In the act of iustification wee say that workes haue no roome because both they are imperfect and also are not done by our own strength but being once iustified we must needs repent and become new creatures walking not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit And this is the doctrine of our Church concerning Iustification 16. Now let vs heare what they say and then weigh both doctrines in the ballance of the sanctuary that wee may see which of them bringeth most glory to the merits of CHRIST and to the power of his satisfaction I will plainely and sincerely God willing set downe the summe of their doctrine First therefore they teach that there is a double iustification the first whereby a man ex iniusto fit iustus of an vniust and wicked man is made iust and good and of a sinner is made righteous the second wherby a man being iust is made more iust and doth encrease in iustice and sanctity according to that Reuel 22. 11. He that is iust let him be more iust Concerning the first iustification some of them affirme that it is the free gift of God and deserued by no precedent workes others that it is merited by congruity but not by condignity but of the second they say that it is gotten and merited by our workes But before both these they make certaine preparations and dispositions whereby a man by the power of his owne free-will stirred vp by grace doth make himselfe fit for iustification namely by the acts of faith feare hope loue repentance and the purpose of a new life all which a man must haue before hee receiue the first grace of iustification and for the obtaining whereof he needs not any grace internally infused but onely offered externally Whereupon they are bold to affirme that the act of Iustification doth emane and proceed Simul ab arbitrio à Deo Both from free-will and from God Now the causes of iustification the Councill of Trent maketh to be these the finall cause Gods glory and mans saluation the efficient Gods mercy the meritorious cause Christs merits the instrumentall the Sacrament of Baptisme but the formall cause which is the chiefest and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dat esse rei giueth being to the thing as the Logicians speake they make to be an inherent righteousnes wrought in vs and inspired into vs by the Spirit of God And this in briefe is the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the iustification of a sinner 17. Wherein let vs obserue three maine and fundamentall differences betwixt their doctrine and ours in all which they raze the foundation and dedignifie the merits of Christ and the mercy of God to extoll the dignitie of man The first in their preparations wee hold that a man cannot any wayes dispose himselfe vnto grace but is wholly fitted and prepared by God and that those acts of preparation as they call them are not fore-runners of iustification but rather fruites and effects thereof they teach the contrary as I haue shewed The second difference is that the workes of a man iustified do not merit increase of grace which they terme the second iustification but as the beginning of grace is from gods mercy alone so the increase and augmentation thereof and perseuerance therein is onely to be ascribed to the worke of Gods spirit according to that of Saint Paul Phil. 1. 6. He that hath begunne this good worke in you will performe it vntill the day of Iesus Christ this we hold they the contrary The third difference is in the formall cause of our iustification which they maintaine to be an inherent righteousnes within vs euen the righteousnes of Sanctification We on the other side affirme that the formall cause of our iustification is the righteousnes of Christ Iesus not dwelling in vs nor proceeding from vs but imputed vnto vs by the mercy of God 18. Hauing thus layd open both our doctrines let vs examine and trye which of them giueth most glory vnto God and most exalts the merites of Christ for that must needs be the truth and which lifteth vp highest the proud nature of man for that must needs be falshood and errour especially seeing that Gods dignity and the dignity of man Christs merits and mans are as it were two skales of a ballance whâ—reof the one rising the other falls the one lifted vp the other is pressed downe First therefore touching the workes of preparation whether doe they more magnifie Gods mercie that say a man cannot prepare and dispose himselfe at all to grace but is wholly disposed and prepared by God or they that affirme that a man can prepare himselfe by his owne endeuour assisted outwardly with the grace of God the one makes Gods mercy the sole cause of iustification the other but the adiâ—vant and helping cause And whether doe they aduance most the dignity of man that say that a man can do nothing of himselfe for his owne iustification or they that say that a man can doe something to the preparation of himselfe to that great worke the one attributeth some dignity to man the other none at all we affirme the one part the Romanists the contrary and therefore our doctrine tends more to the debasing of mans worth and consequently to the exalting of Gods glory then theirs doth 19. True it is like Ferrimen that looke East and go West they with their great Grand-father Pelagius talke of grace when they meane nothing but nature and so deny indeede that which they affirme in word if the matter bee examined according to truth For Pelagius confessed a necessity of grace in all spirituall actions and yet was condemned for an enemy to grace by the Church of God because hee vnderstood not by grace the sanctifying worke of Gods spirit but an outward moouing and perswading power assisting mans free-will to the effecting of his owne saluation The very same is the doctrine of the Romanists as hath beene declared and therefore wee may iustly condemne them as enemies to the grace of God whatsoeuer they bragge and vaunt to the contrary 20. Secondly touching the second iustification which standeth as they say in the augmentation and encrease of our iustice let the most partiall Reader iudge whether tends most to the magnifying of Gods glory their doctrine which teacheth that wee merite the encrease of our iustice by our owne workes or ours which teacheth that both the seed and the growth both the roote and the fruite both the beginning and encrease of all righteousnesse is the worke of Gods spirit alone preuenting assisting and vpholding vs to the end and that these seuerall workes of grace are bestowed vpon vs not for any merites of our owne but simply and entirely for the merits of Christ Iesus I but they will say works doe not merit iustification because they are ours but because they are works of grace which grace floweth from the fountaine of
vero audent cum infimus poene ex nostris vnus comminus cum ijs manus conserere in arenam prouocare non reformidat vnde quid gregum ductores efficere possunt si annitantur par est illos reputare partim etiam quod Pontificiorum suae persuadendo religioni quamplurimos strenuam operam nauasse video Euangelicorum autem qui hoc idem scriptionis genus per certa argumentorum motuumve capita sunt sequuti paucissimos sane recordor ne dicam nulios Vestram igitur in tutelam fratres meas hasce ratiunculas accipite aequis animis atque oculis legite discutite Censuram vestram non recuso dum preces modo vestras amorem mihi non denegetis Hic Romanae religionis septem sacramenta Turpitudinem Impietatem Falsitatem Nouitatem Idololatriam Scripturarum vituperationem Ignorantiae defensionem licet contueri de quibus princeps Impuritas sequentium in rationum prima secunda in tertia autem quarta duodecima Impietas aperietur Nouitas quam nobis obiectant in eos ipsos totam per vndecimam regeretur Falsitas in octaua nona dilucebit Idolorum cultus in septima Scripturarum contemptio simul Ignorantiae defensio in quinta sexta decima patefient Frement frendebunt sat scio Iesuitae caeterique sacrificuli ac omissis forte rationum ipsarum ponderibus momentis hinc atque illinc vt eorum moris est aliquidpiam excerpent quod obtrectent arrodant sed ringantur per me quidem rumpantur invidia nihili illorum siue calumnias moror siue maledicta dum vos modo propitios mihi habeam quorum inprimis vereor reuereor iudicium Quos propterea oro obtestor vt siqua in re de veritatis scopo deflexerim comiter in viam me reducatis si minus ac debui fortiter prudenter hac in arena demicârim imbecillitati id meae condonetis praeuaricationi nequaquam tribuatis Ego certe hoc quantillumcunque est Deo nostro minime displiciturum confido quippe non ignarus seruulum qui duobus extalentis rem fecit Domino suo aeque ac illum alterum acceptum probatumque extitisse qui decem ex quinque lucrifecit Interim fratres mutui amoris vinculo nos inter nos complectamur vt quemadmodum contra sponsam Christi aduersarij nostri vt olim Pilatus Herodes contra Christum ipsum coniunctissimè conspirant consentiunt Sic nos pari voluntatum consensu eademque aut etiam maiore animorum conspiratione aduersus Antichristum illiusque astipulatorum â—ssectatorum omnium vires depugnemus Quod eò vt fortius foeliciusque fiat facessant à nobis precor derebus minutulis lites omnes discordiae quibus nimio plus iam diu assueuimus Reprimamus nunc demum ipsinos ne quam de sui temporis quibusdam Iraeneus habuit querimoniam quod proptermodicas quaslibet causas magnum gloriosum Christi corpus conscinderent quam etiam de suae aetatis consimilibus alijs Nazianzenus quod essent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eadem de nobis ni prouidemus iusta querela esse possit Quin Apostoli illud ad Corinthios de re exgenere indifferentium disserentis potius meminerimus Siquis videtur contentiosus esse nos eiusmodi consuetudinem non habemus neque Ecclesia Dei eiusdem aliud ad Galatas Si alij alios mordetis deuoratis videte ne vicissim alij ab alijs consumamini Deus pacis lucis ab Antichristi illiusque gregalium impetu insidijs vos omnes protegat defendat ac coelestem suam ad ciuitatem nouam Hierosolymam sartos tectos tandem perducat T. B Motiue I. THat Religion which in many points giueth liberty to sinne is not the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. Motiue II. That Religion which maintaynes by the grounds thereof things forbidden by all lawes both of God of Nature and of Man cannot be the true Religion bat such is the Religion of the Romane Church ergo Motiue III. That Religion which imitateth the Iewes in those things wherein ther are enemies to Christ cannot be the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo. Motiue IIII. That Religion which derogâ—teth from the glory of God in the worke of our Redemption and giueth part thereof vnto man cannot be the truth of God but such is the Popish Religion ergo Motiue V. That Religion deserueth to bee suspected which refuseth to bee tâ—yâ—d by the Scriptures as the perfect and alone rule of faith and will be iudged â—ryed by none but it selfe But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo Motiue VI. That Religion doth iustly deserue to be suspected which doth purâ—oâ—â—ly disgrace the sacred Scriâ—tures But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome â—â—go Motiue VII That Religion is to be abhorred which maintayneth commandeth and practiseth grosse anâ— palpable Idolatry but so doth the Religion of the Church of Rome â—rgo c. Motiue VIII That Religion which implyeth manifold contradiction in it selfe and is contrary to it selfe in many things cannot bee the true Religion but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. Motiue IX That Religion whâ—se doctrines are in many points apparently opposite to the word of God and tâ—e doctrine of the Gospell cannot be the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. Motiue X. That Religion which nourisheth most barbarous and grosse ignorance amongst the people and forbiddeth the knowledge and vnderstanding of the grounds of the Christian saith cannot be the truth but this doth the Romish Religion ergo c. Motiue XI That Religion which was neuer knowne nor heard of in the Apostles time nor in the primitiue Church cannot â—e the truth but such is the Romish Religion in most points thereof therefore that cannot be the truth Motiue XII That Church which maintayneth it selfe and the Religion professed by it and seeketh to dâ—saduantage the Aduersaries by vnlawfull vniust and vngodly meanes cannot bee the true Church of God nor that Religion the truth of God by the grounds whereof they are warranted to act such deuillish practices but such is the practice of the Romish Church and therfore neither their Church nor their Religion can be of God Motiue XIII That Religion the doctrines whereof are more safe both in respect Gods glory Mans saluation and Christian charity is to be preferred before that which is not so safe but dangerous But the doctrine of the Protestants Religion is more safe in all those respects and of the Papists more dangerous ergo that is to be preferred before this and consequently this to be reiected THIRTEENE FORCIBLE MOTIVES DISSWADING FROM COMMVNION With the Church of ROME Whereby is demonstratiuely prooued that the now Romish Religion so farre forth as
it is Romish is not the true Catholique Religion of CHRIST but the seduction of Antichrist THE PREAMBLE THat which Ireneus an ancient and godly Father of the Church speaketh of all Heretickes that all the Helleborus in the world is not sufficient to purge them that they may vomit out their follie may truely be spoken of the Church of Rome and her adherents that it is a difficult matter if not almost impossible to reclaime her from her errors and to heale her wounds All the balme of Gilead will not do it nor all the spirituall phisicke that can be ministred for there are two sinnes which of all other are most hard to bee relinquished Whoredome and Drunkennesse the one because it is so familiar and naturall to the flesh the other because it breedeth by custome such an vnquenchable thirst in the stomacke as must euer anon be watered with both which spirituall diseases the Church of ROME is infected She is the Whore of Babylon with whome the Kings of the Earth haue committed fornication and who hath made drunke with the Wine of her fornications all the Inhabitants of the Earth In regard of the first Ieremie prophecied of her that though paines be taken to heale her yet shee could not be healed And in regard of the second Saint Paul prophecied that GOD would send them strong delusion that they should beleeue lies that all they might bee damned that receiued not the loue of the truth Notwithstanding though the hope bee as little of the reclaiming of most of them as of turning an Eunuch into a man or making a blacke Moore white yet I haue propounded in this discourse a strong potion compounded of ingredients which if they bee not past cure may purge and cleanse them of their disease and reduce them to the sanity of Christian Religion Which if their queasie stomackes shall eyther refuse to take or hauing taken shall vomit vp againe and not suffer them to worke vpon their consciences yet this benefit will arise that God shall be glorified the truth manifested and all that loue the truth confirmed and they also themselues that are so drowned in error that they will rather pull in others ouer head and eares vnto them and so drowne together then be drawne out of the myre by any helpe shall be conuinced in their consciences of their most grosse apostacie With this confidence towards Gods glorie and the good of his Church though with little hope of recouering them from their obdurate blindnesse I enter into my intended taske desiring the Lord to giue a blessing to these poore labours which I consecrate to my Lord and Master Iesus Christ whom I serue and the Church his Spouse of which I professe my selfe to bee one of the meanest members MOTIVE I. That Religion which in many points giueth libertie to sinne is not the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of ROME ergo c. THe first proposition is an vndoubted truth and needs no confirmation especially seeing S. Iames describeth true Religion by these attributes pure and vndefiled And S. Paul calleth it the mysterie of godlinesse and the doctrine according to godlinesse And herein consisteth an essentiall difference betwixt the true Religion and all false ones so that it must needs follow that that Religion which is essentially the cause and occasion of sinne and openeth a wide window to vngodlinesse cannot be the truth of God but must needs fetch it beginning from the deuill who is the author of all euill The Gospell indeede may by accident be the occasion of euill as S. Paul saith The law is the occasion of sinne for it stirs vp contention and strife and discouers the corruptions of Mans heart and by opposing against them as a damme against a streame makes them to swell and boyle and burst forth beyond the bounds howbeit here the cause is not in the Gospell or Lawe but in the corruption of mans heart which the more it is stirred the more it rageth and striueth to shew it selfe But neuer yet was the doctrine of godlinesse the cause of wickednesse nor the pure and vndefiled Religion of Christ Iesus an essentiall procurer and prouoker vnto sinne 3. This therefore being thus manifest all the question and difficultie remaineth in the second proposition to wit that the Religion of the Romish Church is such as openeth a gappe vnto sinne and giueth notorious libertie and scope to vngodlinesse and that not by way of accident or occasion but necessarily as the cause to the effect Qua data necessariò soquitur effectus as the Logicians speake and therefore being an â—npure and defiled Religion and the mysterie of iniquitie not the mysterie of godlinesse it cannot be that true Religion which Christ our Sauiour brought with him from heauen and left here vpon earth blamelesse and vnspotted like himselfe to be the way to lead vs vnto heauen where hee is 4. That the Romish Religion is a polluted and defiled Religion tending to libertie and loosenesse Let the indifferent Reader iudge by these few instances deriued out of the verie bowels of their Church and being articles of their faith and grounds of their Religion And first to beginne with their doctrine of dispensations whereby they teach that the Pope hath power to dispense with the word of God and with euery commandement of the Law and not onely with the Law but with the Gospell and Epistles of Paul to what horrible loosenesse and lewdnesse of life doth it tend for to omit that it containeth in it open blasphemie by their owne rule which is that In praecepto superioris non debet dispensare inferior the inferiour may not dispense with the precept of the superiour by which the Pope dispensing with Gods lawe is not oneâ—y equalled but exalted aboue God what sinne is there bee it neuer so hainous which there is not libertie giuen to commit by this licencious doctrine 5. Incest But Pope Martin the first gaue a dispensation to one to marrie his owne sister and not his wiues sister only as some of the Romish crue would dawbe ouer this filthie wall because it is in Antoninus Cum quadam eius germana for Siluester Prieriâ— Bartholomeus Fumus and Angelus de Clauafio speake more plainely Cumsua germana that is with his owne naturall sister Another Pope dispensed with Henry the eight to marrie his sister in law and with Philip of Spaine to marrie his owne Niece and Clement the 7. licenced Petrus Aluaradus the Spaniard to marrie two sisters at once and no maruaile seeing it is the very doctrine of the Romish Church that the Pope can dispense in all the degrees of Consanguinitie and Affinitie saue onely with the Father and his daughter and with the Mother and her Son Sodometrie But Pope Sixtus the fourth licensed the Cardinall of Saint Lucie and his familie to vse freely that sinne not to bee named in the
and benefit which we haue to in the merits of the Saints in their iudgement was by vertue of the Communion of Saints that as the members of one body enioy the strength and vigor that is in each other so the members of Christ militant receiue a certaine benefit from the gifts of God bestowed vpon the Saints triumphant and doe as it were merite by their merits because they are all members of one and the same mysticall body But the Romanists hold that the Saints doe supererogate that is hauing more merits then they need themselues doe conferre some of their superabundance vpon their poore brethren that want Fiftly the Fathers when they spake of praying to the Saints did not speake positiuely but tropically and figuratiuely by hyperbolicall and Rhetoricall Apostophers as may appeare plainely in the Orations of Nazianzen and other of their writings But the Romanists conclude positiuely and doctrinally without any Rhetoricall figures or Hyperbolicall elocutions Sixtly as Cassander confesseth when the Fathers said to the Saints Orate pronobis they meant Vtinam oretis pro nobis Would to God they would pray for vs and so they were rather wishes then prayers But the Romanists admit no such extenuation but flatly affirme that wee ought directly to pray vnto them as our Patrons Protectors and Intercessors And lastly the Fathers relyed not vpon the intercession of Saints except there were in themselues a care and conscience of a godly life but in Popery notorious wicked and vngodly persons that neuer thinke vpon amendment of their liues but perseuere in their sinnes without repentance yet doe assure themselues to bee saued by the merits and intercession of the Saints And thus howsoeuer they make a shew of Fathers to cloke their Idolatry withal yet the Fathers if they be rightly vnderstood are as much different from them as blacke is from white And the Fathers might bee free from Idolatrie when as they remaine guiltie 66. The third and last way whereby they turne the blessed Saints into Idols is by putting their trust and confidence in their merits and mediation which kinde of spirituall worship is due only vnto the diuine Maiestie as hath been shewed The truth of which assertion may be proued first by their doctrine secondly by the publike practice of their Church Touching their doctrine to omit the impious impudent and blasphemous opinions of their Monkes and Friers who haue egregiously exceeded the bounds of all pietie in this point left the Romanists should say that they were but priuate mens conceits and not the receiued doctrines of the Church I will onely relate some few sentences out of their most publicke and athenticke writings 67. And to begin with Peter Lumbard he saith that the Saints doe intercede for vs both by their merite and by their affection therefore we pray vnto them that their merits may helpe vs and that they would will our good because if they will it God also will will it and it shall be done Thus hee makes Gods will to depend vpon theirs and not theirs vpon Gods and consequently more trust to be reposed in them then in God Alexander Alensis the most ancient of the Schoolemen writeth that the Saints are to bee prayed vnto for three causes First eyther for our pouerty in meriting that where our merits faile others may patronize vs or for our pouertie in contemplation that wee not being able to behold the highest light in it selfe may behold the same in the Saints or for our pouertie in louing because the efficacie of prayer ariseth from deuotion and for the most part an imperfect man doth feele himselfe more â—ffected towards the Saints then towards God Secondly for the glory of the Saints that whilst wee obtaine that which wee desire by their suffrages wee may magnifie them And thirdly for the reuerence of God that a sinner that dares not come vnto him in his owne person may fly to the Saints and implore their helps Bonauenture affirmeth that the Saints by their merits haue not onely deserued happinesse and glory to themselues but also by their merits of supererogation haue power to helpe others that pray vnto them And againe he saith He that was before vnworthy by praying to the Saints is made worthy Aquinas giueth this reason for praying to the Saints Quia vltima reducuntur in Deum per media Because the extremes are reduced to God by the meanes therfore Gods benefits are conuayed vnto vs by the meanes of the Saints Biel saith that we ought to fly to the refuge of the Saints that we may be saued by their merits and prayers and he saith further that God hath giuen halfe his Kingdome to the blessed Virgine the Queene of heauen as Assuerus promised to Queene Ester and so retayning iustice to himselfe he hath graunted mercy to her to be exercised And vpon this ground is that saying of Bernhardine that we must appeale from the Court of Gods iustice to the Court of his Mothers mercy But Antoninus the Archbishop of Florence is more playne then them all for hee telleth vs That it must needs be that to whomsoeuer the blessed Virgin turneth her eyes they must be iustified and saued And againe that Christ is not only an Aduocate but a Iudge and therefore a sinner dareth not approch vnto him but that God hath prouided vs of an Aduocatresse which is sweet and milde and in whom is no bitternesse And againe Mary is that Throne of grace spoken of Heb. 4. 16. to whom we must approch with confidence that we may obtayne mercy and find grace in the time of neede Againe he calleth the Virgin Mary the gate of heauen because whatsoeuer grace euer came out of heauen into the world came out by her meanes and whatsoeuer thing entreth into heauen must enter by her and so he calleth the other Saints Portas coeli The gates of heauen Because by their prayers they carry vs into heauen Sotus saith that the Saints are coadiutors and cohelpers in the worke of our saluation Many such-like blasphemous sayings might bee alledged out of their subtile Schoolemen whereby it euidently appeareth that in those dayes the poore ignorant Romanists were taught to repose the trust and confidence of their saluation in the merits and mediation of the Saints yea and that more then in Christ as that publike Picture which was extant in many of their Churches doth more fully prooue when as Christ our Sauiour was painted like a sterne man casting darts and the people flying for succour to the Virgine Mary who interposed her selfe and shewing her Sonne her brests receiued his darts in her garment If this bee not besides Idolatrie horrible and fearefull blasphemy let all men iudge 68. But what is the doctrine of latter times any whit purer no verily for the Councill of Trent that was called in pretence to this end to reforme abuses in the Church and to restore Religion
Peters successor must be in the same case that is neither to erre personally nor iudicially or if he erre one way then also to bee subiect to error the other Lastly experience hath taught that Popes may erre euen as they are Popes and that iudicially yea and also haue beene condemned for Heretikes As Honorius the first whom three generall Councils condemned for a Meâ—othelâ—te And Iohn the two and twentieth who was constrained to recant his iudgement touching the soule by the Vniuersitie of Paris And Iohn the three and twentieth who was condemned for an Heretike by the Council of Constance for denying the immortality of the soule And diuers others who not onely in their priuate opinions but in their publike doctrines haue taught and maintained notorious errours 67. Another doctrine of theirs is that the Pope is the head of the Church and yet they denie not but sometimes the Pope is no true nor sound member of the Church how can hee be the head of the Church that is no sound member thereof nay no member at all not so much as the taile as the Iewish Rabbines call the Bishop of Rome in disdaine except their last distinction helpe them quatenus Papa and quatenus homo I know not how they will rid themselues out of this snare and yet that will not helpe them neither in this case for is it likely that Christ will make a reprobate the head of his Church and commit the cuâ—â—â—dy of the same to an Atheist an Heretike or an Epicure or a Necromancer or a monster of nature as all stories â—all Iohn 12. and as many of them haue beene Surely either as he is a Pope he is not the Churches head or as hee is a man hee must needs be a member of the same If they say that wee giue vnto a King the same title of head and gouernor of the Church who notwithstanding is often a tyrant and waster of the Church and a very reprobate I answere that in attributing these titles of dignity to Kings wee doe not positiuely set downe what euery one is for if hee bee a destroyer of the Church hee is not an vpholder of it but what euery one ought to bee in regard of his office but the Romanists absolutely set it downe that though the Pope be a wolfe wasting the flocke of Christ and though hee lead by his doctrine and example infinite soules with him to hell yet hee is still actually the head of the Church quatenus Papa and no man may say vnto him Why doe you so 68. Againe it was decreed by two Councils and those assembled authorized and confirmed by Popes themselues that the Councill was aboue the Pope and yet the Councill of Laterane vnder Pope Leo the tenth decreeth peremptorily that the Pope is aboue all Councils so also most of the moderne Romanists affirme Now if the decrees of Councils lawfully assembled and approoued by Popes bee the doctrines of the Church then here is one doctrine quite contrary to another one Councill opposite to another yea one Pope to another which is no new nor strange thing but ordinary in the Church of Rome As witnesse Pope Iohn the two and twentieth and Pope Nicholas about the question of our Sauiours manner of possessing earthly goods and Pope Celestine and Pope Innocent the third in the question of diuorce in the case of heresie and Pope Pelagius and Pope Gregory the first in the question of putting away the wiues of Subdeacons one of these crossing the other iudicially and one gain saying what the other defended And most notorious is that which diuers Chronologers testifie of Pope Stephen the sixt how hee decreed in a Councill that they who were ordained Bishops by Pope Forâ—â—sus his predecessour were not ordained lawfully because the man was wicked by whom they were ordained therfore he did vnordain them and reordaine them againe thus Stephen iudicially crossed Formâ—sus and hee againe was crossed and condemned by Pope Iohn the ninth euen for this fact and his new ordainings marched with new baptizings 69. Lastly they constantly maintaine that the Pope is not Antichrist and yet they affirme that hee is the Vicar of Christ heere on earth a flat contradiction for the word Antichrist signifieth not onely an enemie vnto Christ but also one that taketh vpon him the office and authority of Christ the prâ—position 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 affording naturally and properly both significations as appeareth in these two wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an opposite and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Proconsull in the first whereof it signifieth opposition and the second substitution Now then if the Pope bee Christs Vicar generall on earth then he is in the last sense Antichrist and beeing so in the last sense it is most likely that hee is also the same in the first because the Antichrist spoken of in the Scripture is described to be such a one as is not an open and outward but a couert and disguised enemie hauing two hornes like the Lambe that is counterfeting the humility and meeknesse of Christ and making a glorious profession of religion with a shew of counterfeit holinesse when notwithstanding hee speaketh lyes in hypocrisie and vttereth wordes like the dragon and is the greatest enemy to Christ Iesus and his Gospel that euer was so that in that hee is Christs Vicar hee is Antichrist by their owne confession in that sense and being so is probably Antichrist also in the other because the true Antichrist must bee both the one and the other And so for the conclusion of this point wee haue not onely the mystery of iniquity that is Antichristianisme in the manifold contradictions and oppositions thereof but euen Antichrist himselfe lurking in his den professing himselfe and his followers to bee the onely true Church of God and pretending himselfe to be the Prince of the couenant as Saint Ierome speaketh that is asmuch as to say the Vicar of Christ and without doubt as the sweet harmonie in Christian Religion and euery part thereof with it selfe is a pregnant argument of the infallible truth thereof so the miserable opposition and contrariety in the Religion of the Church of Rome and that most of the doctrines therein contained either with themselues or with other as I haue in part here shewed leauing a fuller demonstration thereof to some other that shal more deeply search into them doe euidently euince that it is the Religion of Antichrist and therefore not onely to be suspected but euen to bee abhorred of all them that loue the truth or that desire the saluation of their soules The IX MOTIVE That Religion whose doctrines are in many points apparently opposite to the word of God and the doctrine of the Gospell cannot bee the trueth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. 1 IN the Chapter going before I haue shewed how the Romish Religion is contrary to it selfe
the Elders of Ephesus I haue deliuered vnto you the whole counsaile of God Now if hee deliuered to them the whole counsaile of God then no part of his counsaile that concerned the mysterie of Christian Religion was vndeliuered Besides it is as certaine that that Church which next succeeded the Apostles was the most pure and absolute Church whether for doctrine or manners matter or forme that euer was in the world and therefore to degenerate from that must needes be to degenerate from the puritie and sanctity of Religion And againe it cannot bee denyed that though some heresies were broached euen in the Apostles times and were coetaneae Apostolorum as Tertullian noteth and though the primitiue age of the Church after the Apostles was most pestered with Heretikes yet euermore the truth preuailed both in regard of birthright and predominance And therefore they that will plead antiquitie must both prescribe from the Apostles time and must haue a good title also to hold by for these two things are necessarily required to a iust prescription as the Lawyers speake Bonus titulus A good title and Legittimum tempus A lawfull time A good title is that which is warranted by the diuine Law and a lawfull time is that which is fetcht from Christ Iesus and his Apostles both these concurring together are an inuincible argument of the truth The first proposition therefore must needes be infallibly true 3. And so I leaue it and come to the second proposition the truth whereof shall bee manifested in two poynts first in respect of the outward face and fashion of their Church and secondly in respect of the principall doctrines which are proper vnto them as they are the Romish Synagogue 3. For the first The outward face of the Church deuideth it selfe into three branches first into the persons that exercise preeminence and authoritie in it and secondly into the iurisdiction and authoritie exercised by those persons and thirdly into the outward ceremonies thereof In all these the Church of Rome is degenerate from the Primitiue and Apostolicall puritie 4. The principall persons of the Romish Hierarchie are these The Pope first as the ring-leader next the Cardinals his Counsellors of state then Archbishops and Bishops his assistants and lastly the shaueling Priests his vassals to which body may be added as excrements an infinite rabble of religious Orders as Monks Fryers and Heâ—mits with such like and of Fryers the Dominicanes the Franciscanes the Austinians the Ambrosians the Minorites the Gilbertines the Crossebearers the Cisterensians the Blacke the White the Gray the Bare-footed the Begging with a number more and to conclude the Iesuites which as they are the taile of all the rest for the time so they are the head of all the rest for vill nous conspiracies bloudy plots diuelâ—ish deuices and hellish practices Now of all thesâ— Bishops onely excepted wee finde not so much as any mention neither in the writing of the Apostles nor in the age next succeeding after them for though the name Pope Papa being a word of the Syracusan Language and signifying as much as Pater Father be of great antiquitie yet as a Iesuite of their owne confesseth with others it was a common name to all Bishops as appeareth both in Cyprian and Ruffinus till Gregory the seuenth in an assembly held at Rome decreed that onely the Bishops of Rome should bee called Popes But as touching Cardinals the matter is more grosse for the first birth and originall of that name can be deriued no higher then eyther from Gregory the firsts time or Pope Siluester or Marcellus or Pontianus by their owne confession and therefore some of them ingenuously acknowledge that the Order of Cardinals is not ex iure diuino by Gods ordinance though others no lesse foolishly then impudently would fixe their foundation vpon these words of the Scripture Domini sunt Cardines terrae The hinges or the pillars of the earth are the Lords Therefore Cardinals are of God which is as good a consequent as his that would prooue that Heretikes ought to be put to death by Scripture because Saint Paul said Haereticum hominem deuita c. as hath beene shewed before As for the name of Bishops wee deny not but it is found in Scripture and so Archbishop may also be warranted by the same authositie as signifying nothing else but a chiefe Bishop but how farre the Romish Archbishops and Bishops are degenerate from their office described by the Scripture all the world can witnesse for the Scripture Bishops were diligent Preachers these are idle Prelates they were persecuted these are persecutors they were humble persons these are proud Princes they were holy men seeking onely the aduancement of the Kingdome of Christ these are profane worldlings seeking their owne gaine and pompe and carnall honours all this is confessed of them and lamented by Espensaeus one of the same ranke who thus writeth It was no lesse a wonder in olde times saith he to be called a Bishop and not to preach then he is now as rare as a monster who is seen to performe that dutie and againe I know saith he some learned Bishops who standing vpon their Gentilitie forsooth and greatnesse hold it a matter of seruitude and basenesse to be exercised in preaching because their predecessors were not accustomed thereunto 5. As touching Priests in the new Testament phrase all Christians are called Priests and they whose office it is to dispose the mysteries of the Gospell Ministers and Elders and Pastors but now none may haue that name but their anoynted Shauelings who as they say create their Creator by fiue coniuring words and offer him vp vpon the altar as a Sacrifice propitiatorie for the quicke and the dead For albeit the word Priest is deriued from presbyter which signifieth an Elder and in that sense might well be giuen to the Ministers of the new Testament yet because it is in common vse of speech taken for one appointed to sacrifice which in Latine is Sacerdos and in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And because the Ministers of the Gospell are not once named by these termes in the new Testament therefore they that in this signification terme the Ministers of the Gospell by the name of Priests degenerate from the true meaning of the Scripture but what should I speake of the name seeing the office of these Shauelings is so contrarie to that function which was practised by the Apostles and Disciples of Iesus Christ for the Apostles are neuer said to sacrifice Christ on the Altar as these Shauelings are pretended to doe Their office was to minister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not to sacrifice they receiued of the Lord and gaue vnto the people but these create a Sacrifice of themselues and then offer it vp to the Lord. Here then is a plaine declining of the Romish Priests from the true Ministers of the Primitiue Church both in name and office
vsed by Christ himselfe or his Apostles and therefore must of necessity be grosse and palpable Innouations 29. From the Eucharist let vs looke backe to the ceremonies of Baptisme and first to their baptizing of Bels and of Gallies and Ships secondly exorcisme and exufflation thirdly anointing with oyle and crossing and fourthly salting and spittling lastly threefold Immersion or dipping the Infant all which are palpable nouelties so confessed by the Romanists themselues neither can they euer shew that these ceremonies were either commanded by Christ or practised by Iohn Baptist or the Apostles and though some of them as the crosse and anointing are of great antiquity and were then and may bee still lawfully vsed as things indifferent yet in their Church where such an opinion of necessity is laid vpon them that Baptisme is not effectuall without them they are meere Innouations no wayes warranted by any antiquity 30. Lastly I propound as their feasting so their fasting dayes together with the manner of fasting vsed amongst them as first the Lent fast of fourty dayes which their Iesuite Azorius confesseth not to bee of diuine ordinance and the variablenesse of the vse thereof doth prooue no lesse some Churches continuing the same full sixe weeks as the Illyrians Lybians Egypt and Palestina some seuen weekes as they of Constantinople with the nations adioyning some but three weekes and those dispersed within the six or seuen as occasion serued some againe three weekes immediatly going before Easter and lastly some two onely as the followers of Montanus all this is recorded by Sozomene in his History by which it is euidently euinced that this fast was no Apostolicall institution nor yet any childe of true antiquity for if it had there could not haue beene any such variety in the obseruation thereof 31. Secondly their fast of 4. times coÌ„monly called Ember weekes was first deuised by Pope Calixtus as would witnes Polidore Virgill if he were not gelded by these strange bookpurgers but though he be silent yet their own Platina telleth asmuch Thirdly their tying of fasts to certaine set dayes as the fourth and sixt day of the weeke was not allowed in Saint Augustines time for hee thus writeth against Vrbicus that stroue for the Saturdayes fast I read in deed that wee are commanded to fast but which ought to bee the dayes of our fasting I finde not prescribed in the Euangelicall or Apostolicall writings nor in his scholler Primasius his age for thus sayth he There is no Law set down concerning fasting but as euery man can or will nor in Socrates time who liued about the yeere 440. for hee plainly testifieth that the rites and obseruations of fasting were by the Apostles left to euery mans free liberty and choyce 32. Lastly their manner of fasting which is twice to refresh their bodies on the fasting day at noone by a small dinner and at night by a short supper Bellarmine himselfe confesseth to bee contrary to the ancient custome which was to eate but one meale on the fast day and that a supper and doth also giue diuers reasoÌ„s of this mutatioÌ„ As first that thogh it bee tolerated in their Church yet it is not commanded Secondly that those customes which are not grounded vpon Gods word may by ecclesiasticall Lawes bee varyed according to the diuersity of time place thirdly that when the ancients broke off their fast at the ninth houre they vsed to dyne at the sixt that is noone and therefore when as many doe ordinarily dyne at the third houre they may by like proportion breake off their fast at the sixt these be Bellarmines reasons to maintaine this Innouation whereby we may both behold what silly props hee hath to vphold his rotten cause and also that by his owne confession this is a meere nouelty and therefore he concludes that notwithstanding these forenamed reasons yet they doe better who after the ancient custome eate nothing till the ninth houre and in Lent till the euening And thus wee see how in the principall ceremonies of their Church they haue degenerate from the vsage and custome of all pure antiquity 33. Thus much of the outward face of their Church Now let vs examine a little their doctrines wherein they differ from vs which are the sinewes and nerues thereof here I might referre the Reader ouer vnto our learned and godly Country-man Doctour White lately deceased who in his high-way to the true Church obiecteth eight points wherein the moderne Church of Rome hath varyed from that which formerly was maintained notwithstanding I will also a little touch vpon the same strings adding somewhat more both in points and proofes then is there deliuered that the Reader may haue also heere some satisfaction concerning these matters 34. First therefore it is an article of the Romish faith that the Virgin Mary whom wee honour as a blessed woman and the mother of our Lord was conceiued and borne without the staine of originall sinne This doctrine was decreed 〈◊〉 an article of faith in the Councill of Basill in the yeere 1431. and afterwards was approoued by the Councill of Trent and by Pope Sixtus the fourth yea and all that take any degree in the profession of diuinity in the vniuersity of Paris first sweare that they will defend this prerogatiue of the Virgin Mary Now that this is a nouelty appeareth first because it was not receiued as an article of faith before the Councill of Basill Secondly because the Fathers generally either vtterly denie it to bee a truth or at least doubt of it Saint Chrysostome sâ—â—tly denyeth it Saint Bernard calleth it in plaine termes a nouelty Caietane reckoneth fifteene fathers to haue beene of a contrary opinion others two hundreth others three hundreth as witnesseth Salmeron the Iesuite and lastly Canus peremptorily affirmeth that all the Fathers contradicted it And it is to be noted that whereas Bellarmine produceth twelue Fathers for the proofe thereof not one of them doe directly affirme it except one or two Thirdly because the Elder Schoolemen with one consent disapprooued it as Dominicus Bannes Turrecremata Thomas Aquinas Bonauenture and others in so much that in this point they are driuen to this grosse shift That yonger diuines are more apprehensiue of truths then were the more ancient Doctours Bellarmine I confesse in this point accuseth vs of slendering their doctrine because hee sayth it was neuer held in their Church as an article of saith as wee say it is but by his leaue if it was the decree of one Councill though not confirmed by the Pope as he saith the Councill of Basill was not and was allowed by another Councill confirmed by the Pope to wit the Councill of Trent as an holy opinion and agreeable to the Catholike faith and approued by diuers Popes as hee confesseth and defended generally in their Church not onely by doctrine but by a solemne obseruation of a festiuall day in memoriall
medicines and cold by hot light by darkenesse and darkenesse by light Now trueth and falshood good and euill godlinesse and vngodlinesse are thus contrary and therefore naturally expelling each other they cannot bee meanes of each others preseruation that cannot then bee the trueth which secketh to with-hold it selfe by falshood nor true Religion which is a doctrine according to godlinesse which maintaineth it selfe by vniust vngodly and wicked practices this is natures voyce to which reason subscribeth when it concludeth that it is not onely improbable but impossible that Vertue should seeke for Vices helpe to fortifie it selfe withall or trueth for falshood to maintaine it seeing the chiefe essence of Vertue is to fly Vice and of Trueth to bee free from Falshood Plntarchs Morals Aristotles Ethicks Tullies Offices and all practiâ—ke of Philosophy auoucheth this to be true but if from nature and reason the hand-maides wee ascend to Religion the Mistris wee shall finde in Scripture this vndeniable maxime Euill is not to bee done that good may come of it and therefore they which shall doe so Saint Paul sayth Their damnation is iust whence it followeth that deuilish and mischieuous practices vndertaken for defence of Religion and warranted by the grounds thereof doe both argue a rotten Religion for like mother like daughter according to the Prouerbe and also prooue the professours and practicers thereof to bee lyable to the iust damnation alloted by the Spirit of God to such wicked persons there is no cuasion from this conclusion except they say that their practices are not euill which whether they bee or no the particulars of the second proposition shall propound to the iudgement of him that will with an indifferent eye looke vnto them and so I leaue this first proposition fortified with three strong rampiers of Nature Reason and Religion and come to the second wherein the pith and marrow of the argument consisteth 3. That the Church of Rome is guilty of such vngodly courses for the maintainance of it selfe and their Religion though miserable experience doth sufficiently prooue yet because whilst things are considered in grosse they hide much of their worth and weight therefore it shall not be a misse to display them in particular and to offer them by retaile to such as haue a minde to apprehend the true value of their counterfeit wares In these sixe particulars therefore to omit many other I arraigne them as guilty before God and men first of horrible treason secondly of cruell murther thirdly of damnable periury fourthly of grosse lying fift of impudent and malicious slaundering and lastly of apparent forgery and these be the propps and pillars of their Religion by these they labour to procure credit to themselues and disgrace to vs and with these weapons they fight against all that oppose themselues against their damned opinions 4. Touching their treasons periuries and cruelties they are sufficiently discouered in the first and second reasons before going to which I referre the Reader for his full satisfaction onely note that as their practices haue beene notorious in these kindes so they are deriued fundamentally from the grounds of their Religion notorious I say for who hath not heard of the soule treacheries and conspiracies practised by Popes and their Agents against Kings Emperours some they haue deposed some prisoned some murthered some expelled their kingdomes some betrayed into the hands of their enemies some persecuted and vndermined and that by treacherous plots and hellish deuices to omit all others and to confine my speach to our owne Countrey the pretended Spanish inuasion in the yeere 1588 by that great Armado compounded of 138 great ships addressed by the Popes instigation who blessed and Christened it with the name of an inuincible Nauie and way made by the Iesuites and Seminaries who like Pioners and secret spies indeauoured to vndermine the state to spie out all conueniences for the enemies and to prepare mens hearts and hands to giue assistance to them The Irish rebellion blowen by the bellowes of Rome animated by Doctour Saunders and other Priests sent to incourage the rebels against their lawfull Prince or as Coster the Iesuite confesseth to be helpers to them in matters of conscience and lastly the last horrible hellish neuer sufficiently to bee detested Powder-treason which if it had come to execution as it was neere to the point would haue beene enrolled for euer amongst the wonders of the world and now the wonder is that nature could afford such monsters to deuise such a villany or that any should bee so besoâ—ted as to approoue of that Religion which was the mother of such a monster This I say in which Romanists onely were actours Iesuites Plotters and the Pope the Abâ—tter for Catesby Percie Rookwood Winter Grant and the rest were ranke recusants Garnet alias Walley alias Roberts alias Darcie alias Farmaâ— alias Philips was euer any honest that had so many names Hall alias Oldcorne Tesmond alias Greeneway and others were professed Iesuites and Baynham was sent to Rome to giue notice to the Pope of this bloudy practice whereupon solemne prayers and supplications were made by his direction for the good successe thereof These I say doe witnesse sufficiently that treason is an ordinary practice amongst that generation for the maintenance of their Religion pompe and that they thinke it a lawfull and laudable act so to doe it being the common doctrine of the Iesuites and Canonists that if a King be excommunicate either ipso facto as he is if hee bee an Heretike by their doctrine or by denunciation from the Pope then his subiects are no further to obey him but to rebell against him yea depose and kill him if by any meanes they can and though they dispence with their allegiance during the necessity of time yet it is with this limitation quoad vntill they bee of sufficient power and haue fit opportunity to worke their purpose This pernicious doctrine flowed from the mouthes and pens of Sunancha Creswell alias Philopater mariana Lupus Tresham Bellarmine Emanuell Sa and almost all the rest of that treacherous generation 5. Againe their periuries are also so notorious that I need not to insist vpon them for who knoweth not that Canon of the Councill of Constance which decreeth that faith is not to bee held with Heretikes and that sentence of a Pope reported by Guicâ—ardine that the Church is not bound with oathes and that common doctrine of the Iesuites that a subiect is not tyed by his oath to obey his King excommunicated and who hath not read of Pope Eugenius with his Legate Iulian animating the King of Hungary to breake his league with Amurath the Turke and of Atto Archbishop of Mentz perfidiously against his oath betraying Albert Count of Franconia into the Emperour Lodowick the fourths hands and of Rodulph Duke of Sueuia instigated by the Pope to falsifie his oath of alleageance to Henry the Emperour and of Burghard Archbishop of
Murdach then lately Bishop of Yorke and discharge her of her childe without paine and take it from her so that it was neuer seene more very likely for a priuy or a fishpond might meet with it by the way as it had done a number more in former later times A thousand such lies as these shall you find in their Legends and martyrologies and other bookes insomuch that Espensaens a learned Bishop of their owne doth freely confesse that no stable is so full of doung as the Legends are full of fables yea that very fictions are contained in their portesses and Canus another learned writer that the Pagan Histriographers did more truely write the liues of Emperours then the Christians did the liues of Saints and that in the golden Legend there are monsters for miracles rather then true miracles and that hee which wrote this booke was a man of a brasen face and a leaden heart 23. Thus it is euident by the confession of many learned of their owne side that these bee lying tales coyned as holy deceits as some of them terme them but more truely as deuilish deuices not to maintaine the truth but errour for how can that bee the truth which standeth in need of lying to maintaine it Caietane a Cardinall and a great learned diuine sayth that the credit of the Romish miracles dependeth vpon the report of men who may deceiue others and bee deceiued themselues and Antoninus the Archbishop of Florence calleth the visions of Bernard and Briget touching the conception of the Virgin Mary fantastick visions and mens dreams why should wee then beleeue them to bee true when as they themselues beleeue them not 24. If they obiect and say why may not these miracles be as true as those which are reported by many of the ancient Fathers and seeing famous miracles haue beene in all ages of the Church why should these last ages bee suspected for falsity more then the former I answere first that those Fathers themselues which were reporters of such miracles yet did repose no such confidence in them as to build their faith vpon them as the Romanists doe for Saint Augustine sayth Quisquis adhuc c. Whosoeuer yet seeketh aften wonders that hee may beleeue is himselfe a great wonder who when the world beleeueth doth not beleeue and in another place Contra istos mirabilirios c. Against these miracle-mongers my God hath made mee wary saying there shall arise in the last dayes false Prophets working signes and wonders that they might lead into errour if it were possible the very Elect. And Chrysostome or whosoeuer els was the author of those learned homilies on Mathew proueth that the true Church of Christ cannot bee discerned or knowen by signes or other meane but onely by the Scripture and that the working of miracles is more found among false Christians then true Tertullian sayth plainly that the Heretikes did raise the dead cure maladies foretell things to come the same is affirmed by Chrysostome Ierome Eutheâ—ius Theophilact as witnesseth Maldonate the Iesuite by which it appeareth that the Fathers thought miracles were not to bee regarded except they were wrought for the confirmation of the truth and that a miracle was to bee examined by the doctrine not the doctrine by a miracle and therefore that they are not any proper and true markes of the Church as the Romanists make them nay that they are rather markes of Antichrist and his Church as both our Sauiour and Saint Paul plainely auouch so that by this their great bragge of miracles they giue vs this strong aduantage against them that their Pope is Antichrist and their Church Antichristian which otherwise wee should want 25. And secondly I answere that they themselues reiect diuerse miracles of the fathers as fantastick visions and mens dreames so doth Antoninus call the vision of Bernard and Briget in the question of the Virgin Maries conception and Canus taxeth Gregory and Bede with this that they missed the marke now and then who wrote miracles talked of and beleeued among the vulgar that is which they receiued by heare-say and not by any eye-witnesse or sound proofe now why should wee be restrained from that liberty towards the rest which they take towards Gregory and Bede especially seeing many of their miracles are such as no reasonable man would euer beleeue and deserue rather the splene then the braine as for example Saint Ierome reporteth this to bee one of Saint Anthonies miracles how Anthonie trauailing in the wildernesse to seeke out Paul the Hermite met with a Centaure halfe a man and halfe a horse who spoke to him and shewed him the way and by and by when the Centaure was gone meeteth him another Monster like a Satyre with a hook nose and hornes on his head the lower part of his body like a goat offering him a branch of palme whom Anthony asking who he was he answered I am a mort all creature an inhabitant of the wildernes such an one as the Gentiles deluded with error called a Satyre and I am come as an Embassadour from my flocke to beseech yon to pray to God for vs whom wee know to bee come for the saluation of the world whose sound is gone through the earth if this bee true that there are such monsters or if they bee that they beleeue in Christ and so may bee saued let vs beleue then all that euer the Poets haue written of Ixion Polyphemus Pan Silenus other such like moÌ„sters Gregory Nissen writeth touching Thammaturgus that the Virgin Mary and Saint Iohn camedown from heaueÌ„ to him taught him his creed which is as likely to bee true as that which the Poets write of Apollo that taght Aesculâ—pius the rules of Physick or the Rabbines of the Angell Sanbasser that was Adams Schoolmaster 26. Saint Bernard in the life of Malachias if at least that booke bee Saint Bernards telleth vs of Malchus the teacher of Malachias how hee restored hearing to one that was deafe and how the patient confessed that when the holy man put his fingers into both his eares hee felt as it were two pigges issuing out of them Againe hee reporteth that a certaine Prior of the Regular Friers seing Malachie the Bishop to haue many seruants but few horses gaue vnto him the horse that hee rode on which beeing a restie iade and setting hard at the first the Bishop found him so but ere hee had ridden farre by a wonderfull change hee prooued a very excellent and precious palfrey ambling most sweetly the like tale wee reade in the Dialogues ascribed to Gregory of a horse which a Noble-man lent to Pope Iohn which beeing a very gentle sober nagge when as afterward the noble mans wife should bee set vpon him hee pust and pranced and stampt most strongly disdaining that a woman should sit vpon his backe which had carried the
foreheads 2. That the Religion of the Church of Rome is not so safe as ours may appeare by comparing our principall doctrines together and first to begin with the Sacrament That the bodie of Christ is truely really and effectually present in the Eucharist both they and we hold grounding vpon that text of Scripture this is my bodie but concerning the maner of this presence the Romanists hold that it is by transub stantiation we by a spirituall presence which notwithstanding is true and reall both in relation to the outward signes and to the faith of the Receiuer Now see the dangers that arise from their doctrine which are not incident to ours 2. First if there be not a corporall presence of Christ and a reall Transubstantiation as they suppose then this doctrine leadeth to horrible and grosse Idolatrie for they must needs worship a piece of bread in stead of Christ And this not onely if their doctrine bee false but being supposed to bee true in case hee that consecrateth be not truly a Priest or haue not an intention to consecrate as oftentimes it falleth out for in both these cases by the grounds of their owne Religion there is no change of substances and therefore as much danger of Idolatrie as eyther of a false Priest or of a true Priests false intention But in our doctrine there is no such danger and yet as true reall and powerfull an existence of Christs bodie in the Sacrament as with them if not more seeing the more spirituall a thing is the more powerfull it is according to the rules of reason for wee are not in danger to worship a creature in stead of the Creatour but wee worship the Creatour himselfe euen Iesus Christ our Redeemer who is there present after a spirituall manner and that as reuerently deuoutly and sincerely as they doe a piece of bread 3. Secondly by this doctrine our aduersaries incline to fauour the Capernaites who had a conceit of a corporall and fleshly eating of Christs bodie and giue iust cause to the Pagans to slander Christian Religion to bee a bloudy and cruell Religion Whereupon the Fathers to crosse the one and stop the mouth of the other taught that Christs speech in the sixt of Iohn was to be vnderstood spiritually and not carnally and that it was a figure and not a proper speech But our doctrine doth giue no such occasion eyther to the Heretikes on the one side or to the Pagans on the other neyther hath it any consanguinitie with the Capernaites and yet wee retaine as certaine and powerfull a participation of our Sauiours bodie and bloud as they doe I know they thinke to escape from this rocke by a distinction of visible and inuisible eating as if the Capernaites dreamed that Christ would haue his bodie to bee eaten visibly but they inuisibly that is say they spiritually which indeed is no cuasion for an inuisible eating is a true eating As when a blind man eateth or a seeing man in the darke and cannot therefore be called a spirituall eating but a corporall neyther doth this free them from approching neere to the Capernaites though they somewhat differ from them nor from giuing iust cause of offence to the Heathen from both which our doctrine giueth full and perfect securitie 4. Thirdly and lastly their doctrine of transubstantiation doth not onely countenance but confirme the ancient heresies of the Marcionites Valentinians and Eutychians that impugned the truth of Christs humane nature for they taught that he had not a true but a phantasticall bodie and what do our aduersaries but approue the same indeede though they seeme to detest it in word when they teach that his bodie is present in the Sacrament not by circumscription nor determination but by a spirituall and diuine presence quomodo Deus est in loco as God is in a place which is asmuch as to say that his bodie is not a true bodie but a spirituall bodie that is indeed a phantasticall bodie Againe the bread which they say is the bodie is not bread in truth but in shew after it is consecrated for there is nothing of bread but the mere accidents without a substance according to their doctrine and so it is in all reasonable construction no better then a phantasticall thing seeming to the outward sense to bee that which in truth it is not Why may not those Heretikes then reason from these doctrines thus If Christs bodie be a spirituall bodie in the Eucharist and the bread be phantasticall bread then why might not his bodie be so also when he was on the earth But the former is true by your doctrine O ye Romanists therefore why may not the latter which is our doctrine be also true But none of these Heretikes can haue any such aduantage from our doctrine which teacheth that Christ in respect of his humane nature is resident in the heauens circumscribed by place and that hee is present in the Sacrament by the efficacie of his inuisible and powerful grace after a spirituall manner as Saint Augustine speaketh and that both the bread remaineth bread after consecration and the bodie of Christ remaineth still a naturall bodie after the resurrection retaining still the former circumscription as Theodoret auoucheth this taketh away all aduantage from Heretikes which their doctrine doth manifestly giue vnto them For these causes Petrus de Alliaco the Cardinall doth confesse that from our doctrine no inconuenience doth seeme to ensue if it could be accorded with the Churches determination And Occham that it is subiect to lesse incommodities and lesse repugnant to holy Scripture Thus wee see that in this first doctrine touching the Eucharist there is more securitie and lesse danger in our doctrine and Religion then in theirs 5. I come to a second point which is touching the merits of works whereby the Romish Religion doth cast men into three eminent dangers which by our doctrine they are free from First of vaine glory for when a man is perswaded that there is a merit of condignitie in the worke which hee hath wrought how can he choose but reioyce therein and conceiue a vaine-glorious opinion of his owne worthinesse as the proud Pharise did when he bragged that he had fasted and prayed and payd his tithes seeing it is impossible but that the nature of man which is inclinable vnto vaine-glory and selfe-loue if it haue a conceit of any selfe-worthinesse should bee puffed vp with a certaine inward ioy and pride and therefore Chrysostome taketh it for wholesome counsel to say that wee bee vnprofitable seruants lest pride destroy our good workes 6. Secondly of obscuring and diminishing Gods glorie and Christs merits For where merit is there mercie is excluded and where something is ascribed to man for the obtaining of saluation there all is not ascribed vnto Christ and although they colour the blacke visage of this doctrine with a faire tincture to wit that all
haue with this secret meaning to tell it thee or at this time or some such like things And if an husband aske his wife whether shee be an adulteresse she may answere no though she be with this mentall reseruation to reueale it to him and if a man be constrained to sweare that he will take a woman to his wife he may doe it safely although he neuer meane it with this close clause in his mind if she shall after please him Thus farre Tollet 6. Now of late dayes one hath divulged a whole Treatise in defence of this monstrous doctrine to the which Blackwell the Arch-priest hath giuē this solemne approbatiō that it is a very godly learned Catholique Tractate worthy to be published in print to the comfort of the afflicted instructiō of the godly The author of this Tractate thus concludeth If a Catholike or any other person shal be demanded vpon his oath before a Magistrate whether a Priest be in such a place he may though hee know the contrary securely in conscience answere No without periury with a secret meaning reserued in his mind namely that he is not there so as a man is bound to reueale him Againe if one shall aske me whether such a stranger lyeth in my house I may answere he lyeth not in my house albeit he do meaning Non mentitur this last is verball equiuocation the former is mentall reseruation which are the two approued kindes of their equiuocating art 7. If this filthy strumpet be not the mother of two foule daughters Lying and Periury lying if by a bare asseueration periury if ioyned with an othe let all that haue but common sense and reason iudge and let the Enquest that shall enquire into this matter be first heathen Philosophers secondly the Popish writers themselues thirdly the Fathers and Doctours of the Church and fourthly which is of greater moment then all the rest the holy Scripture of God diuinely inspired and cannot deceiue nor be deceiued Let vs heare the Philosophers verdict A Lye saith Tully is a false enunciation of words with an intent to deceaue and againe he defines dolus malus that is deceit to be when one thing is pretended another acted this is a false action So in like manner a false diction which is a lye must needs bee when one thing is spoken by the mouth another vnderstood in the heart therefore the ordinary Grammaticall notation of this word mentiri to lye is quasi contra mentemire as it were to goe against the minde and Aristotle sayth that speech is ordained for this cause to signifie and expresse the secret conceptions of the mind therfore when the mouth and the mind are at variance then the law of nature is peruerted and in stead of a naturall and true-borne childe Truth a bastard to wit a lye is produced But they which equiuocate pretend one thing and intend another they speake one thing meane another their heart and their tongue like vntuned strings are at iarre with themselues and therefore by no meanes can they be excused from open and notorious lying 8. Now if an oath bee mixed then a fouler monster is brought forth euen Periury for what is periurie but according to their own diuinity a lye made in an oath and is not equiuocating when the equiuocator is sworne to speake the truth periury Let Tully determine this doubt if it bee a doubt Not to sweare a falshood is to bee forsworne but not to performe or make good that which thou hast sworne according to thine owne meaning as customably it is conceiued by thy words is periury all the world cannot more directly cut the throat of all equiuocation then this doth 9. But I leaue the Philosophers and come to their owne Schoolemen To lye saith Lumbard is when a man speaketh any thing contrary to that which he thinketh in his mind It is a lye saith Aquinas when a man will signifie another thing then that which he thinketh in his mind Againe Lumbard Whosocuer vseth craft or subtiltie in an oath defileth his conscience with a double guilt for he both taketh the name of God in vaine and also deceiueth his neighbour And Aquinas their great Doctor condemneth in expresse words this equiuocating tricke of theirs If a Iudge saith he shall require any thing which he cannot by order of law the party accused what may he equiuocate No. he is not bound to answere in deed but either by appeale or some other meanes may deliuer himselfe but in no case may be tell a lye or vse falshood or any kind of craft or deceit This was then good diuinity but now the Iesuites our pretended resiners of Popery haue coyned a new kind of diuinity but like counterset slips it will not abide the tryall Heare what Scotus saith another Schooleman Dicere non feci c. To say I did not that which I know I haue done although I speake it with this reseruation that I may signifie it to you is not equiuocation but a plaine lye To conclude with Maldonate Quisquis fingendo c. Whosoeuer saith he by saining doth goe about to deceiue another although he intend some other thing in his mind without doubt lyeth for otherwise there would be no lye which might not by this meanes be defended 10. Thus we haue the verdict of diuers of their own Writers touching this monstrous doctrine Let vs heare now what the Fathers thinke of it and let Saint Hierome speake first None is a lyer saith he but he that thinks otherwise then he speaketh Therfore the equiuocator is a lyar for he thinketh otherwise then he speaketh as when he affirmeth I am no Priest when he is one he thinketh hee is that which he saith he is not Is Saint Augustine of a contrary minde no hee agreeth with Hierome in this though they iarred in some other things He that speaketh saith he falsly against his conscience doth properly lye but so doth our equiuocator And for Periury This saith Augustine is the very forme of Periurie to thinke that to be false which thou dost sweare Thus doth the equiuocatour for when hee sweareth hee knoweth not a man and yet knoweth him doth hee not manifestly thinke that to be false which he sweareth his mentall reseruation cannot saue him from the pillory seeing as Isidore saith God doth valew an oath not by the sense of the speaker but according to the sense of him to whom the oath was made Thus by the verdict of these three Fathers their doctrine of equiuocation is guilty both of lying and periury 11. And that I may leaue them without a starting hole let them heare what the Iury of Life and Death saith I meane the holy Prophets and Apostles yea what GOD the Iudge himselfe saith Thou shalt not saith he Beare false witnesse against thy Neighbour No nor of thy neighbour therfore much lesse
those marke you Romanists that say Let vs doe euill that good may come thereof whose damnation is iust 15. Their other reasons are vaine and idle for what greater liberty can they desire then to be authorized by the head of the Church who cannot erre as they teach and to follow their filthy lusts by letters Patents froÌ„ his vnholynesse for so here it iustly deserueth to be tituled And is this the way to reclaime conuert them froÌ„ their filthines to dwell in gorgious houses to ride opeÌ„ly in goodly chariots to be apparelled like Princes to haue atteÌ„ding on them men clad in braue attire with chaines of gold and costly ornaments yea to be maintained by the Pope and often visited by his Holynesse and his great Cardinals if this be the way to reclaime them let all men of sound sense and reason iudge indifferently 16. Lastly whether it be a meanes to stoppe the course of lust and to refraine whoredomes from spreading farre and wide let vs against Augustine oppose Saint Basill who expounding these words of the Psalme And hath not sit in the chaire of pestilence saith That whoredome stayeth not it selfe in one man but inuadeth a whole Citie for some one comming to an harlot taketh to himselfe a fellow and the same also seekth another fellow and so as a fire being kindled in a Citie stayeth not in the burning one house or two but spreadeth farre and wide and draweth a great destruction with it so this mischiefe being once kindled rangeth ouer all the Citie Oppose also to him Saint Ambrose who writing vpon the 119. Psalme thus sayth Who can nourish burning â—â—ales in his bosome and not bee burnt with them So how can harlots be nourished in a Citie and young men not bee corrupted with wheredome Yea oppose Tertullian also who affirmeth plainely That all Brothel-houses are detestable before God And lastly Iustinian the Emperour who in his Authentikes in the Title De Lenonibus willeth that harlots should bee vtterly banished out of the Citie and sorroweth because hee saw Brothel-houses so nigh vnto the Churches of God And indeed if it were true that it is a meane to restraine whoredome why is it not then restrained at Rome by that meanes I am sure they haue their Stewes And yet Mantuan doubteth not to affirme that for all their Stewes confined into one place Vrbs estiam tota lupanar The whole Citie was become a Stewes To conclude all in one briefe Sylogisme That Religion which is contrary to the Religion of God cannot bee of God but of the Deuill but the Romish Religion in this one poynt is contrary to the Religion of God for the Scripture saith There shall be no whore in Israel the Romanists say There must be whores in Israel that is in the Church for the auoyding of a further mischiefe then which what can be more contradictorie therefore the Romish religion cannot be of God but of the diuell I meane in those poynts wherein it thus crosseth the truth of God 17. But doe they stay at adultery and simple fornication No their religion maintaineth open and notorious incest and such as the better sort of the heathen abominated and this they doe by three doctrines first by that which giueth allowance at least wise toleration to common Stewes and brothel-houses for the auoyding of a further mischiefe as I haue declared in the former Section for Stewes cannot be tolerated but incest also needs must not onely be occasioned but euen after a sort approued the reason is because often it commeth to passe that the Father and the Sonne or two brethren and neere kindred are defiled with one and the same woman and so vnnaturall and horrible incest prohibited by the lawes of God and man is commited And albeit oftentimes this is a thing secret and vnknowne vnto them yet it doth not wash their consciences from the guilt of this foule crime because they are bound to know in what degree she is vnto them of whome they dare presume to haue carnall knowledge And besides the act it selfe being meerely vnlawfull doth take away all excuse together with a secret suspition they should haue if they be not wilfully ignorant that such a thing might be For if that rule of Saint Augustine bee good Vitandum est licitum propter vicinitatem illiciti that which is lawfull is often to be auoyded for the contiguity and neerenesse it hath with that which is vnlawfull how much more is this true that a thing vnlawfull in it owne nature is to be prohibited and auoyded not onely because it is vnlawfull but much more if it bring with it apparaÌ„t feare of a greater mischiefe Now that affinitie is contracted and therefore incest committed not onely by lawfull marriage but also by vnlawfull copulation I thinke no man doubteth seeing that Saint Paul plainely affirmeth That hee which cleaueth to an harlot is made one flesh with her And their owne law sayth that it skils not whether the kindred descendeth from the lawfull marriages or otherwise 18. Their second doctrine maintaining Incest is their opinion touching the Popes power in dispensations for they hold that hee being Christs Vicar on earth may dispense in degrees expresly prohibited by Gods law and so hath and doth if occasion be offered by vertue of this dissipation so it may better be termed with Saint Bernard then dispensation the King of Spaine and Charles the Arch. Duke of Austria married each of them their sisters daughters And Petrus Aluaradus married two sisters at once and such like as you may see more at large in the former demonstration What is this I pray you but to allowe and authorize incest when as they ascribe vnto their holy Father the Pope authority to dispense with it for according to the old rule in Logike Causa causae est causa causati which is the cause of the cause must needes bee also the cause of the effect when as their doctrine therfore vpholds the Popes power to dispense and this power to dispense brings forth Incest a bastardly brat by consequeÌ„t their doctrine must necessarily stand guilty â—f being the first moouer thereof 19. The third doctrine by which this soule sinne is authorized is the generall opinion of the Church touching the extent of degrees of Consanguinity prohibited in marriage for albeit in former ages it was forbidden to marrie within the seuenth degree yet in the Councill of Laterane that Pontificall constitution was abrogated and the prohibition of marriage restrained to the fourth degree inclusiuely so that beyond the fourth degree it might be lawfull for any to marry without exception Which constitution is at this day held for Authenticall and is of force in the Romane Church now this doth giue manifest allowance vnto Incest for whether the supputation be made after the rule of the Ciuill law by generations or of the Canon law by persons yet so â—e
God that hee cannot doe all these things by himselfe without them but rather of his omnipotencie in that hee was not onely able to doe these things himselfe but also to giue power to those creatures to doe them so it is an argument of greater power in Christs merits to giue strength to our workes to merit heauen then if hee did it for vs without our workes I but by Bellarmines leaue that I may speake with all humble reuerence to the diuine Maiestie the power of God had beene more manifest and his omnipotencie more conspicuous I doe not say had beene greater if he should doe these things immediatly by himselfe then it is by the glasse of the creatures As when the Lord came downe in person vpon mount Sinai and gaue the children of Israel the law from his owne mouth his glory was more famous and fearefull then when hee sent it them after by the hand of Moses though written with his owne finger as the other was spoken with his owne mouth And therefore it is said Exod. 20. that the people were so astonished at Gods voyce that they desired that hee would speake no more vnto them in his owne person but by his seruant Moses Adde herevnto that God in his wisedome ordayned those creatures to that end and purpose and therefore we must not dispute as Bellarmine doth whether it should haue beene a greater token of his omnipotencie if hee had or if hee had not created them but humbly submit our selues to his wisedome knowing that his thoughts are not like ours nor his counsels like ours but as the heauens are higher then the earth so are his wayes higher than ours and his thought aboue our thoughts but for the merits of Christ he hath reuealed in his word that in them onely wee are to finde saluation and therefore wee must beleeue that he is most glorified by that doctrine which teacheth vs to rely onely vpon them and as for the power in them to cause vs to merit it is no where to be found in Scripture and therefore not to be thought to be for the aduancement of his glory besides to say that Christs honour is encreased by mans merit is plaine blasphemie for who hath giuen any thing to God Rom. 11. 25. He standeth not in neede of our good decdes Psal 16. 2. Indeede we doe glorifie God by our good workes but that is not by encreasing but by publishing and proclaiming of his glory but the Romanists say that the glory of Christs merits is augmented by our merits which must needes be a most blasphemous speech In a word seeing we doe not finde in Scripture that Christ died to giue merit to our workes but to purchase pardon to our sinnes and obtaine life for vs wee must bee content to thinke that this serueth most for his glorie and that the contrarie is derogatory thereunto 35. Lastly where did we euer read that wee must be like vnto Christ in meriting we read that wee must bee holy as he is holy and humble and meeke as hee was humble and meeke and patient as he was patient to wit in quality not in quantity in imitation not in perfection but to merit as he did is no where to be found nay it is a thing impossible for it is an infinite and omnipotent worke of righteousnesse that can deserue any thing at the infinite iustice of the omnipotent God and it must bee of infinite valew that can purchase that infinite reward And therefore it was necessarie that he which should be our Redeemer should also be God because neither Angell nor Archangell nor any creature else could performe a worke of that price which might be sufficient to merit the kingdome of heauen It is therefore a most grosse blasphemie to say that we must be like vnto Christ in the point of meriting for it maketh euery man a Iesus that is a Sauiour and Redeemer to himselfe Therefore to conclude I say with S. Bernard Let the glory remaine to the Lord vntouched he hath triumphed ouer the enemie alone he hath freed the captiues alone hee hath fought and conquered alone and with S. Augustine To whom we are endebted for that we are to him we are endebted that wee are iustified let none attribute to God his being and to himselfe his iustifying for it is better which thou giuest to thy selfe than that which thou giuest vnto God thou giuest the lower thing vnto God and the higher to thy selfe giue all to him praise him in all This wee doe by our doctrine and they the contrary and therefore it is most manifest that by this doctrine of theirs mans glory is exalted and Christs defaced mans merits lifted vp and Christs pulled downe which cannot stand with the truth and sincerity of Christian Religion 36. The fourth doctrine which tendeth directly to the dishonor of God the abasing of Christs glory in the worke of our redemption is their paradox of humane satisfactions by which they teach that Christ by his death hath made satisfaction for the guilt of our sinnes and the eternall punishment due vnto them but wee our selues must satisfie the iustice of God for the temporall punishment either in earth or in Purgatory whereas we on the contrary teach and beleeue that by Christs death and passion a perfect and all-sufficient satisfaction is made to the iustice of God for all the sinnes of men and for all the punishment thereof both eternall and temporall As for our doings or sufferings we acknowledge the one to be sabordinately required as fruites of our faith and the other necessary to be sustained as meanes of our mortification And touching offences against our brethren we hold it necessary that we make satisfaction to such whom we haue wronged any wayes either by confession restitution or punishment as the case shall require yea wee acknowledge that a Canonicall or Ecclesiasticall satisfaction is to be made to the Church or any part thereof when as we haue giuen iust scandall and offence there vnto But in all these wee denie that there is any vertue or power to expiate our sinnes or to make satisfaction to God for the punishment thereof either temporall or eternall that to do is only proper and peculiar to the Crosse of Christ for as the disobedience of the first Adam brought vpon vs not onely eternall punishments but also temporall so the obedience and merit of the second Adam hath made satisfaction to God for both 37. And herein we agree both with the holy Scripture in many expresse places as 1. Iohn 2. 2. He is the propitiation for our sinnes And Rom. 5. 18. For the eternall punishment of them And Esay 53. 4. For the temporall for there it is said that he tooke vpon him our infirmities and bore our sicknesses And with the holy Fathers for Saint Augustine plainly affirmeth That temporal afflictions before forgiuenes are the punishments of sin but after forgiuenes
are the fights exercises of the iust And Origen That which is to the iust the exercise of vertue is to the vniust the punishment of sin And Tertullian The plagues of the world are to one for punishment to the other for admonition aduertisement and this is the very substance of our doctrine 38. As for our aduersaries they blush not to affirme euen the Councill of Trent it selfe that when God forgiueth a sinner yet he forgiueth not all the punishment but leaueth the party by his owne workes to satisfie till it bee washed away and that the bloud of Christ doth not serue to acquite vs from the temporall punishment but that we must acquite our selues either by our owne works as prayer almes fasting c. or by our suffrings either in this life or in Purgatory Yes some of the chiefest of them are bold to auouch that the recōpence made by satisfaction respecteth not only the temporall punishment but some part of the offence also and the wrath of God And others say That a sinner by the grace of God may satisfie for his sinne condignely and equally and by that satisfaction obtaine pardon And that which is more then all the rest some of them affirme without blushing that Christ by his sacrifice on the Crosse satisfied onely for originall sinne and not for actuall after Baptisme Bellarmine indeed is ashamed of this doctrine as he might well bee but yet it is plainely maintained by Gregorie de Valentia And this in briefe is the dunghill of Popish satisfactions from whence steame forth like vapours their Purgatorie and Pardons and Penance and much more such like trumpery 39. But let vs leaue them to their manifold errours and come to the examination of this one poynt whether they or we bring more dishonour to the Crosse of Christ And to the purpose first the very nature of satisfaction which as they affirme is the yeelding of a sufficient recompence to God for a trespasse committed is inough to prooue that their doctrine tends to the singular impeachment of the Crosse of Christ for if Christ hath made a full and perfect satisfaction vpon the Crosse as without all doubt he did he himselfe contesting in that his last speech It is finished then what neede any addition of humane satisfactions If there be such a necessity of humane satisfactions as they make then Christs satisfaction must needs be imperfect and so no satisfaction at all for an imperfect satisfaction is no satisfaction as the very word it selfe implyeth importing a sufficient recompence to be made to the party offended And if it be perfect it must be full and absolute that is such as needeth nothing else to be added vnto it But they require something to be added to Christs satisfaction and therefore must needs hold that it is not a full perfect and absolute satisfaction for it implyeth a manifest contradiction to affirme any thing to be a full and perfect cause of it selfe alone and yet to adde another to it as a ioynt cause to produce the same effect 40. But they will answere that mans satisfaction is not to supply the want of Christs but to apply it vnto vs and to fulfill his will and ordinance for Christs satisfaction say they is of infinite value and might aswell haue taken away the temporall punishment as the eternall but that God will haue it otherwise for the mortifying of sinne in vs and making vs conformable to Christ our head This answere of theirs may seeme to carry a shew of sound reason but in very deed it is but a shift and a golden couer to blanch the vglinesse of their doctrine for it were odious for them to say plainely that Christs satisfaction stood in need of a supply or was any wayes imperfect and therefore they would not haue men to thinke so of them though in truth they both thinke and speake so of Christ when they a little forget what they are a doing and by infallible consequence their doctrine concludeth no lesse for plaine speech thus writeth Gabriel Biel Though the passion of Christ be the principall merit for which the grace of God and the opening of heauen and the glory thereof be giuen yet it is neither the sole nor totall meritorious cause but alwaies there concurreth some worke of him that receiueth the grace And Miletus Christ indeed is the generall cause of our saluation but yet particular causes are to be added to this and so he is not the totall and whole cause And Bellarmine himselfe by consequence confesseth as much when he saith that a righteous man hath right to the Kingdome of heauen by a two-fold title one of the merits of Christ another of his owne merits These bee plaine speeches and shew what their meaning is so that howsoeuer they gloze ouer the matter with goodly words yet it is nothing but poyson in a painted boxe wherewith the ignorant may be infected but the skilfull are able to discerne their fraud And here obserue the contrariety of Bellarmines speech to another saying of S. Bernard to the same purpose Christ saith Saint Bernard hath a double right vnto the kingdome of heauen one by inheritance as he is the Sonne of God another by purchase as he bought it by his death the first he keepeth to himselfe this latter he imparts to his members This by S. Bernards Diuinitie is all the right that a faithfull man hath to the kingdome of heauen by Christs purchase and vpon this onely doth that good man and all other of Gods children relie but Bellarmine giueth him another title to wit by purchase of his owne merits which as it is a straine of his owne wit so let him keepe it to himselfe and make merry with it for wee will haue nothing to doe with it 41. As for that which they say that our satisfactions serue not to supply the want but to apply the efficacie of Christs vnto vs is a more ridiculous and shifting deuice then the other for first how can that be when as sinne is first pardoned which is by the satisfaction of Christ and then long after commeth our satisfaction if not in this life yet sure in Purgatorie The applying of a thing is a present act arising betwixt the agent and the patient therefore if our satisfaction doe apply Christs vnto our soules then it followeth that Christ hath not satisfied for our sinnes till wee haue satisfied for the temporall punishment of them which is flat contrarie to their owne principles Secondly that which applieth hath relation to that which is applied as to the obiect but our satisfaction hath no relation to Christs satisfaction as the obiect but is onely referred to the temporall punishment and to the iustice of God as they affirme therefore it cannot apply it vnto vs. And lastly how dissonant is it vnto reason that a satisfaction should apply a satisfaction as if one medicine
an effect of omnipotency Dicitur enim Deus omnipotens faciendo quod vult non patiendo quod non vult i. For God is sayd to be omnipotent by doing that which he will not by suffering that which he will not 8. From hence it must needes follow that heere can bee no miracle and that not onely because miracles are extraordinary works of God and this change of substances is ordinary in euery Sacrament as they say and miracles are not contrary but aboue or beside nature but this is flat contrary not onely to nature but to God himselfe the Authour and Creator of nature and miracles are alwaies sensible but this is insensible and cannot bee discerned by any outward meanes but also for that no miracle can imply contradiction in it selfe as this must needes doe if it were as they would haue it For when Aarons Rodde was turned into a Serpent it left to be a Rodde and when it turned into a Rodde it left to be a Serpent And when the Water was turned into Wine it left to bee Water it was impossible that it should haue beene both Water and Wine at one time in one and the same respect or a Rodde and a Serpent at once And so of all other miracles there is not one to be found that enwrappeth contradictions Besides all which Saint Augustine concludeth peremptorily that Sacraments may haue honour vt Religiosa but not amazement vt admiranda as miracles And Thomas Aquinas more plainely saith Ea quae contradictionem implioant sub diuina potentia non continentur i. Those things which imply contradiction cannot fall vnder the power of God 9. They reply that they teach no more then Cyprian did thirteeene hundred yeeres since who said that Christ did beare himselfe in his owne hands at the last Supper I answere that Cyprian in that place the rest of the Fathers elsewhere did often vse hyperbolicall speeches to extoll the dignity of the Sacrament and to shew the certainty and efficacy of our communion with Christ and of our spirituall eating of him but they neuer meant so as the Romanists doe that Christ bore his reall naturall substantiall body in his owne hands and gaue it to his Apostles after a fleshly manner For Cyprian expoundeth himselfe in another place when hee saith that Sacraments haue the names of those things which they signifie And Saint Augustine more plainly saith that Christ did beare himselfe in his owne hands after a sort If it had beene really and substantially what neede hee haue added after a sort for this word as they vse to speake in Schooles is Terminus diminutiuus qui realitati vbique detrahit A diminitiue terme which detracteth from the realtie and true being of a thing And this speech Christ bore himselfe in his owne hands after a sort is all one with that in another place After a certaine manner the Sacrament of Christs body is Christs body So that it is playne that when the Fathers said Christ bore himselfe in his owne hands they meant nothing but that he bore in his hands the Sacrament of himselfe and thus this first contradiction is irreconciliable I come to a second and that in the Sacrament which is no lesse palpable 10. It is a principle of their Religion and of the truth it selfe that Christ after his resurrection ascended into heauen and there filleth a place and hath figure forme and disposition of parts and is circumscribed within a certaine compasse according to the nature of a body This is Bellarmines owne assertion and it is consonant to sound doctrine confirmed both by manifest Scripture and vniforme consent of ancient Fathers for Scripture Christ is said to bee like vnto vs and not barely like but like in all things that is both in nature and in the qualities and quantities of nature And to put the matter out of doubt onely one thing is excepted wherin he is not like vnto vs and that is Sinne whereby he is absolutely left to bee like vnto vs in all other things And lest any should thinke that that was true onely whilst he was here vpon earth the Apostle in the forenamed places applyeth it to him being in heauen for hee saith Wee haue not an High-priest which cannot be touched with our infirmities and therefore let vs boldly goe vnto the throne of grace where the Apostles argument were of no force if he were like vnto vs here on earth onely in the state of his humilitie and not also now being in heauen in the state of glory for sinfull man might thus reply True Christ was like our nature whilst he liued amongst vs but now being glorified he hath put off our nature and therefore we dare not presume to come vnto him Yes saith the Apostle he is still like vnto vs and hath not put off our nature but the infirmities of our nature onely which were the sequels of sinne as we also shall doe when we shall be translated into heauen after the resurrection And this Saint Luke more plainely auoucheth when he saith that after he had blessed them he departed from them and was carryed vp into heauen and that whilst they beheld he was taken vp by a cloude out of their sight Where we see plainely a locall motion of Christ from earth to heauen and therefore there must needs be of him a locall situation in the heauens As also Saint Peter in expresse words doeth affirme when he saith that the heauens must containe or receiue him vntill the time of restauration of all things Thus this doctrine is consonant to holy Scripture 11. Now let vs see how it was entertayned by the ancient Fathers thus they write Athanasius When Christ said I goe to the Father he spake of the humane nature which hee haed assumed for it is the propertie of him to goe and come who is circumscribed with certaine limits of places and forsaking that place where it was commeth to the place where it was not Nazianzene saith Wee professe one and the same Lord passible in the flesh impossible in his Godhead circumscribed in body vncircumscribed in deity the same both earthly and heauenly visible and inuisible comprehended in place and not comprehended Againe Christ as man is circumscribed and contayned in place Christ as God is vncircumscribed and contayned within no place Augustine saith Christ as man according to his body is in a place but as God filleth all places Cyril saith Though Christ hath taken from hence the presence of his body yet in the maiestie of his deitie hee is alwayes present Fulgentius saith One and the same Christ a locall Man of a Woman his mother who is the infinite God of God his Father Vigilius the Martyr Christ is in all places according to the nature of his deitie but is contayned in one place according to the nature of his humanity Damascene The difference of natures
in Christ is not taken away by their vnion in one person but the proprietie of each nature is kept safe Leo one of their Popes Christ hath vnited both natures together by such a league that neither glorification doth consume the inferiour nature nor assumption doth diminish the superiour To these I might adde many more but these are sufficient to prooue that this doctrine touching the truth of Christs humanitie now glorified in the heauens that he hath retained our nature with all the proprieties sinne onely and infirmities excepted is concordant both with holy Scripture and with the voited opinions of all reuerend antiquitie 12. Now this doctrine is crossed and contradicted by that other doctrine of theirs touching Transubstantiation and the carnall and corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament for this they teach that the body of Christ is in the Sacrament with the whole magnitude thereof together with a true order and disposition of parts flesh bloud and bone as he was borne liued crucified rose againe and yet they say that the same body in the Eucharist though it hath magnitude and extention and disposition of parts agreeable to the forme of an humane body neuerthelesse doth not fill a place neither is to bee extended nor proportioned to the place which it possesseth here be pregnant and manifest contradictions Christ hath one body and yet many bodies euen as many as there are consecrated hoasts in the world that is it may be a thousand bodies at once and so his body is one and not one at the same time Againe this body is in heauen in a place and the same body at the same instant is on the Altar without being compassed about with place to be in heauen and to be in earth at one instant are contradictory propositions being vnderstoode of finite substances and not of that infinite essence which filleth all places for they imply thus much to be in heauen and net to be in heauen to be in earth and not to be in earth which be the rules of Logicke and Reason the mother of Logicke cannot be together true Againe at one moment of time to be aboue and yet below to bee remooued farre off and yet bee neere adioyning to come to one place and yet not to depart from another are so meerely opposite to each other that they cannot be reconciled And lastly a body to haue forme magnitude extention and disposition of parts and yet not with these to fill a place is as much as to say it is a body and yet not a bodie it is in a place and yet not in that very same place these are contradictions so euident that it is impossible for the wit of man to reconcile them 13. Notwithstanding the aduocates of the Romish Synagogue labour might and maine in this taske and by many arguments endeauour to reunite these oppositions first by Gods omnipotency secondly by the qualities of a glorified body and thirdly by arguments from the discourse of reason From hence they thus argue All things are possible to God and therefore this is possible neither is there any thing excepted from the omnipotency of God saue these things Quae facere non est facere sed deficere as Bellarmine speaketh that is which to doe is not to doe but to vndoe and doe argue rather impotency then potency of which sort that one body should be in many places at once is not saith he because it is not in expresse words excepted in Scripture as to lye and to denye himselfe are To this I answere first that albeit the Scripture doth not expresly except this from Gods omnipotency to make one body to bee in two places at once yet implyedly it doth for it denyeth power or rather weaknesse to God to doe those things which imply contradiction of which kinde this is for one body to be in many places at once And Bellarmine himselfe saith that this is a first principle in the light of nature euery thing is or is not which being taken away all knowledge faileth Secondly I answere that the power of God is not so much to be considered as his will nor what he can doe but what he hath reucaled in his word that hee will doe for if wee argue from his power to the effect Wee may deuise God saith Tertullian to doe any thing because he could doe it And therefore the same Authour saith Dei posse velle est Dei nonposse nolle God can of stones raise vp Children vnto Abraham saith Iohn Baptist Now if any should hence conclude that any of Abrahams children were made of stones in a proper speech all would thinke him to haue no more wit then a stone And to this accordeth Theodoret when hee saith That God can doe all things which hee will but God will not doe any of these things which are not agreeable to his nature But for to make a body to be without quantity and a quantity to be without dimension and dimension without a place that is as much to say a body without a body and quantity without quantity and a place without a place is contrary to Gods nature and therefore cannot bee agreeable to his will and so hath no correspondence with his power And lastly I answere that it is no good reason to say God can doe such a thing therefore he doth it but rather thus God will doe such a thing therefore he can doe it and thus the Scripture teacheth vs to reason Whatsoeuer pleased the Lord that did hee in heauen and in earth and not whatsoeuer hee could doe but whatsouer it pleased him to do and the Leper said to our Sauiour Christ Master if thou wilt thou canst make me cleane no◠if thou canst thou wilt but if thou wilt thou canst 14. Secondly whereas they obiect that Christs bodie after his glorification is indued with more excellent qualities then any other naturall body by reason of that super-excellent glory wherewith it is adorned aboue all others and thereby as he came to his Apostles the dores being shut and rose out of his graue notwithstanding the stone that lay vpō it and appeared vnto Paul on earth being at the same time in heauen so he is in the Eucharist after a strange and miraculous manner and yet is in heauen at the same time I answere first with Theodoret that Christs bodie is not changed by his glorification into another nature but remaineth a true bodie filled with diuine glory And with Augustine that Christ gaue vnto his flesh immortality but tooke not away nature and in another place That though Christ had a spirituall body after his resurrection yet it was a true bodie because he said to his Disciples Palpate videte feele and see and as his body was then after his resurrection so it is now being in the heauens Secondly that when hee came out of the graue the Angell remoued the stone
wherein there are as fat and foggie contradictions as in the former For first they teach that Christ hath made a perfect and full sufficient satisfaction for all the Elect and that his death was a sufficient price for the redemption and expiation of the sinnes of the whole world and that his satisfaction was of infinite valew c. This they affirme in semblance of words because if they should not all men would cry shame vpon their Religion And yet in truth they ouerthrow the same by another crosse doctrine of our owne satisfactions for the same men say that Christ hath onely satisfied for the fault of our sinnes and the eternall punishment due vnto them but wee our selues must satisfie for the temporall punishment eyther here on earth by necessary afflictions or in Purgatory by the indurance of those paynes which are there ordayned to purge men withall Now what can be more contrary then these two propositions Christ hath made a full satisfaction for vs and yet we must also satisfie in part for our selues If Christs satisfaction be full and perfect then it hath payd the whole debt which we ought but if we must pay part of the debt then is not this satisfaction full and perfect That the temporall punishment is a part of our debt Bellarmine himselfe confesseth writing vpon the fiâ—ft petition of the Lords Prayer where hee giueth this one reason why sinnes are called debts because he which breaketh the Law is a debter to vndergoe the punishment which the Law requireth But the Law bindeth transgressors not onely to eternall but also to temporary and transitory punishments As a Suretie therfore that payeth for his friend owing an hundred pound fourescoreand ten leauing the remainder to the debter himselfe to be satisfied cannot be sayd to haue made full satisfaction So if any part of our debt is to be payed by our selues Christ our all-sufficient Surety cannot be sayd to haue made a full satisfaction But they answere that this our satisfaction is wrought in vs by Christ and is so in vs that it is not of vs but of Christ And agâ—iâ— that it is nothing but an instrumeÌ„t ordained by God to apply Christs death vnto our selues and so to expiate the punishment of our sinnes instrumentally and not causally To which I answere First that this inwrappeth another contradiction for if it bee Christs in vs and not ours of our selues then it must needs be the satisfaction it selfe and not an instrument to apply it for one and the same thing cannot bee both the instrument to apply and the thing that is applyed But of this see more in the fourth reason And secondly though it be from Christ yet that is but in part because as they teach it is not onely in euery mans power eyther to admit or to exclude the grace of God and the efficacy of Christs merite by his owne free-will but also for that it is wrought by our selues and vpon our selues cooperating with grace at least And thus the knot of the contradiction remaineth still as fast tyed as euer it was 48. Againe they say that our satisfactions when they are at the best are imperfect and no wayes proportionable to the iustice of God for when we sinne we offend him who is an infinite God and whatsoeuer we haue it is but a small and finite thing and therefore there must needes bee an imperfect compensation from vs to God depending rather vpon his mercifull acceptation theÌ„ any proportionable satisfaction This is their doctrine And yet they teach also that there is an equalitie and proportion betwixt Gods iustice and our satisfactory works and that they are in some sort of infinite valew by reason of the infinite power of Gods Spirit dwelling in vs from which they proceede And thus by their doctrine they are perfect and not perfect infinite and finite haue equality and proportion and yet haue no equality nor proportion to Gods iustice Either therefore they are not of infinite valew though they proceede from the Spirit or if because they doe proceede from the Spirit therefore they are of infinite value then they cannot bee imperfect Let them choose which they will they haue a Wolfe by the eares 49. Further they teach that the passions of the Saints doe not onely profite themselues but also others whether liuing or dead not so much by example for their edification as also for their satisfaction by redeeming them from temporall punishment Which doctrine is not onely contrary to Saint Gregory one of their owne Bishops who taught that Christs sufferings are herein distinguished from the sufferings of all others because hee suffered without sinne and all men suffered with sinne but also to the receiued doctrine in their Church which holdeth that the righteousnes by imputation whereby we say a man is iustified is a meere fiction and Chimericall conceit For a man say they cannot bee righteous by another mans righteousnes nor wise by another mans wisedome and so not iustified by Christs righteousnes imputed vnto him Cannot a man be iustified by Christs righteousnes imputed can satisfaction be made by the passions of the Saints imputed Is the death of Christ of lesse pâ—ice force then the sufferings of the Saints The righteousnes of Christ imputed is a Monster in Religion yet the satisfaction of the Saints imputed is with them a Catholike doctrine And thus with one doctrine they establish imputation and with the other pull it downe againe With one breath they condemne it and with another they iustifie it 50. Ioyne vnto Satisfactions their bastard Purgatorie for out of this doctrine That men must satisfie in themselues and for themselues for the temporall punishment of their sinnes springeth Purgatory because when they haue not satisfied sufficiently in this life then as they teach they must make vp that which is wanting in the life to come in the fire of Purgatory This doctrine of Purgatory is directly opposite to their Sacrament of Extreme vnction for there they teach that by this Sacrament all the reliques of sinne are vtterly abolished and wiped away Si quae delicta sint adbuc expianda abstergit saith the Councell of Trent If any sinnes remayne vnpurged or to be satisfied for this Sacrament wypeth them cleane away And the Councell of Florence affirmeth that the effect of this Sacrament is Sanatia animae The healing of the soule And Bellarmine concludeth that therefore the fiue Senses are anoynted because they are as it were the fiue doores by which sinnes enter in vnto the soule to wit that there might bee a generall purgation of all sinnes which remayne This is their absolute doctrine and yet the same men affirme that Purgatory is ordayned to purge away the reliques of sinnes which in our life time wee haue not satisfied for and that many sinnes sticke so fast and close vnto vs that we carry them with vs out
that some sinnes cannot bee committed but a toto composite by the whole man And if the bodie doe not sinne as well as the soule I wonder why it is punished both in this life with corporall diseases and plagues and after death with putrefaction and depriuation of life and in the day of iudgement with eternall torment in hell fire Secondly if it were so that a dead carkasse had no relique of sinne in it yet in that it was an instrument of sinne it is lyable to temporall punishment which is the chiefe ground of Purgatory as hath beene shewed And therefore I conclude that either the body goeth to Purgatory as well as the soule or else a full satisfaction is not made for the temporall punishment or at least that the fire of Purgatory is but an imaginary and witty conceit to keepe men in some awe and to maintaine their owne pride and pompe 53. Next vnto Purgatory is Prayer for the dead which is both the mother and daughter of that fire for as it is vpheld by Purgatory a weake and imaginary foundation so it vpholdeth Purgatory a paper building neuerthelesse it is ouerturned by it owne poyse and weight For this they teach That the prayers and suffrages of the liuing doe nothing profite those that doe enioy blessednesse as the Martyrs and such like according to that of Saint Augustine Iniuriam facit martyri qui or at pro martyro He doth wrong a Martyr that prayes for a Martyr nor the damned whether they be in the lowest Hell as reprobates or in Lymbo as vnbaptized Infants but onely the soules in Purgatory And yet notwithstanding they both alledge the authorities of ancient Fathers to prooue the prayer for the dead who prayed for those whom they assured themselues to be in heauen and also by their owne doctrine and practice declare that they haue vsed to pray for the damned As touching the Fathers Nazianzene prayed for Cesarius and Ambrose for Theodosius Valentinian and Saint Augustine for his mother And in the ancient Leiturgies of the Church prayers were made for Patriarks Prophets Martyrs and the blessed Virgine Mary her selfe yea for the Popes also as for Pope Leo for example and yet they thought all these to be in the state of blessednesse as it appeareth in the same places where these prayers are expressed and therefore Cassander their iudicious reconciler calleth those prayers Testimonies of charitie towards the dead congratulations of their present ioyes and professions of their faith and hope concerning the immortality of their soules and resurrection of their bodies not supplications for their releasement out of Purgatory as our Romanists imagine Now hence thus we reason If the Fathers prayed for them who were in possession of blessednes then their testimonies serue nothing for their purpose who affirme that soules in Purgatory are onely benefited by such prayers and if soules in Purgatory bee onely benefited by such prayers as they say then they deale impertinently and deceitfully to bring in the testimony of the Fathers for maintenance of such prayers in the one bewraying the imbecillitie of their cause in the other the weaknesse of their iudgements and in both crossing themselues in that which they would build vp as the builders of Babel did Neyther doth this onely bewray their fraude in misapplying the authorities of the Fathers but also it implyeth a playne contradiction for they teach that though wee ought not to pray for the soules of the Saints that are in heauen yet wee may pray for the resurrection and glorification of their bodies which notwithstanding are not tormented in Purgatory but asleepe in their graues And so it followeth that by their doctrine we may not pray at all for the Saints departed and yet wee may pray for their bodies which are the one halfe of them And againe we may not pray for any that are dead except they be in Purgatory and yet we may pray for the bodies of the dead that are not in Purgatory but in their graues 54. If they reply as Bellarmine doth that we may pray for the Saints in Heauen not for releas of any paine but for increase of their glorie either of their soules presently or of their bodies futurely at the Resurrection then I say they contradict themselues againe For how doe the Praiers of the liuing doe no good to any but those that are in Purgatorie whereas they are meanes to increase the glorie of their soules and to procure the consummation of their bodies glorie also As for their practice in praying for the damned Damascene reporteth that Gregorie the Pope absolued Traiane and a Martyr Falcenilla from the paines of hell and also relateth out of the historie of Palladius that Saint Maehary demanded of the dead skull of an Idolater whether the Praiers of the liuing did good vnto them in Hell or not to whom the skull should answere When thou offerest vp Praiers for the dead we in the meane time feele some refreshing The like wee read of Iudas in the Legend of Saint Branden. Bellarmine indeed reiecteth this Tale of the skull as a Fable but yet he gain-saith not the deliuerie of Traiane by the praiers of Gregorie But Antoninus the Archbishop of Florence approoueth the first as an authenticall Storie so doth Aquinas the last and frameth this answere thereunto that the soules of the damned receiue no mitigation of their paine by the Praiers of the liuing but onely a certaine vaine and deceitfull ioy and the Schoole men deuise strange reasons how this should be brought to passe some saying that Traian by the vertue of Gregories Praiers returned to life and did penance and so obtained pardon and glorie others affirming that his soule was not simply absolued from the guilt of punishment but that his paine was suspended vntill the day of Iudgement others imagining that his soule was not freed from Hell but from the torments of Hell so that he should remaine there but should feele no paine And lastly Bernardine reiecting all these opinions and concluding that Traian was not definitiuely condemned but conditionally to wit the diuine Wisdome fore-seeing that Gregorie should pray for him and therefore to haue deferred his damnatorie sentence Thus they labour in by-paths that forsake the way of Truth and wander they know not whither But to the point either that is false that soules in Purgatorie are onely helped by the Praiers and Sacrifices of the liuing or this that by them the damned may be either released or refreshed 55. Lastly both the Doctrines of Purgatorie and Praier for the dead are directly crossed by their Canon of the Masse for there those dead persons for whom Praier is made are said to rest in Christ and to sleepe the sleepe of peace and yet here they say that none are to be praied and sacrificed for but those onely that are in Purgatorie What is there then any rest in Purgatorie is to
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
doe so yet they must iudge of them no otherwise then by referring them to their ordinary Pastour which is the Pope to whose definitiue sentence they must yeeld full consent without further examination Nay he most shamefully affirmeth that if their ordinary Pastour teach a falshood and another that is not their Pastour teach the contrary truth yet the people ought to follow their Pastour erring rather then the other telling the truth And thus the poore people must rely al their knowledge vpon their Pastours and may not in any case examine and try their Spirits whether they be of God or no cleane contrary to the Precept of our Sauior Ioh. 5. 39. Search the Scriptures And to the practice of the Bereans who examined Pauls doctrine by the Scriptures And to the counsell of Saint Iohn to all To try the Spirits Now who seeth not that this confirmeth and cherisheth the people in ignorance For if they may not dispute about any matter of faith themselues nor heare others that are learned so to doe nor examine the doctrine of their ordinary Pastours but beleeue whatsoeuer they teach bee it true or false what remaineth but that they should lye and tumble in ignorance and superstition seeing the ordinary meanes of getting knowledge and finding out the truth is taken from them For when they are bound to swallow downe all the doctrines on the one side and may not so much as heare or read the reasons of the other nor weigh them together in the Ballance of iudgement how is it possible that they should euer finde out the truth 22. Wee confesse with Saint Paul that the weake are not to bee admitted to controuersies of disputation But what disputations Mary about needlesse questions touching matters indifferent as meat and drinke and difference of dayes as the Apostle explaineth himselfe in the same Chapter Or foolish and vnlearned questions that ingender strife and are not profitable to edification But if the disputation bee concerning matters of saluation and disquisition of a necessary truth then are none to bee excluded either from reasoning or hearing For Saint Peter requireth of euery man that hee be able to giue an answere to euery one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in him And therefore to dispute for what is to dispute but to giue a reason And our Sauiour disputed with the Pharises and Sadduces in the audience of the people touching the resurrection and the greatest Commandement of the Law and his humane and diuine nature And so likewise did Saint Paul with the Grecians and with the Iewes conuincing them by arguments out of the Scripture That Iesus was the Christ and that there was no way to saluation but by saith in his Name From such disputations as these none was debarred but euery one was and is bound to seeke a firme resolution that hee bee not carried about with euery winde of doctrine True it is euery simple man and woman ought not presently to rush out into arguments of disputation nor too peremptorily to talke of deep mysteries in Religion for then it may bee said vnto them as Saint Basill is reported to haue answered the Emperors Cook Tuum est de pulmentis cogitare non diuina dogmata concoquere It is thy part to looke to thy sauces and dainty dishes and not to boyle in thy shallow wit heauenly mysteries And therefore they must as Saint Ierome speaketh not lacerare Scripturam teare in pieces the Scriptures by their ignorant interpretations and applications of it Nor docere antequam didicerunt Teach others before they haue learned themselues But like Pythagoras schollers keepe silence long till they be wel grounded in knowledge neuerthelesse all this while they must not be barred from hearing others discourse of these high matters nor from reading their arguments pro contra nor at length also when they are come to some perfection from arguing and reasoning with the aduersary For this is the high way to knowledge and vnderstanding the Lord hauing promised to all those that pray vnto him and doe his will whether they bee Priests or people the illumination of his Spirit and power to discerne of doctrines They that deny therefore this liberty vnto the people doe barre them out from all sound knowledge and imprison them in a gaole of ignorance blindnesse and superstition 23. Lastly their braue doctrine touching Implicite faith doth tend to the same end and bring forth the fame effect and that more effectually then any of the rest For thus they teach that it is not necessary for a Layman to know anymore by a distinct knowledge saue some few capitall heads of Religion as that there is one God and three persons That Christ is come in the flesh and redeemed vs from our sinnes and shall com againe to iudge the quicke and the dead c. As for the rest it is sufficient to giue assent vnto the Church and beleeue as it beleeueth though they know not what it beleeueth yea that they are not bound expresly to beleeue all the Articles of the Apostles Creed which is notwithstanding nothing els but a briefe summe and Epitome of Christian Religion and one of the principall grounds of the Catechisme And this is the Colliers faith spoken of before so much commended by many of their greatest Clarks Now how can this but nourish most groffe ignorance For when the people are perswaded that such a short scantling of knowledge is sufficient and that it is enough for their saluatioÌ„ if in a reuerence to the Church they beleeue as it beleeueth what reason haue they either to labour to get any further knowledge or to increase and grow vp in that which they haue attained vnto Surely in matters of Religion so great is the auersenesse of our nature that wee are all so farre from endeuouring to get more then is needfull that few seeke for so much And therefore they that bound our knowledge within so narrow limits cherish this corruption and by speaking pleasing things vnto it lull it asleepe in the bed of ignorance But in the meane time how contrary is this to the word of God let the world indge seeing the Apostle prayeth for the Colossians that they might bee fulfilled with the knowledge of Gods will in all wisedome and spirituall vnderstanding and that they might increase in the knowledge of God Whereas these fellowes would haue Gods people to bee empty of knowledge and in stead of growing to stand at a stay resting vpon the supposed knowledge of the Church And whereas the same Apostle saith vnto the Thessalonians I would not haue you ignorant brethren speaking in the same place of very high and deepe mysteries as the state of the dead the resurrection and ast iudgement they on the contrary say to their people Wâ—e would haue you ignorant brethren These things are so grosse and shamefull that if the Church of
as it appeareth Acts 16. but rather is to bee thought to bee the extraordinary gift of the holy Ghost as Saint Paul plainly insinuateth 2. Tim. 1. And secondly though it should bee sauing grace yet it is not promised to all others though it were then giuen to Timotheus neither were all that receiued holy orders partakers thereof for then Nicholas the Deacon should haue beene sanctified being an hypocrite Who seeth no◠then now weakely hee hath prooued this to bee a Sacrament out of holy Scriptures and this may seeme for a taste of the rest of his proofes which are most of them of the like nature 70. Againe the doctrine of Indulgences to wit that the Pope hath power out of the Churches treasury to grant relaxation from temporall punishment either heere or in Purgatory is so new an article that diuers of their own Doctors doe confesse that there is not any one testimony for proofe thereof either in Scriptures or in the writings of ancient Fathers but that the first that put them in practice in that manner as they are now vsed was Pope Boniface the eight anno 1300. neither could they bee any older then Purgatory being extracted from the flames thereof which hath beene already prooued to bee a meere nouell inuention so that the child cannot be old when as the Father is not gray-headed and that the matter may bee without contradiction reade Burchardus who liued about the yeare of our Lord 1020. And Gratian and Peter Lumbard that came after who all speake of satisfaction and penance and commutation and relaxation of penance but yet haue not a word of these Romish Indulgences whereas if they had beene then extant they would neuer haue passed them ouer in silence especially in the discoursing vpon these points whereupon they haue their necessary dependance 71. Last of all their doctrine touching merite of workes may bee branded with the same marke For first though the word merite bee often vsed by the Fathers yet ordinarily it is not taken in that sense which the Romanists vse it in as witnesse both Bellarmine and Viega and Stapleton and if they did not yet manifold examples out of their owne writings would prooue to be true Secondly the full streame of their doctrine doth make against the proud conceit of merite for they ascribe all to Gods mercy and Christs merits esteeming their owne best workings and sufferings vnworthy of the euerlasting and celestiall reward they neuer dreamt of that ambitious doctrine taught in the Church of Rome that our good workes are absolutely good and truely and properly meritorious and fully worthy of eternall life Let their books be viewed and nothing can bee more apparantly cleare then this is Thirdly the termes of congruity and condignity were deuised but of late dayes by the subtill Schoolemen who notwithstanding could not agree among themselues touching the true definition distinctiō of their own books by which it appeareth that it was not then any Catholike or vniuersall truth Lastly their owne Doctours terme the merite of congruity a new inuention and that other of condignity no Catholike nor ancient doctrine and the whole doctrine of meriting to haue beene first made an article of faith by the Councill of Trent all which laide together prooue it most clearely to bee of no great standing nor they of any vnderstanding that were the first forgers and deuisers thereof 72. Thus wee haue sixteene points wherein the new Romish Religion hath degenerated from all pure antiquity to which many more might bee added but these are sufficient to euince our conclusion which is this that seeing the Romish Church hath neither in matter nor forme substance nor accidents any sure ground either from Scripture or the doctrine of the Primitiue Church but is vtterly vnlike to it in many substantiall respects therefore it cannot bee the true Church of God but an harlot in her stead and their Religion not of God but of men and consequently that wee in declining from them and conforming our selues both in doctrine and manners to the Primitiue patterne are not fallen from the Church but to the Church and that theirs is the new Religion and not ours And thus wee see what all their bragges and clamours touching the antiquity of their Religion and the nouelty of ours come vnto seeing there is no one thing more pregnant to prooue the falshood of their Religion and the Apostacy and Antichristianity of their Church then this is And to conclude as wee would thinke him not well in his wits that hauing beene long sicke and after regained health should say that sicknes was more ancient then health whereas he should rather say that hee had recouered his old health that his new Inmate sicknesse was dispossessed of his lodging though it had kept it long so in all reason it is madnesse to thinke the reformation of the Church and reducing of Christian Religion to the ancient health to bee more nouell and new then the horrible sicknesse and apostacy wherewith it was long not onely infected but almost ouer-whelmed And this is iust our case with the Church of Rome but I leaue them to bee healed by the heauenly Phisitian himselfe Iesus Christ our Sauiour whose wholesome Physicke must cure them or nothing will MOTIVE XII ¶ That Church which maintaineth it selfe and the Religion professed by it and seeketh to disaduantage the aduersaries by vnlawfull vniust and vngodly meanes cannot bee the true Church of God nor that Religion the truth of God by the grounds whereof they are warranted to act such deuilish practices but such is the practice of the Romist Church and therfore neither their Church nor their Religion can be of God IT is a wonder to see what deuises sleights impostures and deuilish practices the Romanists haue and now at this day doe more then euer vse to vphold their rotten Religion to ensnare mens minds with the forlorne superstitiō their kingdome being ready to fall they care not with what props they vnder-shore it and the truth preuailing against them they care not with what engines though fetched from hell it selfe they vndermine it so that they may any wayes batter the walles or shake the foundation thereof My purpose is in this Chapter to discouer some of the Sathanicall practices of these subtle Enginers I meane the Iesuites and Priests and other rabble of Romish proctors It is not possible to reckon them vp all being so many and various such therefore God willing shall be heere discouered as are for villany most notorious for impudency most shamelesse and for certainty most perspicuous and by them let the Christian Reader that loueth the truth iudge of their Religion and Church what it is 2. The first proposition of this argument is grounded vpon three principles one of nature another of reason the third of Scripture nature teacheth that contraries are cured that is expelled by contraries as hot diseases by cold
somewhat longer let the Reader beare with mee for so the nature and nouelty of the matter requireth Their next practice then to defend their Church and Religion is by grosse and palpable lying and falshood yea so grosse and palpable that any ciuill honest man would blush to be reputed the author of such fables which they obtrude vpon silly people as verities necessary to bee beleeued and which they like simple creatures giue faith vnto asmuch as vnto the Gospell it selfe and neither is the one or the other any maruaile seeing Saint Paul prophesied long agoe that on the one side Antichrist his comming should be according to the efficacy of Sathan in all power in lying signes and wonders and on the other that God would send vpon them that receiued not the loue of the truth strong delusion that they should beleeue lyes so that by this prophecy one of the chiefest props of Antichrists kingdome must bee lyes and therefore the Church of Rome making no conscience thereof sheweth it selfe to be no better then the Synagogue of Antichrist If they say that they doe it to a good end namely to maintaine the truth I answere with Iob Nunquid Deus indiget mendacio vestro vt pro illo loquamini dolos Doth GOD stand in need of your lye that you should speake deceitfully for his cause no he will surely reprooue you for it and with Saint Augustine Cum humilitatis causa mentiris si non eras peccator antequam mentireris mentiendo efficieris quod euitaras that is If thou tellest a lye for humility sake or for the truths sake if thou were not a sinner before by lying thou art made that which thou didst auoid what can bee more pithily spoken for the reproofe of these men who by falshood pretend to establish the truth and by lying to vphold their Religion and if neither the Scripture nor this holy Father are regarded by them then let them heare the censure of the Heathen Cicero who concludeth that in virum bonum non cadit mentiri emolumenti sui causa It falleth not to a good man to lye no not for his owne profite sake what are they then in his account who make a common practice to lye for their aduantage But lest I should bee thought to accuse them falsely and in reproouing their lying to fall into the same vice my selfe let vs take a short view of some of their notorious vntâ—uths which are sparsed in their bookes And heere to omit their lying Reuelations lying priuiledges false Canons forged donations counterfeit de lying martyrologies all which are stuffed with notorious falsities and that by the confession of their owne Doctours I will insist onely vpon their lying miracles wherein they vaunt themselues as a marke of their Church and wherewith they labour to vphold most of their erronious opinions 11. And first touching their miraculous transubstantiatioÌ„ and adoration of the Sacrament not finding in Scripture sufficient proofe for it it is strange to see how many monstrous miracles they haue deuised for to win credit thereunto Bozius a man of great fame amongst them telleth vs these three tales first that Anthony of Padua caused his horse to kneele downe and worship the holy hoast by which strange sight a stout Heretike was conuerted to the true faith And secondly Saint Francis had a Cade Lambe which vsed to goe to Masse and would duely kneele downe at the eleuation and adore And thirdly that a certaine deuout woman to cure her Bees of the murren and to make them fruitfull put a consecrated hoast into the Hiue which when after a time shee tooke vp shee not onely found a miraculous increase but saw also a strange wonder the Bees had built a Chappell in the Hiue with an Altar and windowes and doores and a steeple with Bells and had laid the hoast vpon the Altar and with a heauenly noyse flew about it and sung at their Canonicall houres and kept watch by night as Monkes vse to doe in their Cloisters Who would not beleeue now but that the hoast is to be adored if hee be not more senslesse then a horse or a Bee or a Cade Lambe But if this be true why are Mice so prophane that they dare rend it with their teeth And why doth not the Popes Hackney kneele downe and doe reuerence vnto it when hee carrieth it on his backe accompanied with muletters and horse-keepers and Courtisans and Cookes with sumpter-horses and all the baggage of the Court as oft as his Holinesse is to trauell abroad when hee himselfe followeth mouÌ„ted vpon a goodly white palfrey accoÌ„panied with Cardinals Primates Bishops Potentats Is more honor to be giuen to Christs Vicar then to Christ himselfe Or was Anthonies horse more religious then all the Popes horses yea then the Pope himselfe and all his traine And if the hoast bee so soueraigne a preseruatiue for Bees why doe any good housewiues suffer their Bees to perish seeing they may haue the hoast for God amercy or at least wise for a very small price In the booke of the conformities of Saint Francis wee finde this miracle On a time Fryer Francis saying Masse found a Spider in the Chalice which hee would not for reuerence to the Sacrament cast out but drunke it vp with the blood afterward rubbing his thigh and scratching where it itched the Spider came whole out of his thigh without any harme to either O strange miracle and yet not so strange as this that Christs bloud in the Chalice should poyson Pope Victor except Francis a Fryer were more holy then Victor a Pope or the blood in one Chalice were of greater force then in the other but peraduenture the Priest in the one had no intention to turne the wine into blood as the Priest in the other had and then wee know there can be no conuersion but no maruaile if this be true seeing in the festiual of Corpus Christi day we read as great a wonder as this to wit of a Priest that hauing lost the hoast in a wood as hee came to housell a woman that was sicke and hauing whipt himselfe for his negligence went backe to seeke his Lord God and at last spying a pillar of fire that reached from the earth to heauen ran thereunto and found Gods body at the foot of that pillar and all the beasts of the forrest about it kneeling on their foure knees and adoring it with great deuotion ex ept one blacke horse which kneeled but on one knee and that blacke horse sayth the story was a fiend of hell who had turned himselfe into that shape that men might steale him and bee hanged as many had beene This as it was reported to bee done not far from Exbridge in Deuon-shire so it was as solemnely read in the Church and as verily beleeued as any miracle that euer Christ wrought who can doubt now but that the bread in the
Father that is God the word being taken personally and not in the abstract as if the essence of the Deity of the Sonne should bee from the Father which is entirely subsisting in of and by it owne eternall incomprehensible and most glorious nature and this without question was the true intendement of the Councill for els it had not confuted but fauoured the blasphemous heresie of Arrius against whom it was assembled which Caluine and Beza doe not any wayes crosse but onely bring vnto it a fit and fauourable exposition Thus we haue Bellarmine Caluines and Bezaes patrone in this doctrine though full ill against his will and not onely him but Ribera and Gregory de Valentia two other no meane Rabbies both which doe conclude that the Sonne as he is a person is of another but as he is a simple Ens is not of another and that the Essence doth not beget the Essence but the Father the Son so that either they are slanderers of the truth or their Catholike doctrines may bee Atheisme and blasphemy 72. Againe they accuse Caluine of another blasphemy against our Lord and Sauior Iesus Christ to wit that he should make him inferiour to his Father in respect of his Deity This is Arrlanisme indeed as Bellarmine calleth it or Atheisme as Posseuine if it were to bee found in Caluines diuinity or any other but it is as farre from him thus to thinke as it is from their malice to speake the truth This is all that Caluine affirmeth that the Father is God per excellentiam that is after a more excellent manner And what errour I pray you is in this doth hee not speake of the personall relation that is betwixt the Father and the Sonne and not of the nature and essence of the God-head that is in both of equall dignity and excellency This is cleare both by the former article wherein he sloutly auoucheth him to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God of himselfe and not to receiue the essence of his Deity from his Father and so not to be inferiour to his Father in that respect and also by infinite places in his books where he directly maketh the Son Iehouah equall to the Father in dignity excellency eternity and all other properties of the Deity therefore he speaketh this in respect of the person of Christ in which consideration the Father that begetteth respected with the Sonne that is begotten may truely bee said to haue a certaine priority of order ānd to be God after a more excellent manner Here is now neither Arrianisme nor Atheisme nor indeed any error in Caluines doctrine but malicious lying and slaundering in in these Iesuites accusation 73. Nay that Caluine may bee cleared from all suspition of errour and those fellowes condemned as notorious slaunderers Tollet one of their owne fraternity affirmeth that Athanasius Basil Nazianzene Hilary and Origen all strong maintainers of Christs diuinity and profest enemies to Arrius heresie interpret that place Iohn 14. My Father is greater then I in Caluines sense Maldonate another Iesuite in his commentary vpon Iohn addeth to these Epiphanius Cyrillus Leontius Chrysostome Theophilact and Euthemius as patrones of the same opinion yea and this last Iesuite himselfe subscribeth to their exposition for he sayth that the Father is greater then the Sonne in that respect that hee is the Sonne for the Name of the Father is more honorable then the Name of the Son and the Schoolmen say asmuch as Caluine when they ascribe to the Father authority and to the Sonne subauthority What is this but to say that the Father is God after a more excellent manner Now then if this were neither Atheisme nor Arrianisme nor heresie in the Fathers nor in their owne Doctors why should it bee branded with those infamous titles in Caluine I see no reason but that malice is blinde and that the hatred they bare to that good man made them to say and do they cared not what so they might wound his credite thereby 74. Luther is likewise traduced by them as a denyer of the blessed Trinity and that because the word Trinity is said to dislike him for which cause he dispunged out of the Germane Lyturgies this sorme of prayer Sancta Trinitas vnus Deus miserere nostri a notorious calumniation for Luther indeed blotteth out of the Germane prayers a certain forme like vnto that obiected but not so as he setteth it downe for the word vsed in the Germane tongue signifieth rather a triplicity then a Trinity which mooued Luther in a desire to maintaine the pure doctrine of the Trinity as Iunius obserueth to blot out that word thinking it a dangerous matter to vse such a word in so holy and high a mystery By which practice he is so farre from impugning or denying that blessed principle that he sheweth himselfe rather a zealous defender and maintainer thereof and in a word to discouer their falsity and his innocency List how diuinely and soundly and orthodoxally he writeth else-where of that mystery Vnitas Trinitatis est magis vna c. The vnity of the Trinity is more one then the vnity of any creature euen mathematically neuertheles this vnity is a Trinity or the diuinity of three distinct persons that euery person is the whole diuinity as if there were no other and yet it is true that no person is the fole diuinity as if there were no other Againe vpon the transfiguration of Christ Mat. 17. hee thus commenteth Heere the whole Trinity doth appeare to the confirmation of all the faithfull Christ the Son in a glorious forme God the Father by his voyce declaring his Son to be God and the holy Ghost in the bright cloud ouer-shadowing them Againe we beleeue sayth he that there is one God the Father begetting the Sonne begotten and the holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and Son we determine such a plurality in God which is of an vndiuided substāce an indiuisible vnity again the mystery of the Trinity was discouered in the beginning of the world after vnderstood by the Prophets and lastly plainly reuealed by the Gospell when our Saviour commandeth to baptize in the name of the Father of the Son and of the holy Ghost A number of such like places might bee alledged out of his workes wherein most constantly hee auoucheth that doctrine which our and his vnequall aduersaries accuse him to bee an enemy vnto Let enuy it selfe now bee iudge whether this bee not a slander when as they both falsisy those sayings out of which they would deriue their accusation and conceale those which they knew to bee a iust defence and apologie for his innocency 75. Againe they condemne Beza and Martyr and other Protestants for denying the omnipotency of God and why because forsooth they say Quod facta vt infecta sint facere nequeat Hee cannot make those things that bee done to bee vndone An absurd inference for that
so that their ignorance be simple and vnaffected may bee saued And hereupon they conclude that it is safer to bee of that Church wherein by our owne confession a man may be saued then of that to which they denie all hope of saluation but it is a conclusion made by confusion For who seeth not that that is more likely to be the true Church which is animated with charitie then that which is void of charitie and that it is safer to harbour vnder her wings that is charitably affected euen towards her enemies then vnder her that is so miscarried with enuie that she committeth all to the pit of Hell that are not of her fellowship and profession especially seeing Saint Paul chargeth the Thessalonians that If any man obey not the Gospell they should note him with a letter and haue no companie with him that hee may bee ashamed yet they should not accout him as an enemie but admonish him as a brother If then it be safer to thinke charitably of those that are without then vtterly to condemne them all then it must be also safer to bee a member of our Church then of theirs And to make the matter more cleare Saint Augustine is flat of our mind to thinke more Christianlike of Heretikes as they repute vs then they doe for writing against the Donatists thus he sayth They that defend their false doctrine without obstinate boldnesse especially if they be not such as haue beene authors of those errours but either receiued them from their Parents or were seduced by others and doe carefully seeke the truth being readie to be reformed assoone as they shall see their errours such men are not to be esteemed as Heretikes Thus writeth Saint Augustine whereby hee condemneth the practice of the Church of Rome and iustifieth ours as more agreeable to the rule of charitie and thus that reason whereby the Iesuites seduce many ignorant persons falleth to the ground and maketh more against them then for them 43. Thirdly if the Churches authoritie bee aboue the authoritie of the Scriptures then are men to bee preferred before God and that which is subiect to errour before that which can neither erre nor deceiue for the Church consists of men but the Scripture is immediately from God and the Church may erre though not in fundamentall points but the Scripture cannot erre no not in the least titte the truth of this allegation is grounded vpon those reasons First because euery particular Church may erre as is confessed and therefore the whole Chuchin generall may erre also for such as is the nature of the parts is the nature also of the whole Secondly Councels which are their Church representatiue haue erred as is notoriously knowne to all and confessed by Saint Augustine who sayth that the decrees of prouinciall Councels are subiect to reprehension Yea former generall Councels may be corrected by them that follow as the Councell of Arimine by the Councell of Constantinople the second of Ephesus by the Councell of Chalcedon the Councell of Carthage by the first of Nice and the second of Nice by the Councell of Franckeford Thirdly the Pope that is the Head of the Church hath erred this is also confessed therefore the bodie can claime no better priuiledge but sayth the same Augustine There is no doubt of the truth of any thing which is contained in the Scripture Therefore who can doubt to place the resolution of their faith as the safest course on the Scripture rather then on the Church especially seeing no particular writer of the holy Scripture can be taxed with the least errour but many particular parts of the Church whether we respect the imagined head which is vertually the whole Church in their estimation or the chiefe members in grosse as the Councels or the deuided ioynts as particular Congregations may iustly be challenged as tainted with diuers errours in doctrines of faith 44. Lastly the Church of Rome may be the whore of Babylon and so the See of Antichrist if not necessarily as wee auouch yet coniecturally as no man can denie because spirituall Babylon is said to bee a Citie situate vpon seuen hils and not onely so but that raigned ouer the Kings of the earth both which notes directly agree to the Citie of Rome but the Church of Protestants cannot by any likelihood bee that whore seeing neither of those markes doe in any respect belong vnto it Is it not safer then to rest our selues in her bosome which by al probabilitie is an honest Matrone then in her armes which is a suspected harlot If Caesar would haue his wife to bee without suspition then euerie Christian had need to looke to his faith whereunto he is as it were married by the Spirit of God wherby he is married vnto Christ that it be not onely sincere but also free from all suspition or likelihood of errour 45. Thus we see in these few maine points of the Romish Religion compared with our contrarie assertions that it is a farre safer course to bee a Protestant then a Papist let all indifferent persons iudge and discerne betwixt vs and I pray God direct them by his Spirit to choose the truth 46. There is one thing yet remaining whereby this may further appeare and so and end of this whole discourse and that is that there is no one point of doctrine wherein they differ from vs but is contradicted by some of their owne learned Writers shaking hands with vs and crossing their owne Pew-fellowes whence from ariseth not onely another strong argument of greater securitie in our Religion then in theirs which hath the suffrages of the greatest enemies to vphold it but also of vnresistable truth which worketh so vpon the consciences of the aduersaries thereof that it forceth them will they nill they to acknowledge it now and then as the Deuill himselfe was constrained to confesse Christ Iesus to be the Sonne of God I might write a whole Volume of this point alone but I will propound here onely some few instances and so shut vp this Treatise 47. Protestants teach that a man is iustified by faith alone whereby the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed vnto him and not by the inherent or adherent righteousnesse of his owne workes the same is confessed by Thomas Aquinas who sayth that no man is iustified with God by his workes but by the habit of faith infused and againe that there is in the workes of the Law no hope of iustification but by faith onely and by Pighius who holdeth that there is in vs no inherent righteousnesse whereby wee may bee iustified but that our iustification is by Christs righteousnesse imputed vnto vs and by the Diuines of Collen who affirme That the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto vs and apprehended by faith is the principall cause of our iustification and by Cassander who approueth of our doctrine of iustification by faith alone and imputed
righteousnesse So that wee exclude not from this faith repentance amendment of life new obedience c. Lastly by Ferus Stapulensis Peraldus and diuers others yea almost all of them when at the point of death they come to the point of try all flye to this sacred anchor of Christs righteousnesse alone renouncing all righteousnesse in themselues as the famous example of Stephen Gardiner declareth who lying on his death-bed reposed himselfe on the righteousnesse of Christ only for his saluation and being told that it was contrarie to his former resolution answered that though it was the truth yet that gappe was not to bee opened to the people 48. The Protestants hold that our best workes are stayned with so many imperfections that they cannot merit any thing at Gods hand except it be hell fire and damnation and that though God of his mercie reward good workes with eternall life yet it is not for any condignity that is in them but for Christs sake into whom the partie working is ingrafted and made a member Many learned Romanists are of the same opinion Bellarmine sayth that in regard of the vncertaintie of our owne righteousnesse and danger of vaine glorie the safest way is to put our confidence in the sole mercie and goodnesse of God Waldensis writeth Hee is a sounder Diuine a faithfuller Catholicke and more agreeing to the Scriptures that simply denieth merits and sayth that the Kingdome of Heauen is from the mere grace and will of the giuer not from any desert of the Receiuer Of the same opinion was Albertus Pighius as witnesseth Bellarmine Ferus sayth Whatsoeuer God giueth vs is of grace not of debt If therefore thou desire to hold the grace and fauour of God make no mention of thy merits The same hold Gregorius Ariminensis Durandus Stella with many more renouncing all the new Rhemish doctrine of merits of condignitie taught by the Schoole fourbished ouer by the Councell of Trent and refining Iesuites All these being sworne subiects to the Church of Rome yet being constrained by the conscience of the truth doe as fully and perfectly maintaine our doctrine as if they were the rankest Protestants in the World 49. Protestants denie all free will to grace before it bee quickned and liued by Gods Spirit Many learned Romanists teach the same doctrine Laurentius Valla as Bellarmine reports wished that the name of free-will were vtterly taken away The Master of Sentences auouched that free-will before grace repaire it is pressed ouercome with cōcupiscence hath weaknesse in euill but no grace in good and therefore cannot but sinne damnably Dom. Bannes affirmeth that it is false and worse then false that any man without the speciall and supernaturall helpe of God can be able to doe a supernaturall act Ariminensis calleth the Romish doctrine of free-wil Pelagianisme The Iesuite Suarez sayth that diuers Romanists say that it is a rash and hereticall opinion to affirme that when grace is equally offered to two that one of them could be conuerted and not the other What could any Protestant say more 50. Transubstantiation circumgestation and subtraction of the Cuppe are denyed by many of their owne side as well as by vs. Durand sayth It is great rashnesse to thinke the bodie of Christ by his diuine power cannot bee in the Sacrament vnlesse the bread be conuerted into it and therefore that he holdeth the contrarie onely for the Churches determination So also sayth Scotus There is no Scripture to enforce Transubstantiation except ye bring the Church of Romes exposition Occham sayth that that opinion that the substance of the bread remaineth is subiect to lesse inconueniences and lesse repugnant to reason and holy Scripture The custome of circumgestation of the hoast sayth Cassander may be left with greater profit to the Church if it bee wisely laid downe both because it is but a new inuention as also because it seruethrather for pompous ostentation then for any godly deuotion and so as Albertus Crantzius sayth is contrary to Christs institution Pope Gelasius witnesse Gregorie of Valintia said that the substance of the bread and wine in the Eucharist doe not lose their nature Touching abstraction of the Cuppe their learned Cassander acknowledgeth that for the space of a thousand yeeres after Christ the people communicated in both kindes and that in Greece and Armenia they doe still and the best Catholickes earnestly desire a reformation of this matter in the Church of Rome And Durand their Schooleman that the receiuing in one kind onely is not a full sacrament all receiuing for though that in the consecrated hoast Christs bloud bee contained yet it is not there sacramentally in that the bread signifieth the bodie and not the bloud and the wine the bloud and not the bodie Of the same mind were Alexander Alensis Albertus magnus Biel with others more this last affirming that in the Apostles times all did receiue the wine aswell as the bread because God is no respecter of persons The second that it is of greater vse and profit to the faithfull and the first that it is a matter of greater merit Thus all these Schoolemen doe protestantize in this point 51. Auricular confession is denied by Protestants to be necessarie for the remission of sinnes and to bee commanded by God The same is auerred by Panormitane Peresius Bonauenture Medina Rhenanus Erasmus Caietane c. all of them concluding with one voyce that it is a doctrine deriued onely from a positiue Law of the Church and not from the Law of God yea and the last that is named to wit Cardinall Caietane is bold to say that it is so farre from being commanded that euery one should be shriuen before hee come to the Communion that the contrarie is insinuated by the Apostle where hee sayth Let a mantry himselfe And Gratian confesseth that Ambrose Augustine Chrysostome Theophilact and other Greeke Fathers thought that secret confession was not necessarie And lastly Acosta a famous Iesuite auoucheth that it would be well for the Indians if the bond of confession might bee taken away lest they should bee constrained to commit so many and so grieuous sacriledges 52. So the Romish doctrine of satisfactions is vtterly condemned by Protestants and not onely by them but by many of their owne learned Doctours for the Diuines of Louaine as Bellarmine witnesseth of them and others did certainly defend that the sufferings of Saints cannot bee true satisfactions but that our punishments are remitted onely by the personall satisfaction of Christ And Panormitane sayth that a man may be inwardly so penitent and contrite that he shall need no satisfaction at all but may bee absolued presently without any penance doing And another that the treasure of Indulgences doth consist onely of the merits of Christ and not of the satisfactions of Saints because the merits of Christ are of infinite valew 53.
And Salmeron a third Iesuite descending yet a stayre lower saith that the translation of the Scripture should be onely tillinguis of three tongues that is Hebrew Greeke and Latine in honour of the Trinitie Or as another saith Because thâ—se three tongues were onely sanctified vpon the Crosse Herevpon the Councill of Trent decreeth the olde vulgar Latine Translation of the Bible to be onely authenticall and alone to bee vsed in all publike Lectures Disputations Preachings and expositions And though Pope Pius Quartus forbade onely as Bellarmine saith such to read the Scripture as had not licence thereunto giuen them by their Priest or Confessor to wit such as could receiue no damage but profit by their reading yet Pope Clement the eighth as another Iesuite confesseth tooke away all faculty of giuing licence to any to read the Scripture or to retaine with them the common Bibles or any parts of the Old and New Testament in the Mother tongues so that as wofull experience hath taught it was in times past in this Land and is now in those places where the bloudie Inquisition is exercised a sufficient marke of an Heretike and cause of fire and faggot to bee found with a translated Bible in their houses or hands 10. This is their doctrine which how it ingendreth and nourisheth ignorance who seeth not seeing first it locks vp the fountayne of knowledge that few or none of the common sort can drinke of the waters thereof cleane contrary to that famous saying of learned Origene who compareth the Scripture to Iacobs Well where not onely Iacob and his Sonnes that is the Learned but also the Cattell and the Sheepe that is the rude and the ignorant doe drinke and refresh themselues but these men barre out the poore sheepe and driue them away from the waters of life to no other end as it may be thought but that they should pine away with thirst and liue and dye in blindnesse and ignorance For if all sound and true knowledge is to be found in holy Scripture and therein is the whole counsell and will of God reuealed vnto vs so farre foorth as it concerneth our saluation it being the Epistle of the great Iehouah to his poore Subiects to enforme them of his will and pleasure how should they possibly clime to this true and sauing knowledge who are debarred from the place and meanes where it is to found and had and not permitted to reade this Letter or heare it read vnto them contrary to that doctrine of Nazianzene who saith that all Christians ought to come to Church and there read themselues or if they be not able heare others read vnto them the word of God 11. If they reply and say that it is enough for them to know the Traditions of the Church I answere that if there were as certaine ground for their Traditions to prooue them the word of God as there is of the Scripture then this allegation might carry some shew of reason but the vncertainty nouelty mutability and absurdity of many of them doe plainely shew that it is no safe course to repose the strength of our saluation vpon them but rather to flye to that foundation which is immooueable If they say that the people must be content for their knowledge to depend vpon their Priests and to draw it from their lippes and so by that meanes may attayne a sufficient measure of instruction I answere that the Priests are for the most part as ignorant as the people as shall be shewed afterward and if any be furnished with gifts yet they seldome teach the people and when they doe they preach in stead of Gods word their owne inuentions idle tales and meere tales and fables witnesse Cornelius Agrippa and Dante their Poet two no great enemies but fast friends to Popish Religion Now if a man should bee constrained to sup vp whatsoeuer euery sottish Priest or idle Fryer or craftie Iesuite doth belch foorth without examining doubtlesse hee should sucke downe much poyson in stead of wholsome iuyce If they say that there is multiplicity of good Bookes written to this end to instruct the people in the grounds of Religion and to stirre them vp vnto godlines and deuotion I answere there is indeede a great number of such Bookes which are so farre from gendring sound knowledge that they are no better then baits of Antichrist seruing to allure men vnder shew of deuotion vnto Idolatry and Apostacie from God for if they were sound and true why should Gods Booke which without all question is most sound bee prohibited and they admitted Why is it not lawfull to examine them by that rule and why should all Bookes else which any thing make against their Religion be suppressed and by great penalties forbidden Surely this sheweth that all their Bookes of deuotion are but rotten stuffe and meere hypocriticall deuices to deceiue the simple 12. Lastly if they say that all our translations are false and erronious and therefore that our Bibles are not the word of God I answere that indeede it is impossible to haue a Translation so exact perfect that no fault nor imperfection shuld be found therin neuertheles the chief faults in our translations are for the most part in respect of proprietie of words and phrases which are nothing repugnant to holy doctrine or good life and not in any materiall or substantiall poynt of faith and those also are not frequent but heere and there dispersed which can no waies hinder the profite to be gathered by the rest of the Scripture and if for some corruption in translations the Bible should not bee read then none but the originall Hebrew and Greeke should bee in vse for all translations are imperfect yea their so much extolled vulgar authorized by the Councill of Trent wherein the Diuines of Louane obserued many errors and Isidorus Clarius a Spanish Monke professed that hee found eight thousand fau'ts though for his plaine dealing hee was plagued by the Inquisitors and after that it was decreed authenticall by the Councill a thing worth the noting yet it was corrected and castigated by the authority and commaundement of sixe Popes successiuely Nay the Hebrew and Greeke copies themselues should not bee permitted for euen they if wee will beleeue the Romanists are full of corruptions but as Bellarmine saith of the corruptions in the Hebrew text so wee may truely of the imperfections in our translations Non sunt tanti momenti vt inijs quâ— ad fidem bonos more 's pertinent sacrae Scripturae integritas desideretur that is they are not of such moment that they can hinder the integrity of the Scripture in those things which pertaine to faith good manners 13. Moreouer besides all this it is no maruell if they contend for their vulgar Latine Bible that it should be onely authenticall seeing many Romish errors are thereby maintained which in the truth of yeâ—â—â— originall
haue no colour of defence And so this doctrine doth not onely vphold ignorance in the simple but also herefie among the learned As for example to prooue the intercession and patronage of the Virgine Mary they alledge that text of Genesis falsely translated Ipsa conteret caput Serpentis She shall bruise the Serpents head whereas the Hebrew truth hath most euidently He or It meaning the Seede of the woman and not Shee Againe to prooue their Masse Sacrifice they alledge that of Gen. 14. 18. Melchizedek obtulit panem vinum erat enim sacerdos whereas in the Hebrew text is no word that signifieth to offer but to bring foorth and the coniunction causall is also wanting They extenuate originall sinne by the corrupt translation of that text Gen. 8. 21. For whereas in the originall it is Figmentum cordis est tantum malum The frame of the heart is onely euill their translation hath The cogitation of mans heart is prore vnto euill To prooue their inuocation of Saints they obiect that of Iobs thus translated Ad aliquem Sanctorum conuertere which in the Hebrew is not an affirmatiue proposition but an Ironical Interrogation thus To which of the Saint wilt thou turne To proue that no man can be sure of the remission of his sinnes and saluation they alledge that corrupted text Eccles 9. 1. Nescit homo vtrum amore vel odio dignus sit whereas in the originall it is nothing but thus No man knoweth loue or hatred all things are before him That their Church cannot erre they labour to prooue by the promise of our Sauiour Ioh. 14. 26. where their translation thus speaketh Spiritus sanctus suggeret vobis omnia quaeâ—unque dixerâ— vobis but in the originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quaecunque dixi vobis Whatsoeuer I haue told you That Matrimony is a Sacrament they prooue by that place Ephes 5. 32. where their translation hath a Sacrament for a Mysterie So for their Merite of works they produce Heb. 13. where in their translation the word Merite is vsed which is not extant in the Greeke So to prooue that after Baptisme there remaine no Relikes of sinne they vse that text Heb. 9. 28. Christus semel oblatus est ad multorum exhaurienda peccata now where all is drawne out there nothing remaineth and yet in the originall there is no such word Lastly the Councill of Trent it selfe to prooue that the Church may dispense with the Sacraments contrary to Christs institution and alter them abuseth that text 1. Cor. 4. 1. where the Ministers are called Dispensatores mysteriorum Dei whereas the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth no such matter Thus wee â—ee great cause why they should stand vpon this vulgar Latine onely because it affoords vnto them such pregnant proofes for the defence of their grosse errors It defends them and their errors therefore they haue reason to defend it And thus by forbidding the Scriptures to bee read of the people they multiply ignorance and by allowing onely their Latine translation for authenticall they hatch heresie 14. Secondly their doctrine which commandeth Prayers to be made publikely and priuately in an vnknowne tongue tendeth to the same end for though touching priuate prayers they agree not amongst themselues some affirming that the people ought not to say their Pater noster Aâ—e Maria and Mattens in any tongue but the Latine because this hath beene the ancient custome of the Church as they pretend Others that it is lawfull to pray in our natiue tongues but yet if we doe pray in Latine it is not vnfruitfull Notwithstanding their continuall practice sheweth their most approoued opinion for among them all you shall hardly finde one in an age that vseth any other but Latine prayers but as for publike prayers in the Church it is the doctrine of the Councill of Trent armed with a curse that no part of the Diuine Seruice and publike Leiturgie bee celebrated in a knowne tongue Now how can this but noozle the people in ignorance when they are taught to babble out in their deuotions like Parrats without vnderstanding what they say Surely this must needes bee a blinde deuotion and an ignorantzeale when the tongue shall pray or rather prate and the heart not vnderstand what it vttereth for if true deuotion be a religious offering vp of the whole man both body and soule and euery facultie and part of both to God by way of spirituall sacrifice then certainely that cannot bee true deuotion but blinde delusion when the affection and the tongue shall bee lifted vp in prayer and in the meane while the vnderstanding shall be idle not knowing what the affection and tongue doth seeing the proper worke of the intellectiue part of the soule is to know and vnderstand which by this meanes it is depriued of And this is that which both Aquinas their Angelicall Doctor purposely confesseth and Rabbi Bellarmine also himselfe though vnawares for the one saith that he which vnderstandeth not what he prayeth is depriued of the fruit of his deuotion and the other that except the prayer be vnderstood no consolation at all can be reaped thereby Ignorance therefore must needes bee cherished by this doctrine seeing the vnderstanding which is the seat of knowledge is muffled and the best fruit that can arise hence-from is blinde zeale and ignorant deuotion by which the Iewes crucified Christ the Gentiles persecuted the Church of Christ and taught that in so doing they did God good seruice for deuotion without zeale is like an Arrow shot out of a childs Bow which falleth to the ground without doing hurt or good and zeale without knowledge is like a Shippe carryed with full winde and displayed Sailes without a Pilot to sterne and guide it in the right course 15. Thus for the maine doctrine Now the accessarie attending vpon it is more dangerous then the maine it selfe for they are taught not onely thus to pray but that these prayers are meritorious of saluation and that hee which saith a certaine number of them shall haue thus many dayes and thus many yeeres pardon as 3000. dayes for saying a short prayer in the Primer ten thousand dayes for saying fiue Pater nosters before the Vernacle twenty thousand dayes for saying a short prayer at the Leuation yea a hundred yeeres for saying our Ladyes Psalter euery Saturday yea fiue hundred yeeres for saying a short prayer which Saint Gregory made and a number such like as hath beene before sufficiently discouered Now if pardon of sinnes and saluation may be merited by mumbling vp euery day on their Beades these short and vncouth prayers what need any seeke for further knowledge in the word of God If these bee sufficient as they make the people beleeue then all further instruction must needs be thought vnnecessary and so it cannot choose but follow that a deluge of blindnesse