my Bookes as against that Church which so aboundeth with Errours Heresies and Superstitions as I know not when and where to finde the like no not among Ethnicks Publicans Turkes Iewes or Saracens Instruction 2. There are many sectes of Fryers this day in the Church of Rome the Benedictiues began in the yeare 527-after Christ. The Carthusians began in the yeare 1084. after Christ. How this Sect had the first originall it is worthy the Reader should yeeld his due attention this is the trueth of the Storie While one Bruno was the reader of Philosophy at Paris that famous Citie in France a friend of his being a man of good carriage honest externall conuersation departed out of this life this friend lying dead vpon the Coffin in the Church soundeth out these wordes in the eares of the sayd Bruno I am damned by the iust iudgement of God With this wonderment the sayd Bruno was so terrified that hee knew no way how to be saued but by inuenting the sect of the Carthusians Behold heere the subtiltie of the Diuell who neuer wanteth meanes how to set vp Superstition and Idolatrie for if the Story be true as it is most true if many famous Popish Historiographers be not notorious lyers then doubles the Diuell was the author of the voyce as which brought foorth the spirit of Pride not the spirit of Humilitie I prooue it because this Bruno who had vowed perpetuall obedience to his superiour could not now be content to continue a Monke amongst the Benedictiues but hee must be the Lord Abbot of a new Sect For since the Sect of the Benedictes was the ready way to Heauen as late vp-start Poperie taught him it followeth of necessitie that either he condemned his owne Religion and consequently his owne if not the Diuels inuention or else my consequence perforce must be admitted And heere I note by the way the formall deformitie of all the Sectes in Poperie to weet that the Papistes ascribe Merite and saluation to the same and so Poperie is the New religion Instruction 3. The aforenamed Benedictiue-Monkes in a short time began to be dissolute and so to be deuided into many new Sectes Some were called Cluniacenses some Camaldnenses some Vallisumbrenses some Montoliuotenses some Grandimontenses some Cistertienses some Syluestrenses All which beeing most variable in life manners and obseruations will for all that be reputed right Benedictiues Euen so forsooth as our late Popes or Byshops of Rome must needes be S. Peters successors though as like to him as Yorke is like foule Sutton This sect of the Benedictiues farre altered from the first institution was reformed in the yeare 1335. for as Polydorus that famous Popish writer reporteth Monkes doe not long continue in the due obseruation of their Monasticall institution Instruction 4. The Sect called Pramonstratensis began in the yeare 1119. the first Author thereof was one Norbertus by name Who doubles either condemned the former Sectes at the least of imperfection or else was puffed vp with the spirit of Pride as were his fraterculi before him Instruction 5. The Sect of the Carmelites began in the yeare 1170. It was inuented by one Almericus the Byshop of Antioch The Sect of the Dominicans began in the yeare 1198. The sect of the Franciscans began in the yeare 1206. The Sect of the Iesuates began in the yeare 1371. The Sect of the Iesuites that cursed crew began in the yeare 1540. after Christ the Author of this Sect was one Ignatius Loyola a Souldier and a Spaniard borne This Sect as it was the last hatched so doth it in pontificall Pride surpasse all the rest It is by them selues tearmed Ordo sodalitatis Iesu the very name expressing their proud and hautie mindes For no name of so manie Sectes afore them nor any other appellation could content them vnlesse they were tearmed the Fellowes and Companions of our Lord Iesus Their deare breathren the Seminarie-Priestes tell them roundly euen in printed Bookes published to the view of the whole world that they are notorious Lyars cruell Tyrantes arrant Traytours mercilesse Murtherers right Machiuels Scribes and Pharises Gypsees Firebrands of sedition that they ride like Earles in Coaches with many Seruants attending on them that they must haue their Chambers perfumed that Gentlewomen must pull off their Bootes that they trowle vp and downe from good cheere to good cheere that they are Thieues that they threatē a conquest of noble England that they promise to restore men to their Liuinges that will take part with them against their naturall Soueraigne in briefe that they are the wickedst men vpon earth All which much other like stuffe the Reader may finde at large in the Anatomie of Popish tyranny Instruction 6. The name Pope was common to all Byshops euery where for more then 528. yeares after Christ. The Byshops of Rome Sozimus Bonifacius and Celestinus more then 417. yeares after Christ could alleadge no better groundes or reasons for their now falsely vsurped Primacie then that only which the Nicene Councell had allotted to them For which cause the aforenamed Popes falsified the Canons of that most famous Synode as S. Augustine and hundreds of Byshops with him in the Africane Councell assembled freely and roundly told Pope Celestine in their Epistle directed to him exhorting him to surcease from such proud challenges and calling his falsely pretended soueraigntie Fumosum typhū seculi smokely statelines of the world The aforenamed Popes feigned certaine false Canons to haue been made by the Fathers of the famous Nicene Councell by the which as they reported a supereminent power and iurisdiction was graunted to the Byshops of Rome ouer and aboue all other Byshops in the Christian world Whereas the true Canons of that holy Synode did confine allot and limit the iurisdiction of the Byshops of Rome euen as it did allot limit and confine the iurisdiction of other Byshops else where The Fathers of the African Councell sent this way that way and euery way to search and finde out the true copies of the Canons of the Councell of Nice yea to the Churches of the East to the Byshops of Antioch of Alexandria But when all was done that possibly they could performe the Byshops of Rome could no where ground stablish their fondly imagined prerogatiues saue onely vpon false and counterfeit Canons vntruly fathered vpon the Nicene Synode Instruction 7. The Emperours successiuely following Constantine worthily surnamed the Great graunted great priuiledges to the Church and Byshops of Rome which excellencie priuiledges prerogatiues the Bishops of Rome cunningly procured by a counterfait and falsely forged donation of Constantine the great for the late Emperours giuing credite to the counterfeit donation yeelded vp their lawfull Segnories royall Soueraignties and regall Prerogatiues to the Byshops of Rome supposing they had only restored to them that which was wrongfully
deteyned from them For while they gaue away their owne they vnawares and fondly deemed that they onely restored that which was not their owne in deed Instruction 8. The word Pope was not the proper and peculiar name to the Byshop of Rome for the space of 528. yeares after Christ. The Church of Rome was made the Head of all other Churches and the Byshops there the heads of all other Byshops by the imperiall constitution of Phocas 607. yeares after Christ. That the Pope could not erre iudicially was not authenticall in the Romish Church for 1500. yeares after Christ. That the Pope could vnmarrie persons lawfully married by Christes institution was neuer heard of in the Christian world vntill the yeare 1550. after Christ at which time Pope Iulius presumed to dissolue lawfull Matrimonie by his vnlawfull Dispensation It was neuer thought lawfull for the naturall Brother to marry his naturall Sister vntill the time of Pope Martin who by the instigation of the Diuell set the same abroach in the yeare 1418. after Christ. Popish Veniall sinnes were first hatched by Pope Pius 1566. yeares after Christ. That the Blood of popish Saints could worke mans redemptiō was neuer heard of for the space of 1161. yeares after Christ. The like may be sayd of many other Popish Articles for which I referre the Reader to my Tryall of the New Religion I deeme it enough for the present to insinuate to the Christian Reader that our Church hath onely abolished Superstition Errours and Heresies by litle and litle crept into the Church and doth still keepe all and euery iot of the Old Romane Fayth and Religion The Capucheenes at Rome did the like when they euen with the Popes good liking reformed the dissolute Franciscans Yea Pope Pius himselfe of late dayes did the like while he reformed the popish deformed missals and breuiaries in his late Councell gathered at Trent If hee that now is Byshop of Rome would reforme all the rest by abolishing all Nouelties by litle and litle brought into the Church as we haue done he should finde the remnant to be the Old Romane religion in verie deed Marke well the whole Discourse following where all this is soundly prooued as more cannot be wished The Contentes of the Chapters Chapter 1. Proouing THat the name and worde Pope was in the primatiue Church common to all Byshops aswell of Rome as else where That the Byshop of Rome neither is nor ought to be nor euer was called The vniuersall Byshop of the whole Church That the name Pope was not peculiar to the Bishops of Rome for more then 528. yeares after Christ. That the Iesuite volens nolens is enforced to graunt the same Chapter 2. Proouing That the Pope may not be controulled though he carry with him thousands vpon thousands into Hell That it is Sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power That the Pope with his Pardons can deliuer all soules out of Purgatory-fire That the Pope can dissolue that Matrimonie which is firme and stable by Christes institution That the Pope can dispense with the Brother to marrie his owne naturall Sister That the Pope hath as great power as Christ himselfe had on earth That the Pope may doe whatsoeuer pleaseth him That the Pope can make of nothing something That the counterfeit Donation of Constantine was the originall of all Popish superroyall power That whatsoeuer the Emperours of latter time gaue to the Church of Rome they were induced to do the same by the coozening trickes of the Byshops of Rome That the Popes Sozimus Bonefacius and Celestine falsified the Canons of the Nicene Councell so to aduance them-selues aboue all other Byshops That no Byshops nor Priestes ought to appeale to the Church of Rome That the Councell of Nice gaue the primacie of honour to the Church of Rome because it was the Seat of the Emperour and Caput Mundi That all Christians euen the Byshops of Rome are subiect to the Canons of the Nicene Councell That the Nicene Synode did confine and knit the iurisdiction of the Byshop of Rome Chapter 3. Proouing That Marriage of Priestes was euer lawfull during the time of the old Testament That the Marriage of Priestes is prohibited onely by the law of Man and not by any positiue constitution either of Christ or his Apostles That it was euer lawfull for the Byshops and Priestes of the East-church to marry and to beget children in time of their Priesthood That the Marriage of Priestes was euer lawfull also in the West-church vntill the time of Pope Siricius and in Germanie for the space of 1074. yeares after Christ. That all secular Priestes may Marry notwithstanding the Popish solemne Vow annexed That by Popish fayth and doctrine Marriage is of force after the single Vow of chastitie That the Vow single is of one and the same nature with the Vow solemne That the Marriage of Priestes is lawfull after the solemne Vow so it be done by the Popes Dispensation That the forced and coacted Chastitie of Priestes hath been so intollerable as nothing hath brought more shame to Priesthood more shame to Religion more griefe to godly men Chapter 4. Proouing That popish Pardons are neither found in the holy Scripture nor in the auncient Fathers That the popish Maister of sentences could finde no mention of them in the writinges of the holy Fathers That Byshoppe Fisher graunted the young age of late popish Pardons That the best learned Papistes are not able to defend the same Chapter 5. Proouing That the Greeke Church neuer beleeued Purgatorie That the Church of Rome beleeued it not for the space of 250. yeares That the Church of Rome beleeued it not all at once but by litle and litle That the inuention of Purgatorie was the birth of popish Pardons That the primatiue Church was neuer acquainted with the Popes Pardons nor yet with popish Purgatorie Chapter 6. Proouing That popish Auricular confession cannot be prooued out of the Old Testament That the New Testament doth not impose an heauier yoake vpon vs then did the Old That popish Auricular confession is not necessarie for mans saluation That it is neither commaunded by Christ nor yet by his Apostles That it is established by the meere law of man grounded only vpon a falsely imagined Apostolicall vnwritten tradition That it was not an Article of popish Fayth for the space of 1215. yeares after Christ. Chapter 7. Proouing That euery Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature That fiue famous popish Writers Roffensis Almaynus Bains Durandus Gersonus doe all confesse the same That the Jesuite S. R. graunteth freely that the Church of Rome had not defined some Sinnes to be Veniall vntill the dayes of Pius the fift which was not fiftie yeares agoe Chapter 8. Proouing That the Pope may erre both in Fayth and Doctrine iudicially That many Popes haue erred De facto That great learned Papistes did constantly confesse so
requiratur autem ne pusillanimitate aut contentione aeut alio quolibet Episcopi vitio videatur a congregatione seclusus Vt hoc ergo decentius inquiratur bene placuit annis singulis per vnamquamque Prouinciam bis in anno concilia celebrari vt cōmuniter simul omnibus Episcopis congregatis Prouinciae discutiantur huiusmodi quaestiones et sic qui suo peccauerunt Episcopo euidenter excommunicati rationabiliter ab omnibus extimentur vsquequo vel in communi vel Episcopo placeat humaniorem pro talibus ferre sententiam Concilia vero celebrentur vnum quidem ante quadragesimam Paschae vt omni dissensione sublata munus offeratur Deo purissimum Secundum vero circa tempus Autumni Concerning those who are put from the Communion whether they be of the Clericall or Laicall order let the sentence of Byshoppes throughout euery Prouince giuen according to the Canon be of force that they who are reiected be not receiued of others Let examination be had least any be secluded through pusillanimitie or contention or other fault of the Byshop That this therefore may be duly examined it hath pleased the Councell well that yearely in euery Prouince Councels should be kept twise in the yeare that when all the Byshops of the Prouince shall meete togeather in one place then such questions may be duely examined And so they that haue offended their Byshop manifestly may be iudged by all to be excomunicated not without a cause vntill it please the Byshop of the place or all in the Prouince to shew them fauour Let the Councels be kept one before Lent that all dissention being taken away a most pure Oblation may be presented vnto God The second about Autumne Thus this holy and most famous Councell out of whose definition two thinges are cleered th' one that the Byshops of the Prouince should end and determine all appeales no mention at all made or any regard had of or to the Byshop of Rome Th' other that the auncient Canon ought to be kept which commaundeth that none should receiue them to the Communion who were excomunicated and condemned by others So then the Councell of Nice did curbe the Pope and kept him vnder in his former state And withall the holy Councell prouided a very Christian remedie that none should be vniustly oppressed by his Byshoppe Which remedie was this viz. That hee who found himselfe grieued might appeale from his Byshop yet to the Byshops of the Prouince but to none else Secondly the same Councell ordayned in an other Canon that none should be created Byshoppes but by the Byshoppes of their owne Prouince as also that the Metropolitane of the Prouince not the Byshop of Rome should haue authoritie and power to confirme those who were made Byshoppes within the Prouince Thirdly that the Byshoppe of Rome had no prerogatiue of power but onely within his owne Diocesse is constantly auouched by the sayd Councell in the sixt Canon thereof These are the wordes of the Councell as Ruffinus an auncient and learned Writer about 1200. yeares agoe so within eightie yeares of the time of the Nicene Councell hath interpreted the same Et vt apud Alexandriam et in Vrbe Romae vetusta consuetudo seruetur vt vel ille Aegypti vel hic suburbicariarum Ecclesiarum sollicitudinem gerat And that in Alexandria and in the citie of Rome the old custome be kept that the one haue the sollicitude of Egypt the other of the Churches adioyning and about Rome Thus writeth Ruffinus shewing very plainely that the Byshop of Alexandria had as great iurisdiction or rather more as the Byshop of Rome Yea Cusanus a popish Cardinall vnderstandeth the Canon after the same manner with Ruffinus And it is confirmed by the fourth Canon of the same Councell as Ruffinus citeth it these are the wordes Absque quo ordinationē irritam esse voluerunt Without whose authoritie he meaneth the Metropolitane the Councell decreed the ordination to be voyde and of none effect But this sacred Decree of a Councell so holy and so famous the Pope this day contemneth and challengeth the right of all Metropolitanes to himselfe Fourthly the famous Councelles both of Constantinople and of Chalcedon did make the Byshop of Constantinople equall with the Byshoppe of Rome in all Ecclesiasticall affaires excepting onely the Primacie of honour as we haue already seene See and note well the 30. Chapter of this present Booke Aphorisme second The Canons of the holy Nicene Councell are but only twentie though the Pope and his Jesuites would haue them to be foure-score For first onely twentie are this day extant in the common Volumes of Councels Secondly no approoued Councell did euer admit or receiue any more This is very cleere and euident by the testimonie of the famous Affrican Councell as by and by God willing I shall vnfold Thirdly the famous Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon haue flatly decreed against the falsely pretended Primacie of the Byshoppe of Rome which Councels for all that did in euery respect highly reuerence the Decrees and Canons of the Nicene Councell and consequently the sayd Councels did not acknowledge any Canon of the Nicene Synode which made for the pretended Primacie of the Byshoppe of Rome But this Aphorisme shall be further prooued by an euident demonstration in the Aphorismes immediatly following and therefore there is no need now to stand longer about the same Aphorisme third The Councell of Sardica is not a legitimate and lawfull Synode but a bastard and counterfeite conuenticle I prooue it first because S. Augustine doth acknowledge no Councell of Sardica saue one onely which was Hereticall Secondly because Cardinall Cusanus who was a great Champion of the Romish Church is of the same opinion Thirdly because the Councell of Sardica is against the Councell of Nice concerning Appellations to the Pope Fourthly because the Fathers of the famous Affricane Councell in their Epistle to Caelestine then Byshop of Rome doe most constantly affirme with vniforme assent that the Councell of Nice forbiddeth Appeales to the Church of Rome these are their expresse wordes Praefato itaque debitae salutationis officio impendiò deprecamur vt deinceps ad vestras aures hinc venientes non facilius admittatis nec a nobis excommunicatos in communionem vltra velitis excipere Quia hoc etiam Niceno Concilio definitum facilè aduertet venerabilitas tua Nam etsi de inferioribus Clericis vel Laicis videtur ibi praecaueri quanto magis hoc de Episcopis voluit obseruari ne in sua prouincia communione suspensi a tua sanctitate vel festinatò vel praeproperè vel indebitè videantur cōmunioni restitui Presbyterorum quoque et sequentium clericorum improba refugia sicuti te dignum est repellat sanctitas tua quia et nulla patrum definitione hoc Ecclesiae derogatum est Aphricanae et decreta Nicaena siue
Which circumstaunce can by no meanes agree to Cornelius seeing he was not three yeares Byshoppe there Fourthly because he writeth the same to an other expressely of himselfe Thence sayth hee haue Heresies and Schismes sproung and yet do spring because the Byshop which is one and ruleth the Church is despised by the proud presumption of certaine men obiection 10 They say tenthly that S. Ambrose calleth Damasus the Ruler of the Catholike Church But I answere first that those Commentaries are falsely fathered vpon S. Ambrose that holy and famous Byshoppe of Millan The Diuines of Louan haue well obserued and freely testified the same Secondly that these wordes Cuius hodie rector est Damasus can inferre or conclude no more saue this onely that Damasus was not the Ruler but a Ruler of the Church Damasus might rightly be called a Ruler of the Church in that he was Byshoppe of the Church of Rome though not the Ruler of the Vniuersall Church The word Rector may fitly be englished a Ruler but not the Ruler Thirdly that these wordes at this day haue a semblance and relation to the dayes of Timothee viz that as Timothee did gouerne the Church in S. Pauls time so was Damasus in his time Ruler of the same So then this is the true sense and meaning thereof to weete that as Timothee was placed at Ephesus to set that Church in order and to rule it not to rule the whole so was Damasus appoynted to rule the Church of Rome but not all other Churches in the world For as S. Cyprian truely sayth Episcopatus vnus est cuius in solidum a singulis pars tenetur There is one Byshopricke part whereof euery Byshoppe holdeth wholly in solidum This word in solidum must be well marked and faythfully remembred For doubtlesse if there be but one onely Byshopricke whereof euery Byshoppe hath one part wholly to himselfe it followeth by a necessarie an ineuitable illation that there can be but one onely part thereof remaine to the Byshoppe of Rome For he can not possibly haue that whole of which euery other Byshoppe hath a part wholly Let this be well marked and neuer forgotten For if these Aphorismes and the Conclusions aforegoing be seriously pondered throughly vnderstood all that the Iesuite heere sayth or possibly can be said by the Jesuiticall seditious crew will soone appeare very childish and of no force at all Howbeit for the better helpe of the simple Reader I will answere in particular to all such poyntes as shall but seeme to haue any colour of the trueth Proceede therefore sir Fryer and plead couragiously for the Pope B. C. If Bell can prooue that this surreptitious Decree of the Easterne Byshoppes was euer confirmed then were it something which he bringeth But the Byshoppe of Rome his Legates withstood that their indirect proceeding pronouncing it to be contrary to the Decrees of the Nicene Councell And Lucentius in particular spake confidently saying That the Apostolicke Sea ought not to be abased in their presence And Pope Leo himselfe did bitterly inueigh against Anatolius for this his presumption and going against the Nicene Canons T. B. I answere first that the Popes Sozimus Bonifacius and Celestinus falsified and vrged the Canons of the Nicene Councell for the falsely pretended Primacie of the Church and Byshoppe of Rome But the holy learned and famous Byshoppes of the Aphrican Councell whereof S. Austin that rare light of the Christian world was one did roundly controll that their forgerie and naughtie dealing calling it Fumosum typhum seculi the smoakie statelinesse of the world This is already prooued very copiously in all the precedent Aphorismes especially in the third and fourth Secondly that no maruell it is if the Popes Messengers to the vttermost of their power pleaded ridiculously for their owne gaine For so did Demetrius the Siluer-smith for the like end plead for the Temple of the Goddesse Diana Yea so pleaded Pope Boniface the eight about three hundred yeares agoe against Philippe the faire then King of France The Pope challenging Superroyall power would needes excomunicate Philippe the French King but there was neuer excomunication which cost Pope so deare as that did him for his Messengers were committed prisoners his Bulles burnt and Boniface himselfe being taken by Naueret Chauncellour of France presently after dyed for very sorrow Wherein King Philippe did nothing but by the Councell and consent of the whole Clergie of France So Bennet the 13. otherwise called Petrus de Luna interdicted Charles the sixt and his Realme but the King sitting in his Throne of Iustice in the Parliament or high Court of Paris the 21. of May 1408. gaue sentence openly that the Bull should be rent in peeces and that Gonsalue and Conseleux the bearers thereof should be set vpon a Pillorie and publikely notified and traduced in the Pulpit Which Decree was accordingly put in execution in the moneth of August with the greatest scorne that could be deuised the two Messengers hauing this inscription vpon their Miters These men are disloyall to the Church and to the King These wordes are put downe by the French Papistes in their Booke called The Jesuites Catechisme translated into English by the Secular Priestes Thirdly that Pope Leo is a partie and so can not be a competent Witnesse in his owne cause For as one of your owne Popes truely said in euery triall there must be foure distinct persons the accuser the accused the witnesses and the Iudge Fourthly that the holy wise and graue Fathers of that famous Councell which S. Gregorie reuerenced as one of the foure Gospelles laughed the Popes Messengers to scorne and concluded with all their seuerall subscriptions against the Pope yea they protested publikely and zealously that no Byshoppe was compelled to any thing but that they all decreed as they beleeued These are the expresse wordes of the Holy Synode Gloriosissimj Iudices dixerunt Hj quj relecto tomo subscripserunt Asianj et Pontj sanctiss Epispopj dicant si voluntate propria vel imposita sibj aliqua necessitate coactj subscripserunt Let the most holy Byshops of Asia and Pontus which haue subscribed to the Articles openly read declare vnto the Councell whether they subscribed of their owne free accord or by compulsion of Anatolius or any other The holy and most reuerende Fathers answered seuerally protesting before God that they subscribed voluntarily according to their knowledge and as they constantly beleeued no one or other any way constrayning them therevnto It would be a thing tedious to the Reader and laborious to my selfe otherwise I would set downe the seuerall subscriptions of the Byshops For though they be long yet do they conteyne such Christian varietie of wordes as are able to touch the heart of euery honest Reader This may suffice to confound our Iesuite and to cleare Anatolius that blessed Patriarch of the immodest
naturae vitio turpificarent Yet this I will say that this forced coacted Chastitie of Priests was so farre from excelling Chastitie in Wedlocke as no crime whatsoeuer hath brought greater shame to Priesthood more harme to Religion more griefe to all good men then the vnchast life of Priestes Therefore it were perhaps no lesse necessarie for the publique weale of Christendome then for the order of Priesthood that once againe Priestes might marrie publikely and so liue honestly and without shame and not pollute themselues so filthyly This is the doctrine of Polydorus well worthy to be written in Golden letters Yea the Marriage of Priestes is so honourable and so lawfull by Gods law and the prohibition thereof so dishonourable and dolefull that Pope Pius the second of that name who afore his Popedome was named Aeneas Syluius a very learned and famous writer did deliuer his minde opinion concerning this subiect in this manner as his owne deare Platina hath published the same Indoctum Episcopum Asine comparandum corpora malos medicos animas imperitos sacerdotes occiacre vagum Monachum diaboli esse mancipium virtutes Clerum ditasse vitia pauperem facere Sacerdotibus magna ratione sublatas nuptias maiori restituendas videri Pope Pius vsed to say as writeth his owne deuoted vassall Platina that a Bishop without learning was like vnto an Asse consequently that there are many Asses in popish Churches that euill Phisitians did kill mens bodyes and ignorant Priestes their soules that a vagrant Monke was the Diuels slaue that Vertues had enriched the Clergie in times past but that Vices of late dayes doe make it poore that there was great reason to debarre Priestes of Marriage but greater reason to restore Marriage againe vnto them Thus writeth Platina of Pope Pius Now for the benefite of the Christian reader I obserue these godly necessarie Lessons out of these three learned and famous Papistes First that the coacted Chastitie of Priests is neither of the substance of the Ministerie nor grounded vpon the law of God Secondly that the annexed Vow so tearmed is coacted and not free not voluntarie but compelled And consequently that secular Priestes are not Votaries properly but by a cursed and lawlesse Vow violently imposed vpon them Thirdly that the Prohibition of the Marriage of Priestes is against their soules health and causeth them to sinne damnably Fourthly that Priestes marriage would be honourable and honest chastitie if the law of man did not prohibite the same Fiftly that it was once lawfull for Priestes to Marrie Sixtly that it is in mans power to make their Marriages once lawful againe Seuenthly that it is expedient to restore Priestes to their right againe that is to say to referre Marriage to their free choyce and election Marke this poynt well for Christes sake gentle Reader Vt ius publicj matrimonij Sacerdotibus restitueretur That the right of publique Wedlocke might be restored to Priestes againe O sweete Iesus how impudent are our Jesuites and Iesuited Papistes who inueigh so bitterly against Priestes Marriage which is their proper right Nay how tyrannicall is the Pope who violently debarreth and keepeth them from their right Let these two wordes neuer be forgotten viz. Ius and Restitueretur for the former word Ius right doth argue Priestes Marriage to be their proper right And the latter word restitueretur might be restored doth argue the tyrannie of the late Byshops of Rome The reason is euident because Restitution can neuer be truely exacted but where iniustice went before and consequently seeing by the ioynt testimonie of these three famous popish Writers that the Marriage of Priestes ought to be restored to them it followeth of necessitie that the taking away of Marriage from Priestes was sauage brutish cruell tyrannicall and odious to God and all godly men For it was flatte iniustice and violently imposed vpon them Neither hath any good come to the Church of God thereby but filthy life and vncleannesse abounded euery where Which is not mine Assertion but the flatte and plaine Accusation of three learned zealous and famous Papistes Pope Pius him selfe being one of the three The 13. Proposition When the Fathers of the first famous Councell of Nice intended and meant to haue brought a New law into the Church and to haue abandoned the marriage of Priestes then our mercifull Father the mighty God Johouah who neuer hath been is or will be wanting to his Church in necessarie poyntes of Fayth and Doctrine raysed vp his faythfull seruant Paphuntius a man very famous by manifold myracles in his life time to withstand gainesay that cursed and neuer enough detested Law which the Father 's assembled at Nice were about to bring into the Church This Paphuntius the man of God excited by the spirit of God stood vp in the midst of the Councell and constantly affirmed before them all that to forbid Marriage to Priestes was too seuere a Law seeing by the testimonie of Christes blessed Apostle Marriage was honourable in all sortes of men wherevpon the Councell made no Decree in that behalfe This Proposition is prooued by the vniforme assent of three learned and famous Historiographers Cassiodorus Socrates Sozomâ—nus Socrates hath these expresse wordes Visum erat Episcopis legem nouam in Ecclesiam introducere The Byshops meant and intended to bring a new law into the Church But Paphuntius so perswaded the Councell by the power of the Holy ghost that they referred the whole matter to euery Priestes free choyce and election making no Law in that behalfe For Cassiodorus hath these expresse wordes Synodusque laudaâ—it sententiam eius et nihil ex hac parte sanciuit sed hoc in vniuscuiusque voluntate non in necessitate reliquit And the Synode commended Paphuntius his opinion and decreed nothing in the matter but left it in euery ones election to doe what he thought good without compulsion Sozomenus is consonant and confirmeth the same trueth The case is euident it cannot be denied The Corollarie of these 13. Propositions First therefore seeing all Ministers which are not subiect to the lawes of Poperie may lawfully Marrie euen by the doctrine of the Church of Rome as is prooued in the first Proposition Secondly seeing Marriage was euer lawfull for all Priestes and other Ministers of the Church during all the time of the old Testament as is prooued in the second Proposition Thirdly seeing Marriage is lawfull for Priestes and other Ministers of the Church euen now in the time of the new Testament as is prooued in the third Proposition Fourthly seeing the Marriage of Priestes is onely prohibited by the law of Man and not by any positiue constitution either of Christ of his Apostles as is prooued in the fourth Proposition Fiftly seeing it was euer lawfull for the Byshoppes Priestes and Deacons of the East Church to take Wiues and to beget Children in the time of their Priesthood as is prooued
the matter Yet such a Booke I neuer saw to this day neither can I learne that any other hath seene the same But more hereof to speake fitter occasion will be offered hereafter And if I liue to see such a Booke extant it shall not God willing be long vnanswered Thirdly that I prooued it in the Tryall euen in this very Chapter to be a very rotten Ragge of the New religion And this I did performe in that place many wayes First by the expresse wordes of Syluester Pryeras a man so profound and learned that hee was by the Papistes surnamed Absolutus Theologus who constantly affirmeth that the Popes Pardons were neuer knowne to vs neither by the Scriptures nor yet by the auncient Fathers but onely by the late Writers Loe the Popes Pardons are so new that neither the Holy Scriptures nor yet the old Fathers knew them but the late Writers onely Ergo they must needes be Ragges of a New Religion How can the Fryer denie this withoutblushing His owne conscience accuseth him Hee can not tell doubtles what in the world to say or thinke Hee seeth euidently that Poperie is prooued the New Religion Hee perceiueth right well that hee is not able with all the helpe of his best friendes to defend the Pope from vtter shame Secondly by the flat testimonie of the Popish canonized Saint Antoninus sometime Archbyshop of the famous Citie of Florence who deliuereth the selfe same Doctrine that Syluester did Thirdly by the Doctrine of Petrus Lombardus their famous Maister of Sentences who though he with great diligence collected into one Volume all the worthy Sentences of the old Fathers could neuer for all that find the Popes Pardons or any mention thereof in any of their Writinges For as Syluester and Antoninus truely write the Old Writers were not acquainted with any such thing Fourthly by the free confession of M. Fisher that famous Popish so supposed Martir sometime Byshop of Rochester in noble England who in his Answere to M. Luthers Articles was enforced to admit the Newnes of the Popes Pardons To all which and much more plainely set downe in the Tryall our Iesuite sayth not one word Hee was so frighted forsooth with the Conclusion that hee durst not once touch the Premisses but passing them ouer in deepe silence hee curâ—alleth the Ergo and seuereth it from the Consequent because it did connotate plainely lay open to the Reader that the Premisses went before I wish the Reader to peruse the Tryall that so hee may see the coozening trickes of the proud Fryer Marke the Complement following The Complement of this Chapter FOr the better instruction of the Christian Reader and the vtter confusion of our Fryer and of all other Fryers Jesuites and Iesuited Popelinges let vs seriously ponder and constantly remember that there be two kindes of Pardons Th' one De pamtentijs iniunctis th' other Dâ—remissione peccatorum Concerning the former kinde which were onely relaxations or mittigations of Discipline and Canonicall Penance inioyned by the Church I graunt very willingly that in the primatiue and auncient succeding Churches they were very frequent and vsuall For in those dayes and ages such as were notorious offendours and had giuen publike scandall to the Church were enioyned by the Church to doe publique penaunce for their publique faultes before they could be admitted into the Church againe Which godly Discipline is this day obserued God be thanked for it in all particular Churches throughout this Realme of noble England Yea in the auncient Churches many yeares of penaunce or publique exercises of humiliation were ordained for euery publique grieuous Offence Wherevpon it came that when many penitent persons gaue euident signes of true internall remorse for their former scandalous conuersation then the Church thought good to giue to such penitent persons some relaxation of their so inioyned publique penaunce Which kind of Pardons the famous Councell of Nice of Arles of Ancyra and others did vsually giue to penitent persons Of which manner of pardoning the auncient Fathers Tertullianus Cyprianus Jrenaeus Eusebius Sozomenus and others doe often make relation But concerning the latter kind of late Popish Pardons that is of applying to whom they list and when they list aswell to the liuing as to the dead the Merites of Christ and of his Saintes as condigne satisfaction for their Sinnes no Scripture no Councell no Father no auncient approoued Historiographer maketh any mention at all Which trueth I haue so plainely prooued in my Booke of Motiues as no Papist in Europe is able to answere the same The Booke hath been extant in print now 15. whole yeares and to this day no answere though often promised will appeare But let our Iesuite proceed in his wonted maner B. C. I will adde one testimonie more of our Enemies the Waldenses who appeared to the world about the yeare 1270. as testifieth Claudius Cussordius and Guido one of whose Hereâ—â—es was against the Popes Pardons as is most certaine and Kemnitius confesseth which argueth that Parâ—ons were long in vse before the yeare 1300. And therefore be it knowen to Bell that he hath runge out a notorious vntrueth T. B. I answeare first that Waldenses appeared to the world one hundred yeares before the time our Fryer nameth viz. about the yeare 1169. and so hath hee in this poynt runge one notorious vntrueth though but a very small one in respect of his other manifold and most impudent lyes Secondly that Chemnitius doth not confesse as our Fryer impudently affirmeth But wisemen may and will beleeue him at leasure seeing hee referreth them for the proofe to his inuisible Booke The dolefull Knell For I protest to all the world that I can neither see it nor find out any man who hath seene that same Booke And therefore I haue great reason to thinke that no such Booke is extant in deed especially because the Iesuites haue long sithence and many times affirmed both in wordes and writinges that my Motiues and Suruay were answered which for all that was such a notorious lye as the sayd Bookes remayne to this day vnanswered insomuch as some of their dearest and most deuoted vassals are ashamed of their sylence in that behalfe and beginne to stagger and to doubt of the Popish Fayth and Religion My Motiues were printed in the yeare 1593. And my Suruay of Poperie in the yeare 1596. So as the Jesuites haue had the former in their handes now 15. yeares fully compleate and the latter 12. yeares with the vantage of a large assisse But more of this subiect in the 9. Chapter following God willing toward the end of the same Thirdly that our Fryers two Witnesses Guide and Cussordius are in honestie and credite comparable to himselfe base fellowes men of no reputation Knightes of the Post who will say or sweare any thing for the Popes pleasure Fourthly that where our Fryer sayth without
forgerie and more then ridiculous foolerie the Reader God willing shall finde sound and large proofes in the next Chapter The reason is euident because sixe hundred and thirtie learned and holy Byshops assembled in councell at Chalcedon decreed the Byshop there to be equall to the Byshop of Rome in all Ecclesiasticall affayres I will alleadge the expresse words of that famous Synode which our Jesuite vseth not to do least it should discouer his lyes falsehood and cunny catching trickes These are the wordes of the Councell Gloriosissimi iudices dixerunt ex his quae gesta sunt perpendimus omnem quidem primatum et honorem praecipium secundum canones antiquae Romae deo amantissimo Archiepiscopo conseruari oportere autem sanctissimū Archiepiscopū regiae Constantinopolis nouae Romae eisdem primatibus honoris et ipsum dignū esse et potestatē habere ordinare metropolitas in Asiana et Pontica et Thracia diacesibus Sequitur Reuerendi Episcopi dixerunt haec iusta sententia haec omnes dicimus haec omnibus placent hoc iustū decretū quae constituta sunt valeant haec iusta sententia omnia ordinatè decreta sunt The most glorious Iudges sayd Wee perceiue by these thinges which are defined that all Primacie and chiefe Honour according to the Canons is reserued to the most holy Arch-byshop of old Rome but the most holy Arch-byshop of the royall citie of new Rome must haue the same primacie of Honour and power to ordaine Metropolitans in the Dioceses of Asia and Pontus and Thracia The reuerend Byshoppes answered This is a iust sentence this wee all say this pleaseth all this is a iust decree The thinges which are decreed let them be of force This is a iust sentence all thinges are orderly decreed Thus teacheth vs this most famous Councell of 630. Byshops very learned and holy Fathers Out of which Decree I obserue first that the Primacie which the most auncient and best Councels gaue to the Byshop of Rome was not of Power but of Honour Secondly that this holy learned and famous Councell gaue no other name or title to Leo then Byshop of Rome but Arch-byshop of old Rome Thirdly that the same Fathers gaue the same title or name to Anatolius then Byshop of Constantinople calling him Arch-byshop of new Rome Fourthly that this famous Councell made the Byshop of Constantinople equall with the Byshop of Rome in all things the primacie of Honour onely excepted in which preheminence of Honour the sayd 630. Fathers decreed constantly that the Byshoppe of Constantinople or new Rome should be the next to the Byshop of old Rome And this doubtles is that very doctrine which I defend For I willingly graunt both in this and in all my other Bookes that the Byshoppe of Rome is the principall and chiefest Patriarke and ought according to the auncient Canons of the famous and holy Councell of Nice to haue the chiefest place in all Ecclesiasticall meetinges councels and Assemblies before all other Byshoppes in the Christian world This assertion is yet more plainely confirmed in an other place of this famous Councell of Chalcedon these are the expresse wordes Definitiones sanctorū patrum sequentes vbique et regulam et quae nunc relecta sunt centum quinquaginta deo amantissimorum episcoporum qui congregati sunt sub piae memoriae Imperatore maiore Theodosio in regia ciuitate Constantinopoli noua Roma cognoscentes et nos eadem definiuimus de priuilegijs eiusdem sanctissimae Constantinopolitanae ecclesiae Romae nouae etenim sedi senioris Romae propter imperium ciuitatis illius patres consequenter priuilegia reddiderunt et eadem intentione permoti centum quinquaginta deo amantissimi episcopi aequa sanctissimae sedi nouae Romae priuilegia tribuerunt rationabiliter iudicantes imperio et senatu vrbem ornatam aequis senioris regiae Romae priuilegijs frui et in ecclesiasticis sicut illa maiestatem habere negotijs et secundam post illam existere Wee following the definitions of the holy Fathers euery where and knowing the Canons and the Decrees of the 150. holy Byshoppes assembled vnder the Emperour Theodosius the elder of holy memorie in the royall citie Constantinople new Rome haue defined the very same touching the Priuiledges of the same most holy Church of Constantinople new Rome For the Fathers gaue Priuiledges consequently to the seate of old Rome for the Empire and dominion of that Citie And the 150. most holy Byshops hauing the same intention gaue equall Priuiledges to the most holy seat of new Rome iudging according to reason that the Citie which was honored with the Empire and the Senate should enioy equall Priuiledges with the old royall Rome and excell in Ecclesiasticall affaires as it and be the second after it In these wordes of these 630. holy and learned Fathers it is very cleare and euident that the Byshop of new Rome was equall to the Byshoppe of old Rome in all thinges the primacie of Honour onely excepted Which illation is soundly confirmed by the decree of the famous Councell of Constantinople in these expresse wordes Constantinopolitana ciuitatis Episcopum habere oportet primatus honorē post Romanum Episcopum propteria quod sit noua Roma The Byshop of the citie of Constantinople must haue the honour of Primacie after the Byshop of Rom◠because it is new Rome Loe all that wherein the Byshop of Rome excelleth the Byshop of Constantinople and consequently all other Byshops is nothing else in deed but the sole and onely Primacie of honour Which Primacie wee are so farre from denying it that wee giue the same to our Arch-byshoppes and Metropolitans in the Church of England To which I adde and it is very emphataicall that the principall and chiefe cause of making the Byshop of Rome the chiefe Patriarke and of giuing him the Primacie of honour was this and no other viz. because the citie of Rome was the Imperiall seate of the Emperour So affirme two most famous Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon And these Councels are consonant to the most famous Councell of all Councels since the death of the Apostles to weet the Councell of Nice in Bithyni◠although that sacred Councell did not produce the reason for the aforenamed Primacie of the Byshop of Rome B. C. To this may be added that seeing Pope signifieth Father as Bell according to the truth confesseth it followeth that the Byshop of Rome was in old time reputed Superiour to all in that he was called the Father of Fathers For Steuen Byshop of Carthage writing to Pope Damasus in the name of three Councelles celebrated in Africke giueth him this title To Pope Damasus our most blessed Lord exalted with Apostolicall dignity the Father of Fathers T. B. I answere that while our Jesuite laboureth to stablish the Popes falsesly pretended soueraigntie he prooueth himselfe a very Noddie for I haue already graunted that
Thalassius the reuerend Byshoppe of Caesaria did the like in these expresse wordes His quae per consensum ordinata sunt inter amantissimâ—s Episcopos Maximum et Iuuenalâ—m et nos consentimus To these thinges which are ordered by consent betweene the most beloued Byshops Maximus and Juuenalis wee also giue our consent Diogenes the reuerend Byshop of Cyzice did the like in these expresse wordes Consentio his quae a Paetrebus factae sunt I giue my consent to that which the Fathers haue decreed Sixtly all the Fathers of the Councell did the same these being their expresse wordes Omnes reuerendissimj Episcopj clamauerunt nos ita dicimus et consentimus his quae a Patribus dicta sunt All the most reuerend Byshoppes showted Wee say so and wee giue our consentes to those things which the Fathers haue decreed By these manifold testimonies it is cleare and euident that the Fathers who were assembled in Councell at the Emperours commaund decreed and confirmed peace betweene Maximus and Iuuenalis as also that they sought to the Emperour not to the Pope for the decision of their controuersies Neither is Pope Leo so much as once named in that action of the holy Councell What therefore shall wee or what can wee say to our lying Iesuite but that as hee began with lying and deceitfull dealing so he meaneth to continue his falsehood his lying his falsifications and his conny-catching trickes vnto the end Secondly that our Jesuite seemeth not to haue read Sâ—zomenus himselfe but to haue mistaken the Chapter by some note sent him from his best aduisors for to heare that Poperie is prooued the New religion doth so gall and trouble them that they can not sleepe quietly in their beddes for thinking how to withstand the same Many of their deepest heades haue conspired against the trueth and Robert Parsons that brazen-faced Fryer was put in trust to gather their instructions and to publish the same in the English tongue Leonem ex vnguibus I know the Lyon by his pawes The Narration of Sozomenus is in the eight not in the seuenth Chapter No no Sozomenus in the 7. Chapter cutteth the Popes throate and striketh the Jesuite starke dead these are the expresse wordes Romanae vero Ecclesiae Episcopus et sacerdotes per occidentem haec in suaÌ„ contumeliaÌ„ vergere duxerunt etenim sententiaÌ„ eoruÌ„ qui Nicaeae conuenerant quaÌ„ inde ab initio per omnia approbabant nec dum reliquerant sed ad illius normaÌ„ sentiebant et AthanasiuÌ„ ad se venientem amicè susceperunâ— causamqueillius ad se traxerunt But the Byshop of the Church of Rome and the Priestes throughout the West iudged the things to tende to their reproch for they had not yet forsaken their Sentence and Decree who were assembled at Nice which from the beginning they approoued in all thinges but followed it in their iudgements as the rule and friendly receiued Athanasius when he came to them and tooke his cause into their handes Thus writeth Sozomenus by whose relation it is euident that not the Pope alone but all the Byshoppes assembled togeather in a lawfull Synode effected that which our lying Jesuite would deceitfully father vpon the Pope Athanasius of Alexandria Paulus of Constantinople and Marcellus of Ancyra being vniustly molested by the Easterne Arrianizing Bishops sought to Julius then Byshop of Rome for his helpe and countenance as to the chiefest Patriarch who by reason of his place was of great authority and highly esteemed Pope â—ulius willing to afforde the sayd Byshops the best helpe he could called together the Byshops of the West and with their Decrees in a lawfull Synode declared the Easterne Byshops to haue offended against the Councell of Nice whose Canons all the faythfull in the Christian world were bound to reuerence and obey And thus the holy Byshoppes vniustly deposed from their seates were againe restored to their places by force in deed of the Nicene Canons For neither could the Pope alone nor yet the whole Synode of Westerne Byshops haue restored them but that their definitions were firmely grounded vpon the holy Nicene Canons For as we see by Sozomenus his Narration the Byshoppe of Rome with the Byshoppes of the West followed the Nicene Canons as their rule in all their Decrees resolutions and proceedinges whatsoeuer B. C. In his argumentes against the Superioritie of the Byshop of Rome this is one Seuenthly the famous Councell of Chalcedon gaue the Byshoppe of Constantinople equall authoritie with the Byshoppe of Rome in all Ecclesiasticall affayres In which wordes is one vntrueth cunningly couched For he calleth that heere the decree of the Councell which was by the ambition of Anatolius Byshoppe of Constantinople effected in the absence of the Romane Legates If Bell can prooue that this surreptitious Decree of the Easterne Byshoppes was euer confirmed then were it some thing which he bringeth But the Byshoppe of Rome his Legates withstood that their indirect proceeding pronouncing it to be contrary to the Decrees of the Nicene Councell T. B. Though it be the meere trueth that the Romish fayth and doctrine this day taught beleeued and violently with Fire Faggot obtruded vpon many thousands of people is the New religion yet doth that trueth so gall pierce and wound the Pope and his Iesuited Popelings that they can not endure the noyse or sound thereof For which respect our Jesuite turning himselfe this way that way and euery way but to the trueth omitteth sixe truethes by me briefely touched in my Triall but prooued at large in my Suruay and beginneth to cauill and scornefully to bicker with the seuenth thinking by meanes of confusion and disordered proceeding to couer and hide the nakednesse and newnesse of rotten Poperie and to dazell the eyes of his Readers that they shall not behold and discerne the trueth But it will in time preuaile maugre the malice of the Pope of his Iesuited vassals and of the greatest Diuell of Hell Two thinges the Iesuite heere toucheth in which the maine poynt and issue euen prora et puppis of the controuersie of the Popes falsely pretended Soueraigntie doth consist Th' one concerneth the Councell of Nice th' other the Councell of Chalcedon For the exact examination of which difficulties I put downe certaine Aphorismes hoping by Gods holy assistaunce to hit the nayle on the head and to make the heartes of the Pope and his Popish crew as heauie as any Lead Aphorisme first The most famous generall Councell of Nice did confine and limit the iurisdiction of the Byshop of Rome as well as of other Byshoppes euery where Behold the proofe and marke it well First the Nicene Councell in the first Canon hath these expresse wordes De his qui communione priuantur seu ex clero seu ex laico ordine ab Episcopis per vnamquamque Prouinciam sententia regularis obtineat vt hi qui abijciuntur ab alijs non recipiantur
Constantinopoli Alexander et Romanus antistes propter aetatem decrepitam Constantinopolitanus vero propter multam imbecillitatem in sedibus suis remansere Sed eorum nomine bini Presbyteri missi sunt a Iulio quidem Vitus et Vincentius ab Alexandro autem duo alij et vita et eruditione plurimum excellentes Therefore the Emperour perceiuing that the euill did grow to an head did proclaime the most famous Nicene Synode in Bithynia and by his Letters did call the Byshoppes euery where to come thither at the day by him appoynted Macarius was then Byshoppe at Hierusalem Iulius at Rome Alexander at Constantiâ—ople The Byshoppe of Rome by reason of his old age and the Byshoppe of Constantinople by reason of infirmitie did stay at home in their owne Seas But in their names two Priestes were sent from either of them Vitus and Vincentius from Julius and from Alexander other two very excellent both in learning and conuersation Sozomenus iumpeth with Nicephorus yea so doe also Pâ—atina in Agathone and Beda in his Chronologie as Genebrardus the Popes deare darling freely graunteth Where I wish the Reader to obserue seriously with mee that the Councell of Nice was holden in Bithynia in the twenteth yeare of the raigne of Constantine the great in the thirteenth yeare after his comming to Byzantium and that it continued three yeares and something more This Obseruation is profitable to the Reader for diuers good respectes Seuenthly because if this Epistle were admitted for good yet would it nothing helpe the Pope or his Iesu tea Popelinges the reason is at hand because it requires not the Pope alone but togeather withall the Byshoppes in his Citie or if ye will in Jtaly to confirme the decrees thereof So then this helpeth not to discharge Poperie of the New religion obiection 7 They say seauenthly that the Church of Rome in the Decrees of the Nicene Councell had not her preheminence and power limitted but was followed as a paterne in aduancing others for as Pope Nicolas sayth the Nicene Councell durst not make any Decree of that Church as knowing that nothing could be giuen her aboue her desert But I answere first that seeing that Example is allowed therein and made a patterne of the rest it followeth by an ineuitable consequence that the Councell did thereby decree that the Byshoppe of Rome should keepe himselfe within those limits For he must perforce confesse that as the Byshoppe of Alexandria had but the preheminence of all thereabout euen no more had the Byshoppe of Rome This is confirmed because it followeth immediately in the same Canon likewise also in Antioch and in other Prouinces let the Churches enioy their Priuiledges and Prerogatiues For the wordes of the Councell being grounded vpon the custome of the Byshoppe of Rome that as he had had preheminence of all the Byshoppes about him so Alexandria and Antioch should haue of all about them and likewise other Churches each in their owne Prouinces doe euidently conuince marke well my wordes that the Pope neither had formerly preheminence of all through the world neither this day ought to haue the same The old custome is it that the holy Councell doth respect not any prerogatiue of the Church of Rome Secondly because both Ruffinus and Cardinall Cusanus as I haue already prooued doe confirme this mine exposition Thirdly because the wordes next following in the selfe-same Canon doe vtterly ouerthrow and as it were cut the throate of the Popes falsely pretended Primacie These are the wordes Illud autem generaliter clarum est quod si quis praeter sententiam Metropolitani fuerit factus Episcopus hunc magna definiuit Episcopum esse non oportere But that is generally cleare that if any be made Byshoppe without the consent or iudgement of the Metropolitane the famous Synode hath decreed that such a one ought not to be a Byshoppe Now sir Jesuite if this be true as it is most true for all the Christian world doth and must obey the Decrees of the holy and famous Councell of Nice then doubtlesse your Popes pretended Supremacie lieth in the dust is by vertue thereof troden vnder foote For he challengeth a prerogatiue ouer all christian Nations to make Bishops euery where at his owne good pleasure as also to discarde displace them whosoeuer are made without his consent Fourthly because the next Canon hath no regard of the Church of Rome or of any prerogatiue of the Byshop thereof these are the words Quia consuetudo obtinuit et antiqua traditio vt Aeliae Episcopus honoretur habeat honoris consequentiam salua Metropâ—lis propria dignitate Because Custome and old Tradition hath obtayned that the Byshoppe of Jerusalem or Elia be honoured let him consequently haue honour the proper dignitie of the Metropolitane citie euer being safe Out of these wordes I obserue first that the preheminence and honour of particular Churches dependeth of an auncient Custome and not of any Supreame power or Prerogatiue of the Church of Rome Secondly that the Canon plainely teacheth vs that euery Metropolitane Byshoppe hath a proper Dignitie and consequently that such Dignitie resteth not in the Pope or Byshop of Rome Thirdly because the Fathers of the famous Councell of Chalcedon haue as is already prooued graunted equal Priuiledges to the Bishop of Constantinople with the Byshop of Rome in all Ecclesiasticall affaires To which I adde first that the Councell of Chalcedon decreed nothing saue that onely which the three first and most famous Councels of Nice Constantinople and Ephesus decreed before them This to be so Petrus the Metropolitane of Corinthus Athanasius Alexander and many other Byshoppes in their ioynt-Epistle to the Emperour Leo constantly affirme in these expresse wordes Vnde verò dignata est nobis scribere vestra transquillitas et apertè iussit nostram manifestare sententiam haec pietatis vestrae potentiae declaramus quia ea quae a Chalcedonensi sancto et vniuersali concilio definita sunt tanquam sanctis Synodis praecedentibus consona et in nullo contraria aut sanctorum trecentorum decem et octo patrum Niceno concilio aut Constantinopolitano 150. aut Ephesio sub beatae memoriae Cyrillo celebrato omnibus sententijs manere immutilata decreuimus Whereas your tranquilitie hath vouchsafed to write vnto vs and withall hath commaunded vs plainely to declare our sentence this we signifie to the power of your pietie that those thinges which the holy and vniuersall Councell of Chalcedon hath defined as consonant and no way contrarie to the holy precedent Synodes either to the Nicene Councell of the 318. holy Fathers or to the Councell of Constantinople of 150. holy Fathers or to the Councell of Ephesus celebrated vnder Cyrill of blessed memorie we haue decreed the same with all our sentences so to continue without maime or diminution I adde secondly that Gregorie the great who was Byshoppe of Rome himselfe
Ethnickes Publicanes vntill they giue true signes of vnfeyned repentance But withall this must euer be remembred and most loyalty obserued of all Byshoppes in Christes Church viz. That the Prince though full of manifest vices most notorious crimes in the world may neuer be shunned neither of the people nor yet of the Byshoppes The reason is at hand Because God hath appoynted him to be their Gouernour Much lesse may the people forsake their obedience to his sacred prerogatiue Royall and supereminent Power And least of all for it is most execrable damnable and plaine diabolicall may either the people alone or the Byshoppes alone or both ioyntly togeather depose their vndoubted Soueraigne though a Tyrant Heretique or Apostatate for euen in that case all loyall obedience and faythfull seruice in all ciuill affayres and whatsoeuer else is lawfull must of duetie be yeeled vnto them Hee may be admonished by Gods true Ministers in the pulpit court of Conscience if his vices be publike scandalous to the Church but he may neuer be iudged in the court of their Consistorie touching his power Royall and Princely prerogatiue Their power is onely to admonish and rebuke him and to pray to God to amende what is amisse Hee hath no Iudge that can punish him but the great Iudge of all euen the God of Heauen The popish Cardinall Hugo deliuereth this most Christian doctrine though to the vtter confusion of the Pope Tibi soli quia non est super me alius quam tu qui possit punire ego N. sum Rex et non est aliquis preter te super me To thee onely sayth Cardinall Hugo because there is not any aboue mee but thy selfe alone that hath power to punish mee for I am a King and so besides thee there is none aboue mee And the popish Glosse doth giue this sense meaning of the Prophets words Rex omnibus superior tantum a Deo puniendus est The King is aboue all and he can be punished of none but of God alone But for a larger Discourse of this Subiect I referre the Reader to the Downefall of Poperie Thirdly that no Minister may admit any impenitent Person knowne to be such no not him that weareth the Golden Crowne vnto the Holy mysteries for otherwise that Minister should sinne damnably as partaker of his sinne yea the holy Canons of our English Church doe flatly prohibit the same Fourthly that our Iesuite doth shew himselfe to be a sillie disputer while he argueth the defect of power Royall for that the King in some respect is as it were subiect to the Minister For I pray your worship good sir Fryer doth not your Pope himselfe fall downe prostrate before the feete of a silly Minister or Priest when he confesseth his sinnes vnto him Doth he not humbly submitte himselfe vnto the same sillie Priest Is not the sillie Priestes power aboue the Popes while he absolueth the Pope from his sinnes Is not the sillie Priestes Power aboue the Popes while he inioyneth Penance to the Pope I wote he is though not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and absolutely yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in some respect or sort If any Papist shall this deny I can prooue by his Popish denyall all their Popes to perish euerlastingly B. C. S. Cyprian opposing himselfe against the Pope doth nothing preiudice the Authoritie of the Pope For albeit the Pope commaunded Rebaptization not to be practised yet did he not define the question or pronounce any censure against Cyprian or others of his opinion much lesse was it condemned by a generall Councell with reason S. Augustine bringeth in his defence and so it was free for him without daunger of Heresie to persist in his owne opinion T. B. I answere first that though Cornelius then Byshoppe of Rome togeather with the whole nationall Synode of all the Byshops of Jtaly had made a flatte decree touching Rebaptization and though also Pope Stephanus had confirmed the same Decree straightly commaunding to obserue the same and though thirdly our Papistes of late dayes doe obstinately affirme that their Pope can not erre when he defineth iudicially yet this notwithstanding S. Cyprian teacheth and telleth vs plainely that in his dayes the Byshoppe of Rome had no such Power or preheminent prerogatiues as hee this day proudly and Antichristianly taketh vpon him For hee roundly withstood the Decree of Pope Stephanus who then was Byshoppe of Rome and both sharply reprooued him and contemned his falsely pretended Primacie And for all that S. Cyprian was euer reputed an Holy Byshoppe in his life time and a glorious Martir being dead But if the Byshoppe of Rome had been Christes Vicar and so priuiledged as our Papistes beare the world in hand hee is then doubtlesse S. Cyprian must needes haue been an Heretike and so reputed and esteemed in the Church of God Yea if any Christian shall this day doe or affirme as S. Cyprian did or publikely deny the Popes falsely pretended Primacie in any place countrey territories or dominions where Poperie beareth the sway then without all peraduenture hee must be burnt at a Stake with Fire and Faggot for his paines Of which Subiect the Reader may find a larger Discourse in my Christian Dialogue Secondly that while S. Austen sayth that S. Cyprian would haue yeelded to the Decree of a generall Councell albeit he made no reckoning of the Popes Decree euen ioyned with the nationall Synode of all the Bishoppes of Jtaly hee giueth vs to vnderstande two memorable poyntes of Doctrine which I wish the Reader to obserue attentiuely Th' one that the Definitiue sentence of the Byshoppe of Rome is not infallible although he define ioyntly with an whole nationall Synode And consequently that his Definitiue sentence may much more be false and erroneous when he decreeth and defineth without a Councell For if S. Augustine had been of that minde that the Byshoppe of Rome could not haue erred in his Iudiciall and Definitiue sentence either apart or with a nationall Councell hee neither would nor could haue excused S. Cyprian who scorned and constantly refused to yeeld to the same Yea S. Cyprian himselfe would for his great pietie haue humbly yeelded to the Popes sentence if he had knowne him to haue receiued such a Priuiledge and Prerogatiue from Heauen But neither did the Byshoppe of Rome in those dayes stand vpon any such Prerogatiue of not erring neither did any learned Father of that age euer dreame of any such extraordinarie Priuiledge No no the most that the Byshoppes of Rome could say and alleadge for their falsely pretended Soueraigntie when S. Augustine and the other Fathers of the Aphrican Councell reiected and condemned appeales to Rome was onely this and no other thing viz. that the Fathers of the Nicene Councell had graunted such Priuiledge Primacie to the Church of Rome And therefore did S. Austen both grauely and prudently excuse S. Cyprian for
that he would haue yeelded to a lawfull generall Councell As if he had sayd S. Cyprian was no more bound to follow the Opinion and Decree of the Byshoppe of Rome then the Byshoppe of Rome to follow his Thirdly that our Iesuite saith truly though vnawares against himselfe that it was free for S. Cyprian without the danger of Heresie to persist in his owne opinion For it was not in the power of the Byshoppe of Rome to make that Heresie which was not Heresie afore B. C. That it was lawfull and vsuall before the time of this Councell to appeale to Rome is euident out of S. Cyprian who reporteth how Fortunatus and Felix deposed by himselfe appealed to Cornelius Byshoppe of Rome And one Basilides deposed in Spaine appealed to Pope Stephen as the same Cyprian recounteth Not to speake of Marcion that auncient Hereticke who excommunicated of his Byshoppe in Pontus came to Rome for absolution as Epiphanius relateth And therefore Pope Leo calleth it an auncient custome to appeale to Rome T. B. I answere First that many distressed persons in their distressed and desperate causes haue many times indeede sought to Rome for helpe and succour But wee must not so much regard and consider what hath beene done especially by naughty and disobedient persons as what ought of right to be done and according to the Law of God Persons driuen to the brincke of desperation by reason of their bad and wicked dealing will soone attempt any thing which may any way seeme to better their dolefull and miserable estate Euen so men desirous of Honour will easily hearken vnto that which seemeth any way to further their intended purpose But that such Appeales were neuer approued by the holy Fathers and auncient Councels I haue copiously prooued in the Aphorismes of this Chapter and S. Ciprians opposition against the Byshoppe of Rome doth euidently confirme the same What Pope Leo sayth is of no force B. C. That many Canons are wanting in the Nicene Councell is most certaine For one Canon of that Councell was about the obseruation of Easter day as testifieth Constantine in his Epistle and also Epiphanius and Athanasius but this Canon is in none of those twentie which be now extant and of which onely so many yeares since Ruffinus maketh mention in his Historie T. B. I answere first that I will not deny but some thinges might be decreed in the Nicene Councell which are not this day to be found in the Canons now extant But withall I constantly auouch that there is a great disparitie betweene Canons and Decrees as the late popysh Synode of Trent playnely telleth vs. And consequently that there were but twentie Canons howsoeuer some other things besides were decreed at that time To which I adde that all Decrees are not alwayes thought necessarie to be put in print Whereof we haue an euident example in our English Parliament-statutes for it is often thought conuenient not to put them all in print Secondly that Epiphanius distinguisheth Canons from Decrees these are his expresse wordes In eadem Synodo Canones quosaaÌ„ posuerunt Ecclesiasticos simulque de paschate decreuerunt vnam vnitatem ac consensum In the same Synode they put downe certaine Canons Ecclesiasticall and withall they decreed one vnitie and consent touching the Keeping of Easter Loe this auncient and holy Father maketh a cleere difference betweene the Canons of the Nicene Synode and the Decrees thereof Thirdly that though wee should graunt some of the Nicene Canons to haue perished which we constantly deny yet would it not follow thereupon that such Canons conteyned the Popes falsely pretended Primacie especially seeing both the holy Fathers and most renowned Councels doe stoutly impugne the same This is prooued at large throughout the Aphorismes aforegoing Fourthly that 217. holy Fathers assembled in the Aphrican Councell told the Pope roundly that they had vsed all exquisite diligence to find out the true Copies and to that end had sent Messengers into sundry partes of the East howbeit such Canons as the Pope pretended for his falsely challenged Soueraigntie none could any where be found And therefore they aduised him to surcease and to giue ouer his claime for they could no longer endure such Fumosum typhum seculi such smoakie statelinesse of the world I vse the very wordes of the holy Synode as I haue already prooued Fiftly that Pope Julius swore solemnely that he had locked them vp in a Coffer of his Church These are his expresse words Si quis auteÌ„ de his ampliora atque abundantiora scâ—re voluerit in sacro nostrae Ecclesiae sedis 〈◊〉 et ea quae praeâ—â—ximus inuenire poterit If any shall desire a larger Discourse hereof he may find these Canons much more like stuffe in the Holy Arke or Coffer of the seate of our Church Thus writeth Pope Julius nay rather thus sweareth that holy Pope For these wordes follow immediatly Verum me dixisse testis est Diuinitas The Diuinitie is a witnesse that I haue spoken the truth Heere I wish the gentle and honest Reader to ponder duely these poyntes with mee First that this Epistle of Julius is a counterfeite as I haue already prooued for if the Pope had so layde them vp as heere hee sweareth solemnely Sozimus and the other Popes who made such adoe with the Byshoppes of Africke about those Canons would roundly haue shewed the same Yea doubtlesse if they had once had them in their Coffer vnder a Locke they would rather haue lost all the rest then them Secondly that the world hath been too long abused with this kind of coozenage trickes of legierdemaine Thirdly that if the Byshoppes of Rome can not keepe those Canons which make so much for the aduauncement of their stately Soueraigntie how can we safely credite them in keeping pure and free from errours such Bookes Councels and Canons as make greatly for vs and wholly against them selues Wee can not doe it Fourthly that if counterfeite Bookes Histories and Canons were wholly layde away Poperie beleeue mee would soone fall of it selfe For in this supposed rescript of Pope Iulius directed to the Byshoppes of the East there is such aboundance of matter for the Popes Super-lordly Soueraigntie as would certainly serue his turne if it could so be admitted But Gods holy name be blessed the forgerie is so palpable as euery one may with all facilitie discouer the same Fiftly that S. Augustine Alipius Possidius Marinus and all the other Byshoppes 217. in number assembled in the famous Aphricane Synode doe plainely auouch and constantly affirme that the true Copies of the Canons of the Nicene Councell were at Antioch Alexandria and Constantinople and that they were content for charitie-sake to obserue such proceedinges touching Appeales as the Popes Messengers did alleadge out of their commonitorie from Rome vntill true triall should be made thereof out of the true Copies from the East which were to
Sozimus had vnderstood and meant the Canons of Sardica when he named the Canons of Nice about which there was so much adoe as we haue already seene then doubtlesse it had been his part to haue named them though for no other end but onely for vnitie peace and charitie-sake Secondly that I willingly agree to our Jesuite when he auoucheth no new thing touching Fayth to haue been enacted in the supposed Synode of Sardica And my reason is this for that Appeales to the Church of Rome are no matters of Fayth indeed thirdly that it is a matter of Fayth with the Papistes to beleeue that the Fathers of Nice could not erre either in defining matters of Fayth or Manners And consequently seeing the Synode of Sardica in the fourth and seuenth Canons hath decreed flat contrary to the Synode of Nice in the fourth fift sixt and seuenth Canons it can not be deemed a legittimate and lawfull Synode but a bastard and plaine counterfeite as I haue already prooued in the third Aphorisme of this present Chapter To which place I referre the Reader as where he may find whatsoeuer his heart can desire This onely will I heere say for the present that not onely the other first three generall Councels after Nice viz. of Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon being all three after it decreed contrary to it but which is more to be admired 217. Byshoppes of which S. Austen was one assembled in the famous Councell Aphrican affirmed constantly with one vniforme assent to Pope Celestine that no Synode had made such Canons as the Byshoppes of Rome alleadged for their owne pompe and statelynesse These are the expresse words of the holy Synode Nam vt aliqui tanquam a tuae sanctitatis latere mittantur nulla inuenimus patrum Synodo constitutum For that any should be sent from your Holynesse we find it not defined by the Fathers in any Synode Now notwithstanding this vniforme assertion of so many so learned so holy and so auncient Fathers yet is that falsely supposed prerogatiue of Appeales to Rome plainely decreed in the fourth and seuenth Canons of Sardica And consequently either the Synode of Sardice was a bastard and counterfeite Conuenticle or else the two hundred and seuenteene Fathers of the Aphrican Councell auouched to the Pope a most notorious vntrueth But doubtlesse neither could so many holy Fathers for their great reading and learning haue been ignoraunt of the sayd Councell if any such lawfull Synode had been extant neither for their rare pietie would they haue gainesayd or withstood the same Fourthly that the affirmance of the Nicene Fathers to haue been also at Sardice is like to the counterfeite Donation of Constantine the rescript of Pope Julius and such like of which I haue discoursed at large in the conclusions and Aphorismes of this present Chapter Fiftly that it greatly stood the Popes in hand Sozimus Bonifacius and Celestinus during whose times the controuersie did continue to haue vrged the Canons of Sardica if any such lawfull generall Synode had been extant And consequently seeing they neuer once related them it followeth that in their dayes there was no such Councell extant in very deed Sixtly that Pope Gregorie reuerenced the foure first generall Councels as the foure holy Ghospels but for all that he neuer made mention of the Synode of Sardica which if it had been extant no counterfeite ought to haue had the second place Seuenthly that the fourth and seuenth Canons of Sardice are flat contrary to the fourth fifth sixth and seuenth Canons of Nice And yet without all peraduenture no Synode especially comming within a few yeares after Nice which Councell all the Christian world did highly reuerence at all times either would or durst haue decreed against the same To that which is here and else where sayd of the Centuristes and M. Perkins this may in generall yeeld sufficient contentation to the honest Reader viz. that albeit they doe not in euery poynt iumpe precisely with Bell yet doe they not speake any thing in defence of Poperie nor any where plead for the supposed antiquitie thereof No no they vtterly reiect Poperie and euery where condemne the same To that of Policarpus I answere that his comming to Rome was not to insinuate any soueraigntie of Anicetus ouer him as the very end did declare but to visit that famous imperiall Citie the Queene of the world and Caput mundi and to see the old Monumentes in that place euen as the Queene of the South came from farre to heare Salomons Wisedome and to beholde his glory To that of Jrenaeus I haue said sufficiently in many places of this Chapter as also to that of Policrates and the other Byshoppes of Asia That which I haue sayd of S. Cyprian doth euidently confirme the same And the testimonie of Eusebius is consonant while he writeth in this maner Sed hoc non omnibus placabat Episcopis quin potius è contrario scribentes ei iubebant vt magis qua sunt pacis ageret et concordia atque vnanimitati studeret denique extant etiam ipsorum literae quibus asperius obiurgant Victorem All Byshoppes liked not his dealing but by their Letters directed to him they commaunded marke well the word that he should rather doe those thinges which belong to peace and should indeuour himselfe to establish concord and vnitie To be briefe their Letters are extant in which they reprooue Victor the Byshoppe of Rome very sharpely Thus writeth the auntient and learned Father Eusebius cleering two thinges vnto vs. Th' one that Irenaeus and the other holy Byshoppes did chide and reproue the Pope Th' other that they did not onely rebuke him but which is much more freely in their Letters to him commaund him Marke well the word Iubebant they commaunded him For sayth our Jesuite the other Apostles sent not Peter by any authoritie of commaund but onely by request and petition as Princes and Superiours without any touch of their high Office or Dignitie may be sent by their inferiours their sending proceeding from petition nothing empeacheth their high Soueraigntie But our sir Fryer either desireth to deceiue others or knoweth not what he sayth For without all peraduenture in proper phrase of speach whosoeuer is sent by an other or others marke well my wordes the same person or persons as they be sent are inferiours For this reduplication sent as sent implyeth intrinsecally a duetie and subiection euen in him or them who otherwise may be superiours Whensoeuer one goeth to a place vpon request he is not properly sent thyther by him that made the request but freely taketh that iourney in hand of his owne accord Hee doth it willingly not by compulsion of charitie not of duetie To which I adde that it is a disloyall speach of a Subiect to affirme that the King may be sent of his Subiectes Howbeit I will not deny but the King in some matters of
And the Apostles doubted not to say It hath seâ—med good to the holy Ghost and to vs. If in these and such like speaches God and his Creatures be ioyned togeather without being made ioynt purchasers but as the Creator and the secondarie cause in like manner may the Merites of Christ and his Saintes be conioyned as hath been sayd T. B. I answere first that the more our sillie Iesuite striueth against the trueth the more he still woundeth rotten Poperie Fiue examples he heere produceth and neuer one to the purpose as by by God willing shall appeare Secondly that if Poperie were not the New religion in very deed such paultry and beggerly shiftes would neuer be vsed in defence thereof Thirdly that the question is not of those actes which Gods Saintes doe alone and of them-selues but of those effectes in producing whereof Gods Saintes are sayd to concurre and to be ioyned with Christ our Sauiour And therefore of the fiue Examples three are altogeather impertinent viz. the first the third the fourth For in the first place the Angel doth not connotate a Creature but God himselfe which I prooue by a double argument First because the Text speaketh of that Angel which deliuered Israel or Jacob from all euill which effect can not possibly be ascribed to any Creature but To God alone the fountaine of all Grace and giuer of euery good guift And it is confirmed because the same God which in the 15 verse is said To haue fed Israel all his life long is likewise sayd in the verse following To haue deliuered him from all euill Secondly because two other places of Scripture doe interpret the Angel to be God himselfe The God of Bethel the God that did keepe Jsrael whither soeuer he went In the third place as also in the fourth the actes are onely ascribed to the Israelites and to S. Paul but neither the Apostle nor the Jsraelites are sayd to concurre with Christ in producing the same effect Let the wordes be well marked and the case is cleare The second and fift or last Examples doe prooue indeed that Gods Saints are ioyned with Christ in producing the same effectes but for all that are as far from concluding the Iesuites purpose as Rome is distant from Roan or the East from the West For albeit I willingly graunt that Gods Saintes may concurre and be conioyned with Christ in producing al those effectes to which they are deputed of God as instrumentes meanes and inferiour causes vnder him hauing to that end receiued of him actiue power in some measure yet doe I constantly denie and vtterly defie that most vnchristian blasphemous and hereticall Popish assertion which brutishly and more then cruelly auoucheth that Beckets Blood and Christes most pretious Blood concurre in working mans Saluation For as the Israelites truely sayd that the Sword of God and Gideon destroyed their enimies so may it truely be sayd in like manner that God and the Phisition cure inward sores God and the Surgion externall woundes that God and Masons builde Churches God and Taylors make Garmentes God and Meate nourish men and so foorth But we can neuer truly say that Christes Blood and Beckets Blood doe worke mans Saluation The Sword of Gideon Masons Surgions Phisitions Meate and Taylors haue a certaine actiue power inherent in them to produce such effectes but mans Saluation is such a diuine supernaturall supereminent effect as Beckets Blood hath no actiue power at all neither more nor lesse to produce the same For this respect grauely writeth S. Augustine That if the best liuer on earth should be rewarded according to his best desertes yet could he not but perish euerlastingly For this respect wisely sayth the learned and religious Fryer Ferus That our Saluation consisteth onely and solely in the Merite of Christ not in our owne Workes He addeth the reason because we are not able to make satisfaction no not for the least sinne we commit For this respect sayth Abbot Bernard That the sinne which maketh deuision betweene God and vs can not be wholly taken away in this life This Subiect is handled at large in the ninth Chapter afore-going in the eleuenth Conclusion to which place I referre the Reader for his better satisfaction herein B. C. Bell else-where telleth vs That popish Inuocation and Adoration was not knowen vntill the yeare three hundred and seauentie Yet is it no thing comparable to thâ—s heere vttered making that Article a thousand yeares younger then in his former Booke T. B. I answere first that in my Suruey I haue disputed at large how Inuocation of Saints increased by degrees For the better cleering of which difficultie I there put downe many Canons and Conclusions In one Canon I affirmed the Church of God to haue liued vnacquainted with the Merites Intercession of the Saints in heauen for the space of two hundred thirtie yeares after Christ. In an other Canon I prooued soundly that the first seed of Popish inuocation of Saintes began not to besowen till about the yeare 233. after Christ. In an other Canon that about the yeare 250. after Christ some of the Fathers held constantly that the Saintes in heauen did pray for the lyuing vpon earth In an other Canon that some of the Fathers about the yeare 350. after Christ did by Rhetoricall Apostrophes apply their Orations to the dead Many other thinges concerning the Inuocation of Saintes I disputed in that Booke at large To which Booke though published about thirteene yeares agoe neither this Jesuite nor any other euer had any courage to this day to frame any answere at all In my Tryall of the new Religion which this Jesuite hath taken in hand to confute I constantly affirme that to Pray to be saued by the Blood of Thomas Becket is flat blasphemy against the Sonne of God And as I affirmed afore in my Suruey that Poperie sprang vp by degrees in such and such yeares so now I constantly auouch that to be saued by the Blood of Becket was vnknowen to the Church for the space of a thousand yeares and odde In the Margent the Printer hath negligently set downe 1407 for 1047. yeares after Christ. I would that were the least of many schores of faultes which haue escaped in my Bookes partly of ignoraunce and partly through the negligence of careles Printers Now where I assigne diuers times and yeares precisely and distinctly to the birth of seuerall degrees of Poperie our Iesuite being at a flat non-plus what to answere fleeth malitiously to ridiculous cauils and most foolish and false imputations Yea the Fryer Iesuite B.C. bloody cut-throate if his name so be doth bewray his owne malice vnawares For these are his expresse words Let him be vrged with that which he teacheth else where and then his refuge will be that he speaketh not of the Inuocation of Saints in
egregious and notorious lye the Fryer set abroach so to maintaine if it were possible the falsely pretended Antiquitie of rotten Poperie The Fryer durst not cite the wordes of his Authors though my selfe neuer fayle therein least his cogging forgerie and false dealing should haue been discouered by that meanes These are the expresse wordes of Sezomenus Vir quidam è Macedoniana haeresi vxorem eiusdem opinionis habebat Hic cum Johannem quomodo de Deo sentiendum esset docentem andisset dogma illius laudabat et vxorem quoque vt secum sentiret hortabatur Cum vero illa magis nobilium mulierum sermonibus quam illius consuetudini obtemperaret et post frequentes admonitiones vir illius nihil effecisset nisi inquit in diuinis mihi consors fueris neque in vitae communione posthac eris Mulier hoc audito et consensum pollicita rem eam famulae cuidam communicat quam sibi fidam esse iudicabat illiusque opera ad fallendum viruÌ„ vtitur Circa tempus autem mysteriorum illa quod accepit continens quasi oratura procuÌ„bit famula astans clauculum illi dat quod secum in manu attulerat Hoc cum dentibus admoueretur in lapidem congelascit A certaine man infected with the Heresie of Macedonius had a wife of the same opinion hee hearing the doctrine of S. Iohn Chrysostome how he ought to thinke and beleeue of God commended his Doctrine and exhorted his wife to beleeue as he did But when she hearkened rather to the Tales of Noble women then to his admonition so as her husband preuayled nothing by his exhortations vnlesse sayth he thou wilt ioyne with mee in matters diuine I will not hencefoorth ioyne with thee in secular affayres His wife hearing this and promising her consent imparteth the matter to one of her Maydes in whom she reposed great confidence and vseth her helpe to defraude her Husband While the mysteries were in hand she keeping that which she had receiued looketh downe as if she would pray Her Mayde standing by giueth her priuily that which she brought with her in her hand Which when she began to eate it was chaunged into a Stone Nicephorus reciteth the same Storie in the selfe same manner I haue cited the wordes at large that the indifferent Reader may behold the false dealing of the Fryer and be an indifferent iudge betweene him and mee Sozomenus and Nicephorus do both ioyntly and constantly affirme that the Woman receiued the Sacramentall bread which she did not eate so to defraud and deceiue her Husband The Jesuite impudently auoucheth that she being a Macedonian Heretique did so the better to conceale her Religion Which notorious lying of the shamelesse Jesuite not onely the Historie it selfe doth confute but also the due consideration of the Heresie which the woman held For neither the eating neither the not eating of the Sacramentall bread did either further or hinder the Macedonian Heresie If she had been an Arian the Fryers assertion might haue had some colour of truth but seeing she was a Macedonian it is too too foolish and ridiculous For the Heresie of Macedonius consisted in this that the Holy Ghost was not God Secondly that neither Sozomenus nor Nicephorus sayth as the Jesuite beareth his Readers in hand viz. that the Sacrament of our Lords Body and Blood was then ministred vnder one kind but onely this and nothing else viz. that the Woman deceiued her Husband in taking the Bread which she did not eate Thirdly that our Iesuite falsely sayth that the Cuppe was not then giuen into the handes of the Communicantes his Authors affirme nothing lesse Fourthly that whatsoeuer our Fryer saith howsoeuer he imagine that the Woman could not haue had the same euasion in taking the Cuppe which she had in taking the Bread yet doe I constantly affirme and experience will prooue the same that she might haue seemed to drinke of the Cuppe yet haue tasted no Wine at all Fiftly that Pope Gelasius doth contest with me that the Lay people did in his time which was 492. yeares after Christ at the least receiue the holy Eucharist vnder both the kinds yea he affirmeth it to be Sacriledge to receiue but the one kind alone These are his expresse wordes Comperimus autem quod quidam sumpta tantummodo corporis sacriportione a Caâ—ice sacratiâ—ruoris abstineant Qui procul dubio quoniam nescio qua superstitione docentur astringi aut integra sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur Quia diuisio vnius eiusdemque mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire We vnderstand that some receiue onely the portion of the sacred Body and abstaine from the Cuppe of the holy Blood Who for that we know not how they are taught to be superstitious shall either receiue the whole Sacramentes or else be excluded from the whole Thus writeth Pope Geâ—asius the first whom Genebrard truly calleth the most learned Pope That some odde persons in his time did not receiue the Eucharist in both kindes whom hee therefore condemneth of flat Sacriledge because the one kind may not be taken without the other But I will yet touch and tickle our Jesuite more strictly and tell him that which will make his eares to tingle Gabriel Biel a very learned Schoole-doctor and a religious Popish Fryer in his Commentaries vpon the Canon of popish Masse telleth vs very constantly that it was a right generally vsed in the primatiue Church to receiue the holy Eucharist vnder both kindes But withall he affirmeth very resolutely that the Church of Rome in processe of time brought into the Church an other Custome of receiuing in one kind onely In the end he determineth decideth the controuersie in these expresse wordes Olim quaestio illa poterat esse dubia sed nunc post determinationeÌ„ concilij Constantiensis veritateÌ„ catholica determinantis dicere coÌ„munionem sub vtraque specie esse de necessitate salutis omni fideli est haeresis ibidem publice condemnata In former times it was lawfull to doubt of that QuestioÌ„ But in these latter dayes after the Councell of Constance which hath determined the Catholique veritie therein to say that all the faythfull must vpon necessitie of saluation Communicate vnder both kindes is a flatte Heresie publiquely condemned in the sayd Councell Thus disputeth this great Learned Papist out of whose words I gather these worthy obseruations First that the Church of Rome can make Heresies at her good will and pleasure I prooue it because that which was Catholique doctrine in the Primatiue Church is now made a flatte Heresie by Popish constitutioÌ„ Secondly that the Laicall Communion vnder one kind was consonant to the Catholique fayth vntill the late Councell of Constance that is to say for the space of one thousand foure hundred and foureteene yeares For so long was that Councell holden after Christ. Thirdly that no mortall man no pure
is baken in the Ouen and that is dressed in the Panne and in the frying Panne shall be the Priestes that offereth it And euery Meate offering mingled with Oyle and that is dry shall pertaine to all the sonnes of Aaron to all alike B. C. To the matter An vntrueth it is that priuate Masses were not before the time he mentioneth The twelft Councell of Toledo almost nine hundred yeares agoe reprehendeth those Priestes which offering Sacrifice did not communicate Quale illud Sacrificium c. What manner of Sacrifice is that sayth the Councell of which neither he that sacrificeth is knowen to be partaker Which wordes doe shew that none was present to communicate and yet the Councell requireth onely that the Priest himselfe doe Communicate S. Austen also recordeth how a Priest offered Sacrifice in a priuate forme for the freeing of that place from the molestation of wicked spirites In so particular and extraordinarie a place and for so particular a businesse no probabilitie that there were any other Communicantes T. B. I answere first that it is high time for our Jesuiticall Fryer to come once to the matter whose custome is seldome or neuer to be occupied in that honest kind of dealing Secondly that the Councell doth not so much as once name Priuat Masse much lesse doth it approoue the same Thirdly that if priuate Masse had then been vsed in some odde Churches yet would not that serue the Fryers turne The reason is at hand because that which commeth almost 700. yeares after Christ must needes be the New religion To that of S. Austen the same answere is correspondent and our Iesuite sheweth himselfe a very silly and ridiculous disputer while hee seeketh to stablish an Article of Fayth vpon iciune and barren probabilities Fourthly that all approoued antiquitie condemneth our Iesuite with his priuate Masse In the Canons of the Apostles I find these expresse wordes Si quis Episcopus Presbyter vel Diaconus vel ex Sacerdotali catalogo facta Oblatione non coÌ„municauerit causam dicat et si probabilis fuerit veniam consequatur sin verò minus segregetur vt qui populo â—ffensionis causa sit et suspicionâ—â— dedetit aduersus eum qui obtulit tanquam non dignâ— obtulerit If any Byshop Priest or Deacon or other of the Clergie shall not Communicate in time of the Oblation let him shew the cause or if it be found reasonable let him be pardoned but if otherwise let him be excommunicate as one that hath giuen scandall and brought him into suspition which offered as if he had done amisse The Popes owne Decrees are so cleare and manifest at nothing can be more One Canon commaundeth all such to be put out of the Church as do not receiue the holy Communion these are the expresse wordes Paracta Consecratione omnes comunicent qui noluerint Ecclesiaâ—ticiâ— câ—reâ—â—liminibus Sir N. Apostoli slatuerum et suncta Romaâ—â— tinet Ecclesia Whâ—â—â— Consecration is accomplished â—â—t all that will not Communicate be put out of the Church For so the Apostles haue ordeyned and so the holy Romane Church obserueth An other Canon hath these wordes Si quis 〈◊〉 Ecclesiam Dei 〈…〉 sua auertit se a Communione sacramenti et in obseruandis ministerijs declinat constitutam regulam disciplinae istum talem proijciendum de Ecclesia Catholica esse decernimus donec panitentiam agat If any come into Gods Church and heare the holy Scriptures and superstitiously auert himselfe from the Communion of the Sacrament and in obseruing the ministeries swarue from the set Rule of discipline wee decree such a one to be excommunicate vntill he repent An other Canon hath these wordes Omnes fideles qui conueniunt in solennitatibus sacris ad Ecclesiam et scripturas Apostolorum et Euangelium audiant Qui autem non perseuerant in oratione vsque dum missa peragatur nec sanctam Communionem percipiunt velut inquietudines Ecclesiae commouenies conuenit communione priuari All the faythfull which come to the Church in the time of sacred Solemnities must heare the Scriptures of the Apostles and the Ghospell But they that doe not continue in Prayer vntill Masse be done nor receiue the holy Communion ought to be excommunicate as disquieters of the congregation S. Chrysostome is so farre from approouing priuate Masse that he calleth them impudent and wicked that beeing present doe not communicate these are his wordes Ista videlicet et nunc ad omnes nos dicit qui impudenter hic et improbè astamus Quisquis Nâ—mysteriorum consâ—rs non est impudens et improbus astat These thinges verily he now sayth to vs all which stand by impudently and wickedly For whosoeuer standeth by and doth not communicate is impudent and wicked Oh what would this holy Father say if he were this day in Rome and should see many hundredes standing by gazing and the Priest onely deuowring all He would doubtlesse tearme them most impudent and vngratious people This Subiect is plentifully disputed in my Suruey to which place I referre the Reader The 14. Chapter of Pope Martins Dispensation for the Brother to marrie his naturall Sister ALL that our Jesuite sayth in defence of Pope Martins Dispensation is plaine silence in very deed For albeit I soundly confuted the forerunner in my Booke intituled The Popes Funeraâ—l there answering to euery sentence word and syllable which B.C. in his forerunner possibly could deuise yet S. R that Learned Iesuite in his pretensed Answere to the Downefull of Poperie not able to withstand or gainesay the dint of my Authorities Argumentes and Reasons passed ouer all the same being many and of great consequence in deepe silence In like manner this Jesuite fearing to suffer shipwracke vpon the same Rocke is afraid now either to reply vpon mine Answere in the Funerall or to answer my Authors plainely named in the Triall I prooued the Question soundly and clearely in the Popes Funerall by the Authorities and plaine Testimonies of Siluester Prieras sometime Maister of the Popes sacred Pallace and a Fryer so learned that he was surnamed Absolutus Theologus of Bartholomaeus Fumus a religious dominican Fryer a famous Popish summist and a man of great Authoritie in the Holy house of popish Inquisition of Angelus de Clauasio a Papist of great learning and reputation as who was Vicar generall of the Cismontani-Minors of Cardinall Caietain the most learned Papist of that crew and of Martinus Nauarrus a singular Writer and a most famous popish Canonist This notwithstanding all the answere that can any way be extorted from the Jesuites Penne is this and no other viz. that he hath answered me in the Dolefull Knell Which answere if it be pondered seriously with all the circumstaunces thereto apperteyning is able of it selfe if nothing els could be said to ouerthrow Poperie to turne it vpside downe Marke therefore gentle Reader very attentiuely what I