the fact without the Scripture The Scripture is sufficient to its own use to be Rule of Obedience and Judgement but it is not sufficient to every other use which it was never made for The Law said to Cain Thou shalt not murder But it said not to him Thou hast killed thy brother therefore thou shalt die It was the Judges part to deliver this 3. By this trick they would give a man leave to vent any Blasphemy or do any villany changing but the name But they shall find that the Law intended not bare words but by words to signifie things And if they do the things prohibited or hold the opinions condemned what ever names or words they cloath them with they shall feel the punishment 4. By this they would leave almost nothing provable by the Scripture seeing a Papist or Heretick may put the same into other terms and then call for the Proof of that For example they may ask where God commandeth or instituteth any one of the Sacraments in Scripture And when we tell them where Baptism and the Lords Supper were instituted they may reply that there is no mention of Sacraments and so turn real Controversies into verbal 5. Yea it seems by this they would make all Translations to be of little use And a man might lawfully sin in English because God for bad it only in Hebrew and Greek 6. If this be the way of it let us remember that they must in Reason stand to their own Rules Let them tell us then what Scripture saith that Peter was the Vicar of Christ or the Head of the Catholick Church or the Bishop of Rome or that the Pope is his Successor or that the Pope is the Vice-christ or Universal Bishop Where is there express Scripture for any of this Yea so much as Bellarmines Literal sense 7. And why do not these blind and partial men see that the same course also must be taken with their own Laws And that all their Decretals and Canons are insufficient according to these Rules It 's easie for any Heretick to form up his Error into other words then those condemned by Pope or Council And if you go again to the Pope and get him to condemn those new expressions the men in Mexico may use them long to the detriment of the souls of men before the damnatory sentence be brought to them And when it comes they can again word their Heresie anew The Jansenists in France shew how well the Popes decision of wordy Controversies is understood and doth avail But really if they will hold that no part of the Popes Laws oblige but in the literal sense or that none offend that violate not the Letter they will make a great alteration in their affairs And perphaps any of their subjects may Blaspheme the Pope himself in French Dutch Irish English Slavonian c. because he forbids it only in Latine For if Translations be not Gods Word then they are not the Popes word neither A pretty crochet for a Jesuite It is mendacium and not a Lye that the Pope forbids It is said that a Traytor or Murderer may be hang'd but it is not said that such or such a man shall be hang'd or that he was a traytor or murderer Their common instance is The Scripture no where calls it self the whole word of God nor no where tells us which be Canonical Books c. and yet these are Articles of Faith Answ 1. The Scripture doth call it self the Word of God and signifie its own sufficiency and several Books have particular testimonies to be Canonical 2. Though secondarily so far as Scripture affirmeth its own Divinity it be to be beleived yet Primarily that this is Gods Word and that these are the Books and that they are not corrupted and that they are all c. are points of knowledge antecedent in order of nature to Divine Belief of them There are two great Foundations antecedent to the Matter of Divine Faith The one is Gods veracity that God cannot lie The other is His Revelations that This is Gods Word The first is the Formal Object of Faith The second is a Necessary Medium between the formal object and the subject sine quo non without which there is no possibility of Believing The Material object called the Articles of Faith presuppose both these as points of Knowledge proved to us by their proper evidence And that this is All the Word of God is a meer Consequence from the actual Tradition of this much and no more To give you an undenyable illustration by instance Let us enquire which be the Administring Laws of this Common-wealth And we shall find that 1. The Authority of the Law-givers is none of them for that is in the Constitution before the Administration and it is the formale objectum of every Law which is more noble then the Material object 2. And the Promulgation of these Laws is not it self a Law but a necessary Medium sine quo non to the actual obligation of the Law 3. And that there is no other Laws but these is not a Law but a point known by the non-promulgation of more 4. And that all these Laws are the same that they pretend to be and that they are not changed or depraved since this is not a Law neither but a Truth to be proved by Common Reason from the Evidences that may be brought from Records Practise and abundance more So is it in our Case 1. That God is True and the Soveraign Rector is first a point to be known by evidence the one being the formal object of Faith and the other the formal object of obedience and easily proved by Natural Light before we come to Scripture 2. And that this is Gods Revelation or Promulgation of his Law is a point also first to be proved by Reason not before we see the Book or hear the Word but out of the Book or Doctrine it self propria luce together with the full Historical Evidence and many other reasons which in order of Nature lie before our Obligation fide divina to believe So that this is not Primarily an Article of Faith but somewhat higher as being the Necessary Medium of our believing 3. And that there is no other Law or Faith is not Primarily a Law or Article of Faith but a Truth proved by the Non-Revelation or Promulgation of any other to the world He that will prove us obliged to believe more must prove the valid Promulgation or Revelation of more 4. And that these Books are the same and not corrupted is not directly and primarily an Article of Faith but an Historical verity to be proved as abovesaid And yet secondarily Scripture is a witness to all or most of these and so they are de fide But of this I refer the Reader for fuller satisfaction to my Preface before my second Part of the Saints Rest And thus it is manifest that it is an unreasonable demand of
to know the right Pope nor know him not to this day If England were fourty years thus divided between two Kings it were certainly two Kingdoms But the true Catholike Church of Christ is but one CHAP. VIII Argum. 6. THE true Catholike Church hath never ceased or discontinued since the founding of it to this day The Church of Rome hath ceased or discontinued therefore the Church of Rome is not the true Catholike Church I prove the Minor for the Major they will grant If the Head which is an Essential part hath discontinued then the Church of Rome hath discontinued But the Head hath discontinued therefore c. The Minor only needs proof and that I prove 1. There have been many years interregnum or vacancy when there was no Pope at all And where then was the Church when it had no Head 2. There have been long successions of such as you confess your selves were not Apostolical but Apostatical 3. Your own Popes and Councils command us to take such for no Popes For example Pope Nicolas in his Decretals see Caranza pag. 393. saith He that by money or the favour of men or popular or military tumults is intruded into the Apostolical seat without the Concordant and Canonical election of the Cardinall and the following religious Clergy let him not be taken for a Pope nor Apostolical but for Apostatical And even of Priests he commandeth Let no man hear Mass of a Priest whom he certaiâ—ly knoweth to have a Concubine or woman introduced Caranza pag. 395. and ibid. he saith Priests that commit fornication cannot have the honour of Priesthood 4. But our greater Argument is from the authority of God and the very nature of the office An infidel or notoriously ungodly man is not capable of being a Pastor of the Church in sensu composito while he is such But the Popes of Rome have been Infidels and notoriously ungodly men therefore they were uncapable of being Pastors of the Church and consequently that Church was Headless and so no Church The Major I prove 1. Where there is not the necessary matter and disposition of the matter there can be no reception of the form But Infidels and notoriously ungodly men are not matter sufficiently disposed to receive the form of Pastoral Power therefore they cannot receive it The Minor is proved 1. As every true Church is a Christian Church it being only a Congregation of Christians that we so call in our present case so every Pastor is a Christian Pastor but an Infidel or notoriously ungodly man is not a Christian Pastor therefore not a true Pastor 2. Otherwise a Mahometan Jew or Heathen may be a true Pope which I think they will deny themselves 3. If any Disposition or Qualification at all be necessary to the being of the Pastoral Office besides manhood then is it necessary that he own God the Father and the Redeemer that is be not notoriously an Infidel or ungodly But some qualification is necessary therefore c. None can be named more necessary then this And that Popes have been such as I here mention is proved before Not to mention Marcellinus that sacrificed to an Idol or Liberius that subscribed to the Arrian profession for I believe there is an hundred times more hope of their Salvation by Repentance then of an hundred of their Successors John the twenty second held that the soul dies with the body of which the Parisians and others condemned him John the twenty third as I shewed before denyed the life to come and so was an Infidel The Witchcraft Poysonings Simony Sodomy Adulteries Incest c. of others are sufficiently recorded by their own Historians CHAP. IX Argum. 7. TO the foregoing Arguments I add the recital of one formerly mentioned for the use of all that have the use of their wits and senses If a man may be sure that he knows bread to be bread and wine to be wine when he seeth feeleth and tasteth them then he may be sure that Popery is a deceit This Consequence they cannot question But a man may be sure that he knoweth bread to be bread and wine to be wine when he seeth feeleth and tasteth them therefore c. Note that I speak of such a knowledge as belongs to men of sound wits and senses and a convenient object and medium It is the senses of the whole world that I appeal to and not of one or two it is bread and wine that are near us in the hand or mouth that I speak of and not at a miles distance in the day-light and not in the dark So that take the bread and wine into your hand and judge of it and let this decide our Controversie If you can tell whether that be bread or no bread you may tell whether the Papists or we are in the right Those therefore that be not learned and subtile enough to judge by Disputations and writings of Learned men may yet judge by their sight and feeling Either you know bread and wine when you see it taste it feel it or you do not If you do then the Controversie is at an end for the senses of all sound men in the world will be against the Papists that say the bread after Consecration is no bread and the wine is no wine But if you cannot know bread when you see feel and eat it then see what follows 1. Then we are sure that the Pope and all his Council are not at all to be trusted for if sence be not to be trusted then the Pope and his Council know not when they read the Scripture and Canons and Fathers and hear Traditions but that they are deceived 2. Then we are uncertain of any Judgement that Pope or Council can give for when they spoke or wrote it we are uncertain whether our eyes and ears or reason judging by them are not deceived in the hearing or reading of their words 3. How ridiculously then do they call for a Judge of Controversies and what a foolish quarrel is it that they make who shall be the Interpreter of Scriptures or Judge of Controversies For what can a Judge do but speak or write his mind and when he hath done you know not what it is that you hear or read because your senses may deceive you It s a far harder matter to understand a sentence or book of the Pope or Council when you read or hear it then to know bread when you see and feel and eat it Many thousands know bread that know not the Popes sentence nor a word of a book 4. And by this rule it is uncertain whether Scripture be true or Christianity the true Religion For we cannot know it but by our sences and if they are so uncertain all our Religion must needs be uncertain 5. Yea we cannot tell what Revelation to desire that should end our Controversies and make us certain For if God should send an Angel or other Messenger from heaven to decide
many others so like to the Arguments and Language of the Seekers and Infidels that we can scarcely know whom we hear when they speak to us For the discovery of their desperate fraud in this point and the right confuting of them 1. You must distinguish them out of their confusion 2. You must grant them all that is true and just which we shall as stiffly defend as they 3. You must reject their errors and confute them And 4. You may turn their own principall weapon against them to the certain destruction of their cause Of all these briefly in course 1. For the first two I have spoke at large in the Preface to the second part of the Saints Rest and in the determination in the first part of my Book against Infidelity But briefly to touch some of the most necessary things here 1. We must distinguish the Tradition of the Scriptures or the Scripture doctrine from the Tradition of other doctrines pretended to be the rest of the word of God 2. We must distinguish between a certain proved Tradition and that which is unproved and uncertain if not grosly feigned 3. We must distinguish between the Tradition of the whole Catholick Church or the greater part and the Tradition of the lesser more corrupted selfish part even the Roman part 4. We must distinguish between a Tradition of necessary doctrine or practice and the Tradition of mutable Orders 5. And we must distinguish between Tradition by way of Testimony or History or by way of Teaching Ministry and Tradition by way of Decisive Judgement as to the Universal Church suffer them not to jumble all these together if you would not be cheated in the dark 2. And then concerning Tradition we grant all these following Propositions so that it is not all Tradition that we deny 1. We grant that the Holy Scriptures come down to us by the certain Tradition of our fathers and Teachers and that what the seeing and hearing of the Apostles was to them that lived with them that Tradition and belief of certain Tradition is to us by reason of our distance from the time and place So that though the Scripture bear its own evidence of a Divine author in the Image and superscription of God upon it yet we are beholden to Tradition for the Books themselves and for much of our knowledge that these are the true writings of the Apostles and Prophets and all and not depraved c. 2. We thankfully acknowledge that the Essentials of the faith and more hath been delivered even from the Apostles in other wayes or forms besides the Scriptures as 1. In the Professions of the Churches faith 2. In the baptismal Covenant and signs and whole administration 3. In the Sacrament of the Lords Supper 4. In Catechisms or Catechizings 5. In the prayers and praises of the Church 6. In the hearts of all true believers where God hath written all the Essentials of the Christian saith and Law So that we will not do as the Papists perversly do when God delivereth us the Christian Religion with two hands Scripture compleatly and Verbal Tradition in the essentials they quarrell with the one hand Scripture on pretence of defending the other so will not we quarrell with Tradition the other hand but thankfully confess a Tradition of the same Christianity by unwritten means which is delivered more fully in the Scripture and this Tradition is in some respect subordinate to Scripture and in some respect co-ordinate as the spirits left hand as it were to hold us out the truth 3. We confess that the Apostles delivered the Gospel by voice as well as by writing and that before they wrote it to the Churches 4. By this preaching we confess there were Christians made that had the doctrine of Christ in their hearts and Churches gathered that had his ordinances among them before the Gospel was written 5. And we confess that the Converted were bound to teach what they had received to their children servants and others 6. And that there was a setled Ministry in many Churches ordained to preach the Gospel as they had received it from the Apostles before it was written 7. And that the said ordinances of Baptism Catechizing Professions Eucharist Prayer Praise c. were instituted and in use before the Gospell was written for the Churches 8. And that when the Gospel was written as Tradition bringeth it to us so Ministers are commissioned to deliver both the Books and the doctrine of this Book as the Teachers of the Church and to preach it to those without for their conversion 9. And that Parents and Masters are bound to teach this doctrine to their children and servants yea if a Minister or other person were cast into the Indies or America without a Bible he must teach the doctrine though he remembred not the words 10. We grant that to the great benefit of the Church the writers of all ages have in subserviency to Scripture delivered down the Sacred Verities and Historians the matters of fact 11. And that the unanimous Consent of all the Churches manifested in their constant professions and practices is a great confirmation to us 12. And so is the suffering of the Martyrs for the same truth 13. And the Declarations of such consent by Councils is also a confirming Tradition 14. And the Confessions of Hereticks Jews and other Infidels are Providentiall and Historical Traditions for confirmation 15. And we profess that if we had any Certain proof of a Tradition from the Apostles of any thing more then is written in Scripture we would receive it All this we grant them for Tradition 3. But in these points following we oppose them 1. We take the holy Scriptures as the Compleat universal Rule or Law of faith and Holy living and we know of no Tradition that containeth another word of God Nay we know there is none such because the Scripture is true which asserteth its own sufficiency Scripture and unwritten Tradition are but two wayes of acquainting the world with the same Christian doctrine and not with divers parts of that Doctrine so as that Tradition should add to Scripture yea contrarily it is but the substance of greatest verities that are conveyed by unwritten Tradition but that and much more is contained in the Scripture where the Christian doctrine is compleat 2. The manner of delivery in a form of words which no man may alter and in so much fullness and perspicuity is much to be preferred before the meer verbal delivery of the same doctrine For 1. The Memory of man is not so strong as to retain as much as the Bible doth contain and preserve it safe from alterations or Corruptions Or if one man were of so strong a memory no man can imagine that all or most should be so Or if one Generation had such wonderfull memories we cannot imagine that all their posterity should have the like If there were no statute Books Records or Law-books in
only by vertue or meer desert But now this Right side and Left side and Middle and Lower Degree and Presidency and Concomitancy have begot us many Contritions to no purpose and have driven many into the Ditch and have led them away to the region of the Goats What Hierom saith both in his Epistle to Evagrius and on Tit. cap. 2. is commonly known The many plain Testimonies of Anselmn are commonly Cited as plain as Hieroms Alphons à Castro advers Haeres lib. 6. in nom Episcop had more ingenuity then to joyn with them that would wrest Hieroms words to a sence so contrary to their most plain importance Tertullian cap. 17. de Bapt. thought Lay-men in Necessity might Baptize and so doth the Church of Rome now Why then may not Presbyters in such a case at least Ordain when as he there saith Quod ex aequo accipitur ex aequo dari potest And ibid. he saith that it is but propter Ecclesiae honorem that Bishops Rule in such matters and that peace may be kept and Schism avoided But that probati quique seniores did exercise Discipline in the Assembly he testifieth in Apologet. Mr. Prin hath cited you abundance of Fathers that were for the parity of the Ministry or against Prelacy jure Divino Isidore Pelusiat lib. 3. Epist 223. ad Hieracem Episcopatum fugientem saith And when I have shewed what difference there is between the ancient Ministry and the present Tyranny why do you not Crown and Praise the Lovers of equality If you would see more of the Antients making Presbyters to be Bishops and Consenting with Hierom read Sedulius on Tit. 1. Anselm Cantuar in Enarrat in Phil. 1. 1. Beda on Act. 20. Alcuinus de Divinis officiis c. 35 36. and on John lib. 5. Col 547. c. Epist 108. And that Presbyters may Ordain Presbyters see Anselmn on 1 Tim. 4. 14. And Institut in Concil Colon. de sacr Ordin fol. 196. see also what 's said by our Mart. Bucer script Anglic. pag. 254 255 259 291. sequ Pet. Martyr Loc. Commu Clas 4. Loc. 1. sect 23 pag. 849. And Wickliffes Arguments in Waldensis Passim And your own Cassander Consult Artic. 14. saith It is agreed among all that of old in the Apostles dayes there was no difference between Bishops and Presbyters but afterwards for Orders sake and the avoiding of Schism the Bishop was set before the Presbyters And Ockam determineth that by Christs Institution all Priests of what degree soever are of equal Authority Power and Jurisdiction Reynold Peacock Bishop of Chichester wrote a Book de Ministrorum aequalitate which your party caused to be burnt And Richardus Armachanus lib. 9. cap. 5. ad Quest Armen saith There is not found in the Evangelical or Apostolical Scriptures any difference between Bishops and simple Priests called Presbyters whence it follows that there is one Power in all and equall from their Order cap. 7. answering the Question Whether any Priest may Consecrate Churches c. he saith Priests may do it as well as Bishops seeing a Bishop hath no more in such matters then any simple Priest though the Church for reverence to them appoint that those only do it whom we call Bishops It seems therefore that the restriction of the Priests Power was not in the Primitive Church according to the Scripture I refer you to three Books of Mr. Prins viz. his Catalogue his Antipathy of Lordly Prelates c. and his unbishoping of Timothy and Titus where you have the Judgements of many writers of these matters And also to what I have said in my Second Disputation of the Episcopal Controversiès of purpose on this point 7. The chief error of the Papists in this cause is expressed in their reason No man can give the Power that he hath not wherein they intimate that it is Man that giveth the Ministerial Power whereas it is the gift of Christ alone Man doth but design the person that shall receive it and then Christ giveth it by his Law to the person so designed and then man doth in vest him and solemnize his introduction As a woman may choose her an husband but it is not she that giveth him the Power over her but God who determineth of that Power by his Law affixing it to the person chosen by her and her action is but a condition fine qua non or cause of the capacity of the matter to receive the form And so is it here When do but obey God in a right choice and designation of the person his Law doth presently give him the Power which for orders sake he must be in a solemn manner invested with But matters of Order may possibly vary and though they are to be observed as far as may be yet they alwayes give place to the Ends and substance of the work for the ordering whereof they are appoineed 8. Temporal power is as truly and necessarily of God as Ecclesiastical and it was at first given immediately by him and he chose the person And yet there is no Necessity that Kings must prove an uninterrupted Succession God useth means now in designing the persons that shall be Governors of the Nations of the earth But not alway the same means nor hath he tyed himself to a successive Anointing or Election else few Kings on earth would hold their Scepters And no man from any diversity in the cases is able to prove that a man may not as truly be a lawful Church-governor as a lawful Governor of the Commonwealth without an uninterrupted succession of Ministerial Collation 9. If Bellarmine be forced to maintain that with them it is enough that a Pastor have the place and seem lawfull to the people and that they are bound to obey him though it should prove otherwise Then we may as well stand on the same terms as they 10. In a word our Ordination being according to the Law of Christ and the Popes so contrary to it we are ready at any time more fully to compare them and demonstrate to any impartial man that Christ doth much more disown their Ordination then ours and that we enter in Gods appointed way Mr. Eliot in New England may better Ordain a Pastor over the Indians converted by him then leave them without or send to Rome or England for a Bishop or for Orders But again I must refer you of this subject to the Books before mentioned and the Sheet which I have written lest I be over-tedious CHAP. XXXIV Detect 25. ANother of their Deceits is In pretending the Holiness of their Churches and Ministry and the unholiness of ours This being matter of fact a willing and impartial mind may the easier be satisfied in it They prove their Holiness 1. By the Canonized Saints among them 2. By the devotion of their Religious Orders and their strictness of living 3. By their unmarried Clergy 4. By their sanctifying Sacraments and Ceremonies In all which they
nothing can be added and therefore we are at a Certainty for our Religion for we have a sure and perfect Rule from Heaven Nothing may be added to it or taken from it But the Papists do profess that the Determinations of the Pope or Councill may make a point and so five thousand points for there is no certain number to be de fide articles of faith and necessary to salvation though not in se yet quoad nos as to us And what it is for a Law to be obligatory in se and not quoad nos is hard to understand So that the Papists never know when their faith is perfect and grown to its full stature For ought they know a thousand more Articles yet may be added And yet these men of uncertain growing faith have the face to perswade men that we are mutable and they are fixed You see our several Principles now to our Practices For our part 1. We never changed our Head our Lord our Faith or one Article of our Faith if malice it self be able to charge us with changing the smallest Article of our Faith let them say their worst we change not our Rule the holy Scriptures nor one clause or sentence of it but endeavour the preservation of the same which at the first we received In our contests with the Papists our great offence is at their mutation from the antient Rule and way we contend but for the faith once delivered to the Saints the old way with us is the good way we abhor a Religion that is new sprung up or is less then one thousand five hundred and fifty years standing at least If we change in any thing it is but by repenting of our former changeableness while our Nation was Popish having then changed from the Apostolick simplicity we change from that sinful change and return to the antient way again And if we have made any further changes since our first change at the Reformation it is but a perfecting the change to Antiquity and Apostolick simplicity which we then begun Rome was not built in a day and is not pulled down in a day The work of Reformation is but one change though it be not done all at one time If we find some spots of Romish dirt upon us that escaped us at our first washing it is no dangerous mutability yet to wash it off If a man converted by saving grace be not perfectly rid of all his former sin the first day of his Conversion should he be reproached as mutable for striving against it all his life after and casting it off by degrees as he is able If a man did but recover by degrees from the relicks of his disease they will not therefore reproach him as mutable If he sweep the dust or dirt out of his house every day they will not say He is mutable and knows not where to rest These men might as well reproach us as mutable because we rise in the morning and do not still lie in bed or because we go to bed at night and do not stay up still But what is it that we are changeable in we have changed none of the substance of worship did we baptize before and do we not so still Did we pray or administer the Lords Supper before and do we not so still what is the change why 1. We before used the common Prayer book and now we do not 2. Before we used prayers at the buria of the dead which now are omitted 3. Before we used the Cross and Surplice and kneeled at the Sacrament which are now omitted And what then therefore we have changed our Religion Even as a man changeth his cloaths by brushing them or his house by sweeping it or his face by washing it Do these men think us so sottish as to place our Religion in these Circumstances God hath bid us Pray continually but he hath not told us whether we shall use a Prayer book or not but left that to mens necessities or conveniences to determine of And doth a man change his Religion or Worship of God if he either begin or cease to use a Book If any man had so little wit or Religion as to place their Religion in a Prayer book it s no great loss to them if they have lost their Religion when the Prayer book is taken from them We doubt not but Prayer books are profitable to some and hinderances to others some should use them and some should not but whether we use them or not use them is no part of our Religion at all but a meer Accident or common help and appurtenance God hath not told preachers whether they shall use any Notes for their memory in Preaching to one it is an hinderance to another an help Doth a man change his Religion when he changeth a custome of using Notes God hath not told us what Chapter we shall read or what Psalm we shall sing or what Text we shall Preach on this day or that day What if one age think it best that some Pastors give Laws to all the rest that they shall read no Chapter preach on no Text and sing no Psalm but by their direction and the next age think it meeter to leave it to each Minister as thinking it unfit to Ordain such Ministers that have not wit enough to choose their Text or Chapter or Psalm according to occasions Will you say that here is a change of Religion These outside Hypocrites tell the world what a thing they take Religion to be and in what they place it What if one man use an hour-glass in preaching and another use none What if one read a Chapter with spectacles and another without or if one preach in a Pulpit and another below or if one preach in a white garment or another in a black or if one stand at the Sacrament and another sit and another kneel Are we therefore of several Religions or is this any part of the worship it self Do we not all now either stand sit or kneel at the hearing of a Sermon as we please Do we not kneel or stand at Prayer as we please Yea do not men commonly in singing Psalms of Prayer or Praise to God sit or stand as they please And what if we do so at the Sacrament Is it not all one Or doth standing kneeling or sitting make another Religion or any part of it And for Marrying Burying Baptizing and the rest we have altered no part at all of the worship of God but order them in that manner as seemeth most convenient What ignorant souls are these that think that the using a Prayer book or praying without book or the using this gesture or that these words or those words that are to the same sence doth make different Religions or Ordinances of worship These are tricks that none but the sottishly ignorant will be deluded with that know not whâ—â— Religion or worship is They may as well say If I change
of any Father whereby it may appear that any account at all was made of it Where he citeth the full express words of the Fathers of those first ages against praying to Saints as Origen in Jus. Hom. 16. And in Rom. lib. 2. cap. 2. And Contr. Celsum lib. 8. page 432 433 406 411 412. lib. 5. pag. 239. Tertullian Apol. cap. 30. Tertullian and Cyprian of Prayer Athanasius Orat. 4. Cont. Arrium pag. 259 260. Eccles Smyrn apud Euseb Hist lib. 4. c. I am loth to recite what is there already given you 3. And when Prayer to the dead did come in how exceedingly it differed from the Romish Prayers to the dead I pray you read there in the same Author 4. And also of those Adorations and Devotions offered by the Papists to the Virgin Mary I desire you to read in the same Author and Place enough to make a Christian tremble and which for my part I am not able to excuse from horrid Blasphemy or Idolatry though I am willing to put the best interpretation on their words that reason will allow 5. The Reason why in the old Testament men were not wont to pray to Saints Bellarmine saith was because then they did not enter into heaven nor see God Bellar. de sanct Beat. li. 2. cap. 19. So Suarez in the third part Tom. 2. disp 42. Sect. 1. But abundance of the chief Doctors of the Church for divers Ages were of opinion that the Saints are not admitted into Heaven to the clear sight of God before the day of Judgement as most of the Eastern Churches do to this day therefore they could not be for the Popish Prayer to Saints And here again observe that men may be of the same faith and Church with us that differ and err in as great a matter as this The Council of Florence hath now defined it that departed souls are admitted into Heaven to the clear sight of God And yet Stapleton and Francis Pegna à Castro Medina Sotus affirm that Irenaeus Justin Martyr Tertullian Clemens Romanus Origen Ambrose Chrysostome Austin Lactantius Victorinus Prudentius Theodoret Aretas Oecumenius Theophilact Euthymius yea and Bernard have delivered the contrary sentence See Staplet Defens Eccles author cont Whitak lib. 1. cap. 2. with Fran. Pegna in part 2. Director Inquisitor com 21. Now as all these must needs be against the Popish Invocation of Saints so they were against that which is now determined to be de fide Whence I gather on the by 1. That the Romish faith increaseth and is not the same as heretofore 2. That they had not this Article by Tradition from any of these Fathers or from the Apostles by them unless from the Scriptures 3. That men that err in such points as are now defined by Councils to be de fide are yet accounted by Papists to be of their Church and faith And therefore they may be of ours notwithstanding such errours as this in hand 4. And note also by this tast whether the Papists be not a perjured generation that swear not to expound Scripture but according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers 6. The Council of Laodicea condemned them as Idolaters that prayed to Angels Can. 35. which Caranza Crab and other Papists have turned into Angulos whose falsification you may see fully detected by the said Bishop Usher ibid. pag. 470. 471 472. Read there also the full Testimonies of Greg. Nissen Athanasius Epiphanius c. against praying to Saints and Angels and the detection of Bellarmines fraud that pretendeth the Fathers to speak of the Gentiles Idolatry when they mention the Virgin Mary and the Saints and say expresly they were not to be adored But for all this H. T. Manual page 291 c. hath Fathers for this Adoration of Angels and Saints And who are they The first is Dionysius to which I answer 1. There is never a such a word in the place cited in Dionysius in the Book that I have at hand printed Lugdun 1572. 2. We are for praying the Saints to pray for us too that is those on earth And the words cited by him mention not the Saints in heaven 3. That Dionysius is not Dionysius but a spurious Apochryphal Book Not once known and mentioned in the world till Gregory the greats dayes six hundred years after Christ as Bellarmine himself saith Lib. de Scriptor Eccles de Dionys And lib. 2. de Monach. cap. 5. The second is Clem. Apostol Constit 5. Answ 1. The words speak only of honouring the Martyrs which is our unquestioned duty but not of Praying to them 2. It s an Apochryphal forgery and neither the Apostles nor Clements Work which he citeth but any thing will serve these men Let him believe Bellarmine de scriptor Eccles pag. 38 39. where he proveth it and saith that in the Latine Church these Constitutions are of almost no account and the Greeks themselves Canon 2. Trul. reject them as depraved by Hereticks and that the receiving of them is it that misleadeth the Aethiopians See more against them in Cooks Censurâ pag. 17 18 19. and Rivets Crit. Sac. Dalaeus in Pseudepigrap The third Testimony of H. T. is from Justins second Apol. Answ It is not Praying to Angels that Justin seemeth to intend but giving them due honour which we allow of His intent is to stop the mouths of Heathens that called the Christians impious for renouncing their Gods To whom he replyeth that we yet honour the true God and his Angels c. His Testimony for the third age is only Origen and yet none of Origen First in his Lament Answ 1. Origen there mentioneth the Saints but not the dead Saints It may be all the Saints in the Church on earth whose prayers he desireth 2. If this satisfie you not at least be satisfied with this that you cite a forgery that is none of Origens works Not only Erasmus saith that This Lamentation was neither written by Origen nor translated by Hierom but is the fiction of some unlearned man that by this trick devised to defame Origen But Baronius Annal. Tit. 2. ad an 253. p. 477. witnesseth that Pope Gelasius numbers it with the Apocryphals But H. T. hath a second testimony from Origen in Cantic Hom. 3. Answ 1. That speaks of the Saints prayer for us but not of our prayers to them one word which is the thing in question 2. But Erasmus and others have shewed that neither is this any of Origens works Sixtus Senensis saith that some old Books put Hieroms name to it And Lombard and Aquinas cite passages out of it as Ambroses You see now what Testimonies H. T. hath produced for the first three Ages even till above four hundred years after Christ And yet no doubt but this is currant proof with the poor deluded Papists that read his Book 2. The next exception to be considered is Praying for the Dead which they say the ancient Church was for Answ 1. We are for
men know what Council of Carthage decreed that the Bishop primae sedis should be called neither Summus Sacerdos nor Princeps Sacerdotum vel aliquid hujusmodi tantum Episcopus primae sedis i. e. Not the chief Priest or the chief of Priests but the Bishop of the first seat And how long will they shut their eyes against the testimony of two of their own Popes Pelagius and Gregory the first that condemned the name of Universal Bishop Sometime they find the Church of Rome called Apostolick and so were others as well as that as is commonly known And sometime the Pope is called the Pillar of the Church And what of that so are many others as well as he as all the Apostles were as well as Peter The Church is built on the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets That the Pastors of the Church were ordinarily called the Pillars and props of it as by Nicephorus Gildas Theodoret Basil Tertullian Dionysius Hierom Augustine c. you may see proved in Gatakers Cinnus page 395 396. And lastly when the Papists read their Popes called the Successors of Peter they take this as a proof of their Soveraignty Whereas 1. Peter himself had no such Soveraignty 2. They succeed him not in his Apostleship 3. They are called Pauls Successors as well as Peters 4. Others are called Peters Successors too as well as they by the Fathers 5. And other Bishops ordinarily are called the Apostles Successors and other Churches called Apostolick Churches I shall only set before them the words of one man at this time Hesychii Hierosol apud Photium Cod. 269. and desire them to tell me whether ever more were said of the Pope yea or of Peter then he saith of Andrew calling him Chori Apostolici primogenitus primitus defixa Ecclesiae columna Petri Petrus fundamenti fundamentum principii principium vel primitiae qui vocavit antequam vocaretur adduxit priusquam adduceretur i. e. The first begotten of the Apostolick Chore the first fixed Pillar of the Church the Peter of Peter or the Rock of Peter the Foundation of the Foundation the Principal of the Principal who called before he was called and brought others to Christ before he was brought to him by any others And the same Hesychius saith of James apud Photium Cod. 275. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. i. e. With what Praises may I set forth the servant and Brother of Christ the chief Emperour or Commander or Captain of the New Hierusalem the Prince or chief of Priests the President or Principal of the Apostles the Crown or Leader among the Heads the principal Lamp among the Lights the principal planet among the Stars Peter speaketh to the people but James giveth the Law or sets down the Law Can they shew us now where more then this is said of Peter himself Much less of the Pope CHAP. XXVII Detect 18. ANother of the Principal Deceits of the Papists is the forging and corrupting of Councils and Fathers and the citation of such forgeries Be carefull therefore how you receive their Allegations till you have searched and know the Books to be genuine and the particular words to be there and uncorrupted They have by their greatness obtained the opportunity of possessing so many Libraries that they might the easilyer play this abominable game But God in mercy hath kept so many monuments of Antiquity out of their hands partly in the Eastern and partly in the Reformed Churches as suffice to discover abundance of their wicked forgeries and falsifications Of their forging Canons yea feigning Councils that never were as Concil Sinuessan Concil Rom. sub Silvestr See Bishop Ushers Answer to the Jes pag. 12 13. As also of their forging Constantines Donation and Isidore mercators forging of a fardell of Decretals and of their falsifying and corrupting in the Doctrine of the Sacrament the works of Ambrose of Chrysost or the Author operis Imperfecti of Fulbertus Bishop of Chartres of Rabanus of Mentz of Bertram or Ratrannus c. Read I pray you the words detecting their horrible impious cheats But their Indices expurgatorii will acquaint you with much more And yet their secreter expurgations are worst of all What words of Peters Primacy and others for their advantage they have added to Cyprian de unitate Ecclesiae see in Jer. Stephens his Edition of it where much more additions to Cyprians works are detected out of many Oxford Manuscripts Andreas Schottus the Jesuite publishing Basils works at Antwerp Lat. A. D. 1616. with Jesuitical fidelity left out the Epistle in which is this passage following which should not be lost speaking of the Western Bishops he saith verily the manners of Proud men do use to grow more insolent if they be honoured And if God be merciful to us what other addition have we need of But if Gods anger on us remain what help can the pride of the West bring us when they neither know the Truth nor can endure to speak it but being prepossessed with false suspicions they do the same things now which they did in the case of Marcellus contentiously disputing against those that taught the truth but for Heresie confirming it by their authority Indeed I was willing not as representing the publike person of the East to write to their Leader Damasus but nothing about Church matters but that I might intimate that they neither knew the truth of the things that are done with us nor did admit the way by which they might learn them And in general that they should not insult over the calamitous and afflicted nor think that Pride did make for their dignity when that one sin alone is enough to make us hatefull to God so far Basil in that Epistle left out by the Jesuite in which you may see the Romane power in those daies in the consciences of Basil and such other Fathers in the East And by the way how Tertullian reverenced them you may see lib. de pudicit pag. 742. where he calls Zepherinus as we say all to naught And the Asian Bishops condemning of Victor with Irenaeus his reproof of him Cyprians and Firmilians condemning Stephen Marcellinus his condemnation by all Liberius his being so oft Anathematized by Hilary Pictav the resistance of Zosimus and Boniface by the Africans c. shew plainly in what esteem the now-infallible universal Head was then among the Fathers and in all the Churches But when the Papists come to the mention of such passages what juglings do they use sometime they silence them sometime they pass them over in a few words that are buried in a heap of other matters sometime they bring in some forgeries to obscure them But commonly they make a nose of wax of Councils and Fathers as well as of Scripture and put any ridiculous sence upon them that shall serve their turns though perhaps six men among them may have five or six Expositions An Epistle of Ciril of Jerusalem to Austin is forged by one
that their Molanus calleth A barbarous impostor Histor Imag. l. 3. c. 36. about the miracles of Hierom where Purgatory and other errors are befriended When as Ciril himself dyed thirty years before Hierome And yet Binsfield Suarez and other of the most learned Papists stick not to make use of this forgery for all that But it would be tedious to recite their particular forgeries The studious Reader may find many of them discovered up and down by Bishop Usher and other of our Writers And for his fuller help I advise him to read Dr. Reignolds de Libris Apocryph and Dr. Th. James his corruptions of the Fathers and Scultetus his medulla patrum yea of the Papists themselves read Sixtus Senensis his Bibliothec. and Bellaerm de Scriptorib Eccles and Possevines Apparatus and Erasmus censures on the Fathers which he dealt with But especially let him not be without Cooks censura Patrum and Blondell on the Decretals to which also add Rivets Critica Sacra and Dallaeus de Pseudepigraphis Of their abominable Legends I shall say nothing but that the wiser sort of themselves are ashamed of them And if any Ancients have abused the Church by shameless forgeries the Papists make use of such as confidently as if they were the word of God For instance Let any man but read over the Books of Basil Bishop of Seleucia if it be his indeed of the life Miracles of Thecla and try his faith upon it whether he be able to believe that Thecla stood so long at the window to hear Paul while all those daily applications and orations were made to her that Demas and Hermogenes were there to stir up the people against Paul as a deceiver under the cloak of being his companions that any of those Orations recited are true when the Author like a professed fabler useth to say I suppose thus or thus they said that her Mother Theoclaea and her lover Thamiris were on the sudden so cruel as to burn her while they are said so much to burn in Love to her that when Thecla had formed her body like a Cross and cast her self into the flaming pile the flames in reverence of the Cross became as a Chamber to her covering her like a vault from the peoples sight and not approaching her and that the earth making a grievous noise the showrs and hail destroyed the people and Thecla went her way without observance finding Paul and Onesiphorus hid in a Sepulcher at prayer for her that Paul permitted her to cut her hair and change her habit and become his fellow travailer that Alexander the Governour was so inflamed with her beauty at Antioch even before she came in full sight of the people in the City Gate that he could not forbear but presently must leap upon her like a mad dog that she tore his Cloak and threw off his Crown and so saved her Virginity that for this she was cast and tyed to wild beasts and the Lyons couched to her and one Lyoness fought for her and killed the rest that assaulted her that yet they turned more upon her that she leaped into the Fish pond among the devouring Sea Calvs and that fire from Heaven came down into the Water and there made her a chamber and saved her from those Sea-beasts that Falconilla's soul appeared to her Mother Tryphaena to beg Thecla's prayers that she might be admitted into heaven telling her how much Thecla was admired in Heaven She knew who was admired in Heaven before she could be let in that at Thecla's prayers she was admitted into heaven but tells us not where she was before that when Thecla was again tied to wild bulls and fire set to their posteriors to enrage them the fire killed them and burnt the bonds and she was unhurt That Thecla again puts on mans cloaths and seeks Paul whether she wore breeches I find not that Paul hereupon pronounceth her an Apostle a predecessor of Pope Joan and ordaineth her to go and preach the Gospel and appointeth her to one Pagan City as if either women were Apostles or ordained to be preachers of the Gospel that by Paul were forbidden to speak in the Church or Apostles were confined to a City that she fixed at Seleucia and there converted and baptized many and at last after many miracles did not die but entred alive into the earth which opened it self for her in the place where the holy Table stood that after her death she wrought those one and thirty miracles that fill a second Book and many more appearing to this Basil and encouraging him when he was weary to go on in the writing of her praises and plucking him by the ear and so curing his headach which else would have prevented his Oration in her praise the next day with abundance more that are more strange then this I have instanced but in this one case of Thecla because it would be endless to tell you of all the rest of their fictions were I acquainted with them all Nor do I mention this as one of their Legends no nor as a piece of Metaphrastes but as the works of St. Basil not Basil the great an ancient Father Now either this is Basils work or it is not If it be not then you see what trust is to be given to the Papists Antiquities and supposed Fathers For this is one of them and this story vindicated by Petrus Pantinus yea by no less a man then the Great Baronius the Master of Antiquities who Annal. Tom. 1. ad An. D. 47. bringeth a whole Army of Fathers to attest the Acts of Thecla and approveth of this of Basils and the like of Metaphrastes Two Testimonies trouble him shrewdly One is no later then Tertullian who de Baptis cap. 18. saith thus But if any women read the pretended writings of Paul and defend the example of Thecla for womens Liberty to teach and baptise let them know that a Presbyter in Asia that framed that writing putting Pauls name instead of his own was cast out of his place being convicted of it and confessing that he did it in love to Paul The other is Hieroms testimony de Script Eccless who citing the fore-cited words saith The travails therefore of Paul and Thecla and the whole fable of the baptized Lyon we reckon among Apocryphal writings For how can it be that the inseparable companion of the Apostle Luke was ignorant of this only among all his matters But yet Baronius thinks that these are not the same Books that Tertullian and Hierom speak against and why so Because 1. Here is no mention of Theclaes Preaching and Baptizing nor of the Lyon baptized 2. Because so many Fathers attest the story But the first is a visible falshood contrary to the express words of the story which feign Paul to have sent her to preach as a true Apostle and mention her baptizing the people of Seleucia And for the baptized Lyon perhaps Hierom spoke de baptismate sanguinis and
damnable doctrine to destroy and depose Kings hath been the cause of the Civil wars likely to befall these Kingdoms if God in mercy do not stop it So far the Popish Priest You see here if their own pens are to be credited those very Actions of the Swedes Germans French which they cast as a reproach in the face of the Protestant as you may see in a Book called The Image of the two Churches were indeed their own and to be laid at their own doors I omit abundance of better proof because I will give them the words of none but themselves in this How far they were the causes of the old broils in Scotland Knox and Spotswood and all their later Histories will tell you How busie they were in England in Queen Elizabeths dayes the Popes Bulls and the many Treacheries committed signifie Even in King James his dayes who wrote against them they so far prevailed as to cause him to swear to those Articles for Toleration of Popery in order to the Spanish Match which you may read in Prins Introduct pag. 44 45. Yea so far as to prevail with King James before the Lords of his Council to say that His Mother suffered Martyrdom in this Realm for the profession of the Catholick Religion a Religion which had been publikely professed for many ages in this Realm confirmed by many great and excellent Emperours and famous in all Ecclesiastical Histories by an infinite number of Martyrs who had sealed it with their blood that the Catholicks well knew that there was in him a grand affection to the Catholick Religion in so much that they believed at Rome that he did but dissemble his Religion to obtain the Crown of England That now he had maturely considered the penury and calamities of the Roman Catholicks who were in the number of his faithfull subjects and was resolved to relieve them and therefore did from thenceforth take all his Roman Catholick subjects into his protection permitting them the liberty and entire exercise of their Religion and liberty to celebrate the Mass with other Divine offices of their Religion without any inquisition process or molestation from that day forwards And so he goes on restoring them to their estates commanding all Officers to hold their hands and for what cause so ever it be not to attempt to grieve or molest the said Catholicks neither in publick or private in the liberty of the excercise of their Religion upon pain of being reputed guilty of high Treason c. Prin ubi sup p. 30. Mercur. Gal. To. 9. p. 485. So far prevailed they with Prince Charls our late King as to cause him to write that Letter to the Pope which you may read Mercur. Franc. To. 9. An. 1623. p. 509 510. and in Prins Introduct p. 38. which I have no mind to recite and also they prevailed with him to swear to the Spanish conditions and also that he would permit at all times that any should freely propose to him the Arguments of the Catholick Religion without giving any impediment and that he would never directly or indirectly permit any to speak to the Infanta against the same What a hand the Papists had in the late Innovations and wars in England and Scotland and Ireland is too evident How they designed the reducing of England to the Pope in the Spanish and after in the French match and how in prosecution of it they had their Nuntio's here at London and erected their houses of Jesuites Capuchins and Nuns how far they instigated the Court and Prelates to silence and suspend and banish Godly Ministers and to ensnare them by the bowing to Altars by the Book for dancing on the Lords dayes and many such things how far they urged them on against the Scots I had rather you would read in Mr. Prins Works of Darkness brought to Light and Canterburies Tryall and his Romes Master piece and his Royall Favorite then hear it from me And if any reader be disaffected to the reciter of it let them at least peruse impartially the Evidences produced by him It was one of their own Religion who in remorse of Conscience opened the Plot in which they were engaged to Andreas ab Habernfield Physitian to the Queen of Bohemia who told it Sr. Wil. Boswell the Kings Agent at Hague which was to subvert the Protestant Religion and set up Popery and reconcile us to Rome and to that end to attempt the perverting of the King and to engage us in a war with Scotland and if the King would not be perverted then to poyson him The Jesuites of whom four sorts were planted in London and had built them a Colledge having Cardinal Barbarino for their Protector crept into all Societies and acted all parts save the peace-makers and being a foreseeing Generation they lookt further before them then the short witted men whom they over-reacht When they had by the Countenance of the Queen got so considerable a strength at the Court and so much interest in the Prelates and influence on all Ecclesiastical affairs they set afoot the foresaid innovations in worship against the Lords Day c. and the foresaid persecutions of faithfull yea and conformable Ministers and still they went Dilemmatically to work thinking to make sure which way ever things went to effects their ends They see that either their first attempt would prevail without opposition or not If it do then the Calvinifts and Puritan and Protestant Preachers will be removed and the places filled with Arminians and masked Papists and ignorant men unable to resist them and ductile worldlings that will alway be on the stronger side and their ends will be easily attained But if there be any Opposition Murmuring Discontents either it will provoke the Discontented to open Defence and Resistance or not If not their Discontents will hurt none but themselves If it do then either they will be crusht in the beginning or able to bring it to a war If the first then we shall have the Day and this to boot that they will lie under the Odium of Rebellion and be trod the lower and be the less able ever to rise and we shall be able with ease to drive on the change to a higher degree in Opposition to so odious a party But if they he able to make a war of it either they will be conquered or conquer or make Peace The last is most unlikely because Jealousies and Engagements will presently be multiplyed so that an apparent necessity will seem to lie on each party not to trust the other And the flames are easier to be kept in then kindled And if so unlikely a thing should come to pass yet it must needs be to our advantage For we will openly all appear for the King and so in England and Ireland we shall be considerable He will remember that he was helpt by us and look on the Protestants and Puritans as Rebels and take his next advantage against them or
the Murdering of Princes and the pretence of power to dispense with oaths of Allegiance and fidelity and who hath actually so oft pretended to disoblige the subjects and expose Princes and their Dominions to the first occupant I know that many of the seculars in England disowned this doctrine But 1. So never did the Pope but hath owned and practised it 2. By disowning it they disown Popery it self if they know what they do For it is an Article of their Faith and so Essential to their Religion as explicitly held and is determined by a Pope and an approved General Council even 12. the fourth at Lateran under Innocent the third as I before recited the words at large in the third Argument against them here I know some of the Papists would perswade the world that it was none but Mariana the Jesuite that wrote for King killing and that it was first condemned by themselves But the Parliament of Paris tells another story of them as it is recited by Thuanus who was President and then present Hist lib. 130. ad an 1604. And Rivet names them Guignardus that wrote in praise of the murder of Henry the third and of Ode Pichenatus Barterius suborned by Varada c. And Albineus the Jesuite did hear the Murderer of Henry the fourth confess before he did the fact and put off the examiners with this answer that God had given him that special gift to forget when once he had absolved a sinner whatsoever was confessed by him And why was it that France did expel the Jesuites and set up a Pillar of Remembrance of their villanies till Henry the fourth would needs gratifie the Pope by calling them in again and told the Parliament that the peril of it should be on him and so it was for it cost him his life And why did the same Parliament of Paris Novemb. 1610. condemn Bellarmines book against Barclay as an engine of treason and rebellion And the Theological faculty of Paris April 4. 1626. condemned Santarellus Book as guilty of the same villany stirring up people to Rebellion and King-killing And May 12. the University confirmed it And March 13. the Parliament condemned the Book to be burnt And it 's worth the reading which Rivet recites of the Answers of the Jesuites in Paris when the Parliament askt them their judgement of that Book viz. Seeing their General had approved the Book and judged the things that are there written to be certain whether they were of the same mind They answered that Living at Rome he could not but approve what was there approved of But say the Parliament What think you Say the Jesuites the clean contrary Say the Examiners But what would you do if you were at Rome Say the Jesuites That which they do that are at Rome At which said some of the Parliament What! have they one Conscience at Rome and another at Paris God bless us from such confessors as these But yet some of the Papists will seem so honest as to say that private men may not kill a King till he be deposed Very true But withall it is their currant doctrine that if once he be excommunicate he is then no King yea or if he be an Heretick and so being no King they may kill the man and not kill the King This is the jugling of these seeming Loyall subjects You may see it in their own writings Suarez advers Sect. Anglic. lib. 6. cap. 4. Sect. 14. cap. 6. Sect. 22 24. Azorius Jesuita Instit Moral part 1. l. 8. c. 13. He that would see more of their mind in this let him read the Mysterium Patrum Jesuitarum and the Jansenians mysterie of Jesuitism and Bishop Rob. Abbots Antilogia ad Apolog. Eudaemojohan But what need we more then the Decrees of a Pope and General Council and the practice of the Church of Rome for so many ages And for the Popes power to absolve them from all oaths of Allegiance and fidelity the foresaid Pope Innocent and his approved General Council have told the world enough of their mind to put us out of doubt of it But leaving abundance of forreign instances I shall mention but one or two at home The Papists have lately had the confidence to affirm that the Powder-plot and the Spanish invasion in one thousand five hundred eighty eight were not upon a quarrell of Religion nor owned by the Pope King James hath said already so much against them in these points that I think it needless to say any more especially also after Bishop Abbots Antilogia but only here to produce one Testimony of their own concerning the Spanish Invasion Cardinal Ossatus in his 87. Epist ad D. de Ville-roy tels us that Pope Clement the eighth one of the best of all the late ones did press for the King of France to join with Spain in the Invasion of England and the Cardinal answered that the King was tied by an Oath to the Queen of England to which the Pope replyed that The Oath was made to an Heretick but he was bound in another Oath to God and the Pope adding withall that Kings and other Princes do permit themselves all things or tolerate themselves in all things which make for their commodity and that the matter is gone so far that it is not or should not be imputed to them or taken for their fault and he alledged the saying of Franciscus Mariae Duke of Urbine that indeed every one doth blame a Noble man or Great man that is no Soveraign if he keep not his Covenants or fidelity and they account him infamous but supream Princes may without any danger of their reputation make Covenants and break them lye betray and perpetrate other such like things This was good Pope Clement the eighth And can we look for better from the rest You see what Oaths and Covenants are with them And that the design was still carried on against the Queen upon account of Religion and the Realm to have been invaded by the Spaniard on that account and that the principal point of the Plot was to prepare a party within the Realm that might adhere to the invaders all this with much more Sir Francis Walsingham that well knew hath testified to Monsieur Critoy in his Letter Cabal part 2. pag. 39. Thuanus a Moderate Papist and a most knowing and impartial Historian tells you lib. 89. p. 248 249. ad an 1588. that the Spaniards pretended to undertake the expedition only for Religion sake and therefore took with them Martin Alarco Vicar general of the Holy Inquisition with abundance of Capuchins and Jesuites and that they had with them the Popes Bull which they were to publish as soon as they landed and that Cardinal Allan was appointed as the Popes Legate to land at the same time and with full power to see to the restoring of Religion And that the said Bull had these expressions that the Pope by the Power given from God by lawfull