fourth opinion which holdeth that as in receiving of priesthoode power of iurisdiction is given to every simple priest in respect of veniall sinnes and of those mortalls which the penitent nath otherwise confessed and also in respect of every sinner in the point of death so is iurisdiction then given to the said Priest that he may absolve the Pope Thus saith our reverend bishop and worthie fryer Ioseph Out of whose words I note 1 First that since our Lord is the God of peace and not of dissention as recordeth his holy Apostle in many places it must needes follow that this popish doctrine is not of God which is so devided against it selfe and therefore said Caietain truely though vnwittingly and to another ende when he denied the priest to have his authoritie from Christ or from his Church 2 I note secondly that their doctrine is meere opinative as which is onely grounded vpon mans invention 3 I note thirdly that as the priestes iurisdiction is vncerten so is the Popes absolution also as which is consectarie therevnto and consequently that the Pope standeth in daunger of his salvation And so if I be not deceived the obscuritie of this conclusion is made evident The Corollarie FIRST therefore since auricular popish confession is not commaunded by Christ secondly since it was not practised by the Apostles thirdly since it was instituted onely by the positive lawe of man fourthly since the Greeke Church never admitted that lawe fifthly since it is contrarie not onely to the fathers but to popish doctours also sixtly since it bringeth the Pope him selfe to the hazard of his salvation I conclude that it is a sufficient motive for me to renounce the Romish religion as false erroneous and pernicious doctrine Thus much of the tenth and last Motive Peroratio I HAVE in this discourse gentle Reader briefly confuted ten special articles of popish faith and religion 1 First I haue shewed the insufficiencie blasphemie and absurdities of popish pardons 2 Secondly that the Pope both may erre and hath erred defacto not only as a priuate person in priuate opinion but euen as Pope and publike person in iudicial definitions 3 Thirdly that generall councels in these latter daies are nothing els but a meere mockerie sophistical subtiltie to deceiue Gods people withal 4 Fourthly that the Popes dispensations are wicked licentious and intollerable 5 Fiftly that Kings are above Popes that their power is independent that they are subiect to none but to God alone 6 Sixtly that popish dissention is of matters most important and incredible to such as are not wel acquainted with their bookes 7 Seaventhly that the writings of the auncient fathers are to be received with great reuerence yet so as we acknowledge them to be men to haue their errours and to binde vs to their authorities no further then they accord with the holy Scriptures 8 Eightly that all things necessarie for our salvation are conteined in the holy Scriptures and that popish traditions are so vncerten as the best learned papists can not agree therein 9 Ninthly that after this life there is neither merite nor demerite nor satisfaction to be made and that the booke of Machabees can not establish popish purgatorie 10 Tenthly that the specificall enumeration and confession of all our sinnes is not onely not commaunded by the Scriptures but repugnant to the same and impossible to be accomplished by the power of man All which points I have prooued not onely by Scriptures authorities and reasons but euen by the expresse testimonies of best learned papists A thing heretofore never performed by any to my knowledge and yet so forceable against the papists if I be not deceived as nothing can be more My desire was to content all to offend none to confirme the weake to instruct the ignorant to reclaime the seduced and to confound all arrogant disloyall subiects If â—ffect succeede correspondent to my option God be thanked for it who is the chiefe worker of every good act to whome with the Sonne and the holy Ghost three persons and one God be all honour power glorie and dominion nowe and ever AMEN 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sapient 8. 1. Dionys. Arâ—â— pag. de divinis nominibus c. 4 2. Thess. 2. v. 4 5 6 7 8 9. 1 Greg. 9. lib. 1. decret tit 33. cap. 6. Glossa ibid. Gregor ubi supra Glossat lib. 1. decretat tit 7. cap. 3. Gerson de potestat eccles consider 12. part 3. Gerson ubi supra Bellarminus de Rom. Pont. lib. 5. cap. 8 1 2 3 Secundò principalitèr Bernar. ad Gaufridum epist. 125. 3 Robertus Bellarminus lib. 5. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 7. Bellarm. cod cap. Bellarm. cap. codem Bellarm. ubi supra 1 2 3 Prou. c. 8. 15. Rom. c. 13. v. 1. 4 Sylvest de papa para 2. 5 Bellar. derom pontif lib. 5. cap. 7. Luc. 12. 2. Mat. 16. 13. Mat. 23. 3. Mat. 15. 3. Mat. 15. 9. 1. Ioh. 4. 3. Roffensis cont assertion Luther art 18. prope initium Deut. cap. 2. vers 4. 2. Machab. cap. 12. vers 26. Matt. cap. 11. vers 25. Bellar. lib.