they done it to gaine any thing thereby in disputation but onely to keepe the common people from infection whereas they spare none neither Fathers nor Councels nor moderne Writers and that not so much lest the common sort should bee infected as that the learned might be depriued of those weapons wherewith they might fight against them and wound their cause Seeing the case now so stands that hee which can muster vp together the greatest armie of Authours to fight vnder his colours is thought to haue the best cause their dealing then with vs is like that of the Philistims against the Israelites who despoyled them of all weapons and instruments of warre that they might dominiere ouer them with greater securitie but ours is not so towards them And therefore both in this and all the former respects it is a miserable vntruth and a desperate cuasion to say that wee are more guiltie of this crime then they are 107. Lastly whereas in his first answere hee pleadeth the lawfulnesse of the fact let vs heare his reasons to moue thereunto and in the interim remember that in prouing it to bee lawfull hee confesseth it to bee done But why is it lawfull Mary first because the Church being supreme Iudge on earth of all Controuersies touching faith and Religion hath authoritie to condemne Heretikes And therefore also the workes of Heretikes and if this then much more to correct and purge their Bookes if by that meanes shee can make them profitable for her vse and beneficiall to her children To which I answere two things First that it is not the Church that doth this but the sacred Inquisitors to wit certaine Cardinals and Lawyers deputed to that office who for the most part are so farre from being the Church that they are often no sound members thereof Iâ— it be said that they haue their authoritie from the Pope who is vertually the whole Church why doe they then speake so darkly and say the Church hath this authoritie when as they might in plaine termes say that the Pope hath it but that hereby they should display the feeblenesse of their cause and the fillinesse of this reason for thus it would stand Why is it lawful for Books to be purged because the Pope thinkes it lawful And must not he needs think so when the Authors crosse his triple crowne and speake against his state and dignitie Adde hereunto that it is a fallacie in reasoning when that is taken for granted which is in question For we deny their Synagogue to be the true Church and much more the Pope to bee the supreme Iudge and therefore till those things be proued the reason is of no effect 108. Secondly most of those things which are purged by them are so farre from being heresies or errours that they are the most of them sound doctrines of faith grounded vpon the authoritie of Gods sacred truth for they blot out many things in both olde and new Authours that they themselues dare not accuse to bee hereticall as that place in Saint Cyril before mentioned touching the power of faith which is no more in direct termes then that which is said in the Scripture Act. 15. 15. that faith purifieth the heart and that in the Basil Index of Chrysostome The Church is not built vpon a man but vpon faith and those propositions which are commanded by the Dutch Index to be wiped out of the Table of Robert Stephens Bible to wit that sinnes are remitted by beleeuing in Christ that he which beleeueth in Christ shall not die for euer that faith purifieth the heart that Christ is our righteousnes that no man is iust before God and that repentance is the gift of God with a number of like nature These they purge out of Stephens Index which notwithstanding are directly and in as many words recorded in the Booke of God and so it may iustly be thought that they are so farre from clenfing Bookes from the drosse and dregs of errour that they rather purge out the pure gold and cleare wine of truth and leaue nothing but dregs and drosse behind 109. His second reason is because nothing is more dangerous to infect true Christian hearts then bad Bookes Therefore it is not onely lawfull but needfull and behoouefull to the Church of God that such Bookes should bee purged and burned too if it bee so thought meete by the Church to the end that the sinceritie of one true faith and Religion might be preserued I answere all this is true which he saith but are they heresies which they purge no they are sound and orthodox opinions for the most part as hath beene proued in the answere to the former reason And doe they it to keepe Christian men from infection no their chiefe end and drift is to depriue their aduersaries of all authorities that make against them that so they might triumph in the antiquitie of their Religion and noueltie of ours which is one of their principall arguments which they vse though with euill successe for defence of their cause dealing herein as Holofernes did with the Israelites at the siege of Bethulia breaking the Conduits cutting the pipes and slopping the passages which might bring vs prouision of good and wholsome waters out of the cisternes of olde and new Writers this is their purpose and no other whatsoeuer they pretend for if they meant any good to Gods people for preuenting of infection they would haue purged their lying Legends of infinite fables their Canon Law of horrible blasphemies and their Schoolemen of many strange opinions Yea they would haue condemned the Bookes of Machiauel and of that Cardinall that wrote in commendation of the vnnaturall sinne of Sodomie and a number such like filthy and deuillish Writings which are printed and reprinted among them without controulement And againe is it vnitie in the true faith and religion that they seeke no it is conspiracie in falshood and consent in errour and not vnitie in the truth till the Romish Religion bee proued to bee the true Religion which can neuer be this reason is of no force to iustifie their proceedings Lastly is it Christian policy no it is deuilish subtletie and craftie forgerie for the case so stands betwixt them and vs as in a tryall of land betwixt partie and partie wherein hee that bringeth best euidence and witnesse carrieth the cause now if one partie either suborne false witnesses or corrupt true or forge euidences to his purpose or falsifie those that are extant all men will count him as a forger and his cause desperate and iudge him worthie the Pillorie so betwixt vs the question is who hath the right faith and the best title to the Church Our euidences are first and principally Gods Word then the writings and records of godly men in all ages now then they that shall purge pare raze blurr falsify or corrupt any of these must needs bee thought to bee subtle and craftie companions and not honest
those marke you Romanists that say Let vs doe euill that good may come thereof whose damnation is iust 15. Their other reasons are vaine and idle for what greater liberty can they desire then to be authorized by the head of the Church who cannot erre as they teach and to follow their filthy lusts by letters Patents froÌ„ his vnholynesse for so here it iustly deserueth to be tituled And is this the way to reclaime conuert them froÌ„ their filthines to dwell in gorgious houses to ride opeÌ„ly in goodly chariots to be apparelled like Princes to haue atteÌ„ding on them men clad in braue attire with chaines of gold and costly ornaments yea to be maintained by the Pope and often visited by his Holynesse and his great Cardinals if this be the way to reclaime them let all men of sound sense and reason iudge indifferently 16. Lastly whether it be a meanes to stoppe the course of lust and to refraine whoredomes from spreading farre and wide let vs against Augustine oppose Saint Basill who expounding these words of the Psalme And hath not sit in the chaire of pestilence saith That whoredome stayeth not it selfe in one man but inuadeth a whole Citie for some one comming to an harlot taketh to himselfe a fellow and the same also seekth another fellow and so as a fire being kindled in a Citie stayeth not in the burning one house or two but spreadeth farre and wide and draweth a great destruction with it so this mischiefe being once kindled rangeth ouer all the Citie Oppose also to him Saint Ambrose who writing vpon the 119. Psalme thus sayth Who can nourish burning â—â—ales in his bosome and not bee burnt with them So how can harlots be nourished in a Citie and young men not bee corrupted with wheredome Yea oppose Tertullian also who affirmeth plainely That all Brothel-houses are detestable before God And lastly Iustinian the Emperour who in his Authentikes in the Title De Lenonibus willeth that harlots should bee vtterly banished out of the Citie and sorroweth because hee saw Brothel-houses so nigh vnto the Churches of God And indeed if it were true that it is a meane to restraine whoredome why is it not then restrained at Rome by that meanes I am sure they haue their Stewes And yet Mantuan doubteth not to affirme that for all their Stewes confined into one place Vrbs estiam tota lupanar The whole Citie was become a Stewes To conclude all in one briefe Sylogisme That Religion which is contrary to the Religion of God cannot bee of God but of the Deuill but the Romish Religion in this one poynt is contrary to the Religion of God for the Scripture saith There shall be no whore in Israel the Romanists say There must be whores in Israel that is in the Church for the auoyding of a further mischiefe then which what can be more contradictorie therefore the Romish religion cannot be of God but of the diuell I meane in those poynts wherein it thus crosseth the truth of God 17. But doe they stay at adultery and simple fornication No their religion maintaineth open and notorious incest and such as the better sort of the heathen abominated and this they doe by three doctrines first by that which giueth allowance at least wise toleration to common Stewes and brothel-houses for the auoyding of a further mischiefe as I haue declared in the former Section for Stewes cannot be tolerated but incest also needs must not onely be occasioned but euen after a sort approued the reason is because often it commeth to passe that the Father and the Sonne or two brethren and neere kindred are defiled with one and the same woman and so vnnaturall and horrible incest prohibited by the lawes of God and man is commited And albeit oftentimes this is a thing secret and vnknowne vnto them yet it doth not wash their consciences from the guilt of this foule crime because they are bound to know in what degree she is vnto them of whome they dare presume to haue carnall knowledge And besides the act it selfe being meerely vnlawfull doth take away all excuse together with a secret suspition they should haue if they be not wilfully ignorant that such a thing might be For if that rule of Saint Augustine bee good Vitandum est licitum propter vicinitatem illiciti that which is lawfull is often to be auoyded for the contiguity and neerenesse it hath with that which is vnlawfull how much more is this true that a thing vnlawfull in it owne nature is to be prohibited and auoyded not onely because it is vnlawfull but much more if it bring with it apparaÌ„t feare of a greater mischiefe Now that affinitie is contracted and therefore incest committed not onely by lawfull marriage but also by vnlawfull copulation I thinke no man doubteth seeing that Saint Paul plainely affirmeth That hee which cleaueth to an harlot is made one flesh with her And their owne law sayth that it skils not whether the kindred descendeth from the lawfull marriages or otherwise 18. Their second doctrine maintaining Incest is their opinion touching the Popes power in dispensations for they hold that hee being Christs Vicar on earth may dispense in degrees expresly prohibited by Gods law and so hath and doth if occasion be offered by vertue of this dissipation so it may better be termed with Saint Bernard then dispensation the King of Spaine and Charles the Arch. Duke of Austria married each of them their sisters daughters And Petrus Aluaradus married two sisters at once and such like as you may see more at large in the former demonstration What is this I pray you but to allowe and authorize incest when as they ascribe vnto their holy Father the Pope authority to dispense with it for according to the old rule in Logike Causa causae est causa causati which is the cause of the cause must needes bee also the cause of the effect when as their doctrine therfore vpholds the Popes power to dispense and this power to dispense brings forth Incest a bastardly brat by consequeÌ„t their doctrine must necessarily stand guilty â—f being the first moouer thereof 19. The third doctrine by which this soule sinne is authorized is the generall opinion of the Church touching the extent of degrees of Consanguinity prohibited in marriage for albeit in former ages it was forbidden to marrie within the seuenth degree yet in the Councill of Laterane that Pontificall constitution was abrogated and the prohibition of marriage restrained to the fourth degree inclusiuely so that beyond the fourth degree it might be lawfull for any to marry without exception Which constitution is at this day held for Authenticall and is of force in the Romane Church now this doth giue manifest allowance vnto Incest for whether the supputation be made after the rule of the Ciuill law by generations or of the Canon law by persons yet so â—e
faith he doth neuer erre Gretzer saith that the generall lawfull and ordinarie Iudge of controuersies is the Bishop of Rome whether hee define any thing alone or with a Generall Councill this Iudge is always infallible Staplet on saith that the foundation of our Religion is placed of necessitie vpon the authority of this manâ— teaching in whom wee heare God himselfe speaking And another of them saith Si toâ—us mundus sententiaret contra Papam If the whole world should determine against the Pope yet we must stand to his sentence To conclude the Canon Law saith that it were heresie to thinke that our Lord God the Pope might not decree as hee doth yea that his rescripts and decretall Epistles are not Canonicall Scripture 34. Thus we see the Pope is that which they meane by the Church and he is the onely compendious Iudge and therefore when they talke of the Church it is but a vayne vaunt for when all comes to all they entend nothing by the Church but their Lord God the Pope as the Canonists call him who is ens secundae intentionis compofitum ex Deo homine Abeing of the second intention compounded of God and man and quasi Deus in terris c. as it were a God vpon earth greater then man and lesse then God hauing the fulnesse of power Now by this that hath beene said the truth of my second proposition doth euidently appeare to wit that the Romanists will allow no other Iudges in matter of controuersie but themselues alone and so giue iust cause to all that are not blinded with errour at least to suspect their Religion if not vtterly to abandon it which is the conclusion necessarily following vpon these premises 35. Which that it is of most necessarie consequence appeareth by this because it is against all reason that the same should be both the party and the Iudge yea in equity is it fit that we should stand to his iudgement whom we accuse to be a falsifier of the Scripture and euen Antichrist himselfe or that that Church should bee our Church which wee affirme and proue to be an Apostate and an harlot seeing that a Iudge should be indifferent and vnpartiall and not a party as the Church and Pope of Rome is in all cases of controuersie depending betwixt them and vs as for example in the controuersie of the Church the question being which is the true Church The Iudge to determine thereof we say is the Scripture they cry The Church meaning their owne Church as I haue shewed Doe they not by their doctrine aduance themselues into the tribunall seate and make their Church the Iudge whether it bee the Church or no so in the question touching the Popes Supremacy who shall be Iudge whether this supreme power be in the Pope or no Mary the Pope himselfe for they admit no other Iudge Sure he must needes gaine the cause when hee is thus his owne Iudge If this bee not a plaine tergâ—ueâ—sâ—tion I know not what is if this doth not bewray the weakenesse of their cause let any indifferent man consider and giue sentence 36. For as on ourside in the question of the Kings Supremacie whether euery King in his owne dominion bee the supreme Gouernour of the Church vnder Christ or no if wee should in this case admit no Iudge but the King himselfe Or in the question of our Church whether wee be the true Church of Christ or no if wee should refuse all other triall saue that which ariseth from the iudgement of our owne Church and the Bishops and Prelates thereof would not all men laugh at our folly and thinke our cause weake and desperate So may all men thinke of the Romish Religion that it be wrayeth manifest folly in the maintayners and apparent weakenesse in the grounds thereof in that it will not bee iudged but by itselfe especially seeing it is the property of selfe-loue whereof no man liuing is freed to make men blinde in their owne causes and partiall on their owne sides To conclude therefore as the Lion in Esope that challenged to himselfe the whole prey that was caught and would not stand to the equall partition of his fellow-hunters proued himselfe thereby to be a tyrant and his title naught so the Pope of Rome and his Proctours in refusing to be iudged by any saue themselues and by that right clayming a title to the truth discouereth both his tyrannie ouer the Church of God and the holy Scriptures and the badnesse of his weake cause seeing truth like a chaste matrone though it be slandered yet is so bold and powerfull that it feareth not to bee tried by those that are the greatest enemies thereof Spectatum admissirisum teneatis amici MOTIVE VI. That Religion doth iustly deserue to bee suspected which doth purposely disgrace the sacred Scriptures But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo c. OVr Aduersaries may fitly be likened to churlish and angrie Mastifes whose property it is to rend with their teeth those that are vnarmed and not able to resist but if they meet with an armed man that can keepe them off and entertaine them with sharpe blowes then they wreak all their teene vpon the cudgell or weapon wherewith they are annoyed so they seeing themselues well banged and beaten by our men at Armes I meane our Champions that defend the quarrell of our Church with the staffe of the Scripture and their hairy scalpes wounded with the stones fetcht out of Dauids scrip fall a snarling and biting the staffe and the stones which haue beene the instruments of their sorrow whereas if they finde any without a staffe in his hand or a stone in his sling that is vnfurnished with Scripture to fight with them ouer him they domineere take him captiue and leade him to their denne for a prey This their malice against the sacred Scripture which is the only engine of their destruction I hope by Gods fauourable assistance so to discouer in this Chapter that they themselues shall euer bee reputed as blasphemers of the truth and their religion as odious and abominable to all posterity 2. The Maior or first proposition in this demonstration though it bee of an vndoubted truth yet for the greater illustratio thereof two poynts are to be considered first what this Scripture is which is opposed against and secondly what they are to be esteemed which oppose themselues vnto the Scripture The Scripture contained in the Olde and new Testament is in a word the holy and sacred word of the eternall God which to haue said of it is an ascription of the greatest dignitie vnto it as can bee deuised for if it bee the holy and sacred word of the eternall God then must it needs be perfect excellent pure vpright cleane permanent wife sweet and what else may be spoken for the setting forth of the excellency of a thing all which attributes are giuen
New Testament many things are wanting What can be more plaine Yet Lindanus is more plaine for he calleth Traditionem non scriptam c. The vnwritten tradition that Homericall moly which preserueth the Christian faith against the inchantments of Heretikes and the true touch-stone of true false doctrine and the Aâ—acian buckler to be opposed to all Heretikes and in conclusion the very foundation of faith To this fellow adioyne Melchior Canus as a coÌ„panion in blasphemy who saith That many things belong to Christian faith which are contained in the Scripture neither openly nor obscurely To conclude all in one summe without any further repetition of priuate mens opinions wherein much time might be spent the voyce of their whole Church represented in the Councill of Trent is this That traditions are to bee receaued pari pietate with the same reuerence and affection wherwith wee receiue the Scripture it selfe Thus wee haue a view of the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the insufficiency of the holy Scripture both in part and whole Out of all which these two impious conclusions doe necessarily arise First that traditions vnwritten are equall if not superiour in dignity and authority to the written word of God and secondly that without the helpe of them it is not able to bring vs either to a sauing faith in this life or to the end of our faith in the life to come then both which what could be spoken more iniurious either to the Word it self or to the Maiestie of that Spirit from whom it proceeded And that their blasphemy might be known â—o all men Bellarmine more like a Iulian then a Christian doth not onely affirme the Scripture to be vnsufficient and imperfect but also not simply necessary and to that end he maketh a good round discourse and bringeth in long Leaden arguments which indeed are not worth the answering for they are meere sophisticall collusions as any one of meane iudgement may easily discerne Neuerthelesse by this we may see what an honourable opinion and affection these fellowes beare towards the Scripture when as they dare to affirme that they are not simply necessary but may bee wanting and remoued without any great hurt to the Church of God 12. The third iniurious doctrine whereby open disgrace is offered to the holy Scripture is concerning the authority thereof compared with the Church for this they teach and hold That the authority of the Scripture doth depend vpon the Church and not the Church vpon the Scripture And so by consequent that the Scripture is inferiour to the Church and not the Church to the Scripture whereas we on the contrary affirme and defend that the Church wholly dependeth both for authoritie and existency vpon the Scripture and so is euery way inferiour to the Scripture and not the Scripture vpon the Church 13. This blasphemie of theirs may more euidently be discerned if we obserue what they vnderstand by the Church to wit not the Primitiue Church which was in the time and immediately after the Apostles but the succeeding and present Church and that not the whole Catholicke Church which is dispersed ouer the world but the Church of Rome which holdeth vpon the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and in this Church not the whole body but the Pastours and Prelates assembled in a Councill yea and lastly not the Councill neither but the Pope who is totus in toto all in all and in whome all the members meete and resolue themselues as lines in the center as is before declared This is their Church and to this Church of theirs they subiect the Scriptures euen the word of God to the Pope of Rome that is God himselfe to a mortall sinnefull man For as Nilâ—â— the Archbishop of Thessalonica saith To accuse the Scripture is to accuse God so to debase the Scripture is to debase God 14. That wee may see this to be true and that wee lay no false imputation to their charge heare them speake in their owne words and let Bellarmine leade the Ring If we take away saith he the authoritie of the present Church and of the Councill of Trent then the whole Christian faith may bee called in question for the truth of all ancient Councils and of all poynts of faith depend vpon the authority of the present Church of Rome Marke he saith not vpon the authority of the Scripture but of the present church of Rome where he doth manifestly preferre the authority of the Church before the Scripture not onely of the Church but of the Church of Rome as if there were no Church but that and not the Church of Rome as it was in the purer and primer times but the present Church corrupted and depraued with infinite errours Againe in another place he concludeth That the Scriptures doe depend vpon the Church and not the Church on the Scriptures which position he confesseth in the same place to haue beene in other places maintained by him And yet elsewhere he disclaimeth this opinion as none of theirs and calleth it a blasphemy that it is his I haue shewed already though he be ashamed of it as he may well be and therefore exore suo by his owne iudgement he and all the rest are guilty of most grosse and intolerable blasphemie But that you may see that it is the generall receiued doctrine of them all for the most part heare others as well as him vttering their spleene against the Scriptures Siluester Prierias saith that Indulgences are warranted vnto vs not by the authority of the Scripture but by the authority of the Church and Pope of Rome which is greater And againe That the Scripture draweth it strength and authority from the Church and Bishop of Rome Eckius saith that the Scripture was not authentical but by the authority of the Church and putteth this proposition among hereticall assertions The authority of the Scripture is greater then the Church Pighius also affirmeth the same that all the authoritie of Scriptures doth necessarily depend vpon the authority of the Church and calleth all that hold the contrary in scorne Scriptuarij that is Scripture-men or such as maintaine the Scripture Cardinall Hosius goeth further and commendeth a blasphemous speech of one Hermannus as a godly saying That the Scriptures are of no more force then Aesops Fables without the testimonie of the Church and addeth presently of his owne that vnlesse the Churches authority did commend vnto vs the Canonicall Scripture it should bee of little account with vs. The like is deliuered by Coclaeus by Canus Stapleton Andradius Canisius and generally all other of that side that handle that question 15. Onely to palliate the matter they bring in a distinction to wit that this dependance of the Scriptures authority vpon the Church is quoad nos in respect of vs not quâ—adse in respect of it selfe and declaratiuè for declaration sake
not effectiuè as the cause thereof which distinction first implieth a contradiction for the authority of a thing is quoad extra in respect of others not quoad intra in respect of it selfe that is rather to be termed dignitie and excellencie then authority secondly that being granted yet it importeth a falshoode in them and concludeth directly our purpose for by it the last resolut on of our faith should not bee into the Scripture but into the authority of the Church which is contrary both to truth and to their owne principles For why doe they attribute that infallible authority to the Church but because the Scripture saith so as they themselues acknowledge And then to affirm that the Church is of greater authority in respect of vs is sufficient to â—uince that in respect of vs they preferre the Church before the Scripture What is this but to offer open iniury and disgrace to the holy Scripture especially seeing a Iesuite of their own is bold to say that a man may mordicus tenere and propugnare acerrimè strongly hold stoutly maintaine a doctrine contrary to the word of God and yet bee no Heretike vnlesse the opposite to that opinion be defined by the Church in his time 16. The fourth and last doctrine whereby they offer iniurie to the Scripture is this That the Pope may dispense with the Law of God This the Popes vassals do not onely affirme but euen confirme and auouch For thus they teach Potestas in diuinas leges ordinariè in Romano Pontifice residet Power ouer the lawes of God remaineth ordinarily in the Pope of Rome and that the Pope may dispense against the Apostles yea against the new Testament vpon great cause and also against all the precepts of the olde Testament The reason whereby they confirme this braue doctrine is this that where the reason of the law faileth there the Pope may dispense but the reason of the law always faileth where he iudgeth it to faile for speaking definitiuely he cannot erre therefore the Pope may dispense with the precepts of the Olde New Testament where and when he list Now what can be more iniurious to the Scripture then this for first they set the Pope aboue the scriptures because he that taketh vpon him to dispense with the law of another challengeth to himselfe a greater authority then the other according as their owne rule is In praecepto superioris non debet dispensare inferior The inferiour may not dispense with the commandement of the superiour Secondly they equall him to God himselfe for whereas there is no exception nor exemption from the law of God but this Nisi deus aliter voluerit Except God otherwise appoynt they instead thereof put in this exception Nisi Papa aliter voluerit And lastly they make the law of God a maimed an imperfect law in that as their diuinity is it cannot giue sufficient direction to mans life for practice of duties and auoyding of sinnes in all cases without the Poprs dispensation and the interposition of his superwise authority 17. From their iniurious doctrines lâ—t vs come to their malicious practice against the Scripture that both by their precepts and practice their enmity to the Scriptures may fully appeare First therefore whereas the language wherein the Scriptures were originally written is indeed the true Scriptures because that is the immediate dialect of the holy Ghost and the translations of it into other tongues are no farther to bee regarded then as they agree with the originall yet the Church of Rome in the Councill of Trent hath canonized the vulgar Latine aboue the Hebrew and Greeke and hath â—nâ—oyned it onely to be vsed in all readings disputations sermons and expositions and not to be reiected vnder any pretence whatsoeuer vpon paine of Anathema Yea Bellarmine with the rest of that crue accuse the Greeke and Hebrew of many corruptions and iustifie the vulgar Latine aboue them as most free from corruptions whereas notwithstanding for one corruption which they would saine fasten vpon them there are to be found twenty in this and that by the confession of many learned of their owne side 18. Besides those corruptions which are supposed to be in the originals are either none at all as may easily be prooued and is already sufficiently by our learned Diuines or else such as are not of that weight to derogate from the perfection of the Scripture in things pertaining to faith and good manners as Posseuine and Sixtus Senensis confesse or at least are but errours of the Writers which no Booke is free from growing either from humane infirmity or from the mistaking of the letters in the Greeke and prickes in the Hebrew which last is but a late inuention of the Massorites and no essentiall part of the Text whereas on the contrary the errours which are extant iâ— the vulgar Latine are many of them contrary to the grounds of faith as that one for all in the third of Genesis where the Latine readeth ipsa conteret caput tuum she shall bruise thy head which they apply vnto the Virgin Marie being in the originall ipse his and in the Septuagâ—nt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Hee vnderstanding Christ our Sauiour Here wee see a fundamentall poynt of saith ouerthrowne not onely in accommodating a Prophecy of Christ vnto the Virgin his mother but also in ascribing vnto her the worke of our RedeÌ„ption signified by the bruising of the Serpents head And as in this so in many other places which I willingly for breuitie sake â—uerpasse And yet for all this by their doctrine and practice their Latine Translation is onely authenticall Yea so impudent is a Bishop of theirs that setting forth the Bible in diuers Languages he placeth the vulgar Latine betwixt the Hebrew and the Greeke as Christ betwixt two theeues as blasphemouslâ— he speaketh This is therefore a notable iniuricus practice of theirs against the Scripture 19. To which adde second no whâ—t inferiour to the former which â—â— their forbidding the Scripture to bee translated into the mother tongue of euery Nation to the end that it may be to the common people as a Booke sealed vp and that they might not reade nor be exercised therein This prohibition is both contrary to the practice of all the Saints of God both vnder the Law and the Gospell for it was their daily exercise to meditate vpon the Law of God continually and to search the Scriptures whether those things which they heard were so or no and to the plaine precept of Christ and the Apostle bidding vs to search the Scriptures and to haue the word of God to dwell plentiously in vs and to the doctrine of all the ancient Fathers who with one consent exhort and perswade to the diligent reading of them as may appeare by the places quoted in the margent And beside is most iniurious to the Scriptures themselues
with Hierome and Iustine Martyr and when he entred into the house the dores being shut that the dores and walls yeelded vnto him a passage as vnto their Creator with Theodoret and Cyrill and that when hee appeared vnto Paul going to Damascus if it was in the aire or on the earth as it may be doubted that then this body was not in heauen at the same instant for farre bee it from vs so to pin vp our Lord in the Heauens that he cannot be where he pleaseth And this is Thomas Aquinas opinion in expresse words which Bellarmine as expresly contradicteth 15. Thirdly by discourse of reason hee thus laboureth to reconcile these contradictions and thus disputeth God being but one simple and inuisible essence is in infinite places at once and he might create another world and fill it with his presence and be in two worlds at one instant and the soule of man is wholy in euery part of the body and God is able to conserue the soule in a part that is cut off from the body therefore it implieth no contradiction to be in two places at once againe one place may containe two bodies and yet be not two places but one as when Christ rose out of the graue the Sepulchre being shut therefore one body may be in two places at once and yet not two bodies but one Lastly there be many other mysteries of religion as strange and difficult to be conceiued as this and yet are beleeued therefore this also is to be beleeued as well as they 16. A miserable cause sure that needeth such defences the weakenesse of these reasons argueth the feeblenesse of the cause for who knoweth not but that there is no similitude betweene the infinite God and a finite Creature nor any proportion betwixt a Spirit and a body and that à posse ad esse from may bee to must bee is no good consequence Adde that one place cannot hold two bodies nor euer did except they were so vnited that in respect of place they made but one And lastly that all those mysteries of Religion which he nameth to wit the Trinity the Incarnation the Resurrection the Creation and Annihilation c. haue their foundation in holy Scripture and therefore are to be receiued as doct ines of truth though transcending the spheare of nature and reason but this strange mysterie of Transubstantiation hath no ground in Scripture as he himselfe confesseth and therefore it is not to be beleeued as the other are without better reasons then he bringeth for the defence thereof but like lips like lettuces such as the cause is such are the defences both nought and weake as any man may see that is not muffled with errour and thus this second contradiction remaines irreconciliable 17. A third contradiction is also in and about the Sacrament which is this they teach that the matter in Sacrament is partly the outward Elements and partly the thing signified and represented by them and that betwixt these there is a certaine relation and similitude as in Baptisme the outward signe which is water and the thing signified which is the bloud of Christ make the matter of that Sacrament or the outward wasting by water and the inward by the Spirit and the relation is as the water washeth and purgeth away all filthinesse of the body so Christs bloud purgeth away both the guilt and filth of sinne from the soule and so in the Eucharist the Elements of Bread and Wine together with the bodie and bloud of Christ are the matter of the Sacrament and the relation is as those elements doe feed nourish and strengthen and cheare the bodie of man so the body and bloud of Christ doe seed nourish and strengthen and cheare the soule vnto eternall life and as those elements must be eaten and digested or else they nourish not so Christ must also be eaten and as it were digested and after a sort conuerted into our substance or else he is no food vnto our soules This is the very doctrine of the Church of Rome and it is agreeable to the truth for Bellarmine thus speaketh Species illae significant quidem cibum spiritualem sed non sunt ipsae cibus spiritualis that is The signes in the Scrament signifie our spirituall foode but they are not the spirituall foode it selfe And in another place he saith that signum in Sacramento reisignatae similitudinem gerit The signes in the Sacrament doe beare the similitude of the thing signified And in the same Chapter hee sayth more plainely that God would neuer haue ordained one thing to signifie another vnlesse it had a certaine analogie or similitude with it And herein he accordeth with the Master of sentences who defines a Sacrament thus To be a visible forme of an inuisible grace bearing the Image of that grace And with Hugo who saith That a Sacrament is a corporall or materiall element propounded outwardly to the senses by similitude representing and by institution signifying and by Sanctification containing some inuisible and spirituall grace And that this relation is in eating and nourishing Bellarmine in another place confesseth in direct words when he saith that That same outward eating in the Sacrament doth signifie the inward eating and refreshing of the soule but is not the cause thereof and that that is so necessarie a condition that without it we should not be partakers of that diuine nourishment And to this agreeth Saint Augustine who plainely affirmeth that if Sacraments had not a certaine similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they were not Sacraments at all And what this similitude is he declareth in another place where hee saith that We receaue visible meate in the Sacrament but the Sacrament is one thing and the vertue of the Sacrament is another And Thomas Aquinas giueth this as a reason why Bread and Wine are the fittest matter of this Sacrament because men most commonly are nourished therewith his words are these As water is assumed in the Sacrament of Baptisme to the vse of spirituall washing because corporall washing is commonly made by water so bread and wine wherewith most commonly men are nourished are taken vp in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to the vse of the spirituall eating By which it followeth that if water did not wash it was no fit element for the Sacrament of Baptisme so if bread and wine doe not nourish they are no fit signes for the Lords Supper and for this cause our Sauiour at the institution of this Sacrament gaue this commandement to his Disciples that they should take and eate and the Apostle calleth it the Lords Supper and the Lords Table 18. This therefore is their own doctrine and it is grounded vpon the truth But listen a little how they contradict this by their miraculous monster Transubstantiation for when they say that the substance of the bread and wine is vtterly
haue no colour of defence And so this doctrine doth not onely vphold ignorance in the simple but also herefie among the learned As for example to prooue the intercession and patronage of the Virgine Mary they alledge that text of Genesis falsely translated Ipsa conteret caput Serpentis She shall bruise the Serpents head whereas the Hebrew truth hath most euidently He or It meaning the Seede of the woman and not Shee Againe to prooue their Masse Sacrifice they alledge that of Gen. 14. 18. Melchizedek obtulit panem vinum erat enim sacerdos whereas in the Hebrew text is no word that signifieth to offer but to bring foorth and the coniunction causall is also wanting They extenuate originall sinne by the corrupt translation of that text Gen. 8. 21. For whereas in the originall it is Figmentum cordis est tantum malum The frame of the heart is onely euill their translation hath The cogitation of mans heart is prore vnto euill To prooue their inuocation of Saints they obiect that of Iobs thus translated Ad aliquem Sanctorum conuertere which in the Hebrew is not an affirmatiue proposition but an Ironical Interrogation thus To which of the Saint wilt thou turne To proue that no man can be sure of the remission of his sinnes and saluation they alledge that corrupted text Eccles 9. 1. Nescit homo vtrum amore vel odio dignus sit whereas in the originall it is nothing but thus No man knoweth loue or hatred all things are before him That their Church cannot erre they labour to prooue by the promise of our Sauiour Ioh. 14. 26. where their translation thus speaketh Spiritus sanctus suggeret vobis omnia quaeâ—unque dixerâ— vobis but in the originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quaecunque dixi vobis Whatsoeuer I haue told you That Matrimony is a Sacrament they prooue by that place Ephes 5. 32. where their translation hath a Sacrament for a Mysterie So for their Merite of works they produce Heb. 13. where in their translation the word Merite is vsed which is not extant in the Greeke So to prooue that after Baptisme there remaine no Relikes of sinne they vse that text Heb. 9. 28. Christus semel oblatus est ad multorum exhaurienda peccata now where all is drawne out there nothing remaineth and yet in the originall there is no such word Lastly the Councill of Trent it selfe to prooue that the Church may dispense with the Sacraments contrary to Christs institution and alter them abuseth that text 1. Cor. 4. 1. where the Ministers are called Dispensatores mysteriorum Dei whereas the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth no such matter Thus wee â—ee great cause why they should stand vpon this vulgar Latine onely because it affoords vnto them such pregnant proofes for the defence of their grosse errors It defends them and their errors therefore they haue reason to defend it And thus by forbidding the Scriptures to bee read of the people they multiply ignorance and by allowing onely their Latine translation for authenticall they hatch heresie 14. Secondly their doctrine which commandeth Prayers to be made publikely and priuately in an vnknowne tongue tendeth to the same end for though touching priuate prayers they agree not amongst themselues some affirming that the people ought not to say their Pater noster Aâ—e Maria and Mattens in any tongue but the Latine because this hath beene the ancient custome of the Church as they pretend Others that it is lawfull to pray in our natiue tongues but yet if we doe pray in Latine it is not vnfruitfull Notwithstanding their continuall practice sheweth their most approoued opinion for among them all you shall hardly finde one in an age that vseth any other but Latine prayers but as for publike prayers in the Church it is the doctrine of the Councill of Trent armed with a curse that no part of the Diuine Seruice and publike Leiturgie bee celebrated in a knowne tongue Now how can this but noozle the people in ignorance when they are taught to babble out in their deuotions like Parrats without vnderstanding what they say Surely this must needes bee a blinde deuotion and an ignorantzeale when the tongue shall pray or rather prate and the heart not vnderstand what it vttereth for if true deuotion be a religious offering vp of the whole man both body and soule and euery facultie and part of both to God by way of spirituall sacrifice then certainely that cannot bee true deuotion but blinde delusion when the affection and the tongue shall bee lifted vp in prayer and in the meane while the vnderstanding shall be idle not knowing what the affection and tongue doth seeing the proper worke of the intellectiue part of the soule is to know and vnderstand which by this meanes it is depriued of And this is that which both Aquinas their Angelicall Doctor purposely confesseth and Rabbi Bellarmine also himselfe though vnawares for the one saith that he which vnderstandeth not what he prayeth is depriued of the fruit of his deuotion and the other that except the prayer be vnderstood no consolation at all can be reaped thereby Ignorance therefore must needes bee cherished by this doctrine seeing the vnderstanding which is the seat of knowledge is muffled and the best fruit that can arise hence-from is blinde zeale and ignorant deuotion by which the Iewes crucified Christ the Gentiles persecuted the Church of Christ and taught that in so doing they did God good seruice for deuotion without zeale is like an Arrow shot out of a childs Bow which falleth to the ground without doing hurt or good and zeale without knowledge is like a Shippe carryed with full winde and displayed Sailes without a Pilot to sterne and guide it in the right course 15. Thus for the maine doctrine Now the accessarie attending vpon it is more dangerous then the maine it selfe for they are taught not onely thus to pray but that these prayers are meritorious of saluation and that hee which saith a certaine number of them shall haue thus many dayes and thus many yeeres pardon as 3000. dayes for saying a short prayer in the Primer ten thousand dayes for saying fiue Pater nosters before the Vernacle twenty thousand dayes for saying a short prayer at the Leuation yea a hundred yeeres for saying our Ladyes Psalter euery Saturday yea fiue hundred yeeres for saying a short prayer which Saint Gregory made and a number such like as hath beene before sufficiently discouered Now if pardon of sinnes and saluation may be merited by mumbling vp euery day on their Beades these short and vncouth prayers what need any seeke for further knowledge in the word of God If these bee sufficient as they make the people beleeue then all further instruction must needs be thought vnnecessary and so it cannot choose but follow that a deluge of blindnesse
vsed by Christ himselfe or his Apostles and therefore must of necessity be grosse and palpable Innouations 29. From the Eucharist let vs looke backe to the ceremonies of Baptisme and first to their baptizing of Bels and of Gallies and Ships secondly exorcisme and exufflation thirdly anointing with oyle and crossing and fourthly salting and spittling lastly threefold Immersion or dipping the Infant all which are palpable nouelties so confessed by the Romanists themselues neither can they euer shew that these ceremonies were either commanded by Christ or practised by Iohn Baptist or the Apostles and though some of them as the crosse and anointing are of great antiquity and were then and may bee still lawfully vsed as things indifferent yet in their Church where such an opinion of necessity is laid vpon them that Baptisme is not effectuall without them they are meere Innouations no wayes warranted by any antiquity 30. Lastly I propound as their feasting so their fasting dayes together with the manner of fasting vsed amongst them as first the Lent fast of fourty dayes which their Iesuite Azorius confesseth not to bee of diuine ordinance and the variablenesse of the vse thereof doth prooue no lesse some Churches continuing the same full sixe weeks as the Illyrians Lybians Egypt and Palestina some seuen weekes as they of Constantinople with the nations adioyning some but three weekes and those dispersed within the six or seuen as occasion serued some againe three weekes immediatly going before Easter and lastly some two onely as the followers of Montanus all this is recorded by Sozomene in his History by which it is euidently euinced that this fast was no Apostolicall institution nor yet any childe of true antiquity for if it had there could not haue beene any such variety in the obseruation thereof 31. Secondly their fast of 4. times coÌ„monly called Ember weekes was first deuised by Pope Calixtus as would witnes Polidore Virgill if he were not gelded by these strange bookpurgers but though he be silent yet their own Platina telleth asmuch Thirdly their tying of fasts to certaine set dayes as the fourth and sixt day of the weeke was not allowed in Saint Augustines time for hee thus writeth against Vrbicus that stroue for the Saturdayes fast I read in deed that wee are commanded to fast but which ought to bee the dayes of our fasting I finde not prescribed in the Euangelicall or Apostolicall writings nor in his scholler Primasius his age for thus sayth he There is no Law set down concerning fasting but as euery man can or will nor in Socrates time who liued about the yeere 440. for hee plainly testifieth that the rites and obseruations of fasting were by the Apostles left to euery mans free liberty and choyce 32. Lastly their manner of fasting which is twice to refresh their bodies on the fasting day at noone by a small dinner and at night by a short supper Bellarmine himselfe confesseth to bee contrary to the ancient custome which was to eate but one meale on the fast day and that a supper and doth also giue diuers reasoÌ„s of this mutatioÌ„ As first that thogh it bee tolerated in their Church yet it is not commanded Secondly that those customes which are not grounded vpon Gods word may by ecclesiasticall Lawes bee varyed according to the diuersity of time place thirdly that when the ancients broke off their fast at the ninth houre they vsed to dyne at the sixt that is noone and therefore when as many doe ordinarily dyne at the third houre they may by like proportion breake off their fast at the sixt these be Bellarmines reasons to maintaine this Innouation whereby we may both behold what silly props hee hath to vphold his rotten cause and also that by his owne confession this is a meere nouelty and therefore he concludes that notwithstanding these forenamed reasons yet they doe better who after the ancient custome eate nothing till the ninth houre and in Lent till the euening And thus wee see how in the principall ceremonies of their Church they haue degenerate from the vsage and custome of all pure antiquity 33. Thus much of the outward face of their Church Now let vs examine a little their doctrines wherein they differ from vs which are the sinewes and nerues thereof here I might referre the Reader ouer vnto our learned and godly Country-man Doctour White lately deceased who in his high-way to the true Church obiecteth eight points wherein the moderne Church of Rome hath varyed from that which formerly was maintained notwithstanding I will also a little touch vpon the same strings adding somewhat more both in points and proofes then is there deliuered that the Reader may haue also heere some satisfaction concerning these matters 34. First therefore it is an article of the Romish faith that the Virgin Mary whom wee honour as a blessed woman and the mother of our Lord was conceiued and borne without the staine of originall sinne This doctrine was decreed 〈◊〉 an article of faith in the Councill of Basill in the yeere 1431. and afterwards was approoued by the Councill of Trent and by Pope Sixtus the fourth yea and all that take any degree in the profession of diuinity in the vniuersity of Paris first sweare that they will defend this prerogatiue of the Virgin Mary Now that this is a nouelty appeareth first because it was not receiued as an article of faith before the Councill of Basill Secondly because the Fathers generally either vtterly denie it to bee a truth or at least doubt of it Saint Chrysostome sâ—â—tly denyeth it Saint Bernard calleth it in plaine termes a nouelty Caietane reckoneth fifteene fathers to haue beene of a contrary opinion others two hundreth others three hundreth as witnesseth Salmeron the Iesuite and lastly Canus peremptorily affirmeth that all the Fathers contradicted it And it is to be noted that whereas Bellarmine produceth twelue Fathers for the proofe thereof not one of them doe directly affirme it except one or two Thirdly because the Elder Schoolemen with one consent disapprooued it as Dominicus Bannes Turrecremata Thomas Aquinas Bonauenture and others in so much that in this point they are driuen to this grosse shift That yonger diuines are more apprehensiue of truths then were the more ancient Doctours Bellarmine I confesse in this point accuseth vs of slendering their doctrine because hee sayth it was neuer held in their Church as an article of saith as wee say it is but by his leaue if it was the decree of one Councill though not confirmed by the Pope as he saith the Councill of Basill was not and was allowed by another Councill confirmed by the Pope to wit the Councill of Trent as an holy opinion and agreeable to the Catholike faith and approued by diuers Popes as hee confesseth and defended generally in their Church not onely by doctrine but by a solemne obseruation of a festiuall day in memoriall
high Priest of the world much like to King Alexanders Bucephalus which being bare would carry any groome quietly but when his trappings and furniture was on then hee would endure none but Alexander The writer of the life of Saint Bernard relateth a pretty wonder done by that holy man at the dedication of a Church when as the place was so filled with multitude of flies that the people could not enter into it without great annoyance Saint Bernard vsing no other meanes to destroy them said onely I excommunicate them and presently the next morning they were all found dead on the floore Doth this sauour of Saint Bernards holinesse or can any man bee so madde as to thinke that so holy a man would denounce excommunication ordained to separate from the Congregation open and sinfull men against poore silly flies sure hee hath no more wit then a flye that will beleeue this so that notwithstanding the ancient miracles recorded by the Fathers yet the Legendary Romish miracles are not freed from grosse and notorious falshood 27. Another practice of theirs to win credit to their Religion and disgrace to ours is slaundering and calumniating both our Religion and the professours thereof and that so grossely and falsely that their owne consciences could not chuse but say secretly vnto their tongues thou lyest when they were writing them in their bookes but they deale like theeues who to cleare themselues from suspition of robbery raise vp hue and cry against true men or like harlots that lay the imputation of dishonestie vpon sober matrones to the end that they themselues might bee thought chast and honest so beeing full of sores and blemishes themselues they seeke to couer their owne shame by discouering ours Which if it were in truth though their enuy was neuer the lesse yet their sinne was not so great but beeing notorious and outragious lyes they plainely show that they care not what they belch foorth so they staine vs with the filth thereof and that they haue learned that Maâ—chauillian rule audacter calumniari to slander boldly because though the wound bee healed yet a scarre remaineth 28. Their slanders are darted either against our persons or the gouernment of our Church or our doctrines let vs take a short view of all these and first for their personall slanders they slander all of vs in generall with the ignominious titles of solifidians nullifidians nudifidians Infidels worse then Turkes c. yea and say that wee haue no faith no Religion no Christ no God and what not that either malice can deuise or enuy and rage vtter These slanderous reproches are set abroach by rayling Parsons in his booke of the three conuersions and almost in all other of his discourses and by Mathew Kellison who was of a sudden start vp from spigget to the Pulpit a buttery diuine and by Wright another of the same stampe and by Reynolds and Bellarmine and Beran and Coster and all the brood of ranke mouthed Iesuites who as if they were all bitten with one madde dog raue alike against our Religion and the professours thereof but God bee praised with euill successe for their calumnies are so transparent that he that doth but meanly vnderstand the grounds of our Religion cannot but turne the lie vpon their heads 29. But let vs heare their reasons why we are all Infidels mary they propound two principall ones and those very strong as they thinke first they say that all learned Protestants are Infidels because they build their faith vpon their owne priuate exposition of Scripture and secondly that ignorant Protestants are Infidels because they rely their faith vpon their Ministers credit To the first I answere two things first that wee doe not interpret the Scripture by our own priuate iudgements but by the Scripture it selfe for some places are so plaine those principally that contain the grounds of Religion that they need no exposition as Saint Augustine witnesseth saying that quaedam in Scripturis c. There be some things in the Scripture so manifest that they require rather a hearer then an expounder and what those things are the same father declareth in another place where he sayth that in those things which are plainely set downe in Scripture are found all those points which containe faith and manners and those things which are obscure and hard in Scripture we do not expound by any forraine or priuate interpretation but by conferring them with other more plaine and perspicuous places and so except they say that the Scripture it selfe is of a priuate interpretation they cannot condemne vs of that crime Now that this is the best way of interpreting let the same Augustine informe vs who sayth That there is nothing contained in hard places of Scripture which is not to be found most plainely vttered in others and Chrysostome who affirmeth that the Scripture expoundeth it selfe and suffereth not the Reader to erre and Basill who telleth vs that those things which be doubtfull or seeme to be couertly spoken in some places of holy Scripture are expounded by other plaine places Of the same minde are the rest of the Fathers and so wee expound the Scripture no otherwise then all the ancient Fathers vsed to doe and then indeed it ought to be 30. I but wee follow not the iudgement of the Church say they which hath the onely key of interpretation committed vnto it if they meane by the Church the fathers we may iustify our selues by condemning them of the same fault they deale with them as the Iewes dealt with their wiues if they please their humors they hold vnto them but if they crosse or thwart them they sue out a bill of diuorce against them and put them away nothing is more common then this in all their writings and therefore it needs no instances to prooue it if they meane the Councils why by their owne teaching no Councill is of sufficient authority except it bee confirmed by the Pope nor any decree or interpretation to bee entertained without his approbation Therefore they must needs meane the Pope alone and if they doe so then we confesse that wee haue iust causes not to tye our faith to his girdle nor our vnderstanding to his braine seeing many of that ranke haue beene open Heretikes some notorious Atheists all men and therefore subiect to errour yea seeing the body of their Church is an Apostate harlot and the surmised head on earth that man of sinne the great Antichrist spoken of in the Scriptures If to vary from him then and his Babylon in our exposition of Scripture bee priuate interpretation wee confesse our selues guilty but in all other respects cleare and innocent 31. Secondly grant that wee doe in some points follow on our owne priuate exposition yet wee are not therefore Infidels for then most of the Fathers should bee infidels aswell as wee for there are few of them which haue not sometimes priuately vea and falsely