of the Scriptures First therefore seeing the Pope may Erre in faith and doctrine Secondly seeing many Popes haue so Erred De facto And thirdly seeing this strange faith was not hatched or heard of in the World for the space of one thousand and fiue hundred yeeres no not in Alphonsus his dayes as wee haue heard alreadie I cannot but perforce I must conclude that it is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 9. Of the condigne so supposed merrite of workes TRue it is I freely grant that the holy Fathers doe often vse the word Merrit and doe often call the workes of the Faythfull merritorious yet this they doe not for any worthines of the works but for Gods acceptation and promise sake who hath promised and will performe not to suffer so much as one cuppe of cold water giuen in his Name to passe without reward That is to say the Fathers terme good workes merritorious because God hath promised to accept the workes of the Faythfull as vvorthy for the vvorthines of his Sonne and for his merites to reward them with heauen as if they had merited the same For which respect either euer or almost euer they ioyne Merrite and Grace together Of this subiect I haue written at large in my Suruey of Popery I will now onely say with their deere Abbot Bernard It is sufficient to merrite to know that our merrites are not sufficient True it is likewise that not onely the Fathers generally but the best popish Schoole-Doctours also Durandus Aquinas Gregorius Ariminensis Dominicus Scoto Marsilius Waldensis Burgensis and sundrie others do vniformly and constantly affirme that no mans workes how holy soeuer they be eyther are or can be meritorious properly but onely merritorious in an vnproper large kind of speech as is already said This is proued at large in my other bookes True it is thirdly that the religious Fryer and popish Bishop Iosephus Angles telleth the Pope roundly that it is the constant and vniforme fayth of all the holy Doctors that the best and holiest mans works vpon earth neither are nor possibly can be merritorious or worthy of eternall life if Gods holy free promise be set aside Without the which saith Angles in the name of all the rest the best works of all are altogether vnwoorthy of so great reward His expresse words are these prorsus digna wholy vnworthy Where I with the Reader to obserue seriously with me this word prorsus which signifieth wholy for if out best workes be wholy vnworthy of the reward or glory as Iosep Angles in the name of all the holy Fathers Doctors telleth the Pope both grauely and coÌ„stantly then doubtles the best works of all can no way be meritorious The case is cleere for to be meritorious as euery childe knoweth is to be worthy And consequently seeing to be worthy and to be meritorious is all one our workes which are no way worthy but euery way prorsus vnworthy can no way be meritorious When any Papist in the world can truly disprooue this Illation let me be his bondslaue for his reward Againe for the simple Readers helpe and capacitie this is the state of the Controuersie The Papists hold that mans works doe condignely or woorthâ—ly which is all one merite eternall reward I in the name of all Catholiques and good Christians doe hold and constantly defend the contrary Now to merrite is to be worthie â—s is both already prooued and of it seife euident but the best workes are no way woorthy as is alieadie proued Ergo the best workes doe no way merrit If this argument be well marked all papists are coÌ„sounded euerlastingly True it is fourthly that the Iesuite S. R. Robert Parsons indeede I challenge the man in his supposed and pretended Aunswere to The downefall of Popery hath set downe these CoÌ„clusions against both the Pope and himsâ—lfe The first Conclusion There is merite of eternall life and our supernaturall vvorkes done by Gods grace are meritorious of eternall life and glory The second Conclusion Good workes done in Gods grace are condignly merritorious of eternall life The thiâ—d Conclusion This condigne merrite is not absolute but supposeth the condition of Gods promise made to reward it These are the Iesuits Conclusions set down by the best aduise of his best learned friends among whom the Iesuiticall Cardinall Bellarmine must needes be one Which CoÌ„ciusions for all that doe euidently prooue as much as I desire True it is fiftly that the late popish Councell of Trent hath accused all such as 〈◊〉 or not beleeue the condigne merrit of mans works And coÌ„sequentlie it hath made that an Article of Popish faith ô wonderment of the World which was no poynt of fayth in the true Catholique Church for the space of 1540. yeeres viz. The condigne merrit of mans work amonster lately borne at Rome Now to take away all wrangling true it is I will it not deny that the Councell of Trent hath not the word condigne but it hath another worde equiualent to the same viz. True merrite And therefore to answere as the Iesuite doth that the Councell hath onely the word true not the word condigne is meere foolery For to merrite truly and condignly is all one Otherwise let our Iesuite tell vs howe one can merrite that thing truly which he doth not worthily and condignelyd serue Yea to the Iesuites euerlasting shame and to the vtter confusion of all his lesuited brethern S. R. him selfe doth most plainly against himselfe testifie the same to all the world These are his expresse words That good workes are a condigne or wâ—orthy merrite of Heauen followeth of that they are a true merit thereof because as I thinke onely condigne merrite is true merrite Thus writeth our Iesuite I alledge his vvordes truly as I will auoswere before God And consequently seeing true merrite and condigne merrite is all one euen by the Aduersary his free grant it followeth of necessity that the Councell decreed the condigne merrite to be a matter of sayth First therefore seeing the Fathers and Schoole-Doctors doe all generally deny the condigne merit of mans workes Secondly seeing all the Fathers best learned Papists doe all vniformely affirme that the best works are altogether woorthy of heauen Thirdly seeing the Iesuites owne conclusions doe prooue the same against himselfe Fourthly seeing this deformed monster condigne merrite of workes I meane is yet scarce three-scote yeeres of age I cannot but perforce conclude with this incuitable illation Ergo it is but a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 10. Of Transubstantiation in Popish Masse THE popish Transubstantiation in their Masse is to themselues so vnceritaine that they cannot toll in the world what to say or thinke thereof Rupertus a famous popish Abbâ—r holdeth that the Bread is vnited hypostatically to the Sonne of God Caietmus Henricus and Capreolus are of an other opinion Iohaâ—â—es Parisiensis held also that the
THE Tryall of the New RELIGION Contayning a plaine Demonstration that the late Faith and Doctrine of the Church of Rome is indeede the New Religion By Thomas Bell. PRVDENTIA AT LONDON Printed by William Iaggard dwelling in Barbican 1608. The Contents of the Chapters following CHapter 1. Of the name Pope Chap. 2. Of the Popes superoyall power Chap. 3. Of the marriage of Priests Chap. 4. Of Popish pardons Chap. 5. Of Popish Purgatory Chap. 6. Of Popish auricular confession Chap. 7. Of Popish veniall sinnes Chap. 8. Of Popish fayth Chap. 9. Of the condigne merrite of workes Chap. 10. Of transubstantiation in popish Masse Chap. 11. Of Popish inuention of Saints Chap. 12. Of the Communion vnder one kind Chap. 13. Of priuate Masse Chap. 14. Of Pope 〈◊〉 â—â—â—pensation Chap. 15. Of worshipping of Images Chap. 16. Of Church seruice in the vulgar tongue Chap. 17. Of the antiquitie of Popish Masse and the parts thereof Chap. 18. Of the mysteries of popish Masse Chap. 19. Of kissing the Popes foote Chap. 20. Of praying vpon Beades Chap. 21. Of changing the Priestes name Chap. 22. Of the Paschall Torch Chap. 23. Of the Popish Paxe Chap. 24. Of the Popes Bulls Chap. 25. Of the popish Agum Dei Chap. 26. Of Câ—â—â—â—lmasday Chap. â—â— Of the 〈◊〉 made to the Pope Chap. â—â— Of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pâ—pish Lâ—nt-fast Chap. â—â— Of 〈…〉 ing of Wedlocke Chap. â—â— Of 〈◊〉 power of a Generall Councell To the Right Worshipfull and my approoued good friendes Sir Charles Hayles and Sir Cuthbert Pepper Knights and worthy pillers of his Maiesties honorable Counsell established in the North-parts of England â‚ THE visible Church as writeth Egesippus remained a Virgin free from all heresies and corruptions during the life of the Apostles that is to say about one hundred yeeres after Christ to which time S. Iohn the Euangelist was liuing But after the death of the Apostles saith he Errors by little and little crept into the Church as into a voyde and desert house This Assertion is dolefull enough and yet very profitable against all Popish Recusants of our time as who are not ashamed impudently to avouch that after so many hundred yeeres from Christes Ascention there hath been no Error at all in their Romish Babylon If any demaund the cause heereof the aunswere is at hand viz. That many without due examination receiuing negligently and carelesly the Doctrine of them that went before them haue vnawares brought Errors into the Church So writeth Eusebius of Errors in his time that Papius a man of no sound iudgement was the Authour of the Chiliasts who fondly grosly first inuented that there should be a thousand yeeres after the Resurrection To which Errour though most palpable Iraeneus and sundry others otherwise well learned gaue place onely for antiquity sake This sottish imitatien without all rime and reason was is and will be the cause of many Errours which many not of the meanest sort of Papists haue both grauely prudently considered For this cause did that great Shoolemaister Melchior Canus oppose himselfe against all the Chanists and Scotists both the old latter Papists For this cause did Cardinall Câ—â—eranus a man of high esteeme in the Church of Rome both in his litterall exposition of Genesis an in his other bookes roundly reiect the multitude of foâ—mer Commentaries For this cause said their learned 〈◊〉 and Schoole-Doctor Victoria that hee reputed nothing certaine albeit all Writers agreed therevnto vnlesse he could find it in the holy Scriptures For this cause did their famous Canonist Nauarrus peremptorily condemne the common opinion when it was not grounded vppon right reason For this cause grauely wrote S. Augustine that he reputed no mans writings wholy free from Errours saue onely the Writers of the holy Scriptures For this cause wrote theyr owne Roffensis that it is lawfull to appeale from Austen Cyprian Hierom and all the rest because they are men and doe not want theyr imperfections I saith S. Augustine doe not repute S. Cyprians wrytings as Canonicall but iudge them by the Canonicall and whatsoeuer doth not agree with the Scriptures that by his leaue doe I refuse And for this cause is it that so many silly follish rude and ignorant Papists doe at this day terme late vpstart Popery the Old Religion They onely respect the externall face of the Church as it was in the late dayes of their forefathers And for want of skill and reading of auncient Councells Fathers and histories of the Church they deeme that to be very olde which is indeede very new Hence commeth it that nothing more moueth the rude vulgar people to embrace Popery then this theyr fond perswasion that it is the old Religion In regard hereof right Worshipfull I haue taken vppon me for the glory of GOD the peace of his Church and the common good of my natiue Country to set before the eyes of all indifferent Readers as cleerely as in a glasse of Christall the originall and daily excrements of Popery and that it is not the Old but the New Religion I haue prooued succinctly and euidently first that the name Pope was common to the Fathers of the Church for the space of 528 yeeres after Christ and afterward vsurped as peculiar to the Bishop of Rome Secondly that the Popes superoyall power was vnknowne to the world for the space of 607. yeeres vntill Phocas the Emperour of Rome 3. That the Priests Bishops were euer married in the East Church and in the West Church for the space of 385. yeeres 4. That Popish pardons were vnknowne 1300. yeeres 5. That Purgatorie was neuer beleeued of the Greeke Church nor yet of the Latine Church for the space of 250. yeeres about which time Origen too much adicted to his allegorical Speculation â—eyned many odde thinges touching Purgatory After Origen others began to call the matter into question others rashly to beleeue it others to adde many thing to Origens conceit and so by little little it increâ—sâ—d till the late Bishops of Rome presumed to make it an Article of Popish sayth That auriculer coÌ„fession was no Article of Popish fayth for the space of 1215. yeeres 7. That Popish veniall sinnes were first invented by Pope Pius the fift of that name that is to say 1566. yeeres after Christ. 8. That the Article of Popish sayth that the Pope cannot erre in matters of fayth iudicially was neuer knowne to the Church for the space of 1500. yeeres 9. That the coÌ„digne merit of mans works was not an Article of Popish fayth for the space of a thousand fiue hundred and forty yeeres 10. That the popish Transubstantiation was first hatched in the Councell of Lateran 1215. yeeres after Christ. 11. That Popish invocation of Saints was neuer knowne nor heard of for the space of 1047. yeeres 12. That the Communion vnder one kind was neuer knowne for the space of 1230. yeeres neither was it an Article
Bread was assumpted but in a different manner from the opinion of Rupertus Another opinion a firmeth the annihilation of the Bread Durandus for all that telleth vs that onely the forme of Bread is changed and ohat the matter of Bread remaineth still in the Eucharist But Bellarmine the Pope and all his lesuites hold with the Councell of Trents definition that the Bread is transubstantiated into the bodie of Christ Behold this siveâ— harmonic and good agreement in this important poynt of popish fayth Of this subiect I haue written elswhere 〈◊〉 I will here onely touch the birth age thereof Transubstantion is not onely repugnant to all Phylosophy but also so absurd in all Christian speculation that it was vnknowne to the Church of God and to all approoued Councells Fathers and Histories for the space of one thousand and two 〈◊〉 yeeres It was first hatched by Pope Innocentiue the 〈◊〉 of that Name in the late Councell of Lateran which was holden 1215. yeeres after Christ. Yea this councell and the determination thereof was of so small reputation at that time that Durandus they ovvne famous popish Doctor who liued abode threescore yeres after it boldy published the contrary doctrine Which thing doth â—ogall the Papists that they cannot tell what to say to it But seeing this monster of popish sayth was hid and vnknowne for 1206. yeres together I must needs conclude with this ineuitable illation Ergo it is but a rotteÌ„rag of the new religion CHAP. 11. Of Popish invocation of Saints OF this subiect I haue disputed at large in my Suruey The Papists in their fond popish invocation ascribe that to Saints which is onely and soly proper to Christ himselfe I prooue it because they make the Saints departed I will not say Traytors buried in hell not onely Mediators of intercession which is their vsuall refuge and fond so imagined euasion but also of redemption and saluation This one example may suffice for many Thomas 〈◊〉 sometimes Bishop of Canterbury what a subiect let others Iudge is invocated of the Pope and all his popish crew not barely and absolutely as an holy man if perhaps he so were which is more then I know but as the Sonne of the liuing GOD and the onely Sauiour of the World This Affection to the godly may seeme wonderfull but it is such a knowne truth as no Papist whatsoeuer he be 〈◊〉 without blushing denie the same These are the expresse words of their Hymne which they both say and sing vppon that day which they keep holie for his praise and honour Tuper Thomae 〈◊〉 queÌ„ pro te 〈…〉 Christe scandere qua Thomas ascendit By the blood of Thomas which he for thee did spend bring vs shether O Christ whether Thomas did ascend Loe Thomas 〈◊〉 died for vs and shed his blood to bring vs to heauen as the Pope telleth vs and would enforce vs to believe If this Poperly be not flat blasphemy my wits are not at home Let the indifferent Reader iudge and bee carefull of his soule This blasphemy is confirmed by the vsuall practise of the Papists especially of the Iesuits For their brother Iesuite Polanthus in his Treatise of Consesson testifieth as a truth vnto the world that they euer adde in the end of their Absolutions these expresse words The Passion of our Lord lesus Christ the merrits of the blessed Virgm Mary and of all Saints and all the good thou shalt doe and the punishment thou shalt suffer be to thee for the remission of thy sinnes for increase of grace and for the reward of eternall life Loe the merits of Saints are ioynt purchasers of our saluation vvith Christes blood and our owne workes God haue metcy vpon vs miserable sinners procure vs remission of our sinnes increase of Grace and etternall glorie O intollerable Popery who can indure to heare thy blasphemie No Scripture no Councell no Father no approued historie was euer acquainted with this newlie inuented heresie neuer knowne to the church of Christ for the space of one thousand yeres and odde I must therefore perforce conclude vvith this ineuitable illation Ergo popish invocation of Saints is but a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 12. Of the Communion vnder 〈◊〉 kind CHrist onely by the vniforme coÌ„sent of all learned Papists hath lawfull power to institute a Sacrament Yet notwithstanding our Papists haue presumed to alter this holy Order For Christ commaunded the holy Eucharist or Communion to be celebrated in two distinct kindes viz. in Bread and wine He commaunded all to drinke and they all dranke of it saith the holy Euangelist And the Apostle Paule vrging Christes institution to the Corinthians telleth them plainly and religiously That they must receiue the holy Eucharist vnder both kindes This was the practise of the auncient Church for the space of 1230. yeeres after Christ. About which time they began in some odde Churches to leane off the Cuppe and to minister the Sacrament in Bread onely But that was done as Aquinas confesseth in some few places onely Afterward the Councell of Constance about the yeere of our Lord 1414. decreed it as an Article of Popish fayth that the Eucharist might be lawfully receiued vnder one kinde I therefore must perforce conclude with this ineuitable illation Ergo to receiue the holy Eucharist vnder one kind onely is but a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 13. Of priuate Masse THe priuate communicating in the Popish Masse where the Priest deuoureth vp all alone is wicked prophane excerable because it is repugnant to Christes institution who coÌ„maunded all to drinke thereof and to the Euangelist who affirmeth all to haue drunke thereof as also to the Apostle who chargeth the vnpriested Corinthians and laicall people to make a remembrance of the Lords death vntill his second comming so often as they receiue the holy Eucharist and this to do as well by drinking the Cuppe as by eating the Bread This was the vse and practise of the Church euerie where for more then a thousand yeres together But afterward when the peoples deuotion began to be remisse the priestes then deuoured vp all alone I therefore cannot but conclude with this ineuitable illation Ergo late popish priuate Masse is but a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 14. Of Pope Martins dispensation for the Brother to marry his naturall Sister POpe Martin saith Antiminus the popish Archbishop canonized saint tooke vpon him to dispense with one that he might mary his owne naturall sister Siluester Prierus a famous religious Fryer sometime Maister of the Popes sacred pallace hath these wordes Howbeit pope Martin the fift dispensed with him who had contracted and consumated matrimony with his owne naturall sister hauing first coÌ„sulted with his skilfull Diuines so to auoyde scandale which otherwise was likely to ensue therevpon Bartholmaeus Fumus a religious Dominican fryer hath these
things are pure to the pure This example is able our selfe to satisfie any indifferent Reader For first S. Spiridion that holy man of God did eate flesh contrary to popish doctrine Secondly hee vrged the stranger to eate with him Thirdly he constantly anouched his doing to bee the part of altrue Christian. Fourthly he taught plainly that to make conscience in choyse of meates was thy badge of an Infidell Fifâ—lie the fact of S. Spiridion proueth euidently that to make choyce of meates for religion sake was deemed superstitious and vngodly not onely in the Apostles time but also many huÌ„dred yetes after their departure hence To which I adde that this freedom of eating all Kind of meats in Lent was vsuall in the Church for the space of 400. yeeres after Christ. And so I must conclude vvith this incuitable illation Ergo late popish Lent-fast is but a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 29 of the annulling of Popish wedlocke VVHatsoeuer the Bishop of Rome holdeth defineth that must euery Papist beleeue hold and maintaine as an Article of his fayth Matrimonie pronounced by God to be indisloluble the Church for the space of 1500. yeres durst neuer dissolue but the late Pope of Rome Pius Paulus and Iulius haue taken in hand roundly to dissolue the same This truth is proued at large in the Downefall of Popery But the Papists tell vs that the facts Decrees or their Popes must be defended how false and absurd soeuer they seeme Cauarravias a famous and learned popish Bishop hath these wordes Nec me latet c. I know saith he that 〈◊〉 holdeth the coÌ„trary opinion but neuerthelesse we must defend the first opinion least those things which euery where are practised be vtterlie ouerthrowne Thus saith the great Canonist and learned popish Bishop Cauarruvias whose words are setre down at large in my Mâ—tyues This is the same doctrine in effect which the popish canoâ—â—ted Saint Antonius and their famous Sâ—mmrst Sylâ—â—iter Prierus telleth vs viz. That whatsoeuer the Pope doth whether we can proue the same by the holy Scripture or no yet wee must belseeue it to be so Loe the Popes dooings must perforce be 〈…〉 otherwise Popery cannot stand I 〈◊〉 therefore but conclude Ergo Popery is the new Religion CHAP. 30. Of the Popes pretended 〈◊〉 ouer and aboue a generall Councell THe late Popes or Bishops of Rome which is all one with their Iesâ—â—es and Iesuited Papistes doe obstinately and peremptorily affirme as an vndoubted truth that the Pope is aboue a Generall Councell and they seeme to prooue it because the Pope sitting in his Chayre at home as one that cannot Erre confirmeth or condemneth the Councell at his good pleasure And therefore doe the Rhemists that lesuited broode tell vs plainly if we will beleeue theÌ„ that there is no necessity of a Generall or Prouinciall Counbell saue onely for the better contentation of the people But this is a lote vpshirt faith and doctrine neuer knowne to the church of God for the space of 1415. yeeres after Christ that is to say vntill the Generall Councell of Constance Which Councell defined by a firme and resolute Decree as a matter of fayth than a Generall Councell was aboue the Pope and therfore did the said Councell depose three Popes Iohn 23. Gregory 12. and Benedict 13. and choâ— Maâ—tin 5. and made him Pope And so likewise the Generall Councell of Basill about fifteene yeeres after that cited Pope Eugenius to appeare and for his contuâ—acie dâ—posed him and chose Amadaeus who was named Faelix 5 in his roome Yea Cardinall Camer acensis Abbas panorâ—nitanus 〈◊〉 Câ—sanus 〈◊〉 Papa Cardinalis Florentinus Iohannes Cersanus â—sâ—obus Almaynus Abulensis and other learned Papists generally the Iesuites and their Iesuited crew excepted doe all constantly defend as an vndoubted truth that a Generall Councell is aboue the Pope I therefore cannot but conclude with this incuitable illation Ergo popish sayth doctrine by which we must beleeue the Pope to be aboue a Generall Councell is but a rotten râ—gge of the New Religion ⸪ Laus Deo vni et trino Amen Egegesip apud Euseb. hist. lib. 3. cap. 32. Euseb 〈◊〉 lib. 3. cap vlt. 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 19. 〈…〉 〈…〉 cap. 32. Apud Cyprian page 11. Apud Cyprian page 46 paâ— 66 page 61. Apud Augu. â—pist 11. 13 14 17 18. 25. 30. An Dom 528. An Dom 607. Acts. 4. 17. A woorthy note not to be forgotten Ierem 1 1. I Sâ—m 1. 3 Exod 18 1 Luke 1 ver 8 9 13. Leuit. 21. ver 13. 14. Heb. 13 v. 4 1 Cor 7. An Dom 327. 385. An Do 1074. An Dom. 327. Marke this poynt well 385. 1074. â—age 3. chap. 3. 4. Syluest de Indulgent Page 1. tit 10 Capit. 3. Contra. Artic. Lutheri An Dom 1300. Cont. assert Luth. art 18 An Dom 1517. See the fourth Chapter An Dom. 1215. Part 3. cha 12 Io Angleâ—iâ— 2. Sen. pa. 275 Page 281. An Dom 1566. In the Anatomy booke 3. aduâ—so 6. In the hunting of the Foxe Scoto in 4. sent D. 22. Qu. 2. Art 1. An Dom. 1500. Libr. 1. de haer Capit. 4. Math 10. 42. Mark 1 12. Part. 3. chap. 9. Super cant Serm. 18. See the Suruey vbâ— sup In 2. Sect Dist. 27. Concl. 2. diffic 4. Concl. 1. â—age 218. 221. 223. An Dom. 1540. The Iesuite consuteth himselfe Page 224. Marke this poynt well An Dom 1215. Part. 3. cap. 7. In Hymno Tho. Cant. Polanch de modo audiendi confess An Dom 1407. Math 26. 27. Math 14 23. Cor. 11. 27 An Dom. 1230. P. 3. q. 80. art 12. in corp An Dom 1414. Math 26. Marke 14. 1 Cor 11. ver 26 27. An Dom 1000. Anto pa. 3. tit 1. cap 11. prepe sin Syluest in verbo Papâ— Fumut in verbo dispens Angel in verbo papâ— Fumus verbi supra In Euchirid Pag. 115. 〈…〉 capit 18. An Do 1418. An Dom 590. Bieto in can missae lect 40 An Dom. 1484. Pa. 3. cha 10. lib 4. cap. 36. An Dom 400. Greg. Epi. lib. 7. capit 68. Platinainv Sixtâ— Peconecr dist 2 Cap tr forme Ar. Po. Burdegâ— An Dom 708. An Dom 1089. Polid li 5 ca 9 An Dom 843. Plat â—n serg 2. Caâ— lâ— 336 〈◊〉 in Chron. 〈◊〉 lib 6 cap. 7 An Dom. 417. An Dom. 404. Durand lib 4 cap 55 An Do 404. Bedle the Monke Polid. li 6 ca 7 An Dom 772 An Dom 1247. In libel inst sodal lesu libel sod lesu 〈…〉 7. cap. 6 An Dom 843. Par. 3. cap. 5 An Dom. 1229. Decret lib. 2. 〈◊〉 24 cap. 4 Surâ—ey part 1. booke 1. Chap 16. Primo principaliter 〈…〉 Rom 10 3. Math 15 9. Rom. 14 23 Tertio principaliter The Art of Phisick condemneth popish fasts in Lent Hist trig lib. 9. cap. â— 38. Trip. hist. lib. 9. cap. 38. Sozâ—m lib. 7. capit 19. Euseb lib. 5. cap. 24. Sozâ—m 〈◊〉 cap â— 11. Nâ—cep li. 8 capit 42 Histo trip lib. 1. capit 1â— An Dom. 427. Math 19. 17 An Dom. 1540. Anton part 1. tib 10. cap. 3. Syluâ—deindulg An Dom 1415. An Dom. 1431.
of Popish fayth vntill the Councell of Constance about 1414. yeeres after Christ. 13. That Priuate Masse began 1000. yeeres after Christ. 14. That it was euer holden vnlawfull for the brother to marry his naturall sister for the space of 1418. yeeres at what time Pope Martin set it abroach by the instigation of the deuill 15. That worshipping of Images was thought vnlawfull for the space of 1484. yeeres 16. That the Church seruice was euer in the vulgar tongue for the space of 443. yeeres at the least 17. That Popish Agnus Deis were not heard of for the space of one thousand two hundred yeeres after Christ. 18. That the Popes Bulls were vnknowne for the space of 772. yeeres after Christ. 19. That Popish hallowed Candles on Candelmasday were inuented 843. yeeres after Christ. That Bishops were not sworne to defend the Pope and his Canons for the space of one thousand two hundred twenty nine yeeres after Christ. 21. That Lent-fast in Popish manner was neuer heard of for the space of 427. yeeres All which and many other important poynts of Popish fayth are so liuely discouered to the first hatching thereof in this short and plaine Discourse as euery child may with all facility boldly pronounce and constantly affirme that the late Romish Fayth and Doctrine is not the Old but the New Religion Which if the silly Papists would once duly consider they would no longer obey the Pope or like of his Religion The Worke such as it is I haue dedicated to your Worships as a signe of a thankfull hart for your manifold kindnesses towards mee at all times And so I humbly commend your Worships to the protection of the Almighty From my studie the first of Iulie 1607. Yours in Christ Iesus Tho Bell. CHAP. 1. Of this name and word Pope IT is a wonder to consider how the late Bishops of Rome haue aspyred to their super-lordly Primacie and chiefest so supposed Soueraigntie in the Christian world Popery with our Iesuits Iesuited-Papists must needes be the Old Religion and that selfe same Doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paule deliuered to the Church of Rome This is their invincible Bulwarke which as they boast all the Canons of the faithfull and good Christians can neuer batter downe And this they neuer cease to inculcate into the eares and to instill it into the harts of the sillie vulgar people telling them forsooth that Popery is the Old Religion and the fayth of their forefathers in all ages I therefore to take this stumbling blocke out of the way doe purpose in God the fountaine of all goodnes and the chiefe workman of euery good act to set before the Readers eyes in a very summary succinct narration that Popery is a new Religion by little and little crept into the Church and patched together as clout vpon clout in a Beggers cloake Now for this name Pope which the silly people admire God-wote as a most sacred thing and for all that know no more what it meaneth theÌ„ how farre it is to Heauen it is a Greeke word Pappas which signifieth Father It was giuen of old indifferently as well to other Bishops as to the Bishops of Rome I prooue it first because the Clergie of Rome writing to the Clergy of Carthage call S. Cyprian the blessed Pope or holy Father Secondly because the Priestes Moses and Maximus and the Deacons Nicostratus and Ruffinus and sundry other CoÌ„fessors did all with one assent call the same Cyprian Beatissimum Papam the most blessed Pope Thirdly because S. Hierom called S. Austen Beatissimum Papam most holy Father or Pope and this he did many times and in many Epistles But after that the Emperour Iustinianus had in his Legall constitutions named the Bishop of Rome Pope the arrogant Bishops of Rome began to challenge the Name as if it were proper vnto them alone And so in processe of time the Bishops of Rome were onely solely called Popes and of late yeeres Our holy Father His Holinesse is his vsuall Name But this Empâ—rour liued after Christ his birth about 528. yeeres Ergo this poynt of Popery is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 2. Of the Popes superoyall power BOnifacius Bishop of Rome and the third of that Name aboue sixe hundred yeeres after Christ obtayned of Phocas then Emperour of Rome that Rome should be the head of all Churches Before which time no authenticall Writer can be named who euer ascribed the Headship and Vniuersall gouernment of all Churches to the Church of Rome For first Saint Policarpus would not yeelde to Anicetus Bishop of Rome in the controuersie about Easter which for all that he would must haue done if the Bishop of Rome had had any true prerogatiue ouer him Secondly S. Iraeneus other holy and learned Bishops of Fraâ—nce ioyning with him reprooued Victor then Bishop of Rome very sharply and roundly as one that had not due respect to the peace and vnitie of the Church Which doubtlesse those holy learned Bishops would not haue done if the Bishop of Rome had had in those dayes the supreame Soueraigntie ouer them Thirdly S. Polycrates and many Bishops of Asia did stoutly withstand the same Victor theÌ„ the Bishop of Rome in his presumpteous proceedings touching Easter Fourthly S. Cyprian roundly opposed himselfe against Stephanus then Bishop of Rome contemning his Decree and deriding his reasons Fiftly the Apostles at Ierusalem sent Peter and Iohn to coÌ„firme the faythfull in Samaria And consequently if the Pope be not aboue Peter but his supposed Successor he may be sent of the Bishops his Brethren as Saint Peter was But who is that Bishop and where dwelleth he that at this day dareth doe to the novve Pope such supposed villany Sixtly the Fathers of the famous Affrican Counsell in which Saint Austen that holy Father and most stout Champion of Christes Church was present to the great honour and credite thereof would in no wise yeeld to Celestine then Bishop of Rome in the controuersie of Appeales concerning Appiarius And when Pope Celestine alledged for himselfe and his supposed Soueraigntie that the auncient and famous Councell of Nice gaue libertie to appeale to Rome the Fathers of the Councell answered roundly that the true copies of the Decree were otherwise Where I wish the Reader to obserue with me these two poynts seriously First that the Pope could not and therefore did not alledge any better reason for his vsurped and falsely pretended Primacie then the authoritie and Decree of that famous Councell of Nice Secondly that the Pope Celestine falsified the canon and Decree of the Councell so to gaine credit and authority to himselfe if it might be Seauenthly the famous Councell of Chalcedon gaue the Bishop of Constantinople equall authoritie with the Bishop of Rome in all Ecclesiastical affaires Eightly the councell of Nice prescribed limits as well to the Bishop of Rome as to other Patriarkes First
Papists Absolutus Theologus knew right wel that Popish Pardons are but a toy for Chyldren to play withall these are his wordes The Popes Pardons saith he were neuer knowne to vs by the Scriptures although some alledge S. Paule for that purpose neither were they knowne by the auncient Fathers but onely by lare Writers Saint Antoninus theyr popish Saint and famous Archbishoppe had the selfe same opinion And Petrus Lombardus their famous Maister of Sentences who collected with great diligence into one Volume all the woorthy Sentences of the auncient Fathers could neuer find the Popes Pardons or any mention thereof in any of all theyr writings For as Syluester truly said The olde Writers were not acquainted with any such thing Yea their famous Martyr and Bishop Maister Fisher in his aunswere to Maister Luthers Articles was inforced to admit the newnes of the Popes pardons and withall forsooth to yeeld this reason for the same viz. That Purgatory was not then so well knowne to the Church as it is now adayes Peruse and note wel the next Chapter which is of Purgatorie so supposed paynes First therefore seeing the great popish Syluester confesseth plainly and boldly to the popes Holines that his popish pardoning is neither found in the holie Scripture nor in auncient Fathers Secondly seeing Antoninus Fumus and many other learned Papists grant freely that Syluester saith the truth heerein Thirdly seeing their famous Bishop Fisher vvas enforced to graunt the young age noneage of popish-pardons when hee could not aunswere Ma. Luthers reasons Fourthly seeing their Maister of Sentences could not find any mention of them in all the the Fathers writings I must perforce thus conclude Ergo the Popes pardon is a rotten ragge of the new Religion brought into the Church after 1300. yeres by Pope Bonifacius the eyght CHAP. 5. Of Popish Purgatory COncerning the originall of Popish-purgatorie it shal be enough to set down the words of Iohn Fisher the late Bishop of Rochester the popes canonized Martyr these are his expresse words The Greekes to this day doe not beleeue that there is a Purgatory Reade who will the Commentaries of the auncient Graecians and he shall finde either very sildome mention of Purgatory or none at all For neither did the Latine Church conceiue the veritie of this matter at one time but by leysure Neither vvas it without the great dispensation of the holy Ghost that after so many yeeres Catholicks both beleeued purgatory receiued the vse of pardons generallie So long as there was no care of Purgatory no man sought for pardons For of it dependeth all the estimation of pardons If thou take away purgatory to what end shall wee neede pardons for if there be no Purgatory we shall neede no pardons Considering therefore how long Purgatory was vnknowne then that it was beleeued of some by little and little partly by reuelations and partly by the Scriptures and so at the last beleeued generally of the whole Church we doe easily vnderstand the cause of pardons Since therefore purgatory was so lately known receiued of the whole Church who can admire pardons that there was no vse of theÌ„ in the primatiue Church Pardon 's therefore began after the people stoode in some feare of purgatory Thus writeth the popish Bishop Fisher. Whose words I hartily wish that the indifferent Reader may ponder seriously with me For if he so doe hee cannot chuse but abhor late popery and know it to be the new Religion This Bishop was a learned man a great papist said for popery what possibly he could yet he graÌ„teth many things of such force is the truth which quite ouerthrow popery and turne it vpside downe First we see that the Greeke church neuer beleeued purgatory to his dayes and so it was vnknown to theÌ„ 1517 yeres Secondly that the church of Rome belieued it not for the space of 250. yeres after which time it increased by little and little Thirdly that the church of Rome did not beleeue purgatory all at once but by little and little Fourthly that the inuention of purgatory was the birth of Popish-pardons as which could haue no place till purgatory was found out by fained reuelations and the people brought into some feare thereof Fiftly that the primatiue Church was neuer acquainted with the Popes pardons nor yet with his counterfeit and forged purgatory Of which as the popish Bishop telleth vs the silly people doe stand in feare Thus therefore I must coÌ„clude Ergo Popish purgatory is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 6. Of Popish Auriculer Confession SCotus who for his great subtile learning was of the Papists termed Doctor subtilis affirmeth resolutely that popish Auricular-confession is not grounded on the holy Scripture but onely instituted and commanded by the Church of Rome The popish Glosse of great credit with the Papists telleth them roundly that Auricular-confession can no way be defended but by tradition of the Church Panormitanus Rhenanus Richardus Durandus Bonauentura Hugo and all the popish Canonists generally approue and follow the same Glosse To this I adde that Auricular-confession was not an Article of fayth in the Romish Church for the space of 1215. yeeres All which I haue prooued at large in my Suruey of Popery and in my Motiues First therefore seeing popish Confession cannot be proued out of the Scriptures Secondly seeing it is onely commaunded by the Pope And thirdly seeing it was no matter of fayth with the Papists for the space of one thousand two hundred and fifteene yeeres I must needes conclude that it is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 7. Of Popish veniall sinnes THE newnes and young age of Popish-Religion may be sufficiently knowne by the coyning and inuenting of Veniall sinnes if nothingels could be said therein the Thomists will haue some sinnes not against the Law but besides the law and those sinnes they call their Veniall sinnes But Durundus a famous popish Schoole-Doctor many other learned Papists affirme euery sinne to be against Gods Law And this opinion doth nowe preuaile in the popish Schooleâ— as Iâ—sephus Angles in his Booke dedicated to the Popes Holinesse 〈◊〉 vs His words are these Et hae 〈◊〉 in schol◠〈◊〉 coÌ„mâ—nior and this opinion seemeth now adayes to bee more common in the Schooles Where I wish the Reader to 〈◊〉 by the way this word modâ— now adayes because it doth most â—â—â—ely and sufficiently set before our eyes the mutability of the late Romish Religion For in that he saith niodâ— now adaies hee giueth vs to vnderstand that their Doctrine is now otherwise their it was of old time and in former ages Behold heere the new Religion and that popish doctrine is vncertaine Againe Ma. Fisher late Bishop of Rochester granteth to Ma. Luther when he was ouercome with the force of his Reasons that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature Iaeobus Almaynus Durandus