would answere at aduenture I could say that God exhorts none to this vow but them on whom he hath bestowed the gift and they haue his helpe to fulfill that they haue vowed We enuie not this your speciall iudgement nor respect your slanderous challenge onely this I answere that if all the Ministers and their wiues had been as lewd as your malice can imagine they could not haue come neere the thousand part of that filthines which your Bishops Priests Friers and Nunnes committed in this land by record of popish histories Yea let iust triall be made and we will aduenture our liues that time for time there haue been since the renewing of the Gospell more and more beastly vncleane persons among your Popes Cardinals Bishops Priests Monkes Friers and Nunnes in that one Citie of Rome than among al the Ministers and their wiues in this whole realme of England speaker W. P. Yet here marke in what manner we doe it First of all though wee mislike the vowe yet wee like and commend single life Marriage indeed is better in two respects first because God hath ordained it to bee a remedie of continencie to all such persons as cannot containe secondly because it is the seminarie both of Church and Common-wealth and it bringeth forth a seede of God for the inlarging of his kingdome Yet single life in them that haue the gift of continencie is in some respects to bee preferred First because it brings libertie in persequution Thus Paul saith 1. Cor. 7. 26. I suppose it to be good for the present necessitie for a man so to bee Secondly because it frees men from the common cares molestations and distractions that bee in the familie vers 2. 28. Such shall haue trouble in the flesh but I spare you Thirdly because single parties doe commonly with more bodilie ease and libertie worship God it beeing still presupposed that they haue the gift of continencie vers 34. The vnmarried woman careth for the things of of the Lord that shee may be holy both in bodie and spirit Againe though wee mislike the vowe yet wee hold and teach that men or women being assured that they haue the gift of continencie may constantly resolue and purpose with themselues to liue and lead a single life 1. Cor. 7. 38. Hee that standeth firme in his owne heart that hee hath no neede but hath power of his owne will and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keepe his virginitie he doth well And wee imbrace the saying of Theodoret on 1. Tim. cap. 4. for he doth not saith he blame single life or continencie but he accuseth them that by law enacted compel men to follow these And men made themselues chast for the kingdome of heauen Matth. 19. 12. not by vowe but by a purpose of heart which is farre lesse then a vow and may be changed vpon occasion where as a vow cannot vnlesse it doe euidently appeare to bee vnlawfull Thirdly for such persons as are able to containe to liue single for the endes before named indeede we hold it to bee no counsell of perfection yet doe wee not denie it to bee a counsell of expedience oâ— outward ease according to that which Paul saith vers 25. I giue mine aduise and 35. I speake this for your commoditie not to intangle you in a snare Lastly we thinke that if any hauing the gift of continencie doe make a vow to liue single and yet afterward marrie the said gift remaining they haue sinned Yet not because they are married but because their vowe is broken And thus said Augustine of widowes that married after their vow lib. de bono viduit c. 9. speaker D. B. P. This may serue for a reproofe of all that M. Perkins obiecteth against the Vovv of chastitie aftervvard the man vvould somewhat reason the matter by shevving hovv he condemneth not chastitie yet saith that Marriage is better than it in two respects If Iouinian was reputed by the learnedst and holiest Fathers a Christian Epicure and a Monster because he durst make marriage equall vvith Virginitie What shall this man be who saith it is better His reasons are so childish that by the like you may proue durt to be better then gold vvherefore I vvill not stand vpon them He neuerthelesse aftervvard concludeth that one may purpose constantly vvith himselfe to lead a single life but so as he may change vpon occasion and this to be a counsell of expedience but not of perfection Lastly that if any hauing the gift of continencie do Vovv and atfervvard marâ—ie the gift remaining they haue sinned vvhich is flat against his ovvne second rule vvhich prohibits vs to leese our libertie and to make any thing vnlavvfull in conscience vvhich Christian Religion leaueth at libertie Novv to supplie M. Perkins his default vvho vvas accustomed to rehearse although many times vntowardly yet lightlie alvvaies some reasons for the Catholike partie vvhich in this question he hath vvholie omitted speaker A. W. He that will but reade what Master Perkins writes and what you answere shall see a true image of popish dealing whereby you slubber ouer the matter to which you know not what to say Is it a wrong to single life or virginitie to hold that marriage in some respect is better then it I will go further then Master Perkins hath done and not doubt to affirme that it is simply better then virginitie my reason is that it belongs to the perfection of humaine nature that there should be continuance and multiplying of the kind by propagation beside God appointed it as an especiall blessing for Adam when he was in Gods especiall fauour But if that estate be worse then the single life in which he liued before God did not blesse but punish him rather by that change therefore marriage simply is better But that virginitie might haue his due Master Perkins sets downe presently after three respects wherein it is to be preserred before marriage all which you do not once name Those Christian Fathers dealt vnchristianly with Iouinian who ascribed as much to virginitie as our Sauiour Christ or his Apostles gaue to it in any place of Scripture according to that conclusion of Theodoret who ends his discourse of virginitie with these words Such things we haue receiued being appointed and decreed by men endued with the knowledge of heauenly things which are such as do not accuse marriage but exhort vs to a life void of cares This Iouinian acknowledged and worthily denied all difference of merit betwixt a married and single life which no enemy of Iouinian can disproue no more can you Master Perkins reasons though you disgrace them all you can speaker D. B. P. I vvill briefelie proue by an argument or tvvo that it is both lavvfull and verie commendable for men and vvomen of ripe yeeres and consideration hauing vvell tried their ovvne aptnesse to Vovv virginitie if by good inspirations they be thereunto invvardly called My
of any one syllable in matter of faith you may be sure that we Catholikes cannot but carrie a verie base conceipt of your doctrine who goe about vnder the ouerworne and thredbare cloake of reformation to deface and corrupt the purer and greater part of Christian Religion especially when they shall perceiue the most points of your pretended reformation to be nothing else but olde rotten condemned heresies new scoured vp and furbushed and so in shew made more saleable vnto the vnskilfull as in this treatise shall be proued in euery Chapter speaker A. W. TO THE REFORMATION OF THE PREFACE THere are many necessarie heads of saluation wherein we and you agree 1. The Trinitie 2. Redemption by Christ against all Iewes and Heathen 3. The Godhead of Christ against Arius 4. The vnitie of his person against Nestorius 5. The truth of his Manhood though by consequence you ouerthrow it against Eutyches 6. The Godhead of the holy Ghost against Macedonius and many other Which I alleage not to make any Papist beleeue that the differences betwixt vs and you are few or small but to shew that Master Perkins speakes not against reason We are perswaded that no man may shrinke from the truth of that which is deliuered in Athanasius Creede though we dare not peremptorily condemne euery man that hath not a distinct knowledge and beleefe of euery one of the seuerall articles We are wholy of I asils iudgement that euery one ought rather to lose his life than to suffer any one syllable of Gods truth in the Scripture to be betrayed and therefore wee forbeare to ioyne with the Church of Antichrist which preferres a corrupt translation before the text it selfe speaker W. P. REVEL 18. 3. And I heard another voyce from heauen say Goe out of her my people that ye be not pertakers of her sinnes and receiue not of her plagues speaker D. B. P. ANSWERE TO THE Prologue THE learned know it to be a fault to make that the entrie vnto our discourse which may as properly fit him that pleadeth against vs but to vse that for our proeme which in true sence hath nothing for vs nay rather beareth stronglie for our aduersarie must needs argue great want of iudgement Such is the sentence aboue cited out of S. John by M. Perkins for it being trulie vnderstood is so farre off from terrifying any one from the Catholike Romane Church as it doth vehementlie exhort all to fire vnto it by forsaking their wicked companie that are banded against it speaker A. W. TO THE REFORMATION OF THE PROLOGVE IF it fall out as I make no question but it will doe that the place chosen by Master Perkins be prooued to belong to the Church of Rome where is the fault then speaker W. P. IN the former chapter S. Iohn sets downe a description of the whore of Babylon and that at large as he saw her in a vision described vnto him In the sixteenth verse of the same chapter he foretels her destruction and in the three first verses of this 18. chapter he goeth on to propound the sayd destruction yet more directly and plainely withall alleadging arguments to prooue the same in all the verses following Now in this fourth verse is set downe a caueat seruing to forewarne all the people of God that they may escape the iudgement shall befall the whore and the wordes containe two parts a commaundement and a reason The commaundement Come out of her my people that is from Babylon The reason taken from the euent least ye be partakers c. Touching the commaundement first I will search the right meaning of it and then set down the vse thereof and doctrine flowing thence In historie therefore are three Babylons mentioned one is Babylon of Assyria standing on the riuer Euphrates where was the confusion of Languages and where the Iewes were in captinitie which Babylon is in Scripture reproched for Idolatrie and other iniquities The second Babilon is in Egypt standing on the riuer Nilus and is now called Cayr of that mention is made 1. Pet. 5. v. 13. as some thinke though indeede it is as likely and more commonly thought that there is meant Babylon of Assyria The third Babylon is mystical whereof Babylon of Assyria was a tipe and figure and that is Rome which is without question here to be vnderstood And the whore of Babylon as by all circumstances may be gathered is the state or regiment of a people that are the inhabitants of Rome and appertaine thereto This may be prooued by the interpretation of the holy Ghost for in the last verse of the 17. chapter the woman that is the whore of Babylon is said to be a citie which raigneth ouer the kings of the earth now in the daies when S. Iohn penned this booke of Reuelation there was no citie in the world that ruled ouer the kings of the earth but Rome it then being the seate where the Emperour put in execution his Imperiall authoritie Againe in the seuenth verse shee is said to sit on a beast hauing seuen heads and tenne hornes which seuen heads bee seuen hils vers 9. whereon the woman sitteth and also they bee seuen kings Therefore by the whore of Babylon is meant a citie standing on seuen hills Now it is wel known not onely to learned men in the Church of God but euen to the heathen themselues that Rome alone is the citie built on seuen distinct hills called Caelius Auentinus Exquilinus Tarpeius or Capitolinus Viminalis Palatinus Quirinalis Papists to helpe themselues doe alleadge that old Rome stood on seuen hills but now is remooued further to the plaine of Campus Martins I answer that howsoeuer the greatest part of the citie in regard of habitation bee not now on seuen hils yet in regard of regiment and practise of religion it is for euen to this day vpon these hilles are seated certaine Churches and Monasteries and other like places where the Papall Authoritie is put in execution and thus Rome being put for a state and regiment euen at this day it stands vpon 7. hils And though it be come to passe that the harlot in regard of her latter dayes euē changed her seate yet in respect of her younger times in which she was bred and borne she sate vpon the 7. hills Others because they feare the wounding of their own heads labour to frame these words to another meaning say that by the whore is meant the company of all wicked men in the world whersoeuer the diuell being the head thereof But this exposition is flat against the text for she is opposed to the kings of the earth with whom she is said to commit fornication and in the last verse she is called a citie standing on seuen hils and raigning ouer the Kings of the earth as I haue said and therefore must needs be a state of men in some particular place speaker D. B. P. For by the
then admitting the purpel harlot to signifie the Roman state wee doe say that the state of Rome must bee taken as it was then when these words were spoken of it that is Pagan Idolatrous and a hot persecutor of Christians Such it had beene a little before vnder that bloodie Tyrant Nero and then was vnder Domitian which we confirme by the authoritie of them who expound this passage of the Roman state The commentary on the Apocalyps vnder Saint Ambrose name sayth the great where sometime doth signifie Rome specially vvhich at that time vvhen the Apostle vvrote this did persecute the Church of God but othervvise doth signifie the whole Citie of the Diuell And Saint Ierome who applieth the place to Rome affirmeth that she had before his dayes blotted out that blasphemie vvritten in her forhead because then the state was Christian which before had beene Heathen so that vnto the partie Pagan and not vnto the Church of God he ascribeth these works of the wicked Harlot which also the very text it selfe doth conuince for it hath That she vvas drunke vvith the blood of the Martâ—rs of Iesus Now the Church of Rome hath not then by the confession of all men drawne any blood of Christs Saints but in testimonie of his trueth had powred out abundance of her best blood Wherefore it is most manifest that the harlot could not signifie the Church of Rome so pure and free from slaughter but the Romane Empire vvhich vvas then full gorged vvith that most innocent and holy blood Againe that vvhoore is expounded To be a Citie vvhich had kingdome ouer the Kings of the earth But the Church of Rome had then no kingdome ouer the earth or any temporall dominion at all but the Romane Emperours had such soueraigne commaundement ouer many Kings vvherefore it must be vnderstood of them and not of the Church Novv to take Kingdome not properly for temporall soueraignty but for spirituall Iâ—…isdiction as some shifters doe is to she vvithout any vvarrant from the natiue signification of the vvord vnto phantasticall and voluntarie imagination And vvhereas M. Perkins saith that Ecclesiasticall Rome in respect of state princely dominion and cruelty against the Saints is all one vvith the heathâ—…sh Empire he both seeketh to deceiue and is greatly deceiued he vvould deceiue in that he doth applie vvords spoken of Rome aboue 1500. yeares agoe vnto Rome as it is at this day and yet if that were granted him he erreth foâ—â—e in euery one of his particulars For first touching princâ—â—e dominion the Romane Empire held then all Italy all Fraunce all Spayne all England a great part of Germanie of Asia and also of Afrike hauing their Proconsulles and other principall Officers in all those Countries drawing an hundred thousand millions in mony and many other commodities out of them Wherefore in princely dominion and magnificall state it surmounted Ecclesiasticall Rome which hath not temporall dominion ouer the one halfe of that one kingdome of Italy more then an hundred degrees And as for persecution the Empire slew and caused to be slaine more Saints of God in one yeare then the Church of Rome hath done of reprobates and obstinate heretikes in 1600. yeares Hauing thus proued that the whoore of Babilon signifieth the heathen state of Rome and not the Ecclesiasticall let vs now heare what you say against it Marry that the distinction of the Empire of Rome and Church of Rome is foolish and coyned of late to serue our turne which to be farre otherwise I proue out of those verie Authors who doe interpret that harlot to signifie Rome who are neither foolish nor of late daies you haue heard it before out of S. Ambrose commentaries And farther we gather it out of S. Hierome in the Epistle which you cite for he hauing resembled Rome vnto Babilon for the multitude of the wicked which yet remained in it pointeth out a more pure part saying There is in deede the holy Church there are the triumphant monuments of the Apostles and Martyrs there is the true confession of Christ there is the faith praised by the Apostle c. Be not there expressed two distinct parts of Rome Againe Tertullian who liued in the second hundred yeare vnder those persecuting Emperours saith in one place that Babilon is a figure of Rome in respect of her proud Empire and persecution of the Saints And in an other that Rome was most happie for her holy Church vnto vvhich the Apostles vvith their blood had poured forth their vvhole doctrine see a plaine distinction betweene the Heathen Empire and the holie Church of Rome Which finallie may be gathered out of the expresse word of God VVhere the Church in Babilon coelect is distinguished from the rest of that citie which was Pagan You say but without any authour that Babilon there doth not signifie Rome but either a citie in Aegypt or Assyria But Eusebins lib. 2. hist. c. 14. and S. Jerom. de Eccles. script vers Marcus with other Authors more worthie of credit doe expound it of Rome And you your selues take Babilon so Rome where you thinke that any hold may be taken against it as in the 17. of the Reuel but in S. Peters Epistle they will none of it because it would proue too plainely that S. Peter had been at Rome speaker A. W. Master Perkins hauing prooued that by Babylon Rome is signified proceedes to answere two obiections First that the citie of Rome stands not now vpon seuen hils But it did in S. Iohns daies as his reason lies and at this day popish Churches or Monasteries are situated vpon them vnder the Popes authoritie Secondly that by the whore the companie of the wicked vnder their head the diuell is vnderstood But this the text will not beare the whore being opposed to the Kings of the earth and ruling ouer them vpon this foundation Master Perkins thus builds his reason Either Rome Heathenish or Rome Christian is the whore of Babylon But Rome Heathenish is not Therefore Rome Christian is This is plainly his reason and not that which you gather The proposition is euident because the state of Rome was neuer but either Heathenish or Christian. The assumption Master Perkins proues But I must be faine to leaue his course and to follow this reformers steps The state of Rome must be taken as it is the seate of Antichrist but it was not the seate of Antichrist in S. Iohns daies for Antichrist according to your doctrine is not yet come Againe it was no mysterie for heathenish Rome to be an Idolatrous and bloody persecutor of the Christians Thirdly the state that S. Iohn calles the harlot continues till the finall destruction spoken of by him and S. Paul but the estate of heathenish Rome was decayed long since Your proofe is insufficient for you alleage but two of many that make Rome Babylon who as they deserue
Origenist taught that sinne was not taken away in Baptisme but only couered as is recorded by that holy man and auncient Father Eâ—…anius M. Perâ—ins in the name of the Church of England affirmeth in like manner that originall sinne remaineth still and raigneth in the regenerate albeit it is not imputed vnto them speaker A. W. Neither Methodius out of whom Epiphanius recites Proclus opinions in many leaues together word for word nor Epiphanius himselfe refute that of the remainders of sin after Baptisme rather they both confesse that the sproutes and branches of concupiscence abide in vs yea that sinne dwels in vs by which the diuell preuailes The Apostle saith Methodius Rom. 7. seemes to make a three-fold law The first the law of the minde according to that good that is ingrafted in vs. The second by the assault of the diuell vrging and distracting the minde by imaginations full of passion The third which triumphs in the flesh by sinne which the Apostle calles the law of sinne dwelling in our members That Hierom is of our opinion in this point it appeares in his booke against the Pelagians speaker D. B. P. Iouinian was accounted a Monster by S. Augustine for defending honest Marriage to be of equall vertue and merite with chaste Virginitie and saith further that this heresie was so sottish and fleshly that it could not deceiue any one learned Priest but onely some few simple and carnall women Yet this our English champion blusheth not to affirme that marriage is not only equall but better also in diuers respects than Virginitie speaker A. W. S. Austin was neither so ancient nor so holie as S. Paul hauing him on our side we neede not feare the other But the report you make of him is vntrue For these are his words in English This heresie preuailed so much in the citie of Rome that it is said to haue throwne into the estate of mariage euen some vowed virgins of whose chastitie there had been no suspition before So farre is Augustine from calling them simple and carnall Beside he addes though you will not be knowne of it that he weakned and ouerthrew the holy single life of holie men by rehearsing and commending the Fathers Abraham Isaack Iacob who were married men And whereas he saith it could not come to the deceiuing of any Priests for learned and any one is your glosse besides the text he seemes to attribute it to the short continuance thereof It was saith he quickly opprest and extinguished and could not come to the deceiuing of any Priests speaker D. B. P. The same olde reprobate heretike barked also against approoued feasts and fasting dayes so doe most of our Ministers at this time speaker A. W. Our Ministers doe all generally approoue both of feasts and fasting daies keeping the former more religiously than you doe ordinarily the Sabbath The latter we obserue with reuerence and humilitie whensoeuer they are appointed Fish daies superstitiously abused by you are ciuilly retained by vs with lesse riot than your selues doe vse speaker D. B. P. Vigilantius was sharpely reprooued by S. Hierome in a booke written against him and hath been euer since vnto this day esteemed a wicked heretike for denying prayer to Saints and honour to be done vnto their Reliâ—es And yet what poynt of Doctrine is more currant among the Protestants than this speaker A. W. Erasmus not without cause findes want of modestie in that treatise of Hieroms he might haue found want of truth too if Vigilantius held no worse opinion than those you recite But of the former namely praying to Saints neither the one nor the other speakes a word And indeede it was not the manner in those daies to pray to the Martyrs but to pray at their Tombes which custome it should seeme remained till that time according to the former practise of the Christians who assembled ordinarily where the Martyrs were buried before they were suffered to haue any Churches speaker A. W. In like sorte one Aërius to the Arrian heresie added this of his owne That we must not pray for the soules of our friends departed as S. Augustine hath registred And doe not all Protestants imbrace and earnestly defend the same This doctrine of prayer for the dead the deniall whereof is counted an errour in Aërius hath no foundation in the Scripture but was built vpon the tradition of the Fathers as he from whom Austin takes the accusation confesseth speaker A. W. A common custome it was of the Arrians and of other more auncient heretikes to reiect all Traditions and to rely onely vpon the written word as testifieth S. Ireneus and S. Augustine Doe not ours the same reiecting all Traditions as Mans Inuention A perilous error no doubt to rest wholy vpon the written word that is to beleeue none but God in matters of his owne worship and religion Ireneus in the places alleaged hath no word of reiecting traditions rather hee speakes the contrarie of Simon Maguâ— who reiected the Scripture to establish his owne deuices S. Austin findes no fault with Maximinus for resting vpon the Scriptures nor indeede reasonably could for it is his own doctrine in that conference with the Heretike and other where speaker D. B. P. Xeaâ—…s a Barbaâ—ous Persian indeed yet in shew a counterfeited Christian is noted for one of the first among Christians that inueyed against the Images of Saints and the worship done by true Christians vnto them as both Nicephorus and Cedâ—… comppenâ—… doe recorde The reprobate Iewes indeede before him and after euen vntill this day the misâ—râ—anâ— Turkes enemies of all Christianitie doe dwell still in the same erâ—…r And yet is not this most vehemently auerâ—ed by our Protestants and all â—aluiâ—â—sts although they cannot denie but that aboue 900. yeares agoe in the second generall Councell holden at Nice they are by the conâ—â—nt of the best and most learned of the world for euer accursed that doe denie reuerence and worshippe to be giuen vnto the Images of Saints speaker A. W. Nicephorus you should haue added Callistus that the reader might haue knowne whom you meant and haue quoted lib. 16. not 10. who liued not 400. yeeres since and Cedrenus who liued as it is thought about the yeere 1058. are neither of antiquitie nor credit to auow a historie not recorded by any of their ancients But how could Xenaias about the yeere 478. be one of the first if the Commentarie vpon Damascen say true That the worshipping of Images was condemned as superstitious by some about the beginning of the Gospell preached Cedrenus saith be was one of the first Callistus after him more then 200. yeeres saith he was the first speaker D. B. P. The second Councel of Nice was a conuenticle of Idolaters neither of the best nor of the most learned and was presently after
purple Harlot in that place is signified as shall be proued presentlie the Romane Empire as then it was the slaue of Idols and with most bloodie slaughter persecuting Christs Saints Those of the Church of Rome being as nearest vnto it so most subiect to that sacrilegious boucherie Wherefore that voice which S. Iohn heard say Goe out of her my people that you be not partakers of her sinnes c. can haue none other meaning then that all they who desire to be Gods people must separate themselues in faith and manners from them who hate and persecute the Romane Church as did then the Heathen Emperours and now doe all Heretikes Vnlesse they will be partakers of their sinnes and consequentlie of their plagues This shall yet appeare more plainelie in the examination of this Chapter Where I will deale friendly with my aduersarie and aduantage him all thaâ— I can that all being giuen him which is any way probable it may appeare more euidentlie how little he hath to any purpose out of this place of the Apocalypse whereof all Protestants vaunt and bragge so much both in their bookes and pulpits Well then I will admitte that in the 17. and 18. Chapters of the Reuel by the whoore of Babylon is vnderstood the Romane state and regiment which in lawfull disputations they are not able to proue the most iudicious Doctor S. Augustine and diuerse others of the auncient Fathers with the learned troupe of later Interpreters expounding it of the whole corps and societie of the wicked And as for the 7. hâ—llâ—s on the which they lay their foundation they are not to be taken literallie The Angell of God in the verie text it selfe interpreting the 7. heads of the beast to be aswell 7. Kings as 7. hilles But this notwithstanding to helpe you forvvaid I vvill graunt it you because some good vvriters haue so taken it And therefore omitte as imperrinent that vvhich you say in proofe of it What can you inferre hereupon Many that the Romane Church is that vvhoore of Babylon fayre and soft good Sir hovv proue you that thus The vvhoore of Babylon is a state of the Romane regment ergo the Romane Church is the vvhoore of Babylon What some of arguing call you me this By the like sophistication you may proue that Româ—…s and Râ—…s vvere the purple Harlot vvhich to affinne vvere ridiculous or vvhich is impious that the most Christian Empe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and â—â—codosius vvere the vvhâ—ore of Babilon because thes held also the state of the Romane Empire and regiment to make short the seeble force of this reason lyeth in this that they vvho hoâ—…eth the state and gouerne in the same Kingdome must needs be of like affection in Religion vvhich if it vvere necessarie then did Queene Mary of blessed memorie and her sister Eâ—zabeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 same nundes tovvards the true Catholike â—ath because they 〈◊〉 in the same chane of estate and ruled in the same Kingdome See I pray you vvhat a shamefull cauâ—… this is to rase such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A simple Logician vvould blush to argue in the parâ—…s so loose and yet they that take vpon them to controule the learnedst in the vvorld often fall into such open tallacies We desire no fauour of you but that you would acknowledge the truth when you cannot reasonably gainsay it What we can prooue you shall see by and by in the meane while your reason is naught For what though S. Austin and diuers other ancient writers with the learned troupe of your Popish interpreters doe so expound it doth it follow thereupon that in lawfull disputation the contrarie cannot be proued Could not they erre May not some other man see that which they perceiued not But what if wee shall match you in number and antiquitie of writers for our exposition First Hierome as you acknowledge afterward makes for vs and not for you so by your confession doth Tertullian but what name I seuerall men The Greeke Scholiast tels vs that diuers Interpreters by the harlot vnderstood old Rome and he that so thinks in his iudgement erres not though saith he it may be vnderstood of new Rome or the time of Antichrists comming Yea Austin himselfe grants that Rome in Greeke and Latin writers is as it were a second Babylon and he calles it Babylon of the West More then that your owne writers deny those Ho milies on the Apocalyps to be Auâ—tins and think them rather to be written by Ty conius the Donatist which Ribera the Iesuite saies he hath found by certaine arguments and euident reasons Besides Baptista Regnald affirmes that the Commentaâ—ies of diners of the ancients Bede Ambrose Ausâ—ert Anselme Prunasius and Austin are mysticall and allegoricall not historicall so that wee are not to rest vpon any of them for the true and proper meaning of the text It shewes more discretion than plaine dealing to omit that which you cannot answere Master Perkins reasons are euident and strong The citie that in S. Iohns daies raigned ouer the Kings of the earth is the whore of Babylon Apoc. 17. 18. But Rome that is ciuitas the state of Rome and Rome onely is that citie that raigned ouer the Kings of the earth in S. Iohns daies Therefore Rome and Rome onely is the whore of Babylon 2 The citie that in S. Iohns daies was seated on seuen hilles is the seate of the whore of Babylon Apoc. 17. 9. But Rome that is vrbs the towne of Rome is that only is the citie that in S. Iohns daies was seated on seuen hilles Therefore Rome and Rome onely is the seate of the whore of Babylon To the proposition of the latter reason you answere that the seuen hilles are not to be taken literally because the Angell makes the seuen heads aswell seuen Kings as seuen hilles But surely that rather makes against you for as the seuen Kings are literally to be vnderstood so are the seuen hilles both being signified by the seuen heads not that the seuen hils are seuen Kings For the woman or Citie doth not sit vpon the Kings but rather the Kings vpon her Besides it were a strange interpretation to expound heads by hilles and hils by Kings whereas heads doe more resemble Kings than hilles doe speaker W. P. And the Papists themselues perceiuing that this shift will not serue their turne make two Romes heathenish Rome and that whereof the Pope is head now say they the whore spoken of is heathenish Rome which was ruled by cruell tyrants as Nero Domitian and the rest and that Rome wherof now the Pope is head is not here meant Behold a vaine and foolish distinction for Ecclesiasticall Rome in respect of state princely dominion and cruelty in persecuting the Saints of God is all one with the heathenish Empire the See of the Bishop being turned into the Emperours court as all histories doe manifest speaker D. B. P. Well
Kingdomes your principall pillers of the new Gospell comprehended within the number of the ten mentioned there in S. Iohn which hate the harlot Yes marie Why then they are enemies of Christ and Satans souldiers for in the 13. verse it is said of these that they shall deliuer their power vnto the beast which signifieth either the Diuell or Antichrist and shall sight with the Lambe and the Lambe shall ouercome them because he is Lord of Lords and King of Kings Is not this doating in an high degree to infame so notoriouslie them of whom he would speake most honour and to make the special Patrons of their new Gospel the Diuels Captaines and fiercely to wage battaile against Christ Iesus See how heate of wrangling blindeth mens iudgements But you proceed and say that we further hold that the blood of the Saints and Martyrs was not shed in Rome but in Ierusalem Here is a confusion of Men and matters for we say that the blood of many Saints reheaised in the Apoc. was shed in Rome by the tyrannicall Emperours but the martyring of those tvvo principall witnesses Enoch and Elias recorded in the cleauenth of the same shall be at Ierusalem aswell because the text is very plainc for it specifying that their bodies shall lie in the streetes of that great Citie where their Lord was crucified as for that the ordinarie interpreters of that place doe so take it But M Perkins holdeth that the place where Christ was crucified signifieth here not Ierusalem but Rome because Christ was crucified there in his members so it might aswell signifie any other place of persecution as Rome The reason therefore being naught worth befo rt fiath it with the name of S. Ierome but citeth in the margent a letter of two vertuous Matrons Paula and Eustochium Good Sir if S. â—â—reme had meant that that Epistle should haue had his authoritie he would haue set it out in his owne name vvhich seeing he thought not expedient set the authoritie of it aside and vige his reasons iâ— you thinke it vvorth your labour and you shall be ansvvered In the meane season I hope all sober Christians vvill take the place vvhere our Sauiour Christ vvas nailed on the Crosse to signifie rather Ierusalem then Rome And consequently all that you haue alleadged out of Scripture to proue the vvhore of Babylon to figure the Ecclesiasticall state of Rome not to be vvorth a rush speaker A. W. To make the world drunke with the wine of the wrath of her fornication is not to inforce men by file and sword as the Roman Emperors did but to allure them by poysoned doctrine and counterfeite holines which course hath been almost proper to the Church of Rome The like signification hath the other speech of committing fornication with the Kings of the earth which argueth a delight whereby they were drawne not a violence of inforcement yea the idolatrie the Apostle speakes of is not the grosse worshipping of salse gods by profest idolatrie but in a mysterie the false worshipping of the true God Against his reason you except not but charge him with doting in a high degree for making the Kings of England Scotland c. Satans souldiers And such in deed they were when they gaue their power to the beast and as long as they continued the Popes seruants but the Apostle shewes that at the last after their drunkennes and fornication the Lord hauing discouered their shame vnto them they should hate the whore c. which they haue happily done yea euen Bohemia though a Popish Emperour for this present gouerns it and shall in Gods good time wholy consume her flesh with fire It is neither diuinity nor reason to imagine that Henoch and Eltas hauing been taken from the earth by God to their reward should come againe into the world and be slaine by Antichrist As vntrue is it that by that great city Ierusalem is meant for that terme is neuer giuen to it in all the Reuelation but to Rome ordinarily especially chapters 17. 18. yea our Sauiour himselfe was not crucified in Ierusalem but without it In the great city that is in the Romane Empire he was indeed crucified yet is he also daily crucified in his members by the instigation and appointment of the Pope of Rome by whom all the later persecutions of true Christians haue been raised in seuerall countries howsoeuer the secular power hath been the instrument of his crueltie speaker W. P. M. Perkins brings not onely Hieroms name but his iudgment that Epistle being of his writing in the name of those two Matrons yet we stand nor vpon his authoritie though we might well inough against you and your ordinarie interpreters without name but vpon the reasons before deliuered which proue that the great city is not Ierusalem but Rome Which exposition besides the authoritie of the text hath the sauour and defence of auncient and learned men Bernard saith They are the ministers of Christ but they serue Antichrist Againe The beast spoken of in the Apocalyps to which a mouth is giuen to speake blasphemies and to make warre with the Saints of God is now gotten into Peters chaire as a lyon prepared to his pray It will be said that Bernard spake these latter wordes of one that came to the Popedome by intrusion or vsurpation It is true indeed but wherefore was he an vsurper He rendreth a reason thereof in the same place because the Antipope called Innocentius was chosen by the kings of Almaine France England Scotland Spaine Hierusalem with consent of the whole Clergie and people in these nations and the other was not And thus Bernard hath giuen his verdict that not only this vsurper but all the Popes for this many yeeres are the beast in the Apocalyps because now they are onely chosen by the colledge of Cardinals To this agreeth the decree of Pope Nicholas the second ann 1059. that the Pope shall afterward be created by the suffrages of the Cardinall Bishops of Rome with the consent of the rest of the Clergie and people and the Emperor himselfe and all Popes are excommunicate and accursed as Antichrists that enter otherwise as all now doe Ioachimus Abbas saith Antichrist was long since borne in Rome and shall be yet aduanced higher in the Apostolike See Petrarch saith Once Rome now Babylon And Ireneus booke 5. chap. last said before all these that Antichrist should be Lateinus a Romane speaker D. B. P. Novv let vs come to the auncient and learned men vvhom you cite in fauour of your exposition The first is S. Bernard vvho saith that they are the ministers of Christ but they serue Antichrist Of vvhom speaketh that good religious Father forsooth of some officers of the court of Rome Good vvho vvere as he saith the ministers of Christ because they vvere lavvfully called by the Pope to their places but serued Antichrist for that
a sentence of his in commendation of Pope Eugenius which is so full of flatterie that I say not impietie that it can carrie no credit with any modest Christian. It should seeme you saw so much your selfe and therefore craftily left out these absurd and vile speeches viz. Thou art Abel in primacie Noah in gouernment in Patriarkship Abraham in order Melchisedech in authoritie of iudging Samuel in vnction that is either in annoynting or in being annoynted Christ. If this be not a blinde sentence on Bernards part and a broken sentence on yours there is nothing but may abide the light be it neuer so false and be accounted whole be it neuer so mangled It is rather grosse ignorance in you to finde fault with that you vnderstand not Master Perkins neither saith nor meanes that there were many Bishops of Rome at once and yet there haue been three Popes together but according to the Canon cals the Cardinals Bishops of Rome referring this word of Rome not to Bishops simply but to Cardinall Bishops Now all Cardinals were Cardinals of Rome or of the Romish Church The Canon indeede puts not in those words of Rome but the sense is nothing altered by the adding of them For the cleere vnderstanding of the matter we are to know that all Cardinals are either Cardinall Bishops whom the Canon appoints first to consult about electing of the Pope or Cardinall Clerkes that is of some inferiour order of the Clergie the general name wherof is Clerke whether it be Priesthood Deaconship c and these must in the second place be called to the election Now let men iudge whether Master Perkins or you are in fault This Canon is brought to prooue the former proposition that he is no lawfull Pope who is chosen only by the Cardinals and not also by the consent of the rest of the Clergie and people If you had been as carefull to auoide slandering as that reuerend and learned writer was to take heede of vntruths you would neuer haue raised such a suspition of him in this point For the cleering of him let his owne desence against Master Hardings reproches speake For the present Roger Houeden who liued in that time records the historie and sets downe Ioachims words to King Richard That Antichrist was alreadie borne in the citie of Rome and that he should be exalted into the Apostolike seate But you except against Ioachim as an heretike so doth not Bellarmine but onely denies that he writ any such thing It is true that the Councell of Lateran vnder Pope Innocent the third condemned a certaine booke that Abbat Ioachim writ against Peter Lombard Bishop of Paris commonly called the Master of the Sentences concerning the vnitie or essence of the Trinitie but it did not reiect him as an heretike yea the Councell specially addes that they will not by their sentence any way derogate from the Abbey of Florence whereof he was the orderer as well because the orders in it were good as also for that he had submitted all his writings to the Apostolike see Therefore Iodocus Coccius makes him one of his Latin Doctors out of whom he confirmes your Popish doctrine And Trithemius saith that he was a man studious and exercised in the Scriptures and that he writ many things against the Iewes and other aduersaries of the Catholike faith Petrark one of the lights of his age for learning wrote about 250. yeeres since that Rome was become Babylon and not onely Babylon but false and wicked Babylon Further in the same place he calles her The fountaine of griefe the lodge of wrath the schoole of error the temple of heresie a shamelesse strumpet which hauing been founded in chastitie humilitie and pouertie hath lifted vp her hornes against her founders the Emperours In another place he calles her couetous Babylon that hath filled vp the measure of Gods wrath with impious and wicked vices so that it runnes ouer In a third he termes her impious Babylon from whom all shame is fled the lodge of griefe and mother of errors in whom there is no goodnes I set not down all he speakes against her somewhat I haue touched that I might see how easily you will answere his words but I thinke he that hath read Bellarmine of this point may gesse before hand what you can say in the matter Irenaeus as you truly say determines not what shall be Antichrists name and leanes more to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet neither doth he allow of that because a man as hee saith may with likelihood gather by many things that his name perhaps shall not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he affirmes that it is very likely and giues his reason of it because the most true kingdome had that name Master Perkins expounded it not as a proper name but as an appellatiue because neither the Euangelist nor Irenaeus doe intend to shew Antichrists proper name but to make knowne the name of the Beast which Antichrist should make all take Now the Beast being the Romane or Latin state the name also must be sutable thereunto as wee see it is our Papists calling themselues Romane that is Latin Catholikes I will not fall into exhortation hereupon only I desire all men that haue care of their saluation to consider without preiudice whether it be not euident that the state of Rome whereof the Pope is head is the whore of Babylon prophecied of by S. Iohn Reuelat 17. speaker W. P. Againe this commandement must not so much be vnderstood of a bodily departure in respect of cohabitation and presence as of a spirituall separation in respect of faith and religion And the meaning of the holy Ghost is that men must depart from the Romish Church in regard of Iudgement and doctrine in regard of their faith and the worship of God Thus then we see that the words containe a commaundement from God inioyning his Church and people to make a separation from Babylon Whence I obserue That all those who will bee saued must depart and separate themselues from the faith and religion of this present church of Rome And whereas they are charged with schisme that separate on this manner the truth is they are not schismatiks that doe so because they haue the commandement of God for their warrant and that partie is the schismatike in whom the cause of this separation lieth and that is in the Church of Rome namely the cup of abomination in the whores hand which is their heretical and schismaticall religion speaker D. B. P. And because I purpose God willing not only to confute what M. Perkins bringeth against the Catholike doctrine but some what also in euerie Chapter to fortifie and confirme it I will here deliuer what some of the most auncient most learned