vncleannesse and some Angels of the bottomles pit by couetousnes and a little after Not a few of our moderne Priests doe serue the most vild and filthy God Priapus Panormitane a man of great fame in the Councell of Basill after he had shewen the vowe of continencie not to be of the essence of Priest-hood nor by the lawe of God but a constitution of the Church addeth these words I beleeue that it were a wholesome ordinance for the good saluation of soules to leaue it to mâ—ns owne wils to marrie or not because experience doth show that now a daies they doe not liue spiritually and vndefiledly but that they are defiled by vnlawfull copulation whereas they might liue chastly with their owne wiues 37. I could adde vnto these testimonies the report of Iohn Gerson touching his time who complained that some Cloysters of Nunnes were become Stewes of strumpets and whores And of Mantuan a Carmelite Italian Frier whose verses touching this poynt are sufficiently knowne Patrum vita fuit melior cum coniuge quà m nunc Nostra sit exclusis thalamis coniugis vsu The life of the Fathers was better being married then ours to whom marriage is forbidden and of Polidor Virgill who liued in King Henrie the Eights daies whose censure is this that this enforced chastity is so farre from excelling that marriage-chastity that no crime hath brought more shame to the order of Priesthood more euill to Religion nor more griefe to all good men then that blot of the filthinesse of Priests But that I feare I haue too much offeÌ„ded chaste eares already with raking into this dunghill I conclude with the report of Martin Luther he saith that he saw Cardinals at Rome which were accounted holy for no other cause but that they were content onely to commit fornication and adultery with women and did not giue themselues to other vnnaturall lusts Thus as it were in a mappe I haue described the filthy and abominable fruites that proceed from that Romish doctrine of vowed chastitie Is it possible that the spring should be good when the streams are thus corrupt 38. The fift doctrine of Poperie giuing manifest occasion of liberty to the professours thereof is their doctrine of veniall sinnes By which they teach that many acts which are transgressions of the laws of God men yet are not properly sins nor deserue the wrath of God but of their nature are pardonable and therfore he which committeth any such doth neither offer iniury to God nor breake charity in respect of his neighbour and so deserues not hell nor is bound to be sorry for them but that the knocking of the brest going to Church being sprinckled with holy water or the Bishops blessing or crossing ones selfe or doing any worke of charity though we neuer thinke actually of them is a sufficient satisfaction for them This is the doctrine not onely of the Schoolemen but also of the finest and refyning Iesuites euen of Bellarmine himselfe who thus distinguisheth veniall sinnes that some are veniall of their own nature and kind to wit such as haue for their obiect an euill and inordinate matter but which is not repugnant to the law of God and of our neighbour others are veniall by the imperfection of the worke which imperfection ariseth partly ex surreptione that is by vnaduised falling into them without full consent of will and partly ex paruitate materiae by the smalnesse of the matter which is committed as if a man should steale a halfe-peny or some such trifle This is the Cardinals doctrine which as neere as I could I hauâ— word for word set downe And that wee may more fully vnderstand their meaning they affirme in very deede that they are no sinnes but aequiuoce that is so called but not â—o in truth for the word peccatum sinne doth not vniuoce aâ—â—ee 〈…〉 eniall sinnes as it doth to mortall and therefore it is their generall opinion that they are not against but beside the lawe that is in plaine words not sinne for euery sinne is a transgression of the law Now let the Readeriudge whether our doctrine that all sinnes of their owne nature are mortall and deserue condemnation except they be repeÌ„ted of or heirs that some are veniall and binde not the offender to condemnation doe more tend to liberty whether we restraine more the people from sinning that thus say vnto them All your sinnes though neuer so small are of their owne nature damnable except by faith in the bloud of Christ they be purged away and by repentance which is a fruite of faith sorrowed for and laboured against or they that say thus to them A number of your ordinarie sinnes are not damnable you neede not faith in Christs bloud to purge them nor repentance to bewaile them nor care and endeuour to preuent them who seeth not that our doctrine pulleth in and theirs letteth out the reynes of libertie to our corrupt nature for when a man beleeueth that he may do many things which are in deed transgressions of Gods lawe without offence to God or hurt to his neighbour or wounding of his owne conscience and that after he hath committed them he needeth not greatly to repent of them or to be sorry for them but that they are done away by saying a Lords prayer or hearing a Masse or creeping to a Crosse or receiuing a little Holy water what neede he make any conscience of these so sleight trifles nay how can hee choose but neglect and make light account of them This is one of the deuils subtile deuices or iuggling trickes which Saint Paul speaketh of where with hee laboureth to seduce simple soules for either hee will aggrauate our sinnes to driue vs to desperation or extenuate and excuse them to draw to presumption the rocke and gulfe whereat many thousand soules suffer shipwracke And this last the most dangerous wherein the Papists shew themselues the deuils agents and factours by this their doctrine of veniall sinnes for what is this but to excuse sinne and to extenuate it and so to make men presume to commit those things which they esteeme of no greater moment 39. The truth of this will more clearely appeare if wee take a suruay a little of those particular sinnes which they account as veniall To sweare by the bloud of God or wounds or bodie of Christ is no blasphemie saith Cardinall Caietane if it be spoken in a brawle or in some perturbation of mind neither is it to be counted any more than a veniall sinne Againe formall cursing saith Gregorie de Valentia although in it owne kinde it be a mortall sinne yet it may be onely a veniall to wit in respect either of the smalnesse of the matter or the want of deliberation in the speaker and hereby saith he Parents cursing their children with bitter words and deuoting them to the deuill may often be excused from mortall sinne
not iustify and yet faith alone doth iustify If they say that they speake of one kinde of faith and we of another they say nothing to the purpose for euen that any faith alone should iustify is contrary to their owne positions who affirme that the former cause of our iustification is the inherent righteousnes of works and not the righteousnes of Christ apprehended by faith And thus I leaue the Article of iustification at farre with it selfe to be atoned by their best wits if it be possible 37. Let vs come to their doctrine of workes and see how that agreeth with it selfe and here first they hold that works done before faith and regeneration are not good workes but sinnes This is proued by them out of Saint Augustine who affirmeth that the workes of vnbeleeuers are sinnes and if the workes of vnbeleeuers then of all other wicked men which bee not regenerate seeing as the same Father else-where speaketh Impij cogitant non credunt the wicked doe not beleeue but thinke they haue but a shadow of faith without substance It may be prooued also by that generall and infallible axiome of the holy Scripture Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne but the workes of wicked men are all voyd of faith and therefore are no better then sinnes in the sight of God be they neuer so glorious and beautifull in the eyes of men Or as Gregorie Nazianzene saith As faith without workes is dead so workes without faith are dead and dead workes are sinnes as appeares Heb. 9. 41. Besides Bellarmine confirmeth the same by reason because they want a good intention to direct their workes to the glory of the true God whome they are ignorant of To which I adde another reason drawne from our Sauiours owne mouth Mat. 7. Because an euill tree cannot bring forth good fruit but euery man til he be ingrafted into Christ is no better then an euill tree and therefore cannot doe a good worke 38. This is their doctrine and it is sound diuinitie but see how they crosse it ouer the face with a contrary falshood for the same men that teach this notwithstanding affirme that the workes of Infidels are good suo genere in their kind so they are good and not good sinnes and yet good works but this is in their kind say they that is Morally and not Theologically I but morall vertues in the vnregenerate are by their owne principles sinnes how then can they be good any waies Can sinne which is a transgression of Gods law and simply in it owne nature euill be in any respect good as it is sinne But to take cleare away this scruple another of them auoucheth that they are not onely morally but euen Theologically good for he saith that such works as are done by the light of nature onely without grace doe dispose and make a man in some sort fit to iustification though it be longè valdèremotè remotely and a farre off for he that yeeldeth obedience to morall lawes is thereby lesse vndisposed and repugnant to diuine grace Now how can sinnes dispose or prepare a man for iustification is God delighted with sinnes Either therefore they are not sinnes or they doe not dispose to iustification neither farre nor neere or which is the present contradiction they are sinnes and not sinnes good and not good at one time and in one and the same respect And to put the contradiction out of all question the Councill of Trent in the seuenth Canon of the sixt Session enacteth as much and denounceth Anathema to all that say the contrarie the words are these If any man shall say that all the works which are done before iustification by what meanes soeuer they are done are truely sinnes or deserue the hatred of God let him be Anathema And Andradius the interpretor of that Councill authorised by the Fathers of the same doth more perspicuously explaine the meaning of that Canon when hee saith that men without faith destitute of the spirit of regeneration may doe workes which are voyde of all filthinesse free from all fault and defiled with no sinne and by which they may obtaine saluation then which what can be more contradictory to that which before was deliuered that all the workes of Infidels and vnbeleeuers are sinnes be they neuer so glistering with morall vertue or more agreeable to the olde condemned errors of Iustine Clemens and Epiphanius who affirmed that Socrates and Her aclitus were Christians because they liued according to the rule of reason and that the Grecians were iustified by Philosophie and that many were saued onely by the law of nature without the lawe of Moses or Gospell of Christ 39. Againe their doctrine of doubel merit the one of Congruity the other of Condignity as they terme them is not onely contrary to the truth but to it selfe For this they teach that the merit of congruity which the Councill of Trent calleth the preparations and dispositions to iustification is grounded vpon the dignity of the worke and not vpon the promise of God but the merit of condignity requireth both a dignity of the worke and the promise of God to bee grounded vpon or else it is no merit This is Bellarmines plaine doctrine and is consonant to the residue of their Doctours both Schoole diuines and others for thus they define the merit of congruity It is that by which the subiect is disposed that it may receiue grace according to the reason of Gods iustice Here is onely iustice required and not any promise to the merit of congruity though I must confesse Gabriel Biel somewhat crosseth this definition when â—e saith that when a man doth what in him lyeth then God accepteth his worke and powreth in grace not by the due of Iustice but of his liberalitie And Aquinas who affirmeth that when a man vseth well the power of free-will God worketh in him according to the excellencie of his mercy But yet they all agree in this that the merit of congruity is not grounded vpon any promise as the merit of condignity is but onely vpon the worthinâ—s of the worke done Now here lurketh a flat contradiction for by this it should follow that the merit of congruity should bee more properly a merit then that of condignity Which Bellarmine denyeth in the same Chapter because this dependeth vpon it owne dignity and hath no neede of a promise as the other hath and so should bee also more meritorious and excellent then the other being neuerthelesse but a preparation and beginning to iustification and the other the matter of iustification it selfe And that a man that hath no grace dwelling in him but onely outwardly mouing him nor is yet iustified should haue more power to deserue and merite then he that is fulfilled with grace and fully iustified Thus error like a Strumpet bringeth foorth a monstrous brood of absurdities but let vs proceede 40. Their
not sinne or a vice in Philosophy that is not a sinne in diuinity This is strange diuinity The name of euill we know is vsed of annoyances crosses and afflictions but these are naturall euils and not morall but to doe euill can bee said of nothing but sinne and howsoeuer ti bee true that vice is rather the habit then the act of sinne yet because it is the habit is it therefore lesse sinfull then the act noy is it not more sinfull seeing it groweth out of many actes and is confirmed by custome and almost turned to nature In this therefore they are most contrary to themselues when they grant concupiscence to bee of it owne nature an euill and a vice and yet not a sinne for nothing is naturally euill but that which swarueth from good nor any thing vice but that which is contrary to vertue Now all morall good and vertue is within the compasse of the Law of God and all morall euill and vice a transgression of that Law therefore it cannot but follow that concupiscence being a morall euill and vice and therefore a transgression of the Law of God should bee cleared from being sinne of it owne nature especially seeing as Origen saith This is the nature of sinne if any thing bee done which the Law forbiddeth and Bede that all that swarueth from the rule of righteousnesse sinne and Caesarius Gregory Naianzens brother that sinne is euery assay to resist and euery resistance it selfe against vertue And Saint Augustine that therefore a thing is sinne because it ought not to bee done and that to doe any thing amisse is to sinne but euery moral leuill and vice is forbidden by the Law swarueth from the rule of righteousnesse is a resistance against vertue and a thing that is done amisse and ought not to bee done therefore is also sinne in it owne nature They haue no wayes to helpe themselues out of these briers but by the distinction of properly and improperly which they say they fetch out of Saint Augustine as if concupiscence in the regenerat should be sinne improperly and not properly by which the contradiction is not taken away for they say that it is not sinne at all in it owne nature but onely euill now if it bee improperly sinne of it owne nature then it is some way sinne and so that proposition is false that it is not sinne at all and besides therefore it is said by that distinction in Saint Augustine to be improperly sinne because it is not come to so high a perfection as other sinnes are by being without consent of will neuerthelesse hee neuer meant but that it was a transgression of the Law of God and so a sinne in it owne nature as may appeare by almost infinite places in his bookes as for instance one for all Concupiscence saith he is not onely the punishment of sinne and cause of sinne but euen sinne it selfe because there is in it a rebellion against the Law of the minde and therefore hee calleth it a concupiscentiall disobedience which dwelleth in our dying members and in other places an euill quality vitious desires vnlawfull lusts c. Therefore Saint Augustine when he called it â—in improperly neuer dreamt that is was not a transgression of the Law but either that it was not so high a degree of sinne as those which are done with consent of will or that because the guilt of it is taken away by baptisme in the regenerate as hee speaketh in another place Concupiscence is not called sinne in such manner as sinne maketh guilty because the guilt thereof is released in the Sacrament of regeneration And thus this distinction rightly vnderstood standeth them in no stead to keepe their doctrine from manifest contradiction 61. This subiect might bee prosecuted in many more points of their Religion but I conclude with these two Antichrist and the Bishop of Rome which I ioyne together in this discourse because in truth they are all one and though they differ in name yet they agree in nature one egge is not liker to another nor milke liker to milke then the Pope is to Antichrist As touching Antichrist therefore thus they confesse that by mysticall Babylon in the Reuelation is meant ` Rome and by and by with an other contrary blast they puffe away that againe and affirme that Rome is not Babylon The first is auouched in plaine termes both by Bellarmine and Viega and Ribera two other Iesuites and the whole colledge of the Rhemists and diuers others conuicted by the euidence of truth and the second is insinuated by a necessary consequence out of another position for they say that Ierusalem shall bee the seat of Antichrist and in so saying they inferre necessarily that Ierusalem is mysticall Babylon and not Rome because the whore of Babylon is set foorth in the Scripture to be the seat of Antichrist and it must needs bee so seeing shee is called the mother of all fornications that is of Superstition and Idolatry of all Atheisme and heresie and seeing shee maketh drunke the kings and inhabitants of the earth with the golden cup of her fornication and is died red and made drunke with the bloud of the Saints and of the martyrs of Iesus And lastly seeing Antichrist must bee one of the seuen heads to wit the last of the Romane beast and the last King of the Romane Empire though not called the Romane Emperour as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth All these things considered and laide together it must needs bee inferred by necessary consequence that the whore of Babylon cannot choose but bee the seat of Antichrist and if it bee so then either Ierusalem is not the seat where this man of sinne must raigne or by Babylon is not meant Rome but Ierusalem let them choose which one of these is apparantly false 62. Againe when by Babylon they vnderstand Rome they restraine it to heathenish Rome vnder the persecuting Emperours and say that it is not meant of Rome Catholicke and Christian but of Rome Ethnick and Heathenish Now if Rome be Babylon and Babylon the seat of Antichrist as hath beene proued out of their owne confession how can Rome heathenish vnder the Emperours be it when as they all agree that Antichrist shall not come vntill a little before the end of the world That state of Rome which they speake of is past aboue a thousand yeeres since and Antichrist is not yet come according to their doctrine Necessarily therefore it followeth that either Antichrist sate there then and so is come long agoe or else that Rome was not Babylon whilst it was vnder the heathen Emperours but is or shall be after it hath receiued the Christian faith 63. Againe the Romane Empire must bee remoued before the comming of this great enemie this all our aduersaries yeeld vnto and most of the ancient fathers so interpret that place When he that hindereth shall be taken
merite of condignitie bringeth foorth a like monster for they build it vpon two foundations whereof one ouerwhelmeth the other to wit the dignity of the worke and the promise of God for what can be more contrary then mercy and iustice Now if it depend vpon the dignity of the worke then it is a due of iustice and so they call it Meritum ex iustitia A merite by iustice but if it rely vpon the free promise of God as they call it then it must needs be Meritum ex misericordia A merite by mercy for Gods promise is a voluntary fruit of his mercy They answer that they may both well stand together for say they God dealeth with vs as we deale with our hyred labourers we agree with them for a certayne price for doing a peece of worke and when they begin we giue them an earnest penny and when the worke is done according to the couenant we giue them their wages So dealeth Almighty God with Christians he first maketh a couenant with them that for labouring in his Vineyard they shall haue a penny that is eternall life then he giueth them the earnest of his Spirit to assure them thereof and lastly at the end when they haue done their worke hee payeth them their wages But by the Iesuites leaue this similitude is lame of all foure for first when a man hyreth a labourer and bargaineth with him for wages for his worke this is a couenant of iustice and no promise of mercy and therefore if he performe this bargaine hee is not therefore called mercifull but iust but Almighty God as they themselues confesse promiseth freely and is bound to none and therefore this must needs be a worke of mercy and not of iustice Secondly there is a proportion betwixt the labourers worke and his hire but betwixt the Kingdome of heauen and our good works there is no proportion no more then betwixt a finite and an iâ— finite thing or a drop of a Bâ—cket and the huge Ocean And third y a man standeth in need of his workman his worke but God hath no need of vs. And hence it must of necessitie follow that the labourers hire iâ— a debt of iustice but a Christians hire is a reward of mercy And so I conclude that being of mercy it cannot be of iustice too or if it be of iustice it cannot be of mercy tâ—o fâ—â— what needâ— iustice if it bee of mercy and what need mercy if â—â— bâ— of iustice And therefore if this meritâ— of condignitie be grounded vpon the worth and valour of he worke done as they teach 〈…〉 cannot bee grounded vpon the promise of God as theâ— teach also because the dignitie of the worke requires â—â— as a dâ—â— by iustice and the gracious promise of God imparts it as a â—eward of mercy 41. Againe in their merite of congruitie there is another contradiction for they teach that the whoâ—e dignitie of the worke dependeth vpon grace and therefore that it is not so much man that meriteth as Gods grace in man And yet the same affirme that this grace doth not inhabitare that is awell in a man but onely outwardly mooue and helpe him and that it is in mans power either to accept or reiect theâ—s me Now how can the power of meriting issue from grace alone and the whole dignitie of the worke depend vpon grace when as that grace is not in vs and when as our owne free will is the chiefe worker being able of it selfe either to vnlocke the dore and let it in or baâ—re the doore and shut it out And besides if the whole dignitie of the worke depend vpon grace why doth he call â—t Meritum inâ—hoatum imperfectuÌ„ A lame and vnperfect meriâ—e I Gods grace â—ame and imperfect eyther therefore that grace dwelleth in vs and is the chiese worker or else it doth not wholly depend vpon grace And againe if it wholly proceede from grace then it is not a lame and imperfect but a complete perfect merice See â— beseech you how falsehood needeth no other Engine but it selfe to ouerthrow it 42. Lastly concerning works their doctrine is that the good works of the regenerate are fully and absolutely iust and perfectly good and yet neuerthelesse that they may grow in goodnesse and are also mixed with many veniall sinnes If they bee perfectly good how can they grow in goodnesse and if they increase in goodnesse how are they perfectly good seeing that onely is perfect to which nothing can be added If they say that this perfection is but begun and not finished why then also they should say that they are imperfectly perfect or else they pull downe with one hand that which they build with the other And againe if they most holy and iust men haue their works intermixed with many veniall sins for which they need to cry daily Forgiue vs our trespasses how can they either perfectly fulfill the law of God or doe such works as may bee able to abide the censure of Gods iustice seeing Saint Iames saith that he that transgresseth one Commandement is guiltie of the whole law because he violateth the body of iustice contained in the law as he which hurteth the little toe doth herein wrong the whole bodie It is a contradiction therefore to say that the works of the regenerate are perfect and yet are intermingled with many sinnes and it is all one as if a man should say that his face is perfectly cleane and yet hath many spots or that the bodie is perfectly in health and yet is pestred with many diseases 43. And thus much of good works Now besides these there are certaine works in their Religion which are more then good and more perfect then perfection these be their works of Supererogation arising from three grounds First when the Saints in this life do more good works then are necessarie for themselues to the attainment of saluation And secondly when they suffer more and greater punishments then are due vnto them for their sinnes And thirdly when they vndertake noâ— onely works commanded by the law of God but also such as are commended by the Euangelicall Councells as voluntary pouertie abstayning from marriage and regular obedience These superabounding actions and passions of Gods Saints are the works of supererogation spoken of and magnified so much in the Church of Rome which both are the Churches Treasure mingled with the superabounding merits of Christs passion and are layd vp in a Treasury the keyes whereof and dispensation is committed to the Pope of Rome that hee either by himselfe or his Factors may dispence them at his pleasure that is to them that will buy the same for money and also as they say are more excellent and perfect and meritorious of a greater reward This blasphemous doctrine might easily be wouÌ„ded to death by the Sword of the Spirit for it is contrary to all
that it was the Italian fashion to liue by robberie and to trample vnder focte all equity and religion And for the moderne times witnesse the common prouerbe An Englishman Italionate a deuill incarnate Rome is the Popes owne â—eate for it is the spirituall Babylon built vpon seuen hils and yet that is the sincke of Italy witnesse their owne Mantuan I pudor in villas c. Vrbs est iam tot a lupanar Depart honesty into Villages the Citie is wholly become a Stewes and Trauailors report it was neuer so euill as it is at this day witnesse their owne pasquill Roma vale vidi satis est vidisse reuertar Cum leno aut meretrix scurra cynaedus ero Now farewell Rome I haue thee seene it was enough to see I will returne when as I meane Bawde Pander Knaue to bee As if there were none but such at Rome 42. And this the best of them against their wils acknowledge when they confesse Rome to be mysticall Babylon for why is Rome so stiled in the Scripture but because it resembleth the Assyrian Babylon in pride idolatry filthinesse and especially in most cruell persecution of the Church of God and for the same cause it is called spirituall Sodome and Egypt Sodeme for pride and filthines Egypt for Idolatry and cruelty The Popes court is the Popes owne Sanctum Sanctorum if in reuerence to that holy place I may so say yet that is the sincke of the Citie Witnesse Catherina Senensis that holy woman whom Pope Pius the second canonized for a Saint who thus complained that in the Court of Rome where should bee a delicate Paradise of vertues she sound a stincke of hellish vices Concerning the whole state of the Romane Church both Laiâ—ty and Clergy heare what the iudgement of Durand was in his time Desperata est salus Romanae Ecclesiae c. The saluation of the Romane Church is desperate of which is verified the sayings of the Prophet Esay It shall be a bed of Dragons and of Petrus de Alliaco a Cardinall in his time Ad eum statum venit c. The Romane Church is come to that state that it is not worthy to be gouerned but by reprobates And of Platina himselfe the Popes owne Secretary Hac nostra aetate sayth he vitia cò crcuerunt c. In this our age vices are so increased that they seeme to haue scarce left vs any place in Gods mercy c. After the Councell of Trent which promised a reformation heare how a Bishop of their owne Espensaeus complaineth All hope saith he of reformation is taken away where vnder the Sunne is there greater licenciousnes clamour impurity I will not say madnesse and impudency then in this Citie such and so great as none can beleeue but he which hath seene it none can deny but he which hath not seene it I could heape vp many like testimonies for the clearing of this poynt but it is needlesse seeing that all that haue either gotten experimentall knowledge by their trauailes or speculatiue by their reading can will iustifie the truth of this position that in no place of the world more impiety atheisme impurity cruelty poysoning trechery all maner of villanie raigneth then in Italy the Popes owne dominions and in Rome vnder his Holinesse nose So that for shame but that the whore of Babylon and her adherents haue brazen foreheads they may cease to lay that imputation of loosnesse and wickednesse of life vpon vs and our Religion and assume the aspersion of it vnto themselues being farre more guilty and their religion directly tending thervnto by these six maine grounds which I haue in this first motiue propounded to the iudgement of euery indifferent Reader The Lord of his mercy open our eyes that we may discerne the truth and our hearts that we may loue it and embrace it MOTIVE II. That religion which maintaines by the grounds thereof things forbidden by all lawes both of God of Nature and of Man cannot be the true religion but such is the religion of the Romane Church Ergo. THe first proposition in this reason is vnquestionable and without controuersie for the law of God is one part of true religion as the Gospell is the other and therfore whatsoeuer contradicts this law is opposite vnto true religion and so cannot be true religion it selfe for truth is not opposite vnto truth but falshood and the lawe of nature is nothing but the law of God engrauen in the hearts of all men by the instinct of nature which Tullie calleth a lawe engendred not imposed borne with vs not laid vpon vs. And the positiue laws of men if they be good are nothing els but extracts out of the law of God characters of the law of nature That religion therefore that crosseth all these lawes by allowance of such things which are by them all condemned cannot in any wise be the true religion but must needs stand guilty of falshoode and errour Now that the Romish religion is such which is the second proposition in the reason that is my taske to proue and I hope I shall by inuincible arguments make good the same 1. And first what can bee more contrary to the lawes of God of Nature of Man then treason and rebellion against Princes for the lawe of God commandeth ciuill obedience to the Magistrate by the first precept of the second Table and our Sauiour in the Gospell biddeth to giue to Caesar those things that belong vnto Caesar and Saint Paul chargeth euery soule to be subiect to the higher powers because all power is of God euen tyrannicall power as our Sauiour confesseth to Pilate Thou hadst no power ouer mee except it was giuen thee from aboue where he acknowledgeth that Pilates power though he was a tyrant was of God and therefore submitteth himselfe vnto it As for the law of nature it requireth as much of all for as in the bodie naturall all the outward members and inward faculties are gouerned by reason residing in the head and in the body oiconomike all the familie is directed by the Father or Master thereof so in the body politique all the members of a Common-wealth must by natures decree be obedient to the King or gouernour whom to resist is to rebell against nature as it is against nature for the member to mutiny against the head or for children and seruants to be disobedient to their Fathers or Masters Neither are the lawes positiue any whit behinde for no offence by lawe is more seuerely punished then crimen laesae Maiestatis that is high treason against the Kings person or State and that not onely in this our Kingdome but in all others as is sufficiently knowen 2. Now that the Romish doctrine and religion is a supporter of treason and an animater of traytors against their Soueraignes I call to witnesse first their owne principles and secondly their
regard to Christs merits as they do and therefore this is a mere cauill and slander hatcht by them to breed disgrace to our Religion Next they contradict themselues for to say that Christ giueth strength to our righteousnesse to purchase heauen is to affiâ—me that without our helpe Christs righteousnesse was not of sufficient valew to make that purchase and yet the same men say that Christs righteousnesse was of infinite valew Now if it were of infinite valew then it made the full and perfect purchase it selfe and if it made the full purchase then he need not giue strength to our righteousnes to doe the same Thus either the one or the other must needes be false except we will haue a double purchase of one and the same thing and a double satisfaction of the same debt which is in no case agreeable to the iustice of God Lastly they shew their arrogancie in that they scorne to receiue the kingdome of heauen as an almes and free gift from God of his mere mercy towards them but they will haue it like sturdy and proud companions as a due vnto their deserts or a recompence to their seruice nay they will not haue it from Christs purchase alone but they will bee ioyned purchasers with him or else they will haue none of it then which what can be greater arrogancie And thus by this vaine vaunt they fall into diuers palpable absurdities and plainely discouer that it cannot any way be auoyded but that by their doctrine of iustification they doe exalt the dignity of man and pull downe the glory of Christ our Sauiour 24. The third doctrine whereby they derogate from Gods glory is their monster of merit which I put in the next place because it issueth from the two former as the Progenitours thereof the doctrine of iustification by inherent righteousnesse being as it were the mother of it and that of free-will the Grand-mother and so it cannot be the fountaine being poysoned but that the waters streaming there-from must needes be infected and because malum crescit eundo an euill groweth worse by propagation and the daughter commonly exceedeth the mother in naughtinesse therefore this doctrine is firre more blasphemous then either of the former and exceedeth them both in derogating from Gods glory and setting vp mans dignity against God And the Proctors of the Romish Court in no subiect doe more throat it out then they doe in this nor take more paines in any as if their liuelyhood lay vpon it And yet if we draw neere vnto them we shall easily perceiue that all is but a vaine blast of words puffing vp the proud heart of man and pulling downe the glory of Christ as I hope I shall plainely and briefly manifest by the discourse following 25. Their doctrine touching the merite of workes is in briefe this that there is such a dignity excellency and perfection in the workes of the Regenerate that by the rule of iustice they doe not onely deserue temporall and spirituall blessings here in this world but also eternall life and euerlasting blisse in the world to come In which doctrine these three poynts are to be considered first that they make the good workes of the faithfull absolutely and perfectly good able to stand out with the iustice of God and answere the full rigour of the Law secondly they make them proportionable to the reward for betwixt meritum and debitum properly taken as they doe there is alwaies a Geometricall proportion and thirdly they place this meritorious dignitie in the worke done as it is a worke and that not passiuely as it is wrought in vs by grace but actiuely as it worketh by free-will as hath beene shewed 26. That all these things are thus as I haue said let vs heare themselues speaking in their owne words The workes of the iust saith Bellarmine are simply and absolutely good And in another place They are so good and so perfect that God were vniust if he should not reward them with eternall life and that not onely in respect of Gods promises but euen in respect of the workes themselues And to prooue this hee produceth seuen strong reasons as he thinketh but indeed weake ones if they be throughly examined Andradius the approoued interpretour and defender of the Councill of Trent goeth further and saith that the heauenly blessednes which the Scripture calleth the reward of the iust is not giuen them of God gratis and freely but is due to their workes yea God hath set forth heauen to sale for our workes Bellarmine also calleth good workes Mercatura regni coelestis the purchasing of Heauen The Rhemists are yet more insolent Good workes say they are truely and properly meritorious and fully worthy of euerlasting life heauen is the due and iust stipend which God by his iustice oweth to the persons working by his grace and that God should be vniust if he rendred not heauen for the same But Ruardus Tapper is yet more impudent for he saith God forbid that the iust should expect eternall life as the poore man doth an almes it is much more glorious that they should haue it as Conquerours and Triumphers as the prize due vnto their labours Gregory de Valentia goeth yet further and saith That the workes of the faithfull beside their strength of meriting haue also a power of satisfying for the punishment 27. Touching the proportion of our workes with the reward Bellarmine saith That in a good worke proceeding from grace there is a certaine proportion and equality to the reward of eternall life and that not only in regard of the promise and acceptation but euen of the worke it selfe And this he proueth in the place quoted by many arguments which are worthy to be read that we may see the very pith and substance of their opinion touching the merite of workes True it is Bellarmine doth not make this proportion an absolute equality betwixt the worke and the reward according to the rule of commutatiue iustice but onely by the rule of distributiue iustice which hath respect not so much to the worke as to the worthinesse of the person working But herein he crosseth other his fellow Iesuites For Suarez saith That a supernaturall worke proceeding from grace within it selfe and of it owne nature hath a proportion and condignity with the reward and a sufficient valew to be worth the same And Câ—ster affirmeth that the reward which God giueth to our workes belongeth after a sort both to commutatiue and distributiue iustice though the distributiue part of iustice which requireth the dignity of the persons doth more shine forth in it then the commutatiue which considereth the equality of workes And the Rhemists That our workes of their very nature deserue eternall life the reward whereof is a thing equally and iustly answering to the lyne and weight of the worke rather then a free gift Yea he crosseth himselfe for
Religion to the experience of euery mans owne conscience But I leaue this to others who haue or shall meddle in this argument my taske is to shew how it contradicteth both it selfe and other doctrines of their Religion 44. It selfe thus They teach that works of supererogation grounded vpon Euangelicall Counsels are as you haue heard more excellent perfect and meritorious then those which are done in obedience to the law of God and that in three respects First comparing seuerall Counsels with seuerall Precepts which concerne the same matter As to sell all and giue to the poore is a more excellent worke then any commanded in that Precept Thou shalt not steale And the Counsell of Single life is more perfect then the Precept Thou shalt not commit Adultery As if men could bee more perfect then God had commanuded or then Christ himselfe was whose righteousnes consisted in this in being obedient to his Fathers will Or then the Angels whose perfection consisteth in executing the Commandements of God Or as if the law of God was not a perfect rule of righteousnes Secondly comparing the state of men obseruing Euangelicall Counsells with the state of them that onely yeeld obedience to Precepts as if a man could be in a higher and happier estate then they are which loue God with all their heart and their Neighbour as themselues which is the summe of the Law And thirdly marke this comparing Counsells with any precept whatsoeuer euen with that great Commaundement of the Law Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy strength As if a man could loue God more then with all his heart and with all his strength Gods children labour for so much let them take the more for their shares Hence they conclude that in respect of matter the Precept is good but the Counsels better and in respect of the end the fulfilling of Precepts hath a reward but the execution of Counsels hath a greater reward This is their plaine doctrine And yet neuerthelesse the same men teach that the perfection of a Christian man consisteth essentially in the obseruation of Precepts and instrumentally in the obseruation of Counsels And secondly that the Precepts of charitie are the ends whereunto Counsels are ordayned and the works of Counsels are but the way and meanes for the better keeping of the Precepts Now to the purpose How can works of supererogation bee more perfect then works of obedience Counsels then Precepts seeing perfection consisteth in the one instrumentally and in the other essentially and Precepts are the end of Counsels and not Counsels of Precepts Is an instrumentall perfection greater then an essentiall or the meanes more perfect then the end This is contrary to naturall reason for Aristotle saith Maius bonum est finis quà m quod finis non est The end is a greater good then that which is not the end and the instrument is neuer so perfect as the essence of a thing 45. Againe it crosseth another of their doctrines thus They teach that though the law of God bee possible to bee kept by the regenerate the works of the faithfull be simply and absolutely iust yet they are mixed with many veniall sinnes and therefore there is none so iust but that sinneth sometimes and hath neede to vse that petition in the Lords Prayer daily Forgiue vs our trespasses According to that generall axiome of Sain Iames In many things wee sinne all Yea Bellarmine himselfe affirmeth that the regenerate may fall into many deadly sinnes and that hee cannot possibly auoyd veniall sinnes Nisi priuilegio singulari But by a singular priuiledge Which priuiledge hee cannot instance to haue beene granted to any man liuing or dead except Christ only who was God man Obserue now the contradiction to omit that this necessitie of sinning doth ouerthrow the possibility of fulfilling the law and doth imply an impossibilitie how can these two extremes be reconciled The regenerate cannot performe all they should do yet do performe more then they should do They cannot auoyd veniall sins and yet can supererogate It is as much as to say that a man is not able to pay his owne debts but must aske pardon for them yet hath ability to pay another mans far greater then his owne Or an Archer cannot by any means shoot home to the marke yet with the same Bow Arrowes sent forth by the same strength of his arme he can shoote farre beyond the marke He that is tainted and stained with many veniall sinnes in that respect is not perfect but hee that doeth supererogate is more then perfect For so they say when they giue a higher degree of perfection to these works then to the perfect obedience of the law If they say that veniall sinnes doe not hinder the perfection of good works I answere that neuerthelesse they hinder the perfection of the worker if they stick fast to the worke it selfe they hinder that also as the least spot of inke blemisheth the whole face and the lightest disease disableth the health of the whole body Eyther therefore they must deny them to be sinnes and so spots defects in the soules of the regenerate or they must confesse that they are not so perfect as they should be And how then can they be more perfect then they should be 46. Further they teach that one degree of superero gating perfection is the vow of Monasticall pouerty renouncing all propriety in worldly goods and holding in Common the vse of temporall things and yet they say that the state of Bishops who possesse lands and goods and enioy the propriety of them is more perfect then the state of Monks who depriue themselues thereof because Bishops haue alreadie atchiued this perfection and Monks are but in the way to it From which ground a man may thus argue If perfection consist in voluntary pouerty which is an alienation of all proprietie of worldly goods then Bshiops possessing Lordships and reuenues are not more perfect then Monks that haue renounced all and if Bishops possessing be more perfect then Monks not possessing then perfection consisteth not in the alienation of all proprietie of worldly goods One or the other must needes bee false except hee will place perfection in two contraries to wit possessing and not possessing And the rather may this absurditie appeare because aske them why Monks are more perfect then other men they will answere because they remooue from them all impediments of their loue to God in which ranke they place worldly wealth and consecrate themselues wholly to Gods seruice By which reason Bishops cannot bee more perfect then either they or other men because they retayne those impediments and so by their doctrine doe not wholly consecrate themselues to Gods seruice 47. From their actions let vs come to their passions to wit their Satisfactions or as Melanchton calleth them Satispassions
That all the power of Emperours and Kings is subdeligate in respect of the power of the Pope And againe that all secular power is to be restrayned enlarged and executed at the commaundement of the Pope This is the assertion of that man who was authorised first to write by Pope Iohn the two and twentieth and after his Booke was set foorth by the priuiledge of Gregory the thirteenth So that here we haue two Popes maintayning this doctrine Clement the first was of the same minde who affirmeth that hee and the rest of the Popes had a soueraignity and superiority ouer the Empire and vpon that ground he dissanulled all the Sentences and Processes made by Henry the seuenth Emperour And so also was Boniface the eighth who in that famous Canon Vnam sanctam c. directly affirmeth that the Temporall authority must be subiect to the Spirituall and that it is necessary to saluation to beleeue that euery humane creature is subiect to the Pope of Rome Now the rest of the Popes must needes be of the same minde or else they should condemne these of error and that speaking definitiuely which is contrary to their Religion And so indeede that they are Bellarmine their Champion in his late Booke against Barclay the Lawyer doth manifestly declare who most impudently maintayneth this position with all his wit against that learned man as also in his last doting Apologie against our King wherein without doubt he is authorised and as it were tapped on the backe and called A good childe by the Popes Holinesse himselfe 72. Thus we see this doctrine maintayned by the Popes and their Lawes Let vs see also what the Cardinalls and the Iesuites say vnto it Cardinall Baronius a notable clawer of the Popes holdeth that the Pope hath power directly ouer Princes agreeing with Bozius and Triumphus but Cardinall Bellarmine with others on his side quallifieth the matter and saith that the Popes power ouer Princes in temporall matters is not direct but indirect as depending vpon his spirituall power and in order relation vnto that Let vs leaue these two Cardinalls fighting about direct indirect and come to the other Iesuites Gregory de Valentia saith that the Pope is subiect to none but that by a certaine hereditary right he is exempted from all humane jurisdiction Tollet affirmeth that there may bee in the Church many holier and learneder then the Pope but none superior or equall vnto him in dignitie Turrian the Iesuite saith that Christ hath translated all his Kingdome on earth vpon the Pope who beareth his person and carryeth his Image And lastly all of them like lines in a circle meeting in a Center ioyne in this that the Pope hath power to depose Kings to translate Kingdomes and to conferre them vpon others if it seeme to him necessary for the good of mens soules 73. Thus we haue their doctrine concerning their Head the Pope Now let vs heare what they say touching the body that hangs vpon his head their Clergie Kings are not now any more Soueraignes ouer Clerks faith Bellarmine and therefore Clerks are not bound to obey them by Gods law or mans except it be in respect of directiue lawes And Emanuel Sa. affirmeth that a Clergie man cannot be a Traytor though hee rebell because he is no subiect And it was long agoe the doctrine of the Fryers continued by the Iesuites that the King was not Lord ouer the Clergie but that the Pope was their Lord and therefore though a Clergie man had committed theft murther or treason yet hee ought not to bee called in question much lesse punished for it by a temporall Magistrate but ought to be iudged by Ecclesiasticall Iudges in the Ecclesiasticall Court and if hee were conuict hee should lose his Orders and so being excluded from Office Benefice Ecclefiasticall if after this he incurred the like fault then might he be iudged at the pleasure of the King yea they goe so farre that if any offence were committed by diuers persons amongst whom there were one Clergie man none of the offenders were subiect to temporall iurisdiction And thus we see that neyther the Pope nor his Clergie will bee subiect to these higher Powers to which the Gospell commaundeth all men to submit themselues 74. How will they distinguish here Mary they haue two distinctions to helpe this doctrine out of the myre and yet all too weake First they say that when the Apostles Paul and Peter commanded euery soule to bee subiect c. they meane generally that all subiects should obey their superiors whether Spirituall or Temporall and not that euery one should particularly bee subiect to the King or secular power which interpretation is first flat contrary to the text for both Paul and Peter mention expressely Kings and Princes and such as haue the right of the sword which they would neuer haue done if Kings should haue beene subiect to Popes and not Popes to Kings for then they would haue instanced in Popes and not in Kings and though Christians were falsely accused of treason and rebellion to Princes yet this could not be a sufficient reason to mooue the Apostles to conceale so necessary a truth especially seeing they write to Christians and not to Infidels 75. Secondly it is contrary to reason for if Peter and so the Pope his pretended successor had beene in their iudgement superiors to Kings then surely Peter himselfe writing not onely to the people but also to the Elders of the Church as appeareth 1. Pet. 5. 1. would neuer haue enioyned them all to the obedience of the Ciuill Magistrate but would haue reserued some to his owne iurisdiction and bidden them all both Magistrate and people to submit themselues vnto him as the head of the Church or if he for modestie might forbeare this imperiall iniunction yet without question Paul had he beene of that minde would not haue sent euery soule to bee subiect to Kings but would haue told them that Kings and all should be subiect to Peter but seeing that neither of them both doth it neither here nor elsewhere and it is as they thinke so necessary a thing to be beleeued of all men it is most euident that they neuer meant it 76. Thirdly and lastly whereas the Apostle Paul commaundeth euery soule to be subiect wee may conclude that if the Pope be a soule or haue a soule for some of them haue thought that a man had no more a soule then a beast then he must be subiect And this conclusion a learned man that was afterward a Pope himselfe made when he plainly confessed that the Apostle did not except animam Papae the Popes soule from this subiection I omit heere S. Chrysostomes and Oecumenius exposition of the same place both which affirme that by euery soule the Apostle included both Priests Monks and Apostles and that this subiection was not contrary vnto piety And
the Elders of Ephesus I haue deliuered vnto you the whole counsaile of God Now if hee deliuered to them the whole counsaile of God then no part of his counsaile that concerned the mysterie of Christian Religion was vndeliuered Besides it is as certaine that that Church which next succeeded the Apostles was the most pure and absolute Church whether for doctrine or manners matter or forme that euer was in the world and therefore to degenerate from that must needes be to degenerate from the puritie and sanctity of Religion And againe it cannot bee denyed that though some heresies were broached euen in the Apostles times and were coetaneae Apostolorum as Tertullian noteth and though the primitiue age of the Church after the Apostles was most pestered with Heretikes yet euermore the truth preuailed both in regard of birthright and predominance And therefore they that will plead antiquitie must both prescribe from the Apostles time and must haue a good title also to hold by for these two things are necessarily required to a iust prescription as the Lawyers speake Bonus titulus A good title and Legittimum tempus A lawfull time A good title is that which is warranted by the diuine Law and a lawfull time is that which is fetcht from Christ Iesus and his Apostles both these concurring together are an inuincible argument of the truth The first proposition therefore must needes be infallibly true 3. And so I leaue it and come to the second proposition the truth whereof shall bee manifested in two poynts first in respect of the outward face and fashion of their Church and secondly in respect of the principall doctrines which are proper vnto them as they are the Romish Synagogue 3. For the first The outward face of the Church deuideth it selfe into three branches first into the persons that exercise preeminence and authoritie in it and secondly into the iurisdiction and authoritie exercised by those persons and thirdly into the outward ceremonies thereof In all these the Church of Rome is degenerate from the Primitiue and Apostolicall puritie 4. The principall persons of the Romish Hierarchie are these The Pope first as the ring-leader next the Cardinals his Counsellors of state then Archbishops and Bishops his assistants and lastly the shaueling Priests his vassals to which body may be added as excrements an infinite rabble of religious Orders as Monks Fryers and Heâ—mits with such like and of Fryers the Dominicanes the Franciscanes the Austinians the Ambrosians the Minorites the Gilbertines the Crossebearers the Cisterensians the Blacke the White the Gray the Bare-footed the Begging with a number more and to conclude the Iesuites which as they are the taile of all the rest for the time so they are the head of all the rest for vill nous conspiracies bloudy plots diuelâ—ish deuices and hellish practices Now of all thesâ— Bishops onely excepted wee finde not so much as any mention neither in the writing of the Apostles nor in the age next succeeding after them for though the name Pope Papa being a word of the Syracusan Language and signifying as much as Pater Father be of great antiquitie yet as a Iesuite of their owne confesseth with others it was a common name to all Bishops as appeareth both in Cyprian and Ruffinus till Gregory the seuenth in an assembly held at Rome decreed that onely the Bishops of Rome should bee called Popes But as touching Cardinals the matter is more grosse for the first birth and originall of that name can be deriued no higher then eyther from Gregory the firsts time or Pope Siluester or Marcellus or Pontianus by their owne confession and therefore some of them ingenuously acknowledge that the Order of Cardinals is not ex iure diuino by Gods ordinance though others no lesse foolishly then impudently would fixe their foundation vpon these words of the Scripture Domini sunt Cardines terrae The hinges or the pillars of the earth are the Lords Therefore Cardinals are of God which is as good a consequent as his that would prooue that Heretikes ought to be put to death by Scripture because Saint Paul said Haereticum hominem deuita c. as hath beene shewed before As for the name of Bishops wee deny not but it is found in Scripture and so Archbishop may also be warranted by the same authositie as signifying nothing else but a chiefe Bishop but how farre the Romish Archbishops and Bishops are degenerate from their office described by the Scripture all the world can witnesse for the Scripture Bishops were diligent Preachers these are idle Prelates they were persecuted these are persecutors they were humble persons these are proud Princes they were holy men seeking onely the aduancement of the Kingdome of Christ these are profane worldlings seeking their owne gaine and pompe and carnall honours all this is confessed of them and lamented by Espensaeus one of the same ranke who thus writeth It was no lesse a wonder in olde times saith he to be called a Bishop and not to preach then he is now as rare as a monster who is seen to performe that dutie and againe I know saith he some learned Bishops who standing vpon their Gentilitie forsooth and greatnesse hold it a matter of seruitude and basenesse to be exercised in preaching because their predecessors were not accustomed thereunto 5. As touching Priests in the new Testament phrase all Christians are called Priests and they whose office it is to dispose the mysteries of the Gospell Ministers and Elders and Pastors but now none may haue that name but their anoynted Shauelings who as they say create their Creator by fiue coniuring words and offer him vp vpon the altar as a Sacrifice propitiatorie for the quicke and the dead For albeit the word Priest is deriued from presbyter which signifieth an Elder and in that sense might well be giuen to the Ministers of the new Testament yet because it is in common vse of speech taken for one appointed to sacrifice which in Latine is Sacerdos and in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And because the Ministers of the Gospell are not once named by these termes in the new Testament therefore they that in this signification terme the Ministers of the Gospell by the name of Priests degenerate from the true meaning of the Scripture but what should I speake of the name seeing the office of these Shauelings is so contrarie to that function which was practised by the Apostles and Disciples of Iesus Christ for the Apostles are neuer said to sacrifice Christ on the Altar as these Shauelings are pretended to doe Their office was to minister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not to sacrifice they receiued of the Lord and gaue vnto the people but these create a Sacrifice of themselues and then offer it vp to the Lord. Here then is a plaine declining of the Romish Priests from the true Ministers of the Primitiue Church both in name and office
weeping eyes acknowledged with what vniust and slanderous reproches he had loaden Caluine and that all which hee had written of him to his disgrace was false and vntrue now what Bolseck did against Caluine wee haue iust cause to thinke to hane beene the practice of the others against the rest of the fore-named godly men and all other of our profession knowing that old Prouerbe to bee true that though the wound of a mans good name be healed yet a scarre will euer remaine Let this suffice touching their personall slaunders though much more might bee added for their malice in this kinde is of an vnlimitable extent 44. Secondly they calumniate our gouernment and that which two notable false accusations first of vniustice both in the substance of the Lawes enacted against them and secondly of cruelty in the execution of the same Lawes but it is an easie matter to discouer their slanders and to iustifie our state from both these imputations for touching our Lawes first of all they are of that nature that except they will condemne all the statute Lawes that euer were made either in this or any other common wealth they cannot condemne them of iniustice they were not made in a corner or deuised by the braine of any Licurgus Solon or Numa Pompilius pretending the conference and counsell of some diuine power to gaine authority vnto them but by the whole state of the kingdome assembled in Parliament the Lords spirituall and temporall with the Commons a select company gathered out of the wisest sagest and discretest persons of the whole land and that which is the happinesse of this kingdome aboue others not rashly or suddenly but after mature and graue deliberation neither by the Prince alone without his subiects nor the subiects alone without their Prince but by both consenting subscribing ratifying and approouing the same Now doe they imagine any man to bee so simple as vpon their bare word to condemne Lawes thus made as vniust and not rather to condemne them as vniust slanderers and impudent sycophants that thus rage against a whole state vpon a priuat malitious spirit especially seeing no Law bee it neuer so iust doth please the humour of malefactors that would gladly liue without Law that their wickednesse might goe vnpunished for the Law Iulia could not please adulterers nor the Law Cornelia murtherers nor the Law Reminia promooters and yet these Lawes were neuer the worse for that such malefactors disliked them but they rather the more desperate for accusing the Lawes of iniustice as if a theefe condemned of a robbery should cry out that the Law was vniust by which hee was condemned so these fellowes being guilty of treason against the Prince and state haue no wayes to cloake themselues but with this out-cry the Lawes are vniust whereas they should rather keepe themselues innocent and then the Lawes would neuer take no hold of them 45. Secondly if it bee true which Thomas Aquinas sayth that then Lawes are said to bee iust first when they are made for the common good secondly when they exceed not his power that maketh them and thirdly when they haue their due forme to wit when the burthens are imposed on the subiect with a certaine equality of proportion in order to the common good then our Lawes are iust and good Lawes for they are made by full authority in Parliament they tend to the conseruation of the Kings Maiesty and whole Common-wealth in tranquillity and peace and their penalties are so proportioned that by the gentle punishment of some few the whole state is preserued 46. Thirdly they themselues were occasioners at least if not causers of those Lawes that were made against them for the Bull of Pius Quintus which came roaring into this land in the tenth yeere of Queene Elizabeth whereby the Queene was accursed and deposed and her subiects discharged of their obedience and oath was the root of all this mischiefe for it caused the first Lnw made anno 13. Elizabeth and not onely gaue occasion to it but bred recusancy in ordinary Romanists which vsed to come to Church before time and sedition and rebellion in the Priests and Iesuites and some eminent persons yea and manifold bloudy practices by treason against her Maiesties sacred person and the state These perilous effects procured other Lawes to be deuised more seuere and strict then the former against recusants seditions books Iesuites and Priests that beeing borne Englishmen should goe beyond sea and take vpon them the Romish Priesthood and so returne into these dominions to infect her loyal subiects with the poyson of their doctrine and what were the causes I pray you since his Maiesties comming to the Crowne of the reuiuing those former statutes and enlarging them in some points and of the new oath of Allegiance which hath stirred vp so many pens to write both for it and against it were not the treasonable practices of many Romish male contented persons sure it was high time to countermyne against them by some Christian politike Lawes when their malice was growen to that hight that they cared not what mischiefe they wrought so that they might worke their willes by all which it is euident that they may thanke themselues for those Lawes and not our state which were drawen vnto the making therof with vnwilling minds and more vnwillingly to their execution So that as according to the old saying Good Lawes spring out of euill manners so from the fountaine of these fearefull treasons horrible rebellions and bloudy practices sprung all these Lawes which they so calumniate 47. Fourthly the Lawes thus occasioned by their owne villany doe not run vpon them with violence but they desperatly runne vpon the point of the Lawes for if they keepe themselues at home in quiet they might enioy the liberty of their Conscience without any danger from the Lawes saue only a gentle mulct imposed vpon them for refusing to communicate with vs in the seruice of our Church and if like fugitiue children they should flee from their own naturall mother vnto a step-dame in forraine Countreyes and there receiue vpon them not onely the Character of Romish Priesthood but also into them the poyson of treason they might stay there still without any coaction from the Lawes for they were directed onely against such as beeing priested returned into their countrey to practise treason and to withdraw the peoples hearts from their obedience and reconcile them to the Church of Rome So that the Law is but like a naked sword held foorth by the hand of the state for it own defence which these desperate Priests run voluntarily vpon and kill themselues and therefore they themselues are guilty of selfe-murder and not the Law of iniustice 48. Fiftly and lastly this matter may be yet more euident all men know that there was neuer any Law hitherto enacted in this kingdome to put to death any Romanist for his Religion except hee either passed ouer the
Goodman yea and Munster also with his Anabaptists all which let vs briefly examine and begin with the last and so goe backward 83. Munster with his Anabaptists maintained indeed such rebellious doctrines but were they Protestants or did euer any Protestant giue credit coūtenance or allowāce vnto thē No Bellarmine himselfe confesseth the contrary when hee sayth that the opinion of the hereticall Anabaptists was abhorred not onely of Catholikes but also of Caluine Yea Caluine and Luther wrote each of them a booke against their impieties It is impious wickednesse then for any to obiect to Protestants the opinion of those rebellious and giddy Anabaptists 84. Touchng Goodman Knox and Buchanan we ingeniously confesse that the two last went too farre in diminishing the authority of Princes and that the first was impious in animating subiects against their Soueraignes but withall wee giue them to know this that they are condemned of all good men in this their rebellious assertion and that by a publike Act of Parliament in Scotland Buchanans books was called in and censured as contrary to sound doctrine and the like censure is giuen by all godly Protestants against Knox or any other that maintaine the like 85. And now I would faine vnderstand of these fellowes what are these three in comparison of the whole Church of Protestants that they should blemish our Religion by their exorbitant opinions and to the many hundred of Protestant writers that abhorre all such doctrine and clearely auouch the contrary If it be a good plea in them to say that the opinion of some priuate men ought not to preiudice the Religion of the whole Church then it may also by good right serue our turnes in the case of these three seeing the rule of equity requireth vt feras legem quam fers that euery one should bee subiect to that Law which hee himselfe maketh In sum here are with vs but three that can be touched but with them are multitudes not onely of inferiour Priests and Iesuites but of Cardinals and Popes that are guilty of this crime ours are priuate men condemned by all others with them publike persons authorized by their places and chayres and priuiledged from errour with vs writings of no authoritie with them Bulles decrees and bookes with priuiledge and publike allowance Lastly with vs the whole streame of our Religion tendeth to the maintenance of obedience and condemning of all treason and rebellion but with them the very grounds of their Religion doe warrant and vphold the contrary as is manifestly prooued heretofore 86. Concerning Luther Caluine and Beza how farre they were from this pernicious doctrine let their owne words and writings testify Luther first Gouernment sayth he is a certaine diuine vertue and therefore God calleth all Magistrates gods not for creation but for administration and gouernment which belongeth onely to God therefore he that is a ruler is as it were a god incarnate Againe in another place We doe not flatter the Magistrates when we stile them most gracious and most mighty but from the heart we reuerence their order and their persons ordained to this office And in another place Though some thinke sayth he the gouernment of man ouer man to bee a tyrannous vsurpation because all men are naturally of like condition yet we that haue the word of God must oppose the commandement and ordinance of God who hath put a sword into the hand of the Magistrate whom therefore the Apostle calleth Gods Ministers 87. Caluine in diuers places deliuereth this doctrine that not onely good and godly Kings are to be obeyed but also wicked ones because in them is stamped and ingrauen the image of diuine Maiestie neyther can any one sentence be picked and culled out of all his bookes yea though it be strayned to the vttermost and wrung till it bleed that but sauoureth of rebellion except that may perhaps which hee speaketh concerning an impious King that riseth vp against God and seeketh to rob him of his right how such a one doth bereaue himselfe of his authoritie and is rather to be spit at then obeyed But this also being rightly vnderstood maketh nothing to that purpose for first he doth not say that such an one is to be bereaued of his authoritie but that he bereaueth himselfe and secondly he meaneth that hee is rather to bee spit at and defiled then to be obeyed in that particular wherein he commandeth any thing contrary to the dignitie and maiestie of God What hurt now I pray you is in this doctrine Or rather what sound truth is not in it saue that there is a little harshnesse of phrase which might haue beene well omitted and yet this is all that the Romish aduersaries can charge Caluine withall 88. Lastly for Beza if I should produce all his excellent sayings whereby he doth maintaine the authority of Princes and obedience of subiects I should trouble the Reader too long let this suffice that his greatest enemies cannot obiect against him any one thing tending to the impeachment of Royall authoritie except they grossely bely him which is no new thing with them lyes and slanders being one of the chiefe props of their Kingdome Thus our doctrine affordeth them no hold for this accusation 89. Againe they challenge Caluine for imputing vnto our Lord and Sauiour some staine of sinne not by expresse words but by consequence because he said that when in the garden he prayed Father if it be possible let this cuppe passe from me neuerthelesse not as I will but as thou wilt hee corrected and revoked his prayer suddenly vttered therefore say they he must be tainted with sinne seeing he did something that might be corrected the like crime they lay to the charge of Luther and all other learned Protestants for saying that in Christs humane nature there was some ignorance residing and that he grew vp and increased in knowledge and had not the full measure of knowledge at his birth as they would haue it We grant the premises to be true to wit that this is the doctrine of Caluine Luther and other learned Protestants but neuerthelesse we say that the conclusion is a malicious slander for first many of the fathers yea most were of the same opinion with vs as also some of the popish Doctors themselues that there was ignorance in Christ and that his knowledge grew and increased together with his age according to that of Saint Luke Hee increased in wisedome and stature and in fauour with God and men And yet none of them did once imagine that this was in him either a sinne or a fruit of sinne grounding vpon that text of Scripture Heb. 4. 15. that Christ was like vnto vs in all things sinne onely excepted nor euer was that errour imputed vnto them for that cause Heare some of them speake in their owne words Ambrose sayth thus How Christ increased in wisdome the order of the words doth
they done it to gaine any thing thereby in disputation but onely to keepe the common people from infection whereas they spare none neither Fathers nor Councels nor moderne Writers and that not so much lest the common sort should bee infected as that the learned might be depriued of those weapons wherewith they might fight against them and wound their cause Seeing the case now so stands that hee which can muster vp together the greatest armie of Authours to fight vnder his colours is thought to haue the best cause their dealing then with vs is like that of the Philistims against the Israelites who despoyled them of all weapons and instruments of warre that they might dominiere ouer them with greater securitie but ours is not so towards them And therefore both in this and all the former respects it is a miserable vntruth and a desperate cuasion to say that wee are more guiltie of this crime then they are 107. Lastly whereas in his first answere hee pleadeth the lawfulnesse of the fact let vs heare his reasons to moue thereunto and in the interim remember that in prouing it to bee lawfull hee confesseth it to bee done But why is it lawfull Mary first because the Church being supreme Iudge on earth of all Controuersies touching faith and Religion hath authoritie to condemne Heretikes And therefore also the workes of Heretikes and if this then much more to correct and purge their Bookes if by that meanes shee can make them profitable for her vse and beneficiall to her children To which I answere two things First that it is not the Church that doth this but the sacred Inquisitors to wit certaine Cardinals and Lawyers deputed to that office who for the most part are so farre from being the Church that they are often no sound members thereof Iâ— it be said that they haue their authoritie from the Pope who is vertually the whole Church why doe they then speake so darkly and say the Church hath this authoritie when as they might in plaine termes say that the Pope hath it but that hereby they should display the feeblenesse of their cause and the fillinesse of this reason for thus it would stand Why is it lawful for Books to be purged because the Pope thinkes it lawful And must not he needs think so when the Authors crosse his triple crowne and speake against his state and dignitie Adde hereunto that it is a fallacie in reasoning when that is taken for granted which is in question For we deny their Synagogue to be the true Church and much more the Pope to bee the supreme Iudge and therefore till those things be proued the reason is of no effect 108. Secondly most of those things which are purged by them are so farre from being heresies or errours that they are the most of them sound doctrines of faith grounded vpon the authoritie of Gods sacred truth for they blot out many things in both olde and new Authours that they themselues dare not accuse to bee hereticall as that place in Saint Cyril before mentioned touching the power of faith which is no more in direct termes then that which is said in the Scripture Act. 15. 15. that faith purifieth the heart and that in the Basil Index of Chrysostome The Church is not built vpon a man but vpon faith and those propositions which are commanded by the Dutch Index to be wiped out of the Table of Robert Stephens Bible to wit that sinnes are remitted by beleeuing in Christ that he which beleeueth in Christ shall not die for euer that faith purifieth the heart that Christ is our righteousnes that no man is iust before God and that repentance is the gift of God with a number of like nature These they purge out of Stephens Index which notwithstanding are directly and in as many words recorded in the Booke of God and so it may iustly be thought that they are so farre from clenfing Bookes from the drosse and dregs of errour that they rather purge out the pure gold and cleare wine of truth and leaue nothing but dregs and drosse behind 109. His second reason is because nothing is more dangerous to infect true Christian hearts then bad Bookes Therefore it is not onely lawfull but needfull and behoouefull to the Church of God that such Bookes should bee purged and burned too if it bee so thought meete by the Church to the end that the sinceritie of one true faith and Religion might be preserued I answere all this is true which he saith but are they heresies which they purge no they are sound and orthodox opinions for the most part as hath beene proued in the answere to the former reason And doe they it to keepe Christian men from infection no their chiefe end and drift is to depriue their aduersaries of all authorities that make against them that so they might triumph in the antiquitie of their Religion and noueltie of ours which is one of their principall arguments which they vse though with euill successe for defence of their cause dealing herein as Holofernes did with the Israelites at the siege of Bethulia breaking the Conduits cutting the pipes and slopping the passages which might bring vs prouision of good and wholsome waters out of the cisternes of olde and new Writers this is their purpose and no other whatsoeuer they pretend for if they meant any good to Gods people for preuenting of infection they would haue purged their lying Legends of infinite fables their Canon Law of horrible blasphemies and their Schoolemen of many strange opinions Yea they would haue condemned the Bookes of Machiauel and of that Cardinall that wrote in commendation of the vnnaturall sinne of Sodomie and a number such like filthy and deuillish Writings which are printed and reprinted among them without controulement And againe is it vnitie in the true faith and religion that they seeke no it is conspiracie in falshood and consent in errour and not vnitie in the truth till the Romish Religion bee proued to bee the true Religion which can neuer be this reason is of no force to iustifie their proceedings Lastly is it Christian policy no it is deuilish subtletie and craftie forgerie for the case so stands betwixt them and vs as in a tryall of land betwixt partie and partie wherein hee that bringeth best euidence and witnesse carrieth the cause now if one partie either suborne false witnesses or corrupt true or forge euidences to his purpose or falsifie those that are extant all men will count him as a forger and his cause desperate and iudge him worthie the Pillorie so betwixt vs the question is who hath the right faith and the best title to the Church Our euidences are first and principally Gods Word then the writings and records of godly men in all ages now then they that shall purge pare raze blurr falsify or corrupt any of these must needs bee thought to bee subtle and craftie companions and not honest