Suruay and The Tryall I meane out of which our Fryer Jesuite who may seeme to be begotten of some Fayrie Bratte as the Secular popish Priestes write of the Iesuite Robert Parsons the Author of this scurrilous shamelesse impudent and lying Libell would seeme to conclude and finde out against mee a strange Contradiction viz. that in the one Booke I make the seede of Purgatory not to haue been sowen before the yeare 250. And afterward to haue increased till it came to perfection And that this notwithstanding in my other Booke I make the seede sowen before and to haue increased by litle and litle vntill it became ripe and perfect Poperie which was in the yeare 250. And therevpon he inferreth that Purgatorie was sowen and not sowen growen and not growen an Article of Fayth and not an Article of Fayth in one and the same yeare Now to this lusty Gallant a poore begging Fryer by profession though as the Secular Priestes their brethren in Poperie tell them they shame with that occupation as who must haue their Chambers Perfumed Gentlewomen to pull off their Bootes them-selues to trowle vp and downe from good cheare to good cheare at their owne good pleasures I returne this Answere which if nothing else would is able to strike him dead First that hee hath vttered as many Lyes as hee hath done lines His first Lye is this viz. That I say in my Suruay of Poperie that the seed of Purgatorie was sowen before the yeare 250. His second Lye is this viz. That I affirme in my sayd Suruay that Poperie was ripe and perfect in the yeare 250. His third Lye is this viz. That I make Poperie sowen and not sowen in one and the same yeare His fourth Lye is this viz. That I make Purgatorie growen and not growen in one the same yeare His fift Lye is this viz. That I make Poperie an Article of Fayth and not an Article of Fayth in one and the same yeare that is to say in the 250. yeare after Christ. Secondly that albeit hee charge mee with sundry vntruethes and more then a litle please himselfe therewith yet is there no vntrueth at all but those false accusations which proceed from his owne lying lippes No other proofe need be made thereof but the bare recitall of my wordes For doubtles the Jesuite either speaketh against his owne knowledge or else he is so besotted blinded with malice that he can not see Wood for Trees Thirdly that our Fryer sheweth himselfe to be a right Iesuite that is to say a shamelesse and impudent Lyer For the Letters and Figures in the Margent A.D. 250. doe not connotate the wordes following but the wordes immediatly afore-going Which no man of iudgement and reason can for shame denie For first I say plainely that Origen fayned many odde thinges touching Purgatorie Againe I say expressely that after Origen others began to call it into question Where I wish the indifferent Reader to obserue seriously these two poyntes with mee First that Purgatorie could not be ripe and perfect when it began but to be called into question Then that this calling into question was after Origen who was lyuing about 250. yeares after Christ And consequently that the 250. yeares must needes haue relation to the time of Origen and his immediate followers as who all approoued Chronographers testifying the same lyued about that time And this is confirmed because I do not speake of the Byshoppes of Rome barely and absolutely but with a restriction implyed in this word late I in all my Bookes doe euer repute S. Austen S. Chrysostome and others that lyued 400. yeares after Christ not late Writers but old and auncient Fathers which is an euident argument that I applyed my Marginall note to the time of Origen of his immediate followers and not to the late Byshoppes of Rome whom I contend to be men not of the Old but of the late and New Religion So as euery child may see that our Iesuite not able to defend Poperie nor to withstand the trueth and yet vnwilling to yeeld to the trueth and to condemne Poperie in which and by which he liueth in wealth pompe and glorie imployeth himselfe and his wittes with might and maine heaping Lyes vpon Lyes furnished with notorious coozening trickes euery where so to dazell the eyes of his Reader least he behold the trueth and so condemne the rotten Ragges of Poperie for the New Religion He is at a non plus his Backe is at the Wall all his pleading for late start-vp Poperie is fraughted with nothing else but coozening trickes notorious cauils impudent calumnies and false dealing B. C. In the same place he writeth thus Fiftly that the primatiue Church was neuer acquainted with the Popes Pardons nor yet with his counterfeit and forged Purgatorie A notable vntrueth for not to speake of Pardons but of Purgatorie was it not the primatiue Church which beleeued Purgatorie when as himselfe confesseth that it was made an Article of Popish Fayth in the yeare 250. at what time all the Popes were martyred for Christ and in his Funerall he acknowledgeth the first thirtie for godly men saying that both they and diuers others taught the same doctrine which S. Peter had done before them and most certaine that one of these thirtie lyued in the yeare 250. and so I trow they were of the primatiue Church The Minister is full of distinctions his braine a shoppe of solutions hauing many I-sayes for the answere of any Obiection Yet it is to be feared that no deuise will free him from a grosse vntrueth affirming heere that the primatiue Church was not acquainted with Purgatorie and yet teaching in his Suruay that Purgatorie was made an Article of Fayth by the late Popes of Rome in the yeare 250. T. B. I answere first that our Fryer is willing heere as afore to passe ouer in deepe silence the Popes Pardons as a thing not possible to be defended Secondly that our Jesuite seemeth more impudent then Impudencie it selfe as who is not ashamed againe and againe to iterate most grosse palpable and shamelesse Lyes I haue already refuted him plentifully and honestly discharged my selfe of that vntrueth which he would gladly impose vpon mee concerning the making of Purgatorie an Article of Popish Fayth Thirdly that I doe not in any one of all my Bookes impute the inuention of Purgatorie to any one of the first thirtie Byshops of Rome as whom all I honour in mine heart haue euer spoken and written reuerently of them Fourthly that I doe not onely trow but am well assured that our Iesuites trowing is a meere leasing while he auoucheth 250. yeares to be within the compasse of the primatiue Church I prooue it because all Christes Apostles who were the primatiue Church were dead long before that time of which our Fryer speaketh Fiftly that our Fryers feare is a flatte Lye
shall heere truely relate as I will answere for it at the dreadfull day of Doome the Iesuite B.C. in his Forerunner hath these expresse words He may very well liue to see it and yeâ— die much sooner then he would Let him not be dismayed for I can assure him of mine owne knowledge that our consciences do not condemne vs neither do we know that we are not able to performe as great a matter as that To giue the more credite to my wordes and somewhat to reuiue his dead spirits I will heere giue him a note of the number of the Bookes and their particular contentes they be in all fiue written against his Motiues and Suruey fiue yeares agoe Thus writeth the Jesuite B. C. in his Forerunner To which let vs truely adde that which the Jesuite E.O. writeth in his Detection against M. D. Sutclâ—ffe and M. Willet These are his expresse wordes But I altered my purpose partly vpon other considerations but especially because the Confutation of his worthy Workes is alreadie vndertaken and to be published if it shall be thought necessarie Thus writeth E. O. that Learned man as B. C. his brother Jesuite tearmeth him Now sir marke well for Christes sake the detector E. O. That coozening Iesuite telleth vs mordicùs that the Confutation of my Bookes was but vndertaken by his fellowes when he published his Detection that is to say it was then concluded amongst his Breathren that my Bookes should be answered Hence commeth it it can not be denied that the supposed Answere to my Books was in the yeare 1602. for at that time was the Detection published at the most but in fieri not in facto esst to speake as the Schooles doe viz. the Answere was then but in hand or in doing at the most not done or finished in very deed Nay it was but then resolued amongst them as I prooued in my Counterblast out of the prouinciall Garnets Letter that some Answere should be made vnto my Bookes And therefore sayth the detector that he was once determined to haue said something against my Bookes but hearing that his fellowes were about the same matter he altered his purpose Heere is a most coozening legierdemain heere the Iesuites play their partes and shew themselues not onely egregious lyars and most cursed deceiuers but also as the secular Priestes write of them the most wicked men that liue vpon the earth It was not without great cause that the learned Papistes in France published a Booke against them which they teaâ—med The Iesuites Catechisme In which Booke they shew at large that the further a Jesuite goes the lowder he lyes An other Booke called The franke Discourse affirmeth resolutely that the Iesuites neuer harboured in their heartes any other proiect but the subuertion of States disauthorizing of Magistrates and seducing of Subiectes from their naturall allegeance In briefe thus the case standeth S. R. that learned Iesuite affirmeth constantly that at the publication of his Detection which was in the yeare 1602. my Bookes were not answered but at the most in fieri as is already said B.C. that famous Jesuite singeth an other song and auoucheth peremptorily that my Bookes my Motiues and my Suruey were answered fiue yeares before he published his fore-runner That is in plaine English foure yeares before that time in which his brother Jesuiteâ—elleth â—elleth vs that his fellowes were but aboue to answere them And least it should be obiected against B. C. that bloody cutthroate for so may his name be till he more plainely disclose it that his brother Jesuite S. R. accuseth him of a most notorious Lye therein hee to preuent that Obiection telleth vs that the Answere is suppressed and vpon iust occasion staied and not published These are his expresse wordes in the Contentes of his third Chapter That Bels Bookes haue long since receiued their answere though vpon iust occasion it hath hitherto bin suppressed yet shortly by Gods grace to be set foorth Thus discourseth the Fryer for the honour and life of his Pope which he manageth so gallantly as if his reward should be a Rope These Jesuites their seuerall asseuerations are much like to Sampson Foxes their Tayles are fast tyed togeather but their Heades are farre asunder So then this must needes be the conclusion though it imply a flat and plaine contradiction viz. that my Motiues and Suruey were answered about tenne yeares agoe at the least and yet vnanswered to this day This in my conceipte is not onely a Riddle but a plaine Jesuiticall Miracle Yet such a Miracle euer vnderstand as the Iesuites wrought vpon Sebastian the late King of Portugall Well all the world may see by this their dealing that they are at their wittes end what to say or write turning them selues this way that way and euery way by coozening lying iugling by what other meanes they possibly can deuise so to stay the out-cries of the people and their Popish vassals for being so long silent touching the answere of my Bookes Alasse alasse Who seeth not the nakednesse of late hatched Romish religion to what impudent desperate most damnable shiftes are the Papistes driueÌ„ for the defence therof How dare they confesse to the whole world that they haue bin buzzing about the Answere of my Motiues and Suruey for the space of sixe whole yeares or more and that when they had framed their Answere after their best manner they haue suppressed the same for the space of fiue years The trueth is that their falsely pretended Answere which should consist of fiue Books can not to this day befound extant in rerum natura When the Iesuites and Seminaâ—ie-Priestes consulted with Garnet their Prouinciall what course was best to be taken in hand for the Answere of my Bookes because their silence in that behalfe was verie dangerous to their Pope and Poperie the Father Jesuite hauing on his cappe of Consideration answered very peremptorily though neither clerkly nor honestly That they must either not meddle with the matter at all or else deale rather with my Person then with my Doctrine Yet he addeth very grauely these words Neuerthelesse for this matter as yee shall all agree for I doubt not but so many and such will see what is best Where wee haue to obserue by the way in perpetuam rei memoriam that not one onely Iesuite or Seminarie-priest writeth against mee but euen the whole broode tagge and ragge haue bent their Bowes to shoote their Arrowes at mee For though one odde Companion be singled out to take the quarrell in hand and to penne the Answere yet is the same fellow garded and assisted with the ioynt counsell aduise iudgement and helpe of all the rest But to what end is this my digression Doubtlesse to insinuate to the Reader that seeing I can neither see nor yet learne who hath seene this dolefull Knell to which I must resort for Answere I
THE Catholique Triumph Conteyning A Reply to the pretensed Answere of B. C. a masked Iesuite lately published against the Tryall of the New Religion Wherein is euidently prooued that Poperie and the Doctrine now professed in the Romish Church is the New Religion And that the Fayth which the Church of England now mayntaineth is the ancient Romane Religion Psal. 22. v. 16. Dogges are come about mee and the councell of the wicked layeth siege against me Psal. 120. v. 3. What reward shall be giuen to thee thou false tongue euen mighty and sharpe arrowes with hot burning coales AT LONDON Printed for the companie of Stationers 1610. To the most reuerend Father my very good Lord TOBY the L. Archbyshop of Yorke his Grace Primate of England Fifteene yeares most reuerend Father are now fully expired since I first began to write against the professed aduersaries of the auncient Christian Catholike Apostolique and old Romane religion I meane the late Byshops of Rome the Romish Cardinals the Iesuites Iesuited Papistes and Gunpowder-popish-vassals In which space of time I haue published so many Bookes in defence of the Catholique Fayth as are in number correspondent to the yeares A very long time it was the argument in hand considered before I could any way extort any Answere to any of my Bookes Howbeit when the Iesuites after mature deliberation had seriously pondered with them-selues that through their long silence many Papistes did vtterly renounce Poperie and ioyfully embrace the Catholique Fayth this day sinceerely professed in our Church then they became so ashamed of their silence in that behalfe that in the yeare 1605. they published a litle Pamphlet tearming it The forerunner of Bels downefall wherein they auouched with brasen faces that they had written fiue Bookes fiue yeares afore that time against my Motiues and my Suruey of Poperie And least it should be obiected against them that it cannot be so seeing we can neither see them nor heare of them the Fore-runner telleth vs very grauely but to their endlesse shame that the Answere is suppressed and vpon iust occasion stayed from the publication Alasse alasse how are silly Papistes bewitched with the iugling and deceitfull dealing of these seducers They haue been buzzing about the answering of my two first Bookes as they them selues tell vs almost the space of sixe whole yeares and when after their great paines and labours of so many yeares they had framed the answere in the best manner they could deuise then they suppressed the same vpon iust occasiō as their Forerunner in their name telleth vs. What haue they bestowed fiue yeares in wryting fiue Bookes against two of my Bookes and dare not to this day publish any one of them Out vpon lying lippes Out vpon trayterous Iesuites and Iesuiticall deceyuers of the world The trueth is that there is no trueth in these men And it is an euident testimonie that they are not indeed able to answere for otherwise they would not for very shame haue protested so much in print and haue performed nothing lesse I am verily perswaded that they will neuer during my life which they wish to be short and therefore haue they prouided my Winding sheete and other indirect meanes to take away my life frame any full and direct Answere to the said Bookes because in trueth all the Iesuites in the Christian world are not able to performe it the trueth being so cleare forcible against them After the Fore-runner a pretensed Answere was published in the yeare 1606. against the Downe fall of Poperie For refutation of which silly Pamphlet I addressed my Booke intituled The Iesuites Antepast which seemeth to their daintie mouthes so vntouthsome that I deeme it will serue also for their Post-past as I had formerly published an other Reply intituled The Popes Funerall to the Fore-runner of the Downefall Now lately in the end of the yeare 1608. an other pretensed Answere a silly thing God wote was published against my Booke intituled The Tryall of the new religion This Pamphlet came to my handes in Nouember last at which time I was very ill in body and also distant aboue one hundred Myles from mine owne Librarie the want whereof at that time was farre more grieuous to me then were all my painefull infirmities of body In the midst of which whiles I am writing for the trueth I find no litle comfort The case so standing albeit your Grace was then aboue fourtie Myles from me yet did I presume to bemone my selfe vnto your Grace for the supply of my present want of Bookes with whom my suite found such intertainement as I neither did nor euer could expect Bookes indeed I expected but that your Grace should also send them to me vpon your owne charges most freely and Christianly offering to send me your whole Librarie which is indeed a Librarie most excellent if I shouldst and in need thereof it seemed to mee such an honorable sauour as that I could not now in duetie omit to make this publique acknowledgement thereof The Iesuites and Iesuited Gunpowder Papistes not able to endure the sound of my Tryall wherein Poperie was tearmed and prooued the New Religion haue suborned as it seemeth Robert Parsons that lewd companion and trayterous Fryer to publish that supposed Refutation the summe and substaunce whereof they had no doubt collected and framed to his handes His name he dareth not disclose least the great disgrace which can not but insue vpon that silly Answere should eternally cleaue vnto him as being one who not able to defend Poperie by honest and Christian-like proceeding bestirreth himselfe to effect the same by continuall forgerie by lying by coozenage and deceitfull dealing as in this Booke I shall make apparant Wherein what my selfe haue effected or rather God in mee let the iuditious and honest Reader iudge and for that which he findeth well done giue God the glorie Such as it is I dedicate vnto your Grace as vnto him who hath deserued my vttermost service The Almighty blesse your Grace with many happy yeares in this life and with eternall glory in the life to come Amen Iunij 3. 1609. Your Graces most bounden Thomas Bell. Briefe Instructions for the better vnderstanding of the Discourse following Instruction 1. THE Pope Cardinals Iesuites and all Papistes generally do beare the world in hand that the Church of Rome this day keepeth inuiolably that Fayth and Religion which S. Peter and S. Paul in their time planted there I hold and defende the negatiue proouing the same soundly and euidently throughout this whole Discourse Wee all agree in this that the Church of Rome had once the true auncient Christian catholique and apostolique Fayth which she receiued from S. Peter and S. Paul my selfe most willingly subscribing thereunto I neither impugne the old Romane religion nor reprooue the auncient Byshops there it is the Late vp-start-religion of the Romish Church that now is which I detest and write against in all
our Fryers liking viz. that the name Pope was giuen to other Byshops in the auncient Church as I haue prooued in my Tryall euen hundreds of yeares after the Primitiue Church To which addition this to cheere vp our Fryer is consectarie to weet that the Clergie of Rome writing to the Clergie of Carthage called S. Cyprian the most blessed Pope Which verily as is already sayd they neither would nor yet durst haue done if the name in such a peculiar manner as the Fryer would make vs beleeue had been due to the Byshop of Rome For if the sayd name had been peculiar to him and his supposed soueraignetie implied therein other Byshops could neuer haue enioyed the same in the puritie of the Church Nay other Byshops would neuer haue improperly accepted of that name and title which none but the Byshop of Rome could properly ascribe vnto himselfe B. C. With the former he hath coupled an other saying thus And so in processe of time the Byshoppes of Rome were solely and onely called Popes and of Late yeares our Holy Father and his Holynesse is his vsuall name A grosse vntrueth T. B. This assertion hath two partes The former our Fryer hath freely graunted in his immediately aforegoing words The latter he must likewise yeeld vnto against his will or else be condemned of the whole world For besides that the Iesuiticall Cardinall Bellarmine and the popish Byshop Iosephus Angles in their Books of Late yeares dedicated to the Byshoppes of Rome haue giuen them the title of Holinesse euen in the abstract it is so euident that his Holinesse is of Late yeares the vsuall name of the Byshop of Rome that if any man either in Rome or in Jâ—ahe shall deny the same he may iustly be censured worthy of the Whetstone That which he sayth of Theodoretus the Councell of Chalcedon S. Cyprian and S. Austin is very friuolous and nothing to the purpose For first I say of Late yeares and yet the youngest of our Fryer named lyued aboue a thousand yeares agoe Secondly there is great disparitie betweene a peculiar and an vsuall name A peculiar name perteineth solely and onely vnto one but that an vsuall name may agree to many at once it cannot be denyed Thirdly as our Fryer hath confessed that the name Pope was of old time giuen to many and yet afterward remayned to the Byshop of Rome alone so must he volens nolens confesse of the name Holynesse B. C. Prosecuting his former matter he sayth But this Emperour that is Iustinian lyued after Christ his birth about 528. yeares ergo this poynt of poperie is a rotten ragge of the New religion In which wordes he venteth out an vntrueth For be it that it was then appropriated to the Pope as he sayth yet how can it be New which by his owne confession was vsed xi hundred yeares agoe That is so many ages before the foundations of his Religion were laide or the name of a Protestant heard of in the whole world T. B. Our Iesuite desiring to discharge the Pope and Poperie of Newnesse would prooue it by my graunt viz. because I confesse the name Pope to haue been appropriated to the Byshops of Rome a thousand yeares agoe But our Fryer in thus disputing doth prooue him selfe a very Daw. For he must learne to know that the newnesse of a thing may be considered two wayes absolutely and respectiuely And consequently that though the name Pope be Old absolutely considered yet it is New respectiuely when it is compared with the time of the Apostles Now so it is that you Papistes beare the world in hand that your Poperie is the Old religion and that selfe-same Doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the Church of Rome This is the Doctrine which I oppugne euen in the beginning of this present Chapter But our Fryer is so besotted with malice that he cannot discerne the trueth my reason standeth thus You Iesuites and Iesuited Papistes affirme desperatly and damnably that your Late start-vp Poperie is the Old religion deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paul to the Church of Rome But that is so farre from being true that the very name Pope is New as wanting aboue 500. yeares of that age or time whereof you bragge and boast ergo seeing the Apostolicke and first Religion is onely the Old religion and that which commeth after as Tertullian truly writeth the false and New religion it followeth of necessitie that the name Pope comming 500. yeares after the Old religion is but a rotten Ragge of the New Where I wish the Reader to remember that I speake of the name Pope in that sense in which the Byshoppes of Rome vsurpe the same That which our Jesuite addeth of Protestantes how absurd it is shall God willing by and by appeare B. C. I omit heere how many Ecclesiasticall names haue been brought into the Church as Consubstantiall against the Arrians Incarnation against other Heretikes the better by a new name to declare an auncient article of Fayth Will Bell for all that call these Wordes rotten Ragges of a New religion Hee never dare offer it and yet with no lesse reason may be doe it then he doth heere the name of the Pope T. B. Who seeth not to what shiftes our Iesuiticall Fryer is driuen He affirmeth desperately that I may with no lesse reason call the holy names appropriated to the sonne of God rotten ragges of a New religion then the name of the Pope But out vpon such Rotten diuinitie out vpon such paltry Fryers The sacred names Consubstantiall and Incarnation are equiualently according to the substance and true nature of the thinges signified by the same set downe in many places of the holy Scriptures Which was made most apparant against the Arrians by the Fathers of the first famous Councell of Nice but the name Pope as it is of Late yeares challenged by the Byshops of Rome and heere auouched by the impudent Fryer is so farre from being either expressely or virtually conteyned in the holy Scriptures that all sacred Writ vtterly condemneth the same as a Rotten ragge of a New religion inuented at Rome aboue fiue hundred yeares after the death of S. Peter S. Paul Againe the Holy names of Consubstantiall and Incarnation were not first common to others and afterward attributed to the sonne of God But the name Pope as I haue prooued and as the Frier hath plainely confessed was first and that more then 500-yeares common to all Byshops and in processe of time appropriated to the Byshops of Rome Thirdly the thing truly signified by the holy wordes Consubstantiall and Incarnation neuer could agree to any creature in the world but the thing truely signified by the word Pope did in the primatiue and purest age of the Church doth at this present and may in time to come truely agree to all true Byshops in Christs Church Now touching the name of Protestant I answere
great consequence may be perswaded by the aduise of his graue Councellours that his corporall presence were necessarie and therevpon resolue with himselfe to goe in proper person Yet in such a case it can neither truly nor properly be sayd That the King was sent of his Subiectes but that hee tooke the iourney in hand freely and of his owne accord though perhappes the rather by their aduise To that of our Iesuite where he sayth That S. Paul being inferiour to S. Peter reprehended him and that Bell if he were a Byshoppe would looke as the Diuell looked ouer Lincolne and none might admonish him of any fault I answere in this manner First that our Fryer doth too much iniurie to S. Paul while he maketh him inferiour to S. Peter and withall doth no little dishonour to his Popes who in all their Pardons Dispensations and such like trumperie doe euer rely vpon the ioynt authoritie of S. Peter and S. Paul grounding their power and soueraigntie in them both For S. Paul receiued not his Authoritie from any mortall man but from God himselfe immediately Yea himselfe sayth of himselfe that hee had as great Power as Peter th' one ouer the Iewes th' other ouer the Gentiles Secondly that euery Apostle receiued from Christ himselfe equall Power ouer the whole World euery one of the eleuen hauing the same Commission that Peter had Thirdly that our Jesuite seemeth better acquainted with the Diuell then he is with God as who beareth his Reader in hand that he knoweth how the Diuell looked ouer Lincolne Fourthly that not Bell but the Pope is the man who may carry thousandes of soules into Hell and yet no man may say vnto him Why doest thou so This is alreadie prooued in the Conclusions aforegoing Heere I deeme it not amisse for the complement of the Popes falsely pretended Soueraigntie to adioyne a testimonie of one of his holy Martyrs by way of digression The Digression THe Secular popish Priestes aswell French as English haue published in print may Bookes in which they haue most liuely pourtrayed and paynted out the Iesuites in their best beseeming colours They affirme constantly in their sayd Bookes of the Iesuites in generall that they be Proud men Tyrantes Coozeners Thieues Gypsies Murderours and men of no Religion Of Robert Parsons that trayterous and foule-mouthed Jesuite in particular that hee is a Bastard a notorious Drunkard a Deceiuer a Traytor a prouoker of others to Treason the Monster of mankind a Farie-brat begotten of some Incubus and what not All which are plainely and truly related in my Booke intituled The Anatomie of Popish tyrannie Which Booke hee that hath not seene and read may seeme to be ignorant of the deepest poyntes of Iesuiticall Theologie These Bookes do so gall wound the Jesuites at the very heart as they know not in the world what to say or answere in that behalfe Clerke and Watson lately executed for their most notorious treasons wrote sundry Bookes against the sayd Jesuites This Iesuite B. C. is so mightily assayled and turmoyled with that which I cite out of Watson that in one place to weete in his Epistle about the 27. page hee hath these wordes The Author he alleadgeth is some Quodlibetarian Minister though poore Watson beareth the name But in an other place to weete in the eight Chapter of this present Pamphlet he writeth thus Bell sheweth smal conscience in belying the dead and laying more faultes vpon him vniustly when alasse hee had otherwise too many Againe Watson speaketh of matters of fact In which twaine the Iesuite flatly contradicteth himselfe In the former hee would gladly finde out an other Author But in the latter hee vnawares fathereth the Booke vpon Watson telling Bell that hee belyeth the dead To which I adde that Watson vpon his death did acknowledge himselfe to be the Author The Iesuites third Chapter of the Marriage of Priestes and Ministers of the Church THe Jesuite greatly lamenting that the prohibition of the Marriage of Priestes can not be iustified not daring to deale with my Suruey where the same is most largly handled all Obiections and difficulties which possibly can be imagined distinctly soundly answered complayneth grieuously that I seeke to deceiue my reader in not proouing in my Tryall what I say for the same but referring the Reader to my Suruey The truth is this that in the Tryall I meant onely to shew to all simply seduced Papistes that late Popish Faith and Doctrine was not the old as they ignorantly beleeue but the new Religion in verie deede And my purpose was to effect the matter with such breuitie as euery one might buy the Treatise for a small peece of money and carry it in his Bosome about with him and so be able to poynt as it were with his Finger against all such as boast of Poperie as of the old Religion when and by whom euery maine poynt of late Papistrie first began Our Jesuite seeing their Pope confounded and their Fayth and Doctrine prooued to be the New religion can not tell in the world what to doe say or thinke for and in the defence thereof Let vs heare his owne wordes thus doth he write It serueth not the turne saith he to tell vs that he hath done it in his Suruay I therefore to content our Fryer Jesuite if it will be am heere resolued to set downe such speciall kindes of proofe deriued and taken out of my Suruay as are able to perswade all indifferent Readers that the Marriage of Priestes euer was and this day is both honest lawfull by Gods law and onely prohibited by the wicked and cursed Lawes of men the Byshops of Rome I meane The first Proposition All Ministers which are not Papistes nor subiect to the lawes and rules of Poperie may lawfully Marry euen by the doctrine of the Church of Rome I prooue it because all such Ministers are meere Lay-men by the iudgement of the Church of Rome which Church for all that and none other debarreth Priestes and other Ministers of the Church from the freedome of honourable Wedlocke This Assertion is plaine and euident it needeth no proofe at all The 2. Proposition Marriage was euer lawfull for all Priestes and other Ministers of the Church during all the time of the Old Testament This Proposition is cleare to all such as shall duely reuolue the holy Bibles For the holy Prophet Jeremie was the sonne of Helkiah who was one of the Priestes that were at Anathoth Hophni and Phinehaâ— were the sonnes of Helj the Priest Sephora was the daughter of Jethro the Priest of Midian S. John the Baptist who was the precursor of our Lord Iesus was the sonne of Zacharias the Priest Yea the High Priest was appoynted by God himselfe to marry a Mayde of his owne people so honourable was the mariage of Priestes in his most holy sight The 3. Proposition Marriage is lawfull for Priestes and
the matter Yet such a Booke I neuer saw to this day neither can I learne that any other hath seene the same But more hereof to speake fitter occasion will be offered hereafter And if I liue to see such a Booke extant it shall not God willing be long vnanswered Thirdly that I prooued it in the Tryall euen in this very Chapter to be a very rotten Ragge of the New religion And this I did performe in that place many wayes First by the expresse wordes of Syluester Pryeras a man so profound and learned that hee was by the Papistes surnamed Absolutus Theologus who constantly affirmeth that the Popes Pardons were neuer knowne to vs neither by the Scriptures nor yet by the auncient Fathers but onely by the late Writers Loe the Popes Pardons are so new that neither the Holy Scriptures nor yet the old Fathers knew them but the late Writers onely Ergo they must needes be Ragges of a New Religion How can the Fryer denie this withoutblushing His owne conscience accuseth him Hee can not tell doubtles what in the world to say or thinke Hee seeth euidently that Poperie is prooued the New Religion Hee perceiueth right well that hee is not able with all the helpe of his best friendes to defend the Pope from vtter shame Secondly by the flat testimonie of the Popish canonized Saint Antoninus sometime Archbyshop of the famous Citie of Florence who deliuereth the selfe same Doctrine that Syluester did Thirdly by the Doctrine of Petrus Lombardus their famous Maister of Sentences who though he with great diligence collected into one Volume all the worthy Sentences of the old Fathers could neuer for all that find the Popes Pardons or any mention thereof in any of their Writinges For as Syluester and Antoninus truely write the Old Writers were not acquainted with any such thing Fourthly by the free confession of M. Fisher that famous Popish so supposed Martir sometime Byshop of Rochester in noble England who in his Answere to M. Luthers Articles was enforced to admit the Newnes of the Popes Pardons To all which and much more plainely set downe in the Tryall our Iesuite sayth not one word Hee was so frighted forsooth with the Conclusion that hee durst not once touch the Premisses but passing them ouer in deepe silence hee curâ—alleth the Ergo and seuereth it from the Consequent because it did connotate plainely lay open to the Reader that the Premisses went before I wish the Reader to peruse the Tryall that so hee may see the coozening trickes of the proud Fryer Marke the Complement following The Complement of this Chapter FOr the better instruction of the Christian Reader and the vtter confusion of our Fryer and of all other Fryers Jesuites and Iesuited Popelinges let vs seriously ponder and constantly remember that there be two kindes of Pardons Th' one De pamtentijs iniunctis th' other Dâ—remissione peccatorum Concerning the former kinde which were onely relaxations or mittigations of Discipline and Canonicall Penance inioyned by the Church I graunt very willingly that in the primatiue and auncient succeding Churches they were very frequent and vsuall For in those dayes and ages such as were notorious offendours and had giuen publike scandall to the Church were enioyned by the Church to doe publique penaunce for their publique faultes before they could be admitted into the Church againe Which godly Discipline is this day obserued God be thanked for it in all particular Churches throughout this Realme of noble England Yea in the auncient Churches many yeares of penaunce or publique exercises of humiliation were ordained for euery publique grieuous Offence Wherevpon it came that when many penitent persons gaue euident signes of true internall remorse for their former scandalous conuersation then the Church thought good to giue to such penitent persons some relaxation of their so inioyned publique penaunce Which kind of Pardons the famous Councell of Nice of Arles of Ancyra and others did vsually giue to penitent persons Of which manner of pardoning the auncient Fathers Tertullianus Cyprianus Jrenaeus Eusebius Sozomenus and others doe often make relation But concerning the latter kind of late Popish Pardons that is of applying to whom they list and when they list aswell to the liuing as to the dead the Merites of Christ and of his Saintes as condigne satisfaction for their Sinnes no Scripture no Councell no Father no auncient approoued Historiographer maketh any mention at all Which trueth I haue so plainely prooued in my Booke of Motiues as no Papist in Europe is able to answere the same The Booke hath been extant in print now 15. whole yeares and to this day no answere though often promised will appeare But let our Iesuite proceed in his wonted maner B. C. I will adde one testimonie more of our Enemies the Waldenses who appeared to the world about the yeare 1270. as testifieth Claudius Cussordius and Guido one of whose Hereâ—â—es was against the Popes Pardons as is most certaine and Kemnitius confesseth which argueth that Parâ—ons were long in vse before the yeare 1300. And therefore be it knowen to Bell that he hath runge out a notorious vntrueth T. B. I answeare first that Waldenses appeared to the world one hundred yeares before the time our Fryer nameth viz. about the yeare 1169. and so hath hee in this poynt runge one notorious vntrueth though but a very small one in respect of his other manifold and most impudent lyes Secondly that Chemnitius doth not confesse as our Fryer impudently affirmeth But wisemen may and will beleeue him at leasure seeing hee referreth them for the proofe to his inuisible Booke The dolefull Knell For I protest to all the world that I can neither see it nor find out any man who hath seene that same Booke And therefore I haue great reason to thinke that no such Booke is extant in deed especially because the Iesuites haue long sithence and many times affirmed both in wordes and writinges that my Motiues and Suruay were answered which for all that was such a notorious lye as the sayd Bookes remayne to this day vnanswered insomuch as some of their dearest and most deuoted vassals are ashamed of their sylence in that behalfe and beginne to stagger and to doubt of the Popish Fayth and Religion My Motiues were printed in the yeare 1593. And my Suruay of Poperie in the yeare 1596. So as the Jesuites haue had the former in their handes now 15. yeares fully compleate and the latter 12. yeares with the vantage of a large assisse But more of this subiect in the 9. Chapter following God willing toward the end of the same Thirdly that our Fryers two Witnesses Guide and Cussordius are in honestie and credite comparable to himselfe base fellowes men of no reputation Knightes of the Post who will say or sweare any thing for the Popes pleasure Fourthly that where our Fryer sayth without
is also a manifest vntrueth T. B. I answere first that as our Fryer is bold vntruely to charge me with vntruethes so I must be bold to returne the same vntruethes vnto himselfe and for his iust demerites reward him with the Whetstone Secondly that while our Fryer Jesuite would very gladly impose vpon me two vntruethes so to hide the nakednesse of Poperie he hath committed no fewer then three notorious Lyes First he saith roundly though vntruely that Roffensis the Byshoppe of Rochester speaketh nothing of 250. yeares This is his first notorious Lye I prooue it sundry wayes First because he telleth vs resolutely that the Greeke Fathers beleeued not Purgatorie for the space of 1517. yeares consequently not for the space of 250. yeares Secondly that after many pluralities of yeares Purgatorie and Pardons were receiued Thirdly that Purgatorie was a long time vnknowen Fourthly that afterward some beleeued it by litle and litle How sayest thou now sir Fryer doth your Popish Byshoppe say nothing of 250. yeares Are not 250. contayned in 1517. yeares Doe not many pluralities of yeares something touch 250. yeares Doest not thou ô Fryer extend the age of the Primatiue Church how truely shortly will be seene vnto 250. yeares And yet doth the Byshoppe tell thee that both Pardons and Purgatorie were vnknowne to the primatiue Church Ergo I must score this vp for a flatte and knowne Lye Secondly he sayth impudently that the Byshop doth not denie that Purgatorie was alwayes beleeued in the Church This is his second notorious and shamelesse Lye I prooue it by a three-fold argument For first the Byshop sayth plainely in expresse wordes that the Greeke Fathers S. Chrysostome S. Basill S. Gregorie S. Epiphanius and the rest of those great Learned men and stout Champions of the Church beleeued not Purgatorie for the space of 1517. yeares Secondly that the Fathers of the Latine Church beleeued it not for many yeares Thirdly that afterward some beleeued it by litle and litle Where I wish the Reader to obserue seriously this word deinde afterward for it striketh dead confoundeth the Iesuite and prooueth manifestly that Poperie is the New Religion The case is so cleare and euident as euery Child may easily perceiue the same For that which was beleeued afterward must perforce be vnbeleeued at the first Againe that which was sometime vnknowne must needes be sometime vnbeleeued or else our Fryer must needs say which for his Lugs he dareth not say that the Pope forsooth and his Iesuited Popelinges beleeued they know not what His third notorious Lye is this viz. that I vntruely charge their Byshoppe of Rochester in fathering vpon him that the Church of Rome beleeued not Purgatorie for the space of 250. yeares after Christ. For I haue euidently and irrefragably deduced out of the Byshoppes expresse wordes that the Church of Rome beleeued not Purgatorie for more then 250. yeares thrise told yea not for the space of more then one thousand yeares I prooue it once againe to the Iesuites and the Popes euerlasting shame Marke well my Discourse for Christes sake gentle Reader for in so doing thou canst not but abhorre and detest Poperie as a fond and new Religion I protest vpon my saluation that I beleeue as I write as also that the late Bishoppe of Rochester whom our Fryer nameth Roffensis which word onely connotateth the place where he was Byshoppe but is not his name prooueth the same effectually this is the proofe First the Byshoppe telleth vs constantly that the Greeke Church neuer beleeued Purgatorie Secondly that the Latine Church did not beleeue it of a long time Thirdly that afterward some few beleeued it by litle and litle Fourthly that it was generally beleeued not but of late yeares Fiftly that Pardons began to be sought for and to be graunted when the people stood a while in feare of Purgatorie paines To which I adde that Pardons beganne not vntill Bonifacius the eight 1300. yeares after Christ as I haue alreadie prooued out of Platina the Popes deuoted vassall and sometime his Abbreuiator Apostolicus And consequently that seeing such Pardons as I speake of in this place were not knowen for the space of 1300. yeares after Christ and seeing withall that they were in vse shortly after Purgatorie began to be feared it followeth by a necessarie and ineuitable illation that Purgatorie was not knowen and beleeued for the space of 1200. yeares at the least And so I trow nay am well assured not for the space of 250. yeares after Christ euen by the flatte testimonie of their great learned Popish Byshop my late Lord of Rochester B. C. As I haue prooued against him in the Dolefull Knell out of S. Denis S. Pauls scholler and Tertullian yea and to his vtter confusion conuinced out of himselfe T. B. I answere first that when our Fryer is at a non plus then would hee be thought to haue done that els where which he is not able to performe in deed and therefore doth he many times send me to this inuisible Booke of which more at large God willing before the end of this Discourse Secondly that if euer I can see the Booke as I hope to doe if any such Booke be extant in rerū natura I shall with speed conuenient frame mine answere to the same not doubting but the Confusion will be his owne after due examination of the same And in the interim let him this know by the way and before hand that his Booke is a sillie and dolefull thing indeed as which by his owne confession heere hath no better Authors to relie vpon then a counterfeite Denis and a Montanizing Tertullian Thirdly that what hee can possibly gather out of all my Bookes the same hath hee in this present pretensed Refutation set downe at large whether to his owne shame and confusion or to mine let the indifferent Reader iudge B. C. In this place I will adde the Testimonie of his brother Perkins who in his Probleme confesseth That Purgatorie was first receiued by Tertullian the Montanist wherein is one open vntrueth to weete that Hee was the first for hee onely affirmeth it but prooueth it not and no maruell when hee can not seeing most certaine it is that it came from the Apostles Non temerè c. Not without cause sayth S. Chrisostome these thinges were ordayned of the Apostles that in the dreadfull mysteries commemoration should be made of the dead for they know that thereby much gaine doth come vnto them much profite T. B. I answere first that our Fryer in one place calleth M. Perkins The Puritane of England and in an other place obiecteth my Booke penned against them Howbeit heere hee must needes be my Brother and I oppressed with his Authoritie Secondly that our Fryer hath no sooner obiected M. Perkins against mee but foorthwith hee oppugneth his Assertion Thirdly that he affirmeth it for a most certaine
trueth that Purgatorie came from the Apostles Which more bold then wise affirmance I returne vnto our Fryer for a most certaine and shamelesse Lye for a most notorious Slaunder and for an intollerable Blasphemie against the blessed Apostles of our Lord Iesus I prooue it sundry wayes First because S. Chrysostome was one of the chiefest and best Learned Fathers of the Greeke Church who as my Lord of Rochester hath told vs very plainely and resolutely neuer beleeued there was any Popish Purgatorie while they were lyuing heere on earth and consequently that Purgatorie can neuer be truely fathered vpon that great learned holy man Secondly because those Homilies from whence our Fryer would gladly fetch Purgatorie-fire are counterfeite not S. Chrysostomes indeed Whereof this is an argument insoluble that the Greeke Fathers did neuer beleeue Purgatorie For if S. Chrysostome had taught Purgatorie in his Bookes Byshoppe Fisher that glorious so supposed Popish Martyr could not truely haue written and constantly auouched to the whole world as he did that the Greekes neuer beleeued Purgatorie Thirdly that if the Apostles had taught Purgatorie then could not so many so Learned so holy Fathers of the Greeke Church haue been so long time euen till their death ignoraunt thereof Nay if the Latine Church in their dayes had receiued Purgatorie as a tradition Apostolicall they would neuer haue withstood it but most reuerently haue admitted and most Christianly beleeued the same Fourthly that if we suppose and graunt our Fryer thus much to cheare vp his spirits a while viz. that they are S. Chrysostomes wordes which he citeth in his name yet will it not serue his turne to build Popish Purgatorie therevpon For the words do onely prooue this and no more to weete that th'Apostles taught Commemoration of the dead Which my selfe am so farre from disliking that I haue many yeares agoe approoued it in my Suruay of Poperie Yea the Papistes in their publike Prayers make frequent and vsuall Commemoration of their Martyrs whom they for all that deny to be in Purgatorie-fire and freely graunt to be in Heauen And so they can not inferre Purgatorie out of the Commemoration of the dead To this I adde that Prayer for the dead which is more then Commemoration may in a godly sort be vsed as I haue shewed at large first in my Motiues and afterward in my Suruay More then which the Iesuite can not inferre out of his Author as his Marginall note doth declare I therefore conclude that our â—esuite hath runge out a notorious vntrueth when he telleth his Reader that Purgatorie came from the Apostles B. C. Heere the iudicious Reader may also note how the Minister contradicteth himselfe In his Suruay intreating of Purgatorie he sayth Thus by litle and litle it increased till the late Byshoppes of Rome made it an Article of Popish Fayth Where in the Margent he noteth the time thus In the yeare of our Lord 250. Heere he sayth that the Church of Rome beleeued it not for the space of 250. yeares After which as he telleth vs it increased by litle and litle And so in this place he maketh the seed of Purgatorie not to haue been sowen before the yeare 250. and afterward to haue increased till it came to perfection There he affirmeth that the seed was sowen before and increased by litle and litle vntill it became ripe and perfect Poperie which was in the yeare 250. And so Purgatorie was sowen and not sowen growen and not growen an article of Fayth and not an article of Fayth in the same one yeare 250. I will not deny but the Minister hath some skill in botching togeather of old endes of Diuinitie gathered out of the Ragge market of Caluin and such like Geneua-Merchants yet I feare mee it will be hard for him so to cobble the sayinges togeather that the flaw of a contradiction appeare not T. B. I answere first that where our Fryer pretendeth some feare that I can not defend by any cobling my contradiction by him so supposed I am so free from it that I weene his heart will pant so soone as he shal peruse my answere to the same For so God helpe me I woonder he is not ashamed so to write O tempora O mores I would not haue imagined that the Maister Deuill of Hell had so possessed him as to make him the instrument of such notorious execrable and plaine diabolicall Lyes Neuer did any man heare know or read such shamelesse palpable and grosse vntruethes Who will not exclaime and cry out of Poperie that shall read this Fryers Answere and this my Reply ioyned with my Tryall and my Suruay in which hee would seeme to ground his deuillish and abhominable Lyes Fie fie how can he thinke that any of witte and iudgemet will beleeue him Hee perceiueth right well that the trueth published in my Bookes can neuer be truly answered and therefore sillie Papistes who dare not for feare of Popish tyrannicall censures read my Bookes must perforce receiue and beleeue his most execrable Lyes for the trueth Oh that they would once read my Bookes nay but this one Reply with a single eye and indifferent iudgement all parcialitie set apart Hee knoweth that hee falsely accuseth mee his owne conscience though neuer so badde can not but condemne him Euery child may easily discerne that the trueth is on my side The case is so cleare my wordes so plaine and the trueth thereof so apparant as euery iudicious and honest Reader must needes thinke him worthy to haue a Whetstone tyed at his Girdle a Foxe-tayle in his necke and a Fooles-bable in his hand If Poperie through mortall wounds receiued were not past recouerie if the trueth published in my Bookes were not vnanswereable if the Iesuite were not at a Non plus not able to defend the Pope and his late start-vp Romish Fayth he would neuer thus delude the world with his most notorious Lyes and deceitfull dealing In my Suruay marke wel for Christs sake these are my expresse words in the third part and sixt Chapter Afterward Origen being too much addicted to his allegoricall speculation fayned many odde things touching Purgatorie as the Ethnicke Plato whom he much imitateth had done before him After Origen others began to call the matter into question others rashly to beleeue it others to adde many thinges to Origens conceit Thus by litle and litle it increased till the late Byshops of Rome made it an Article of Popish Fayth In my Booke intituled The Tryall of the new Religion these are my expresse words First we see that the Greeke Church neuer beleeued Purgatorie to his dayes I speake there of Iohn Fisher late Byshoppe of Rochester and so it was vnkowen to them 1517. yeares Secondly that the Church of Rome beleeued it not for the space of 250. yeares after which time it increased by litle and litle These are my very wordes in both my Bookes The
And the Apostles doubted not to say It hath seâ—med good to the holy Ghost and to vs. If in these and such like speaches God and his Creatures be ioyned togeather without being made ioynt purchasers but as the Creator and the secondarie cause in like manner may the Merites of Christ and his Saintes be conioyned as hath been sayd T. B. I answere first that the more our sillie Iesuite striueth against the trueth the more he still woundeth rotten Poperie Fiue examples he heere produceth and neuer one to the purpose as by by God willing shall appeare Secondly that if Poperie were not the New religion in very deed such paultry and beggerly shiftes would neuer be vsed in defence thereof Thirdly that the question is not of those actes which Gods Saintes doe alone and of them-selues but of those effectes in producing whereof Gods Saintes are sayd to concurre and to be ioyned with Christ our Sauiour And therefore of the fiue Examples three are altogeather impertinent viz. the first the third the fourth For in the first place the Angel doth not connotate a Creature but God himselfe which I prooue by a double argument First because the Text speaketh of that Angel which deliuered Israel or Jacob from all euill which effect can not possibly be ascribed to any Creature but To God alone the fountaine of all Grace and giuer of euery good guift And it is confirmed because the same God which in the 15 verse is said To haue fed Israel all his life long is likewise sayd in the verse following To haue deliuered him from all euill Secondly because two other places of Scripture doe interpret the Angel to be God himselfe The God of Bethel the God that did keepe Jsrael whither soeuer he went In the third place as also in the fourth the actes are onely ascribed to the Israelites and to S. Paul but neither the Apostle nor the Jsraelites are sayd to concurre with Christ in producing the same effect Let the wordes be well marked and the case is cleare The second and fift or last Examples doe prooue indeed that Gods Saints are ioyned with Christ in producing the same effectes but for all that are as far from concluding the Iesuites purpose as Rome is distant from Roan or the East from the West For albeit I willingly graunt that Gods Saintes may concurre and be conioyned with Christ in producing al those effectes to which they are deputed of God as instrumentes meanes and inferiour causes vnder him hauing to that end receiued of him actiue power in some measure yet doe I constantly denie and vtterly defie that most vnchristian blasphemous and hereticall Popish assertion which brutishly and more then cruelly auoucheth that Beckets Blood and Christes most pretious Blood concurre in working mans Saluation For as the Israelites truely sayd that the Sword of God and Gideon destroyed their enimies so may it truely be sayd in like manner that God and the Phisition cure inward sores God and the Surgion externall woundes that God and Masons builde Churches God and Taylors make Garmentes God and Meate nourish men and so foorth But we can neuer truly say that Christes Blood and Beckets Blood doe worke mans Saluation The Sword of Gideon Masons Surgions Phisitions Meate and Taylors haue a certaine actiue power inherent in them to produce such effectes but mans Saluation is such a diuine supernaturall supereminent effect as Beckets Blood hath no actiue power at all neither more nor lesse to produce the same For this respect grauely writeth S. Augustine That if the best liuer on earth should be rewarded according to his best desertes yet could he not but perish euerlastingly For this respect wisely sayth the learned and religious Fryer Ferus That our Saluation consisteth onely and solely in the Merite of Christ not in our owne Workes He addeth the reason because we are not able to make satisfaction no not for the least sinne we commit For this respect sayth Abbot Bernard That the sinne which maketh deuision betweene God and vs can not be wholly taken away in this life This Subiect is handled at large in the ninth Chapter afore-going in the eleuenth Conclusion to which place I referre the Reader for his better satisfaction herein B. C. Bell else-where telleth vs That popish Inuocation and Adoration was not knowen vntill the yeare three hundred and seauentie Yet is it no thing comparable to thâ—s heere vttered making that Article a thousand yeares younger then in his former Booke T. B. I answere first that in my Suruey I haue disputed at large how Inuocation of Saints increased by degrees For the better cleering of which difficultie I there put downe many Canons and Conclusions In one Canon I affirmed the Church of God to haue liued vnacquainted with the Merites Intercession of the Saints in heauen for the space of two hundred thirtie yeares after Christ. In an other Canon I prooued soundly that the first seed of Popish inuocation of Saintes began not to besowen till about the yeare 233. after Christ. In an other Canon that about the yeare 250. after Christ some of the Fathers held constantly that the Saintes in heauen did pray for the lyuing vpon earth In an other Canon that some of the Fathers about the yeare 350. after Christ did by Rhetoricall Apostrophes apply their Orations to the dead Many other thinges concerning the Inuocation of Saintes I disputed in that Booke at large To which Booke though published about thirteene yeares agoe neither this Jesuite nor any other euer had any courage to this day to frame any answere at all In my Tryall of the new Religion which this Jesuite hath taken in hand to confute I constantly affirme that to Pray to be saued by the Blood of Thomas Becket is flat blasphemy against the Sonne of God And as I affirmed afore in my Suruey that Poperie sprang vp by degrees in such and such yeares so now I constantly auouch that to be saued by the Blood of Becket was vnknowen to the Church for the space of a thousand yeares and odde In the Margent the Printer hath negligently set downe 1407 for 1047. yeares after Christ. I would that were the least of many schores of faultes which haue escaped in my Bookes partly of ignoraunce and partly through the negligence of careles Printers Now where I assigne diuers times and yeares precisely and distinctly to the birth of seuerall degrees of Poperie our Iesuite being at a flat non-plus what to answere fleeth malitiously to ridiculous cauils and most foolish and false imputations Yea the Fryer Iesuite B.C. bloody cut-throate if his name so be doth bewray his owne malice vnawares For these are his expresse words Let him be vrged with that which he teacheth else where and then his refuge will be that he speaketh not of the Inuocation of Saints in
can not but thinke that it is hid vnder a Pipkin so to be kept from Sun-burning euen as the other Fiue Bookes are prepared so many yeares agoe Howbeit if either it or any other Booke shall happen to come to my handes while God shall of his great mercie graunt me life health and sight the two last whereof doe in an hie degree begin to fayle me it shall God willing receiue a speedy Answere Let this Jesuite and all the rest so perswade them-selues as also that God giueth me comfort more then a litle in all my conflictes against them The 15. Chapter of Popish worshiping of Images B. C. SAint Gregorie sayth Bell sharply reprooued the Worship done to Images True it is But what kinde of Worshippe was it The Minister would haue the Reader to thinke that it was the same which the Catholique Church alloweth and teacheth which is nothing so For it was passing farre different for as much as S. Gregorie allowed conuenient Adoration as shall straight be sayd T. B. I answere first that I approoue our Iesuites Answere while he confesseth truely that Gregorie sharpely reprooued the Worshippe done to Images Secondly that I can not but withall condemne his fond interpretation of S. Gregories wordes For it is most cleare and euident that Gregorie neuer approoued religious Worship giuen to Images Thirdly that our Fryer falsely imagineth the Church of Rome to be the Catholique Church Of which Subiect I haue disputed at large in my Christian Dialogue B. C. Cardinall Bellarmine thinketh that this erroneous Worshippe was giuen by certaine new Christians 〈◊〉 surely such were most likely to fall into that grosse sinne of whom it is not so much to be marueyled if accustomed before to Idols they behaved themselues in like manner towardes sacred Images and adored them for Gods as in Pagain sinne they were taught and practised T. B. I answere first that woe is to those silly and simply seduced Christians who are enforced to beleeue and receiue as Catholique Doctrine whatsoeuer Bellarmine and his Iesuited complices shall coniecture imagine to be the trueth Yet is is true that all must be burnt with Fire and Faggot in Rome Spaine and Portingale that will not beleeue as the Pope and his Cardinals teach them Secondly that the Worship which the Papistes this day giue to Images is of like nature qualitie semblance and condition in euery respect with that which was giuen to Idols euen in the time of Paganisme I prooue it out of your popish Reformed Portesse or Breuiarie where I find this Prayer made to the Crosse. O Crux aue spe vnica hoc passionis tempore auge pijs iustitiam reisque dona veniam All hayle ô Crosse our only hope in this time of the Passiō increase Iustice to the Godly and eke to sinners Pardon giue To which I adde the manner of Worship which the Papistes doe to the Crosse on Good-fry day to say nothing of other times Vpon that day the Crosse is couered and in time of popish Prayers the Priest by degrees doth vncouer the same first on the right side with low reuerence done vnto it Then on the left side with the like reuerence exhibited Lastly the whole Crosse is reuealed and made manifest to the people And the like superstitious dotage is vsed in the Songe made to the Crosse. For in euery of the three degrees the tune is eleuated and made higher then afore Which being thus done the Priest putteth off his Shooes and prostrate vpon the ground adoreth and kisseth the Crosse. After the Priest follow the rest aswell of the Temporaltie as of the Clergie euery one in his order and degree And because none may come empty to the Lordes House many rich Oblations are made euen with the good liking of the Priest But if any refuse to adore and worshippe the Crosse he shall be burnt as an Heretique If any desire to know the mysteries of Popish worshippe done to the Wooden Crosse with the profound significations thereof he may find the same in Byshoppe Durand who hath bestowed great labour in that behalfe But say on sir Fryer it is not yet time to goe to dinner B. C. Bell quoteth Biel where nothing is handled of any such Subiect A small fault especially in Bell being one of such knowen trueth that he neuer vseth any such sleightes vnlesse it be for the better passage of the Ghospell To let that passe Why hath he not cited his Wordes He may pretend what reason he please but he must giue me leaue to thinke that there is none other saue onely that he knew not truely where to find them T. B. I answere first that our Iesuite is so addicted to lying as the Diuell may seeme to haue begotten him If I should stand to examine and refute all the Lyes which our Iesuite poureth out in his Pamphlets time doubtlesse would sooner fayle me then matter whereof to speake Secondly that our Jesuite is condemned in his owne Conscience as who accuseth me of that which is proper to himselfe and whereof he knoweth me to be innocent Is this possible to be prooued It is not onely possible but so easie a thing for me to prooue it that if I fayle herein I will desire no credite to be giuen me in other matters For the manifestation of the trueth herein I desire the honest and indifferent Reader to obserue two thinges with mee Th' one that the Iesuite hath seene read and taken note or notes out of my little Booke intituled The wofull cry of Rome For so much himselfe confesseth in his Preface to the Reader Th' other that in the selfe-same Wofull cry I haue both truly quoted the place and sincerely cited the expresse wordes of Biel there I write in this manner Yea Gabriel Biel a religious Popish Fryer and a very learned Schoole-doctor who liued long after Gregorie and Serenus euen one thousand foure hundred eightie and foure yeares after Christ doth sharply inueigh and reprooue the Worshippe giuen to Images Hee hath a large Discourse of this Subiect in which the Reader may finde these expresse wordes Quod vero Christiana religio Imagines sustinet in Ecclesia et oratorijs non permittit eo fine vt ipsae adorentur Sequitur Neque adoro Imaginem Christi quia lignum nec quia Imago sed adoro Christum coram imagine Christi quia scilicet imago Christi excitat me ad amandum Christum Whereas Christian religion tolerateth Images in the Church and in Oratories it doth not permit them for this end that they may be adored Neither doe I adore the Image of Christ because it is Wood neither for that it is an Image but I adore Christ before the Image of Christ because the Image of Christ doth allure me to loue Christ. Thus much and plentifull other matter against popish Worshippe of Images the Reader may find in that Booke And therefore I must not giue the Fryer that leaue
a Vaile hanging in the Doores of the same Church dyed and painted which had the Image as it were of Christ or some Saint for I doe not well remember whose Image it was Therefore when I saw in the Church of Christ a mans Image against the authoritie of the Scriptures I tore it in peeces and aduised the Keepers of that place of the Church in Anablatha to burie some poore body with it I pray you commaund that hencefoorth such Vailes which make against our Religion be not hanged vp in the Church of Christ. The same Epiphanius in an other place hath these expresse wordes Re vera sanctuÌ„ erat corpus Mariae non tamen Deus Re vera virgo erat ipsa virgo et honorata sed non ad adorationem nobis data sed ipsa adorâ—ns eum qui ex ipsa carne genitus est de caelis vero ex finibus paternis accessit Sequitur Neque Helias adorandus est etiamst in viuis sit Neque lohannes adorandus neque Thecla neque quisquam Sanctus adoratur Non. N. dominabitur nobis antiquus error vt relinquamus viuentem et adoremus ea quae ab ipso sacta sunt Sequitur Sit in honore Maria Pater et Filius ei Spiritus sanctus adoretur Muriam nemo adoret non dico mulierem imò neque virum Deo debetur hoc mysterium Neque Angeli capiunt talem glorificationem Sequitur Etsi pulcherrima est Maria et sancta et honorata a non ad adorationeÌ„ The body of Mary was holy indeed but she was not God The Virgin was a Virgin indeed and honorable but not giuen to vs to be adored But she adoreth him who being borne of her according to the flesh came downe from Heauen euen from his Fathers Throne Helias ought not to be Worshipped if he were this day liuing amongst vs. Neither is John to be Adored neither Thecla neither any other Saint For the old Errour may not so farre ouerrule vs that we forsake the liuing God and Adore the Workmanshippe of his handes Let Mary be had in honour let the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost be Adored Let none Adore Mary I say not the Woman but neither the Man this mysterie is due to GOD alone The Angels are not capable of such glorification Though Mary be most beautifull and holy and honourable yet is she not to be Adored Thus discourseth S. Epiphanius affirming resolutely that onely GOD ought to be Worshipped and Adored not any Saintes in Heauen or on Earth much lesse their Images The 16. Chapter of Church seruice in the Vulgar tongue B. C. TO prooue that the Publique Seruice of the Church ought to be in the Vulgar tongue he citeth the names of many Authors without euer setting downe their Sentences thinking it sufcient to referre the Reader 〈◊〉 his Suruey where he hath layd out their wordes at large T. B. I answere first that our Jesuite is so troubled with my Bookes as he seemeth to haue lost his wittes For in his Preface of this present Pamphlet hee obiecteth against me as a fault that I iterate some thinges in one Booke which I haue published in an other Neuerthelesse heere he chargeth me of insufficiencie for that I referre the Reader to my Suruey where I haue handled the controuersie at large What a fellow is this Jesuisicall Fryer If I iterate that which afore I vttered in an other Booke hee is like a madde man and cryeth out that I trouble him with often repetitions If I referre him to that which I haue written else where he accuseth me as in this place that it is not sufficient so to deale Secondly that himselfe in the .14 Chapter of this Pamphlet yeeldeth no other Answere touching Pope Mâ—rtins Dispensation saue onely that he referreth me to an vnknowen and as yet inuisible Booke which he calleth The dolefull Knell B. C. This prooueth not that the Publique Seruice of the Church was in any other Language then in the sacreâ— Tongues of the Greeke Latine c. For the Grecians might vnderstand the Priest though their Seruice were in Greeke because that Tongue was to them the vulgar and common T. B. I answere first that our Iesuite confesseth plainely that his purpose is not to examine my whole Tryall and I beleeue him in this point albeit this Chapter consisteth onely of sixteene lines But those few lines containe such sound and pithy Doctrine as all the Jesuitees in Christendome are not able truely to answere the same Secondly that I am heere content to iterate part of that which I haue else where set downe at large and yet I can hardly thinke that the same will be to our Fryers contentation Howbeit volens nolens he must put it vp seeing he hath prouoked me thereunto Theodoretus a great Learned man and a very famous Historiographer who liued almost one thousand and two hundred yeares agoe affirmeth constantly that in his time the Scriptures were translated into all maner of Languages and that they were not onely vnderstood of Doctors and Maisters of the Church but euen of the Lay people and common Artificers also These are his expresse wordes Hebraici verò Libri non modo in Graecum idioma conuersi sunt sed in Romanam quoque linguam Aegyptiam Persicam Indicam Armenicamque et Scythicam atque adeo Sanromaticam semelque vt dicam in linguas omnes quibus ad hanc diem nationes vtuntur Sequitur Fossoresque adeo ac bubuleos inuenias plantarumque consitores de diuina Trinitate rerumque omnium creatione discertantes The Hebrew Bookes are turned not onely into the Greeke tongue but also into the Romane language into the Egyptian Persian Indian Armenian and Scythian as also into the Sanromaticall tongue and to speake all in a word into all tongues which this day are in vse amongst Nations We may find Ditchers Deluers Neatheards and Gardiners disputing euen of the blessed Trinitie and of the Creation of all thinges Thus discourseth this auncient Father and great learned Writer shewing most clearely vnto his Readers that in the auncient Church and old time euery Nation had the holy Scriptures in their Vulgar language and that in those dayes all Christians did read the holy Scriptures so seriously that both men and women of all trades and conditions were able to dispute of the holy Trinitie and of the Creation of the world Which two poyntes for all that are the most difficult obscure hard and intricate Articles in the whole course of Theologie S. Ambrose hath these expresse wordes In oratione totius plebis tanquam vndis refluentibus stridet tum responsorijs Psalmorum cantu virorum mulierum Virginum parvulorum censonus vndarum sragor resultat When all the people pray togeather there is a noyse as if the Waues of the Sea did beate one against an other then with the answering of Psalmes with the singing togeather of men women maydes and
hath bestowed almost one whole Leafe of Paper in the recitall of my wordes Transeat It is impertinent B. C. If he inferre against our Ceremonies as he doth because they were instituted since Christ though very auncient That they be rotten rags of the New religion What shall become of their Ceremonies which either be borrowed from vs or of farre latter date What can they be else but pil◠patches of Protestanisme rusty Ragges of the Reformed congregation Nay what must their Communion Booke it selfe be neuer heard of in the whole world till the late dayes of King Edward the sixt and drawen from our Portesse and Masse-bookes as the thing it selfe speaketh and their Geneua Ghospellers often cast in their teeth T. B. I answere first that our Jesuite vnawares giueth Poperie a deadly wound while he maketh popish Masse and the Oath which popish Byshoppes make to the Pope to be no weighty poyntes of Religion For they are within the compasse of the eleuen Chapters of which he writeth in this manner These Chapters I shall soone dispatch seeing they concerne not any weighty poyntes of Religion but Ceremonies and such like Secondly that seeing by Popish free graunt neither popish Masse nor the popish Oath be matters of any weight to which I for my part willingly agree it followeth of necessitie that the Pope is a most cruell Tyrant while he suffereth no Byshoppes to haue voyces in Councels but such as take that wofull Oath As also while he burneth with Fire and Faggot all such as will not adore the popish Bread-god in the Idolatrous popish Masse Thirdly that our Fryer Jesuite is still like himselfe that is a most notorious lyer while he chargeth me to tearme all Ceremonies instituted since Christ though very auncient to be rotten Ragges of the New religion For I am so farre and so free from this false and plaine Diabolicall accusation as I approoue all Ceremonies consonant to Gods word at what time soeuer the Church did institute the same None that shall duely peruse my Regiment of the Church can be ignorant hereof Nay I say further that the Jesuite is not able to bring any one sentence out of any one of all my Bookes which denyeth Authoritie to the Church to institute new Ceremonies at any time so the same be consonant to Gods word and profitable for the circumstaunces of time place and persons Yea the Iesuite confesseth within twentie lines before this false and heynous slaunder that this is the very doctrine which I teach But his witte is so besotted in fighting and bickering against the manifest trueth that he forgetteth what he writeth so soone as a new reason pricketh him for he had rather heape lyes vpon lyes and slaunders vpon slaunders then forsake and condemne their gainefull Poperie which is to him and his fellowes as was the Temple of Diana to Demetrius and the other Craftes-men Fourthly that we vse no Ceremonies in our English Church but such as are both agreeable to the holy Scriptures and of farre greater antiquitie then the time of Poperie which I oppugne Albeit I doe not absolutely condemne all Ceremonies this day vsed in the Romish Church but respectiuely as they are superstitiously vsed and too vnlawfull or at least ridiculous or vnprofitable endes For I willingly graunt that sundry Ceremonies now vsed in the Romish Church are thinges indifferent of their owne nature and that the same were not to be condemned if the superstitious abuse and wicked intentes for which they are done were wholly remooued from them Where I wish the Reader to marke attentiuely these my words Absolutely Respectiuely Fiftly that in our Communion Booke two thinges must distinctly be obserued and Christianly distinguished viz. the Essentiall and the Accidentall partes thereof Touching the partes Essentiall they are all and euery of them as old as is the written Word of God it selfe The Aduersaries are not able to giue any true instance against the same Touching the partes Accidentall they are all in like manner old in the thing it selfe though of later date in the modification of the thing Thus in playner tearmes All the accidentall partes of our English Communion booke if we respect the matter it selfe conteined therein are as old as the holy Scripture it selfe though of farre latter date if we respect the order and disposition of the same This my Answere is grounded vpon this doctrine of S. Paul Omnia ad aedificationem fiant Omnia honestè et secundum ordinem fiant in vobis Let all thinges be done to edifying Let all thinges be done decently and according to order Sixtly that our Communion booke is drawne from the holy Scriptures as is already prooued and from the old Romane Missals or Communion-bookes in the Purer age of the Church long before the time of idolatrous and superstitious Poperie which I in all my Bookes oppugne B. C. More then foure hundred yeares before the time of S. Gregorie the auncient Brytaines receiued the same manner of seruing God from the blessed Pope and Martyr S. Eleutherius that is in the Latin tongue Which appeareth first because venerable Bede reporteth that there was not any materiall difference betwixt S. Austen sent by S. Gregorie and the Brytaine Byshops saue onely in Baptisme and the obseruation of Easter Secondly for that certaine it is that they had also since S. Austens time the Masse in the Latin tongue But to thinke that if they had been once in possession of the seruice in their owne vulgar Language that they could haue been brought from that without infinite garboyles especially the opposition betwixt them and the English Saxons in auncient time considered or that if any such contention had fallen out that it could haue been omitted by the curious Pennes of our Historiographers it were great simplicitie once to surmise Wherefore what followeth but that they receiued that custome at their first conuersion which was within lesse then two hundred yeares after Christ And consequently that by Bels allowance and the common Computation of others it is sound Catholique and Apostolicall and not any Rotten ragge of a New religion as this Ragge-maister gableth And that on the contrary to haue the publique Seruice in the vulgar tongue is a New patch of Protestanisme fetched from Wittenberge or that Mart of Martinistes the holy City of Geneua T. B. I answere first that I haue prooued already in the sixteene Chapter aforegoing that in the primatiue and auncient Church the publique Prayers and diuine Seruice were euery where in the vulgar Tongue Secondly that the Latin tongue was then vulgar to all the Nations of Italy Spaine Germanie France Africa and other Countries of the West For in those dayes the Latin tongue was commonly spoken and vnderstood wheresoeuer the diuine Seruice was in Latine Which is plaine and euident by S. Austens Doctrine in many places of his workes Thirdly that if the