vnlesse he will haue both a building without a foundation and a foundation beside the building Fourthly it is an absurd course to separate the power of the Church and the persons in whome the same consisteth from the Church Fiftly what more ridiculous then to call a forme of proceeding a principle of Christian Doctrine Sixtly all Articles of the faith may be called heads but it is meere foppery to thinke that Christian Religion hath as many foundations as seuerall Articles Finally it is moste absurde to beleeue that eyther the Pope or the Church of Rome doth interpret scriptures infallibly or hath the power to adde Articles not contained in Scriptures to the Christian faith If then Stapletons meaning be that all traditions not written and all interpretations of the Pope and his adherents and all the Popes determinations and decretales and the sayings of the fathers and Councels allowed by the Pope are the foundations of faith then doth he endeuor to build Babylon not Hierusalem fantasticall deuises and monstrous chimeraes and not the true faith the kingdome of Antichrist and not Christes church Nay if these were foundations of faith then would it follow First that the foundation of the Romish faith is not yet fully laide For as yet all their decretales and determinations are not fully published Secondly we should not know where to finde this faith these traditions and interpretations and opinions of Fathers all of them being not yet resolued Thirdly the Romish faith should be a meere humane deuise standing vpon humane fancies Finally it should be contrary to it selfe and to scriptures for such are the Romish traditions and interpretations and allegations of fathers Canus in his Booke de Locis Theologicis layeth downe ten groundes from whence all arguments in controuersies of Diuinitie in his opinion are deriued The first is holy Scripture The 2. traditiō The 3. is the authoritie of the Catholik church The 4. is the authority of general councels The 5. is the authoritie of the Church of Rome The 6. is the authoritie of the holy Fathers The 7. is the authoritie of Schoolemen Canonists The 8. is naturall reason The 9. is the authoritie of Philosophers and ciuill lawyers The last is the authoritie of humane histories But first it is no smal wrong to ioyne with holy scriptures not onely the writing of Fathers but also the writings of Schoolemen canonists and profane writers Secondly it is the ouerthrowe of faith to found the same vppon vncertaine and vnknowne traditions Thirdly it appeareth heereby that the faith of Papists for the moste part is an humane opinion being grounded vpon men nay vpon humane reason Finally his groundes are not onely changeable for the moste part but also contrarie one to another That is prooued not onely by the mutability of the decrees of councels Doctrine of councels Schoole-diuines Canonists and prophane authors but also by traditions themselues of which diuers are abrogated and ceased This may be demonstrated by traditions by testimonies of Fathers actes of Councels the doctrine of Thomistes and Scotistes Canonists ciuill Lawyers and profane writers For not onely profane writers haue shewed themselues ignorant of matters of faith but both Schoolemen and fathers haue held contrarie opinions as shall be prooued when neede is by diuers particulars Bellarmine in his Preface in lib. de pont Rom. is not ashamed to apply these words of the Prophet Isay Behold I will put a Stone in the foundation of Sion vnto the pope There also hee auoucheth the Sea of Rome to bee the foundation of the Faith Likewise in the end of his preface de verbo dei he seemeth to holde that the sence of Scriptures is to be fetched from the Popes See and sencelesse decretales Lastly the same man doth as confidently alleadge the Pope decretales as Saint Paules Epistles Gelasius in the Chapter Sancta dist 15. ordeineth that the Histories of Martyrs and their sufferings are to bee receiued And commonly the Romish Church doth prooue her traditions partly out of such legends and partly out of their missals porteses and other rituall Bookes Kellison therefore when he looketh vpon the ruinous foundations of the Romish faith hath little reason to talke against the foundations of our Christian faith For First we all agree that the writings of the Prophets and Apostles are the principles and foundations of our faith and thus both Scriptures and Fathers doe teach vs. But the Papists as may appeare by that which I haue alleadged doe one differ from another Canus doth not once mention the Pope among his theologicall places which to Stapleton and Bellarmine is the principall foūdation of the worke Contrarywise Stapleton leaueth Scriptures out of his reckoning of principles of faith which Canus confesseth to be a moste solide foundation of faith Canus againe numbreth diuers foundations and places theologicall which others doe not once mention Secondly albeit we doe not build our faith principallye eyther vpon the actes of councels or testimonies of Fathers further then they build their Doctrine vpon holy Scriptures yet in the interpretatiō of Scriptures wee doe not neglect the authoritie of councels and Fathers But the Papists albeit they seeme to found their faith vpon the authoritie of councels and Fathers yet regard them not one straw if it be the popes pleasure to determine contrarie vnto them Thirdly our faith is built vpon the rocke Christ Iesus but the faith of the Romanists is built vppon the straw and stubble of popish traditions determinations and as they say vpon the Pope who to them is the supreme iudge and pole-starre of faith shining out of his papall Chaire Fourthly our faith is the Christian faith being built onely vpon the word of God Theirs is a decretaline an humane faith being built vpon the Popes decretales and humane inuentions Fiftly our groundes are immoouable and agree well one with an other But their groundes are mutable and contrary one to another Sixtly they cannot deny our groundes vnlesse they will blaspheme against holy Scriptures But vpon their owne groundes they are not yet well agreed We doe generally refuse them and antiquity was ignorant of them Seuenthly our groundes are safe and sure But he that foloweth the Pope or beleeueth all that is written in the Breuiaryes and Missals cannot assure him felfe that he is in the right Finally it is a thing most ridiculous to beleeue that whatsoeuer an vnlearned Pope or a man voyd of religion determineth in matters of fayth is to be holden as a matter and firme Article of fayth For as well may a blind man iudge of colours as a blind and irreligious Pope of matters of religion But we are assured that the Prophets and Apostles haue truly declared vnto vs the whole counsaile of God Open your eyes therfore deere Christians and suffer not your selues to be abused by the impostures of Masse-priestes You see they are not resolued in the foundations of fayth And doe you
that teacheth that the authoritie of preachers is a sufficient assurance for Christians to builde their Religion and faith vpon As for vs wee beleeue them no further then they treade in the steps and continue in the Doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets of God Secondly it is not sufficient to alleadge or pretend Scriptures but they must bee truelye alleadged Neither is the priuate fancie of euerie capriecious head to be equalled with the determinations of graue men and well experimented in Scriptures Lastlye there is no comparison betweene learned men called and allowed by the Church phantasticall fellowes that rashly presume to leape into the ministeriall function without eyther calling allowance or qualities fitting for such a calling In his second chapter he shameth not to say that those which ground their Religion on Scriptures which hee like a bad and bare fellow calleth bare set the gate open to all Heretickes and Heresies Thus our aduersaries aduauncing the Popes decretales and the vncertaine tradisions of the Romish Church detest the holy Scriptures and open their mouthes against God But wee are rather to beleeue Christ and his Apostles then such blasphemous gapers and speakers against holy Scriptures The Apostle Ephes 2. saith the faithfull are built vppon the Apostles and prophets Ephes 6. the word of God is called the sword of the Spirit And 2. Tim. 3. The scripture is commended as profitable to instruct and reproue and able to make the man of God perfit But neither may the ground of faith be tearmed a gate set open to Heresies nor is the sword of the spirit a meanes to breede errors Further how can the same be a gate set open to heretikes being able to make the man of God perfit certes if the allegation of Scriptures were a way to error our Sauiour Christ would neuer haue sent his hearers to search scriptures Neither would the auncient Fathers haue termed Scriptures a canon of faith if they had beene any gate set open to Heresies Irenaeus in his third booke against Heresies saith the Apostles first preached the Gospell and afterwards deliuered the same to vs in Scriptures that it might be a foundation pillar of our faith He sheweth also that it is the propertie of Heretikes when they are conuinced by Scriptures to accuse the Scriptures and to speake euill of them Origen in Math. tract 25. sheweth that Scriptures are to be brought for proofe of all Doctrines Neither neede we to doubt but that of themselues they are verie sufficient Our Sauiour Math. 4. by Scriptures onely ouercame the Diuell Neither did the auncient Fathers by other weapons preuaile against Hereticks In generall councels of olde time not the Popes decretales but the holy Scriptures were laide before the fathers Lastly if the word of God cannot be receiued it is farre more vnlike that Heretickes will respect the traditions or wrightings of men Neither is it material that Hereticks cauil against Scriptures and detort them to contrarie sences For such cauils and deprauations may easily be refuted by scriptures and to such abuses the wrightings of men are much more subiect then holy scriptures But saith Kellison The Deuill hath alwayes affected to be as like as may be to Christ and his Apostles in allegation of Scripture He maketh also a long and lewd narration of heretikes alleadging Scriptures But first most false it is that the deuil alwayes affecteth to alleadge Scriptures Nay he alleadgeth traditions customes and humane deuises more often then Scriptures False it is also that heretikes more often alleadge Scriptures then the testimony of traditions Fathers other reasons But suppose that heretikes should often alleadge Scriptures yet we are not to refuse that which by others is abused Neither doe wise men refuse meat because gluttons doe thereby surfet or forbeare to drinke for that drunkards abuse wine to excesse If then Kellison wil néeds folowe heretikes in calumniating scriptures and not forbeare as the deuil did to abuse Scriptures to contrary sence then must he giue Christians leaue to folowe Christ and his Apostles in alleadging Scriptures and not presume to condemne those which prefer Scriptures before traditions Gods worde before the Popes decretales Pag. 33. and 34. He runneth out into a large field concerning the possession of Scriptures which as he sayth belongeth to Catholikes not to heretikes But what may this make for Papists whom by many reasons we haue in our Challenge conuinced to be heretikes and not Catholikes Furthermore the question which he proposeth here concerneth the sufficiency and authority and not the possession of Scriptures But this is this Surueyors pleasure to abandon matters in Controuersie and to trifle about needlesse questions Afterward he sheweth why heretikes aledge Scriptures and mentioneth the decrees writings of the Pope the Church He endeuoreth also to prooue that Scripture is not easily to be vnderstood Matters much stood vpon by him but yet very impetinent in this place where the question is about allegation of Scriptures as an Argument of it selfe only sufficient Furthermore what if heretikes depraue and wrest Scriptures shal not true Catholikes rely vpon them Thirdly the Popes bulles and blundering decretales are not of such qualitye that they ought to be cōpared to Scriptures or mentioned where they are in place Lastly Scriptures in matters necessary to saluation are playne and easy But what if some places were difficult should we therfore absteine to alleadge Scriptures nay rather we ought diligently to study them that by vnderstanding of them we may resolue our difficultyes Tertullian alleadged by him pag. 37. doth not refuse flatlye to dispute with heretikes by Scripture or count such disputation lippe labour as this impudent compagnion falsely affirmeth For his common course was to conuince heretikes by Scriptures But if he thought it frutelesse at any time to alleadge Scriptures it was against such onely as denied the Scriptures Of holy Scriptures the prophane fellowe speaketh if not blasphemously yet basely and contemptibly pag. 35. he compareth them to colours vsed by foule women and to sweete odours vsed by sluttes pag. 39. he calleth them bare and compareth them to a nose of waxe and alloweth the saying of one that compared them to Aesops Fables especially vnderstanding the bare letter of Scriptures Finally he shameth not pag. 41. to say that the worde of God with a false meaning is the worde of the deuill Matters deseruing rather corporal punishment then verbal censures We may not therfore maruel if he rayle at Luther Caluin belying them without all shame or conscience First he sayth Luther dissaloweth S. Iames his Epistle He onely maketh it inferiour to other Canonical Scriptures as not esteemed to be his Secondly he chargeth Caluin and Luther with Misconstruing S. Pauls Epistles He should rather prooue it then falsely affirme it Thirdly he saith Luther doth discanon Iob jest at Ecclesiastes and contemne all the Gospels but S. Iohns the Epistle to the Hebrewes and that
For what motiue can any man haue to beleeue that an vnlearned bougerly blinde and wicked Pope is supreme iudge of Religion that an obscure and infamous Italian hath power to depose the King of England that Christians are not to beleeue the articles of our christian faith nor Scriptures vnlesse they receiue them from the Popes chayre that Ecclesiasticall traditions of which the authours and defenders are not yet resolued are equall to holy Scriptures that the olde lattin vulgar translation of the Bible is authenticall and the originall text not or that Dogges do somtime eate Christes body or that Christes body and blood is sacrificed in the Masse although the same at the same instant be in heauen and is not consumed as is the manner of sacrifices and infinite such absurdities In the end of the first Chapter hee citeth diuers slaundrous reports of Luther and Caluin and talketh Idely of the good life of Papists or rather excuseth their lewd life notorious to the world He doth also alleage the number antiquity miracles and other qualityes of such as taught his religion Afterward he runneth backe to talke of the succession of Popes Finally by a tale out of Iosephus of the Iewes and Samaritans Temple he douteth not but he should winne the victory if he were to plead against vs. But if he plead no more wisely then he doth in this place his auditorye should haue good reason to hisse him from the barre For first his slanderous reportes against Luther and Caluin are matters deuised by Cochleus Staphilus Bolsecus and other popish parasites hired of purpose to deuise slanders against thē of which Bolsecus in publike synode reuoked his malicious libell But the matters we obiect to the Popes and their adherents are matters recorded in publik actes authētical histories the authors wherof were men fauouring popery Secondly this Lobster-faced fellow would blush to talk of the liues of the Italians and other the popes adherents but that he knoweth their lewde actes are concealed from the people of England by the remotenesse and distance of their Country And yet all that know Italy and the nations subiect to the Pope will say he hath no reason to stand much vpon their pietye or honestye Thirdly neuer shall he shewe eyther that the moderne Popes are the successors of the first Bishops of Rome or that the Popish Bishops that are now the marked slaues of Antichrist are the true successors of Austen the Monke and his fellowes Nay the Doctrine that wee professe being taught by them and the decretaline doctrine that we refuse being vnknowne to them it must needes followe that not the popish Wolues but our Bishops are their successors Finally the tale out of Iosephus doth little fit this K. purpose For neither hath the moderne Church of Rome any affinitie with the temple of the Iewes nor can this K. doe any such feates as he imagineth Was not then this surueyor both idle and vnaduised that runneth through so many impertinent matters to his particular purpose and so aduerse to his generall cause The last Chapter of his first book is yet more extrauagāt then al the rest For therin he speaketh not one word of the groūds of our Religion which are the things which he propoūded for the subiect of his discourse but of the Pope whome wee take to bee the head of Antichristes Kingdome and to bee so rightlye called although hee would gladlye prooue him to bee the supreme iudge in matters of Religion And his reason is for that euery Kingdome hath his King euerie Dukedome a Duke euerie Cittie a Major or Bayliffe euery Army a general euerie village almost hath a Constable c. hee prooueth the same also by Gods order both before the Law and after and by the example of Saint Peter and of the Bishops of Rome who as he saith were euer called the Vicars of Christ and successors of S. Peter And in the end hauing runne himselfe out of breath he concludeth that we haue no iudge in matters of Religion and so open a gap to all Heresies But if he come into his Countrie and reason no better the Constable of the parrish where he landeth if hee bee a man of any vnderstanding may doe well to set him by the heeles For First hee reasoneth absurdly from politick bodies to Christes mystical body Secondly if any argument might bee drawne from thence yet would this similitude ouerthrowe the Popes monarchy For albeit euerie Kingdome Armie Cittie and Village hath his gouernour yet it were absurd to make one King ouer all the world one commander ouer all armies one grand Maior or Constable ouer all the Maiors and Constables of the world Thirdly neyther was there one supreme iudge of matters of Religion before the lawe vnder the lawe or in the time of the Gospell as I haue at large prooued against Bellarmine in my Bookes De pōtifice Rom. which are to hot for such a tender fingred Surueyor to handle nor are we now to conforme our selues to the law but to Christes institution Fourthly for one thousand yeares after Christ shall not this ranging fellow prooue that the Bishops of Rome were called Christs Vicars The title of Peters successors is common to all true teachers succeeding Peter and importeth no generall commaund ouer the whole Church Fiftlye Theophilus Bishop of Antioche Lib. 2. Autolicum is grossely belyed So like wise is Chrysostome homil 34. in epist 1. ad Corinth Finally he wrongeth vs where he saith we haue no judge of matters of Religion For the onely supreme iudge that determineth infallibly is God speaking in Scriptures If any varietie bee about his determination the supreme iudge of all the church vpon earth is a lawfull generall councell proceeding according to Gods word In the meane while euerie nation is to stand to the definition of a nationall councel And to this iudge doe we submit our selues As for the Papists they submitte themselues to a blinde Pope that sometime beleeueth not and seldome vnderstandeth the Articles of the Christian faith Kellison therefore that dreameth of such a fellowes infallible iudgement hath little reason to talke against the proceeding vsed in the Church of England for deciding of matters of Religion Further hee hath neede to beware that the Constable of one parrish or other take him not within the sphere of his actiuitie least he place him in the supreme hole of the Stocks for his supreme idiotisme in matters of iudgement concerning religion Chap. 2. The foundations of Popish religion discouered to be most weake and foolish THus we haue séene how much this K. hath mistaken the grounds of our religion and how litle he hath to say against them Let vs therefore nowe consider his supposed groundes and the common foundations of the popish religion and what Christians are to thinke of them Kellison where he talketh of the grounds of our religion discourseth first of the mission of our Preachers and Lib. 1. cap. 1. concludeth
these Cardines terrae or rather terren and carnall Cardinalls may goe in vltimos fines terrae that is into the vtmoste endes of the earth to seeke for their mission The Monkes and Fryars are no where mentioned in Scripture vnlesse it be Apocalyps 9. Where wée finde that Locustes did issue out of the smoke of the bothomlesse pit whereby is signified that by their smoky traditions they should obscure the light of the Gospell They succeede not Pastors and Teachers For their profession is pouertie chastitie and obedience to monkish rules and not to teach or administer Sacraments Hierome and all antiquitie put monkes after Priests and range them in another order Fryars entred but lately into the Church vnder the conduct of Dominicke and Francis Their authoritie is wholy from the Pope and other commission can they shew none Masse-priestes are not sent to preach and administer the Sacraments but to sacrifice Christs bodie and blood vnder the accidents of bread and wine for quick and dead as appeareth in the formall wordes of their ordination But such a mission is no where found in Scripture For our Sauiour instituting the Sacrament of the Eucharist said accipite edite bibite That is take eate drinke and not sacrificate pro viuis et defunctis that is Sacrifice for quicke dead True it is that he saith hoc facite that is doe this But hoc facere doth no where eyther in Scripture or prophane Authors signifie sacrifice this Virgil is alleadged where one saith cum faciam vitula But if they bring no better proofes the Masse-priests will prooue themselues as wise as Calues For it is one thing to say facere vitula and facere hoc Beside that Virgil yet was neuer esteemed a good interpreter of Christes wordes To omitte Scriptures this sacrificing Preest-hood of the Romanistes hath no proofe out of Fathers For no where in any authenticall writing of theirs is any mention made of such an ordination Nay it is apparant that the same was first talked of by idle Schoolemen and authorized after a sort by the conuenticle of Florence vnder Eugenius the fourth Finally neither doe Scriptures nor Fathers mention any such real carnal and corporall sacrifice of Christes body and blood made in the Eucharist vnder the accidentes of breade and wine for the sinnes of the quicke and dead as I haue fully demonstrated in my Bookes de mâ—ssa against Bellarmine Nay the Canon it selfe dooth signifie that the sacrifice of the Church is offered as well by the people as the Priest as these words declare qui tibi offerunt But the Papists wil not say that the people offereth vp Christs body Further the Masse-priest prayeth that God would be pleased to accept the sacrifice but it is absurd to make a Masse-priest mediator for Christs body and blood If then they bee false Prophets Theeues Robbers that come without missioÌ„ or sufficient warrant then are the Popes of Rome Cardinals Monkes Fryars and Masse-priests false Prophets Theeues and Robbers And that may in part also bee prooued by the confession of our aduersarie For if as hee saith all are to bée reputed such that can neither shew ordinarie calling from the Apostles nor extraordinarie from the spirit of God then are they to bee shunned as false Prophets and false teachers and punished seuerely not onely as men lately besmired with Gunne-powder but also as false Theeues Robbers For extraordinarie calling they pretend none ordinarie calling authorized by Gods word they haue none as hath in part beene prooued Further we say that whereas two thinges are to be respected in ordination of Bishops Ministers of Gods word viz. the rite of ordination the substance of the function whereto they are ordeyned in the popish Church our aduersaries haue neither of these two lawfull First they haue no impositioÌ„ of hands by Bishops For they haue no lawful Bishops allow the impositioÌ„ of hands of Abbots Further their Bishops are no successors of the Apostles but the popes creatures that is rather a temporal prince then a Bishop The Monks and Fryars are rather called to doe pennance then to preach wheÌ„ they are shorne Secondly their Priests are not called to preach and baptise which was the forme and substance of the mission of the Apostles and their successors but to sacrifice Christes body and blood vnder the accidents of breade and wine for quicke and dead which forme and function neither Kellison nor all the rabble of Romish Priests and Fryars shall euer prooue to bee auncient lawful or authenticall Against our Bishops Priests and Deacons no such matter can be excepted For first it caÌ„not be denyed but that our Bishops were lawfully ordeined by imposition of handes of other lawfull Bishops The Ordination of Bishop Cranmer other Bishops then liuing the Papistes themselues cannot deny to be lawfull But from them other Bishops folowing receiued the rite of consecration Bishop Parker was consecrated by the imposition of handes of Bishop Barloe Bishop Couerdale Bishop Scory and two Suffragans mentioned in the Acte of consecration yet to be seene which not onely had succession from such Bishops as our aduersaries account lawfull but in deede were lawfull Bishops Our bretherne in Germany and Zuizzerland had imposition of handes from Luther Zuinglius Oecolampadius Bucer and others in France from Farel in Scotland from Knox and others whome the Papistes cannot deny to haue bene lawfully ordeined Priests at the least if their owne formes were lawfull And from these men their successors al other Pastors Ministers of the Church haue receiued the rite of impositioÌ„ of handes or ordination to the Ministery Neither is it materiall that the first preachers of the Gpspel in these Countries were not Bishops and so called as it was in England For suppose no Bishop would haue renouÌ„ced the heresyes of Popery nor haue taught sincerely should not inferiour ministers teach truth and ordeine other teachers after them Furthermore they wanted nothing of true Bishops but the name and tytle Finally the rite and imposition of handes by such as are called Bishops is not so necessary but that in a defection of Bishops of a nation and in case of other extreme necessitye Ministers may lawfully be ordained by other Ministers which is prooued first for that generally the Presbytery or Ministery of the Church hath right to impose handes and next for that the Keyes are called Claues Ecclesiae and not Claues Episcoporum and lastly for that necessitie admitteth not the obseruance of all ceremonyes As for example admit a multitude of Christians should goe into the Indiaes without ministers it is not to be supposed but they haue power to appoint Ministers among them selues in this case of necessitye Secondly it is certaine that the Bishops and Ministers of reformed Churches haue bene sent to preach and so administer the Sacraments by such as had authoritye in the Church and that they haue executed their function accordingly Why then
that no man is to hang his saluation on these newe Ministers Which argueth first that hee supposeth the mission of the Pope and his shaâ—â—â— Masse-priestes to be a principall ground of religion and next 〈◊〉 â—he papists are to hang their saluation vpon them But this 〈…〉 nely a meere foolery and most grosse impietye but also an open way to all superstition and Heresie The same ground is also ouerthrowne by Kellisons owne positions Meere foolery it is to build our faith vpon a blind ignorant and wicked Pope Neither can wee esteeme it other then impietie to adde a foundation to that which is already laide which is Christ Iesus and to beleeue the Popes determinations as the word of God Furthermore this being graunted then will it followe the Pope teaching Heresie that all Papists are to followe him and that when he goeth to hell for teaching errors according to the Chapter si papa dist 40. that Kellison and his consorts are to goe after him Kellison supposeth that he cannot erre But this sheweth that his faith is built vppon supposals yea such supposals as by euident demonstrations are declared to be false Finally this ground of the mission of the Popes and their adherent Masse-priestes is ouerthrowne by Kellison his owne discourse For if the Popes bee not S. Peters or the first Bishops of Romes successors then are they as Kellison saith intruders and false Prophets nay theeues and Robbers But Saint Peters successors they cannot be hauing First no vocation to be Apostles Secondly taking on them an Office that S. Peter neuer had to wit to mannage both the swords to dispose of kingdomes to cut christian mens throates that will not receiue their marke and leauing S. Peters office in feeding Christes shéepe Neither are they the lawful successors of the first Bishops For first they are no Bishops as neither hauing lawfull election by the people and Clergie but onely by certaine new vpstart electors called Cardinals nor preaching or dooing the worke of a Bishop Secondly they haue deuised a new Doctrine and faith diuers from that which the first bishops of Rome taught as their decretales shew Thirdly they haue taken vppon them an vniuersall power both in temporall and ecclesiasticall matters which the Christian Bishops of Rome in times past neuer had nor challenged The Masse-priests consequently being authorized by the Pope cannot pretend any lawfull calling or mission But were they cleare of this exception yet can they not iustifie their mission For first they are called ad sacrificandum pro viuis et defunctis that is to sacrifice for quicke and dead But of such a calling there is neyther ground nor memoriall in the holy scriptures or auncient fathers Secondly they teach not the Doctrine of the Apostles and their successors but of the Popes decretales and of the Schools Sophisters Lastly they are the market slaues of Antichrist hauing their crownes shauen and their handes annointed with his oyle and with him they fight against the Saints of God Of their abhominable villanies I will say nothing at this time although I haue iust occasion being prouoked thereto by the vniust slaunders of this greasie Masse-priest against maister Luther and Maister Iohn Caluin of reuerend memorie That part of my defence shall be reserued to a greater volume Secondly this K. excludeth scriptures from being a foundation of religion Wherin he hath great reason if we respect the doctrine of Papists For how can they admit scriptures for a foundation that rayle against them flye from them and cannot stand if their authoritie were most eminent and to bee preferred before all humaine deuises but this sheweth the Kellison is a better Mason to build Babell and the synagogue of satan which is vpholden with humane traditions and the Popes sword theÌ„ the Church of God which is built vppon the Prophets and Apostles Iesus Christ being the cheefe corner stone His third foundation as it seemeth is laid vpon Councels and Fathers For of them hee talketh much Lib. 1. C. 4. but neither doth he name what Councels nor what Fathers nor what writings of Fathers he meaneth matters of verie important consideration For foundations must be certaine But among the councels actes and writings of Fathers there are many thinges neuer established by councels nor taught by Fathers Furthermore the Fathers themselues will not haue their writings taken for canonicall or authenticall scriptures as may bee prooued by infinite testimonies But I will heere onelye alleadge one or two Quamuis sanctus sit aliquis post apostolos saith Hierome in Psal 86. quamuis disertus sit non habet authoritatem He saith plainely that no Father after the Apostles time hath authoritie The same Father sheweth that onely Scriptures are the foundation of the Church and Augustine lib. 2. Contr. Crescon c. 31. hath these words literas Cypriani non vt canonicat habeo The like he saith epist 19. ad Hieronymum and epist 48. shewing that there is great difference betwixt scriptures and the writings of Fathers Finally diuers Heretikes haue pretended councels and Fathers His last and moste authenticall foundation is the supreme iudgement of the Pope But that sheweth that popish religion is rather from man then God and that the Papists are rather the synagogue of Antichrist relying vppon his decretales then the church of God that is built vpon also plainelye declare that there is no certainty in popish Religion standing vppon the humor of a man whose opinions are repugnant to other popes and whose minde may change and cause him to vtter contrarie Doctrines Thirdly it sheweth that Popish Religion is absurd being grounded vpon the opinions and sentences of ignorant impious men Finally grant this then the Papists if the Pope deny Christ must all goe to hell with him Likewise Stapleton handling of purpose this argument in the preface of his booke of Doctrinall principles deliuereth vnto vs these seauen principles and foundations of faith First the Catholike and Apostolike Church Secondly the power of the same church in teaching and iudging matters of faith infallibly Thirdlye the persons in whome this power doth reside Fourthly the meanes by which they proceede in teaching judging Fiftly the chiefe heads about which that power is conuersant Sixtly authoritie to interpret Scriptures infallibly and lastly power to deliuer Doctrines not conteined in Scriptures But if he had beene bound in statute staple I doe not thinke he could haue spoken more absurdly or impiously falslye For First if hee talke of principles demonstratiue of the christian faith then should he not haue talked of single words and termes as he doth but of propositions or Scriptures conteining the primarye propositions of the Christian faith Secondly if the rude fellow had but had one graine of pietie he would not haue left out the holy Scriptures out of the number of christian principles Thirdly the Church to speake properlye is built vpon a foundation and is not the foundation of the Church
and titles The Valentinians as Tertullian in his Book against them testifieth did colour their most vaine and filthie deuises with holy names titles and arguments of true religioÌ„ Sanctis nominibus titulis argumentis verae religionis vanissimà atque turpissima figmenta configurantes So likewise doe Papistes vnder colour of Catholike religion present to their followers their hereticall Dâ—â—trine concerning the being of Christes bodie in many places transubstantiatioÌ„ the carnall eating of Christes flesh with the mouth the deuouring of Christes body by brute beastes and the merits of congruitie Vnder the title of Gods true worship they commend the seruice of the blessed Virgin the adoration of Angels of Saints and of their images vnder the name of the sacrifice of praise and thankes-giuing they shadow the abhominable idolâ— of the Masse and vnder the name of succession the greeuous yoake of the Popes Tyrannye But as Wolues muffled in sheepes cloathing are discerned by their Woluish qualities so Hereticks are discouered by certaine markes and hereticall properties The which if Kellison would or durst haue set downe truely then would it haue appeared that Papists and not we are Heretikes For first Heretikes are they that teach new Doctrine in the Church Haerest deputatur saith Tertullian Lib. de praescript quod postea inducitur But such is the decretaline and Trent doctrine of traditions iustification Sacraments purgatorie indulgences worship of images Angels and Saints Secondly they flye the light of Scriptures and speake euill of them Therefore Tertullian calleth them lucifugas scripturarum and Ierenaeus Lib. 3. aduers haeres c. 2. saith when they are conuinced by Scriptures they fall to accuse Scriptures as if they stood not well or wanted authoritie or were to bee wrested to diuers sences or else as if truth could not bee sound by those that are ignorant of tradition Cum ex scripturis arguuntur in accusationem conuertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non recte habeant neque sint ex authoritate quia variè sint dictae quia non possit ex his inueniri veritas ab hâ—â— qui nesciant traditionem And doe not the Papists flye the light of Scriptures forbidding them to bee read publikelie in vulgar tongues and punishing such as haue Scriptures translated into their mother tongue without licence doe they not also say that Scriptures are like a nose of waxe or as Kellison saith waxy and that they depend vpon the Church and that the truth cannot sufficiently be knowne without tradition Thirdly Heretickes teach otherwise then the Apostles did Therefore the Apostle 1. Tim. 1. gaue order to Timothy that hee should charge some that they should not teach otherwise Vnde extranei inimici apostolis haeretici saith Tertullian de praescript adu haeret nisi ex diuersitate doctrinae quaÌ„ vnusquisque de suo arbitrio aduersus Apostolos aut protulit aut recepit Whence are Heretickes strangers and enemies to the Apostles but by reason of the diuersitie of Doctrine which euerie one of his owne head either deuised or receiued contrarie to the Apostles This qualitie is also incident to the Papistes that not onely teach otherwise then did the Apostles but haue also added to the Apostles doctrine all that trash which wee desire to be scoured away as being contrarie to the apostolike forme of doctrine Fourthly Heretickes stand much vpon false miracles and prophesies as the examples both of Montanistes and Seuerians doe shew There were also certaine Heretickes called mirabiliarij confirming all their Doctrines with miracles Tertullian de praescrip aduers haeret Sheweth that Heretickes shall commend the authoritie of their teachers in raysing the dead curing the weake and fore-prophecying things to come adijcient multa de authoritate cuiusque doctoris haeretici illos maxima doctrinae suae confirmasse mortuos suscitasse debiles reformasse futura significasse In which pointes the Papists doe followe them at the heeles bragging of the miracles of Dominic Francis Ignatius Xauerius and other their Romish Saints and making miracles prophecies markes of their Church and motiues to enduce men to like of their Religion Fiftly Hereticks commonly stand vpon traditions as wee may reade in Irenaeus Lib. 3. c. 2. And because Christ said he had many things to say to the Apostles which they could not theÌ„ beare imagine that their deuises were conteined in these concealed Doctrines Omnes etiam insipientissimi haeretici qui se Christianos vocari volunt audacias figmentorum suorum quas maxime exhorret sensus humanus saith Augustin tract 97. in Ioan. bac occasione euangelicae sententiae colorare conantur vbi dominus ait adhuc multa habeo vobis dicere sed non potestis portare modò The same humor is likewise in the Papists and diuers of them vse these words of our Sauiour to that purpose albeit S. Augustine calleth them therefore most foolish Heretickes Sixtly our Sauiour Christ sheweth that false Prophets shall come vnto vs in the habit and cloathes of Sheepe but are inwardly rauening Wolues The same we finde partly verified in the Arians and Donatistes but moste expressely in the Papistes For albeit they will bee called Catholikes and Christes sheepe yet they deuoure true Catholikes like Wolues and massacre all that once dare open their mouthes against their idolatries and hereticall imaginations Their inquisitors tribunals are full of blood of innocents and their garments are red with blood and carrie euident markes of their crueltie In France they haue massacred old and young men and women and spared none that came in their way farre passing in crueltie both the Donatistes and Arians 7. To defend their peruerse erroneous Doctrine Hereticks are wont to detruncate and by false expositions to peruert holy scriptures Tertullian de praescript saith of marcion that to fit his purpose he cut the Scriptures at his pleasure ad materiam suam caedem scripturarum confecit Hierome in epist ad Galat. c. 5. saith hee may bee called an Heretike that vnderstandeth the Scriptures otherwise then the sence of the holy Ghost requireth albeit he be not yet departed out of the Church So likewise the Papists abuse the holy Scriptures moste shamefully in their allegations cutting them and forcing them contrarie to the meaning of the holy Ghost The old Latin translation of the Bible cutteth off and addeth to the originall text and yet will they needes haue it authenticall These words of Isay ecce ponam in fundamentis Sion lapidem c. in praefat in lib. de pontif Rom. Bellarmine most impudently detorteth to the Pope Likewise doe the Papists abuse these wordes Hierem. 1. ecce constitui te hodie super gentes to prooue that the Pope is made head of nations These words bibite ex hoc omnes they conster as if none of the communicants but the preest were to drinke of the chalice 8. Hereticks conceale diuers of their false lewd Doctrines Iraeneus lib. 1. c. 23. saith that they holde that they are not
we bring all ReligioÌ„ into contempt But how prooueth hee that wee contemne the Churches authoritie First he sayth it is a maxime and almoste an article of fayth among vs that the true Church which once was hath erred grossely and in no lesse matters then fayth justification merit free-will workes satisfaction Purgatory prayer to Sayntes worship of Images number vertue of Sacraments sacrifice and such like But if hee meane the whole Catholique Church this is neither article nor maxime nor opinion of ours that the whole Church hath erred grossely If he meane the Pope and his adherents and parasites why should not they erre as well as the Churches of Antioch Alexandria Hierusalem and Constantinople That they haue indeed erred we haue already prooued and offer our selues alwayes ready to prooue and it is most apparant for that their Doctrine is not only diuers but also contrary to the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles and namely in the points aboue specified Next hee sayth Luther cared not for a thousand Churches and Caluin Beza and others despised all the Councels and ancient Fathers But neyther the contempt of the Synagogue of Rome nor the reiection of diuers Conuenticles assembled by Popes nor the refusall of diuers counterfet Bookes alledged vnder the name of Fathers or of some Fathers singuler opinions doth argue anye contempt of the true Church or of lawfull councelles or of the authenticall writinges and common Doctrines of Fathers Further I would haue thought that reason might haue taught him talking so long of Religion that priuate mens sayinges and opinions should not so often haue beene imputed generally to vs or to the whole Church To prooue that contempt of the Churches authoritie bringeth Religion into contempt hee alleadgeth that wee cannot knowe which is Scripture which not but by the voice of the Church But first this is nothing to vs which doe much esteeme the authoritie of the Apostolike and Catholike Church We say also that euerie priuate man is to reuerence the iudgement of the true Church But what is this to the Romish synagogue that is not the true church againe what is this to the Pope that is an oppressor of the church and an enemie of Christian Religion if Kellison wil contend that the sentence of the Pope which neither vnderstandeth nor percase can reade Scriptures in the originall tongues must needes be followed in deciding the controuersies about Canonical scriptures his owne schollers wil laugh at him that maketh a betilheaded fellow iudge in matters of religion a blinde man iudge of colours If he refer men to the particular church of Rome that now is it will bee said that she cannot bee iudge and partye and that the auncient Church is much to bée preferred before her Saint Augustine wee confesse among manye other reasons was enduced also to beleeue by the churches authoritie So likewise are many more then he But K. remooueth all other reasons and motiues in matter of discerning scriptures and maketh his moderne Church a necessarie cause and almost sole motife of faith as if none were to beleeue eyther scriptures or any other Article of faith vnlesse hee bee resolued by the Pope and the moderne Church of Rome Blasphemously also hee affirmeth that the Romaine Church being contemned wee can no more assure a man of Scripture then of a Robin-hoodes tale But to vse these comparisons is blasphemye To make so much of nothing and to stand so much vpon a blinde Pope and to preferre the Romaine moderne Church before the auncient and all other moderne churches is foolery In the fourth Chapter he beareth his Reader in hand that wee reject some bookes of Canonicall Scripture and for proofe saith that Luther reiected the Booke of Iob Ecclesiastes and all the Gospels saue that of Iohn and that we reiect the Bookes of Iudith Tobia Ecclesiasticus Wisdome and the Machabees But these latter Bookes hee shall neuer prooue to be canonicall vnlesse wée take the Canon largelye as Saint Augustine sometimes seemeth to doe S. Hierome in prol galeato Athanasius in Synops Gregorius Nazianzenus in carminibus Epiphanius in lib. de pond mensur and the moste and best Fathers esteeme of them no otherwise then we doe The calumniation concerning Luther wee haue answered already But saith K. they will needes receiue Scripture at the Roman Churches hand And of this hee would inferre that as well we ought to follow that Church in the number of bookes as in receiuing canonicall Scripture vpon that Churches warrant This sâ—ith hee but hee taketh that for graunted that no man yeeldeth him For wee take the Scriptures as the Church of Rome her selfe did from the Prophets and Apostles We doe also assure our selues that the iudgement of the Apostolike Church is farre to be preferred before the iudgement of the Apostaticall moderne Romish Church Lastlye wee answere to his argument that wee haue diuers arguments to assure vs of the authoritie truth and number of canonicall bookes of Scriptures beside the testimony of any one particular Church as for example the testimony of Scripture it selfe the likenesse Maiestie antiquitie truth stile of Scripture and such like In the fift chapter he endeuoreth to prooue that our dissensions in Religion doe open a gappe to contempt of Religion And thereupon talketh his pleasure of Caluinistes and Lutherans Puritanes Protestants soft and rigid Lutherians Zuinglians Bezites Anabaptistes Libertines Brownistes Martinistes family of loue and damned crew But first the damned crew is by vs damned In this late conspiracie of Papists Edward Baynham that is knowne to bee of the damned crewe was choson for a fit maÌ„ to goe as nuntio from this damned crew to the Pope Anabaptistes Libertines the family of loue are more among the Papists then among vs. We say to them anathema maranatha The Brownistes and Martinistes wee generally condemne The rest are the names of slaunder deuised by Papistes To answere his obiection therefore wee say that the Churches of Germanye France and other countries doe well agree and priuate men doe submitte themselues to the determination of a free generall councell and in the meane while to their nationall Churches The groundes of his sixt chapter are laide vpon the Popes head-ship For because wee want a visible head hee supposeth wee giue great aduantage to Atheistes But as the Popes headship is a matter rather fancied then prooued out of Scriptures or Fathers so what so euer is thereupon built the same is founded vpon fancie and not worth a head of Garlike That Saint Peter did rule both the Apostles and all the church as Christes vicar generall and head of the Church it cannot bee prooued All the Apostles were called alike and sent to teach and administer the Sacraments alike They had also the keyes of the Church giuen to them by one ioynt commission and Paul professeth that the principall of the Apostles gaue vnto him nothing But had Peter had any such monarchy as is