clergie there was neither religion nor good life nor shame afterward he taxeth the luxuriousnesse of all estates but especially the furiousnesse of lusts the ambition couetousnesse and superstition of the Romish Clergie Marcellus Palingenius in virgine complaineth of a generall corruption of manners throughout the world imo libenter saith he Destituam hunc mundum innumerisque refertum Fraudibus atque dolis incestibus atque rapinis Est vbi nulla fides piet as est nulla nec vlla Iustitia pax requies vbi crimina regnant Omnia He saith that all vices reigned and that there was neither faith nor piety nor iustice in the world viz. among the Papists Matthew Paris in Henrico tertio complaineth that religion was trodden vnder foote and that vsury and simony reigned Erasmus de amicab concord saith that if a man looke neerely he shall find all filled with fraudes iniuries rapines si quis propiùs inspiciat inueniet fraudibus iniurijs rapiniâ—referta omnia Hereupon Petrus de Aliaco lib. de reformat ecclesiae complaineth that certaine barators had destroied the church which the fathers had formerly built primitius theologi ecclesiam aedificauerunt quam nunc baritatores destruxerunt Simony and Vsury among the Romanists is so common that as Matth. Paris saith they accompt the first no sinne the second a small sinne Felin in c. ex parte de offic potest iudic delegat saith that without the rent of Simony the popes sea would grow contemptible heu Simon regnat per munera quaeque reguntur saith one in hist Citizensi Theodoric à Niem lib. 2. de schism c. 7. saith that vsury did then so much preuaile that it was accompted no fault Paul the 4. and Pius the 4. in their times were great banquiers and vsurers as we may see in their liues written by a Parasite of the Popes called Onuphrius If we should speake of particular men we should find no end of their villanies Wernerus speaking of Iohn the 12. saith he was wholy giuen to lust totus lubricus Beno Platina and others testifie that Siluester the 2. and Benedict the ninth were Magicians and the Diuels sworne sernantes Gregory the 7. was deposed by the councell of Brixia as a notorious necromancer possessed with a diabolicall spirit Iohn the 23. was conuicted in the councell of Constance to be an incestuous person a Sodomit and an atheist denying the immortality of the soule as we reade in the actes thereof Clement the 5. as Hermannus testifieth was a publike fornicator the same is also testified by Mattheo Villani hist l. 3. c. 39. against Clement the sixt Sixtus the 4. passed Nero in cruelty and all villany Gaude prisce Nero saith one vincit te crimine Sixtus Hic scelus omne clauditur vitium Marullus and others testifie against Innocent the 8. that he had sixteene bastards and was a dull fellow giuen to carnall pleasures Of Alexander the 6. we reade that he wasted the world ouerthrew law and religion neither could Onuphrius dissemble his vices He that listeth to see the like testimonies against Masse-priests Monkes Friers and their complices let him reade the second booke of my answere to Rob. Parsons his warne-warne-word But what should proofes neede in so plaine matters if the Popes whom they call most holy be such we must not imagine that their base slaues and dependants are better The practise of this sect doth iustifie this charge most fullie of late time they haue murdred millions of Gods Saints In England of late they attempted to destroy the King and his house to blow vp the Lords Commons in Parliament assembled and to cut the throtes of all good men they neither respect King nor friend old nor yoong oath nor promise Among themselues there is neither iustice nor honesty poore people are abused with superstitious shewes and dissembled grauity through the practises of Popes Christendome is diuided and the kingdome of Turkes enlarged Can those therefore bee good men that doe such leud acts and haue they reason to boast of works whose liues are so defiled with all vices CHAP. XXXI That in Popery a base accompt is made of Princes and all lay-men HOly scriptures doe giue honorable titles not only to Kings and Princes but also to all the people of God Princes Rom. 13. are called superior powers and Gods ministers for our good and in diuers places they are dignified as Gods anoynted Christians are also called Saints and Gods heritage and his sonnes and children and heires of Gods kingdome annexed together with Christ but the Masse-priests and polshorne crew make but a base reckoning of them for first they appropriat to themselues the title of Gods inheritance calling themselues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and clericos as if the Popes greasie shauelings were only Gods inheritance and the rest were profane and common persons Secondly in the church they diuide themselues from lay-men as if lay-men were not holy inough to communicate with them in Gods seruice or else as if they were vnworthy to come neere the Popes poleshorne and greasie complices Thirdly they call themselues only spirituall men as if the lay-people were grosse and carnall and without sense and feeling of piety they doe call themselues also Gods annointed interpreting these words touch not mine anointed of their owne greasie company Fourthly the state of matried folkes is termed a damned state of life as appeareth by their decretales de conuersione coniugatorum where they talke of married folks entring into monasteries no otherwise then as if they should talke of the conuersion of sinners Syricius c. plurimos dist 82. doth talke of maried folkes as of men profane and vnholy and Innocentius in the same distinction c. proposuisti doth interpret these words of the Apostle those that are in the flesh cannot please God of married folkes as if they were in the flesh and could not please God for otherwise his conclusion is of no valew Fiftlie they call lay-people imperfect for that is a worde vsed by Faber contra anatomen missae the state of perfection they ascribe commonly to Monkes and Friers some call them doggs and hoggs and proue that scriptures are not to be permitted to be read in vulgar tongues because holie things are not to bee giuen to dogs nor pearles cast before swine Thomas Aquinas 2.2 q. 2. art 6. compareth Gods people to asses holding that it is sufficient for them to adhere to their superiors in matters of saith because we read Ioh 1. that the oxen were at plow and the Asses fedde by them Summa Rosella and Siluester in his summe in verb. fides doth take lay-men and simple people to be all one and commonly they call them idiots and rude fellowes 6 Pops Alexander trod vpon the Emperors necke calling him a lion basiliske and Boniface the 8. indeuoreth to make Kings his subiects 7 They make Kings and Princes their hang-men exequutioners forcing them to put Gods Saints to death whom the
Iebusites and in former times the rules of Benet Francis and Dominike His followers fall downe like beasts before him and worship him as God Paulus Aemilius lib. 2. telleth how the Ambassadors of Sicily cried thus to the Pope thou which takest away the sinnes of the world haue mercy vpon vs thou which takest away the sinnes of the world giue vnto vs peace and Simon Begnius bishop of Modrusa in the Councell of Lateran ses 6. calleth Leo the 10. his sauiour te beatissimâ— Leo saluatorem exspectauimus saith he Stapleton writing to Gregory the 13. calleth him supremum numen in terris his epistle is extant before his doctrinall principles they call him the vicar of Christ the monarch of the church the head the spouse and foundation of the church most blasphemously ascribing to him the honor due to Christ Most shamefully also they racke scriptures to apply them to the Pope Thomas Waldensis that fleering frier in his prologue before the first tome of his works turneth the words which the apostle spoke to Christ to Martin the fift Domine saith he salua nos perimus Lord saue vs we perish declaring that the Pope is the sauiour of friers Cornelius bishop of Bitonto in the conuenticle of Trent vttereth these blasphemous speeches the Pope the light is come into the world but men loued the darknesse more then light Antoninus part 3. doth compare Dominike with Christ and saith he wrought more miracles then Christ dominus Christus saith he est dominus absolutè authoritatiuè Dominicus possessiuè that is Dominicke is Lord of the world by possession Christ by authoritie and absolutely likewise the booke of conformities of Christ and Francis doth conteine nothing but blasphemous comparisons betwixt them two Francis they call the figuratiue Iesus and in heauen they say he and his company is kept in Christs side To S. Dominike his company they giue a place vnder our Ladies gowne Fulbertus bishop of Charters saith Radulphus niger was nourished with our Ladies milke they tell also blasphemous tales of Alane de rupe the author of our Ladies Rosary and say that he was very familiar with the blessed virgin Finally it is no maruell if Romish religion be full of impieties and blasphemies seeing the same was deuised by Popes that were most impious and great blasphemers Benet the 9. and Syluester the second gaue themselues to the diuell as Beno testifieth Gregory the 7. in a solemne Councel was condemned for a sotthsayer a necromancer and a wicked fellow the Councell of Pise as Theodoric à Niem lib. 3. c. 44. reporteth condemned Gregory the 12. and Benet the 13. as notorious wicked men Alexander the 6. as is said beleeued not that there was a God Iohn the 23. in the Councel of Constance was conuinced that he beleeued not the resurrection Leo the 10. and Clement the 7 by Papistes themselues were reputed atheistes Paul the 3. was a great magician and very familiar with Cecco d'ascoli Iulius the 3. called for his gambon of bacon al dispet to di dio that is in despite of God and said that he had more reason to be angry for a peacocke then God for an apple Boccace in his second nouell bringeth in a Iew maruelling how Reme could stand in which there was no religion at all If I should report all the blasphemies of particular authors I should fill vp a whole volume with them onely thus much I thought good to say for to giue you an assaie of greater matters Faber in his booke aduers anatomen missae fol. 25. compareth Christ to the drunken Silenus annon saith he mirisiâ—us Silenus suit Christus in another place he calleth Christ an iuchanter Bellarmine lib. 1. de sanct beat c. 13. alledging a place out of Iustine martyr but most falsely placeth angels before the holy ghost and would haue them worshipped together with the holy Trinitie to the Pope also in his Preface before his bookes de Pontif. Rom. and in his booke de Pontif. Rom. c. 31. he giueth the proper titles of Christ but I cannot in this short treatise report all he that list to see diuers examples of Parsons his impieties and blasphemies let him read my answer to his Warneword and 3. conuersions Kellison is conuinced of the same crime in my answer to his Suruey CHAP. X. That Popery is a sinke of heathenish idolatry OF this argument I haue spoken at large in my last challenge much therefore I shall not need to say in this briefe suruey yet for that we perceiue that by the secret and cunning practise of the Diuell the idolatrie of the heathen nations ouerthrowen by the preaching of the Gospell is brought backe againe vnder colour of Christianity briefly we are to say somwhat of the former argument It may please God percase to open the eies of some Papists and to worke a detestation in them of popery if they may see that as a sink it hath together with heresie receiued into it self most grosse and heathenish idolatrie but this is prooued first by these words of the law Exod. 20. thou shalt haue no other Gods before me for this being directed principally against the heathenish worship of more Gods than one certaine it is that whosoeuer doth worship more Gods than one or giueth the honour of God to creatures is an idolater but this fault is diuersly incurred by the Papists for first they call the Pope their Lord and God in gloss in c. cum inter extrau Ioan. 22. de verb. signific and both Felm and Baldus as I shewed in the last chapter doe call him a God on the earth absolutely also he is called God in the chap. satis dist 96. and diuers other places secondly they cal the sacrament their Lord and God as appeareth by Allens treatise de sacrsic eucharist c. 41. and Bristow in his 26. motiue neither will they deny but they giue vnto it diuine honour as to God thirdly Bellarmine lib. 1. de cult sanct c. 9. doth call Saints Gods by participation but whosoeuer is God by participation hee is absolutely God for the deity is not communicable to any creature lastly to the sacrament and to the crosse they giue diuine honor saying to the crosse ô crux aue spes vnica and falling downe like beasts before the pixe they doe also make vowes to Saints sweare by Saints and confesse their sinnes iointly to them and to God therefore plainly are they idolaters for these are honours not due to any but to God as at large I haue shewed in my treatise against Bellarmines disputes de culiu sanctorum My second argument is drawn from the second commandement directed against the heathenish idolatrie of those which worshipped God in grauen images for that forbiddeth the making either of grauen image or likenesse to the intent to adore it or worship it but the Papists both make such images and pictures and fall downe before them and worship them to the crosse they pray
of her image there to be idolatrous 14. They celebrate the feast of our Ladies conception and of the assumption of her body into heauen as appeareth by their missals and breuiaries but Catholickes drslike both as grounded vpon apocryphall fables and lying legends S. Bernard epist 174. speaking against the feast of her conception saith she needed no false honours 15. Catholickes neuer beleeued that Christ had a body inuisible impalpable and not comprehended in a place S. Augustine de essentia diuinitatis saith that Christ according to his humane nature is visible corporal and local but our aduersaries teach that his true body is in the sacrament where it is neither seene felt nor circumscribed in a place 16. They speake reuerentlie of Christs body and hold it blasphemy to say that the same may be cast into the fire or eaten of dogs or hogs or other brute beasts but the Papists doe not so much as goe about to cleare themselues of this blasphemy 17 They teach that Christ had a body like to ours in all things sin except the Papists beleeue that his body is really in the sacrament and conteined in the compasse of a consecrated host and that the same is inuisible and able to penetrat other solide bodies without the dissolution of their substance but such abodie no man euer yet had nor by nature can haue 18 They beleeue that euery body is continued to it self or as Logicians call it continua quanutas but Papists beleeue that Christs body is in heauen and earth and euery altar and yet not in the middle places whereby it followeth that Christs head in heauen is not continued to his feet being in a consecrated host in earth 19. Vigilius lib. 4. cont Eutych saith that Christs body being now in heauen is not on earth and that is the faith of Catholickes but the false and pretended catholickes beleeue that his body is both in heauen and earth and diuers distant places at one time 20. Catholickes beleeue that Christ only is our redeemer for so the Apostle teacheth vs Rom. 3.1 Cor. 1. and diuers other places but Bellarmine in his first booke of indulgences teacheth vs that saints and others may be called redeemers all his consorts also teach that the Pope by his indulgences redeemeth soules out of purgatorie 21. Catholickes acknowledge that Christ is our iustice for so the Apostle 1. Cor. 1. expresly saith they beleeue also that we are iustified by faith in him as we read Rom. 5. but Kellison in his suruey and his consorts teach that he is onely the meritorious cause of our iustification and that we are formally iustified and saued by our owne workes 22. Catholickes doubt not to make their election sure and being iustified by faith haue peace with God and are perswaded that nothing shall separate them from the loue of God for all this is Apostolike doctrine but Papists teach their followers to doubt of their election and of the grace of God towards them and depriue them both of peace of conscience and of all assurance of Gods grace 23. Catholickes beleeue that Christ was wounded for our transgressions and that he hath borne our infirmities and that by his stripes we are healed for so the Prophet Isay cap. 53. teacheth vs. but the pretended popish catholickes do lash themselues and hope by their owne stripes to heale their sinnes and to satisfie for them and without this satisfaction they beleeue that no man can obteine remission of sinnes 24. Catholickes euer spared their owne bodies but certaine heretickes and idolaters did vsually afflict their bodies and lash themselues before their idols in lashing of themselues therefore the Papists imitate the Priests of Baal and not true Catholickes 25. Catholickes beleeue that their sinnes are purged by the bloud of Christ as we read Hebr. 1. but Papists beleeue that their sinnes are purged in purgatory and by their owne satsifactions 26. The Greekes to this day neuer beleeued Purgatory neither doe any of the ancient fathers beleeue that after our sinnes are remitted Christians are to satisfie for temporall paines either in this life or in purgatory the doctrine therefore of purgatorie will neuer be proued Catholicke 27. The Apostles and ancient fathers neuer knew nor heard of the doctrine and treasure of the Popes indulgences this doctrine of Papists therefore is to bee abolished as not Catholicke 28. True Catholickes neuer beleeued that Christians were iustified by mariage the master of the sentences saith it is onely a remedy against sinne but Papists hold they are iustified by marriage aswell as by other Sacraments 29. The doctrine of the conuenticle of Florence concerning the forme of priesthood popish confirmation extreme vnction and their number of seuen sacraments cannot bee proued to be Catholicke 3. Bellarmine lib. 2. de effectu sacrament c. 3. and other his consorts affirme that Christians are instified by the sacraments ex opere operato or by their owne act and worke wrought whereby it followeth that they are iustified by greasing crossing and such like acts but this doctrine is not catholicke the Greekes to this day acknowledge no such doctrine nor is any such thing to bee found in ancient writers 31. The Greekes to this day renounce the Popes supremacy the ancient fathers neuer heard of a triple crowned Pope with a crossed slipper and a guard of Suitzers the doctrine therefore of the Popes generall vicarship taught by Bellarmine in his bookes de pontisice Rom. and by others is not Catholicke 32. Papists teach that some sinnes are done away by holy water and without repentance and that such sinnes deserue not death but the Apostle Galat. 3. sheweth him to be accursed that abideth not in all the words of the law to doe them and Rom. 6. saith that the wages of sinne is death this is also the faith of all Catholickes but of the efficacy of holie water to doe awaie sinnes true Catholickes say nothing 33. Papists offer the sacrifice of the masse pro redemptione animarum suarum for the redemption of their soules but Catholikes doe not hope for redemption but by the sacrifice of Christ once offered vpon the crosse 34. They make Christians eaters of mans flesh and drinkers of mans blood really and literally as their words in the chapter ego Berengarius dist 2. de consecrat do import but our Sauiour saith that the spirit quickeneth and Saint Augustine tract 25. in loan sheweth that Christs flesh is not to be receiued with our mouth or teeth vt quid paras dentem saith he why doest thou prepare thy teeth 35. They make their Priests creators of their creator as Innocentius in his bookes de myster missae stella Clericorum and Boner in his speech to the Priests in Queene Maries time in expresse words doe declare but Christians and Catholikes abhorre to heare Priests called creators or God to be made a creature 36. They make the Priest to intercede for Christs bodie and blood saying supra quae propitio
all the fathers almost denie publicke penance to Priests and Deacons fallen into notorious crimes but the popish faction regardeth them not one iote Bellarmine lib. 1. de eucharist c. 11. saith that Augustine did not well weigh these words of Luke I will drinke no more of the fruit of the vine Augustine lib. 22. de ciuit Dei c. 10. saith that Christians doe not worship martyrs or erect remples in their honour lib. 1. de morib eccles c. 3. he denieth that we are to adore any ereature Hierome also ioineth with him in this opinion mepist ad Riparium but the popish sect doth not regard what they say nor followeth their doctrine Finally it were an easie matter to shew the fathers to bee aduerse to popery in all materiall controuersies but what shall wee neede to doe it seeing their late corruptions and false allegations of fathers doe plainlie testifie that they doe not hope for victory if the fathers may be truely alleadged of late they haue set out indexes expurgatory teaching Printers how to falsifie fathers Sixtus Senensis inepist ad Pium 5. ante biblioth sanct sheweth how that Pope had caused the fathers to bee purged or rather corrupted expurgari fecisti omnium authorum catholicorum saith he praecipuè veterum patrum scripta Pameluts hath most shamefully corrupted Cyprian and the like course all Papists take with the bookes of the fathers lately set foorth Somtime also they confesse the corruption of fathers Aeneas Sylu. lib. 1. de gest concil Basil sheweth how Popes stand vpon these words vocaberis Cephas and lanch into the deepe and such like neglecting the exposition of all the holy doctors posthabitis omnino omnium sanctorum expositionibus Alan Chartier saith they reiect the holy doctrine of fathers sanctâ—â— patrum doctrine reiectae posthabitae sunt Matth. Paris in Wilhelmo Conquest speaking of Hildebrandes decree against maried Priests saith it was made without consideration and against the iudgement of holy fathers inconsiderato iudicio contra sanctorum patrum sententiam CHAP. XIX That Popish religion was neuer testified by the blood of Christian martyrs STrange it were if the martyrs of Christ should turne from Christ and testifie for Antichrist yet because the aduersaries of truth doe boast of ancient martyrs and Bristow in his 15. motiue doth place Martyrs as setters foorth of the Popes glorious kingdome we are briefly to shew that the testification of Martyrs maketh nothing for popish religion and that appeareth first for that the Papists refuse to bee tried by the doctrine of the Apostles which were principall Martyrs Secondly we haue shewed that the principall points of Popery were neither taught nor receiued during the time of the primitiue Martyrs nor many ages after and that many points now taught and receiued among Papists were then refused as heresies Thirdly Papists adore idols and burne incense vnto them but the ancient Martyrs were therefore martyred cruelly put to death because they would not consent to the worship of idols nor burne incense to them Fourthly the practises of Papists declare that they are more like to the heathen Emperors and persecutors of Christians then to the ancient martyrs of Christs church for as they massacred Christians for maintenance of the Apostolike faith so do the Popes and their complices massacre all that stand for the same as they by sword and fire sought to vphold idolatry so doe these as they hated them deadly which taught the true faith so doe these Finally the confession of the faith published by Pius the fourth and that doctrine which the conuenticle of Trent hath of late confirmed and commanded to be taught and beleeued is in many points contrarie to the faith of ancient martyrs and in all points of controuersie betwixt Papists and vs vtterly vnknowne to them The holy Apostles commend scriptures and so doe ancient martyrs but Papists accuse them of insufficiencie obscuritie flexibility and call them a nose of waxe and a killing letter Ancient martyrs were burned and put to death because they would not deliuer holy scriptures to be burnt the Papists doe burne scriptures and suspect such for heretikes as reade them in vulgar tongues The Apostles and Primitiue martyrs beleeued the scriptures because they came from God the Papists will not haue scriptures to bee belecued vnlesse they be deliuered by the Pope They taught neither heresie nor impiety nor noueltie but Popish religion as before is declared is full of heresies impieties nouelties In ancient time the Bishops of Rome were martyrs now those that call themselues their successors doe murder Gods Saints and make them martyrs Ancient martyrs taught that one God was to bee adored the Papists giue diuine honour to the crosse and crucifixe and call the Sacrament their Lord and God Ancient martyrs did breake downe images now the Papists erect them fall downe before them and worship them Finally ancient martyrs neuer beleeued that either doggs or hogs could eate Christs body or that the same was in any place where it could neither be felt nor seene or that the same was both in heauen and earth and euery pixe at one time or that bread is transubstaÌ„tiated into Christs body or that Christians do with their teeth eate mans flesh or with their throats swallow mans blood or that the bishop of Rome is lord and monarch of the church or that he can fetch souls out of Purgatorie or that there is a treasure of Saints merites out of which indulgences are granted or that Christians are iustified by extreme vnction or eating fish and such like Popish deuises Neither is it materiall that these holy martyrs are put in Popish calenders for the Iewes bragged of their father Abraham and adorned the sepulchers of the Prophets although they neither abode in the faith of Abraham nor followed the doctrine of the Prophets Further Bristow telleth vs that S. Stephen helped all those that sought vnto him but his proofes are drawne out of legendes and certeine counterset sermons of S. Augustine in his 22. chapter de ciuit dei c. 8. there is no such matter and yet these reports that are there inserted seeme to be none of S. Augustines but suppose certein superstitious persoÌ„s should pray to S. Stephen yet S. Stephen neuer taught them so to do nor allowed such formes of praiers Lastly he talketh of Fisher More the Charterhouse monks and diuers that died in king Henry the 8. the late Queens reigne for the Popes cause and telleth vs that they were of his religion but it is first denied that they were martyrs and next that Fisher and More were of the moderne Romish religion the first is proued for that they died for the Pope and not for Christ Secondly they died as traitors either by open rebellion or by ouert act oppugning the Princes authoritie the second is euident for that diuers of them died before the conuenticle of Trent which hath now published a new forme of faith and decreed many things
in 1. sent dist 2. hold contrary Richardus in 1. sent dist 3. holdeth that the mysterie of the Trinitie may be demonstrated by naturall reasons Scotus Maronis and Thomas affirme the contrary About the faculties of the soule called potentiae the schoolemen are diuided into three sectes as may appeare by their disputes lib. 1. sent dist 3. some hold they are all one with the substance of the soule others that they are accidents the third that they are betweene substances and accidents Abbot Ioachim and Richard de sancto victore taught that the diuine essence might generare gigni the contrarie is taught by Peter Lombard and his followers Peter Lombard lib. sent 1. dist 17. taught that charity wherewith we loue God and our neighbour is the holy ghost and that it is not any thing created but now most of his followers in this point forsake him In the 24. dist of his first booke of sentences Peter Lombard saith that the words of number spoken of God are spoken only relaturely and that the word Trinity implieth nothing positiuely but onlie priuatiuely which because it ouerthroweth the mysterie of the holy Trinity is almost generally contradicted by his followers In the 44. distinction of the same booke he saith that God can alwaies doe whatsoeuer he could euer doe and that he willeth whatsoeuer hee would at any time and knoweth whatsoeuer hee knew at any time but his Disciples hold direct contrary Thomas p. 1. q. 46. art 2. holdeth that the world or at the lest some creature might haue beene from euerlasting so likewise holdeth Bonauenture and some others Richardus maintaineth the opposite opinion and that rightly for that the other sauoureth of Arianisme The master of sentences in 4. dist 1. and Gabriel and Vega lib. 7. pro Conc. Trid. c. 13. hold that not onely substances but accidents also are created Alexander Hales q. 9. m. 6. q. 10. m. 1. and Thomas p. 1. q. 45. art 4. affirme that onely substances are created About this question an omnium aeuiternorum sit vnum aeuum vel multiplex there are 5. different opinions the first of Scotus the second of Thomas the third of Durand the fourth of Henricus the fifth of Bonauenture Likewise about this question quae sit ratio formalis cur Angelus sit in loco there are fiue opinions all repugnant one to another Thomas and Richardus doe affirme that two Angels cannot be in one place together Scotus Occham and Gabriel hold the contrarie Thomas holdeth that Angels haue not intellectum agentem possibilem Scotus doth directly contradict him Scotus and Gabriel teach that both Diuels and good Angels doe vnderstand naturally both our thoughts and the thoughts one of another but to Thomas p. 1. q. 57. art 4. this seemeth absurd Antisiodorensis lib. 2. sum saith that Christ had Angelum custodem other schoolemen denie it Scotus in 2. sent dist 1. holdeth that the soule and an Angel do not differ as two diuers kinds others teach contrary Some doctours hold that Angels consist of forme only others hold contrarie as appeareth by their disputes in 2. sent dist 3. The second councell of Nice Act. 5. determineth that Angels soules are corporall nemo dixerit saith the councell vel angelos vel daemones velanimas incorporeas but this opinion will not now bee beleeued of any learned Papists Why then should they rather beleeue that synode in the article of worship of images than in this Scotus saith that the will is the only subiect of sinne Thomas denieth it Concerning the place of paradise there are three different opinions some hold that it reacheth to the circle of the Moone Thomas in 2. dist 17. and Bonauenture doe place it vpon a high mountaine they know not where others place it in the East Concerning the nature of free wil there are diuersities of opinions among schoolemen and others as Iosephus Angles in lib. 2. sent dist 24. and 25. sheweth particularly Richardus holdeth that freewill cannot be changed by God others for the most part hold the contrary Thomas Bonauenture and Setus hold that grace is not a qualitie infused but a qualitie inherent in the soule Alexander Hales and Scotus hold that it is a quality infused Iosephus Angles in lib. 2. sent dist 26. rehearseth three seuerall opinions of schoole-doctors about the diuision of grace in gratiam operantem cooperantem whereby it may euidently appeare that Papists in talking of grace goe about to shut out Gods grace Most schoolemen and others affirme that Adam and Eue beleeued not Gods words concerning the forbidden fruit Bellarmine lib. 3. de amiss grat c. 6. saith they beleeued In the same booke c. 9. Bellarmine saith Adams offence was greater then that of Eue contrary both to ancient doctors and to schoolemen Lib. 5. de amiss grat c. 17. he sheweth great diuersities of opinions among his schoolemen fellowes about orginall sinne and himselfe dissenteth from all About the conception of the blessed Virgin whether it was in originall sinne or not there haue beene not onely contradictions but also tragicall stirres and contentions Certeine schollers of Aquinas beleeue and teach that no man being of yeares of discretion can be iustified by the absolute power of God without the act and concurrence of free will Scotus Vega and Caietan hold contrary both their opinions are touched by Iosephus Angles in 2. sent dist 27. Richardus in 2. dist 27. art 2. q. 1. Scotia in 1. dist 17. q. 1. art 1. and Durand in 1. dist 17. q. 2. and others hold that a man may merit the first grace do Congruo Gregorius Arimineusis in 2. dist 26. Lyra in Ioan. 1. Waldensis and others denie it Sotus lib. 2. de not grat c. 4. saith that the former opinion is neere to Peligiamsine Gregorius Ariminensis and Capreolus in 2. dist 27. q. 1. hold that no man without the illustration of Gods speciall grace can attaine to the knowledge of any moral truth but Thomas and Scotus in 2. dist 27. doe hold contrary Durand placeth originall sinne in the carnall appetite Thomas placeth it in the whole substance of the soule Scotus differeth from both and placeth it in the will of man Iosephus Angles in 2. dist 27. rehearseth three seuerall opinions about this question whether a sinne of omission may be committed without a positiue act The same man reckoneth 5. different opinions about the difference of mortall and veniall sinnes and three opinions concerning this question what is sinne of malice Catharin and Caietan doe striue about faith of infants and diuers other matters and greater would the contention haue beene if the matter had not been taken vp or at least silence commanded by the Pope Bellarmine lib. 1. de pontif Rom. c. 12. saith that the keies of the church are nothing but order and iurisdiction the Master of sentences and Caietan de iust auth pontif Rom. hold that they containe somewhat more Pighius lib. 4. hierarch eccles c. 8.
say as much and greatly complaineth of Roman Caursins and vsurers Are not then our moderne Papists simple to continue vnder the gouernment of Antichrist where they are pilled both aliue and dead and spoiled by diuers fraudes and brought to extreme pouerty through manifold oppressions and exactions CHAP. XLI That the Popish church hath no true Bishops nor Priests THe gouernment of the Popish church being so burdensome and dangerous cannot well be tolerated by rules of policy but if the same be against both scriptures and canons of the church then as repugnant both to religion and Christian policy it is to be abandoned of all Christian common-wealthes let vs then consider what allowance it may haue either of scriptures or ancient canons The Apostle Act. 20. saith that the holy ghost hath appointed Bishops to gouerne the Church of God in quo vos spiritus sanctus posuit Episcopos regere ecclesiam dei saith he speaking of the Bishops of Asia but the popish church hath no true Bishops and that is prooued first for that bishops cannot be orderned but by true Bishops but the prelats of the Romish church are ordeined by the Pope that is no Bishop the proposition is granted of the assumption the first part is not denied in the second part our aduersaties insist firmely and affirme the Pope to be a true bishop but how can he be a Bishop that neither preacheth nor can preach nor administreth the Sacraments nor succeedeth the Apostles in their Apostolicall office the Apostle 1. Tim. 3. sheweth that the office of a bishop consisteth in the worke and not in the title qui Episcopatum desiderat bonum opus desiderat Secondly antichrist can ordeine no true bishops but that the Pope is antichrist I haue declared in my fist booke de Pontif. Rom. and it is apparent in that he teacheth doctrine contrary to that which we haue receined from Christ Iesus and is plainly described in the Reuelation by the whoore of Babylon Apocalyps 17. and by the beast like a lambe rising out of the earth Apocalyps 13. which are figures of Antichrist Thirdly none but the successors of Christs apostles can ordaine true bishops but the Pope succeedeth Iulius Caesar rather then Simon Peter for Simon Peter fed Christs flocke he murdreth Christs lambes Fourthly neither heretikes nor simoniacall persons haue power to ordeine bishops as the master of the sentences lib. 4. dist 25. prooueth by the authoritie of Cyprian Innocent the first and Leo. and this is the practise of the Romish church at this day who refuseth to allow them for bishops that are ordred by such as they repute heretikes or schismatikes some determine otherwise but they repugne against the Romish churches practise Finally no woman can ordeine bishops but Pope Ioan was a woman and therefore all ordeined by her and their successors are no bishops by the confession of the aduersaries themselues Howsoeuer it is the Papists cannot assure themselues that they haue any bishops for no man is ordeined bishop vnlesse he that ordeined him had an intention to order him a bishop but of this intention no man can assure himselfe Furthermore the Popish synagogue hath no true priests for their priests are all ordred to sacrifice for quicke and dead The forme of priesthood say the Masse-priests assembled at Florence is this accipe potestatem offerendi sacrificium in ecclesia pro vinis mortuis and this is prooued also by their rituall bookes and by Bellarmines confession lib. deord c. 9. but such priests were neuer appointed by Christ or his Apostles neither is there any footestep of such an ordination to be found in ancient fathers Secondly no true priests can be ordeined by other then true bishops and the Apostles successors but such bishops the synagogue of Rome wanteth Lastly true priests and ministers of the Gospell are ordeined to preach Gods word truely and to administer the Sacraments sincerely but popish priests are not ordered to this end If then that cannot be the church that wanteth priests and bishops then are we not to looke for the true church among the papists but Hierome in dialog contr Lucifer denieth that to be the church that hath no priests and Cyprian lib. 4. epist 9. teacheth that the church is a people or flocke vnited to the bishop Againe if all the ordination of bishops and priests in the Romish church dependeth vpon the Pope and the Pope be not mentioned either Ephes 4. or 1. Cor. 12. where all the ministers of the church giuen to the same by Christ are mentioned then doth the ordination of Roman priests and prelates take his beginning not from Christ but from Antichrist Lastly if the function of masse-priests doth consist in saying Masse and the Masse be prooued to be an humane inuention then is the Romish priesthood an humane inuention but otherwhere we haue sufficiently declared that the Masse was by little and little peeced togither and is a meere humane inuention nay an inuention contrarie to Christs institution of the Sacrament of the Eucharist CHAP. XLII That Popery cannot be mainteined without forgery and falshood THis point of it selfe alone would require a large discourse if we should prosecure particularly and distinctly whatsoeuer our aduersaries haue herein offended for whether we respect the diuers kinds of forgeries or the places of authors forged and falsified by them it were a great worke to comprehend them all we will therefore choose out some few examples out of many whereby all true Christians may haue cause sufficient to suspect them in the rest First then we charge them with falsity for that as much as in them lieth they haue gone about to suppresse Gods eternall word comprised in the old and new testament that this is falsitie it is apparent by the law qui testamentum ff ad legem corneliam de falsis for by that law they are condemned qui testamentū amouerint celauerint that is which shall amooue or conceile a testament but the Pope and his complices forbid expressely all translations of the new testament made by our doctors and only grant certaine translations made by themselues and that with hard conditions as is declared in the index of forbidden bookes reg 3. and 4. but publikely they will not haue scriptures red in vulgar tongues Secondly they burne the holy scriptures vnder pretense of false translations but the law formerly cited doth pronounce him a falsarie that shall abolish or cancell or burne a mans testament the words of the law are these si quis testamentum deleuerit that is if any shall cancell a testament Thirdly it is falsity to cancell or breake the seales of a testament as the practise of the law of this land declareth how then can the Popish synagogue of Rome excuse it selfe that depriueth the lords people of the cup which our sauiour Christ calleth the new testament in his blood is not this all one as if the same should breakē the seales of Gods testament
all the decretals of Popes before Siluesters time are counterfet and saith that he hath prooued it Multas supra in praefatione rationes adduxi saith he quibus omnium Pontificum qui Siluestrum praecesserunt decretales falsas esse manifestè ostendi but in Plantins edition of the canon lawe they haue taken away this Preface with notorious impudency couering their grosse falsities Thus we see how they haue forged whole bookes treatises epistles lawes other instruments if then they haue dealt so falsly in whole instruments books we may not thinke that they are more scrupulous in adding or taking away words or sentences and falsifying parts c. in canonicis dist 19. in the rubricke they tell vs that the Popes decretales are numbred among canonicall Scriptures and pretend Augustines authoritie but he saith no such thing lib. 2. de doctr Christ c. 8. they adde these wordes ab ea alij vnto the words of S. Augustine Dist 1. de consecrat c. Iacobus they say that Iames and Basil did deliuer to vs missae celebrationem that is the forme of celebrating Masse and cite Synodum sextam c. 32. whereas it is onely said that they taught how in the holy celebration of the Lords Supper the cup was filled with wine and water C. species dist 2. de consecrat these words species similitudo illarum rerum vocabula sunt with the rest following are pretended to be taken ex Paschali Gregorij papae but most falsely C. vtrum de consecrat dist 32. these words vtrum sub figura an sub veritate hoc mysticum calicis sacramentum fiat with all the chapter following are alledged as spoken by S. Augustine yet neither is the place signed nor can those words be found in any place of S. Augustine In the chapter in Christo dist 2. de consecrat taken as is pretended out of Hilary lib. 8. de trinit these words corpus Christi quod sumitur de altari are foisted into the text Into the words of consecration of the cuppe they haue thrust in these words eterni mysterium fidei committing falshood in the very canon of the Masse Durand Rat. diuin lib. 4. c. 4. alleadgeth Pope Cyprian for proof of holy water Cyprianus Papa ait quod ideo aqua benedicta homines asperguntur quia valet ad sanctisicationem saith Durand but neither can he find a Pope of that name nor any such words in the writings of Cyprian Pius quintus in his Missall out of the 2. booke of Machab c. 12.46 writeth Peccatis mortuorum for peccato and for 2. M. writeth 12. M. Turrecremat a lib. 2. c. 12. summae de ecclesia maketh Chrysostome to call Peter the prouost and head of his brethren and to affirme that they ought to preach Peter matters neuer thought of by Chrysostome Pope Syricius alledgeth these words S. cerdotes mei semel nubant out of Moyses but no where in all the fiue books of Moyses are any such wordes to be found in the 3. action of the 2. synod of Nice Basil is made to say that the honour giuen to the image redoundeth to the originall but such words are no where found Bellarmines forgeries are infinit in his 2. booke de Pont. Rom. c. 31. he falsifieth the wordes of Hierom in an epistle to Damasus writing hanc Petram for illam Petram as if Hierome called Damasus the foundation of the church where he expresly meaneth Christ the rocke In his booke de reliquijs cap. 3. he alledgeth certaine obscure bookes and counterfet testimonies for the proofe of the worship of reliques in the same place alledging Eusebius his historie lib. 4. c. 14. he maketh him say that S. Iames his chaine is had in great veneration whereas he saith no such thing but rather sheweth in what honorable account holy men were holden in ancient time Lib. 1. de sanct beat c. 13. citing Eusebius de praeparat euangel lib. 13. he maketh him to vse these wordes nos quotidie id factitamus nam verae pietatis milites vt dei amicissimos honoramus whereas no such wordes are to be found he saith onely that Christians honor the blessed soules of such as contend for true pietie Lib. 2. de pont Rom. c. 31. he falsifieth the wordes of the councell of Chalcedon making the same to say that Leo did preside and gouerne the church as the head the members for neither was this epistle that is cited the act of the councel nor is it said there that Leo was head of the church as Bellarmine would haue it but that he ruled his clerkes as the head the members Likewise in the same booke and Chapter rehearsing the titles giuen to the bishops of Rome he saith that Eusebius in his chronicle anno D. 44. doth giue them the title of Pontifex Christianorum but Eusebius doth not so much as once mention the bishops of Rome in that place Lib. de monachis c. 31. he changeth Chrysostomes words in c. 19. Matth. making him to say that it is easie to absteine from marriage where he saith onely that it is possible and in his booke de Monachis c. 27. alledging a place out of the 15. homily of Chrysostome vpon the first to Timothy he addeth these words id est Christo nubit It were infinit to rehearse all the places which he hath falsified and not necessary considering that I haue set downe so many in diuers treatises written against him alreadie the false allegations of Harding are particularly noted by bishop Iewel of reuerend memorie Stapleton is conuinced of falsehood both by D. Fulke and D. Whitaker of Parsons and Kellisons forgeries and false allegations I haue spoken my selfe somewhat largely and shall percase haue occasion to speake of them further hereafter Wherefore if it be the propertie of heretikes and not of catholikes to mangle the sentences of fathers then Papists heerein doe declare themselues to be heretikes and not Catholikes non conuenit orthodoxis say the fathers of the 8. councel act 8. circumtruncatas patrum voces deflorare hareticorum hoc potius proprium est heerein therefore they shall neuer be able to cleare themselues of a speciall note of heretikes CHAP. XLIII That Popery cannot be well vpholden without calumniations and lies AS iustice is accompanied with trueth so wicked causes cannot be vpholden without lies and calumniations a matter cleerely verified by the practise of the papists whose false and erromous doctrine is built vpon lies and calumniations as vpon two pillers by their calumniations they seeke to bring good men into obloquie and hatred by lies they would willingly grace their owne false religion and bring a scandale vpon the truth To make proofe heereof we need not to goe farther then to their wicked libels lately published against Luther Caluin Zuinglius Oecolampadius Beza and all that haue been actors in the defence of truth to the lying traditions and legends of the synagogue of Rome to the feined miracles of supposed Romish
foundation and pillar of our faith they doe make the traditions of the church not written equall to the scriptures and vpon them nay vpon the decretales of Popes and practise of Massepriestes doe build their faith all antiquitie esteemeth holy scriptures to be the canon of our faith and therefore calleth them canonicall But the Romanists esteeme them to be an vnperfect canon without their traditions and the Popes decretales and determinations Bellarmine lib. 4. de verb. dei c. 4. saith they are neither necessary nor sufficient without traditions The fathers neuer accounted the bookes of Tobiah Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdome and the Machabees equall to the bookes of the law and Prophets extant originally in Hebrew as appeareth by the testimony of Hierome in prologo Galeato of Athanasius in synopsi of Nazianzen in carm of Epiphanius and diuers others old and new writers the Papists in the synode of Trent decree them to be of equall authoritie with the rest the auncient catholikes euer esteemed the Hebrew text of the old testament and the Greeke of the new to be more authentical then anie translation the conuenticle of Trent hath made the old latin vulgar translation of the bible authenticall and doth not giue that honor to the originall bookes of the bible the canonicall scriptures we say receiue their force from the author of them and this is to be prooued by the consent of fathers and by arguments from scriptures law and reason they say that scriptures receiue force and authoritie in respect of vs from the Church or rather from the Pope Papists are neither willing that scriptures be turned into vulgar tongues nor will permitte them to be read of the vulgar sort without licence or publickly read in vulgar tongues in the church finally they say they are obscure and hard to be vnderstood and speake what they can in their disgrace Secondly they teach erroneously concerning Christs naturall body and concerning his office the body of Christ they beleeue to be both in heauen and on earth on euerie altar at one and the selfe same time they also hold that his body is really vnder the accidents of bread and wine giuing him a body neither visible nor palpable nor in any sort like to ours they teach further that his body is in diuers places where it filleth not the places and that his one body hath relation to diuers places they beleeue that the soules of the faithfull before Christes comming were in hell or at least in Limbo which is a part of hell and were thence deliuered by Christes going to hell as if his crosse had wrought nothing for them they teach that Christ as man is omniscient and per consequent omnipotent and that he was vir perfectus that is a perfect or growne man from the first instant of his conception his office of mediation they giue to the virgin Mary to Angels and to Saints they make also Saints our redeemers teaching that by their merits Christians obteine their desires and are deliuered out of purgatorie to Masse-priests they giue priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech and say that they offer vp Christs body and blood really for quicke and dead finally they make the Pope head spouse and monarke of the Church Neither doe they teach more catholikely of Christes mysticall body then of his naturall body for they subiect the same to the Pope and exclude all from Christ that are not subiect to the Pope the true members thereof they persecute and make heretikes and reprobates and such as liue without order or law professing their religion outwardly true members of Christes body the Church say they is alwaies so conspicuous and visible that euery one may see it and discerne it the true markes of the church that is true doctrine and the sincere administration of Sacraments and holinesse of life they denie assigning most common and vncerteine markes as vnitie vniuersalitie antiquitie succession and such like The Pope they make a most certeine and infallible interpreter of Scriptures and iudge of matters of faith they giue him authoritie to make lawes for the whole Church and power to binde mens consciences they make him more souereigne then a generall Councell and say that his power in giuing indulgences reacheth into purgatorie they say he hath power to excommunicate and depose kings and to giue away their kingdomes to others Betwixt the Catholicke church and Roman church they make no difference equalling a part to the whole they say also that the Roman church can neither erre nor faile The worship of God consisteth in spirit and trueth but they place the same in certeine externall rites and ceremonies and in meere humane inuentions and deuices nay for God they worship creatures not onely giuing diuine honour to the Sacrament but also to crucifixes and images of the Trinitie made of wood stone and colours they doe also adore not onely saints but rotten bones and ragges they know not of whom to Saints they pray they make vowes they confesse their sinnes to saints they erect churches and altars to their images they burne incense and present diuers oblations and finally in the honour of Saints haue deuised particular masses and offices transforming the Psalmes and wordes of Scriptures to Angels and Saints Their doctrine concerning the Sacraments is most exorbitant for they doe not onely adde vnto water in Baptisme salt spittle oile and diuers other ceremonies partly idle partly superstitious but also vnto the two Sacraments instituted by Christ they equall confirmation matrimonie penance orders and extreme vnction making them Sacraments as well as Baptisme or the Lords Supper in Confirmation they haue deuised both a new signe and new wordes in extreme Vnction they haue deuised new formes in the ordring of Priestes they say accipe potestatem offerendi sacrisicium in ecclesia pro viuis mortuis that is receiue power to offer sacrifice in the church for quicke and dead in Penance they vrge a necessity of confession strange formes of whipping and vncerteine hopes and new deuices of satisfaction from Matrimonie they exclude Priestes monkes and friars and make it a Sacrament albeit they know neither certeine signes nor words of the institution of it but the institution of the Lords supper they haue quite abolished for that which Christ ordeined to be receiued of the Communicants that the masse-priest doth offer for quicke dead and in the honour of Saints and Angels of which there is not one worde spoken in the institution our Sauiour in bread and wine instituted his last supper these neither leaue bread nor wine but make Christians eaters of mans flesh and drinkers of mans blood like the canibals Cyclopes Christ ordeined this Sacrament in remembrance of his death and passion these make of the same a sacrifice in honour of Angels and Saints the cup of the new testament they take from Christians abrogating as much as in them lieth the new testament established in Christs blood and
pretence doe reiect the old translation or vse any interpretation contrary to the Romish Churches meaning they condemne Stapleton in his booke intituled Principia doctrinalia doth deliuer vnto vs seuen grounds or principles of his religion the first is the Church the second the Pope the third the means vsed by the Pope in iudgement the fourth the Popes infallibility in iudgement the fifth his power in taxing the canon of Scriptures the sixth his certaine interpretation of Scriptures the seuenth his power in deliuering doctrine not written these I say are his grounds and principles absurdly deuised confusedly disposed and ridiculously propounded as God willing shall be shewed otherwhere now it is sufficient to declare that whatsoeuer he bableth elsewhere of scriptures councels fathers yet heere they are all suppressed in this diuision or at the least concealed vnder the name of the Church or Pope which in his preface to Gregory the 13. hee calleth supremum numen in terris that is the supreme God of the world and who to him is all in all likewise in his preface to his relection of doctrinall principles hee seemeth directly to exclude the scriptures Christianae religionis fundamentum habemus saith he ab ipsis literis apostolicis euangelicis uliud that is we haue another foundation of Christian religion diuers from the writings of the Apostles Prophets if he exclude not scriptures yet he admitteth them no otherwise than according to the interpretation of the Pope and his complices nay without the Popes declaration he doth tediouslie discourse that Christians are not to receiue the canon of scriptures The decretale epistles of the Pope no doubt they admit for the foundation of their faith for in the rubricke of their decrees c. in canonicis dist 19. they doe determine that the Popes decretales are to bee numbred among canonicall scriptures inter canonicas scripturas say they decretales epistolae connumerantur likewise Gelasius c. sancta Romana dist 15. defineth that the Popes decretale epistles are to bee receiued with veneration In the same decretale Gelasius authoriseth the Romane martyrologe or legends of martyrs neither can Kellison or his kettle companions deny this to be one of the grounds of his rammish I would say Romish religion seeing these martyrologes and legendes conteine diuers traditions which the conuenticle of Trent will haue all Papistes to receiue with equall affection to scriptures Canus lib. 1. loc theolog c. 1. assigneth tenne places out of which he saith diuines are to draw arguments the first is the authority of scriptures the second the authority of traditions not written the third is the authority of the catholike church the fourth the authority of councels the fifth the authority of the church of Rome where wee are to note that more honestly than his companions hee maketh the church of Rome to differ from the Catholike church the sixth is the authority of ancient fathers the seuenth the authority of Romish schoole doctors the eighth naturall reason the ninth the authority of Philosophers the tenth the authority of writers of stories so wee see how hee buildeth his faith vpon men as well as vpon God and matcheth traditions not written with the most diuine writings of the Prophets and Apostles and conioyneth the authority of councels and fathers nay of schoolemen and Philosophers with the testimony of holy scriptures framing to vs rather an humane then a diuine foundation of Christian faith Martin Perez a plaine dealing Papist knowing that all those points of doctrine which are in controuersie betwixt his fellowes and vs are grounded rather vpon tradition then scripture doth entitle his whole discourse of these matters de traditionibus that is a discourse of traditions Finally Bellarmine lib. 2. de Pontif. Rom. cap. 31. doth call the Pope the foundation of the building of the church Fundamentum aedisicij ecclesiae and in his preface before his bookes de pontisice Rom. he saith that the seat of Peter or the Popes chaire is the approued stone the corner and pretious stone placed in the soundation of which the Prophet I say speaketh c. 8. and 28. and with him concurreth Sanders in his booke of the Rocke of the church Stapleton also declareth the matter most plainely in praefat in relect princip doctr where he saith that the foundation of the knowledge of Christian religion is necessarily placed in the authority of the Pope teaching vs in whom he saith he heareth God speaking to vs. his wordes are in hac docentis hominis authoritate he speaketh of the Pope in qua deum loquentem audimus religionis nostrae cognoscenda fundamentum necessariò pom credimus and this others must necessarily also hold for they hold him to be the supreme interpreter of scriptures and an infallible Iudge of all controuersies of religion and a law-giuer to our consciences binding all mens consciences by his lawes which is the common opinion as Bellarmine lib. 4. de Pontifice Rom. c. 16. saith of all casuistes a pitifull case therefore it is wherein the Papistes stand whose consciences are chained with so many bondes This then being found in the suruey of the grounds of Popish religion let vs also consider what conclusions may be hence inferred that we may as well suruey the conclusions as the premisses First it followeth that these grounds being blasphemous both in regard of the spirit of God which is the enditer and author of holy scriptures and also in regard of Christ Iesus the foundation of the church and finisher of our saith the doctrine and religion of Popery cannot be cleere of blasphemie for to match Popish decretales with holy scriptures and the Popes determination with Gods law is derogatory to Gods holy spirit and a plaine disparagement to Gods holy law likewise it is blasphemous to accuse the holy scriptures of insufficiencie and imperfection and to attribute more certaintie and perspicuitie to the decretales of the Pope then to the lawes of God it is also blasphemous either to remoue Christ out of the foundation of the church or at the least to ioyne the Pope with him in the foundation and that as a more necessary foundation for the knowledge of Christian religion as Stapleton saith the same also is directly contrary to the words of the Apostle 1. Cor. 3. Ephes 2. and of S. Iames. c. 4. in the first of which places we finde that no other foundation can be layd of the church but Christ Iesus in the 2. we reade that the Church is founded vpon the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ being the cheefe corner stone in the 3. we vnderstand that there is only one Law-giuer and Iudge which is able to saue and destroy it is finally very impious and blasphemous to assirme that the Pope is a more certaine and superiour Iudge then God himselfe speaking to vs in scriptures or then the Apostles and Prophets that were ledde into all truth by the spirit of God of other blasphemies of Popery
a In breuiar Rom. auge pijs iustitiam reisque dona veniam that is increase righteousnesse in the godly and grant pardon to sinners to these images they burne incense as did the heathen to their idols nay Alexander Hales p. 3. q. 30. art vlt. and Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 25. art 3. and other schoolemen affirme that what honour is due to the originall the same is also due to the image which is more than the heathen euer supposed lastly they kisse these images touch them with their beads and because they are blind set vp light before them Thirdly we read Deut. 4. that God to represse the idolatry of his people told them that when they heard him speake out of the fire in mount Horeb yet they saw no likenesse of any thing do they not then run into this sin that make the likenesse of God and represent God the father in the image of an old man and God the holy ghost in the figure of a doue if this be not idolatry yet it is certainly idolatry to giue the same honour to one of these images which they giue to God neither will they denie that it is idolatrie to giue Gods honour to creatures they must therefore either denie these images to be creatures or confesse themselues to be idolaters Fourthly where God by the Prophet Psal 81. forbiddeth the hauing of new Gods or worshipping strange Gods saying non erit in te Deus recens neque adorabis Deum alienum wee are taught that it is idolatry to haue new Gods or to worship strange Gods but the Papists euerie day make new crucifixes and new Gods of the altar and the Pope also canonizeth new Saints which euery one of his followers is bound to worship these are also most strange Gods for neither were they knowen to the people of God before Christ nor were any such things worshipped by the ancient catholike Church finally some crucifixes are so euilfauoured and some saints so huge and monstrous that they are more fit to scare crowes than to be worshipped of Christians The holy scriptures Amos. 5. and Act. 7. condemne them for idolaters that worshipped and serued the host of heauen but the Papists deny not but that Dulia and seruice is due to Angels and Saints and all the host of heauen and accordingly they doe them seruice in most ample manner The gentiles are condemned Psal 114. for that they worshipped images of siluer and gold and the worke of mens hands images I say that had mouthes spoke not eies saw not noses and smelled not hands and handled not feete but walked not and that were not able to viter one word out of their throte now gladly would I haue any Papist to shew me that their images are of other matter and forme and that they haue more perfect senses then the images of the gentiles the lady of Loreto notwithstanding the report of her great miracles neither seeth nor speaketh one word The gentiles did thinke they offred sacrifices pleasing to God yet the Apostle 1. Cor. 10. because they were offered without warrant saith they offered them to diuels if then the Papists haue no warrant for their sacrifices in the honor of Angels and Saints then are they to be reputed as idolaters and sacrificers to diuels The Prophet Hicremie c. 7. declareth them to be idolaters that built high places neuer commanded by God and made vowes to the Queene of heauen and serued her but this is iust the case of Masse-priests that in euery great church haue high altars and that without commandment of God or precedent of ancient Catholikes they doe also make vowes to our lady whom they call the Queene of heauen and serue her most diligently saying more aue Mariaes then praiers to God In the booke of Baruch c. 6. the Babylonians are reputed to beidolaters for that they caried their Gods of gold siluer wood and stone vpon their shoulders adorned them with costly apparell and iewels worshipped them albeit their faces were dusty and they vnable to gard themselues from rust corruption and theeues why then should not the Papists be so reputed likewise seeing they adorne dumbe idoles and worship them that cannot gard themselues from corruption and rust and are often stollen away by theeues or molten to serue base vses is it more ridiculous in the heathen to cary about their images then for the Papists The idolatrous Iewes were condemned for saying to a stocke thou art my father and to a stone thou hast begotten me as we read Hieremy 2. and yet the Papists before stocks and stones say pater noster and the babling Friers in their chaires turning to a little crucifixe of wood or mettall set by them say thou hast redeemed vs thou hast reconciled vs. and this Bellarmine lib. 2. de cult sanct c. 23. is not ashamed to allow but all of them together must be thrust into the rolle of idolaters S. Iohn giueth Christians warning to keepe themselues from grauen images 1. Iohn 5. but why so if there were no idolatry in worshipping them either must the Papists denie their images to be simulachra and themselues to worship them or confesse themselues to be idolaters The Israelites Iudges 10. confesse their seruice of Baalim or other Lords to be leud and idolatrous and God taxeth them there for seruing and inuocating other Gods if then the Papists call vpon their volto santo or their crosses or the Queene and hoast of heauen and serue them they cannot cleere themselues from the faultes of the idolatrous Israelites The worship of Angels both by scriptures and fathers is condemned as idolatrous the Apostle Coloss 2. exhorteh Christians to beware least they be seduced by humility and religion of Angels the Angell Apocalyps 22. forbad Iohn to worship him and addeth this reason for that he was his fellow seruant the worship of Angels by the councell of Laodicea c. 35. is declared to be idolatrous Christians must not leaue the church saith the councell and make meetings for the idolatrous worship of Angels Theodoret in Coloss 2. saith that by this councell those were condemned that praied to Angels S. Hierom. in epist ad Riparium saith that Christians neither adore Angels nor Archangels we honour them with loue saith S. Augustine de ver relig c. 55. and not with seruice nor do we build temples to them God will not haue vs to adore Angels saith Epiphanius haeres 79. finally Tertullian de praescript aduers haeret sheweth that the seruice of Angels was accounted to be idolatrie and that it descended from Simon Magus but the Papists cannot denie but they serue Angels they also pray vnto them in their publike letanies saying sancte Michael sancte Gabriel sancte Raphael omnes Angeli Archangeli orate pro nobis in their Masse they confesse their sinnes to Angels saying confiteor Beato Michaeli Archangelo in their breuiaries they praie to an Angel vnknowen whom they call their gardian but praying
Bishops of Rome or else he must know that whatsoeuer he fableth of his three supposed conuersions the same will make for the destruction of Popery and the ouerthrow of the cause which he mainteineth Secondly we are able to prooue that all these corruptions of doctrine superstitious deuises impieties blasphemies which we refuse haue beene receiued and established in the synagogue of Rome not onely since the Apostles times but also since the time of Eleutherius and Gregory the first the idolatrous worship of images was first confirmed by the second coūncell of Nice vnder the Empire of Irene and by little and little brought into the Westerne church being long oppugned by the bishops of France Germany and Britain That the images of the crosse and Trinity should be worshipped with latria was not allowed in that idolatrous councell but first taught by Thomas Aquinas and his followers and grounded not vpon Gods word but vpon this rule of Philosophy that the same motion is directed to the image and the thing imagined which rule by him is mistaken being meant of the species or representation of things in our vnderstanding and not of materiall images that come not within our vnderstanding The Popes authority began to be established first by the rebellion of Gregory the second and Gregory the third that caused Italy to reuolt from the Emperour vnder pretence of worship of images and afterward the same was confirmed by Gregory the seuenth and his successors that by force and violence ouerthrew the empire and made way by the diuisious of Christendome to the victories and conquests of the Turkes and Saracens Boniface the third obteined of Phocas that the church of Rome should be reputed head of other churches Boniface the 9. as Theodoric à Niem in his booke of schisme testifieth by fraude vsurped first the temporall gouernment ouer the Citie and territorie of Rome which before that belonged either to the emperor or to the citizens and thus by fraud and violence the Pope made himselfe great and by little and little exalted himselfe in the church and erected the kingdome of Antichrist The carnall eating and presence of Christs body in the sacrament was first decreed by Nicolas the second in the Chap. ego Berengarius dist 2. de consecrat for there we read first that Christs true body is handled with the hands of Priests broken and torne with the teeth of the faithfull his words prescribed to Berengarius are verum corpus sanguinem domini nostri Iesu Christi esse sensualiter non solum sacramentum sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Transubstantiation got reputation first by the decree of Innocent the 3. as we read in the chapter Firmiter de sum Trin. fid cath for there he decreeth that the bread is transubstantiate into the body and the wine into blood by the power of God but yet two inconueniences will heere fall out if we yeeld to his words for there he saith that Christ is both the priest and the sacrifice and that this transubstantiation is wrought by the power of God whereof the first ouerthroweth the priesthood of the polshorne priests of Baal the second doth take away the efficacie from these wordes hoc est enim corpus meum and hic est sanguis meus and ascribeth all to the power of God absolutely In the conuenticle of Constance we finde it first resolued that the accidents of bread and wine doe remaine without subiect and that the Pope is Christs immediate vicar and sess 13. that although Christ did institute the eucharist in bread and wine yet lay-men were onely to receine it vnder one kinde Auricular confession was established by Innocent the 3. in the chap. omnis vtriusque sexus de poenit remiss for before that it was free to confesse or not to confesse the doctrine of confession was enlarged by the canonistes and schoole-men In the conuenticle of Florence we reade that the forme of ordring masse-priestes of popish confirmation and extreme vnction and of other popish sacraments was then first setled by law there also Purgatorie and the Popes supremacy was first enacted by force of law Clement the 6. in the chapter vnigenitus extr de poenit remis did first deuise the treasure of indulgences Boniface the 8. and Sixtus the 4. ordred the Popish Iubiley That the Pope is aboue the Councel it was first decreed in the councel of Lateran vnder Leo the 10. who also begā first to thunder out his excommunications against M. Luther Finally the conuenticle of Trent gaue finall complement to the Popish doctrine of Traditions of the Latine vulgar translation of concupiscence of formal iustification by charitie and works of seuen sacraments of the sacrifice of the masse of purgatorie and indulgences of framing the images of God the Father and the holy Ghost and the rest of their heresies and abuses for what before the schoolemen had taught vainlie that began now by the decrees of the Pope and his complices to be established and held for law then also the missals breuiaries offices and other rituall bookes began to be confirmed by the Popes authoritie Thirdly it is an easie matter to prooue that the doctrine of S. Peter and of the times wherein Ioseph of Arimathaea Eleutherius and Gregory the first liued is direct contrarie in diuers points to popish religion S. Peter 1. ep 2. exhorted all Christians to submit themselues to kings and gouernors but the Pope commandeth subiects to rebell and take armes against princes and excommunicateth such as refuse so to doe as appeareth by the excommunication of Paul the 3. against king Henry the 8. and of Pius the fift against Queene Elizabeth both which are extant in Sanders his libell de schismate S. Peter 1. ep 1. would haue Christians to trust perfectly on gods grace the Papists teach their disciples to distrust gods grace and to doubt of their saluation and to trust rather in their owne works and merits he saith we are not redeemed with corruptible things but with Christes most precious blood these teach that men are redeemed after a sort by indulgences and by the satisfaction and merites of Saints to whom Bellarmine in his booke of indulgences doubteth not to giue the title of redeemers S. Peter exhorteth Christians to desire the sincere milke of Gods word that they may grow thereby the papistes barre men from hearing Gods word in tongues which they vnderstand and send them to beleeue the traditions of the church of Rome and the impure trash of the schoolemen and the Popes decretales he excludeth the lordship of Popes ouer Gods inheritance these false teachers enforce it he exhorteth vs to make our election sure these fellowes teach that Christians cannot be assured of their election or make it sure Ioseph of Arimathaea and the godly bishops that liued in his time and diuers hundred yeeres after him continued we doubt not in
of all men and not to be iudged of any Againe where we read in the Gospell behold heere are two swords he presumeth the meaning of those words to be that the Pope hath two swords he doth also in the same place abuse the words of God Hierem. 1. ecce constitut te hodie super gentes regna in the same manner that Innocentius did as is shewed before In the chapt per venerabilem qui filij sunt legitimi Innocentius concludeth that Deuteronomy is to be obserued of Christans because Deuteronomium importeth as much as the second law By the place which the Lord hath chosen spoken of Deut. 17. he vnderstandeth the Popes see locus quem elegit dominus Apostolicasedes esse cognoscitur saith he By the priests of the stocke of Leui he vnderstandeth the Cardinals his words are these sunt sacerdotes leuiticâ— generis fratres nostri Vocaberis Cephas id est caput thou shalt be called Cephas that is a head saith Anacletus in a certaine decretale epistle and c. sacrosancta dist 22. Suscitabo super eos pastorem vnum saith God by his prophet Ezech. c. 34. that is I will set ouer them a shepherd and he prophecieth of Christ but Turrecremata lib. 2. sum c. 2. applieth these words to the Pope The priest sprinkling himselfe and the altar with holy water as is conteined in the missale in the consecration of holy water saith thou shalt sprinkle me o Lord with hysope and I shall be cleane as if the Prophet had prophesied of holie water When a church is consecrated the Bishop without saith attollite principes portas vestras and then answereth a certein quidamet fellow within quis est ille rex gloriae and then out steppeth a fellow with a mitre and saith I am the king of glory thus doe they play with the words of holy scripture and blasphemously applie the words spoken of Christ to a mumming Masse-priest Alexander the third treading vpon the Emperours necke vttered these words of the 91. Psalme to his disgrace thou shalt walke vpon the Lion and Aspe and Boniface the eigth for these words remember man that thou art dust said to the bishop of Genua remember man thou art Gibelline and with them thou shalt be beaten to dust The canonists in the chapter translato c. de constitutionibus beleeue that the Pope hath power to make lawes because the Apòstle saith translato sacerdotio necesse est vt legis translatio siat but in these words the Apostle speaketh not of the Pope but of Christ and his priesthood Turrecremata lib. 1. sum c. 90. finding these words 2. King 7. I will establish the seate of his kingdome for euer imagineth that this prophecy sheweth how the Popes kingdome shall endure for euer and lib. 2. sum c. 80. by the faithfull seruant set ouer the whole family Luke 22. hee vnderstandeth the Pope which as hee saith is set ouer the whole Church and lib. 1. c. 8. expounding these words Apocalyps 4. sedes posita est in coelo supra sedem sedens in circuitu eius sedil 〈◊〉 24. super thronos 24. seniores by the seat he vnderstandeth the Popes see and by heauen the church of Rome and by him that sate vpon the seat the Pope and by the 24. elders the Cardinals Isay 40. we reade quis appendit tribus digitis molem terrae and by these words Hosites confess Petricou c. 10. supposeth to bee meant that the signe of the crosse is to bee made with three singers Bellarmine in his preface vnto his booke de Pontif. Rom. doth wrest the words of scripture spoken of Christ the corner stone laid in the foundation of the Church and draweth them most impudently to the Pope These words of the Prophet adducentur regi virgines post eam which are meant of the church the synagogue of Rome in their missal vpon the feast of S. Catherine wrest so as if they had beene meant of her On the feast of Clement in their missall they apply these words thou art a Priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech to Clement On the feast of Cecilia likewise in the missall these words audi filia vide inclina aurem tuam c. which are spoken of the church they applie to Cecilia These words ego ex ore altissims prodiui primogenita ante omnem creaturâ—â—â— they applie in their breuiaries to the Virgin Mary as if she were the first borne before all creatures Thus it were an easie matter to bring infinite examples out of the bookes of our aduersaries and to make it apparent that they make no conscience of wresting scriptures but these are sufficient for this first taste CHAP. XXIII That the Pope and the principall proctours of his cause are great forgers and falsifiers of fathers profane writers and of publicke records SEing then they make so little scruple to wrest the words of holy scriptures wee may not thinke that our aduersaries will be scrupulous in falsifying either publicke records or the writings of the fathers and other authors for first wee find diuers counterfet writings auouched by them which were neuer written by those who are pretended to be the authours vnder the names of the Apostles they haue set forth canons which conteine diuers errors in the 46. canon they condemne the baptisme of heretickes in the 84. canon Ezdras and Nehemias is omitted and Clements epistles put among canonicall scriptures Leo c. Clementis dist 16. and Isidore c. canones in the same distinction and Gelasius c. sancta Romana dist 15. doe reckon them among apocryphall writings which they would not doe vnlesse they were counterfet 2. They haue also falsified the acts of councels of the acts of the councell of Sinuessa Peter Crabbe setteth out 3. copies neuer a one agreeing with the other the stile is so simple that it can no way agree with the forme of speech of those times the like falsitie is committed in the acts of the councell of Rome supposed to bee assembled vnder Syluester Russine reporteth onely 20. canons made in the councell of Nice and Stephen bishop of Rome c. viginti dist 16. confirmeth his saying but Gratian vnder colour of the authority of Athanasius saith there are 70. as appeareth by the chap. septuagint dist 16. now one Alphonsus of Pisa a Iebusite hath published 80. canons of that councell translates as he saith out of Arabicke In the sixth councel of Carthage Sozimus bishop of Rome was conuicted manifestly to haue falsified a canon of the Nicene councell concerning appeales to the bishop of Rome Paschasius one of the Popes agents in the 16. action of the Councell of Chalcedon thrust in a peece of counterfeit stuffe into a canon of the councell of Nice as if that councell had said that the church of Rome had alwaies the primacie this he did or at the least some vnder his name as appeareth in the acts of that councell Likewise Bellarmine lib. 2. de
Pontif. Rom. foisteth in the same words into the sixt canon of the Nicene councell but he may be conuinced of falsitie by the testimony of all ancient copies and of Russine and all that record the canons of Nice in their histories Pius the fist in certaine letters of his to the emperor Maximilian recorded in his life written by Hierome Catena alledgeth a false canon of the councell of Nice to prooue that the Pope is gouernor of all Christian Princes Bellarmine lib. 1. de cult sanct c. 19. doth falsifie the 7. canon of the sixth synod to prooue the inuocation of saintes and this falsification is also committed by those that haue lately published the actes of councels but they may bee conuinced by the originall copies in Greeke and by all ancient editions of that councell in Latin In the 35. canon of the councell of Laodisea Surius and Carrauza in their editions of the decrees and acts of councels for angelos write angulos least it should appeare that the worship of angels is condemned by that councel as idolatrous but this grosse falshood is discouered by Theodoret in Coloss 2. and Chrysostomes homilies vpon the same epistle and confessed by Bellarmine lib. 1. de cultu sanct c. 20. In the chapter renouantes dist 22. the 36. canon of the 6. synod is notoriously falsified for there it is ordred that the church of Constantinople shall not be magnified as Rome directly contrary to the sixth synodes meaning and contrary to the actes of the councel of Constantinople and Chalcedon Gratian hath corrupted the 22. canon of the councell of Mileuis adding these wordes nisi forte sedem Romanam appellauerit whereas expresly that councel forbad priests and deacons to appeale beyond the seas this appeareth by the chap. placuit 2. q. 6. The donation of Constantine is confessed to be counterfet by Cusanus Valla and diuers papists yet still mainteined by Gregory the 13. in his new correction and edition of the canon law The constitution also of Ludouicus dist 63. c. ego Ludouicus is manifestly forged as may appeare by the contradiction of the copies of Gratian and Volaterran Geograph l. 3. and for that it contradicteth the histories of those times The Popes agents haue also counterfeited two epistles vnder the name of Iustinian and Iohn bishop of Rome and thrust them into the code C. de sum trin fid cath l. inter claras Alciat parerg lib. 5. c. 23. testifieth they are not found in ancient copies and the contradictions and notorious falsities declare them to haue beene deuised of purpose for the aduancement of the church of Rome Alexander the 3. vpon colour of some counterfet grants doth in his registre affirme that the kingdome of England from the first time the same was conuerted to Christianitie was vnder the defence and subiection of the prince of the Apostles and that which belonged to him the Popes do now challenge as their owne proper right Boniface the 9. as Theodoric à Niem lib. 2. de schism c. 6. doth testifie would antedate any grant of his for money vendidit prioritates datarum plus offerentibus which is a notorious tricke of falshood Bellarmine lib. 3. de bonis operib in part c. 11. doth confesse that the epistle of Clement to Iames is counterfet and did he not confesse it yet may the same be prooued by most euident arguments The decretall epistles set out vnder the names of ancient bishops of Rome before Syluester are most shamefully forged the stile and repugnancie which they carie with the state of things in those times doe plainly conuince them to be such Contius also in his annotations in c. septuagint dist 16. doth confesse it and saith he hath prooued it Bellarmine lib. de monach c. 40. acknowledgeth that the epistle of Anicetus concerning shauing of crownes is not vndoubtedly authenticall he might as well haue said plainly forged Melchiades 12. q. 1. c. futuram telleth how Constantine was Christened and gaue his seate and other great possessions to the church of Rome yet it cannot be denied but that Melchiades was dead before the time of Constantines Christening Vnder the name of Clement they haue published certeine constitutions which they call Apostolicall yet Gelasius doth account them apocryphal vnder his name also passe certeine counterfet recognitions The bookes of Tertullian and Origen are often cited yet doth Gelasius note them as corrupted the commentaries vpon Iob set out vnder the name of Origan were written by an Arian heretike Diuers treatises set out vnder the names of Abdias Prochorus Martialis Africanus Egesippus Amphilochius and other ancient fathers were neuer written by the authors whose names they beare yet are they commonly alledged by our aduersaries Vnder the names of Cyprian Hierome Ambrose Chrysostome Basill Nazianzen Augustine and other fathers the Papists haue published diuers commentaries treatises sermons epistles praiers and fragments most vnworthy their piety and learning Bellarmine de bonis operib in partie lib. 2. c. 15. confesseth that the sermons d◠tempore that goe vnder S. Augustines name were collected by a later author the sermons ad Eromitas are taxed by Paulus Langius in Chronico Citizensi and by Hilgerius his Manuall sauoreth of Pelagianisme his meditations in some editions are ascribed to Anselmus Bellarmine lib. 2. de missa c. 16. reiecteth certaine epistles that goe vnder the name of Hierome and Damasus as foolish and certes very foolish he must needes be that alloweth all the bookes set out vnder the names of these fathers as authenticall In their expurgatory indexes they put out and put in what they please in the bookes of diuers authors Sixtus Senensis in epist ad Pium 5. ante biblioth sanct saith he caused the writings of fathers to be purged Bertram is shamefully mangled and visibiliter changed into inuisibiliter Posseuin in his booke entitled selecta bibliotheca sheweth how Hermes Melito Cabasilas Anastasius and other authors are to bee corrupted for so we must say rather then corrected The writings of the fathers they alledge most falsely Bellarm lib. 1. de sanct beat c. 13. corrupteth a place out of Eusebius de praeparat euangel lib. 13. and another out of Eusebius de praeparat euangel lib. 13. and another out of Euscbius his history lib. 4. c. 14. and infinit places out of Origen Tertullian Hilary Hierome Augustine Chrysostome and other fathers as I haue particularly declared in my answers to his most corrupt allegations Adrian the Pope in his epistle alledged in the 2. synode of Nice citeth these words as out of Basil deiparam virginem sanctos Prophetas Apostolos martyres suscipio qui pro me apud deū supplicant c. which words are no where found in Basil Nay the terme of Deipara was first by act of the Ephesine Councell deuised to meet with the heresie of Nestorius which was celebrated long after Basils time To prooue that the Popes decretale epistles are to bee reckoned among canonicall scriptures Gratian
saints to the Popes decretals and decrees and to the diuers treatises set foorth of late time in defence of their faction and heresie Against Luther they haue hired one Staphilus a rinegat Christian and Cochleus a fellow not woorth a cochle shell to speake as much shame as their malicious wits could deuise from these two Surius Laingeus Stapleton and all the kennell of curres let loose to barke against him haue borrowed the subiect of their slanders if any thing more be obiected by later libellers that proceedeth of late inuention Bellarmine de notis ecclesiae in praefat de Christo and others charge him with teaching that Christ suffered according to his diuinity he in his booke de concilijs from whence the ground of this slander is taken saith onely that he had to do with certeine Nestorians which denied that the diuinity could suffer so it appeareth these words were the Nestorians and Luther disputing against them sheweth that the person of Christ consisting of two natures could and did suffer and if he did say the diuinitie did suffer he tooke the word of the nature for the person as auncient fathers and namely Vigilius contra Eutychem haue done Vigilius saith the diuinitie of Christ was nailed with nailes consixa clauis Campian rat 8. Bellarmine in praefat in controuers de Christo charge Luther to haue said that his soule hated this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a meere slander he saith onely if he shoulde hate the worde and beleeue the thing defined in ancient councels that he should not therefore be an heretike Bellarmine lib. 4. de ecclesia militante c. 13. Cregorius de Valentia and others say that Luther learned of the diuel that the Masse was naught but Luther hath no such wordes he saith onely that the diuell went about to make him despaire hauing so long saide Masse which long before he had learned to be naught Others adde that in a certeine disputation at Lipsia Luther should say that the contention begun by him against popish abuses was neither begun for Gods honour nor would end for Gods honour but wickedly that which Luther spoke of his aduersaries that for to please the Pope tooke vp the bucklers against him they apply to Luther himselfe and his own actions Some say that he taught if the wife refuse the husband may goe in to his maide whereas he declareth onely how husbands vse to threaten their froward wiues not commending either any such act or threates His life is traduced by them commonly as if he were giuen to wine but not onely all that knew him and speake indifferently testifie the contrary but also Erasmus his aduersarie that had reason to reprooue him if there had beene cause Lutheri vita omnium consensu probatur saith Erasmus in ep ad Thomam Card. Eboracensem id non leue praeiudicium est tantam esse morum seueritatem Luthers life is approued by consent of all and that is no small preiudice that such is the sinceritie of his manners that his enemies can not sinde what to calumniate Finally they obiect that endeuouring to cast out a diuell he was euill entreated by the party possessed and that going to bed merry he died the same night but the first is refuted by Luthers doctrine who commonly taught that Christian doctrine is not now to be confirmed by miracles the second is a slander falsely deuised by such as neither were at Luthers death nor desirous to vnderstand the truth Sleidan lib. 16. reporteth that he was long sicke before and that feeling his sicknesse to grow extreme he called his friends and spending his time in praier pious exhortations quietly departed this life and this is also confirmed by Melancthon in Luthers life and was testified by al that were present at his end The principall libeller that vndertooke to raile against Caluin was Bolsec a rinegat frier who hauing either himselfe written or suffering others to publish diuers impudent slanders in his name did in a publike synod in France retract the same but his recantation they regard not his first malitious reports they wilfully embrace Campian rat 8. chargeth Caluin with saying that God is the author of sinne but his words instit lib. 1. c. 18. doe euidently discharge him flagitiorum causa extra humanam voluntatem quaerenda non est saith he Bellarmine lib. de notis eccles c. 9. telleth vs how Caluin taught that hell was nothing else but the horror of conscience but no such words could euer yet be found in Caluin he saith that the horror of conscience is a part of hellish paines but that Hell should bee nothing else he neuer saied nor thought Caluin is also charged for speaking contumeliously against Saints and calling them shadowes monsters and such like names but he is much wronged for either he spake of Christopher and Catherine and such like forged Saints or of Dominick Medard and such like superstitious fellowes who are rather for their cruelty and other vices to be hated then honored for any holinesse Posseuin lib. 3. de notis verbi dei c. 74. chargeth Caluin with atheisme for teaching that the sonne of God was God of himselfe or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Bellarmine excuseth him and dischargeth him confessing he said well if he spoke of the son in respect of his diuine essence The Rhemists in their annotations on the 5. to the Hebrews affirm that Caluin taught that Christ despaired and the same sclander was also bruted abroad by Campian Rat. 8. but neuer did any such words passe from his mouth or his penne and if the Papists will not beleeue me let them beleeue Bellarmine who lib. 4. de Christo c. 8. expresly affirmeth that Caluin saith that Christ despaired not Calumus dicit saith he Christum non desperasse Others giue out that he was conuicted of Sodomy and burned on the backe for his offence at Noyon but the notorious wickednesse of those that first deuised this slander may be refuted by diuers plaine arguments first Sodomites are not burned on the backe in France but burned at a stake secondly neuer was he conuented before any iudge either for that or other matter Lastly the sincerity of his life repugneth to such beastlinesse neither was it like that he would haue so violently pursued the Romanists for their vnnaturall abominations vnlesse he had beene cleere of all suspition in that behalfe Bellarmine lib. 4. de eccles c. 14. saith that Caluin went about to worke a miracle by compact with one Bruley but he sheweth himselfe therein miraculously impudent for in the same chapter he confesseth that Calum in the preface to his Institutions should complaine that wrong was offered christians by those that required miracles at their hand seeing they taught the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles which was confirmed by innumerable miracles further it is a shamelesse tricke to alledge the testimony of Bolsec who was hired to write what he could against Caluin
Gods worship and persecuted their enemies like most cruell tyrantes that afterward they might with more security satisfie their lusts when there was none to controll them Ioannes Marius de schism part 3. c. 5. testifieth that all the euils of christendome haue proceeded from the malice ambition and auarice of wicked Popes a malitia ambitione auaritia sceleratorum paparum omnia mala in mundo proueniunt Robert Grosted as Matthew Paris testifieth in Henrico 3. did bitterly inueigh against the couetousnesse vsury simony rapines excesse and luxuriousnesse of the court of Rome neither doth Budaeus de Asse or Valla contra Donationem Constantini say lesse against the Popes then he Next to the Popes the Cardinals Masse-priests Monks and Friers and of late yeares the Dominicans Franciscans and Iebusites are the chiefe aduancers teachers and defenders of Romish heresies of which if we say litle men may suppose there is no more to be said if we say what they deserue and is in authenticall bookes reported of them it would exceede the proportion of this short Suruey onlie thus much we say of many things that may be said Brigit in her reuelations testifieth that Cardinals are excessiue in pride couetousnesse al delights of the flesh 4. Brig 49. cardinales extenti effusi sunt ad omnem superbiam cupiditatem delectamentum carnis Pelaguis lib. 2. de planct eccles art 16. saith they are encreased in riches but much diminished in pietie aucta est possessio diminuta religio The same man lib. 2. de planct leccles art 20. saith the prelates of the church haue declared their sinnes like Sodome Peccatum suum sicut Sodoma praedicauerunt Mantuan Alphonsi lib. 6. saith that the priests hate their flocks and care not to feed them but to poll them and mocke them Pastores saith he odere pecus nec pascere curant Sed tondere greges pecorique illudere tonso Catherine of Siena c. 125. saith that religious men pretend angels liues but for the most part are woorse then diuels Religiosi collocati sunt in religione velut angeli sed quam plurimi sunt daemonibus deteriores What the Iebusites are I report me to the French carechisme of Iesuites set out by a Papist and a learned man and to the discourses of the secular priests against them they shew they are couetous false proud cruell malicious and diuels incarnate for the rest I referre them ouer to the 2. booke 2. chap. of my answer to Rob. Parsons his warn-Warn-word a man in whom most of the capitall vices of the Iebusites may be specified The chiefe mainteiners of Popery in our times if we speake of lay men were Charles the 9. of France Henry the 3. his brother Philip the 2. of Spaine the duke of Alua the duke of Guise and his brethren the earle of Westmerland the head of the rebellion in the North. but if we seeke all histories we shall hardly finde woorse men Charles the 9. was a notorious sweater a perfidious and licentious prince Henry the 3. was superstitious and altogether giuen to carnall delights What Philip the 2. was his wiues and sonne and the innocents done to death by him for religion will speake one day the Duke of Guise and Alita were cruell and bloodie men perfidious and wicked atheists the first more giuen to pleasure the second to auarice Charles of westmerland was a rebell to his prince and a man consumed with his own delights and pleasures Is it not then a matter ridiculous that Masse-priests should so excessiuely commend this religion that had such founders and fauorers as these are and which as we see was inuented and confirmed by wicked men and vpholden by fraude and force CHAP. XLVII That Popery in many points is more absurd and abominable then the doctrine of Mahomet THe impieties and abominations of Turkish religion are so many that hardly can we recount them and so odious and horrible that no Christian can take pleasure to heare them and yet if we please to looke into the secret mysteries of Popery and to examine all the odious and abominable doctrines of the Romish synagogue we may well make question whether of the two religions deserueth more to be abhorred and hated for first the Turkes do speake well of the law and the Prophets and handle books of scriptures with great reuerence Antonie Geoffrey in his 2. booke of Turkish ceremonies reporteth how the Turkes accompt the gospels among holy scriptures inter sacras literas habent nostra euangelia saith he but the Papists speake euill of scriptures and call them sometimes a dead and killing letter sometimes a matter of strife sometime a nose of waxe they doe also handle them very rudely and without respect Lastly they will not haue them to be authenticall in respect of vs without the Popes consignation and testimony The Turkes neuer burned their Alchoran or the writings of the Prophets and Apostles vpon pretence of false translations but the Papists haue often times burned holy scripturs as appeareth by the ecclesiasticall histories of France England Germany and other places Postell in his history of Turkes sheweth how they teach that perfection is conteined in the gospell and Gifford lib. Caluinoturcis 3. c. 9. confesseth that they beleeue all religion to be therein conteined but Papists doe rather hope to finde perfection in the rules of Monkes and Friers then in the gospell and therefore accompt rather the state of Monks to be a state of perfection then the liues of Christians after the rule of the Gospell the Masse-priests of Trent doe make traditions equall to scriptures and commonly they deny scriptures to be a perfect rule of life and doctrine The doctors of Turkish religion were neuer so simple as to thinke the traditions of their church to be equall to the Alchoran of Mahomet But the Masse-priests of Trent will haue traditions not written and holy scriptures to bee receiued with equall affection Such as blaspheme Christ are punished by the Turkes most seuerely but Papists teare him in pieces with their blasphemies and such are thought to be most cleare of heresie which sweare most wickedly and blasphemously Auerroes of all religions accompteth Popery to bee most absurd for that Papists worship a peece of a Masse-cake for their God and yet presently deuoure him and swallow him downe into their bellies No Turkes euer allowed the eating of mans flesh or beleeued that it were possible for a man to swallow downe a whole and perfect man without hurt or diminution or brusing of his body but Papists make their followers eaters of mans flesh and say that euery one eating the sacrament doth eate vp Christs body whole and entire and yet beleeue that they neither breake his flesh nor digest it Euery Mahometan albeit he beleeueth not Christ to be God yet would be ashamed to say that doggs and hogges and other brute beasts may eate Christs body but the Papists albeit according to the Christian faith they