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
God in them and therefore the worship of them is called the feare of Iehouah and yet they are branded for Idolaters in that respect The like I might say of the golden Calfe in the wildernesse and of that Image which Micha erected Fourthly and lastly that the true God worshipped in or before an Image is made an Idol because as Saint Augustine saith they that worship God in any other sort then he hath appointed worship not him but that which they had fayned that is an Idoll of their owne fancy and therefore the Scripture saith when the Iewes worshipped God in the golden Calfe they turned God into the likenesse of a beast which eateth grasse 21. The second conclusion to bee obserued is that by their doctrine the Images of Christ are to be adored with such worship as is belonging vnto Christ himselfe though improperly and that this worship is to be bounded within the compasse of the Image without relation to the Samplar By which is euident First that by their owne confession they are Idolaters improperly and secondly that trust and confidence is to be put in such an Image vowes and prayers and sacrifices to be made vnto it for all these are parts of diuine worship which must be confined to the Image and so they are not improperly but properly Idolaters and then by this we may see that the caueat inserted in the decree of the Councill of Trent is but a meere sophistication for whereas the decree saith that Images must be so worshipped that trust and confidence be not placed in them in affirming that some ought to bee worshipped with Latria they enioyne plainely that men should repose their trust and confidence in them and thus they bewray the fraud of the decree and their owne secret impiety 22. The third conclusion is that same Hyperdulia or extraordinary reuerence which they say is due to the Image of the blessed Virgin and that Dulia or common seruice which they assigne to the Images of other Saints is no lesse then Idolatry let them extenuate the matter neuer so much by titles and distinctions for it is religious worship all which is due vnto God onely Reuel 19. 10. and 22. 9. The Angel would not suffer Iohn to performe any outward worship vnto him nor so much as prostrate himselfe before him but commanded him to worship God and yet Iohn knew him to be but an Angel and therefore meant not to giue him any thing but outward reuerence yet he refused it vpon this ground that all religious worship both outward and inward belongeth onely vnto God So Mardochee the Iew refused to bow the knee to Haman the Agagite because the honour which was giuen vnto him was more then ciuill for he was made a petty God and therefore in the fragments of Hester this reason is giuen by himselfe I did it because I would not preferre the honour of a man before the glory of God and would not worship any but thee my Lord therefore the bowing of the knee or prostrating of the body after a religious manner is due onely vnto God and is part of diuine worship to bow the knee and prostrate the body after a ciuill manner is lawfull to Kings and Princes and others that are either exalted in gouernment or endued with excellent gifts and graces of God but to doe the same in a religious respect is proper onely to God because it presupposeth the knowing of the heart an omni-presence and an infinite power to helpe And thus this same Hyperdulia and Dulia wherewith they worship the Image of the Virgin and other Saints is open and plaine Idolatry and the rather because it is seldome or neuer seuered from Latria that is the inward worship of the soule which as they say is onely due vnto God as by their practice more plainely shall appeare 23. Thus we see the morrow and mystery of their doctrine discouered now let vs take a view of their practice And first what worship can bee more performed vnto God then they giue vnto their Images they kneele to them they pray to them they vow vowes to them they offer offerings to them they sweare by them they prostrate their bodies before them let Polydore Virgill one of their owne sworne fauorites who would not we may presume speake any thing too lauishly of his owne but rather bee sparing in their disgrace describe their manners Men saith hee are growne to that madnesse that this part of piety is little differing from flat impiety for there are very many of the rude and ignorant which worship the very Images of wood or stone of marble or brasse or pictures painted vpon the walls not as figures but euen as if they had verily sense and doe put more trust in them then they doe in Christ or other Saints to whom they are dedicated Thus doth this man describe the practice of their Idolatry and much more might be found in him to that purpose but that the Spanish Censours haue taken order by their Index Expurgatorius that he shall not doe them much hurt But if this mans testimony will not serue the turne let vs heare another of the same ranke a man of great learning and iudgement Cornelius Agrippa who thus complaineth The corrupt manner and false Religion of the Gentiles hath infected our Religion and hath brought into the Church Images and pictures with many vaine ceremonies of externall pompe none whereof was found amongst the first and true Christians Hence wee began to bring into our Churches dumbe Images and to place them vpon Gods Altars with great reuerence and whither we account it vnlawfull for a man the true Image of God to ascend thither we translate senselesse Images to them we bow our heads giue kisses offer lights hang vp gifts apply myracles buy pardons of them To conclude to them we goe a pilgrimage to them we make vowes them we inwardly worship and not only outwardly adore neither can it be vttered how great superstition that I may not say Idolatry is nourished amongst the rude and ignorant people in Images the Priests winking thereat and reaping thereby no small gaine to their purses Adde vnto these Cassanders testimony another learned man of an indifferent spirit It is more manifest saith he then that it needeth any long explication that the worship of Images hath too much preuailed and that the affection or rather superstition of the people hath beene too much fauoured in this regard so that Christians seeme to be nothing inferiour to Pagans in the adoration which they vsed to exhibite to their Idols and in the vanity which they shewed in making and adorning their Images And a little after he bringeth in a saying of Gabriel Biell to this effect The blockish errour of certaine men is so great and they are so affected to Images that they thinke that some diuine grace or sanctity resideth in them by which
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
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
for a more filthy bottle Besides which is more vnreasonable he maketh things to be of a contradictory opposition which are one and the same in nature for to giue diuine honour to the creature is not Idolatry saith hee but to worship a creature as God is Idolatry whereas in verie truth to giue diuine honour to a creature is to worship that creature as God and to worship a creature as God is no more nor lesse then to giue diuine honour vnto it as any man of vulgar sense may easily discerne 9. Scripture for if none were Idolaters but they which accounted the Idols which they worshipped to be very Gods then were not the Israelites Idolaters when they adored the golden Calfe in the Wildernesse nor the tenne Tribes when they offered sacrifice to Ieroboams Calues at Dan and Bethel nor the Iewes when they bowed the knee and buâ—nt Incense to the Image of Baal for they did not esteeme these Images as very Gods but in them the two former worshipped the true God and the latter the God of the Sidonians which was the same and yet all these are condemned as Idolaters in the Booke of God nay many of the Heathen themselues were to be freed from Idolatry as the Athenians who on that Altar which was dedicated to an vnknowne God worshipped ignorantly the true God which made the world and all things that are therein as Saint Paul declareth Acts 17. 23. and the Ephesians who worshipping the great Goddesse Diana did not ascribe diuine power to the Image which was like vnto a great pillar full of dugs but vnto nature represented by that Image or rather God the nourisher and conseruer of nature of all things in nature and the rest of the wiser rancke of the Gentiles who as some of the Romish Writers themselues confesse worshipped vnwittingly that same God which was preached by the Apostles and though they set before them diuers Images yet their meaning was to worship in them the true God 10. Fathers for all of them with one consent define Idolatry to be nothing else but the attributing of diuine honour to the Creatures as Thomas Aquinas out of them all concludes that this is Idolatry quando honor soli Deo debitus exhibetur creaturae that is when that honour which is onely due vnto God is bestowed vpon a creature Hee that would see the Fathers particular definitions hereof let him reade the places quoted in the Margent which for breuity sake I ouerpasse And to conclude to see how grosly this Iesuite doth erre from the scope of truth and how vnaduisedly he brings in that fond addition as vnto God the Catechisme of the Councill of Trent doth plainly affirme that the Heathen set vp vnto God the Images of diuers creatures that the Israelites worshipped the true God in the golden Image of the Calfe These are the two vaine euâ—sions of these two great pillars whose workes are approued by the censure of the Church to bee wholly Orthodex and to containe nothing contrary to the Catholike verity 11. But enough of them let vs leaue the two Cubs in their holes and come to the hunting of the olde Foxe the Idolatrous Church it selfe That the Church of Rome attributes diuine honour to creatures appeareth by this because trust and confidence inuocation vowes sacrifice adoration all which are giuen by them vnto creatures are all parts of diuine honour and worship For trust and confidence the Prophet Ieremie so appropriateth it to the Lord that he denieth it to all other Ier. 17. 5 7. Cursed be hee that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arme and withdraweth his heart from the Lord. And then he addeth but blessed bee the man that trusteth in the Lord and whose hope the Lord is And S. Peter more plainely 1. Pet. 5. 7. doth bid vs to cast all our care vpon God Now if all confidence and our trust or care is to be reposed in the Lord then there is no part nor piece thereof to beeb stowed vpon any creature and that as all so onely it belongeth to the Lord. Christ himselfe teacheth Math. 4. 10. interpreting that place of Deut. 6. 13. and 10. 20. for whereas Moses saith Thou shalt feare the Lord thy God and serue him Christ the best Expositor of the Law that euer was himselfe being the end and perfection of the Law doth thus alledge it adding this word onely vnto the Text Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serue Whereby he euidently declareth that all the parts of Gods worship are to bee restrained by this word onely that is that they so belong vnto the Lord that it is sacriledge if not Idolatry to communicate them to any other and so of inuocation vowes sacrifice and adoration the Scripture doth ascribe them to God as parts of his worship and therefore by the same rule onely to God and none else the reason hereof is giuen by the Lord himselfe Esai 42. 5. I am the Lord saith he this is my name and my glory will I not giue to any other but his worship is his glory therefore no part of this may be giuen to any other 12. To this also consent all the Fathers Ierome saith If we must put our confidence in any let vs haue our affiance in God alone And Basil As it is meete to worship nothing beside God so wee must fixe our hope in one God Augustine thus Saints are to be honoured for imitation and not to be adored for Religion Epiphanius thus Let Mary bee honoured but not adored let the Father Sonne and holy Ghost bee adored Lastly Ambrose determines the poynt most effectually thus Is any so mad saith hee that will giue to the Earle the honour of the King Yet these men marke this you idolatrous brood of Babylon doe not thinke themselues guilty who giue the honour of Gods name to a creature and leauing the Lord adore their fellow seruants as though there were any thing more reserued for God This is iust your case and therefore by the iudgement of this good Father you stand as guilty before Gods iudgement seat of Idolatry 13. But all these are but generall considerations let vs therefore see in particular how these parts of Gods worship are by the Religion of the Church of Rome assigned vnto creatures and to what creatures they are assigned that the Strumpet of Babylon may haue no mantle to couer her vncleannesse I might here begin with the Pope himselfe and shew how hee is made an Idoll in the Church of Rome and worshipped as God yea takes to himselfe the titles of God and suffers himselfe to be called God and receiueth adorations prostrations and kissing of the seete from all his followers as is testified by their owne corrected Canon Law and diuers of their learned Doctours whereby hee doth plainely shew himselfe to be Antichrist according to S. Pauls description I might
vpon the same though they bee now both made dumbe by their expurging Index speake asmuch for in them we fiude this proposition Anciently Priests were permitted to marry 41. For history to omit the Priests and Prophets of the old Testament Peter whose successours they claime to bee carryed a wife about with him in his preaching which was put to death at Antioch for consessing lesus Christ as witnes both Clemens Alexandrinus and Eusebius which writers do also affirme that Paul had a wise also and left her at Philippos a City of Macedonia that hee might with lesse cumbrance preach the Gospell abroad That Philip the Euange list was marryed Saint Luke testifyeth in the Acts of the Apostles for it is said there that he had foure daughters which were Prophetisses thus was it in the first age of the Church then afterward we read that Hilary a French Bishop was marryed and of Saint Basils Father that hee was a Bishop and in the state of marriage held that function and the like of Synesius the Bishop of Pâ—olomais and Athanasius reports that Bishops and Monks liued marryed and had children and Eusebius that in the Easterne Churches it was counted a yoke too heauy to bee borne to binde Church-men from marriage yea Gratian boldly affirmeth that except they will brand some of the Popes with bastardy and adultery they must confesse that Bishops were and might then bee marryed for Gregory the first was grand-child to Pope Felix the third and Alexander the sixt had two sonnes begotten of his owne body and Boniface Felix Gelasius and Agapetus were all sonnes of Bishops yea their owne Vicelius reckoneth vp a number both of Bishops and Priests that in the Primitiue Church were marryed In briefe though in all ages the Deuill by his instruments laboured to bring disgrace vpon Gods holy ordinance of marriage and by that meanes to make way to adulteries fornications and vnlawfull lusts and some learned and godly fathers were too lauish in commending virginity before marriage yet they were alwayes gainsaide by other some as learned godly as themselues whoÌ„ God stirred vp for the desence of his own ordinance neither was it euer propounded as a Law vntill Pope Siricius time who was the first that forbad and interdicted Priests to marry and afterwards Pope Nicholas the first or as some thinke the second about the yeere 867 did the like against whose proceedings Haldericus the Bishop of Ausbrough wrote that learned and pithy Epistle where of mention is made before and yet it was not vniuersally receiued vntill the time of Pope Calixtus about the yeere 1108. History is so cleare for this matter that it admitteth no iust exception and thus both by their owne confessions and by the light of history this doctrine is conuinced of nouelty 42. Another article of the Popes Creede is concerning Images to wit that God himselfe may bee represented by and worshipped before an Image and that the Images of Christ and the Saints are to be adored with the same worship which is due vnto their pâ—tternes or at least wise that they are to be worshipped in or at the Image This is the generall doctrine of that Idolatrous Church which that it hath no true warrant from antiquity is so cleare that none that is but meanely seene in ancient writers can doubt thereof For first in the Church of the Iewes it was vnlawfull either to make any Image of God beeing an inuisible and incomprehensible essence or to worship the Image of any other thing whatsoeuer this was the prescript of the second Commandement which was no ceremoniall Law As Azorius and Vasques two Iesuites haue not ashamed to auerre but morall and naturall as the grand Iesuite Bellarmine confesseth and may be further confirmed by the sentence of Varro alledged by Saint Augustine in his fourth book de Ciuitate who sayth that the Iewish nation worshipped God without any Image that they had no Image in the Temple ordained for worship Also Iosephus doth write that when Caius the Emperour would haue caused his statue to haue been set vp by Petroniâ—s to be worshipped in the Temple of Ierusalem the Iewes had rather expose themselues to present death then to admit that which was forbidden by the Law 43 Secondly in the age of Iesus Christ and the Apostles there was no precept nor example for the worshipping of Images nei her did they commend vnto the Lay people Images and Pictures as fittest bookes for their capacities but the word preached and committed to writing by which they should bee brought to saluation And when as they abolished the worship of Idols and brought in the worship of the true God wee doe not read that either they translated those Idolatrous statues to the worship of the true God or substituted other Images of God himselfe for of holy men to succeed in their roome but taught that God who is a Spirit ought to bee worshipped in Spirit and truth Now surely if it had beene so necessary as the Church of Rome maketh it our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles would neuer haue concealed it from them 44. Thirdly the age also after the Apostles was free from Images for amongst those Ecclesiasticall rites which are recorded to haue been vsed in the first 300. yeeres after Christ there is not so much as any mention made of Image-worship except it bee amongst those that were condemned for Heretikes as the followers of Simon Magus who worshipped his Image and of his harlot Selene and the Disciples of Basilides whom Irenaeus affirmeth to haue vsed Images and Inuocations and the Carpocratians and Gnosticks who burned incense to the Images of Christ and Paul Homer and Pithagoras c. as testifyeth Saint Augustine but the true Church of God condemned these and abhorred all such kind of worship and therefore amongst the accusations which the Heathen obiected to Christians in that age this was one that they professed a Religion without Images as witnesse both Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen the one whereof liued 200. yeeres after Christ and the other 240. which trueth their Cassander confesseth in direct words that at the first preaching of the Gospell there was no publike vse of Images in the Church 45. Fourthly in the next age of the Church after the three hundreth yeere that Images were not approued wee haue the witnesse of the Councill of Eliberis which decreed that no Image should bee made in the Church lest that should be adored which is painted on walles and of Ierome who affirmed that it was condemned of all ancient Fathers and of Origen who called that worship a foolish and adulterous profanation and of Epiphanius who finding a painted Image in a Church rent it downe and said that it was against the authority of the Scripture that any Image should bee in the Church and of Augustine who condemned the vse of them in Churches as vnlawfull and lastly
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