second Chapter of this present Volume To this let vs adde a most notable testimonie of our Rhemistes which is comprised in these very wordes Notorious is the saying of S. Augustine concerning S. Cyprian who being a blessed Catholique Byshop and Martyr yet erred about the rebaptizing of such as were Christined by Heretiques If he had liued sayth S. Augustine to haue seene the determination of a plenarie Councell which he saw not in his life time he would for his great humilitie and charitie straight way haue yeelded preferred the generall Councell before his owne Iudgement and his fellow Byshops in a prouinciall Councell onely Thus dispute our Rhemistes confounding them-selues and their Pope vnawares For first they tell vs marke well my wordes that S. Cyprian was a blessed Byshop and Martyr and therefore would haue yeelded to the Decree of a generall Councell They tell vs secondly that S. Augustine was of the same opinion In which double Narration the Rhemistes confound them-selues with their Pope and all his deuoted Popelinges For they giue vs to vnderstand very plainely that neither the Pope is aboue a generall Councell neither yet his Iudgement infallible But how prooue I that This forsooth is a plaine demonstration thereof S. Cyprian and S. Augustine being both of them very Holy very Learned Fathers could not but know right well for their great Learning what Authoritie Power Priuiledges and Prerogatiues Christ had giuen to the Byshops of Rome And without all question it is it can not be denyed that for their great pietie and humilitie they would humbly haue acknowledged and highly reuerenced all Power giuen them by our Lord Iesus Yet true it is sir Fryer marke well my wordes that Pope Cornelius togeather with a nationall Synode of the Byshoppes of Jtaly had made a flatte decree concerning Rebaptization True it is likewise that Pope Stephanus had confirmed the same Decree and commaunded it to be obserued True it is thirdly that all Papistes of late dayes doe obstinately affirme as our Rhemistes in the name of all Papistes tell vs that the Pope is aboue a generall Councell that the Pope can not erre Iudicially that the Popes Iudgement is infallible Now this Decree made by Pope Cornelius and confirmed by Pope Stephanus S. Cyprian knew right well neither was S. Austen ignorant thereof Howbeit this notwithstanding S. Cyprian roundly withstood the Decree of Pope Stephanus and both sharpely reprooued him and vtterly contemned his falsely pretended Authoritie S. Austen in like manner held the same opinion with S. Cyprian concerning the Popes falsely pretended Prerogatiues infallibilitie of Iudgement neuer excusing any such thing in S. Cyprian as a fault neither once saying that the Pope was Christes Vicar or that Christ had prayed that his Fayth should not fayle but constantly telling the Reader for his full satisfaction on S. Cyprians behalfe that he would humbly haue yeelded to the Decree of a plenarie Councell if any such had been in his time In which wordes S. Austen giueth the Reader to vnderstand that though S. Cyprian did contemne both the definitiue Sentence of the Pope and the Decree of his prouinciall Councell because neither of their Iudgements was infallible yet would he haue yeelded to the Decree of a plenarie Councell as which he acknowledged to be infallible and to haue the assistannce of the holy Ghost Let vs adde further that the two hundred seauenteene Fathers in the Aphrican Councell whereof S. Augustine was one were so farre from acknowledging the Byshop of Rome to be Christes Vicar generall vpon earth to be aboue a plenarie Councell and his Iudgement to be infallible that they all with one assent refused vtterly to graunt any such Prerogatiue or Priuiledge vnto him constantly affirming that he was bound as well as they to obey the Decrees of the Nicene Councell For which cause neither would the said Fathers graunt greater Power and Prerogatiues to the Byshoppes of Rome neither did the Byshoppes of Rome them-selues challenge greater Power then the Canons of the Nicene Synode would affoorde them Of which poynt I haue disputed at large in the second Chapter afore-going Whosoeuer shall seriously peruse that whole Chapter from the beginning to the end thereof will vndoubtedly rest satisfied in this behalfe Ioyne this with my Tryall and Poperie will prooue it selfe the New religion The 31. Chapter conteyning according to my promise an Answere to the Iesuites short admonition in the 16. Chapter aforegoing as also to some other patches elsewhere dispearsed to the same effect T. B. HAuing euidently prooued and plainely conuinced by the power of God and the assistance of his holy Spirit that Poperie is the New religion it followeth consequently that I prooue the Fayth Doctrine this day professed and by Authoritie established in the Church of England to be the Old Religion I therefore heartily craue the gentle Readers attentiue hearing vnto the end of my Discourse I haue not hitherto in any of my former Bookes oppugned the Old Romane Religion which S. Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the Church of Rome while they liued heere on earth Neither doe I at this present or euer intend hereafter in any future worke to oppugne the same It is the late Fayth and late Romish Doctrine which I contend to be the New Religion euery maine poynt whereof I haue clearely conuinced when and by whom it first began Our Church of noble England constantly reteyneth euery Article and iote of the old Romane Religion onely reiecting and abolishing of the essentiall partes of late Romish Fayth and Doctrine so much as was Hereticall erroneous or superstitious and repugnant to the eternall trueth of Gods most sacred word And concerning late Romish ceremonies such so many as were either superstitious or ridiculous or vnprofitable to the Church of God So that wee are this day the true reformed Catholiques euen as the Fryers at Rome commonly called Capuchoâ—nes are indeed the true reformed Franciscans The Church of England doth not this day hold any Article of Fayth or Doctrine or vse any Ceremonie saue such onely as we are able to iustifie either by the expresse wordes of the holy Scripture and by the approbation of best approoued Antiquitie or else to deduce the same from thence by a necessarie ineuitable consequence Let vs now in Gods name heare attentiuely what our Iesuite in the name of all Papistes is able to obiect against the Fayth and Doctrine of the Church of England B. C. COncerning Ceremonies and such like Bell in his Regiment of the Church graunteth freely that the Church hath Authoritie to ordaine and abrogate to make or repeale Lawes as shall seeme most meete for the honour of God and the edification of Christian people T. B. Bell admitteth all this Say on good Fryer if happily thou haue any better Bread in thy Bagge seeing this is not worth a silly Ragge Howbeit our Fryer for want of matter
and place be correspondent thereunto I prooue it first because Christ himselfe saith That euery Tree which bringeth not foorth Good fruite shal be cut downe and cast into the fire Secondly because Christ sayth in an other place That whosoeuer loue him will keepe his Commaundementes Thirdly because S. Paul telleth vs in one place That God chose vs in Christ before the world was made that we should be holy in his sight And in an other place That we are Gods workmanship created in Christ Jesu vnto good workes which he hath prepared that we may walke in them The 5. Conclusion Good workes are the effectes of Predestination depending vpon it not it vpon them S. Paul prooueth it in these plaine golden and pithy wordes Whom he hath Predestinate them hath he Called and whom he hath Called them hath he Iustified and whom he hath Iustified those hath he also Glorified By this golden Chaine we may euidently perceiue that Glorification Iustification Vocation and consequently Good workes are the effectes of Predestination especially if we ioyne this with the other Conclusions afore going For if it be true as it is most true else th'Apostle should be a lyer that we were elected to be Holy and to doe Good workes it is also true it can not be denyed that Holy life and Good workes are the effectes of our Election and Predestination in Christ Iesus For this cause sayth that famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra in this manner Dicendum quod predestinatio diuina est preparatio gratiae in presenti et gloriae in futuro Et ideo cum sit aeterna sicut ab aeterno predestinauit aliquem ad beatitudinem ita praeordinauit modum quo daret sibi illam beatitudinem I answere sayth this great learned Popish Doctor that Gods Predestination is the preparation of Grace in this world and of Glory in the world to come And therefore seeing it is Eternall as he hath predestinated any one from eternitie to endlesse Blisse or Beatitude so hath he also fore-ordayned the meane by which he would bring him to the same For this cause sayth the Popish Angelicall Doctor Aquinas whose doctrine sundry Popes haue confirmed for Authenticall that Predestination includeth Gods will of bestowing both Grace and Glorie And this Doctor so famous and authenticall addeth these wordes Nam predestinatio est causa et eius quod expectatur in futura vita a predestinatis scz gloriae et eius quod percipitur in presenti scz gratiae For Predestination is the cause both of that which is expected in the life to come that is to say of Glorie and also of that which the predestinate receiue in this life that is to say of Grace For this cause saith our Jesuiticall Cardinall Bellarminus that Good workes follow Predestination as effectes follow their causes These are his expresse wordes Itaque sunt opera bona effectus Predestinationis Therefore Good workes are the effect of Predestination Againe in other place the same Jesuite hath these wordes Itaque illa propositio Deus ab aeterno predestinauit hominibus dare regnum per opera bona praeuisa potest et vera esse et falsa Nam si illud per opera praeuisa referatur ad verbum predestinauit falsa erit Significabit enim Deum predestinasse homines quia opera illorum bona praeuiderat si referatur ad verbum dare vera erit Quia significabit executionem futuram esse per opera bona siue quod est idem glorificationem effectum esse iustificationis et operum bonorum sicut ipsa iustificatio effectus est vocationis et vocatio praedestinationis Therefore that proposition God fore-ordayned from eternitie to giue to men the Kingdome of heauen by their fore-seene Workes may both be true and false For if those wordes by their workes fore-seene be referred to the word Predestinauâ—t hee predestinated or fore-ordayned the sense and meaning is false For it will signifie God to haue Predestinated Men because he fore-saw their Good workes but if the same wordes be referred to the worde Dare to giue and bestow the sense and meaning will be true For it will signifie that the execution must be done by Good works or which is all one that Glorification is the effect of Iustification and Good workes euen as Iustification is the effect of Vocation and Vocation the effect of Predestination Againe in an othor place hee hath these wordes Non ideo pendet praedestinatio ab operibus sed opera a praedestinatione Therefore Predestination doth not depend of Workes but Workes depend of Predestination Againe in an other place he sayth thus Alia ratio est pradestinationis alia executionis Constituit N. in praedestinatione regnum caelorum dare certis hominihus quos absque vlla operum praeuisione dilexit tamen simul constituit vt quo ad executionem via perueniendi ad regnum essent bona opera There is one reason of Predestination an other of Execution For in Predestination God decreed to giue the Kingdome of Heauen to certaine men whom he loued without any fore-sight of Workes howbeit he decreed withall that in respect of the execution Good workes should be the way to come vnto the same For this cause doe our Râ—emistes tell vs that our first Iustification is of Gods Grace and not of our deseruinges because none of all our actions that were before our Iustification could merit or iustly procure the Grace of iustification Thus discourse these famous and great learned Popish Writers to whose Doctrine I subscribe with all my heart For as I haue often sayd else where I highly reuerence the Old Romane religion and to the vttermost of my small talent skill I both haue done doe and will defende the same Yea and iustifie the Doctrine of the Church of England to be the Old Romane Catholike and Apostolike religion which S Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the auncient and first Church of Rome Out of the Doctrine heere deliuered by these famous Papistes Lyranus Aquinas and Bellarminus I gather many excellent Notes First that the Grace Fayth and Good workes which we haue in this world and the Glory which we expect in the world to come doe all wholly proceed from Gods Predestination euen without all desertes of Man Secondly that as God prepared the Kingdome of heauen for his Elect euen before they were borne or had done any Good workes so did he also prepare the way and meanes by which he would bring them to the same Thirdly that no Workes done or fore-seene to be done did mooue God to predestinate any man to the ioyes of Heauen Fourthly that Good workes are not the Cause but the Effect of Predestination Fiftly that Good workes are the way and meanes which God ordayned for the execution of Predestination and for the accomplishment of Glorification Sixtly that not onely Predestination but also Iustification proceedes of
litle children the consonant sound reboundeth as it were an eccho with the surges of the Sea Iustinus Martyr hath these wordes Sub haec consurgimus communiter omnes et praecationes profundimus et sicuti retulimus praecibus peractis panis offertur et vinum et aqua Et praepositus itidem quantum pro virili sua potest praeces et gratiarum actiones fundit et populus faustè acclamat dicens Amen These thinges being done wee all arise togeather and make our Prayers and after our Prayers the Bread is offered with Wine and Water and the Minister as he is able prayeth and giueth thankes and the people with ioyfull acclamation say Amen Philo a very auncient and learned Writer awong the Iewes sheweth this old practise of our Christian Church in these wordes Quae omnia supra dictus vir eo ordine eademque consequentia qua apud nos geruntur expressit Et vt vnus ex omnibus consurgens in medio Psalmū honestis modulis concinat vtque praecinenti ei vnum versiculum omnis multitudo respondeat All which the aforenamed man he speaketh of Philo the Jew related in the same order and consequence in which our selues doe them And that one among all rising vp in the middest sing a Psalme with tunable voyce and that so soone as he hath sung one Verse all the people answere him S. Chrysostome speaketh so plainely of the peoples praying togeather with the Priest that euē in the time of the Liturgis or Masse as none doubtlesse that either read or heare his wordes can stand any longer in doubt thereof These are his expresse wordes In eisdem iterum horrendis mysterijs bene precatur Sacerdos populo et bene precatur populus Sacerdoti Nam cum spiritu tuo nihil aliud est quam hoc Ea quae sunt Eucharistiae id est gratiarum actionis communiae sunt omnia neque ille solus gratias agit sed etiam omnis populus prius N. accepta illorum voce deinde congregatis illis vt dignè et iustè hoc faciat incipit Eucharistiā Et quid miraris si populus cum Sacerdote loquitur In these dreadfull mysteries the Priest wisheth well to the people and the people desire Gods mercie to the Priest For these wordes with thy spirit haue no other meaning The thinges that pertaine to the Eucharist that is to the giuing of thankes are common to them all for he onely giueth not thankes but all the people also with him For he first receiueth their voyce after that they being gathered togeather that he may doe this reuerently and well he beginneth the Communion And what maruell is it to thee if the people pray with the Priest S. Cyprian testifieth the same practise to haue been vsuall in his time alleadging the very wordes that the common people answered to the Priest Thus doth he write in expresse tearmes Ideo et Sacerdos ante orationem praefatione praemissa parat fratrum mentes dicendo sursum corda vt dum respondet plebs habemus ad Dominum admoneatur nihil aliud se quam Dominum cogitare debere Therefore the Priest after the Preface before the Prayer prepareth the mindes of the brethren saying Lift vp your heartes that while the common people answere wee lift them vp vnto the Lord they may be instructed to thinke vpon no other thing but the Lord. What need is there to stand vpon this poynt any longer Sozomenus sheweth plainely in his Historie that in his time which was more then 400. yeares after Christ the people and the Clergie did sing Psalmes in the Church togeather So S. Hierome testifieth of the Church of Rome that in his time the people sounded out Amen with such an eccho as if it had been with an heauenly Thunder Nicolaus Lyranus that great learned popish Doctor in his Commentaries vpon S. Paul to the Corinthians affirmeth to his Readers very constantly that in the Primatiue Church both the Prayers and all other thinges were in the Vulgar tongue Yea S. Basil sayth that in his time all the people sang Psalmes togeather in the Church And he addeth therevnto that it was the custome of all Churches so to doe By these Testimonies it is cleare and euident that in the Primatiue Church and many yeares after the Church seruice was euerywhere in the Vulgar tongue S. Gregorie sometime Byshoppe of Rome himselfe reporteth the vsuall practise of the Greeke Church which he approoueth to haue been as we haue already heard out of S. Chrysostome and other famous Greeke Writers And that which our Fryer sayth of the same Gregorie is too too childish ridiculous as it is euident by that which is already said shall God willing be yet more euident before the end of this discourse Our Iesuite heere by way of a digression more then extrauagant giueth a very short but too too sweete an admonition In which he pleaseth himselfe more then a litle with his old doting foolerie and rusty rotten Poperie He telleth his Readers whom he would gladly perswade to giue credite to his wordes that our Ceremonies are pild patches of Protestanisme rusty ragges of the Reformed Congregation and withall forsooth that our Communion Booke it selfe was neuer heard of in the whole world till the late dayes of King Edward the sixt My answere to this extrauagant and foolish admonition I purpose in God to set downe in the last Chapter of this Discourse My reason hereof is this My scope intent and purpose in this present Booke is bipartite or two folde viz. to prooue soundly and plainely to lay open to all iudicious honest and indifferent Readers that the Religion Fayth and Doctrine of the late Byshoppes Church of Rome is indeed the New religion by litle and litle crept into the Church and distinctly to name the time when and the Authors by whom euery materiall poynt Article of the new Romish Fayth and Religion did first begin as also to prooue soundly and clearely that the Fayth and Doctrine this day established in the Church of England is Catholique Apostolicall and the Old Romane religion For which respect I haue thought it meete and conuenient first to accomplish and finish the former member in proouing Poperie the New Religion And that done to prooue the Doctrine and Fayth of our English Church to be the Old Religion Which to performe as is sayd I haue steadfast confidence in my mercifull GOD all sufficient who woonderfully preseruing me from many dangers almost ineffable seemeth to haue reserued me to that end and purpose God make me thankfull and euer to referre all that I well doe to his most holy name Non nobis Domine non nobis sed nomini tuo da gloriam Thou ô God who hast chosen the foolish things of this world to confound the wise and the weake thinges to confound the mightie things thou who by
dayes the Byshoppes of England now so called haue had and kept a continuall and vninterrupted succession of Byshoppes successiuely so sound firme and inuiolable as the Church of Rome is not able to shew the like This succession is so clearely prooued in my Christian Dialogue as none with right reasoÌ„ can deny the same Fourthly that the Church of England now so called hath euer since the time of King Ethelbert constantly kept all and euery Article of the old Romane Religion which she receiued from the auncient and purer Church of Rome No Papist liuing is able to giue any true instance against this irrefragable assertion Fiftly that as in processe of time many superstitious grosse and palpable errours yea flatte Heresies haue by litle and litle crept into the Church of Rome euen so hath our Church of England through the sway of the time been deeply stayned polluted with the same Sixtly that our Church in the time of King Henry the eight began to be reformed in some Articles of Fayth and Doctrine but the reformation was not perfect vntill the raigne of King Edward the sixt In which Reformation no New Article of Fayth or Religion is added to the former but the former Fayth and Religion is onely refyned purged purified and such Superstition Errours and Heresies abolished as were by litle and litle brought into the Church All and euery iote of the old Romane Religion remayneth still in our Church permanent and inuiolable But some perhappes will heere demaunde of me how the Church of Rome did so degenerate from the auncient Fayth and so foulely corrupt the old Romane Religion To whom I answere in this manner First with Egesippus that auncient and learned Father that during the life of Christes blessed Apostles the visible Church remayned a Virgin free from all Heresies and corruptions but after their death Errours by litle and litle crept into the Church as into a voyde and desart House Secondly with Franciscus a Victoria that famous popish Fryer and great learned Schooleman that by litle litle the Papistes were in his time brought to such inordinate dispensations and to so miserable a state that they were neither able to endure their owne griefes nor remydies assigned by the Pope for the same That Clemens Lâ—nus and Syluester were very good Byshoppes of Rome but that the latter Byshoppes comming after them successiuely were wicked men and nothing comparable to the olde Byshoppes there Thirdly with Iosephus Angles that famous Popish Byshoppe euen in that Booke which hee dedicated to the Pope himselfe that the Romish Religion changeth euery day Fourthly with the fiue famous Popish Doctors Iohannes Roffensis Jacobus Almaâ—nus Gersonus Durandus and Michael Baius that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature and that the old Romane Church did so beleeue vntill the time of Pope Pius the fift that is about 1560 yeares after Christ at which time Veniall sinnes werâ— hatched in the Church of Rome This is such a constant knowen trueth as neither the Jesuite S. R. nor yet the Iesuite B. C. his deare brother can tell in the world what answere to frame to the same Fourthly with Polidorus Virgilius that famous Popish Writer that the Popish Legistes and Canonistes of latter dayes haue so wrested the holy Scriptures to their owne sense and liking as Coblers doe gnaw with their teeth and stretch out their filthy skinnes Fiftly with Platina the Popes deare Vassall and trustie Friend that in his dayes the Popedome was brought to that passe that who so could goe before others in Bribes and Ambition hee onely should haue the place Sixtly with Couarruuias that worthy popish Arch-byshoppe and learned Canonist that in these dayes either the Popes opinion must be defended or else Poperie can not stand Lastly with Iosephus Angles writing to the Popes deare Holynesse that albeit the old Church of Rome did by the commaundement of the Apostles excommunicate all non communicants in the time of the Masse or Liturgie yet hath the late Church decreed that it shall be lawfull for all Lay persons to receiue the Eucharist onely at Easter Much more I might and could say if I thought not this sufficient So then the Fayth and Doctrine this day professed and authorized in this our Church of England is indeed the old Romane religion purged refined and restored to the primatiue and most auncient puritie in King Edwardes dayes in whose happy raigne was the perfect and complete Reformation But the Fayth and Religion it selfe came from S. Peter and S. Paul yea euen from Christ himselfe their Jesus and our Jesus world without end To whom with the Father and the holy Ghost three in the distinction of persons and one in the vnitie of diuine essence be all Honour Maiestie Power Glory and Dominion now and euermore Amen A Caueat to the Christian Reader THE masked Jesuite in his Preface to the Reader laboureth with might and maine to perswade his Readers that I dare not performe that challenge which I made to the Fore-runner his wordes are these I the meanest of many millions doe accept of his Challenge and doe vndertake to defend not onely these two poynes of Iosephus Doctrine and Pope Martins Dispensation which he hath singled out as matters important but also all the rest so it may be with that equitie and fauour which was graunted to the Protestantes in France And vpon the same conditions doe prouoke him with a counter-challenge to the defence of his Bookes And a litle after he telleth his Reader That hee sendes me as many Challenges as will stand betweene Charing-crosse Chester and as many Dares as will reach from Darby to Darington To which I answere in this manner First that the Jesuites are accused and charged by their deare Breathren the popish Secular Priestes with Pride Ambition Couetousnesse Coozenage Theft Crueltie Murther Treason and all wickednesse that can be named Yea of Fryer Parsons that trayterous Iesuite they giue this testimonie in particular viz. by Parsons platformes Secular Priestes must depend vpon Blackwell and Blackwell vpon Garnet and Garnet vpon Parsons and Parsons the Priestes Bastard vpon the Deuill Peruse my Anatomy of popish Tyrannie and there thou shalt finde this trueth with great varietie of like matter Secondly that in all my Challenges I require but one onely Condition which the Iesuite passeth ouer in silence because he meaneth not to performe the same The Condition is this viz. That the Iesuite which shall accept the Challenge must put downe his name with his addition in print and send it to me Which if it be once performed during my life I promised vpon my saluation to doe what in me lyeth to procure a false conduct for the safe comming safe abyding and safe departure of him whosoeuer he be that shall accept and vndertake the true performance of the Challenge in maner aforesayd Thirdly that the Jesuite
deteyned from them For while they gaue away their owne they vnawares and fondly deemed that they onely restored that which was not their owne in deed Instruction 8. The word Pope was not the proper and peculiar name to the Byshop of Rome for the space of 528. yeares after Christ. The Church of Rome was made the Head of all other Churches and the Byshops there the heads of all other Byshops by the imperiall constitution of Phocas 607. yeares after Christ. That the Pope could not erre iudicially was not authenticall in the Romish Church for 1500. yeares after Christ. That the Pope could vnmarrie persons lawfully married by Christes institution was neuer heard of in the Christian world vntill the yeare 1550. after Christ at which time Pope Iulius presumed to dissolue lawfull Matrimonie by his vnlawfull Dispensation It was neuer thought lawfull for the naturall Brother to marry his naturall Sister vntill the time of Pope Martin who by the instigation of the Diuell set the same abroach in the yeare 1418. after Christ. Popish Veniall sinnes were first hatched by Pope Pius 1566. yeares after Christ. That the Blood of popish Saints could worke mans redemptiō was neuer heard of for the space of 1161. yeares after Christ. The like may be sayd of many other Popish Articles for which I referre the Reader to my Tryall of the New Religion I deeme it enough for the present to insinuate to the Christian Reader that our Church hath onely abolished Superstition Errours and Heresies by litle and litle crept into the Church and doth still keepe all and euery iot of the Old Romane Fayth and Religion The Capucheenes at Rome did the like when they euen with the Popes good liking reformed the dissolute Franciscans Yea Pope Pius himselfe of late dayes did the like while he reformed the popish deformed missals and breuiaries in his late Councell gathered at Trent If hee that now is Byshop of Rome would reforme all the rest by abolishing all Nouelties by litle and litle brought into the Church as we haue done he should finde the remnant to be the Old Romane religion in verie deed Marke well the whole Discourse following where all this is soundly prooued as more cannot be wished The Contentes of the Chapters Chapter 1. Proouing THat the name and worde Pope was in the primatiue Church common to all Byshops aswell of Rome as else where That the Byshop of Rome neither is nor ought to be nor euer was called The vniuersall Byshop of the whole Church That the name Pope was not peculiar to the Bishops of Rome for more then 528. yeares after Christ. That the Iesuite volens nolens is enforced to graunt the same Chapter 2. Proouing That the Pope may not be controulled though he carry with him thousands vpon thousands into Hell That it is Sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power That the Pope with his Pardons can deliuer all soules out of Purgatory-fire That the Pope can dissolue that Matrimonie which is firme and stable by Christes institution That the Pope can dispense with the Brother to marrie his owne naturall Sister That the Pope hath as great power as Christ himselfe had on earth That the Pope may doe whatsoeuer pleaseth him That the Pope can make of nothing something That the counterfeit Donation of Constantine was the originall of all Popish superroyall power That whatsoeuer the Emperours of latter time gaue to the Church of Rome they were induced to do the same by the coozening trickes of the Byshops of Rome That the Popes Sozimus Bonefacius and Celestine falsified the Canons of the Nicene Councell so to aduance them-selues aboue all other Byshops That no Byshops nor Priestes ought to appeale to the Church of Rome That the Councell of Nice gaue the primacie of honour to the Church of Rome because it was the Seat of the Emperour and Caput Mundi That all Christians euen the Byshops of Rome are subiect to the Canons of the Nicene Councell That the Nicene Synode did confine and knit the iurisdiction of the Byshop of Rome Chapter 3. Proouing That Marriage of Priestes was euer lawfull during the time of the old Testament That the Marriage of Priestes is prohibited onely by the law of Man and not by any positiue constitution either of Christ or his Apostles That it was euer lawfull for the Byshops and Priestes of the East-church to marry and to beget children in time of their Priesthood That the Marriage of Priestes was euer lawfull also in the West-church vntill the time of Pope Siricius and in Germanie for the space of 1074. yeares after Christ. That all secular Priestes may Marry notwithstanding the Popish solemne Vow annexed That by Popish fayth and doctrine Marriage is of force after the single Vow of chastitie That the Vow single is of one and the same nature with the Vow solemne That the Marriage of Priestes is lawfull after the solemne Vow so it be done by the Popes Dispensation That the forced and coacted Chastitie of Priestes hath been so intollerable as nothing hath brought more shame to Priesthood more shame to Religion more griefe to godly men Chapter 4. Proouing That popish Pardons are neither found in the holy Scripture nor in the auncient Fathers That the popish Maister of sentences could finde no mention of them in the writinges of the holy Fathers That Byshoppe Fisher graunted the young age of late popish Pardons That the best learned Papistes are not able to defend the same Chapter 5. Proouing That the Greeke Church neuer beleeued Purgatorie That the Church of Rome beleeued it not for the space of 250. yeares That the Church of Rome beleeued it not all at once but by litle and litle That the inuention of Purgatorie was the birth of popish Pardons That the primatiue Church was neuer acquainted with the Popes Pardons nor yet with popish Purgatorie Chapter 6. Proouing That popish Auricular confession cannot be prooued out of the Old Testament That the New Testament doth not impose an heauier yoake vpon vs then did the Old That popish Auricular confession is not necessarie for mans saluation That it is neither commaunded by Christ nor yet by his Apostles That it is established by the meere law of man grounded only vpon a falsely imagined Apostolicall vnwritten tradition That it was not an Article of popish Fayth for the space of 1215. yeares after Christ. Chapter 7. Proouing That euery Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature That fiue famous popish Writers Roffensis Almaynus Bains Durandus Gersonus doe all confesse the same That the Jesuite S. R. graunteth freely that the Church of Rome had not defined some Sinnes to be Veniall vntill the dayes of Pius the fift which was not fiftie yeares agoe Chapter 8. Proouing That the Pope may erre both in Fayth and Doctrine iudicially That many Popes haue erred De facto That great learned Papistes did constantly confesse so
addidit etiam hoc quod vsque ad illa tempora virgo munda et immaculata permanset ecclesia sequitur Vt vero et apostolorum chorus et omnis illa aetas quae a domino susceperat viuae vocis auditum de hac luce discessit tum velut in vacuam domum falsae doctrinae impius se error immersit After these things the same writer Egesippus added this also That vnto those dayes the Church continued a pure immaculate virgin but after the death of the Apostles and all that age which had heard our Lord speake in liue voyce vnto them false and erronious doctrine began to intrude her selfe as into a voyde house or desart place Thus writeth Eusebius in that very Booke and Chapter where our Jesuite impudently auoucheth that no such thing can be found no not so much as Egesippus once named albeit both the whole matter and the wordes be in very deed as I haue heere truely put them downe yea Egesippus is named in the very beginning of the sayd Chapter as the relator of the Storie and in these words the same writer eftsoones insinuated to the reader Is it now true sir Frier Jesuite that I haue powdred mine assertion with lyes Is it true sir lyer that I vsed Iugling trickes therein Is it true that I haue done the same thicke and threefold Haue I belyed both Egesippus and Eusebius Can no such thing be found in Eusebius Is not Egesippus once named in that Chapter Is he not once named expressely and twise virtually If all this be true as it is must true in deed what shall I say or what can I say to this shamelesse and impudent Fryer Apagè apagè Out vpon rotten Poperie out vpon lying Jesuites out vpon the new Romish Religion which can be defended by no better meanes then by impudencie falsehood and flat lying What shall or what can the Reader expect at the handes of this shamlesse impudent and lying Jesuite in the rest of his Pamphlet who intertayneth him in the very beginning with such leasings such iugling trickes and such diabolicall accusations What hath this shamelesse and impudent Jesuite deserued the Whetstone nay rather with Chore Dathan and Abyram to goe downe quick into Hell This doubtlesse if nothing els should be said were enough to proue Poperie to be the new Religion I woonder how the Jesuite durst publish such notorious slaunders but on the one side being at a non-plus and not able in truth to say any thing for the antiquitie of Poperie and on the other side choosing rather to consecrate his soule to the Diuell by lying slaundering and deceitfull dealing then to graunt Poperie to be the new Religion He thought to face out the matter by imputing that to mee which most iustly and properly pertayneth to him-selfe And withall he very politikely considered the maister Diuell of Hell suggesting it vnto him that his best course was to doe the same in the beginning These thinges thus standing all wise Papistes I trow will looke more carefully into the matter and from hence foorth not giue credite to such lying Doctors such false Teachers such notorious slaunderers of the innocent If all Jesuites in England all Dominicans in Spaine all Franciscans in France and all Cardinals in Rome should conspire togeather how to accuse the innocent I know not it is aboue my reach and capacitie how they could surpasse this impudent lying Jesuite in such kind of treacherie This one thing I will now say which will appeare before the end of this Discourse that as he here beginneth so he continueth vnto the end For if his lyes slaunders cauils coozening trickes false dealing ridiculous sophistications be once taken away very litle or rather nothing at all will remaine in this his pretenced answere to the triall of the new Religion It woundeth the Pope and his Jesuites to heare Poperie tearmed the New Religion they are not able to endure the sound thereof The Iesuites first Chapter of this name and word Pope B. C. ALbeit the name Pope was attributed also to other Byshoppes yet was it in such speciall maner giuen to him that it sufficiently declared his Supreame authoritie ouer all other T. B. I answere First that S. Epiphanius called Athanasius Pope in these expresse wordes Eusebius praedictus Nicomedia episcopus erat totius ipsorū collectionis administrator ac concinnator detrimenti in ecclesia et aduersus papam Athanasiū Eusebius the forenamed Byshop of Nicomedia was the administrator of their whole collection and the contriuer of the detriment in the Church and against Pope Athanasius Secondly that S. Hierome called S. Augustine Pope in sundry Epistles written to him in these wordes Domino verê sancto et beatissimo Papae Augustino Hieronimus in domino salutem Hierom to the truly holy and most blessed Pope Augustyne sendeth salutations in our Lord. Thirdly that S. Austyn called Aurelius Pope who was but his fellow-Byshop in many things far inferiour to him Fourthly that not onely S. Austyn but Alipius also called the same Aurelius Pope Fiftly that S. Hierom callen not onely S. Austyn Pope but also S. Epiphanius Pope in like manner Sixtly that the Priestes Moses and Maximus with the Deacons Nicostratus and Ruffinus and sundry confessours did all with one vniforme assent call S. Cyprian most blessed Pope Seuenthly that the Clergie of Rome writing to the Clergie of Carthage called the same Cyprian Pope But doubtles neither would neither durst the Clergie of Rome haue called Cyprian the Byshop of Carthage Pope if the name had then been proper or any way peculiar to the Byshop of Rome Eightly that Laurentius Valla a very learned and famous Writer yea and a Romane borne is Consonant to the Clergie of Rome in that most excellent and learned Declamation which hee published against the counterfeit Donation of Constantine these are the expresse wordes of that great Learned Roman Transeo quod rasuram coronam vocas et Papam pontificem Romanū qui nondū peculiariter sic appellari erat captus I let passe that thou calles his shauing a Crowne and the Byshop of Rome Pope who began not yet to haue that name peculiarly Loe for more then 330. yeares the Byshop of Rome did not begin to chalenge that name B. C. Which appeareth first because when any was called Pope without further addition it was vnderstood onely of the Bpshops of Rome as is euident out of the Councell of Chalcedon where it is sayd The most blessed and apostolicke man the Pope doth commaunde vs this thing Secondly because the Byshop of Rome was called Pope of the whole Church as we read in the same Councell where Leo is called Pope of the vniuersall Church And Liberatus affirmeth that there is no Pope ouer the Church of the whole world but the Byshop of Rome Thirdly because he is called the Pope or Father of generall
the Byshop of Rome for the excellencie of that Citie is the chiefest Patriarke and so may be called the Father of Fathers that is the chiefest Father or Byshop of all Fathers or Byshops in Christes Church It is one thing to call the Byshop of Rome Father of Fathers an other thing to call him vniuersall Byshop or vniuersall Father The former our Church of noble England admitteth while shee approoueth two Primates th' one of England th' other of all England Euen so doe wee repute our two Arch-byshops of Canterbury and Yorke to be the Byshops of Byshops or Fathers of Fathers which is all one for either of them is Byshop of Byshops within his prouince that is the Chiefest of all the rest But this is nothing to that superroyall power of which wee are to intreate in the next Chapter which I wish the reader to marke with such attention as apperteyneth thereunto But the latter both we and great learned Popish writers doe vtterly disclaime In the Popes owne decrees I finde these expresse wordes Primae sedis Episcopus non appelletur princeps sacerdotuÌ„ vel suÌ„mus sacerdos aut aliquid huiusmodj sed tantuÌ„ primae sedis Episcopus Vniuersalis auteÌ„ nec etiaÌ„ Romanus pontifex appelletur Let not the Byshoppe of the chiefe Seate be called the Prince of Priestes or the Hie Priest or haue any such like name but onely the Byshop of the first Seate And Vniuersall Byshop none may be called no not the Byshop of Rome himselfe What doth Gratianus that famous Champion of the Romish Church tell vs soe We haue read the Popes Decree which was taken out of the Affrican Councell the wordes of Gratianus haue sounded in our eares Nay you shall heare a greater wonder Pope Pelagius doth constantly deliuer the selfe same doctrine and defineth it for the trueth to be receiued and beleeued these are his expresse wordes Nullus Patriarcharum vniuersalitatis vocabulo vnquam vtatur quia si summus Patriarcha vniuersalis dicit Patriarcarum nomen caeteris derogatur Sed absit hoc a fidelibus hoc sibi velle queÌ„piam arripere vnde honorem fratrum suorum imminuere ex quantulaecunque parte videatur Quapropter charitas vestra neminem vnquam etiam suis in epistolis vniuersalem nominet ne sibi debitum subtrahat cum alteri honorem infert indebitum Let no Patriarke euer vse the word of Vniuersalitie because if the chiefest Patriarke be called Vniuersall the name of Patriarkes is derogated from the rest But be this farre from the faythfull that any should willingly snatch that to himselfe which may any way seeme to diminish the honour of this breathren though in neuer so small a degree Wherefore let not your charitie in your Epistles name any Patriarcke at any time Vniuersall least while ye giue to an other that honour which is not due yee take from your selues that which is due To which I adde this Epigramme set downe as the contentes of the Decree in the beginning thereof Nec etiam Romanus pontifex vniuersaâ—is est appellandus Neither may the Byshoppe of Rome be called Vniuersall Pope Gregorie is consonant to Pope Pelagius in these expresse wordes Ecce in presatione Epistolae quam ad meipsum qui prohibui direxistis superbae appellationis verbum vniuersalem me Papam dicens imprimere curastis Quod peto mihi dulcissima sanctitas vestra vltra non faciat quia vobis subtrahitur quod alteri plus quam ratio exigit praebetur Sequitur sin me vniuersaleÌ„ PapaÌ„ vestra sanctitas dicit negat se hoc esse quod me fatetur vniuersum sed absit hoc recedant verba quae veritateÌ„ inflant et charitateÌ„ vulnerant Behold in the Preface of your Epistle which you addressed to mee forbidding it you laboured to impose vpon me a word of proud appellatioÌ„ calling me Vniuersall Pope which I pray your sweet holynesse not to do to me any more because that is taken from you which is giuen to an other more then reason doth require For if your Holynesse call mee Vniuersall Pope you denie your selfe to be so seeing you call mee Vniuersall But God forbid away with wordes that puffe vp the trueth and wound charitie Thus writeth Gratianus the compiler of the Decrees thus Pope Pelagius thus Pope Gregorius Out of those Positions thus constantly deliuered I obserue sundry very profitable and necessarie documentes First that none no not the Byshop of Rome may be called Vniuersall Pope Secondly that the giuing of Vniuersall to one taketh away that which is due to all the rest Thirdly that Gregorie who lyued more then 590. yeares after Christ vtterly refused the name of Vniuersall Byshop or Pope calling it a proude name and sharply reprooued Enlagius the Patriarke of Alexandria for ascribing the same vnto him Fourthly that Pope Pelagius the predecessour of Gregorie detested and abhorred the same proud arrogant name So then I may lawfully conclude that the name Pope in popish sense and meaning was not proper and peculiar to any Byshop of Rome for the space of 591. yeares after Christ. How impudent therfore is our Fryer when he auoucheth the Councell of Chalcedon to haue called Leo the Vniuersall Pope Liberatus to haue tearmed him Pope ouer the Church of the whole world Pope Damasus and Theodoretus to haue done the same All which are meere lyes notorious slaunders and irksome falsifications inuented by the Father of lyes and his deare children the Iesuiticall crew to defend late vp-start Poperie if it were possible from the imputation of the New religion B. C. And this may be the reason that albeit sometime in the primatiue Church the name was also giuen to other Byshops yet seeing in foresayd manner it agreed peculiarly to the Byshop of Rome as declaring his sone raigne authoritie ouer others the former custome ceased and so it remayned alone to him T. B. Three things our Fryer freely graunteth in these words all which such is the force of trueth are altogeather against him selfe First he confesseth the trueth vnawares that the name Pope was giuen to other Byshoppes in the primitiue Church and consequently he must graunt volens nolens that to chalenge that name as the Byshop of Rome this day doth is a rotten ragge of the New religion Secondly he sayth it peculiarly agreed to the Byshop of Rome as declaring his Soueraigne authoritie ouer others In which his assertion a notable absurdity is implyed viz. that the name Pope was aralogon and consequently was giuen to other Byshops but improperly analogically and by way of similitude as euery meane Logician can tell or Iesuâ—te Thirdly he graunteth that the name Pope did in processe of time cease to be giuen to other Bishops and so remayned to the Byshop of Rome alone Which doubtlesse is that very doctrine which I in the tryall doe defend To which I must needes adde this one thing though litle to
our Fryers liking viz. that the name Pope was giuen to other Byshops in the auncient Church as I haue prooued in my Tryall euen hundreds of yeares after the Primitiue Church To which addition this to cheere vp our Fryer is consectarie to weet that the Clergie of Rome writing to the Clergie of Carthage called S. Cyprian the most blessed Pope Which verily as is already sayd they neither would nor yet durst haue done if the name in such a peculiar manner as the Fryer would make vs beleeue had been due to the Byshop of Rome For if the sayd name had been peculiar to him and his supposed soueraignetie implied therein other Byshops could neuer haue enioyed the same in the puritie of the Church Nay other Byshops would neuer haue improperly accepted of that name and title which none but the Byshop of Rome could properly ascribe vnto himselfe B. C. With the former he hath coupled an other saying thus And so in processe of time the Byshoppes of Rome were solely and onely called Popes and of Late yeares our Holy Father and his Holynesse is his vsuall name A grosse vntrueth T. B. This assertion hath two partes The former our Fryer hath freely graunted in his immediately aforegoing words The latter he must likewise yeeld vnto against his will or else be condemned of the whole world For besides that the Iesuiticall Cardinall Bellarmine and the popish Byshop Iosephus Angles in their Books of Late yeares dedicated to the Byshoppes of Rome haue giuen them the title of Holinesse euen in the abstract it is so euident that his Holinesse is of Late yeares the vsuall name of the Byshop of Rome that if any man either in Rome or in Jâ—ahe shall deny the same he may iustly be censured worthy of the Whetstone That which he sayth of Theodoretus the Councell of Chalcedon S. Cyprian and S. Austin is very friuolous and nothing to the purpose For first I say of Late yeares and yet the youngest of our Fryer named lyued aboue a thousand yeares agoe Secondly there is great disparitie betweene a peculiar and an vsuall name A peculiar name perteineth solely and onely vnto one but that an vsuall name may agree to many at once it cannot be denyed Thirdly as our Fryer hath confessed that the name Pope was of old time giuen to many and yet afterward remayned to the Byshop of Rome alone so must he volens nolens confesse of the name Holynesse B. C. Prosecuting his former matter he sayth But this Emperour that is Iustinian lyued after Christ his birth about 528. yeares ergo this poynt of poperie is a rotten ragge of the New religion In which wordes he venteth out an vntrueth For be it that it was then appropriated to the Pope as he sayth yet how can it be New which by his owne confession was vsed xi hundred yeares agoe That is so many ages before the foundations of his Religion were laide or the name of a Protestant heard of in the whole world T. B. Our Iesuite desiring to discharge the Pope and Poperie of Newnesse would prooue it by my graunt viz. because I confesse the name Pope to haue been appropriated to the Byshops of Rome a thousand yeares agoe But our Fryer in thus disputing doth prooue him selfe a very Daw. For he must learne to know that the newnesse of a thing may be considered two wayes absolutely and respectiuely And consequently that though the name Pope be Old absolutely considered yet it is New respectiuely when it is compared with the time of the Apostles Now so it is that you Papistes beare the world in hand that your Poperie is the Old religion and that selfe-same Doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the Church of Rome This is the Doctrine which I oppugne euen in the beginning of this present Chapter But our Fryer is so besotted with malice that he cannot discerne the trueth my reason standeth thus You Iesuites and Iesuited Papistes affirme desperatly and damnably that your Late start-vp Poperie is the Old religion deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paul to the Church of Rome But that is so farre from being true that the very name Pope is New as wanting aboue 500. yeares of that age or time whereof you bragge and boast ergo seeing the Apostolicke and first Religion is onely the Old religion and that which commeth after as Tertullian truly writeth the false and New religion it followeth of necessitie that the name Pope comming 500. yeares after the Old religion is but a rotten Ragge of the New Where I wish the Reader to remember that I speake of the name Pope in that sense in which the Byshoppes of Rome vsurpe the same That which our Jesuite addeth of Protestantes how absurd it is shall God willing by and by appeare B. C. I omit heere how many Ecclesiasticall names haue been brought into the Church as Consubstantiall against the Arrians Incarnation against other Heretikes the better by a new name to declare an auncient article of Fayth Will Bell for all that call these Wordes rotten Ragges of a New religion Hee never dare offer it and yet with no lesse reason may be doe it then he doth heere the name of the Pope T. B. Who seeth not to what shiftes our Iesuiticall Fryer is driuen He affirmeth desperately that I may with no lesse reason call the holy names appropriated to the sonne of God rotten ragges of a New religion then the name of the Pope But out vpon such Rotten diuinitie out vpon such paltry Fryers The sacred names Consubstantiall and Incarnation are equiualently according to the substance and true nature of the thinges signified by the same set downe in many places of the holy Scriptures Which was made most apparant against the Arrians by the Fathers of the first famous Councell of Nice but the name Pope as it is of Late yeares challenged by the Byshops of Rome and heere auouched by the impudent Fryer is so farre from being either expressely or virtually conteyned in the holy Scriptures that all sacred Writ vtterly condemneth the same as a Rotten ragge of a New religion inuented at Rome aboue fiue hundred yeares after the death of S. Peter S. Paul Againe the Holy names of Consubstantiall and Incarnation were not first common to others and afterward attributed to the sonne of God But the name Pope as I haue prooued and as the Frier hath plainely confessed was first and that more then 500-yeares common to all Byshops and in processe of time appropriated to the Byshops of Rome Thirdly the thing truly signified by the holy wordes Consubstantiall and Incarnation neuer could agree to any creature in the world but the thing truely signified by the word Pope did in the primatiue and purest age of the Church doth at this present and may in time to come truely agree to all true Byshops in Christs Church Now touching the name of Protestant I answere
all then hee doth in setting one onely at libertie as it is already prooued by Syluester and Viguerius Secondly Plenarie Pardons are so common at the houre of death as none that either haue friendes or money are or can be destitute thereof which notwithstanding is a more vndiscreet poynt then the other Thirdly the three conditions required for the legitimation of Popish pardoning concurre as sweetly in deliuering all togeather ioyntly as in deliuering one by one seuerally The Popes inordinate affection of lucre is hereby conuinced in that albeit hee can with one onely Pardon set open the gates of Purgatorie and set all the prisoners there at libertie yet will hee not extende that compassion to them but taketh this course with them that they shall appoynt Ptalegata by their last Willes and Testamentes for Masses Diriges and Trentals to be sayd yearely or rather perpetually if their abilitie will extend so farre with which Masses Diriges Trentals his Pardons shal concur so deliuer theÌ„ by policie discretion By reasoÌ„ of which couetously deuised policie we may this day behold in Spaine Rome Italy so many Alters erected so many Churches sumptuously decked so many Priestes richly maintayned especially in S. Gregories Church at Rome for which Masses Diriges Trentals huge summes of money are giuen dayly yearely perpetually not for the Masses formally concedo but yet formally for the Priestes panis and materially for the Masses constanter assero The fourth Conclusion The Pope hath often by his most wicked and execrable Dispensations taken vpon him to dissolue that Matrimonie which is firme stable by Christes owne institution The former part is prooued by the popish learned Canonist and great Diuine Martinus Nauarrus in these expresse wordes Diuiditur MatrimoniuÌ„ ante consummationem per dispensationem Papae iusta de causa sactam Matrimonie is dissolued before Consummation by the Popes Dispensation vpon iust cause graunted Now to prooue that the Pope may this doe Nauarre taketh it for a good ground that the same hath been often practised by the Pope Thus doth he write Quorum opinio adeo obseruatur quod etiam ter vel quater ad petitiones meo consilio antequaÌ„ in vrbem venissem oblatas Paulus 3. et Pius 4. per suas dispensationes dissoluerunt quaedam matrimonia omnino clandestina nondum consummata in remedium animarum alioquin probabiliter periturarum Whose opinion he speaketh of the Canonistes is so obserued that three or foure times before my comming to Rome vpon petitions made by mine aduise Paulus the third and Pius the fourth with their Dispensations dissolued certaine secret Matrimonies not yet consummate for the sauegard of soules which by likelyhood would otherwise haue perished Couarruuias an other very learned and most famous popist Canonist doth confirme the same while he telleth vs constantly that Pope Paulus the fourth and Pope Julius the third dispensed in like maner Now for proofe of the latter viz. that holy Matrimonie before consummation or copulation is firme and perfect and cannot be dissolued by the power of man our Sauiour himselfe teacheth vs when he sayth Quod Deus coniunxit homo non separet That which God hath conioyned let not man put asunder Againe in an other place thus Omnis qui dimittit vxorem suam et alteram ducit maechatur Euery one that putteth away his Wife and marryeth an other committeth adulterie Yea S. Paul sayth plainely That if the Wife depart from her Husband she must either remaine vnmarried or else be reconciled to him againe But our holy Father the Pope in his Decretals doth answere this matter very lustily though nothing clerkely in these words Non enim homo sed Deus separat quos Romanus pontifex qui non puri hominis sed veri Dei vicem gerit in terris ecclesiarum necessitate vel vtilitate pensata non humana sed diuina potius authoritate dissoluit For not man but God doth separate those whom the Byshop of Rome who beareth the person not of pure man but of the true God heere on earth dissolueth not by humane but rather diuine authoritie as the necessitie or vtilitie of the Church requireth The popish Saint and angelicall Doctor Aquinas proceedeth further vttering these expresse wordes Christus poterat relaxare ergo et Paulus potuit ergo et Papa poâ—est qui non est minoris potestatis in Ecclesia quâ—m Paulus suit Christ could pardon or dissolue Matrimonie therefore Paul could pardon therefore the Pope also can pardon as who is of as great authoritie in the Church as Paul himselfe was So then a primo ad vltimum by Aquinas his doctrine the Pope can doe as much as Christ. Hee can no doubt make the deafe to heare the dumbe to speake the lame to walke the blind to see and the dead to rise againe to life But our holy Father must pardon mee if I beleeue not these thinges before I see them done And yet doe these thinges follow by an ineuitable and irrefragable consequence of that Doctrine which the Pope and his angelicall Doctor haue taught vs. The Fift Conclusion The Pope can Dispense with a Monke already professed that he may become a married man Nauarrus that famous popist Canonist is and may be a witnesse sufficient of this popish Theame these are his expresse wordes Papa potest dispensare cum Monacho iam professo vt contrahat matrimoniuÌ„ imo de facto multi Papae dispensarunt The Pope can dispense with a Monke already professed that he may be a married man yea many Popes haue de facto dispensed so indeed Hereof see more at large in the 3. Chapter and the eleuenth Proposition The Sixt Conclusion The Pope can Dispense with the full Brother to marry his owne naturall and full Sister of the same Father the same Mother This may seeme very strange to the Christian reader But I haue prooued it plentifully in the Popes Funerall Pope Martin the fift of that name did Dispense as is already sayd but for the better contentation of the Reader let him ponder seriously the 14. Chapter following Where God willing Pope Martins Dispensation shal be examined to the bottome The Seuenth Conclusion The Pope may doe whatsoeuer pleaseth his Holinesse as whose bare will is a sufficient warrant so to doe The Popes owne deare glose vpon his Decretals telleth vs peremptorily without blushing that this Conclusion is true these are the expresse wordes Quia in his quâ— vult et est pro ratione voluntaâ— For in those thinges which the Pope will doe his will is a reason sufficient And it followeth in the same place Nec est qui eâ— dicat cur ita facis Neither may any say to him Why doest thou so Pope Boniface in his Decrees yeeldeth the reason hereof if wee will beleeue him pleading for himselfe these are his wordes Quia cunctos
Clergie reputed Pope Hildebrand an Heretique for withstanding the same Fiftly that the Popes so supposed Soueraigntie ouer the whole Church was in those dayes vtterly condemned of the whole Church of Germanie For Lambertus telleth vs freely and truely that all the Clergie withstood the cursed Decree of the Pope proclaimed him an Heretique and this they did euen by the flat testimonie of Christ and his Apostles Sixtly that by the verdict of al the Learned in Germanie that great goodly Country the Pope did not only enforce theÌ„ violently against their ancient Customes but withal made the way to all filthy liuing This my Doctrine is confirmed by a double argument First because Pope Pelagius the second of that name who was Byshop 200. yeares after Siricius did willingly admitte the Byshoppe of Syracusa albeit he were a married man and had a Wife and Children neither was that Byshoppe then vrged to forsake the vse of holy Wedlocke Gratianus a man of great reputation among the Papistes doth in the fore-named Distinction referre out of Pope Pelagius his wordes in this manner Siue ergo Presbyter siue Diaconus siue Subdiaconus fuerit quod praefaâ—is ordinibus constitutj licitè matrimonio vtj possunt Whether therefore he be Priest Deacon or Sub-deacon it is euident that such as are within the aforenamed Orders may lawfully haue the vse of holy Wedlocke Out of these words of Gratianus that learned and zealous Papist I inferre against the Doctrine of the Pope that Priestes Deacons and Sub-deacons may not onely be Married but withall while they be Married haue the vse of holy Wedlocke Secondly because Pope Nicholas who liued aboue three hundred yeares after Pelagius was so farre from disquieting Married Priestes for their Marriages that when the Bulgarians complayned of that fault so supposed he perswaded them to be content and not to dishonour their married Priestes This is that Doctrine which the Popes owne Canon-law affoordeth vs wee heartily thanke him foâ— it Let vs adde herevnto that the Constitution of Pelagius was not of force in Sicilia saue onely three yeares before the Popedome of Gregory the great which doubtlesse was more then two hundred yeares after the Popedome of Siricius For thus doth Pope Gregory write Ante triennium omnium Ecclesiarum Subdiaconi Siciliae prohibiti fuerunt vt more Romanae Ecclesiae suis vxoribus nullatenus misceantur Quod mihi durum atque incompetens videtur vt qui vsum continentiae non inuenit neque castitatem promisit compellatur a suo Vxore separari Three yeares ago all Sub-deacons of Sicilia were charged to forbeare the vse of holy Wedlocke according to the custome of the Romane Church Which seemeth to mee a very hard and vnconuenient thing that hee who neither hath the gift of Continencie neither yet hath vowed Chastitie should be forcibly secluded from his Wife Out of these wordes I obserue these Instructions First that the Lawes of single life tooke onely place in Sicilia about three yeares before the time of Gregory the first Secondly that it is a diabolicall thing to compell such to Marriage as neither haue the gift of Continencie neither yet haue vowed Chastitie Thirdly that the Marriage of all Byshoppes and Ministers in our Churches as also of all secular Popish Priestes euerie where is lawfull and true Wedlocke by the doctrine of Pope Gregorie the reason is at hand because none of them are Votaries For to the Vow which they call Annexed they are no more bound in the West Church then they are in the East Marke well the next Proposition The 8. Proposition All secular Priestes are so free from the solemne Vow which by the Church of Rome is annexed to Ecclesiasticall orders that their Marriages are true perfect and of force the supposed dissoluing impediment thereof not withstanding I prooue it by a triple argument First because Scotus Nauarrus Iosephus Angles Durandus and the rest doe all freely graunt that this Vow is onely annexed by the ordinaunce of the Church and by the power of man Secondly because if the secular Priestes be Votaries their Vow must either be by the word spoken or by the deed done Not the former because no such word can be prooued Neither the latter because if the act it selfe in taking orders should be the Vow annexed or essentially include the same it would follow therevpon necessarily that the Greekes likewise should become Votaries seeing they doe the selfe same thing Who for all that were neuer Votaries nor yet so reputed by the Learned Papistes as we haue already seene in the fourth Proposition Thirdly because when two thinges are essentially and really distinguished the graunt of the one doth not necessarily include the grant of the other and yet is the solemne Vow of Chastitie essentially and really distinct from sacred Orders as Nauarrus Iosephus Gratianus Sectus Durandus Antoninus and all learned Papistes willingly do graunt Marke the next Proposition well The 9. Proposition Albeit by Popish fayth and doctrine all such as Marrie after the single Vow of Continencie doe sinne mortally yet doth their Marriage holde and is of force Thus teach all Learned popish Doctors with vniforme assent no exception can be made Angelus Rosella Calderinus Couarruvias Paludanus Maior Siluester Nauarrus Fumus Scotus Aquinas and the rest do constantly affirme it It shall suffice to alleadge the wordes of Fumus in the name of all the rest Thus doth he write Secundum impedimentum est votum simplex nam qui vouet castitatem simpliciter si contrahat mortaliter peccat violans fidem Deo datam tamen tenet matrimonium The second impediment is a single Vow for he that voweth Chastitie simply if he afterward marrie committeth a mortall sinne in breaking his promise made to God but yet the Matrimonie holdeth and is of force Marke the next Proposition againe and againe The 10. Proposition The Vow single is of one the same nature with the Vow solemne not distinguished by any essentiall but meere accidentall difference I prooue it by the plaine affirmance of Josephus Angles a very learned Fryer and a famous popish Byshoppe these are his expresse wordes Votum solenne et simplex ex parte subiecti specie accidentali differunt propterea quod voti simplicis subiectuÌ„ est ad contrahendum matrimonium habile licet contrahendo peccet at vero subiectum voti solennis est ad contractum matrimonialem inhabile transgressiones voti simplicis et solennis eiusdem speciei sunt etiamsi qui solenniter vouet grauius peccet ratio est quia specifica differentia actuuÌ„ est penes obiecta et cum idem sit vtriusque voti obiectum nempe seruare continentiam erunt actus eiusdem speciei erit tamen voti solennis transgressio grauior ratione perfectioris status The Vow solemne and single differ accidentally in respect of the subiect because the subiect of the
naturae vitio turpificarent Yet this I will say that this forced coacted Chastitie of Priests was so farre from excelling Chastitie in Wedlocke as no crime whatsoeuer hath brought greater shame to Priesthood more harme to Religion more griefe to all good men then the vnchast life of Priestes Therefore it were perhaps no lesse necessarie for the publique weale of Christendome then for the order of Priesthood that once againe Priestes might marrie publikely and so liue honestly and without shame and not pollute themselues so filthyly This is the doctrine of Polydorus well worthy to be written in Golden letters Yea the Marriage of Priestes is so honourable and so lawfull by Gods law and the prohibition thereof so dishonourable and dolefull that Pope Pius the second of that name who afore his Popedome was named Aeneas Syluius a very learned and famous writer did deliuer his minde opinion concerning this subiect in this manner as his owne deare Platina hath published the same Indoctum Episcopum Asine comparandum corpora malos medicos animas imperitos sacerdotes occiacre vagum Monachum diaboli esse mancipium virtutes Clerum ditasse vitia pauperem facere Sacerdotibus magna ratione sublatas nuptias maiori restituendas videri Pope Pius vsed to say as writeth his owne deuoted vassall Platina that a Bishop without learning was like vnto an Asse consequently that there are many Asses in popish Churches that euill Phisitians did kill mens bodyes and ignorant Priestes their soules that a vagrant Monke was the Diuels slaue that Vertues had enriched the Clergie in times past but that Vices of late dayes doe make it poore that there was great reason to debarre Priestes of Marriage but greater reason to restore Marriage againe vnto them Thus writeth Platina of Pope Pius Now for the benefite of the Christian reader I obserue these godly necessarie Lessons out of these three learned and famous Papistes First that the coacted Chastitie of Priests is neither of the substance of the Ministerie nor grounded vpon the law of God Secondly that the annexed Vow so tearmed is coacted and not free not voluntarie but compelled And consequently that secular Priestes are not Votaries properly but by a cursed and lawlesse Vow violently imposed vpon them Thirdly that the Prohibition of the Marriage of Priestes is against their soules health and causeth them to sinne damnably Fourthly that Priestes marriage would be honourable and honest chastitie if the law of man did not prohibite the same Fiftly that it was once lawfull for Priestes to Marrie Sixtly that it is in mans power to make their Marriages once lawful againe Seuenthly that it is expedient to restore Priestes to their right againe that is to say to referre Marriage to their free choyce and election Marke this poynt well for Christes sake gentle Reader Vt ius publicj matrimonij Sacerdotibus restitueretur That the right of publique Wedlocke might be restored to Priestes againe O sweete Iesus how impudent are our Jesuites and Iesuited Papistes who inueigh so bitterly against Priestes Marriage which is their proper right Nay how tyrannicall is the Pope who violently debarreth and keepeth them from their right Let these two wordes neuer be forgotten viz. Ius and Restitueretur for the former word Ius right doth argue Priestes Marriage to be their proper right And the latter word restitueretur might be restored doth argue the tyrannie of the late Byshops of Rome The reason is euident because Restitution can neuer be truely exacted but where iniustice went before and consequently seeing by the ioynt testimonie of these three famous popish Writers that the Marriage of Priestes ought to be restored to them it followeth of necessitie that the taking away of Marriage from Priestes was sauage brutish cruell tyrannicall and odious to God and all godly men For it was flatte iniustice and violently imposed vpon them Neither hath any good come to the Church of God thereby but filthy life and vncleannesse abounded euery where Which is not mine Assertion but the flatte and plaine Accusation of three learned zealous and famous Papistes Pope Pius him selfe being one of the three The 13. Proposition When the Fathers of the first famous Councell of Nice intended and meant to haue brought a New law into the Church and to haue abandoned the marriage of Priestes then our mercifull Father the mighty God Johouah who neuer hath been is or will be wanting to his Church in necessarie poyntes of Fayth and Doctrine raysed vp his faythfull seruant Paphuntius a man very famous by manifold myracles in his life time to withstand gainesay that cursed and neuer enough detested Law which the Father 's assembled at Nice were about to bring into the Church This Paphuntius the man of God excited by the spirit of God stood vp in the midst of the Councell and constantly affirmed before them all that to forbid Marriage to Priestes was too seuere a Law seeing by the testimonie of Christes blessed Apostle Marriage was honourable in all sortes of men wherevpon the Councell made no Decree in that behalfe This Proposition is prooued by the vniforme assent of three learned and famous Historiographers Cassiodorus Socrates Sozomâ—nus Socrates hath these expresse wordes Visum erat Episcopis legem nouam in Ecclesiam introducere The Byshops meant and intended to bring a new law into the Church But Paphuntius so perswaded the Councell by the power of the Holy ghost that they referred the whole matter to euery Priestes free choyce and election making no Law in that behalfe For Cassiodorus hath these expresse wordes Synodusque laudaâ—it sententiam eius et nihil ex hac parte sanciuit sed hoc in vniuscuiusque voluntate non in necessitate reliquit And the Synode commended Paphuntius his opinion and decreed nothing in the matter but left it in euery ones election to doe what he thought good without compulsion Sozomenus is consonant and confirmeth the same trueth The case is euident it cannot be denied The Corollarie of these 13. Propositions First therefore seeing all Ministers which are not subiect to the lawes of Poperie may lawfully Marrie euen by the doctrine of the Church of Rome as is prooued in the first Proposition Secondly seeing Marriage was euer lawfull for all Priestes and other Ministers of the Church during all the time of the old Testament as is prooued in the second Proposition Thirdly seeing Marriage is lawfull for Priestes and other Ministers of the Church euen now in the time of the new Testament as is prooued in the third Proposition Fourthly seeing the Marriage of Priestes is onely prohibited by the law of Man and not by any positiue constitution either of Christ of his Apostles as is prooued in the fourth Proposition Fiftly seeing it was euer lawfull for the Byshoppes Priestes and Deacons of the East Church to take Wiues and to beget Children in the time of their Priesthood as is prooued
in the fift Proposition Sixtly seeing the Marriage of Priestes was euer lawfull also in the West Church vntill the cursed and vntimely inuented Prohibition of Pope Siricius almost 400. yeares after Christ as is prooued in the sixt Proposition Seuenthly seeing Siricius his Prohibition notwithstanding Priestes were still Married in many places a long time and in Germanie aboue a thousand yeares after Christ without restraint euen vntill the dayes of the vngratious Pope Hildebrand as is prooued in the 7. Proposition Eightly seeing all secular Priestes are so free from the Vow which is annexed to Ecclesiasticall orders by the Church of Rome that the supposed dissoluing impediment thereof notwithstanding their Marriages are true perfect and of force Ninthly seeing that by Popish Fayth and Doctrine the single Vow of Chastitie neither doth nor can dissolue Matrimonie as is prooued in the ninth Proposition Tenthly seeing the Vow single is of one and the same nature with the Vow solemne not distinguished by any essentiall but meere accidentall difference as is prooued in the tenth Proposition Eleuenthly seeing Matrimonie of Monkes Fryers and Nonnes euen after their solemne Vow of Religion is with the Pope his Iesuites and Iesuited Popelinges very lawfull and of force so it be done by and with the Popes Dispensation as is prooued in the eleuenth Proposition Twelfthly seeing the forced and coacted Chastitie of popish Priestes hath been such and so intollerable euen by the best learned Papistes their free confessions as nothing in the whole world hath brought more shame to Priesthood more harme to Religion more griefe to godly men as is prooued in the 12. Proposition Thirteenthly seeing the Fathers of the famous Councell of Nice thought it not agreeable to Gods word to make any Law against the Marriage of Priestes as is prooued in the 13. Proposition I can not I may not but must of necessitie conclude with this ineuitable and irrefragable illation ergo the Prohibition of Priestes Marriage is but a rotten ragge of the new Religion The Refutation of the Friers third Chapter In these 13. Propositions if due application be made thereof all the vntruethes lyes miserable shiftes and colourable euasions of our Fryer Jesuite will easily appeare and vanish away as doth the smoake of a Fire especially if my Discourse in the Suruay of Poperie bee duely pondered with these 13. Propositions For all that our Fryer hath sayd in this Chapter and whatsoeuer else any other Iesuite or Iesuited Papist in the world is able to say against the Marriage of Priestes is verie largely distinctly and soundly resuted in my Suruay of Poperie The Jesuite full of nothing but Winde Vanitie Rayling and lying would dazell the eyes of his Reader with crying out against Vntruethes when indeed all vntruethes proceed onely from his owne lying lippes Two thinges onely may seeme to the vulgar Reader to carry some shew or colour of trueth which both are soundly confuted in my Suruay Howbeit for the better satisfaction of the indifferent Reader especially of such as perhappes haue not read my Suruay I am content once againe to examine the same The former colour of trueth pretended by our Frier is this in very deed viz. That Saint Paphuntius in the Councell of Nice perswaded the Fathers onely vnto this to weete That they which were called to the Priesthood beeing Married should not be separated from their Wiues which they had for it was the old Tradition of the Church sayth our Fryer That those which were made Priestes beeing not yet Married should not afterward marrie Wiues Thus pleadeth our Jesuite out of Sozomenus and Socrates Marke now my Answere to the same The Answere I answere first that the Marriage of Priestes is onely prohibited by the Law of man and not by any positiue Constitution either of Christ or his Apostles This I haue prooued in the 4. Proposition by the flat testimonie of many famous Popish Writers yea out of the Popes owne Decrees Read the Proposition to the end and marke it seriously Secondly that it was euer lawfull for Priestes in the East Church to be Married and to beget children in time of their Priesthood This trueth is cleared in the fift Proposition euen out of the Popes owne Decrees Thirdly that it was lawfull in the West Church for Priestes to be Married for the space of one thousand yeares after Christ This is made euident in the sixt and seuenth Propositions Fourthly that Secular Priestes are not Votaries and that therefore their Marriage is lawfull This trueth is soundly prooued in the 8. and 9. Propositions Let them be well marked Fiftly that the Marriage of Priestes is their owne proper right and that therefore restitution must be made for taking the same away This trueth is prooued in the 12. Proposition and it striketh dead Now seeing first that no positiue Constitution against Priestes Marriage can truely be deriued either from Christ or his Apostles seeing secondly that it was euer lawfull for Priestes in the East Church to be Married seeing thirdly that it was lawfull for Priestes euen in the West Church to Marrie euery where for the space almost of 400. yeares and in Germanie aboue a thousand yeares after Christ seeing fourthly that Secular Priestes are no Votaries seeing fiftly that the Pope is bound to Restitution for taking away of Priestes Marriage I must perforce conclude against our Iesuite that the Tradition which Socrates and Sozomenus speake of was neither Generall nor Diuine howsoeuer Paphuntius alleadged it so to mittigate the rigorous and seuere Lawes intended by the Councell I prooue it by a double argument First because if there had been any such Tradition generall or diuine the Greekes could not be excused who neuer yeelded therevnto Secondly because so many Learned Papistes doe constantly affirme and teach that neither Christ nor his Apostles made any Law against Priestes Marriage To which I must needes adde that if there had been any such Tradition receiued either from Christ or his Apostles neither would holy Paphuntius haue pleaded against it neither yet the famous Councell haue yeelded to him in that behalfe But the Councell of Carthage will some say maketh mention of Apostolicall tradition to the same effect I answere with the Popes owne deare Glosse vpon his Decrees in these expresse wordes Ergo Apostoli dâ—cuerunt exemplo et admonitione non institutione vel constitutione Therefore the Apostles taught it by example and admonition and not by any Law or Constitution But how by Admonition and Example did the Apostles teach the single life of Priestes S. Paul albeit he were some time a marryed-man as S. Clement very probably deduceth out of the holy Scriptures yet did he after that liue a single life and withall exhorted others that had the gift to liue as he did But here three things must seriously be obserued First that th' Apostle wished Lay-men aswell as he did Ecclesiasticall persons
will take the paines to lay open to the Reader the expresse wordes of the Byshop their glorious Martyr Thus doth hee write I will not alter adde or take away one word vpon my saluation to answere it Sed et Graecis ad hunc vsque diem non est creditum Purgatorium esse Legat qui velit Graecorum veterum commentarios et nullum quantum opinor aut quam rarissimum de Purgatorio sermonem inueniet Sed neque Latini simul omnes at sensim huius rei veritatem conceperunt Et Paulo post non absque maxima sancti spiritus dispensatione factum est quod post tot annorum curricula Purgatorij fines et Indulgentiarum vsus ab orthodoxiâ— generatim sit receptus Quamdiu nulla fuerat de Purgatorio cura nemo quaesiuit Indulgentias nam ex illo pendet omnis Indulgentiarum existimatio Si tollas Purgatorium quorsum Indulgentijs opus erit His. N. si nullum fuerit Purgatorium nihil Indigebimus Contemplantes igitur aliquandiu Purgatorium incognitum fuisse deinde quibusdam pedetentim partim ex reuelationibus partim ex Scripturis fuisse creditum atque ita tandem generatim eius fidem ab orthodoxa Ecclesia fuisse receptissimam facillime rationem aliquam Indulgentiarum intelligimus Quum itaque Purgatorium tam sero cognitum ac receptum Ecclesiae fuerit vniversae quis iam de Indulgentijs mirari potest quod in principio nascentis Ecclesiae nullus fuerat earum vsus Caeperunt igitur Indulgentiae postquam ad Purgatorij cruciatus aliquandiu trepidatum erat The Greekes to this day doe not beleeue there is a Purgatorie Read who will the Commentaries of the auncient Greeke Writers and he shall either find very seldome mention of Purgatorie or none at all But neither did the Latine Church conceiue the veritie of this matter all at one time but by litle and litle Neither was it done without the woonderfull dispensation of the Holy Ghost that after so many pluralities of yeares Catholikes both beleeued Purgatorie and receiued the vse of Pardons generally So long as there was no care of Purgatorie no man sought for Pardons for of it dependeth all the estimation that wee haue of Pardons If thou take away Purgatorie to what end shall wee need Pardons For if there be no Purgatorie wee shall neede no Pardons Considering therefore how long Purgatorie was vnknowne then that it was beleeued of some by litle and litle partly by Reuelations and partly by Scriptures and so at the last beleeued generally of the whole Church wee doe easily vnderstand the cause of Pardons Since therefore Purgatorie was so lately knowne and receiued of the Vniuersall Church Who can now admire Pardons that there was no vse of them in the primatiue Church Pardon 's therefore began after the people stood in some feare of Purgatorie These are the wordes of M. Fisher sometime our Byshoppe of Rochester a Popish so supposed glorious Martyr and a man for his great Learning renowned throughout the Christian world who writing against M. Luther in defence of Poperie to which he was woonderfully addicted spared not so say and to plead what possibly he could inuent for the free passage and credite of the same Whose best pleading which hee possibly was able to affoorde the Pope and Poperie doth roundly and clearely turne it vp-side downe I desire the Reader right heartily euen in the bowels of our Lord Iesus to marke attentiuely and then to iudge and giue his censure Christianly betweene the Jesuite and my selfe Which if he shall indeed performe all partialitie set apart hee can not but euidently perceiue my life I gage for the tryall that Poperie is the New Religion He can not but see that the trueth is that which I defend He can not but behold as clearely as the noone day that the Fryer is condemned in his owne conscience and can not tell what to say For first their most Learned Byshoppe and glorious Martyr telleth vs constantly and plainely that the famous Fathers and Writers of the Greeke Church neuer beleeued Purgatorie And who were those Greeke Writers S. Basill for his great skill surnamed the great S. Gregorie Nazianzene for his surpassing knowledge in Diuinitie surnamed Theologus S. Chrysostome for his Learning and Eloquence surnamed the Golden mouth to say nothing of all the rest If these auncient Fathers these Holy men these so learned and so famous Writers with all the rest of the Greeke Church did not beleeue there was a Popish Purgatorie for the space of 1517. yeares for so long after Christ was this Byshoppe lyuing who for all that as we haue seene affirmeth vnawares against himselfe the Pope and Poperie that they beleeued it not in his time What noddies what fooles how voyd of all feeling of all sense of all reason may they iustly be censured Who to the eternall perill of their soules and saluation will needs beleeue such erroneous hereticall and most execrable Doctrine such diabolicall Fayth and plaine Heathenish Religion Secondly that the Latine Church and consequently the Church of Rome did not beleeue the aforenamed Purgatorie for many hundreds of yeares after S. Peters death whose successor the Pope boasteth himselfe to be Thirdly that this Purgatorie was not beleeued of the Latine Church at one and the same time but by litle and litle Fourthly that Purgatorie was beleeued in the latter age by speciall Reuelation of the Holy Ghost Fiftly that Pardons came not vp vntill Purgatorie was found out as which without Purgatorie can haue no vse Sixtly that Purgatorie was a long time vnknowne Seuently that Purgatorie could not be found in the Scriptures of a long time Eightly that it was not wholly found out by the Scriptures but partly by Reuelations Ninthly that Pardons were not heard of or knowne to the primatiue Church Tenthly that then Pardons began when men began to feare the paines of Purgatorie Behold heere gentle Reader what a worthy Fisher was my Popish Lord of Rochester hee hath caught with his Net at one draught tenne goodly Fishes that is to say tenne golden and worthy Lessons for Christian edification Which effect will appeare more euidently before the end of this Chapter B. C. Secondly that the Church of Rome beleeued it not that is Purgatorie for the space of 250. yeares after which time it increased by litle and litle This either hee meaneth is gathered out of the testimonie of Roffensis and that is not true for nothing doth Roffensis speake of 250. yeares or deny that Purgatorie was alwayes beleeued in the Church although hee confesseth that the Doctrine thereof was not so well knowen as now it is which is farre different from this Proposition Purgatorie was not beleeued of the Church of Rome for the space of 250. yeares after Christ. Or else he affirmeth of himselfe that Purgatorie was not beleeued vntill that time and then must I be so bold to tell him that it
as the great learned Papist Rhenanus telleth vs And hee yeeldeth this reason thereof viz. because Auricular or Secret Confession was wholly vnknowen in those dayes I further adde for the accomplishment of this Conclusion that which the sayd Rhenanus citeth out of a famous and learned Papist Geilerius These are the wordes Thomas Aquinas et Scotus homines nimium arguti confessionem hodie talem reddiderunt vt Iohannes ille Geilerius grauis ac sanctus Theologus qui tot annis argentorati concionatus est apud amicos suos saepe testatus sit iuxta eorum denteroseis impossibile esse confiteri But Tho. Aquinas and Scotus men too much delighted with subtilties haue brought Confession this day to such a passe that Iohannes Geilerius a graue and reuerend Diuine and a Preacher a long time at Argentâ—ratuÌ„ said many a time vnto his friends that it was impossible for a man to make his Confession according to their Traditions Out of these words I note first that the vaine curious distinctions of the Schoole-Doctors haue brought much mischiefe into the Church of God Which if a Papist had not spoken it would seeme incredible to the world Secondly that it is impossible for a Papist to make his Confession according to the Popish Law And consequently that all Papistes by Popish Doctrine must perish euerlastingly Marke well my wordes gentle Reader as thou art carefull of thine owne saluation The Papistes teach vs to hold for an Article of our Beleefe that wee are bound to make our Confessions as the Popes Law prescribeth that is as Aquinas whose Doctrine two Popes haue confirmed for Authenticall and Scotus the Popes Doctor subtilis haue set downe the same And for all that Geilertus a Papist himselfe a great learned man complained often to his friends that none could possibly performe the same Now then since on the one side Popish Confession must be made and that vnder paine of damnation and since on the other side none possibly can make the same as it is coÌ„maunded it followeth of necessitie by Popish doctrine that Papistes must be damned eternally Thirdly that many lyuing among the Papistes doe externally seeme to obey the Popes Law who in their heartes detest a great part of their late hatched Romish Religion This is euident by the secret complaint of the learned Papist Geilerius who told that to his trustie friendes which he durst not disclose to others Yea God hath euen among the Papistes in Italie and Rome many thousandes which haue not or doe not this day bow their knee to Baal Read my Suruay and it will satisfie thee in this behalfe Let vs now heare our Jesuite and confute his fond cauils and ridiculous sophistications B. C. Scotus enquireth by what Law a man is bound to Confession and determineth first in generall that the precept must grow from one of these Lawes either from the Law of Nature or the Law positiue of God or the Law of the Church And descending to particulars hee resolueth first that wee are not bound by the Law of Nature Nextly hee disputeth whether it groweth from the precept of the Church and not liking that opinion he proceedeth to the next member and sayth To be short it seemeth more reasonable to hold the second member that Confession falleth vnder the positiue Precept of God But then wee must consider sayth Scotus whether it be found explicitely in the Ghospell immediately from Christ because it is manifest quoth hee that it is not in the old Law or whether it be from him expressely in some of the Apostles doctrine or if neither so nor so whether then it was giuen of Christ by word only published to the Church by the Apostles And hauing made this triple Diuision how Confession might come by the Precept of God that is either first commaunded by him in the Ghospell or else secondly to be found in some of the Apostles writinges or lastly instituted of Christ by word of mouth onely And hauing disputed of the first two members with dislike of the second he concludeth that we must either hold the first member to weete that it commeth from the Law of God published by the Ghospell or if that be not sufficient we must say the third that it is of the positiue Law of God published by Christ to the Apostles but published by the Apostles to the Church without all Scripture T. B. I answere first that albeit our Jesuite vseth much babling turning himselfe this way that way and euery way to anoyde and cassire if it were possible the verdict censure of their subtile Doctor Scotus yet is all that hee sayth in this Chapter as also all that any other Iesuite or Papist in the world is able to say in the same subiect soundly and most euidently refuted in the sixt Conclusion aforegoing For the last and best Resolution that Scotus could inuent after he had disputed the Question pro et contra so profoundly as his wittes could conceiue was euen this and no other viz. that Popish Auricular Confession is not grounded vpon Christes Ghospell or Apostolicall writing but onely and solely vpon vnwritten Tradition which is an huge and deepe Gulfe without any bottome If the sixt Conclusion be duely pondered and vnderstood aright the Jesuites backe is at the wall Yet I will adde thereto one other Confirmation which is deduced and plainely related in the Popes owne Decrees these are the expresse wordes Quidam Deo solummodo confiteri debere peccata dicunt vt Graeci Quidam vero Sacerdotibus confitenda esse percensent vt tota ferè Ecclesia sancta Quod vtrumque non sine magno fructu intra sanctam fit Ecclesiam ita dumtaxat vt Deo qui remissor est peccatoruÌ„ peccata nostra confiteamur Some say we must Confesse our sinnes onely to God as the Greekes doe Other some say wee must Confesse them vnto Priests as doth almost the whole Church Either of which is done with great good within the holy Church so onely that we Confesse our sinnes to God who is the forgiuer of sinnes Thus are wee taught by the Popes owne sweete deare Decrees published in print to the view of the whole world Out of which Decree I obserue these memorable documentes for the helpe of the Reader First that the Greeke Church neuer confessed their sinnes vnto Priests but vnto God alone Of which Church for all that the Presidentes Gouernours were most holy learned Fathers viz. S. Epiphanius S. Chrysostome S. Basill surnamed the great S. Gregorie Nazianzene S. Damascene and many other most excellent and holy Byshoppes Secondly that others hold the contrarie saying that wee must Confesse our sinnes to Priestes Thirdly that both these opinions are profitably practised in the Church so wee Confesse our sinnes to God Fourthly that Popish Auricular confession euen by the Popes owne Decrees is not necessarie to saluation as the Papistes this day
teach and with Fire and Faggot violently vrge the same but is a thing in deed indifferent For if it had been necessarie vnto mans saluation all the holy and learned Fathers of the Greeke Church should haue perished euerlastingly But some will here demaund how that can be prooued To whom I answere that the same is plainely and expressely prooued in the Popes owne Decrees Which is such a testimonie against the Pope and his Popelings as none greater can be had The expresse wordes of the Popish Decrees haue already sounded in our eares This mine Obseruation is confirmed by the plaine wordes of the same Decrees where it is freely confessed that that opinion which holdeth sinnes onely to be confessed vnto God of necessitie is true lawfull and honest Let the wordes of the Decree be well marked because it sheweth all the holy Fathers of the Greeke Church to confound the Pope and all his Jesuited Popelings But let vs heare the verdict of a famous popish Cardinall of Rome Cardinall Caietanus as we haue seene already auoucheth constantly that Auricular and Secret confession is against Christes holy Institution as is also the Precept that compelleth vs to frequent the same For the better explication of this famous Cardinals Assertion because the Pope and his Jesuites can not endure to heare the same I will heere lay open before the eyes of the indifferent Reader the best answere that the Papistes haue or can inuent against the same Iosephus Angles that famous Popish Byshoppe not well pleased with the Popish Cardinall as it may seeme writeth of his Doctrine in this manner Hinc intelliges cauendum esse Caietanum super Ioan. cap. 20. vbi duos errores affirmauit vnum est institutam fuisse â— Christo Confessionem voluntariam cum sit ab Ecclesia definitum necessariam esse ad salutem Nam quod est voluntarium vt religionis ingressus non est ad salutem necessarium Alterum scilicet modum confitendi ad aurem non esse a Christo institutum Et hic error est in Conc. Trident. damnatus Hence mayest thou vnderstand that wee ought to take heede of Caietane vpon the 20. of John where hee affirmeth two errours the one is that Christ instituted Confession voluntary albeit the Church defined the same to be necessarie to saluation The other is that Christ did not institute Confession Auricular which is made in the Priestes eare And in the next page the same Angles telleth vs that the Councell of Trent did of purpose condemne Caietans opinion By the doctrine of this great Learned Papist who was a Cardinall of Rome and a Frier Dominican we see clearely these three poyntes First that the best learned Popish Doctors condemne Poperie and iustifie the doctrine of the Church of England Secondly that Auricular Confession was voluntarie in the dayes of Cardinall Caietane who liued aboue a thousand yeares after Christ. Thirdly that this Cardinall gaue such a deadly wound to Popish Confession a Ragge of the New religion that the Councell of Trent could find no better remedie but to condemne his Opinion as Hereticall Wisely therefore doth the Popish Byshoppe Angles exhort his Readers to beware of Caietane Bonauenture Hugo Panormitane and the Popish Glosse because they all with the Popes deare Canonistes tell vs constantly that Popish Confession hath no better ground then pure Mans inuention And consequently all such may iustly be deemed as blind as Beetles that do not see Popish Auricular Confession to be a rotten Ragge of the New religion The Iesuites Seuenth Chapter Of Popish Veniall sinnes COncerning Popish Veniall sinnes I will first set downe and lay open to the Reader the state and trueth of the Controuersie now in hand and that done refute refell the Iesuites counterfeite and pretensed Answere to the same The 1. Conclusion Euery Sinne is mortall of it owne nature I prooue it sundry wayes First because the Prophet in the spirit of God pronounceth Death to be due to euery Sinne Anima quae peccauerit ipsa morietur The soule that sinneth it shall die Secondly because S. Paul teacheth vs that The reward of sinne is death Thirdly because S. Iohn affirmeth euery Sinne to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say The transgression of Gods Law for so doth Ben. Arias Montanus that famous Popish Linguist translate the Greeke word and therefore no deniall can be made thereof Fourthly because the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed in the Scripture for Sinne and signifying a declining or swaruing from the right way doth emphatically and plainely confirme the same Fiftly because S. Bede Dionisius Carthusianus and Nicolaus Lyranus doe all three with vniforme assent expound S. John of Mortall sinne S. Bede who for his Learning and Vertue was renowned throughout the Christian world and therevpon surnamed Venerabilis hath these expresse wordes Virtus huius sententiae facilius in lingua Graecorum qua edita est Epistola compraehenditur Siquidem apud eos iniquitas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocatur quod significat quasi contra legem vel sine lege factum Siquidem lex graecè 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appellatur Sequitur sed et Latinum nomen eidem rationi congruit quod iniquitas quasi aequitati aduersa nuÌ„cupatur Quia quicunque peccat contrarius nimirum aequitati diuinae legis peccando existit The force and efficacie of this sentence is more easily perceiued in the Greeke tongue in which the Epistle was written for Iniquitie with them is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth As done against Law or without Law for the Law is called in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Latine word also agreeth to the same reason because it is called Iniquitie as being against Equitie For euery one that sinneth is by reason of sinne contrary to the equitie of Gods Law Dionysius Carthusianus a famous and learned Papist hath these expresse wordes Lex autem diuina est aequitas ipsa sicque mortale peccatum est iniquitas id est non aequitas vtpote violatio aequitatis The Law of God is Equitie it selfe and consequently Iniquitie that is not Equitie as the trangression of Equitie is a mortall sinne Lyranus an other famous Popish Writer hath these wordes Peccatum est transgressio legis diuinae Lex autem diuina est ipsa aequitas et ideo in omni peccato mortali est aequitatis corruptio et per consequens iniquitas Sinne is the transgression of Gods Law and the Law of God is Equitie it selfe And therefore in euery mortall sinne there is corruption of Equitie and consequently there is Iniquitie Sixtly because holy Moses pronounceth euery one accursed that keepeth not the whole Law Seuenthly because fiue famous and great learned Papistes Iacobus Almaâ—nus Durandus Jo. Gersonus Michael Baius and Byshop Fisher not able to answere the reasons against Veniall sinnes doe freely and constantly affirme without all And 's or
it is alreadie prooued in the third Conclusion To which I adde that the holy Fathers when they speake of Venial sinnes doe euer vnderstand Small sinnes respectiuely In which sense my selfe do willingly admit Veniall sinnes as also sinnes Veniall by the mercie of God But withall I wish the Reader euer to remember what Gersonus Almaynus Baius Durandus and Roffensis teach vs viz. that euery least Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature which is the flat Doctrine I heere defend Thirdly that the difference amongst the Learned Popish Doctors concerning Veniall sinnes is a matter of small importance which I exhort the Christian reader in the bowels of our sweete Redeemer neuer to forget For it doth plainely conuince if nothing else could be sayd in that behalfe that Poperie is the New religion What is Popish fayth a matter of Small moment Is it not necessarie to saluation If the Pope will say it I am ready to confirme it Roffensis Baius Almaynus Durandus and Gersonus all being both learned and zealous Papistes affirme constantly the force of trueth compelling them that euery Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature Contrariwise the Pope his Jesuites and Jesuited vassals affirme teach and beleeue as an Article of Popish Fayth that many Sinnes are Veniall euen of their owne nature This notwithstanding our Jesuite telleth vs roundly though nothing Clerkly that the difference is but small So then Articles of Popish fayth are small or great as it pleaseth the Pope His bare Will as we haue heard and seene is a warrant sufficient in euery thing as who can change the nature of thinges if we will beleeue him and of nothing make some thing Fourthly that my selfe hold no Opinion teach no Article of Fayth defend no Position but such Opinions Positions and Articles as the best learned Papistes haue holden taught and defended before mee For my woonted maner euer hath been is and shall be to wound the Papistes with their owne Weapons and to conâ—ound the Pope with his best Learned Proctors B. C. This being so let vs consider what a notable vntrueth the Minister offereth to the view of his Readers when he sayth Almaynus Durandus Gerson Baius and other famous Papistes not able to answere the reasons against Veniall sinnes confesse the trueth with the Byshop that euery Sinne is Mortall Hee doth cunningly abuse them in leauing out those wordes of it owne nature which ought to be added after their opinion and himselfe likewise doth adde in citing of Roffensis immediately before T. B. I answere first that the vntrueth our Fryer speaketh of proceedeth from his owne lying lippes as by and by it will appeare Secondly that our Fryer doth falsely peeuishly vnchristianly and impudently abuse both his Reader and mee when he chargeth me to abuse my Authors in leauing out their wordes What wordes sir Fryer haue I left out These wordes forsooth of it owne nature sayth our Iesuiticall Fryer O malitious Jesuite Where is thine Honestie where is thy Christianitie where is thy Fayth where is thy Conscience Art thou become a flat Atheist art thou at defiance with true dealing Thou seemes to make thy soule saleable for the Popes pleasure Doth not thine owne Penne condemne thee when thou grauntes that I added the same wordes in citing of Roffensis immediatly before Let the indifferent Reader be an indifferent Iudge betweene vs. I added the wordes immediatly before as our Fryer truely sayth it therefore had been an irkesome tantologie to cite them againe in the next wordes following especially seeing I affirme the Popish Doctors Almaynus Durandus Gersonus and Baius to hold and defend the selfe same opinion that Byshoppe Fisher affirmeth to be the trueth Againe the Controuersie consisteth precisely in this speciall poynt viz. Whether euery sinne be Mortall of it owne nature or no. I defende the affirmatiue the Iesuite the negatiue And consequently I must perforce speake of Sinnes as they are in their owne nature O worthy defender of late start-vp Poperie Thou perceiuest right well that Poperie is the New religion indeed and not able to withstand the truth nor to answere mine inuincible reasons and groundes Thou fleest from that which is in question to impertinent extrauagant and friuolous cauils so to dazell the eyes of thy Readers least they behold the newnesse of late Romish Religion Out vpon such beggerly Religion as which can not be defended but by cauils coozenage lying and deceitfull dealing B. C. After this vntrueth immediatly followeth another Yea the Jesuite S. R. quoth hee with the aduice of his best Learned friendes in his answere to the Downefall of Poperie confesseth plainely and blusheth not thereat that the Church of Rome had not defined some sinnes to be Veniall vntill the dayes of Pius the fift and Gregorie the 13. which was not fiftie yeares agoe In which wordes he blusheth neuer a whit to slaunder that Learned man and wholly to corrupt his meaning Hee sayth not that the Church of Rome had not defined some sinnes to be Venial vntill the dayes of Pius the fift and Gregorie the 13. as this licentious cast-away corruptly fathereth vpon him For he knew well that to beleeue Veniall sinnes was an Article long receiued before the times of those Popes But he affirmeth onely that to hold Veniall sinnes onely to be such by the mercie of God was censured and condemned by those Popes Why did Sir Thomas his sinceritie cut away these wordes by the mercie of God Forsooth because that without lying and corruption he can obiect nothing against Catholike doctrine T. B. I answere first that our impudent Fryer lyeth egregiously when he chargeth mee to slaunder S. R. his learned Brother For vpon my saluation I auerre it I deale christianly honestly and sincerely I neuer change adde or take away any one iote of that which I finde in mine Authors Would to God our Iesuites did so deale with mee Secondly our Fryer lyeth impudently when he vttereth these wordes Hee sayth not that the Church of Rome had not defined some sinnes to be Veniall vntill the dayes of Pius the fift and Gregorie the thirteenth For these are S. R. his expresse wordes True it is that Byshoppe Fisher and Gerson were in that errour but that was both before it was condemned in the Church as it was since by Pius the fift and Gregorie the thirteenth In which wordes the Jesuite S. R. telleth vs two memorable poyntes of Doctrine Th' one that Fisher and Gerson were in an Errour Th' other that the Errour was before the Church had condemned it So it onely remaineth duely to examine what the supposed Errour was The Iesuite B. C. heere telleth vs plainely if wee may beleeue him that the Popes Pius and Gregorius condemned that opinion onely which holdeth Venial sinnes to be onely such by the mercie of God I admit the Assertion I like the Narration I onely reiect the Popes friuolous vnchristian and
Christ prayed for the Fayth of S. Peter and his successours that it should neuer fayle that Hel-gates should neuer preuaile against it Yet heere God be thanked for it their pride is somewhat abated Christ is now either distrusted of them which they dare not say or at least suspected not to haue promised to the Byshops of Rome that their Fayth should not fayle For if they beleeue not that Christ is faythfull in all his Promises they are flat Heretiques If they beleeue him to performe what hee hath promised then it must perforce either be with them an Article of popish Fayth that the Pope as Pope can not erre or else doubtlesse that Christ made no such Promise to the Byshops of Rome Vtrum â—orum manis accipe good sir Fryer for the better of them is able to giue the Pope his dinner For which respect S. R. that learned Iesuite as his deare brother B. C. calleth him telleth vs roundly that false Fayth can haue no accesse to S. Peters Chaire For which respect the same Jesuite telleth vs in an other place That wee must obey what hee decreeth or defineth iudicially as sitting in S. Peters Chaire though in heart he were an Heretique For which respect the same Iesuite telleth vs in his wordes following That Byshops must not examine the Doctrine which the Pope deliuereth iudicially out of S. Peters Chaire as supreame Pastor of Gods Church but onely that wherein he vttereth his owne priuate opinion Thus writeth S. R. that great Learned Jesuite truly telling vs the Popish Fayth Which Doctrine if any but a Papist had deliuered it few or none would haue giuen credite thereunto O sweete Iesus I woonder how any Papist hearing such Doctrine published in print by the Jesuites so deare and so neare to the Pope himselfe and duely pondering the vanitie thereof and the blasphemie therein conteyned can still be a Papist and not defie the Pope and his damnable Doctrine What shall we doe with the holy Scripture Is it the infallible rule of Fayth Is it superiour to the Popes Iudiciall sentence Must the Papistes depend vpon it rather then vpon the Popes Decree No no if the Pope define against it his Decree must be obeyed neither may any Byshop as our Fryer heere teacheth vs much lesse may euery Priuate man examine the same or once call it into question Of which more at large when I come to the Oath which Byshops make to the Pope Thirdly that when I say this Popish Article of Fayth was neuer heard of in the Church for the space of a thousand and fiue hundred yeares I meane not of bare vocall hearing but of hearing with approbation of which hearing this Text of the holy Ghospell is emphaticall Scimus quia peccatores Deus non audit Wee know that God heareth not sinners that is Approoueth not sinners in graunting their requestes For God knoweth seeth and heareth all Petitions vocally but theirs onely with approbation Which aske according to his will The Psalmograph vseth the like phrase in these wordes They shall cry but there shall be none to helpe them yea euen vnto the Lord shall they cry but he shall not heare them The Prophet Micheas doth second the Psalmograph in these wordes Then shall they cry vnto the Lord and he shall not heare them The Prophet Zacharie is consonant in these wordes Sic clamabunt et non exaudiam dicit Dominus exercituum So shall they cry and I will not heare them sayth the Lord of Hostes. All which places and the like must perforce be vnderstood not of bare vocall hearing but of hearing with approbation Which kind of hearing my selfe did plainly insinuate to the Reader when in my words following I excepted the Iesuites and Iesuited Papistes For if I had meant of bare vocall hearing I neither would nor truely could haue excepted the Iesuites whom I graunt to haue heard it both vocally with approbatioÌ„ Fourthly wheÌ„ our Fryer obiecteth ridiculously that Aquinas Antoninus Waldensis and Turrecremata taught the same Doctrine within 1500. yeares I answere thus first that Canus denieth Waldensis to hold that opinion Secondly that the vse of holy Writ is to speake of many as all and of few as none Which synecdochicall speach very frequent in the holy Scriptures were sufficient if need required as it doth not to iustifie my manner of speaking in this behalfe Thirdly that if I should admit so much as our sir Fryer desireth yet would it follow of necessitie that Poperie is the New Religion For we see heere as clearely as the Sunne shyning at noone day that this Popish Article the Pope as Pope can not erre was hatched a thousand two hundred and fourtie yeares after Christ. For the most auncient Father thereof which our Iesuite possibly is able to name is Aquinas as we haue seene who for al that liued more then 1240. yeares after Christ. To which I adde that the Church as the famous Papistes Panormitanus and Gersonus teach vs is either the Congregation of the faythfull or a generall Councell sufficiently representing the same This being so and my reasons duely pondered it is very cleare and euident that this Popish Article of Fayth was neuer heard of in the Church that is approoued of the Church for the space of 1240. yeares after Christ. For doubtlesse the approbation of Aquinas Antoninus and Turrecremata the Popes flattering Parasites can not establish the Religion and Fayth of the Church of Rome If our Iesuite dare say it let him publish it in print and then expect my Commentarie vpon the same See and note well the 29. and the 30. Chapters as also the Christian Dialogue page 24.27.30.38.41.60.63.65 B. C. One maine Lye with a prettie tricke of lieger-demaine For he is to prooue out of Alphonsus that the Pope might erre in Fayth iudicially for that is the question as appeareth in the Premisses and that this Article was neuer heard of 1500. yeares and yet in the foresayd wordes of Alphonsus no such thing is conteyned seeing he speaketh in them not of his iudiciall Decrees but of priuate Errours which may befall him in the exposition of the Scriptures and that Alphonsus must needes meane of his priuate opinions in writing or otherwise and not of his definitiue sentence is certaine For otherwise there be and were in his time that held the Pope could not be an Heretique iudicially or erre as Pope Much lesse doth Alphonsus say that it was neuer heard of for the space of 1500. yeares that the Pope could not erre in Fayth iudicially for of this poynt he hath not one word or syllable T. B. I answere thus first that I beleeue our Jesuite viz. while he telleth vs that his Pope may erre in expounding the holy Scriptures But withall I must needes tell him that his Pope may as truely erre in his iudiciall sentence The reason is euident
egregious and notorious lye the Fryer set abroach so to maintaine if it were possible the falsely pretended Antiquitie of rotten Poperie The Fryer durst not cite the wordes of his Authors though my selfe neuer fayle therein least his cogging forgerie and false dealing should haue been discouered by that meanes These are the expresse wordes of Sezomenus Vir quidam è Macedoniana haeresi vxorem eiusdem opinionis habebat Hic cum Johannem quomodo de Deo sentiendum esset docentem andisset dogma illius laudabat et vxorem quoque vt secum sentiret hortabatur Cum vero illa magis nobilium mulierum sermonibus quam illius consuetudini obtemperaret et post frequentes admonitiones vir illius nihil effecisset nisi inquit in diuinis mihi consors fueris neque in vitae communione posthac eris Mulier hoc audito et consensum pollicita rem eam famulae cuidam communicat quam sibi fidam esse iudicabat illiusque opera ad fallendum viruÌ„ vtitur Circa tempus autem mysteriorum illa quod accepit continens quasi oratura procuÌ„bit famula astans clauculum illi dat quod secum in manu attulerat Hoc cum dentibus admoueretur in lapidem congelascit A certaine man infected with the Heresie of Macedonius had a wife of the same opinion hee hearing the doctrine of S. Iohn Chrysostome how he ought to thinke and beleeue of God commended his Doctrine and exhorted his wife to beleeue as he did But when she hearkened rather to the Tales of Noble women then to his admonition so as her husband preuayled nothing by his exhortations vnlesse sayth he thou wilt ioyne with mee in matters diuine I will not hencefoorth ioyne with thee in secular affayres His wife hearing this and promising her consent imparteth the matter to one of her Maydes in whom she reposed great confidence and vseth her helpe to defraude her Husband While the mysteries were in hand she keeping that which she had receiued looketh downe as if she would pray Her Mayde standing by giueth her priuily that which she brought with her in her hand Which when she began to eate it was chaunged into a Stone Nicephorus reciteth the same Storie in the selfe same manner I haue cited the wordes at large that the indifferent Reader may behold the false dealing of the Fryer and be an indifferent iudge betweene him and mee Sozomenus and Nicephorus do both ioyntly and constantly affirme that the Woman receiued the Sacramentall bread which she did not eate so to defraud and deceiue her Husband The Jesuite impudently auoucheth that she being a Macedonian Heretique did so the better to conceale her Religion Which notorious lying of the shamelesse Jesuite not onely the Historie it selfe doth confute but also the due consideration of the Heresie which the woman held For neither the eating neither the not eating of the Sacramentall bread did either further or hinder the Macedonian Heresie If she had been an Arian the Fryers assertion might haue had some colour of truth but seeing she was a Macedonian it is too too foolish and ridiculous For the Heresie of Macedonius consisted in this that the Holy Ghost was not God Secondly that neither Sozomenus nor Nicephorus sayth as the Jesuite beareth his Readers in hand viz. that the Sacrament of our Lords Body and Blood was then ministred vnder one kind but onely this and nothing else viz. that the Woman deceiued her Husband in taking the Bread which she did not eate Thirdly that our Iesuite falsely sayth that the Cuppe was not then giuen into the handes of the Communicantes his Authors affirme nothing lesse Fourthly that whatsoeuer our Fryer saith howsoeuer he imagine that the Woman could not haue had the same euasion in taking the Cuppe which she had in taking the Bread yet doe I constantly affirme and experience will prooue the same that she might haue seemed to drinke of the Cuppe yet haue tasted no Wine at all Fiftly that Pope Gelasius doth contest with me that the Lay people did in his time which was 492. yeares after Christ at the least receiue the holy Eucharist vnder both the kinds yea he affirmeth it to be Sacriledge to receiue but the one kind alone These are his expresse wordes Comperimus autem quod quidam sumpta tantummodo corporis sacriportione a Caâ—ice sacratiâ—ruoris abstineant Qui procul dubio quoniam nescio qua superstitione docentur astringi aut integra sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur Quia diuisio vnius eiusdemque mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire We vnderstand that some receiue onely the portion of the sacred Body and abstaine from the Cuppe of the holy Blood Who for that we know not how they are taught to be superstitious shall either receiue the whole Sacramentes or else be excluded from the whole Thus writeth Pope Geâ—asius the first whom Genebrard truly calleth the most learned Pope That some odde persons in his time did not receiue the Eucharist in both kindes whom hee therefore condemneth of flat Sacriledge because the one kind may not be taken without the other But I will yet touch and tickle our Jesuite more strictly and tell him that which will make his eares to tingle Gabriel Biel a very learned Schoole-doctor and a religious Popish Fryer in his Commentaries vpon the Canon of popish Masse telleth vs very constantly that it was a right generally vsed in the primatiue Church to receiue the holy Eucharist vnder both kindes But withall he affirmeth very resolutely that the Church of Rome in processe of time brought into the Church an other Custome of receiuing in one kind onely In the end he determineth decideth the controuersie in these expresse wordes Olim quaestio illa poterat esse dubia sed nunc post determinationeÌ„ concilij Constantiensis veritateÌ„ catholica determinantis dicere coÌ„munionem sub vtraque specie esse de necessitate salutis omni fideli est haeresis ibidem publice condemnata In former times it was lawfull to doubt of that QuestioÌ„ But in these latter dayes after the Councell of Constance which hath determined the Catholique veritie therein to say that all the faythfull must vpon necessitie of saluation Communicate vnder both kindes is a flatte Heresie publiquely condemned in the sayd Councell Thus disputeth this great Learned Papist out of whose words I gather these worthy obseruations First that the Church of Rome can make Heresies at her good will and pleasure I prooue it because that which was Catholique doctrine in the Primatiue Church is now made a flatte Heresie by Popish constitutioÌ„ Secondly that the Laicall Communion vnder one kind was consonant to the Catholique fayth vntill the late Councell of Constance that is to say for the space of one thousand foure hundred and foureteene yeares For so long was that Councell holden after Christ. Thirdly that no mortall man no pure
creature no Angell in heauen or Saint vpon earth hath any power at any time to alter or change the least iote of the Catholique fayth This Obseruation all learned Papistes willingly imbrace acknowledging the same for an vndoubted truth And Biel my Doctor now in hand approoueth the same in these expresse wordes Quaedam sunt de necessitate sacramentorum et de iure diuino sic quod nulla authoritate vel consuetudine oppositum induci possit Some thinges are of the necessitie of Sacramentes and of the Law diuine so that whatsoeuer is opposite or repugnant to the same can neuer be established by any Custome or Authoritie To which I adde fourthly that the Church hath no new reuelations in matters of Fayth So writeth the famous Byshoppe and great learned popish Doctor Melchior Canus in these expresse wordes Nec vllas in fide nouas reuelationes Ecclesia habet The Church hath no new Reuelations in matters of Fayth This is true Catholique doctrine in very deed no denyall may be made thereof For once a matter of Fayth is and must euer be a matter of Fayth And in like maner once no Article of Fayth neither is nor euer can be an Article of true Fayth indeed B. C. S. Thomas of Aquine doth not say That this was in some few places onely as Bell maketh him to speake but that in some Churches it was so obserued which might be very many as well as some few T. B. I Answere that in my Suruey of Poperie I set downe Aquinas his expresse wordes as mine accustomed manner euer hath been though our Iesuite dare not performe so much In my Tryall I onely gaue the true sense and meaning for breuitie sake His wordes are these Ex parte quidem ipsius sacramenti conuenit quod vtramque sumatur sez et corpus et sanguis quia in vtroque consistit perfectio sacramenti Sequitur ideo prouidè in quibusdam ecclesijs obseruatur vt populo sanguis sumendus non detur sed solum a sacerdote sumatur On the behalfe of the Sacrament it is meete and conuenient that both be receiued to weet both the Body the Blood because in both consisteth the perfection of the Sacrament Therefore it is prouidently obserued in some Churches that the Blood be not giuen to the Lay people but be onely receiued of the Priest Thus writeth Aquinas out of whose wordes I note two speciall Documentes Thâ—one that the perfection of the Sacrament consisteth in both kindes and consequently that the Communion of the Lay people is this day vnperfect in the Church of Rome This is a note of great consequence let it be well remembred Th' other that both kindes were vsually receiued euen of the Lay people in the dayes of Aquinas both in the Church of Rome and in all other Churches some few excepted For if Aquinas should meane by some Churches very many Churches as our Fryer would perswade his readers he should not haue sayd in some Churches but in very many or in all Churches for the most part For two which are a few not very many may determine some Churches very sufficiently But to extend some Churches to very many is to offer no small violence to the Text. For example sake If our Jesuite should promise to giue me some Money for my paines as I thinke he will not if then I did challenge very much Money vpon his Promise hee perperhaps would deny the same and my selfe for any helpe the wordes would affoord me should by Law recouer the great summe ad Calendâ—â— Graetaâ— In my Suruey this Lay call Communion vnder both kindes is prooued at large out of Origen S. Cyprian S. Hierome S. Chrysostome S. Jgnatius S. Justinus S. Ambrose S. Austen S. Gregorie and Haymo It shall now suffice to cite the testimonies of Iustinus and Haymo Iustinus hath these expresse wordes Qui apud nos vocaÌ„tur Diaconi atque Ministri distribuunt vnicuique praesentium vt participet eum in quo gratiae actae sunt Panem Vinum et Aquam Sequitur Nam Apostoli in commentarijs a se scriptis quae Euangelia vocantur ita tradiderunt praecepisse sibi Iesum They that we call Deacons and Ministers doe distribute to euerie one that is present the sanctified Bread Wine Water to be made partaker thereof For the Apostles in their Commentaries that is in the Ghospels haue taught vs that Iesus so commaunded them to minister the holy Communion Haymo an auncient Father and learned Byshoppe hath these expresse wordes Ego N. accepi â— Domino quod et tradidi vobis id est mysterium corporis et sanguinis Domini quomodo debeatis sumere sicut mihi reuelauit ita tradidi vobis For I haue receiued of the Lord that which I deliuered to you that is the mysterie of our Lords Body Blood in what maner yee ought to receiue it Euen as he reuealed it to mee so haue I deliuered it to you Thus write these holy auncient learned Fathers very resolutely and plainely teaching vs that Christ commaunded all sortes of people to Communicate vnder both kindes I therefore must conclude with this ineuitable illation That seeing the Communion vnder one kind was not an Article of popish Fayth for the space of 1414. yeares after Christ as is already prooued it both is and must perforce be so reputed a very rotten ragge of the New religion The .13 Chapter of Popish priuate Masse B. C. THE Minister speaketh of the dreadfull Mysteries as homely as though he were talking of the English Communion which is had in such high reuerence that the fragmentes remayning are appoynted for the Ministers priuate vses and leaue giuen him to feed with them his Chickens or to soppe his Pottage T. B. I answere first that our cogging Iesuite is as vnreuerent in speaking as he is impudent and shamelesse in lying Secondly that all wise discreete and zelous Christians in our Churches doe come with more true reuerence to our holy Communion which we acknowledge to be sacramentally Christes true Body and pretious Blood then Papistes doe in the Romish Church to their transubstantiated Bread-god Thirdly that the Papistes giue leaue to Dogges Mice and Rattes to eate the remainder of their Bread-gods in so much that Petrus Lombardus their reuerend Maister of Sentences not able to expresse what the Mouse doth eate answereth to the great mysticall difficultie in these wordes Deus noâ—u God knoweth what the Mouse doth eate Fourthly that God by the mouth of holy Moses pronounced to the Isâ—â—eâ—uâ— that the remnant of the Meat-offering should be Aaron and his Sonnes And the reason is added immediately in these expresse wordes For it is most Holy of the Lordes Offeringes made by Fire Againe in an other place thus The Priest that offereth any mans Burnt offering shall haue the Skinne of the Burnt offering which he hath offered And all the Meate offering that
and his successors and that their fayth can not fayle B. C. What followeth What but that Bell hath abused the good Reader with an vntrueth T. B. I answere that this in very deed followeth and that of meere necessitie that our Iesuiticall Fryer is a most impudent and shamelesse lyer Which thing I haue prooued againe againe in euery Chapter most euidently I therfore must perforce conclude that seeing the late Byshops of Rome Pius Paulus Iulius haue taken in hand roundly and most Antichristianly as I haue prooued in my Tryal and more at large in the Downe-fall of Poperie to dissolue that Matrimonie which the true Church of God durst neuer dissolue for the space of more then fifteene hundred yeares after Christ the same can be nothing else but a very filthy rotten Ragge of the New Religion The 30. Chapter of the Popes pretended Superioritie ouer and aboue a generall Councell B. C. BELL beginning with false asseueration to tell vs of the late opinion of the Popes Superioritie ouer a Generall Councell interlaceth also an other shamelesse vntrueth against the Rhemists T. B. I answere that our Fryer still continueth one and the selfe-same man that is to say an impudent and shamelesse lyar as he first began For within foure lines hee compriseth and coucheth two most notorious Lyes The former is touching the late Opinion of the Popes Superioritie ouer a generall Councell I affirme that the Popish opinion which holdeth the Pope to be aboue a generall Councell is a late vpstart Fayth and Doctrine neuer knowne to the Church of God for the space of more then fourteene hundred yeares after Christ. This our Fryer calleth a False asseueration but prooueth it not at all Hee is an honest man we may if we will beleeue his bare word But I by the power of God shall prooue the contrary to be the trueth and that out of hand The latter is concerning the Rhemistes which shall be cleared God willing by and by B. C. The Rhemists quoth hee that Iesuited brood tell vs plainely if we will beleeue them that there is no necessitie of a Generall or Prouinciall Councell saue onely for the better contentation of the people Thus hee chargeth them yet not noting any particular place But I will helpe him it is in their Annotations vpon the Actes T. B. I answere that our Fryer sheweth himselfe what he is aswell heere as else where He is so full of Charitie forsooth that he will needes helpe me for his owne intended gaine though he be thereby prooued a lying swaine for in the next Page following hee hath these expresse wordes This vntrueth the Minister had set abroach once afore in his Downe-fall and quoteth the place very orderly in this manner Rhemes test in Act. 15. Loe in one page our Fryer chargeth me of purpose to haue omitted the quotation so to delude and deceiue the Reader In an other page he graunteth freely that I haue set it downe very orderly Behold this changeable Camelion who both accuseth and acquitteth me with one breath Concerning the slaundering of the Rhemists wherewith he chargeth me this is mine answere that in very deede the slaunder fitly agreeth to himselfe which he would vntruely impose vpon mee I prooue it First Because the Rhemists plainely declare their meaning in this briefe Marginall note Though the Sea Apostolique it selfe say the Rhemists haue the same assistance yet Councels be also necessarie for many causes In which wordes they graunt as much in effect as I either affirme or require Secondly because the causes which our Rhemists name may easily be reduced to that one of mine viz. For the better contentation of the people for the controuersie is this Whether the Popes Iudgement be infallible in it selfe without a Generall Councell or no. The Rhemists answere that Papistes hold the affirmatiue viz. That the Popes Iudgement is infallible and is assisted of God euen as a generall Councell Thirdly that if the Papistes will stand to the deny all of mine Assertion then must they perforce grant against them-selues which willingly they would not that they haue no infallible trueth in their Church saue onely the Determination of a generall Councell I heare it I receiue it I like it I willingly subscribe vnto it Let the Papistes therefore defend this Doctrine That the Popes Iudgement without a generall Councell is fallible that he may Iudicially erre and be deceiued and let a lawfull generall Councell determine all controuersies and no doubt all Christians in the world will yeeld thereunto But Sir Fryer Hic labor hoc opus est For in these last and worst dayes of ours the Pope will stay at home and whatsoeuer or howsoeuer the Councelles shal decree yet must nothing be of force saue that onely which the Pope liketh to confirme as he sitteth in his Chaire at Rome This I haue prooued at large in the Downe-fall of Poperie and in my Christian Dialogue by euident demonstrations B. C. What can Bell fetch from Alphonsus to iustifie his iniurious charge of the Rhemists Alphonsus was one of those Diuines that thinke the infallibilitie of Iudgement to be in a Councell and not in the Pope alone And hee bringeth this reason Because otherwise it were in vaine with so great labour to assemble so many Byshops togeather This informeth vs very well what Alphonsus his opinion was But where doth hee say that the Rhemistes teach that the Determination of a generall Councell is needlesse saue onely for the better contentation of the people because the Popes Iudgement is infallible Hee speaketh not one word of the Rhemists and no marueile for he could not being dead many a faire day before the Rhemes Testament was published T. B. I answere that I can fetch so much from the famous and learned Papist Alphonsus as is able to kill the Pope with all his Jesuites and Iesuited Popelinges For first the Pope with his Jesuites and Jesuited Popelinges auouch most impudently and would enforce all Christians to beleeue the same that Christ built his Church vpon S. Peter and vpon his successors the Byshops of Rome and also that Christ prayed for Peter and for the Byshops of Rome that their Fayth should neuer fayle But Alphonsus condemneth that opinion for Hereticall while hee affirmeth the infallibilitie of Fayth to rest in a generall Councell not in the Pope alone Secondly Alphonsus confuteth the Rhemists most soundly euidently while he affirmeth generall Councels to be gathered in vaine if the Popes Determination and iudgement were infallible Thirdly Alphoâ—sus is one of those Learned popish Writers euen by the Iesuites free confession in this place which I wish the Reader neuer to forget who defende the trueth with vs against the Pope his Iesuites and all his Iesuiteâ— Popelinges For I doe not hold or defend any Article or poynt of Doctrine as I haue often sayd and heere our Fryer vnawares graunteth the same such is the
Church while euery one of them sought with might and maine to be the Pope of Rome For the Councell lamenting the Schisme and greatly desiring to stablish vnitie peace in the Church vsed the chiefest and last remedie in that behalfe that is they deposed the three contentious Popes Iohn Gregory and Benedict and chosing Martin made him Pope by their supereminent power And to take away al Schisme dissentions difficulties doubtes suspitions and future garboyles which might perhappes haue insued therevpon the Councell decreed and constantly defined that a generall Councell in causes Ecclesiasticall had the greatest power vpon earth and consequently power and authoritie ouer the Pope euen to cite him to excommunicate him and to depose him And therefore De facto they deposed the three aforenamed Popes and placed Martin in their stead Maister Doctor Gerson a famous and great learned Papist maketh this case so plaine in many places of his workes as none that with iudgement and indifferencie shall peruse the same can stagger or stand in doubt thereof these are his expresse wordes Ecclesia vel generale Concilium eam reprasentans est regula a spiritu sancto directa tradita a Christo vt quilibet cuiuscunque status etiam Papalis existat cam audire ac eidem obedire teneatur alioquin habendus est vt Ethnicus et Publicanus The Church or generall Councell representing it is a rule directed of the holy Ghost and giuen vs of Christ that euery one of what state soeuer euen Papall must heare and obey the same or else be reputed as an Ethnicke and Publican Againe in another place the same Doctor hath these words Iohannes Papa non est accusatus vel conuictus de Heretica prauitate et tamen concilium vocauit et iudicauit ipsum tanquaÌ„ suuÌ„ subditum vnde et in toto processu vsque post sententiam definitiuam suae depositionis reputatus est ab eodem concilio verus Papa Pope John was neither accused nor conuicted of Heresie and for all that the Councell both called and iudged him as their Subiect Wherevpon the Councell reputed him the true Pope in all the time of their proceeding against him vntill after the definitiue sentence of his Deposition In an other place the same Learned Writer hath these wordes In causis fidei non habetur in terra Index infallibilis vel qui non sit deuiabilis a fide de lege communi praeter ipsum Ecclesiam vniuersalem vel ConciliuÌ„ generale eam sufficienter repraesentans In matters of Fayth there is no infallible Iudge vpon earth or which can not swarue from the Fayth by the common course of Gods proceedinge sauing the Church vniuersall or a generall Councell representing the same sufficiently In an other place he hath these wordes Ecclesia vel generale Concilium potuit et potest congregari sine expresso consensu vel mandato Papae etiam ritè electi et viuentis in multis câ—sibus The Church or a generall Councell both might and may be called togeather without the expresse consent or mandate of the Pope euen when the Pope is lawfully elected liuing Thus disputeth this famous Papist and great learned Doctor Out of whose wordes I gather many very excellent documentes well worthy to be written in Golden letters First that the Pope is subiect to a generall Councell and may be controlled by the same Secondly that the Pope may erre both priuately and publiquely in resolutions of Fayth aswell as other Byshopps and Ministers of the Church Thirdly that a generall Councell is aboue the Pope and hath power to depose the Pope for any notorious Crime whatsoeuer Fourthly that the contrary opinion is flatte Heresie condemned in the Councell of Constance Fiftly that a generall Councell hath full power to compell a Pope lawfully elected to renounce and forsake the Popedome and to giue place to him whom the Councell shall appoynt and choose Sixtly that if the Pope shall withstand the Councell and refuse to obey the Decrees and Constitutions thereof he ought and must be excommunicated and reputed as an Ethnicke and Publican Seuenthly that a generall Councell may be summoned and kept without the consent of the Pope euen of that Pope who is both lawfully chosen and at time liuing Eightly that all people are subiect to a lawfull generall Councell euen by Christes owne rule and designement Ninthly that neither the Pope nor any one man vpon earth is or can be an infallible Iudge in matters of Fayth Tenthly that the iudgement which we must finally rest vpon in all controuersies of Fayth and Religion is either the iudgement of the vniuersall Church or else of a generall Councell sufficiently representing the same This is found and very Catholike doctrine though proceeding from the Penne of a great Papist Which Doctrine as the Councell of Constience first and after it the Councell of Basill did approoue by their flat decrees so doe I reuerently embrace the same with all my heart humbly thanking God that by the mighty power of his trueth our aduersaries are compelled to confesse the trueth against them-selues This Doctrine is confirmed more at large both in my Anatomie and in my Golden Ballance to say nothing of my Christian Dialogue which woundeth the Pope at the very heart From hence proceedeth that which will seeme to many a woonderment of the world But what is that will some say This forsooth that all Papistes this day liuing are flat Heretiques Is it so in deede Is that possible to be prooued It is so possible that I haue euen now prooued the same most euidently And thus the most simple Reader in the world shall easily perceiue the same The generall Councell of Constance decreed plainely that the Popes Iudgement is fallible that the Pope is subiect to a generall Synode and by the authoritie thereof may be depriued of the Popedome as also that the contrary opinion is flatte Heresie This is alreadie prooued Now so it is that all Papistes this day liuing vpon earth doe hold the Popes Iudgement to be infallible and himselfe to be aboue a generall Councell So say the Rhemistes so sayth our Iesuite euen in the end of his Chapter next afore-going being the 29. in number Ergo seeing all Iesuites and Iesuited Papistes doe this day hold and defende that opinion which a generall Councell hath defined to be flatte Heresie it followeth by a most necessarie consequence and ineuitable illation that they all are flat Heretiques it can not be denyed Deo gratias dixi B. C. And before we prooued how Pope Leo irritated and made of no force a Decree enacted in the Councell of Chalcedon which argueth his Superioritie ouer the Councell T. B. I answere first that this assertion and opinion of our Fryer is a flatte Heresie as it is euen now prooued and that most euidently Secondly that this sottish allegation is confuted againe and againe in the
hath bestowed almost one whole Leafe of Paper in the recitall of my wordes Transeat It is impertinent B. C. If he inferre against our Ceremonies as he doth because they were instituted since Christ though very auncient That they be rotten rags of the New religion What shall become of their Ceremonies which either be borrowed from vs or of farre latter date What can they be else but pil◠patches of Protestanisme rusty Ragges of the Reformed congregation Nay what must their Communion Booke it selfe be neuer heard of in the whole world till the late dayes of King Edward the sixt and drawen from our Portesse and Masse-bookes as the thing it selfe speaketh and their Geneua Ghospellers often cast in their teeth T. B. I answere first that our Jesuite vnawares giueth Poperie a deadly wound while he maketh popish Masse and the Oath which popish Byshoppes make to the Pope to be no weighty poyntes of Religion For they are within the compasse of the eleuen Chapters of which he writeth in this manner These Chapters I shall soone dispatch seeing they concerne not any weighty poyntes of Religion but Ceremonies and such like Secondly that seeing by Popish free graunt neither popish Masse nor the popish Oath be matters of any weight to which I for my part willingly agree it followeth of necessitie that the Pope is a most cruell Tyrant while he suffereth no Byshoppes to haue voyces in Councels but such as take that wofull Oath As also while he burneth with Fire and Faggot all such as will not adore the popish Bread-god in the Idolatrous popish Masse Thirdly that our Fryer Jesuite is still like himselfe that is a most notorious lyer while he chargeth me to tearme all Ceremonies instituted since Christ though very auncient to be rotten Ragges of the New religion For I am so farre and so free from this false and plaine Diabolicall accusation as I approoue all Ceremonies consonant to Gods word at what time soeuer the Church did institute the same None that shall duely peruse my Regiment of the Church can be ignorant hereof Nay I say further that the Jesuite is not able to bring any one sentence out of any one of all my Bookes which denyeth Authoritie to the Church to institute new Ceremonies at any time so the same be consonant to Gods word and profitable for the circumstaunces of time place and persons Yea the Iesuite confesseth within twentie lines before this false and heynous slaunder that this is the very doctrine which I teach But his witte is so besotted in fighting and bickering against the manifest trueth that he forgetteth what he writeth so soone as a new reason pricketh him for he had rather heape lyes vpon lyes and slaunders vpon slaunders then forsake and condemne their gainefull Poperie which is to him and his fellowes as was the Temple of Diana to Demetrius and the other Craftes-men Fourthly that we vse no Ceremonies in our English Church but such as are both agreeable to the holy Scriptures and of farre greater antiquitie then the time of Poperie which I oppugne Albeit I doe not absolutely condemne all Ceremonies this day vsed in the Romish Church but respectiuely as they are superstitiously vsed and too vnlawfull or at least ridiculous or vnprofitable endes For I willingly graunt that sundry Ceremonies now vsed in the Romish Church are thinges indifferent of their owne nature and that the same were not to be condemned if the superstitious abuse and wicked intentes for which they are done were wholly remooued from them Where I wish the Reader to marke attentiuely these my words Absolutely Respectiuely Fiftly that in our Communion Booke two thinges must distinctly be obserued and Christianly distinguished viz. the Essentiall and the Accidentall partes thereof Touching the partes Essentiall they are all and euery of them as old as is the written Word of God it selfe The Aduersaries are not able to giue any true instance against the same Touching the partes Accidentall they are all in like manner old in the thing it selfe though of later date in the modification of the thing Thus in playner tearmes All the accidentall partes of our English Communion booke if we respect the matter it selfe conteined therein are as old as the holy Scripture it selfe though of farre latter date if we respect the order and disposition of the same This my Answere is grounded vpon this doctrine of S. Paul Omnia ad aedificationem fiant Omnia honestè et secundum ordinem fiant in vobis Let all thinges be done to edifying Let all thinges be done decently and according to order Sixtly that our Communion booke is drawne from the holy Scriptures as is already prooued and from the old Romane Missals or Communion-bookes in the Purer age of the Church long before the time of idolatrous and superstitious Poperie which I in all my Bookes oppugne B. C. More then foure hundred yeares before the time of S. Gregorie the auncient Brytaines receiued the same manner of seruing God from the blessed Pope and Martyr S. Eleutherius that is in the Latin tongue Which appeareth first because venerable Bede reporteth that there was not any materiall difference betwixt S. Austen sent by S. Gregorie and the Brytaine Byshops saue onely in Baptisme and the obseruation of Easter Secondly for that certaine it is that they had also since S. Austens time the Masse in the Latin tongue But to thinke that if they had been once in possession of the seruice in their owne vulgar Language that they could haue been brought from that without infinite garboyles especially the opposition betwixt them and the English Saxons in auncient time considered or that if any such contention had fallen out that it could haue been omitted by the curious Pennes of our Historiographers it were great simplicitie once to surmise Wherefore what followeth but that they receiued that custome at their first conuersion which was within lesse then two hundred yeares after Christ And consequently that by Bels allowance and the common Computation of others it is sound Catholique and Apostolicall and not any Rotten ragge of a New religion as this Ragge-maister gableth And that on the contrary to haue the publique Seruice in the vulgar tongue is a New patch of Protestanisme fetched from Wittenberge or that Mart of Martinistes the holy City of Geneua T. B. I answere first that I haue prooued already in the sixteene Chapter aforegoing that in the primatiue and auncient Church the publique Prayers and diuine Seruice were euery where in the vulgar Tongue Secondly that the Latin tongue was then vulgar to all the Nations of Italy Spaine Germanie France Africa and other Countries of the West For in those dayes the Latin tongue was commonly spoken and vnderstood wheresoeuer the diuine Seruice was in Latine Which is plaine and euident by S. Austens Doctrine in many places of his workes Thirdly that if the
Brytaines did at their conuersion receiue the Latine Seruice first by Eleutherius about the yeare 179. after Christ and againe by Gregorie about the 596. yeare yet can no more be truely inferred therevpon if we graunt the Latine tongue to haue been then decayed in Brytaine same onely that the Romanes deliuered their Church-seruice in the Latine tongue which then was their vulgar Language being altogeather ignoraunt of the Brytaine tongue and that the Brytaine for the loue they bore to the publique Prayers and Church-seruice which they receiued at their conuersion to the Christian faith did euer after vse and retaine the same in the Latine tongue in which they first receiued it Fourthly that seeing by Christes commandement deliuered by his Apostle All thinges in the Church ought to be done to edification it followeth of necessitie that the Latine vsage of the Brytaines in diuine Seruice was a Ragge of a New religion as which was about 179. yeares younger then the old and repugnant to Apostolicall doctrine For S. Paul spendeth no lesse then one whole Chapter that only to prooue that euery Nation ought to haue their Church-seruice in their vulgar knowne tongue If the Trumpet sayth he giue an vncertaine sound who shall prepare him selfe to the Warre So likewise you except ye vtter by the tongue manifest speech how shall it be knowne what is spâ—ken for ye shall speake in the ayre Againe thus If I know not the meaning of the voyce I shall be to him that speaketh an Aliant and he that speaketh shall be an Aliant to mee Againe thus Wherefore let him that speaketh with the tongue pray that he may interpret For if I pray with the tongue my spirit prayeth but my vnderstanding is without fruite Where I wish the Reader to obserue with me that the Spirit in this place is taken for the spirituall gift of Tongues as S. Chrysostome vpon this place doth witnesse S. â—heophilact is consonant to S. Chrysostome He calleth the Gift the Spirit sayth Theodorus My Spirit prayeth that is my spirituall Gift to speake with Tongues sayth Phoâ—us Againe thus If thou blesse with the Spirit how shall he that occupieth the roome of the vnlearned say Amen at the giuing of thankes seeing he vnderstandeth not what thou sayeth Againe thus I had rather speake fiue wordes with my vnderstanding in the Church that J may instruct others then ten thousand wordes in an vnknowen tongue Againe thus Let all things be done to edification Fourthly that our Jesuite gableth as a lying pratler while he impudently auoucheth that by Bels allowance the Latine vse in Church-seruice where the people vnderstand it not is found Catholique and Apostolicall For Bell hath plainely prooued it to be vnsound Prophane and Diabolicall as also that the vse of publique Seruice in the vulgar Tongue came neither from Wittenberge nor Geneua But from the Primitiue Apostolicall and succeding Churches for many hundred yeares togeather Whosoeuer shall with a single eye and sound iudgement peruse the Sixteene chapter afore-going and ioyne my Suruey with it can not but cleerely behold as in a Glasse of Christall the trueth to be as I haue written Lyranus a famous and great learned Papist in his learned Commentaries vpon S. Pauls Epistles doth so plainely so constantly affirme that in the Primatiue Church the publique Prayers and all other thinges were in the vulgar Tongue as none that shall read him seriously can possibly stand in doubt thereof Yea S. Basil auoucheth expressely that the Egyptians the Lybians the Thebanes the Palestines the Arabians the Phaenicians the Syrians and generally all Christian Nations of what Language soeuer they were had their common Prayers and Seruice in their vulgar Tongue But our Rhemishes obiect S. Pauls words against S. Paul in this manner Also when a man prayeth in a strange Tongue which himselfe vnderstandeth not it is not so fruitfull for instruction to him as it be knâ—w particularly what he prayed Neuerthelesse the Apostle forbiddeth not such praying neither confessing that his spirit heart and affection prayeth well towardes God though his minde and vnderstanding be not profited to instruction as otherwise it might haue been if he vnderstood the wordes Neither yet doth he appoynt such a one to get his strange Prayers translated into his vulgar Tongue to obtaine thereby the aforesaid instruction To this I answere first that I haue alreadie prooued out of S. Chrysostome and other Fathers Theodoretus Theophilactus and Photius that S. Paul doth not vnderstand by the word Spirit the Heart and Affection but the Spirituall gift to speake with Tongues Secondly that it is cleare by many textes of the Apostle that the word Spirit doth so signifie as I haue sayd Thirdly that if we should graunt the Spirit to signifie Heart and Affection as the Rhemistes absurdly expound it yet could not that serue their turne because S. Paul willeth to pray not onely with Spirit but also with minde and vnderstanding As also for that S. Paul in an other text commaundeth expressely That all thinges â—e done in the Church to edifying Which is no other Doctrine indeed then Christ himselfe teacheth in his holy Ghospell This people saith he draweth neere vnto me with their mouth and honoureth me with the lippes but their heart is farre from me Fourthly that the Apostle commaundeth him that hath the gift of Tongues to pray that he may interpret his strange tongue himselfe or that some other should interpret it or else to keepe silence in the Church For this cause doth S. Chrysostome constantly affirme that Prayers not vnderstood of him that vttereth them are altogeather vnprofitable Thou seest sayth he how by litle and litle he is come to this poynt that he declareth him to be vnprofitable not onely to others but also to him selfe seeing the minde of such a man is voyde of fruite For if a man speake onely in the Persians Language or in any other strange Tongue and doe not vnderstand those things which he speaketh he shall be to himselfe as he that vnderstandeth not the meaning of the voyce This and much more to the like effect sayth S. Chrysostome of those that had the gifts of Tongues and vnderstood not what they spake What thinke you sir Fryer would he haue sayd if he had heard the vnlearned Papistes babling on their Beades and Primers what they did not vnderstand Nay if he had heard that which now adayes is very frequent among the vnlearned Papistes both men and women how they choppe and change clippe and mangle the wordes so as they either haue a contrarie or ridiculous sense or else plaine none at all but stand as Cyphers and Voces non significatiuae For this is a truth so well knowne as it can not without blushing be denied that many popish Priestes haue been so ignoraunt that they neither vnderstood their Portesses
nor their Missals nor their Absolutions no nor yet the wordes of Baptisme Hence sprang this curious question euen among the Popish Schoole-men viz. If the Child were truely Baptized when the ignoraunt Baptizer did vtter the words in this manner Ego to baptizo in nomine Patria et Filia et Spiritui Sancta In briefe the Popish Councell of Lateran vnder Pope Innocentius the third decreed flatly strictly commaunded all Byshoppes who within their iurisdictions had Nations of diuers Tongues Rites and Manners vnder one Fayth to prouide meete men to celebrate diuine Seruice vnto them according to the diuersitie of their Rites and Languages By which Popish Decree it is cleare and euident that foure hundred yeares are not yet expired since the Pope approoued publique Seruice in all vulgar Languages B. C. The Minister very profoundly scoffeth both at other partes of the Masse and also at these following writing thus Gregorie added the Kyrie eleyson Telesphorus Gloria in excelsis Deo Gelasius the Collectes Hieronymus the Epistle and Ghospell The Creede was receiued of the Nicene Councell Pope Sergius the Agnus Dei. After this he concludeth both of these and others which he there mentioneth as the Introite Halleluia the Commemoration of the Dead Incense and the Pax in this maner This being so I can not but conclude that euery patch peece of the Romish Fayth is but a Rotten ragge of the New religion So earnest he is to make euery peece of the Masse a Rotten ragge that he hath also made many partes of their owne Communion-booke Patches and Peeces and Rotten ragges In which Kyrie eleyson Gloria in excelsis the Collectes Epistle and Ghospell Nicene Creede and Agnus Dei be found no lesse then in our Masse-bookes T. B. I answere first that some of the Patches of the Popish Masse heeâ—e recited are Hereticall some Superstitious some Ridiculous as I haue else-where prooued at large Secondly that the Kyrie eleyson the Epistle and Gholpell Gloria in excelsis Nicene Creede Agnus Dei and the Collects which our Church vseth are all wholly conteyned in the holy Scriptures and consequently they are damnable in the Popish Church though commendable in ours For we finding them in holy Writte vse them according to S. Paules rule in that behalfe But the Papists prophane them many wayes First because they prohibite their vse in all vulgar Tongues Secondly because they teach the people erroneous Doctrine labouring to perswade them euery where that they may not haue their publique Prayers and Seruice in their knowne vulgar Tongues Thirdly because they abuse them superstitiously many wayes For they must say the Epistle in one corner of the Alter the Ghospell in the other the Creed in the middest and so foorth The rest they may learne of Byshoppe Durand the Patrone of all Popish Superstition To which I adde for a superstitious merriment That neither the Layicall people nor yet their Popish Deacons in their deuout Prayers may for ten thousand pounds once say and pronounce these words Dominus vobiscuÌ„ The words doe signifie The Lord be with you And for al that the Pope being as Superstitious as Superstition it selfe doth strictly forbid all Deacons to pronouÌ„ce the said words vntil they be made popish Priests This in briefe is my answere viz. that Kyrie eleyson Gloria in excelsis Agnus Dei the Epistles and Ghospels with the Nicene Creede and Collectes are all lawfully vsed in our Church but most shamefully abused in the Popish Church They are most Christian and commendable as they are in them selues absolutely considered but yet most damnable while they are superstitiously abused and against Gods Commaundement by his Apostle giuen vs which strictly requireth all thinges in the Church-seruice to be done to the peoples edification B. C. I omit heere how falsely and blaspheamously he concludeth euery peece of the Masse to be Rotten ragges For are the wordes of Consecration the most essentiall part thereof which came not from any man but from the institution of Christ himselfe as also the Pater noster Rotten ragges Who durst say it but sir Thomas T. B. I answere first that I haue alreadie concluded not falsely but truely not blaspheamously but Christianly that euery patch and peece of Popish Masse as Popish Masse marke well this reduplication is a Rotten ragge of the New Religion Secondly that the wordes of Popish Consecration are but onely fiue in number one of which for all that came from pure Man or rather from the impure Deuill of Hell For who but the Deuill himselfe durst insert among Christes most sacred wordes a word of his owne inuention especially in a matter of so great weight consequence It is a common maxiome receiued of all Diuines generally aswell of Papistes as of others that no inferiour hath power ouer the Law of his superiour And consequently that the Pope hath no power to adde diminish choppe or change any word of Christes sacred Institution vnlesse he either be God or at least equall with him Thirdly that the holy words This is my body came not from Christ as they are a part of the late Romish Masse I proue it soundly Because our Sauiour Christ did not vtter them vntill he had blessed and consecrated the Bread For doubtlesse if it be true as it is most true because the Trueth it selfe hath spoken it that Christ had blessed and consecrated the Bread before he vttered the same wordes it followeth of necessitie it cannot be denied that they are not the wordes of Consecration as the Papistes grossely and fondly doe imagine For in Christes holy Institution many thinges went before the wordes of Popish supposed Consecration First he tooke the Bread Secondly he blessed it Thirdly he brake it Fourthly he gaue it to his Disciples Fiftly he commaunded them to take and to eate it All which being done in order he vttered the Popish so supposed Consecration wordes So then seeing in that Masse which Christ instituted for I receyue aswell the word Masse with the Latine Fathers as the word Liturgie with the Greeke Doctors in their true sense and meaning these wordes Hoc est corpus meum were not the wordes of Consecration it followeth by a consequence ineuitable that the popish Masse in which they are made the wordes of Consecration is a false forged Masse and the New religion in very deed This Doctrine thus deliuered may be confirmed many wayes First because the best learned Papists are at their wittes end and put to their best last trumpe what they shal thinke say or write of the effectiue words of popish Consecration For the famous popish Byshop and great learned Doctor Josephus Angles euen in that Booke which he dedicated to the Pope him selfe relateth foure seuerall popish opinions concerning this present Subiect These are his wordes borrowed of Alexander and Aquinas Prima est Innocentij asserentis per
not daring indeed to accept the Challenge and to encounter me seeketh by fond cauils and shamelesse euasions to instill into the eares and heartes of their silly deuoted Vassals that I will not because I dare not performe my promise And for the better effecting of their purpose they require of me that which I neuer promised yea that whereof my selfe am altogeather ignoraunt and no way able to performe For how can I performe that which I doe not know I must forsooth procure him a safe conduct to dispute with that equitie and fauour which was graunted to the Protestantes in France Marke for Christes sake how feard our Iesuite is to accept the Challenge First hee dareth not put downe in print his name and addition A tricke of Iesuiticall or rather Diabolicall pollicie I must procure a safe conduct for B. C. Some bloody cut-throate I thinke hee be Yet I must not know whether hee be a Man or a Monster whether Pope Iohn the Woman or some Deuill incarnate of a Popish Nunne Besides this I must accept of such slye conditions as he addeth to my Challenge so as he may be at libertie to slippe the Halter when and as he list Whereby who seeth not that by all meanes he auoydeth to dispute or bicker with mee Fourthly that the Iesuite and his Jesuited complices haue a long time intended and still labour by vngodly and indirect meanes to take away my life from me and so to stoppe me from further writing against their rotten Poperie Yea in his Preface he protesteth lustily that hee hath prouided a Winding-sheete for the shrowding of my Carcase and that he will with all speed make ready my blacke Funerall And it seemeth so in very deed For vpon the 13. of Iune instant 1609. euen immediately after I had finished this Catholique Triumph there came a friendly Letter but without name vnto my handes and a Packet with Siluer in it which the man namelesse pretended he had borrowed of me c. The circumstaunces were such quae nunc non est narrandi locus that neither my selfe nor others durst open the Packet as hauing apparant inducementes to suspect Poyson Pestilence or other like infection Diabolicall Thus much I thought good in briefe to insinuate to the Readers that they may thereby see and perceiue how vnable the Papistes are to defende their late vpstart Poperie as who know no better meanes but by seeking most cruelly to murder all such as stand in their way God make me firme and constant in the trueth and God defend me and all professors of his holy trueth from Popish sauage crueltie and in the end bring vs to endlesse felicitie Amen Amen FINIS Fiue Bookes were printed but hid vnder a Pipkin least they should be seene or burnt with the Sunne My Booke of Motyues and Booke of Suruey Forerunner pag 15. To what end were they written but to be published This Church of Rome hath foulely corrupted the old Romane Religion which our Church hath reformed A.D. 527. A.D. 1084. The Papistes ascribe saluation to popish Monkry Bruno the author of a new popish sect Hence Poperie is conuinced to be the new Religion A.D. 1335. A.D. 1119. A.D. 1170. A.D. 1198. A.D. 1206. A.D. 1371. A.D. 1540. Ignatius Loyola was the father of Iesuites these proud lordly Fryers Behold the Iesuites liuelie purtrayed in their best beseeming colours Note well my Anatomy The Fathers of the African Councell did stoutly controule the Byshops of Rome for their forgerie of false Canons The Byshop of Romes authoritie limitted by the Councell of Nice Hence sprang the Byshop of Romes falsely pretended Primacie The Emperours were deceiued and so gaue away their royall prerogatiues A.D. 528. Vniuersall Byshop A.D. 607. A.D. 1550. A.D. 1418. A.D. 1566. A.D. 1161. Chap. 4. Of the Popes Pardons Chapt. 5. Of popish Purgatorie Chap. 6. Of Auricular confession Chap. 7. Of Veniall sinnes Chap. 8. Of the Popes fayth Chap. 9. Of the condigne Merite of Workes Chap. 10. Of Transubstantiation Chap. 11. Of popish inuocation of Saintes The Iesuite only snatcheth at such peeces as he thinketh he may best deale withal B.C. pag. 2. 〈…〉 apud 〈…〉 3 cap. 32. O the most monstrous lye in the world God of his mercy either conuert or confound the lyer Secundo principaliter Ioh 12. ver 41. Euseb. hist. lib. 3. cap. 32. Vpon my saluation the Iesuite hath most impudently belyed mee The Iesuite is as honest as he that hath no trueth at all in him Nomb. 16. vers 24.30 Out vpon all lying trayterous Iesuits Poperie can not in trueth be defended it is the new Religion The Iesuite beginneth continueth and endeth with lying Epiphan haer 68. p. 213. Apud Aug. epist. â—1 13.14.17.18.25.30 Aug. ep 76. Aug. ep 77. Apud CypriaÌ„ pag. 11.46.61.66 Valla. de don Constant. â—ol 34. B. Act. 16. In breuiario cap. â—1 Act. 16. Pag. 10. The Iesuite is full of notorious lyes Act. 16. pag. 21â— Liberatus cap. 13. pag. 621. in Breâ—iar Cap. 12. pag. 620. Cap. 23. pag. 630. Cap. 12. Pag. 20. A.D. 457. A.D. 327. Quinto principaliter Theod. hist. lib. 5. cap. 10. Theod. hist. lib. 5. cap. 9. A.D. 371. Sixto principaliter Notetur cap. 2 in conclus â—0 valde Fuerunt 630. episcopi in Chalcedone A.D. 457. Act. 16. pag. 212. The Byshop of Rome the chiefest Patriarke but yet vnder the Emperour as other Byshops else where Act. 16. pag. 208. Concil 1. Constant. A.D. 383. Celebratum Marke this The Byshop of Rome was made the chiefe Patriarcke because Rome was the head of the Empire Concil prim Constantinop Can. 5. et habetur dist 22. cap. Constantinop ciuitatis Honoris primatum Marke this poynt well Concil primum Constantinop A D. 383. celebratum Epist. ad Damasum The Iesuite prooueth himselfe a noddy Euery Arch-byshop is Byshop of Byshops in a godly sense meaning Marke well the next Chapter Dist. 99. cap. primae sedis Dist. 99. cap. Nullus Let these decrees of the Popes be neuer forgotten Gratian Dist 99. cap. ecce Floruit Greg. A.D. 591. The Byshop of Rome is confounded Concil Chalc. A. D 455. celebratum Our Fryer slaundreth the primitiue Church Our Fryer confuteth himselfe See the tryall and marke it well It is new for that it coÌ„meth short by more then 400. yeares of the time of S. Peters doctrine The newnesse of Religion may be considered two wayes The word or name Pope is a ragge of the new religion The name was old as coÌ„mon to al Byshops but not as proper to one O Fryer great is thy malice against the truth Ioh. 10. v. 28.29.30 Mat. 9.6 Ioh. 1. v 14. B.C. pag. 12. Let the Fryers confession be well remembred pag. 12. The protestation of the Duke of Saxonie and of the rest Read and marke well the antepast Gratian. Dist. 40. cap. si papa The Pope may not be iudged though he carry many thousands of men into Hell fire Vict. relect 4. depotest Papae
Platina Carranza Sigeberius Nanclerus Marke well the answere Petr. Dam. Mar. Polonus The Buffaloes are Beastes as terrible as Lyons Many yet liuing know this to be most true The Iesuit Alphonsus was then the Maister of the English Colledge A thing neuer heard nor knowne before Iohn 4 v. 24. 1. Iohn 5. v. 14. Sap. 8.1 Ephes. 1. v. 4.11 Rom. 9. v. 11.15.16 c. Ephes. 6.12 Act. 9. v. 1.2.3 c. Act. 8. v. 1.3 See the Anatomie for this point and note it well Loe the Fryer confoundeth both himselfe and his Pope The Author with the Church of England defendeth euery iote of the old Romane Religion Three very Memorable pointes See the oath Infra Cap. 27. All must be as the Pope will See the Oath which Bishops make to the Pope infra Cap. 27. The Popes pretended prerogatiues must euer be defended Rhemistes in Act. 15. The Pope can not erre The Pope in the Church say the Iesuites S. R. pag. 281. marke this well When Papists speake of the Church they euer meane the pope The Iesuite cuts the Popes throate Marke well the answere See my Booke of Motiues Cap. 8. The Popish Church holdeth no poynts of fayth Marke well for Christes sake this poynt of doctrine The first Corollarie The second Corollarie All this is meere folly Praecedunt ista in B.C. page 86. Marke this confession The Pope as Pope by Popish graunt can not erre Vnderstand this poynt well for Christes sake See and note well my ChristiaÌ„ Dialogue Chap. 2. Pag 14. Argumentum ad hominem See and note well the 29. the 30. Chapters Christ neuer prayed that the Pope should not erre This DileÌ„ma is insoluble S.R. Pag 315. Pag. 417. Loe we must beleeue his doctrine that is an Heretike See and note my Reply to the 29. Chapt. S. R. in the name of the Pope proclaimeth the Popes fayth and doctrine Inferius Cap. 27. Ioh. 9 3â— 1. Ioh. 5. v. 14. Psal. 18. v. 41. Mich. 3.4 Zach. 7. v. 13. Poperie is the new religion Vixit Aquinas A.D. 1243. For the space of 1240. The Fryer dare not do it for his lugges Loe the Pope as Pope by Popish doctrine can not erre The Iesuite how he is beleeued Luke 22. vers 32. Alas alas Poperie is wounded vnto death S. R. pag. 417. Out vpon Poperie who is able to endure it S. R. pag. 417. The Iesuite is shameles and impudent Alphons lib 3. aduers. haereses prope finem This is wonderfull Bellarmine speaketh against his owne knowledge O childish vanitie A.D. 1538. Marke well for Christes sake if thou loue thine owne soule Alphons lib. 1. cap. 4. aduers haeres Marke well this poynt striketh dead The Iesuites are Gypsies Loe the Pope is wounded at the heart hee can no longer liue A note worthy the remembrance The Iesuite hath deserued the whetstone Iob. 1.8 1. Ioh. 3. v. 12. Gen. 6· v. 9. Luke 1.28 Luke 1.6 Heb. 11. Act. 10. v. 2. Mat. 10. v. 42. Heb. 11. v. 27. Rom. 8. v. 18. Io. de Comb. lib. 5. Theol. ver cap. 11. Rhem. Rom. 8. v. 17. in annotae Heb. 11.6 Mat. 7. v. 18. Rom. 14. v. 23. Mat. 7.17 Aug. de fide ex operib cap. 14. tom 4. Esa. 64.6 Bernard de verb. Esa. Serm. 5. p. 405. Phil. 3.12 1. Cor. 1.30 Bernard vbi super D. 2. Ioh. 3.9 Rom. 6.23 Iac. 3.2 Bernard de grat et lib. Arb. p. 1189 Aug. in Ps. 11â— con 2. in fine Bernar. de aduent Dom. Serm. â— To. 1. See my Suruay pag. 389. 2. Cor. 5. v. 19. Vulgaâ—a editio Marke this poynt well Note the Seuenth Conclusion Mat. 7.19 Ioh. 14. v. 23. Ephes. cap. 1. v. 4. et cap. 2. v. 10. Rom. â— v. 30. Esa. 59.2 Ephes. 2. .v. 3.5 Lyr. in Cap. 6 Matt. See the Conclusion and note it Loe Good workâ— are the way which lead vs to heauen Aquin. p. 1. q. 23. art 3. ad 2. Bellar. To. 3. col 627. et col 628. The foresight of workes no cause of predestination Bellarm. To. 3. Col. 628. Bellarm. To. 3. Col 626. et Col. 628. Workes are not the cause of saluation yet the way by which we must come vnto it I defend the old Romane religion God in his eternall purpose prepared both eternall glory for his elect and the way or meanes to attaine the same Bern. super Cant. Ser. 68. Loe the confession of our vnworthines is our best merite Bern in Canâ—â— ser. 67. Bern. ser. 1. in Annunâ— B.M.V. This testimonie is wonderfull Marke it well The Popish Abbot woundeth the Pope at the very heart Vixit Bernardus A.D. 1110. Marke this well Note this ex iure This reason can not be answeared See and note well the 11. Conclusion Aug. lib. 9. Confess cap. 13. Psal. 143. v. 2. Psal. 130. v. 3. Bern. de adu dom serm 6. tom 1. Bernard in annue B.V. serm 1. No Workes can merite Glory Durand in 2 sent dist 27. q 2. in medio Condigne merite is so farre aboue mans capacitie as no man possiblely can haue it Suruey part 3. cap. 9. Soro de nat et gr lib. 3. cap. 6. pag. 138. Popish satisfaction is impossible Arist. in 8. Ethic. cap. 7. Luke 17. v. 20. Iac 3 v. 2. Aquin. 1.2 q. 114. ar 1. in corp Loe man can not merite any thing condignely or properly There is no proper merite in man Marke vnderstand this poynt aright Angles in 2. sent pag. 103. Loe the Papistes graunt as much as we desire Philip. 3.9 Rom. 10.4 Tit. 3.5 1. Cor. 1.30 2. Cor. 5.19 Rom. 8. v. 1 2.3.4 Rom. 5. v. 14. Reu. 7. v. 14. Reu. 3. v. 4. All this is already proued Marke the Cardinals wordes wel vnderstand them soundly Bellar. de iustif tom 3. col 1296. ct col 1298. All the good deedes we can possibly doe are Gods owne and so we can merite nothing of God with them Marke well for Christes sake for Poperie bleedeth vnto death Aug. lib. 9. Confess cap. 13. Marke this well Secundò principaliter Angles in 2. sent pag. 107. The Byshoppe confuteth him selfe he needeth no aduersarie A very fond distinction inuented without rime or reason Tit. 1. v. 2. Heb. 6.10 2. Tim. 4.8 Iac. 1.12 Iac. 2.5 Psal. 130.3 Psal. 143.2 S. R. pag. 257. Note well the eleuenth Conclusion following 1. Cor. 13. v. 13. Heb. 11. v. 6. Aug. in Epist. IohaÌ„ tract 10. in initio Ioh 6. v. 29. Rom. 3 28. Rom. 5.1 Rom. 10. v. 3.4 Act. 13.39 Phil. 3 9. Fides sumitur dupliciter propriè et sinapliciter seu figuratè et re latiuè By Fayth Christes obedience merites are applyed to vs. By Fayth Christes obedience merites are applyed to vs. Ioh. 3. v. 17. Mar 16 v. 7. Hâ—b 11. v. 7 Bona opera sunt medium sine quo non salutis Supâ—rius concl 4. See the 5. Conclusion and note it Rom. 5.1 1. Cor. 1.3 2. Cor. 4.16 Gal. 6.15 Mat. 7.17 Ioh. 15.12 Ioh. 14. v. 1â—
ChristiaÌ„ Dialogue pag. 17.19 A.D. 1415. The Fryer killeth himselfe with his owne sword Note well the answere This is veriâ—â—ed in the Gun-powder Iesuited vassals Marke well this answere See my Anatomie where this is plainely prooued A.D. 1415. O new borne Popery where is thy mother where is thy Godfather where is thy christianitie None euer heard of thee for the space of 1414. yeares after Christ. A generall Councell is aboue the Pope Gers. in Serm. coram concil Const. V prim part Gers. prim part in tract de appellat a Papa circa med Gers. vbi supr in 2. propos Gers. in serm coram Concil Const. K. prim part To this doctrine I willingly agree See my Anatomy pag. 137. All Papistes are Heretikes Rhem. in 16. Mat. 22. Luk. 15. Act. 18. All Papistes are Heretikes Rhem. in 15. Act. v. 28. ex Aug. libr. 2. de baptis cap. 4. Florint Cypriauâ—â— A.D. 250. Aug. A.D. 419. Marke well this poynt Supr cap. 2. prope finem The old Romane religion was the true Catholique Church The Papistes are the deformed and wee the reformed Catholiques in very deed B.C. pag. 136. All this is true but nothing to the purpose B.C. page 138. The Iesuite is full of vanitie and lying Marke well the answere B·C. page 136. See the Regiment cap. 14. page 183 184.185.187 170.166.200 128.125.155.119 Act. 19. v. 24.25 Marke well this poynt The right end is edification 1. Cor. 14 v. 14. v. 26.16 See and note my Regiment pag. 183.185.200.198.199 1. Cor. 14. v. 27.40 Marke well gentle reader B.C. pag. 135. Beda lib. 2. hist. cap. 2. Super cap. 16. note the chapter well Aug. confess lib. 1 cap. 14. de doctr Christ. lib. 2. cap. 13. de Catechi rud cap. 9. et in Psal. 123.128 Foolish zeale doth much hurt to the Church 1. Cor. 14. v. 26 1. Cor. 14. per totum V. 8. V. 9. V. 11. V. 13. V. 14. Chrysost. in 1. Cor. hom 35. Theodoretus in 1. Cor. 14. Phoâ—ius ibideÌ„ V. 16. V. 19. V. 26. Suruey part 3. cap. 10. pag. 477. Lyran. in 1. Cor. 14. Basill in ep ad cler Neocaesar ep 62. Rhem. in 1 Cor. 14. v. 14. Marke well this answere V. 15. Mat. 15. v. 8. V. 13. et V. 28. Chrysost. in 1. Cor. hem 35. Loe S. Chrysostome doth very sharply reprooue them that haue the diuine Seruice in a tongue vnknowne Conc. Later sub Innoc. 3. cap 9. A.D. 1215. See Suruey et supra cap. 23. 1. Cor. 14. v. 26.40 Things good in their owne nature are prophaned in the popish Masse None but popish Priestes may say Dominus vobiscuÌ„ Popish Deacons may not say The Lord be with you 1. Cor. 14. v. 16.40 B.C. page 140. Marke well this reduplication Mat. 26.27 Mar. 14.22 Luke 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 Math. 26.27 Luk. 22.19 Masse and Communion are all one in the true sense and meaning Confirmatio prima Ioseph Angles in 4. sentent part 1 p. 102. Marke the vncertaintie of popish Consecration Confirm 2. Sot apud Angels in 4. s. p. 102. Ios. Angl. in 4. s. p. 103. Apud 10. Angl. in 4. s. p. 144. Iosep. Angles vbi supra Angl. vbi supra p. 105. Mat. 26.27 Mar. 14.22 Luk. 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 Quartò prinâ—ipaliter Deut. 4.2 Deut. 5.32 Deut. 12.32 Reuel 22.18 1. Cor. 14. v. 27. 1. Sam. 5.2 See my Suruey the Downefall the Iesuites Antepast 1. Cor. 10.31 Rom. 16.27 Ier. 9.24 Psal. 115.1 Gal. 1.5 Ephes. 1.12 B.C. pag. 140. Accidens potest adesse et abesse citra subiecti interitum Apud Ioseph Angles in 4 â— part 1. pag. 151. Act. 3.11 Chistes be dyâ— flesh blood bones in the popish Masse Ios. Angl. in 4. s. part 1. pag. 104. concl 1. Loe Popish Masse is the New religion Ios. Angles vbi supra pag. 104. Ios. Angles vbisupra pag. 104. B.C. pag. 141. Our Church was stayned with many errors vntill the time of King Edward when it was restored to the auncienâ— puritie of Fayth and Doctrine Rom. 1.8 A.D. 179. Tertio principaliter See the ChristiaÌ„ Dialogue chap. 4. pag. 66 The Papistes can name no â—ote of the old Romane religion which is not still kept in our Church of England See marke well my Dialogue chapter 4. pag. 92. Apud Euseb. hist. lib. 3. cap. 32. Victor de potest Papae et coÌ„c rel 4. pag. 151. et paulaâ—â—m c. Io. Angles in 2. sent pag. 275. part 2. See S. R. pag. 281. et B.C. pag. 76. Polyd. lib. 4. cap. 9. pag. 39. Couaâ—ruu to 1. c. 20. part 11. in med col 1. Angl. in 4. s. p. 1. pag. 133. Conc. Later Sic enim Apostoli statuerunt et sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia Preface pag. 15. Chalenges doe occupie no place they are adiectiues which can not stand without subiectes The Author still so protesteth that he will performe his promise The Iesuite dareth not dispute and therefore requireth new conditions Preface pag. 18.