promised to the Apostles to dwel with them and to remain with them for ever And in the 16. chap. vers 13. that he shal lead them in all truth I answer first that was the Apostles prerogative the Maister-builders of the Church of Christ that in writing and teaching the doctrine of salvation they should be led in all truth and in none ever since promised nor performed in that high measure Secondly this promise of the Spirit of truth to dwel and remain in them for ever and to lead them in all truth is made and performed in all believers in so far as may sanctifie them and save them and yet ye will not deny but that every one of the believers may err Therefore this promise will not reach so far as to keep the Church from impossibility of erring As to that place in the 17. of John I answered to it before As to the 28. of Matthew I will be with you to the end of the world I answer the same thing to it which I answered to the former that this promise is made not to any visible and ordinar succession for that is to ty the promises of God to persons and places but to the Pastors of the Church whom he sends forth and to all the faithful and is performed in them in so far forth as may save them and inable them for his work But yet this will not exeem them from all possibility of erring As to that in the 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. the Church is called the pillar and ground of truth therefore ye gather It cannot err First I will ask you to whom the Apostle speaks so and upon what occasion he speaks it Ye must say To Timothie that he might know how to behave himself in the house of God which is the Church 2. Tim. 3.14 for so the Apostle writes Then I ask Is not that Church wherein Timothy should have behaved himself called the ground and pillar of truth So the Scripture calls it and ye cannot deny it Now this Church was the Church of Ephesus then the Church of Ephesus is called the ground and pillar of truth But first the Church of Ephesus fell from her first love and the candlestick is threatned to be removed from her unless she repent Rev. 2.5 She did not repent but in time became worse and worse and so heaped fault upon fault till Christ hath now removed his candlestick from her and delivered her over to darkness and death by taking his own elect to himself and giving over the reprobat that hated the truth to the blindness of their own mind so that city is left desolat to the impiety of Mahomet and she that was once called by Gods Spirit the pillar and ground of truth hath now lost the truth Now I say that which may befall one Church may befall any other Church Then that which is befallen to the Church of Ephesus may befall any other But the Church of Ephesus was first craised and then by little and little utterly overthrown and being bereft of the light of Christ is now a Church no longer Therefore I say that there is no Church on the face of the earth howsoever they flatter themselves with glorious styles of Catholick pillars and ground of the truth whose body that is the elect and chosen in it may not be overshadowed with darkness and overtaken with faintness whose chaff that is the hypocrits in it may not be wholly consumed with rottenness and destruction and whose whole frame and outward government may not loose both their strength and beauty Thirdly I say if the Church cannot err as ye say because it is the ground and pillar of truth and if the Church of Ephesus be called the pillar and ground of truth as the Scripture saith and seeing the Church of Ephesus with all the Churches of the East as ye cannot deny hath condemned the Popes supremacy as heresie Therefore one of these two must follow either that the Church that is the pillar and ground of the truth not only may err but hath erred or else it is an heresie condemned many hūdred years ago That the Pope is the head of the Church so Popery is heresie Judge ye which of these ye will choose Last of all I say the Church is called the pillar and ground of truth because it is her office and duty to hold out the word of truth as lanterns and light Philip. 2.16 by preaching it and practising it as the Priest is called the Messenger of the Lord of hosts because his lips should preserve knowledge and declare the message of God Malach. 2.7 But as there were Priests which shew not forth the message of God but caused many to err in the Law and corrupted the covenant of Levi so there may be Churches and have been which have not upheld and maintained the truth but have fallen therefrom Now I come to your last testimony of Scripture Acts 5.39 In that counsel of Gamaliel to the Council of the Scribes and Pharisies That if the doctrine of the Apostles be of God that it cannot be destroyed What do you gather here That the truth doth remain for ever Bellarmin telleth you that ye spend but time in proving that for we grant it unto you It cannot I grant be destroyed but yet it can be persecuted and removed out of places where it was before and obscured and corrupted by mens glosses and traditions as it hath been these 1500. years by the Jews to whom this was spoken That if the doctrine of the Apostles was of God they could not destroy it and yet as was said they banished it and made the Lord to deprive them thereof and to give them over to the blindness and hardness of their hearts because they would not embrace the truth when it was offered Seeing then there is not a syllab in Gods Word that will uphold this main foundation of your Church that the Church cannot err take heed to your self M. Gilbert in time and build not the damnation of your own soul and the damnation of the souls of many others upon a point of doctrine that hath not God to bear witness to it in the whole Scripture I might end here but because this point as I said before is the main pillar that upholds the whole weight of their Church and Religion therefore I will utterly overthrow the same and I will prove out of the Word of God That the Church in all ages both may err and hath erred And first the Scripture testifieth that it is only proper to God alone by nature to be perfectly holy and true and free from all errors Mark 10.18 And contrariwise man by nature is unholy a liar prone to deceive and to be deceived Rom. 3.4 9.10.11.17 and 19. vers so that by nature he is nothing else but a mass of blindness and corruption so that the light he hath he hath it by free grace by Gods Spirit to make
certainty and warrant of all the doctrine in the Scripture and the Scripture it self that they are of God but the testimony of your Popes and Clergy What is it to expone the certainty of the Lords Scripture and of all Religion comprehended in the same to the mocking and derision of the wicked if this be not Yea is not this to prefer the voice and authoritie of your Popes and Clergie to the voice of God himself For what is the testimonie of your Church but the testimonie of men And is not the Scripture the testimonie and voice of God himself Do ye not therefore lift up the authoritie of your Church that is your Popes and Clergie above the authoritie of God in his Word which as you say that there is no other warrant of the Divinitie of the Scripture but only the testimonie of your Church But God be thanked in Christ Jesus who hath delivered us from this blindness for we have other warrants whereupon the certaintie of our salvation and the Divinitie of the Scripture depends then by the testimonie of the true Church much less the testimonie of your Church which is Antichristian and given over of God to believe lies and so worthy of no credit But how prove ye it Ye say there was no other Church immediatly before Luther but that of yours which was worthy of credit Whereunto I answer first that is false for there was a true Church immediatly before him which ye persecuted as I have proved else where Next I say your argument will not follow there was no other Church immediatly before him c. Ergo we have no other warrant that the Scripture is the written Word of God For we have also the testimony of the Church of the Jews concerning the Old Testament and of the primitive Church in all ages concerning both the Old and New Testament which are not only other warrants then the testimonies of your Roman Church but also worthie of more credit Next I say we have many more principal and more effectual warrants that the Scripture is of God then the testimony of the Church either past or present As first the testimonie of the holy Ghost crying testifying and sealing up in all consciences of the godly not only the truth of the doctrine contained in them but also the Divinitie of the Scripture which Stapleton lib. 1. de authorit script cap. 1.6.7 denyes not and therefore the Scripture saith That the Spirit that is the holy Ghost hears witness that the Spirit that it is the doctrine is truth 1. John 5 6. Secondly the testimony of the Scripture it self warranting and testifying of it self the whole Scripture is inspired of God 2. Tim. 3.16 The Old Testament warranted both by the testimony of its self the histories and prophesies testifying of the books of Moses and also by the testimony of the New Testament both in general 2. Pet. 1.19 Luke 24.44 and 16 29 John 5.39 and also in particular as the books of Moses Matth. 1.5 and 19.7 and 22. John 3.14 and the historical books as the history of the Queen of Saba Matth. 12. and of the widow of Sarepta Luke 4. and of the Psalms in sundry places Acts 2. and 13. and of sundrie of the books of the Old Testament Heb. 11. and Ruth also Matth. 1. and out of Isaiah Ezechiel and Jeremy many testimonies are cited and out of the Books of the smal Prophets Acts 7.42 And such like the New Testament hath the confirmation of it out of the Old Testament For whatsoever thing were prophesied in the Old Testament concerning the Messias are fulfilled in the New Testament so if the Old Testament hath authority the New Testament also hath authority And such like Peter by his testimonie confirmes the Epistles of Paul to be the written Word of God Thirdly the majestie of the doctrine which shines in it the simplicitie puritie and heavenliness of the speach therein which is not to be found in any other writings whatsoever the ancientness and antiquitie of them as the Books of Moses far ancienter then any other writing The accomplishment of the Prophesies and Oracles in them as they were fore-told their miracles and wonders whereof they testifie the testimonies of the holy Martyrs that shed their blood in the defense of the truth of them their wonderful preservation notwithstanding of the rage and cruelty of sundry tyrants who sought them out most diligently to have destroyed them all testifying of the Divinity of the holy Scripture So then to conclud this seeing we have the testimony of Gods Spirit sealing up the truth of them in our hearts and the testimony of the Scripture it self testifying of its self so many manner of wayes and sundry other arguments out of the Scripture it self and the testimony of the Church in all ages all warranting to us the Divinity of the holy Scripture I cannot but wonder at the unsearchable judgement of God in blinding you so far that ye have set it down in writ that we have no other warrant of the holy Scripture but the authority of your Church SECTION VI. Concerning the necessity of Baptism to Infants Master Gilbert Brown ANd albeit here it were not necessary to me to prove any heads of our Religion by the Word of God because M. John hath promised to improve the same by the Word which he is no ways able to perform yet to satisfie the Christian Reader and that he may know that the Word of God is only on our side and with us so that their exposition and notes be taken from the same I will set down God willing some heads for examples cause that that same doctrine which we teach and practise is the same that our Savior and his Apostles preached before and is written in the same that he calls the touchstone Master John Welsch his Reply Howsoever ye say this M. Gilbert that that doctrine which ye teach and practise in your Church is that same which our Savior and his Apostles teached before and is written in the Scripture yet in very truth there is nothing less in your conscience For if you and your Roman Church were so perswaded wherefore then should ye have declined to have it tryed by the same And wherefore have some of your own chief pillars and defenders of your Roman Religion who knows the certaintie of the same wherefore I say would they have proclaimed it by writ unto the world that the most part and the principal heads of their Religion are unwritten traditions which have neither their original beginning nor authoritie in the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same And wherefore would your Roman Church have heapt up so many false accusations and blasphemies against the same And wherefore last of all would ye have set up your Pope and his Bishops to be supream and soveraign Judge over the same as you do But this you do because you know that if ye rejected the Scripture
of purpose in repeating the sentence omit to say He that is not baptized but he that believeth not shal be damned for he saw that faith only might suffise to salvation and without faith nothing can suffise Justly then might your Popes sentence and your own be said to be cruel in our confession But how prove ye this doctrine of yours to be Christs Ye cite John 3.2 where our Savior saith Except a man be born again c. which say ye is properly meant of the Sacrament of Baptism Upon the which ye infer the necessity of the same Whereunto I answer that interpretation of yours is false for our Savior speaks not here of the Sacrament of Baptism and that for these reasons First our Savior speaks here generally of all men and not of infants only and therefore he saith Except a man be born c. speaking to Nicodemus who was a man and not an infant so that if your exposition were true all men that died without baptism and not infants only are excluded from heaven But that is false for first the good thief was not baptized with water and yet our Savior said to him This night thou shall be with me in paradise And therefore our Savior speaks not here of the Sacrament of Baptism for he speaks of that new birth by water and the spirit without the which none can be saved but this thief and others were saved without the Baptism of water therefore he speaks not here of it Next our Savior in that place speaks of that new birth by the spirit and water which is so absolutly necessary to the salvation of all men that it admits no exception This cannot be denyed But Bellarmin makes two exceptions against the absolut necessity of Baptism one of the martyrdom the other of true conversion and pennance whereof saith he either of them supplies the want of Baptism lib. 1. de Baptis cap. 6 Therefore our Savior speaks not here of the Sacrament of Baptism Thirdly if we will believe Christ Jesus expounding himself and Scripture expounding Scripture I say by water is not alwayes meant the Sacrament of Baptism but the purifying grace of Christ which is called the water of life so our Savior speaks in John 4.11 and 7.38 And in that same sense water is here added to the spirit to expound the more sensibly the efficacy of the Spirit in washing and cleansing us as fire is added to the Spirit in the third of Matthew 11. verse He will baptize you with the Spirit and with fire which is not properly understood of any natural fire but taken figuratively to expound more sensibly the force and efficacy of the Spirit in burning up our corruption Fourthly what an absurd thing were this which should follow if your exposition were true that for the want of the sprinkling of a little water the infants should perish that are in the covenant seeing they were not the cause of the want of it Further I say that suppose Baptism were here meant yet there is no such necessitie as ye suppose for if martyrdom and pennance may supplie the want of this water as Bellarmin confesseth how much more may the holy Ghost supply the want of the same in infants and if any thing may supply the want of it then it is not so absolutly necessary that all these infants are damned that wants it 2. Our Savior speaks as generallie and absolutlie Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you John 6.53 which ye interpret of the other Sacrament so that if your interpretation were true the Eucharist should be as absolutly necessary to the salvation of infants as you say Baptism is But the first you will not grant Therefore the other must also be falfe 3. If here ye would infer a necessity of Baptism then I say at that same time it began to be necessary for he saith not He that shal not be born again c. but he that is not born c. But Bellarmin saith lib. de bapt cap. 5. It was not necessary while Christs death yet not while the Pentecost fifty days after his death therefore it is not like that any necessity of Baptism is here understood for it had been good reason that Christs Baptism which was ministred while he lived in the flesh should have been as necessary as the Apostles Baptism which was ministred afterward But the first was not absolutly necessary as Bellarmin testifies therefore neither is the second And last of all lest ye should say all this is our exposition the Master of the Sentences expounding this place sent lib. 4. distinct 4. cap. His autem who suppose he be of this judgement with you concerning infants departed yet he saith that this place is to be understood of them who might have been baptized but contemned the same therefore this place imputes no absolut necessity of it As for the rest of the places of Scripture which ye quote they serve nothing to prove such an absolut necessitie of Baptism as ye suppose but only sets down the effects of the same which are sealed up in the hearts of the believers by the holy Ghost as the inward worker and Baptism as the outward instrument as our salvation through the death of Christ 1. Pet. 3.20.21 Tit. 3.5 Mark 16.16 our union with Christ Gal. 3.27 and with his death Rom. 6 3.4 and remission of sins regeneration mortification of the old man Acts 22.17 and 2.38 1. Cor. 6.11 And therefore Circumcision in whose room Baptism is succeeded it is called the seal of righteousness which is by faith Rom. 4. Take away therefore your exposition from these places and there will no such absolut necessitie of Baptism follow here as ye suppose And therefore Bellarmin the learnedst of your writers lib. 1. de sacr bapt cap. 4. because he knew that these places which ye quote here could not prove such an absolut necessitie of Baptism nor have no appearance to prove the same doth not cite one of them for the proof of the necessity except only the third of John leaving all the rest And as for that of Augustin we grant he was of that mind that Baptism was necessary to infants but he was also of that judgement that the Eucharist was necessary unto them and yet your Roman Church nor you neither I hope will subscribe to this error of his Seeing therefore you dissent from him in the necessity of the one and that upon good ground of the Scripture why may not we also dissent from him in the other having so many grounds and reasons out of the Word of God to the contrary as hath been said And this for the first point Now let the Christian Reader judge upon whose side the Word of God is SECTION VII Whither a man by the help of the grace of GOD may perfectly keep the Commandments Master Gilbert Brown SEcondly our doctrine is that a man
Sacrament of the union of Christ and his Church And yet our new Confession detests the same and will have it but a bastard Such concord is betwixt Christ his Apostles and our new preachers of the Gospel and also among themselves M. John Welsch his Reply The ninth point of your doctrine is you will have Marriage a Sacrament of the New Testament and that properly and that according to the institution of God unto the which the promise of the grace of justification is annexed so Bellarmin lib. 1. de matrim cap. 2. and the Council of Trent saith But mark Christian Reader their ground of this their doctrine They say the bond of marriage among infidels may be broken but say they the bond of marriage among the faithful cannot be broken And they make the cause of this difference to be this because the marriage of Christians is a Sacrament So they reason Marriage among Christians is a Sacrament therefore say they it cannot be broken But what is their principal ground now whereby they prove marriage to be a Sacrament Because say they the marriage of Christians is a bond indissoluble therefore it is a Sacrament which hath the grace of Justification joyned with it So mutually one error upholds another Upon the which I reason If the bond of marriage may be broken for adultery then it cannot be a Sacrament this your Church grants because they make that the ground of this but the bond of marriage may be broken for adultery as hath been proved before both by the Scriptures and also by your own Canons Councils Doctors and Popes therefore marriage is not a Sacrament Secondlie in the Sacraments of the New Testament there are earthly elements as the water in Baptism the bread and wine in the Supper and an express form of words prescribed in the New Testament as in Baptism I baptize thee c. and in the Supper This is my body c. Matth. 26. They have their express institution by Christ in the same and have the promises of remission of sins and justification annexed to them But none of these things are to be had in marriage First no earthly element next no form prescribed in the Word of God thirdly no express institution of it as of a Sacrament fourthly no promise of the remission of sins and salvation annexed unto it Therefore it cannot be a Sacrament of the New Testament properly Thirdly if marriage were a Sacrament and such a Sacrament that signified and gave the grace of justification with it that is remission of sins then wherefore should your Church forbid all your Clergie from the same And wherefore should ye abstain from that Sacrament which is instituted of God to give remission of sins to you and to make you acceptable to God as your doctrine saith Bellarmin lib. 1. de matrim cap. 5. pag. 67. Why should ye deprive your self of that thing which may place you in Gods favor and purchase to you remission of sins as ye say marriage may do it is a token that either ye believe not your own doctrine or else prefers whoredom and adultery which is condemned of God to marriage which is Gods ordinance and honorable among all men Fourthly I say if the marriage of Adam and Eva in Paradise and the marriage of all the Patriarchs and Prophets and Priests and people in the Old Testament was not a Sacrament neither is the marriage of Christians in the New Testament a Sacrament For they were symbols that represented our spiritual conjunction with Christ as well as the marriage of Christians in the New Testament doth the which you will not deny And Pope Leo saith Epist 92. That marriage was instituted from the beginnning that they might have in themselves a Sacrament of Christ and his Church but the first you grant your selves was not a Sacrament therefore neither is the second a Sacrament Fifthly that which is filthiness and pollution cannot be a Sacrament to give forgiveness of sins but Pope Syricius calls marriage pollution and uncleanness Dist 82. cap. Proposuisti c. Plurim 8. Therefore it cannot be a Sacrament if he speak true Sixthly if marriage be such a Sacrament as ye say to give remission of sins then it should be more excellent then virginity because virginity hath not this promise but this ye will not grant therefore it is not a Sacrament Last of all Durandus a great Doctor of your Church saith Ut Capreolus refert in 4. dist 26. quaest unica artic 3. That marriage is not properly a Sacrament As for that place in the fifth of the Ephesians which ye quote where the Apostle saith This is a great mystery speaking of the mutual duâ—ies of man and wife I answer first he calls not marriage this great mystery but that band of our conjunction with Christ as he expones himself This is saith he a great mystery and then he subjoyns I speak of Christ and his Church Secondly suppose the old Interpreter doth translate this word mystery a Sacrament yet you know if you know the Greek language that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called a secret Thirdly will you have all these to be Sacraments properly which are called mysteries in the New Testament and which the old Interpreter and your Rhemists translats Sacraments then shal you not only make marriage a Sacrament but also the chief articles of our faith 1. Tim. 3.16 and the Gospel Col. 1. Eph. 3 1. 2. Thess 27 and the seven stars in the Revelation chap. 1.20 and the whore o Babel and the iniquity of the Antichrist Rev. 17 5 all Sacraments For they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek and some of them are translated Sacraments by the old Interpreter and your Rhemists as marriage is I wonder that ye quote Melancthon as though he were of your opinion seeing Bellarmin acknowledges plainly lib. 1. de matrim cap. 1. 5. that he denyes it to be a Sacrament properly as Baptism and the Lords Supper is but only grants that it is a Sacrament in some respect But you regard not what ye write so being it may carry any show against us The same we answer to you of Zuinglius and Merchiston They call it a Sacrament but not in that sense that Baptism and the Lords Supper are called Sacraments taking the word improperlie and more amply as Bellarmin confesses of Melancthon So here is no discord neither betwixt us and Christ neither among our selves But in very deed you are they who are at discord both with Christ and among your selves For beside this that Bellarmin and Innocentius calls the marriage of the Gentils Sacraments because you may answer that they call them Sacraments improperly as Melancthon Zuinglius and Merchiston calls marriage a Sacrament improperly So if they be at variance with us for calling marriage a Sacrament so is Bellarmin lib. 1. de sacram matrim c. 3 and Pope Innocent cap. gaud de divort at variance with your
let us read why do we strive Ireneus saith lib. 4. contra haeres cap. 63. That the lawful exposition of the Scripture which hath no peril with it is according to the Scripture themselves What can be more plain M. Gilbert And I ask you further Would you have vs to ascribe more to the interpretation of the Fathers then the learned of your Church do As Cajetan a Cardinal in Praefat. in Comment in lib. Mosis and Doctor Andradius the first saith That God hath not tyed the exposition of the Scripture unto the exposition or sense of the Fathers If God hath not bound it as he saith why then should we bind it Wherefore there he desires the Reader Not to mislike it if sometimes in the expounding of them he fall into a sense agreeable to the text though it go against the stream of the Fathers If he speak truth then that sense that is agreeable to the text suppose it be against the stream of their expositions is to be received and preferred before them And Andradius that learned man saith That the Fathers spake not Oracles when they exponed the Scriptures but might therein be deceived Defens fid Trident lib. 2. And he saith more That the oversights of the translation which they followed must needs cause them sometimes to miss the meaning of the holy Ghost And yet you would have the sense of the Scriptures to be decided by them who sometimes have missed the meaning of the holy Ghost And he concluds in the end That the holy Ghost is the only and faithful interpreter of the Scriptures Thus the fairest flowers of your garden and chiefest pillers of your Faith have written So that if they speak true whom I know not if ye will presume to contradict the exposition of the Scripture is not tyed unto the exposition of the Fathers and it is lawful to go with the text against the stream of their expositions And whereas you say if I will be as good as my word the matter will soon be ended I am glad of it if you think as you speak My word was M. Gilbert as your self hath written it that there be very few points of controversie between us wherein I will not get some testimonies of sundry Fathers of the first six hundred years proving with us against them meaning your Church And I desired any man to set me down any weighty point of controversie one or mo and he should have the proof of it These were my words Now ye say if I will be as good as my word the matter will soon be ended Whither I have been as good as my word in this or not let the Reader judge And I appeal your conscience M. Gilbert before the Lord in the great day whither it be true or not For not only in that example of Justification which ye cast in but almost in all the heads which are debated among us I have brought in sundry testimonies of sundry Fathers with us against you Yea I have been better then my word in that For I have brought in testimonies of sundry that lived after the six hundred years and not of these only but also testimonies of sundry of your own Doctors Jesuits Cardinals Bishops Canons Councils and Popes proving with us in some points against your selves I look therefore M. Gilbert that ye shal be as good as your word and that the matter shal end here between you and me For both you have said that the matter would soon end if I were as good as my word and also ye have promised and subscribed with your hand to reform your Religion in all things wherein it is not conform to their testimonies The which if you do then must you renounce the supremacy of your Pope the sacrifice of your Mass your Transubstantiation your Justification by works your Merits of works your perfect fulfilling of the Law of God your erroneous opinions that the Church cannot err that the Scripture should not be Judge with sundry others For in all these I have brought the testimonies of sundry Fathers and in some of them the testimonies of your own Doctors Councils Canons and Popes with us against you Either therefore take shame and falshood for ever more upon you or else keep your word and your writ which ye have subscribed here and reform these points of your Religion As for that calumny wherewith ye charge us to have taken away a great part from the Scripture I know you mean the Apocrypha which bears not the mark and stamp of Gods Spirit as being neither written by Prophets nor yet the most part of them in the prophetical language the Hebrew tongue wherein all the Old Testament was written except some things of Daniel and Ezra which were written in the Chaldaick language which was known then to the Jews nor yet received as Canonical by the Church of the Jews which your (a) Bellar. lib. 1. cap. 10. Church will not deny Nor yet acknowledged Canonical by the testimonies of sundry (b) Melito lib. 4. cap. 26. Euseb Origen lib. 6. cap. 25. Euseb Athan. in synop Hilar. in prolog explan Psalm Cyrill in 4. catechis Ruffinus in expos symboli Hieron in prologo galeato Fathers (c) Synod Laodicen Canon 59. confirmed by the Council Trullan Councils and of your (d) Greg. Mag. in comment in Jobum lib. 19. cap. 16. Hugo Cardinalis in prolog Josuae Cajetan Cardinal in fine comment Hester Arias Montanus who was present at the Council of Trent in aeditione quadam Hebraicorum Bibliorum interlinearium interpretationum selves also Papists of great name some rejecting all some more some fewer containing also many things repugnant to the truth of God set down in the Canonical Scripture Last of all wanting that majesty of Gods Spirit which so evidently shines in the Canonical Scripture And therefore most justly say we that ye underly the curse of God pronounced in his Scripture Rev. 22.18 for the adding unto the holy truth of God And look to it M. Gilbert what you will say to your Cardinal Cajetan who hath denyed sundry Books and parts of the Canonical Scripture in the New Testament Master John Welsch Now if the first thing I offer me to prove be sound of verity that is that our Religion is that self-same and no other then that that Jesus Christ preached and his Apostles and theirs is not so but devised by the man of sin and that Antichrist that whore of Babylon then the plea is won But if I prove the second also then I hope they will never open their mouth to speak evil of the truth of God as though it were but a new Religion M. Gilbert Brown When M. John proves the thing that he is not able to prove we shal do the thing that we are not able to perform but it is a wonder of him to put in so many ifs and doth nothing to the matter For it is a true
thereof lest the people should be discouraged and faint went himself with the Canonier up the walls and desired he should charge such a piece of Canon and shoot for GOD should direct that shot and cause it to prosper which accordingly did to the astonishment of on-lookers dismount that battery and the Lord so ordered things after that the King did parley on favorable terms with the City and did only himself with his Court come in without doing any violence Upon the LORDS day thereafter some of the godly in that place fearing M. Welsch his hazard did seriously deal with him that he would forbear to go forth and preach the Court being there But he would by no means be hindered showing them he would adventure to preach the Word to his people and trust the Lord with what concerned himself Therefore he went forth and preached having a very great Auditory both of friends and others who came upon the fame of such a man But in time of Sermon a great man of the Court with some of the Kings own guard was sent to bring him forthwith before the King and whilst he was entering the Church which had some difficulty by reason of the multitude M. Welsch did turn himself toward that entry and desired the people to give way to one of the great Peers of France that was coming in But after whilst he was coming near the Pulpit to execute his Commission he did with great authority speak to him before all the people and in the Name of his Master JESUS CHRIST charged him that he would not disturb the worship of GOD. Wherewith he was so affrighted that he fell a shaking yea was forced to crutch down and make no further trouble Sermon being ended M. Welsch with much submission went to the King who was then greatly incensed and with a threatning countenance asked What he was And how he durst preach Heresie so near his person and with such contumacy carry himself To which with due reverence bowing himself he did answer I am Sir the servant and Minister of JESUS CHRIST whose truth I preached this day which if your Majesty rightly knew ye would have judged it your duty to have come your self and heard And for my doctrine I did this day preach these three truths to your people First that man is fallen and by nature in a lost condition yea by his own power and abilities is not able to help himself from that estat Secondly that there is no salvation or deliverance from wrath by our own merits but by JESUS CHRIST and his merit alone Thirdly I did also preach this day the just liberties of the Kingdom of France that your Majesty oweth obedience to Christ only who is the Head of the Church and that the Pope as he is an enemy to Christ and his truth so also to the Kings of the earth whom he keepeth under slavery to his usurped power Whereat the King for a time keeping silence with great astonishment turned to some about him and said Surely this is a man of GOD. Yea after did commune with him and with great respect dismissed him The next year the differences betwixt the King and Protestants growing greater the City was again besieged M. Welsch intreated the Citizens to make peace with the King for God had a controversie with them for their unthankfulness and not walking answerably to the Gospel therefore he was not with them as formerly but had given them up to their enemies and if they stood out their City should be taken But the City not hearkening to him was taken and in part sacked At which time the King passed a solemn order that none should in the least wrong M. Welsch nor any thing that belonged to him under highest pains and said to him as Nebuzaradan to Jeremiah All the land is before thee whither it seemeth good and convenient for thee to go thither go But M. Welsch being grown exceedingly infirm in his body and the Physicians advising that only his native air could help him choised to go over to England whereupon the King granted him a safe-conduct So he came over to London where he remained a certain space but not being permitted to return to Scotland his sickness encreased and he died During the time of his sickness he was so filled and overcome with the sensible enjoyment of GOD that he was sometimes over-heard in prayer to have these words LORD hold thy hand it is enough thy servant it a clay vessel and can hold no more He was a man for piety converse and communion with GOD most singular and rare M. Rutherfurd in his Epistle prefixed to his Survey of Antinomianism showeth that from the witnesses of his life he had this account that of every twenty-four hours he gave usually eight to prayer if other necessary and urgent duties did not hinder Yea he spent many dayes and nights which he set apart in fasting and prayer for the condition of the Church and the sufferings of the Reformed Churches abroad He used even in the coldest winter nights to rise for prayer as the Author of the fulfilling of the Scripture testifieth and oft times his wife hath risen to seek after him where he hath been found lying on the ground weeping and wrestling with the LORD yea some times would have been much of the night alone in the Church of Air on that account One time especially his wife finding him overcharged with grief he told her he had that to press him which she had not the souls of three thousand people to answer for whilst he knew not how it was with many of them And at another time whilst she found him alone his spirit almost overcharged with anguish and grief upon her serious enquiry said That the times which were to come on Scotland were heavy and sad though she should not see them and this for the contempt of the Gospel While he was in France a Frier travelling through the Countrey came to his house and M. Welsch being very hospital permitted him to stay all night The Friers bed being not far from M. Welsch his chamber heard a noyse with many deep sighs and groans all night which he supposed to have been an evil spirit and therefore arose early in the morning and would needs be gone a Scots Gentle-man being in the house and seeing the Frier troubled enquired what the matter meant that he would be gone so soon He answered he would not stay in a Huguenots house any longer for they had converse with evil spirits The Gentle-man understanding the matter told him that it was M. Welsch whose ordinary it was to pray all night and desired him to stay the next night and he should see the truth thereof which accordingly he did and was so much astonished at M. Welsch his piety that he forsook Popery and embraced the Reformed Religion As he conversed with GOD and dwelt in the Mount by prayer and wrestling with GOD night and
a notable sentence to this purpose It is to be wished saith he where heresie flowrishes that all these who have any gift of writing that they all write suppose they should write not only of the self-same matters or questions but also the self-same things or arguments suppose perchance in other words For saith he it is expedient that Hereticks understand that there are not only one or two but many in the camps of the Catholicks who dare with open face meet them And he saith There is another commodity that comes by the writing of many to wit that by this means the Catholicks books themselves are more shortly and easily brought unto the hands of all men so that while as some fall upon one and some fall upon others yet notwithstanding they are all instructed to use the same weapons in their common dangers The which how fitly it agrees unto this purpose of mine I leave it to the judgement of all men who know the estat of this blinded Countrey wherein that darkness of the Antichristian Kingdom is so far spred the confident brags of the adversary are so universally credited the people scattered as sheep without shepherdâ— Matth. 9.36 lying wide open to all the assaults of the Devil and the deceits of these ravenous wolves and their hands so full of Papistical books the deadly weapons of their own destruction without any one book almost for ought that I know whereby either these that are perverted may be revoked from their errors or these that are assaulted may be sustained from yeelding to the adversary or those that are weak may be confirmed Not unlike the miserable estate wherein the Hebrews were brought unto through the tyranny of the Philistims wanting both sword and spear in the time of their warfare having no smiths in their whole land whereby they were compelled to go to their enemies to sharpen their cowter and sock and other instruments 1. Sam. 13.19.20 22. Now as for the work it self I say nothing of it but only recommend it to the blessing of GOD in all your hearts and consciences The which also hath been my earnest desire to GOD from the first time that I put in hand to the pen continually that his effectual presencâ— might be joyned therewith both to convict the contraâ—â— minded and to confirm the godly Read ye it therefâ—â—â— with that affection of heart wherewith it was written anâ— desire ye that blessing in the reading of it as I did in thâ— writing of it and then I hope through GODS blessing ye shal reap some profit by it Now the GOD of all mercy and the Father of all light illuminat all our eyes more and more and cause the light of his glorious Gospel to shine in our hearts and bless all the means thereof that we may be the children of light here and may be partakers of that everlasting weight of glory hereafter in CHRIST JESUS Amen From Air the 18. December 1602. Yours in the Lord M. Iohn Welsch Preacher of Christs Gospel AN INDEX OF THE SECTIONS of M. Welsch Treatise SEction I. The Introduction page 1. Section II. Whither the Church of Rome be a true Church page 4 Section III. Concerning the infallibility of the Church and her immunity from error page 12 Section IV. Whither the Church of Rome be the only true Church and the Reformed not true Churches page 44 Section V. Concerning the Judge of Controversies namely Whither God speaking in the Scriptures be Judge of Controversies page 71 Section VI. Concerning the necessity of Baptism to Infants page 85 Section VII Whither a man by the help of the grace of God may perfectly keep the Commandments page 93 Section VIII Whither a man by his free-will may resist the will of God page 104 Section IX Concerning transubstantiation and Christs real and substantial body and blood in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper page 106 Section X. Concerning the sacrifice of the Mass page 131 Section XI Concerning the degrees and means whereby the sacrifice of the Mass crap in page 170 Section XII Of the manifold abuses of the Mass page 189 Section XIII Concerning Confession and Absolution by the Priest page 219 Section XIV Of Extreme-unction whither it be a Sacrament page 2â—1 Section XV. Concerning Imposition of hands whither it be a Sacrament page 226 Section XVI Concerning Marriage whither it be a Sacrament page 231 Section XVII Concerning the merit of Good Works page 240 Section XVIII Concerning works of Supererogation page 246 Section XIX Concerning Christs descending into Hell page 253 Section XX. Concerning the difference betwixt Popery and the Reformed Religion page 258 Section XXI Concerning Justification by Faith page 263 Section XXII Concerning the authority of the Fathers page 270 Section XXIII Concerning the visibility of the Church and which â—he visible Church may make defection page 278 Section XXIV Where our Religion was before Luther Or a Catalogue of them who professed our Religion in the midst of Popery page 314 Section XXV That the Reformed Churches have not renewed old condemned Heresies page 328 Section XXVI That the Church of Rome renewed and maintaineth old condemned Heresies page 337 Section XXVII Concerning Antichrist page 343 Section XXVIII That the Pope is Antichrist page 346 An Index of the Sections contained in M. Crafords Treatise SEction I. Showing that the principles of Papists are bloody treasonable and rebellious against the person and authority of Princes and peace of Kingdoms And the excuses of H. T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies are proved to be frivolous page 445 Section II. Showing that no Oath or Bond can oblige a Papist and that they hold it as a principle that no faith is to be kept to Hereticks page 457 Section III. Showing that the Pope and Synagogue of Rome have been the grand Authors of Warrs and Combustions and Confusions in the Christian world both before and since the Reformation page 465 Section IV. That the continual practise of Papists ever since the Reformation hath been to plot and practise bloody and treasonable Conspiracies Affassinations and Murders both of Princes and People who profeâ— the Reformed Religion page 474 Section V. Containing some instances in particular of the barbarous and inhumane cruelty of Papists to Protestants where they had the power over them page 490 The Conclusion Holding forth the hazard that the Churches of Britain and Ireland are in of being ruined by Antichrist page 5â—8 A LEARNED PIOUS AND ELABORAT Treatise wherein many of the greatest and weightiest points of Controversie betwixt the Reformed Churches and Papists are solidly debated and the truth of the doctrine of the Reformed Churches especially of the Churches of Scotland evidently demonstrated and the falshood and error of the Popish Religion and doctrine plainly discovered and solidly refuted by Scripture Fathers and also by some of their own Popes Doctors Cardinals and other Popish Writers By way of Reply to one M. Gilbert Brown Priest SECTION I. THE
Babel and therefore one day she shal be recompensed for all her iniquity Rev. 17.6 and 18.24 Go out of her therefore and save thy soul that thou be not tormented in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone with her for evermore Rev 18.45 Otherwise I call heaven and earth to witness against thee that thou shalt die in her sin and the smoke of thy torment shal ascend for evermore Rev. 14.1 What now will you say to these things that your Church is not the Catholick Church but a part of it only and is only Catholick because of the Catholick doctrine that she professes But if this be true wherefore then did your general Council condemn it in John Hus and burn him for that doctrine which both your self must confess to be true and is agreeable to Scripture Fathers and your own Popes Next I say suppose when ye are brought to this strait ye must say so yet for all this not only call ye your Church Catholick because of the soundness of doctrine which ye suppose she professes but also and speciallie to make the simple believe that there is no salvation out of her As appeareth by the Epistle of Cardinal Cusanus writing to the Bohemians Cochlaeus histor Hussitar lib. 21. Therefore ye call it the only true Church and the Catholick Church for out of the particular Church there is salvation but out of the Catholick Church there is no salvation Thirdlie I say as the Epistles of Peter John James and Jude are intituled Catholick not because of the soundness of their doctrine which is common to the Epistles of Paul also and all the rest of the Scripture which in that respect may also be called Catholick but because they are written generallie to all So the Church is called Catholick properly not because of the soundness of doctrine for that is common to all the particular Churches that have the puritie of Religion but because it comprehends all the particular Churches and all the elect And also to put a difference between the Church of the Jewes which did comprehend but one certain people and the Christian Church since the coming of Christ which is not bound to any certain place or nation or people but indifferently receives all both Jew and Gentil that believes and therefore is it called Catholick and therefore in our Belief we say not I believe the Catholick doctrine but the Catholick Church So by this she is properlie distinguished from particular Churches as the mother from the daughters and the whole body from the particular members So then if you would speak properlie of your Church and not make your styles snares to catch the souls of the simple call her but a particular Church and a member of the Catholick Church but yet dead and rotten as shal be shown afterward by the grace of God Otherwise if you will but call her the Catholick Church you first rob the mother for she is properly Catholick and also injures the rest of the daughters For in respect of the soundness of faith they may also challenge the same to them And thirdly ye deceive the souls of the simple thereby by making them believe there is not one other Church but yours And last of all you are sacrilegious in decking an adulteress with the styles of the spouse of Christ As to the third point wherein ye calumniate the truth of God which we profess in calling it a new Evangel and old renewed and new invented heresies of our own These are indeed heavie words wherewith ye blaspheme the word of the Lord Acts 18.6 and 19.9 and speak evil of it to the people of this Countrey And therefore as the Apostle saith of them that blasphemed his doctrine Your damnation is just Rom. 3.8 For a wo by Gods own mouth is pronounced against them that call good evil and evil good truth falshood and falshood truth and darkness light and light darkness Isai 5.20 But as the Archangel when he strave with Satan about the body of Moses did not blame him with cursed speaking but said The Lord rebuke thee Jude 9. so we will not blame you with cursed speaking but the Lord rebuke you For ye speak here the vision of your own heart and not from the mouth of the Lord And ye are not the first that hath blasphemed the truth of God for so did the Jewes before you call the doctrine of the Gospel a sect a heresie and the Gentiles called it strange Gods and a new doctrine and the preachers thereof a setter forth of strange Gods and of new doctrine and a babler Acts 28. and 14. and 17. The Jews said that Christ had a Devil and yet as our Lord testifies it was they that were the children of the Devil John 8.44 Ye say that we preach a new Evangel and old new heresies but this is the sin the doctrine of your Church For to let that pass of that new everlasting Gospel which your Friers invented devised as testifieth Guliel de sancto Amore in his book de pericul noviss temp anno 1192. wherein was contained such blasphemies as the heaven and earth abhorrs to hear them That God the Father reigned under the law God the Son under grace And the holy Ghost was then that year to begin his kingdom and to continue to the end of the world And that Jesus Christ was not God his Sacrament nothing and his Evangel not a true Evangel O horrible blasphemie the which if God had not raised up some men in those days to have resisted it as the Waldenses and others which ye call hereticks and infamous men the Gospel of Christ had been lost and in stead of it we would have gotten a new Gospel the dreggs whereof yet remains in your Church But I will let this pass because the wise men of Babel I mean your Clergy of Rome saw that that was too plain an iniquitie therefore they caused it quietlie to be removed and buried and yet they not condemned as hereticks that preached it But by the contrary the Waldenses and others that withstood it was condemned as hereticks and their books burnt To let this pass I say which testifieth what the world might have looked for at your hands if the Lord had not provided better for his poor Church Your whole doctrine is Antichristian as shal be proved hereafter your Church Babel Rev. 17. your Kingdom that second beast Rev. 13.11 that hath two horns like the Lamb and yet speaks like the dragon and your head the man of sin 2. Thess 2. and son of perdition And ye are they that have renewed old condemned heresies and have invented new of your own as shal be proved afterward by Gods grace SECTION III. Concerning the Churches infallibility and immunity from error M. John Welsch SAy they our Religion is so ancient that it hath continued ever by a lineal succession of Pastors and Bishops from the dayes of Christ and his
Apostles till now never interrupted never spoken against but of late since Martin Luthers dayes But yours say they is newlie forged and invented never heard tell of but since Luther and Calvins dayes Therefore yours cannot be the true Religion and ours must be the only true Religion M. Gilbert Brown This objection consists partly of a truth and partly of an untruth It appears by this that either M. John knows not our proofs or if he doth he alters the same that he may the better oppugn his own invention Our objection or rather one of our proofs whereby we prove that we Catholicks is the only true Church of Christ and have the only truth in all things is this We have aboundantly set down to us by the Prophets and Apostles in the holy writ that the kingdom and Church of Christ shal never fail in this earth and that the gates of hell shal not prevail against it But shal be permanent for ever and shal have alwayes the presence and assistance of the Father Son and holy Ghost who shal teach it all truth and remain with it for ever as may be perceived by these places noted here which were over longsome to be set down at length To the which I adjoyn some of the ancient Fathers exponing the same Out of the Old Testament Psal 60.5 read August upon this Psal 88. v. 1.2.3.4.5.19.30.31.32.33.34.35.36.37.38 read Aug. on these places Psal 104. ver 8. read Aug. Psal 110.9 Esa 9.7 read S. Hier. on Esa 51.7.8 read S. Hier. on Esa 54.8.9 read Hier. on Esa 55.3.13 Esa 59.21 read Hier. on Jer. 31.3.36 read Hier. on Ezec. 37.25.26 Dan. 2.44 Dan. 7.14.27 Mich. 4.7 Out of the New Testament Luc. 1.33 read S. August upon the 109. Psal Matth. 10.18 read here Saint Hierome upon this place Luke 22.32 John 14.16.17 John 17.18.19.20 Matth. 28.20 1. Tim. 3.15 Acts 5.39 Some of the ancient Fathers Hilar. de Trinitat lib. 7. August de utili credent cap. 87. Ambros lib. 9. cap. 20. Chrysost in serm de pente Clem. Alex. lib. 6. strom in the end And because the Scriptures and the ancient Fathers of the primitive Church concurrs and agrees in one unitie I would wish M. John to consider the same that the Church of Christ by all mens judgements shal never fail nor be interrupted nor broken M. John Welsch his Reply I will follow your footsteps and first answer to that part which ye say is true and then unto that which ye say is false And as to the first the ground which ye laid down whereupon ye go about to build the truth of your Religion is the Church of Christ shal never fail nor be interrupted c. It is recorded in Histories Athenaeus dipnosophist lib. 12. of one Thrasilaus a frantick man among the Greeks whensoever he saw any ships arrive at the haven of Athens he thought them all his own and took an inventarie of their wares and met them with great joy Even so it is with you wheresoever you see the name of the Church in the holy Scripture the promises of God made unto the same ye take all to be yours and books the treasures of it and boasts thereof as though they were your own crying The gates of hell shal never prevail against it It shal never fail It hath always the holy Ghost to lead it in all truth To remove you therefore out of the haven and to give every merchant his own ware and his own ship and to set the Church it self in possession of the Church we must distinguish the name of the Church The Church therefore is taken sometimes for the companie of the elect and chosen whereof a part is in heaven triumphing with Christ their Lord a part here in the earth fighting her battels lying in her camp and awaiting for the victorie And these are termed the invisible Church because Gods election cannot be discerned by the judgement of mans senses or eyes and we cannot know who are his chosen And unto this Church that is to the chosen appertains all the promises set down in the Scripture and in them only are they fulfilled And sometimes it is taken for the company of them who professes the true Religion wherein both the chaff and the wheat the popple and the good seed Matth. 3.12 and 13.24.25 the dregs and the wine the good and the evil are mixed together the which suppose they be in the Church yet they are not of the Church no more then the superfluous humors of the bodie are true and livelie members thereof So then if ye mean by the Church The Church of the elect and if ye mean by this That it shal never fail nor be interrupted c. only this that it shal never be utterly abolished but shal have alwayes the presence of the holy Ghost to lead her in all truth yea and in all holiness also in so far as shal serve for her salvation We grant that with you as Bellarmin confesseth of us and therefore he saith Lib. 3. de Eccles milit cap. 13. That many of their number spend but time while as they go about to prove that the Church here beneath absolutelie cannot perish or make absolute defection for Calvin saith he and the rest of the hereticks grant that but they speak and mean saith he of the invisible Church So if ye mean no further but this then Bellarmin telleth you that all the testimonies of Scripture and Fathers that ye have heaped up here to prove the same is but to spend the time so are fetched as needless witnesses in a matter â—â—at is not doubt some or called in question And if ye had understood his language ye needed not to have cumbred your self in fetching of this mortar and stone to build up your Babel For this was not required at your hands But because it is Babel which ye are bigging a tower of confusion therefore the Lord hath sent such a confusion of language among you that few of you understands what another sayes when some cryes for mortar others brings stone Bellarmin the great maister-builder cryes for proofs to prove that the visible Church here beneath cannot err neither in the matters which are needful to salvation neither in the matters which are not needful which she propones to be believed or to be done whither they be doctrine contained in the Scripture or extra scripturam that is not contained in the Scripture He cryes to prove that and ye cumber your self in bringing in a number of Scriptures to prove that the Church shal alwayes remain till the end of the world whereas in the examination of your proofs it will be found that they will go no further with you But if ye mean of the visible Church that it shal never fail c. that is it shal never fail in doctrine nor be interrupted in the same not only in the matters needful to salvation but in all truth as ye affirm of your
Church and as Bellarmin sayes as hath been said before If ye go this far as ye do indeed and as Bellarmin doth and your self must do if ye be a right defender of your Catholick faith here or else there is no ground whereupon ye can build the puretie and truth of your Church and Religion Then I say that your ground is as false and erroneous as the stuff that ye build upon it for both they have failed and have been interrupted as shal be proved afterward And mark this Christian reader as the Philistins Church wherein they praised their God Judg. 16. and mocked Samson the Lords servant had two chief pillars whereon the whole house leaned and was born up so hath the Church of Rome two chief pillars whereon the whole weight of their Church and Religion hings the one whereof is this that the Church cannot err the other that the Pope is the head of the Church Take these two from them their house must fall and their Religion can stand no longer For when they are brought to this strait that they see they cannot defend their Religion neither by the testimonies of the Scripture nor yet by the examples of the Church of God when she was in her greater purity and sincerity they are compelled to lay this as a ground to hold all their errors on that the Church of Christ cannot err So take this ground from them their Church and Religion cannot stand Now as to the testimonies which ye quote out of the Old Testament out of Luke 1.33 in the New Testament they only prove that the Church and Kingdom of Christ shal endure for evermore and that his covenant made with her is everlasting The which cannot exeem the militant Church from erring in points of doctrine for both the chaff and evil seed in the Church that is these that are called but not chosen may err and that to death and damnation and yet his Church and Kingdom and his covenant remaineth sure stable and inviolate for the Lord only offers his covenant unto them and they through incredulitie reject it and so he is not bound to sanctifie or save them much less to keep them from error And as for these who are called and chosen all these promises are made and performed in every one of them and the covenant of God is so sure in every one of them that our Savior saith None of them can perish John 10.28 And yet for all this every one of them may err in doctrine suppose not to death and damnation which ye will not deny And if ye would infinit examples not only of the Saints of God of the laicks as ye call them but also of the Priests Prophets Apostles yea and of Popes also and of your own Doctors and Bishops as a cloud of witnesses would stand up and avow the same in your face Now I gather seeing that the militant Church here on earth hath but two sorts of persons in her these that are called and chosen and these that are only called but not chosen and both may err in points of doctrine the one finally to death and damnation the other may err suppose not finally to death and damnation and yet the covenant of God remain sure everlasting and inviolate with his Church Therefore I say the promises of the stabilitie of Christs Kingdom and the perpetuitie of his covenant made with her cannot exeem the militant Church from erring in points of doctrine So ye have lost your vantguard Let us come to the rest and see if they will favor your cause any better then the former hath done The next place ye quote is Matth. 16.18 Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shal not prevail against it And because ye trust that there is not a testimony of Scripture which shal fight more for you then this let us therefore try it to the uttermost and see how far it can be stretched out What argument will ye frame out of this place For if you gather no more but this Christ hath promised that the gates of hell shal never prevail against the Church that is built on the Rock that is on Christ Therefore the Church that is built on him shal never be all utterlie extinguished and abolished by Satan Then Bellarmin tells you that ye spend but time in proving of this for we grant it That the Church of the chosen shal never perish But if you go further and say That the Church of Christ shal never err because Christ hath promised that the gates of hell shal not prevail against it then I say either that exposition is false or else the gates of hell should have prevailed long since against your Church for when it prevailed against the rock whereon the Church was built it prevailed against the Church For raze and overturn the foundation of a house the house cannot stand seeing the standing of the house consists on the firmness sureness of the foundation thereof Now the rock whereon ye say the Church is built unto whom this promise is made is Peter and his successors the Popes of Rome for so ye all with one consent expone the same Rhemists annotation upon this place Seeing then that they are the foundation of the Church as ye say and the gates of hell hath prevailed against them as I shal prove by the grace of God it must follow if your exposition be true that the gates of hell hath prevailed not once only but at many times against â—he Church For first Peter himself erred in a matter of doctrine when he thought with the rest of the Apostles after the resurrection of Christ the Kingdom of Christ not to be heavenlie but earthlie not spiritual but like the Kingdoms of this world proper to Israel Acts 1.6 not common to all by vertue of the promise and also he is commanded to preach the Gospel to the Gentils doubting nothing Acts 10.20 Which testifies that he doubted before whither the Gospel should be preached to them or not and therefore erred in a matter of faith and that after he had received the promise of the holy Ghost And also he erred in the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law Acts 10.14 for he believed that some meats were unclean after the death and resurrection of Christ and therefore he refused to eat thereof And this was a matter of faith also And last of all the holy Ghost testifies that he went not a right foot to the truth of the Gospel Gal. 2.11 and therefore was rebuked by the Apostle Paul to his face And as for them whom ye call his successors the Popes of Rome not only may they be hereticks but also some of them have been hereticks And therefore if your argument be good the gates of hell both may and have prevailed against them That they may be hereticks I will fetch no other witnesses but your own Councils Canons Cardinals
and your own Popes for they shal be your Judges in this matter Bellarmin saith lib. 7. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 30. that the Pope being a manifest heretick ceaseth to be Pope and to be head of the Church Caietan a Cardinal saith lib. de authoritate Papae Consilij cap. 20. 21. That the Pope being a manifest heretick should be deposed by the Church Johannes de Turrecremata a Cardinal saith lib. 4 part 2. cap. 20. That when the Pope falls in heresie he is deposed of God Alphonsus de Castro saith lib. 1. cap. 2. That the Pope as he is a Pope may be an heretick and teach heresie which also hath sometimes saith he fallen out in them Innocentius the 3. serm 2. de consecr Pontificis And Hadrian the 2. Popes as also the 6. and 8. Synode and their own Canon Law Dist. 40. cap. Si Papa do testifie that they may be hereticks And also Pope Hadrian 6. Bellar. lib. 4. de Romano Pontif. cap. 2. And some of them have been hereticks also Zepherinus a Montanist Tertuli ad prax Marcellinus one that sacrificed â—o Devils the Idols of the Gentils Damasus Concil Sinuessâ—num Liberius an Arrien that denyed the Godhead of the Son Athanas in Epist. ad solit vita Hieron in Catal. Script Fascic tem aetate sexta Hermannus contractus Marianus Scotus compilatio Chronologica Supplementum chronic Platina Anastasius a favorer of the Nestorian heresie Platina in vita Anastas supplement Chronic distinct 19. cap. Anastasius Fascic temp Vigilius an Eutychian whose heresie was that after the incarnation of Christ there was but one nature in Christ made of his Divinity and Humanity which overthrows the foundation of our salvation Liberatus in Breviario cap. 22. Honorius a Monothelite and therefore damned and accursed in the sixth Council of Constantinople act 13. John the 22. held that the souls of the blessed being separat from their bodies did not see the Lord before the resurrection Occam in opere 93. dierum Adrian de confirmatione circa finem Gerson in sermone de Pascha John the 23. denyed eternal life whereof he was accused and deposed in the Council of Constance Sessione 11. Eugenius the 4. deposed in the Council of Basile for heresie Sessione 34. I omit the rest Seeing then these whom ye call the rock and foundation of your Church have erred and that in matters of doctrine and Religion and in the principal points thereof and that by the testimonies both of the Scripture and of your own Councils Doctors Cardinals and Popes Therefore if your argument hold forth then I say the gates of hell hath prevailed against your Church because they have prevailed against the rocks and foundations thereof for they have erred as hath been proved the which I suppose ye will not grant And therefore the furthest that ye can gather here is but this That the gates of hell that is the power of condemnation shal not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is totally and finally overcome So that suppose they may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is be strong and make them to fail in many things yet they cannot prevail totally and finally against the Church of God that is the elect and chosen who are built not on the Pope but on the immoveable Rock the Lord Jesus I say further this promise is made and performed in every one of the elect For the gates of hell shal not prevail that is get the final and full victory over any of them And therefore our Savior saith None of my sheep shal perish John 10 28. and yet ye will not deny but every one of the elect may err Therefore this promise doth not priviledge the Church of God from erring but the chaff and evil seed that is these that are called and not chosen may err and err finally because this promise is not made unto them for they are not built upon this Rock but upon the sand for none is built upon this Rock but these who are blessed and heareth the word and doth it Matth. 7. as our Savior testifieth And the good seed which are these that are called and chosen may err suppose not finally and totally The next place which ye quote is that prayer of Christ for Peter Luke 22.32 But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not Matth. 26. It is true he prayed It is true also that Peters faith failed not but yet it swooned as it were when he denyed his Lord and that by perjuring and cursing of himself and yet he erred both in the qualitie of Christs Kingdom in the calling of the Gentils and in the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law Acts 10 14. As also he went not rightly to the truth of the Gospel Gal. 2.11 as hath been proved So this prayer was not that he should be kept absolutely from all erring for then it shal follow that Christ obtained not that which he prayed for seeing he erred which is impious to think but that his faith should not decay finally and totally Secondly the Lord Jesus prayed also for all believers John 17.18.19.20 which place ye also quote and yet there is not one of the believers but they may err as your selves cannot deny and we have proved by examples of your own Popes for if any were exeemed from erring in your judgement it should be these that are the foundation of your Church which ye call your Popes but they may err and have erred as hath been proved Thirdly I say it will not follow Christ prayed for Peters faith that it should not fail Therefore he prayed for the Popes whom ye will have to be successors to Peter that their faith should not fail for that is the thing ye would be at for their faith hath failed For if by faith ye understand the doctrine of the faith of Christ as it is taken sometimes in the Scripture 1. Tim. 4. then I say your own Doctors Canons Councils Cardinals and Popes themselves as they have been cited before testifieth that not only they may err but also that some of them have erred and have been hereticks And if by that faith which our Lord prayed for ye understand that lively faith that embraceth the promises of Gods mercie in Christ which worketh by love and showeth forth the self by good works as by keeping of Christs commandments and by loving one another Rom. 3.25 Gal. 5.6 1. John 2.4 Then I say your own writers friends favorers and Cardinals testifieth of them Platin Genebrard Crantz that they have gone from Peters steps that they got the Popedom by brybery and bargaining with the Devil That they were monstrous and prodigious men yea rather beasts and monsters So that of all men that ever professed the faith of Jesus they have failed most foully in that lively faith as I have proved in another place concerning the Antichrist As to that place which ye quote John 14.16.17 where the Spirit of Christ is
3. and 11. and 15. And the Church of Galatia erred in being carried away to another Gospel and in joyning the Ceremonies of the law with grace in justification Gal. 1. and 3. And what will ye say when the heresie of Arrius who denied Christ to be the Son of God equal to his Father spread its self so far that it is testified by Theodor. hist. Eccles lib. 2. Hier. dial contra Lucif cap. 7. in chron Athanas Epist de Synod Alim Seleu. that the Bishops of the whole world became Arrians that the whole world did grieve and wonder at it self that it was become an Arrian What will ye say unto all the Christian Churches of the East Grecia Asia and Africa Churches planted by the Apostles I mean not now of them that have professed Mahometism but of them that admits the Scripture acknowledges Christ their Savior who have their ordinar succession of Patriarks and Bishops as well as your Church of Rome hath who in number far exceeds these Churches which acknowledges your Pope to be the head of the Church For first yours is but in Europe except ye will claim to the New-found land and not all Europe for all the Churches in Greece which is a great part of Europe acknowledges not your supremacy Now take the Greek Churches from you next the Reformed Churches in Scotland England Germany Denmark France Zeland Holland and other places which have gone out of Babel which are all in Europe your number will not be many that acknowledges your supremacy And next take all Asia and Africa from you which is the two parts of the world your number will be smal in comparison of these that are against your supremacy Now all these detests your supremacy as tyranny and the worship of Images your transubstantiation in the Sacrament the Communion under one kind the single life of Priests Either therefore ye must grant that the greatest number of Christian Churches have erred and doth err or else that your Roman Church doth err and your supremacy yea your Religion which depends upon your supremacy is the head of heresie But it may be ye will say that all other Christian Churches may err but that it is only proper to your Church not to err First therefore let me ask at you what can be the cause of that singular priviledge which the Church of Rome hath beside all other Churches which ever have been is or shal be Yea above Adam when he was in his integrity for he erred yea above the Angels for they remained not in the truth Jude 6 Above the Patriarcks Abraham Isaac and Jacob yea above Aaron and the Church in the wilderness above the Church under the Law yea above the Apostles and Peter himself before Christs suffering in the time of his suffering after the resurrection after the receiving of the holy Ghost for they erred in all these times Yea above the Christian Churches that have been founded by the Apostles as well as yours that had the promise the covenant the service of God once in as great purity as ever yours had that have their ordinar succession their antiquity their vocation ordinar as well as yours hath unto this day Great surely must be that priviledge given unto the Church of Rome that hath exeemed her from error others having erred What is then your prerogative above all other Churches I know that ye will say because of Peters chair that was there wherein the Popes sits after him First then if Peters chair hath such a prerogative that the Pastors who sits in it and the Church that cleaves to it cannot err I think surely the Lords chair which was at Jerusalem which was called the Temple and seat of God and Moses chair wherein the Scribes and Pharisees sate should rather have that prerogative to free the Churches and Pastors sitting in these chairs from erring yea the Church which the truth it self Jesus Christ founded whom he taught with his own mouth and among whom he was crucified should with far greater right claim to that prerogative But since all their seats have erred for the Temple became a den of thieves the Scribes and Pharisees that sate in Moses chair condemned the Lord of glory and Jerusalem it self cryed out Crucifie crucifie him And the Christian Church gathered there are long since far from the way of salvation So that if neither the chair of God nor Moses freed the Church of the Jews from erring nor the chair of Christ freed the Christian Church there gathered from erring How then can Peters chair have this prerogative above them all as to exeem that Church and Pastors that sits therein from possibility of erring What is this but to prefer him before them all whose seat hath a priviledge that neither God nor his sons nor Moses seat had O high blasphemy to be detested and abhorred of all Christian hearts But let us see if it hath this prerogative which they ascribe unto it or not And first if it could have exeemed any from erring should it not have exeemed himself especially from erring But as it hath been shown he erred Acts 1.6 Gal. 2. therefore it cannot exeem neither his successors not yet the Church that acknowledges them from erring Secondly if it had exeemed any Church from erring should it not have exeemed the Church of Antiochia especially for surely Antiochia hath better right to claim to this prerogative then your Church hath For first it was Peters first seat Next the Scripture bears witness to it that he was there Gal. 2.11 But neither was Rome Peters first seat nor is there so much as a syllab in all the Scriptures to prove that ever Peter was in Rome But suppose Peter was there for we will not examine this now whither is this prerogative not to err given to your head that is to the Popes or to the body that is the people or to both If ye say to the head as ye do indeed then what will ye answer to your own Writers and Fathers to your own Councils and Popes to your own Canon Law affirming that Popes may err and be hereticks and should be deposed and are deposed when they are manifest hereticks as hath been proved before And what will ye say to your Popes that have been hereticks indeed one of them an Arrian another an Eutychian the third a Nestorian the fourth a Montanist the fifth deposed as an heretick the sixth denying that the souls of the children of God saw Gods face while after the resurrection the seventh denying life everlasting and others giving themselves over in the hands of the Devil for the Popedom others repelling and abrogating the decrees of their predecessors others such monsters and beasts so cruel to the dead and to the living that your own friends calls them monsters and affirms of one of them that the Devil shot him through while he was abusing another mans wife and so died without repentance Dare you
third he permits one to have two wives if the first be sickly decret causa 32. quaest 7. cap. Quod proposuisti contrary both to the Gospel Matth. 19. and to another decreet of the Canon Law Decretal lib. 4. tit 9. cap. Quoniam Pope Nicolas saith Dist 40. cap. A quodam Judaeo that that Baptism which is ministred without express mention of the three persons of the Trinity is firm and sure enough But Pope Zacharie Dist eadem de consecrat cap. In Synodo hath decreed the contrary All these decreets are set down in their Canon Law and hath the strength of a law in the Roman Church not as privat mens but as Popes decreets And yet some of them are directly repugnant to the Word of God that themselves cannot deny but they are heresies and some of them so directly repugnant to the decreets of other Popes that either the one or the other must be heresie But it may be ye will answer that suppose the Pope may err as he is Pope and that in matters of doctrine yet he cannot err with his Council either Provincial or General as Bellarmin saith Whereunto I answer first if General Councils lawfully conveaned together may err in matters of doctrine unless they be confirmed by the Pope as Bellarmin grants and if the Popes may err themselves alone and that judicially in matters of doctrine as hath been proved why may they not err also being joyned together seeing Councils have this priviledge only by his confirmation and allowance As Bellarmin saith lib. 4. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 3. Secondly I say either Pope Steven the 6. with his Council erred in condemning of Formosus and his acts which he made as Pope and in decreeing his ordinations to be void and null because the man was wicked by whom they were ordained Sigebert in Chron. which is an error of the Donatists or else Pope John the 9. with his Council of 72. Bishops erred in justifying Formosus and his decreets and condemning the acts of Pope Steven with his Council Last of all since General Councils that have been confirmed by their Popes have erred the sixth General Council confirmed by Pope Hadrian in epist. ad Thracium quae est in 2. actione 7. Syn. Canon 2. hath sundry errors which they themselves will not defend as the rebaptizing of hereticks For the counsel of Cyprian is confirmed there wherein this is decreeted And also it is ordained Canon 13. that Elders Deacons Subdeacons should not separat from their wives contrary to the Canon of the Roman Church as is said there And the marriage of Catholicks and Hereticks is judged null and voyd Canon 67. which your self cannot deny to be an error contrary to the express truth of God 1. Cor. 7.13 And the forbidding of Ministers to remain with their wives Canon 12. contrary to the sixth Canon of the Apostles Either therefore a General Council confirmed by a Pope hath erred or else the Apostles have erred in this Canon for they judge them to be the Canons of the Apostles The first General Council of Constantinople and the General Council of Chalcedon which are both by their own confession approved by the Popes Bellarm lib. 1. de Concilijs cap. 5. And yet both these have decreeed that the Bishop of Constantinople should have equal priviledges of authority honor and dignity in Ecclesiastical affaires with the Bishop of Rome except only the first place or seat the which by their own confession is an error Therefore either lawful General Councils confirmed by the Pope have erred or else the Pope is not the head of the Church and hath not a preeminence of authority over the rest for they have made the Bishop of Constantinople equal with him or else there are two heads of thier Church the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Constantinople I omit the rest Augustin saith de baptismo contra Donatistas lib. 2. cap. 3. That Provincial Councils may be corrected by General Councils and of General Councils the former may be amended by the latter If they may be mended then they may err And here he speaks not of a matter of fact but of a matter of faith For he speaks of the baptism of hereticks Now to conclud seeing the Churches in all ages before the Law in the time of the Law and in the time of grace yea and the Apostles and Peter himself have erred and seeing the Church of Rome that claims this priviledge of not erring above all other Churches hath erred also and that not only her people which they call Laicks but also her Clergy severally and together in Councils as well Provincial as General And seeing the head which as they say is the Rock and foundation of the Church hath erred in life in Office in matters of Faith and Religion not as privat men only but as Popes both by themselves alone as also with their Councils as well Provincial as General Seeing I hope I have proved all these things sufficiently then may I not with the judgement of all men safely conclud that that main pillar whereupon the whole weight and pillar of your Religion depends that the Church cannot err that it is an error and such a dangerous and damnable error whereupon all the errors of your Religion is built that whosoever will believe it they hazard the endless salvation of their souls Ground then Christian Reader thy salvation not upon this that the Church cannot err for that is false but upon this that as long as she sticks to the Word of God written in the Old and New Testament she errs not and when she swerves and it were but an inch broad from the Scripture then she errs And therefore two learned Papists Gerson de examinat part 1. consid 5. and Panorm affirms the one saith Simplici non authorizato sed excellenter in sacris literis erudito c. that is that more credit is to be given to one unlearned and simple but yet excellently beseen in the holy Writ in a point of doctrine then to the Pope And such a learned man saith he ought to oppone himself to a General Council if he perceive the greater part to decline to the contrary of the Gospel either of malice or of ignorance The other saith extra de elect cap. Significasti That more credit is to be given to an unlearned and simple man that brings for him the Scripture then to a whole General Council And this for answer to the testimonies of Scripture which ye cited Now as concerning the Fathers testimonies which ye bring in they will serve you no further then the Scripture hath done For they will go no further with you then this that the Church of Christ and his covenant with her shal endure for ever the which we grant and they that will read them will find them so And if ye prove any further out of them it shal be answered by Gods grace For it were too fashous to the
Reader to set down here the particular sayings of every one of them And if ye had formed your arguments out of them I should have formed my answer by the grace of God to every one of them And thus much concerning your ground and the proofs of it Now I come to that which ye gather of it SECTION IV. Whither the Church of Rome be the only true Church and the Reformed not true Churches OF this we collect that our Church must be the only true Church and not theirs because ours hath never been interrupted nor hath failed in any substantial point of faith and Religion since Christ and his Apostles dayes and theirs hath done To confirm this I say that M. John nor no Minister in Scotland can be able to assign to us the circumstances of all mutations and changes in Religion That is to say 1. The author who first began our Religion 2. The time when it was begun 3. The place where it began 4. The true Church who said against the same 5. The matter it self which was changed or begun 6. Nor the faithful number from whom they departed All these things we shal assign to their Religion and that since Christ and his Apostles 1. The first auâ—hor of their Religion albeit not in all things was Martin Luther an Augustine Frier 2. He began his Religion in the year of God 1517. 3. He began the same in Saxony in the countrey of Almanie 4. The Church of Rome Italie France Spain Scotland England Denmark Sweden Pole a great part of Almanie with the east and west Indies which were the true Church said against him 5. The heads of Religion which he first said against were Pardons He affirmed that man was only justified by Faith He denied the Supper of our Lord to be a sacrifice c. 6. He departed himself from all the Christian Churches in Europe in the Indies and other places and therefore he had no predecessors of his own Religion as we read in the Apologie of the English Protestants that he and Zuinglius were the first that came to the knowledge of the Evangel and therefore none immediatly before them Then seeing that there was none of his profession in the earth before him immediatly neither visible nor invisible he and his could not be the Church of Christ for it hath ever stood and never failed no not the space of one day universally because our Savior saith I shal be with you every day to the consummation of the world M. John Welsch his Reply As to your collection the form of it must be this That Church only must be the true Church that hath never been interrupted nor failed in any substantial head of faith and Religion since Christ and his Apostles But say ye yours is such and ours not Therefore your Church is the true Church and ours not The proposition I grant But all the controversie lyes in the probation of your assumption Yea in stead of proving ye say it is not possible to me nor to no Minister in Scotland to assign to you the circumstances of all mutations and changes in your Religion as the person time place c. And then ye attempt to assign all these circumstances of our Religion upon the which ye conclud the falsehood of it So we will first see how ye prove your own and then see how ye disprove ours Indeed this argument of yours is of such account with you that there are not many of your Writers but they have set it as it were in the vant-guard of their host and among the greatest of their strengths and bulwarks for to uphold their ruinous Babel So Hammilton and Hay in their demands to the Ministers of Scotland so Campion so Duraeus Scotus against Whitaker in his defence so your Rhemists upon the 28. of the Acts and on 1. John 2. and so Bellarmin lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 5. Whereby it may be seen of what account this argument of yours is in the judgement of your Church But to answer to your argument first I say If there be no mutations or changes in your Religion since Christ and his Apostles then your Religion and doctrine will be one with that which is set down in the Scripture of God For you will not deny I hope but the Scripture doth sufficiently testifie what doctrine and Religion was in Christs and his Apostles dayes And so let it once be put in the ballance of the Scripture and tryed thereby and then I hope it will soon be made manifest how far it is changed So and you dare M. Gilbert let once your Religion be set upon the pannel and let it once have an assise of the Scripture and then the plea will end I hope Next I say it will not follow We cannot assign all the circumstances of changes in your Religion Therefore your Religion is uncorrupted For it suffiseth if we can prove the first only that is the matter or doctrine it self which is changed and that by comparing it with the Scriptures of God suppose we could not assign all the rest of the circumstances of the mutation as the time place author c. for the changes of many things are most notorious and yet all the circumstances of the change thereof not known We say then it is not needful to seek the beginnings and circumstances of the decays and corruptions in your Church when the corruption and change it self is so manifest by comparing your doctrine with the written Word of God that it cannot be denyed For will you say that he who is deadly diseased is whole and sound because I cannot tell you the first article of time the place and first occasion of the disease When it is manifest that a city is full of misorder and confusion will ye say that ye will not believe it to be so unless you know the first beginnings and progress of these misorders If you saw a ruinous house would ye say Prove me and tell me all the circumstances of the change of it otherwise I will not believe it Will ye deny that a ship could be drowned unless it were told you all the circumstances of the change of the leck where through it drowned If any found a man fallen in a pit shal he not believe that he is fallen whom nevertheless he sees to be there unless it were told him when and by whom he was cast into the same Even so will ye not believe or will ye hinder all others to believe that your Church and Religion is ruinous consumed rotten dead drowned and full of misorder heresie and confusion unless the first beginnings of these changes can be told you We say therefore it is sufficient to prove the ruine and consumption of your Church and Religion if by comparing your doctrine with the truth of God in the Scripture we make evident the direct opposition betwixt them suppose we could not assign all the circumstances of the change of
it out of the histories leaving it free to Historiographers to write what they please and omit what they please Thirdly it is manifest that the Church of the Jewes in the time of Christ was changed both in doctrine and manners from that estat that it was in the time of Aaron Eleazar and sundry others and also the Churches of Galatia and Corinth that they were changed from the estat wherein they were And yet I suppose that neither ye nor any Papist in the earth is able to assign to me all the circumstances of the mutations and changes in the same as the first authors time place c. and yet there was a great change in doctrine and Religion in all these Churches as hath been proved before And we read that our Savior and the Apostles convicted them of a change and yet they designed not the first authors time and place c. The like I say of the Church of Greece Asia and Africa which in number exceeds yours That there is a wonderful change in their Church and Religion ye will not deny or else your Religion is heresie For as said is they acknowledge not your Popes supremacy transubstantiation c. And yet I suppose ye nor no Papist in the earth is able to assign all the circumstances of changes in their Church and Religion which they have presently yea more unable to do this then we are able to do the same in yours I mean not the heresies of Arrius Samosatenus Nestorius Eutyches Sergius and the rest which long ago were damned by the Councils of the Greek Churches For I suppose ye shal not be able to prove that they now maintain these heresies which they condemned and refuted long ago But I mean of the present errors and corruptions in their worship and Religion which now they maintain and profess If then ye judge the Churches of the East heretical because they are not agreeable to your doctrine and Religion of Rome and yet not be able to assign the circumstances of the changes and mutations of the same will ye not grant the same liberty to us to account and judge your Church and Religion failed because it is not agreeable to the doctrine of Jesus Christ set down in the Scripture suppose we could not assign to you the circumstances of the changes of the same Fourthly I say if you have read Epiphanius there ye shal find many heresies which I omit for shortness which he accounts heresies whose beginnings and authors are unknown Fifthly there is such an universal complaint of the monstrous abominations decays in your Religion discipline and manners and that by your own Councils Concil Constant sess 4. 5. Trident. sess 6. Basil sess 2. 3. Fathers Bernard in Cant. 33. Popes Cardinals and Friers that I would have thought it uncredible unless I had read them that either your own mouthes should have so condemned your selves or else that the posterity afterward should have been so shameless as to have boasted of the purity of their Church and Religion Therefore the Council of Trent hath proclaimed it to the world in writ that the Church hath need to be reformed in the head and members Now I ask that of you concerning these abuses in discipline and manners which ye ask of us concerning your doctrine Show me all the circumstances of mutation and change distinctly if ye can what time what place by what author c. such monstrous abominations first brake in in your Church and Religion Now seeing there is no man who hath a spark of judgement that will doubt of that incredible change of manners and discipline in your Church and yet the circumstances of the changes unknown think ye then that ye shal assure men that no changes could fall in your doctrine unless we knew the circumstances of the changes of the same Sixthly the Scripture testifies Matth. 13.27.28 that even the tares which is the evil seed doth not appear so soon as they are sown and that neither the times nor the first author of them was known no not to the most diligent laborers of the Lords ground at the first and yet it was enough to know them to be evil seed by the difference that was seen betwixt them and the good seed suppose the time place and author was unknown at the first So it is proof enough against your doctrine that it is but tares if the difference be made manifest between it and the Lords truth in the Scripture suppose the circumstances of the changes of it cannot be assigned Seventhly error is likened to leaven and a canker which doth not all at once infect the whole mass and fester the whole body but piece and piece so your corruption came not in all at once but piece and piece infected your Church and festered your Religion And therefore it is no wonder suppose the beginnings of infection and circumstances of it hath not been marked For if they had broken in all at once and suddenly overthrown the whole Church it had been no difficulty to have assigned the circumstances of the overthrow of it For if any having a whole constitution with a stroke were slain if a ship with a wave were drowned it were no difficulty to assign the circumstances of the sudden changes But in a consumption and in a leck that hath come in piece and piece in the body and in the ship the beginnings thereof cannot be so easily perceived For a little leck in process of time will sink a great ship And if it be so hard to discern the beginnings of these things which our senses may grope how much more hard is it to perceive the beginnings of these spiritual corruptions which cannot be perceived by the natural man but only by the light of Gods Spirit by the spiritual man Eightly if now it be so in other heresies as the Scripture testifies of them that their beginnings are ofttimes unknown even unto the most diligent laborers of the Lords husbandrie and that they come in by little and little and doth not infect all at once how much more is this true in your Antichristian Religion which as it was fore-told should deceive all Nations and make them drunken with the wine of her fornication And therefore your doctrine is termed in the Scripture an iniquitie but a secret iniquitie an unrighteousness but yet a deceivable unrighteousness a delusion but yet a strong delusion 2. Thess an abomination and spiritual fornication Rev. 17. but yet put in a golden cup that is having the show of godliness and Religion and your Church is called a harlot but yet finely decked in purple c. not like a harlot but a Queen Your Kingdō is called a beast that speaks like the dragon but yet like the lamb in his horns resembling the power and authority of the Lord Jesus Seeing then your Church Kingdom and Doctrine is such a mystery of iniquity hath such a show of godliness hath such a
resemblance with the lamb hath such clokes of styles is so deceivable and is such a strong delusion as the Scripture testifies of it Is it any wonder suppose the beginnings of this mystery and of the whoredoms of this Queen be not distinctly marked and set down Ninthly it is likely enough that the great credit wherein the first Bishops of Rome was for their piety and godliness and the lofty estat of their successors after them together with their cruelty and tyranny did so dazel on the one side the eyes of the godly that they were not inquisitive in marking the changes and beginnings of their corruptions and so bridled the mouthes of other some that they durst not write the things they saw and if they writ any thing they writ it but barely and corruptly for the tyranny of your Church was such that none durst mutter against your Church and Religion but he was taken without further as an heretick and condemned and executed where ever your tyranny reached Last of all suppose they had been written by the Histories of every age and that distinctly yet considering the universal power craft and policy of your Church and Kingdom is it any wonder suppose they be not now extant at all but either burnt or else so falsified and corrupted that the beginnings thereof should not have been perceived For seeing in the purer times when the power and dominion of your Church was not yet come to the hight such was the ambition and falshood of your Popes that in the presence of a Council of 217. Bishops in Carthage anno 430. where Augustin was present they did alledge a false Canon of the Council of Nice for to have established their supremacy and under one of their hands sent it to the Council by their Legats the which was espyed and found out by the whole Council that not only it was decreed and ordained in that Council he should have no prerogative over the Churches of Africk and that none should appeal to him under the pain of deposition and excommunication but alâ—o he was rebuked by the Fathers of that Council in their letters to him If he was so bold then what marvel suppose since he hath falsified and corrupted every History and Writing that he saw might bear any wayes witness of the corruptions tyrannies and abominations of that Church and Religion of his And hence it is I am sure that we find so little written of the beginnings of their corruptions and of them that resisted it And your Index expurgatorius devised in the Council of Trent for blotting out every thing in the writings of men that might testifie of your corruptions doth also sufficiently witness unto the world what ye did in the former times So to conclud this suppose we could not assign to you the circumstances of the changes of your Religion yet it follows not but your Religion and Church may be corrupted and decayed But to satisfie your demand suppose I hope the things already said will satisfie the consciences of the godly What crave you that all the circumstances of changes in your Religion may be assigned to you First then I say there is nothing that may serve either to make the man of God wâ—se unto salvation or yet that may make him perfect in every good work but the Scripture testifies For it is able to do both these If these circumstances then serve either for salvation or perfection I say they are set down in the Scripture so that we need not to go to Histories to search the same The first then ye crave is the time when the change began The Scripture tells you That the mystery of iniquity began to work even then in the Apostles days and that it doth already work and so grew on from degree to degree till he that withheld it was removed that is till the Empire of Rome began to decay and the seat of it removed from thence as the Fathers expounded it Augustin Chrysostome Jerome and so the city left to the Pope the man of sin for him to set his throne there for Rome that seven hilled City Rev. 17 9 behoved to be the seat of the Antichrist as it was fore told by the Scripture So if you will believe the Scripture you have the time What crave you next The place I say the Scripture testifieth of the same that that mystical Babylon which Bellarmin lib. 2. de Rom. Pontif. cap 2. Rev. 17. your chief champion grants to be Rome that sits upon sâ—ven hills that had the dominion over the Kings of the earth that is the place where first your Church and Religion began to decay So there the place if you will believe the Scripture What crave you next The author The Scripture also hath fore told That the beast that came out of the bottomless pit and slew the witnesses of God and made war with the Saints and overcame them and made all to worship the image of the beast and the harlot Babel the city of Rome the mother of whoredoms who made all Nations to drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication Rev. 12 7. and 14.8 That is your head and Church they are the authors and mothers of this decay and corruption What is the fourth thing ye require The Church that said against the same The Scripture will tell you that too The two witnesses of God whom she killed the woman that fled in the wilderness the Saints with whom she made war and who would not worship the beast nor receive his image the hundred forty and four thousand that John saw standing with the Lamb on mount Sion who was not defiled with your idolatry but followed the Lamb whithâ—rsoever he went Rev. 11. and 12 and 13. and 14. These then are the true Church which spake against your corruptions who are like unto Eliahs seven thousand that had not bowed their knees to Baal What crave you more The matter it self they said against The Scripture and ye will believe will satisfie you in this point also The doctrine then that was said against Was the mystery of iniquity that deceivableness of unrighteousness that strong delusion 1. Thess 2 Rev. 13. That doctrine of the dragon that spiritual idolatrie and abomination Rev. 17.18 That doctrine of Devils in forbidding marriage and commanding abstinence of meat c. 1. Tim. 4. What crave you last The number from whom they departed The Scripture will also bear witness of this seeing your Religion is a departure from the faith 1. Thess 2. then all these that ever professed the faith of Jesus set down in his written Word even the Lord Jesus the head the Apostles the layers of the foundation the primitive Churh the woman that fled in the wilderness the Saints with whom ye made war and all the elect and chosen of God that abhorred your idolatrie These are the true Churches from whom you departed What now crave you more Will not the
abundance of the rivers of the Scriptures of God quench and satisfie this your desire but that you must go unto the unpure fountains of mens writings as though the Scriptures were not sufficient not only to make a man wise unto salvation but to make him perfect in every thing These things I am sure will satisfie the souls of them that love the truth But because you give no credit to the Scriptures but counts them as a nose of wax and as one of your Popes speaking to Bembus a Cardinal called them a fable of Christ and yet such a fable as hath inriched your treasures And Sylvester Prierias writing against Luther saith That the Roman Church and Pope is of greater authority then the Scriptures O horrible blasphemies of the holy truth of God Therefore we will go to the Histories and see what they have testified of these circumstances And although all things here be not expressed to the full yet there is so much left uncorrupted and unscraped out by the gracious providence of God that would not want his witness in all ages out of the Fathers and your own Writers that I hope will satisfie the consciences of all the modest and godly Clemens Alexandrinus saith lib. 1. strom that the Apostles successors received the doctrine from them as the sons from their fathers But he subjoyns That there was very few children that was like their fathers Aegesippus as Nicephorus reports saith lib. 3. cap. 16. That the Church remained a pure virgin as long as the Apostles lived unto Trajans time but they being dead he writes that it was speedily corrupted So if ye credit the testimonies of these men ye see the Church remaineth not long in her integrity And if you would hear any thing of your Roman Church Socrates lib. 7. cap. 11. saith That Celestin your Pope past the bounds of his Priesthood Read Basilius de Spiritu sancto cap. ult and there ye may see what change of Religion was in his time Augustin testifies epist 119. c. 19. That the multitude of ceremonies grew so in his time that the condition of the Jews seemed to be more tollerable then the condition of the Church Now did not this sickness suppose ye grow by time And to come to your own Writers Bernard saith in Cant. 33. That the Ministers of Christ meaning of the Roman Church serves Antichrist And to the Pope himself Eugenius the 3. he saith lib. 4. And thou the shepherd goeth forth being clothed with a glorious attyr if I durst say it these are the feeding places of Devils rather then of sheep Thy court is accustomed rather to receive good men then to make them good not the evil profits but the good decays there And in another place he saith From the sole of the foot speaking of the Church of Rome to the crown of the head there is no health nor soundness And de conv Pauli Psal 91. ser 6. he saith What remains now speaking of the corruption of that Church of Rome but that the man of sin be revealed the man of perdition Daemonium non modò diurnum sed meridianum that is a devilry not only in the day-tyde but in the very noon-tyde And lib. 4. to Eugenius the Pope he saith In these secular attyrs and powers thou hast not succeeded to Peter but to Constantine The day would sooner fail me then the writing of his complaints against the Church of Rome Pope Adrian the 6. in his instructions to his Legats who were sent to the Council of Noremberg he grants and bids them say to the Council That we know that in this chair meaning Peters Sea in Rome for certain years many abominable things have been in it the abuse in spiritual things the excess in commandments and in a word all things are changed in a worse And the Council of the Cardinals to Paul the third they say Out of this fountain holy Father as from the Troyan horse hath broken so many abuses in the Church of God such heavy diseases whereby we see now that she is despaired almost of health Aeneas Sylvius a Cardinal who also was Pope afterward saith of your Church That all faith hath perished in her and love is grown yce-cold And Cornelius Bitontinus Bishop who was present at the Council of Trent saith Would to God speaking of your Church that unanimes velut prorsus c. all with one heart all utterly they had not declined from Religion to superstition from Faith to infidelity from Christ to Antichrist What would ye have more Will ye yet be so shameless as to boast of the purity of your Church and from God to Epicurism ex Epistola 54 ad Caspar Schlick Oratio Cornelii Epis Bitonti 3. Dom. advent I leave the rest as Platin Genebrard Frier Mantuan Nicolaus Clemangis Franciscus Petrarcha Aventinus and a number of others who are full of complaints of the abominations of your Church of Rome that certainly I cānot but wonder at your shamelesness in opening of your mouth and saying That your Church had the truth in all things and never failed nor was interrupted against such a cloud of witnesses whose testimonies ye dare not refuse But I leave you to the Lord. The lips of a liar is abomination to the Lord Prov. 20 So your own mouthes shal rise up in the day of the Lord and condemn you that saith Your Church hath not failed in any substantial point of Religion But you require more distinctly the time place and persons c. that hath brought in this mutation and change If these are to be accounted authors of your erroneous doctrines who were the chief defenders thereof then I say the Popes of Rome for the most part are the authors of the same for they were the chief defenders thereof suppose they had not been the first teachers thereof For otherwise Luther cannot be said to be the author of our Religion as ye say because he was not the first that taught the same and that by your own confession For ye say that sundry other hereticks before Luther taught the same heads of doctrine which he taught and which we profess now as that fasting should be free that only faith justifieth that man hath not free will c. Next because it were too longsome to go through the whole heads of your Religion therefore I will only bring a few examples and that in some of the substantial points thereof As for the sacrifice of the Mass and the ceremonies thereof I have shown the authors thereof in another place therefore I omit that now The first that ever took upon him to exercise jurisdiction over the Churches of the East was Pope Victor anno 200. or 198. who took upon him to excommunicat the Bishops of the East because they would not follow his fashion in the celebration of Easter There the person time and place resisted by Irenaeus Bishop of Lions in France and the Bishops of the East and the brethren
there Polycarpus and sundrie others Euseb lib. 5. cap. 25.26 The first that took upon him the style to be called Universal Bishop was the Bishop of Constantinople anno 581. resisted by Pelagius and after him by Gregorius Bishops of Rome lib. 4. epistola 32.38 39. And yet for all this Boniface the 3. anno 607. obtained this style of Phocas the Emperor the murtherer of his predecessor Platina Sabellicus Marianus Scotus complained of by the Church of Ravenna in Italie and resisted by sundrie as shal be proved afterwards The first that appointed laws of fasting was Montanus the heretick anno 145. Euseb lib. 5. cap. 17. accounted heresie by Apolonius and Augustine against the fasting of the Manicheans The Manicheans were the first we read of that ministred the Communion under one kind as the Papists do now so forth of many other old condemned heresies which your Church hath renewed as shal be proved afterward The first that gave the rise to Transubstantiation was Mark a notable Magician anno 115. who by his inchantment having first caused a cup of white wine to bear the color of blood made his followers believe that by his invocation over it that grace which is above all things had powred his blood into the cup refuted by Epiphanius Haeres 34. and Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 8. The first that decreed Transubstantiation in effect was Pope Nicolaus the 2. anno 1090. in causing Berengarius to recant De consecrat Distinct 2. cap. Ego Berengarius but yet it was not decreed as an universal doctrine before Pope Innocent the 3. his time in a Council of Lateran anno 1215. as Tonstal witnesses de Sacramenta The Greek Church never consented to it Bertramus Berengarius Waldensis withstood it The first that decreed the worshipping of Images was Hadrian in the 2. Council of Nice against the express Scripture after the example of Marcellina an heretick who worshipped the Image of Jesus resisted by sundry Fathers and Councils Concil Eliber Concil Constant Conc. Francof The first that imposed single life and condemned marriage in their Clergy was Pope Syricius anno 290. distinct 82. cap. Proposuisti as the Manichees did before him resisted by sundrie Sigebert H. Mutius Let these examples serve as a taste to the reader How stronglie now ye have manned and fortified your own Church and Religion by your proofs let the reader judge Now let us see how ye disprove ours The question now comes in of the truth of our Church and Religion whither it be from Jesus Christ or not You say it is not from him but from others since his time If ye had gone the straight way to have proved this and to have satisfied the consciences of men you would at the nearest have run to the Scripture and by the same have disproved it But you in stead of this go a far by-way and would father our Religion on flesh and blood dust and ashes in pointing us out Martin Luther to be the father and author of the same as though it had not an ancienter pedegre to reckon unto nor had not the beginning and foundation of it from the root of Jesse the bud of the Lord from whom it hath sprung And for to get your self the better credit you busie your self in marking the circumstances of his preaching as time place matter opposition c. Now that ye are so skilled and acquainted with that history of Martin Luther that you can assign all these circumstances it is no wonder for that was the most notable and remarkable period of the decaying of your Babel and of the erecting up again of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ which your head and Clergy had stamped under foot for so many years which suppose the beginning of it was but like a little leaven and as a grain of mustard seed which of all seeds is the least yet now since it hath so sowred almost the whole mass even the most part of the Kingdoms of Europe which once was under your spiritual bondage and hath grown up into such a high tree having fair and great branches under the which the Lords sheep may get rest and warmness and in the which his souls that mounts upwards to that Kingdom doth build their nests so that neither can all your purgations nor yet all your axes of fire and sword of buls and pardons of preachings and writings stay the spreading of the one nor cut down the branches and root of the other That M. Luther began at that time and in that place and preached against these doctrines we do not deny and that is not controverted But here lyes all the question whither if that doctrine that he preached against was Antichristian or not and whither that Religion which he neither invented nor yet first preached for sundry before him did preach that same doctrine whose names I set down in my answer to your objection but only raised it out of the grave of darkness wherein ye had buried the truth of God Here then I say is the question whither that Religion which he preached hath the warrant from Jesus Christ in his Testament or not The which if ye ever disprove by the written Word of God then shal we grant you all that ye say the which is as impossible to you to do no not suppose your King would call all your wise men and Clergy together as it was to all the wise men of Babel to tell and interpret Nebuchadnezar his dream yea suppose your King would reward you gloriously with honor and riches if ye could do it yet are ye not able to win your wages yea suppose he would tear you in pieces and make your house a jakes unless ye did it as the wise men of Babel was because they could not tell and interpret the Kings dream This is therefore the point which lyes in question betwixt us which ye should have proved if ye could But know ye for a truth that suppose he raised out of the grave the truth of God which ye had buried yet was he neither the inventer nor the first preacher of it but it hath for the beginning and Author of it Jesus Christ the Son of God and the foundation of it in the New Testament of his holy Scripture This for the Author time and place which ye assign Now to the Churches that spake against him I answer They were but such as was made drunken with the wine of your fornication and deluded by your strong delusions being deceived by the golden cup wherein you propined them to be drunken out as it was prophesied of you Rev. 17.4 But the measure of your iniquity being full and the time of the lurking of the truth of God being run out God of his infinit mercy by his ministery and the rest that followed since hath opened the eyes of a great part of these Kingdoms who first said against him to see your Church to be the whore Rev. 17.1 your Kingdom to
condemned in the Scripture I deny that For Antichrist and his Kingdom are not so old as the Scripture and yet the Scripture condemned it For not only condemns it present heresies but also the heresies that was to come And seeing Papistrie is that Antichristian Religion as shal be made manifest by Gods grace therefore it hath the express condemnation of it in the Word of God The form therefore of it no wayes will make it impossible to be proved As for the next thing that I prove nothing bu offers very fair I answer it was not my purpose then but I hope ye shal have a proof now of that which I offered then As to the third then that I can say nothing to your argument which ye would hâ—ve the Reader to mark When I read this I marked this that ye would earnestly have the Reader perswaded of the invincibleness of your argument and my inability to answer But what bring ye with you to perswade him of the same Your reason is because I have not answered it Will this follow I have not suppose it were so as ye say therefore I cannot It will not follow I have not answered I cannot answer to it But as you have a new Theology so have you a new Logick But said I nothing to your argument What is not answered sufficiently in the same Your argument was the antiquity of your Religion and continuance of it from Christ by a lineal succession never interrupted c. and the novelty of ours My answer was Yours was not institut by Christ nor his Apostles in his Scripture as ours was and yours was gain-said in the chief points by the testimonies of the Fathers the first six hundred years and the principal points of our Religion confirmed by sundry of their testimonies Thirdly yours was that Antichristian apostasie that the Scripture fore told should come and in the hight of your tyranny and Idolatry was gain-said by many before Martin Luther and ours was professed by sundry before him whose names I set down all which I offered to prove and now shal do by Gods grace Now you say this is no answer But is that no answer that cuts the very throat of your Religion if it be verified and invalidities your argument that it do never stand up to under-prop your Religion again For that Religion which is not instituted by Christ in the Scripture whose main foundations is gain-said by the testimonies of sundry of the Fathers of the first 600. year which is Antichristian and which was gain-said by the Saints that they persecuted and slew hath not the continuance from Christ by a lineal succession never interrupted nor spoken against by a true Church till Martin Luthers days This I am sure ye will not deny But your Religion is such as I offered then to prove and now have in some points and shal in other some points by Gods grace The which if it be verified then I hope ye will not deny but that your Religion hath neither antiquity continuance nor succession from Christ till Martin Luthers dayes And that Religion cannot be newly forged and invented since Martin Luthers dayes which hath the warrant and institution of it in the Scripture c. This you cannot deny But our Religion is such as then I offered to prove and now have done in some points and shal do in other some points by Gods grace Therefore our Religion cannot be newly forged and invented c. but is the only true Religion So that this answer if it be proved doth sufficiently vindicat our Religion from novelty Now if this be no answer to your argument then I say no more but ye will answer it the sooner And because ye formed your own argument your self in your answer to me and I have answered to it else therefore I will now insist no further upon it And as for your lineal succession of Bishops it will come in question afterward therefore I omit it now SECTION V. Concerning the Judge of Controversies namely whither GOD speaking in the Scripture be Judge of Controversies Maister Gilbert Brown AS for the written Word it is true that it is a most faithful witness and it be not corrupted to Christ and his Church as our Savior testifies himself John 5.39 of the which opinion there is sundry Protestants chiefly young Merchiston in his discourse upon the Revelation in the 21. proposition and other places 2. Cor. 3.6 John 6.63 But that it ought to be Judge to decide all controversies in Religion M. John hath no Scripture for the same It is the holy Ghost that must be Judge and the holy Writ must bear witness thereto For this cause the holy Ghost was given to the Church by the Father and the Son that he might teach it all truth John 14.25.26 This holy Ghost gives judgement by the Pastors of the true Church as he did by the Apostles and Priests at the Council of Jerusalem It hath pleased the holy Ghost and us saith the Apostle Acts 15.19.28 and so he hath ever done since the beginning of the Church when it was troubled with heresies and false doctrine as the Councils of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon M. John Welsch his Reply You first here decline the Scripture as Judge to decide all controversies in Religion And you are not the first that have done this but all your Roman Clergy with you And suppose there were not another thing to make the consciences of men suspect your Religion that it is not found in the book of God yet this is a great presumption that ye give out of it your selves For what may all men think of the same but that if ye were perswaded in your conscience to justify your Religion to be from Jesus Christ in his written Word ye would never decline the judicatorie of it and the declining of the same is an evident demonstration that ye are privy to your selves in your own consciences that it is not from God in his written Word But wherefore say I that ye are privy to your selves of this Ye have made it known to the world by your confession in your own books that many of the chief points of your Religion controverted between you and us which ye maintain have not their original beginning nor authors in the Scriptures but in your unwritten traditions So Petrus a Soto a Papist of great name confessed He calls all these observations Apostolick traditions whose beginning principium origo author cannot be found in the whole Scriptures in his book against Brentius And then he reckons out a number of the chief and principal heads of their Religion saying Of the which sort are the oblation of the sacrifice of the altar the invocation or prayers to Saints the prayer for the dead the supremacie of the Pope of Rome the consecration of the water in baptism the whole sacraments of orders matrimonie pennance confirmation and extream unction the merits of works
the necessitie of satisfaction the numbering over the sins to the Priest Canisius a great Papist in his Catechism cap. 5. de praeceptis Ecclesiae saith That the worshipping of images the set fastes and the forty dayes of Lent and all that are done in the sacrifice of the Mass prayers and oblations for the dead alia and others he saith all these are traditions because they are such that they cannot be defended by the Scripture And Lindanus another great defender of your Romish faith and Religion he reckons out for Traditions lib 4. Panopliae cap. 100. in fine illius libri tab 6. that there are seven Sacraments the consecration of the water and oyl in Baptism the real presence of Christs flesh and blood in the Sacrament Communion under one kind that the Lords Supper is a sacrifice that it should be kept and adored privat Masses Confession of sins to the Priests satisfactions pardons Purgatorie and that Peter was in Rome Martinus Peresius another Papist numbers the single life of Priests among the unwritten traditions The truth is strong that hath so far glanced in the consciences of some of you and hath opened your mouthes to confess and to set it down in writ to the world that the principal heads of your Religion yea the very foundation and ground of it as the supremacie of your Popes and the sacrifice of your Mass and the rest are unwritten traditions which have not the beginning nor original nor authoritie in the Lords written Word and which cannot be defended by the same as some of your selves have confessed So it is no wonder suppose ye refuse to have the controversies of Religion decided by the same Let the Reader now judge what he may think of your Religion that hath not God in his Scripture in the principal and main foundations thereof as some of your selves have confessed to be the author and beginner thereof So what needs any further proof against their Religion Out of their own mouthes the falshood of their Religion is convicted This therefore was the true cause wherefore ye refused to have the coÌ„troversies of Religion decided by the Scripture And for this cause also hath your Church heaped up so many false calumnies accusations and blasphemies against the same calling it obscure a Hosius lib. 3. de authorit contra script Andradius lib. 2. orthod explic Lindanus in Panoplia sua lib. 3. cap. 6. darksome doubtsome b Bellarm. de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 4. not necessary but only profitable imperfect c Juel pag. 521. defens Apolog. Lodovicus a canon a dead ink a dumb and dead thing d Pigius controv 3. de Ecclesia dumb Judges e Eckius a black Gospel an inky Divinity f Pigius hierarch lib. 3. cap. 3. a nose of wax that may be drawn every way g Fox pag. 804. containing in them diverse erroneous and damnable opinions h Hermannus a Papist which wâ—re of no greater authority then the fables of Asop without the approbation of the Church and by the i Pope Leo the 10. ex Juel defen Apolog. pag. 273. Pope himself a fable of Christ And for this cause also did they hide it up in an unknown language forbidding the translating of it in the vulgar language and the reading of it by the people in their mother tongue lest they should have perceived the falshood of their Religion and so it should have lost the credit at their hands So ye have been wise in your generation Sed veritas tandem vincet but the truth shal overcome at the last You grant it to be a witness but yet you deal subtilly while as ye put in an exception if it be not corrupted For if you be of that mind with your Church and especially with Canus lib. 3. cap. 13. de locis Theologicis Lindanus lib. 1. cap. 11. de Optimo Genere interpret and the Colledge of Rhemes you think the Hebrew and Greek fountains of the Scripture to be corrupted And therefore it is decreed in the Council of Trent the old Latin vulgar translation to be authentick which notwithstanding by the confession of some Papists as Andradius Pagnin and Arias Montanus it hath missed the sense and meaning of the holy Ghost sometimes So you not only put the Lord in his Scripture out of the bench that he should not judge and give out the sentence of doom against your doctrine but by this exception also ye remove him from the bar that his testimony in the Hebrew and Greek fountains against you should have no credit Let all men judge now what prejudice ye give against your own Religion when as ye will not admit the Lord in his Word in the Hebrew and Greek fountains neither Judge nor witness But you say I have no Scripture for me that the Scripture ought to be Judge What will ye say then to Jesus Christ in John 12.48 speaking to such as ye are He that refuseth me and receiveth not my words hath one that judgeth him the word that I have spoken it shal judge him in the last day Unless now ye be a man of perdition ye must confess that the Word of Jesus Christ whereof so much is written as may make a man believe and by believing to get eternal life is Judge and judgeth presently and shal judge also in the latter day Therefore the Apostle saith That God shal judge the secrets of mens hearts by Jesus Christ according to his Gospel So the Gospel shal be the rule of that great judgement in that great day and so is it the rule of his worship while we are in the way to that judgement Suppose you now decline the judicatorie of the same here because in your conscience ye know and your own mouthes have confessed it that ye are not able to justifie your Religion thereby yet nill ye will ye ye shal be judged by the same Word in the last day But whom will ye have to be your Judge Ye say the holy Ghost Bellarmin saith that we and your Church agrees in that that the holy Ghost should be supream Judge of all controversies lib. 3. de verbi interpret cap. 3. But is not the Scripture the holy Ghosts own infallible voice and breath So then when the Scripture is Judge the holy Ghost is Judge because the Scripture is the immediat voice of the holy Ghost and the holy Ghost hath given out and gives out his judgement in all controversies of Religion in and by the Scripture and the holy Ghost illuminats the eyes of those that are fore-ordained to life to see the truth in the Scripture 2. Tim. 3.16 Rom. 10.17 and works in their heart faith to apprehend it and believe it and formes a spiritual judgement in their hearts to try and judge for the spiritual man judgeth all things 1. Cor. 2.15 And all this he works by the means of the Scripture for it is the
only means and instrument whereby the holy Ghost works faith in our hearts Thus I reason therefore He only can be Judge in controversies of Religion whose authority is such that none may appeal from the same whose judgement is infallible true who will not be partial nor favor parties and who is able to convict and perswade the conscience of the truth and make the party to rest in the same But only the holy Ghost in by the Scripture hath these proprieties no other Therefore the holy Ghost in and by the Scripture is only Judge And whereas you say that the holy Writ must bear witn ss to it What will you say then to all the chief points of your Religion almost which the learned and great defenders of your faith before cited have confessed are unwritten traditions which have not their beginning nor authority from the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same Upon the which I reason thus That doctrine is not the holie Ghosts which the Scripture bears not witness to this ye say your self for ye say The Scripture must bear witness to it But all the chief points almost of your Religion as the supremacy of the Pope the sacrifice of the Mass invocation of Saints the five bastard Sacraments the worshipping of Images Transubstantiation Communion under one kind Satisfactions Pardons Purgatory Merits of works c. have not their authoritie from the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same as your own Catholicks as ye call them testifies Therefore your Doctrine and Religion is not the holie Ghosts and that by your own testimonie Now trulie M. Gilbert I fear ye lose your style if you defend your Religion no better then this And whereas you say That the holy Ghost gives out his judgement by the Pastors of the true Church I grant indeed that the Pastors gives out publick sentence in controversies of Religion because they are the Lords witnesses messengers and mouthes to testifie proclaim interpret and discern his truth from falshood But first the rule of this their judgement should be the Word of God unto the which they are bound in all their testimonies and judgements from the which if their judgements swerve but an inch-broad they are not the judgements of the holie Ghost so that all their decreets and determinations in the worship of God and man his salvation should onlie be received accordinglie as they agree or dissent from the same For the Apostle pronounces him accursed suppose he were an Angel that would preach another Gospel then that which he preached Gal. 1 8. And he preached nothing but out of the Scripture Acts 26.22 But your Roman Church by the contrary saith That their decreets and sentences should be taken without all tryal and examination because whatsoever they decree say they in manners or doctrine whither they be comprehended in the Scripture or not they cannot err Bellar. de Eccles lib. 1. de Consil cap. 18. lib. 3. c. 14. Next if it be asked of you whom ye judge to be the Pastors of the true Church You will answer as ye do that your Church is the only true Church and your Bishops and Popes the only true Pastors so that they only must be the Judge to end all controversies And Bellarmin is plain in this for he saith lib 3. de verbi interpret cap. 5. 9. lib. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 2. The Pope is chief Judge in all controversies in Religion either he himself alone or with his Council and that in his judgement and sentence all men should rest and he should be obediently heard of all the faithful in all matters of controversie whether he can err or not And their Canon Law hath decreeted That no man should rebuke him suppose he should carry with him innumerable souls to hell And they teach that their decreets should not be examined of any whither they be agreeable to the Scripture or not but that they should be received as the express Word of God and the Gospel Dist 40. cap. Si Papa Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 18. Rhemist annotat in 2. Thess 2. v. 12. Joannes Maria verractus editus anno 1561. Hosius lib. de express verb. Dei pag. 97. But first judge thou Reader in what suspicion they have their Religion in their own hearts They have declined the holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture and that not only as Judge but in the authentick Greek and Hebrew as witness So their Religion cannot stand if the Lord be either as Judge in his Scripture to give out sentence of it or as witness in the authentick copies to hold his hand at the bar and depone against it Now whom would they have as Judges Their own Pastors and the Pope and all their determinations to be received without a tryal as the Gospel and express Word of God as though their Religion could not be justified unless the Fathers and forgers thereof the Popes and Bishops of Rome were set on the bench to be Judges thereof Now what an unrighteous thing is this both to be partie and Judge For the chief controversie is of themselves whither he be the Antichrist or not And his Ministers and Church Antichristian or not But what show of reason can you have for this The Prince of life the Son of God who is the righteous Judge of the whole world in that great controversie wherein it is called in question whether he was the Messias or not desired not to be the Judge For he said If I testifie of my self much more if I judge of my self my testimony is not true John 3.31 but referred this controversie to the Scripture saying Search the Scriptures c. John 5.32 And yet you that are but flesh and blood dust and ashes yea monsters and incarnat Devils as your own Writers and Councils have testified of some of your Popes who may err and have been hereticks as some of your Popes have been and that by your own testimonies you will not only bear witness of your selves but also be Judges in the controversies of your selves rejecting the judgement of the holy Ghost in the Scripture All men saith the Apostle are liars How then shal I certainlie know but they may lie How shal my conscience rest in their judgement Shal I have no better warrant for my salvation then the testimonies of your Bishops and Popes who are but men and so may lie who are partie and so never will condemn themselves who of all men have most foully erred What is this but to make the voice of your Bishops and Popes of greater authoritie then the voice of God in his Scripture For seeing it is the sense of the Scripture that is called in controversie and the sense of the Scripture is the Scripture it self And your doctrine is that I must embrace such and such interpretations of the Scripture that are called in controversie and my conscience must rest in the same
without further tryal because he hath so decreed it What is this but not only to make him equal to the Lord For God only hath that priviledge to be believed because he so speaks mans testimony so far only is to be credited as it may be warranted by the Scripture but also to preferr his authoritie to the voice of God in his Scripture seeing he is Judge of the same and not that onlie but to hang my salvation upon his voice and testimonie And seeing ye will have them Judges what is the cause that their Canons Laws and determinations are not as authentick as the Scripture and insert in the Canon of the Scripture But let us see your reasons First you say That the holy Ghost was given to the Church by the Father and the Son that he might teach it all truth I grant this that the holy Ghost is given to every one of the elect as wel Pastor as people to lead them in all truth in so far as may bring them to salvation And yet ye will not make every one of them Judges next every one of the elect may err notwithstanding of this promise suppose not totally and finally and therefore cannot be Judges of Religion Secondly you alledge the example of the Council of the Apostles and Elders It is true in that controversie that arose among the Christians concerning the observing of the ceremonies of the law of Moses that the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church after reasoning defined the same and writes the same to be observed by the Disciples everie where but first they were Apostles and was infallibly governed by Gods Spirit that they could not err in teaching and writing but your Pastors are not Apostles and may err Next they assemble with the Elders and the whole Church and all with one accord defines Acts 15.12.22.23 You in your Council excludes all except your Bishops to be ordinary Judges to give out judgement and your Popes neither Elder nor brethren having power of voting with you Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 1. Thirdly they define according to the Scripture saying As it is written c. Act. 15.15 This controversie to make us to understand if we will not be more then blind that this rule should be followed in all Councils to determine in controversies according to the Scripture Upon the which I reason if the Apostles who had that high measure of Gods Spirit which never man had since so that in writing and teaching they could not err if they I say did determine the controversies of Religion according to the Scripture how much more then are all Pastors since who may err both severally and jointly together in a Council bound to follow the same rule And whereas ye call their Elders Priests you stile them not as the holy Ghost hath stiled them there so there they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Elders and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is sacrificing Priests as ye suppone Your third reason is the practise and custom of the Church in deciding the controversies of Religion in Councils we grant that this is a very commodious mean to search and find out the truth by the Scripture For first the more they are that seek the truth it is the more easily found Next the consent of many in determining a truth will be of greater authority to repress hereticks then if it were agreed upon only by a few But yet they should determine nothing but that which is warranted by the Scripture and their determinations only in so far forth to be received as is agreeable to the same And this we grant hath been done in the Council of the primitive Church And therefore the Emperor Constantine speaking to the Fathers of the Council of Nice saith Sunt libri Prophetici Apostolici qui apertè quid credendum sit docent c. That is there are the Books of the Prophets and Apostles who teacheth plainly what we should believe All contention therefore laid aside let us take the soveraign decision of these things which are called in controversie out of the Scriptures which are inspired by God And this we grant and this we require But that Councils ought to determin any thing of their own authority in matters of Religion which binds the conscience without the warrant of the Word that we deny Master Gilbert Brown It is a wonder that M. John will refer any thing to the written Word seeing that he and his have no warrant that the same is the Word of God but by the authority of the Roman or Papist Church For understand there was no Church worthie of credit immediatly before Luther but that Church Master John Welsch his Reply You wonder that I refer any thing to the Scripture But what a wōder is this that ye are so far blinded of God that you think that a wonder in me which Abraham hath done which the Prophets have done which our Savior and his Apostles have done and which the Fathers have done for all these have referred the infallible testimony and decision of the will of God concerning his worship unto the Scriptures Luke 16 29. John 5 39. Acts 26.22 Rom. 12. and 16.26 2. Tim. 3.16 2. Pet. 1.10 Rev. 1 3. cap. ult yea which your self also hath done for ye make it a witness But what hath moved you to think this a wonder in me which so many and your self also have done before me Because say ye that he and his that is our Church have no warrant that it is the Word of God but by the authoritie of the Roman or Papist Church I grant indeed that you and your Church are plunged in this blindness and miserie that all the warrant that you have not only of the Scriptures themselves that they are inspired of God but also of all your doctrine and Religion is the testimony of your Roman Church that is of your Pope and Clergy for so ye interpret the Church So Bellarmin grants de Sacr. lib. 2. cap. 25. That all the certainty of all doctrine depends upon the authority of the present Church meaning the Pope and his Clergy And Stapleton saith lib. 1 contra Whitak de author script cap. 10. That it is no absurd thing not to believe God but for the testimony of the Church Pigius saith That it is not needful to believe all that Matthew and John writ in their Gospels to be true because that they might fail in memory and lie as all men may do Ecclesiast hierar lib. 1. cap. 2. And Hermannus saith That the Scripture would be of no more authority then the fables of Esop were not the testimony of the Church And so blind and miserable must you be that hangs the certaintie of all Religion and of man his salvation upon so smal a threed as the testimony of your Popes and Clergy What peace in conscience can any man have that professes your Religion which teaches that the
as far in word as ye do in deed the consciences of the poor people would at the last withdraw themselves from under your tyranny and would go out of your fellowship for the safety of their souls so under the cloke and pretence of the Scripture ye keep them in your communion And surelie were not for this cause only you would regard no more of the testimony of the Scripture then of the testimony of the fables of Esop For the chief authority and all the surety and certainty of all Religion with you as Bellarmin de sacr lib. 2. cap. 25. and Stapleton lib. 1. cont Whitaker cap. 10. confesses is not the testimony of the Scripture but the authority of your own Church So I assure thee Reader it is but for a show that they bring forth the Scripture to prove the heads of their Religion Let the matter therefore be tryed betwixt us by these examples which ye set down here M. Gilbert Brown 1. We say with Saint Augustin Epist 28. ad Hier. that the Sacrament of Baptism is so necessary to infants that they cannot come to heaven without the same which is contrary to their negative saith where they call it the Popes cruel judgement against infants departing without the Sacrament First I say that Christ taught the same doctrine in these words Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter in the Kingdom of God John 3.5 We say this is spoken properly of the Sacrament of Baptism because there is no regeneration of water and the Spirit of God but in Baptism The same is the doctrine of the Apostles also When they exspected the patience of God saith S. Peter in the days of Noe when the Ark was building in the which few that is eight souls were saved by water whereunto Baptism being of the like form now saves you also 1. Pet. 3.20.21 And S. Paul saith For as many of you as are baptized in Christ have put on Christ Galat 3.27 And Ananias said to S. Paul And now what tarriest thou rise up and be baptized and wash away thy sins invocating his name Acts 22.17 and 2.38 And S. Paul himself in another place Christ hath saved us by the washing of regeneration and renovation of the holy Ghost Tit. 3.5 Rom. 6.3.4 1. Cor. 6.11 Mark 16.16 I think there is no Christian reader that sees these places but he must say that Baptism is most necessary to infants except he will believe rather the exposition of the Ministers then the Word of God Maister John Welsch his Reply First ye begin at the necessity of the Sacrament of Baptism whereof ye affirm that it is so necessary that infants cannot come to heaven without the same As for Baptism we grant that it is a most effectual seal and pledge of our ingrafting in Christ Jesus and of the remission of our sins through his blood and regeneration through his Spirit so that either the neglect or the contempt of it because it is the neglect and contempt of the covenant it self and of Christ Jesus the foundation of the covenant is damnable But that it is so absolutly necessary to infants that without it they cannot come to heaven to wit these whom he hath predestinat it being neither neglected nor contemned but death preventing the receiving of it that we allutterly deny as impious ungodly and cruel For first I say there is none that is in the covenant of grace and who hath God to be their God and are holy that can perish This you cannot deny But the children of the faithful who are of his secret election are such before they be baptized And this I prove The Lord promised to Abraham I will be thy God and the God of thy seed Gen. 17.17 And this Peter also testifies The promise saith he is made to you and to your children Acts 2.39 And the Apostle saith That the children of the faithful are holy 1. Cor. 7.14 Therefore the children of the faithful who are of Gods secret election suppose they die without Baptism do not perish Secondlie if Baptism were absolutly necessary to salvation then the grace of God were bound to the Sacrament This cannot be denyed But your Master of Sentences saith that the grace of God is not bound to the Sacraments and it is impious so to think that Gods free grace and salvation is bound to the instrument Thirdlie if Circumcision was not absolutly necessary to salvation in the Old Testament then Baptism is not absolutly necessary now because Circumcision was as straitly enjoyned to them as Baptism is enjoyned to us and Baptism is suceeded in the room of the same but Circumcision is not absolutly necessarie For Lombardus is rebuked by the Doctors of Paris because he so thought And David doubts not to say of his child who died the seventh day and so before he was circumcised I shal go to him c. and so he pronounced that he was saved and all the time that they were in the wilderness almost 40 years Circumcision was neglected which plainly shows that it was not so absolutly necessary that salvation could not be obtained without it Therefore Baptism is not so absolutly necessary to salvation as ye suppose for the grace of God is of no less force in the New Testament then it was in the Old Fourthlie we read of sundry that received the holy Ghost before they were baptized and seeing the holy Ghost where he is regenerats to eternal life Therefore life eternal is not bound absolutly to Baptism Fifthlie what a cross and disturbance is this that your doctrine brings to the consciences of all these parents whose children have been prevented by death before they could be offered to be baptized If they believe your doctrine how often will this come in their mind that their children are damned And seeing the infants themselves are not in the cause that they are not baptized but their death preventing by Gods providence or the Parents neglecting or contemning the same or persecution or one impediment or other hindering wherefore are ye so cruel to judge them to be damned for that whereof themselves are causeless And last of all if ye be acquainted in the Histories of the Church of God in the first age ye will find many that delayed to be baptized until their latter age which they would never have done if they had thought it simpliciter necessary to salvation as ye do And Ambrosius doubts not to say That Valentinian wanted not the grace of Baptism suppose he wanted Baptism it self the which he would never have said if he had thought it absolutly necessary to salvation And Bernard saith I cannot altogether despair of the salvation of them who wants Baptism not through contempt but only through impossibility to get it And in that same place he saith So also if our Savior Christ for this cause when he had said he that believeth and is baptized shal be saved did
it is not of that which he speaks here Secondly he speaks of that eating and drinking of his flesh and blood which whosoever so doth hath eternal life to themselves so our Savior Christ promises in the 54. verse But your own doctrine is that the reprobat eats and drinks Christs body and blood in the Sacrament and yet have no life in them therefore he speaks not here of that sacramental eating Thirdly if he speak here of the sacramental eating as you say then your Church not only hath erred foully but also hath been and is the cause of the condemnation of your people these many years because you give them not his blood to drink And our Savior saith not only Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man but also except ye drink his blood ye have no life in you And this reason was so effectual that it hath moved sundry of your own Doctors as Jansenius and Tapperus with sundry others to expone this place not of the sacramental eating and drinking of the body and blood of Christ but of the spiritual eating and drinking of him by faith For they did see that it behoved them either to forsake this place as not making for them and grant that it speaks not of the Sacrament or else to confess that their Church hath erred and through this error hath been the cause of the damnation of many in ministring the Sacrament but under one kind And because you say if our expositions vere removed from the Scripture they would ferve for you whom therefore will you credit in exponing of this place If our Savior hear then how he expon s this eating and drinking of his flesh and blood in the 35. verse I am the bread of life he that cometh unto me shal not hunger and he that believes in me shal never thirst So when we believe in Christ we eat him and when we come unto him which is only by faith we drink him So Augustine also expones this place Tractat. 25. in Johan cap 6. Tract 26 de doct Christ lib. 3 cap. 16. Believe saith he and thou hast eaten Clement Alexandrinus lib. 1. Padago cap. 6. and Hieronymus in Psal 147. and Bernard supra Psal 90 vers 3 all expones the flesh and blood of Christ figuratively And if ye will credit none of these then I hope ye will not discredit your own chief Doctors who affirms That this place is not meant of the Sacrament but of the spiritual eating and drinking of Christ by faith As Biel Cusanus Caiâ—tanus Hesselius and Jansâ—nius cited by Bellarm lib 1 de Eucharist cap. 5. And if ye will reply that many others of the Fathers have exponed this place of the Sacrament then Janfenius and Tapperus two Papists will answer you That they did it only by way of application unto the readers and hearers to stir them up to the often receiving of the Sacrament So this place can serve nothing for your Transubstantiation for it speaks not of the Sacrament but of his suffering upon the Cross for the away taking of our sins and the purchasing to us of eternal life The next place ye quote is the words of the institution as Matthew Mark Luke and the Apostles rehearses them Your argument is this Christ calls the bread his flesh and so Paul and the wine his blood therefore the bread is changed in his body and the wine in his blood the outward formes of bread and wine only remaining This is the chief and principal ground of your real presence and Transubstantiation Whereunto I answer First there is not a syllable here that tells us that the substance of the bread and wine is transchanged in the body and blood of Christ unless ye will expone this word is my body for it is changed in my body which is a monstrous exposition for both it is contrary to the native signification of the word est Est Fieri sunt contraria that signifies to be alreadie for to be already and to be in a change are contrary as also it hath not the like form of speach in the whole Scripture to warrant it from the first of Genesis to the last of the Revelation Bring one instance if ye can And Augustin saith in Genes quaest 117. in Psal 105. supr Num. quaest 95. The solution of a question should be warranted by some example of the like speach in the Scripture the which you are not able to do Therefore your exposition is without warrant Next I say by what Art of reasoning can you gather this doctrine out of these places of Scripture Christ saith of the bread This is my body and of the wine This is my blood Therefore the outward formes of the bread and wine only remains but the substance of them is gone Never such an inkling in all these texts of this doctrine of yours Thirdly this interpretation and doctrine which results upon it is false and that for these reasons First because it is plainly gain-said by the Scripture Secondly because it destroys sundry articles of our Faith and many blasphemous absurdities doth follow upon it Thirdly it destroys the nature of the Sacrament And last of all is utterly repugnant to the words of the institution My argument then is this That interpretation and doctrine which is gain-said by the plain testimony of the Scripture which destroyes the articles of our faith and the fundamental points of our salvation which hath many absurdities following upon it which overthrowes the nature of the Sacrament and last of all which is contrary to the whole institution must be false blasphemous and erroneous This cannot be denyed but your interpretation of these words This is my body c. and your transubstantiation which ye gather upon it is such Therefore it must be erroneous c. My assumption I prove thus First your interpretation is gain-said by the plain testimony of the Scripture Your interpretation is that there remains no true bread nor wine in the Sacrament but the substance of it is changed But Matthew Mark Luke and the Apostles all four testifies That Christ took bread brake it and gave it to his disciples And lest ye should say that it was true bread and wine before the consecration but not after the Scripture saith plainly 1. Cor. 10.16 that it is bread which we break and bread which is eaten and the fruit of the vine which is drunken in the Sacrament The Apostle saith The bread which we break c. And as oft as ye eat this bread c. Whosoever shal eat this bread c. And let a man examine himself and so let him eat of this bread c. And our Savior saith that after he had given the cup and they had drunken of it From henceforth shal I not drink of the fruit of the vine with you c. Therefore true bread and wine remains in the Sacrament contrary expresly to your interpretation Secondly That your
the rest which is exceeding many and because if you be a right defender of the Catholick Faith you will say with the rest of your Clergie that the Pope cannot err Therefore a Pope Gelasius by name saith de duabus natura in Christo Neither the substance of the bread nor nature of the wine ceaseth to be any more then they were before but remain in their own substance And he calls them there An image and resemblance of the body and blood of Christ Now tell me Master Gilbert do not these speak as plain as we Will you avow your transubstantiation which they so flatly deny And as our Savior saith A Kingdom divided against it self cannot stand so the manifold divisions among your selves concerning this transubstantiation is a very sure argument of the falling both of you and your doctrine Some of you expounds this word hoc this (1) Bonaventure Gerson contra Florentiū lib. 4. of the bread (2) As Thomas lib. 4 seu dist 8. Occam in 4 sent d. 13. q. 16.17 Some of Christs body (3) Innocent 3 de offic miss pag. 3 object 14 Scotus in l. 46. d. 8. q. 3. and some calls it an individuum vagum (4) Durandus rational 4 some saith it signifieth nothing (5) Holcot in 4. sent quaest 1 and some saith it signifieth a thing which is common both to terminus à quo and terminus ad quem Secondly in the exposition of the word est is some for it is some for it is changed Thirdly some (a) Thomas saith the substance of the bread and wine returns to nothing some saith (b) The gloss of Gratian and the extravag de cōsecr dist 2 cap. Species c firmit extr de summa Trinitate it passes in the body of Christ Fourthly some saith (c) C. non oportet ibi gloss de consecrat dist 2. c. Cum Martha para verum eleemos the water in the Sacrament returns to nothing some saith it is changed in the blood with the wine some saith it is (d) Thomas 3974 art 8. turned in Christs vital humors some saith it is turned in the wine and after in the blood some saith (e) Durand lib. 4. cap. 42. they dare not define it Fifthly some saith (f) Thomas Epist 59. 3. quaest 79. the worms that are bred of the Sacrament comes of the quantitie other some saith (g) Durand lib. 3. cap. 41. they are bred of the substance Sixthly some saith Christ (h) Idem lib. 4. cap. 41. consecrated by the word he blessed some by the (i) M. Gilbert words This is my body and the blessing together some (k) Gloss in cap. Utrum in verbis perferri de cons dist 2. will have the consecration to be made in heaven and some frankly (l) Scotus in repor dist 8. qu. 2. confesses That they neither know the words nor the number of them whereby this consecration is made And to omit six hundred the like I will only touch these few (m) Gloss in l. tribus some saith The body of Christ is taken bodily with the mouth (n) Cajetan tom 2. cap. 2. 3. 5. some saith That it feeds (o) Gloss ibidem some saith As soon as it is pressed with the teeth the body of Christ is caught up to heaven (p) Durand rational lib. 4. But other some faith It passeth from the teeth to the heart and then the bodily presence ceases (q) Bonavent 4. dist 13. art 2. qu. 2. and other some will have him go to the stomack c. but not to the mind And yet he saith He doubts whither he goes to the belly or not for the variety of opinions and in so great variety he saith what to hold is hard to judge And suppose he holds it That the body of Christ goes not into the belly of a mouse or is casten out into the draught because saith he the ears of well disposed persons would abhor it and infidels and hereticks would jest at it and laugh us to scorn Yet sundry others holds as Alexander de Hales part quaest 45. Thomas Aquin parte 3. qu. 80. art 3. Antonius Archiepisc part 3. tit 13. cap. 6. That not only it goes into the belly but also Christs body may be vomited up or purged out in the draught and that brute beasts may eat Christs body it may go into the belly of dogs and swine O filthy mouthes unclean spirits what heretick what Capernait was ever so gross and carnal yea so barbarous and brutish as ye are So not only are ye more gross then the Capernaits who thought that saying hard but also like the barbarous Canibals who eat the flesh of man O blind leaders of the blind shal myce dogs and swine eat and drink the precious body and blood of Christ Shal they then have eternal life I think the ears of all Christians will abhor this your doctrine and their hearts will tremble at it These absurdities together with Scriptures and Fathers against the same hath made some of your great pillars to say as Fisher against the captivity of Babylon That no man can prove by the words of the Gospel that any Priest in these days doth consecrat the very body and blood of Christ And others as Lindanus Panop lib. 4. Canisius and Petrus a Soto supra citati That transubstantiation it but a tradition which hath not the author of it in the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same And others as Tonstal de Sacramentis That it had been better to have left every man to his own conjecture as they were before the Council of Lateran then to bring in such a question I have been longsome in this but yet it so behoved me because it is the foundation of their sacrifice of the Mass and their other idolatries and abominations So then to conclud this seeing your doctrine of Transubstantiation is agreeable neither to the doctrine of Christ nor his Apostles nor ancient Fathers nor your own Canon Law and Popes as they have been cited And seeing ye are at such variance among your selves concerning the same therefore it is to be rejected as heretical damnable and blasphemous by all Christians And this for the fourth point of your doctrine SECTION X. Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mass Master Gilbert Brown WE have only in our Church that heavenly action and sacrifice which we call the blessed Mass that our Savior did at his latter Supper and was (a) Levit. 2. per totum 6.20 prefigured by the Law of Moses and fore-spoken by the (b) Mal. 1.10 11. Isai 19.19.21 and 56.7 Prophets For Christ being the chief Priest of all Priests according to the order of (c) Genes 14.18 Psal 109.4 Heb. 7.3.17 Melchisedec in this action according to the order of (d) Heb. 9.12.13.14 Aaron upon the Cross took (e) Matth.
26.26.27 bread and wine and having given (f) Luke 22.19 thanks to his Father of heaven (g) Mark 14.22 blessed the same by the which (h) 1. Cor. 10.16 blessing and heavenly words he made them his body and blood as I said before and (i) Luke 22.29 gave or offered himself then for them that is for his And last of all gave the same body and blood to his Apostles to be eaten which we call to (k) 1. Cor 10.16 communicat And when he had done the same he commanded his Apostles and by them the lawful Pastors of the Church till the worlds end to do the same for the (l) Luke 22.19 remembrance of him And seeing that our Priests do the same as our Savior did how can M. John say that our Religion in this was not instituted by Christ Master John Welsch his Reply I come to another point of your doctrine concerning the sacrifice of the Mass which suppose ye call blessed yet is it most abominable idolatry as by the grace of God shal be made manifest And first concerning the word it self MASS you are of such variety of opinions among your selves concerning it that (a) As Doctor Bellarmin in his answer to Duplessis Mornay de Eucharist lib. 11. cap. 1. Genebrard in Liturg. S. Denis from the word MISSAH Deut. 16.10 that properly signifieth sufficiency but Bellarmin refutes this lib. 1. de Missa cap. 1. some of you saith it is taken from the Hebrew some (b) Bulinger ibidem from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that signifies a secret sanctificatioÌ„ from the which comes mystery from the Greek some (c) As Bellarmin ibidem and sundry others from mitto missio or dimissio from the Latin and (d) Some because the sacrifice and prayers is sent to God in the same as Hugo de S. Victor de sacram lib. 2. part 8. cap. ult some saith it is called the Mass for one cause and (e) Some because an angel as they say is sent unto the same as Lombard in 4. sent dist 13. Thomas part 3. quaest 83. And some because the people is dismissed and sent forth as Bellar. lib. 1. de Missa cap. 1. some for another I will only speak this of it that it is usually taken by the ancient Writers for the dismission or skailing as we call it of the Church after the publick service was done to God as Bellarmin grants in the first acception of this word Mass And therefore in the end of your Mass the Deacon crys Ite missa est that is Go your way the Congregation is dismissed But now the Papists takes not the word in this sense for the skailing of the Church or dismission of the people after the service of preaching prayer and so forth but for that abominable sacrifice of theirs wherein as they suppone they offer up Christ his very body and blood in a sacrifice for the quick and the dead as M. Gilbert doth here And for this cause they call this sacrifice the Mass that is first sent from the Father to us that Christ his body and blood might be with us next sent from us to the Father that he may interceed and may be for us with the Father as Durandus lib. 4. ration divin testifieth But how can he be sent from them to heaven seeing he descends in the mouth stomack and belly of the Priest for to be sent down to the belly of the Priest to be sent up to heaveÌ„ are things contrary So by this stile of the Mass as they take it it is plain that either Christ descends from heaven in the earth dayly in the Mass which some of them grants also Turrian 1 tract cap. 11 fol. 59. which is contrary to an article of our faith That he sits at the right hand of hâ—s Father whom the heavens must contain until the time that all things be restored Acts 3.21 or else their Mass-Priests dust and ashes are the creators of their Creator which is a blasphemy Thus much now for the name of the Mass which all Christians should abhor according to that of David That he would not take the name of false Gods in his mouth Psal 16 4. For that word which is proponed by men for an Article of our Faith which is not found in the Scripture neither in proper terms nor yet in substance and by necessary consequence out of the same should be rejected by the Church of God as a profane and a bastard word But the Mass is such For it is proponed by the Church of Rome as an Article of our Faith and yet it is neither found in proper termes nor in substance nor by any necessary consequence out of the Scripture Therefore it should be rejected as profane and idolatrous by the Church of God This for the name Now to the matter This is one of the greatest controversies betwixt you and us concerning your sacrifice of the Mass which as ye account it most heavenly so we account it most abominable as that which injures the Son of God which derogats from his death and passion which is injurious to his everlasting Priesthood which is idolatrous vain needless and fruitless which hinders and overthrows the true service of God all which shal be made plain of it by Gods grace The matter of our controversie therefore is Whither Jesus Christ God and man his body and blood be personally and corporally offered up in your sacrifice of the Mass as ye call it And whither this your sacrifice be a propiciatory sacrifice for the sins of the quick and the dead This your Church affirms and holds and this we deny Now let us see your reasons first and then we will set down what reasons we have for us out of the Word of God to the contrary As to yours First ye say it way prefigured by the Law of Moses Next prophesied of by the Prophets And thirdly done and instituted by Christ our Savior and commanded by him to be done to the end of the world As to the first This sacrifice was prefigured by the sacrifices of the Old Testament for the which purpose ye quote Levit. 2. and 6.20 Unto the which I answer That the sacrifices of the Old Testament were figures and shadows of that great and bloody sacrifice of Christ Jesus ones offered up upon the cross never to be offered up again as the Apostle saith Heb. 9.25.26.27.28 and of our spiritual sacrifices and service to God whereof the Apostle speaks in these places here cited Rom. 12.1 Heb. 13.15.16 The which also were fulfilled in that one and only sacrifice of himself upon the cross for the sins of the world and are fulfilled in our spiritual sacrifices of our selves and of the calves of out lips continually But that these were figures of your abominable sacrifice in the Mass there is not a syllable in the whole Scripture to prove the same For that which was prefigured
own heads as may be seen in our Psalm books Whereunto I answer If ye respect the matter contained in our thanksgiving it hath the warrant of the Scripture and so in that respect it is not our own invention If ye respect the authority we are taught and commanded by our Savior both by his example for he gave thanks and also by his commandment Do this to do the same And so in that respect it is not our own invention If you respect the end it is Gods glory which is the proper end of all thanksgiving If ye will respect the form of this thanksgiving to wit the words and order wherein it is conceived I say it is left indifferent to the Church of God to form their prayers and thanksgiving so being the matter end and authority of the using of them publickly have their warrant out of the Word of God So seeing the authority to give thanks and the matter also of our thanksgiving and end thereof is set down in the Word and seeing the Lord hath left it free to the Church of God concerning the outward form of the same the Scriptures not determining it which your self I hope will not deny For your Canon hath many forms of prayers and thanksgiving in your Mass which after that form and order is not set down in the Word of God Therefore you injury the Lords Spirit and his Church who calls our thanksgiving our own invention As to the third concerning blessing which you distinguish from thanksgiving and saith we have blotted it out of our Scots Bibles and put thanksgiving in the room thereof and so you say we want that part First then I will ask you Did not Luke and the Apostle Paul set down the whole form and the chief points of the institution of that Sacrament I suppose you will not deny it for it were too plain an impiety for you to say that either Luke the sworn pen-man of Gods Spirit or Paul who said I have received of the Lord that which also I have delivered unto you 1. Cor. 11.23 that either of these had omitted the history of the institution of this Sacrament a principal point thereof but either this blessing is one with thanksgiving or else they have omitted a principal point thereof for neither of them makes mention in these places of blessing but only of thanksgiving therefore it is one with thanksgiving Secondly I say either the whole three Evangelists and the Apostle Paul in setting down the institution of the Sacrament of the Supper omits a chief thing to wit the blessing of the cup which I suppose ye will not say or else the blessing of the cup is one with thanksgiving for the Apostles Paul Luke makes no mention at all of blessing but only of thanksgiving and the two Evangelists Matthew and Mark makes no mention of the blessing of the cup but saith that after or also he took the cup and when he had given thanks c. therefore they are one Thirdly if ye will credit one Evangelist exponing another whereas Matthew and Mark have this word and he blessed Luke and Paul have these words And he gave thanks And whereas Matthew and Mark have this word blessing after he took the bread they use the word thanksgiving after he took the cup to signifie that they are both one And therefore if ye will believe Scripture exponing Scripture they are both one Yea what will you say to Bellarmin who saith lib. 1. de sacram Euchar. cap. 10 That some Catholicks contends that both the words to bless and to give thanks in the Scripture signifies one thing and therefore they interpret thanksgiving blessing So if you will credit your own Catholicks they are both one here And whereas you say that both in the Greek and Latin they signifie diverse things I answer Indeed it is true that sometimes they signifie diverse actions as blessing Numb 6. for the petition of a blessing But yet sometimes also blessing is taken in the Scripture for thanksgiving as both I have proved in these places as also if ye will deny there is many places in the Scripture for the contrary as Luke 1.65 Eph. 1.3 1. Pet. 1.3 And whereas you say that in Mark they signifie two distinct actions I have proved before they are both one And last of all I say if by blessing you mean the words of the consecration this is my body which is broken for you c. as Bellarmin affirms lib. 4. de sacram Euch. cap. 13 that the Roman catechist so expones it and the Theologues commonly teaches the same then I say we want not that chief point for we rehearse the words of the institution So howsoever the word blessing be taken either for thanksgiving or for the sanctification of these elements to an holy use by prayer which is comprehended in the thanksgiving or for the words as ye call them of the consecration we have always this blessing in our cōmunion And as for your hovering and blowing of the words of Christ over the bread and calice with your crossing and charming them after the manner of Sorcerers with a set number and order of words and signs your hiding it your rubbing of your fingers for fear of crums your first thortering and then lifting up of your arms your joining and disjoyning of thumb and fore-finger and sundry other vain and superfluous ceremonies and curiosities which you use in blessing of the elements they have neither command nor example of Christs institution and action and the Apostles doctrine and doing in the Scriptures of God Now as to the fourth giving or offering up of the body and blood of Christ to his Father by the faithful We confess a giving to his Disciples which you call afterward a communicating But for another giving that is as you expone it an offering up of his body and blood to his Father we utterly deny it as a thing not so much as once mentioned in the whole institution but contrary to the same and Antichristian and therefore we utterly abhor it and detest it as an invention of your own as Antichristian as idolatry as abomination as that which derogates from that blessed only one sacrifice whereby he offered up himself once upon the cross never to be offered up again as the Scripture testifies Heb. 25. And Bellarmin saith plainly lib. 1. de missa cap. 12. 24. That this offering up is not expresly set down in the words of the institution and that it cannot be easily discerned And as for the fifth a communicating we have it and that not only of the bread and wine as ye here imagine but of Jesus Christ God and Man his very flesh and blood and all his blessings by faith spiritually seeing therefore we have all these points which are requisit in the institution a lawful Minister thanksgiving blessing giving and communicating therefore we have the true institution of Christ in the
Mass-Priest any longer for they all agree in this that the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross hath accomplished all the sacrifices of the Old Law and that the vertue of it is everlasting and therefore should not be reiterat and that the sacrifice of Christians are not propiciatory but only spiritual Seeing therefore the sacrifice of the Mass was so long unknown to the Church of Christ it remains now that we show by what degrees it crap in For as after the going down of the Sun darkness comes not in immediatly but there is a twi-light before the darkness come even so after the bright stars of the primitive Church had ended their course in process of time and piece and piece first the third part of the Sun Moon and Stars were darkened till at the last the bottomless pit was opened and that great darkness came up as the smoak of a great furnace that darkened both the Sun and the air Out of the which this great abomination of the sacrifice of the Mass did proceed For Bertram who lived between the 800. and 900. years after Christ saith Our Savior hath done it once in offering up himself for he hath once offered up himself for the sins of the people and this oblation is always celebrat every day but in a mystery And he saith That once oblation of Christ is handled every day by the celebration of these mysteries or Sacraments in the remembrance of his Passion Bertram de corp sang Dom. in Heb. 7. There he oppones a real sacrifice to a mystery and Christs sacrifice once made to a dayly commemoration or remembrance of his suffering Haymo such like reckoning out the sacrifices of Christians he calls there The praises of the believers the penitence of sinners the tears of supplications their prayers and alms Haymo in cap. 5. Ose in cap. 2. Abac. Malac. 1. Theophilact who lived in the 900. year after Christ he saith in Joan. cap 81. That there is but one sacrifice and not many because Christ hath offered up himself once And he saith in another place ab Heb. cap. 10. Christ hath offered up himself once a sufficient sacrifice for ever and we have need of no other sacrifice to wit propiciatory And Anselm who lived in the thousand year of God and after he saith That which we offer every day is the remembrance of the death of Christ and that there is but one sacrifice not many for it hath been once only offered up And again Our Lord saith he bade take eat not sacrifice◠and offer up to God Anselm◠in Epist ad Heb. cap. 10. So this was the doctrine of the most learned who lived a thousand years after Christ that Christ offers up himself but once and that sacrifice was sufficient and everlasting and the sacrifices of Christians are spiritual and the Sacrament which they called sometimes a sacrifice was a commemoration of Christs one sacrifice once offered up upon the cross But from thence unto this time this abuse and sacrifice of their Mass crap in but by diverse degrees and by the concurrence of many causes SECTION XI Concerning the Degrees and Means whereby the Sacrifice of the Mass crap in First I will set down the estat of the publick worship of God in the primitive Church the first three hundred or four hundred years after Christ and then the means and degrees whereby this abominable Sacrifice crap in FIrst it is manifest that in the primitive Church the Communion or Sacrament of the Lords Supper was ministred ever week once upon the Lords day and in some place it was ministred every day as appears by these Authors Justin Martyr in Apolog. 2. Tertull. apolog Aug. de consecrat dist 2. cap. Quotidie And therefore Ambrose who lived in the three hundred age exhorteth to a dayly receiving of it Ambros lib. 5 cap. 4. de sacrament Next from the Communion was excluded◠first these who were not sufficiently instructed in the grounds of Christianity who were called Catechumeni that is catechised and instructed by questions and answers Next these who had not ended out their repentance◠and satisfaction to the Church who were called Poenitentes that is penitents And thirdly these who were possessed with an evil spirit who were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All these after that the first prayer the reading of the Scripture the sermon and the rehearsing of the Creed at the which they were present were ended they were commanded by the Deacon to retire themselves and to depart out of the Assembly or Congregation that place might be given to the faithful who was to cōmunicat in these words Ite missa est that is Go your way depart And from this first came the word Mass in the Church of God and this Bellarmin confesses lib. 1. de missa cap. 1. that the word in Latin is called missio or dimissio or missa and in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Pagans used that same word after their sacrifice was ended in Apule l. 11. de metamorph And the abuse easily growing in the frequent using of this word it came to pass by time that all the worship of God as the first prayers the singing of the Psalmes the reading of the Scripture the preaching of the Word the rehearsing of the Symbole which was performed in the Assembly before the dimission of these who were catechised was called Missa Catechumenorum As Bellarm. confesses lib. 1. de missa cap. 1. And the rest of the worship of God which was done after their departure to the demission of the faithful as the celebration of the Supper c. was called Missa Fidelium Conc. Valent. cap. 1. Bellarm. ibidem Alcuinus de officijs Eccles cap. de celebratione Missa So then this word Mass which the Church of Rome ascribes now unto their pretended sacrifice came first from the demission or skailing of the people as they call it from the Lords service and was never heard of in the Church of Christ nor read of in any Author Hebrew Greek or Latin for the space of 400. years almost after Christ And Jerome who lived in the year 422. and was an Elder in Rome who writ so many volumes made no mention of this word Mass at all For that Commentary of the Proverbes which is ascribed unto him where mention is made of the Mass is not his See Marianus Victorius Reat in praefat in 8 tom operum Hier. For beside other things there mention is made of Gregory who lived almost 200. years after him And Ambrose makes mention of it only once S. Augustin twise or thrise for all the volums which they writ if these book be theirs For Erasmus in his censures upon the sermons de Tempore saith that many of them are found under the names of others Authors savors little either of Augustines learning or phrase See James Gillotius in praefat ad Ambros And that neither of them in the
And to Bellarmin who saith the Church instituted them lib. 2. de missa cap. 13. and so referrs the institution of them not to CHRIST in his written Word but to the institution of the Church and to your own Doctors and Canon Law and Writers who ascribes the institution of them to your Popes and others of your Church as I have proved before O M. Gilbert What a preposterous love is this that ye bear to your abominable sacrifice that ye are not ashamed to write that the very ceremonies of it hath their warrant in the same holy Word and that contrary your own general Council of Trent and all your learned Doctors and Writers I think ye thought that we had never read your ceremonies or never known them that ye write so boldly of them Shal the Council of Trent say they are instituted by the Church by Apostolical traditions which your Church confesses are not written in the Scripture And yet are not you ashamed to say they have their warrant by the Scripture and so openly to contradict the doctrine of your own Council of Trent I will say no further but surely either they err in this point or else ye and if they err then the general Church may err and hath erred and so one of your main foundations is gone Choose you whither you will take this blot to your self or let it fall on them But because ye account this Mass of yours most heavenly and ye vaunt that ye only have in your Church that heavenly action and because it is the chiefest point of your service and worship which ye give to God in your Church and also because ye so impudently affirm that the ceremonies thereof hath their warrant out of the Scripture Therefore I will discover here as shortly as I can the abominations absurdities blasphemies idolatries vain idle superstitions Jewish and Ethnick ceremonies of the same that poor folks be not deceived any longer therewith For certainly for as heavenly as ye think it is I dare affirm that it is nothing else but a very sink and filthy closet of all abominations idolatries and horrible blasphemies So that as it is said in the Proverbs of the vertuous woman that many women have done vertuously but thou surmounts them all Prov. 31.23 So it may be said of the Mass Many services and worships devised by man have been idolatrous blasphemous and abominable but this sacrifice of the Mass brought in the Church of God by Antichrist in idolatrie abominations and blasphemies surmounteth them all so that the like of it hath never been before it nor never shal be after it For beside the fore said abuses that it is a will-worship instituted by man that it hath corrupted the Sacrament of the Supper which was given us to assure us of the grace of Christ and hath turned it in a sacrifice and that a propitiatory sacrifice and meritorious not to the Priest only but to the beholders also and not to the present only but to the absent and not only for the living but for the dead that it hath abolished the death of Christ and the vertue of that one sacrifice and that it hath spoiled Christ Jesus of his Priesthood and communicated it unto others beside these intolerable abuses it abounds and overflows with other intolerable abominations As first their altars in their Mass whereon they think they sacrifice the Son of God and therefore in the beginning of their Mass the Priest saith And I will go in into the altar of God whereby they renew either Judaism or Paganism for their material altars was a part of the Ceremonial law of the Jewes which was abolished by the death of Christ and Numa Pompilius 700 years before Christ ordained that the Ethnick Priest when he went about to offer sacrifice that he should draw near to the altar This entry of the Mass is said to be the ordinance of Pope Celestin the first about the year of God 426 And because the Priests take the altars for the Table whereon the Supper is celebrat which he confounds with the abominations of the Mass also because M. Gilbert said he was minded to prove the ceremonies of the Mass by the Scripture therefore I will ask him and his fellow Priests these few things concerning their altars First where read they that Christ did ever institut in the New Testament that the Table of our Lord should only be of stone and not of timber or any other mettal as their altars whereon they chant their Mass must be according to their law Dist 1. cons cap. Altaria si non Secondly where read they in the New Testament that the Table of the Lord should be consecrated with oyl and chrism with a sprinkling of water mixed of wine and salt of ciphers of holy water at the four corners of the same at the middle part and that none may do this but a Bishop if a Clark do it that he be degraded and if one of the Laicks do it that he be excommunicat Canon Non alij What folly is this that a Priest hath authority as they think to sacrifice the Son of God yet he may not powr a little oyl upon a stone That the Bishop compass the altar seven times singing the 51. Psalm Thou shalt wash me with hysop c. prophaning the truth of God And there to bury the relicks of some Saints put in a little shrine with three grains of incense that God for their cause may hear the prayers and accept of the sacrifice offered up upon that altar And then anointing the table of the altar with oyl and singing Jacob erected up a stone c. Where I say read you these in the New Testament that Christ commanded these things to be done to the table of his Supper which ye do to the altars whereon ye say your Masses And such like where read you that none should chant their Masses but on such altars as are consecrated And such like that your altars are not lawful where there is not found the bodies or relicks of some Martyrs Canon Placuit ut altaria Such like that ye dedicat your altars whereon ye chant your Mass to others then to Christ as unto the Virgin Mary Peter and other Saints departed And such like that the Priest should kiss the altar often and namely when he approaches unto it carrying the calice Hath Christ commanded this Hath the Apostles used them Hath the Scripture made mention of them What think you will you answer to God when it shal be said to you Who required all these things at your hands And wherefore also transgress ye your own law in having mo altars then is necessary seeing by it ye are commanded by express terms that superfluous altars be destroyed Canon Eccles vel altaria To conclud this then with Ambros in Epist ad Heb. cap. 8. 10. As our sacrifice saith he which is no other thing but our prayers and thanksgiving
he may of right dispense against right that he may make righteousness of unrighteousness and that he may deliver as many souls out of Hell and Purgatory and place them in heaven as pleaseth him Extra de translat Epist Canon Quanto in textu glossa Clement 6. in Bulla he needs no Masses to be said for him Either therefore these sentences that are spoken of him are false or else all Masses said for him are superfluous Eightly if the Mass be one with the Supper then as the Supper was only instituted for the living and not for the dead and therefore our Savior in the Supper commands To take eat drink and to do it in remembrance of him which the dead cannot do so these Masses should not be for the dead And for what dead are these that these Masses are said If they say for them that are in Heaven or Hell I answer the one needs them not and they are unprofitable for the other If they say for them that are in Purgatory I answer this Purgatory is but their own invention to draw water to their own mill and to enrich the Popes treasures for the Scripture makes no mention of it Ninthly their Masses that are said for them that are absent as for the prisoners for them that sail and are in their voyage c. makes it manifest also that the Mass is not one with the Lords Supper for it was instituted not to them that were absent but to them that were present For in the Supper they are commanded to take eat and to drink in remembrance of him which the absent cannot do Indeed it is true that these that are present at the Mass do eat and drink as little as they that are absent the only vantage they have is to be beholders of the Priest eating and drinking all himself alone and of these vain and juglers tricks of the Priest in saying of his Mass which the absent cannot see Tenthly how can their Priests please God in saying Mass for him of whose soul it is doubted seeing it cannot be said with faith and whatsoever is done without faith the Apostle saith is sin Rom. 4.23 And this doubting as James saith cannot stand with faith James 2 6. therefore this Mass of theirs for his soul of whom there is doubt cannot please God But what is all their Religion but conjectures and opinions and doubtings Eleventhly is their Masses for the pest tempest fury fire and all afflictions and maladies as well of man as of beast which containeth intolerable and vile idolatry for every Mass hath his own Saint to be a Patron according to the subject thereof and every Saint hath his own office Against the pest the Priest saith the Mass of S. Sebastian and S. Roch for they are the Patrons and defenders against it after the custom of the Pagans who honored Apollo and Esculapius by feasts and sacrifices for to be saved from the contagion of the same Against the tempest they say the Mass of S. Bernard S. Graith S. Barbe and others in stead of Jupiter which the Pagans worshipped Against the rage or fury they say the Mass of S. Hubert who is the Patron of hunters and dogs as the Goddess Diana was the Patron among the Pagans Against the fire they say the Mass of S. Antony for they make him the Patron of it and they say it is a greater oath to swear upon the arm of S. Antony then when one swears by the Name of God For a woman with child they say the Mass of S. Margaret in stead of Diana and Juno which the Pagans worshipped for women with child For a horse they say the Mass of S. Eloy or S. Antony yea for a poor wifes hen if it be sick or lost And for their pigs they have the Mass of S. Antony Alanus de sacrific Euch. cap. 32. But first what blasphemy is this to have their recourse to Saints hee or shee to obtain of them or by their merit or intercession health in sickness c. and such like things which are only in Gods hands to bestow For it is he only that sends health and sickness fair weather and foul weather and so forth Next the Lords Supper was not instituted to be a charm for such diseases of man or beast or for the fire pest tempest c. but for the remembrance of Christs death So that if there were no more abuse in the Mass but these two things it is sufficient to make all men to abhor such abominable idolatry The twenty and one abuse is their mixing of parcels of the Scripture with their abomination and idolatries in their Mass after the manner of those who go about to impoyson any who mix their poyson with some good food that it may be the less suspected Or rather as the Magiciens and Charmers doth who mixes with their devilish practises parcels of the Scriptures of God and makes those to serve for their devilish purposes which was appointed to Gods honor So are all the places of Scripture which are read and sung in their Mass they are brought forth not for the truth but against the truth for their idolatry and abomination and this they have done that their idolatrie may be less suspected by the simple Next what warrant have they to prefer the Gospel as they call it to the Epistles in standing up at the reading of the Gospel and sitting at the reading of the Epistles seeing they are both inspired of God and they both contain the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the Apostle testifies Rom. 1.1 and 2.16 1. Cor. 4.15 Thirdly the Gospel and Epistles were appointed not to be sung and chanted in the Church as they do but to be read and interpreted for the Psalms and other Hymns in the Scripture are ordained for that use Fourthly seeing the Scripture which is read and sung in your Mass is read and sung in an unknown language as all the rest of your Mass is done to what purpose doth it serve And what is it but a mocking of God and abusing of the poor people The twenty and two abuse is their wax candles which they have burning in the time of their Masses in the fair day light mocking as it were thereby both God the Author of all light and the light of the Sun And to what purpose can they serve to burn in the day light when the Sun is shining but to bear witness against them in the great Day that in the midst of the noon-day they groped in darkness and that they have put out the light of the Gospel that should have shined in their hearts What shal I speak of the rest of your ceremonies which are superstitious idle carnal and Jewish In attire like them for as their Priests were clad in an Ephod a Myter a broidered coat a girdle a breast-plate and a robe Exode 28.4 So with you your Priests must have an Amice an Albe a girdle a fannel whereof some
Sacraments the Lord hath instituted are publick and not privat but this Sacrament of yours is privatly ministred therefore not a true Sacrament Sixthly all the Sacraments of the New Testament should be ministred by them who have the preaching of the Gospel concredited unto them and not by privat Christians But Innocentius the first a Pope saith in his Epist 1. cap. 8 Private men may minister this in their own and others necessities as also Thomas Waldensis a Papist And yet the Council of Trent accurses them that so say Therefore it is not a Sacrament Seventhly Pope Innocent in that same Epistle cited before calls it but genus Sacramenti a kind of Sacrament therefore it is not properly a Sacrament But you are more bold to call it a Sacrament Eightly all the Sacraments of Christ have their warrant from the written word But Petrus a Soto in his book against Brentius calls this a tradition which hath not the warrant in the written word therefore it is not a lawful Sacrament of Christ And as to your argument That it hath an external form of anointing with oyl of an internal grace which is remission of sins I answer this form or ceremony was extraordinary as I proved before annexed to a miraculous gift of healing The which seeing it is now ceased the ceremonie also should cease And this promise is not made to the anointing if ye will believe the Apostle but to the prayer of faith The prayer of faith saith the Apostle shal save the sick And whereas ye say that we make him a Mediciner only for the bodie in this and not for the soul we answer That this ceremonie as sundrie others was only annexed to the extraordinary gift of healing of the bodie and was not seals of grace And yet with the health of the bodie the healing of the soul was oftentimes joyned as our Savior saith to the paralytick man Thy sins are forgiven thee take up thy bed and walk Matth 9 28. Now whither these be our vain subterfuges or clear grounds out of the Scripture let the Reader judge And whereas ye call us new men let them be new and most recent whose doctrine is most new But as hath and shal be proved by Gods grace our doctrine is not new but Jesus Christs in his Old and New Testament and yours devised since Therefore this title of noveltie most justly belongs unto you This for the sixth point of your doctrine SECTION XV. Concerning Imposition of hands and whither it be a Sacrament Master Gilbert Brown SEventhly our doctrine is that when our Priests which are the only lawful Ministers now adayes are called to that function receives the imposition of hands with the grace or gift of the holy Ghost because it is the doctrine of S. Paul in these words Neglect not the gift or grace that is within thee which is given thee by prophesy with the imposition of priesthood And therefore must be a Sacrament because it hath an external form which is the imposition of hands of an external grace which is the gift given by the same And for this cause a John Calvin himself admits it to be a Sacrament albeit in their Confession they call it a bastard Sacrament of the Popes and detests the same although b Melancthon hath the contrary a Institut lib. 4. cap. 14. sect 20. item lib. 4. cap. 19. sect 28. b In locis com edit 1543. de num sacrament M. John Welsch his Reply As for the seventh point of your doctrine concerning the imposition of hands in the ordination of the lawful Ministers of the Church of Christ because it is a ceremony which hath the foundation of it in the word of God and was practised in the primitive Church as in the ordination of Timothie here and others and is profitable both to put the Pastors in mind of his calling that he is separated of God for the discharge of the same and also the people that they embrace him as one sent of God to them therefore we both acknowledge it and practise it But that either the gift of the holy Ghost is inseparably joyned with it or that it is a Sacrament of the New Testament properly as you affirm that we deny As to the first the gift of the holy Ghost is not inseparably joyned with it First because that is injurious to the Lords free grace which is not bound to any instrument let be to a ceremony And also he speaks against experience for how many I pray you do receive imposition of hands who receive not a new grace and gift of the holy Ghost among you Miserable experience these many ages both doth testifie it and also one hath testified the same saying Our Priests do lay the word of blessing upon many but in few followeth the effect of that blessing Ex veteri Testam quaest 109. inter opera Augustini And certainly if any gift of the holy Ghost is joyned with this ceremony it should be an ability to preach the Word For that is the principal part of the office of the Minister of the Gospel But how many thousands are they among you in your Church who have received this imposition of hands and yet as unable to preach the Gospel as asses are And last of all what needed that tryal and examination so straitly commanded in the Scripture which ought to be had of them that are to be ordained if the holy Ghost were ever inseparably given with the ceremony For wherefore is this tryal and examination And wherefore is Timothy so straitly charged to lay his hands suddenly on no man but because it is only the holy Ghost who enables The which also should be well known unto his Church ere they presume to testifie the calling of God to them For if it were true that ye say that the gift of the holy Ghost were joyned with the imposition of hands inseparably then the Apostle should rather have commanded Timothy 2 Tim. 5.22 to lay his hands upon many in respect of the need that the Church stood in of all men rather then to have discharged him And as for the place of Paul which ye cite here Despise not the gift c. this serves nothing for your doctrine For if first the gift given to Timothy which the Apostle speaks of was extraordinary and so ordinarily doth not ever follow the ceremony 2. It is not ascribed here to the ceremony of imposition of hands but unto prophesie which is given thee by prophesie whereby it was revealed to the Church of the ability of this man And so if there be any prophesies that go of you in your Clergy that the holy Ghost is given to you then ye may claim unto the same but I think ye will not say that such like prophesies go of you therefore ye cannot claim to this testimony 3. Timothy is exhorted to keep that worthy thing concredited unto him through the holy Ghost 2 Tim. 1.14 It was the
holy Ghost therefore who was the giver and preserver of it And as for the ceremony it was a sign of the presence of Gods Spirit in them who was lawfully ordained Now as to the second that ye will have it a Sacrament because it hath an external form and also a promise of grace That will not follow For then you should have innumerable Sacraments For prayer alms-deeds and the ordination of Magistrats and many others have external forms and have promises of grace joyned with them and yet you will not say that they are properly Sacraments For in all the Sacraments of the New Testament which properly are Sacraments there must be first not only an external action but an earthly and visible element as water in Baptism and bread and wine in the Supper And therefore Augustin saith in Joan. tract 90. Let the word be joyned with the element and then it is a Sacrament Secondly they must have their express warrant and institution from Jesus Christ in the Scripture as Baptism hath Matth. 28. and the Lords Supper Matth. 26. Thirdly they must not only have a promise of grace but a promise of remission of sins and sanctification For they must be seals of that Covenant which is common to all Christians as Baptism and the Lords Supper is But this ceremony of imposition of hands wants all these three For neither is there any earthly element neither seals it up the Covenant which is common to all but proper to the Ministery only neither hath it the express institution of Christ in all the four Evangelists And whereas in the 20. of John he there ordains his Apostles we read he breathed on them and said Receive the holy Ghost But not a word that he laid his hands on them or commanded them to use it to others The which without all question he would have done if he had ordained it to be a Sacrament And Petrus a Soto a Papist saith That the making of the imposition of hands to be a Sacrament is a tradition Therefore it is not a Sacrament properly of the New Testament Secondly if the ordination of any by imposition of hands were a Sacrament the ordination of a Bishop by the same especially should be a Sacrament For the place which ye quote here is of Timothy who was a Bishop as your Church affirms And Bellarmin saith de Sacramento ordinis lib. 1. cap. 5. If this be not a Sacrament then it cannot be proved by the Scripture that ordination by imposition of hands is a Sacrament And he saith If this be not granted they will lose all the testimonies of the Ancients to prove imposition of hands to be a Sacrament for they speak of the ordination of Bishops But the ancient Schollers and Doctors of your own Church in 4. dist 24. and Dominicus a Soto a learned Papist lib. 10. de justitia jure qu. 1. art 2. affirms That this is not a Sacrament properly and so neither the ordination of the rest of the Ministery can be a Sacrament seeing a Bishop is above the rest in your order Last of all the Council of Trent sess 23. cap. 2. 3. is not against it and sundry of the rest of your Clergy Bellarm. lib. 1. de sacr ord cap. 9. makes all the seven Orders of your Church as Priests which you distinguish in two sorts to wit in Bishops and inferior Priests Deacons Sub-Deacons Exorcists Lectors Door-keepers and your Acoluthyts every one of them by themselves Sacraments And your Master of Sentences lib 4 dist 24. cap. Si autem calls all the Orders in the plural number Sacraments So if ye durst let the people know the secret of this your doctrine ye make not only seven Sacraments but fourteen in very deed But this were dangerous to you to sowe abroad For you fear it would cast your doctrine in some suspicion with them and be an occasion to them to examine it by the Scripture the which if they would once begin to do ye know your hope were lost As for Calvin and Melancthon they call it a Sacrament taking the word in an ample sense for these ceremonies that have the foundation in the Word which have a promise of a blessing joyned with them and not in that sense that Baptism and the Lords Supper are called Sacraments as Calvin in that first place which ye quote plainly acknowledgeth For these are his words Let the Christian Church saith he be content of these meaning of Baptism and the Supper and let them not admit nor acknowledge desire or look for any other third Sacrament till the end of the world And as for imposition of hands which the Church useth in their ordinations he saith I will not be against it that it be called a Sacrament so being I reckon it not among the ordinary Sacraments And Melancthon in that same place reckons up prayer alms marriage the Magistrat in the number of these unto the which he gives this name of a Sacrament whereby he makes it plain that he takes this word Sacrament amply and largely as hath been said before and not in that sense that Baptism and the Supper is called Sacraments So you play your self M. Gilbert in the ambiguity of this word Sacrament and deceives the Reader with the same And whereas ye call your Priests the only lawful Ministers now adays I will answer to this more fully afterward only this now First seeing the fountain and ground upon the which all the lawful callings in your Church depends and is derived as your selves confess is the supremacy of your Pope whom I have proved to be the Antichrist in my other Treatise and seeing the office of your Priesthood in sacrificing the Son of God as ye suppose is most abominable idolatrous and Antichristian as I have proved also there therefore you are not only not lawful Ministers of Christ but the Ministers of Antichrist And as for the style of Priest I answered it before it is not so much as once ascribed to the Ministers of the Gospel to signifie their proper calling in the whole New Testament SECTION XVI Concerning Matrimony and whither it be a Sacrament Master Gilbert Brown EIghtly our doctrine is that Matrimony is a bond undissoluble because our Savior saith That which God hath joyned together let no man separat Matth 19.6 And such like he saith That whosoever demits his wife and marries another commits adultery upon her Mark 10.11.12 And in S. Luke 16.18 we have the same And S. Matthew 5.35 19.9 is of the same opinion albeit one may put away his wife by him for fornication this is the doctrine also of the Apostles of Jesus Christ for it is written in S. Paul That a woman that is under a husband her husband living is bound to the law but if her husband be dead she is loosed from the law of her husband Therefore her husband living she shal be called an adulteress if she be with another man
Acts 2. and Thomas of Aquin 3. part quaest 52. art 1. 3. two great Papists and yet Bonaventure in 3. distinct 22. quaest 4. and Bellarmin lib. 4. de Christo cap. 16. affirms the contrary That his soul was in the place of pain and yet suffered no pain Next Thomas of Aquin affirms 3. part qu. 52. That Christ descended only into that place of hell called Limbus Patrum but Bellarmin saith It is more probable that he went to all the parts of hell And this is the consent which you Papists have among your selves not only in this point but almost in all the points of your doctrine Now as to the places of Scripture which ye quote they serve nothing to this purpose For the 2. of the Acts it speaks of that bondage of the grave which kept him under until he rose again and therefore the Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth death and not hell as ye translate it here and Peter saith whom God raised up The Apostle speaks then of that part of Christ which had fallen and was raised up but it was the body only and not the soul which fell down and was raised up therefore he speaks of the sorrows of death whereby his body was kept in bondage and not of any local descension of Christs soul As for the places of the Psalms which ye quote here Peter brings them not in to prove this local descension as ye say whereof he makes no mention but to prove his resurrection as he saith in the 31. verse most plainly He knowing this before speaking of David spake of the resurrection of Christ that his soul should not remain in grave neither his flesh should see corruption So if ye will believe the Spirit of God in the Apostle interpreting these places they speak of the resurrection of Christ and not of the delivering of the soul out of hell for he was in Paradise as he saith himself and it is the body that was raised and not the soul And the Hebrew word is NEPHESCH which not only signifieth the soul but also the life as Gen. 37.21 Let us smite his soul that is take away his life And it signifieth also the body of the dead wherein there was life as Levit. 21.1.11 And this word Hell is SCHEOL in Hebrew which most usually is taken in the Scripture for the grave So then the meaning is this The Lord will not leave his Nephesch that is the body wherein his life was in Scheol that is in the grave which speech is usual in the Scripture Now as to the other Psalm 29.3 it is spoken properly of David where he thanketh God who had saved his life from the hands of his enemies which by a borrowed speech frequented in the Scripture is called the delivery of his soul from the grave As for the 4. of the Ephesians these lower parts of the earth is not Hell as ye expone it but the earth it self which in respect of the world is the lowest part and so it is taken in the Psalm 139 15. where David saith Thou hast fashioned me beneath in the lower parts of the earth where here it is not taken for Hell as you take it in that place of the Ephesians otherwise ye must say that David was born in Hell which I suppose ye will not say So hereby is meant then the lowest and basest degree of his humiliation So now to conclud this neither in these points M. Gilbert nor in any point of doctrine wherein ye differ from us is your doctrine agreeable to Christs doctrine and his Apostles as hath been I hope proved sufficiently You must therefore provide you for better weapons and armor and stronger defences for the overthrow of our doctrine and uphold of yours then ye have done otherwise your shots will be but as shots of paper and your bulwarks but of intempered morter which suddenly will rush down at the light of the truth of God The Lord open your eyes to see the truth and suffer you not to continue any longer to cause the blind go out of the way as you have done Amen SECTION XX. Concerning the difference betwixt Popery and the Reformed Religion Master John Welsch ANd our Religion which we profess and all the particular heads of it was instituted by Jesus Christ and his Apostles which I offer me also to prove either by word or writ against whosoever will plead the contrary The which if I fail in I will be content to lose my life therefore by his grace Master Gilbert Brown There is much promised here but nothing done and it is a thing impossible to him to do For why the difference chiefly that the Protestants differ from us is in denying abhorring or detesting as may be seen in their Confession of Faith which they compel all men to swear and subscribe As we detest and refuse the usurped authority of that Roman Antichrist upon the Scriptures of God upon the Church the civil Magistrat c. except such things were expresly contained in the Word of God M. John Welsch his Reply As for my promise and performance I answere◠〈◊〉 that before and whither that be a thing unpossible 〈◊〉 or not let this my answer be a tryal thereof You are bold enough indeed in affirming it to be impossible but what have ye for you You say because the difference chiefly that we differ from you is in denying and abhorring What a raison is this Can we not prove our Religion out of the Scripture because we deny yours which is contrary to the same Is it impossible to prove the truth because falshood is denyed and abhorred What new Logick or Divinity is this I would never have believed that ye had been such an unskilful reasoner if your self had not bewrayed the same And certainly your Church is not beholden to you For if your reason hold forth it will follow that it is impossible to you or any man else to prove the heads of your Religion by the Scripture For in your Confession of Faith and form of abjuration set down by the Monks of Burdeaux anno 1585. there they deny and abhor the Protestants and their doctrine and compel all men who desire the fellowship of the Roman Church and their absolution to abjure renounce and subscribe the same But I suppose your Church will not allow this manner of reasoning of yours And whereas you say that the chief difference wherein we differ from you is in denying and abhorring c. of your Religion I ask you Doth not our Religion differ as far from yours as yours doth from us This you cannot deny For are not two contraries equally different one from another Doth not light differ as far from darkness white from black Christ from Antichrist as darkness from light black from white and Antichrist from Christ And are not yours and our Religions contrary one to another But your self will not deny and Bellarmin confesseth in
saying in Philosophy that a conditional Proposition proves nothing It appears he hath been in haste that he might not have leasure to (a) I proved all that was required at my hands prove any head for example of his promise For we understand that M. John is a man who may err as many man hath done before by his judgement and therefore he must have no (b) I desire no credit without warrant as your Popes and your Church do of her disciples credence of us except he bring his warrant and ye shal be (c) M. Gilbert is once beguiled for this is performed sure that he is never able to perform his sayings Master John Welsch his Reply This my Reply I hope satisfies for answer to this section SECTION XXIII Concerning the Visibility of the Church and whither the Visible Church may make defection Master John Welsch THirdly I answer The Spirit of God fore-tels that when the Antichrist shal come the defection shal be universal and all Nations shal be drunken with the wine of her fornication M. Gilbert Brown Where this is written M John tells not For I am sure as it is set down here there is no such thing in our Bibles no not in their own corrupted Bibles except they have augmented them of new That there shal be an universal defection it is altogether repugnant to the Word of God as I have shewed before in proving the Church always to continue For the same place where I believe he alledges to hath these words And it was given unto him to make war with the Saints and to overcome them And power was given him upon every tribe and people and tongue and nation and all that inhabit the earth adored it whose names be not written in the book of life of the Lamb Rev. 13 7.8 Here any man may see that the Saints of God that shal be persecute by the Antichrist such that is written in the book of life shal not make defection then it shal not be an universal defectioÌ„ And also M. John afterward in finding some of his Religion that said against the Antichrist the Pope the time bygone is contrary to himself here that the defection shal not be universal And where he saith that all Nations shal be drunkâ—n with the wine of her fornication the text is otherwise Because all Nations have drunken of the wine of the wrath of her fornication that is that the people of all Nations that have obeyed her shal be punished with the wrath of God and not that all the world should make defection M. John Welsch his Reply You fight against your own shadow M. Gilbert and whereas ye can find nothing justly to quarrel in my words being rightly taken and taken as the Scripture takes them you devise a meaning of your own brain and would father it upon me that ye may the more easily have somewhat to speak against For I neither spake it nor meant it that the elect should make defection in the time of the Antichrist I am so far from it that suppose I believe assuredly that this prophesie is fulfilled in your own Church yet I know assuredly that the Lord reserved his own elect to himself who was kept free from your Idolatry as he promised Rev. 14. and Histories record of some whereof I did set down some of their names But this is the doctrine of one of your own Church Dominicus a Soto in lib. 4. sent dist 46. quaest 1. art 1. who believed it assuredly That the faith of Jesus Christ and Religion should be utterly extinguished through the persecution of the Antichrist if Bellarmin speak true of him lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 17. And so turn the point of your sword M. Gilbert upon your own brother who so taught and not upon me who is far from it And if ye will say wherefore then called I it universal I answer Because the Scripture calls it a defection without any addition or restraint and your Rhemists grant That this defection shal be a revolting of Kings People and Provinces and the publick intercourse of the faithful with the Church of Rome shal cease And that the dayly sacrifice shal be abolished most universally throughout all Nations and Churches of the world by Antichrist himself Annot. upon 2. Thess 2. And Bellarmin saith lib. 3. cap. 16. That he shal be Monarch of the whole world Therefore this Kingdom by your own confession shal be universal and seeing his Kingdom is an apostasie or defection for as many as shal obey him shal make defection from the faith therefore by the doctrine of your own Church it must be an universal defection And the Scripture saith expresly That he shal make all both smal and great c. to receive a mark on their right hand and on their fore-heads and that no man may buy or sell c. and that all Nations have drunken of the wine of the wrath of her fornication Rev. 13.16 and 14.8 and 18.3 Now whither I might call that universal which the Scripture calls all and your Rhemists and Bellarmin makes so general and universal that it shal possess all the Kingdoms of the earth let the Christian Reader judge And let me ask you M. Gilbert Do you not believe that the Church is Catholick or Universal And do you not think with one of your own number to wit Costerus a Jesuit in Enchirid. that the Church is called Universal because the faith of the Church is scattered in all Nations and yet for all this all particular Nations and all particular men receives not this faith and yet notwithstanding it is Universal and is called Universal still And doth not the Scripture prophesie that in Abraham all the Nations shal be blessed Gal. 3.8 and yet for all this there were and is millions of the Gentils that are not blessed in him Why then in like manner may not the defection in the time of the Antichrist be called universal although the elect be exeemed from it But wherefore insist I to refute this vain quarrelling of words which serves to no purpose So then this that I said is both in your Translation and ours in substance and is not contrary to that which I said afterward As for that place of Scripture which ye cite here Rev. 3.7 8. it is not spoken here of the Antichrist but of the persecution of the Roman Emperors As for that calumny of yours in calling our Bibles corrupted and augmented this is your sin M. Gilbert whereof one day ye shal make an account to the Majesty of God for the slandering and bearing false witness of the truth of God And to speak the truth this is true of you For both you have added to the Scriptures of God first the Apocrypha next your traditions which your Church hath decreed to be received with equal reverence and godliness with the Scripture Concil Trident. sess 4. thirdly the Decretal Epistles of your Popes which
some of you have reckoned in the number of the Canonical Scripture Gratianus dist 19. Alphonsus de genero in thesauro Christ Relig. cap. 3. num 5. And also you have corrupted the Scriptures of God by your corrupt translation especially that of the Colledge of Rhemes The which to be true if time would serve I might soon be able to prove which hath been sufficiently proved by that learned and worthy man of God Doctor Fulk unto the which you nor all your Clergy have not answered as yet for ought I know nor never is able to do And as for the last point wherein ye say that the text is otherways then I set down let the Christian Reader judge whether my words be one in substance with this text or not For suppose this be set down in the preterit-time and I spake it in the future time yet it is a prophesie of a thing to come and your Church grants it is not fulfilled yet therefore they are both one in substance And as for your exposition where you expone this of the punishment of the people that have obeyed her and not of their sin in communicating with her Idolatry that is manifestly against the text For this is set down here as the cause of her punishment which is pronounced before in these words Babylon is fallen c. Now the reason because all Nations have drunken of the wine of the wrath of her fornication whereby in the Scripture is signified Idolatry and it is called the wine of the wrath c. because her fornication provoked God to wrath And Aretas exponeth this fornication a defection from every good And in the 18. chapter it is more evident where after the denunciation of her fall this reason is subjoyned Because all Nations have drunken of the wine of the wrath c. and the Kings of the earth have committed fornication with her and the marchands of the earth are waxed rich through the aboundance of her pleasures The which as they cannot be understood of the punishment but of the defection so this drinking cannot be understood of their punishment but of their communication with her Idolatrie And yet however it be this proves that universal defection of the which I spake Master John Welsch And the Church of God shal be latent and flee to the wilderness and there lurk and be fed of God all that time secretly Master Gilbert Brown It is a wonder to hear the Word of God abused not only with false expositions repugnant to the words self but also alledging the word falsly For the text of S. John hath but this for he notes no place because he knowes it may not abide a tryal And the woman fled unto the wilderness where she had a place prepared of God that there they might feed her a thousand two hundred and threescore dayes Here there is no word that she shal be latent nor lurk nor be secret And if M John will mean that the fleeing to the wilderness is nothing but to be invisible and to ly secret then it must follow that the whore of Babylons self must be invisible and secret For the same S John saith And the Angel took me away in spirit into the desert and I saw a woman sitting upon a skarlet colored beast full of names of blasphemy having seven heads and ten horns This word desert signifies more properly to be secret or invisible then the word wilderness It is true appearantly that if this woman signifie the Church of Christ that in the time of the Antichrist she shal be redacted to a smal number as it were in a wilderness and shal not possess every Nation as she had wont to do but that she may be made invisible and not to be seen there is no true Catholick that expones it so And such like this time shal be but short that is for 1260. dayes as the text saith which is but three years and an half And if M. Johns Church had been but so long invisible we should have dispensed with the same But it hath been invisible these thousand years as it is now professed in Scotland and much more as young Merchiston hath in his book upon the Revelation chap. 12. vers 14. M. John Welsch his Reply All that you can find fault with here is this that I said the Church in the time of the Antichrist should be latent and lurk and be fed secretly the which hath stirred you up in such a choler that you have cryed out with admiration that I have abused the Scripture c. Now tell me M. Gilbert whither is it because these same words are not found in the Scripture or because the doctrine it self cannot be warranted by the same If the former then I say you are but a quarreller about words And all the doctrine which ye have set down in this your answer is not set down in so many termes in the Scripture and yet ye will have it to be the doctrine of Gods Spirit suppose it be not so So it sufficeth that this which I said be warranted by the Scripture suppose the same termes be not found If the other then I say beside other places of Scripture this same place which ye quote here confirmes the same For know ye not that the wilderness is a place of refuge and secrecie from the tyranny of their pursuers And they that flie to the same they flie to lurk there and to be kept close and secret from the rage of their persecuters for the safety of their lives So while it is prophesied That this woman whereby is signified the Church which suppose ye conditionally expone so yet Sanderus 40. demonstrat one of your own number expones it to be the Church without all doubt shal flie in the wilderness from the face of the dragon and that for her safety and there be fed c. Is it not then manifest that she shal be secret and lurk then and not be so open and visible as she was before And if this be an abuse of the Scripture then not only your self hath abused it but also sundry of your own Church as the Rhemists Bellarmin and Sanderus For your self saith That in the time of the Antichrist she shal be redacted in a smal number as it were in a wilderness and shal not possess every Nation as she had wont to do For what is this else but to lurk and be latent and to be fed secretly in comparison of that estat wherein she was before And therefore the only thing that I inferred on this in the end was that no man should think that the Church of God was ever open and visible in such a flowrishing estat as it is now And the Rhemists annot in 2. Thess say That in the time of the Antichrist this great defection or revolt shal be of Kingdoms People and Provinces from the open external obedience and communion with the Church of Rome So
but our Ministers have prophesied these 38. years if preaching be prophesying And these two shal be clad in sackcloth but our Ministers chiefly of Borrowstowns is clad in fine black cloth or silk And so forth of many more differences as is contained in the 11. chapter of the Revelation Master John Welsch his Reply It appears to you that I have found some new Revelation other then that of S. John So did it appear to the Jews that the Apostle Paul taught all men every where against the Law of Moses Acts 21.28 and yet it was the truth as he himself testifies he spake nothing beside that which Moses and the Prophets fore-told was to come Acts 26.22 So every appearance is not truth It is but the scales that are upon your eyes that makes this so to appear to you For the Scripture of God and this Revelation of S. John is sufficient to us to make it manifest that your head is the Antichrist and your doctrine is that Apostasie that was prophesied to come so that we need no new revelations as ye do For because the revelations already made by God to his Church and written in his holy Scripture doth not warrant your abominable and false doctrine and your Popes supremacy which is the foundation of all therefore you and your Church flies to unwritten traditions and fained revelations to prove the same As for example because your Church hath not so much as a syllable in the whole Book of God to prove that Peters seat was translated from Antiochia to Rome which is the whole foundation of all Popery Therefore your Pope Marcellinus in his Canon Law causa 24. quaest 1. cap. Rogamus grounds the certainty of this upon a fained revelation that Peter by the commandment of God did translate it But to leave you with your new revelations what have ye for you for this your appearance You say first because I note no place and next because these words of mine are no wayes in S. John therefore ye conclud it to be an invention of my own As to the first Is this a good reason I note not the place therefore I have found out some new revelation You must be sent to the Logick schools again to learn the right manner of reasoning I noted no place Ergo I could not that will not follow As to the second my words are no wayes found in S. John Ergo I have found a new revelation But what if the sense be found What if the self-same doctrine be found in S. John suppose not in the same words Then it will not follow that I have found out a new revelation or that this is the invention of my own brain This place which ye quote here Rev. 11.3 sufficiently confirms all that I said For your self will not deny and Bellarmin lib. 3. cap. 6 the Rhemists annot in Apoc. cap. 11. and Sanderus in his Demonstrations grant that these two Witnesses are they who shal preach in the time of the Antichrist suppose they expound them of Elias and Enoch and that they shal be persecuted and put to death by him What a blindness is this M. Gilbert that hath overfyled your eyes that for the writing of that same doctrine which the Scripture warrants your Divines grant and your self will not deny you have said that it appeared to you that I have found out some new revelation But judge thou Christian Reader what thou may presume upon M. Gilberts appearances But you say this agrees not with my purpose and that because of the differences between these two Witnesses and the Ministers of Scotland First I do not mean by these two Witnesses the Ministers of Scotland only but the Ministers of all the Reformed Churches in Europe who have departed out of your Babel and have shaken off the yoke of the tyrannous bondage of your Head the Man of sin and not only these who now live but these also who now rest from their labors and sleep in the Lord of whom a great many were persecuted and put to death by your tyranny for speaking against your abominations Now as to these differences which ye mark the fountain from the which this springs is your mistaking of the prophesies of God and exponing them literally which according to the use of prophesies and especially these which are set down in this Revelation and all the circumstances of this text ought to be exponed figuratively These same two Witnesses are called two Olives two Candlesticks and it is said of them that fire comes out of their mouthes and destroys their enemies Rev. 11.4.5.6 c. If you will not be so absurd and ridiculous as to expone these things literally but figuratively otherwise ye will make them monsters trees and candlesticks why then do ye expone this place concerning their number work time apparel c. literally and not figuratively as the rest of their works and properties must be exponed the which if you had done then would you have seen no difference between the Ministers of the Gospel that resisted your Pope and these two Witnesses here but the one to be the prophesie of the other and the other to be the accomplishing of the prophesie As for their number then they are said to be but two that is few and yet such a sufficient number as may prove and qualifie any thing by the Law For by the Law Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses shal every word be established So the Ministers of the Gospel in the time of your Antichrist and darkness was but few at the beginning and yet so many as served for to establish the truth of God by their testimony in the consciences of so many whom God had appointed to save As for their work of prophesying the Scripture calls preaching prophesying 1. Cor. 12. and 13. and 14. And the Rhemists annot in 11. Rev. grant that these Witnesses shal preach against the Antichrist And whereas you say that we fore-tell oft-times things that is not true this is your calumnie and lie M. Gilbert and so ought to have no credit And the prophesies of the Ministers of this land against your Antichristian Kingdom ye have found by experience that they have been too true And their prophesies are truer then the prophesies of one of your Popes Hildebrand who openly in the pulpit on the second holy day in Easter week in the presence of diverse Bishops and Cardinals and of the people and Senat of Rome prophesied That the King whose name was Henry should die before the feast of Peter next ensuing or at the least that he should be so dejected from his Kingdom that he should not be able any more to gather above the number of six Knights And this he preached with this confirmation Never accept me for Pope any more if this prophesie be not fulfilled but pluck me from the altar But he was a false Prophet in the same for neither was fulfilled And whereas
raising up of Elias in his own person again but in the sending of John Baptist in the vertue and spirit of Elias So this Prophesie concerning the reviving of these two Witnesses whereby was figured the faithful Ministers of Christ who was murdered in the time of Popery as John Wicleff John Hus Jerome of Prague M. George Wishart and many others is fulfilled not by raising up of their persons again but of others his faithful servants who in their vertue and spirit have defended and maintained that same doctrine and cause against the Antichrist as Martin Luther Calvin Bucer Peter Martyr M. Knox and sundry others whom the Lord hath and dayly raises up in all Countreys for the overthrow of your Babel As for your trust what will come to pass we pass not for so much hath been fulfilled of these prophesies which testifies your Head to be the Antichrist and the Ministers of the Reformed Church to be the faithful servants of Christ And the rest concerning your dayly consumption and final abolition 2. Thess 2.8 Rev. 18.2.21 and 19.20 we know assuredly shal come to pass because the Lord hath so thought it and said it And as for any further proof of the clemency and meekness of your Popes if so the Lord will we desire it not For as it is said of the wicked man Your compassions are cruel and your by past cruelty testifies of what spirit ye are And suppose you say you trust that this among the rest shal not come to pass yet I fear you long to see that day upon the Ministers of Scotland which your brethren rejoyced to see fulfilled in that cruel persecution of Queen Mary in England and in that bloody massacre of Paris of the Saints of God there For we cannot think but that ye are of the same spirit and mind which your brethren were of otherwise ye are not a right Catholick As for the Laird of Merchistons conjecture concerning the day of Judgement he hath his own probable reasons and if you be as good as your word as your favorers have reported of you we will see the refutation of his book by you And suppose I know the time to be uncertain to man or Angel as our Savior saith Matth. 24.36 yet his conjecture thereof is in greater modesty and sobriety then your determination thereof Whereby if the doctrine of your Church be true concerning the Antichrist whom ye imagine is yet to come and the time of his reign which ye say is to be but three years and an half then not only the year but the very day thereof may be known of them that live in those days For the Scripture saith He shal be abolished by the brightness of his coming 2. Thess 2.8 Yea that which is greater arrogancy and presumption the learnedest of your Church Bellarmin lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 17. pag. 418. hath taken upon him to determine the very day of the coming of Christ to Judgement to wit 45. days after the perishing of the Antichrist It is manifest saith he that after the death of the Antichrist there shal be but 45. days to the end of the world Master John Welsch Now if all this be true both concerning the Antichrist the largeness of his dominion the estat of the Church of God and his true Pastors all that time which I offer me to prove by the Scripture And also that the Pope of Rome is that only Antichrist that was to come and is now disclosed then I say no man should think that the Church of God was ever open and visible in that flowrishing estat as it is now Master Gilbert Brown But what if all these sayings of his be false what shal follow then but that M. John and the rest of the Ministers are deceived and deceive others with such vain and untrue expositions upon the Word of God For take away M. Johns own invention and the Word shal never have such a meaning And although M. John offer never so oft to prove the same I say he is never able to do it nor all the Ministers in Scotland Master John Welsch his Reply If all these sayings of mine concerning the largeness of the dominion of Antichrist the estat of the Church of God and his true Pastors all that time be false then not only have I been deceived but also Bellarmin the Rhemists and Sanderus the chief defenders of your Church have been deceived and deceive others For they have spoken and written as much and further in these points then ever I did as I have proved before by their own testimonies And yet I suppose your Head and Clergy will judge them to be as far from error as you are So either you or they must be deceived in this And as for the fulfilling of these prophesies in your Popes of Rome I hope it hath been proved sufficiently which ye nor all the Clergy of Rome is never able to improve As for the rest of your answer wherein ye prove that the Pope is not the Antichrist I have answered to it in the other part of my Treatise concerning the Antichrist therefore I omit it now Master Gilbert Brown What he means that the Pope is now disclosed I know not for I understand that he hath not been like their Church that sometimes is visible and sometimes not for he hath always been known by the visible Church to be the visible head thereof in place of Christ Master John Welsch his Reply My meaning is this That suppose in the darkness of Papistry he was taken to have been the Vicare of Christ yet now the Lord hath smitten him and consumed him by the sword of his mouth 2. Thess 2.8 that is the Word of God and hath discovered him to the full to all these whose eyes the Lord hath opened that he is that Antichrist which the Scripture hath fore-told was to come And where you say that he hath been always known by the visible Church to be the visible Head thereof in place of Christ I see you regard not what you say for the maintenance of that Head and Kingdom of yours For certainly either hath the Lord wonderfully blinded you or else ye speak against the light of your own conscience For are you ever able to produce one syllable in the whole Scripture to prove this Yea hath not his Monarchie and Supremacie been condemned First by the Son of God Matth. 18.1 and 20.25.26 Mark 10.42 Luke 22.25 Next by the Apostles themselves 2. Cor. 1.24 1. Pet. 5 3. Thirdly by the Fathers of the primitive Church in their Synods and Councils Provincial and General as by the Bishops of Africk Cyprian Epist 55. ad Cornel. about the year 255. By the General Councils of Nice 1. Canon 5.6.17 wherein was 318 Bishops anno 327. Of Constantinople Canon 2.3 5. wherein was 150. Bishops anno 381. Of Ephesine Canon 8. where was 200. Bishops anno 436. Of Chalcedonense Actio 16. anno 454. where there
was 630. Bishops Of Constantinople 6. Canon 36. anno 681. where there was 289. Bishops Of Nicene 2. Canon 1. anno 781. where was present 350. Bishops Of Constantinople 8. Canon 27. anno where was present 383. Bishops anno 870. Of the Council of Constance Sess 4.5 where was a thousand Fathers almost anno 1418. And of Basel Sess 2.18 anno 1431. all General Councils condemning your Popes Supremacy as your Church now affirms of him some more some less And also it is condemned by Provincial Councils as of Antioch Canon 6.12.13.14.15.19.20 and of Carthage 2. Canon 12. anno 404. and 3. confirmed in the General Council of Trullan Canon 26. and 6. and by the Council of Milevis Canon 22. condemned also by the Universities of Paris Appellat Univers Paris olione 10. ad futur Concil infastic rerum expe ca. fugi and Lovane Aeneas Sylvius de gestis Basil Concil lib. 1. and Colen and Vienna Histor de Europa cap. 22. and Cracovia Comer de rebus Polonorum lib. 21. So then by the authority of Councils General and Provincial and of Universities the Monarchie and Superioritie of the Pope over all General Councils is disallowed And suppose the Churches of France and Germany did honor them and gave them some preeminence both of honor and power being blinded at that time with the smoke that came out of the bottomless pit yet it may appear by their supplication ad Ludovicum 11. pro libertate Ecclesiae Gallicanae adversus Rom. aulam defensio Parisiensis curiae Gravamina nationis Germaniae exhibita Maxim 1. that they did not allow that full Monarchie of his but misliked it and hated the same yea France made laws against it in Conventu Bituricensi Now these are such whom your selves do hold for Catholicks and yet they acknowledged not the Monarchie of your Pope The Churches of Graecia and of Asia in the East Chalcon conc de reb Turc lib. 1. 6. and of Muscovia Jovius in Muscovia in the North and of Ethiopia in the South Alvarez in descriptione Aethiopiae cap. 77. 83. and of Boheme Aeneas Sylvius hist Bohem. cap. 32. Provence Sleydan comment lib. 16. Piemont M. Fox in the acts and monuments lib. 7. And the Reformed Churches that are this day in France Flanders England Scotland and so forth throughout Europe all have condemned your Popes Supremacie So that if his Supremacie were to be put to tryal by the judgement and will of men so many thousands of Pastors Doctors Synods Councils Universities and Churches through all ages in all Countreys of all sorts and estats may suffice to put the Pope from his Supremacie So that I think you may blush M. Gilbert that hath so boldly written that he hath been alwayes acknowledged by the visible Church to be the visible Head of the Church seeing his Monarchie was never fully acknowledged until the Lateran Council under Leo the 10. 1516. years after Christ But seeing the Word of God is the only just tryal of it and seeing it is not written in the book of life therefore I conclud that his Supremacie is not a citizen of that new Jerusalem but a child of Babel and therefore they are blessed that shal dash it against the stones M. Gilbert Brown That the Church at any time may be invisible it is repugnant to the Word of God in many places and to M. John also For he gives examples afterward of sundry as he saith that was of his Religion and opponed themselves to the Pope and his Clergy and that saith he when he was come to the hight If the true Church opponed its self to the Antichristian Church then it was visible and known and if it was known when the Popes Kingdom was at the highest much more when it was low and so it was always known by M. Johns self Master John Welsch his Reply Whether oppugn ye your own imagination M. Gilbert here or that which I write If the first then you are foolish who fight against your self as ye do indeed If the second then I say that which I said was this That no man should think that the Church of God was ever open and visible in that flowrishing estat as it is now For this is our doctrine concerning the invisibility of the Church the which because you know not therefore you stumble at it and oppugns only your own invention and not our doctrine and therefore your reasons and Scriptures which ye bring here serve to no purpose for they make nothing against us We say that the Catholick Church which comprehends all the elect is always invisible both because the principal part thereof is in heaven and also because the senses of men cannot discern who are true members of the Catholick Church here their effectual calling their faith love hope and inward graces their union with Christ their Head their spiritual armor weapons and warfare and their Head Christ Jesus and their whole glorie is inward and invisible and they shal never be seen all gathered together until that great day Ephes 5.25.26.27.32 Psal 45.13 John 10.27 2. Tim. 2.19 Luke 11.28 Matth. 7. Ephes 6.12 2. Cor. 12.3.4 So that suppose they may be seen outwardlie as they are men and sometimes in respect of their outward ministerie yet in so far as they are a part of the Catholick Church that is in so far as they are chosen and sanctified c. as hath been said they cannot be discerned by the senses of men and so are invisible Next we say that the particular visible Churches are not always in one outward estat sometimes outwardlie glorious sometimes more obscure sometimes openly known and seen by all sometimes known and seen but by a few sometimes frequent and consisting in many sometimes rare and consisting in few sometimes adorned with outward ornaments of peace largeness outward glory and multitude sometimes again wanting this outward glory under persecution but yet having that inward glory of these inward graces So that when we say these particular Churches are sometimes invisible we do not mean as though they were known to none for that is not our doctrine M. Gilbert as ye imagine but that they are not so openly known that they are patent to all to be the true Church but known unto them with whom they have to do and who profess the truth with them Yea sometimes some of them are known unto the very persecuters and enemies by their constancy and perseverance in their sufferings suppose they allow not their profession And in this state was the Church of Israel in the time of Elias when he complained that he knew none left but himself of the true worshippers of God 1. Kings 19.10 And the Church of Juda in the days of Achaz and Manasseh Kings of Judah 2. Chron. 28.24 2. Kings 16.10 And such like in the time of Christ both in the time of his living among them as also in the time of his death and resurrection the Church
was brought to a smal handful The Princes Priests and Scribes who only was in dignity and authority being persecuters of Christ condemned him and crucified him And such like in the time of the persecution of Dioclesian the Emperor and in the time of the Arrian heresie which over-spred as it were the whole world The which also our Savior fore-told should come to pass When the Son of man saith he shal come shal he find faith in the world Matth. 18.8 and 24 11.12 And by the Apostle also 2. Thess 2. 1. Tim. 4. And John in the Revelation in the time of the Antichrist Rev. 9 1.2.3.4 and 12.6 and 13 14.15.16.17 and 14 8. and 17.2 and 18.3 Confessed also by the learned of your own Church as Bellarmin and the Rhemists as they have been quoted before and by your self also who confessed that the Church of Christ should be redacted to a smal number as it were in a wilderness in the time of the Antichrist This now is our doctrine concerning the invisibility of the Church which is neither repugnant to the Word of God nor yet to the examples which I brought in afterward against your Religion For both these M. Gilbert are true and neither of them repugning one another that the particular Churches in the time of the Antichrist are not so openly known and so outwardly glorious and flowrishing as they were before but redacted to a smal number more obscure and more latent partly through that universal defection and partly through that extream persecution of your Church and Head and that there was some that opponed themselves to the Pope and his Clergy and that even when he was come to the hight If you will make these repugnant which are not adversa but only diversa secundum magis minus then I say ye are repugnant to all rules of reasoning and to the light of nature it self Master Gilbert Brown Of this I may justly make an argument against M. John that the Pope is not the Antichrist The woman that fled to the wilderness is the true Church and to flie to the wilderness is to be invisible as M. John saith Now young Merchiston hath that this invisibility indured from the year of God 316. till our days the space of 1260. years which was by him all the time of the Antichrist But by M. John Welsch there was many in that time that opponed themselves to the Pope and said against him and his Religion and Clergy and therefore was known Of the which the Popes did slay many as he saith Therefore it must follow that either the Pope is not the Antichrist because he did persecute but visible things or else the Church was not invisible all the time fore-said Master John Welsch his Reply Let us see the force of this argument that ye make for your Pope that he is not the Antichrist The woman ye say that fled to the wilderness is the true Church That I grant and to flie into the wilderness is to be invisible by me I answer By me it is to be latent and to lurk to eschew the rage of her persecuters and not to be openlie conversant as that all the world may know her and yet not to be so latent but that some of them are known both among themselves as also to their enemies And this is our meaning as I have said before when we affirm that the particular Churches sometimes become invisible But you take it as though our meaning were that the Church is so invisible that it is known to none which is your invention M. Gilbert and not our doctrine and therefore you fight without an adversarie in this point But to go forward to the rest of your argument you say that by me there was sundrie that oppugned the Pope and his Clergie and was put to death by them This is true and therefore the blood of the Saints is found in your Church Now what will you gather of all this Therefore say you the Pope is not the Antichrist because he persecutes but visible things or else the Church is not invisible I deny that either the one or the other will follow And because you made an argument against your Pope I should have said with him that he is not the Antichrist which is grounded upon your own invention mistaking our doctrine and therefore hath no feet I will make another for him that he is the Antichrist the which you nor all your Clergy will not be able to disprove He is that undoubted Antichrist which hath redacted the Church of Christ as it were in a wilderness to a smal handful partly through the pest of his damnable doctrine partly through his extream persecution so that they were compelled to lurk and hide themselves from the cruelty of his power This you cannot deny because the Scripture affirms this of the Antichrist But I assume that the Popes of Rome have done this these many hundred years as I have proved before and in the other part of my answer therefore of necessity it must follow that the Popes of Rome are the Antichrist that the Scripture fore told should come Answer this if you can And as for the time of this invisibilitie it hath relation to the beginning and grouth and hight of your Antichristian Kingdom For as it grew the Church was more and more obscured and when it was at the hight the Church was in her eclipse and as it hath decayed now since she hath accordingly spred her self abroad If the Apostle be true that Mystery of Iniquity began to work in his days 2. Thess 2.7 1. John 4 3. For first the manifold heresies which were sown in the primitive Church whereof the Popes of Rome have renewed a great many as shal be proved hereafter was the first step to that Antichristian Kingdom Next the loving of preeminence in the Ministery over their brethren as the Scripture testifies of Dictrephes who loved preeminence 3. of John 9. and specially the aspiring of the Bishops of Rome to a Domination and Lordship over their brethren forbidden by Christ which was manifestly kythed in Pope Victor who did take upon him to excommunicat the Bishops of Asia for a light dissention of the celebration of Easter anno 198. And in others as Cornelius Zosimus Bonifacius and Celestin Popes who did receive to their Communion those who were excommunicat in Africa was the second step Thirdly if it be true that these impious and superstitious Decreets which your Church ascribes to the Popes of Rome before Constantine be theirs as is not likely that such superstitions did creep into the Church of Christ it being under persecution then I say the Popes of Rome even before Sylvester by their superstitious Decreets made a further entry to that Antichristian Kingdom And because the Roman Empire was the let that hindered Antichrist to step up to his throne 2. Thess 2.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the City of Rome behoved
to be his seat Rev. 18. therefore Constantin the Great leaving the City of Rome to Sylvester the Bishop of R me made yet the way more easie till at the last they first got the primacy of honor next of authority and jurisdiction over their brethren and then last of all did subdue the necks of Kings and Emperors unto them The which they did not attain unto at the first but piece and piece and that not without long and great resistance both of the Church as I have proved before condemning his Monarchy in all ages and of the Emperors as we shal see hereafter And as they ever grew in their superiority so did the purity of the Church of Christ decay and as a pest infects not a Kingdom all at once but piece and piece so did your Antichristian heresie it infected not all at once but piece and piece till at the last it went over all While as then Merchiston makes the beginning of his reign to be in the 316 year of God and the Church from thence to become invisible His meaning is that then that let which the Apostle speaks of was begun to be removed that his seat and throne might be in Rome and from thence as they grew in hight so was the Church ay more and more continually obscured till at the last the Lord did scatter that darkness by the light of his Gospel which came to pass in our days Master Gilbert Brown The Church that is set down to us in the Word of God can no way be invisible for when the holy Writ speaks of the Church of Christ it speaks of a visible number of men and women and no wise of Angels or spirits as may be seen in these examples Numb 20.4.3 Kings 8.14 Matth. 16.18 and 18.17 Acts 15.3.4 and 18.22 and 22.28 1. Tim. 3.15 Master John Welsch his Reply I come now to your arguments First you say that the Church that is set down to us in the Word of God can no ways be invisible because say ye when it speaks of the Church it speaks of a visible number of men and women and no ways of Angels or spirits I answer This is most false For the Scripture sets down to us that Church which is the body of Christ Eph. 1.22.23 and whereof he is the head and Savior Eph. 5.23 and which is built upon the rock Col. 1.18 which is called the congregation of the first born whose names are written in heaven Heb. 12.23 and that Jerusalem which is the mother of us all Gal. 4.26 Matth. 16.28 And this is the Catholick Church which comprehends all the elect as well triumphant as militant which is invisible for the respects before said as I have proved And suppose the elect that are here militant may be seen as they are men and ofttimes also in respect of their outward profession yet it follows not but that they are invisible in so far as they are a part of the Catholick Church And also that sometimes through the extremity of persecution they may be latent and lurk so that they are not openly visible and known to all as I have said before As for these places of Scripture to wit Num. 20 4. 3. Kings 8.14 Acts 15.3.4 and 20.28 and 18.22 and 1. Tim 3 15 they speak all of particular Churches which we grant unto you are visible suppose not ay alike as hath been proved As for the 16. of Matthew it speaks of the Church of the chosen for they only are built upon this rock and against whom the gates of hell prevail not and they are invisible in respect before said as hath been proved As for the 18 of Matthew it is quoted afterward therefore I refer the answer of it unto that place Master Gilbert Brown The Scripture also in many places compares the Church to visible things that cannot be unseen as He hath placed his tabernacle in the Sun A city cannot be hid set on a mountain It is also compared to a light set on a candlestick to lighten the whole house and not to be put under a bed or a bushel with many the like which I have omitted for brevities cause saving some here at the end Moreover our Savior commands us to complain to the Church if our brother offend us and also we ought to joyn our selves to the true Church or else we cannot have remission of our sins But how can a man complain to it if it cannot be seen Or joyn himself to it if it be invisible The Church of Christ may never want the true preaching of the Word and right administration of the Sacraments but these things are always visible because by the Ministers they are the signs and marks of the Church therefore the true Church may be always known by them To be short not only the Word of God affirms the Church to be alwayes visible as I have noted before but also the ancient Fathers in all their works as partly I have marked also Psal 18.6 read S. Aug. on this Mat. 5.15 Isai 69.9 Dan 2.35 Mich. 4.1.2 Read Hieron on these places Aug 1. tract in Epist Joan. item de bapt lib. 4. cap. 1. Matth. 18.17 Cyprian de simpli praelat Jer. 1. Epist ad Damas Aug. lib. 19. contra Faust cap. 11. Origen homil 30. in Matth. Cyp. lib de unitat Eccles Chrysost hom 4. in cap. 6. Isai August lib. 3. contra Epist. Parmeni cap. 3. item tract 1. in Epist Joan. tract 2. item Epist 166. ad Donatistas M. John Welsch his Reply As for the 18. Psalm it speaks not of the visibility of the Church there but of the Lords wonderful and glorious works and specially in disponing such a glorious place or tabernacle or throne to the Sun to shine in the which demonstrates the glory of the Lord. As for Augustine exposition it results of the corrupted old Translation which was not taken from the Hebrew fountain but from the version of the Septuagints therefore Pagninus Vatabius and Arias Montanus a Papist and Tremellius expone it not so but after the Hebrew Secondly he means not here of the Catholick Church but of particular Churches which were exceeding far enlarged in his days but yet this hinders not but that they should be obscured in the time of the Antichrist as it was fore-told and your Church acknowledges As for the 5. of Matthew 15.16 there not the Catholick Church but the Pastors of particular Churches are compared to this light which is set up in the candlestick and to the city set up upon the hill top which cannot be hid that is the eyes of all is on them and therefore they should be so much the more wake-rife and careful because their doings cannot be hid As for Isai 2.3 and 60.20 and 61.9 and Dan. 2.35 and Mich. 4.12 they prophesie of the greatness and clearness of the Church of Christ in the time of the Messias and of the propagation of the Gospel throughout the
world and of the stability and perpetuity of Christs Kingdom But yet it follows not but both the Catholick Church is invisible as I said before and that the visible Churches may be obscured and darkened as it was fore-told in the time of the Antichrist As for the 18. of Matthew 17. Go tell the Church c. The Church is here taken for the Pastors and Governors of particular Churches which we grant are visible but yet it follows not but that both they and the professors may be obscured and darkened either through heresie or through extream persecution or through both together as it was fore-told in the time of the Antichrist and hath been fulfilled by your Church As for the true Church unto whom we should joyn our selves I answer We can have no salvation unless we joyn our selves first to the Catholick Church that is unto Jesus and his members by a spiritual communion without the which there is no salvation Next unto some particular visible Church by the outward communion of the Word and Sacraments c if we know it and possibly can joyn our selves unto it For if either we know it or may not as these seven thousand that bowed not their knee to Baal then I say salvation is not perilled As for your last reason The true Church may never want the true preaching of the Word and right administration of the Sacraments I answer First there is not the like necessity of the Sacraments as there is of the Word Next suppose they have it and thereby are known among themselves and some of them also to their adversaries yet it follows not that they are so openly visible that they are patent and known to all As for example There is no question but these seven thousand that did not bow their knee to Baal 1. Kings 19.18 and these hundred Prophets who was hid in the caves 1. Kings 18.13 and the Apostles when all were scattered through that persecution as Luke testifies Acts 8.1 had the exercise of the Word among them And it is not likely that the Apostles wanted some to teach suppose they were not known to all no not to their persecuters otherwise they would have been persecuted And such like we doubt not but in the time of Queen Maries persecution in England and in other parts under that Antichristian tyranny but the Lord had his own both Pastor and people among whom the truth was preached suppose neither we nor their adversaries knew them all For it is oft-times for the safety of the Church to lurk and to be hid that she may escape the fury and rage of her enemies As for Augustin Cyprian Origen Chrysostome and Jerome which ye quote here they speak either of the perpetuity and eternity of the Catholick Church or else of the largeness and clearness of the particular Churches which were in those days which is neither against the invisibility of the Catholick Church nor yet against the obscure estat and smal handful of the Church of Christ whereunto she should be brought in the days of the Antichrist as was fore-told by the Scripture and fulfilled in your Papistical Kingdom For we grant that in their dayes the Churches of Christ was frequent and glorious but yet they did not ay remain in that estat For the Churches of the East are almost overthrown by the Mahomet and the Churches of the West by the Antichrist So that partly by the one and partly by the other the Church of Christ hath been redacted to a smal handful as hath been said SECTION XXIV Where our Religion was before Luther Or a Catalogue of them who professed our Religion in the midst of Popery Master John Welsch Last of all I will set you down the names of these worthy men that in the midst of Popery spake against their errors and preached the same Religion which we preach I will but only name a few of them that was in the midst of Popery when it was come to the hight anno 1158. Gerardus and Dulcimus Navarrensis M John hath not the right dyet of these his holy Fathers Answer If it was so as you write it it was error in scribendo and that which I writ afterward might have taught you this when I said this was 400. years past did preach earnestly against the Church of Rome and called the Pope the Antichrist and taught also that the Clergy of Rome was become the whore of Babylon fore-spoken in the Revelation this was 400. years past In the year of our Lord 1160. one * This Waldus and his sect had wives and all things common and so must M. John if he follow him Answer This is falsly alledged of him and his followers but either your Canon Law errs Causa 12. qu. 1. Dilectissimis or else Pope Clement was of this mind and so if you be of his Religion you must be so for albeit ye have no wives yet other mens wives have been made common to your Popes and your Clergy in horrible adulteries Waldus a citizen of Lyons in France with a great number taught that same doctrine which we teach now condemned the Mass to be wicked the Pope to be the Antichrist and Rome to be Babylon They were persecuted by the Pope and remained long in Bohemia In the year 1112. the Pope caused an hundred persons in the Countrey of Alsatia whereof many were noble-men to be burnt in one day for the maintaining of that same doctrine that we now maintain against the Church of Rome About the year of our Lord 1230. almost all the Churches of the Grecians which with the rest of the Churches of Asia and Africk who do not acknowledge the supremacy of your Pope are mo then the Churches of Europe who submit themselves to him did all renounce the Pope and the Romish Church because of their execrable simony and idolatry in the year 1240. In the Countrey of Swevia there were many Preachers that taught freely against the Pope and affirmed he and his Clergy were hereticks and simoniacks in the year 1251. or thereabout Arnoldus de Villanova a learned Spaniard taught freely against the Church of Rome and among the rest that the Pope led the people to hell for the which cause the Pope condemned him as an heretick about the same time Gulielmus de Sancto Amore Master and chief Ruler of that University taught that all the testimonies of the Scripture spoken of the Antichrist should be applyed to the Pope and his Clergy and so taught them to be the Antichrist and the whore of Babel anno 1290. Laurence an English-man and Master of the University in Paris proved mightily that the Pope was the Antichrist and his Clergy the Synagogue of Babylon About the same time Robertus Gallus a man of noble parentage taught the Pope was an Idol and said the judgement of God would fall upon him and his Clergy Because I have no time to write the doctrine of the rest
blasphemous reason of yours Martin Luther is the author of our Religion For now your are inforced to grant the contrary that infinit numbers have taught the same doctrine before him The truth is too strong for you M Gilbert that compells you to grant the thing that ye would wish with all your heart the people never knew it But comfort your self M. Gilbert for the truth will be victorious at the last and your darkness dayly more and more will be discovered Indeed the least stroke that ye can give for the defence of your Pope is to call them all hereticks who have spoken against him For I grant the Pope and his Clergy is not such fools as being their own Judges to condemn themselves and to justifie them who not only have taught it but also sufficiently did prove it and many thousands sealed with their blood that he was the Antichrist and his Church Babel But with them they have the Son of God and the Apostles Paul and John hereticks for they also did condemn his idolatry and tyranny and errors But whereabout now will ye contend M. Gilbert Ye say whether their doctrine be heresie or not I would you and your Church would stand upon this and give over all your other contentions while this were first proved Whether their doctrine in so far as they agree with ours and ours in so far as it dissents from yours be heresie or not that is be against the Scripture or not the which if you would do then I hope our contention would soon be ended But for as fast as you run to this now you will flee from it as fast again when we desire to have yours and our doctrine tryed by the Scriptures which of them is heresie and consequently whether ye or we be hereticks And therefore you ever refuse to let your doctrine be tryed by the Scripture but run to your pretended antiquity and successions Councils and lying miracles and many other vain starting-holes like a wild Fox when he is hunted out of one hole he flies to another and dares never abide the fair fields And mark their craft Reader when we affirm that our Religion hath Jesus Christ to be the Author of it in the Scriptures as we offer to prove the same ye refuse this tryal by the Scriptures and say That Martin Luther invented our Religion and we had none that professed it and taught it before him When we again reply That we had sundry of all sorts many hundred years before him even when your Kingdom was at the hight and produces their names they not being able to deny it they slip from that again and say They contend not whether there was such that taught such doctrine or not but they contend whether that was truth or heresie so they run from one starting hole to another But I will ask you M. Gilbert if it be proved that this their doctrine was not heresie will you contend any more then Shal the plea cease then Will you ever slander our Religion of novelty in saying Martin Luther was the first that began it and we had none who professed before him But you will say This you have not proved It is true I had not proved it then but now I hope I have proved it sufficiently that your Popes are the Antichrist and your Rome Babel which was one of the principal heads of the doctrine which ye taught and sundry others also Disprove you it if you can M. Gilbert Master Gilbert Brown But he saith They preached the same Religion that he preaches c. Let M. John name any of these his Doctors that he will abide at in Religion and I shal let him see that he was not of his Religion in all things For that is the thing that we say That albeit M. John and his brethren have renewed many old condemned heresies of hereticks yet they were not of their Religion in all things And therefore this that M. John calls the only truth was never professed in all heads as it is now in Scotland before in no Countrey no not by any one man let be by a number which thing M. Robert Bruce grants himself in his Sermons in these words And God hath chosen a few hearts in this Countrey where he hath begun his dwelling place for God dwells now in the hearts and consciences of his own by his holy Spirit And surely so hath he dwelt with 〈◊〉 these thirty years in such purity that he hath not done the like with any Nation in the earth he hath not remained with any Nation without error and heresie so long as he hath done with us c. So God dwelt in no place without error and heresie the space of thirty years while now in Scotland Master John Welsch his Reply But you say they dissent from us in some things and is not of our Religion in all things Whereunto I answer That suppose this were true yet it will not follow but that they are of our Religion seeing they and we do agree in the main foundations thereof For we have learned to call them brethren which do hold the foundation as the Apostle saith suppose they have built hay straw or timber upon the same Otherwise if ye will be content to be measured with that same measure wherewith ye measure us if you will have none to be accounted of your Religion but these only that profess with you in all things as your Church doth now then not only by your reason shal ye want the Lord Jesus his Apostles the primitive Church as ye do indeed and that not only in the first six hundred years but long after till the thousand year and long after that also to be of your profession because not only the weightiest points of your doctrine have not their original in the Scripture and are unwritten traditions by the testimony of some of your selves but also sundry points of your Religion have been brought in after these dayes being unknown in the former ages as your selves will not deny and I have proved in some heads in the other part concerning the Mass Yea you shal want all the Fathers by this reason of yours For there is not one of them but they have their own errors which ye your selves will not defend and the most part of them are with us against you in many things which you cannot deny and that which is more ye shal want almost all the general Councils except three or four and many of your own Popes Doctors Bishops Cardinals and Jesuits for not only have some of them had errors and some of them been hereticks by your whole confessions but also some of them have been with us in some points against you as I have proved before so that I need not repeat them now As for example Pope Gregory affirms That the books of the Macchabees are Apocrypha Lib. 19. cap. 16. in morali And so have sundry others of your Clergy as
Image of these who were first authors of their Orders 2. The Basilidians worshipped Images Irenaeus lib. cap. 23. and used invocations so do you 3. Carpocras had some painted Images in great estimation both of others as also of Christ Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 3.24 So do the Papists paint Christ and say that his form was painted by Luke the Evangelist 4. The old Idolaters did excuse their Idolatry that they did not worship the Images but the thing represented by the Image August in Psal 113. in con 2. Lactant lib. 2. cap. 2. So do you excuse your Idolatrie 5. It was the custom of the old Idolaters to afflict and whip their own bodies that they might please their own Gods Iren. lib. 1. cap. 21. So do some of you now 6. It was their custom also to light candles at noon day in the time of their service Iren. lib. 6. cap. 2. So do you 7. Basilidians and Carpocratians kept secret their doctrine counting all other men dogs and swine Iren. lib. 1. cap. 23. Epiph. haeres 24. So do you keep secret your mysteries from the common people and will not suffer the Scriptures to be read of all lest say ye precious pearls be cast before swine 8. Marcosij they spake some Hebrew words in Baptism to astonish and affray the hearers Iren. lib. 1. cap. 18. But you are worse who in all your service speak nothing but an unknown language and that say you to make their mysteries to be had in greater reverence 9. The Heracleonits anointed their dead with oyl balm and water superstitiouslie August de haeres cap. 16. Epiph. haeres 36. and so do you 10. Marcion and the Pepuzian hereticks permitted women to baptize Epiph. haeres 42. au ad quod vult cap. 27. So do you 11. The ossenes taught that it was not needful that prayers should be made in a known language Epiph. haeres 19. ante Christum So do you and therefore your prayers are in Latin 12. The Messalians affirmed Baptism only to serve for the washing away of the sins going before it Theodoret. divin decret cap. de Bapt. So do you 13. The Tatians and sundry other hereticks affirmed marriage impure Epiph. haeres 46 So doth your Pope Siricius in their Priests Gratianus Epist. 82. cap. Proposuisti 14. The Manichees damned marriage in their elect and perfect but suffered it in the rest August Epist. 74. So do the Papists in their Priests and religious men they damn it but they do tolerat it in the laicks and yet the Spirit of God calls it A doctrine of Devils to forbid marriage 1. Timothy 4.1.2.3 15. The Manichees they had the Communion under one kind So doth the Papistical Church The Council of Constance so decreed it against the Scriptures with these hereticks Such like their Fasting and your Fasting is alike For they made choise of meats and abstained from flesh but yet used their delicats and so do you 16. The Manichees affirmed there was two beginnings so doth Augustinus Steuchus a Papist in sua Cosinopoea in principio Genes where he saith That the crystallin heaven is coeternal with God The which if it be true then certainly it is God For that which is without beginning is God and so there are two Gods If Calvin or any of us had written such how would heaven and earth have been filled with cryes against us 17. Montanus an heretick received the whole Scripture but yet he denyed that it contained all doctrine needâ—ul to salvation Epiph. haeres 48. So doth the Papists And from this error springs their traditions their ceremonies infinit in number partly Jewish partly Ethnick 18. This Montanus was the first who prescribed certain laws of fasting the Scripture appointing no such thing Apollo apud Euseb lib. 5. cap. 17. So doth the Papists their fastings are upon their prefixt and set days 19. Montanus taught that smal faults was to be suffered for after this life neither was the souls to be delivered from the prison till they had payed the utmost farthing Tertull. de anima in fine So doth the Papists also 20. Such like the doctrine of the Montanists was that Abrahams bosome was beside Hell or in the uppermost part of Hell 21. That the Patriarcks before the coming of Christ were in Hell 22. That only the Martyrs souls go immediatly to Paradise 23. That prayers and oblations should be made for the dead 24. That extream unction should be given after Baptism 25. That the sign of the Cross should be used as testifieth Tertullian in lib. de animo de coron milit All which your Church hath renewed 26. Helcesaitae made two Christs one above another beneath So doth your Church make two Christs one in heaven having a true natural body with his own essential properties in a certain place visible another in earth made of the bread and wine with all the essential properties of a true body invisible in the Sacrament 27. Sampsaei kept the dust of the feet and the spittle of two women which they worshipped as Goddesses which they affirmed did serve to cure diseases and which they used as amulets Epiph haeres 53. haeres 19. ante Christum So doth your Papistical Church keep the relicks of Saints worship them and carry them about as serving either to preserve or to recover health The like also was the superstition of the Ossens 28. Cathari gloried in the merit of their works and affirmed that they were made righteous with an inherent righteousness Isid etymol. cap. 8. de haeres Christ. The Papistical Church in this heresie goeth beyond them for both they glory of their works and affirm that we are justified with an inherent righteousness 29. The hereticks called Angelici and also the Caini they worshipped Angels Aug. ad quod vult cap. 39. Epiph. haeres 38. So do the Papists 30. The hereticks called Apostolici admitted none in their number but those who vowed wilful poverty and chastity August de haeres cap. 40. Epiph. haeres 61. So the Papists admit none to their religious Orders but such who vow both 31. There were some hereticks who went bare-footed August ex Philastrio quorundam cap. 68. So do the Franciscan Friers and those who are called Coâ—digeri 32. The Donatists denyed that the true preaching of the Word was a note of the pure Church and therefore Augustin in sundry places calls them back to the Scriptures So doth your Church 33. The Collyridians worshipped Mary and therefore they are called Idolaters by Epiphanius haeres 74. So do the Papists 34. Armenij worshipped the Cross of our Lord and therefore they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is worshippers of the Cross Epiph. in Panoplia So do the Papists 35. The Pelagians affirmed Adam would have died suppose he had not sinned So doth Augustinus Steuchus a Papist of great name in his Annotations upon the 2 of Genesis He saith Death is natural and sin is not the cause of
did not obey the other As also a number of the Fathers of your own Religion who in two General Councils the one of Constance where there was almost a thousand Fathers the other of Basel did not obey the Pope in defining General Councils to be above the Pope So if ye speak truth infinit millions of Christians in all ages and innumerable Churches and thousands of your own Religion are condemned to Hell But this is false M. Gilbert and who will believe you And to the end now my conclusion yet holds sure That seeing his Kingdom is that second beast that hath two horns like the Lamb and speaks like the Dragon Rev. 13.11 And himself is that man of sin and son of perdition that adversary and Antichrist that was to come 2. Thess 2.3.4 And his doctrine is that Apostasie and abomination sore-told in the Scripture Rev. 17. And his seat that Harlot and mystical Babylon that mother of whoredoms who is drunken with the blood of the Martyrs of Jesus Whosoever receives his mark on his fore-head or hand that is openly or privatly professes obedience unto him shal as the Angel proclaimed drink of the wine of the wrath of God yea of that pure wine in the cup of his wrath and he shal be tormented with fire and brimstone before the holy angels and before the Lamb. And the smoak of his torment shal ascend for evermore and they shal have no rest day nor night which worship the beast or his image And as for your prayer I beseech God M. Gilbert that he may open my eyes and inlarge my heart to understand and imbrace his truth more and more and to make me to grow up in that spiritual communion with Christ and his members more and more But that which ye call truth is heresie and that which ye call the true Church is Babel and therefore that doctrine and Church of yours is that strong delusion and whore of Babel with the which whosoever shal communicat is excluded from the merits of Christ and shal be partaker of her plagues and finally shal be damned SECTION XXVIII That the Pope is Antichrist Master Gilbert Brown IF the Pope be the Antichrist what is the cause that M. John would not set down some place out of the Word of God that proves the same But good Reader I will let you see how far M. John is against the Word of God in this and that by some examples only First our Savior shew unto the Jews that albeit he came in the name of his Father yet they would not receive him If another saith he shal come in his own name him ye will receive This no doubt as Augustin expones the same is meant of the Antichrist that the Jews shal receive Now it is out of all controversie that the Jews never received the Pope Therefore the Pope is not the Antichrist Again the Pope came never in his own name but in the Name of Christ for he is called the Vicare of Christ and the servant of the servants of God therefore he cannot be the Antichrist Master John Welsch his Reply I come now to prove that which I offered before to prove to wit that your Popes which ye will have to be the Head of the Church of Christ are the self-same Antichrist that the Scripture fore-told should come Thou wouldest know Christian Reader of what weight this controversie is Whether the Pope be the Antichrist or not For this supremacy of his unto them is the foundation whereupon their Religion and the safety of their whole Church depends so that they call it The Rock whereupon the Church is built against which the gates of Hell shal not prevail Rhemist annot upon Matth. 16. And Bellarmin calls him in his Preface before the controversie of the Popes supremacy The foundation which upholds the house of God the Pastor which feeds his flock the Emperor which governes his host the Sun which gives light to the starrs that is to the Ministers of the Church the Head which gives life to his body So that remove his supremacy the house of God must fall the flock of Christ must be scattered the host of the Lord must be discomfited the starrs that is the Ministery must be darkened and the body must ly still without motion And he applyes these Prophesies Isai 28.16 and 8.14.15 spoken and fulfilled only in the Son of God unto him a calling him that foundation stone in Sion upon the which the whole Church is built and that proved stone against the which the gates of Hell hath never nor never shal prevail and that corner stone which joyns both Jew and Gentil as two walls together in a Christian Church and that precious stone from whence the infinit treasure of grace is most plenteously derived unto the whole Church as unity in doctrine the bond of peace the unity of faith which is salvation it self and the very life of Religion And he saith There is no way to Christ but by Peter in whose room their Popes succeed So that in their judgement there is no way to Christ but by the Pope And he calls him that rock of offence and stumbling stone spoken of in Isai chap. 8. Upon the which whosoever shal fall shal be broken and on whom it shal fall it shal dash him in pieces O blasphemous mouth Let the heavens be confounded at this And therefore this is of such a weight that Boniface the 8 hath made it an article of our Faith whose words are these We declare we affirm we define and pronounce that it is altogether needful to salvation to all creatures to be under the Pope of Rome Extra de minoritate obedientia cap. unam sanctam So that Bellarmin saith when the Popes supremacy is called in controversie The sum of all Christianity is called in question and when that is controverted Then it is controverted whether the Church should stand any longer or not or fall and dissolve Unto them therefore it is an article of Faith which must be believed and practised under the pain of the loss of salvation And unto us he is that self-same Antichrist which the Scripture hath fore-told time hath made manifest and the Church hath suffered Unto them he is the Head of the body of Christ the Pastor of his flock the Sun that gives light to the starrs the foundation of the house of God and a mortal God among men Unto us he is Gods enemy the son of perdition the second beast and false prophet 2 Thess 2.13 Rev. 13.11 the adversary of true Religion a pest in the body a tyrant in the Common-wealth and Antichrist in the Church So thou sees Christian Reader of what weight this controversie is Let us see then how he defends him from being the Antichrist and then you shal hear our reasons to the contrary You ask wherefore I set not down some places of Scripture to prove the Pope to be the Antichrist I answer Not
for I think you would not have wished me to read that thing which ye your self believes not to be true I therefore read it and read it over again And beside many other things I find this in it that the Antichrist should be born of a Virgin by the help of the Devil as Christ was born of the Virgin by the work of the holy Ghost I wondered that you should have wished me to read that Book in the which there was so manifest an error and that contrary the doctrine of your own Church You should beware of this M. Gilbert for if your Head and Church get wit of it they will not only count you a bad defender of the Catholick Faith as you say you are but also it may be they suspect you of heresie who do wish your adversaries to read that Book wherein so manifest an error is and that against the doctrine of your own Church For who will think of you but that ye are of that same opinion your self seeing you are so earnest with others to read the same Bellarmin that great defender of your Catholick Faith was more wise then you in this point For first he saith lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 12. There is a manifest error in that treatise Next he saith It is certain that that treatise cannot be Augustins but it is probable saith he that it is Rabanus his work So to conclud this I assure you M. Gilbert I am of the same mind that I was concerning your Popes for all the reading of that work But I am not of the same mind towards you that I was before the reading of the same for either I think you have been very foolish in wishing me to read that which you believed not your self to be true or else that ye defend a manifest error not only against the truth but also against the doctrine of your own Church And let your Pope who is the bond of unity among you see to this how to reconcile you and Bellarmin two defenders of his Catholick Faith you saying that that work is Augustins and Bellarmin flatly denying it and affirming that it cannot be his you wishing your adversary to read it and Bellarmin confuting a manifest error in it But betwixt you be it Now this is all that you have said for the defense of your Pope which are but as figg leaves which cannot hide his nakedness Now I will let thee see Christian Reader what we have for us wherefore we affirm and teach and is ready also as thousands have done before us to seal it with our blood that the Popes of Rome are the Antichrist which the Scripture hath fore-told should come time hath made manifest and the Lord his mouth hath in a part consumed And first I will lay this ground which M. Gilbert cannot gain say and the conscience of all men will subscribe to That as the true Christ is sufficiently described in the Old and New Testament so the Antichrist is sufficiently described there also And as he is to be believed under the pain of the endless damnation of their souls to be the true Christ to whom the prophesies of the Old Testament concerning the Savior to come doth agree and of whom the New Testament testifieth that they are accomplished so he must be that Antichrist which the Scripture fore-told was to come to whom every one of the marks and properties of the Antichrist set down in the same do agree and in whom they are found to be accomplished Let us therefore out of the Scripture search the marks of the Antichrist and then let us see whether their Popes of Rome be stamped with these marks or not I speak not now of the many Antichrists whereof John speaks 1. John 2.18 which were fore-runners of that great defection which was fore-told should come in the Church of God but of that chief and great Antichrist who not in one or two things only but almost in all the points of his Religion should be contrary to Jesus Christ whom these places of Scripture 1. John 4.3 2. Thess 2. Rev. 11.13.17.18 do describe And while as I affirm that the Popes of Rome are this great Antichrist I understand it thus That they are the Prince and Head of that defection and apostasie which the Scripture fore-shew and fore-told was to come in the Church For I do not think that all the strength and force of the Antichrist is included in the Pope but the Pope and his Kingdom which is contrary to the Kingdom of Christ is most truly called the Antichrist whereof because the Pope is the Prince and Head therefore by that figure taking the part for the whole I call him the Antichrist And in this we follow the Scripture for the Scripture speaking of the Antichrist sometimes calls it a defection and a mystery of iniquity and the second beast that hath horns like the Lamb and the Harlot and sometimes points out the principal and chief in this Kingdom on whom the whole body of iniquity doth hang as when he writes here the man of sin and son of perdition which is an adversary who extolls himself above all c. which is most properly spoken not of the body but of the Head Having shown now in what sense we take the Antichrist we will go to the matter And first to that 2. Thess 2.3.4 where he is described and that by no dark prophesies as you say but by plain sayings First therefore the Scripture calls him there a man of sin a son of perdition The which to be accomplished in your Popes your own Histories Cardinals Councils Favorers Friers Friends and themselves do sufficiently testifie So that if they speak true of themselves which you cannot deny then of all the monsters that ever the earth hath born some of your Popes have been the greatest monsters For in this point M. Gilbert we deal not with you as ye deal with us for ye cite our enemies as witnesses of us which should have no credit and we cite your own friends and these of your own Religion So that they shal be fetched out as witnesses against you in this point whether your Popes be the men of sin and sons of perdition or not What Commandment is there of the first or second Table which they have not violated in the highest degree 1. Whoremongers 2. Adulterers 3. Sodomits 4. Incestuous 5. Fosterers and maintainers of harlots 6. Tyrants 7. Devilish and Sorcerers 8. In pride passing all creatures under heaven 9. Atheists without God 10. Perjured 11. Burreaus 12. Bawds and merchants of whores 13. Sacrilegious 14. Traitors 15. Seditious 16. Blasphemous 17. Parricides 18. Poysoners of Emperors Senators Cardinals yea of their own parents and sisters 19. Helpers of the Turks 20. Drunkards 21. Simoniacks 22. Monsters 23. Bastards 24. Arrians 25. Idolaters 26. And so contentious that sometimes there was two sometimes three and sometimes four all Popes striving for the Popedom together
solemn bargan with the Devil that if he would promote him to the Popedom he would give him both soul and body afterward obtains the same He had a copperhead in secret which alwayes gave him answer of that which he demanded of the Devil He asked of the Devil how long he should live Who doubtfully answering him that he should not die while he said Mass in Jerusalem He rejoycing at that and never being purposed to go to Jerusalem yet not being ware of the Devil his subtilty on a certain day went to a certain place in Rome which was called Jerusalem and there saying his Mass in that Temple is suddenly taken with a fever and knowing by the noise of the Devils his death to be at hand in the anguish of his soul confessed his devilry and as Benno a Cardinal writes he desires his hands and tongue and as some other write his privy members also to be cut off with the which he sacrificed to the Devil and blasphemed God Now judge thou Christian Reader whether this seat and throne and office of the Popedom be of God or not which the Devil can give and hath given to men and which men can obtain by devilry And judge whether these men whom they call the Head light and foundation of their Church be Christs Vicars or the Devils Vicars or not Yea judge whether they are the very men of sin and sons of perdition and the Antichrists which the Scripture foretold should come in the Church or not But yet this did not fear his successors for they followed his footsteps in these devilish arts as witnesseth Platina Sabellicus Volateran Benno a Cardinal and John de Pineda part 3. lib. 19. Benedictus the 9 he was so skilled in these devilish arts of Magick that before he was made Pope in the woods he called upon these evil spirits and by his devilry caused women to follow him for to satisfie his filthiness He by these his devilish arts obtains the Popedom and makes his former companions Magicians his most familiar counsellers But he fearing himself sold the Popedom unto his fellow Magician called Joannes Gratianus who was afterward called Gregory the 6. for 1500. pound Platin saith that by the judgement of God he is damned for the selling of his Popedom So after he is deposed he is suffocat by a Devil in the woods and so he perisheth Of whom it is reported that after his death he was seen monstrously to appear to a certain Hermit in his body like a Bear in his head and tail like an Ass and being asked how he was so monstrously transformed He answered I wander in this shape because I lived in the Popedom without reason without a law and without God Out of thy own mouth thou art condemned There was such tumults contentions and great slaughters for that throne betwixt Sylvester the 3. and Benedict his faction that Benno a Cardinal saith The Church was rent in pieces and by heresies under the color of sweet honey was suffocat And Platin a Papist saith That the good was oppressed and rejected and they that might do most by pride and ambition clamb up to that throne But Gregory the 6. buyes the Popedom as hath been said and so at one time there are three Popes which have three seats in Rome whom Platin calls Teterrima monstra most ugly monsters Gregory the 7. called otherwise Hildebrand that most ugly monster he having by the means of Brazutus poysoned six Popes his predecessors to make a way to himself unto the Popedom climbs up to that devilish throne that same night without consent either of people or Clergy Of whom Benno a Cardinal writes that he was a notable Magician that when it pleased him he would shake his slieves and sparks of fire would come out whereby he deceived the minds of the simple Of whom the said Cardinal reports also that coming to Rome at a time he left his book of his Magical and devilish arts behind him through forgetfulness and remembring himself he sends two of his most faithful servants about it charging them straitly that they opened not the book but they the more they were forbidden were the more curious and so opening the book and reading it behold the angels of Satan appeared to them in such a multitude that scarcely did the two young men remain in their wits and the Devils said unto them Wherefore have ye called us Why do ye weary us Tell us what we shal do otherwise we will fall upon you Unto whom one of them answered Pull down these high walls which are near Rome Who went and did it quickly and so the young men came to Rome exceedingly terrified This same Cardinal reports of him that he seeking by many deceitful means to put down the Emperor hearing that the Emperor resorted often to a certain Church to his prayers and having searched the place where he used to bow himself hired a villain to lay great stones over the beams of the Temple where the Emperor prayed that they falling on the Emperor might crush him in pieces and so it might be reckoned for a miracle of Gods judgements But it fell not out so for the stone being so heavy fell backward upon him and breaking a table that was among the beams the stone and the miserable man fell down upon the floor of the Church and so the miserable villain is crushed in pieces with the same stone which he had prepared for the destruction of the Emperor The same Cardinal also reports that he sought a response of the Sacrament of the Lords body against the Emperor as the Pagans wont to do at their Idols but when he got none he cast it in the fire For the which cause the Bishop of Porteous in open pulpit saith that Hildebrand and we should be burnt quick He excommunicats Henry the 4. deposed him from his Empire and set up Rodolphus Duke of Suevia in the Empire and sent him a Crown with this verse Petra dedit Petro Petrus Diadema Rodolpho He loosed all his subjects from their oath of obedience to him and forbad his Bishops and Clergy under the pain of excommunication to acknowledge him This Emperor with his wife and son came in the Winter and stood before his Palace bare-footed three dayes in linning clothes and all that time could not get access to this proud Antichrist who answered that his Holiness was not at leasure Antoninus and Vincentius say that he granted to a Cardinal in the time of his death that by the instigation of the Devil he stirred up hatred enmity and warrs among many Of whom also Cardinal Benno writes That seeing the Devil could not get Christ subverted by the Pagans he labored to subvert his Name under the shape of a Monk and pretence of Religion The most cruel arrogant and treasonable tyrant Pope Alexander the third he continues a debate for that Satanical Seat twenty years first with Victor then with Paschalis Calixtus and
themselves but also may communicat of the superabundance of their merits unto others Malvenda in disput Ratisb cum Bucero omnes fere Scholastici Now is it possible that these men who so lift up themselves in the conceit of their own righteousness can have the knowledge and sense of their misery And as for this full assurance of faith without doubting they call it Presumption And as for the fruits of holiness without the which no man can see God let their fruits of their vow of single life among their Clergy and forbidding of marriage which the Scripture saith is the doctrine of Devils bear witness whereby innumerable abominations murders adulteries whoredoms have been committed in their Cloysters and Nunneries as their visitation doth testifie And in a fish pond there was found six thousand childrens heads which moved Gregory to revoke that determination of his upon this reason that it was better to let them marry then to give such occasion of murder as appeareth by an Epistle of Hulderick Bishop of Ausburgh written to Pope Nicolas the first And Pope Pius the 2. saith that marriage was taken away for some reasons but it should be restored again for greater This is ascribed unto him And as for true prayers which should be in the Spirit with sighs and sobs that cannot be expressed Rom. 8.26 in a known language with words of understanding that men may say Amen to them in stead of this they teach vain repetition and babling in prayers 1 Cor. 14. as though God were served by reckoning up their mutterings so many Avees so many Pater nosters upon a pair of beads They teach to pray in a strange language which is a sign not to them that believe but to them that believe not which cannot edifie nor build up no not the tower of Babel it self suppose it be a tower of confusion So by their doctrine they have spoyled Christ of his spiritual government in the hearts of his own by the work of his Spirit And as for the outward government by the Word Sacraments and Discipline they have both spoyled him of it and also have deprived the people of God of these means whereby their faith may be wrought nowrished and confirmed in their hearts For as for the Word beside their corrupting of it what by Apocrypha what by traditions what by the commandments of the Church what by their corrupted translation and their false interpretations they have starved the people of God for the want of them in keeping them up in a strange language and reading them out so in their Assemblies in a strange language so that the people may have eyes and not read them ears and not hear them minds and not understand them because they are kept up in a strange language And therefore sundry of our predecessors have been accused and burnt by them for reading parcels of them being translated in the vulgar language And as for the Sacraments they have increased the number of them by adding other five unto them they have impaired them of their vertue corrupted them with errors polluted them with ceremonies and have spoyled the people of the fruit of them by reason they are ministred in a strange tongue and they have turned the Sacrament of the Supper in a propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead They have taken away the sign of the Sacrament They have abolished the humanity of Christ by their monstrous transubstantiation They have taken away the Communion which should be in the Sacrament by their privat Masses and they have spoyled the people of a sweet pledge of their salvation in taking away the cup from them by their lamed communion under one kind And as for the discipline of Christ they have renversed it also the order whereof according to the Scripture is that the Church of Christ be governed by his own Ministers and his own laws set down in the Word for the salvation of his people Numb 3.10 Heb. 5.4 Ephes 4.11 Exod. 25.30 Matth. 28.20 1. Cor. 12.28 Eph. 4.12 all which they have taken away And first concerning the Ministers of Christ Pastors Doctors Elders Deacons which is given of God for the work of the Ministery and building up of the body of Christ they have removed them from the government of the same and have set up other Office-bearers as Legats Cardinals Primats Patriarks Archbishops Lord Bishops Chanons Parsons Vicars Archdeacons Priests Abbots Provincials Popes Inquisitors Commissioners Officers Procutors Promoters and the innumerable rout of their Monks Friers Jesuits whose Sects and Orders as they have been reckoned by some extends to an hundred and one all different in Ceremonies and Orders one from another all unknown in the Scriptures of God and transformed the government of the Church of Christ into a visible Monarchy and Kingdom of the Romans as it is named by Turrian a Jesuit de Eccles ordinar Minist lib. 1. cap. 2. And the Popes having set themselves in the room of Jesus Christ the King of his Church have not only tumbled out Christs Officers and set in their own of whom they exact an oath of obedience to them but have lifted up themselves above the higher Powers Kings and Magistrats as shal be spoken hereafter Claiming to themselves both the Swords and authority to give and to take Kingdoms at their pleasure exacting an oath of obedience of them making them their vassals and tyrannizing over the Church of God And as they have shut out the Ministers who should rule the Church of God so have they shut out his Laws whereby it should be ruled For this new Prince the Pope hath shut out the Canon of the Scripture from being a rule to govern his Kingdom and in stead thereof hath set down his Canon Law Decrees Decretals c. which decretal Epistles Gratian the gatherer of the Canon Law would have reckoned in the number of the Canonical Scriptures Distinct 19 in Canonicis And to what end doth he use these laws Not to further the salvation of Gods people but to satisfie his own if yet a horse-leech might be satisfied and his Courtiers insatiable covetousness ambition and lust For this cause he hath taken in his own hand the election of Bishops from them to whom it belonged For this cause he hath not permitted the causes of the Church to be debated where they rose as equity reason and peace would he should have done But he hath removed them thence to be heard at Rome what by reserving of causes to himself what by appellations what by exemptions And for the same cause he hath committed the feeding and guiding of the flock of Christ to brute and beastly creatures in giving the charge and commodities of the Church to whom he would by presentations preventions reservations translations provisions permutations and commendations How hath he wasted and seized upon the Church goods with his pensions and first fruits and appropriations so that he hath been cryed out upon