de vita obitu Clarissimi Viri Theodori Bezae the Protestant recordeth the battaile of Druce and sayth that Bezâ— was there present euen armed with weapons encoraging the souldiers to fight for the defence of their Religion We further may reade how it is registred that the (13) In the History of France written by Iohn de Serres Protestants of France treated touching peace partly as humble subiects partly as armed men lyke to such who beg an Almes with their naked swords in their Hands Now to shew who were the Battefeu's in all these Rebellions and Insurrections I will produce the Words of the French Ministers themselues who in their Assembly did see forth certaine Canons printed at Berna Anno 1572. where we thus read in the third Canon In euery Citty all shall sweare that they and their Posterity shall not violate but obserue the Points following Canon 40. Vntill it shall please God in whose hands are the Harts of Kings to change the hart of the French Tyrant c. In the meane time let euery Citty chuse an ancient Magistrate to gouerne them as wel in warre as in peace c. Let all Captaines and Leaders neuer lay downe their weapons as long as they shall see their Aduersaries to persecute the doctrine of Saluation c. And yet further If God shall vouchsafe to raise another Prince to take reuenge of our Aduersaries Sinnes and to deliuer his People they are then to subiect themselues to that Prince as to another Cyrus sent to them from God c. Thus we see how our French Ministers do indoctrinate their Proselytes in the mystery of Rebellion and Treason against their lawfull and naturall Princes and this only in maintenance of their innouations in Fayth first disseminated by Luther and his Schollers But here let me vse an introuersion and reflex vpon my owne Country How much then O France art thou departed from thy selfe In former times our owne forces vnited with a true coniunction of mynds made vs not only formidable to other Nations but also aduanced our state to that largenes of Empire which at this day it enioyeth But since your Gospell My Countrimen first got on wing what secret molitions what proditious what euisceration and disbowelling of your owne deare Country hath this viperous brood of your Reformed Religion attempted But I will stay my selfe in discoursing of my owne Country any further I am loath to be offensiue to neighboring Princes either aliue or dead Neuerthelesse before I end this Parallel I cannot but in few words touch vpon one Act of immanity perpetrated by Elizabeth heretofore Queene of England vpon the Queene of Scots Mother to Iames at this present King of England a peacefull mercifull and learned Prince This foresaid Queene to whom Nature and Fortune had contributed much but Grace and Vertue nothing This English Semiramis a fitting branch of such a Stemme exercized an vnheard vnhumanesse and ferocity by putting to cruell death the forsaid most worthy Catholike Princesse who in her youth was maried to our Prince Dolphine of France Concerning whom only Vertue and Doscent came in not to plead for for that must not be admitted but to accuse her In which most barbarous Act a Woman did butcher a Woman The Regnant her next Successour The annointed Gods annointed finally a Queene a Queene But as vn willing to soule my Pen any further in this most dishonorable subiect I will passe to the next Paralleâ—â— Only I here referre the Reader to obserue the cruell barbarous proceedings of Miâ—humet against Christians and of those of the reformed Religion against their owne Brâ—thren against their Catholike Princes as also against their Catholike Neighbours which done I hope it will appeare that our New Ghospellers though perhaps they do not fully equall Mahumet in immanity and cruelty yet are not many degrees short to him therein And heere I would not be reputed to be of that seuere iudgment as to charge all the French Protestants with disloyall minds against their Catholike Princes No God forbid For I do hould diuers of them trusty and faythfull though not for such acknowledged by all other Catholiks So many counterfeite Iewells make the true suspected The 12. Parallel Whether Mahumetisme or Lutheranisme more inclines their Belieuers to Vice and Sinne CHAP. XIII IN this place I will compare the doctrine of Mahumet with the doctrine of Luther and his Ospring And so see whether of them stand more changeable in lesning of Vice and sinne as not reputing it hurtfull to mans Saluation To begin then with Mahumet We find him as aboue I haue shewed thus to teach in his Alcoran Vâ—ores quotiescunque (1) Azoera 8. placuerit duas scilicet tres aut quatuor ducite Et cum contingerit eaâ— non diligere vnam pro alia mutare licet Take as many wiues as you will either two or three or foure And if it happen that any of them you shall not loue it is lawfull to change her for another Wherein Mahumet I freely confesse warranteth the perpetrating of sinne though he might make a shew though falsly of securing this his wicked Position by his owne vnlawfull doctrine of Polygamy to which doctrine Brentius the Protestant affoardeth great liberty as elswhere is made manifest The like lustfull doctrine Mahumet teacheth in another passage of his Alcoran saying Omnes (2) Azoare 43. mulieres iua manui per emptienem suppositas amitaetuae materieraeque filias omnes item bonas mulieres tibi volenti gratis succumbere captentes licitas constituimus We ordaine that it shall be lawfull for thee to lye with all such bond slaue women which thou shalt redeeme by bying also it shal be lawfull for thee to haue the vse of the body of the daughters of thy Aunts either by the Fathers syde or the Mother syde yea of all sayre Women which couer to prostitute themselues to thee willingly These two are the two chiefest passages in the Alcoran for the patronizing of sinne Now let vs looke into the doctrine of our New Gospellers obserue how they teach that Sinne as if it were but an intentionall Notion of the Mynd is in no sort preiudiciall to the Soule First then Luther doth thus strangely oracle in defence of sinne As (3) Luther 〈◊〉 loc com class 5. pag. 27. nothing doth iustify but fayth so nothing sinneth but vnbeliefe Againe A Christian (4) Luther tom 2. Wittenb de Captiuit Babilon fol. 74. or baptized Man is so rich as that he cannot loose his Saluation by any Sinne how great soeuer vnlesse he will not belieue And Luther yet more No (5) Luth. in sermonibus worke is disallowed or condemned by God except the Authour thereof be disallowed According to which most licentious doctrine Beza thus writeth Dauid (6) Beza in respons ad Act. colloq Montisbelgâ— pag. 44. 48. by his adultery and neurther did not loose the Holy Ghost and
cum anno 15â—3 Trinity one very God haue mercy vpon us Ad also he further sayth The Word (7) Luth. in Postill maiore Basiâ—eâ—e aâ—ud Heruagium in euarrat Euang. Dom. Trinity is but an huâ—â—â—ne Inuention and soundeth coldly And hereupon it is that (8) Calu. epist 2. ad Polonos extat in his tract Theol. pag. 796. Caluin following Luther he in thus writeth Precatio vulgè trita est Sancta Trinitas vnus Deus misérere nostrâ— mihi non placei That Prayer Holy Trinity c. is very vulgar and pleaseth me not And in â—egard of this former doctrine and as not acknowledging Christ to be Consubstantiall to his Father Luther belcheth out these blasphâ—â—uous words Anima (9) Luth. in lib. contra Iacobâ—â— Lacoâ—â—â—â—ons 2. Wittemberg edit antâ—o â—351 mea odit Omâ—usion optimè exigerunt Aâ—iani nevocem illem prophanant noâ—am regulis fidei statut liceret My Soulâ—â— hateth the word Homâ—ousiâ—s or Consubstantialis and the Arians deseruedly insisted vpon that this Word should not be inserted in the rules of fayth Finally from hence it riseth that Luther expungeth out of his duch Bibler that markable passage of sacred Scripture in proofe of the Trinity There (10) 1. Ioan. 5. are three which giue witnes in Heauen the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are One. And according to this doctrine of Luther it proceeded that the Protestant Deuines (11) In Synod Vilnae habis anno 1589. of Lituania enacted by Synodicall authority that the Word Trinity thould not be vsed any longer So crosse these men are in doctrine to the ancient Apostolike Fayth teaching Christ to be God and Consubstantiall with his Father and that the diuine Maiesty (12) Bernard did send the Word into the World and yet retayned with him the Word Concerning Caluins dislike besides what is aboue said of the doctrine of the Trinity and consequently of Christ being God it is more fully discouered by his interpreting of all chiefe places of Scripture produced by all Antiquity in proofe of the Trinity with the Ariahs and against all other Christians He thus by his false commenting of them main â—â—yping that they are wrongfully alledged in defence of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity I will here insist in some few particulars And first that markable place â—l (13) Iohn 10. and the Father are Vnum one thing this stigmaticall Apostaâ—â— thus paraphrazeth Abusi sunt hoc loco Veteres vt prâ—barent Christaine esse Patri 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The antient Doctoure haue abusiuely alledged this place to proue Christ to be Consubstantiall to his Father Neque enim Christus de Vnitate substantia disputat sed de Consensis For heare Christ disputeth not of the Vnity of substance but of Consent Againe where it is said The Lord (15) Genes c. 19. rayned vpon So dome and Gomorâ—â— fire from the Lord Caluin thus anoideth this restimony by saying (16) Caluin in Gones c. 19. Quod Veteres Christs diuinitatem hoc testimonie probare conati sunt minimé firmumestâ— It is noc solid and firme to proue from this Testemony the diuinity of Christ as the Fathers attempted to haue done In like sort Where it is said Thou (17) Hebr. 1. Psalm 2. are my somne hodie this day I haue begotten thee Which place is produced not only by the Fathers but euen by the (18) Heb. 1. Apostle to proue Christs diuinity yet Caluin thus shifteth it of saying Scio (19) Caluin in Psalm 2. hunc locum de aetorna generatione Christs c. I know well that this place is expounded by many of the eternall Generation of Christ who touching the Word Hodie in this teâ—â— haue â—uer subtily disputed To oâ—â—it diuers other (20) Touching the word Eloim in Gâ—nes c. 1. and out of the Psalm 33. passages of Scripture vrged by the Fathers in proufe of the Trinity where we read that most â—â—â—uinâ—ing Text There be three (21) 1. Iohn c. â— which giue testimony in Heauen the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three be One Caluin thus auoydeth the force thereof by saying Quòd dicit Tras esâ—e Vnum ad EssentiaÌ„non refertur (22) Caluin in 8. Ioan. c. 5. sed ad CoÌ„sensum poâ—iuÌ„s Where the Apostle sayth that Three are One these words are not to be referrad to the Essence but rather to Consent Thus we see how Caluin thereby to conspire with Mahumet the Turks and the Arians in denying the Blessed Trinity Christ to be God hath poysoned the chiefest and most forcing passages of Gods Word euer anciently produced for proofe of that supreme Mystery with his most wicked expositions of them A Point so cleare that Aegidius (23) Hunius in his books entituled Caluinus Iâ—daizaâ—â— Huunius the Protestant chargeth Caluin with Iudaisme for such his pestilent deprauing of the former sacred Texts of Scripture O Impiety scarsly piacular since he who created the World is here not acknowledged by the World Mundus (24) Iohn 1. per ipsum factut est mundus euni non cognouit The 17. Symbolisme Concerning the suffering of Christ. CHAP. XVII TO proceed further Mahumet affirmeth that Christ did not suffer for MaÌ„kind since he sayth that Christ did not suffer death at al. Thus did Mahumet euen wound and crucify Christ of new in teaching with Eutiches that Christ was not wounded or crucified at all For thus we read in the Alcoran iudaei (1) Azoâ—â—â— 1â— â—â— Mariae blasphemiam immoderatam contumeliam inferunt dum eius filium Christuâ—â— Dei nuncium se interemisse perâ—ibent Euns â—â—im â—equaquam sed alterum et â—milem interfecerunt quia Deut incenâ—prehensibilis sapâ—ens eum ad se migrare fecit The Iewes do offer blasphemy and immoderate contumely to Mary whiles they say they did put to death Christ her sonne being the Messenger of God for him they killed not but another like to him for God being incomprehensible and wise caused him to leaue the World and remooue to him From whence we infer that since Christ according to Mahumets doctrine did not dye at all that therefore in his iudgment he dyed not for the Redemption of Mankind Luther and his followers do at least in words grant that Christ did corporally dye But they further teach that his death of Body could not nor did redeeme the World except his Diuinity had also suffered Thus they annexing this Impossibility of Christs suffering according to his Godhead since true Diuinity is impassible And thus potentially they teach with Mahumet that Christ did not redeeme the World contrary to the Sentence of Gods Vniuersall Church maintayning that Christ who had no sinne became a Sacrifice for sinne Now that Luther teacheth that Christ suffered besides his Corporall death according to his diuinity is euident out of Luthers owne words which are these Cum (2) Luther in
Confess maiore de caena Domini credo quòd sola humana natura prome passa est c. When I do belieue that only the Humane Nature suffered for me Christ is a Sauiour of a vile and small account and needeth also a Sauiour for himselfe an execrable Blasphemy since in Christ his Passion through the coniunction of the Diuinity with the Humanity an infinit debs was discharged by a finit payment and yet only infinity of satisfaction doth truly expiate infinity of sinne The same Luther in another place thus writeth Pertinacissime (3) Luther l. de Concil par 2. contra me pugâ—abant quod diuinitas Christi pati non posset They contended most pertinaciously with me for that they maintained the diuinity of Christ could not suffer And Musculus a great Lutheran agreeth with Luther herein of whom Siluester Checanorius a Protestant thus writeth andraas Musculus non veritus fuit palà m dicere c. Andrew (4) In dialog de corruptis moribus v triusque partis Art 3. fol. 5. Musculus was not afraid opeÌ„ly to say That the Diuine Nature of Christ which is God was dead together with the humane Nature vpon the Crosse Thus did Luther and his scholler conspire with Mahumet in frustrating the Redemption of the world by Christ seing Luther would not grant his Corporall death preuayled any thing except his Diuinity which was impossible to doe did suffer also O how forgetfull was Luther with Mahumet of the words of the Apostle Reconciliati (5) Rom. 5. sumus Deo per morteÌ„ filij eius We are reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne And how far distant was his iudgment from S. Austins iudgment herein who writing of Heresies in generall particularly recordeth this opinion of Luther in these words There (6) August com â— de Haeresi ad Quodvult Deum Haeres 73. is an Heresy which teacheth that Christs diuinity suffered when his flesh was fastaned vpon the Crosse The 18. Symbolisme Touching the second Person in the B. Trinity CHAP. XVIII TO passe yet further touching the Second Person of the most Sacred Trinity This is an Azoara in the Alcoran Deus (1) Azoara 27.28 est substantia necessario existens eui impossibile est vt naturam aliunde mutuetur God is a necessary substance to whome it is impossible to take or borrow his Nature from another And againe in another part of the Alcoran we thus find set downe Constanter (2) Azoara 40. 53. dic illis Christianis Deum vnum essâ—â—ecessariò omnibus qui nec genuit nec generatus est nec habet quidquam simile Mantaine constantly to those Christians that God is but one to All who hath neither begot or is begotten and who hath not like to him From these passages of the Alcoran we fynd that according to Mahumet God cannot borrow his Nature from another Now to apply this The Protestants teach that Christ hath his diuine nature from himselfe and not of his Father So teach Caluin (3) Caluin in examin persidiae Valentini Geneilis extaâ— in eract Theolog. pag. 77â— and Beza (4) Beza contra Hâ—chusium besides many others And the mayne Reason why these Protestants teach that Christ hath not his Essence of his Father but of himselfe is taken our of the former Azoara in the Alcoran and in that respect borrowed from Mahumet To wit because God cannot borrow or take his Nature from another And thus we see how our Ghospellers conioyne with Mahumet in denying Christ as God to haue his diuine Essence from his Father and by consequence admitting Mahumets ground to be true which also is their ground that Christ is not God Which Blasphemy of theirs is wholy repugnant to the Nicâ—â—â— Councell and Athanasius his Creed Both which teach that Christ taketh his Diuine Nature from his Father and that he is God of God Behould here O you my Countrimen how these Blasphemies haue begun a pulluler â—'enracener entrerous and how your chiefe Doctours by way of necessary Inference grounded vpon Mahumets Alcoran do deny Christ to be God and therein do deny with Mahumet the most Blessed rudeuided Trinity in which most Reuerend Mystery to speake in the Churches Idiome God remained that which afore he was and assumed that which afore he was notâ— suffering neither commixture nor diuesion But to returne According to what is aboue deliuered Osiander the Protestant had iust reason thus to exprobrat the Reformed Arians of these dayes in Poloniâ— which Men are Protestants refined or sublimated Illi (5) Osiander Câ—â—â— â—6 pag. 26â— aiuâ—â— Deum vnum in Essentia triâ—â—â— in Personiâ— esse commentum Antichristi c. These reformed Arians teach that to say God is One in Essence but three in Person is a fiction of Antichrist And that it is the three headed Câ—rbâ—â—â—s the God Baal Moluch c. Did euer Mahumet or Sergius eructate out of their impure breasts such poyson as the Arions of these tymes comparting with Mahumet and all originally Protestanis haue done The 19. Symbolisme Touching the ouerthrow and implicite deniall of Christ his Passion CHAP. XIX YEt further to discourse touching the supreme Mysteries of Christ. Mahumet in his Alcoran teacheth as aboue is shewed that Christ did not suffer death vpon the Crosse (1) Azoara 〈◊〉 but one like vnto him did suffer Well Luther (2) Luther lib. quod Verbe Domini firmiter stant and the Lutherans (3) Kempniâ—ius 2. part Examin c. 4. â— 13 Illyricus lib. de mystica Sacramentali extrema praesentia Corporis Domini in Caena with ioint consent maintaine that the Body of Christ through its hypostaticall and inseparable Vnion with the Diuinity is in all Places True it is that the Deity is euery where yet no where but in it selfe And that Gods immensity is such as that it includeth in it selfe euery thing and yet is included in euery thing But howsoeuer this he notwithstanding certaine it is that the doctrine of the Vbiquity of Christs body and humanity maintained violently by Luther and others doth vtterly ouerthrow all the mysteries of Christ and particularly of his Death and Passion and thereby it makes our Nouellists to ioyne hands with Mahumet in Vertually denying the said Mysteries For once granting that Christs body is in all places then followeth it that it was in the Virgins wombe after its byrth or death That it was in the graue before Christs death and after his Resurrection Finally that it was vpon the Crosse after it was taken downe and in Heauen before its Ascension Thus we obserue that this doctrine of Vbiquity taught by Luther wholly destroyeth and frustrateth the Mistery of our Sauiours death and Passion Therefore I conclude that Luther and the Vbiquitaryes do ioyne and agree by ineuitable deductions taken from their owne doctrine with Mahumet in implicitly denying that Christ did really and truly suffer death for the Saluation of Man
Gospellers do teach that Matrimony is not a Sacrament but only an Office or Function of Nature ordained for the Conseruation or perpetuating of Mankind In respect of which Office or End it is nor repugnant but rather consonant and sutable to Polygamy For in this sense Matrimony is but a Ciuil Contract but euery Ciuill Contract by the ioint Consent of the Contractors may be dissolued and the same or a like Contract without any Iniustice to any may be made againe with others Secondly the Protestants generall doctrine of the Necessity of hauing the Vse of a Woman most strongly induceth the doctrine of Polygamy Now touching the Necessity of the Act of Copulation betwene man and Woman obserue I pray besides that aboue said of this point what your Parent from whose loynes all you Hugenors are proseminated speakes hereof Luther then your first Apostle thus 〈◊〉 â—â—â—heth Quà m (2) Luther tom 5 de Matrimon fol. â—19 non est in meis viribus vt Vir 〈◊〉 sim tam non est mei iuris vt absque muliere sim As it is not in my power not to be a Man so it is not in my power to liue without a Woman And againe in the same place Verbum hoc Crescite multiplicamini non est praeceptum sed plus quà m Praeceptum That Sentence Increase and multiply is not a Precept but more then a Precept being a diuine Worke which is not in our power to be hindered or omitted but is as necessary as that I am a Man more necessary then to eate to drinke to sleepe to walke c. And speaking in the same place to women Luther thus indoctrinateth them Vt in manu tua non est vt fâ—mina non sis sic nec in te esâ— vt absque viro degas As it is not in thy choice not to be a Woman so it is not in thy power that thou thouldest liue without a Man For the Counsell or Election is not heere free but it is Necessary For Marem feminae feminam mari sociari oportet Now then dreaming Luthers doctrine herein to be true doth it not vnauoidably inuolue in it selfe the doctrine of Polygamy if the parties maried through impotency or some casuall disease cannot performe the duty of Mariage or should for a long time be separated in place the one from the other since it is taught we see as true That A Man cannot liue without the vse of a Woman nor a Woman without the vse of a Man The third Ground of our Euangelists implying the doctrâ—ne of Polygamy is the Ordinary doctrine of Diuorce euen for any small occasion taught by them and most fully by Bucer who much enlargeth himselfe herein Sortably hereto Bucer alloweth the liberty of diuorce and marying againe in case of departure (3) Bucer in Script Anglic de regnâ— Christi l 2. c. 16. of the one party from the other In case of Homicide (4) Bucer ibidem cap. 37. or Theft Or of the Incurable Infirmity (5) Bucer ibidem c. 4â— of the Woman by Childbirth Or if the Man proue Lunatike Or when either party is become vnable to render nuptiall duty In all which cases Bucer (6) Bucer ibidem cap. 124. concludeth lawfulnes of diuorce and Mariage againe maintayning the same to be Verbo (7) Bucer ibidem cap. 124. Dei consentiens agreable to the Word of God Now according to this doctrine of Bâ—cer Luther thus adiudgeth The (8) Luther tom 5. Wittemberg Sermon de Matrimonio fol. 123. Magistrats duty if the myfe be froward and will refuse â—er Husbands bed is to curbe the wyfe yea to put her to death This if the Magistrate omit the Husband must imagine that his wyfe is stolne away by â—heauâ—â— or dead and let him consider how to marry another Thus Luther And thus we obserue that from the former Principles and Theoâ—â—â—s of your owne Teachers to wit that Mariage is no Sacrament That it is not possible for a Man to liue without a Woman or a Woman without a man lastly that Diuorce vpon seuerall Cases and to marry againe is most lawfull the doctrine of Polygamy is warrantable and is to be put in practise From all which it is necessarily euicted that Luther and the Lutherans consent with Mahumet and the Turkes in maintenance or defence of Polygamy or hauing many Wiues at one and the same tyme. Who obserueth then not here that the spirit of our Gospellers of which they do so much glory like to those things which beget meere Contraries ingenders corporall and fleshly desires The 26. Symbolisme Touching the contempt of the Crosse CHAP. XXVI IN the Alcoran (1) Azâ—â—râ—â— we thus read Iudaâ— Maria blasphemiam immoderatam c. The Iewes do offer great contumely to Mary when they say they put to death her sonne Christ Iesus for him they did not kill but another like to him Now vpon this ground Mahomet and the Turks did extremely hate the Crosseâ— noâ— enduring the signe thereof or suffering 〈◊〉 Crosse to stand in any place or Nation subiect to them Our Reformists though vpon another ground do no lesse hate the Crossâ—â— then the Turks doe as the whole World knoweth and is aboue in part I haue shewed Thus Mahumet and our Reformists do conspire and agree in presecuting the Crosse with an intestime hatred though the Reason of this their Hatred be different to them both And thus the Crosseâ— is despised as being the remembrance of Christs Charity dying vpon it whose graue after the taking downe of his sacred Body from the Crosse became as it were that wombe from whence the lyfe of our Saluation did rise The 27. Symbolisme Tâ—â—â—hing other seuerall points of Fayth CHAP. XXVII I Haue been long in giuing 〈◊〉 to the Concordences or Harmony tuned by Mahumet or Turks and the Protestants in touch of the strings therof we can find small iarring but rather a perfect agrement I meane I haue spent many leaues in laying open the particular Symbolismes between them Therfore for greater expedition I will make here a coacetuâ—tion or heaping together of diuers other Points of Religion equally defended taught and practized by the Turks and our new Euangelists 28. First then the flery Protestants do teach that Christ did not descend after his death vnto Limbus statrum 29. That we ought not to bowe at the Name of Iesue 30. That Christ did not leaue in the Sacrament his true and yeall Body to be receiued by faythfull Christians 31. That Seauen Sacraments were not instituted by Christ. 32. That not any Sacrament doth conferre Grace 33. That the Church of God it not free from Errour in fayth 34. That there is not any Vniuersality of Grace proceeding from Christs Passion 35. That we ought not to pray to Saincts 36. That Priests haue not true Power to remit sinnes 37. They in lyke manner teach that there are not any Euangelicall Councells 38. That the Church
the Romans and the Grecians but among the Vnworthies and Monsters of Mankind registring and mutually conferring not their faults for in so tearming them I speake ouer indulgently but their Enormous Crimes and flagitious liues But seing they both crept into the World long after the former learned Historiographer I will therefore be content to take the paines as to place them in the scales of a steedy and impartiall iudgment First then Mahumet erected (2) Bibliander in praesâ—â— Alcorâ—â—â— himselfe by subâ—elty and treachery a great Prince subiecting to his gouerment no small part of Asia Syria Arabia Aegypt and Afrike in which places he first caused his blasphemies to be planted He at the first of his presumed correction and emendation of the then Church of God made it an Article (2) Bibliander vbi suprà of the Mahumetan Religion that himselfe was the Supreme Head of the Church of God so he depriuing the Successours of S. Peter of that dignity and Prerogatiue Thus to his Princly Authority did he ioyne the Pontificall Authority so making himselfe Caliphas that is King and supreme Prelate and ordayning by his sword and Regall soueraignty what should be belieued touching fayth and that the contrary Points should not be questioned and punishing with death such as would not submissiuely yeild and giue their appiobation to his wicked doctrines Henry the eight was by byrth King of England and Ireland a great Monarchy and did runne in the same line with Mahumet For he was the first Christian Prince who either in those Nations or throughout all â—urâ—pe assumed to himselfe the Title of Head (*) Vide Sand. de Schismats Aâ—gliâ— of the Church and decread by a Parlament or generall meeting togeathâ—â— of all the States of the Realme that all Câ—noâ—â— of the Church and Councells formerly â—nacted should be wholy â—â—iecâ—ed and disâ—nulled those only excepted which himselfe vouchsafed to appâ—ouâ— And accordingly such Canons and decrees which himselfe and some few others substiâ—ured by him did make werâ— to be reputed as sincere and Euangelicall being warranted vnder his Letters Patents and Regall Seale It is said aboue that Mahumet did punish yea sometymes with death such as were refractory to his Will and would not allow the doctrine published in his Alcoran The like Course did this Engliâ—â— Antiochus to the dishonour of all Kingly Soueraignty take for did he not besides many reuerend Abbots and other Religion men put to cruell death that Payre of Martyâ—s the Pryde Honour of that Nation I meane the Bishop â—ossensis and Thomas â—ore 〈◊〉 his Chancellour for their not subscribing to the wicked Arâ—icle of Supremaâ—y first established by that vnfortunate King Mahumet had diuâ—rs wiuâ—â— and Câ—â—â—â—ines together and at the same time Whereas Henry of England who otherwise 〈◊〉 doubt wanted not his Seraglio had indeed in compare but few wyues yeâ— when 〈◊〉 was weâ—â—y of one Wyfe his accustomed stratageme was commonly to accuse her of some forged disloyalty and so force them one after an other either to diuorce or to loose their heades thus making Cruelty murther a stâ—uâ—king horse as it were for his next Mariage An impiety neuer practized by Mahumet Henry had in all six wiues of which the first was Catharine daughter of Ferdinand the six King of Spaine who was his wyfe twenty yeares But then through his dislike towards her or desire of hauing another he caused a sentence of diuorce to be giuen against her by the Archbishop of Canterbury Anne his second wife was the daughter of Syr Thomas Bullen who was not his Wife aboue three yeares but she was condemned of disloyalty of Body whereupon she lost her Head The immediate day after the death of Anne so impatient his lâ—st was of delay he maried his third wyfe Iane who was daughter of Iohn Seamer Knight She was his wife but one yeare and fiue months She died in Childbed but who knoweth if of child-byrth seing easily he might take the oportunity of the tyme Anne his fourth wife being sister to Willam Duke of Cleue was his wife for six Months but after for he could not feede of one dish any long tyme she was diuorced from him by Act of Parlament Catherine his fyfth wyfe was neceâ—â—nto Thomas Howard Duke of Suffolk yet within one yeare and six Months the must also be condemned of vnchastnes and was beheaded His last Wyfe was Catherine daughter of Syr Thomas Parre She was his wyfe three yeares and had the priuiledge neither to be diuorced nor beheaded but suruiued him And thus his death was in likelyhood the occasion of prolonging her life But now in one kind of Wickednes Henry surpassed Mahumet We reade that Mahumet after his planting or his Blasphemies did exeruct diuers (3) Postili de Repub. de Turcis Monasteries and Hospitalls in Constantinople it selfe as the like did Baiazeâ— Selymus his Successours euen in that Citty We further reade that Mahumet did not destroy any one Religious house or Monastery exected before his tyme. But how great then is the disparity herein For euen all Europe hath trumpeted forth the irreligious proceeding of King Henry in this Case Who did ouerthrow all the Monasteryes and Religions Houses in England in the abundaÌ„ce wherof no Nation by the record of Historyes was able to compare with it This flagitious King whose All was Luxury Murther and Sacriledge prostrating euen with the ground so many Religious Houses buchering so many Religious Persons of the said Monasteries did lastly confiscate all the Lands and benefits belonging to them which were almost of incredible Opulency riches to himselfe partly to spend in all sensuality and dissolution of lyfe partly to maintaine his flattering Attendants and Followers Now then to encircle the seuerall Passages of this King displayed in this Chapter or Parallell we may from hence gather that the afore mentioned Ecclesiasticall Primacy of the Church was neuer challenged or assumed during this last nyne hundred yeares by any temporall Prince confessing the name of Christ vntill this Mahumetan Henry through more then a Neâ—trodian (4) â—â—ns 10. Auarice had demolished seuerall thousands of Religious Houses and through an vnheard Homicidy had made himselfe HusbaÌ„d successiuely of six Wyues O blemish and dishonour to Nature With this I end this Parallell betweene King Henry Mahumet the great Prophet as vuulgarly the Turks and Saracens do stile him And yet I see no iust cause to be somewhat pleasant with you my Countrimen but that this Henry might be reputed as great a Prophet as euer Mahumet was My reason is this we do not read of any thing particularly prophesied by Mahumet wheras this our Propheticall King was able supernaturally forsooth to foretell diuers Moneths before of what kind of death for what cause and at what tyme his present liuing Wyfe though then being in good health must after dye A stupendious Vaticinatour Thus whiles England is England so long
that precept of our Lord Oportet (2) Luc. 18. semper orare non desinere Now in lieu of true and holy Prayer which is the Embassadour betweene God and Man treating for reconcilement to his diuine Maiesty or the very Pen wherwith Man cancelleth out his spirituall debts recorded in the Booke of God Iustice you Hugenots of France yea the very Women and Children among you can cry out Allons à la Presche à la Presche Let vs goe to the Sermon to the Sermon The which after you haue heard it being ordinarily but a virulent Inuectiue against the Church of Rome deliuered by an ignorant and malignant fellow Yf your Women I say can but repeate some Words of the Text they repute themselues to be learned and much conuersant in the holy Scriptures Poore Soules how is their Credulity abused And what punishment are your spirituall Maisters to vndergoe for their impoysoning of them with their pestiferous doctrines occasioned through their misunderstanding of Gods most holy Bible and giuing to them Liberty promiscuously and at their owne freedome to read the sacred Scriptures In regard of our Salique Law heere in France which excludeth Women from all supreme Soueraignty you know we haue a saying La Churone ne tombe pasâ—soubs la queâ—â—ouille The Crowne falleth not vpon the distaffe I cold wish this sentence might be extended also to Gods holy Written Word My meaning is that euery silly Woman who is sitter rather for a distaffe to span or with the nedle to pricke a cloath should be restrayned from their priuate reading of the Scriptures from whence through their falsly vnderstanding of it they sucke their Soules poyson their iudgments resembling vnproportioned Instruments not sorting to worke vpon any curious Matter But to returne backe Therefore touching Prayer my Countrimen so little vsed by you and your greedines of hearing an illiterate Companion to spit out nothing but declamatory Philippicks in the Pulpit sacrilegiously to detort Gods holy Word I may iustly conclude That the greatest part it not all of the practize of your Religion resteth in your eares the least in your tongue as most of your Mortification lyeth in casting vp the white of your Byes The 11. Parallell Touching the Proceedings of the Turks against Christians and of the Protestants against other Protestants and Catholiks CHAP. XII THe next Comparatiue hath reference to the Proceeding of the Turks against Christians and of Protestants against other Protestants against Catholiks True it is that Mahumet did put to (*) Cusanus vbi sub à Semptemâ—â—str alij death such Christians through most wicked cruelty in Arabia and other bordering Countries thereto who would not imbrace his Religion and also most sacrilegiously killed diuers holy Hermites and others at the first plantation of Mahumetisme Now the better to obserue the Comparison heere made let vs looke into the comporement of our prime Ghospellers some of our Euangelicall Princes But in discoursing of this subiect let vs ascend by degrees and first obserue in part the cariage of Protestant Writers euen against other Protestant writers I will not here insist in their dissentions in Fayth as partly aboue layed open but I will rest only in their outward proceeding among themseluer First then they brand one another with the name of being Heretiks Thus for some tast hereof we reade that Luther vomiteth out these words against the Swinglians and Sacramentaries We (1) Luther contra artic Louamens thes 27 tom 2. Wittenb fol â—â—3 in earnest condemne the Swinglians and Sacramentaries to be Heretiks estranged from the Church of God Which charitable Censure the Tygurine Deuines all Swinglians and Caluinists do thus kindly retaliate Luther termeth vs (2) Tyzurini tractâ—â—contra suprâ—mâ—m Luthert Confess â—ag â—1 Condemnat ans execrabâ—lem Sectam c. Acobdemned and execrable Sect but let him beware that he doth not discouer himselfe to be an Arch-Heretike since he will not nor can brooke to haue any society with the Confessours of Christ And according hereto Swinglius thus sayth of Luther En vt (3) Swinglius iâ— tom â— respoâ—s ad confess Luthâ—â—iâ—â— fol. â—78 totum istum hommem Sathan occupare â—â—netur Behould how Sathan endeauoreth wholy to possesse this Man To proceed Our Euangelists do prohibit the sale and reading of ech others Bookes as Hospinian (4) Hospinian in histor Sacramentepart altera fol. 39â— the Protestant confesseth Yea they approue (5) Hospinian vbi suprà Articles of Visitation and enquiry of ech others Aduersaries though all call themselues by the name of Protestants And which is more they commit 6 one another to prison and restraine the giuing 7 common entertainment due to trauaillers and strangers And which is yet more They enter into open Armes among themselues as the foresaid Hospinian (8) Hospinian vbi suprà fol. 195. 197. recordeth But now it is no lessâ— strange to obserue how ready and prompt those of the Reformed Religion haue been in raysing seditious tumults and entring into open hostility against their Soueraigne Catholike Princes The former Proceedings of this kind in Scotland the Lomcountries Germany Bohemia Denmarke c. do proclaime the outrage ousnesse of them to the whole World Therefore pretermitting them I wil infist in briefly displaying as most pertinent to vs the insurrections and rebellions heere in my owne Country of France and all originally for Matter of Religion Thus shall my Pen reueale but with intention to preuent the like hereafter the scars of my owne noble Country as the Surgeon makes a deep and rough incision in his Patients Wounds thereby to cure them First then it is ourr euident that out Country of France hath been infested with Ciuill Warrs begun by them of the Reformed Religion for the maintenance of their said Religion during the full space of forty yeares and more vntill Henry the fourth our late King the very Prototypon of a valiant and most worthy Monarch became Catholike for answearably hereto Osiander (9) Osiander Epit. Cent. 10. pag. 688. 804. relateth that the French Protestants vnder shew of exhibiting a Confession of their Fayth came armed vnto the Kings Pallace That Ciuill Warrs for Religion were renewed and that the Constable of France being the Kings Generall was slaine and vpon his death the Kings Brother entred into his place In like sort Crispinus thus writeth After (10) Crespinus de stat Eccles diuers messages sent to the Protestant Princes from the King but all in vaine the Warrs had a second beginning and the Prince of Condy rose vp in armes vnder whose solemne Protestation these words were subscribed Deo victricibus armis Another Protestant (11) In the history of France written by Ioan Serres writer relateth thus The Protestants grow earnest and in all places where they are of Power they take reuenge of Churches Images Priests and Religions Howses In like manner Fayus (12) Antonius Fayus