brethren but the Cardinals Patriarkes and Archbishops Emperours and Kings are his children and not his brethren behold his pride neither did the rest of the Apostles challenge to themselues any such titles of dignity For they had learned of Christ their Lord and master not to Lord it ouer others but to humble themselues that they might bee exalted And let them name but one Bishop of the Primitiue Church that tooke vpon him any of these glorious titles yea of the Bishops of Rome themselues 11. Wee deny not but that some of the ancients haue yeelded vnto the Bishops of Rome great and honorable titles but first this was in respect of their vertue learning and integrity and not in respect of any preeminence of iurisdiction Secondly wee find none of these titles which I speake of attributed vnto them but onely the Apostles successours and Apostolicall Bishops not heads of the Church vniuersall Bishops high Priests of the world c. which the later Popes haue vsurped And thirdly if at any time they were yet the same titles of honour which were ascribed vnto them wee finde giuen to other Bishops aswell as to the Bishop of Rome as to Saint Ambrose by Saint Basill and to one Lupus a Bishop in France by Sidonius Apollinaris And to Fontellus another Bishop in France by the same man To Basill by Nazianzene To Athanasius who is saluted by the name of high Bishop and chiefe Priest And to Cyprian who was honoured with this stile The Bishop of the whole world Neither can it bee denyed but these titles grew by little and little to be attributed to the Bishops of Rome after the first three hundreth yeers of the Church though they came not to perfection till the perfect reuelatioÌ„ of Antichrist in the Apostolical sea but this can neuer bee proued that either in the Apostles times or in two hundreth yeeres next succeeding after euer any Bishop arrogated to himselfe or any other ascribed vnto him any of these arrogant titles 12. A sufficient argument whereof is this that Bellarmine propounding this as his last reason to proue the principality of the Pope draweth it from the great and famous titles which are attributed vnto him and spending a whole Chapter in that purpose alledgeth not one testimony older then Damasus the Bishop of Rome who was elected to that sea in the yeere 369. Surely if he could haue found out more ancient proofes he would haue after his manner stuffed the Chapter with them but in that hee produceth none it is euident that hee knew none indeed that there were none to be known Nay Gregory the great one of their owne Popes that liued sixe hundreth yeeres after Christ not onely execrated the name of vniuersall Bishop which Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople vsurped calling it a name of blasphemy and a proud and superstitious title and him that vsurped it a fore-runner of Antichrist but also plainely auoucheth that none of his predecessors vsed that prophane denomination by which the proud times of Antichrist were marked out Also Platina Nauclerus Cuspinian with many other Historiographers affirme that Boniface the third and Gregory the second obtained of the Emperour Phocas by great labour the name of Head of the Church A strange and tyrannical title neuer publikely vsurped before that time in the Church of God but now new created by Phocas who hauing killed his Lord Mauritius and his children exercised a tyranny in the kingdome of the world and begate this tyrannicall appellation in the kingdome of the Church But of all other records of antiquity most pregnant is the Canon of the Africane Council to condemne the nouelty of these ambitious nominations of which thus writeth our Roffensis These are the words of the Councill Let not any no not the Romane be called an vniuersall Bishop For that age sayth he which was neere to the Apostolicall times studied modesty and humility such a glorious title pleased not that Councill 13. Wherefore concerning these great titles of honour wee may conclude with our Sauiour Christ that It was not so from the beginning They are new and vpstart in respect of true antiquity ensignes of that pride and arrogancy which reigned in the Prelates of the Church in those latter times and badges of Antichrists kingdome where at Peter and Paul would blush for shame if they were aliue as it was merrily spoken by the Duke of Vrbanes Painter when he had drawne their Pictures of a ruddy and high colour 14. But leauing their titles let vs take a short suruey of their practice And first let it bee showne that Peter or Paul or any the rest of the Apostles or any Bishop of Rome or of any other place did euer take vpon them to depose Kings and dispose of their kingdomes and to translate them from one to another and to absolue subiects from their oath of alleageance and children from the bond of obedience to their parents to dispense with the Law of God to haue sole power of decision of controuersies to challenge the right of appeales from all countreyes of Christendome And lastly to exercise not onely spirituall but also temporall coactiue iurisdiction But all this power hath beene in former times and is at this day practised by the Bishop of Rome and that with that rigour and vehemency that it is a wonder that they doe not blush so much to degenerat from those whose successors they claime to be But no maruaile for els he should not shew himselfe to bee that Antichrist except hee did aduance himselfe aboue all that is called God on earth For this is a special marke of that man of sinne 15. But let History the light of time make cleare this point Pope Hadrian the fourth reprooued Frederick Barbarosse the Emperour of insolency and arrogancy in an Epistle written vnto him for setting his owne name before his and checked him also very bitterly for holding his stirrup on the wrong side and when hee came vnto him in the Church of Saint Marke in Venice to bee absolued from his excommunication commanded him to prostrate himselfe vpon the ground and then set his foote on his necke with these words Super aspidem c. Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and Cocatrice and shalt tread vpon the Lyon and Dragon Did Peter euer doe the like Gregory the seuenth caused Henry the â—ourth comming in all humility to submit himselfe vnto him with his wife and childe to dance attendance at his gate bare-footed and bare-headed for the space of three dayes ere hee would grant them any accesse vnto him Did Peter euer doe the like Celestine the third being about to crown Henry the sixt Emperour set the imperiall Diademe on his head as some say with his foote and kicked it off with his foote againe Did Peter euer doe the likeâ— Innocent the second caused his owne Picture with the Emperours to bee set vp in the Palace of
Prophet Esay saying Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a sure foundation which is a playne and manifest Prophecie of Christ and not of Peter as the Apostle Peter himselfe expoundeth it where by the way we may note the feareful outrage of these Romish Rabbies against the truth of God and the God of truth whilst to the end they may aduance their Popes dignity by Peter they wrest and peruert the Scriptures and apply the Prophecies belonging to the Sonne of God to his seruant Peter and so make Peter himselfe nay the holy Ghost a Lyar. It were not credible that such blasphemous thoughts and words should nestle in the heart and issue out of the mouth of any but that the Apostle Saint Paul hath fore-told vs that in the time of Antichrist because men would not receiue the loue of the truth that they might be saued therefore God would send them strong delusions that they should beleeue lyes c. But to the point If Christs person be the onely true foundation of the Church in whom all the building being coupled together groweth vnto an holy Temple in the Lord and that not the persons but the doctrine and faith of the Apostles are those secundary foundations which the Scripture speaketh of as hath beene proued out of the Fathers then the opposition is vndefeasible namely that there is but one person the foundation of our Church which is our Lord and Sauiour the Sonne of God Christ Iesus and yet that Peters person should be the foundation of the Church also together with Christ 45. Thirdly I answere that both in truth and also in proprietie of speech there can bee but one foundation of one building those stones that are layd next to the foundation are not properly a secundary foundation but the beginning of the building vpon the foundation and for that cause when Peter and the rest of the Apostles are called twelue foundations it cannot bee vnderstood that they were any wayes properly foundations of the Church either first or second but that our Sauiour who is the substance and subiect of their doctrine is the onely true and singular foundation of the Church and that there is none other besides him for if when it is said that we are built vpō the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles as must needes bee because the Prophets are coupled together with the Apostles which liued not in the Christian Church and therefore could not be personall foundations of it and Christ crucified is the substance of their doctrine then it must needes follow that the Apostles meaning is nothing else but that we are built vpon Christ whom the Prophets and the Apostles preached and beleeued in And thus S. Hilary vnderstood it and Saint Ambrose and Anselmus who giuing the foundation of the Church to Peter expoundeth it sometimes of his faith in Christ and sometimes of Christ himselfe in whom he beleeued And thus doe also Salmeron the Iesuite and Cardinall Caietane in their commentaries vpon that place and Peter Lumbard together with the glosse vpon the place interpret And so this distinction of a primary and secundary foundation hath no foundation in the word of God 46. The Gospell teacheth that no Apostle or Bishop or other Minister of the Gospell is superiour to another of the same ranke or hath greater power and authority then another in respect of their ministerie but that all Ministers in their seuerall degrees haue equall power of preaching the Gospell administring the Sacraments binding and loosing But the Bishop of Rome challengeth to himselfe a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and ouer the whole Church and braggeth that he hath by right a title to both the swords both spirituall and temporall and that both iurisdictions doe originally pertaine to him and from him are conueyed to others c. 47. Bellarmine heere first confesseth and secondly distinguisheth hee confesseth that the Bishop of Rome hath a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and the whole Church and denyeth that eyther those places here quoted or any other doe prooue the contrary 48. To which I answere first that whereas out of Luke 22. 26. and 1. Cor. 3. 4. he extracteth a disparity and an inequality I answere that no man denyeth it and therefore he fighteth with his owne shadow hee should prooue not a bare superiority which wee confesse but a superiority in the same degree as of one Bishop to another and that in power not in execution wherein standeth the point of opposition 49. Secondly whereas he saith that though the power of remitting and retayning finnes and binding and loosing was communicated to all the Apostles yet Peter was ordayned chiefe Pastor ouer them all because our Sauiour Christ sayd vnto him alone Feede my sheepe and To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen I answere that in this hee crosseth both himselfe the Fathers and the truth himselfe for elsewhere hee confesseth that the keyes both of Order and Iurisdiction were giuen to all the Apostles indifferently and therefore it must needes follow that Tibi dabo claues was not spoken singularly to Peter but generally to them all for if Christ gaue the keyes to them all as he confesseth then without doubt he promised them to them all or else his word and his deede should not accord together And againe hee acknowledgeth that all the Apostles had both power and commission to feede the sheepe of Christ when Mat. 28. he bade them all Goe teach and baptize and they all did put that commission in execution therefore it must needes follow that no singular power was giuen to Peter when as Christ said vnto him Feede my sheepe vnlesse we will say that the rest had not the same commission 50. The Fathers for Saint Cyprian saith plainely that all the Apostles were the same with Peter indued with equall fellowship both of honour and power and that a primary was giuen vnto Peter that the Church might appeare to be one Saint Hilary is of the same minde You O holy and blessed men saith he for the merit of your faith haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and obtained a right to binde and loose in Heauen and earth Saint Augustine saith that if when Christ said To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen he spake onely to Peter then the Church hath not the power of the keyes but if the Church hath it then Peter receiuing the keyes represented the Church And lastly Leo one of their owne Popes confesseth asmuch when hee affirmeth that the strength of this power of the keyes passed vnto all the Apostles and the constitution of this decree vnto all the Princes of the Church 51. Lastly the truth for when the Apostles stroue for superiority Christ who is truth it selfe and would not haue concealed so necessary a trueth if
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
vnto him And that wee may not thinke that this Master of theirs is without schollers the glosse of their decrees doth set down asmuch when it sayth Dimiâ—tantur id est dimissa ostendantur Let them bee forgiuen that is let them bee declared to bee forgiuen Which because it speakes too boldly therefore their iudicious Censurers haue caused it either to bee blotted out or compelled it to speake otherwise 92. Secondly I answere that this doctrine is crossed by it selfe For they do not professe any other absolution but such as may be hindered by the party to by absolued to wit if by want of faith or repentance he put an inuisible bar to stop the power thereof Now if the sinner may hinder his own absolutioÌ„ then the Priest hath no power to absolue him except he be fitly disposed for the receiuing of it this disposition is meerly from God and therefore in God is the onely power to absolue and in the Priest onely to declare who is absolued and that conditionally if hâ— be thus qualified and haue no barre to hinder For if the power of absoluing or not absoluing depend vpon the putting in or taking away the barre of impenitency then he onely can iudicially absolue a sinner that can giue him repentance but neyther the Pope nor any mortall man is able to doe this as the Scripture testifieth in many places and therefore neyther Pope nor Priest can absolue a sinner any further then by a declaratiue sentence 93. Lastly it crosseth their owne practice for they teach that dead mâ—n dying in excommunication may be absolued and they practise the same to wit as Bellarmine saith when it is discouered that the partie was erroniously excommunicate and as Tollet saith when he shewed manifest signes of contrition before his death in which case their absolution can bee no more then a declaration that hee did repent and that he is absolued before the tribunall â—â— at of God 94. And thus this first distinction wiâ—l hold no water Let vs heare the second Touching the Popes power to pardon out of the Sacrament this it is They say that the Pope doth not by his pardon take vpon him eyther to remit the guilt of sinne or the eternall punishment due vnto it but onely the temporall punishment which it ought to sustaine eyther here in this life òr in Purgatory But I answere that hâ—e which can remit any part of the punishment due vnto sinne can also remit the guilt it sâ—lâ—e for guilt and punishment are vnseparable companions insomuch as in the Hebrew tongue Sinne and Punishment are notified by one and the same word to shew that where the one is there the other is also and therefore he that can pardon the ore may also release the other Adde hereunto that to pardon a sinne is nothing else as our common phrase of speech together with reason teacheth vs but to remit the punishment thereof as when the King in the Court of Iustice pardoneth a Malefactor he releaseth him from the punishment which by the law he should suffer so in the Court of Conscience he that doth remit any part of the punishment due by Gods Law vnto a sinner as the Pope doth vndertake to doe by the same labour doth remit so much of the guilt it selfe And so this distinction filleth to the ground being as feeble and brittle as the former 95. Lastly the Gospell teacheth that when we haue done all that we can yet we may say that we are vnprofitable seruants Luke 17. 10. But the Church of Rome teacheth that a man may doe more then he ought and then the law requireth and so may say and thinke himselfe to be not onely a profitable but more then a profitable seruant for hee mâ—y say they supererogate now hee doeth supererogate who layeth out more then he receiued as he that to the precepts of Christ adioyneth the commaundements of the Church and to the precepts of the law the counsels of the Gospell 96. Bellarmine answereth first out of Saint Ambrose that it is to bee vnderstood of vs whilst wee are in the state of nature and not of grace as if by nature we are vnprofitable but by grace profitable but our Sauiour speaketh this to his Disciples who were now in the state of grace and not of nature And Saint Ambrose his meaning is nothing else but this that our naturall imbecillity though it be sanctified yet it is not abolished by grace and therefore that we in regard thereof are still bound to remember that when we doe all we can yet we are vnprofitable 97. Secondly he answereth that we are vnprofitable indeede but to God not to our selues which hee saith is Beda's interpretation but hee leaueth out that which followeth in Beda for so farre is hee from building hereupon the merite of works that he saith plainely that by whose mercy we are preuented that we may humbly serue him by his gift wee are crowned to raigne with him By which it is euident that if wee bâ— profitable to our selues it is because God accepteth our seruice and in mercy rewardeth the same not because we deserue any thing at his hands To omit that the word Seruants hath relation to Masters and not to themselues and therfore in saying they are vnprofitable seruants it must needs be vnderstood in respect of God and not of themselues 98. Thirdly hee answereth out of Saint Augustine that we are said to bee vnprofitable in respect of the couenant of the law but in respct of the free couenant of grace we may be profitable and more then profitable But this is Bellarmines fraudulent collection and not Saint Augustines intention for he saith onely that we can require no reward for our labour though we haue kept all the commandements vnlesse God of his free grace had couenanted with vs to reward vs. He saith not that wee are made profitable by grace eyther to God our Master or to our selues And therefore in another place he disclaimeth vtterly all profite and merite in our selues when he saith Lord for thy Names sake quicken me in thy righteousnes not in mine not because I haue deserued it but because thou art mercifull Thus this generation is not ashamed to wrest and wring the godly Fathers to make them speake to their purpose 99. Lastly hee answereth out of Saint Chrysostome that our Sauiour saith not Yee are vnprofitable seruants but bids them say so of themselues to teach them humility and to auoyd pride But how doe this follow that because Christ biddeth vs to say so to auoyd pride therefore we are not so yea rather therefore we are so for would he bid vs to lye Chrysostome himselfe in another place cleereth this doubt when he saith that all that euer wee doe we doe vpon dutie for which cause Christ sayd When yee haue done all say yee are vnprofitable seruants So that Chrysostome did not onely
of Gregory their owne Pope who allowing onely an historicall vse of them forbad them to bee worshipped as testifieth Agrippa Indeed wee confesse that there was in these Primitiue times of the Church an historicall vse of Images as may appeare by that statue of our Sauiour at Cesarea mentioned by Eusebius and the Pictures of Peter and Paul in the same author and of the good shepheard seeking the lost sheepe painted vpon their Chalices in Tertullian But wee shall neuer finde in any good author that either they were receiued into Churches or worshipped in any religious manner 46. Lastly it is a knowne and confessed truth that Images were neuer generally receiued inioyned vpon the Church vntill the second Nicene Council which was eight hundreth yeeres after Christ and also that the decree of that Councill was abrogated by another Councill held at Frankeford not long after so that it is manifest that the petigree of this bastard is of no great continuance not fetched from the Primitiue Church which is the thing we haue in hand to prooue but springing vp in the more corrupt times when superstition had darkned the light of true Religion and almost banished it out of the world 47. Another article of their Religion is that the Pope hath a supremacy of power ouer all euen Princes not onely in spirituall matters but euen in temporall which to bee a late deuice not warrantable by true antiquity may be easily demonstrated For vpon those words of Saint Paul Let euery soule bee subiect to the higher powers Chrysostome and Occumenius write thus That whether it bee a Priest or a Monke or an Apostle hee must bee subiect to the ciuill Magistrate for this subiection doth not ouerthrow piety and if an Apostle then the Pope as Aeneas Siluius who was after a Pope himselfe inferreth yea Espensaeus goeth further and sayth that not onely Chrysostome but Theodoret Theophilact and all the Greeke Doctours and in the Latine Church Saint Gregory and Saint Bernard did from that place teach that eueryl Apostle and Prophet and Priest was commanded to acknowledge subiection vnto Emperours Saint Ambrose sayth plainely that the Church lands and Church men themselues did pay tribute to the Emperour and if tribute then subiection Saint Augustine sayth that it is generale pactum societatis humanae abedire Regibus suis The generall couenant and bond of humane societie to obey Kings If the Pope then bee a man by Saint Augustines rule hee must bee subiect yea Gregory the first himselfe auoucheth plainely that power ouer all men is committed by GOD Dominorum meorum pietati to the piety of my Lords where hee not onely subiecteth all none excepted to the Imperiall power but also calleth the Emperour his Lord but now the Pope is the Emperours Lord and not the Emperour the Popes as Bellarmine speaketh without blushing when he sayth Non sunt ampliùs Reges Clericorum superiores c. Kings are not any longer superiours to Clerks and therefore Clerks are not bound to obey them by Gods Law and thus in generall the Pope had not this supremacy till Gregories time 48. For particulars one part of this supremacy is that the Pope is absolutely aboue a Councill which notwithstanding was condemned by the Councils of Constance and Basill And as Cardinall Cusanus confesseth was not acknowledged in the dayes of Saint Augustine Pope Gregory and other Fathers and Councils which liued before the first six hundreth yeere Another part is that appeales should bee made to the Pope from all places which the Councils of Chalcedon Africke Mileri and Constantinople vtterly withstood and interdicted A third is that peculiar cases of conscience should bee reserued to the Popes consistory which their owne Salmeran confesseth to haue not beene vsed in the time of Cyprian who liued two hundreth and fourty yeeres after Christ A fourth is the claime of Inuestitures which by consent of history was brought in first by Pope Hildebrand as witnesse Malmsbury Nauclerus Sigibert with others A fift authority to depose and molest Princes which no Orthodoxall Father for the space of 1000. yeeres taught or approoued as sayth their owne Barclay and the first Pope that practised this was Hildebrand surnamed Gregory the seuenth as witnesseth Espensaeus or at the highest Gregory the third who attempted this rebellious practice against Les the Emperour for defacing Images as Platina confesleth A sixt a supereminent prerogatiue in calling Councils and dissoluing the Acts thereof at his pleasure both which are notorious nouelties for the first eight generall Councils were called by Christian Emperours and the decrees of Councils were of so sacred authority that the better sort of Popes in the purer times put great Religiō in changing them or varying from them in any respect witnes Aeneas Siluius Victorine and Cardinall Cusanus Lastly a seuenth the fountaine of Episcopall Iurisdiction challenged to reside in the Pope alone and from him to bee imparted to other Bishops at his pleasure which was a doctrine not known in Saint Cyprians time nor in Saint Ieromes as hath beene shewed before In a word there is no colour of antiquity for any part of this transcendent Iurisdiction and yet the very soule and life of Popery consisteth therein 49. Of the same stampe is their doctrine of receiuing the Sacrament vnder one kinde and withholding the cup from the peoples this was first decreed by the Council of Constance and afterward established by the Trent conuenticle and hath euer since beene practised in the Church of Rome vnder paine of excommunication But that it is a grosse innouation wee need no further testimony then of the two foresaid Councils the one whereof sayth that in the Primitiue Church both kinds were receiued and that this custome of one kinde onely came afterward in and the other striketh with anathema all them that shall say that the Catholike Church hath not altered this custome vpon iust causes by which words it confesseth that there is an alteration of ancient custome now what the causes were of this alteration I will not here report let the Reader behold them in Bellarmine Gerson and Lyranus and wonder that Christs ordinance the generall custome of the primitiue Church should be altered annihiled vpō so sleight friuolous and foolish grounds adde vnto these Councils the wirnesse of their owne Cassander who directly affirmeth that this custome of communicating vnder one kinde inuaded not the Latin Church vntill the yeere of our Lord 1300. To the same purpose might bee alledged their owne ancient Lyturgies the decrees of their owne Popes and the generall doctrine of their schoole and lastly the consent of Fathers all which doe most clearly proue this doctrine to be a nouelty if not an heresie Their Lyturgies are plaine that the cup was ministred to the people and not appropriated to the Priests as may be seene in them Among their
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
God that hee cannot doe all these things by himselfe without them but rather of his omnipotencie in that hee was not onely able to doe these things himselfe but also to giue power to those creatures to doe them so it is an argument of greater power in Christs merits to giue strength to our workes to merit heauen then if hee did it for vs without our workes I but by Bellarmines leaue that I may speake with all humble reuerence to the diuine Maiestie the power of God had beene more manifest and his omnipotencie more conspicuous I doe not say had beene greater if he should doe these things immediatly by himselfe then it is by the glasse of the creatures As when the Lord came downe in person vpon mount Sinai and gaue the children of Israel the law from his owne mouth his glory was more famous and fearefull then when hee sent it them after by the hand of Moses though written with his owne finger as the other was spoken with his owne mouth And therefore it is said Exod. 20. that the people were so astonished at Gods voyce that they desired that hee would speake no more vnto them in his owne person but by his seruant Moses Adde herevnto that God in his wisedome ordayned those creatures to that end and purpose and therefore we must not dispute as Bellarmine doth whether it should haue beene a greater token of his omnipotencie if hee had or if hee had not created them but humbly submit our selues to his wisedome knowing that his thoughts are not like ours nor his counsels like ours but as the heauens are higher then the earth so are his wayes higher than ours and his thought aboue our thoughts but for the merits of Christ he hath reuealed in his word that in them onely wee are to finde saluation and therefore wee must beleeue that he is most glorified by that doctrine which teacheth vs to rely onely vpon them and as for the power in them to cause vs to merit it is no where to be found in Scripture and therefore not to be thought to be for the aduancement of his glory besides to say that Christs honour is encreased by mans merit is plaine blasphemie for who hath giuen any thing to God Rom. 11. 25. He standeth not in neede of our good decdes Psal 16. 2. Indeede we doe glorifie God by our good workes but that is not by encreasing but by publishing and proclaiming of his glory but the Romanists say that the glory of Christs merits is augmented by our merits which must needes be a most blasphemous speech In a word seeing we doe not finde in Scripture that Christ died to giue merit to our workes but to purchase pardon to our sinnes and obtaine life for vs wee must bee content to thinke that this serueth most for his glorie and that the contrarie is derogatory thereunto 35. Lastly where did we euer read that wee must be like vnto Christ in meriting we read that wee must bee holy as he is holy and humble and meeke as hee was humble and meeke and patient as he was patient to wit in quality not in quantity in imitation not in perfection but to merit as he did is no where to be found nay it is a thing impossible for it is an infinite and omnipotent worke of righteousnesse that can deserue any thing at the infinite iustice of the omnipotent God and it must bee of infinite valew that can purchase that infinite reward And therefore it was necessarie that he which should be our Redeemer should also be God because neither Angell nor Archangell nor any creature else could performe a worke of that price which might be sufficient to merit the kingdome of heauen It is therefore a most grosse blasphemie to say that we must be like vnto Christ in the point of meriting for it maketh euery man a Iesus that is a Sauiour and Redeemer to himselfe Therefore to conclude I say with S. Bernard Let the glory remaine to the Lord vntouched he hath triumphed ouer the enemie alone he hath freed the captiues alone hee hath fought and conquered alone and with S. Augustine To whom we are endebted for that we are to him we are endebted that wee are iustified let none attribute to God his being and to himselfe his iustifying for it is better which thou giuest to thy selfe than that which thou giuest vnto God thou giuest the lower thing vnto God and the higher to thy selfe giue all to him praise him in all This wee doe by our doctrine and they the contrary and therefore it is most manifest that by this doctrine of theirs mans glory is exalted and Christs defaced mans merits lifted vp and Christs pulled downe which cannot stand with the truth and sincerity of Christian Religion 36. The fourth doctrine which tendeth directly to the dishonor of God the abasing of Christs glory in the worke of our redemption is their paradox of humane satisfactions by which they teach that Christ by his death hath made satisfaction for the guilt of our sinnes and the eternall punishment due vnto them but wee our selues must satisfie the iustice of God for the temporall punishment either in earth or in Purgatory whereas we on the contrary teach and beleeue that by Christs death and passion a perfect and all-sufficient satisfaction is made to the iustice of God for all the sinnes of men and for all the punishment thereof both eternall and temporall As for our doings or sufferings we acknowledge the one to be sabordinately required as fruites of our faith and the other necessary to be sustained as meanes of our mortification And touching offences against our brethren we hold it necessary that we make satisfaction to such whom we haue wronged any wayes either by confession restitution or punishment as the case shall require yea wee acknowledge that a Canonicall or Ecclesiasticall satisfaction is to be made to the Church or any part thereof when as we haue giuen iust scandall and offence there vnto But in all these wee denie that there is any vertue or power to expiate our sinnes or to make satisfaction to God for the punishment thereof either temporall or eternall that to do is only proper and peculiar to the Crosse of Christ for as the disobedience of the first Adam brought vpon vs not onely eternall punishments but also temporall so the obedience and merit of the second Adam hath made satisfaction to God for both 37. And herein we agree both with the holy Scripture in many expresse places as 1. Iohn 2. 2. He is the propitiation for our sinnes And Rom. 5. 18. For the eternall punishment of them And Esay 53. 4. For the temporall for there it is said that he tooke vpon him our infirmities and bore our sicknesses And with the holy Fathers for Saint Augustine plainly affirmeth That temporal afflictions before forgiuenes are the punishments of sin but after forgiuenes
to the ground And this indeed is the very ground of this blasphemous doctrine 66. Doctour Bishop misliking this distinction as it seemeth flyeth to another In sinne sayth hee there are two things the one is the turning away from God whom wee offend The other is the turning to the thing for the loue of which wee offend Now the turning away from GOD both the sinne and the eternall paine due vnto it are freely through Christ pardoned but for the pleasure we tooke in sinne wee our selues are to satisfie and according to the greatnesse thereof to doe penance Thus dreameth Doctor Bishop but let his owne fellow Doctor waken him and he of greater credit then himselfe Aquinas it is who reiecteth this distinction as nothing worth and giueth this reason of his reiecting because satisfaction answereth not to sinne but according as it is an offence to God which it hath not of conuerting to other things but of auerting and turning from God And surely his reason is passing good for to vâ—â— the Creatures and to loue the Creatures is not sinne but to vse them disorderly and to loue them immoderately which disordered vse immoderate loue is the very turning and auersion from God and therefore to say that wee satisfy not for our auersion from God but for our conuersion to the creatures is to say either that wee satisfy for that which is no sinne or els that some part of sinne is not an auersion from God both which are equally absurd and Doctor Bishop cannot giue a third and therefore his distinction is a meere foppish dreame without head or foote 67. The Gospell teacheth that there is giuen no other name vnder Heauen whereby wee must bee saued but the name Iesus But the Church of Rome propoundeth vnto vs other names to bee saued by as the Virgin Mary the Saints and Martyrs yea Francis and Dominick c. For they make them Mediatours of intercession to God for vs which office belongeth only vnto Christ as hath been shewed and they teach that we are saued by their merits aswell as by the merits of Christ and that as there are diuers mansions in Heauen so among the Saints there are diuers offices some haue power ouer one thing some ouer another as Saint Peter against infidelity Saint Agnes for Chastity Saint Leonard for Horses Saint Nicholas against ship-wracke Saint Iames for Spaine Saint Denis for France Saint Marke for Venice c. Yea they would make men beleeue if a man being otherwise a vyler sinner dye in the habit of Saint Francis or Saint Dominick c. must needes goe straight to heauen without any more adoe and that as it may seeme though he hath neyther faith nor repentance 68. Lastly they are not ashamed to say that the death and passion of Christ and of the holy Virgine together was for the redemption of mankinde and as Adam and Eue sold the world for one Apple so Mary and her Sonne redeemed the world with one heart and therefore as they called him Sauiour so her Sauiouresse as him Mediator so her Mediatresse as him the King of the Church so her the Queene If this be not to repose the confidence of our saluation vpon other names besides the Name of Iesus let the world be iudge 69. Yet for all this they thinke to couer this their filthinesse by a distinction for they say that they doe not flye to the Saints as authors and giuers of good things but as Impetrators and Intercessors To which I answere that to omit their doctrine which hath at large beene discouered before the very forme of their prayers doth extinguish this distinction for when they cry and say O Saint Peter haue mercy on me Saue mee Open mee the gate of heauen Giue mee patience Giue mee fortitude c. And to the blessed Virgine O Mediatrix of God and men ô Fountaine of mercy Mother of grace Hope of the desolate Comforter of the desperate c. receiue this my humble petition and giue me life euerlasting And to Saint Paul Vouchsafe to bring vs whom thou hast caused to know the light of truth after the end of this mortality thither where thou thy selfe art Doe they not make them authors and giuers of these things Yes in word saith Bellarmine but not in sense for the meaning of these petitions is that by their prayers and merites they would obtaine of God these good things But alas how should the common people vnderstand their meaning seeing the sound of their words are so playne to the contrary Againe why doe they not propound their sense in playner termes but leaue it thus inuolued vnder darke riddles to the great offence of thousands And lastly how harsh an interpretation must this needs be in the eares of all men Giue me euerlasting life that is Pray to God that he would giue mee it If a man should speake so in his common talke no man would vnderstand him otherwise then his words sound how much lesse can these spirituall matters be otherwise vnderstood then they are spoken Surely this shift is so filly that if it might stand good what might not a man speake and yet excuse it sufficiently after this manner And though the Councill of Trent seeme to graunt to the Saints the power onely of intercession as Bellarmine also doth yet the Romane Catechisme set foorth by the commandement of the Pope and decree of the same Councill doth cleerely and expressely attribute vnto the Saints the power of Mercy Grace and Donation of benefits Whereby it appeareth that this is not the opinion of some priuate men but the receiued and approoued doctrine of the Church And thus this distinction vanisheth before the truth as snow against the Sunne 70. The Gospell teacheth that euery soule bee subiect to the higher powers and that we submit our selues vnto all maner of ordinance for the Lords sake whether vnto King or vnto Gouernours c. And our Sauiour himselfe confesseth that Pilate had power euer him from God when he faith Thou couldest haue no power at all against me except it were giuen thee from aboue But the Church of Rome teacheth that neyther the Pope himselfe nor any of his Clergie are subiect to the temporall power of Princes eyther to be iudged of them or punished by them no not in cases of fact when they are guilty of haynous crimes as of Treason Murther Theft c. 71. This doctrine though it bee contradicted by many learned Doctors of their owne side as Occham Marsilius Pataninus Barclay a late French Lawyer and others yet is maintayned by their Popes and Cardinalls Iesuites and Canon Lawes which are the very synewes of Popery as not onely true but necessary to saluation and therefore we may well call it The doctrine of their Church For Popes Iohn the two and twentieth commaunded Augustinus Triumphus of Ancona to write a Booke wherein he maintaineth this position
as it appeareth Acts 16. but rather is to bee thought to bee the extraordinary gift of the holy Ghost as Saint Paul plainly insinuateth 2. Tim. 1. And secondly though it should bee sauing grace yet it is not promised to all others though it were then giuen to Timotheus neither were all that receiued holy orders partakers thereof for then Nicholas the Deacon should haue beene sanctified being an hypocrite Who seeth no◠then now weakely hee hath prooued this to bee a Sacrament out of holy Scriptures and this may seeme for a taste of the rest of his proofes which are most of them of the like nature 70. Againe the doctrine of Indulgences to wit that the Pope hath power out of the Churches treasury to grant relaxation from temporall punishment either heere or in Purgatory is so new an article that diuers of their own Doctors doe confesse that there is not any one testimony for proofe thereof either in Scriptures or in the writings of ancient Fathers but that the first that put them in practice in that manner as they are now vsed was Pope Boniface the eight anno 1300. neither could they bee any older then Purgatory being extracted from the flames thereof which hath beene already prooued to bee a meere nouell inuention so that the child cannot be old when as the Father is not gray-headed and that the matter may bee without contradiction reade Burchardus who liued about the yeare of our Lord 1020. And Gratian and Peter Lumbard that came after who all speake of satisfaction and penance and commutation and relaxation of penance but yet haue not a word of these Romish Indulgences whereas if they had beene then extant they would neuer haue passed them ouer in silence especially in the discoursing vpon these points whereupon they haue their necessary dependance 71. Last of all their doctrine touching merite of workes may bee branded with the same marke For first though the word merite bee often vsed by the Fathers yet ordinarily it is not taken in that sense which the Romanists vse it in as witnesse both Bellarmine and Viega and Stapleton and if they did not yet manifold examples out of their owne writings would prooue to be true Secondly the full streame of their doctrine doth make against the proud conceit of merite for they ascribe all to Gods mercy and Christs merits esteeming their owne best workings and sufferings vnworthy of the euerlasting and celestiall reward they neuer dreamt of that ambitious doctrine taught in the Church of Rome that our good workes are absolutely good and truely and properly meritorious and fully worthy of eternall life Let their books be viewed and nothing can bee more apparantly cleare then this is Thirdly the termes of congruity and condignity were deuised but of late dayes by the subtill Schoolemen who notwithstanding could not agree among themselues touching the true definition distinctiō of their own books by which it appeareth that it was not then any Catholike or vniuersall truth Lastly their owne Doctours terme the merite of congruity a new inuention and that other of condignity no Catholike nor ancient doctrine and the whole doctrine of meriting to haue beene first made an article of faith by the Councill of Trent all which laide together prooue it most clearely to bee of no great standing nor they of any vnderstanding that were the first forgers and deuisers thereof 72. Thus wee haue sixteene points wherein the new Romish Religion hath degenerated from all pure antiquity to which many more might bee added but these are sufficient to euince our conclusion which is this that seeing the Romish Church hath neither in matter nor forme substance nor accidents any sure ground either from Scripture or the doctrine of the Primitiue Church but is vtterly vnlike to it in many substantiall respects therefore it cannot bee the true Church of God but an harlot in her stead and their Religion not of God but of men and consequently that wee in declining from them and conforming our selues both in doctrine and manners to the Primitiue patterne are not fallen from the Church but to the Church and that theirs is the new Religion and not ours And thus wee see what all their bragges and clamours touching the antiquity of their Religion and the nouelty of ours come vnto seeing there is no one thing more pregnant to prooue the falshood of their Religion and the Apostacy and Antichristianity of their Church then this is And to conclude as wee would thinke him not well in his wits that hauing beene long sicke and after regained health should say that sicknes was more ancient then health whereas he should rather say that hee had recouered his old health that his new Inmate sicknesse was dispossessed of his lodging though it had kept it long so in all reason it is madnesse to thinke the reformation of the Church and reducing of Christian Religion to the ancient health to bee more nouell and new then the horrible sicknesse and apostacy wherewith it was long not onely infected but almost ouer-whelmed And this is iust our case with the Church of Rome but I leaue them to bee healed by the heauenly Phisitian himselfe Iesus Christ our Sauiour whose wholesome Physicke must cure them or nothing will MOTIVE XII ¶ That Church which maintaineth it selfe and the Religion professed by it and seeketh to disaduantage the aduersaries by vnlawfull vniust and vngodly meanes cannot bee the true Church of God nor that Religion the truth of God by the grounds whereof they are warranted to act such deuilish practices but such is the practice of the Romist Church and therfore neither their Church nor their Religion can be of God IT is a wonder to see what deuises sleights impostures and deuilish practices the Romanists haue and now at this day doe more then euer vse to vphold their rotten Religion to ensnare mens minds with the forlorne superstitiō their kingdome being ready to fall they care not with what props they vnder-shore it and the truth preuailing against them they care not with what engines though fetched from hell it selfe they vndermine it so that they may any wayes batter the walles or shake the foundation thereof My purpose is in this Chapter to discouer some of the Sathanicall practices of these subtle Enginers I meane the Iesuites and Priests and other rabble of Romish proctors It is not possible to reckon them vp all being so many and various such therefore God willing shall be heere discouered as are for villany most notorious for impudency most shamelesse and for certainty most perspicuous and by them let the Christian Reader that loueth the truth iudge of their Religion and Church what it is 2. The first proposition of this argument is grounded vpon three principles one of nature another of reason the third of Scripture nature teacheth that contraries are cured that is expelled by contraries as hot diseases by cold
Magdeburge released of his oath to his owne citizens by Pope Iohn the 23. And of Sigismund the Emperour who was constrained by the 〈◊〉 to falsifie his oath giuen to Iohn Husse and Ierome of Prage for their safe conduct to the Councill of Constance and of Pope Zacharie Boniface the sixt and Benedict de la Lune who vnbound the French men from their oath of obedience to their Kings and of Gregory the seuenth with other succeeding Popes who did the like to the Germanes in respect of diuers Emperours and lastly of Pius Quintus that excited the subiects of Queene Elizabeth to the breach of their faith and open rebellion all which doth show that they make no conscience of periury so that they may maintaine thereby their Hierarchie and Religion which to bee so this one testimony will sufficiently beare witnesse out of the French Chronicles when a league was made between Charles the ninth and the Prince of Condy the Iesuites sayth the author cryed out dayly in their sermons that peace was not to bee made with Heretikes and being made was not to bee kept that it was a godly thing to lay violent hands on those vnpure persons c. 6. Lastly their murthering cruelty exercised against all that stand in their way is so notorious that I need not to stand vpon it the examples of Henry the Emperour marked out by Pope Hildebrand to bee murthered by the tumbling down of a great stone vpon his head in Saint Maries Church though with euill successe for the Vâ—rlet himselfe that was suborned to doe this feat tumbled downe headlong together with the stone and so was crushed in pieces before the Emperour came into the place The poysoning of Frederick the second by the secret practice of Innocent the fourth and of Conrade by the meanes of the same Pope and of Lewes of Bauary by the appointment of Clement the sixt and of Henry of Lucemburgh by a Iacobine Fryer of Saint Dominicks order and that O horrible impiety in the bread of the Sacrament mixed with adamantine dust and of Iohn of England by a Monke of Swinestead Abbay of Henry the third of France stabbed by a Iacobine Fryar and of Henry the fourth murthered by Rauillac that Deuill in humane shape who beeing demaunded by the Iudges why he committed that horrible act answered without blushing Because the King went about to aide the Protestant Princes of Germany contrary to the Popes minde whom hee did beleeue to be a God vpon earth and of Parry Lopez Squire with many other which were suborned to murther our late Queene and of Faulx that was prepared with a match kindled at Rome and a the euish Lanthorne to blow vp the Parliament house These exanples I say with many other that might bee produced doe euidently euince them to make no conscience of shedding blood and murther for the maintenance and defence of their Religion 7. Which that it may yet further appeare to be true consider the infinite numbers of Hâ—gonets that is Protestants which haue been slaine in France alone for refusing the marke of the beast In the Low Countreyes 36000. at least are knowne to haue beene put to death by the Duke of Alba for not yeelding in all things to the Romish Religion The like persecution hath beene in other Countreyes and is still at this day where their bloody inquisition taketh place by the which in thirty yeeres as ir is recorded by Authors of sufficient credit a hundred and fifty thousand Christians were miserably murthered and that which is to be noted it rageth against none but Protestants so that euen in Rome a man may bee either Iew. Turke or Infidell or what els and bee neuer questioned but a Protestant hee cannot be but with danger of his life What should I speake of the multitude of poore innocents that were in this land of ours adiudged to the stake in the fiue yeeres raigne of Queene Mary Smithfield Colchester Couentrie and Norwich and almost all the other great townes beare witnesse of this their cruelty and the Innocent blood of these poore soules doth stil cry for vengeance against them 8. And yet all this is nothing to those horrible and outragious Massacres whereby whole multitudes haue beene but hered like sheepe in a slaughter house witnesse that miserable slaughter made of the Albigenses by Fryar Dominick and Simon Monfort which going astray from the truth if all be true which is written of them these butchers did not labor to reclaime by perswasions and gentle meanes but oppressed them by armes at the first and so sent them packing to hell without repentance witnesse also that fearefull Powder treason intended not executed which if it had taken effect such a massacre of men and those of highest place and worth had beene made as neuer yet the Sunne saw the like And lastly witnesse that dreadfull massacre in France vnder Charles the ninth when in one night were murthered at Paris many thousand Protestants with the illustrious Admirall of France and at Lions and other places within one month as some say 40000. as others aboue 30000. The greatest and most grieuous perfecution in the Primitiue Church is not to bee compared to this for it is recorded that vnder Dioclesian 17000. were martyred in one month but behold heere the number doubled that we might certainly know and beleeue that the Pope is that true and great Antichrist vnder whom and by whose meanes the greatest persecution that euer befell the Church of God should happen 9. Neither is there doctrine any whit dissonant from their practice for thus Bellarmine deliuereth it in plaine termes as in a Christian the Spirit is to rule ouer the flesh to chastise it and keepe it vnder yea sometimes to vndergoe death it selfe as in the Martyrs so the spirituall power residing in the Church that is in the Pope is to bridle and restraine the temporall by all meanes what soeuer if it rebell against it yea the Cardinall Como in his letters to Parry the Traitour animateth him to the murther of the good Queene by his damned position that it is meritorious to kill a King excommunicate and some of them goe yet deeper into hell and entitle it an heroicall act that is no ordinary meritorious worke but such an extraordinary exploit as none but men of a more then humane Spirit can performe and for which an higher place in Heauen is reserued then for common merits Can this Religion now bee of God that is thus maintained by treachery periury and blood-shed Is not this Church rather the purple coloured harlot spoken of in the Reuelation embrued and dyed red with the blood of the Saints then the true Catholike Church of Christ These things are so notorious that I need not further enlarge them 10. Leauing therefore these I come to the three last wicked meanes whereby they maintaine their Religion vpon which if I insist