they deuide the word of God into verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 written and vnwritten their vnwritten word is nothing but orall Traditions deliuered as they say by Christ himselfe to his Apostles alone and not to his common Disciples because it contayned the high mysteries of the Kingdome of God and by them conuayed to their successours Bishops and Elders of the Church Secondly they affirme also with them that these orall Traditions are of equall authority and necessity with the word written yea that the word written is of no authority at all quoadnos in respect of vs except it bee authorized by the tradition of the Church And thirdly they teach that the word written is imperfect vnlesse the vnwritten Cabala bee added vnto it and that not one alone but both together make a perfect rule both for faith and manners Doe they not now Iudaize in all these points Yes the Romish Apologers to proue their doctrine of traditions fetch an argument from the Iewes Cabala as may bee seene in a late tractate falsly called the Catholike Apologie which is so much the more strange because their own Sixtus Senensis professeth that the Iewish Thalmud is fraught with innumerable blasphemies against God and his Christ our Sauiour and impieties against the law of Moses besides other infinite fopperies Is not this then a good patterne for them to imitate and is it not a sound argument that is deduced from such premises Surely their traditions which they build all their superstition vpon thus symbolizing with the Iewish Cabala can be of no better credit then it is and what credit that hath not onely their Senensis before bâ—t Galatinus another stout champion of theirs acknowledgeth when he saith that it is mere madnesse to approue all their vnwritten traditions which they bragge to haue beene deliuered in mount Sinai and from thence orderly to haue descended to posterity Now that which he speaketh of the Iewes Cabala may as truly be affirmed of the Romish traditions let them therefore goe arme in arme together since they will needes haue it so â—â— ioynt enemies to Christian Religion 18. Againe the Iewes ascribe so much credit and faith to their Cachamim or illumined Doctors that whatsoeuer they teach be it right or wrong they must not enquire into the truth thereof but receiue it as an article of their Creed and build their faith and saluation thereupon Thus writeth one of their owne Rabbines to wit Rabbi Isaac that died in Portugall Anno 1493. Wee are bound saith he to giue no lesse credit to euery Rabbine in their sermons and mysticall or allegoricall explications then vnto the Law of Moses it selfe and if there be found in their words any thing hyperbolicall or contrary to nature and sence we must ascribe the fault thereof to our owne defectiue vnderstanding and not vnto their words And the same is the doctrine of their Thalmud Their speeches saith it are the speeches of the liuing God neither doth one word of theirs fall to the ground in vaine and therefore we are bound to beleeue all things whatsoeuer are written of them or in their name for it is the truth neither must any man laugh at them neither in his countenance nor in his heart for whosoeuer shall doe so shall not escape punishment and his punishment they say shall be this that he shall be tormented in hell in boyling excrements And in another Booke the Iewes are commanded to say Amen not onely to their Prayers but also to all their Sermons and alleÌ„goricall expositions Yea if two Rabbines contend and contradict each other yet they are bound to beleeue both of them because the words both of the one and the other are the words of the liuing God though they vnderstand not each other And in a word so great is their madnesse that they are not ashamed to say That the words of their Rabbines are more to be regarded then the words of Moses law and that if they teach that the right hand is the left and the left the right yet they are bound to beleeue them 19. And is not the Church of Rome paralell to them in this case I will not condemne them but let their owne words be their Iudges Thus write the Rhemists in their Annotations vpon Acts 17. 11. The hearers must not try and iudge whether their Teachers doctrine be true or no neither may they reiect that which they find not in Scripture The same is the tenent of Cardinall Hosius Andradius and all other of that stampe Bellarmine affirmeth that the people must beleeue what soeuer their Passors teach except they broach somenew doctrine which hath not beene heard of in the Church before and if they do so yet they must not Iudge of them but referre them to the definitiue sentence of the Pope to the which they must yeeld full consent without further examination Yea he impudently concludeth in another place That if their ordinary Pastor teach falshood another that is not their Pastor teach the contrary truth yet the people ought to follow their Pastor erring rather then the other telling the truth And another blasphemous Cardinall giueth a reason thereof Because saith he if a man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and man and the Pope thought the same hee should not be condeÌ„ned For saith a third Cardinal the iudgement of the Pope is the iudgement of God and his sentence the sentence of God As if the Iudgement and sentence of God could bee erronious which the first Cardinall supposeth concerning the Pope or as if the Popes sentence being erronious could be the sentence of God as the second affirmeth Obserue their blasphemous absurdities Siluester Prierias concludeth this poynt when hee sayth That whosoeuer resteth not on the doctrine of the Romane Church and Bishop of Rome as the infallible rule of God is an Heretike And the Canonists sticke not to say that the Pope is subiect to no law but that his iudgement is in stead of law and that his actions are not to bee enquired into neither may a man say vnto him though hee lead thousand soules into hell with him Sir why doe you thus and that it is not better then sacriledge to call in question the Popes fact or to iudge of his actions Thus an insallibility of iudgement and an impossibility of erring is ascribed vnto the Bishop of Rome so that whatsoeuer hee propoundeth bee it right or wrong must bee receiued vpon paine of damnation Neither is it ascribed onely vnto him the worlds high Priest but also to their Councills and inferiour Pastors animated by his spirit whose doctrine is to be heard and not examined as they teach And therefore it is esteemed a great sin amongst them for a man to make question of any doctrine brought vnto them by any Romish Iesuite Fryer or Priest
the Elders of Ephesus I haue deliuered vnto you the whole counsaile of God Now if hee deliuered to them the whole counsaile of God then no part of his counsaile that concerned the mysterie of Christian Religion was vndeliuered Besides it is as certaine that that Church which next succeeded the Apostles was the most pure and absolute Church whether for doctrine or manners matter or forme that euer was in the world and therefore to degenerate from that must needes be to degenerate from the puritie and sanctity of Religion And againe it cannot bee denyed that though some heresies were broached euen in the Apostles times and were coetaneae Apostolorum as Tertullian noteth and though the primitiue age of the Church after the Apostles was most pestered with Heretikes yet euermore the truth preuailed both in regard of birthright and predominance And therefore they that will plead antiquitie must both prescribe from the Apostles time and must haue a good title also to hold by for these two things are necessarily required to a iust prescription as the Lawyers speake Bonus titulus A good title and Legittimum tempus A lawfull time A good title is that which is warranted by the diuine Law and a lawfull time is that which is fetcht from Christ Iesus and his Apostles both these concurring together are an inuincible argument of the truth The first proposition therefore must needes be infallibly true 3. And so I leaue it and come to the second proposition the truth whereof shall bee manifested in two poynts first in respect of the outward face and fashion of their Church and secondly in respect of the principall doctrines which are proper vnto them as they are the Romish Synagogue 3. For the first The outward face of the Church deuideth it selfe into three branches first into the persons that exercise preeminence and authoritie in it and secondly into the iurisdiction and authoritie exercised by those persons and thirdly into the outward ceremonies thereof In all these the Church of Rome is degenerate from the Primitiue and Apostolicall puritie 4. The principall persons of the Romish Hierarchie are these The Pope first as the ring-leader next the Cardinals his Counsellors of state then Archbishops and Bishops his assistants and lastly the shaueling Priests his vassals to which body may be added as excrements an infinite rabble of religious Orders as Monks Fryers and Heâ—mits with such like and of Fryers the Dominicanes the Franciscanes the Austinians the Ambrosians the Minorites the Gilbertines the Crossebearers the Cisterensians the Blacke the White the Gray the Bare-footed the Begging with a number more and to conclude the Iesuites which as they are the taile of all the rest for the time so they are the head of all the rest for vill nous conspiracies bloudy plots diuelâ—ish deuices and hellish practices Now of all thesâ— Bishops onely excepted wee finde not so much as any mention neither in the writing of the Apostles nor in the age next succeeding after them for though the name Pope Papa being a word of the Syracusan Language and signifying as much as Pater Father be of great antiquitie yet as a Iesuite of their owne confesseth with others it was a common name to all Bishops as appeareth both in Cyprian and Ruffinus till Gregory the seuenth in an assembly held at Rome decreed that onely the Bishops of Rome should bee called Popes But as touching Cardinals the matter is more grosse for the first birth and originall of that name can be deriued no higher then eyther from Gregory the firsts time or Pope Siluester or Marcellus or Pontianus by their owne confession and therefore some of them ingenuously acknowledge that the Order of Cardinals is not ex iure diuino by Gods ordinance though others no lesse foolishly then impudently would fixe their foundation vpon these words of the Scripture Domini sunt Cardines terrae The hinges or the pillars of the earth are the Lords Therefore Cardinals are of God which is as good a consequent as his that would prooue that Heretikes ought to be put to death by Scripture because Saint Paul said Haereticum hominem deuita c. as hath beene shewed before As for the name of Bishops wee deny not but it is found in Scripture and so Archbishop may also be warranted by the same authositie as signifying nothing else but a chiefe Bishop but how farre the Romish Archbishops and Bishops are degenerate from their office described by the Scripture all the world can witnesse for the Scripture Bishops were diligent Preachers these are idle Prelates they were persecuted these are persecutors they were humble persons these are proud Princes they were holy men seeking onely the aduancement of the Kingdome of Christ these are profane worldlings seeking their owne gaine and pompe and carnall honours all this is confessed of them and lamented by Espensaeus one of the same ranke who thus writeth It was no lesse a wonder in olde times saith he to be called a Bishop and not to preach then he is now as rare as a monster who is seen to performe that dutie and againe I know saith he some learned Bishops who standing vpon their Gentilitie forsooth and greatnesse hold it a matter of seruitude and basenesse to be exercised in preaching because their predecessors were not accustomed thereunto 5. As touching Priests in the new Testament phrase all Christians are called Priests and they whose office it is to dispose the mysteries of the Gospell Ministers and Elders and Pastors but now none may haue that name but their anoynted Shauelings who as they say create their Creator by fiue coniuring words and offer him vp vpon the altar as a Sacrifice propitiatorie for the quicke and the dead For albeit the word Priest is deriued from presbyter which signifieth an Elder and in that sense might well be giuen to the Ministers of the new Testament yet because it is in common vse of speech taken for one appointed to sacrifice which in Latine is Sacerdos and in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And because the Ministers of the Gospell are not once named by these termes in the new Testament therefore they that in this signification terme the Ministers of the Gospell by the name of Priests degenerate from the true meaning of the Scripture but what should I speake of the name seeing the office of these Shauelings is so contrarie to that function which was practised by the Apostles and Disciples of Iesus Christ for the Apostles are neuer said to sacrifice Christ on the Altar as these Shauelings are pretended to doe Their office was to minister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not to sacrifice they receiued of the Lord and gaue vnto the people but these create a Sacrifice of themselues and then offer it vp to the Lord. Here then is a plaine declining of the Romish Priests from the true Ministers of the Primitiue Church both in name and office
6. Lastly concerning Monkes Fryers and Hermites they are names neuer heard of in the Apostles time nor in the purer age of the Church The first Hermite was one Anthony who liued three hundred yeeres after Christ who taught others that state of life and learned it of none as confesseth Bellarmine Monkes had no being in the best times of the Church sayth Agrippa though Bellarmine is not ashamed to say that the Apostles were the first Monks in Christianity who notwithstanding liued not alone in cels but went about the world preaching the Gospell some of them had wiues also both which are contrarie to the Monkish profession but Fryers are yet of a far later impressiō The orders of Dominick Francis sprung vp vnder Innocent the third in the time of the Laterane Councill about the yeere 1220. For when Pope Innocent would not be perswaded to confirme to Dominick his order of preaching Fryers hee dreamed that the Church of Laterane was ready to fall and that Dominick came in and with his shoulders vnder-propped it Vpon which dreame he presently sent for Dominick and granted his petition and sure not vaine was that dreame for had not Fryers beene the vpholders and chiefe Pillars of the Popes Church it had fallen longere this The croutched Fryers otherwise called the crosse-bearers sprang vp about the same time for Pope Innocent raising an army against the Albingenses whom the Pope accounted for Heretikes caused the souldiers to be signed with a crosse on their brest whereupon they were called crosse-bearers or croutched Fryers All the other orders of Fryers which amount as some reckon them to an hundreth at least are most of them of later institution And most true is the assertion of Wiclif that Fryers were neuer knowne in the world before the yeare 1200. 7. The Iesuites tooke their beginning about threescore and fifteene yeeres since For in the yeare 1540. their order was first confirmed by Pope Paul the third to Ignatius Loyola the lame souldier the chiefe Father and Patriarch of that viperous brood at the request and intercession of Cardinall Contarenus so that they are not yet beyond the bounds of a mans age and neuerthelesse they are growne to such maturity of craft and deceit that all other orders are but nouices to them they are the onely fellowes of the world for subtill practices and daring enterprises and now the chiefest props of the Papall sea For Dominick was weary of bearing that burden and for the ease of himselfe suffered Loyola to put vnder his shoulder and so now all the burden lyeth vpon him let him hold vp stiffely therefore or els all will goe to wracke 8. But now to the purpose Where were all these orders in the Apostles times and in the Primitiue age of the Church Then men reioyced to be called by the Name of Christ now these fellowes glory to be called by the name of Dominick or Francis and as if Christians was too base a name for them they will be called Iesuites of Iesus they say the Sonne of God but more truely of Bar-Iesus the Sorcerer that withstood the preaching of Paul was a peruerter of the straight wayes of the Lord or of a French weapon called Gesu◠wherewith these same bloudy Traitours vse to murther kings and Princes if they withstand their purposes whereupon is that elegant Epigram A Gesis sunt indita nomina vobis Quae quia sacrilegi Reges torquetis in omnes Inde sacrum nomen sacrum sumpsistis omen 9. But to shut vp in one word all the villany of these monstrous late-borne orders of Fryers let Aretine an Italian Poet describe them Frate sayth he in Italian is a Fryer euery letter of which word doth represent the nature of that generation for Furfanto a thiefe Ribaldo a filthy Ribald Asino an asse Traditore a Traitour Eretico an Heretike All together make the true and perfect definition of a Fryer Or as Lincolniensis defineth him A dead carcase risen out of his graue wrapped in a winding sheet and carryed among men by the Deuill But my purpose is not to bring vpon the stage their filthy and abominable liues hee that will see that let him read Clemangis in his booke of the state of the Church which hee wrote about two hundreth yeeres since And Cornelius Agrippa of the vanity of Sciences And Polidore Virgill and Aluarus Pelagius and Palingenius with Ariosto an Italian Poet c. and he shall finde matter not onely of wonder and admiration but also of griefe and lamentation that the Church of God should bee so long pestered with such filthy dregges but it is sufficient for this place to haue showne that neither their name nor orders were once heard of in the Primitiue Church 10. Thus much touching their persons Now for the iurisdiction exercised by these persons how not onely transcendent but repugnant it hath beene and is at this day to that of the Apostles and Primitiue Church their both Lordly titles and tyrannous practice doth clearely demonstrate For their titles which of the Apostles either assumed to himselfe which they might haue iustly done if it had beene their due or receiued from others these titles Vniuersall Bishop Head of the Church High Priest of the world Prince of Priests and Christs Vicar vpon earth c But the Pope of Rome doth challenge to himselfe all these yea more then these that he is as it were a god vpon earth hauing fulnesse of power and yet more aequè ac Christus Deus A God aswell as Christ a beeing of the second intention compounded of God and man and yet more Deus vindictae a God of reuenge and another god vpon earth and lastly Stupor mundi the wonderment of the world neither God nor man but a neuter betwixt both Could such intolerable pride euer enter into the heart of a man or could the tongue of any wight liuing dare to belch out such horrible blasphemies Surely none but hee that is that man of sinne who sitteth in the Temple of God as God and to whom is giuen a mouth to blaspheme the God of Heauen and in whose fore-head is written this name of blasphemy Deus sum errare non possum I am God I cannot erre But to the point Did euer Peter whose successour the Pope claimeth to bee challenge to himselfe any such titles or did euer any of the other Apostles or any Bishop in the Primitiue Church for the space of three hundreth yeeres Peter was so farre from this pride that hee giueth charge to all Elders of the Church that they should not behaue themselues as Lords ouer Gods heritage And in that very place hee equalleth himselfe to the rest and the rest to himselfe calling himselfe a fellow Elder and in another place hee calleth all the Disciples his brethren yea all the Israelites his brethren and all Christians his brethren behold his humility But the Pope acknowledgeth no
brethren but the Cardinals Patriarkes and Archbishops Emperours and Kings are his children and not his brethren behold his pride neither did the rest of the Apostles challenge to themselues any such titles of dignity For they had learned of Christ their Lord and master not to Lord it ouer others but to humble themselues that they might bee exalted And let them name but one Bishop of the Primitiue Church that tooke vpon him any of these glorious titles yea of the Bishops of Rome themselues 11. Wee deny not but that some of the ancients haue yeelded vnto the Bishops of Rome great and honorable titles but first this was in respect of their vertue learning and integrity and not in respect of any preeminence of iurisdiction Secondly wee find none of these titles which I speake of attributed vnto them but onely the Apostles successours and Apostolicall Bishops not heads of the Church vniuersall Bishops high Priests of the world c. which the later Popes haue vsurped And thirdly if at any time they were yet the same titles of honour which were ascribed vnto them wee finde giuen to other Bishops aswell as to the Bishop of Rome as to Saint Ambrose by Saint Basill and to one Lupus a Bishop in France by Sidonius Apollinaris And to Fontellus another Bishop in France by the same man To Basill by Nazianzene To Athanasius who is saluted by the name of high Bishop and chiefe Priest And to Cyprian who was honoured with this stile The Bishop of the whole world Neither can it bee denyed but these titles grew by little and little to be attributed to the Bishops of Rome after the first three hundreth yeers of the Church though they came not to perfection till the perfect reuelatioÌ„ of Antichrist in the Apostolical sea but this can neuer bee proued that either in the Apostles times or in two hundreth yeeres next succeeding after euer any Bishop arrogated to himselfe or any other ascribed vnto him any of these arrogant titles 12. A sufficient argument whereof is this that Bellarmine propounding this as his last reason to proue the principality of the Pope draweth it from the great and famous titles which are attributed vnto him and spending a whole Chapter in that purpose alledgeth not one testimony older then Damasus the Bishop of Rome who was elected to that sea in the yeere 369. Surely if he could haue found out more ancient proofes he would haue after his manner stuffed the Chapter with them but in that hee produceth none it is euident that hee knew none indeed that there were none to be known Nay Gregory the great one of their owne Popes that liued sixe hundreth yeeres after Christ not onely execrated the name of vniuersall Bishop which Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople vsurped calling it a name of blasphemy and a proud and superstitious title and him that vsurped it a fore-runner of Antichrist but also plainely auoucheth that none of his predecessors vsed that prophane denomination by which the proud times of Antichrist were marked out Also Platina Nauclerus Cuspinian with many other Historiographers affirme that Boniface the third and Gregory the second obtained of the Emperour Phocas by great labour the name of Head of the Church A strange and tyrannical title neuer publikely vsurped before that time in the Church of God but now new created by Phocas who hauing killed his Lord Mauritius and his children exercised a tyranny in the kingdome of the world and begate this tyrannicall appellation in the kingdome of the Church But of all other records of antiquity most pregnant is the Canon of the Africane Council to condemne the nouelty of these ambitious nominations of which thus writeth our Roffensis These are the words of the Councill Let not any no not the Romane be called an vniuersall Bishop For that age sayth he which was neere to the Apostolicall times studied modesty and humility such a glorious title pleased not that Councill 13. Wherefore concerning these great titles of honour wee may conclude with our Sauiour Christ that It was not so from the beginning They are new and vpstart in respect of true antiquity ensignes of that pride and arrogancy which reigned in the Prelates of the Church in those latter times and badges of Antichrists kingdome where at Peter and Paul would blush for shame if they were aliue as it was merrily spoken by the Duke of Vrbanes Painter when he had drawne their Pictures of a ruddy and high colour 14. But leauing their titles let vs take a short suruey of their practice And first let it bee showne that Peter or Paul or any the rest of the Apostles or any Bishop of Rome or of any other place did euer take vpon them to depose Kings and dispose of their kingdomes and to translate them from one to another and to absolue subiects from their oath of alleageance and children from the bond of obedience to their parents to dispense with the Law of God to haue sole power of decision of controuersies to challenge the right of appeales from all countreyes of Christendome And lastly to exercise not onely spirituall but also temporall coactiue iurisdiction But all this power hath beene in former times and is at this day practised by the Bishop of Rome and that with that rigour and vehemency that it is a wonder that they doe not blush so much to degenerat from those whose successors they claime to be But no maruaile for els he should not shew himselfe to bee that Antichrist except hee did aduance himselfe aboue all that is called God on earth For this is a special marke of that man of sinne 15. But let History the light of time make cleare this point Pope Hadrian the fourth reprooued Frederick Barbarosse the Emperour of insolency and arrogancy in an Epistle written vnto him for setting his owne name before his and checked him also very bitterly for holding his stirrup on the wrong side and when hee came vnto him in the Church of Saint Marke in Venice to bee absolued from his excommunication commanded him to prostrate himselfe vpon the ground and then set his foote on his necke with these words Super aspidem c. Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and Cocatrice and shalt tread vpon the Lyon and Dragon Did Peter euer doe the like Gregory the seuenth caused Henry the â—ourth comming in all humility to submit himselfe vnto him with his wife and childe to dance attendance at his gate bare-footed and bare-headed for the space of three dayes ere hee would grant them any accesse vnto him Did Peter euer doe the like Celestine the third being about to crown Henry the sixt Emperour set the imperiall Diademe on his head as some say with his foote and kicked it off with his foote againe Did Peter euer doe the likeâ— Innocent the second caused his owne Picture with the Emperours to bee set vp in the Palace of
vero audent cum infimus poene ex nostris vnus comminus cum ijs manus conserere in arenam prouocare non reformidat vnde quid gregum ductores efficere possunt si annitantur par est illos reputare partim etiam quod Pontificiorum suae persuadendo religioni quamplurimos strenuam operam nauasse video Euangelicorum autem qui hoc idem scriptionis genus per certa argumentorum motuumve capita sunt sequuti paucissimos sane recordor ne dicam nulios Vestram igitur in tutelam fratres meas hasce ratiunculas accipite aequis animis atque oculis legite discutite Censuram vestram non recuso dum preces modo vestras amorem mihi non denegetis Hic Romanae religionis septem sacramenta Turpitudinem Impietatem Falsitatem Nouitatem Idololatriam Scripturarum vituperationem Ignorantiae defensionem licet contueri de quibus princeps Impuritas sequentium in rationum prima secunda in tertia autem quarta duodecima Impietas aperietur Nouitas quam nobis obiectant in eos ipsos totam per vndecimam regeretur Falsitas in octaua nona dilucebit Idolorum cultus in septima Scripturarum contemptio simul Ignorantiae defensio in quinta sexta decima patefient Frement frendebunt sat scio Iesuitae caeterique sacrificuli ac omissis forte rationum ipsarum ponderibus momentis hinc atque illinc vt eorum moris est aliquidpiam excerpent quod obtrectent arrodant sed ringantur per me quidem rumpantur invidia nihili illorum siue calumnias moror siue maledicta dum vos modo propitios mihi habeam quorum inprimis vereor reuereor iudicium Quos propterea oro obtestor vt siqua in re de veritatis scopo deflexerim comiter in viam me reducatis si minus ac debui fortiter prudenter hac in arena demicârim imbecillitati id meae condonetis praeuaricationi nequaquam tribuatis Ego certe hoc quantillumcunque est Deo nostro minime displiciturum confido quippe non ignarus seruulum qui duobus extalentis rem fecit Domino suo aeque ac illum alterum acceptum probatumque extitisse qui decem ex quinque lucrifecit Interim fratres mutui amoris vinculo nos inter nos complectamur vt quemadmodum contra sponsam Christi aduersarij nostri vt olim Pilatus Herodes contra Christum ipsum coniunctissimè conspirant consentiunt Sic nos pari voluntatum consensu eademque aut etiam maiore animorum conspiratione aduersus Antichristum illiusque astipulatorum â—ssectatorum omnium vires depugnemus Quod eò vt fortius foeliciusque fiat facessant à nobis precor derebus minutulis lites omnes discordiae quibus nimio plus iam diu assueuimus Reprimamus nunc demum ipsinos ne quam de sui temporis quibusdam Iraeneus habuit querimoniam quod proptermodicas quaslibet causas magnum gloriosum Christi corpus conscinderent quam etiam de suae aetatis consimilibus alijs Nazianzenus quod essent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eadem de nobis ni prouidemus iusta querela esse possit Quin Apostoli illud ad Corinthios de re exgenere indifferentium disserentis potius meminerimus Siquis videtur contentiosus esse nos eiusmodi consuetudinem non habemus neque Ecclesia Dei eiusdem aliud ad Galatas Si alij alios mordetis deuoratis videte ne vicissim alij ab alijs consumamini Deus pacis lucis ab Antichristi illiusque gregalium impetu insidijs vos omnes protegat defendat ac coelestem suam ad ciuitatem nouam Hierosolymam sartos tectos tandem perducat T. B Motiue I. THat Religion which in many points giueth liberty to sinne is not the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. Motiue II. That Religion which maintaynes by the grounds thereof things forbidden by all lawes both of God of Nature and of Man cannot be the true Religion bat such is the Religion of the Romane Church ergo Motiue III. That Religion which imitateth the Iewes in those things wherein ther are enemies to Christ cannot be the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo. Motiue IIII. That Religion which derogâ—teth from the glory of God in the worke of our Redemption and giueth part thereof vnto man cannot be the truth of God but such is the Popish Religion ergo Motiue V. That Religion deserueth to bee suspected which refuseth to bee tâ—yâ—d by the Scriptures as the perfect and alone rule of faith and will be iudged â—ryed by none but it selfe But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo Motiue VI. That Religion doth iustly deserue to be suspected which doth purâ—oâ—â—ly disgrace the sacred Scriâ—tures But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome â—â—go Motiue VII That Religion is to be abhorred which maintayneth commandeth and practiseth grosse anâ— palpable Idolatry but so doth the Religion of the Church of Rome â—rgo c. Motiue VIII That Religion which implyeth manifold contradiction in it selfe and is contrary to it selfe in many things cannot bee the true Religion but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. Motiue IX That Religion whâ—se doctrines are in many points apparently opposite to the word of God and tâ—e doctrine of the Gospell cannot be the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. Motiue X. That Religion which nourisheth most barbarous and grosse ignorance amongst the people and forbiddeth the knowledge and vnderstanding of the grounds of the Christian saith cannot be the truth but this doth the Romish Religion ergo c. Motiue XI That Religion which was neuer knowne nor heard of in the Apostles time nor in the primitiue Church cannot â—e the truth but such is the Romish Religion in most points thereof therefore that cannot be the truth Motiue XII That Church which maintayneth it selfe and the Religion professed by it and seeketh to dâ—saduantage the Aduersaries by vnlawfull vniust and vngodly meanes cannot bee the true Church of God nor that Religion the truth of God by the grounds whereof they are warranted to act such deuillish practices but such is the practice of the Romish Church and therfore neither their Church nor their Religion can be of God Motiue XIII That Religion the doctrines whereof are more safe both in respect Gods glory Mans saluation and Christian charity is to be 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 be reiected THIRTEENE FORCIBLE MOTIVES DISSWADING FROM COMMVNION With the Church of ROME Whereby is demonstratiuely prooued that the now Romish Religion so farre forth as
absolution to wit if he will be absolued from adultery or incest it must cost him foure Turons if from both together it must stand him in sixe Turons if from wilfull murther being in holy orders hee must pay twelue Turons being a Bishop or an Abbot fiftie Turons twelue Ducats c. Thus there is no sinne so haynous for which pardon may not be purchased for a small summe of money as one of their owne Canonists could sing Si dederis marcas ijs impleueris arcas Culpa soluêris quaque ligatus eris If thou with markes wilt fill their arkes what ere thou doest commit By word or deed thou shalt be freed the Pope hath pardon'd it 15. If this be not a doctrine of liberty let all the world iudge Who need care what sinne hee commit when a pardon is but a money matter Is it any maruaile now if whores and theeues and notorious offenders turne Papists seeing they may haue so easily a full and plenary remission of all their offences And that which is yet a greater emboldening of men to sinne then all the rest they oftentimes for money pardon a sinne before it be committed as it is constantly reported of Parry that he brought with him his pardon in his pocket for murdering the late Queene intended by him But I haue heard of some that haue beene hanged with their pardons about their necks and so it may be was that bloudy-minded Traytor And this was it that emboldened the Germans to robbe the Popes pardoner because they had purchased of him before a pardon for the next sinne they should commit though it were a great one now this was the next and therfore iustly he could not find fault with them 16 By this it is euident to what loosenesse and lewdnesse of life this doctrine doth tend Isti enim indulgentiarum buccinatores omnimodam promitâ—unt securitatem quaeparit negligentiam negligentia offensam Dei saith the Author of that Booke called Onus Ecclesiae that is these publishers of pardons do promise all manner of security which breedeth negligence and negligence the offence of God for Culpam qui praeterit inuitat nouam conniuence at one fault is the hatching of a new Who so will plainly see in one view the monstrous licentiousnesse of life that issueth from this puddle of Popish pardons let him read the third grieuance of the German Nation in the Booke of their Centum grauamina exhibited to the Popes Legate at Noremberge Anno 1522. in the latter end whereof are these wordes of iust complaint By the sale and marchandize of this ware not onely Germany is spoyled of money but Christian godlinesse is extinguished where when euery one according to the quantity of his payment taketh vnto himselfe liberty to sinne hence whoredome incest adultery periury murther theft robbery vsury and a whole heape of mischiefes haue proceeded for what mischiefe will men be afraid to commit when they be once perswaded that they haue obtained licence and impunitie to sinne not onely in this life but also after their death Hitherto is the complaint of Germany which also may bee the iust complaint of the whole world 17 A third doctrine of the Papists opening the gap to licentiousnes is their auricular confession and popish penance I ioyne them together because they goe together in their practice and are both together members of one of their new deuised Sacraments True it is that in outward showe these carry a semblance of seuere discipline but if we search into their bowels we shall find them to be the greatest baytes that can be vnto dissolutenesse For when they teach that the enumeration and reckoning vp of all a mans finnes in the yeare of a Priest once a yeare obtaineth present absolution and pardon at the Priests hands who is both Iudge in this cause and Phisicion and hath power to loofe and binde and to open and shut to wound and heale by the key of power committed to him What is this but to open a gappe to all wickednes for when men are perswaded that there is so ready and easie a meanes to be rid of their sinne what need they be so chary of committing it Hence it is as by lamentable experience it is found true among those that are deuoted to this Religion they sinne freely that they may confesse and be absolued and when they haue confessed they sinne againe that they may confesse againe making no conscience how they liue all the yeare and what horrible sinnes they commit being perswaded that at Easter by the shriuing of a Priest they are cleane absolued Iust like a drunkard that drinkes so long till hee vomite and when his stomacke is disgorged drinkes afresh that he may vomite afresh or like a glutton that surfets all the yere long in all maner of intemperancy then in the spring takes phisick to purge out the naughty humors froÌ„ his stomake as soone as he is purged fals again to his surfeting ryot in hope to be purged again in the spring 18. This is the fruite of Popish shrift commended so highly by them to be so soueraigne a medicine against sin which if it be so why did not Christ and his Apostles vse it were they not as carefull to preserue men from sinne as the Pope and his shauelings are or is the Pope and his Apostles wiser then Christ Iesus and his Disciples why was it not vsed in the Primitiue and purer times of the Church Rhenanus and Erasmus two learned Papists affirme plainely that it was neither ordained by Christ nor vsed by the ancient Church and Chrysostome telleth vs that God doth not enforce vs to come forth and disclose our sinnes to any man He requireth no more saith he but that we speake to him alone and to him alone confesse our faults I but the Popes iudgement is more diuine and the times of Popery are more free from corruption beleeue it who list and therefore howsoeuer then yet now it is found to be a soueraigne preseruatiue against sinne as if they that feare not to offend in the presence of God will blush to confesse their offences in the eare of a sinnefull Priest or as if the law of God were of lesse force to keep men in awe which they cannot escape than the feare of a mortall man whome they may deceiue 19. But let them say what they will and cloake their licentiousnesse with neuer so holie pretences all that haue any iudgement to discerne colours which the blinde Romanists cannot do or any wisedome to trye the spirits and doctrines whether they be of God or no know that Romish shrift is nothing but a shift to diue into mens purses and a tricke of policie to search into their purposes that by that meanes they may enrich their owne coffers and vphold their Antichristian Hierarchie for by this deuice they vnderstand the secrets of state and ciscouer mens
is against nature And from hence sprang the sect of the Nicholaitans whose chiefe opinion was this that if so be they could abstaine from lawfull marriage it was no sinne to defile themselues with any other filthy or vnlawfull copulation Here wee may behold a perfect mappe of the Romish single life with the fruits thereof This happened in the first period of the primitiue Church 31. Afterward in the Nicene Synode when some went about to prohibite marriage to the Clergy Paphnutius a great learned Father of that assembly gaine-said with great vehemency the proceeding of that decree giuing this for one principall reason that it would bee the cause of horrible impurity and obscaenity in the Ecclesiasticall order which to bee a true prophecie the euent afterward hath manifestly declared After this about the sixe hundreth yeare of our Lord it is reported of Gregory the great that when hee sawe the heads of more than sixe thousand infants taken out of a Fish-pond he sighed and confessed that the decree of single life in the Clergie was the cause thereof and therefore condemning that decree he commended the Apostles counsell that it was better to marrie then to burne and added this moreouer that it was better to marrie then to giue occasion to murder 32. After this in the yeare eight hundred and sixtie Huldericus Bishop of Augusta in Germany in his Epistle to Pope Nicholas the first most liuely describeth the filthy fruites of Popish single life his words be these Nullum tam graue facinus c. There is no so great offence which is not to be admitted to the end that a greater then that may bee auoyded Notwithstanding many flatterers desirous to please men not God vnder a false show of continency commit greater sinnes to wit they defile their Fathers wiues they abhorre not the embracings of men and bruite beasts though they be of the most holy order they make no scruple to abuse other mens wiues And when as certaine Bishops and Archdeacons are so giuen ouer to lust that they cannot abstaine neither from adulteries nor incests nor other filthy and vnnameable sinnes yet they affirme that the chaste marriages of Priests doe stincke in their nosthrils and forbid yea constraine Clergie men to abstaine from them saying that it is more honest to be entangled with many whores in secret then to be tyed to one wife in publique But woe be to you Pharisecs which doe all to be seene of men These be the expresse words of that reuerend Bishop after he thus concludeth Whilest the Clergie are constrained by Pharisaicall fury to giue ouer the lawfull fellowship of one wife they are made fornicators adulterers and workers of other most filthy abominations and that which with teares we behold all of them rage in such wickednesse Hence it is that the Church of God is so scandalized and the Clergy so despised Who seeth not by this testimony of this great learned man in the very heate and middest of Popery what fruites this doctrine then brought forth 33. After in the yeare one thousand and eightie when that brand of hell Hidlebrand otherwise called Gregory the seuenth sate in the Romane seate who laboured earnestly to bring in that tyrannicall decree vpon the Clergie in Germanie Auentinus thus writeth Gratum hoc fuit scortatoribus quibus c. This was acceptable to whoremongers to whom now it was lawfull in stead of one wife to haue the fellowship of sixe hundred harlots Hence many false Prophets tooke occasion by fables and miracles to cast mists ouer the truth and by drawing places of Scripture to their purpose to deceyue the people In a word when as very few did truely make warre with lust and some did faine continency for gaine sake the greatest part vnder the honest name of chastitie did commit whoredomes incests adulteries euery where without punishment thus writeth Auentine touching those times 34. After this in the yeare 1102. in a Synode at London where Anselme the Archbishop of Canterbury laboured with tooth and naile to interdict Priests of the vse of lawfull marriage allowed before vnto them by King William many opposed themselues against him saying it would be very dangerous Ne dum mundicias viribus maiores appeterent c. Lâ—st while they desired greater purity then their strength was able to beare they should fall into horrible vncleannes to the great ignominy of Christian Religion And when as notwithstanding Anselme had effected this prohibition the next yeare after complaint was made vnto him that in stead of marriage forbiddeÌ„ the horrible sin of Sodomie raigned ouer all England and from the Clergie crept also into the Laity which he endeuoured to restraine also but all in vaine for the ordinance of God being neglected what can the wisdome and lawes of man doe good 35. But were the latter ages any whit better reformed peraduenture in these sixe hundred yeares last past the Popish Cleargie were more holy and lesse licencious Let Saint Bernard be iudge of his times If saith he according to the Prophecie of Ezekiel we should digge through the wall that we might looke into Gods house there will peraduenture appeare within the wall a filthy abomination for after fornications succeede adulteries after incests the passions of ignominie and works of filthinesse are not wanting I would to God that it neither behooued the Apostle to write these things nor vs to relate them that it might not be beleeued that such abominable lust possessed the mind of man Alas the enemie of mankind hath besprinckled the body of the Church with the execrable ashes of Sodome that many of the very ministers therof And in the end he thus concludes Many I say not all yet many they can neither be hidden for multitude neither do they seeke to be hidden for impudency I say many seeme to haue giuen libertie to the occasion of the flesh aÌ„bstaining from the remedie of marriage and bursting forth into all manner of wickednesse Againe the same Bernard in another place thus complaineth Tolle de Ecclesia c. Take from the Church honourable marriage and the bed vndefiled and thou shalt fill it full of whoremongers incestuous persons buggâ—rers and all kind of vncleane ones And a little before in the same Sermon he giueth the reason hereof Omni immunditiae laxat habenas qui nuptias damnat He that condemnes marriage le ts loose the reynes to all vncleannesse 36. Robert Holket an English man and a Dominican Frier that liued in the yeare of our Lord one thousand three hundred and fortie thus complaineth of the corruption in the Clergie of his time Sed proh dolor c. But alas in these daies the saying of Iob is verified Behold they that serue the Lord are not stable and constant c. For of the Priests some be Angels of Sathan by discord and contention some Apostatious by pride some bee filthy spirits by rioutousnesse and
Passeouer Pentecost feast of Tabernacles of Trumpets reconciliation new Moones Purim and dedication but these haue their Holy-dayes for euery Saint for the Crosse Corpus Christi All Saints All Soules and what not insomuch that their friend Erasmus complaineth that in Ieromes age there were few Holy-dayes besides the Lords day but now that there is neither end nor measure in the multitude of them The Iewes obserued a few fasting dayes by Gods appointment and others taken vp by their owne tradition as the second and fift day of the weeke but the Romish fasts exceede both in number and superstition for besides two dayes in euery weeke euery Saints Eue almost is a fasting day with them besides their Lent fast continued whole sixe weekes without intermission if to abstaine from flesh and glut themselues with other viands as nutritiue to the body be to be termed a fast The Iewes Priest-hood was distinguished but into two maine orders Priests and Leuites and these later assigned to some few distinct offices about the Temple but the Romish Priest-hood is pestered with a swarme of the seuerall orders of Friars Monkes Anchorites secular and regular Priests that almost serue for nothing but to consume the fruits of the earth The holy garments for the Leuiticall Priest-hood were but few in number in comparison of the Romish vestments for the high Priest of the Iewes had but sixe garments appointed to him the Ephod the brest-plate the Robe the linnen coate the girdle and the crowne and for the inferiour Priests but foure linnen coats bonnets linnen breeches and girdles but the Romish haue sixe garments in token of perfection and the Bishops nine because there are as they say nine orders of Angels in all fifteene answerable to the fifteene degrees of vertues What should I reckon vp their manifold crossings kissings kneelings whisperings washings anoyntings spittings breathings saltings with an infinite number besides of vaine and strange obseruations which are vsed in their Church which the Iewish Synagogue may not compare withall either for multitude or strangenesse And thus they are not onely equall to them but farre exceed them in the number of their Ceremonies And this is euen confessed by many of their fauourites for Cornelius Agrippa saith that Christians are now more oppressed with ceremonies then the Iewes were in former times And Polydore Virgsll that a very wood of Iewish and heathenisâ— ceremonies pestered the Lords field Yea Saint Augustine complaineth of the same superstition in his time when Antichristianisme was but in breeding when he saith that the Church was pressed contrary to Christs mercifull institution with such a seruile burden of Ceremonies that the state of the Iewes vnder the law was mâ—re tolerable then the condition of Christians seeing they were subiect onely to Gods ordinances and not to humane presumptions as Christians are But if he had liued at this time and seene the fruitfull multiplication of them in respect of his age how would hee haue complained And thus in respect of multitude of Ceremonies the Romish Church is by many degrees before the Church of the Iewes 5. To descend to particulars The Iewes had their sacrificing Priests whereof one was their chiefe Priest and the other of an inferiour ranke The Romanists in an apish imitation haue their sacrificing Priests too the Pope their chiefe and the vnder-shauelings his vassals as if Aaron was a type of the Pope and not of Christ or as if all Christians were not Priests vnder the Gospell both which are euident in the new Testament but we no where find that the high Priest of Ierusalem was a type of the high Priest of Rome or that the Ministers of the Gospell are sacrificing Priests This latter is confessed by Bellarmine who saith that the Christians of the Primitiue Church did purposely abstaine from the names of Temple and Priesthood vntill the dayes of Tertullian lest that they should seeme to haue retained some Iewish Ceremonies Why then doe they now entertaine those names whereof the purer times were ashamed do they not shew thereby that they are degenerated from that primer purity which they so much bragge of And yet we doe not dislike the name of Priest if it bee rightly taken for such an one as ministreth in holy things betwixt God and the people but that the Ministers of the Gospel should be sacrificing Priests is Iewish as also that the man of Rome should be the Arch-priest on earth whereas we haue but one high Priest euen Christ our Sauiour who hauing once offered himselfe a sacrifice for sinne sitteth for euer at the right hand of God And that we may plainely see that in their Hierarchie they imitate the Iewes Bellarmine is a sufficient witnesse who to proue that there ought to be a visible Monarch in the Church alleageth that Aaron was not onely a type of Christ but also of the Pope because the sacrifices of the law did not onely represent the bloudy sacrifice of the Crosse but also the vnbloudy sacrifice of the Masse Which if it be true then there can be but one high Priest in the Church of Christ as there was but one in the Church of the Iewes for the argument will stand thus in good moode and forme being built vpon their owne ground As the Church of the old Testament was gouerned so ought the Church of the new but the old was gouerned by one onely high Priest therefore the new ought also to haue but one onely for either he must shew that there were two high Priests in the Church of the Iewes one subordinate vnto the other or conuicted by his owne principle he must acknowledge that there ought not to bee two in the Church of Christ or at least confesse that this argument is lame drawne from the imitation of the Iewish Hierachy and then if it be not true which he affirmeth what will be the sequell therof but either ignorance in symbolizing those things which are no wise matches or impiety in dethroning Christ from his office and setting the Diademe vpon the Popes head and so that in their Romish Hierarchy they are the Iewes Apes in that thing which most tendeth to the dishonor of Christ 6. As they imitate the Iewish Priest-hood so do they also their Altar and sacrifices for they are not content with the name of the Lords Table which name was vsed both by the Apostles and primitiue Church For which cause as testifieth Arnobius Cyrill and Chrysostome they were challenged by the Pagans of impiety nor yet to take the name of Altar and Sacrifice in an improper signification as some of the later Fathers did calling the Lords Table an Altar because on it was represented the sacrifice of the Crosse and the action in the Eucharist a sacrifice because it was a commemoratiue representation of that sacrifice as their writings plentifully testifie but they will haue a very Altar in proper phrase of speach and
a true reall sacrifice then which what can be more Iewish especially seeing all such Altars were abolished by the Crosse of Christ and there remaineth but one Altar in the Church Whereof they haue no power to eate which serue the Tabernacle to wit Christ as all the Fathers expound the place who is the onely true Altar and proper sacrifice of the new Testament True Altar I say and proper Sacrifice because the soule of euery iust man is called by them a metaphoricall Altar and their prayers good workes almes-deeds c. spirituall sacrifices And therefore Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen and Lactantius writing against the Pagans who obiected that Christians had no Altars nor sacrifices and therefore no religion answere That a iust and holy soule is a right holy Altar from which doe arise prayers as sweet incense and vpon which are offered vp to God iustice patience faith innocencie chastity and such other vâ—rtues And these are the onely Altars and Sacrifices now vpon earth for our true Altar and sacrifice is in heauen 7. Againe the Iewes had lampes continually burning in the Tabernacle and afterward in the Temple which were types of Christ who is the true light of the world and of the Apostles and Ministers of the Gospell who by their doctrine and preaching conuay this light from Christ the fountaine as it were by Conduits and Pipes to the illuminating of the whole world Quiâ— in candelabro saith Gregory nisi Redemptor humani gener is designatur Who is figured out by the candlesticke but the Redeemer of mankinde Hastile candelabro saith venerable Bede ipse qui est caput Ecclesiae debet intelligi By the shaft of the Candlesticke must be vnderstood hee that is the head of the Church And the sixe branches issuing out of the body of the Candlesticke what are they but the Apostles and Pastours of the Church saith Marbachius which as branches issue from Christ and make but one body with the shaft to signifie that they must conspire in preaching Christ alone and so vnited to each other by the bond of Concord Yet the Church of Rome retaine also this ceremonie for they haue multitude of Lampes and Candles in their Churches burning in the day time as if they would declare to the world that either they beleeue that Christ is not yet come or else that they haue not the cleare Sunne-shine of the Gospell amongst them but the dimme Candle-light of superstition Now that this Iewish ceremonie is vsed amongst them not onely experience sheweth in all places and their great solemne Candlemasle vpon the day of the purification of the blessed Virgin but also the decree of their owne Popes Gregory the first and Sabinian his successour the one of which appointed certaine Lands for the maintenance of Wax-candles and Lamps in Churches and the other ordained Vt accensae Lampades perpetuò in Ecclesys retinerentur That burning Lampes should be alwayes kept in their Churches And that they fetch their patternâ— from the Iewes Durand plainly acknowledgeth when he saith That the Church is enlightned by Gods commandement Whereupon it is read in Exodus Charge the children of Israel that they offer pure oyle of oliue that the Lamps may burne continually in the Tabernacle It is cleare then that this is a Iewish imitation at least if they had not rather bee counted to be followers of the Gentiles then of the Iewes amongst whom also this custome was in vse to haue lights and Lampes continually burning in their Idoll Temples as witnesse both Tertullian Lactantius Gregory Naezianzene with diuers others Lactantius saith plainly That they set vp lights to their God as if he dwelt in darknesse And so they did for their gods whom they worshipped were deuils who are reserued in the chaines of darknesse vnto the Iudgement of the great day But our God dwelleth in light inaccessible and he is all light and in him is no darknesse what neede any light or Lamps be set vp before him then If they say that they haue the example of the primitiue Church for their warrant I answere that it is true indeede as may appeare out of all Ecclesiasticall Histories and the Epistles of Plinie the second to Traiane that they had the vse of Lamps in their assemblies but this was in their night-meetings which they were constrained to vse in the time of persecution not daring to assemble together by day as is testified both by Eusebius Epiphanius Tertullian c. but neuer in the day time till Ieromes age when this superstition began to grow vpon the Church So that this custome is either Heathenish or Iewish let them chuse whether both which are equally disgracefull to the Church of Christ 8. So likewise they fetch the vse of their hallowed water from the Iewes if not from the Pagans for the Iewes had their Holy-water made of the ashes of a red Cow whereby were purged all legall vncleannesses so haue the Romanists their Holy-water sprinkles to purge and clense away all the impurities of the soule This is plaine not onely by their practice but also by the decree falsly fathered vpon Pope Alexander the first but indeede of some later Pope which thus speaketh We blesse water mingled with salt that all being sprinkled therewith may be sanctified and purified which wee enioyne all Priests to doe for if the ashes of a Cow being sprinkled did sanctifie and clense the people of the Iewes then much more doth water mixed with salt and consecrated by diuine prayers sanctifie and clense Christian people Which consequence how vaine and impious it is who seeth not Vaine I say for the Leuiticall Holy-water did onely clense from outward vncleannesses but the Romish by their doctrine doth purge the soule from spirituall pollutions Impious for the Scripture saith that it is the bloud of Christ that purgeth vs from all our sinnes and not water mingled with salt and it maketh the comparison not betwixt the ashes of an Heyser and Holy-water water but betwixt it and the bloud of Christ This imitation then is both vaine and impious if it bee of the Iewes and more if it be of the Gentiles for what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols And yet so it is also for Iustine Martyr telleth vs that the deuils when they heard out of the Prophets of the spirituall washing that should be in the Kingdome of Christ in an apish resemblance caused his worshippers to purge themselues by the sprinkling of hallowed water And Theodoret that Iulian the Apostate commanded their bread flesh fruits and all other kind of victuals to be purged as he supposed by holy-water and that Valentinian his Tribune who succeeded him in the Empire when Fortunes Priest sprinkled him with holy-water strooke the Priest with his fist saying Thou hast not clensed but defiled me Hipocrates also the Physician doth witnesse the same when he saith
New Testament many things are wanting What can be more plaine Yet Lindanus is more plaine for he calleth Traditionem non scriptam c. The vnwritten tradition that Homericall moly which preserueth the Christian faith against the inchantments of Heretikes and the true touch-stone of true false doctrine and the Aâ—acian buckler to be opposed to all Heretikes and in conclusion the very foundation of faith To this fellow adioyne Melchior Canus as a coÌ„panion in blasphemy who saith That many things belong to Christian faith which are contained in the Scripture neither openly nor obscurely To conclude all in one summe without any further repetition of priuate mens opinions wherein much time might be spent the voyce of their whole Church represented in the Councill of Trent is this That traditions are to bee receaued pari pietate with the same reuerence and affection wherwith wee receiue the Scripture it selfe Thus wee haue a view of the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the insufficiency of the holy Scripture both in part and whole Out of all which these two impious conclusions doe necessarily arise First that traditions vnwritten are equall if not superiour in dignity and authority to the written word of God and secondly that without the helpe of them it is not able to bring vs either to a sauing faith in this life or to the end of our faith in the life to come then both which what could be spoken more iniurious either to the Word it self or to the Maiestie of that Spirit from whom it proceeded And that their blasphemy might be known â—o all men Bellarmine more like a Iulian then a Christian doth not onely affirme the Scripture to be vnsufficient and imperfect but also not simply necessary and to that end he maketh a good round discourse and bringeth in long Leaden arguments which indeed are not worth the answering for they are meere sophisticall collusions as any one of meane iudgement may easily discerne Neuerthelesse by this we may see what an honourable opinion and affection these fellowes beare towards the Scripture when as they dare to affirme that they are not simply necessary but may bee wanting and remoued without any great hurt to the Church of God 12. The third iniurious doctrine whereby open disgrace is offered to the holy Scripture is concerning the authority thereof compared with the Church for this they teach and hold That the authority of the Scripture doth depend vpon the Church and not the Church vpon the Scripture And so by consequent that the Scripture is inferiour to the Church and not the Church to the Scripture whereas we on the contrary affirme and defend that the Church wholly dependeth both for authoritie and existency vpon the Scripture and so is euery way inferiour to the Scripture and not the Scripture vpon the Church 13. This blasphemie of theirs may more euidently be discerned if we obserue what they vnderstand by the Church to wit not the Primitiue Church which was in the time and immediately after the Apostles but the succeeding and present Church and that not the whole Catholicke Church which is dispersed ouer the world but the Church of Rome which holdeth vpon the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and in this Church not the whole body but the Pastours and Prelates assembled in a Councill yea and lastly not the Councill neither but the Pope who is totus in toto all in all and in whome all the members meete and resolue themselues as lines in the center as is before declared This is their Church and to this Church of theirs they subiect the Scriptures euen the word of God to the Pope of Rome that is God himselfe to a mortall sinnefull man For as Nilâ—â— the Archbishop of Thessalonica saith To accuse the Scripture is to accuse God so to debase the Scripture is to debase God 14. That wee may see this to be true and that wee lay no false imputation to their charge heare them speake in their owne words and let Bellarmine leade the Ring If we take away saith he the authoritie of the present Church and of the Councill of Trent then the whole Christian faith may bee called in question for the truth of all ancient Councils and of all poynts of faith depend vpon the authority of the present Church of Rome Marke he saith not vpon the authority of the Scripture but of the present church of Rome where he doth manifestly preferre the authority of the Church before the Scripture not onely of the Church but of the Church of Rome as if there were no Church but that and not the Church of Rome as it was in the purer and primer times but the present Church corrupted and depraued with infinite errours Againe in another place he concludeth That the Scriptures doe depend vpon the Church and not the Church on the Scriptures which position he confesseth in the same place to haue beene in other places maintained by him And yet elsewhere he disclaimeth this opinion as none of theirs and calleth it a blasphemy that it is his I haue shewed already though he be ashamed of it as he may well be and therefore exore suo by his owne iudgement he and all the rest are guilty of most grosse and intolerable blasphemie But that you may see that it is the generall receiued doctrine of them all for the most part heare others as well as him vttering their spleene against the Scriptures Siluester Prierias saith that Indulgences are warranted vnto vs not by the authority of the Scripture but by the authority of the Church and Pope of Rome which is greater And againe That the Scripture draweth it strength and authority from the Church and Bishop of Rome Eckius saith that the Scripture was not authentical but by the authority of the Church and putteth this proposition among hereticall assertions The authority of the Scripture is greater then the Church Pighius also affirmeth the same that all the authoritie of Scriptures doth necessarily depend vpon the authority of the Church and calleth all that hold the contrary in scorne Scriptuarij that is Scripture-men or such as maintaine the Scripture Cardinall Hosius goeth further and commendeth a blasphemous speech of one Hermannus as a godly saying That the Scriptures are of no more force then Aesops Fables without the testimonie of the Church and addeth presently of his owne that vnlesse the Churches authority did commend vnto vs the Canonicall Scripture it should bee of little account with vs. The like is deliuered by Coclaeus by Canus Stapleton Andradius Canisius and generally all other of that side that handle that question 15. Onely to palliate the matter they bring in a distinction to wit that this dependance of the Scriptures authority vpon the Church is quoad nos in respect of vs not quâ—adse in respect of it selfe and declaratiuè for declaration sake
call the Scripture a dumbe Iudge some a dead Letter and without a Soule others dead Inke others a Nose of Waxe to be wreathed this way or that way others say that it is no better then Aesops Fables without the authority of the Church all of them ioyne in this that it is not simply necessary that it was written not to rule our faith but to be ruled by it and that Christ neuer commanded his Apostles to write any Scripture and that it is subiect and inferiour to the Church all these and many other bitter and blasphemous speeches they belch out against the Scripture whereby they plainely bewray their cankred hatred against the Scripture and all because they finde it contrary to their humour and an enemie to their Religion 33. Thus the Minor proposition in this demonstration is I hope sufficiently prooued to wit that the Religion of the Church of Rome doth professedly disgrace the holy Scripture as both by their doctrine their practice and their blasphemous speeches against it doth manifestly appeare and so the conclusion is of necessary and vndeniable consequence that therefore it deserueth to be suspected and reiected of all those that professe themselues to be friends to the Scripture and hope from it either consolation in this life or saluation in the life to come MOTIVE VII That Religion is to be abhorred which maintaineth commandeth and practiseth grosse and palpable Idolatry but so doth the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo c. WHen I consider the fearefull Idolatry of the Church of Rome which for that cause is called The Whore of Babylon and The Mother of fornications Reuel 17. 1. 2. I cannot choose but wonder that any should be so bewitched with the sorceries of this Iezabel or made drunke with the wine of her fornication that they should take her marke vpon their forheads and right hands and ioyne with her in her abominations and not rather come out of her with all speed as they are admonished by the Angell lest they bee partakers in her sinnes and haue a share also with her in her plagues but then againe remembring that which S. Paul faith that the comming of Antichrist should be in all deceiueablenesse of vnrighteousnesse and that God should send vpon them strong delusion to beleeue lies I turne my wondering at their sottishnesse into the admiration at Gods Iustice and Truth the one in punishing their contempt of his Gospell with such a giddinesse of spirit and the other in making good his owne word after such an euident and manifest manner that there by it most clearely appeareth that the Pope of Rome is that Man of sinne and Sonne of perdition there spoken of euen that Antichrist which exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God and sitteth in the Temple of God as if he were God As this appeareth in many grosse errors which they hold so in none more then in the horrible idolatry practised and preached defended in this Antichristian Church of which I may truely say as Plutarch said of the heathen that they mingle heauen with earth because they made Gods of men men of Gods So these whilst they giue diuine worship to earthly creatures as the crosse pictures of Christ and to the Saints in heauen or attribute earthly affections to heauenly creatures make a plaine mixture of heauen and earth spoyling the Creatour of his honour due vnto his Dietie and adorning the creature therewith and ascribing that vnto men which is onely proper vnto God That the Church of Rome is guilty of this impiety I hope by Gods grace so to proue in this Motiue that no Iesuite though neuer so subtill shall bee able with any shew of sound reason to hisse against 2. The first proposition in this Argument though it be of so euident a truth that it needeth no further demonstration yet because S. Paul saith that an Idoll is nothing in the world and thereupon some may peraduenture conclude that Idolatrie is a matter of nothing and a small and triuiall sinne I will therefore very briefly shew the greatnesse and haynousnesse of this sinne and how odious and abominable it is in the sight of God As touching therefore that phrase of Saint Paul An Idoll is nothing it is not to bee vnderstood either in respect of matter for euery Idoll hath a materiall being and subsisting as the matter of the Calfe which the Israelites made in the Wildernesse was gold and of the brazen serpent which was abused also as an Idoll was brasse and of those Idols which the Prophet Esay declameth so against were wood nor yet in respect of forme as Bellarmine and Caietane would haue it As though the Apostle should meane thus that an Idoll though it hath matter yet it hath no forme that is to say is the representation of such a thing as hath no being in nature for many of the Idols of the Gentiles were of such things as truly were but the Apostles meaning is as Tertullian obserues and many other both of ancient and late Writers that an Idoll is nothing in respect of that which it is intended to bee that is that it is no God nor hath any part of the Diuinitie in it which deserueth to bee worshipped or that it is nothing in regard of efficacie and power that is as the Psalmist speaketh is not able to doe either good or bad to hurt or to helpe to saue or to kill and this interpretation is authorized by S. Augustine and S. Chrysostome the one saying thus There are Idols indeede but they can doe nothing neither are they Gods the other thus Sunt Idola sed ad salutem nihil sunt There are Idols but they auaile nothing to the attaynement of saluation and it is also approued by many other Expositors both ancient and moderne Protestants and Papists and is most agreeable to the whole current of the Text. This then that S. Paul saith That an Idoll is nothing is both so farre from extenuating the sinne of Idolatrie that it aggrauateth the same and also so farre from clearing the Church of Rome from the guilt of that crime that it rather layeth a greater stayne thereof vpon it 3. As for the greatnesse of the sinne it may appeare by three considerations first of the precept for there is no one commandement of the Law so frequent in the whole Scripture and so strictly vrged and mounded and fenced about with so many reasons as that is against Idolatrie as we may see in the Decalogue Secondly in respect of the punishment denounced against and inflicted vpon the committers thereof to wit not onely eternall death from the iustice of God which is the wages of all sinne vnrepented of but also temporall death from the iustice of man as being vnworthy to breathe this common ayre or to tread vpon the earth that thus sinne against the Maiestie of God and that
blindnesse of the Popish crue that they beleeue all to bee true and take all this trash for good ware 33. There is almost nothing that our Sauiour touched or that touched him or that hee had any thing to doe withall but is turned into a Relicke as the Manger wherein hee was laid at his birth is to be seene in Rome at Saint Mary Maior the Linnen cloth wherein he was swadled at Saint Paul and another piece at Saint Sauiour in Spaine his Cradle and the Shirt which his mother made for him at the same place the Pillar which he leaned vnto when hee disputed with the Doctours and the water-pot in which he turned water into wine which are to be seene at diuers sundry places to wit at Rauenna at Pisa at Andegauum and in Spaine at Saint Sauiours the Table which he eate his last Supper on at Saint Iohn Laterane a piece of the bread at Saint Sauiours in Spaine the Knife where with he killed the Passeouer at Treuers the Cup wherein he gaue the Sacrament of his bloud to bee drunke at Saint Maries neere Lyons which Cup also is to bee seene among the Heluians in a certaine Monasterie of the Augustine Friers so the dish wherein the Paschall Lambe was put is visible at Rome at Genua and at Arles so the to well wherwith he wiped his Apostles feet is to be seene in Rome at S. Iohn Laterane and yet the same is shewed at Aquae in Germanie and at Saint Cornelius with the marke of Iudas his foote imprinted in it a piece of one of those loaues wherewith Christ miraculously fed the multitude in the desart is yet extant at Rome at Saint Maria Noua and another piece at Saint Sauiours in Spaine 34. What should I speake of the Crosse found out by Helena whereof as Histories report she gaue one part to her Son Constantine which was placed on a porphyrie pillar in Constantinople and the other part enclosed in a siluer case shee sent to the Bishop of Hierusalem to be kept It is admirable to see into how many pieces and patches it is now subdiuided one man was able to beare it sixteene hundred yeares agoe and now sixteene men nay if I said a hundred it were not amisse are scarce able to carry the fragments of it yea they would load a whole ship and that of good burthen The nailes as I said before which were but three as all know haue spawned eleuen more and are become foureteene where of two are to be seene at Rome one at Saint Hellens another at Saint Crosses a third at Venice a fourth at Sene a fift at Colne in Germanie at the three Maries a sixt at Treuers a seuenth at S. Dennis in France an eight at S. Sacell a ninth with the Carmelites a tenth among the Biturigions an eleuenth in an Abby c. his crowne of thornes is diuided into so many portions that either it must needs be of huge bignesse or else some of those fragments which are taken for parts of it must needs be meere impostures his seamelesse Coat hath begot diuers others for one is to be seene at Argentolium another at Treuers a third the Turke hath with him I should bee too long in this friuolous argument if I should reckon vp all the reliques of our Sauiour Christ that are notoriously extant and to all which worship and adoration is performed 35. As for the Virgin Maries relicks they are also very many and notable her haire and her milke are reserued in so many places that neuer any woman gaue so much milke in all her time of bearing as she did in that time that shee gaue sucke her Smocke is had in great honour both at Carnutis and also at Aquae in Germany and is carried vpon the end of a pole to be worshipped it is of that bignesse that the blessed Virgin should seeme by it to haue been a woman of an incredible stature which is the more to be wondred at because Iosephs breeches which are carried with the smocke in the same pompe are so little that they would fit a little boy or adwarfe her Kerchiefes are to be seene one at Treuers another at Lisium in Italie a little Crosse-cloth of hers is at Bononia her girdle at Pratum and another at Monferrat her Slippers at Saint Saniacquery her Shoo at Sanfloridum her Combes one at Rome another at Vesontium her marriage Ring is at Perusium as if then mariage was made with Rings as it is at this day her Garments or at least pieces of them are to be seene at so many places that the Virgin Maries wardrobe might compare if all were hers with the greatest Princesse in the world foure pictures are to be seen of her which Saint Luke himselfe drew 36. What should I reckon vp the Relicks of other Saints which are all of the same nature though not number Saint Michaels Sword and Buckler wherewith he ouercame the diuell is a monument of great estimation they are kept at great Saint Michaels in France a place much frequented by Pilgrims And what kind of things are they thinke you mary the sword is like a Childes dagger that hee weareth at his back and his Buckler like a little cupping-glasse or like the bosse of a Bridle fit weapons without doubt for an Archangell and more fit for him to fight with the Diuell withall What should I speake of the Relicks of Saint Iohn Baptist breuity bids me passe them ouer and yet I cannot chuse but relate one or two which are most famous as that finger of his wherewith he poynted vnto Christ when he said Behold the Lambe of God this finger is multiplied for it is to be seene at Vesontium and at Tholosse and at Lyons and among the Bituriges and at Florence and neere Matiscone Behold a wonder sixe fingers on a hand or else one finger begetting fiue more and so turned into sixe both a like miraculous one of his shooes is in Paris among the Carthusians behold here another miracle it was stolne away vpon a time and another of a sodaine came in the roome thereof sure a shoo will neuer bee wanting as long as there be Shoo-makers in Paris 37. Such like are the relickes of the rest of the Saints as of Peter and Paul and Iohn and Iames with the other Apostles the Popish Churches are replenished with thē and some of them are in diuers places at once after a miraculous maner as the Altar whereon Peter said Masse is both to bee viewed at Rome and at Pisa his staffe is at Colne and at Treuers Andrew hath one bodie to be seene at Tholosse and another at Melphis Iames the lesser and Philip haue each of them two bodies one of them at Tholosse another at Rome so also haue Simon and Iude Bartholomew is to be seene at Naples and yet for all that his body is at Rome too in a Church dedicated vnto him Mathew hath three bodies one at Patauium another at Rome
touch of diuine worship and religion therfore it was reiected the one saying Stand vp for I my selfe am a man insinuating that a man must not bee religiously adored and the other See thou doe it not for I am thy fellow seruant implying thereby that Angels and if Angels then Saints are but our fellow-seruants and therefore not to bee worshipped with any part of diuine and religious worship 49. To the example of Peter Bellarmine and Vasques giue two answers the one out of Hierom in his Booke against Vigilantius that Cornelius was worthily corrected by Peter because he thought some diuine thing to be in him aboue othermen the other out of Chrysostome vpon this place that it was no fault in Cornelius to exhibite but modesty in Peter to refuse that honour which was due vnto him Bellarmine is in different which of these two answers we take and therefore without propounding his owne iudgement leaues theÌ„ to our choyce and yet the one of them ouer-turneth the other for Hierom saith it was a fault in Cornelius Chrysostome that it was no fault Hierom that Peter did well in reprouing Cornelius Chrysostome that he did not reprooue him at all but of modesty refused the honour giuen to him What reason had he to leaue these to our choyce being thus contrary It plainely sheweth that he knew not what to answere Therefore Vasques the Iesuite renounceth Hieroms answere vpon this ground that Cornelius knew the true God before Peter came vnto him and therefore could not erre so grossely as to ascribe any diuinity to a mortall man and insists vpon Chrysostomes that hee did it for modesty sake but by as good warrant we may reiect Chrysostome as he doth Hierom especially seeing our reason is as effectuall for Peter giues this reason of his denyall for I my selfe am a man which must needs be the medium of a sillogisme thus to be concluded No religious worship is to be giuen to man but I my selfe am a man therefore thou doest euill to worship me Here is not a strayning at courtesie for modesty sake but a plaine renunciation of Cornelius his sact as vnlawfull if it had been a tricke of modesty onely he should rather haue said thus comparatiuely I am not worthy of this honour from such a man as thou art or such like but in saying I my selfe am but a man he insinuateth that Cornelius did more then he ought to do 50. If they say I but though you thus escape from Chrysostome yet Hieroms interpretation will hold you fast I answere Besides Vasques reason whereby he reiecteth Hierom that it maketh nothing against vs but for vs rather against them because Hierom seemeth to condemne as idolatrous all such adoration of Saints wherein any part or propertie of the diuine nature is attributed vnto them but the Romanists in kneeling and prostrating their bodies to the Saints ascribe the properties of God vnto them to wit either to be present in many places at once oâ— to heare being as farre remote from them as â—eaâ—en is from earth and to know the heart and to haue power to helpe c. all which properly are proper vnto God 51. To the example of Iohn and the Angell the former two Iesuites oppose also a double answere first that the Angell did appeare vnto Iohn in that maiesty that he might bee thought to be Christ himselfe And therefore that Iohn was rebuked not for the errour in his adoration but for his errour in the person adored This answere Vasques names onely and then reiects as friuolous But Bellarmine propounds it as good and authenticall Which shall we beleeue in this case Maâ—y sauing his reuerence though hee be now a Cardinall the plaine Iesuite is to be preferred before him both because this answere is crossed and contradicted by the second and also because the Iesuite giues a reason of his reiection And the Cardinall goeth to it by downe-right authority as if because he is their chiefe Rabbi hee may say what hee list his reason is because Iohn did truely know him to be an Angell and not God and therefore that there was no errour in the person Secondly they answere that the Angell would not now as in time before be worshipped of men because now God was become man and by his incarnation brought such dignity to the nature of man that the very Angels should doe reuerence vnto it not be adored and reuerenced by it especially of Christs Apostles and Princes of the Church To which I answere first that by this allegation it must needes follow that Angels are not now to bee adored in the Church of Christ howsoeuer they were before which is contrarie to their owne doctrine and generall tenent of their religion And secondly if not Angels then much lesse the Saints who at their highest though they be made like yet are farre inferiour to the Angels in excellency of graces and gifts And thâ—â—â—ly the reason where with the Angell after he had reproued Iohn directeth him to the right obiect of religious worship doth ouerthrow this exposition for he saith Worship God he doth not say Forbeare to worship me because your nature is dignified by the incarnation of the Sonne of God but forbeare because I am not God and all diuine and religious worship belongeth vnto him And thus notwithstanding all that is yet said all religious kneeling and prostrating the body to the Saints is Idolatrous 52. As for the dedicating Temples consecrating Festiuall daies making vowes to them they are all within the same compasse and that partly for the reasons before specified being acts of a religious worship but especially because the doctrine of their Church is that these things are so properly directed vnto the Saints that the end of their consecration is determined in them And therefore Bellarmine reprooues their opinion which say that Temples cannot properly bee erected to any but to God and affirmeth that they may be dedicated directly vnto Saints and that vowes may bee made to them determinately and so also Holy daies consecrated which cannot be any lesse then plaine Idolatrie seeing as Saint Augustine saith Cuiconuenit Templum ei conuenit sacrificium to whom a Temple to him a Sacrifice belongeth And seeing the Scripture in many places testifieth that vows must onely be made to God I am not ignorant of their cuasion that they doe not dedicate Churches to Saints as they are Temples but as they are Basilicae that is stately buildings for memorials of the Saints and that a Vow is made to God in signum gratitudinis â—rga authorem primum principium omnium bâ—nâ—rum as a signe of our thankfulnes to God the authour and first cause of all good things but to the Saints as a signe of gratefulnesse towards our mediatours and Intercessours by whose meanes wee receaue benefits from God And that the honour of the holy day though it immediately pertaineth to the Saints yet mediately
creature For as Augustine well obserueth Wee beleeue the Apostle we doe not beleeue in the Apostle and we beleeue the Church and not in the Church and therefore in the Apostles Creed where we say I beleeue in God wee doe not say I beleeue in the Catholicke Church but I beleeue the Catholicke Church whereby is plainely insinuated that none but God is to be beleeued in because to beleeue in a thing is to put our trust and confidence in that thing As for that place in the Epistle to Philemon it maketh nothing for this purpose for there the word Faith is referred to the Lord Iesus and Loue to the Saints neither ought Saint Hieromes authority more preiudicate vs in this interpretation then it doth them in many such like whom they reiect as they do the rest of the Fathers at their pleasures especially seeing no man else besides himselfe is of that minde at least wise if he vnderstand by faith to beleeue in the Saints and not to beleeue them onely the one whereof is proper to the Creator the other to the creatures 62. To the last I answere that Prayer is properly one of the sacrifices of the New Testament for here the sacrifices are not corporall but spirituall as may bee prooued in generall by that which our Sauiour saith Iohn 4. God will be worshipped in Spirit and truth And in particular by comparing Mal. 1. 11. with 1. Tim. 2. 8. for whereas Malachie prophecying of the Kingdome of Christ had said that Incense and a cleane offering should be offered to God in euery place Paul sheweth what is meant hereby when he commandeth to lift vp pure hands vnto God in euery place But suppose that it were improperly called a sacrifice yet it looseth not the knot for all kinde of sacrifices both proper and improper corporall and spirituall are due onely vnto God for to whome belongeth a Temple and Altar to him belongeth a sacrifice saith Saint Augustine but no Temple or Altar proper or improper is to be built or set vp to any but to God and therfore no sacrifice is to be offered but to him 63. Lastly touching the authority of the Fathers which are alleaged so frequently by Bellarmine to prooue the Inuocation of Saints and from which Cassander would draw this conclusion That it was not credible that those holy men would admit any doctrine or custome which they supposed to bee contrary to the Euangelicall and Apostolicall doctrine or detract any thing from the glory of God or the merit of Christ when as they vnderwent so heauie conflicts for Christs sake Here not to keepe the Reader in suspense referring a fuller satisfaction to this argument to a more fit place foure things are to bee noted first that for the space of two hundred yeares after Christ the Intercession and Inuocation of Saints were doctrines vnknowne vnto the Church and therefore they alledge no Father within that compasse saue Dionisius Areopagita Cap. 7. Eccles Hierarch which booke as diuers other that goe vnder that name Illyricus hath proued to bee counterfeit by impregnable reasons And Iraeneus Lib. 5. contra Haeres who saith that the Virgine Mary was made the Aduocate of the Virgine Eue by which hee could not meane that Eue did pray vnto Mary here on earth seeing Mary was not then borne when Eue liued nor that the Virgine Mary did pray for Eue whilst shee liued because then shee her selfe was not both which must needes be if by this testimony the Inuocation of Saints should be proued 64. Secondly those Fathers that liued in the next two hundred yeares speake of this matter very variously and doubtfully as if it were a doctrine which they knew not what to say to were not fully resolued in Thirdly of those Fathers which he alleageth though in some places they seeme to allow that custome which was then brought into the Church yet in other places they disallow the same Yea and they are disapprooued also of others that liued in the same age Thus true Athanasius condemneth Inuocation of Saints Orat. 2. 3. contra Arianos and false Athanasius alloweth it Sermon in Euangel de Sanctissima Deipara Basil approueth it but Nazianzene doubteth of it and Epiphanius that liued also about that time vtterly condemneth iâ— Chrysostome in some places seemeth to allow of it in others he speaketh against it and so doth Augustine and the rest as you may see at large prooued by Chemnitius in his examine of the Councill of Trent And that which is not to be forgotten they alleage many false and counterfeit Bookes vnder the name of the Fathers as Dionysius Areopagita Ecclesiast Hierar Athanas Serm. de Sanctissima Deipara Chrysost hom ad pop 66. and many others of the like impression as the same Chemnitius hath learnedly and vnanswerably prooued 65. Lastly those Fathers which doe defend this Inuocation yet do not defend it as it is now practised in the Church of Rome for first the Fathers if they did allow of this Inuocation yet it was in their priuate deuotions not in the publike Leiturgie of the Church for it cannot bee prooued that in any of the ancient Leiturgies this Inuocation was vsed vntill Gregorie the firsts time for as for that which was called Chrysostomes Masse all know it is a bastard brat and not a true Child of that good Father but in the Church of Rome it is practised in their publicke seruice and so is come from a matter of priuate deuotion to a generall practice of Religion Secondly the Fathers though they may seeme to haue prayed sometimes vnto the Saints out of the heate of their deuotion yet it was but now and then and as it were by the way whereas their ordinary prayers and deuotions were directed vnto God but in the Church of Rome the Saints are more prayed vnto then God he hath the least and they the greatest share in their deuotion witnesse the Letanie of the blessed Virgin Marie and the Marie Psalter and their Common practice Thirdly the Fathers albeit they directed their prayers sometimes to the Saints yet they reposed most confidence in their prayers to God and in the mediation of Christ as appeareth by that which Chrysostome saith Ad Deum non ostiarâ—o c. We need no Porter nor Mediator nor Minister to bring vs to God say but Miserere mei Deus c. And in another place hee saith that when wee pray our selues to God wee obtaine more then when others pray for vs. But the superstitious Romanists thinke to speede better when they pray to the Saints then when vnto God And therefore they are not ashamed to say that we must appeale from the Court of Gods iustice to the Court of his Mothers mercy Fourthly the Fathers did not so much as dreame of any merits of supererogation which should be in the Saints and by them should be communicated vntovs but all the interest
meates and that from all in generall and that to this end for the castigation and mortification of the body and not eyther for merite sake or that it is a thing vnlawfull or that wee may glut our selues with some kinde and may not so much as touch others vpon paine of heresie which is the doctrine of the Church of Rome This is all that S. Augustines words import which as they doe not deliuer them from opposition to the Gospell so they manifestly imply these two conclusions first that the Synagogue of Rome is not the Church of God for it forbiddeth marriage to Priests not as a lesser good but as a thing simply euill And secondly that they maintaine in this their Church that doctrine which of S. Paul is called The doctrine of Diuels for they forbid both Meates and Marriage at some times and to some persons as things sinfull and vnlawfull And whereas the Fathers almost in generall say that it is better for such as haue vowed continency to marry then to fall into the fire of lust they conclude filthily to their eternall disgrace It is better for a Priest to play the whoremonger and keepe a Concubine then after his vow of continency to be coupled in wedlocke 39. But Bellarmine couereth her nakednesse whereof he is as it seemeth some what ashamed with a figge leafe of a distinction for he saith that fornication is not simply better then marriage but in respect that a man hath before entred into a vow in which regard to marry after the vow is a greater sinne then to commit fornication and this hee proueth by an example from a married woman whose husband is eyther continually absent or sicke so that hee cannot performe the marriage debt vnto her It is not sayd vnto her It is better to marry then to burne but shee ought to keepe her faith to her husband and by fasting and prayer keepe vnder and tame the concupiscence of her nature and therefore saith hee that precept or permission Let him marry is not spoken to all but only to such as are free and not if they be bound and haue giuen their faith vnto God 39. To which I answere two things First I aske him whether this vow which 〈◊〉 talke of be onely against marriage or against all manner of incontinency If they say that it is the vow of chastitie and that it is against all manner of incontinency then how can it bee that it should bee broken more by marriage then by fornication by hauing a wife then by keeping a whore and that to marry in respect of the vow should be a greater sinne then to commit whoredome especially seeing marriage is Gods ordinance and fornication of the Diuels institution that an honourable and holy estate and this a filthy and vgly sinne If they say that the vow is against marriage onely then what a Religion is Popery that teacheth her people to vow against marriage and not against fornication against wiues and husbands but not against whores and varlets Surely that Religion that maintaineth this cannot be of God 40. Secondly to his example I answere Marriage cannot be inioyned to her that is married already albeit her husband bee eyther absent or impotent for that is contrary to Gods ordinance Mal. 2. 14. Mat. 19. 5. But the vow of single life is not Gods ordinauce especially in so high a degree as marriage is for at the most it is but a Council whereas the other is a flat Precept to all that cannot containe and besides they that are married may expect the blessing of God vpon them vsing the meanes for their restraint in a godly manner and begging continency at Gods hand because they are in a calling ordayned by God but they that are in a vow who either enter rashly or are thrust in against their wills and contrary to Gods Commandement not being able to abstaine but proudly presume vpon their owne strength how can they hope for Gods blessing vpon them to strengthen them against the temptations of the flesh And thus this example together with the distinction it selfe maketh no whit to the iustifying of their doctrine but that it still remayneth in plaine contrariety and opposition to the Gospell of Iesus Christ 41. The Gospell teacheth that there is one true and solide foundation vpon which the Church of God is built 〈◊〉 to wit our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ But the Romish congregation cryeth out that Peter and the ordinary succession of Popes and the Church of Rome is the foundation of the whole Church and that the Church is built vpon them and not vpon Christ alone 42. Bellarmine distinguisheth of foundations and saith that Christ is the primary and principall foundation of the Church but that doth not hinder but that there may be secundary foundations and for proofe thereof he alledgeth Ephes 2. 20. where it is said that we are built the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles and Apoc. 11. 14. where the twelue Apostles are made the twelue foundations of the Church 43. To which I answere three things First that though it be trueâ—â— that the Apostles bee the secundary foundations of the Church layd vpon Christ the true Rocke and foundation as twelue goodly stones and that vpon them the Church is built to wit vpon Christ primarily and principally and vpon them secundarily yet it doth not take away the Antithesis of their doctrine to the Gospell for they say that Peter is the onely secundary foundation and that hee as the chiefest stone is layd next vnto Christ and the rest of the Apostles built immediately vpon him and mediately by him vpon Christ But those Scriptures say that the twelue Apostles are twelue precious stones laid one by one vpon Christ and not one vpon another and twelue foundations equally proportioned to each other and not one placed vpon the top of another and so it is true that as the prerogatiue of the onely singular foundation belongeth to Christ so the honour of being secundary foundations is equally deuided among the twelue Apostles and so Peter in this respect hath no greater prerogatiue then the rest And therefore this distinction deliuers them not from the snare seeing that it maketh all the twelue Apostles altogether ioynt-foundations of the Church and they would haue Peter to bee the onely foundation next vnto Christ vpon whom both the Church of God and the Apostles themselues are built 44. Secondly I answere that when the Apostles are said to be foundations of the Church it is not meant of their persons but of their doctrine as witnesse almost all the Fathers for concerning person it is true which Saint Paul saith No man can lay any other foundation beside that which is layd Iesus Christ 1. Cor. 3. 11. But the Romanists would not haue the doctrine of Peter but the person of Peter to be this foundation and for proofe thereof Bellarmine fetcheth this argument from the
Prophet Esay saying Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a sure foundation which is a playne and manifest Prophecie of Christ and not of Peter as the Apostle Peter himselfe expoundeth it where by the way we may note the feareful outrage of these Romish Rabbies against the truth of God and the God of truth whilst to the end they may aduance their Popes dignity by Peter they wrest and peruert the Scriptures and apply the Prophecies belonging to the Sonne of God to his seruant Peter and so make Peter himselfe nay the holy Ghost a Lyar. It were not credible that such blasphemous thoughts and words should nestle in the heart and issue out of the mouth of any but that the Apostle Saint Paul hath fore-told vs that in the time of Antichrist because men would not receiue the loue of the truth that they might be saued therefore God would send them strong delusions that they should beleeue lyes c. But to the point If Christs person be the onely true foundation of the Church in whom all the building being coupled together groweth vnto an holy Temple in the Lord and that not the persons but the doctrine and faith of the Apostles are those secundary foundations which the Scripture speaketh of as hath beene proued out of the Fathers then the opposition is vndefeasible namely that there is but one person the foundation of our Church which is our Lord and Sauiour the Sonne of God Christ Iesus and yet that Peters person should be the foundation of the Church also together with Christ 45. Thirdly I answere that both in truth and also in proprietie of speech there can bee but one foundation of one building those stones that are layd next to the foundation are not properly a secundary foundation but the beginning of the building vpon the foundation and for that cause when Peter and the rest of the Apostles are called twelue foundations it cannot bee vnderstood that they were any wayes properly foundations of the Church either first or second but that our Sauiour who is the substance and subiect of their doctrine is the onely true and singular foundation of the Church and that there is none other besides him for if when it is said that we are built vpō the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles as must needes bee because the Prophets are coupled together with the Apostles which liued not in the Christian Church and therefore could not be personall foundations of it and Christ crucified is the substance of their doctrine then it must needes follow that the Apostles meaning is nothing else but that we are built vpon Christ whom the Prophets and the Apostles preached and beleeued in And thus S. Hilary vnderstood it and Saint Ambrose and Anselmus who giuing the foundation of the Church to Peter expoundeth it sometimes of his faith in Christ and sometimes of Christ himselfe in whom he beleeued And thus doe also Salmeron the Iesuite and Cardinall Caietane in their commentaries vpon that place and Peter Lumbard together with the glosse vpon the place interpret And so this distinction of a primary and secundary foundation hath no foundation in the word of God 46. The Gospell teacheth that no Apostle or Bishop or other Minister of the Gospell is superiour to another of the same ranke or hath greater power and authority then another in respect of their ministerie but that all Ministers in their seuerall degrees haue equall power of preaching the Gospell administring the Sacraments binding and loosing But the Bishop of Rome challengeth to himselfe a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and ouer the whole Church and braggeth that he hath by right a title to both the swords both spirituall and temporall and that both iurisdictions doe originally pertaine to him and from him are conueyed to others c. 47. Bellarmine heere first confesseth and secondly distinguisheth hee confesseth that the Bishop of Rome hath a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and the whole Church and denyeth that eyther those places here quoted or any other doe prooue the contrary 48. To which I answere first that whereas out of Luke 22. 26. and 1. Cor. 3. 4. he extracteth a disparity and an inequality I answere that no man denyeth it and therefore he fighteth with his owne shadow hee should prooue not a bare superiority which wee confesse but a superiority in the same degree as of one Bishop to another and that in power not in execution wherein standeth the point of opposition 49. Secondly whereas he saith that though the power of remitting and retayning finnes and binding and loosing was communicated to all the Apostles yet Peter was ordayned chiefe Pastor ouer them all because our Sauiour Christ sayd vnto him alone Feede my sheepe and To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen I answere that in this hee crosseth both himselfe the Fathers and the truth himselfe for elsewhere hee confesseth that the keyes both of Order and Iurisdiction were giuen to all the Apostles indifferently and therefore it must needes follow that Tibi dabo claues was not spoken singularly to Peter but generally to them all for if Christ gaue the keyes to them all as he confesseth then without doubt he promised them to them all or else his word and his deede should not accord together And againe hee acknowledgeth that all the Apostles had both power and commission to feede the sheepe of Christ when Mat. 28. he bade them all Goe teach and baptize and they all did put that commission in execution therefore it must needes follow that no singular power was giuen to Peter when as Christ said vnto him Feede my sheepe vnlesse we will say that the rest had not the same commission 50. The Fathers for Saint Cyprian saith plainely that all the Apostles were the same with Peter indued with equall fellowship both of honour and power and that a primary was giuen vnto Peter that the Church might appeare to be one Saint Hilary is of the same minde You O holy and blessed men saith he for the merit of your faith haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and obtained a right to binde and loose in Heauen and earth Saint Augustine saith that if when Christ said To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen he spake onely to Peter then the Church hath not the power of the keyes but if the Church hath it then Peter receiuing the keyes represented the Church And lastly Leo one of their owne Popes confesseth asmuch when hee affirmeth that the strength of this power of the keyes passed vnto all the Apostles and the constitution of this decree vnto all the Princes of the Church 51. Lastly the truth for when the Apostles stroue for superiority Christ who is truth it selfe and would not haue concealed so necessary a trueth if
of God A dead man cannot moue the members of the body nor vse the naturall saculties of the soule no more can the vnregenerate mooue one haire bredth to Heauen-ward nor vse any graces of the Spirit A dead man hath no sense nor feeling though hee bee neuer so sharply handled seeth not though the Sunne shineth neuer so bright heareth not though a trumpet be sounded in his eare no more can the vnregenerat feele the wounds of Gods Lawes heare the sound of the Gospell nor see the cleare light of truth that shinethround about him Lastly in a dead man there is a separation of the soule froÌ„ the body so in the vnregenerate there is a separation of Gods Spirit from the soule which is the soule of the soule For this cause S. Aug. likened the vnregenerate man to the Shunamites sonne beeing dead whom the Prophet Elizeus raised from death to life and others to Lazarus stinking in the graue or to the widowes sonne of Naiâ—â— lying dead vpon the beare or to Iairus daughter that was dead in the house noting three degrees of sinnes one more notorious then the other yet all in the state of death vntill Christ by his Spirit shall inspire life into them and this is the perfect analogy and proportion betwixt a dead man and a sinner and therefore Bellarmines exception is false that they doe not agree in all things for there is nothing wherein they doe agree not if the comparison bee rightly proportioned 82. Secondly if they did disagree in other things yet in this wherein lyeth the life of the similitude they must needs agree that as a dead man hath nothing whereby he can helpe himselfe for the recouery of his life so man spiritually dead hath nothing in him no faculty or power of the soule whereby he can any way further the obtaining of his coÌ„uersioÌ„ And this was Saint Augustines opinion agreeable to the Gospell for his words are plaine concerning Pauls conuersion that he was called from Heauen and by that mighty and effectuall calling conuerted Gratia Deisolaerat It was onely the grace of God And no otherwise did Iustine Martyr conceiue thereof when hee sayth That as to haue beeing at the first when wee are created was not of our selues so to choose and follow that which is pleasing to God is not by vs but by his perswading and mouing vs to the faith In this therefore which is the point of the question the similitude holds most strongly and so Bellarmines exception is nothing to the purpose 83. Thirdly and lastly it is most absurd of all which hee sayth that because a sinner liueth naturally therefore he moueth towards grace more then a dead carkas to nature which hath no life at all for in respect of grace it is all one to haue no life at all and to haue no life of the Spirit For nothing can worke aboue the compasse of it owne beeing Naturall life cannot tranicend the Spheare of nature nor any way moue to the Spheare of grace For as Plants that liue the vegetatiue life cannot arise to the sensitiue life which is in beasts nor they to the rationall which is in men So neither can these arise vp any whit to the life of the Spirit which is in Gods Saints till a new life bee inspired into them which new life as it is the conuersion of the soule to God so it is the foundation of all spirituall actions seeing life in euery kinde is the foundation of all the actions in that kind For vntill there bee life in a plant it doth not grow vntill it bee in a beast it doth not moue nor feele vntill in a man hee doth not thinke speake or remember and so vntill this life of the Spirit bee in the soule it cannot will nor worke any thing that is good Therefore I conclude that though a sinner liue naturally yet beeing dead to grace that that life doth no more helpe to his conuersion then the sensitiue life of a beast doth to the obtaining of reason or the vegetatiue life of a Plant to the obtaining of sense 84. The Gospell teacheth that all should read the Scriptures for so our Sauiour chargeth and his Apostles Paul and Peter and Iohn charge not Priests onely but all others And Abraham sendeth the rich Gluttons brethren to Moses and the Prophets And the Eunuch is not rebuked but approued by Philip for reading the Prophesie of Esay And the Bereans are commended for examining Pauls doctrine by the Scripture which should neuer haue beene if it had not beene lawfull for them to doe it This is the doctrine of the Gospell most plaine and euident But the Church of Rome teacheth that all men must not read the Scripture to wit Laymen except they bee permitted by their Ordinary because pearles are not to bee cast amongst swine nor a sword or a knife put into a childes hand nor occasion of errour offered to the ignorant nor matter of offence to the weake as also because they are more obscure then can bee vnderstood of the Laicks and common sort of people Thus they paint ouer the foule wrinkled face of Iezabel with false colours but yet the contrariety is plaine All ought to read the Scriptures and some ought not to read the Scriptures The one is the doctrine of Iesus Christ The other of the Pope and his Church 85. But Bellarmine distinguisheth two wayes First that there is a double way of knowing the Scriptures one by hearing and another by reading The first is commanded to all and therefore necessary to be vsed of all But this last is not commanded to any but to the Clergie and those whom they shall thinke fit to read them with profit and without danger But who seeth not that when our Sauiour willeth to search the Scriptures hee speaketh of reading And when the Bereans examined Pauls sermon by the Scriptures they did it by reading And when Abraham remitteth Diues brethren to Moses and the Prophets hee sendeth them to reading For Moses and the Prophets were dead in their persons and liued onely in their writings And lastly when the Apostles wrote their Epistles to the seuerall Churches they wrote them to this end that they might bee read of all For so Saint Paul chargeth the Colossians after they had read the Epistle that they themselues would cause it also to bee read in the Church of the Laodiceans Besides if it bee a dangerous thing for the ignorant to read the Scriptures for feare they should peruert the sense so fal into heresie or impiety then much more dangerous is the hearing of it seeing there is no preaching so pure as the word it selfe man euer mixing some dregs of his own corruption with the pure wine of the word nor any preacher so sincere but he doth often erre and so the hearer being debarred from trying his doctrine by the touchstone of the Scripture must needs irrecouerably fall into
euery man As the multitude of the Nineuites knew not their right hand from their left so this rabble know not the right hand of Religion from the left As for the maine points of the Catechisme how can they know them whereas they are ignorant of the grounds thereof For the Lords Prayer the ten Commandements and the Creede they rumble vp in the Latine tongue not vnderstanding one word what they speake They say Pater noster and Credo in Deum and yet they know not what Pater meaneth nor what Credo signifieth Yea for the most part they so mistearme the words thereof that their language is more like to the babling of Infants or rather the prattling of Parrats then the speech of men Neither is this ignorance onely to be found among the basest of the people which haue no teaching and education but euen amongst the better sort of them that are well borne and brought vp and after so strange and strong a fashion that by no meanes can they be withdrawne from this inueterate and continued custome of their Ancestors Hence springeth all that grosse superstition which is vsed of them as creeping to the Crosse falling downe before Images adoring and beautifying them with new-fashioned garments running a Pilgrimage to this Saint and that setting vp Tapers before their shrines wearing about their necks the beginning of the Gospell of Saint Iohn as a preseruatiue against the Diuell and the herbe Veruine being crossed and blessed against blasts the white Pater noster and the little Creede with an infinite number of such like superstitious vanities whereof there is neyther head nor foote Would any that are not plunged ouer head and eares in ignorance put any affiance in such trumperie and yet herein is all the Religion of the vulgar who repose euen the hope of their saluation in these things and thinke it a greater sinne to neglect or omit one of these Ceremonies then to breake any of the Commandements of God 28. Now let any man iudge whether this can be the true Religion which nourisheth this barbarous and monstrous ignorance and superstition amongst the people and whether that can be a good tree which bringeth forth such bitter and sowre fruits This is the conclusion which groweth out of the premises by necessary consequence The XI MOTIVE That Religion which was neuer knowne nor heard of in the Apostles time nor in the Primitiue Church cannot be the truth but such is the Romish Religion in most points thereof therefore that cannot be the truth 1. THe Romanists triumph in no one thing so much as in the antiquitie of their Church and Religion and therefore they cast euermore into our teeth that our Religion is but vp-start and our Church of yesterday euen since Luthers time being neuer extant in the world before But herein they play but the Sophisters for if they speake of true antiquitie we will ioyne issue with them in this point and doubt not but to prooue that theirs is the vp-start Church and their Religion the new Religion in those points wherein they differ from vs and that our faith and Religion was taught and professed by Christ himselfe and his Apostles and exercised and maintained in the pure and primitiue Age of the Church For the cleere manifestation of which point it is first to be obserued that there is a double antiquitie one primary another secundary Primary is that which was from the beginning though discontinued and interrupted by the corruption of times Secundary is that which indeede is aged and gray-headed but yet reacheth not to the spring head Thus our Sauiour Christ controlleth the law of Diuorce Mat. 19. 8. though it was aged and of long continuance euen two thousand yeeres old yet Nonsic fuit ab initio It was not so from the beginning where we see that Diuorce was old and full of yeeres and yet farre from true antiquitie for true antiquitie is that which is deriued ab initio from the beginning In regard of this it is truely said of Tertullian Verum quod primum falsum quod posterius That which is first is alwaies true and that which commeth later is false but in respect of the other it is also as truely spoken of Saint Augustine Estmos diabolicus vt per antiquitatis traducem commendetur fallacia It is a diuellish custome that error should be commended by the descent of antiquitie Secondly it is to be obserued that no antiquitie be it neuer so ancient and hoare-headed is to be reuerenced or regarded if it bee not grounded vpon the truth of the Scriptures and that which seemeth nouelty if it bring Scripture for it warrant is truely ancient and hath true certaine and vnresistable authoritie the reason is giuen by Aquinaâ— Because the Law of God proceedeth from the will of God and therefore may not be altered by custome proceeding from the will of man whence it is that no custome ought to preuaile against the Law of God To which purpose is that of Tertullian Heresies are to bee conuinced not so much by noueltis as by verity whatsoeuer sauours against the truth that shall bee heresie yea though neuer so ancient And of Cyprian If onely Christ is to bee heard wee ought not to regard what any before vs hath thought fit to bee done but what Christ who is before all hath first done for we must not follow the custome of man but the truth of God and in another place Custome without truth is nothing but antiquitie of error Vpon this ground also Clemens Alexandrinus in an Oration to the Gentiles who pretended antiquitie for their errors as the Romanists now doe saying that they and their Fathers before them were borne and bred in that Religion and therefore will not now giue it ouer saith Let vs flye custome as a rocke or the threates of Charybdis or the fabulous Syrenes for it choaketh a man it turneth from the truth it leadeth from life it is a snare a hellish gulfe an euill fanne c. And Saint Augustine Truth being knowne custome is not to be followed for our Sauiour did not say I am custome but I am truth Now vpon these grounds wee offer to ioyne issue with them First that they haue no true and primitiue antiquitie for their Religion and secondly though some of their opinions be of long continuance yet being not warrantable by Scriptures they ought not to preiudice by a conceit of nouelty that primitiue and Apostolicall truth which by corrupt time hath beene interrupted And this I hope to discourse so plainely in this Argument following that no indifferent reader that seemeth not forestalled with preiudice shall depart vnsatisfied 2. Concerning the first proposition I take it to bee of an vndeniable truth for without all question all truth was taught by the Apostles to the Primitiue Church and no part thereof was left vnreuealed for so Saint Paul saith in plaine tearmes to
Laterane himselfe sitting in his Pontificall Throne and the Emperour kneeling before him and holding vp his hands vnto him as vnto God Did Peter euer doe the like Gregory the third deposed Leo surnamed Iconomachus for defacing Images set vp in Churches to bee worshipped Pope Stephen deposed Childerick King of France and set vp Pipin in his roome for no haynous offence by him committed but onely because hee was in his iudgement vnprofitable for the kingdome Gregory the seuenth called Hildebrand would haue deposed Henry the fourth and haue aduanced Rodolph Duke of Sueuia into his throne but that Gods iustice preuented his purpose by bringing Rodolph to an vntimely end and the Pope himselfe to a miserable and fearefull destruction yet afterwards the same Henry was surprised by his owne sonne Henry the fift at the inspiration of the succeeding Popes and depriued and imprisoned and brought to his graue Hadrian the fourth discharged the subiects of William King of Sicilia of their oath and alleageance because hee would not yeeld Apulia to the Pope for inlarging of Saint Peters patrimony Alexander the fift excommunicated the Emperour Frederick as also he had done his predecessour Hadrian and thundred out great curses vpon him and sent letters abroad to all Princes and people to raise tumults against him for punishing some dissolute persons of the Clergy and claiming by warre some rebellious Cities in Italy as they pretended Innocent the third excommunicated Philip and raised vp Otho against him seeking to dispossesse him of his kingdome and after when Otho was inuested with the Empyre hee set vp Frederick the sonne of Henry the sixt against him and deposed Otho Honorius the third persecuted this Frederick depriued him and stirred vp his subiects against him absoluted them from their faith oath and alleageance And the like also did Gregory the ninth and Celestine the fourth and Innocent the fourth against the same man After the same manner was serued King Iohn of England by the fore-named Innocent the fourth because hee banished the Monks that had chosen Stephen Langton to bee Archbishop of Canterbury contrary to his minde 16. What should I reckon Raymundus Earle of Tholouse Or Conrade the son of Frederick the second Or Mamphred the bastard sonne of Frederick Or Peter King of Arragon Or Philip the faire King of France Or Henry the seuenth who being persecuted by Clement the fift was at last poysoned in the Eucharist by a Iacobine Fryer suborned to worke that feate Or Lewes of Bauary Charles the fourth or Wenceslaus or George King of Bohemia or Iohn King of Naâ—arre all which were grieuously persecuted if not vtterly deposed by sundry Popes And lastly our late Queene of famous memory whose life was not once or twise but often assaulted by the Popes instruments and her kingdome so farre as lay in the Popes power taken from her and translated to the Spanish faction Did euer Peter doe the like 17. But to descend from Kings to Bishopâ— the Pope doth challenge to himselfe the fulnesse of power ouer all other Bishops that the fountaine of iurisdiction the authority of the keyes is resident onely in his person and that all other Bishops are subdelegate vnder him and receâ—â—â— their power from him and that they ought to receiue their inuestitures from him alone Did Peter euer doe the like No Hee esteemed all the rest of the Apostles his equals and so our Sauiour Christ inioyned an equality and parity to be among the Apostles albeit they had a superiority ouer the seuenty disciples and all Bishops are the vndoubted successors of the Apostles witnesse Irenaeus Cyprian and Hierome and therefore must needs haue equall power of iurisdiction as those from whom they receiued it were equall this Saint Ierome auoucheth in direct termes when hee sayth Vbicunque fuâ—rit Episcopus c. Wheresoeuer he be Bishop whether at Rome or at Eugubium c. hee is of the same merit and of the same Priesthood And Saint Cyprian Episcopatus vnus est cuius à singulis pars in solidum tenetur The Bishopricke is one whereof euery Bishop hath a found and entyre part 18. Againe the Pope claimeth a Soueraignetâ—e ouer a Councell and that not onely to call it at his pleasure and to dissolue it againe when hee will but also to allow and approue what he lusteth and to disanull whatsoeuer is distastefull vnto his humorous palate in which respect it is set downe as a ruled case amongst them that Although in a generall Councell the vniuersall Church is represented insomuch that nothing is greater then a Councell notwithstanding the Pope surpasseth the same in all manner authoritie and therefore if the whole world should giue sentence against the Pope yet the Popes sentence is to be stood vnto and all other reiected And the reason is giuen because hee is of greater perfection then the whole bodie of the Church beside Did euer Peter doe the like In that Councell of the Apostles and Disciples in the eleuenth of the Acts when as diuers Christians of the Circumcision contended against him for preaching and baptizing Cornelius and his houshold at Cesarea which were of the Gentiles he did not arrogate this supereminencie to himselfe that he was their chiefe and head and therefore ought not to be called to an account by them 〈…〉 that they ought to subiect themselues to his power as one that could not erre no he doth no such matter but meekly rendreth a reckoning of his carriage in this businesse and submitteth himselfe to their censure So Acts 15. when the Apostles and Elders of the Church came together in a Councell to decide that great Controuerfie then mooued in the Church about Circumcision Peter behaueth not himselfe as a Iudge nor taketh vpon him any authoritie aboue the rest but as one of the Apostles giueth his opinion and the determination of the question is set downe not vnder his name onely but in the name of the Apostles Elders and brethren that were present yea Iames was president of that Councell and not Peter if we will beleeue Gerson and Lyran of their owne and Chrysostome of the ancients 19. Againe the Pope taketh vpon him to exempt Clarks though offending by Murder Treason Theft Adulterie or such like from all temporall Courts of Princes and punishment of the Laytie except the Church proceed against them first and make them no Clarkes Thus Pope Nicholas the first wrote to Michael the Emperour Christian Emperors haue no right at all to make any inquisition for Monkes vnlesse it be in fauour to pittie them Thus Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterburie quarrelled with Henrie the Second for this cause principally as both Houeden and Fabain report for that the King went about to punish such of the Clergie as were malefactors by the temporall Lawes of the Land which the Archbishop vtterly denyed to be lawfull For this he said that if a Clarke being
within holy Orders were accused of any crime hee must bee iudged by Ecclesiasticall Iudges and if he were conuict he should lose his Orders and so being excluded from Ecclesiasticall office and benefice if after this he incurred the like fault then might he be iudged at the pleasure of the King and his Officers This was that proud Archbishops challenge against his Soueraigne Henry the Second for defence whereof as also for other trayterous demeanors being tumultuously killed hee was canonized a Saint at Rome 20. And that you may see that this practice of theirs is agreeable to their Doctrine Bellarmine himselfe concludeth That Kings are not Superiours vnto Clarkes and therefore that they are not bound either by Gods or mans Law to obey them saue onely in respect of Lawes directiue and that the Imperiall Law ought in matters criminall to giue place to the Canon Law which is as much as to say that not the King but the Pope is the Lord of the Clergie Did Peter euer doe the like No he both in his owne person submitted himselfe to the temporall power when he paid Tribute at his Masters Commandement and when he vnder-went stripes and imprisonment for the Gospels sâ—ke without making any such challenge of exemption and also when he gaue in charge to all others euen his fellow Elders to submit themselues to Kings and Superiours for the Lords sâ—ke Sure it is that hee which payd a Tribute of monie much more ought to pay a Tribute of obedience and he which commanded others to obey would not in any wise bee refractorie himselfe lest that olde Prouerbe should be returned vpon him Phisician heale thy selfe and lest his practice should looke one way and his doctrine another which was vnfit for any much more for an Apostle 21. Lastly did euer Peter challenge to himselfe any such power and preeminence aboue the Scriptures as to dispense with the Law of GOD at his pleasure and to take away and abrogate what hee list in the same But the Pope taketh vpon him this also for these be their owne positions That the Pope may dispense with the Law of God and against the Apostle and against the new Testament vpon a great causâ— and that he may take away the Law of God in part but not in whole Yea that hee can ex iniustitia facere iustitiam turne sinne into righteousnesse and de facto Some of them haue dispenst with diuers Commandements of the Law with Incest with Murther with Theft with Treason Adulterie and such like as hath beene before sufficiently declared and may further be prooued if it were not a thing both knowne and confessed To shut vp the poynt certaine it is that Peter neuer exercised any such Iurisdiction eyther in part or whole as here is claimed by the Popes and if hee had it and did not shew it eyther by doctrine or practice he was not so carefull of the Church of God as hee should bee to hide from them so necessarie a truth but if he had it not then doe the Popes both vniustly deriue it from his chaire and wrongfully vsurpe that which by no right belongeth vnto them Now in that which I say Peter neuer did the like let Paul and Iames and Iohn and all the rest of the Apostles yea the whole Primitiue Church be included within the same proposition and it is as fully true as in that one particular and therefore it must necessarily follow that the Romish Iurisdiction hath no footing nor founding in the whole Primitiue Church but is like a Monster borne out of time deformed and mis-shapen in euery part thereof 22. In the third place if we coÌ„sider the outward ceremonies now vsed in the Church of Rome we shall yet more cleerely foe their declining from the Primitiue antiquitie for a taste whereof I instance first in their Latine Seruice which Bellarmine himselfe confesseth was not in vse in the Apostles times and Lyranus goeth a step further and sayth that in the Primitiue Church and long after all things in the Church were performed in the vulgar tongue the same is acknowledged by Aquinas and Caietan writing vpon the same place and Cassander as learned and iudicious a Papist as their side affordeth yea Platina himselfe pointeth out the very time when and person by whom this was first commanded to wit by Vittalianus the first about the yeere sixe hundred threescore ten What need we more to euince the noueltie of this Ceremonie seeing wee haue so many of their owne confessions and no maruell if they confesse it seeing else they should haue contradicted most of the ancient Fathers whose testimonies are so cleere in this point that they admit no exception as the places quoted doe manifestly declare 23. Secondly I instance in their praying vpon beades which came in as Polidore Virgil affirmeth in the yeere of our Lord 1040. being the deuice of one Petrus a French Eremite but the Rosarie was deuised by Fryer Dominick long after that is fiftie Aue Maries fiue Pater nosters for which purpose he framed fiue fiftie stones which were so hanged together on a string that betwixt euery tenne small stones one big one was interposed this he called a Patriloquie Out of which as yet a later inuention sprung the Marie Psalter for three Rosaries that is an hundred and fiftie Aue Maries and 15. Pater nosters make a Psalter because forsooth Dauids Psalmes were so many in number these are confessed nouelties and therefore I neede not to insist any longer in them 24. Thirdly I vrge their festiuall dayes which as they are full of superstition so are they of nouell and late institution as for example the feast of the conception of the Virgin Marie not that whereby shee conceiued Christ but whereby she was conceiued by her Mother and also the feast of her assumption and of her visitation and of her presentation the first whereof their Iesuite Suarez confesseth not to haue beene clearely knowne in the world fiue hundreth yeeres since nor receiued by generall consent till almost three hundreth yeeres after so that by his confession it is not much aboue two hundreth yeeres old and indeed it was publikely inioyned by Sistus quartus Anno 1480. The second their Sixtus Senensis confesseth that it was not found among the Latine Fathers and Baronius that it is not confirmed either by Canonicall Scriptures or by the writings of ancient Fathers and in a constitution of the Council of Mentz where it is named this addition is with all sound in the bookes of Charolus Magnus Touching the assumption of Mary wee leaue it to bee questioned Now this Councill was in the yeere 800. whereby it is euident that all that time it was no publike ordination of the Church The third was instituted by Vrbanus Sextus which though Antoninus affirmeth was neuer receiued nor kept yet it was the inuention of a Pope and that of no
great antiquity And indeed why should it not bee obserued if the Pope cannot erre or if it be not fit to bee obserued how is it true that the Pope erreth not in defining matters of Religion The fourth was ordained by Paulus the second anno 1466. as they themselues will not deny 25. Besides these of the Virgin Mary they haue many other festiuall dayes of the same nature and stampe as the feast of Corpus Christi of the inuention of the Crosse of the dedication of Churches of All soules and a number such like all which are confessed nouelties for in the Apostles times and Primitiue Church during the space of foure hundred yeeres none of these were once heard of The feast of the Crosse was Gregory the fourths inuention anno 828. and Corpus Christi day was first ordained by Pope Vrbane the fourth about the yeere 1264. as confesseth Bellarmine himselfe who of his Apostolicall power gaue spirituall wages and special pardon to all that should personally obserue the houres of this holy solâ—mnity as at Mattens an hundred dayes pardon at Masse asmuch and so at first and second Euen-song at the houres of prime of tierce of sixth of noone of complete fourty dayes apiece and thus in like manner for the whole weeke following 26. The annuall seaâ—ts of dedication of Churches grew from a sinister imitation of Constantine the great who because hee kept a solemne day at the dedication of a certain Church which hee had built therefore it was receiued as a Law for Princes actions are the peoples directions to solemnize euery yeere a holy day vpon the day of the dedication of their Church And all Soules was the deuice of one Saint Odyll who as they write in Cicilia in the I le of Vulcane heard the voyces howlings of Deuils which complained with great griefe that the soules of them that were dead were taken away out of their hands by almes and prayers whereupon this feast was ordained wherein prayer should be made for al Soules And as for this so for the other they deuised strange miracles to win credit vnto them which plainely argueth their nouelty in that they stood in need of miracles to confirme them as for example touching the inuention of the holy Crosse they fable that it was first found in Paradise by Seth the son of Adam to whom Michael the Angell gaue a branch of the forbidden tree which hee planted vpon the graue of his Father Adam which tree beeing after found by Salomon in mount Libanus was translated vnto his house and there beeing worshipped by the Queene of Saba and foretold to bee the tree whereon the Sauiour of the world should bee hanged and by which Ierusalem should bee destroyed was therefore taken downe and buried deepe in the ground by Salomon in which place afterward the Iewes diging a pit for a poole to water their cattell found this tree from which such vertue arose to that poole that the Angels descended to mooue the water so that the first that bathed himselfe therein after the motion was healed of his disease whatsoeuer it was as wee read Iohn 5. Now vpon this tree was Christ crucified which being afterward buried againe in the earth was found out by Queene Helene the mother of Constantine through the discouery of one Iudas a Iew who was conuerted to the Christian faith by the sweet sauour that arose from the Crosse and the quaking of the earth and then that Crosse was discerned from the two other Crosses of the theeues by restoring life to a dead corps whereupon it was laide and the Deuill cryed in the aire that this Iudas had betrayed him as the other had done his Master Christ By these strange miracles they dignisy that holy feast and indeed shew it to bee nothing els but a meere fable and forsooth all this they fetch out of the Gospell of Nichodemus 27. So for the dedication of Churches they tell vs this miracle that when a Church of the Arrians was hal owed by Christian men and the reliks of Saint Fabian Saint Sebastian Saint Agathe brought into it the people being assembled heard suddenly the fearefull gronings gruntings of an hog running vp and downe inuisibly and seeking a passage out of the Church and for three nights together â—umbluâ—g in the roofe with an hideous noise which say they was nothing but the banishing of the Deuill out of that Church by the hallowing and dedicating of it Who would not then obserue deuoutly this feast seeing the benefit is so great that commeth by the thing it selfe whereof it is a memoriall But let vs leaue these tables to their golden or rather leaden Legend of lyes as their owne Canus termeth it and shut vp the point that both these heere named and a number such like festiuall dayes more precisely honoured and obserued in the Romish Church and with greater deuotion t 〈…〉 n Gods holy Sabbath it selfe are new inuentions as sprung vp from superstition so ordained to maintain the same and haue no ground either of true antiquity to countenance them or holy Scripture to vphold them but Iewish fables Apocrypha writings old wiues tales and forged miracles 28. Fourthly I requiâ—e satisfaction for their ceremonies vsed in both the Sacraments as first in the Eucharist their pompous circumgestation of it to bee seene viewed and adored which Cassander acknowledgeth to haue beene Praeter veterem morem mâ—ntem haud longo tempore inductaâ—â— Beside the custome and meaning of antiquity and brought in of late time And Bellarmine also to haue beene first ordained by Vrbanus the fourth their mixture of water with the wine and separation of leauen from the bread came both in from Pope Alexander the seuenth as witnesse both Polidore Virgill and Durantius Yea and Bonauenture doth confesse that this practice of mixing of water cannot bee read of in all the Scriptures nor found in the first institution of the Sacrament Their not breaking the bread out of a loafe but giuing it in small cakes Salmeron the Iesuite acknowledgeth to be contrary to the ancient practice of the Church Their dipping the consecrated hoste in the cup Suarez another Iesuite yeeldeth not to haue beene vsed by our Sauiour Christ and therefore must needs bee an Innouation Their putting the Sacrament not into the hands but into the mouths of the communicants the former Salmeron doth freely confesse to bee an action contrary to the first institution Lastly their various and ridiculous gestures murmuring dopping staring crossing c. with the strange garments vsed by the Priests in the time of their administration Six of Priests in signe of perfection because in sixe dayes God created Heauen and earth nine for Bishops in token that they are spirituall like the nine orders of Angels and fifteene for both in token of the fifteene degrees of Vertues No man can bee so simple but must needs see that they were neuer
vsed by Christ himselfe or his Apostles and therefore must of necessity be grosse and palpable Innouations 29. From the Eucharist let vs looke backe to the ceremonies of Baptisme and first to their baptizing of Bels and of Gallies and Ships secondly exorcisme and exufflation thirdly anointing with oyle and crossing and fourthly salting and spittling lastly threefold Immersion or dipping the Infant all which are palpable nouelties so confessed by the Romanists themselues neither can they euer shew that these ceremonies were either commanded by Christ or practised by Iohn Baptist or the Apostles and though some of them as the crosse and anointing are of great antiquity and were then and may bee still lawfully vsed as things indifferent yet in their Church where such an opinion of necessity is laid vpon them that Baptisme is not effectuall without them they are meere Innouations no wayes warranted by any antiquity 30. Lastly I propound as their feasting so their fasting dayes together with the manner of fasting vsed amongst them as first the Lent fast of fourty dayes which their Iesuite Azorius confesseth not to bee of diuine ordinance and the variablenesse of the vse thereof doth prooue no lesse some Churches continuing the same full sixe weeks as the Illyrians Lybians Egypt and Palestina some seuen weekes as they of Constantinople with the nations adioyning some but three weekes and those dispersed within the six or seuen as occasion serued some againe three weekes immediatly going before Easter and lastly some two onely as the followers of Montanus all this is recorded by Sozomene in his History by which it is euidently euinced that this fast was no Apostolicall institution nor yet any childe of true antiquity for if it had there could not haue beene any such variety in the obseruation thereof 31. Secondly their fast of 4. times coÌ„monly called Ember weekes was first deuised by Pope Calixtus as would witnes Polidore Virgill if he were not gelded by these strange bookpurgers but though he be silent yet their own Platina telleth asmuch Thirdly their tying of fasts to certaine set dayes as the fourth and sixt day of the weeke was not allowed in Saint Augustines time for hee thus writeth against Vrbicus that stroue for the Saturdayes fast I read in deed that wee are commanded to fast but which ought to bee the dayes of our fasting I finde not prescribed in the Euangelicall or Apostolicall writings nor in his scholler Primasius his age for thus sayth he There is no Law set down concerning fasting but as euery man can or will nor in Socrates time who liued about the yeere 440. for hee plainly testifieth that the rites and obseruations of fasting were by the Apostles left to euery mans free liberty and choyce 32. Lastly their manner of fasting which is twice to refresh their bodies on the fasting day at noone by a small dinner and at night by a short supper Bellarmine himselfe confesseth to bee contrary to the ancient custome which was to eate but one meale on the fast day and that a supper and doth also giue diuers reasoÌ„s of this mutatioÌ„ As first that thogh it bee tolerated in their Church yet it is not commanded Secondly that those customes which are not grounded vpon Gods word may by ecclesiasticall Lawes bee varyed according to the diuersity of time place thirdly that when the ancients broke off their fast at the ninth houre they vsed to dyne at the sixt that is noone and therefore when as many doe ordinarily dyne at the third houre they may by like proportion breake off their fast at the sixt these be Bellarmines reasons to maintaine this Innouation whereby we may both behold what silly props hee hath to vphold his rotten cause and also that by his owne confession this is a meere nouelty and therefore he concludes that notwithstanding these forenamed reasons yet they doe better who after the ancient custome eate nothing till the ninth houre and in Lent till the euening And thus wee see how in the principall ceremonies of their Church they haue degenerate from the vsage and custome of all pure antiquity 33. Thus much of the outward face of their Church Now let vs examine a little their doctrines wherein they differ from vs which are the sinewes and nerues thereof here I might referre the Reader ouer vnto our learned and godly Country-man Doctour White lately deceased who in his high-way to the true Church obiecteth eight points wherein the moderne Church of Rome hath varyed from that which formerly was maintained notwithstanding I will also a little touch vpon the same strings adding somewhat more both in points and proofes then is there deliuered that the Reader may haue also heere some satisfaction concerning these matters 34. First therefore it is an article of the Romish faith that the Virgin Mary whom wee honour as a blessed woman and the mother of our Lord was conceiued and borne without the staine of originall sinne This doctrine was decreed 〈◊〉 an article of faith in the Councill of Basill in the yeere 1431. and afterwards was approoued by the Councill of Trent and by Pope Sixtus the fourth yea and all that take any degree in the profession of diuinity in the vniuersity of Paris first sweare that they will defend this prerogatiue of the Virgin Mary Now that this is a nouelty appeareth first because it was not receiued as an article of faith before the Councill of Basill Secondly because the Fathers generally either vtterly denie it to bee a truth or at least doubt of it Saint Chrysostome sâ—â—tly denyeth it Saint Bernard calleth it in plaine termes a nouelty Caietane reckoneth fifteene fathers to haue beene of a contrary opinion others two hundreth others three hundreth as witnesseth Salmeron the Iesuite and lastly Canus peremptorily affirmeth that all the Fathers contradicted it And it is to be noted that whereas Bellarmine produceth twelue Fathers for the proofe thereof not one of them doe directly affirme it except one or two Thirdly because the Elder Schoolemen with one consent disapprooued it as Dominicus Bannes Turrecremata Thomas Aquinas Bonauenture and others in so much that in this point they are driuen to this grosse shift That yonger diuines are more apprehensiue of truths then were the more ancient Doctours Bellarmine I confesse in this point accuseth vs of slendering their doctrine because hee sayth it was neuer held in their Church as an article of saith as wee say it is but by his leaue if it was the decree of one Councill though not confirmed by the Pope as he saith the Councill of Basill was not and was allowed by another Councill confirmed by the Pope to wit the Councill of Trent as an holy opinion and agreeable to the Catholike faith and approued by diuers Popes as hee confesseth and defended generally in their Church not onely by doctrine but by a solemne obseruation of a festiuall day in memoriall
thereof then surely it cannot bee lesse then an article of their faith or if that terme mislike him a generall Romish opinion which is enough for our purpose 35. Againe it is another article of the Romish faith that diuine seruice should bee in the Latin tongue this to be contrary to all antiquity I haue already declared a little before and therefore I thinke it not needfull here to repeate it onely this is to bee marked that till the Pope of Rome began to shew himselfe to be Antichrist that man of sinne the mystery of whose name is the number 666. which according to Irenaeus coniecture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Till then I say this Latine seruice was not publikely receiued but euer since as if the Pope would discouer himselfe to bee that enemy pointed at by that Prophecy hee will haue all the prayers of the Church to bee Latin and hath fixed an Anathema vpon euery one that shall dare to affirme the contrary 36. Againe it is another doctrine of the Romish Religion that the Lay people may not read the Scriptures nor keepe them in their mother tongue which to bee contrary to the ancient custome of the Church three reasons demonstrate First their own confession for Azorius the Iesuite confesseth that the Scriptures in the Primitiue Church were to be published throughout all nations and therefore were made common by the three most common and famous languages and againe Wee confesse sayth he that in Ierome and Chrysostomes times the Lay people were exercised in reading the Scriptures because they were written in those languages which they vnderstood And Ledesima another Iesuite that the Bible was translated into the Latine tongue presently after the Apostles times and that to this end that all might vnderstand the Scriptures And Espensaeus sayth that it is manifest by the Apostles doctrine Col. 3. 16. and by the practice of the Church that the publike vse of reading the Scriptures was then permitted to the people And further that the Iewes instructed their children at fiue yeeres of age in the Scriptures and therefore that Christians might bee ashamed to be carelesse therein and this hee sayth was not onely his complaint but the complaint of the ancient Fathers And lastly Cornelius Agrippa affirmeth that it was a decree in the Nicene Councill that no Christian should be without a Bible Thus we haue a quadron of their owne Doctors acknowledging this to bee a nouelty 37. Secondly the generall consent of the Fathers demonstrate the same for the Councill of Nice as it is alledged before out of Agrippa decreed that no Christian should be without a Bible and Saint Augustine alloweth the vse of the Scriptures to all when hee sayth that they are not so hard but that euery one by his study and diligence may attaine to so much knowledge in them as shall further him in his saluation and Chrysostome in many places exhorteth all both men and women learned and ignorant yea very tradesmen to get Bibles and to read them for though they vnderstand not what they read yet they gaine to themselues some sanctity by the reading of them And Ierome perswadeth not onely men but women to fly to the mountaines of the Scriptures saying that though there be none to teach them yet their indeuour shall bee accepted of God and in another place hee sayth that Plato wrote not to the people but to a few for scarse three vnderstand his workes but Christ our Lord wrote by his Apostles not to a few but to the whole people Origen compareth the Scripture to Iacobs Well wherein drinke not onely Iacob and his children that is the learned but the sheepe and oxen that is the rude and simple Nazianzene affirmeth that Christians ought to read the Scriptures or if through ignorance they cannot then they must giue eare to others Many other testimonies I could alledge but these are I thinke sufficient to shew that in the age when these holy men liued this doctrine was neuer hatcht nor heard of and therefore must needs bee an addle egge of a later layer 38. Thirdly lastly the manifold translations of the Bibles into sundry languages proueth the same for to what end were they translated if they might not bee read This Saint Augustine affirmeth when hee sayth that the holy Scripture proceeding from one tongue beeing through the diuers tongues of interpreters farre and wide dispersed abroad became knowne to the Gentiles to their saluation And Theodoret as plainely The Hebrew bookes were translated into all languages which are at this day vsed in the world Chrysostome is confessed to haue translated some parts of the Scriptures into the Armenian tongue and Vlphias into the Gothicke Charles the fift caused them to be translated into the French tongue and Charles the great into the Germane Alfred king of this Island the Psalter into the English tongue and at this day the Moscouites Armenians Egyptians Ethiopians haue their publike prayers and Scripture in their vulgar and knowne tongues Now these ancient translations doe euidently proue this Romish doctrine to bee an Innouation 39. Againe it is another doctrine in the Romish faith that Priests and Ministers of the Gospell ought not to marry and that marriage is an inseparable impediment to holy orders some of them most grosly affirming that the vow of single life is so essentiall to Priesthood euen by the Law of God as that it is no more lawfull for any person to permit the Clergy to marry then to license a man to steale But they which speake more remissely say that though it bee a positiue Law yet it is Apostolicall and therefore ought to bee obserued in the Church inuiolably and the reason is giuen by Bellarmine Because great purity and sanctity is required in the office of sacrificing but in the act of marriage there is mixed a certain impurity and pollution which though it be not sinne yet it proceedeth from sinne and maketh a man carnall and so vnfit for diuine offices 40. This is their doctrine which to haue no ground in true antiquity first their own confessions beare witnesse and secondly the light of history For their confessions one of them sayth that marriage of Priests is not prohibited either by Legall Euangelicall or yet Apostolicall authority but by Ecclesiasticall onely another that many hundreth yeeres after the Apostles by reason of want of others Priests were marryed another that if wee exclude the Church Lawes and stand onely to that which wee haue from Christ it cannot bee prooued by any reason or authority that speaking absolutely a Priest sinneth in marrying or that holy order is an hinderance to marriage either as it is an order or as it is holy others that in the most ancient times of the Church and after the Apostles deaths Priests had their wiues And lastly their owne glosse and marginall obseruation
vpon the same though they bee now both made dumbe by their expurging Index speake asmuch for in them we fiude this proposition Anciently Priests were permitted to marry 41. For history to omit the Priests and Prophets of the old Testament Peter whose successours they claime to bee carryed a wife about with him in his preaching which was put to death at Antioch for consessing lesus Christ as witnes both Clemens Alexandrinus and Eusebius which writers do also affirme that Paul had a wise also and left her at Philippos a City of Macedonia that hee might with lesse cumbrance preach the Gospell abroad That Philip the Euange list was marryed Saint Luke testifyeth in the Acts of the Apostles for it is said there that he had foure daughters which were Prophetisses thus was it in the first age of the Church then afterward we read that Hilary a French Bishop was marryed and of Saint Basils Father that hee was a Bishop and in the state of marriage held that function and the like of Synesius the Bishop of Pâ—olomais and Athanasius reports that Bishops and Monks liued marryed and had children and Eusebius that in the Easterne Churches it was counted a yoke too heauy to bee borne to binde Church-men from marriage yea Gratian boldly affirmeth that except they will brand some of the Popes with bastardy and adultery they must confesse that Bishops were and might then bee marryed for Gregory the first was grand-child to Pope Felix the third and Alexander the sixt had two sonnes begotten of his owne body and Boniface Felix Gelasius and Agapetus were all sonnes of Bishops yea their owne Vicelius reckoneth vp a number both of Bishops and Priests that in the Primitiue Church were marryed In briefe though in all ages the Deuill by his instruments laboured to bring disgrace vpon Gods holy ordinance of marriage and by that meanes to make way to adulteries fornications and vnlawfull lusts and some learned and godly fathers were too lauish in commending virginity before marriage yet they were alwayes gainsaide by other some as learned godly as themselues whoÌ„ God stirred vp for the desence of his own ordinance neither was it euer propounded as a Law vntill Pope Siricius time who was the first that forbad and interdicted Priests to marry and afterwards Pope Nicholas the first or as some thinke the second about the yeere 867 did the like against whose proceedings Haldericus the Bishop of Ausbrough wrote that learned and pithy Epistle where of mention is made before and yet it was not vniuersally receiued vntill the time of Pope Calixtus about the yeere 1108. History is so cleare for this matter that it admitteth no iust exception and thus both by their owne confessions and by the light of history this doctrine is conuinced of nouelty 42. Another article of the Popes Creede is concerning Images to wit that God himselfe may bee represented by and worshipped before an Image and that the Images of Christ and the Saints are to be adored with the same worship which is due vnto their pâ—tternes or at least wise that they are to be worshipped in or at the Image This is the generall doctrine of that Idolatrous Church which that it hath no true warrant from antiquity is so cleare that none that is but meanely seene in ancient writers can doubt thereof For first in the Church of the Iewes it was vnlawfull either to make any Image of God beeing an inuisible and incomprehensible essence or to worship the Image of any other thing whatsoeuer this was the prescript of the second Commandement which was no ceremoniall Law As Azorius and Vasques two Iesuites haue not ashamed to auerre but morall and naturall as the grand Iesuite Bellarmine confesseth and may be further confirmed by the sentence of Varro alledged by Saint Augustine in his fourth book de Ciuitate who sayth that the Iewish nation worshipped God without any Image that they had no Image in the Temple ordained for worship Also Iosephus doth write that when Caius the Emperour would haue caused his statue to haue been set vp by Petroniâ—s to be worshipped in the Temple of Ierusalem the Iewes had rather expose themselues to present death then to admit that which was forbidden by the Law 43 Secondly in the age of Iesus Christ and the Apostles there was no precept nor example for the worshipping of Images nei her did they commend vnto the Lay people Images and Pictures as fittest bookes for their capacities but the word preached and committed to writing by which they should bee brought to saluation And when as they abolished the worship of Idols and brought in the worship of the true God wee doe not read that either they translated those Idolatrous statues to the worship of the true God or substituted other Images of God himselfe for of holy men to succeed in their roome but taught that God who is a Spirit ought to bee worshipped in Spirit and truth Now surely if it had beene so necessary as the Church of Rome maketh it our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles would neuer haue concealed it from them 44. Thirdly the age also after the Apostles was free from Images for amongst those Ecclesiasticall rites which are recorded to haue been vsed in the first 300. yeeres after Christ there is not so much as any mention made of Image-worship except it bee amongst those that were condemned for Heretikes as the followers of Simon Magus who worshipped his Image and of his harlot Selene and the Disciples of Basilides whom Irenaeus affirmeth to haue vsed Images and Inuocations and the Carpocratians and Gnosticks who burned incense to the Images of Christ and Paul Homer and Pithagoras c. as testifyeth Saint Augustine but the true Church of God condemned these and abhorred all such kind of worship and therefore amongst the accusations which the Heathen obiected to Christians in that age this was one that they professed a Religion without Images as witnesse both Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen the one whereof liued 200. yeeres after Christ and the other 240. which trueth their Cassander confesseth in direct words that at the first preaching of the Gospell there was no publike vse of Images in the Church 45. Fourthly in the next age of the Church after the three hundreth yeere that Images were not approued wee haue the witnesse of the Councill of Eliberis which decreed that no Image should bee made in the Church lest that should be adored which is painted on walles and of Ierome who affirmed that it was condemned of all ancient Fathers and of Origen who called that worship a foolish and adulterous profanation and of Epiphanius who finding a painted Image in a Church rent it downe and said that it was against the authority of the Scripture that any Image should bee in the Church and of Augustine who condemned the vse of them in Churches as vnlawfull and lastly
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
Popes Leo the first Gelasius Gregory the great and Gregory the third doe all directly conclude the same doctrine yea the last of the foure commandeth that euen Lepers if they bee Christians which should not bee admitted to our owne Tables yet should not bee barred from the participation of the body and blood of Christ For schoolmen Durand Biell Caietane doe with one consent auouch that all without exception were to drinke of the cup because God is no respecter of persons and that this custome of communicating with both kindes indured long in the Church And whereas Thomas Aquinas sayth that to auoid irreuerence it is wisely obserued in certaine Churches that the blood should not be receiued of the people but of the Priests onely It is to bee marked first that hee sayth in certaine Churches by which he confesseth that it was not vniuersally receiued in his dayes and secondly that it is wisely obserued by which hee insinuates that before time it was not obserued but indiscreetly neglected 50. Lastly for the Fathers it would bee too tedious to recite all their testimonies onely therefore I referre the Reader to the places quoted in the margent or if he desire to behold at one view all their opinions to Plesseis first booke tenth Chapter of the Masse where he shall finde a whole catalogue of them I will content my selfe with one onely saying of Chrysostome in his eighteenth Homily vpon the first to the Corinthians hee thus writeth Sometime there is no difference betwixt the Priest and the people as to wit at the receiuing of the sacred mysteries for all are admitted to them alike for though in the old Testament it was not lawfull for the people to eat of the same things with the Priests yet the matter is otherwise now for one body and one cup is propounded vnto all This doctrine therefore is an Innouation by the iudgement of all these 51. Transubstantiation commeth in the next place which though they labour tooth and naile to procue to bee of great antiquity yet we haue the testimony of Scotus of Tonstall and of Biell who affirme that before the Councill of Lateran which was in the yeere 1215. Transubstantiation was no doctrine of faith and that it was free for all men till that time to follow their owne coniecture as concerning the manner of of the presence Lumbard also sayth that he is not able to define what manner of conuersion is in the Sacrament and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that the name transubstantiation was first found out and brought into the world by the Laterane Councill though hee labour to proue that the thing it selfe was beleeued long before And thus howsoeuer this bastard Babe was borne before yet it is not denyed but that it was then Christened 52. And how long before was it borne I pray you Marry Bellarmine alledgeth two Councils both held at Rome one vnder Nicholas the second the other vnder Gregory the seuenth in both which Berengarius was constrained to abiure his heresie as he calleth it and to subscribe to this article that the bread and wine after consecration are changed into the very body and blood of Christ but concerning the Councill vnder Gregory the seuenth wee haue iust causes to doubt whether there were any such or no first because the acts of it are no where to bee sound and secondly because the same Pope Gregory is reported by Cardinall Benno to haue doubted whether the opinion of Berengarius or of the Church of Rome were more sound And for the other Councill vnder Nicholas the second Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that Berengarius was constrained onely to confesse the reall presence and not transubstantiation and so indeed in both of them not the manner of the presence which is transubstantiation but the realty thereof was in question But let it be granted that it was decreed in these two Councils yet the antiquity is not very great for the eldest of them was but in the yeere 1059. 53. As for the opiniō of the Church from the firstage of it vntill these times thogh Bellarmine produceth many testimonies of the Fathers yet either they are counterfeit or little to the purpose or at least wise misapplied vnderstood whereas the testimonies of the same Fathers others produced by vs against this doctrine are so plaine direct and peremptory that by no sound reason they can be auoided I may not ouer-burden the Reader with a repetition of them they may finde thē els-where at large discoursed so that thogh the iust time cannot bee assigned when this errour sprung in the Church yet it is a nouell doctrine borne since the purer times of the Gospell and growing in stature and strength till the Laterane Councill and then taking it name and full perfection 54. Their priuate Masses may be ranked in the next place I meane such priuate Masses wherein the Priest alone doth participate the Sacrament without the people This is a doctrine and practice in the Church of Rome as may appeare both in the Councill of Trent where it is approoued for Catholike and lawfull and in Bellarmine and others which haue their mouthes full of arguments to defend the same but I will not meddle with their arguments onely my taske is to prooue it to bee a nouelty which I may well doe by these three reasons First because it is contrary to our Sauiours first institution Secondly to the writing and practising of the Apostles and thirdly to the example of the Primitiue Church That it is contrary to Christs first institution it is euident because Christ at his last Supper did not take the bread and wine alone his Apostles beholding and looking on and consecrate them and so eat and drinke them himselfe but gaue both the Elements vnto them all and bade them eat and drinke them in remembrance of him this was the first institution of the Sacrament which ought to be a patterne to the Church of God for euer But Bellarmine sayth that it was but an affirmatiue precept of our Sauiour therefore did bind no further then the circumstance of time place and person would permit and that to communicate in the Sacrament was no essentiall part thereof and therefore might bee omitted vpon occasion To which I answere that though it bee false which hee sayth touching communicating in the Sacrament that it is no essentiall part thereof for the contrary may be prooued both by Scripture which calleth the whole Sacrament a Communion 1. Cor. 10. and by analogy of the Passeouer in the Law which was to bee eaten of all by the confession of their owne learned Schooleman Gabriel Piel who sayth that the consecration in the Eucharist is ordained for the vse which is the eating of it as vnto the next end after a sort yet it is sufficient for our purpose that he confesseth that it is a variation from the first institution and therefore
without question an Innouation 55. Secondly that it is contrary to the doctrine and practice of the Apostles appeareth by this because the Apostle Saint Paul sometimes calleth the ministration of the Sacrament a breaking of bread and that through housholds By which is necessarily insinuated a distribution and dispensation of it to others besides the Priest Sometimes the communion or communication of the body and blood of Christ Yea the Apostle sayth plainly that wee that are many are one bread and one body because wee are partakers of one bread but if it bee priuate then there is no communion neither are there many and neither is the bread which is made of many graines of corne nor the wine crushed out of many grapes a representation of the mysticall body of Christ as all diuines confesse aswell as of the naturall if there bee no mysticall body that is no Congregation to participate Lastly Chrysostome writing vpon 1. Cor. 11. sayth that this was the fault which the Apostle blameth in the Corinthians because they made that priuate which was the Lords for the Supper of the Lord sayth hee ought to bee common 56. Thirdly what the example of the Primitiue Church was after the Apostles the ancient Lyturgies then in vse doe declare in none of which can wee finde any colour for this practice which euidence caused iudicious Cassander to confesse that solitary Masses are most manifestly confuted by the ancient Greeke Lyturgies and that which hee sayth of the Greeke may bee iustly auerred of all the other ancient missals that were in vse of the Church and are extant in the writings of the Fathers as Chrysostomes Ambroses Gregories and such like yea the Canon of the Romish masse it selfe is against this errour for it is said there As many of vs haue beene partakers and Blesse O Lord these Sacraments to vs which wee haue receiued Now how can this bee said without mockage when there is none present but the Priest 57. But besides those Lyturgies wee haue the plaine testimonies of ancient Fathers one Chrysostome for breuities sake shall stand insteed of all hee thus propoundeth the custome of the Church in his time The dayly oblation sayth he is made in vaine when there is none to participate and again Whosoeuer is not partaker of the mysteries stand by as a foolish and wicked man This is flat contrary to the Romish practice where the Priest masseth alone the people kneele by knocking their brests and lifting vp their eyes to their breaden God you see then there was no such custome in Chrysostomes time and this further may bee confirmed by the tenth Canon of those that are called Apostolicall which doth forbid any to be present but such as doe communicate saying that they are disturbers of the order of the Church the same Canon also is repeated and confirmed in the Councill of Antioch cap. 2. And in the Councill Naxâ—â—tense it is said that it is a ridiculous thing to murmure to the walles that which should belong to the people Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth that it is a more perfect and lawfull Masse where communicants are present then where they are absent so doth Cardinal Humbertus and Walasred all which laide together caused Erasmus and Cassander in expresse words to affirme this practice to bee a nouelty not instituted by Christ nor vsed either in the Apostles times or in the Primitiue Church 58. The next point may bee touching the sacrifice in the Masse for they teach that there is offered vp by the Priest a true reall propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead this is the direct doctrine of the Romish Church canonized in the Councill of Trent which doctrine how true it is I will not dispute onely I am to shew how new it is which may appeare first in that throughout all the new Testament where there is any mentioÌ„ made of the Lords supper there is not one word spoken of a sacrifice for neither doth our Sauiour himselfe say that hee offered a sacrifice when he first instituted it neither doth Saint Paul call it by that name when hee deliuers the full doctrine thereof to the Corinthians neither doth Saint Luke affirme that the Apostles offered a sacrifice when they put it in practice but onely that they broke bread from house to house now if this had beene so essentiall a part of the Eucharist as the Romanists make it yea if it had beene any part at all our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles would neuer haue concealed it from the Church 59. If they obiect that though a sacrifice bee not mentioned yet it was acted both because Melchizedek was a type of Christ and he offered bread and wine and also because these words Hoc facite Doe this asmuch as Sacrificate sacrifice I answere that neither did Melchizedek offer bread and wine but brought it foorth onely to the refreshing of Abraham and his fellowers as the Chaldy Paraphrase the Greeke interpretours Iosephus Cyprian and Chrysostome doe interpret the place and the words themselues in the originall doe import neither doth the verbe facere signifie to sacrifice in that place seeing as euery schoole-boy knoweth then it should bee construed with an Ablatiue and not with an Accusatiue case as heere it is and this they themselues doe euidently prooue when they cannot agree among themselues in which action of the Sacrament consisteth the essence and perfection of this sacrifice whether in the eleuation which Sotus thought to belong vnto it or in the consecration as Suares or in the oblation as Ecchius or in the intinction as Canus or in the dispensation and distribution as others or in the consumption as Bellarmine and Ledesima and so they know not where to fixe the center thereof hauing indeed no footing in the whole circle of our Sauiours example 60. And as for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed by Saint Luke it signifieth no more but Sacra administratio the performance of holy duties or the seruing of God in any sort of religious worship as the Fathers doe all interpret the place and not to offer a sacrifice as Erasmus translates it or to say Masse as our Rhemists would interpret it for then the Angels should say Masse in Heauen because they are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 1. which some of them are not ashamed to say they doe but I beleeue it all alike as I doe that tale in their Legend of Bees singing Masse in their Hyue about the hoste put in by 2 woman to make her swarmes to thriue Againe of the like nature is that fond conclusion of Genebrard who because by the Leuitical Law God coÌ„manded Cakes of new corne to be offered vpoÌ„ the day of Pentecost which is there called A new offering therefore the Apostles sung the first Masse vpon that great day of Pentecost Act. 2. and that Iames being Bishop of Hierusalem was the chiefe
against their Emperours and that this was not for want of strength as Bellarmine would haue it he sayth that euen then they did not attempt any such thing when in number and strength they might make their party good but in this extolled their Religion aboue all other by defending this most holy doctrine That all men ought to obey the Magistrates The notable and learned Treatises of Barclay a French man Blackwell Warberton c. our Countrey-men all profest Romanists doe peremptorily and plainely by many reasons confute the same Touching his spirituall iurisdiction though there bee fewe of them that gain-say that yet Gregory the great one of their owne Popes may stand in stead of many who by many letters both to the Emperour and Bishop of Constantinople sheweth that no man ought to be an vniuersall Bishop ouer therest calling that name in detestation vaine proud prophane blasphemous mischieuous Antichristian against the commandements of God and decrees of Councils and peremptorily sayth that he is a follower of Sathan and a fore-runner of Antichrist that assumeth it to himselfe 59. And that the Pope is not the supreme Iudge in the Church nor of infallible iudgement but the Scripture only many of them are of opinion aswell as we Aquinas saith that the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles is the rule of our vnderstanding Antoninus saith that God hath spoken but once and that in the holy Scripture and that so plentifully to meet with all temptations and all cases that may fall out Gerson saith that the Scripture is the rule of our faith which being well vnderstood no authority of men is to be admitted against it Gonradus Clingius saith that the Scripture is the infallible rule of truth yea the measure and Iudge of the truth Peresius saith that the authority of no Saint is of infallible truth for that honour is due only to the Scripture Yea Bellarmine their Ring-leader confesseth the Scripture to be the most certaine and most safe rule of faith Franciscus Victoria saith that the Pope in dispensing against the Decrees Councels and former Popes may erre and grieuously sinne Alphonsus de Castro diueth deeper and saith that euery man yea the Pope and that as he is Pope and Pastor of the Church may be deceiued Bozius pierceth yet deeper and saith that the Pope may be an Heretike yea write teach and preach heresie And lastly Almayne saith that the power of not erring in the faith is not alway in the Pope Are not all these now Protestants in this point But for fuller satisfaction in this point I referre the Reader to the reuerent and iudicious Deane of Winchester Doctor Morton with others who haue largely and learnedly discouered this matter in their writings 60. The like might bee shewne in all other points these few instances therefore shall suffice for this time to perswade that it is farre more safe to subscribe to the Religion of Protestants then of Romanists seeing we hold nothing which many of their owne ranke and order doe not maintayne aswell as we and what I pray you could mooue them thus to doe being sworne subiects to the Church of Rome but the euidence of truth which shined so cleerely to their consciences that they neither could nor durst gaine-say the same Conclusion NOw then gentle Reader these things being thus cleerly proued viz First that the Religion of the Church of Rome giueth open libertie to sinne Secondly that it maintayneth by the grounds therof things forbidden by all lawes Diuine Naturall and Humane Thirdly that it imitateth the Iewes in those things wherein they are enemies to Christ Fourthly that it derogateth from the glorie of Gods mercy and efficacy of the merits of Christ in the worke of our redemption Fiftly that it refuseth to bee tryed by the Scriptures and will be iudged and tryed by none but it selfe Sixtly that it is at defiance and profest enmitie with the sacred Scriptures Seuenthly that it maintayneth grosse and palpable Idolatrie Eightly that it is contrary to it selfe by manifest contradictions Ninthly that it is apparently opposite to the Gospell of Iesus Christ Tenthly that it nourisheth grosse and barbarous ignorance amongst the people Eleuenthly that it was neuer knowne nor heard of in the Apostles time nor in the primitiue Church Twelfthly that it vpholdeth it selfe by vnlawfull vniust and vngodly meanes and lastly that it is dangerous and vnsafe both in respect of Gods glorie mans conscience and Christian charitie I say all these things being thus cleerely demonstrated what remayneth but that wee abhorre the same as the Religion of the great Whore and her Paramour Antichrist who with their cup of fornications and vaine pretext of Peters authoritie haue besotted heretofore all Nations of the earth and cleaue to the sinceritie of the Gospell taught and professed in the Church of Protestants which is free from all these imputations for it neither giueth libertie to sinne nor maintayneth any thing that is vnlawfull nor imitateth the Iewes ascribeth all the worke of our redemption to Gods mercy and Christs merits onely desireth to bee tryed and examined by the Scriptures reuerenceth the fulnesse and perfection thereof abhorreth all shew of Idolatrie is not at enmity and opposition but keepeth a sweet harmony with it selfe doth not crosse the Gospell not so much as in shew condemneth and laboureth against ignorance is agreeable to the doctrine of the Apostles and primitiue Church maintayneth it selfe by no vnlawfull meanes and lastly hath great safetie and securitie in the profession thereof Good Christians must bee like good Gold-smiths who will not take a piece of gold of any mans word but will trie it by the touch-stone and weigh it in the ballance The Truth is like gold it behoueth all therefore to trie it and weigh it before they entertayne it into their soules lest they receiue in stead of pure mettall that which is counterfeit and light trie therefore these two Religions which of them hath the truth and without partialitie or affection retayne the good and reiect the counterfeit remember that the truth of Christians as Saint Augustine saith is more beautifull incomparably then Helene of the Grecians and that it alone as Saint Ambrose saith freeth alone saueth alone washeth and therefore though it be hid in a deepe pit as the Philosopher said yet it is diligently to be digged for of all them that desire the saluation of their soules In a word let not the darke mists of error and superstition blinde thine eyes but open them wide to the beholding of the bright light of truth that shineth round about thee and know that if the Gospell be hid it is hid to them that perish in whom the god of this world hath dazeled their mindes that they should not see the light of the glorious Gospell of Iesus Christ I desire no more credit at thy hands then the euidence of these reasons produced do require and therefore if they be true then