chap. and 15. verse be penitent I will not stand vpon any moe places in the newe Testament but come to a fewe of the olde In the ninth of the Preacher and second verse they haue these wordes Omnia in futurum servantur incerta All things are reserued as vncertain for the future time there is no such thing in the Hebrew yet out of this place is prooued the vncertentie of saluation and finall perseuerance O most wretched and vile doctrine that must coyne scripture to defende it selfe In the 98. psalme and 5. verse they translate vvorshippe his footestoole for it is holy and from hence conclude the adoration and worshipping of creatures wheras it should haue beene turned at his footestoole he is holy lahadom the same thing being repeated in the last verse In the 8. of Genesis toward the ende of the chap. where it should be the thoughts of mans heart are euill in their translation it is prone to euill as if there were no difference betwixt prone to euill and euill If I should affirme a papist to be prone to euill and treason doe I say that he is euill and treason it selfe nothing lesse euen so there is a difference betwixt pronesse to vice and vice it selfe In the 14. of Genesis and 18. verse they haue it thus erat enim sacerdos dei altissimi for he was a priest of the most high God in fauour of their sacrifice where it is and he vvas a priest of the high God neither let them aunswere me that the coniunction vau doeth sometimes signifie for that is not the question but whether it so signifieth in this place And because they vaunte of antiquitie in this point Freculph in the first booke of his historie and 42 chap. saith that Melchizedech in refectionem ipsius Abrahae panem vinumque protulit Melchizedech brought forth bread and wine for the refreshing of Abraham I will follow this matter of translations no further at this time By this euery one may gather why they forsake the pure Hebrewe and Greeke fountaines and drinke of the corrupt Latin streames I come in the second place to the denial of plaine Scriptures In the 3. of the Galat. and 10. ver it is thus written for as many as are of the deedes of the law are vnder the curse for it is written cursed is euery one that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the law to doe them in which words the Apostle doth thus reason They which cannot fulfill the law are vnder the curse But no man can fulfill the law ergo If this be not the Apostles assumption the Galatians might haue answered Paul that they could fulfil the law and therefore were not vnder the curse Yet the Papists teach that man may fulfil Gods law and so cut the sinewes of S. Pauls reason Secondly in the 4. to the Rom. and 11. verse circumcision is called a seale of the righteousnes of faith out of which place we gather that we are not iustified by the sacraments The Papists to elude the place answer it followeth not that it is so in all because it was so in the patriarchs this answer disioynteth the Apostles argument which is this As Abraham was iustified so are all men iustified But Abraham was iustified without the sacraments Therefore all men are so iustified In the 6. of the Rom. and 27. ver it is saide that the gift of God is eternall life through Iesus Christ our Lord. S. Pauls speach is corrected by the Rhemists saying the sequele of the speach required that as he saide death or damnation is the stipend of sinne so life euerlasting is the stipende of iustice To see papists sit as it were in iudgement of the Scriptures to alow or disalow sentences at their pleasure is the most notorious example of Hereticall pride and miserie that can be Againe in the 6. to the Rom. and 12. v. concupiscence is called sinne yet denied by them to be sinne If the scripture had so said they might well haue expounded it as they doe namely the occasions and matter of sinne But caÌ„not one thing be properly sinne and the occasion of sinne let Augustine then be controlled who in his 5. book contra Iul. Pelag. and 3. chap. writeth thus Sicut caecitas cordis peccatum est poena peccati causa peccati it a concupiscentia carnis peccatum est quia inest illi inobedientia contra dominatum mentis poena peccati causa peccati As blindnes of heart is sinn and a punishment of sinne and a cause of sinn so likewise is concupiscence sinne because it disobeieth the rule of the minde and a punishment of sinne and a cause of sinne Augustines syllogisme is this That which is disobedience to the gouernment of the minde is sinne But concupiscence is disobedience to the gouernement of the minde Therefore concupiscence is sinne Also in the 5. of the Roman and 14. vers Paul prooueth all men to be sinners because of death yet is the virgin Marie exempted from sinne which strengtheneth Pelagius his opinion For he might denie the argument Infants die therefore they are no sinners because Marie died and yet was no sinner In the 1. to the Corinthians and 10. chap. S. Paul beateth downe the conceit of the Corinthians coÌ„cerning the sacraments For the Iewes did eate Christ in their sacraments Yet the Papists will haue our sacraments to giue grace ex opere operato of the worke wrought and so make the Apostles argument to be of no force For the Corinthians might haue replied our sacraments giue grace to them that receiue them therfore we cannot be dismaied with the examples of the Israelites Furthermore in the 9. of the Hebrewes the 25. vers Christ is said to haue offered himselfe but once because he suffered but once The Apostles reason is this Christ died but once Therefore he suffered but once Lastly Hebr. 10. and 8. ver the Apostles conclusion is seeing there is remission of sinnes there is no more offering for sinne Therefore it followeth inuincibly that the masse is not a sacrifice for sinne Yet the papists assertion must needes frustrate both these arguments of the Apostle From the deniall of scripture I come to the addition of the same which argueth extreame despeâ—atenes The Councell of Laodicea 59. canon reiecteth the books which we doe and commandeth ne aliqui praeterea legantur in authoritatem recipiantur that non besides be read and receiued into authority Ruffinus likewise in his exposition vpon the Creede reiecteth the same and will not haue them alleadged ad authoritatem fidei confirmandam for the confirmation of faith Cirill of Hierusalem in the 4. booke of his Catech. writeteth thus Lege scripturas sacras nempè viginti duos veteris testamenti libros read the holy scriptures namely the two and twentie bookes of the old testament I passe ouer Hieroms authority and Nazianzens with Eusebius Epiphanius and Lyraes
not be cruell to the Christians Propter discordiam Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum for the variance of Ecclesiastical opinions For amongst the Pagans there vvere more then three hundred sects To come now to succession doth not Bellarmine your Pythagoras teach that it prooueth not alwaies a church Secondly Atheists Heretikes Sorcerers and a woman haue beene Pope and that interrupteth your succession Thirdly your plurality of Popes during your two and twenty schismes disanulleth the same Lastly many Popes haue not beene Canonically elected To proceed to antiquitie see your selues stripped of it in this my treatise and yet you are not greatly vvise men to alleadge bare antiquitie for as Lactantius saieth in his 2. booke and 7. chap. Tanta est apud insipientes authoritas vetustatis vt in cam inquirere scelus esse ducatur Amongst fooles antiquitie hath that authoritie that it is counted a hainous thing to inquire into it Lastly concerning your miracles I say with Augustine in his book de vnitate Ecclesiae cap. 16. Let them not say it is true because Donatus or Pontius or any other man hath done these these miracles Againe whether they hold the church or no let them shew no otherwise but by the Canonical bookes of holy Scriptures I will not spend any time in painting out of the odious and infamous lifes of Papists but come to a conclusion namely that seing those thinges that they were wont to bragge of are taken from them let them embrace the truth let not the world seduce them against their owne consciences For what are vngodly rich men but as Plutarch saith asini ligna ferentes asses bearing burdens The Lord open your eyes to see the truth To the Christian reader ALthough I had many motiues to set forth this my treatise in latin yet regarding the good of those that are ignorant in that tongue I haue written it in English with as much shortnes and breuitie as I could possibly I confesse I might haue made a great volume of it if I had insisted vpon the amplification of euery reason but for diuerse respects I haue comprehended it in this small manuall And as I haue disswaded men from popery by these twelve seuerall reasons so did I once thinke to haue adioyned more but for causes known to my selfe I haue yet concealed them Their senselesse paradoxes and witlesse arguments with which their bookes are fraught haue caused me so to abhorre their religion that I may protest in simplicitie of a good conscience I could neuer read any argument to perswade me to papistrie yet haue I read their writers without any praeiudicate opinion at all being neuer forestalled with this religion in which through Gods grace nowe I stand And Bellarmines corrupting of fathers his foolish distinctions his cōtradictions with himselfe with other Papists his sencelesse sophismes his wresting of holy writte haue in them as I thinke this force to perswade his readers from his religion Now it remaineth Christian reader to desire this of thee to weigh these my motiues with an indifferent mind and if thou receiuest any good by them to be thankefull to God and to commend me in thy praiers vnto him Catalogus authorum ALcoranus franciscanorum Alexander de Ales. Alphonsus de castro Ambrosius Aquinas Arias montanus Arnobius Augustinus Bellarminus Bernardus Buckingerus Catalogus testiū veritatis Censura Coloniensis Catechismus Coloniensis Clemens Alexandrinus Chrysosthomus Cusanus Cyprianus Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Duraeus Durandus Epiphanius Erasmus Euripides Eusebius Fasciculus temporum Freculphius Gratianus Gregorius Episcopus Romanus Gregorius Nazianzenus Gregorius Martinus Hentenius Herbranaus Hierom. Hugo Cardinalis Index Expurgatorius Irenaeus Iuellus Iustinus Lactantius Lombardus Lyra. Macrobius Maierius Mathaeus Paris Melchior Canus Origines Picus Miranaula Plautus Polidorus Virgilius Psalterium Romanū Rhemenses Roffensis Ruffinus Scotus Sleidan Socrates Tertullianus Tullius Turrianus Wolfgangus Hermānus Zozomenus THE FIRST REAson of Antichrist IN times past Christiā Reader the question was whether Christ appointed the Pope to be heade of this church but now blessed be God it is not without cause demanded whether he be Antichrist or no. From which as the title of servus servorum that is the seruant of seruants will not excuse him beeing indeed the title of cursed Cham and so fit in Gods iust prouidence for the man of sinne so these circumstances following beeing laide together will firmely conclude the same The 1. Circumstance Antichristianisme is a mysterie 2. Thess cap. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is The mysterie of iniquity doth now worke out of which place of holy writte I argue that neither the open blasphemous haeretiks nor the Turke can be that Antichrist because they are not dissembled but plaine and open enimies to Christ Yet as Hierom saith on the 24. chapter of Mathew Omnis Haeresiarchia est Antichristus Euery Arch-haeritike is Antichrist but not Antichrist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is that singular Antichrist Maruell not then though all men perceiue vnderstand him namely the Pope not to be that Antichrist seeing it is a mysterie for as fewe knowe the Gospell because it is a mysterie so likewise little is the flocke to which this Antichrist is revealed pray therefore with Dauid to open thine eyes that thou maist behold the secrets of God for as Augustine saith Epistola 11 2. Qui didicerunt à Domino Iesu esse humiles mites in corde plus proficiunt or ando quà m audiendo legendo that is They that have learned of Christ meekenesse of minde and humility of heart profit more by prayer then by hearing and reading The second Circumstance Antichrist is not called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an aduersary to God although he doth band himselfe against him but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is an aduersary to Christ in aemulatiō of like honour For he arrogateth to himselfe those things that are propper to Christ as namely remissiō of sinnes which I prooue out of Bernard who saith 11. sermon ad Milites Vnde scimus quòd Christus potest dimit tere peccata quia deus est vnde scis quod deus est miracula probant That is Howe do we knowe that Christ can remit sinnes because he is God How dost thou knowe he is God his miracles prooue the same Out of which testimony I frame this syllogisme he that remitteth sinnes is god but the pope remineth sinnes therefore he is god and by consequēt Antichrist The third Circumstance Those things which the Papists write concerning Antichrist are ridiculous First the Rhemists say and affirme that he shall come of the tribe of Dan which opinion Bellarmine strongly refuteth by this reason Namely because the tribes are so confounded that no man can say this man is of this or that Tribe Secondly they say Antichrist shall be the Iewes Messias but he must spring of the tribe of Iudah ergo Antichrist the Iewes Messias cannot descend of Dan. Thirdly they teach he shall be one singuler man
except we knowe whether we must runne 2. 2 q. 44. art 8. So doth Aquinas vse the very same answer by which it is apparent to all mē that God commaundeth impossible things and therefore by this blasphemy must be more cruell then any tyrant but this might haue beene better borne withall if they had vttered no moe blasphemous arguments The Rhemists vpon the first of Timoth. chap. 4. wanting reasons for their prohibition of meates and marriages know not how to defend their practise but by an argument à pari taken from equalitie God in paradise did commaund abstinence from one certaine tree and also did forbidde in the time of the Law certaine degrees of marriage ergo so may the Pope doe O vnanswerable nay rather blasphemous consequents if ye thus dispute without all peraduenture in the ende ye shall haue the victorie From Bellarmine and the Rhemists I come to their angelical Doctour who in his supple 25. quae art 1. concludeth thus Christus potest Ergo Paulus potest Ergo papa potest Christ can doe it therefore Paul can doe it therefore the Pope can doe it Make the syllogisme and then the argument will be of greater force whatsoeuer Christ can doe that can Paul doe and whatsoeuer Paul can doe that can the Pope doe but Christ can doe this therefore Paul and the Pope can doe it But why are Paul and the pope ioyned together seeing his authoritie is deriued from Peter when Peters keies will not serue then Pauls sword must saue To let passe these sensles disputers heare what is written in the first part of the 6. booke of Decretalls and 6. title de electione fol. 44. Papa non est homo sed vicarius Dei expressius acus The pope is not a man but Gods vicar more expressely God In the proheme of the Clementines and 3. folio I finde the notation of the pope to be this Papa id est admirabilis nec deus es nec homo quasineuter es inter vtrunque The pope is called so because he is wonderfull thou art neither god nor man but as it were a neuter betvvixt both Againe in the Extravagants fol. 16. tit 3. Supposit a plenitudine potestatis iuxta quam papae dici non potest Domine cur ita facis Presupposing the plenarie power by which no man may say to the pope Master why doest thou so no not though as it is in an other place he leade innumerable soules with him by heapes to the deuill of hell Nowe let Panormitan play his part Papa Christus faciunt vnum consistorium The pope and Christ make one consistorie excepto peccato omnia potest quae deus excepting sinne he can do al that God can doe Also papa potest quicquid vult the Pope can do what he wil and therfore cōtra novū testamētū potest dispensare he may dispense against the new testament From the Canonists I come to the Alcorā of the Franciscans taken out of their booke of Conformities nihil fecit Christus quod Franciscus non fecit imo plura fecit quà m Christus vngues Francisci tentationem propellunt Christ did not any thing but Frances did the same yea more then Christ the nailes of frier Frances driue away temptations Sicut Ade Deo non parenti omnis creatura libellis extitit Sic Frācisco omnia praecepta diuina implenti creatura omnis famulata est omnia Deus subiecit sub pedibus eius c. As euerie creature rebelled against Adam disobeying God so all of them serued Frances who fulfilled gods commandemēt God hath put all things vnder his feete he hath made him ruler ouer all the workes of his handes and he may most worthily say that which is written in the Gospell All things are giuen mee of my father Can the diuel himselfe speake more spitefully against the God of heauen and earth I wonder howe the Pope can suffer those things seing he applyeth the same scriptures to his authority and therefore sayeth Omnis potestas mihi data est in terra all power is giuen me on earth To proceede in the same booke thus they speake of the masse Celebratio vnius missae tantum valet quantum Christi passio The saying of one masse is as profitable as Christs passion And againe si quis devotè audierit missam non incidit in peccatum mortale if any here masse with deuotion he cannot fall into mortall sinne if this be true why haue the priests so many harlots nay why are Popish geldings become stone horses These Christian reader are not the tenth of their blasphemies which they haue vomited but I dare not load thee with any more least I should he offensiue I will ende this reason in a word that religion is a blasphemous religion which maketh not God mercifull and iust in the highest degree but the Popish religion maketh not God mercifull and iust in the highest degree Ergo it is a blasphemous religion the assumption is thus prooued if the onely mercie of God be not the onely cause of the pardoning of our sinnes and the alone satisfaction of Christ aunswereth not to Gods iustice then may a finite thing as mans satisfactions answer the same so he shal neither be summè misericors nor summè iustus neither haue perfect mercy nor perfect iustice but the only mercy of God is not the onely cause of the forgiuenesse of our sinnes neither is his iustice fully satisfied by Christ but by our owne satisfaction and therefore he is neither perfectly mercifull not perfectly iust Let god be then as he is is most rich in mercy and absolute in iustice and the Romish religion cannot stand for it detracteth from his infinit mercy and iustice therfore without all controuersie is a blasphemous religion The eight reason of the Papists owne Confession AMongst the properties of truth this as I proued was one that it was great and preuaileth and indeed thorough Gods omnipotent power it is so great that the Aduersaries against themselues confesse the same so that I may say with the Orator in his oration pro Quinctio quis nostrae causae testis idem qui accerrimus aduersarius in hac re inquam adversarium citabo testem Who beareth witnes to our defence euen he that is the fiercest aduersary in this defence I say I will vse our aduersarie for a witnes for although I may say to him as the same orator doth in an other oration pro Fonteio Tuum testimonium quod in aliena re leve est in tua quoniam contrate est gravissimum esse debet Thy ovvne testimonie which is of small credit in another matter in thine owne because it is against thy selfe ought to be of exceeding great waight vpon these triumphs as it were the Christian Reader will be desirous to heare the Papists testimonie not to hold him therfore any longer in suspence this is Bellarmines confession in his 7. chap. 5. book of Iustification Propter periculum
maius gloriae tutissimum est fiduciam totam in sola Dei misericordia benignitate reponere by reason of the danger of pride and vaine glorie it is safest to put our whole confidence onely in the mercy of God not in our merites or good workes And this he prooueth out of the 9. chap. of Daniel we pray not in our righteousnes but in thy manifold mercies and out of the 17. of Luke when you haue done all that you can you are vnprofitable seruants nay out of their owne praiers Deus qui conspicis quia ex nulla actione nostra confidimus O God thou seest that vve trust not in any of our actions or vvorkes and least these his proofes should not be waightie enough he quoteth Chrysostome in diuers places as namely in his 3. homily vpon Matthew writing thus Noli mercedem poscere vt accipias mercedem require no reward that thou maiest receiue a rewarde Next followeth Ambrose Non sic vixi vt me pudeat vivere nec mori timeo quia bonum Dominum habemus I haue so liued that I am not ashamed to liue neither am I afraide to die because I haue a mercifull Lord. After Ambrose followes Augustine Gregorie and Bernard and lastly he vseth this reason vel homo habet vera merita vel non habet man hath good works in truth or els he hath thē not in truth but in appearance onely if onely in appearance then is he dangerously deceiued if in truth then he looseth nothing for his trust is onely in God This is to disanull all his former doctrine for before he prooued that a man might put his confidence in good workes because they deserue eternall life but now he confesseth that it is best to put no cōfidence in works but only in Gods mercie out of which I conclude that it is safest to disclaime our owne merits in the attaining to saluation and by consequent to be a Protestant The syllogisme shall be thus framed It is safest to put no confidence in workes but this is the Protestants constant doctrine ergo it is safest to be a Protestant and indeede it hath beene alwaies iudged the part of a wise man to encline in eam partem quae cautior est into that defence which is best but our defence is best by the aduersaries own confession ergo it is the wisest part to holde with the Protestants So now I may iustly vse the Orators exclamatiō in his oration pro Coelio ô magna vis veritatis quae contra hominū ingenia colliditatē solertiā c ô mighty power of truth who doth defend it selfe against the wit craft subtiltie of men I will end this reason with some sayings of Hieron because his authoritie hath not bin yet vsed in this matter in his 3. book against the Pelagians he writeth thus Nec in sapientia nostra nec in vllis virtutibus confidendum sed in solo domino We trust neither in our wisdome nor in any vertues but onely in the Lord and in his dialogue against the Luciferians Credo tamen secundum fidem meam fieri nolo si etenim sit peribo I beleeue yet I vvould not haue it be according to my beleefe for then I perish So must euery Christian say if it be according to our workes wee perish but we trust onely to the mercie of God therefore looke and waite for saluation To this confession of Bellarmine I might likewise haue adioyned Steuen Gardiners but Bellarmine being the papists Pythagoras shal serue in stead of all And now for a conclusion of this point and reason let any papist answer me what harme can come of the Protestāts doctrine if they say good works are come to a downefall by it I would haue yeelded but that S. Paul in the 2. of the Galat. ver 17. many hundered yeares agoe hath answered this rotten and stale obiection If vve that seeke for iustification by Christ be found sinners in Christ is Christ the minister of sinn God forbid c. by which place of holy Scripture this friuolous cauill is so plainely confuted that the Papists except they cannot resolue the Apostles argument might as well haue charged Pauls doctrine with dissolutenes as they do ours therfore I desire all men to holde that which is safest which is the part of a wise man to doe But it is safest to hold as we hold and it is the part of wise men to defende the best part which is ours Ergo it is safest to hold with and why was the Pharise cōdemned vs but for putting his confidence in workes he acknowledged them to come from God Luk. 18. v. 11 saying I thanke thee that I am not as other men are I fast twise in a weeke I giue tith of all that I haue If we giue thanks to god for those his good actions and workes then by necessarie consequent it may be concluded that he ascribed thē not to himselfe but to the giuer fountaine of all good things yet hath he Christs owne testimony against him for what thē but for his affiance in his workes Thus the Papists by their owne doctrine of confidēce in workes become Pharisees also I see not why they may not say to god as the Iewes did why do we fast thou doest not regard vs why doe we afflict out soules and thou doest not acknowledge vs Better it is to pray with the Prophet Dauid Enter not into iudgement O Lord with thy seruants Psal 143. v. 3 for no flesh is righteous in thy sight To which place of Scripture Bellarmine answereth that it is to be vnderstood Tom. 1. lib de Mona cap. 13 ad comparationē Dei in comparison of God and so contenteth himselfe with the answer of Pelagius as I prooue out of Hierom in his booke ad Ctesip Non iustificabitur in conspectu Dei omnis vivens quod testimonium sub nomine pietatis eludunt aiunt enim ad comparationem dei nullum esse perfectum quasi hoc dicat scriptura quando enim dicit in conspectu tuo hoc intelligi vult quod etiam qui hominibus sancti videntur dei scientiae atque notitiae nequaquam sunt sancti No mā liuing shall be iustified in thy sight which testimony vnder the pretēce of piety they delude for they say that no man is perfect in respect of God as if this were the meaning of the scripture for whē it saith in thy sight it giueth vs to vnderstand that those which seeme holy to men in gods sight and knowledge are not holy Out of this testimony it appeareth that the papists accepting of Pelagius his answer ioyne not onely with the Pharises in this point but also with the Pelagiās of whose heresie I haue spoke before I dare not stay any longer in this reason lest I forget my selfe promising to haue ended it before but the laying open of the Papists Phariseisme and Pelagianisme I hope will ad some weight
to it and therefore I haue dwelt a little the longer in it The ninth reason of the practise of the Primitiue Church ALthough I might be very long in shewing the practise of the primitiue Church to be repugnant to popery yet I will eude this reason with all possible brevity Eusebius in his 4. booke of his Ecclesiasticall history and 14. chapter writeth thus of the people of Smyrna who by the malitious Iewes were esteemed as worshippers of Policarpus Iudaei nostros intentis oculis observarunt ne eum à flammis adhuc ardentibus raperent ignorantes quia neque Christum aliquando possemus derelinquere qui mortem pro totius mundi salute sustinuit neque alium quenquā colere quoniam eum verum deum qui solus colendus sit noverimus martyres vero tanquam descipulos diligimus quasi integrè fidem magistro seruantes domino quorum nos quoque in fidei perseverantia charitatis optamus esse participes The Iewes watched vs diligently least we should haue taken him out of the fire being ignorant that neither we can leaue Christ which hath suffered for all that are saued in the world neiworshippe any other for him we adore as beeing God but the Martyrs as disciples and fellowes of our Lord we loue worthily for their exceeding good will vnto their king and master of whose charitie in faith and perseuerance God graunt we may be partakers This testimony sheweth howe the Papists are departed from this practise who do not only loue but most superstitiously adore the reliques of Saints the christiās were charged as you may see in Iustins 2. apo to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Atheists not to worship God to whom he answereth Profitemur nos quidem talium qui habentur deorum esse expertes atheos sed non verissimi illius dei patris videlicet virtutum expertes verum hūc ipsum qui ab illo venit filium spiritum propheticum colimus adoramus cum ratione veritate venerantes We professe our selues to be vvithout such as are accounted Gods and indeed to be Atheists but not without the most true God the father of vertues for we worship and adore him and his sonne and the holy ghost in truth and as reason requireth Out of which answer I gather that the Christians did not worship Saints Angels or other things for then Iustine might haue answered that the Christians worshipped many Gods as the heathen did especially if they worshipped as many as the Papists who exceed the Gentiles or at leastwise are nothing behinde them in their idolatrie and if these two will not content the Papists in this point 8. Booke contra Celsum p. 937. let Origen speak Solus Deus adorandus est preces offerendae soli vnigenito Dei verbo qui vt pontifex eas ad Deum suum Deum nostrum perferat God alone is to be adored to the onely begotten sonne of God our praiers are onely to be offered vvho as high priest offereth them to his and our God And againe Oblitus cum Christianis se agere soli Deo per Iesum preces offerentibus Hee forgetteth himselfe that he hath to doe with Christians who offer their praiers only to God by Christ Iesus These testimonies of Origen do euidently manifest vnto vs what was the approoued vse of the church in his time viz. that their praiers were not made vnto Angels nor Saints but onely to God in the name of Iesus Christ neither haue we the practise of the primitiue Church onely in this point but in many moe which I will in a worde declare The Christians were charged by the Pagans for hauing no images and they not onely confessed so much but also defended it as most agreeable to the law of God Origen Contra Celsum lib. 8. Pag. 934. posthaec Celsus ait nos ararum statuarum templorumque dedicationes fugere non videns pro aris suam esse mentem cuique ex qua sursum feruntur verè intelligibiliter suaueolentes suffitus simulachra autem Deo dicanda sunt non fabrorum opera sed à verbo Dei dedolata formata in nobis viz. virtutes ad imitationem primogeniti totius ei naturae hae sunt statuae Deo dicatae Furthermore Celsus affirmeth that vvee haue no dedication of Altars standing Images and Temples not knovving that euerie man in steede of an Altar hath a minde out of vvhich are sent spirituall svvet-smelling perfumes and as touching Images such are dedicated to god as are not the vvorkes of artificers but are framed of the word of god in vs namely vertues to the imitation of the first begotten of euery creature those are the images that are dedicated to god Againe in his 7. booke pag. 928. Multa adeò nos prohibent ab aris simulachris vt emori citius iubeant quà m contaminemus nostram de Deo fidē talibus impietatibus There are so many prohibitions against Altars Images that men are commaunded rather to die then to defile their faith which they haue of god with such impiety Out of which two testimonies as I conclude against images so may I likewise against Altars and then what will become of the popish sacrifice of the masse Not to rest onely in the authoritie of Origen heare what Clemens Alexandrinus saith in his exhortation to the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Nobis non est imago sensilis de materia sensili sedquae percipitur intelligentia Wee haue no image that is materiall and seene vvith eyes but onely such as is conceaued with vnderstanding I let passe Lactantius his testimony because I haue bin long in it before and vse Arnobius authority in whose 8. booke the heathen do moue this question Cur nullas ar as habent nulla tēpla nulla not a simulachra why haue they no Altars no Temples no knowen Images of these testimonies I may say with the Orator Aut hoc testium satis est aut nescio quid satis est Either these are sufficient witnesses or els I know not what is sufficient But I come now to a third practise of the church repugnant and opposite to poperie which was to haue publike praiers in a knowen tongue Iustine in his second apologie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in solis qui dicitur die omnium qui vel in oppidis vel ruri degunt in eundem locum conuentus fit commentaria Apostolorum aut scripta Prophetarum leguntur quo ad tempus patitur On the day which is called Sunday all that are in townes or villages meet together in one place vvhere the writings of the Apostles or Prophets are read as the houre permitteth vs. When the reader ceaseth the parson warneth and exhorteth vs to imitate the good things that haue bin read vnto vs then arise we all ioyntly make our praiers after which ended bread and wine with water are brought to the place
euery other person declared by the generall councells of Constance and this of Basill is the veritie of the Catholicke faith And to retort Turrian his reason thus may an argument be framed The whole is aboue the part But the general Councell is the whole representing the vniuersal Church Therefore it is aboue the Pope The 3. Contradiction The Papists teach that necessarie arguments may be drawne from traditions couÌ„cells Popes decrees and I know not what and therefore wanting arguments against vs obtrude their pelfe of traditions which haue no warrant in the booke of God yet Aquinas writeth otherwise Sacra doctrina authoritatibus canonicae scripturae vtitur ex necessitate argumentando parte 1. q. 1. art 8. resp ad 2um authoritatibus autem aliorum doctorum ecclesie quasi arguendo non ex propriis sed probabilibus Diuinitie vseth the authoritie of the Canonicall scripture arguing out of it by by necessarie arguments but the authoritie of other church teachers arguing as it were by proper not by probable arguments I wish the Papists would attend to their Angelical Doctor in this point which he proueth soundly out of Augustine Solis enim scripturarum libris qui Canonici appellantur didici hunc honorem deferre vt nullum authorem eorum in scribendo errasse aliquid firmissimè credam For I haue learned to deferre this honour onely to the Canonicall Scriptures to beleeue most steadfastly that no Author of them hath erred in any point If this were the opinion of all papists many controuersies would be compounded betwixt them and vs yet this is in truth to honour and reuerence the Scriptures which were good for all papists and not to disgrace them as they doe The 4. Contradiction Praefat. Toâ—ia Postquam auxiliante deo saith Lyra scripsi super libros Canonicos sacrae Scripturae incipiendo à principio Genes progrediendo vsque ad finem eiusdem confisus auxilio super alios intendo scribere qui non sunt de Canone lib. Sapientiae Ecclesiastic Iudith Tobiae Macchabaeorum c. After that by Gods assistance I haue written vpon the bookes of Canonicall scripture from the beginning of Genesis and so forward to the ende trusting still vnto his helpe I purpose to write vpon those that are not Canonical as the booke of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Iudith Tobias and the Maccabees This is Lyra his opinion concerning these bookes which he prooueth out of Hierom and yet the Papists plead for them to be numbered amongst the Canonicall Scriptures yea as thou heardest before Campian in his first reason prooueth that we distrust our cause because we denie them to be of equall authoritie with the other bookes I passe by the authoritie of other Papists as namely Hugo the Cardinall and Caietan who with Lyra cut these bookes from the bodie of the Bible yet we may not doe so without heresie and accusation of mayming the holy Scriptures let them now turne their pennes against their owne fellowes Here I might haue made an other article of dissention about the corruption of Scriptures for Lindanus and other Papists holde them to be corrupt but the contrarie is learnedly taught by Isacke and Arrias Montanus two famous Hebricians and by Gods assistance I offer to defend it against all Papists that are of another minde Bellarmines reasons are blowne away with a blast The 5. Contradiction There are so many opinions of Papists about marriage that they themselues are vncertaine what to hold This is witnessed by Melchior Canus lib. 8. cap. 5. fol. 245. in initio Lege Magistrum Diuum Thomam Scotum Bonavent Richard Paludan DuranduÌ„ caeterosque scholae theologos nisi statim pendentes vacillantes eorum animos depreheÌ„deris tum verò me aut stultum aut temerarium iudicato nam cum quaerunt an matrimonium conferat gratiam idque eo loco maximè finiendum erat non definiunt tamen sed in his referunt quae in hominum opinione posita sunt In materia auteÌ„ forma huius sacrameÌ„ti statuenda adeò sunt inconstantes varii adeò incerti ambigui vt ineptus futurus sit qui in tanta illoruÌ„ varietate ac discrepantia rem aliquam certam constantem exploratam conetur efficere quod si in forma materia sacrameÌ„ti c. Read the Master of Sentences Saint Thomas Bonaventure Richardus Paludanus Durandus and the rest of the schoole diuines and if forthwith thou doest not finde their wauering and doubtfull mindes then iudge me either a foole or a rash fellow for when they dispute whether matrimonie giueth grace that which was especially to be determined they doe not determine at all but onely make relation of mens opinions and in setting downe the matter and forme of this sacrament they are so inconstant so variable so vncertaine and doubtfull that he shall be iudged indiscreete who in such a varietie and discent goeth about to frame any certaine constant matter But if they be so doubtful about the matter and forme of the sacrament which is a matter of exceeding great moment c. Thus the Papists bare witnesse one against another concerning their pretended sacrament of marriage and whosoeuer readeth Bellarmine out of this point tom 2. shal find more varietie The 6. Contradiction Peter Lumbard the master of sentences Lib. 40. dist 18. teacheth that priestes onely haue power to manifest and declare that men are bound loosed froÌ„ their sins and therfore he is reprehended by Doctor Allen in his booke of the power of priesthood I wil set downe their masters reasons Non ergo postmodum per sacerdotem cui confitetur ab ira aeterna liberatur à qua liberatus est per dominum ex quo dixit confitebor he is not afterward deliuered from aeternall vvrath by the priest to whome he maketh confession from which he is deliuered by the Lord euen then vvhen he said I will confesse His syllogisme is this He that is deliuered by the Lord before his confession is not absolued by the Priest But the repentant is deliuered by the Lord himselfe before his confession Therefore not by the Priest Next followeth Ambrose his testimonie Verbum dei dimittit peccata sacerdos iudex sacerdos quidem officium suum exhibet sed nullius potestatis ius exercet The vvord of God namely Iesus Christ forgiueth sinnes being Priest and Iudge the Priest indeede doeth his duetie but hee practiseth not the right of any povver To Ambrose is adioyned S. Augustins saying Nemo tollit peccata nisi solus Deus no man taketh away sinne but onely God Afterward in the same distinction he prooueth it because the Lord first cleansed the Leapers and then sent them to the Priests Hee likewise first raised Lazarus and then offred him to the disciples in the end after Hieroms notable testimony he coÌ„cludeth thus Et in remitteÌ„dis vel in retineÌ„dis culpis id iuris officii habent Evangelici sacerdotes quod