Prophet Esay saying Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a sure foundation which is a playne and manifest Prophecie of Christ and not of Peter as the Apostle Peter himselfe expoundeth it where by the way we may note the feareful outrage of these Romish Rabbies against the truth of God and the God of truth whilst to the end they may aduance their Popes dignity by Peter they wrest and peruert the Scriptures and apply the Prophecies belonging to the Sonne of God to his seruant Peter and so make Peter himselfe nay the holy Ghost a Lyar. It were not credible that such blasphemous thoughts and words should nestle in the heart and issue out of the mouth of any but that the Apostle Saint Paul hath fore-told vs that in the time of Antichrist because men would not receiue the loue of the truth that they might be saued therefore God would send them strong delusions that they should beleeue lyes c. But to the point If Christs person be the onely true foundation of the Church in whom all the building being coupled together groweth vnto an holy Temple in the Lord and that not the persons but the doctrine and faith of the Apostles are those secundary foundations which the Scripture speaketh of as hath beene proued out of the Fathers then the opposition is vndefeasible namely that there is but one person the foundation of our Church which is our Lord and Sauiour the Sonne of God Christ Iesus and yet that Peters person should be the foundation of the Church also together with Christ 45. Thirdly I answere that both in truth and also in proprietie of speech there can bee but one foundation of one building those stones that are layd next to the foundation are not properly a secundary foundation but the beginning of the building vpon the foundation and for that cause when Peter and the rest of the Apostles are called twelue foundations it cannot bee vnderstood that they were any wayes properly foundations of the Church either first or second but that our Sauiour who is the substance and subiect of their doctrine is the onely true and singular foundation of the Church and that there is none other besides him for if when it is said that we are built vpō the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles as must needes bee because the Prophets are coupled together with the Apostles which liued not in the Christian Church and therefore could not be personall foundations of it and Christ crucified is the substance of their doctrine then it must needes follow that the Apostles meaning is nothing else but that we are built vpon Christ whom the Prophets and the Apostles preached and beleeued in And thus S. Hilary vnderstood it and Saint Ambrose and Anselmus who giuing the foundation of the Church to Peter expoundeth it sometimes of his faith in Christ and sometimes of Christ himselfe in whom he beleeued And thus doe also Salmeron the Iesuite and Cardinall Caietane in their commentaries vpon that place and Peter Lumbard together with the glosse vpon the place interpret And so this distinction of a primary and secundary foundation hath no foundation in the word of God 46. The Gospell teacheth that no Apostle or Bishop or other Minister of the Gospell is superiour to another of the same ranke or hath greater power and authority then another in respect of their ministerie but that all Ministers in their seuerall degrees haue equall power of preaching the Gospell administring the Sacraments binding and loosing But the Bishop of Rome challengeth to himselfe a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and ouer the whole Church and braggeth that he hath by right a title to both the swords both spirituall and temporall and that both iurisdictions doe originally pertaine to him and from him are conueyed to others c. 47. Bellarmine heere first confesseth and secondly distinguisheth hee confesseth that the Bishop of Rome hath a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and the whole Church and denyeth that eyther those places here quoted or any other doe prooue the contrary 48. To which I answere first that whereas out of Luke 22. 26. and 1. Cor. 3. 4. he extracteth a disparity and an inequality I answere that no man denyeth it and therefore he fighteth with his owne shadow hee should prooue not a bare superiority which wee confesse but a superiority in the same degree as of one Bishop to another and that in power not in execution wherein standeth the point of opposition 49. Secondly whereas he saith that though the power of remitting and retayning finnes and binding and loosing was communicated to all the Apostles yet Peter was ordayned chiefe Pastor ouer them all because our Sauiour Christ sayd vnto him alone Feede my sheepe and To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen I answere that in this hee crosseth both himselfe the Fathers and the truth himselfe for elsewhere hee confesseth that the keyes both of Order and Iurisdiction were giuen to all the Apostles indifferently and therefore it must needes follow that Tibi dabo claues was not spoken singularly to Peter but generally to them all for if Christ gaue the keyes to them all as he confesseth then without doubt he promised them to them all or else his word and his deede should not accord together And againe hee acknowledgeth that all the Apostles had both power and commission to feede the sheepe of Christ when Mat. 28. he bade them all Goe teach and baptize and they all did put that commission in execution therefore it must needes follow that no singular power was giuen to Peter when as Christ said vnto him Feede my sheepe vnlesse we will say that the rest had not the same commission 50. The Fathers for Saint Cyprian saith plainely that all the Apostles were the same with Peter indued with equall fellowship both of honour and power and that a primary was giuen vnto Peter that the Church might appeare to be one Saint Hilary is of the same minde You O holy and blessed men saith he for the merit of your faith haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and obtained a right to binde and loose in Heauen and earth Saint Augustine saith that if when Christ said To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen he spake onely to Peter then the Church hath not the power of the keyes but if the Church hath it then Peter receiuing the keyes represented the Church And lastly Leo one of their owne Popes confesseth asmuch when hee affirmeth that the strength of this power of the keyes passed vnto all the Apostles and the constitution of this decree vnto all the Princes of the Church 51. Lastly the truth for when the Apostles stroue for superiority Christ who is truth it selfe and would not haue concealed so necessary a trueth if
And Salmeron a third Iesuite descending yet a stayre lower saith that the translation of the Scripture should be onely tillinguis of three tongues that is Hebrew Greeke and Latine in honour of the Trinitie Or as another saith Because thâ—se three tongues were onely sanctified vpon the Crosse Herevpon the Councill of Trent decreeth the olde vulgar Latine Translation of the Bible to be onely authenticall and alone to bee vsed in all publike Lectures Disputations Preachings and expositions And though Pope Pius Quartus forbade onely as Bellarmine saith such to read the Scripture as had not licence thereunto giuen them by their Priest or Confessor to wit such as could receiue no damage but profit by their reading yet Pope Clement the eighth as another Iesuite confesseth tooke away all faculty of giuing licence to any to read the Scripture or to retaine with them the common Bibles or any parts of the Old and New Testament in the Mother tongues so that as wofull experience hath taught it was in times past in this Land and is now in those places where the bloudie Inquisition is exercised a sufficient marke of an Heretike and cause of fire and faggot to bee found with a translated Bible in their houses or hands 10. This is their doctrine which how it ingendreth and nourisheth ignorance who seeth not seeing first it locks vp the fountayne of knowledge that few or none of the common sort can drinke of the waters thereof cleane contrary to that famous saying of learned Origene who compareth the Scripture to Iacobs Well where not onely Iacob and his Sonnes that is the Learned but also the Cattell and the Sheepe that is the rude and the ignorant doe drinke and refresh themselues but these men barre out the poore sheepe and driue them away from the waters of life to no other end as it may be thought but that they should pine away with thirst and liue and dye in blindnesse and ignorance For if all sound and true knowledge is to be found in holy Scripture and therein is the whole counsell and will of God reuealed vnto vs so farre foorth as it concerneth our saluation it being the Epistle of the great Iehouah to his poore Subiects to enforme them of his will and pleasure how should they possibly clime to this true and sauing knowledge who are debarred from the place and meanes where it is to found and had and not permitted to reade this Letter or heare it read vnto them contrary to that doctrine of Nazianzene who saith that all Christians ought to come to Church and there read themselues or if they be not able heare others read vnto them the word of God 11. If they reply and say that it is enough for them to know the Traditions of the Church I answere that if there were as certaine ground for their Traditions to prooue them the word of God as there is of the Scripture then this allegation might carry some shew of reason but the vncertainty nouelty mutability and absurdity of many of them doe plainely shew that it is no safe course to repose the strength of our saluation vpon them but rather to flye to that foundation which is immooueable If they say that the people must be content for their knowledge to depend vpon their Priests and to draw it from their lippes and so by that meanes may attayne a sufficient measure of instruction I answere that the Priests are for the most part as ignorant as the people as shall be shewed afterward and if any be furnished with gifts yet they seldome teach the people and when they doe they preach in stead of Gods word their owne inuentions idle tales and meere tales and fables witnesse Cornelius Agrippa and Dante their Poet two no great enemies but fast friends to Popish Religion Now if a man should bee constrained to sup vp whatsoeuer euery sottish Priest or idle Fryer or craftie Iesuite doth belch foorth without examining doubtlesse hee should sucke downe much poyson in stead of wholsome iuyce If they say that there is multiplicity of good Bookes written to this end to instruct the people in the grounds of Religion and to stirre them vp vnto godlines and deuotion I answere there is indeede a great number of such Bookes which are so farre from gendring sound knowledge that they are no better then baits of Antichrist seruing to allure men vnder shew of deuotion vnto Idolatry and Apostacie from God for if they were sound and true why should Gods Booke which without all question is most sound bee prohibited and they admitted Why is it not lawfull to examine them by that rule and why should all Bookes else which any thing make against their Religion be suppressed and by great penalties forbidden Surely this sheweth that all their Bookes of deuotion are but rotten stuffe and meere hypocriticall deuices to deceiue the simple 12. Lastly if they say that all our translations are false and erronious and therefore that our Bibles are not the word of God I answere that indeede it is impossible to haue a Translation so exact perfect that no fault nor imperfection shuld be found therin neuertheles the chief faults in our translations are for the most part in respect of proprietie of words and phrases which are nothing repugnant to holy doctrine or good life and not in any materiall or substantiall poynt of faith and those also are not frequent but heere and there dispersed which can no waies hinder the profite to be gathered by the rest of the Scripture and if for some corruption in translations the Bible should not bee read then none but the originall Hebrew and Greeke should bee in vse for all translations are imperfect yea their so much extolled vulgar authorized by the Councill of Trent wherein the Diuines of Louane obserued many errors and Isidorus Clarius a Spanish Monke professed that hee found eight thousand fau'ts though for his plaine dealing hee was plagued by the Inquisitors and after that it was decreed authenticall by the Councill a thing worth the noting yet it was corrected and castigated by the authority and commaundement of sixe Popes successiuely Nay the Hebrew and Greeke copies themselues should not bee permitted for euen they if wee will beleeue the Romanists are full of corruptions but as Bellarmine saith of the corruptions in the Hebrew text so wee may truely of the imperfections in our translations Non sunt tanti momenti vt inijs quâ— ad fidem bonos more 's pertinent sacrae Scripturae integritas desideretur that is they are not of such moment that they can hinder the integrity of the Scripture in those things which pertaine to faith good manners 13. Moreouer besides all this it is no maruell if they contend for their vulgar Latine Bible that it should be onely authenticall seeing many Romish errors are thereby maintained which in the truth of yeâ—â—â— originall
Protestants condemne the worship of Images taught and practised in the Church of Rome but they are not alone therein but haue many Romanists for their abetters and companions Cassander concludeth out of Saint Augustine that there were no Images in all the Churches of his Diocesse And Polydore Virgil writeth that by the testimonie of Ierome it appeareth how in a manner all the ancient Fathers condemned the worship of Images for feare of Idolatrie thus speaketh he in his vncorrupted editions but in his later editions his tongue is tyed by the Belgicke Index others as Holcot Durand Alphonsus flatly affirme that no worship at all is due to an Image neither is it lawfull to worship it diuers Councels also decreed the same as the ancient Councell of Eliberis propounded this onely remedie against Idolatrie that no Images should bee painted in Churches but this Councell was not Romish for Poperie was then scarce in the Embrio therefore of later time a mere Romish Councell to wit that of Franckford consisting of many Romish Bishops and the Popes owne Legates condemned all worship of Images and a later yet to wit the Councell of Mentz held in the yeere 1549. decreed that the Image it selfe was not to bee worshipped but that by the Image of Christ men should bee stirred vp to adore Christ which is contrarie to the new professed doctrine of the Church of Rome 54. Many Romanists as well as Protestants reiect the intercession and inuocation of Saints as an Article not found eyther in the olde or new Testament In the olde Testament sayth Salmeron The Patriarchs vsed not to be inuocated both because they were not in perfect estate of blessednesse and also because there had beene then a danger of Idolatrie to offer that honour vnto them And for the new Testament the same Iesuite confesseth that this article is not expressed because the Iewes would haue thought it an hard matter to inuocate Saints departed and the Gentiles would haue taken occasion to haue thought that the worship of new Gods had beene prescribed vnto them Of the same opinion was Ecchius who peremptorily affirmeth that the inuocation of Saints departed is not commanded in the holy Scripture And Faber Stapulensis thus writeth I would to God that the forme of beleeuing might bee fetcht from the Primitiue Church which consecrated so many Martyrs to Christ and had no scope but Christ nor imployed any worship to any saue to the one Trinity alone 55. That a Christian may bee certaine of his owne standing in present grace and of his future saluation is the doctrine of Protestants denyed by the Church of Rome and yet approued by many of her deare children as for example Euery one that beleeueth seeth that he doth beleeue sayth Dominicus Bannes A Christian man by the infallible certaintie of faith which cannot bee deceiued certainly knoweth himselfe to haue a supernaturall faith sayth Medina Some spirituall men may be so certaine that they are in grace that this their assurance shall be free from all feare and staggering sayth Vega reported by Gregory de Valentia And touching assurance of eternall life the same Medina sayth that hee would haue euery beleeuer certainly to hope that he shall obtaine eternall life And of the same opinion are al the rest of them saue that they will haue this certainty to be of hope and not of faith and so the difference is in words and not in the thing for they make it to be without doubting or wauering firme and assured aswell as we 56. That concupiscence is a finne in the regenerate is affirmed by Protestants contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Church of Rome yet many Romanists themselues shake hands with the Protestants in this point as Ribera a Iesuite who writing vpon the twelfth of the Hebrewes sayth that by sinne hanging fast vpon is meant the concupiscence of the flesh against the holy Spirit which the Apostle vseth often to call by the name of sinne and Tanner another Iesuite acknowledgeing that concupiscence in the regenerate is called sinne by the Scripture sayth that it is a great wickednesse to traduce as blasphemous the manner of speech true in it selfe and imitating the Scriptures yea and Stapleton calleth it a certaine iniquitie and obliquity not onely against the dominion of the mind but also against the Law of God Now Bellarmine telleth vs that whatsoeuer is contrarie to the Law of God is mortall sinne Cassander playeth the Protestant in direct termes in this point for he sayth that if we respect sinne as an iniquitie or disease which must be resisted by the spirit lest it burst forth into vnlawfull acts concupiscence is not vnfitly called sinne but if we respect it as an offence to God and guiltinesse to which punishment and damnation is answering it is not thus sinne in the regenerate 57. Touching marriage of Priests which the Church of Rome condemneth as execrable filthie and abominable we allow as holy and lawfull we haue their owne Doctours on our side and against their owne mother Gratian sayth that marriage of Priests is not prohibited eyther by legall or Euangelicall or yet Apostolicall authoritie but by Ecclesiasticall onely Espenseus sayth that for many hundred yeeres after the Apostles time by reason of the want of others Priests were married Caietane affirmeth that if wee stand onely to the tradition of Christ and his Apostles it cannot appeare by any authoritie or reason that holy order can be any hinderance to marriage eyther as it is an order or as it is holy Pius the second one of their owne Popes affirmeth that it is better for a Priest to marry then to burne though hee haue vowed the contrary and that there be many reasons to forbid Priests marriage but more to allow it Panormitane Cassander Erasmus doe all agree that in regard of the monstrous and filthy effects that follow a vowed single life it were better both for Gods glory and the auoyding of scandall in the Church that libertie of marrying were granted to all men And Espenseus and Agrippa doe grieue and blush to behold rather Concubines and Stewes to bee permitted to their Clergy then lawfull wiues 58. The Popes Primacie or rather Supremacie in all affaires and ouer all persons challenging the iurisdiction of both swords and authoritie of supreme Iudicatures in cases of controuersie and interpretation of Scripture with an infallibilitie of Iudgement is the verie foundation of Poperie yet the same is razed not onely by Protestants but by many of their owne ranke that are both by name and profession Papists Concerning his temporall Iurisdiction so stiffely maintained by Bellarmine and the Iesuits our Wisbich Priests affirme that this power was neuer giuen vnto Peter Espensâ—us condemneth it in direct tearmes Tolosanus confesseth that for two hundred yeeres after Christ it was neuer read that Christians attempted any thing
enforcement to take vengeance on those parts which had done her the mischiefe and to eate them also with many other filthy circumstances which I shame to speake of but in conclusion to make vp the matter with a miracle two midwiues were brought from heauen to Mistresse Nunne by the ghost of Henry Murdach the Archbishop of Yorke which discharged her of her childe without paine and carryed it forth with them to heauen with lie and all so that it was neuer after seene Is not this penance thinke you able to terrifie any one from committing the like sinne or rather might not this Nunne say as another of her sexe and profession said after she had had three Bastards which proued great Clarkes and learned men in the Church that it was a happy scape which brought forth three such worthy bastards so this might call her Sonne an happy Sonne which was honoured with so great a miracle But let the Popes lawes bee broken or his triple Crowne touched and he shall smoake for it that dares do this 25. Their fourth doctrine tending apparently and by necessary consequence to loosnesse is their doctrine of vowed chastity whereby they enioyne single life and prohibite matrimony to certaine kinds of men and women to wit such as enter into holy orders teaching and maintaining that for such it is better to go to harlots then to marry and that to go to a harlot now and then is but a sinne of infirmitie as Pighius calleth it but to marry is no better then a resolued deliberate or continuall incest vtterly without all shame What an occasion or rather a cause this point of Romish doctrine hath beene of horrible silthinesse and wickednesse of life wofull experience in all places where the Romish Religion beareth sway manifestly declareth For to omit that this doctrine is but an vpstart doctrine in respect of true antiquity brought in first by Pope Seritius three hundred and eighty yeares after Christ who was the first that made any restraint of Priests marriages as it is confessed by Polidore Virgill the decree on the Canon law and Clictoueus and yet tooke not effect vntill the time of Gregory the seuenth called Hidlebrand in the yeare one thousand seuentie and foure as also to omit that this doctrine is both contrary to the precepts of holy Scripture and practice of holy men both vnder the law and vnder the Gospell for vnder the lawe both Priests and Prophets were married and vnder the Gospell both Apostles and Disciples had their wiues and after them Bishops and Prestbyters and the doctrine of the Scripture is Marriage is honourable among all men and again If they cannot abstaine let them marrie for it is better to marrie then to burne Yea and Saint Paul giueth order concerning the wiues and children of Bishops which had beene needlesse if they might haue none And lastly to omit that this prohibiting of marriage is called by Saint Paul one of the doctrines of deuils euery one of which might be a sufficiēt argument not only to euince the vnsoundnesse of this doctrine but also to demonstrate how likely itmust needs be to occasionate sinne comming not from God and therfore not likely to haue his blessing to follow it but from the deuill and therfore most likely to serue for the aduancement of his kingdome Notwithstanding to omit all these and to refer them to a fitter place let vs weigh this matter in the ballance of reason and wee shall easily find that a great breach is hereby made for mens vnruely and vntoward affections to burst forth into horrible and damnable sinnes 26. For first the gift of Continency is no common but a rare and singular gift which God bestoweth not vpon all but vpon some few this proposition is prooued by that aphorisme of our Sauiour All men cannot receaue this thing saue they to whom it is giuen and in the next verse He that is able to receaue it let him receaue it Whereby he insinuateth that who so euer taketh vpon him the vowe of chastity not being able to performe the same sinneth in so doing It is proued also by Saint Paul in this conclusion Euery man hath his proper gift of God one this way another that way for speaking of the gift of continencie he wisheth that all men were as he himselfe but seeing they are not so therefore he leaueth it free to marrie for such as haue not that gift But the Romish Clergy together with the infinite orders of religious Votaries are not few but many and those chosen promiscuously without any respect had whether they be endowed with that gift or no therefore being vnable to containe and forbidden to vse the lawfull remedy ordained by God they must of necessity fall into lawlesse and vnordinate lusts besides seeing that euery man that will be hee neuer so defamed for incontinency and so by experience knowne to be voyde of that same excellent gift may become a Votary and on the contrary our Sauiour saith euery man cannot receaue this what hope can there be of chastity among these men Is the gift of chastitie indeed so common that euery man may haue it that will Is it so ordinary that it is communicated to thousands of Priests Monkes Friars and Nunnes yea to innumerable of that order in all places why then what meant Cassander a learned diuine of their owne to say that the world was come to that passe that a man could scarce find one of an hundred that kept himselfe free from incontinency And Erasmus that the number of Monkes and Priests that liued in whoredome and incest was innumerable weigh the reason now in his iust termes they that cannot containe must needs burst forth either into secret or open vncleannesse But of infinite Romish votaries few or none haue that gift to containe therefore the rest must necessarily fall into either secret or open vncleannesse let any man iudge now whether this doctrine doth not directly tend vnto loosenesse 27. If any alleadge that this gift of continency may bee obtained by fasting and prayer I answere two things First If it may be thus obtained it is a signe that they vse but little the same holy exercises seeing fewe among them doe attaine vnto it Secondly I answere that continency is in the number of those gifts which may be denyed to a man salua salute without danger of his saluation because it is not necessarie to saluation nor common to all Gods children but peculiar to some Now the promise of our Sauiour aske and yee shall haue is meant of things necessary to saluation and not of particular and speciall gifts Thus Paul prayed thrice that the pricke in the flesh the messenger of Sathan might be remoued from him and some say this was concupiscence yet he was not heard in that which he prayed for because hee might be saued without it as it appeared in the answer giuen vnto
haue with this secret meaning to tell it thee or at this time or some such like things And if an husband aske his wife whether shee be an adulteresse she may answere no though she be with this mentall reseruation to reueale it to him and if a man be constrained to sweare that he will take a woman to his wife he may doe it safely although he neuer meane it with this close clause in his mind if she shall after please him Thus farre Tollet 6. Now of late dayes one hath divulged a whole Treatise in defence of this monstrous doctrine to the which Blackwell the Arch-priest hath giuē this solemne approbatiō that it is a very godly learned Catholique Tractate worthy to be published in print to the comfort of the afflicted instructiō of the godly The author of this Tractate thus concludeth If a Catholike or any other person shal be demanded vpon his oath before a Magistrate whether a Priest be in such a place he may though hee know the contrary securely in conscience answere No without periury with a secret meaning reserued in his mind namely that he is not there so as a man is bound to reueale him Againe if one shall aske me whether such a stranger lyeth in my house I may answere he lyeth not in my house albeit he do meaning Non mentitur this last is verball equiuocation the former is mentall reseruation which are the two approued kindes of their equiuocating art 7. If this filthy strumpet be not the mother of two foule daughters Lying and Periury lying if by a bare asseueration periury if ioyned with an othe let all that haue but common sense and reason iudge and let the Enquest that shall enquire into this matter be first heathen Philosophers secondly the Popish writers themselues thirdly the Fathers and Doctours of the Church and fourthly which is of greater moment then all the rest the holy Scripture of God diuinely inspired and cannot deceiue nor be deceiued Let vs heare the Philosophers verdict A Lye saith Tully is a false enunciation of words with an intent to deceaue and againe he defines dolus malus that is deceit to be when one thing is pretended another acted this is a false action So in like manner a false diction which is a lye must needs bee when one thing is spoken by the mouth another vnderstood in the heart therefore the ordinary Grammaticall notation of this word mentiri to lye is quasi contra mentemire as it were to goe against the minde and Aristotle sayth that speech is ordained for this cause to signifie and expresse the secret conceptions of the mind therfore when the mouth and the mind are at variance then the law of nature is peruerted and in stead of a naturall and true-borne childe Truth a bastard to wit a lye is produced But they which equiuocate pretend one thing and intend another they speake one thing meane another their heart and their tongue like vntuned strings are at iarre with themselues and therefore by no meanes can they be excused from open and notorious lying 8. Now if an oath bee mixed then a fouler monster is brought forth euen Periury for what is periurie but according to their own diuinity a lye made in an oath and is not equiuocating when the equiuocator is sworne to speake the truth periury Let Tully determine this doubt if it bee a doubt Not to sweare a falshood is to bee forsworne but not to performe or make good that which thou hast sworne according to thine owne meaning as customably it is conceiued by thy words is periury all the world cannot more directly cut the throat of all equiuocation then this doth 9. But I leaue the Philosophers and come to their owne Schoolemen To lye saith Lumbard is when a man speaketh any thing contrary to that which he thinketh in his mind It is a lye saith Aquinas when a man will signifie another thing then that which he thinketh in his mind Againe Lumbard Whosocuer vseth craft or subtiltie in an oath defileth his conscience with a double guilt for he both taketh the name of God in vaine and also deceiueth his neighbour And Aquinas their great Doctor condemneth in expresse words this equiuocating tricke of theirs If a Iudge saith he shall require any thing which he cannot by order of law the party accused what may he equiuocate No. he is not bound to answere in deed but either by appeale or some other meanes may deliuer himselfe but in no case may be tell a lye or vse falshood or any kind of craft or deceit This was then good diuinity but now the Iesuites our pretended resiners of Popery haue coyned a new kind of diuinity but like counterset slips it will not abide the tryall Heare what Scotus saith another Schooleman Dicere non feci c. To say I did not that which I know I haue done although I speake it with this reseruation that I may signifie it to you is not equiuocation but a plaine lye To conclude with Maldonate Quisquis fingendo c. Whosoeuer saith he by saining doth goe about to deceiue another although he intend some other thing in his mind without doubt lyeth for otherwise there would be no lye which might not by this meanes be defended 10. Thus we haue the verdict of diuers of their own Writers touching this monstrous doctrine Let vs heare now what the Fathers thinke of it and let Saint Hierome speake first None is a lyer saith he but he that thinks otherwise then he speaketh Therfore the equiuocator is a lyar for he thinketh otherwise then he speaketh as when he affirmeth I am no Priest when he is one he thinketh hee is that which he saith he is not Is Saint Augustine of a contrary minde no hee agreeth with Hierome in this though they iarred in some other things He that speaketh saith he falsly against his conscience doth properly lye but so doth our equiuocator And for Periury This saith Augustine is the very forme of Periurie to thinke that to be false which thou dost sweare Thus doth the equiuocatour for when hee sweareth hee knoweth not a man and yet knoweth him doth hee not manifestly thinke that to be false which he sweareth his mentall reseruation cannot saue him from the pillory seeing as Isidore saith God doth valew an oath not by the sense of the speaker but according to the sense of him to whom the oath was made Thus by the verdict of these three Fathers their doctrine of equiuocation is guilty both of lying and periury 11. And that I may leaue them without a starting hole let them heare what the Iury of Life and Death saith I meane the holy Prophets and Apostles yea what GOD the Iudge himselfe saith Thou shalt not saith he Beare false witnesse against thy Neighbour No nor of thy neighbour therfore much lesse
against thy selfe or of thy selfe but the equiuocatour doth both first against his Neighbonr when by a false suggestion he perswadeth him to beleeue an vntruth and of his neighbour when hee reporteth that of him which is vntrue and secondly of and against himselfe by confessing himselfe to be that which he is not or denying himselfe to be that which hee is Equiuocation then is a plaine breach of this Commandement and therefore a lye at the least The Prophet Ieremy interpreting this precept as the manner of the Prophets was giues it affirmatiuely thus Thou shalt sweare in truth c. And the Prophet Dauid saith that the righteous man speakes in truth Now what is it to sweare or speake in truth Azorius the Iesuite will tell vs that It is either for the confirmation of a truth or in a probable opinion of that to be true which we sweare or speake But the equiuocatours speach or oath is neither for the truth nor from the truth and therefore a lye if not grosse periury Againe the Prophet Dauid sets downe this as one note of a righteous man that he speakes the truth from his heart but the Equiuocatour either speaketh not the truth at all or at least speaketh not from the heart whereby he is euidently conuinced to be none of those that shall dwell in Gods Tabernacle or asend into his holy Mountaine Lastly when as Saint Paul was taxed by some false brethren to be carnally minded because promising to come to Corinthus he came not doth he excuse himselfe by equiuocation saying that he promised one thing and minded another no but he protesteth that he was minded as hee spake and that his word was not yea and nay but simply yea which proueth first that all our speach must be simple and plaine without equiuocation and secondly that such as abuse their speach in such sort are fleshly minded men full of lightnesse and vanity And thus we haue a full verdict of Philosophers Popish diuines Fathers and Scriptures and therefore why may not sentence bee pronounced and the equiuocator adiudged guilty both of lying and periury two sinnes which the law of God of Nature and Men haue alway condemned 12. Againe what more contrary to the lawe of God and man then adultery and fornication But the religion of the Church of Rome doth directly maintaine and allow both these by tolerating Stewes places of common whoredome open and knowne Strumpets prostituted to filthinesse and that not onely in all other places of the Popes Dominion but euen in Rome vnder his Holinesses owne nose and by his authentical approbation neither can this be imputed vnto them as a corruption in manners onely and not as an errour in doctrine for they not onely vphold these places and persons of infamy by their practice and winke at them by neglect of due execution of iustice but they are growne to that impudency that they allow maintaine and approue them by their doctrine as things necessary and commodious in a Common wealth and albeit they condemne them generally as sinnes yet they approue them againe as necessary and profitable as if there were any necessary profit or profitable necessity of sinnes which Saint Paul calleth the vnfruitfull workes of darknesse Ephes 5. 11. And thus with their owne mouthes they condemne themselues in that which they allow being Iudges of themselues and proclaimers of their owne shame 13. Their doctrine is this that a lesser euill is to bee permitted to the end that a greater may be auoyded and therefore brothel houses to be suffered lest all places should bee filled with filthy lusts and this their position they defend first by the testimonie of Saint Augustine in his Booke De Ordine secondly by deprauing and corrupting that place of Scripture where it is forbidden that there should bee any harlot in Israel thirdly by diuers reasons to wit if harlots were suffered to be free and at liberty without these Stewes they would sinne more licenciously and that by their first restraint to that one place they may be made ashamed and so at length conuerted and that knowne harlots are to be tolerated lest violence should be offered vnto honest Matrons and lastly they are not ashamed to reckon whoredome and fornication amongst those things which of their owne nature are not euill because the Apostles place it among things of that nature to wit bloud things strangled and things dedicated vnto Idols These bee their goodly reasons whereby they maintaine Stewes but no maruaile if they maintaine them seeing their holy Father the Pope is in some sort maintained by them The Romish harlots pay saith Agrippa vnto the Pope euery wecke a Iuly which is a certaine kind of Coyne for their liberty they prophane Gods word by a filthy Comment for take away say they harlots out of the Common-wealth and all places will abound with whoredomes whereas neuerthelesse the Common-wealths of Israel endured long without that stain where notwithstanding an harlot was not permitted It is recorded also that the harlots in Rome pay vnto the Pope a yearely pension which amounteth sometimes to thirtie thousand sometimes to fortie thousand Ducats Pope Paulus the third is said to haue had in his Tables the names of 45000. Curtezans which payd a monethly tribute vnto him And therefore not without great cause if gaine may be a sufficient cause did Pope Sixtus build a noble or famous Stewes at Rome as Agrippa witnesseth for seeing such large reuenewes arise to the holy Fathers purse by the meanes of strumpets why should they not be there maintained where not as Saint Paul saith godlinesse is gaine but gaine is godlinesse and all Religion is turned into lucre as Mantuan a Fryer Carmelite of their owne saith Ven alia nobis Templa sacerdotes altaria sacra coronae Ignis thura preces coelum est venalâ—â— Deusque With vs are all things to be bought and sold Priests Altars Temples Sacraments new and old Crownes Incense Prayers yea Heauen and God for gold Adde to these Whoredome Sodomitry and Incest and all manner of sinne and then there is a full square number But I would faine know how these holy Fathers can free themselues from the name and imputation of notorious bawdes seeing he is by all law esteemed a bawde that maintaineth harlots exposing them to the lust of others for gaine then which what can be more vilde and base 14. As touching the testimony of Saint Augustine and their other reasons I answere in a word first that when Saint Augustine wrote that Booke he was but Catecheumenus a nouice in Religion not well instructed in Christs Schoole and besides that it doth crosse the doctrine both of himselfe in other Books of more mature iudgement and also of the holy Scripture for he himselfe affirmeth elsewhere that the good which commeth of euil as a recompence must not be admitted and the Scripture condemneth to hell all
that entring into their Temples they were sprinkled not that they might be defiled but that if they had any sinne they might be purged from it Thus it plainely appeareth that this was a Heathenish custome which how it can agree with the Church of Christ I know not sure I am that in the Primitiue Church there was no holy-water besides the water of Baptisme that can be proued by any good authority for the testimonies of Alexander the first Clement and Basil alledged by Bellarmine are all counterfeit as partly the matter in them contayned and partly the censure of Eusebius and Erasmus doe sufficiently proue and might here bee demonstrated if I thought it necessary neither doth it agree with the nature of those times to the which S. Iohn so lately before had left this doctrine that the onely purgation of sinne was the bloud of Christ and not holy-water consecrated by a Priest 9. In like manner their vse of Incense on their Altars to driue away deuils as they say doth sauour both of Iudaisme and of Paganisme That the Iewes vsed to burne Incense in sacrifice to God is no question for they had their Altar of burnt Incense appoynted by God himselfe for that purpose this Altar without question was a type of Christ our Mediatour and the incense of the prayers of the Saints which are then acceptable vnto God when they are offered vp in the name of Christ who is the Altar that sanctifieth all our sacrifices This is so euident not only out of holy Scripture but froÌ„ the full consent of all Writers old new that it is needles to stand to prooue it And therefore offering of Incense being a shadow of things to come why should it still remaine seeing the Sunne of righteousnesse is risen in our Horizon and hath â—ispelled all shadowes by the glorious beames of his presence As touching the Pagans Polydore Virgil confesseth that it was their custome to offer Incense to their Idols And Theodoret affirmeth that when Iulian distributed gold amongst his Souldiers hee commanded an Altar full of coales to bee set by him and Frankincense to bee layd on a Table to the end that euery one would recieue gold at his hand should first cast Frankincense vpon the Altar and this hee did to distinguish the Pagan from the Christian By which it is euident by the way that at that time this was not in vse in the Church This Iewish and Paganish custome then how commeth it to passe that it should now bee taken vp as a holy seruice of God Are not all Iewish Ceremonies at an end by the coÌ„ming of the body which is Christ And is it fit that Christians should learne to worship God froÌ„ the Gentiles which were worshippers of deuils These things are so dissonant to the nature of true Religion that they admit no iust reconciliation Sure it is that the Primitiue Church neuer knew the vse therof as appeareth both by that Example of Iulian before alleaged out of Theodoret and also by testimonies of Arnobius Eusebius and Augustine all which acknowledge that the Church in their time had no such custome We goâ—â—into Arabia saith Saint Augustine to fetch Frankincense God requireth of vs the sacrifice of praise As for the auncient Leiturgies and Dionisius that mention it in Gods seruice wee care not for them seeing all men either vehemently suspect them or vtterly reiect them as counterfeit 10. Againe the Iewes had their holy oyle wherewith their Kings Priests and Prophets were anoynted which was a type and figure of that spirituall vnction of grace wherewith Christ our head was anoynted aboue his fellowes and all his members in a due proportion The Church of Rome hath also reuiued this Ceremonie and that after a farre more superstitious manner for there was not halfe such a stirre at the making of the holy oyle of the Tabernacle as there is at the consecrating of their holy Chrisme it would euen prouoke the spleene to laughter and the gall to bitternesse to heare or behold the apish trickes that they vse at the making of their precious Chrisme such muttering such charming and enchanting such blowing and breathing such exorcising and coniuring the deuill by the mitted Bishop first and then twelue Priests in their order before they come to Aue Sanctum Chrisma All haile O holy Chrisme as is wonderfull What is this I pray you but a profest restoring of a Iewish Ceremony and a plaine declaration that their Priests are rather Iewish than Christian and that those graces of Gods spirit which were figured by their holy oyle are not to bee found in cheir Church seeing they retaine so superstitiously the type thereof If they say that Saint Iames mentioneth oyle to bee vsed at the visitation of the sicke whereby they recouered health I answer first that this was no such consecrated oyle as is in vse in the Church of Rome and secondly that it was applyed onely to the sicke that were in danger of death not to young Infants that are new come into the world at their baptisme thirdly that it was not an instrument of spirituall grace but of corporall health and lastly that it lasted onely during the time that miracles liued in the Church and dyed when they dyed so that Saint Iames his oyle maketh nothing for the maintenance of the Romish Chrisme and therefore I leaue it vnto them as a meere Iewish superstition 11. Lastly doth not the high Priest of Rome imitate the high Priest of the Iewes in his Pontificall garments are not their Fryers and Anchorites â—pâ—sh counterfeiters of the Leuiticall Nazarites doth not their Iubile both in name and nature represent the Iewish Iubile no man that knoweth the one and seeth the other but will confesse this to be true for Aaron wore a Crowne vpon his head to signifie the Kingly power of Christ the Bishop of Rome hath three Crownes to signifie forsooth his threefold power in Heauen Earth and Purgatory Or as Aretine iested one for the flesh another for the world and the third for the deuill and none for God Aaron had a plate on his Crowne wherin was engrauen Holinesse to the Lord. The Bishop of Rome vsed to weare a plate on his head wherein was written the word Mysterie as if he would professe himselfe to be the vpholder of that mystery of iniquitie spoken of by the Apostle Aaron had his Ephod and Robe the Bishop of Rome hath answerable therevnto his rich Pontificall attire which in many resemblances is like vnto the same yea the Romanists doe plainely Iudaize in bringing in againe into the Priestly order such variety of garments as the Pall the Miter the Crozier-staffe the Albe the Chimere the gray Amice the Sâ—oale with such like Insomuch that when their Bishops come forth to doe diuine seruice a man would thinke that he saw Aaron addressed with his attire to sacrifice at the Altar 12. As touching
when at any time they are conferred withall about their Religion presently not being able to answer their refuge is to referre vs ouer to their Priests of whose learning and iudgement they haue such a perswasion that though Scripture and reason be against them yet their opinions preuaile more with them then either of these So that hence it is most euident that as the Iewes are bound to beleeue all that their Cachamim teach and not to stand to examine what it is that they teach so the Romanists are bound by their Religion to entertaine into their Creed whatsoeuer is taught them by their ordinary Pastours without all enquirie and search into their doctrines whether they bee true or false And as this is one chiese cause of the Iewes obstinacie against Christian Religion so is it also of that miserable superstition which raigneth in the Church of Rome for if the people were but perswaded that their learned Doctours might erre and deceiue they would certainely suspect their doctrines and try them by the touchstone of the holy Scriptures and so at length might be reclaimed from their errours thus they march together in this point also 20. Againe the Romanists are like vnto the Iewes in their doctrine and practice of praying for the dead for they hold and teach that prayer sacrifice is to be offered for the dead grounding their opinion partly vpon the example of Iudas Maccabeus who as they affirme procured sacrifice to bee offered by the Priests for the dead that had trespassed by taking to themselues the idolatrous iewels of the Iamnites and partly vpon the Thalmudical traditions of diuers of their ancient Rabbines but they haue no ground nor warrant for the same in the word of God for as concerning the bookes of the Maccabees they themselues acknowledge that they are not Canonicall Scripture and for the Scripture we finde no such precept or example in the whole volume of the olde and new Testament neither is it likely that God would haue omitted in the law that kinde of sacrifice for the soules of men where he prescribeth sinne-offerings for bodily pollutions and euery light trespasse if he had thought it necessarie That this is the opinion and practice of the Iewes their practice at this day beareth witnesse for they vse to say ouer the dead bodies a certaine prayer called Kaddish by the vertue whereof as they thinke they are deliuered out of Purgatory especially if it bee said by the sonne for his father and if hee haue no sonne by the whole Congregation on their Sabboth dayes And that this also is the doctrine and vsage of the Church of Rome besides their Bookes their Masses for the quicke and the dead their Diriges and Trentals doe sufficiently testifie And that they fetch this custome from the Iewes may appeare by two reasons first because one mayne argument of theirs which they call a demonstration to proue the lawfulnesse hereof is deriued from the example of the Iewes as we may see both in Galatinus Coccius and our late English Apologists And secondly because as it is confessed by their owne Bredenbachius it is not found in all the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists in the new Testament and we may adde hereunto neither in the olde vnlesse by distorted and misalledged texts which are not worth the answering except onely that fore-named passage of the Maccabees which notwithstanding is corrupted both by the Translatour and also the Relatour Iason Cyreneus as is vnanswerably proued by our famous Country-man Doctour Reynolds the word Dead being cogged into the Text by some cunning Iuggler which is not in the Originall wherein lyeth the pith of the argument And therefore it must needes follow that the Romanists doe merely Iudaize herein And for the Fathers which they alledge for the proofe of this article let their owne Cassander giue satisfaction who affirmeth that the ancient Church vsed prayers for the dead either as thankfull congratulations for their present ioyes or esse as restimonies of their hope and desire of their future resurrection and consummate blessednes both in their bodies and soules and this hee proueth out of Cyprian Augustine Epiphanius Chrysostome and ancient Leiturgies 21. Againe they Iudaize in their doctrines of Limbus Patrum and Purgatorie for Purgatorie it hath beene alreadie touched in the former section and for Limbus Patrum it is coâ—sessed by our aduersaries themselues that it is the tenent of the Iewish Rabbines warranted as they say onely by a Text in Ecclefiasticus which being both corrupted in the translation as our worthy Champion Doctour Whitaker hath proued and being also no part of Canonicall Scripture doth plainely shew that it is a mere Rabbinish conceit hatched in their brainsick Thalmud and not bred in holy writ Yet our Romanists lay fast hold on the same opinion without any other certaine ground to build it vpon For as touching the places of Scripture collected by them to proue this assertion they are either so impertinent or distorted that the meanest iudgement may easily discry their weaknesse for either they are deriued from a word of an ambiguous signification as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the speach of Iacob Gen. 37. 35. which signifieth sometimes the graue and sometimes hell by the confession of their great Bellarmine or from a Parable as that place in Luke 16. concerning Abrahams bosome confessed by Maldonate to be parabolicall because bodies are not yet tormented in hell but here is mention of a finger and a tongue or from an allegorie as is that place of Zacharie 9. 11. where is mention made of loosing Prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water which both Salmeron and Bellarmine acknowledge to make more for Purgatory then for Limbus but in truth for neither it signifying literally nothing else but the deliuerance of the Israelites out of the Babylonish captiuity and tipically the redemption of the Elect from the bondage of Sathan and hell which they are liable vnto or lastly are merely impertinent as those places Heb. 11. 39. 4. 1. Reg. 28. 1. Pet. 3. 19 the first whereof intendeth the consummate and perfect blessednesse of body and soule which the Fathers had not attayned vnto The second meaneth not the true Samuel but the deuill in his shape and likenesse and the third is to bee referred not to Christs dâ—scension into hell but to the operation of his Diuinitie which he exercised from the beginning of the world preaching by the mouthes of iust men as both S. Augustine and Aquinas expound the place How can any sound conclusion now be drawne from Texts that are either equiuocall or allegoricall or parabolicall or impertinent and all by their owne confessions Therefore it must needes follow that seeing this doctrine hath no sure foundation in Gods word but is founded vpon the Iewes prophane Thalmud that it is no better then a mere Rabbinish
conceit 22. Againe they ioyne hands with the Iewes in their doctrines of Free-will inuocation of Angels and Saints and merite of good workes all which the moderne Rabbines hold as articles of their Creed deriuing them from their predecessours the Pharises that went before them Petrus Galatinus that Rabbinish Romanist reckoneth vp a number of them that were all Patrons of Free-will and not as it is set free by grace for so we hold that a man hath free-will to good but euen by nature before grace as the Romanists hold And so also of Inuocation of Saints some of them affirming that the pure soules which heare them that pray vnto them haue a place in heauen Others that the Iewes vsed to interpose in their prayers betwixt them and God Isaac as an intercessour Others that prayers are to be made to Angels to open the gates of Paradise and to appease Gods wrath And lastly the Romanists themselues affirme that when our Sauiour cryed out on the Crosse Eli Eli c. the Iewes would neuer haue supposed that he had called for Elias had it not been an vsuall practice amongst them to call vpon the Saints departed Lastly touching the merite of worke the Iewes teach that God once euery yere to wit in the moneth of September at what time he created the world calleth all mens liues to an account for the yeare past and openeth three Bookes one wherein are written the names of notorious sinners and Atheists called The Booke of Death another in which are enrolled the names of iust and holy men called The Booke of Life and a third for such as are in a meane betwixt both neither exceeding bad nor exceeding good but of a mixt disposition and these haue respite giuen them till the day of reconciliation to repent in which is the tenth day of the same month at which time if their good doth exceed their euill then it goeth well with them but if their euill exceed their good then they are registred presently in the Booke of Death And lest GOD should be deceiued they say that he holdes in his hand a ballance into one skale whereof he puts their good workes and into the other their euill deeds that he may measure out his rewards according to the weight of the one or the other How ridiculous a fable is this Much like vnto the Poeticall fiction of Minâ—s Aeaâ—us and Radamanthus the three Iudges of hell whome the Poets faine to sit there weighing the soules of men and giuing sentence vpon them according to their poyse and weight By this it appeareth that the foolish Rabbines maintained free-will inuocated Saints and Angels and esteemed their workes meritorious All which are the very opinions of the Church of Rome beleeued and practised of all the professours of that Religion which is so much the more absurd because they themselues confesse in speciall concerning the doctrine of Inuocation of Saints that it was not taught vnto the people of the olde Testament for feare of Idolatry nor at the first preaching of the Gospell for feare it should seeme vnto them a hard and harsh doctrine and in generall that it is madnesse to relye our faith vpon the Iewish Thalmud seeing the Thalmudicall Writers are full of impieties and blasphemies and therefore haue not onely been prohibited to be read but also condemned to the fire by diuers of their owne Popes all which notwithstanding our Romish Rabbies fetch a demonstration for the maintenance of these doctrines from the example and practice of the Iewes 23. In like manner the Iewes had those that professed a monasticall and single life which were called Essaeans from the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Saints or holy men as some suppose because â—orsooth they tooke vpon them to be more holy then others and therefore would not offer sacrifice with the people because they thought them not so holy as themselues And these as Iosephus and Philo testifie professed continency from marriage community in goods and abstinence from meats not by any warrant out of Gods word but onely by the authority of their vnwritten traditions And doe not the Romanists imitate them in the same kind What are their Monkish Votaries but Apes of the Iewish Essaeans And what is their Monasticall profession but a pretence of a state of rare holinesse and perfection They vow chastitie in single life and abhorre marriage as a state of pollution they abstaine from meates and professe voluntary pouerty with a community of goods and all this they do that they may seeme more holy then others and merite heauen by their holinesse hauing withall answerable vnto them nothing but tradition for their warrantize without either sound precept or true example out of holy Scripture For grant that their Euangelicall Councils are such as they would haue them to be and that vowes in Christianity are lawfull yet it is certaine that the authority of Councils and the lawfulnesse of vowes doe neither warrant nor allow their superstitious and idle monkery nor the blasphemous opinion of merite which they ascribe vnto such voluntary deuotions nor yet the necessity of irreuocation though by the frailty of mans nature there be an impossibility of performance And so both in substance and circumstance they want the authority of gods word to vphold them Let then the Iewish Essaeans and the Romish Monks walke together as in one path of superstition so vnder one cloake of hypocrisie for that which Sigonius affirmeth of the one that they were by Nation Iewes and by manners hypocrites we may truely confirme of the other that they are Christians by profession but hypocrites by conuersation And as those Essaeans did farre degenerate from the ancient Nazarites and Rechabites whome they pretended for their patterns so these doe as farre and more from those ancient Monkes that liued in former ages of the Church as is vnanswerably demonstrated by many of the learned Champions of our Church especially Doctour Mortâ—n and Doctour White to whome I referre the Reader for fuller resolution in this poynt 24. The Iewish Rabbines also taught that the damned soules in hell and Purgatory had some refreshing and rest vpon euery Sabboth day assoone as a certaine prayer was chanted out by them with sweet melodie and therefore that on euery Friday at night there is a great shout in hell for ioy of the ensuing Sabboth and on their Sabboth day at night a dolefull crye for griefe of their returne to their paines Thus the Rabbines doted And do not our Romish Rabbines dote in like manner They also teach that the damned soules haue some refreshment and ease vpon the Sabboth day as in the legend of S. Brandon it is written how that holy Abbotfound Iudas the Traytour sitting vpon a stone in a certaine Island and demanding of him what he was and why heesate in that place he answered that vpon euery Saturday at noone
God that hee cannot doe all these things by himselfe without them but rather of his omnipotencie in that hee was not onely able to doe these things himselfe but also to giue power to those creatures to doe them so it is an argument of greater power in Christs merits to giue strength to our workes to merit heauen then if hee did it for vs without our workes I but by Bellarmines leaue that I may speake with all humble reuerence to the diuine Maiestie the power of God had beene more manifest and his omnipotencie more conspicuous I doe not say had beene greater if he should doe these things immediatly by himselfe then it is by the glasse of the creatures As when the Lord came downe in person vpon mount Sinai and gaue the children of Israel the law from his owne mouth his glory was more famous and fearefull then when hee sent it them after by the hand of Moses though written with his owne finger as the other was spoken with his owne mouth And therefore it is said Exod. 20. that the people were so astonished at Gods voyce that they desired that hee would speake no more vnto them in his owne person but by his seruant Moses Adde herevnto that God in his wisedome ordayned those creatures to that end and purpose and therefore we must not dispute as Bellarmine doth whether it should haue beene a greater token of his omnipotencie if hee had or if hee had not created them but humbly submit our selues to his wisedome knowing that his thoughts are not like ours nor his counsels like ours but as the heauens are higher then the earth so are his wayes higher than ours and his thought aboue our thoughts but for the merits of Christ he hath reuealed in his word that in them onely wee are to finde saluation and therefore wee must beleeue that he is most glorified by that doctrine which teacheth vs to rely onely vpon them and as for the power in them to cause vs to merit it is no where to be found in Scripture and therefore not to be thought to be for the aduancement of his glory besides to say that Christs honour is encreased by mans merit is plaine blasphemie for who hath giuen any thing to God Rom. 11. 25. He standeth not in neede of our good decdes Psal 16. 2. Indeede we doe glorifie God by our good workes but that is not by encreasing but by publishing and proclaiming of his glory but the Romanists say that the glory of Christs merits is augmented by our merits which must needes be a most blasphemous speech In a word seeing we doe not finde in Scripture that Christ died to giue merit to our workes but to purchase pardon to our sinnes and obtaine life for vs wee must bee content to thinke that this serueth most for his glorie and that the contrarie is derogatory thereunto 35. Lastly where did we euer read that wee must be like vnto Christ in meriting we read that wee must bee holy as he is holy and humble and meeke as hee was humble and meeke and patient as he was patient to wit in quality not in quantity in imitation not in perfection but to merit as he did is no where to be found nay it is a thing impossible for it is an infinite and omnipotent worke of righteousnesse that can deserue any thing at the infinite iustice of the omnipotent God and it must bee of infinite valew that can purchase that infinite reward And therefore it was necessarie that he which should be our Redeemer should also be God because neither Angell nor Archangell nor any creature else could performe a worke of that price which might be sufficient to merit the kingdome of heauen It is therefore a most grosse blasphemie to say that we must be like vnto Christ in the point of meriting for it maketh euery man a Iesus that is a Sauiour and Redeemer to himselfe Therefore to conclude I say with S. Bernard Let the glory remaine to the Lord vntouched he hath triumphed ouer the enemie alone he hath freed the captiues alone hee hath fought and conquered alone and with S. Augustine To whom we are endebted for that we are to him we are endebted that wee are iustified let none attribute to God his being and to himselfe his iustifying for it is better which thou giuest to thy selfe than that which thou giuest vnto God thou giuest the lower thing vnto God and the higher to thy selfe giue all to him praise him in all This wee doe by our doctrine and they the contrary and therefore it is most manifest that by this doctrine of theirs mans glory is exalted and Christs defaced mans merits lifted vp and Christs pulled downe which cannot stand with the truth and sincerity of Christian Religion 36. The fourth doctrine which tendeth directly to the dishonor of God the abasing of Christs glory in the worke of our redemption is their paradox of humane satisfactions by which they teach that Christ by his death hath made satisfaction for the guilt of our sinnes and the eternall punishment due vnto them but wee our selues must satisfie the iustice of God for the temporall punishment either in earth or in Purgatory whereas we on the contrary teach and beleeue that by Christs death and passion a perfect and all-sufficient satisfaction is made to the iustice of God for all the sinnes of men and for all the punishment thereof both eternall and temporall As for our doings or sufferings we acknowledge the one to be sabordinately required as fruites of our faith and the other necessary to be sustained as meanes of our mortification And touching offences against our brethren we hold it necessary that we make satisfaction to such whom we haue wronged any wayes either by confession restitution or punishment as the case shall require yea wee acknowledge that a Canonicall or Ecclesiasticall satisfaction is to be made to the Church or any part thereof when as we haue giuen iust scandall and offence there vnto But in all these wee denie that there is any vertue or power to expiate our sinnes or to make satisfaction to God for the punishment thereof either temporall or eternall that to do is only proper and peculiar to the Crosse of Christ for as the disobedience of the first Adam brought vpon vs not onely eternall punishments but also temporall so the obedience and merit of the second Adam hath made satisfaction to God for both 37. And herein we agree both with the holy Scripture in many expresse places as 1. Iohn 2. 2. He is the propitiation for our sinnes And Rom. 5. 18. For the eternall punishment of them And Esay 53. 4. For the temporall for there it is said that he tooke vpon him our infirmities and bore our sicknesses And with the holy Fathers for Saint Augustine plainly affirmeth That temporal afflictions before forgiuenes are the punishments of sin but after forgiuenes
should apply another to the patient It is the hand that applieth the medicine and not another medicine so it is faith that applieth Christs satisfaction vnto our sinnes and not our satisfaction Nay except the merits of Christ be applied to our best works and sufferings they cannot stand before Gods iustice neither can they be meritorious as they themselues confesse so that it will follow by this doctrine that our satisfactions are both the hand to apply Christs and the thing to which it is applied All which is most repugnant not only to Religion but euen to reason it selfe 42. Lastly when as Bellarmine affirmeth that ad maiorem c. that is for the greater glory of God who is satisfied and the greater honour of man satisfying it pleased Christ to ioyne his satisfaction to ours He plainely discouereth the scope of their doctrine to bee the aduancement of the dignity of man whereunto indeede he ioyneth the glory of God for else all men would cry fie vpon such a Religion but yet it both detracteth greatly from the glory of God in ascribing some dignity vnto man and peruerteth the true end of the Gospel which is not the partial but the entire honor glory of God For as S. Paul saith Gods power is most clearly seene in our weaknes and his righteousnes in the confession of our shame his glory in our basenes and vilenes that no flesh might reioyce in his presence but that he onely might be exalted at that day But by this Romish doctrine euery iust maÌ„ may reioyce in his own dignity may lift vp himselfe in the presence of God as if he were the ioynt cause of his own saluation together with Christ and that Christs satisfaction had beene nothing auaileable to him except he had applied it to himselfe by his owne satisfaction 43. Thus they deuide saluation as it were party parpale betwixt Christ and man and paralell them together And whereas they say that we must be like vnto Christ as in meriting so in satisfying what doe they but intrude man into the fellowship of Christs office for our imitation of Christ standeth in a conformity to his conuersation and life and of those things onely which concerne his person and are imitable but not in being like vnto him in his office and therefore when they say that we must be like vnto Christ in satisfying they make euery man that is saued a Iesus and Sauiour to himselfe because they make him to imitate him in those things wherein consisteth his being our Christ Then which what can be more contrary to the honour of Christ 44. These bee the foure principall poynts whereby the glory of Gods mercy and Christs merits and the holy Ghosts grace is greatly defaced and in stead thereof mans nature and merits exalted Besides these there are diuers other doctrines of the Church of Rome which bring forth the same fruit some of which I will onely name and so conclude this thâ—â—â— argument And first by the doctrine of the Popes supremacie they detract from the power of Christ and consequently from his glory for both they endow the Pope with those titles which properly belong to Christ as to be the Father in Gods family the vniuersall Pastor the head of the Church the husband and bridegroome of it and all other names which are giuen to our Sauiour Christ in holy Scripture whereby it is shewne that he is aboue the Church and also they attribute the same power to the Pope which belongeth properly to Christ as to pardon sinne to dispense with the law of God to open and shut the gates of heauen not ministerially but absolutely and iudicially to depose Kings and to dispose of Kingdomes and such like Now what a dishonour is this to him in whose thigh is written this glorious title The King of Kings Hee must not be the onely head of the Church but the Pope must be a ioynt head with him nor hee the sole Gouernor but the Pope must be his Vicar nor the sole husband of the Church but the Pope in his absence must be her husband in his roome Could a mortall man endure this iniurie And doe wee thinke that the Sonne of God will beare it Either Christ is not able to gouerne alone or not willing they will not say not able lest their blasphemy should be too too odious and if they say not willing how can hee not be willing to maintaine his owne glory or not bee vnwilling to be confederated with a sinfull Pope for so often they are in the disposition of his Kingdome Let them make the best that they can of it yet it appeareth that Christs gouernment is diuided betwixt the Pope and him and so must the glory also needs be diuided 45. Secondly by their doctrine of the Inuocation and Intercession of Saints what doe they but diuide the office and so the glory of the Mediatour-ship betwixt Christ and them for they teach that Christ is our Mediatour of Redemption but the Saints Mediatours of Intercession whereas we with the Scripture make Christ Iesus to be the onely and sole Mediatour both of Redemption and Intercession Wee honour the Saints but wee pray vnto God alone in the name of his Sonne they adore the Saints and make their prayers vnto them as well as vnto God yea more prayers do they powre out by numbers vnto them then vnto God What is to dishonour God and Christ if this be not 46. Thirdly by their doctrine of traditions they derogate greatly from the glory of Gods mercy towards his Church for they hold that the written word is not sufficient for a Christian man to saluation without the helpe of Ecclesiasticall traditions whereby they plainely insinuate that either God had not that care of his family the Church as he might haue had seeing hee left not for it a perfect and certaine rule for the gouernment thereof but sent it ouer to vncertaine traditions or that wisedome which all Law-giuers labour to attaine vnto seeing hee could not at the first prouide for all future occasions or that loue that he would not one of these doth necessarily follow from their doctrine 47. Lastly by their doctrine of worshipping of Images whereby they giue vnto stockes and stones part of that religious worship which is due vnto God We teach that all religious worship is due vnto God alone They on the contrary maintaine that latria that is diuine worship is Gods due but dulia that is seruice is to be giuen to Images Yea that the Crucifixe is to be worshipped with diuine worship which is due onely to God Who seeth not what manifest iniury they offer to Gods glory by this superstitious worship of dumbe and dead Images 48. And thus omitting many other like poynts which might be inserted in this place I hope that the Minor proposition is sufficiently demonstrated that the Church of Rome doth by many doctrines derogate from the
glory of God and the merits of Christ And therefore the conclusion must needs follow being built vpon an vnmooueable foundation that that Religion which maintaineth such doctrines is not the truth of Christ but the seduction of Antichrist MOTIVE V. That Religion deserueth to be suspected which refuseth to be tryed by the Scriptures as the perfect and alone rule of faith and will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo. THe first proposition in this Argument though it be most true and cannot without any shew of reason be contradicted yet that it may be without all doubt and exception it shall not be amisse to strengthen the same by sound and euident proofes deriued both out of Gods word and consent of ancient Fathers The Proposition consists of two parts first that it cannot be the true Religion which will not abide the alone tryall of the Scriptures Secondly that it will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe let vs consider of both these seuerally 2. And concerning the first if the Scripture be the fountaine of all true religion the foundation and basis of our faith the Canon and rule of all the doctrines of faith and the touch-stone to trye truth from falshood then to refuse to be iudged and tryed by the Scriptures alone is plainely to discouer that there is something in it which issued not from that fountain which is not built vpon that foundation which is so oblique and crooked that it dares not to be applyed to that rule and which is counterfeit and dares not abide the touchstone Now that the Scripture is such as I haue said let the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture beare witnesse Search the Scripture saith our Sauiour for in them you thinke to haue eternall life and they be they which testifie of me therefore the Scripture is the fountaine of all true religion for what is the Religion of Christians but the right knowledge of Christ Iesus This caused Saint Paul to say I desire to know nothing but Christ Iesus and him crucified Againe the Scriptures are able to make vs wise vnto saluation through faith in Christ Iesus and are profitable to teach to improue to correct and to instruct in righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute and perfect to euery good worke Therefore the Scripture is the onely fountaine of true Religion for what is true Religion but spirituall wisedome and holy perfection the one in contemplation the other in action the one in knowledge the other in practice for these two ioyned together do make a man truly religious but the Scriptures afford both as it is cleare in that saying of S. Paul and may be confirmed by another like speech of Salomon who affirmeth that the commandements of God will make a man to vnderstand righteousnesse and iudgement and equity and euery good path Righteousnesse and iudgement pertaine to knowledge equity and euery good path belong to practice And for this cause Origen compareth the Scriptures to Iacobs Well from whence not onely Iacob and his sonnes that is the learned and the skilfull but his sheepe and cattell that is the simple and ignorant doe drinke that is deriue vnto themselues the waters of life and saluation and therefore where the knowledge of the Scriptures flourished not as among all the Heathen both Romanes Grecians and Barbarians before their conuersion there no true Religion shewed it selfe but their Religion was all false and deuillish for in stead of the true God they worshipped dumb creatures and mortall men yea deuils themselues as Lactantius sheweth All which proceeded from hence that they had not the word of God for their guide which is the onely fountaine and well-spring of true Religion 3. Againe as it is the fountaine from whence so it is the foundation vpon which our faith relieth whether wee take faith for the act of beleeuing or for the matter and obiect of our beliefe Ye are built saith S. Paul vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Christ Iesus himselfe being the chiefe corner stone By the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine as all Expositours that I haue read yea their owne Aquinas and Caietane with one consent auouch and to bee built vpon this foundation is to haue our faith to relye and depend vpon it onely as a house relyeth onely vpon the foundation and without a foundation cannot stand that therefore is no doctrine of faith that is vpholden by any other foundation neither hath that any good foundation which is not built vpon the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine they build vpon sand that build vpon humane traditions euery stormy puffe of winde will shake the house of that faith but they which heare the word of Christ and keepe it build vpon a rocke against which neither the raine flouds nor windes no not the gates of hell are able to preuaile because they are grounded vpon the rocke which rocke indeede is Christ to speake properly as not onely S. Peter confesseth 1. Pet. 2. 7. but euen Christ himselfe that is this rocke Math. 16. 18. when hee saith Vpon this rocke will I build my Church that is vpon this truth that Christ is the Sonne of God yet the word of Christ may also be called the rocke because it is as firme and durable as Christ himselfe And that wee may know that Gods word onely is the foundation of faith S. Paul telleth vs plainely that faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God If any of them say as they doe that the word of God is not onely that which is written in Scripture but that which is vnwritten deliuered by tradition let them shew as good reasons to proue their traditions to be the word of God as we doe to proue the Scripture and we will beleeue them but since they cannot let them beare with vs if we vnderstand the Apostles words as spoken onely touching the written word and the rather because we haue for the warrantize of our interpretation both S. Paul himselfe in the same Chapter verse 8. when he saith This is the word offaith which we preach Where hee sheweth what is that word which is the ground of our faith namely the word preached And S. Peter who hauing magnified the word of God with this commendation that it endureth for euer presently expoundeth himselfe of what word hee spake saying And this is that word which is preached amongst you That is the word of the Gospell which was not in part but wholy and fully as preached by mouth so committed to writing And thus S. Basil also interprets it for he saith Quicquid est vltra scripturas Whatsoeuer is out of the Scriptures diuinely inspired because it is not of faith is sinne for faith is by hearing and hearing by
the word of God Now from hence thus I reason If the word of God written be the onely ground of faith then that Religion which will not acknowledge it dependance onely vpon the word written is not to be beleeued but to be suspected as erronious but the word written is the onely ground of faith as hath beene proued therefore that Religion which disclaymeth it dependance only vpon the word deserues iustly not to be beleeued but to be suspected as erronious And in this regard the Romish Religion though it be in our Pater noster to wit vnder the last petition Deliuer vs from euill yet it should neuer come into our Creed to repose our faith and our saluation vpon it 4. Thirdly the Scripture as it is the fountaine and foundation of true Religion So it is the rule of faith and the touchstone of doctrines and the ballance of the Sanctuarie to weigh truth and falshood in that the one may be discerned from the other This the Prophet Esay teacheth when hee calleth vs to the Law and to the Testimonie saying that if any speake not according to that word there is no light in them From which place thus I reason that whereunto we must resort in all controuersies and doubts for resolution that is the rule of faith but such is the Scripture by the testimonie of the Prophet therefore the Scripture is the rule of faith In like manner we may conclude out of S. Peter who saith that We haue a more sure word of the Prophets whereunto wee must take heede as vnto a light that shineth in a darke place till the Day-starre arise in our hearts If the word of the Prophets was a sure direction to the Church of God before the Gospell was written then much more is the whole Scripture contayning the word of the Prophets and of the Apostles together but S. Peter affirmeth the first therefore the second must needs follow For this cause when one asked our Sauiour what hee might doe to bee saued hee referred him to the Scripture for his direction What is written how readest thou And so Abraham referreth the rich gluttons brethren to Moses and the Prophets and Christ telleth the Saduces that this was the cause of their errour because they knew not the Scriptures Out of all which Texts thus I argue If there were any other rule of faith besides the sacred Scripture our Sauiour and Saint Peter would neuer haue sent vs ouer to the Scripture alone but would haue poynted out vnto vs some other meanes but they send vs to the Scripture alone and therefore that alone is the rule and ballance of our faith 5. And this the very title and inscription of the Scripture doth intimate for why is it called Canonicall but because it containes the Canon that is the rule of faith and life The Fathers with one consent agree in this truth Saint Basil calls the Scripture Canonem recti normam veritatis The Canon of right and the rule of truth Chrysostome sayth that Assertio diuinarum legum c. The assertion of the law of God is a most exact Ballance Squire and Rule Saint Augustine calleth it Statera diuina Gods ballance or a diuine ballance these bee his words Non afferamus stateras dolosas Let vs not bring deceitfull ballances to weigh what we will and how we will saying This is heauie that is light but let vs bring that diuine ballance out of the holy Scriptures as it were out of the Lords treasurie and by it weigh all things or rather acknowledge them being weighed by the Lord. Tertullian giueth to the Scripture the same name so doth Gregory Nyssen and our Countriman venerable Bede to passe ouer all the rest as he is reported by Gratian in his decrees telleth vs in most plaine termes that In sacris literis vnica est credendi pariter viuendi regula praescripta The onely rule both of Faith and Life is prescribed vnto vs in the holy Scriptures Now if this be so as it is meere madnesse to affirme the contrary then that religion which doth refuse to be tryed by this rule and to be weighed in this ballance doth giue iust cause of suspition that it is but light stuffe and crooked ware 6. If a man should offer to his creditor a piece of gold for payment and should refuse to haue it either tryed by the touch-stone or weighed in the ballance he might iustly suspect that it was but either light or counterfeit so may any of good sense rightly suspect that religion to bee both light and counterfet which refuseth to be examined by the rule of Gods word especially which is the second branch of the first proposition if it not onely refuse to be tryed by the Scripture but also will admit no tryall nor Iudge but it selfe for as by reason wee conclude that such a man hath an euill cause in hand who in Westminster Hall refuseth to haue his matter tryed by the law and will admit no Iudge but his own opinion that man to be guilty which standing at the bar of iustice accused of some great crime denyeth to be tryed by the verdict of his Country according to the law so likewise the cause of Religion being called in question that must needs in any equall iudgement bee deemed vnsound and guilty which will not stand to the verdict and sentence of the Prophets and Apostles who are the Iury to trye all cases of conscience and of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scripture who is the onely Iudge to heare and determine all questions of doubt which may arise in matters of faith and will be censured and iudged by none but it selfe 7. Against this truth all the Romanists and especially the Iesuites and of the Iesuites chiefly Bellarmine conflict and fight with foote and horse sailes and oares tooth and naile and all they can doe for herein lyeth the very bloud and life of their Religion And if this bee wrung from them that the Scripture is the onely iudge and rule of faith Actum est de regno Pontificio The Romish kingdome goeth to wracke vtterly and therefore they mainely contend to proue first that the Scripture is not the Iudge of controuersies secondly that it is not properly the rule of faith and if it bee a Iudge it is a dumbe one that cannot speake and if it be a Rule it is a partiall and imperfect one not totall and absolute 8. These two positions Bellarmine laboureth to prooue by many sorts of Arguments first from testimonies of the Olde Testament secondly from testimonies of the New thirdly by the authority of Bishops and Emperours fourthly by the witnesse of the Fathers lastly by reason I passe ouer the foure first sorts of Arguments as being sufficiently answered by others and come to the last which are deriued from reason the slightnesse whereof doth plainely discouer the vanity of this their opinion
Now to proue that the Scripture cannot be the iudge of Controuersies nor the Interpreter of it selfe they vse three chiefe reasons first because it hath diuers senses secondly because it is not able to speake but is mute and dumbe and thirdly because in euery well ordered Common-wealth the Law and the Iudge are distinguished and therefore seeing the Scripture is the law therefore it cannot be the Iudge 9. I answere to the first that it is not onely false but impious to affirme that the Scripture is as it were A nose of wax flexible into many senses as Melchior Canus affirmeth or that it may be dinersly expounded according to the occasion of the time as Cardinall Cusanus auerreth or that it is like a Delphian Sword to be conuerted into many senses as Turrian the Iesuite maketh it for as of one body there is but one soule so of one place of Scripture there is but one true sound sense which is the soule and life of it the words being but the flesh and the skinne that couereth the same and that true sense is that which the Spirit of God intendeth and not that which euery priuate spirit collecteth and deduceth out of the same as for the Tropologicall Anagogicall and Allegoricall senses they are not distinct senses of the Scripture but diuers collections and applications issuing out of one and the same sense all which may bee intended by the Holy Ghost vnder that one literall sense For example when an Allegory is deduced out of a place of Scripture as Saint Paul Gal. 4. 24. doth allegorize that History of Abrahams two Wiues it is not a double interpretation of that History but it is onely an Allegoricall application of it to the illustrating of the matter which he had in hand and so when by a tropologie a morall doctrine is deriued out of a text of Scripture as our Sauiour doth Math. 12. 41. 42. applying to the Iewes the repentance of the Niniuites and the long iourney of the Queene of Saba to see and heare Salomon or when as by a type any thing in Scripture is mystically expounded otherwise then the literall sense doth beare this is not a new sense but an accommodation of the right sense to another purpose which notwithstanding is intended by the spirit of God and this is confessed by diuers of their owne side Cornelius Agrippa thus writeth The Scripture hath but one simple and constant sense in which alone the truth is found And Aquinas thus It is the literall sense which the author of the Scripture intendeth which is God yet it is not inconuenient if in one letter of the Scripture according to the literall sense there bee many senses 10. But grant that there are diuers distinct senses of some few places of Scripture to wit one literall and another spirituall for in the most there is not yet there can be but one literall sense as many of the Iesuites themselues confesse and from that onely a forcible argument may be drawne as Bellarmine acknowledgeth and Vega another Iesuite except the mysticall sense be explaned and authorized by some other expresse place of Scripture as Salmeron Azorius Sixtus Senensis and Polidore Virgil auouch and proue the same by the testimonie of Augustine and Ierome Now then why should the multiplicity of senses barre the Scripture from being the Iudge of controuersies seeing no controuersie can effectually be decided by any other sense but by the literall which is euer one and the same or by the mysticall so farre forth as it is approued and declared by another Scripture which then becomes the literall sense of that place wherein it is expounded though it was spiritually included in the barke of the former from whence it was deriued This therefore is a most vaine and friuolous obiection 11. To the second that the Scripture is dumb and therefore cannot bee the Iudge because the Iudge of controuersies must haue a deciding and determining voyce I answere that this is blasphemy against the sacred word of God for if the Scripture bee an Epistle of the omnipotent God to his creature as Gregory calleth it what doth it but speake to them to whom it is sent He that writes a letter to his friend doth hee not speake vnto him and hee that reades his friends letter doth hee not vnderstand his meaning and intendment because the letter doth not vtter a voyce and he heareth not his friend himselfe Doth not euery man know that there is a double word verbum dictum a word spoken and verbum scriptum a word written the one being Imago cordis the Image of the minde the other Imago oris the Image of the speech True it is the Scripture doth not speake as man speaketh but yet it speaketh as the Law vseth to speake and God himselfe speaketh in the Scripture to them that haue eares to heare him and therefore in the Epistles to the Churches which were all written not spoken it is said Let him that hath an eare heare what the Spirit saith vnto the Churches and is there any thing more common then these phrases what saith the Scripture doth not the Scripture say Yea and is not the Scripture called viâ—us Dei sermo the liuely word of God Heb. 4. 12. how can it speake if it bee dumbe how can it giue life if it be dead 12. This manifest truth Stapleton striueth to elude by a witty as he thinkes but indeed a witlesse distinction God saith he speaketh indeed by the Scripture but hee speaketh not vnto vs by them the Scripture is indeed the word of God but the Church is the voyce of God Which fond obiection our famous Country-man the scourge of Poperie Doctor Whitaker thus wipeth away If God speake in the Scripture then hee doth it either with himselfe or vnto some other but not with himselfe therefore to some other and if to some other to whom but vnto man for hee neither speaketh to Angels nor Deuils nor dumb creatures therefore onely to man as when he saith Thou shalt not kill or Loue your enemies there is no man so simple but hee perceiueth that God speaketh vnto man And therefore the Apostle saith that whatsoeuer things are written aforetime are written for our learning that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might haue hope And so it is cleare that God by the Scripture not onely speaketh but speaketh vnto vs and so the Scripture is not onely the word of God but the voyce of God in it selfe as it proceeded from God the voyce of God to vs as we haue it by writing the word of God and the Epistle of the great King to his poore subiects whereby they are enformed of his will and pleasure and directed in the wayes of saluation 13. I but when the question is about the sense of a Text as of that Math. 16. 19. To thee will I giue the keyes
confesse afterward that it is indeed a rule but not a total and entire rule but a partiall and imperfect one If it bee any waies a rule then it was giuen by God and written by the men of God to that end to be the rule And so Bellarmines goodly reasons hang together like a sicke mans dreame the one part wherof ouerthroweth the other 18. But to answere in particular to them seuerally To the first I say that it is not farre from blasphemy to affirme that there is any thing in holy Scripture that is vnnecessary for though all things are not of equall necessity and profit yet there is nothing in the whole Booke of God from the beginning of Gen. to the end of the Reuel but may haue most profitable and necessary vse in the Church of God if not for the essentiall forme of faith yet for the adorning and beautifying of it and this may truely bee verified euen of those things which he excepteth against to wit the Histories of the Olde and New Testament and the salutations in the Epistles of the Apostles out of all which how many excellent doctrines may be deriued both for the confirmation of faith and edification of manners And therefore as in mans body God by nature hath not disposed all parts to be alike necessary but some haue no other vse but ornament and comelinesse so hath Almighty God mingled the parts of holy Scripture in that manner that some are as it were bones and sinews to our faith some flesh and bloud and some againe but exteriour beautie and fashion yet as in nature nothing is made in vaine so much lesse in Scripture is there any thing to be accounted superfluous and redundant nay in this diuine body there are no excrements that may be cast out and separated as it fareth in our earthly carkases but all is entire sound and perfect as the Prophet Dauid teacheth Psal 19. 7. when hee saith that the Law of God is perfect conuerting the soule and our Sauiour Math. 5. 18. when he auoucheth that till heauen and earth perish one iote or title of the Law shall not c. 19. To his second reason I answere three things first that it is entirely false that the Scripture doth not contayne all things necessarily required to the Essence of faith for if the Scripture be perfect and giueth wisedome to the simple if nothing may bee added to it nor taken from it if to teach any thing besides the Scripture deserueth the fearefull Anathema if it be able to make the man of God perfect to euery good worke if in them onely wee may finde eternall life if the Church of God be built vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles and lastly if our faith and hope doe arise from the Scriptures then there is nothing necessary to saluation but is fully and plenarily contained in them but the first is true as appeareth by all those testimonies before alledged and therefore the latter must by necessary consequence be true also 20. Secondly I answere that Bellarmine by that assertion crosseth the whole streame of the Fathers for most of them affirme the flat contrary Tertullian saith that when we once beleeue the Gospell Hoc prius credimus non esse quod vltra credere debemus This we beleeue first that there is nothing besides which we ought to beleeue Iraeneus saith that the Apostles committed to writing the Gospell which they preached Fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum To be the foundation and pillar of our faith Basil saith Quicquid extra diuinam scripturam est cum ex fide non sit peccatum est Whatsoeuer is beside the holy Scripture because it is not of faith is sinne Cyrill saith that all those things were written in holy Scripture which the Writers thought sufficient Tam ad mores quà m ad dogmata As well touching conuersation as doctrine Augustine saith that those things were chosen out to be written Quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur Which seemed sufficient for the saluation of them that beleeue And againe he saith in another place Whether concerning Christ or concerning the Church of Christ or concerning any thing that pertaineth to our faith or life we will not say if we but if an Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you but what ye haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospell let him be accursed Chrysostome saith Si quis eorum If any of them who are said to haue the holy Ghost doe speake any thing of him selfe and not out of the Gospell beleeue it not Ierome speaking of an opinion touching the death of Zacharias the father of Iohn Baptist saith Hoc quia ex Scripturis non habet authoritatem This because it hath not authority out of the Scriptures is as easily contemned as approued I supersede for breuity sake the residue of the Fathers who with full consent conspire in the same opinion yea not onely the Fathers but many also of their owne most learned Authors as Thomas Aquinas Antoninus Durandus Peresius Clingius and diuers others by all which we may see how little reckoning Bellarmine maketh of the ancient Fathers where they make for him hee magnifieth and exalteth them to the skies but when they are opposite to him he reiecteth them as drosse and the like account he maketh of his owne Doctors 21. Lastly I answere that of those things which he affirmeth not to be contayned in holy Scripture and yet to be of necessity of beliefe some of them are farre from either necessity or profit as that of the meanes whereby women vnder the Law were purged from originall sinne and how the Gentiles were partakers of the couenant hauing not the Sacrament and that Easter is to be celebrated vpon the Lords day If these things be of that necessity of beliefe which hee maketh them how many thousand then haue sinned greatly in being ignorant thereof for at this day not the hundreth part of Christians euer heard these things once named and yet by this ignorance they neither offended God nor hindered their owne saluation And what shall we thinke of Iraeneus and other godly Bishops in the East that held that Easter was not to bee celebrated euer vpon the Lords day Againe the other things nominated by him as that the books of the sacred Bible are the Canonicall Scripture and the word of the liuing God that the children of beleeuing parents are to be baptized that Christ descended into hell may easily be proued out of Scripture either by expresse testimonie or by necessarie consequence and deduction which is all one for Perinde sunt â—a quae ex Scripturis colliguntur atqueâ—a quae scribuntur c. saith Nazianzene 22. Thirdly being driuen by the power of truth to acknowledge the Scripture to be a rule he commeth in with a leaden distinction to wit that is not a totall but
a partiall rule and that the word of God written and not written by this last meaning traditions is the totall and perfect rule To this I answere in a word that by this distinction he plainely ouerturneth that which before hee had confessed for if it bee the rule of faith then it must needes be totall and perfect if it be not totall and perfect then is it not the rule for a rule must be proportioned to the thing whereunto it is applied If then our faith be either longer and larger then the Scripture then cannot the Scripture bee any wayes called the rule thereof Besides as Theophilact saith Regula et amussis neque appositionem habet neque ablationem A rule doth neither admit addition nor diminution and that is the definition of a rule according to Varinus Regula est mensura quae non fallit quaeque nullam vel additionem vel detractionem admittit A rule is saith hee a measure which deceiueth not and which admitteth no addition nor detraction Therefore if it be the rule of faith either it is perfect and absolute or none at all if it standeth in neede of traditions to supply it want then why doth hee call it the rule and why doe all the Fathers giue it the same name and why hath it that inscription in the forehead the Canonicall Scripture Lastly if God would giue vs a rule for our faith and life in the Scripture then by the same reason hee would make that a perfect rule for shall any imperfect thing proceede from the authour of all perfection When an imperfect creature is borne wanting either limmes or forme we ascribe it to a defect and errour in the particular nature from whence the creature is deriued or to the indisposition of the instrumentall causes not to the generall nature which tendeth alwaies vnto perfection How much more then ought this Iesuite be afraid to ascribe an imperfect creature to the all-perfect Creatour especially seeing it is the worke of his owne hands without the intermingling of all second causes and proceedeth immediately from his owne spirit the Prophets and Apostles being but as Baruch to Ieremie writers and engrossers of that which the spirit did dictate vnto them And therefore I may boldly and firmely conclude that as the vncreated word of God begotten of the Father before all time is perfect God and can neither receiue augmentation nor diminution so the word of God pronounced first by the mouth of the Prophets and Apostles and after by them committed to writing which is called the Scripture is absolute and perfect and can neither be encreased nor diminished to make it more or lesse perfect and so is the onely true sound and sacred Rule whereby both our Faith and life is to be directed towards the Kingdome of Heauen 23. And thus I hope the first proposition remaineth sound and firme notwithstanding all that can be sayd to the contrary Now I come to the confirmation of the assumption or second proposition which is that the Religion of the Church of Rome refuseth to be tryed and iudged by the Scriptures alone and will be tried and iudged by none but it selfe which if it be euicted then the conclusion must necessarily follow that therefore it is not onely to be suspected but vtterly reiected and abhorred 24. That this is so though it hath already in the precedent discourse beene sufficiently demonstrated yet that the matter may appeare more plaine and their impudency may be more notorious let vs search deeper into this wound and discouer the filthinesse thereof from the very bottome and first that they renounce the Scripture from being their Iudge and then in the second place that they admit of no other Iudge but themselues 25. Concerning the first let vs heare Bellarmine the Achilles of Rome speake foremost hee affirmeth in expresse words that the Scripture is not the rule of faith or if it be that it is a partiall and imperfect rule and vtterly insufficient of it selfe without the helpe of Ecclesiasticall traditions This assertion is well-neere the whole matter subiect of his third and fourth Bookes De verbo Dei which he laboureth to strengthen by all meanes possible Yea in the third Chapter of his third Booke he saith peremptorily that the Pope with a Councill is the Iudge of the true sense of the Scripture all controuersies Now in setting vp the Pope or a Councill into the supreme throne of Iudgement he must needes pull downe the Scripture the Spirit of God speaking therein from that throne and despoyle it of that authority But what need I draw this consequence from his words seeing throughout that whole Chapter he doth almost nothing else but striue to proue that the Scripture is not the Iudge doth reproue the Protestāts for saying that all the iudgements of the Fathers and all the decrees of Councils ought to be examined ad amussim Scripturarum according to the rule of the Scriptures Next vnto Bellarmine commeth in Gregory de Valentia and hee most boldly auoucheth that the Scripture is not a sufficient Iudge or rule of all controuersies of faith and that the Scripture alone defineth nothing at all no not obscurely of the chiefe questions of faith and where it doth speake it speaketh so obscurely that it doth not resolue but rather increase the doubt Cardinall Hosius is no whit lesse audacious when he affirmeth that the Scripture in it selfe is not the true and expresse word of God which we ought to obey vnlesse it bee expounded according to the sense and consent of the Catholike that is in his opinion the Romane Church The Iesuites Salmeron Turrian and Coster doe not onely barely affirme as much but also confirme it by reason The Scripture is dumbe saith Salmeron but the deciding voyce of a Iudge must be quicke The Scripture is a dead letter saith Turrian and a thing without life saith Coster but a Iudge must be liuing who may correct such as erre therfore that Scripture cannot be the Iudge It is as it were a Nose of wax saith Melchior Canus flexible into euery sense and as it were a Delphian Sword fit for all purposes saith Turrian therefore cannot be the Iudge And therefore two other Iesuites to wit Tanner and Gretzer impudently conclude that no heresie can be sufficiently refuted by Scripture alone and that by no meanes it may be graunted that either the holy Scripture or the Holy Ghost speaking by the Scripture should be the supreme and generall Iudge of Controuersies and hee addes his reason because the Scripture cannot dicere sententiam giue sentence on one side as a Iudge should doe Nay one Vitus Miletus as Pelargus reporteth is not ashamed to say that wee read that an Asse spoke in the Scripture but that the Scripture it selfe euer spoke we neuer read And thus this fellow makes the Scripture it selfe to be more mute then Balaams
Asse and the holy Spirit lesse able to make that speake then an Angell was to make an Asse to speake Then which what could be brayed out more like the beast he speaketh of 26. But some may say All these are but priuate mens opinions we heare not all this while the determination of the Church Let vs harken therefore to the voyce of the Church touching this poynt that is as they hold of the Councill or rather Conuenticle of Romish Bishops assembled together at Trent which they call the Church representatiue The second Canon of the second decree in thy fourth Session of that Councill doth thus determine Let no man trusting to his owne wisedome dare to interpret the Scripture after his owne priuate sense or contrary to that sense which our holy Mother the Church holdeth or contrary to the vnanimous consent of the Fathers The former part of this Canon is good and sound for Saint Peter saith that no Scripture is of priuate interpretation and therefore they which wrest the Scriptures to their owne senses contrary to the intent and scope of them are guilty of a grieuous sinne before God and doe it to their owne destruction for Optimus scripturae lector est qui dictorum intellectum non attulerit sed retulerit exscriptura saith Hil. that is He is the best reader of the Scripture which doth not bring a sense to the Scripture but draweth it out of the Scripture Besides the middle and end of the Canon is not to bee misliked if they haue a fauourable interpretation for the iudgement of the Fathers is greatly to be regarded and the authority of the Church is to be held in especiall reuerence but for all this latet anguis in herba vnder these faire pretences of words is couched a snake of foule errour for first they tye the gift of interpretation of Scripture and of decision of controuersies to the Chaire of Peter seated at Rome and possessed by the Pope Peters successour as they call him or to the Chaire of Bishops assembled together in a Councill as in Noahs Arke whereas Saint Paul saith plainely speaking of the gift of interpretation These things workethone and the same Spirit distributing to euery man seuerally as he will And in another place that the spirituall man discerneth all things and therefore the Scriptures Now by the spirituall man the Apostle meaneth the man regenerate and sanctified by the Spirit as it appeareth by that he opposeth him to the naturall man in the verse going before and so the gift of discerning and interpreting is not proper to the Chaire of Bishops 27. Secondly this Canon doth not onely giue vnto the Church thus conceiued of them the onely gift of interpretation but also a Praetorian and vnexaminable authority in interpreting so that all which they deliuer out of their Chaires must bee receiued peremptorily without examining the grounds and reasons for which they are mooued to be of that iudgement which Tyrannicall vsurpation is both contrary to the expresse precepts and principles of holy Scripture and also to the doctrine and practice of all the ancient Fathers for the scripture bids to try all things to hold that which is good And Paul refused not to haue his doctrine examined of the men of Berâ—a by the Scripture the same Apost directeth vs how to behaue our selues at the time of prophecying namely that two or three Prophets speake the other iudge All which places are flatopposite to that peremptory obtruding of interpretations vpon the Church which the Canon speaketh of so are all the Fathers in generall for in prescribing certaine rules to all men both of vnderstanding and interpreting the Scriptures they plainely shew that there is not this absolute authority nor infallibility in any to obtrude what interpretation soeuer without contradiction or examination 28. Lastly the Canon in giuing this indefinite power of interpretation and determination of doubts to the Church without any relation had to the Scripture doth vtterly iustle out the Scripture from being the Iudge And so Andradius the interpretour of this Councill doth expound the intendment thereof when he saith that the iudgement of the Church is Principium vltra quod non sit fas in inquisitione progredi Aprinciple beyond the which it is not lawfull to proceede in inquisition By which he giueth to vnderstand that our faith must relye wholly and solely vpon the iudgement of the Church that is the Pope and his Prelates without enquirie at all into the word of God whether that which they propound be consonant to the truth or no. As Erasmus in a certaine disputation against the Papists confesseth that their opinion hath not sure certain testimonies of Scripture but that the contrary opinion may be better more clerely strongly proued out of Gods word notwithstanding saith he if the Church bid I will beleeue it for I will captiuate my vnderstanding to the obedience of the Church And this indeed is the Babylonian seruitude of the church of Rome wherby they fetter the souls of their followers to perpetual slauery and lead theÌ„ blindfold vnder the veile of an implicite faith vnto perdition for this is the first ground they lay in the hearts of all their generation that they must not examine the doctrine of the Church but take it at their hands as good coyne though it be neuer so counterfeit doctrina in Concilijs definit a custodieÌ„da est non examinanda saith Bellarmine that doctrine which is defined in a Council is to be kept not examined and ordinarius pastor Ecclesiae audiendus est non iudicandus saith Stapleton an ordinary Pastor of the Church is to be heard not iudged thus we see that the Scripture is thrust cleane out of dores from hauing any right or title in the decision of questions of faith not onely by priuate men but euen by their Church it selfe 29. Now here two things are to be obserued of vs for the plainer enucleation and clearing of this poynt first that in making the Scripture Iudge we doe not exclude the Church nor any member of the Church from the office of iudging and discerning onely we place them in their due order and ranke for this is it we intend that the Scripture is the highest and most absolute Iudge from the sentence whereof there is no appeale to be made to any higher Court and that the iudgement determination of the Church or of any member therof is subordinate vnto that and to be ruled and guided by that and where it is agreeable vnto that there to be receiued where it swarueth from that to be reiected For as in the ciuill estate the Iudges deputed to that office haue no absolute authority in themselues but are subiect vnto the lawe and the Ministers thereof and therefore must not speake what they list but what the law directeth so in the state Ecclesiasticall they
faith he doth neuer erre Gretzer saith that the generall lawfull and ordinarie Iudge of controuersies is the Bishop of Rome whether hee define any thing alone or with a Generall Councill this Iudge is always infallible Staplet on saith that the foundation of our Religion is placed of necessitie vpon the authority of this manâ— teaching in whom wee heare God himselfe speaking And another of them saith Si toâ—us mundus sententiaret contra Papam If the whole world should determine against the Pope yet we must stand to his sentence To conclude the Canon Law saith that it were heresie to thinke that our Lord God the Pope might not decree as hee doth yea that his rescripts and decretall Epistles are not Canonicall Scripture 34. Thus we see the Pope is that which they meane by the Church and he is the onely compendious Iudge and therefore when they talke of the Church it is but a vayne vaunt for when all comes to all they entend nothing by the Church but their Lord God the Pope as the Canonists call him who is ens secundae intentionis compofitum ex Deo homine Abeing of the second intention compounded of God and man and quasi Deus in terris c. as it were a God vpon earth greater then man and lesse then God hauing the fulnesse of power Now by this that hath beene said the truth of my second proposition doth euidently appeare to wit that the Romanists will allow no other Iudges in matter of controuersie but themselues alone and so giue iust cause to all that are not blinded with errour at least to suspect their Religion if not vtterly to abandon it which is the conclusion necessarily following vpon these premises 35. Which that it is of most necessarie consequence appeareth by this because it is against all reason that the same should be both the party and the Iudge yea in equity is it fit that we should stand to his iudgement whom we accuse to be a falsifier of the Scripture and euen Antichrist himselfe or that that Church should bee our Church which wee affirme and proue to be an Apostate and an harlot seeing that a Iudge should be indifferent and vnpartiall and not a party as the Church and Pope of Rome is in all cases of controuersie depending betwixt them and vs as for example in the controuersie of the Church the question being which is the true Church The Iudge to determine thereof we say is the Scripture they cry The Church meaning their owne Church as I haue shewed Doe they not by their doctrine aduance themselues into the tribunall seate and make their Church the Iudge whether it bee the Church or no so in the question touching the Popes Supremacy who shall be Iudge whether this supreme power be in the Pope or no Mary the Pope himselfe for they admit no other Iudge Sure he must needes gaine the cause when hee is thus his owne Iudge If this bee not a plaine tergâ—ueâ—sâ—tion I know not what is if this doth not bewray the weakenesse of their cause let any indifferent man consider and giue sentence 36. For as on ourside in the question of the Kings Supremacie whether euery King in his owne dominion bee the supreme Gouernour of the Church vnder Christ or no if wee should in this case admit no Iudge but the King himselfe Or in the question of our Church whether wee be the true Church of Christ or no if wee should refuse all other triall saue that which ariseth from the iudgement of our owne Church and the Bishops and Prelates thereof would not all men laugh at our folly and thinke our cause weake and desperate So may all men thinke of the Romish Religion that it be wrayeth manifest folly in the maintayners and apparent weakenesse in the grounds thereof in that it will not bee iudged but by itselfe especially seeing it is the property of selfe-loue whereof no man liuing is freed to make men blinde in their owne causes and partiall on their owne sides To conclude therefore as the Lion in Esope that challenged to himselfe the whole prey that was caught and would not stand to the equall partition of his fellow-hunters proued himselfe thereby to be a tyrant and his title naught so the Pope of Rome and his Proctours in refusing to be iudged by any saue themselues and by that right clayming a title to the truth discouereth both his tyrannie ouer the Church of God and the holy Scriptures and the badnesse of his weake cause seeing truth like a chaste matrone though it be slandered yet is so bold and powerfull that it feareth not to bee tried by those that are the greatest enemies thereof Spectatum admissirisum teneatis amici MOTIVE VI. That Religion doth iustly deserue to bee suspected which doth purposely disgrace the sacred Scriptures But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo c. OVr Aduersaries may fitly be likened to churlish and angrie Mastifes whose property it is to rend with their teeth those that are vnarmed and not able to resist but if they meet with an armed man that can keepe them off and entertaine them with sharpe blowes then they wreak all their teene vpon the cudgell or weapon wherewith they are annoyed so they seeing themselues well banged and beaten by our men at Armes I meane our Champions that defend the quarrell of our Church with the staffe of the Scripture and their hairy scalpes wounded with the stones fetcht out of Dauids scrip fall a snarling and biting the staffe and the stones which haue beene the instruments of their sorrow whereas if they finde any without a staffe in his hand or a stone in his sling that is vnfurnished with Scripture to fight with them ouer him they domineere take him captiue and leade him to their denne for a prey This their malice against the sacred Scripture which is the only engine of their destruction I hope by Gods fauourable assistance so to discouer in this Chapter that they themselues shall euer bee reputed as blasphemers of the truth and their religion as odious and abominable to all posterity 2. The Maior or first proposition in this demonstration though it bee of an vndoubted truth yet for the greater illustratio thereof two poynts are to be considered first what this Scripture is which is opposed against and secondly what they are to be esteemed which oppose themselues vnto the Scripture The Scripture contained in the Olde and new Testament is in a word the holy and sacred word of the eternall God which to haue said of it is an ascription of the greatest dignitie vnto it as can bee deuised for if it bee the holy and sacred word of the eternall God then must it needs be perfect excellent pure vpright cleane permanent wife sweet and what else may be spoken for the setting forth of the excellency of a thing all which attributes are giuen
vnto it by the Prophet Dauid in the 19. Psalme and doe necessarily appertaine vnto it being immediately deriued from that cleare and sole fountaine of all goodnesse and perfection For howsoeuer the holy Prophets were the penne-men thereof yet those were all and in euery parcell and particle inspired by the Holy Ghost as Saint Peter informeth vs when hee said That no Prophecie in the Scripture is of any priuate motion but that holy men of God spake as they were mooued by the holy Ghost For as the heathen Oracles were conceiued and vttered by the immediate instigation of the Deuill who guided both the hearts and tongues of his Priests to bee the instruments of his malice So the Oracles of Christians to wit the holy Scriptures proceeded from the sacred inspiration of Gods Spirit mouing the hearts and directing the pens of the Prophets Apostles his Secretaries to commit to writing that only which they receiued from God both in respect of matter and manner To this purpose is that notable saying of Hugo In the holy Scripture whatsoeuer is taught is truth whatsoeuer is commanded is goodnesse whatsoeuer is promised is happinesse And he addes the reason Because God is truth without deceit goodnesse without malice and happinesse without misery 3. I need not stand to prooue this position That the Scripture is the infallible word of the eternall God it is a grounded truth and a receiued principle of all that professe themselues to be Christians And as Saint Basil saith Like as of euery Science there are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vnquestionable Principles which are beleeued without further demonstration so in the Science of Sciences Theologie This is one of those vnquestionable principles that the Scripture is the word of God and therefore of diuine both purity and authority Adde hereunto that if any should doubt thereof the purity and perfection of the matter the maiestie and the statelinesse of the stile the power and efficacy ouer the conscience the certaintie of Prophesies fulfilled in the duenesse of time the strangenesse of the miracles the antiquity of the writings before all other the admirable prouidence of God in preseruing them from the teeth of time and rage of Tyrants the sweet harmony consent of euery part with each other the iudgements of God against the contemners therof and lastly the bloud of so many thousand Martyrs which hath beene shed in the defence thereof doe sufficiently conuince and proue that this Booke is the Booke of GOD and euery line and title therein the Word of God 4. This being so then secondly it must needs follow that either to denie the Scripture to bee the Word of God or to abuse it with vnreuerent termes and reproches or any wayes to diminish the credit and authority thereof is not onely plaine blasphemy but also open and notorious Atheifme and so in both high treason against the Maiestie of God for if it be treason to vse contumelious speeches against the Kings person or either by word to reuile or by deede to resist his decrees and proclamations how much more doth that deserue the name of the highest treason when the sacred word of God which is a diuine Law issuing from his owne mouth is blasphemed and the maiestie of God most clearely shining therein abused It is an olde and a true saying in ciuility Qui contemnit legem contemnit Regem He that despiseth the Law despiseth the law-giuer So much more then in Diuinitie hee that reprocheth the word of God reprocheth God himselfe How can they then bee lesse than Atheists Blasphemours and Traytours to God that are guilty of all this iniurie to the holy Scripture 5. Celsus against whom Origen wrote and Lucian and Porphery and Apelles were Whelpes of this Litter and therefore remaine to this day branded with the note of infamy to these succeeded many others in after-ages for the world hath neuer beene without such monsters God permitting them for the further demonstration of his truth and declaration of his iust iudgement in their deserued and strange destruction yea that which is most strange many of those that haue vaunted themselues for Christs Vicars here on earth haue beene taynted with this infection as Pope Leo the tenth who as Writers report mocked at the promises and threats of the Scripture and told Cardinall Bembus that that fable of Christ had brought vnto him and his great profit Such another was Iohn the twelfth who vsed to blaspheme God and call vpon the deuill at his dice and Iulius the third who asked why he should not bee as angry for the eating of a colde Peacock as God was for the eating of an Apple And Benedict the eight alias the ninth whose custome was in Woods and Mountaines to sacrifice to the deuill and diuers others which for breuity sake I forbeare to name Is it possible that such Athiests and blasphemous wretches and worshippers of deuils should be chosen of Christ to be his Vicars here on earth to whom hee might commit the gouernment of his Church Will a mortall man commit the gouernment of his family especially if he loueth his wife and children to a knowne Ruffin and a notorious villaiue Now Christ so loueth his family his Church that to purchase and redeeme it hee gaue his owne pretious bloud for a ransome for it and will hee now ordaine in his roome such notorious Wolues to bee the ministeriall heads and guides thereof As for the rest of the Popish crue both learned and vnlearned though they bee as I must needes confesse for the most part more infected with superstition then with Atheisme albeit neuer did any Country more swarme with that generation then doth Italy at this day yet in blaspheming and debasing the holy Scripture they cannot be farre from not onely giuing-way and opening a wide dore to that horrible sinne but also from making an open profession thereof 6. Thus we see both what the Scripture is and also what they are that oppose against the Scripture which two considerations serue much for the clearing of the first proposition Now I come to the confirmation of the assumption or second proposition which euery Romanist will denie in this argument and therefore stands in neede of stronger fortification the proposition is this that the Religion of the Church of Rome doth purposely disgrace the holy Scriptures and is at enmity with it that is that both by doctrine practice and bitter and blasphemous speeches the holy Scripture is disgraced defaced and vilely slandered by the chiefe professours and maintayners of that Religion yea and by the grounds of the Religion it selfe I will begin with their doctrine and secondly come to their practice and in the last place their slanderous and bitter speeches shall be discouered 7. Amongst many of their doctrines whereby they offer open iniurie and wrong to the sacred Scriptures these foure are the most principall First that which hath beene
at large discoursed in the former Chapter touching the chiefe Iudge of controuersies for when as they disable the Scripture from that office and exalt the Church that is the Pope as I haue shewed into the highest throne of iudgement what doe they else but debase the Scripture in subiecting it to the Popes wil and making it a vassall to wayt vpon his pleasure and giuing a greater certainty and infallibility to the determinations of his mouth speaking out of his chayre then vnto the infallible and certaine light of truth shining in the Scriptures This is open wrong to the Scriptures and not onely to it but also to the Spirit of God the Author and Enditer thereof for they which set vp the Pope as an all-sufficient and most competent Iudge and pull downe the Scripture as non-sufficient and incompetent as the Romanists doe doe they not aduance the one and disgrace the other as on the contrary we which ascribe all conâ—petencie of right and sufficiencie of power to the Scripture and denie the same to the Pope doe we not disgrace him and aduance it This is the difference in this poynt betwixt them and vs and their Religion and ours and that men may see how little estimation they haue of the Scripture compared with their Pope though the Pope be a man vtterly vnlettered ignorant euen of the grounds of Grammar much more of the grounds of Diuinitie as some of them were though he be a childe of tenne yeeres of age as Bennet the ninth or a mad Lad not past eighteene yeeres old as Iohn the twelfth though he be an Atheist as was Leo the tenth or a Coniurer as Iulius the third Lastly though hee were a man destayned with all manner of filthy and lewd conuersation as a number of them were yet his iudgement must bee heard and preferred because forsooth quatenus Papa as he is Pope he cannot erre though quatenus homo as he is a man hee be an Heretike or an Atheist or a wicked wretch or because Papa est doctor vtriusque legis authoritate non scientia The Pope is Doctour of both lawes in authority and not in knowledge And thus by their Religion the holy and sacred Scripture must giue place and bow the knee to an vnholy sacrilegious and ignorant Pope oftentimes and acknowledge him as Iudge and submit it selfe to his sentence and censure 8. The second doctrine of theirs whereby they disgrace and wrong the Scripture is that touching the insufficiency and imperfection thereof for they are not ashamed to say that the Scripture is imperfect and vnsufficient of it selfe and that in it are not contained all things needfull to saluation but that a great part yea the greatest part of true Religion is grounded vpon tradition without the which the Church of GOD could not bee sufficiently instructed either in faith or manners this is their goodly doctrine whereas we on the other side hold and maintaine that the Canonicall Scripture containeth in it sufficiently plainely and abundantly all doctrines necessary to be knowne for the attainment of saluation whether they be positions of faith or directions for godlinesse and that thereis no neede of any vnwritten traditions for the suppliance of any want or defect which is found therein And herein we haue not onely all the ancient Fathers of the primitiue and purer times of the Church our Abbetters as Iraeneus Origen Athanasius Basil Chrysostome Cyril Tertullian Cyprian Augustine Hierome as you may see in the places quoted in the Margent but also the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures plainely and directly affirming the same 9. That this imputation of imperfection and insufficiency is layd by them vpon the Scripture let vs heare themselues acting their owne parts and first Bellarmine the Ringleader He in his fourth Booke De verbo Dei and fourth Chapter sets downe this position that the Scriptures without traditions are not simply necessary nor sufficient and throughout that whole Chapter doth nothing else but labour to prooue the same by many arguments and reasons as if hee were not content barely to affirme so high a blasphemy but euen as the Poet sayth Cum ratione insanire To be madde with reason and so are all his reasons there vsed in very deed mad reasons which my purpose is not to spend time in confuting that being sufficiently performed by our great and learned Champions of the truth which as yet remaine vnanswered onely it is inough for my intent to discouer to all men his notable blasphemy against the holy Scriptures which not onely in that place but in many other euidently and impudently sheweth it selfe 10. Next vnto him comes in another great Iesuite Gregorie de Valentia and he playeth his part and sayth That the most fittest way of deliuering the doctrine of faith to the Church was this not that all should bee committed to writing but that some things should be deliuered viua voce that is by tradition But Cardinall Hosius more plainly and boldly affirmeth That the greatest part of the Gospell is come to vs by tradition and that very title of it is committed to writing Yea it is reported of him that he should say Melius actum fuisse cum Ecclesia si nullum extaret scriptum Euangelium That it had beene better for the Church if there were no written Gospell extant O blasphemy and yet wisely spoken if so be by the Church hee meaneth the Church of Rome as without doubt hee doth But let vs heare another of the same stampe Eckius I meane that peremptory Bragadochio he steps forth and shoots his bolt in a moment The Lutherans are dolts sayth hee which will haue nothing beleeued but that which is expresse Scripture or can be prooued out of Scripture for all things are not deliuered manifestly in the Scriptures but very many are left to the determination of the Church Coster another Stage-player of theirs comes in and diuides the word into three parts to wit That which God himselfe writ as the tables of the Law that which he commanded others to write as the Olde and the New Testament and that which he neither writ himselfe nor rehearsed to others but left it to themselues as traditions the decrees of Popes and Councils And then he concludeth blasphemously that many things of faith are wanting in the two former neither would Christ haue his Church depend vpon them but this latter is the best scripture the Iudge of controuersies the Expositor of the Bible and that whereupon we must wholly depend His words are these Omnia fidei mysteria ccaeeraque credita scitu necessaria â—n corde Ecclesiae sunt clarissimè exarata in membranis tamen tam noui quam veteris Testaments multa defiderantur that is All the mysteries of faith and other things necessary to bee beleeued and known are most clearely engrauen in the heart of the Church but in the leaues of the Olde and
New Testament many things are wanting What can be more plaine Yet Lindanus is more plaine for he calleth Traditionem non scriptam c. The vnwritten tradition that Homericall moly which preserueth the Christian faith against the inchantments of Heretikes and the true touch-stone of true false doctrine and the Aâ—acian buckler to be opposed to all Heretikes and in conclusion the very foundation of faith To this fellow adioyne Melchior Canus as a coÌ„panion in blasphemy who saith That many things belong to Christian faith which are contained in the Scripture neither openly nor obscurely To conclude all in one summe without any further repetition of priuate mens opinions wherein much time might be spent the voyce of their whole Church represented in the Councill of Trent is this That traditions are to bee receaued pari pietate with the same reuerence and affection wherwith wee receiue the Scripture it selfe Thus wee haue a view of the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the insufficiency of the holy Scripture both in part and whole Out of all which these two impious conclusions doe necessarily arise First that traditions vnwritten are equall if not superiour in dignity and authority to the written word of God and secondly that without the helpe of them it is not able to bring vs either to a sauing faith in this life or to the end of our faith in the life to come then both which what could be spoken more iniurious either to the Word it self or to the Maiestie of that Spirit from whom it proceeded And that their blasphemy might be known â—o all men Bellarmine more like a Iulian then a Christian doth not onely affirme the Scripture to be vnsufficient and imperfect but also not simply necessary and to that end he maketh a good round discourse and bringeth in long Leaden arguments which indeed are not worth the answering for they are meere sophisticall collusions as any one of meane iudgement may easily discerne Neuerthelesse by this we may see what an honourable opinion and affection these fellowes beare towards the Scripture when as they dare to affirme that they are not simply necessary but may bee wanting and remoued without any great hurt to the Church of God 12. The third iniurious doctrine whereby open disgrace is offered to the holy Scripture is concerning the authority thereof compared with the Church for this they teach and hold That the authority of the Scripture doth depend vpon the Church and not the Church vpon the Scripture And so by consequent that the Scripture is inferiour to the Church and not the Church to the Scripture whereas we on the contrary affirme and defend that the Church wholly dependeth both for authoritie and existency vpon the Scripture and so is euery way inferiour to the Scripture and not the Scripture vpon the Church 13. This blasphemie of theirs may more euidently be discerned if we obserue what they vnderstand by the Church to wit not the Primitiue Church which was in the time and immediately after the Apostles but the succeeding and present Church and that not the whole Catholicke Church which is dispersed ouer the world but the Church of Rome which holdeth vpon the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and in this Church not the whole body but the Pastours and Prelates assembled in a Councill yea and lastly not the Councill neither but the Pope who is totus in toto all in all and in whome all the members meete and resolue themselues as lines in the center as is before declared This is their Church and to this Church of theirs they subiect the Scriptures euen the word of God to the Pope of Rome that is God himselfe to a mortall sinnefull man For as Nilâ—â— the Archbishop of Thessalonica saith To accuse the Scripture is to accuse God so to debase the Scripture is to debase God 14. That wee may see this to be true and that wee lay no false imputation to their charge heare them speake in their owne words and let Bellarmine leade the Ring If we take away saith he the authoritie of the present Church and of the Councill of Trent then the whole Christian faith may bee called in question for the truth of all ancient Councils and of all poynts of faith depend vpon the authority of the present Church of Rome Marke he saith not vpon the authority of the Scripture but of the present church of Rome where he doth manifestly preferre the authority of the Church before the Scripture not onely of the Church but of the Church of Rome as if there were no Church but that and not the Church of Rome as it was in the purer and primer times but the present Church corrupted and depraued with infinite errours Againe in another place he concludeth That the Scriptures doe depend vpon the Church and not the Church on the Scriptures which position he confesseth in the same place to haue beene in other places maintained by him And yet elsewhere he disclaimeth this opinion as none of theirs and calleth it a blasphemy that it is his I haue shewed already though he be ashamed of it as he may well be and therefore exore suo by his owne iudgement he and all the rest are guilty of most grosse and intolerable blasphemie But that you may see that it is the generall receiued doctrine of them all for the most part heare others as well as him vttering their spleene against the Scriptures Siluester Prierias saith that Indulgences are warranted vnto vs not by the authority of the Scripture but by the authority of the Church and Pope of Rome which is greater And againe That the Scripture draweth it strength and authority from the Church and Bishop of Rome Eckius saith that the Scripture was not authentical but by the authority of the Church and putteth this proposition among hereticall assertions The authority of the Scripture is greater then the Church Pighius also affirmeth the same that all the authoritie of Scriptures doth necessarily depend vpon the authority of the Church and calleth all that hold the contrary in scorne Scriptuarij that is Scripture-men or such as maintaine the Scripture Cardinall Hosius goeth further and commendeth a blasphemous speech of one Hermannus as a godly saying That the Scriptures are of no more force then Aesops Fables without the testimonie of the Church and addeth presently of his owne that vnlesse the Churches authority did commend vnto vs the Canonicall Scripture it should bee of little account with vs. The like is deliuered by Coclaeus by Canus Stapleton Andradius Canisius and generally all other of that side that handle that question 15. Onely to palliate the matter they bring in a distinction to wit that this dependance of the Scriptures authority vpon the Church is quoad nos in respect of vs not quâ—adse in respect of it selfe and declaratiuè for declaration sake
not effectiuè as the cause thereof which distinction first implieth a contradiction for the authority of a thing is quoad extra in respect of others not quoad intra in respect of it selfe that is rather to be termed dignitie and excellencie then authority secondly that being granted yet it importeth a falshoode in them and concludeth directly our purpose for by it the last resolut on of our faith should not bee into the Scripture but into the authority of the Church which is contrary both to truth and to their owne principles For why doe they attribute that infallible authority to the Church but because the Scripture saith so as they themselues acknowledge And then to affirm that the Church is of greater authority in respect of vs is sufficient to â—uince that in respect of vs they preferre the Church before the Scripture What is this but to offer open iniury and disgrace to the holy Scripture especially seeing a Iesuite of their own is bold to say that a man may mordicus tenere and propugnare acerrimè strongly hold stoutly maintaine a doctrine contrary to the word of God and yet bee no Heretike vnlesse the opposite to that opinion be defined by the Church in his time 16. The fourth and last doctrine whereby they offer iniurie to the Scripture is this That the Pope may dispense with the Law of God This the Popes vassals do not onely affirme but euen confirme and auouch For thus they teach Potestas in diuinas leges ordinariè in Romano Pontifice residet Power ouer the lawes of God remaineth ordinarily in the Pope of Rome and that the Pope may dispense against the Apostles yea against the new Testament vpon great cause and also against all the precepts of the olde Testament The reason whereby they confirme this braue doctrine is this that where the reason of the law faileth there the Pope may dispense but the reason of the law always faileth where he iudgeth it to faile for speaking definitiuely he cannot erre therefore the Pope may dispense with the precepts of the Olde New Testament where and when he list Now what can be more iniurious to the Scripture then this for first they set the Pope aboue the scriptures because he that taketh vpon him to dispense with the law of another challengeth to himselfe a greater authority then the other according as their owne rule is In praecepto superioris non debet dispensare inferior The inferiour may not dispense with the commandement of the superiour Secondly they equall him to God himselfe for whereas there is no exception nor exemption from the law of God but this Nisi deus aliter voluerit Except God otherwise appoynt they instead thereof put in this exception Nisi Papa aliter voluerit And lastly they make the law of God a maimed an imperfect law in that as their diuinity is it cannot giue sufficient direction to mans life for practice of duties and auoyding of sinnes in all cases without the Poprs dispensation and the interposition of his superwise authority 17. From their iniurious doctrines lâ—t vs come to their malicious practice against the Scripture that both by their precepts and practice their enmity to the Scriptures may fully appeare First therefore whereas the language wherein the Scriptures were originally written is indeed the true Scriptures because that is the immediate dialect of the holy Ghost and the translations of it into other tongues are no farther to bee regarded then as they agree with the originall yet the Church of Rome in the Councill of Trent hath canonized the vulgar Latine aboue the Hebrew and Greeke and hath â—nâ—oyned it onely to be vsed in all readings disputations sermons and expositions and not to be reiected vnder any pretence whatsoeuer vpon paine of Anathema Yea Bellarmine with the rest of that crue accuse the Greeke and Hebrew of many corruptions and iustifie the vulgar Latine aboue them as most free from corruptions whereas notwithstanding for one corruption which they would saine fasten vpon them there are to be found twenty in this and that by the confession of many learned of their owne side 18. Besides those corruptions which are supposed to be in the originals are either none at all as may easily be prooued and is already sufficiently by our learned Diuines or else such as are not of that weight to derogate from the perfection of the Scripture in things pertaining to faith and good manners as Posseuine and Sixtus Senensis confesse or at least are but errours of the Writers which no Booke is free from growing either from humane infirmity or from the mistaking of the letters in the Greeke and prickes in the Hebrew which last is but a late inuention of the Massorites and no essentiall part of the Text whereas on the contrary the errours which are extant iâ— the vulgar Latine are many of them contrary to the grounds of faith as that one for all in the third of Genesis where the Latine readeth ipsa conteret caput tuum she shall bruise thy head which they apply vnto the Virgin Marie being in the originall ipse his and in the Septuagâ—nt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Hee vnderstanding Christ our Sauiour Here wee see a fundamentall poynt of saith ouerthrowne not onely in accommodating a Prophecy of Christ vnto the Virgin his mother but also in ascribing vnto her the worke of our RedeÌ„ption signified by the bruising of the Serpents head And as in this so in many other places which I willingly for breuitie sake â—uerpasse And yet for all this by their doctrine and practice their Latine Translation is onely authenticall Yea so impudent is a Bishop of theirs that setting forth the Bible in diuers Languages he placeth the vulgar Latine betwixt the Hebrew and the Greeke as Christ betwixt two theeues as blasphemouslâ— he speaketh This is therefore a notable iniuricus practice of theirs against the Scripture 19. To which adde second no whâ—t inferiour to the former which â—â— their forbidding the Scripture to bee translated into the mother tongue of euery Nation to the end that it may be to the common people as a Booke sealed vp and that they might not reade nor be exercised therein This prohibition is both contrary to the practice of all the Saints of God both vnder the Law and the Gospell for it was their daily exercise to meditate vpon the Law of God continually and to search the Scriptures whether those things which they heard were so or no and to the plaine precept of Christ and the Apostle bidding vs to search the Scriptures and to haue the word of God to dwell plentiously in vs and to the doctrine of all the ancient Fathers who with one consent exhort and perswade to the diligent reading of them as may appeare by the places quoted in the margent And beside is most iniurious to the Scriptures themselues
for to restraine a common good to a particular vse is an open wrong to the good it selfe which the more common it is the better it is and the lesse common the lesse good for bonum est sui diffusiuum good inclineth naturally to spreade it selfe and therfore the restriction thereof is violence and force offered to the nature of it and truth cannot abide to bee imprisoned but loueth liberty This is true in all naturall good and true things but much more in this supernaturall good and truth which as Origenâ— well noteth was not written for a few as Platoes Bookes were but for the people and multitude yea for the veriest Ideots and women and children as the Fathers affirme 20. And yet these presumptuous Romanists forbid the reading of the Scripture among the people one of them affirming That it was the deuils inuention to permit the people to reade the Bible Another That he knew certaine men to be possessed of the deuill because being but Husband-men they were able to discourse of the Scriptures All teaching that it is the ground of Heresie and that Lay men are no better then Hogs and Dogs and therefore these precious pearles not to be committed vnto them and that the Scripture to a Lay man is as a sword in a mad mans or a knife in a Childes hand Thus they practise to imprison the Scriptures within the Priests cells or Monkes cloysters which were giuen by God to be the light of the world and yet which is to be noted in Queene Maries bloudy and blinde daies such as could dispend a certaine summe of mony by the yeare might reade the Bible without any speciall dispensation as if heresie builded her nest rather in the brest of the poore man then of the rich or as if the rich were lesse carnall then the poore and thus these saucy fellowes handle the sacred Scripture at their pleasure being rightly to be branded with the name of Heretikes whom Epiphanius generally calleth Lucifugae because they cannot abide the light of the Scriptures but fly from them as Owles and Bats from the light 21. Another practice of theirs is against the sense of the Scripture as the two former were against the letter that neither the body nor the soule thereof might be left vnuiolated and this is in respect of the learned to bar them vp from controuling their errours as the other were in respect of the simple to keepe them from once looking into them Their policy in this is to interdict all senses and expositions of the Scripture saue such as agree with the Church of Rome and are allowed by the Pope of Rome this is the interdiction of the Councill of â—rent and is grounded vpon a false interpretation of that article of our faith I beleeue the Catholike Church for as Stapleton saith The literall sense of that article is that thou beleeuest whatsoeuer the Catholike Church holdeth and teacheth And Cardinall Hosius If any man haue the interpretation of the Church of Rome though he know not whether and how it agreeth with the words of the scripture notwithstanding he hath Ipsissimum verbum Dei Now by the Catholike Church they meane the Romane Church or rather the Romane Bishop as I haue shewed for as Siluester sayth The power of the Catholike Church remaineth onely in him And as Stapleton The foundation of our Religion is of necessity placed vpon the authority of this mans teaching and therfore one â—aith that the Pope may change â—he Gospell and giue to it according to place and time another sense Yea a blasphemous Cardiâ—all is bâ—ld to say That if a man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and Man and the Pâ—pe thought the same he should not be condemned This is a tricke pâ—ssing all other whereby they not onely make sure worke with the Scripture that it neuer doe them hurt but also fashion the sacred and diuine sense thereof vnto their fond and foolish fancies and make it speake not what the Holy Ghost intendeth but what they imagine Nay they are so impudent as to say That the Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood the sense thereof being one while this and another while that according as it pleaseth the Church to change her iudgement Can there be a greater disgrace to the Scripture then this is 22. Adde to these yet another deuice which is far worse then all the rest that is a grosse and palpable wringing and wresting out of the holy Scripture a sense contrary to the true intendment of the place fitting it strangely to their own purpose This is a practice of theirs so coÌ„mon as that their Books swarme with nothing so much as such fond and foolish interpretations and so ridiculous withall that it would make euen Heraclitus himselfe to laugh if he were aliue I wil here report some few of these strange wrested Expositions that the Reader may haue a taste of them and so iudge of the whole caske 23. And to beginne at the beginning of the Bible Genes 1. 16. It is written God created two great Lights the greater to rule the day and the lesser to rule the night that is saith Innocentius the third one of their owne Popes And also Molina the Iesuite God ordained in the Firmament of the Catholike Church two dignities to wit the Pontificiall dignitie and the Regall But that to gouerne the day that is the Spiritualty and is the greater and this to rule the night that is the Carnalty and is the lesser so that how great difference is betwixt the Sunne and the Moone so great is there betwixt the Bishop of Rome and a King that is according to the Glosse vpon the same place seuen and fiftie times So in the 3. of Genesis whereas the words of the Text are plaine Hee shall breake thy head or tread vpon thy head which is the first and principall promise of the Messiah they contrary both to the Hebrew and Septuagint translate and expound it Ipsa She shall applying vnto the Virgin Mary that which properly belongeth vnto Christ euen the worke of our Redemption And this interpretation and translation of that place is approued by the Councill of Trent in approuing the vulgar Latine Bible for authenticall and by Bellarmine also who calleth it a great mysterie that in the Hebrew a verbe of the Masculine gender is ioyned with a Nowne of the foeminine to signifie that a woman should breake the serpents head but not by her selfe but by her sonne and is also so translated by our Doway Translatours in English 24. So againe that place in the Psalme Psal 91. 13. Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and the Cockatrice and shalt tread vpon the Lion and the Dragon Pope Alexander the third interpreted it of himselfe and the Emperour applying the promise made to Christ principally and in him to all the Elect vnto himselfe as Pope and
vnderstanding by the Aspe and Cockatrice Lyon and Dragon the Emperour Frederick vpon whose necke hee set his foote vsing those words and all other Kings and Emperours and to proue that he so vnderstood the place when as the Emperor disdayning this pride made answere Not to thee but to Peter the holy Father treading on his necke replied Et mihi Petro Both to mee and to Peter Which storie though it bee branded by Baronius with the marke of a fable yet it is auouched by a full Iurie of witnesses and especially two Gennadius the Patriarke of Constantinople and a Venetian Historian that liued about that time which last onely differeth in the Popes alledging of the Text for he makes the Pope to say not in the second person thou but ambulabo I will walke vpon the Lion and the Adder Againe they interpret that place of Esay 49. 23. They shall worship towards the face of the earth and licke the dust of thy feete as a Prophecie of the Popes sublimitie For saith Turrian the Iesuite Where is this verified but in the kissing of the feete of the Bishop of Rome and yet who knoweth not that this is nothing else but a manifest prediction of the glory of the Church and the conuersion and subiection of Kings and Princes to the Religion of Christ What a wresting of Scripture call you this Are not these strange interpretations 25. But yet heare them which are more strange and ridiculous In the 28. of Esay 16. verse wee read Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation This all know being taught by the interpretation of S. Peter 1. Pet. 2. 6. is to be vnderstood of Christ only and none other yet Bellarmine vnderstands by this tried precious corner stone not Christ but Peter that is as he saith Sedes Romana The Roman Sea Againe we read Iere. 26. 14. Behold I am in your hands doe with mee as you thinke good and right This Text Bonauenture alledgeth to proue that Christ is in the Priests hands at the Masse as a Prisoner not to bee let goe till he haue payd his ransome that is till he haue giuen remission of sinnes contrary to the manifest sense of the place Hosea 1. 11. We read that the children of Iudah and Israel shall be gathered together and appoint themselues one head answerable to that Ioh. 10. 16. There shall be one fold and one shepheard which places properly appertayning to Christ and his Church are ordinarily and blasphemously alledged to proue that the Pope is the head of the Church Againe Cant. 5. 11. His head is as fine gold And Cant. 7. 5. Thy head is like the mount Carmel One of which is the speech of the Church to Christ and the other of Christ to the Church but Bellarmine interprets the first to be spoken Christ and the second of the Pope These be his words The Bridegrome compareth the head of his Spouse to mount Carmel because though the Pope be a great mountaine yet he is nothing but earth that is a man and the Bride compareth the Bridegromes head to the best gold because the head of Christ is God 26. But let vs come a little to the new Testament are they any thing more shie and cautelous in this then in the olde Heare and then iudge Matth. 28. 18. our Sauiour saith to his Disciples All power is giuen vnto me in heauen and earth This in the booke of Ceremonies is expounded of the Pope and also by Stephen the Archbishop of Patauy in the Councill of Laterane Luc. 22. 38. the Apostles say vnto Christ Behold two swords and he answered It is sufficient By this place of Scripture Boniface the eighth challenged to himselfe both temporall and ecclesiasticall authority because Christ said two swords were sufficient and bade Peter not cast away one of them but put it vp into the sheath This exposition flat contrary to the meaning of the Text was not only deuised by a Pope but also approued by Bellarmine and Molina the Iesuite and Balbus with diuers others though I confesse reiected by Stella Maldonate and Arias Montanus But what are these to a Pope that cannot erre and to such an Emminent Cardinall as Bellarmine is So likewise they expound that Text Matth. 17. 24. Solue pro te me Pay for thee and me To signifie that Christs family hath two heads to wit Christ and Peter because they two onely payd and that Peter was chiefe ouer the rest of the Apostles because none of the rest payd as if paying of tribute was a signe of preeminence and not rather of subiection as Iansenius expounds it So Baronius alledgeth that of Act. 10. 13. Arise Peter kill and eate to proue the Popes power to excommunicate the Venetians Kill that is excommunicate and eate that is bring them to the obedience of the Church of Rome This is goodly stuffe indeede sure they stand in neede of arguments to proue their cause that are driuen to these silly shifts So our Country-man Fisher to proue iustification by workes alledgeth that Text of S. Peter 1. Pet. 4. 8. Loue couereth the multitude of sinnes which he expounds thus that loue expiateth and purgeth away the guilt of our sinnes in the sight of God contrary to the direct sense of the holy Ghost Pro. 10. 12. 27. It is a wonder to see how both Bellarmine and all the Patrones of Purgatory wring and wrest the Scripture to vnderprop the Popes Kitchin The Scripture cannot name fire and purging but presently there is Purgatory as Esay 4. 4. and 9. 18. Mal. 3. 3. nor a lake where there is no water but there is Purgatory as Zachar. 9. 11. nor things vnder the earth Phil. 2. 10. Apoc. 5. 3. but there is Purgatory and yet they themselues confesse that they know not whether it be vnder the earth or no because the Church hath not yet defined where it is And Bellarmine bringeth in eight diuers opinions touching the place of Purgatory but two of their expositions touching Purgatory I cannot ouerpasse left I should depriue the Reader of matter of laughter in the midst of this serious discourse and them of commendation of wit for they are witty aboue measure the one is Mar. 13. 34. where it is said in a Parable that a certaine man going into a strange Country leaueth his house and giueth authority to his seruants and commandeth the Porter to watch This man going into a strange Country signifieth the soule say they which by death departeth out of this world his leauing authority with his seruants signifieth that he commandeth his executors to procure with his goods the prayers suffrages of the Church whereby he may be freed from Purgatory hee commandeth the Porter to watch that is he giueth part of his goods to his Pastor that he may diligently
sacrifice for him by saying Masse Who can doubt of Purgatory that is thus authentically proued The second place is in the 8. Psalme 7. Thou hast put all things vnder his feete fowles of the ayre that is say they the Angels in heauen beasts of the field that is the godly in this life and fish of the Sea that is the soules in Purgatory Here is a proofe of Purgatory worthy the noting 28. And thus much for a taste of their false and foolish expositions these being not the hundreth part of them which are found in their writings Let all men iudge now whether these men deale well with the Scriptures or no and whether they be friends or enemies to the sacred word of God the Spirit of God that animateth it that dare thus wretchedly abuse it at their pleasures and wring it like a nose of waxe into any shape to make it serue their purpose Erasmus placeth that Frier in the Ship of fooles that being asked what Text he had in the Scripture for the putting of Heretikes to death produced that of S. Paul Tit. 3. 10. Haereticum hominem post vnam aut alteram admonitionem deuita that is in true construing Shunne an Heretike after the first or second admonition but he construed it thus De vita supple tolle that is Kill an Heretike after c. This fellow by Erasmus opinion was worthy of a Garland or rather of a Cockscomb for his witty exposition and so was he also that being asked where hee found the Virgin Mary in the olde Testament answered In the first of Genesis in this Text Deus vocauit congregationem aquarum Maria. But I must not be so sawcy with Popes and Cardinalls I iudge them not therefore but leaue them to the iudgement of God 29. Their last practice against the Scriptures is their adding to and detracting from it at their pleasure whatsoeuer either distasteth their Pallate or may seeme to make for their profit which notwithstanding hath a wo denounced against it And this practice is grounded vpon a rule Papa potest tollere ius diuinum ex parte non in totum The Pope may take away say they the lawe of God in part but not in whole and if hee may take away then may he adde also for the same reason is of both and one is as lawfull as the other for adding marke their practice the Councill of Trent together with most of the Popish Doctours adde vnto the Canon of the Scripture the Apocrypha Bookes of Iudith Wisedome Tobias Ecclesiasticus Machabees remainders of Ester and Daniel and curse all them that are not of the same minde and yet the Iewes before Christ who were the onely Church of God at that time and Scriniarij Christianorum as Tertullian calls them or depositarij custodes eloquiorum Dei as Tollet the Iesuite names them that is The keepers and treasurers of the holy Scriptures and to whome were committed the Oracles of God Rom. 3. 2. These Iewes I say neuer admitted of these Books as Canonical and the Fathers for the most part though they held them Bookes profitable for instruction of manners yet dispunged them out of the Canon as not of sufficient authority to proue any poynts of faith as is confessed by Bellarmine himselfe in some sort naming Epiphanius Hilarius Ruffinus and Hierom and by Melchior Canus nominating besides the former Melito Origen Damascene Athanasius accompanied with many other Diuines as he saith and besides the Bookes themselues by many pregnant proofes deriued out of their owne sides doe be wray that they are not of the same spirit the Canonicall Scripture is of 30. Againe they adde to the Scriptures theiâ— Decretals and Traditions Innocentius the third commanded the Canon of the Masse to be held equall to the words of the Gospell and it is in one of their Bookes Inter Canonicas Scripturas decretales Epistolae connumerantur that is The Decretall Epistles are numbred among these Canonicall Scriptures As for Traditions I haue shewed before that it is a decree of the Councill of Trent that they are to be receiued with as great affection of piety and reuerence as the written Word of God Againe they adde vnto the Scripture when they take vpon them to make new articles of faith which haue no ground nor footing in the Scriptures for vnto the twelue articles of the Apostles Creed the Councill of Trent addeth twelue more as may appeare in the Bull of Pius the fourth in that publike profession of the Orthodoxall faith vniformely to be obserued and professed of all And when they adde vnto the two Sacraments ordained by Christ fiue other deuised in the forge of their owne braines and those two also they so sophisticate with their idle and braine-sicke Ceremonies as the Eucharist with eleuation adoration circumgostation and such like trumperie and Baptisme with oyle and spittle and salt and coniuring and crossing c. that they make them rather Pageants to mooue gazing then Sacraments for edifying and thus most wrongfully they adde vnto the Scripture euen what they themselues list 31. As for their detracting and taking away they shew themselues no lesse impudent for they haue taken away the second Commandement as appeareth in diuers of their Catechismes and Masse-bookes because it cutteth the throat of their Idolatry wholly out of the Decalogue and to make vp the number of tenne they diuide the last Commandement into two contrary to all reason and authority Yea so impudent are they that two famous Iesuites Vasques and Azorius doe boldy affirme that this second precept which forbiddeth worshipping of Images was not of the law of nature but onely a positiue Ceremoniall and Temporall Iniunction which was to cease in the time of the Gospell and in the Eucharist whereas Christ ordained the Sacrament of his bodie and bloud in two kindes they notwithstanding depriue the people of the cup and will haue it administred to them but in one kind Yea Cardinall Caietane as Catharinus testifieth of him cut off from the Scripture the last Chapter of S. Marks Gospell some parcels of Saint Luke the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of Iames the second Epistle of Peter the second and third of Iohn and the Epistle of Iude and yet this mans writings were not disallowed in the church as containing any thing contrary to wholesome doctrine and hee himselfe acknowledged to bee an incomparable Diuine and the learnedst of all his age and thus wee see both the doctrines and practices of the Church of Rome against the Scripture 32. To the which if we adde their open blasphemies and horrible reproches wherewith in plaine downe-right blowes they rent and teare in pieces or at least-wise besmeare and defile these holy writings then their malice against them will bee knowne to all men and there will bee no vizard left to maske it withall To conclude therefore some of them
call the Scripture a dumbe Iudge some a dead Letter and without a Soule others dead Inke others a Nose of Waxe to be wreathed this way or that way others say that it is no better then Aesops Fables without the authority of the Church all of them ioyne in this that it is not simply necessary that it was written not to rule our faith but to be ruled by it and that Christ neuer commanded his Apostles to write any Scripture and that it is subiect and inferiour to the Church all these and many other bitter and blasphemous speeches they belch out against the Scripture whereby they plainely bewray their cankred hatred against the Scripture and all because they finde it contrary to their humour and an enemie to their Religion 33. Thus the Minor proposition in this demonstration is I hope sufficiently prooued to wit that the Religion of the Church of Rome doth professedly disgrace the holy Scripture as both by their doctrine their practice and their blasphemous speeches against it doth manifestly appeare and so the conclusion is of necessary and vndeniable consequence that therefore it deserueth to be suspected and reiected of all those that professe themselues to be friends to the Scripture and hope from it either consolation in this life or saluation in the life to come MOTIVE VII That Religion is to be abhorred which maintaineth commandeth and practiseth grosse and palpable Idolatry but so doth the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo c. WHen I consider the fearefull Idolatry of the Church of Rome which for that cause is called The Whore of Babylon and The Mother of fornications Reuel 17. 1. 2. I cannot choose but wonder that any should be so bewitched with the sorceries of this Iezabel or made drunke with the wine of her fornication that they should take her marke vpon their forheads and right hands and ioyne with her in her abominations and not rather come out of her with all speed as they are admonished by the Angell lest they bee partakers in her sinnes and haue a share also with her in her plagues but then againe remembring that which S. Paul faith that the comming of Antichrist should be in all deceiueablenesse of vnrighteousnesse and that God should send vpon them strong delusion to beleeue lies I turne my wondering at their sottishnesse into the admiration at Gods Iustice and Truth the one in punishing their contempt of his Gospell with such a giddinesse of spirit and the other in making good his owne word after such an euident and manifest manner that there by it most clearely appeareth that the Pope of Rome is that Man of sinne and Sonne of perdition there spoken of euen that Antichrist which exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God and sitteth in the Temple of God as if he were God As this appeareth in many grosse errors which they hold so in none more then in the horrible idolatry practised and preached defended in this Antichristian Church of which I may truely say as Plutarch said of the heathen that they mingle heauen with earth because they made Gods of men men of Gods So these whilst they giue diuine worship to earthly creatures as the crosse pictures of Christ and to the Saints in heauen or attribute earthly affections to heauenly creatures make a plaine mixture of heauen and earth spoyling the Creatour of his honour due vnto his Dietie and adorning the creature therewith and ascribing that vnto men which is onely proper vnto God That the Church of Rome is guilty of this impiety I hope by Gods grace so to proue in this Motiue that no Iesuite though neuer so subtill shall bee able with any shew of sound reason to hisse against 2. The first proposition in this Argument though it be of so euident a truth that it needeth no further demonstration yet because S. Paul saith that an Idoll is nothing in the world and thereupon some may peraduenture conclude that Idolatrie is a matter of nothing and a small and triuiall sinne I will therefore very briefly shew the greatnesse and haynousnesse of this sinne and how odious and abominable it is in the sight of God As touching therefore that phrase of Saint Paul An Idoll is nothing it is not to bee vnderstood either in respect of matter for euery Idoll hath a materiall being and subsisting as the matter of the Calfe which the Israelites made in the Wildernesse was gold and of the brazen serpent which was abused also as an Idoll was brasse and of those Idols which the Prophet Esay declameth so against were wood nor yet in respect of forme as Bellarmine and Caietane would haue it As though the Apostle should meane thus that an Idoll though it hath matter yet it hath no forme that is to say is the representation of such a thing as hath no being in nature for many of the Idols of the Gentiles were of such things as truly were but the Apostles meaning is as Tertullian obserues and many other both of ancient and late Writers that an Idoll is nothing in respect of that which it is intended to bee that is that it is no God nor hath any part of the Diuinitie in it which deserueth to bee worshipped or that it is nothing in regard of efficacie and power that is as the Psalmist speaketh is not able to doe either good or bad to hurt or to helpe to saue or to kill and this interpretation is authorized by S. Augustine and S. Chrysostome the one saying thus There are Idols indeede but they can doe nothing neither are they Gods the other thus Sunt Idola sed ad salutem nihil sunt There are Idols but they auaile nothing to the attaynement of saluation and it is also approued by many other Expositors both ancient and moderne Protestants and Papists and is most agreeable to the whole current of the Text. This then that S. Paul saith That an Idoll is nothing is both so farre from extenuating the sinne of Idolatrie that it aggrauateth the same and also so farre from clearing the Church of Rome from the guilt of that crime that it rather layeth a greater stayne thereof vpon it 3. As for the greatnesse of the sinne it may appeare by three considerations first of the precept for there is no one commandement of the Law so frequent in the whole Scripture and so strictly vrged and mounded and fenced about with so many reasons as that is against Idolatrie as we may see in the Decalogue Secondly in respect of the punishment denounced against and inflicted vpon the committers thereof to wit not onely eternall death from the iustice of God which is the wages of all sinne vnrepented of but also temporall death from the iustice of man as being vnworthy to breathe this common ayre or to tread vpon the earth that thus sinne against the Maiestie of God and that
thereof 18. This is Bellarmines But to the first I answere That though the people ought to doe so that is adore vpon condition which notwithstanding is a thing neuer heard of before in any diuine worship and implieth necessity of danger yet because not one amongst a thousand doe so hauing neuer heard that distinction once named in their liues nor vnderstanding what it meaneth therefore they are for this neuer a whit freed from Idolatry To the second I answere that oftentimes the Priest hath neither actuall nor vertuall intention for what intent had the Monke Bernhardine that poysoned the hoast to the intent that he might poyson the Emperour Henry of Lucenburgh as he also did at the instigation of Robert King of Sicily What intent had that Priest that either did or would haue poysoned Pope Victor the second as witnesseth Baronius or those Priests that poysoned William Archbishop of Yorke for hee was poysoned at the Masse by the treason of his owne Chaplins both with that which was in the Chalice If the Priest bee an Athiest as many of the Popes themselues were what intention haue they of consecrating Christs body when they beleeue not that Christ hath a body or that there is a Christ now liuing in the heauens and sitting at the right hand of his Father to be present in the Sacrament or what intention can they haue to doe that which the Church doth when as they beleeue not that there is a Church but that all Religion is a fable and a matter of policy Here must needes be grosse and notable Idolatry by their owne confession for I argue Ex concessis that is out of their owne grounds So that we must iustly conclude notwithstanding all their distinctions and shifts that the Church of Rome in worshipping the consecrated hoast and that with such worship as is due vnto God is guilty of Artolatry that is of worshipping a piece of bread in stead of God then which what can be more Heathenish and palpable Idolatry 19. Secondly wee indite them of Idolatry for that they teach that Images are to bee worshipped with diuine worship and in their practice they giue vnto stockes and stones the honour which belongeth vnto God For this is their doctrine that the Images of the blessed Trinity and of Christ and of the Virgin Mary the mother of Christ and of other Saints are to be had and retained especially in Churches ijsque debitum honorem venerationem impertiandam and that due honour and worship is to be giuen vnto them they be the words of the Councill of Trent Now what that due honour and worship is that is a great question among them some thinke it is the same which appertaineth to the persons whom they represent as if it be the Image of God or Christ then it is to be worshipped latria that is with the highest degree of worship if of the Virgin Mary then with a little lower degree called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if of the Saints then with the lowest which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and this is the tenet of many of their Rabbies as reporteth Vasques the Iesuite to wit Aquinas Caietane Bonauenture Alexander Coster and diuers others Others thinke that the Image is not to be worshipped at all but onely the Samplar before the Image Of this opinion were Durandus Alphonsus de Castro and some others but it is confuted by Catharine and vtterly reiected by Bellarmine A third sort were of opinion that Images ought to bee worshipped in themselues and properly with a lesse honour then the Samplar and therefore that no Image was to be worshipped with Latria Of this opinion were Peresius Catharinus Sanders Gabriel c. But the Councill of Trent which is their Church in the wordes of the decree and Bellarmine which is their chiefe champion doe manifestly incline to the first opinion for this is the summe of his propositions First that the Images of Christ the Saints are to be worshipped not onely by accident and improperly but euen by themselues and properly so that they doe limit the worship as they are Images and not onely as they stand in stead of their patternes Secondly that in truth and deed Images may be worshipped with the same kind of worship which belongeth vnto their patternes improperly and by accident and so with Latria in that condition Thirdly and lastly that though this be true yet especially in the pulpits and before the people it is not to be said that Images are to bee worshipped with this kind of worship but rather the contrary Heere is excellent diuinity the people must not bee taught the truth nay the contrary rather which is a lie and that in the pulpit beholde here a doctor of lies and that by his owne confession whilst he goeth about to maintaine Images which Habacuk calleth doctors of lies Hab. 2 18. 20. This is the summe of their doctrine Out of all which these three conclusions doe arise First that the blessed Trinity that sacred and incomprehensible deitie by their doctrine may be pictured on a wall and worshipped in or at an Image yea that such an Image ought at least improperly bee worshipped with the same worship that is due vnto God himself as whē they picture God the Father in the similitude of an old man God the Son in the likenes of a yong child God the holy Ghost in the likenesse of a Doue which the Scripture in the second Commandement condemneth as Idolatrie and that the intendment of that Commandement is not against the Images of false gods onely as the Romanists would haue it but also of the true Iehouah Moses the best expounder of himselfe teacheth most plainely Deut. 4. 16. when hee saith Take heed that you make not to your selues any grauen Image or representation of any figure for you saw no Image in the day that the Lord spake vnto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire and the Prophet Esay confirming the same exposition saith To whom will you liken God or what similitude will yee set vp vnto him Esay 40. 18. as if he should say it is impossible to represent God by any likenesse or similitude If they reply that they worship not the Image but God in the Image I answer First that the very Image of God is an Idoll by this Commandement and therefore the erecting of it to a religious vse is Idolatry Secondly that it is false which they say that they worship not the Image but God in the Image for their doctrine is contrary as hath beene shewed and their practice is contrary as shall be declared hereafter Thirdly though it be true which they alledge yet the worshipping of God before an Image is Idolatry for when the children of Israel worshipped the two golden calues at Dan and Bethel they were not such calues to worship the outward calues but
touch of diuine worship and religion therfore it was reiected the one saying Stand vp for I my selfe am a man insinuating that a man must not bee religiously adored and the other See thou doe it not for I am thy fellow seruant implying thereby that Angels and if Angels then Saints are but our fellow-seruants and therefore not to bee worshipped with any part of diuine and religious worship 49. To the example of Peter Bellarmine and Vasques giue two answers the one out of Hierom in his Booke against Vigilantius that Cornelius was worthily corrected by Peter because he thought some diuine thing to be in him aboue othermen the other out of Chrysostome vpon this place that it was no fault in Cornelius to exhibite but modesty in Peter to refuse that honour which was due vnto him Bellarmine is in different which of these two answers we take and therefore without propounding his owne iudgement leaues theÌ„ to our choyce and yet the one of them ouer-turneth the other for Hierom saith it was a fault in Cornelius Chrysostome that it was no fault Hierom that Peter did well in reprouing Cornelius Chrysostome that he did not reprooue him at all but of modesty refused the honour giuen to him What reason had he to leaue these to our choyce being thus contrary It plainely sheweth that he knew not what to answere Therefore Vasques the Iesuite renounceth Hieroms answere vpon this ground that Cornelius knew the true God before Peter came vnto him and therefore could not erre so grossely as to ascribe any diuinity to a mortall man and insists vpon Chrysostomes that hee did it for modesty sake but by as good warrant we may reiect Chrysostome as he doth Hierom especially seeing our reason is as effectuall for Peter giues this reason of his denyall for I my selfe am a man which must needs be the medium of a sillogisme thus to be concluded No religious worship is to be giuen to man but I my selfe am a man therefore thou doest euill to worship me Here is not a strayning at courtesie for modesty sake but a plaine renunciation of Cornelius his sact as vnlawfull if it had been a tricke of modesty onely he should rather haue said thus comparatiuely I am not worthy of this honour from such a man as thou art or such like but in saying I my selfe am but a man he insinuateth that Cornelius did more then he ought to do 50. If they say I but though you thus escape from Chrysostome yet Hieroms interpretation will hold you fast I answere Besides Vasques reason whereby he reiecteth Hierom that it maketh nothing against vs but for vs rather against them because Hierom seemeth to condemne as idolatrous all such adoration of Saints wherein any part or propertie of the diuine nature is attributed vnto them but the Romanists in kneeling and prostrating their bodies to the Saints ascribe the properties of God vnto them to wit either to be present in many places at once oâ— to heare being as farre remote from them as â—eaâ—en is from earth and to know the heart and to haue power to helpe c. all which properly are proper vnto God 51. To the example of Iohn and the Angell the former two Iesuites oppose also a double answere first that the Angell did appeare vnto Iohn in that maiesty that he might bee thought to be Christ himselfe And therefore that Iohn was rebuked not for the errour in his adoration but for his errour in the person adored This answere Vasques names onely and then reiects as friuolous But Bellarmine propounds it as good and authenticall Which shall we beleeue in this case Maâ—y sauing his reuerence though hee be now a Cardinall the plaine Iesuite is to be preferred before him both because this answere is crossed and contradicted by the second and also because the Iesuite giues a reason of his reiection And the Cardinall goeth to it by downe-right authority as if because he is their chiefe Rabbi hee may say what hee list his reason is because Iohn did truely know him to be an Angell and not God and therefore that there was no errour in the person Secondly they answere that the Angell would not now as in time before be worshipped of men because now God was become man and by his incarnation brought such dignity to the nature of man that the very Angels should doe reuerence vnto it not be adored and reuerenced by it especially of Christs Apostles and Princes of the Church To which I answere first that by this allegation it must needes follow that Angels are not now to bee adored in the Church of Christ howsoeuer they were before which is contrarie to their owne doctrine and generall tenent of their religion And secondly if not Angels then much lesse the Saints who at their highest though they be made like yet are farre inferiour to the Angels in excellency of graces and gifts And thâ—â—â—ly the reason where with the Angell after he had reproued Iohn directeth him to the right obiect of religious worship doth ouerthrow this exposition for he saith Worship God he doth not say Forbeare to worship me because your nature is dignified by the incarnation of the Sonne of God but forbeare because I am not God and all diuine and religious worship belongeth vnto him And thus notwithstanding all that is yet said all religious kneeling and prostrating the body to the Saints is Idolatrous 52. As for the dedicating Temples consecrating Festiuall daies making vowes to them they are all within the same compasse and that partly for the reasons before specified being acts of a religious worship but especially because the doctrine of their Church is that these things are so properly directed vnto the Saints that the end of their consecration is determined in them And therefore Bellarmine reprooues their opinion which say that Temples cannot properly bee erected to any but to God and affirmeth that they may be dedicated directly vnto Saints and that vowes may bee made to them determinately and so also Holy daies consecrated which cannot be any lesse then plaine Idolatrie seeing as Saint Augustine saith Cuiconuenit Templum ei conuenit sacrificium to whom a Temple to him a Sacrifice belongeth And seeing the Scripture in many places testifieth that vows must onely be made to God I am not ignorant of their cuasion that they doe not dedicate Churches to Saints as they are Temples but as they are Basilicae that is stately buildings for memorials of the Saints and that a Vow is made to God in signum gratitudinis â—rga authorem primum principium omnium bâ—nâ—rum as a signe of our thankfulnes to God the authour and first cause of all good things but to the Saints as a signe of gratefulnesse towards our mediatours and Intercessours by whose meanes wee receaue benefits from God And that the honour of the holy day though it immediately pertaineth to the Saints yet mediately
and secondarily it amounteth to God 53. These be Bellarmines goodly but scarce godly distinctions for these and such like as these are hee vseth as engines to vndermine the truth and as vizards to couer the face of vgly falshood But they may well bee ouerthrowne with this one blast that the holy Scripture neuer taught them neither haue they any warrant from Gods Spirit and therefore they are rather to be accounted forgeries of a frothy wit then fruits of truth But let vs examine them a little A Church is dedicated to God as it is a Temple and to a Saint as it is a Basilica Why then it seemeth that either sometimes it is a Temple and sometimes not a Temple according to the fancie of those that approach vnto it or else it is alwaies a Temple and yet alwaies a Basilica too and then the honour must be diuided betwixt God and the Saints let them take which they will the first is impiety the second Idolatry Againe for Vowes though we vow chiefly vnto God and secondarily to the Saints yet the same worship in nature is giuen to these as to him onely it is not in the same degree but Idolatry is to afford any part of Gods worship to a creature as hath beene shewed And lastly touching feast daies if they be immediately applied to the honour of the Saint and in a mediate and secondarie respect to God as his distinction importeth then the creature is adored not onely with the like worship in nature but with a higher degree then God himselfe And thus the mist which he seeketh to cast ouer mens eyes by the subtiltie of his distinctions is quickly dispelled assoone as the light of truth sheweth it selfe and therefore as Ixion imbracing a cloud in stead of Iuno beg at a monstrous off-spring so the entertaining of those cloudie distinctions without deciphering them to the quicke hath bred and doth breed most of those monstrous errors in the Church of Rome Thus we see that this outward adoration is tainted with most grosse Idolatrie 54. The second branch of their Idolatrie to the Saints is by Inuncation and Prayer directed vnto them For Prayer is a proper and peculiar part of Gods worship and therefore not to be giuen to any other besides without a plaine touch of Idolatry for the commandement of God is in the Olde Testament Call 〈…〉 of 〈…〉 not vpon my â—â—gels or my Saints but vpon 〈…〉 nd tâ—â—â— be alone is 〈…〉 inuocated the reason following declareth 〈…〉 d I will deliuer thee from whence ariseth this conclusion he alone is to be inuocated by prayer that is able to deliuer vs in the day of trouble but God alone can doe that therefore he alone is to be prayed vnto Againe it is the commandement of our Sauiour Christ in the New Testament to his whole Church that it should thus pray O our Father not O our mother nor O our brother nor O our sister nor O our fellow-seruants as the Popish Church prayeth but O our Father If there had been any necessity of praying to Saints sure our Sauiour would here haue prescribed it where he setteth downe a perfect forme of prayer to be vsed in his Church for euer Infinite be the places of Scripture â—ending to this end neither is there so much as one precept or example in the whole Booke of God that either inioyneth or approueth Inuocation of Saints as Cassander confesseth albeit his inference therevpon is absurd that therefore it may be done because as there is no mandate nor example extant to warrant it so there is no prohibition to interdict it as if it were not necessarily required that as all our actions so our prayers should bee grounded vpon faith without which it is not onely impossible to please God but also whatsoeuer we doe is sinne but saith is grounded vpon the word of God only It commeth by hearing saith the Apostle and hearing by the word of God How then can the Inuocation of Saints bee but vaine and vnprofitable yea impious and dangerous seeing it is without saith and so without all hope of Gods acceptance 55. Suarez and Salmeron two famous Iesuites confesse as much as Cassander for the one saith that we neuer reade that any directly prayed vnto the Saints departed that they should pray for them and the other that the Inuocation of Saints is not expressed in the New Testament because it would haue beene a harsh precept to the Iewes and dangerous to the Gentiles Thus here are three and those not of the meanest that acknowledge the inuocation of Saints not to bee found in Scripture And yet Bellarmine and â—â—â—ius and Coster and others 〈…〉 ashamed to â—â—est di 〈…〉 laces of Scripture to prooue it but with what impudeâ—â—y of spirit and euill successe I shall not neede to shew being sufficiently discouered by others and the very fight of them being a sufficient refutation 56. As for his reason which he braggeth to be vnanswerable me thinkes it halts of all foure for because we entreat Gods children here in this world to pray for vs doth it therefore follow that we must pray vnto them being departed out of this world By the same reason it may bee inforced that we ought to giue almes vnto them and entertaine them into our houses and wash their feete and comfort them and aduise them and preach vnto them for all these duties of charity wee performe to Saints militant If they say Why but they are remooued from vs and also from their bodies and therefore as they stand not in neede of our charity so wee cannot extend it vnto them The same answere cutteth the throte of this argument they are so farre exalted aboue vs and seuered from all commerce with our affaires that though we vsed their prayers here on earth yet it is in vaine to inuocate them in heauen our prayers as our deeds of charity being not able to stretch so farre This I take to be a sufficient solution to that vnsoluble argument Albeit we haue also another answere in readinesse to wit that there is not the same reason of the inuocation of Saints in heauen as of the mutuall prayers of Gods children on earth but a great difference here we know one anothers necessities there the Saints know not our wants here we are present with them whom we request to pray for vs but we are not present with the Saints in heauen nor they with vs and therefore the one is a fruite of charity but the other a practice of piety and religion here one liuing man may request anothers helpe by word of mouth or letter but inuocation of Saints is often performed by the secret desires of the heart without the vtterance of any speech here we stand as fellow members in our prayers and make request for each other not in our owne names but in the name of Christ our Mediatour but when men inuocate the Saints in
an effect of omnipotency Dicitur enim Deus omnipotens faciendo quod vult non patiendo quod non vult i. For God is sayd to be omnipotent by doing that which he will not by suffering that which he will not 8. From hence it must needes follow that heere can bee no miracle and that not onely because miracles are extraordinary works of God and this change of substances is ordinary in euery Sacrament as they say and miracles are not contrary but aboue or beside nature but this is flat contrary not onely to nature but to God himselfe the Authour and Creator of nature and miracles are alwaies sensible but this is insensible and cannot bee discerned by any outward meanes but also for that no miracle can imply contradiction in it selfe as this must needes doe if it were as they would haue it For when Aarons Rodde was turned into a Serpent it left to be a Rodde and when it turned into a Rodde it left to be a Serpent And when the Water was turned into Wine it left to bee Water it was impossible that it should haue beene both Water and Wine at one time in one and the same respect or a Rodde and a Serpent at once And so of all other miracles there is not one to be found that enwrappeth contradictions Besides all which Saint Augustine concludeth peremptorily that Sacraments may haue honour vt Religiosa but not amazement vt admiranda as miracles And Thomas Aquinas more plainely saith Ea quae contradictionem implioant sub diuina potentia non continentur i. Those things which imply contradiction cannot fall vnder the power of God 9. They reply that they teach no more then Cyprian did thirteeene hundred yeeres since who said that Christ did beare himselfe in his owne hands at the last Supper I answere that Cyprian in that place the rest of the Fathers elsewhere did often vse hyperbolicall speeches to extoll the dignity of the Sacrament and to shew the certainty and efficacy of our communion with Christ and of our spirituall eating of him but they neuer meant so as the Romanists doe that Christ bore his reall naturall substantiall body in his owne hands and gaue it to his Apostles after a fleshly manner For Cyprian expoundeth himselfe in another place when hee saith that Sacraments haue the names of those things which they signifie And Saint Augustine more plainly saith that Christ did beare himselfe in his owne hands after a sort If it had beene really and substantially what neede hee haue added after a sort for this word as they vse to speake in Schooles is Terminus diminutiuus qui realitati vbique detrahit A diminitiue terme which detracteth from the realtie and true being of a thing And this speech Christ bore himselfe in his owne hands after a sort is all one with that in another place After a certaine manner the Sacrament of Christs body is Christs body So that it is playne that when the Fathers said Christ bore himselfe in his owne hands they meant nothing but that he bore in his hands the Sacrament of himselfe and thus this first contradiction is irreconciliable I come to a second and that in the Sacrament which is no lesse palpable 10. It is a principle of their Religion and of the truth it selfe that Christ after his resurrection ascended into heauen and there filleth a place and hath figure forme and disposition of parts and is circumscribed within a certaine compasse according to the nature of a body This is Bellarmines owne assertion and it is consonant to sound doctrine confirmed both by manifest Scripture and vniforme consent of ancient Fathers for Scripture Christ is said to bee like vnto vs and not barely like but like in all things that is both in nature and in the qualities and quantities of nature And to put the matter out of doubt onely one thing is excepted wherin he is not like vnto vs and that is Sinne whereby he is absolutely left to bee like vnto vs in all other things And lest any should thinke that that was true onely whilst he was here vpon earth the Apostle in the forenamed places applyeth it to him being in heauen for hee saith Wee haue not an High-priest which cannot be touched with our infirmities and therefore let vs boldly goe vnto the throne of grace where the Apostles argument were of no force if he were like vnto vs here on earth onely in the state of his humilitie and not also now being in heauen in the state of glory for sinfull man might thus reply True Christ was like our nature whilst he liued amongst vs but now being glorified he hath put off our nature and therefore we dare not presume to come vnto him Yes saith the Apostle he is still like vnto vs and hath not put off our nature but the infirmities of our nature onely which were the sequels of sinne as we also shall doe when we shall be translated into heauen after the resurrection And this Saint Luke more plainely auoucheth when he saith that after he had blessed them he departed from them and was carryed vp into heauen and that whilst they beheld he was taken vp by a cloude out of their sight Where we see plainely a locall motion of Christ from earth to heauen and therefore there must needs be of him a locall situation in the heauens As also Saint Peter in expresse words doeth affirme when he saith that the heauens must containe or receiue him vntill the time of restauration of all things Thus this doctrine is consonant to holy Scripture 11. Now let vs see how it was entertayned by the ancient Fathers thus they write Athanasius When Christ said I goe to the Father he spake of the humane nature which hee haed assumed for it is the propertie of him to goe and come who is circumscribed with certaine limits of places and forsaking that place where it was commeth to the place where it was not Nazianzene saith Wee professe one and the same Lord passible in the flesh impossible in his Godhead circumscribed in body vncircumscribed in deity the same both earthly and heauenly visible and inuisible comprehended in place and not comprehended Againe Christ as man is circumscribed and contayned in place Christ as God is vncircumscribed and contayned within no place Augustine saith Christ as man according to his body is in a place but as God filleth all places Cyril saith Though Christ hath taken from hence the presence of his body yet in the maiestie of his deitie hee is alwayes present Fulgentius saith One and the same Christ a locall Man of a Woman his mother who is the infinite God of God his Father Vigilius the Martyr Christ is in all places according to the nature of his deitie but is contayned in one place according to the nature of his humanity Damascene The difference of natures
in Christ is not taken away by their vnion in one person but the proprietie of each nature is kept safe Leo one of their Popes Christ hath vnited both natures together by such a league that neither glorification doth consume the inferiour nature nor assumption doth diminish the superiour To these I might adde many more but these are sufficient to prooue that this doctrine touching the truth of Christs humanitie now glorified in the heauens that he hath retained our nature with all the proprieties sinne onely and infirmities excepted is concordant both with holy Scripture and with the voited opinions of all reuerend antiquitie 12. Now this doctrine is crossed and contradicted by that other doctrine of theirs touching Transubstantiation and the carnall and corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament for this they teach that the body of Christ is in the Sacrament with the whole magnitude thereof together with a true order and disposition of parts flesh bloud and bone as he was borne liued crucified rose againe and yet they say that the same body in the Eucharist though it hath magnitude and extention and disposition of parts agreeable to the forme of an humane body neuerthelesse doth not fill a place neither is to bee extended nor proportioned to the place which it possesseth here be pregnant and manifest contradictions Christ hath one body and yet many bodies euen as many as there are consecrated hoasts in the world that is it may be a thousand bodies at once and so his body is one and not one at the same time Againe this body is in heauen in a place and the same body at the same instant is on the Altar without being compassed about with place to be in heauen and to be in earth at one instant are contradictory propositions being vnderstoode of finite substances and not of that infinite essence which filleth all places for they imply thus much to be in heauen and net to be in heauen to be in earth and not to be in earth which be the rules of Logicke and Reason the mother of Logicke cannot be together true Againe at one moment of time to be aboue and yet below to bee remooued farre off and yet bee neere adioyning to come to one place and yet not to depart from another are so meerely opposite to each other that they cannot be reconciled And lastly a body to haue forme magnitude extention and disposition of parts and yet not with these to fill a place is as much as to say it is a body and yet not a bodie it is in a place and yet not in that very same place these are contradictions so euident that it is impossible for the wit of man to reconcile them 13. Notwithstanding the aduocates of the Romish Synagogue labour might and maine in this taske and by many arguments endeauour to reunite these oppositions first by Gods omnipotency secondly by the qualities of a glorified body and thirdly by arguments from the discourse of reason From hence they thus argue All things are possible to God and therefore this is possible neither is there any thing excepted from the omnipotency of God saue these things Quae facere non est facere sed deficere as Bellarmine speaketh that is which to doe is not to doe but to vndoe and doe argue rather impotency then potency of which sort that one body should be in many places at once is not saith he because it is not in expresse words excepted in Scripture as to lye and to denye himselfe are To this I answere first that albeit the Scripture doth not expresly except this from Gods omnipotency to make one body to bee in two places at once yet implyedly it doth for it denyeth power or rather weaknesse to God to doe those things which imply contradiction of which kinde this is for one body to be in many places at once And Bellarmine himselfe saith that this is a first principle in the light of nature euery thing is or is not which being taken away all knowledge faileth Secondly I answere that the power of God is not so much to be considered as his will nor what he can doe but what he hath reucaled in his word that hee will doe for if wee argue from his power to the effect Wee may deuise God saith Tertullian to doe any thing because he could doe it And therefore the same Authour saith Dei posse velle est Dei nonposse nolle God can of stones raise vp Children vnto Abraham saith Iohn Baptist Now if any should hence conclude that any of Abrahams children were made of stones in a proper speech all would thinke him to haue no more wit then a stone And to this accordeth Theodoret when hee saith That God can doe all things which hee will but God will not doe any of these things which are not agreeable to his nature But for to make a body to be without quantity and a quantity to be without dimension and dimension without a place that is as much to say a body without a body and quantity without quantity and a place without a place is contrary to Gods nature and therefore cannot bee agreeable to his will and so hath no correspondence with his power And lastly I answere that it is no good reason to say God can doe such a thing therefore he doth it but rather thus God will doe such a thing therefore he can doe it and thus the Scripture teacheth vs to reason Whatsoeuer pleased the Lord that did hee in heauen and in earth and not whatsoeuer hee could doe but whatsouer it pleased him to do and the Leper said to our Sauiour Christ Master if thou wilt thou canst make me cleane no◠if thou canst thou wilt but if thou wilt thou canst 14. Secondly whereas they obiect that Christs bodie after his glorification is indued with more excellent qualities then any other naturall body by reason of that super-excellent glory wherewith it is adorned aboue all others and thereby as he came to his Apostles the dores being shut and rose out of his graue notwithstanding the stone that lay vpō it and appeared vnto Paul on earth being at the same time in heauen so he is in the Eucharist after a strange and miraculous manner and yet is in heauen at the same time I answere first with Theodoret that Christs bodie is not changed by his glorification into another nature but remaineth a true bodie filled with diuine glory And with Augustine that Christ gaue vnto his flesh immortality but tooke not away nature and in another place That though Christ had a spirituall body after his resurrection yet it was a true bodie because he said to his Disciples Palpate videte feele and see and as his body was then after his resurrection so it is now being in the heauens Secondly that when hee came out of the graue the Angell remoued the stone
with Hierome and Iustine Martyr and when he entred into the house the dores being shut that the dores and walls yeelded vnto him a passage as vnto their Creator with Theodoret and Cyrill and that when hee appeared vnto Paul going to Damascus if it was in the aire or on the earth as it may be doubted that then this body was not in heauen at the same instant for farre bee it from vs so to pin vp our Lord in the Heauens that he cannot be where he pleaseth And this is Thomas Aquinas opinion in expresse words which Bellarmine as expresly contradicteth 15. Thirdly by discourse of reason hee thus laboureth to reconcile these contradictions and thus disputeth God being but one simple and inuisible essence is in infinite places at once and he might create another world and fill it with his presence and be in two worlds at one instant and the soule of man is wholy in euery part of the body and God is able to conserue the soule in a part that is cut off from the body therefore it implieth no contradiction to be in two places at once againe one place may containe two bodies and yet be not two places but one as when Christ rose out of the graue the Sepulchre being shut therefore one body may be in two places at once and yet not two bodies but one Lastly there be many other mysteries of religion as strange and difficult to be conceiued as this and yet are beleeued therefore this also is to be beleeued as well as they 16. A miserable cause sure that needeth such defences the weakenesse of these reasons argueth the feeblenesse of the cause for who knoweth not but that there is no similitude betweene the infinite God and a finite Creature nor any proportion betwixt a Spirit and a body and that à posse ad esse from may bee to must bee is no good consequence Adde that one place cannot hold two bodies nor euer did except they were so vnited that in respect of place they made but one And lastly that all those mysteries of Religion which he nameth to wit the Trinity the Incarnation the Resurrection the Creation and Annihilation c. haue their foundation in holy Scripture and therefore are to be receiued as doct ines of truth though transcending the spheare of nature and reason but this strange mysterie of Transubstantiation hath no ground in Scripture as he himselfe confesseth and therefore it is not to be beleeued as the other are without better reasons then he bringeth for the defence thereof but like lips like lettuces such as the cause is such are the defences both nought and weake as any man may see that is not muffled with errour and thus this second contradiction remaines irreconciliable 17. A third contradiction is also in and about the Sacrament which is this they teach that the matter in Sacrament is partly the outward Elements and partly the thing signified and represented by them and that betwixt these there is a certaine relation and similitude as in Baptisme the outward signe which is water and the thing signified which is the bloud of Christ make the matter of that Sacrament or the outward wasting by water and the inward by the Spirit and the relation is as the water washeth and purgeth away all filthinesse of the body so Christs bloud purgeth away both the guilt and filth of sinne from the soule and so in the Eucharist the Elements of Bread and Wine together with the bodie and bloud of Christ are the matter of the Sacrament and the relation is as those elements doe feed nourish and strengthen and cheare the bodie of man so the body and bloud of Christ doe seed nourish and strengthen and cheare the soule vnto eternall life and as those elements must be eaten and digested or else they nourish not so Christ must also be eaten and as it were digested and after a sort conuerted into our substance or else he is no food vnto our soules This is the very doctrine of the Church of Rome and it is agreeable to the truth for Bellarmine thus speaketh Species illae significant quidem cibum spiritualem sed non sunt ipsae cibus spiritualis that is The signes in the Scrament signifie our spirituall foode but they are not the spirituall foode it selfe And in another place he saith that signum in Sacramento reisignatae similitudinem gerit The signes in the Sacrament doe beare the similitude of the thing signified And in the same Chapter hee sayth more plainely that God would neuer haue ordained one thing to signifie another vnlesse it had a certaine analogie or similitude with it And herein he accordeth with the Master of sentences who defines a Sacrament thus To be a visible forme of an inuisible grace bearing the Image of that grace And with Hugo who saith That a Sacrament is a corporall or materiall element propounded outwardly to the senses by similitude representing and by institution signifying and by Sanctification containing some inuisible and spirituall grace And that this relation is in eating and nourishing Bellarmine in another place confesseth in direct words when he saith that That same outward eating in the Sacrament doth signifie the inward eating and refreshing of the soule but is not the cause thereof and that that is so necessarie a condition that without it we should not be partakers of that diuine nourishment And to this agreeth Saint Augustine who plainely affirmeth that if Sacraments had not a certaine similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they were not Sacraments at all And what this similitude is he declareth in another place where hee saith that We receaue visible meate in the Sacrament but the Sacrament is one thing and the vertue of the Sacrament is another And Thomas Aquinas giueth this as a reason why Bread and Wine are the fittest matter of this Sacrament because men most commonly are nourished therewith his words are these As water is assumed in the Sacrament of Baptisme to the vse of spirituall washing because corporall washing is commonly made by water so bread and wine wherewith most commonly men are nourished are taken vp in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to the vse of the spirituall eating By which it followeth that if water did not wash it was no fit element for the Sacrament of Baptisme so if bread and wine doe not nourish they are no fit signes for the Lords Supper and for this cause our Sauiour at the institution of this Sacrament gaue this commandement to his Disciples that they should take and eate and the Apostle calleth it the Lords Supper and the Lords Table 18. This therefore is their own doctrine and it is grounded vpon the truth But listen a little how they contradict this by their miraculous monster Transubstantiation for when they say that the substance of the bread and wine is vtterly
not iustify and yet faith alone doth iustify If they say that they speake of one kinde of faith and we of another they say nothing to the purpose for euen that any faith alone should iustify is contrary to their owne positions who affirme that the former cause of our iustification is the inherent righteousnes of works and not the righteousnes of Christ apprehended by faith And thus I leaue the Article of iustification at farre with it selfe to be atoned by their best wits if it be possible 37. Let vs come to their doctrine of workes and see how that agreeth with it selfe and here first they hold that works done before faith and regeneration are not good workes but sinnes This is proued by them out of Saint Augustine who affirmeth that the workes of vnbeleeuers are sinnes and if the workes of vnbeleeuers then of all other wicked men which bee not regenerate seeing as the same Father else-where speaketh Impij cogitant non credunt the wicked doe not beleeue but thinke they haue but a shadow of faith without substance It may be prooued also by that generall and infallible axiome of the holy Scripture Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne but the workes of wicked men are all voyd of faith and therefore are no better then sinnes in the sight of God be they neuer so glorious and beautifull in the eyes of men Or as Gregorie Nazianzene saith As faith without workes is dead so workes without faith are dead and dead workes are sinnes as appeares Heb. 9. 41. Besides Bellarmine confirmeth the same by reason because they want a good intention to direct their workes to the glory of the true God whome they are ignorant of To which I adde another reason drawne from our Sauiours owne mouth Mat. 7. Because an euill tree cannot bring forth good fruit but euery man til he be ingrafted into Christ is no better then an euill tree and therefore cannot doe a good worke 38. This is their doctrine and it is sound diuinitie but see how they crosse it ouer the face with a contrary falshood for the same men that teach this notwithstanding affirme that the workes of Infidels are good suo genere in their kind so they are good and not good sinnes and yet good works but this is in their kind say they that is Morally and not Theologically I but morall vertues in the vnregenerate are by their owne principles sinnes how then can they be good any waies Can sinne which is a transgression of Gods law and simply in it owne nature euill be in any respect good as it is sinne But to take cleare away this scruple another of them auoucheth that they are not onely morally but euen Theologically good for he saith that such works as are done by the light of nature onely without grace doe dispose and make a man in some sort fit to iustification though it be longè valdèremotè remotely and a farre off for he that yeeldeth obedience to morall lawes is thereby lesse vndisposed and repugnant to diuine grace Now how can sinnes dispose or prepare a man for iustification is God delighted with sinnes Either therefore they are not sinnes or they doe not dispose to iustification neither farre nor neere or which is the present contradiction they are sinnes and not sinnes good and not good at one time and in one and the same respect And to put the contradiction out of all question the Councill of Trent in the seuenth Canon of the sixt Session enacteth as much and denounceth Anathema to all that say the contrarie the words are these If any man shall say that all the works which are done before iustification by what meanes soeuer they are done are truely sinnes or deserue the hatred of God let him be Anathema And Andradius the interpretor of that Councill authorised by the Fathers of the same doth more perspicuously explaine the meaning of that Canon when hee saith that men without faith destitute of the spirit of regeneration may doe workes which are voyde of all filthinesse free from all fault and defiled with no sinne and by which they may obtaine saluation then which what can be more contradictory to that which before was deliuered that all the workes of Infidels and vnbeleeuers are sinnes be they neuer so glistering with morall vertue or more agreeable to the olde condemned errors of Iustine Clemens and Epiphanius who affirmed that Socrates and Her aclitus were Christians because they liued according to the rule of reason and that the Grecians were iustified by Philosophie and that many were saued onely by the law of nature without the lawe of Moses or Gospell of Christ 39. Againe their doctrine of doubel merit the one of Congruity the other of Condignity as they terme them is not onely contrary to the truth but to it selfe For this they teach that the merit of congruity which the Councill of Trent calleth the preparations and dispositions to iustification is grounded vpon the dignity of the worke and not vpon the promise of God but the merit of condignity requireth both a dignity of the worke and the promise of God to bee grounded vpon or else it is no merit This is Bellarmines plaine doctrine and is consonant to the residue of their Doctours both Schoole diuines and others for thus they define the merit of congruity It is that by which the subiect is disposed that it may receiue grace according to the reason of Gods iustice Here is onely iustice required and not any promise to the merit of congruity though I must confesse Gabriel Biel somewhat crosseth this definition when â—e saith that when a man doth what in him lyeth then God accepteth his worke and powreth in grace not by the due of Iustice but of his liberalitie And Aquinas who affirmeth that when a man vseth well the power of free-will God worketh in him according to the excellencie of his mercy But yet they all agree in this that the merit of congruity is not grounded vpon any promise as the merit of condignity is but onely vpon the worthinâ—s of the worke done Now here lurketh a flat contradiction for by this it should follow that the merit of congruity should bee more properly a merit then that of condignity Which Bellarmine denyeth in the same Chapter because this dependeth vpon it owne dignity and hath no neede of a promise as the other hath and so should bee also more meritorious and excellent then the other being neuerthelesse but a preparation and beginning to iustification and the other the matter of iustification it selfe And that a man that hath no grace dwelling in him but onely outwardly mouing him nor is yet iustified should haue more power to deserue and merite then he that is fulfilled with grace and fully iustified Thus error like a Strumpet bringeth foorth a monstrous brood of absurdities but let vs proceede 40. Their
this Sacrament there is a cōmemoration of that sacrifice of the crosse which was once offered this he spake conuicted by the truth And the Councill of Trent also in another place doth almost if not fully speake asmuch when it sayth that Iesus Christ left to his Church a sacrifice by which that bloudy sacrifice which hee made vpon the crosse might bee represented and the memory thereof continued which if it be true then being conuicted by their owne consciences and confessions it remaines that that doctrine which holdeth that the masse is a true reall propitiatory sacrifice is opposite to the doctrine of the Gospell which teacheth the contrary and so this fourth Antithesis is safe and sound for all that Bellarmine can say against it 21. The Gospell teacheth that both parts of the Sacrament are to bee ministred to all Christians and of the cup it sayth expresly Drinke ye all of this but the Church of Rome hath decreed that none should drinke of the cup but the Clergie and that the people should content themselues with the other part of the Sacrament 22. Bellarmine distinguisheth of the word All and saith By it is not to be vnderstood all the faithfull but the Apostles onely which hee prooueth by Saint Marke who sayth that they dranke all of it that is all the Apostles which sate at table with our Sauiour Christ and not all the Christians that beleeued in him 23. But to his distinction not all Christians but all Apostles I answere that this is Bellarmines conceit or rather deceit and hee borrowed it of Andradius the famous expositer of the Councill of Trent but it is a miserable glosse woe bee to it that so soully corrupts the text first the fathers vnderstood by the vniuersall All all the faithfull and that the Apostles heere in this great action were not Pastors but sheep Christ himselfe the great shepheard beeing the distributer and diuider of this Sacrament I shall not need to repeat their words they are so euident and ordinary Let the margent direct the Reader to them if they desire satisfaction in this point 24. Secondly many of their owne Doctors so interprete it as Thomas Aquinas Durand Biel Alphonsus de Castro Lorichius the author of the glosse and diuers others Cassanders testimony shall stand in stead of all the rest he sayth plainly that the Westerne Church beleeued for a thousand yeeres that our Sauiour Christ gaue this Sacrament to his disciples representing the persons of all the faithfull and he addeth reasons why the wine as well as the bread was to bee receiued both for a more full representation of the passion of Christ and signification of our full spirituall nourishment in Christ and also the full and perfect redemption of our bodies and soules by the body and soule of our Sauiour This Cassander repeats to haue beene the opinion of the Latine Greeke Church for the space of a thousand yeeres What an vpstart distinction then is this of Bellarmine who notwithstanding ceaseth not to bragge that they haue all antiquity on their side 25. Thirdly wee haue Saint ` Paul thus interpreting the words of his Lord and Master who spake nothing but by the direction of the Spirit for whereas our Sauiour sayth Drinke yee all of it Saint Paul sayth Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eat of this bread and drinke of this cup. But all must examine themselues before they come to the sacrament therefore all are enioyned to drinke of the Sacramentall cup let vs chuse then whom wee will beleeue whether Saint Paul or Bellarmine for Saint Paul interprets this All one way and Bellarmine cleane contrary 26. Lastly reason it selfe disapprooueth this exposition for first I would aske him whether that which our Sauiour commanded to bee done at his last Supper were to bee done once and no more or often euen to the end of the world If hee say once and no more the words will confute him which say Doe this in remembrance of me if often then by All he meant not the Apostles onely for the Apostles liued not till the end of the world Againe if by All was intended the Priests onely then not onely the people should bee excluded from the cup but from the bread also for if in these words Drinke ye all of it hee speaketh to Priests onely then in these words Eat ye all of it hee speaketh to none but Priests for they are both spoken to one and the same persons And thus the people should haue no part of the Sacrament at all for the same All that is in one is in the other And to conclude if the Apostles stood heere in stead of Pastors or Priests why did they not minister the Sacrament It is the part of a Priest as hee is a Priest to minister the Sacrament to others and when hee receiueth it himselfe then hee standeth for a common Christian and not for a Priest for a sheepe not for a shepheard But they did not minister but receiue therefore they stood not here for Priests but for the whole body of the faithfull And thus this distinction being battered by the testimony of fathers confession of their owne Doctors authority of Saint Paul and strength of reason doth fall to the ground like Babel and this fift Antithesis is nothing weakened by Bellarmines Sophistrie 27. The Gospell teacheth that true repentance or conuersion to God is an earnest sorrow of heart for sinnes committed and faith perswading that they are certainely remitted for Christs sake But the Church of Rome teacheth that contrition indeed is one of the parts of repentance but they faine that it meriteth a remission of sinnes and to it they adde auricular confession not commaunded by God satisfaction or voluntary workes by which they say that the punishments of sinne are satisfied that these also may be redeemed by money and purse-penance All which whole doctrine is very blasphemous against the merit of the Son of God who onely made satisfaction for our sinnes 28. Bellarmine heere from distinguishing falleth to rayling and accuseth vs of manifest lying and falshood in laying that to our charge which wee are not guilty of but whether is the lyar hee or wee let the Reader iudge First therefore that true repentance is not a bare sorrow of heart for sin but such a sorrow as is ioyned with and ariseth from faith appeareth by this because contrition without faith leads to desperation and not to saluation as the wofull examples of Cain Esau and Iudas declare and therefore the Romanists themselues doe not exclude all manner of faith from repentance but onely that faith which apprehendeth remission of sinnes by Christ which speciall faith whereby remission of sinnes is beleeued and obtained is ioyned with repentance Luke 24. 47. Act. 26. 18. This is our doctrine and it is warranted by the holy Scripture though it pleaseth Bellarmine to say that it is a
of nature then the Saints are no wayes our Mediatours for if they bee they must bee one of these two wayes vnlesse wee will say that they doe that which belongs not vnto them but like busy-bodies are pragmaticall in anothers charge which farre bee it from vs to thinke of those blessed creatures but both these wayes he sayth Christ is the onely Mediatour therefore the Saints by his owne conclusion are no Mediatours at all 58. His third distinction is that therefore Christ is called the onely Mediatour because hee prayeth for all and none for him but the Saints are such Mediatours that they themselues stand in need of a Mediatour I answere that therefore they are no Mediatours at all for if the Saints in Heauen stand in need of a Mediatour themselues then it must necessarily follow that they are not Mediatours at all for they that are parties cannot bee vmpiers And this is that which Saint Augustine plainely affirmeth though Bellarmine laboureth to distort his words to another sense when he sayth He for whom none intreateth but hee intreateth for all is the onely true Mediatour And thus it is cleare that the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the mediation of Saints is directly contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell 59. The Gospell teacheth that Christ Iesus hath made a full and perfect satisfaction for all our debts and so is our full and perfect Redeemer But the Church of Rome teacheth that Christ hath satisfied but in part for our debts to wit neither for all our sinne nor for all the punishment due vnto all our sinne and so that he is not our full and perfect Redeemer 60. This doctrine of the Gospell is so euidently propounded in holy Scripture that our aduersaries themselues acknowledge it in generall to bee true for Aquinas where the Apostle sayth I suffer all things for the Elects sake that they may also obtaine the saluation which is in Christ Iesus asketh this question What was not the passion of Christ sufficient and answereth to the same Yes as touching the working of saluation And Bayus sayth that there is but one satisfaction onely vnto God and that of Christ yea Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth asmuch in generall for hee affirmeth that the merit of Christ is sufficient to take away all sinne and punishment neither dare any of the rest for shame in plaine words deny the same because if they did many manifest texts of Scripture would conuince them of impiety and heresie 61. And that the other is the doctrine of the Church of Rome the Councill of Trent will witnesse which thus defineth When God forgiueth a sinner hee forgiueth not all the punishment but leaneth the party by his owne workes to satisfie till it bee washed away Yea they affirme not onely that wee our selues must satisfie for the temporall punishment but also for the relikes of sinne and for the fault it selfe yea for that punishment that should bee suffered in hell excepting the eternity yea so impious and shamelesse are some of them whose bookes are notwithstanding authorized by the Church of Rome that they affirme that Christ dyed onely for originall sinne and that the satisfaction of Christ deserueth not the name of a satisfaction for our sinnes Let the world iudge now whether these positions of the Church of Rome bee not flat contrary of the Gospell of Iesus Christ for the Gospell attributeth to Christ all sufficiencie of meriting and satisfaction but these fellowes make him a Satisfier party parpale for the sinne but not the punishment yet not for all our sinnes neither but for a part of them as for originall not actuall or iffor actuall yet for mortall onely and not for veniall And this is the Romish Religion though palliated with the name of Catholicke and hidden from the sight of the common people vnder the vaile of an implicite faith which if they should but see they could not chuse but abhorre 62. For the healing of this wound Bellarmine applyeth his wonted playster of a distinction Christs satisfaction saith he is in vertue sufficient but not in act efficient except it bee applyed by our satisfaction and therefore that there is but one onely actuall satisfaction which is ours which by the grace and efficacy of Christs satisfaction taketh away the punishment of our sinne and maketh a iust recompence to God for the same 63. But this distinction first vndermineth it selfe for if Christs bee a satisfaction then it is an actuall satisfaction if it bee not an actuall one then it is none at all Did not he actually dye and rise againe Did not hee actually by that death of his satisfy Gods iustice for all the Elect Doth not the strength and efficacy ofhis death stretch it selfe backward to Adam and forward to the last beleeuing child of Adam vpon earth If all this bee true then it must needs bee intolerable blasphemy to say that actually there is no satisfaction but our owne and that Christs satisfaction which hee made for our sinnes is indeed no satisfaction except it bee by the meanes of ours which must apply it and as it were giue efficacy vnto it 64. Againe the ground of his distinction is absurd for where doth the Scripture make our satisfaction a meanes to apply Christs satisfaction vnto vs It telleth vs of other meanes of application to wit outward the Word and Sacraments inward faith in respect of vs and the Spirit in respect of God but no where of this new-deuised meanes which they talke of and besides how can our satisfactions apply Christs vnto vs whereas they are both satisfaction and that to God and that for our sinnes Nay when as hee sayth that our satisfaction doth include the satisfaction of Christ in it and so both together make but one compound satisfaction if they be of one naturâ—â— how can one apply the other If they bee one in mixture and composition how is the one seuered from the other These bee absurd inconsequences and irreconciliable 65. Lastly if the strength power of satisfying which is in our sufferings is wholly from the grace of God the vertue of Christs satisfaction why doe some of them hold that a man by power of nature without grace may bee able to satify for Veniall sinnes and expell them nay why doth Bellarmine say that a righteous man hath right to Heauen by a twofold title one of the merits of Christ by grace communicated vnto him and another of his owne merits By which he plainely diuideth our merits from Christ and ascribeth a satisfactory power to them equall to the death of Christ it selfe and that without the helpe of grace Nay why do they not say plainly that Christ hath satisfied for vs without any intermixing of our owne but that their wisedome perceiued that then Purgatory Masses Penance Romish pardons yea and the Popes Kitchin it selfe and the very marrow of all their Pompe shall fall
thinke it fit for vs to say so for humility sake but also that wee were so in truth and indeede Let Saint Bernard for an vpshot wipe away this distinction Wilt thou saith he say that Christ hath taught thee to say so for humility sake true indeed it was for humility but what against truth And thus none of these shifts and distinctions can deliuer this doctrine from opposition to the Gospell for it followeth ineuitably if the best be no better then vnprofitable seruants then none can worke such works whereby hee may not onely merite for himselfe eternall life but hauing a surplusage of redundant merits bestow some of them for the supplying of others wants 100. And thus wee haue a short view of the cleere and manifest oppositions that are betwixt the doctrines of the Gospell and the doctrines of the Church of Rome And we see with what subtill and intricate distinctions they labour to reconcile them together but truth is naked and needeth no such shiftings Both the one and the other therefore namely their direct opposition to the Gospell on the one side and their elaborate diflinctions to make good their cause on the other doth euidently euince the conclusion of this ninth demonstration that that Religion which is built vpon such desperate and dangerous principles cannot be the truth of Christ but the doctrine and Religion of Antichrist The X. MOTIVE That Religion which nourisheth most barbarous and grosse ignorance amongst the people and forbiddeth the knowledge and vnderstanding of the grounds of the Christian faith cannot be the truth but this doth the Romish Religion ergo c. 1. IN the first proposition of this Argument the Romanists hold the Wolfe by the eares not knowing whether it be better to graunt or to deny it for if they graunt it to bee true it will flye in their faces because they are guilty of the contents thereof and if they deny it it will bite them by the fingers for all men will condemne them of shamelesse impudency for denying so apparant a truth Therefore as the beast which Pliny calleth Amphisbaena so it stingeth both wayes But of two euils the lesser they must of necessitie deny it or else they must condemne their owne practice of impietie which sure they will not doe though for their labour they gaine to themselues that name which so frequently and imperiously they impute vnto vs Shamelesse Heretikes they speake it of vs in the spirit of malice but it shall be prooued of them by sound reason and that in this demonstration ensuing by Gods assistance 2. For the confirmation therefore of the first proposition a word or two though whatsoeuer can be spoken thereof is but to adde light vnto the Sunne First therefore the Scripture standeth foorth and condemneth ignorance so plainely that nothing can be more euident Salomon telleth vs That they which hate knowledge loue death And the Prophet Esay That the people were carryed into captiuitie because they had no knowledge And the Prophet Hosca That they were destroyed for lacke of knowledge Our Sauiour affirmeth that the cause of erring in the Sadduces was the ignorance of the Scripture And Saint Paul coupleth these two together in the Gentiles Darkned cogitations through ignorance and strangers from the life of God where he plainely sheweth that ignorance and destruction are inseparable companions as sanctified knowledge and saluation are And to omit infinite other passages of holy writ our Sauiour directly concludeth that he which knoweth his Masters will and doth it not shall bee beaten with many stripes and he which knoweth it not and therefore doth it not shall be beaten too but with fewer stripes By which he giueth vs to know that though some kinde of ignorance may extenuate and lessen the fault yet none especially if it bee of matters which we are bound to know and may be attayned vnto doth excuse from all fault but is blame-worthy and punishable by Gods iustice 3. Thus speakes the holy Ghost in the Scripture and doubtles in reason it must needs be so for wherin doth a man differ from a beast but in reason and vnderstanding and wherein doth one man differ from another but in the enlightning of reason by diuine knowledge which is the matter subiect of true Religion Religion being nothing else but the knowledge and profession of the diuine truth the want whereof must needs be a subuerter and destroyer thereof A Physicion that is ignorant of the grounds of his Arte we account a Mountebanke and Imposter And what I pray you can they be lesse that professe ignorance and that in the most difficult Art of all other the Art of Christianitie Besides all confesse that ignorance is a defect and blemish of the soule and that the more knowledge a man hath the neerer he is vnto perfection because hee is the more like vnto God but the chiefe end of Religion is to purge away the blemishes to make vp the breaches of the soule to renue Gods Image defaced therin that so we may be made like vnto him euen perfect as he is perfect How can then true Religion teach ignorance which is such an enemy vnto perfectiō or how can that be true religion which nourisheth ignorance inioyneth it vnto most of her professors followers 4. Let the fathers bee Iudges of this cause Saint Augustine sayth in one place that Ignorance as a naughty mother bringeth forth two wicked daughters falshood and doubting And in another that the knowledge of God is the engine by which the structure of charity is built vp Saint Bernard sayth that both the knowledge of God and of a mans selfe is necessary to saluation For as out of the knowledge of a mans selfe commeth the feare of God and out of the knowledge of God the loue of him so on the contrary from the ignorance of a mans selfe commeth pride and from the ignorance of God desperation Saint Chrysostome sayth that knowledge goeth before the imbracing of Vertue because no man can faithfully desire that which hee knoweth not and euill vnknowne is not feared The like song sing all the rest of the Fathers whose testimonies I thinke needlesse to accumulate being so wel knowne to all men 5. And that they may bee vtterly without excuse heare what their owne Doctours affirme Aquinas confesseth that omnis ignorantia vincibilis est peccatum si sit eorum quae aliquis seire tenetur All vincible ignorance that is which may bee auoided is sinne if it bee of those things which a man is bound to know But such is the ignorance maintained in the Church of Rome not onely vincible but affected wilfull and voluntary Bellarmine also acknowledgeth that ignorance is a disease and wound of the soule brought in as a punishment of originall sinne And confesseth out of Saint Augustine that it is the cause of errour For Two euils are
brought into the world sayth Saint Augustine by originall sinne ignorance and difficulty from which two other fountaines of euils doe arise to wit error griefe For ignorance bringeth forth error and difficulty griefe And our Countrey-man Stapleton telleth vs plainely that Zelus sine scientia est vehemens cursus in deui◠in quo quantò curris velociùs tantò a via aberras longiùs peccas absurdiùs Zeale without knowledge is a violent course in a wrong way wherein the swifter wee runne the further woe wander and sinne the groslier Thus they themselues write and therefore I wonder how the same men should dare to allow that which in their own consciences they condemne or nourish that in the people which they confesse to bee a sinne a wound and disease of the soule and the way to perdition I know not how they will distinguish and shift off that saying of Saint Paul Blessed is he that condemneth not himselfe in that which hee alloweth vnlesse it bee either by saying that they condemne not ignorance in all but onely in the Lay people as if Lay people had not souls to saue aswel as Priests Or that they allow of it not simply in regard of it selfe but in respect to a further good to wit the increase of deuotion as if euill were to be done that good might come thereof which Saint Paul giueth a God forbid vnto and sayth that their damnation is iust that are of that minde I leaue therefore this first proposition confirmed by Scripture reason Fathers and their owne Doctours and come to the second wherein out of their owne grounds they shall bee conuinced of this grosse impiety 6. That the Romish Religion doth nourish and maintaine most grosse and barbarous ignorance amongst the people and take from them the key of knowledge First their owne confessions Secondly their doctrines And thirdly the fruits and effects of both in the whole rabble of their multitude Priests and people shall euince For their confession The Rhemists doe plainely confesse that knowledge in things wee pray for is not required of Christians but that ignorance is to bee preferred before it and that ability to professe the particulars of our faith is not necessary no when possibly we are to dye in the defence of the same faith How contrary is this to that which Saint Peter teacheth that eueryman be ready to giue an answere of the hope that is in him Hosius saith that to know nothing is to know all things and ignorance of most things is best of all How contrary to that which our Sauiour teacheth This is eternall life to know thee and whom thou hast sent Iesus Christ The same Hosius with Stephylus and others commends the Colliers faith to be the onely faith whereby euery vnlearned man may trye the spirits resist the Deuill iudge of the right sense of Scriptures and discerne true doctrine from false c. And what was the Colliers faith Mary being at the point of death and tempted of the Deuill answered I beleeue and dye in the faith of Christs Church Being againe demanded what the faith of Christs Church was answered that faith that I hold And thus hee beleeued as the Church beleeued and the Church as he and yet he neither knew what the Church nor himselfe beleeued This is a braue faith and worthy to bee canonized to all posterity for conquering the Deuill But what if the Deuill departed from the Collier not because hee was scarred with his bugbare faith but because he perceiued him safe enough intangled in his snare and so needed not to tempt him any more being already sure enough his owne Where was his faith then Sure I am it is farre vnlike to that faith which the Scripture speaketh of which is often called by the name of knowledge and not of ignorance as Esay 53. 11. Iohn 17. 3. 7. Againe another affirmeth plainely to wit Linwood their Lawyer that for simpler people it is sufficient to beleeue the articles of the faith implicuè that is confusedly and infoldedly and not distinctly and plainely as a bottome of yarne folded together which lieth in a small compasse and not raueled out at the length that it may bee seene and discerned in euery part And their Angelicall Doctour Aquinas compareth Gods children to asses and their teachers to oxen because it is said in the first Chapter of Iob that the oxen did plow and the asses fed by them that it is sufficient for them in matters of faith to adhere vnto their superiours And in the same place hee concludeth that a man is bound to know no more explicitely but the Aritcles of the faith As for all other doctrines of Religion conteined in Scripture it is enough to beleeue them implicitely And againe in another place hee sayth that knowledge doth occasionally hinder deuotion and therfore that simple men and women that are voyd of knowledge are for the most part most inclined to deuotion But I confesse he speaketh this of such knowledge as is not sanct fied but puffeth vp how be it hee should then haue ascribed the impediment of deuotion vnto the pride that accompanieth knowledge and not to knowledge Hence grew that notorious celebrated prouerbe of the Romish Synagogue that Ignorance is the mother of deuotion And it goeth for currant amongst them all as yet vncontrolled But how opposite is the very sound thereof to that which holy Scripture teacheth that ignorance is the mother of errour and of folly Prou. 7. 7. and of destruction Hos 2. 6. Thus wee haue their open confession and what should follow but their open condemnation 8. But peraduenture the Iury requireth fuller euidence let them list therefore to their doctrines diuers whereof either directly maintaine ignorance or at least by necessary consequence driue thereunto and they are such as are not the particular opinions of priuate men but the approoued doctrines of their Church so that a man cannot bee an entyre Romanist but he must needes subscribe vnto them and subscribing vnto them must also needs confesse that that monstrous ignorance which is in the Church of Rome doth issue out of their corrupt fountaine To come therefore vnto them 9. The first doctrine that breedeth and nourisheth ignorance amongst them is their locking vp the Scripture in an vnknowne tongue that the common people being ignorant of the learned tongues may not be able to read them much lesse to vnderstand them to their comfort which that is so hath beene partly declared already and may further bee demonstrated for Bellarmine affirmeth that it is not necessary for the Scripture to be translated into our Mother tongue And Azorius another Iesuite going a step further saith that it is not expedient for the sacred volumes to be translated into Mother tongues because thereby the vnitie of the faithfull should be detrimented and diuers causes of errors and heresies would spring vp
and ignorance must needs ouerflow the world as wofull experience hath taught to bee true in those places where the Romish Religion preuaileth 16. Thirdly they teach that Images and Pictures are Lay mens Bookes wherein they must read and with the which they must content themselues without searching at all into the Booke of God This doctrine taught Gulielmus Peraldus three hundred yeeres since saue that hee ioyned the Scripture and Images together for thus he writeth As the Scriptures be the Bookes of the Clergie so Images and the Scripture are the Bookes of Lay men where hee equalleth a dumbe and dead Picture to the speaking and liuely Scriptures the worke of man to the Word of God But Loelius Zechius a learned and famous Diuine of latter time goeth further and saith that Images are the onely Bookes for them that bee vnlearned to draw them to faith and knowledge and imitation of diuine matters Yea another Fryer that liueth in Paris at this day or at least was aliue very lately goeth yet a degree further and affirmeth that Lay men may more easily learne diuine mysteries by contemplation of Images then out of the Booke of God and all these are as they stile them most Catholike and holy Bookes But what should I search further into these petty Disciples whereas the grand Doctor himselfe hath this proposition in expresse words Meliùs interdum docet pictura quà m scriptura A Picture doth better instruct sometimes then the Scripture 16. This is their Doctrine Now what fruits doth it bring foorth Surely the best fruit is ignorance a worse then that error and the worst of all superstition and and idolatry for howsoeuer we deny not that there may be an historicall and ciuill vse of Pictures either to put vs in minde of our absent friends or to represent some obseruable history and notable deede done or to stirre vs vp to the imitation of the vertues of Godly men and women yet we constantly affirme that to make them the Bookes of Lay men either to be instructed by them alone without the Booke of God or to finde better and more perfect instruction in them then in it is to inwrap the people in a cloude of foggie and mistie ignorance and to hood-winke their eyes that they should not see the bright shining light of truth for where is all sound sauing knowledge to bee found but in the holy Scripture whither doth our Sauiour Christ send his Disciples but vnto them he doth not say vnto them Gaze vpon Pictures for they be they that testifie of me and In them yee shall finde eternall life but Search the Scriptures for c. And the Prophet Dauid that it is the Law of God that giueth wisedome vnto the simple and that conuerteth the soule and giueth light vnto the eyes and not the Pictures of Abraham Isaac and Iacob or of any of the Prophets And therefore though a man may be instructed by a Picture touching a thing done yet most certaine it is that more excellent and more perfect instruction is gotten by the Scripture for let an vnskilfull man returne neuer so often to the beholding of his Picture it will alwaies represent the same thing vnto him and if any scruple or doubt remaine in his minde it can answere nothing for the explication thereof whereas in holy Scripture that which is obscure in one place is explained in another and that which in one Chapter we cannot conceiue in the next following it may be is so cleerely set downe that a childe may discerne it without erring so that as a man may discouer his meaning by signes and becks yet it is not so effectuall as if he vtter it by word of mouth so Pictures may teach but yet Scripture teacheth more fully and effectually And therefore to tye the people to these dumbe Bookes and discharge them from searching into the Booke of God is to depriue them of the chiefest meanes of knowledge and so to foster them in ignorance 17. But yet this is not all For besides that it occasioneth ignorance an Image also is a teacher of lyes as the Prophet Habakuk calleth it and a mother and a nurse of superstition and Idolatry For first how many Pictures are there in their Churches of Monsters and miracles that neuer were As of Saint George killing the Dragon Saint Christopher carrying Christ vpon his shoulder ouer the Ford. Saint Catherine tormented vpon the wheele and disputing with the Philosopher Saint Dunstane holding the Diuell by the nose or lip with a paire of Pincers Saint Denis carrying his owne head in his hands being strooke off Saint Dominick burning the Deuils fingers with a Candle which hee made him to hold will he nill hee And an infinite number such like which either neuer were extant in the world or were not such neither euer did worke such feates as are represented by their Pictures Two Pictures I cannot passe ouer in silence which I haue seen and obserued with my owne eyes the one at the Church of Ramsey in Huntington-shire neere adioyning vnto that quondam a famous and rich Abbay In this Church in the lowest window in the right I le is a picture of a paire of Ballance in one skole whereof is the Deuill and in the other a woman and the woman is more sinfull then the Deuill ouerweighing him euen to the ground Behold a Lay mans book whereat wise men may wonder fooles may laugh and women may bee inraged and euery one may read the folly and prophanenes of those times Sure I am heere is little instruction for the soules health The other is in the Cloister window of the cathedrall Church of Peterborough where is painted out at large the history of Christs passion In one place whereof our Sauiour Christ sitteth with his twelue Apostles eating his last Passeouer which because it was vpon the Thursday night before Easter commonly called Maundey Thursday therefore they picture before him in a dish not a Lambe as the truth was but because it was Lent O miserable blindnesse three pickerels so that now the Paschall Lambe is turned into a Paschall pickerell and all forsooth to nourish in the people the superstition of the Lent fast For if they should see Christ eating flesh in Lent what an incouragement would this be thought they for the people to doe the like 18. And thus Images may wel be called Laymens bookes But what bookes you see euen such as teach lyes and superstition no sound and true instruction I could heere relate how that Saint Dunstane put life by a trunke forsooth into the Image of the Virgin Mary and made her speake against the marriage of Priests when that controuersie could no otherwise bee decided And how the Image of the Crucifixe vsed to speake to Saint Francis to the end to giue authority to the order of his fraternity and that vpon two Images in a Church at Venice the one of Saint
Dominick the other of Saint Paul were written these words On Pauls By this man you may come to Christ On Dominicks But by this man you may doe it easilier because Pauls doctrine led but to faith and the obseruation of the Commandements but Dominicks taught the obseruation of Councils which is the easier way All this and asmuch more might be produced to this purpose But I conclude the point with the censure and confession of their owne Cassander who out of the writings of William Bishop of Miniatum concludeth with him that as if officious lyes should bee added to the holy Scriptures there would remaine no authority nor weight in them So no errour nor falshood should be tolerated in Images and Pictures in the Church seeing that an errour not resisted is receiued for a trueth And in the same place the same Cassander doth bewaile the abuse of Images in the Church of Rome affirming that superstition was too much pampered thereby that Christians were nothing behind the Heathō in the extreme vanity of framing adorning and worshipping of Images Thus farre Cassander out of which we may perceiue the chiefe lessons that are learned out of these Lay bookes to wit ignorance superstition and Idolatry And therefore no maruaile if all these vices raigne in the midst of their Church as plentifully as amongst the Heathen themselues 19. Fourthly they deliuer for sound doctrine that whereas Saint Iohn sayth that they which haue the anointing of the holy Ghost know all things Hee meaneth not that euery one should haue all knowledge in himselfe personally but that euery one that is of that happy society to which Christ promised and gaue the holy Ghost is partaker of all other mens graces and gifts in the same holy Spirit to saluation And thus whereas Saint Iohn meaneth that euery true Christian both by the outward preaching of the word and by the inward vnction of the Spirit hath a distinct knowledge of all things necessary to saluation They say that it is sufficient if he be partaker of another mans knowledge though he be empty voyde himselfe Then which what can be a greater nourisher of ignorance and quencher of knowledge For if I may bee saued by anothers mans knowledge and faith And if it bee not required that I should know al things necessary to saluation in my owne person but may haue a share of another mans knowledge what need I greatly seeke for knowledge my selfe And why may I not repose the hope of my saluation vpon other men And heereby wee may obserue their grosse absurdity In the case of iustification they teach that wee are not made righteous by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto vs though hee bee the head of the body of the Church and the Spirit that animateth it proceedeth from him and yet heere they say that a man may be made wise and knowing by the knowledge of other their fellow members in the same body abiding in the vnity of Christs Church What is this but to aduance the members aboue the head or at least to forget themselues not caring what they say so that they maintaine the cause they haue in hand 20. I but Saint Augustine sayth If thou loue vnity for thee also hath he whosoeuer hath any thing in it it is thine which I haue it is mine which thou hast And againe in another place hee sayth When Peter wrought miracles he wrought them for me because I am in that body in which Peter wrought them In which body though the eye seeth and not the eare and the eare heareth and not the eye yet the eye heareth in the eare and the eare seeth in the eye c. Therefore all the grace and knowledge that is in any other of Gods Saints either liuing or dead is ours by participation And so that which was sufficient in them for their saluation is also enough for vs for ours though wee haue little or none of our owne Thus reason our Rhemists in the place before quoted But I answere first with our reuerend learned countrey-man Doctor Fulk that Saint Augustine vnderstandeth that place of Saint Iohn of an actuall and personall knowledge inspired by the holy Ghost concurring with the outward ministery of the Church and not of any generall knowledge infused into the Church to bee transfused and dispersed among the members by an imputatiue participation Secondly if a man may know by another mans knowledge why may not a man bee righteous by anothers righteousnesse And if the knowledge of our fellow members may bee imputed to vs that wee thereby may bee saide to know why may not the iustice of our head bee so imputed vnto vs that thereby wee may bee made iust These things are so paralell that the one being granted the other needs must follow Thirdly and lastly that communion which is betwixt the members of a body either naturall or mysticall is not an actuall translation of gifts from one to another but either a participation in the fruit of those gifts or a generating of the like in others by doctrine example exhortation prayers and such like meanes And so wee may truely say that euery one that is in the body of Christ reapeth fruit and benefit by all the graces and gifts that euer haue or shall belong to any member thereof though not for merit yet for comfort instruction edification and increase of grace And againe as one candle lighteth another and one steele sharpeneth and whetteth another So wisedome and grace is deriued from one to another either by naturall commerce of speech or patterne of example Thus much did Saint Augustine intend and no more and therefore it neuer came into his minde to thinke as these idle braines would make him that the knowledge which resided in the Saints of God is actually in all Gods Children or that they are partakers of their gifts and graces to their saluation For he that will be saued must beleeue for himselfe and know for himselfe and liue godly for himselfe If hee doe all these things by a proxy hee must also goe to Heauen by a proxy and not by himselfe This doctrine therefore is a manifest breeder and maintainer of such grosse ignorance as both Saint Augustine and all other holy men haue alwayes condemned for a sinne 21. A fift doctrine from whence ignorance springeth and ariseth is their prohibiting of Lay men to dispute touching matters of faith and that vnder paine of excommunication This Nauarre propoundeth as the doctrine of their Church neither is it contradicted by any other Aquinas goeth further and sayth that it is vnlawfull to dispute of matters of faith in the presence of those that are ignorant and simple And Bellarmine taketh away from the people all power of iudging of their Pastours doctrine saying that they must beleeue whatsoeuer they teach except they broach some new doctrin which hath not beene heard of in the Church before And if they
great antiquity And indeed why should it not bee obserued if the Pope cannot erre or if it be not fit to bee obserued how is it true that the Pope erreth not in defining matters of Religion The fourth was ordained by Paulus the second anno 1466. as they themselues will not deny 25. Besides these of the Virgin Mary they haue many other festiuall dayes of the same nature and stampe as the feast of Corpus Christi of the inuention of the Crosse of the dedication of Churches of All soules and a number such like all which are confessed nouelties for in the Apostles times and Primitiue Church during the space of foure hundred yeeres none of these were once heard of The feast of the Crosse was Gregory the fourths inuention anno 828. and Corpus Christi day was first ordained by Pope Vrbane the fourth about the yeere 1264. as confesseth Bellarmine himselfe who of his Apostolicall power gaue spirituall wages and special pardon to all that should personally obserue the houres of this holy solâ—mnity as at Mattens an hundred dayes pardon at Masse asmuch and so at first and second Euen-song at the houres of prime of tierce of sixth of noone of complete fourty dayes apiece and thus in like manner for the whole weeke following 26. The annuall seaâ—ts of dedication of Churches grew from a sinister imitation of Constantine the great who because hee kept a solemne day at the dedication of a certain Church which hee had built therefore it was receiued as a Law for Princes actions are the peoples directions to solemnize euery yeere a holy day vpon the day of the dedication of their Church And all Soules was the deuice of one Saint Odyll who as they write in Cicilia in the I le of Vulcane heard the voyces howlings of Deuils which complained with great griefe that the soules of them that were dead were taken away out of their hands by almes and prayers whereupon this feast was ordained wherein prayer should be made for al Soules And as for this so for the other they deuised strange miracles to win credit vnto them which plainely argueth their nouelty in that they stood in need of miracles to confirme them as for example touching the inuention of the holy Crosse they fable that it was first found in Paradise by Seth the son of Adam to whom Michael the Angell gaue a branch of the forbidden tree which hee planted vpon the graue of his Father Adam which tree beeing after found by Salomon in mount Libanus was translated vnto his house and there beeing worshipped by the Queene of Saba and foretold to bee the tree whereon the Sauiour of the world should bee hanged and by which Ierusalem should bee destroyed was therefore taken downe and buried deepe in the ground by Salomon in which place afterward the Iewes diging a pit for a poole to water their cattell found this tree from which such vertue arose to that poole that the Angels descended to mooue the water so that the first that bathed himselfe therein after the motion was healed of his disease whatsoeuer it was as wee read Iohn 5. Now vpon this tree was Christ crucified which being afterward buried againe in the earth was found out by Queene Helene the mother of Constantine through the discouery of one Iudas a Iew who was conuerted to the Christian faith by the sweet sauour that arose from the Crosse and the quaking of the earth and then that Crosse was discerned from the two other Crosses of the theeues by restoring life to a dead corps whereupon it was laide and the Deuill cryed in the aire that this Iudas had betrayed him as the other had done his Master Christ By these strange miracles they dignisy that holy feast and indeed shew it to bee nothing els but a meere fable and forsooth all this they fetch out of the Gospell of Nichodemus 27. So for the dedication of Churches they tell vs this miracle that when a Church of the Arrians was hal owed by Christian men and the reliks of Saint Fabian Saint Sebastian Saint Agathe brought into it the people being assembled heard suddenly the fearefull gronings gruntings of an hog running vp and downe inuisibly and seeking a passage out of the Church and for three nights together â—umbluâ—g in the roofe with an hideous noise which say they was nothing but the banishing of the Deuill out of that Church by the hallowing and dedicating of it Who would not then obserue deuoutly this feast seeing the benefit is so great that commeth by the thing it selfe whereof it is a memoriall But let vs leaue these tables to their golden or rather leaden Legend of lyes as their owne Canus termeth it and shut vp the point that both these heere named and a number such like festiuall dayes more precisely honoured and obserued in the Romish Church and with greater deuotion t 〈…〉 n Gods holy Sabbath it selfe are new inuentions as sprung vp from superstition so ordained to maintain the same and haue no ground either of true antiquity to countenance them or holy Scripture to vphold them but Iewish fables Apocrypha writings old wiues tales and forged miracles 28. Fourthly I requiâ—e satisfaction for their ceremonies vsed in both the Sacraments as first in the Eucharist their pompous circumgestation of it to bee seene viewed and adored which Cassander acknowledgeth to haue beene Praeter veterem morem mâ—ntem haud longo tempore inductaâ—â— Beside the custome and meaning of antiquity and brought in of late time And Bellarmine also to haue beene first ordained by Vrbanus the fourth their mixture of water with the wine and separation of leauen from the bread came both in from Pope Alexander the seuenth as witnesse both Polidore Virgill and Durantius Yea and Bonauenture doth confesse that this practice of mixing of water cannot bee read of in all the Scriptures nor found in the first institution of the Sacrament Their not breaking the bread out of a loafe but giuing it in small cakes Salmeron the Iesuite acknowledgeth to be contrary to the ancient practice of the Church Their dipping the consecrated hoste in the cup Suarez another Iesuite yeeldeth not to haue beene vsed by our Sauiour Christ and therefore must needs bee an Innouation Their putting the Sacrament not into the hands but into the mouths of the communicants the former Salmeron doth freely confesse to bee an action contrary to the first institution Lastly their various and ridiculous gestures murmuring dopping staring crossing c. with the strange garments vsed by the Priests in the time of their administration Six of Priests in signe of perfection because in sixe dayes God created Heauen and earth nine for Bishops in token that they are spirituall like the nine orders of Angels and fifteene for both in token of the fifteene degrees of Vertues No man can bee so simple but must needs see that they were neuer
thereof then surely it cannot bee lesse then an article of their faith or if that terme mislike him a generall Romish opinion which is enough for our purpose 35. Againe it is another article of the Romish faith that diuine seruice should bee in the Latin tongue this to be contrary to all antiquity I haue already declared a little before and therefore I thinke it not needfull here to repeate it onely this is to bee marked that till the Pope of Rome began to shew himselfe to be Antichrist that man of sinne the mystery of whose name is the number 666. which according to Irenaeus coniecture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Till then I say this Latine seruice was not publikely receiued but euer since as if the Pope would discouer himselfe to bee that enemy pointed at by that Prophecy hee will haue all the prayers of the Church to bee Latin and hath fixed an Anathema vpon euery one that shall dare to affirme the contrary 36. Againe it is another doctrine of the Romish Religion that the Lay people may not read the Scriptures nor keepe them in their mother tongue which to bee contrary to the ancient custome of the Church three reasons demonstrate First their own confession for Azorius the Iesuite confesseth that the Scriptures in the Primitiue Church were to be published throughout all nations and therefore were made common by the three most common and famous languages and againe Wee confesse sayth he that in Ierome and Chrysostomes times the Lay people were exercised in reading the Scriptures because they were written in those languages which they vnderstood And Ledesima another Iesuite that the Bible was translated into the Latine tongue presently after the Apostles times and that to this end that all might vnderstand the Scriptures And Espensaeus sayth that it is manifest by the Apostles doctrine Col. 3. 16. and by the practice of the Church that the publike vse of reading the Scriptures was then permitted to the people And further that the Iewes instructed their children at fiue yeeres of age in the Scriptures and therefore that Christians might bee ashamed to be carelesse therein and this hee sayth was not onely his complaint but the complaint of the ancient Fathers And lastly Cornelius Agrippa affirmeth that it was a decree in the Nicene Councill that no Christian should be without a Bible Thus we haue a quadron of their owne Doctors acknowledging this to bee a nouelty 37. Secondly the generall consent of the Fathers demonstrate the same for the Councill of Nice as it is alledged before out of Agrippa decreed that no Christian should be without a Bible and Saint Augustine alloweth the vse of the Scriptures to all when hee sayth that they are not so hard but that euery one by his study and diligence may attaine to so much knowledge in them as shall further him in his saluation and Chrysostome in many places exhorteth all both men and women learned and ignorant yea very tradesmen to get Bibles and to read them for though they vnderstand not what they read yet they gaine to themselues some sanctity by the reading of them And Ierome perswadeth not onely men but women to fly to the mountaines of the Scriptures saying that though there be none to teach them yet their indeuour shall bee accepted of God and in another place hee sayth that Plato wrote not to the people but to a few for scarse three vnderstand his workes but Christ our Lord wrote by his Apostles not to a few but to the whole people Origen compareth the Scripture to Iacobs Well wherein drinke not onely Iacob and his children that is the learned but the sheepe and oxen that is the rude and simple Nazianzene affirmeth that Christians ought to read the Scriptures or if through ignorance they cannot then they must giue eare to others Many other testimonies I could alledge but these are I thinke sufficient to shew that in the age when these holy men liued this doctrine was neuer hatcht nor heard of and therefore must needs bee an addle egge of a later layer 38. Thirdly lastly the manifold translations of the Bibles into sundry languages proueth the same for to what end were they translated if they might not bee read This Saint Augustine affirmeth when hee sayth that the holy Scripture proceeding from one tongue beeing through the diuers tongues of interpreters farre and wide dispersed abroad became knowne to the Gentiles to their saluation And Theodoret as plainely The Hebrew bookes were translated into all languages which are at this day vsed in the world Chrysostome is confessed to haue translated some parts of the Scriptures into the Armenian tongue and Vlphias into the Gothicke Charles the fift caused them to be translated into the French tongue and Charles the great into the Germane Alfred king of this Island the Psalter into the English tongue and at this day the Moscouites Armenians Egyptians Ethiopians haue their publike prayers and Scripture in their vulgar and knowne tongues Now these ancient translations doe euidently proue this Romish doctrine to bee an Innouation 39. Againe it is another doctrine in the Romish faith that Priests and Ministers of the Gospell ought not to marry and that marriage is an inseparable impediment to holy orders some of them most grosly affirming that the vow of single life is so essentiall to Priesthood euen by the Law of God as that it is no more lawfull for any person to permit the Clergy to marry then to license a man to steale But they which speake more remissely say that though it bee a positiue Law yet it is Apostolicall and therefore ought to bee obserued in the Church inuiolably and the reason is giuen by Bellarmine Because great purity and sanctity is required in the office of sacrificing but in the act of marriage there is mixed a certain impurity and pollution which though it be not sinne yet it proceedeth from sinne and maketh a man carnall and so vnfit for diuine offices 40. This is their doctrine which to haue no ground in true antiquity first their own confessions beare witnesse and secondly the light of history For their confessions one of them sayth that marriage of Priests is not prohibited either by Legall Euangelicall or yet Apostolicall authority but by Ecclesiasticall onely another that many hundreth yeeres after the Apostles by reason of want of others Priests were marryed another that if wee exclude the Church Lawes and stand onely to that which wee haue from Christ it cannot bee prooued by any reason or authority that speaking absolutely a Priest sinneth in marrying or that holy order is an hinderance to marriage either as it is an order or as it is holy others that in the most ancient times of the Church and after the Apostles deaths Priests had their wiues And lastly their owne glosse and marginall obseruation
as it appeareth Acts 16. but rather is to bee thought to bee the extraordinary gift of the holy Ghost as Saint Paul plainly insinuateth 2. Tim. 1. And secondly though it should bee sauing grace yet it is not promised to all others though it were then giuen to Timotheus neither were all that receiued holy orders partakers thereof for then Nicholas the Deacon should haue beene sanctified being an hypocrite Who seeth no◠then now weakely hee hath prooued this to bee a Sacrament out of holy Scriptures and this may seeme for a taste of the rest of his proofes which are most of them of the like nature 70. Againe the doctrine of Indulgences to wit that the Pope hath power out of the Churches treasury to grant relaxation from temporall punishment either heere or in Purgatory is so new an article that diuers of their own Doctors doe confesse that there is not any one testimony for proofe thereof either in Scriptures or in the writings of ancient Fathers but that the first that put them in practice in that manner as they are now vsed was Pope Boniface the eight anno 1300. neither could they bee any older then Purgatory being extracted from the flames thereof which hath beene already prooued to bee a meere nouell inuention so that the child cannot be old when as the Father is not gray-headed and that the matter may bee without contradiction reade Burchardus who liued about the yeare of our Lord 1020. And Gratian and Peter Lumbard that came after who all speake of satisfaction and penance and commutation and relaxation of penance but yet haue not a word of these Romish Indulgences whereas if they had beene then extant they would neuer haue passed them ouer in silence especially in the discoursing vpon these points whereupon they haue their necessary dependance 71. Last of all their doctrine touching merite of workes may bee branded with the same marke For first though the word merite bee often vsed by the Fathers yet ordinarily it is not taken in that sense which the Romanists vse it in as witnesse both Bellarmine and Viega and Stapleton and if they did not yet manifold examples out of their owne writings would prooue to be true Secondly the full streame of their doctrine doth make against the proud conceit of merite for they ascribe all to Gods mercy and Christs merits esteeming their owne best workings and sufferings vnworthy of the euerlasting and celestiall reward they neuer dreamt of that ambitious doctrine taught in the Church of Rome that our good workes are absolutely good and truely and properly meritorious and fully worthy of eternall life Let their books be viewed and nothing can bee more apparantly cleare then this is Thirdly the termes of congruity and condignity were deuised but of late dayes by the subtill Schoolemen who notwithstanding could not agree among themselues touching the true definition distinctiō of their own books by which it appeareth that it was not then any Catholike or vniuersall truth Lastly their owne Doctours terme the merite of congruity a new inuention and that other of condignity no Catholike nor ancient doctrine and the whole doctrine of meriting to haue beene first made an article of faith by the Councill of Trent all which laide together prooue it most clearely to bee of no great standing nor they of any vnderstanding that were the first forgers and deuisers thereof 72. Thus wee haue sixteene points wherein the new Romish Religion hath degenerated from all pure antiquity to which many more might bee added but these are sufficient to euince our conclusion which is this that seeing the Romish Church hath neither in matter nor forme substance nor accidents any sure ground either from Scripture or the doctrine of the Primitiue Church but is vtterly vnlike to it in many substantiall respects therefore it cannot bee the true Church of God but an harlot in her stead and their Religion not of God but of men and consequently that wee in declining from them and conforming our selues both in doctrine and manners to the Primitiue patterne are not fallen from the Church but to the Church and that theirs is the new Religion and not ours And thus wee see what all their bragges and clamours touching the antiquity of their Religion and the nouelty of ours come vnto seeing there is no one thing more pregnant to prooue the falshood of their Religion and the Apostacy and Antichristianity of their Church then this is And to conclude as wee would thinke him not well in his wits that hauing beene long sicke and after regained health should say that sicknes was more ancient then health whereas he should rather say that hee had recouered his old health that his new Inmate sicknesse was dispossessed of his lodging though it had kept it long so in all reason it is madnesse to thinke the reformation of the Church and reducing of Christian Religion to the ancient health to bee more nouell and new then the horrible sicknesse and apostacy wherewith it was long not onely infected but almost ouer-whelmed And this is iust our case with the Church of Rome but I leaue them to bee healed by the heauenly Phisitian himselfe Iesus Christ our Sauiour whose wholesome Physicke must cure them or nothing will MOTIVE XII ¶ That Church which maintaineth it selfe and the Religion professed by it and seeketh to disaduantage the aduersaries by vnlawfull vniust and vngodly meanes cannot bee the true Church of God nor that Religion the truth of God by the grounds whereof they are warranted to act such deuilish practices but such is the practice of the Romist Church and therfore neither their Church nor their Religion can be of God IT is a wonder to see what deuises sleights impostures and deuilish practices the Romanists haue and now at this day doe more then euer vse to vphold their rotten Religion to ensnare mens minds with the forlorne superstitiō their kingdome being ready to fall they care not with what props they vnder-shore it and the truth preuailing against them they care not with what engines though fetched from hell it selfe they vndermine it so that they may any wayes batter the walles or shake the foundation thereof My purpose is in this Chapter to discouer some of the Sathanicall practices of these subtle Enginers I meane the Iesuites and Priests and other rabble of Romish proctors It is not possible to reckon them vp all being so many and various such therefore God willing shall be heere discouered as are for villany most notorious for impudency most shamelesse and for certainty most perspicuous and by them let the Christian Reader that loueth the truth iudge of their Religion and Church what it is 2. The first proposition of this argument is grounded vpon three principles one of nature another of reason the third of Scripture nature teacheth that contraries are cured that is expelled by contraries as hot diseases by cold
high Priest of the world much like to King Alexanders Bucephalus which being bare would carry any groome quietly but when his trappings and furniture was on then hee would endure none but Alexander The writer of the life of Saint Bernard relateth a pretty wonder done by that holy man at the dedication of a Church when as the place was so filled with multitude of flies that the people could not enter into it without great annoyance Saint Bernard vsing no other meanes to destroy them said onely I excommunicate them and presently the next morning they were all found dead on the floore Doth this sauour of Saint Bernards holinesse or can any man bee so madde as to thinke that so holy a man would denounce excommunication ordained to separate from the Congregation open and sinfull men against poore silly flies sure hee hath no more wit then a flye that will beleeue this so that notwithstanding the ancient miracles recorded by the Fathers yet the Legendary Romish miracles are not freed from grosse and notorious falshood 27. Another practice of theirs to win credit to their Religion and disgrace to ours is slaundering and calumniating both our Religion and the professours thereof and that so grossely and falsely that their owne consciences could not chuse but say secretly vnto their tongues thou lyest when they were writing them in their bookes but they deale like theeues who to cleare themselues from suspition of robbery raise vp hue and cry against true men or like harlots that lay the imputation of dishonestie vpon sober matrones to the end that they themselues might bee thought chast and honest so beeing full of sores and blemishes themselues they seeke to couer their owne shame by discouering ours Which if it were in truth though their enuy was neuer the lesse yet their sinne was not so great but beeing notorious and outragious lyes they plainely show that they care not what they belch foorth so they staine vs with the filth thereof and that they haue learned that Maâ—chauillian rule audacter calumniari to slander boldly because though the wound bee healed yet a scarre remaineth 28. Their slanders are darted either against our persons or the gouernment of our Church or our doctrines let vs take a short view of all these and first for their personall slanders they slander all of vs in generall with the ignominious titles of solifidians nullifidians nudifidians Infidels worse then Turkes c. yea and say that wee haue no faith no Religion no Christ no God and what not that either malice can deuise or enuy and rage vtter These slanderous reproches are set abroach by rayling Parsons in his booke of the three conuersions and almost in all other of his discourses and by Mathew Kellison who was of a sudden start vp from spigget to the Pulpit a buttery diuine and by Wright another of the same stampe and by Reynolds and Bellarmine and Beran and Coster and all the brood of ranke mouthed Iesuites who as if they were all bitten with one madde dog raue alike against our Religion and the professours thereof but God bee praised with euill successe for their calumnies are so transparent that he that doth but meanly vnderstand the grounds of our Religion cannot but turne the lie vpon their heads 29. But let vs heare their reasons why we are all Infidels mary they propound two principall ones and those very strong as they thinke first they say that all learned Protestants are Infidels because they build their faith vpon their owne priuate exposition of Scripture and secondly that ignorant Protestants are Infidels because they rely their faith vpon their Ministers credit To the first I answere two things first that wee doe not interpret the Scripture by our own priuate iudgements but by the Scripture it selfe for some places are so plaine those principally that contain the grounds of Religion that they need no exposition as Saint Augustine witnesseth saying that quaedam in Scripturis c. There be some things in the Scripture so manifest that they require rather a hearer then an expounder and what those things are the same father declareth in another place where he sayth that in those things which are plainely set downe in Scripture are found all those points which containe faith and manners and those things which are obscure and hard in Scripture we do not expound by any forraine or priuate interpretation but by conferring them with other more plaine and perspicuous places and so except they say that the Scripture it selfe is of a priuate interpretation they cannot condemne vs of that crime Now that this is the best way of interpreting let the same Augustine informe vs who sayth That there is nothing contained in hard places of Scripture which is not to be found most plainely vttered in others and Chrysostome who affirmeth that the Scripture expoundeth it selfe and suffereth not the Reader to erre and Basill who telleth vs that those things which be doubtfull or seeme to be couertly spoken in some places of holy Scripture are expounded by other plaine places Of the same minde are the rest of the Fathers and so wee expound the Scripture no otherwise then all the ancient Fathers vsed to doe and then indeed it ought to be 30. I but wee follow not the iudgement of the Church say they which hath the onely key of interpretation committed vnto it if they meane by the Church the fathers we may iustify our selues by condemning them of the same fault they deale with them as the Iewes dealt with their wiues if they please their humors they hold vnto them but if they crosse or thwart them they sue out a bill of diuorce against them and put them away nothing is more common then this in all their writings and therefore it needs no instances to prooue it if they meane the Councils why by their owne teaching no Councill is of sufficient authority except it bee confirmed by the Pope nor any decree or interpretation to bee entertained without his approbation Therefore they must needs meane the Pope alone and if they doe so then we confesse that wee haue iust causes not to tye our faith to his girdle nor our vnderstanding to his braine seeing many of that ranke haue beene open Heretikes some notorious Atheists all men and therefore subiect to errour yea seeing the body of their Church is an Apostate harlot and the surmised head on earth that man of sinne the great Antichrist spoken of in the Scriptures If to vary from him then and his Babylon in our exposition of Scripture bee priuate interpretation wee confesse our selues guilty but in all other respects cleare and innocent 31. Secondly grant that wee doe in some points follow on our owne priuate exposition yet wee are not therefore Infidels for then most of the Fathers should bee infidels aswell as wee for there are few of them which haue not sometimes priuately vea and falsely
foreheads 2. That the Religion of the Church of Rome is not so safe as ours may appeare by comparing our principall doctrines together and first to begin with the Sacrament That the bodie of Christ is truely really and effectually present in the Eucharist both they and we hold grounding vpon that text of Scripture this is my bodie but concerning the maner of this presence the Romanists hold that it is by transub stantiation we by a spirituall presence which notwithstanding is true and reall both in relation to the outward signes and to the faith of the Receiuer Now see the dangers that arise from their doctrine which are not incident to ours 2. First if there be not a corporall presence of Christ and a reall Transubstantiation as they suppose then this doctrine leadeth to horrible and grosse Idolatrie for they must needs worship a piece of bread in stead of Christ And this not onely if their doctrine bee false but being supposed to bee true in case hee that consecrateth be not truly a Priest or haue not an intention to consecrate as oftentimes it falleth out for in both these cases by the grounds of their owne Religion there is no change of substances and therefore as much danger of Idolatrie as eyther of a false Priest or of a true Priests false intention But in our doctrine there is no such danger and yet as true reall and powerfull an existence of Christs bodie in the Sacrament as with them if not more seeing the more spirituall a thing is the more powerfull it is according to the rules of reason for wee are not in danger to worship a creature in stead of the Creatour but wee worship the Creatour himselfe euen Iesus Christ our Redeemer who is there present after a spirituall manner and that as reuerently deuoutly and sincerely as they doe a piece of bread 3. Secondly by this doctrine our aduersaries incline to fauour the Capernaites who had a conceit of a corporall and fleshly eating of Christs bodie and giue iust cause to the Pagans to slander Christian Religion to bee a bloudy and cruell Religion Whereupon the Fathers to crosse the one and stop the mouth of the other taught that Christs speech in the sixt of Iohn was to be vnderstood spiritually and not carnally and that it was a figure and not a proper speech But our doctrine doth giue no such occasion eyther to the Heretikes on the one side or to the Pagans on the other neyther hath it any consanguinitie with the Capernaites and yet wee retaine as certaine and powerfull a participation of our Sauiours bodie and bloud as they doe I know they thinke to escape from this rocke by a distinction of visible and inuisible eating as if the Capernaites dreamed that Christ would haue his bodie to bee eaten visibly but they inuisibly that is say they spiritually which indeed is no cuasion for an inuisible eating is a true eating As when a blind man eateth or a seeing man in the darke and cannot therefore be called a spirituall eating but a corporall neyther doth this free them from approching neere to the Capernaites though they somewhat differ from them nor from giuing iust cause of offence to the Heathen from both which our doctrine giueth full and perfect securitie 4. Thirdly and lastly their doctrine of transubstantiation doth not onely countenance but confirme the ancient heresies of the Marcionites Valentinians and Eutychians that impugned the truth of Christs humane nature for they taught that he had not a true but a phantasticall bodie and what do our aduersaries but approue the same indeede though they seeme to detest it in word when they teach that his bodie is present in the Sacrament not by circumscription nor determination but by a spirituall and diuine presence quomodo Deus est in loco as God is in a place which is asmuch as to say that his bodie is not a true bodie but a spirituall bodie that is indeed a phantasticall bodie Againe the bread which they say is the bodie is not bread in truth but in shew after it is consecrated for there is nothing of bread but the mere accidents without a substance according to their doctrine and so it is in all reasonable construction no better then a phantasticall thing seeming to the outward sense to bee that which in truth it is not Why may not those Heretikes then reason from these doctrines thus If Christs bodie be a spirituall bodie in the Eucharist and the bread be phantasticall bread then why might not his bodie be so also when he was on the earth But the former is true by your doctrine O ye Romanists therefore why may not the latter which is our doctrine be also true But none of these Heretikes can haue any such aduantage from our doctrine which teacheth that Christ in respect of his humane nature is resident in the heauens circumscribed by place and that hee is present in the Sacrament by the efficacie of his inuisible and powerful grace after a spirituall manner as Saint Augustine speaketh and that both the bread remaineth bread after consecration and the bodie of Christ remaineth still a naturall bodie after the resurrection retaining still the former circumscription as Theodoret auoucheth this taketh away all aduantage from Heretikes which their doctrine doth manifestly giue vnto them For these causes Petrus de Alliaco the Cardinall doth confesse that from our doctrine no inconuenience doth seeme to ensue if it could be accorded with the Churches determination And Occham that it is subiect to lesse incommodities and lesse repugnant to holy Scripture Thus wee see that in this first doctrine touching the Eucharist there is more securitie and lesse danger in our doctrine and Religion then in theirs 5. I come to a second point which is touching the merits of works whereby the Romish Religion doth cast men into three eminent dangers which by our doctrine they are free from First of vaine glory for when a man is perswaded that there is a merit of condignitie in the worke which hee hath wrought how can he choose but reioyce therein and conceiue a vaine-glorious opinion of his owne worthinesse as the proud Pharise did when he bragged that he had fasted and prayed and payd his tithes seeing it is impossible but that the nature of man which is inclinable vnto vaine-glory and selfe-loue if it haue a conceit of any selfe-worthinesse should bee puffed vp with a certaine inward ioy and pride and therefore Chrysostome taketh it for wholesome counsel to say that wee bee vnprofitable seruants lest pride destroy our good workes 6. Secondly of obscuring and diminishing Gods glorie and Christs merits For where merit is there mercie is excluded and where something is ascribed to man for the obtaining of saluation there all is not ascribed vnto Christ and although they colour the blacke visage of this doctrine with a faire tincture to wit that all
Popish superstition doe say that it is an ordinarie matter A wonderful superstitiō that is nourished by Images so apparent that it cannot be denied Now if this were a scandall taken and not giuen they might in some sort bee excused but it is eūidently not onely occasioned but caused by reason that both the doctrine is inuolued with so many intricate questions and distinctions that it is impossible for an ignorant person to discerne thereof and also because the Image it selfe as the Prophet Habacuck telleth vs is a teacher of lyes For which cause as Polidore Virgil reporteth the Fathers of all vices condemned the worship of Images for feare of Idolatrie the most execrable vice of all The second offence is to the vnconuerted Iewes who are most zealous in this point of the Law against Images insomuch as Iosephus reports of them they did hate the verie Images of men in their Heathenish Trophees as being forbidden them by God Now it is well concluded by a iudicious obseruer of the Westerne Religions and without doubt is a most true obseruation that there is no one thing in outward respects that doth ingender in the Iewes such a detestation of Christian Religion and keepe them from being conuerted as the worship of Images in the Church of Rome for they and that by good reason may thus dispute If this Religion of Christians were of God then they would not oppose themselues to the expresse Commaundement of God in worshipping Images which he hath so plainly forbidden but they oppose themselues to Gods Commandement and worship Images therefore their Religion cannot bee of God Hence it is as the former learned Relator doth report that at Rome though all the Iewes in the Citie are constrained once a yeere to come to a Christian Church and there heare a Sermon for their pretended conuersion yet when as a Fryer before the beginning of his Sermon holdeth vp a Crucifix and prayeth vnto it in their open sight they are more alienated from the Christian faith by this odious spectacle then all the reasons and arguments that he can vse are able to perswade them to the same Behold two dangerous and fearefull scandals which arise from this doctrine one to their owne weake ones of which our Sauiour saith that it were better for a man that a milstone were hanged about his necke and that hee were throwne into the Sea then that hee should offend one of them the other to the obstinate Iewes whose conuersion shall be so beneficiall to the whole world as that Saint Paul calleth it life from the dead Now our Religion is farre from giuing any such offence to one or other either in this or any other point thereof if it bee not vtterly misconstrued and misconceiued 24. Againe in their worship of Relickes there is no securitie at all both in feare of Idolatrie which may bee well committed to them if they bee true in giuing them a higher measure of adoration then they themselues allow of which is easio to bee done by the ignorant multitude and also in feare of worshipping false relickes in stead of true whereof there is no small number in the Church of Rome as hath bin alreadie declared and lasty in feare of neglecting the true members of Christ by a too sumptuous prodigalitie towards the bones of I cannot tel what dead men or other creatures as is most vsuall in their Church and that in great excesse in which respects it is without question a more safe course that all such Relickes were buried vnder the earth with due honour of Christian sepulture then that they should thus indanger both godly pietie Christian charitie And this is the conclusion of their Cassander who sayth that it is more safe rather honourably to burie those corruptible relickes and to draw the World to the worship of their spirituall relickes which neither time can corrupt nor fraud counterfeit 25. Againe they hold and teach that traditions are to bee honoured with equall affection and deuotion as is due vnto the olde and new Testament and that there are many things belonging to the doctrine and faith of Christianitie which are neyther expressely nor obscurely contained in the Scriptures And therefore by their owne confession they build many doctrines of their Religion vpon tradition onely without Scripture and acknowledge that without tradition many of them would reele and totter The Protestants hold the contrarie and constantly affirme that the Scripture is an all-sufficient directorie and a most absolute and perfect rule for faith and manners and therefore that wee ought not to relye our faith vpon any thing but Scripture alone Now let vs consider and examine whether of these two doctrines are more safe for a man to repose his soule vpon And that our doctrine is so may appeare first by the nature of the question it selfe which is controuerted betwixt them and vs for the question is not whether the Scripture bee the Word of God or no therein wee shake hands as an vndoubted truth but whether traditions bee the Word of God or no the affirmatiue they hold wee the negatiue and that by great and strong grounds which our aduersaries themselues cannot deny but that they carrie great shew of reason and probabilitie Now whether is the safer course to relye our faith vpon those principles that are vnquestionably Gods Word or vpon those that are controuerted disputed and called in question Any man that goeth about to buy a purchase will sooner venture vpon such a title which was neuer called in question nor can indeed bee doubted of then vpon a broken disputable and vndecided title he will looke twice vpon his pennie before he part with it in such a case lest caueat emptor proue him to bee of little discretion and teach him to repent when it is too late This is the case of euerie Christian wee are to buy the truth and not to sell it as Salomon counselleth Now who will not that hath any graine of wisedome in his heart rather lay out his monie that is his soule and conscience which as Augustine calleth it is numisma Dei Godscoyne because his Image is imprinted therein for the purchase of that truth which is without all exception in the holy Scriptures then for that which is said to be in traditions but mixed with many doubts and ambiguities It is a rule in Law that abundans cautela non nocet a man cannot be too warie in making sure his title to any thing whatsoeuer How much more then should it preuaile in cases of conscience where the damage is not of house and land but of our soules which to euery man ought to be more precious then the whole world Here is an euident direction for our choice if we eyther loue the truth or our own soules which must liue by it 26. Secondly it may appeare by the perpetuall certaintie of the holy Scripture and variable
vncertaintie of vnwritten traditions for the Scripture was euer the same since it was Scripture and so shall continue to the end of the World no man daring to alter or change it to adde thereto or detract ought therfrom for feare of the curse denounced against such presumption But Traditions are and haue beene euer most variable and vnconstant some that haue beene held for Apostolical traditions being vtterly abrogated and abolished as threefold immersion or thrice dipping in baptisme for signification of the Trinitie giuing the Eucharist to infants which was vsed 600. yeeres in the Church standing in publike Prayers at Easter and Pentecost and such like and some altered and changed as deferring Baptisme vntill the feasts of Easter and Pentecost into baptizing vpon any occasion fasting vpon Wednesdayes and Saturdayes into Wednesdayes and Fridayes and so many ancient constitutions dispensed withall by the pretended Apostolicall authoritie of the Church of Rome as is confessed by them And that this is an vncontroulable truth that one famous example of the contention betwixt the East and West Churches touching the obseruation of Easter doth euince for the one side pretended a tradition from Saint Iohn and Saint Philip the other from Saint Peter and Saint Paul Now if some traditions bee thus vncertaine subiect to change abrogating dispensing and abolishing all must needs bee of the same nature and if all bee of that nature then there can be no securitie in conscience to suspend our faith vpon them the safest way therefore is to relye vpon Scripture alone the fulnesse whereof Tertullian adored and of the authoritie whereof whatsoeuer was destitute Ierome iudged to bee nothing but vaine babbling and besides the which whosoeuer teacheth any doctrine of faith Saint Augustine pronounceth anathema against him 27. Thirdly and lastly by the infallible truth which shineth in the Scriptures as the Sunne in the firmament wherein no errour euer was found no spots or blemishes as in the Moone of traditions no deceit nor misleading vnlesse in sence peruerted as by Heretikes to their owne destruction but many traditions haue beene as erronious and deceitfull in themselues so the causes of much errour in the Church witnesse Papius who as Eusebius testifieth broched many exorbitant doctrines vnder pretence of tradition from the Apostles and drew manie Ecclesiasticall Doctours moued by his antiquitie for he was Disciple to Iohn into the errour of the Chiliasts and all the ancient Heretikes almost who flying from the Scriptures did shelter themselues vnder the pretext eyther of philosophicall principles fained gospels or forged traditions and hereof many ancient traditions themselues giue pregnant euidence as those alleadged by Clemens Alexandrinus to wit Iustification by philosophie Repentance after death Preaching the Gospell to the wicked in hell which the Romanists themselues condemne or that of Cyprian touching anointing to bee vsed in Baptisme and mixing wine with water which Saint Augustine relected as erronious or that of Iraeneus who saith that it was a tradition that Christ suffered at fiftie yeeres of age which is disallowed by all sound authoritie and conuinced of errour by the Scripture it selfe Of this kind a number more might bee produced if need required but these are enough to inferre the conclusion that traditions are not of that infallible truth as the holy Scripture is but rather subiect to errour and falshood and therefore it can bee no part of Christian wisedome to repose our faith vpon them for it is to build vpon a sandie foundation which will deceiue the building in time of need 28. Auricular confession hath as little securitie in the practice of it as any of the former doctrines for first it implieth inpossibilitie of performance by requiring a perfect enumeration of all particular sinnes both secret and open and that vpon danger of damnation the absolution being frustrate if this condition bee not obserued Now because no man is able to performe this therefore no mans conscience can be assured of the remission of his sinnes by that sacramentall medicine whereas on the contrarie hee that confesseth his knowne sinnes to God and forsaketh them with a generall detestation of all other vnknowne though many escape his remembrance yet by Gods promise is sure to find mercie which is the doctrine of the Protestants This is possible and easie to be done The other impossible and improbable and that many learned of their side haue ingeniously confessed as Cassander Rhenanus with diuers others And albeit the Fathers of the Trent Councell in shew seemed to qualifie the matter with this limitation that other sinnes which do not come into the mind of the partie confessing diligently thinking vpon them are vnderstood as generally included in his confession yet the Iesuite Suarez confesseth that the Priest cannot remit any one sinne except the penitent confesse all that hee ought to confesse and Maldonate another Iesuite that because the Priest can remit no sinnes but such as he heareth confessed therefore hee that must remit all must heare all And it is plaine that whatsoeuer the Councell spake yet it meant no otherwise by the reason which they giue for necessitie of confession which is that the penitent may bee iudged whether he hath sinned or no and if hee haue in what kind and degree to the end that proportionable penance may be ioyned to his offence and therefore it is required that not onely the act of sinne but all the circumstances bee discouered Who what to what end how by what helpes where when which are the seuen circūstances attending vpon euery actiō Now how can the Priest iudge of the nature qualitie quantitie of the sin except he know it with all the circumstances if he know it not how can he enioyne a competent satisfaction And if no satisfaction be enioyned then no remission eyther of the sinne or at least releasement from the temporall punishment thereof can bee obtained What a snare are mens consciences brought into by this intricate doctrine How much freer and securer a course is it to confesse necessarily to God alone voluntarily to the Pastor in cases of distresse of conscience and want of instruction and penally to the Church in publike for satisfaction not of God but of men for some publike offence committed This is the doctrine of Protestants which as it is free from impossibilitie so it is full of safetie 29. Secondly their doctrine leaueth the conscience in doubt whether the sinne bee truly pardoned or no by the absolution of the Priest for the Priest being a man is vnable to search into the heart of a sinner and so consequently may erre in the vse of the key for if the Confessor bee an Hypocrite though he make a true relation of all his sinnes with all their circumstances and be therefore absolued by the Priest yet it is certaine that such an one is not absolued in Heauen but stands lyable to Gods
iudgement because there must be by their doctrine aswell contrition in heart as confession in the mouth or else no pardon can follow but a Priest cannot discerne of the heart Nay further many if not most of their Romish shauelings are vnable to iudge of the nature and qualitie of sin much more of the quantitie and degrees thereof so consequently can neither impose a iust or proportionable satisfaction without which no releasement nor make the partie vnderstand the ease hee standeth in that hee may take vpon himselfe voluntarie penance or if need bee purchase indulgence from the Pope In all which respects it is danger to trust our soules vpon such a slipperie foundation but hee that confesseth to God his sinnes and expecteth pardon at his hand onely is sure that hee discerneth the secrets of the heart and that he shutteth and no man openeth and openeth and no man shutteth and therefore if hee absolue though all the World condemne hee is on a sure ground and if hee condemne though all the World acquite hee is in a miserable case In this doctrine there is no vncertainty but strong comfort to the penitent sinner and terrour of conscience to the obstinate and vnrepentant 30. If they say that the absolution of a Priest is certaine vnlesse there bee a barre in him that confesseth because our Sauiour saith Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted and whosoeuers sinnes yee retaine they are retained I answer that first de facto the Priest may erre but God cannot Secondly he cannot choose but erre in absoluing if the penitent doe erre in confessing which hee is verie likely to doe and thirdly that when God purposeth to absolute a sinner no barie can hinder the performance thereof yea hee infuseth grace into his soule to hate his sinne and power to forsake it Is it not better then to trust vnto God then to man and safer to confesse our sinnes to him that hath absolute power to pardon them then to a Priest whose pardon depends vpon the vncertaintie of a mans true confession These things be so cleare that no reasonable man can doubt of the truth of them 31. Lastly confession to God hath manifest and vndeniable grounds in holy Scripture but auricular Romish confession to a Priest is by the iudgement of their greatest Clarkes taken vp onely by a tradition of the Church and not by any authoritie of the olde and new Testament witnesse their Canon Law Panormitane Peresius Petrus Oxoniensis Bonauenture Medina Rhenanus Erasmus with many more and though the new Iesuites and Rhemists auouch the contrarie yet they but therein crosse their fellowes as learned and wise as themselues and yet are not able to alleadge any one direct proofe of their opinion Now is it not a safer practice to build vpon Scripture then tradition that is vpon God then man And to chuse that kind of confession which no man doubteth to be warranted from God rather then that which the Patrones thereof themselues are at variance from whom it commeth who that hath eyes seeth not which of these is rather to be chosen 32. Touching Purgatorie it breedeth diuers dangerous consequences as to their holy Pope first who taketh vpon him to haue plenarie power ouer all creatures especially ouer the soules in Purgatorie which the Canonists call peculium Papae the Popes peculiar for it proueth him eyther to bee a lying Prophet or a cruell Tyrant if hee haue full power ouer them why doth hee let so many thousand poore soules lye frying there without release His suffering them to continue in that cruell torment argueth him either to want power to relieue them or mercie to put that power in execution both which are vnbeseeming qualities for Christs Vicar If they reply against this as Antoninus doth and say that in respect of his absolute Iurisdiction he may absolue all that are in Purgatorie but if we regard the orderly execution thereof in that respect the Pope may not nor ought so to doe I say againe But why ought hee not if it bee in his power is it for feare to fill Heauen too soone with Saints but that would be a great blessing for then the consummation of all things would the sooner come or is it for feare lest the iustice of God should be fully satisfied by a proportionable punishment But the Popes indulgence can helpe that for hee hath in his Treasure-house such a surplussage of Saints merits that can serue to make good whatsoeuer is wanting in their behalfe and the Pope by their doctrine hath authoritie to dispence dispose of these merits at his discretion Or is it for feare lest purgatorie should bee emptied and so hee should lose one part of his Kingdome But our Sauiour contented himselfe with heauen and earth to be vnder him and his dominion and Saint Paul attributes to his regiment things vnder earth that is in hell and wil his Vicar needs haue a larger dominion then his Master But indeed this is the true reason For if hee should make a goale deliuerie out of this infernall prison then his chiefest sway were gone yea and his reuenue too It stands vpon him therefore not to bee pleased to deliuer any out of these paines vnlesse he bee well pleased for his paines and if hee bee so then the soules shall flye out of that place to heauen in whole troupes as they say they did at the Prayer of a certaine holy man c. In their leaden Legend this danger lighteth vpon the head of their head the Pope which according to their doctrine can by no meanes be auoided it were better then for him to forgoe his profit which ariseth by purgatorie then to vndergoe such foule discredit 33. Another dangerous consequence ariseth hencefrom to all the professors of Religion in generall that is a feareful presumption and securitie of sinning when they are perswaded that after this life they may be released from the paines of purgatorie by the prayers almesdeeds Masses and other meritorious workes of the liuing for who would bee afraid to sinne or carefull to make his saluation sure in this life with feare and trembling when hee beleeueth that by giuing a summe of monie at his death for Masses and dirges to be sung for his soule he shall be certainly deliuered out of purgatory This must needs cast men into manifest presumption if not of all sinnes yet of veniall sinnes and ordinarie offences which are to be purged by that fire as they teach Is not our doctrine more sound and safe that informeth vs that such as die in their sinnes sinke downe to the lowest Hell as hopelesse after death to bee relieued by anything that can bee done for their sakes by the liuing doth not this teach men betimes to bee wise and to finish vp the worke of their saluation before the night come and make their peace with God whilest they are here in the way of
so that their ignorance be simple and vnaffected may bee saued And hereupon they conclude that it is safer to bee of that Church wherein by our owne confession a man may be saued then of that to which they denie all hope of saluation but it is a conclusion made by confusion For who seeth not that that is more likely to be the true Church which is animated with charitie then that which is void of charitie and that it is safer to harbour vnder her wings that is charitably affected euen towards her enemies then vnder her that is so miscarried with enuie that she committeth all to the pit of Hell that are not of her fellowship and profession especially seeing Saint Paul chargeth the Thessalonians that If any man obey not the Gospell they should note him with a letter and haue no companie with him that hee may bee ashamed yet they should not accout him as an enemie but admonish him as a brother If then it be safer to thinke charitably of those that are without then vtterly to condemne them all then it must be also safer to bee a member of our Church then of theirs And to make the matter more cleare Saint Augustine is flat of our mind to thinke more Christianlike of Heretikes as they repute vs then they doe for writing against the Donatists thus he sayth They that defend their false doctrine without obstinate boldnesse especially if they be not such as haue beene authors of those errours but either receiued them from their Parents or were seduced by others and doe carefully seeke the truth being readie to be reformed assoone as they shall see their errours such men are not to be esteemed as Heretikes Thus writeth Saint Augustine whereby hee condemneth the practice of the Church of Rome and iustifieth ours as more agreeable to the rule of charitie and thus that reason whereby the Iesuites seduce many ignorant persons falleth to the ground and maketh more against them then for them 43. Thirdly if the Churches authoritie bee aboue the authoritie of the Scriptures then are men to bee preferred before God and that which is subiect to errour before that which can neither erre nor deceiue for the Church consists of men but the Scripture is immediately from God and the Church may erre though not in fundamentall points but the Scripture cannot erre no not in the least titte the truth of this allegation is grounded vpon those reasons First because euery particular Church may erre as is confessed and therefore the whole Chuchin generall may erre also for such as is the nature of the parts is the nature also of the whole Secondly Councels which are their Church representatiue haue erred as is notoriously knowne to all and confessed by Saint Augustine who sayth that the decrees of prouinciall Councels are subiect to reprehension Yea former generall Councels may be corrected by them that follow as the Councell of Arimine by the Councell of Constantinople the second of Ephesus by the Councell of Chalcedon the Councell of Carthage by the first of Nice and the second of Nice by the Councell of Franckeford Thirdly the Pope that is the Head of the Church hath erred this is also confessed therefore the bodie can claime no better priuiledge but sayth the same Augustine There is no doubt of the truth of any thing which is contained in the Scripture Therefore who can doubt to place the resolution of their faith as the safest course on the Scripture rather then on the Church especially seeing no particular writer of the holy Scripture can be taxed with the least errour but many particular parts of the Church whether we respect the imagined head which is vertually the whole Church in their estimation or the chiefe members in grosse as the Councels or the deuided ioynts as particular Congregations may iustly be challenged as tainted with diuers errours in doctrines of faith 44. Lastly the Church of Rome may be the whore of Babylon and so the See of Antichrist if not necessarily as wee auouch yet coniecturally as no man can denie because spirituall Babylon is said to bee a Citie situate vpon seuen hils and not onely so but that raigned ouer the Kings of the earth both which notes directly agree to the Citie of Rome but the Church of Protestants cannot by any likelihood bee that whore seeing neither of those markes doe in any respect belong vnto it Is it not safer then to rest our selues in her bosome which by al probabilitie is an honest Matrone then in her armes which is a suspected harlot If Caesar would haue his wife to bee without suspition then euerie Christian had need to looke to his faith whereunto he is as it were married by the Spirit of God wherby he is married vnto Christ that it be not onely sincere but also free from all suspition or likelihood of errour 45. Thus we see in these few maine points of the Romish Religion compared with our contrarie assertions that it is a farre safer course to bee a Protestant then a Papist let all indifferent persons iudge and discerne betwixt vs and I pray God direct them by his Spirit to choose the truth 46. There is one thing yet remaining whereby this may further appeare and so and end of this whole discourse and that is that there is no one point of doctrine wherein they differ from vs but is contradicted by some of their owne learned Writers shaking hands with vs and crossing their owne Pew-fellowes whence from ariseth not onely another strong argument of greater securitie in our Religion then in theirs which hath the suffrages of the greatest enemies to vphold it but also of vnresistable truth which worketh so vpon the consciences of the aduersaries thereof that it forceth them will they nill they to acknowledge it now and then as the Deuill himselfe was constrained to confesse Christ Iesus to be the Sonne of God I might write a whole Volume of this point alone but I will propound here onely some few instances and so shut vp this Treatise 47. Protestants teach that a man is iustified by faith alone whereby the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed vnto him and not by the inherent or adherent righteousnesse of his owne workes the same is confessed by Thomas Aquinas who sayth that no man is iustified with God by his workes but by the habit of faith infused and againe that there is in the workes of the Law no hope of iustification but by faith onely and by Pighius who holdeth that there is in vs no inherent righteousnesse whereby wee may bee iustified but that our iustification is by Christs righteousnesse imputed vnto vs and by the Diuines of Collen who affirme That the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto vs and apprehended by faith is the principall cause of our iustification and by Cassander who approueth of our doctrine of iustification by faith alone and imputed
righteousnesse So that wee exclude not from this faith repentance amendment of life new obedience c. Lastly by Ferus Stapulensis Peraldus and diuers others yea almost all of them when at the point of death they come to the point of try all flye to this sacred anchor of Christs righteousnesse alone renouncing all righteousnesse in themselues as the famous example of Stephen Gardiner declareth who lying on his death-bed reposed himselfe on the righteousnesse of Christ only for his saluation and being told that it was contrarie to his former resolution answered that though it was the truth yet that gappe was not to bee opened to the people 48. The Protestants hold that our best workes are stayned with so many imperfections that they cannot merit any thing at Gods hand except it be hell fire and damnation and that though God of his mercie reward good workes with eternall life yet it is not for any condignity that is in them but for Christs sake into whom the partie working is ingrafted and made a member Many learned Romanists are of the same opinion Bellarmine sayth that in regard of the vncertaintie of our owne righteousnesse and danger of vaine glorie the safest way is to put our confidence in the sole mercie and goodnesse of God Waldensis writeth Hee is a sounder Diuine a faithfuller Catholicke and more agreeing to the Scriptures that simply denieth merits and sayth that the Kingdome of Heauen is from the mere grace and will of the giuer not from any desert of the Receiuer Of the same opinion was Albertus Pighius as witnesseth Bellarmine Ferus sayth Whatsoeuer God giueth vs is of grace not of debt If therefore thou desire to hold the grace and fauour of God make no mention of thy merits The same hold Gregorius Ariminensis Durandus Stella with many more renouncing all the new Rhemish doctrine of merits of condignitie taught by the Schoole fourbished ouer by the Councell of Trent and refining Iesuites All these being sworne subiects to the Church of Rome yet being constrained by the conscience of the truth doe as fully and perfectly maintaine our doctrine as if they were the rankest Protestants in the World 49. Protestants denie all free will to grace before it bee quickned and liued by Gods Spirit Many learned Romanists teach the same doctrine Laurentius Valla as Bellarmine reports wished that the name of free-will were vtterly taken away The Master of Sentences auouched that free-will before grace repaire it is pressed ouercome with cōcupiscence hath weaknesse in euill but no grace in good and therefore cannot but sinne damnably Dom. Bannes affirmeth that it is false and worse then false that any man without the speciall and supernaturall helpe of God can be able to doe a supernaturall act Ariminensis calleth the Romish doctrine of free-wil Pelagianisme The Iesuite Suarez sayth that diuers Romanists say that it is a rash and hereticall opinion to affirme that when grace is equally offered to two that one of them could be conuerted and not the other What could any Protestant say more 50. Transubstantiation circumgestation and subtraction of the Cuppe are denyed by many of their owne side as well as by vs. Durand sayth It is great rashnesse to thinke the bodie of Christ by his diuine power cannot bee in the Sacrament vnlesse the bread be conuerted into it and therefore that he holdeth the contrarie onely for the Churches determination So also sayth Scotus There is no Scripture to enforce Transubstantiation except ye bring the Church of Romes exposition Occham sayth that that opinion that the substance of the bread remaineth is subiect to lesse inconueniences and lesse repugnant to reason and holy Scripture The custome of circumgestation of the hoast sayth Cassander may be left with greater profit to the Church if it bee wisely laid downe both because it is but a new inuention as also because it seruethrather for pompous ostentation then for any godly deuotion and so as Albertus Crantzius sayth is contrary to Christs institution Pope Gelasius witnesse Gregorie of Valintia said that the substance of the bread and wine in the Eucharist doe not lose their nature Touching abstraction of the Cuppe their learned Cassander acknowledgeth that for the space of a thousand yeeres after Christ the people communicated in both kindes and that in Greece and Armenia they doe still and the best Catholickes earnestly desire a reformation of this matter in the Church of Rome And Durand their Schooleman that the receiuing in one kind onely is not a full sacrament all receiuing for though that in the consecrated hoast Christs bloud bee contained yet it is not there sacramentally in that the bread signifieth the bodie and not the bloud and the wine the bloud and not the bodie Of the same mind were Alexander Alensis Albertus magnus Biel with others more this last affirming that in the Apostles times all did receiue the wine aswell as the bread because God is no respecter of persons The second that it is of greater vse and profit to the faithfull and the first that it is a matter of greater merit Thus all these Schoolemen doe protestantize in this point 51. Auricular confession is denied by Protestants to be necessarie for the remission of sinnes and to bee commanded by God The same is auerred by Panormitane Peresius Bonauenture Medina Rhenanus Erasmus Caietane c. all of them concluding with one voyce that it is a doctrine deriued onely from a positiue Law of the Church and not from the Law of God yea and the last that is named to wit Cardinall Caietane is bold to say that it is so farre from being commanded that euery one should be shriuen before hee come to the Communion that the contrarie is insinuated by the Apostle where hee sayth Let a mantry himselfe And Gratian confesseth that Ambrose Augustine Chrysostome Theophilact and other Greeke Fathers thought that secret confession was not necessarie And lastly Acosta a famous Iesuite auoucheth that it would be well for the Indians if the bond of confession might bee taken away lest they should bee constrained to commit so many and so grieuous sacriledges 52. So the Romish doctrine of satisfactions is vtterly condemned by Protestants and not onely by them but by many of their owne learned Doctours for the Diuines of Louaine as Bellarmine witnesseth of them and others did certainly defend that the sufferings of Saints cannot bee true satisfactions but that our punishments are remitted onely by the personall satisfaction of Christ And Panormitane sayth that a man may be inwardly so penitent and contrite that he shall need no satisfaction at all but may bee absolued presently without any penance doing And another that the treasure of Indulgences doth consist onely of the merits of Christ and not of the satisfactions of Saints because the merits of Christ are of infinite valew 53.
against their Emperours and that this was not for want of strength as Bellarmine would haue it he sayth that euen then they did not attempt any such thing when in number and strength they might make their party good but in this extolled their Religion aboue all other by defending this most holy doctrine That all men ought to obey the Magistrates The notable and learned Treatises of Barclay a French man Blackwell Warberton c. our Countrey-men all profest Romanists doe peremptorily and plainely by many reasons confute the same Touching his spirituall iurisdiction though there bee fewe of them that gain-say that yet Gregory the great one of their owne Popes may stand in stead of many who by many letters both to the Emperour and Bishop of Constantinople sheweth that no man ought to be an vniuersall Bishop ouer therest calling that name in detestation vaine proud prophane blasphemous mischieuous Antichristian against the commandements of God and decrees of Councils and peremptorily sayth that he is a follower of Sathan and a fore-runner of Antichrist that assumeth it to himselfe 59. And that the Pope is not the supreme Iudge in the Church nor of infallible iudgement but the Scripture only many of them are of opinion aswell as we Aquinas saith that the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles is the rule of our vnderstanding Antoninus saith that God hath spoken but once and that in the holy Scripture and that so plentifully to meet with all temptations and all cases that may fall out Gerson saith that the Scripture is the rule of our faith which being well vnderstood no authority of men is to be admitted against it Gonradus Clingius saith that the Scripture is the infallible rule of truth yea the measure and Iudge of the truth Peresius saith that the authority of no Saint is of infallible truth for that honour is due only to the Scripture Yea Bellarmine their Ring-leader confesseth the Scripture to be the most certaine and most safe rule of faith Franciscus Victoria saith that the Pope in dispensing against the Decrees Councels and former Popes may erre and grieuously sinne Alphonsus de Castro diueth deeper and saith that euery man yea the Pope and that as he is Pope and Pastor of the Church may be deceiued Bozius pierceth yet deeper and saith that the Pope may be an Heretike yea write teach and preach heresie And lastly Almayne saith that the power of not erring in the faith is not alway in the Pope Are not all these now Protestants in this point But for fuller satisfaction in this point I referre the Reader to the reuerent and iudicious Deane of Winchester Doctor Morton with others who haue largely and learnedly discouered this matter in their writings 60. The like might bee shewne in all other points these few instances therefore shall suffice for this time to perswade that it is farre more safe to subscribe to the Religion of Protestants then of Romanists seeing we hold nothing which many of their owne ranke and order doe not maintayne aswell as we and what I pray you could mooue them thus to doe being sworne subiects to the Church of Rome but the euidence of truth which shined so cleerely to their consciences that they neither could nor durst gaine-say the same Conclusion NOw then gentle Reader these things being thus cleerly proued viz First that the Religion of the Church of Rome giueth open libertie to sinne Secondly that it maintayneth by the grounds therof things forbidden by all lawes Diuine Naturall and Humane Thirdly that it imitateth the Iewes in those things wherein they are enemies to Christ Fourthly that it derogateth from the glorie of Gods mercy and efficacy of the merits of Christ in the worke of our redemption Fiftly that it refuseth to bee tryed by the Scriptures and will be iudged and tryed by none but it selfe Sixtly that it is at defiance and profest enmitie with the sacred Scriptures Seuenthly that it maintayneth grosse and palpable Idolatrie Eightly that it is contrary to it selfe by manifest contradictions Ninthly that it is apparently opposite to the Gospell of Iesus Christ Tenthly that it nourisheth grosse and barbarous ignorance amongst the people Eleuenthly that it was neuer knowne nor heard of in the Apostles time nor in the primitiue Church Twelfthly that it vpholdeth it selfe by vnlawfull vniust and vngodly meanes and lastly that it is dangerous and vnsafe both in respect of Gods glorie mans conscience and Christian charitie I say all these things being thus cleerely demonstrated what remayneth but that wee abhorre the same as the Religion of the great Whore and her Paramour Antichrist who with their cup of fornications and vaine pretext of Peters authoritie haue besotted heretofore all Nations of the earth and cleaue to the sinceritie of the Gospell taught and professed in the Church of Protestants which is free from all these imputations for it neither giueth libertie to sinne nor maintayneth any thing that is vnlawfull nor imitateth the Iewes ascribeth all the worke of our redemption to Gods mercy and Christs merits onely desireth to bee tryed and examined by the Scriptures reuerenceth the fulnesse and perfection thereof abhorreth all shew of Idolatrie is not at enmity and opposition but keepeth a sweet harmony with it selfe doth not crosse the Gospell not so much as in shew condemneth and laboureth against ignorance is agreeable to the doctrine of the Apostles and primitiue Church maintayneth it selfe by no vnlawfull meanes and lastly hath great safetie and securitie in the profession thereof Good Christians must bee like good Gold-smiths who will not take a piece of gold of any mans word but will trie it by the touch-stone and weigh it in the ballance The Truth is like gold it behoueth all therefore to trie it and weigh it before they entertayne it into their soules lest they receiue in stead of pure mettall that which is counterfeit and light trie therefore these two Religions which of them hath the truth and without partialitie or affection retayne the good and reiect the counterfeit remember that the truth of Christians as Saint Augustine saith is more beautifull incomparably then Helene of the Grecians and that it alone as Saint Ambrose saith freeth alone saueth alone washeth and therefore though it be hid in a deepe pit as the Philosopher said yet it is diligently to be digged for of all them that desire the saluation of their soules In a word let not the darke mists of error and superstition blinde thine eyes but open them wide to the beholding of the bright light of truth that shineth round about thee and know that if the Gospell be hid it is hid to them that perish in whom the god of this world hath dazeled their mindes that they should not see the light of the glorious Gospell of Iesus Christ I desire no more credit at thy hands then the euidence of these reasons produced do require and therefore if they be true then