the word of God Now from hence thus I reason If the word of God written be the onely ground of faith then that Religion which will not acknowledge it dependance onely vpon the word written is not to be beleeued but to be suspected as erronious but the word written is the onely ground of faith as hath beene proued therefore that Religion which disclaymeth it dependance only vpon the word deserues iustly not to be beleeued but to be suspected as erronious And in this regard the Romish Religion though it be in our Pater noster to wit vnder the last petition Deliuer vs from euill yet it should neuer come into our Creed to repose our faith and our saluation vpon it 4. Thirdly the Scripture as it is the fountaine and foundation of true Religion So it is the rule of faith and the touchstone of doctrines and the ballance of the Sanctuarie to weigh truth and falshood in that the one may be discerned from the other This the Prophet Esay teacheth when hee calleth vs to the Law and to the Testimonie saying that if any speake not according to that word there is no light in them From which place thus I reason that whereunto we must resort in all controuersies and doubts for resolution that is the rule of faith but such is the Scripture by the testimonie of the Prophet therefore the Scripture is the rule of faith In like manner we may conclude out of S. Peter who saith that We haue a more sure word of the Prophets whereunto wee must take heede as vnto a light that shineth in a darke place till the Day-starre arise in our hearts If the word of the Prophets was a sure direction to the Church of God before the Gospell was written then much more is the whole Scripture contayning the word of the Prophets and of the Apostles together but S. Peter affirmeth the first therefore the second must needs follow For this cause when one asked our Sauiour what hee might doe to bee saued hee referred him to the Scripture for his direction What is written how readest thou And so Abraham referreth the rich gluttons brethren to Moses and the Prophets and Christ telleth the Saduces that this was the cause of their errour because they knew not the Scriptures Out of all which Texts thus I argue If there were any other rule of faith besides the sacred Scripture our Sauiour and Saint Peter would neuer haue sent vs ouer to the Scripture alone but would haue poynted out vnto vs some other meanes but they send vs to the Scripture alone and therefore that alone is the rule and ballance of our faith 5. And this the very title and inscription of the Scripture doth intimate for why is it called Canonicall but because it containes the Canon that is the rule of faith and life The Fathers with one consent agree in this truth Saint Basil calls the Scripture Canonem recti normam veritatis The Canon of right and the rule of truth Chrysostome sayth that Assertio diuinarum legum c. The assertion of the law of God is a most exact Ballance Squire and Rule Saint Augustine calleth it Statera diuina Gods ballance or a diuine ballance these bee his words Non afferamus stateras dolosas Let vs not bring deceitfull ballances to weigh what we will and how we will saying This is heauie that is light but let vs bring that diuine ballance out of the holy Scriptures as it were out of the Lords treasurie and by it weigh all things or rather acknowledge them being weighed by the Lord. Tertullian giueth to the Scripture the same name so doth Gregory Nyssen and our Countriman venerable Bede to passe ouer all the rest as he is reported by Gratian in his decrees telleth vs in most plaine termes that In sacris literis vnica est credendi pariter viuendi regula praescripta The onely rule both of Faith and Life is prescribed vnto vs in the holy Scriptures Now if this be so as it is meere madnesse to affirme the contrary then that religion which doth refuse to be tryed by this rule and to be weighed in this ballance doth giue iust cause of suspition that it is but light stuffe and crooked ware 6. If a man should offer to his creditor a piece of gold for payment and should refuse to haue it either tryed by the touch-stone or weighed in the ballance he might iustly suspect that it was but either light or counterfeit so may any of good sense rightly suspect that religion to bee both light and counterfet which refuseth to be examined by the rule of Gods word especially which is the second branch of the first proposition if it not onely refuse to be tryed by the Scripture but also will admit no tryall nor Iudge but it selfe for as by reason wee conclude that such a man hath an euill cause in hand who in Westminster Hall refuseth to haue his matter tryed by the law and will admit no Iudge but his own opinion that man to be guilty which standing at the bar of iustice accused of some great crime denyeth to be tryed by the verdict of his Country according to the law so likewise the cause of Religion being called in question that must needs in any equall iudgement bee deemed vnsound and guilty which will not stand to the verdict and sentence of the Prophets and Apostles who are the Iury to trye all cases of conscience and of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scripture who is the onely Iudge to heare and determine all questions of doubt which may arise in matters of faith and will be censured and iudged by none but it selfe 7. Against this truth all the Romanists and especially the Iesuites and of the Iesuites chiefly Bellarmine conflict and fight with foote and horse sailes and oares tooth and naile and all they can doe for herein lyeth the very bloud and life of their Religion And if this bee wrung from them that the Scripture is the onely iudge and rule of faith Actum est de regno Pontificio The Romish kingdome goeth to wracke vtterly and therefore they mainely contend to proue first that the Scripture is not the Iudge of controuersies secondly that it is not properly the rule of faith and if it bee a Iudge it is a dumbe one that cannot speake and if it be a Rule it is a partiall and imperfect one not totall and absolute 8. These two positions Bellarmine laboureth to prooue by many sorts of Arguments first from testimonies of the Olde Testament secondly from testimonies of the New thirdly by the authority of Bishops and Emperours fourthly by the witnesse of the Fathers lastly by reason I passe ouer the foure first sorts of Arguments as being sufficiently answered by others and come to the last which are deriued from reason the slightnesse whereof doth plainely discouer the vanity of this their opinion
in it selfe doth not deserue a iust reproofe 64. In the other place obiected hee writeth thus Qui seriò tanquam sub conspectu Dei c. i. They which shall earnestly as in the sight of God seeke the true rule of iustice shall finde for certainty all the words of men if they be censured by their owne dignity to be nothing but pollution and filthines and that which is commonly called righteousnesse to be before God meere iniquity that which is counted integrity to be impurity and that which is esteemed glory to be ignominie Let the Reader now iudge what notorious lyars these bee to fasten this opinion vpon Caluin whose wordes I haue sincerely and fully set downe that euery one may see their false dealing for in what one place nameth hee mortall sinne or what one word tendeth to that end The worse termes he◠giueth to good workes in the first place are these That they are sprinkled with imperfection mixed with the dregs of the slesh stained with corruption and in the second that they are filthines iniquity pollution and ignominy but how first if they bee examined by the strict rule of Gods iustice secondly if they bee compared to Gods righteousnesse and thirdly if they bee considered in their owne merite and worth without the merite of Christ whereby both their staines and imperfections are couered and an excellent dignity giuen vnto them 65. And indeed what I pray you doth Caluine say herein but that which the Fathers said before I will propound two or three vnto you in stead of al the rest Woe be to our righteousnesse sayth Saint Augustine if God remouing his mercy should search into it and againe All our righteousnes standeth rather in the remission of our sinnes then in any perfection of iustice Our best righteousnes sayth Saint Bernard if it be any is right perhaps but not pure vnlesse happily we thinke our selues better then our Fathers who no lesse truely then humbly said All our righteousnes is as a defiled cloth The holy man Iob sayth Saint Gregory because he saw all the merite of our vertue to be in vice if it be strictly iudged by the eternall Iudge did rightly adde in If I will contend with him I shall not be able to answere him one of a thousand Lastly all beauty sayth Arnobius in Gods presence is but deformity all righteousnes is but vnrighteousness all strength but weakenes all riches but beggery These Fathers with all the rest say no lesse then Caluine nor Caluine no more then they and therefore they must either bee condemned with him or bee iustified with them Now if any man should say that they affirmed that our best works were deadly sinnes all men would condemne him for a liar so may we iustly say of our malicious aduersaries in imputing that opinion to Caluine which hee neuer meant nor yet the words will beare and also which in all his writings hee directly crosseth 66. That which hath beene spoken concerning Caluine may bee applyed to the iustification of Luther and Melancthon who are so farre from esteeming good workes to bee mortall sinnes that they extoll them hyperbolically as hath beene already manifested Luther indeed sayth thus That a good worke done after the best manner that can be yet is a veniall sinne according to the mercy of God and a mortall sinne according to the iustice of God but what of this doth he therefore say that it is a mortall sinne simply as they would haue him no in no case for first hee calleth it a good worke which hee would neuer haue done if hee had iudged it no better then a sinne secondly hee sayth that it is mortall according to the iustice of God and veniall by the mercy of God which is the very same that all the Fathers affirmed before intending by mortall not that which is a high degree of sinne but that which in it owne nature deserueth death Thirdly Luther himselfe sheweth what his intendment is in the article going before where he sayth that not the good worke it selfe but the defect in the worke is truely sinne because it is an omission of that precept Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart By all which it is cleare that Luther doth not condemne a good worke but the euil in the worke and that though God doth in mercy pardon the euill for the goods sake being a fruit of faith so he might iustly condemne the good for the euill sake that cleaueth vnto it being a fruit of originall sinne so that Luther standeth cleare and innocent from this crime layd to his charge in all true iudgement and they stand guilty of a most foule slander imputed vnto him by their malice 67. Thirdly they slaunder vs that we slaunder God by making him the author of sinne This accusation Bellarmine Campion Stapleton Vasques Feuardentius and all the Iesuiticall rabble lay to our charge And they accuse Caluine Luther Peter Martir and all other Protestant-writers as guilty thereof but vpon what ground and with what shew of reason let them declare vnto vs for it passeth the reach of our capacities to finde out any such doctrine either direct in plaine words or indirect by logicall consequence in any of them direct doctrine I am sure Caluine thus writeth The cause of sinne is not to be sought out of mans will out of which the roote of euill ariseth and in the which sinne resideth And in his Comment vpon the Epistle of Saint Iames more plainely he affirmeth that God is not the author of sinne and that euils doe not proceed from any other roote but from the euill concupiscence of euery mans owne heart And this doctrine he iterateth againe and againe many score of times in his bookes Peter Martyr in like maner is most direct against this blasphemous doctrine for thus he saith That opinion of the Libertines which maketh God the author of sinne is a most detestable opinion then which nothing can be imagined more wicked nor a more compendious way to hell And in the same place he concludeth that though nothing in the world no not sinnes themselues come to passe besides Gods will and prouidence yet he is not truly to be called the cause of sinne but all that can be sayd is that he is such a cause which is tearmed by the Logicians the remoouing or hindering cause that is not efficient but deficient rather which in truth is no cause at all Luther is as direct for he auoucheth this proposition in many places God is not the author of sinne And this same is the constant affirmation of all our Diuines What a shamelesse forehead then haue our malicious aduersaries that dare lay vnto our charge this blasphemy which we all detest and abhorre 68. I but say they though in word you say so yet by consequence from your doctrine it may be necessarily gathered that you hold the contrary for you all teach that God concurreth with
An officious lye and a lye in sport are but veniall sinnes saith Molanus the same Authour affirmeth that if any man steale some little thing suppose an halfe peny as Bellarmine giueth instance whereby no notable hurt is caused this is to bee esteemed no mortall sinne Againe rash iudgement though consent bee added thereto is regularly but a veniall sinne so also is the painting of the face saith Molanus Cardinall Caietane reckoneth vp a number such like as for example Partiality in iudgement and acception of person if it be not pernitious Flattery when we praise one for veniall euils and it be without any manifest hurt Ambition that is an inordinate desire of honour if it be not for euill deeds or immoderate Arnogancie whereby a man attributeth that to himselfe which is farre aboue him if it be without preiudice of his neighbour Craft if it bee not ioyned with damage Couetousnesse as it is opposed to liberality that is an inordinate desire of money and greedy keeping of it being gotten because it is not against but besides charity Contempt of our neighbour and Superiour in small trifles To contend in words against a known truth if the opposite falshood be not pernitious To rayle vpon our neighbour to his face if it proceede from passion or bee but a light reproach Curiositie if it bee naked without some other euill ioyned with it To mocke and scorne our neighbour if in a small matter Drunkennesse if it be not full and compleat to wit if a man drinke till the house seeme to goe round and yet is not depriued of reason yea if it bee of purpose and with full intention For a childe not to reuerence his Parents so that it be free from notorious iniurie and contempt To deceiue if in a small mater Gluttony is then onely mortall when a man makes the delight in eating the last end Hypocrisie to wit thus farre forth if a man faine himselfe to be good in some thing when hee is not or better then he is Filthy speech is most vsuall but veniall To disdaine a mans neighbour is commonly but a veniall sinne To iudge rashly of our neighbour is either veniall or mortall according to the greatnes of the thing where of we giue iudgement Idlenesse if it haue no other mischiefe to accompany it These and a number such like are reckoned vp by that Author to which I might adde many more out of other Romish writers but these may suffice for our purpose to demonstrate what liberty this doctrine giues to loosnesse For hence men may be bold to sweare to curse to raile to back-bite to steale to be drunke to be idle c. cloke all vnder this vaile They are but veniall sinnes Yea and because the common people are not able to vnderstand their nice distinctions of against and beside charitie surreption and irruption great and small dammage c. therefore often grosse and great sinnes creepe in vnder the name of venials if this be not a doctrine of liberty what is 40. The sixt and last doctrine tending to loosnesse the last I meane of those which I intend to propound in this Discourse for there are many more that tend to the same end is their doctrine of implicite and infolded faith where by they teach that if a man know some necessary poynts of Religion as the doctrine of the God-head of the Trinitie of Christs incarnation and Passion c. it is needlesse to busie himselfe about the rest by a particular or distinct knowledge but it sufficeth to giue assent to the Church and to beleeue as the Pastors beleeue This implicite faith is the mother of ignorance and this ignorance say they is the mother of deuotion but what kind of deuotion I pray you such as the mother is such is the daughter a blinde mother and a blinde daughter such a deuotion and zeale which the Iewes had when they crucified Christ or as Saint Paul had when he persecuted the Church of Christ or which the Gentiles had when they thought they did God good seruice by putting to death the primitiue Christians Like Poliphemus when his eye was bored out by Vlisses dashed himselfe against euery rocke so doe these blinde Romanists the eye of knowledge being bored out by this pernitious doctrine dash themselues against the rocke of Heresie in matter of faith and impietie in manners for all errour in doctrine ariseth from ignorance of the Scriptures You erre not knowing the Scripture and the power of God saith our Sauiour and erring in manners proceedeth from the same fountaine for if the hyding of Gods word in the heart is a preseruatiue against sinne as the Prophet Dauid auoucheth then the ignorance of Gods word must needs be the cause of many errours and enormities in life To this agreeth the opinion of Chrysostome Scripturarum ignoratio haereses peperit haec vitam corruptam inuexit haec sursum ac deorsum omniamiscuit The ignorance of Scripture hath bred heresies brought in corruption of life and turned all things vpside downe And also of Saint Hierome who sayth plainely Ama scientiaÌ„ Scripturarum carnis vitia non amabis Loue the knowledge of the Scriptures and thoushalt not loue the vices of the flesh Whereby hee giueth vs to vnderstand that where there is no loue of knowledge there must needs be the loue of vice the reason is manifest because the Scripture is a most exquisite rule and exact squire to try all our actions by as Chrysostome calleth it and a straight and inflexible rule as Gregory Nissen termeth it Now if this rule squire and ballance be hid from vs how can we square our actions aright how can wee giue them their iust poyse and weight As the Carpenter that hath lost his rule and line cannot but erre grosly in his worke So the Christian that is depriued of this knowledge of Gods word must needs runne into infinite foule and grosse enormities 41. From this fountaine conioyned with those which went before springeth the monstrous corruption of manners in all places whâ—â— Popery raigneth especially in Italie and Rome vnder the Popes nose They obiect to vs the great and horrible disorder and corruption which is among Protestants but we on the other side as we stand not to iustifie our selues in this kind but rather be waile the prophanenesse of all estates in these dayes euen vnder the Gospell so we dare boldly say that in the time of Popery heretofore and in places where it now swayeth their impiety and prophanenesse doth as farre exceed ours as a great mountaine doth a little molehill Of all Countries in the world Italie is the Popes owne peculiar and yet that is the very siacke of the world for sinne witnesse Aencas Siluius who liued almost two hundred yeares since who sayth
haue with this secret meaning to tell it thee or at this time or some such like things And if an husband aske his wife whether shee be an adulteresse she may answere no though she be with this mentall reseruation to reueale it to him and if a man be constrained to sweare that he will take a woman to his wife he may doe it safely although he neuer meane it with this close clause in his mind if she shall after please him Thus farre Tollet 6. Now of late dayes one hath divulged a whole Treatise in defence of this monstrous doctrine to the which Blackwell the Arch-priest hath giuē this solemne approbatiō that it is a very godly learned Catholique Tractate worthy to be published in print to the comfort of the afflicted instructiō of the godly The author of this Tractate thus concludeth If a Catholike or any other person shal be demanded vpon his oath before a Magistrate whether a Priest be in such a place he may though hee know the contrary securely in conscience answere No without periury with a secret meaning reserued in his mind namely that he is not there so as a man is bound to reueale him Againe if one shall aske me whether such a stranger lyeth in my house I may answere he lyeth not in my house albeit he do meaning Non mentitur this last is verball equiuocation the former is mentall reseruation which are the two approued kindes of their equiuocating art 7. If this filthy strumpet be not the mother of two foule daughters Lying and Periury lying if by a bare asseueration periury if ioyned with an othe let all that haue but common sense and reason iudge and let the Enquest that shall enquire into this matter be first heathen Philosophers secondly the Popish writers themselues thirdly the Fathers and Doctours of the Church and fourthly which is of greater moment then all the rest the holy Scripture of God diuinely inspired and cannot deceiue nor be deceiued Let vs heare the Philosophers verdict A Lye saith Tully is a false enunciation of words with an intent to deceaue and againe he defines dolus malus that is deceit to be when one thing is pretended another acted this is a false action So in like manner a false diction which is a lye must needs bee when one thing is spoken by the mouth another vnderstood in the heart therefore the ordinary Grammaticall notation of this word mentiri to lye is quasi contra mentemire as it were to goe against the minde and Aristotle sayth that speech is ordained for this cause to signifie and expresse the secret conceptions of the mind therfore when the mouth and the mind are at variance then the law of nature is peruerted and in stead of a naturall and true-borne childe Truth a bastard to wit a lye is produced But they which equiuocate pretend one thing and intend another they speake one thing meane another their heart and their tongue like vntuned strings are at iarre with themselues and therefore by no meanes can they be excused from open and notorious lying 8. Now if an oath bee mixed then a fouler monster is brought forth euen Periury for what is periurie but according to their own diuinity a lye made in an oath and is not equiuocating when the equiuocator is sworne to speake the truth periury Let Tully determine this doubt if it bee a doubt Not to sweare a falshood is to bee forsworne but not to performe or make good that which thou hast sworne according to thine owne meaning as customably it is conceiued by thy words is periury all the world cannot more directly cut the throat of all equiuocation then this doth 9. But I leaue the Philosophers and come to their owne Schoolemen To lye saith Lumbard is when a man speaketh any thing contrary to that which he thinketh in his mind It is a lye saith Aquinas when a man will signifie another thing then that which he thinketh in his mind Againe Lumbard Whosocuer vseth craft or subtiltie in an oath defileth his conscience with a double guilt for he both taketh the name of God in vaine and also deceiueth his neighbour And Aquinas their great Doctor condemneth in expresse words this equiuocating tricke of theirs If a Iudge saith he shall require any thing which he cannot by order of law the party accused what may he equiuocate No. he is not bound to answere in deed but either by appeale or some other meanes may deliuer himselfe but in no case may be tell a lye or vse falshood or any kind of craft or deceit This was then good diuinity but now the Iesuites our pretended resiners of Popery haue coyned a new kind of diuinity but like counterset slips it will not abide the tryall Heare what Scotus saith another Schooleman Dicere non feci c. To say I did not that which I know I haue done although I speake it with this reseruation that I may signifie it to you is not equiuocation but a plaine lye To conclude with Maldonate Quisquis fingendo c. Whosoeuer saith he by saining doth goe about to deceiue another although he intend some other thing in his mind without doubt lyeth for otherwise there would be no lye which might not by this meanes be defended 10. Thus we haue the verdict of diuers of their own Writers touching this monstrous doctrine Let vs heare now what the Fathers thinke of it and let Saint Hierome speake first None is a lyer saith he but he that thinks otherwise then he speaketh Therfore the equiuocator is a lyar for he thinketh otherwise then he speaketh as when he affirmeth I am no Priest when he is one he thinketh hee is that which he saith he is not Is Saint Augustine of a contrary minde no hee agreeth with Hierome in this though they iarred in some other things He that speaketh saith he falsly against his conscience doth properly lye but so doth our equiuocator And for Periury This saith Augustine is the very forme of Periurie to thinke that to be false which thou dost sweare Thus doth the equiuocatour for when hee sweareth hee knoweth not a man and yet knoweth him doth hee not manifestly thinke that to be false which he sweareth his mentall reseruation cannot saue him from the pillory seeing as Isidore saith God doth valew an oath not by the sense of the speaker but according to the sense of him to whom the oath was made Thus by the verdict of these three Fathers their doctrine of equiuocation is guilty both of lying and periury 11. And that I may leaue them without a starting hole let them heare what the Iury of Life and Death saith I meane the holy Prophets and Apostles yea what GOD the Iudge himselfe saith Thou shalt not saith he Beare false witnesse against thy Neighbour No nor of thy neighbour therfore much lesse
cases cannot be cleared from Incest for this is the rule of supputation by the Canon law which is most fauourable to them Quo gradu remotior distat à communi stipite eodem etiam inter se distant In what degree the person furthâ—st remoued is distant from the stockâ— in the same degree they are distant from one another Now put the case after this manner ABRAHAM ISAAC IACOB IVDA PHARES ISCAH ISMAEL Here in this Scheme or figure Iscah is by their own rule in the first degree from ISMAEL and therefore by their doctrine ISMAEL may marry ISCAH which is most notable and apparent Incest for brethren and sisters are but one flesh and so Isaac and Ismael are both one flesh as Iudah said of Ioseph Frater noster est caro nostra est he is our brother and our flesh And therefore Ismael is vnto all Isaacs posterity as it were their Father and they vnto him in stead of Children and so by consequent cannot marrie not onely within the fourth degree but euen vnto the thousand degree if it were possiâ—le For Adam if hee were now aliue could not find a woman in the whole world to marry lawfully withall without committing Incest neither is this a conceit of our own deuising but the expresse rule of the word of God for Leuit. 18. 12. 13. wee are forbidden to vncouer the shame of our Fathers sister or of our Mothers sister but all our predecessours in the right line are our fathers and mothers though they he neuer so sarre remooued and therefore to marry with their brothers or sisters stands guilty of Incest by 〈…〉 law For which cause also Iustinian decreeth that Amitam licet adoptiuam c. It is not lawfull to marrie our Fathers adopted sister nor our Mothers adopted sister because they are held in place of Parents and the law in the Digests is plaine and pertinent Amitam quoque materteram item magnam amitam materter am magnam prohibemur vxorem ducere quamisis amita magna maâ—â—rter a magna quarto gradit sunt We are forbidden to warry our Auxt either by Father or Mothers side yea our great Aunt though she be in the fourth degree Thus by all â—awes the Popish doctrine that it is lawfull for any to marry beyond the fourth degree is a plaine maintenance and allowance of Incest 20. Againe who knoweth not but that theft is condemned by all lawes except it be by the lawes of Platoes imaginaries CoÌ„mon-wealth or the Anabaptistical positions of some later heretikes who would haue propriety of goods taken away and a communitie of all things brought vp but the Papists by their doctrine not onely tolerate some kind of theft but euen maintaine and allowe it as lawfull For thus writeth Maldonate a learned Iesuite and of great authoritie Poore men saith he doe not commit theft when being pressed with extreame necessity they take that which is another mans because marke his Anabaptisticall reason the thing at such a time is not properly another mans but common to the life of man being in danger c. And to prooue this hee abuseth an excellent sentence of Saint Ambrose who speaking of the communitie of charitie and not of propriety saith Esurientis pauis est quem â—â— retines nudorum vestimenâ—uÌ„ est quod â—â— recludis miserorum paecunia est quam tu in terram defodis It is the poores bread which thou retainest his garment which thou lockest vp and his money which thou hy dest in the ground But he speaketh as any man may see not to encourage the poore to lay hands vpon rich mens substance but to stirre vp the rich to the workes of charitie neither to excuse a poore man from theft if he steale from the rich but to accuse the rich of theft if out of his wealth he do not powre forth to the necessitie of the poore Neither is this the opinion of one Iesuite onely but it is backed and barred by the approbation of another of no meane credite For thus writeth Emanuel Sa in his Aphorisines Ego inquit c. I saith he am of the same mind with them which thinke that it is lawfull for a poore man priuily to purloine from a richman which is bound to helpe him and doth not Here be two brethren in euill concurring in the defence of one and the same sinne for if to steale be not an offence for a poore man why doth the law say in generall Thou shalt not steale Let them shew the exception and exemption of the poore from the law or let them confesse to their eternall shame that they are maintainers of those that breake Gods law Besides if as Saint Augustine and all other learned Diuines confesse it bee not lawfull to lye though it bee to the sauing of our liues then it must needs follow that it is not lawfull for a poore man to steale though it be for the sauing of his life for theft is a sinne that bringeth more damage with it then an officious lye can doe which is vttered not for hurt of another but for the preseruation of our selues 21. Besides these Cardinall Tollet another Iesuite a man of high dignity and authority in the Romane Church approueth by his verdict another kind of theft worse then those before specified for he alloweth in some cases the vse of false ballances and falsification of wares his words are these There is saith he a man that either by reason of vniust dealing of the Magistrate or the malice of the buiers conspiring together to pull downe the price or some other reasonable cause cannot sell his wine at a iust price when the case thus falleth out then may this man either lessâ—n his measure or mingle water with his wines and so sell it for pure wine and require the full price as if the measure were compleate prouided that he doe not lye which neuertheles if he doe it is no pernitious lye nor mortall nor binding to restitution In like manner it is lawfull to sell other silke in stead of Granado silke and Italian in stead of Greeke and so after the same proportion all other wares These bee the braue positions of that renowned Cardinall wherein how apparently hee doth contradict the written word of God let any indifferent vmpier iudge by comparing this his doctrine with these sentences of the Scripture here ensuing Diuers weights are an abomination to the Lord and deceitfull ballances are not good A true weight and a ballance are of the Lord and all the weights of the bagge are his worke Diuers weights and diuers measures both these are euen abomination to the Lord yee shall not doe vniustly in iudgement in line in weight or in measure yee shall haue iust ballances true weights a true Ephah and a true Hin I am the Lord your God c. Thou shalt not haue in thy bagge two manner of weights a great and
are enabled to merit and partly by vertue of Gods promise whereby hee hath engaged himselfe to crowne those merits with glory which he hath wrought in vs by grace to which double obiection I returne this double answere First if all good workes issue from the roote of grace as they doe indeede then how can we merit thereby seeing that which doth merit must bee our owne and not anothers especially his of whom we looke to merit So saith Hilary it is for him to merit who himselfe is to himselfe the Author of getting his merit and therfore if it be true which they affirme that Gods grace is the onely fountaine of all good workes as without doubt it is it is so farre from following thence that therefore our workes are meritorious that it followeth by mere necessary consequence that therefore they are not meritorious And this conclusion is made by diuers of the ancient Fathers themselues We haue nothing to reioyce or glory of saith S. Cyprian therefore nothing to merit because we haue nothing of our owne The merits of men are not such saith S. Bernard as that life eternall by right is owing for them and why because all merits are the gifts of God and so man is rather a debter to God for them then God to man And S. Augustine Eternall life should be rendred as due vnto thee if of thy selfe thou hadst the righteousnesse to which it is due but now of his fulnesse wee receiue not onely grace now to liue iustly in our labours to the end but also grace for this grace that afterward wee may liue in rest without rest So then if our good works arise only frō Gods grace this maketh plaine against all merit as they know well enough and therfore behold their fraud and the mysterie of iniquity though they shadow the matter with goodly words of grace and mercy yet vpon free-will they hang the vertue and effect of this grace and from that fountaine doe they deriue vnto man all this merit which they talke so much of and so howsoeuer they ascribe vnto Gods grace the cause of merit yet in very deede with them it is free-will that maketh a worke meritorious 31. Secondly I answere that when God doth promise to reward our workes with eternall life eternall life is due to vs but not for our workes sake but for his promise sake for many things are due by promise which haue no reference to any desert As if the King should promise one of his seruants a thousand pound of his mere liberality for keeping a Hawke he is bound to pay him so much but is it from the seruants desert or from the Kings bounty So God promiseth eternall life to our workes and by reason of his promise wee may challenge it as our due but yet it is not for our worke but for his word sake as Saint Augustine confesseth when he saith God is become a debter not by receiuing any thing from vs but by promising what it pleased him therfore a reward giuen by promise is so far frō importing desert that it rather ouerthroweth the very foundation thereof by being a worke of mercy as the same Augustine saith in another place The promise is sure not according to our merits but according to his mercy The doctrine of merit then vndermineth the mercy of God which way so euer they turne themselues whether to grace as the cause of the worke or to Gods promise as the cause of the reward 32. Againe by this doctrine not onely the mercy of God is darkened but also the merits of Christ quite euacuated and made of no force for if Christs merits were sufficient what neede there then any supply of our owne if our owne merits be necessarily required then Christs merits were not sufficient If Christs merits were perfect then mans merits cannot be added vnto them for that is perfect to which nothing can be added but if mans merits must bee added to them then it followeth that Christs were not perfect and so no merits at all for this property is required in a merit that it bee perfect and so either they must denie the necessity of our meriting or confesse the vnsufficiencie of Christ either they must acknowledge Christs merits to be vnperfect or ours to be vnnecessarie yea none at all I but they will say Christ did not onely merit the pardon of our sinnes but also that our workes should be meritorious of life euerlasting and by this sat they are Christs merits more magnified then by vs because the greater the gift is the greater is the glory of the giuer so that our meriting doth not argue any want in his merits but rather proue a greater efficacie to be in them for to this end will hee haue vs to merit partly that we may shew our selues like vnto him and partly to traine vs vp in good workes by this spurre All these are but shifts and indeede mere cauils for first to say that Christ did not alone merit for vs eternall life but also grace that so we might merit eternall life for our selues what is it but to make vs our owne Sauiours for all our merits come from grace and free-will ioyned together as hath beene shewne and grace is nothing with them except free-will concurre with it for they teach that we may receiue it if we will and when we haue it we may merit if we will eternall life or else goe without it What is this I say but to affirme that a man is not saued by Christs merits but that by the helpe of grace hee doth saue himselfe by his owne merits and so they shoue Christ out of his office and put themselues in his roome 33. Secondly I answere that the efficacie of Christs merits is greater in purchasing eternall life for vs by himselfe alone then in giuing vs ablenesse to merit it for our selues because it is a greater glory and a token of greater power to effect a thing immediatly without meanes then by the mediation or vsurpation of any meanes whatsoeuer In the former all the honour is to the worker in the later there must needes be some glory ascribed to the meanes and some power attributed vnto them and therefore to say that Christ hath onely merited by himselfe without vs eternall life for vs is to giue the entire and perfect glory vnto him and none vnto our selues and to affirme that hee merited to make our workes meritorious is to derogate from his glory and to detract from the efficacie of his death and passion 34. And here we may see the vanity of Bellarmines assertion who to proue that by this doctrine of theirs they ascribe more efficacie to Christs merits then we doe bringeth in this similitude Sicut quòd Deus c. that is As in that God vseth the Sunne to lighten the world fire to heat it ayre and raine to refresh it is not an argument of weakenesse in
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
of Gregory their owne Pope who allowing onely an historicall vse of them forbad them to bee worshipped as testifieth Agrippa Indeed wee confesse that there was in these Primitiue times of the Church an historicall vse of Images as may appeare by that statue of our Sauiour at Cesarea mentioned by Eusebius and the Pictures of Peter and Paul in the same author and of the good shepheard seeking the lost sheepe painted vpon their Chalices in Tertullian But wee shall neuer finde in any good author that either they were receiued into Churches or worshipped in any religious manner 46. Lastly it is a knowne and confessed truth that Images were neuer generally receiued inioyned vpon the Church vntill the second Nicene Council which was eight hundreth yeeres after Christ and also that the decree of that Councill was abrogated by another Councill held at Frankeford not long after so that it is manifest that the petigree of this bastard is of no great continuance not fetched from the Primitiue Church which is the thing we haue in hand to prooue but springing vp in the more corrupt times when superstition had darkned the light of true Religion and almost banished it out of the world 47. Another article of their Religion is that the Pope hath a supremacy of power ouer all euen Princes not onely in spirituall matters but euen in temporall which to bee a late deuice not warrantable by true antiquity may be easily demonstrated For vpon those words of Saint Paul Let euery soule bee subiect to the higher powers Chrysostome and Occumenius write thus That whether it bee a Priest or a Monke or an Apostle hee must bee subiect to the ciuill Magistrate for this subiection doth not ouerthrow piety and if an Apostle then the Pope as Aeneas Siluius who was after a Pope himselfe inferreth yea Espensaeus goeth further and sayth that not onely Chrysostome but Theodoret Theophilact and all the Greeke Doctours and in the Latine Church Saint Gregory and Saint Bernard did from that place teach that eueryl Apostle and Prophet and Priest was commanded to acknowledge subiection vnto Emperours Saint Ambrose sayth plainely that the Church lands and Church men themselues did pay tribute to the Emperour and if tribute then subiection Saint Augustine sayth that it is generale pactum societatis humanae abedire Regibus suis The generall couenant and bond of humane societie to obey Kings If the Pope then bee a man by Saint Augustines rule hee must bee subiect yea Gregory the first himselfe auoucheth plainely that power ouer all men is committed by GOD Dominorum meorum pietati to the piety of my Lords where hee not onely subiecteth all none excepted to the Imperiall power but also calleth the Emperour his Lord but now the Pope is the Emperours Lord and not the Emperour the Popes as Bellarmine speaketh without blushing when he sayth Non sunt ampliùs Reges Clericorum superiores c. Kings are not any longer superiours to Clerks and therefore Clerks are not bound to obey them by Gods Law and thus in generall the Pope had not this supremacy till Gregories time 48. For particulars one part of this supremacy is that the Pope is absolutely aboue a Councill which notwithstanding was condemned by the Councils of Constance and Basill And as Cardinall Cusanus confesseth was not acknowledged in the dayes of Saint Augustine Pope Gregory and other Fathers and Councils which liued before the first six hundreth yeere Another part is that appeales should bee made to the Pope from all places which the Councils of Chalcedon Africke Mileri and Constantinople vtterly withstood and interdicted A third is that peculiar cases of conscience should bee reserued to the Popes consistory which their owne Salmeran confesseth to haue not beene vsed in the time of Cyprian who liued two hundreth and fourty yeeres after Christ A fourth is the claime of Inuestitures which by consent of history was brought in first by Pope Hildebrand as witnesse Malmsbury Nauclerus Sigibert with others A fift authority to depose and molest Princes which no Orthodoxall Father for the space of 1000. yeeres taught or approoued as sayth their owne Barclay and the first Pope that practised this was Hildebrand surnamed Gregory the seuenth as witnesseth Espensaeus or at the highest Gregory the third who attempted this rebellious practice against Les the Emperour for defacing Images as Platina confesleth A sixt a supereminent prerogatiue in calling Councils and dissoluing the Acts thereof at his pleasure both which are notorious nouelties for the first eight generall Councils were called by Christian Emperours and the decrees of Councils were of so sacred authority that the better sort of Popes in the purer times put great Religiō in changing them or varying from them in any respect witnes Aeneas Siluius Victorine and Cardinall Cusanus Lastly a seuenth the fountaine of Episcopall Iurisdiction challenged to reside in the Pope alone and from him to bee imparted to other Bishops at his pleasure which was a doctrine not known in Saint Cyprians time nor in Saint Ieromes as hath beene shewed before In a word there is no colour of antiquity for any part of this transcendent Iurisdiction and yet the very soule and life of Popery consisteth therein 49. Of the same stampe is their doctrine of receiuing the Sacrament vnder one kinde and withholding the cup from the peoples this was first decreed by the Council of Constance and afterward established by the Trent conuenticle and hath euer since beene practised in the Church of Rome vnder paine of excommunication But that it is a grosse innouation wee need no further testimony then of the two foresaid Councils the one whereof sayth that in the Primitiue Church both kinds were receiued and that this custome of one kinde onely came afterward in and the other striketh with anathema all them that shall say that the Catholike Church hath not altered this custome vpon iust causes by which words it confesseth that there is an alteration of ancient custome now what the causes were of this alteration I will not here report let the Reader behold them in Bellarmine Gerson and Lyranus and wonder that Christs ordinance the generall custome of the primitiue Church should be altered annihiled vpō so sleight friuolous and foolish grounds adde vnto these Councils the wirnesse of their owne Cassander who directly affirmeth that this custome of communicating vnder one kinde inuaded not the Latin Church vntill the yeere of our Lord 1300. To the same purpose might bee alledged their owne ancient Lyturgies the decrees of their owne Popes and the generall doctrine of their schoole and lastly the consent of Fathers all which doe most clearly proue this doctrine to be a nouelty if not an heresie Their Lyturgies are plaine that the cup was ministred to the people and not appropriated to the Priests as may be seene in them Among their
Father that is God the word being taken personally and not in the abstract as if the essence of the Deity of the Sonne should bee from the Father which is entirely subsisting in of and by it owne eternall incomprehensible and most glorious nature and this without question was the true intendement of the Councill for els it had not confuted but fauoured the blasphemous heresie of Arrius against whom it was assembled which Caluine and Beza doe not any wayes crosse but onely bring vnto it a fit and fauourable exposition Thus we haue Bellarmine Caluines and Bezaes patrone in this doctrine though full ill against his will and not onely him but Ribera and Gregory de Valentia two other no meane Rabbies both which doe conclude that the Sonne as he is a person is of another but as he is a simple Ens is not of another and that the Essence doth not beget the Essence but the Father the Son so that either they are slanderers of the truth or their Catholike doctrines may bee Atheisme and blasphemy 72. Againe they accuse Caluine of another blasphemy against our Lord and Sauior Iesus Christ to wit that he should make him inferiour to his Father in respect of his Deity This is Arrlanisme indeed as Bellarmine calleth it or Atheisme as Posseuine if it were to bee found in Caluines diuinity or any other but it is as farre from him thus to thinke as it is from their malice to speake the truth This is all that Caluine affirmeth that the Father is God per excellentiam that is after a more excellent manner And what errour I pray you is in this doth hee not speake of the personall relation that is betwixt the Father and the Sonne and not of the nature and essence of the God-head that is in both of equall dignity and excellency This is cleare both by the former article wherein he sloutly auoucheth him to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God of himselfe and not to receiue the essence of his Deity from his Father and so not to be inferiour to his Father in that respect and also by infinite places in his books where he directly maketh the Son Iehouah equall to the Father in dignity excellency eternity and all other properties of the Deity therefore he speaketh this in respect of the person of Christ in which consideration the Father that begetteth respected with the Sonne that is begotten may truely bee said to haue a certaine priority of order ānd to be God after a more excellent manner Here is now neither Arrianisme nor Atheisme nor indeed any error in Caluines doctrine but malicious lying and slaundering in in these Iesuites accusation 73. Nay that Caluine may bee cleared from all suspition of errour and those fellowes condemned as notorious slaunderers Tollet one of their owne fraternity affirmeth that Athanasius Basil Nazianzene Hilary and Origen all strong maintainers of Christs diuinity and profest enemies to Arrius heresie interpret that place Iohn 14. My Father is greater then I in Caluines sense Maldonate another Iesuite in his commentary vpon Iohn addeth to these Epiphanius Cyrillus Leontius Chrysostome Theophilact and Euthemius as patrones of the same opinion yea and this last Iesuite himselfe subscribeth to their exposition for he sayth that the Father is greater then the Sonne in that respect that hee is the Sonne for the Name of the Father is more honorable then the Name of the Son and the Schoolmen say asmuch as Caluine when they ascribe to the Father authority and to the Sonne subauthority What is this but to say that the Father is God after a more excellent manner Now then if this were neither Atheisme nor Arrianisme nor heresie in the Fathers nor in their owne Doctors why should it bee branded with those infamous titles in Caluine I see no reason but that malice is blinde and that the hatred they bare to that good man made them to say and do they cared not what so they might wound his credite thereby 74. Luther is likewise traduced by them as a denyer of the blessed Trinity and that because the word Trinity is said to dislike him for which cause he dispunged out of the Germane Lyturgies this sorme of prayer Sancta Trinitas vnus Deus miserere nostri a notorious calumniation for Luther indeed blotteth out of the Germane prayers a certain forme like vnto that obiected but not so as he setteth it downe for the word vsed in the Germane tongue signifieth rather a triplicity then a Trinity which mooued Luther in a desire to maintaine the pure doctrine of the Trinity as Iunius obserueth to blot out that word thinking it a dangerous matter to vse such a word in so holy and high a mystery By which practice he is so farre from impugning or denying that blessed principle that he sheweth himselfe rather a zealous defender and maintainer thereof and in a word to discouer their falsity and his innocency List how diuinely and soundly and orthodoxally he writeth else-where of that mystery Vnitas Trinitatis est magis vna c. The vnity of the Trinity is more one then the vnity of any creature euen mathematically neuertheles this vnity is a Trinity or the diuinity of three distinct persons that euery person is the whole diuinity as if there were no other and yet it is true that no person is the fole diuinity as if there were no other Againe vpon the transfiguration of Christ Mat. 17. hee thus commenteth Heere the whole Trinity doth appeare to the confirmation of all the faithfull Christ the Son in a glorious forme God the Father by his voyce declaring his Son to be God and the holy Ghost in the bright cloud ouer-shadowing them Againe we beleeue sayth he that there is one God the Father begetting the Sonne begotten and the holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and Son we determine such a plurality in God which is of an vndiuided substāce an indiuisible vnity again the mystery of the Trinity was discouered in the beginning of the world after vnderstood by the Prophets and lastly plainly reuealed by the Gospell when our Saviour commandeth to baptize in the name of the Father of the Son and of the holy Ghost A number of such like places might bee alledged out of his workes wherein most constantly hee auoucheth that doctrine which our and his vnequall aduersaries accuse him to bee an enemy vnto Let enuy it selfe now bee iudge whether this bee not a slander when as they both falsisy those sayings out of which they would deriue their accusation and conceale those which they knew to bee a iust defence and apologie for his innocency 75. Againe they condemne Beza and Martyr and other Protestants for denying the omnipotency of God and why because forsooth they say Quod facta vt infecta sint facere nequeat Hee cannot make those things that bee done to bee vndone An absurd inference for that
and plain-dealing men The case then thus standing this practice of theirs cannot be termed Christian policy but plaine subtlety to giue it no worse a name 110. His last reason is drawne from the practice of the Church of God in all ages which hath alwaies forbidden the Bookes of Heretikes to be read and condemned them to the fire and to this purpose he produceth diuers fit and pertinent authorities to which I answere first that he fighteth herein without an aduersarie for we confesse that this was a necessarie and commendable practice to prohibit condemne burne and abolish all such Bookes as tend to the corrupting of the Christian faith and also to preuent them in the birth that they may not come to light but yet for all that this alloweth not their purging and paring of Bookes for they cannot giue vs one example in all antiquitie of this dealing except it bee drawne from Heretikes whose practice it hath beene to depraue the Scriptures themselues and the Decrees of Councels and the Bookes of ancient Fathers as witnesseth Bellarmine in many places of his workes and Sixtus Senensis and almost all other of their side III. Secondly the Fathers condemned onely the Bookes of Heretikes but our holy Inquisitors condemne not onely those whom they call Heretikes as Caluine Luther Beza Melancthon but mangle and purge the Fathers themselues and their owne deare children whom they dare not condemne for Heretikes as this Author himselfe confesleth those they chop and change wriâ—he and wring bend and bow as they list which is so much the more intolerable because being profest Romanists they durst not vary from the receiued opinions of the Church of Rome except mere conscience inwardly and some forcible reason outwardly mooued them thereunto 112. Thirdly and lastly the Fathers when they condemned any Heretike or hereticall Booke did it openly to the view of the World and not secretly in a corner not ascribing vnto them other opinions then they held eyther by adding vnto or detracting from their writings But our Romish correctors like Owles flye by moonshine and so closely câ—rtie their businesse that they would haue none to discry them yea they denie and abiure this trade I meane in respect of the Fathers and in a word they make almost all Authours to speake what they list for if any thing dislike them deleatur let it be wiped out or at least mutetur let it bee changed or addatur let something bee added vnto it that may change the sense and turne the sentence into a new mâ—ld of all these their Iudices Expurgatorij afford plentifull examples so that they can no wayes colour their forgerie and false dealing by the examples of the Fathers or Primitiue Church For this is a new tricke of legerdemaine of the Deuils owne inuention found out in this latter age of the World which hath beene verie fertile in strange deuices 113. Now then to conclude and to leaue this Priest with his vaine and idle reasons to be fuller confuted of him whom it more neerely concerneth and whose credit is touched by him Hence two necessarie conclusions doe arise one that they are guiltie of forgerie and corrupting of Authours by their owne confessions and secondly that they adde hereunto impudencie and shamelessenesse which is alwayes the marke of an Heretike and that first in defending their owne vniust and false dealing by reasons as if their wits were able to maintaine that snow was blacke and the Crow white and secondly in translating the crime from themselues vnto vs without all shew of reason not caring what they say so they say something for the honour of their mistresse the whore of Babylon and defence of her cause 114. Now then seeing it is manifest that they labour to vphold their Religion by these vniust vngodly and deuillish practices as treason crueltie periurie lying slandering and forging this conclusion must needes bee of necessarie consequence that therefore their Religion is not the truth of God nor their Church the true Church of God It is the iudgement of their owne learned Iesuites touching this last crime that wee may conuince them out of their owne mouthes that forging of false Treatises corrupting of true changing of Scriptures and altering of mens words contrarie to their meaning be certaine notes of heresie what can the Church of Rome be then lesse then hereticall that not onely doth all this but now at length professeth and maintaineth the doing thereof as lawful and profitable MOTIVE XIII That Religion the doctrines whereof are more safe both in respect Gods glorie mans saluation and Christian charitie is to bee preferred before that which is not so safe but dangerous But the doctrine of the Protestants Religion is more safe in all those respects and of the Papists more dangerous ergo that is to be preferred before this and consequently this to bee reiected THe first proposition is so euident and cleare that our aduersaries themselues will not deny it neither can it by any good reason bee excepted against for as it is in bodily physicke that medicine is alwayes preferred which bringeth with it lesse danger to the life of the patient and if it misse curing cannot kill so is it in the spirituall physicke of the soule which is Religion that doctrine deserueth best acceptance which is most safe and least dangerous for the soules health And as desperate medicines if they bee applyed by a skilfull Physicion argue a desperate case in the patient so desperate doctrines proue a desperate cause Neyther will any wayfaring man when two wayes are offered vnto him the one whereof is full of manifold perils and the end doubtfull the other safe from dangers and the end certainly good not choose rather the safer and certainer way and leaue the other so men like Pilgrimes trauelling towards the heauenly Canaan the way of Poperie on the one side and of Protestancie on the other being seâ— before them if they bee well in their wits will choose rather that way which is both the safer in the passage and the certainer in the end There is no doubt then in this first proposition and therefore let vs leaue it thus naked without further proofe and come to the second and examine whether our Religion or the Romish is the safer that all men may imbrace that which by euidence of demonstration shall appeare to be so and resuse the contrarie and here notwithstanding all the former pregnant arguments whereby the falsitie of their Church and Religion is plainly discouered wee put our selues againe vpon a lawfull tryall and referre our cause to the iudgement not of twelue men but of the whole world that if our euidence bee good wee may obtaine the day and the mouthes of our aduersaries may be stopped if not we may yeeld as conquered to bee led in triumph by them to Rome yea to the Popes owne palace to kisse his feet and receiue his marke on our