shew also how good workes to wit almse-deedes pilgrimages workes of supererogation vowed chastity voluntary pouerty Monkish obedience which they esteeme the chiefest good workes are made Idols in that they repose the confidence of their heart and the hope of saluation in them through the power of meriting which they ascribe vnto them as also how they turne their Sacraments into Idols by teaching that they conferre grace Ex opere operato by the very worke done and that effectiuely actiuely and immediatly they produce in the heart the grace of regeneration and iustification which is the proper and immediate worke of the Godhead but I passe ouer these many other things because they admit in shew some probable exception though no sound confutation and I insist in those things onely in which euery Ideot and almost Infant may discerne most grosse and palpable Idolatry And those are these fiue in number the bread in the Sacrament Images Reliques Angels and Saints departed And lastly the Crosse and Crucifix of which in order 14. The blessed Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ ordayned for a perpetuall remembrance of his death and passion and for the strengthning and nourishing of the soules of the faithfull to eternall life is transhaped by them into a most horrible Idoll For this they teach and practise that that very thing which to all the senses is but bread being but lately moulded and knead by the Baker is to be worshipped and adored with diuine worship because forsooth after consecration it is the true and naturall body of Christ And therefore at the Priests eleuation of the hoast they all fall downe vpon their knees and worship it with great deuotion and expect from it forgiuenesse of their sinnes and all manner of earthly and temporall blessings and whosoeuer refuseth to doe this is an Heretike 15. Their Apologie is that there is a reall and naturall presence of Christs body and bloud in the Sacrament and therefore not the bread but the body of Christ into which the bread is transubstantiate is worshipped of them and so they thinke to free themselues To which I answere that if that were certaine then their defence was iust and their practice godly and we in calling them Idolaters for this cause should bee slanderers of the truth but seeing the contrary is rather certaine to wit that Christ is not corporally in the Sacrament but in heauen and that the bread remayneth still true bread both for matter and forme after consecration they cannot be excused from notorious Idolatry in worshipping a piece of Bakers bread in stead of Christ the eternall Sonne of God for to the outward senses it beareth the shape taste figure and colour of bread This is certaine and to the vnderstanding in reason it is bread because accidents cannot be without a substance this is as certaine and to faith it is bread because the Word which is the foundation of saith so calleth it after the words of consecration neither is there any Scripture to auouch the contrary saue that which may well receiue our interpretation as well yea better then theirs as the best learned amongst them confesse for Bellarmine confesseth that it may iustly bee doubted whether the Text this is my body be cleare inough to enforce transubstantiation And Scotus and Cameracensis thinke our opinion more agreeable to the words of institution and thus they haue against them sense and reason and faith and for them onely a doubtfull Exposition of two or three places of Scripture and therefore three to one but they are guilty of Idolatry 16. Besides graunt that there is a reall transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ yet the accidents of bread and wine remaine vnchanged and the forme and shape Now howsoeuer the learned may here distinguish their worship from the outward accidents to the inward substance yet the common people are not able so to doe but worship confusedly the outward accidents together with Christ contayned vnder them and so in that respect are Idolaters also for accidents be creatures as well as substances Yea and Bellarmine also doth allow them so to dâ—e for thus he writeth Diuine worship doth appertaine to the Symboles and signes of bread and wine so farre forth as they are apprehended as being vnited to Christ whom they containe Euen as they that worshipped Christ vpon earth being clothed did not worship him alone but after a sort his garments also Here is a braue straine of Diuinity they worshipped Christ in his clothes therfore they worshipped Christs clothes So Christ is worshipped vnder the formes of bread and wine therefore the formes of bread and wine must be worshipped This is like the Asse which bore vpon his backe the Image of Isis and when men fell downe before the Image he thought they worshipped him but hee was corrected with a cudgell for his sawcinesse and so are they worthy for their folly that cannot distinguish betwixt a man and his garments Christ and the signes of Christ but promiscuously confound the worship of the one with the other Rather therefore may we thus conclude they which worshipped Christ on earth did not worship his garments that he wore therefore they which will worship Christ in the Sacrament must not worship the outward Elements and so it will follow that as it had beene Idolatry in any to worship the garments of Christ so it is in the Romanists to worship the accidents of bread and wine 17. Lastly let it be supposed that there is such a reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament yet according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome no man can be certaine when it is because it depends vpon the intention of the Priest for thus they teach if the Priest should say the words of consecration without intention to consecrate the bread and wine he should effect nothing or if hee intend to consecrate but one hoast and there chance to be two or more then nothing is consecrated at all and so the intention of the Priest being vncertaine to the people there must needes be an vncertaine adoration and the Priest oftentimes intending nothing lesse then the matter it selfe which hee hath in hand there must needes be certaine and vndoubted Idolatry for if the bread and wine be not effectually consecrated as they are not without the Priests intention then Christ is not really present and so nothing is worshipped but the bare bread for remedy hereof they haue deuised two poore shifts one that the people must adore vpon a condition to wit if the due forme in consecrating bee obserued the other that an actuall intention is not necessarily required but onely a vertuall that is when an actuall intention to consecrate is not present at the very time of consecration by reason of some vagation of the minde yet it was present a little before the operation is in vertue
with Hierome and Iustine Martyr and when he entred into the house the dores being shut that the dores and walls yeelded vnto him a passage as vnto their Creator with Theodoret and Cyrill and that when hee appeared vnto Paul going to Damascus if it was in the aire or on the earth as it may be doubted that then this body was not in heauen at the same instant for farre bee it from vs so to pin vp our Lord in the Heauens that he cannot be where he pleaseth And this is Thomas Aquinas opinion in expresse words which Bellarmine as expresly contradicteth 15. Thirdly by discourse of reason hee thus laboureth to reconcile these contradictions and thus disputeth God being but one simple and inuisible essence is in infinite places at once and he might create another world and fill it with his presence and be in two worlds at one instant and the soule of man is wholy in euery part of the body and God is able to conserue the soule in a part that is cut off from the body therefore it implieth no contradiction to be in two places at once againe one place may containe two bodies and yet be not two places but one as when Christ rose out of the graue the Sepulchre being shut therefore one body may be in two places at once and yet not two bodies but one Lastly there be many other mysteries of religion as strange and difficult to be conceiued as this and yet are beleeued therefore this also is to be beleeued as well as they 16. A miserable cause sure that needeth such defences the weakenesse of these reasons argueth the feeblenesse of the cause for who knoweth not but that there is no similitude betweene the infinite God and a finite Creature nor any proportion betwixt a Spirit and a body and that à posse ad esse from may bee to must bee is no good consequence Adde that one place cannot hold two bodies nor euer did except they were so vnited that in respect of place they made but one And lastly that all those mysteries of Religion which he nameth to wit the Trinity the Incarnation the Resurrection the Creation and Annihilation c. haue their foundation in holy Scripture and therefore are to be receiued as doct ines of truth though transcending the spheare of nature and reason but this strange mysterie of Transubstantiation hath no ground in Scripture as he himselfe confesseth and therefore it is not to be beleeued as the other are without better reasons then he bringeth for the defence thereof but like lips like lettuces such as the cause is such are the defences both nought and weake as any man may see that is not muffled with errour and thus this second contradiction remaines irreconciliable 17. A third contradiction is also in and about the Sacrament which is this they teach that the matter in Sacrament is partly the outward Elements and partly the thing signified and represented by them and that betwixt these there is a certaine relation and similitude as in Baptisme the outward signe which is water and the thing signified which is the bloud of Christ make the matter of that Sacrament or the outward wasting by water and the inward by the Spirit and the relation is as the water washeth and purgeth away all filthinesse of the body so Christs bloud purgeth away both the guilt and filth of sinne from the soule and so in the Eucharist the Elements of Bread and Wine together with the bodie and bloud of Christ are the matter of the Sacrament and the relation is as those elements doe feed nourish and strengthen and cheare the bodie of man so the body and bloud of Christ doe seed nourish and strengthen and cheare the soule vnto eternall life and as those elements must be eaten and digested or else they nourish not so Christ must also be eaten and as it were digested and after a sort conuerted into our substance or else he is no food vnto our soules This is the very doctrine of the Church of Rome and it is agreeable to the truth for Bellarmine thus speaketh Species illae significant quidem cibum spiritualem sed non sunt ipsae cibus spiritualis that is The signes in the Scrament signifie our spirituall foode but they are not the spirituall foode it selfe And in another place he saith that signum in Sacramento reisignatae similitudinem gerit The signes in the Sacrament doe beare the similitude of the thing signified And in the same Chapter hee sayth more plainely that God would neuer haue ordained one thing to signifie another vnlesse it had a certaine analogie or similitude with it And herein he accordeth with the Master of sentences who defines a Sacrament thus To be a visible forme of an inuisible grace bearing the Image of that grace And with Hugo who saith That a Sacrament is a corporall or materiall element propounded outwardly to the senses by similitude representing and by institution signifying and by Sanctification containing some inuisible and spirituall grace And that this relation is in eating and nourishing Bellarmine in another place confesseth in direct words when he saith that That same outward eating in the Sacrament doth signifie the inward eating and refreshing of the soule but is not the cause thereof and that that is so necessarie a condition that without it we should not be partakers of that diuine nourishment And to this agreeth Saint Augustine who plainely affirmeth that if Sacraments had not a certaine similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they were not Sacraments at all And what this similitude is he declareth in another place where hee saith that We receaue visible meate in the Sacrament but the Sacrament is one thing and the vertue of the Sacrament is another And Thomas Aquinas giueth this as a reason why Bread and Wine are the fittest matter of this Sacrament because men most commonly are nourished therewith his words are these As water is assumed in the Sacrament of Baptisme to the vse of spirituall washing because corporall washing is commonly made by water so bread and wine wherewith most commonly men are nourished are taken vp in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to the vse of the spirituall eating By which it followeth that if water did not wash it was no fit element for the Sacrament of Baptisme so if bread and wine doe not nourish they are no fit signes for the Lords Supper and for this cause our Sauiour at the institution of this Sacrament gaue this commandement to his Disciples that they should take and eate and the Apostle calleth it the Lords Supper and the Lords Table 18. This therefore is their own doctrine and it is grounded vpon the truth But listen a little how they contradict this by their miraculous monster Transubstantiation for when they say that the substance of the bread and wine is vtterly
changed into the body and bloud of Christ and that onely the accidents remaine I would faine know of them how these outward signes doe nourish the bodie can the accidents of bread and wine nourish the substance of the bodie must there not be a similitude and proportion betwixt the nourishment and the thing nourished but betwixt accidents and a substance there is no similitude nor proportion Aristotle telleth vs as much when he saith that Foode doth nourish as it is a substance and not as an accident Now if the outward signes doe not nourish the body what analogie is there betwixt them and the things signified or why were they ordayned to represent the spirituall refection of our soules by Christ if they minister no corporall refection vnto our bodies or how can they represent that where of they beare no similitude for as in Baptisme if the nature and substance of the water were taken away and onely accidents did remayne so that it could not wash nor clense the body without doubt it could be no fit signe to signifie the inward ablution of the soule by the bloud of Christ So they that take away the nature and substance of the Bread and Wine and leauâ— bare accidents make it without all question a dead and liuelesse Sacrament not fit to represent so high a mystery 19 Behold now the contradictions first accidents without a substance that is to say accidents and no accidents for therefore they are called accidents because they adhere and are ioyned to a substance in which they haue their subsistance vpon which they haue their dependance so that take away their substance and they presently â—urcease to bee accidents For Aristotle saith Accidentis esse est in esse The essence of an accident is to bee in a subiect Secondly two parts of the Sacraments the visible elements and the inuisible grace yet but one part of the same Sacrament for the elements bee taken away and accidents onely remayne therefore two parts and not two parts Thirdly the externall matter of the Sacrament is the outward elements and yet there are no elements at all and so elements and no elements matter and no matter Fourthly the outward elements are signes of the inward grace and the same by their doctrine being but accidents are signes of the outward elements which are signes of the inward grace and so they are signes of the signes rather then of the thing signified Lastly the outward feeding by bread wine represents the inward feeding by the body and bloud of Christ yet there is no outward feeding by bread and wine because there is no bread and wine except they will make accidents to â—eede a substance which is against all reason for the Philosopher saith that Ex iâ—sdem nutrimur ex quibus sumus wee are nourished by the same things of which we consist but we do not consist of accidents but of substances 20. Out of this snare they seeke to ridde themselues by a double euasion first they say that accidents may be without a subiect though not naturally yet by the supernaturall power of God This is Bellarmines and hee prooueth it by two instances first because Saint Basil affirmeth that That light which was created the first day was without a subiect and secondly because as the substance of Christs humanitie had no subsistance in it selfe but in the word so though an accident naturally doth inhere in a subiect yet supernaturally it may bee and yet not inhere To this I answere first that though Saint Basil be of that opinion yet Saint Augustine is not for he thought it to be a spirituall and no naturall light Nor Beda Lyranâ—s and the master of sentences who supposed it to be a bright and lightsome cloude which was carried about and gaue light vnto the world Nor Damascene who supposed that this light proceeded from the element of fire as an effect thereof Nor yet the Fathers who though they differed in their opinions touching this light yet none of them were of Saint Basils mind to thinke that it was an accident without a subiect Now why should we beleeue Saint Basil herein more then S. Augustine venerable Bede Damascene or the rest This therefore is but one priuate mans opinion crossed by many others and so maketh little for his purpose 21. Secondly I answere that though the humanitie of Christ had no subsistance in it selfe yet by reason of the vnion with the God-head it was sustained and vpholden by it but there is no such vnion betwixt the accidents in the Sacraments and the body and bloud of Christ that the body and bloud of Christ should sustaine and vphold those accidents and therefore they themselues say that they are not sustained by the body of Christ but by the extraordinary power of God and so this instance maketh nothing for this purpose neither Lastly I answere that we are not so much to consider what God can doe by his omnipotent power as what he hath done heretofore or what he hath said hee will doe hereafter let them therefore shew that accidents haue beene without a substance in times past or that God hath said hee will haue them so to be and then wee will yeeld vnto them but till then wee haue more reason to hold conclusions of nature not crossed by religion then to relye vpon supernaturall imaginations 22. The second euasion is by Aquinas who affirmeth that supernaturally the accidents of bread and wine may nourish because they receaue miraculously the strength and vertue of a substance and that they doe nourish he proueth because by the same reason they may be turned into the substance of the body by the which they are turned into ashes wormes and also because wee see by experience that the body is nourished by the signes in the Sacrament to which a short answere will suffice for first that there should be such a miraculous nourishing by accidents hath no ground either in experience or in Scripture And secondly he should rather conclude because the body is nourished by outward elements and they are often conuerted into ashes and wormes therefore they are not bare accidents but substances then that therefore bare accidents may nourish for let the reader iudge whether concludes more reasonably we when we say the elements doe nourish the body therefore they are bodily substances or they that thus reason the elements do nourish the bodie therefore accidents without a substance may nourish and thus the snare is not broken neither are they escaped 23. A fourth contradiction and that about the Sacrament they hold that the wicked and reprobate receaue the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament and yet reape no benefit thereby to their owne soules but rather iudgement and damnation as if the merits grace and vertue of Christ could be separated from his person or as if a man could receaue life and yet not
affections in Religion and so cunningly insinuate themselues into the managing of all affaires both for preuention of preiudice to themselues and vndermining their opposites this is the policie of Romish shrift and were this all it were to be borne withall if withall it did not open a wide doore of liberty to others as I haue in part shewed and were not a bawd of vncleanesse to the shriuers themselues Heare what one of their own writers reuealeth concerning this last poynt It is an ordinary practice saith he for Priests to commit execrable villany with women at shrift rauishing wiues and deflowring maids in the Church and committing Sodomie with young men c. Cornelius Agrippa another of their owne hath left in writing for all posterity to remember that Auricular confession is genus quoddam lenocinij and he referreth vs for proofe thereof vnto the Tripartite History Nec desunt mihi saith hee si referre velim cognita recentia exempla I need not to seeke for farre examples for I could relate many fresh and well knowen if I would And then he concludes that Priests and Friers and Monkes hauing vnder pretence of Religion free accesse vnto any woman many times whose soules they should gaine to God their bodies they sacrifice to the deuill Thus is their owne filth cast in their faces by their owne fauorites who by all likelihood would speake the best of their mother and in no respect durst slander her for feare of shame and punishment Wee finde in the Tripartite History to the which it may be Agrippa had relation of the rape of a noble woman by a Deacon in the time of shrift for the which cause Nectarius the Bishop of Constantinople banished this secret confession out of his Church as also all the Bishops of the East did the like in theirs This story is recorded by Socrates Sozomene and Nicephorus neither is it denied by the Romanists themselues though some of them condemne Nectarius for doing so As Andradius and Baronius the one calling it a most impudent fact the other saying that not a good spirit but an euill spirit perswaded him there unto And others seeke to elude ti by saying the story is mistaken and that Nectarius banished not confession it selfe but the necessitie of confessing to one certaine Priest which though it bee a vaine glosse which corrupts the text as Chemnitius fully proueth yet not to stand vpon it this is euident that such a foule fact was committed in the time of shrift and that thereupon this secret confession was either vtterly abrogated or at least so restrained that it was no more secret for feare of such like enormities and indeed graunt that Nectarius did euill in abolishing all kind of confession as Socrates and Sozomene charge him and as wee also will not excuse him for wee hold that there may be an holy profitable vse of confession in the Church for the searching of the wounds of sinnefull soules and applying of fit counsell comfort to distressed consciences yet from thence we may deriue these three conclusions first that secret shrift was then thought not to bee ex iure diuino but onely a tradition of the Church for else it could not haue been abolished secondly that it was not thought necessarie for the remission of sinnes as the Romanists teach and thirdly that it is a most dangerous occasion to vncleannes which is the matter we haue in hand to proue 20. If any here except that these enormities proceed from the abuse and not from the vse of shrift and that they bee personall frailties and not corruptions of doctrine I answer first that the very vse thereof is so daungerous especially to these ranke Votaries that it is tenne to one but it euer degenerates into the abuse for wanting the lawfull remedy ordained by God no maruaile if their lusts breake forth into lawlesse actions Againe what warrant can there be of Gods blessing to sanctifie the vse of that which is not an ordinance of God but a meere humane inuention as diuers of their owne Doctors haue confessed and is most easie to bee prooued And lastly though there may bee a profitable vse of confession as I haue said yet this Auricular enumeration and Romish shrift cannot be lawfully vsed because they make the very act thereof meritorious to saluation and the absolution of the Priest an actuall and reall remitting of sinne which opinion cannot but animate men to the committall of sinne seeing they haue their remedy so ready at hand to wit after the vttering a fewe wordes the mouth of the Priest to absolue them 21. As for Contrition which by their doctrine must goe before Confession that makes the matter neuer a whit the more difficult neither doth it any whit the more bridle from sinne for if the griefe be but small yet is the penitent absolued saith our Fisher and a Iesuite a slender griefe is sufficient and another Iesuite The least degree of griefe is able to wipe away the highest degree of sinne Surely this kind of contrition is so farre from brideling our corrupt nature from sinne that it more incites and prickes it forward for who would feare to sinne if this be true that the least griefe conceiued in heart together with the discouering of it to the Priest and the Priests formall absolution is sufficient for the full pardon and remission thereof 22. But peraduenture the last part of this Sacrament binds vp the two former in greater seuerity let vs consider a little therefore of their penance and satisfaction They condemne vs lowdly and raile with open throat against vs calling vs Libertines and Epicures for reiecting their penance and satisfactory paines after sinnes committed But who are the Libertines they or vs let any indifferent reader all preiudice set apart iudge Are we Libertines for renouncing their popish penance why there is no doctrine that more notoriously tends to liberty then this For first what are those satisfactory workes which they enioyne poore penitents Coster a Iesuite reduceth them to three heads Prayer Almes and Fasting to one of which three all particulars in that kind may be referred as to Prayer they referre Masses Dirges and Trentals visiting of holy places pilgrimage and such like to Almes building of Abbeys and religious houses giuing to Couents of Friers and Nuns as for relieuing of the poore that is the least poynt of their almes to Fasting sackcloth ashes watching whipping sleeping on the pauement going barefoote handy labour and such like If the first sort be imposed for the most part it is nothing but the shuffling ouer of their Beads so many times a day with so many Creeds and so many Aues though they vnderstand neuer a word they speake or the saying of so many Masses or going to visite the shrine of Saint Thomas of Canterbury or of some other Saint all which is so farre from pinching the soule or taming the body
thinke it fit for vs to say so for humility sake but also that wee were so in truth and indeede Let Saint Bernard for an vpshot wipe away this distinction Wilt thou saith he say that Christ hath taught thee to say so for humility sake true indeed it was for humility but what against truth And thus none of these shifts and distinctions can deliuer this doctrine from opposition to the Gospell for it followeth ineuitably if the best be no better then vnprofitable seruants then none can worke such works whereby hee may not onely merite for himselfe eternall life but hauing a surplusage of redundant merits bestow some of them for the supplying of others wants 100. And thus wee haue a short view of the cleere and manifest oppositions that are betwixt the doctrines of the Gospell and the doctrines of the Church of Rome And we see with what subtill and intricate distinctions they labour to reconcile them together but truth is naked and needeth no such shiftings Both the one and the other therefore namely their direct opposition to the Gospell on the one side and their elaborate diflinctions to make good their cause on the other doth euidently euince the conclusion of this ninth demonstration that that Religion which is built vpon such desperate and dangerous principles cannot be the truth of Christ but the doctrine and Religion of Antichrist The X. MOTIVE That Religion which nourisheth most barbarous and grosse ignorance amongst the people and forbiddeth the knowledge and vnderstanding of the grounds of the Christian faith cannot be the truth but this doth the Romish Religion ergo c. 1. IN the first proposition of this Argument the Romanists hold the Wolfe by the eares not knowing whether it be better to graunt or to deny it for if they graunt it to bee true it will flye in their faces because they are guilty of the contents thereof and if they deny it it will bite them by the fingers for all men will condemne them of shamelesse impudency for denying so apparant a truth Therefore as the beast which Pliny calleth Amphisbaena so it stingeth both wayes But of two euils the lesser they must of necessitie deny it or else they must condemne their owne practice of impietie which sure they will not doe though for their labour they gaine to themselues that name which so frequently and imperiously they impute vnto vs Shamelesse Heretikes they speake it of vs in the spirit of malice but it shall be prooued of them by sound reason and that in this demonstration ensuing by Gods assistance 2. For the confirmation therefore of the first proposition a word or two though whatsoeuer can be spoken thereof is but to adde light vnto the Sunne First therefore the Scripture standeth foorth and condemneth ignorance so plainely that nothing can be more euident Salomon telleth vs That they which hate knowledge loue death And the Prophet Esay That the people were carryed into captiuitie because they had no knowledge And the Prophet Hosca That they were destroyed for lacke of knowledge Our Sauiour affirmeth that the cause of erring in the Sadduces was the ignorance of the Scripture And Saint Paul coupleth these two together in the Gentiles Darkned cogitations through ignorance and strangers from the life of God where he plainely sheweth that ignorance and destruction are inseparable companions as sanctified knowledge and saluation are And to omit infinite other passages of holy writ our Sauiour directly concludeth that he which knoweth his Masters will and doth it not shall bee beaten with many stripes and he which knoweth it not and therefore doth it not shall be beaten too but with fewer stripes By which he giueth vs to know that though some kinde of ignorance may extenuate and lessen the fault yet none especially if it bee of matters which we are bound to know and may be attayned vnto doth excuse from all fault but is blame-worthy and punishable by Gods iustice 3. Thus speakes the holy Ghost in the Scripture and doubtles in reason it must needs be so for wherin doth a man differ from a beast but in reason and vnderstanding and wherein doth one man differ from another but in the enlightning of reason by diuine knowledge which is the matter subiect of true Religion Religion being nothing else but the knowledge and profession of the diuine truth the want whereof must needs be a subuerter and destroyer thereof A Physicion that is ignorant of the grounds of his Arte we account a Mountebanke and Imposter And what I pray you can they be lesse that professe ignorance and that in the most difficult Art of all other the Art of Christianitie Besides all confesse that ignorance is a defect and blemish of the soule and that the more knowledge a man hath the neerer he is vnto perfection because hee is the more like vnto God but the chiefe end of Religion is to purge away the blemishes to make vp the breaches of the soule to renue Gods Image defaced therin that so we may be made like vnto him euen perfect as he is perfect How can then true Religion teach ignorance which is such an enemy vnto perfectiō or how can that be true religion which nourisheth ignorance inioyneth it vnto most of her professors followers 4. Let the fathers bee Iudges of this cause Saint Augustine sayth in one place that Ignorance as a naughty mother bringeth forth two wicked daughters falshood and doubting And in another that the knowledge of God is the engine by which the structure of charity is built vp Saint Bernard sayth that both the knowledge of God and of a mans selfe is necessary to saluation For as out of the knowledge of a mans selfe commeth the feare of God and out of the knowledge of God the loue of him so on the contrary from the ignorance of a mans selfe commeth pride and from the ignorance of God desperation Saint Chrysostome sayth that knowledge goeth before the imbracing of Vertue because no man can faithfully desire that which hee knoweth not and euill vnknowne is not feared The like song sing all the rest of the Fathers whose testimonies I thinke needlesse to accumulate being so wel knowne to all men 5. And that they may bee vtterly without excuse heare what their owne Doctours affirme Aquinas confesseth that omnis ignorantia vincibilis est peccatum si sit eorum quae aliquis seire tenetur All vincible ignorance that is which may bee auoided is sinne if it bee of those things which a man is bound to know But such is the ignorance maintained in the Church of Rome not onely vincible but affected wilfull and voluntary Bellarmine also acknowledgeth that ignorance is a disease and wound of the soule brought in as a punishment of originall sinne And confesseth out of Saint Augustine that it is the cause of errour For Two euils are
Magdeburge released of his oath to his owne citizens by Pope Iohn the 23. And of Sigismund the Emperour who was constrained by the 〈◊〉 to falsifie his oath giuen to Iohn Husse and Ierome of Prage for their safe conduct to the Councill of Constance and of Pope Zacharie Boniface the sixt and Benedict de la Lune who vnbound the French men from their oath of obedience to their Kings and of Gregory the seuenth with other succeeding Popes who did the like to the Germanes in respect of diuers Emperours and lastly of Pius Quintus that excited the subiects of Queene Elizabeth to the breach of their faith and open rebellion all which doth show that they make no conscience of periury so that they may maintaine thereby their Hierarchie and Religion which to bee so this one testimony will sufficiently beare witnesse out of the French Chronicles when a league was made between Charles the ninth and the Prince of Condy the Iesuites sayth the author cryed out dayly in their sermons that peace was not to bee made with Heretikes and being made was not to bee kept that it was a godly thing to lay violent hands on those vnpure persons c. 6. Lastly their murthering cruelty exercised against all that stand in their way is so notorious that I need not to stand vpon it the examples of Henry the Emperour marked out by Pope Hildebrand to bee murthered by the tumbling down of a great stone vpon his head in Saint Maries Church though with euill successe for the Vâ—rlet himselfe that was suborned to doe this feat tumbled downe headlong together with the stone and so was crushed in pieces before the Emperour came into the place The poysoning of Frederick the second by the secret practice of Innocent the fourth and of Conrade by the meanes of the same Pope and of Lewes of Bauary by the appointment of Clement the sixt and of Henry of Lucemburgh by a Iacobine Fryer of Saint Dominicks order and that O horrible impiety in the bread of the Sacrament mixed with adamantine dust and of Iohn of England by a Monke of Swinestead Abbay of Henry the third of France stabbed by a Iacobine Fryar and of Henry the fourth murthered by Rauillac that Deuill in humane shape who beeing demaunded by the Iudges why he committed that horrible act answered without blushing Because the King went about to aide the Protestant Princes of Germany contrary to the Popes minde whom hee did beleeue to be a God vpon earth and of Parry Lopez Squire with many other which were suborned to murther our late Queene and of Faulx that was prepared with a match kindled at Rome and a the euish Lanthorne to blow vp the Parliament house These exanples I say with many other that might bee produced doe euidently euince them to make no conscience of shedding blood and murther for the maintenance and defence of their Religion 7. Which that it may yet further appeare to be true consider the infinite numbers of Hâ—gonets that is Protestants which haue been slaine in France alone for refusing the marke of the beast In the Low Countreyes 36000. at least are knowne to haue beene put to death by the Duke of Alba for not yeelding in all things to the Romish Religion The like persecution hath beene in other Countreyes and is still at this day where their bloody inquisition taketh place by the which in thirty yeeres as ir is recorded by Authors of sufficient credit a hundred and fifty thousand Christians were miserably murthered and that which is to be noted it rageth against none but Protestants so that euen in Rome a man may bee either Iew. Turke or Infidell or what els and bee neuer questioned but a Protestant hee cannot be but with danger of his life What should I speake of the multitude of poore innocents that were in this land of ours adiudged to the stake in the fiue yeeres raigne of Queene Mary Smithfield Colchester Couentrie and Norwich and almost all the other great townes beare witnesse of this their cruelty and the Innocent blood of these poore soules doth stil cry for vengeance against them 8. And yet all this is nothing to those horrible and outragious Massacres whereby whole multitudes haue beene but hered like sheepe in a slaughter house witnesse that miserable slaughter made of the Albigenses by Fryar Dominick and Simon Monfort which going astray from the truth if all be true which is written of them these butchers did not labor to reclaime by perswasions and gentle meanes but oppressed them by armes at the first and so sent them packing to hell without repentance witnesse also that fearefull Powder treason intended not executed which if it had taken effect such a massacre of men and those of highest place and worth had beene made as neuer yet the Sunne saw the like And lastly witnesse that dreadfull massacre in France vnder Charles the ninth when in one night were murthered at Paris many thousand Protestants with the illustrious Admirall of France and at Lions and other places within one month as some say 40000. as others aboue 30000. The greatest and most grieuous perfecution in the Primitiue Church is not to bee compared to this for it is recorded that vnder Dioclesian 17000. were martyred in one month but behold heere the number doubled that we might certainly know and beleeue that the Pope is that true and great Antichrist vnder whom and by whose meanes the greatest persecution that euer befell the Church of God should happen 9. Neither is there doctrine any whit dissonant from their practice for thus Bellarmine deliuereth it in plaine termes as in a Christian the Spirit is to rule ouer the flesh to chastise it and keepe it vnder yea sometimes to vndergoe death it selfe as in the Martyrs so the spirituall power residing in the Church that is in the Pope is to bridle and restraine the temporall by all meanes what soeuer if it rebell against it yea the Cardinall Como in his letters to Parry the Traitour animateth him to the murther of the good Queene by his damned position that it is meritorious to kill a King excommunicate and some of them goe yet deeper into hell and entitle it an heroicall act that is no ordinary meritorious worke but such an extraordinary exploit as none but men of a more then humane Spirit can performe and for which an higher place in Heauen is reserued then for common merits Can this Religion now bee of God that is thus maintained by treachery periury and blood-shed Is not this Church rather the purple coloured harlot spoken of in the Reuelation embrued and dyed red with the blood of the Saints then the true Catholike Church of Christ These things are so notorious that I need not further enlarge them 10. Leauing therefore these I come to the three last wicked meanes whereby they maintaine their Religion vpon which if I insist
grace not deluding their soules with a fond expectation of other mens deuotions Sure it is that the opinion of purgatorie and prayer for the dead must of necessitie nourish a presumption of veniall sinnes at the least which our doctrine adiudgeth to hell without repentance aswell as any other and because few are able to distinguish betwixt mortall and veniall sinnes but iudge them veniall which are to Gods iudgement mortall as their Iesuite Coster confesseth when hee sayth that that may seeme a light offence vnto man which is haynous in Gods sight therefore it must needs also bee in danger to breed a secret presumption of mortall sinnes also And so whilest they haue a blind conceit of the suburbes which is Purgatorie they cast themselues into the Citie it selfe which is hell 34. Lastly this may be demonstrated to the conscience of any not preiudiced with a blind zeale to the Romish Church by this reason for that neyther Purgatorie nor Prayer for the dead can directly be proued out of Scripture as hath bin proued before concerning Purgatory and is apparent concerning prayer for the dead there being neither precept nor promise nor direct example in the whole volume of Gods Booke for the same as is confessed by their owne Bredenbachius and besides hauing no sound foundation in the consent of ancient Fathers as hath beene also prooued but being founded vpon vaine apparitions and strange reuelations of soules departed which many of the Fathers were of opinion could not bee as testifieth Maldonate one of their owne Iesuites for feare lest vnder that colour we should be drawne to superstitions and others thought that Deuils did faine themselues to be the soules of dead men as witnesseth Pererius another Iesuite yea and some of their owne Doctours haue beene perswaded that all apparitions about Churches are eyther demoniacall or phantasticall whereas on the contrarie our doctrine of two places is direct in Scripture and was neuer denied by any authoritie either of olde or new Diuines I meane possitiuely that there is a Heauen and a Hell wherefore this wee may safely beleeue and repose our soules vpon but to entertaine the beliefe of the former is as dangerous to the conscience as doubtfull to the vnderstanding seeing hee that doubtingly vndertaketh any action is condemned as a sinner because hee doth it not in faith Faiths obiect being Gods Word alone and not the vncertaine coniectures of humane opinions much lesse the vaine apparitions of dead ghosts 35. Againe their doctrine of the absolute necessitie of baptisme excluding thereby infants from Heauen and confining them to a Prison in the brimme of Hell there to indure the euerlasting punishment of losse is a dangerous doctrine both in respect of pietie towards God and charitie towards our neighbour and certaintie to a mans conscience and consequently our doctrine that holdeth the contrarie is more safe in all those respects For touching pietie it is a great imbasing to Gods mercie and a detracting from the glorie of his grace to thinke that Almightie God should in iustice cast away the infinite myriades of vnbaptized infants or that his sauing grace is so tyed to the outward Sacrament that he cannot or at the least will not saue any without it the first of these is confessed by many of the learned Romanists themselues to be à Dei misericordia alienum not agreeable to the mercie of God which exceedeth not onely the deserts but euen the hopes of men The second is confirmed by a due comparing of the olde couenant of the Law with the new couenant of the Gospell for if it be true that children dying vnder the Law vncircumcised were saued by the faith of their Parents as Saint Bernard thinketh yea and is also agreeable to the tenure of the Scripture for many children dyed in the Wildernesse without the Sacrament of Circumcision it being omitted for those fortie yeeres by Gods own allowance and Dauid hearing of the death of his childe before hee had receiued the outward character of Circumcision as may be gathered out of the Text. did solace himselfe with this confidence that the childe was saued Then it must needs follow if the same priuiledge be not granted to the children of Christian Parents that the couenant of the Gospell is not so large as the couenant of the Law nor Gods mercie so bountifull to Christians as to Iewes nor the merits of Christ so effectuall after his comming in the flesh as they were before by all which the glorie of the Gospell and grace of Christ is much defaced and the vnbounded Ocean of Gods mercie limited and stinted 36. Touching charitie is it not an vncharitable conceit to despaire of the saluation of poore infants dying without Baptisme and that both towards the infants themselues who though they are borne in originall sinne yet are innocent from actuall transgressions and towards the Parents who being themselues within the couenant hereby are depriued of that chiefe comfort of the couenant which is that God is not onely their God but the God of their seed and towardes the Church that hereby is robbed of a great part of her children and made vnable to present young infants to her Husband Christ Iesus Children are little beholding to them for this doctrine Parents lesse and the Church the mother of the faithfull least of all And indeed so farre is it from charitie that it is full of damnable crueltie 37. Lastly touching the perilous consequences that follow vpon this doctrine I need name but these three to wit first that it maketh God more mercifull to men of yeeres then vnto tender infants for they teach that men of yeeres as Valentinian the Emperour may be saued by the Baptisme of the Spirit or by the Baptisme of bloud which is Martyrdome though they want the Baptisme of water but infants albeit they may haue the Spirit of sanctification euen in the wombe as Iohn Baptist had and may be Martyrs according to their opinion as the children that Herod caused to be slaine yet if they want the Sacrament of water they adiudge them peremptorily to be banished from Gods presence for euer Now then children and men being in the same predicament either the one must be admitted to Gods fauour aswell as the other or it must needs follow that God is partial and more fauourable to the one then the other If they say that men though they haue not the act of Baptisme yet they haue votum a desire vnto it which being intercepted by some sodaine accident is supplied by inward grace I answere with Bellarmine that as another mans sinne was the cause of the damnation of infants so other mens faith sufficeth them vnto baptisme Why should then the desire of one man be of more efficacie to his saluation then the desire and purpose of the Church for the saluation of infants To this purpose their owne learned Schooleman sayth that
for sinne that as by Chaucers Canterbury tales may appeare it deserueth rather to bee called a pastime than a penance If Almes be enioyned by the Confessor to the poore penitent then must an Abby be built or some religious house to nourish a company of idle drones good for nothing but fruges consumere or suppose an high-way bee repayred or a Church reedified or an Hospitall erected what terrour can this be from sinne when the penalty may thus be discharged by the purse As for their Fasting watching whiping going barefoote though it carry a shew of zeale in respect of not sparing the body yet it is a plaine imitation of Baals Priests and little profitable as Saint Paul saith to godlinesse but rather an incitation to loosenes For when a man is perswaded and taught that all his foule sins committed the whole yere before are vtterly blotted out and done away by fasting one meale euery Wednesday and Friday and eating nothing but Fish during the holy time of Lent except Iunckets and sweet meates and wine and Sugar which they gorge themselues withall and yet fast too and bearing ashes on Ashwednesday going woolward on Good-friday or giuing himselfe halfe a dozen lashes on the back or creeping to a crosse and such like trumpery I say when a man is perswaded that this short paine is a sufficient satisfaction for the punishment of all his former sinne for so they teach who would not returne againe to his vomit of wickednesse seeing the pleasures which he hopes to enioy by his sinnes are farre longer and greater then the punishment wherewith he maketh satisfaction 22. Secondly to shew that all this great noyse of satisfactions is nothing but a meere May-game and mockery obserue diligently their owne doctrine Thus they teach that all satisfactory punishments may be released by a pardon Aquinas their illumined Doctor giueth this reason thereof Christ might release the fault without any satisfaction and so might Paul ergo so may the Pope and this is one of their late definitions of a pardon Indulgentia est remissio harum actionuÌ„ quae sunt a Confessario iniunctae peccatori It is the remitting of that penance which is enioyned a sinner by his Confessor And therefore another Iesuite truely confesseth that the Indulgences haue taken away all vse of seuere discipline out of the Church haue they so good Iesuite Then thus it followeth you let out satisfactions which you so much extoll and withall let in great liberty into the Church not onely by opening the dore to pardons but bewray your own absurdities For what a ridiculous jest is this he that hath offended must do penaÌ„ce after his confession or else hee cannot be saued and after his penance is assigned get but a pardon and then there needes no further satisfaction And how is a pardon procured why for a little peece of money omnia venalia Romae The Pope hath his pardon Pedlers in all Countries thou needest not go farre for it they will bring it home to thy dores at least if thou beest sat and able to greaze them well Pope Boniface the ninth sent out his Buls into diuers Countries releasing for a certaine summe of money all offences whatsoeuer without any penance And Leo the tenth offered to free for ten shillings any soule you would name out of Purgatory much more a mans owne soule that it should neuer come thither here is a doctrine indeede of seuerity if any was among the Epicures who will not say but this is a Censorious and strict Religion 23. I but some will say peraduenture oh it is an hard matter to pay tenne shillings for a pardon this is the penance of the purse which to a couetous rich man or to a miserable poore man is worse theÌ„ the penance of the carkeis Why but thou mayst haue it cheaper if thou wilt and therefore indeed he is a foole which will part with a penny for the purchase of a pardon say but deuoutly a little short prayer in the Primer thou shalt haue three thousand dayes pardon of mortall sinnes and twenty thousand dayes of veniall giuen by Pope â—ohn the twenty two And if that Prayer bee too long say fiue Pater-nosters before the Vernacle and thou shalt haue tenne thousand dayes pardon graunted by the same Pope and if so many Pater-nosters be too tedious say but an Aue at the Eleuation thou shalt obtaine pardon for 20000. daies or if thou dwellest neere Rome doe but visite the Church of Saint Paul without the walls haue eight forty thousand yeres of pardon Who would stand vpon dayes when he may haue thus many thousand yeares If thou beest weake or sick and not able to visite a Church then doe but deuoutly worship the Crosse or the nayles whip launce heart or hands of Christ painted in thy chamber and that shall bee a sufficient satisfaction for all thy sinnes Here is stuffe with a witnesse for can a man forbeare laughter to heare these May-games and yet this is not the tenth part of these incredible absurdities But I passe them ouer being sufficiently discouered by others to the shame of the Romish Religion It sufficeth that by this little it is euident that satisfactions are so farre from restraining that they rather remit the reines to all liberty and licentiousnesse 24. Lastly to conclude if so be their imposed penance be at any time strict seuere it is when the Pope iâ— offended not when God Men may franckly sin against God no man will say vnto him blacke is thine eye or if vpon his shriuing they enioyne him penance either it shall be so easie that it will not much trouble him to endure it or if it be too hard he may either redeeme it with his purse or at least commute it into another kind But if their Lord god the Pope be offended so the Canonists stile him then not onely seuerity but cruelty must be exercised then the whip and the scourge then the fire and the fagot Et scutica dignum horribili sectere flagello That which deserued but a flap with a ferula must be chastised with a scourge As on the contrary if the offence was only against God and not the Pope then that which deserued to be seuerely corrected must haue nothing but three flaps with a Fox-tayle which is credibly reported by some Writers to haue beene the penance of a Nunne which was gotten with childe in her Cloyster Albeit another Nunne at Watton in Yorkeshire fared farre worse for her wantonnesse with a yong Monke of the same house for being gotten with childe by him she was first imprisoned saith the Story and then beaten vnreasonably and vnseasonably too being great with childe then the Monke that committed this trespasse being taken and stript and bound fast to a stoole a sharpe knife was put into the Nunnes hand and shee was compelled by most cruell