proofe that it is most certaine that one of the Heresies of the Waldenses was against the Popes Pardons let him know from mee that therein he is a fowle mouthed lying Fryer For Platina their deare friend the Popes Abbreuiator Apostolâ—â—us hath these expresse words Iubilaeum idem retulit anno millesimo trecentesimo quo plenam delictorum omnium remissionem his praestabat qui limina Apostolorum visitassent ad exemplum veteris testamentj Pope Boniface brought againe the Iubilee after 1300. yeares and gaue full Pardon of all sinnes to such as did visite S. Peters Church and S. Pauls in Vaticano at Rome after the example of the old Law Out of these wordes I obserue these golden Lessons First that the old Iubilee was neuer heard of in Christes Church till the time of Boniface the Iewish Pope I prooue it by the word retulit hee brought againe from the Iewes Secondly that the Church was free from Popish Pardons 1300. yeares Thirdly that this Pope pardoned not onely the paine but euen the sinne it selfe yea all sinnes whatsoeuer Fourthly that this Pope brought againe the Iewish ceremoniall Law Fiftly that the remission of the old Law which our Papistes pretend apishly to imitate was not of Sinnes but of Debts Landes Bondage and such like which the Pope vseth not to pardon and yet forsooth hee would be thought to bring the Iubilee againe Of this Iubilee see woonderfull Popish coozening trickes liuely discouered in their colours in my Suruay of Popery The Perioch of the Chapter First therefore seeing the Popes Pardons can not be found in the Holy Scriptures Secondly seeing the holy Fathers in old time were not acquainted with them Thirdly seeing they depend intrinsecally vpon Purgatorie which the Greeke Fathers neuer beleeued as God willing shall be made euident in the next Chapter Fourthly seeing Pope Boniface was the first that gaue generall Pardons for all Sinnes in the yeare 1300. after Christ I must perforce conclude against the Pope and Poperie that the Popish Pardons are a Rotten Ragge not of the Old but of the New Religion This Chapter connotateth an intrinsecall order to the next following and so must be coupled togeather with the same The Iesuites 5. Chapter of Popish Purgatorie B. C. IN this Chapter after he hath disputed against Purgatorie with the authoritie of Roffensis hee commeth to his recapitulation and sayth Secondly that the Church of Rome beleeued it not for the space of 250. yeares after which time it increased by litle and litle T. B. Whosoeuer shall but with an indifferent iudgement peruse my Tryall of the new Religion togeather with this Answere of the Jesuite which is not of one man alone but of many togeather as will appeare before the end of this my Reply God willing that man doubtles can not but see as clearely as the noone day that Poperie is the New Religion This is mine Answere let it be well marked For my life and soule I dare gage that the Iesuites Answere sheweth euidently to all iudicious and indifferent Readers that it is the trueth which I defend and that all the Papistes in the world are not able in trueth to confute the same His miserable shiftes his silly euasions and coozening trickes doe euery where and in euery Chapter declare that the Jesuite is at a Non plus and knoweth not for his life how to defend the Pope For first he neuer setteth downe my wordes truely Secondly he doth but snatch at some of them which seeme to be of the least force and strength which for all that haue more force in them then he is able to deale withall His first coozening tricke in this present Chapter is this viz. That hee not daring to alleadge all mine Assertion which truly containeth the true meaning of their famous Martyr so supposed late Byshop of Rochester as which are his owne wordes in deed hee at the first leapeth ouer 40. lynes almost in which the force of my Disputation resteth and onely toucheth my Recapitulation This coozening tricke being after his maner performed hee combineth an other with it implying a greater coozening by many degrees This coozenage is contayned in these wordes Secondly that the Church of Rome I prooue it first because euery Child knoweth that the first goeth before the second Secondly because the first which the Fryer would not because he durst not touch at all contayneth nay prooueth the maine poynt in this controuersie the poynt is this This Byshop was a Learned man a great Papist and said for Poperie what possibly he could yet doth he graunt many thinges of such force is the trueth which quite ouerthrow Poperie and turne it vpside-downe First wee see by his free assertion that the Greeke Church neuer beleeued Purgatorie to his dayes and so it was to them vnknowne 1517. yeares All this the Iesuite passeth ouer in deepe silence and beginneth at Secondly Loe M. Fisher that Learned Byshoppe for so I graunt hee was telleth vs plainely and resolutely that the Holy Fathers and Learned men of the Greeke Church neuer beleeued Purgatorie vntill his time that is for the space of 1517. yeares after Christ. But our Iesuite is so blind that hee could not see these wordes Nay rather hee durst not acknowledge them because hee can not frame any colourable answere to them This is the trueth in very deed His third coozening tricke is in the omission and not speaking of these wordes Thirdly that the Church of Rome did not beleeue Purgatorie all at once but by litle and litle These wordes our Fryer Jâ—suite durst not once name least they should haue giuen him a mortall wound For in deed to speake the trueth they strike dead They shew plainely that as the holy Fathers of the Greeke Church neuer beleeued Purgatorie so neither did the Fathers of the Latine Church beleeue it all and wholly at one and the same time but by litle and litle Ah poore Purgatorie thy birth by peece-meale maketh thee the New Religion Thou art a Monster among the Iesuited Papistes Thou wast neither begotten nor borne at once but by litle and litle O sillie Poperie O new Religion His fourth coozening tricke is implyed in omitting these wordes Fourthly that the inuention of Purgatorie was the birth â—f Popish Pardons as which could haue no place till Purgatorie was found out by feigned reuelations Marke how gallantly our Jesuite confuteth Bell. You see hee is not able to endure the sound of the Bell Of fiue poyntes of great consequence he durst name onely two the Second forsooth and the Fift Of the fiue three seemed euery way vnanswerable To the second and the fift he thought he could say something in shew of wordes albeit very nothing in the trueth of the matter Which God willing shall soone appeare after the due examination of his wordes But first because the controuersie is a maine poynt of Popish Religion and the ground of Popish Pardons I
it is alreadie prooued in the third Conclusion To which I adde that the holy Fathers when they speake of Venial sinnes doe euer vnderstand Small sinnes respectiuely In which sense my selfe do willingly admit Veniall sinnes as also sinnes Veniall by the mercie of God But withall I wish the Reader euer to remember what Gersonus Almaynus Baius Durandus and Roffensis teach vs viz. that euery least Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature which is the flat Doctrine I heere defend Thirdly that the difference amongst the Learned Popish Doctors concerning Veniall sinnes is a matter of small importance which I exhort the Christian reader in the bowels of our sweete Redeemer neuer to forget For it doth plainely conuince if nothing else could be sayd in that behalfe that Poperie is the New religion What is Popish fayth a matter of Small moment Is it not necessarie to saluation If the Pope will say it I am ready to confirme it Roffensis Baius Almaynus Durandus and Gersonus all being both learned and zealous Papistes affirme constantly the force of trueth compelling them that euery Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature Contrariwise the Pope his Jesuites and Jesuited vassals affirme teach and beleeue as an Article of Popish Fayth that many Sinnes are Veniall euen of their owne nature This notwithstanding our Jesuite telleth vs roundly though nothing Clerkly that the difference is but small So then Articles of Popish fayth are small or great as it pleaseth the Pope His bare Will as we haue heard and seene is a warrant sufficient in euery thing as who can change the nature of thinges if we will beleeue him and of nothing make some thing Fourthly that my selfe hold no Opinion teach no Article of Fayth defend no Position but such Opinions Positions and Articles as the best learned Papistes haue holden taught and defended before mee For my woonted maner euer hath been is and shall be to wound the Papistes with their owne Weapons and to conâ—ound the Pope with his best Learned Proctors B. C. This being so let vs consider what a notable vntrueth the Minister offereth to the view of his Readers when he sayth Almaynus Durandus Gerson Baius and other famous Papistes not able to answere the reasons against Veniall sinnes confesse the trueth with the Byshop that euery Sinne is Mortall Hee doth cunningly abuse them in leauing out those wordes of it owne nature which ought to be added after their opinion and himselfe likewise doth adde in citing of Roffensis immediately before T. B. I answere first that the vntrueth our Fryer speaketh of proceedeth from his owne lying lippes as by and by it will appeare Secondly that our Fryer doth falsely peeuishly vnchristianly and impudently abuse both his Reader and mee when he chargeth me to abuse my Authors in leauing out their wordes What wordes sir Fryer haue I left out These wordes forsooth of it owne nature sayth our Iesuiticall Fryer O malitious Jesuite Where is thine Honestie where is thy Christianitie where is thy Fayth where is thy Conscience Art thou become a flat Atheist art thou at defiance with true dealing Thou seemes to make thy soule saleable for the Popes pleasure Doth not thine owne Penne condemne thee when thou grauntes that I added the same wordes in citing of Roffensis immediatly before Let the indifferent Reader be an indifferent Iudge betweene vs. I added the wordes immediatly before as our Fryer truely sayth it therefore had been an irkesome tantologie to cite them againe in the next wordes following especially seeing I affirme the Popish Doctors Almaynus Durandus Gersonus and Baius to hold and defend the selfe same opinion that Byshoppe Fisher affirmeth to be the trueth Againe the Controuersie consisteth precisely in this speciall poynt viz. Whether euery sinne be Mortall of it owne nature or no. I defende the affirmatiue the Iesuite the negatiue And consequently I must perforce speake of Sinnes as they are in their owne nature O worthy defender of late start-vp Poperie Thou perceiuest right well that Poperie is the New religion indeed and not able to withstand the truth nor to answere mine inuincible reasons and groundes Thou fleest from that which is in question to impertinent extrauagant and friuolous cauils so to dazell the eyes of thy Readers least they behold the newnesse of late Romish Religion Out vpon such beggerly Religion as which can not be defended but by cauils coozenage lying and deceitfull dealing B. C. After this vntrueth immediatly followeth another Yea the Jesuite S. R. quoth hee with the aduice of his best Learned friendes in his answere to the Downefall of Poperie confesseth plainely and blusheth not thereat that the Church of Rome had not defined some sinnes to be Veniall vntill the dayes of Pius the fift and Gregorie the 13. which was not fiftie yeares agoe In which wordes he blusheth neuer a whit to slaunder that Learned man and wholly to corrupt his meaning Hee sayth not that the Church of Rome had not defined some sinnes to be Venial vntill the dayes of Pius the fift and Gregorie the 13. as this licentious cast-away corruptly fathereth vpon him For he knew well that to beleeue Veniall sinnes was an Article long receiued before the times of those Popes But he affirmeth onely that to hold Veniall sinnes onely to be such by the mercie of God was censured and condemned by those Popes Why did Sir Thomas his sinceritie cut away these wordes by the mercie of God Forsooth because that without lying and corruption he can obiect nothing against Catholike doctrine T. B. I answere first that our impudent Fryer lyeth egregiously when he chargeth mee to slaunder S. R. his learned Brother For vpon my saluation I auerre it I deale christianly honestly and sincerely I neuer change adde or take away any one iote of that which I finde in mine Authors Would to God our Iesuites did so deale with mee Secondly our Fryer lyeth impudently when he vttereth these wordes Hee sayth not that the Church of Rome had not defined some sinnes to be Veniall vntill the dayes of Pius the fift and Gregorie the thirteenth For these are S. R. his expresse wordes True it is that Byshoppe Fisher and Gerson were in that errour but that was both before it was condemned in the Church as it was since by Pius the fift and Gregorie the thirteenth In which wordes the Jesuite S. R. telleth vs two memorable poyntes of Doctrine Th' one that Fisher and Gerson were in an Errour Th' other that the Errour was before the Church had condemned it So it onely remaineth duely to examine what the supposed Errour was The Iesuite B. C. heere telleth vs plainely if wee may beleeue him that the Popes Pius and Gregorius condemned that opinion onely which holdeth Venial sinnes to be onely such by the mercie of God I admit the Assertion I like the Narration I onely reiect the Popes friuolous vnchristian and
plaine hereticall condemnation For I pray you sir Fryer are not those sinnes Mortall of their owne nature which are onely Veniall by mercie and fauour Doth not Veniall onely by Mercie exclude Veniall by all other wayes and meanes For doubtles whatsoeuer is Veniall of it owne nature can not be Veniall onely by Mercie Onely our fond Iesuiticall Fryer not able to defend Poperie from being the New religion is forced for want of matter to say it The nature of euerie thing is intrinsecall and essentiall to the thing and can not be taken away from the thing without the vtter destruction of the same But euerie meane Logitian euerie young Gramarian euerie wittie Ploughman and euerie Boy of discretion is able to teach and tell our Jesuite that Mercie is extrinsecall and meere accidentall to the thing and may be added or taken away from the thing without the destruction of the same Ergo whatsoeuer is Veniall not any other way but by the Mercie of God onely is vndoubtedly Mortall of it owne nature And consequently seeing all Sinnes were Mortall of their owne nature vntill the dayes of Pius and Gregorius as our Jesuites freely graunt it followeth by a necessarie and ineuitable illation that Veniall sinnes of their owne nature were neuer knowne to the Church of God vntill the irreligious and plaine hereticall Decrees of Pius the fift and Gregorie the thirteenth that is to say for the space of one thousand fiue hundred threescore and fiue yeares after Christ. For the supposed errour of Roffensis Gersonus Almaynus Baius and Durandus who all were verie learned Papistes and for all that taught and defended euery Sinne to be Mortall of it owne nature was not condemned as we see and heare it freely confessed by our Aduersaries vntill the time of Pius the fift of that name The trueth therefore is this viz. that the Church for the space of 1565. yeares after Christ beleeued euerie Sinne to be Mortall of it owne nature For as we haue seene alreadie in the first Conclusion of this Chapter God may most iustly condemne euerie least Sinne to eternall Death and Hell fire Yea as M. Gerson learnedly writeth he that holdeth the contrarie must perforce hold withall that in some case Sinne may be done lawfully and be no Sinne at all And it is but a very childish and friuolous cauill to say at our Fryer heere doth viz. that it was an Article of Popish Faith long before Pius the Pope to beleeue Veniall sinnes For such Venialles were of necessitie such either of their owne nature or else of mercie onely If our Jesuite graunt the latter I haue my desire it is the trueth which I defende If the former a double refutation is at hand First because the opinion of Almaynus Roffensis Baius Durandus and Gersonus was verie currant in the Romish Church vntill the dayes of Pius and Gregorius as our Iesuite S. R. affirmeth and the Fryer B. C. his deare Brother willingly admitteth Againe because to be Veniall both by Mercie by Nature implieth contradiction The reason is euident both for that sinnes Veniall of their owne Nature stand not in need of any Mercie and also for that Mercie mittigateth that punishment which by the Nature of the subiect might iustly be inflicted O miserable Poperie What sillie shiftes and childish cauils are inuented to defend thee from being the New Religion If any shall hencefoorth call or thinke thee the Old Religion that shall heare thine age truely discouered I shall thinke him so wise as not to know when to come out of the raine Thirdly that our Iesuite sheweth himselfe more impudent then Impudencie it selfe while he beareth his Readers in hand that I haue cut away these wordes of mine Author the Iesuite his Learned brother By the Mercie of God For I referre my selfe to the expresse wordes of the Iesuite in his pretensed Answere to the Downe-fall of Poperie which I haue truely recited in the Tryall of the New religion as I will answere at the dreadfull day of doome But our Jesuite not able to defend Poperie from being the New Religion addicteth himselfe wholly to forgerie falsehood and lying for otherwise both hee and all his Jesuited crew are at a Non-plus and haue nothing at all to say B. C. The same Catholike writer noted him in the place cited by himselfe of two vntruthes The one for calling Byshoppe Fisher the Popes Canonized Martyr the other for styling Gerson a Byshoppe Neither of which be true but he skely passeth ouer them as not knowing poore wretch what to say in his owne defence into such straites doth this dominering Doctor driue himselfe by his talent of ouerlashing T. B. I answere first that the Pope may haue a cold heart when he seeth Poperie bleeding vnto death and no Popish Doctor able to stanch the same Our controuersie is of the Nature and Essence of Sinnes whether euerie Sinne be Mortall of it owne nature or no Our Jesuite being confounded and not able to prooue any sinne to be Veniall of it owne nature answereth me thus That neither Fisher is a Popish canonized Martir nor yet Gerson a Popish Byshoppe O worthie defender of the Pope and of the late Romish Religion I demaunde of our Fryer Iesuite how farre it is to London Hee forsooth answereth a Pokefull of Plumbes I aske him What hee saith to his learned Popish Doctors Almaynus Baius Roffensis Durandus and Gersonus who all with vniforme assent affirme resolutely as the Fryer hath confessed that euerie Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature The Fryer almost frighted out of his wittes telleth mee roundly and blusheth not thereat That neither Gerson is a Byshop nor Fisher a Canonized Martyr Is not this a Learned and Clerkly answere trow yee Hath not the Jesuite much to say for the antiquitie of Poperie when he fleeth to such miserable shiftes pitifull digressions sillie cauils and ridiculous euasions What if Byshoppe Fisher were not a Popish canonized Martir What if M. Gerson the famous Chauncellour of Paris were not a Byshoppe yee know the Prouerbe Cucullus non facit Monachum Your selues can not denie that both Fisher and Gerson were verie learned Popish Writers and so it skilleth not whether the one was a Byshoppe and the other a canonized Martir or no. Secondly that our Jesuite belieth mee heere as his wonted manner is else where I referre the censure hereof to mine Answere in the Downe-fall it selfe Thirdly that M. Gerson was in his old dayes the Byshop of Paris as a litle Treatise published by the Doctors of Paris and sometime printed or bound in one volume with the Maister of Sentences plainely auoucheth to the Reader Fourthlie that Fisher was Canonized priuately at the least as Alphonsus the rector of the English Colledge at Rome did Canonize Campian in my time with a White Surplesse on his backe himselfe then singing a collect of Martirs and
deteyned from them For while they gaue away their owne they vnawares and fondly deemed that they onely restored that which was not their owne in deed Instruction 8. The word Pope was not the proper and peculiar name to the Byshop of Rome for the space of 528. yeares after Christ. The Church of Rome was made the Head of all other Churches and the Byshops there the heads of all other Byshops by the imperiall constitution of Phocas 607. yeares after Christ. That the Pope could not erre iudicially was not authenticall in the Romish Church for 1500. yeares after Christ. That the Pope could vnmarrie persons lawfully married by Christes institution was neuer heard of in the Christian world vntill the yeare 1550. after Christ at which time Pope Iulius presumed to dissolue lawfull Matrimonie by his vnlawfull Dispensation It was neuer thought lawfull for the naturall Brother to marry his naturall Sister vntill the time of Pope Martin who by the instigation of the Diuell set the same abroach in the yeare 1418. after Christ. Popish Veniall sinnes were first hatched by Pope Pius 1566. yeares after Christ. That the Blood of popish Saints could worke mans redemptiō was neuer heard of for the space of 1161. yeares after Christ. The like may be sayd of many other Popish Articles for which I referre the Reader to my Tryall of the New Religion I deeme it enough for the present to insinuate to the Christian Reader that our Church hath onely abolished Superstition Errours and Heresies by litle and litle crept into the Church and doth still keepe all and euery iot of the Old Romane Fayth and Religion The Capucheenes at Rome did the like when they euen with the Popes good liking reformed the dissolute Franciscans Yea Pope Pius himselfe of late dayes did the like while he reformed the popish deformed missals and breuiaries in his late Councell gathered at Trent If hee that now is Byshop of Rome would reforme all the rest by abolishing all Nouelties by litle and litle brought into the Church as we haue done he should finde the remnant to be the Old Romane religion in verie deed Marke well the whole Discourse following where all this is soundly prooued as more cannot be wished The Contentes of the Chapters Chapter 1. Proouing THat the name and worde Pope was in the primatiue Church common to all Byshops aswell of Rome as else where That the Byshop of Rome neither is nor ought to be nor euer was called The vniuersall Byshop of the whole Church That the name Pope was not peculiar to the Bishops of Rome for more then 528. yeares after Christ. That the Iesuite volens nolens is enforced to graunt the same Chapter 2. Proouing That the Pope may not be controulled though he carry with him thousands vpon thousands into Hell That it is Sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power That the Pope with his Pardons can deliuer all soules out of Purgatory-fire That the Pope can dissolue that Matrimonie which is firme and stable by Christes institution That the Pope can dispense with the Brother to marrie his owne naturall Sister That the Pope hath as great power as Christ himselfe had on earth That the Pope may doe whatsoeuer pleaseth him That the Pope can make of nothing something That the counterfeit Donation of Constantine was the originall of all Popish superroyall power That whatsoeuer the Emperours of latter time gaue to the Church of Rome they were induced to do the same by the coozening trickes of the Byshops of Rome That the Popes Sozimus Bonefacius and Celestine falsified the Canons of the Nicene Councell so to aduance them-selues aboue all other Byshops That no Byshops nor Priestes ought to appeale to the Church of Rome That the Councell of Nice gaue the primacie of honour to the Church of Rome because it was the Seat of the Emperour and Caput Mundi That all Christians euen the Byshops of Rome are subiect to the Canons of the Nicene Councell That the Nicene Synode did confine and knit the iurisdiction of the Byshop of Rome Chapter 3. Proouing That Marriage of Priestes was euer lawfull during the time of the old Testament That the Marriage of Priestes is prohibited onely by the law of Man and not by any positiue constitution either of Christ or his Apostles That it was euer lawfull for the Byshops and Priestes of the East-church to marry and to beget children in time of their Priesthood That the Marriage of Priestes was euer lawfull also in the West-church vntill the time of Pope Siricius and in Germanie for the space of 1074. yeares after Christ. That all secular Priestes may Marry notwithstanding the Popish solemne Vow annexed That by Popish fayth and doctrine Marriage is of force after the single Vow of chastitie That the Vow single is of one and the same nature with the Vow solemne That the Marriage of Priestes is lawfull after the solemne Vow so it be done by the Popes Dispensation That the forced and coacted Chastitie of Priestes hath been so intollerable as nothing hath brought more shame to Priesthood more shame to Religion more griefe to godly men Chapter 4. Proouing That popish Pardons are neither found in the holy Scripture nor in the auncient Fathers That the popish Maister of sentences could finde no mention of them in the writinges of the holy Fathers That Byshoppe Fisher graunted the young age of late popish Pardons That the best learned Papistes are not able to defend the same Chapter 5. Proouing That the Greeke Church neuer beleeued Purgatorie That the Church of Rome beleeued it not for the space of 250. yeares That the Church of Rome beleeued it not all at once but by litle and litle That the inuention of Purgatorie was the birth of popish Pardons That the primatiue Church was neuer acquainted with the Popes Pardons nor yet with popish Purgatorie Chapter 6. Proouing That popish Auricular confession cannot be prooued out of the Old Testament That the New Testament doth not impose an heauier yoake vpon vs then did the Old That popish Auricular confession is not necessarie for mans saluation That it is neither commaunded by Christ nor yet by his Apostles That it is established by the meere law of man grounded only vpon a falsely imagined Apostolicall vnwritten tradition That it was not an Article of popish Fayth for the space of 1215. yeares after Christ. Chapter 7. Proouing That euery Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature That fiue famous popish Writers Roffensis Almaynus Bains Durandus Gersonus doe all confesse the same That the Jesuite S. R. graunteth freely that the Church of Rome had not defined some Sinnes to be Veniall vntill the dayes of Pius the fift which was not fiftie yeares agoe Chapter 8. Proouing That the Pope may erre both in Fayth and Doctrine iudicially That many Popes haue erred De facto That great learned Papistes did constantly confesse so
thus viz. That about the yeare of our Lord God 1529. the Duke of Saxonie with others protested publiquely and constantly against the decree of Ferdinando the Emperour that they could not with safe conscience obey and yeeld vnto the same Whereupon the aduersaries did euer since that time malitiously call all reformed Catholikes and sound Christians by the name of Protestants But as I haue prooued in the Jesuites Antepast wee are the Legitimate and reformed Catholiques and the Papistes are Bastardes and deformed Catholiques and consequently the thing truly implyed in the name Protestant is as old as the Religion deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paul to the Church of Rome Which mine Assertion shall by the power of God be made most euident before the end of this Discourse See and note well the end of the 16. Chapter and the 17. Chapter with it as also the 29.30 and 31. Chapters being the three last of this present Booke The Second Chapter of the Popes Superroyall power B. C. TO season the beginning of his Chapter with a little of his mendatious powder be writeth thus Bonifacious Byshoppe of c. T. B. To this before I answere in particular and plaine tearmes it shal not be amisse to lay open to the indifferent Reader the Popes falsely challenged Superroyall power Which I hope in God to performe most plentiously by these Conclusions following The first Conclusion The Popes owne Decrees teach vs that though he be most wicked and carry with him thousandes vpon thousandes to the chiese Diuell of Hell yet may no mortall man reproue him for his such detestable and cursed dealing These are the expresse wordes of the Popes owne Canon Si Papa c. innumerabiles populos cateruatim secum ducit primo mancipio gehennae cum ipso plagis multis inaeternum vapulaturus huius culpas istic redarguere praesumit mortalium nullus quia cunctos ipse iudicaturus a nemine est indicandus nisi deprehendatur a fide deuius These are the wordes of Pope Bonifacius as Gratianus who compiled the Booke of Decrees hath related them I heartily wish the Reader to ponder seriously what I write protesting vpon my saluation that in all mine Assertions Authorities Allegations I deale faythfully euer citing the expresse wordes as I finde them in mine Authors their authorities and reasons The second Conclusion The Popes Power is so sacred so eminent and so surpassing great as it is become flat Sacriledge to dispute of the same Victoria a most famous and learned popish schoole-Doctor who was the first man that brought Scholasticall doctrine into Spaine deliuereth this poynt of doctrine in these expresse wordes Non spectat ad subditos determinare aut examinare quid possit Papa aut quid non possit et quomodo teneantur parere vel non quia sacrilegium est disputare de potentia principis et praecipuè Papae It pertaineth not to popish vassals to determine or examine what the Pope may doe or what he may not doe and how they are bound to obey or not because it is Sacriledge to dispute of the Power of the Prince especially of the Pope Loe we may not dispute of the Popes Power no not to know and learne how and wherein wee ought to obey him This is it indeed that maketh so many sillie Papistes euery where For Papistes must beleeue all thinges but examine nothing that the Pope doth And why I pray you Forsooth least his coozening trickes and the newnesse of late Poperie should be knowne and so both the Pope and all his Iesuited Popelings be vtterly ouerthrowne The third Conclusion The Pope can deliuer if he list all men in this world from the paine due to their sinnes in this world and not this onely but also bring all soules out of Purgatorie if that be done for them which he requireth Three verie learned and famous Popish Doctors Syluester Pryeras Bartholomaeus Fumus and Vigâ—erius doe constantly resolutely affirme this conclusion Sylmester hath these expresse words Sicut potest Papa liberare a paena peccatorum debita in hoc mundo omnes qui sunt in mundo si faciant quod mandat etiamsi essent millies plures quam sunt itae liberare potest omnes qui sunt in purgatorio si quis pro ets facial quod iubet As the Pope can deliuer all in this world from paine due for sinne in this world if they doe what hee commaundeth though they were thousandes more then they bee euen so can hee deliuer all that are in Purgatorie if any doe that for them which he commaundeth And least any man should thinke that impossible which the Pope requireth to be done the same learned Writer telleth vs in an other place that it is a thing very easily done these be his wordes Indulgentiae simpliciter tantum valent quantum praedicantur modo ex parte dantis sit authoritas ex parte recipientis charitas et ex parte causae piet as Pardones are simply worth so much as they are payed so there be authoritie in the giuer charitie in the receiuer and pietie in the cause or motiue But so it is no Papist dare or can deny the same that the soules in Purgatorie be in charitie by popish fayth doctrine for otherwise they could not be out of Hell And doubtlesse that the Pope hath authoritie to giue Pardons as also that he graunteth them for good godly causes viz. for saying Masses Trentals Diriges for murdering of noble Princes for blowing vp with Gunpowder Townes Cities Common-weales and the like I suppose no Papist will denie If they do my argument is the stronger and my selfe shall very willingly agree thereunto Bartholomaus Fumus hath these expresse wordes Papa posset liberare omnes animas purgatorij etiamsi plures essent si quis faceret pro eis quod iuberet peccaret tamen indiscretè concedendo The Pope could set at libertie all the soules in Purgatorie though neuer so many if any would doe that for them which hee commaundeth mary hee should sinne by his vndiscreet pardoning But Viguerius proceedeth further and is bold to tell vs that it is neither inconuenient nor against the iustice of God these are his expresse wordes Nec est inconueniens quod Papa purgatoriuÌ„ posset euacuare non enim per hoc aliquid detraheretur diuinae iustitiae Neither is it inconuenient that the Pope can harrow Hell for that doth derogate nothing from the iustice of God Antoninus that famous popish Arch-byshop iumpeth with the rest in these expresse wordes Quia Ecclesia hoc facit et seruat credencuÌ„ est it a esse Because the Church this doth and obserueth we must beleeue it to be so Now to say that the Pope can deliuer al soules out of Purgatorie but doth it not to keepe himselfe from sinne is altogeather vaine friuolous For first hee should no more sinne in deliuering
Kingdome as one that would execute Constantinet gyft both to haue been and this day to be subiect to the Church of Rome which his successours Benedict and Clement foorthwith reuoked as a thing wicked and vniust But what meaneth this your sollicitude O yee Byshoppes of Rome that ye doe exact of euery Emperour to confirme Constantines gyft if ye doe not distrust your owne right But all in vaine as the prouerbe sayth for it neuer was at any time and what is not can not be confirmed Yea whatsoeuer the Caesars doe they doe the same being deceyued by Constantines example or supposed gyft and they cannot giue away the Empire His fourth place is comprised in these wordes Praescipsit Romana ecclesia O Imperiti O diuini iuris ignari nullus quantuÌ„uis annorum numerus verum abolere titulum potest Sequitur parum ante me natum testor eorum memoriam qui interfuerunt per inaudituÌ„ genus fraudis Roma papale accepit Imperium seu tyrannidem potius cum diu libera fuisset Is fuit Bonifacius nonus octauo in fraude et nomine par si modo Bonifacij dicendi sunt qui pessime faciunt Sequitur sed quid plura opus est in re apertissima dicere Ego non modo Constantinum non donasse tanta non modo non potuisse Romanum Pontificem in eisdem praescribere sed etiamsi vtrumque esset tamen vtrumque ius sceleribus possessorum extinctum esse contendo cum videamus totius Italiae multarumque prouinciarum cladem ac vastitatem ex hoc vno fonte fluxisse Sequitur Papa non modo remp quod non Verres non Catilina non quispiam peculator auderet sed etiam rem Ecclesiasticam et spiritum sanctum quaestui habet quod Simon ille Magus detestatur et cum horum admonetur et a quibusdam bonis viris reprehenditur non negat sed palam fatetur atque gloriatur licere ei quauis ratione patrimonium Ecclesiae a Constantino donatum ab occupantibus extorquere Sequitur Nulla itaque vnquam religio nulla sanctitas nullus Dei timor et quod referens quoque horresco omnium scelerum impij homines a Papa sumunt excusationem in illo enim comitibusque eius est omnis facinoris exempluÌ„ vt cuÌ„ Esaia et Paulo in Papam et Papae proximos dicere possumus Nomen Dei per vos blasphematur inter Gentes qui alios docetis vosipsos non docetis qui praedicatis non surandum latrocinamini qui abhominamini idola sacrilegiuÌ„ facitis qui in Lege et in Pontificatu gloriamini per praeuaricationem legis Deum veruÌ„ PontificeÌ„ inhonoratis The Church of Rome pleadeth Prescription O foolish men O men that know not the law of God! None though neuer so great number of yeares can abolish the title of trueth Not long before my birth I call to witnesse the memorie of them that were present by such fraud as was neuer heard of Rome receiued the Papall Empire or tyranny rather when it had a long time remayned free Boniface the ninth was the man equall to the eight in fraude and name if wee may call them Bonifaces who liue most abhominably But what need more be sayd in a matter most euident to all the world I contend not onely that Constantine gaue not such great giftes not only that the Byshop of Rome could not prescribe in such thinges but although they both had been so yet that the tytles of both were extinct with the wickednesse of the possessours when we may see that the dectruction and desolation of all Jtaly and many Prouinces sprange onely out of this Fountaine The Pope selleth for gaine not onely the Common-weale which neither Verres nor Catiline nor any notorious robber durst doe but also the Treasure of the Church and the holy Ghost which Simon the Magician doth detest And when he is admonished of these thinges and good men reprooue him for the same he denieth not but openly confesseth and glorieth therein that he may extort and by what meanes soeuer take from the possessours that Patrimonie which Constantine gaue to the Church Therefore he had neuer any Religion sanctimonie or feare of God And I tremble while I speake it men polluted with sinnes of all sortes alledge the Pope for their excuse For hee and his retinue are the example of all kind of mischiefe so as wee may iustly exclaime with â—say and with Paul against the Pope and his deuoted Pope-lings You are the cause that Gods name is blaspheamed among the Gentiles You that teach others doe not teach your selues you that preach against Stealing commit Robberie by the hie-way side you that abhorre Idolatrie practise Sacriledge yee that glorie in the Law boast of the Popedome by transgression of the Law dishonour the true Byshop which is GOD. Out of these plaine and euident testimonies of these famous zealous and great learned Papistes Gratianus Victoria Syluester Viguerius Fumus Nauarrus Couarruuias Gregorius Aquinas Augustinus de Anchona Glossator decretalium Gersonus Cardinalis Cusanus Antoninus Volateranus Paulus Cathalanus and Laurentius Valla I obserue these manifold Christian golden and worthy Lessons First that though the Pope be a most wicked man and carry thousands vpon thousandes to Hell yet may no man reprooue him for such his detestable cursed dealing Secondly that it is sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power and authoritie Thirdly that the Pope can not only pardon all punishment due to sinnes in this world but also bring all soules out of popish Purgatorie at his good will and pleasure Fourthly that the Pope hath often taken vpon him by his most wicked and execrable Dispensations to dissolue Matrimonie against Christes sacred Institution Fiftly that the Pope can dispense with a popish Monke already professed that he may marry vse coniugall actes with his lawfull Wife Sixtly that the Pope hath de facto dispensed with the full Brother to marry his naturall and full Sister of the same Father and the same Mother Seuenthly that the Pope may doe whatsoeuer pleaseth his maiesticall Holynesse his bare and onely Will being a sufficient warrant so to doe Eightly that the Pope hath vniuersall iurisdiction ouer all Kingdomes and Empires and not that onely but also the Fulnesse of Power in as large and ample manner as Christ him selfe had it Ninthly that the Pope can by his supereminent excellencie and fulnesse of Power change the nature of thinges apply the substantiall partes of one thing to another and of nothing make something in so much as all knees must bow and bende vnto him and consequently that he is not pure Man but God also Tenthly that the first occasion and originall of Popish Superroyall falsely pretended Primacie was a counterfeit and falsely pretended Donation of the Emperour Constantinus surnamed the great Eleuenthly that the Late Byshop of Rome solliciting the Emperour Phocas with great
Reges Domino seruiunt in timore nisi ea quae contra iussa Domini fiunt religiosa seueritate prohibendo atque plectendo Aliter N. seruit quia homo est aliter quia etiam et rex est Quia homo est ei seruit viuendo fideliter quia vero etiam Rex est seruit leges iusta praecipientes et contraria prohibentes conuenienti vigore sanctiendo sicut seruiuit Ezechias Lucos et Templa Idolorū et illa excelsa quae contra praecepta Dei fuerant constructa destruendo sicut seruiuit Iosias talia et ipse faciendo sicut seruiuit rex Niniuitarum vniuersam Ciuitatem ad placandum Dominum compellendo sicut seruiuit Darius Idolum frangendum in potestatem Danieli dando et inimicos eius Leonibus ingerendo sicut seruiuit Nabuchodonosor omnes in regno suo positos a blasphemando Deo lege terribili prohibendo In hoc ergo seruiunt Domino Reges in quantum sunt Keges cum ea faciunt ad seruiendum illi quae non possunt facere nisi Reges How doe Kinges serue God in feare but by punishing with religious seueritie such thinges as are against Gods lawes For the King serueth God one way as he is man an other way as he is King As he is man he serues God in lyuing as becommeth an honest Christian as he is King he serues God in making sharpe Lawes to the furtheraunce of Vertue and to the suppressing of Vice As Ezechias serued God while he destroyed the Groues and Temples of Idols and those Hie places which were erected against Gods lawes As Josias serued God while he performed the same or like dueties As the King of the Niniuites serued God in compelling the whole Citie to serue God As Nabuchodonosor serued God while he with very sharpe Lawes terrified all his subiectes from blaspheming the euerliuing God In this therefore Kings serue God as they are Kinges when they doe that for the seruice of God which none but Kinges can doe Thus writeth S. Austin that auncient Father that holy Writer that learned Doctor that strong Piller that worthy Champion of Christes Church Out of whose Discourse I obserue many thinges well worthy to be engrauen in Marble with Golden letters in perpetuam rei memoriam First that Kinges serue God when they religiously punish sinne Secondly that Kinges serue God as they be men when they liue as it becommeth faythfull and honest Christians Thirdly that Kinges serue God as they be Kinges when they make Godly lawes to aduance Vertue and to suppresse Vice Fourthly that it belongeth to the office dutie and charge of Kings to purge the Church and House of God from Heresies Errours Superstition and Idolatrie Fiftly that it appertaineth to the charge and office of Kinges to punish Blasphemie and to cause their Subiectes to liue religiously and in the feare of God Sixtly that this holy Father and great learned Doctor vtterly condemneth the Popes Fayth and Doctrine while he denyeth all authoritie to Kinges in Church causes and Ecclesiasticall affaires and maketh them onely executors of his Lawes Will and good Pleasure For which respect the same holy Father soone after addeth these expresse wordes Quis mente sobrius Regibus dicat Nolite curare in regno vestro a quo teneatur vel oppugnetur Ecclesia Domini vestri non ad vos pertineat in regno vestro quis velit esse siue religiosus siue sacrilegus Who well in his Wittes will say thus to Kinges Haue no regard neither take any care who within your Kingdome either protect or oppugne the Church of God you haue no charge neither doth it pertaine to your office who in your Kingdome be Religious or who be Sacrilegious Seuenthly that Kinges haue charge not onely of the bodyes of their Subiectes but much more of their soules Which not onely S. Austen fayth but the whole course of Scripture teacheth the same For the godly Kinges as well in time of the Law of Moyses as in the time of the New Testament and law of Grace did manage all matters both of Church and Common-weale For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to read the whole Booke of the Law as well of the first as of the second Table and to studie the same night and day For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to goe out and in before the people and to lead them out and in that the congregation of the Lord should not be as Sheepe without a Shepheard For which cause the Booke of the Law was deliuered into the Kings handes at such time as he receiued the Crowne and was annoynted King Lastly and this striketh dead that Kings as Kings serue God when they doe those things which none but Kinges can doe If this golden Periode were soundly vnderstood and perfectly kept in memorie it alone would be enough to trample Pope and Poperie vnder foote For I pray you sir Frier did not Constantinus surnamed the great Theodesius the elder Theodosius the younger and Martianus gather the foure first generall Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon which Pope Gregorie did reuerence as the foure Ghospels did they not call the same Synodes as they were Emperours Kinges and Monarches I wote they did it is already prooued it can not be denyed What Did not Reccaredus as King commaunde all the Byshops of Spaine and Gallicia to assemble themselues before him at Toledo there to decide and determine causes ecclesiasticall did he not tell them the cause why he sent for them did he not sit downe among them did he not define with them did he not subscribe before all the Byshops did he not confirme the Decrees and Canons of the Councell with his royall edict we haue already seene it wee haue viewed the very wordes it is prooued most manifestly Now let vs duely ponder and throughly vnderstand what of necessitie must be inferred heereupon S. Austin affirmeth constantly that when Kinges serue God as Kings then doe they that which none but Kings can doe But so it is that Reccaredus and the other Kings both called confirmed Councels as they were Kings for it is already prooued ergo Kinges and none but Kings can call and confirme holy Councels and sacred Synodes The reason is S. Austens when he resolutely auoucheth that while Kinges serue God as Kinges they doe that which none but Kinges can doe for if Kinges as Kinges call and confirme Councels none doubtlesse which are no Kinges can doe the same And consequently no Byshop no not the Pope of Rome hath authoritie to gather Councels or to confirme the same Two thinges onely the Pope may in shew of wordes seeme to obiect for himselfe obiection 1 Th' one that Kinges doe not call or confirme Councels as they be Kinges but rather as the Seruantes or Deputies of the Pope obiection 2 Th' other that the Pope is not onely a Byshoppe but a King also To
whole care industrie and diligence to see what helpe might be had in that behalfe his best resolution is to say with the old doting man of Carlton That it is either one thing or other For first he freely confesseth that it is not in the Old law Secondly that it is not in the Scripture of th'Apostles Thirdly that we must either hold this or that but he can not tell whether Fourthly that how soeuer we thinke or say of this Popish Auricular confessioÌ„ this perforce we must resolue to be the trueth viz. that it is grounded vpon Vnwritten tradition without all maner of Scripture This is it which our Papistes must euer flie vnto as to their best and last trumpe For which respect their learned and canonized Martyr the late Byshoppe of Rochester confessed plainely that the holy Scriptures will not serue their turne these are his expresse wordes Contendentibus itaque nobiscum Hareticis nos also subsidio nostram oportet tueri causam quam scriptura sacra Therefore when Heretiques contende with vs we must defend our cause by other meanes then by the holy Scripture Thus writeth Byshoppe Fisher the Popes canonized Saint and glorious Martyr a Learned man indeed who as we see for all his Learning was not able to defend Poperie by Gods word and therefore he fled from the holy Scriptures to vnwritten Traditions as Scotus did afore him And for the same respect Couarruuias a famous Popish Bishoppe and a great learned man confessed and published to the whole world that howsoeuer the trueth was that which their Pope did must of necessitie be defended These are his expresse words Nec mâ—latet c. Neither am I ignorant that S. Thomas affirmeth after great deliberation that the Byshoppe of Rome can not with his Dispensation take away from Monkes their solemne Vow of Chastitie This notwithstanding wee must defend the first opinion least those thinges which are practised euery where be vtterly ouerthrowne Behold here gentle Reader that howsoeuer the Popes opinion be whether true or false that skilleth not the same wee must defende of necissitie And why I pray you must this be done Because forsooth sayth Couarruutas otherwise Poperie will be turned vpside downe Sixtly because their famous Cardinall Caietanus affirmeth roundly that Auricular and Secret confession is against Christes institution as also the Precept that vrgeth vs to the same For albeit hee approoue Confession as instituted by Christ yet doth he adde a double restriction First that it was Voluntarie then that it was neither Secret nor of All sinnes Which twaine for all that the late Byshoppes of Rome affirme and vrge as necessarie to Saluation Marke well the next Conclusion out of the Popes owne Decrees The Seuenth Conclusion Popish Auricular Confession was not an Article of Popish Fayth for the space of 1215. yeares I prooue it because their famous Fryer and reuerend Popish Byshop Iosephus Angles affirmeth peremptorily and without all And 's or Ifs that none were Heretikes for the deniall of the necessitie of Popish confession vntill the Decree of their late Councell of Latheran which was holden 1215. yeares after Christ. And the Fryer Byshoppe yeeldeth this reason for the same viz. Quia nondum erat ab Ecclesia declaratum Because the Church of Rome had not before that time declared it to be so To which I adde for the complement of this controuersie that the Holy Auncient Fathers those stout Champions and mighty Pillers of Christes Church were neuer acquainted with Popish Auricular confession I prooue this by a double argument First by the fact of the holy Byshop Nectarius then by the ioynt-testimonies of Nicephorus and Rhenanus Concerning Nectarius that holy and worthy Byshoppe of Constantinople hee abolished the Law made for Confession so to auoyde the great Vices which ensued therevpon Where the Reader must obserue two thinges with mee th' one that in the Auncient church Publike Penaunce was inioyned to those who publikely denyed the Fayth in time of Persecution And that some were so zelous and so highly esteemed the sacred Ministerie that although they did not denie the Fayth publikely yet for that they had some doubtes therein and were troubled in their mindes they voluntarily disclosed their secret griefes to Gods Ministers humbly desired their Godly aduise submitted themselues to doe what was thought expedient by those Ministers whom the Church had placed to inioyne Penance for publike sinnes Th' other that notwithstanding the whoredome of the Deacon and other vices neither would that holy Byshop Nectarius euer haue attempted to abolish Confession if it had been Gods ordinance neither would so many famous Byshops haue imitated his fact And yet is it most certaine as shal be seene by and by that all for the most part Easterne-Byshops did follow his opinion Yea euen S. Chrysostome who succeeded Nectarius at Constantinople that goodly Patriarchall seate of the World Concerning Nicephorus and Rhenanus their owne expresse wordes shall heere be layde open to the Reader Nicephorus after he hath told vs what Nectarius did immediatly addeth these wordes Quem etiam ferè Orientales Episcopi omnes sequuti sunt Whom almost all the Byshoppes of the East did follow and imitate Againe he addeth toward the end of that Chapter these wordes Itaque de quorundam maximè vero Eudaemonis Ecclesiae eius Presbyteri patria Alexandrini Consilio ne postea in Ecclesia Presbyter paenitentiarius esset Nectarius statuit suadentibus illis vt cuique permitteretur pro conscientia et fiducia sua communicare et de immaculatis mysterijs participare Therefore Nectarius being aduised by sundry especially by Eudaemon an Elder of that Church borne in Alexandria made a Decree through their perswasion that from that day no Priest should heare the Confessions of the penitentes but that euery one should be permitted to communicate and to be partaker of the holy Mysteries as his owne Conscience and Fayth did mooue him Beatus Rhenanus after he had discoursed at large how the Auncient Church appoynted Priestes ouer the penitent that they might giue them counsaile how to make satisfaction according to the Canons which themselues did not vnderstande and withall had prooued out of S. Cyprian S. Chrysostome S. Basill S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Bede Tertullian Hesychius Theodulphus Theodorus Bertramus Rabanus and Nectarius all which he alleadged for his opinion he deliuered his owne iudgement in these wordes Non aliam ob causam complurimi hic testimonijs vsi sâ—mus quam ne quis admiretur TertullianuÌ„ de clancularia illa admissoruÌ„ confessione nihil loquutum quae quantum coijcimus penitus id temporis ignorabatur For no other cause haue I heere vsed the testimonies of so many Writers but least any should maruell that Tertullian spake nothing of that secret Confession which as I thinke was vtterly vnknowen at that time Loe Tertullian spake not one word of Auricular confessioÌ„
as the great learned Papist Rhenanus telleth vs And hee yeeldeth this reason thereof viz. because Auricular or Secret Confession was wholly vnknowen in those dayes I further adde for the accomplishment of this Conclusion that which the sayd Rhenanus citeth out of a famous and learned Papist Geilerius These are the wordes Thomas Aquinas et Scotus homines nimium arguti confessionem hodie talem reddiderunt vt Iohannes ille Geilerius grauis ac sanctus Theologus qui tot annis argentorati concionatus est apud amicos suos saepe testatus sit iuxta eorum denteroseis impossibile esse confiteri But Tho. Aquinas and Scotus men too much delighted with subtilties haue brought Confession this day to such a passe that Iohannes Geilerius a graue and reuerend Diuine and a Preacher a long time at Argentâ—ratuÌ„ said many a time vnto his friends that it was impossible for a man to make his Confession according to their Traditions Out of these words I note first that the vaine curious distinctions of the Schoole-Doctors haue brought much mischiefe into the Church of God Which if a Papist had not spoken it would seeme incredible to the world Secondly that it is impossible for a Papist to make his Confession according to the Popish Law And consequently that all Papistes by Popish Doctrine must perish euerlastingly Marke well my wordes gentle Reader as thou art carefull of thine owne saluation The Papistes teach vs to hold for an Article of our Beleefe that wee are bound to make our Confessions as the Popes Law prescribeth that is as Aquinas whose Doctrine two Popes haue confirmed for Authenticall and Scotus the Popes Doctor subtilis haue set downe the same And for all that Geilertus a Papist himselfe a great learned man complained often to his friends that none could possibly performe the same Now then since on the one side Popish Confession must be made and that vnder paine of damnation and since on the other side none possibly can make the same as it is coÌ„maunded it followeth of necessitie by Popish doctrine that Papistes must be damned eternally Thirdly that many lyuing among the Papistes doe externally seeme to obey the Popes Law who in their heartes detest a great part of their late hatched Romish Religion This is euident by the secret complaint of the learned Papist Geilerius who told that to his trustie friendes which he durst not disclose to others Yea God hath euen among the Papistes in Italie and Rome many thousandes which haue not or doe not this day bow their knee to Baal Read my Suruay and it will satisfie thee in this behalfe Let vs now heare our Jesuite and confute his fond cauils and ridiculous sophistications B. C. Scotus enquireth by what Law a man is bound to Confession and determineth first in generall that the precept must grow from one of these Lawes either from the Law of Nature or the Law positiue of God or the Law of the Church And descending to particulars hee resolueth first that wee are not bound by the Law of Nature Nextly hee disputeth whether it groweth from the precept of the Church and not liking that opinion he proceedeth to the next member and sayth To be short it seemeth more reasonable to hold the second member that Confession falleth vnder the positiue Precept of God But then wee must consider sayth Scotus whether it be found explicitely in the Ghospell immediately from Christ because it is manifest quoth hee that it is not in the old Law or whether it be from him expressely in some of the Apostles doctrine or if neither so nor so whether then it was giuen of Christ by word only published to the Church by the Apostles And hauing made this triple Diuision how Confession might come by the Precept of God that is either first commaunded by him in the Ghospell or else secondly to be found in some of the Apostles writinges or lastly instituted of Christ by word of mouth onely And hauing disputed of the first two members with dislike of the second he concludeth that we must either hold the first member to weete that it commeth from the Law of God published by the Ghospell or if that be not sufficient we must say the third that it is of the positiue Law of God published by Christ to the Apostles but published by the Apostles to the Church without all Scripture T. B. I answere first that albeit our Jesuite vseth much babling turning himselfe this way that way and euery way to anoyde and cassire if it were possible the verdict censure of their subtile Doctor Scotus yet is all that hee sayth in this Chapter as also all that any other Iesuite or Papist in the world is able to say in the same subiect soundly and most euidently refuted in the sixt Conclusion aforegoing For the last and best Resolution that Scotus could inuent after he had disputed the Question pro et contra so profoundly as his wittes could conceiue was euen this and no other viz. that Popish Auricular Confession is not grounded vpon Christes Ghospell or Apostolicall writing but onely and solely vpon vnwritten Tradition which is an huge and deepe Gulfe without any bottome If the sixt Conclusion be duely pondered and vnderstood aright the Jesuites backe is at the wall Yet I will adde thereto one other Confirmation which is deduced and plainely related in the Popes owne Decrees these are the expresse wordes Quidam Deo solummodo confiteri debere peccata dicunt vt Graeci Quidam vero Sacerdotibus confitenda esse percensent vt tota ferè Ecclesia sancta Quod vtrumque non sine magno fructu intra sanctam fit Ecclesiam ita dumtaxat vt Deo qui remissor est peccatoruÌ„ peccata nostra confiteamur Some say we must Confesse our sinnes onely to God as the Greekes doe Other some say wee must Confesse them vnto Priests as doth almost the whole Church Either of which is done with great good within the holy Church so onely that we Confesse our sinnes to God who is the forgiuer of sinnes Thus are wee taught by the Popes owne sweete deare Decrees published in print to the view of the whole world Out of which Decree I obserue these memorable documentes for the helpe of the Reader First that the Greeke Church neuer confessed their sinnes vnto Priests but vnto God alone Of which Church for all that the Presidentes Gouernours were most holy learned Fathers viz. S. Epiphanius S. Chrysostome S. Basill surnamed the great S. Gregorie Nazianzene S. Damascene and many other most excellent and holy Byshoppes Secondly that others hold the contrarie saying that wee must Confesse our sinnes to Priestes Thirdly that both these opinions are profitably practised in the Church so wee Confesse our sinnes to God Fourthly that Popish Auricular confession euen by the Popes owne Decrees is not necessarie to saluation as the Papistes this day
Byshoppe which hee was bold to present to the Popes Holynesse where it found kind acceptation and therefore is and must be authenticall though it giue our Holy Father a deadly blow Out of which learned Discourse I obserue these worthy Lessons First that euery Veniall sinne is against right reason Secondly that euery Veniall sinne is the transgression of some Law Thirdly that to doe any thing against right reason is to doe against the law of Nature Fourthly that the law of Nature commaundeth not to decline from the rule of right reason Fiftly that the temporall rule with which the goodnesse of our actions is measured is the right reason of our vnderstanding which is giuen to euery one in his creation birth or natiuitie Sixtly that the eternal rule with which the goodnesse of our actions ought to be measured is the Will of God Seuenthly that therefore our thoughtes wordes and workes are against right reason because they are against the Will of God which is the law Eternall Which Obseruations if they be duely pondered doe euidently prooue and plainely conuince that euery Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature Fiftly because euery one is accursed which keepeth not euery iote of the Law Sixtly because Christes blessed Apostle S. Iames telleth vs plainely That whosoeuer shall keepe the whole Law and but offende in any one precept is guiltie of all Seuenthly because God will destroy all manner of Liers and all workers of Iniquitie Odisti omnes qui operantur iniquitatem perdes omnes qui loquuntur Mendacium Thou hatest all workers of Iniquitie thou wilt destroy euery one that is a Lyer Thus saith the holy Prophet of God in the spirit and person of God Out of which wordes I obserue two poyntes of great consequence First that where all are comprised there not one among all is excepted and consequently the sacred Text is to be vnderstood euen of euery least Sinner and of euery least Lyer Secondly that where Destruction is for Punishment inflicted there Gods Law doubtles is transgressed and so is euery Popish Veniall sinne against the Law Eightly because Christ himselfe teacheth vs That besides the Law against the Law is all one in rei veritate in the trueth of the matter Qui non est mecum contramâ— est et qui non congregat mecuÌ„ spargit He saith our Maister Christ that is not with mee is against mee and hee that gathereth not with mee scattereth Ninthly because Durandus a famous and learned Popish Writer confuteth the fondly inuented distinction of their Popish Canonized Saint Aquinas which the Pope and his Jesuites hold for the maintenaunce of late start-vp Poperie to weete that Veniall sinnes are praeter Legem non contra Besides the Law but not against the Law These are the expresse wordes of Durandus Ad argumentum dicendum quod omne peccatum est contra Legem Dei naturalem vel inspiratam vel ab eis deriuatam To the Argument answere must be made that euery Sinne is against the Law of God either naturall or inspired or deriued from them And this opinion of M. Durand is this day commonly defended in the Schooles So doth Fryer Ioseph tell our holy Father the Pope these are his wordes D. Thomas et eius sectatores tenent peccatum Veniale non tem esse contra Legem quaÌ„ praeter Legem Sequitur Durandus tamen et alij permulti hanc sententiaÌ„ impugnant affirmantes peccata venialia esse contra mandata Et haec opinio modo in scholis videtur coÌ„munion S. Thomas and his followers hold that a Veniall sinne is not so much against the Law as besides the Law But Durand and very many others impugne this opinion auouching Veniall sinnes to be against the commaundementes And this opinion seemeth now adayes to be more common in the Schooles Heere I wish the reader to note by the way out of the word modo now adayes the mutabilitie of late start-vp Romish religion as also the dissentioÌ„ of popish Schoole-doctors in the misteries of their fayth and Doctrine For in that their Byshoppe the Fryer sayth modo now adayes he giueth vs to vnderstand that their Romish Doctrine is now otherwise then it was of old time and in former ages And in that he telleth vs of the great dissension amongest their Doctors he very emphatically layeth open to the Reader the vncertainty of Romish fayth and Religion For doubtlesse if their tyrannicall Inquisition and the dayly feare of Fire and Faggot were taken out of the way the Popes ridiculous and plaine Heathenish Excommunications with his Decrees and Definitions in matters of Fayth would be of small account and troden vnder foote This is a most worthy Note and must be well remembred For the Old Romane religion was Catholique pure and found and with it doe not I contend I onely impugne the late start-vp Romish Fayth and Doctrine which the Pope and his Romish Schoolemen haue brought into the Church Tenthly because Vega a great Learned Papist very famous in the Church of Rome doth not onely teach euery Veniall sinne to be against the Law but withall he constantly affirmeth that therefore none lyuing can possibly keepe the whole Law at once For albeit hee hold that euery part of the Law may be kept at some time yet doth he constantly denie that the whole 〈◊〉 kept at once because one partiâ—â—â—â—â— broken with Popish Venials against the Law while an other is kept The third Conclusion Albeit euery Sinne be Mortall of it owne nature yet are not all sinnes equall and alike but one greater then an other I prooue it first because our Lord Iesus doth distinguish the degrees of Sinnes while he affirmeth him that is angrie with his brother to be guiltie of Iudgement him that sayth to his brother Raca to be guiltie of a Councell him that calleth his brother Foole to be guiltie of Hel-fire Secondly because the holy Ghospell telleth vs that the Sinnes of the Sodomites and of the Gomorrhaeans shal be punished more remissely in the day of Iudgement then the sinnes of those Citizens who would not receiue the Apostles nor hearken to their preaching Thirdly because Tyrus and Sidon shall be more remissely dealt withall in iudgement then Corozain and Bethsaida The case is cleare I need not stand about it For euery Child can tell vs that it is a greater Mortall sinne to steale a goodly Gelding or a great fatte Oxe then it is to steale a fatte Calfe or a fatte Hogge Yea a greater sinne to kill a Man then to eate an Egge in Lent though Popish inflicted punishment doth not euer so insinuate But hereof more at large when I come to speake of Popish Lent The fourth Conclusion Veniall sinnes of their owne nature are against Charitie and doe breake friendshippe and amitie with God I prooue this Conclusion against the Pope his Iesuites and all Jesuiâ—ed Popelinges whether in England
Gods most Holy most Wise and most Pure Decrees For which respect God telleth vs by the mouth of his Prophet that his wayes are not as ours For My thoughtes sayth Esay are not your thoughtes neither are your wayes my wayes saith the Lord. Gods Will is the Rule by which all mans thoughtes wordes and workes must be measured But Mans Will is no Rule or Law to measure Gods actions or to direct his most Iust most Holy and most Pure Purposes Ordinaunces and Decrees Secondly Man can but punish the body temporally but God can punish both body and soule eternally Man can but punish the outward actions of man but God can punish both the outward actes and the inward thoughtes Man can but punish the temporall iniurie done to man but God can punish both that and the eternall iniurie done to his most sacred Maiestie surpassing Omnipotencie and ineffable Deitie Offence done to Man is finite and limitted but offence done to God is infinite and illimited Thirdly Sinnes which are but small in respect of man are exceeding great in respect of God For example sake a reprochfull word spoken against a Meane priuate person is respectiuely a small offence the same word spoken against a Great personage of high place in Church or Common-weale is a farre greater Offence the same spoken against our Soueraigne Lord the King is the greatest of all three And consequently when we offende God whose person is of infinite Worthinesse of infinite Maiestie of infinite Power our offence obiectiuely must needes be infinite howsoeuer our Iesuites and Jesuited Papistes flatter themselues in their Venials Fourthly the thinges which are trifles in our Iesuites iudgement are great and heynous Sinnes in the tribunall of our Lord Iesus Adams eating of the Apple was one of our Iesuites trifles The looking backe of Lots wife was an other The sinne of Infantes in their natiuitie was an other For which respect sundry of their best learned Doctors haue inuented a third place beside Heauen and Hell for those Infantes which die without Baptisme Superfluous idle Wordes an other All which for all that are heynous and grieuous Sinnes with God And no maruayle seeing the Least sinne that can be named is against the infinite Maiestie of God and consequently of infinite deformitie And our Iesuite S. R. sheweth himselfe to be a very noddie while he publisheth these wordes For who will say that a little superfluous Laughter breaketh the order of Nature Marke well gentle Reader and thou shalt see Poperie stricken dead When our Jesuite S. R. was not able to answere the Authorities of the holy Fathers layd open by T. B. in the Downe-fall of Poperie which did euidently conuince that the Breaking of the order of Nature was against the eternall Law and Will of God hee was enforced to say as there is to be seene in the Page noted in this Margent that the Fathers S. Austen and S. Ambrose defined such Sinne as breaketh the order of Nature which also is Mortall Sinne not Veniall In which wordes he vnawares confoundeth himselfe For he truely sayth against himselfe That the Sinne which is against the Order of Nature is a Mortall sinne indeed But withall hee sayth vntruly That a litle superfluous Laughter breaketh not the order of Nature For if it be true as it is most true which Christ himselfe hath told vs viz. That euery idle and superfluous word breaketh the order of Nature in that it is against the Law eternall it followeth by a necessarie consequence that euery superfluous and idle Laughter breaketh the order of Nature in that it is against the Law eternall to which the Law and Order of Nature is subordinate To which I adde to second my former proofe that the order of Nature as Nature to weete of Nature afore not after Adams fall was pure free and voyde of euery spot bleamish excesse defect or other fault whatsoeuer and consequently of euery vaine idle and superfluous Laughter But perhaps our Fryer will say that idle and superfluous Laughter is besides the order of Nature not against the same as he before affirmed his Venials to be besides the Law but not against the Law of God If he so doe the confutation is at hand First because Christ sayth plainely that Hee is against hâ—m whosoeuer is not with hâ—m Againe because Vega Durandus Almaynus Baius Gersorus and all the Popish Schoole-doctors of best esteeme do auouch plainely and resolutely That euery Sinne euen the least that can be named is against the Law Whereupon Vega that great Learned Papist a man of high esteeme in the late Councell of â—rent concluded egregiously and learnedly That the whole Law is impossible to be kept at once For albeit he graunt that euery part of the Law may be kept yet doth he withall confesse that while we keepe one part thereof we can not but breake an other Ninthly because our Fryer S. R. that Learned man as his brother Jesuite B. C. stileth him confesseth lustily though vnawares against himselfe that involuntarie Concupiscence is naught euill disorderly because it is against the rule of Reason and much more doubtlesse is superfluous voluntarie Laughter against the order of Nature rule of Reason and consequently it breaketh friendshippe with God as being quite opposite to the eternall Law which is his diuine Will and Reason Tenthly because the same Jesuite freely confesseth in an other place That the Least Sinnes want equitie and conformitie to Gods Law and consequently he must volens nolens confesse withall That his falsely supposed Venials are truely Mortals against Gods friendship and his eternall Law Now let vs heare our Jesuite speake for the honour of the Pope B. C. The common opinion most receiued and most sound is that some Sinnes of their owne nature be small or Veniall others great and Mortall Byshoppe Fisher and some foure other alleadged by Bell thinke that all Sinnes of their owne nature be Mortall and that it proceedeth from the Mercie of God that some be Veniall because he would not vpon diuers smaller Sinnes impose so great a punishment But notwithstanding this small difference neither B. Fisher nor any of the others denie Veniall Sinnes as Bell and his consorts doth T. B. I answere first that the Papistes themselues doe not agree in their Popish Fayth and Doctrine as the Jesuite heere confesseth to their confusion For he freely graunteth that the great Learned Papistes whom I named viz. Jacobus Almaynus Durandus Gersonus Michael Baius and Byshoppe Fisher doe all fiue constantly hold and defend that all Sinnes are Mortall of their owne nature And withall he telleth vs that the Pope and Church of Rome hold the contrary opinion Secondly that Small sinnes and Veniall sinnes are all one as our Iesuite heere teacheth vs. And my selfe will not deny that some sinnes respectiuely are small of their owne nature as
causing the M. of the Musicke to sound the Organges and all the Studentes to singe Te Deum as also the Arch-priest the Prouinciall the Jesuites and Jesuited Papistes euerie where doe after their best manner canonize Sherewin Nelson Ballard and the Gun-powder Iesuited Popelinges by praying vnto them and by reseruing their Blood Bones Haire and whatsoeuer once touched them as the Reliques of Gods holy Martirs Other like impertinent Vanities he vseth in this Chapter but he euer fleeth from my Reasons and slylie passeth ouer the chiefest matters I haue soundly refuted the Fryers Answere not omitting any thing of moment See and note well the Triall The Eight Chapter Of the Popes Fayth I Haue discoursed of this Subiect so largely both in my Golden Ballance in the Anatomie of Popish tyrannie in the Iesuites Antepast and lastly in my Christian Dialogue as more can not be wished for the full decision of the trueth in that behalfe Howbeit for the better contentation of the Christian Reader I am willing to answere euerie poynt of any moment through out the whole Chapter B. C. Bell collecteth out of Watsons Bookes in this formall manner First therefore if we meane to wring any trueth out of the Popes Nose we must haue recourse to his Holynesse at such time as hee is sober and not when hee is furious least he become starke madde and forget the knowledge of the trueth As though Watson had sayd that the Pope is sometime sober and sometime furious He doth much wronge him for his wordes reported by Bell himselfe in this very Chapter containe no such thing Onely he sayth That as the prudent Greeke appealed from Alexander furious to Alexander sober so may the Seculars notwithstanding any Decree set downe by his Holynesse by wrong information appeale euen from the Pope as Clemens vnto his Holynesse as Peter He speaketh of Alexander Furious and Sober and not of the Pope T. B. Bels Collection is truely deducted of Watsons wordes For Watson compareth the appealing of the prudent Greeke from Alexander furious to the appealing of the Seculars from Pope Clemens Neither can it be thought strange if Warson deemed the Popes to be sometimes furious For first Pope Iohn was rather furious then sober when he kept Women openly to the notorious scandall of the Church insomuch as some of the Cardinals writte to Otto then King of the Saxons to come and besiedge Rome so to afflict him for his sinnes The same Pope was rather furious then sober when he caused the Cardinals Nose to be cut off that gaue the counsell and his hand that wrote the Letter Pope Siluester the second was furious rather then sober I weene when by couenant he did homage to the Deuill to be preferred to the Popedome Pope Formosus was not sober when wittingly and willingly he committed flat Periurie Pope Martin was not sober when he absolued Formosus of his Oath Pope Stephanus the 6. was not very sober when he caused the dead body of Pope Formosus to be brought foorth into his Consistorie the ornaments Papall to be taken away two fingers of his right hand to be cut off a Laicall habit to be put on the dead corps and all this being solemnely done the body to be put into the Graue againe Pope Sergius the 3. was not very sober trow I when he commaunded Pope Formosus who now had bin dead almost tenne yeares to be taken out of his Tombe and to be set in a Chaire with pontificall Attyre vpon his backe and then his head to be cut off and cast into Tyber Pope Vrbanus the second was not sober doubtlesse when he absolued Subiectes from alleageance due vnto their Soueraignes condemning those that obeyed the King and absoluing such as tooke part against the King from the crime of Periurie and iniustice Pope Boniface the eight was nothing sober when he challenged the right of both Swordes when he depriued Philippe the French King and gaue his Kingdome to him that could get it But what need many wordes this poynt is most plentifully handled in my Christian Dialogue lately published to which I referre the reader for his full satisfaction concerning the Popes double person Read more of Watson in the end of the Second Chapter and ponder the same seriously B. C. His rusticall immodestie and childish scoffing at the Popes Nose litle becommeth the grauitie of his Ministershippe but he that is ledde vp and downe by the Nose like a Buffalo by the Prince of this world must to gratifie his Maister imploy his rayling talent according to his blacke inspiration T. B. I answere first that our Fryers blacke inspiration may better beseeme Pope Benedict the eight who as Petrus Damascenus affirmeth was seene riding corporally after his death vpon a blacke Horse the Deuil and who freely confessed that afore-time hee was much addicted to robberie and extortion It may also better be bestowed on Pope Siluester the second who as we haue seene did homage to the blacke Deuill and so aspired to the Popedome Secondly that the declamation our Fryer maketh against the leading vp and downe by the nose like a Buffal will litle content either our Jesuites or their Pope after the due recitall of the same This is a true Narration of the cruell furious and raging Buffaloes My selfe being student in the English Colledge at Rome not long afore my arriuall in this Kingdome and on a time walking abroad to take the ayre with many others of the same Colledge when we came without one of the Posterne gates of the Citie we espied certaine Buffaloes with their keeper at the Riuer side Which spectacle as vnpleasant to the eyes so also most terrible to the heart my fellowes and deare Countrey-men no sooner beheld but they betooke them selues to their best speed My selfe more bold therein then wise for the trust I reposed in the Keeper would not at that time amende my pace and so remained behind alone Sodainely the furious raging and cruell Buffaloes brake from their Keeper and with great violence came vpon me My Countrey-men standing a farre off vpon the toppe of an high Mountaine durst not for their liues aproach to offer me any comfort helpe or succour they neither did nor could expect any other thing saue onely present and most cruell death Howbeit the wilde cruell raging and most furious Buffaloes a thing very strange rare and wonderfull if a miracle let the prudent and Christian Reader iudge did no hurt to me at all but as it were sported with mee euen as one childe playeth with another after awhile the furious and raging Buffaloes left me and in peaceable maner departed from me at the length my fellowes beholding the departure of the Buffaloes and perswading themselues that I was most pitifully and cruelly slaine came with conuenient speed to visite my dead corps but finding mee aliue yea as liue-like as I was afore
punire et damnare popoteram non simpliciter assumpsi sed elegi vos multis alijs neglectis ex massa corruptionis Sequitur docet igitur Christus hoc verbo quod ipse sit author nostrae salutis Deinde quod gratia est quicquid habemus siue sint dona illa iustificantia Fides Spes Charitas Spiritus sanctus c. Siue externa illa dona quae alio nomine dicuntur gratiae gratis datae I saith hee haue chosen you This Text may bee vnderstood either of Election to the Apostleship or of eternall Election to Saluation For in both there is grace but no merit and both are wrought by Christ for in him and through him did God chose vs euen before the world was made I saith he who am God and therefore stand in need of nothing I who can punish and condemne haue not simply taken you but reiecting many others haue chosen you out of the masse of corruption Christ therefore doth by these words teach vs that hee is the authour of our saluation Then that whatsoeuer we haue the same is grace whether they be those iustifying gifts faith hope charity the holy Spirit the like or other externall gifts which by another name are called graces freely giuen That which our Sauiour sayth of Marie Magdalene that many sinnes were forgiuen her because shee loued much doth serue well to illustrate that which is here obiected of the kingdome of heauen For Christes Argument is not drawne from the cause but from the effect as if Christ had sayd we may know by her great loue that great gifts are bestowed on her that many sinnes are forgiuen her for that not remission of her sinnes proceeded from her loue but her loue from the forgiuenesse of her sinnes the similitude of the debtors doth plainly insinuate the same vnto vs. Christ told Peter of two debters whereof the one owed fiue hundred pence the other fiftie and that when they had not wherewith to pay the creditour forgaue them both he therefore demaunded of Peter whether of the debtours loued the creditour more Peter answered that he to whom more was forgiuen Christ approoued Peters answere and concluded thereupon that seeing Marie Magdalene loued more he might know that shee had more forgiuen her Because saith Christ to whom little is forgiuen the same loueth little neither is it possible to draw any other meaning out of Christs wordes The reason is euident because Christ saith plainely that the debts were freely forgiuen the debters who were not able to pay the debts For otherwise Maries forgiuenesse could haue no coherence with the similitude of the debters Out of this discourse these points are euidently deduced First that wee are the sonnes of God not by nature for so wee are his enemies and the children of wrath but by grace and adoption in Iesus Christ. Secondly that God chose vs to be his children before wee were borne Thirdly that he chose vs not because wee were holy but that we might bee holy and immaculate in his sight Fourthly that he predestinated vs to be his children by adoption not for any good workes which we either had done or could doe but for his owne good pleasure to the glorie of his grace for as to doe any workes at all before we be borne is altogether impossible so to doe good workes when we are borne seeing we are conceiued in sinne borne in sinne and by nature the children of warth is impossible in like manner Fiftly that all our good Workes are the effects and fruites of our predestination For if it be true as it is most true els the Apostle were a lyer that we were elected to be holy and to doe good Workes it is also true it can neuer be denyed that holy life and good Workes are the effects of our Election and Predestination in Christ Iesus For this cause saith the Apostle that Predestination proceedes freely of Gods eternall purpose Iustification of Predestination and Glorification of Iustification For first he choseth vs in Christ then he iustifieth vs in Christ thirdly and lastly he glorifieth vs for his owne Names sake B. C. And beside in the same place Damnation is giuen to had Workes Get ye away from me ye cursed saith Christ into euerlasting fire which was prepared for the deuill and his angels For I was an hungry and you gaue mee not to eate Seeing then the Scripture declareth plainely that bad workes deserue damnation and hee the cause thereof as plainly doth it also signifie that good Workes merit heauen and be the cause thereof T. B. I answer that there is great disparitie between saluation damnation therefore that good works can not merit saluation though euil works be enough for damnation The reason hereof is euident both in Phylosophy and Diuinitie because as S. Dionysius Areopagita sayth and the popish angelicall doctour Aquinas approueth the same Bonum ex integra causa existet malum ex quolibet defectu Good is of an intire and whole cause but euill comes of euery defect Yea that more is required to good then to euill dayly experience teacheth vs for one may soone doe that hurt to his neighbour which can not without great cost and long time bee cured againe For euery childe can tell our Iesuite that one stroake is able to kill a man but twentie potions and twentie chirurgicall actions can not restore him to life againe So one leape is enough to cast one into the bottome of a pitte or deepe gulfe but twentie hops skippes or leapes will not bring him vp againe This Saint Austen well obserued when hee left in Writing to all posteritie That it is a greater thing to iustifie the Wicked man then to make Heauen and Earth Free-will of it selfe is able to doe euill in the highest degree but of it selfe it hath no power at all either to doe well or to will well For it is God that worketh in you saith the Apostle both the will the deed euen of his good pleasure Againe in an other place thus To will is present with me but I find no meanes to performe that which is good Againe in an other place thus No man can say that Iesus is the Lord but by the holy Ghost Againe in an other place thus we are not sufficient of our selues to thinke any thing as of our selues but our sufficiencie is of God All which and much more our sweete Sauiour compriseth in these few pethy and most golden wordes For without me yee can doe nothing Much more I could say to the same effect but I refraine for two respectes First because I haue regard to breuitie Secondly for that this matter is disputed at large and soundly prooued in the Conclusions afore-going especially in the first sixt and seuenth B. C. Wee find also in Scripture that men are sayd worthy of Reward That you may be counted worthy of
can possibly be alleadged or produced out of the holy Fathers concerning this Subiect now in hand To this Booke in the third part and tenth Chapter I referre the Reader for his full satisfaction in this behalfe Secondly that aswell the thing it selfe as the name was first hatched in the Councell of Lateran For no Text in the Law of Moses no Sentence in the Prophets no Word in the Psalmes no Affirmation out of the Ghospell no Testimonie out of the Epistles of the Apostles no Verdict out of the holy Fathers no specialtie out of the auncient Councels can now or euer be found extant which once maketh mention either of Transubstantiation or of accidentes without subiectes Thirdly that this Popish fondly imagined Transubstantiation is farre different from that Reall presence with which the Pope and his Romish Synode most cruelly assayled Berengarius That Reall presence though most absurd as I haue prooued demonstratiuely in the Iesuites Antepast may well stand with Consubstantiation and nothing at all change the substaunce of Bread For it is a Popish foundation though foolish and ridiculous as is prooued in my Suruey that two Bodyes may be in one place at once This Transubstantiation sendeth the substance of Bread neither my selfe nor yet the Papistes can tell whither That Reall presence altereth not Christes Body but this Transubstantiation changeth the substaunce of Bread into Christes Body That Reall presence causeth not accidentes without subiectes but this Transubstantiation inferreth Miracles vpon Miracles aboue ten thousand times a day Popish Reall presence is one thing of which I dispute not in my Tryall Popish Transubstantiation is an other thing which is the subiect now in hand Fourthly that the Papistes them-selues doe not know what to thinke or say of their lately inuented Transubstantiation Durand as I haue prooued in the Downefall of Poperie affirmeth constantly that onely the forme of Bread is changed and that the matter of Bread remaineth still in the Eucharist Rupertus the Popish Abbot holdeth that the Bread is vnited Hypostatically to the Sonne of God Cardinall Caietanus Henricus and Capreolus are of an other different opinion Iohannes Parisionsis held also that the Bread was assumpted but in a different manner from the opinion of Rupertus An other opinion yet remaineth which affirmeth the Annihilation of the Bread Yet Cardinall Bellarmine holdeth with the Councell of Trent for hee that at Rome holdeth otherwise must be burnt that the Bread is transubstantiated into the Body of Christ. What Childe in the fyre would not come foorth to heare this harmonie Will yee heare what the learned Fryer S.R. sayth to this discordant melodie these are his expresse wordes in his pretensed Answere to the Downefall of Poperie The first Contradiction which this contradictions fellow findeth in the Masse is that Durand Caietan and foure Catholiques more before the Councell of Trent did otherwise explicate the manner of Christes Reall presence in the Eucharist then was trueth and since the Church hath defined and explicated in the sayd Councell Thus answereth S.R. that Learned man as B.C. his brother calleth him By whose learned Assertion we are giuen to vnderstand that Transubstantiation was not an Article of Popish sayth vndoubtedly vntill the late Popish Councell of Trent that is 1547. yeares after Christ. The Eleuenth Chapter of Popish Inuocation of Sainctes B. C. TV per Thomae sanguinem c. By the blood of Thomas which hee for thee did spend bring vs thyther ô Christ whyther Thomas did ascend I vtterly deny that any of these wordes or altogeather make Thomas a Mediator of Redemption or doe prooue that wee inuocate him as the Sonne of the liuing God and the onely Sauiour of the World T. B. I answere that this Popish manner of Praying prooueth euidently that Thomas Becket is to the Papistes a Mediator not onely of Intercession but also of Redemption I prooue it by sundry meanes and irrefragable reasons First because there is no Saluation in any but in Iesus Christ neither any other Name vnder Heauen whereby we must be saued Secondly for that the auncient Catholique Church hath euer desired Remission of sinnes of God the Father for and through Iesus Christ his onely Sonne and our onely Sauiour Thirdly because onely the Blood of Iesus Christ not the Blood of any other is able to bring vs to Heauen Fourthly because Iesus Christ with his owne Blood not the Blood of others hath perfectly accomplished the saluation of his Elect and that hath he done once for all Fiftly because an Angell came downe from Heauen and imposed the name Iesus vpon the Sonne of God yeelding this reason thereof for that he should saue Gods people from their sinnes Sixtly because all the workes of God are perfect Which for all that could not be so if Beckets Blood be a cause of our going to Heauen Seuenthly because all Gods Children are rewarded farre aboue their condigne desertes as I haue foundly and plentifully prooued in the Conclusions of the ninth Chapter immediately aforegoing Eightly because S. Austen affirmeth constantly that the best liuer vpon earth shall perish euerlastingly if he find not Mercie farre aboue his Desertes But doubtlesse hee that is rewarded aboue his Desertes and standeth in need of Mercie for his owne Sinnes that mans Blood is not a fit cause or meane to bring others vnto Heauen B. C. The Pope and many thousandes more vse the Romane Breuiarie Missall in neither of which any such Prayer is conteyned and as I suppose it is not found but in those of Sarum vse which be now antiquated and out of date T. B. I answere first that our Jesuite now beginneth to tell vs wonders euen the mutabilitie of Romish Fayth and Religion of which I disputed in the Chapter of Veniall sinnes Secondly that as the Pope hath reformed the Romish Fayth and Religion in this and some other poyntes euen so hath our English Church abolished all Popish errours and superstition whereby wee are the true Reformed Catholiques in very deed For as your Capuchones are the true reformed Franciscanes at Rome so are wee the true reformed Catholiques in England B. C. An vntrueth it is that Saintes merites are ioynt purchasers of saluation with Christes blood if he meane that the Merites of Christ and his Saintes doe alike availe to saluation T. B. I answere first that our Jesuite not able to defend Poperie nor to answere the reasons by mee produced doth highly blaspheame Christ and the sacred Merites of his most precious Blood For as we see hee absurdly and most impiously auoucheth that the Merites of Saintes may be ioynt purchasers of saluation with Christes most sacred Blood so it be not in the same degree Let his wordes be well marked for they import as much as I do say O monstrum horrendum What blasphemie what impietie what crueltie what infidelitie is diabolically implyed in rotten Poperie You were not saith
can not but thinke that it is hid vnder a Pipkin so to be kept from Sun-burning euen as the other Fiue Bookes are prepared so many yeares agoe Howbeit if either it or any other Booke shall happen to come to my handes while God shall of his great mercie graunt me life health and sight the two last whereof doe in an hie degree begin to fayle me it shall God willing receiue a speedy Answere Let this Jesuite and all the rest so perswade them-selues as also that God giueth me comfort more then a litle in all my conflictes against them The 15. Chapter of Popish worshiping of Images B. C. SAint Gregorie sayth Bell sharply reprooued the Worship done to Images True it is But what kinde of Worshippe was it The Minister would haue the Reader to thinke that it was the same which the Catholique Church alloweth and teacheth which is nothing so For it was passing farre different for as much as S. Gregorie allowed conuenient Adoration as shall straight be sayd T. B. I answere first that I approoue our Iesuites Answere while he confesseth truely that Gregorie sharpely reprooued the Worshippe done to Images Secondly that I can not but withall condemne his fond interpretation of S. Gregories wordes For it is most cleare and euident that Gregorie neuer approoued religious Worship giuen to Images Thirdly that our Fryer falsely imagineth the Church of Rome to be the Catholique Church Of which Subiect I haue disputed at large in my Christian Dialogue B. C. Cardinall Bellarmine thinketh that this erroneous Worshippe was giuen by certaine new Christians 〈◊〉 surely such were most likely to fall into that grosse sinne of whom it is not so much to be marueyled if accustomed before to Idols they behaved themselues in like manner towardes sacred Images and adored them for Gods as in Pagain sinne they were taught and practised T. B. I answere first that woe is to those silly and simply seduced Christians who are enforced to beleeue and receiue as Catholique Doctrine whatsoeuer Bellarmine and his Iesuited complices shall coniecture imagine to be the trueth Yet is is true that all must be burnt with Fire and Faggot in Rome Spaine and Portingale that will not beleeue as the Pope and his Cardinals teach them Secondly that the Worship which the Papistes this day giue to Images is of like nature qualitie semblance and condition in euery respect with that which was giuen to Idols euen in the time of Paganisme I prooue it out of your popish Reformed Portesse or Breuiarie where I find this Prayer made to the Crosse. O Crux aue spe vnica hoc passionis tempore auge pijs iustitiam reisque dona veniam All hayle ô Crosse our only hope in this time of the Passiō increase Iustice to the Godly and eke to sinners Pardon giue To which I adde the manner of Worship which the Papistes doe to the Crosse on Good-fry day to say nothing of other times Vpon that day the Crosse is couered and in time of popish Prayers the Priest by degrees doth vncouer the same first on the right side with low reuerence done vnto it Then on the left side with the like reuerence exhibited Lastly the whole Crosse is reuealed and made manifest to the people And the like superstitious dotage is vsed in the Songe made to the Crosse. For in euery of the three degrees the tune is eleuated and made higher then afore Which being thus done the Priest putteth off his Shooes and prostrate vpon the ground adoreth and kisseth the Crosse. After the Priest follow the rest aswell of the Temporaltie as of the Clergie euery one in his order and degree And because none may come empty to the Lordes House many rich Oblations are made euen with the good liking of the Priest But if any refuse to adore and worshippe the Crosse he shall be burnt as an Heretique If any desire to know the mysteries of Popish worshippe done to the Wooden Crosse with the profound significations thereof he may find the same in Byshoppe Durand who hath bestowed great labour in that behalfe But say on sir Fryer it is not yet time to goe to dinner B. C. Bell quoteth Biel where nothing is handled of any such Subiect A small fault especially in Bell being one of such knowen trueth that he neuer vseth any such sleightes vnlesse it be for the better passage of the Ghospell To let that passe Why hath he not cited his Wordes He may pretend what reason he please but he must giue me leaue to thinke that there is none other saue onely that he knew not truely where to find them T. B. I answere first that our Iesuite is so addicted to lying as the Diuell may seeme to haue begotten him If I should stand to examine and refute all the Lyes which our Iesuite poureth out in his Pamphlets time doubtlesse would sooner fayle me then matter whereof to speake Secondly that our Jesuite is condemned in his owne Conscience as who accuseth me of that which is proper to himselfe and whereof he knoweth me to be innocent Is this possible to be prooued It is not onely possible but so easie a thing for me to prooue it that if I fayle herein I will desire no credite to be giuen me in other matters For the manifestation of the trueth herein I desire the honest and indifferent Reader to obserue two thinges with mee Th' one that the Iesuite hath seene read and taken note or notes out of my little Booke intituled The wofull cry of Rome For so much himselfe confesseth in his Preface to the Reader Th' other that in the selfe-same Wofull cry I haue both truly quoted the place and sincerely cited the expresse wordes of Biel there I write in this manner Yea Gabriel Biel a religious Popish Fryer and a very learned Schoole-doctor who liued long after Gregorie and Serenus euen one thousand foure hundred eightie and foure yeares after Christ doth sharply inueigh and reprooue the Worshippe giuen to Images Hee hath a large Discourse of this Subiect in which the Reader may finde these expresse wordes Quod vero Christiana religio Imagines sustinet in Ecclesia et oratorijs non permittit eo fine vt ipsae adorentur Sequitur Neque adoro Imaginem Christi quia lignum nec quia Imago sed adoro Christum coram imagine Christi quia scilicet imago Christi excitat me ad amandum Christum Whereas Christian religion tolerateth Images in the Church and in Oratories it doth not permit them for this end that they may be adored Neither doe I adore the Image of Christ because it is Wood neither for that it is an Image but I adore Christ before the Image of Christ because the Image of Christ doth allure me to loue Christ. Thus much and plentifull other matter against popish Worshippe of Images the Reader may find in that Booke And therefore I must not giue the Fryer that leaue
excessiue eating Vse dayly abstinence refection without gluttonie or excesse for it profiteth thee nothing to haue an emptie Belly two or three dayes and after to fill the Panch while it may hold Thus the Popes owne Decrees teach vs and it is to be well obserued For doubtlesse Popish Fastes haue this effect most vsually the richer sort stuffe their bellies and fill their panches at Dinner with great varietie of Wines and delicate Meates Yea at all times they drinke Wines and eate Peares Apples Rasinges Figges and Simnels especially in their Collations at night they eate conserues of Quinces Cheries Wardens and like dainties which farre exceed the best Dinners of the poorer sort And this I protest for edification-sake I heere disclose the same that my selfe heard one Recusant once say at dinner that he did eate the more at dinner on the Fasting day that so he might put away Hunger vntill the next day What I haue heard touching this Subiect if I should here relate the same would seeme strange to many a one I speake of thinges heard by report the other I speake of my owne hearing this by the report of others An other Decree of Pope Pius doth yeeld vs this instructioÌ„ These are the words Nihil enim prodest homini ieiunare et orare et alia religionis bona agere nisi mens ab iniquitate et ab obtrectationibus lingua cohibeatur To Fast and Pray doth not profit a man any thing neither yet to do other dueties of Religion vnlesse he keepe his Minde from iniquitie his Tongue froÌ„ euill speaking An other Decree borrowed from S. Austen hath these wordes Ieiunium autem magnum et generale est abstinere ab iniquitatibus et ab illicitis voluptatibus seculi quod est perfectum ieiunium in hoc seculo Quasi QuadragesimaÌ„ S. abstinentiae celebramus cum bene viuimus cum ab iniquitatibus et ab illicitis voluptatibus abstinemus The great and generall Fast is to absteine from iniquitie and vnlawfull pleasures of this world and this is the perfect Fast in this world We keepe as it were a Quadragesima or Lent of abstinence while we liue well and Christianly while we absteine from sinne and from vnlawfull pleasures But an other Decree borrowed of S. Hierome shall be the vpshot of this game These are the very wordes Audiant itaque qui ea quae necessaria sunt corpori subtrahunt illud quod per Prophetam Dominus loquitur Ego Dominus odio habens rapinam holocanstorum De rapina vero holocanstum offert qui temporalium bonorum siue ciborum nimia egestate vel manducandi vel somni penuria corpus suum immoderatè affligit Let them therefore who withhold or take from the body thinges necessarie for it heare what our Lord sayth by his Prophet I the Lord hate the robbery of burnt Offeringes Now he offereth burnt Offeringes of Rapine or Roberie who afflicteth his body immoderately either with too much want of temporall good thinges or of Meates or with the penurie of eating or of sleepe This Discourse if my Tryall be annexed to it is enough concerning this Subiect To S. Hierome this in briefe is my answere viz. That the Epistle fathered on him is a counterfeit as which agreeth not with the true Hieroms Doctrine else where as is alreadie prooued To which I adde which I haue also prooued that if wee suppose and admit it to be a Tradition of the Apostles yet doth mine assertion stand firme and vntouched viz. That notwithstanding that Tradition yet was Lent-fast free voluntarie and not commaunded by any Law To S. Austen I answere first that the Sermon which our Jesuite citeth is not his but a counterfeit My reason is at hand because S. Austen as is already prooued affirmeth constantly that the Apostles made no Law for Fasting This is already prooued Secondly that in things indifferent such as I haue prooued Lent to be euery one is bound to obey the Law of that Church in which he lyueth And so he that keepeth not Lent-fast may truely be said to sinne Thirdly that S. Epiphanius and S. Austen did not reprooue Aerius for denying popish Lent-fast which was at that time vnhatched but for denying the Churches Authoritie in appoynting Fasting-dayes vpon what cause soeuer Which my selfe doe constantly auouch to be an Heresie indeede For when the Church vpon speciall causes appoynteth Fasting dayes then all that for infirmitie may ought to absteine and not to contemne those Fastes as Aerius taught Howbeit I say withall that the auncient Church condemned it for an Heresie in Montanus to appoynt ordinary times of necessarie and Religious Fasting when there was no speciall cause so to doe B. C. That which he bringeth concerning S. Spiridion his eating of Flesh in Lent all circumstaunces considered hurteth not vs but maketh against himselfe For we deny not but that in some cases Flesh may be eaten without violation of that Fast. T. B. I answere First that S. Spiridions eating of Flesh all circumstances duely considered maketh so much against Popish Lent fast as will make both the Jesuites and the Popes heart to pant when they shall seriously ponder my answere in that behalfe Secondly that our Jesuite truly graunteth that Papists may in some cases eate Flesh in theâ—â— holy Lent For first seeing the Pope can bring all Soules out of Popish Purgatory Secondly seeing he can dissolue that Matrimony which Christ himselfe instituted Thirdly seeing he can make a vowed Popish Monke to become a truly marryed man Fourthly seeing he can authorize the Brother to marrie his owne full and naturall Sister Fiftly seeing his owne will is a reason sufficient to doe whatsoeuer pleaseth him Sixly seeing he may iudge all but none iudge him Seuenthly seeing he can doe as much as Christ him selfe could doe Eightly Seeing none may say vnto him Why doest thou so Although he carry many thousandes of Soules to Hell Nynthly seeing he hath the right of both Swords the Spirituall and the Temporall and by vertue thereof deposeth Kings and translateth their Kingdomes Tenthly seeing he can by the fulnes of his power change the nature of things and of nothing make somthing all which is already prooued it followeth by an ineuitable illation that by the Popes Dispensation all Papistes may eate Flesh aswell in the time of Lent as at other times of the yeare This is confirmed by the vsuall practise aswell of Seminarie Priestes as of Iesuites Iesuited Papistes within this Land For a famous Jesuite made offer to a Gentleman that if he would become a Papist he should haue Licence to eate Flesh in Lent among Lollards that by so doing he might liue without suspition and escape daunger of the Lawes Now let vs duely examine the circumstaunces of S. Spiridions eating of Flesh in Lent Cassiodorus in the Tripartite Historie hath these expresse wordes Instante iam Quadragesima quidam
dayes the Byshoppes of England now so called haue had and kept a continuall and vninterrupted succession of Byshoppes successiuely so sound firme and inuiolable as the Church of Rome is not able to shew the like This succession is so clearely prooued in my Christian Dialogue as none with right reasoÌ„ can deny the same Fourthly that the Church of England now so called hath euer since the time of King Ethelbert constantly kept all and euery Article of the old Romane Religion which she receiued from the auncient and purer Church of Rome No Papist liuing is able to giue any true instance against this irrefragable assertion Fiftly that as in processe of time many superstitious grosse and palpable errours yea flatte Heresies haue by litle and litle crept into the Church of Rome euen so hath our Church of England through the sway of the time been deeply stayned polluted with the same Sixtly that our Church in the time of King Henry the eight began to be reformed in some Articles of Fayth and Doctrine but the reformation was not perfect vntill the raigne of King Edward the sixt In which Reformation no New Article of Fayth or Religion is added to the former but the former Fayth and Religion is onely refyned purged purified and such Superstition Errours and Heresies abolished as were by litle and litle brought into the Church All and euery iote of the old Romane Religion remayneth still in our Church permanent and inuiolable But some perhappes will heere demaunde of me how the Church of Rome did so degenerate from the auncient Fayth and so foulely corrupt the old Romane Religion To whom I answere in this manner First with Egesippus that auncient and learned Father that during the life of Christes blessed Apostles the visible Church remayned a Virgin free from all Heresies and corruptions but after their death Errours by litle and litle crept into the Church as into a voyde and desart House Secondly with Franciscus a Victoria that famous popish Fryer and great learned Schooleman that by litle litle the Papistes were in his time brought to such inordinate dispensations and to so miserable a state that they were neither able to endure their owne griefes nor remydies assigned by the Pope for the same That Clemens Lâ—nus and Syluester were very good Byshoppes of Rome but that the latter Byshoppes comming after them successiuely were wicked men and nothing comparable to the olde Byshoppes there Thirdly with Iosephus Angles that famous Popish Byshoppe euen in that Booke which hee dedicated to the Pope himselfe that the Romish Religion changeth euery day Fourthly with the fiue famous Popish Doctors Iohannes Roffensis Jacobus Almaâ—nus Gersonus Durandus and Michael Baius that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature and that the old Romane Church did so beleeue vntill the time of Pope Pius the fift that is about 1560 yeares after Christ at which time Veniall sinnes werâ— hatched in the Church of Rome This is such a constant knowen trueth as neither the Jesuite S. R. nor yet the Iesuite B. C. his deare brother can tell in the world what answere to frame to the same Fourthly with Polidorus Virgilius that famous Popish Writer that the Popish Legistes and Canonistes of latter dayes haue so wrested the holy Scriptures to their owne sense and liking as Coblers doe gnaw with their teeth and stretch out their filthy skinnes Fiftly with Platina the Popes deare Vassall and trustie Friend that in his dayes the Popedome was brought to that passe that who so could goe before others in Bribes and Ambition hee onely should haue the place Sixtly with Couarruuias that worthy popish Arch-byshoppe and learned Canonist that in these dayes either the Popes opinion must be defended or else Poperie can not stand Lastly with Iosephus Angles writing to the Popes deare Holynesse that albeit the old Church of Rome did by the commaundement of the Apostles excommunicate all non communicants in the time of the Masse or Liturgie yet hath the late Church decreed that it shall be lawfull for all Lay persons to receiue the Eucharist onely at Easter Much more I might and could say if I thought not this sufficient So then the Fayth and Doctrine this day professed and authorized in this our Church of England is indeed the old Romane religion purged refined and restored to the primatiue and most auncient puritie in King Edwardes dayes in whose happy raigne was the perfect and complete Reformation But the Fayth and Religion it selfe came from S. Peter and S. Paul yea euen from Christ himselfe their Jesus and our Jesus world without end To whom with the Father and the holy Ghost three in the distinction of persons and one in the vnitie of diuine essence be all Honour Maiestie Power Glory and Dominion now and euermore Amen A Caueat to the Christian Reader THE masked Jesuite in his Preface to the Reader laboureth with might and maine to perswade his Readers that I dare not performe that challenge which I made to the Fore-runner his wordes are these I the meanest of many millions doe accept of his Challenge and doe vndertake to defend not onely these two poynes of Iosephus Doctrine and Pope Martins Dispensation which he hath singled out as matters important but also all the rest so it may be with that equitie and fauour which was graunted to the Protestantes in France And vpon the same conditions doe prouoke him with a counter-challenge to the defence of his Bookes And a litle after he telleth his Reader That hee sendes me as many Challenges as will stand betweene Charing-crosse Chester and as many Dares as will reach from Darby to Darington To which I answere in this manner First that the Jesuites are accused and charged by their deare Breathren the popish Secular Priestes with Pride Ambition Couetousnesse Coozenage Theft Crueltie Murther Treason and all wickednesse that can be named Yea of Fryer Parsons that trayterous Iesuite they giue this testimonie in particular viz. by Parsons platformes Secular Priestes must depend vpon Blackwell and Blackwell vpon Garnet and Garnet vpon Parsons and Parsons the Priestes Bastard vpon the Deuill Peruse my Anatomy of popish Tyrannie and there thou shalt finde this trueth with great varietie of like matter Secondly that in all my Challenges I require but one onely Condition which the Iesuite passeth ouer in silence because he meaneth not to performe the same The Condition is this viz. That the Iesuite which shall accept the Challenge must put downe his name with his addition in print and send it to me Which if it be once performed during my life I promised vpon my saluation to doe what in me lyeth to procure a false conduct for the safe comming safe abyding and safe departure of him whosoeuer he be that shall accept and vndertake the true performance of the Challenge in maner aforesayd Thirdly that the Jesuite