that doth believe that Popery is the most abominable Idolatry imaginable to wit to worship the handy-work of the Baker and wood and stone c. and considers what severe threatnings he hath denounced against Idolatry namely That they shal be shut out of that New Jerusalem Rev. 22.15 and shal drink of the wine of the wrath of GOD and shal be tormented day and night before the holy Angels and before the Lamb and the smoke of their torment shal ascend for evermore and they shal have no rest Rev. 14.9 And that he is a jealous GOD visiting not only this iniquity of Idolatry upon themselves but likewise upon their children to the third and fourth generation and is not much troubled to hear and see so many souls seduced and led aside thereto and doth not judge it of his concernment to lay out himself to the utmost for discovering the snare pit that is laid for entraping and ruining eternally of poor souls Therefore we hope as our endeavors shal be peace to us so we hope it shal be acceptable to all the lovers of truth That this prayerful Treatise of that great wrestler with GOD may be blessed for convincing of gain-sayers informing establishing and confirming the LORDS people in the truth and for stirring up and awaking zeal love and repentance in the godly shal be the earnest prayer of Your servant for CHRISTS sake MATT. CRAFORD TO THE RIGHT EXCELLENT AND MIGHTY PRINCE JAMES THE VI. KING OF SCOTLAND c. Grace and Peace be multiplied I Hope it shal not be accounted presumption most Noble Prince to offer to your Majesty the first fruits of these my simple and rude labors seeing the cause is JESVS CHRISTS that KING of Kings and LORD of glory which is here defended even the everlasting truth of GOD against the venimous stings of one of the Locusts Rev. 9.3 of that Antichristian Kingdom The right whereof doth most justly belong to your Majesty both in respect of these rare and singular gifts of knowledge and understanding which the LORD hath vouchsafed upon your Majesty in such a plentiful measure that your subjects do acknowledge it at home and strangers do admire it and commend it abroad Whereby you are not only able to render a reason of that Faith which is in you 1. Pet. 3.15 but also able to stop the mouth of the adversary Tit. 1.9 and convict the gain-sayer whatsoever by that word of truth 2. Tim. 3.5 Wherewith your Majesty hath been brought up from your very infancy So that all the wise men of Babel I mean the Clergy of that Roman Harlot is not able to resist the mouth and wisdom which the Lord hath given to your Majesty And also in respect of that supereminent power as the Apostle calls it Rom. 13.1 whereby as you are most able so are you most obliged to maintain his truth propagat his Kingdom and nowrish his own Spouse which he hath purchased to himself by his own blood Acts 20.28 by the breasts of your Majesties government as it was promised of old That his Spouse should suck the breast of Kings Esa 60.16 So who is more obliged then ye Sir Who so sufficient and able every way to maintain it as ye Sir Your knowledge binds you Your profession binds you Your soveraign authority as ye are a King in Israel binds you For as the wisest King that ever was hath said and left it in writ or rather that King of Kings in him and by him Princes reign by me Prov. 8.15 Ye hold your Kingdom of him Sir and must lay down your Crown at his feet and must stand up and give a reckoning of the government of his Kingdom of the maintenance of his Truth of the nowrishing his Spouse in that day Your knowledge Sir is able to justifie it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your soveraign authority able to defend it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye have received that two-edged sword of Gods Spirit in your mouth able to wound Heb. 4.12 yea to consume that man of sin and son of perdition Ye have received that sword of justice and judgement Rom. 13.4 in your hands able to destroy betimes all the wicked of your Kingdom and to root out from the city of the Lord all the workers of iniquity Psal 101.8 Ye know Sir the abomination of Babel Rev. 17.4.5 that as it is said of the vertuous woman Many women have done vertuously but thou surmounts them all Prov. 31.26 So the contrary may be said of her Many hereticks have taught erroneously and worshipped and wrought abominably but the whoor of Babel Rev. 17.1 the Church of Rome in heresie in abomination in idolatry hath surmounted them all that ever went before her or ever shal come after her Many beasts have spoken blasphemously Rev. 13.1.3.6 but that second beast that hath two horns like the Lamb Rev. 13. 16.13.14 17.3.4.5.6 18.24 surmounteth them all in blasphemy tyranny cruelty and abominable idolatry destroying and making merchandise of the souls of men and women Other heresies did but subvert some fundamental points of Religion but the Church of Rome hath subverted them all almost Of other heresies some was but against the Godhead of Christ other some against his manhood other some against his offices and benefits or some one head or other But the doctrine of the Church of Rome is against them all Injurious to his Godhead in making him not only inferior to the Father in teaching that he is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but also inferior to the very creatures in praying to Mary to cōmand her Son Jure Matris impera Redemptori as I heard your Majesty most solidly prove and so worse then the Arrians Injurious to his manhood to all his offices his benefits and all the means inward and outward of the knowing and applying of him And last of all injurious to his soveraign glory in communicating it to stocks and stones a piece of bread bones and ashes and the skurf skarf of all things as I hope I have made manifest in this my Answer So that most justly it is called The speach of the Dragon and the doctrine of Devils by the Spirit of God Rev. 13.11 1. Tim. 4. And if the profession of such a devilish doctrine be too great an evil what would the practise thereof be I mean the idolatrous Mass that abomination of desolation The misery alace were too great to see the people of this Countrey scattered like sheep without shepherds Matth. 9.36 dying that second and everlasting death for want of the bread of life and Gospel of salvation But this would be the misery of miseries if the golden cup of Babel full of all abominations Rev. 17.4 should be set to their head again to drink the deadly poyson of their own damnation And certainly if this famine of the Word of GOD Amos 8.11.12 whereby not only two or three Cities as the same Prophet saith ch 4.8 but twenty or
without further tryal because he hath so decreed it What is this but not only to make him equal to the Lord For God only hath that priviledge to be believed because he so speaks mans testimony so far only is to be credited as it may be warranted by the Scripture but also to preferr his authoritie to the voice of God in his Scripture seeing he is Judge of the same and not that onlie but to hang my salvation upon his voice and testimonie And seeing ye will have them Judges what is the cause that their Canons Laws and determinations are not as authentick as the Scripture and insert in the Canon of the Scripture But let us see your reasons First you say That the holy Ghost was given to the Church by the Father and the Son that he might teach it all truth I grant this that the holy Ghost is given to every one of the elect as wel Pastor as people to lead them in all truth in so far as may bring them to salvation And yet ye will not make every one of them Judges next every one of the elect may err notwithstanding of this promise suppose not totally and finally and therefore cannot be Judges of Religion Secondly you alledge the example of the Council of the Apostles and Elders It is true in that controversie that arose among the Christians concerning the observing of the ceremonies of the law of Moses that the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church after reasoning defined the same and writes the same to be observed by the Disciples everie where but first they were Apostles and was infallibly governed by Gods Spirit that they could not err in teaching and writing but your Pastors are not Apostles and may err Next they assemble with the Elders and the whole Church and all with one accord defines Acts 15.12.22.23 You in your Council excludes all except your Bishops to be ordinary Judges to give out judgement and your Popes neither Elder nor brethren having power of voting with you Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 1. Thirdly they define according to the Scripture saying As it is written c. Act. 15.15 This controversie to make us to understand if we will not be more then blind that this rule should be followed in all Councils to determine in controversies according to the Scripture Upon the which I reason if the Apostles who had that high measure of Gods Spirit which never man had since so that in writing and teaching they could not err if they I say did determine the controversies of Religion according to the Scripture how much more then are all Pastors since who may err both severally and jointly together in a Council bound to follow the same rule And whereas ye call their Elders Priests you stile them not as the holy Ghost hath stiled them there so there they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Elders and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is sacrificing Priests as ye suppone Your third reason is the practise and custom of the Church in deciding the controversies of Religion in Councils we grant that this is a very commodious mean to search and find out the truth by the Scripture For first the more they are that seek the truth it is the more easily found Next the consent of many in determining a truth will be of greater authority to repress hereticks then if it were agreed upon only by a few But yet they should determine nothing but that which is warranted by the Scripture and their determinations only in so far forth to be received as is agreeable to the same And this we grant hath been done in the Council of the primitive Church And therefore the Emperor Constantine speaking to the Fathers of the Council of Nice saith Sunt libri Prophetici Apostolici qui apertè quid credendum sit docent c. That is there are the Books of the Prophets and Apostles who teacheth plainly what we should believe All contention therefore laid aside let us take the soveraign decision of these things which are called in controversie out of the Scriptures which are inspired by God And this we grant and this we require But that Councils ought to determin any thing of their own authority in matters of Religion which binds the conscience without the warrant of the Word that we deny Master Gilbert Brown It is a wonder that M. John will refer any thing to the written Word seeing that he and his have no warrant that the same is the Word of God but by the authority of the Roman or Papist Church For understand there was no Church worthie of credit immediatly before Luther but that Church Master John Welsch his Reply You wonder that I refer any thing to the Scripture But what a wōder is this that ye are so far blinded of God that you think that a wonder in me which Abraham hath done which the Prophets have done which our Savior and his Apostles have done and which the Fathers have done for all these have referred the infallible testimony and decision of the will of God concerning his worship unto the Scriptures Luke 16 29. John 5 39. Acts 26.22 Rom. 12. and 16.26 2. Tim. 3.16 2. Pet. 1.10 Rev. 1 3. cap. ult yea which your self also hath done for ye make it a witness But what hath moved you to think this a wonder in me which so many and your self also have done before me Because say ye that he and his that is our Church have no warrant that it is the Word of God but by the authoritie of the Roman or Papist Church I grant indeed that you and your Church are plunged in this blindness and miserie that all the warrant that you have not only of the Scriptures themselves that they are inspired of God but also of all your doctrine and Religion is the testimony of your Roman Church that is of your Pope and Clergy for so ye interpret the Church So Bellarmin grants de Sacr. lib. 2. cap. 25. That all the certainty of all doctrine depends upon the authority of the present Church meaning the Pope and his Clergy And Stapleton saith lib. 1 contra Whitak de author script cap. 10. That it is no absurd thing not to believe God but for the testimony of the Church Pigius saith That it is not needful to believe all that Matthew and John writ in their Gospels to be true because that they might fail in memory and lie as all men may do Ecclesiast hierar lib. 1. cap. 2. And Hermannus saith That the Scripture would be of no more authority then the fables of Esop were not the testimony of the Church And so blind and miserable must you be that hangs the certaintie of all Religion and of man his salvation upon so smal a threed as the testimony of your Popes and Clergy What peace in conscience can any man have that professes your Religion which teaches that the
and so forth And in another place he saith Rom 7.2.3 1. Cor. 7.39 and 7.10.11 To them that be joyned in matrimony I give not command but our Lord that the wife depart not from her husband and if she depart to remain unmarried or to be reconciled to her husband And let not the husband put away his wife Now this is our Religion of matrimony and plain repugnant to the doctrine of the Ministers of Scotland that will licence a man to put away his wife and marry another And they call the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles the Popes cruelty against the innocent divorced in their negative faith Master John Welsch his Reply As for your 8. and 9 points of doctrine concerning Marriage the first that it is undissoluble for no cause the other that it is a Sacrament As to the first I would scarcely have understood this point of your doctrine if your Council of Trent and others of your Clergy who write of it had not been more plain then ye And I think that there are few that knows not this point of your doctrine otherwise who can take it up by this your writing I wonder why ye are so dark in setting down your own doctrine But wherefore should I wonder for darkness may not bide to see the light Your doctrine then is this First you make many causes of separation and divorcement besides adultery Concil Trid sess 24. Can. 8. Bellarm lib. 1. de matrim cap. 14. express against the doctrine of Jesus Christ He that shal demit his wife except for fornication c. he makes her to commit adultery As 1. for the vow of continency to enter in a Monastery or Nunry 2. For heresie 3. And for peril of offending of God Next your doctrine is That suppose there be many causes of separation betwixt the man and the wife from bed and boord as we speak yet the bond of marriage contracted and perfected betwixt the faithful can no ways be broken as long as they both live together no not for adultery So that the party innocent divorced may not lawfully marry another during the life of the guilty party And if they marry they call it adultery and they will have the ground of this to be because it is a Sacrament Bellar. lib. 1. c. 12. So one error follows and leans upon another For if marriage be not a Sacrament then the bond may be loosed by their own doctrine But marriage is not a Sacrament as shal be proved hereafter therefore the bond is soluble Our doctrine is that the bond of marriage contracted and perfected between two Christians is broken by the adultery of either of the parties so that the innocent divorced may lawfully marry another As for our doctrine it is plain in the Scripture in the 19. and 5. of Matthew where there the Lord in plain termes excepts the cause of fornication saying Whosoever demits his wife except it be for fornication and marries another commits adultery So then by the contrary he that demits his wife for fornication which is adultery there and marries another commits not adultery And seeing the Apostle commands 1. Cor 7.2 That every man have his own wife and every wife her own husband and that for the avoiding of fornication and it is better to marry then to burn Therefore the first marriage being dissolved by divorcement justly according to Gods Word it is lawful to the party innocent at least to use the remedy of marriage for the avoiding of fornication Otherwise if he might not use it divorcement were not a benefit but rather a punishment and the innocent should be punished without a fault Now as to the Scriptures which ye quote Matth. 19.6 and 5.31 they have that exception of fornication expresly mentioned And as for the places of Mark 10.11.12 and Luke 16.18 and Romans 7.2.3 and 1. Cor. 7 39. they are all to be understood with that exception of fornication that our Savior expresly sets down in the former two places otherwise Scripture should be contrary to Scripture which is blasphemie to think and our Savior is the best exponer of himself And as for the 1. Corinth 7.10.11 the Apostle speaks not of that separation for adultery but of a separation for a season for other causes or variances in the which case the parties separated are to remain unmarried or to be reconciled together And because ye will not credit us nor the Son of God so expresly speaking in his Scripture yet I think ye will give some credit to your own Doctors Councils Canons and Popes whom if ye be a right Catholick ye think that they cannot err Cajetanus a Cardinal in comment Matth. 19. Ambrosius Catarinus lib. 5. annot in comment Cajetani Papists hold this doctrine with us against the Religion of your Church That adultery breaks the bond of marriage and that the innocent divorced may marry another Pope Zachary Decret causa 32. quaest 7. cap. Concubuisti And the Concil Triburiense ibidem cap. Si quis and another Canon saith That incestuous adultery breaks the bond of marriage so that the party innocent may marrie another Ibid. cap. quaedam And Pope Gregory the third suppose in a Canon he will not have adultery to break the bond of marriage Ibid. cap. Hi vero so that the party innocent may marry another contrary to the doctrine of Christ our Savior yet he permits a man to marrie another if his former wife being taken with some disease be not able to render due benevolence unto her husband Ibid. cap. Quid proposuisti So suppose this Pope will not admit that true cause which our Savior sets down of adultery yet he sets down causes himself which wants the warrant of the Word And Pope Celestin the third set forth a decree that when of married persons one falleth into heresie the party Catholick is free to marry again cap. laudabileÌ„ de convers infidelium confessed by Alphonsus a Papist lib. 1 c. 4. advers haeres So then either your Doctors Canons Councils three Popes err or else the bond of marriage may be broken and the innocent partie divorced may marrie another Your Religion of Matrimonie therefore is not only repugnant to ours and Jesus Christs but also to your own Canons Councils Doctors and Popes Let them therefore condemn your cruel juâ—gement against the innocent divorced And therefore Bellarmin confesses Bellarm. de mat lib. 1. cap. 15. That in this point they have many against them not only us whom he calls hereticks but also Latins Greeks and Catholicks Master Gilbert Brown Ninthly with S. Paul Eph. 5.23 we make it a Sacrament as sundrie of the learned Protestants do as Zuinglius lib. de vera falsa rel cap. de matrimonio Melancthon in locis aeditis 1552. 1558. and chiefly young Merchiston in his 22. Proposition of his discourse upon the Revelation whose words are these Thirdly bodily marriage is by S. Paul called a symbol and a
old heresie in the very time of the Apostles Maister John Welsch his Reply As for this calumny of yours the tryal of it will come in afterward therefore I refer the answer of it to that place And whereas you say that you know not whom I call Fathers either your malice makes you to dissemble your knowledge in this or else palpable must your ignorance be And where you say that Ireneus Cyprian c. and the rest of the holy Fathers are no ways with us against you and that I will not be able to prove it I have not only proved that already in sundry heads of our Religion but also that sundry of your own Popes Cardinals Doctors Bishops Councils and Canon Law have been with us in sundry points of our Religion which we profess against that which ye profess And as for that example of justification by faith only which ye cast in which is one of the chief grounds of our Religion This I will prove both by the Scripture and by the testimonies of the Fathers of the first six hundred years Our doctrine then concerning Justification is this That as our sins was not inherent in Christ but imputed to him 2. Cor. 5 21. which was the cause of his death so his righteousness whereby we are accounted righteous before God is not inherent in us but imputed to us and therefore the Scripture saith that he is made of God unto us righteousness 1. Cor. 1.30 Next the only instrument that apprehends and as it were takes hold of this righteousness of Christ is a lively Faith which works by love and brings forth good fruits so that neither is Faith an efficient or meritorious cause of our salvation for only Christs death and righteousness is that but only an instrument to apprehend the same Neither is every Faith this instrument but only that living Faith which I have spoken of so that true Faith is never without the fruits of good works no more then fire is without heat and yet neither are our works nor the work of Faith it self the meritorious cause of our salvation but only Christs death and righteousness Neither are the fruits of this lively Faith the instrument to apprehend and take hold of Christs righteousness but only Faith it self This then is our doctrine which is so plainly confirmed by the Scripture that he must be exceeding blind that seeth it not The places to confirm the same are these Rom. 3.28 We conclud that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law Rom. 4.2 If Abraham were justified by works then hath he wherein to rejoyce but not with God Ephes 2.9 By grace are ye saved through faith and that not of your selves for it is the gift of God not by works that none should boast And Phil. 3.9 I have counted all things loss that I might win Christ and might be found in him not having my own righteousness which is of the law but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God through faith And again Tit. 3.5 Not by the works of righteousness which we had done but according to his mercy he saved us Seeing the Scripture so expresly removes all works both of nature and of grace both going before Faith and following after it and therefore the Apostle saith We are not saved by the works of righteousness which we had done and of all men even of those who were justified already and sanctified as Abraham Paul and the Ephesians were from our justification and salvation as the causes thereof therefore we are only justified and saved by a lively Faith apprehending the righteousness of Christ Secondly the Scripture not only removes works as we have said from the cause of our Justification and salvation but also ascribes it to Faith as in these places John 3.16 Whosoever believeth in him shal have eternal life And Luke 8.48 Thy faith hath saved thee c. And again Ephes 2.9 We are saved through faith And Rom. 4.3.4.5 Man is justified by faith And Rom. 3.26.28.30 God shal justifie circumcision of faith and incircumcision through faith And Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness And lest ye should say the Scripture hath not by Faith only read the 8. of Luke and 50. verse where our Savior saith to Jairus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Only believe and she shal be saved Therefore Faith is the only instrument to lay hold on the promise of God And lest ye should say this was not a justifying Faith I answer This Faith which Jairus had was that same Faith which the woman with the bloody issue had but her Faith not only healed her body but her soul also Luke 8.48 which Bellarmin grants lib. 1. de justif cap. 17. pag. 84. our Savior testifieth saying Thy faith hath saved thee c. therefore this is a justifying Faith also Secondly seeing the Faith of miracles justifying Faith is both one in substance with your Church as Bellarmin c. 5. l. de justif the Rhemists annot in 2. Cor. 12. say if it be a greater work to work miracles as they say then to be justified therefore if only Faith suffice to obtain miracles as Bellarmin grants lib. 1. cap. 20. pag. 97. why should not Faith only be also sufficient to justifie For if it suffice for the greater work much more for the less Thirdly the Scripture ascribes our Justification to grace and not to works and so oppones them that the one cannot stand with the other in the matter of our Justification We are justified saith he freely by grace and not by works Rom. 3.24 And to him that worketh the reward is imputed not according to grace but to debt but to him who worketh not but believeth in him who justifieth the ungodly his faith is imputed to him for righteousness Rom. 4.4 And in another place If it be of grace it is no more of works or else were grace no more grace but if it be of works it is no more grace or else work were no more work Rom. 11.6 Seeing therefore our Justification is only of free grace and grace if the Apostle be true cannot stand with works therefore our Justification is not by works or else it were not of grace and so not at all and so the foundation of our salvation were overturned I hope therefore this our doctrine of Justification is plainly warranted by the Scripture Now to the Fathers because ye say it cannot be proved by them they speak as plainly as we do Origen hath these words in epist ad Rom. cap. 3 And the Apostle saith that the justification of faith only sufficeth solius fidei so that he that believeth only is justified suppose no work be fulfilled of him Hilarius Canon 8. in Matth. saith For only faith justifieth fides enim sola justificat Basilius in homil de humil saith This is a perfect rejoicing in God when a man vaunts
sufficient to obtain salvation without works neglecting to live well and to hold the way of God by good works and being secure of salvation which is in faith had not a care to live well as he saith And in the end of that chapter he concluds the whole matter saying How far therefore are they deceived who promise to themselves everlasting life through a dead faith The which error we condemn also with you For we acknowledge the necessity of good works as the fruits of a living Faith but not as the efficient formal or instrumental cause of our justification SECTION XXII Concerning the Authority of the Fathers M. Gilbert Brown FUrther I say since the difference chiefly in Religion betwixt us and them is about the understanding of the Word of God * Not we M. Gilbert but one of the chief pillers of your own Church Cajetan a Cardinal which was sent in Germany against Luther the Popes Legat who saith in plain words That the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews doth gather insufficient arguments to prove Christ to be the Son of God that the 2. and 3. Epistle of John is not Canonical Scripture that the Epistle of Jude is Apocrypha that the last chapter of Mark is not of sound authority that the history of the adulterous woman in S. John is not authentical and of S. James Epistle that the salutation of it is profane albeit they deny a great part of the same to us what is the cause that they will not abide the tryal of the ancient Fathers of the first six hundred years seeing that they were of his Religion as he affirms If he be as good as his word the matter will be soon ended And if our Religion be not sound consonant to theirs in all things wherein they differ from us we shal reform the same Master John Welsch his Reply You said a little before M. Gilbert that the chief difference wherein we differ from you is in denying abhorring or detesting c. Now you say that the difference chiefly of Religion betwixt us is about the understanding of the Word of God How well these two agree let the Reader judge It is no wonder suppose you dissent from your brethren as I have proved in sundry points before seeing ye dissent from your self It is true indeed that many of our controversies are about the right sense and understanding of the Scripture but yet if Petrus a Soto Lindanus Peresius Canisius all great and learned Papists speak truth the most part of the weightiest and chiefest points of your Religion which are in controversie between us are but unwritten traditions which have not their beginning nor author in the Scripture and cannot be defended by the same And whereas ye would have us to refer the controversies about the sense and right meaning of the Scriptures to be decided by the writings of the Fathers of the first six hundred years we receive their monuments and writings gladly but yet so that we put a difference between them and the writings of the holy Ghost in the Scripture For as I have proved sufficiently before as I hope that only the Scriptures of God have this prerogative to be the supreme Judge of all controversies in Religion and no other and the best way to learn the sense of the Scripture is by the Scripture it self for seeing all the Scripture is inspired of God therefore it ought to be exponed by God in the same For he who made the Law can best interpret the Law And the Levits practised this in the Old Testament who exponed the Scripture by the Scripture Nehem. 8.8 and the Apostles in the New Testament who taught nothing but that which the Prophets said should come to pass Acts 26.28 And if a Father yea a Saint yea if an Angel would preach beside that which the Apostles preached let him be accursed So then nothing can be a warrant to us of the truth of the sense of the Scripture but the Scripture it self And as for the Fathers expositions as they may not be Judge as hath been said because they may err and have erred as hath been proved and your selves will not deny and they dissent oftentimes one from another in the exposition of the same So let their expositions be taken in so far as they agree with the Scripture For would ye have us ascribe that unto them which they themselves have refused and have ascribed unto the Scriptures only Hear therefore what Optatus the Bishop of the Church of Milevitan a learned man who lived about the year of God 369. saith writing against the Donatists who claimed to themselves only the title of the Church of Christ as ye do They called for a Judge he brings the Testament of Christ for a Judge and speaking to them of a point of Religion that was controverted whither one should be twise baptized or not He saith You saith he affirm it is lawful we affirm it is not lawful between your say it is lawful and our say it is not lawful the peoples souls do doubt and waver Let none believe you nor us we are all contentious men Judges must be sought for If Christians they cannot be given on both sides for truth is hindred by affection A Judge without must be sought for If a Pagan he cannot know the Christian mystery If a Jew he is an enemy to Christianity No Judge therefore of this matter can be found in earth A Judge from heaven must be sought for But why knock we at heaven when here we have his Testament in the Gospel Optatus lib. 5. contra Parmenianum And he renders a reason of this in that same Book Christ saith he hath dealt with us as an earthly father is wont to do with his children who fearing left his children should fall out after his decease doth set down his will in writing under witness and if there arise debate among the brethren they go to the Testament He whose word must end our controversie is Christ Let his will be sought in his Testament saith he Augustin in Psal 21. expos 2. urgeth the same reason of Optatus against the Donatists We are brethren saith he to them why do we strive Our father died not untestate he made a Testament and so died Men do strive about the goods of the dead while their Testament be brought forth When that is brought forth they yeeld to have it opened and read The Judge doth hearken the Counsellers be silent the Cryer biddeth peace All the people is attentive that the words of the dead man may be read and heard He lyeth void of life and feeling and his words prevail Christ sitteth in heaven and is his Testament gain-said Open it let us read We are brethren why do we strive Let our minds be pacified Our Father hath not left us without a Testament He that made the Testament is living for ever he doth hear our words He doth know his own word
did not obey the other As also a number of the Fathers of your own Religion who in two General Councils the one of Constance where there was almost a thousand Fathers the other of Basel did not obey the Pope in defining General Councils to be above the Pope So if ye speak truth infinit millions of Christians in all ages and innumerable Churches and thousands of your own Religion are condemned to Hell But this is false M. Gilbert and who will believe you And to the end now my conclusion yet holds sure That seeing his Kingdom is that second beast that hath two horns like the Lamb and speaks like the Dragon Rev. 13.11 And himself is that man of sin and son of perdition that adversary and Antichrist that was to come 2. Thess 2.3.4 And his doctrine is that Apostasie and abomination sore-told in the Scripture Rev. 17. And his seat that Harlot and mystical Babylon that mother of whoredoms who is drunken with the blood of the Martyrs of Jesus Whosoever receives his mark on his fore-head or hand that is openly or privatly professes obedience unto him shal as the Angel proclaimed drink of the wine of the wrath of God yea of that pure wine in the cup of his wrath and he shal be tormented with fire and brimstone before the holy angels and before the Lamb. And the smoak of his torment shal ascend for evermore and they shal have no rest day nor night which worship the beast or his image And as for your prayer I beseech God M. Gilbert that he may open my eyes and inlarge my heart to understand and imbrace his truth more and more and to make me to grow up in that spiritual communion with Christ and his members more and more But that which ye call truth is heresie and that which ye call the true Church is Babel and therefore that doctrine and Church of yours is that strong delusion and whore of Babel with the which whosoever shal communicat is excluded from the merits of Christ and shal be partaker of her plagues and finally shal be damned SECTION XXVIII That the Pope is Antichrist Master Gilbert Brown IF the Pope be the Antichrist what is the cause that M. John would not set down some place out of the Word of God that proves the same But good Reader I will let you see how far M. John is against the Word of God in this and that by some examples only First our Savior shew unto the Jews that albeit he came in the name of his Father yet they would not receive him If another saith he shal come in his own name him ye will receive This no doubt as Augustin expones the same is meant of the Antichrist that the Jews shal receive Now it is out of all controversie that the Jews never received the Pope Therefore the Pope is not the Antichrist Again the Pope came never in his own name but in the Name of Christ for he is called the Vicare of Christ and the servant of the servants of God therefore he cannot be the Antichrist Master John Welsch his Reply I come now to prove that which I offered before to prove to wit that your Popes which ye will have to be the Head of the Church of Christ are the self-same Antichrist that the Scripture fore-told should come Thou wouldest know Christian Reader of what weight this controversie is Whether the Pope be the Antichrist or not For this supremacy of his unto them is the foundation whereupon their Religion and the safety of their whole Church depends so that they call it The Rock whereupon the Church is built against which the gates of Hell shal not prevail Rhemist annot upon Matth. 16. And Bellarmin calls him in his Preface before the controversie of the Popes supremacy The foundation which upholds the house of God the Pastor which feeds his flock the Emperor which governes his host the Sun which gives light to the starrs that is to the Ministers of the Church the Head which gives life to his body So that remove his supremacy the house of God must fall the flock of Christ must be scattered the host of the Lord must be discomfited the starrs that is the Ministery must be darkened and the body must ly still without motion And he applyes these Prophesies Isai 28.16 and 8.14.15 spoken and fulfilled only in the Son of God unto him a calling him that foundation stone in Sion upon the which the whole Church is built and that proved stone against the which the gates of Hell hath never nor never shal prevail and that corner stone which joyns both Jew and Gentil as two walls together in a Christian Church and that precious stone from whence the infinit treasure of grace is most plenteously derived unto the whole Church as unity in doctrine the bond of peace the unity of faith which is salvation it self and the very life of Religion And he saith There is no way to Christ but by Peter in whose room their Popes succeed So that in their judgement there is no way to Christ but by the Pope And he calls him that rock of offence and stumbling stone spoken of in Isai chap. 8. Upon the which whosoever shal fall shal be broken and on whom it shal fall it shal dash him in pieces O blasphemous mouth Let the heavens be confounded at this And therefore this is of such a weight that Boniface the 8 hath made it an article of our Faith whose words are these We declare we affirm we define and pronounce that it is altogether needful to salvation to all creatures to be under the Pope of Rome Extra de minoritate obedientia cap. unam sanctam So that Bellarmin saith when the Popes supremacy is called in controversie The sum of all Christianity is called in question and when that is controverted Then it is controverted whether the Church should stand any longer or not or fall and dissolve Unto them therefore it is an article of Faith which must be believed and practised under the pain of the loss of salvation And unto us he is that self-same Antichrist which the Scripture hath fore-told time hath made manifest and the Church hath suffered Unto them he is the Head of the body of Christ the Pastor of his flock the Sun that gives light to the starrs the foundation of the house of God and a mortal God among men Unto us he is Gods enemy the son of perdition the second beast and false prophet 2 Thess 2.13 Rev. 13.11 the adversary of true Religion a pest in the body a tyrant in the Common-wealth and Antichrist in the Church So thou sees Christian Reader of what weight this controversie is Let us see then how he defends him from being the Antichrist and then you shal hear our reasons to the contrary You ask wherefore I set not down some places of Scripture to prove the Pope to be the Antichrist I answer Not
own selves covetous boasters proud blasphemers disobedient to parents unthankful unholy Without natural affection truce-breakers false accusers incontinent c. Traitors heady high-minded c. From such turn away TO THE LOVERS OF THE Reformed Religion in Britain and Ireland Grace mercy and peace DEarly beloved in the Lord The great increase of Popery every where is so visibly seen and so evidently known that to speak any thing to prove and evidence the same were altogether needless seeing he is a great stranger in our Israel that knoweth it not But alace there is very great decay of zeal and hatred against that Whore that if our glorious Predecessors whose excellent Motto it always was No peace with Rome were alive they would wonder to see us so brutish and sensless indifferent and lukewarm in ae matter of so great moment wherein the honor and glory of God the eternal happiness and felicity of our own and our posterities souls and the safety and preservation of Kings Kingdoms our lives estats and all that is near and dear to us is so much and so nearly concerned Therefore for letting us see our hazard in all and every one of these as we have revised and republished the above written excellent Treatise of that learned godly and eminently zealous and faithful servant of Christ M. John Welsch whose memory is very precious in the Church of Christ who doth learnedly and plainly to any ordinary capacity discover the abominations of that Whore and solidly prove her doctrine both to be most heretical and damnable and her self to be the very Antichrist that all who love the truth of God and the salvation of their immortal souls may be stirred up to a just zeal and indignation against her So we have thought fit to subjoyn this following Treatise for discovering to all and every one who love the Reformed Religion and resolve to adhere thereto what treasonable and bloody principles and inhumane and matchlesly cruel practises are maintained and committed by Papists in reference both to Kings Princes and People who profess the Reformed Religion and consequently what all and every one of us may expect to meet with if Popery prevail that so being convinced of our hazard both in body and soul and in all that is near and dear to us we may be stirred up to a real hatred and indignation against that Whore and may be much in the exercise of prayer repentance and other lawful and commanded duties for the putting a stop to the growth of the spreading abominations of that Whore which is earnestly prayed for by Yours for the truth M. C. A BRIEF DISCOVERY OF THE BLOODY REBELlious and treasonable Principles and Practises of Papists SECTION I. Showing that the principles of Papists are treasonable and rebellious against the person and authority of Princes and peace of Kingdoms c. And the excuses of H. T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies are proved to be frivolous and naught THE Church of Rome was formerly most hateful to the Churches of Christ in Britain and Ireland not only because of her most damnable and heretical doctrine but also because of the rebellious and treasonable principles and practises maintained and committed by her against the persons and authority of Princes and peace of Kingdoms her faith being accounted faction and her Religion rebellion Therefore Papists of late have endeavored by all means to ingratiat themselves in the favor of Princes and Magistrats making ample profession of loyalty and fidelity and charging Protestants with the odious crime of disloyalty And thus we see their late Writers denying and disowning the doctrine of Rebellion and Parricide that our Divines have justly charged them with For H T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies c. printed at Doway 1671 calleth it a loud slander to charge Papists with maintaining that if the Pope excommunicat a Tyrant or heretical Prince his own subjects may lawfully kill him Therefore to unmask a little the bloody rebellious and treasonable principles of Papists we shal prove First that it is no slander but a real truth that the Church of Rome holdeth that if the Pope excōmunicateth a King his own subjects may lawfully kill him 2. That the Pope can dispense with the alleageance of subjects to their Princes and if he so dispense then they are loosed from subjection and alleageance to them 3. That no faith nor oath is to be kept with Hereticks 4 That the Pope and Synagogue of Rome have been the Authors of warrs combustions and confusions in Christian Churches and Kingdoms all Europe over 5. That their continual practise ever since the Reformation hath been to plot and practise treasons and rebellions assassinations and murders both of Princes and people who professed the Reformed Religion 6. That whereever they got the upper-hand and dominion in any Kingdom or Common-wealth they have practised most unheard-of cruelties and barbarous inhumanities against the professors of the Protestant Reformed Religion For the first and second of these points to wit that Papists hold that if the Pope excommunicat a King his own subjects may lawfully kill him And that the Pope can dispense with the alleageance of subjects to their Princes and if he so dispense then they are loosed from subjection and alleageance to them I shal evidence it to be their commonly received doctrine both by the writings of their approved Doctors and Bulls of their Popes and their dayly practises And lest they say we wrong them we shal for the most part set down the words of the Authors themselves 1. I shal begin with Doctor Ranchin a Papist and a famous Lawyer in France in his Book intituled A review of the Council of Trent lib. 2. cap. 10. who setteth down these following positions as commonly received in the Church of Rome to wit That it is necessare to salvation to believe that every creature is subject to the Pope of Rome That he it set over Emperors and Kingdoms That he carryeth both the temporal and spiritual sword That he may depose Emperors c. and transfer their Empires and Dominions from one line to another That he may absolve subjects from their oath of alleageance That upon just cause be may set up a King in every Kingdom for he is the overseer of all Kingdoms in Gods stead That it belongeth to the Pope to correct Kings when they offend Much more hath this Author to this purpose 2. But let us hear their own Doctors themselves Augustinus Triumphus de potest Eccles quaest 46. art 2. as Doctor Usher citeth him saith There is no doubt but that the Pope may depose all Kings when there is a reasonable cause so to do Thomas Aquinas their Angelical Doctor holdeth 22. quast 12 art 2. That so soon as a Prince is denounced excommunicat for Apostasie ipso facto his subjects are free from his soverainity and absolved from the oath of alleageance which they are bound to him Bannes and
persons by the Council who by its authority strengtheneth them against their King But although it were true that is alledged to wit that the Council of Constance had decreed against King-killing yet who knows not that Papists make nothing of its authority for none of the Popes ever liked it much less confirmed it 3. His next excuse is That Mariana maintained the doctrine of King-killing only problematically and his book was condemned burnt by a Provincial Council of his own Order Answer 1. Peter du Moulin tells another of your stamp using the same excuse that the Court of Parliament of Paris composed of grave heads did not understand it so when they condemned his Book to the fire neither doth he speak of the murder of King Henry the third problematically when he exalteth the murderer in these words Making a show of delivering letters to the King he gave him a deep wound above the bladder with a poysoned knife which he hid in his hand O admirable confidence of mind O memorable action by killing the King he got to himself a great name And in the same place he taxeth the Kings servants who presently killed that murderer of cruelty and barbarousness Mariana de rege c lib. 1. cap. 6. 2. Whereas he saith that a Provincial Council of the Jesuits condemned Marianas book the same Du Moulin answereth But why then did the same General of the Jesuits who disavowed it when destruction was hanging over the head of his Order approve and licence it before For the book was approved by Aquaviva General of the Jesuits and Stephanus Hoyeda Visitor of their Society in the Province of Toledo and the approbation mentioneth that other Jesuits had approved it before But saith he see what that condemnation comes to The Jesuits seeing their sect made odious by the writings of Mariana Suarez Vasquez and others and more by the murdering of Kings and for that cause expelled France made an order among themselves whereby they forbade to write or teach that doctrine any more The words of the ratification are these That none teach by writing or speaking that it is lawful f r any person or upon any pretence of tyranny to kill Kings and Princes But how gross is their fraud in that Order Do they forbid their Society to believe so by no means but to teach so neither will they have the execution done upon any pretence of tyranny but only upon the definitive sentence of the Pope or the States and how are the lives of Kings and Princes more secure then before by their declaring that it is not lawful to kill Kings and Princes seeing that in their account they are no more Kings and Princes when they are once excommunicated and deposed by the Pope Peter die Moulin ubi supra cap. 5. Truly any that considers the Jesuits temper needs not to think it strange that their General both approved and condemned Marianas book for Doctor Rivet tells us that when the Parliament of Paris asked the Jesuits in Paris whither they were of the mind of their General who had approved Santarellas book for King killing and judged the things that are there to be certain They answered That living at Rome he could not but approve what was there approved of But say the Parliament What think you They answer We think the clean contrary But say the examiners What would ye do if ye were at Rome The Jesuits answered That which they do which are at Rome So Jesuits have one conscience at Rome another at Paris Thirdly nor was it Mariana his alone that was guilty of writing for King killing For beside these before cited D. Rivet tells us that Gingâ—ardus a Jesuit did write in praise of the murder of King Henry the third And Albineus another Jesuit did hear the murderer of King Henry the fourth confess before he did the fact and when he was examined upon it he answered That God had given him that special gift to forget when once he had absolved a sinner whatsoever was confessed by him Yea there was so much wryting for and acting of assassinations and parricids upon the persons of Princes that the Parliament of Paris did not only condemn Bellarmin and Santarellas books to be burnt as engins of treason and rebellion but also did expel the Jesuits the Kingdom and set up a pillar of remembrance of their villanies From all which I hope it is more then evident that it is no slander but a real truth that the Church of Rome holdeth 1. That if the Pope excommunicat a King or Prince his subjects may lawfully kill him 2. That the Pope can dispense with the allegiance of subjects to their Princes and if he do dispense therewith they are loosed from subjection to them SECTION II. Showing that no oath nor bond can oblige a Papist and that they hold it as a principle that no faith is to be kept to Hereticks THe third thing we proposed was to prove that no oath bond or obligation whatsoever can ty or oblige Papists whither to their allegiance to their Prince or duty to their neighbors if Protestants which is very palpable if ye consider First that it is beyond all controversie with them that all Protestants are hereticks Princes not excepted all being condemned as such by the Pope and Council of Trent 2. That they all hold that Protestant Princes being declared hereticks by the Pope have no right to their Kingdoms nor are their subjects bound to any allegiance to them which is evident both from what is said formerly and also from the Bull and Decrees of Pope Pius the fifth who did depose and excommunicat Queen Elizabeth and loosed her subjects from their allegiance and gave the Kingdom to Philip the second of Spain which Bull was confirmed by Gregory the thirteenth and Sixtus the fifth his successors and was mantained and defended by Sanders Parsons Cresuel and sundry other English Papists even unto death 3. They not only loose subjects from their allegiance to Protestant Princes but also they hold and maintain that no faith is to be kept with Protestants because condemned by the Pope and Council of Trent as hereticks and so are fallen from the faith and so forfeit all priviledges wherein keeping of faith with them might oblige others or stead them and therefore let a Papist swear never so solemnly and ingage himself never so strictly by oath compact or covenant to a Protestant he may break his oath compact and covenant to him without sin according to their principles But because that brazen headed impostor H. T. Author of the Manual of Controversies c denyeth this affirming that Papists esteem themselves obliged to keep faith even with infidels therefore I shal prove the truth thereof First who knoweth not that John Hus and Jerome of Prague upon the Emperors promise of safe-conduct appeared before the Council of Constance But the Council declared that the Emperor was not obliged to keep his
as we said before and the Kingdom interdicted but also King James was by a Bull sent unto England a little before Queen Elizabeths death excluded from the Crown and all that were not Roman Catholicks were declared incapable of and excluded from the succession whereof his Majesty complaineth in his Apologie For Bâ—llarmin tells King James Tort pag. 19 That the Pope claims a dâ—uble right to England one by reason oâ— his Apostolick power which he extends over all men according to that Charter Psal 44. Thou shalt establish them Princes over all the earth The other proper by a right of Dominion for saith he England and Ireland are the Churches Dominions the Pope is direct Lord and the King his vassal XXI Neither were they less active in stirring up wars and combustions in other Kingdoms for a Priest of their own named John Brown aged seventy two in his voluntary confession to a Committee of Parliament set down by M. Prin in his introductioÌ„ to Canterburies doom p 202. saith That the Jesuits who are the Popes agents were the only cause of the troubles which fell out in Muscovia when under pretence to reduce the Latin Church and plant themselves and destroy the Greek Church the poor King Demetrius and his Queen and these that followed him from Polonia were all in one night murdered by the usurper of the Crown and the true progeny rooted out That they were the only cause that moved the Sweds to take arms against their lawful King Sigismund and chased him to Poland and neither he nor his successors were ever able to take possession of Sweden for the Jâ—suits intention was to bring in the Romish Religion and root out the Protestants They were the only cause that moved the Polonians to take arms against the said Sigismund because they had perswaded him to marry two sisters c. They were the sole cause of the war in Germany and Bohemia which began anno 1619. which caused the death of many thousands They have been the cause of the civil wars in France moving the King to take arms against his own subjects the Protestants where innumerable people have lost their lives for the Jesuits intentions were to set their Society in all Cities and Towns conquered by the King and quite to abolish the Protestants They were the cause of the murder of the last King of France They were the only projectors of the Gun-powder treason and their penitents the actors thereâ—f XXII M. Baxter in his key for Catholicks chap. 45. 46 47 48 49 proveth at large by good evidence that the Jesuits had a special hand in the late Civil War that burnt in the bowels of these three Nations till it had near consumed them Whose evidence I intreat that the Reader would read and seriously ponder From all which I hope it is evident enough that the Pope and Church of Rome have been the continual Authors and instigators to wars and combustions in Christian Churches and Kingdoms SECTION IV. That the continual practise of Papists ever since the Reformation hath been to plot and practise bloody and treasonable Conspiracies Assassinations and Murders both of Princes and People who profess the Reformed Religion IN the former Section we have proven that the Pope and Synagogue of Rome have been the grand Authors of warrs confusions and combustions in Christian Churches and Kingdoms In this Section we are to prove that not only have they been the Authors and instigators to bloody wars and confusions in Christian Churches and Kingdoms but that in all Protestant or Reformed Churches Kingdoms or States they have been secretly and under-hand always plotting and practising bloody and treasonable conspiracies assassinations and murders both of Princes and people who profess the Reformed Religion It would be too tedious to declare at large what plots and conspiracies the Pope and his dependers and vassals have had in all the Reformed Churches ever since Luthers Reformation we only shal instance some few not our near hand in France Ireland and in Britain I. I told in the former Section how the Pope and his sworn vassals were the Authors of the massacre of Paris anno 1572. which was surely hatched in hell and carried on with all the subtilty of that old Serpent for when the Pope and Court of Rome and Queen Catharin de Medicis and Charles the 9. her son saw that fire and fagot and force of war could not undo the Protestants they said come and let us deal subtily with them and ensnare them by pretences of friendship and flatteries therefore they not only concluded a peace with them but gave the sister of the King of France to the King of Navarre in marriage that so they might massacre the Protestants at the marriage and they suspecting no treachery came to the City of Paris where the Queen of Navarre was poysoned by a pair of perfumed gloves and the Admiral and the greatest part of the Protestant Nobility were all massacred in a morning the massacre was so cruel that it made the river run with blood and there were thirty thousand Protestants killed in one moneths time of which more afterward II. We also hinted before how King Henry the 3. of France although he lived and died a Papist and while he was Duke of Anjou had foughten several battels against the Protestants and was one of the plotters in the massacre of Paris yet because he did not joyn with the holy League and obey the Popes will in all things the Pope excommunicated him and stirred up James Clement a Jacobin Monk to commit that horrible parricide upon his Royal person III. We did also a little touch how his successor King Henry the 4. was opposed and molested by the Pope and the holy League his sworn servants and excommunicat and the Spaniards brought in the Kingdom to joyn with the holy League to his ruine But God so blessed his enterprises that he foyled them often but he being weary of war and consulting with flesh and blood for peace and ease to himself and quyet to his Kingdom turned Papist and sought absolution from the Pope and at length obtained it But because they thought him not a heart Papist and cordial for them in all things they plot his death by secret assassination and after several attempts one whereof wounded him in the mouth Râ—villac stroke him through the very heart although to please the Pope he caused recall the Jesuits which for their bloody principles and practises were banished the Kingdom So this is the Pope and his Jesuits method when they cannot overcome any Prince that they think no cordial favorer of theirs by open hostility they excite and stimulat some scholer or other of theirs secretly to assassinat him For John Chastel a scholer of the Jesuits who stroke King Henry the fourth of France in the mouth and broke out one of his teeth intending to have cut his throat when he was examined confessed that he being guilty of
a great crime was kept prisoner by the Jesuits in the chamber of meditations where after they had long terrified his soul they propounded to him a way to lessen his torments in hell to wit to kill the King which the miserable wretch promised and attempted Whereupon the Colledge of the Jesuits was searched and many persons seized on among which was found a book in the praise of James Clement the murderer of King Henry the 3 written by the Jesuit Guignard containing many arguments and reasons to prove it was lawful and just to kill King Henry the 3. together with many incitements and motives to make away his successor King Henry the 4. then reigning The themes given to young scholars were found to be about King killing with praises of the attempt and exhortations to it Likewise Bariere another wretch who had attempted to kill King Henry the 4. being examined confessed that the Jesuit Varadius Rector of the Colledge of the Jesuits had incited and adjured him upon the Sacrament of confession and the communion of the Lords body to kill the King assuring him that if he suffered for it he should obtain martyrdom Moreover Ravillac in his examination shewed sufficiently by whose instructions he was perswaded to murther King Henry the 4. for he gave this reason why he did it because the King would make war with God in as much as he prepared war against the Pope who is God which is the plain doctrine of the Church of Rome So the Jesuits at the Popes instigation never ceased till they had assassinated both these Kings of France Henry the 3. and Henry the 4. So Peter du Moulin chap. 5. IV. William Prince of Orange being one of the blessed instruments the Lord imployed for the delivery of the Netherlands from the Spanish tyranny and Popish idolatry therefore the Popish faction carrying an implacable hatred to him they stirred up one Joanville to kill him and for encouraging him in this devilish attempt a Frier perswaded him that he should go invisible and for that effect he gave him some characters in paper and little frogs bones and other conjurations whereby he being animated to that wicked deed went lay in wait and shot the Prince with a pistol through the throat But he through Gods goodness recovering they stirred up Baltazar Gerard to make a second attempt upon him who shot him through the stomack and vital parts so that he presently died V. But leaving these forraign instances let us come home to Britain where we will see a wonderful Tragedy of secret bloody treasons plotted and carried on for the ruine of Queen Elizabeth King James c. and the whole Reformed Religion professed in these lands For so soon as the Pope perceived that Queen Elizabeth intended in earnest to shake off that Romish yoke and that all his flattery and fair dealing could not reduce her to his obedience she refusing to permit his Nuncio to enter her Kingdom he falls to his old course and anno 1569. Pope Pius the 5. excommunicats her as we said before absolving all her subjects from her obedience and â—ursing all that should longer obey her giving her Kingdom to the King of Spain But fearing that a war might be dangerous and of doubtful event he thought the most compendious way to ruine her was to send over his Agents to England to cause proclaim his Bull there and to excite the Papists in England to rebellion against her and to endeavor by all means to assassinat her For he thought this would either win her or at least it would strengthen the King of Spains hands when he knew that there were secret plottings in England for to accomplish his design Therefore he sent over his Bull declaratory by one Morton an English fugitive who bringing it to Rodolf a Florentin divers copies of it were first secretly scattered among the Papists and then the Brieve it self fixed on the gate of London-house by which time the Priests and other Agents for Rome had wrought so far with sundry Nobles and Gentle-men of eminency whom they either found or could make discontented with the Reformed Religion or Government or whom they discerned to be ambitiously affected that they never rested plotting one treason and rebellion after another For in that same year wherein the Popes Bulls was here scattered among the Papists the Earls of Northumberland and Westmerland and sundry other their complices fell out in actual rebellion But that not taking effect they used more secret and hidden wayes for carrying on their mischief For L. Aubespine a French Ambassador of the Guisian faction solicited one Mocdy to kill the Queen by laying gun powder under her chamber and secretly firing it But although that was discovered yet they did not cease but all that Queens time they were still plotting treasons such as the treasons of Stuckly in Ireland of the Stanlies in Darbishyre of John Trogmorton and Brook of Sanders and Bristow of the Nortons Barn and Mather of Doctor Story and Shirwin Parsons Campian and Kirly and many other Priests and Jesuits to the number of 120. of Somervail and his adherents of Mayn Nilson Thomson and the rest of that crue of Payn and his fifty resolutes hyred by the Pope to murder the Queen Of Francis Throgmorton Paget and Englfield Of bloody Pary of Babington Tichburn and the rest of that pack Of the same Babington Charnock and Savace on a second devilish design Of Lopoz of Stanly of Cullen of York and Williams c. with infinit mo that never came to light yea Garnet Winter Catesby Treshame and others in the last year of Queen Elizabeth travelled with the King of Spain to joyn with the Papists in England to depose the Queen and to extirpat Religion Thus they never rested all the time of that Queen to plot treasons and rebellions against her And is it not well known how the Duke of Guise and his faction in France did enter in the holy League to root out all the Protestants In prosecution whereof they warred and rebelled against their natural Soveraigns King Henry the 3. and King Henry the 4. while several hundreds of thousands of the subjects were killed and destroyed and the whole Kingdom almost wasted and depopulated and way made for the Spaniard to conquer the Kingdom with whom the Leaguers joyned and brought his forces unto the Kingdom And if his wars in the Netherlands and the loss of his Armado anno 1588. had not weakned him he might have conquequested all France But did King James feel them any quieter in Scotland Surely no. For beside the hazard he was in from them in his infancy and minority he felt also their treasons and rebellions when come to age For the Earls of Angus Huntly and Arrol the Lords Maxwel Hares and others made a conspiracy for bringing in the Spaniard with whom they were to joyn forces for the ruine of King and Kingdom and afterward brake out in open rebellion
desperat propounders and ring-leaders of that treason against King James and Prince Henry at his coming to England for which the said Watson and Clerk suffered the reward of traitors So that H. T. and other Papists are not to be believed for they will say any thing maintain any assertion that they may make for the advancement of their cause 3. What is the matter although they pretend to grant to the King all that the Sorbon Doctors and Parliament of Paris grant yea what although they profess to swear their allegiance are we the safer seeing they change their principles according as they see occasion and seeing they hold that the Pope can dispense with any oath even after they have taken it as I have proven before And did not Parsons and Campian anno 1580. notwithstanding of their strict oath to obey the Pope in all things procure a dispensation to free all Catholicks from obeying the Popes own declaratory Bull of excommunication against Queen Elizabeth till a better opportunity So you see they can get a dispensation from the Popes own Bull if they find it not seasonable What oath then will bind them especially to these they account heretical For that is one of their principles No faith is to be kept to hereticks as we shewed you They can change themselves Proteus-like in any form When there is no remedy they will yeeld to any thing But when they see their time they will do any thing I shal close all with the testimony of two great Doctors and Bishops in King James time the first whereof is Doctor Andreus Bishop of Winchester who in a sermon on Nov. 5. 1616. speaking of the reason that Bellarmin gives why the primitive Christians did not rise up against persecuting Emperors id fuit quia deerant vires He makes this collection that is as much as to say if they now in these days be so as they were then and carry themselves quietly it is quia non sunt vires and to hold no longer then donec erunt And then you are like to hear of them to have them go again with such another birth Ye shal have them as myld as Gregory the first when they have no strength But as fierce as Gregory the 7. when they have and afterwards thus See ye not next under God whereto to ascribe your safety even to non erant vires there is a point hangs on that for while that lasts while ye keep them there ye shal have the primitive Church of them have them to ly as quiet as still as ever did the barrels in the vault till vires like fire come to them and then off go they then nothing but depose Kings dispose of Kingdoms assoil subjects arm them against their Soveraigns then do they care not what But if the powder take not fire then shal you straight have books tending to mitigation then all quiet again certainly thus standing it were best to hold them in defectu virium to provide ut ne sint to keep them at non sunt vires till time they be better minded in this point and we have good assurance of it for minded as they are they want no will no virus they tell us what the matter is strength they want they write it they print it and si adessent vires they would act it in earnest Thus he The second is Doctor Prideaux in a Sermon on Nov. the 5. who having reckoned up a Catalogue of the damnable doctrines of Popery professeth to have done it To make it appear to these that would willingly be better perswaded of their doctrine that the doctrine it self directly warranteth treason Let the traitors be what they will and that none can be an absolut Papist but if he throughl◠understand himself and live under a Christian Prince that hath renounced the Popes authority must needs being put unto it be an absolut traitor Thus I hope ye have it proved both from their principles and practise that if Popery or Papists get any strength or footing in a Kingdom it will tend undoubtedly to the ruine of both King and Kingdom Yet the Papists are grown so impudent of late as to charge the Protestants integrity of rebellion and rebellious principles and excuse their own rebellious principles As in a Treatise intituled Philanax Anglicus dedicated to the Archbishop of Canterbury But Peter du Moulin hath learnedly answered it And truly herein they deal with us as Verres did with Tully Verres himself was a very notorius thief and knew that Cicero had much against him in that kind and therefore he knavishly and impudently calls Cicero the thief first though a very true man and noble Orator It is just so in this case Now I pray what case may both King and Kingdom expect to be in if Papists get any strength or power Have they not given infinit proofs both of old and late of their rebellious disposition and treasonable practises SECTION V. Containing some instances in particular of the barbarous and inhumane cruelty of Papists to Protestants where they had the power over them I Have hitherto shown that both the principles and practises of Papists tend to treasons rebellions war and blood-shed I shal in this Section to detect their cruelty give some instances in particular of their barbarous inhumane cruelty to Protestants where ever they get power authority or the upper-hand over them This is so well known that none that knows any thing of History are ignorant of it Ought ever the sad and deplorable case of England in Queen Maries time to be forgotten when either the soul behoved to be ruined by Idolatry or else the body to be burnt in a fire This was an unanswerable Dilemma either soul or body must perish How many hūdreds of Martyrs were burnt in one year all the Countrey over Their inhumane cruelties executed on Protestants are so many and terrible that they would make up many Volumes and make the hair to stand and the ears to tingle What greater torments are imaginable then is used in the Inquisition of Spain and Italy as it is described by M. Clerk in his Martyrologie But that the Reader may know ex ungue leonem their cruel and inhumane carriage to Protestants I shal set down a few instances I shal begin with the Waldenses in Provence against whom Meinerus President of Oppede anno 1545. raised war coming to Cabriers in which there were only 60. poor sick pesants who offered to open the gates and quite the Countrey leaving all their goods behind them but he entering the town caused all the men to be brought in a field and to be cut in pieces The souldiers striving who should show the best manhood in cutting of heads arms and leggs The women he caused to be locked in a barn with much straw and so put fire to it where many women great with child were burnt One souldier moved with pitie opening a hole in the wall that
as far in word as ye do in deed the consciences of the poor people would at the last withdraw themselves from under your tyranny and would go out of your fellowship for the safety of their souls so under the cloke and pretence of the Scripture ye keep them in your communion And surelie were not for this cause only you would regard no more of the testimony of the Scripture then of the testimony of the fables of Esop For the chief authority and all the surety and certainty of all Religion with you as Bellarmin de sacr lib. 2. cap. 25. and Stapleton lib. 1. cont Whitaker cap. 10. confesses is not the testimony of the Scripture but the authority of your own Church So I assure thee Reader it is but for a show that they bring forth the Scripture to prove the heads of their Religion Let the matter therefore be tryed betwixt us by these examples which ye set down here M. Gilbert Brown 1. We say with Saint Augustin Epist 28. ad Hier. that the Sacrament of Baptism is so necessary to infants that they cannot come to heaven without the same which is contrary to their negative saith where they call it the Popes cruel judgement against infants departing without the Sacrament First I say that Christ taught the same doctrine in these words Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter in the Kingdom of God John 3.5 We say this is spoken properly of the Sacrament of Baptism because there is no regeneration of water and the Spirit of God but in Baptism The same is the doctrine of the Apostles also When they exspected the patience of God saith S. Peter in the days of Noe when the Ark was building in the which few that is eight souls were saved by water whereunto Baptism being of the like form now saves you also 1. Pet. 3.20.21 And S. Paul saith For as many of you as are baptized in Christ have put on Christ Galat 3.27 And Ananias said to S. Paul And now what tarriest thou rise up and be baptized and wash away thy sins invocating his name Acts 22.17 and 2.38 And S. Paul himself in another place Christ hath saved us by the washing of regeneration and renovation of the holy Ghost Tit. 3.5 Rom. 6.3.4 1. Cor. 6.11 Mark 16.16 I think there is no Christian reader that sees these places but he must say that Baptism is most necessary to infants except he will believe rather the exposition of the Ministers then the Word of God Maister John Welsch his Reply First ye begin at the necessity of the Sacrament of Baptism whereof ye affirm that it is so necessary that infants cannot come to heaven without the same As for Baptism we grant that it is a most effectual seal and pledge of our ingrafting in Christ Jesus and of the remission of our sins through his blood and regeneration through his Spirit so that either the neglect or the contempt of it because it is the neglect and contempt of the covenant it self and of Christ Jesus the foundation of the covenant is damnable But that it is so absolutly necessary to infants that without it they cannot come to heaven to wit these whom he hath predestinat it being neither neglected nor contemned but death preventing the receiving of it that we allutterly deny as impious ungodly and cruel For first I say there is none that is in the covenant of grace and who hath God to be their God and are holy that can perish This you cannot deny But the children of the faithful who are of his secret election are such before they be baptized And this I prove The Lord promised to Abraham I will be thy God and the God of thy seed Gen. 17.17 And this Peter also testifies The promise saith he is made to you and to your children Acts 2.39 And the Apostle saith That the children of the faithful are holy 1. Cor. 7.14 Therefore the children of the faithful who are of Gods secret election suppose they die without Baptism do not perish Secondlie if Baptism were absolutly necessary to salvation then the grace of God were bound to the Sacrament This cannot be denyed But your Master of Sentences saith that the grace of God is not bound to the Sacraments and it is impious so to think that Gods free grace and salvation is bound to the instrument Thirdlie if Circumcision was not absolutly necessary to salvation in the Old Testament then Baptism is not absolutly necessary now because Circumcision was as straitly enjoyned to them as Baptism is enjoyned to us and Baptism is suceeded in the room of the same but Circumcision is not absolutly necessarie For Lombardus is rebuked by the Doctors of Paris because he so thought And David doubts not to say of his child who died the seventh day and so before he was circumcised I shal go to him c. and so he pronounced that he was saved and all the time that they were in the wilderness almost 40 years Circumcision was neglected which plainly shows that it was not so absolutly necessary that salvation could not be obtained without it Therefore Baptism is not so absolutly necessary to salvation as ye suppose for the grace of God is of no less force in the New Testament then it was in the Old Fourthlie we read of sundry that received the holy Ghost before they were baptized and seeing the holy Ghost where he is regenerats to eternal life Therefore life eternal is not bound absolutly to Baptism Fifthlie what a cross and disturbance is this that your doctrine brings to the consciences of all these parents whose children have been prevented by death before they could be offered to be baptized If they believe your doctrine how often will this come in their mind that their children are damned And seeing the infants themselves are not in the cause that they are not baptized but their death preventing by Gods providence or the Parents neglecting or contemning the same or persecution or one impediment or other hindering wherefore are ye so cruel to judge them to be damned for that whereof themselves are causeless And last of all if ye be acquainted in the Histories of the Church of God in the first age ye will find many that delayed to be baptized until their latter age which they would never have done if they had thought it simpliciter necessary to salvation as ye do And Ambrosius doubts not to say That Valentinian wanted not the grace of Baptism suppose he wanted Baptism it self the which he would never have said if he had thought it absolutly necessary to salvation And Bernard saith I cannot altogether despair of the salvation of them who wants Baptism not through contempt but only through impossibility to get it And in that same place he saith So also if our Savior Christ for this cause when he had said he that believeth and is baptized shal be saved did
of purpose in repeating the sentence omit to say He that is not baptized but he that believeth not shal be damned for he saw that faith only might suffise to salvation and without faith nothing can suffise Justly then might your Popes sentence and your own be said to be cruel in our confession But how prove ye this doctrine of yours to be Christs Ye cite John 3.2 where our Savior saith Except a man be born again c. which say ye is properly meant of the Sacrament of Baptism Upon the which ye infer the necessity of the same Whereunto I answer that interpretation of yours is false for our Savior speaks not here of the Sacrament of Baptism and that for these reasons First our Savior speaks here generally of all men and not of infants only and therefore he saith Except a man be born c. speaking to Nicodemus who was a man and not an infant so that if your exposition were true all men that died without baptism and not infants only are excluded from heaven But that is false for first the good thief was not baptized with water and yet our Savior said to him This night thou shall be with me in paradise And therefore our Savior speaks not here of the Sacrament of Baptism for he speaks of that new birth by water and the spirit without the which none can be saved but this thief and others were saved without the Baptism of water therefore he speaks not here of it Next our Savior in that place speaks of that new birth by the spirit and water which is so absolutly necessary to the salvation of all men that it admits no exception This cannot be denyed But Bellarmin makes two exceptions against the absolut necessity of Baptism one of the martyrdom the other of true conversion and pennance whereof saith he either of them supplies the want of Baptism lib. 1. de Baptis cap. 6 Therefore our Savior speaks not here of the Sacrament of Baptism Thirdly if we will believe Christ Jesus expounding himself and Scripture expounding Scripture I say by water is not alwayes meant the Sacrament of Baptism but the purifying grace of Christ which is called the water of life so our Savior speaks in John 4.11 and 7.38 And in that same sense water is here added to the spirit to expound the more sensibly the efficacy of the Spirit in washing and cleansing us as fire is added to the Spirit in the third of Matthew 11. verse He will baptize you with the Spirit and with fire which is not properly understood of any natural fire but taken figuratively to expound more sensibly the force and efficacy of the Spirit in burning up our corruption Fourthly what an absurd thing were this which should follow if your exposition were true that for the want of the sprinkling of a little water the infants should perish that are in the covenant seeing they were not the cause of the want of it Further I say that suppose Baptism were here meant yet there is no such necessitie as ye suppose for if martyrdom and pennance may supplie the want of this water as Bellarmin confesseth how much more may the holy Ghost supply the want of the same in infants and if any thing may supply the want of it then it is not so absolutly necessary that all these infants are damned that wants it 2. Our Savior speaks as generallie and absolutlie Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you John 6.53 which ye interpret of the other Sacrament so that if your interpretation were true the Eucharist should be as absolutly necessary to the salvation of infants as you say Baptism is But the first you will not grant Therefore the other must also be falfe 3. If here ye would infer a necessity of Baptism then I say at that same time it began to be necessary for he saith not He that shal not be born again c. but he that is not born c. But Bellarmin saith lib. de bapt cap. 5. It was not necessary while Christs death yet not while the Pentecost fifty days after his death therefore it is not like that any necessity of Baptism is here understood for it had been good reason that Christs Baptism which was ministred while he lived in the flesh should have been as necessary as the Apostles Baptism which was ministred afterward But the first was not absolutly necessary as Bellarmin testifies therefore neither is the second And last of all lest ye should say all this is our exposition the Master of the Sentences expounding this place sent lib. 4. distinct 4. cap. His autem who suppose he be of this judgement with you concerning infants departed yet he saith that this place is to be understood of them who might have been baptized but contemned the same therefore this place imputes no absolut necessity of it As for the rest of the places of Scripture which ye quote they serve nothing to prove such an absolut necessitie of Baptism as ye suppose but only sets down the effects of the same which are sealed up in the hearts of the believers by the holy Ghost as the inward worker and Baptism as the outward instrument as our salvation through the death of Christ 1. Pet. 3.20.21 Tit. 3.5 Mark 16.16 our union with Christ Gal. 3.27 and with his death Rom. 6 3.4 and remission of sins regeneration mortification of the old man Acts 22.17 and 2.38 1. Cor. 6.11 And therefore Circumcision in whose room Baptism is succeeded it is called the seal of righteousness which is by faith Rom. 4. Take away therefore your exposition from these places and there will no such absolut necessitie of Baptism follow here as ye suppose And therefore Bellarmin the learnedst of your writers lib. 1. de sacr bapt cap. 4. because he knew that these places which ye quote here could not prove such an absolut necessitie of Baptism nor have no appearance to prove the same doth not cite one of them for the proof of the necessity except only the third of John leaving all the rest And as for that of Augustin we grant he was of that mind that Baptism was necessary to infants but he was also of that judgement that the Eucharist was necessary unto them and yet your Roman Church nor you neither I hope will subscribe to this error of his Seeing therefore you dissent from him in the necessity of the one and that upon good ground of the Scripture why may not we also dissent from him in the other having so many grounds and reasons out of the Word of God to the contrary as hath been said And this for the first point Now let the Christian Reader judge upon whose side the Word of God is SECTION VII Whither a man by the help of the grace of GOD may perfectly keep the Commandments Master Gilbert Brown SEcondly our doctrine is that a man