Apostles till now never interrupted never spoken against but of late since Martin Luthers dayes But yours say they is newlie forged and invented never heard tell of but since Luther and Calvins dayes Therefore yours cannot be the true Religion and ours must be the only true Religion M. Gilbert Brown This objection consists partly of a truth and partly of an untruth It appears by this that either M. John knows not our proofs or if he doth he alters the same that he may the better oppugn his own invention Our objection or rather one of our proofs whereby we prove that we Catholicks is the only true Church of Christ and have the only truth in all things is this We have aboundantly set down to us by the Prophets and Apostles in the holy writ that the kingdom and Church of Christ shal never fail in this earth and that the gates of hell shal not prevail against it But shal be permanent for ever and shal have alwayes the presence and assistance of the Father Son and holy Ghost who shal teach it all truth and remain with it for ever as may be perceived by these places noted here which were over longsome to be set down at length To the which I adjoyn some of the ancient Fathers exponing the same Out of the Old Testament Psal 60.5 read August upon this Psal 88. v. 1.2.3.4.5.19.30.31.32.33.34.35.36.37.38 read Aug. on these places Psal 104. ver 8. read Aug. Psal 110.9 Esa 9.7 read S. Hier. on Esa 51.7.8 read S. Hier. on Esa 54.8.9 read Hier. on Esa 55.3.13 Esa 59.21 read Hier. on Jer. 31.3.36 read Hier. on Ezec. 37.25.26 Dan. 2.44 Dan. 7.14.27 Mich. 4.7 Out of the New Testament Luc. 1.33 read S. August upon the 109. Psal Matth. 10.18 read here Saint Hierome upon this place Luke 22.32 John 14.16.17 John 17.18.19.20 Matth. 28.20 1. Tim. 3.15 Acts 5.39 Some of the ancient Fathers Hilar. de Trinitat lib. 7. August de utili credent cap. 87. Ambros lib. 9. cap. 20. Chrysost in serm de pente Clem. Alex. lib. 6. strom in the end And because the Scriptures and the ancient Fathers of the primitive Church concurrs and agrees in one unitie I would wish M. John to consider the same that the Church of Christ by all mens judgements shal never fail nor be interrupted nor broken M. John Welsch his Reply I will follow your footsteps and first answer to that part which ye say is true and then unto that which ye say is false And as to the first the ground which ye laid down whereupon ye go about to build the truth of your Religion is the Church of Christ shal never fail nor be interrupted c. It is recorded in Histories Athenaeus dipnosophist lib. 12. of one Thrasilaus a frantick man among the Greeks whensoever he saw any ships arrive at the haven of Athens he thought them all his own and took an inventarie of their wares and met them with great joy Even so it is with you wheresoever you see the name of the Church in the holy Scripture the promises of God made unto the same ye take all to be yours and books the treasures of it and boasts thereof as though they were your own crying The gates of hell shal never prevail against it It shal never fail It hath always the holy Ghost to lead it in all truth To remove you therefore out of the haven and to give every merchant his own ware and his own ship and to set the Church it self in possession of the Church we must distinguish the name of the Church The Church therefore is taken sometimes for the companie of the elect and chosen whereof a part is in heaven triumphing with Christ their Lord a part here in the earth fighting her battels lying in her camp and awaiting for the victorie And these are termed the invisible Church because Gods election cannot be discerned by the judgement of mans senses or eyes and we cannot know who are his chosen And unto this Church that is to the chosen appertains all the promises set down in the Scripture and in them only are they fulfilled And sometimes it is taken for the company of them who professes the true Religion wherein both the chaff and the wheat the popple and the good seed Matth. 3.12 and 13.24.25 the dregs and the wine the good and the evil are mixed together the which suppose they be in the Church yet they are not of the Church no more then the superfluous humors of the bodie are true and livelie members thereof So then if ye mean by the Church The Church of the elect and if ye mean by this That it shal never fail nor be interrupted c. only this that it shal never be utterly abolished but shal have alwayes the presence of the holy Ghost to lead her in all truth yea and in all holiness also in so far as shal serve for her salvation We grant that with you as Bellarmin confesseth of us and therefore he saith Lib. 3. de Eccles milit cap. 13. That many of their number spend but time while as they go about to prove that the Church here beneath absolutelie cannot perish or make absolute defection for Calvin saith he and the rest of the hereticks grant that but they speak and mean saith he of the invisible Church So if ye mean no further but this then Bellarmin telleth you that all the testimonies of Scripture and Fathers that ye have heaped up here to prove the same is but to spend the time so are fetched as needless witnesses in a matter â—â—at is not doubt some or called in question And if ye had understood his language ye needed not to have cumbred your self in fetching of this mortar and stone to build up your Babel For this was not required at your hands But because it is Babel which ye are bigging a tower of confusion therefore the Lord hath sent such a confusion of language among you that few of you understands what another sayes when some cryes for mortar others brings stone Bellarmin the great maister-builder cryes for proofs to prove that the visible Church here beneath cannot err neither in the matters which are needful to salvation neither in the matters which are not needful which she propones to be believed or to be done whither they be doctrine contained in the Scripture or extra scripturam that is not contained in the Scripture He cryes to prove that and ye cumber your self in bringing in a number of Scriptures to prove that the Church shal alwayes remain till the end of the world whereas in the examination of your proofs it will be found that they will go no further with you But if ye mean of the visible Church that it shal never fail c. that is it shal never fail in doctrine nor be interrupted in the same not only in the matters needful to salvation but in all truth as ye affirm of your
Church and as Bellarmin sayes as hath been said before If ye go this far as ye do indeed and as Bellarmin doth and your self must do if ye be a right defender of your Catholick faith here or else there is no ground whereupon ye can build the puretie and truth of your Church and Religion Then I say that your ground is as false and erroneous as the stuff that ye build upon it for both they have failed and have been interrupted as shal be proved afterward And mark this Christian reader as the Philistins Church wherein they praised their God Judg. 16. and mocked Samson the Lords servant had two chief pillars whereon the whole house leaned and was born up so hath the Church of Rome two chief pillars whereon the whole weight of their Church and Religion hings the one whereof is this that the Church cannot err the other that the Pope is the head of the Church Take these two from them their house must fall and their Religion can stand no longer For when they are brought to this strait that they see they cannot defend their Religion neither by the testimonies of the Scripture nor yet by the examples of the Church of God when she was in her greater purity and sincerity they are compelled to lay this as a ground to hold all their errors on that the Church of Christ cannot err So take this ground from them their Church and Religion cannot stand Now as to the testimonies which ye quote out of the Old Testament out of Luke 1.33 in the New Testament they only prove that the Church and Kingdom of Christ shal endure for evermore and that his covenant made with her is everlasting The which cannot exeem the militant Church from erring in points of doctrine for both the chaff and evil seed in the Church that is these that are called but not chosen may err and that to death and damnation and yet his Church and Kingdom and his covenant remaineth sure stable and inviolate for the Lord only offers his covenant unto them and they through incredulitie reject it and so he is not bound to sanctifie or save them much less to keep them from error And as for these who are called and chosen all these promises are made and performed in every one of them and the covenant of God is so sure in every one of them that our Savior saith None of them can perish John 10.28 And yet for all this every one of them may err in doctrine suppose not to death and damnation which ye will not deny And if ye would infinit examples not only of the Saints of God of the laicks as ye call them but also of the Priests Prophets Apostles yea and of Popes also and of your own Doctors and Bishops as a cloud of witnesses would stand up and avow the same in your face Now I gather seeing that the militant Church here on earth hath but two sorts of persons in her these that are called and chosen and these that are only called but not chosen and both may err in points of doctrine the one finally to death and damnation the other may err suppose not finally to death and damnation and yet the covenant of God remain sure everlasting and inviolate with his Church Therefore I say the promises of the stabilitie of Christs Kingdom and the perpetuitie of his covenant made with her cannot exeem the militant Church from erring in points of doctrine So ye have lost your vantguard Let us come to the rest and see if they will favor your cause any better then the former hath done The next place ye quote is Matth. 16.18 Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shal not prevail against it And because ye trust that there is not a testimony of Scripture which shal fight more for you then this let us therefore try it to the uttermost and see how far it can be stretched out What argument will ye frame out of this place For if you gather no more but this Christ hath promised that the gates of hell shal never prevail against the Church that is built on the Rock that is on Christ Therefore the Church that is built on him shal never be all utterlie extinguished and abolished by Satan Then Bellarmin tells you that ye spend but time in proving of this for we grant it That the Church of the chosen shal never perish But if you go further and say That the Church of Christ shal never err because Christ hath promised that the gates of hell shal not prevail against it then I say either that exposition is false or else the gates of hell should have prevailed long since against your Church for when it prevailed against the rock whereon the Church was built it prevailed against the Church For raze and overturn the foundation of a house the house cannot stand seeing the standing of the house consists on the firmness sureness of the foundation thereof Now the rock whereon ye say the Church is built unto whom this promise is made is Peter and his successors the Popes of Rome for so ye all with one consent expone the same Rhemists annotation upon this place Seeing then that they are the foundation of the Church as ye say and the gates of hell hath prevailed against them as I shal prove by the grace of God it must follow if your exposition be true that the gates of hell hath prevailed not once only but at many times against â—he Church For first Peter himself erred in a matter of doctrine when he thought with the rest of the Apostles after the resurrection of Christ the Kingdom of Christ not to be heavenlie but earthlie not spiritual but like the Kingdoms of this world proper to Israel Acts 1.6 not common to all by vertue of the promise and also he is commanded to preach the Gospel to the Gentils doubting nothing Acts 10.20 Which testifies that he doubted before whither the Gospel should be preached to them or not and therefore erred in a matter of faith and that after he had received the promise of the holy Ghost And also he erred in the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law Acts 10.14 for he believed that some meats were unclean after the death and resurrection of Christ and therefore he refused to eat thereof And this was a matter of faith also And last of all the holy Ghost testifies that he went not a right foot to the truth of the Gospel Gal. 2.11 and therefore was rebuked by the Apostle Paul to his face And as for them whom ye call his successors the Popes of Rome not only may they be hereticks but also some of them have been hereticks And therefore if your argument be good the gates of hell both may and have prevailed against them That they may be hereticks I will fetch no other witnesses but your own Councils Canons Cardinals
and your own Popes for they shal be your Judges in this matter Bellarmin saith lib. 7. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 30. that the Pope being a manifest heretick ceaseth to be Pope and to be head of the Church Caietan a Cardinal saith lib. de authoritate Papae Consilij cap. 20. 21. That the Pope being a manifest heretick should be deposed by the Church Johannes de Turrecremata a Cardinal saith lib. 4 part 2. cap. 20. That when the Pope falls in heresie he is deposed of God Alphonsus de Castro saith lib. 1. cap. 2. That the Pope as he is a Pope may be an heretick and teach heresie which also hath sometimes saith he fallen out in them Innocentius the 3. serm 2. de consecr Pontificis And Hadrian the 2. Popes as also the 6. and 8. Synode and their own Canon Law Dist. 40. cap. Si Papa do testifie that they may be hereticks And also Pope Hadrian 6. Bellar. lib. 4. de Romano Pontif. cap. 2. And some of them have been hereticks also Zepherinus a Montanist Tertuli ad prax Marcellinus one that sacrificed â—o Devils the Idols of the Gentils Damasus Concil Sinuessâ—num Liberius an Arrien that denyed the Godhead of the Son Athanas in Epist. ad solit vita Hieron in Catal. Script Fascic tem aetate sexta Hermannus contractus Marianus Scotus compilatio Chronologica Supplementum chronic Platina Anastasius a favorer of the Nestorian heresie Platina in vita Anastas supplement Chronic distinct 19. cap. Anastasius Fascic temp Vigilius an Eutychian whose heresie was that after the incarnation of Christ there was but one nature in Christ made of his Divinity and Humanity which overthrows the foundation of our salvation Liberatus in Breviario cap. 22. Honorius a Monothelite and therefore damned and accursed in the sixth Council of Constantinople act 13. John the 22. held that the souls of the blessed being separat from their bodies did not see the Lord before the resurrection Occam in opere 93. dierum Adrian de confirmatione circa finem Gerson in sermone de Pascha John the 23. denyed eternal life whereof he was accused and deposed in the Council of Constance Sessione 11. Eugenius the 4. deposed in the Council of Basile for heresie Sessione 34. I omit the rest Seeing then these whom ye call the rock and foundation of your Church have erred and that in matters of doctrine and Religion and in the principal points thereof and that by the testimonies both of the Scripture and of your own Councils Doctors Cardinals and Popes Therefore if your argument hold forth then I say the gates of hell hath prevailed against your Church because they have prevailed against the rocks and foundations thereof for they have erred as hath been proved the which I suppose ye will not grant And therefore the furthest that ye can gather here is but this That the gates of hell that is the power of condemnation shal not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is totally and finally overcome So that suppose they may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is be strong and make them to fail in many things yet they cannot prevail totally and finally against the Church of God that is the elect and chosen who are built not on the Pope but on the immoveable Rock the Lord Jesus I say further this promise is made and performed in every one of the elect For the gates of hell shal not prevail that is get the final and full victory over any of them And therefore our Savior saith None of my sheep shal perish John 10 28. and yet ye will not deny but every one of the elect may err Therefore this promise doth not priviledge the Church of God from erring but the chaff and evil seed that is these that are called and not chosen may err and err finally because this promise is not made unto them for they are not built upon this Rock but upon the sand for none is built upon this Rock but these who are blessed and heareth the word and doth it Matth. 7. as our Savior testifieth And the good seed which are these that are called and chosen may err suppose not finally and totally The next place which ye quote is that prayer of Christ for Peter Luke 22.32 But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not Matth. 26. It is true he prayed It is true also that Peters faith failed not but yet it swooned as it were when he denyed his Lord and that by perjuring and cursing of himself and yet he erred both in the qualitie of Christs Kingdom in the calling of the Gentils and in the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law Acts 10 14. As also he went not rightly to the truth of the Gospel Gal. 2.11 as hath been proved So this prayer was not that he should be kept absolutely from all erring for then it shal follow that Christ obtained not that which he prayed for seeing he erred which is impious to think but that his faith should not decay finally and totally Secondly the Lord Jesus prayed also for all believers John 17.18.19.20 which place ye also quote and yet there is not one of the believers but they may err as your selves cannot deny and we have proved by examples of your own Popes for if any were exeemed from erring in your judgement it should be these that are the foundation of your Church which ye call your Popes but they may err and have erred as hath been proved Thirdly I say it will not follow Christ prayed for Peters faith that it should not fail Therefore he prayed for the Popes whom ye will have to be successors to Peter that their faith should not fail for that is the thing ye would be at for their faith hath failed For if by faith ye understand the doctrine of the faith of Christ as it is taken sometimes in the Scripture 1. Tim. 4. then I say your own Doctors Canons Councils Cardinals and Popes themselves as they have been cited before testifieth that not only they may err but also that some of them have erred and have been hereticks And if by that faith which our Lord prayed for ye understand that lively faith that embraceth the promises of Gods mercie in Christ which worketh by love and showeth forth the self by good works as by keeping of Christs commandments and by loving one another Rom. 3.25 Gal. 5.6 1. John 2.4 Then I say your own writers friends favorers and Cardinals testifieth of them Platin Genebrard Crantz that they have gone from Peters steps that they got the Popedom by brybery and bargaining with the Devil That they were monstrous and prodigious men yea rather beasts and monsters So that of all men that ever professed the faith of Jesus they have failed most foully in that lively faith as I have proved in another place concerning the Antichrist As to that place which ye quote John 14.16.17 where the Spirit of Christ is
promised to the Apostles to dwel with them and to remain with them for ever And in the 16. chap. vers 13. that he shal lead them in all truth I answer first that was the Apostles prerogative the Maister-builders of the Church of Christ that in writing and teaching the doctrine of salvation they should be led in all truth and in none ever since promised nor performed in that high measure Secondly this promise of the Spirit of truth to dwel and remain in them for ever and to lead them in all truth is made and performed in all believers in so far as may sanctifie them and save them and yet ye will not deny but that every one of the believers may err Therefore this promise will not reach so far as to keep the Church from impossibility of erring As to that place in the 17. of John I answered to it before As to the 28. of Matthew I will be with you to the end of the world I answer the same thing to it which I answered to the former that this promise is made not to any visible and ordinar succession for that is to ty the promises of God to persons and places but to the Pastors of the Church whom he sends forth and to all the faithful and is performed in them in so far forth as may save them and inable them for his work But yet this will not exeem them from all possibility of erring As to that in the 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. the Church is called the pillar and ground of truth therefore ye gather It cannot err First I will ask you to whom the Apostle speaks so and upon what occasion he speaks it Ye must say To Timothie that he might know how to behave himself in the house of God which is the Church 2. Tim. 3.14 for so the Apostle writes Then I ask Is not that Church wherein Timothy should have behaved himself called the ground and pillar of truth So the Scripture calls it and ye cannot deny it Now this Church was the Church of Ephesus then the Church of Ephesus is called the ground and pillar of truth But first the Church of Ephesus fell from her first love and the candlestick is threatned to be removed from her unless she repent Rev. 2.5 She did not repent but in time became worse and worse and so heaped fault upon fault till Christ hath now removed his candlestick from her and delivered her over to darkness and death by taking his own elect to himself and giving over the reprobat that hated the truth to the blindness of their own mind so that city is left desolat to the impiety of Mahomet and she that was once called by Gods Spirit the pillar and ground of truth hath now lost the truth Now I say that which may befall one Church may befall any other Church Then that which is befallen to the Church of Ephesus may befall any other But the Church of Ephesus was first craised and then by little and little utterly overthrown and being bereft of the light of Christ is now a Church no longer Therefore I say that there is no Church on the face of the earth howsoever they flatter themselves with glorious styles of Catholick pillars and ground of the truth whose body that is the elect and chosen in it may not be overshadowed with darkness and overtaken with faintness whose chaff that is the hypocrits in it may not be wholly consumed with rottenness and destruction and whose whole frame and outward government may not loose both their strength and beauty Thirdly I say if the Church cannot err as ye say because it is the ground and pillar of truth and if the Church of Ephesus be called the pillar and ground of truth as the Scripture saith and seeing the Church of Ephesus with all the Churches of the East as ye cannot deny hath condemned the Popes supremacy as heresie Therefore one of these two must follow either that the Church that is the pillar and ground of the truth not only may err but hath erred or else it is an heresie condemned many hūdred years ago That the Pope is the head of the Church so Popery is heresie Judge ye which of these ye will choose Last of all I say the Church is called the pillar and ground of truth because it is her office and duty to hold out the word of truth as lanterns and light Philip. 2.16 by preaching it and practising it as the Priest is called the Messenger of the Lord of hosts because his lips should preserve knowledge and declare the message of God Malach. 2.7 But as there were Priests which shew not forth the message of God but caused many to err in the Law and corrupted the covenant of Levi so there may be Churches and have been which have not upheld and maintained the truth but have fallen therefrom Now I come to your last testimony of Scripture Acts 5.39 In that counsel of Gamaliel to the Council of the Scribes and Pharisies That if the doctrine of the Apostles be of God that it cannot be destroyed What do you gather here That the truth doth remain for ever Bellarmin telleth you that ye spend but time in proving that for we grant it unto you It cannot I grant be destroyed but yet it can be persecuted and removed out of places where it was before and obscured and corrupted by mens glosses and traditions as it hath been these 1500. years by the Jews to whom this was spoken That if the doctrine of the Apostles was of God they could not destroy it and yet as was said they banished it and made the Lord to deprive them thereof and to give them over to the blindness and hardness of their hearts because they would not embrace the truth when it was offered Seeing then there is not a syllab in Gods Word that will uphold this main foundation of your Church that the Church cannot err take heed to your self M. Gilbert in time and build not the damnation of your own soul and the damnation of the souls of many others upon a point of doctrine that hath not God to bear witness to it in the whole Scripture I might end here but because this point as I said before is the main pillar that upholds the whole weight of their Church and Religion therefore I will utterly overthrow the same and I will prove out of the Word of God That the Church in all ages both may err and hath erred And first the Scripture testifieth that it is only proper to God alone by nature to be perfectly holy and true and free from all errors Mark 10.18 And contrariwise man by nature is unholy a liar prone to deceive and to be deceived Rom. 3.4 9.10.11.17 and 19. vers so that by nature he is nothing else but a mass of blindness and corruption so that the light he hath he hath it by free grace by Gods Spirit to make
say and would ye have the salvation of mens souls to lean to this point of doctrine that they caÌ„not err which is the rock foundation of your Church which above all others have erred most grievously O malicious and cruel man that would deceive the poor flock of Jesus Christ for whom he shed his blood with such heresie and abomination Then this prerogative is not granted to your Popes the head and foundation of your Church And surely if the foundation may be turned up-side-down and the head may become sensless and dead I see not how the house can stand and the body can be whole and one of your greatest Papists Bâ—llarmin plainly confesseth lib. 4 de Rom. Pontif. cap. 3. that if the Pope err of necessity tota Ecclesia errabit that is the whole Church shal err Upon the which I reason If the Pope may err and hath erred then the whole Church may err and hath erred so Bellarmin one of the learnedest Papists that ever was writ But the first hath been proved by your own Doctors Cardinals Popes Councils Canon Law Ergo by your own doctrine the whole Church may err Here we might stay now and go no further for this sufficiently overthrows this point of your doctrine that the Church caÌ„not err that by the confession of the learnedest of your side But yet I will pursue the rest If you say it is granted to the body then it is either graÌ„ted to the people or to the Clergy To the people I suppose ye will not for if your Popes may err much more may your people err And if the Apostles other famous Churches may err much more may your people err yea if not it should follow that your people were above their head the Pope which I suppose ye wil not say If ye say the Clergy then either it must be your Doctors severally by themselves or as they are gathered together in a Council But as they are several ye will not say For your Bellarmin controversies would convince you to the face for almost there are few controversies which he handles and he handles more then 300 but he brings in some of your own Writers dissenting from him and whom in many places he confutes And I think if Popes have not this priviledge surely the Doctors of your Church severally have not this priviledge But because as Bellarmin confesseth Lib. 2. de author Concil c. 11. If a general Council err then the whole Church may err for it represents the whole Church And therefore he brings this in as a reason to prove That general Councils cannot err because the whole Church cannot err For saith he the general Council represents the whole Church therefore it cannot err Let us examine this for if it be found that general Councils may err surely your cause is gone First then what will ye say to thirteen general Councils whereof seven is utterly rejected the other six are in part allowed and in part rejected which all have erred as Bellarmin de Concilijs lib. 1. cap. 6. 7. confesseth But it may be you answer that these were not approved by the Popes of Rome and therefore they might err and have erred but these Councils that are altogether allowed of him cannot err nor have not erred Indeed it is true that this is your doctrine That neither general nor provincial Councils can err that is allowed by the Pope Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 2. 5. and that general Councils lawfully conveaned may err unless they follow the instructions of the Pope And therefore Bellarmin saith cap. 11. that they may err three manner of wayes 1. If in defining of any thing the Fathers of the Council dissent from the Popes Legats 2. If it be against the Popes instruction suppose both the Fathers and the Legats of the Council agree together 3. They may err before they have received the Popes confirmation and judgement suppose all both Fathers and Legats consent together because saith he the Popes judgement is the last from the which no man may appeal and he may approve and disprove the General Council notwithstanding of their consent with his own Legats And therefore he saith in another place Lib. 4. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 3. That the whole strength or certainty of lawful Councils depends only of the Pope So then this is your last refuge All depends on his instruction and confirmation he hath a priviledge that he cannot err and the General Councils receives the same through his approbation and confirmation But I answer The Pope can give no greater prerogative to others then he hath himself But as hath been proved before the Popes may err and have been hereticks therefore they cannot give this prerogative to others And if ye will say as some of you do that the Pope suppose he may err privatly as he is a privat man and as a privat teacher yet he cannot err as he is Pope in his office judicially Whereunto I answer first That some of your own Church as Gerson and Almane de potestate Ecclesiae Alphonsus de Castro lib. 1. cap. 2. contra haeres Canus loci Theolog. lib. 6. cap. 1. and Pope Adrian the sixth all these teaches That the Popes may err and teach heresie as they are Popes Either therefore the Popes may err as they are Popes judicially and teach heresie or else not only these Doctors of your own Church but also the Pope himself hath erred and that in a point of doctrine and so however it be the Popes as they are Popes judicially may err in points of doctrine Secondly I say besides nine Popes which have been hereticks and that when they were Popes sundrie of them have made decrees not only contrary to Gods Word but also contrary one to another and that in matters of doctrine As for example Pope Celestin the third made a decree cap. laudabilem de conversione infidelium that when of married persons the one falls in heresie the marriage is dissolved and the Catholick partie is free to marry again contrary to the truth of God Matth. 6. and 19.9 and also contrary to the decreet of Pope Innocentius the third lib 4. decretal cap. Quanto Thirdly either your Canon Law errs or else Clements decrees that all things should be common and that wives also should be common causa 12 quaest 1. Dilectissimis Gelasius Pope affirms de consecrat cap. Comperimus That the mistery of the body and blood in the Sacrament cannot be divided and that the Sacrament cannot be taken in one kind only without great sacriledge and yet the Council of Trent hath decreed the contrary and the whole Romane Church practises the contrary Pope Martin decreed dist 50. cap. Qui semel that the Priests who are deposed for any fault may never be admitted to any degree of the Priesthood again Pope Syricus distinct 82. cap. Quia and Pope Calixtus distinct 82. cap. Presbyter have decreed the contrary Pope Gregory the
third he permits one to have two wives if the first be sickly decret causa 32. quaest 7. cap. Quod proposuisti contrary both to the Gospel Matth. 19. and to another decreet of the Canon Law Decretal lib. 4. tit 9. cap. Quoniam Pope Nicolas saith Dist 40. cap. A quodam Judaeo that that Baptism which is ministred without express mention of the three persons of the Trinity is firm and sure enough But Pope Zacharie Dist eadem de consecrat cap. In Synodo hath decreed the contrary All these decreets are set down in their Canon Law and hath the strength of a law in the Roman Church not as privat mens but as Popes decreets And yet some of them are directly repugnant to the Word of God that themselves cannot deny but they are heresies and some of them so directly repugnant to the decreets of other Popes that either the one or the other must be heresie But it may be ye will answer that suppose the Pope may err as he is Pope and that in matters of doctrine yet he cannot err with his Council either Provincial or General as Bellarmin saith Whereunto I answer first if General Councils lawfully conveaned together may err in matters of doctrine unless they be confirmed by the Pope as Bellarmin grants and if the Popes may err themselves alone and that judicially in matters of doctrine as hath been proved why may they not err also being joyned together seeing Councils have this priviledge only by his confirmation and allowance As Bellarmin saith lib. 4. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 3. Secondly I say either Pope Steven the 6. with his Council erred in condemning of Formosus and his acts which he made as Pope and in decreeing his ordinations to be void and null because the man was wicked by whom they were ordained Sigebert in Chron. which is an error of the Donatists or else Pope John the 9. with his Council of 72. Bishops erred in justifying Formosus and his decreets and condemning the acts of Pope Steven with his Council Last of all since General Councils that have been confirmed by their Popes have erred the sixth General Council confirmed by Pope Hadrian in epist. ad Thracium quae est in 2. actione 7. Syn. Canon 2. hath sundry errors which they themselves will not defend as the rebaptizing of hereticks For the counsel of Cyprian is confirmed there wherein this is decreeted And also it is ordained Canon 13. that Elders Deacons Subdeacons should not separat from their wives contrary to the Canon of the Roman Church as is said there And the marriage of Catholicks and Hereticks is judged null and voyd Canon 67. which your self cannot deny to be an error contrary to the express truth of God 1. Cor. 7.13 And the forbidding of Ministers to remain with their wives Canon 12. contrary to the sixth Canon of the Apostles Either therefore a General Council confirmed by a Pope hath erred or else the Apostles have erred in this Canon for they judge them to be the Canons of the Apostles The first General Council of Constantinople and the General Council of Chalcedon which are both by their own confession approved by the Popes Bellarm lib. 1. de Concilijs cap. 5. And yet both these have decreeed that the Bishop of Constantinople should have equal priviledges of authority honor and dignity in Ecclesiastical affaires with the Bishop of Rome except only the first place or seat the which by their own confession is an error Therefore either lawful General Councils confirmed by the Pope have erred or else the Pope is not the head of the Church and hath not a preeminence of authority over the rest for they have made the Bishop of Constantinople equal with him or else there are two heads of thier Church the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Constantinople I omit the rest Augustin saith de baptismo contra Donatistas lib. 2. cap. 3. That Provincial Councils may be corrected by General Councils and of General Councils the former may be amended by the latter If they may be mended then they may err And here he speaks not of a matter of fact but of a matter of faith For he speaks of the baptism of hereticks Now to conclud seeing the Churches in all ages before the Law in the time of the Law and in the time of grace yea and the Apostles and Peter himself have erred and seeing the Church of Rome that claims this priviledge of not erring above all other Churches hath erred also and that not only her people which they call Laicks but also her Clergy severally and together in Councils as well Provincial as General And seeing the head which as they say is the Rock and foundation of the Church hath erred in life in Office in matters of Faith and Religion not as privat men only but as Popes both by themselves alone as also with their Councils as well Provincial as General Seeing I hope I have proved all these things sufficiently then may I not with the judgement of all men safely conclud that that main pillar whereupon the whole weight and pillar of your Religion depends that the Church cannot err that it is an error and such a dangerous and damnable error whereupon all the errors of your Religion is built that whosoever will believe it they hazard the endless salvation of their souls Ground then Christian Reader thy salvation not upon this that the Church cannot err for that is false but upon this that as long as she sticks to the Word of God written in the Old and New Testament she errs not and when she swerves and it were but an inch broad from the Scripture then she errs And therefore two learned Papists Gerson de examinat part 1. consid 5. and Panorm affirms the one saith Simplici non authorizato sed excellenter in sacris literis erudito c. that is that more credit is to be given to one unlearned and simple but yet excellently beseen in the holy Writ in a point of doctrine then to the Pope And such a learned man saith he ought to oppone himself to a General Council if he perceive the greater part to decline to the contrary of the Gospel either of malice or of ignorance The other saith extra de elect cap. Significasti That more credit is to be given to an unlearned and simple man that brings for him the Scripture then to a whole General Council And this for answer to the testimonies of Scripture which ye cited Now as concerning the Fathers testimonies which ye bring in they will serve you no further then the Scripture hath done For they will go no further with you then this that the Church of Christ and his covenant with her shal endure for ever the which we grant and they that will read them will find them so And if ye prove any further out of them it shal be answered by Gods grace For it were too fashous to the
be the beast Rev. 13.11 and your head to be the Antichrist your doctrine to be delusions 2. Thess 2.3.4.11 and your Rome to be that mystical Babylon Rev. 18 4. And so the Lord hath made them believe and give obedience to that commandment of his Go out of her my people c. That ye call these the true Church that spake against him that lyes in the weights and ballance yet betwixt us For ere ye prove them to be the true Church ye must first prove your doctrine which they then professed to have the warrant out of the Word of God So let them have the name of a Church but of an impure and corrupted Church of a Church infected by the pest of your doctrine oppressed by the tyranny of your Pope and Clergy and consumed by the rotten humors of your Idolatry So then it was not the true Church that is the called ones by the light of the Gospel for they are the true Church that spake against him but only these that were infected and poysoned with your abominations the which I grant did over-spread these Nations as it was fore-told of her Rev. 17.2 and 18.3 and 13.14 And as for these first heads of Religion which he oppugned Of your pardons justification by works and the sacrifice of the Mass their condemnation is set down in the great Register and Testament of Jesus Christ the Lord of life as shal be proved hereafter So that he was not the first that oppugned them Now as to the last the Churches from whom he departed he departed not from their body but from the consumption of your heresie that consumed the body Not from the Church but from the corruptions of your Idolatry and abominations in the Church Not from the Commonwealth of Israel but from your tyranny and oppression of the Commonwealth Not from the city of God but from the pest of your doctrine that infected the city And last of all not from the spiritual communion and society of the Saints of God in these parts but from the communion with Babel with Antichrist with the beast and with the dragon and that at the commandment of the Lord Flie from idolatry Go out of Babel my people 1. Tim. 6.3.4.5 Matth. 7.15 Acts 19. and 8.9 1. Cor. 10.14 2. Cor. 5.14.15.16.17.18 Hosea 4.15 Rev. 18.4 Now after you have assigned the mutations of our Religion since Christ and his Apostles as you think you gather the whole force of it together and makes the stream of your argument to run as strongly as it can upon our Church and Religion that the face and form of it might be so washen away that it be not known to be a true Church Your reason then is this The true Church of Christ hath never failed universally for the space of one day because our Savior hath promised to be with it to the end of the world But our Church was never before Martin Luthers dayes therefore it is not the true Church of Christ As to your proposition if ye take failing for erring in matters of doctrine then I deny your proposition for I hope I have proved sufficiently before that the Church both may err and hath erred in all ages But if you take failing to be utterly abolished and rooted out of the face of the earth then I grant your proposition that God hath ever a Church the Church of his elect with whom he will be to the end of the world And as to your assumption that our Church was never before Martin Luthers dayes I deny it Let us see how ye prove it There was none say ye before his dayes neither visible nor invisible that professed his Religion But how do ye prove that for that is still denied to you For if your Religion hath the Old and New Testament to bear witness to it and Jesus Christ to be the author of it in every point as shal be made manifest by the grace of God then I say whosoever they were from the beginning of the world to this day visible or invisible that professed the true Jesus the true Savior his true doctrine and Sacraments wherein Religion stands they are our predecessors and are of our profession and Religion so then ye should first if ye had gone squarely to work have disproved the heads of our Religion not to have their warrant from the tables of Christs Testament ere ye had concluded that we had none of our profession and Religion before Martin Luther And this is the point you should have begun at for it is not the Church that makes the Religion but the Religion that makes the Church Have we a warrant out of the Word of God for our Religion then are we the true Church and the successors of all them who ever from the beginning of the world have professed the same Have we not this warrant then I grant you we have no true Church So there is the point of our controversie whither our doctrine be from God out of his Word or not But how prove ye that Martin Luther had none of his profession before him First you gathered upon the former things that all the true Churches said against him and that he departed from them unto the which I answered before that these was not the true Church but only so many of every Nation who was deceived by your doctrine and whereof the Lord did cure a great many by his ministery and by the ministery of others whom the Lord did stir up since so that neither did the true Church who saw the truth speak against nor yet did he depart from their societie Next as the Lord had a true Church in Israel in the time of Elias even these who did not bow their knee to Baal 1. Kings 19 10.18 who was neither known to Elias the Prophet nor yet to the persecuters so did the Lord in the midst of your darkness and Idolatry reserve to himself a true Church even these hundred forty and four thousand which John saw standing with the Lamb on mount Sion Rev. 14 1. who did not defile themselves with your Idolatry and did not worship the beast and receive his mark which suppose neither ye nor we had known yet the Lord did reserve them as he promised Thirdly I say Martin Luther had sundry who professed his Religion immediatly before him who was even known to the world as I shal prove afterward Your next proof is taken from a testimony of one of our own Writers where ye alledge that it is written of Martin Luther and Zuinglius that they were the first that came to the knowledge of the Gospel I say ye are not faithful in citing of this testimony for it saith not that they were the first that came to the knowledge of the Gospel but these are the words That it was an easie thing to them meaning of your Church to devise against us meaning the English Protestants as ye call them these cursed speaches
that doth believe that Popery is the most abominable Idolatry imaginable to wit to worship the handy-work of the Baker and wood and stone c. and considers what severe threatnings he hath denounced against Idolatry namely That they shal be shut out of that New Jerusalem Rev. 22.15 and shal drink of the wine of the wrath of GOD and shal be tormented day and night before the holy Angels and before the Lamb and the smoke of their torment shal ascend for evermore and they shal have no rest Rev. 14.9 And that he is a jealous GOD visiting not only this iniquity of Idolatry upon themselves but likewise upon their children to the third and fourth generation and is not much troubled to hear and see so many souls seduced and led aside thereto and doth not judge it of his concernment to lay out himself to the utmost for discovering the snare pit that is laid for entraping and ruining eternally of poor souls Therefore we hope as our endeavors shal be peace to us so we hope it shal be acceptable to all the lovers of truth That this prayerful Treatise of that great wrestler with GOD may be blessed for convincing of gain-sayers informing establishing and confirming the LORDS people in the truth and for stirring up and awaking zeal love and repentance in the godly shal be the earnest prayer of Your servant for CHRISTS sake MATT. CRAFORD TO THE RIGHT EXCELLENT AND MIGHTY PRINCE JAMES THE VI. KING OF SCOTLAND c. Grace and Peace be multiplied I Hope it shal not be accounted presumption most Noble Prince to offer to your Majesty the first fruits of these my simple and rude labors seeing the cause is JESVS CHRISTS that KING of Kings and LORD of glory which is here defended even the everlasting truth of GOD against the venimous stings of one of the Locusts Rev. 9.3 of that Antichristian Kingdom The right whereof doth most justly belong to your Majesty both in respect of these rare and singular gifts of knowledge and understanding which the LORD hath vouchsafed upon your Majesty in such a plentiful measure that your subjects do acknowledge it at home and strangers do admire it and commend it abroad Whereby you are not only able to render a reason of that Faith which is in you 1. Pet. 3.15 but also able to stop the mouth of the adversary Tit. 1.9 and convict the gain-sayer whatsoever by that word of truth 2. Tim. 3.5 Wherewith your Majesty hath been brought up from your very infancy So that all the wise men of Babel I mean the Clergy of that Roman Harlot is not able to resist the mouth and wisdom which the Lord hath given to your Majesty And also in respect of that supereminent power as the Apostle calls it Rom. 13.1 whereby as you are most able so are you most obliged to maintain his truth propagat his Kingdom and nowrish his own Spouse which he hath purchased to himself by his own blood Acts 20.28 by the breasts of your Majesties government as it was promised of old That his Spouse should suck the breast of Kings Esa 60.16 So who is more obliged then ye Sir Who so sufficient and able every way to maintain it as ye Sir Your knowledge binds you Your profession binds you Your soveraign authority as ye are a King in Israel binds you For as the wisest King that ever was hath said and left it in writ or rather that King of Kings in him and by him Princes reign by me Prov. 8.15 Ye hold your Kingdom of him Sir and must lay down your Crown at his feet and must stand up and give a reckoning of the government of his Kingdom of the maintenance of his Truth of the nowrishing his Spouse in that day Your knowledge Sir is able to justifie it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your soveraign authority able to defend it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye have received that two-edged sword of Gods Spirit in your mouth able to wound Heb. 4.12 yea to consume that man of sin and son of perdition Ye have received that sword of justice and judgement Rom. 13.4 in your hands able to destroy betimes all the wicked of your Kingdom and to root out from the city of the Lord all the workers of iniquity Psal 101.8 Ye know Sir the abomination of Babel Rev. 17.4.5 that as it is said of the vertuous woman Many women have done vertuously but thou surmounts them all Prov. 31.26 So the contrary may be said of her Many hereticks have taught erroneously and worshipped and wrought abominably but the whoor of Babel Rev. 17.1 the Church of Rome in heresie in abomination in idolatry hath surmounted them all that ever went before her or ever shal come after her Many beasts have spoken blasphemously Rev. 13.1.3.6 but that second beast that hath two horns like the Lamb Rev. 13. 16.13.14 17.3.4.5.6 18.24 surmounteth them all in blasphemy tyranny cruelty and abominable idolatry destroying and making merchandise of the souls of men and women Other heresies did but subvert some fundamental points of Religion but the Church of Rome hath subverted them all almost Of other heresies some was but against the Godhead of Christ other some against his manhood other some against his offices and benefits or some one head or other But the doctrine of the Church of Rome is against them all Injurious to his Godhead in making him not only inferior to the Father in teaching that he is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but also inferior to the very creatures in praying to Mary to cōmand her Son Jure Matris impera Redemptori as I heard your Majesty most solidly prove and so worse then the Arrians Injurious to his manhood to all his offices his benefits and all the means inward and outward of the knowing and applying of him And last of all injurious to his soveraign glory in communicating it to stocks and stones a piece of bread bones and ashes and the skurf skarf of all things as I hope I have made manifest in this my Answer So that most justly it is called The speach of the Dragon and the doctrine of Devils by the Spirit of God Rev. 13.11 1. Tim. 4. And if the profession of such a devilish doctrine be too great an evil what would the practise thereof be I mean the idolatrous Mass that abomination of desolation The misery alace were too great to see the people of this Countrey scattered like sheep without shepherds Matth. 9.36 dying that second and everlasting death for want of the bread of life and Gospel of salvation But this would be the misery of miseries if the golden cup of Babel full of all abominations Rev. 17.4 should be set to their head again to drink the deadly poyson of their own damnation And certainly if this famine of the Word of GOD Amos 8.11.12 whereby not only two or three Cities as the same Prophet saith ch 4.8 but twenty or
a notable sentence to this purpose It is to be wished saith he where heresie flowrishes that all these who have any gift of writing that they all write suppose they should write not only of the self-same matters or questions but also the self-same things or arguments suppose perchance in other words For saith he it is expedient that Hereticks understand that there are not only one or two but many in the camps of the Catholicks who dare with open face meet them And he saith There is another commodity that comes by the writing of many to wit that by this means the Catholicks books themselves are more shortly and easily brought unto the hands of all men so that while as some fall upon one and some fall upon others yet notwithstanding they are all instructed to use the same weapons in their common dangers The which how fitly it agrees unto this purpose of mine I leave it to the judgement of all men who know the estat of this blinded Countrey wherein that darkness of the Antichristian Kingdom is so far spred the confident brags of the adversary are so universally credited the people scattered as sheep without shepherdâ— Matth. 9.36 lying wide open to all the assaults of the Devil and the deceits of these ravenous wolves and their hands so full of Papistical books the deadly weapons of their own destruction without any one book almost for ought that I know whereby either these that are perverted may be revoked from their errors or these that are assaulted may be sustained from yeelding to the adversary or those that are weak may be confirmed Not unlike the miserable estate wherein the Hebrews were brought unto through the tyranny of the Philistims wanting both sword and spear in the time of their warfare having no smiths in their whole land whereby they were compelled to go to their enemies to sharpen their cowter and sock and other instruments 1. Sam. 13.19.20 22. Now as for the work it self I say nothing of it but only recommend it to the blessing of GOD in all your hearts and consciences The which also hath been my earnest desire to GOD from the first time that I put in hand to the pen continually that his effectual presencâ— might be joyned therewith both to convict the contraâ—â— minded and to confirm the godly Read ye it therefâ—â—â— with that affection of heart wherewith it was written anâ— desire ye that blessing in the reading of it as I did in thâ— writing of it and then I hope through GODS blessing ye shal reap some profit by it Now the GOD of all mercy and the Father of all light illuminat all our eyes more and more and cause the light of his glorious Gospel to shine in our hearts and bless all the means thereof that we may be the children of light here and may be partakers of that everlasting weight of glory hereafter in CHRIST JESUS Amen From Air the 18. December 1602. Yours in the Lord M. Iohn Welsch Preacher of Christs Gospel AN INDEX OF THE SECTIONS of M. Welsch Treatise SEction I. The Introduction page 1. Section II. Whither the Church of Rome be a true Church page 4 Section III. Concerning the infallibility of the Church and her immunity from error page 12 Section IV. Whither the Church of Rome be the only true Church and the Reformed not true Churches page 44 Section V. Concerning the Judge of Controversies namely Whither God speaking in the Scriptures be Judge of Controversies page 71 Section VI. Concerning the necessity of Baptism to Infants page 85 Section VII Whither a man by the help of the grace of God may perfectly keep the Commandments page 93 Section VIII Whither a man by his free-will may resist the will of God page 104 Section IX Concerning transubstantiation and Christs real and substantial body and blood in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper page 106 Section X. Concerning the sacrifice of the Mass page 131 Section XI Concerning the degrees and means whereby the sacrifice of the Mass crap in page 170 Section XII Of the manifold abuses of the Mass page 189 Section XIII Concerning Confession and Absolution by the Priest page 219 Section XIV Of Extreme-unction whither it be a Sacrament page 2â—1 Section XV. Concerning Imposition of hands whither it be a Sacrament page 226 Section XVI Concerning Marriage whither it be a Sacrament page 231 Section XVII Concerning the merit of Good Works page 240 Section XVIII Concerning works of Supererogation page 246 Section XIX Concerning Christs descending into Hell page 253 Section XX. Concerning the difference betwixt Popery and the Reformed Religion page 258 Section XXI Concerning Justification by Faith page 263 Section XXII Concerning the authority of the Fathers page 270 Section XXIII Concerning the visibility of the Church and which â—he visible Church may make defection page 278 Section XXIV Where our Religion was before Luther Or a Catalogue of them who professed our Religion in the midst of Popery page 314 Section XXV That the Reformed Churches have not renewed old condemned Heresies page 328 Section XXVI That the Church of Rome renewed and maintaineth old condemned Heresies page 337 Section XXVII Concerning Antichrist page 343 Section XXVIII That the Pope is Antichrist page 346 An Index of the Sections contained in M. Crafords Treatise SEction I. Showing that the principles of Papists are bloody treasonable and rebellious against the person and authority of Princes and peace of Kingdoms And the excuses of H. T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies are proved to be frivolous page 445 Section II. Showing that no Oath or Bond can oblige a Papist and that they hold it as a principle that no faith is to be kept to Hereticks page 457 Section III. Showing that the Pope and Synagogue of Rome have been the grand Authors of Warrs and Combustions and Confusions in the Christian world both before and since the Reformation page 465 Section IV. That the continual practise of Papists ever since the Reformation hath been to plot and practise bloody and treasonable Conspiracies Affassinations and Murders both of Princes and People who profeâ— the Reformed Religion page 474 Section V. Containing some instances in particular of the barbarous and inhumane cruelty of Papists to Protestants where they had the power over them page 490 The Conclusion Holding forth the hazard that the Churches of Britain and Ireland are in of being ruined by Antichrist page 5â—8 A LEARNED PIOUS AND ELABORAT Treatise wherein many of the greatest and weightiest points of Controversie betwixt the Reformed Churches and Papists are solidly debated and the truth of the doctrine of the Reformed Churches especially of the Churches of Scotland evidently demonstrated and the falshood and error of the Popish Religion and doctrine plainly discovered and solidly refuted by Scripture Fathers and also by some of their own Popes Doctors Cardinals and other Popish Writers By way of Reply to one M. Gilbert Brown Priest SECTION I. THE
INTRODVCTION M. Gilbert Brown An Answer to a certain Libel or Writing sent by M. JOHN WELSCH to a Catholick as an Answer to an objection of the Roman Church c. I received a little scrol which was sent to you by M. John Welsch Minister at Kirkubright in the which there is much promised and little done And because it may appear to some to be something I will God willing answer the same in particular M. John Welsch his Reply AS to your judgement and censure of this my answer to your objection wherein ye think there is much promised and little done I do not regard it For so long as your heart is bewitched with the pleasures of Babel your light is but darkness so while the Lord anoint your eyes with that eye-salve promised in the Revelation 3. and purge your heart by faith ye cannot discern of things different and give upright judgement What I promised I am now by the grace of God ready to perform And whether it was something or nothing much or little that I did let work bear witness and let them that love the truth judge M. Gilbert Brown First he tittles his libel An answer to an objection of the Roman Church whereby they go about to deface the verity of that only true Religion which we profess God forbid that we Catholicks whom he calls the Roman Church seeing that we are the only defenders of the truth as our predecessors the Pastors of the true Church was before us should go about to deface the truth But we go about to impugn all false doctrine repugnant to the truth as the holy Fathers of the primitive Church did before us against the hereticks in their dayes as Ireneus Cyprian Ambrose Augustine Hierome Basile Gregory Chrysostome with the rest of the true Pastors of the Church And seeing that the Ministers of this new Evangel have not only invented some heresies themselves but also have renewed many old condemned heresies confuted by them before as they cannot deny as I shal give some examples afterward as the heresie of Simon Magus of Manicheus Pelagius Aerius Jovinianus Vigilantius with many others what less can we do nor impugn the same as our predecessors did before M. John Welsch his Reply As to your answer First ye deny it and detest it as a blasphemy Next ye go about to clear your selves from the suspicion of it Thirdly ye challenge us and our doctrine with the crimes of novelty and heresie And so ye conclud ye could do no less nor impugn it As to your denying of the defacing of the truth of God so doth the whorish woman Prov. 30.20 after she hath eaten she wipes her mouth and saith she hath not sinned which is true as well in spiritual as in bodily fornication So notwithstanding your Church hath buried the truth of God in the graves of darkness and did overcover it with their traditions and glosses these many years by gone yet you wipe your mouthes and say you have not sinned But look to it in time for ignorance and zeal without knowledge will not excuse you in the day of the Lord. That you detest it as a blasphemy so did the high Priest rent his clothes and said Christ blasphemed Matth. 26.65 when he spake but the truth As for your golden styles which you take to your selves of Catholicks defenders of the truth successors to the Pastors of the true Church and impugners of all false doctrine Your doctrine indeed could not deceive so many if it were not covered with these styles your poyson and abomination would not be drunken so universally if it were not in such a golden cup as this Rev. 17.4 So these are the hyssop wherewith ye would wash you from this iniquity and cleanse you from this sin But may not false Prophets come in sheeps clothing Matth. 7.15 And the ministers of Satan can they not transform themselves as though they were the ministers of Christ 2. Cor. 11.13.14 The Scriptures have fore-told it And did not the false Apostles in Ephesus call themselves the Apostles of Christ and yet they were found lyars And did not the synagogue of Satan call her self the synagogue of the Jews Rev. 2.4.9 that is the Church of God and yet they were not so but the synagogue of the devil Yea and did not Abrahams seed and they that sate in Moses chair and was the successors of Aaron condemn the Savior of the world John 8.37 Matth. 23.2 Therefore not by your styles but by your fruits ye must be tryed Matth. 7.16 For if ye be Catholicks c. ye will teach the doctrine of that good Pastor and chief shepherd the Lord Jesus John 10.14 So it is your doctrine and not your styles that must defend you SECTION II. Whither the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church ANd because Christian Reader by this style of Catholick which they ascrive only to their Church they cause the simple to err and leads many blind-fold to damnation therefore I will take this visard from them Ye are not the Catholick Church as ye style your self and thus I prove it Pope Pius the fifth who wrote a Catechism according to the decree of the Council of Trent Catechism Conc. Trident. in expositione Symb. He there saith That the Church which is called the body of Christ whereof he is the head is called Catholick because it is spread in the light of one faith from the East to the West receiving men of all sorts containing all the faithful which have been from Adam even until this day or shal be hereafter to the end of the world professing the true faith c. Now I reason thus The Catholick Church comprehends all the faithful from Adam till now and that shal be hereafter to the end of the world or else Pope Pius and the Fathers of Trent errs But the Roman Church comprehends not all the faithful from Adam till now and that shal be hereafter Therefore the Roman Church is not the Catholick Church Choose you now which of these ye will deny The proposition I suppose ye will not for then ye should bring two inconveniencies the one upon Pope Pius and the Fathers of Trent that they have erred in defining the Catholick Church and so the Church and the Pope may err The other is upon your self who said that your Church hath not erred And so ye lose your styl of a defender of the Catholick faith for this is a chief point of their faith that the Church cannot err I hope therefore that these are Labyrinths which ye will not wittingly cast your self into and so you must hold fast the proposition All the question is then of the assumption Whither the Roman Church comprehends all the faithful from Adam till now and which shal be to the end of the world or not First I say a particular Church comprehends not all the faithful from Adam c. But the Roman Church is a particular Church or
else the Fathers of the Council of Basile and Verratus a Papist errs for they call the Roman Church a particular Church We grant say they Basil Concil Epist Synod 3 Verratus disputationum contra Lutheranos Tom. 6. de authoritate potest univers Eccles cap. 1. that the Roman Church is a principal Church among others but while you commend a part forget not the whole And they say The Universal Church comprehends the Roman Church Choose you then whither will you contradict the Fathers of the Council of Basile and a Papist Verratus and be so absurd as to call the arm of the body the whole body an arm of the Ocean sea the whole Ocean sea or to go from your tittle that the Roman Church is not the Catholick Church Secondly the Catholick Church comprehends them that were before Christ but the Church of Rome comprehends not them for there was a Church ere ever there was a Church at Rome and the Roman Church comprehends none but them that acknowledges the Pope to be the head of the Church But those that were before Christ never did that Therefore the Roman Church is not the Catholick Church Thirdly the Catholick Church is invisible for at the least neither are they that are glorified neither are they that are to be born visible But ye will not have the Roman Church but alwayes visible Therefore the Roman Church is not the Catholick Church Fourthly if the Roman Church be the Catholick Church then either it shal follow that the Pope is the head of the Catholick Church or else that the Roman Church wants a visible head Choose you whither of these ye will for the one ye must if ye will have the Roman Church to be the Catholick Church But to say that the Pope is the head of the Catholick Church I suppose ye dare not be so blasphemous for the glorified Saints and Peter himself are of the Catholick Church or else as I said before Pope Pius and the Fathers of Trent errs And so then if ye will make him head of the Catholick Church ye must make him head of the glorified Saints and of Peter also So then choose you whither will ye leave the style of Catholick which ye claim as proper to your Church or will ye have the Pope the head of the triumphant Church in heaven Or last of all will ye have your Roman Church to want a visible head One of these ye must choose So to end this point this style of Catholick it is like the numbering of the people by David for as it brought him in a wonderful strait when he saw it behoved him to choose either seven years famine or four moneths flying before his enemies or three days pestilence 2. Sam. 24. So this tittle of yours if you will abide by it brings you in a wonderful strait for ye have not the choise of one of three evils but these three things must ye either choose or else let this style of Catholick go one of you fighting against another the Church invisible and the Pope not to be the head of the Church Of the which the least of these is more able to overthrow your Kingdom then they all were able to have overthrown the Kingdom of David for they are the main pillars of your Kingdom your unity your visibility your Popes supremacy all which you must either lose or else let your style of Catholick go from your Church But how will ye wrestle your self out of this For if ye will believe the Fathers of Trent and Pope Pius in defining the Catholick Church ye cannot eschew these inconveniencies And if you will not believe them that they spake truly in that point ye must accuse them of error And so the Church hath erred the Pope hath erred and your self hath erred that said your Church hath the truth in all things And surely as Cajaphas being high Priest that year spake the truth when he said that one must die for the people John 11.50 and not the whole Nation perish suppose in an evil sense So have the Fathers of Trent and Pope Pius here spoken truly both according to the Scriptures for the Church is called the assembly of the first-born whose names are written in heaven Heb. 12.23 And that new Jerusalem which is from above which is the mother of us all Gal. 4.26 And also according to the Fathers Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 7. Bernard in Cant. c. 78. August de catechis rud cap. 20. Gregor moral in Job lib. 28. cap. 9. who affirmeth that the Church is the company of the predestinat and all the elect are within the compass of it are citizens of it So as Christ said to the Jews Matth. 12.27 If I cast out devils by the prince of devils by whom then casteth your children them out So if we speak now by an erroneous spirit that sayes the Catholick Church comprehends all the elect that was is and shal be and the Church of Rome cannot be the Catholick Church By what spirit hath your Council and Pope and these Fathers spoken the same So not your children but your Fathers shal be your Judges Ye did mark some contradiction as ye thought between me and some others unto the which I will answer in the own time Let me therefore mark this one now and mark it Reader Ye have heard now how that all these with one voice have said that the Catholick Church comprehends all the elect that was is and shal be Is it any heresie then to hold this point I think you will not nor dare not say it What will you say then to your general Council of Constance Sess 15. art 1. 6. who condemned John Hus for the same doctrine the first and sixth article for saying that there is an Universal Church which is the company of the predestinat and as it is taken in this sense it is an article of our faith For these among the rest was this pure innocent condemned and burnt as an heretick his doctrine as heresie which of these will ye say now have erred whither the general Council of Constance or the Fathers of Trent Pope Pius Gregorie Augustine Clement and Bernard For surely if the latter erred not then not only did the Council of Constance err but also have brought upon themselves innocent blood in condemning the innocent and the truth in him And if the Council of Constance erred not in condemning these articles of John Hus then have they condemned the doctrine of the Fathers of Trent Pope Pius Gregorie Augustine c. and their persons in the person of John Hus. Choose which of them ye will I speak the truth to thee in Christ Reader be not deceived But open thy eyes and behold the veritie it self condemned by a general Council and the professor of it burnt for an heretick but his blood and the blood of the rest of the martyrs of God is found in this whore of
Babel and therefore one day she shal be recompensed for all her iniquity Rev. 17.6 and 18.24 Go out of her therefore and save thy soul that thou be not tormented in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone with her for evermore Rev 18.45 Otherwise I call heaven and earth to witness against thee that thou shalt die in her sin and the smoke of thy torment shal ascend for evermore Rev. 14.1 What now will you say to these things that your Church is not the Catholick Church but a part of it only and is only Catholick because of the Catholick doctrine that she professes But if this be true wherefore then did your general Council condemn it in John Hus and burn him for that doctrine which both your self must confess to be true and is agreeable to Scripture Fathers and your own Popes Next I say suppose when ye are brought to this strait ye must say so yet for all this not only call ye your Church Catholick because of the soundness of doctrine which ye suppose she professes but also and speciallie to make the simple believe that there is no salvation out of her As appeareth by the Epistle of Cardinal Cusanus writing to the Bohemians Cochlaeus histor Hussitar lib. 21. Therefore ye call it the only true Church and the Catholick Church for out of the particular Church there is salvation but out of the Catholick Church there is no salvation Thirdlie I say as the Epistles of Peter John James and Jude are intituled Catholick not because of the soundness of their doctrine which is common to the Epistles of Paul also and all the rest of the Scripture which in that respect may also be called Catholick but because they are written generallie to all So the Church is called Catholick properly not because of the soundness of doctrine for that is common to all the particular Churches that have the puritie of Religion but because it comprehends all the particular Churches and all the elect And also to put a difference between the Church of the Jewes which did comprehend but one certain people and the Christian Church since the coming of Christ which is not bound to any certain place or nation or people but indifferently receives all both Jew and Gentil that believes and therefore is it called Catholick and therefore in our Belief we say not I believe the Catholick doctrine but the Catholick Church So by this she is properlie distinguished from particular Churches as the mother from the daughters and the whole body from the particular members So then if you would speak properlie of your Church and not make your styles snares to catch the souls of the simple call her but a particular Church and a member of the Catholick Church but yet dead and rotten as shal be shown afterward by the grace of God Otherwise if you will but call her the Catholick Church you first rob the mother for she is properly Catholick and also injures the rest of the daughters For in respect of the soundness of faith they may also challenge the same to them And thirdly ye deceive the souls of the simple thereby by making them believe there is not one other Church but yours And last of all you are sacrilegious in decking an adulteress with the styles of the spouse of Christ As to the third point wherein ye calumniate the truth of God which we profess in calling it a new Evangel and old renewed and new invented heresies of our own These are indeed heavie words wherewith ye blaspheme the word of the Lord Acts 18.6 and 19.9 and speak evil of it to the people of this Countrey And therefore as the Apostle saith of them that blasphemed his doctrine Your damnation is just Rom. 3.8 For a wo by Gods own mouth is pronounced against them that call good evil and evil good truth falshood and falshood truth and darkness light and light darkness Isai 5.20 But as the Archangel when he strave with Satan about the body of Moses did not blame him with cursed speaking but said The Lord rebuke thee Jude 9. so we will not blame you with cursed speaking but the Lord rebuke you For ye speak here the vision of your own heart and not from the mouth of the Lord And ye are not the first that hath blasphemed the truth of God for so did the Jewes before you call the doctrine of the Gospel a sect a heresie and the Gentiles called it strange Gods and a new doctrine and the preachers thereof a setter forth of strange Gods and of new doctrine and a babler Acts 28. and 14. and 17. The Jews said that Christ had a Devil and yet as our Lord testifies it was they that were the children of the Devil John 8.44 Ye say that we preach a new Evangel and old new heresies but this is the sin the doctrine of your Church For to let that pass of that new everlasting Gospel which your Friers invented devised as testifieth Guliel de sancto Amore in his book de pericul noviss temp anno 1192. wherein was contained such blasphemies as the heaven and earth abhorrs to hear them That God the Father reigned under the law God the Son under grace And the holy Ghost was then that year to begin his kingdom and to continue to the end of the world And that Jesus Christ was not God his Sacrament nothing and his Evangel not a true Evangel O horrible blasphemie the which if God had not raised up some men in those days to have resisted it as the Waldenses and others which ye call hereticks and infamous men the Gospel of Christ had been lost and in stead of it we would have gotten a new Gospel the dreggs whereof yet remains in your Church But I will let this pass because the wise men of Babel I mean your Clergy of Rome saw that that was too plain an iniquitie therefore they caused it quietlie to be removed and buried and yet they not condemned as hereticks that preached it But by the contrary the Waldenses and others that withstood it was condemned as hereticks and their books burnt To let this pass I say which testifieth what the world might have looked for at your hands if the Lord had not provided better for his poor Church Your whole doctrine is Antichristian as shal be proved hereafter your Church Babel Rev. 17. your Kingdom that second beast Rev. 13.11 that hath two horns like the Lamb and yet speaks like the dragon and your head the man of sin 2. Thess 2. and son of perdition And ye are they that have renewed old condemned heresies and have invented new of your own as shal be proved afterward by Gods grace SECTION III. Concerning the Churches infallibility and immunity from error M. John Welsch SAy they our Religion is so ancient that it hath continued ever by a lineal succession of Pastors and Bishops from the dayes of Christ and his
Reader to set down here the particular sayings of every one of them And if ye had formed your arguments out of them I should have formed my answer by the grace of God to every one of them And thus much concerning your ground and the proofs of it Now I come to that which ye gather of it SECTION IV. Whither the Church of Rome be the only true Church and the Reformed not true Churches OF this we collect that our Church must be the only true Church and not theirs because ours hath never been interrupted nor hath failed in any substantial point of faith and Religion since Christ and his Apostles dayes and theirs hath done To confirm this I say that M. John nor no Minister in Scotland can be able to assign to us the circumstances of all mutations and changes in Religion That is to say 1. The author who first began our Religion 2. The time when it was begun 3. The place where it began 4. The true Church who said against the same 5. The matter it self which was changed or begun 6. Nor the faithful number from whom they departed All these things we shal assign to their Religion and that since Christ and his Apostles 1. The first auâ—hor of their Religion albeit not in all things was Martin Luther an Augustine Frier 2. He began his Religion in the year of God 1517. 3. He began the same in Saxony in the countrey of Almanie 4. The Church of Rome Italie France Spain Scotland England Denmark Sweden Pole a great part of Almanie with the east and west Indies which were the true Church said against him 5. The heads of Religion which he first said against were Pardons He affirmed that man was only justified by Faith He denied the Supper of our Lord to be a sacrifice c. 6. He departed himself from all the Christian Churches in Europe in the Indies and other places and therefore he had no predecessors of his own Religion as we read in the Apologie of the English Protestants that he and Zuinglius were the first that came to the knowledge of the Evangel and therefore none immediatly before them Then seeing that there was none of his profession in the earth before him immediatly neither visible nor invisible he and his could not be the Church of Christ for it hath ever stood and never failed no not the space of one day universally because our Savior saith I shal be with you every day to the consummation of the world M. John Welsch his Reply As to your collection the form of it must be this That Church only must be the true Church that hath never been interrupted nor failed in any substantial head of faith and Religion since Christ and his Apostles But say ye yours is such and ours not Therefore your Church is the true Church and ours not The proposition I grant But all the controversie lyes in the probation of your assumption Yea in stead of proving ye say it is not possible to me nor to no Minister in Scotland to assign to you the circumstances of all mutations and changes in your Religion as the person time place c. And then ye attempt to assign all these circumstances of our Religion upon the which ye conclud the falsehood of it So we will first see how ye prove your own and then see how ye disprove ours Indeed this argument of yours is of such account with you that there are not many of your Writers but they have set it as it were in the vant-guard of their host and among the greatest of their strengths and bulwarks for to uphold their ruinous Babel So Hammilton and Hay in their demands to the Ministers of Scotland so Campion so Duraeus Scotus against Whitaker in his defence so your Rhemists upon the 28. of the Acts and on 1. John 2. and so Bellarmin lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 5. Whereby it may be seen of what account this argument of yours is in the judgement of your Church But to answer to your argument first I say If there be no mutations or changes in your Religion since Christ and his Apostles then your Religion and doctrine will be one with that which is set down in the Scripture of God For you will not deny I hope but the Scripture doth sufficiently testifie what doctrine and Religion was in Christs and his Apostles dayes And so let it once be put in the ballance of the Scripture and tryed thereby and then I hope it will soon be made manifest how far it is changed So and you dare M. Gilbert let once your Religion be set upon the pannel and let it once have an assise of the Scripture and then the plea will end I hope Next I say it will not follow We cannot assign all the circumstances of changes in your Religion Therefore your Religion is uncorrupted For it suffiseth if we can prove the first only that is the matter or doctrine it self which is changed and that by comparing it with the Scriptures of God suppose we could not assign all the rest of the circumstances of the mutation as the time place author c. for the changes of many things are most notorious and yet all the circumstances of the change thereof not known We say then it is not needful to seek the beginnings and circumstances of the decays and corruptions in your Church when the corruption and change it self is so manifest by comparing your doctrine with the written Word of God that it cannot be denyed For will you say that he who is deadly diseased is whole and sound because I cannot tell you the first article of time the place and first occasion of the disease When it is manifest that a city is full of misorder and confusion will ye say that ye will not believe it to be so unless you know the first beginnings and progress of these misorders If you saw a ruinous house would ye say Prove me and tell me all the circumstances of the change of it otherwise I will not believe it Will ye deny that a ship could be drowned unless it were told you all the circumstances of the change of the leck where through it drowned If any found a man fallen in a pit shal he not believe that he is fallen whom nevertheless he sees to be there unless it were told him when and by whom he was cast into the same Even so will ye not believe or will ye hinder all others to believe that your Church and Religion is ruinous consumed rotten dead drowned and full of misorder heresie and confusion unless the first beginnings of these changes can be told you We say therefore it is sufficient to prove the ruine and consumption of your Church and Religion if by comparing your doctrine with the truth of God in the Scripture we make evident the direct opposition betwixt them suppose we could not assign all the circumstances of the change of
it out of the histories leaving it free to Historiographers to write what they please and omit what they please Thirdly it is manifest that the Church of the Jewes in the time of Christ was changed both in doctrine and manners from that estat that it was in the time of Aaron Eleazar and sundry others and also the Churches of Galatia and Corinth that they were changed from the estat wherein they were And yet I suppose that neither ye nor any Papist in the earth is able to assign to me all the circumstances of the mutations and changes in the same as the first authors time place c. and yet there was a great change in doctrine and Religion in all these Churches as hath been proved before And we read that our Savior and the Apostles convicted them of a change and yet they designed not the first authors time and place c. The like I say of the Church of Greece Asia and Africa which in number exceeds yours That there is a wonderful change in their Church and Religion ye will not deny or else your Religion is heresie For as said is they acknowledge not your Popes supremacy transubstantiation c. And yet I suppose ye nor no Papist in the earth is able to assign all the circumstances of changes in their Church and Religion which they have presently yea more unable to do this then we are able to do the same in yours I mean not the heresies of Arrius Samosatenus Nestorius Eutyches Sergius and the rest which long ago were damned by the Councils of the Greek Churches For I suppose ye shal not be able to prove that they now maintain these heresies which they condemned and refuted long ago But I mean of the present errors and corruptions in their worship and Religion which now they maintain and profess If then ye judge the Churches of the East heretical because they are not agreeable to your doctrine and Religion of Rome and yet not be able to assign the circumstances of the changes and mutations of the same will ye not grant the same liberty to us to account and judge your Church and Religion failed because it is not agreeable to the doctrine of Jesus Christ set down in the Scripture suppose we could not assign to you the circumstances of the changes of the same Fourthly I say if you have read Epiphanius there ye shal find many heresies which I omit for shortness which he accounts heresies whose beginnings and authors are unknown Fifthly there is such an universal complaint of the monstrous abominations decays in your Religion discipline and manners and that by your own Councils Concil Constant sess 4. 5. Trident. sess 6. Basil sess 2. 3. Fathers Bernard in Cant. 33. Popes Cardinals and Friers that I would have thought it uncredible unless I had read them that either your own mouthes should have so condemned your selves or else that the posterity afterward should have been so shameless as to have boasted of the purity of their Church and Religion Therefore the Council of Trent hath proclaimed it to the world in writ that the Church hath need to be reformed in the head and members Now I ask that of you concerning these abuses in discipline and manners which ye ask of us concerning your doctrine Show me all the circumstances of mutation and change distinctly if ye can what time what place by what author c. such monstrous abominations first brake in in your Church and Religion Now seeing there is no man who hath a spark of judgement that will doubt of that incredible change of manners and discipline in your Church and yet the circumstances of the changes unknown think ye then that ye shal assure men that no changes could fall in your doctrine unless we knew the circumstances of the changes of the same Sixthly the Scripture testifies Matth. 13.27.28 that even the tares which is the evil seed doth not appear so soon as they are sown and that neither the times nor the first author of them was known no not to the most diligent laborers of the Lords ground at the first and yet it was enough to know them to be evil seed by the difference that was seen betwixt them and the good seed suppose the time place and author was unknown at the first So it is proof enough against your doctrine that it is but tares if the difference be made manifest between it and the Lords truth in the Scripture suppose the circumstances of the changes of it cannot be assigned Seventhly error is likened to leaven and a canker which doth not all at once infect the whole mass and fester the whole body but piece and piece so your corruption came not in all at once but piece and piece infected your Church and festered your Religion And therefore it is no wonder suppose the beginnings of infection and circumstances of it hath not been marked For if they had broken in all at once and suddenly overthrown the whole Church it had been no difficulty to have assigned the circumstances of the overthrow of it For if any having a whole constitution with a stroke were slain if a ship with a wave were drowned it were no difficulty to assign the circumstances of the sudden changes But in a consumption and in a leck that hath come in piece and piece in the body and in the ship the beginnings thereof cannot be so easily perceived For a little leck in process of time will sink a great ship And if it be so hard to discern the beginnings of these things which our senses may grope how much more hard is it to perceive the beginnings of these spiritual corruptions which cannot be perceived by the natural man but only by the light of Gods Spirit by the spiritual man Eightly if now it be so in other heresies as the Scripture testifies of them that their beginnings are ofttimes unknown even unto the most diligent laborers of the Lords husbandrie and that they come in by little and little and doth not infect all at once how much more is this true in your Antichristian Religion which as it was fore-told should deceive all Nations and make them drunken with the wine of her fornication And therefore your doctrine is termed in the Scripture an iniquitie but a secret iniquitie an unrighteousness but yet a deceivable unrighteousness a delusion but yet a strong delusion 2. Thess an abomination and spiritual fornication Rev. 17. but yet put in a golden cup that is having the show of godliness and Religion and your Church is called a harlot but yet finely decked in purple c. not like a harlot but a Queen Your Kingdō is called a beast that speaks like the dragon but yet like the lamb in his horns resembling the power and authority of the Lord Jesus Seeing then your Church Kingdom and Doctrine is such a mystery of iniquity hath such a show of godliness hath such a
resemblance with the lamb hath such clokes of styles is so deceivable and is such a strong delusion as the Scripture testifies of it Is it any wonder suppose the beginnings of this mystery and of the whoredoms of this Queen be not distinctly marked and set down Ninthly it is likely enough that the great credit wherein the first Bishops of Rome was for their piety and godliness and the lofty estat of their successors after them together with their cruelty and tyranny did so dazel on the one side the eyes of the godly that they were not inquisitive in marking the changes and beginnings of their corruptions and so bridled the mouthes of other some that they durst not write the things they saw and if they writ any thing they writ it but barely and corruptly for the tyranny of your Church was such that none durst mutter against your Church and Religion but he was taken without further as an heretick and condemned and executed where ever your tyranny reached Last of all suppose they had been written by the Histories of every age and that distinctly yet considering the universal power craft and policy of your Church and Kingdom is it any wonder suppose they be not now extant at all but either burnt or else so falsified and corrupted that the beginnings thereof should not have been perceived For seeing in the purer times when the power and dominion of your Church was not yet come to the hight such was the ambition and falshood of your Popes that in the presence of a Council of 217. Bishops in Carthage anno 430. where Augustin was present they did alledge a false Canon of the Council of Nice for to have established their supremacy and under one of their hands sent it to the Council by their Legats the which was espyed and found out by the whole Council that not only it was decreed and ordained in that Council he should have no prerogative over the Churches of Africk and that none should appeal to him under the pain of deposition and excommunication but alâ—o he was rebuked by the Fathers of that Council in their letters to him If he was so bold then what marvel suppose since he hath falsified and corrupted every History and Writing that he saw might bear any wayes witness of the corruptions tyrannies and abominations of that Church and Religion of his And hence it is I am sure that we find so little written of the beginnings of their corruptions and of them that resisted it And your Index expurgatorius devised in the Council of Trent for blotting out every thing in the writings of men that might testifie of your corruptions doth also sufficiently witness unto the world what ye did in the former times So to conclud this suppose we could not assign to you the circumstances of the changes of your Religion yet it follows not but your Religion and Church may be corrupted and decayed But to satisfie your demand suppose I hope the things already said will satisfie the consciences of the godly What crave you that all the circumstances of changes in your Religion may be assigned to you First then I say there is nothing that may serve either to make the man of God wâ—se unto salvation or yet that may make him perfect in every good work but the Scripture testifies For it is able to do both these If these circumstances then serve either for salvation or perfection I say they are set down in the Scripture so that we need not to go to Histories to search the same The first then ye crave is the time when the change began The Scripture tells you That the mystery of iniquity began to work even then in the Apostles days and that it doth already work and so grew on from degree to degree till he that withheld it was removed that is till the Empire of Rome began to decay and the seat of it removed from thence as the Fathers expounded it Augustin Chrysostome Jerome and so the city left to the Pope the man of sin for him to set his throne there for Rome that seven hilled City Rev. 17 9 behoved to be the seat of the Antichrist as it was fore told by the Scripture So if you will believe the Scripture you have the time What crave you next The place I say the Scripture testifieth of the same that that mystical Babylon which Bellarmin lib. 2. de Rom. Pontif. cap 2. Rev. 17. your chief champion grants to be Rome that sits upon sâ—ven hills that had the dominion over the Kings of the earth that is the place where first your Church and Religion began to decay So there the place if you will believe the Scripture What crave you next The author The Scripture also hath fore told That the beast that came out of the bottomless pit and slew the witnesses of God and made war with the Saints and overcame them and made all to worship the image of the beast and the harlot Babel the city of Rome the mother of whoredoms who made all Nations to drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication Rev. 12 7. and 14.8 That is your head and Church they are the authors and mothers of this decay and corruption What is the fourth thing ye require The Church that said against the same The Scripture will tell you that too The two witnesses of God whom she killed the woman that fled in the wilderness the Saints with whom she made war and who would not worship the beast nor receive his image the hundred forty and four thousand that John saw standing with the Lamb on mount Sion who was not defiled with your idolatry but followed the Lamb whithâ—rsoever he went Rev. 11. and 12 and 13. and 14. These then are the true Church which spake against your corruptions who are like unto Eliahs seven thousand that had not bowed their knees to Baal What crave you more The matter it self they said against The Scripture and ye will believe will satisfie you in this point also The doctrine then that was said against Was the mystery of iniquity that deceivableness of unrighteousness that strong delusion 1. Thess 2 Rev. 13. That doctrine of the dragon that spiritual idolatrie and abomination Rev. 17.18 That doctrine of Devils in forbidding marriage and commanding abstinence of meat c. 1. Tim. 4. What crave you last The number from whom they departed The Scripture will also bear witness of this seeing your Religion is a departure from the faith 1. Thess 2. then all these that ever professed the faith of Jesus set down in his written Word even the Lord Jesus the head the Apostles the layers of the foundation the primitive Churh the woman that fled in the wilderness the Saints with whom ye made war and all the elect and chosen of God that abhorred your idolatrie These are the true Churches from whom you departed What now crave you more Will not the
abundance of the rivers of the Scriptures of God quench and satisfie this your desire but that you must go unto the unpure fountains of mens writings as though the Scriptures were not sufficient not only to make a man wise unto salvation but to make him perfect in every thing These things I am sure will satisfie the souls of them that love the truth But because you give no credit to the Scriptures but counts them as a nose of wax and as one of your Popes speaking to Bembus a Cardinal called them a fable of Christ and yet such a fable as hath inriched your treasures And Sylvester Prierias writing against Luther saith That the Roman Church and Pope is of greater authority then the Scriptures O horrible blasphemies of the holy truth of God Therefore we will go to the Histories and see what they have testified of these circumstances And although all things here be not expressed to the full yet there is so much left uncorrupted and unscraped out by the gracious providence of God that would not want his witness in all ages out of the Fathers and your own Writers that I hope will satisfie the consciences of all the modest and godly Clemens Alexandrinus saith lib. 1. strom that the Apostles successors received the doctrine from them as the sons from their fathers But he subjoyns That there was very few children that was like their fathers Aegesippus as Nicephorus reports saith lib. 3. cap. 16. That the Church remained a pure virgin as long as the Apostles lived unto Trajans time but they being dead he writes that it was speedily corrupted So if ye credit the testimonies of these men ye see the Church remaineth not long in her integrity And if you would hear any thing of your Roman Church Socrates lib. 7. cap. 11. saith That Celestin your Pope past the bounds of his Priesthood Read Basilius de Spiritu sancto cap. ult and there ye may see what change of Religion was in his time Augustin testifies epist 119. c. 19. That the multitude of ceremonies grew so in his time that the condition of the Jews seemed to be more tollerable then the condition of the Church Now did not this sickness suppose ye grow by time And to come to your own Writers Bernard saith in Cant. 33. That the Ministers of Christ meaning of the Roman Church serves Antichrist And to the Pope himself Eugenius the 3. he saith lib. 4. And thou the shepherd goeth forth being clothed with a glorious attyr if I durst say it these are the feeding places of Devils rather then of sheep Thy court is accustomed rather to receive good men then to make them good not the evil profits but the good decays there And in another place he saith From the sole of the foot speaking of the Church of Rome to the crown of the head there is no health nor soundness And de conv Pauli Psal 91. ser 6. he saith What remains now speaking of the corruption of that Church of Rome but that the man of sin be revealed the man of perdition Daemonium non modò diurnum sed meridianum that is a devilry not only in the day-tyde but in the very noon-tyde And lib. 4. to Eugenius the Pope he saith In these secular attyrs and powers thou hast not succeeded to Peter but to Constantine The day would sooner fail me then the writing of his complaints against the Church of Rome Pope Adrian the 6. in his instructions to his Legats who were sent to the Council of Noremberg he grants and bids them say to the Council That we know that in this chair meaning Peters Sea in Rome for certain years many abominable things have been in it the abuse in spiritual things the excess in commandments and in a word all things are changed in a worse And the Council of the Cardinals to Paul the third they say Out of this fountain holy Father as from the Troyan horse hath broken so many abuses in the Church of God such heavy diseases whereby we see now that she is despaired almost of health Aeneas Sylvius a Cardinal who also was Pope afterward saith of your Church That all faith hath perished in her and love is grown yce-cold And Cornelius Bitontinus Bishop who was present at the Council of Trent saith Would to God speaking of your Church that unanimes velut prorsus c. all with one heart all utterly they had not declined from Religion to superstition from Faith to infidelity from Christ to Antichrist What would ye have more Will ye yet be so shameless as to boast of the purity of your Church and from God to Epicurism ex Epistola 54 ad Caspar Schlick Oratio Cornelii Epis Bitonti 3. Dom. advent I leave the rest as Platin Genebrard Frier Mantuan Nicolaus Clemangis Franciscus Petrarcha Aventinus and a number of others who are full of complaints of the abominations of your Church of Rome that certainly I cānot but wonder at your shamelesness in opening of your mouth and saying That your Church had the truth in all things and never failed nor was interrupted against such a cloud of witnesses whose testimonies ye dare not refuse But I leave you to the Lord. The lips of a liar is abomination to the Lord Prov. 20 So your own mouthes shal rise up in the day of the Lord and condemn you that saith Your Church hath not failed in any substantial point of Religion But you require more distinctly the time place and persons c. that hath brought in this mutation and change If these are to be accounted authors of your erroneous doctrines who were the chief defenders thereof then I say the Popes of Rome for the most part are the authors of the same for they were the chief defenders thereof suppose they had not been the first teachers thereof For otherwise Luther cannot be said to be the author of our Religion as ye say because he was not the first that taught the same and that by your own confession For ye say that sundry other hereticks before Luther taught the same heads of doctrine which he taught and which we profess now as that fasting should be free that only faith justifieth that man hath not free will c. Next because it were too longsome to go through the whole heads of your Religion therefore I will only bring a few examples and that in some of the substantial points thereof As for the sacrifice of the Mass and the ceremonies thereof I have shown the authors thereof in another place therefore I omit that now The first that ever took upon him to exercise jurisdiction over the Churches of the East was Pope Victor anno 200. or 198. who took upon him to excommunicat the Bishops of the East because they would not follow his fashion in the celebration of Easter There the person time and place resisted by Irenaeus Bishop of Lions in France and the Bishops of the East and the brethren
condemned in the Scripture I deny that For Antichrist and his Kingdom are not so old as the Scripture and yet the Scripture condemned it For not only condemns it present heresies but also the heresies that was to come And seeing Papistrie is that Antichristian Religion as shal be made manifest by Gods grace therefore it hath the express condemnation of it in the Word of God The form therefore of it no wayes will make it impossible to be proved As for the next thing that I prove nothing bu offers very fair I answer it was not my purpose then but I hope ye shal have a proof now of that which I offered then As to the third then that I can say nothing to your argument which ye would hâ—ve the Reader to mark When I read this I marked this that ye would earnestly have the Reader perswaded of the invincibleness of your argument and my inability to answer But what bring ye with you to perswade him of the same Your reason is because I have not answered it Will this follow I have not suppose it were so as ye say therefore I cannot It will not follow I have not answered I cannot answer to it But as you have a new Theology so have you a new Logick But said I nothing to your argument What is not answered sufficiently in the same Your argument was the antiquity of your Religion and continuance of it from Christ by a lineal succession never interrupted c. and the novelty of ours My answer was Yours was not institut by Christ nor his Apostles in his Scripture as ours was and yours was gain-said in the chief points by the testimonies of the Fathers the first six hundred years and the principal points of our Religion confirmed by sundry of their testimonies Thirdly yours was that Antichristian apostasie that the Scripture fore told should come and in the hight of your tyranny and Idolatry was gain-said by many before Martin Luther and ours was professed by sundry before him whose names I set down all which I offered to prove and now shal do by Gods grace Now you say this is no answer But is that no answer that cuts the very throat of your Religion if it be verified and invalidities your argument that it do never stand up to under-prop your Religion again For that Religion which is not instituted by Christ in the Scripture whose main foundations is gain-said by the testimonies of sundry of the Fathers of the first 600. year which is Antichristian and which was gain-said by the Saints that they persecuted and slew hath not the continuance from Christ by a lineal succession never interrupted nor spoken against by a true Church till Martin Luthers days This I am sure ye will not deny But your Religion is such as I offered then to prove and now have in some points and shal in other some points by Gods grace The which if it be verified then I hope ye will not deny but that your Religion hath neither antiquity continuance nor succession from Christ till Martin Luthers dayes And that Religion cannot be newly forged and invented since Martin Luthers dayes which hath the warrant and institution of it in the Scripture c. This you cannot deny But our Religion is such as then I offered to prove and now have done in some points and shal do in other some points by Gods grace Therefore our Religion cannot be newly forged and invented c. but is the only true Religion So that this answer if it be proved doth sufficiently vindicat our Religion from novelty Now if this be no answer to your argument then I say no more but ye will answer it the sooner And because ye formed your own argument your self in your answer to me and I have answered to it else therefore I will now insist no further upon it And as for your lineal succession of Bishops it will come in question afterward therefore I omit it now SECTION V. Concerning the Judge of Controversies namely whither GOD speaking in the Scripture be Judge of Controversies Maister Gilbert Brown AS for the written Word it is true that it is a most faithful witness and it be not corrupted to Christ and his Church as our Savior testifies himself John 5.39 of the which opinion there is sundry Protestants chiefly young Merchiston in his discourse upon the Revelation in the 21. proposition and other places 2. Cor. 3.6 John 6.63 But that it ought to be Judge to decide all controversies in Religion M. John hath no Scripture for the same It is the holy Ghost that must be Judge and the holy Writ must bear witness thereto For this cause the holy Ghost was given to the Church by the Father and the Son that he might teach it all truth John 14.25.26 This holy Ghost gives judgement by the Pastors of the true Church as he did by the Apostles and Priests at the Council of Jerusalem It hath pleased the holy Ghost and us saith the Apostle Acts 15.19.28 and so he hath ever done since the beginning of the Church when it was troubled with heresies and false doctrine as the Councils of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon M. John Welsch his Reply You first here decline the Scripture as Judge to decide all controversies in Religion And you are not the first that have done this but all your Roman Clergy with you And suppose there were not another thing to make the consciences of men suspect your Religion that it is not found in the book of God yet this is a great presumption that ye give out of it your selves For what may all men think of the same but that if ye were perswaded in your conscience to justify your Religion to be from Jesus Christ in his written Word ye would never decline the judicatorie of it and the declining of the same is an evident demonstration that ye are privy to your selves in your own consciences that it is not from God in his written Word But wherefore say I that ye are privy to your selves of this Ye have made it known to the world by your confession in your own books that many of the chief points of your Religion controverted between you and us which ye maintain have not their original beginning nor authors in the Scriptures but in your unwritten traditions So Petrus a Soto a Papist of great name confessed He calls all these observations Apostolick traditions whose beginning principium origo author cannot be found in the whole Scriptures in his book against Brentius And then he reckons out a number of the chief and principal heads of their Religion saying Of the which sort are the oblation of the sacrifice of the altar the invocation or prayers to Saints the prayer for the dead the supremacie of the Pope of Rome the consecration of the water in baptism the whole sacraments of orders matrimonie pennance confirmation and extream unction the merits of works
only means and instrument whereby the holy Ghost works faith in our hearts Thus I reason therefore He only can be Judge in controversies of Religion whose authority is such that none may appeal from the same whose judgement is infallible true who will not be partial nor favor parties and who is able to convict and perswade the conscience of the truth and make the party to rest in the same But only the holy Ghost in by the Scripture hath these proprieties no other Therefore the holy Ghost in and by the Scripture is only Judge And whereas you say that the holy Writ must bear witn ss to it What will you say then to all the chief points of your Religion almost which the learned and great defenders of your faith before cited have confessed are unwritten traditions which have not their beginning nor authority from the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same Upon the which I reason thus That doctrine is not the holie Ghosts which the Scripture bears not witness to this ye say your self for ye say The Scripture must bear witness to it But all the chief points almost of your Religion as the supremacy of the Pope the sacrifice of the Mass invocation of Saints the five bastard Sacraments the worshipping of Images Transubstantiation Communion under one kind Satisfactions Pardons Purgatory Merits of works c. have not their authoritie from the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same as your own Catholicks as ye call them testifies Therefore your Doctrine and Religion is not the holie Ghosts and that by your own testimonie Now trulie M. Gilbert I fear ye lose your style if you defend your Religion no better then this And whereas you say That the holy Ghost gives out his judgement by the Pastors of the true Church I grant indeed that the Pastors gives out publick sentence in controversies of Religion because they are the Lords witnesses messengers and mouthes to testifie proclaim interpret and discern his truth from falshood But first the rule of this their judgement should be the Word of God unto the which they are bound in all their testimonies and judgements from the which if their judgements swerve but an inch-broad they are not the judgements of the holie Ghost so that all their decreets and determinations in the worship of God and man his salvation should onlie be received accordinglie as they agree or dissent from the same For the Apostle pronounces him accursed suppose he were an Angel that would preach another Gospel then that which he preached Gal. 1 8. And he preached nothing but out of the Scripture Acts 26.22 But your Roman Church by the contrary saith That their decreets and sentences should be taken without all tryal and examination because whatsoever they decree say they in manners or doctrine whither they be comprehended in the Scripture or not they cannot err Bellar. de Eccles lib. 1. de Consil cap. 18. lib. 3. c. 14. Next if it be asked of you whom ye judge to be the Pastors of the true Church You will answer as ye do that your Church is the only true Church and your Bishops and Popes the only true Pastors so that they only must be the Judge to end all controversies And Bellarmin is plain in this for he saith lib 3. de verbi interpret cap. 5. 9. lib. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 2. The Pope is chief Judge in all controversies in Religion either he himself alone or with his Council and that in his judgement and sentence all men should rest and he should be obediently heard of all the faithful in all matters of controversie whether he can err or not And their Canon Law hath decreeted That no man should rebuke him suppose he should carry with him innumerable souls to hell And they teach that their decreets should not be examined of any whither they be agreeable to the Scripture or not but that they should be received as the express Word of God and the Gospel Dist 40. cap. Si Papa Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 18. Rhemist annotat in 2. Thess 2. v. 12. Joannes Maria verractus editus anno 1561. Hosius lib. de express verb. Dei pag. 97. But first judge thou Reader in what suspicion they have their Religion in their own hearts They have declined the holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture and that not only as Judge but in the authentick Greek and Hebrew as witness So their Religion cannot stand if the Lord be either as Judge in his Scripture to give out sentence of it or as witness in the authentick copies to hold his hand at the bar and depone against it Now whom would they have as Judges Their own Pastors and the Pope and all their determinations to be received without a tryal as the Gospel and express Word of God as though their Religion could not be justified unless the Fathers and forgers thereof the Popes and Bishops of Rome were set on the bench to be Judges thereof Now what an unrighteous thing is this both to be partie and Judge For the chief controversie is of themselves whither he be the Antichrist or not And his Ministers and Church Antichristian or not But what show of reason can you have for this The Prince of life the Son of God who is the righteous Judge of the whole world in that great controversie wherein it is called in question whether he was the Messias or not desired not to be the Judge For he said If I testifie of my self much more if I judge of my self my testimony is not true John 3.31 but referred this controversie to the Scripture saying Search the Scriptures c. John 5.32 And yet you that are but flesh and blood dust and ashes yea monsters and incarnat Devils as your own Writers and Councils have testified of some of your Popes who may err and have been hereticks as some of your Popes have been and that by your own testimonies you will not only bear witness of your selves but also be Judges in the controversies of your selves rejecting the judgement of the holy Ghost in the Scripture All men saith the Apostle are liars How then shal I certainlie know but they may lie How shal my conscience rest in their judgement Shal I have no better warrant for my salvation then the testimonies of your Bishops and Popes who are but men and so may lie who are partie and so never will condemn themselves who of all men have most foully erred What is this but to make the voice of your Bishops and Popes of greater authoritie then the voice of God in his Scripture For seeing it is the sense of the Scripture that is called in controversie and the sense of the Scripture is the Scripture it self And your doctrine is that I must embrace such and such interpretations of the Scripture that are called in controversie and my conscience must rest in the same
without further tryal because he hath so decreed it What is this but not only to make him equal to the Lord For God only hath that priviledge to be believed because he so speaks mans testimony so far only is to be credited as it may be warranted by the Scripture but also to preferr his authoritie to the voice of God in his Scripture seeing he is Judge of the same and not that onlie but to hang my salvation upon his voice and testimonie And seeing ye will have them Judges what is the cause that their Canons Laws and determinations are not as authentick as the Scripture and insert in the Canon of the Scripture But let us see your reasons First you say That the holy Ghost was given to the Church by the Father and the Son that he might teach it all truth I grant this that the holy Ghost is given to every one of the elect as wel Pastor as people to lead them in all truth in so far as may bring them to salvation And yet ye will not make every one of them Judges next every one of the elect may err notwithstanding of this promise suppose not totally and finally and therefore cannot be Judges of Religion Secondly you alledge the example of the Council of the Apostles and Elders It is true in that controversie that arose among the Christians concerning the observing of the ceremonies of the law of Moses that the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church after reasoning defined the same and writes the same to be observed by the Disciples everie where but first they were Apostles and was infallibly governed by Gods Spirit that they could not err in teaching and writing but your Pastors are not Apostles and may err Next they assemble with the Elders and the whole Church and all with one accord defines Acts 15.12.22.23 You in your Council excludes all except your Bishops to be ordinary Judges to give out judgement and your Popes neither Elder nor brethren having power of voting with you Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 1. Thirdly they define according to the Scripture saying As it is written c. Act. 15.15 This controversie to make us to understand if we will not be more then blind that this rule should be followed in all Councils to determine in controversies according to the Scripture Upon the which I reason if the Apostles who had that high measure of Gods Spirit which never man had since so that in writing and teaching they could not err if they I say did determine the controversies of Religion according to the Scripture how much more then are all Pastors since who may err both severally and jointly together in a Council bound to follow the same rule And whereas ye call their Elders Priests you stile them not as the holy Ghost hath stiled them there so there they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Elders and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is sacrificing Priests as ye suppone Your third reason is the practise and custom of the Church in deciding the controversies of Religion in Councils we grant that this is a very commodious mean to search and find out the truth by the Scripture For first the more they are that seek the truth it is the more easily found Next the consent of many in determining a truth will be of greater authority to repress hereticks then if it were agreed upon only by a few But yet they should determine nothing but that which is warranted by the Scripture and their determinations only in so far forth to be received as is agreeable to the same And this we grant hath been done in the Council of the primitive Church And therefore the Emperor Constantine speaking to the Fathers of the Council of Nice saith Sunt libri Prophetici Apostolici qui apertè quid credendum sit docent c. That is there are the Books of the Prophets and Apostles who teacheth plainly what we should believe All contention therefore laid aside let us take the soveraign decision of these things which are called in controversie out of the Scriptures which are inspired by God And this we grant and this we require But that Councils ought to determin any thing of their own authority in matters of Religion which binds the conscience without the warrant of the Word that we deny Master Gilbert Brown It is a wonder that M. John will refer any thing to the written Word seeing that he and his have no warrant that the same is the Word of God but by the authority of the Roman or Papist Church For understand there was no Church worthie of credit immediatly before Luther but that Church Master John Welsch his Reply You wonder that I refer any thing to the Scripture But what a wōder is this that ye are so far blinded of God that you think that a wonder in me which Abraham hath done which the Prophets have done which our Savior and his Apostles have done and which the Fathers have done for all these have referred the infallible testimony and decision of the will of God concerning his worship unto the Scriptures Luke 16 29. John 5 39. Acts 26.22 Rom. 12. and 16.26 2. Tim. 3.16 2. Pet. 1.10 Rev. 1 3. cap. ult yea which your self also hath done for ye make it a witness But what hath moved you to think this a wonder in me which so many and your self also have done before me Because say ye that he and his that is our Church have no warrant that it is the Word of God but by the authoritie of the Roman or Papist Church I grant indeed that you and your Church are plunged in this blindness and miserie that all the warrant that you have not only of the Scriptures themselves that they are inspired of God but also of all your doctrine and Religion is the testimony of your Roman Church that is of your Pope and Clergy for so ye interpret the Church So Bellarmin grants de Sacr. lib. 2. cap. 25. That all the certainty of all doctrine depends upon the authority of the present Church meaning the Pope and his Clergy And Stapleton saith lib. 1 contra Whitak de author script cap. 10. That it is no absurd thing not to believe God but for the testimony of the Church Pigius saith That it is not needful to believe all that Matthew and John writ in their Gospels to be true because that they might fail in memory and lie as all men may do Ecclesiast hierar lib. 1. cap. 2. And Hermannus saith That the Scripture would be of no more authority then the fables of Esop were not the testimony of the Church And so blind and miserable must you be that hangs the certaintie of all Religion and of man his salvation upon so smal a threed as the testimony of your Popes and Clergy What peace in conscience can any man have that professes your Religion which teaches that the
certainty and warrant of all the doctrine in the Scripture and the Scripture it self that they are of God but the testimony of your Popes and Clergy What is it to expone the certainty of the Lords Scripture and of all Religion comprehended in the same to the mocking and derision of the wicked if this be not Yea is not this to prefer the voice and authoritie of your Popes and Clergie to the voice of God himself For what is the testimonie of your Church but the testimonie of men And is not the Scripture the testimonie and voice of God himself Do ye not therefore lift up the authoritie of your Church that is your Popes and Clergie above the authoritie of God in his Word which as you say that there is no other warrant of the Divinitie of the Scripture but only the testimonie of your Church But God be thanked in Christ Jesus who hath delivered us from this blindness for we have other warrants whereupon the certaintie of our salvation and the Divinitie of the Scripture depends then by the testimonie of the true Church much less the testimonie of your Church which is Antichristian and given over of God to believe lies and so worthy of no credit But how prove ye it Ye say there was no other Church immediatly before Luther but that of yours which was worthy of credit Whereunto I answer first that is false for there was a true Church immediatly before him which ye persecuted as I have proved else where Next I say your argument will not follow there was no other Church immediatly before him c. Ergo we have no other warrant that the Scripture is the written Word of God For we have also the testimony of the Church of the Jews concerning the Old Testament and of the primitive Church in all ages concerning both the Old and New Testament which are not only other warrants then the testimonies of your Roman Church but also worthie of more credit Next I say we have many more principal and more effectual warrants that the Scripture is of God then the testimony of the Church either past or present As first the testimonie of the holy Ghost crying testifying and sealing up in all consciences of the godly not only the truth of the doctrine contained in them but also the Divinitie of the Scripture which Stapleton lib. 1. de authorit script cap. 1.6.7 denyes not and therefore the Scripture saith That the Spirit that is the holy Ghost hears witness that the Spirit that it is the doctrine is truth 1. John 5 6. Secondly the testimony of the Scripture it self warranting and testifying of it self the whole Scripture is inspired of God 2. Tim. 3.16 The Old Testament warranted both by the testimony of its self the histories and prophesies testifying of the books of Moses and also by the testimony of the New Testament both in general 2. Pet. 1.19 Luke 24.44 and 16 29 John 5.39 and also in particular as the books of Moses Matth. 1.5 and 19.7 and 22. John 3.14 and the historical books as the history of the Queen of Saba Matth. 12. and of the widow of Sarepta Luke 4. and of the Psalms in sundry places Acts 2. and 13. and of sundrie of the books of the Old Testament Heb. 11. and Ruth also Matth. 1. and out of Isaiah Ezechiel and Jeremy many testimonies are cited and out of the Books of the smal Prophets Acts 7.42 And such like the New Testament hath the confirmation of it out of the Old Testament For whatsoever thing were prophesied in the Old Testament concerning the Messias are fulfilled in the New Testament so if the Old Testament hath authority the New Testament also hath authority And such like Peter by his testimonie confirmes the Epistles of Paul to be the written Word of God Thirdly the majestie of the doctrine which shines in it the simplicitie puritie and heavenliness of the speach therein which is not to be found in any other writings whatsoever the ancientness and antiquitie of them as the Books of Moses far ancienter then any other writing The accomplishment of the Prophesies and Oracles in them as they were fore-told their miracles and wonders whereof they testifie the testimonies of the holy Martyrs that shed their blood in the defense of the truth of them their wonderful preservation notwithstanding of the rage and cruelty of sundry tyrants who sought them out most diligently to have destroyed them all testifying of the Divinity of the holy Scripture So then to conclud this seeing we have the testimony of Gods Spirit sealing up the truth of them in our hearts and the testimony of the Scripture it self testifying of its self so many manner of wayes and sundry other arguments out of the Scripture it self and the testimony of the Church in all ages all warranting to us the Divinity of the holy Scripture I cannot but wonder at the unsearchable judgement of God in blinding you so far that ye have set it down in writ that we have no other warrant of the holy Scripture but the authority of your Church SECTION VI. Concerning the necessity of Baptism to Infants Master Gilbert Brown ANd albeit here it were not necessary to me to prove any heads of our Religion by the Word of God because M. John hath promised to improve the same by the Word which he is no ways able to perform yet to satisfie the Christian Reader and that he may know that the Word of God is only on our side and with us so that their exposition and notes be taken from the same I will set down God willing some heads for examples cause that that same doctrine which we teach and practise is the same that our Savior and his Apostles preached before and is written in the same that he calls the touchstone Master John Welsch his Reply Howsoever ye say this M. Gilbert that that doctrine which ye teach and practise in your Church is that same which our Savior and his Apostles teached before and is written in the Scripture yet in very truth there is nothing less in your conscience For if you and your Roman Church were so perswaded wherefore then should ye have declined to have it tryed by the same And wherefore have some of your own chief pillars and defenders of your Roman Religion who knows the certaintie of the same wherefore I say would they have proclaimed it by writ unto the world that the most part and the principal heads of their Religion are unwritten traditions which have neither their original beginning nor authoritie in the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same And wherefore would your Roman Church have heapt up so many false accusations and blasphemies against the same And wherefore last of all would ye have set up your Pope and his Bishops to be supream and soveraign Judge over the same as you do But this you do because you know that if ye rejected the Scripture
4. That it is impossible to fulfil the whole Law and Vega a Papist saith lib 11. in consil cap 20 That venial sins are properly against the Law Upon the which I reason He that daylie transgresses the law fulfills not nor is not able to fulfil the law for to fulfill the law and transgress the law are contrarie but your own doctrine is that no man can keep himself at least from venial sins and Vega as hath been said saith that venial sins are against the law Therefore if your selves speak true no man is able to fulfil the law I conclud therefore that this doctrine of yours is contrarie to the doctrine of Jesus Christ and his Apostles set down in the Scripture and also contrarie to the doctrine of the Fathers and contrarie to the doctrine of the most learned and chief Doctors of your Roman Church And this for the second point of your doctrine SECTION VIII Whither a man by his Free-will may resist the will of GOD. Master Gilbert Brown THirdly Our doctrine is that man of his Free-will may resist the will of God which is contrary to their doctrine ratified by Act of Parliament in the year 1560. And also against their Psalm book of Geneva Yet our doctrine is the doctrine of Christ For Christ said to them of Jerusalem How oft would I have gathered together thy children but you would not Matth. 23.37 And S. Steven Ye stiff-necked and of uncircumcised hearts and ears ye alwayes resist the holy Ghost as your fathers your selves also Acts 7 51. The same was the faith and belief of the Apostle S. Peter saith Our Lord is not willing that any perish but that all return to pennance 2. Pet. 3.9 And S. Paul hath Our Savior God wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth 1. Tim. 2.4 This was the doctrine of the Prophets before Psal 5.5 Ezec. 18.23 and 33.11 Now then if God wills that all men should return and yet all men doth not the same whereof proceeds it but of their Free-will which will not work with the will of God Therefore our Savior saith in sundrie places If thou wilt enter into life keep my commands If thou wilt be perfect go and sell all that thou hast Matth. 19.17 He that will follow me let him deny himself Luke 9.23 Master John Welsch his Reply As for this third point of doctrine I cannot wonder enough what ye mean by it For have you sold your self so far to untruth and lying that for to bring the truth of God which we profess in hatred you will father on us that doctrine which never so much as once entred into our thoughts let be to teach it or write it Did you think when you writ this that the truth of it would never come to light Or thought you that ye regarded not to be controlled of lying at the last so being that for a season ye might make our Religion to be more abhorred through your calumnie But frost and falshood as they say will never have a fair hinder end If you mean then by resisting the will of God a voluntary disobedience and repining against the Spirit of God and his revealed will in his Word as the testimonies which ye quote here imports Then I say there was never man of our Religion that professed taught or writ the contrary and ye will not find a syllable neither in the Confession of our Faith confirmed by the Act of Parliament neither in our Psalm book to the contrary For our doctrine is flat contrary to this to wit that man of his Free-will resists that that is good and chooses the contrary So ye fight here with your own shadow And if ye mean any other thing set it down in plain termes and I hope by his grace it shal be answered So I cannot wonder enough what ye mean to write and subscribe so manifest an untruth Now surelie M. Gilbert I think it had been greater wisdom to you to have saved your own credit and not for a little hatred to our Religion to have blotted your self with lying and untruth for ever I would pray thee Christian Reader if thou wilt not credit me read our Confession thy self and I hope thou shalt wonder with me what the man meant in subscribing so manifest a calumnie This for the third point SECTION IX Concerning Transubstantiation and Christs real and substantial Body and Blood in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Master Gilbert Brown Fourthly Our doctrine is that our Savior gave his true flesh and very body and blood under the forms of bread and wine to be eaten of his Disciples at his last Supper and that to be received by their very mouth And this I say by the written Word is the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles Christ saith John 6.51 And the bread which I will give you is my flesh for the life of the world And at the latter Supper Take ye and eat ye this is my body And Drink ye all of this For this is my blood of the New Testament which shal be shed for many unto remission of sins Matth 26.27.28 And in S. Mark This is my body and this is my blood of the New Testament which shal be shed for many Mark 14.22.24 And S Luke saith This is my body which is given for you and this is the calice of the New Testament in my blood which shal be shed for you Luke 22.19.20 This same is the doctrine of the Apostles For S. Paul saith This is my body which shal be delivered for you and this calice is the New Testament in my blood and whosoever shal eat this bread and drink the calice of our Lord unworthily he shal be guilty of the body and blood of our Lord. And after For he that eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgement to himself not decerning the body of our Lord 1. Cor. 11.24.25 27.29 And in the chapter befo e The calice of benediction which we do bless is it not the communication of the blood of Christ And the bread which we break is it not the participation of the body of the Lord 1. Cor. 10.10 M. John Welsch his Reply I come now to the fourth point of your doctrine your Transubstantiation and real presence The first ye quote is the 6. of John And the bread which I will give is my flesh c. This makes nothing for your real presence For first our Savior speaks not here of that sacramental eating and drinking of his flesh and blood in this sermon which was not instituted a year after that For he speaks here of that eating and drinking of his flesh and blood without the which there is no life So our Savior testifies in the 53. verse Except ye eat saith he the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you But your selves grants that men may be saved without that sacramental eating therefore
it is not of that which he speaks here Secondly he speaks of that eating and drinking of his flesh and blood which whosoever so doth hath eternal life to themselves so our Savior Christ promises in the 54. verse But your own doctrine is that the reprobat eats and drinks Christs body and blood in the Sacrament and yet have no life in them therefore he speaks not here of that sacramental eating Thirdly if he speak here of the sacramental eating as you say then your Church not only hath erred foully but also hath been and is the cause of the condemnation of your people these many years because you give them not his blood to drink And our Savior saith not only Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man but also except ye drink his blood ye have no life in you And this reason was so effectual that it hath moved sundry of your own Doctors as Jansenius and Tapperus with sundry others to expone this place not of the sacramental eating and drinking of the body and blood of Christ but of the spiritual eating and drinking of him by faith For they did see that it behoved them either to forsake this place as not making for them and grant that it speaks not of the Sacrament or else to confess that their Church hath erred and through this error hath been the cause of the damnation of many in ministring the Sacrament but under one kind And because you say if our expositions vere removed from the Scripture they would ferve for you whom therefore will you credit in exponing of this place If our Savior hear then how he expon s this eating and drinking of his flesh and blood in the 35. verse I am the bread of life he that cometh unto me shal not hunger and he that believes in me shal never thirst So when we believe in Christ we eat him and when we come unto him which is only by faith we drink him So Augustine also expones this place Tractat. 25. in Johan cap 6. Tract 26 de doct Christ lib. 3 cap. 16. Believe saith he and thou hast eaten Clement Alexandrinus lib. 1. Padago cap. 6. and Hieronymus in Psal 147. and Bernard supra Psal 90 vers 3 all expones the flesh and blood of Christ figuratively And if ye will credit none of these then I hope ye will not discredit your own chief Doctors who affirms That this place is not meant of the Sacrament but of the spiritual eating and drinking of Christ by faith As Biel Cusanus Caiâ—tanus Hesselius and Jansâ—nius cited by Bellarm lib 1 de Eucharist cap. 5. And if ye will reply that many others of the Fathers have exponed this place of the Sacrament then Janfenius and Tapperus two Papists will answer you That they did it only by way of application unto the readers and hearers to stir them up to the often receiving of the Sacrament So this place can serve nothing for your Transubstantiation for it speaks not of the Sacrament but of his suffering upon the Cross for the away taking of our sins and the purchasing to us of eternal life The next place ye quote is the words of the institution as Matthew Mark Luke and the Apostles rehearses them Your argument is this Christ calls the bread his flesh and so Paul and the wine his blood therefore the bread is changed in his body and the wine in his blood the outward formes of bread and wine only remaining This is the chief and principal ground of your real presence and Transubstantiation Whereunto I answer First there is not a syllable here that tells us that the substance of the bread and wine is transchanged in the body and blood of Christ unless ye will expone this word is my body for it is changed in my body which is a monstrous exposition for both it is contrary to the native signification of the word est Est Fieri sunt contraria that signifies to be alreadie for to be already and to be in a change are contrary as also it hath not the like form of speach in the whole Scripture to warrant it from the first of Genesis to the last of the Revelation Bring one instance if ye can And Augustin saith in Genes quaest 117. in Psal 105. supr Num. quaest 95. The solution of a question should be warranted by some example of the like speach in the Scripture the which you are not able to do Therefore your exposition is without warrant Next I say by what Art of reasoning can you gather this doctrine out of these places of Scripture Christ saith of the bread This is my body and of the wine This is my blood Therefore the outward formes of the bread and wine only remains but the substance of them is gone Never such an inkling in all these texts of this doctrine of yours Thirdly this interpretation and doctrine which results upon it is false and that for these reasons First because it is plainly gain-said by the Scripture Secondly because it destroys sundry articles of our Faith and many blasphemous absurdities doth follow upon it Thirdly it destroys the nature of the Sacrament And last of all is utterly repugnant to the words of the institution My argument then is this That interpretation and doctrine which is gain-said by the plain testimony of the Scripture which destroyes the articles of our faith and the fundamental points of our salvation which hath many absurdities following upon it which overthrowes the nature of the Sacrament and last of all which is contrary to the whole institution must be false blasphemous and erroneous This cannot be denyed but your interpretation of these words This is my body c. and your transubstantiation which ye gather upon it is such Therefore it must be erroneous c. My assumption I prove thus First your interpretation is gain-said by the plain testimony of the Scripture Your interpretation is that there remains no true bread nor wine in the Sacrament but the substance of it is changed But Matthew Mark Luke and the Apostles all four testifies That Christ took bread brake it and gave it to his disciples And lest ye should say that it was true bread and wine before the consecration but not after the Scripture saith plainly 1. Cor. 10.16 that it is bread which we break and bread which is eaten and the fruit of the vine which is drunken in the Sacrament The Apostle saith The bread which we break c. And as oft as ye eat this bread c. Whosoever shal eat this bread c. And let a man examine himself and so let him eat of this bread c. And our Savior saith that after he had given the cup and they had drunken of it From henceforth shal I not drink of the fruit of the vine with you c. Therefore true bread and wine remains in the Sacrament contrary expresly to your interpretation Secondly That your
the words themselves be understood of him without great absurdity Or can they be applyed to him without horrible blasphemy And may not every one see that they were conceived and made of the gifts and sacrifices of praise which the people did offer up to God in the Sacrament And they speak here in the plural number of many and the sacrifice of the Son of God is but one Next they are called gifts presents thy own gifts of thy own sacrifices of praises which caÌ„not be spoken of the real sacrifice of the Son of God which is a propitiatory sacrifice are not called gifts presents and sacrifices of praises of the people Thirdly they say Remember them who offers unto thee their gifts for themselves and theirs which cannot be understood of any but of the people that offered their offerings of their fruits unto the Lord. For you will not say that the people offers up the Son of God but only the Priest And what Christian heart can think that these prayers can be applyed to him without horrible blasphemy as to dust and ashes to interceed by prayer to God the Father for his beloved Son to pray him to accept in his favor to bless and sanctify his own beloved Son who is the fountain of all blessing and holiness and in whom the fulness of the Godhead dwels and to look upon him with a merciful and favorable countenance and to daign to vouchsafe to accept of him in whom and with whom he is well pleased who is his Fathers dayly delight and joy and to accept of him as he did of the sacrifices of Abel Abraham and Melchisedeck comparing that blessed sacrifice of himself with the sacrifices of the fruits of the earth and beasts of the field as theirs was without the which neither their sacrifices nor persons would ever have pleased God and to pray to God the Father to command the Angels in whom as Job saith he found no purity to carry his own eternal Son up to heaven in his presence as though he were not as able now to ascend from thence to heaven if he were there being glorified without the help of Angels as he did after his resurrection Now let any Christian heart judge whither these prayers can be conceived without blasphemy of the eternal Son of God or not And after the consecration they have this prayer in their Ganon By whom thou creates sanctifies quickens blesses and gives to us all these good things which can no ways be applyed unto the sacrifice of Christ unless they will have him a creature dayly made blessed and quickned in their Mass but unto the gifts and presents of the people which they offered up to God in the Sacrament And in the Liturgy which they ascribe to Clement the prayer is Pro dono oblato that is for the gift which is offered up that it would please God to receive it in his altar through the intercession of his Christ in a sweet smelling savor Clemens lib. 3. cap. 17. which no ways can be applyed unto the sacrifice of the Son of God For here they are manifestly distinguished the gift offered and the intercession of Christ for the which they desire God to accept of the gift offered So here is a most notorious corruption wherein they apply all the prayers which were first conceived and made of the gifts and presents of the people which they offered up to God in the Sacrament to the pretended sacrifice of the Son of God And from the offerings of the people which was many they pass to an oblation which was offered For a Sacrament of praise to a Sacrament which the Priest consumeth all himself from a Sacrament to confirm us of our salvation in Christ to a propiciatory sacrifice of the Son of God for the redemption of souls and from a commemoration of the death of Christ in the Sacrament to a real immolation and offering of him up again and that not for the living only but for the dead also By these degrees then hath this monstrous sacrifice been conceived formed received life and brought forth into the world Now many other things did concurr to the strengthening of her and the rooting of her in the hearts and consciences of men as first the word sacrifice which was frequently used by the Fathers of the pâ—imitivâ— Church taken from the Old Testament and the typical sacrifices there which they ascribed unto the Sacrament of the Supper calling it a sacrifice And that first because it was celebrated with thanksgiving which is called the sacrifice of praise Next because they sacrificed themselves in a holy lively and acceptabâ—e sacrifice to God in the same Rom. 12.1.2 3. Heb. 13 15.16 Thirdly because of their offering and alms which they â—ffered in the Sacrament which are called sacrifices wherewith God is pleased And last of all because it was a commemoration of that once offered up sacrifice of the Son of God the vertue whereof is eternal and sufficient The next was the universal ignorance both of Pastors and people through the barbarous Nations of the Goths Huns and Vandals which spoiled and wasted the Empire of the West more then an hundred years full whereby all learning almost was buried and the lights and torches of the Church being extinguished their successors being born and brought up under that barbarity in that common and publick ignorance they were so far from chasing away that darkness that they rather increased the same being given altogether to seculare and worldly affairs as the laws of Charles the Great do testifie commanding them that they should abstain from seculare affairs from the Court from warrs from salconry from lechery from games Thirdly the corruption of languages which entred in with these barbarous Nations at that same time through the mixture of people of sundry languages Whereby first the language became barbarous next not universally understood And certainly were not this Satan could not have prevailed so much in causing this poyson of this monstrous sacrifice to be so universally drunken out by the people For if they had understood the language these words which they dayly heard in their service Sursum corda lift up your hearts And show forth the death of the Son of man and confess his resurrection till his coming These words might easily have kept them in this knowledge that Christ was above and they should not seek him bodily in the Sacrament because he was not there really present but was to come and that the Sacrament was not a real offering of the Son of God again but a showing forth of his death until his second coming But two doctrines especially which by process of time also entred in the Church of God brought this pretended sacrifice of their Mass to her full perfection and strength the one was the doctrine of Transubstantiation that the bread and wine in the Sacrament by the words spoken or rather muttered by the Priest was changed in
the body and blood of Christ From time this was taught the people then what followed but all adoration and worship to be given to the Sacrament where Christ is really present Then how could it be but a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the living seeing it was that self-same body and blood under the forms of bread and wine which was offered up upon the cross for the sins of the world The next was that of Purgatory for seeing say they that there is a fire of Purgatory after this life where through men must pass to heaven and seeing in these flames their sins must be purged therefore a remedy must be fore-seen and where is there a remedy to be found but in the sacrifice of the Mass where the Son of God is offered up that will relieve our souls after we are departed These will help the souls of our parents and friends that are there already Upon the which was founded the Masses and sacrifices for the dead and from thence came the most part of the donation of lands to the Churches to have Masses said for their souls So then to conclud the loss of the Communion in the Sacrament of the Supper Next the sanctification of the oblations of the people which at last was turned to that which the Priest consumed himself alone Thirdly the avarice of the Priests which bred their damnable doctrine that the Supper was not only a Sacrament but a sacrifice c. Fourthly the applying of the prayers conceived of the gifts of the people unto the round host and calice which the Priest consumed Fifthly the abusing of the word sacrifice which the Fathers and Church used Sixthly the publick and universal negligence and ignorance of Pastor and people Seventhly the confusion of languages And last of all their damnable doctrine of Transubstātiation and Purgatory These were the degrees by the which their abominable sacrifice hath been created nowrished entertained and perfected in that measure and strength that at the last it took such deep root in the hearts of all men almost that nothing could root it out except only the power of the Lords Spirit by the voice of his Word And yet this abuse was perceived by sundry whom the Lord stirred up as Arnold de Villanova anno 1200. and Albigenses and Waldenses in France who taught That the sacrifice of the Mass was a manifest abuse and that the Masses both for the living and the dead was directly contrary the institution of our Lord. And some of their own Doctors in their writings doth contradict this propitiatory sacrifice of the Mass as the Maister of Sentences distinct 12. lib. 4. de consecrat and Thomas of Aquin in summa part 3. quaest 83. 73. Lyranus in Epist ad Heb. cap. 10. affirming That Christ once died for our sins and that once oblation is sufficient for all our sins and that it cannot be reiterat and that the Sacrament is an ordinary memorial and representation of that only one sacrifice which was offered up upon the cross the which doctrine of theirs cannot stand with their dayly immolation and real oblations of the Son of God in their Mass And that nothing may be lacking to the manifesting of it we will show also the Authors and times of the entring in of the ceremonies of the same The mixing of water with the wine in the calice is ascribed to Pope Alexander the first de consecrat dist 2. Can. in Sacram. oblat anno 111. he also put to this clause to the Mass Qui pridie quam pateretur Secondly Sanct. sanct sanct Dom. Deus Sabaoth is put to by Pope Syricius the first anno 121. Thirdly Gloria in excelsis is put to by Pope Telesphore the first anno 139 Fourthly the singing of the Creed after the Gospel put to by Pope Mark the first and according to some by Pope Julius the first anno 335. Fifthly Pope Zepherin ordained that the wine should be put in glasses and Urban the first ordained that the vessels should be of gold or silver or at the least of tin anno 213. Sixthly Pope Felix the first ordained to celebrat Masses in the names of the Martyrs above their graves and relicks anno 267. Seventhly the offerture of the Mass is ascribed to Eutychian the first anno 270. Eightly the Kyrieeleison to Sylvester the first anno 314. Ninthly the celebration of Masses in linnen clothes to Eusebius and him also Tenthly the standing up at the reading of the Gospel to Anastasius the first anno 401. Eleventhly the blessing of the Pax. to Innocentius the first anno 405 dist 2. cap. Pacem Twelfthly the Antiphones the Introits and the Graduals to Celestin the first anno 427. Thirteenthly Orate pro me fratres Deo gratias sanctum sacrificium to Leo the first anno 444. Fourteenthly the nine-fold repetition of Kyrieeleyson and the singing of Hallelujah to Gregory the first anno 593. Fifteenthly the singing of Agnus Dei thrise to Sergius the first anno 688. Sixteenthly the incense and offerture restored by Leo the third anno 800. Seventeenthly their Transubstantiation invented by Lanfrancus an Italien anno 1036. decreed in the Council of Lateran in substance anno 1059. And made the 13. Article of Faith by Innocent the third anno 1215. Decret tit 1. de summa Trinit fide cap. Firmiter credimus I omit the rest as their Canon compiled by one named Scholasticus as Gregory witnesses lib. 2. 7. 9 and fundry other ceremonies So that between the first and last inventers and authors of their Mass it is more then a thousand years And thus much touching that abominable sacrifice of the Mass which is not the Lords ordinance but the invention of the Popes and Clergy of Rome Master Gilbert Brown I thought such like to have proved the ceremonies of this blessed sacrifice by the same holy Word but because it were something long some I have continued the same till another place SECTION XII Of the manifold abuses of the Mass Master John Welsch his Reply AS for your Ceremonies you did most wisely in rejecting the probation of them till another place and so to hold the Reader in the halfe as we speak because ye are never able to do it and it is good to delay to enterprise a thing that is impossible But how can you be so impudent as to write that you will prove the ceremonies of your Mass by the Scripture seeing the Mass it self hath not the warrant out of the same but contrary and repugnant to the same as hath been proved And I can scarcely think M. Gilbert that you have spoken this in earnest when you said you would prove the ceremonies of your Mass by the same holy Word which is the Scripture For what then will you say to the Council of Trent Sess 22. cap. 5. who referrs not the institution of them to the Lord Jesus in his written Word but to the Church by the unwritten traditions
And to Bellarmin who saith the Church instituted them lib. 2. de missa cap. 13. and so referrs the institution of them not to CHRIST in his written Word but to the institution of the Church and to your own Doctors and Canon Law and Writers who ascribes the institution of them to your Popes and others of your Church as I have proved before O M. Gilbert What a preposterous love is this that ye bear to your abominable sacrifice that ye are not ashamed to write that the very ceremonies of it hath their warrant in the same holy Word and that contrary your own general Council of Trent and all your learned Doctors and Writers I think ye thought that we had never read your ceremonies or never known them that ye write so boldly of them Shal the Council of Trent say they are instituted by the Church by Apostolical traditions which your Church confesses are not written in the Scripture And yet are not you ashamed to say they have their warrant by the Scripture and so openly to contradict the doctrine of your own Council of Trent I will say no further but surely either they err in this point or else ye and if they err then the general Church may err and hath erred and so one of your main foundations is gone Choose you whither you will take this blot to your self or let it fall on them But because ye account this Mass of yours most heavenly and ye vaunt that ye only have in your Church that heavenly action and because it is the chiefest point of your service and worship which ye give to God in your Church and also because ye so impudently affirm that the ceremonies thereof hath their warrant out of the Scripture Therefore I will discover here as shortly as I can the abominations absurdities blasphemies idolatries vain idle superstitions Jewish and Ethnick ceremonies of the same that poor folks be not deceived any longer therewith For certainly for as heavenly as ye think it is I dare affirm that it is nothing else but a very sink and filthy closet of all abominations idolatries and horrible blasphemies So that as it is said in the Proverbs of the vertuous woman that many women have done vertuously but thou surmounts them all Prov. 31.23 So it may be said of the Mass Many services and worships devised by man have been idolatrous blasphemous and abominable but this sacrifice of the Mass brought in the Church of God by Antichrist in idolatrie abominations and blasphemies surmounteth them all so that the like of it hath never been before it nor never shal be after it For beside the fore said abuses that it is a will-worship instituted by man that it hath corrupted the Sacrament of the Supper which was given us to assure us of the grace of Christ and hath turned it in a sacrifice and that a propitiatory sacrifice and meritorious not to the Priest only but to the beholders also and not to the present only but to the absent and not only for the living but for the dead that it hath abolished the death of Christ and the vertue of that one sacrifice and that it hath spoiled Christ Jesus of his Priesthood and communicated it unto others beside these intolerable abuses it abounds and overflows with other intolerable abominations As first their altars in their Mass whereon they think they sacrifice the Son of God and therefore in the beginning of their Mass the Priest saith And I will go in into the altar of God whereby they renew either Judaism or Paganism for their material altars was a part of the Ceremonial law of the Jewes which was abolished by the death of Christ and Numa Pompilius 700 years before Christ ordained that the Ethnick Priest when he went about to offer sacrifice that he should draw near to the altar This entry of the Mass is said to be the ordinance of Pope Celestin the first about the year of God 426 And because the Priests take the altars for the Table whereon the Supper is celebrat which he confounds with the abominations of the Mass also because M. Gilbert said he was minded to prove the ceremonies of the Mass by the Scripture therefore I will ask him and his fellow Priests these few things concerning their altars First where read they that Christ did ever institut in the New Testament that the Table of our Lord should only be of stone and not of timber or any other mettal as their altars whereon they chant their Mass must be according to their law Dist 1. cons cap. Altaria si non Secondly where read they in the New Testament that the Table of the Lord should be consecrated with oyl and chrism with a sprinkling of water mixed of wine and salt of ciphers of holy water at the four corners of the same at the middle part and that none may do this but a Bishop if a Clark do it that he be degraded and if one of the Laicks do it that he be excommunicat Canon Non alij What folly is this that a Priest hath authority as they think to sacrifice the Son of God yet he may not powr a little oyl upon a stone That the Bishop compass the altar seven times singing the 51. Psalm Thou shalt wash me with hysop c. prophaning the truth of God And there to bury the relicks of some Saints put in a little shrine with three grains of incense that God for their cause may hear the prayers and accept of the sacrifice offered up upon that altar And then anointing the table of the altar with oyl and singing Jacob erected up a stone c. Where I say read you these in the New Testament that Christ commanded these things to be done to the table of his Supper which ye do to the altars whereon ye say your Masses And such like where read you that none should chant their Masses but on such altars as are consecrated And such like that your altars are not lawful where there is not found the bodies or relicks of some Martyrs Canon Placuit ut altaria Such like that ye dedicat your altars whereon ye chant your Mass to others then to Christ as unto the Virgin Mary Peter and other Saints departed And such like that the Priest should kiss the altar often and namely when he approaches unto it carrying the calice Hath Christ commanded this Hath the Apostles used them Hath the Scripture made mention of them What think you will you answer to God when it shal be said to you Who required all these things at your hands And wherefore also transgress ye your own law in having mo altars then is necessary seeing by it ye are commanded by express terms that superfluous altars be destroyed Canon Eccles vel altaria To conclud this then with Ambros in Epist ad Heb. cap. 8. 10. As our sacrifice saith he which is no other thing but our prayers and thanksgiving
oblation after the consecration I leave the rest of their contradictions so that seeing they have no concord among themselves neither in the matter nor in the form nor in the effect nor in the substance nor in the circumstances of their pretended sacrifice but that the Lord as is said in Hosea hath divided their hearts therefore their Mass must perish And seeing the Lord hath sent such a confusion among them that they understand not the language one of another some saying one thing some another therefore it is Babel the tower of confusion which they are building and not the house of the Lord. To conclud this they will have their sacrifice not a creature but a Creator of all creatures and therefore they worship it with the worship of latria which by their own doctrine is only proper to God Turrian 1. tract cap. 17. Antonius de Padua ex Bellarm. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 8. Therefore they sing after the consecration It is not bread but God and man my Savior And yet they say That this Creator both begins to be where he was not before after the consecration and ceases to be where he was before and that he is not every where as God is Scarga art 5. fol. 335. Turrian tract 1. cap. 21. And they say That the Priest makes Christ his body of the bread in the Sacrament and Christ the King is made of bread Bellar. lib. 3. de Euch. fol. 399. Pope John 22. lib. orat inscrip Antidotarius animae in Breviario missalibus Qui creavit me sine me creatur mediante me he that created me without me that is the Priest is created by my moyen that is he makes that God that made him Now how can he be the true God and a true Creator which hath a beginning and ceases to be which is not every where as God is which is made of bread and wine by a Mass-Priest and that by their own doctrine How therefore shal their Church be cleared from abominable idolatrie that worships that which they call God Creator and Savior and yet such a God as by their own doctrine hath a beginning and ending and is not every where and is made of bread and wine by dust and ashes O! wo be to their souls that worship God which made not heaven and earth and causeth others to do the same And how shal their Mass-Priests be cleared from sacrilegious blasphemy which vaunts that in their Mass they dayly creat their Creator and that of bread and wine and so makes themselves Gods and more then Gods For God created but creatures but they as they suppone creat the Creator And as they worship a false Creator in their Mass so do they worship a false Christ and Savior in the same For the Scripture saith That the true Christ is made of the seed of David of the seed of the woman Rom. 1.3 Gal. 4.4 and not of any other substance But the Christ which they offer up in their Mass by their own doctrine is made of bread and wine and that by the Priest So Bellarmin confesseth ibidem and Pope John 22. ibidem For the one saith That it is no absurd thing to the Priest to make Christ his body of bread And the other saith That Christ the King is made of bread Therefore they worship not JESUS the son of Mary who was made of the woman and of the seed of David but a false Jesus made of bread and baken in the oven and formed by the Priest Therefore of all Idolaters they must be the most blasphemous and abominable And thus much for the Mass SECTION XIII Concerning Confession and Absolution by the Priest Master Gilbert Brown FIfthly our doctrine is that the lawful Ministers and Priests of the Church of Christ have power given them by Christ to forgive and to retain sins because Christ saith to his Apostles Receive ye the holy Ghost whose sins ye shal forgive they are forgiven them and whose sins ye shal retain they are retained John 20.23 And in another place That ye may know saith Christ that the Son of man hath power in earth to forgive sins c. Matth. 6.9 and 16.19 and 18.18 with sundry other places conform to the same And this is denyed by the Protestants Master John Welsch his Reply As for the fifth point of your doctrine that the lawful Ministers of Christ have power given them by Christ to forgive sins and to retain them If you mean that they have this power as Gods Witnesses Ministers and Embassadors yea and Judges too For the Apostle saith We judge them that are within to testifie and to declare to judge and give out judgement according to Gods Word not only by the preaching of the Gospel and administration of the Sacraments joyned therewith but also by the censures and discipline in excommunicating the obstinat impenitent and absolving the penitent If I say your doctrine be this then you injury us in saying we deny it and you needed not to have quoted these places to confirm the thing which we both teach and also practise But what is the cause ye would not quote the place where we deny this doctrine But if you mean that the lawful Ministers of Christ have an absolut power and full authority not as Ministers and Witnesses only but as Judges and Lords over our Faith to forgive or retain by their own authority and that the very pronouncing of the words of absolution is the cause of remission of sins and that it so scattereth the sins and makes them to evanish as the blast of wind extinguishes the fire and scatters the cloud as Bellarmin saith Controv. Tom. 2. If you mean so this we utterly deny un-you and all men because it is only proper unto God The which the Jews suppose they were blinded did acknowledge and so not so blind as ye are For it is only God that forgives in Jesus Christ Matth 9. It is only his death that hath merited it and only faith that apprehends it and only his Spirit that seals it up and the Word and Ministery that declares testifies and confirms it For the Apostle saith He hath committed to us the word and ministery of reconciliation and we are in his stead to beseech men to be reconciled to God 2. Cor. 5.18.19.20 So we are but Ministers of this Augustin is plain in this Homil. 23. It is the Spirit saith he that forgives and not you meaning of the Ministers and the Spirit is God it is God therefore who forgives and not we There is one argument God only forgives sins therefore not man And again What is man but a sick man to be healed himself Wouldst thou be a Physician to me with me seek the Physician thy self Here another argument He cannot be a Physician to others who needs a Physician himself Further he saith He that can forgive by man can also forgive without man for he may as well forgive by
him as by another But to what purpose do ye quote the 9. of Matthew That the Son of man hath power to forgive sins For will you say that the Ministers of the Church have that absolut authority that he had The which if ye do then are ye blasphemous As for the word Priest wherewith ye style the Ministers of the Church I know that you and your Church takes more pleasure in this style then in all the styles which the holy Ghost hath given to the Ministers of the Church in the New Testament For among the manifold styles which are given to his Ministers yet hath he never given this style of a sacrificing Priest as proper to them throughout the whole New Testament But as your office of Priesthood is not written in Christ his latter Testament so neither is your style of sacrificing Priests contained in the same But new offices must have new styles SECTION XIV Of Extreme Vnction and whither it be a Sacrament Master Gilbert Brown SIxthly our doctrine is to make the Priests of the Church to anoint the sick with oyl in the Name of our Lord and to pray over him because it is the doctrine of the Apostles as we have in S. James in these words Is any sick among you let him bring in the Priests of the Church and let them pray over him anointing him with oyl in the Name of our Lord and the prayer of faith shal save the sick and our Lord shal lift him up and if he be in sins they shal be remitted him * James 4.15 August tom 4. super Levit. quaest 84. And because we find here an external form which is the anointing with oyl of an internal grace which is remission of sins therefore we say it is a Sacrament Now take from these places the vain subterfuges of our new men that will have him a Mediciner for the body in this and not for the soul the matter will be plain of it self M. John Welsch his Reply As to your doctrine of anointing of the sick with oyl and that not by every man but by a Priest not in all sicknesses but in the extremity of death not with every oyl but with oyl consecrated by the Bishop which Bellarmin makes essential to this Sacrament cap. 7. de extr unctione and that not all the parts and members of the body but the five organs of the senses and the reins and feet and that by this form of words Let God forgive thee whatsoever thou hast sinned by the sight hearing smelling c. by this holy unction and his most godly mercy The which you will have to have two effects The one the health of the body if it be expedient for the soul the other remission of the relicks of sins that remains and this ye make to be one of your Sacraments And for this purpose ye only bring one testimony of Scripture So that all the show of warrant you can pick out of the Scripture is this only place of James For I suppose with Bellarmin and sundry others you have seen that that place of Mark 6.13 which is also alledged by the Council of Trent for the confirmation of this doctrine would carry no show to make any thing for you and therefore it may be you have omitted it But this place serves nothing for your purpose For first I say this was a ceremonie annexed to the miraculous gift of healing as is plain both by the text using the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Lord will lift him up which is properly spoken of the health of the bodie and also by that place of Mark 6.13 where it is written that the Apostles anointed many sick with oyl and they healed them The which gift was not only given to the Apostles but also to the very Churches as is plain of the 1. Corinth 12. Unto another is given the gift of healing c. Now seeing this extraordinary gift is ceased in the Church of God wherefore will you superstitiously use the ceremonie So either avow M. Gilbert that your Priests have this miraculous gift of healing which I suppose ye will not or else leave off the ceremonie Secondly by this argument ye may as wel make all the rest of the ceremonies which our Savior and his Apostles Peter and Paul and the believers in the primitive Church used toward the sick blind lame and dead Sacraments As the laying on of hands Mark 16.18 which had both a command and a promise joyned with it anointing of the eyes of the blind with clay John 9.6 washing in the pool of Siloam c. John 5. Mat. 9.29 Acts 3.6 20.10 For why should not their examples be as well followed as the example of the Elders of the primitive Church And seeing you use not these ceremonies because ye want the miraculous gift which was joyned with them why do ye use this ceremonie superstitiously seeing ye want this gift also Thirdly I say this place can make nothing for your doctrine for this place saith Call the Elders of the Church and let them c. but you call for a sacrificing Priest This text saith in the plural number Call for the Elders your doctrine saith one Priest is sufficient This place speaks of oyl not mentioning a syllable of consecration blessing of it by the Bishop and that nine-fold salutation that ye give unto it Hail O holy oyl with the bowing of the knee and other ceremonies There is not a syllable in this nor in any other Scripture that speaks of these things and yet your doctrine will have all these ceremonies This place saith And the prayer of faith shal save the sick and you attribut it to the ointment This place puts no difference of sickness but your doctrine is that none be anointed but he who is lying in the bed and at the point of death This place only specifieth the anointing of the sick some of you reckons as the Council of Florentine seven parts some the five senses as necessary And therefore this moved Thomas of Aquin lib. 4. sent 4. dist 23. quaest to say That the form of this Sacrament is not extant in the Scripture Now if it be not extant in the Scripture what to do have we with it seeing the Scripture is able to make a man wise unto salvation and to make the man of God perfect in every good work Fourthly Beda Ecumenius and Theophylactus in their Commentaries upon these places and Thomas Waldensis lib. 2. de sacr Alphonsus de Castro de haeresibus two archpapists affirms that in the 6. of Mark 5. of James the self-same unction and anointing is meaned But Bellarmin de extr unct Jansenius in Marc. 6. two other Papists affirms and proves by firm reasons that that anointing in Mark is no Sacrament therefore neither is this anointing in James a Sacrament seeing as said is in both the places the self-same unction is meaned Fifthly I say all the
Sacraments the Lord hath instituted are publick and not privat but this Sacrament of yours is privatly ministred therefore not a true Sacrament Sixthly all the Sacraments of the New Testament should be ministred by them who have the preaching of the Gospel concredited unto them and not by privat Christians But Innocentius the first a Pope saith in his Epist 1. cap. 8 Private men may minister this in their own and others necessities as also Thomas Waldensis a Papist And yet the Council of Trent accurses them that so say Therefore it is not a Sacrament Seventhly Pope Innocent in that same Epistle cited before calls it but genus Sacramenti a kind of Sacrament therefore it is not properly a Sacrament But you are more bold to call it a Sacrament Eightly all the Sacraments of Christ have their warrant from the written word But Petrus a Soto in his book against Brentius calls this a tradition which hath not the warrant in the written word therefore it is not a lawful Sacrament of Christ And as to your argument That it hath an external form of anointing with oyl of an internal grace which is remission of sins I answer this form or ceremony was extraordinary as I proved before annexed to a miraculous gift of healing The which seeing it is now ceased the ceremonie also should cease And this promise is not made to the anointing if ye will believe the Apostle but to the prayer of faith The prayer of faith saith the Apostle shal save the sick And whereas ye say that we make him a Mediciner only for the bodie in this and not for the soul we answer That this ceremonie as sundrie others was only annexed to the extraordinary gift of healing of the bodie and was not seals of grace And yet with the health of the bodie the healing of the soul was oftentimes joyned as our Savior saith to the paralytick man Thy sins are forgiven thee take up thy bed and walk Matth 9 28. Now whither these be our vain subterfuges or clear grounds out of the Scripture let the Reader judge And whereas ye call us new men let them be new and most recent whose doctrine is most new But as hath and shal be proved by Gods grace our doctrine is not new but Jesus Christs in his Old and New Testament and yours devised since Therefore this title of noveltie most justly belongs unto you This for the sixth point of your doctrine SECTION XV. Concerning Imposition of hands and whither it be a Sacrament Master Gilbert Brown SEventhly our doctrine is that when our Priests which are the only lawful Ministers now adayes are called to that function receives the imposition of hands with the grace or gift of the holy Ghost because it is the doctrine of S. Paul in these words Neglect not the gift or grace that is within thee which is given thee by prophesy with the imposition of priesthood And therefore must be a Sacrament because it hath an external form which is the imposition of hands of an external grace which is the gift given by the same And for this cause a John Calvin himself admits it to be a Sacrament albeit in their Confession they call it a bastard Sacrament of the Popes and detests the same although b Melancthon hath the contrary a Institut lib. 4. cap. 14. sect 20. item lib. 4. cap. 19. sect 28. b In locis com edit 1543. de num sacrament M. John Welsch his Reply As for the seventh point of your doctrine concerning the imposition of hands in the ordination of the lawful Ministers of the Church of Christ because it is a ceremony which hath the foundation of it in the word of God and was practised in the primitive Church as in the ordination of Timothie here and others and is profitable both to put the Pastors in mind of his calling that he is separated of God for the discharge of the same and also the people that they embrace him as one sent of God to them therefore we both acknowledge it and practise it But that either the gift of the holy Ghost is inseparably joyned with it or that it is a Sacrament of the New Testament properly as you affirm that we deny As to the first the gift of the holy Ghost is not inseparably joyned with it First because that is injurious to the Lords free grace which is not bound to any instrument let be to a ceremony And also he speaks against experience for how many I pray you do receive imposition of hands who receive not a new grace and gift of the holy Ghost among you Miserable experience these many ages both doth testifie it and also one hath testified the same saying Our Priests do lay the word of blessing upon many but in few followeth the effect of that blessing Ex veteri Testam quaest 109. inter opera Augustini And certainly if any gift of the holy Ghost is joyned with this ceremony it should be an ability to preach the Word For that is the principal part of the office of the Minister of the Gospel But how many thousands are they among you in your Church who have received this imposition of hands and yet as unable to preach the Gospel as asses are And last of all what needed that tryal and examination so straitly commanded in the Scripture which ought to be had of them that are to be ordained if the holy Ghost were ever inseparably given with the ceremony For wherefore is this tryal and examination And wherefore is Timothy so straitly charged to lay his hands suddenly on no man but because it is only the holy Ghost who enables The which also should be well known unto his Church ere they presume to testifie the calling of God to them For if it were true that ye say that the gift of the holy Ghost were joyned with the imposition of hands inseparably then the Apostle should rather have commanded Timothy 2 Tim. 5.22 to lay his hands upon many in respect of the need that the Church stood in of all men rather then to have discharged him And as for the place of Paul which ye cite here Despise not the gift c. this serves nothing for your doctrine For if first the gift given to Timothy which the Apostle speaks of was extraordinary and so ordinarily doth not ever follow the ceremony 2. It is not ascribed here to the ceremony of imposition of hands but unto prophesie which is given thee by prophesie whereby it was revealed to the Church of the ability of this man And so if there be any prophesies that go of you in your Clergy that the holy Ghost is given to you then ye may claim unto the same but I think ye will not say that such like prophesies go of you therefore ye cannot claim to this testimony 3. Timothy is exhorted to keep that worthy thing concredited unto him through the holy Ghost 2 Tim. 1.14 It was the
Sacrament of the union of Christ and his Church And yet our new Confession detests the same and will have it but a bastard Such concord is betwixt Christ his Apostles and our new preachers of the Gospel and also among themselves M. John Welsch his Reply The ninth point of your doctrine is you will have Marriage a Sacrament of the New Testament and that properly and that according to the institution of God unto the which the promise of the grace of justification is annexed so Bellarmin lib. 1. de matrim cap. 2. and the Council of Trent saith But mark Christian Reader their ground of this their doctrine They say the bond of marriage among infidels may be broken but say they the bond of marriage among the faithful cannot be broken And they make the cause of this difference to be this because the marriage of Christians is a Sacrament So they reason Marriage among Christians is a Sacrament therefore say they it cannot be broken But what is their principal ground now whereby they prove marriage to be a Sacrament Because say they the marriage of Christians is a bond indissoluble therefore it is a Sacrament which hath the grace of Justification joyned with it So mutually one error upholds another Upon the which I reason If the bond of marriage may be broken for adultery then it cannot be a Sacrament this your Church grants because they make that the ground of this but the bond of marriage may be broken for adultery as hath been proved before both by the Scriptures and also by your own Canons Councils Doctors and Popes therefore marriage is not a Sacrament Secondlie in the Sacraments of the New Testament there are earthly elements as the water in Baptism the bread and wine in the Supper and an express form of words prescribed in the New Testament as in Baptism I baptize thee c. and in the Supper This is my body c. Matth. 26. They have their express institution by Christ in the same and have the promises of remission of sins and justification annexed to them But none of these things are to be had in marriage First no earthly element next no form prescribed in the Word of God thirdly no express institution of it as of a Sacrament fourthly no promise of the remission of sins and salvation annexed unto it Therefore it cannot be a Sacrament of the New Testament properly Thirdly if marriage were a Sacrament and such a Sacrament that signified and gave the grace of justification with it that is remission of sins then wherefore should your Church forbid all your Clergie from the same And wherefore should ye abstain from that Sacrament which is instituted of God to give remission of sins to you and to make you acceptable to God as your doctrine saith Bellarmin lib. 1. de matrim cap. 5. pag. 67. Why should ye deprive your self of that thing which may place you in Gods favor and purchase to you remission of sins as ye say marriage may do it is a token that either ye believe not your own doctrine or else prefers whoredom and adultery which is condemned of God to marriage which is Gods ordinance and honorable among all men Fourthly I say if the marriage of Adam and Eva in Paradise and the marriage of all the Patriarchs and Prophets and Priests and people in the Old Testament was not a Sacrament neither is the marriage of Christians in the New Testament a Sacrament For they were symbols that represented our spiritual conjunction with Christ as well as the marriage of Christians in the New Testament doth the which you will not deny And Pope Leo saith Epist 92. That marriage was instituted from the beginnning that they might have in themselves a Sacrament of Christ and his Church but the first you grant your selves was not a Sacrament therefore neither is the second a Sacrament Fifthly that which is filthiness and pollution cannot be a Sacrament to give forgiveness of sins but Pope Syricius calls marriage pollution and uncleanness Dist 82. cap. Proposuisti c. Plurim 8. Therefore it cannot be a Sacrament if he speak true Sixthly if marriage be such a Sacrament as ye say to give remission of sins then it should be more excellent then virginity because virginity hath not this promise but this ye will not grant therefore it is not a Sacrament Last of all Durandus a great Doctor of your Church saith Ut Capreolus refert in 4. dist 26. quaest unica artic 3. That marriage is not properly a Sacrament As for that place in the fifth of the Ephesians which ye quote where the Apostle saith This is a great mystery speaking of the mutual duâ—ies of man and wife I answer first he calls not marriage this great mystery but that band of our conjunction with Christ as he expones himself This is saith he a great mystery and then he subjoyns I speak of Christ and his Church Secondly suppose the old Interpreter doth translate this word mystery a Sacrament yet you know if you know the Greek language that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called a secret Thirdly will you have all these to be Sacraments properly which are called mysteries in the New Testament and which the old Interpreter and your Rhemists translats Sacraments then shal you not only make marriage a Sacrament but also the chief articles of our faith 1. Tim. 3.16 and the Gospel Col. 1. Eph. 3 1. 2. Thess 27 and the seven stars in the Revelation chap. 1.20 and the whore o Babel and the iniquity of the Antichrist Rev. 17 5 all Sacraments For they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek and some of them are translated Sacraments by the old Interpreter and your Rhemists as marriage is I wonder that ye quote Melancthon as though he were of your opinion seeing Bellarmin acknowledges plainly lib. 1. de matrim cap. 1. 5. that he denyes it to be a Sacrament properly as Baptism and the Lords Supper is but only grants that it is a Sacrament in some respect But you regard not what ye write so being it may carry any show against us The same we answer to you of Zuinglius and Merchiston They call it a Sacrament but not in that sense that Baptism and the Lords Supper are called Sacraments taking the word improperlie and more amply as Bellarmin confesses of Melancthon So here is no discord neither betwixt us and Christ neither among our selves But in very deed you are they who are at discord both with Christ and among your selves For beside this that Bellarmin and Innocentius calls the marriage of the Gentils Sacraments because you may answer that they call them Sacraments improperly as Melancthon Zuinglius and Merchiston calls marriage a Sacrament improperly So if they be at variance with us for calling marriage a Sacrament so is Bellarmin lib. 1. de sacram matrim c. 3 and Pope Innocent cap. gaud de divort at variance with your
because all men by nature are hypocrits and boasts of a vain pretence of faith unto whom James saith Show me thy faith by thy works James 2.18 to take away therefore this vail of hypocrisie from hypocrits the promises are made to works 2. The promise is made to works to stir us up to the doing of them for we would be faint in doing good if we knew not that the Lord would reward them It is true he hath promised no reward to them who work not because they in whom Christ dwels they are not only justified but also sanctified and bring forth the fruit of their sanctification And this for the ninth point of your doctrine which is so damnable that both it derogats from the merit of Christ and makes men to take away their confidence from Gods only mercy and free grace and swells them up with a vain confidence of themselves and binds as it were their hearts and mouthes that they cannot with all their heart render the whole praise of their salvation to Gods only free grace SECTION XVIII Concerning Works of Supererogation M. Gilbert Brown TWelftly we have other works that are called works of Supererogation which are works of greater perfection and are not set down to us as the commands of God without the which we cannot be saved but as divine counsels adjoyned thereto they augment our glory and reward in heaven which is also the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles Christ said to the young man If thou wilt be perfect go sell the things thou hast and give unto the poor and thou shalt have treasure in heaven and come follow me Matth. 19.21 Mark 10.21 So we find that wilful poverty is a work of supererogation Such like S. Paul 1. Cor. 7.34.38 saith And the woman unmarried and the virgin thinks on the things that pertains to our Lord that she may be both holy in body and spirit And afterwards Therefore both he that joyns his virgin in matrimony doth well and he that joyns not doth better Therefore virginity is a work of supererogation for albeit matrimony be good yet the other is better and this was a counsel that S. Paul gave and no command Such like Paul wrought a work of supererogation when he preached the Evangel gratis where he might have taken justly for his labors 1. Cor. 7.40 and 9.14.15.23.17.18.19 Christ our Savior speaks of the same works in the parable of the Samaritan Luke 10.35 where he promised to the hostler to recompense him what ever he did supererogat upon the wounded man more then the two pennies And David the Prophet did supererogat when he did rise in the night to give God praise and seven times in the day and so forth Psal 118.62.164 Master John Welsch his Reply As though your former doctrine had not injuried the merits of the Son of God and his free grace enough with the which if the Apostle be true your merits of works cannot stand For the Apostle saith speaking of our salvation If it be of grace then it is no more by works otherwise grace were no more grace and if it were of works then were it no more of grace otherwise works were no more works Rom. 11.6 You yet add this damnable and blasphemous doctrine to all the rest And certainly suppose ye will not let it fall to the ground that your doctrine is the doctrine of the dragon and that your Church is that mystical Babylon that mother of whoredoms full of names of blasphemie yet this your blasphemous doctrine sufficiently declares what you are For I appeal your conscience if ye have any unblotted out yet with the smoke of the bottomless pit and the conscience of all men who ever felt the power of sin in them and the free grace of God renewing them whither this doctrine of yours be blasphemous or not That not only you may fulfil the Law and do all the duty which God hath commanded you and thereby merit eternal life but also you may do more then God hath commanded which ye call works of greater perfection then the Law of God requires of us by the doing of the which you say you merit a greater degree of glory in the kingdom of heaven and as Bellarmin saith in his preface before de monachis lib. 2. That your religious Monks lives a straiter and more high kind of life then either the Law of God or man hath prescribed And that a man may love God with a greater and more perfect love then is commanded him in the Law lib. 2. cap. 13. 6. yea that a man may love God with a greater love then he is bound to love him and that these works are not only meritorious of eternal life and of a singular glory in heaven but also are profitable to satisfie for our sins and that men may communicat of the abundance of these their merits unto others And therefore they have in their service books according to the order of sarum this form of prayer often That by the merits of the Saints they may obtain grace and by the blood of Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury they may ascend to heaven All which whither they be not words of blasphemy and the doctrine of the dragon I appeal your conscience before God in the great day and the consciences of all men as though it were not blasphemy enough to say that men may merit eternal life and a greater degree of glory in that life to themselves by their works but also to communicat unto others of the abundance of their works and so not only to be saviors of themselves but of others also And here Reader I am compelled to speak this to thee suppose thou believe not that they have written and will maintain so horrible blasphemies I wonder not for I speak the truth to thee in my conscience I lie not I could not have been induced my self to have believed that ever they durst have professed such damnable and devilish doctrine if I had not read it my self in their own books yea I durst not have been so confident as to have set it down here upon the report of any except I had read it my self But if the blind lead the blind both will fall into the pit together The Lord deliver his own from such damnable doctrine which of necessity must bring damnation upon the believers and professors of it To answer you then first if we be not able to perform all the duties which God requires of us in his law then we are not able to do works of supererogation which is more then our duty commanded in the law as ye say But the first I have proved before therefore the second is true Secondly if the Law of God be perfect and prescrives more then we are able to do then there is no works of supererogation this you will not deny But David saith The Law of God is perfect Psal 19. and our inability to perform it I have
saying in Philosophy that a conditional Proposition proves nothing It appears he hath been in haste that he might not have leasure to (a) I proved all that was required at my hands prove any head for example of his promise For we understand that M. John is a man who may err as many man hath done before by his judgement and therefore he must have no (b) I desire no credit without warrant as your Popes and your Church do of her disciples credence of us except he bring his warrant and ye shal be (c) M. Gilbert is once beguiled for this is performed sure that he is never able to perform his sayings Master John Welsch his Reply This my Reply I hope satisfies for answer to this section SECTION XXIII Concerning the Visibility of the Church and whither the Visible Church may make defection Master John Welsch THirdly I answer The Spirit of God fore-tels that when the Antichrist shal come the defection shal be universal and all Nations shal be drunken with the wine of her fornication M. Gilbert Brown Where this is written M John tells not For I am sure as it is set down here there is no such thing in our Bibles no not in their own corrupted Bibles except they have augmented them of new That there shal be an universal defection it is altogether repugnant to the Word of God as I have shewed before in proving the Church always to continue For the same place where I believe he alledges to hath these words And it was given unto him to make war with the Saints and to overcome them And power was given him upon every tribe and people and tongue and nation and all that inhabit the earth adored it whose names be not written in the book of life of the Lamb Rev. 13 7.8 Here any man may see that the Saints of God that shal be persecute by the Antichrist such that is written in the book of life shal not make defection then it shal not be an universal defectioÌ„ And also M. John afterward in finding some of his Religion that said against the Antichrist the Pope the time bygone is contrary to himself here that the defection shal not be universal And where he saith that all Nations shal be drunkâ—n with the wine of her fornication the text is otherwise Because all Nations have drunken of the wine of the wrath of her fornication that is that the people of all Nations that have obeyed her shal be punished with the wrath of God and not that all the world should make defection M. John Welsch his Reply You fight against your own shadow M. Gilbert and whereas ye can find nothing justly to quarrel in my words being rightly taken and taken as the Scripture takes them you devise a meaning of your own brain and would father it upon me that ye may the more easily have somewhat to speak against For I neither spake it nor meant it that the elect should make defection in the time of the Antichrist I am so far from it that suppose I believe assuredly that this prophesie is fulfilled in your own Church yet I know assuredly that the Lord reserved his own elect to himself who was kept free from your Idolatry as he promised Rev. 14. and Histories record of some whereof I did set down some of their names But this is the doctrine of one of your own Church Dominicus a Soto in lib. 4. sent dist 46. quaest 1. art 1. who believed it assuredly That the faith of Jesus Christ and Religion should be utterly extinguished through the persecution of the Antichrist if Bellarmin speak true of him lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 17. And so turn the point of your sword M. Gilbert upon your own brother who so taught and not upon me who is far from it And if ye will say wherefore then called I it universal I answer Because the Scripture calls it a defection without any addition or restraint and your Rhemists grant That this defection shal be a revolting of Kings People and Provinces and the publick intercourse of the faithful with the Church of Rome shal cease And that the dayly sacrifice shal be abolished most universally throughout all Nations and Churches of the world by Antichrist himself Annot. upon 2. Thess 2. And Bellarmin saith lib. 3. cap. 16. That he shal be Monarch of the whole world Therefore this Kingdom by your own confession shal be universal and seeing his Kingdom is an apostasie or defection for as many as shal obey him shal make defection from the faith therefore by the doctrine of your own Church it must be an universal defection And the Scripture saith expresly That he shal make all both smal and great c. to receive a mark on their right hand and on their fore-heads and that no man may buy or sell c. and that all Nations have drunken of the wine of the wrath of her fornication Rev. 13.16 and 14.8 and 18.3 Now whither I might call that universal which the Scripture calls all and your Rhemists and Bellarmin makes so general and universal that it shal possess all the Kingdoms of the earth let the Christian Reader judge And let me ask you M. Gilbert Do you not believe that the Church is Catholick or Universal And do you not think with one of your own number to wit Costerus a Jesuit in Enchirid. that the Church is called Universal because the faith of the Church is scattered in all Nations and yet for all this all particular Nations and all particular men receives not this faith and yet notwithstanding it is Universal and is called Universal still And doth not the Scripture prophesie that in Abraham all the Nations shal be blessed Gal. 3.8 and yet for all this there were and is millions of the Gentils that are not blessed in him Why then in like manner may not the defection in the time of the Antichrist be called universal although the elect be exeemed from it But wherefore insist I to refute this vain quarrelling of words which serves to no purpose So then this that I said is both in your Translation and ours in substance and is not contrary to that which I said afterward As for that place of Scripture which ye cite here Rev. 3.7 8. it is not spoken here of the Antichrist but of the persecution of the Roman Emperors As for that calumny of yours in calling our Bibles corrupted and augmented this is your sin M. Gilbert whereof one day ye shal make an account to the Majesty of God for the slandering and bearing false witness of the truth of God And to speak the truth this is true of you For both you have added to the Scriptures of God first the Apocrypha next your traditions which your Church hath decreed to be received with equal reverence and godliness with the Scripture Concil Trident. sess 4. thirdly the Decretal Epistles of your Popes which
that their communion with her shal be in heart and the practise thereof in secret and he shal abolish the publick exercise of all Religions true or false save that which is done to himself So that the Mass they say shal be had but in secret then And Bellarmin lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 17. 18. and Sanderus demonst 35. 37. is of the same mind That his cruel persecution shal stay all publick exercise of Religion and he shal make open warfare with the whole Church and shal endeavor to destroy the universal estat of the whole Christian Commonwealth and shal shut up the door of Sacraments and shal suffer no man any more to enter in the Church of Christ and shal be Monarch of the whole world Now if this be true whether shal the Church of Christ by your own doctrine be fed secretly or not be latent and lurk in the time of the Antichrist let all men judge But what a contradictorious spirit is this of yours who to gain-say the thing that I writ cares not to involve your self in a contradiction not only to the truth but also to your own Catholicks Either therefore wonder at your own Catholicks who have spoken as much and more in this point then I did and at your self also who grants as much in substance as I meant that ye and they have abused the Scripture or else leave off to wonder at me and wonder at the vail which is hung over your own eyes which hinders you not only to understand the truth but also to understand what your self and your own brethren teach Now as for your reason it is not said that Babylon was in the desert but that John was taken in the spirit that is ravished in the spirit as in the 1. and 4. chapter into the desert that is into a solitar and heavenly contemplation of that vision which was afterward shown him For as this carrying of him in the sprit signifies his spiritual ravishing so this desert signifies the solitariness of his contemplation And as that lifting up of Ezekiel by the locks of the hair of his head between the heaven and the earth and that carying of him to the door of the innermost port towards the North to see the abominations of Jerusalem was only in vision and not bodily So I take this carrying of John in spirit to the wilderness to see the whore of Babylon to have been in vision only and not bodily And whereas ye say that this word desert signifies more properlie to be hid and invisible then the word wilderness I pray you tell me M. Gilbert what is between desert and wilderness save that the first is driven from the Latin and the second is English Must you be set to the Grammar-school again What fancie is this wherewith ye are possessed that you put a difference between wilderness and desert Is there any difference if you understood the Greek language between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is between desert and desert wilderness and wilderness And if ye have ever read the New Testament in Greek there is but the self-same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in both these places which signifieth desert or wilderness But where have you been when ye did imagine this difference Appearantly ye have been dreaming in some wilderness or else wandring in the wilderness of your own blind imaginations As for the exposition of your true Catholicks we count not much of them Always these whom ye call your true Catholicks Bellarmin the Rhemists and Sanderus have been plain in this matter and have spoken more in this point then we do And as for the time of this her secrecie and lurking 1260 days which you expound literally to be but three years and an half I answer This exposition of yours is against first the custom of prophesies which are expounded figuratively and not literally as these 70. weeks in Daniel concerning Christ where there a day is put for a year Next it is against the whole circumstances of the text For will you expound this woman figuratively for the Church as Sanderus doth and the wilderness unto the which she fled figuratively for the smal number whereunto she shal be redacted as you do and the sun wherewith she was clad and the moon which was under her feet and the twelve stars that was upon her head and the red Dragon which pursued her with ten heads c. all figuratively and yet will ye expound the time of her being in the wilderness literally What violence is this which ye will offer unto the holy truth of God to expound all the rest figuratively and only the time literally So then a day here is set for a year as also it is taken in the same sense in the 2. chapter of the Reveâ—ation in the Epistle to Smyrna where it is said They shal have tribulation for the space of ten dayes that is for the space of ten years As for the invisibility of our Church because that question comes afterward therefore I omit it now Only this as your Hierarchie and abomination of your Church grew so did the purity of the doctrine of Jesus Christ in his Church decay And as your Popes came not to their hight at an instant and brought not in their abominations at an instant but piece and piece and by long process of time So the purity of the truth of God decayed not at an instant but piece and piece and by a long process of time For the degrees of your exalting was the degrees of the depressing of the truth of God in his Church As for our dispensation suppose your Church useth not to give them without money laid down yet we will neither buy them nor have them for nought So keep your dispensations at home M. Gilbert while we send for them M. John Welsch And the Ministers thereof shal preach in sackcloth that is under persecution all that time and at the last they shal be put to death for the testimonie of Jesus and for speaking against their false Worship and Religion Master Gilbert Brown It appears to me that M. John hath found some new Revelation other then that of S. John for he notes no place to us and these words of his are no way in S. John and therefore as an invention of his own head we will reject the same Indeed we have in S. John That God shal give to us two witnesses and they shal prophesie 1260. dayes clad with sackcloth Rev. 11.3 But this can no wayes agree with this purpose of his For why there shal be but two of these and there is more then two hundred Ministers in Scotland And these two shal prophesie but our Ministers are no Prophets albeit they foretell things oftentimes that is not true all the prophesies if they prophesie at any time is of evil and not of good These two shal prophesie but three years and an half
but our Ministers have prophesied these 38. years if preaching be prophesying And these two shal be clad in sackcloth but our Ministers chiefly of Borrowstowns is clad in fine black cloth or silk And so forth of many more differences as is contained in the 11. chapter of the Revelation Master John Welsch his Reply It appears to you that I have found some new Revelation other then that of S. John So did it appear to the Jews that the Apostle Paul taught all men every where against the Law of Moses Acts 21.28 and yet it was the truth as he himself testifies he spake nothing beside that which Moses and the Prophets fore-told was to come Acts 26.22 So every appearance is not truth It is but the scales that are upon your eyes that makes this so to appear to you For the Scripture of God and this Revelation of S. John is sufficient to us to make it manifest that your head is the Antichrist and your doctrine is that Apostasie that was prophesied to come so that we need no new revelations as ye do For because the revelations already made by God to his Church and written in his holy Scripture doth not warrant your abominable and false doctrine and your Popes supremacy which is the foundation of all therefore you and your Church flies to unwritten traditions and fained revelations to prove the same As for example because your Church hath not so much as a syllable in the whole Book of God to prove that Peters seat was translated from Antiochia to Rome which is the whole foundation of all Popery Therefore your Pope Marcellinus in his Canon Law causa 24. quaest 1. cap. Rogamus grounds the certainty of this upon a fained revelation that Peter by the commandment of God did translate it But to leave you with your new revelations what have ye for you for this your appearance You say first because I note no place and next because these words of mine are no wayes in S. John therefore ye conclud it to be an invention of my own As to the first Is this a good reason I note not the place therefore I have found out some new revelation You must be sent to the Logick schools again to learn the right manner of reasoning I noted no place Ergo I could not that will not follow As to the second my words are no wayes found in S. John Ergo I have found a new revelation But what if the sense be found What if the self-same doctrine be found in S. John suppose not in the same words Then it will not follow that I have found out a new revelation or that this is the invention of my own brain This place which ye quote here Rev. 11.3 sufficiently confirms all that I said For your self will not deny and Bellarmin lib. 3. cap. 6 the Rhemists annot in Apoc. cap. 11. and Sanderus in his Demonstrations grant that these two Witnesses are they who shal preach in the time of the Antichrist suppose they expound them of Elias and Enoch and that they shal be persecuted and put to death by him What a blindness is this M. Gilbert that hath overfyled your eyes that for the writing of that same doctrine which the Scripture warrants your Divines grant and your self will not deny you have said that it appeared to you that I have found out some new revelation But judge thou Christian Reader what thou may presume upon M. Gilberts appearances But you say this agrees not with my purpose and that because of the differences between these two Witnesses and the Ministers of Scotland First I do not mean by these two Witnesses the Ministers of Scotland only but the Ministers of all the Reformed Churches in Europe who have departed out of your Babel and have shaken off the yoke of the tyrannous bondage of your Head the Man of sin and not only these who now live but these also who now rest from their labors and sleep in the Lord of whom a great many were persecuted and put to death by your tyranny for speaking against your abominations Now as to these differences which ye mark the fountain from the which this springs is your mistaking of the prophesies of God and exponing them literally which according to the use of prophesies and especially these which are set down in this Revelation and all the circumstances of this text ought to be exponed figuratively These same two Witnesses are called two Olives two Candlesticks and it is said of them that fire comes out of their mouthes and destroys their enemies Rev. 11.4.5.6 c. If you will not be so absurd and ridiculous as to expone these things literally but figuratively otherwise ye will make them monsters trees and candlesticks why then do ye expone this place concerning their number work time apparel c. literally and not figuratively as the rest of their works and properties must be exponed the which if you had done then would you have seen no difference between the Ministers of the Gospel that resisted your Pope and these two Witnesses here but the one to be the prophesie of the other and the other to be the accomplishing of the prophesie As for their number then they are said to be but two that is few and yet such a sufficient number as may prove and qualifie any thing by the Law For by the Law Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses shal every word be established So the Ministers of the Gospel in the time of your Antichrist and darkness was but few at the beginning and yet so many as served for to establish the truth of God by their testimony in the consciences of so many whom God had appointed to save As for their work of prophesying the Scripture calls preaching prophesying 1. Cor. 12. and 13. and 14. And the Rhemists annot in 11. Rev. grant that these Witnesses shal preach against the Antichrist And whereas you say that we fore-tell oft-times things that is not true this is your calumnie and lie M. Gilbert and so ought to have no credit And the prophesies of the Ministers of this land against your Antichristian Kingdom ye have found by experience that they have been too true And their prophesies are truer then the prophesies of one of your Popes Hildebrand who openly in the pulpit on the second holy day in Easter week in the presence of diverse Bishops and Cardinals and of the people and Senat of Rome prophesied That the King whose name was Henry should die before the feast of Peter next ensuing or at the least that he should be so dejected from his Kingdom that he should not be able any more to gather above the number of six Knights And this he preached with this confirmation Never accept me for Pope any more if this prophesie be not fulfilled but pluck me from the altar But he was a false Prophet in the same for neither was fulfilled And whereas
was 630. Bishops Of Constantinople 6. Canon 36. anno 681. where there was 289. Bishops Of Nicene 2. Canon 1. anno 781. where was present 350. Bishops Of Constantinople 8. Canon 27. anno where was present 383. Bishops anno 870. Of the Council of Constance Sess 4.5 where was a thousand Fathers almost anno 1418. And of Basel Sess 2.18 anno 1431. all General Councils condemning your Popes Supremacy as your Church now affirms of him some more some less And also it is condemned by Provincial Councils as of Antioch Canon 6.12.13.14.15.19.20 and of Carthage 2. Canon 12. anno 404. and 3. confirmed in the General Council of Trullan Canon 26. and 6. and by the Council of Milevis Canon 22. condemned also by the Universities of Paris Appellat Univers Paris olione 10. ad futur Concil infastic rerum expe ca. fugi and Lovane Aeneas Sylvius de gestis Basil Concil lib. 1. and Colen and Vienna Histor de Europa cap. 22. and Cracovia Comer de rebus Polonorum lib. 21. So then by the authority of Councils General and Provincial and of Universities the Monarchie and Superioritie of the Pope over all General Councils is disallowed And suppose the Churches of France and Germany did honor them and gave them some preeminence both of honor and power being blinded at that time with the smoke that came out of the bottomless pit yet it may appear by their supplication ad Ludovicum 11. pro libertate Ecclesiae Gallicanae adversus Rom. aulam defensio Parisiensis curiae Gravamina nationis Germaniae exhibita Maxim 1. that they did not allow that full Monarchie of his but misliked it and hated the same yea France made laws against it in Conventu Bituricensi Now these are such whom your selves do hold for Catholicks and yet they acknowledged not the Monarchie of your Pope The Churches of Graecia and of Asia in the East Chalcon conc de reb Turc lib. 1. 6. and of Muscovia Jovius in Muscovia in the North and of Ethiopia in the South Alvarez in descriptione Aethiopiae cap. 77. 83. and of Boheme Aeneas Sylvius hist Bohem. cap. 32. Provence Sleydan comment lib. 16. Piemont M. Fox in the acts and monuments lib. 7. And the Reformed Churches that are this day in France Flanders England Scotland and so forth throughout Europe all have condemned your Popes Supremacie So that if his Supremacie were to be put to tryal by the judgement and will of men so many thousands of Pastors Doctors Synods Councils Universities and Churches through all ages in all Countreys of all sorts and estats may suffice to put the Pope from his Supremacie So that I think you may blush M. Gilbert that hath so boldly written that he hath been alwayes acknowledged by the visible Church to be the visible Head of the Church seeing his Monarchie was never fully acknowledged until the Lateran Council under Leo the 10. 1516. years after Christ But seeing the Word of God is the only just tryal of it and seeing it is not written in the book of life therefore I conclud that his Supremacie is not a citizen of that new Jerusalem but a child of Babel and therefore they are blessed that shal dash it against the stones M. Gilbert Brown That the Church at any time may be invisible it is repugnant to the Word of God in many places and to M. John also For he gives examples afterward of sundry as he saith that was of his Religion and opponed themselves to the Pope and his Clergy and that saith he when he was come to the hight If the true Church opponed its self to the Antichristian Church then it was visible and known and if it was known when the Popes Kingdom was at the highest much more when it was low and so it was always known by M. Johns self Master John Welsch his Reply Whether oppugn ye your own imagination M. Gilbert here or that which I write If the first then you are foolish who fight against your self as ye do indeed If the second then I say that which I said was this That no man should think that the Church of God was ever open and visible in that flowrishing estat as it is now For this is our doctrine concerning the invisibility of the Church the which because you know not therefore you stumble at it and oppugns only your own invention and not our doctrine and therefore your reasons and Scriptures which ye bring here serve to no purpose for they make nothing against us We say that the Catholick Church which comprehends all the elect is always invisible both because the principal part thereof is in heaven and also because the senses of men cannot discern who are true members of the Catholick Church here their effectual calling their faith love hope and inward graces their union with Christ their Head their spiritual armor weapons and warfare and their Head Christ Jesus and their whole glorie is inward and invisible and they shal never be seen all gathered together until that great day Ephes 5.25.26.27.32 Psal 45.13 John 10.27 2. Tim. 2.19 Luke 11.28 Matth. 7. Ephes 6.12 2. Cor. 12.3.4 So that suppose they may be seen outwardlie as they are men and sometimes in respect of their outward ministerie yet in so far as they are a part of the Catholick Church that is in so far as they are chosen and sanctified c. as hath been said they cannot be discerned by the senses of men and so are invisible Next we say that the particular visible Churches are not always in one outward estat sometimes outwardlie glorious sometimes more obscure sometimes openly known and seen by all sometimes known and seen but by a few sometimes frequent and consisting in many sometimes rare and consisting in few sometimes adorned with outward ornaments of peace largeness outward glory and multitude sometimes again wanting this outward glory under persecution but yet having that inward glory of these inward graces So that when we say these particular Churches are sometimes invisible we do not mean as though they were known to none for that is not our doctrine M. Gilbert as ye imagine but that they are not so openly known that they are patent to all to be the true Church but known unto them with whom they have to do and who profess the truth with them Yea sometimes some of them are known unto the very persecuters and enemies by their constancy and perseverance in their sufferings suppose they allow not their profession And in this state was the Church of Israel in the time of Elias when he complained that he knew none left but himself of the true worshippers of God 1. Kings 19.10 And the Church of Juda in the days of Achaz and Manasseh Kings of Judah 2. Chron. 28.24 2. Kings 16.10 And such like in the time of Christ both in the time of his living among them as also in the time of his death and resurrection the Church
was brought to a smal handful The Princes Priests and Scribes who only was in dignity and authority being persecuters of Christ condemned him and crucified him And such like in the time of the persecution of Dioclesian the Emperor and in the time of the Arrian heresie which over-spred as it were the whole world The which also our Savior fore-told should come to pass When the Son of man saith he shal come shal he find faith in the world Matth. 18.8 and 24 11.12 And by the Apostle also 2. Thess 2. 1. Tim. 4. And John in the Revelation in the time of the Antichrist Rev. 9 1.2.3.4 and 12.6 and 13 14.15.16.17 and 14 8. and 17.2 and 18.3 Confessed also by the learned of your own Church as Bellarmin and the Rhemists as they have been quoted before and by your self also who confessed that the Church of Christ should be redacted to a smal number as it were in a wilderness in the time of the Antichrist This now is our doctrine concerning the invisibility of the Church which is neither repugnant to the Word of God nor yet to the examples which I brought in afterward against your Religion For both these M. Gilbert are true and neither of them repugning one another that the particular Churches in the time of the Antichrist are not so openly known and so outwardly glorious and flowrishing as they were before but redacted to a smal number more obscure and more latent partly through that universal defection and partly through that extream persecution of your Church and Head and that there was some that opponed themselves to the Pope and his Clergy and that even when he was come to the hight If you will make these repugnant which are not adversa but only diversa secundum magis minus then I say ye are repugnant to all rules of reasoning and to the light of nature it self Master Gilbert Brown Of this I may justly make an argument against M. John that the Pope is not the Antichrist The woman that fled to the wilderness is the true Church and to flie to the wilderness is to be invisible as M. John saith Now young Merchiston hath that this invisibility indured from the year of God 316. till our days the space of 1260. years which was by him all the time of the Antichrist But by M. John Welsch there was many in that time that opponed themselves to the Pope and said against him and his Religion and Clergy and therefore was known Of the which the Popes did slay many as he saith Therefore it must follow that either the Pope is not the Antichrist because he did persecute but visible things or else the Church was not invisible all the time fore-said Master John Welsch his Reply Let us see the force of this argument that ye make for your Pope that he is not the Antichrist The woman ye say that fled to the wilderness is the true Church That I grant and to flie into the wilderness is to be invisible by me I answer By me it is to be latent and to lurk to eschew the rage of her persecuters and not to be openlie conversant as that all the world may know her and yet not to be so latent but that some of them are known both among themselves as also to their enemies And this is our meaning as I have said before when we affirm that the particular Churches sometimes become invisible But you take it as though our meaning were that the Church is so invisible that it is known to none which is your invention M. Gilbert and not our doctrine and therefore you fight without an adversarie in this point But to go forward to the rest of your argument you say that by me there was sundrie that oppugned the Pope and his Clergie and was put to death by them This is true and therefore the blood of the Saints is found in your Church Now what will you gather of all this Therefore say you the Pope is not the Antichrist because he persecutes but visible things or else the Church is not invisible I deny that either the one or the other will follow And because you made an argument against your Pope I should have said with him that he is not the Antichrist which is grounded upon your own invention mistaking our doctrine and therefore hath no feet I will make another for him that he is the Antichrist the which you nor all your Clergy will not be able to disprove He is that undoubted Antichrist which hath redacted the Church of Christ as it were in a wilderness to a smal handful partly through the pest of his damnable doctrine partly through his extream persecution so that they were compelled to lurk and hide themselves from the cruelty of his power This you cannot deny because the Scripture affirms this of the Antichrist But I assume that the Popes of Rome have done this these many hundred years as I have proved before and in the other part of my answer therefore of necessity it must follow that the Popes of Rome are the Antichrist that the Scripture fore told should come Answer this if you can And as for the time of this invisibilitie it hath relation to the beginning and grouth and hight of your Antichristian Kingdom For as it grew the Church was more and more obscured and when it was at the hight the Church was in her eclipse and as it hath decayed now since she hath accordingly spred her self abroad If the Apostle be true that Mystery of Iniquity began to work in his days 2. Thess 2.7 1. John 4 3. For first the manifold heresies which were sown in the primitive Church whereof the Popes of Rome have renewed a great many as shal be proved hereafter was the first step to that Antichristian Kingdom Next the loving of preeminence in the Ministery over their brethren as the Scripture testifies of Dictrephes who loved preeminence 3. of John 9. and specially the aspiring of the Bishops of Rome to a Domination and Lordship over their brethren forbidden by Christ which was manifestly kythed in Pope Victor who did take upon him to excommunicat the Bishops of Asia for a light dissention of the celebration of Easter anno 198. And in others as Cornelius Zosimus Bonifacius and Celestin Popes who did receive to their Communion those who were excommunicat in Africa was the second step Thirdly if it be true that these impious and superstitious Decreets which your Church ascribes to the Popes of Rome before Constantine be theirs as is not likely that such superstitions did creep into the Church of Christ it being under persecution then I say the Popes of Rome even before Sylvester by their superstitious Decreets made a further entry to that Antichristian Kingdom And because the Roman Empire was the let that hindered Antichrist to step up to his throne 2. Thess 2.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the City of Rome behoved
that spake against the Pope I will but note their persons Robert Grosshed John Gryllis a pâ—eaching Frier anno 1253. Gregory Ariminensis Franciscus de Rupe Scissa Taulerus in Germany Gerardus Rhidit Michael de Cesena Petrus de Carbona and Joannes de Poliaco Joannes Rithetalanda anno 1360. Armachanus the Archbish p in Ireland 1360. Nicolas Orem Matthias Parisiensis Nilus Aâ—chbishop of Thessalonica John Wicleff and the Lord Cobham and sundry others Master Gilbert Brown M. John hath set down here a number of (a) It is false obscure and infamous persons for the most part justly (b) And this also condemned for heresies without their works or books whereby they affirm this that he alledges and all (c) This is also false for Gerard and Dulcimus Navarrensis which I first cited was almost 400. years before M. Luther and Calvin and the Waldenses was more then 300. years before them two hundred years before Calvin began their Religion or thereabout Of the which I contend not whether they spake against the Pope or not For all hereticks from the beginning have barked against the Pope But our contention is whether such heads of Religion as they denyed were heresies or not which as yet M. John hath not (d) But these heads is proven that the Pope is the Antichrist and Rome Babel they are not hereticks therefore our Religion was before Martin Luther proved nor is not able to defend these whom he calls his worthy men for appearantly by this all hereticks are worthy men by him albeit they be not of his Religion in all things Master John Welsch his Reply You calumniat our Religion of novelty and say Martin Luther begin it anno 1517. Unto the which I answered That our Religion hath Christ Jesus in the Old and New Testament to be the Author thereof and hath the primitive Church many hundred years thereafter to be the teachers and professors thereof the which I have proved already by some examples and that even till the smoak of that Antichristian darkness of yours did overspread all as it was fore-told by the holy Ghost At the which time also the Lord did reserve his own elect to himself even these hundred and forty and four thousand which did not bow their knees to your Baal as it was fore-prophesied whereof also a great many is recorded in Histories and of whom I set down some examples here Upon the which I reason That Religion which is warranted by the Scripture and professed in the primitive Church c. and hath sundry that taught and professed it and that even in the midst of Popery when it was at the hight thereof is not a new Religion nor invented by Martin Luther But ours is such as hath been proved Therefore unrighteous and blasphemous must ye be who slanders the Lords truth and Religion of novelty and fathers it upon flesh and blood whereof he is the Author Your answer to the first two we have examined Now let us see your answer to this First you say they are obscure men I answer If you call them obscure because they wanted the outward glory wealth and renown of this world Then suppose it were so yet have they Jesus Christ the Prince of life who was called a carpenters son Matth. 13.54 55 56. and his Prophets of whom some were herd-men Amos 1.2 and his Apostles who were fisher-men Mat. 4.18.21 his Church which consists not of many wise mighty or noble but of the foolish weak and vile of the world for them God hath chosen to confound the wise and noble 1. Cor. 1.26.27.28 to be companions with them and so they are the liker both the Head and the members It is true indeed your Popes and Clergy are not obscure for they have the wealth and glory of the world But as Bernard said to the Pope In this they succeed not to Christ or Peter but to Constantine But they receive their good things in this life with the rich gluttâ—n and therefore they must receive their pain with hâ—m in the life to come But why do you call these obscure whom I named here Are not some of them Friers some of them Provincials of Gray-Friers some of them Masters and Rulers of Universities some of them excellently learned which your own Church cannot deny some of them Bishops and Archbishops some of them Noble-men and some of them as namely the Greek and Eastern Churches in number learning purity of doctrine and godliness far exceeding your Papistical Church Who is worthy or famous if these be obscure Are all men obscure and infamous to you but your Popes and those who submit their necks to him And if you think these too obscure men to be called worthy men then behold yet M. Gilbert more noble personages who have resisted your Popes Monarchy As King Philip le Bell of France the Prelats of France joyning with him in his Dominions about the year of God 1300. And Edward the third King of England despised the Popes curse and appealed from him to God about the year of God 1346. And also sundry Emperors as Constantine the fifth Leo his son and Constantine the sixth in the East and Henry the 4. and Henry the 5. and Frederick the 2. in the West Will you call these Kings and Princes of the whole world obscure men So all sorts of men M. Gilbert both rich and poor Princes and subjects and these also within your own bowels being overcome with the strength of the truth of God have spoken against your Religion Why you call them infamous and hereticks justly condemned I know not except it be because they taught and professed the truth of God and condemned your Antichristian idolatry and abominations But all are not infamous and hereticks whom ye call so and surely if murderers hereticks adulterers Sodomites open bargainers with the Devil and the vile monsters of the earth is to be called obscure infamous and hereticks then your Popes are to be called so who of all men that ever the earth hath born have been the vilest monsters and hereticks as I have proved in my other Treatise concerning the Mass and the Antichrist You say next that you contend not whether they have spoken against the Pope or not for all hereticks have ever barked against him that sore against your heart M. Gilbert because you cannot deny but ye have taught this doctrine with us and if it be so M. Gilbert that these men and Churches and many thousands more of all sorts have taught this doctrine with us many hundred years before Martin Luther for the first two which I named was almost 400. years before him then why were you so shameless both to write it and also speak it to blind your poor Countrey-men to their and your damnation that our Religion was begun by Martin Luther and never professed before him So leave off M. Gilbert to beguile the simple and ignorant people with this sottish and
blasphemous reason of yours Martin Luther is the author of our Religion For now your are inforced to grant the contrary that infinit numbers have taught the same doctrine before him The truth is too strong for you M Gilbert that compells you to grant the thing that ye would wish with all your heart the people never knew it But comfort your self M. Gilbert for the truth will be victorious at the last and your darkness dayly more and more will be discovered Indeed the least stroke that ye can give for the defence of your Pope is to call them all hereticks who have spoken against him For I grant the Pope and his Clergy is not such fools as being their own Judges to condemn themselves and to justifie them who not only have taught it but also sufficiently did prove it and many thousands sealed with their blood that he was the Antichrist and his Church Babel But with them they have the Son of God and the Apostles Paul and John hereticks for they also did condemn his idolatry and tyranny and errors But whereabout now will ye contend M. Gilbert Ye say whether their doctrine be heresie or not I would you and your Church would stand upon this and give over all your other contentions while this were first proved Whether their doctrine in so far as they agree with ours and ours in so far as it dissents from yours be heresie or not that is be against the Scripture or not the which if you would do then I hope our contention would soon be ended But for as fast as you run to this now you will flee from it as fast again when we desire to have yours and our doctrine tryed by the Scriptures which of them is heresie and consequently whether ye or we be hereticks And therefore you ever refuse to let your doctrine be tryed by the Scripture but run to your pretended antiquity and successions Councils and lying miracles and many other vain starting-holes like a wild Fox when he is hunted out of one hole he flies to another and dares never abide the fair fields And mark their craft Reader when we affirm that our Religion hath Jesus Christ to be the Author of it in the Scriptures as we offer to prove the same ye refuse this tryal by the Scriptures and say That Martin Luther invented our Religion and we had none that professed it and taught it before him When we again reply That we had sundry of all sorts many hundred years before him even when your Kingdom was at the hight and produces their names they not being able to deny it they slip from that again and say They contend not whether there was such that taught such doctrine or not but they contend whether that was truth or heresie so they run from one starting hole to another But I will ask you M. Gilbert if it be proved that this their doctrine was not heresie will you contend any more then Shal the plea cease then Will you ever slander our Religion of novelty in saying Martin Luther was the first that began it and we had none who professed before him But you will say This you have not proved It is true I had not proved it then but now I hope I have proved it sufficiently that your Popes are the Antichrist and your Rome Babel which was one of the principal heads of the doctrine which ye taught and sundry others also Disprove you it if you can M. Gilbert Master Gilbert Brown But he saith They preached the same Religion that he preaches c. Let M. John name any of these his Doctors that he will abide at in Religion and I shal let him see that he was not of his Religion in all things For that is the thing that we say That albeit M. John and his brethren have renewed many old condemned heresies of hereticks yet they were not of their Religion in all things And therefore this that M. John calls the only truth was never professed in all heads as it is now in Scotland before in no Countrey no not by any one man let be by a number which thing M. Robert Bruce grants himself in his Sermons in these words And God hath chosen a few hearts in this Countrey where he hath begun his dwelling place for God dwells now in the hearts and consciences of his own by his holy Spirit And surely so hath he dwelt with 〈◊〉 these thirty years in such purity that he hath not done the like with any Nation in the earth he hath not remained with any Nation without error and heresie so long as he hath done with us c. So God dwelt in no place without error and heresie the space of thirty years while now in Scotland Master John Welsch his Reply But you say they dissent from us in some things and is not of our Religion in all things Whereunto I answer That suppose this were true yet it will not follow but that they are of our Religion seeing they and we do agree in the main foundations thereof For we have learned to call them brethren which do hold the foundation as the Apostle saith suppose they have built hay straw or timber upon the same Otherwise if ye will be content to be measured with that same measure wherewith ye measure us if you will have none to be accounted of your Religion but these only that profess with you in all things as your Church doth now then not only by your reason shal ye want the Lord Jesus his Apostles the primitive Church as ye do indeed and that not only in the first six hundred years but long after till the thousand year and long after that also to be of your profession because not only the weightiest points of your doctrine have not their original in the Scripture and are unwritten traditions by the testimony of some of your selves but also sundry points of your Religion have been brought in after these dayes being unknown in the former ages as your selves will not deny and I have proved in some heads in the other part concerning the Mass Yea you shal want all the Fathers by this reason of yours For there is not one of them but they have their own errors which ye your selves will not defend and the most part of them are with us against you in many things which you cannot deny and that which is more ye shal want almost all the general Councils except three or four and many of your own Popes Doctors Bishops Cardinals and Jesuits for not only have some of them had errors and some of them been hereticks by your whole confessions but also some of them have been with us in some points against you as I have proved before so that I need not repeat them now As for example Pope Gregory affirms That the books of the Macchabees are Apocrypha Lib. 19. cap. 16. in morali And so have sundry others of your Clergy as
For if appears that either ye are not acquainted with the Histories of that age or else ye dissemble it of purpose for John Wicleff he left so many behind him in England who professed our Religion that though your Prelats did molest them what they could yet they and their favorers in short time grew to such strength and multitude that by the year 1422. which was an hundred years immediatly before Luther Henry Chichesley the Archbishop of Canterbury wrot to the Pope that they all could not be suppressed they were so many but by force of war The professors of our Religion began to gather so great force in Bohemia after the burning of John Hus and Jerome of Prague at the Council of Constance which was about the year 1417. which was just an hundred years immediatly before Luther that they were able not only to defend themselves by force of armes against the tyrannie of your Popes but also obtained many notable victories against the strongest power that the Pope did raise against them In England William Taylor was burnt anno 1422. and two years after that William White was burnt And betwixt that time and 1430. Father Abraham of Colchester John Wadden and Richard Hovington were burnt And after that Richard Wiche and John Goose one Braban and one Jerome and others with him were burnt Hieronymus Savanarola a Monk in Italie with two others named Dominick and Sylvester were condemned to death at Florence in the year 1500. with sundry others whom for shortness I omit here Now surely I cannot but wonder M. Gilbert that ye should have been so impudent as to have set it down in writ that I could get none that professed our Religion an hundred years immediatly before Martin Luther But the Reader may gather what credit he may give to your notes and yet with such impudent lies ye blind the poor people Upon the which I gather that both these conclusions of yours is false For the Church of Christ in all ages even from the Apostles days to this day hath ever had her own teachers and professors unto whom Martin Luther hath succeeded in his Religion suppose not in the like frequencie and puritie and that by reason partly of the smoke of that bottemless pit that is of your doctrine which darkned both the Sun and the air Rev. 9.2 that is both teachers and people and partly by your extream persecution whereby ye made war with the Saints of God and overcame them Rev 13 7. But your smoke will evanish away at the last and the clear light of the Lord shal shine more and more maugre all your hearts SECTION XXV That the Reformed Churches have not renewed old condemned Heresies Master Gilbert Brown BUt that M. John shal not think that we slander him and his â—iâ—h old condemned heresies let him read S. Augustin Epiphanius and others noted here as of these and many the like 1. Novatus forsook the Pope of Rome Cornelius and caused others do the like as Eusebius hist lib. 6. cap. 33. and Nicephorus report lib. 6. cap. 30. 2. Aërus the heretick denyed that offering or prayers should be done for the dead and that fasting should be free as S. Augustine and Epiphane declare haeres 75. 3. Eunomius and Aërius held that only faith justifieth as Augustin haeres 55. lib. de fide operibus and Epiphanius haeres 76. write Master John Welsch his Reply Now are we by Gods grace come unto your last calumnie in affirming that we renew old condemned heresies This is indeed M. Gilbert a heavie challenge if it were true but it is but like the rest of your calumnies yea it hath less appearance of truth then any thing which ye have spoken against us A liar M. Gilbert shal not enter in that heavenly city but his portion shal be in that lake that burne with fire and brimstone Rev. 19.20 22.15 And he that slandereth his neighbor much more then he who slandereth the truth of God shal not rest in the Lords holy mountain Psal 15 3. But to come to the first Novatus intruded himself in another mans charge and caused set up himself against Cornelius the lawful Pastor of the Church in Rome then and that craftily and withdrew many of his flock from him which is as contrary to our doctrine as black to white For we teach that every Pastor should have his own particular flock as Cornelius had then in Rome and no man should intrude himself in another mans charge as he did So this is a calumny M. Gilbert But your Popes are like Novatus who not only have disturbed all the Christian Congregations in Europe almost by setting up and thrusting down such Pastors as they would but also all the Kingdoms in Europe As for this doctrine of Aerius I answer you as ye did me I contend not whether he taught this doctrine or not for the Scriptures have taught the same But our contention is whether they be heresie or not which you have not proved nor ever will be able to prove by the Scripture It is true Epiphanius and Augustin following him reckon him among hereticks but Theodoretus in his Book de fabulis Judaeorum and the Ecclesiastical History reckon him not among hereticks and he was not condemned for an heretick in any Council that therefore which he taught according to the Scripture we imbrace But as for the errors of the Aërians which are errors indeed and which are ascribed unto them as the damning of marriage urging of continency requiring them whom they receive to their fellowship to forsake their own proper things These heresies I say your Church hath renewed who damns marriage and urges continency in your Clergy and receives none to your religious Orders but such as refuse their own proper things As to the third the Aërian and Eunomian heresies they secluded holiness of life from that faith of theirs and taught such a faith that might stand with whatsoever sins and with perseverance in them Will you stand to this M. Gilbert before the Lord that we teach such doctrine Is not this our doctrine that only living faith which works by love and brings forth good fruits doth justifie But you are like to them that know no other justifying faith but such a faith as both the reprobats and the Devils may have So this is your third calumnie M. Gilbert Brown 4. Simon Magus Marcion and Manichaeus denyed that man had free-will as Augustin haeres 46. Jerome and Epiphanius haeres 42. make mention 5. Jovinianus affirmed that Priests marriage was lawful after the lawful vow of chastity He moved sundry Nuns to marry in the city of Rome He made fasting and abstinence from meat superfluous as Augustin writes of him haeres 82. item lib. 1. cap. 7 de peccat merit remiss 6. Vigilantius denyed the prayer to Saints as S. Jerome contra Vigilantium writes He despised the burning of lights and candles in the Churches in the day
did not obey the other As also a number of the Fathers of your own Religion who in two General Councils the one of Constance where there was almost a thousand Fathers the other of Basel did not obey the Pope in defining General Councils to be above the Pope So if ye speak truth infinit millions of Christians in all ages and innumerable Churches and thousands of your own Religion are condemned to Hell But this is false M. Gilbert and who will believe you And to the end now my conclusion yet holds sure That seeing his Kingdom is that second beast that hath two horns like the Lamb and speaks like the Dragon Rev. 13.11 And himself is that man of sin and son of perdition that adversary and Antichrist that was to come 2. Thess 2.3.4 And his doctrine is that Apostasie and abomination sore-told in the Scripture Rev. 17. And his seat that Harlot and mystical Babylon that mother of whoredoms who is drunken with the blood of the Martyrs of Jesus Whosoever receives his mark on his fore-head or hand that is openly or privatly professes obedience unto him shal as the Angel proclaimed drink of the wine of the wrath of God yea of that pure wine in the cup of his wrath and he shal be tormented with fire and brimstone before the holy angels and before the Lamb. And the smoak of his torment shal ascend for evermore and they shal have no rest day nor night which worship the beast or his image And as for your prayer I beseech God M. Gilbert that he may open my eyes and inlarge my heart to understand and imbrace his truth more and more and to make me to grow up in that spiritual communion with Christ and his members more and more But that which ye call truth is heresie and that which ye call the true Church is Babel and therefore that doctrine and Church of yours is that strong delusion and whore of Babel with the which whosoever shal communicat is excluded from the merits of Christ and shal be partaker of her plagues and finally shal be damned SECTION XXVIII That the Pope is Antichrist Master Gilbert Brown IF the Pope be the Antichrist what is the cause that M. John would not set down some place out of the Word of God that proves the same But good Reader I will let you see how far M. John is against the Word of God in this and that by some examples only First our Savior shew unto the Jews that albeit he came in the name of his Father yet they would not receive him If another saith he shal come in his own name him ye will receive This no doubt as Augustin expones the same is meant of the Antichrist that the Jews shal receive Now it is out of all controversie that the Jews never received the Pope Therefore the Pope is not the Antichrist Again the Pope came never in his own name but in the Name of Christ for he is called the Vicare of Christ and the servant of the servants of God therefore he cannot be the Antichrist Master John Welsch his Reply I come now to prove that which I offered before to prove to wit that your Popes which ye will have to be the Head of the Church of Christ are the self-same Antichrist that the Scripture fore-told should come Thou wouldest know Christian Reader of what weight this controversie is Whether the Pope be the Antichrist or not For this supremacy of his unto them is the foundation whereupon their Religion and the safety of their whole Church depends so that they call it The Rock whereupon the Church is built against which the gates of Hell shal not prevail Rhemist annot upon Matth. 16. And Bellarmin calls him in his Preface before the controversie of the Popes supremacy The foundation which upholds the house of God the Pastor which feeds his flock the Emperor which governes his host the Sun which gives light to the starrs that is to the Ministers of the Church the Head which gives life to his body So that remove his supremacy the house of God must fall the flock of Christ must be scattered the host of the Lord must be discomfited the starrs that is the Ministery must be darkened and the body must ly still without motion And he applyes these Prophesies Isai 28.16 and 8.14.15 spoken and fulfilled only in the Son of God unto him a calling him that foundation stone in Sion upon the which the whole Church is built and that proved stone against the which the gates of Hell hath never nor never shal prevail and that corner stone which joyns both Jew and Gentil as two walls together in a Christian Church and that precious stone from whence the infinit treasure of grace is most plenteously derived unto the whole Church as unity in doctrine the bond of peace the unity of faith which is salvation it self and the very life of Religion And he saith There is no way to Christ but by Peter in whose room their Popes succeed So that in their judgement there is no way to Christ but by the Pope And he calls him that rock of offence and stumbling stone spoken of in Isai chap. 8. Upon the which whosoever shal fall shal be broken and on whom it shal fall it shal dash him in pieces O blasphemous mouth Let the heavens be confounded at this And therefore this is of such a weight that Boniface the 8 hath made it an article of our Faith whose words are these We declare we affirm we define and pronounce that it is altogether needful to salvation to all creatures to be under the Pope of Rome Extra de minoritate obedientia cap. unam sanctam So that Bellarmin saith when the Popes supremacy is called in controversie The sum of all Christianity is called in question and when that is controverted Then it is controverted whether the Church should stand any longer or not or fall and dissolve Unto them therefore it is an article of Faith which must be believed and practised under the pain of the loss of salvation And unto us he is that self-same Antichrist which the Scripture hath fore-told time hath made manifest and the Church hath suffered Unto them he is the Head of the body of Christ the Pastor of his flock the Sun that gives light to the starrs the foundation of the house of God and a mortal God among men Unto us he is Gods enemy the son of perdition the second beast and false prophet 2 Thess 2.13 Rev. 13.11 the adversary of true Religion a pest in the body a tyrant in the Common-wealth and Antichrist in the Church So thou sees Christian Reader of what weight this controversie is Let us see then how he defends him from being the Antichrist and then you shal hear our reasons to the contrary You ask wherefore I set not down some places of Scripture to prove the Pope to be the Antichrist I answer Not
because I could not but because it was not my purpose at that time But now I mind to do it God willing after that I have answered to your arguments Your first reason is The Jews shal receive the Antichrist but they never received the Pope therefore the Pope is not the Antichrist I answer Your proposition I deny that the Jews shal receive the Antichrist For first I will ask you Are you of that opinion with Bellarmin lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 12 the Rhemists annot upon 2 Thess 2. and the rest of your Clergy that they shal receive him as their Messias which they look for If you be not of their mind then beside that you dissent from the doctrine of your own Church it is not probable that the Jews would receive him if they thought not he were their Messias And if ye be of their mind then I say the Jews will receive none as their Messias but these who are born of the Tribe of Juda and the family of David in Bethlehem and who shal reign in Jerusalem But the Tribes are confounded so that they cannot know it and the family of David destroyed by sundry Emperors or at the least so confounded that they cannot be distinguished and Bethlehem is destroyed and the Temple of Jerusalem utterly casten down therefore the Messias which they look for will never come And so if this be true the Antichrist which ye imagine here will never come since your Antichrist and their Messias that they look for are both one as your Church suppones And I say further Sanderus in 8. demonst and the Rhemist annot upon the 2. Thess 2. say the Antichrist shal come of the Tribe of Dan if then he shal come of the Tribe of Dan as they say the Jews will never receive him as their Messias because they know their Messias which they look for shal come of the Tribe of Juda. Therefore if Sanderus and the Rhemists speak true the Jews shal never receive the Antichrist at all Thirdly I lay this ground which you cannot deny that the Jews are to be planted in again in the natural olive that is they are to be converted to Christ because their fall was but for a time as the Apostle plainly fore-tells Rom. 11.24 and the Rhemists grant it annot upon that chapter Upon the which I ask you M. Gilbert whether shal they receive the Antichrist before or after their conversion If you say after then I say after they have embraced the true Messias and the Gospel how can it be that they will look for another Messias and receive the Antichrist as their Savior Next we read of their conversion in the Scripture but nothing of their rejection of Christ after their conversion And thirdly seeing as your Church saith the Antichrist shal be sent to them and they shal receive him because they received not Christ Jesus of force then it cannot be after their conversion For the cause to wit their hardness of heart and refusal of the true Messias being taken away this punishment should not be sent unto them after their embracing of Christ so not after their conversion And if you say before their conversion then I say either must you make the reign of your Antichrist longer then three years and an half which your Church doth and put a greater space betwixt the perdition of him and the end of the world then your Church doth For Bellarmin puts but 45. dayes between his perdition and the end of the world lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 17. and so overthrow your own doctrine concerning the Antichrist that ye may establish your imaginary Antichrist Or else what likelyhood is there that ever they shal be converted to Christ which is against both the Scripture and your own doctrine For seeing the Jews are to receive him as their Messias and seeing he is to build their Temple restore their ceremonies and obtain the Monarchy of the whole world especially by their help as your doctrine affirms Bellar. lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 12. 16 c. shal not this drive them further from Christ and harden their hearts more then ever it was before And seeing he shal reign but three years and an half and they cannot embrace the true Savior as long as he reigns for they cannot embrace both the Antichrist and the true Christ together and seeing after his death the day of judgement shal come immediatly or at the least 45. days after as Bellarmin saith how can it be possible that they shal ever be turned to Christ before the end of the world if this your doctrine be true Therefore they cannot receive the Antichrist before their conversion and so they shal never receive the Antichrist So then to conclud this point as the Messias which the poor blinded Jews look for will never come the true Messias being come already whom they crucified so the Antichrist which ye imagine will never come for the true Antichrist which either ye will not see or else if ye see ye will not confess him lurks within your own bosom these many years whom ye labor to cover that he should not be seen But how prove ye that the Jews will receive the Antichrist Because our Savior saith to the Jews If another shal come in his own name him ye will receive I grant indeed our Savior so speaks But first I say this other is not to be restricted to the Antichrist only but to be referred to all false Prophets who shal come not being sent of God so Nonnus so Lyra expone it and this was fulfilled long since in receiving of Theudas and Cozban and other deceivers whom they received Joseph de bello Judaico lib. 2. cap. 12. Pet. Gala. lib. 40. cap. 21. As for Augustin it is true he expones it of the Antichrist But if Bellarmin lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 12. rejects Augustins opinion concerning the generation of the Antichrist that he shal come of the Tribe of Dan because it cannot saith he be proved by the Scripture shal it not also be lawful for us not to be bound to the exposition of Augustin unless it be certain by the Scripture so give us that liberty which ye take to your selves Your first reason then hath no feet for this place speaks of all false Prophets whatsoever which the Jews should receive and it hath been accomplished sundry times among them therefore this yet remains unproved that the Jews shal receive the Antichrist This for the first part of the argument The second part of your argument is The Pope came never in his own name but in the name of Christ therefore he is not the Antichrist Your antecedent I deny For if ye will credit Franciscus Toledo if ye know him writing upon the same place he saith He shal come in his own name who truly shal have no divine vertue but shal fain himself to be sent of God as the false Prophets came
for I think you would not have wished me to read that thing which ye your self believes not to be true I therefore read it and read it over again And beside many other things I find this in it that the Antichrist should be born of a Virgin by the help of the Devil as Christ was born of the Virgin by the work of the holy Ghost I wondered that you should have wished me to read that Book in the which there was so manifest an error and that contrary the doctrine of your own Church You should beware of this M. Gilbert for if your Head and Church get wit of it they will not only count you a bad defender of the Catholick Faith as you say you are but also it may be they suspect you of heresie who do wish your adversaries to read that Book wherein so manifest an error is and that against the doctrine of your own Church For who will think of you but that ye are of that same opinion your self seeing you are so earnest with others to read the same Bellarmin that great defender of your Catholick Faith was more wise then you in this point For first he saith lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 12. There is a manifest error in that treatise Next he saith It is certain that that treatise cannot be Augustins but it is probable saith he that it is Rabanus his work So to conclud this I assure you M. Gilbert I am of the same mind that I was concerning your Popes for all the reading of that work But I am not of the same mind towards you that I was before the reading of the same for either I think you have been very foolish in wishing me to read that which you believed not your self to be true or else that ye defend a manifest error not only against the truth but also against the doctrine of your own Church And let your Pope who is the bond of unity among you see to this how to reconcile you and Bellarmin two defenders of his Catholick Faith you saying that that work is Augustins and Bellarmin flatly denying it and affirming that it cannot be his you wishing your adversary to read it and Bellarmin confuting a manifest error in it But betwixt you be it Now this is all that you have said for the defense of your Pope which are but as figg leaves which cannot hide his nakedness Now I will let thee see Christian Reader what we have for us wherefore we affirm and teach and is ready also as thousands have done before us to seal it with our blood that the Popes of Rome are the Antichrist which the Scripture hath fore-told should come time hath made manifest and the Lord his mouth hath in a part consumed And first I will lay this ground which M. Gilbert cannot gain say and the conscience of all men will subscribe to That as the true Christ is sufficiently described in the Old and New Testament so the Antichrist is sufficiently described there also And as he is to be believed under the pain of the endless damnation of their souls to be the true Christ to whom the prophesies of the Old Testament concerning the Savior to come doth agree and of whom the New Testament testifieth that they are accomplished so he must be that Antichrist which the Scripture fore-told was to come to whom every one of the marks and properties of the Antichrist set down in the same do agree and in whom they are found to be accomplished Let us therefore out of the Scripture search the marks of the Antichrist and then let us see whether their Popes of Rome be stamped with these marks or not I speak not now of the many Antichrists whereof John speaks 1. John 2.18 which were fore-runners of that great defection which was fore-told should come in the Church of God but of that chief and great Antichrist who not in one or two things only but almost in all the points of his Religion should be contrary to Jesus Christ whom these places of Scripture 1. John 4.3 2. Thess 2. Rev. 11.13.17.18 do describe And while as I affirm that the Popes of Rome are this great Antichrist I understand it thus That they are the Prince and Head of that defection and apostasie which the Scripture fore-shew and fore-told was to come in the Church For I do not think that all the strength and force of the Antichrist is included in the Pope but the Pope and his Kingdom which is contrary to the Kingdom of Christ is most truly called the Antichrist whereof because the Pope is the Prince and Head therefore by that figure taking the part for the whole I call him the Antichrist And in this we follow the Scripture for the Scripture speaking of the Antichrist sometimes calls it a defection and a mystery of iniquity and the second beast that hath horns like the Lamb and the Harlot and sometimes points out the principal and chief in this Kingdom on whom the whole body of iniquity doth hang as when he writes here the man of sin and son of perdition which is an adversary who extolls himself above all c. which is most properly spoken not of the body but of the Head Having shown now in what sense we take the Antichrist we will go to the matter And first to that 2. Thess 2.3.4 where he is described and that by no dark prophesies as you say but by plain sayings First therefore the Scripture calls him there a man of sin a son of perdition The which to be accomplished in your Popes your own Histories Cardinals Councils Favorers Friers Friends and themselves do sufficiently testifie So that if they speak true of themselves which you cannot deny then of all the monsters that ever the earth hath born some of your Popes have been the greatest monsters For in this point M. Gilbert we deal not with you as ye deal with us for ye cite our enemies as witnesses of us which should have no credit and we cite your own friends and these of your own Religion So that they shal be fetched out as witnesses against you in this point whether your Popes be the men of sin and sons of perdition or not What Commandment is there of the first or second Table which they have not violated in the highest degree 1. Whoremongers 2. Adulterers 3. Sodomits 4. Incestuous 5. Fosterers and maintainers of harlots 6. Tyrants 7. Devilish and Sorcerers 8. In pride passing all creatures under heaven 9. Atheists without God 10. Perjured 11. Burreaus 12. Bawds and merchants of whores 13. Sacrilegious 14. Traitors 15. Seditious 16. Blasphemous 17. Parricides 18. Poysoners of Emperors Senators Cardinals yea of their own parents and sisters 19. Helpers of the Turks 20. Drunkards 21. Simoniacks 22. Monsters 23. Bastards 24. Arrians 25. Idolaters 26. And so contentious that sometimes there was two sometimes three and sometimes four all Popes striving for the Popedom together
Antichrist is called an adversary that is opposed and contrary to God and that not in life only but in doctrine Religion and government and that not in one point only but almost in all the substantial points thereof The which mark the Popes of Rome bear and that not only in their lives but also in the whole substantial points of Religion And to make this clear besides that which hath been spoken we shal compare the doctrine of Jesus Christ and the government of his Kingdom set down in the Scripture with the doctrine of the Popes and the manner of their government that the contrariety of them may be known so that it shal be seen that cold is no more contrary to heat and black to white then Papism to Christianity and the Religion of the Church of Rome to the Religion of Christ Jesus The doctrine of Christ stands especially in these two things in the knowledge of his person and in the knowledge of his offices And therefore the Apostle saith I desire to know nothing but Jesus Christ and him crucified 1. Cor. 2.2 And Christ himself saith It is life eternal to know thee to be the only true God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ John 17 3. The doctrine of the Popes of Rome overthrows both And first to prove this concerning his person the Scripture testifies that Jesus Christ is conceived of the substance of the Virgin Mary and that he hath but one true body made of the seed of David and of the seed of the woman Rom. 1.3 Gal. 4. 4 and not many and that he is like unto us in all things except sin Heb. 2.17 The doctrine of the Church of Rome is that Christ Jesus his body is made of the bread and wine in the Sacrament their doctrine makes him to have as many bodies as there is bits of bread in the Sacrament and not to be like his brethren in all things except sin Bellar. lib. 3. de Eucharistia fol. 399. Pope John 22. lib. orat in scr antidotarius animae for his brethren can be but in one place at once with their own due proportion visibly But their doctrine of Transubstantiation makes him to be both in heaven and earth at once in heaven visibly in earth invisibly in heaven with his own quantity and proportion in earth without his natural proportion and not in one place of the earth only but in innumerable places thereof at once so that this main foundation of mans salvation without the which there is no eternal life concerning the truth of Christs manhood made of the woman is utterly defaced and overthrown by the doctrine of the Popes of Rome in making him to have infinit bodies not made of the feed of the woman but of bread and wine or at the least made of two diverse substances And as they overthrow the doctrine of his person so they overthrow the doctrine of his offices His offices are three a Prophet a Priest and a King which are all overthrown by them As he is a Prophet he hath revealed his Fathers whole will unto his servants John 1.18 and hath left it in register in his latter Testament and hath forbidden to add empair or to alter the same Deut. 4.2 and hath pronounced a wo a curse unto them that adds empairs or alters the same Rev. 22.18 Gal. 1.8 and that because it is sufficient to make a man wise unto salvation and to make the man of God perfect unto every good work 2. Tim. 3.15.16 and because it is pure and perfect and easie to all them that will understand it Prov. 8.9 Psal 19.8.9 13. 119. But they have many wayes corrupted this Testament of Christ by mingling and adulterating the same First in that they give divine authority to the Books called Apocrypha which are humain Concil Trident. Sess 4. Next in receiving and commanding others to receive traditions with equal reverence and affection with the Scripture Thirdly in their corrupt Latin translation which they have made authentical which some of themselves confess have missed sometimes the meaning of the holy Ghost Bud. annot prior in Pandect Andrad lib. 4. Arias Montanus Tom. 8. Bibl. Reg. in praefat Fourthly in joyning with the Commandments of God their own commandments and that not as things indifferent but as necessary to salvation Concil Trident. Sess 6 cap. 10. Fifthly in condemning all sense and meaning of the holy Scripture but that which they hold themselves Sess 4. Last of all in quarrelling the Scripture of imperfection obscurity and ambiguity calling it dead and dumb like a nose of wax They therefore who have altered added and corrupted the Testament of Jesus Christ confirmed by his death which he hath left in writ for to instruct his Church in all things and to make her wise to salvation and perfect to every good work doth spoil the Lord Jesus of his Prophetical office But the doctrine of the Church of Rome hath done so Ergo they spoyl Jesus Christ of his Prophetical office Thirdly they are no less sacrilegious and injurious to his Priesthood His Priesthood stands in two things First in purchasing unto us by the vertue of that one sacrifice once offered up upon the Cross an everlasting redemption Next in making continual intercession for us with his Father Heb. 9.11.12 15.24.25.26.27.28 the which both are overthrown by the doctrine of the Church of Rome As to the first it is overthrown many wayes as first our Savior saith That his soul was sorrowful unto the death and that he swat drops of blood Matth. 26.37.38 and he sent up strong cryes and supplications with tears in the dayes of his flesh Heb. 5.7 Luke 22.44 and therefore he thrise upon his knees prays That if it had been possible that cup might be removed from him Matth. 27.39 And upon the Cross through the sense and feeling of that wrath he breaks forth in that complaint My God my God why hast thou forsaken me All which do testifie that he suffered more then a common death to wit the terrors of the wrath of God which was due to the sins of all the elect But the doctrine of the Church of Rome ranverseth this doctrine of our salvation and teacheth that Christ suffered not the wrath of God upon his soul which if it be true then Christ hath not payed our debt sufficiently for our debt was not only the natural death of the body but the wrath of God upon the soul and therefore the Scripture saith The soul that sinneth shal die the death Ezech. 18.20 Secondly the Scripture testifieth that Christs death and blood is a sufficient ransom for our sins and a sufficient satisfaction unto the justice of God Heb. 10.10.14 John 19.28 1. Tim. 2.6 1. Pet. 2.24 1. John 1.7 They by the contrary joyn to his satisfaction the satisfactions of men both in this life and in the life to come in Purgatory and that not only for their own sins but for
of ryot pride extortion and simony Ammian Marcel lib. 27. Baptist. Mant. Fast lib. 5. Bern. Epist 42. Conc. Basil Sess 21. And as for excommunication he hath used it not against the wicked Bernard ad Eugen. lib. 1. 3. Mantuan sylvar lib. 2. of whom a sink hath flowed at all times in Rome not against thieves of whom Rome is made a den not against murderers for whom there is a sanctuary in the houses of Cardinals at Rome Aeneas Sylvius hist de Asia min. cap. 77. not against adulterers not against whores whereof the Pope received such tribut as hath been spoken but against Emperors Estats Nations who would not serve him at a beck against any man that denyed his Parish Priest a little tiends against whole assemblies of the faithful whom he by most villanous cruelty and treachery as if they had been sheep appointed for the slaughter hath rid away by fire by torment by sword And to end this what shal I speak of his tyrannical laws whereby he hath oppressed the Church of God as of single life auricular confession choise of meats apparel dayes of new and strange canonizing of Saints of pilgrimage to the holy Land of the vows of Monks Nuns of the estates and rites of marriage and of innumerable ceremonies partly unfruitful partly foolish partly impious And what shal I speak of his dispensations against the Old Testament against the Epistles of Paul against all right and equity That a brother may marry his own brothers wife King Henry the 8. and an uncle his sisters daughter Philip King of Spain And Pope Martin the fifth approved the marriage of one with his sister germain That Church offices and livings may be given to boyes to simonical merchants and unlearned persons Bernard Epist 42. de consid ad Eugen. lib. 1. 3. That one may have plurality of Benefices Dist 70. cap. Sacerdotum cap. de mult de praeb That he who hath the Benefice needs not to attend the office cap. relatum de cler cap. licet Canon de elect in Sexto That promise may be broken with God and man That subjects may be discharged of their oath to their Princes Conc. Constant. Sess 19. And last of all what shal I speak of his Indulgences and Pardons in granting so many hundred and thousand years pardon of their sins to them that will devoutly say their idolatrous prayers Some giving three hundred dayes pardon as Pope Celestin Some seven hundred years pardon as Pope Boniface Some ten thousand years pardon as Boniface the 6. Some thirtytwo thousand seven hundred fiftyfive years pardon And Sixtus the 4 hath doubled the time of this fore-said pardon And some ten hundred thousand years pardon for deadly sins as Pope John 22. Portuus book of Sarum printed anno 1520. Here is pardon for all sins so that there be money And as the Revelation saith The very souls of men are made merchandise of Rev. 18.13 And one of their own friends saith venalia Romae Templa Sacerdâ—tes Altaria sacra coronae Ignes thura preces coelum est venale Deúsque Baptist Mantuan calam temp lib. 3. That is Churches Priests Altars crowns fire incense prayers heaven and God are to be sold in the Church of Rome To conclud this then he is the Antichrist whose Doctrine and Religion Ministery and Discipline is directly contrary to the Doctrine Religion Ministery and Discipline of Jesus Christ Again he is the undoubted Antichrist whose doctrine spoyls Jesus Christ of the truth of his humanity of his Prophetical Kingly and Priestly Offices and sets himself and others up in the same offices and whose doctrine spoils him of the glory which is due to him only for our creation and redemption and gives it to creatures and last of all he whose doctrine spoyls men of their salvation must be that undoubted Antichrist But the Doctrine and Religion of the Popes of Rome and his Clergy as hath been proved sufficiently are such Therefore they are that undoubted Antichrist which the Scripture fore-told was to come And this for the second mark The third mark of the Antichrist is That he exalts himself above all that is called God and is worshipped that is above all powers and majesties both heavenly and earthly He saith not Above God himself but above all that is called God that is above all powers heavenly and earthly as hath been said He then is the undoubted Antichrist whom the Scripture fore-told should come who lifts up himself above all powers as well heavenly as earthly this you cannot deny because the Scripture so affirms But the Pope of Rome have lifted up themselves above all powers both heavenly and earthly the which if it shal be proved then of necessity it must follow that the Popes of Rome are that undoubted Antichrist Now for proof hereof we shal set none other upon their assise to file or cleanse them in this point but their own Canon Law their own Writers their own Bishops and themselves Antonius Archbishop of Florence saith Sum. part 3. tit 22. cap. 5. That his power is greater then any created power and that it extends its self to heavenly earthly and infernal things Of whom saith he that is true which is spoken of Christ in the 8. Psalm 6. Thou hast subjected all things under his feet that are in heaven in earth or in hell applying it to the Pope What needs more This is conviction enough But yet we will proceed and see how far he hath lifted up himself above all these As for them in the earth there are two special powers the temporal power and the spiritual power He claims superiority over both as is manifest by their own doctrine The Pope is over the world in stead of Christ Anton in sum part 3. tit 22. cap. 5. I am Cesar all the power in the heaven and in the earth is mine Boniface 8. We affirm and define that it stands all creatures upon the necessity of their salvation to be subject to the Pope Extra de majorit unam sanct The Pope should judge all and be judged of none unless he be found an heretick And suppose he should draw after him innumerable souls by heaps unto Hell yet no mortal man should be so bold as to say to him Lord why dost thou this Dist 40. cap. Si. Papa Gloss extravagant ad Apost How far he hath lifted up himself above the temporal power Kings Princes and Emperors let both their doctrine and practise bear witness The Pope is as the Sun to rule over the day that is the spirituality and the Emperor as the Moon to rule over the night that is the temporality And as the earth is seven times greater then the Moon and the Sun eight times greater then the earth so is the Pope forty seven times greater then the Emperor And as the Emperor or Roman Princes take of me their approbation unction and Imperial Crown so they must not
the undoubted Antichrist This for the fourth mark The fifth mark of the Antichrist as he is described by the Apostle is in these words Ye know saith the Apostle what withholdeth namely that he might be revealed in his own time This Tertullian de resurrect cap. 24. Jerome ad Gelasium and Chrysostom upon this same place and so also Ambrose upon this place and August de civit Dei lib. 20. cap. 29. expone it of the Roman Empire the which as long as it flowrished and was in full strength the Antichrist could not climb up to this his full hight and preeminence So that it behoved that Empire first to be translated and piece and piece diminished before the Antichrist could come up to his hight for that stayed him Now it is manifest out of the 17. chap. of the Revelation that Rome should be the seat of the Antichrist and Bellarmin and the Rhemists do not deny it and Rome was the seat of the Roman Empire before So then it behoved the Empire to translate his seat from Rome that Rome which was first the seat of the Empire might be the seat of the Antichrist Now the issue and event is a sure and clear interpretation of this Prophesie For Constantin the Emperor of Rome translated his seat from Rome to Byzantium called Constantinople in Greece And piece and piece that Empire of the Greek Emperor began to decay and was translated from the Greeks to the French-men by the Popes and then from them to the Germans by the Popes also So that both Rome and a great part of Italy and at the last a great part of the Empire is fallen in the Popes hand So that now he vaunts himself to be Monarch of the whole world and all Kings and Princes gave him their oath of alleageance and the Emperors and Kings held their Empires and Kingdoms of him and are but his vassals as their Canon Law saith So that by the taking away of the Roman Empire the Popes did then climb up to their supremacy and make themselves manifest that they were the Antichrist And so this doth also agree to the Pope of Rome and to none other He is the Antichrist whose climbing up was letted by the Roman Empire and who is built up upon the ruines of the same But the Papacy is such Therefore the Papacy is that Antichristian Kingdom It is said sixthly that this mystery began to work in the dayes of the Apostles that is the foundations of that apostasie was begun to be laid in these dayes and that he shal continue to the Lords coming for he shal not be abolished but by the brightness of his coming suppose he shal be first consumed with the sword of his mouth that is discovered and sore beaten by the Lords Word All which agrees unto Papistrie For that Kingdom is that Apostasie and Antichristian Monarchy whose foundation was beginning to be laid in the Apostles dayes which should be first consumed by the Word of God and utterly abolished by the brightness of his coming But the Papacy is such therefore it is that Antichristian Kingdom Matth. 18.1.2.3.4 and 20.25.26.27 Mark 10.41 Luke 22.25 2 Cor. 1 24. 1 Pet. 3.2.3 For the foundations of it was soon laid both of that Hierarchie and supremacy of the Pope and also of his damnable and erroneous doctrine For that superiority of the Ministery one over another of Bishops over Pastors forbidden by Jesus Christ soon crept in which was the foundation or rather staires by the which the Pope clamb up to his Popedom and supremacy the old condemned heresies which sprang up in the primitive Church many of them were the foundation of these damnable doctrines which the Popes brought in afterward as is proved in the end of the first part And as to his consuming by the Lord his mouth the Lord hath accomplished that already in some measure and shal assuredly fulfil it dayly more and more For since the time of the burning of John Hus and Jerome of Prague about the year of God 1415. and since the time the Lord stirred up Martin Luther and sundry others his faithful servants to preach the Gospel of Christ which was as it were buried in the darkness of Papistry the supremacy of the Pope hath taken such a dayly consumption that many of the Kingdoms of Europe now have forsaken her and the Lord hath put in their hearts to hate her But yet we know the dreggs of it shal not be abolished utterly while the bright coming of the Son of God It followes seventhly the manner how his Kingdom and tyranny shal be promoved upholden and established To wit By the effectual working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness among them that perish Which the Apostle calles strong delusions And with this that of the Rev. 13.13.14 in the description of the second beast whereby it is meaned the Antichristian Kingdom doth agree that he did great wonders and deceived them that dwelt upon the earth by the signs which was permitted him to do Now certainly nothing can be spoken more aptly of the Popes Kingdom then this For unless the Pope had had an effectual power strong and devilish also by signs and lying wonders and unless his unrighteousness that is his false doctrine had been exceeding deceiveable that is covered with a fair color of godliness and unless his delusions had been strong his Kingdom had never been so far enlarged and so firmly established as we see it hath been and his damnable doctrine and errors would never have deâ—eived so many Nations as they have done For what is more common and usual in their mouthes then miracles What is it they vaunt so much of as of their miracles So that they make it an infallible mark of the Church And how I pray you have a great part of their errors and superstitions as the praying to Saints and worshipping of Images and pilgrimages and other of their superstitions and idolatries as Purgatory the real presence their monstrous Transubstantiation c. how I say have they been so confirmed and so rooted in the hearts of ignorant people but by their lying wonders and miracles which they fain was done Whereof their golden Legends are full and sundry yet live who have been eye-witnesses of the falshood of their miracles I will only set down for example some of the false miracles of two Nuns here the one of Magdalena de la Cruz Abbess of the Monastery of the Franciscan Nuns who was condemned by the Inquisitors of Cordoua for her enormous offences and covenant which she made with the Devil as they say in their sentence against her She by the aid of the Devil with whom she made a covenant when she was nine years old became a singular hypocrit and by his help wrought many miracles as that she appeared unto Mariners in a storm being invocated and so the storm calmed that she
of Rome he saith They only desire to reign They cannot abide peace They will not cease till they have stamped all under their feet that they may sit in the Temple of God and be lifted up above all that is called God or that is worshipped He who is the servant of servants is the Lord of Lords and desires to be thought of as if he were God And he saith That man whom they use to call Antichrist he speaketh great things as though he were God in whose fore-head that name of blasphemie is written I am God I cannot err Franciscus Petrarcha a light of that age for his manifold learning calls the Court of Rome Babylon and that harlot of Babel that sitteth upon many waters the mother of Idolatry and whoredom the refuge of heresies and errors And Petrus Joannes pronounced the Pope to be the Antichrist and the synagogue of Rome to be that great Babylon And Matthias Parisiensis saith That Antichrist hath seduced all the Universities and Colledges of the learned so that they teach nothing soundly now And the Edict of the Empire under Lodowick the fourth speaking of Pope John the 22. saith Christians cannot keep the peace which is given them of God for this Antichrist meaning the Pope And in another Edict it is written As he is a disaguised Pastor so is he a mystical Antichrist and we declars him being the author of that Antichristian Empire to be damned of heresie and deposed by our right by the Council sentence and common consent of the Princes and Prelats of Germanie the Priests of Italie and people of Rome so desiring And Aventinus in the history of Hildebrand writes That almost all the plain just simple and upright have written that then to wit when he was Pope the Empire of the Antichrist began because they saw that come to pass at that time which our Savior fore-told so many years before And to conclud this Hadrian the 6. Pope in his instructions of his Legats to the Convention at Norimberg he saith Thou shalt say that we grant freely that God hath suffered this persecution to come upon the Church for the sins of men and especially of the Priests and Prelats of the Church And again he saith We know that in this seat speaking of that Pontifical seat in Rome many abominable things have been for some years as abuse in spiritual things excess in commandments and last of all all things changed in worse And the Popes Cardinals speaking to Paul the third say From this fountain holy Father as from the Trojan horse so many abuses have rushed into the Church and so heavy diseases wherewith as we may see she is brought into a disperat estat I omit the rest Ye may see the truth is strong that hath made their own mouthes to fyle themselves To conclud this then He must be the undoubted Antichrist and his Kingdom Antichristian unto whom the whole markes of the Antichrist as he is described in the Scripture by the Apostle Paul and John in the Revelation doth agree But they all agree unto the Popes of Rome and his Kingdom as hath been proved Therefore they must be that undoubted Antichrist who was to come Secondly he must be that undoubted Antichrist whom his own Friers Bishops Cardinals and some of themselves do call Antichrist and ascribe these things unto him that belongs properly to the Antichrist But his own Friers Bishops Cardinals and some of themselves have so testified as hath been proved also Therefore out of their own mouthes they are condemned to be that Antichrist and their Kingdom Antichristian Now to put an end to this my reply That Religion is false which hath neither unity succession nor antiquitie this you cannot deny because you make them the marks of your Church But your Religion hath neither unity for that is broken by your manifold contradictions and dissentions among your selves whereof I have marked some and the diligent Reader of your works may gather many mo Chrachtovius in his book called Bellum Jesuiticum hath gathered of two heads to wit the Mass and Antichrist 205. contradictions let the Christian Reader judge then what may be gathered of the rest no succession neither personal broken by their Popes who was Atheists Schismaticks Hereticks and by a woman Pope neither in doctrine being direct contrary to the doctrine of Christ no antiquitie for the authors and origine of sundry main points of your Religion is set down here and all your Roman Clergy have not satisfied M. Jewels challenge these thirty years ago concerning the novelty of twenty and seven of your opinions Therefore since it hath neither unity succession nor antiquity it is a false Religion by your own doctrine Secondly that Religion which is contrary the Scripture contrary the practise of the primitive Church which opens a door to all licentiousness which can bring no true peace and consolation unto the consciences of men which blusheth to be known and made manifest which maintaineth many great absurdities horrible blasphemies abominable idolatry that is the doctrine of Antichrist and the doctrine of Devils which by their own mouthes is condemned must be erroneous and false But the Religion of the Church of Rome is such as hath been evidently proved before therefore it must be false Wo therefore belongeth to their souls that profess it openly or secretly REVEL 14.8 And there followed another Angel saying Babylon is fallen is fallen that great City because she made all Nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication Vers 9. And the third Angel followed them saying with a loud voyce If any man worship the beast and his image and receive his mark in his fore-head or in his hand Vers 10. The same shal drink of the wine of the wrath of God which is powred out without mixture into the cup of his indignation and he shal be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy Angels and in the presence of the Lamb Vers 11. And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever And they have no rest day nor night who worship the beast and his image and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name FINIS A BRIEF DISCOVERY OF THE BLOODY REBELLIOUS AND TREASONABLE Principles and Practises of Papists Wherein is evidently demonstrated That they teach and commit Treasons and Rebellions against the lives of Princes and peace of Nations and dissolve the obligation of all Oaths and Bonds and making Perjury and Rebellion duties and meritorious works they have been the Authors of Warrs Commotions and Combustions both before and ever since the Reformation in Kingdoms and Common-wealths and have used unparalleled cruelty and unheard-of inhumanity towards Protestants where ever they had the upper-hand And the excuses of H.T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies are evidenced to be false and frivolous 2. Tim. 3.1 In the last dayes perillous times shal come For men shal be lovers of their
own selves covetous boasters proud blasphemers disobedient to parents unthankful unholy Without natural affection truce-breakers false accusers incontinent c. Traitors heady high-minded c. From such turn away TO THE LOVERS OF THE Reformed Religion in Britain and Ireland Grace mercy and peace DEarly beloved in the Lord The great increase of Popery every where is so visibly seen and so evidently known that to speak any thing to prove and evidence the same were altogether needless seeing he is a great stranger in our Israel that knoweth it not But alace there is very great decay of zeal and hatred against that Whore that if our glorious Predecessors whose excellent Motto it always was No peace with Rome were alive they would wonder to see us so brutish and sensless indifferent and lukewarm in ae matter of so great moment wherein the honor and glory of God the eternal happiness and felicity of our own and our posterities souls and the safety and preservation of Kings Kingdoms our lives estats and all that is near and dear to us is so much and so nearly concerned Therefore for letting us see our hazard in all and every one of these as we have revised and republished the above written excellent Treatise of that learned godly and eminently zealous and faithful servant of Christ M. John Welsch whose memory is very precious in the Church of Christ who doth learnedly and plainly to any ordinary capacity discover the abominations of that Whore and solidly prove her doctrine both to be most heretical and damnable and her self to be the very Antichrist that all who love the truth of God and the salvation of their immortal souls may be stirred up to a just zeal and indignation against her So we have thought fit to subjoyn this following Treatise for discovering to all and every one who love the Reformed Religion and resolve to adhere thereto what treasonable and bloody principles and inhumane and matchlesly cruel practises are maintained and committed by Papists in reference both to Kings Princes and People who profess the Reformed Religion and consequently what all and every one of us may expect to meet with if Popery prevail that so being convinced of our hazard both in body and soul and in all that is near and dear to us we may be stirred up to a real hatred and indignation against that Whore and may be much in the exercise of prayer repentance and other lawful and commanded duties for the putting a stop to the growth of the spreading abominations of that Whore which is earnestly prayed for by Yours for the truth M. C. A BRIEF DISCOVERY OF THE BLOODY REBELlious and treasonable Principles and Practises of Papists SECTION I. Showing that the principles of Papists are treasonable and rebellious against the person and authority of Princes and peace of Kingdoms c. And the excuses of H. T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies are proved to be frivolous and naught THE Church of Rome was formerly most hateful to the Churches of Christ in Britain and Ireland not only because of her most damnable and heretical doctrine but also because of the rebellious and treasonable principles and practises maintained and committed by her against the persons and authority of Princes and peace of Kingdoms her faith being accounted faction and her Religion rebellion Therefore Papists of late have endeavored by all means to ingratiat themselves in the favor of Princes and Magistrats making ample profession of loyalty and fidelity and charging Protestants with the odious crime of disloyalty And thus we see their late Writers denying and disowning the doctrine of Rebellion and Parricide that our Divines have justly charged them with For H T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies c. printed at Doway 1671 calleth it a loud slander to charge Papists with maintaining that if the Pope excommunicat a Tyrant or heretical Prince his own subjects may lawfully kill him Therefore to unmask a little the bloody rebellious and treasonable principles of Papists we shal prove First that it is no slander but a real truth that the Church of Rome holdeth that if the Pope excōmunicateth a King his own subjects may lawfully kill him 2. That the Pope can dispense with the alleageance of subjects to their Princes and if he so dispense then they are loosed from subjection and alleageance to them 3. That no faith nor oath is to be kept with Hereticks 4 That the Pope and Synagogue of Rome have been the Authors of warrs combustions and confusions in Christian Churches and Kingdoms all Europe over 5. That their continual practise ever since the Reformation hath been to plot and practise treasons and rebellions assassinations and murders both of Princes and people who professed the Reformed Religion 6. That whereever they got the upper-hand and dominion in any Kingdom or Common-wealth they have practised most unheard-of cruelties and barbarous inhumanities against the professors of the Protestant Reformed Religion For the first and second of these points to wit that Papists hold that if the Pope excommunicat a King his own subjects may lawfully kill him And that the Pope can dispense with the alleageance of subjects to their Princes and if he so dispense then they are loosed from subjection and alleageance to them I shal evidence it to be their commonly received doctrine both by the writings of their approved Doctors and Bulls of their Popes and their dayly practises And lest they say we wrong them we shal for the most part set down the words of the Authors themselves 1. I shal begin with Doctor Ranchin a Papist and a famous Lawyer in France in his Book intituled A review of the Council of Trent lib. 2. cap. 10. who setteth down these following positions as commonly received in the Church of Rome to wit That it is necessare to salvation to believe that every creature is subject to the Pope of Rome That he it set over Emperors and Kingdoms That he carryeth both the temporal and spiritual sword That he may depose Emperors c. and transfer their Empires and Dominions from one line to another That he may absolve subjects from their oath of alleageance That upon just cause be may set up a King in every Kingdom for he is the overseer of all Kingdoms in Gods stead That it belongeth to the Pope to correct Kings when they offend Much more hath this Author to this purpose 2. But let us hear their own Doctors themselves Augustinus Triumphus de potest Eccles quaest 46. art 2. as Doctor Usher citeth him saith There is no doubt but that the Pope may depose all Kings when there is a reasonable cause so to do Thomas Aquinas their Angelical Doctor holdeth 22. quast 12 art 2. That so soon as a Prince is denounced excommunicat for Apostasie ipso facto his subjects are free from his soverainity and absolved from the oath of alleageance which they are bound to him Bannes and
that the Jesuit Varadius wrote to Barerius Non posse ab aliquo fieri ullum magis meritorium opus quà m si Regem intersecerit That there could not be a more meritorious work then for him to kill a King Cresuel in his Philopat sect 2. num 160. 162. affirmeth That subjects may not only lawfully dethrone heretical Princes but also are obliged by divine precepts yea even upon the greatest hazard of their souls His words are Obligati sunt subditi ad Principos haereticos depellendos hujusmodi Principes suos non tantum legitimè possunt deturbare sed etiam ad hoc praecepto divino ac vinculo arctissimo ac-extremo animarum periculo tenentur But let us hear what H. T. replyeth First saith he art 7. p. 100. What this or that particular Doctor may hold or the Popes flatterers if he have any adds nothing to the creed of Catholicks nor is it justly chargeable on the whole Church Answer Sir if you had not the whores fore head that refuseth to be ashamed ye could not write so for this is so well known to be the commonly received doctrine of your Church that Cresuel Eudem ingenuously confesseth it For Cresuel plainly avoweth That it is the universal opinion of your Divines and an article of your Faith that any Prince who openly maketh defection from the Roman Catholick Religion and would withdraw others from the same doth presently fall from all his power and dignity by vertue both of Divine and Humane law and that before any sentence of the Pope and their subjects are all free of any obligation of oath to obedience and they ought to cast such a man out of their dominions as an Apostat lest he infect others Now lest ye think we wrong him not citing his words faithfully we shal set down his own words Universa Theologorum Schola tenet est certum ac de fide quemcunque Principem Christianum si de Romano Catholica Religione manifestè deflexerit alios avocare voluerit excidere statim ab omni potestate dignitate ex ipsa vi juris divini ac humani Hocque ante omnem sententiam Pontificis subditos quoscunque liberos esse ab omni juramenti obligatione quod de obedientia praestitissent posséque ac debere hujusmodi hominem tanquam apostatam ex dominatu eficere ne alios inficiat Cresuel Philop. num 37. Likewise Eudem affirmeth Apol. cap. 3. Non est propria Jesuitarum sed totius Ecclesiae quidem ab antiquissimis temporibus consensione recepta nostra doctrina That this is not the peculiar doctrine of the Jesuits but of the whole Church of Rome received from ancient times 2. But if the testimony of these two Doctors be not sufficient I hope the infallible judgement of two Popes è Cathedra will abundantly convince that this is the doctrine of the Romish Church The first is Pope Urban who Can. 23. quast 5. Can. excommunicatorum saith We esteem them not murderers who being possessed with the zeal of their mother the Catholick Church against these that are excommunicat shal happen to kill any of them The second is Pope Sixtus the fifth who when he heard that King Henry the third of France was killed by the Monk he went to his Consistory where before his Cardinals at Rome Sept. 11. 1589 he had a Panegyrick Oration which he began thus Animo meo saepe c. When I pondered in my mind and was intent upon the thoughts of these things which lately have fallen out by God providence I thought I might make use of that of the Prophet Habakkuk There shal be a work done in your dayes which none shal believe when it shal be told The King of France is dead by the hands of a Monk for to that may the words of the Prophet be rightly applyed c. a brave application of Scripture indeed And a little after We with grief truly did often fore-tell that as he was the last of his family so he should have an unusual and shameful end See more of this Oration cited by learned Hornbeck contra Bullam Pap. Innocent 10. Now can any Papist for his heart disown this treasonable doctrine which the Pope approveth except he disown his faith and Religion For doth not the faith and Religion of Papists depend on the Popes decrees so strongly and with such a spirit of delusion that he can make the most pestilent doctrines pass with them for Evangelical truths and the most abominable actions for patterns of holiness For Bellarmin expresly affirmeth and no Papist that I heard of did ever disallow it That if the Pope did err in commanding vices or prohibiting vertues the Church should be obliged to believe that vices are good and vertues evil unless she should speak against conscience Bellarm. lib. 4. de Pontif. cap. 5. And that in good sense Christ hath given to Peter the power to make sin to be no sin and that which is no sin to be sin Bellarm. contra Barclay cap. 31. We can dissent from the most eminent in our Church when they hold any thing contrary to the Word of God but so cannot Papists do with the Pope whom they acknowledge to be infallible 2. But let us hear what H. T. saith further We saith he abominat and detest that doctrine to wit that if the Pope excommunicat an heretical Prince it is lawful for his own subjects to kill him For it is defined by the Council of Constance and therefore of faith with us that it is heretical to affirm it lawâ—ul for a subject to kill his Prince upon any pretence whatsoever Sess 15. Ans O matchless audacity For doth not the Bulls and Dâ—cretals of your Popes the Writings and Disputations of your Doctors and your actings and practises prove you a liar Yea if there were no more then the Acts of the Parliament of Paris who condemned the Books of Bellarmin Suarez Mariana Santarella c. to the fire and banished the Jesuits the Kingdom it were sufficient to convince you of falshood 2. Whereas ye say that the Council of Constance hath declared the doctrine of King-killing heretical it is a mere forgery For your great Doctor Suarez who did write fifteen Volumes of Divinity saith to King James of famous memory that the Council of Constance forbiddeth not the killing of a King excommunicated by the Pope His words are Ubi legit Rex in Concilio Constantiensi particulam illam Principis per Papam excommunicati vel deprivati aut illam per suos subditos aut alios quoscunque The truth is the case propounded to the Council by Gerson was not about the murdering of Soveraign Princes but about the killing of a great Officer of the Crown who ruleth tyrannically and exalts himself above his King For John Duke of Burgundy who had killed Lewis Duke of Orleans pretended him to have been a Tyrant of that kind So then Tyrants are declared inviolable
in the Goal and about midnight they were all stript stark naked and there most cruelly and barbarously murdered with swords axes skeens some of them being women great with child their infants thrust out their arms and legs at their wounds after which execrable murders they laid the dead naked bodies of the men upon the dead naked bodies of the women in a most immodest posture where they left them while the next day to be looked on as a delectable spectacle to the Irish About Dunganon were 316. Protestants in the like barbarous manner murdered about Charlmont above 510. about Tiron 250. One M. Crew murdered 31. in one morning Two young villains murdered 140. poor women and children An Irish women with her own hands murdered 45. At Portendown-bridge were drowned above 300. At Lawgh were drowned above 200. In another place 300. were drowned in one day In the Parish of Killamen there were murdered 1200. Protestants In the County of Antrum they murdered 954. Protestants in one morning and afterwards about 1200 more in that County Sir Philem Oneal boasted that he had slain above 600 at Garvagh and that he had left neither man woman nor child alive in the Barrony of Munterlong In other places he murdered above 2000. persons in their houses above 12000 were slain in the high wayes as they fled towards Down Not only the men but also the boyes murdered Protestants for there were 15. Protestants all murdered in one night by a Popish boy of 14. years who slew them with his skeen they being imprisoned and their feet in the stocks Another of twelve years killed two women An English Papist woman killed seven men and women of her neighbors in one morning and it was usual for the Papists children to murder the Protestants children and sometimes with their wooden swords sharp and heavy they would venture upon people of riper years An English woman who was newly delivered of two children some of these vilains violently compelled her in great pains and sickness to rise from her bed and took one of the infants that was living and dashed his brains against the stones and then threw him into the river The like they did with many other infants Many others they hanged without all pity yea many young children they cut into quarters and goblets Eighteen Scots infants they hanged upon a clothiers tenter-hooks One fat man they murdered and made candles of his greass Another Scottish man they ript up his belly and an end of his smal guts tyed it to a tree and forced him round about it till he had drawn them all out of his body saying they would try whither a Scots-man or a dogs guts were the longer They took one M. Watson and cutting two colops out of his buttocks they roasted him alive They ript up a Scottish woman great with child cut the child out of her womb and so left it crawling on her body They used also to send their children abroad in troups armed with long watles and whips wherewith they use to beat dead mens bodies about the privy members till they beat them off They brake the back-bone of a young youth and so left him in the fields and some days after he was found having like a beast eaten all the grass round about him yet neither then would they kill him outright but removed him to a place of better pasture These and many mo cruelties were used among the poor Protestants who desires to see their monstrous and more then barbarous cruelties at more length let him peruse a book written on purpose called Irelands tears and M. Clerks Martyrology from pag. 347. to pag. 369. which books never Papist could convince of falshood Now lest any should think this was a natural quarrel that the Irish had against the English Ans Certainly that could not be because they were no more merciful to the Scottish whom all acknowledge to be of their own Nation 2. The English Papists were no whit inferior but rather exceeded the natural Irish in their cruelty against the Protestants that lived among them within the Pale being never satisfied with their blood till they had seen the last drop thereof Now was ever such inhumane cruelty heard or read of among Turks or Heathens as they exercised against the poor Protestants who never provoked them thereto yea that had always lived peaceably with them administring help and pitie to them in distress cherishing them as friends and loving neighbors yet they shewed them no favor nor pity Alace who can conceive the fears terrors anguish bitterness and perplexity that seazed upon the hearts of the poor Protestants finding themselves so suddenly surprized without remedy and inextricably wrapt up in all kind of outward miseries which could possibly by man be inflicted upon humane creatures What sighs and groans trembling and astonishment What schricks cryes and bitter lamentations of wives children servants and friends howling and weeping finding themselves without all hope of deliverance from their present miseries How inexorable were their torments without all bowels of compassion The most barbarous Nation never used more cruelty then they did upon the poor Protestants all the land over I believe the Irish in this massacre destroyed by several sorts of torments several hundred thousands for there were given up upon oath 150000. put to several sorts of death in the Province of Ulster What the number of the slain was in the three other Provinces is not on record but certainly it was very great As among other things the Remonstrance of the distressed Protestants in Munster set down in M. Clarks Martyrology evidenceth By all that is said I hope it is sufficiently proved that the principles and practises of Papists are bloody treasonable cruel and inhumane yet they are not only so impudent as to deny this calling it a loud slander but also to charge Protestants of integrity as they call us with treasonable and rebellious principles Whereas we in all our Confessions acknowledge that Magistracy is an ordinance of God and that every soul is to be subject to the higher powers and that fidelity and obedience is due to them in and for the Lord. The publick Confessions of our Churches plead for this See the Augustan French Belgick Helvetick Bohemian Saxonick Suevick Scottish English and the Assemblies Confessions Did ever any of our Divines teach any such doctrine or to commit any such practises as Papists teach Do we not all hold that an oath is strictissimi juris of most strict obligation and can be dispensed by none under heaven and ought to be kept even to hereticks infidels or any other whatsoever We acknowledge that Church-men as well as others are subject to the Magistrat according to the Word of God Rom. 13.1 None of us did ever teach that the Pope or any Church-man may dethrone Kings and alien at their Crowns to others neither do we teach that Church men are loosed from the positive laws of Emperors and Kings
there Polycarpus and sundrie others Euseb lib. 5. cap. 25.26 The first that took upon him the style to be called Universal Bishop was the Bishop of Constantinople anno 581. resisted by Pelagius and after him by Gregorius Bishops of Rome lib. 4. epistola 32.38 39. And yet for all this Boniface the 3. anno 607. obtained this style of Phocas the Emperor the murtherer of his predecessor Platina Sabellicus Marianus Scotus complained of by the Church of Ravenna in Italie and resisted by sundrie as shal be proved afterwards The first that appointed laws of fasting was Montanus the heretick anno 145. Euseb lib. 5. cap. 17. accounted heresie by Apolonius and Augustine against the fasting of the Manicheans The Manicheans were the first we read of that ministred the Communion under one kind as the Papists do now so forth of many other old condemned heresies which your Church hath renewed as shal be proved afterward The first that gave the rise to Transubstantiation was Mark a notable Magician anno 115. who by his inchantment having first caused a cup of white wine to bear the color of blood made his followers believe that by his invocation over it that grace which is above all things had powred his blood into the cup refuted by Epiphanius Haeres 34. and Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 8. The first that decreed Transubstantiation in effect was Pope Nicolaus the 2. anno 1090. in causing Berengarius to recant De consecrat Distinct 2. cap. Ego Berengarius but yet it was not decreed as an universal doctrine before Pope Innocent the 3. his time in a Council of Lateran anno 1215. as Tonstal witnesses de Sacramenta The Greek Church never consented to it Bertramus Berengarius Waldensis withstood it The first that decreed the worshipping of Images was Hadrian in the 2. Council of Nice against the express Scripture after the example of Marcellina an heretick who worshipped the Image of Jesus resisted by sundry Fathers and Councils Concil Eliber Concil Constant Conc. Francof The first that imposed single life and condemned marriage in their Clergy was Pope Syricius anno 290. distinct 82. cap. Proposuisti as the Manichees did before him resisted by sundrie Sigebert H. Mutius Let these examples serve as a taste to the reader How stronglie now ye have manned and fortified your own Church and Religion by your proofs let the reader judge Now let us see how ye disprove ours The question now comes in of the truth of our Church and Religion whither it be from Jesus Christ or not You say it is not from him but from others since his time If ye had gone the straight way to have proved this and to have satisfied the consciences of men you would at the nearest have run to the Scripture and by the same have disproved it But you in stead of this go a far by-way and would father our Religion on flesh and blood dust and ashes in pointing us out Martin Luther to be the father and author of the same as though it had not an ancienter pedegre to reckon unto nor had not the beginning and foundation of it from the root of Jesse the bud of the Lord from whom it hath sprung And for to get your self the better credit you busie your self in marking the circumstances of his preaching as time place matter opposition c. Now that ye are so skilled and acquainted with that history of Martin Luther that you can assign all these circumstances it is no wonder for that was the most notable and remarkable period of the decaying of your Babel and of the erecting up again of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ which your head and Clergy had stamped under foot for so many years which suppose the beginning of it was but like a little leaven and as a grain of mustard seed which of all seeds is the least yet now since it hath so sowred almost the whole mass even the most part of the Kingdoms of Europe which once was under your spiritual bondage and hath grown up into such a high tree having fair and great branches under the which the Lords sheep may get rest and warmness and in the which his souls that mounts upwards to that Kingdom doth build their nests so that neither can all your purgations nor yet all your axes of fire and sword of buls and pardons of preachings and writings stay the spreading of the one nor cut down the branches and root of the other That M. Luther began at that time and in that place and preached against these doctrines we do not deny and that is not controverted But here lyes all the question whither if that doctrine that he preached against was Antichristian or not and whither that Religion which he neither invented nor yet first preached for sundry before him did preach that same doctrine whose names I set down in my answer to your objection but only raised it out of the grave of darkness wherein ye had buried the truth of God Here then I say is the question whither that Religion which he preached hath the warrant from Jesus Christ in his Testament or not The which if ye ever disprove by the written Word of God then shal we grant you all that ye say the which is as impossible to you to do no not suppose your King would call all your wise men and Clergy together as it was to all the wise men of Babel to tell and interpret Nebuchadnezar his dream yea suppose your King would reward you gloriously with honor and riches if ye could do it yet are ye not able to win your wages yea suppose he would tear you in pieces and make your house a jakes unless ye did it as the wise men of Babel was because they could not tell and interpret the Kings dream This is therefore the point which lyes in question betwixt us which ye should have proved if ye could But know ye for a truth that suppose he raised out of the grave the truth of God which ye had buried yet was he neither the inventer nor the first preacher of it but it hath for the beginning and Author of it Jesus Christ the Son of God and the foundation of it in the New Testament of his holy Scripture This for the Author time and place which ye assign Now to the Churches that spake against him I answer They were but such as was made drunken with the wine of your fornication and deluded by your strong delusions being deceived by the golden cup wherein you propined them to be drunken out as it was prophesied of you Rev. 17.4 But the measure of your iniquity being full and the time of the lurking of the truth of God being run out God of his infinit mercy by his ministery and the rest that followed since hath opened the eyes of a great part of these Kingdoms who first said against him to see your Church to be the whore Rev. 17.1 your Kingdom to
by the grace of God may keep the Commands of God and obey him which is contrary to their Confession of Faith Our doctrine in this is the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles Christ saith If you will enter into life keep the commands Matth. 19.17 And again If ye love me keep my commands John 14.25 24. Matth. 11.29 30. And in another place He that loves me not keeps not my words c. Also Take up my yoke upon you c. For my yoke is sweet and my burden light Now I believe that no man can deny but this yoke and burden of Christ is his Commands and Laws This same doctrine the Apostles teached S. Paul saith Phil. 4.13 and 2.13 I can do all things in him that comforts me And before For it is God that works in you both to will and to accomplish according to his good will And S. John 1.5.3 saith This is the charity of God that we keep his Commands and his Commands are not heavy Now further then these we read that Noe Gen. 6.9 Abraham Gen. 26.5 Job 1.22 were just men and obeyed God And S. Luke 1.6 saith that Zacharias and Elizabeth his wife were both just before God and walked in all the commands and justification of our Lord without blame There are many other places in the Old Testament of the same matter of the which I have noted some as 3. Kings 14.8.4 and 18.3.4 and 20.3.4 and 23.25 2. Chron. 15.15 Now hold away from these places the Ministers Commentaries and I believe that all men will confess that our doctrine in this and the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles is all one M. John Welsch his Reply It appeareth that M. Gilbert is loath that the secrets of the doctrine of his Church should be known to the people because he knows in his heart they would abhor the same their own hearts and consciences witnessing to the contrary Therefore he hath hid up the poyson of it and covered it as secretly as he could But that wherein you are dark the rest of your Roman Clergy are plain For first where as ye say that a man by the grace of God may keep the Commands Bellarmin expones more clearly and sayes By the help of the grace of God Lib. de justific cap. 10. And the Monks in that form of abjuration set out anno 1585 saith That man by the new strength of grace infused in good will may keep the commands So that whereas your words would seem to import that the grace of God is the only cause of this obedience to Gods Commandments in the faithful and so I think every one almost who is not acquainted with the doctrine of your Roman Church will take it and so it may be ye teach them The rest of your brethren are more plain in halfing it betwixt free-will and the grace of God helping free-will as though the strength of nature were the more principal cause and the grace of God but a helper to it And secondly whereas ye say that a man by the grace of God may keep the Commandments of God and obey them Bellarmin saith more plainly cap. 19 pag. 364 lib. 2 de justifi cap. 3. That the Law of God is absolutely possible unto them and they may absolutly fulfil the Law and keep the whole Law and that the works of the righteous are absolutly and simpliciter righteous and proceeding of a perfect holiness without all blemish of sin and that they please God not for the imputation of Christs righteousness covering their imperfections and forgiving them but for the excellencie of the work it self So this is their doctrine Christian Reader Now as he hid his own so hath he hid ours also For our Confession of Faith saith That our sanctification and obedience to Gods Law is imperfect which word he omitted as though it had been our doctrine that the children of God in no measure nor degree keep the Commandments of God Our doctrine therefore is this That of our own nature we are dead in sin Eph. 2.1 and of our selves we are neither able to understand 1. Cor. 2.14 nor think 2. Cor. 3.7 nor will nor do those things that are pleasant to God Philip 2.13 and therefore we must be born anew again John 3 5. ere we can do any thing that is acceptable in Gods sight John 15.5 and this sanctification of ours is not perfect while we are in this life Rom. 7.14 15. but imperfect ever some darkness some rebellion some dregs of the old man yet remaining in us so that we know but in a part 1 Cor. 13.12 and our will is but renewed in part and our heart sanctified in part from the which it cometh that first we do not all the good that we are bound to do and would do as the Apostle saith Rom 7 15.16.17.18.19 20.21.22.23 24. Next that all our righteousness as the Prophet saith is but as a menstruous cloth Esai 64.6 ever smelling somewhat of the corruption of the old man within us and so that they have need to be covered with the righteousness of Jesus Christ and their imperfection to be pardoned By the only strength therefore of Gods Spirit who works both to will and to do in us we begin here obedience to the whole Law of God but yet are not able perfectly so to keep it as our works may abide to be tryed before the Lord in the ballance of his Law and therefore we place the whole hope of our salvation in the only mercy of God through Jesus Christ who is made to us of God righteousness sanctification and redemption by whose mercy we obtain the perfect remission or our sins and so we conclud with David Psal 32. Blessed is he whose sins are forgiven him and whose iniquities are covered This now is the verie simple truth both of our doctrine and theirs in this head Now to answer you Whereas ye say That a man by grace may keep the Commandments of God if you mean that the only cause of the obedience of the children of God to his Law is the renewing grace of God and that this obedience is sincere and hearty not to one but to all the Commandments not only outward but inward suppose not in that high measure of perfection that the Law of God requires then I say you contradict the doctrine of your Roman Church and forsakes their error of free-will concurring with grace and of the perfection of man his obedience here to the Law and so shakes hands with the truth of God which we profess in this point And so becoms a bad defēder of their Catholick faith as ye stile yourself And would to God your eyes were opened so to see and believe suppose ye lost that stile for ever But if ye make free-will the principal cause of this obedience as Bellarmin calls it and if ye understand a perfect obedience as your Church teaches then first tell me why did ye not speak as
plainly as you thought Were you afraid that the hearts of men should have skunnered with this your doctrine if ye had been as plain in your writ as ye are in your own judgement Next I say you have the Lord in his written Word as contrary to this your doctrine as light is to darkness For as to the first the Scripture testifies plainly that we are dead in sin John 5.25 Col. 2 13. Eph 2.1 And that the wisdom of the flesh is enmity against God Rom. 8.17 and therefore we have need to be born again John 3.5 that is to receive a new life ere ever we can be able to enter into the Kingdom of God and that it is God that worketh in us both to will and to do Philip. 2.13 and that of our selves we are not sufficient to think any thing as of our selves 2. Cor. 3 5. and that all the imaginations of mans heart is only evil continually Gen. 6 5. Where then is there any place left to free-will And as to the second the Scripture saith Eccles 7.20 There is not a righteous man in the earth who doth good and sinneth not therefore no perfect keeping of the Law And who may say my heart is clean and I am pure from sin Prov. 20.9 If no man may say so then no man can keep perfectly the whole Law And by the works of the Law no flesh is justified in his sight Rom. 3.20.28 therefore no flesh is able perfectly to keep the Law for if he could keep the Law he would be justified by the Law But the Apostle saith that no flesh can be justified by the Law therefore none can keep the Law And therefore the Scripture saith Rom. 8.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Law is impossible because of the weakness of the flesh For the which cause the Son of God took on him our nature to fulfill this impossibility of the Law And James calls the Law a yoke which saith he neither we nor our fathers were able to bear Acts 15.10 If they said that they could not bear it that is perfectly obey it who obtained a higher measure of grace then ever any since did what shal we then say of all other men after them And what arrogancy and presumption is this in these of the Roman Church to say and to bear others in hand that they are able to bear that yoke which the Apostles was not able to bear And JESUS CHRIST hath taught us to pray dayly Forgive us our sins Matthew 6. which needed not if we were able to keep the whole Law And beside the plain testimony of the Scripture every mans own doleful experience tells them of their manifold and continual sinning What a damnable doctrine is this then which blinds their eyes so far that neither they see nor feel the inward corruptions of their own heart within them rebelling against the Law of God nor yet the perfection which the Law of God requires Now to the testimonies of Scripture which ye quote And first that in the 19. of Matthew If you would enter into life keep the Commandments I answer The same is to be said to you who seek for life righteousness by the works of the Law Keep the Commands But that are ye unable to do or any man else except the man the Lord Jesus as hath been proved and as unable as this young man was to whom it was said at the last It is as impossible to him to go into heaven as to a camel or cable rope to go through the eye of a needle But ye will say Wherefore then would our Savior Christ have commanded him to keep the Commandments if he would have life I answer Not because he was able to do it but to bring him to a conscience of the breach of it For by the Law as the Apostle saith cometh the knowledge of sin Rom. 7.7 And to cast down that presumption that he had of himself that he had observed and kept the Law that in conscience of sin he might be brought to seek for life eternal in Christ Jesus only And lest ye say that this is my exposition therefore hear what the Apostle saith Gal. 3.10.14 As many as are of the works of the Law are under the curse for it is written Cursed is every man that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do them and that no man is justified by the Law in the sight of God it is evident Now this is spoken not only of the Jews but of the Gentils that believed in Christ Jesus and were under grace Upon the which I reason thus If as many as are of the works of the Law are under the curse and no man is justified by the Law in the sight of God then no man is able to get life eternal by keeping of the Law and so this young man to whom Christ gave his answer neither had kept nor could keep the Law but the first is said by the Apostle therefore the second is true Next the Law requires a perfect obedience with all the heart with all the understanding and thought and strength unto all the commandments and that continually Matth. 22.37 Luke 10 17. Mark 12.31 So that James saith He that breaks one is guilty of all James 2.10 And the Law doth pronounce them accursed That continues not in the doing of all things c. Deut. 27.16 in this perfection Now who is he that is come out of the loins of Adam except only the Lord Jesus who hath continued in the perfect obedience of all things without the breach of any in thought word or deed Are you able or hath every one of your Roman Churches performed or is able to perform this obedience that the Law requires Seeing therefore that none is able and this young man neither had performed not yet was able to perform this perfect obedience to the Law therefore of necessity it must follow that our Savior gave him this command Keep the Commandments c. not because he was not able to keep them but to bring him by the Law to a conscience of the breach of them As for the rest of the Scriptures which ye bring in they are easily answered John 14.15 24. If ye love me keep my Commandments c. And he that loves me not keeps not my word c. I grant the Lord hath commanded obedience to his Commandments And I grant they that loves him keeps them and all the children of God loves him and begins also obedience to all his Commandments But yet as their love is not in that perfection which the Law requires with all their heart with all their understanding and with all their strength so their obedience is not in that perfection And nevertheless the perfection of their obedience is forgiven being covered with the perfect obedience of Jesus Christ and through him is acceptable in his presence and of him also shal be