that teacheth that the authoritie of preachers is a sufficient assurance for Christians to builde their Religion and faith vpon As for vs wee beleeue them no further then they treade in the steps and continue in the Doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets of God Secondly it is not sufficient to alleadge or pretend Scriptures but they must bee truelye alleadged Neither is the priuate fancie of euerie capriecious head to be equalled with the determinations of graue men and well experimented in Scriptures Lastlye there is no comparison betweene learned men called and allowed by the Church phantasticall fellowes that rashly presume to leape into the ministeriall function without eyther calling allowance or qualities fitting for such a calling In his second chapter he shameth not to say that those which ground their Religion on Scriptures which hee like a bad and bare fellow calleth bare set the gate open to all Heretickes and Heresies Thus our aduersaries aduauncing the Popes decretales and the vncertaine tradisions of the Romish Church detest the holy Scriptures and open their mouthes against God But wee are rather to beleeue Christ and his Apostles then such blasphemous gapers and speakers against holy Scriptures The Apostle Ephes 2. saith the faithfull are built vppon the Apostles and prophets Ephes 6. the word of God is called the sword of the Spirit And 2. Tim. 3. The scripture is commended as profitable to instruct and reproue and able to make the man of God perfit But neither may the ground of faith be tearmed a gate set open to Heresies nor is the sword of the spirit a meanes to breede errors Further how can the same be a gate set open to heretikes being able to make the man of God perfit certes if the allegation of Scriptures were a way to error our Sauiour Christ would neuer haue sent his hearers to search scriptures Neither would the auncient Fathers haue termed Scriptures a canon of faith if they had beene any gate set open to Heresies Irenaeus in his third booke against Heresies saith the Apostles first preached the Gospell and afterwards deliuered the same to vs in Scriptures that it might be a foundation pillar of our faith He sheweth also that it is the propertie of Heretikes when they are conuinced by Scriptures to accuse the Scriptures and to speake euill of them Origen in Math. tract 25. sheweth that Scriptures are to be brought for proofe of all Doctrines Neither neede we to doubt but that of themselues they are verie sufficient Our Sauiour Math. 4. by Scriptures onely ouercame the Diuell Neither did the auncient Fathers by other weapons preuaile against Hereticks In generall councels of olde time not the Popes decretales but the holy Scriptures were laide before the fathers Lastly if the word of God cannot be receiued it is farre more vnlike that Heretickes will respect the traditions or wrightings of men Neither is it material that Hereticks cauil against Scriptures and detort them to contrarie sences For such cauils and deprauations may easily be refuted by scriptures and to such abuses the wrightings of men are much more subiect then holy scriptures But saith Kellison The Deuill hath alwayes affected to be as like as may be to Christ and his Apostles in allegation of Scripture He maketh also a long and lewd narration of heretikes alleadging Scriptures But first most false it is that the deuil alwayes affecteth to alleadge Scriptures Nay he alleadgeth traditions customes and humane deuises more often then Scriptures False it is also that heretikes more often alleadge Scriptures then the testimony of traditions Fathers other reasons But suppose that heretikes should often alleadge Scriptures yet we are not to refuse that which by others is abused Neither doe wise men refuse meat because gluttons doe thereby surfet or forbeare to drinke for that drunkards abuse wine to excesse If then Kellison wil néeds folowe heretikes in calumniating scriptures and not forbeare as the deuil did to abuse Scriptures to contrary sence then must he giue Christians leaue to folowe Christ and his Apostles in alleadging Scriptures and not presume to condemne those which prefer Scriptures before traditions Gods worde before the Popes decretales Pag. 33. and 34. He runneth out into a large field concerning the possession of Scriptures which as he sayth belongeth to Catholikes not to heretikes But what may this make for Papists whom by many reasons we haue in our Challenge conuinced to be heretikes and not Catholikes Furthermore the question which he proposeth here concerneth the sufficiency and authority and not the possession of Scriptures But this is this Surueyors pleasure to abandon matters in Controuersie and to trifle about needlesse questions Afterward he sheweth why heretikes aledge Scriptures and mentioneth the decrees writings of the Pope the Church He endeuoreth also to prooue that Scripture is not easily to be vnderstood Matters much stood vpon by him but yet very impetinent in this place where the question is about allegation of Scriptures as an Argument of it selfe only sufficient Furthermore what if heretikes depraue and wrest Scriptures shal not true Catholikes rely vpon them Thirdly the Popes bulles and blundering decretales are not of such qualitye that they ought to be cōpared to Scriptures or mentioned where they are in place Lastly Scriptures in matters necessary to saluation are playne and easy But what if some places were difficult should we therfore absteine to alleadge Scriptures nay rather we ought diligently to study them that by vnderstanding of them we may resolue our difficultyes Tertullian alleadged by him pag. 37. doth not refuse flatlye to dispute with heretikes by Scripture or count such disputation lippe labour as this impudent compagnion falsely affirmeth For his common course was to conuince heretikes by Scriptures But if he thought it frutelesse at any time to alleadge Scriptures it was against such onely as denied the Scriptures Of holy Scriptures the prophane fellowe speaketh if not blasphemously yet basely and contemptibly pag. 35. he compareth them to colours vsed by foule women and to sweete odours vsed by sluttes pag. 39. he calleth them bare and compareth them to a nose of waxe and alloweth the saying of one that compared them to Aesops Fables especially vnderstanding the bare letter of Scriptures Finally he shameth not pag. 41. to say that the worde of God with a false meaning is the worde of the deuill Matters deseruing rather corporal punishment then verbal censures We may not therfore maruel if he rayle at Luther Caluin belying them without all shame or conscience First he sayth Luther dissaloweth S. Iames his Epistle He onely maketh it inferiour to other Canonical Scriptures as not esteemed to be his Secondly he chargeth Caluin and Luther with Misconstruing S. Pauls Epistles He should rather prooue it then falsely affirme it Thirdly he saith Luther doth discanon Iob jest at Ecclesiastes and contemne all the Gospels but S. Iohns the Epistle to the Hebrewes and that
answered by vs in a Treatise called Turco Papismus And that so sufficiētly that D. Gifford resteth eyther satisfied or silent If then this new surueyor would needes renew their slaunders and vaine obiections he should for his credit sake haue doone wel eyther to haue replyed to our answere or to haue held his peace as his betters haue done Againe if hee had beene so wise and circumspect as he pretendeth to bee he would haue been well aduised before he entred this course least he might giue vs occasion to rip vp the deformities fooleries absurdities Heresies impieties and other abuses of Popery of which I doubt not but his best friendes when they are laid open will bee much ashamed Himselfe being but a new vpstart Doctor lately crept out of my Lord Vauxes Buttery will bee much puzled to make any probable defence for them Thus much may serue for answere to the front of his Suruey and his two liminare Epistles For the rest I shall not neede to say much in this place Onely this I thought good to signifye vnto thee good Reader that thou looke not for any curious or long answere heereafter to wit that the whole volume is nothing but a newe packe of olde calumniations and lyes The forme of his discourse is trifling the Subject rayling Such declamations it should seeme hee was wont in the time of his butlerage to make ouer a canne of Beere His proofes are fancies and bare conceites His witnesses fellowes of a lowe price His conclusions weake collections It may bee eyther neede and hunger or else hope and promise of reward made him so talkatiue How be it least hee might grow proud of his owne prowesse I haue vndertaken to shape him a short answere In the meane while concerning his obiections and proofes this hee may learne of mee for his instruction First that it is a foolish thing for a man to obiect that to others whereof they are cleare and hee moste guiltie and to suruey other mens estates when his owne can abide no suruey Secondly that the bosome and domesticall testimonies of Cochleus Genebrard Bolsec Stapleton and such like are little to be esteemed Fidele est testimonium quod causas non habet mentiendi That testimony saith Hierome ad Saluinam deserueth most credit that hath no causes of fiction Be not then mooued with the largenesse of Kellisons volume nor with his manifold leasings Common barators are wont to put in longest billes whē they haue least matter and shallow waters make moste noise To such lewd and long lies this our short answere will be more then sufficient Vouchsafe therefore to compare both our discourses together and to reade them with indifferency And so thou shalt soone discouer the vanitie of his accusations and giue sentence for our innocency THE EXAMINATION and Confutation of Kellisons scurrilous Suruey of the newe Religion as he tearmeth it Chap 1. Kellisons fond conceit and error concerning the foundations of our Religion IF it be the part of a wise builder to lay a firme foundation as our Sauiour Christ Math. 7. teacheth and common experience prooueth most euidently vnto vs then we may wel collect that Kellison our aduersary in his Suruey hath shewed himselfe neither wise builder nor wise man who in his first booke going about to build the Toure of his Romish Babel doth wholy mistake his foundations laying the frame of his worke eyther vpon the Pope whome he supposeth to be a visible Iudge of all controuersies or vpon the mission and preaching of Romish Masse priestes Furthermore talking of our Religion he doth grossely erre in the foundations of it supposing that it relyeth first vpon the authoritie of our Preachers then vpon their allegations out of Scriptures thirdly vpon mens priuate spirits fourthly vpon credible or probable testimonies and lastly vpō some visible Iudge matters certes rather deuised by him selfe then taught by vs. The visible Iudge and authoritie of Priestes is layd as a foundation of fayth by Stapleton in his booke of doctrinal principles That which he talketh of priuat spirits and the allegatiō of Scriptures out of mens own humors is an imputation of Papists layd vpon vs and that most vniustly For we build the Church vpon the Prophets and Apostles Iesus Christ him selfe being the cheefe corner stone as the Apostle teacheth vs Ephes 2. And the Scriptures we receiue not as they are interpreted by the Massepriests or any mans humorous fancy but as they procéed from the spirit of God by the ministery of his Prophets and Apostles Wherefore mistaking the foundation of the worke we may well imagine that his discourse that is a worke raysed either without foundation or beside the foundation is most vaine idle and absurd The first Chapter of his first booke he beginneth with a long declamatory narration proouing that no man is to intrude him selfe into the function of the ministery of the Church without mission But what is that to the foundation of religion which is the subiect which he promised to handle Doth he suppose that the principal foundation of his Massing religion is layd vpon the preaching or rather not preaching mission of pol-shorne priests sent out by the Pope to say Masse for quicke and dead if he doe then like as his gunpowder consortes went about of late to blow vp the King and Sate so doth he goe obout to blow vp the Popes Chayre together with all his Cardinals Friars Monkes and Masse-priestes For first the Pope shall neuer be able to proue his mission Ephes 4. wee read that Christ gaue some Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastors and Teachers But the Pope is none of all these His state is too great to be conteyned within this small and weake number Further he is no successor of Peter For he rather killeth thē féedeth Christs shéep Thirdly he rather medleth with Swordes then Keyes and if he handleth the Keyes of the Church yet can he shewe no Commission for it Fourthly he is absurd if he clayme the right of a Bishop For he doth not the worke of a Bishop Lastly the Apostles Successors and Preachers sent from God procéed according to their Commission and Instructions receiued from God But the Pope procéedeth according to his owne Decretales and the rules of his owne Chancery Out then must he goe and all that pretend to come from him as méere intruders if we folowe the Apostles rules The Cardinals are but of a late standing S. Peter had no Cardinals about him Nor were the parish Priests of Rome that assisted the auncient Bishops of that Cittie so gallant fellowes as these new Cardinals are They neither preach nor Baptise as Cardinals And therefore cannot pretend right of succession eyther from the Apostles or from auncient Bishops or Priestes In the holy Scriptures albeit some alleadge the wordes Cardines terrae there is no mention of them Finallye the Fathers knew them not If then the Popes decretales warrant them not
of Iude. But his writings doe refute these slaunders and nothing doth K. bring to iustifie them Lastly he sayth Caluin and Luther will haue the bare letter or joyned with their voluntary exposition to be Iudge of controuersies matters vtterly vntrue and improbable For neither doe we admitte the letter without the sence nor doe we allow voluntary or priuate expositions Pag. 46. he falsifyeth the testimony of Scriptures where he sayth Her selfe confesseth her owne obscurity For S. Peter 2. Epist 3. doth not say that the Scriptures are obscure as this K. pretendeth but only that certaine thinges in S. Pauls Epistles are difficult And psal 119. the Prophet compareth Gods word to a Lanterne and to light Lucerna pedibus meis verbum tuum sayth he lumen semitis meis If any obscuritie and difficultie be attributed to Scriptures by Fathers it is only in such poyntes as are not necessary to saluation Finally he reciteth the words of Luther concerning the plainnesse of Scriptures partially and obiecteth vnto vs the testimony of Osiander about the differences concerning mans iustification by Christ But neither is Luther to be blamed if he reprooue those that call Scriptures obscure nor is any credite to be giuen to Bellarmine citing Osiander nor to Osiander where he writeth against those that differ from him in the Article of mans iustification Long may he declayme against Luther and Osiander and others But nothing doth his reasoning or rather rayling against reading of Scriptures effect For who will not rather folowe the exhortation of Chrysostome exhorting lay-men to get them Bibles and to read Scriptures then regarde the babling of this Popish parasite that calleth readers of scriptures Biblists and sayth we holde that to be the true meaning of Scriptures which euery ones priuate spirit imagineth In the third chapter of his first book he disputeth against those which make their owne priuate Spirit supreme iudge in earth of the interpretation of Scripture The which as it lanceth the Pope deepely whose priuate and satanical spirit is the supreame iudge whome all Papists are bound to follow so it toucheth not vs at all For albeit wee refuse the Pope and his adherents for iudges yet we relye not vpon our owne priuate spirit in expounding scriptures but vpon the spirit of God that eyther speaketh plainely or expoundeth himselfe in some other place and for atteining the right vnderstanding of Scriptures vse the hope of tonges the exposition of fathers and all learned men the discourse of histories and all other good meanes Neither did Luther thinke or proceede otherwise Why then doth noth this superlunaticall Surueyor declare who they bee that doe attribute the publike and iudiciall interpretation of Scriptures to euery mans priuate spirit and in what place why doth he forge to himselfe an absurde opinion held by none that I knowe saue the Papists who in matters controuersed hold the Popes priuate definition for a supreme resolution would hee therein shew his triumphant eloquence if this were his purpose let vs see I beseech you what he performeth First he saith selfe loue is a good as guilding and then talketh of the goodmans Cowe Pans pipe Appolloes harpe painting of womens faces Hens and Chickens and such like fooleries But his horrible eloquence declareth him to bee the Chicken of a Buzzard and a blinde Harper that cannot discerne betweene selfe loue priuate spirits His reader also may see that hee hath as much skill in painting of faces as in expounding of scriptures And yet all his Cow eloquence wil not serue to couer the deformities of the painted whore of Babilon of whome hee is a deuoute seruant and vppon whome he bestoweth much complextion to no purpose Luther regardeth it not albeit some of the Fathers should speake against a point of faith neither would hee submitte his Doctrine to be iudged by the Romish antichristian prelates But that sheweth not that he preferred himselfe before any but rather that hee preferred the Scriptures and articles of Christian faith before all And to them he exhorteth all to submitte themselues ascribing nothing to his owne opinion But what if Luther shold haue spoken out of square what is that to the new Religion he speaketh off doth our religion depend vpō euery word of Luther certes no more then the faith of the Church of Rome vpon the idle discourses of Kellisons Suruey As for Caluin hee referreth nothing to his owne spirrit but to the rule of Gods word to which he submitteth his interpretations as well of these wordes hoc est corpus meum as of other places of Scriptures else where interpreted by him Finally we neither reiect Fathers nor Councels nor godlye pastors The skip-iacke surueyor therefore that calleth Luther and Caluin Skip-iacks and like a skip-iack running from matter to matter makes so long a declamation against selfe loue and ouer-weening a mans selfe did herein seeme to loue himselfe but too much and much to offend in ouer-weening and surcuydrie that pleased himselfe in this Chapter that is so farre from the purpose so false in respect of vs and so contrarie to himselfe and his owne cause His fourth Chapter he beginneth as his manner is with a pedanticall declamation against Parricides shewing how strangely they were punished being sowed into a sacke with a Cocke a Viper an Ape and a Dogge But to what purpose is all this doth he thinke that it is no lesse then the crime of Parricide to reiect some Fathers why then the Pope and his agents by the confession of this K. are all parricides and for their dogged and viperous apish and cockish natures deserue to be sewed in sackes as Vrbane the sixt did deale with certaine Cardinals with the beastes of like nature to be throwne into the sea As for vs wee reiect no Fathers that consent one with another and with holy scriptures in matters of faith but rather the bastardlye writinges of falsaries and of such as take vppon them the names of Fathers or else such as hold singular opinions or varie from the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles of Christ Luther had no reason in matter of the Sacrifice of the Masse to disclaime the fathers which all with one voice as I haue iustified against Bellarmine make against the carnall sacrifice of the Popish Masse for quicke and dead But if hee or Caluin or any other speake against Fathers it is not against all nor against the Bookes which are certainely knowne to bee theirs but against counterfet fellowes and some particuler opinions If Caluin should call the men of Trent Hogges and Asses he did them a speciall fauour For they shewed themselues to bée worse being open enemies of the Christian faith and moste obstinate oppugners of the truth But they are none of our Fathers nor of the Fathers of the Church Nor is the synagogue of Rome maintaining the abuses which we refuse our Mother but the Mother of fornications or as Petrarch calleth her the
Mother of errors and the greate Whore described Apocalyps 17. Gregory the first wanteth much of the learning of former Fathers yet is neither he nor his messenger Austen so bad but that his successors were farre worse Furthermore we doe not beleeue that so wise a man as Gregory the first is reputed would write so foolish Bookes as the dialogues that goe vnder his name and are so full of olde wiues tales and fabulous toyes But should Luther Caluin or others ouerlash in speaking of Fathers yet to doe this K. fauour I am content to ioyne with him vpon this issue that the Fathers of the Church in their authentical writinges in the greatest controuersies betwixt vs and the Papistes are for vs and against them And of this hee could not be ignorant but that he is onely a Schoole pedant and an ignorant broacher of new opinions and not versed in the writings of the Fathers Against vs he alleageth the most reuerend learned Father Toby Matthew most worthy Bishop of Durham but he doth offer him singuler wrong as that reuerend Bishop will alwaies testifie Afterward he bringeth in Genebrard a professed enemy whose deposition is no more worth then if this ketler should out of his malice speake it Luthers scruples grew not vpon doubt of the Fathers doctrine but of the long approbation of the Masse and other abuses In fréewill for substance of doctrine we doubt not of the Fathers fauour against the Papistes Finally he sayth The Fathers haue the infallible assistance of Gods holy spirit in exposition of Scriptures and that those which reiect them reiect also the councels of the Church and the authority of Pastors by which the Church is directed And finallye open a gate to all Heresies But heere are manye absurdities hoodled together without truth or order For First he supposeth most falsely that all the Fathers are reiected by vs. Secondly he confirmeth the expositiō of Fathers to be equal to the determination of the Pope which neither his holy Father nor his owne consortes will graunt Thirdly not euerie one that reiecteth Fathers in some things dooth therefore reiect councels or all the pastors of the Church Finally albeit diuers late Councels were reiected and the testimonies of fathers not admitted without choise yet the definitions of Councels which are apparently deduced out of Scriptures and the Fathers authentical expositions consonant to the rule of faith might bee approued by those which haue authoritie in the Church which euerie priuate man is to followe vnlesse by some equall or greater authoritie that resolution be reuersed But if Kellisons Doctrine were confessed then might the Pope goe shake his eares For what shold we need to goe to him if the Fathers haue Gods holy spirit infallibly assisting them in the exposition of Scriptures againe if denying of the authoritie of Fathers were the opening of a gap to all Heresies thē did the Popes open gaps to al Heresies who in their decretaline expositions of hoc est corpus meum feede my Sheep and drinke ye all of this and infinit such like textes of scriptures decline quite from the common interpretation of Fathers and nothing regard their authoritie The fift Chapter is partly a Scholastical exercise concerning the motiues that may enduce men to beleeue the Christian fayth and partly an inuectiue against vs for that we admit not the rinegued Masse-priestes sent vs hither by the Pope their counterfet miracles And thereupon he would conclude that we want those probable meanes to enduce reasonable men to be of our religion which the Papists haue But first his dispute concerning probable motiues to the fayth is nothing else but a vaine discourse of his owne foolish motions disioynted opinions and improbable fancyes For not onely the Pagans of olde time but also the Turkes now may better alleage antiquity consent authority of mission the subduing of the worlde to their religiō miracles and such like motiues then the Papistes séeing Popery is nothing else but a corruption of Christian religion that is neither so auncient as Arianisme nor so largely spread abroad as Paganisme and Turcisme Neither are the Papistes for learning comparable to the auncient Philosophers Secondly whatsoeuer this K. speaketh of mission it maketh against the Masse-priestes that come both without authority and without any message deliuered by Christ or his Apostles vnto them For neuer shal he prooue the Popes vsurped authority though he should liue to the worldes end nor that Masse-priests are to sacifice for quick and dead and to cut the throat of Princes which be the principal poyntes of their mission Thirdly we offer to prooue that we haue not onely those probable motiues which he speaketh of as miracles consent antiquity and such like to enduce men to like of our religion but also the worde of God the testimony of the auncient apostolike Church and many sure groundes which our aduersaryes want Neither néeded this K. to brag much of Bellarmine or Suarez seeing their positions stand refuted without answer but that he which can say little him selfe must néeds relye on others Fourthly nothing hath this babler to obiect either against the authoritye of our teachers or their doctrine which is not more vnsauery then Colewortes twice or thrice sodden Where he calleth Boy Masse-priestes olde teachers and their doctrine also olde and our teachers and doctrine newe he like a poore disputer beggeth that which he cannot by argument effecte or conuince and like a foolish pleader talketh of matters preiudiciall to him selfe Nay when he shall come to tryall he shall find that the Fathers in all poyntes of fayth are for vs and not for the Pope whose triple-Crowneship and decretaline doctrine they neuer knewe Fiftly where he like a curre barketh at the memory of the renowned Father Bishop Iewel and snarleth at the most famous learned man the Lord of Plessis Marlj as if they had corrupted and mis-alledged Scriptures and Fathers and by vntruthes and weake proofes abused they readers the first is iustified by maister Whitakers against al the barkings of his malicious enimies the second hath verified his allegations against al his accusers by the original words of the authors by him alledged in a late edition of his booke both these verifications stand without reply But if we should goe about to collect all the lyes slaunders impostures corruptiōs falsifications errors fooleries fond conclusions absurd assertions without ground and imperfections of Bellarmine Baronius Suarez Harding Saunders Alan Stapleton and their mates they would fill Cart-loades of volumes Finally all this long discourse is as farre from the purpose as Kellison is farre from learning and honesty For heere hee should reason against the grounds of our Religion But groundes are one thing and motiues another those being certaine these probable and oftentimes not concludent But were hee not a beetle-headed Surueyor as he is a polshorne sacrificer of Baal he would haue forborne to touch this poynt of motiues