papist in the towre of London I wote he did Did not olde Sir Iohn in the kidcote at Yorke so agree with Comberforth the priest that they would never keepe companie the one with the other though living both in one little prison and imprisoned for the selfe same cause it was so my selfe was testis oculatus Did not VVright Fletcher and Comberforth imprisoned all together in the blockehouses at Hull upon Kingstone agree in deviding their contributions which were right large ones euen as theeves agree in deviding their spoyles and robberies Their mutuall contumelies filled the eares of countrey-papistes their writings were lamented of the readers Let Padley Norlees and Haversiege say if it be not so VVhat holy amitie is betweene the Iesuite Mushe and other seminarie-priestes Brodell Dakins Butler and others his brother priestes will witnesse with me And that ye may knowe in one worde the perfection of the English Romish seminarie you must vnderstand that by the Iesuites their advise the students in their supplications to the pope in their great conflict with the Cardinall promised that they woulde all be romish priests for the conversion of England to his Romish religion VVhich offer and promise was verie plausible in the popes eares For the better confirmation of which promise all the schollers were shortly after called to their corporall oathes All which was wrought and contrived by the politikes the Iesuites some fewe schollers onely acquainted with the promise and oath vntill the verie instant in which they did sweare VVhich oth as it was ungodlily made so is it and will be ungodlily perfourmed so long as that colledge can stand by all probabilitie I say by all probabilitie because I haue great reason so to thinke though I can not as a God divine of future contingents That it is vngodlily perfourmed too much experience sheweth by so many seminaries sent daily in multitudes oddely and disloyally into this land The like experience we haue in Iohn Gower who so long resisted the Iesuites in refusing to bee made priest and at length was made against his will for feare as also in Humfrey Maxfielde and Thomas Nevvell verie proper schollers for their time who staying in the seminarie untill they were urged to be priestes were at the last expulsed because they would not be priestes But now to dissentions of more importance The second Article BEllarminus auoucheth that it neither is nor ever was lawfull since Christes time for Bishoppes Priestes or Deacons to marrie after taking of their orders as which saieth hee is prohibited by the apostolique law But their Canon law telleth us another tale for thus is it written in their owne decrees Cum ergo ex sacerdotibus nati in summos pontifices supra legantur esse promoti non sunt intelligendi de fornicatione sed de legitimis coniugijs nati quae sacerdotibus ante prohibitionem vbique licita erant in Orient ali Ecclesia vsque holie eis licere probantur VVhen therefore wee reade that they are promoted to the popedome who vvere the sonnes of Priestes wee must not understande that such were bastardes but borne in lawfull wedlocke and legitimate which marriages were lawful for priestes everie vvhere before the prohibition and in the east church they are approoved to be lawfull vntill this day And in other place of the saide Canon-lavve vvee are tolde of many popes that vvere priests sonnes to wit Bonifacius Agapitus Theodorus Sylverius Foelix Deusdedit and others The third article COncerning veniall sinnes hovve they are remitted in purgatorie the dissention is such and so great as of the schoole-men eache one differeth from other Scotus saith they are forgiven in the instant of death that is vvhen man beginneth first not to be by reason of his merites in his life time Durandus sayeth they are forgiven for the displiecence of venials which the soules haue in that place and that because they are in charitie So to sayeth the sinne is remitted in purgatorie for the acte of charitie and continuall patience which the soules haue in their tormentes The like dissention is about their pardons as is said alreadie The fourth article NAvarre telleth vs that wee are onely bounde to confesse our mortall and great sinnes and that a papist comming to their sacramentall confession may confesse some and conceale other some These are his wordes Hoc praeceptum non includit venialia etiam si mixta sint mortalibus Quibus consequens est posse quem si velit confesso uno peccato veniali alterum tacere This precept doth not include veniall sinnes albeit they be mingled with mortals whereupon it followeth that the penitent may if he list confesse one veniall and conceale another Thus Navarre To which I adde that by this doctrine the penitent may dissemble egregiously in confession and deceive his ghostly father and yet not sinne at all But the famous popish Chancellour of Paris Iohannes Gersonus telleth another tale Thus he writeth Omne peccatum pro quanto est offen sa Dei contra legem eius aeternam est de sua conditione indignitate mortiferum secundum rigorem iustitiae à vita gloriae separativum Ratio est quoniam omnis offen sa in Deum potest iustè ab ipso iudice deo puniri poena mortis tâ—n temporalis quà m aeternae imò annihilationis poena est igitur de se mortifera assumptum deducitur ex hoc quod nulla poenâ talis est ita mala quà m mala est ip sa offen sa Et ex alio quia potius toleranda esset omnis mors paenalis annihilatio quà m committenda esset quantumlibet parva offen sa in deum da oppositum iam offen sa Dei licitè fieri deberet in casu Every sinne in that it is an offense against God and his eternall lawe is mortall of it owne condition and indignitie according to the rigour of ivstice and devideth us from the life of glorie The reason is because God may iustly punish every offense done against him as well with eternall as temporall death and with the mult of annihilation It is therefore mortall of it owne nature The assumption is gathered of this for that no such punishment is so evill as the offense as also because every penall death and annihilation both ought rather to be tolerated then the least sinne to be committed Graunt the contrarie and in some case sinne shall be done lawfully and be no sinne at all Thus saith Gerson and this is a true learned and comfortable saying whereof more shalbe said hereafter The fift Article NAvarre saith that one may both denie in word and upon his oth that which the iudge requireth of him so he equivocate and make his owne sense unto himselfe but their lerned doctour Genesius Sepulveda telleth him it may not be so Yet all our politikes our Iesuites I would say holde with Navarre Yea the Iesuites will now and then
est quodolim non erat vsque adeo ecclesiae notum purgatorium Imo Graecis inquit adhunc vsque diem non est creditum whereof the first reason is that in old time purgatorie was not so well knowen vnto the church yea saith he the Greekes do not to this day beleeue it And doubtlesse if there were anie purgatorie besides Christs passion the thiefe that lived wickedly to the last houre should have had his part therein who yet went incontinently to paradise as saith the holie scripture The third Conclusion AFter this life is neither place to merit demerit or satisfaction This conclusiō is proved out of Ecclesiasticus where it is writtē Ante obitum tuum operare iustitiam qui a non est apud inferos invenire cibum Before thy death worke iustice because there is no reliefe to be found among the dead Correspondent hereunto is this saying of Aquinas Dicendum quod mereri demereri pertinent ad statum viae vnde bona in viatoribus sunt meritoria mala vero demeritoria in beatis autem bona non sunt meritoria sed pertinentia ad eorum beatitudinis premium sic mala in damnatis non sunt demeritoria sed pertinent ad damnationis poenam we must answere that to merit demerit perteine to the state of the way wherefore good workes are meritorious to suche as be viatores and liue in this world and likewise euill workes demeritorious But in the saintes of heaven good vvorkes are not meritorious but appertaine to the reward of their beatitude And in like manner euill workes in the damned are not demeritorious but perteine to the paine of their damnation Dominicus Soto commenting vpon the maister of sentences holdeth the selfe same opinion For which cause saint Paul exhorteth vs to doe good dum tempus habemus while wee haue time This the preacher confirmeth in these words Viventes sciunt quod morientur mortui nesciunt quicquam non est eis amplius merces in oblivione enim est memoria eorum The living know that they must die and the dead know nothing at all neither haue they henceforth a rewarde for their memorie is forgotten Vppon which wordes saint Hierome hath this glosse Viventes metu mortis possunt bona operaperpetrare mortui uero nihil valent adid adijcere quod semel secum tulere de vita Sed dilectio eorum odium aemulatio omne quod in seculo habere potuerunt mortis finitur adventu nec iuste quippe possunt agere nec peccare nec virtutes adijcere nec vitia The living may doe good woorkes for feare of death but the dead can ad nothing to that which they once tooke with them out of this life Their loue also and their hatred their emulation and what soeuer they could haue in this world all is ended with death For they can neither doe well nor sinne neither addevice nor vertue All which Saint Cyprian comprised in these fewe golden words Quumistine excessum fuerit nullus iam locus paenitentiae est uullus satisfactionis effectus VVhen vve shall depart out of this life there will be no place to penance no effect of satisfaction Saint Augustine teacheth the course of Gods iustice to be such as wee must either attaine remission of our sinnes in this world or never to expect the same These are his wordes Morum porro corrigendorum uullus alius quam in hac vit a locus nā post hanc quisque idhabebit quod in hac sibimet conquisierit There is no other place but this life to reforme our manners For after this life everie one shall have that which hee purchased for himselfe in this life many other like sayinges the said holie father hath to the like effect and purpose which I now let passe with silence thinking that sufficient which is alreadie said hereof Most miserable therefore are the soules in popish purgatorie as who by popish doctrine can neither merite nor satisfie for their sinnes For if soules in purgatorie can satisfy or merit then can they also demerite because the selfe same reason holdeth in both alike and if they can demerite they can also sinne mortally and so perish eternallie contrarie to popish doctrine Again if any mercie can be found after this life the reason made by saint Paul to the Corinthians which was grounded vpon the chiefest misterie of our Christian faith is doubtlesse of no force at all to wit when hee concludeth of the faith vpon Christ his resurrection from the dead Thus standeth the Apostles discourse they that die in the faith of Christ are either saved or damned who if they be saved then is Christ risen againe and become a true saviour but if they be damned then doubtlesse is Christ not risen againe neither become a true saviour Now to confesse a thirde place where soules remaine neither saved or damned but in a perplexe manner that indeed may stand with popish doctrine but is flatte against Saint Paules discourse Againe to hold a third place doth overthrovv another of Saint Paules reasons when he affirmeth the being in this bodie to keepe the faithfull from Christ. For if popish purgatorie be admitted the soules suffering there shall be as well absent from Christes presence as when they were in Christes bodie But perhaps saint Paul knew not how to conclude his purpose or at least was not in love with papistrie Yet the papistes will say that it is verie common with the fathers to pray for the dead To this I say that in verie deede it cannot be denied but that sundrie of the fathers have both praied themselues for the dead and haue also approved the praiers of others to the like end But this will neither establish the popish purgatorie nor their manner of praying for the dead VVhich obiection because it seemeth to carrie a great maiestie with it and indeede seduceth many a one as which is plainly set downe in verie expresse termes in many places of the auncient writers I purpose a litle to stand vpon it nothing doubting but to satisfy the indifferent reader therewith through the power of God so he will yeeld attentiue eares vnto my words 1 I therefore say first as is proved elswhere in this treatise that what writer so euer affirmeth any doctrine contrarie to that which is taught in the holy scriptures he who soeuer he be must be reiected and his doctrine in that point contemned VVhich thing I doe not barely say but I haue prooved the same out of the doctrine of the fathers by the flat and expresse wordes of the fathers themselues peruse the ninth chapter of credit to be giuen to writers 2 I say secondly that it is a seemely good and godly maner to pray for the dead so our hearts bee rightly disposed and our praiers framed accordingly As for example when it is said of some friend departed out
faciunt peccatum The children of God both love and doe iustice but the children of the deuil both loue and do sinne and againe Manifestum fit studium bonorum operum effectum esse preaestinationis It is manifest that studie to liue well and to doe good workes is the effect of predestination and an hundred such like places the same author hath which I let passe for brevitie sake neither doth anie other of the learned amongest vs hold contrary to this doctrine nay all the pulpets God be thanked found out and extoll the praise of good workes yea which is more to be admired of the papistes who thinke so baselie of our religion wee affirme the good workes of the regenerate to be so acceptable in Gods sight that he will not suffer the least therof to be vnrewarded further we teach affirm in our religion that the regenerat childrē of God cā not cōtinue in gods favour vnles they detest sin striue against the concupiscence of the flesh do good works yet further we auouch cōstantlie that none cā beleeùe truly in Christ which doth not love Christ which doth not emploie his whole care studie industrie to doe the will of Christ and to keepe his commaundements And that this is the faith and doctrine of the Church of England verie manie God be thanked for it haue left to their posteritie livelie testimonies of the same wherof I will onelie name one who as hee did inwardlie in his heart beleeue the gospell so did he outwardlie in his life professe it and after his death confirme the same with a most charitable and christian testimonie of immortall memorie I speake of that honourable and zealous christian Sir VValter Mildmey the late foūder of a most famous colledge in the vniuersitie of Cambridge which he tearmed not after his owne name as the greater part vseth but Emanuell that is God with vs giuing vs to vnderstand therby that as hee beleeued and loued God so he would testify the same to al posterities by that worthie act as by the effect and fruite of a liuelie faith Now then how doe we differ from the papistes herein Zanchius shall answere Atque hic est vnus ex praecipuis vsibus bonorumoperum quod ijs non tanquam salutis causis sadtanquā effectis predestinationis fidei tum nos tum proximi certiores fimus nostrae electionis eoque salutis And this is one of the chiefest vses of good works that both wee and our neighbours are assured by them of our election and salvation not as by the causes of salvation but as by the effectes of predestination and of faith But the papistes will say if good woorkes cannot merite glorie nor iustifie wherefore then must we do them I answere that we must liue well and doe good workes for the loue and dutie we owe to God and because so is his holie will and good pleasure so saith the Apostle in these words ipsius enim sumus factura creati in Christo Iesu in operibus bonis quae preparavit Deus vt in illis ambulemus for wee are his workemanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good workes which God hath ordained that we should walke in them so then we thinke as reuerentlie and esteem as worthilie of good works as doth anie papist in the world for we grant that none can be saued or sanctified without good workes and further that none is truelie iustified which hath not good works yet for all that do we constantly affirme and that by the authoritie of holie writte that no man is or can be iustifyed by vertue of his good works the error of the Papistes consisteth in this that they do not distinguish betweene sanctification and iustificatiō the truth of our doctrine which is the verity grounded in the sacred scriptures is this that sanctificatiō iustificatió are inseparably vnited in one the same subiect in eodē instanti tëporis nōnaturae as the scholes speake that is we are freelie iustified sanctifyed also in the same instāt of time but first iustified in prioritie of nature for example fire and the heate are both at one and the same time though fire be before in prioritie of nature that is though fire goe before as the cause of euerie thing is before the effect of the same and as fire is not before heate in time and yet the cause of that heate so is our iustification not before our sanctification or our inherent iustice in time and yet is it the cause of our sanctification of our inherent iustice and of all the good workes we doe which thing if the papistes would once seriouslie observe they would not differ from our opinion in this behalfe vnlesse they haue fullie resolved to oppose themselves desperatlie against the truth The 12. Preamble VVHo so euer will but euen superficiallie consider the vncertaintie of popish doctrine shall thereby without further discourse find svfficient matter to abhorre and detest the same as most friuolous most ridiculous most irreligious For example in the sacrament of the altar as they terme it if certaine questions be propounded vnto them the best learned know not what to answere but so simply and so sottishly as euerie child may espie the follie of their doctrine If anie papist can truely and without blushing say the contrarie let the same be notifyed by his ansvvere to these my briefe demaundes 1. First I demaund how they excuse the people that adore with diuine worship the thing eleuated ouer the priestes head at Masse from idolatrie from heresie from false beleefe For if either the Priest want intention to consecrate vvhich often chaunceth by reason of vvandering imaginations or of purpose meaneth not to consecrate or of negligence omitteth any vvord of consecration then by popish religion the thing adored is but pure bread so the adorers thereof become idolaters vvorshipping a peece of bread for the euerliuing God And if the people either refuse to adore or doubt if they may adore they are deemed heretiques ipso facto for their pains because as the Popes disholie canons tell vs he that but doubteth of Romish definitions concerning faith and maners is an heretike 2 Secondlie I demaund what it is that the priest receiueth and deliuereth to the communicants when he hauing 40. breads before him supposeth them to be but 38. or 39. and so intendeth to consecrate no more for beyond the priestes intention consecration cannot extend as all wise Papistes graunt neither is his intention more limited to one bread then to an other and therfore can no more consecrate one bread then another 3 Thirdlie I demaund which part of the host as they terme it is the popish made God when the sacrificer intendeth indefinitelie to consecrate the one halfe of the said host and how there in adoring they can avoid idolatrie 4 Fourthly I demaund howe many gods or how many times God is made in
or bishops of Rome seduced Gods people manie and sundrie waies but neuer more groslie infatuated or bewitched them then by their ridiculous mōstruous and execrable pardons as which are foolish vncertaine absurd new and the deadlie woundes of all popish doctrine For plaine and evident demonstration of this assertion I put downe these conclusions following The first Conclusion THe popes pardons are too too foolish as which are repugnant to common sense and reason My proofe standeth thus all relaxations beeing larger then any man liuing or dead doth or can need are too too foolish but the popes pardons are such ergo the popes pardons are to to foolish The consequence is good and the consequent directly and truelie inferred vpon the premisses as which is in prima figura and modo darij as the Logicians terme it the proposition is so euident as none can or will denie the same so the difficultie resteth onely in the assumption vvhich I proue three seuerall waies First by the huge and infinite numbers of pardons hanged vp in pardoning tables at the pillars of euerie church for the most part in Rome which not onelie my selfe haue seene and read but manie thousand besides me Secondlie by pardons conteining manie thousand yeares expressely set downe in olde English primars vvhereof the papistes seeme novv at length so ashamed that the like is not to be found in the nevv tridentine primars Thirdly by a litle pamphlet of the marueilous things of Rome which is commonlie to be sold euerie where one of vvhich I brought from thence my selfe and haue at this houre For in all these three pardons are graunted prodigallie I would say charitably for manie thousands of yeares yea in the litle romish pamphlet to omitte other churches are graunted euerie day to S Iohn Euangelistes church 6048. yeares of pardon Novv least any be so sottish as to imagine that a man can neede so manie yeares of pardon that I vvill disprooue sundrie vvaies First because it is against the holy scripture that any man should liue so long 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The daies of our yeares in thē 70. and if they be of strēgth 80. yeares vvhich vvords saint Hierome glosseth in this maner Vbi sunt mille anni in feptuaginta annis contracti sumus si autem multum octoginta Si autem plus vixerimus i am non est vita sed mors VVhere are the thousand yeares that they liued of old vve are novv brought to seaventie yeares and if vve endure long to eightie but if vve liue longer then is it not life but death 2 Secondlie because no man can abide so long in purgatorie And least some papist replie and say that one may be so long in purgatorie I vvill prove mine assertion by the best popish doctors Bellarminus in his defense of the pope thinketh that opinion verie probable vvhich holdeth that the vvorld shall not henceforth endure aboue 400. yeares at the most And of his opinion are great learned men Ireneus Iustinus Lactantius and others yea Saint Augustine and S. Hierome are not dissonant from that supposition the Thalmudistes likevvise had a prophesy of Elias as they say that the world should continue 6000. yeares to vvit 2000. before the lavv 2000. in the lavv and 2000. after the lavv that is from Christes incarnation vntill the second aduent or doomesday Dominicus Soto cōmenting vpon the maister of sentences holdeth as a stable and constant ground that no soule in purgatorie abideth the paines thereof aboue ten yeares and doubtles if the popes pardons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvere of force So to his opinion could not be false the reason therof is evident because all that vvill may vpon small sute if not vvithout sute haue not only for themselves but for their friendes also so many thousands of pardons as they shall desire vvhich liberalitie in pardoning pope Gregorie bestovved on our disloyal captaine Stukeley vvhen he imploied him to invade his naturall countrey England but as the pardons vvere counterfaite and Stukeleys heart disloiall so vvas the Popes intention frustrate and Stukeley revvarded accordingly that is iustly slaine for his proud attempt vvhile my selfe vvas at Rome The 2. Conclusion THe vertue and efficacie of Popes pardons is so vncertaine and doubtfull and that euen amongest the greatest popish doctors as themselves can not tel vvhat in the vvorld to say or thinke therof This conclusion I proue thus Angelus de Clauasio a famous canonist and religious Frier reciteth 6. severall and dissonant opinions concerning the vertue of pardons and after hee hath confuted them all he setteth dovvne the seaventh for his ovvne and the best vvhich as hee sayth is true it is therefore no doubt substantiall as shortlie shall bee seene The first opinion saith our holie Frier holdeth that the Popes pardons onely remit that punishment which God appointeth to be imposed in another worlde for a supplie unto those who have done penance onely according to the Canons but doeth in no case remit that penance which is imposed and taxed by the Canons The second opinion holdeth that the Pardons onely forgive that penance which is taxed by the law and penitentiall Canons but not that paine which Gods justice appointeth to be imposed The third opinion holdeth that Pardons forgive paine due for sinne aswell before God as before his Church but this opinion addeth a clause so sharpe as our holy Father doeth not brooke it to wit that the Pope is bound to do penance for that person whome he pardoneth The fourth opinion holdeth that the paine of hell is partly remitted by the Popes pardons as which becommeth thereby more tollerable The fift opinion holdeth that that penance onely is pardoned which the partie omitted of negligence not of purpose or contempt The sixt opinion holdeth that the Popes pardons remit not onely penance imposed by the Priest but that also which is taxed of God marrie this opinion hath one limitation which forsooth is this that the Priest must be content therewith or else the Pope can not worke his will The seventh opinion holdeth that Popish pardons forgive and are woorth so much as the wordes of the Pardons do sound that is to say if the Pardons containe an hundred thousand yeeres then the partie obteining such pardons at the Popes handes must have remission of so many yeeres Thus gentle Reader standeth the doctrine of Popish pardons amongst the greatest Doctors of that faction He that listeth to peruse the place quoted by me out of Angelus shall finde every thing as I have set it downe The rehearsall of the varietie and uncertaintie of these opinions is a most sufficient confutation of the same Sylvester Prieras a great Thomist and sometime Master of the sacred pallace reciteth three severall opinions and disliking them all setteth downe the fourth for the trueth Antoninus sometime the Arch-bishop of Florence alledgeth three opinions and scarce knoweth which of them he should preferre Bellarminus in
that Valentinianus Theodosius and Satyrus were in heaven and enioied eternall rest and neverthelesse even then prayed for their eternall rest But doubtlesse his praiers had beene both vaine and foolish if he should haue praied for that vnto them which they had and enioyed alreadie Hee therefore praied as my observations declare not for the rest and blisse of the soules which thē possessed eternall rest and blisse but that the bodies also may bee pertakers of that place and rest which they wanted them and shall vntill the day of dome And for the better confirmation of this mine assertion saint Ambrose doth in expresse words so expound himselfe For thus he writeth Te quae so summe Deus vt charissimos iuvenes matura resurrectione resuscites immaturum hunc vitae istius cur sum matura resurrectione compenses O high and mightie God I beseech thee to raise vp most deare yong youthes with mature resurrection and to recompence the vnripe course of this their life with mature and ripe resurrection Loe here in plaine and briefe tearmes the compendious explication of that popish obiection and doubt vvhich so troubleth and seduceth many a one And so Saint Ambrose his prayer for the dead was even this and no other God give them a ioyfull resurrection The fourth Conclusion IF popish purgatorie were admitted to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet would it follow by a necessarie consequent that the soules tormented there should perish everlastingly This conclusion is thus proved There is no salvation to be expected out of the church as witnesseth their great councell of Lateran and the holie fathers accord thereunto But soules boiling in purgatorie papisticall bee neither in the church triumphant because there is no neede of purgation neither in the church militant because there is place for merite and satisfaction ergo they be out of the church And consequently without the state of salvation and in the state of eternall damnation And that the best learned papistes stand in doubt of their salvation it cannot with right reason be denied For in their Masses of Requiem the priestes are commaunded to pray in these expresse words Ne absorbeat eas tartarus That hell swallow not them vp and devoure them And doubtlesse if they bee assured of their salvation it is a vaine and ridiculous thing to pray that they be not swallowed vp of hell And consequently their holie Masse is farced with a bundell of vanities Neither wil it helpe the adversarie to say that though the soules in their purgatorie can not satisfy for themselves Yet may the living satisfy for them which is of as much force as if they did satisfy for themselves For as the transgression is personall so must the satisfaction also bee The reason hereof is evident because to accept ones satisfaction for another may well stand with acceptation or mercie but never with iustice For which iustice notwithstanding popish purgatorie was invented and this day is defended as their reverend professor of divinity Dominicus Soto plainly testifyeth in these words Respondetur quod licet tunc moriens satisfacere nequeat culpa sua fuit quod tempus adid antea non elegit ideo poena quae per contritionē nonfuerit ei dimissa in purgatorio est luenda vt ratio divinae iustitiae servetur I answere That although he that dieth can not satisfy for his sins yet was it his owne default because he chose not before time for it And therfore the punishment which was not remitted by contrition and confession must be punished in purgatorie that the order of Gods iustice may be observed The 5. Conclusion IT is euident even by the opinion of great papistes that manie soules in purgatorie shall abide there for ever and yet is that flat against popish religion This conclusion shall bee manifest if I prove three pointes 1 First that everie sinne is mortall 2 Secondlie that no mortall sinne can be remitted or forgiven in popish purgatorie 3 Thirdly that many depart out of this world not having their venial sinnes of the papists so tearmed before remitted or forgiven For first if everie sinne bee mortall and secondly if no mortall sinne be forgiven in purgatorie and thirdly if sundrie be in purgatorie whose sinnes be not all forgiven it must needes follow by a necessarie sequel that such persons must continue in purgatorie eternallie because they cannot come from thence vntill their sinnes be remitted wholy 1 First therefore that euerie sinne is mortall is confessed by three great papistes that is to say Roffensis Gersonus and Michael Baius For these three confesse plainlie that everie sinne is mortall of it owne nature and onely veniall through Gods mercifull acceptation and therefore may it be iustly punished everlastinglie Roffensis writing against Luther hath these expresse words Quod peccatum veniale solum ex Dei misericordia veniale sit in hoc tecum sentio That a veniall sinne is onely veniall through the mercie of God not of it owne nature therein doe I agree vnto you Loe my Lord of Rochester confesseth plainlie that euerie sinne is mortall of it owne nature And Ioannes Gerson sometime chanceler of Paris that famous vniuersitie though otherwise a great papist can not denie this veritie for these are his words Nulla offensa Dei est venialis de se nisitantum modo per respectum ad divinā misericordiā qui nonvult de facto quālibet offensam imputare ad mortem cū illud posset iustissime Et ita concluditur quod peccatū mortale veniale in esse tali non distinguuntur intrinsece essentialiter sed solum per respectum ad divinam gratiam quae peccatum istud imputat ad poenam mortis aliud non No offence of God is veniall of it owne nature but onely in respect of Gods mercie who will not de facto impute euerie offence to death although he might most iustlie doe it And so I conclude that mortal and veniall sinnes as such are not distinguished intrinsecallie and essentiallie but onelie in respect of Gods grace which assigneth this sinne to the paine of death and not the other Manie other sentences to the like effect the said Gerson hath but these may suffice to content anie reasonable mind Other papistes are of the same opinion in verie deed though they do not disclose their mindes in such manifest tearmes Thus writeth our father Iesuit Bellarminus Respondeo omne peccatum esse contra legem Dei non positivam sedaeternam vt Aug. recte docet omnis enim iusta lex siue a Deo sive ab homine detur ab aeterna dei lege derivatur est enim aeterna lex vt malum sit violare regulam I answere that everie sinne is against the lawe of God not positiue but eternall as Augustine rightly teacheth For euerie iust law whether it be made by God or by man is derived from the law of God eternall For
the lawe eternall is that it is sinue to transgresse the rule And this is the common opinion as I haue proved out of Iosephus Angles Neither will it helpe the papistes to say as the Thomistes doe that veniall sins are praeter non contra legem besides the law but not against the law 1 First because saint Augustine defineth sinne generallie to be a gainst the law of God writing in this manner Peccatum est dictum vel factum vel concupitum contra legem aeternam dei Sinne is a saying or doing or coveting against Gods eternall lawe Secondly because as Iosephus Angles their owne doctor saith everie venial sinne is against right reason and to doe against right reason is to doe against the law of nature which commaundeth not to depart from the rule of right reason 3 Thirdly because we must give an accompt of euerie idle word in the general day of iudgement as Christ himselfe telleth vs for no-other end doubtlesse must this accompt be made but onely because everie idle word is against the law of God This the papistes can never denie and yet must they likewise confesse that idle wordes bee those sinnes which they tearme venialles and consequently that veniall sinnes be against the lawe of God Secondly that no mortall sinne can be forgiven in purgatorie is confessed of all papistes without contradiction Thus writeth Bellarminus Manet vltima sententia vera catholica purgatorium pro ijs tantum esse qui cum venialib culpis moriuntur rur sum pro illis qui decedunt cum reatupaenae culpis iam remissis The true and catholike opinion remaineth that purgatorie is only for those that die with veniall sinnes and againe for those that die with the guilt of sinne after their sinnes bee forgiven And with Bellarminus doe all other papistes agree that such as die in mortall sinne goe incontinently to hel Thirdly that sundrie having venial sinnes abide the paines of purgatorie appeareth by Bellarminus his wordes before alleaged and by Dominicus So to in these wordes Qui dixerit verbum contra spiritum sanctum nō remittetur ei in hoc seculo neque in futuro Vbi Gregorius lib. 4. di alogorum adnotavit aliqua leuia peccata remitti in futuro seculo per ignem purgationis He that shall blaspheme the holie Ghost shall neither be forgiven in this vvorld neither in the vvosld to come In vvhich place Gregorius pope of Rome noted certaine light sinnes to be forgiven in the world to come by the fire of purgation And their Aquinas saith thus Secundum enim quod peccata venialia sunt maioris vel minoris adhaerentiae vel gravitatis citius vel tardius per ignem purgantur For veniall sinnes are purged by fire sooner or latter according to their greater or lesser adherence or gravitie And for a full accomplishment of this conclusion Iosephus Angles vttereth the great perplexitie of papistes concerning this their purgative imagination These are his vvords Quo igitur modo remittuntur venialia in purgatorio varij sunt modi dicendi Scotus dicit in instanti mortis idest in primo non esse hominis propter merita quae homo habuit in vita Dur andus dicit remitti quoad culpam in purgatorio propter displicentiam quam habent illic animae venialium cum sint in charitate Soto asserit remitti quoad culpā in purgatorio propter actum chariiatis continuam patientiam quam dum cruciantur habent Hovv then are veniall sinnes forgiven in purgatorie diverse hold diversly Scotus saith they are forgiven in the instant of death that is vvhen man first beginneth not to be by reason of his merits in his life time Durand saith the fault is remitted in purgatorie for the displicence of venials vvhich the soules haue in that place and that because they be in charity Soto saith the sinne is remitted in purgatorie for the act of charitie and continuall patience vvhich they have in ther torments VVhom vvill not this discordant theologie vtterly dissvvade from papistrie The sixt Conclusion THe booke of Machabees which is the sole and onely foundation of popish purgatorie is of no force at all to establish the same This conclusion shalbe evidently prooved when I shall effectually disproove the authoritie of the said booke of Machabees wherewith many have a long time beene most miserably seduced Marke therefore my discourse herein To prove that the 2. book of Machabees out of which prayer and sacrifice for the dead and consequently purgatory is gathered is not Canonicall that is not penned by the assistance of the holy ghost I say first that it is not in the canon of the Hebrewes neither did the Iewes or Hebrewes at any time repute it as a part of holy divine scripture This S. Hierome witnesseth in these wordes Sicut ergo Iudith Tobiae Machabaeorum libros legit quidem Ecclesia sedinter Canonicas scripturas non recipit sic haec duo volumina legit ad aedificationem plebis non ad authoritatem Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam As therefore the Church readeth the bookes of Iudith of Toby and of the Machabees but receiveth them not amongst the Canonicall scriptures so doth it read also these 2. volumes for edification of the people but not to confirme any Ecclesiasticall doctrine S. Cyprian hath the very same wordes in effect in Symb. expositione S. Augustine doth testifie the same when he thus writeth Hanc scripturam quae appellatur Machabaeorum non habent Iudaei sicut legem prophetas Psalmos quibus dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis dicens oportebat impleri omnia quae scripta sunt in lege Prophetis in Psalmis de me Sedrecepta est ab Ecclesia non inutiliter si sobriè legatur vel audiatur maximè propter illos Machabaeos qui pro Dei lege sicut veri martyres à per secutoribus tam indigna atque horrenda perpessi sunt This scripture which is of the Machabees the Iewes repute not as they do the law the Prophets Psalmes to which the Lord gave testimonie as to his witnesses saying It behoved all things to be fulfilled which are written in the law in the Prophets and Psalmes of me but it is received of the Church not without profite if it bee read or heard soberly especially for those Machabees who for the lawe of God as true martyrs suffred of their persecutors so unworthy horrible torments And their owne deare fryer Bryton telleth vs that neither is it knowne who was the author of these bookes neither did the east Church ever receive them I say secondly that this second booke out of which purgatorie is collected was never in Hebrew and consequently never authenticall among the Iewes I say thirdly that many things found affirmed in the bookes of Machabees proove the same to be of no credit at
all For first those for whome Iudas offred sacrifice prayer could not be holpen therwith because as the text recordeth they perished for their secretidolatry so saith the Glosse also and consequently Iudas erred grosly in praying and sacrificing for them and the author of the booke likewise in commēding Iudas his fact wherupon it followeth necessarily that the writer was not directed by the holy ghost because he concluded prayer for the dead upō a notorious known fact condēned by the scriptures Secondly this booke saith that the Iewes were led captives into Persia but they were translated indeed not into Persia but into Babylon as their owne Lyranus doth testifie Thirdly the second book saith that Iudas with others wrote their epistle to Aristobolus in the 188 yere but the first book affirmeth Iudas to be dead in the yere 152 so that he must perforce write his epistle 36 yeres after his death Fourthly the first book saith that Antiochus died in Babylon in his bed for sorow but the second book avoucheth that he was slaine in the tēple of Nannea Fiftly because the author of the books of Machabes desireth pardō if any thing be done amisse These be his words Si bene ut historiae competit hoc et ipse velim si autem minus dignè concedendumest mihi If I haue done well and as is decent for the historie that is my desire but if not worthily I must craue pardon And doubtlesse he that writeth by the direction of the holy ghost needeth no pardon at all Sixtly the wilfull murder of Razias is there commended which commendation can not proceed from the holy ghost Seventhly the authour of the Macchabees doeth onely conclude praying for the dead because Iudas offered sacrifice for the dead VVhich general illation vpon a particuler fact is not good in popish maner of proceeding For as their Maxime saith which is true indeede Privilegium paucorum non facit legem communem The privilege of a fewe can not establish a generall law neither will it helpe the papistes to say that saint Augustine and others alleaged this booke For so saint Paul alleaged the testimonies of Ethnickes Epimenides Menander and Aratus and popish divines alleage now and then Esops Fables But in what maner to what end S. Augustine alleaged this book I have shewed out of Augustine alreadie Neither yet will it helpe to say which some repute for a great argument that this booke is in the corps of the Bible For so is the fourth booke of Esdras within the corps of the bible yet doe the papistes themselves repute it no better then a fable yea which is more to be noted they will not haue the last end of the Lords praier to be canonicall albeit it be found in the greeke originall and placed in the corpse of the bible For the great popish linguist Benedictus Arias Montanus telleth the reader in his observation vpō that place that it is not of the text though he can not denie it to be in the greeke first originall To conclude neither did Iudas pray himselfe neither did he will others to pray for remission of sinnes unto the dead neither is it flatly so said in the Greeke copie neither did hee offer sacrifice for the sinnes of the dead but for the resurrection of the body vnderstanding by sinne the death and corruption of the bodie which proceedeth of sinne and followeth the same VVhich my interpretation may be gathered out of these wordes of the text it selfe Bene religiose de resurrectione cogitans Thinking well and religiously of tbe dead And therefore is the illation of the popish latine translation so highly commended and strictly commanded by the synod of Trent vaine frivolous and foolish He that penned the storie hath without all rime and reason infarced the same because no such conclusion can be truly gathered of Iudas his oblation and fact The Corollarie FIrst therefore since there is no purgatorie but Christs blood Secondly since after this life there is no place for merite or satisfaction Thirdly since the booke of Machabees is not Canonicall I conclude that it is a sufficient motive for me to renounce the Romish religion as false erroneous and pernicious doctrine Thus much of the sixt Motive The VIII CHAP. Of dissention amongest the Papistes ALthough nothing is more common with the Papistes then to charge protestants with dissention yet is it their owne peculiar badge as will appeare by due examination thereof The first article of dissention THe first erection of the English seminarie at Rome began with dissention betweene the students on the one part and Master Morice the VVelsh-man on the other part This Morice was appointed the rectour of the seminarie with whome tooke part doctor Lewes an other VVelsh-man who was Arch-deacon to the Arch-bishop of Cambrey and referendarie to the Pope at that time and also Cardinall Morone then the protectour of the English nation With the scholers tooke part the close and politike Iesuites who would seeme to doe nothing in the matter openly but in deede did all in all secretly For the space of some daies in which time the matter was hotely handled on both sides daily sutes being made and supplications exhibited unto his holinesse the Cardinall prevailed and the pope discharged the schollers But the Iesuites laboured so forcibly yet covertly that within three daies notwithstanding all the means that the Cardinall did and could make the schollers were againe restored to their places For Toledo the Iesuite was commaunded by the generall of their societie to fall prostrate on his knees before the popes holinesse and there to make a pitifull lamentation for the overthrowe of England that is forsooth that now were reiected the finest wittes the most towarde youthes the seed of poperie and the onely hope of the English nation who now exiled for zeale in religion and come to be his popish vassals must either be trained up in papistrie after the Iesuiticall maner or els should England never be reclaimed world without end VVhich sweete narration no sooner sounded in the popes eares but he commanded the schollers to be received into the Colledge againe And shortly after by Iesuiticall pollicie Master Morice was officiperda and a Iesuite made rectour in his place This dissention still continueth in that seminarie as in which have bene foure or five to speake of the least notorious combattes or endeavours betweene the rectour and the students who should expulse ech other And sometime the rectour hath so prevailed by pollicie that some fewe haue bene dismissed and other-somtime the generall of the Iesuites hath bin glad to change the rector so to appease the dissention The like agreement is amongst the papistes at home here in England for I pray you did not their holy confessor M. Sherewood even in the time of his bondes for poperie murder his brother