therefore seeing the holy councell of Chalcedon acknowledged the authoritie of the Bishop of Constantinople to be equall with the Bishoppe of Rome Secondly seeing Celestine the Bishop of Rome could alledge neither Scripture councell Father or reason for his pretended Primacie but one onely false allegation out of the councell of Nice Thirdly seeing the Fathers of the Affrican councell contradicted and reproued the Pope for his forgery of the Nicene councell concerning Appiarius Fourthly seeing S. Polycarpus S. Policrates S. Iraeneus and S. Cyprian with many Bishops of Europe Asia and Affrica contemned the Bishoppe of Rome his Decrees his supposed Supremacie I cannot but conclude with this inevitable illation Ergo the late pretended Soueraigntie of the Pope is but a rotten ragge of the new Religion as which was neuer heard of in Christ his church for the space of sixe hundred yeres and odde Al◠this is proued at large in my Suruey of Popery CHAP. 3. Of the mariage of Priestes and Ministers of the Church MArriage was lawfull for all Priestes in the old Testament For the Prophet Ieremie was the sonne of Helkiah who was one of the Priests at Anathoth Hophni and Phinehas were the sonnes of Eli the Priest Sephora was the daughter of Iethro who was the Priest of Midian Saint Iohn the Baptist that holy precurser of our Lord Iesus was a priests sonne euen the sonne of Zacharias Yea the marriage of Priestes was then so deere in Gods sight that the High-priest was forbidden to marry not simply and absolutely but to marry a Widdow a diuorced or polluted woman and hee was charged to take a Maid of his owne people In the New Testament no prohibition can be found as which is consonant to the Old pronouncing Marriage honorable in all and a bedde vndefiled Marriage as the Apostle teacheth vs was ordayned for a remedy against fornication to be vsed of all such as find themselues grieued with that disease consequently seeing that disease is as well incident to persons Ecclesiasticall as to persons secular and oftentimes more the Medicine is as necessary and as lawfull for the one sort as it is for the other For this respect did holy Paphnutius stand vp in the Councell of Nice at such time as the Fathers then and there assembled thought to haue seuered married Priests and Bishops from their wiues and told them according to Gods word that to forbid mariage to priests was too seuere a Law Hee yeelded this reason because marriage is so honourable in all sorts of men Thus writeth Cassiodorus thus writeth Socrates thus writeth Sozomenus For this respect was it that the Bishops Priestes and Deacons of the east-East-Church would neuer admit or receiue the Canons of the West and Romish Church For this respect was it that Priestes were euer maried in the East Churches vntill these our dayes and in the West Church generally for the space of three hundred eightie and fiue yeeres at which time Pope Siritius excited by satan prohibited Priestes marriage as an vnlawfull thing Yea Priestes continued still married in Germanie for the space of 1074. yeeres vntill the dayes of the vngracious Pope Hildebrand who termed himselfe Gregorie the seauenth so soone as hee had crept into the Popedome by naughty meanes For this respect was it that the famous Popish Cardinall Panormitanus committed to print to the view of the vvhole World that Priestes marriage was neither of the substance of their Order nor forbidden by Gods Lawe and that therefore it were for the saluation of soules that all such as would might marry Hee addeth the reason Because experience saith hee teacheth vs that the Priests debarred frō marriage liue not spiritually but are polluted in vnlawfull copulation though they might liue chastly with their owne wiues For this respect was it that the great Papist Polydorus could not containe himselfe but pittifully exclaime against the wicked prohibition of Priests mariage affirming stoutly and resolutely that the compelled chastitie of vnmarried Priestes was so far from excelling chastitie in wedlocke as no crime whatsoeuer hath brought greater shame to Priesthood more harme to Religion or more griefe to all good men then the vnchast life of Priests For this respect was it that Pope Pius the second of that name who before his Popedome was named Aeneus Syluius a very learned man famous Writer after he had reproued many vices in the Romish Church concluded very grauely that though there had beene great reason to debarre Priestes from marriage yet was there greater reason to restore marriage againe vnto them For this respect was it that many holy and learned Bishops were married men in the auncient time and florishing state of the Church viz. S. Gregory Saint Clement S. Spiridian S. Chereman S. Philogonius S. Eupsichus and others First therefore seeing Priestes marriage is approued both by the Old and New Testament Secondly seeing all Priests were alwayes married or at the least might haue married in the East Church Thirdly seeing Priestes marriage was holden for lawfull in the famous Councell of Nice and that the holy Bishoppe Paphnutius a man full of miracles in his life time did pronounce openly in the same Councell that the coniugall acts of married Priestes was true chastitie whose sentence was approued of the whole Councell and therevppon the matter was left as indifferent for euery Priest eyther to marry or not to marry at his owne choyce Fourthly seeing priestes marriage was euer holden lawfull and Christian for the space of three hundred eighty fiue yeeres euen vntill the time of the vntimely birth of Siritius then the Bishop or Pope of Rome and in the great country of Germany for the space of 1074. yeeres euen vntill the dayes of wicked Pope Hildebrand whom at that day the whole Clergie of Germany accused of flat heresie for that his most damnable Decree or Constitution against the honest and lawfull marriage of Priestes Fifily seeing the famous popish Abbot and Bishop and Cardinall Panormitanus for he was all the three and seeing withall that the great learned Papist Polydore Virgill did bitterly and pittifully exclaime against the vngodly and vnchristian prohibition of Priestes marriage crying out that it was the destruction of many soules and seeing also that Pope Pius the second cōfessed freely that it was time to restore marriage to their Popish priests again and to suffer thē to liue as they had done in old time all which and much more for the lawfull and honest defence of the marriage of all Bishops Priests Ministers of the Church the indifferent Reader shall finde pithily and copiously prooued in my Suruey of Popery I cannot but perforce I must conclude vvith this ineuitable illation Ergo the prohibition of the marriage of Priests is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 4. Of the Popish execrable Pardons THE famous Popish Writer Syluester for his great learning surnamed by the
Papists Absolutus Theologus knew right wel that Popish Pardons are but a toy for Chyldren to play withall these are his wordes The Popes Pardons saith he were neuer knowne to vs by the Scriptures although some alledge S. Paule for that purpose neither were they knowne by the auncient Fathers but onely by lare Writers Saint Antoninus theyr popish Saint and famous Archbishoppe had the selfe same opinion And Petrus Lombardus their famous Maister of Sentences who collected with great diligence into one Volume all the woorthy Sentences of the auncient Fathers could neuer find the Popes Pardons or any mention thereof in any of all theyr writings For as Syluester truly said The olde Writers were not acquainted with any such thing Yea their famous Martyr and Bishop Maister Fisher in his aunswere to Maister Luthers Articles was inforced to admit the newnes of the Popes pardons and withall forsooth to yeeld this reason for the same viz. That Purgatory was not then so well knowne to the Church as it is now adayes Peruse and note wel the next Chapter which is of Purgatorie so supposed paynes First therefore seeing the great popish Syluester confesseth plainly and boldly to the popes Holines that his popish pardoning is neither found in the holie Scripture nor in auncient Fathers Secondly seeing Antoninus Fumus and many other learned Papists grant freely that Syluester saith the truth heerein Thirdly seeing their famous Bishop Fisher vvas enforced to graunt the young age noneage of popish-pardons when hee could not aunswere Ma. Luthers reasons Fourthly seeing their Maister of Sentences could not find any mention of them in all the the Fathers writings I must perforce thus conclude Ergo the Popes pardon is a rotten ragge of the new Religion brought into the Church after 1300. yeres by Pope Bonifacius the eyght CHAP. 5. Of Popish Purgatory COncerning the originall of Popish-purgatorie it shal be enough to set down the words of Iohn Fisher the late Bishop of Rochester the popes canonized Martyr these are his expresse words The Greekes to this day doe not beleeue that there is a Purgatory Reade who will the Commentaries of the auncient Graecians and he shall finde either very sildome mention of Purgatory or none at all For neither did the Latine Church conceiue the veritie of this matter at one time but by leysure Neither vvas it without the great dispensation of the holy Ghost that after so many yeeres Catholicks both beleeued purgatory receiued the vse of pardons generallie So long as there was no care of Purgatory no man sought for pardons For of it dependeth all the estimation of pardons If thou take away purgatory to what end shall wee neede pardons for if there be no Purgatory we shall neede no pardons Considering therefore how long Purgatory was vnknowne then that it was beleeued of some by little and little partly by reuelations and partly by the Scriptures and so at the last beleeued generally of the whole Church we doe easily vnderstand the cause of pardons Since therefore purgatory was so lately known receiued of the whole Church who can admire pardons that there was no vse of theÌ„ in the primatiue Church Pardon 's therefore began after the people stoode in some feare of purgatory Thus writeth the popish Bishop Fisher. Whose words I hartily wish that the indifferent Reader may ponder seriously with me For if he so doe hee cannot chuse but abhor late popery and know it to be the new Religion This Bishop was a learned man a great papist said for popery what possibly he could yet he graÌ„teth many things of such force is the truth which quite ouerthrow popery and turne it vpside downe First we see that the Greeke church neuer beleeued purgatory to his dayes and so it was vnknown to theÌ„ 1517 yeres Secondly that the church of Rome belieued it not for the space of 250. yeres after which time it increased by little and little Thirdly that the church of Rome did not beleeue purgatory all at once but by little and little Fourthly that the inuention of purgatory was the birth of Popish-pardons as which could haue no place till purgatory was found out by fained reuelations and the people brought into some feare thereof Fiftly that the primatiue Church was neuer acquainted with the Popes pardons nor yet with his counterfeit and forged purgatory Of which as the popish Bishop telleth vs the silly people doe stand in feare Thus therefore I must coÌ„clude Ergo Popish purgatory is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 6. Of Popish Auriculer Confession SCotus who for his great subtile learning was of the Papists termed Doctor subtilis affirmeth resolutely that popish Auricular-confession is not grounded on the holy Scripture but onely instituted and commanded by the Church of Rome The popish Glosse of great credit with the Papists telleth them roundly that Auricular-confession can no way be defended but by tradition of the Church Panormitanus Rhenanus Richardus Durandus Bonauentura Hugo and all the popish Canonists generally approue and follow the same Glosse To this I adde that Auricular-confession was not an Article of fayth in the Romish Church for the space of 1215. yeeres All which I haue prooued at large in my Suruey of Popery and in my Motiues First therefore seeing popish Confession cannot be proued out of the Scriptures Secondly seeing it is onely commaunded by the Pope And thirdly seeing it was no matter of fayth with the Papists for the space of one thousand two hundred and fifteene yeeres I must needes conclude that it is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 7. Of Popish veniall sinnes THE newnes and young age of Popish-Religion may be sufficiently knowne by the coyning and inuenting of Veniall sinnes if nothingels could be said therein the Thomists will haue some sinnes not against the Law but besides the law and those sinnes they call their Veniall sinnes But Durundus a famous popish Schoole-Doctor many other learned Papists affirme euery sinne to be against Gods Law And this opinion doth nowe preuaile in the popish Schooleâ— as Iâ—sephus Angles in his Booke dedicated to the Popes Holinesse 〈◊〉 vs His words are these Et hae 〈◊〉 in schol◠〈◊〉 coÌ„mâ—nior and this opinion seemeth now adayes to bee more common in the Schooles Where I wish the Reader to 〈◊〉 by the way this word modâ— now adayes because it doth most â—â—â—ely and sufficiently set before our eyes the mutability of the late Romish Religion For in that he saith niodâ— now adaies hee giueth vs to vnderstand that their Doctrine is now otherwise their it was of old time and in former ages Behold heere the new Religion and that popish doctrine is vncertaine Againe Ma. Fisher late Bishop of Rochester granteth to Ma. Luther when he was ouercome with the force of his Reasons that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature Iaeobus Almaynus Durandus
Io Gorsonus Michaell Baius and other famous papists not able to aunswere the reasons against Veniall sinnes confesse the truth with the Bishop That euery sinne is mortall Yea the Iesuite S. R. with the aduise of his best learned friends in his Aunswere to The downefall of Popery coÌ„fesseth plainly blusheth not thereat that the Church of Rome had not defined some sinnes to be Veniall vntill the dayes of Pius the fift and Gregory the thirteene which was not fiftie yeeres agoe These are the Iesuits owne wordes True it is that Bishop Fisher and Gerson were in that Errour but that was before it was condemned in the Church as it was since by Pius Quintus and Gregorius 13. Loe the Iesuite cannot denie that great learned Papistes held euery sinne to be mortall and therefore he had no other shift to defend Popery vvithall saue this onely which is a very silly one That the Church of Rome had not yet defined the matter O sweet Iesus what a world is this that silly foolish papists should bee so bewitched as to thinke Popery the Old Religion We see it plainely confessed by our Aduersaries that for the space of one thousand fiue hundred and threescore yeeres all sinnes vvere deemed mortall But because some sinnes to be Veniall made greatly for the life of popery as without which it could hardly liue continue pope Pius and after him Gregorius decreed it for an Article of popish fayth That some sinnes are mortall and some Veniall for vvhich Venialls God cannot iustlie condemne any one to hell if wee will beleeue the Pope and his doctrine First therefore seeing the Papists cannot agree among themselues what sinnes are against Gods law Secondly seeing their opinions in their Schooles are now adayes changed and not as they were in olde time Thirdly seeing all sinnes were beleeued and holden for mortall for the space of one thousand fiue hundred odde yeeres Fourthly seeing pope Pius and pope Gregorie could change sinnes mortall into Veniall Fiftly seeing the Pope siâ—ting in his Chayâ—e or â—yding on his White Palâ—ray so he doe it iudieially can make that a poynt of popish fayth which was of no fayth for the space of one thousand and fiue hundred yeeres before that time I cannot but needes I must conclude with this ineuitable illation Ergo the Popish distinction without all rime or reason of mortall and veniall sinnes is nothing in deede but a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 8. Of the Popes Fayth VVIsedom with the whole troupe of Vertues were needfull for him that should dispute of the holy Fathers fayth or power I therefore post deosculationem pedum humbly pray to be heard in defence of Truth wherein I will desire no more of his Holinesse but onely that he will graunt so much to be true as I shall proue to be true by the testimony of the best Popish Writers The popish Seminarie Priestes write of this subiect in this manner As the pâ—udent Greeke appealed froÌ„ Alexander furious vnto Alexander sober and Bishop Crostrate from pope Adrian priuate to pope Adrian publique and as Summus Pontifex in Cathedra Petri so may the Seculars notwithstanding any decree set downe by his Holines to the contrary by wrong information giuen appeale euen from the Pope as Clemens vnto his Holinesse as Peter Thus 〈◊〉 William Watson in the name of all the rest By this Doctrine thus plainly deliuered which is a constant position in the Romish Church the Seculars giue vs to vnderstand that execrable and neuer enough detested fallacie where-with the Pope his popelings haue a long time sedueed the greater part of the Christian World viz. That the Pope may Erre as a priuate man but not as a publique person This is a great wonderment obserue vvell the sequell First therefore if wee meane to wring any truth out of the Popes nose wee must haue recourse to his Holinesse at such time as he is sober not when he is furious least he become starke mad and forget the knowledge of the Truth Secondly wee must haue the Popes aduise when he is a publique person not when or as he is a priuate man Thirdly we must goe vnto him not as he is indeed this or that pope but as he is Saint Peter that blessed Apostle of our Lord Iesus Thus much is necessarily gathered out of this popish doctrine Which beeing well marked Poperie will be the Newe Religion and turne it selfe vpside downe For first it is a constant Maxine in all popish doctrine that the Pope and none but the Pope must iudge in all Controuersiâ—s of fayth doctrine This notwithstanding we see by this popish doctrine so contrary is popery to it selfe that if the Pope judge of any matter as he is furious and not sober as he is a priuate man and not a publique person as hee is Clemens Sixtus Adrianus or some other like Pope and not S. Peter himselfe then he may Erre and so both he deceiued and deceiue others O my sâ—rable Papists how are ye led headlong into pernicious Fayth and Doctrine and eyther doe not or will not see the same Your Pope say you may Erre as a priuate mâ—n but not as pope or publique person This distinction may fitly be termed a tricke of fast and loose For if the Pope define a truth they may say he defined it as a publique person but if he define an error then say they he defined it as a priuate man Behold heere gentle Reader vppon what rotten stuffe the Papists would haue vs to ground our Fayth when we proue as I haue done elswhere that pope Anastasius pope Honorius pope Iohn pope Celestine and others haue both holden and taught false Doctrine they tell vs they did that as priuate men not as popes of Rome That their pope cannot erre in fayth iudiciallie it is this day with papists an Article of their fayth The famous papist Dominicus Scoto shal be the spokesman for the rest Albeit saith hee the Pope as Pope cannot Erre that is to say cannot set downe any Errour as an Article of our Fayth because the holy Ghost will not that permit neuerthelesse as hee is a priuate person so may he Erre euen in fayth as he may doe other sinnes But how old is this Romish Doctrine Of vvhat age is this strange Fayth Of this sâ—biect I haue written at large in my Golden Ballance of Tryall This onely will I now say that this popish Article The Pope cannot Erre in fayth was neuer heard of in Christes Church for the space of 1500. yeeres Many famous papists I might alledge but one Alphonsus will suffice We doubt not saith he whether one man may be a Pope an hereticke both together For I beleeue there is none so shamelesse a flatterer of the Pope euer except our Iesuites and Iesuited Papists that will ascribe this vnto him that hee can neither Erre nor be deceiued in the exposition
of Popish fayth vntill the Councell of Constance about 1414. yeeres after Christ. 13. That Priuate Masse began 1000. yeeres after Christ. 14. That it was euer holden vnlawfull for the brother to marry his naturall sister for the space of 1418. yeeres at what time Pope Martin set it abroach by the instigation of the deuill 15. That worshipping of Images was thought vnlawfull for the space of 1484. yeeres 16. That the Church seruice was euer in the vulgar tongue for the space of 443. yeeres at the least 17. That Popish Agnus Deis were not heard of for the space of one thousand two hundred yeeres after Christ. 18. That the Popes Bulls were vnknowne for the space of 772. yeeres after Christ. 19. That Popish hallowed Candles on Candelmasday were inuented 843. yeeres after Christ. That Bishops were not sworne to defend the Pope and his Canons for the space of one thousand two hundred twenty nine yeeres after Christ. 21. That Lent-fast in Popish manner was neuer heard of for the space of 427. yeeres All which and many other important poynts of Popish fayth are so liuely discouered to the first hatching thereof in this short and plaine Discourse as euery child may with all facility boldly pronounce and constantly affirme that the late Romish Fayth and Doctrine is not the Old but the New Religion Which if the silly Papists would once duly consider they would no longer obey the Pope or like of his Religion The Worke such as it is I haue dedicated to your Worships as a signe of a thankfull hart for your manifold kindnesses towards mee at all times And so I humbly commend your Worships to the protection of the Almighty From my studie the first of Iulie 1607. Yours in Christ Iesus Tho Bell. CHAP. 1. Of this name and word Pope IT is a wonder to consider how the late Bishops of Rome haue aspyred to their super-lordly Primacie and chiefest so supposed Soueraigntie in the Christian world Popery with our Iesuits Iesuited-Papists must needes be the Old Religion and that selfe same Doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paule deliuered to the Church of Rome This is their invincible Bulwarke which as they boast all the Canons of the faithfull and good Christians can neuer batter downe And this they neuer cease to inculcate into the eares and to instill it into the harts of the sillie vulgar people telling them forsooth that Popery is the Old Religion and the fayth of their forefathers in all ages I therefore to take this stumbling blocke out of the way doe purpose in God the fountaine of all goodnes and the chiefe workman of euery good act to set before the Readers eyes in a very summary succinct narration that Popery is a new Religion by little and little crept into the Church and patched together as clout vpon clout in a Beggers cloake Now for this name Pope which the silly people admire God-wote as a most sacred thing and for all that know no more what it meaneth theÌ„ how farre it is to Heauen it is a Greeke word Pappas which signifieth Father It was giuen of old indifferently as well to other Bishops as to the Bishops of Rome I prooue it first because the Clergie of Rome writing to the Clergy of Carthage call S. Cyprian the blessed Pope or holy Father Secondly because the Priestes Moses and Maximus and the Deacons Nicostratus and Ruffinus and sundry other CoÌ„fessors did all with one assent call the same Cyprian Beatissimum Papam the most blessed Pope Thirdly because S. Hierom called S. Austen Beatissimum Papam most holy Father or Pope and this he did many times and in many Epistles But after that the Emperour Iustinianus had in his Legall constitutions named the Bishop of Rome Pope the arrogant Bishops of Rome began to challenge the Name as if it were proper vnto them alone And so in processe of time the Bishops of Rome were onely solely called Popes and of late yeeres Our holy Father His Holinesse is his vsuall Name But this Empâ—rour liued after Christ his birth about 528. yeeres Ergo this poynt of Popery is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 2. Of the Popes superoyall power BOnifacius Bishop of Rome and the third of that Name aboue sixe hundred yeeres after Christ obtayned of Phocas then Emperour of Rome that Rome should be the head of all Churches Before which time no authenticall Writer can be named who euer ascribed the Headship and Vniuersall gouernment of all Churches to the Church of Rome For first Saint Policarpus would not yeelde to Anicetus Bishop of Rome in the controuersie about Easter which for all that he would must haue done if the Bishop of Rome had had any true prerogatiue ouer him Secondly S. Iraeneus other holy and learned Bishops of Fraâ—nce ioyning with him reprooued Victor then Bishop of Rome very sharply and roundly as one that had not due respect to the peace and vnitie of the Church Which doubtlesse those holy learned Bishops would not haue done if the Bishop of Rome had had in those dayes the supreame Soueraigntie ouer them Thirdly S. Polycrates and many Bishops of Asia did stoutly withstand the same Victor theÌ„ the Bishop of Rome in his presumpteous proceedings touching Easter Fourthly S. Cyprian roundly opposed himselfe against Stephanus then Bishop of Rome contemning his Decree and deriding his reasons Fiftly the Apostles at Ierusalem sent Peter and Iohn to coÌ„firme the faythfull in Samaria And consequently if the Pope be not aboue Peter but his supposed Successor he may be sent of the Bishops his Brethren as Saint Peter was But who is that Bishop and where dwelleth he that at this day dareth doe to the novve Pope such supposed villany Sixtly the Fathers of the famous Affrican Counsell in which Saint Austen that holy Father and most stout Champion of Christes Church was present to the great honour and credite thereof would in no wise yeeld to Celestine then Bishop of Rome in the controuersie of Appeales concerning Appiarius And when Pope Celestine alledged for himselfe and his supposed Soueraigntie that the auncient and famous Councell of Nice gaue libertie to appeale to Rome the Fathers of the Councell answered roundly that the true copies of the Decree were otherwise Where I wish the Reader to obserue with me these two poynts seriously First that the Pope could not and therefore did not alledge any better reason for his vsurped and falsely pretended Primacie then the authoritie and Decree of that famous Councell of Nice Secondly that the Pope Celestine falsified the canon and Decree of the Councell so to gaine credit and authority to himselfe if it might be Seauenthly the famous Councell of Chalcedon gaue the Bishop of Constantinople equall authoritie with the Bishop of Rome in all Ecclesiastical affaires Eightly the councell of Nice prescribed limits as well to the Bishop of Rome as to other Patriarkes First
of the Scriptures First therefore seeing the Pope may Erre in faith and doctrine Secondly seeing many Popes haue so Erred De facto And thirdly seeing this strange faith was not hatched or heard of in the World for the space of one thousand and fiue hundred yeeres no not in Alphonsus his dayes as wee haue heard alreadie I cannot but perforce I must conclude that it is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 9. Of the condigne so supposed merrite of workes TRue it is I freely grant that the holy Fathers doe often vse the word Merrit and doe often call the workes of the Faythfull merritorious yet this they doe not for any worthines of the works but for Gods acceptation and promise sake who hath promised and will performe not to suffer so much as one cuppe of cold water giuen in his Name to passe without reward That is to say the Fathers terme good workes merritorious because God hath promised to accept the workes of the Faythfull as vvorthy for the vvorthines of his Sonne and for his merites to reward them with heauen as if they had merited the same For which respect either euer or almost euer they ioyne Merrite and Grace together Of this subiect I haue written at large in my Suruey of Popery I will now onely say with their deere Abbot Bernard It is sufficient to merrite to know that our merrites are not sufficient True it is likewise that not onely the Fathers generally but the best popish Schoole-Doctours also Durandus Aquinas Gregorius Ariminensis Dominicus Scoto Marsilius Waldensis Burgensis and sundrie others do vniformly and constantly affirme that no mans workes how holy soeuer they be eyther are or can be meritorious properly but onely merritorious in an vnproper large kind of speech as is already said This is proued at large in my other bookes True it is thirdly that the religious Fryer and popish Bishop Iosephus Angles telleth the Pope roundly that it is the constant and vniforme fayth of all the holy Doctors that the best and holiest mans works vpon earth neither are nor possibly can be merritorious or worthy of eternall life if Gods holy free promise be set aside Without the which saith Angles in the name of all the rest the best works of all are altogether vnwoorthy of so great reward His expresse words are these prorsus digna wholy vnworthy Where I with the Reader to obserue seriously with me this word prorsus which signifieth wholy for if out best workes be wholy vnworthy of the reward or glory as Iosep Angles in the name of all the holy Fathers Doctors telleth the Pope both grauely and coÌ„stantly then doubtles the best works of all can no way be meritorious The case is cleere for to be meritorious as euery childe knoweth is to be worthy And consequently seeing to be worthy and to be meritorious is all one our workes which are no way worthy but euery way prorsus vnworthy can no way be meritorious When any Papist in the world can truly disprooue this Illation let me be his bondslaue for his reward Againe for the simple Readers helpe and capacitie this is the state of the Controuersie The Papists hold that mans works doe condignely or woorthâ—ly which is all one merite eternall reward I in the name of all Catholiques and good Christians doe hold and constantly defend the contrary Now to merrite is to be worthie â—s is both already prooued and of it seife euident but the best workes are no way woorthy as is alieadie proued Ergo the best workes doe no way merrit If this argument be well marked all papists are coÌ„sounded euerlastingly True it is fourthly that the Iesuite S. R. Robert Parsons indeede I challenge the man in his supposed and pretended Aunswere to The downefall of Popery hath set downe these CoÌ„clusions against both the Pope and himsâ—lfe The first Conclusion There is merite of eternall life and our supernaturall vvorkes done by Gods grace are meritorious of eternall life and glory The second Conclusion Good workes done in Gods grace are condignly merritorious of eternall life The thiâ—d Conclusion This condigne merrite is not absolute but supposeth the condition of Gods promise made to reward it These are the Iesuits Conclusions set down by the best aduise of his best learned friends among whom the Iesuiticall Cardinall Bellarmine must needes be one Which CoÌ„ciusions for all that doe euidently prooue as much as I desire True it is fiftly that the late popish Councell of Trent hath accused all such as 〈◊〉 or not beleeue the condigne merrit of mans works And coÌ„sequentlie it hath made that an Article of Popish faith ô wonderment of the World which was no poynt of fayth in the true Catholique Church for the space of 1540. yeeres viz. The condigne merrit of mans work amonster lately borne at Rome Now to take away all wrangling true it is I will it not deny that the Councell of Trent hath not the word condigne but it hath another worde equiualent to the same viz. True merrite And therefore to answere as the Iesuite doth that the Councell hath onely the word true not the word condigne is meere foolery For to merrite truly and condignly is all one Otherwise let our Iesuite tell vs howe one can merrite that thing truly which he doth not worthily and condignelyd serue Yea to the Iesuites euerlasting shame and to the vtter confusion of all his lesuited brethern S. R. him selfe doth most plainly against himselfe testifie the same to all the world These are his expresse words That good workes are a condigne or wâ—orthy merrite of Heauen followeth of that they are a true merit thereof because as I thinke onely condigne merrite is true merrite Thus writeth our Iesuite I alledge his vvordes truly as I will auoswere before God And consequently seeing true merrite and condigne merrite is all one euen by the Aduersary his free grant it followeth of necessity that the Councell decreed the condigne merrite to be a matter of sayth First therefore seeing the Fathers and Schoole-Doctors doe all generally deny the condigne merit of mans workes Secondly seeing all the Fathers best learned Papists doe all vniformely affirme that the best works are altogether woorthy of heauen Thirdly seeing the Iesuites owne conclusions doe prooue the same against himselfe Fourthly seeing this deformed monster condigne merrite of workes I meane is yet scarce three-scote yeeres of age I cannot but perforce conclude with this incuitable illation Ergo it is but a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 10. Of Transubstantiation in Popish Masse THE popish Transubstantiation in their Masse is to themselues so vnceritaine that they cannot toll in the world what to say or thinke thereof Rupertus a famous popish Abbâ—r holdeth that the Bread is vnited hypostatically to the Sonne of God Caietmus Henricus and Capreolus are of an other opinion Iohaâ—â—es Parisiensis held also that the