else the Fathers of the Council of Basile and Verratus a Papist errs for they call the Roman Church a particular Church We grant say they Basil Concil Epist Synod 3 Verratus disputationum contra Lutheranos Tom. 6. de authoritate potest univers Eccles cap. 1. that the Roman Church is a principal Church among others but while you commend a part forget not the whole And they say The Universal Church comprehends the Roman Church Choose you then whither will you contradict the Fathers of the Council of Basile and a Papist Verratus and be so absurd as to call the arm of the body the whole body an arm of the Ocean sea the whole Ocean sea or to go from your tittle that the Roman Church is not the Catholick Church Secondly the Catholick Church comprehends them that were before Christ but the Church of Rome comprehends not them for there was a Church ere ever there was a Church at Rome and the Roman Church comprehends none but them that acknowledges the Pope to be the head of the Church But those that were before Christ never did that Therefore the Roman Church is not the Catholick Church Thirdly the Catholick Church is invisible for at the least neither are they that are glorified neither are they that are to be born visible But ye will not have the Roman Church but alwayes visible Therefore the Roman Church is not the Catholick Church Fourthly if the Roman Church be the Catholick Church then either it shal follow that the Pope is the head of the Catholick Church or else that the Roman Church wants a visible head Choose you whither of these ye will for the one ye must if ye will have the Roman Church to be the Catholick Church But to say that the Pope is the head of the Catholick Church I suppose ye dare not be so blasphemous for the glorified Saints and Peter himself are of the Catholick Church or else as I said before Pope Pius and the Fathers of Trent errs And so then if ye will make him head of the Catholick Church ye must make him head of the glorified Saints and of Peter also So then choose you whither will ye leave the style of Catholick which ye claim as proper to your Church or will ye have the Pope the head of the triumphant Church in heaven Or last of all will ye have your Roman Church to want a visible head One of these ye must choose So to end this point this style of Catholick it is like the numbering of the people by David for as it brought him in a wonderful strait when he saw it behoved him to choose either seven years famine or four moneths flying before his enemies or three days pestilence 2. Sam. 24. So this tittle of yours if you will abide by it brings you in a wonderful strait for ye have not the choise of one of three evils but these three things must ye either choose or else let this style of Catholick go one of you fighting against another the Church invisible and the Pope not to be the head of the Church Of the which the least of these is more able to overthrow your Kingdom then they all were able to have overthrown the Kingdom of David for they are the main pillars of your Kingdom your unity your visibility your Popes supremacy all which you must either lose or else let your style of Catholick go from your Church But how will ye wrestle your self out of this For if ye will believe the Fathers of Trent and Pope Pius in defining the Catholick Church ye cannot eschew these inconveniencies And if you will not believe them that they spake truly in that point ye must accuse them of error And so the Church hath erred the Pope hath erred and your self hath erred that said your Church hath the truth in all things And surely as Cajaphas being high Priest that year spake the truth when he said that one must die for the people John 11.50 and not the whole Nation perish suppose in an evil sense So have the Fathers of Trent and Pope Pius here spoken truly both according to the Scriptures for the Church is called the assembly of the first-born whose names are written in heaven Heb. 12.23 And that new Jerusalem which is from above which is the mother of us all Gal. 4.26 And also according to the Fathers Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 7. Bernard in Cant. c. 78. August de catechis rud cap. 20. Gregor moral in Job lib. 28. cap. 9. who affirmeth that the Church is the company of the predestinat and all the elect are within the compass of it are citizens of it So as Christ said to the Jews Matth. 12.27 If I cast out devils by the prince of devils by whom then casteth your children them out So if we speak now by an erroneous spirit that sayes the Catholick Church comprehends all the elect that was is and shal be and the Church of Rome cannot be the Catholick Church By what spirit hath your Council and Pope and these Fathers spoken the same So not your children but your Fathers shal be your Judges Ye did mark some contradiction as ye thought between me and some others unto the which I will answer in the own time Let me therefore mark this one now and mark it Reader Ye have heard now how that all these with one voice have said that the Catholick Church comprehends all the elect that was is and shal be Is it any heresie then to hold this point I think you will not nor dare not say it What will you say then to your general Council of Constance Sess 15. art 1. 6. who condemned John Hus for the same doctrine the first and sixth article for saying that there is an Universal Church which is the company of the predestinat and as it is taken in this sense it is an article of our faith For these among the rest was this pure innocent condemned and burnt as an heretick his doctrine as heresie which of these will ye say now have erred whither the general Council of Constance or the Fathers of Trent Pope Pius Gregorie Augustine Clement and Bernard For surely if the latter erred not then not only did the Council of Constance err but also have brought upon themselves innocent blood in condemning the innocent and the truth in him And if the Council of Constance erred not in condemning these articles of John Hus then have they condemned the doctrine of the Fathers of Trent Pope Pius Gregorie Augustine c. and their persons in the person of John Hus. Choose which of them ye will I speak the truth to thee in Christ Reader be not deceived But open thy eyes and behold the veritie it self condemned by a general Council and the professor of it burnt for an heretick but his blood and the blood of the rest of the martyrs of God is found in this whore of
that the Jesuit Varadius wrote to Barerius Non posse ab aliquo fieri ullum magis meritorium opus quà m si Regem intersecerit That there could not be a more meritorious work then for him to kill a King Cresuel in his Philopat sect 2. num 160. 162. affirmeth That subjects may not only lawfully dethrone heretical Princes but also are obliged by divine precepts yea even upon the greatest hazard of their souls His words are Obligati sunt subditi ad Principos haereticos depellendos hujusmodi Principes suos non tantum legitimè possunt deturbare sed etiam ad hoc praecepto divino ac vinculo arctissimo ac-extremo animarum periculo tenentur But let us hear what H. T. replyeth First saith he art 7. p. 100. What this or that particular Doctor may hold or the Popes flatterers if he have any adds nothing to the creed of Catholicks nor is it justly chargeable on the whole Church Answer Sir if you had not the whores fore head that refuseth to be ashamed ye could not write so for this is so well known to be the commonly received doctrine of your Church that Cresuel Eudem ingenuously confesseth it For Cresuel plainly avoweth That it is the universal opinion of your Divines and an article of your Faith that any Prince who openly maketh defection from the Roman Catholick Religion and would withdraw others from the same doth presently fall from all his power and dignity by vertue both of Divine and Humane law and that before any sentence of the Pope and their subjects are all free of any obligation of oath to obedience and they ought to cast such a man out of their dominions as an Apostat lest he infect others Now lest ye think we wrong him not citing his words faithfully we shal set down his own words Universa Theologorum Schola tenet est certum ac de fide quemcunque Principem Christianum si de Romano Catholica Religione manifestè deflexerit alios avocare voluerit excidere statim ab omni potestate dignitate ex ipsa vi juris divini ac humani Hocque ante omnem sententiam Pontificis subditos quoscunque liberos esse ab omni juramenti obligatione quod de obedientia praestitissent posséque ac debere hujusmodi hominem tanquam apostatam ex dominatu eficere ne alios inficiat Cresuel Philop. num 37. Likewise Eudem affirmeth Apol. cap. 3. Non est propria Jesuitarum sed totius Ecclesiae quidem ab antiquissimis temporibus consensione recepta nostra doctrina That this is not the peculiar doctrine of the Jesuits but of the whole Church of Rome received from ancient times 2. But if the testimony of these two Doctors be not sufficient I hope the infallible judgement of two Popes è Cathedra will abundantly convince that this is the doctrine of the Romish Church The first is Pope Urban who Can. 23. quast 5. Can. excommunicatorum saith We esteem them not murderers who being possessed with the zeal of their mother the Catholick Church against these that are excommunicat shal happen to kill any of them The second is Pope Sixtus the fifth who when he heard that King Henry the third of France was killed by the Monk he went to his Consistory where before his Cardinals at Rome Sept. 11. 1589 he had a Panegyrick Oration which he began thus Animo meo saepe c. When I pondered in my mind and was intent upon the thoughts of these things which lately have fallen out by God providence I thought I might make use of that of the Prophet Habakkuk There shal be a work done in your dayes which none shal believe when it shal be told The King of France is dead by the hands of a Monk for to that may the words of the Prophet be rightly applyed c. a brave application of Scripture indeed And a little after We with grief truly did often fore-tell that as he was the last of his family so he should have an unusual and shameful end See more of this Oration cited by learned Hornbeck contra Bullam Pap. Innocent 10. Now can any Papist for his heart disown this treasonable doctrine which the Pope approveth except he disown his faith and Religion For doth not the faith and Religion of Papists depend on the Popes decrees so strongly and with such a spirit of delusion that he can make the most pestilent doctrines pass with them for Evangelical truths and the most abominable actions for patterns of holiness For Bellarmin expresly affirmeth and no Papist that I heard of did ever disallow it That if the Pope did err in commanding vices or prohibiting vertues the Church should be obliged to believe that vices are good and vertues evil unless she should speak against conscience Bellarm. lib. 4. de Pontif. cap. 5. And that in good sense Christ hath given to Peter the power to make sin to be no sin and that which is no sin to be sin Bellarm. contra Barclay cap. 31. We can dissent from the most eminent in our Church when they hold any thing contrary to the Word of God but so cannot Papists do with the Pope whom they acknowledge to be infallible 2. But let us hear what H. T. saith further We saith he abominat and detest that doctrine to wit that if the Pope excommunicat an heretical Prince it is lawful for his own subjects to kill him For it is defined by the Council of Constance and therefore of faith with us that it is heretical to affirm it lawâ—ul for a subject to kill his Prince upon any pretence whatsoever Sess 15. Ans O matchless audacity For doth not the Bulls and Dâ—cretals of your Popes the Writings and Disputations of your Doctors and your actings and practises prove you a liar Yea if there were no more then the Acts of the Parliament of Paris who condemned the Books of Bellarmin Suarez Mariana Santarella c. to the fire and banished the Jesuits the Kingdom it were sufficient to convince you of falshood 2. Whereas ye say that the Council of Constance hath declared the doctrine of King-killing heretical it is a mere forgery For your great Doctor Suarez who did write fifteen Volumes of Divinity saith to King James of famous memory that the Council of Constance forbiddeth not the killing of a King excommunicated by the Pope His words are Ubi legit Rex in Concilio Constantiensi particulam illam Principis per Papam excommunicati vel deprivati aut illam per suos subditos aut alios quoscunque The truth is the case propounded to the Council by Gerson was not about the murdering of Soveraign Princes but about the killing of a great Officer of the Crown who ruleth tyrannically and exalts himself above his King For John Duke of Burgundy who had killed Lewis Duke of Orleans pretended him to have been a Tyrant of that kind So then Tyrants are declared inviolable
purity and liberty as thou hast had Or if ever Nation after us shal have so long a day after such a manner again And it seems to me that as the LORD confirmed Ezechiah of his promise by causing 2. Kings 20. the Sun to return back again miraculously by the degrees whereby it went down So the LORD hath confirmed his superabundant love towards us in causing the light of the Gospel to return again as it were oft times and that most wonderfully and miraculously by the degrees whereby our iniquities in the righteous judgement of God did hasten it to go down upon us Yea the blessing of Abraham hath come upon us For he hath blessed them that blessed us and hath cursed them who hath cursed us he hath striven against them who hath striven against us and hath made our oppressors to eat their own flesh and to drink their own blood no instrument formed against thee O Church of Scotland hath ever prospered and the tongue that hath risen against thee the LORD hath condemned that all flesh might know that GOD was thy Savior and the strong GOD of Jacob thy avenger And certainly if ever people might have been called Jephzibas Esai 62.6 that is the LORDS delight or their land Beula that is married unto him the Church and Kingdom of Scotland might have been so called For the LORD had delight in us and our land hath a husband even the LORD our Redeemer he was an ornament unto us Esa 60 19. he set his beautie on us Ezech. 16.14 he crowned us with glory and a Diadem by the hand of our GOD was set upon our heads Esai 6.2 And true is that of us which our Savior spake to his disciples Luke 10.24 Many Kings and Prophets hath desired to see the things that we have seen and hear the things that we have heard and have not seen them nor heard them So who are so ladened with mercy and kindness as we have been for we have been made the head and not the tail Deut. 28.13 as the LORD promised And surely if ever people should have been Joshurim Deut. 32.15 that is upright and straight in the eyes of the LORD we should have been so No who should have been so holy as we Who so strong in CHRIST and rooted and grounded in him as we Coloss 2.7 Who so rich in all grace and fruitful in all good works as we For who had so many and so glorious means to have made us to have abounded in all grace as we had What could the LORD have done more to us then he hath done Isai 5.4 For we wanted no mean that ever the LORD commanded in his Word either to have bred grace in us or to have preserved it and increased it But they to whom much is given much shal be required at their hands again For as the LORD made us a spectacle of his mercy wherein he did demonstrat the riches of his free grace in CHRIST JESUS unto all the Kingdoms of the earth and above them all So it had been our part proportionably to have met him with thankfulness again and to have been examples of all grace godliness righteousness and of all good works unto all others and above all others But alace sinful Nation laden with iniquities Esai 1.4 who is so sinful as thou art What Nation so polluted with all abomination and wickedness as thou art Thy iniquities are mo then the sand of the sea they are grown up so high that the top of them reach up to the very heavens Hosea 9.7 and the cry of them is like yea beyond the cry of Sodom there is such a burden of iniquity upon this Land that considering all circumstances both of the means and of the time and space the LORD hath given us to repent I know not if ever Nation was so great in the eyes of the LORD as this Land is For may not that which the Prophet spake of Juda. Ezechiel 22. be most justly said of thee O Scotland For art thou not replenished with blood from corner to corner so that blood touches blood Are not thy Nobles in thee every one ready to shed blood In thee the father and the mother are despised in the midst of thee the widow and the fatherless are oppressed In thee the very abominations of the Gentils are committed The discovering of the Fathers shame and adultery with thy neighbors wife thou art so laden with adulteries incests and whoredooms that the Land groans under thee thou hast prophaned his Sabaths despised his Law contemned his Gospel withholden from him the fruits of his Kingdom and hast trodden under foot the blood of CHRIST and hast grieved that Spirit of grace So that when I think of the number and greatness of our sins I cannot but wonder that the LORD should not have withdrawn his Kingdom long since from us and have given it unto others that would have brought forth the fruits thereof Matth. 21.41 Yea I wonder that he hath not caused the Land to vomit us out for the abominations and sins wherewith we have defiled it in so great a light And surely when I think of the severity of the Justice of GOD in punishing other Nations and Kingdoms for the contempt of his Gospel and the withholding of the fruits of his Kingdom from him my soul trembles For wherefore did the LORD reject the natural branches that chosen generation of whom the Fathers was and of whom CHRIST was according to the flesh Rom. 11 2â— 9.5 and gave them and their posterity over to the hardness of their hearts this 1500. years and more to be damned for ever and ever in that everlasting darkness and yet his wrath is not turned back but because they would not be gathered and knew not in that their day the things that belonged to their peace and would not render to him the fruits of his Kingdom in due season Matth. 23.37 Luke 19.42.43 Mat. 21.41 And wherefore did the LORD remove his Candlestick Rev. 2.5 from a great many of the Churches both of the East and of the West which were planted by the Apostles and were once lanterns of light and hath given them over to strong delusions to believe lies 2. Thes 2.10.12 the one to the impiety of Mahomet and the savage Tyrant of the Church the other to the bondage of that second beast and fearful darkness of that bottomless pit Rev. 13.11 9.1 But because they received not the love of the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness as the Apostle saith 2. Thes 2.12 Now if GOD spared not them but gave them over to a most fearful bondage both of soul and body both spiritual and corporal temporal and eternal how should we not fear as great or rather greater judgements seeing we had all these as examples before us to have fore-warned us and to have made us to fear For we are not to think as our Savior saith to the Galileans that they
Babel and therefore one day she shal be recompensed for all her iniquity Rev. 17.6 and 18.24 Go out of her therefore and save thy soul that thou be not tormented in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone with her for evermore Rev 18.45 Otherwise I call heaven and earth to witness against thee that thou shalt die in her sin and the smoke of thy torment shal ascend for evermore Rev. 14.1 What now will you say to these things that your Church is not the Catholick Church but a part of it only and is only Catholick because of the Catholick doctrine that she professes But if this be true wherefore then did your general Council condemn it in John Hus and burn him for that doctrine which both your self must confess to be true and is agreeable to Scripture Fathers and your own Popes Next I say suppose when ye are brought to this strait ye must say so yet for all this not only call ye your Church Catholick because of the soundness of doctrine which ye suppose she professes but also and speciallie to make the simple believe that there is no salvation out of her As appeareth by the Epistle of Cardinal Cusanus writing to the Bohemians Cochlaeus histor Hussitar lib. 21. Therefore ye call it the only true Church and the Catholick Church for out of the particular Church there is salvation but out of the Catholick Church there is no salvation Thirdlie I say as the Epistles of Peter John James and Jude are intituled Catholick not because of the soundness of their doctrine which is common to the Epistles of Paul also and all the rest of the Scripture which in that respect may also be called Catholick but because they are written generallie to all So the Church is called Catholick properly not because of the soundness of doctrine for that is common to all the particular Churches that have the puritie of Religion but because it comprehends all the particular Churches and all the elect And also to put a difference between the Church of the Jewes which did comprehend but one certain people and the Christian Church since the coming of Christ which is not bound to any certain place or nation or people but indifferently receives all both Jew and Gentil that believes and therefore is it called Catholick and therefore in our Belief we say not I believe the Catholick doctrine but the Catholick Church So by this she is properlie distinguished from particular Churches as the mother from the daughters and the whole body from the particular members So then if you would speak properlie of your Church and not make your styles snares to catch the souls of the simple call her but a particular Church and a member of the Catholick Church but yet dead and rotten as shal be shown afterward by the grace of God Otherwise if you will but call her the Catholick Church you first rob the mother for she is properly Catholick and also injures the rest of the daughters For in respect of the soundness of faith they may also challenge the same to them And thirdly ye deceive the souls of the simple thereby by making them believe there is not one other Church but yours And last of all you are sacrilegious in decking an adulteress with the styles of the spouse of Christ As to the third point wherein ye calumniate the truth of God which we profess in calling it a new Evangel and old renewed and new invented heresies of our own These are indeed heavie words wherewith ye blaspheme the word of the Lord Acts 18.6 and 19.9 and speak evil of it to the people of this Countrey And therefore as the Apostle saith of them that blasphemed his doctrine Your damnation is just Rom. 3.8 For a wo by Gods own mouth is pronounced against them that call good evil and evil good truth falshood and falshood truth and darkness light and light darkness Isai 5.20 But as the Archangel when he strave with Satan about the body of Moses did not blame him with cursed speaking but said The Lord rebuke thee Jude 9. so we will not blame you with cursed speaking but the Lord rebuke you For ye speak here the vision of your own heart and not from the mouth of the Lord And ye are not the first that hath blasphemed the truth of God for so did the Jewes before you call the doctrine of the Gospel a sect a heresie and the Gentiles called it strange Gods and a new doctrine and the preachers thereof a setter forth of strange Gods and of new doctrine and a babler Acts 28. and 14. and 17. The Jews said that Christ had a Devil and yet as our Lord testifies it was they that were the children of the Devil John 8.44 Ye say that we preach a new Evangel and old new heresies but this is the sin the doctrine of your Church For to let that pass of that new everlasting Gospel which your Friers invented devised as testifieth Guliel de sancto Amore in his book de pericul noviss temp anno 1192. wherein was contained such blasphemies as the heaven and earth abhorrs to hear them That God the Father reigned under the law God the Son under grace And the holy Ghost was then that year to begin his kingdom and to continue to the end of the world And that Jesus Christ was not God his Sacrament nothing and his Evangel not a true Evangel O horrible blasphemie the which if God had not raised up some men in those days to have resisted it as the Waldenses and others which ye call hereticks and infamous men the Gospel of Christ had been lost and in stead of it we would have gotten a new Gospel the dreggs whereof yet remains in your Church But I will let this pass because the wise men of Babel I mean your Clergy of Rome saw that that was too plain an iniquitie therefore they caused it quietlie to be removed and buried and yet they not condemned as hereticks that preached it But by the contrary the Waldenses and others that withstood it was condemned as hereticks and their books burnt To let this pass I say which testifieth what the world might have looked for at your hands if the Lord had not provided better for his poor Church Your whole doctrine is Antichristian as shal be proved hereafter your Church Babel Rev. 17. your Kingdom that second beast Rev. 13.11 that hath two horns like the Lamb and yet speaks like the dragon and your head the man of sin 2. Thess 2. and son of perdition And ye are they that have renewed old condemned heresies and have invented new of your own as shal be proved afterward by Gods grace SECTION III. Concerning the Churches infallibility and immunity from error M. John Welsch SAy they our Religion is so ancient that it hath continued ever by a lineal succession of Pastors and Bishops from the dayes of Christ and his
promised to the Apostles to dwel with them and to remain with them for ever And in the 16. chap. vers 13. that he shal lead them in all truth I answer first that was the Apostles prerogative the Maister-builders of the Church of Christ that in writing and teaching the doctrine of salvation they should be led in all truth and in none ever since promised nor performed in that high measure Secondly this promise of the Spirit of truth to dwel and remain in them for ever and to lead them in all truth is made and performed in all believers in so far as may sanctifie them and save them and yet ye will not deny but that every one of the believers may err Therefore this promise will not reach so far as to keep the Church from impossibility of erring As to that place in the 17. of John I answered to it before As to the 28. of Matthew I will be with you to the end of the world I answer the same thing to it which I answered to the former that this promise is made not to any visible and ordinar succession for that is to ty the promises of God to persons and places but to the Pastors of the Church whom he sends forth and to all the faithful and is performed in them in so far forth as may save them and inable them for his work But yet this will not exeem them from all possibility of erring As to that in the 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. the Church is called the pillar and ground of truth therefore ye gather It cannot err First I will ask you to whom the Apostle speaks so and upon what occasion he speaks it Ye must say To Timothie that he might know how to behave himself in the house of God which is the Church 2. Tim. 3.14 for so the Apostle writes Then I ask Is not that Church wherein Timothy should have behaved himself called the ground and pillar of truth So the Scripture calls it and ye cannot deny it Now this Church was the Church of Ephesus then the Church of Ephesus is called the ground and pillar of truth But first the Church of Ephesus fell from her first love and the candlestick is threatned to be removed from her unless she repent Rev. 2.5 She did not repent but in time became worse and worse and so heaped fault upon fault till Christ hath now removed his candlestick from her and delivered her over to darkness and death by taking his own elect to himself and giving over the reprobat that hated the truth to the blindness of their own mind so that city is left desolat to the impiety of Mahomet and she that was once called by Gods Spirit the pillar and ground of truth hath now lost the truth Now I say that which may befall one Church may befall any other Church Then that which is befallen to the Church of Ephesus may befall any other But the Church of Ephesus was first craised and then by little and little utterly overthrown and being bereft of the light of Christ is now a Church no longer Therefore I say that there is no Church on the face of the earth howsoever they flatter themselves with glorious styles of Catholick pillars and ground of the truth whose body that is the elect and chosen in it may not be overshadowed with darkness and overtaken with faintness whose chaff that is the hypocrits in it may not be wholly consumed with rottenness and destruction and whose whole frame and outward government may not loose both their strength and beauty Thirdly I say if the Church cannot err as ye say because it is the ground and pillar of truth and if the Church of Ephesus be called the pillar and ground of truth as the Scripture saith and seeing the Church of Ephesus with all the Churches of the East as ye cannot deny hath condemned the Popes supremacy as heresie Therefore one of these two must follow either that the Church that is the pillar and ground of the truth not only may err but hath erred or else it is an heresie condemned many hūdred years ago That the Pope is the head of the Church so Popery is heresie Judge ye which of these ye will choose Last of all I say the Church is called the pillar and ground of truth because it is her office and duty to hold out the word of truth as lanterns and light Philip. 2.16 by preaching it and practising it as the Priest is called the Messenger of the Lord of hosts because his lips should preserve knowledge and declare the message of God Malach. 2.7 But as there were Priests which shew not forth the message of God but caused many to err in the Law and corrupted the covenant of Levi so there may be Churches and have been which have not upheld and maintained the truth but have fallen therefrom Now I come to your last testimony of Scripture Acts 5.39 In that counsel of Gamaliel to the Council of the Scribes and Pharisies That if the doctrine of the Apostles be of God that it cannot be destroyed What do you gather here That the truth doth remain for ever Bellarmin telleth you that ye spend but time in proving that for we grant it unto you It cannot I grant be destroyed but yet it can be persecuted and removed out of places where it was before and obscured and corrupted by mens glosses and traditions as it hath been these 1500. years by the Jews to whom this was spoken That if the doctrine of the Apostles was of God they could not destroy it and yet as was said they banished it and made the Lord to deprive them thereof and to give them over to the blindness and hardness of their hearts because they would not embrace the truth when it was offered Seeing then there is not a syllab in Gods Word that will uphold this main foundation of your Church that the Church cannot err take heed to your self M. Gilbert in time and build not the damnation of your own soul and the damnation of the souls of many others upon a point of doctrine that hath not God to bear witness to it in the whole Scripture I might end here but because this point as I said before is the main pillar that upholds the whole weight of their Church and Religion therefore I will utterly overthrow the same and I will prove out of the Word of God That the Church in all ages both may err and hath erred And first the Scripture testifieth that it is only proper to God alone by nature to be perfectly holy and true and free from all errors Mark 10.18 And contrariwise man by nature is unholy a liar prone to deceive and to be deceived Rom. 3.4 9.10.11.17 and 19. vers so that by nature he is nothing else but a mass of blindness and corruption so that the light he hath he hath it by free grace by Gods Spirit to make
3. and 11. and 15. And the Church of Galatia erred in being carried away to another Gospel and in joyning the Ceremonies of the law with grace in justification Gal. 1. and 3. And what will ye say when the heresie of Arrius who denied Christ to be the Son of God equal to his Father spread its self so far that it is testified by Theodor. hist. Eccles lib. 2. Hier. dial contra Lucif cap. 7. in chron Athanas Epist de Synod Alim Seleu. that the Bishops of the whole world became Arrians that the whole world did grieve and wonder at it self that it was become an Arrian What will ye say unto all the Christian Churches of the East Grecia Asia and Africa Churches planted by the Apostles I mean not now of them that have professed Mahometism but of them that admits the Scripture acknowledges Christ their Savior who have their ordinar succession of Patriarks and Bishops as well as your Church of Rome hath who in number far exceeds these Churches which acknowledges your Pope to be the head of the Church For first yours is but in Europe except ye will claim to the New-found land and not all Europe for all the Churches in Greece which is a great part of Europe acknowledges not your supremacy Now take the Greek Churches from you next the Reformed Churches in Scotland England Germany Denmark France Zeland Holland and other places which have gone out of Babel which are all in Europe your number will not be many that acknowledges your supremacy And next take all Asia and Africa from you which is the two parts of the world your number will be smal in comparison of these that are against your supremacy Now all these detests your supremacy as tyranny and the worship of Images your transubstantiation in the Sacrament the Communion under one kind the single life of Priests Either therefore ye must grant that the greatest number of Christian Churches have erred and doth err or else that your Roman Church doth err and your supremacy yea your Religion which depends upon your supremacy is the head of heresie But it may be ye will say that all other Christian Churches may err but that it is only proper to your Church not to err First therefore let me ask at you what can be the cause of that singular priviledge which the Church of Rome hath beside all other Churches which ever have been is or shal be Yea above Adam when he was in his integrity for he erred yea above the Angels for they remained not in the truth Jude 6 Above the Patriarcks Abraham Isaac and Jacob yea above Aaron and the Church in the wilderness above the Church under the Law yea above the Apostles and Peter himself before Christs suffering in the time of his suffering after the resurrection after the receiving of the holy Ghost for they erred in all these times Yea above the Christian Churches that have been founded by the Apostles as well as yours that had the promise the covenant the service of God once in as great purity as ever yours had that have their ordinar succession their antiquity their vocation ordinar as well as yours hath unto this day Great surely must be that priviledge given unto the Church of Rome that hath exeemed her from error others having erred What is then your prerogative above all other Churches I know that ye will say because of Peters chair that was there wherein the Popes sits after him First then if Peters chair hath such a prerogative that the Pastors who sits in it and the Church that cleaves to it cannot err I think surely the Lords chair which was at Jerusalem which was called the Temple and seat of God and Moses chair wherein the Scribes and Pharisees sate should rather have that prerogative to free the Churches and Pastors sitting in these chairs from erring yea the Church which the truth it self Jesus Christ founded whom he taught with his own mouth and among whom he was crucified should with far greater right claim to that prerogative But since all their seats have erred for the Temple became a den of thieves the Scribes and Pharisees that sate in Moses chair condemned the Lord of glory and Jerusalem it self cryed out Crucifie crucifie him And the Christian Church gathered there are long since far from the way of salvation So that if neither the chair of God nor Moses freed the Church of the Jews from erring nor the chair of Christ freed the Christian Church there gathered from erring How then can Peters chair have this prerogative above them all as to exeem that Church and Pastors that sits therein from possibility of erring What is this but to prefer him before them all whose seat hath a priviledge that neither God nor his sons nor Moses seat had O high blasphemy to be detested and abhorred of all Christian hearts But let us see if it hath this prerogative which they ascribe unto it or not And first if it could have exeemed any from erring should it not have exeemed himself especially from erring But as it hath been shown he erred Acts 1.6 Gal. 2. therefore it cannot exeem neither his successors not yet the Church that acknowledges them from erring Secondly if it had exeemed any Church from erring should it not have exeemed the Church of Antiochia especially for surely Antiochia hath better right to claim to this prerogative then your Church hath For first it was Peters first seat Next the Scripture bears witness to it that he was there Gal. 2.11 But neither was Rome Peters first seat nor is there so much as a syllab in all the Scriptures to prove that ever Peter was in Rome But suppose Peter was there for we will not examine this now whither is this prerogative not to err given to your head that is to the Popes or to the body that is the people or to both If ye say to the head as ye do indeed then what will ye answer to your own Writers and Fathers to your own Councils and Popes to your own Canon Law affirming that Popes may err and be hereticks and should be deposed and are deposed when they are manifest hereticks as hath been proved before And what will ye say to your Popes that have been hereticks indeed one of them an Arrian another an Eutychian the third a Nestorian the fourth a Montanist the fifth deposed as an heretick the sixth denying that the souls of the children of God saw Gods face while after the resurrection the seventh denying life everlasting and others giving themselves over in the hands of the Devil for the Popedom others repelling and abrogating the decrees of their predecessors others such monsters and beasts so cruel to the dead and to the living that your own friends calls them monsters and affirms of one of them that the Devil shot him through while he was abusing another mans wife and so died without repentance Dare you
sufficient to obtain salvation without works neglecting to live well and to hold the way of God by good works and being secure of salvation which is in faith had not a care to live well as he saith And in the end of that chapter he concluds the whole matter saying How far therefore are they deceived who promise to themselves everlasting life through a dead faith The which error we condemn also with you For we acknowledge the necessity of good works as the fruits of a living Faith but not as the efficient formal or instrumental cause of our justification SECTION XXII Concerning the Authority of the Fathers M. Gilbert Brown FUrther I say since the difference chiefly in Religion betwixt us and them is about the understanding of the Word of God * Not we M. Gilbert but one of the chief pillers of your own Church Cajetan a Cardinal which was sent in Germany against Luther the Popes Legat who saith in plain words That the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews doth gather insufficient arguments to prove Christ to be the Son of God that the 2. and 3. Epistle of John is not Canonical Scripture that the Epistle of Jude is Apocrypha that the last chapter of Mark is not of sound authority that the history of the adulterous woman in S. John is not authentical and of S. James Epistle that the salutation of it is profane albeit they deny a great part of the same to us what is the cause that they will not abide the tryal of the ancient Fathers of the first six hundred years seeing that they were of his Religion as he affirms If he be as good as his word the matter will be soon ended And if our Religion be not sound consonant to theirs in all things wherein they differ from us we shal reform the same Master John Welsch his Reply You said a little before M. Gilbert that the chief difference wherein we differ from you is in denying abhorring or detesting c. Now you say that the difference chiefly of Religion betwixt us is about the understanding of the Word of God How well these two agree let the Reader judge It is no wonder suppose you dissent from your brethren as I have proved in sundry points before seeing ye dissent from your self It is true indeed that many of our controversies are about the right sense and understanding of the Scripture but yet if Petrus a Soto Lindanus Peresius Canisius all great and learned Papists speak truth the most part of the weightiest and chiefest points of your Religion which are in controversie between us are but unwritten traditions which have not their beginning nor author in the Scripture and cannot be defended by the same And whereas ye would have us to refer the controversies about the sense and right meaning of the Scriptures to be decided by the writings of the Fathers of the first six hundred years we receive their monuments and writings gladly but yet so that we put a difference between them and the writings of the holy Ghost in the Scripture For as I have proved sufficiently before as I hope that only the Scriptures of God have this prerogative to be the supreme Judge of all controversies in Religion and no other and the best way to learn the sense of the Scripture is by the Scripture it self for seeing all the Scripture is inspired of God therefore it ought to be exponed by God in the same For he who made the Law can best interpret the Law And the Levits practised this in the Old Testament who exponed the Scripture by the Scripture Nehem. 8.8 and the Apostles in the New Testament who taught nothing but that which the Prophets said should come to pass Acts 26.28 And if a Father yea a Saint yea if an Angel would preach beside that which the Apostles preached let him be accursed So then nothing can be a warrant to us of the truth of the sense of the Scripture but the Scripture it self And as for the Fathers expositions as they may not be Judge as hath been said because they may err and have erred as hath been proved and your selves will not deny and they dissent oftentimes one from another in the exposition of the same So let their expositions be taken in so far as they agree with the Scripture For would ye have us ascribe that unto them which they themselves have refused and have ascribed unto the Scriptures only Hear therefore what Optatus the Bishop of the Church of Milevitan a learned man who lived about the year of God 369. saith writing against the Donatists who claimed to themselves only the title of the Church of Christ as ye do They called for a Judge he brings the Testament of Christ for a Judge and speaking to them of a point of Religion that was controverted whither one should be twise baptized or not He saith You saith he affirm it is lawful we affirm it is not lawful between your say it is lawful and our say it is not lawful the peoples souls do doubt and waver Let none believe you nor us we are all contentious men Judges must be sought for If Christians they cannot be given on both sides for truth is hindred by affection A Judge without must be sought for If a Pagan he cannot know the Christian mystery If a Jew he is an enemy to Christianity No Judge therefore of this matter can be found in earth A Judge from heaven must be sought for But why knock we at heaven when here we have his Testament in the Gospel Optatus lib. 5. contra Parmenianum And he renders a reason of this in that same Book Christ saith he hath dealt with us as an earthly father is wont to do with his children who fearing left his children should fall out after his decease doth set down his will in writing under witness and if there arise debate among the brethren they go to the Testament He whose word must end our controversie is Christ Let his will be sought in his Testament saith he Augustin in Psal 21. expos 2. urgeth the same reason of Optatus against the Donatists We are brethren saith he to them why do we strive Our father died not untestate he made a Testament and so died Men do strive about the goods of the dead while their Testament be brought forth When that is brought forth they yeeld to have it opened and read The Judge doth hearken the Counsellers be silent the Cryer biddeth peace All the people is attentive that the words of the dead man may be read and heard He lyeth void of life and feeling and his words prevail Christ sitteth in heaven and is his Testament gain-said Open it let us read We are brethren why do we strive Let our minds be pacified Our Father hath not left us without a Testament He that made the Testament is living for ever he doth hear our words He doth know his own word
Sixtus Senesis in lib. Operis Biblioth Cajetanus in fine comment Veter Test Arias Montanus in editione quadam Hebr. Bibli cum interlineari Hugo Cardinalis are against you and with us in the books of Apocrypha Gelasius de duabus naturis in Christo is against your Transubstantiation also against your Communion under one kind And Pope Adrian the 6. against this that the Pope cannot err and teach heresies Panormitan against this that it is not lawful to Ministers to marry after their ordination Bellarm. lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 19. Idem lib. 2. de purg cap. 4. Michael Bai Gerson and Roffensis all Papists against your venial sins Bellarm. lib. de imaginibus cap. 8. Abulensis and Durandus and Peresius Papists against your making of the Images of the Trinity A great many of you as Alexander Thomas Cajetan Bonaventure Marsilius Almain Carthusianus and Capreolus teach That that same worship should be given to the Image which is given to that which the Image represents And yet Durandus and Alphonsus a Castro and others is against this Therefore either the one or the other is not of your Religion And ye your self if ye be measured by this measure is not a right Papist because you dissent from many of them in many things as hath been proved before And certainly M. Gilbert if this reason of yours hold forth you shal cut off from your profession such a number of Popes Councils Jesuits Cardinals and Doctors from your Religion that it is to be feared that they cut you off from being a right defender of their Catholick Faith yea from being a member of their Synagogue that for the defence thereof is compelled to cut off so many from the same And secondly I say your reports concerning their doctrine is not to be credited but their own Apologies and Writings whereby it appears that it hath been always your fashion the more to discredit them to charge them with a number of absurd opinions which they never held As for example you charge here Waldus and his followers to have had their wives and all other things common which is your calumny of them and not their practise or doctrine For Gulielmus Parvus writeth that their life was commendable And Reynerus in his Book of Inquisitions one of your own Religion a Writer of 300. years ago who was often at the examination of them as he himself saith confesseth That they had great show of holy life and that they believed all things well of God and all the articles contained in the Creed and lived justly before men and chargeth them that they hated and blasphemed solam Romanam Ecclesiam the Romish Church only So then if his report be true as I hope ye will not gainsay they were both far from that error for that were neither to believe all things well of God nor yet to have a show of holy life and to live justly before men and also they were of our Religion in all things And where you say that we renew many old condemned heresies I answer That neither the doctrine which I affirmed they taught here was heresies nor yet themselves hereticks But you and your Church who have condemned them for the truth of God and have renewed old condemned heresies as shal be proved afterward And we have renewed no heresie at all but only the truth of God which your Church hath obscured and buried Therefore your conclusion is false that our Religion was never professed in all points as it is now in Scotland before in no Countrey no not say you by any one man For it was taught and professed by Christ and his Apostles and also by all the primitive Churches in their dayes in all points throughout all the parts of the world where they preached the Gospel as it is now in Scotland as we offer to prove by their writings and I have proved the same in sundry heads here Next the substance thereof was continued many hundred years in the Churches of Christ while partly by the heresies that sprang up for the popple was soon sown among the good seed and the Mystery of Iniquity began to work in the Apostles dayes and partly by the Mahomet and partly by the darkness of Popery it was corrupted piece and piece And what difference can you find between the Religion that the Waldenses professed and us if ye will give credit to their Apologies and Reynerus testimonies of them As for M. Robert Bruces testimony which ye produce it serves no wise to confirm your purpose but seeing ye abuse the testimonies of Scripture it is no wonder suppose ye abuse the testimonies of men For it is most true which he affirms that the truth of God hath continued for that space in this Kingdom without heresie or schism as we never read it did in any Nation in the earth in such purity without heresie and schism for such a long space And yet it follows not but it hath dwelt in sundry Churches in such purity before suppose not so long together which you omit in your conclusion Doth it follow by his testimonie but that our Religion hath been preached and professed in all true Churches in all points suppose not so long in such purity as it is in Scotland Neither doth it follow but that the substantial and main points of our Religion have been professed in all Christian Churches longer then that space suppose mixed either with some heresies or schismes So you must coin a new Logick M Gilbert before ye can confirm your proposition by his testimonie Master Gilbert Brown But here it is to be noted also that M. John can find none before the year of Christ 1158. that said against the Pope and his Religion and none immediatly before Luther the space of an hundred years and more So the Church was without his Doctors eleven hundred years and fifty or thereabout And such like Martin Luther had no predecessors to whom he succeeded in his Religion Master John Welsch his Reply You not two things here which are both false The one that I can find none that said against the Pope and his Religion before the year of Christ 1158. For our Savior and his Apostles and sundry learned Fathers in all ages and Councils both General and Provincial and some of your own Doctors and Popes have spoken against the Monarchie of your Pope and your Doctrine and Religion as I have proved before And Reynerus a man of your own Religion testifies that some said The Waldenses who had the same Religion which we profess was continued from Sylvesters dayes who lived about the 320. year of God And some said that it continued even from the Apostles days Therefore the first is false The second thing is that I can find none before Luther immediatly the space of an hundred years and more I see you are not ashamed to speak any thing for the defence of your Kingdom were it never so manifestly false
was a stranger and was to preach in a strange tongue and to strangers yet did preach with such boldness and authority as if he had been before the meanest Congregation whereat Trochrig being astonished could not but on his acquaintance with him question him thereanent whence he had such confidence and was so little moved whilst he preached before strangers so grave and judicious an Auditory and in a strange tongue To whom Ex intimo animi sensu respondit vultu velut ad condolentiam compassionem non ad contemptum vel dedignationem composito Vah Ego ne hominum quorumvis faciem aut curem aut metuam qui memini reputo apud me me coram S. Sancta gloriosà illa majestate consistere cujus verbum in ipsius conspectu servis creaturis ejus annuncio Crede mihi quum ea me subit cogitatio vultus hominum quorumcunque curare aut magni facere non possum etiamsi vellem vel maxime he answered in a humble way as one humbled and not lifted up O do I either care for or fear the face of any man who remembers and considers that I am standing before that holy and glorious Majesty whose word I preach in his sight to his servants and creatures Believe me when the impression of that is upon my spirit I cannot although I most willingly would care for or esteem the countenance of men He was most zealous and tender of all the truths of GOD and studied to the utmost of his power to advance the Kingdom and interest of CHRIST not esteeming his life dear to him for the cause of CHRIST yea accounting it his greatest honor to suffer for him and his truth witness these words of his in the fore-cited letter VVho am I that he should first have called me and then constitut me a Minister of glad tydings of the Gospell of salvation these sixteen years already and now last of all to be a sufferer for his cause and Kingdom c. He shined most brightly as a star of the first magnitude in Kirkubright and Air the space of sixteen years and in France about twelve or thirteen years how long he lived after he came to England I cannot learn but I suppose it was not very long For the sad case of the Churches of France Bohemia and Germany brake his heart His wife was a very eminently godly woman the daughter of John Knox our famous Reformer He had two sons that came to maturity one whereof was a Doctor of Physick the other to wit M. Josias was a very faithful and eminent Minister of the Gospel There are several of his Sermons in manuscripts in the hands of many It is a great loss that these candles should be hid under bushels and not set on candlesticks As concerning this Treatise it is both learned solid clear and easie to be understood by very ordinary capacities and the greatest and weightiest points of Controversie are handled therein as concerning the Church the Mass Antichrist Justification by Faith the merit of works the Judge of Controversies and several other very weighty points of Controversie so learnedly solidly and convincingly that now for the space of seventy years none ever did attempt to make a reply thereto We need not detain you longer in showing reasons that moved us to republish this Treatise at this time for the great increase of Popery and ignorance of the people of this Countrey is reason sufficient for publishing Treatises of this kind especially such an one as this which is preferable to other Treatises of this nature on several accounts First it handles both convincingly clearly and yet briefly the most weighty points of Controversie betwixt us and Papists whereas other Treatises generally either handle only some one or two heads or else they are so voluminous that common people neither can have money to buy or time to read them 2. The Author spent much time in praying for a blessing on this work and therefore we may expect a blessing on it 3. The whole Treatise savors of much piety and zeal especially the Epistle to the Reader where is laid out to our serious consideration GODS goodness to us on the one hand and our unanswerableness to him on the other with the Authors fears lest the Gospel be removed from us if we do not repent and reform The consideration whereof will undoubtedly have great influence on a gracious soul to stir him up to mourn and lament for the sins of the Land and deal seriously for the LORDS abiding with us I know not any thing more useful through GODS blessing for stirring us up and awaking us out of our security in this secure and stupid generation then the serious consideration of the things held out in that Epistle Was our provocations so great seventy years ago that the godly and learned Author expected nothing but the removeal of our candlestick except we did repent And what can be expected now but the powring forth of wrath to the utmost on us except speedy and serious repentance prevent it seeing GOD out of his infinit long-suffering and patience hath continued the Gospel with us to this day and we have multiplied our provocations above the iniquities of our Fathers as if they had been smal things We have exceedingly surmounted them notwithstanding that our light hath been greater and our mercies mo then theirs were O if the consideration of these things would lead us to repentance That the reading of this Treatise might be less tedious and you may more easily take it up I have divided the same in Sections annexing a title to each Section And because the Section concerning the Mass did agree to be placed after the Section concerning Transubstantiation we have transposed it and placed it there I intended to have annexed thereto An answer to H. T. his Manual of Controversies printed anno 1671. and sent into the Countrey for seducing of poor souls but because it would have caused the Book to swel to a Volume I forbare intending if the LORD will to publish it shortly and in the mean time I have annexed A Discovery of the bloody and treasonable principles and practises of Papists that all may see that not only Papists are Hereticks and Idolaters but also bloody Traitors and incendiaries unworthy to live in any Christian Kingdom or Commonwealth As it was the design of the blessed Author in writing and publishing this Treatise at first to confirm the weak establish the wavering convince and stop the mouth of gain-sayers and to discover and lay open the errors idolatries and abominations of that Whoor of Rome that the poor people may be made to flee from Babylon lest being partakers of her sins they be made also partakers of her plagues which are no less then to have their portion in that Lake that burneth with fire and brimstone which is the second death So it is our design in republishing the same For what man is he
Church and as Bellarmin sayes as hath been said before If ye go this far as ye do indeed and as Bellarmin doth and your self must do if ye be a right defender of your Catholick faith here or else there is no ground whereupon ye can build the puretie and truth of your Church and Religion Then I say that your ground is as false and erroneous as the stuff that ye build upon it for both they have failed and have been interrupted as shal be proved afterward And mark this Christian reader as the Philistins Church wherein they praised their God Judg. 16. and mocked Samson the Lords servant had two chief pillars whereon the whole house leaned and was born up so hath the Church of Rome two chief pillars whereon the whole weight of their Church and Religion hings the one whereof is this that the Church cannot err the other that the Pope is the head of the Church Take these two from them their house must fall and their Religion can stand no longer For when they are brought to this strait that they see they cannot defend their Religion neither by the testimonies of the Scripture nor yet by the examples of the Church of God when she was in her greater purity and sincerity they are compelled to lay this as a ground to hold all their errors on that the Church of Christ cannot err So take this ground from them their Church and Religion cannot stand Now as to the testimonies which ye quote out of the Old Testament out of Luke 1.33 in the New Testament they only prove that the Church and Kingdom of Christ shal endure for evermore and that his covenant made with her is everlasting The which cannot exeem the militant Church from erring in points of doctrine for both the chaff and evil seed in the Church that is these that are called but not chosen may err and that to death and damnation and yet his Church and Kingdom and his covenant remaineth sure stable and inviolate for the Lord only offers his covenant unto them and they through incredulitie reject it and so he is not bound to sanctifie or save them much less to keep them from error And as for these who are called and chosen all these promises are made and performed in every one of them and the covenant of God is so sure in every one of them that our Savior saith None of them can perish John 10.28 And yet for all this every one of them may err in doctrine suppose not to death and damnation which ye will not deny And if ye would infinit examples not only of the Saints of God of the laicks as ye call them but also of the Priests Prophets Apostles yea and of Popes also and of your own Doctors and Bishops as a cloud of witnesses would stand up and avow the same in your face Now I gather seeing that the militant Church here on earth hath but two sorts of persons in her these that are called and chosen and these that are only called but not chosen and both may err in points of doctrine the one finally to death and damnation the other may err suppose not finally to death and damnation and yet the covenant of God remain sure everlasting and inviolate with his Church Therefore I say the promises of the stabilitie of Christs Kingdom and the perpetuitie of his covenant made with her cannot exeem the militant Church from erring in points of doctrine So ye have lost your vantguard Let us come to the rest and see if they will favor your cause any better then the former hath done The next place ye quote is Matth. 16.18 Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shal not prevail against it And because ye trust that there is not a testimony of Scripture which shal fight more for you then this let us therefore try it to the uttermost and see how far it can be stretched out What argument will ye frame out of this place For if you gather no more but this Christ hath promised that the gates of hell shal never prevail against the Church that is built on the Rock that is on Christ Therefore the Church that is built on him shal never be all utterlie extinguished and abolished by Satan Then Bellarmin tells you that ye spend but time in proving of this for we grant it That the Church of the chosen shal never perish But if you go further and say That the Church of Christ shal never err because Christ hath promised that the gates of hell shal not prevail against it then I say either that exposition is false or else the gates of hell should have prevailed long since against your Church for when it prevailed against the rock whereon the Church was built it prevailed against the Church For raze and overturn the foundation of a house the house cannot stand seeing the standing of the house consists on the firmness sureness of the foundation thereof Now the rock whereon ye say the Church is built unto whom this promise is made is Peter and his successors the Popes of Rome for so ye all with one consent expone the same Rhemists annotation upon this place Seeing then that they are the foundation of the Church as ye say and the gates of hell hath prevailed against them as I shal prove by the grace of God it must follow if your exposition be true that the gates of hell hath prevailed not once only but at many times against â—he Church For first Peter himself erred in a matter of doctrine when he thought with the rest of the Apostles after the resurrection of Christ the Kingdom of Christ not to be heavenlie but earthlie not spiritual but like the Kingdoms of this world proper to Israel Acts 1.6 not common to all by vertue of the promise and also he is commanded to preach the Gospel to the Gentils doubting nothing Acts 10.20 Which testifies that he doubted before whither the Gospel should be preached to them or not and therefore erred in a matter of faith and that after he had received the promise of the holy Ghost And also he erred in the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law Acts 10.14 for he believed that some meats were unclean after the death and resurrection of Christ and therefore he refused to eat thereof And this was a matter of faith also And last of all the holy Ghost testifies that he went not a right foot to the truth of the Gospel Gal. 2.11 and therefore was rebuked by the Apostle Paul to his face And as for them whom ye call his successors the Popes of Rome not only may they be hereticks but also some of them have been hereticks And therefore if your argument be good the gates of hell both may and have prevailed against them That they may be hereticks I will fetch no other witnesses but your own Councils Canons Cardinals
and your own Popes for they shal be your Judges in this matter Bellarmin saith lib. 7. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 30. that the Pope being a manifest heretick ceaseth to be Pope and to be head of the Church Caietan a Cardinal saith lib. de authoritate Papae Consilij cap. 20. 21. That the Pope being a manifest heretick should be deposed by the Church Johannes de Turrecremata a Cardinal saith lib. 4 part 2. cap. 20. That when the Pope falls in heresie he is deposed of God Alphonsus de Castro saith lib. 1. cap. 2. That the Pope as he is a Pope may be an heretick and teach heresie which also hath sometimes saith he fallen out in them Innocentius the 3. serm 2. de consecr Pontificis And Hadrian the 2. Popes as also the 6. and 8. Synode and their own Canon Law Dist. 40. cap. Si Papa do testifie that they may be hereticks And also Pope Hadrian 6. Bellar. lib. 4. de Romano Pontif. cap. 2. And some of them have been hereticks also Zepherinus a Montanist Tertuli ad prax Marcellinus one that sacrificed â—o Devils the Idols of the Gentils Damasus Concil Sinuessâ—num Liberius an Arrien that denyed the Godhead of the Son Athanas in Epist. ad solit vita Hieron in Catal. Script Fascic tem aetate sexta Hermannus contractus Marianus Scotus compilatio Chronologica Supplementum chronic Platina Anastasius a favorer of the Nestorian heresie Platina in vita Anastas supplement Chronic distinct 19. cap. Anastasius Fascic temp Vigilius an Eutychian whose heresie was that after the incarnation of Christ there was but one nature in Christ made of his Divinity and Humanity which overthrows the foundation of our salvation Liberatus in Breviario cap. 22. Honorius a Monothelite and therefore damned and accursed in the sixth Council of Constantinople act 13. John the 22. held that the souls of the blessed being separat from their bodies did not see the Lord before the resurrection Occam in opere 93. dierum Adrian de confirmatione circa finem Gerson in sermone de Pascha John the 23. denyed eternal life whereof he was accused and deposed in the Council of Constance Sessione 11. Eugenius the 4. deposed in the Council of Basile for heresie Sessione 34. I omit the rest Seeing then these whom ye call the rock and foundation of your Church have erred and that in matters of doctrine and Religion and in the principal points thereof and that by the testimonies both of the Scripture and of your own Councils Doctors Cardinals and Popes Therefore if your argument hold forth then I say the gates of hell hath prevailed against your Church because they have prevailed against the rocks and foundations thereof for they have erred as hath been proved the which I suppose ye will not grant And therefore the furthest that ye can gather here is but this That the gates of hell that is the power of condemnation shal not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is totally and finally overcome So that suppose they may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is be strong and make them to fail in many things yet they cannot prevail totally and finally against the Church of God that is the elect and chosen who are built not on the Pope but on the immoveable Rock the Lord Jesus I say further this promise is made and performed in every one of the elect For the gates of hell shal not prevail that is get the final and full victory over any of them And therefore our Savior saith None of my sheep shal perish John 10 28. and yet ye will not deny but every one of the elect may err Therefore this promise doth not priviledge the Church of God from erring but the chaff and evil seed that is these that are called and not chosen may err and err finally because this promise is not made unto them for they are not built upon this Rock but upon the sand for none is built upon this Rock but these who are blessed and heareth the word and doth it Matth. 7. as our Savior testifieth And the good seed which are these that are called and chosen may err suppose not finally and totally The next place which ye quote is that prayer of Christ for Peter Luke 22.32 But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not Matth. 26. It is true he prayed It is true also that Peters faith failed not but yet it swooned as it were when he denyed his Lord and that by perjuring and cursing of himself and yet he erred both in the qualitie of Christs Kingdom in the calling of the Gentils and in the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law Acts 10 14. As also he went not rightly to the truth of the Gospel Gal. 2.11 as hath been proved So this prayer was not that he should be kept absolutely from all erring for then it shal follow that Christ obtained not that which he prayed for seeing he erred which is impious to think but that his faith should not decay finally and totally Secondly the Lord Jesus prayed also for all believers John 17.18.19.20 which place ye also quote and yet there is not one of the believers but they may err as your selves cannot deny and we have proved by examples of your own Popes for if any were exeemed from erring in your judgement it should be these that are the foundation of your Church which ye call your Popes but they may err and have erred as hath been proved Thirdly I say it will not follow Christ prayed for Peters faith that it should not fail Therefore he prayed for the Popes whom ye will have to be successors to Peter that their faith should not fail for that is the thing ye would be at for their faith hath failed For if by faith ye understand the doctrine of the faith of Christ as it is taken sometimes in the Scripture 1. Tim. 4. then I say your own Doctors Canons Councils Cardinals and Popes themselves as they have been cited before testifieth that not only they may err but also that some of them have erred and have been hereticks And if by that faith which our Lord prayed for ye understand that lively faith that embraceth the promises of Gods mercie in Christ which worketh by love and showeth forth the self by good works as by keeping of Christs commandments and by loving one another Rom. 3.25 Gal. 5.6 1. John 2.4 Then I say your own writers friends favorers and Cardinals testifieth of them Platin Genebrard Crantz that they have gone from Peters steps that they got the Popedom by brybery and bargaining with the Devil That they were monstrous and prodigious men yea rather beasts and monsters So that of all men that ever professed the faith of Jesus they have failed most foully in that lively faith as I have proved in another place concerning the Antichrist As to that place which ye quote John 14.16.17 where the Spirit of Christ is
say and would ye have the salvation of mens souls to lean to this point of doctrine that they caÌ„not err which is the rock foundation of your Church which above all others have erred most grievously O malicious and cruel man that would deceive the poor flock of Jesus Christ for whom he shed his blood with such heresie and abomination Then this prerogative is not granted to your Popes the head and foundation of your Church And surely if the foundation may be turned up-side-down and the head may become sensless and dead I see not how the house can stand and the body can be whole and one of your greatest Papists Bâ—llarmin plainly confesseth lib. 4 de Rom. Pontif. cap. 3. that if the Pope err of necessity tota Ecclesia errabit that is the whole Church shal err Upon the which I reason If the Pope may err and hath erred then the whole Church may err and hath erred so Bellarmin one of the learnedest Papists that ever was writ But the first hath been proved by your own Doctors Cardinals Popes Councils Canon Law Ergo by your own doctrine the whole Church may err Here we might stay now and go no further for this sufficiently overthrows this point of your doctrine that the Church caÌ„not err that by the confession of the learnedest of your side But yet I will pursue the rest If you say it is granted to the body then it is either graÌ„ted to the people or to the Clergy To the people I suppose ye will not for if your Popes may err much more may your people err And if the Apostles other famous Churches may err much more may your people err yea if not it should follow that your people were above their head the Pope which I suppose ye wil not say If ye say the Clergy then either it must be your Doctors severally by themselves or as they are gathered together in a Council But as they are several ye will not say For your Bellarmin controversies would convince you to the face for almost there are few controversies which he handles and he handles more then 300 but he brings in some of your own Writers dissenting from him and whom in many places he confutes And I think if Popes have not this priviledge surely the Doctors of your Church severally have not this priviledge But because as Bellarmin confesseth Lib. 2. de author Concil c. 11. If a general Council err then the whole Church may err for it represents the whole Church And therefore he brings this in as a reason to prove That general Councils cannot err because the whole Church cannot err For saith he the general Council represents the whole Church therefore it cannot err Let us examine this for if it be found that general Councils may err surely your cause is gone First then what will ye say to thirteen general Councils whereof seven is utterly rejected the other six are in part allowed and in part rejected which all have erred as Bellarmin de Concilijs lib. 1. cap. 6. 7. confesseth But it may be you answer that these were not approved by the Popes of Rome and therefore they might err and have erred but these Councils that are altogether allowed of him cannot err nor have not erred Indeed it is true that this is your doctrine That neither general nor provincial Councils can err that is allowed by the Pope Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 2. 5. and that general Councils lawfully conveaned may err unless they follow the instructions of the Pope And therefore Bellarmin saith cap. 11. that they may err three manner of wayes 1. If in defining of any thing the Fathers of the Council dissent from the Popes Legats 2. If it be against the Popes instruction suppose both the Fathers and the Legats of the Council agree together 3. They may err before they have received the Popes confirmation and judgement suppose all both Fathers and Legats consent together because saith he the Popes judgement is the last from the which no man may appeal and he may approve and disprove the General Council notwithstanding of their consent with his own Legats And therefore he saith in another place Lib. 4. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 3. That the whole strength or certainty of lawful Councils depends only of the Pope So then this is your last refuge All depends on his instruction and confirmation he hath a priviledge that he cannot err and the General Councils receives the same through his approbation and confirmation But I answer The Pope can give no greater prerogative to others then he hath himself But as hath been proved before the Popes may err and have been hereticks therefore they cannot give this prerogative to others And if ye will say as some of you do that the Pope suppose he may err privatly as he is a privat man and as a privat teacher yet he cannot err as he is Pope in his office judicially Whereunto I answer first That some of your own Church as Gerson and Almane de potestate Ecclesiae Alphonsus de Castro lib. 1. cap. 2. contra haeres Canus loci Theolog. lib. 6. cap. 1. and Pope Adrian the sixth all these teaches That the Popes may err and teach heresie as they are Popes Either therefore the Popes may err as they are Popes judicially and teach heresie or else not only these Doctors of your own Church but also the Pope himself hath erred and that in a point of doctrine and so however it be the Popes as they are Popes judicially may err in points of doctrine Secondly I say besides nine Popes which have been hereticks and that when they were Popes sundrie of them have made decrees not only contrary to Gods Word but also contrary one to another and that in matters of doctrine As for example Pope Celestin the third made a decree cap. laudabilem de conversione infidelium that when of married persons the one falls in heresie the marriage is dissolved and the Catholick partie is free to marry again contrary to the truth of God Matth. 6. and 19.9 and also contrary to the decreet of Pope Innocentius the third lib 4. decretal cap. Quanto Thirdly either your Canon Law errs or else Clements decrees that all things should be common and that wives also should be common causa 12 quaest 1. Dilectissimis Gelasius Pope affirms de consecrat cap. Comperimus That the mistery of the body and blood in the Sacrament cannot be divided and that the Sacrament cannot be taken in one kind only without great sacriledge and yet the Council of Trent hath decreed the contrary and the whole Romane Church practises the contrary Pope Martin decreed dist 50. cap. Qui semel that the Priests who are deposed for any fault may never be admitted to any degree of the Priesthood again Pope Syricus distinct 82. cap. Quia and Pope Calixtus distinct 82. cap. Presbyter have decreed the contrary Pope Gregory the
third he permits one to have two wives if the first be sickly decret causa 32. quaest 7. cap. Quod proposuisti contrary both to the Gospel Matth. 19. and to another decreet of the Canon Law Decretal lib. 4. tit 9. cap. Quoniam Pope Nicolas saith Dist 40. cap. A quodam Judaeo that that Baptism which is ministred without express mention of the three persons of the Trinity is firm and sure enough But Pope Zacharie Dist eadem de consecrat cap. In Synodo hath decreed the contrary All these decreets are set down in their Canon Law and hath the strength of a law in the Roman Church not as privat mens but as Popes decreets And yet some of them are directly repugnant to the Word of God that themselves cannot deny but they are heresies and some of them so directly repugnant to the decreets of other Popes that either the one or the other must be heresie But it may be ye will answer that suppose the Pope may err as he is Pope and that in matters of doctrine yet he cannot err with his Council either Provincial or General as Bellarmin saith Whereunto I answer first if General Councils lawfully conveaned together may err in matters of doctrine unless they be confirmed by the Pope as Bellarmin grants and if the Popes may err themselves alone and that judicially in matters of doctrine as hath been proved why may they not err also being joyned together seeing Councils have this priviledge only by his confirmation and allowance As Bellarmin saith lib. 4. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 3. Secondly I say either Pope Steven the 6. with his Council erred in condemning of Formosus and his acts which he made as Pope and in decreeing his ordinations to be void and null because the man was wicked by whom they were ordained Sigebert in Chron. which is an error of the Donatists or else Pope John the 9. with his Council of 72. Bishops erred in justifying Formosus and his decreets and condemning the acts of Pope Steven with his Council Last of all since General Councils that have been confirmed by their Popes have erred the sixth General Council confirmed by Pope Hadrian in epist. ad Thracium quae est in 2. actione 7. Syn. Canon 2. hath sundry errors which they themselves will not defend as the rebaptizing of hereticks For the counsel of Cyprian is confirmed there wherein this is decreeted And also it is ordained Canon 13. that Elders Deacons Subdeacons should not separat from their wives contrary to the Canon of the Roman Church as is said there And the marriage of Catholicks and Hereticks is judged null and voyd Canon 67. which your self cannot deny to be an error contrary to the express truth of God 1. Cor. 7.13 And the forbidding of Ministers to remain with their wives Canon 12. contrary to the sixth Canon of the Apostles Either therefore a General Council confirmed by a Pope hath erred or else the Apostles have erred in this Canon for they judge them to be the Canons of the Apostles The first General Council of Constantinople and the General Council of Chalcedon which are both by their own confession approved by the Popes Bellarm lib. 1. de Concilijs cap. 5. And yet both these have decreeed that the Bishop of Constantinople should have equal priviledges of authority honor and dignity in Ecclesiastical affaires with the Bishop of Rome except only the first place or seat the which by their own confession is an error Therefore either lawful General Councils confirmed by the Pope have erred or else the Pope is not the head of the Church and hath not a preeminence of authority over the rest for they have made the Bishop of Constantinople equal with him or else there are two heads of thier Church the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Constantinople I omit the rest Augustin saith de baptismo contra Donatistas lib. 2. cap. 3. That Provincial Councils may be corrected by General Councils and of General Councils the former may be amended by the latter If they may be mended then they may err And here he speaks not of a matter of fact but of a matter of faith For he speaks of the baptism of hereticks Now to conclud seeing the Churches in all ages before the Law in the time of the Law and in the time of grace yea and the Apostles and Peter himself have erred and seeing the Church of Rome that claims this priviledge of not erring above all other Churches hath erred also and that not only her people which they call Laicks but also her Clergy severally and together in Councils as well Provincial as General And seeing the head which as they say is the Rock and foundation of the Church hath erred in life in Office in matters of Faith and Religion not as privat men only but as Popes both by themselves alone as also with their Councils as well Provincial as General Seeing I hope I have proved all these things sufficiently then may I not with the judgement of all men safely conclud that that main pillar whereupon the whole weight and pillar of your Religion depends that the Church cannot err that it is an error and such a dangerous and damnable error whereupon all the errors of your Religion is built that whosoever will believe it they hazard the endless salvation of their souls Ground then Christian Reader thy salvation not upon this that the Church cannot err for that is false but upon this that as long as she sticks to the Word of God written in the Old and New Testament she errs not and when she swerves and it were but an inch broad from the Scripture then she errs And therefore two learned Papists Gerson de examinat part 1. consid 5. and Panorm affirms the one saith Simplici non authorizato sed excellenter in sacris literis erudito c. that is that more credit is to be given to one unlearned and simple but yet excellently beseen in the holy Writ in a point of doctrine then to the Pope And such a learned man saith he ought to oppone himself to a General Council if he perceive the greater part to decline to the contrary of the Gospel either of malice or of ignorance The other saith extra de elect cap. Significasti That more credit is to be given to an unlearned and simple man that brings for him the Scripture then to a whole General Council And this for answer to the testimonies of Scripture which ye cited Now as concerning the Fathers testimonies which ye bring in they will serve you no further then the Scripture hath done For they will go no further with you then this that the Church of Christ and his covenant with her shal endure for ever the which we grant and they that will read them will find them so And if ye prove any further out of them it shal be answered by Gods grace For it were too fashous to the
without further tryal because he hath so decreed it What is this but not only to make him equal to the Lord For God only hath that priviledge to be believed because he so speaks mans testimony so far only is to be credited as it may be warranted by the Scripture but also to preferr his authoritie to the voice of God in his Scripture seeing he is Judge of the same and not that onlie but to hang my salvation upon his voice and testimonie And seeing ye will have them Judges what is the cause that their Canons Laws and determinations are not as authentick as the Scripture and insert in the Canon of the Scripture But let us see your reasons First you say That the holy Ghost was given to the Church by the Father and the Son that he might teach it all truth I grant this that the holy Ghost is given to every one of the elect as wel Pastor as people to lead them in all truth in so far as may bring them to salvation And yet ye will not make every one of them Judges next every one of the elect may err notwithstanding of this promise suppose not totally and finally and therefore cannot be Judges of Religion Secondly you alledge the example of the Council of the Apostles and Elders It is true in that controversie that arose among the Christians concerning the observing of the ceremonies of the law of Moses that the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church after reasoning defined the same and writes the same to be observed by the Disciples everie where but first they were Apostles and was infallibly governed by Gods Spirit that they could not err in teaching and writing but your Pastors are not Apostles and may err Next they assemble with the Elders and the whole Church and all with one accord defines Acts 15.12.22.23 You in your Council excludes all except your Bishops to be ordinary Judges to give out judgement and your Popes neither Elder nor brethren having power of voting with you Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 1. Thirdly they define according to the Scripture saying As it is written c. Act. 15.15 This controversie to make us to understand if we will not be more then blind that this rule should be followed in all Councils to determine in controversies according to the Scripture Upon the which I reason if the Apostles who had that high measure of Gods Spirit which never man had since so that in writing and teaching they could not err if they I say did determine the controversies of Religion according to the Scripture how much more then are all Pastors since who may err both severally and jointly together in a Council bound to follow the same rule And whereas ye call their Elders Priests you stile them not as the holy Ghost hath stiled them there so there they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Elders and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is sacrificing Priests as ye suppone Your third reason is the practise and custom of the Church in deciding the controversies of Religion in Councils we grant that this is a very commodious mean to search and find out the truth by the Scripture For first the more they are that seek the truth it is the more easily found Next the consent of many in determining a truth will be of greater authority to repress hereticks then if it were agreed upon only by a few But yet they should determine nothing but that which is warranted by the Scripture and their determinations only in so far forth to be received as is agreeable to the same And this we grant hath been done in the Council of the primitive Church And therefore the Emperor Constantine speaking to the Fathers of the Council of Nice saith Sunt libri Prophetici Apostolici qui apertè quid credendum sit docent c. That is there are the Books of the Prophets and Apostles who teacheth plainly what we should believe All contention therefore laid aside let us take the soveraign decision of these things which are called in controversie out of the Scriptures which are inspired by God And this we grant and this we require But that Councils ought to determin any thing of their own authority in matters of Religion which binds the conscience without the warrant of the Word that we deny Master Gilbert Brown It is a wonder that M. John will refer any thing to the written Word seeing that he and his have no warrant that the same is the Word of God but by the authority of the Roman or Papist Church For understand there was no Church worthie of credit immediatly before Luther but that Church Master John Welsch his Reply You wonder that I refer any thing to the Scripture But what a wōder is this that ye are so far blinded of God that you think that a wonder in me which Abraham hath done which the Prophets have done which our Savior and his Apostles have done and which the Fathers have done for all these have referred the infallible testimony and decision of the will of God concerning his worship unto the Scriptures Luke 16 29. John 5 39. Acts 26.22 Rom. 12. and 16.26 2. Tim. 3.16 2. Pet. 1.10 Rev. 1 3. cap. ult yea which your self also hath done for ye make it a witness But what hath moved you to think this a wonder in me which so many and your self also have done before me Because say ye that he and his that is our Church have no warrant that it is the Word of God but by the authoritie of the Roman or Papist Church I grant indeed that you and your Church are plunged in this blindness and miserie that all the warrant that you have not only of the Scriptures themselves that they are inspired of God but also of all your doctrine and Religion is the testimony of your Roman Church that is of your Pope and Clergy for so ye interpret the Church So Bellarmin grants de Sacr. lib. 2. cap. 25. That all the certainty of all doctrine depends upon the authority of the present Church meaning the Pope and his Clergy And Stapleton saith lib. 1 contra Whitak de author script cap. 10. That it is no absurd thing not to believe God but for the testimony of the Church Pigius saith That it is not needful to believe all that Matthew and John writ in their Gospels to be true because that they might fail in memory and lie as all men may do Ecclesiast hierar lib. 1. cap. 2. And Hermannus saith That the Scripture would be of no more authority then the fables of Esop were not the testimony of the Church And so blind and miserable must you be that hangs the certaintie of all Religion and of man his salvation upon so smal a threed as the testimony of your Popes and Clergy What peace in conscience can any man have that professes your Religion which teaches that the
of them are taken from the fashion of the Pagans For Numa Pompilius when he used to worship he covered himself with a kerchief or vail and he ordained that these idolatrous Priests should have their Albe and a painted colored coat above it Ovid. in Fastis Alex. ab Alex. As the Jewish Priest had a lawer whereat they must wash before they sacrificed Exod 30.20 so have yours as they lifted up a part of the hoste Exod 29.27 so you lift up the whole hoste as they sounded the trumpets at their sacrifices Num. 10.10 so you ring your bells And what shal I speak of the rest of your vain and superstitious ceremonies in washing often in crossing and blessing often in censing often in soft speech and whispering in kissing of the Amice kissing of the fannel kissing of the stole kissing of the altar kissing of the book kissing of the Priests hand and kissing of the Pax in smiting and knocking of the breast in gesturing by rule and measure in bowing and becking in spacing forward backward and turning round about and traversing of the ground his gesture so ridiculous so changeable so affectat in saying of his Mass that a man would think a player were coming forth upon the stage to play when the Priest adresseth himself to the Mass beside de musick of your Organs where it may be had and your three-fold salutation of the Priest Dominus vobiscum which can have no use in the privat Masses where the Priest is himself alone together with the Clark So that in truth it is more then Jewish For in ceremonies they are above their ceremonies in orders more exquisite in cautels more diligent so that it seems rather to be a stage-play then the worship of God But I see it is fulfilled in them which was fore-told that God would send them strong delusions that they might believe lies that all these might be damned which loved not the truth Let the Christian Reader judge now whither the Mass be an heavenly action or whither it be not a sink and closet of all abomination or idolatry or not As truth confirms it self so falshood destroys it self A Kingdom divided against it self as our Savior saith cannot stand Therefore their divisions and contradictions among themselves concerning this their sacrifice of the Mass is an evident token that that Kingdom cannot stand Some of you saith Christ descends dayly from the bosom of the Father to the altar and ascends from thence to heaven again Turrian 1. tract cap. 11. fol. 59. Other some say the contrary That he neither descends from heaven in the Mass nor ascends from thence to heaven Scarga art 11. fol. 335. 2. Bellarmin lib. 2. de Missa cap. 4. saith That the sacrifice of the Mass doth not satisfie for our sins or merit properly the forgiveness of them And yet in lib. 2. de Missa fol. 731. he saith That Christ offered in the last Supper a sacrifice for the sins of the Apostles and the sacrifice of the Mass saith he is one with that And their Priests say in the Mass That he offers it up for the redemption of souls In Canone Miss And the Council of Trent calls it A true propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the quick and the dead Sess 6. Can. 2. 3. And Gabriel Biel an exponer of the Mass saith That the Mass is one in substance with the sacrifice of the cross and that it proceeds the self-same effects to wit the appeasing of God his wrath Lect. 85. in explic Canon in 4. sâ—nt dist 12 qu. 2. If it then appease God his wrath and be offered for the redemption of souls then it must both merit properly and satisfie properly 3. Some of you affirms That the sacrifice of the cross is more excellent then the sacrifice of the Mass Bellar. lib. 1. de Missa fol. 626. and the vertue of the Mass depends upon it Vega de Missa thes 141. And yet some of you saith It is but one sacrifice with that of the cross the same sacrifice and the same Priest in both Vega thes 137. How then can the one be more excellent then the other 4. Bellarmin lib. 2. de Missa cap. 4 saith That the value of the sacrifice of the Mass is finit and therefore it is oft repeated But Caietan a Cardinal saith That the vertue quantity and effect of it is infinit as the suffering of Christ Tract 7. de celebrat Missae cap. 2. quaest 1. 5. Some of them saith That Christ is offered up in the Mass by the words of the Church when it is said Tua de tuis offerimus tibi Possevinus lib. contra Chytraeum Volanum Some when the words of the consecration are pronounced But Bellarmin agrees with neither he saith The sacrifice is offered up not so much by the words as by the putting of the sacrifice upon the altar Lib. 2. de Missa cap. 11. 6. Bellarmin saith in a part That if there be not a real and true slaughter of Christ in the Mass then the Mass is not a true and real sacrifice Lib. 1. de Missa cap 17 For saith he to a true and real sacrifice is required a true and real slaughter of the thing that is sacrificed for the essence saith he of the sacrifice stands in the slaughter Upon the which follows that either Christ is dayly truly crucified in the Mass by their Priests or else their Mass is not a true and real sacrifice And yet in another part he saith That the sacrifice of the Mass requires not a true slaughter of the sacrifice Ibidem cap. 25. 7. Gaspa Castlius saith That there are two diverse sacrifices in the Eucharist or Mass the one of the bread and wine the other of the body and blood of Christ Lib. 1. de sacr cap. 20. And yet Bellarmin and sundry others denyes it and saith There is but one Lib. 1. de Missa cap. 27. 8. Pope Innocent saith That the sacrifice of the Mass is offered up for original venial and mortal sins Tract de Missa And yet the Master of Sentences and Gerson saith That the Mass purgeth but venial sins Lib. 4. sent dist 12. cap. Posthaec in Floret lib. 4. And Thomas of Aquin agrees with neither of them for he saith The sacrifice of the cross was for our original sin but the sacrifice of the altar is for our ordinary sins Thomas de Aquaviva 9. M. Gilbert Brown saith That their Priests doth the same in the Mass which Christ did in the Supper But Bellarmin frankly grants That Christ did not offer up the bread by the same words that their Priests do now in the Mass Lib. 1. de Missa cap. 27. Therefore they do not the same thing that Christ did 10. M. Gilbert Brown saith That Christ did offer his body and blood to the Father after the consecration But Bellarmin saith ibidem That neither Christ nor his Apostles in the beginning did offer up any
because all men by nature are hypocrits and boasts of a vain pretence of faith unto whom James saith Show me thy faith by thy works James 2.18 to take away therefore this vail of hypocrisie from hypocrits the promises are made to works 2. The promise is made to works to stir us up to the doing of them for we would be faint in doing good if we knew not that the Lord would reward them It is true he hath promised no reward to them who work not because they in whom Christ dwels they are not only justified but also sanctified and bring forth the fruit of their sanctification And this for the ninth point of your doctrine which is so damnable that both it derogats from the merit of Christ and makes men to take away their confidence from Gods only mercy and free grace and swells them up with a vain confidence of themselves and binds as it were their hearts and mouthes that they cannot with all their heart render the whole praise of their salvation to Gods only free grace SECTION XVIII Concerning Works of Supererogation M. Gilbert Brown TWelftly we have other works that are called works of Supererogation which are works of greater perfection and are not set down to us as the commands of God without the which we cannot be saved but as divine counsels adjoyned thereto they augment our glory and reward in heaven which is also the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles Christ said to the young man If thou wilt be perfect go sell the things thou hast and give unto the poor and thou shalt have treasure in heaven and come follow me Matth. 19.21 Mark 10.21 So we find that wilful poverty is a work of supererogation Such like S. Paul 1. Cor. 7.34.38 saith And the woman unmarried and the virgin thinks on the things that pertains to our Lord that she may be both holy in body and spirit And afterwards Therefore both he that joyns his virgin in matrimony doth well and he that joyns not doth better Therefore virginity is a work of supererogation for albeit matrimony be good yet the other is better and this was a counsel that S. Paul gave and no command Such like Paul wrought a work of supererogation when he preached the Evangel gratis where he might have taken justly for his labors 1. Cor. 7.40 and 9.14.15.23.17.18.19 Christ our Savior speaks of the same works in the parable of the Samaritan Luke 10.35 where he promised to the hostler to recompense him what ever he did supererogat upon the wounded man more then the two pennies And David the Prophet did supererogat when he did rise in the night to give God praise and seven times in the day and so forth Psal 118.62.164 Master John Welsch his Reply As though your former doctrine had not injuried the merits of the Son of God and his free grace enough with the which if the Apostle be true your merits of works cannot stand For the Apostle saith speaking of our salvation If it be of grace then it is no more by works otherwise grace were no more grace and if it were of works then were it no more of grace otherwise works were no more works Rom. 11.6 You yet add this damnable and blasphemous doctrine to all the rest And certainly suppose ye will not let it fall to the ground that your doctrine is the doctrine of the dragon and that your Church is that mystical Babylon that mother of whoredoms full of names of blasphemie yet this your blasphemous doctrine sufficiently declares what you are For I appeal your conscience if ye have any unblotted out yet with the smoke of the bottomless pit and the conscience of all men who ever felt the power of sin in them and the free grace of God renewing them whither this doctrine of yours be blasphemous or not That not only you may fulfil the Law and do all the duty which God hath commanded you and thereby merit eternal life but also you may do more then God hath commanded which ye call works of greater perfection then the Law of God requires of us by the doing of the which you say you merit a greater degree of glory in the kingdom of heaven and as Bellarmin saith in his preface before de monachis lib. 2. That your religious Monks lives a straiter and more high kind of life then either the Law of God or man hath prescribed And that a man may love God with a greater and more perfect love then is commanded him in the Law lib. 2. cap. 13. 6. yea that a man may love God with a greater love then he is bound to love him and that these works are not only meritorious of eternal life and of a singular glory in heaven but also are profitable to satisfie for our sins and that men may communicat of the abundance of these their merits unto others And therefore they have in their service books according to the order of sarum this form of prayer often That by the merits of the Saints they may obtain grace and by the blood of Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury they may ascend to heaven All which whither they be not words of blasphemy and the doctrine of the dragon I appeal your conscience before God in the great day and the consciences of all men as though it were not blasphemy enough to say that men may merit eternal life and a greater degree of glory in that life to themselves by their works but also to communicat unto others of the abundance of their works and so not only to be saviors of themselves but of others also And here Reader I am compelled to speak this to thee suppose thou believe not that they have written and will maintain so horrible blasphemies I wonder not for I speak the truth to thee in my conscience I lie not I could not have been induced my self to have believed that ever they durst have professed such damnable and devilish doctrine if I had not read it my self in their own books yea I durst not have been so confident as to have set it down here upon the report of any except I had read it my self But if the blind lead the blind both will fall into the pit together The Lord deliver his own from such damnable doctrine which of necessity must bring damnation upon the believers and professors of it To answer you then first if we be not able to perform all the duties which God requires of us in his law then we are not able to do works of supererogation which is more then our duty commanded in the law as ye say But the first I have proved before therefore the second is true Secondly if the Law of God be perfect and prescrives more then we are able to do then there is no works of supererogation this you will not deny But David saith The Law of God is perfect Psal 19. and our inability to perform it I have
his Preface before the Controversies and in his Preface de 〈◊〉 Pontifice that you differ from us in the main and â—â—â—â—tantial points of Religion therefore of necessity we must also differ from you in the main substantial points of our Religion And so the chief difference wherein we differ from you is not in denying and abhorring but in the main and fundamental grounds of our Religion Otherwise it shal follow that the chief difference that ye differ from us is in denying and abhorring of our Religion which I think your Church will not digest Whereas you say that this may be seen by our Confession of Faith Our Confession hath not only the detesting and denying of your abominable errors in general and particular but also the confession of our Faith in general referring the particular heads thereof to that confession which is ratified and established by Act of Parliament And so here M. Gilberts untruth and calumny of our Confession may be seen As for this form of exacting of an oath and subscription to Religion if you find fault with it you not only gain-say the Scriptures of God impaires Princes lawful authority and the Church of their Jurisdiction and lawful power the example of Moses Deut. 29.10 and of Josua 24.25 Jehoiada the High-Priest 2. Kings 11.17 Josia 2. of the Kings 23.3 Asa 2. Chron. 15.12 And of the people returning from the captivity of Babel with Nehemias chap. 10. But also blots your own Church who as may be seen in that Confession of Faith and form of abjuration set out by the Monks of Burdeaux whereof we spake before doth the same As for this exception which ye put in here I answered to it before Master Gilbert Brown For if this be a true ground of theirs that nothing ought to be done or believed but such things as are expresly contained in the Word of God but their general Confession or their negative faith is not expresly contained in the Word of God therefore it ought not to be done nor believed M. John Welsch his Reply As for this ground which ye alledge to be ours it appeareth certainly M. Gilbert that as ye said of me either ye know not our grounds or else ye wilfully invert them for your own advantage For our ground is that nothing ought to be done or believed in Religion but that which may be warranted by the testimony of the Scripture either in words and sense together or else by a necessary collection out of the same The which with Nazianzene we say Are of the same truth and authority with the first And according to this sense we say That all the heads of our Religion as well negative as affirmative are expresly contained in the Scripture and so ought both to be believed and practised These are but silly shifts M. Gilbert which ye bring to discredit the truth of our Religion You knew full well the blindness and simpleness of the people in this Countrey and therefore you regarded not how silly and simple your reasons were Master Gilbert Brown That their faith is contained in the Word of God so far as it differs from ours he will never be able to prove neither by word nor writ And if he will cause our Kings Majesty to suspend his acts against us that we may be as free to speak our mind as he he shal have a proof hereof If not let him prove the same by writ and he shal have an answer by Gods grace As for his life we desire not the same but rather his conversion to the truth M. John Welsch his Reply As for our ability to prove the truth of our doctrine I answered it before Judge thou Christian Reader of the same by this my answer As for the suspending of his Majesties acts against you that is not in our hands and for all the good ye could do you have but too much liberty And if you speak no better for your Religion then you have done else in this your answer your Church will be but little beholden to you for it And certainly if you will bind and oblige your self to face your own cause and defend your Religion by word I hope that licence of a safe passage and conduct would be granted to you by his Majesty to let you speak for your self what ye have for you for the defence of it for that space without any danger to your person and that surer and with greater safety then John Hus had who notwithstanding of his safe-conduct yet was burnt And whereas you promise an answer do what you can M. Gilbert for now it is time to plead for your Baal And let your answer be more firm then this or else ye will lose more then ye will win by it That you desire not my life I am beholden to you if you speak truth considering the bloody generation of your Roman Church who these many years by past hath spilt the blood of the Saints of God in such abundance that if any can tell the starrs of heaven he may number them whom your Church hath slain for the testimony of the Word of God And as for that which ye call conversion it is aversion from the truth and the losing of salvation the which I hope shal be dearer to me then a thousand lives suppose they were all included in one Master John Welsch Secondly I offer me to prove that there be very few points of controversie betwixt the Roman Church and us wherein we dissent but I shal get testimonies of sundry Fathers of the first six hundred years against them and proving the heads of Religion which we profess Let any man therefore set me down any weighty point of controversie one or mo and he shal have the proof of this SECTION XXI Concerning Justification by Faith Master Gilbert Brown WHom M. John calls Fathers here I know not except Simon Magus Novatus Aerius Jovinianus Pelagius Vigilantius and such For indeed there is none of these and many the like but they were against us and with them in some heads But I am sure S Ireneus S. Cyprian S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Jerome S. Basile S. Chrysostome with the rest of the holy Fathers is no way with them and against us as M. John will not be able to prove for all his offer As for example it is a chief ground in their Religion that only faith justifieth This I say can neither be proved by the Scriptures nor ancient Fathers of the first six hundred years For why the contrary is expresly contained in the Word of God Do ye see saith S. James that by works a man is justified and not by faith only James 2.24 with many other places that agrees with the same Matth. 7.21 and 19.17 and 34.35 John 14.15.21 1. John 2.3.4 Rom. 2.13 1. Cor. 13.2 and 1.19 Gal. 5.6 Tit. 1.16 And S. Augustin saith himself de fide operibus cap. 14. That this Justification by faith only was an
for I think you would not have wished me to read that thing which ye your self believes not to be true I therefore read it and read it over again And beside many other things I find this in it that the Antichrist should be born of a Virgin by the help of the Devil as Christ was born of the Virgin by the work of the holy Ghost I wondered that you should have wished me to read that Book in the which there was so manifest an error and that contrary the doctrine of your own Church You should beware of this M. Gilbert for if your Head and Church get wit of it they will not only count you a bad defender of the Catholick Faith as you say you are but also it may be they suspect you of heresie who do wish your adversaries to read that Book wherein so manifest an error is and that against the doctrine of your own Church For who will think of you but that ye are of that same opinion your self seeing you are so earnest with others to read the same Bellarmin that great defender of your Catholick Faith was more wise then you in this point For first he saith lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 12. There is a manifest error in that treatise Next he saith It is certain that that treatise cannot be Augustins but it is probable saith he that it is Rabanus his work So to conclud this I assure you M. Gilbert I am of the same mind that I was concerning your Popes for all the reading of that work But I am not of the same mind towards you that I was before the reading of the same for either I think you have been very foolish in wishing me to read that which you believed not your self to be true or else that ye defend a manifest error not only against the truth but also against the doctrine of your own Church And let your Pope who is the bond of unity among you see to this how to reconcile you and Bellarmin two defenders of his Catholick Faith you saying that that work is Augustins and Bellarmin flatly denying it and affirming that it cannot be his you wishing your adversary to read it and Bellarmin confuting a manifest error in it But betwixt you be it Now this is all that you have said for the defense of your Pope which are but as figg leaves which cannot hide his nakedness Now I will let thee see Christian Reader what we have for us wherefore we affirm and teach and is ready also as thousands have done before us to seal it with our blood that the Popes of Rome are the Antichrist which the Scripture hath fore-told should come time hath made manifest and the Lord his mouth hath in a part consumed And first I will lay this ground which M. Gilbert cannot gain say and the conscience of all men will subscribe to That as the true Christ is sufficiently described in the Old and New Testament so the Antichrist is sufficiently described there also And as he is to be believed under the pain of the endless damnation of their souls to be the true Christ to whom the prophesies of the Old Testament concerning the Savior to come doth agree and of whom the New Testament testifieth that they are accomplished so he must be that Antichrist which the Scripture fore-told was to come to whom every one of the marks and properties of the Antichrist set down in the same do agree and in whom they are found to be accomplished Let us therefore out of the Scripture search the marks of the Antichrist and then let us see whether their Popes of Rome be stamped with these marks or not I speak not now of the many Antichrists whereof John speaks 1. John 2.18 which were fore-runners of that great defection which was fore-told should come in the Church of God but of that chief and great Antichrist who not in one or two things only but almost in all the points of his Religion should be contrary to Jesus Christ whom these places of Scripture 1. John 4.3 2. Thess 2. Rev. 11.13.17.18 do describe And while as I affirm that the Popes of Rome are this great Antichrist I understand it thus That they are the Prince and Head of that defection and apostasie which the Scripture fore-shew and fore-told was to come in the Church For I do not think that all the strength and force of the Antichrist is included in the Pope but the Pope and his Kingdom which is contrary to the Kingdom of Christ is most truly called the Antichrist whereof because the Pope is the Prince and Head therefore by that figure taking the part for the whole I call him the Antichrist And in this we follow the Scripture for the Scripture speaking of the Antichrist sometimes calls it a defection and a mystery of iniquity and the second beast that hath horns like the Lamb and the Harlot and sometimes points out the principal and chief in this Kingdom on whom the whole body of iniquity doth hang as when he writes here the man of sin and son of perdition which is an adversary who extolls himself above all c. which is most properly spoken not of the body but of the Head Having shown now in what sense we take the Antichrist we will go to the matter And first to that 2. Thess 2.3.4 where he is described and that by no dark prophesies as you say but by plain sayings First therefore the Scripture calls him there a man of sin a son of perdition The which to be accomplished in your Popes your own Histories Cardinals Councils Favorers Friers Friends and themselves do sufficiently testifie So that if they speak true of themselves which you cannot deny then of all the monsters that ever the earth hath born some of your Popes have been the greatest monsters For in this point M. Gilbert we deal not with you as ye deal with us for ye cite our enemies as witnesses of us which should have no credit and we cite your own friends and these of your own Religion So that they shal be fetched out as witnesses against you in this point whether your Popes be the men of sin and sons of perdition or not What Commandment is there of the first or second Table which they have not violated in the highest degree 1. Whoremongers 2. Adulterers 3. Sodomits 4. Incestuous 5. Fosterers and maintainers of harlots 6. Tyrants 7. Devilish and Sorcerers 8. In pride passing all creatures under heaven 9. Atheists without God 10. Perjured 11. Burreaus 12. Bawds and merchants of whores 13. Sacrilegious 14. Traitors 15. Seditious 16. Blasphemous 17. Parricides 18. Poysoners of Emperors Senators Cardinals yea of their own parents and sisters 19. Helpers of the Turks 20. Drunkards 21. Simoniacks 22. Monsters 23. Bastards 24. Arrians 25. Idolaters 26. And so contentious that sometimes there was two sometimes three and sometimes four all Popes striving for the Popedom together