Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	bishop_n	church_n	exposition_n	3,560	5	11.1579	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65422	Popery anatomized, or, A learned, pious, and elaborat treatise wherein many of the greatest and weightiest points of controversie, between us and papists, are handled, and the truth of our doctrine clearly proved : and the falshood of their religion and doctrine anatomized, and laid open, and most evidently convicted and confuted by Scripture, fathers, and also by some of their own popes, doctors, cardinals, and of their own writers : in answer to M. Gilbert Brown, priest / by that learned, singularly pious, and eminently faithful servant of Jesus Christ M. John Welsch ...; Reply against Mr. Gilbert Browne, priest	Welch, John, 1568?-1622.; Craford, Matthew. Brief discovery of the bloody, rebellious and treasonable principles and practises of papists.	1672 (1672)	Wing W1312; ESTC R38526	397,536	586

Church and as Bellarmin sayes as hath been said before If ye go this far as ye do indeed and as Bellarmin doth and your self must do if ye be a right defender of your Catholick faith here or else there is no ground whereupon ye can build the puretie and truth of your Church and Religion Then I say that your ground is as false and erroneous as the stuff that ye build upon it for both they have failed and have been interrupted as shal be proved afterward And mark this Christian reader as the Philistins Church wherein they praised their God Judg. 16. and mocked Samson the Lords servant had two chief pillars whereon the whole house leaned and was born up so hath the Church of Rome two chief pillars whereon the whole weight of their Church and Religion hings the one whereof is this that the Church cannot err the other that the Pope is the head of the Church Take these two from them their house must fall and their Religion can stand no longer For when they are brought to this strait that they see they cannot defend their Religion neither by the testimonies of the Scripture nor yet by the examples of the Church of God when she was in her greater purity and sincerity they are compelled to lay this as a ground to hold all their errors on that the Church of Christ cannot err So take this ground from them their Church and Religion cannot stand Now as to the testimonies which ye quote out of the Old Testament out of Luke 1.33 in the New Testament they only prove that the Church and Kingdom of Christ shal endure for evermore and that his covenant made with her is everlasting The which cannot exeem the militant Church from erring in points of doctrine for both the chaff and evil seed in the Church that is these that are called but not chosen may err and that to death and damnation and yet his Church and Kingdom and his covenant remaineth sure stable and inviolate for the Lord only offers his covenant unto them and they through incredulitie reject it and so he is not bound to sanctifie or save them much less to keep them from error And as for these who are called and chosen all these promises are made and performed in every one of them and the covenant of God is so sure in every one of them that our Savior saith None of them can perish John 10.28 And yet for all this every one of them may err in doctrine suppose not to death and damnation which ye will not deny And if ye would infinit examples not only of the Saints of God of the laicks as ye call them but also of the Priests Prophets Apostles yea and of Popes also and of your own Doctors and Bishops as a cloud of witnesses would stand up and avow the same in your face Now I gather seeing that the militant Church here on earth hath but two sorts of persons in her these that are called and chosen and these that are only called but not chosen and both may err in points of doctrine the one finally to death and damnation the other may err suppose not finally to death and damnation and yet the covenant of God remain sure everlasting and inviolate with his Church Therefore I say the promises of the stabilitie of Christs Kingdom and the perpetuitie of his covenant made with her cannot exeem the militant Church from erring in points of doctrine So ye have lost your vantguard Let us come to the rest and see if they will favor your cause any better then the former hath done The next place ye quote is Matth. 16.18 Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shal not prevail against it And because ye trust that there is not a testimony of Scripture which shal fight more for you then this let us therefore try it to the uttermost and see how far it can be stretched out What argument will ye frame out of this place For if you gather no more but this Christ hath promised that the gates of hell shal never prevail against the Church that is built on the Rock that is on Christ Therefore the Church that is built on him shal never be all utterlie extinguished and abolished by Satan Then Bellarmin tells you that ye spend but time in proving of this for we grant it That the Church of the chosen shal never perish But if you go further and say That the Church of Christ shal never err because Christ hath promised that the gates of hell shal not prevail against it then I say either that exposition is false or else the gates of hell should have prevailed long since against your Church for when it prevailed against the rock whereon the Church was built it prevailed against the Church For raze and overturn the foundation of a house the house cannot stand seeing the standing of the house consists on the firmness sureness of the foundation thereof Now the rock whereon ye say the Church is built unto whom this promise is made is Peter and his successors the Popes of Rome for so ye all with one consent expone the same Rhemists annotation upon this place Seeing then that they are the foundation of the Church as ye say and the gates of hell hath prevailed against them as I shal prove by the grace of God it must follow if your exposition be true that the gates of hell hath prevailed not once only but at many times against ●he Church For first Peter himself erred in a matter of doctrine when he thought with the rest of the Apostles after the resurrection of Christ the Kingdom of Christ not to be heavenlie but earthlie not spiritual but like the Kingdoms of this world proper to Israel Acts 1.6 not common to all by vertue of the promise and also he is commanded to preach the Gospel to the Gentils doubting nothing Acts 10.20 Which testifies that he doubted before whither the Gospel should be preached to them or not and therefore erred in a matter of faith and that after he had received the promise of the holy Ghost And also he erred in the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law Acts 10.14 for he believed that some meats were unclean after the death and resurrection of Christ and therefore he refused to eat thereof And this was a matter of faith also And last of all the holy Ghost testifies that he went not a right foot to the truth of the Gospel Gal. 2.11 and therefore was rebuked by the Apostle Paul to his face And as for them whom ye call his successors the Popes of Rome not only may they be hereticks but also some of them have been hereticks And therefore if your argument be good the gates of hell both may and have prevailed against them That they may be hereticks I will fetch no other witnesses but your own Councils Canons Cardinals

ye say if they prophesie at any time it is of evil and not of good so said Achab of the Prophet of the Lord 1. Kings 22.8 and therefore he hated him so you speak with the same spirit against us that Achab spake with against the Lords Prophet And what good can be spoken of your Babel since the Lord hath fore-told the ruine of it in part hath been accomplished And some of your own number as Hildegardis Briget Catherine de Sens have fore-told of the destruction of your Church the reformation of the Church of Christ As for the time it was spoken of before and I suppose ye have thought it too long and yet be in patience M. Gilbert for it must continue and your Babel must down As for the clothing of sackcloth it was the apparel of such as was in dolor and in mourning whereby is signified the sorrow and dolor that should arise to the true Ministers of Christ through the persecution of the Antichrist his members their idolatrie and abominations The which hath been so clearly fulfilled in the Preachers of the Gospel since John Hus his dayes and before also even to this day that he must be blinded of the Lord who sees it not And whereas ye cast up the clothing of the Ministry in this land ye have forgotten your self and your Clergy and your Head the Pope with his triple Crown with all the rable of his Prelats Abbots Bishops Cardinals c. as full of riotous pride and pomp as ever were the Persian Kings See Bernard de confid ad Eugen. lib. 4. Platin. de vita Pontif. in Paulo 2. His clothes be made of precious stones his gorgeous Miter dight With jewels rare with glistering gold and with 1 A precious stone called a Carbuncle of the which kind one that fell out of the Popes Miter by a mischance at his coronation was worth 6000. crowns Platin. in vita Clementis 5. Pyropus bright O very Troyan trulls no Troyans The pomp and glory of whose Court doth surmount all the pomp and glory of all the Princes in Europe as some that have seen it reports How then can ye justly quarrel our attire Can you say that we pass the bounds of that modesty and comeliness which the Apostle requires in the over-seers of the Church of Christ seeing you will have all the outward pomp and glory of your Popes and Prelats according as it was prophesied of you Rev. 17. to be comprehended within the definition of comeliness and modestie But you are like the Lamians of whom it is reported that they had but one eye and when they went forth they took it with them to look upon others and when they came in their own houses they laid it beside them You look to your neighbors but ye over-see your self So for all the differences which ye have yet assigned it remains sure that by these two Witnesses here are signified the Ministers of the Gospel Master Gilbert Brown But note here I pray you how well these new Evangelists agree in the exposition of this Revelation of S. John for all their grounds proofs is upon prophesies and dark speakings Young Merchiston in his book upon the Revelation chap. 11. vers 3. expones these Witnesses to be the Old and New Testament as he proves in the 21. Proposition and M. John will have them the Ministers Merchiston saith that to be clad in sackcloth is to preach the Word of God with the obscurity of mens traditions and colored glosses M. John saith here that the sackcloth signifies persecution for the preaching of the Word The notes on their Geneva Bibles printed at London expones the sackcloth to signifie poor and simple apparel And Bale upon the same place writes that this sackcloth signifies sober conversation God knows if this and the like be wholsome doctrine to preach to the poor people some one way and some another according to the invention of their own brains without any proofs Maister John Welsch his Reply As for these diverse expositions which ye mark in us that have so stirred up your affections that ye cry out God knows whether this be wholsome doctrine to teach the poor people or not I answer That these diverse expositions of ours are all agreeable to the analogie of faith as your self will not deny and therefore cannot be called unwholsome doctrine Otherwise not only the Fathers but also your own Doctors and Bishops and Popes have delivered unwholsome doctrine by your reason for they have exponed innumerable places of Scripture diversly which is so manifest that I need not prove it and your self also hath delivered unwholsome doctrine here for ye expone blessing and thanksgiving for two contrary things and yet Bellarmin saith that some Catholicks take them both for one And what shal I say of your diverse expositions which were tolerable so being they were according to the proportion of faith your contradictions one to another and that not only in exponing the Scripture but in the main points of your Religion some holding one thing and some another as partly hath and partly shal be marked are manifold And if diverse expositions of a place of Scripture be unwholsome doctrine as ye say then surely this point of your Catholick doctrine which teaches that the Scripture hath a five-fold sense and that it may be five diverse ways exponed must be unwholsome doctrine and then ye lose more then you can win by this Beware M. Gilbert that by this dealing ye bring not your self in suspicion that ye are forsaking your Catholick Faith For this is a point of it as Bellarmin reports lib. 3. de interpret verb. cap. 3. As for your calumnies first in calling us new Evangelists I answered to that before next in saying that all our proofs and grounds are upon prophesies and dark sayings First you injure the holy Ghost in calling his prophesies dark for the cause of this is not in them but in our blindness Secondly ye speak too plain an untruth for it is more then manifest that not only prophesies but also the plain and simple doctrine of the whole Scripture is the grounds and proofs of our Religion as is manifest by the points of doctrine which we have handled here Master Gilbert Brown And it follows in M. John And at the last saith he they shal be put to death c. Here is two things to be noted First that the Church shal not be invisible in the time of Antichrist for if the Pastors of the Church be invisible how shal they be taken and put to death If the Antichrist and his members shal slay them how can they do the same except they know and may see them To be invisible is not to be known or seen but they will see and know them or else they cannot discern them from their own whereby they may put them to death and save their own The second thing to be noted that

that spake against the Pope I will but note their persons Robert Grosshed John Gryllis a p●eaching Frier anno 1253. Gregory Ariminensis Franciscus de Rupe Scissa Taulerus in Germany Gerardus Rhidit Michael de Cesena Petrus de Carbona and Joannes de Poliaco Joannes Rithetalanda anno 1360. Armachanus the Archbish p in Ireland 1360. Nicolas Orem Matthias Parisiensis Nilus A●chbishop of Thessalonica John Wicleff and the Lord Cobham and sundry others Master Gilbert Brown M. John hath set down here a number of (a) It is false obscure and infamous persons for the most part justly (b) And this also condemned for heresies without their works or books whereby they affirm this that he alledges and all (c) This is also false for Gerard and Dulcimus Navarrensis which I first cited was almost 400. years before M. Luther and Calvin and the Waldenses was more then 300. years before them two hundred years before Calvin began their Religion or thereabout Of the which I contend not whether they spake against the Pope or not For all hereticks from the beginning have barked against the Pope But our contention is whether such heads of Religion as they denyed were heresies or not which as yet M. John hath not (d) But these heads is proven that the Pope is the Antichrist and Rome Babel they are not hereticks therefore our Religion was before Martin Luther proved nor is not able to defend these whom he calls his worthy men for appearantly by this all hereticks are worthy men by him albeit they be not of his Religion in all things Master John Welsch his Reply You calumniat our Religion of novelty and say Martin Luther begin it anno 1517. Unto the which I answered That our Religion hath Christ Jesus in the Old and New Testament to be the Author thereof and hath the primitive Church many hundred years thereafter to be the teachers and professors thereof the which I have proved already by some examples and that even till the smoak of that Antichristian darkness of yours did overspread all as it was fore-told by the holy Ghost At the which time also the Lord did reserve his own elect to himself even these hundred and forty and four thousand which did not bow their knees to your Baal as it was fore-prophesied whereof also a great many is recorded in Histories and of whom I set down some examples here Upon the which I reason That Religion which is warranted by the Scripture and professed in the primitive Church c. and hath sundry that taught and professed it and that even in the midst of Popery when it was at the hight thereof is not a new Religion nor invented by Martin Luther But ours is such as hath been proved Therefore unrighteous and blasphemous must ye be who slanders the Lords truth and Religion of novelty and fathers it upon flesh and blood whereof he is the Author Your answer to the first two we have examined Now let us see your answer to this First you say they are obscure men I answer If you call them obscure because they wanted the outward glory wealth and renown of this world Then suppose it were so yet have they Jesus Christ the Prince of life who was called a carpenters son Matth. 13.54 55 56. and his Prophets of whom some were herd-men Amos 1.2 and his Apostles who were fisher-men Mat. 4.18.21 his Church which consists not of many wise mighty or noble but of the foolish weak and vile of the world for them God hath chosen to confound the wise and noble 1. Cor. 1.26.27.28 to be companions with them and so they are the liker both the Head and the members It is true indeed your Popes and Clergy are not obscure for they have the wealth and glory of the world But as Bernard said to the Pope In this they succeed not to Christ or Peter but to Constantine But they receive their good things in this life with the rich glutt●n and therefore they must receive their pain with h●m in the life to come But why do you call these obscure whom I named here Are not some of them Friers some of them Provincials of Gray-Friers some of them Masters and Rulers of Universities some of them excellently learned which your own Church cannot deny some of them Bishops and Archbishops some of them Noble-men and some of them as namely the Greek and Eastern Churches in number learning purity of doctrine and godliness far exceeding your Papistical Church Who is worthy or famous if these be obscure Are all men obscure and infamous to you but your Popes and those who submit their necks to him And if you think these too obscure men to be called worthy men then behold yet M. Gilbert more noble personages who have resisted your Popes Monarchy As King Philip le Bell of France the Prelats of France joyning with him in his Dominions about the year of God 1300. And Edward the third King of England despised the Popes curse and appealed from him to God about the year of God 1346. And also sundry Emperors as Constantine the fifth Leo his son and Constantine the sixth in the East and Henry the 4. and Henry the 5. and Frederick the 2. in the West Will you call these Kings and Princes of the whole world obscure men So all sorts of men M. Gilbert both rich and poor Princes and subjects and these also within your own bowels being overcome with the strength of the truth of God have spoken against your Religion Why you call them infamous and hereticks justly condemned I know not except it be because they taught and professed the truth of God and condemned your Antichristian idolatry and abominations But all are not infamous and hereticks whom ye call so and surely if murderers hereticks adulterers Sodomites open bargainers with the Devil and the vile monsters of the earth is to be called obscure infamous and hereticks then your Popes are to be called so who of all men that ever the earth hath born have been the vilest monsters and hereticks as I have proved in my other Treatise concerning the Mass and the Antichrist You say next that you contend not whether they have spoken against the Pope or not for all hereticks have ever barked against him that sore against your heart M. Gilbert because you cannot deny but ye have taught this doctrine with us and if it be so M. Gilbert that these men and Churches and many thousands more of all sorts have taught this doctrine with us many hundred years before Martin Luther for the first two which I named was almost 400. years before him then why were you so shameless both to write it and also speak it to blind your poor Countrey-men to their and your damnation that our Religion was begun by Martin Luther and never professed before him So leave off M. Gilbert to beguile the simple and ignorant people with this sottish and

the undoubted Antichrist This for the fourth mark The fifth mark of the Antichrist as he is described by the Apostle is in these words Ye know saith the Apostle what withholdeth namely that he might be revealed in his own time This Tertullian de resurrect cap. 24. Jerome ad Gelasium and Chrysostom upon this same place and so also Ambrose upon this place and August de civit Dei lib. 20. cap. 29. expone it of the Roman Empire the which as long as it flowrished and was in full strength the Antichrist could not climb up to this his full hight and preeminence So that it behoved that Empire first to be translated and piece and piece diminished before the Antichrist could come up to his hight for that stayed him Now it is manifest out of the 17. chap. of the Revelation that Rome should be the seat of the Antichrist and Bellarmin and the Rhemists do not deny it and Rome was the seat of the Roman Empire before So then it behoved the Empire to translate his seat from Rome that Rome which was first the seat of the Empire might be the seat of the Antichrist Now the issue and event is a sure and clear interpretation of this Prophesie For Constantin the Emperor of Rome translated his seat from Rome to Byzantium called Constantinople in Greece And piece and piece that Empire of the Greek Emperor began to decay and was translated from the Greeks to the French-men by the Popes and then from them to the Germans by the Popes also So that both Rome and a great part of Italy and at the last a great part of the Empire is fallen in the Popes hand So that now he vaunts himself to be Monarch of the whole world and all Kings and Princes gave him their oath of alleageance and the Emperors and Kings held their Empires and Kingdoms of him and are but his vassals as their Canon Law saith So that by the taking away of the Roman Empire the Popes did then climb up to their supremacy and make themselves manifest that they were the Antichrist And so this doth also agree to the Pope of Rome and to none other He is the Antichrist whose climbing up was letted by the Roman Empire and who is built up upon the ruines of the same But the Papacy is such Therefore the Papacy is that Antichristian Kingdom It is said sixthly that this mystery began to work in the dayes of the Apostles that is the foundations of that apostasie was begun to be laid in these dayes and that he shal continue to the Lords coming for he shal not be abolished but by the brightness of his coming suppose he shal be first consumed with the sword of his mouth that is discovered and sore beaten by the Lords Word All which agrees unto Papistrie For that Kingdom is that Apostasie and Antichristian Monarchy whose foundation was beginning to be laid in the Apostles dayes which should be first consumed by the Word of God and utterly abolished by the brightness of his coming But the Papacy is such therefore it is that Antichristian Kingdom Matth. 18.1.2.3.4 and 20.25.26.27 Mark 10.41 Luke 22.25 2 Cor. 1 24. 1 Pet. 3.2.3 For the foundations of it was soon laid both of that Hierarchie and supremacy of the Pope and also of his damnable and erroneous doctrine For that superiority of the Ministery one over another of Bishops over Pastors forbidden by Jesus Christ soon crept in which was the foundation or rather staires by the which the Pope clamb up to his Popedom and supremacy the old condemned heresies which sprang up in the primitive Church many of them were the foundation of these damnable doctrines which the Popes brought in afterward as is proved in the end of the first part And as to his consuming by the Lord his mouth the Lord hath accomplished that already in some measure and shal assuredly fulfil it dayly more and more For since the time of the burning of John Hus and Jerome of Prague about the year of God 1415. and since the time the Lord stirred up Martin Luther and sundry others his faithful servants to preach the Gospel of Christ which was as it were buried in the darkness of Papistry the supremacy of the Pope hath taken such a dayly consumption that many of the Kingdoms of Europe now have forsaken her and the Lord hath put in their hearts to hate her But yet we know the dreggs of it shal not be abolished utterly while the bright coming of the Son of God It followes seventhly the manner how his Kingdom and tyranny shal be promoved upholden and established To wit By the effectual working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness among them that perish Which the Apostle calles strong delusions And with this that of the Rev. 13.13.14 in the description of the second beast whereby it is meaned the Antichristian Kingdom doth agree that he did great wonders and deceived them that dwelt upon the earth by the signs which was permitted him to do Now certainly nothing can be spoken more aptly of the Popes Kingdom then this For unless the Pope had had an effectual power strong and devilish also by signs and lying wonders and unless his unrighteousness that is his false doctrine had been exceeding deceiveable that is covered with a fair color of godliness and unless his delusions had been strong his Kingdom had never been so far enlarged and so firmly established as we see it hath been and his damnable doctrine and errors would never have de●eived so many Nations as they have done For what is more common and usual in their mouthes then miracles What is it they vaunt so much of as of their miracles So that they make it an infallible mark of the Church And how I pray you have a great part of their errors and superstitions as the praying to Saints and worshipping of Images and pilgrimages and other of their superstitions and idolatries as Purgatory the real presence their monstrous Transubstantiation c. how I say have they been so confirmed and so rooted in the hearts of ignorant people but by their lying wonders and miracles which they fain was done Whereof their golden Legends are full and sundry yet live who have been eye-witnesses of the falshood of their miracles I will only set down for example some of the false miracles of two Nuns here the one of Magdalena de la Cruz Abbess of the Monastery of the Franciscan Nuns who was condemned by the Inquisitors of Cordoua for her enormous offences and covenant which she made with the Devil as they say in their sentence against her She by the aid of the Devil with whom she made a covenant when she was nine years old became a singular hypocrit and by his help wrought many miracles as that she appeared unto Mariners in a storm being invocated and so the storm calmed that she

only means and instrument whereby the holy Ghost works faith in our hearts Thus I reason therefore He only can be Judge in controversies of Religion whose authority is such that none may appeal from the same whose judgement is infallible true who will not be partial nor favor parties and who is able to convict and perswade the conscience of the truth and make the party to rest in the same But only the holy Ghost in by the Scripture hath these proprieties no other Therefore the holy Ghost in and by the Scripture is only Judge And whereas you say that the holy Writ must bear witn ss to it What will you say then to all the chief points of your Religion almost which the learned and great defenders of your faith before cited have confessed are unwritten traditions which have not their beginning nor authority from the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same Upon the which I reason thus That doctrine is not the holie Ghosts which the Scripture bears not witness to this ye say your self for ye say The Scripture must bear witness to it But all the chief points almost of your Religion as the supremacy of the Pope the sacrifice of the Mass invocation of Saints the five bastard Sacraments the worshipping of Images Transubstantiation Communion under one kind Satisfactions Pardons Purgatory Merits of works c. have not their authoritie from the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same as your own Catholicks as ye call them testifies Therefore your Doctrine and Religion is not the holie Ghosts and that by your own testimonie Now trulie M. Gilbert I fear ye lose your style if you defend your Religion no better then this And whereas you say That the holy Ghost gives out his judgement by the Pastors of the true Church I grant indeed that the Pastors gives out publick sentence in controversies of Religion because they are the Lords witnesses messengers and mouthes to testifie proclaim interpret and discern his truth from falshood But first the rule of this their judgement should be the Word of God unto the which they are bound in all their testimonies and judgements from the which if their judgements swerve but an inch-broad they are not the judgements of the holie Ghost so that all their decreets and determinations in the worship of God and man his salvation should onlie be received accordinglie as they agree or dissent from the same For the Apostle pronounces him accursed suppose he were an Angel that would preach another Gospel then that which he preached Gal. 1 8. And he preached nothing but out of the Scripture Acts 26.22 But your Roman Church by the contrary saith That their decreets and sentences should be taken without all tryal and examination because whatsoever they decree say they in manners or doctrine whither they be comprehended in the Scripture or not they cannot err Bellar. de Eccles lib. 1. de Consil cap. 18. lib. 3. c. 14. Next if it be asked of you whom ye judge to be the Pastors of the true Church You will answer as ye do that your Church is the only true Church and your Bishops and Popes the only true Pastors so that they only must be the Judge to end all controversies And Bellarmin is plain in this for he saith lib 3. de verbi interpret cap. 5. 9. lib. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 2. The Pope is chief Judge in all controversies in Religion either he himself alone or with his Council and that in his judgement and sentence all men should rest and he should be obediently heard of all the faithful in all matters of controversie whether he can err or not And their Canon Law hath decreeted That no man should rebuke him suppose he should carry with him innumerable souls to hell And they teach that their decreets should not be examined of any whither they be agreeable to the Scripture or not but that they should be received as the express Word of God and the Gospel Dist 40. cap. Si Papa Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 18. Rhemist annotat in 2. Thess 2. v. 12. Joannes Maria verractus editus anno 1561. Hosius lib. de express verb. Dei pag. 97. But first judge thou Reader in what suspicion they have their Religion in their own hearts They have declined the holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture and that not only as Judge but in the authentick Greek and Hebrew as witness So their Religion cannot stand if the Lord be either as Judge in his Scripture to give out sentence of it or as witness in the authentick copies to hold his hand at the bar and depone against it Now whom would they have as Judges Their own Pastors and the Pope and all their determinations to be received without a tryal as the Gospel and express Word of God as though their Religion could not be justified unless the Fathers and forgers thereof the Popes and Bishops of Rome were set on the bench to be Judges thereof Now what an unrighteous thing is this both to be partie and Judge For the chief controversie is of themselves whither he be the Antichrist or not And his Ministers and Church Antichristian or not But what show of reason can you have for this The Prince of life the Son of God who is the righteous Judge of the whole world in that great controversie wherein it is called in question whether he was the Messias or not desired not to be the Judge For he said If I testifie of my self much more if I judge of my self my testimony is not true John 3.31 but referred this controversie to the Scripture saying Search the Scriptures c. John 5.32 And yet you that are but flesh and blood dust and ashes yea monsters and incarnat Devils as your own Writers and Councils have testified of some of your Popes who may err and have been hereticks as some of your Popes have been and that by your own testimonies you will not only bear witness of your selves but also be Judges in the controversies of your selves rejecting the judgement of the holy Ghost in the Scripture All men saith the Apostle are liars How then shal I certainlie know but they may lie How shal my conscience rest in their judgement Shal I have no better warrant for my salvation then the testimonies of your Bishops and Popes who are but men and so may lie who are partie and so never will condemn themselves who of all men have most foully erred What is this but to make the voice of your Bishops and Popes of greater authoritie then the voice of God in his Scripture For seeing it is the sense of the Scripture that is called in controversie and the sense of the Scripture is the Scripture it self And your doctrine is that I must embrace such and such interpretations of the Scripture that are called in controversie and my conscience must rest in the same

him as by another But to what purpose do ye quote the 9. of Matthew That the Son of man hath power to forgive sins For will you say that the Ministers of the Church have that absolut authority that he had The which if ye do then are ye blasphemous As for the word Priest wherewith ye style the Ministers of the Church I know that you and your Church takes more pleasure in this style then in all the styles which the holy Ghost hath given to the Ministers of the Church in the New Testament For among the manifold styles which are given to his Ministers yet hath he never given this style of a sacrificing Priest as proper to them throughout the whole New Testament But as your office of Priesthood is not written in Christ his latter Testament so neither is your style of sacrificing Priests contained in the same But new offices must have new styles SECTION XIV Of Extreme Vnction and whither it be a Sacrament Master Gilbert Brown SIxthly our doctrine is to make the Priests of the Church to anoint the sick with oyl in the Name of our Lord and to pray over him because it is the doctrine of the Apostles as we have in S. James in these words Is any sick among you let him bring in the Priests of the Church and let them pray over him anointing him with oyl in the Name of our Lord and the prayer of faith shal save the sick and our Lord shal lift him up and if he be in sins they shal be remitted him * James 4.15 August tom 4. super Levit. quaest 84. And because we find here an external form which is the anointing with oyl of an internal grace which is remission of sins therefore we say it is a Sacrament Now take from these places the vain subterfuges of our new men that will have him a Mediciner for the body in this and not for the soul the matter will be plain of it self M. John Welsch his Reply As to your doctrine of anointing of the sick with oyl and that not by every man but by a Priest not in all sicknesses but in the extremity of death not with every oyl but with oyl consecrated by the Bishop which Bellarmin makes essential to this Sacrament cap. 7. de extr unctione and that not all the parts and members of the body but the five organs of the senses and the reins and feet and that by this form of words Let God forgive thee whatsoever thou hast sinned by the sight hearing smelling c. by this holy unction and his most godly mercy The which you will have to have two effects The one the health of the body if it be expedient for the soul the other remission of the relicks of sins that remains and this ye make to be one of your Sacraments And for this purpose ye only bring one testimony of Scripture So that all the show of warrant you can pick out of the Scripture is this only place of James For I suppose with Bellarmin and sundry others you have seen that that place of Mark 6.13 which is also alledged by the Council of Trent for the confirmation of this doctrine would carry no show to make any thing for you and therefore it may be you have omitted it But this place serves nothing for your purpose For first I say this was a ceremonie annexed to the miraculous gift of healing as is plain both by the text using the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Lord will lift him up which is properly spoken of the health of the bodie and also by that place of Mark 6.13 where it is written that the Apostles anointed many sick with oyl and they healed them The which gift was not only given to the Apostles but also to the very Churches as is plain of the 1. Corinth 12. Unto another is given the gift of healing c. Now seeing this extraordinary gift is ceased in the Church of God wherefore will you superstitiously use the ceremonie So either avow M. Gilbert that your Priests have this miraculous gift of healing which I suppose ye will not or else leave off the ceremonie Secondly by this argument ye may as wel make all the rest of the ceremonies which our Savior and his Apostles Peter and Paul and the believers in the primitive Church used toward the sick blind lame and dead Sacraments As the laying on of hands Mark 16.18 which had both a command and a promise joyned with it anointing of the eyes of the blind with clay John 9.6 washing in the pool of Siloam c. John 5. Mat. 9.29 Acts 3.6 20.10 For why should not their examples be as well followed as the example of the Elders of the primitive Church And seeing you use not these ceremonies because ye want the miraculous gift which was joyned with them why do ye use this ceremonie superstitiously seeing ye want this gift also Thirdly I say this place can make nothing for your doctrine for this place saith Call the Elders of the Church and let them c. but you call for a sacrificing Priest This text saith in the plural number Call for the Elders your doctrine saith one Priest is sufficient This place speaks of oyl not mentioning a syllable of consecration blessing of it by the Bishop and that nine-fold salutation that ye give unto it Hail O holy oyl with the bowing of the knee and other ceremonies There is not a syllable in this nor in any other Scripture that speaks of these things and yet your doctrine will have all these ceremonies This place saith And the prayer of faith shal save the sick and you attribut it to the ointment This place puts no difference of sickness but your doctrine is that none be anointed but he who is lying in the bed and at the point of death This place only specifieth the anointing of the sick some of you reckons as the Council of Florentine seven parts some the five senses as necessary And therefore this moved Thomas of Aquin lib. 4. sent 4. dist 23. quaest to say That the form of this Sacrament is not extant in the Scripture Now if it be not extant in the Scripture what to do have we with it seeing the Scripture is able to make a man wise unto salvation and to make the man of God perfect in every good work Fourthly Beda Ecumenius and Theophylactus in their Commentaries upon these places and Thomas Waldensis lib. 2. de sacr Alphonsus de Castro de haeresibus two archpapists affirms that in the 6. of Mark 5. of James the self-same unction and anointing is meaned But Bellarmin de extr unct Jansenius in Marc. 6. two other Papists affirms and proves by firm reasons that that anointing in Mark is no Sacrament therefore neither is this anointing in James a Sacrament seeing as said is in both the places the self-same unction is meaned Fifthly I say all the

proved before therefore there is no works of supererogation Thirdly what an absurd and blasphemous thing is this to say that God hath no commanded to us the works of greatest perfection for M. Gilbert calls these works of greater perfection and so such works wherein he is most glorified but hath left them in our own choise to do or not to do as though the Lord had not commanded us to glorifie him in the greatest perfection nor yet we were bound to do the same Fourthly if there be any such works of supererogation which are of greater perfection then the Law commands then it should follow that the vow of continency wilful poverty and monastical obedience to their superiors should be works of greater perfection and so please God more then the love of God with all the heart with all the soul with all the strength with all the mind with all the thought Matth. 2.2.37 Mark 12.29.30 For the former are your works of supererogation and the last is commanded in the Law but this is absurd therefore there is no such works Fifthly this was only proper to the Son of God to fulfil the Law of God perfectly and to do more then the Law required to wit to die for us who were his enemies this doctrine therefore of yours spoils him of this his glory Last of all if none can merit eternal life through their works at all then none can augment their glorie and reward in heaven by their works of supererogation But the first I have proved before therefore the other must follow And mark this Reader how far God hath blinded their minds for they deride and they mock at that imputation of the righteousness and merits of Christ and they pronounce them accursed that so think but yet they teach that the works of supererogation which men do may be communicat to others Be●larm lib. 2. de justific cap. 2. Consil Trid. can 10. Bellarm. lib. 2. pag. 129. As for the first place which ye quote Matth. 19. If thou wilt be perfect c. I answered to it before in my answer to the second point of your doctrine to the which I refer the Reader And so your wilful poverty hath no ground here For if this man did not perfectly fulfill the Law then was he not able to do more then the Law required of him But the first is true as I proved before in the second point of your doctrine and as the circumstances of the text testifies it for he went away sad and he put his trust in his riches and so it was not only difficile but impossible for him to enter in the Kingdom of God as our Savior saith which had not been true of him if he had fulfilled the Law And this was a special command to this man to discover his hypocrisie And all Christians are bound also out of the love of their heart to Christ to be content to forsake all that they have before we renounce him or his Word when he so requireth of us And if wilful poverty be such a work of perfection as ye think wherefore then would the Prophet have prayed Prov 30.8 Give me neither poverty nor riches but feed me with food convenient And if this be the work of greatest perfection what is the cause that your Abbots Popes Bishops and Cardinals For who should be perfect if not these will not sell all their revenues which they have wherein they surmount the Princes of the world and so augment their glory in heaven and be perfect But shal others believe and obey this doctrine of yours when the greatest Patrons of it believes and obeys it not O hypocrits who will believe you As for the next work of supererogation Virginity It is true that the virgin and unmarried who hath the gift of continency thinks upon the things that appertains to God And it is true that if any have the gift of continency it is better to be unmarried then to marry especially in the times of persecution But yet it follows not that it is a work of supererogation For to them who have the gift it is a commandment For he that hath the gift is commanded to use it and in losing it he sins And every man is bound to glorifie God to the uttermost of his power and God is most glorified by the single life of these especially in the time of pe●●ecution who have the gift And so it is not a counsel simply but also a command but to them only who have the gift and that so long only as they have the gift And the Apostle saith in that same place which ye quote here that he thinks he hath the Spirit of GOD also and so this judgement of his was the judgement of the Spirit of GOD which binds and obliges all them who have the gift But unto these who have not the gift the Scripture hath a plain command 1. Cor. 7.3.9 For the avoyding of fornication let every man have his own wife c. And if they cannot abstain let them marry c. And whereas ye say that Virginity is better then Matrimony that is not true simply but only to them who have the gift And since you say it is better wherefore make ye Matrimony a Sacrament to give remission of sins For shal not a Sacrament which gives remission of sins be better then an indifferent action which men may do or leave undone such as ye say Virginity is As for the Apostles example 1 Cor. 9. in preaching the Gospel freely without wages to them I answer Suppose it was lawful to him and all the Ministers of the Gospel to have taken wages as himself testifies and proves in that same chapter from the 4. verse to the 15. yet it was not expedient to him for the course of the Gospel among them And men are not only commanded to abstain from that which is unlawful but also from the things which are lawful if they be not expedient and so he did no more here then he should have done And therefore he saith It were better for me to die then that any should take my glory from me 1. Cor. 9.15 which cannot be said of these works which we are not bound to do And he saith vers 8. That I abuse not my authority in the Gospel but this would have been an abuse of his liberty with his people therefore he was bound to do it And yet we read that he spoiled other Churches as he saith himself and took wages from them And also the Church of Philippi did communicat unto him twise 2. Cor. 11.8 Phil. 4. As for the 10. of Luke it appears ye are scarce of proofs in quoting this place for your works of supererogation For will you say that the Samaritan was not bound by Gods law to ware more upon his neighbor in his extremity then two penny worth Hath not the Law said Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thy self And are we not

it no heresie to fast on the Lords day more then other dayes both to stir up our repentance and to make us more meet to holy and spiritual exercises because it is not contrary to the Word of God As for Leo his Epistle it is wrong quoted for it should be Epist 91. and their fasting on the Lords day is not like ours for they fasted on the Lords day because they believed not that Christ was a true man as Leo in that same place testifies which you will not say your self that we do for we acknowledge him to be a true man As for the 13. heresie of the Pepusians and Collyridians their doctrine was that women might be Bishops and Elders and might use these publick functions as these places which ye have quoted testifie which is not our doctrine but rather yours who permit women to baptize in case of necessity That they denyed Orders to be a Sacrament there is no such thing to be found in these places which ye quote here As for the 14. heresie of the Pelagians if they denyed that these who were accused of any scandalous offence and guilty thereof should make their confession of it to God his Ministers and the Congregation for to take away the offence of it then they erred and our doctrine and practise condemn this but if they denyed the absolut necessity of your auricular confession then is it no error because there is no such thing commanded in the whole Scriptures of God Now as for the testimony of Boëtius I have not seen it As for their second heresie concerning Baptism they taught as Augustin reports in that place That Baptism was not needful to children because they were born without original sin as they taught which is an heresie indeed but this is a calumny to ascribe it to us for we teach that children are born in original sin and so should be baptized And surely this heresie rather agrees to you who teach that Mary was not born in original sin and therefore she needed not to be baptized As for the last of the Donatists denying the order of Monks I answer First your Papistical and idolatrous Monks are far different from these which Augustin and Chrysostome defended and these of the primitive Church Bellarmin lib. 1. cap. 2. de indulgentijs For first they were bound to no prescript form of dyet apparel or any thing else by solemn vowes of wilful poverty and perpetual continency as yours are Next the former Monks remained in the order of privat men and laicks and had nothing to do with Ecclesiastical charges which was afterward broken by Pope Boniface the fourth anno 606. But yours are not so they have Ecclesiastical charges and are more then privat men And last of all suppose their kind of life was mixed with some superstition for the envious man soon sowed the popple among the good seed and the mystery of iniquity began soon to work yet their Religion was not defiled with Idolatry worshipping of Images prayers to Saints opinion of merit the sacrifice of the Mass and other abominations wherewith your Papistical Monks are defiled Next I say these Monks and religious Orders of yours have not their foundation within the four corners of the Scripture of God Master Gilbert Brown These and many the like new renewed heresies by the Ministers was old condemned heresies in the primitive Church of the former hereticks as testifie the ancient Fathers and therefore this is a true argument What ever was heresie in old times is heresie yet and the defenders thereof hereticks as they were of old But these former heads that I have set down with many the like was heresies in old times and the defenders thereof hereticks as testifie the ancient Fathers Therefore they are heresies yet and the defenders thereof hereticks Master John Welsch his Reply Now here was all the cause Christian Reader that made M. Gilbert so oft to cry out of us that we renewed old condemned heresies whereof some are such as we our selves condemn and some are such which do better agree unto themselves then unto us And some heresies he forceth upon us which we never taught nor maintained and some are such which are not heresies indeed but agreeable to the Scriptures of God So that if we err in these suffer us to err with Jesus Christ and his Apostles Now to answer to your argument which ye bring What ever was heresie in old times is heresie yet and the defenders thereof hereticks I answer If ye define heresie to be an error obstinatly maintained against the Scriptures of God I grant your proposition But if ye define heresies in general to be whatsoever any one Father or Doctor or some more have rebuked as an heresie then I deny it for sundrie of the Fathers have maintained errors themselves against the Scripture and have accused some doctrine to be heresies which have been agreeable to the truth of God which you will not deny I hope For if you would I could prove it both of the Fathers Councils and your own Popes Now to your assumption But these former heads say ye which ye have set down with many the like was heresies in old times and the defenders thereof hereticks as testifie the ancient Fathers I answer That some of these are heresies indeed and we abhor and condemn them more then ye and some of these as falsly laid to our charge and some of these are not heresies indeed but agreeable to the Scripture And therefore your conclusion falls not upon us who have renewed no old condemned heresies and therefore is not hereticks And where you say many other like I answer It is true they are like for they are both calumnies and horrible untruths and lies as these have been whereof one day ye shal make answer to the great God that judgeth the quick and the dead But the pit which you digged for others you have fallen in it your self For certainly in this you do as thieves do who the better to eschew the crime of theft which is justly laid to their charge and that they may the more easily escape in a fray do cry out and shout out upon others Common thieves common thieves Even so do you for these crimes whereof ye are guilty your selves you falsly charge us with SECTION XXVI That the Church of Rome hath renewed and maintaineth old condemned Heresies THat all men may see that not we but the Church of Rome hath renewed and doth maintain old condemned Heresies I shal not do as you have done to us that is either to lay to your charge such heresies as ye maintain not or such things to be heresies which are not heresies indeed which ye did to us But in this I will deal sincerely with you faining nothing neither of them nor of you 1. Simoniani worshipped the Image of Simon and Selene whose heresie they followed Ederus in Baby pag. 5. so do your religious Orders worship the

burnt in flames like Seraphims and was ravished in the spirit and heard wonders which mortal man could not utter In this she was made another S. Paul that she was lifted up in the air and the Sacrament went visibly out of the hand of the Priest that said Mass through the air entred into her mouth And when the Sacramēt went by she being in a garden the wall of the garden opened its self and then she worshipped it Such was the opinion of her holiness that many Ladies of Spain and the Empress seeing themselves at point of child birth sent their mantles wherein the creature should be wrapped that she should bless them She gave to her beloved friends drops of her monstrous blood made them believe it was the blood of Christ she was condemned as a Witch by the Inquisitors of Spain about the year of God 1540. The other of a Dominican Nun Prioress de la Anunciada of Lisbon in Portugal about the 1586. year of God that she had deserved to have Christ visible for her husband that he appeared to her often times and talked with her as one friend would talk with another that she had the impression of Christs five wounds upon her And as the history recordeth other infinit miracles did she So that many became Nuns through the opinion which was conceived of her holiness and miracles This story is written in French by one Steven de Lusignan a Dominican Frier and dedicated to the Queen of France with this title The great miracles and most holy wonders which this present year 1586. hath happened to the right reverend Mother Prioress of the Monastery c. in Lisbon approved by Frier Lewes of Granada and by other persons worthy of credit in Paris printed by John Bessant 1586. He alledgeth three letters sent from persons of great credit for his warrant But she was discovered and confessed her hypocrisie and that she painted the wounds on her hands drew blood on her side fained all the rest that she might be esteemed holy and therefore was condemned by the Archbishops of Lisbon and Brage the Bishop of Guardia the Inquisitors and sundry others in the end of the 1588. year as it is to be seen in a book printed at Sevil in Spain 1589. Let these examples suffice to prove this mark that by lying wonders they have established their damnable doctrine So that certainly there is not one thing that doth more confirm this that their Popes is the Antichrist and their Kingdom Antichristian then the effectual working of Satan by lying wonders whereby their devilish doctrine hath been promoved and established And what seek we further Is it not manifest by their own Histories that their own Popes to the number of 20. or mo have wrought by the effectual working of Satan So then to conclud this point If the Apostle Paul be a true Prophet which I trust no man will call in question and if he be the true Antichrist to whom all these marks do agree that is who is the man of sin and son of perdition who hath lifted up himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped c. which cannot be denyed then of necessity it must follow that the Popes of Rome are the self-same Antichrist which was fore-told to come because they bear all these marks of that Antichrist whom the Apostle describes and no other And if we will come to the Revelation where the Antichrist is most clearly fore-told What is there in that Revelation spoken of the Antichrist which is not fulfilled in the Popes of Rome In the 13 of the Revelation mention is made of two beasts by the first is signified the Roman Empire by the which the Saints of God were persecuted the first 300. years by the other is signified the Kingdom of the Antichrist which rose up immediatly after the diminishing and destruction of the Roman Empire the which John calls another beast distinguishing it from the former which he describes first from his outward form and shape that he hath two horns like the Lamb but speaks like the Dragon which hath been accomplished in the Popes of Rome as I have shewed before The second from his works that he doth First that he did all that the first beast could do before him Secondly that he shal cause all to worship the first beast whose deadly wound was healed Thirdly that he should deceive them which dwel upon the earth by the wonders and signes which was permitted to him to do Fourthly that he should restore the image of the first beast Fifthly that he should suffer none to buy or sell but such as received his mark on their fore-head and hands And the last thing from the which that Antichristian Kingdō which is represented by the second beast is described is the number of his name All the which are so clearly accomplished in that Papistical Kingdom these many hundred years that he must be blinded of God that sees not that the Popes are the Antichrist and their Kingdom Antichristian As to the first Who have exercised all the power of the former Emperors of Rome but they Have not they claimed to themselves the Monarchy of the whole world The authority of both the swords Have not Emperors and Kings sworn their oath of alleageance and fidelity unto them taking their unction consecration and Crowns of them and payed tribut unto them Have they not kissed their feet holden the stirrops led their bridles set them on their horse Have not the Popes of Rome excommunicated Emperors and Kings deposed them from their Kingdoms stirred up their subjects against them set up others in their places And finally what outward power or tyranny did ever the Roman Emperors exercise over Kingdoms and Nations yea what cruelty tyranny avarice blasphemy against God and his Saints did they ever exercise which the Popes of Rome have not done yea and have overcome them in all these things The which are so clear and manifest and that by their owne practises that they cannot be denyed Doth he not affirm in the Canon Law Dist 96. cap. Constantinus c. Venerabilem de electio That Constantin gave the Pope all the Kingdoms in the earth And that all Kings reign by the Pope And that he transferrs the Empire from Nation to Nation and gives them to whom he will And that all Kings are but the Popes vassals Steuchus de donat Constant And therefore saith Blondus lib. 3. instau Romae Now the Princes of the world adore worship the Pope as perpetual Dictator not Cesars successor but Peters successor and the foresaid Emperors Vicar Yea saith he All Europe sends greater or at the least as great tribut to Rome as they did in the former times to wit to the Roman Empire And Bernard saith serm de convers They are the first in the persecution speaking to the Church which appear to love the primacy in the Church to be Princes thereof