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
Asse and the holy Spirit lesse able to make that speake then an Angell was to make an Asse to speake Then which what could be brayed out more like the beast he speaketh of 26. But some may say All these are but priuate mens opinions we heare not all this while the determination of the Church Let vs harken therefore to the voyce of the Church touching this poynt that is as they hold of the Councill or rather Conuenticle of Romish Bishops assembled together at Trent which they call the Church representatiue The second Canon of the second decree in thy fourth Session of that Councill doth thus determine Let no man trusting to his owne wisedome dare to interpret the Scripture after his owne priuate sense or contrary to that sense which our holy Mother the Church holdeth or contrary to the vnanimous consent of the Fathers The former part of this Canon is good and sound for Saint Peter saith that no Scripture is of priuate interpretation and therefore they which wrest the Scriptures to their owne senses contrary to the intent and scope of them are guilty of a grieuous sinne before God and doe it to their owne destruction for Optimus scripturae lector est qui dictorum intellectum non attulerit sed retulerit exscriptura saith Hil. that is He is the best reader of the Scripture which doth not bring a sense to the Scripture but draweth it out of the Scripture Besides the middle and end of the Canon is not to bee misliked if they haue a fauourable interpretation for the iudgement of the Fathers is greatly to be regarded and the authority of the Church is to be held in especiall reuerence but for all this latet anguis in herba vnder these faire pretences of words is couched a snake of foule errour for first they tye the gift of interpretation of Scripture and of decision of controuersies to the Chaire of Peter seated at Rome and possessed by the Pope Peters successour as they call him or to the Chaire of Bishops assembled together in a Councill as in Noahs Arke whereas Saint Paul saith plainely speaking of the gift of interpretation These things workethone and the same Spirit distributing to euery man seuerally as he will And in another place that the spirituall man discerneth all things and therefore the Scriptures Now by the spirituall man the Apostle meaneth the man regenerate and sanctified by the Spirit as it appeareth by that he opposeth him to the naturall man in the verse going before and so the gift of discerning and interpreting is not proper to the Chaire of Bishops 27. Secondly this Canon doth not onely giue vnto the Church thus conceiued of them the onely gift of interpretation but also a Praetorian and vnexaminable authority in interpreting so that all which they deliuer out of their Chaires must bee receiued peremptorily without examining the grounds and reasons for which they are mooued to be of that iudgement which Tyrannicall vsurpation is both contrary to the expresse precepts and principles of holy Scripture and also to the doctrine and practice of all the ancient Fathers for the scripture bids to try all things to hold that which is good And Paul refused not to haue his doctrine examined of the men of Berâ—a by the Scripture the same Apost directeth vs how to behaue our selues at the time of prophecying namely that two or three Prophets speake the other iudge All which places are flatopposite to that peremptory obtruding of interpretations vpon the Church which the Canon speaketh of so are all the Fathers in generall for in prescribing certaine rules to all men both of vnderstanding and interpreting the Scriptures they plainely shew that there is not this absolute authority nor infallibility in any to obtrude what interpretation soeuer without contradiction or examination 28. Lastly the Canon in giuing this indefinite power of interpretation and determination of doubts to the Church without any relation had to the Scripture doth vtterly iustle out the Scripture from being the Iudge And so Andradius the interpretour of this Councill doth expound the intendment thereof when he saith that the iudgement of the Church is Principium vltra quod non sit fas in inquisitione progredi Aprinciple beyond the which it is not lawfull to proceede in inquisition By which he giueth to vnderstand that our faith must relye wholly and solely vpon the iudgement of the Church that is the Pope and his Prelates without enquirie at all into the word of God whether that which they propound be consonant to the truth or no. As Erasmus in a certaine disputation against the Papists confesseth that their opinion hath not sure certain testimonies of Scripture but that the contrary opinion may be better more clerely strongly proued out of Gods word notwithstanding saith he if the Church bid I will beleeue it for I will captiuate my vnderstanding to the obedience of the Church And this indeed is the Babylonian seruitude of the church of Rome wherby they fetter the souls of their followers to perpetual slauery and lead theÌ„ blindfold vnder the veile of an implicite faith vnto perdition for this is the first ground they lay in the hearts of all their generation that they must not examine the doctrine of the Church but take it at their hands as good coyne though it be neuer so counterfeit doctrina in Concilijs definit a custodieÌ„da est non examinanda saith Bellarmine that doctrine which is defined in a Council is to be kept not examined and ordinarius pastor Ecclesiae audiendus est non iudicandus saith Stapleton an ordinary Pastor of the Church is to be heard not iudged thus we see that the Scripture is thrust cleane out of dores from hauing any right or title in the decision of questions of faith not onely by priuate men but euen by their Church it selfe 29. Now here two things are to be obserued of vs for the plainer enucleation and clearing of this poynt first that in making the Scripture Iudge we doe not exclude the Church nor any member of the Church from the office of iudging and discerning onely we place them in their due order and ranke for this is it we intend that the Scripture is the highest and most absolute Iudge from the sentence whereof there is no appeale to be made to any higher Court and that the iudgement determination of the Church or of any member therof is subordinate vnto that and to be ruled and guided by that and where it is agreeable vnto that there to be receiued where it swarueth from that to be reiected For as in the ciuill estate the Iudges deputed to that office haue no absolute authority in themselues but are subiect vnto the lawe and the Ministers thereof and therefore must not speake what they list but what the law directeth so in the state Ecclesiasticall they
that are inferiour Iudges are but the Ministers of the law of God and must not vary from the rule thereof in any respect And for this cause as the Iewes were commanded to obey the sentence and determination of the Priest in all controuersies so the Priest was commanded to giue iudgement according to the law and no otherwise and albeit the Hebrew glosse vpon that Text teacheth that if the Priest say that the right hand is the left or the left is the right his sentence is to be holden which is the plaine doctrine of the Church of Rome Iudaizing in this as in many other things yet Lyra writing vpon that Text saith that the glosse is manifestly false because the sentence of no man of what authority soeuer is to be holden if it be contrary to the law of God so we admit the Church to be Iudge and euery priuate Christian also in his place but we ascribe the chiefe power and authority of Iudging to the Scripture alone The next place we allow vnto the Church and the lowest vnto the particular members thereof These last to be directed by the Church but yet so farre as it bringeth it authority out of the Scriptures and it to be limited by the bounds of the Scripture also and if it iudge against the euidence thereof not to bee heard nor beleeued This is our opinion that wee may not be mistaken but our aduersaries aduance their Church vnto the highest place and make the Scripture an inferiour vassall and seruant vnto it as I haue declared 30. Secondly note thereason that moueth them thus to disclaime from the iudgement of the Scripture it is because they know full well that the maynest and chiefest poynts of their Religion wherein they dissent from vs haue no ground nor foundation in the Scripture but would vanish like a morning aust if the light of Gods word should but shine vpon them as for instance their doctrines of worshipping Images of tasting dayes of prayer for the dead of Purgatorie of shrift of pardons of the communion in one kinde of single life and of the priuate Masse and such like all which poynts and many other their owne Writers contesse cannot be sufficiently proued out of the Scripture And therefore Andradius doth fully and ingenuously acknowledge that many poynts of their Religion would reele and stagger if they were not supported by tradition and Bellarmine himselfe saith that it may be doubted whether the great poynt of transubstantiation may be sufficiently enforced out of the words of the Text Hoc est corpus meum So that wee see now the reason why they will not be tried by the Scriptures euen this because if the Scripture bee Iudge Popery must needes goe to wracke This is ther fore a cunning and witty policie or rather a grosse and palpable subtilty of theirs whereby though they dazle the sight of the simple and ignorant yet they cannot bleare the eyes of the vnderstanding and wise from discerning into their fraud 31. Hauing thus proued that they reiect the Scripture now I come to shew that they allow of no other Iudges but themselues for the proofe whereof there needes no long discourse seeing it is sufficiently apparent by that which hath already beene deliuered that they appeale from the sentence of the Scripture vnto the iudgement of the Church and tye vnto the girdle thereof the onely key of interpretation Now by the Church they intend first the Romish Synagogue that is all that whole bony which dependeth vpon the Pope for their head and receiue as it were life and nourishment by his influence for as Bristo saith the Romane Church is the Catholike Church and as the Rhemists the Catholike and the Roman faith is all one Secondly by the Church they meane more particularly a congregation of Romish Bishops and Prelates assembled together in a Councill which they call the Church representatiue And thirdly and principally they intend by the Church the Pope who is the head of the Church and contayneth in him virtually all the power and authority of the Church The Church in the first sense is not to be this Iudge say they nor yet in the second which notwithstanding is but an vpstart opinion and but of the first head for in the Councils of Constance and Basil it was decreed that the Pope should obey the Councill and be ordered by it in all things pertayning to faith and the reformation of the 〈…〉 and many learned Romanists haue been of the same opinion as Bellarmine confesseth but now neither may the Councill be Iudge therefore take the Church in the third sense for the Pope and then you haue the man that is the Church virtuall and must be all in all euen the only Iudge and Vmpier in all controuersies The center in which all the lines that is opinions of Fathers Councils and Diuines must concurre and meete The Epitome and abridgement of the whole Church in whom alone remayneth the whole power of the Catholike Church And thus from the Scripture they call vs to the Church from the Church to the Councils and from them to the Pope and there they pitch their line as in the highest poynt of resolution 32. That they thus vnderstand by the Church the Pope and that all iudgement is deuolued vnto him alone heare them speake in their owne persons Bellarmine saith that the Pope without a Councill may define matters of faith because being the vniuersall Pastor and Teacher of the Church he cannot erre teaching out of the chaire and that he is absolutely aboue the Councill and that he may as he is the chiefe Prince of the Church retract the iudgement of the Councill and not follow the greater part And therefore when hee affirmeth in another place that the Pope with a Councill is the Iudge of the true sense of the Scripture he foysteth in the word Councill for a flourish but indeede hee meaneth the Pope alone for if the Pope be aboue all Councils and may establish or disanull their decrees at his pleasure then is not hee with a Councill but without a Councill the chiefe Iudge 33. Gregory of Valence is more plaine By the Church saith he we meane her head that is to say the Romane Bishop in whom resideth the full authority of the Church the Iesuite Coster after he hath discarded the Scripture from being Iudge because it is Res sine anima sensu in varias pugnantesque sent entias distracta A thing without life and sense distracted into diuers and contrary opinions saith that Penes Ecclesiā Cathelicā est indicium veritatis The iudgement of the truth is belonging to the Catholike Church but because the whole Church cannot meete together in one place without great inconueniences Therefore God hath appoynted and nominated one man to wit the Pope to whom he hath so tyed his presence and spirituall grace that in question◠of
affections in Religion and so cunningly insinuate themselues into the managing of all affaires both for preuention of preiudice to themselues and vndermining their opposites this is the policie of Romish shrift and were this all it were to be borne withall if withall it did not open a wide doore of liberty to others as I haue in part shewed and were not a bawd of vncleanesse to the shriuers themselues Heare what one of their own writers reuealeth concerning this last poynt It is an ordinary practice saith he for Priests to commit execrable villany with women at shrift rauishing wiues and deflowring maids in the Church and committing Sodomie with young men c. Cornelius Agrippa another of their owne hath left in writing for all posterity to remember that Auricular confession is genus quoddam lenocinij and he referreth vs for proofe thereof vnto the Tripartite History Nec desunt mihi saith hee si referre velim cognita recentia exempla I need not to seeke for farre examples for I could relate many fresh and well knowen if I would And then he concludes that Priests and Friers and Monkes hauing vnder pretence of Religion free accesse vnto any woman many times whose soules they should gaine to God their bodies they sacrifice to the deuill Thus is their owne filth cast in their faces by their owne fauorites who by all likelihood would speake the best of their mother and in no respect durst slander her for feare of shame and punishment Wee finde in the Tripartite History to the which it may be Agrippa had relation of the rape of a noble woman by a Deacon in the time of shrift for the which cause Nectarius the Bishop of Constantinople banished this secret confession out of his Church as also all the Bishops of the East did the like in theirs This story is recorded by Socrates Sozomene and Nicephorus neither is it denied by the Romanists themselues though some of them condemne Nectarius for doing so As Andradius and Baronius the one calling it a most impudent fact the other saying that not a good spirit but an euill spirit perswaded him there unto And others seeke to elude ti by saying the story is mistaken and that Nectarius banished not confession it selfe but the necessitie of confessing to one certaine Priest which though it bee a vaine glosse which corrupts the text as Chemnitius fully proueth yet not to stand vpon it this is euident that such a foule fact was committed in the time of shrift and that thereupon this secret confession was either vtterly abrogated or at least so restrained that it was no more secret for feare of such like enormities and indeed graunt that Nectarius did euill in abolishing all kind of confession as Socrates and Sozomene charge him and as wee also will not excuse him for wee hold that there may be an holy profitable vse of confession in the Church for the searching of the wounds of sinnefull soules and applying of fit counsell comfort to distressed consciences yet from thence we may deriue these three conclusions first that secret shrift was then thought not to bee ex iure diuino but onely a tradition of the Church for else it could not haue been abolished secondly that it was not thought necessarie for the remission of sinnes as the Romanists teach and thirdly that it is a most dangerous occasion to vncleannes which is the matter we haue in hand to proue 20. If any here except that these enormities proceed from the abuse and not from the vse of shrift and that they bee personall frailties and not corruptions of doctrine I answer first that the very vse thereof is so daungerous especially to these ranke Votaries that it is tenne to one but it euer degenerates into the abuse for wanting the lawfull remedy ordained by God no maruaile if their lusts breake forth into lawlesse actions Againe what warrant can there be of Gods blessing to sanctifie the vse of that which is not an ordinance of God but a meere humane inuention as diuers of their owne Doctors haue confessed and is most easie to bee prooued And lastly though there may bee a profitable vse of confession as I haue said yet this Auricular enumeration and Romish shrift cannot be lawfully vsed because they make the very act thereof meritorious to saluation and the absolution of the Priest an actuall and reall remitting of sinne which opinion cannot but animate men to the committall of sinne seeing they haue their remedy so ready at hand to wit after the vttering a fewe wordes the mouth of the Priest to absolue them 21. As for Contrition which by their doctrine must goe before Confession that makes the matter neuer a whit the more difficult neither doth it any whit the more bridle from sinne for if the griefe be but small yet is the penitent absolued saith our Fisher and a Iesuite a slender griefe is sufficient and another Iesuite The least degree of griefe is able to wipe away the highest degree of sinne Surely this kind of contrition is so farre from brideling our corrupt nature from sinne that it more incites and prickes it forward for who would feare to sinne if this be true that the least griefe conceiued in heart together with the discouering of it to the Priest and the Priests formall absolution is sufficient for the full pardon and remission thereof 22. But peraduenture the last part of this Sacrament binds vp the two former in greater seuerity let vs consider a little therefore of their penance and satisfaction They condemne vs lowdly and raile with open throat against vs calling vs Libertines and Epicures for reiecting their penance and satisfactory paines after sinnes committed But who are the Libertines they or vs let any indifferent reader all preiudice set apart iudge Are we Libertines for renouncing their popish penance why there is no doctrine that more notoriously tends to liberty then this For first what are those satisfactory workes which they enioyne poore penitents Coster a Iesuite reduceth them to three heads Prayer Almes and Fasting to one of which three all particulars in that kind may be referred as to Prayer they referre Masses Dirges and Trentals visiting of holy places pilgrimage and such like to Almes building of Abbeys and religious houses giuing to Couents of Friers and Nuns as for relieuing of the poore that is the least poynt of their almes to Fasting sackcloth ashes watching whipping sleeping on the pauement going barefoote handy labour and such like If the first sort be imposed for the most part it is nothing but the shuffling ouer of their Beads so many times a day with so many Creeds and so many Aues though they vnderstand neuer a word they speake or the saying of so many Masses or going to visite the shrine of Saint Thomas of Canterbury or of some other Saint all which is so farre from pinching the soule or taming the body
practice Their principles are these As long as the Prince continueth excommunicate the Subiect is freed from the oath of subiection this is the Position of a Cardinall whose authority was so great in the Church of Rome that whatsoeuer he wrote was allowed as sound and authenticall without examination or supervizing To him I adde a Bishop whose writings after supervision and examination were approued as Catholique doctrine and to containe in them nothing contrary to the receiued faith of the Romane Church his Position is this Assoone as a Christian King becomes hereticall forthwith people are freed from their subiection The condition in the first Position is if the King be excommunicate in the second if he be hereticall which though different in termes yet in substance are all one for euery heretique is excommunicate quatenus apertè haereticus in that he is an open heretique if not by name yet in deed and by right and so Subiects may lawfully deny him obedience saith another Iesuite and what is an hereticke in their diuinity I pray you Marry Whosoeuer maintaineth any doctrine expresly condemned by the Church of Rome hee is to be accounted say they an obstinate hereticke To these adde the sentence of another Cardinall euen our owne Countriman Al in his Apology for Stanlies treason who ioyneth both these two conditions together as two twinnes By reason saith he of Queene Elizabeths excommunication and heresie it was not onely lawfull for any of her Subiects but euen they were bound in conscience to depriue her of any strength which lay in their power to doe and to deliuer her Armies Townes or fortresses into her enemies hands she no more being the right owner of them But all this while we haue not the pillar of Popery Bellarmine it may be he is of another mind heare therefore his resolution Non licet Christianis tolerare c. It is not lawfull for Christians to tolerate a King that is an infidell or an heretike if he endeuour to draw his Subiects to his heresie or infidelity This is braue Bellarmines resolution of this case Neither doth he barely set it downe but laboureth to proue it by many arguments throughout that whole Chapter indeed he pinneth it all vpon the Popes sleeue he must pronounce the King to be an heretike and they like sheepe must auoyde him as a wolfe he must forbid them to obey and they must forthwith fall to rebellion that whole seuenth Chapter is worth the reading if any desire to know the full and compleat doctrine of the Romish Church concerning the poynt of rebellion and treason against Princes And that this was the doctrine not of some few among them but of all in generall Let a Fryer of their owne testifie about three hundred yeares since Sigebert mencioning the Popes proceeding against Henry the Emperor thus writeth Be it spoken with the leaue of all good men this nouelty that I say not heresie had not as yet sprung vp in the world that Gods Priests should teach the people that they owe no subiection to euill Princes and though they haue sworne allegeance to them yet they owe them no fidelity neither shall hee be accounted periur'd which thinketh against the King yea hee that obeyeth him shall be counted for excommunicate and he that doth against him shall be absolued from the guilt of iniustice and periurie Here we may behold the doctrine of that age and withall that by this Fryers iudgement concurring with vs it is not onely nouelty but a point of heresie to dissolue the bond of allegeāce which Subiects owe vnto their Princes vpon any pretence whatsoeuer 3. But all these are but the opinions of priuate men and not the decrees of the Church heare therefore what the Church speaketh by the pretended head thereof the Pope who as they affirme cannot erre whilest he sits in the chaire of Peter to determine matters of faith Gregory the seuenth alias Hildobrand thus determineth We by Apostolicall authority doe absolue all from their oaths which they haue giuen to persons excommunicate And another Pope of later time in his Bull against Queene Elizabeth thus We absolue all Subiects from their faith they haue plight with Elizabeth their Queen A third Pope Paulus Tertius did excommunicate Henry the Eight King of England and commanded his nobles to beare armes against him and to make vp the full squadron of Popes when as the Vniuersite of Salamanca determined that all Catholiques which did not forsake the defence of the English and follow the traytor One all in Ireland did sinne mortally and could not obtaine euerlasting life except they should desist Pope Xistus giueth this censure of their determination Those Diuines saith he haue done the parts of good Lawyers Confessours and Doctours Many more testimonies to this effect might be accumulated but these are sufficient because wee shall haue occasion to speake hereof more at large hereafter to all that are not either bewitched with the enchantments of the whore of Babylon or blinded with preiudice to shew how both in their principles and their practice they maintaine treason and rebellion against Princes contrary to the lawes of God of nature and of man 4. A doctrine Cousin german vnto this of the same kind though not of the same degree is that their Position touching the dissoluing of all bonds of naturall and ciuill society wherby they resolue that no communion or fellowship is to bee held with heretiques that is with Protestants by whatsoeuer bond of nature or ciuility they be obliged therevnto and therefore the Father is bound to dis-inherite and cast off his Sonne the Sonne to deny and disobey his Father the wife is forbidden to render due beneuolence to her husband the seruant is commanded to disobey his Master the debter to deny payment to his Creditor the Countriman to deny his owne Country the kinsman to disclaime his kindred if any of these be heretiques that is be Protestants What a religion is this that not only choaketh the breath of humane society but euen stifleth the life of nature it selfe Hee that desireth to see these things proued let them reade Doctor Mortons first Booke of Romish positions and practices of rebellion and also his reply vnto the moderate answere where he shall find them largely and foundly discouered and confirmed 5. Againe by their doctrine of equiuocation they teach and maintaine open and notorious lying and periury such as the very heathen of stricter life and simpler iudgement abhor'd their doctrine is this A man saith Tollet is not alwaies bound to answere according to the meaning of the asker but may sometimes vse equiuocation and deceiue the hearer this is lawfull saith he whē the Iudge requireth an oth against iustice or when he is not a competent Iudge as another speaketh as for example if the Iudge demand Hast thou done this he may answere I haue not though he
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
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
for to restraine a common good to a particular vse is an open wrong to the good it selfe which the more common it is the better it is and the lesse common the lesse good for bonum est sui diffusiuum good inclineth naturally to spreade it selfe and therfore the restriction thereof is violence and force offered to the nature of it and truth cannot abide to bee imprisoned but loueth liberty This is true in all naturall good and true things but much more in this supernaturall good and truth which as Origenâ— well noteth was not written for a few as Platoes Bookes were but for the people and multitude yea for the veriest Ideots and women and children as the Fathers affirme 20. And yet these presumptuous Romanists forbid the reading of the Scripture among the people one of them affirming That it was the deuils inuention to permit the people to reade the Bible Another That he knew certaine men to be possessed of the deuill because being but Husband-men they were able to discourse of the Scriptures All teaching that it is the ground of Heresie and that Lay men are no better then Hogs and Dogs and therefore these precious pearles not to be committed vnto them and that the Scripture to a Lay man is as a sword in a mad mans or a knife in a Childes hand Thus they practise to imprison the Scriptures within the Priests cells or Monkes cloysters which were giuen by God to be the light of the world and yet which is to be noted in Queene Maries bloudy and blinde daies such as could dispend a certaine summe of mony by the yeare might reade the Bible without any speciall dispensation as if heresie builded her nest rather in the brest of the poore man then of the rich or as if the rich were lesse carnall then the poore and thus these saucy fellowes handle the sacred Scripture at their pleasure being rightly to be branded with the name of Heretikes whom Epiphanius generally calleth Lucifugae because they cannot abide the light of the Scriptures but fly from them as Owles and Bats from the light 21. Another practice of theirs is against the sense of the Scripture as the two former were against the letter that neither the body nor the soule thereof might be left vnuiolated and this is in respect of the learned to bar them vp from controuling their errours as the other were in respect of the simple to keepe them from once looking into them Their policy in this is to interdict all senses and expositions of the Scripture saue such as agree with the Church of Rome and are allowed by the Pope of Rome this is the interdiction of the Councill of â—rent and is grounded vpon a false interpretation of that article of our faith I beleeue the Catholike Church for as Stapleton saith The literall sense of that article is that thou beleeuest whatsoeuer the Catholike Church holdeth and teacheth And Cardinall Hosius If any man haue the interpretation of the Church of Rome though he know not whether and how it agreeth with the words of the scripture notwithstanding he hath Ipsissimum verbum Dei Now by the Catholike Church they meane the Romane Church or rather the Romane Bishop as I haue shewed for as Siluester sayth The power of the Catholike Church remaineth onely in him And as Stapleton The foundation of our Religion is of necessity placed vpon the authority of this mans teaching and therfore one â—aith that the Pope may change â—he Gospell and giue to it according to place and time another sense Yea a blasphemous Cardiâ—all is bâ—ld to say That if a man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and Man and the Pâ—pe thought the same he should not be condemned This is a tricke pâ—ssing all other whereby they not onely make sure worke with the Scripture that it neuer doe them hurt but also fashion the sacred and diuine sense thereof vnto their fond and foolish fancies and make it speake not what the Holy Ghost intendeth but what they imagine Nay they are so impudent as to say That the Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood the sense thereof being one while this and another while that according as it pleaseth the Church to change her iudgement Can there be a greater disgrace to the Scripture then this is 22. Adde to these yet another deuice which is far worse then all the rest that is a grosse and palpable wringing and wresting out of the holy Scripture a sense contrary to the true intendment of the place fitting it strangely to their own purpose This is a practice of theirs so coÌ„mon as that their Books swarme with nothing so much as such fond and foolish interpretations and so ridiculous withall that it would make euen Heraclitus himselfe to laugh if he were aliue I wil here report some few of these strange wrested Expositions that the Reader may haue a taste of them and so iudge of the whole caske 23. And to beginne at the beginning of the Bible Genes 1. 16. It is written God created two great Lights the greater to rule the day and the lesser to rule the night that is saith Innocentius the third one of their owne Popes And also Molina the Iesuite God ordained in the Firmament of the Catholike Church two dignities to wit the Pontificiall dignitie and the Regall But that to gouerne the day that is the Spiritualty and is the greater and this to rule the night that is the Carnalty and is the lesser so that how great difference is betwixt the Sunne and the Moone so great is there betwixt the Bishop of Rome and a King that is according to the Glosse vpon the same place seuen and fiftie times So in the 3. of Genesis whereas the words of the Text are plaine Hee shall breake thy head or tread vpon thy head which is the first and principall promise of the Messiah they contrary both to the Hebrew and Septuagint translate and expound it Ipsa She shall applying vnto the Virgin Mary that which properly belongeth vnto Christ euen the worke of our Redemption And this interpretation and translation of that place is approued by the Councill of Trent in approuing the vulgar Latine Bible for authenticall and by Bellarmine also who calleth it a great mysterie that in the Hebrew a verbe of the Masculine gender is ioyned with a Nowne of the foeminine to signifie that a woman should breake the serpents head but not by her selfe but by her sonne and is also so translated by our Doway Translatours in English 24. So againe that place in the Psalme Psal 91. 13. Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and the Cockatrice and shalt tread vpon the Lion and the Dragon Pope Alexander the third interpreted it of himselfe and the Emperour applying the promise made to Christ principally and in him to all the Elect vnto himselfe as Pope and
vnderstanding by the Aspe and Cockatrice Lyon and Dragon the Emperour Frederick vpon whose necke hee set his foote vsing those words and all other Kings and Emperours and to proue that he so vnderstood the place when as the Emperor disdayning this pride made answere Not to thee but to Peter the holy Father treading on his necke replied Et mihi Petro Both to mee and to Peter Which storie though it bee branded by Baronius with the marke of a fable yet it is auouched by a full Iurie of witnesses and especially two Gennadius the Patriarke of Constantinople and a Venetian Historian that liued about that time which last onely differeth in the Popes alledging of the Text for he makes the Pope to say not in the second person thou but ambulabo I will walke vpon the Lion and the Adder Againe they interpret that place of Esay 49. 23. They shall worship towards the face of the earth and licke the dust of thy feete as a Prophecie of the Popes sublimitie For saith Turrian the Iesuite Where is this verified but in the kissing of the feete of the Bishop of Rome and yet who knoweth not that this is nothing else but a manifest prediction of the glory of the Church and the conuersion and subiection of Kings and Princes to the Religion of Christ What a wresting of Scripture call you this Are not these strange interpretations 25. But yet heare them which are more strange and ridiculous In the 28. of Esay 16. verse wee read Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation This all know being taught by the interpretation of S. Peter 1. Pet. 2. 6. is to be vnderstood of Christ only and none other yet Bellarmine vnderstands by this tried precious corner stone not Christ but Peter that is as he saith Sedes Romana The Roman Sea Againe we read Iere. 26. 14. Behold I am in your hands doe with mee as you thinke good and right This Text Bonauenture alledgeth to proue that Christ is in the Priests hands at the Masse as a Prisoner not to bee let goe till he haue payd his ransome that is till he haue giuen remission of sinnes contrary to the manifest sense of the place Hosea 1. 11. We read that the children of Iudah and Israel shall be gathered together and appoint themselues one head answerable to that Ioh. 10. 16. There shall be one fold and one shepheard which places properly appertayning to Christ and his Church are ordinarily and blasphemously alledged to proue that the Pope is the head of the Church Againe Cant. 5. 11. His head is as fine gold And Cant. 7. 5. Thy head is like the mount Carmel One of which is the speech of the Church to Christ and the other of Christ to the Church but Bellarmine interprets the first to be spoken Christ and the second of the Pope These be his words The Bridegrome compareth the head of his Spouse to mount Carmel because though the Pope be a great mountaine yet he is nothing but earth that is a man and the Bride compareth the Bridegromes head to the best gold because the head of Christ is God 26. But let vs come a little to the new Testament are they any thing more shie and cautelous in this then in the olde Heare and then iudge Matth. 28. 18. our Sauiour saith to his Disciples All power is giuen vnto me in heauen and earth This in the booke of Ceremonies is expounded of the Pope and also by Stephen the Archbishop of Patauy in the Councill of Laterane Luc. 22. 38. the Apostles say vnto Christ Behold two swords and he answered It is sufficient By this place of Scripture Boniface the eighth challenged to himselfe both temporall and ecclesiasticall authority because Christ said two swords were sufficient and bade Peter not cast away one of them but put it vp into the sheath This exposition flat contrary to the meaning of the Text was not only deuised by a Pope but also approued by Bellarmine and Molina the Iesuite and Balbus with diuers others though I confesse reiected by Stella Maldonate and Arias Montanus But what are these to a Pope that cannot erre and to such an Emminent Cardinall as Bellarmine is So likewise they expound that Text Matth. 17. 24. Solue pro te me Pay for thee and me To signifie that Christs family hath two heads to wit Christ and Peter because they two onely payd and that Peter was chiefe ouer the rest of the Apostles because none of the rest payd as if paying of tribute was a signe of preeminence and not rather of subiection as Iansenius expounds it So Baronius alledgeth that of Act. 10. 13. Arise Peter kill and eate to proue the Popes power to excommunicate the Venetians Kill that is excommunicate and eate that is bring them to the obedience of the Church of Rome This is goodly stuffe indeede sure they stand in neede of arguments to proue their cause that are driuen to these silly shifts So our Country-man Fisher to proue iustification by workes alledgeth that Text of S. Peter 1. Pet. 4. 8. Loue couereth the multitude of sinnes which he expounds thus that loue expiateth and purgeth away the guilt of our sinnes in the sight of God contrary to the direct sense of the holy Ghost Pro. 10. 12. 27. It is a wonder to see how both Bellarmine and all the Patrones of Purgatory wring and wrest the Scripture to vnderprop the Popes Kitchin The Scripture cannot name fire and purging but presently there is Purgatory as Esay 4. 4. and 9. 18. Mal. 3. 3. nor a lake where there is no water but there is Purgatory as Zachar. 9. 11. nor things vnder the earth Phil. 2. 10. Apoc. 5. 3. but there is Purgatory and yet they themselues confesse that they know not whether it be vnder the earth or no because the Church hath not yet defined where it is And Bellarmine bringeth in eight diuers opinions touching the place of Purgatory but two of their expositions touching Purgatory I cannot ouerpasse left I should depriue the Reader of matter of laughter in the midst of this serious discourse and them of commendation of wit for they are witty aboue measure the one is Mar. 13. 34. where it is said in a Parable that a certaine man going into a strange Country leaueth his house and giueth authority to his seruants and commandeth the Porter to watch This man going into a strange Country signifieth the soule say they which by death departeth out of this world his leauing authority with his seruants signifieth that he commandeth his executors to procure with his goods the prayers suffrages of the Church whereby he may be freed from Purgatory hee commandeth the Porter to watch that is he giueth part of his goods to his Pastor that he may diligently
wherein there are as fat and foggie contradictions as in the former For first they teach that Christ hath made a perfect and full sufficient satisfaction for all the Elect and that his death was a sufficient price for the redemption and expiation of the sinnes of the whole world and that his satisfaction was of infinite valew c. This they affirme in semblance of words because if they should not all men would cry shame vpon their Religion And yet in truth they ouerthrow the same by another crosse doctrine of our owne satisfactions for the same men say that Christ hath onely satisfied for the fault of our sinnes and the eternall punishment due vnto them but wee our selues must satisfie for the temporall punishment eyther here on earth by necessary afflictions or in Purgatory by the indurance of those paynes which are there ordayned to purge men withall Now what can be more contrary then these two propositions Christ hath made a full satisfaction for vs and yet we must also satisfie in part for our selues If Christs satisfaction be full and perfect then it hath payd the whole debt which we ought but if we must pay part of the debt then is not this satisfaction full and perfect That the temporall punishment is a part of our debt Bellarmine himselfe confesseth writing vpon the fiâ—ft petition of the Lords Prayer where hee giueth this one reason why sinnes are called debts because he which breaketh the Law is a debter to vndergoe the punishment which the Law requireth But the Law bindeth transgressors not onely to eternall but also to temporary and transitory punishments As a Suretie therfore that payeth for his friend owing an hundred pound fourescoreand ten leauing the remainder to the debter himselfe to be satisfied cannot be sayd to haue made full satisfaction So if any part of our debt is to be payed by our selues Christ our all-sufficient Surety cannot be sayd to haue made a full satisfaction But they answere that this our satisfaction is wrought in vs by Christ and is so in vs that it is not of vs but of Christ And agâ—iâ— that it is nothing but an instrumeÌ„t ordained by God to apply Christs death vnto our selues and so to expiate the punishment of our sinnes instrumentally and not causally To which I answere First that this inwrappeth another contradiction for if it bee Christs in vs and not ours of our selues then it must needs be the satisfaction it selfe and not an instrument to apply it for one and the same thing cannot bee both the instrument to apply and the thing that is applyed But of this see more in the fourth reason And secondly though it be from Christ yet that is but in part because as they teach it is not onely in euery mans power eyther to admit or to exclude the grace of God and the efficacy of Christs merite by his owne free-will but also for that it is wrought by our selues and vpon our selues cooperating with grace at least And thus the knot of the contradiction remaineth still as fast tyed as euer it was 48. Againe they say that our satisfactions when they are at the best are imperfect and no wayes proportionable to the iustice of God for when we sinne we offend him who is an infinite God and whatsoeuer we haue it is but a small and finite thing and therefore there must needes bee an imperfect compensation from vs to God depending rather vpon his mercifull acceptation theÌ„ any proportionable satisfaction This is their doctrine And yet they teach also that there is an equalitie and proportion betwixt Gods iustice and our satisfactory works and that they are in some sort of infinite valew by reason of the infinite power of Gods Spirit dwelling in vs from which they proceede And thus by their doctrine they are perfect and not perfect infinite and finite haue equality and proportion and yet haue no equality nor proportion to Gods iustice Either therefore they are not of infinite valew though they proceede from the Spirit or if because they doe proceede from the Spirit therefore they are of infinite value then they cannot bee imperfect Let them choose which they will they haue a Wolfe by the eares 49. Further they teach that the passions of the Saints doe not onely profite themselues but also others whether liuing or dead not so much by example for their edification as also for their satisfaction by redeeming them from temporall punishment Which doctrine is not onely contrary to Saint Gregory one of their owne Bishops who taught that Christs sufferings are herein distinguished from the sufferings of all others because hee suffered without sinne and all men suffered with sinne but also to the receiued doctrine in their Church which holdeth that the righteousnes by imputation whereby we say a man is iustified is a meere fiction and Chimericall conceit For a man say they cannot bee righteous by another mans righteousnes nor wise by another mans wisedome and so not iustified by Christs righteousnes imputed vnto him Cannot a man be iustified by Christs righteousnes imputed can satisfaction be made by the passions of the Saints imputed Is the death of Christ of lesse pâ—ice force then the sufferings of the Saints The righteousnes of Christ imputed is a Monster in Religion yet the satisfaction of the Saints imputed is with them a Catholike doctrine And thus with one doctrine they establish imputation and with the other pull it downe againe With one breath they condemne it and with another they iustifie it 50. Ioyne vnto Satisfactions their bastard Purgatorie for out of this doctrine That men must satisfie in themselues and for themselues for the temporall punishment of their sinnes springeth Purgatory because when they haue not satisfied sufficiently in this life then as they teach they must make vp that which is wanting in the life to come in the fire of Purgatory This doctrine of Purgatory is directly opposite to their Sacrament of Extreme vnction for there they teach that by this Sacrament all the reliques of sinne are vtterly abolished and wiped away Si quae delicta sint adbuc expianda abstergit saith the Councell of Trent If any sinnes remayne vnpurged or to be satisfied for this Sacrament wypeth them cleane away And the Councell of Florence affirmeth that the effect of this Sacrament is Sanatia animae The healing of the soule And Bellarmine concludeth that therefore the fiue Senses are anoynted because they are as it were the fiue doores by which sinnes enter in vnto the soule to wit that there might bee a generall purgation of all sinnes which remayne This is their absolute doctrine and yet the same men affirme that Purgatory is ordayned to purge away the reliques of sinnes which in our life time wee haue not satisfied for and that many sinnes sticke so fast and close vnto vs that we carry them with vs out
bare assertion without Scripture 29. As touching their crossing of it wee need fetch no other proofe then from the Councill of Trent which in expresse words denounceth Anathema to those that make this faith whereby wee beleeue the remission of our sinnes a necessary ingredient into true repentance and yet it propoundeth reconciliation and remission of sinnes to such as doe repent let all the world therefore know to the eternall shame of the Romish Religion that remission of sinnes and reconciliation by their doctrine may bee obtained by repentance without faith then which what can bee more opposite to the Gospell of Iesus Christ 30. If they reply that they make faith the foundation of repentance I answere why doe they then exclude it out of repentance is the foundation no part of the house yes it is the chiefest part either therefore it is not the foundation of repentance or els it is necessarily required to the essence of it one or the other must needs bee false but heere is the mystery of this iniquity by faith they meane nor a beliefe of the remission of our sinnes by the bloud of Christ which is the true Euangelicall faith but a generall perswasion of the truth of their Religion and a particular conceit that he which performeth the worke of penance in the three parts thereof shall thereby obtaine pardon of his sinnes and reconciliation with God 31. Secondly whereas hee sayth that wee doe not satisfie for the eternall but for the temporall punishments of our sinnes either heere in this life or in Purgatory hee speaketh nothing for the clearing of their doctrine from opposition to the Gospell for the Gospell teacheth that Christ our Redeemer hath made a full and perfect satisfaction for the sinnes of all the world yeelding a sufficient and worthy recompence and contentment to God for them and therefore they which say that wee must giue any manner of satisfaction our selues whether for the temporall or eternall punishment due vnto them doe euidently crosse the doctrine of the Gospell And this Aquinas one of their owne illumined Doctors doth in effect confesse when hee sayth that the passion of Christ was a sufficient and super abundant satisfaction for the sinne and guilt of punishment of mankind his passion was as it were a price or paiment by which we are freed from both these obligations to bring in then the foggy mist of humane satisfactions is to eclipse and darken the glory of Christs all-sufficient redemption 32. Thirdly whereas hee findeth fault with Chytraus for saying without proofe that auricular confession is not commanded of God and yet hee himselfe doth not proue it is we might driue out one naile with another and returne vpon him his owne answere but I reply further that diuers of his owne fellow Doctors haue auouched asmuch for Maldonate Erasmus the glosse in Gratian and Gratian himselfe and Rhenanus with diuers others are of the same minde as may appeare in the texts quoted in the margent whose wordes I forbeare to set downe because I shall haue occasion to handle the same in a more proper place one thing I cannot omit that the testimony of Rhenanus is so plaine that our aduersaries not able to giue answere sufficient vnto it haue by their peremptory authority said Deleatur let it bee blotted out as they deale also with Polidore Virgill in the like point and with all other that stand in their way 33. Lastly the redeeming of penance by the purse though Bellarmine shuffle it ouer neuer so cunningly yet is so palpable an abuse and so contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell that the very naming of it is a sufficient declaration of the foulnesse of that Religion which maketh a mart of sinne and setteth repentance which is the gift of God to sale for a little earthly drosse and exchangeth punishment due to the body and soule for a little pinching of the purse 34. The Gospell teacheth that marriage is permitted and set free for all men both Priests and people and that the prohibition of marriage and meats is a doctrine of Deuils But the Romish Religion forbids marriage to a great part of men to wit Priests and Monkes and commands to abstaine from certaine meates vpon certaine dayes 35. Bellarmine excepteth and saith by a distinction that when the Apostle sayth Marriage is honourable amongst all men hee meaneth not all in generall for then it should bee honorable betwixt the father and the daughter the brother and the sister but onely those that are lawfully ioyned together which they that are bound with a vow cannot bee 36. It is a strange fore-head but no maruaile seeing it is the fore-head of the whore of Babylon when the Scripture sayth Marriage is honorable amongst al men to exempt their Votaries from this honour as if they were not in the number of men but beasts and as the assertion is strange in impudency so the reason is more strange in folly for though the father may not marry the daughter nor the brother the sister without incest yet the father may marry and the daughter may marry and the brother and the sister also so that they take those that are not prohibited by the Law of God and nature Now let him shew that Gods Law forbiddeth Votaries to marry and then hee sayth something to the purpose but by his owne confession together with many of his pew-fellowes the prohibition of marriage is no diuine but humane ordinance and institution yea the Councill of Trent it selfe calleth it but an Ecclesiasticall Law and therefore not a Law of God but a decree of the Church 37. Adde to this impudency and folly his crossing of all antiquity for in the Councill of Nice Paphnutius alleadgeth this place of Scripture against those that went about to take away the vse of marriage from the Clergie and in the sixt generall Synode it is expressely applied to the same purpose And Ierome in defence of Charterius a married Bishop produceth the same text 38. As touching Chrysostomes speech to Theodorus the Monke alledged by Bellarmine though it seemeth a little to fauour them at the first view yet in another place he cleereth himselfe from that suspition for he saith plainely that Marriage is so honourable and precious that a man with it may ascend into the sacred Chaire of a Bishop What hath Bellarmine got now by Chrysostomes testimony Surely this If all that Chrysostome saith bee sound doctrine then it is an error in the Church of Rome to inhibite all that are consecrated by holy Orders from the vse of the marriage bed For by Chrysostome Bishops may marry Saint Augustines testimonies alledged by him in the one and twentieth Chapter are little to the purpose for in the first he saith plainely that the Church of God doth not forbid marriage but onely preferre virginitie before it as a greater good and in the second hee approoueth onely abstinence from
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
to the ground And this indeed is the very ground of this blasphemous doctrine 66. Doctour Bishop misliking this distinction as it seemeth flyeth to another In sinne sayth hee there are two things the one is the turning away from God whom wee offend The other is the turning to the thing for the loue of which wee offend Now the turning away from GOD both the sinne and the eternall paine due vnto it are freely through Christ pardoned but for the pleasure we tooke in sinne wee our selues are to satisfie and according to the greatnesse thereof to doe penance Thus dreameth Doctor Bishop but let his owne fellow Doctor waken him and he of greater credit then himselfe Aquinas it is who reiecteth this distinction as nothing worth and giueth this reason of his reiecting because satisfaction answereth not to sinne but according as it is an offence to God which it hath not of conuerting to other things but of auerting and turning from God And surely his reason is passing good for to vâ—â— the Creatures and to loue the Creatures is not sinne but to vse them disorderly and to loue them immoderately which disordered vse immoderate loue is the very turning and auersion from God and therefore to say that wee satisfy not for our auersion from God but for our conuersion to the creatures is to say either that wee satisfy for that which is no sinne or els that some part of sinne is not an auersion from God both which are equally absurd and Doctor Bishop cannot giue a third and therefore his distinction is a meere foppish dreame without head or foote 67. The Gospell teacheth that there is giuen no other name vnder Heauen whereby wee must bee saued but the name Iesus But the Church of Rome propoundeth vnto vs other names to bee saued by as the Virgin Mary the Saints and Martyrs yea Francis and Dominick c. For they make them Mediatours of intercession to God for vs which office belongeth only vnto Christ as hath been shewed and they teach that we are saued by their merits aswell as by the merits of Christ and that as there are diuers mansions in Heauen so among the Saints there are diuers offices some haue power ouer one thing some ouer another as Saint Peter against infidelity Saint Agnes for Chastity Saint Leonard for Horses Saint Nicholas against ship-wracke Saint Iames for Spaine Saint Denis for France Saint Marke for Venice c. Yea they would make men beleeue if a man being otherwise a vyler sinner dye in the habit of Saint Francis or Saint Dominick c. must needes goe straight to heauen without any more adoe and that as it may seeme though he hath neyther faith nor repentance 68. Lastly they are not ashamed to say that the death and passion of Christ and of the holy Virgine together was for the redemption of mankinde and as Adam and Eue sold the world for one Apple so Mary and her Sonne redeemed the world with one heart and therefore as they called him Sauiour so her Sauiouresse as him Mediator so her Mediatresse as him the King of the Church so her the Queene If this be not to repose the confidence of our saluation vpon other names besides the Name of Iesus let the world be iudge 69. Yet for all this they thinke to couer this their filthinesse by a distinction for they say that they doe not flye to the Saints as authors and giuers of good things but as Impetrators and Intercessors To which I answere that to omit their doctrine which hath at large beene discouered before the very forme of their prayers doth extinguish this distinction for when they cry and say O Saint Peter haue mercy on me Saue mee Open mee the gate of heauen Giue mee patience Giue mee fortitude c. And to the blessed Virgine O Mediatrix of God and men ô Fountaine of mercy Mother of grace Hope of the desolate Comforter of the desperate c. receiue this my humble petition and giue me life euerlasting And to Saint Paul Vouchsafe to bring vs whom thou hast caused to know the light of truth after the end of this mortality thither where thou thy selfe art Doe they not make them authors and giuers of these things Yes in word saith Bellarmine but not in sense for the meaning of these petitions is that by their prayers and merites they would obtaine of God these good things But alas how should the common people vnderstand their meaning seeing the sound of their words are so playne to the contrary Againe why doe they not propound their sense in playner termes but leaue it thus inuolued vnder darke riddles to the great offence of thousands And lastly how harsh an interpretation must this needs be in the eares of all men Giue me euerlasting life that is Pray to God that he would giue mee it If a man should speake so in his common talke no man would vnderstand him otherwise then his words sound how much lesse can these spirituall matters be otherwise vnderstood then they are spoken Surely this shift is so filly that if it might stand good what might not a man speake and yet excuse it sufficiently after this manner And though the Councill of Trent seeme to graunt to the Saints the power onely of intercession as Bellarmine also doth yet the Romane Catechisme set foorth by the commandement of the Pope and decree of the same Councill doth cleerely and expressely attribute vnto the Saints the power of Mercy Grace and Donation of benefits Whereby it appeareth that this is not the opinion of some priuate men but the receiued and approoued doctrine of the Church And thus this distinction vanisheth before the truth as snow against the Sunne 70. The Gospell teacheth that euery soule bee subiect to the higher powers and that we submit our selues vnto all maner of ordinance for the Lords sake whether vnto King or vnto Gouernours c. And our Sauiour himselfe confesseth that Pilate had power euer him from God when he faith Thou couldest haue no power at all against me except it were giuen thee from aboue But the Church of Rome teacheth that neyther the Pope himselfe nor any of his Clergie are subiect to the temporall power of Princes eyther to be iudged of them or punished by them no not in cases of fact when they are guilty of haynous crimes as of Treason Murther Theft c. 71. This doctrine though it bee contradicted by many learned Doctors of their owne side as Occham Marsilius Pataninus Barclay a late French Lawyer and others yet is maintayned by their Popes and Cardinalls Iesuites and Canon Lawes which are the very synewes of Popery as not onely true but necessary to saluation and therefore we may well call it The doctrine of their Church For Popes Iohn the two and twentieth commaunded Augustinus Triumphus of Ancona to write a Booke wherein he maintaineth this position
Dominick the other of Saint Paul were written these words On Pauls By this man you may come to Christ On Dominicks But by this man you may doe it easilier because Pauls doctrine led but to faith and the obseruation of the Commandements but Dominicks taught the obseruation of Councils which is the easier way All this and asmuch more might be produced to this purpose But I conclude the point with the censure and confession of their owne Cassander who out of the writings of William Bishop of Miniatum concludeth with him that as if officious lyes should bee added to the holy Scriptures there would remaine no authority nor weight in them So no errour nor falshood should be tolerated in Images and Pictures in the Church seeing that an errour not resisted is receiued for a trueth And in the same place the same Cassander doth bewaile the abuse of Images in the Church of Rome affirming that superstition was too much pampered thereby that Christians were nothing behind the Heathō in the extreme vanity of framing adorning and worshipping of Images Thus farre Cassander out of which we may perceiue the chiefe lessons that are learned out of these Lay bookes to wit ignorance superstition and Idolatry And therefore no maruaile if all these vices raigne in the midst of their Church as plentifully as amongst the Heathen themselues 19. Fourthly they deliuer for sound doctrine that whereas Saint Iohn sayth that they which haue the anointing of the holy Ghost know all things Hee meaneth not that euery one should haue all knowledge in himselfe personally but that euery one that is of that happy society to which Christ promised and gaue the holy Ghost is partaker of all other mens graces and gifts in the same holy Spirit to saluation And thus whereas Saint Iohn meaneth that euery true Christian both by the outward preaching of the word and by the inward vnction of the Spirit hath a distinct knowledge of all things necessary to saluation They say that it is sufficient if he be partaker of another mans knowledge though he be empty voyde himselfe Then which what can be a greater nourisher of ignorance and quencher of knowledge For if I may bee saued by anothers mans knowledge and faith And if it bee not required that I should know al things necessary to saluation in my owne person but may haue a share of another mans knowledge what need I greatly seeke for knowledge my selfe And why may I not repose the hope of my saluation vpon other men And heereby wee may obserue their grosse absurdity In the case of iustification they teach that wee are not made righteous by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto vs though hee bee the head of the body of the Church and the Spirit that animateth it proceedeth from him and yet heere they say that a man may be made wise and knowing by the knowledge of other their fellow members in the same body abiding in the vnity of Christs Church What is this but to aduance the members aboue the head or at least to forget themselues not caring what they say so that they maintaine the cause they haue in hand 20. I but Saint Augustine sayth If thou loue vnity for thee also hath he whosoeuer hath any thing in it it is thine which I haue it is mine which thou hast And againe in another place hee sayth When Peter wrought miracles he wrought them for me because I am in that body in which Peter wrought them In which body though the eye seeth and not the eare and the eare heareth and not the eye yet the eye heareth in the eare and the eare seeth in the eye c. Therefore all the grace and knowledge that is in any other of Gods Saints either liuing or dead is ours by participation And so that which was sufficient in them for their saluation is also enough for vs for ours though wee haue little or none of our owne Thus reason our Rhemists in the place before quoted But I answere first with our reuerend learned countrey-man Doctor Fulk that Saint Augustine vnderstandeth that place of Saint Iohn of an actuall and personall knowledge inspired by the holy Ghost concurring with the outward ministery of the Church and not of any generall knowledge infused into the Church to bee transfused and dispersed among the members by an imputatiue participation Secondly if a man may know by another mans knowledge why may not a man bee righteous by anothers righteousnesse And if the knowledge of our fellow members may bee imputed to vs that wee thereby may bee saide to know why may not the iustice of our head bee so imputed vnto vs that thereby wee may bee made iust These things are so paralell that the one being granted the other needs must follow Thirdly and lastly that communion which is betwixt the members of a body either naturall or mysticall is not an actuall translation of gifts from one to another but either a participation in the fruit of those gifts or a generating of the like in others by doctrine example exhortation prayers and such like meanes And so wee may truely say that euery one that is in the body of Christ reapeth fruit and benefit by all the graces and gifts that euer haue or shall belong to any member thereof though not for merit yet for comfort instruction edification and increase of grace And againe as one candle lighteth another and one steele sharpeneth and whetteth another So wisedome and grace is deriued from one to another either by naturall commerce of speech or patterne of example Thus much did Saint Augustine intend and no more and therefore it neuer came into his minde to thinke as these idle braines would make him that the knowledge which resided in the Saints of God is actually in all Gods Children or that they are partakers of their gifts and graces to their saluation For he that will be saued must beleeue for himselfe and know for himselfe and liue godly for himselfe If hee doe all these things by a proxy hee must also goe to Heauen by a proxy and not by himselfe This doctrine therefore is a manifest breeder and maintainer of such grosse ignorance as both Saint Augustine and all other holy men haue alwayes condemned for a sinne 21. A fift doctrine from whence ignorance springeth and ariseth is their prohibiting of Lay men to dispute touching matters of faith and that vnder paine of excommunication This Nauarre propoundeth as the doctrine of their Church neither is it contradicted by any other Aquinas goeth further and sayth that it is vnlawfull to dispute of matters of faith in the presence of those that are ignorant and simple And Bellarmine taketh away from the people all power of iudging of their Pastours doctrine saying that they must beleeue whatsoeuer they teach except they broach some new doctrin which hath not beene heard of in the Church before And if they
Rome were not the whore of Babylon she would blush that any such imputation should iustly be laid vnto her charge 24. These bee the Romish doctrines which directly and naturally ingender and maintaine ignorance and therefore no maruaile if a flood of ignorance doth ouer-flow the field of their Church seeing it bursteth forth by so many spowts Let vs take a view therefore a little of the effects and fruits of these doctrines both in the Clergie and the people Touching the ignorance of the Romish Clergie what it hath beene in former ages and is yet at this day though the Iesuites bragge neuer so much of their new learning and labour to wipe away that staine from their faces let their owne writers speake Platina the Popes Secretary thus complaineth of the horrible corruption and ignorance of the Priests in his dayes Quanta sit auaritia Sacerdotum c. How great is the couetousnesse of Priests sayth he and especially of those that bee in chiefest authority how great leachery how great ambition and pompe how great pride and idlenesse how great ignorance both of themselues and Christian doctrine how little Religion c I need not declare when they themselues doe so openly proclaime it as though they sought praise thereby This complaint hee maketh in the life of Marcellus the first and the like in Denis the first Boniface the fift Stephen the third and Gregory the fourth The like complaint or worse maketh one Bredenbachius Deane of the Church of Mentz in Germany in the time of Charles the fourth and yeere of our Lord 1370. The Law saith he is departed from Priests Counsell from the Elders Charity from Prelates Religion from Monks Discipline from Clerks Learning from teachers Study from Schollers c. and in the end he bursteth foorth into this exclamation O times ô manners most trouble some and miserable times reprobate and wicked manners both of Clergie and people Mathew Paris saith that in the time of William the Conqueror Clerks were so vnlearned in England that such that vnderstood their Grammar were a wonderment to their fellowes And for Italy Espensaeus a learned Bishop faith that it was told him by an Italian Bishop that his Countrymen did not studie the Scriptures but the Ciuill and Canon Lawes because that was the shortest â—ut to Bishopricks Cardinalships and highest dignities on earth Touching Spaine thus complaineth Aluarus Pelagius that the Bishops there committed thousands of soules to some young Nephewes of theirs to whom a man would bee loth to commit two peares to be kept And for Germanie let vs heare their owne complaint that most vsually Bishops aduanced to the Order of Priesthood vnlearned Idiots vnfit vile and ridiculous persons The like might bee showne in all other Countries but this is sufficient for a taste of the miserable ignorance of the Romish Clergie deriued from their owne confession 25. And therefore we neede not wonder when we read of many Popes that were vtterly vnlearned euen so farre that they knew not the Grammar as that Pope that said as it is reported Fiatur in stead of Fiat and being told that it was false Latine answered that in spight of Priscian and all Grammarians it should be euer after canonized for true Latine Or that Pope to wit Gregory the sixth who being ignorant of Latine was faine to haue another consecrated with him to helpe to say Masse Or that Pope to wit Zachary that condemned Virgilius a Bishop of Germany for saying there were Antipodes Or Paul the second that determined all them to bee Heretikes that named the word Academy Or Bennet the ninth who when hee was made Pope was a childe about ten yeeres old and therefore could not haue any great store of wisedome in him at those yeeres And if Popes haue beene thus ignorant which are the heads of the Church no maruell if Cardinalls which are the necke and Archbishops and Bishops which are the shoulders and Priests and Fryers which are but the armes and legges bee voyd of all vnderstanding for how can the members bee wise if the head be a foole And therefore when wee read that Lois Marsilius an Augustinian Fryer being asked what the two strops of the Bishops Miter signified answered that they represented that the Bishop neuer vnderstood the Old nor the New Testament We haue no cause to wonder at it neyther when that we read that a certain Priest was of this mind that whatsoeuer was in print was as true as the Gospell Nor when we heare another of them fishing the Virgine Maries name out of the first Chapter of Genesis where it is written that God called the gathering together of the waters Maria c. Nor another that prooued our Sauiour Christ to take away the sinne of the world because the word Iesus was written in Hebrew with the letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sin in the midst But what need I insist in particulars seeing this was one of the rules of a whole Order called the Franciscane or Minorite Fryers â— Nescientes non curent discere literas Let not the ignorant regard to know letters Of which rule they euer were most obseruant from whence springs that elegant Epigramme Cauisti bene tu ne te vlla occidere possit Litera nam nulla est litera not a tibi That is in English thus Preuented well thou hast the letter that doth kill For not a letter wilt thou learne to stop this ill 26. Now then let their Bozius vpbrayd vnto vs the ignorance of all Arts and bragge of their Iesuites learning aboue all others And let their Posseuine and Grester and Tanner doe the same yet they shall neuer shew a whole Order amongst vs and that of Clergie men that make a profession of Ignorance As for the eminence of the Iesuites learning whereof they bragge so much we enuy it not vnto them so that they will not make themselues the onely engrossers of learning but suffer vs poore men to retayle some part with them with whom we may boldly say that for number and quality we haue them that are euery way equall if not superiour vnto them 27. But to leaue their Clergie and come to the multitude of their Lay people which are they indeede amongst whom we may see the true fruit of these their doctrines It is both strange and lamentable to behold the prodigious ignorance of most both men and women that liue vnder Popery and haue receiued the marke of the Beast on their foreheads for as the Priests teach so the people follow like a flocke of sheepe following their Belweather the one commending ignorance the other imbracing it with all their hearts Some of their owne Writers affirme that the Common people for the most part amongst them knew not the Articles of the faith and if they knew not the Articles of the faith how can they giue a reason of them which Saint Peter requireth of
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
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
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
the child before it bee baptized is in some sort partaker of the Sacrament of Baptisme euen by the faith of the Church which hath vowed him thereunto And Bonauenture as hee is reported by Cassander sayth that infants are disposed vnto Baptisme not according to any act of their owne but according to the act of other because the mercie of God imputeth to them as their owne will the will of another Insants therefore stand still in as good case in euery respect as men of yeares if not in better both being vnbaptized and the one dedicated to God by their owne desire the other by the purpose desire of the Church and therefore either these may bee saued aswell as they or else God is not so mercifull to them as to these which is no lesse then impietie to thinke and blasphemie to pronounce 38. Another wicked consequence that followeth vpon this doctrine is that it maketh God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost euen that blessed Trinitie that is the fountaine of all truth and goodnesse to be lyars and teachers of vntruth For God the Father sayth to Abraham I will bee thy God and the God of thy seed And that this is not to bee vnderstood of the seed of Abraham according to the flesh onely to wit the Iewes but much more of his seed according to the Spirit which are faithfull Christians may appeare both by that which is in the verie same place where it is called an euerlasting couenant and by Saint Pauls testimonie who affirmeth that the blessing of Abraham was to come on the Gentiles through Christ Iesus aswell as on the Iewes God the Sonne sayth Suffer little children to come vnto me for of such is the Kingdome of Heauen plainly affirming that the Kingdome of Heauen is pertaining to little children and not barred vp against any as our Romanists teach it is against such little ones as dye without baptisme Our Sauiour saith without exception that the Kingdome of Heauen belongeth vnto them they as it were to make him a lyar bring in an exception and say that except they bee baptized not Heauen but Lymbus belongeth vnto them And the holy Ghost by the mouth of Saint Paul sayth That the children of beleeuing Parents are holy the reason is because the root is holy and therefore the branch must needs be holy and if children may be holy before they be baptized then by the same rule they may goe to Heauen before they be baptized for as no man without holinesse can see God so with holinesse none can be banished out of the sight of God And thus this doctrine giueth the lye to euery person of the blessed Trinitie 39. If they say that it is our Sauiours doctrine that except a man be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost hee cannot enter into the Kingdome of Heauen and therefore all those generall promises are to bee restrained by this exception if they bee baptized I answere out of Bellarmine that God is not tyed to his Sacraments but can saue them by his especiall grace as also witnesse diuers others of their learned Doctours And therefore whereas our Sauiour saith Except a man be borne againe c. it must needs be vnderstood by another exception to wit of cases of necessitie where Baptisme cannot be obtained and is not contemned for not the want but the contempt of Baptisme is damnable 40. The third and last inconuenience that ariseth from this doctrine is that it is the mother of diuers strange paradoxes and grosse absurdities as not onely of Lay mens Baptisme yea of Pagans and that in scorne but also of changing the true element into lee or broth or puddle water and that which is most strange of baptizing the childe in the mothers wombe before it bee borne or ripping vp the mothers belly in case the child be in danger of death c. some of all which absurdities are held by them all and all by some Is it not then more safe to hold that opinion which is more respectiue to Gods glorie agreeable to Christian charitie and free from all these dangerous consequences 41. To conclude omitting many other of their doctrines which might easily bee shewne to stand in the same case of dangerous tenure and hath in part alreadie beene manifested as their doctrine of set fasts implicite faith veniall sins dispensations with others more I propound for the last instance that doctrine of doctrines the verie groundcell of their ruinous Religion touching the veritie authoritie and singularitie of their Church which they vaunt and bragge to be the onely true Catholike Church of Christ and to haue a preeminence ouer the Scriptures and without the which to be no possibilitie of saluation that there is no safetie in these positions many reasons will euince as first if it should bee true that out of the bounds of that Church none could bee saued then those famous Churches of Asia which were in Pope Victors time that opposed themselues against the predominance of the Church of Rome were all damned wherein flourished many holy Martyrs that gaue vp their liues for the testimonie of Iesus Then Saint Cyprian and all the Bishops of Carthage to the number of fourescore that in a Councell at Carthage set themselues against Pope Stephen and his Councell were damned and Saint Cyprian must bee no longer a Martyr but a Schismaticke and then S. Augustine with the whole Church of Africa and troupes of Martyrs and Confessors should not bee crowned with blisse but tormented in hell for they reiected the yoke of the Bishop of Romes authoritie and would not admit that any should make appeales from them to Rome This horrible and vncharitable inconuenience doth arise from that dismall doctrine The Church of Rome is the onely Catholike Church and out of it there is no hope of saluation now that these holy and heauenly Martyrs and Confessors of Iesus Christ were out of it appeareth by their most receiued definitions of a Catholike and a Schismaticke A Catholike faith Bellarmine is he that is subiect to the one Pastor the Pope whereby hee makâ—th the essentiall forme of a Catholike to be his vnion and coniunction with his head the Pope and a Schismatike sayth Tollet is hee that doth separate himselfe from the head of the Church and the Vicar of Christ I assume but Cyprian Augustine and those other famous Bishops did not acknowledge any subiection to the Pope but separated themselues from his dominion therefore they were by their doctrine no Catholickes but Schismatickes and consequently out of the Church and so out of saluation a damnable conclusion 42. Secondly they peremptorily auouch that none of vs being not members of their Church can bee saued we on the contrarie charitably beleeue that many of them that are ignorantly members of their Church if they hold the foundation of Iesus Christ and depend vpon his merits not their owne
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
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